CCB0057_Nash_SwiftCreek_GW_FID1279934_201806

ERM NC, Inc.
February 5, 2019
NCDEQ - Division of Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646
Attention: Ms. Jackie Drummond - Compliance Hydrogeologist
Reference: Water Quality Monitoring Report Submittal
Swift Creek CCB Structural Fill - CCB0057
Battleboro, Nash County, North Carolina
Ms. Drummond:
8000 Corporate Center Dr.
Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28226
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
On behalf of Reuse Technology, Inc., ERM NC, Inc. (ERM) is transmitting the enclosed
report of groundwater and surface water quality monitoring conducted at the Swift Creek
site in June 2018. The water quality monitoring is being conducted in accordance with the
approved Corrective Action Plan dated February 2015.
If you should have any questions or require additional information concerning this
submittal, please contact Tom Wilson ([e-mail]) or Dave Wasiela
([e-mail]).
Sincerely,
ERM NG Inc.
Thomas M Wilson, P.G.
cc: Mr. John R. Thomas, ReUse Technology, Inc.
Mr. Bob Waldrop, Full Circle Solutions, Inc.
Attch: Water Quality Monitoring Report

Submitted to:
ReUse Technology
Submitted by:
ERM NC, Inc. (ERM)
Ballantyne One
15720 Brixham Hill Ave, Suite 120
Charlotte, NC 28277
www.erm.com
The business of sustainability
77
a '
�. r. � .•�]'lt ._ _ _.. '.W . _. '�, ter•: ����'4Cs:"..y�'�.."'r.
2018 Water Quality Monitoring
Report
Swift Creek
CCB Structural Fill — CCB0057
June 2018 (Revised through 2-5-19)

Swift Creek Project
Reuse Technology Inc.
ReUse Technology, Inc.
2018 Water Quality Monitoring Report
Swift Creek CCB Structural Fill — CCB0057
Battleboro, Nash County
North Carolina
CCB0057
February 5, 2019
Project No. 0397281
Dave Wasiela, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
Thomas M. Wilson, PG
Principal -in -Charge
Nso~a
SEAL
1113
h
ERM NC, Inc.
15720 Brixham Hill Avenue
Suite 120
Charlotte, North Carolina 28277
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
© Copyright 2018 by ERM Worldwide Group Limited and/or its affiliates (`ERM'). All Rights Reserved.
No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior written permission of ERM.

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION AND SITE HISTORY.................................................................................1
1.1. Introduction..................................................................................................................1
1.2. Summary of Site Environmental History and Corrective Action....................................1
2. CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL...............................................................................................3
2.1. Hydrogeology...............................................................................................................3
2.2. Contaminant Fate and Transport.................................................................................4
3. WATER QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITIES....................................................................5
3.1. Objectives....................................................................................................................5
3.2. Monitor Well Installation...............................................................................................6
3.3. Monitoring Methods.....................................................................................................6
4. MONITORING RESULTS.....................................................................................................7
4.1. Groundwater Monitoring Results..................................................................................7
4.2. Surface Water Monitoring Results..............................................................................10
4.3. Laboratory Data Quality Analysis...............................................................................10
5. SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................10
DRAFT

Swift Creek Project
Reuse Technology Inc.
TABLES
Table 1: Monitor Well Construction Data Summary
Table 2: Historical Groundwater Elevation Data
Table 3: Groundwater and Surface Water Analytical Event Results
Table 4: Groundwater and Surface Water Field Parameter Results
FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Site Location Map
Site Map and Monitor Well Locations
Shallow Groundwater Potentiometric Map — June 2018
Groundwater Analyses - Constituents Exceeding 2L Groundwater Standards — June 2018
Groundwater Analyses — Sulfate — Surficial Aquifer
Hydrogeologic Profile A -A'
Sulfate Concentrations Over Time — Selected Monitor Wells
APPENDICES
A Historical Groundwater and Surface Water Analytical Data
B Field Sheets
C Boring Logs
D Laboratory Data Report
DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
1. INTRODUCTION AND SITE HISTORY
1.1. Introduction
On behalf of ReUse Technology, Inc. (ReUse), ERM NC, Inc. (ERM), has prepared this Water
Quality Monitoring Report associated with corrective action activities conducted for the Swift
Creek Coal Combustion By -Products (CCBs) Structural Fill site (CCB-0057) located along U.S.
Highway 301 north of Battleboro, Nash County, North Carolina, (hereafter called the "Site" or
"subject property"). Corrective actions have been implemented at the Site to address
groundwater quality impacts in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) (ERM
February 27, 2015) approved by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
(NCDEQ) on March 12, 2015. The corrective actions were implemented in 2017 and included
temporary removal of CCB materials to allow raising the floor foundation above the seasonal
high groundwater table, placing the CCB materials on the raised floor in a reduced footprint,
installation of a synthetic liner (cap) over the limits of the CCBs, and drainage improvements to
minimize rainfall infiltration. Groundwater and surface water monitoring activities presented
herein are being conducted at the Site to monitor the effectiveness of the corrective actions. The
Site location is shown in Figure 1. A Site map is included as Figure 2.
1.2. Summary of Site Environmental History and Corrective Action
The Site is a 25 acre property in northeast Nash County bounded by US Highway 301 to the
west, Lane Swamp to the north and east and Swift Creek to the south. The area surrounding the
site is comprised of sparsely populated agricultural land and partially wooded land. In
December 2011, the Solid Waste Section approved a proposed plan submitted by Reuse to use
CCBs as structural fill material in the development of the 25 acres as a commercial property. In
September 1992, ReUse began placement of CCBs as beneficial use fill at the site. In January
2003, the last shipment of CCBs was accepted at the site. In March 2003, the site had been
graded, compacted, covered with an 18-inch soil cap and planted with grass seed. In
December 2003, Full Circle Solutions, Inc. purchased the business assets of ReUse
Technology, Inc. including the Swift Creek Site. According to records of Full Circle Solutions,
Inc., a total of approximately 134,000 tons of CCBs were placed at the Site. On November 4,
2004, the Closure Notice was forwarded to the Solid Waste Section.
In August 2004, Sherrill Environmental, Inc. reported the results of groundwater monitoring at
four newly installed monitoring wells (MW-1 S/MW-1 D, MW-2S/MW-2D) at the site. Lead and
sulfate were detected at concentrations above the respective North Carolina 2L Groundwater
Standards in the shallow groundwater on the east side of the CCB fill. In October 2004, the
Solid Waste Section required an assessment by ReUse to determine the extent of the
groundwater impact resulting from the placement of CCBs at the Site. In March 2006, a
Comprehensive Site Assessment for the Swift Creek Project was submitted to the Solid Waste
Section which included the results of an expanded groundwater and surface water assessment.
ERM 1 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project
Reuse Technology Inc.
In September 2006, a Compliance Order was issued by the Solid Waste Section to ReUse. In
December 2006, pursuant to the Compliance Order, an Assessment Monitoring Plan and a
Swift Creek Dewatering Analysis were submitted to the Solid Waste Section. The Assessment
Monitoring Plan described a proposed groundwater and surface water monitoring program for
the site. The Swift Creek Dewatering Analysis described a proposed dewatering subsurface
drain along the western boundary of the fill along US Highway 301 to remove water from the
coal ash fill and lower the local groundwater table to provide a required minimum 1-foot vertical
separation between coal ash and seasonal high groundwater elevations. The Assessment
Monitoring Plan was approved by the Solid Waste Section in February 2007. The Swift Creek
Dewatering Analysis was conditionally approved by the Solid Waste Section in July 2007 based
on the performance of the proposed dewatering plan.
In January 2008, a dewatering subsurface drain was installed consisting of a 6-inch PVC drain
pipe along the western boundary of the fill along US Highway 301. The drain was designed to
lower the local groundwater table to provide a required minimum 1-foot vertical separation
between coal ash and seasonal high groundwater elevations. Groundwater collected in the pipe
was transmitted by gravity flow to an outfall box located at the north end of the site at Lane
Swamp.
The groundwater and surface water monitoring program was initiated at the site in October 2007
in accordance with the Assessment Monitoring Plan. The program consisted of semi-annual
sampling and laboratory analytical testing for metals and sulfates at eight (8) groundwater
monitoring well locations and three (3) surface water monitoring locations. Groundwater levels
were also measured in the monitoring wells and piezometers in order to evaluate ground water
flow direction and determine water levels relative to the CCB fill. The reported results of the
groundwater monitoring from 2007 to 2014 confirmed groundwater quality impacts including
concentrations of sulfate, arsenic and lead at levels above the respective North Carolina 2L
groundwater standards. The monitoring reported no impacts to surface water quality in Lane
Swamp or Swift Creek adjacent to the facility.
The Division of Waste Management issued a "Warning Notice" to Full Circle Solutions and
ReUse dated May 16, 2014. The notice stated that the required groundwater vertical separation
between filled CCBs and seasonal high groundwater elevations had not been achieved and
exceedances of the North Carolina 2L groundwater standards had been routinely reported. As a
result, a "Groundwater Corrective Action Application" was required to be submitted for approval.
On behalf of Full Circle Solutions and ReUse, ERM NC, Inc. (ERM) submitted a Corrective
Action Application to the Division of Waste Management dated October 16, 2014 for approval.
The Corrective Action Application proposed the construction of a synthetic liner (cap) and
drainage improvements as corrective actions to significantly reduce or eliminate rainfall
infiltration and leachate generation from the beneficial fill. Two contingency corrective actions
also were identified. The Division issued approval in December 2014 and requested the
submittal of a detailed Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to the Solid Waste Section.
The Corrective Action Plan was submitted in February 2015 and approved by the NCDEQ Solid
Waste Section in March 2015. The Corrective Action Plan was designed to raise existing CCBs
DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
to above historically high groundwater levels to prevent the leaching of contaminants of concern
from the existing CCBs. The CAP included the installation of a protective liner system, cover soil
layer, and drainage outlets to prevent infiltration of precipitation into the CCBs to assist in the
prevention of leaching. The footprint of the limits of ash was condensed from approximately 10
acres to 5 acres reducing the effective infiltration area. Implementation of the Corrective Action
Plan was delayed approximately 1 year in 2015-2016 due to a North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) project to realign US Highway 301 along with bridge replacements
across Swift Creek. The corrective measures began on April 24, 2017 and were completed on
January 12, 2018.
In accordance with the CAP, a performance monitoring and reporting plan was implemented in
2018 to monitor the effectiveness of the corrective action. The elements of the performance
monitoring plan include:
• Semi-annual groundwater and surface water monitoring and reporting,
• Quarterly inspection and reporting of the Site for cap structural integrity, erosion control,
proper drainage, etc., and
• Corrective Action Effectiveness Reports prepared every five years to evaluate and
document a reduction in contaminant concentrations in groundwater and a stable or
decreasing plume extent.
2. CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
2.1. Hydrogeology
Based on the corrective action and monitoring work by ERM as well as previous site
investigation activities performed by others, the following updated conceptual site model has
been developed.
The Site is located in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North Carolina. The site
surficial geology consists of alluvial terrace deposits consisting of layers and mixtures of silts,
clay, sands and gravels. The alluvial deposits at the site range in thickness from approximately
8 to 16 feet. The shallow ground water at the site occurs in the alluvial deposits and is referred
to as the surficial or alluvial aquifer. The alluvial aquifer sands are of low to moderate
permeability (average hydraulic conductivity 0.67 feet/day). Within the alluvial aquifer zone, a
yellowish -brown clay layer was encountered in the majority of the borings for monitoring wells
and piezometers installed at the site. The clay layer of the alluvial aquifer at the site is
approximately 1 to 4 feet thick and has a low permeability (average hydraulic conductivity 0.002
feet/day). The clayey layer behaves as a confining layer or perching layer which appears to
limit the vertical migration of contaminants at the site. On the west (upgradient) edge of the site,
the clay layer was reported absent in the borings for former wells MW-5S, MW-5D, P-23 and P-
24. The alluvial deposits at the site are underlain by the Yorktown Formation, a regionally
ERM 3 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
extensive marine deposit. At the site, the upper Yorktown Formation consists typically of a
greenish -gray, clayey, silty, shelly, very fine sands, is encountered from approximately 13 feet to
the maximum depth of investigation of 35 feet, and has a low permeability (average of 0.002
feet per day). No groundwater quality impacts have been detected in monitoring wells
completed in the deeper Yorktown aquifer zone.
The general groundwater flow pattern at the site is controlled largely by two groundwater
discharge features: Lane Swamp to the north and east and Swift Creek to the south.
Groundwater flow in the area of the site is generally from west to east with a northeast
component of flow toward Lane Swamp at the north end of the site, and a southeast component
of flow toward Swift Creek at the south end of the site.
2.2. Contaminant Fate and Transport
The key features of the site conceptual model for contaminant fate and transport are
summarized as follows:
• The depth to groundwater ranges from 0 feet bgs at the creeks and swamps to more than 6
feet in topographically higher areas (not including the beneficial fill footprint).
• The regional groundwater flow regime within the surficial (alluvial) aquifer flows west to east
with north and south flow components near Swift Creek and Lane Swamp which serve as
shallow groundwater discharge features.
• The estimated groundwater velocities at the site are very low. The historical calculated
groundwater velocities are approximately 6 feet per year for the surficial (alluvial) aquifer
and approximately 0.03 feet per year for the deeper Yorktown aquifer.
• Prior to the 2018 corrective action, seasonal rises of the underlying water table and rainfall
infiltration downward through the old soil cap resulted in water infiltration into the coal ash
fill. Constituents within the coal ash fill were dissolved by the infiltration water and became
mobile. The former infiltration mechanism has been mitigated by the corrective action.
• Once the infiltration water enters the surficial groundwater, it migrates laterally above a clay
confining or perching layer within the alluvial aquifer zone towards the groundwater
discharge features of Lane Swamp and Swift Creek which serve to limit the lateral extent of
the affected groundwater. The limited lateral extent of the affected groundwater is evident
at wells MW-2S and 2D, located approximately 200 feet east of the former perimeter of the
beneficial fill, where no 2L groundwater exceedances are observed. Similarly, there is no
evidence of affected groundwater to the west (upgradient) as evidenced by groundwater
monitoring results at current monitoring wells MW-5RS and MW-5RD and former
monitoring wells MW-5S and 5D.
• Based on historical groundwater monitoring results, the groundwater quality impacts at the
site are limited to the surficial aquifer zone. No groundwater quality impacts are detected in
the deeper aquifer zone of the Yorktown Formation.
• The swamps and creeks surrounding the beneficial fill site act as a "natural perimeter drain"
and intercept of the affected groundwater. Based on the historical surface water monitoring
results, there are no surface water quality impacts to Lane Swamp or Swift Creek due to
affected groundwater from the site.
ERM 4 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
3. WATER QUALITY MONITORING ACTIVITIES
3.1. Objectives
Demonstration of effectiveness of the completed remediation is the primary objective of the
water quality monitoring program (i.e. remedial performance monitoring). This objective can be
achieved primarily by monitoring the success in reducing the site -specific contaminants of
concern (COC) in groundwater in the site monitor wells and thereby mitigating the potential for
surface water quality impacts due to contaminated groundwater migration and discharge to
surface water.
The applicable preliminary remedial goals for groundwater and surface water are summarized
below.
Groundwater
Surface Water
NC 21L
NC 213
Standard'
Standard'
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
Compounds
Arsenic
0.01
0.15
Barium
0.7
NE
Cadmium
0.002
h
Chromium (Total)
0.01
h
Lead
0.015
0.025
Mercury
0.001
0.000012
Selenium
0.02
0.005
Silver
0.02
0.00006
Sulfate
250
NE
pH
6.5-8.5
6.0-9.0
1 North Carolina 2L Groundwater Quality Standard.
2 North Carolina Surface Water Quality Standard for Class C Waters
NE = Not Established
mg/L = milligrams per liter
h = hardness dependent dissolved metal standard
Water quality monitoring is conducted in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan (ERM
March 2015). Following is a discussion of the groundwater and surface water monitoring
activities conducted at the Site during the reporting period.
ERM 5 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc
3.2. Monitor Well Installation
ERM installed two new monitor wells at the Site in June 2018. The new monitor wells, MW-
5RS and MW-5RD, were installed as replacements for former upgradient wells MW-5S and
MW-51D which were abandoned in 2015 by the NCDOT as part of the Highway 301 realignment
project. The new wells were located hydraulically upgradient (west) of the Site on the west
side of Highway 301 (see Figure 2) to monitor background water quality in the surficial aquifer
(MW-5RS) and deep aquifer (MW-5RD) zones. The monitor wells were installed under an
NCDOT right-of-way encroachment agreement (E-0420981800025).
ERM contracted with Geologic Exploration to drill and construct the replacement monitor wells
with ERM oversight. The wells were installed by hollow stem auger method in accordance with
North Carolina well construction standards. Monitor well MW-5RS was completed to a total
depth of 18 feet below ground level (bgl) with a 10-foot screen interval from 8 to 18 feet bgl.
Monitor well MW-5RD was completed to a total depth of 35 feet bgl with a 5-foot screen interval
from 30 to 35 feet bgl. Both wells were completed as flush -mount well heads and properly
developed by pumping. The well elevations were determined by a licensed surveyor. The
boring logs and well construction details are provided in Appendix C.
3.3. Monitoring Methods
A water quality monitoring event was conducted at the Site on June 28-29, 2018. Groundwater
and surface water samples were collected from the following monitor wells and surface water
locations.
Monitor Wells
Surface Water Locations
MW-1 S
SW-1
MW-1 D
SW-2
MW-2S
SW-3
MW-2D
MW-3
MW-4
MW-5RS
MW-5RD
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
Subtotal: 11
Subtotal: 3
The monitor well and surface water locations are shown on . Monitoring well
construction details are summarized in Table 1.
DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
All monitor wells were gauged for water levels and then purged and sampled by low -flow
purging methods. The surface water samples were collected as grab samples using clean
containers. Field parameters (pH, conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen & oxidation
reduction potential) were measured for each groundwater and surface water sample by
calibrated meters. Well purge logs were completed for each monitor well to document the
stabilization of field parameters prior to sample collection. Well purge logs are provided in
Appendix B. The groundwater and surface water samples were placed in laboratory supplied
containers and placed on ice. The samples were submitted to North Carolina certified laboratory
Shealy Environmental Services (NC329) and were analyzed for eight specific metals, sulfates
and total dissolved solids using the analytical methods summarized below:
Analvtical Methods
EPA Method Compound
EPA Method 6010 Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Lead
Selenium
Silver
EPA Method 7470C Mercury
EPA 300.0 Sulfates
SM 2540 C Total Dissolved Solids
4. MONITORING RESULTS
4.1. Groundwater Monitoring Results
Groundwater monitoring activities were conducted at 11 monitor wells at the Site. Groundwater
depth -to -water gauging and elevation data are presented in Table 2. The depths to
groundwater on June 26, 2018 ranged from approximately 4 to 11 feet BTOC. A potentiometric
surface map for the surficial (alluvial) aquifer zone for the June 2018 monitoring event is
presented as Figure 3. Groundwater flow in the surficial aquifer over most of the Site is
generally west to east-northeast towards Lane Swamp which serves as a groundwater
discharge zone. At the southern edge of the Site, there is a localized east-southeast component
of groundwater flow towards Swift Creek, which is located south of the Site and also serves as a
groundwater discharge zone.
Using the current groundwater elevation data, the hydraulic gradients for the Site were
calculated and are summarized below.
DRAFT

Swift Creek Project
Reuse Technology Inc.
Horizontal Hydraulic Gradient - Surficial Aquifer
26-Jun-18
Well
Head
Head
Distance
Hydraulic
Designation
Elevation
Change
Change
Gradient
ft
ft
ft
ft/ft
MW-5RS
91.86
2.13
700.00
0.0030
MW-6
89.73
MW-4
94.41
4.90
400.00
0.0123
MW-3
89.51
Average Hydraulic Gradient
0.0076
Vertical Hydraulic Gradients
26-Jun-18
Head
Mid -
Well
Measurement
Head
Head
Point
Hydraulic
Up/
Designation
Location
Elevation
Change
Length
Gradient
Down
Elevation*
Change
ft MSL
ft
ft
ft
ft/ft
MW-1 S
88.84
90.18
-0.17
19.74
-0.009
Up
MW-1 D
69.10
90.35
MW-2S
81.07
90.31
0.05
19.85
0.002
Down
MW-2D
61.22
90.26
Groundwater seepage velocities were calculated using Darcy's equation, summarized as:
Where:
V=(Kxi)/ne
V = seepage velocity of groundwater in ft/day
K = hydraulic conductivity in ft/day
i = hydraulic gradient (ft/ft)
ne = effective porosity
As summarized below, based on the June 2018 hydraulic gradients and the previously
calculated mean hydraulic conductivities, the estimated groundwater seepage velocity in the
surficial aquifer zone using a primary porosity range of 10 to 25% is approximately 6 to 15 feet
per year.
Seepage Velocity Range (Surficial Aquifer) =
= (0.55) (0.0076) / (0.25) = 1.68E-02 ft/day
= (0.55) (0.0076) / (0.10) = 4.19E-02 ft/dgy
Range of 25% 6.12 ft/yr
porosity 10% 15.30 ft/yr
of 6 to 15
ERM 8 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
The June 2018 groundwater analytical results are summarized in Table 3 for metals, sulfate and
TDS, and in Table 4 for field parameters. Constituents that exceeded North Carolina 2L
groundwater standards are summarized on Figure 4. Laboratory analytical reports for the
sampling event are provided in Appendix D. A historical groundwater data summary is provided
in Appendix A.
For the June 2018 monitoring event, six analytes were detected above their respective North
Carolina 2L Groundwater Standards, as summarized in the following table.
Current Maximum Concentrations in Groundwater— June 2018
Analyte
Maximum Concentration
(mg/L)
NC 2L
(mg/L)
Arsenic
0.055
0.01
Cadmium
0.0074
0.002
Lead
0.10
0.015
Sulfate
1,000
250
Total Dissolved Solids
9,400
500
mg/L = milligrams per liter
Sulfate, a primary indicator analyte for CCB contaminant releases, was detected in groundwater
at concentrations above its 2L standard (250 mg/L) at 5 of the 11 monitor wells. The distribution
of sulfate concentrations across the Site is depicted in plan view in Figure 5. A hydrogeologic
profile across the Site, including sulfate concentrations in groundwater, is presented in Figure 6.
The highest concentrations of sulfate were detected in groundwater samples from monitor wells
located on the north (downgradient) end of the site, with 1,000 mg/L sulfate detected both at
MW-6 and MW-8. An elevated sulfate concentration (980 mg/L) was also detected in the
groundwater sample from MW-3 located on the southern (locally downgradient) side of the Site.
The June 2018 groundwater monitoring results for sulfate concentrations were compared to the
results of the December 2014 monitoring event which was the most recent monitoring event
prior to implementation of the corrective action. Compared to the December 2014 results, the
June 2018 sulfate concentrations showed an increase at monitor wells MW-3, MW-6, MW-7 and
MW-8; and remained relatively stable at MW-1 S. Graphs of sulfate concentrations over time for
selected monitor wells are presented in Figure 7.
Notably low values of pH were measured in the groundwater samples from MW-6 (3.9), MW-7
(3.8) and MW-8 (3.9). The low pH values at the three wells are consistent with historical
monitoring results, and correlate with detections of arsenic and lead at concentrations above
their respective North Carolina 2L groundwater standards at the three wells.
There were no exceedances of 2L standards in the three monitor wells located on the west
(upgradient) side of the Site (MW-4, MW-5RS & MW-5RD). Three monitor wells located on the
east side of the Site (MW-1 D, MW-2S & MW2D) only had exceedances of 2L standards for one
parameter, total dissolved solids. The elevated TDS concentrations at MW-1 D, MW-2S and
ERM 9 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
MW21D do not appear to be attributable to sulfate or metals which were not present at elevated
levels.
4.2. Surface Water Monitoring Results
Consistent with historical monitoring results, the June 2018 surface water monitoring results
indicated no exceedances of any North Carolina 2B surface water standards for any samples
collected from Swift Creek (SW-1) and Lane Swamp (SW-2 & SW-3). The June 2018 surface
water sampling results are summarized in Table 3. Laboratory analytical reports for the surface
water samples are provided in Appendix D. Historical surface water data is summarized in
Appendix A
4.3. Laboratory Data Quality Analysis
Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) samples collected during the June 2018 groundwater
sampling activities included one blind duplicate sample collected at MW-IS. The duplicate
sample of MW-1 S and the MW-1 S sample results can be compared in Table 3. The analytical
results of the MW-1 S and duplicate groundwater samples compare favorably indicating no
analytical discrepancy.
5. SUMMARY
Corrective actions have been implemented at the Site to address groundwater quality impacts in
accordance with the approved CAP. The corrective actions were completed in January 2018
and included temporary removal of CCB materials to allow raising the floor foundation above the
seasonal high groundwater table, placing the CCB materials on the raised floor in a reduced
footprint, installation of a synthetic liner (cap) over the limits of the CCBs, and drainage
improvements to minimize rainfall infiltration. Groundwater and surface water monitoring
activities are being conducted at the Site to monitor the effectiveness of the corrective actions.
The June 2018 water quality monitoring event evaluated groundwater and surface water quality
conditions at the Site approximately 5 months after the corrective action implementation. In
general, the monitoring results indicate that, due to the relatively low groundwater flow rates at
the Site, groundwater quality improvements are not yet evident in the monitoring wells located at
the downgradient perimeter of the Site. Additional time will be required before improvements to
shallow groundwater quality occur as a result of the corrective action. However, the June 2018
surface water quality results continue to demonstrate that there have been no surface water
impacts to Swift Creek or Lane Swamp due to discharges of affected groundwater from the Site.
In accordance with the CAP, semi-annual water quality monitoring will continue at the Site.
ERM 10 DRAFT

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
TABLES

TABLE 1
MONITOR WELL CONSTRUCTION DATA SUMMARY - SWIFT CREEK PROJECT
Monitor Well
Top of
Casing Elev.
Ground
Surface Elev.
Casing Stick
Up
Screen
Interval
Total
Depth (TOC)
Alluvial/
Marine
Status
MW-is
99.54
96.8
2.7
3-13
15.7
84.0
Active
MW-1 D
99.90
97.1
2.8
23-33
35.7
84.0
Active
MW-2S
94.87
92.1
2.8
6-16
18.7
78.5
Active
MW-21D
95.22
92.2
3.0
26-36
39.1
78.5
Active
MW-3
102.15
99.2
3.0
7-17
20.0
82.2
Active
MW-4
106.06
104.1
2.0
8-18
20.0
89.1
Active
MW-5S
102.68
99.7
3.0
6-16
17.0
88.2
Abandoned
MW-51D
102.67
99.8
2.9
25-35
37.9
88.2
Abandoned
MW-5RS
98.80
TBD
Flush Mount
8-18
18.0
70.6
Active
MW-5RD
98.57
TBD
Flush Mount
30-35
37.9
70.6
Active
MW-6
98.41
95.0
3.4
6-16
19.4
79.0
Active
MW-7
98.63
95.1
3.5
6-16
19.5
79.0
Active
MW-8
95.42
92.4
3.0
6-16
19.0
76.4
Active
Piezometer
P-1
108.19
105.6
2.6
20-30
32.6
Abandoned
P-2
109.53
106.7
2.8
20-30
32.8
Abandoned
P-3
106.18
104.4
1.8
18-28
30.0
Abandoned
P-4
106.57
104.0
2.6
20-30
32.6
Abandoned
P-5
108.39
105.9
2.5
20-30
32.5
Abandoned
P-6
109.79
107.5
2.3
20-30
32.3
Abandoned
P-7
107.77
105.9
1.9
30-40
41.9
82.9
Abandoned
P-8
106.53
103.9
2.6
30-40
42.6
82.9
Abandoned
P-9
103.32
100.9
2.4
20-30
32.4
87.0
Abandoned
P-10
108.17
106.1
2.1
20-30
32.1
89.1
Abandoned
P-11
101.88
99.2
2.7
13-23
25.7
82.0
Abandoned
P-12
107.04
104.0
3.0
6-16
19.0
Abandoned
P-13
108.99
105.9
3.1
6-16
19.1
Abandoned
P-14
105.38
101.9
3.5
4-14
17.5
Abandoned
P-15
103.76
101.0
2.8
4-14
16.8
Abandoned
P-16
105.28
102.1
3.2
4-14
17.2
Abandoned
P-17
105.31
101.8
3.5
4-14
17.5
Abandoned
P-18
111.21
107.5
3.7
5-15
18.7
Abandoned
P-19
111.86
108.3
3.6
7-17
20.6
Abandoned
P-20
107.00
104.2
2.8
7-17
19.8
Abandoned
P-21
104.99
99.5
5.5
4.5-11.5
16.5
Abandoned
P-22
103.60
101.8
1.8
17-27
28.8
87.0
Abandoned
P-23East
109.75
107.1
2.7
9-19
21.8
90.0
Abandoned
P-24West
103.17
101.1
2.1
3-13
15.3
90.0
Abandoned
B-1
107.66
105.7
2.0
14-19
21.0
88.9
Abandoned

TABLE 2
HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
SWIFT CREEK - CCB0057
BATTLEBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
Page 1 of 1
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Depth
Elevation
Gauging Date
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
ft MSL
ft BTOC
It MSL
ft BTOC
It MSL
ft BTOC
It MSL
ft BTOC
It MSL
ft BTOC
It MSL
Well Identification
MWAS
MWAD
MW-28
MW-2D
MW-3
MW-4
MW-5S
MW-5D
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-5RS
MW-SRD
Lane Swamp
TOC Elevation:
99.54
99.90
94.87
95.22
102.15
106.06
102.68
102.67
98.41
98.63
95.42
98.80
98.57
92.25
TOC Stickup (Ft from GL)
2.7
2.8
2.8
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
2.9
3.4
3.5
3.0
N/A
Screened Interval(Ft BGL)
3-13
23-33
6.16
26-36
7-17
8-18
6-16
25-35
6-16
6-16
6-16
8-18
30-35
N/A
Geologic Zone Screened
Surficial
Sudicial
Surtcial
Deep (Yorktown)
Surficial
Surfcial
Surfcial
Deep (Yorktown)
Surficial
Surficial
Surficial
Surficial
Deep (Yorktown)
N/A
12Jan-2005
8.21
91.33
8.57
91.33
4.72
90.15
4.7
90.52
9.85
92.50
11.24
94.82
6.01
96.67
6.4
96.27
7.17
91.24-
1-Aug-2006
8.11
91.43
8.28
91.62
NM
--
NM
9.48
85.39
10.15
95.91
5.86
96.82
5.68
96.99
7.18
91.23
7.74
90.89
NM
-
--
-
--
-
-
6-Sep-2006
8.69
90.65
9.05
90.85
4.83
90.04
4.87
90.35
10.32
84.55
11.41
94.65
6.94
95.74
6.84
95.83
7.74
90.67
8.68
89.97
NM
-
--
-
--
-
-
4-Apr-2007
7.80
91.74
8.18
91.72
4.4
90.47
4.75
90.47
9.31
85.56
9.96
96.10
6.12
96.56
5.96
96.71
7.28
91.13
7.8
90.83
4.84
90.58
--
-
--
-
-
21-Aug-2007
10.89
88.65
11.30
88.60
6.77
88.10
6.82
88.40
11.4
83.47
13.28
92.78
9.57
93.11
9.1
93.25
10.8
87.61
10.71
87.92
7.67
87.75
--
-
--
--
-
21-Oct-2007
11.40
88.14
11.76
88.14
7.31
87.56
7.43
87.79
12.98
81.89
14.06
92.00
10.62
92.06
10.63
92.04
11.9
86.51
11.41
87.22
8.3
87.12
--
-
--
-
31Jan1008
9.13
90.41
9.42
90.48
4.86
90.01
5.02
90.20
10.7
84.17
14.11
91.95
7.65
95.03
8.11
94.56
8.44
89.97
8.71
89.92
5.57
89.85
--
-
--
-
-
22-Mar-2008
8.10
91.44
8.44
91.46
4.4
90.47
4.54
90.68
9.18
85.69
13.28
92.78
6.98
95.70
7.34
95.33
7.18
91.23
7.79
90.84
4.78
90.64
--
-
--
-
2.51
89.74
9-APr-2008
9.26
90.28
9.47
90.43
4.58
90.29
5.02
90.20
10.98
83.89
14.82
91.24
10.87
91.81
10.72
91.95
8.92
89.49
9.06
89.57
5.97
89.45
--
-
--
-
3.1
89.15
17Jun-2008
9.12
90.42
9.42
90.48
5.03
89.84
5.23
89.99
10.1
84.33
14.05
92.01
8.93
93.75
8.1
93.75
8.36
90.05
9.06
89.57
6.09
W33
--
-
--
-
3.2
89.05
13Jan-2009
8.22
91.32
8.55
91.35
4.26
90.61
4.46
90.76
9.35
85.52
13.41
92.65
7.16
95.52
7.54
95.13
7.02
91.39
7.6
91.03
4.58
90.84
--
-
--
-
2.52
89.73
31-Mar-2009
7.60
91.94
7.96
91.94
4.36
90.51
4.38
90.84
6.74
88.13
12.43
93.63
5.98
96.70
6.22
96.45
6.81
91.60
7.2
91.43
4.21
91.21
--
-
--
-
2.5
89.75
23Jun-Jun
8.62
90.92
8.92
90.98
4.41
90.46
4.77
90.45
10.06
84.81
13.86
92.20
9.83
92.85
9.63
93.04
7.72
90.69
8.52
90.11
5.56
89.86
--
-
--
-
2.9
89.35
30-Sep-2009
8.86
90.68
9.18
90.72
4.64
90.23
5.00
90.22
10.82
84.05
14.7
91.36
10.4
92.28
10.26
92.41
8.08
90.33
8.51
90.12
5.5
89.92
--
-
--
--
3.15
89.10
"_Dec-2009
7.54
92.00
NM
--
4.22
90.65
NM
8.68
86.19
12.85
93.21
6.3
96.38
NM
--
6.78
91.63
7.13
91.50
4.21
91.21
--
-
--
-
2.8
89.65
31-Mar-2010
7.37
92.17
7.74
92.16
2.42
92.45
4.46
90.76
8.64
86.23
12.52
93.54
5.8
96.88
6.19
96.48
6.77
91.64
7.93
90.70
3.96
91.46
--
-
--
-
2.14
90.11
29Jun-2010
9.35
90.19
NM
4.94
89.93
NM
10.66
84.21
14.62
91.44
9.97
92.71
NM
--
9.21
89.20
9.25
89.38
6.31
89.11
--
-
--
-
3.35
88.90
28-Sep-2010
9.23
90.31
10.05
89.85
4.8
90.07
5.50
89.72
11.55
83.32
14.8
91.26
10.85
91.83
11.1
91.57
9.11
89.30
8.52
90.11
5.48
89.94
--
-
--
--
4.1
88.15
13-Dec-2010
8.54
91.00
NM
4.36
90.51
NM
10.12
84.75
14.02
92.04
8.72
93.96
NM
--
7.37
91.04
7.93
90.70
4.81
90.61
--
-
--
-
2.02
90.23
28-Mar-2011
8.03
91.51
8.42
91.48
4.35
90.52
4.67
90.55
9.17
85.70
13.32
92.74
7.45
95.23
7.84
94.83
7.25
91.16
7.53
91.10
4.42
91.00
--
-
--
-
2.85
89.40
26Jun-2011
10.05
89.49
10.35
89.55
6.02
88.85
6.32
88.90
11.23
83.64
14.82
91.24
10.59
92.09
10.43
92.24
9.2
89.21
9.98
88.65
7.04
88.38
--
-
--
-
2.85
89.40
28-Sep-2011
7.84
91.70
NM
4.24
90.63
NM
8.9
85.97
13.09
92.97
7.62
95.06
NM
--
7.13
91.28
7.71
90.92
4.83
90.59
--
-
--
-
2.2
90.05
18-Dec-2011
8.00
91.54
8.35
91.55
4.32
90.55
4.65
90.57
8.88
85.99
13.1
92.96
7.35
95.33
7.7
94.97
6.98
91.43
7.53
91.10
4.47
90.95
--
-
--
-
1.8
90.45
23-Mar-2012
8.01
91.53
8.35
91.55
4.31
90.56
4.56
90.66
8.89
85.98
13.01
93.05
7.35
95.33
7.66
95.01
7.03
91.38
7.75
90.88
4.8
90.62
--
-
--
-
1.65
90.60
28Jun-2012
8.39
91.15
8.72
91.18
4.65
90.22
4.92
90.30
9.4
85.47
13.38
92.68
8.52
94.16
8.54
94.13
7.42
90.99
8.45
90.18
5.63
89.79
--
-
--
-
1.95
90.30
18-Sep-2012
7.41
92.13
7.86
92.04
4.16
90.71
4.5
90.72
8.21
86.66
12.73
93.33
7.21
95.47
7.45
95.22
6.82
91.59
7.37
91.26
4.51
90.91
--
-
--
-
1.52
90.73
17-Dec-2012
8.04
91.50
8.44
91.46
NM
NM
9.19
85.68
13.36
92.70
8.55
94.13
8.76
93.91
6.82
91.59
7.37
91.26
4.51
90.91
--
-
--
--
1.45
90.80
26-Mar-2013
7.87
91.67
8.13
91.77
4.23
90.1
4.46
90.76
8.71
86.16
12.1
93.22
7.03
95.65
7.38
95.29
7.08
91.33
7.26
91.37
4.22
91.20
--
-
--
-
2.05
90.20
12-Apr-2013
8.30
91.24
8.59
91.31
4.31
90.56
4.72
90.50
9.59
85.28
14.13
91.93
8.48
94.20
8.7
93.97
7.47
90.94
7.8
90.83
4.82
90.60
--
-
--
-
2.85
89.40
25Jun-2013
8.00
91.54
8.34
91.56
4.18
90.69
4.57
90.65
9.05
85.82
12.97
93.09
6.1
95.76
7.44
95.23
7.05
91.36
7.7
90.93
4.69
90.73
--
-
--
-
2.45
89.80
26-Sep-2013
8.38
91.16
8.67
91.23
4.32
90.55
4.71
90.51
9.57
85.30
13.65
92.41
9.5
93.18
9.5
93.17
8.75
89.66
8.19
90.44
5.25
90.17
--
-
--
-
3.05
89.20
28-Mar-2014
7.74
91.60
8.03
91.87
4.33
90.54
4.54
90.68
8.56
86.31
12.53
93.53
6.68
96.00
7.03
95.64
6.92
91.49
7.23
91.40
4.39
91.03
--
-
--
-
1.85
90.40
27Jun-2014
8.43
91.11
8.74
91.16
4.45
90.42
4.8
90.42
9.69
85.18
13.93
92.13
7.78
94.90
8.8
93.87
8.33
90.08
8.54
90.09
5.6
89.82
--
-
--
-
2.95
89.30
26-Sep-2014
7.82
91.72
8.20
91.70
3.91
90.96
4.28
90.94
8.62
86.25
13.81
92.25
6.68
96.00
7.33
95.34
7.1
91.31
7.36
91.27
4.4
91.02
--
-
--
-
1.95
90.30
17-Dec-2014
7.88
91.66
8.30
91.60
4.22
90.65
4.53
90.69
9.01
85.86
13.71
92.35
7.94
94.74
7.46
95.21
7.24
91.17
7.4
91.23
4.34
91.08
--
-
--
-
2.1
90.15
28Jun-Jun
9.36
90.18
9.55
90.35
4.56
90.31
4.96
90.26
10.35
89.51
11.65
94.41
Abandoned
2015
Abandoned
2015
8.68
89.73
9.12
89.51
5.86
89.56
6.84
91.96
10.52
88.05
-
-
NE - Not Established BTOC Below Top of Casing BGL- Below ground level
--= N. Measured ft MSL =feet above Mean Sea Level TOC Stickup data per Shemll Environmental, Assessment Montoring Report, Feb 10, 2015
RJRnSMft Creek Tables RI DW ,f A2. GW Elevations

TABLE 3
GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER ANALYTICAL EVENT RESULTS
SWIFT CREEK STRUCTURAL FILL - CCB0057
BATTLEBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
Page 1 of 1
Sample
Location / ID
Date
D
m
0
oo
�'
n
Q
3
s
o
o
7
r
n
0
,�
Cn
m
�
3
-
cn
m
� v
o o--I
(- a v
NC 2L Groundwater Standard
0.01
0.7
0.002
0.01
0.015
0.001
0.02
0.02
250
500
NC 213 Surface Water Standard
0.15
NE
h
h
0.025
0.000012
0.005
0.00006
NE
NE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
MW-1S 6/28/18 <0.015 0.24 <0.005 <0.030 <,,
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
320
8,100
Duplicate (MW-1S)
6/28/18
<0.015
0.24
<0.005
<0.030
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
340
7,8'
MW-1 D
6/28/18
<0.01
0.66
<0.005
<0.01
<0.010
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
19
8,200
MW-2S
6/28/18
<0.015
0.13
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
<1
790
MW-2D
6/28/18
<0.015
0.13
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
<1
790
MW-3
6/28/18
<0.015
0.066
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
830
MW-4
6/28/18
<0.01
0.041
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
66
450
MW-5RS
6/29/18
<0.015
0.098
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
12
420
MW-5RD
6/29/18
<0.01
0.15
<0.001
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.01
<0.01
26
230
MW-6
6/28/18
0.04
0.041
0.047
0.1
<0.005
<0.01
0.045
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
1,000
6,300
MW-7
6/28/18
0.0074
<0.02
0.089
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
770
9,400
MW-8
6/28/18
a0.055
0.056
<0.005
<0.02
0.1
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
1,000A
8,400
SURFACE WATER
SW-01
6/28/18
<0.015
0.031
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
<1
73
SW-02
6/28/18
<0.015
0.089
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
<1
130
SW-03
6/28/18
<0.015
0.032
<0.005
<0.01
<0.01
<0.0002
<0.02
<0.01
<1
76
All concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L) unless
otherwise noted.
--- Not sampled
NE - Not established
Bold with gray background indicates exceedance of NC Groundwater or Surface Water Standai
h = hardness dependent dissolved metal standard
Swift Creek Tables R1 DWWxlsx/Table 3-Event Data 2018-06

TABLE 4
GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER FIELD PARAMETER RESULTS
SWIFT CREEK STRUCTURAL FILL - CCB0057
BATTLEBORO, NORTH CAROLINA Page 1 of 1
Sample
Location / ID
Date
=
CD
CDCDoC
��-, (Q@
V y
Q
3�
z a
:T
o
Xo
niaQ
a �;
<0
0
O�
2 0
v 3 a
NC 2L Groundwater Standard
6.5 - 8.5
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NC 2B Surface Water Standard
6.0 - 9.0
NE
NE
50
NE
>5.0
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
27.0
25.6
14,679
1,221
47
-93
0.2
0.2
MW-is
6/28/18
6/28/18
5.8
5.3
MW-1D
6.9
3.5
MW-2S
6/28/18
6.3
21.0
448
0.0
-36
0.2
MW-2D
6/28/18
7.1
25.0
444
9.7
18
1.3
MW-3
6/28/18
5.5
27.2
7,611
9.1
60
0.3
MW-4
6/28/18
6.4
25.1
72
6.9
56
0.3
MW-5RS
6/29/18
6.9
23.9
454
6.5
45
3.4
MW-5RD
6/29/18
7.3
23.0
327
19.5
29
0.1
MW-6
6/28/18
3.9
25.3
9,665
0.2
196
0.8
MW-7
6/28/18
3.8
23.0
13,584
1.9
243
1.4
MW-8
6/28/18
3.9
19.0
11,539
0.5
125
0.7
SURFACE WATER
SW-01
6/28/18
7.0
28.5
101
NM
-3
4.2
SW-02
6/28/18
7.0
29.7
369
90.0
0
0.7
SW-03
NM
NE - Not established NM - Not measured
Bold value exceeds applicable pH standard
Swift Creek Tables R1 DWW.xlsx/Table 4-Field Parameters2018-06

Swift Creek Project Reuse Technology Inc.
FIGURES

,I a�
SITE LOCATION -�
I � all.
a1£vCUTCHIN
i=
L- -�
o
I aar
I�
c,\
O'U1�TT
- ROCKY M 9
^ .,-�_ ` aam aanle�wro 1l W,amcsTaa �✓�� �\
m �
Y�
- - o + —
SOURCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE:
L
SCALE 1:24000
1 1/2 0 1 MILE
u
NORTH CAROLINA 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET N
D
7
b CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
DOTTED LINES REPRESENT 5-FOOT CONTOURS
QUADRANGLE LOCATION NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
SWIFT CREEK FIGURE
i
z ERM, NC INC. STRUCTURAL FILL — CCB0057 �
ReUse Technology
r ERM Battleboro, NC
L