HomeMy WebLinkAbout8103_RutherfordCountyMSWLF_GWMR_20170627
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
CENTRAL SANITARY LANDFILL
APPENDIX I DETECTION MONITORING
APPENDIX II ASSESSMENT MONITORING
APPENDIX II TRIGGERED CONSTITUENTS
MNA PARAMETERS
C & D PARAMETERS
MAY 2017
SAMPLING
PREPARED FOR
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
SGC PROJECT NUMBERS 0001.001 AND 0001.006
JUNE 27, 2017
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
500 Hepowil Trace 919-477-9519
Hillsborough, NC www.scarlettgeophysics.com
RUTHERFORD COUNTY CENTRAL SANITARY LANDFILL
APPENDIX I DETECTION MONITORING
APPENDIX II ASSESSMENT MONITORING
APPENDIX II TRIGGERED CONSTITUENTS
MNA PARAMETERS
C & D PARAMETERS
MAY 2017 SAMPLING
I hereby certify this 27th day of June, 2017, that this report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision.
E. W. Scarlett, Jr., P.G.
Principal Geologist/Geophysicist
E. W. Scarlett, Jr., P.G.
Review performed by:
Cindy J. Garre
Reviewer
C. W. Scarlett
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION 4
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK 5
4.0 METHODS EMPLOYED 6
4.1 Monitoring Well Sampling 6
4.2 Stream Sampling 8
4.3 MNA Sampling 8
5.0 RESULTS 8
5.1 Groundwater 8
5.1.1 Analytical Results 8
5.1.2 Hydraulic Conductivity 12
5.1.3 Groundwater Flow Direction and Rate 12
5.2 Surface Water 13
5.3 Monitored Natural Attenuation 14
5.4 C & D Monitoring 15
5.5 Notifications 16
5.6 Quality Assurance 17
6.0 REFERENCES 18
TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Monitoring Well Data, Central Sanitary Landfill
Table 2 Table 2 Ground and Surface Water Sampling Field Data, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-
9, 2017
Table 3 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix I Inorganic Constituents by SW-846
Method 6010, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 4 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix I Volatile Organic Constituents by SW -
846 Method 8260, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 5 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix II Triggered Constituents, Central
Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 6 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix II Inorganic Constituents, Central
Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 7 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix II Volatile Organic Constituents by SW-
846 Method 8260, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 8 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix II Semi-Volatile Organic Constituents by
SW-846 Method 8270, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 9 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix II Organophosphorus Pesticides by SW-
846 Method 8270, Appendix II Herbicides by SW-846 Methods 8151 and
8270, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 10 Groundwater Sampling Results, Appendix II Pesticides/PCBs by SW-846 Method
8081/8082, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 11 Groundwater Sampling Results, Monitored Natural Attenuation Parameters, Central
Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 12 Groundwater Sampling Results, C&D Parameters, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-
9, 2017
Table 13 Summary of Sampling Events, Central Sanitary Landfill
Table 14 Groundwater Flow Rates, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 15 Surface Water Sampling Results, Appendix I Inorganic Constituents by SW-846
Method 6010, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 16 Surface Water Sampling Results, Appendix I Volatile Organic Constituents by SW -
846 Method 8260, Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 17 Notification Table, Constituents Detected At or Above Groundwater Standards,
Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
Table 18 Notification Table, Constituents Detected At or Above Surface Water Standards,
Central Sanitary Landfill, May 3-9, 2017
FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Groundwater Contour Map, May 3-9, 2017
APPENDICES
Appendix A Ground and Surface Water Sampling Field Data Sheets
Appendix B Laboratory Reports
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 1
RUTHERFORD COUNTY CENTRAL SANITARY LANDFILL
APPENDIX I DETECTION MONITORING
APPENDIX II ASSESSMENT MONITORING
APPENDIX II TRIGGERED CONSTITUENTS
MNA PARAMETERS
C & D PARAMETERS
MAY 2017 SAMPLING
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sixteen monitoring wells and four stream locations at the Rutherford County Central Sanitary
Landfill were sampled May3-9, 2017. Six of the wells (8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6,
8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-8, and 8103-MW-9) comprise the Subtitle D groundwater monitoring
system for the municipal solid waste disposal area of the landfill. Six monitoring wells comprising
two well nests (8103-MW-10A, 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-10D, 8103-MW-11A,
and 8103-MW-11B) were installed in August 1998 to provide additional data on the nature and
extent of the contaminant plume emanating from the disposal area. 8103-MW-10A has an
extremely slow recharge rate and is not used as a sampling location. Five monitoring wells (8103 -
MW-3, 8103-MW-12, 8103-MW-13, 8103-MW-14, and 8103-MW-15) comprise the groundwater
monitoring system for the construction and demolition (C&D) and yard waste disposal areas and
the transfer station facility. 8103-MW-2 provides the upgradient groundwater data for the closed
MSW and C&D sections of the facility. All sampling was conducted in accordance with North
Carolina Solid Waste Management Guidelines.
Samples from 8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-3, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-8,
8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-10D, 8103-MW-11A, 8103-MW-11B,
8103-MW-12, 8103-MW-13, 8103-MW-14, and 8103-MW-15 were submitted to a North Carolina
certified laboratory for analysis using the Federal Appendix I list of constituents for detection
monitoring. The Appendix I detection monitoring constituent list is a subset of the Federal
Appendix II assessment monitoring constituent list. Samples from 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6,
8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-8, and 8103-MW-9 were analyzed for the Appendix II assessment
monitoring constituents. Samples from 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-10D, 8103-
MW-11A, and 8103-MW-11B were also analyzed for triggered Federal Appendix II assessment
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 2
monitoring constituents. In this report, the term "triggered Appendix II constituent" refers to any
Appendix II constituent not included in the Appendix I list that was detected above the quantitation
limit established by the Solid Waste Section during previous sampling events. Samples from
surface water sampling locations 8103-SW-2, 8103-SW-3, 8103-SW-4, and 8103-SW-5a were
analyzed for Federal Appendix I detection monitoring constituents.
In addition to Appendix I and triggered Appendix II parameters, samples from 8103 -MW-2, 8103-
MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-MW-11A were analyzed for the MNA
parameters set forth in the NC Solid Waste Section CAP approval letter dated August 17, 2007.
The results of the laboratory analyses and field tests for the MNA parameters are discussed in
Section 5.3.
In addition to Appendix I and triggered Appendix II parameters, samples from 8103 -MW-2, 8103-
MW-3, 8103-MW-12, 8103-MW-13, 8103-MW-14, and 8103-MW-15 were analyzed for the C&D
parameters set forth in the NC Solid Waste Section approved monitoring plan. Surface water
samples 8103-SW-2, 8103-SW-3, and 8103-SW-4 were also analyzed for the C&D parameters.
The results of the laboratory analyses for the C&D parameters are discussed in Section 5.4.
Results from the sixteen monitoring wells sampled indicate that five Appendix I inorganic
constituents (chromium in 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-11B, and
8103-MW-15; cobalt in 8103-MW-3, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-10B,
8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-10D, 8103-MW-11A, 8103-MW-11B, 8103-MW-12, 8103-MW-13, and
8103-MW-15; lead in 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-10C, and 8103-MW-11B; thallium in 8103-MW-6,
8103-MW-10D, 8103-MW-11A, 8103-MW-11B, and 8103-MW-12; and vanadium in 8103-MW-2,
8103-MW-3, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-8, 8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-
10C, 8103-MW-11A, 8103-MW-11B, 8103-MW-12, 8103-MW-13, 8103-MW-14, and 8103-MW-
15) were present in concentrations exceeding the 15A NCAC 2L Standards for Class GA
Groundwater (2L) or NC Groundwater Protection (NCGP) Standards. Eleven Appendix I inorganic
constituents (barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, nickel, selenium, silver,
and zinc) were detected in one or more of the monitoring well samples at concentrations at or
above the Method Detection Limits (MDLs), but below the 2L or NCGP Standards. The above
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 3
totals include those constituents detected at or above the MDLs, but below the Solid Waste Sect ion
Limits (J values).
Concentrations of five Appendix I volatile organic constituents (1,2-dichloropropane in 8103-MW-
9; 1,4-dichlorobenzene in 8103-MW-6; benzene in 8103-MW-6 and 8103-MW-10D;
tetrachloroethene in 8103-MW-10D; and vinyl chloride in 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-
10D, and 8103-MW-13) exceeded the 2L or NCGP Standards on the date the samples were
collected. Twelve Appendix I volatile organic constituents (1,1-dichloroethane; 1,2-
dichlorobenzene; 1,4-dichlorobenzene; benzene; carbon disulfide; chlorobenzene; chloroethane;
chloroform; cis-1,2-dichloroethene; total xylenes; trichloroethene; and trichlorofluoromethane)
were detected in one or more of the monitoring well samples at concentrations at or above the
MDLs, but below the 2L or NCGP Standards. The above totals include those constituents detected
at or above the MDLs, but below the Solid Waste Section Limits (J values).
No Appendix II triggered constituents exceeded the 2L or NCGP Standards on the dates the
samples were collected. Two Appendix II triggered constituents (1,3-dichlorobenzene and
mercury) were detected in one or more of the monitoring well samples at concentrations at or
above the MDLs, but below the 2L Standards. The above totals include those constituents detected
at or above the MDLs, but below the Solid Waste Section Limits (J values).
In addition to the triggered Appendix II constituents noted above, two Appendix II constituents
(acenaphthene and dibenzofuran in 8103-MW-6) were detected at concentrations below the
2L/NCGP Standards and Solid Waste Section limits.
Surface water samples were collected from creeks along the northern, western, and southern
perimeters of the landfill property.
Concentrations of two Appendix I inorganic constituents (copper in all four surface water samples
and silver in 8103-SW 3, 8103-SW-4 and 8103-SW-5A) were detected in concentrations that
exceeded the Recommended Action Levels. Two Appendix I inorganic constituent (cadmium and
chromium) was detected in surface water samples at concentrations at or above the Method
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 4
Detection Limits (MDLs), but below the 15A NCAC 2B Standards for Class B/C Surface Waters
(2B). Four Appendix I inorganic constituents that do not have established standards (antimony,
barium, cobalt, and vanadium) were detected in one or more of the surface water samples at
concentrations at or above the MDLs. No volatile organic constituents were detected in any of the
surface water samples.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Central Sanitary Landfill is a Solid Waste Management Facility (SWMF) located off of Business
Highway 74 at the south end of Laurel Hill Drive south of Rutherfordton in Rutherford County,
North Carolina. Figure 1 is a map showing the site location. Groundwater and surface water
sampling locations are shown on Figure 2. Scarlett Geophysical Consulting, P.C. (SGC) was
contracted by Rutherford County to conduct sampling efforts to satisfy the following groundwater
monitoring requirements:
2017 semi-annual C&D water quality monitoring
2017 semi-annual Appendix I detection monitoring
2017 annual Appendix II assessment monitoring
2017 semi-annual Appendix I detection and Appendix II (triggered constituents only)
assessment monitoring for five supplemental wells installed in 1998
2017 semi-annual MNA monitoring
To complete the semi-annual C&D water quality monitoring requirement, samples from 8103-MW-
2, 8103-MW-3, 8103-MW-12, 8103-MW-13, 8103-MW-14, 8103-MW-15, 8103-SW-2, 8103-SW-
3, 8103-SW-4, and 8103-SW-5a were analyzed for the Appendix I constituent list and the C&D
parameters set forth in the NC Solid Waste approved monitoring plan.
To complete the semi-annual Appendix I and annual Appendix II monitoring requirements,
samples from 8103-MW-2 and the four surface water sampling locations were analyzed for
Appendix I inorganics and volatile organics and samples from 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-
MW-7, 8103-MW-8, and 8103-MW-9 were analyzed for the full list of Appendix II constituents.
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 5
To complete the semi-annual Appendix I and triggered Appendix II monitoring requirements for
the five assessment wells installed in August 1998, samples from 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C,
8103-MW-10D, 8103-MW-11A, and 8103-MW-11B were analyzed for the full list of Appendix I
constituents and triggered Appendix II constituents 1,3-dichlorobenzene; 1,3-dichloropropane;
dichlorodifluoromethane; 4,4'-DDD; 4,4'-DDT; alpha-BHC; beta-BHC; delta-BHC; endrin;
gamma-BHC (Lindane); and mercury.
Monitoring wells 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-8, and 8103-MW-9 were installed in
November 1994 and March 1995 after three of the Appendix I baseline sampling rounds had been
completed. The March 1995 sampling event was the first in which they were included.
Monitoring wells 8103-MW-10A, 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-10D, 8103-MW-
11A, and 8103-MW-11B were installed in August-September 1998 and were first included in the
September 1998 sampling event. 8103-MW-10A was installed to provide deep groundwater
samples, and 8103-MW-10D was installed to provide water level data. 8103-MW-10A has a very
low recharge rate (less than 0.03 gallons over 24 hours); therefore, 8103-MW-10D has been
designated the deep sample well. Monitoring wells 8103-MW-12 and 8103-MW-13 were installed
in June 2002 and May 2001 to monitor the C&D waste disposal area of the landfill. 8103-MW-12
and 8103-MW-13 were first sampled in June 2002. Monitoring wells 8103-MW-14 and 8103-MW-
15 were installed in February 2008 to supplement the C&D area monitoring, and were first
sampled in May 2008.
To complete the semi-annual MNA water quality monitoring requirement, samples from 8103-
MW-2, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-8, 8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-MW-11A
were analyzed for the MNA parameters set forth in the NC Solid Waste Section CAP.
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK
To fulfill the groundwater monitoring requirements, SGC completed the following tasks:
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 6
Sampled sixteen monitoring wells and four surface water locations at the Central Sanitary
Landfill SWMF
Obtained field values for pH, temperature, and conductivity at each sample location
Obtained field values for ORP, DO, and turbidity at the MNA sample locations
Analyzed the appropriate samples for Appendix I, Appendix II, and triggered Appendix II
constituents by a North Carolina certified laboratory using State approved methods
Analyzed the appropriate samples for MNA parameters
Analyzed the appropriate samples for C&D parameters
Determined groundwater flow rates and directions at the monitoring well locations
Prepared a report for the State
4.0 METHODS EMPLOYED
4.1 Monitoring Well Sampling
Groundwater monitoring well sampling took place on May 3-9, 2017. The monitoring well
locations are shown on Figure 2. A representative from SGC opened each well and measured the
static water level from the top of the PVC casing. The volume of water in the well was calculated.
These data are summarized in Table 1. The wells were purged until a minimum of three well
volumes was removed, the well was purged dry, or the indicator field parameters were stabilized
(for the wells purged using pneumatic pumps). Following purging, groundwater samples were
collected and pH, temperature, and conductivity were measured and recorded on the groundwater
sampling field data sheets. Field measurements for oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved
oxygen (DO), and turbidity were obtained from the designated MNA wells. A groundwater
sampling field data sheet for each well is included in Appendix A. Table 2 summarizes the results
of the field data.
Samples from 8103-MW-3, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-MW-11A were collected using
the dedicated pumps installed in each well. Samples from 8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-8,
and 8103-MW-9 were collected using a properly decontaminated pneumatic pump and dedicated
tubing. Samples from 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-10B, 8103-MW-10C, 8103-MW-11B, 8103-MW-
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 7
12, 8103-MW-13, 8103-MW-14, and 8103-MW-15 were collected using properly decontaminated
teflon bailers. Immediately upon collection, each sample was placed in laboratory supplied sample
containers, packed on ice, and placed under chain-of-custody. The sampling technician wore new
latex gloves and used separate bailers at each of the bailed wells to minimize the possibility of
cross contamination. Additionally, new bailer cord was used for each purging/sampling event
where a pneumatic pump was not available. The surface water samples were collected by
immersing laboratory supplied containers in the water to be sampled. After collection, each
sample was packed on ice and placed under chain-of-custody. All samples were submitted to
Research & Analytical Laboratories, Inc. (R&A), a North Carolina certified laboratory, for
analysis.
4.2 Stream Sampling
Surface water sampling took place on May 3 and May 9, 2017. Sample 8103-SW-2 was collected
from a tributary of Cleghorn Creek immediately upstream from the confluence. This stream flows
to the southwest along the northwest boundary and south along the west boundary of the landfill
property. Sample 8103-SW-3 was collected from Stonecutter Creek, a stream that flows to the
southwest along the southeastern toe of the landfill. Sample 8103-SW-4 was collected from the
same stream as 8103-SW-2 approximately 2,500 feet upstream on the northern boundary of the
landfill property. The original 8103-SW-5 sampling location is an intermittent stream
downgradient from the C&D landfill. This feature drains into the Cleghorn Creek tributary
upstream from the 8103-SW-2 sampling location. This location is usually dry and rarely available
for sampling; therefore, the sampling location has been moved to the Cleghorn Creek tributary 50
feet upstream from the intersection with the drainage feature. Comparison of the data collected at
the new location with the 8103-SW-2 data should reveal whether or not conditions upgradient from
the drainage feature are impacting surface water quality. The new location is designated 8103 -SW-
5A and is shown on Figure 2. Immediately upon collection, pH, temperature, and conductivity
were measured and recorded on the surface water sampling field data sheets. A surface water
sampling field data sheet for each location is included in Appendix A and the field data are
summarized in Table 2. All stream samples were analyzed for the same Appendix I and C&D
parameters as the groundwater samples. The stream sample locations are shown on Figure 2.
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 8
4.3 MNA Sampling
The October 2007 event was the first to include a comprehensive set of baseline MNA
parameters. Subsequent MNA sampling has occurred on a semi-annual basis to evaluate the
effectiveness of MNA as a groundwater protection strategy. The MNA performance wells are
8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-8, 8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-
MW-11A. A Corrective Action Evaluation Report (CAER) discussing the first thirteen MNA
sampling events was submitted on April 1, 2014.
8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-MW-11A have dedicated bladder pumps, and were
purged and sampled in general accordance with the EPA guidelines for low-flow groundwater
sampling. Low-flow sampling was accomplished in 8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-6, and 8103-MW-9
using a properly decontaminated portable pneumatic pump and dedicated tubing.
5.0 RESULTS
5.1 Groundwater
5.1.1 Analytical Results
The results of the laboratory analyses for Appendix I constituents in the groundwater monitoring
wells are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. Table 5 summarizes the results of the laboratory analyses
for triggered Appendix II constituents. Tables 6 through 10 summarize the results of the
laboratory analyses for all Appendix II constituents in 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-7,
8103-MW-8, and 8103-MW-9, including the subset of Appendix I inorganics and volatile organics
presented in Tables 3 and 4 and triggered Appendix II constituents presented in Table 5. Table 11
summarizes the results of the laboratory analyses for MNA parameters 8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-4,
8103-MW-6, 8103-MW-8, 8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-MW-11A. Table 12
summarizes the results for the additional C&D parameters required by the current C&D monitoring
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 9
plan. Complete laboratory reports for all Appendix I, Appendix II, MNA, and C&D analytical
testing are included in Appendix B.
The groundwater sample analyses revealed that twelve Appendix I constituents had concentrations
above 2L or NCGP Standards in one or more of the wells. A summary of these analytical results is
provided below.
Chromium was detected in 8103-MW-7 at 14.6 ppb, 8103-MW-10B at 29.7 ppb, 8103-
MW-10C at 44.4 ppb, 8103-MW-11B at 64.6 ppb, and 8103-MW-15 at 17.0 ppb. The 2L
Standard is 10.0 ppb.
Cobalt was detected in 8103-MW-3 at 1.7 ppb, 8103-MW-4 at 5.7 ppb, 8103-MW-6 at 36.0
ppb, 8103-MW-7 at 5.2 ppb, 8103-MW-10B at 14.5 ppb, 8103-MW-10C at 27.9 ppb, 8103-
MW-10D at 30.5 ppb, 8103-MW-11A at 13.7 ppb, 8103-MW-11B at 28.3 ppb, 8103-MW-
12 at 6.8 ppb, 8103-MW-13 at 7.4 ppb, and 8103-MW-15 at 8.9 ppb. The NCGP Standard
is 1.0 ppb. All results below 10.0 ppb are estimated (J) values.
Lead was detected in 8103-MW-4 at 17.1 ppb, 8103-MW-10C at 15.1 ppb, and 8103-MW-
11B at 24.3 ppb. The 2L Standard is 15.0 ppb.
Thallium was detected in 8103-MW-6 at 22.2 ppb, 8103-MW-10D at 5.1 ppb, 8103-MW-
11A at 12.3 ppb, 8103-MW-11B at 3.8 ppb, 8103-MW-12 at 4.9 ppb. The NCGP Standard
is 0.28 ppb. All results below 5.5 ppb are estimated (J) values.
Vanadium was detected in 8103-MW-2 at 2.2 ppb, 8103-MW-3 at 2.3 ppb, 8103-MW-4 at
39.2 ppb, 8103-MW-7 at 22.4 ppb, 8103-MW-8 at 0.9 ppb, 8103-MW-9 at 0.4 ppb, 8103-
MW-10B at 54.8 ppb, 8103-MW-10C at 82.2 ppb, 8103-MW-11A at 2.22 ppb, 8103-MW-
11B at 131.0 ppb, 8103-MW-12 at 7.8 ppb, 8103-MW-13 at 3.1 ppb, 8103-MW-14 at 1.9
ppb, and 8103-MW-15 at 37.8 ppb. The NCGP Standard is 0.3 ppb. All results below 25.0
ppb are estimated (J) values.
1,2-Dichloropropane was detected in 8103-MW-9 at 16.7 ppb. The 2L Standard is 0.6 ppb.
1,4-Dichlorobenzene was detected in 8103-MW-6 at 6.6 ppb. The 2L Standard is 6.0 ppb.
Benzene was detected in 8103-MW-6 at 1.1 ppb and 8103-MW-10D at 1.3 ppb. The 2L
Standard is 1.0 ppb.
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 10
Tetrachloroethene was detected in 8103-MW-10D at 1.3 ppb. The 2L Standard is 0.7 ppb.
All results below 1.0 ppb are estimated (J) values.
Vinyl Chloride was detected in 8103-MW-4 at 0.2 ppb, 8103-MW-6 at 0.4 ppb, 8103-MW-
10D at 0.4 ppb, and 8103-MW-13 at 0.2 ppb. The 2L Standard is 0.03 ppb. All results
below 1.0 ppb are estimated (J) values.
The following Appendix I constituents were detected in one or more of the wells in concentrations
above the MDLs and below established 2L or NCGP Standards. Values that are above the MDLs
and below the SWSLs (estimated “J” values) are included.
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
Benzene
Carbon Disulfide
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 11
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Total Xylenes
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
The groundwater sample analyses did not reveal any Appendix II triggered constituent
concentrations above the 2L or NCGP Standards.
The following Appendix II triggered constituents were detected in one or more of the wells in
concentrations above the MDLs and below established 2L Standards. Values that are above the
MDLs and below the SWSLs (estimated “J” values) are included.
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
Mercury
The following Appendix II constituents that are not included in the triggered Appendix II data set
were detected at concentrations above the MDLs and below established 2L Standards. They were
detected at low concentrations below the SWSLs (estimated “J” values) and will be monitored
annually. They will not be added to the triggered Appendix II list at this time.
Acenaphthene was detected in 8103-MW-6.
Dibenzofuran was detected in 8103-MW-6.
The results of the laboratory analyses for MNA parameters are presented in Table 11 and discussed
in Section 5.3.
The results of the laboratory analyses for C&D parameters are presented in Table 12 and discussed
in Section 5.4.
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 12
Table 13 summarizes the sampling history for the wells in the groundwater monitoring plan and
includes the C&D and MNA wells.
5.1.2 Hydraulic Conductivity
In-situ hydraulic conductivity tests were performed on wells 8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-
6, 8103-MW-7, 8103-MW-8 and 8103-MW-9 on March 20, 1995. These tests resulted in hydraulic
conductivity values ranging from 2.9 x 10-6 to 1.6 x 10-4 cm/sec (average 3.7 x 10-5 cm/sec). These
data are included in Table 14 and were used to calculate groundwater flow velocities across the
site. A complete discussion of the test methods and calculations is presented in BPA
Environmental & Engineering’s July 7, 1995, report "Monitoring Well System Upgrade, Central
Sanitary Landfill, Rutherford County, North Carolina."
5.1.3 Groundwater Flow Direction and Rate
The static levels in the monitoring wells were measured May 3-9, 2017. The water table elevations
ranged from 803.02 to 949.26 feet MSL on these dates. Groundwater and well casing elevation
data are included in Table 1. A groundwater contour map was constructed and is presented as
Figure 2. Based on field data, groundwater appears to be flowing in a radial pattern from the fill
area towards the east, south, and west. Groundwater flow lines were drawn through each well as
shown on Figure 2. The groundwater gradient at each well was calculated assuming a constant
groundwater gradient along the flow line between adjacent groundwater elevation contours,
between two monitoring wells along the same flow path, or between a well and the nearest stream.
Based on a variation of Darcy's Law, the rate of groundwater movement within the regolith aquifer
was calculated at each monitoring well using the following equation:
V = Ki
n
where V = velocity (ft/day)
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 13
K = hydraulic conductivity (ft/day)
i = groundwater gradient (ft/ft)
n = porosity (dimensionless)
Calculated hydraulic conductivity and gradient values and estimated effective porosity values for
each well were used in the velocity calculations. The 20 percent effective porosity value is based
on porosity and specific yield versus grain size distribution relationships presented in Fetter (1988)
and is typical for the type of soil (sandy silt with some clays) comprising the regolith at the
landfill. The calculated groundwater velocities ranged from 0.54 to 14.83 ft/yr (average 6.39 ft/yr)
and are included in Table 14.
5.2 Surface Water
No Appendix I volatile organic constituents were detected above the MDLs in any of the surface
water samples.
No Appendix I inorganic constituents were detected in concentrations at or above the 2B
Standards. Two inorganic constituents (listed below) were detected above the Recommended
Action Levels in the surface water samples.
Copper was detected in 8103-SW-2 at 11.5 ppb, 8103-SW-3 at 12.8 ppb, 8103-SW-4 at
11.3 ppb, and 8103-SW-5a at 10.3 ppb. The Recommended Action Level is 7.0 ppb.
Silver was detected in 8103-SW-3 at 2.4 ppb, 8103-SW-4 at 3.1 ppb, and 8103-SW-5a at
1.3 ppb. The Recommended Action Level is 0.06 ppb. All results below 10.0 ppb are
estimated (J) values.
Appendix I inorganic constituents with established standards (listed below) were detected in one or
more of the surface water samples at concentrations above the MDL and below the 2B Standards or
Action Levels. Values that are above the MDLs and below the SWSLs (estimated “J” values) are
included.
Cadmium
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 14
Chromium
Zinc
The following Appendix I inorganic constituents were detected in one or more of the surface water
samples in concentrations above the MDL. No 2B Standards have been established for these
constituents. Values that are above the MDLs and below the SWSLs (estimated “J” values) are
included.
Antimony
Barium
Cobalt
Vanadium
The results of the laboratory analyses for C&D surface water parameters are presented in Table 12
and discussed in Section 5.4.
The results of the laboratory analyses for Appendix I constituents in the surface water samples are
summarized in Tables 15 and 16, and the complete laboratory reports are included in Appendix B.
5.3 Monitored Natural Attenuation
The designated MNA performance wells are 8103-MW-2, 8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, 8103-
MW-8, 8103-MW-9, 8103-MW-10D, and 8103-MW-11A. MNA parameters have been included
in the semi-annual sampling schedule since October 2007. These analytical results provide a
sufficient set of baseline data for constructive evaluation of MNA processes. The results are
encouraging. The presence and ratios of reductive dehalogenation chlorinated ethenes and other
MNA parameter concentrations in the wells that are in the primary plume migration routes
(8103-MW-4, 8103-MW-6, and 8103-MW-11A to the west and 8103-MW-10D to the east) are
consistent with the impacts expected from biodegradation processes at work in a mixed
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 15
contaminant plume. A Corrective Action Evaluation Report (CAER) discussing the first thirteen
MNA sampling events was submitted on April 1, 2014.
Two MNA parameters (shown below) were detected at concentrations above the 2L Standard.
The results of the MNA field parameter measurements are included in Table 2, and the complete
results of the MNA laboratory parameter analyses are presented in Table 11.
Chloride was detected in 8103-MW-6 at 318,000 ppb. The 2L Standard is 250,000 ppb.
Iron was detected in 8103-MW-2 at 1,360 ppb, 8103-MW-4 at 9,920 ppb, 8103-MW-6 at
4,880 ppb, 8103-MW-10D at 666 ppb, and 8103-MW-11A at 4,580 ppb. The 2L Standard
is 300.0 ppb.
5.4 C & D Monitoring
The groundwater sample analyses revealed that four C&D parameters (listed below) exceeded
established groundwater water protection standards.
Aluminum was detected in 8103-MW-15 at 19,600.0 ppb. The NCGP Standard is 3,500.0
ppb.
Iron was detected in 8103-MW-2 at 1,360.0 ppb, 8103-MW-3 at 1,470.0 ppb, 8103-MW-12
at 3,270.0 ppb, 8103-MW-13 at 2,240.0 ppb, 8103-MW-14 at 463.0 ppb, and 8103-MW-15
at 16,200.0 ppb. The 2L Standard is 300.0 ppb.
Manganese was detected in 8103-MW-3 at 292.0 ppb, 8103-MW-12 at 2,050.0 ppb, 8103-
MW-13 at 769.0 ppb, and 8103-MW-15 at 424.0 ppb. The 2L Standard is 50.0 ppb.
TDS was detected in 8103-MW-3 at 568,000 ppb. The 2L Standard is 500,000 ppb.
One C&D surface water constituent had concentrations (listed below) that exceeded the 2B
Standard for Class B,C Surface Waters.
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 16
Mercury was detected in 8103-SW-2 at 0.05 ppb, 8103-SW-3 at 0.05 ppb, 8103-SW-4 at
0.06 ppb, and 8103-SW-5A at 0.05 ppb. The 2B Standard is 0.012 ppb.
One C&D surface water constituent concentration (listed below) exceeded the Recommended
Action Level for surface waters.
Iron was detected in 8103-SW-2 at 3,600.0 ppb. The Recommended Action Level is
1,000.0 ppb.
Notifications
All groundwater constituent concentrations that exceeded the 2L or NCGP standards are listed in
Section 5.1.1, Section 5.3, and Section 5.4, and indicated by shaded cells and bold typeface in
Tables 3 through 12. Surface water constituent concentrations that exceeded the 2B or NCGP
Standards are listed in Sections 5.2 and 5.4 and indicated by shaded cells and bold typeface in
Tables 12, 15, and 16. A summary of groundwater notifications is provided in Table 17 and
surface water notifications in Table 18.
Groundwater and surface water concentrations that exceeded the reporting limits, but were below
the 2L or NCGP standards are listed in Sections 5.1.1 and 5.2 and in Tables 3 through 12, 15, and
16.
The volatile organic constituents present in the groundwater samples are likely due to past waste
disposal activities; however, contributions by ongoing borrow, maintenance, and transfer station
activities cannot be ruled out. Continued operation of the C&D facility adjacent to the old disposal
area is also a potential contributor. There is no evidence indicating that volatil e organic
constituents resulting from waste disposal at Central Landfill currently exceed the 2L or NCGP
Standards at locations beyond the facility boundary.
The inorganic constituents present in the groundwater samples have been influenced by past waste
disposal, but it is likely that local geology has an impact. The upgradient well, 8103-MW-2, shows
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 17
no volatile organic impacts but over time has shown a number of inorganic concentrations similar
to those in downgradient wells. Inorganic concentrations have shown significant fluctuations over
time at several sampling locations monitoring the C&D disposal area. It is possible/likely that the
fluctuations are significantly influenced by long duration precipitation patterns.
5.6 Quality Assurance
A duplicate sample was collected from 8103-MW-12 and submitted for analysis as "Duplicate."
This sample was analyzed for Appendix I volatile organic constituents. The duplicate Appendix I
volatile organic results are in agreement with the 8103-MW-12 results. The results of the duplicate
sample analyses are included in Appendix B.
Trip blank samples accompanied the sample bottles from the time they left the laboratory until
their return. The laboratory did not report the presence of any Appendix I constituents above the
detection in the trip blank sample.
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 18
6.0 REFERENCES
BPA Environmental & Engineering, Inc., Monitoring Well System Upgrade, Central Sanitary
Landfill, Rutherford County, N.C., July 7, 1995.
Fetter, C.W., 1988, Applied Hydrogeology, New York, New York; Macmillan Publishing
Company, 1988, 592 pp.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Subchapter 2L, Classifications and Water
Quality Standards Applicable to the Groundwaters of North Carolina, Sections .0100, .0200, and
.0300 (Downloaded from NCSW Web Site, June 11, 2012); from the Environmental Management
Commission, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Subchapter 2B, Classifications and Water
Quality Standards Applicable to the Surface Waters of North Carolina, Section .0200, May 1,
2007; from the Environmental Management Commission, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Composite 15A NCAC Subchapter 2B and EPA National Criteria for Freshwater Aquatic Life,
current as of February 5, 2010.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Solid Waste Management, Subchapter 13B, Solid Waste Management,
Section .1600 (August 27, 2001).
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Solid Waste Management, Subchapter 13B, Solid Waste Management,
recently added/updated rules .1604, .1626, .1632, .1633, .1634, .1635, and .1637 (effective
April/May 2011)
Rutherford County Central Sanitary Landfill June 27, 2017
Rutherford County, NC Page 19
North Carolina Water Quality Monitoring Guidance Document for Solid Waste Facilities,
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of Solid Waste Management,
Solid Waste Section, (January 2000), Download from NCSW Web Site.
North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding New Guidelines for Electronic
Submittal of Environmental Data, October 27, 2006.
Addendum to October 27, 2006, North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding New
Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Data, February 23, 2007.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Solid Waste
Management, Solid Waste Management, Solid Waste Environmental Monitoring Reporting Limits
and Standards, updated June 13, 2011, downloaded from NCDENR June 11, 2015.
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 8, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-2 Purge Time 1559 to 1655
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 8, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1655
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Sunny, 74⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 46.25 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 60.08 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 13.83 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 2.25 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 7.3 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.69⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 104 mhos/cm
3) pH 8.25
4) ORP 187 mV
5) DO 6.57 mg/l
6) Turbidity 15.7 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Slightly cloudy, no odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1730
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 3, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-3 Purge Time 1530 to 1600
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 3, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1600
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Scattered Clouds, 80⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 33.89 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 47.66 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 13.77 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 2.24 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 10.0+ gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.5⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 944 µmhos/cm
3) pH 6.37
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Slightly cloudy, reddish tan, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 3, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-4 Purge Time 1321 to 1405
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 3, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1405
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Sunny, 78⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 36.06 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 51.31 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 15.25 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 2.49 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 11.0 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 15.46⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 650 µmhos/cm
3) pH 6.25
4) ORP 50 mV
5) DO 0.00 mg/l
6) Turbidity 22.7 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Cloudy, gray, septic odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1440
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 8, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-6 Purge Time 0940 to 1020
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 8, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1100
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Sunny, 54⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 31.88 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 38.97 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 7.09 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 1.16 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 6.8 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.90⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 1690 µmhos/cm
3) pH 6.73
4) ORP -172 mV
5) DO 0.00 mg/l
6) Turbidity 0.0 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Cloudy, gray, fetid odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1130
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-7 Purge Time 1158 to 1215
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 9, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1245
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Partly Cloudy, 68⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 37.82 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 56.19 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 18.37 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 2.99 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 6.5 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES X NO ___
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.3⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 898 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.68
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Slightly cloudy, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 4, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-8 Purge Time 1352 to 1435
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 4, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1435
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Cloudy, 71⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 43.49 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 46.95 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 3.46 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 0.56 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 3.4 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 17.00⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 350 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.13
4) ORP 285 mV
5) DO 2.35 mg/l
6) Turbidity 1.4 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Slightly silty, tan, no odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1530
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 8, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-9 Purge Time 1237 to 1307
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 8, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1307
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Sunny, 69⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 34.00 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 39.78 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 5.78 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 0.94 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 4.8 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 15.72⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 42.0 mhos/cm
3) pH 5.93
4) ORP 289 mV
5) DO 3.92 mg/l
6) Turbidity 0.0 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Clear, no odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1430
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 4, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-10A Purge Time - to -
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date NS
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time NS
Measuring point description: Sampled by NS
Top of PVC Casing Weather Cloudy, 63⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 4.50 f t.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 103.50 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 99.00 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method -
2) Sample Method -
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) - gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling - gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO __
Field Analysis
1) Temperature -
2) Specific Conductance -
3) pH -
4) Physical Appearance and Odor -
NS – Not Sampled
Note: Well not used for sample collection. See text.
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 4, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-10B Purge Time 1032 to 1155
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 4, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1200
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Cloudy, 63⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 8.92 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 38.65 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 29.73 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 4.85 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 5.5 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES X NO __
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.0⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 130.9 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.32
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Slightly cloudy, tan, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 4, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-10C Purge Time 1210 to 1220
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 4, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1220
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Cloudy, 63⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 8.65 f t.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 17.69 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 9.04 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 1.47 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 4.4 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 15.0⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 107.2 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.30
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Cloudy, reddish-tan, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 4, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-10D Purge Time 1019 to 1115
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 4, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1115
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Cloudy, 63⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 9.88 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 68.50 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 58.62 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 9.56 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 28.0 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 14.68⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 296 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.56
4) ORP 24 mV
5) DO 0.00 mg/l
6) Turbidity 0.0 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Clear, no odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1150
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 3, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-11A Purge Time 1034 to 1145
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 3, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1145
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Sunny, 69⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 8.62 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 46.79 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 38.17 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Pneumatic Pump
2) Sample Method Pneumatic Pump
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 6.22 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 27.3 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 14.86⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 617 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.55
4) ORP 42 mV
5) DO 0.00 mg/l
6) Turbidity 3.7 NTU
7) Physical Appearance and Odor Slightly cloudy, gray, no odor
Note: Hydrogen sampled @ 1235
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 3, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-11B Purge Time 1118 to 1128
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 3, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1130
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Sunny, 69⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 9.65 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 21.40 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 11.75 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 1.92 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 5.7 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 14.9⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 182.2 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.01
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Silty, tan, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-12 Purge Time 0950 to 1015
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 9, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1020
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Partly Cloudy, 63⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 33.10 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 52.35 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 19.25 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h)
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h) 3.14 gal.
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 9.4 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.2⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 642 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.53
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Silty, tan-gray, fetid odor
Note: Duplicate VOC Sample
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-13 Purge Time 1100 to 1120
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 9, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1125
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Partly cloudy, 68⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 82.05 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 90.10 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 8.05 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h) 1.31 gal.
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h)
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 3.9 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 17.4⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 195.1 mhos/cm
3) pH 5.83
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Silty, gray, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-14 Purge Time 1317 to 1327
Locked: Yes No X Sample Date May 9, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1430
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Partly Cloudy, 76⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 23.51 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 34.80 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 11.29 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h)
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h) 1.84 gal.
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 5.5 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 17.2⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 241 mhos/cm
3) pH 5.90
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Muddy, tan, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Purge Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-MW-15 Purge Time 1350 to 1405
Locked: Yes X No Sample Date May 9, 2017
PVC X Steel Stainless Steel Sample Time 1410
Measuring point description: Sampled by E. W. Scarlett
Top of PVC Casing Weather Partly Cloudy, 76⁰F
Water Level and Well Data
1) Depth to water from measuring point 31.41 ft.
2) Depth to well bottom from measuring point 39.96 ft.
3) Height of water column (h) 8.55 ft.
Well Purging and Sample Collection
1) Purge Method Teflon Bailer
2) Sample Method Teflon Bailer
3) Volume of water in well
1" well . . . . (v = 0.041 x h)
X 2" well . . . . (v = 0.163 x h)
4" well . . . . (v = 0.651 x h) 1.39 gal.
6" well . . . . (v = 1.5 x h)
4) Volume of water removed prior to sampling 4.2 gal.
5) Was well purged DRY? YES NO X
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 16.7⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 194.1 mhos/cm
3) pH 5.98
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Cloudy, tan, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
SURFACE WATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Sample Date May 3, 2017
Source/Well 8103-SW-2 Time 1535
Sampled by E. W. Scarlett Weather Partly Cloudy, 80⁰F
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 17.8⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 85.5 mhos/cm
3) pH 7.27
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Clear, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
SURFACE WATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Sample Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-SW-3 Time 1610
Sampled by E. W. Scarlett Weather Partly cloudy, 82⁰F
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 18.7⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 75.9 mhos/cm
3) pH 7.39
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Clear, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
SURFACE WATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Sample Date May 9, 2017
Source/Well 8103-SW-4 Time 1520
Sampled by E. W. Scarlett Weather Partly Cloudy, 79⁰F
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 17.8⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 54.0 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.97
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Clear, no odor
SCARLETT GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTING, P.C.
SURFACE WATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Location Rutherford County Central Sample Date May 3, 2017
Source/Well 8103-SW-5A Time 1545
Sampled by E. W. Scarlett Weather Partly Cloudy, 80⁰F
Field Analysis
1) Temperature 17.7⁰C
2) Specific Conductance 68.6 mhos/cm
3) pH 6.96
4) Physical Appearance and Odor Clear, no odor