4002_GreeneCounty_MSWLF_GWMR

Greene County Active C&D over Closed Unlined Landfill
Walstonburg, North Carolina
September 2016
MESCO Project Number: G16010.0
Semi-Annual Water Quality Monitoring Report
with Corrective Action Update
Prepared for
Municipal Engineering Services Company, P.A.Garner and Boone, North Carolina
Permit Number: 40-02
P.O. Box 97
Garner, NC 27529
License No. C-0281

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
Introduction Page 1
Background Page 1
Sampling Procedures Page 2
Field Parameter Data Page 2
Laboratory Results Page 2
Quality Control Samples Page 2
Groundwater Samples Page 2
Surface Water Samples Page 3
Groundwater Characterization Page 3
Corrective Action Update Page 3
Findings Page 4
Closing Page 4
FIGURES
Topographic Map with Site Location Figure 1
Potentiometric Map of Surficial Aquifer with Detections Above 2L Standards Figure 2
Biochlor Natural Attenuation Screening Protocol Matrix (MW-4) Figure 3
Bioscreen Model for Benzene Data Input Sheet (Source to MW-4 to MW-7 to Compliance Line)Figure 4
Bioscreen Model for Benzene (Current 2016) Figure 5
Bioscreen Model for Benzene (Predicted 3016) Figure 6
Bioscreen Model for Benzene (Predicted 2032) Figure 7
Time-Series Graphs of Select Detections Figure 8
Histograms of VOC Concentrations in MW-4 Figure 9
TABLES
Groundwater Monitoring Well Construction Table Table 1
Sampling and Analysis Summary Table 2
Detections Above SWSL, GWP, 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL (Appendix 1) Table 3
Detections Above MDL (Appendix II) Table 4
Hydrologic Properties at Monitoring Well Locations Table 5
MNA Parameter Data Summary Table 6
APPENDIX
Laboratory Analysis Reports, Field Parameter Data and Chains of Custody Appendix A
April 21, 2017
Ms. Jaclynne Drummond
Solid Waste Section (SWS)
NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
2090 US Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
Subject: Semi-Annual Water Quality Monitoring Report with Corrective Action Update
Greene County Active C&D and Closed Unlined Landfill
MESCO Project No. G16010.0
Permit No. 40-02
Event Date: September 7, 2016
Dear Ms. Drummond:
Introduction
On behalf of Greene County, Municipal Engineering Services Company, P.A. (MESCO) is pleased to present this
Semi-Annual Water Quality Report with Corrective Action Update for fall 2016 at the active Construction and
Demolition (C&D) Landfill and closed Unlined Sanitary Landfill. NCDEQ Solid Waste Rules 15ANCAC13B.1630
through .1637 requires that Greene County provide this report to the SWS on a semi-annual basis. This report
documents the quality of the ground and surface waters during this monitoring event performed on September 7, 2016.
A brief corrective action update and qualitative evaluation comparing current and historical data is also presented.
Constituents detected in concentrations above North Carolina Groundwater Standards (2L) were benzene and vinyl
chloride in sample MW-4 which is located within the compliance boundary.
Background
The Greene County Active Construction and Demolition (C&D) Landfill and Closed Unlined Sanitary Landfill is
located off Fire Tower Road (SR 1239), Walstonburg, Greene County, North Carolina and operates under permit #40-
02. A topographic map showing the facility location is included as Figure 1.
Prior to operating as a C&D landfill, the site operated as an approximate 13-acre unlined sanitary landfill which
stopped receiving waste prior to January 1, 1998 in accordance with the Greene County Transition Plan. The C&D
landfill is operating on a portion of the top of the MSW unit which are monitored together.
Water quality has been monitored at this facility on at least a semi-annual basis since 1994. MESCO submitted an
Assessment and Corrective Action (ACM) [DIN:8776] report dated August 30, 2007. MESCO then developed a
Corrective Action Plan (CAP) which was revised on February 12, 2010 (CAP-Rev. 5) [DIN:9670] and subsequently
approved on February 16, 2010 [DIN:671]. Groundwater remediation using monitored natural attenuation (MNA)
was initiated on March 30, 2010 and has continued on a semi-annual basis ever since. A Corrective Action Evaluation
Report (CAER) was submitted to the SWS on October 16, 2012 (DIN:17502) which was reviewed by the SWS and
responded to on December 6, 2012 (DIN:17837).

As specified within rule 15A NCAC 13B.1632(i), the SWS Environmental Monitoring Report Form, and SWS
memorandums this report contains sampling procedures, field and laboratory results, corrective action update,
groundwater and surface water characterization, and findings. Well construction summary table, sampling and
analysis summary table, detections compared to Standards tables, a groundwater flow directions/rates table,
potentiometric map, natural attenuation screening matrix score table, quality assurance/quality control data, and
field/laboratory analytical data results are enclosed herein.
Sampling Procedures
Environment 1 (E1) of Greenville, NC, reportedly performed this monitoring event utilizing portable monitoring
methodology in accordance with the approved Sampling & Analysis Plan (SAP) contained in the CAP-Rev.5. E1
reportedly collected groundwater samples from all locations designated in the SAP which includes five
downgradient groundwater monitoring wells (MW-4, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7 and MW-8), one background well
(MW-1R) and both surface water points (Upstream and Downstream). Quality control measures included submittal
and analysis of an equipment blank (EB), field blank (FB) and trip blank (TB). Surface water and groundwater
monitoring locations are depicted on Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. A summary detailing the construction of
the water monitoring wells is presented on Table 1.
Static water levels in each well were measured electronically prior to purging. Samples were transported under C-
O-C protocol and analyzed within the hold times specified for each method.
Field Parameter Data
E1 recorded the field parameters pH, specific conductance, temperature, turbidity, oxidation reduction potential
(ORP) and dissolved oxygen (DO) which are presented in the laboratory analysis report in Appendix A.
Laboratory Results
E1 performed analysis of groundwater samples for the constituents listed in Appendix II of 40 CFR 258. Both total
and dissolved metals listed in Appendix II of 40 CFR 258 were reported as requested by the SWS in the CAER
response (DIN 17837). In addition, samples from MW-4 and background well MW-1, were analyzed for the full
suite of MNA performance parameters as part of corrective action. MNA analysis was conducted for volatile fatty
acids, methane, ethane, ethene, and dissolved hydrogen by Microseeps Inc. of Pittsburgh, PA. A sampling and
analysis table summarizing the locations, constituents, and methods is presented on Table 2. Laboratory results and
C-O-Cs are contained in Appendix A.
Water samples were analyzed to the laboratory-established Method Detection Limits (MDL), which are at or below
current Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSL). Table 3 summarizes Appendix I constituents detected in groundwater
and surface water samples above the current SWSL, Groundwater Protection Standards (GWP), North Carolina
Groundwater Standards (2L), the applicable Class C North Carolina Surface Water Standards (2B) and Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCL) also known as “Federal Primary Drinking Water Standards”. Table 4 summarizes the
few detections of tin which was the only parameter detected that is listed in Appendix II but not also listed in
Appendix I.
Quality Control Samples
Four of the seventeen (24%) targeted total metals, including tin, were detected in low non-quantifiable (“j”
qualified) concentrations in the FB. Since no metals were detected in excess of the SWSL and a regulatory
Standard, any lab or field induced artifact contamination is inconsequential.
2
Groundwater Samples
Total vanadium was detected in sample MW-7 at 6.6 ug/L which is above the GWP Standard (3.5 ug/L) but below
the SWSL (25 ug/L) thus “j-qualified”. Dissolved phase vanadium was not detected in sample MW-7.
Sample MW-4 contained the VOCs benzene (2.6 ug/L) and vinyl chloride (1.8 ug/L) which are above their
respective 2L Standards (1.0 ug/L and 0.03 ug/L). These VOCs have consistently been detected in concentrations
above their respective 2L Standards in samples collected from MW-4 since the detection levels were reduced in
March 2007.
Tin, the only Appendix II exclusive parameter, defined in this report as not also listed in Appendix I, was detected in
sample MW-8 below the SWSL, below the applicable regulatory compliance Standard and lower than in the quality
control blanks EB and FB.
A site map spatially depicting contaminants detected in excess of the 2L Standard during this event is presented on
Figure 2.
Surface Water Samples
No constituents were detected in excess of applicable 2B Standard in the surface water sample collected upstream or
downstream of the facility.
Groundwater Characterization
A single-day potentiometric map of the uppermost aquifer is presented on Figure 2, using ground water elevation
data reported by E1 for this event. Reported groundwater elevations were all within their respective historically
identified range. Groundwater flow direction and rates were calculated based on reported data and are included in
Table 5. Estimated flow flow rates during this event, quantified through modified Darcy's equation, ranged from
about 4 ft/yr (MW-4) to 281 ft/yr (MW-8) for a site-wide average of approximately 71 ft/yr.
Corrective Action Update
Semi-annual MNA monitoring of MW-4 was initiated on March 30, 2010 and has consistently been performed for
the full suite of SWS recommended parameters for 14 consecutive semi-annual events. The most recent MNA data
is presented in Table 5. The MNA data for this event at MW-4 was entered into the Biochlor natural attenuation
screening protocol matrix developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The screening matrix
score for this event was 18 which is between 15-20 which the USEPA interprets as adequate evidence of anaerobic
biodegredation of chlorinated organics (Figure 3). Interpretation of geochemical data indicates that most of the
biodegredation capacity near MW-4 is due to methanogensis, the final terminal electron acceptor, which should
degrade the chlorinated solvents.
Findings
The laboratory results indicate the uppermost aquifer near MW-4 remains impacted by low level dissolved phase
Appendix I VOC(s) in concentrations above the 2L Standard. Quantitative evaluations reveal concentrations of
constituents detected above the 2L Standard during this event remain within their own respective historically
identified range and an increasing trend is not evident.
3
Figures
Topographic Map with Site Location
FIGURE 1
Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF
QUADRANGLE LEGEND
NOTE: Topographical map assembled from corresponding USGS 7.5-min. quadrangles of the subject region.
105 Landfill Road (SR1257)
Walstonburg, NC
Lat:35-31-29.7520
Long:-77-41-49.4325
Northing:648520.2533
Easting:2387660.4409
DOWNSTREAM
UPSTREAM
3,334'0
ACTIVE C&D OVER CLOSED UNLINEDLANDFILL FACILITYGREENE COUNTYNORTH CAROLINAMW-4
Benzene - 2.6 ug/l
Vinyl Chloride - 1.8 ug/l
G
G
September 7, 2016
BENZENE
(FT AMSL)(FT BTOC)(FT AMSL)
15A NCAC 2L Groundwater Quality Standard 1.00 0.03
MW-1R 121.78 4.83 116.95
MW-4 117.89 16.31 101.58 2.6 1.8
MW-5 115.76 16.23 99.53
MW-6 117.41 8.53 108.88
MW-7 110.48 11.57 98.91
MW-8 111.36 10.38 100.98
Groundwater Elevations and VOCs Above 2L Standards
WELL
ID
TOP OF
CASING
ELEVATION
DEPTH TO
WATER
GROUNDWATER
POTENTIOMETRIC
ELEVATION
Vinyl
Chloride
(ug/L)(ug/L)
Natural Attenuation Interpretation Score
Screening Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics 0 to 5
Protocol Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics 6 to 14 Score:18
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics 15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics >20 Scroll to End of Table
Concentration in PointsAnalysisMost Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*<0.5 mg/L Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher 0
concentrations
> 5mg/L Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically 0
Nitrate*<1 mg/L At higher concentrations may compete with reductive 2
pathway
Iron II*>1 mg/L Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under 3
Fe(III)-reducing conditions
Sulfate*<20 mg/L At higher concentrations may compete with reductive 2
pathway
Sulfide*>1 mg/L Reductive pathway possible 0

Methane*>0.5 mg/L Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates 3
Oxidation <50 millivolts (mV)Reductive pathway possible 1
Reduction
Potential* (ORP)<-100mV Reductive pathway likely 0

pH*5 < pH < 9 Optimal range for reductive pathway 0
TOC >20 mg/L Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be 0
natural or anthropogenic
Temperature*>20oC At T >20oC biochemical process is accelerated 1
Carbon Dioxide >2x background Ultimate oxidative daughter product 0
Alkalinity >2x background Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer 1
minerals
Chloride*>2x background Daughter product of organic chlorine 0
Hydrogen >1 nM Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate 3
Volatile Fatty Acids >0.1 mg/L Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic 0
compounds; carbon and energy source
BTEX*>0.1 mg/L Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination 0
PCE*Material released 0
TCE*Daughter product of PCE a/0

DCE*Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter 0
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a chem. reaction product of TCA
VC*Daughter product of DCEa/2
1,1,1- Material released 0
Trichloroethane*
DCA Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions 0
Carbon Material released 0
Tetrachloride
Chloroethane*Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions 0
Ethene/Ethane >0.01 mg/L Daughter product of VC/ethene 0
>0.1 mg/L Daughter product of VC/ethene 0
Chloroform Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride 0
Dichloromethane Daughter product of Chloroform 0

* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).
End of Form
* reductive dechlorination
The following is taken from the USEPA protocol (USEPA, 1998). The results of this scoring process have no regulatory significance.
ResetSCORE
Greene County Active C&D and Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Figure 4
Histograms of VOC Concentrations in MW-4
(March 30, 2010-September 28, 2011) Compared to September 7, 2016
BASELINE
MARCH 2010 59.30 5.30 10.30
SEPT. 2010 17.40 2.50 4.10
MARCH 2011 17.50 3.00 5.40
SEPT. 2011 19.10 3.00 5.30
BASELINE AVERAGE 28.33 3.45 6.28
CURRENT
SEPT 2016 8.00 2.60 1.80
COMPARISON BENZENE
-20.33 -0.85 -4.48
DIFFERENCE (%)-72 -25 -71
TOTAL
VOCS
(ug/l)
BENZENE
(ug/l)
VINYL
CHLORIDE
(ug/l)
TOTAL
VOCS
(ug/l)
BENZENE
(ug/l)
VINYL
CHLORIDE
(ug/l)
TOTAL
VOCS
VINYL
CHLORIDE
DIFFERENCE (ug/l)
TOTAL VOCS BENZENE VINYL CHLORIDE
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
VOC(s)BASELINE AVERAGES COMPARED TO SEPT 2016
in MW-4
BASELINE AVERAGE
SEPT 2016ug/L
Tables
Greene County Active C&D and Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Table 1
Groundwater Monitoring Well Construction Table
September 7, 2016
Latitude Longitude
(inches) (ft)
MW-1R 11/19/1981 2 18.20 3.20 15 Soil 121.78 119.79 116.95 4.83 35.525139 -77.695158
MW-4 8/26/1994 2 24.10 9.10 15 Soil 117.89 115.14 101.58 16.31 35.526914 -77.692369
MW-5 8/26/1994 2 29.00 14.00 15 Soil 115.76 113.16 99.53 16.23 35.526133 -77.692242
MW-6 8/28/1994 2 28.80 13.80 15 Soil 117.41 114.54 108.88 8.53 35.525008 -77.692431
MW-7 8/29/1994 2 18.50 6.50 12 Soil 110.48 107.75 98.91 11.57 35.526639 -77.691833
MW-8 6/21/2007 2 17.98 6.98 11 Soil 111.36 108.71 100.98 10.38 35.527039 -77.691842
PZ-2 11/19/1981 2 20.00 10.00 10 Soil 119.59 116.58 107.59 12.00 35.527278 -77.696911
NOTE:
Monitoring
Well
Date
Installed
Well Diameter Total Well Depth Top of Screen Depth Screen Length Geology of
Screened Interval
Top of Casing Elevation Ground Elevation Groundwater Elevation Depth to Water
(ft bgs)(ft bgs)(ft amsl) (ft amsl)(ft amsl)(ft btoc)
bgs = below ground surface
amsl= above mean sea level
btoc = below top casing (PVC well casing)
Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Table 2
Sampling and Analysis Summary
September 7, 2016
App. II MNA Field Parameter
Total Metals (App II)Metals, Total Dissolved (App II)PesticidesHerbicides-ChlorinatedTotal CyanideSulfideVFAHydrogenDissolved CO2AlkalinitySulfateSulfideChlorideTOCCODBODIron, totalIron, total dissolvedIron, FerrousNitrateTurbidityDissolved Oxygen (DO)Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP)TemperatureConductivitypHLab EPA 8260B Lab EPA 6000/7000 Lab EPA200.8 Lab EPA 8081B Lab SW8151A Lab EPA 8081BLab EPA 8270DLab EPA 9014Lab SM18 4500-S DLab AM23GLab AM20GAXLab AM20GAXLab SM4500CO2CLab SM426CLab SM18 4500-S2DLab SM4500-CLBLab SM 5310CLab HACH8000Lab SM5210BLab SM3111BLab SM3111BLab EPA353.2Lab SM2130BField MeterField MeterField MeterField MeterField MeterMW-1R x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
MW-4 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
MW-5 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
MW-6 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
MW-7 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
MW-8 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Downstream x x x x x x x x x
Upstream x x x x x x x x x
EB x x x x x x x x
TB x
FB x x
App I & II = Appendix Lists from current 40 CFR 258VOCs (App II)Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)Semivolatile Organics (SVOCs)Methane/Ethene/EthaneLab SM2320BLab 3111B-99
Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Table 3
September 7, 2016
Sample ID Result Unit
MW-1R Zinc,total 9/7/16 10 1.61 10 1000 NE
MW-1R Zinc,dissolved 9/7/16 9.8j 1.61 10 1000 NE
MW-4 Vinyl Chloride 9/7/16 1.8 0.63 1 0.03 2
MW-4 9/7/16 3.6 0.39 1 6 75
MW-4 Benzene 9/7/16 2.6 0.24 1 1 5
MW-7 Vanadium,total 9/7/16 6.6j 0.36 10 3.5 NE N
MW-7 Vanadium,dissolved 9/7/16 ND<0.36 0.36 10 3.5 NE
UPSTREAM Zinc, Total Dissolved 9/7/16 21.9 1.61 10 50 NE
UPSTREAM Zinc,total 9/7/16 30 1.61 10 50 NE
DOWNSTREAM Zinc,total 9/7/16 12 1.61 10 50 NE
DOWNSTREAM Zinc,dissolved 9/7/16 9.2j 1.61 10 50 NE
A definitive source of the detection was not determined as part of this report.
J =The reported value is between the laboratory method detection limit (MDL) and the laboratory method reporting limit (MRL),
adjusted for actual sample preparation data and moisture content, where applicable
N = Natural from erosion of natural deposits
LFG = Landfill Gas
NE = Not Established
BOLD = Concentration > 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL Standard
Detections in Water Samples Above SWSL, 2L, 2B, GWP, or MCL (Appendix I)
Parameter Name 1 Sample
Date MDL 2 SWSL 3 2L 4 2B 5 GWP 6 MCL 7 Preliminary
Cause 8
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l L &.or LFG
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/l
ug/l L &.or LFG
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
1 Table contains constituents detected at or above SWSL, 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL
2 MDL = Method Detection Limit
3 SWSL = Solid Waste Section Reporting Limit
4 2L = North Carolina 15A NCAC 2L Groundwater Quality Standard
5 2B = North Carolina 15 NCAC 2B Surface Water Quality Standard for this Specific Stream Classification
6 GWP = Groundwater Protection Standard
7 MCL = Primary Drinking Water Standard (not currently applicable for regulatory comparisons)
8 Preliminary Cause = Refers to a preliminary analysis of the cause and/or source of a detection over the respective 2L/2B Standard.
L = Leachate
Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Table 4
September 7, 2016
Sample ID Result Unit
MW-8 Tin,total 9/7/16 0.14j 0.06 100 2000 NE
EB Tin,total 9/7/16 0.2j 0.06 100 2000 NE
FB Tin,total 9/7/16 1.3j 0.06 100 2000 NE
A definitive source of the detection was not determined as part of this report.
j =The reported value is between the laboratory method detection limit (MDL) and the laboratory method reporting limit (MRL),
adjusted for actual sample preparation data and moisture content, where applicable
NE = Not Established
BOLD = Concentration > 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL Standard
Detections in Water Samples Above MDL (Appendix II Exclusive)
Parameter Name 1 Sample
Date MDL 2 SWSL 3 2L 4 2B 5 GWP 6 MCL 7 Preliminary
Cause 8
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
1 Table contains constituents listed in 40 CFR Appendix II but not on Appendix I that were detected at or above MDL
2 MDL = Method Detection Limit
3 SWSL = Solid Waste Section Reporting Limit
4 2L = North Carolina 15A NCAC 2L Groundwater Quality Standard
5 2B = North Carolina 15 NCAC 2B Surface Water Quality Standard for this Specific Stream Classification
6 GWP = Groundwater Protection Standard
7 MCL = Primary Drinking Water Standard (not currently applicable for regulatory comparisons)
8 Preliminary Cause = Refers to a preliminary analysis of the cause and/or source of a detection over the respective 2L/2B Standard.
Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Table 5
September 7, 2016
MW-1R 1.20E-04 15 0.017 14 N28E 4.83 116.95
MW-4 1.10E-04 15 0.005 4 N66E 16.31 101.58
MW-5 1.40E-04 15 0.031 30 N85E 16.23 99.53
MW-6 1.90E-04 15 0.031 41 N47E 8.53 108.88
MW-7 1.98E-04 7 0.019 55 S45E 11.57 98.91
MW-8 1.14E-03 7 0.017 281 S36E 10.38 100.98
PZ-2 5.168 N19E 12.00 -12.00
Minimum 1.10E-04 7 0.005 4 -4.83 -12.00
Average 3.16E-04 12 0.020 71 -11.41 87.83
Maximum 1.14E-03 15 0.031 281 -16.31 116.95
NOTE:
where
Hydrologic Properties at Monitoring Well Locations
Monitoring
Well
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(cm/sec)
Effective
Porosity (%)
Hydraulic
Gradient
(ft/ft)
Linear Velocity
(ft/yr)
Flow
Direction
Depth to
Groundwater
(ft btoc)
Groundwater
Potentiometric Elevation
(ft amsl)
na na na
Data for hydraulic conductivities for wells except MW-7 & MW-8 obtained from GAI Consultants' Water Quality Modifications (October, 1994)
Data for hydraulic conductivities for MW-7 & MW-8 obtained from slug tests performed by MESCO (June, 2007)
Hydrologic gradient from water level elevations reportedly taken on September 7, 2016.
Flow rate (Q) is defined by modified Darcy's equation:
K= hydraulic conductivity
ne = effective porosity
dh= head difference
dl= horizontal distance
Q=−K
ne
⋅dh
dl
Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1
Table 6
MNA Parameters at Monitoring Well Locations Summary
September 7, 2016
Parameters Method Units MW-1R MW-4
09/07/16 09/07/16
VFA – Acetic Acid AM23G 7 27j 58j
AM23G 7 9.4j <7
AM23G 7 <7 <7
AM23G 4 <4 <4
AM23G 7 <7 <7
VFA – Lactic Acid AM23G 6 22j 25j
AM23G 6 28j 29j
AM23G 9 <9 <9
AM23G 7 <7 <7
Hydrogen AM20GAX 0.08 5.8 7.3
Methane AM20GAX 0.01 0.08 11000
AM20GAX 0.01 0.05 0.31
Ethane AM20GAX 0 0.0081j <0.002
CO2-Dissolved 4500CO2C 1000 473000 90000
Alkalinity 2320B-97 1000 5000 84000
Sulfate 4500SO42E97 5000 6000j 8600j
Sulfide 4500S2D-00 100 <100 <100
Chloride 4500CLB-97 5000 68000 8000
TOC 5310C-00 100 1490 8660
COD H8000-79 20000 21000 43000
BOD 5210B-01 2000 <2000 <2000
Iron, Total EPA200.7 5.23 804 60689
Iron, Ferrous 3500FEB-97 50 <50 59900
Nitrate 353.2 R2-93 4 3370j <4
Temperature 2550B-00 0 C 24 23
ORP 2580B 0 131 44
DO 4500OG-01 100 740 1270
pH 4500HB-00 0.1 Units 6.7 5.8
Specific Conductance 2510B-97 1 319 353
Turbidity 2130B-01 1 NTU 15.6 6.35
Notes:
VFA = Volatile Fatty Acids
j = Estimated concentration greater than the set method detection limit (MDL) and less then the set reporting limit (PQL).
mdl*
ug/l
VFA – Butyric Acid ug/l
VFA – Hexanoic Acid ug/l
VFA – i-Hexanoic Acid ug/l
VFA – i-Pentanoic Acid ug/l
ug/l
VFA – Pentaonic Acid ug/l
VFA – Propionic Acid ug/l
VFA – Pyruvic Acid ug/l
nM
ug/l
Ethene ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
ug/l
uMhos/cm
mdl* = Lowest Method Detection Limit for Lab Parameters or Lowest Field Measurement Possible
Appendix A
Laboratory Analysis Report
Field Analysis Report
Chains of Custody