21020_Maxton Feed_Receptor Survey_201701

DUNCKLEE
& DUNHAM

MAILING ADDRESS – POST OFFICE BOX 33366 – RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27636
NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF EXAMINERS FOR ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS LICENSE C-3559
NORTH CAROLINA BOARD FOR LICENSING OF GEOLOGISTS LICENSE C-261
NC DENR REGISTERED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT NUMBER 00061
DD ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING & ENGINEERING
511 KEISLER DRIVE – SUITE 102
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
OFFICE: (919) 858–9898
WWW.DUNCKLEEDUNHAM.COM

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

To: Jim Rudder
North Carolina Brownfields Program
Copy to: Shirley Liggins
From: Joshua Hanks
Date: January 10, 2018
Reference: Mountaire Scotland County Feed Mill
Maxton, Scotland and Robeson County, North Carolina
BF# 21020-17-078

The following document is attached:

Draft Letter / Report Phase I ESA Report

Laboratory Report Certification Forms

Contract or Change Order Other: Receptor Survey as pdf

For the following action:

For Your Review / Information For Your Signature & Return

As You Requested Other: CD-ROM will be mailed to Shirley

Comments:

Page 1 of 4
General Instructions
1.)
2.)
3.)
Site:Mountaire- Scotland County
Address:10800 Pell Road
City:Maxton
County:Scotland and Robeson
Property Characteristics
Surrounding Properties
X North
X South
X East Residential/Agriculture, Highway Business
X West Residential/Agriculture, Heavy and Light Industrial
Zoning information from Scotland and Robeson County GIS is attached in Appendix A.
0
12
0
13
Residential/Agriculture, Heavy and Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
351.37 351.37
42
34
8
16
36
23
8
0
0
0
% of property that is agricultural crops
% of property that is barren
% of property that is used for commercial or industrial usage including
paved areas
BROWNFIELDS AREA RECONNAISSANCE AND RECEPTOR SURVEY GUIDANCE FORM
Provide Information for the following potential receptors Current Usage Proposed Usage
This form was created to clarify and simplify preparing a receptor survey for a brownfield site. The form was designed to minimize unnecessary delays in processing
brownfield applications. This is a guidance document only and Potential Developers may complete and submit their own receptor survey, if they desire.
The shaded fields on the form marked “Applicable to Site” will be determined by the DENR Brownfields Project Manager on a site by site basis.
The distances to potential receptors from the Property boundary will be determined by the DENR Brownfields Project Manager on a site by site basis.
Distances are measured from the site Property Boundary unless otherwise indicated by the DENR Brownfield’s Project Manager.
Proposed UsageApplicable to Site
(DENR Use Only)
Surrounding Properties
Zoning/Land Use Current Usage
Heavy Industrial
Residential,/Agriculture, Highway Business
Residential/Agriculture, Heavy and Light
Industrial
Residential/Agriculture, Heavy and Light
Industrial
Size of Property (acres)
% of property that is wooded
% of property that is grass area
% of property that is scrub/shrub
% of property that is open land (including surface water bodies)
Rev. 06/05/02
Page 2 of 4
Potential Receptors - include depth to top, construction material and diameter of the utilities, if available
Distance Direction Depth
10/27/2017
11/9/2017
11/9/2017
X Is a storm sewer within 1000 ft of
the Property boundary?Y Y 12/20/2017
X Is a sanitary sewer within 1000 ft of
the Property boundary?Y Y 12/20/2017
X Is a septic system leach field within
1000 ft of the Property boundary?Y N 12/18/2017
X Is a water line main within 1000 ft of
Property boundary?Y Y 12/20/2017
Youth for Christ Holiness Church located at 259 NC Highway 71
approximately 1,000 ft E of the site (Photograph 3, Appendix B; Google
Map Image, Appendix C).
Did not observe any basements within the 1,000 ft buffer area.
Scotland County sanitary sewer lines run down Lewis Road and end just
before the property boundary and run west through the We Pack Logistics
property. Another line runs parallel to Airport Road and ends at the Maxton
Warehouse and Railroad Friction properties. Robeson County GIS does not
show sanitary sewer lines but sewer manholes were observed along NC
Highway 71. (Photograph 4, Appendix B; Water and Sewer Maps,
Appendix D)
Observed storm sewer drop inlets within the road median located under the
U.S. Highway 74 bridge on N.C. Highway 71. No storm sewer features
listed within survey area on Scotland County GIS. Robeson County GIS
does not shown storm sewer features.
A water line main is parallel to Airport Road and Skyway Church Road to
the W and NW of the site. A water line main runs from Airport Road to Pell
Drive and Edwards Road, where they both connect to another main that is
parallel to Lewis Road. Robeson County GIS does not show water line
mains but does show fire hydrants along Brandie Road. Water meters were
also observed in the yards of houses along Brandie Road. (Photographs 5-7,
Appendix B; Water and Sewer Maps, Appendix D)
Sanitary sewer service is available in Scotland County areas within the
buffer area. Robeson County GIS does not show sanitary sewer lines but
the Robeson County Health Department did confirm septic tank records for
the following four properties: Sandy Grove Baptist Chuch, 108 Deangelo
Road, and 2 Deangelo Road. (Email dated 01/03/18, Appendix D)
Complete and attach map as appropriate
Applicable to Site
(DENR Use Only)
Provide Information for the
following potential receptors Y/N Date Verified
Is a school or daycare center within
1000 ft of the Property boundary?Y Y
Field
Verified
Sandy Grove Baptist Church located at 73 Deangelo Road, adjacent to the
SE corner of the site (Photograph 1, Appendix B; Google Map Image,
Appendix C).
Skyway Baptist Church located at 21780 Skyway Church Road approx.
900 ft NW of the site (Photograph 2, Appendix B; Google Map Image,
Appendix C).
Is a basement or subsurface
foundation within 1000 ft of the
Property boundary?
X N Y 12/20/2017
X
Rev. 06/05/02
Page 3 of 4
X Is a natural gas line main within
1000 ft of the Property boundary?Y Y 12/20/2017
X
Is a buried telephone/ cable main
within 1000 ft of the Property
boundary?
Y Y 12/20/2017
X Is a buried electrical cable main
within 1000 ft of Property boundary?Y Y 12/20/2017
Local Water Supply
Public:LMAC Industrial Park Private:Nearest supply well ~300 feet east of southeastern corner
Potable Water Supplier Name:Laurinburg-Maxton Airport Commission (LMAC)
Potable Water Supply Source:
Distance:Nearest public well ~1,600 ft Direction:Northwest
Potable Water Source Intake:
Distance:Approximately 1 mile Direction:Northwest
Water Supply Wells
Distance Direction Depth
X
Is a public water supply well within
1 mile of the Property boundary?
Y Y 12/20/2017
X
Is a irrigation supply well within 1/2
mile of the Property boundary?N Y 12/20/2017
X
Is a private water supply well within
1/2 mile of the Property boundary?
Y Y 12/20/2017
X Is a monitoring well within 1500 ft
of the Property boundary?Y N 12/21/2017
Irrigation wells not observed within survey area.
Groundwater (Multiple Wells)
LMAC Water Treatment Plant
Observed suspected private supply wells along Old Lumberton Road,
Deangelo Road, NC Highway 71, and Bryants Circle. Conditions of well
houses vary from in disrepair to good condition. Suspected private supply
wells are shown in the photo log (Photographs 1 and 14-20, Appendix B).
Railroad Friction Products Corporation adjacent to the western property
boundary located at 13601 Airport Road reportedly had a hexane spill on
January 10, 2017. The Soil and Groundwater Assessment Report by ECS
details a previously installed well existing on the site and a new well being
installed on February 10, 2017. (Figures 2 and 3 from report, Appendix F)
LMAC Supply Wells (1A, 2A, 3, 6) & Town of Maxton Well #1 as shown
on the Source Water Assessment Program Report and NC Public Water
Supply Map (Photograph 13, Appendix B; SWAP Reports and Figures,
Appenxidx E).
Overhead power lines were observed along Pell Road, Airport Road, and
NC Highway 71. Underground cable utility boxes are present along
Brandie Road and transition back into overhead power lines along
Deangelo Road (Photographs 4-7 and 10-12, Appendix B).
Complete and attach map as appropriate
A natural gas easement is located north of the brownfields property line and
comes within 1,000 ft of the boundary near the hog waste pond to the
northeast. A natural gas line also runs along Lewis Road and turns west
along Pell Road. Natural gas line markers were also observed along Airport
Road (Photographs 7-9, Appendix B; Piedmont Natural Gas Map,
Appendix D).
Buried telephone/cable markers were present along Airport Road, NC
Highway 71, Brandie Road, and Deangelo Road (Photographs 5, 7, 10, and
14; Appendix B).
Applicable to Site
(DENR Use Only)
Field
Verified Date VerifiedProvide Information for the
following potential receptors Y/N
Rev. 06/05/02
Page 4 of 4
Water Bodies on Property
X
Is water body naturally developed or
man made?
X List the uses of the water body
X What is the source of the water for
the water body
X
What is the nature of the bottom of
the water body (e.g., rocky or
concrete bottom, drainage ways or
impoundments)
X
Are there any wetlands present on
the property?
Surface Water Body
Distance Direction Depth
X
Are there surface waters located
within 1000 ft of the Property
boundary?Y Unknown Pond ~600 feet from
southeast corner East Unknown
Y Unknown Non-perennial
drainage ditch 4-5 feet
Y Unknown Non-perennial
drainage ditch
~800 feet from
southwest corner Southwest Unknown
Y Unknown Non-perennial
drainage ditch
~400 feet from
western on-site
pond
South Unknown
Y Unknown Hog Waste Pond ~300 feet from
northeast corner Northeast Unknown
Additional Requests/ Observations

Two man-made ponds are located on site along the southern property boundary. Three non-perennial stormwater drainage
ditches are present on site and appear to direct flow south to southwest (Photographs 21-24, Appendix B; Surface Water
Features Map, Appendix G).
Surface runoff. Two man-made ponds originally constructed to drain the Carolina bays.
Primarily sandy drainage ways.
ECS determined non-jurisdictional wetlands were present on the property and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers confirmed
their findings (Notification of Jurisdictional Determination, Appendix G).
Unknown
Applicable to Site
(DENR Use Only)
Provide Information for the
following potential receptors Comments
Applicable to Site
(DENR Use Only)
Provide Information for the
following potential receptors Comments
Applicable to Site
(DENR Use Only)
Provide Information for the
following potential receptors Y/N Name Type Complete and attach map as appropriate
Additional water bodies, if needed
Located along the northern
brownfields property boundary.
Flow appears to be from
northwest to southeast.
Rev. 06/05/02

Appendix A

Appendix B

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
1
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

Southwest
Description:

Sandy Grove Baptist
Church and potential
supply well structure at
73 Deangelo Road.
Property is adjacent to
the southeast corner of
the site.

Photo No.
2
Date:
11/09/17

Direction of Photo:

East
Description:

Skyway Baptist Church
located at 21780
Church Road,
approximately 900 feet
northwest of the site.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
3
Date:
11/09/17

Direction of Photo:

West
Description:

Youth for Christ
Holiness Church
located at 259 NC
Highway 71,
approximately 1,000
feet east of the site.

Photo No.
4
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

Northeast
Description:

Sanitary sewer manhole
and overhead power
observed along NC
Highway 71.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
5
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

South
Description:

Water meter,
underground electrical
box, and underground
telecommunications
observed in
neighborhood along
Brandie Road.

Photo No.
6
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

East
Description:

Fire hydrant and
electrical box observed
in neighborhood along
Brandie Road.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
7
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

West
Description:

Fire hydrant, fiber optic
marker, and a natural
gas marker observed at
the intersection of Pell
Road and Airport Road.
Overhead power
observed running
parallel to Airport
Road.

Photo No.
8
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

North
Description:

Piedmont Natural Gas
meter and marker
observed along Pell
Road.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
9
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

North
Description:

Closer image of the
Piedmont Natural Gas
marker along Pell
Road.

Photo No.
10
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

North
Description:

Underground
telecommunications,
fiber optic marker, and
overhead power
observed along Airport
Road.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
11
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

West
Description:

Overhead power
observed along Pell
Road.

Photo No.
12
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

Southeast
Description:

Overhead power
observed along
Deangelo Road.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
13
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

Southeast
Description:

LMAC Well #1A
located approximately
1,600 feet northwest of
the site.

Photo No.
14
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

South
Description:

Underground
telecommunications
and suspected private
supply well located at
317 NC Highway 71,
approximately 1,700
feet from the site.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
15
Date:
11/09/17

Direction of Photo:

Northwest
Description:

Suspected private
supply well located at
189 NC Highway 71,
approximately 1,300
feet from the site.

Photo No.
16
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

East
Description:

Suspected private
supply well located at
690 NC Highway 71,
approximately 3,200
feet from the site.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
17
Date:
11/09/17

Direction of Photo:

East
Description:

Suspected private
supply well located at
424 NC Highway 71,
approximately 2,400
feet from the site.

Photo No.
18
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

Southeast
Description:

Suspected private
supply well located at
598 NC Highway 71,
approximately 3,000
feet from the site.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
19
Date:
12/20/17

Direction of Photo:

South
Description:

Suspected private
supply well located at
100 Bryants Circle,
approximately 4,000
feet from the site.

Photo No.
20
Date:
11/09/17

Direction of Photo:

South
Description:

Suspected private
supply well located at
22100 Old Lumberton
Road, approximately
1,800 feet from the site.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
21
Date:
10/27/17

Direction of Photo:

South
Description:

Drainage feature
located in the center of
the property. Water in
this feature flows from
the north to south
feeding into the
western-most pond.

Photo No.
22
Date:
10/27/17

Direction of Photo:

West
Description:

Drainage feature
located on the western
property boundary
adjacent to the Rail
Road Friction property.
Water in this feature is
believed to flow from
the east to west.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

Client Name:
Mountaire Farms Inc.
Site Location:
10800 Pell Road, Maxton, NC
Project No.:
201742
Photo No.
23
Date:
10/27/17

Direction of Photo:

Northeast
Description:

Drainage feature
located on the eastern
side of the property.
Water in this feature
flows from the
northeast to the
southwest feeding into
the western-most pond.

Photo No.
24
Date:
10/27/17

Direction of Photo:

West
Description:

Eastern-most pond
located on the property.

Appendix C

Appendix D
Robeson County Fire Hydrants
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and theGIS user community
County Line
Fire Hydrants
December 18, 2017
2017
0 0.2 0.40.1 mi
0 0.35 0.70.175 km
1:14,156

:

Divider
Page
From:diane.edwards
To:Josh Hanks
Subject:RE: Septic System Inquiry for Robeson County
Date:Wednesday, January 03, 2018 12:11:05 PM
GOOD AFTERNOON. YOU ARE CORRECT. THE PARCEL 11030100124 IS FOR WATSON TYRIS AND
RICHARD MALLOY, BERTHA MAE MOTES, ETC. I SEARCHED OUR RECORDS AND CANNOT FIND A
SEPTIC TANK PERMIT FOR THIS. HOWEVER, I DO HAVE TWO SEPTIC TANK RECORD FOR JOSEPH
MOTES (11030100144) OFF OF HWY 71. I NOTICED ONE OF THE NAMES ON THE TAX CARD
(11030100124) IS BERTHA MAE MOTES. ONE OF JOSEPH MOTES RECORD COULD BE FOR BERTHA
MAE MOTES. I DO HAVE A NC ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURES ON HWY 71. I AM NOT
SURE IF THE PARCEL 110301028 (ON YOUR SHEET) IS FOR THAT. DME.
From: Josh Hanks [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2018 10:42 AM
To: diane.edwards <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Septic System Inquiry for Robeson County

Hi Diane,

I hope you had a great New Year’s. I just wanted to follow up with you regarding one of the
properties you were able to confirm septic tank records for our environmental survey. I was going
back through our information and noticed the parcel number and address for the property
“11030100124-NC ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES HWY 71” appears to have been
mixed up with another parcel.

I double checked the Robeson County GIS and it shows the following for parcel number
11030100124:
Parcel Number Owner Physical Address
11030100124 MALLOY RICHARD 108 DEANGELO ROAD

I just wanted to confirm if this was the correct parcel. Please feel free to contact me if you have any
questions or would like to discuss any further. Thanks again for your help!

Josh

Joshua Hanks, PG
Project Geologist I
Duncklee & Dunham, P.C.
511 Keisler Drive, Suite 102
Cary, North Carolina 27518
Mobile: [phone]
Office: 919-858-9898 x 112
www.dunckleedunham.com

From: diane.edwards [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 4:24 PM
To: Josh Hanks <[e-mail]>
Subject: Septic System Inquiry for Robeson County

I found the e mail after searching for an hour. I mistakenly e mailed it to myself. LOL.

Below is the records that I was able to find. Sorry for the delay. Diane Edwards,

11030100124-NC ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES HWY 71*
11030100144-JOSEPH MOTES-DIRT RD TO SR 1390&HWY 71*
11030100141C-JOHN LEWIS WILKERSON HEIRS-SR 1302 TO HWY 71*
11030100142-SANDY GROVE BAPTIST CHURCH**
110301030-JAMES EDWARD GRAHAM-HWY 71**
110301031-SANDY GROVE BAPTIST CHURCH-OFF HWY 71*
11030100110-SANDY GROVE BAPTIST CHURCH-SR 1313**

*SEPTIC TANK ONLY.
**SEPTIC TANK AND WELL.

Divider
Page
Scotland County Feed Mill
Piedmont Natural Gas Lines
Legend
Brownfields Property Boundary
Existing Permanent Easement
Service line
Station
2000 ft
N➤➤N
© 2017 Google
© 2017 Google
© 2017 Google

Divider
Page
C-3Sheet No.Job No.:
Checked By:
Drawn By:
Date:
Scale:
PELL ROAD
MOUNTAIRE FARMS
PROPOSED OVERALL SITE
MAXTON - SCOTLAND COUNTY - NORTH CAROLINA
PLLC
Asheboro, NC 27204
Summey Engineering Associates,
Engineering - Land Planning - Consulting
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
PO Box 968
Email - [e-mail]
Description:Date:No.By:
BK
HMSJ
E-3754
JAN, 2017
AS NOTED PROPOSED MILL SITEPROPOSED SS FORCE MAINPROPOSED RR TRACKSPROPOSED ACCESS ROADPROPOSED ELECTRIC MAINPROPOSED GAS SERVICEPROPOSED WATER MAINPROPOSED FUEL STATIONPROPOSED PUMP STATIONPROPOSED GAS MAIN LOCATIONRevised Utilities9.25.171 bkPROPOSED SCALE FACILITYPROPOSED FUTURE TRACKRevised Gas line Location10.19.172 bk EXISTING GAS EASEMENTEXISTING RR TRACKS

Appendix E
NC Public Water Supply Map
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS user community
Groundwater_Sources_2015
Ground Water Community
Ground Water Non-Transient Non-Community
Ground Water Transient Non-Community
Ground Water Adjacent
October 26, 2017
State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS | State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE | NC Public Water Supply
1:36,112
0 0.7 1.40.35 mi
0 1 20.5 km

Divider
Page

Source Water Assessment Program Report
for
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
Non-Transient Non-Community Water System

Introduction: What is a Source Water Assessment?
The North Carolina Division of Water Resources, Public Water Supply (PWS) Section is
responsible for implementing the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) and completing assessments for all public drinking water supplies in the state. The 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act provided federal support and required states to conduct assessments of all public water systems. A source water assessment is a qualitative evaluation of the potential of a drinking water source to become contaminated by the identified potential contaminant sources
(PCS) within the delineated area. In North Carolina there are more than 10,000 public water supply sources that were assessed by the state. The PWS Section has gathered information for each water supply and developed a process for completing the assessments. This process is summarized in the next few pages and detailed in Section 6 of this report.
This report provides a summary of the results for the Source Water Assessment for your
drinking water source(s).

What is the Source of Your Drinking Water?
Everyone wants clean, safe drinking water and we assume this natural resource will always be
available to us. However, drinking water wells can be threatened by many potential contaminant sources, including underground storage tanks for gasoline, permitted waste disposal sites, storm water runoff or improper handling of hazardous materials. Your drinking water source(s) is listed in Table 1. Protecting your water from becoming contaminated is a wise investment in public
health and your community's future.
PWS ID: 03-83-107 2 April 26, 2017
Table 1. Public Water Supply System Information
System Name LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
City MAXTON
PWS ID 03-83-107
Source Name WELL #1A
Source Name WELL #3
Source Name WELL #6
Source Name WELL #8
Source Name WELL #2A
Source Name WELL #7
Assessment Report Contents
This assessment report includes the following sections:
Section 1: Assessment Area Delineation
Section 2: Potential Contaminant Source Inventory and Map
Section 3: What is a Susceptibility Rating?
Section 4: Reviewing Your SWAP Results
Section 5: List of Maps, Tables and Figures for Your Well(s)
Section 6: North Carolina's SWAP Approach
Section 1: Assessment Area Delineation
The area delineated for your well(s) for the purpose of this assessment is the contributing area for the well(s). When a well is pumped, it begins to influence groundwater that is flowing through the subsurface and towards the well. The pumping of the well creates a contributing area around
the well that supplies water to the well. This is the area through which contaminants, if released to the environment, can be reasonably expected to move through the ground and reach the well.
PWS ID: 03-83-107 3 April 26, 2017
Section 2: Potential Contaminant Source Inventory and Map
The potential contaminant source inventory map shows the delineated area for your well(s). This
is the area where potential contaminant sources, if released to the environment, could reasonably be expected to be a risk or a potential for contamination of your drinking water supply. A PCS in this assessment report is a facility or site regulated under a state or federal regulatory program. These facilities are identified in electronic databases that contain location information for each facility. Only databases that include information statewide were used for this source water
assessment. Included in this report are:
1) A table of any PCS identified within the delineated assessment area; and
2) A map of the delineated assessment area showing PCSs, roads, jurisdictional boundaries and other pertinent information.
It is important to note that the PCSs identified in this report are only potential sources of
contamination to your drinking water source. Environmental contamination is not likely to occur if harmful contaminants are managed properly.
Section 3: What is a Susceptibility Rating?
In North Carolina the susceptibility of any drinking water source is based on two components, a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. Your well(s) was assigned a qualitative
susceptibility rating of higher, moderate or lower based on the results of the contaminant rating and inherent vulnerability rating process as described in the following paragraphs.
Susceptibility Rating
The final susceptibility rating for your well(s) is determined by combining the contaminant rating and the inherent vulnerability rating. More detailed information on the susceptibility rating
process can be found in Section 6 of this report
Contaminant Rating
The contaminant rating for your well(s) was determined based on the number and location of PCSs within the delineated area. Each PCS identified within the delineated area was assigned a risk rating of higher, moderate or lower. If a PCS is a facility regulated in an existing
environmental program, it will receive a risk rating of higher. The number of PCSs that occur within the delineated area was determined and a contaminant rating of higher, moderate, or lower was assigned to your well(s).
Inherent Vulnerability Rating
The inherent vulnerability rating of your well(s) refers to the geologic characteristics or existing
conditions of the well and its delineated assessment area. These characteristics include aquifer rating, unsaturated zone rating and well integrity/well construction rating. The aquifer rating is an assessment of the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifer. The unsaturated zone rating is an assessment of the likelihood that contaminants from surface and shallow sources will
PWS ID: 03-83-107 4 April 26, 2017
follow the path of aquifer recharge and reach the water table. The well integrity/construction rating is an assessment of the quality of the construction of the well. An inherent vulnerability
rating of higher, moderate or lower was assigned to your well(s).
PWS ID: 03-83-107 5 April 26, 2017
Table 2. SWAP Results Summary
Source Name
Inherent
Vulnerability
Rating
Contaminant
Rating
Susceptibility
Rating
WELL #1A Higher Lower Moderate
WELL #3 Higher Lower Moderate
WELL #6 Higher Lower Moderate
WELL #8 Moderate Lower Moderate
WELL #2A Moderate Lower Moderate
WELL #7 Higher Lower Moderate

It is important to understand that a susceptibility rating of higher does not
imply poor water quality. Susceptibility is an indication of a water supply's
potential to become contaminated by the identified PCSs within the
assessment area.

Table 3. Well Information
Source Name Well Yield
(Gallons/Min)
Well Depth
(Feet)
WELL #1A 510 193
WELL #3 381 251
WELL #6 550 180
WELL #8 400 110
WELL #2A 609 175
WELL #7 450 162
PWS ID: 03-83-107 6 April 26, 2017
Section 4: Reviewing Your SWAP Results
Please review the information on your well(s) provided in this report. If you believe any of this
information is incorrect please contact the Public Water Supply Section by e-mail at the following address: [e-mail]. Or you may submit comments to us at:
SWAP Public Water Supply Section 1634 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1634
Or you may contact the Source Water Assessment staff by phone at 919-707-9098.
PWS ID: 03-83-107 7 April 26, 2017
Section 5: Maps, Tables and Figures for Your Well(s)
Maps, tables and figures specific to your well(s) are included in this report in the following pages
and are listed below.
Map 1. Location Map
Map 2. Delineated Area and PCS Map

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation

Figure 1. Land Use / Land Cover Categories
Figure 2. Unsaturated Zone Rating
Figure 3. Vertical Hydraulic Conductance Rating
Figure 4. Land Surface Slope Rating
Figure 5. Land Use Rating
Figure 6. Land Cover Rating

PWS ID: 03-83-107 8 April 26, 2017 "ROBESONROBESON
HOKEHOKE
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
Laurinburg
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rowland
Rennert
Lumberton
Lumber Bridge
Mcdonald
Lumberton
Raynham
East Laurinburg
I -9 5US-401NC-72U S -3 0 1
NC-71
US-1
U
S-74
N
C-711NC-211NC-20
NC-710NC-97
N C -41US-74
N
C
-2
1
1NC-71U
S-74
NC-710WELL #1A
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 9 April 26, 2017
(
<
<
7
7
"WELL #1A
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
PCS Types
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 10 April 26, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #1A

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
LUTER PACKING CO.
18553 Pollution Incidents H STATE ROAD 1435 LAURINBURG Unknown SCOTL

PWS ID: 03-83-107 11 April 26, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #1A

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Pollutant Type GASOLINE/DIESEL/KEROSENE
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Site Risk L

PWS ID: 03-83-107 12 April 26, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #1A

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Higher
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Moderate

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Higher

PWS ID: 03-83-107 13 April 26, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107 , WELL #1A

Unsaturated Zone Rating 58.2

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 14 April 26, 2017 "WELL #1A
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 15 April 26, 2017 "WELL #1A
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 16 April 26, 2017 "WELL #1A
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 17 April 26, 2017 "WELL #1A
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 18 April 26, 2017 "WELL #1A
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 19 April 26, 2017 "WELL #1A
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #1A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 20 April 26, 2017 "ROBESONROBESON
HOKEHOKE
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
Laurinburg
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rowland
Rennert
Lumberton
Mcdonald
Raynham
Lumber Bridge
East Laurinburg
Lumberton
I -9 5US-401NC-72U S -3 0 1
US-1
NC-71
U
S-74 NC-211NC-711
NC-20
NC-710NC-97
NC-41NC-
2
1
1
US-74 NC-71U
S-74
NC-710WELL #3
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 21 April 26, 2017
(
7 "WELL #3
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
PCS Types
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 22 April 26, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #3

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
LUTER PACKING CO.
18553 Pollution Incidents H STATE ROAD 1435 LAURINBURG Unknown SCOTL

PWS ID: 03-83-107 23 April 26, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #3

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Pollutant Type GASOLINE/DIESEL/KEROSENE
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Site Risk L

PWS ID: 03-83-107 24 April 26, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #3

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Higher
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Higher

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Higher

PWS ID: 03-83-107 25 April 26, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107 , WELL #3

Unsaturated Zone Rating 56.6

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 26 April 26, 2017 "WELL #3
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 27 April 26, 2017 "WELL #3
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 28 April 26, 2017 "WELL #3
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 29 April 26, 2017 "WELL #3
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 30 April 26, 2017 "WELL #3
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 31 April 26, 2017 "WELL #3
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #3

PWS ID: 03-83-107 32 April 26, 2017 "ROBESONROBESON
HOKEHOKE
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
Laurinburg
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rowland
Rennert
Lumberton
Mcdonald
Raynham
Lumber Bridge
East Laurinburg
Hoffman
Lumberton
I-9 5US-401NC-72U S -3 0 1
US-1
NC-71
U
S-74 NC-211N
C-711
NC-20
NC-710NC-97
NC-41NC-
2
1
1
US-74 NC-71U
S-74
NC-211
NC-710WELL #6
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 33 April 26, 2017
(
7
7
"WELL #6
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
PCS Types
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 34 April 26, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #6

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
LUTER PACKING CO.
18553 Pollution Incidents H STATE ROAD 1435 LAURINBURG Unknown SCOTL

PWS ID: 03-83-107 35 April 26, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #6

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Pollutant Type GASOLINE/DIESEL/KEROSENE
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Site Risk L

PWS ID: 03-83-107 36 April 26, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #6

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Higher
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Moderate

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Higher

PWS ID: 03-83-107 37 April 26, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107 , WELL #6

Unsaturated Zone Rating 51.9

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 38 April 26, 2017 "WELL #6
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 39 April 26, 2017 "WELL #6
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 40 April 26, 2017 "WELL #6
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 41 April 26, 2017 "WELL #6
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 42 April 26, 2017 "WELL #6
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 43 April 26, 2017 "WELL #6
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #6

PWS ID: 03-83-107 44 April 26, 2017 "HOKEHOKE
ROBESONROBESON
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
CUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDMOOREMOORE
Laurinburg
Hoffman
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rennert
Lumberton
Lumberton
Lumber Bridge
Raynham
East Laurinburg US-401U S -1NC-72I-9 5
NC-71
US-74
N
C-711NC-211U S -3 0 1
NC-20
NC-710NC-97
US-74
U S -4 0 1N
C-2
1
1NC
-2
1
1
NC-71US-74
NC-710WELL #8
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 45 April 26, 2017
(
_
7"WELL #8
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
PCS Types
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 46 April 26, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #8

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
Umicore USA, INC. WI0600145 UIC Permits M 17182 Airport Rd Maxton Unknown SCOTLAND
Umicore Autocatalyst Recycling
NCS000005 NPDES Permits L 17182 Airport Rd Maxton Unknown SCOTLAND

PWS ID: 03-83-107 47 April 26, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #8

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value
Umicore USA, INC. WI0600145 Permit Type Injection Deemed Air Well
Umicore Autocatalyst Recycling NCS000005 Permit Type Stormwater Discharge, Individual
Umicore Autocatalyst Recycling NCS000005 Permit Issued Date 8/16/2010
Umicore Autocatalyst Recycling NCS000005 Permit Expiration Date 8/31/2015
Umicore Autocatalyst Recycling NCS000005 Receiving Stream LUMBER RIVER

PWS ID: 03-83-107 48 April 26, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #8

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Higher
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Lower

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Moderate

PWS ID: 03-83-107 49 April 26, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107 , WELL #8

Unsaturated Zone Rating 53.4

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 50 April 26, 2017 "WELL #8
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 51 April 26, 2017 "WELL #8
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 52 April 26, 2017 "WELL #8
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 53 April 26, 2017 "WELL #8
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 54 April 26, 2017 "WELL #8
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 55 April 26, 2017 "WELL #8
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #8

PWS ID: 03-83-107 56 April 26, 2017 "ROBESONROBESON
HOKEHOKE
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
Laurinburg
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rowland
Rennert
Lumberton
Mcdonald
Raynham
Lumber Bridge
Lumberton
East Laurinburg
I -9 5US-401NC-72U S -3 0 1
NC-71
US-1
US-74 NC-211NC-711
NC-20
NC-710NC-97
NC-41N
C-2
1
1
US-74 NC-71U
S-74
NC-710WELL #2A
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 57 April 26, 2017
(
7
7
"WELL #2A
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
PCS Types
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 58 April 26, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #2A

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
LUTER PACKING CO.
18553 Pollution Incidents H STATE ROAD 1435 LAURINBURG Unknown SCOTL
Scotland Manufacturing Co Inc
NCG030156 NPDES Permits L 22261 Skyway Church Rd Laurinburg Unknown SCOTLAND

PWS ID: 03-83-107 59 April 26, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #2A

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Pollutant Type GASOLINE/DIESEL/KEROSENE
LUTER PACKING CO. 18553 Site Risk L
Scotland Manufacturing Co Inc NCG030156 Permit Type Metal Fabrication Stormwater Discharge COC
Scotland Manufacturing Co Inc NCG030156 Permit Issued Date 11/1/2012
Scotland Manufacturing Co Inc NCG030156 Permit Expiration Date 10/31/2017
Scotland Manufacturing Co Inc NCG030156 Receiving Stream Shoe Heel Creek (Big Shoe Heel Creek)(Maxton Pond)

PWS ID: 03-83-107 60 April 26, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #2A

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Higher
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Lower

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Moderate

PWS ID: 03-83-107 61 April 26, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107 , WELL #2A

Unsaturated Zone Rating 55.9

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 62 April 26, 2017 "WELL #2A
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 63 April 26, 2017 "WELL #2A
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 64 April 26, 2017 "WELL #2A
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 65 April 26, 2017 "WELL #2A
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 66 April 26, 2017 "WELL #2A
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 67 April 26, 2017 "WELL #2A
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #2A

PWS ID: 03-83-107 68 April 26, 2017 "HOKEHOKE
ROBESONROBESON
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
CUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDMOOREMOORE
Laurinburg
Hoffman
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rennert
Lumberton
Lumber Bridge
Raynham
Lumberton
East Laurinburg
McdonaldUS-401US-1
NC-72I-9 5
NC-71
US-74
U S -3 0 1 NC-211N
C-711
NC-20
NC-710NC-97
U S -4 01
NC-
2
1
1
US-74 NC-71US-74NC-
2
1
1
NC-710WELL #7
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 69 April 26, 2017
6
G
<
_"WELL #7
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
PCS Types
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 70 April 26, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #7

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT COMM
00-0-0000002506 UST Sites H 16701 AIRPORT ROAD MAXTON Unknown SCOTLAND

PWS ID: 03-83-107 71 April 26, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #7

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value

PWS ID: 03-83-107 72 April 26, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107, WELL #7

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Higher
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Higher

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Higher

PWS ID: 03-83-107 73 April 26, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
PWS ID: 03-83-107 , WELL #7

Unsaturated Zone Rating 51.3

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 74 April 26, 2017 "WELL #7
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 75 April 26, 2017 "WELL #7
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 76 April 26, 2017 "WELL #7
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 77 April 26, 2017 "WELL #7
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 78 April 26, 2017 "WELL #7
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 79 April 26, 2017 "WELL #7
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT, PWS ID: 0383107, WELL #7

PWS ID: 03-83-107 80 April 26, 2017
Section 6: North Carolina's SWAP Approach
This section of the report is a more detailed description of North Carolina's SWAP approach. This is a summary of Chapter 2 of North Carolina's Source Water Assessment Program Plan.
Description of North Carolina’s SWAP Approach
To meet the requirements of the 1996 SDWA Amendments, a Source Water Assessment was completed for approximately 9,000 drinking water sources in North Carolina. A delineated area for assessment was established for each drinking water source. An inventory of potential contaminant sources was conducted in each assessment area and finally, a susceptibility rating was assigned to each drinking water source. Because of the scope of this task and the limited
time and resources available for completing the work, North Carolina’s SWAP program efforts relies on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to effectively use information. GIS allows databases to be linked to points on a map (e.g., public water supply sources, streams, geology, land use, roads, permitted waste disposal sites, Superfund sites, etc.) and overlaid on top of one another.
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Surface Water Sources
For the purpose of performing source water assessments, "delineation" means defining what land area constitutes the area contributing water to a public water supply source. The delineation of the source water assessment areas for surface water sources was done in consideration and collaboration with the Water Supply Watershed Protection (WSWP) Program. During the
development of the WSWP program (final state rules adopted in 1992), the state worked with local governments to determine the location of all surface water sources and existing land uses within the water supply watersheds. This information, in conjunction with information on the types and location of wastewater discharges, was used to determine the appropriate Water Supply Watershed Classification for more than 200 surface water sources in the state. The
watershed classifications, WS-I, WS-II, WS-III, WS-IV, and WS-V are based on the size of the watershed, development activities, and allowable waste treatment and disposal practices.
All surface water sources were located on US Geological Survey 1:24,000 scale topographic maps. The water supply watershed boundaries were delineated (except WS-V waters, which
were delineated for the SWAP assessments by the PWS Section), and the boundaries of the
Critical Area, and in the case of most WS-IV water supply watersheds Protected Areas (described below) were delineated.
For protection of the surface water sources in North Carolina, a segmentation of the water supply watersheds was implemented through the WSWP rules. The entire drainage areas of WS-I water
supply watersheds were delineated. These watersheds are all publicly owned and no new
development is allowed in these watersheds. These watersheds are very small. Some are located within National Forests. Others are owned by a local government.
All WS-II, WS-III and WS-IV water supplies require delineation of a Critical Area which is defined as the area within ½ mile and draining to the normal pool elevation of a water supply
reservoir, or ½ mile and draining to a water supply intake in a river. For WS-II and WS-III water
supplies, the remainder of the drainage area is subject to the development standards of the

PWS ID: 03-83-107 81 April 26, 2017
WSWP rules and are implemented through local land use ordinances. WS-IV water supplies, which are typically portions of major river systems, are segmented in a Critical Area (previously defined) and a Protected Area. The Protected Area is defined as the area within 5 miles and draining to the normal pool elevation of a reservoir or 10 miles upstream and draining to a river
intake. In very few instances the WS-IV Protected Area encompasses the entire drainage area due to the size of the watershed. In 1995, the state allowed local governments to request that the 10 mile Protected Area boundary of a WS-IV water supply be measured “run of river” rather than using a 10-mile arc linear measurement. Surface waters that are used by industry to supply their employees with drinking water or waters formerly used as water supply are generally
classified as WS-V. The WS-V waters are protected as water supplies and are typically located upstream of and draining to Class WS-IV waters. Land use restrictions do not apply to WS-V waters under the WSWP rules.
Please note that for the purpose of the PWS Section’s Source Water Assessments, delineation of WS-IV boundaries may be different from the WSWP Program’s delineation. The PWS Section
watershed assessment areas include all land draining to a drinking water source. However, the watersheds defined in accordance with the WSWP rules often exclude land area draining to a source based on municipal or county jurisdictional boundaries. Please refer to the WSWP program website (http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/lr/water-supply-watershed) for information on the regulations associated with their program and the land area affected by their regulations.
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Public Water Supply Wells
The delineation of source water assessment areas for wells was in accordance with North Carolina’s EPA approved Wellhead Protection Program. The calculated fixed radius method was used to delineate assessment areas around each well in the following areas: piedmont and mountains; the unconfined surficial aquifer of the coastal plain; and in the semi-confined
portions of the Castle Hayne aquifer with an estimated recharge rate of 250,000 gallons per day per square mile. The aquifer-source-volume method was used for confined aquifers of the coastal plain. These methods are described below. Well depth is the determining factor for a well to be considered confined. Well depths greater than 70 feet are considered confined.
Other assessment area delineation methods may be of interest to a PWS system in an effort to
more accurately define the area contributing water to the well. The state will review delineations provided by any PWS system that employs acceptable alternative delineation methods. Resulting alternative delineation areas will be incorporated into the SWAP if the state concludes that the use of the more sophisticated method is appropriate.
Calculation of the Contributing Area
The first step in delineating the assessment areas is to determine the size of the contributing area to the well. When a well is pumped, it causes groundwater that is flowing through the subsurface to flow toward the well. The surface area surrounding a well that delineates the area in which water entering the groundwater system at the water table eventually flows to the well and
discharges is known as the contributing area for the well. In this area, any contaminants released
to the environment that reach the water table, can reasonably be expected to move toward and possibly reach the well. The calculated fixed radius method requires the pumping rate (Q) and the recharge rate (W) for the pumping well in order to calculate the size of the contributing area. The contributing area is calculated as follows:

PWS ID: 03-83-107 82 April 26, 2017

where:
AC = contributing area in square miles,
Q = maximum daily pumping rate in gallons per day, and W = average recharge rate in gallons per day per square mile.
The maximum daily pumping rate in gallons per day was determined from information on wells obtained from PWS Section sanitary survey inspection forms, Division of Water Resources Local Water Supply plans, and information supplied by system owners/operators. Where no
information was available, an estimate of maximum daily pumping rate was assigned based on hydrogeologic characteristics of the aquifer supplying water to the well.
Size of the Assessment Area for Wells Using Calculated Fixed Radius Method
Estimates of the size of the contributing area can be obtained using the equation given above. However, because of the complex nature of groundwater flow and contaminant transport, it is not
possible to define exact contributing area boundaries around each well. Two factors that affect the shape of the contributing area and its position and orientation with respect to a pumping well are the hydraulic gradient and aquifer transmissivity. The variation in aquifer transmissivity is important in determining the shape of the contributing area for a supply well. In areas where the hydraulic gradient and the aquifer transmissivity are essentially the same in all directions, the
shape of the contributing area depends primarily on the hydraulic gradient. Where the water table is nearly flat, as near the water-table divide in broad interstream areas of low relief, the contributing area is approximately circular. Where the hydraulic gradient is moderate to steep, the contributing area is approximately elliptical, being oriented in the direction of groundwater movement.
Due to limited availability of information on both hydraulic gradient and aquifer transmissivity, the assessment area for each well was doubled. Therefore, the assessment area for each well is twice the size of the calculated contributing area or:

W
Q = AC
W
2Q = A2 = A CSWAP

PWS ID: 03-83-107 83 April 26, 2017
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Wells in Confined Aquifers
Recharge to confined aquifers is much less than that to the surficial unconfined aquifer where the calculated fixed radius method was used. If the calculated fixed radius method were applied to wells withdrawing water from confined aquifers, the resulting assessment areas would be very
large. With the exception of a portion of the Castle Hayne aquifer, the aquifer-source-volume method was used for delineating assessment areas for wells determined to be withdrawing water from highly confined and semi-confined aquifers. “Aquifer source volume” refers to the volume of the source aquifer that supplies the withdrawals from a well for a specified period of time. This factor has been adopted in many states for defining assessment areas for confined aquifers.
For the purpose of these assessments, the volume of aquifer that supplies ten years of withdrawals (i.e. the area surrounding a well in which the time of travel to the well is ten years) was used. A ten-year period should be sufficient to provide time to assess the potential impact of any groundwater contamination discovered within an assessment area and for developing appropriate remediation and source water protection strategies for the water supply. For any well
in the coastal plain determined to be withdrawing water from a confined aquifer, the table below will be used to determine the size of the assessment area.

Table 1. Radii of Assessment Areas for
Wells Withdrawing from Confined Aquifers in the Coastal Plain
Pumping Rate of
Well
(Gal. / min.)
Radius of Assessment
Area (Feet Rounded)
50 1000
100 1000
200 1500
500 2000
1000 3000
2000 3500

PWS ID: 03-83-107 84 April 26, 2017
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Water Supply Sources Classified as GWUDIs
Drinking water supplied by a well may include a surface water component. This is defined as Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water (GWUDIs). This term is used to indicate that water withdrawn from a well contains a specific indicator or indicators
(e.g., giardia) of the presence of a surface water component. The delineated area for a PWS well classified as a GWUDI well will be the combined area of a circle based on the calculated fixed radius method and the resulting upgradient watershed of the intersected surface water. Segmentation of the resulting watersheds was in accordance with the most appropriate water supply watershed classification scheme.
Delineation for Water Supply Sources Classified as Springs
Springs can be defined as areas where the water table intersects the ground surface. Ground water may have flowed many miles before appearing on the surface to form a particular spring. The delineated area for a drinking water source classified as a spring was defined as the entire watershed area upgradient of the spring. Segmentation of the resulting watersheds was in
accordance with the most appropriate water supply watershed classification scheme.
Susceptibility Rating Methodology
The state determined that the overall susceptibility rating for each drinking water source should be based on two key components, a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. Inherent vulnerability refers to the physical characteristics and existing conditions of the
watershed or aquifer. A contaminant rating refers to an evaluation of the number and location of potential sources of contamination. The contaminant rating and inherent vulnerability methodologies are explained below.
Contaminant Rating Methodology
The contaminant rating for each water supply source was determined based on the number and
location of potential contaminant sources (PCSs) within the delineated area. The delineated area for the drinking water source encompasses the area where PCSs, if released to the environment, could reasonably be expected to be a risk or a potential for contamination of the drinking water supply. A PCS in this assessment report is a facility or site regulated under a state or federal
regulatory program. These facilities are identified in electronic databases that contain location
information for each facility. Only databases that include information statewide were used for this source water assessment. Each PCS identified within the delineated area was assigned a risk rating of higher, moderate or lower. The number of PCSs that occur within the delineated area was determined and a Contaminant Rating of higher, moderate or lower was assigned to each
drinking water source.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 85 April 26, 2017
Contaminant Rating for Ground Water Sources
For each ground water source, define an inner Zone A with an area equal to half the area of the delineated assessment area. Using Table 2, determine the number of PCSs that occur within each risk category according to their location, either in Zone A or in the remaining
delineated area. Determine the Contaminant Rating of higher, moderate or lower for each well by adding the totals for each risk category.
Table 2. Determination of Contaminant Rating for Ground Water Sources

Potential
Contaminant
Sources in :
Number of
Higher Risk
PCSs

Cumulative Number of
Higher and Moderate
Risk PCSs

Cumulative Number of
Higher, Moderate and
Lower Risk PCSs

Zone A
(the inner 1/2 of the
delineated area)
(Number of sources )
> 1 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 2 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 4 Score: (1 or 0)

Delineated
Area (Zone A plus the remaining delineated area)

(Number of sources )
> 2 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 4 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 8 Score: (1 or 0)

For each category, score “1” if the number of contaminants exceeds the indicated threshold,
or score “0” if the number of contaminants is less than the threshold. Total all the scores (1 or
0) for each category. Therefore, the highest possible score is 6.
Determine the Contaminant Rating for each well as follows:
Higher (6 - 4)
Moderate (3 - 2)
Lower (< 1)
Contaminant Rating for Surface Water Sources
Because the WSWP rules prohibit development in these watersheds, the existence of one PCS in the delineated area of a drinking water source located in a WS-I watershed will result in a contaminant rating of higher.
Using Table 3 for WS-II and WS-III watersheds, or Table 4 for WS-IV and V watersheds,
determine the number of PCSs that occur within each risk category (i.e., lower, moderate or higher risk) and within each delineated assessment area (e.g., critical area, protected area, etc). Determine the Contaminant Rating for each surface water PWS source by summing the totals for each risk category.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 86 April 26, 2017

Table 3. Determination of Contaminant Rating
for Surface Water Sources in WS - II or III Watersheds
Potential
Contaminant
Sources in :

Number of
Higher Risk
PCSs

Cumulative
Number of Higher
and Moderate Risk
PCSs

Cumulative Number
of Higher, Moderate
and Lower Risk
PCSs

Critical Area

(Number of sources )

> 1 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources_____)

> 5 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 10 Score: (1 or 0)

Watershed Area

Within 1000 Foot
Stream Zone
(Number of
sources )

> 5
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number
of sources )

> 10
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number
of sources )

> 20
Score: (1 or 0)

Watershed Area

Outside Stream
Zone
(Number of sources )

> 20
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 40
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 80
Score: (1 or 0)

For each category, score “1” if the number of contaminants exceeds the indicated threshold,
or score “0” if the number of contaminants is less than the threshold. Total the scores (1 or 0 for each category). Therefore, the highest possible score is a 9.
Determine the Contaminant Rating for each surface water source in a Water Supply Watershed II or III as follows:
Higher (9 - 6)
Moderate (5 - 3)
Lower (< 2)

PWS ID: 03-83-107 87 April 26, 2017
Table 4. Determination of Contaminant Rating
for Surface Water Sources in WS - IV and V Watersheds

Potential
Contaminant
Sources in :

Number of
Higher Risk
PCSs

Cumulative Number of
Higher and Moderate
Risk
PCSs

Cumulative
Number of Higher,
Moderate and
Lower Risk PCSs

Critical Area

(Number of sources )

> 1 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 5 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 10 Score: (1 or 0)

Protected Area

Within 1000 Foot
Stream Zone
(Number of sources )

> 5 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 10 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 20 Score: (1 or 0)

Protected Area

Outside Stream
Zone

(Number of sources )

> 20 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 40 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 80 Score: (1 or 0)

Stream Zone from
Protected Area to
25 Mile or
Watershed
Boundary
(Number of
sources )
> 20
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of
sources )
> 40
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of
sources )
> 80
Score: (1 or 0)

For each category, score “1” if the number of contaminants exceeds indicated threshold. If the number of contaminants is less than the threshold score “0.” Total all the scores (1 or 0
for each category). Therefore, the highest possible score is a 12.
Determine the Contaminant Rating for each surface water source in a Water Supply Watershed IV or V as follows:
Higher (12 - 9)
Moderate (8 - 4)
Lower (< 3)

PWS ID: 03-83-107 88 April 26, 2017
Inherent Vulnerability Rating Methodology
The inherent vulnerability of a well or surface water source refers to the characteristics or existing conditions of the well or surface water source and its delineated assessment area. Several factors were evaluated for both groundwater and surface water sources and included in
the inherent vulnerability rating of each public water supply source. Each drinking water source was assigned an inherent vulnerability rating of higher, moderate or lower.
Inherent Vulnerability Rating for Wells
The characteristics included for assigning an inherent vulnerability rating for wells are aquifer rating, unsaturated zone rating and well integrity/well construction rating. The aquifer
rating is an assessment of the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifer. The unsaturated zone rating is an assessment of the likelihood that contaminants from surface and shallow sources will follow the path of aquifer recharge and reach the water table. The well integrity/construction rating is an assessment of the quality of the construction of the well. A brief description of each factor follows:
Aquifer Rating
The aquifer rating is a qualitative assessment of the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifer. Relative differences in aquifer vulnerability were based on a review of relevant literature, expert opinions, and confirmed with historical data. Factors considered in rating aquifer vulnerability include hydraulic conductivity, degree of confinement, dilution, and
sorption potential. The attenuative capacity of the unsaturated zone is not considered in the determination of aquifer ratings. Table 5 summarizes the aquifer-rating scheme used for these assessments.
Well depths determined whether a well was considered unconfined, deep confined or shallow confined for these assessments. Wells less than or equal to 70 feet deep were considered to
be withdrawing water from an unconfined or surficial aquifer. Wells greater than 70 feet but less than 180 feet deep were considered to be withdrawing water from a shallow confined aquifer. Wells greater than 180 feet deep were considered to be withdrawing water from a deep confined aquifer.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 89 April 26, 2017
Table 5. Aquifer Rating Based on Water Transmitting Characteristics
Aquifer/Ground Water Source Rating
Coastal Plain Aquifers:
Deep Confined (e.g., Kinston area) Lower
Shallow Confined (e.g., Pamlico Co.) Moderate
Unconfined (e.g., Castle Hayne Outcrop area) Higher
Piedmont and Mountain Aquifers:
Triassic Basins (e.g., Sanford-Durham) Moderate
Fractured Rock Aquifers Higher
Other:
Metamudstones and Meta-argillites of the Carolina Slate Belt Higher
Areas with Wells Cased to Less Than 20 Feet Higher
Groundwater under the Direct Influence of Surface Water Higher
Sand Hills Area Higher

Unsaturated Zone Rating
The state, in cooperation with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), developed the unsaturated zone rating methodology. The USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4283, "Methods of Rating Unsaturated Zone and Watershed Characteristics of Public Water
Supplies in North Carolina" describes the methodology. The unsaturated zone rating is the
combination of selected factors that contribute to the likelihood that contaminants from surface and shallow sources will follow the path of aquifer recharge and reach the water table. Contributing factors, in the form of GIS spatial data layers, include land use/land cover, vertical hydraulic conductance of the unsaturated zone, and land-surface slope.
Vertical hydraulic conductance measures the capacity of the unsaturated zone to transmit
water from land surface to water table. Land-surface slope and land cover influences the amount of precipitation that infiltrates into the subsurface. Land use describes the activities that take place on the surface or in the shallow subsurface and the type of contaminants that may be present as a result of those activities (i.e., "non-point source" potential contaminant
sources).

PWS ID: 03-83-107 90 April 26, 2017
Well Integrity/Construction Rating
The integrity of well construction can vary widely, depending on details such as casing depth, grouting depth, well materials and driller knowledge. However, these details are not always available for assigning SWAP assessment ratings. In 1994 and 1999 there were
important rule changes that greatly improve the quality of the well construction standards. Therefore, the SWAP assessments use well construction and approval dates as a surrogate to construction details to assign a well construction / integrity rating. For wells that construction and approval date is not available, the well construction/integrity rating defaults to Higher.
Table 6 summarizes the characteristics evaluated and rated for the inherent vulnerability for
each PWS well. Each well was assigned an inherent vulnerability rating of higher, moderate or lower:
Table 6. Inherent Vulnerability Rating of Wells

Inherent Vulnerability
Factors

Higher
Vulnerability

Moderate
Vulnerability

Lower
Vulnerability

Aquifer Rating

10 5 - 1
Unsaturated Zone
Rating
10 5 1
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
5
3 1

Totals

25-18

17-15

14-1

Inherent Vulnerability Rating for Surface Water Sources
The inherent vulnerability of a surface water source refers to the characteristics and existing conditions of the source and the delineated assessment area (watershed). The characteristics included for assigning an inherent vulnerability rating are water supply watershed
classification, surface water source location, raw water quality, and the watershed characteristics rating. The watershed classification is based on the size of the watershed, development activities, and allowable waste treatment and disposal practices. The surface water sources were characterized based on whether they are located in streams, large multi-purpose reservoirs, or small water supply reservoirs. The raw water quality rating is based on
recorded turbidity and total coliform values over a twelve month period. The watershed characteristics rating is an assessment of the likelihood that contaminants will follow the path of overland flow or shallow subsurface flow to a surface water source. A description of each factor follows:

PWS ID: 03-83-107 91 April 26, 2017
Watershed Classification
In North Carolina, all surface water sources are located in water supply watersheds that are classified as either WS-I, II, III, IV, or V. The Water Supply Watershed Protection rules required that all local governments having land use jurisdiction within water supply
watersheds adopt and implement water supply watershed protection ordinances, maps and a management plan. All of these ordinances are in place and have been deemed to be in compliance with the statutory requirements. The inherent vulnerability ratings for watershed classification are based on differences between watershed classes, including size of the watershed, development activities, and allowable waste treatment and disposal practices.
Surface Water Source Location
All surface water sources are located in streams, large multi-purpose reservoirs (Class 3), or small water supply reservoirs (Class 1 or 2). The inherent vulnerability ratings for surface water source location are based on differences between the reaction time for a water plant in the case of a contamination event or spill in a stream versus a reservoir and includes the
allowable activities on surface water reservoirs (i.e., single use versus multiple uses allowed).
Raw Water Quality
The likelihood of the presence of Cryptosporidium and other water-borne microorganisms increases when turbidity is high. Therefore, turbidity and total coliform bacteria are good indicators of raw water quality. The Area Wide Optimization Program (AWOP) within the
PWS Section has developed a ranking system for surface water treatment plants based primarily on these two parameters. This ranking system, with some minor modifications, has been adopted by SWAP in order to assign a raw water quality rating to each surface water source.
The AWOP ranking system is based on the treatment plant’s raw, settled and finished water
turbidity and coliform levels along with violations of MCLs and treatment techniques. Raw, settled and finished water samples are collected daily and compiled in a monthly report, commonly referred to as a MOR (monthly operating report). The AWOP ranking system first totals the number of months in a year that specific levels of turbidity and coliform are
exceeded and/or the number of months certain violations occur. The monthly totals are then
multiplied by a weighting factor to balance the relative importance of these parameters. These numbers are then totaled for the year and are considered the water treatment plant’s total score.
Because the purpose of SWAP is to assess sources of drinking water supply and not how well
water plants treat their water, SWAP only uses the raw water scores for turbidity and
coliform from the AWOP ranking system. The total raw water quality scores were divided into three categories of vulnerability: Higher, Moderate and Lower. The AWOP ranking system is for surface water treatment plants and not individual surface water sources. Therefore, in the case where more than one source is used by a treatment plant, the plant’s
raw water quality rating was initially assigned to all of the plant’s sources. Upon review by
the regional office staff some of the ratings were then adjusted based on their extensive knowledge of the surface water sources in their area.

PWS ID: 03-83-107 92 April 26, 2017

Watershed Characteristics Rating
The state determined the watershed characteristics ratings of each surface water source in cooperation with the USGS. The USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4283,
"Methods of Rating Unsaturated Zone and Watershed Characteristics of Public Water Supplies in North Carolina" describes this methodology. The watershed characteristics ratings were based on the combination of selected factors that may contribute to the likelihood that contaminants follow the path of overland flow and reach the surface water source. Contributing factors, in the form of GIS spatial data layers, include average annual
precipitation, land cover, land use, land-surface slope and groundwater contribution. Precipitation is the source of water transported overland to a stream or lake. Land-surface slope and land cover influence the amount of precipitation that infiltrates into the subsurface. Land use describes the activities that take place on the surface or in the shallow subsurface and the type of contaminants that may be present as a result of those activities (i.e., non-point
source potential contaminant sources). Ground-water contribution is the effect of ground water on surface-water quantity and quality. For these assessments the ground-water contribution is derived from the unsaturated zone rating described in the ground water inherent vulnerability section of this report. Table 7 includes the characteristics that were evaluated and rated for the inherent vulnerability for each surface water source:
Table 7. Inherent Vulnerability of Surface Water Sources

Surface Water
Source
Characteristics

Higher
Vulnerability

Moderate
Vulnerability

Lower
Vulnerability
Watershed
Classification
WS-IV, WS-V 10
WS-III, WS-II 5
WS-I 1

Intake Location
Direct Stream 8
Class 3 Reservoirs 4
Class 1 and 2 Reservoirs 2

Raw Water Quality
(water plant data)

5
3 1

Watershed
Characteristics
Rating

10

5

1

Totals

33 - 21

20 - 13

12 - 5

PWS ID: 03-83-107 93 April 26, 2017
Susceptibility Rating Methodology
The state assigned a susceptibility rating for each drinking water source that was based on two components, a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. Using the results of the evaluations of contaminant rating and inherent vulnerability rating for each public drinking water
source, a susceptibility rating of higher, moderate or lower was assigned to each source according to the table below:
Table 8. Susceptibility Rating for Public Water Supply Sources
by Combining the Inherent Vulnerability and Contaminant Ratings.
Contaminant
Rating
Inherent Vulnerability Rating
Higher Moderate Lower
Higher H H M
Moderate H M M
Lower M M L

Divider
Page

Source Water Assessment Program Report
for
MAXTON, TOWN OF
Community Water System

Introduction: What is a Source Water Assessment?
The North Carolina Division of Water Resources, Public Water Supply (PWS) Section is
responsible for implementing the Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) and completing assessments for all public drinking water supplies in the state. The 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act provided federal support and required states to conduct assessments of all public water systems. A source water assessment is a qualitative evaluation of the potential of a drinking water source to become contaminated by the identified potential contaminant sources
(PCS) within the delineated area. In North Carolina there are more than 10,000 public water supply sources that were assessed by the state. The PWS Section has gathered information for each water supply and developed a process for completing the assessments. This process is summarized in the next few pages and detailed in Section 6 of this report.
This report provides a summary of the results for the Source Water Assessment for your
drinking water source(s).

What is the Source of Your Drinking Water?
Everyone wants clean, safe drinking water and we assume this natural resource will always be
available to us. However, drinking water wells can be threatened by many potential contaminant sources, including underground storage tanks for gasoline, permitted waste disposal sites, storm water runoff or improper handling of hazardous materials. Your drinking water source(s) is listed in Table 1. Protecting your water from becoming contaminated is a wise investment in public
health and your community's future.
PWS ID: 03-78-035 2 April 25, 2017
Table 1. Public Water Supply System Information
System Name MAXTON, TOWN OF
City MAXTON
PWS ID 03-78-035
Source Name WELL #1
Source Name WELL #2

In addition to the sources listed in Table 1 above, this water supply system (MAXTON, TOWN OF) has interconnections to allow for the purchase of water from the following water system(s) or "Seller" system(s):
 LAURINBURG-MAXTON AIRPORT
 ROBESON CO #1
 ROBESON CO #2
Please refer to the Source Water Assessment Program Report for the "Seller" system(s) to review the assessment results for the purchased water supply sources that provide drinking water for this
water system (MAXTON, TOWN OF).
Assessment Report Contents
This assessment report includes the following sections:
Section 1: Assessment Area Delineation
Section 2: Potential Contaminant Source Inventory and Map
Section 3: What is a Susceptibility Rating?
Section 4: Reviewing Your SWAP Results
Section 5: List of Maps, Tables and Figures for Your Well(s)
Section 6: North Carolina's SWAP Approach
Section 1: Assessment Area Delineation
The area delineated for your well(s) for the purpose of this assessment is the contributing area for the well(s). When a well is pumped, it begins to influence groundwater that is flowing through the subsurface and towards the well. The pumping of the well creates a contributing area around the well that supplies water to the well. This is the area through which contaminants, if released to the environment, can be reasonably expected to move through the ground and reach the well.
PWS ID: 03-78-035 3 April 25, 2017
Section 2: Potential Contaminant Source Inventory and Map
The potential contaminant source inventory map shows the delineated area for your well(s). This
is the area where potential contaminant sources, if released to the environment, could reasonably be expected to be a risk or a potential for contamination of your drinking water supply. A PCS in this assessment report is a facility or site regulated under a state or federal regulatory program. These facilities are identified in electronic databases that contain location information for each facility. Only databases that include information statewide were used for this source water
assessment. Included in this report are:
1) A table of any PCS identified within the delineated assessment area; and
2) A map of the delineated assessment area showing PCSs, roads, jurisdictional boundaries and other pertinent information.
It is important to note that the PCSs identified in this report are only potential sources of
contamination to your drinking water source. Environmental contamination is not likely to occur if harmful contaminants are managed properly.
Section 3: What is a Susceptibility Rating?
In North Carolina the susceptibility of any drinking water source is based on two components, a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. Your well(s) was assigned a qualitative
susceptibility rating of higher, moderate or lower based on the results of the contaminant rating and inherent vulnerability rating process as described in the following paragraphs.
Susceptibility Rating
The final susceptibility rating for your well(s) is determined by combining the contaminant rating and the inherent vulnerability rating. More detailed information on the susceptibility rating
process can be found in Section 6 of this report
Contaminant Rating
The contaminant rating for your well(s) was determined based on the number and location of PCSs within the delineated area. Each PCS identified within the delineated area was assigned a risk rating of higher, moderate or lower. If a PCS is a facility regulated in an existing
environmental program, it will receive a risk rating of higher. The number of PCSs that occur within the delineated area was determined and a contaminant rating of higher, moderate, or lower was assigned to your well(s).
Inherent Vulnerability Rating
The inherent vulnerability rating of your well(s) refers to the geologic characteristics or existing
conditions of the well and its delineated assessment area. These characteristics include aquifer rating, unsaturated zone rating and well integrity/well construction rating. The aquifer rating is an assessment of the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifer. The unsaturated zone rating is an assessment of the likelihood that contaminants from surface and shallow sources will
PWS ID: 03-78-035 4 April 25, 2017
follow the path of aquifer recharge and reach the water table. The well integrity/construction rating is an assessment of the quality of the construction of the well. An inherent vulnerability
rating of higher, moderate or lower was assigned to your well(s).
PWS ID: 03-78-035 5 April 25, 2017
Table 2. SWAP Results Summary
Source Name
Inherent
Vulnerability
Rating
Contaminant
Rating
Susceptibility
Rating
WELL #1 Moderate Lower Moderate
WELL #2 Lower Lower Lower

It is important to understand that a susceptibility rating of higher does not
imply poor water quality. Susceptibility is an indication of a water supply's
potential to become contaminated by the identified PCSs within the
assessment area.

Table 3. Well Information
Source Name Well Yield
(Gallons/Min)
Well Depth
(Feet)
WELL #1 450 100
WELL #2 600 172
Section 4: Reviewing Your SWAP Results
Please review the information on your well(s) provided in this report. If you believe any of this information is incorrect please contact the Public Water Supply Section by e-mail at the following address: [e-mail]. Or you may submit comments to us at:
SWAP Public Water Supply Section
1634 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1634
Or you may contact the Source Water Assessment staff by phone at 919-707-9098.
PWS ID: 03-78-035 6 April 25, 2017
Section 5: Maps, Tables and Figures for Your Well(s)
Maps, tables and figures specific to your well(s) are included in this report in the following pages
and are listed below.
Map 1. Location Map
Map 2. Delineated Area and PCS Map

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation

Figure 1. Land Use / Land Cover Categories
Figure 2. Unsaturated Zone Rating
Figure 3. Vertical Hydraulic Conductance Rating
Figure 4. Land Surface Slope Rating
Figure 5. Land Use Rating
Figure 6. Land Cover Rating

PWS ID: 03-78-035 7 April 25, 2017 "ROBESONROBESON
HOKEHOKE
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
RICHMONDRICHMOND
CUMBERLANDCUMBERLAND
Laurinburg
Lumberton
Raeford
Maxton
Red Springs
Pembroke
Wagram
Fairmont
Gibson
Rowland
Rennert
Lumber Bridge
Mcdonald
Raynham
East Laurinburg
I -9 5US-401NC-72N
C
-2
1
1
U S -3 0 1
NC-71
NC-711
US-74
NC-20
N C -41NC-710NC-97 NC-211US-74
N C -7 1
U
S-74
NC-710MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 8 April 25, 2017
(
(
(
h
GG
G
G
"Maxton
US-74
WELL #1
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
PCS Types
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 9 April 25, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035, WELL #1

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
MAXTON, NC CENTRAL OFFICE
4034004 Tier II Sites H 32 EAST COTTINGHAM STREET
MAXTON Unknown Robeson

PWS ID: 03-78-035 10 April 25, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035, WELL #1

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value

PWS ID: 03-78-035 11 April 25, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035, WELL #1

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Moderate
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Higher

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Moderate

PWS ID: 03-78-035 12 April 25, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035 , WELL #1

Unsaturated Zone Rating 61.8

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-78-035 13 April 25, 2017 "WELL #1
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 14 April 25, 2017 "WELL #1
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 15 April 25, 2017 "WELL #1
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 16 April 25, 2017 "WELL #1
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 17 April 25, 2017 "WELL #1
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 300 600 900 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 18 April 25, 2017 "WELL #1
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 300 600 900 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #1

PWS ID: 03-78-035 19 April 25, 2017 "ROBESONROBESON
SCOTLANDSCOTLAND
HOKEHOKERICHMONDRICHMOND
CUMBERLANDCUMBERLAND
Laurinburg
Lumberton
Maxton
Red Springs
Fairmont
Raeford
Pembroke
Wagram
Gibson
Rowland
Rennert
Lumber Bridge
Mcdonald
Raynham
East Laurinburg
I-9 5US-401NC-72N
C
-2
1
1
U S -3 0 1
NC-71
N
C-711
U
S-74
NC-20
N C-41NC-710NC-97 NC-211US-74
N C -7 1
U
S-74
N
C-
2
0
NC-710WELL #2
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP ©Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
County Boundaries
04812Miles
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 20 April 25, 2017
)
(
+
h
G
"Maxton
US-74
WELL #2
MAP 2. DELINEATED AREA AND PCS MAP ©6 Animal Operations
*CERCLIS Sites
)RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities
<Non Discharge Permits
7 NPDES Permits
[National Priority List Sites
F PCB Sites
(Pollution Incidents
+Septage Disposal Sites
,Soil Remediation Sites
i Solid Waste Facilities
h Tier II Sites
8 RCRA TSD Facilities
9 Old Landfill Sites
_UIC Permits
G UST Permits
Roads
Rivers and Streams
Major Hydrology
Municipal Boundaries
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
PCS Types
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 21 April 25, 2017

Table 4. Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035, WELL #2

Common Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID PCS Type PCS Risk Rating Street Address City Zip County
CAMPBELL SOUP SUPPLY COMPANY
NCD097728000 RCRA Gen. / Trans. Facilities H NC 71 HWY N MAXTON Unknown ROBESON

PWS ID: 03-78-035 22 April 25, 2017

Table 4. (Cont.) Potential Contaminant Source Attributes
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035, WELL #2

Unique Attributes

PCS Name PCS ID Attribute Value
CAMPBELL SOUP SUPPLY COMPANY NCD097728000 GENERATOR SQG
CAMPBELL SOUP SUPPLY COMPANY NCD097728000 TRANSPORTER N

PWS ID: 03-78-035 23 April 25, 2017

Table 5. Inherent Vulnerability Rating
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035, WELL #2

Ground Water Source
Characteristics
Higher
Vulnerability
Moderate
Vulnerability
Lower
Vulnerability
Aquifer Rating Moderate
Unsaturated Zone
Rating Moderate
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
Lower

Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Lower

PWS ID: 03-78-035 24 April 25, 2017

Table 6. Unsaturated Zone Rating Calculation
MAXTON, TOWN OF
PWS ID: 03-78-035 , WELL #2

Unsaturated Zone Rating 62.0

Notes:

1. Unsaturated Zone Rating for each cell (CR):
CR = [3 x (vertical hydraulic conductance rating)] + [2 x (land surface slope rating)]
+ [3 x (land use rating)] + [2 x (land cover rating)]

2. Unsaturated Zone Rating (R) for the entire Assessment Area is the mean of the cell ratings (CR)
calculated as:
The sum of all cell unsaturated zone ratings (CR) divided by the number of cells (N) within the
assessment area: R = (CR) / N

3. The USGS publication “Methods of ranking unsaturated zone and watershed characteristics of
public water supplies in North Carolina,” by J. L. Eimers, J. C. Weaver, S. Terziotti, and R. W. Midgette, 1999, provides a detailed discussion of the methods used to determine unsaturated zone ratings.

PWS ID: 03-78-035 25 April 25, 2017 "WELL #2
FIGURE 1. LAND USE/LAND COVER CATEGORIES ©Water
Developed, Open Space
Developed, Low Intensity
Developed, Medium Intensity
Developed, High Intensity
Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay)
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Shrub/Scrub
Grassland, Herbaceous
Pasture, Hay
Cultivated Crops
Woody Wetlands
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 26 April 25, 2017 "WELL #2
FIGURE 2. UNSATURATED ZONE RATING ©Lower <= 50
Moderate < 50 to 65
Higher > 65
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 27 April 25, 2017 "WELL #2
FIGURE 3. VERTICAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTANCE RATING ©
1 ( <= 5 sq. ft./day)
2 ( >5 to 10 sq. ft./day)
3 ( >10 to 20 sq. ft./day)
4 ( > 20 to 40 sq. ft./day)
5 ( > 40 to 80 sq. ft./day)
6 ( > 80 to 160 sq. ft./day)
7 ( > 160 to 320 sq. ft./day)
8 ( > 320 to 640 sq. ft./day)
9 ( > 640 to 1,280 sq. ft./day)
10 ( > 1,280 sq. ft./day)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 28 April 25, 2017 "WELL #2
FIGURE 4. LAND SURFACE SLOPE RATING ©
1 ( > 50 percent)
3 ( > 20 to 50 percent)
5 ( > 10 to 20 percent)
7 ( > 5 to 10 percent)
9 ( > 2 to 5 percent)
10 ( <= 2 percent)
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 29 April 25, 2017 "WELL #2
FIGURE 5. LAND USE RATING ©1 Water, Wetlands (Woody and Herbaceous)
2 Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)
3 Forest (Deciduous, Evergreen, Mixed)
4 Grassland/Herbaceous; Shrub/Scrub
5 Pasture/Hay
6 Developed, Open Space
7 Developed, Low Intensity; Cultivated Crops
8 Developed, Medium Intensity
10 Developed, High Intensity
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A 0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 30 April 25, 2017 "WELL #2
FIGURE 6. LAND COVER RATING ©
1 Developed, High Intensity
2 Water; Wetlands; Developed, Medium Intensity
4 Developed, Low Intensity
6 Barren Land (Rock, Sand, Clay); Cultivated Crops
8 Grassland/Herbaceous; Pasture/Hay; Developed, Open Space
9 Shrub/Scrub
10 Deciduous, Evergreen and Mixed Forest
Ground Water Assessment Area - Delineated Area
Ground Water Assessment Area - Zone A
0 500 1,000 1,500 Feet
MAXTON, TOWN OF, PWS ID: 0378035, WELL #2

PWS ID: 03-78-035 31 April 25, 2017
Section 6: North Carolina's SWAP Approach
This section of the report is a more detailed description of North Carolina's SWAP approach. This is a summary of Chapter 2 of North Carolina's Source Water Assessment Program Plan.
Description of North Carolina’s SWAP Approach
To meet the requirements of the 1996 SDWA Amendments, a Source Water Assessment was completed for approximately 9,000 drinking water sources in North Carolina. A delineated area for assessment was established for each drinking water source. An inventory of potential contaminant sources was conducted in each assessment area and finally, a susceptibility rating was assigned to each drinking water source. Because of the scope of this task and the limited
time and resources available for completing the work, North Carolina’s SWAP program efforts relies on Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to effectively use information. GIS allows databases to be linked to points on a map (e.g., public water supply sources, streams, geology, land use, roads, permitted waste disposal sites, Superfund sites, etc.) and overlaid on top of one another.
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Surface Water Sources
For the purpose of performing source water assessments, "delineation" means defining what land area constitutes the area contributing water to a public water supply source. The delineation of the source water assessment areas for surface water sources was done in consideration and collaboration with the Water Supply Watershed Protection (WSWP) Program. During the
development of the WSWP program (final state rules adopted in 1992), the state worked with local governments to determine the location of all surface water sources and existing land uses within the water supply watersheds. This information, in conjunction with information on the types and location of wastewater discharges, was used to determine the appropriate Water Supply Watershed Classification for more than 200 surface water sources in the state. The
watershed classifications, WS-I, WS-II, WS-III, WS-IV, and WS-V are based on the size of the watershed, development activities, and allowable waste treatment and disposal practices.
All surface water sources were located on US Geological Survey 1:24,000 scale topographic maps. The water supply watershed boundaries were delineated (except WS-V waters, which
were delineated for the SWAP assessments by the PWS Section), and the boundaries of the
Critical Area, and in the case of most WS-IV water supply watersheds Protected Areas (described below) were delineated.
For protection of the surface water sources in North Carolina, a segmentation of the water supply watersheds was implemented through the WSWP rules. The entire drainage areas of WS-I water
supply watersheds were delineated. These watersheds are all publicly owned and no new
development is allowed in these watersheds. These watersheds are very small. Some are located within National Forests. Others are owned by a local government.
All WS-II, WS-III and WS-IV water supplies require delineation of a Critical Area which is defined as the area within ½ mile and draining to the normal pool elevation of a water supply
reservoir, or ½ mile and draining to a water supply intake in a river. For WS-II and WS-III water
supplies, the remainder of the drainage area is subject to the development standards of the

PWS ID: 03-78-035 32 April 25, 2017
WSWP rules and are implemented through local land use ordinances. WS-IV water supplies, which are typically portions of major river systems, are segmented in a Critical Area (previously defined) and a Protected Area. The Protected Area is defined as the area within 5 miles and draining to the normal pool elevation of a reservoir or 10 miles upstream and draining to a river
intake. In very few instances the WS-IV Protected Area encompasses the entire drainage area due to the size of the watershed. In 1995, the state allowed local governments to request that the 10 mile Protected Area boundary of a WS-IV water supply be measured “run of river” rather than using a 10-mile arc linear measurement. Surface waters that are used by industry to supply their employees with drinking water or waters formerly used as water supply are generally
classified as WS-V. The WS-V waters are protected as water supplies and are typically located upstream of and draining to Class WS-IV waters. Land use restrictions do not apply to WS-V waters under the WSWP rules.
Please note that for the purpose of the PWS Section’s Source Water Assessments, delineation of WS-IV boundaries may be different from the WSWP Program’s delineation. The PWS Section
watershed assessment areas include all land draining to a drinking water source. However, the watersheds defined in accordance with the WSWP rules often exclude land area draining to a source based on municipal or county jurisdictional boundaries. Please refer to the WSWP program website (http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/lr/water-supply-watershed) for information on the regulations associated with their program and the land area affected by their regulations.
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Public Water Supply Wells
The delineation of source water assessment areas for wells was in accordance with North Carolina’s EPA approved Wellhead Protection Program. The calculated fixed radius method was used to delineate assessment areas around each well in the following areas: piedmont and mountains; the unconfined surficial aquifer of the coastal plain; and in the semi-confined
portions of the Castle Hayne aquifer with an estimated recharge rate of 250,000 gallons per day per square mile. The aquifer-source-volume method was used for confined aquifers of the coastal plain. These methods are described below. Well depth is the determining factor for a well to be considered confined. Well depths greater than 70 feet are considered confined.
Other assessment area delineation methods may be of interest to a PWS system in an effort to
more accurately define the area contributing water to the well. The state will review delineations provided by any PWS system that employs acceptable alternative delineation methods. Resulting alternative delineation areas will be incorporated into the SWAP if the state concludes that the use of the more sophisticated method is appropriate.
Calculation of the Contributing Area
The first step in delineating the assessment areas is to determine the size of the contributing area to the well. When a well is pumped, it causes groundwater that is flowing through the subsurface to flow toward the well. The surface area surrounding a well that delineates the area in which water entering the groundwater system at the water table eventually flows to the well and
discharges is known as the contributing area for the well. In this area, any contaminants released
to the environment that reach the water table, can reasonably be expected to move toward and possibly reach the well. The calculated fixed radius method requires the pumping rate (Q) and the recharge rate (W) for the pumping well in order to calculate the size of the contributing area. The contributing area is calculated as follows:

PWS ID: 03-78-035 33 April 25, 2017

where:
AC = contributing area in square miles,
Q = maximum daily pumping rate in gallons per day, and W = average recharge rate in gallons per day per square mile.
The maximum daily pumping rate in gallons per day was determined from information on wells obtained from PWS Section sanitary survey inspection forms, Division of Water Resources Local Water Supply plans, and information supplied by system owners/operators. Where no
information was available, an estimate of maximum daily pumping rate was assigned based on hydrogeologic characteristics of the aquifer supplying water to the well.
Size of the Assessment Area for Wells Using Calculated Fixed Radius Method
Estimates of the size of the contributing area can be obtained using the equation given above. However, because of the complex nature of groundwater flow and contaminant transport, it is not
possible to define exact contributing area boundaries around each well. Two factors that affect the shape of the contributing area and its position and orientation with respect to a pumping well are the hydraulic gradient and aquifer transmissivity. The variation in aquifer transmissivity is important in determining the shape of the contributing area for a supply well. In areas where the hydraulic gradient and the aquifer transmissivity are essentially the same in all directions, the
shape of the contributing area depends primarily on the hydraulic gradient. Where the water table is nearly flat, as near the water-table divide in broad interstream areas of low relief, the contributing area is approximately circular. Where the hydraulic gradient is moderate to steep, the contributing area is approximately elliptical, being oriented in the direction of groundwater movement.
Due to limited availability of information on both hydraulic gradient and aquifer transmissivity, the assessment area for each well was doubled. Therefore, the assessment area for each well is twice the size of the calculated contributing area or:

W
Q = AC
W
2Q = A2 = A CSWAP

PWS ID: 03-78-035 34 April 25, 2017
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Wells in Confined Aquifers
Recharge to confined aquifers is much less than that to the surficial unconfined aquifer where the calculated fixed radius method was used. If the calculated fixed radius method were applied to wells withdrawing water from confined aquifers, the resulting assessment areas would be very
large. With the exception of a portion of the Castle Hayne aquifer, the aquifer-source-volume method was used for delineating assessment areas for wells determined to be withdrawing water from highly confined and semi-confined aquifers. “Aquifer source volume” refers to the volume of the source aquifer that supplies the withdrawals from a well for a specified period of time. This factor has been adopted in many states for defining assessment areas for confined aquifers.
For the purpose of these assessments, the volume of aquifer that supplies ten years of withdrawals (i.e. the area surrounding a well in which the time of travel to the well is ten years) was used. A ten-year period should be sufficient to provide time to assess the potential impact of any groundwater contamination discovered within an assessment area and for developing appropriate remediation and source water protection strategies for the water supply. For any well
in the coastal plain determined to be withdrawing water from a confined aquifer, the table below will be used to determine the size of the assessment area.

Table 1. Radii of Assessment Areas for
Wells Withdrawing from Confined Aquifers in the Coastal Plain
Pumping Rate of
Well
(Gal. / min.)
Radius of Assessment
Area (Feet Rounded)
50 1000
100 1000
200 1500
500 2000
1000 3000
2000 3500

PWS ID: 03-78-035 35 April 25, 2017
Delineation of Assessment Areas for Water Supply Sources Classified as GWUDIs
Drinking water supplied by a well may include a surface water component. This is defined as Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water (GWUDIs). This term is used to indicate that water withdrawn from a well contains a specific indicator or indicators
(e.g., giardia) of the presence of a surface water component. The delineated area for a PWS well classified as a GWUDI well will be the combined area of a circle based on the calculated fixed radius method and the resulting upgradient watershed of the intersected surface water. Segmentation of the resulting watersheds was in accordance with the most appropriate water supply watershed classification scheme.
Delineation for Water Supply Sources Classified as Springs
Springs can be defined as areas where the water table intersects the ground surface. Ground water may have flowed many miles before appearing on the surface to form a particular spring. The delineated area for a drinking water source classified as a spring was defined as the entire watershed area upgradient of the spring. Segmentation of the resulting watersheds was in
accordance with the most appropriate water supply watershed classification scheme.
Susceptibility Rating Methodology
The state determined that the overall susceptibility rating for each drinking water source should be based on two key components, a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. Inherent vulnerability refers to the physical characteristics and existing conditions of the
watershed or aquifer. A contaminant rating refers to an evaluation of the number and location of potential sources of contamination. The contaminant rating and inherent vulnerability methodologies are explained below.
Contaminant Rating Methodology
The contaminant rating for each water supply source was determined based on the number and
location of potential contaminant sources (PCSs) within the delineated area. The delineated area for the drinking water source encompasses the area where PCSs, if released to the environment, could reasonably be expected to be a risk or a potential for contamination of the drinking water supply. A PCS in this assessment report is a facility or site regulated under a state or federal
regulatory program. These facilities are identified in electronic databases that contain location
information for each facility. Only databases that include information statewide were used for this source water assessment. Each PCS identified within the delineated area was assigned a risk rating of higher, moderate or lower. The number of PCSs that occur within the delineated area was determined and a Contaminant Rating of higher, moderate or lower was assigned to each
drinking water source.

PWS ID: 03-78-035 36 April 25, 2017
Contaminant Rating for Ground Water Sources
For each ground water source, define an inner Zone A with an area equal to half the area of the delineated assessment area. Using Table 2, determine the number of PCSs that occur within each risk category according to their location, either in Zone A or in the remaining
delineated area. Determine the Contaminant Rating of higher, moderate or lower for each well by adding the totals for each risk category.
Table 2. Determination of Contaminant Rating for Ground Water Sources

Potential
Contaminant
Sources in :
Number of
Higher Risk
PCSs

Cumulative Number of
Higher and Moderate
Risk PCSs

Cumulative Number of
Higher, Moderate and
Lower Risk PCSs

Zone A
(the inner 1/2 of the
delineated area)
(Number of sources )
> 1 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 2 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 4 Score: (1 or 0)

Delineated
Area (Zone A plus the remaining delineated area)

(Number of sources )
> 2 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 4 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 8 Score: (1 or 0)

For each category, score “1” if the number of contaminants exceeds the indicated threshold,
or score “0” if the number of contaminants is less than the threshold. Total all the scores (1 or
0) for each category. Therefore, the highest possible score is 6.
Determine the Contaminant Rating for each well as follows:
Higher (6 - 4)
Moderate (3 - 2)
Lower (< 1)
Contaminant Rating for Surface Water Sources
Because the WSWP rules prohibit development in these watersheds, the existence of one PCS in the delineated area of a drinking water source located in a WS-I watershed will result in a contaminant rating of higher.
Using Table 3 for WS-II and WS-III watersheds, or Table 4 for WS-IV and V watersheds,
determine the number of PCSs that occur within each risk category (i.e., lower, moderate or higher risk) and within each delineated assessment area (e.g., critical area, protected area, etc). Determine the Contaminant Rating for each surface water PWS source by summing the totals for each risk category.

PWS ID: 03-78-035 37 April 25, 2017

Table 3. Determination of Contaminant Rating
for Surface Water Sources in WS - II or III Watersheds
Potential
Contaminant
Sources in :

Number of
Higher Risk
PCSs

Cumulative
Number of Higher
and Moderate Risk
PCSs

Cumulative Number
of Higher, Moderate
and Lower Risk
PCSs

Critical Area

(Number of sources )

> 1 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources_____)

> 5 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 10 Score: (1 or 0)

Watershed Area

Within 1000 Foot
Stream Zone
(Number of
sources )

> 5
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number
of sources )

> 10
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number
of sources )

> 20
Score: (1 or 0)

Watershed Area

Outside Stream
Zone
(Number of sources )

> 20
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 40
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 80
Score: (1 or 0)

For each category, score “1” if the number of contaminants exceeds the indicated threshold,
or score “0” if the number of contaminants is less than the threshold. Total the scores (1 or 0 for each category). Therefore, the highest possible score is a 9.
Determine the Contaminant Rating for each surface water source in a Water Supply Watershed II or III as follows:
Higher (9 - 6)
Moderate (5 - 3)
Lower (< 2)

PWS ID: 03-78-035 38 April 25, 2017
Table 4. Determination of Contaminant Rating
for Surface Water Sources in WS - IV and V Watersheds

Potential
Contaminant
Sources in :

Number of
Higher Risk
PCSs

Cumulative Number of
Higher and Moderate
Risk
PCSs

Cumulative
Number of Higher,
Moderate and
Lower Risk PCSs

Critical Area

(Number of sources )

> 1 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 5 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )
> 10 Score: (1 or 0)

Protected Area

Within 1000 Foot
Stream Zone
(Number of sources )

> 5 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 10 Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of sources )

> 20 Score: (1 or 0)

Protected Area

Outside Stream
Zone

(Number of sources )

> 20 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 40 Score: (1 or 0)

(Number of sources )

> 80 Score: (1 or 0)

Stream Zone from
Protected Area to
25 Mile or
Watershed
Boundary
(Number of
sources )
> 20
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of
sources )
> 40
Score: (1 or 0)
(Number of
sources )
> 80
Score: (1 or 0)

For each category, score “1” if the number of contaminants exceeds indicated threshold. If the number of contaminants is less than the threshold score “0.” Total all the scores (1 or 0
for each category). Therefore, the highest possible score is a 12.
Determine the Contaminant Rating for each surface water source in a Water Supply Watershed IV or V as follows:
Higher (12 - 9)
Moderate (8 - 4)
Lower (< 3)

PWS ID: 03-78-035 39 April 25, 2017
Inherent Vulnerability Rating Methodology
The inherent vulnerability of a well or surface water source refers to the characteristics or existing conditions of the well or surface water source and its delineated assessment area. Several factors were evaluated for both groundwater and surface water sources and included in
the inherent vulnerability rating of each public water supply source. Each drinking water source was assigned an inherent vulnerability rating of higher, moderate or lower.
Inherent Vulnerability Rating for Wells
The characteristics included for assigning an inherent vulnerability rating for wells are aquifer rating, unsaturated zone rating and well integrity/well construction rating. The aquifer
rating is an assessment of the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifer. The unsaturated zone rating is an assessment of the likelihood that contaminants from surface and shallow sources will follow the path of aquifer recharge and reach the water table. The well integrity/construction rating is an assessment of the quality of the construction of the well. A brief description of each factor follows:
Aquifer Rating
The aquifer rating is a qualitative assessment of the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifer. Relative differences in aquifer vulnerability were based on a review of relevant literature, expert opinions, and confirmed with historical data. Factors considered in rating aquifer vulnerability include hydraulic conductivity, degree of confinement, dilution, and
sorption potential. The attenuative capacity of the unsaturated zone is not considered in the determination of aquifer ratings. Table 5 summarizes the aquifer-rating scheme used for these assessments.
Well depths determined whether a well was considered unconfined, deep confined or shallow confined for these assessments. Wells less than or equal to 70 feet deep were considered to
be withdrawing water from an unconfined or surficial aquifer. Wells greater than 70 feet but less than 180 feet deep were considered to be withdrawing water from a shallow confined aquifer. Wells greater than 180 feet deep were considered to be withdrawing water from a deep confined aquifer.

PWS ID: 03-78-035 40 April 25, 2017
Table 5. Aquifer Rating Based on Water Transmitting Characteristics
Aquifer/Ground Water Source Rating
Coastal Plain Aquifers:
Deep Confined (e.g., Kinston area) Lower
Shallow Confined (e.g., Pamlico Co.) Moderate
Unconfined (e.g., Castle Hayne Outcrop area) Higher
Piedmont and Mountain Aquifers:
Triassic Basins (e.g., Sanford-Durham) Moderate
Fractured Rock Aquifers Higher
Other:
Metamudstones and Meta-argillites of the Carolina Slate Belt Higher
Areas with Wells Cased to Less Than 20 Feet Higher
Groundwater under the Direct Influence of Surface Water Higher
Sand Hills Area Higher

Unsaturated Zone Rating
The state, in cooperation with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), developed the unsaturated zone rating methodology. The USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4283, "Methods of Rating Unsaturated Zone and Watershed Characteristics of Public Water
Supplies in North Carolina" describes the methodology. The unsaturated zone rating is the
combination of selected factors that contribute to the likelihood that contaminants from surface and shallow sources will follow the path of aquifer recharge and reach the water table. Contributing factors, in the form of GIS spatial data layers, include land use/land cover, vertical hydraulic conductance of the unsaturated zone, and land-surface slope.
Vertical hydraulic conductance measures the capacity of the unsaturated zone to transmit
water from land surface to water table. Land-surface slope and land cover influences the amount of precipitation that infiltrates into the subsurface. Land use describes the activities that take place on the surface or in the shallow subsurface and the type of contaminants that may be present as a result of those activities (i.e., "non-point source" potential contaminant
sources).

PWS ID: 03-78-035 41 April 25, 2017
Well Integrity/Construction Rating
The integrity of well construction can vary widely, depending on details such as casing depth, grouting depth, well materials and driller knowledge. However, these details are not always available for assigning SWAP assessment ratings. In 1994 and 1999 there were
important rule changes that greatly improve the quality of the well construction standards. Therefore, the SWAP assessments use well construction and approval dates as a surrogate to construction details to assign a well construction / integrity rating. For wells that construction and approval date is not available, the well construction/integrity rating defaults to Higher.
Table 6 summarizes the characteristics evaluated and rated for the inherent vulnerability for
each PWS well. Each well was assigned an inherent vulnerability rating of higher, moderate or lower:
Table 6. Inherent Vulnerability Rating of Wells

Inherent Vulnerability
Factors

Higher
Vulnerability

Moderate
Vulnerability

Lower
Vulnerability

Aquifer Rating

10 5 - 1
Unsaturated Zone
Rating
10 5 1
Well
Integrity/Construction
Rating
5
3 1

Totals

25-18

17-15

14-1

Inherent Vulnerability Rating for Surface Water Sources
The inherent vulnerability of a surface water source refers to the characteristics and existing conditions of the source and the delineated assessment area (watershed). The characteristics included for assigning an inherent vulnerability rating are water supply watershed
classification, surface water source location, raw water quality, and the watershed characteristics rating. The watershed classification is based on the size of the watershed, development activities, and allowable waste treatment and disposal practices. The surface water sources were characterized based on whether they are located in streams, large multi-purpose reservoirs, or small water supply reservoirs. The raw water quality rating is based on
recorded turbidity and total coliform values over a twelve month period. The watershed characteristics rating is an assessment of the likelihood that contaminants will follow the path of overland flow or shallow subsurface flow to a surface water source. A description of each factor follows:

PWS ID: 03-78-035 42 April 25, 2017
Watershed Classification
In North Carolina, all surface water sources are located in water supply watersheds that are classified as either WS-I, II, III, IV, or V. The Water Supply Watershed Protection rules required that all local governments having land use jurisdiction within water supply
watersheds adopt and implement water supply watershed protection ordinances, maps and a management plan. All of these ordinances are in place and have been deemed to be in compliance with the statutory requirements. The inherent vulnerability ratings for watershed classification are based on differences between watershed classes, including size of the watershed, development activities, and allowable waste treatment and disposal practices.
Surface Water Source Location
All surface water sources are located in streams, large multi-purpose reservoirs (Class 3), or small water supply reservoirs (Class 1 or 2). The inherent vulnerability ratings for surface water source location are based on differences between the reaction time for a water plant in the case of a contamination event or spill in a stream versus a reservoir and includes the
allowable activities on surface water reservoirs (i.e., single use versus multiple uses allowed).
Raw Water Quality
The likelihood of the presence of Cryptosporidium and other water-borne microorganisms increases when turbidity is high. Therefore, turbidity and total coliform bacteria are good indicators of raw water quality. The Area Wide Optimization Program (AWOP) within the
PWS Section has developed a ranking system for surface water treatment plants based primarily on these two parameters. This ranking system, with some minor modifications, has been adopted by SWAP in order to assign a raw water quality rating to each surface water source.
The AWOP ranking system is based on the treatment plant’s raw, settled and finished water
turbidity and coliform levels along with violations of MCLs and treatment techniques. Raw, settled and finished water samples are collected daily and compiled in a monthly report, commonly referred to as a MOR (monthly operating report). The AWOP ranking system first totals the number of months in a year that specific levels of turbidity and coliform are
exceeded and/or the number of months certain violations occur. The monthly totals are then
multiplied by a weighting factor to balance the relative importance of these parameters. These numbers are then totaled for the year and are considered the water treatment plant’s total score.
Because the purpose of SWAP is to assess sources of drinking water supply and not how well
water plants treat their water, SWAP only uses the raw water scores for turbidity and
coliform from the AWOP ranking system. The total raw water quality scores were divided into three categories of vulnerability: Higher, Moderate and Lower. The AWOP ranking system is for surface water treatment plants and not individual surface water sources. Therefore, in the case where more than one source is used by a treatment plant, the plant’s
raw water quality rating was initially assigned to all of the plant’s sources. Upon review by
the regional office staff some of the ratings were then adjusted based on their extensive knowledge of the surface water sources in their area.

PWS ID: 03-78-035 43 April 25, 2017

Watershed Characteristics Rating
The state determined the watershed characteristics ratings of each surface water source in cooperation with the USGS. The USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4283,
"Methods of Rating Unsaturated Zone and Watershed Characteristics of Public Water Supplies in North Carolina" describes this methodology. The watershed characteristics ratings were based on the combination of selected factors that may contribute to the likelihood that contaminants follow the path of overland flow and reach the surface water source. Contributing factors, in the form of GIS spatial data layers, include average annual
precipitation, land cover, land use, land-surface slope and groundwater contribution. Precipitation is the source of water transported overland to a stream or lake. Land-surface slope and land cover influence the amount of precipitation that infiltrates into the subsurface. Land use describes the activities that take place on the surface or in the shallow subsurface and the type of contaminants that may be present as a result of those activities (i.e., non-point
source potential contaminant sources). Ground-water contribution is the effect of ground water on surface-water quantity and quality. For these assessments the ground-water contribution is derived from the unsaturated zone rating described in the ground water inherent vulnerability section of this report. Table 7 includes the characteristics that were evaluated and rated for the inherent vulnerability for each surface water source:
Table 7. Inherent Vulnerability of Surface Water Sources

Surface Water
Source
Characteristics

Higher
Vulnerability

Moderate
Vulnerability

Lower
Vulnerability
Watershed
Classification
WS-IV, WS-V 10
WS-III, WS-II 5
WS-I 1

Intake Location
Direct Stream 8
Class 3 Reservoirs 4
Class 1 and 2 Reservoirs 2

Raw Water Quality
(water plant data)

5
3 1

Watershed
Characteristics
Rating

10

5

1

Totals

33 - 21

20 - 13

12 - 5

PWS ID: 03-78-035 44 April 25, 2017
Susceptibility Rating Methodology
The state assigned a susceptibility rating for each drinking water source that was based on two components, a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. Using the results of the evaluations of contaminant rating and inherent vulnerability rating for each public drinking water
source, a susceptibility rating of higher, moderate or lower was assigned to each source according to the table below:
Table 8. Susceptibility Rating for Public Water Supply Sources
by Combining the Inherent Vulnerability and Contaminant Ratings.
Contaminant
Rating
Inherent Vulnerability Rating
Higher Moderate Lower
Higher H H M
Moderate H M M
Lower M M L

Appendix F
APPROXIMATE SITE BOUNDARY
SOURCE:

SCOTLAND COUNTY GIS WEBSITE
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, DATED 2015

FIGURE 2

SITE MAP
RAILROAD FRICTION PRODUCTS
13601 AIRPORT ROAD
MAXTON, SCOTLAND COUNTY, NC

ECS PROJECT NO. 49-3806

300’
SOURCE:

SCOTLAND COUNTY GIS WEBSITE
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, DATED 2015

FIGURE 3

SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
RAILROAD FRICTION PRODUCTS
13601 AIRPORT ROAD
MAXTON, SCOTLAND COUNTY, NC

ECS PROJECT NO. 49-3806

50’
LEGEND

Soil Sample Location

Surface Water Sample Location

Monitoring Well Sample Location
GP-2
GP-1
GP-3
GP-4
GP-5
GP-6
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
MW-1
MW-2

Appendix G

Divider
Page