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 <IP_ADDRESS> Source Hazardous Waste Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Constituent Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Wastestream Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.3 Volume — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Volume <IP_ADDRESS>.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 =.

<IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS> Source Hazardous Waste Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Constituent Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Wastestream Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.4 Area  Not evaluated <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS> Source Hazardous Waste Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Constituent Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Wastestream Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.3 Volume — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Volume <IP_ADDRESS>.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).

<IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>).

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 <IP_ADDRESS> Source Hazardous Waste Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Constituent Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity — Sufficient evidence does not exist to evaluate Hazardous Wastestream Quantity <IP_ADDRESS>.3 Volume — The type of source is "other". Volume is unknown but >0 Volume assigned value (Ref. 1, Table 2 5) = > 0 <IP_ADDRESS>.4 Area — not evaluated <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>)

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 <IP_ADDRESS>)

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 <IP_ADDRESS> 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 <IP_ADDRESS> 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 <IP_ADDRESS> LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE <IP_ADDRESS>.1 OBSERVED RELEASE (Drinking water threat not scored, no intake within 15 mile pathway)

<IP_ADDRESS> 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 <IP_ADDRESS>).

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 <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Potential to Release <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.1 of this HRS documentation record). 39 SWOF  Food Chain <IP_ADDRESS> HUMAN FOOD CHAIN THREAT — WASTE CHARACTERISTICS <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.1.2; Ref. 2, pp. 6, 16. *Ref. 1, Table 4  15, section <IP_ADDRESS>.1.3; Ref. 2, pp. 6, 16.

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

Toxicity/ Persistence/ Bioaccumulation Factor Value: = 5 x 10 8 40 SWOF  Food Chain <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity HRS (Ref. 1), section <IP_ADDRESS>.2 instructs to assign the same Hazardous Waste Quantity as is assigned for the drinking water threat, as instructed in <IP_ADDRESS>.2. Section <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS> HUMAN FOOD CHAIN THREAT  TARGETS Actual Human Food Chain Contamination Observed Release to Surface water documented in Section <IP_ADDRESS>. No actual human food chain contamination is documented.

<IP_ADDRESS>.1 Food Chain individual (Ref. 1, section <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Food Chain Population  not evaluated <IP_ADDRESS>.2.1 Potential Human Food Chain Contamination  not evaluated <IP_ADDRESS>.3 Calculation of Human Food chain threat  targets factor category value (Ref. 1, section <IP_ADDRESS>.3)

Human food chain threat targets factor category value =

20 + (population factor not evaluated) = 20 <IP_ADDRESS> 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 <IP_ADDRESS> LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE = 550 (Ref. 1, section 4.1.4)

<IP_ADDRESS> ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT WASTE CHARACTERISTICS <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity (Ref. 1, section <IP_ADDRESS>.2, <IP_ADDRESS>.2)

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value = 100 <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS> 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 <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>.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 <IP_ADDRESS>))


[Federal Register: July 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 128)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37791-37793]
[DOCID:fr02jy08-8]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0254; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-06-AD;
Amendment 39-15591; AD 2008-13-28]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Hartzell Propeller Inc. ( )HC-(
)(2,3)Y(K,R)-2 Two- and Three-Bladed Compact Series Propellers

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Hartzell Propeller Inc. left-hand rotating ( )HC-( )(2,3)Y(K,R)-2 two-
and three-bladed, aluminum hub, ``compact'' series propellers, with
hubs having a non-suffix serial number, and lubrication holes located
on the shoulder of the hub blade socket. These propellers are installed
on Lycoming Engines LIO-360 series and LO-360 series reciprocating
engines installed on Piper Aircraft, Inc. Seneca PA-34-200 and Seminole
PA-44-180, and Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model 76 Duchess,
airplanes. This AD requires initial and repetitive eddy current
inspections (ECI), of the area around the lubrication holes of the hub
blade sockets. This AD results from four reports of propeller hub
cracks, including two in-flight blade separation events. We are issuing
this AD to prevent failure of the propeller hub, which could result in
blade separation and loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 17, 2008. The Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the regulations as of July 17, 2008.
    We must receive any comments on this AD by September 2, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this AD:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: U.S. Docket Management Facility, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Hartzell Propeller Inc. Technical Publications Department,
One Propeller Place, Piqua, OH 45356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(937) 778-4391, for the service information identified in this AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Smyth, Senior Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We received four reports of hub cracks
initiating from the lubrication holes on ``left-hand'' rotating
propellers, including incidents of in-flight blade

separation, in Hartzell two blade ``compact'' series aluminum
propellers. These propellers have hubs with a non-suffix serial number,
and lubrication holes located on the shoulder of the hub blade socket.
We received the most recent report of a cracked hub, in June 2007. The
lubrication holes on the ``left-hand'' rotating propeller experience
additional stresses not experienced in the lubrication holes on
``right-hand'' rotating propellers. Some of the hub cracks were found
during inspection following a report of abnormal vibration or grease
leakage. Such a crack typically initiates in the area around the
lubrication holes. As a crack spreads across the blade socket, the
spreading can accelerate. This condition, if not corrected, could
result in failure of the propeller hub which could result in blade
separation and loss of control of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of Hartzell
Propeller Inc. Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. HC-ASB-61-297, Revision
1, dated November 14, 2007. That ASB describes procedures for
performing initial and repetitive ECIs of the propeller hubs for
cracks.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or
develop on other Hartzell Propeller Inc. left-hand rotating ( )HC-(
)(2,3)Y(K,R)-2 two- and three-bladed compact series propellers of the
same type design. For that reason, we are issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the propeller hub, which could result in blade separation
and loss of control of the airplane. This AD requires an initial ECI of
the affected propeller hubs within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 12
months after the effective date of the AD, whichever occurs first. This
AD also requires repetitive ECIs of the affected propeller hubs within
50-hour TIS intervals or within 12 months from the previous ECI,
whichever occurs first. You must use the service information described
previously to perform the actions required by this AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate
adoption of this AD, we have found that notice and opportunity for
public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable, and that good
cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for public
comment; however, we invite you to send us any written relevant data,
views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``AD Docket No. FAA-2008-0254;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-06-AD'' in the subject line of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify it.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of the
Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets,
including, if provided, the name of the individual who sent the comment
(or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement
in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the same as
the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a summary of the costs to comply with this AD and
placed it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary at the
address listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal
Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2008-13-28 Hartzell Propeller Inc.: Amendment 39-15591. Docket No.
FAA-2008-0254; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-06-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective July 17,
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Hartzell Propeller Inc. left-hand
rotating ( )HC-( )(2,3)Y(K,R)-2 two- and three-bladed, aluminum hub,
``compact'' series propellers, with hubs having a non-suffix serial
number (SN), and lubrication holes located on the shoulder of the
hub blade socket. These propellers are installed on Lycoming Engines
LIO-360 series and LO-360 series reciprocating engines, installed on
Piper Aircraft, Inc. Seneca PA-34-200 and Seminole PA-44-180, and
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Model 76 Duchess, airplanes.
    (d) The parentheses appearing in the propeller model number
indicates the presence or absence of an additional letter(s) that
varies the basic propeller model. This AD still applies regardless
of whether these letters are present or absent in the propeller
model designation.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from four reports of propeller hub cracks,
including two in-flight blade separation events. We are issuing this
AD to prevent failure of the propeller hub, which could result in
blade separation and loss of control of the airplane.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the
actions have already been done.

Initial Eddy Current Inspection (ECI)

    (g) Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 12 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, perform an
initial ECI of the area around the lubrication holes of the hub
blade sockets.
    (h) Use paragraphs 3.A. through 3.A.(3)(d) of Hartzell Propeller
Inc. Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. HC-ASB-61-297, Revision 1,
dated November 14, 2007, to do the initial ECI.
    (i) If any cracks are found, remove the propeller hub from
service before further flight.
    (j) If no cracks are found, mark the propeller using paragraph
3.A.(5)(a) of the Accomplishment Instructions of Hartzell Propeller
Inc., ASB No. HC-ASB-61-297, Revision 1, dated November 14, 2007, to
indicate compliance with this ASB.

Repetitive ECIs

    (k) At repetitive intervals not to exceed 50 hours TIS or 12
months from the previous ECI, whichever occurs first, perform ECIs
of the area around the lubrication holes of the hub blade sockets.
    (l) Use paragraphs 3.A. through 3.A.(3)(d) of Hartzell Propeller
Inc. ASB No. HC-ASB-61-297, Revision 1, dated November 14, 2007, to
do the repetitive ECIs.
    (m) If any cracks are found, remove the propeller hub from
service before further flight.

Optional Terminating Action

    (n) As optional terminating action to the repetitive ECIs
required by this AD, replace the non-suffix SN propeller hub with a
propeller hub identified by an ``A'' or ``B'' suffix letter in the
propeller hub SN.
    (o) Replacement propeller hub part numbers can be found in
paragraph 2.A., Material Information, of Hartzell Propeller Inc. ASB
No. HC-SB-61-297, Revision 1, dated November 14, 2007.

Prohibition of Propeller Hub Reuse

    (p) After the effective date of this AD, propeller hubs that
have a non-suffix SN, or an ``E'' suffix letter in the SN removed
from affected propellers in this AD, are not eligible for
installation on any engine in any aircraft.

Previous Credit

    (q) ECIs of the propeller hubs done before the effective date of
this AD that use Hartzell Propeller Inc. ASB No. HC-SB-61-297, dated
September 17, 2007, comply with the requirements specified in this
AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (r) The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, has the
authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD
if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (s) Contact Tim Smyth, Senior Aerospace Engineer, Chicago
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 2300
East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for more information about this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (t) You must use Hartzell Propeller Inc. Alert Service Bulletin
No. HC-ASB-61-297, Revision 1, dated November 14, 2007, to perform
the ECIs required by this AD. The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of this service bulletin in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact Hartzell
Propeller Inc. Technical Publications Department, One Propeller
Place, Piqua, OH 45356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (937) 778-
4391, for a copy of this service information. You may review copies
at the FAA, New England Region, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA; or at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on June 19, 2008.
Diane Cook,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-14312 Filed 7-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 45626]
[DOCID:fr03au10-66]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-1821-000]

Goshen Phase II LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

July 23, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Goshen Phase II LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application
includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of
future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is August 12, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-18979 Filed 8-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 246 (Friday, December 21, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75598-75599]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30801]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1185; Airspace Docket No. 12-AAL-8]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; White Mountain, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace at White
Mountain Airport, White Mountain, AK, to accommodate aircraft using new
Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) standard
instrument approach procedures at the airport. The FAA is proposing
this action to enhance the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations at White Mountain Airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 4, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2012-
1185; Airspace Docket No. 12-AAL-8, at the beginning of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Roberts, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical,
economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA 2012-1185 and Airspace Docket No. 12-AAL-8) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2012-1185 and Airspace Docket No. 12-AAL-8''. The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at White Mountain Airport, White
Mountain, AK. Controlled airspace within a 6.3-mile radius of the
airport, with extensions to the northwest and southeast, is necessary
to accommodate aircraft using new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument
approach procedures to/from the en route environment at White Mountain
Airport. This action would enhance the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in this Order.
    The FAA has determined this proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation; (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority for the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would establish controlled airspace at White Mountain Airport,
White Mountain, AK.
    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 White Mountain, AK [New]

White Mountain Airport, AK
    (Lat. 64[deg]41'21'' N., long. 163[deg]24'46'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3 mile radius of the White Mountain Airport, and within1
mile either side of the 344[deg] bearing of the airport extending
from the 6.3-radius to 11 miles northwest of the airport, and within
1 mile either side of the 164[deg] bearing of the airport extending
from the 6.3-radius to 11 miles southeast of the airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on November 13, 2012.
Steven L. Vale,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-30801 Filed 12-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Environmental Protection Agency                           Office of Pesticide Programs                                                       Supporting document to docket# EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0558                                                                                Listing of 72 chemical substances removed from the currently approved inert ingredient list.                                                                              CAS Reg. No                                  Chemical Name                                         1 109-89-7 Diethylamine 2 78-93-3 Methyl ethyl ketone 3 109-99-9 Tetrahydrofuran 4 123-92-2 1-Butanol, 3-methyl-, acetate  5 80-62-6 Methyl methacrylate 6 100-02-7 p-Nitrophenol 7 10024-97-2 Nitrous oxide  (N2O) 8 100-37-8 2-(Diethylamino)ethanol  9 101-68-8 4,4-Methylenedi(phenyl isocyanate) 10 106-88-7 1,2-Butylene oxide 11 107-18-6 Allyl alcohol 12 107-19-7 Propargyl alcohol 13 108-46-3 Resorcinol 14 110-19-0 Isobutyl acetate 15 110-80-5 Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether  16 112-55-0 Dodecyl mercaptan 17 117-81-7 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester 18 117-84-0 Dioctyl phthalate 19 119-61-9 Benzophenone 20 121-54-0 Benzenemethanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-(2-(2-(4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenoxy)ethoxy)ethyl)-, chloride 21 123-38-6 Propionaldehyde  22 124-16-3 Butoxyethoxypropanol 23 1303-86-2 Boron oxide (B2O3) 24 1309-64-4 Antimony trioxide 25 131-11-3 Dimethyl phthalate 26 131-17-9 Diallyl phthalate 27 1317-95-9 Tripoli 28 1319-77-3 Cresol 29 1321-94-4 Methyl naphthalene 30 1338-24-5 Naphthenic acid 31 139-13-9 Aminotriethanoic acid 32 141-32-2 Butyl acrylate 33 142-71-2 Copper acetate 34 149-30-4 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole 35 150-76-5 p-Methoxyphenol 36 150-78-7 1,4-Dimethoxybenzene 37 16919-19-0 Ammonium fluosilicate 38 1762-95-4 Ammonium thiocyanate 39 25013-15-4 Vinyl toluene 40 25154-52-3 Nonylphenol  41 2761-24-2 Amyl triethoxysilane 42 28300-74-5 Antimony potassium tartrate 43 50-00-0 Formaldehyde 44 533-74-4 Dazomet 45 552-30-7 Trimellitic acid andydride   46 618-45-1 o-m-p-Isopropylphenols   47 71-55-6 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 48 7440-37-1 Argon 49 74-84-0 Ethane 50 75-43-4 Dichloromonofluoromethane 51 75-45-6 Chlorodifluoromethane 52 75-68-3 1-Chloro-1,1-difluoroethane 53 75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 54 75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 55 76-13-1 1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 56 7758-01-2 x Potassium bromate 57 78-88-6 2,3-Dichloropropene 58 79-11-8 Monochloroacetic acid 59 79-24-3 Nitroethane 60 79-34-5 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 61 8006-64-2 Turpentine, oil 62 83-79-4 Rotenone 63 85-44-9 Phthalic anhydride  64 88-12-0 N-Vinyl-2-pyrrolidone 65 88-69-7 2-Isopropylphenol  66 88-89-1 2,4,6-Trinitrophenol 67 94-36-0 Benzoyl peroxide 68 95-48-7 o-Cresol  69 97-63-2 2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester 70 97-88-1 Butyl methacrylate 71 98-54-4 p-tert-Butylphenol 72 99-89-8 o-m-p-Isopropylphenols