7407_Pitt_C&DLandfillInc_CDLF_Phase1_Phase2_CAP_FID1419623_20200710

SUMMIT
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
July 9, 2020
Ms. Jaclynne Drummond
Hydrogeologist, Solid Waste Section
Division of Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Reference: Groundwater Corrective Action Plan
C&D Landfill, Inc., Phases 1 and 2
Greenville (Pitt County), North Carolina
Permits 7407- CDLF- 2001 and 7407- CDLF- 2009
Dear Ms. Drummond:
100 East Six Forks Road, Suite 320
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Telephone [phone]
On behalf of C&D Landfill, Inc., I am pleased to present this Groundwater Corrective Action Plan, featuring
Monitored Natural Attenuation and CDLF Closure as the selected remedy. This document was prepared
by me, pursuant to completing the requirements for a CAP submittal begun by Wood Environmental,
where I was formerly the project manager for all aspects of compliance for this Facility. The staff and I
have maintained a cordial relationship; thus, preparation of this submittal represents a continuum of
project understanding and planning.
This document contains a thorough characterization of site conditions; a Water Quality Monitoring Plan
intended to serve the next 5 years of Corrective Action; highlights of a Final Closure Plan for Phase 1; a
Contingency Plan for action required if the data do not support the underlying premises upon which this
plan is based; and a Financial Assurance calculation for the next 5 years of groundwater monitoring. The
WQMP and Closure Plan documents are presented as appendices, such that there is inherent flexibility to
make program changes as needed based on review of the data with the SWS.
I appreciate your cooperation and input to the preparation of this CAP. Please contact me at your
earliest convenience if you require further information.
�N„CARo,
Sincerely, '
GODavi� G rett, P.G., P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
cc: Judson Whitehurst — C&D Landfill Inc. • ; gill�o GA,,,0:,�
My contact information is [phone], Mobile, or [e-mail]

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0
July 9, 2020
Page 2
Contents
Chapter1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................
1.1 Site Background...................................................................................................................
1.2 Aquifer Characteristics........................................................................................................
1.3 Contaminant Distribution....................................................................................................
Chapter 2 Site Conceptual Model........................................................................................................
2.1 Regulatory Status................................................................................................................
2.2 Contaminant Characterization............................................................................................
2.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds..................................................................................
2.2.2 Appendix I and II Metals.........................................................................................
2.2.3 Suspected Legacy Contaminants............................................................................
2.3 Contaminant Source Confirmation......................................................................................
2.4 Source Control Measures....................................................................................................
2.5 Groundwater End Use.........................................................................................................
2.6 Sensitive Receptor Pathways..............................................................................................
2.7 Human Exposure Pathways.................................................................................................
2.7.1 Surface Water Pathway..........................................................................................
2.7.2 Groundwater/Soil Pathway....................................................................................
2.8 Background Concentrations................................................................................................
2.9 Exceedances of Groundwater Quality Standards................................................................
2.10 Exceedances of Surface Water Quality Standards..............................................................
2.11 Landfill Gas Monitoring Results...........................................................................................
2.12 Media of Concern................................................................................................................
Chapter 3 Selected Remedy Technical Approach................................................................................
3.1 Design and Specifications of Remedy..................................................................................
3.2 Monitored Natural Attenuation..........................................................................................
3.3 Phase 1 CDLF Unit Closure..................................................................................................
Chapter 4 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring.....................................................................
4.1 Revised Water Quality Monitoring Plan..............................................................................
4.2 Revised Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan..................................................................................
4.3 Special Monitoring Provisions.............................................................................................
Chapter 5 Evaluation of Effectiveness and Report Submittals............................................................
5.1 Corrective Action Performance Objectives.........................................................................
.5
.5
.9
11
13
13
14
14
23
24
24
24
24
25
25
25
25
26
28
29
29
30
31
31
31
32
33
33
33
33
34
34

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0 Page 3
5.2
Physical Changes in Aquifer Conditions..................................................................................
34
5.3
Chemical Changes in Aquifer Conditions................................................................................
35
5.4
Physical Changes in Plume Characteristics..............................................................................
35
5.5
Chemical Changes in The Plume..............................................................................................
35
5.6
Refining the Site Conceptual Model........................................................................................
36
5.7
CAP Modification.....................................................................................................................36
Chapter6
Contingency Plan.....................................................................................................................37
6.1
Factors that Could Affect MNA Performance Data.................................................................37
6.2
Triggering Events and Established Responses.........................................................................
37
Chapter 7
Schedule and Maintenance.....................................................................................................40
7.1
Timeline and Schedule............................................................................................................40
7.2
Operation, Monitoring & Maintenance..................................................................................41
7.3
Performing Operations............................................................................................................41
7.4
Longterm mechanical maintenance.......................................................................................41
7.5
Monitoring of the site equipment associated with the remedial measure ............................41
7.6
Corrective Action Oversight....................................................................................................
41
7.7
Responsible Parties.................................................................................................................41
7.8
Notifications............................................................................................................................
42
7.9
Safeguard Measures and Site Security....................................................................................42
7.10
Plan Modifications...................................................................................................................42
Chapter 8
Financial Assurance.................................................................................................................43
8.1
Basis of Calculation..................................................................................................................43
8.2
CA Monitoring for 5-year period.............................................................................................
43
Chapter 9
Completion of Groundwater Corrective Action......................................................................44
Chapter10
Bibliography.............................................................................................................................44

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0 Page 4
List of Tables
Table 1
Monitoring Well Construction Data.......................................................................................... 7
Table 2
Historic Groundwater Elevation Data.....................................................................................10
Table 3
Aquifer Physical Properties.....................................................................................................11
Table 4
Horizontal Groundwater Characteristics................................................................................11
Table 5
Vertical Groundwater Characteristics.....................................................................................11
Table 6
Summary of Detections...........................................................................................................
12
Table 7
Metals in Background Samples...............................................................................................26
Table 8
Metals in Background Geochemistry......................................................................................
27
Table 9
Selected VOCs in Background Samples...................................................................................
28
Table 10
Metals Exceeding 2L Groundwater Standards........................................................................
28
Table 11
VOCs Exceeding 2L Groundwater Standards...........................................................................
28
Table 12
Constituents Exceeding 2B Surface Water Standards.............................................................
29
Table 13
Landfill Gas Readings...............................................................................................................
29
List of Figures
Figure 1
Regional Topography
Figure 2
Facility Plan/Local Topo
Figure 3
Monitoring Locations
Figure 4
Top of Confining Unit
Figure 5
Groundwater Contours — Shallow
Figure 6
Groundwater Contours — Deep
Figure 7
Cross Section A
Figure 8
Cross Sections B & D
Figure 9
Cross Section C
Figure 10
VOC Distribution — Shallow Detections AOC
Figure 11
VOC Distribution — Deep Detections AOC
Figure 12
Changes with Time (Benzene)
Figure 13
Changes with Time (Vinyl Chloride)
Figure 14
Surface Water Quality
Figure 15
TBD
Appendices
Appendix 1
Excerpts from June 2019 Sampling Report (Wood statistical analysis)
Appendix 2
Cumulative Detections Data Tables
Appendix 3
Documentation of Phase 1 Closure Conditions
Appendix 4
Remaining Phase 1 Closure Plans and Specs
Appendix 5
WQMP
Appendix 6
LFGMP

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0 Page 5
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Site Background
C&D Landfill, Inc. owns and operates a Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill (CDLF), located at 802
Recycling Lane, Greenville (Pitt County), North Carolina. The Facility was developed in two non-contiguous
footprints, Phases 1 and 2 approximately midway between US 264, i.e., a localized topographic divide,
and Grindle Creek (Figure 1). The phases became operational in May 2001 and August 2009, respectively.
Phase 1 was the regional repository for flood -damage debris after Hurricane Floyd in 1999. Phase 2 was
a staging area, where flood -debris was stored temporarily. Both areas were used for agriculture, and a
former railroad corridor traverses the site, including the northern Phase 2 footprint.
Phases 1 and 2 are situated on slightly elevated mounds separated by a partially channelized, "central"
drainage feature that originates onsite (Figure 2) and predates the landfill. Phase 2 is north and west of
the central drainage feature, while Phase 1 is south and east. Both phases are isolated from their
surroundings by deeply incised tributaries to Grindle Creek and associated wetlands, referred to as the
"west" stream and the "south" stream. The drainage features converge just south of the site and flow
south to Grindle Creek. Permitting studies have established the three water bodies as on -site discharge
points for the uppermost aquifer. No downgradient groundwater users have been identified.
The site is in the Coastal Plain physiographic and geologic province of North Carolina.' Immediate
topography consists of a broad, gently sloping ridge varying from Elevations 22 to 26, along which US 264
divides surface flow between north and south. The site is located along the south side, adjacent to a
several -mile wide floodplain with wetlands, occupied by Grindle Creek and further south by Tar River. The
Facility Owner controls several hundred acres, extending from US 264 to the tributaries of Grindle Creek.
The Facility contains scattered pockets of wetlands. Near the south Facility boundary, the ground surface
elevations decrease by 6 to 10 feet into the stream bottoms. Downstream (south) areas are wooded
marshlands with sluggish surface flow and scattered wetlands all the way to Grindle Creek. To the east
and west exists farmland with scattered woods. To the north is farmland and the recycling yard/transfer
station, separated from the Facility by an area of wetlands.
Regulatory Changes Since Opening — Important events have occurred since the opening of Phase 1.
Groundwater regulations were adopted in 2007 with lowered analytical and reporting limits for certain
constituents. Newly added constituents, i.e., tetrahydrofuran and 1,4-dioxane, appear to be nearly
ubiquitous and enforcement limits have yet to be established. Compliance standards (NCAC 2L) for some
constituents have changed, including some currently being watched at this site. New threat -based
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL's) may influence regulatory thresholds for corrective action. In time,
emerging contaminants of concern for the solid waste industry may require future evaluation. A rule
revision in 2007 resulted in more stringent final closure requirements for landfills receiving waste after
June 30, 2008. In theory, those landfills were supposed to meet the new rules, but operating landfills
undergoing incremental closure (as they were encouraged by the regulatory agency) were caught in a
predicament with significant investment having been expended on the partial cover installation. That,
and legislation (after commencement of operations) concerning waste acceptance criteria for unlined
landfills, ostensibly complicates decisions pertaining to corrective action for this landfill.
1 North Carolina Geological Map, Scale 1:62,500, NC Geological Survey, 1985.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev
July 9, 2020
Page 6
Detection Monitoring - Groundwater is monitored at the following monitoring wells (Figure 3):
Phase 1 MW-1d, MW-1s (background), MW-2d, MW-2s, MW-3d, MW-3s, MW-3A,
MW-4, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8,
Phase 2 MW-9A (background), MW-10, MW-11, MW-12s, MW-14d, MW-14s, MW-15,
MW-16, MW-17.
Surface water is monitored on the boundary streams at the following locations:
"South" SW-1 (background), SW-2,
"East" SW-3, SW-4 (background, activated with Phase 2).
Well Construction Data and hydrogeologic data are presented on Table I.
Both phases have undergone detection -stage monitoring for metals and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), analytes on the US -EPA Appendix I list and field parameters, in accordance with North Carolina
Solid Waste Section (SWS) protocols. Metals were detected from the beginning, indicating they occur in
the background. The effect of turbidity was demonstrated early on, leading to adoption of "low -flow"
sampling techniques. Benzene and vinyl chloride were first detected at MW-3s beginning in 2007, with
concentrations slightly above the North Carolina 2L ground water quality standards (15A NCAC 2L) and/or
then applicable Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSLs). The timing roughly coincides with early construction
activities at Phase 2 but also the lower analytical reporting requirements.
Other Appendix I VOCs, including acetone, 1,2-dichloroethane, cis-1,2-dichloroethene, ethylbenzene and
toluene, were detected at concentrations below the SWSL at MW-3s. Later, concentrations of VOCs below
SWSLs became detected intermittently and with less frequency at MW-8 and, after Phase 2 opened, at
MW-12s. Over time, concentrations of detected constituents ("detects") have been gradually increasing
but showing an apparent seasonality. Later the low concentrations of VOCs have spread to spread to
MW-10 and MW-11 and occasionally other wells, including MW-5, MW-6, and MW-7. During the time of
monitoring this facility, the regulations have added several new parameters, e.g., iron, tin, manganese,
chloride, sulfide, tetrahydrofuran (THF) and 1,4-dioxane. Some of these are naturally in the background.
Assessment Monitoring - C&D Landfill, Inc., initiated a ground water assessment monitoring program in
August 2009, in accordance with North Carolina Solid Waste regulation 15A NCAC 13B .0545 (a) and (b).
This included baseline sampling for a broader set of analytes on the US -EPA Appendix II list at all active
wells, including a new well, MW-3A, located between MW-3s and the south Facility boundary. After the
baseline sampling, the monitoring program returned to detection -stage monitoring, except wells MW-3s,
MW-3A, MW-8, later MW-12s, and MW-1s (as background), where Appendix II sampling was continued.
Low concentrations of a semi-volatiles, pesticides and herbicides have been detected sporadically.
Since 2009, benzene and other petroleum -derived constituents (BTEX) have been detected above the 2L
standards in wells MW-3s, MW-8 and MW-12s. Benzene has shown a steady or slightly increasing trend
at MW-3s, while the "TEX" constituents have steadily decreased. Acetone, 1,2-dichloroethane, cis-1,2-
dichloroethene and other chlorinated solvents have been reported with decreasing frequently and/or
lower concentrations, while vinyl chloride has been increasing in MW-3s and MW-3A. Since May 2011,
THE has been widely detected, as has 1,4-dioxane since monitoring began in May 2018.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report
Table 1 Monitoring Well Construction Data
July 9, 2020
Page 7
Elevation Data
Piezometer Construction Data
Hydrology
Boring
Number
Boring
Date
PVC Pipe
Elev.
Ground
El-
Total
Depth, ft.
Yorktown Fm.
Castle Hayne Fm.
Beaufort Fm. Confining Layer
Top of Screen
Bot. of Screen
Stickup
ft.
Monitored
Unit
Purpose
Depth, ft.
Elev.
Depth, ft.
Elev.
Depth, ft.
Elev.
Depth, ft.
Elev.
Depth, ft.
Elev.
Depth, ft.
Elev.
MN-1d
10/12/2000
21.14
17.40
50.0
7.5
9.9
30.5
-13.1
7.5
9.9
40.0
-22.6
50.0
-32.6
3.74
AU-2
BG for Phase 1
MN-1s
5/2/2001
20.91
17.59
13.0
--
3.0
14.6
13.0
4.6
3.32
AU-1
BG for Phase 1
WV-2d
10/9/2000
21.80
17.97
70.0
12.5
5.5
33.5
-15.5
61.5
-43.5
12.5
5.5
39.0
-21.0
49.0
-31.0
3.83
ALL2
MN-2s
5/3/2001
21.44
18.45
13.0
--
3.0
15.5
13.0
5.5
2.99
AU-1
WV-3d
10/12/2000
22.83
19.37
50.0
14.0
5.4
27.5
-8.1
14.0
40.0
-20.6
50.0
-30.6
3.46
AU-2
MW-3s
8/6/2007
22.76
19.37
20.0
12.9
6.5
--
5.0
14.4
20.0
-0.6
3.39
ALL1
MN-3A
8/10/2009
21.93
19.13
20.0
--
5.0
14.1
20.0
-0.9
2.80
AU-1
MW-4
5/3/2001
18.42
14.83
13.0
--
3.0
11.8
13.0
1.8
3.59
AU-1
MW-5
11/18/2002
17.90
14.80
18.0
18.4
-3.6
18.0
3.0
11.8
18.0
-3.2
3.10
AU-1
MN-6
5/5/2001
20.03
16.87
13.0
--
3.0
13.9
13.0
3.9
3.16
AU-1
MW-7
5/5/2001
19.40
16.03
13.0
--
3.0
13.0
13.0
3.0
3.37
AU-1
MW-8
11/18/2002
21.21
18.30
18.0
17.6
0.7
17.8
3.0
15.3
18.0
0.3
2.91
AU-1
MW-9A
8/7/2009
20.58
17.64
20.0
13.3
3.4
5.0
12.6
20.0
-2.4
2.94
AU-1
BG for Phase 2
MW-10
8/6/2009
16.61
14.16
20.0
13.3
3.4
5.0
9.2
20.0
-5.8
2.45
AU-1
MW-11
8/6/2009
14.49
11.60
20.0
15.5
2.1
5.0
6.6
20.0
-8.4
2.89
AU-1
MN-12s
8/10/2009
16.18
13.72
20.0
10.9
4.3
5.0
8.7
20.0
-6.3
2.46
ALL1
MW-13
8/7/2009
20.69
18.12
20.0
17.9
-1.2
5.0
13.1
20.0
-1.9
2.57
AU-1
MN-14d
12/17/2002
17.45
14.54
40.0
12.7
1.8
33.8
-19.3
1
j 12.7
35.0
-20.5
40.0
-25.5
2.91
CLL1
Old B-23d
MW-14s
12/18/2002
16.60
13.90
20.0
13.0
0.9
5.0
8.9
20.0
-6.1
2.70
ALL1
Old B-23s
MW-15s
12/18/2002
19.67
17.00
20.0
8.1
7.8
13
4
15.0
3.8
20.0
-1.20
2.8
AU-1
Old B-17s
MW-16
6/16/2017
19.16
17
20.0
17.0
0.0
5.0
12
20.0
-2
TBD
AU-1
MW-17
12/9/2002
20.74
18.18
20.0
17.0
1.3
18.1
0.1
15.0
3.2
20.0
-1.80
2.6
AU-1
Old B-20
Old B-1d
12/7/2001
20.23
17.33
80.0
17.0
1.3
23
-5.7
55.0
-37.7
65.0
-47.70
2.9
AU-2
Supplemental BG
Old B-1s
12/14/2001
20.06
17.19
15.0
17.0
1.3
--
10.0
7.2
15.0
2.20
2.9
AU-1
Supplemental BG
AU-1 = Uppermost Aquifer
CLL1 = Confining Layer
AU-2 = Lower Aquifer
Surface Water Sampling Locations
Sampling Point
Purpose
Location
Description
Field Marker?
SW-1
Background
"South" stream
At property line northeast of Phase 1
Y
SW-2
Compliance
"South" stream
At property line southeast of Phase 1
Y
SW-3
Compliance
"West" stream
Below convergence with ditch between Phases 1 and 2
Y
SW-4
Background
"West" stream
Northwest of Phase 2 along former railroad corridor
Y

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0 Page 8
Alternate Source Demonstration — A study was performed in 2014-15, focusing on the soils within and
near the central drainage feature with inconclusive results. No spills or incidents are known to have
occurred. The study pointed out at least a few constituents, (acetone, 2-butanone, THF, and toluene)
have been detected in the background samples from the "south" tributary. The literature suggests that
benzene is the last of the BTEX group of compounds to degrade under natural conditions, as benzene is a
stable "building block" for many common chemicals. Vinyl chloride, another "building block" constituent,
is known to result from the degradation of chlorinated solvents and due to the breakdown of PVC and
other polymers. While offsite sources could not be clearly identified, it is possible the detected
contaminants were introduced inadvertently from the storm debris or soils brought into the facility.
Assessment of Corrective Measures — A study was completed in 2017 to evaluate the extent and
concentrations of detected contaminants. That study defined an Area of Concern (AOC) between the
phases, i.e. the groundwater impact zone centered on the central drainage feature and/or a buried relict
channel (of natural sources), possibly influenced by both phases. The AOC extends south from the
channelized drainage feature near MW-8 to the southwest corner of Phase 1, near MW-3s where the first
detections were observed. The AOC originates north of the drainage feature, along the south side of
Phase 2, first detected at MW-12s but now showing at MW-11 and MW-10.
Two principal Constituents of Concern (COC), benzene and vinyl chloride, were identified based on 2L or
SWSL exceedances, along with minor constituents (detected below the 2L standards or SWSLs) occurring
in the same plume. The timing and location of the first detections point to Phase 2, possibly influenced
by prior site activity. Data from earlier wells, MW-9s and MW-9d, long since abandoned and replaced by
MW-3s and MW-3d, indicated no impact at the southwest corner of Phase 1. However, MW-3s showed
an immediate impact during the initial sampling in November 2007, prior to construction of the last cell
in Phase 1 but after early stage ground improvements had begun in Phase 2. The ACM also discussed the
likelihood of inherent changes in aquifer chemistry, e.g., reduced oxygen levels beneath the landfill units,
and natural differences between recharge and discharge zones, as influences on groundwater quality.
Monitored Natural Attenuation — Based on the preliminary indications of the ACM, a study was
conducted in 2018-19 to further evaluate the groundwater chemistry pursuant to selecting an appropriate
remedy. The study included four semi-annual sampling events that identified favorable concentrations of
constituents that promote biological activity, along with other conditions that will likely reduce the
concentrations of the COCs, including various dissolved gases, fatty acids, nitrate, alkalinity, total organic
carbon and oxygen demand. Excerpts of the June 2019 sampling report are found in Appendix 1.
Corrective Action Permit Modification — The results were reported in the October 2019 groundwater
monitoring report, followed by a letter request in December 2019, which states "... the primary remedy
selected for VOCs in [the site] groundwater is MNA ... appropriate because VOC concentrations are
limited to the shallow aquifer, groundwater monitoring data indicates that natural attenuation of VOCs is
occurring, and concentrations near the perimeter of the site are not increasing."
In the approval letter, SWS officials acknowledged "... C&D Landfill, Inc. has selected the following
groundwater correction action remedy:
• Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA), and
• Landfill Capping.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 13B .0545(e)(2), the selected remedy must:

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0
July 9, 2020
Page 9
(A) be protective of human health and the environment.
(B) attain the approved ground -water protection standards.
(C) control the source(s) of releases to reduce or eliminate, to the maximum extent
practicable, further releases of constituents into the environment that may pose a
threat to human health or the environment; and
(D) comply with standards for management of wastes."
As a result, this document is the required Corrective Action Plan (CAP) prepared in accordance with 15A
NCAC 13B .0545, 15A NCAC 2L, and the NC Solid Waste Section Guidelines for Corrective Action at Solid
Waste Management Facilities. This plan details the remedy approved by the SWS, i.e., specific plans and
schedule for final closure of C&D Landfill, Inc. (Closed Phase I and Active Phase II) and a Water Quality
Monitoring Plan. This plan also a discusses financial assurance, a tentative contingency plan, and a
timeline/schedule for activities during the next five years following the approval of the CAP. This plan will
be reviewed on a 5-year recurring cycle, and based on data and future regulatory changes, the plan may
require revision and update. This overarching plan contains many parts and is intended to be flexible.
1.2 Aquifer Characteristics
The following discussion is consistent with the 2017 ACM report. Published literature indicates that
upland areas throughout the region are underlain by relatively thin, undifferentiated Quaternary surface
deposits,z characterized as stratified fluvial deposits containing layers or pockets of low permeability and
high permeability horizons. Test borings confirm the surficial deposits (uppermost aquifer) consist of
poorly stratified terrestrial sand and clay layers, extending to depths varying between 12 to 30 feet.
The author believes the uppermost formation contains relict channels, i.e. buried "oxbows" that form
preferential pathways for groundwater movement, based on drilling data and morphological features.
One such feature may pass through the site, based on surface morphology (Figure 4), possibly aligning
with the central drainage feature between the phases. The upper sands are underlain by the Yorktown
Formation, presenting as a sticky, silty clay, easily identified by a deep green -gray color and a distinctive
turritella fossil -marker bed.
A two -aquifer system is shown in map view (Figures 5 and 6) and in cross sections based on site
characterization studies (Figures 7 — 9), i.e. upper and lower sandy units separated by the silt -clay
confining layer. Ground water flow in both aquifers is toward the south and west, with upper unit
contours that subtly reflect the surface topography. Groundwater depths vary from approximately 3 to 9
feet beneath the surface (El. 15 to El. 10 feet, MSL), deeper in the higher elevations and subject to seasonal
variation. Horizontal hydraulic gradients in the upper aquifer are slight and generally directed south and
west (Figure 5). In the deep aquifer, the horizontal gradient is nearly flat and toward the south (Figure 6).
The early data show an upward vertical gradient (intermittently) in piezometers and some well couplets.
Generalized aquifers and flow conditions from the permitting studies follow.
Historical Groundwater Elevation Data is found on Table 2.
z Hydrogeologic Framework of the North Carolina Coastal Plain Aquifer System,
U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 87-690, USGS.

C&DLandfU. Inc. Phases and 2(7407-CDLF-2001-2X09)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev
Table Historic Groundwater Elevation Data
July 9.2020

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev. 0
July 9, 2020
Page 11
The upper sand aquifer is approximately 8 to 15 feet thick. The silt -clay is approximately 8 to 15 feet thick
and is present at each test boring. The deeper aquifer thickness is 25 to 30 feet (observed). The deeper
clay is 10's or 100's of feet thick (literature). Physical properties are summarized as follows:
Table 3
Aquifer Physical Properties
Hydrogeologic
Flow
Grain Size Distribution
Unit
Regime
% Gravel
%Sand
%Silt
%Clay
AU-1
Upper Sand
0 - 0.3
65 - 97
3 - 30
5-9
CU-1
Confining Clay
0
40 - 50
37 - 49
10 - 13
AU-2
Lower Sand
0
62
34
4
CU-2
Confining Clay
1
31
31
37
Table 4
Horizontal Groundwater Characteristics
Hydrogeologic
Effective
Horizontal
Conductivity
Typ. Ground Water Velocity
Unit
Porosity
Gradients
cm/sec
inches/day
feet/year
AU-1
0.5
0.05 — 0.039
10-3 to 10-4
0.505
15
CU-1
0.5
0.002 — 0.01
10-6 to 10-'
0.014
0.4
AU-2
0.4
0.001— 0.005
10-4 to 10-5
0.018
0.5
CU-2
0.35
0.008
10"6
0.004
0.1
Table 5
Vertical Groundwater Characteristics
Monitoring
Nearest
CDLF
Observed
Indicated
Well
Borings
Phase
Gradients
Direction
MW-2 pair
B2s/B2d
1
-0.030 to -0.035
Upward
MW-4
616/1318
1
0.040
Down
MW-6
1315/1317
1
-0.018
Up
MW-10
68/138A
11
-0.018 to -0.76
Up
MW-11
B15s/B15d
11
0.042 to 0.061
Up
MW-14 pair
B23s/B23d
11
-0.095 to 0.042
Varies
MW-15
B17s/B17d
11
0.024 to 0.072
Up
MW-16
135/135A
11
0.066 to 0.428
Down
1.3 Contaminant Distribution
The following data represent "full disclosure" of all detections, condensed from the Cumulative
Detections Tables, found in Appendix 2. Some detections represent legacy effects of prior activities at
the site and/or traces of residuals from laboratory equipment cleaning. Refer to Section 2.1.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report
Table 6 Summary of Detections
July 9, 2020
Page 12
Analy to
J
w 7
Jv
N
Q
�
>
>
0
It
O N
Cn
cn
N
>
M
>
(a
>
CQ
I�
00
m
Q
O>
CD
N
(M
LO
CO
f�
N L
U 0
U)
U
m
N
CO
C9
m
N
Acetone
6000
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Acenaphthene
80
Y
Y
Y
Y
Benzene
5
1
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
2-Butanone
4000
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Carbon Disulfide
700
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Chlorobenzene
50
Y
Chloroethane
3000
Y
Y
Y
Y
Chloromethane
3
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
1,2-Dichloroethane
0.4
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Cis- 1,2-Dichloroethene
70
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Ethylbenzene
600
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Methylene Chloride
5
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Naphthalene
6
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Tetrahydrofuran
NA
NA
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Trichloroethene
3
Y
Y
Toluene
600
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Vinyl chloride
2
0.03
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Xylene
500
Y
Y
Y
Y
2-4-D
70
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Dinoseb
7
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
2,4,5-TP
50
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
2,4,5-T
NE
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
beta-BHC
0.02
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Aldrin
0.05
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Dibenzofuran
28
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Endrin Aldehyde
2
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
114-Dioxane
3
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Antimony
6
1
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Arsenic
10
10
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Barium
2000
700
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Beryllium
4
4
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Cadmium
1
2
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Chromium
100
10
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Cobalt
IMAC =
1
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Copper
1300
1000
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Lead
15
15
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Mercury
2
1
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Nickel
100
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Selenium
50
20
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Silver
20
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Thallium
20
0.2
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Tin
IMAC =
2000
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Vanadium
IMAC =
0.3
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Zinc
1000
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 13
Chapter 2 Site Conceptual Model
A three-dimensional representation of site conditions that represent what is known (or suspected) about
the physical, chemical, and biological processes that determine the transport of contaminants, from the
source, through environmental media, to potential receptors, is based on the discussion in Section 1.2.
Graphical depicture is in the form of the maps and sections found in the Figures.
A two -aquifer system is conceptualized, with the upper aquifer described as a relatively isolated, shallow
closed -loop, unconfined porous media contained within near -surface fluvial sands with interspersed clay,
separated from a deeper regional sandy aquifer by a partial confining layer. Groundwater depths typically
vary from 3 to 9 feet. Horizontal gradients and velocities are slow; vertical gradients are upward.
The uppermost sand aquifer (AU-1) is characterized as unconfined porous media, which recharges on -site
beginning at a divide coinciding with US 264. Discharge occurs at the blue -line streams that comprise the
south and west facility boundaries, and the central drainage feature discussed in Section 1.1.
Groundwater contour mapping indicates local convergence of groundwater flow, a subtle reflection of
the surface streams, which come together just south of the Facility. Undeveloped, low-lying lands to the
south are wooded, marshy and contain numerous small streams serving as the discharge features.
Groundwater velocities in the lower sand are estimated as approximately 15 feet per year.
The deeper sand aquifer (AU-2) is characterized as partially confined, porous media with a lower
conductivity and hydraulic gradient than the upper sand. The deeper aquifer is more regional and is
recharged from several miles distant, with some expected contribution from the upper aquifer, i.e., a
"leaky" aquifer system. The interstitial silt -clay imparts sufficient separation to result in upward gradients.
The gradients also suggest the discharge zone for the regional aquifer is nearby, interpreted as numerous
streams within the floodplain south of the site, the larger streams (i.e., Grindle Creek) and Tar River.
Groundwater velocities in the lower sand are estimated as approximately 0.5 feet (6 inches) per year.
Test borings reveal the upper sand contains significant interspersed organic content, i.e., decayed plant
debris, roots, and peat. The wooded marshland into which the shallow groundwater beneath the Facility
discharges is expected to have a high organic content. Highly organic soils, often but not exclusively
associated with wetlands, are recognized as natural groundwater filters, providing "treatment" for low
concentrations of many common contaminants. Based on topographic relationships, it is unlikely that the
Facility influences shallow groundwater beyond a radius of a few hundred feet. Based on the conceptual
model, discharge from the uppermost aquifer is filtered through natural organic deposits before reaching
surface waters. Due to the upward vertical gradients, the Facility is believed to have minimal influence
on the deep aquifer.
Regional groundwater use is sparse, and municipal water is widely available. Suspected local ground
water users are more than one thousand feet southeast of the Facility, considered cross gradient from
the Facility (not down gradient). To the south is one suspected ground water user, separated from the
Facility by several thousand feet and a major stream (Grindle Creek), so this groundwater user is not
considered down gradient either. Refer to Figures 1 and 2.
2.1 Regulatory Status
The ACM recommendations of Monitored Natural Attenuation and future landfill closure have been
approved. Neither of the CDLF phases are certified closed. There is no apparent risk to the public.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
2.2 Contaminant Characterization
July 9, 2020
Page 14
The following is excerpted from the June 2019 Water Quality Monitoring Report (used with permission).
That report, dated October 2019 (DIN 1359974), presented a summary of four semi-annual sampling
events focused on Appendix II and MINA parameters. Contaminants of concern identified in the 2017 ACM
Report are discussed with historical context and relative to natural attenuation parameters. Mann -
Kendall statistical analyses were used to assess trends in selected VOC concentrations over time since
November 2015. Graphical depiction of the data confirms the findings of the statistical analyses.
2.2.1 Volatile Organic Compounds
Benzene has historically been reported in samples from wells MW-3A, MW-3S, MW-8, and MW-12S at
concentrations that exceed the 2L Groundwater Standard. Benzene has also been reported in samples
from MW-10 since May 2016 and MW-11 since December 2017. Mann -Kendall trend analysis of
concentrations in samples from MW-3A, MW-3s, MW-8, and MW-12s since November 2015 indicate that
concentrations are probably increasing in MW-12s, stable at MW-3s and MW-8, and that trends cannot
be identified at MW-3A (i.e., similar to stable). While reports of benzene in samples from MW-10 and
MW-11 are a recent occurrence, Mann Kendall analysis indicates that since benzene was first reported in
the wells no trend is evident at MW-10, and concentrations at MW-11 are stable.
Field measurements and natural attenuation parameters reported during the June 2019 monitoring event
suggest that groundwater conditions at wells where benzene is reported are somewhat reducing and not
conducive to aerobic biodegradation of benzene; however the absence of increasing concentration trends
(with the possible exception of MW-12s) suggests that benzene is naturally attenuating at these locations
at a rate roughly equivalent to the "input" of mass to the aquifer system.
Graphical trends covering 2001 — 2019 (Charts 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D) confirm the concentrations may be
leveling out at MW-3s, MW-3A, MW-8, and still rising at MW-10, MW-11, and MW-12s.
Vinyl chloride (VC) concentrations that exceed the 2L Groundwater Standard have been reported
consistently in samples from MW-12s since 2012 and MW-10 since 2016. Mann -Kendall trend analysis
indicates that VC concentrations over the past three years are stable at MW-12s and a trend cannot be
identified at MW-10. Sporadic exceedances have also been reported in samples from MW-3A, MW-3s,
MW-6, MW-7, and MW-8. VC was reported in the samples from MW-11 and MW-14s for the first time in
June 2019.
VC in groundwater is often the result of the reduction of larger chlorinated ethenes and ethanes, such as
trichloroethylene (TCE) and cis-1,2-dichloroethylene (cis-1,2-DCE). Based on the historical presence of
these compounds at the site (not observed recently) and considering the reducing groundwater
conditions observed, this reduction appears to be the source of VC and is evidence of natural attenuation
processes taking place. The current absence (or decreasing concentration) of larger chlorinated ethenes
in groundwater samples and the lack of increasing VC concertation trends suggests that additional VC
source mass may not be present, and that the VC is attenuating naturally.
Graphical trends covering 2001— 2019 (Charts 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D) confirm the concentrations may be still
be gradually rising at MW-3s, MW-3A, MW-8. At MW-12s the data shows an apparent peak and may be
trending downward. These findings are not conclusive, but the data may warrant cautious optimism.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Chart 1A -- Benzene CAS 71-43-2
MCL = 5 UG/L (2018)
m
m
m
— 3.0
`
2.00
0
2s
2.10
2 0
2.10
2,0
n
1.0o
1.90 n
A �SO/ � 1.
1.60
0
y =-2E-O8x2 + 0.0013x - 25.812
1,17 13
1, 0 0
2L STD = 1 UG/L 0 7o
60 v=-zE-oax2+o.002X -43so6
So 0 So 0,
os o.ao o. —
0 30
MDL = 0.24 UG/L (2018)
0.00 0.00 0.00 o.00 o.00 oo o.o0 0.00 ®.00 o.o -A-0- 00 0.
00
z° a -— o 7 0�j i —— Z a .� LL o o ¢' Z
BMW 3S BMW 8 Poly. (MW 3S) Poly. (MW-6)
July 9, 2020
Page 15

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 16
MCL = 5 UG/L (2018)
4.5
4.0
3,5
3,0
0
2,5
2.0
1.5
Chart 1B -- Benzene CAS 71-43-2
2.52 2.56
mm
1.10 1.10
ml
im
1.0
2L STD = 1 UG/L V a'0
0 0,50 0,4
o,s o.
MDL = 0.24 UG/L (2018) 0.
0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.40.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.
o,o
BMW-10 BMW-11 BMW-12S

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
MCL = 5 UG/L (2018)
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
0
25
2.0
1.5
1.0
2L STD = 1 UG/L
Chart 1C -- Benzene CAS 71-43-2
!�9
ME
0m
m
0.5 0.40 0. 40
MDL = 0.24 UG/L (2018) 30 0 0 01 30 0.31
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 m 00 0.00 0.0m000 ®.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 00
0.0
rvo ory
BMW-6 BMW-7 BMW-8 Poly. (MW-0)
y = -2 E-08x2 + 0.002x - 43.506
July 9, 2020
Page 17

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Chart 1D -- Benzene CAS 71-43-2
MCL = 5 UG/L (2018)
4.5
4.0
3.5
3. 0
3,0
2.6000
2,5
2,10 2 0 2,10
2.
2.0
1.81
1,70 1 1.69
50 50 1 49
1.5
30 30
1, 20 1. 20 Y ' -2 E-08x2 + 0.0013X - 25.812
1. 1.10 ^ 1. 0
1,00 100 w 1.0 + 0
1.0
2L STD = 1 UG/L 07
a6o aeo
0,s0 o.
0,s
M DL = 0.24 UG/L (2018) 0
0,00
0,0�
o
BMW-3S BMW-3A Po1y.(MW-3S)
July 9, 2020
Page 18

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 19
Chart 2A --Vinyl Chloride CAS 75-01-4
4.5
4.0
3,5
3,0
O
2,5
MCL= 2 UG/L (2018)
zoo
w
6m
0,5 2L = 0.3 UG/L (2018) 0.10
y=6E-05x-2.1317
MDL = 0.12 UG/L (2018) y = 5E-05x - 1.9659
0,0
BMW-35 BMW-8 L—r(MW-35) Ll—(MW-B)

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 20
Chart 213 --Vinyl Chloride CAS 75-01-4
n0
3,5
3,0
0
25
2.0
1.5
1.0
0,5
0,0 , . .
BMW-10 BMW-11 BMW-125 Pdy.(MW-125)

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 21
Chart 2C -- Vinyl Chloride CAS 75-01-4
4.5
4.0
3,5
3,0
O
2,5
MCL = 2 UG/L (2018)
20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _
am
1.5 1,40
1.0
oneo
0,5 2L = 0.3 UG/L (2018) — 1
MDL=0.12UG/L(2018)
0,0 r1 r1 rl1 r1�r1Ti—i—r1 S r
BMW-6 BMW-] BMW-8 Lin-r(MW-0) L—.r(MW-7)
y = 5 E-05x-1.9659
y = 3 E-05x - 0.9906

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 22
Chart 2D -- Vinyl Chloride CAS 75-01-4
MCL = 2 UG/L (2018) zoo
2.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �r
m
0,5 2L = 0.3 UG/L (2018)
MDL = 0.12 UG/L (2018)
00
mm
BMW-3S BMW-3A L-1(MW-3S)
an
y = 6 E-05x - 2.2317

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 23
1,4-Dioxane concentrations exceeded the 2L Groundwater Standard in shallow samples from across the
site, including once in a background stream sample, with the exceptions of the wells on the western and
northern sides of Phase 2. The highest concentrations thus far have been reported at MW-3s (326 µg/L)
and MW-8 (218 µg/L) in December 2019. 1,4-dioxane was once used as stabilizer for other VOCs, but the
compound can be found in glues, inks, personal care products and cleansing agents. 1,4-dioxane is highly
soluble and resistant to degradation, however published research is showing promising indications of
naturally occurring microbial improvement.' The compound has only been sampled three times as of this
writing, thus a trend analysis cannot be established. Due to the ubiquitous nature of 1,4-dioxane,
regulatory directives have not been determined, thus it is an "emerging contaminant of concern."
2.2.2 Appendix I and II Metals
Each of the metals discussed below occur naturally at the site and are present in background samples.
Changes in the concentrations of these metals likely reflect changing groundwater conditions beneath the
landfill, i.e., a potential shift toward reducing (not oxidizing) conditions indicated by field measurements
and other natural attenuation parameters.
Arsenic has been reported in samples from each monitoring well and surface water sampling location,
including those monitoring background conditions. Concentrations exceeding the 2L Groundwater
Standard have been reported in MW-3s, MW-3A, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, and MW-12s. Currently,
samples from MW-3s, MW-3A, MW-6, MW-8, and MW-12s were reported to contain arsenic
concentrations above its 2L Standard.
Barium has been reported in samples from each monitoring well and surface water sampling location,
including those monitoring background conditions. Concentrations exceeding the 2L Groundwater
Standard have been reported in MW-3s, MW-6, MW-7, and MW-12s. Currently, samples from MW-6 and
MW-12s were reported to contain barium concentrations above its 2L Standard.
Chromium has been reported in samples from each monitoring well and surface water sampling location,
including those monitoring background conditions. Historically, elevated chromium concentrations
reported in samples from several wells decreased overtime to below the 2L Groundwater Standard. More
recently, chromium concentrations reported in samples from MW-3s, MW-5, MW-7, MW-8, MW-10, and
MW-12s have exceeded the 2L Groundwater Standard. Currently, samples from MW-3S, MW-7, MW-8,
MW-10, and MW-12s were reported to contain chromium concentrations above its 2L Standard.
Cobalt has been reported in samples from each monitoring well and surface water sampling location,
including those monitoring background conditions. Reported cobalt concentrations typically exceed the
1.0 IMAC in samples from MW-2s, MW-3s, MW-3A, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, MW-12s, and MW-14s.
Currently, samples from MW-2s, MW-3s, MW-3A, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, MW-10, and MW-12s
were reported to contain cobalt concentrations above its 2L Standard.
Vanadium has been reported in samples from each monitoring well and surface water sampling location,
including those monitoring background conditions. Reported concentrations fluctuate over time and
generally exceed the 0.3 µg/L IMAC; however, exceedances are less frequent in the deep wells. Higher
concentrations are reported in samples from MW-12s more consistently than in samples from other wells.
3 Steffan, R., Biodegradation of 1,4-Dioxane, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP),
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), ER-1422, https://www.serdp-estcp.org/.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 24
2.2.3 Suspected Legacy Contaminants
A few intermittent detections of pesticides (Aldrin, beta-BHC, Dibenzofuran and Endrin aldehyde) and
herbicides (Dinseb"', Silvex"', 2-4-D and 2-4-5-T) have shown in the cumulative data (Appendix 2). None
of these constituents have exceeded 2L Standards, but Aldrin and beta-BHC have exceeded 2L IMACs
although the lab flagged these detections with "J". These constituents were all banned since before the
landfill came into existence except 2-4-D. Most of the detections occurred prior to 2015 except pesticides
were first observed at MW-3s and MW-12S in 2018. These constituents are relict of past agricultural
activities and, hence, none are believed to be a concern. These constituents require a special sampling
and analysis regimen, and plans are to petition the SWS to curtail these from future monitoring.
Several Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) have shown in the cumulative data. These compounds
(acenaphthene, benzo[]pyrelene, fluorene, indeno[]pyrene, and naphthalene) are known to result from
incomplete combustion of organic materials. The occurrence is believed to result from a documented
2005 fire in Phase 1 and the intake of burned materials in the C&D waste stream in Phase 2. These
constituents have been detected mostly after 2016 at MW-3, MW-3s, MW-8 and MW-12s. None of the
detections exceed promulgated standards and, hence, none are believed to be a concern. These
constituents require a special sampling and analysis regimen, and plans are to petition the SWS to curtail
these from future monitoring.
Petroleum -associated (BTEX) compounds have been detected intermittently, although it is undetermined
if these are associated with past uses of the site. Benzene has been discussed as a COC (Section 2.2.1)
and, in addition to fuels, benzene has applications as a solvent and for intermediary steps in the
production of plastics, rubber, asphalt, glues, inks, paints and sealants, any of which could get into the
C&D waste stream. The other compounds have similar industrial applications and have been detected
below the 2L Standard at MW-3s (in the initial sampling event and intermittently thereafter) and later at
MW-3A, MW-12s, MW-14s (all intermittently). Toluene has been detected in the background surface
water samples. Ethylbenzene has been detected once at the background well MW-9A. Xylene has been
mostly detected at MW-12s.
2.3 Contaminant Source Confirmation
No other sources of contamination have been identified. Metals are naturally occurring, but detections
may be indirectly associated with the altered geochemistry beneath the site. Some of the solvents
discussed above have been detected in background wells and surface water samples.
2.4 Source Control Measures
Planned source control measures include maintaining and enhancing the final caps, pursuant to reducing
the quantity of surface water infiltration into the CDLF units. Said enhancements are part of the planned
post -closure care requirements and have been described in earlier permit applications.
2.5 Groundwater End Use
Based on the earlier site characterization studies, including a survey of groundwater users, the fate of
groundwater at the site is discharge into surface streams and wetlands, where natural processes are
available to mitigate the groundwater impact. No downgradient groundwater users have been identified.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 25
2.6 Sensitive Receptor Pathways
Potential receptors for the two key COCs at the facility, benzene and vinyl chloride, are flora and fauna,
and human. Exposure potential is via direct contact with groundwater or surface water downgradient of
the landfill. Considerations for flora and fauna are incorporated into the Stream Classification and 2B
Standards that apply. Based on the data, no organic contaminants that can be specifically tied to the
landfill have been identified in the surface water sampling (THF is in the background sample). Metals have
been generally below the stream standards except within the last couple of years, where background
values show an increase. These trends and the risk to human population is discussed in Section 2.7.
2.7 Human Exposure Pathways
Two exposure pathways have been identified for contact with the COCs. The first pathway involves
contact with surface water that drains through the facility and discharges to the unnamed tributaries. The
second pathway exists where direct contact could be made with the groundwater from the facility,
including dermal contact, ingestion, or inhaling vapors from VOCs contained in the water.
2.7.1 Surface Water Pathway
This pathway includes direct contact by facility employees or visitors with surface water in the unnamed
tributaries downgradient of the CDLF units. Another possibility exists for direct contact by the general
population in these tributaries (beyond the Facility boundary) or larger receiving streams downgradient
of the site. All the surface water bodies are jurisdictional and carries Class C water quality classifications.
Detected concentrations of metals and most VOCs are below North Carolina 2B surface water standards,
except cadmium, copper, lead, vanadium, zinc exceed the hardness dependent chronic standards, and
1,4-dioxane exceeds the USEPA drinking water advisory value. The surface water detects with highest
concentrations are observed at the background location on the "south" stream, SW-1. An evaluation of
the sampling and analytical protocols (and/or the sampling location) may be warranted.
2.7.2 Groundwater/Soil Pathway
Contact with the groundwater and/or soil can occur via groundwater sampling and/or well installation
activities. This work is limited to outside -trained contractors, not Facility employees or visitors. All
personnel likely to have contact with impacted groundwater or soil should have training defined in CFR
Title 29 Part 1910.120, i.e., HAZWOPER training (a.k.a. 40-hour training). Said training prescribes safety
protocols for personal protection on contaminated sites or working with potentially contaminated
samples. There is a very slight chance of vapor inhalation when handling the samples.
The likelihood of the public contacting with site -influenced groundwater is negligible. No groundwater
users (domestic, industrial, or agricultural) have been identified downgradient of the site. Due to the
nature of the lands south (downgradient) of the site, i.e., marshy ground beneath the mapped 100-year
flood level of Tar River, it is unlikely that future development leading to potential groundwater use will
occur. Vapors associated with groundwater are not expected to be problematic offsite.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 26
2.8 Background Concentrations
In groundwater and surface water, background values of constituents detected at the site are as follows:
Table 7
Metals in Background Samples
Constituent
Deep GW
Shallow GW
2L Std/
Surface
2B Std A
ug/I
ug/I
MCL
Water, ug/I
ug/I
Antimony
0.2J - 9.0
0.03J -16 a
116
0.05 - 0.65
5,300
Arsenic
0.3.1 - 2.6 c
0.02.1 - 1.5
101150
1.2.1 - 30
150
Barium
11.1 -115
25J - 43
70012,000
33J -1725
21,000
Beryllium
0.07J - 0.38
0.03J -1.0
4
0.06J - 0.31
6.5
Cadmium
0.1J-1.0
0.07J-2.3
2/5
0.04J-2.0°
0.15
Chromium
0.13J - 83
0.2.1 -15
10 / 100
0.4.1 - 61
24
Cobalt
0.1J - 0.76
0.13J - 2.5J
NE/1
0.3J - 8.9
16
Copper
0.4 -1.6
0.5J - 3.1
1,000 / 1,300
0.4J - 41
2.7
Lead
0.23.1 - 1.0
0.11.1 - 3.7
15
0.28.1 - 46
0.54
Mercury
0.06.1 - 0.12
0.04J13- 0.06
112
---
0.012
Nickel
0.9J - 5.0
1.3J - 7.9
100
0.7J -13.7
16
Selenium
0.24J - 0.33
0.23J -1.9
20 / 50
0.2J - 5.4
5
Silver
0.06.1 - 0.52
0.1.1 - 0.2.1
20
0.05.1 - 0.2J
0.06
Sulfide
100-422
147
NE
---
NE
Thallium
0.03J
0.04.1 - 0.14
0.2
0.05J - 0.08
2
Tin
0.52.1 - 0.17
0.11.1 -1.8
NE / 800
---
800
Vanadium
0.88J-46
0.16J-5.0
NE/0.3
1.1J-84
21
Zinc
3.8J - 51
1.2J - 91
1,000
2.3J - 202
36
A Hardness dependent chronic standards
a Bold numbers represent 2L
standard exceedance
c Values flagged with J by the lab indicate
detection above the PQL and below SWS Reporting Limit
A recent upward
trend in concentrations at SW-1 is shown
in the cumulative data (Appendix 2).
Published information discussed in the 2017 ACM and newly researched data indicate the following
constituents are in the regional background (all values are ug/1):

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Page 27
Table 8 Metals in Background Geochemistry
NURE4 NHIM 5
USGS 6
ppm ug/I (ppb)
ppm
Arsenic 4.4A 1.1-2.5B
0.7-6.1c
Barium 12.5 — 25 °
17 - 998
Beryllium 0.25 — 0.5
0.1— 4.5
Cadmium 0.1
0.1— 0.2
Chromium 2.5 — 5
2 - 64
Cobalt 5
0.2 — 27.4
Copper 1-4
12 — 36.7
Iron 20,000
0.05 —10.2
Lead 5-10
5-31.6
Manganese 150 — 250
25 - 1600
Nickel 2-5
0.9 — 38.4
Silver 0.05 — 0.25
<1
Vanadium 45
3 - 155
Zinc 5-12.5
2-106
A In soils (Shacklette, ca. 1976), published by USGS, https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/492/guad/q
rockmt.htm
B In groundwater, based on 31 domestic wells in Pitt County sampled in 2009 by NCDHHS DPH
C In 24 shallow soil samples (8 locations), USGS ca. 2010; data points correlated by latitude and longitude,
typically representing sites with 15 miles
Sediment samples in streams, sampled by NCGS and others ca. 1978 for the National Uranium Resource
Evaluation (NURE), Open -file reports 93-1 through Open -file report 93-34, NC Geological
Survey, 1993
4 The Geochemical Atlas of North Carolina, NC Geologic Survey, www.geology.enr.state.nc.us/NUREgeochem
5 Alison P. Sanders, et al, Arsenic in North Carolina: Public Health Implications, Environ Int. 2012 Jan; 38(1): 10-16.
Published online 2011 Sep 10. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2011.08.005. National Institutes of Health, NIHMSID:
NIHMS320000. PMCID: PMC3539775. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3539775/.
6 Smith, D.B., et al, 2013, Geochemical and Mineralogical Data for Soils of The Conterminous United States: U.S.
Geological Survey Data Series 801, 19 p., https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/801/.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report
Rev 0
Page 28
Table 9 Selected VOCs in Background Samples
Constituent Deep GW Shallow GW
2L Std/
Surface
2B Std A
ug/I ug/I
MCL
Water, ug/I
ug/I
Acetone 2.1.1 - 247 1.7 - 247
6000
4.5J - 12.5.1
2,000
Benzene --- 0.3 - 0.6
115
---
51
2-Butanone 66J -129J 0.9 - 24.8
4,000
1.2J - 3.2J
26,000
Toluene --- 2.6
600 / 1,000
0.3.1 - 33.1
11
1,4-Dioxane --- 4.39 - 5.33
3
414
85
A Class C Standards, typically; USEPA drinking water advisory
for dioxane
2.9 Exceedances of Groundwater Quality Standards
In groundwater at the site, values of constituents exceeding 2L Standards are as follows:
Table 10
Metals Exceeding 2L Groundwater Standards
Constituent
2LStd/ MW2s
MW3s MW3A MW4
MW5 MW6
MW7
MW8 MW10 MW11 MW12 MW14
MCL ug/I
ug/I
ug/I ug/I
ug/I ug/I
ug/I
ug/I ug/I ug/I
ug/I
ug/I
Arsenic
10 / 16
27
21
11 22
15
28 55
54
150
Barium
700 / -
-
-
- 776
819
- -
759
2,000
Chromium
10 / 85
32
15 42
13 22
40
122 21
44
14
100
Lead
15 83
-
- 25
- -
-
- -
-
21
Vanadium
0.3 / -
122
0.3
Table 11
VOCs Exceeding 2L Groundwater Standards
Constituent A
2L Std/ MW2s
MW3s MW3A MW5
MW6 MW7
MW8
MW10 MW11 MW12 MW14 MW15
MCL ug/I
ug/I
ug/I ug/I
ug/I ug/I
ug/I
ug/I ug/I ug/I
ug/I
ug/I
Benzene
1 / -
3.1
2.7
1.9
2.26 2.56 2.52
1.47
-
5
Vinyl Chloride 0.3 / - 2 1.091 - 0.8J 1.25J 1.48J 2.2 0.69 4.3 2.53J -
2
1,4-Dioxane 3 129 329 257 74.2 40.1 18.2 218 10.7 25.2 32.8 3.71 3.69
A Highest reported value for constituent at selected well (Tables 8 and 9)

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
2.10 Exceedances of Surface Water Quality Standards
In surface water, values of constituents exceeding 2L Standards are as follows:
Table 12
Constituents Exceeding 2B Surface Water Standards
Constituent
2B StclA SW1
SW2
SW3
SW4
ug/I
ug/I
ug/1
ug/I
ug/1
Arsenic
150
-
-
-
-
Cadmium
0.15
2.0
2.0
1.0
-
Chromium
24
61
-
-
-
Copper
2.7
41
6.1J
8.4.1
4.8J
Lead
0.54
46
14
2.5J
1.11
Vanadium
21
84
-
-
-
Zinc
36
202
-
71
-
1,4-Dioxane
85
414
-
-
-
A Class C Standards, typically;
USEPA drinking water
advisory for dioxane
2.11 Landfill Gas Monitoring Results
July 9, 2020
Page 29
Table 13 Landfill Gas Readings
LFG
Nearest
May 2019
Jul 2019
Sep 2019
Dec 2019
Monitoring
Monitoring
CH4 1-12S
CH4 1-12S
CH4 1-12S
CH4 1-12S
Location
Well
(%vol) (ppm)
(%vol) (ppm)
(%vol) (ppm)
(%vol) (ppm)
GP-01A
MW9A
- -
- -
- -
- -
GP-02
MW17
- 1
- 1
- 1
- -
GP-03
MW16
- 1
- -
- 1
- -
G P-04
M W 15
0.1 1
- 1
- -
0.4 1
GP-05
MW14s
- 1
- -
- -
- -
SG-06 B
M W12
- -
- -
- -
0.1 -
SG-07
MW5
- -
- 1
- 2
- -
SG-08
MW2s
- -
- -
- -
- -
GP-09
MW4
- 1
- -
- -
0.1 -
GP-10
MW1s
- 1
- 1
- 1
0.1 -

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 30
GP-11 MW10 - - 0.3 8 1.5 9 0.5 1
SG-12 MW13 - - - - - 1 - -
SG-13 MW12s - - - - - - - -
SG-14 MW11 - - - - - - - -
SG-15 MW8 - - - - - - - -
SG-16 MW11 - 1 - - - - - -
SG-17 MW3s - - - 1 - 1 - -
SG-18 MW3A - - - 1 - 1 - -
SG-19 MW2s - - - - - - - -
SG-20 MW10 - - - - - 3 - -
A Permanent Gas Probe
B Soil Gas Probe / Flux Chamber
A clear correlation between LFG monitoring sites showing methane and/or hydrogen sulfide and the
pattern of contaminants observed at the monitoring wells cannot be drawn. The MINA parameters
sampled at the monitoring does include certain dissolved gases, from which future correlations may be
recognized. Albeit there may be a coincidence of data at GP-11 and MW-10, the separation is
approximately 200 feet but, in fact, SG-20 is closer to MW-10 and shows little detection of methane
and/or hydrogen sulfide. With respect to GP-04, located midway between MW-14s and MW-15, the
groundwater constituents do not appear to be related.
Recalling the regulatory ACTION LEVELS,
Methane: > 1. 25% by volume (inside structures) and > 5% by volume (at facility boundary)
Hydrogen Sulfide: > 1 % by volume (inside structures) and > 4% by volume (at facility boundary)
It does not appear that Landfill Gas is an issue of concern at this Facility.
2.12 Media of Concern
Based on current data, the media of concern at the Facility is groundwater and/or soil. No air quality
issues are apparent (no landfill gas), and no surface water standards have been exceeded except for
constituents that are present in the background. Should future additional information cause these
conclusions to change, contingency activities will be considered for implementation (Chapter 6).

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Chapter 3 Selected Remedy Technical Approach
3.1 Design and Specifications of Remedy
The following sections summarize the logistics of the two -pronged corrective action remedy:
• Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA), and
• Landfill Capping.
July 9, 2020
Page 31
These sections will describe how the remedy will meet the requirements of 15A NCAC 13B .0545(e)(2):
(A) be protective of human health and the environment.
(B) attain the approved ground -water protection standards.
(C) control the source(s) of releases to reduce or eliminate, to the maximum extent
practicable, further releases of constituents into the environment that may pose a
threat to human health or the environment; and
(D) comply with standards for management of wastes.
3.2 Monitored Natural Attenuation
The following excerpt from the North Carolina Solid Waste Section MNA Guidance Document defines the
purpose of this Corrective Action Plan:
"Monitored natural attenuation (MNA) is the sum of natural processes that leads to the
decreasing of contaminant concentrations in groundwater over time. The primary objective
of MNA is to demonstrate that natural processes will reduce contaminant concentrations in
groundwater to levels below regulatory standards before a point of compliance is reached."
To that end, the following plan description is based on the findings and conclusions of data summary
described in Chapters 1 and 2.
An initial period of monitoring (four semiannual sampling events) of an approved monitoring well network
has indicated the effectiveness of MNA as a remedial option. Sampling of the existing monitoring well
network for MNA performance parameters indicates a favorable geochemistry for degrading the COCs.
In addition, concentrations of COCs at key locations, MW-3s and MW-3A, appear to be leveling or possibly
beginning to decline. Earlier detected chlorinated solvents appear to be declining and the pattern of
observed impacts within the monitoring network appears to be stable.
Paraphrasing the Guidance Document: after the baseline sampling events, an EPA approved MNA
screening model shall be applied to facilitate a determination of which reactions and processes are driving
the subsurface biogeochemistry. This includes a mass balance assessment to verify balance between
source loading and plume attenuation capacity. Plume stability (chemical, biological, and physical) must
be determined in evaluating trends along specific flow lines within the contaminant plume and along the
contaminant plume boundary. The interpretation of the MNA performance parameters and the technical
evaluation of MNA as a remedy shall be presented in a comprehensive MNA Corrective Action Evaluation
Report at least once every five calendar years.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 32
In accordance with the November 8, 2019 approval letter concerning the MNA Sampling Frequency
Modification Request (FID 1376883), the following MNA parameters have been approved to be monitored
every three years during both semiannual events that year: carbon dioxide, total organic carbon, BOD,
COD, ethene, ethane, volatile fatty acids, methane, hydrogen, ferrous iron, and chloride. In addition, the
following MINA parameters are requested to be monitored semiannually: sulfate, sulfide, DO, ORP, nitrate,
pH, conductivity, temperature, and alkalinity. This requirement is in addition to standard semi-annual
sampling requirements.
Adherence to the prescribed monitoring plan, including the building and maintaining the MNA screening
model (to commence with the third -year sampling events), will facilitate an effective evaluation of the
MNA geochemistry performance and predicting when the compliance will be achieved, in addition to
verifying the COCs are decreasing as expected. In this manner, the monitoring program meets Parts A
and B of the of the 15A NCAC 13B .0545(e)(2) requirements, i.e., be protective of human health and the
environment, and attain the approved ground -water protection standards.
3.3 Phase 1 CDLF Unit Closure
Closure documentation for two existing phases of C&D Landfill, Inc. are beyond the scope of this CAP. A
brief description of existing conditions and proposed future action is described below. These issues will
require input from the SWS Permitting Branch; as such, this portion of the CAP remains flexible and may
not be included in the initial review/approval of this document.
Regulatory changes enacted during Phase 1 operation flagged June 30, 2008 as the cutoff date for
compliance with 15A NCAC 13B .0543 requirements for final covers. C&D Landfill, Inc. was following a
prescriptive incremental closure protocol for Phase 1 operations, by which portions of the side slopes
were closed (but not certified) prior to the cutoff.
A test pit investigation of the Phase 1 final cover soils in April 2020 documented field density testing and
soil classification (Appendix 3). The study determined the final cover thickness is at least 36 inches at
investigated locations on the side slopes. Soil density acquired via nuclear moisture -density gauge
indicated compaction in the lower 18 inches of the side slope cover varies from 66 to 92 percent of the
standard Proctor maximum dry density (MDD). Visual soil classifications for the lower 18 inches of side
slope cover are typically SM, ML, and some CL. Less than 36 inches of final cover was observed for the
upper cap area, estimated at ±2 acres with approximately 2-5 percent slopes.
The study concluded that the well vegetated side slopes should meet or exceed the original "pre-2008"
final cover requirements of the time those areas operated. The upper cap area for Phase 1 does not meet
either the "new" or "old" requirements, thus an upgrade of portions of the cover is warranted to certify
the unit closed. In order to meet the CAP requirements, I am proposing a "post-2008" cover construction
on the upper cap area of Phase 1 and leaving the side slopes as built with enhanced vegetation on the
side slopes of Phase 1. Technical specifications for the proposed cover (Appendix 4) is subject to review
and approval by the SWS.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 33
Chapter 4 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring
4.1 Revised Water Quality Monitoring Plan
Earlier versions of the WQMP, prepared in accordance with 15A NCAC 13B .0544, defines the monitoring
network, sampling parameters and protocols, and schedule for differing requirements for Spring and Fall
sampling events. The WQMP includes semi-annual sampling and analysis for compliance with North
Carolina ground water standards, i.e., 15A NCAC 2L .0300 (the "2L rules").
The sampling list has evolved over time to include RCRA metals and organic constituents on the Appendix
1 list, i.e., volatiles and semi-volatiles that are analyzed by US -EPA Method 8260 protocols; metals and
organic constituents on the Appendix II list, i.e., US -EPA Method 8270 protocols, pesticides (8081 scan),
herbicides (8151 scan); inorganic compounds and field parameters, e.g., chloride, sulfide, temperature,
oxidation-reduction potential, total dissolved solids, and turbidity; emerging contaminants
tetrahydrofuran and 1,4-dioxane; and during the last two years MNA performance parameters.
As the Facility moves into Corrective Measures, the monitoring program will again be modified to
incorporate the requirements of the MNA Guidance Document 7 and the November 8, 2019 letter
approving the MNA Sampling Frequency Modification Request (FID 1376883). MNA parameters to be
monitored every three years during both semiannual events that year: carbon dioxide, total organic
carbon, BOD, COD, ethene, ethane, volatile fatty acids, methane, hydrogen, ferrous iron, and chloride. In
addition, MNA parameters to be monitored semiannually: sulfate, sulfide, DO, ORP, nitrate, pH,
conductivity, temperature, alkalinity, and groundwater elevations. A standalone Water Quality
Monitoring Plan inclusive of the Corrective Action protocols is presented in Appendix 5.
4.2 Revised Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan
Monitoring of landfill gas (LFG) has been performed in accordance with Solid Waste Rule 15A NCAC 13B
.0544. Results of LFG monitoring to date have shown no obvious correlation between the gas and the
groundwater, that is, the LFG does not appear to be a significant driver of the groundwater constituents.
A standalone LFG monitoring plan prepared in accordance with the regulations is found in Appendix 6.
4.3 Special Monitoring Provisions
• Field personnel shall be trained and certified (experienced) for specific sampling requirements.
• Laboratory shall be required to maintain North Carolina Wastewater certification.
• Background monitoring locations should be evaluated to verify that these locations are not being
influenced by the groundwater impact. Locations may be adjusted with SWS approval.
• Data evaluation and reporting will be performed by a qualified and duly licensed geologist or
professional engineer. Reports shall be prepared in accordance with SWS requirements.
• Well -heads shall be protected, and maintenance shall be performed as needed. Vegetation shall
be mowed prior to each sampling event — no chemical weed control products shall be used.
7 NC Solid Waste Section, MNA Excerpt from Examples of Approved Groundwater Corrective Measures for Solid Waste
Management Facilities, Rev 6-08.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 34
Chapter 5 Evaluation of Effectiveness and Report Submittals
The following narrative outlines and demonstrates an understanding of the contents and format of future
Corrective Action Evaluation Reports (CAERs), specifically the evaluation of performance parameters that
indicate the success of the CA program. In accordance with the regulations and guidance, CAERs will be
generated every 5 years. Data review will be performed after every sampling event, especially the
evaluation of the MNA parameters every three years. The data will be evaluated using an EPA approved
MNA screening model, including the ability to measure mass flux.
The MNA performance parameters may be re-evaluated to determine if the sampling frequency may
decrease for a specific MNA performance parameter or if a specific MNA performance parameter may be
removed from the corrective action sampling program based upon its technical relevance (example
anaerobic conditions instead of aerobic conditions). It is necessary to determine after the baseline
sampling events, which reactions and processes are driving the subsurface biogeochemistry. A mass
balance assessment must also be completed. There must be balance between source loading and plume
attenuation capacity. Any changes to the MNA performance parameter list must be approved by the SWS.
Several USEPA references have been researched that will provide specific data evaluation protocols to
assist with the MNA performance evaluations. Refer to the Bibliography section following the text.
5.1 Corrective Action Performance Objectives
MNA is not be considered a sole presumptive remedy, rather MNA is part of a Corrective Action process,
defined in the document, with measurable performance objectives but also the flexibility to accommodate
various natural and anthropomorphic factors. The goal is ultimate restoration of groundwater at the
Facility to its designated beneficial use, considering cost, regional groundwater use, technical
practicability, remedial objectives, and protection of human health and the environment. The objectives
that will be evaluated on an initial reporting period and on a 5-year schedule the following:
1. The COC concentrations will stabilize (not increase) at the south facility boundary, based on a
trend analysis acceptable to the Solid Waste Section.
2. No new constituents will be recognized as a COC at the south facility boundary, based on a trend
analysis acceptable to the Solid Waste Section.
3. A reduction in concentrations of COCs due to MNA processes will be demonstrated with SWS-
approved screening tools.
4. No degradation of surface water due to discharges of groundwater can be observed.
5.2 Physical Changes in Aquifer Conditions
Changes in water levels and flow directions (e.g., gradient reversals) that could indicate differing
conditions within the aquifer will be accomplished by mapping the groundwater elevation contours after
every sampling event. Horizontal gradients drive groundwater velocities, and vertical gradients reflect
groundwater pressures and can indicate the likelihood of cross -contamination between aquifers, thus
tracking the gradients is important. Both gradient types indicate flow directions, an obvious concern for
contaminant transport, but the position of the water table within the soil column affects which of the
many MNA mechanisms, anaerobic vs. aerobic, oxidizing vs. reducing, are operative. The groundwater
elevation data will be used to construct potentiometric maps and flow nets, to be updated periodically.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 35
5.3 Chemical Changes in Aquifer Conditions
Changes in geochemistry may influence the effectiveness of the remedy and can be indexed with
measurements of pH, Eh, temperature, turbidity, and TDS in the normal monitoring protocol. MNA
parameters such as dissolved oxygen, BOD/COD and the presence of certain dissolved gases are
paramount to evaluating whether conditions are favorable for microbial activity, upon which the MNA
processes depend. These parameters are inputs to periodic evaluations via modeling, e.g., BIOPLUME,
BIOCHLOR, BIOSCREEN. These predictive models and their derivatives are popular means of evaluating
solute transport using convection, dispersion, mixing, and biodegradation effects. These models may be
applied as part of evaluating fate and transport of contaminants in the subsurface, and they can be used
to predict the effect of injecting oxygen or other MNA enhancements. $
5.4 Physical Changes in Plume Characteristics
Measuring the concentrations and extent of the contaminants is a principle means of being protective of
human health and the environment. For the subject Facility, the south property line is the point of
compliance, with MW-3A installed nearby as a sentinel to contaminant migration. Several processes
cause reductions in contaminant concentrations and apparent reductions in the total mass of contaminant
in a system. Processes causing apparent reductions in contaminant mass include dilution, sorption, and
hydrodynamic dispersion. To determine the mass of contaminant removed from the system, it is
necessary to correct the observed concentrations for the effects of these processes into a comprehensive
solute transport model. Iso-concentration maps of contaminants and daughter products allow both
quantitative and qualitative interpretation of the distribution and the relative transport and degradation
rates. The maps are necessary so that contaminant concentrations can be input to a numerical model. 9
5.5 Chemical Changes in The Plume
The measurement of dissolved oxygen, nitrate, manganese, iron, sulfate, and sulfide along the axis of the
plume, as well as transverse to it, are used to characterize biological activity with respect to the redox
state at those locations. This information will allow an estimation of the current redox state at various
parts of the plume, thereby defining the types of reactions that may take place. These data will also help
characterize the abundance of the principal electron acceptors, oxygen, nitrate, and sulfate, to allow an
estimate of how long natural attenuation will remain a viable remedial alternative.
Another approach is using the hydrogen (1-12) concentration to indicate the which terminal electron
acceptor (TEA) process in play, e.g., denitrification, ferric iron (iii) reduction, sulfate reduction,
methanogenesis (Chapelle et al., 1995). Then, there is biological action that depends on a source of
organic nutrients, i.e., dissolved organic carbon, in the optimal conditions of temperature, pH, redox
potential (Eh), and alkalinity. The microbial activities of a site are thus determined by the dissolved organic
8 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Ground Water Modeling Research, September 13, 2016,
https://www.epa.gov/land-research/ground-water-modeling-research
9 Wiedemeier, T.H., et al, Technical Protocol for Evaluating Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Ground
Water, National Risk Management Research Laboratory Office of Research And Development, IAG #RW57936164,
EPA/600/R-98/128, September 1998.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 36
carbon, presence of macro- and micronutrients and the TEA (Semprini et al., 1995). The presence and
concentration of each will determine not only the activity, but the predominant microbe population.lo
5.6 Refining the Site Conceptual Model
The Corrective Action Evaluation Reports (CAERs) will focus on the following:
1. Proving that a reduction in contaminant concentrations is occurring.
2. Demonstrating that contaminant reduction is caused by chemical or biologic
attenuation of the COCs.
3. Proving that the plume has stabilized or is decreasing within the horizontal and
vertical extent.
To that extent, the data are correlated to the modeling and, if needed, the model inputs are adjusted to
reflect what the data are showing. The purpose is to improve confidence in of the site model for making
long-term performance predictions. US EPA states the following:
"The conceptual site model for MNA and the monitoring program are continually refined
as new data are gathered and interpreted. Each new round of data should help develop
a better understanding of the site and site processes, including plume shape, location,
stability, and dynamics; attenuation rates; geochemical regimes; and site hydrogeology.
The criteria used for site -related decision -making are usually based on either presence of
specific contaminant concentrations (e.g., MCLs at a specified group of wells), or spatial
and temporal trends in concentrations (e.g., a decreasing trend in contaminant
concentrations that indicates progress toward contaminant reduction objectives). Other
site -related data (e.g., geochemical and ground -water flow data) are important for
corroborating contaminant migration, fate, and attenuation processes. These data may
be used to provide evidence for contaminant degradation and the continuation of
appropriate conditions for attenuation at acceptable rates." 11
5.7 CAP Modification
This CAP is intentionally flexible to allow amendment as warranted by changing conditions or other
factors discussed above. Should the need arise, alternative correction action will be evaluated,
including but not limited to enhanced attenuation or active remediation options. The conditions that
might trigger such alternatives are discussed in the contingency plan (Chapter 6). No changes to this
CAP may be made with express authorization of the Solid Waste Section.
10 Azad pou r-Keeley, A., et al, Microbial Processes Affecting Monitored Natural Attenuation of Contaminants in the
Subsurface, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA/540/S-99/001, September 1999.
11 Pope, D.F., et al, Performance Monitoring of MNA Remedies for VOCs in Ground Water, prepared under contract to
Dynamac Corporation, Contract Numbers 68-C-99-256 and 68-C-02-092, U.S. EPA National Risk Management
Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development, EPA/600/R-04/027, April 2004.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Chapter 6 Contingency Plan
6.1 Factors that Could Affect MNA Performance Data
July 9, 2020
Page 37
If the approved corrective action does not appear to be effectively reducing the COC concentrations in
either horizontal or vertical dimensions, factors that could affect the data should first be evaluated.
Possible influences on the data, which is considered a first step in evaluating trends or sudden changes in
the data, though not necessarily triggering a program change, include the following:
Changes in land or ground -water use — development near the site could potentially result in hydrologic
changes that affect plume stability, e.g., new pumping wells, clearing, ditching or dewatering for surface
mining (present on the area), with an increased possibility of exposure via contact with the water;
geochemical changes that affect biotransformation processes, e.g., application of nitrogen -containing
fertilizers could cause an influx of nitrate to ground water and possibly inhibit reductive dichlorination;
these institutional controls may require evaluation or amending the site model.
Laboratory error or sample contamination — verification by the analytical laboratory that sampling and
analysis protocols did not introduce an error; have the laboratory to analyze another aliquot of the same
sample, if available (prearrange for the lab to retain samples until data evaluation has been completed);
resample the well and analyze the detected constituent, evaluate consistency.
Seasonal variation — the effects of seasonal groundwater flux can affect dilution and can mobilize
contaminants previously held in the vadose zone, possibly resulting in data "spikes;" an understanding of
these effects will be developed over time through data review; trends will be considered when developing
(and, perhaps, reevaluating) the CA goals for the site.
Transient changes — a sudden release of new contaminants, e.g., a fuel spill, fire, damage to a final cover,
or even a prolonged drought or wet climatic spell, can result in a short-term effect on the data; these
conditions may warrant adjusting the site model or perhaps reevaluating the CA goals.
Long-term changes —the formation of toxic transformation products or secondary contaminants can alter
the geochemistry, e.g., reduction of electron acceptors or donors, influx of substances such as oxygen or
nitrate, a change in oxidation-reduction potential, can hinder MNA processes, requiring alternative CA.
Other sources of contaminants — the site characterization has identified factors that could influence the
data, including past agricultural activities, the nature of the early wastes disposed at the site, the presence
of a former railroad corridor through the property, and more than one former fuel stations or automobile
service facilities; none are currently suspected as influences on the data.
6.2 Triggering Events and Established Responses
Per the requirements of the MNA Guidance Document, if MNA is not performing in accordance with the
objectives set forth in the approved CAP (Section 5.1) after the first five consecutive calendar years, the
contingency plan must be implemented immediately. If contaminants migrate off site, active remediation
shall be initiated, and adjacent property owners notified. Also, if the contingency plan is found not to be
effective at the facility, then the public participation process pursuant to 15A NCAC 13B .1635 may be
required and a new CAP shall be submitted for approval.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 38
Based on US EPA literature and SWS Guidance, uncertainty associated with estimated rates of attenuation
over extended periods of time is a major consideration with MNA. Hydrologic and geochemical conditions
amenable to MNA can change due to (1) natural or anthropogenic causes, and (2) changes in the mobility
of a plume over time. 12 Situations that may warrant implementation of a contingency and the
appropriate responses largely depend on site conditions and include, but not limited to, these
hypothetical examples:
1) Contaminant concentrations in soil or ground water at specified locations exhibit an increasing
trend not originally predicted during remedy selection.
Response: Evaluate travel times to potential receptors and consider the source and duration of
the data increase for the COC. A low-level increase near the source area does not necessarily
mean that remediation time frames will be expanded or concentration of the COC will exceed
limits at the compliance boundary. If contaminants will not reach receptors for several years, it
may be possible to allow verification procedures to continue, with time for making informed
decisions. If the increased concentration is close to the leading edge of the plume, i.e., there is a
shorter travel time, and/or receptors are at risk, Enhanced Attenuation (EA) techniques will be
evaluated. If a transient condition is indicated, that is the "spike" is followed by one or more
detections in the normal range for that COC and location, no action may be warranted.
2) Near -source wells exhibit large concentration increases indicative of a new or renewed release.
Response: A new COC or sudden and large increase in an existing COC near the landfill boundary,
i.e., the source, increased sampling frequency and locations may be warranted to define the
changes in the plume. The expanded data would be incorporated into the site model to determine
the influence on meeting the CA objectives. Further remedial action might include implementing
EA techniques or some type of active remediation.
3) Contaminants are identified in monitoring wells located outside the original plume boundary or
other specified compliance boundary.
Response: This condition could indicate the plume is expanding. The response might include
increased sampling frequency and locations to define the changes; the data will be evaluated to
determine the long-term influence on meeting the CA objectives. Additional action may or may
not be warranted, depending on the potential influence on the timeframe or target concentration
at the compliance boundary. Consideration would be given to implementing EA techniques.
4) Contaminant concentrations are not decreasing at the rate previously determined to be necessary
to meet the remediation objectives.
Response: A comparison of data trends with earlier predictions will be used to evaluate new trend
projections. The CA objectives may be reevaluated, or alternative CA technologies may be
implemented. A staged approach may be appropriate, depending on the data, such as first
12 Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground Storage Tank Sites,
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), Directive 9200.4-17P, April 1999.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 39
implementing EA via injection of oxygenators, nutrients, emulsified oil, or biological agents
(bacteria), then moving to more aggressive treatment methods such as air sparging or pumping.
5) Changes in land and/or ground -water use will adversely affect the protectiveness of the MNA
remedy, and
Response: This involves the institutional controls; for land controlled by the Facility owner, the
ramifications of altering the land use should be clearly understood. For land outside of the control
of the owner, however unlikely the prospects, negotiations may be warranted to minimize
changes near the Facility. Most of the usable, non -controlled downgradient land is across major
streams. Land -use changes that cannot be helped will warrant adjusting the site model and,
perhaps, defining the CA objectives, or moving to more aggressive technologies.
6) Contaminants are identified in locations posing unacceptable risk to human or ecological
receptors.
Response: This condition would likely warrant a move to active remediation; a first step is to
determine if conditions are Immediately Dangerous to Health or Life (IDHL). An Emergency
Response would be coordinated with local authorities (fire, rescue) and the SWS. Other mitigating
activities might be appropriate, e.g., providing drinking water to at -risk populations. Close
monitoring of the data, i.e., semi-annual update of the COC concentrations, would provide a basis
for quickly deciding a remedy. Modeling would facilitate prediction of the nature, extent, and
timeframe that unacceptable risks would likely prevail; EA method, now considered "active"
remediation, or one of the more aggressive methods would be selected.
It might be prudent to develop this and any other contingency activities into a more implementable course
of action, once the CA has been in operation for sufficient time to more completely understand the
performance of the selected MINA remedy (and the final closure of the CDLF units). Once the mass balance
relationships of the COCs are known, at a future time, specific injectable EA treatments can be developed.
Any such plan modifications will require SWS approval. Based on the known conditions at the Facility, it
is highly unlikely that conditions requiring more aggressive Active Remediation will be encountered.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Chapter 7 Schedule and Maintenance
7.1 Timeline and Schedule
Initial Target Date
1 Groundwater Monitoring
1a
Finalize WQMP
Within 90 days of CAP
Submittal to SWS
1b
Well Head Inspection A
Week of Nov 16, 2020
1c
Mowing Access Paths
Week of Nov 23, 2020
1d
Semi -Annual Sampling Events
Week of Dec 1, 2020
Week of Jun 1, 2021
Week of Dec 1, 2021
1e
Sampling MNA Parameters
Week of Jun 1, 2023
Week of Dec 1, 2023
1f
Data Review and Reporting
120 days after sampling
1g
CA Performance Review
120 days after Dec 1, 2025
A Repairs as needed (Section 7.2)
2 LFG Monitoring
2a Screening Events
2b Data Review and Reporting
2c Plan Revision
3 Alternate Final Cover
3a Design/Plan Approval
3b Installation/Upgrade
3c Inspection
3d Maintenance
3e Mowing Cover
3f Data Review and Reporting
3g Plan Revision
A Repairs as needed (Section 7.2)
Week of June 1, 2020
30 days after sampling
TBD
Within 90 days of CAP
Submittal to SWS
180 days after approval
Covered in separate plan
Covered in separate plan
Covered in separate plan
30 days after sampling
TBD
July 9, 2020
Page 40
Ongoing Target Dates
Two weeks before every event
One week before every event
Every 180 days for next 5 years
Etc.
Every 3 years thereafter
Every 3 years thereafter
Every 90 days thereafter
Every 90 days for next 5 years
Every 180 days or as required A
Yearly
Yearly

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 41
7.2 Operation, Monitoring & Maintenance
Requirements — For the selected remedy, the OM&M activities do not exceed the normal activities
associated with disposal operations and facility maintenance, which are addressed fully in other
documents. With respect to CA performance, the issues of final cover maintenance are essential,
including vegetation health, periodic mowing, erosion and sedimentation control, and facility monitoring.
Typical issues — The MNA monitoring appurtenances prescribed for this facility typically require no
maintenance aside from routine well -head issues, e.g., access, ID tags, hinges, locks, incidental damage.
These subjects will be addressed more thoroughly in the WQMP separate submission.
7.3 Performing Operations
Requirements — The selected Corrective Action essentially has no "operations" except for the monitoring
and reporting activities and the final cover construction and maintenance (addressed elsewhere). The CA
should not affect routine landfill disposal activities; likewise, the operation of the landfill should be
performed carefully, such that no influence or damage to the MNA program.
Responsible parties — The Owner is ultimately responsible for facility maintenance and compliance.
Facility staff may assume the duties of well -head maintenance and LFG monitoring. In the future, the
Owner may wish to engage the services of a caretaker (individual or firm) for post -closure facility
maintenance. A third -party laboratory will be contracted for groundwater sampling and analysis. A
workable relationship is already in place.
7.4 Long term mechanical maintenance
Specific maintenance requirements include the well -heads, discussed above. This aspect could change
depending on the CA performance and the potential implementation of more aggressive technologies.
7.5 Monitoring of the site equipment associated with the remedial measure
At present, the equipment required for the selected CA program includes LFG meters and other water
quality meters measuring devices utilized by the sampling crew. Said equipment will be maintained and
calibrated by the equipment supplier (for rentals) or the lab (for use in the service provided).
7.6 Corrective Action Oversight
A "program manager" (individual or firm) may be designated by the Owner to oversee the CA monitoring
requirements and compliance. Tasks would involve coordinating the schedules, performing a review of
the sampling activities, curating/reporting the data, and interacting with SWS officials. Said entity would
need to be a licensed geologist and/or a professional engineer to address some of the technical issues.
7.7 Responsible Parties
This section will be left incomplete for the initial submittal of this CAP. The Owner/Operator of the Facility
is known (C&D Landfill, Inc., Judson T. Whitehurst, President). Name(s) and contact numbers for those
critical site personnel on whom responsibility for overseeing the OM&M operations will fall, including the
laboratory, caretaker, and program manager (as appropriate) will be designated during the SWS review
of this document, and those parties will be listed within a future revision of this document.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 42
7.8 Notifications
In the event of the discovery of any deficiency or failure of the selected CA operating system, the
Owner/Operator will notify the Solid Waste Section within 24 hours of the discovery and provide a written
report documenting the cause of the deficiency or breakdown within 15-days of completing repairs.
7.9 Safeguard Measures and Site Security
In its present form, and if no site changes or damage occurs, the selected CA program will operate with
little attention except for monitoring and maintenance activities. Said changes to the site include those
related to land use, e.g., vegetation, drainage, the installation of wells or the application of agricultural
chemicals near the Facility. The site comprises several hundred acres, but it is isolated there are pathways
for casual access by curiosity seekers or those with malicious intent. The Owner will be encouraged to
develop strategies to limit public access, which dovetails with routing Operations requirements for the
CDLF. Use recreational motor vehicles and hunting activities within the CDLF facility should be prevented.
7.10 Plan Modifications
Any requests for modifications of the approved corrective action and the implementation schedule must
be submitted in writing to the Solid Waste Section and may not modify the schedule until approved in
writing by the Division of Waste Management.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009)
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0
Chapter 8 Financial Assurance
July 9, 2020
Page 43
Minimum requirements for financial assurance relative to the selected CA will include lust the costs of
groundwater monitoring (third -party sampling and analysis) and professional oversight costs. It should
be realized that the costs of groundwater monitoring are already included in the Closure and Post Closure
bond calculation for the two separate phases, along with LFG monitoring and final cover maintenance for
the 30-year post closure care period and $1,000,000 of PACA. The Closure and Post Closure bond now in
place is $3,544,876, based on documentation furnished with the approved December 6, 2019 Corrective
Action Permit Modification application (Wood). That amount is subject to annual multipliers since 2014.
8.1 Basis of Calculation
Environment 1, Inc. provided tentative estimated costs per sampling event for the current number of wells
(22) and surface waters (4) :
Appendix I +Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters (June 2020 event) A = $12,810
Appendix I +full Appendix II + landfill specific parameters (December 2020 event) = $17,400
Appendix I +Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters + MNA parameters B = $22,233
A Surface waters only receive Appendix I parameters each sampling event.
B MNA Parameters : Hydrogen*
Methane*
Ethane*
Ethene*
Low Level Volatile Fatty Acids* *(sub -contracted to Pace Laboratories in Baton Rouge, LA)
BOD
Hardness
COD
Ferrous Iron
TOC
Carbon Dioxide
8.2 CA Monitoring for 5-year period
For the Corrective Action requirement, the calculation for yearly sampling and analysis costs, over a
Sampling/Analysis Oversight/Reporting Event Cost
Year 0
2020 A
Fall
$17,400
$3,500
$20,900
Year 1
2021
Spring
$12,810
$2,500
$15,310
Fall
$17,400
$3,500
$20,900
Year 2
2022
Spring
$12,810
$2,500
$15,310
Fall
$17,400
$3,500
$20,900
Year 3
2023
Spring
$22,233
$7,500
$29,833
Fall
$22,233
$7,500
$29,833
Year 4
2024
Spring
$12,810
$2,500
$15,310
Fall
$17,400
$3,500
$20,900
Year 5
2025
Spring
$12,810
$2,500
$15,310
Fall
$17,400
$6,000
$23,400
Total Monitoring Costs for 5-Year Period
$227,906
A Included with the 5-year calculation

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 44
Chapter 9 Completion of Groundwater Corrective Action
The SWS considers attaining the goal of compliance with 2L Standards for all COCs, and maintaining that
status for 5 years, as the endpoint of the Corrective Action. A timeframe has not been specified, other
than demonstration of improvement at the end of the initial 5-year monitoring period and, ostensibly, for
each successive 5-year reporting cycle.
After termination of the Corrective Action, which is expected to occur before the end of the post -closure
care period, the Facility would revert to a negotiated sentinel monitoring program with fewer parameters
or an alternate monitoring schedule for the remainder of the minimum 30 years.
Chapter 10 Bibliography
Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground Storage Tank Sites,
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), Directive 9200.4-17P, April 1999.
Pope, D.F., et al, Performance Monitoring of MNA Remedies for VOCs in Ground Water, prepared under contract to
Dynamac Corporation, Contract Numbers 68-C-99-256 and 68-C-02-092, U.S. EPA National Risk Management
Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development, EPA/600/R-04/027, April 2004.
Azad pou r-Keeley, A., et al, Microbial Processes Affecting Monitored Natural Attenuation of Contaminants in the
Subsurface, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA/540/S-99/001, September 1999.
Wiedemeier, T.H., et al, Technical Protocol for Evaluating Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents in Ground Water,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development, IAG #RW57936164,
EPA/600/R-98/128, September 1998.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Waste Management Area and Supplemental
Well Guidance, FINAL, June 1993.
Ford, R.G. (Ed.) et al, Monitored Natural Attenuation of Inorganic Contaminants in Ground Water, Volumes 1 and 2,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research
Laboratory, EPA/600/R-07/139, October 2007.
Borden, R.C., et al, Anaerobic Biodegradation of BTEX in Aquifer Material, Environmental Research Brief, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research
Laboratory, EPA/600/S-97/003, August 1997.
Groundwater Technologies, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Land and Emergency Management
(OLEM), Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI), Last update Sep 2019,
https://www.epa.gov/superfund/groundwater-technologies#main-content.
Guidance for Cleaning Up Groundwater, Soil and Air at Corrective Action Facilities, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM), Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR),
Last update Feb 2020, https://www.epa.gov/hw/guidance-cleaning-groundwater-soil-and-air-corrective-action-
facilities#main-content.
Monitored Natural Attenuation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National
Risk Management Research Laboratory, Ground Water and Ecosystems Restoration, Ground Water and Ecosystems
Restoration Research (Archived), Last Updated Aug 2015, https://archive.epa.gov/ada/web/html/mna.html.
Ground Water Modeling Research, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, September 13, 2016, https://www.ei)a.gov/land-research/ground-
water-modeling-research.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 45
MNA Excerpt from Examples of Approved Groundwater Corrective Measures for Solid Waste Management Facilities,
NCDEQ Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, Rev 6-08.
Solid Waste Section Guidelines for Groundwater, Soil, and Surface Water Sampling, NCDENR Division of Waste
Management, Solid Waste Section, Rev 4-08.
Smith, D.B., et al, 2013, Geochemical and Mineralogical Data for Soils of The Conterminous United States: U.S.
Geological Survey Data Series 801, 19 p., https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/801/.
The Geochemical Atlas of North Carolina, NC Geologic Survey, www.geology. enr.state.nc.us/NUREgeochem
Alison P. Sanders, et al, Arsenic in North Carolina: Public Health Implications, Environ Int. 2012 Jan; 38(1): 10-16.
Published online 2011 Sep 10. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2011.08.005. National Institutes of Health, NIHMSID:
NIHMS320000. PMCID: PMC3539775. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3539775/.
Steffan, R., Biodegradation of 1,4-Dioxane, Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP),
Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), ER-1422, https://www.serdp-estcp.org/.
Hydrogeologic Framework of the North Carolina Coastal Plain Aquifer System, U.S. Geological Survey Open File
Report 87-690, USGS.
North Carolina Geological Map, Scale 1:62,500, NC Geological Survey, 1985.
Corrective Action Plan for Greenway Waste Solutions at North Meck, LLC, prepared by Civil & Environmental
Consultants, Inc., Charlotte, NC, Rev. Oct 2019, Permit 6012-CDLF-1993, FID1358899.
15A NCAC 13B .0547 EXISTING C&DLF UNITS AS OF JANUARY 1. 2007.

_
MW-14D
MW-13x
MW-14S
Phase 2
MW-12S;
•� mw-u
r d'r"
*.,
1
MW-2S - MW-6
-.
Legend SW
®Surface Water Sampling Location
• Shallow Monitoring Well
Deep Monitoring Well y
0 200 400
Approximate Stream Location I Feet
Site Boundary Source. Esri, Digi 'I'�I � oEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus D
AeroGRID, IGN, nd the GISa��ser Community
SITE: Figure
TITLE: FI
C&D Landfill 9
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834 MONITORING WELL AND
SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATION MAP
CLIENT: ^
W
0 do
C&D LANDFILL INC.
SCALE: 1 " = 200 ' DATE: 05/01 /2019 PROJECT: 6480199035
Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc.
4021 Stirrup Creek Drive, Suite 100 DRAWN BY: D. Hriciga CHECKED BY: D. Hriciga
Durham, NC 27703
[phone] LOCATION: 56548 emmerr R\Figures C DENR DSCA\DSCA Projects\DC640004 - CleanCleanDrycleaners\
565480142_PAR\Figures

C&D Landfill
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
CLIENT:
wood* C&D LANDFILL INC.
Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc.
4021 Stirrup Creek Drive, Suite 100
Durham, NC 27703
[phone]
TITLE:
Figure
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MAP
- DECEMBER 2018
3
SCALE: 1 " = 2001 DATE: 04/30/2019 1 PROJECT: 6480199035
DRAWN BY: D. Hriciga I CHECKED BY: D. Hriciga
LOCATION: P:\Government\State\NC\NC DENR DSCA\DSCA Projects\DC640004 - CleanCleanDrycleaners\
565480142PAR\Figures

Notes:
Metals concentrations in excess of standards are not illustrated.
Units are micrograms per liter (mg/L).
BRL = Contaminant concentrations were below reporting limits.
NE = No exceedances of applicable groundwater or surface water standards were reported.. e -
NS = Not Sampled
J = Estimated value below the laboratory reporting limit
IM MW-17 ; r
r.
...... .� � ,�. BRL _ :� ''•� z
YMW-15
BRL
f 5
4'
q MW-14S
BRL
•i -
�.�� + MW-14D
�f BRL
MW-13,'
+NJ / "' BRL
# 4 Phase 2
AN. MW-12S
jr Benzene 1.48
Vinyl Chloride 2.21 MW-11
1,4-Dioxane 8.82 1,4-Dioxane 8.15
.1 -F
.�M
BRL — "
MW-3S
Benzene 1.3 MW-3D
Vinyl Chloride 1.82 -
1,4-Dioxane 184
Dibenzofuran 9.19 J
Beta-BHC 0.04 J
MW-3A
Benzene 1.69
r� Vinyl Chloride 1.09
1,4-Dioxane 87 _
Ort
MW-10
Benzene 1.57
Vinyl Chloride 2.2
1,4-Dioxane 5.4
i
t
W=1 D'VolA' M
MW-1
1,4-DioxanSe 5.33
MW-8
Vinyl Chloride 1.48
1 4-Dioxane 49.3
7-1 - • � ' k F' 4 F i r
rww
Na
k-
Phase 1
MW-4
BRL
MW-5
1,4-Dioxane 16.4
I<
Vinyl Chloride 0.18 J
1,4-Dioxane 13.5
N
MW-7 SW-1
Vinyl Chloride 1.25 NE
1,4-Dioxane 18.2
-r1
2S or
!T• -rt
,k M1 .7 w 1,4-Dioxane 6.2MW-
s
Raw
Legend i4;'j�"► l`NIr. # s�.
® Surface Water Sampling Location 40,' ; ,
• Shallow Monitoring Well 3 IN L y
SW-2
Deep Monitoring Well BRL 0 200 400
- Approximate Stream Location ��t'%._ Feet
Site Boundary"` ,It' �-'r, +►
Source Esri, DI,gi 1111 • L � ,Earth tar Geographic§, CNES/Airbus DS, SDA, G
AeroGRID, IGN, d the G1= r ' mmu it
SITE: Figure
TITLE: FI
C&D Landfill 9
802 RECYCLING LANE GREENVILLE, NC 27834 GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER
STANDARD EXCEEDANCE MAP - DECEMBER 2018
CLIENT: w
wood* C&D LANDFILL INC.
SCALE: 1 " = 200 ' DATE: 04/24/2019 PROJECT: 6480199035
Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc.
4021 Stirrup Creek Drive, Suite 100 DRAWN BY: D. Hriciga CHECKED BY: D. Hriciga
Durham, NC 27703
[phone] LOCATION: 56548 142P t RTig\NC\NC DENR DSCA\DSCA Projects\DC640004 - CleanCleanDrycleaners\
565480142_PAR\Figures

Water Quality Monitoring Report
December 2017 Semiannual Sampling Event
Amec Foster Wheeler Project No. 6468-17-7152
Attachment C
Mann -Kendall Trend Analyses
amec
foster
wheeler

TOOLKIT
Trendfor Constituent Analysis
Evaluation Date: 8-Mar-18
Job ID:
Facility Name: C&D Landfill
Constituerrt: Benzene
Conducted By: DH
Concentration Units: Ng/L
SarroingPoint ID:l
MW-3S
MW-3A MW-8
MW-12S
1
1-Nov-07
1
0.7
2
1-May-08
1.1
0.5
3
1-Nov-08
2.1
0.5
4
1-May-09
1.5
0.3
5
1-Aug-09
1.3
0.07
1.9
0.07
6
1-Jan-10
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
7
1-May-10
3.1
0.24
0.24
0.24
8
1-Nov-10
2.1
0.9
0.24
0.24
9
1-May-11
1
0.24
0.4
0.24
10
1-Nov-11
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.3
11
1-May-12
1
0.6
1.1
1.2
12
1-Nov-12
1.2
0.7
1.6
0.7
13
1-May-13
0.24
0.3
0.24
1.1
14
1-May-14
1.1
0.24
1.9
0.4
15
1-Nov-14
2.1
0.5
0.8
1.1
16
1-May-15
1.5
0.24
0.24
0.5
17
1-Nov-15
1.7
1.7
0.24
0.24
18
1-May-16
1.3
0.24
0.9
1.4
19
1-Nov-16
1.2
0.8
1.5 1
1.9
20
1-May-17
2.8
2
1.2
1.7
21
1-Dec-17
1.7
2.7
0.6
2
22
23
24
25
Coefficient of Variation:
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor.
Concentration Trend:
. --
10
�MW35
� 1
c
O
1�
O
L
0.1
d
c
O
U
0.01
10106 02/08 07/09 11/10 04/12 08/13 12114 05116 09/17 02/19
Sampling Date
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing;
< 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S50, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support
System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
4 MDL value used for ND concentrations.
DISCL4llvER The GSI Nbnn-Kendall Toolldt is available as is" Considerable care has been exerdsed in preparing this software product,- hoKeve; no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or wanantyregarding the accuracy, erectness, or completeness of the infom ation contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any dined, indirect consequential,
incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the infomration contained hereinlnfomBtion in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., d/sdaims any responsibility or obligation to update the infornution c dained herein.
GSI Bmron edallnc., www.gsi-net.con

MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 8-Mar-18 Job ID.
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Vinyl Chloride
Conducted By DH Concentration Units: Ng/L
San-oing Point ID
I MW-10 MW-12S
1
1-Ma -12
0.8
2
1-Nov-12
1.9
3
1-Ma -13
3
4
1-Ma -14
1.1
5
1-Nov-14
3.4
6
1-Ma -15
1.7
7
1-Nov-15
0.63
8
1-Ma -16
1.9
3.7
9
1-Nov-16
1.7
4.3
10
1-Ma -17
1.1
4.3
11
1-Dec-17
0.9
3.7
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Coeffiaent of Variation:
0.34
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor: c
Concentration Trend: Deaxwing Irmwing
10
� M W-12S
J
C
O 1
a=.
R
L
U
r_
O
U
0.1
11/10 04/12 08113 12/14 05r16 0W17 02/19
Sampling Date
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S!50, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
DISCLAI&ER The GSI A&m-Kendall Toolldt is available 3s is" Caisiderable care has been exercised in preparing this soUav product, hovtever, no party, inducing without
limitation GS1 Ermronmental Inc., rrekes any representation or waarrairty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the infanretion ocr#alned irereln, and no such
party shall be liable for any drect, incired, consequential, incidental or other darreges rescdting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Infarretion in
this publication is sLged to dwW witha rt notice. GS/ Eriororurental Inc., dsdaims any responsibility or obligation to update the intbanation contained herein.
GSI EnOrorurental Inc., www.grd-net com

Table 4
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters - December 2017
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
Analyte Group
Parameter
MDL
Compliance Limit
Phase I Monitoring Wells
SWSL
2L
Standard
MW-IS
(Well #1)
MW-2S
(Well #2)
MW-3S
(Well #3)
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-16
MW-11)
MW-2D
MW-31)
Carbon Dioxide
1,000
1,000
NE
68,000
241,000
313,000
363,000
60,000
44,000
326,000
106,000
346,000
255,000
27,000
9,000
71000
Dissolved Gasses
Hydrogen (nM)
0.2
NE
NE
0.0049 J
0.074 J
0.13
0.11
0.22
0.0094 J
0.017
0.011
0.018
1.4
-
1.7
1.5
(µg/L; unless
Methane
0.02
NE
NE
30
1,500
1,600
1,900
160
4.9
860
160
940
380
1,300
64
27
noted)
Ethene
0.007
NE
NE
0.0049 J
0.074 J
0.13
0.11
0.22
0.0094 J
0.017
0.011
0.018
0.0082 J
0.52
0.036
0.0083 J
Ethane
0.005
NE
NE
0.0023 J
0.038 J
0.24
0.17
0.071 J
0.0033 J
0.014
0.0078 J
0.07
0.0045 J
0.33
0.042
0.03
Acetic Acid
100
50
88**
44 J
54 J
310 J
-
99 J
42 J
23 J
20 J
-
28 J
47 J
46 J
48 J
Butyric Acid
14
NE
NE
-
450
-
1,300
-
-
410
17 J
1,400
-
-
-
-
Hexanoic Acid
38
NE
NE
-
41 J
-
93 J
-
-
66 J
73 J
94 J
-
-
-
-
Lactic Acid
41
NE
NE
28 J
-
-
-
-
59 J
-
-
-
-
70 J
95 J
58 J
Fatty Acids
(µ Acids
Pentanoic Acid
5.5
NE
NE
-
15 J
-
67 J
-
-
-
-
35 J
-
-
-
-
Propionic Acid
6.1
NE
NE
6.3 J
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pyruvic Acid
16
NE
NE
-
24 J
-
38 J
-
-
-
-
51 J
-
-
-
-
i-Hexanoic Acid
41
NE
NE
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
i-Pentanoic Acid
5.5
NE
NE
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Chloride
5,000
5,000
250,000
8,000
162,000
242,000
214,000
73,000
66,000
99,000
180,000
202,000
26,000
10,000
13,000
25,000
Sulfate
1,040
250,000
250,000
98,000 J
82,300 J
15,400 J
161,000 J
59,100 J
232,000 J
-
-
342,000
14,800
-
35,400 J
-
Nitrate (as N)
3.0
10,000
10,000
80 J
530 J
1,440 J
260 J
90 J
12,440
820 J
-
530 J
-
-
-
80 J
Iron
13.27
300
300
120 J
14,436
16,923
31,757
2,471
491
15,716
1,371
26,539
18,941
12,620
627
83 J
Manganese
1.28
50
50
6.7 J
660
1,155
1,104
65
38 J
592
85
629
99
605
41 J
8.2 J
Other Natural
Attenuation
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
1,000
NE
NE
152,000
670,000
1,380,000
1,000,000
90,000
388,000
1,100,000
740,000
1,190,000
212,000
NA
168,000
215,000
Parameters
Hardness (mg/L)
252
736
780
744
132
540
704
628
956
112
NA
136
76
(µg/L; unless
noted)
Total Dissolved Residue
(TDR)
1,000
10,000
500,000
322,000
1,200,000
2,090,000
1,010,000
228,000
968,000
1,310,000
1,350,000
1,850,000
473,000
4,610,000
263,000
306,000
Total Organic Carbon
(TOC)
120
NE
NE
7,140
103,000
169,000
104,000
9,840
25,200
94,900
45,500
99,520
49,900
26,800
1,410
3,550
Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD)
2,000
NE
NE
-
52,000
8,700
4,600
3,700
7,500
7,500
12,000
6,000
2,000
NA
-
2,100
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
840
NE
NE
23,000
255,000
425,000
339,000
26,000
63,000
251,000
97,000
370,000
96,000
184,000
,
-
-
pH (S.U.)
NA
NE
6.5 - 8.5
6.1
6.1
6.5
6.6
6.1
7.1
6.6
6.8
6.7
5.8
7.1
7.1
7.1
Conductivity at 25°C (µ6/ci
1.0
NE
NE
481
1,278
3,660
1,931
298
986
1,660
1,546
3,410
407
639
398
453
Field
Dissolved Oxygen (µg/L)
NE
NE
NE
3,660
220
370
400
1,240
3,180
560
460
600
600
3,800
1,030
3,660
Parameters
ORP (mV)
NE
NE
NE
40
-10
-33
-93
41
57
-56
100
-77
37
178
36
70
Temperature (°C)
NE
NE
NE
15
17
20
17
15
15
18
16
18
18
16
17
18
Turbidity NTU
1.0
NE
NE
4.61
80
22
30.8
205
17.2
31.7
18.2
12.8
110
5.01
20
4.52
Page 1 of 3

Table 4
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters - December 2017
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
r
Analyte Group
Parameter
MDL
Compliance Limit
Phase II Monitoring Wells
SWSL
2L
Standard
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MW-14S
MW-15
MW-16
MW-17
MW-14D
Carbon Dioxide
1,000
1,000
NE
61,000
336,000
315,000
442,000
149,000
140,000
193,000
255,000
103,000
14,000
Dissolved Gasses
Hydrogen (nM)
0.2
NE
NE
2.6
1.500
1.6
-
1.7
1.1
1.8
1.4
1.5
4.5
(µg/L; unless
Methane
0.02
NE
NE
37
3,100
120
3,100
140
320
600
380
180
3.6
noted)
Ethene
0.007
NE
NE
0.0064 J
0.054
0.089
0.44
0.0046 J
0.079
0.0069 J
0.0082
0.0048 J
0.016
Ethane
0.005
NE
NE
0.0074 J
0.042
0.014
0.096 J
0.0024 J
0.013
0.021
0.0045
0.026
0.01
Acetic Acid
100
50
88**
23 J
20 J
40 J
-
35 J
57 J
37 J
28 J
24 J
34 J
Butyric Acid
14
NE
NE
-
79 J
42 J
580
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hexanoic Acid
38
NE
NE
-
-
-
66 J
-
-
-
-
-
-
Lactic Acid
41
NE
NE
22 J
-
25 J
-
-
-
78 J
-
22 J
87 J
Fatty Acids
(µg/L)
Pentanoic Acid
5.5
NE
NE
-
-
-
65 J
-
-
-
-
-
-
Propionic Acid
6.1
NE
NE
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pyruvic Acid
16
NE
NE
-
-
-
30 J
-
-
-
-
-
-
i-Hexanoic Acid
41
NE
NE
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
i-Pentanoic Acid
5.5
NE
NE
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Chloride
5,000
5,000
250,000
13,000
97,000
96,000
7,000
58,000
18,000
71000
26,000
14,000
16,000
Sulfate
1,040
250,000
250,000
136,000 J
-
268,000
-
-
15,200 J
6,900 J
14800 J
218,000 J
-
Nitrate (as N)
3.0
10,000
10,000
-
-
-
-
1,430 J
270 J
-
-
-
140 J
Iron
13.27
300
300
7,393
2,122
9,453
4,384
2,640
12,852
12,329
18,941
4,969
139 J
Manganese
1.28
50
50
207
242
388
697
14 J
58
74
99
195
9.4 J
Other Natural
Attenuation
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
1,000
NE
NE
210,000
416,000
552,000
816,000
164,000
240,000
65,000
212,000
40,000
230 000
'
Parameters
Hardness (mg/L)
328
436
728
664
236
172
92
112
308
156
(µg/L; unless
noted)
Total Dissolved Residue
(TDR)
1,000
10,000
500,000
463,000
763,000
980,000
1,520,000
309,000
654,000
201,000
473,000
549,000
312,000
Total Organic Carbon
(TOC)
120
NE
NE
7,720
62,300
37,000
10,620
13,490
119,000
27,000
49,900
23,960
2,380
Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD)
2,000
NE
NE
-
3,500
2,900
28,000
-
15,000
-
-
-
-
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
840
NE
NE
24,000
143,000
109,000
439,000
32,000
299,000
55,000
96,000
50,000
-
pH (S.U.)
NA
NE
6.5 - 8.5
7.2
6.2
6.7
6.8
6.3
6.0
5.5
5.8
5.5
7.1
Conductivity at 25°C (µ&ci
1.0
NE
NE
425
858
962
2,710
449
185
220
407
561
433
Field
Dissolved Oxygen (µg/L)
NE
NE
NE
130
370
330
450
190
620
240
600
260
730
Parameters
ORP (mV)
NE
NE
NE
85
113
60
11
43
111
79
37
64
123
Temperature (°C)
NE
NE
NE
12
13
11
15
17
13
17
18
18
16
L
Turbidity NTU
1.0
NE
NE
60
12
110.00
14.00
20.00
300
70.0
110.0
60
2.3
Page 2 of 3

Water Quality Monitoring Report
December 2018 Semiannual Sampling Event
Wood Project No. 6468-19-9035
Attachment C
Mann -Kendall Trend Analyses
wood.

TOOLKIT
for Constituent• Analysis
Evaluation Date: 26-Apr-19 Job ID: 6480199035
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Benzene
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: N /L
Sampling Point ID:
MW-31S
I MW-3A
I MW-8
I MW-12S
BENZENE
•
•
1
1-Nov-15
1.1
1.1
0.24
0.24
2
1-Ma -16
1.3
0.24
0.9
1.4
3
1-Nov-16
1.2
0.8
1.5
1.9
4
1-May-17
2.8
2
1.2
1.7
5
1-Dec-17
1.7
2.7
0.6
2
6
1-Jun-1 8
1.2
0.5
0.3
1.4
7
1-Dec-19
1.3
1.69
0.48
1.48
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Coefficient of Variation: �fii•
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor:
Concentration Trend:
10
�MW35
�MW3A
0M 1
or
L
d
V
C
O
U
0.1
07115 01116 08116 03117 09117 04118 10118 05119 12119 06120
Sampling Date
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S<_0, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
4 MDL value used for ND concentrations.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann -Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com

TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 26-Apr-19 Job ID: 6480199035
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Vinyl Chloride
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: N IL
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION (N9Coefficient of /
U)
Variation:
Confidence
Concentration
I 0.43
I 61.4%
�end Stable
I
I
I
I

Table 4
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
December 2018
Analyte Group
Parameter
Phase I Monitoring Wells
GWPS
MW-is
(Well #1 )
MW-2S
(Well #2)
MW-3S
(Well #3)
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-16
MW-1D
MW-2D
MW-3D
Carbon Dioxide
NE
72,000
119,000
346,000
214,000
46,000
164,000
278,000
354,000
348,000
346,000
22,000
8,000
6,000
Dissolved
Ethane
NE
0.0039 Jn
0.015 n
0.10 n
0.056 n
0.015 n
0.060 n
0.011 n
0.024 n
0.16 n
0.011 n
1.4 n
0.018 n
0.045 n
Gasses
(pg/L;
Ethene
NE
0.0050 Jn
0.0075 Jn
0.020 n
0.013 n
0.0089 Jn
0.0030 Un
0.019 n
0.017 n
0.0030 Un
0.0074 Jn
0.0030 Un
0.032 n
0.011 n
unless
noted)
Methane
NE
6.5 n
440 n
590 n
440 n
320 n
890 n
620 n
760 n
2,000 n
650 n
5600 n
45 n
54 n
Hydrogen(nM)
NE
2.1n
2.3n
3.3n
3.3n
2.5n
2.4n
2.8n
2.5n
3.0n
3.3n
4.8n
2.8n
2.1n
Acetic Acid
5,000'
110
150
270
200
170
240
230
170
200
44 J
220
130
180
Butyric Acid
NE
14 J
4.7 U
79 J
13 J
20 J
8 J
520
920
24 J
12 J
13 J
13 J
Hexanoic Acid
NE
12 U
17 J
220
160 J
12 U
28 J
100 J
250
180 J
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
i-Hexanoic Acid
NE
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4g1J
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
4.9U
Fatty Acids
(pg/L)
i-Pentanoic Acid
NE
7.5U
7.5U
9.7J
111
7.5U
7.5U
7.5U
7.5U
J
7.5U
7.5U
7.5U
7.5U
Lactic Acid
NE
14 U
14 U
14 U
58 J
14 U
14 U
14 U
14 U
1
27 J
20 J
55 J
27 J
Pentanoic Acid
NE
12 U
12 U
33 J
30 J
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
26 J
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
Propionic Acid
NE
55 J
71 J
110
120
81 J
89 J
93 J
80 J
89 J
4.4 U
60 J
66 J
86 J
Pyruvic Acid
NE
5.1 -
12 J
72 J
57 J
5.7 U
9.11
16 J
36 J
57 J
6.5 J
5.7 U
5.7 U
Chloride
250,000
33,000
54,000
190,000
178,000
5,000
59,000
34,000
88,000
144,000
30,000
13,000
13,000
21,000
Nitrate (as N)
NE
9 U
1,200
9 U
9 U
9 U
290
4,540
480
410
9 U
9 U
9 U
50
Total Dissolved Residue (TDR)
500,000
457,000
732,000
2,300,000
1,520,000
162,000
695,000
1,120,000
1,350,000
1,650,000
440,000
232,000
243,000
312,000
Sulfate
250,000
127,000
214,000
256,000
136,000
5,600
138,000
5,600
5,700
234,000
110,000
5,000 U
17,500
5,700
Other Natural
Attenuation
Biolo
Biological Oxygen Demand
NE
2,000 U
2,000 U
12,000
4,700
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,700
4,600
4,000
2,000 U
6,600
2,000 U
2,000 U
Parameters
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
NE
27,000
69,000
474,000
333,000
34,000
72,000
111,000
124,000
335,000
113,000
33,000
840 U
840 U
(pg/L)
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
NE
154,000
256,000
1,600,000
1,080,000
88,000
336,000
975,000
396,000
1,070,000
164,000
158,000
168,000
208,000
Iron
300
573
3,908
19,510
32,980
1,098
8,810
10,890
40,540
31,400
25,860
5,405
174
152
Manganese
50
12
284
642
954
36
172
436
578
1,093
117
273
30
0.31 U
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
NE
7,710
22,860
164,000
115,000
10,540
22,580
38,480
74,560
90,280
41,000
8,270
1,700
2,350
Ferrous Iron
NE
345
3,510
19,170
30,200
764
3,950
11,080
28,600
30,700
23,000
5,100
50 U
50 U
Total Hardness
NE
339
453
917
620
94
420
938
771
910
180
139
139
126
pH (S.U.)
6.5 - 8.5
6.5
6.6
6.9
6.7
6.9
6.6
6.8
6.7
6.7
6.1
7.0
8.1
8.2
Conductivity at 25°C (pS/cm)
NE
773
688
1,390
1,488
233
773
984
1,964
1,249
370
420
414
511
Field
Temperature (°C)
NE
14
17
19
17
15
14
16
16
16
17
16
17
19
Parameters
Turbidity (NTU)
NE
6.11
7.25
3.31
4.38
25.8
8.12
1.26
6.23
7.42
7.82
7.58
3.50
1 U
ORP (mV)
NE
43
79
-51
-68
44
44
80
70
-25
97
78
22
31
Dissolved Oxygen ( /L)
NE
630
850
950
5,480
330
810
330
180
800
180
1,220
120
360
Page 1 of 3

Table 4
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
December 2018
Analyte Group
Parameter
Phase II Monitoring Wells
GWPS
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MW-14S
MW-15
MW-16
MW-17
MW-14D
Carbon Dioxide
NE
42,000
444,000
180,000
318,000
122,000
30,000
35,000
346,000
110,000
13,000
Dissolved
Ethane
NE
0.012 n
0.060 n
0.012 n
0.026 n
0.0032 Jn
0.0037 Jn
0.014 n
0.011 n
0.013 n
0.015 n
Gasses
(Ng/L; unless
Ethene
NE
0.0038 Jn
0.16 n
0.045 n
0.15 n
0.0068 Jn
0.011 n
0.0047 Jn
0.0074 Jn
0.0038 Jn
0.0085 Jn
noted)
Methane
NE
30 n
6,400 n
140 n
920 n
200 n
170 n
460 n
650 n
120 n
8.8 n
Hydrogen(nM)
NE
2.9n
2.6n
3.2n
3.4n
3.0n
2.9n
3.0n
3.3n
3.1n
3.0n
Acetic Acid
5,000'
45 J
24 U
45 J
130
46 J
52 J
37 J
44 J
32 J
42 J
Butyric Acid
NE
4.7 U
380
4.7 U
660
4.7 U
4.7 U
18 J
24 J
4.7 U
4.7 U
Hexanoic Acid
NE
12 U
250
24 J
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
12 U
i-Hexanoic Acid
NE
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
Fatty Acids
(Ng/L)
i-Pentanoic Acid
NE
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
7.5 U
Lactic Acid
NE
32J
95J
191
991
17J
18J
31J
27J
18J
52J
Pentanoic Acid
NE
12U
12U
12U
60J
12U
12U
12U
12U
12U
12U
Propionic Acid
NE
5.5 J
111
4.4 U
21 J
5.8 J
4.4 U
4.4 U
4.4 U
4.4 U
4.4 U
Pyruvic Acid
NE
5.7 U
130
5.7 U
140
5.7 U
5.7 U
5.7 U
6.5 J
5.7 U
5.7 U
Chloride
250,000
9,000
52,000
14,000
117,000
5,000 U
5,000 U
10,000
30,000
14,000
14,000
Nitrate (as N)
NE
9 U
9 U
9 U
250
50
9 U
9 U
9 U
90
Total Dissolved Residue (TDR)
500,000
373,000
1,670,000
691,000
1,290,000
379,000
196,000
260,000
440,000
654,000
287,000
Sulfate
250,000
63,700
211,000
146,000
6,100
10,100
67,100
103,000
110,000
383,000
6,100
Other Natural
Attenuation
Biolo
Biological Oxygen Demand
NE
2,000 U
6,200
2,000 U
6,600
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,000 U
Parameters
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
NE
840 U
259,000
54,000
317,000
45,000
23,000
36,000
113,000
54,000
840 U
(pg/L)
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
NE
244,000
1,320,000
550,000
630,000
292,000
74,000
63,000
164,000
36,000
258,000
Iron
300
557
363
13,560
2,075
917
2,303
2,645
25,860
1,470
12.08 U
Manganese
50
74
253
284
460
22
237
83
117
170
6.9 J
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
NE
4,700
99,200
20,920
114,000
20,520
8,360
12,800
41,000
21,800
2,310
Ferrous Iron
NE
464
302
13,070
1,951
802
1,198
2,200
23,000
1,382
50 U
Total Hardness
NE
278
1,030
498
451
306
129
153
180
384
149
pH (S.U.)
6.5 - 8.5
6.9
6.5
6.8
6.6
6.0
6.4
6.5
6.1
5.8
7.8
Conductivity at 25°C (pS/cm)
NE
529
1,607
857
941
558
246
401
370
775
522
Field
Temperature (°C)
NE
13
11
11
13
16
13
16
17
17
17
Parameters
Turbidity (NTU)
NE
8.62
2.29
18.6
2.33
1 U
38.8
6.42
7.82
2.76
1 U
ORP (mV)
NE
99
108
64
105
72
99
85
97
71
94
Dissolved Oxygen ( /L)
NE
340
280
210
330
300
100 U
250
180
320
100 U
Page 2 of 3

Water Quality Monitoring Report
June 2018 Semiannual Sampling Event
Wood Project No. 6468-17-7152
Attachment C
Mann -Kendall Trend Analyses
wood.

TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 21-Aug-18
Job ID: 6468177152
Facility Name: C&D Landfill
Constituent: Benzene
Conducted By: DH
Concentration Units: Ng/L
Sampling Point ID:
MW-3S
MW-3A MW-8 MW-12S
1
1-Nov-07
1
0.7
2
1-Ma -08
1.1
0.5
3
1-Nov-08
2.1
0.5
4
1-Ma -09
1.5
0.3
5
1-Au -09
1.3
0.07
1.9
0.07
6
1-Jan-10
0.24
0.24
0.24
0.24
7
1-Ma -10
3.1
0.24
0.24
0.24
8
1-Nov-10
2.1
0.9
0.24
0.24
9
1-May-11
1
0.24
0.4
0.24
10
1-Nov-11
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.3
11
1-Ma -12
1
0.6
1.1
1.2
12
1-Nov-12
1.2
0.7
1.6
0.7
13
1-Ma -13
0.24
0.3
0.24
1.1
14
1-May-14
1.1
0.24
1.9
0.4
15
1-Nov-14
2.1
0.5
0.8
1.1
16
1-Ma -15
1.5
0.24
0.24
0.5
17
1-Nov-15
1.7
1.7
0.24
0.24
18
1-Ma -16
1.3
0.24
0.9
1.4
19
1-Nov-16
1.2
0.8
1.5
1.9
20
1-Ma -17
2.8
2
1.2
1.7
21
1-Dec-17
1.7
2.7
0.6
2
22
1-Jun-18
1.2
0.5
0.3
1.4
23
24
25
Coefficient of Variation:
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor:
Concentration Trend:
� M W-3S
BMW-3A
J
`
-8
4k
12S
O
M
L
41
C
0
U
0.01
10106 02108 07/09
11/10 04112 08113 12114 05116 09/17 02/19
Sampling Date An
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are
required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent
concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing;
< 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S<_0, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
4 MDL value used for ND concentrations.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann -Kendall Toolkit is available
"as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation
or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com

TOOLKIT
for • - Analysis
Evaluation Date: 21-Aug-18 Job ID: 6468177152
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Benzene
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: Ng/L
Sampling Point ID:
MW-3S MW-3A MW-8 MW-12S
1
1-Nov-07
2
1-Ma -08
3
1-Nov-08
4
1-Ma -09
5
1-Au -09
6
1-Jan-10
7
1-Ma -10
8
1-Nov-10
9
1-May-11
10
1-Nov-11
11
1-Ma -12
12
1-Nov-12
13
1-Ma -13
14
1-May-14
15
1-Nov-14
16
1-Ma -15
17
1-Nov-15
1.7
1.7
0.24
0.24
18
1-Ma -16
1.3
0.24
0.9
1.4
19
1-Nov-16
1.2
0.8
1.5
1.9
20
1-Ma -17
2.8
2
1.2
1.7
21
1-Dec-17
1.7
2.7
0.6
2
22
1-Jun-18
1.2
0.5
0.3
1.4
23
24
25
Coefficient of Variation:
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor:
Concentration Trend:
� M W-3S
BMW-M
J
� �MW-8
-MW-12S
1
i
c
d
c
0
O
U
0.1
10106 02108 07109 11/10 04112 08113 12114 05116 09117 02119
Sampling Date A&
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S<_0, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
4 MDL value used for ND concentrations.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann -Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com

TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 8-Mar-18
Job ID: 6468177152
Facility Name: C&D Landfill
Constituent: Vinyl Chloride
Conducted By: DH
Concentration Units: N /LCoefficient
of
VINYL CHLORIDE
CONCENTRATION
(HgIL)

TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 8-Mar-18 Job ID: 6468177152
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Vinyl Chloride
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: N /L
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION (Coefficient of Mann -Kendall Statistic (S): 1
Confidence Factor: 50.0%
p
gIL)
Variation:
Concentration Trend:
0.43

Table 4
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters - July 2018
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
r
Analyte Group
Parameter
Phase I Monitoring Wells
2L
Standard
MW-1S
(Well #1)
MW-2S
(Well #2)
MW-3S
(Well #3)
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-16
MW-1D
MW-2D
MW-3D
Carbon Dioxide
NE
62,000
97,000
310,000
81,000
103,000
79,000
188,000
100,000
146,000
197,000
14,000
7,000
6,000
Dissolved Gasses
Ethane
NE
0.0028 Jn
0.0036 Jn
0.15 n
1 0.028 n
0.014 n
0.0052 Jn
0.0025 Jn
0.0081 Jn
0.045 n
0.0062 Jn
0.24 n
0.0082 Jn
0.0014 Jn
(pg/L; unless
Ethene
NE
0.005 Jn
0.0052 Jn
0.068 Jn
0.0082 Jn
0.002 Un
0.0094 Jn
0.0048 Jn
0.0066 Jn
0.019 n
0.009 Jn
0.025 n
0.0069 Jn
0.0047 Jn
noted)
Hydrogen(nM)
NE
3.7n
4.4n
NA
3.1n
3.4n
2.7n
3.1n
2.4n
9.1n
3.4n
4.4n
1.9n
3.4n
Methane
NE
5.3 n
65 n
1,900 n
420 n
480 n
63 n
140 n
290 n
660 n
480 n
700 n
22 n
0.4 n
Acetic Acid
5,000"
57 J
40 J
92 J
160
911
79 J
26 J
240
84 J
52 J
120
44 J
59 J
Butyric Acid
NE
5.5 U
36 J
5.5 U
190
46 J
47 J
74 J
100
29 J
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
Hexanoic Acid
NE
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.8J
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
i-Hexanoic Acid
NE
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
Fatty Acids
(pg/L)
i-Pentanoic Acid
NE
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
111
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
Lactic Acid
NE
18 J
16 J
11 U
21 J
3,300
20 J
28 J
27 J
30 J
27 J
120 J
55 J
77 J
Pentanoic Acid
NE
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
Propionic Acid
NE
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
8.3 J
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
12 J
6.7 J
5.5 U
14 J
6.4 J
5.5 U
Pyruvic Acid
NE
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
12J
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
8.9U
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
NE
185,000
196,000
1,800,000
332,000
123,000
350,000
690,000
404,000
470,000
168,000
173,000
216,000
230,000
Biological Oxygen Demand
(BOD)
NE
2000 U
3,400
9,700
2000 U
2000 U
3600
5800
3400
3,500
14,000
2,000 U
2,000 U
Chloride
250,000
5,000 U
51,000
216,000
46000
9000
33,000
27000
24000
62000
18000
12,000
13,000
21,000
Other Natural
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
NE
24,000
39,000
496,000
94000
36,000
56000
71,000
59,000
121,000
87,000
29,000
840 U
840 U
Attenuation
Iron
300
1,257
3,727
16,526
12,617
3,613
3,603
765
5,969
16,301
11,080
4,887
2,513
2,035
Parameters
Manganese
50
0.31 U
105
938
179
71
81
265
141
815
85
410
41 J
16 J
(pg/L; unless
noted)
Nitrate (as N)
10,000
9 U
370 J
9 U
9 U
170 J
9 U
2,270 J
9 U
140 J
60 J
370 J
Sulfate
250,000
27,100
190,000
66,000
23,300
19,000
93,900
25,200
30,700
108,000
11,300
5,000 U
30,700
18,500
Total Dissolved Residue
(TDR)
500,000
283,000
623,000
2,250,000
439,000
234,000
592,000
707,000
472,000
745,000
359,000
253,000
326,000
346,000
Total Hardness (mg/L)
NE
220
320
840
190
132
370
450
300
370
136
100
176
92
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
NE
8,320
13,240
172,000
26,670
11,950
14,020
22,750
19,380
29,850
39,500
7,970
2,410
3,790
pH (S.U.)
6.5 - 8.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.5
7.0
6.6
6.6
6.6
5.9
7.3
7.8
8.0
Conductivity at 25°C (pS/cm
NE
484
847
3,570
398
402
562
1,109
778
710
394
400
447
524
Field
Dissolved Oxygen (pg/L)
NE
420
180
680
540
530
510
710
730
420
590
580
1,190
350
Parameters
ORP (mV)
NE
1 31
1 -31
1 -92
1 -38
1 18
42
1 102
1 -18
1 -14
1 96
1 97
1 17
1 87
Temperature (°C)
NE
23
22
23
18
22
21
19
20
20
25
20
22
22
Turbidity (NTU)
NE
10
13.8
6.8
47.4
72.0
71.5
5.4
12.1
15.5
35.9
9.55
45.5
32.4
Page 1 of 3

Table 4
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters - July 2018
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
r.
Analyte Group
Parameter
Phase II Monitoring Wells
2L
Standard
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MW-14S
MW-15
MW-16
MW-17
MW-14D
Dissolved Gasses
(Ng/L; unless
noted)
Carbon Dioxide
NE
60,000
380,000
168,000
250,000
99,000
67,000
16,000
197,000
95,000
11,000
Ethane
NE
0.015 n
0.046 n
0.013 n
0.048 Jn
0.0033 Jn
0.02 n
0.02 n
0.0062 Jn
0.026 n
0.0062 Jn
Ethene
NE
0.0045 Jn
0.064 n
0.081 n
0.33 n
0.016 n
0.0074 Jn
0.0061 Jn
0.009 Jn
0.014 Jn
0.011 n
Hydrogen (nM)
NE
3.3 n
3.8 n
3.6 n
NS
2.8 n
3.7 n
3.6 n
3.4 n
3.7 n
3.4 n
Methane
NE
98 n
3400 n
110 n
2300 n
83 n
210 n
430 n
480 n
160 n
6.3 n
Fatty Acids
(Ng/L)
Acetic Acid
5,000*
46 J
47 J
47 J
12 U
53 J
60 J
51 J
52 J
39 J
60 J
Butyric Acid
NE
5.5 U
180
25 J
470
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
Hexanoic Acid
NE
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
76J
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
9.5U
i-Hexanoic Acid
NE
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
11U
i-Pentanoic Acid
NE
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
9.8 U
Lactic Acid
NE
40 J
25 J
24 J
190 J
61 J
100 J
14 J
27 J
33 J
100 J
Pentanoic Acid
NE
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
58J
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
8.2U
Propionic Acid
NE
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
6.9 J
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
5.5 U
Pyruvic Acid
NE
8.9 U
8.9 U
8.9 U
86 J
8.9 U
8.9 U
8.9 U
8.9 U
8.9 U
8.9 U
Other Natural
Attenuation
Parameters
(Ng/L; unless
noted)
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
NE
170,000
492,000
480,000
980,000
163,000
114,000
58,000
168,000
39,000
261,000
Biological Oxygen Demand
(BOD)
NE
2,000 U
4,100
6,700
6,300
2,000 U
2,000 L
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,000 U
2,000 U
Chloride
250,000
8,000
92,000
17,000
98,000
5,000 U
5,000 U
5,000 U
18,000
17,000
14,000
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
NE
25,000
134,000
82,000
302,000
42,000
80,000
47,000
87,000
72,000
840 U
Iron
300
5,463
1,568
17,196
6,240
9,822
1,736
6,510
11,080
3,081
176 J
Manganese
50
166
291
325
570
53
353
75
85
191
21 J
Nitrate (as N)
10,000
9 U
9 U
180 J
9 U
980 J
9 U
40 J
9 U
C J
210 J
Sulfate
250,000
94,200
58,200
271,000
5,000 U
5,000 U
5,000 U
45,400
11,300
144,000
5,000 U
Total Dissolved Residue
(TD R)
500,000
348,000
822,000
907,000
1,200,000
271,000
185,000
164,000
359,000
677,000
324,000
Total Hardness (mg/L)
NE
240
424
640
580
200
100
76
136
368
156
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
NE
5,860
89,680
28,840
90,760
18,100
14,600
16,800
39,500
29,800
2,710
Field
Parameters
L
pH (S.U.)
6.5 - 8.5
7.6
6.4
6.9
6.8
6.5
6.4
7.6
5.9
5.4
6.0
Conductivity at 25°C (pS/cm
NE
375
717
866
1,502
322
194
491
394
628
197
Dissolved Oxygen (pg/L)
NE
390
570
640
540
530
270
670
590
490
1,630
ORP (mV)
NE
14
106
-48
-23
-7
93
80
96
91
79
Temperature (°C)
NE
I
25
21
24
1 23
1 24
24
25
25
23
24
Turbidity (NTU)
NE
38.2
7.6L__L
56.1
1 5.93
1 26.1
17.6
63.0
35.9
41.3
3.5
Page 2 of 3

Water Quality Monitoring Report
December 2019 Semiannual Sampling Event
Wood Project No. 6468-19-9035
Attachment C
Mann -Kendall Trend Analyses
wood.

TOOLKIT
for • - Analysis
Evaluation Date: 22-Mar-20 Job ID: 6480199035
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Benzene
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: N /L
Sampling Point ID:
MW-31S
I MW-3A I MW-8
I MW-10 I MW-11 MW-12S
1
1-Nov-15
1.7
1.7
0.24
0.24
2
1-Ma -16
1.3
0.24
0.9
0.5
1.4
3
1-Nov-16
1.2
0.8
1.5
0.6
1.9
4
1-May-17
2.8
2
1.2
0.4
1.7
5
1-Dec-17
1.7
2.7
0.6
0.24
1
2
6
1-Jun-18
1.2
0.5
0.3
0.24
0.9
1.4
7
1-Dec-18
1.3
1.69
0.48
1.57
0.48
1.48
8
1-Jun-19
0.89
1
1.17
2.26
1.89
2.52
9
1-Dec-19
1.81
1.49
1.13
1.28
2.56
2.12
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Coefficient of Variation:
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor: '
Concentration Trend: Stable No Trend No Trend No Trend No Trend Increasing
10
--4- M W-3S
^` --41-- M W-3A
J
\ MW-8
_ M W-10
v
_ MW-11
O1 MW-12S
L
d
V
_
O
U
0.1
07115 01116 08116 03117 09117 04118 10118 05119 12119 06120
Sampling Date
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S<_0, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
4 MDL value used for ND concentrations.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann -Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com

TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 22-Mar-20 Job ID: 6480199035
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Vinyl Chloride
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: N IL
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION (N9Coefficient of Variation:
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor:
Concentration Trend: l�end
/
U)

Water Quality Monitoring Report
June 2019 Semiannual Sampling Event
Wood Project No. 6468-19-9035
Attachment C
Mann -Kendall Trend Analyses
wood.

TOOLKIT
for • - Analysis
Evaluation Date: 29-Aug-19 Job ID: 6480199035
Facility Name: C&D Landfill Constituent: Benzene
Conducted By: DH Concentration Units: N /L
Sampling Point ID:
MW-31S
I MW-3A I MW-8
I MW-10 I MW-11 MW-12S
1
1-Nov-15
1.7
1.7
0.24
0.24
2
1-Ma -16
1.3
0.24
0.9
0.5
1.4
3
1-Nov-16
1.2
0.8
1.5
0.6
1.9
4
1-May-17
2.8
2
1.2
0.4
1.7
5
1-Dec-17
1.7
2.7
0.6
0.24
1
2
6
1-Jun-18
1.2
0.5
0.3
0.24
0.9
1.4
7
1-Dec-18
1.3
1.69
0.48
1.57
0.48
1.48
8
1-Jun-19
0.89
1
1.17
2.26
1.89
2.52
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Coefficient of Variation:
Mann -Kendall Statistic (S):
Confidence Factor:
Concentration Trend: Stable No Trend Stable No Trend Stable Prob. Increasing
10
M W-3S
t M W-3A
J M W-8
ai - MW-io
v -ix- M W-11
O1 MW-12S
i+
d
V
_
O
U
0.1
07115 011161F 08116 03117 09117 04118 10118 05119 12119
Sampling Date
Notes:
1. At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples.
2. Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing;
>_ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S<_0, and COV >_ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable.
3. Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales,
Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003.
4 MDL value used for ND concentrations.
DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann -Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without
limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such
party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in
this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein.
GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com

TOOLKIT
for • • Analysis
Evaluation Date: 29-Aug-19
Job ID: 6480199035
Facility Name: C&D Landfill
Constituent: Vinyl Chloride
Conducted By: DH
Concentration Units: N IL
VINYL CHLORIDE
CONCENTRATION
(N9/
U)
Concentration Trend:
Wo Trend Stable

Table 6
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters - June 2019
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
Analyte Group
Parameter
Carbon Dioxide
GWPS
NE
(Well #1)
68,000
(Well #2)
121,000
(Well #3)
3,000,000
240,000
Phase I Monitoring Wells
130,000 299,000 304,000 342,000
389,000
13,000
6,000
6,000
Dissolved
Ethane
NE
0.006 Udn
0.018 n
0.069 n
0.24 n
0.038 n
0.15 n
0.039 Jn
0.043 Jn
0.23 n
0.53 n
0.0046 Jn
0.0061 Jn
Gasses
(Ng/L;
Ethene
NE
0.010 Udn
0.005 Un
0.005 Un
0.012 n
0.0097 Jn
0.005 Un
0.065 Jn
0.049 Jn
0.068 Jn
0.005 Un
0.005 Un
0.005 Un
unless
noted)
Methane
NE
27 do
430 n
440 n
1,100 n
1,900 n
960 n
2,400 n
1,800 n
3,000 n
4,300 n
12 n
9.7 n
Hydrogen (nM)
NE
1.5 Udn
1.1 n
1.2 n
1 n
0.86 Jn
0.98 Jn
NS
NS
5.5 n
1 n
0.91 Jn
Acetic Acid
5,000*
33 J
55 J
28 U
280 U
58 J
280 U
280 U
290 J
280 U
230
42 J
47 J
Butyric Acid
NE
11 U
98 J
11 U
370 J
24 J
230 J
380 J
330 J
980 J
11 U
11 U
11 U
Hexanoic Acid
NE
10 U
10 U
1101
160 J
10 U
160 J
210 J
100 U
1101
10 U
10 U
10 U
i-Hexanoic Acid
NE
29 U
29 U
29 U
290 U
29 U
290 U
290 U
290 U
290 U
29 U
29 U
29 U
Fatty Acids
iNgAc
i-Pentanoic Acid
NE
6 U
6 U
6 U
60 U
6 U
60 U
60 U
60 U
60 U
6 U
6 U
6 U
Lactic Acid
NE
43 U
43 U
43 U
430 U
43 U
430 U
430 U
430 U
430 U
43 U
43 U
43 U
Pentanoic Acid
NE
7 U
7 U
36 J
70 U
7 U
70 U
70 U
70 U
79 J
7 U
7 U
7 U
Propionic Acid
NE
4U
4U
4U
40U
4U
40U
40U
40U
40U
25J
4U
4U
Pyruvic Acid
NE
5 U
5 U
48 J
50 U
5 U
50 U
50 U
50 U
64 J
5 U
5 U
5 U
Nitrate (as N)
10,000
170
100
9 U
9 U
D U
9 U
190
2,710
170
9 U
110
350
Biological Oxygen Demand
(BOD)
NE
2000 U
2000 U
7,500
2000 U
2000 U
3,100
4,100
7,600
13,000
2,000
2000 U
2000 U
Other Natural
Attenuation
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
NE
36,000
67,000
423,000
198,000
67,000
148,000
294,000
291,000
432,000
28,000
840 U
840 U
Parameters
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
NE
165,000
280,000
1,610,000
810,000
342,000
912,000
1,500,000
1,360,000
1,620,000
171,000
182,000
236,000
Iron (Ferrous)
NE
371
8,136
24,655
27,430
3,957
7,394
20,872
27,011
39,673
2,258
50 U
50 U
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
NE
13,000
26,080
164,600
75,200
27,480
50,360
108,500
104,800
275,800
7,140
2,240
2,420
Total Hardness
NE
1 316
548
1 856
596
268
896
1,020
720
1 1,032
140
164
92
Page 1 of 3

Table 6
Summary of Natural Attenuation Parameters - June 2019
Construction and Demolition Debris (C&D) Landfill (Permit #74-07), Pitt County, North Carolina
re Group
Parameter
Carbon Dioxide
GWPS
NE
•A
48,000
408,000
246,000
Phase 11 Monitoring Wells
151,000 462,000 306,000
66,000
332,000
80,000
14,000
Dissolved
Ethane
NE
0.076 n
0.04 n
0.0078 Jn
0.17 n
0.0066 Jn
0.039 n
0.0079 Jn
0.01 n
0.022 n
0.009 Jn
Gasses
(Ng/L;
Ethene
NE
0.005 Un
0.19 n
0.058 n
0.5 n
0.027 n
0.1 n
0.005 Un
0.022 n
0.005 Un
0.0064 Jn
unless
noted)
Methane
NE
92 n
3,900 n
130 n
4,600 n
190 n
3,000 n
200 n
660 n
160 n
12 n
Hydrogen (nM)
NE
0.82 Jn
1.1 n
1.2 n
NS
1.5 n
0.84 Jn
0.98 Jn
1.2 n
1.1 n
0.9 Jn
Acetic Acid
5,000'
31 J
28 U
63 J
730 J
52 J
44 J
40 J
74 J
46 J
45 J
Butyric Acid
NE
11 U
240
55 J
1,100
11 U
11 U
11 U
70 J
11 U
11 U
Hexanoic Acid
NE
10 U
10 U
76 J
100 U
14 J
10 U
10 U
10 U
10 U
10 U
i-Hexanoic Acid
NE
29 U
29 U
29 U
290 U
29 U
29 U
29 U
29 U
29 U
29 U
Fatty Acids
(NgAc)
i-Pentanoic Acid
NE
6 U
6 U
6 U
60 U
6 U
6 U
6 U
6 U
6 U
6 U
Lactic Acid
NE
43 U
43 U
43 L
430 U
70 J
43 U
43 U
43 U
43 U
43 U
Pentanoic Acid
NE
7 U
7 U
9.9 J
180 J
7 U
7 U
7 U
7 U
7 U
7 U
Propionic Acid
NE
4 U
4 U
40 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4.2 J
4 U
4 U
Pyruvic Acid
NE
5 U
5 U
17 J
50 U
14 J
15 J
5 U
5.8 J
5 U
5 U
Nitrate (as N)
10,000
9 U
9 U
9 U
U
460
9 U
9 U
9 U
9 U
240
Biological Oxygen Demand
(BOD)
NE
2000 U
11,000
2000 U
8,500
2000 U
3,100
2000 U
4,000
2000 U
2000 U
Other Natural
Attenuation
Chemical Oxygen Demand
(COD)
NE
22,000
276,000
67,000
620,000
55,000
96,000
39,000
141,000
43,000
840 U
Parameters
Alkalinity (CaCO3)
NE
196,000
1,340,000
528,000
1,730,000
232,000
520,000
49,000
240,000
71,000
248,000
Iron (Ferrous)
NE
2,394
50 U
19,045
1,887
5,026
5,629
5,962
25,400
2,511
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
NE
4,960
106,300
26,760
220,000
22,320
29,760
15,260
76,400
18,320
2,680
Total Hardness
NE
267
1,120
659
749
263
353
114
713
302
161
Page 2 of 3

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Antimony CAS No. 7440-36-0
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Met. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
IMAC
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-iS
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MIN-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
NO
NO
NO
0.05 U 0.1 J
0.1 J 0.44 U
0.05 U 0.11
0.06 J 0.06 J
NO
NO
NO
2.95 U 2.95 U 2.95 U 2.95 U 2.95 U 2.95 U 2.95 U
0.4 J 0.06 J 0.06 J 0.06 J 0.06 J 0.1 J 0.2 J 0.3 J 0.06 J
0.22 U 0.22 U 0.7 J 0.22 U 0.22 U 0.22 U
0.22 U 0.22 U 0.22 U 0.8 J 0.22 U 0.22 U
0.14U 0.14U 0.14U 0.47J 0.14U 0.14U
0.14U 0.14U 0.14U 0.511 0.14U 0.14U 0.14U
0.03 J 0.04 J 0.061 0.24 J 0.101 0.34 J
0.06 J 0.09 J 0.08 J 0.3 J 0.10 J 0.9 1 0.14 J
0.04 J 0.04 J 0.05 J 0.18 J 0.03 J 0.4 J 0.15 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.05
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
Nov-2007
0.05 E
0.05 U
0.4 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.2 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
Dry
0.05 U
0.05 U
May-2008
0.08
0.2 J
0.44 U
0.44 U
0.44 U
0.11
0.5 J
0.2 J
0.2 J
0.1 J
0.2 J
0.44 U
0.44 U
Nov-2008
0.05E
0.1 J
0.11
0.1 J
0.1 J
0.2 J
0.11
0.05 U
Dry
0.6 J
0.11
May-2009
0.06
0.1 J
0.06 J
0.1 J
0.7 J
0.2 J
0.11
0.06 J
0.06 J
0.11
0.06 J
0.06 J
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+ Phase 2
2.95
2.95 U
2.95 U
2.95 U
Jan-2010
6
1
0.06
0.06 J
0.11
0.06 J
0.06 J
0.06 J
0.50
0.06 J
0.06 J
0.06 J
0.1 J
0.11
0.6 J
0.2 J
May-2010
0.22
0.22 U
0.7 J
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
Nov-2010
0.22
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.6 J
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
0.22 U
May-2011
0.14
0.19J
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.4J
0.
00.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.2J
0.14U
0.29J
Nov-2011
0.14
Damaged
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.551
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
0.14U
May-2012
0.02
0.121
0.12 J
0.27 J
0.101
0.151
0.36 J
0.17J
0.16 J
0.13 J
0.13 J
0.091
0.051
0.04 J
Nov-2012
0.02
Damaged
0.14 J
0.1 J
0.28 J
0.17 J
0.16 J
0.50 J
0.14 J
0.5 1
0.07 J
0.151
0.16 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
May-2013
0.02
Damaged
0.07 J
0.04 J
0.09 J
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.34 J
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.14 J
0.14 J
0.04 J
0.03 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
2B values verified as of 9/22/2017
in -stream target values except
bold values are hardness related
0.12
0.19 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.34 J
0.02 U
0.12 J
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.10 J
0.02 U
0.17 J
0.101 0.06U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.02
16.00
0.16 J
0.14 J
0.12 U
0.78 J
Damaged
0.18 J
0.22 J
0.20 J
0.12 U
0.24 J
0.24 J
0.34 J
0.12 U
0.21 J
0.12 U
0.12 U
0.46 J
Dry
May-2015
0.02
0.57 J
0.26 J
0.21 J
0.03 J
0.05 J
0.06 J
0.02 U
0.23 J
0.52 J
0.08 J
0.22 J
0.111
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.70 J
0.02 U
0.06 J
0.18 J
0.65 J
0.18 J
0.06 J
0.04 J
Nov-2015
0.05
0.951
0.151
0.161
0.24 J
0.191
1.4 J
0.24 J
0.27 J
0.32 J
0.20 J
0.17 J
0.12 J
0.14 J
0.161
0.12 J
0.101
0.091
0.061
0.86 J
May-2016
0.05
0.56 J
0.05 U
0.10 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
DRY
0.12 J
0.13 J
0.12 J
0.05 U
0.27 J
0.05 U
0.26 J
0.12 J
0.12 J
0.05 U
0.09 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
Nov-2016
0.05
0.45 J
0.07 J
0.19 J
0.111
0.05 U
DRY
0.08 J
0.12 J
0.24 J
0.05 U
0.21 J
0.05 U
0.28 J
0.111
0.08 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.06 J
Dry
May-2017
0.06
0.3J
0.66 J
0.081
0.08 J
O.06U
0.15 J
0.19 J
O.06U
0.44 J
0.061.1
0.08 J
0.19 J
O.06U
0.31 J
0.07 J
0.29 J
0.16 J
0.091
0.14 J
O.06U
O.06U
O.06U
O.06U
Dec-2017
chronic value at Hardness =25 mgll
0.06
0.26 J
0.37 J
0.06 U
0.17 J
0.06 U
0.19 J
0.2 J
0.06 J
0.69 J
0.111
0.12 J
0.26 J
0.11
0.15 J
0.07 J
0.25 J
0.13 J
0.08 J
0.111
0.08 J
0.14 J
0.09 J
Dry
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.07 J
Jun-2018
5300
0.03
0.08
J
0.41
J
0.04
J
0.07
J
0.07
J
0.21
J
0.06
J
0.07
J
0.18
J
0.06
J
0.09
J
0.04
J
0.12
J
0.10
J
0.18
J
0.13
J
--
U
--
U
0.04
J
0.04
J
0.04
J
Dry
0.07
J
0.05
J
Dry
Dec-2018
0.03
0.11
J
0.52
J
--
U
0.16
J
0.04
J
0.12
J
0.20
J
0.18
J
0.17
J0.22
J
0.10J--U006
J
0.17
J
0.13
J
0.04
J
0.06
J
0.05
J
0.05
J
0.04
J
0.17J040.05J
0.04
J
Jun-2019
0.03
9.00
0.67
J
0.03
J
0.09
J
0.04
J
0.17
J
0.14
J
0.26
rulioo
J
0.10
J0.24
J
--
U
0.21
J
0.03
J
2.90
0.10
J
0.04
J
0.06
J
0.04
J
0.46
J
--
U
0.05
J
0.05
J
0.07
J
006
JDeo-2019
0.03
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
0.18
J
0.36
J
0.31
J
0.11
J
0.22
J
0.18
J
0.06
J
0.18
J
0.06
J
0.41
0.05
J
0.09
J
0.04
J
0.04 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.36 0.00 2.90 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.06 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. INS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)' in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 1 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Arsenic CAS No. 7440-38-2
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MW-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
50
--
NO
NO
NO
0.6 J 6.7 J
7.3J 0.4J
0.2 J 8.4 J
0.51 7.0J
NO
NO
NO
4.9 U 4.9 U 4.9 U 4.9 U 4.9 U 4.9 U 4.9 U
1.3J 0.51 0.17U 0.17U 2.4J 0.2J 1.3J 3.6J 0.5J
0.3J 0.51 0.04U 0.4J 1.4J 0.04U
0.61 1.11 0.61 5.3J 1.81 1.61
0.601 0.52J 0.10U 5.91 0.29J 1.51
0.501 2.5 J 0.23 J 11.00 0.52 J 0.32 J 1.7 J
0.501 1.11 0.41J 24.00 0.62J 4.0J
0.17 J 1.S J 0.82 J 15.00 0.76 J 0.24 J 3.7 J
0.151 0.74 J 0.581 19.00 0.34 J 0.081 5.O J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
13.00
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
6.41
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
14.00
3.60
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
22.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
5.30
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
5 J
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
10
Nov-2007
0.47 E
0.47 U
4.2 J
1.3 J
5.3 J
16.00
6.4 J
0.47 U
Dry
2.0 J
0.5 J
May-2008
0.47
0.3J
0.51
0.4J
1.3J
1.01
5.0J
5.3J
3.61
4.5J
11.00
1.11
0.11
Nov-2008
0.47 E
1.1 1
5.61
0.3 J
2.1 J
11.00
3.3 J
2.7 J
Dry
5.3 J
0.91
May-2009
0.47
1.81
1.2J
2.2J
2.8J
1.3J
2.9J
1.01
1.61
6.3J
1.4J
0.81
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
4.91
6.4 J
4.9 U
4.9 U
Jan-2010
10
0.17
2.1J
0.81
6.8J
2.6J
2.8J
5.81
6.4J
0.51
4.0J
3.9J
0.3J
0.17U
0.2J
May-2010
0.04
0.7J
1.7J
9.2J
1.01
2.6J
3.9J
6.11
4.5J
7.5J
0.91
1.3J
0.4J
0.61
Nov-2010
0.04
1.91
5.61
0.04U
5.4J
2.3J
0.04U
4.8J
0.91
4.0J
2J
1.11
0.61
0.51
May-2011
0.10
0.36J
3.1J
3.8J
0.93J
1.61
6.4J
2.2J
1.51
3.2J
3.1J
0.82J
1.11
1.3J
Nov-2011
0.10
Damaged
1.11
0.48 J
0.91
0.36 J
4.9 J
2.2 J
1.91
3.3 J
2.4 J
0.811
2.7 J
2.O J
2.5 J
0.991
0.511
May-2012
0.13
0.881
6.11
4.2J
2.8J
2.9J
6.81
2.2J
2.3J
5.8J
4.7J
2.0J
1.01
0.92J
Nov-2012
0.13
Damaged
0.74 J
0.35 J
9 J
0.33 J
5.7 J
5.51
0.91
1.9 J
2.4 J
0.72 J
8.O 1
0.93 J
0.681
0.501
0.82 J
May-2013
0.05
Damaged
0.02 J
0.86 J
5.3 J
0.51 J
3.7 J
2.4 J
0.831
2.4 J
2.4 J
5.0 J
6.2 J
1.2 J
0.81 J
0.35 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
0.05
0.05 U
0.12 J
3.8 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.28 J
0.05 U
2.1 J
5.8 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
11.00
0.05 U
0.30 J
6.4J 0.41J
0.67 Jfi0147
J
0.26 J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.14
0.86 J
7 J
9 J
4.5 J
0.66 J
Damaged
3.4 J
4.1 J
10.00
0.14 U
0.84 J
0.17 J
36.00
0.37 J
6.9 J
0.78 JJ
0.33 J
Dry
May-2015
0.14
0.49J
2.2J
0.391
0.15J
0.26J
6.1J
0.14U
1.7J
11.00
1.3J
SJ
4.3J
0.14U
0.73J
0.46J
15.00
0.41J
0.23J
1.2J
0.82JJ
0.71J
0.80J
Nov-2015
0.14
1.01
1.2J
11.00
81
3.6J
3.5J
3.6J
2.9J
2.1J
0.14U
1.2J
0.24J
2.8J
0.26J
2.4J
0.71J1
0.52J
0.39J
May-2016
0.66
2.7 J
0.66 U
10.00
1.5 J
2.1 J
DRY
5.2 J
5.6 J
11.00
0.66 U
10.00
0.66 U
38.00
0.66 U
0.84 J
0.92 JJ
0.88 J
0.66 U
Nov-2016
0.66
1.9 J
1.2 J
7.00
6.8 J
0.91J
DRY
13.00
5.1J
21.00
0.66 U
7 J
1.3 J
42.00
0.85 J
2.1 J
1.2 JJ
0.72 J
Dry
May-2017
0.07
0.07U
0.31J
0.07U
1.2 J
0.401
11.00
11.00
0.75 J
5.1J
6.4 J
4.0 J
16.00
0.21 J
8 J
0.44 J
52.00
1.3 J
0.07U
0.90 J
1.8 JJ1.1J
1.2 J
Deo-2017
0.07
4.9 J
0.42 J
0.79 J
8.0 J
0.41 J
14.00
13.00
0.74 J
2.1 J
10.00
0.47 U
15.00
0.36 J
2.6 J
2.2 J
41.00
1.5 J
0.58 J
2.6 J
2.8 J
3.2 J
2.4 J
Dry
J
0.49 J
0.14J
Jun-2018
0.03
2.60
J
1.50
J
1.30
J
2.00
J
0.68
J
25.00
4.40
J
1.10
J
5.00
J
1.20
J
1.90
J
5.50
J
0.64
J
2.20
J
3.60
J
37.00
J
5.00J
--
U
2.40
J
3
J
2.4
J
0.54
J
Dry
J
1.70
J
Dry
Deo-2018
2.50
J
0.96
J
0.91
J
4.10
J
0.12
J
27.00
21.00
0.48
J
4.10
5.70
15.00
15.00
0.03
J
9.00
3.20
J
22.00
1.10
J
--
U
0.59J1.40
J
3.2
J
--
U
1.60
J
0.44
J
0.16
J
Jun-20191.50
J
0.68
J
0.06
J
5.30
0.27
J
20.00
11.00
1.50
J
7.00
11.00
9.00
19.00U
9.00
55002.30
J
0.18
J
2.20
J
1.60
J
5
0.03
J
1.50
J
1.90
J
1.10
J
Deo-2019
Effective
11/1/2019
150
0.08
--
U--
U
--
U
16.00
--
U
22.00
2000
--
U
3.20
J
10.00
2.80
J
28.00
--
U
5.50
4.61
J
29.00
--
U
--
U
0.58
J
0.10
J
39J--
U
30.00U
2.30
J
--
U
1.30 0.00 16.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 27.00 0.00 21.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 11.00 0.00 22.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 28.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 10.00 0.00 55.00 0.00 54.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 2.40 0.00 3.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 1.30 0.00 2.30 0.00 1.10 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 2 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Barium CAS No. 7440-393
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MW-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
NO
NO
NO
4.6 J 357.00
394.00 4 J
5 J 447.00
5.3 J 460.00
NO
NO
NO
112 B 76.1 B 39.8 B 56.6 B 41 1 JB 13.9 JBME
55.4 J 113.00 23.4 J 98.5 J 82.8 J 13.1 J 51.5 J 54.8 J
29.4 J 129.00 14.2 J 39.2 J 86.7 J
32.9 J 63.2 J 31.4 J 177.00 106.00
50.7 J 89.2 J 19.2 J 346.00 92.3 J
43.6 J 43.6 J 17.3 J 467.00 67.8 J 9.9 J
48.9 J 87.5 J 23.9 J 291.00 74.2 J
36.5 J 132.00 19.31 504.00 76.6 J 11.2 J
39.5 J 169.00 19.8 J 342.00 69.7 J 10.2 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.04
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
100.00
0.04 U
112.00
144.00
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
Nov-2007
0.11 E
62.4 J
96.9 J
207.00
115.00
233.00
136.00
214.00
Dry
126.00
571.00
May-2008
0.11
111
27.5 J
16 J
51.8 J
203.00
101.00
65 J
311
127.00
174.00
71.2 J
63 J
Nov-2008
0.11 E
62.5 J
165.00
196.00
48.3 J
161.00
103.00
121.00
Dry
268.00
75.1 J
May-2009
0.04
26 J
1.8 J
6.9 J
266.00
117.00
56.10
31 J
113.00
181.00
61.6 J
78.7 J
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
2.06
701 B
125 B
127 B
Jan-2010
2000
700
0.04
77.4 J
15.4 J
492.00
84.2 J
165.00
83.8 J
137.00
29.1 J
169.00
89.2 J
71.3 J
76.1 J
70.9 J
May-2010
0.03
23.5 J
47.5 J
527.00
42.7 J
202.00
92.1 J
215.00
266.00
140.00
33.3 J
79.4 J
69.2 J
82.1 J
Nov-2010
0.03
56.6 J
149.00
254.00
100.00
141.00
129.00
155.00
34.3 J
164.00
49.8 J
59.11
75.5 J
94.2 J
May-2011
0.02
36 J
101.00
242.00
36 J
174.00
80.5 J
124.00
174.00
124.00
70.8 J
71.6 J
77.8 J
137.00
Nov-2011
0.02
Damaged
58.7 J
2.0 J
34.3 J
7.6 J
484.00
70.7 J
183.00
150.00
157.00
67.4 J
184.00
48.7 J
69.4 J
73.3 J
81.2 J
May-2012
0.07
68.3 J
166.00
342.00
86.6 J
278.00
122.00
128.00
294.00
142.00
78.8 J
84.8 J
60.8 J
74.3 J
Nov-2012
0.07
Damaged
37.1 J
1.8 J
152.00
7.0 J
425.00
120.00
151.00
117.00
53.4 J
100.00
133.00
38.0 J
49.1 J
74.1 J
70.6 J
May-2013
0.06
Damaged
73.9 J
16.5 J
80.2 J
7.8 J
288.00
62.5 J
108.00
115.00
209.00
560.00
144.00
50.2 J
64.6 J
30.3 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
21000
0.12
20.3 J
33.0 J
343.00
28.6 J
80.2 J
67.9 J
110.00
291.00
157.00
29.3 J
58.9 J
18.3 J
368.00
52.4 J
90.9 J
88.7J 136.0
94.3 J
72.9 J
37.9 J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.01
64.5 J
273.00
675.00
123.00
7.3 J
Damaged
246.00
398.00
189.00
32.1 J
100.00
19.7 J
515.00
69.9 J
207.00
86.6 J
57.7 J
46.6 J
Dry
May-2015
0.01
71.1 J
19.9 J
6.1 J
34.3 J
10.8 J
412.00
17.9 J
151.00
130.00
271.00
819.00
202.00
25.8 J
63.2 J
24.4 J
292.00
57.1 J
10.7 J
54.3 J
57.6 J
59.7 J
54.2 J
78.3 J
Nov-2015
0.02
21.4 J
34.6 J
625.00
145.00
109.00
233.00
131.00
294.00
131.00
54.3 J
119.00
21.3 J
69.2 J
57.7 J
93.8 J
55.8 J
44.7 J
63.2 J
74.0 J
May-2016
0.02
24.6 J
89.5 J
648.00
78.9 J
68.11
DRY
561.00
751.00
325.00
51.0 J
344.00
23.6 J
550.00
46.2 J
52.1 J
56.3 J
51.8 J
75.1 J
76.1 J
Nov-2016
0.02
49.4 J
55.2 J
945.00
198.00
123.00
DRY
336.00
411.00
285.00
45.3 J
260.00
31.3 J
654.00
53.1 J
73.1 J
50.0 J
65.8 J
99.1 J
Dry
0.07
74.6J
31.4 J
15.iJ
39.9 J
11.8J
515.00
191.00
149.00
187.00
98.1 J
367.00
340.00
39.0 J
200.00
20.3 J
507.00
36.3 J
9.90J
75.0 J
128.00
77.5 J
65.7 J
83.3 J
0.07
115.00
25 J
16.7 J
281.00
11.1 J
709.00
253.00
68.7 J
76.1 J
633.00
312.00
323.00
68.4 J
184.00
42.4 J
541.00
56.3 J
10.9 J
92.0 J
134.0
251.0
84.2 J
Dry
54.4 J
79.0 J
83.0 J
0.03
35.60
33.70
19.80
J
62.60
J
11.40
J
879.00
56.10
J
93.20
J
82.50
J
348.00
132.00
328.00
56.80
161.00
78.30
466.00
38.70
10.20
65.0099.5
196
89.1
Dry
58.30
117.00
Dry
Nay201187
35.50
38.50
15.60
135.00
10.10
J
689.00
312.00
525.00
140.00
470.00
566.00
358.0048.80
368.00
55.00
398.00
47.50
8.50
J
49.30
95.231.30
15.20
94.70920
J
502.00
238.00
167.00
280.00
776.00
524.00
608.004770321.00
72.20
759.0045.80
10.00
98.90
25.00
43.00
13.00
331.00
8.00
J
650.00
299.00
7;
119.00
535.00
234.00
475.00
62.00
267.00
131.00
589.00
77.00
9.00
J
32.20
255
394
49.20
1725.00
48.40
155.00
60.00
19.80 0.00 331.00 0.00 394.00 0.00 945.00 0.00 312.00 0.00 525.00 0.00 280.00 0.00 776.00 0.00 819.00 0.00 608.00 0.00 62.00 0.00 368.00 0.00 131.00 0.00 759.00 0.00 106.00 0.00 10.20 0.00 223.00 0.00 255.00 0.00 418.00 0.00 256.00 0.00 0.00 1725.00 0.00 268.00 0.00 571.00 0.00 137.00 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 3 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Beryllium CAS No. 744041-7
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
IMAC
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MIN-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MIN-15 MW-16 MW-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
NO
NO
NO
0.06 U 0.06 U
0.06 U 0.06 U
0.06 U 0.06 U
0.06 U 0.06 U
NO
NO
NO
0.44 U 0.44 U10-44 0.44 U 0.44 U 0.44 U 0.44 U
0.2J 0.2J 0.06U 0.3J O.06U O.6J 10 0.3J
0.02 U 0.1 1 0.11 0.3 J 0.1 1
0.02 U 0.1 1 0.11 0.3 J 0.2 J
0.02 U 0.29 J 0.02 U 0.12 J 0.2 J
0.02 U 0.16 J 0.02 U 0.14 J 0.02 U 0.29 J
0.07 U 0.09 J 0.07 U 0.12 J 2.00
0.07 U 0.08 J 0.07 U 0.13 J 0.07 U 0.39 J
0.Z U 0.08 J 0.03 J 0.12 J 0.03 U 0.48 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
2.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.08
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
6.5
Nov-2007
0.06 E
0.6 J
0.06 U
0.8 J
0.11
0.9 J
0.11
0.11
Dry
0.06 U
0.11
May-2008
0.06
0.06 U
1.00
0.06 U
0.11
0.4 J
0.11
0.1 J
0.11
0.11
Nov-2008
0.06 E
0.7 J
0.06 U
0.2 J
0.1 J
0.11
0.11
0.06 U
Dry
0.4 J
0.11
May-2009
0.06
2.60
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.9 J
0.5 J
0.11
0.11
0.06 U
0.6 J
0.06 U
0.11
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
0.44
0.44 U
0.44 U
0.44 U
Jan-2010
4
4
0.06
0.2J
0.91
O.06U
0.11
1.00
1.00
0.11
0.06U
0.11
0.2J
O.06U
0.2J
0.11
May-2010
0.02
0.51
0.11
0.02 U
0.02 U
O.81
0.51
0.11
0.11
0.4 J
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11
Nov-2010
0.02
0.3 J
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.7 J
1.00
0.11
0.11
0.2 J
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11
May-2011
0.02
0.16 J
0.1J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.57 J
0.92 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.06 J
0.12 J
0.06 J
0.02 U
0.57 J
Nov-2011
0.02
Damaged
0.26 J
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.65 J
0.24 J
0.06 J
0.06 J
0.24 J
0.02
.09 J
0.10 J
May-2012
007
0.19 J
017 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.50 J
0.50 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.13 J
0.19
.07 U
0.15 J0.07
Damaged
0.18 J
0.07 U
0.09 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.47 J
0.13 J
0.09 J
0.07 U
0.09 J
0.07
M
.07 U
112J
3
Damaged
0.04 J
0.03 J
0.10 J
0.03 U
0.09 J
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.23 J
0.16 J
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.12
.11 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
0.03
0.03 U
0.06 J
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.23 J
0.03 U
0.05 J
0.04 J
0.12 J
0.03 U
0.04 J
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.04 J
0.03 U
0.42J 0.13J
0.16 J
0.04 J
0.04 J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.04
0.04 U
0.111
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
Damaged
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 J
0.04 U
0.04 J
0.24 J
0.04 U
0.08 J
0.08 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.08 J
Dry
May-2015
0.02
0.02 U
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.08 J
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.02 U
0.55 J
0.02 U
0.15 J
0.06 J
0.26 J
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.18 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.06 J
0.05 J
0.111
0.04 J
Nov-2015
0.02
0.04 U
0.07 J
0.04 J
0.04 J
0.30 J
0.08 J
0.05 J
0.05 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.05 J
0.06 J
0.04 J
0.03 J
0.48 J
0.02 U
0.03 J
0.13 J
0.09 J
May-2016
0.04
0.07 J
0.08 J
0.06 J
0.05 J
0.18 J
DRY
0.07 J
0.07 J
0.06 J
0.04 U
0.05 J
0.05 J
0.04 U
0.06 J
0.13 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.10 J
0.04 U
Nov-2016
0.04
0.051
0.04 U
0.14 J
0.081
0.15 J
DRY
0.13 J
0.101
0.24 J
0.04 U
0.101
0.12 J
0.101
0.04 U
0.061
0.051
0.04 U
0.091
Dry
May-2017
0.07
0.071J
0.071.1
0.071J
0.071.1
0.071J
0.08 J
0.09 J
0.17 J
0.46 J
0.18 J
0.07 J
0.18 J
0.071J
0.071J
0.071J
0.071J
0.071J
0.071J
0.10 J
0.07U
0.071J
0.071J
0.07U
Deo-2017
0.07
0.07 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.18 J
0.07 U
0.08 J
0.07 J
0.311
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.09 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.32 J
0.33 J
0.16 J
0.311
Dry
0.07 U
0.071J
0.071J
Jun-2018
0.05
--
U
0.05
J
0.10
J
0.06
J
0.06
J
--
U
0.12
J
0.26
J
0.13
J
--
U
--
U
0.09
J
--
U
0.06
J
0.10
J
0.07
J
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
0.27
J
0.07
J
0.16
J
Dry
0.05
J
0..09
J
Dry
Deo-2018
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.10
J
--
U
--
U
0.07
J
0.06
J
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
0.09
J
0.05
J
J-U
0.05
J
0.11
JJun-2019
005
--
U
--
U
--
U
005
J
--
U
0.06
J
0.06
J
01
J
0.09
J
0.07
J
0.06
J
0.08
J
--
U
0.12
J
0.22
J
008
J
0.06
J
--
U
0.07
J
0.11
J
0.16
J
--
U
�S3
J
0.08
J
0.12
J
0.12
J
Deo-2019
Effective
11/1/2019
6.5
0.05
0.38
J
0.42
J
0.32
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.36
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.02
J
0.04
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.02
J
0.12
J
0.05
J
0.04
J
1
--
U
0.28
J
0.06
J
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
1.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.12 0.00
Page 4 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Cadmium CAS No. 744043-9
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Data
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MIN-8 MW-9A MIN-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MIN-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1.75
NO
NO
NO
0.51 0.7 J
0.1 1 1.00
0.04 U 0.04 U
0.1 J 0.11
NO
NO
NO
0.16 J 0.17J 0.31 0.158 U 0.16 J 0.4 J 0.23 J
0.11 0.04U 0.2J 0.2J 0.2J 1.00 0.2J 1 2.0 1 1 0.1J
0.2J 1.00 0.11 0.2J 0.4J 0.11
0.11 0.11 0.2J 0.11 0.2J 0.3J
0.051 0.81 0.17 J 0.11 0.161 0.12 J
0.08 J 0.08 J 0.13 J 0.06 J 0.13 J 0.43 J 0.29 J
0.14 J 0.051 0.22 J 0.05 J 0.18 J 0.18 J
0.04 J 0.08 J 0.64 J 0.13 J 0.12 J 0.43 J 0.36 J
0.64 J 0.06 J 0.97 J 0.68 J 0.21 J 2.00 0.18 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
4.000
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
1.000
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
1.00
3.000
NO
NO
Nov-06
1.00
1.00
NO
NO
NO
1.00
NO
5.000
2.000
1.000
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.06
1.00
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
1.000
2
Nov-2007
0.06 E
0.7 J
0.3 J
0.5 1
0.61
0.61
0.4 J
0.3 J
Dry
0.11
0.2 J
May-2008
0.04
0.1 1
0.6 J
0.351
0.11
0.2 J
0.1 1
0.4 J
0.04 U
Nov-2008
0.04 E
0.3 J
0.11
0.3 J
0.04 U
0.4 J
0.04 U
0.1 J
Dry
0.3 J
0.04 U
May-2009
0.04
2.30
3.60
0.04 U
0.9 J
0.3 J
0.9 J
0.8 J
0.2 J
0.7 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
0.16
0.16 J
0.18 J
0.3 J
Jan-2010
5
2
0.04
0.2J
0.4J
0.04U
0.2J
0.3J
0.61
0.3J
0.2J
0.2J
1.90
1.20
0.3J
0.11
May-2010
0.02
0.2J
0.81
0.3J
0.11
1.20
0.3J
2.20
2.00
0.2J
0.2J
0.11
0.11
0.11
Nov-2010
0.02
0.2J
O.6J
0.11
0.11
0.51
2.00
0.61
0.4J
0.3J
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.2J
May-2011
0.02
0.11 1
0.29 J
0.07 J
0.1 J
0.351
0.64 J
0.43 J
0.4 J
0.061
0.22 J
0.111
0.29 J
0.14 J
Nov-2011
0.02
Damaged
0.37 J
0.09 J
0.17 J
0.24 J
0.12 J
0.36 J
0.43 J
0.69 J
0.29 J
0.38 J
0.13 J
0.02 J
0.02 J
0.14 J
0.05 J
May-2012
0.03
0.03 U
0.25 J
0.04 J
0.081
0.16 J
0.22 J
0.27 J
0.12 J
O.O6 J
0.17 J
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
Nov-2012
0.03
Damaged
0.16 J
0.03 J
0.18 J
0.03 U
0.05 J
0.34 J
0.22 J
0.12 J
0.12 J
0.16 J
0.04 J
0.07 J
0.03 J
0.04 J
0.07 J
May-2013
0.05
Damaged
0.15 J
0.39 J
0.29 J
0.48 J
0.11 J
0.07 J
0.09 J
0.20 J
0.31 J
0.14 J
0.13 J
0.08 J
0.05 J
0.08 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
Water
Dissolved
Effects Ratio'
metals
Hardness dependent
'WER
0.04
0.11 J
0.14 J
0.19 J
0.15 J
0.08 J
0.05 J
0,311
0.29 J
0.39 J
1.00
0.17 J
0.25 J
0.09 J
1.00
2.00
0.20J 0.14J
0.22 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.01
0.12 J
0.44 J
0.17 J
0.12 J
0.04 U
Damaged
0.20 J
0.26 J
0.08 J
0.311
0.21 J
0.58 J
0.26 J
0.18 J
0.26 J
0.05 J
0.04 J
0.04 J
Dry
May-2015
0.01
0.85 J
0.13 J
0.23 J
0.13 J
0.18 1
0.03 J
0.011
0.33 J
0.62 J
0.48 J
0.44 J
0.101
0.101
0.081
0.33 J
0.091
0.101
0.50 1
0.861
0.07 J
0.02 J
0.03 J
0.03 1
Nov-2015
0.05
0.08 J
0.26 J
0.04 J
0.15 J
0.21 J
0.38 J
0.45 J
0.35 J
0.12 J
0.18 J
0.62 J
0.45 J
1.00
1.00
0.66 J
0.04 J
0.04 J
0.07 J
0.08 J
May-2016
0.05
0.12 J
0.10 J
0.05 U
0.07 J
0.08 J
DRY
0.48 J
0.15 J
0.05 U
0.12 J
0.13 J
0.16 J
0.14 J
0.23 J
0.44 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
Nov-2016
0.05
0.13 J
0.10 J
0.05 U
0.08 J
0.09 J
DRY
0.18 J
0.30 J
0.20 J
0.13 J
0.09 J
0.50 J
0.15 J
0.05 J
0.29 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
Dry
May-2017
0.08
0.60J
0.1J
0.23J
0.13J
0.40J
0.08U
0.08U
0.091
0.881
0.25J
0.1J
0.11J
0.08U
0.1"0.151
0.08U
0.08U
0.25J
0.611
0.08U
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.08U
Deo-2017
0.08
0.55 J
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.17 J
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.09 J
0.111
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.09 J
0.08 U
0.09 J
0.15 J
0.08 U
0.15 J
0.08 U
0.19 J
0.44 J
0.12 J
0.21 J
0.08 U
Dry
0.08U
0.08U
0.08U
Jun-2018
0.02
0.27
J
0.05
J
0.09
J
0.06
J
0.26
J
--
U
0.06
J
0.09
J
0.12
J
0.15
J
0.06
J
0.06
J
0.04
J
0.04
J
0.08
J
0.13
J
0.04
J
0.22
J
0.10
J
0.17
J
0.13
J
0.11
J
Dry
--
U
0.03
J
Dry
Deo-2018
0.02
0.11
J
0.14
J
--
U
0.11
J
--
U
0.11
J
0.04
J
0.14
J
0.08
J
0.17
J
0.16
J
0.08
J
0.02
J
0.14
J
1.00
J
--
U
0.06
J
0.06
J
0.07
J
0.08
J
0.15
J
0.04
J
0.51
J
--
U
0.02
J
0.04
J
Jun-2019
0.02
--
U
0.07
J
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.07
J
0.14
J
0.13
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.11
J
1.20
J
--
U
0.05
J
0.06
J
0.05
J
0.07
J
0.13
J
0.04
J
0.06
J
0.02
J
0.03
J
--
U
Deo-2019
EffecOve it/1/2019
0.15
0.04
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
2.00
--
U
0.12
J
--
U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
5.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.04 0.00
Page 5 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Chromium CAS No. 744047-3
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MIN-7
MIN-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MIN-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
NO
29.00
NO
0.24 U 1.2 J
1.51 0.2J
0.11 U 1.4 J
0.10U 1.61
NO
NO
NO
3 JB 3 JB 3.09 JB 2.48 JB 1.77 JB 4.24 JB 2.8 JB
2.7J 0.91 0.10U 0.10U 0.7J 1.81 2.6J 3.3J 1.5J
0.3J 0.61 0.3J 0.61 0.81 0.51
0.03U 0.11 0.11 1.7J 0.91 0.51
0.17 J 0.83 J 0.23 J 2.6 J 0.51 J 0.48 J
0.23 J 0.86 J 0.04 J 14.00 0.57 J 0.04 U 1.3 J
0.18U 0.501 0.18U 6.5J 0.61J 2.0J
0.18 U 0.801 0.25 J 16.00 0.68 J 0.4 J 1.2 J
0.131 1.1 1 0.78 J 19.00 0.59 J 0.27 J 5.8 1
NO
NO
Nov-01
83.00
NO
NO
29.00
NO
15.00
NO
NO
May-02
NO
85.00
42.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
69.00
13.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
24.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
22.00
15.00
NO
NO
NO
11.00
NO
122.00
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
42.00
12.00
NO
11.00
NO
10.00
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
33.00
25.00
NO
22.00
NO
25.00
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
33.00
30.00
NO
20.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
15.00
NO
NO
11.00
40.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
11.00
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
ND
NO
NO
12.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
Nov-2007
0.24 E
0.3 J
0.5 J
2.7 J
0.4 J
13.00
1.3 J
1.0 J
Dry
1.5 J
0.24 U
May-2008
0.11
0.3J
0.2J
0.3J
O.6J
1.2J
1.2J
3.11
1.11
1.11
8.01
1.11
0.4J
Nov-2008
0.11 E
0.51
1.7 J
1.0 1
1.11
4.7 J
1.11
0.4 J
Dry
5.O 1
0.3 J
May-2009
0.10
0.10U
1.7J
0.7J
2.1J
0.7J
2.5J
0.51
0.1J
5.iJ
0.51
0.51
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+ Phase 2
1.46
8.8 JB
3.36 JB
4.76 JB
Jan-2010
100
10
0.10
0.10U
0.10U
11
0.10U
2.8J
2.7J
0.81
0.10U
0.10U
2.iJ
0.7J
0.4J
0.3J
May-2010
0.03
0.51
0.7J
2J
0.11
2.1J
2.3J
4.2J
2.5J
0.81
0.4J
0.91
0.4J
0.91
Nov-2010
0.03
0.51
0.61
1.7J
0.3J
3.11
11.00
2J
0.4J
0.81
0.51
0.51
0.2J
0.3J
May-2011
0.04
0.44 J
0.62 J
0.76 J
0.3 J
3 J
6.2 J
2.4 J
1.2 J
0.84 J
1.81
0.581
0.991
3.1 J
Nov-2011
0.04
Damaged
0.66 J
0.04 U
0.29 J
0.15 J
1.7 J
0.67 J
3.7 J
9.5 J
2.7 J
0.92 J
2.1 J
0.74 J
1.2 J
0.63 J
0.46 J
May-2012
0.18
0.91J
1.7J
1.0J
1.51
5.7J
6.11
2.5J
2.0J
1.7J
2.6J
1.4J
0.38J
1.001
Nov-2012
0.18
Damaged
0.45 J
0.18 U
1.9 J
0.18 U
1.5 J
2.31
3.61
5.2 J
1.81
1.51
3.O J
0.54 J
0.545 J
0.181
1.1 1
May-2013
0.04
Damaged
0.50 J
0.7 J
0.57 J
0.38 J
0.50 J
1.0 1
2.2 J
4.8 J
3.2 J
7.4 J
2.2 1
2.4 J
1.6 J
1.6 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
W ER
0.14
0.45 J
0.81 1
1.8 1
0.29 J
1.9 1
3.1 1
0.381
6.1 J
3.8 J
0.04 U
0.83 1
0.20 J
9.0 1
0.46 J
2.1 J
2.9J 1.51
1.9 1
0.951
0.51 1
Dry
Nov-2014
0.12
1.6 J
3.5 J
5.11
2.8 J
0.14 U
Damaged
2.6 J
11.00
5.8 J
0.14 U
1.11
0.34 J
21.00
0.35 J
14.00
0.98 J
0.81 J
0.14 U
Dry
May-2015
0.12
0.24J
0.17J
0.31J
0.14J
0.40J
2.6J
0.12U
3.0J
9.3J
0.861
18.00
2.9J
0.181
1.4J
1.11
8.91
0.63J
0.12U
0.82J
1.2J
1.11
1.2J
0.951
Nov-2015
0.06
0.12U
1.2J
7.3J
5.11
3.3J
9.8J
1.3J
9.91
1.3J
0.12U
1.7J
0.65J
2.7J
0.42J
8.4J
0.86J
0.43J
0.851
0.531
May-2016
0.06
0.52 J
0.70 J
9.8 J
1.0 J
1.9 J
DRY
4.0 J
18.00
8.7 J
0.08 J
9.2 J
0.85 J
27.00
0.811
3.0 J
1.6 J
0.80 J
1.11
0.71 J
Nov-2016
0.06
0.53 J
0.37 J
18.00
4.1 J
2.0 J
DRY
4.8 J
8.8 J
9.3 J
0.06 U
11.00
0.43 J
28.00
0.26 J
1.2 J
0.95 J
1.0 J
0.61 J
Dry
May-2017
0.08
0.13J
0.17 J
0.63J
0.82 J
0.581
13.00
8.7 J
2.0 J
13.00
3.4 J
8.9 J
12.00
0.08U
12.00
0.08U
28.00
0.15 J
0.08U
2.1 J
1.3 J
0.46 J
0.08U
3.1 J
Da 2017
0.08
2.1J
0.11J
0.57J
7.6J
0.08U
17.00
10.00
3.2J
6.7J
7.7J
8.2J
17.00
0.36J
4.7J
0.81
31.00
0.4J
0.081
9.1J
2.9J
6.9J 2.4J
Dry
0.64J
0.4J
0.081
Ju-218
0.15
--
U
--
U
2.00
J
0.43
J
4.60
J
24.00
2.50
J
2.40
J
4.50
J
1.30
J
2.70
J
3.90
J
--
U
4.10
J
1.30
J
26.00
--
U
--
U
0.84
J
2.6
J
2.5 J 2.9 J
Dry
--
U
1.20
J
Dry
Deo-2018
0.15
1.40
J
0.77
J
0.35
J
3.00
J
0.08
J
32.00
13.00
4.40
J
3.30
J
4.30
J
12.00
15.00
--
U
14.00
0.56
J
24.00
0.31
J
--
U
0.48
J
--
U
1.5 J 0.94 J
0.53
J
0.37
J
0.60
J
Jun-2019
jiD.n.20019
0.15
--
U
0.18
J
0.09
J
1.30
--
U
2.90
6.00
0.57
J
4.00
3.50
8.00
3.80
0.11
J
1.90
0.90
J
3.20
0.75
J
0.01
J
0. is
J
0.26
J
0.94 J 0.20 J
�6J
0.33
J
0.67
J
0.36
J
Effective
it/1/2019
24
0.15
1.30
J
3.00
J
4.00
J
5.70
1.00
J
25.00
15.00
3.00
J
11.00
1.20
15.00
23.00
--
U
21.00
--
U
44.00
--
U
--
U
1.10
J
--
U
5 1.20 J
--
U
--
U
--
U
29.00 0.00 85.00 0.00 4.60 0.00 32.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 13.00 0.00 22.00 0.00 40.00 0.00 122.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 21.00 0.00 1.30 0.00 44.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.01 0.00 14.00 0.00 2.60 0.00 5.00 0.00 2.90 0.00 0.00 61.00 0.00 0.53 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.60 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 6 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Cobalt CAS No. 744048-4
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Data
IMAC
21- Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MW-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
0.41 U 9.4 J
13.00 0.11
0.11 17.00
0.11 12.60
NO
NO
NO
1.72 U 1.72 U 1.72 U 1.72 U 1.72 U 1.72 U 1.72 U
0.7J 0.3J 0.51 0.2J 1.3J 0.2J 0.4J 1.2J 0.3J
0.2J 0.2J 0.3J 0.2J 0.91 0.2J
0.2 J 0.3 J 0.3 J 0.81 1.O 1 0.3 J
0.091 2.2 J 0.26 J 1.51 1.2 J 0.181
0.111 0.26 J 0.20 J 0.84 J 0.60 J 0.08 J 0.42 J
0.06 J 0.45 J 0.22 J 0.72 J 1.5 J 3.4 J
0.08 J 0.86 J 0.53 J 1.11 0.46 J 0.10 J 1.6 J
0.04 J 0.33 J 0.73 J 0.88 J 0.47 J 0.04 J 2.4 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
19.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
16.00
NO
NO
11.00
17.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
52.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
23.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
11.00
NO
21.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
12.00
15.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
13.00
NO
29.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
17.00
11.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
43.00
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.41
0.41 U
0.41 U
0.41 U
0.41 U
0.41 U
0.41 U
0.41 U
12.00
38.00
0.41 U
0.41 U
0.41 U
4
Nov-2007
0.41 E
1.5 J
9.3 J
1.0 J
2.3 J
6.3 J
17.00
0.41 U
Dry
0.8 J
0.7 J
May-2008
0.03
0.1 J
0.8 J
0.1 J
1.3 J
1.0 J
1.7 J
1.7 J
2.6 J
19.00
1.2 J
0.8 J
1.0 J
Nov-2008
0.03 E
0.9 J
10.00
0.4 J
0.5 J
4.4 J
2.8 J
12.00
Dry
1.9 J
5.11
May-2009
0.02
1.2J
0.4J
5.81
1.3J
1.2J
1.11
2.3J
8.4J
1.01
0.4J
1.3J
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
1.72
10.60
19.90
12.30
Jan-2010
1
0.02
2.5J
0.4J
5.7J
15.00
0.91
1.61
0.61
1.11
10.00
0.61
0.3J
1.2J
0.2J
May-2010
0.10
0.7J
1.11
18.00
3.8J
0.91
2.8J
5.4J
9.01
21.00
0.3J
0.61
0.61
0.51
Nov-2010
0.10
0.81
3.3 J
37.00
17.00
1.11
7.8 J
0.7 J
0.81
24.00
0.4 J
0.51
1.O 1
0.7 J
May-2011
0.03
0.41 J
3.7 J
14.00
7.7 J
0.581
1.51
1.41
4.2 J
31.00
0.84 J
1.51
0.42 J
1.61
Nov-2011
0.03
Damaged
0.48 J
0.03 U
1.11
0.05 J
6.8 J
15.00
0.76 J
1.6 J
1.11
1.2 J
17.00
0.50 J
0.75 J
1.3 J
0.86 J
May-2012
0.02
0.38 J
7.0 J
2.6 J
25.00
0.63 J
1.7 J
1.3 J
3.6 J
31.00
0.89 J
0.79 J
0.76 J
0.72 J
Nov-2012
0.02
Damaged
0.31 J
0.04 J
8.6 J
0.03 J
15.00
28.00
0.38 J
1.1 J
0.55 J
1.3 J
27.00
0.42 J
0.31 J
0.89 J
1.7 J
May-2013
0.02
1 Damaged
0.20 J
0.26 J
2.0 J
0.08 J
2.2 J
18.00
0.35 J
1.6 J
3.0 J
9.2 J
24.00
0.73 J
0.52 J
0.48 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not sampled
May-2014
16
0.12
0.13 J
1.0 J
5.9 J
0.28 J
0.30 J
0.34 J
0.22 J
5.2 J
22.00
0.05 J
0.44 J
0.19 J
0.82 J
0.32 J
0.24 J
0.3 T0.33J
0.38 JEO.20
0.31 J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.03
0.33 J
5.6 J
2.6 J
15.00
0.13 J
Damaged
2.8 J
5.0 J
12.00
0.12 U
0.49 J
0.66 J
1.1 J
0.47 J
1.8 J
0.41 J
0.75 J
Dry
May-2015
0.03
0.22 J
0.44 J
0.04 J
0.29 J
0.051
0.89 J
0.12 J
0.80 J
2.6 J
0.911
18.00
14.00
0.06 J
0.31 J
0.43 J
0.811
0.28 J
0.05 J
0.79 J
0.33 J
0.48 J
0.34 J
Nov-2015
0.04
0.30 J
0.39 J
2.7 J
11.00
1.3 J
1.5 J
1.11
4.1 J
4.0 J
0.10 J
0.38 J
0.52 J
0.30 J
0.35 J
1.6 J
0.26 J
0.74 J
0.26 J
May-2016
0.04
0.20 J
0.49 J
3.1J
7.6 J
0.38 J
DRY
4.5 J
16.00
11.00
0.07 J
0.92 J
0.30 J
1.7 J
0.26 J
0.61J
0.27 J
0.72 J
0.18 J
Nov-2016
0.04
0.31 J
1.7 J
3.O J
6.2 J
0.331
DRY
2.5 J
3.3 J
9.81
0.113 J
1.O 1
0.70 J
2.O J
0.94 J
1.3 J
0.34 JJ
0.47 J
Dry
May-2017
0.24
0.38J
0.24U
0.24U
1.1J
0.24U
2.5 J
8.6 J
0.36 J
2.9 J
1.4 J
8.3 J
8.0 J
0.24U
0.87 J
0.28 J
1.8 J
0.50 J
0.24 U
0.74 J
0.35 JJ
0.36 J
0.47 J
Deo-2017
0.24
0.57 J
0.24 U
0.24 U
4.1 J
0.24 U
3.9 J
9.51
0.511
0.99 J
2.9 J
3.5 J
3.3 J
0.29 J
0.561
0.73 J
2.O J
0.37 J
0.24 U
1.61
0.36 J
0.861
DryJ
0.51 J
0.24 U
Jun-2018
0.03
0.22
J
0.20
J
0.51
J
1.10
J
026
J
4.70
J
2.10
J
0.46
J
1.10
J
1.60
J
2.40
J
3.20
J
0.21
J
0.42
J1.40
J
1.90
J
0.85
J
0.09
J
0.59
J
0.33
J
0.55 J
Dry
J
0.65
JDry
Deo-2018
0.27
J
0.27
J
0.12
J
1.40
0.08
J
3.00
J
8.30
0.22
J
1.20
2.90
12.00
3.40
0.12
J
1.80
1.00
J
1.60
0.54
J
0.07
J
--
U
0.15
J
0.53 J
0.79
J
0.32
J
0.62
J
Jun-2019
0.07
J
0.37
J
--
U
2.00
J
--
U
24.00
J
9.30
3.80
J
7.50
7.10
14.00
21.00
--
U
19.00
0.77
J
55.00
0.30
J
--
U
2.00
J
0.46
J
2.9 J
5.1
0.74
J
2.5
J
0.72
J
Deo-2019
0.32
0.76
J
--
U
1.00
3.40
1.00
6.00
J
7.00
0.82
J
2.00
4.00
4.00
4.10
0.51
J
2.60
2.40
J
3.30
0.49
J
0.14
J
1.80
0.71
J
0.9 J
8.9
0.26
J
8.4
J
0.44
J
0.76 0.00 0.37 0.00 1.00 0.00 19.00 0.00 13.00 0.00 37.00 0.00 28.00 0.00 3.80 0.00 29.00 0.00 52.00 0.00 18.00 0.00 43.00 0.00 0.51 0.00 19.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 55.00 0.00 0.85 0.00 0.14 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.71 0.00 2.90 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 8.90 0.00 0.74 0.00 8.40 0.00 0.72 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 7 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Copper CAS No. 7440-50-8
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Data
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1000
NO
NO
NO
1.30 1.80
1.30 0.80
1.30 1.30
0.70 1.40
NO
NO
NO
2.13 J 2.34J 2.44J 1.86J 1.33 J 1.29 U 1.34 J
1.3J 1.01 0.81 0.7J 1.2J 2.4J 2.4J 4.8J 1.5J
0.11 0.61 0.2J 0.3J 0.51 0.11
0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 U 1.1 1 0.81 0.11
0.29J 1.7J 0.67J 1.51 2.1J 0.811
0.05 J 0.18 J 0.09 J 0.53 J 0.82 J 0.66 J 0.59 J
0.111 0.37 J 0.501 0.87 J 0.77 J 1.91
0.501 0.64 J 0.70 J 0.91 1 1.O 1 1.2 J 0.571
0.351 0.68 J 1.4 J 1.5 J 0.63 J 0.84 J 1.8 1
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.2
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
Nov-2007
0.05 E
1.70
2.00
2.31
1.60
6.70
2.70
1.60
Dry
1.90
1.60
May-2008
0.05
0.40
1.50
0.70
1.00
0.70
0.90
2.10
2.00
0.90
5.50
0.80
0.60
Nov-2008
0.04 E
1.30
1.20
0.90
3.30
2.80
3.00
0.80
Dry
5.60
1.10
May-2009
0.04
0.70
5.50
1.90
1.80
2.60
2.30
1.60
0.60
4.90
1.50
0.40
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
1.29
3.64 J
2.35 J
2.31 J
2.7 J
0.8 J
0.8 J
0.7 J
Jan-2010
1300
1000
0.04
0.91
1.2J
1.91
1.3J
1.81
1.61
1.11
2.4J
0.7J
0.4J
0.4J
0.3J
0.51
May-2010
0.03
0.7J
0.91
1.11
4.0J
1.4J
1.11
2.4J
2.9J
1.11
0.3J
0.11
0.11
0.3J
Nov-2010
0.03
0.51
1.11
1.11
0.51
1.3 J
3.9 J
1.51
0.81
0.81
1.7 J
0.94 J
1.11
1.51
May-2011
0.02
1.1J
1.5J
1.3J
1.1J
1.91
4.4J
1.61
1.51
1.3J
0.17J
0.46J
0.30J
0.02U
Nov-2011
0.02
Damaged
0.89 J
0.15 J
0.49 J
0.52 J
1.5 J
0.88 J
1.11
7.1 J
1.7 J
0.93 J
0.69 J
2.3 J
1.2 J
0.34 J
0.42 J
May-2012
0.06
0.87 J
1.3 J
0.911
0.851
1.81
3.4 J
2.2 J
1.91
1.1 1
2.1 J
0.36 J
0.581
1.2 J
Nov-2012
0.06
Damaged
1.O 1
0.76 J
1.31
1.3 J
1.61
1.4 J
0.881
4.2 J
1.2 J
1.91
1.4 J
1.31
1.4 J
1.1 1
Dry
May-2013
0.06
Damaged
0.96 J
2.0 J
1.6 J
1.6 J
0.77 J
1.0
0.61 J
4.8 J
1.8 1
1.9 1
1.3 J
2.4 J
0.46 J
0.40 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
WER
0.06
1.0 J
0/8 U
1.1 J
0.54 J
0.31 J
4.0 J
0.52 J
1.7 J
2.0 J
0.67 J
0.38 J
0.37 J
0.63 J
1.0 J
1.8 J
1.4J 0.35J
0.46 J
0.37 J
0.41 J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.02
0.94 J
2.0 J
1.5 J
0.74 J
5.5 J
Damaged
0.611
4.8 J
1.2 J
0.51 J
0.76 J
0.96 J
1.2 J
0.40 J
1.11
0.80 J
0.62 J
0.72 J
0.60 J
May-2015
0.02
4.8 J
0.60 J
1.5 J
0.36 J
0.92 J
0.56 J
0.12 J
0.911
3.5 J
0.84 J
1.6 J
0.66 J
0.23 J
0.27 J
0.90 J
0.35 J
0.60 J
1.3 J
0.55 J
0.66 J
0.87 J
0.72 J
0.74 J
Nov-2015
0.07
1.61
2.7 J
2.3 J
1.3 J
1.01
4.9 J
1.91
5.6 J
0.71 J
0.46 J
0.75 J
1.11
1.51
2.O J
3.61
0.681
0.52 J
0.64 J
0.601
May-2016
0.09
3.O J
1.2 J
2.2 J
1.3 J
0.50 J
DRY
2.5 J
1.91
1.7 J
0.43 J
0.97 J
0.511
1.6 J
1.31
1.81
0.48 J
0.34 J
0.39 J
Dry
Nov-2016
0.07
1.81
0.34 J
1.7 J
1.11
0.36 J
DRY
1.O 1
4.1 J
1.81
0.16 J
0.70 J
0.35 J
1.51
0.50 J
0.62 J
0.45 J
0.561
0.57 J
1.61
May-2017
0.09
4.1J
3.0J
1.4J
1.3J
1.61
2.0J
1.5J
0.531
5.5J
1.51
1.2J
1.81
0.22J
0.70J
3.5J
1.11
0.691
1.2J
1.4J
0.45J
0.561
0.57J
1.61
Deo-2017
0.09
3.1J
1.7J
0.55J
2.7J
0.861
2.71
2.2J
0.92J
3.6J
1.61
4.6J
2.0J
0.68J
0.951
0.661
2.4J
0.7J
0.61
3.8J
0.6J
2.6J
0.771
Dry
0.43J
0.47J
0.68J
Jun-2018
10
0.03
1.50
J
1.30
J
1.10
J
1.30
J
1.80
J
2.60
J
1.10
J
1.00
J
1.60
J
1.40
J
0.6
J
1.00
J
0.35
J
0.69
J
0.46
J
0.76
J
0.89
J
0.77
J
0.56
J
1.1
J
1.2
J
0.88
J
Dry
D.ry
05
J
1.50
J
1.20
J
0.65
J
0.87
J
1.30
J
1.20
J
1.1
J
0.38
J
0.96
J
0.30
0.38
J
0.41
.52
0.44
J
0.25
J
0.12
J
3.10
0.1
2
.
0.46
0Deo-2018 .43
J
1.6
J
6
05
5
J
7
J
220
1.10
0.84
0
50
J
0.40
1.4
0.17
J
2.20
J
0.62
J
0.6
J
1.103
J5
Effectie
11/1/2019
2.7
.
147
U
U
1.47U
7.80
J
U400
J
2.00
J
--
U
2.00
J
--
U
J
2.00
J
5
2.00
J
3.00
J
U
2.00
J
2.00
J
U
2
J
5
J
41.00
6.10
J
8.40
48
JDo-
1.60 0.00 3.10
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
41.00 0.00 6.10 0.00 8.40 0.00 4.80 0.00
Page 8 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Lead CAS No. 7439-92-1
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MW-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
15
NO
NO
29.00
0.10 0.10
0.10 0.04 U
0.10 0.10
0.04 U 0.04 U
NO
NO
NO
6.79 U 6.79 U 6.79 U 6.79 U 6.79 U 6.79 U 6.79 U
1.8J 1.4J 0.2J 0.4J 3.2J 1.2J 21.00 5.3J O.SJ
0.11 2.0J 0.2J 1.11 1.81 1.51
0.01U 1.11 0.2J 1.91 3.1J 2.2J
0.161 1.2J 0.11 0.83J 0.81 4.4J
0.161 1.91 0.12 J 0.64 J 0.93 J 0.17 J 3.2 J
0.08 U 0.74 J 0.09 J 0.90 J 1.0 J 11.00
0.12 J 0.43 J 0.49 J 0.65 J 1.5 J 0.22 J 7.9 J
0.12 J 0.23 J 0.53 J 0.07 J 0.93 J 0.07 J 0.75 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
27.00
11.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
13.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
2.8J
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
22.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
20.00
25.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
19.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
14.000
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
14.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.07
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
Nov-2007
0.04 E
1.30
0.30
7.20
0.40
5.90
0.30
0.30
Dry
1.60
0.20
May-2008
0.04
0.04 U
1.60
0.20
0.50
4.80
0.40
0.50
0.70
0.20
25.00
0.70
0.30
Nov-2008
0.04E
2.80
0.40
3.40
0.60
0.40
0.30
0.20
Dry
14.00
0.90
May-2009
0.04
3.70
0.70
0.50
11.00
0.20
0.30
0.10
0.10
23.00
0.50
0.20
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+ Phase 2
6.79
6.79 U
6.79 U
6.79 U
Jan-2010
15
0.04
0.81
3.91
0.11
0.2J
14.00
1.51
0.51
0.11
0.4J
8.OJ
0.3J
0.61
0.31
May-2010
0.01
3.0J
1.11
0.11
0.01U
6.3J
0.7J
0.2J
0.11
0.4J
0.91
0.51
0.61
1.6J
Nov-2010
0.01
2.0J
0.51
0.11
0.2J
6.4J
3.9J
0.3J
0.2J
0.4J
11
0.11
0.5J
0.2J
May-2011
0.02
0.61
0.92J
0.16J
0.151
4.8J
3.0J
0.181
0.12J
0.131
4.3J
0.51
0.28J
5.7J
Nov-2011
0.02
Damaged
1.7 J
0.06 J
O.68 J
0.08 J
0.42 J
0.171
7.3 J
2.1 J
0.24 J
0.29 J
1.2 J
0.951
0.79 J
1.11
0.29 J
May-2012
0.08
1.1 J
1.3 J
0.22 J
0.25 J
7.6 J
3.5 J
0.39 J
0.33 J
0.20 J
7.0 J
2.1 J
0.46 J
1.3 J
Nov-2012
0.08
Damaged
1.1 J
0.07 J
0.64 J
0.08 U
0.31 J
0.35 J
3.11
1.4 J
0.55 J
0.20 J
0.19 J
0.45 J
0.43 J
0.111
1.3 J
May-2013
0.02
Damaged
0.14 J
0.33 J
0.55 J
.13'
0.03 J
0.04 J
0.29 J
1.5 J
0.05 J
0.08 J
0.06 J
1.6 J
1.2 J
3.0 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
WER
0.13
0.11 1
0.19 1
0.16 J
0.06 J
0.74 J
0.51 1
0.04 J
0.14 J
0.19 J
0.07 J
0.101
0.04 J
0.02 U
0.40 1
0.42 J
10.0 0.34J
5.2 J
0.39 1
1.2 1
Dry
Nov-2014
0.03
0.18 J
83.00
0.13 U
0.13 U
0.31 J
Damaged
0.13 U
0.22 J
0.13 U
0.13 U
0.13 U
0.13 U
0.13 U
0.52 J
1.4 J
0.30 J
0.21 J
0.78 J
Dry
May-2015
0.03
0.27 J
0.34 J
0.05 J
0.27 J
0.07 J
0.16 J
0.06 J
3.8 J
3.9 J
0.09 J
0.25 J
0.39 J
0.03 U
0.05 J
0.10 J
0.03 U
0.111
0.05 J
0.56 J
0.69 J
0.53 J
2.5 J
0.84 J
Nov-2015
0.06
0.26 J
2.6 J
0.091
0.28 J
2.0 J
0.65 J
0.191
0.35 J
0.16 J
0.16 J
0.111
0.091
0.191
1.O 1
13.00
0.38 J
0.46 J
11
0.681
May-2016
0.06
1.8 J
0.32 J
0.24 J
0.34 J
0.87 J
DRY
0.14 J
0.27 J
0.20 J
0.19 J
0.12 J
0.07 J
0.07 J
2.1 J
2.7 J
0.82 J
0.62 J
1.0 J
0.60 J
Nov-2016
0.06
0.69 J
0.13 J
0.19 J
0.26 J
0.45 J
DRY
0.66 J
0.24 J
0.69 J
0.06 J
0.06 U
0.24 J
0.06 J
0.08 J
1.0 J
0.32 J
0.40 J
0.42 J
Dry
0.08
0.29J
0.56 J
.27J
0.37 J
0.16J
0.30 J
0.42 J
1.7 J
7.8 J
2.2 J
0.44 J
0.22 J
0.08U
0.08U
0.08U
0.08U
0.17 J
0.08U
2.1 J
0.28 J
0.42 J
0.56 J
4.3 J
0.082.1J
0.19J
0.24J
1.8J
0.11J
0.46J
0.78J
1.9J
0.3J
0.35J
0.24J
0.14J
0.35J
0.76J
0.111
0.24J
1.11
0.181
8.61
5.6J
3.1J
1.7J
Dry
0.33J
0.41J
0.24J
0.030.53
J
0.48
J
0.98
J
0.48
J
0.60
J
0.13
J
0.91
J
1.80
J
1.10
J
0.07
J
0.14
J
0.26
J
0.11
J
0.18
J
0.13
J
0.60
J
2.80
J
0.12
J
0.69
J
6.8
J
0.8
J
0.97
J
Dry
0.01
J
1.10
J
Dry
tDe]011dl
0.031.00J0.28J
--
U
0.41
J
--
U
0.03
J
0.04
J
0.28
J
0.16
J
--
U
0.02
J
-
U
--
U
0.03
J
0.04
J
--
U
0.16
J
--
U
0.73
J
0.10
J
0.12
J
0.06
J
9.600.65
J
032
J
0.38
J
0.03--
U
0.60
J
--
U
0.04
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.08
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
011
J
--
U
0.72
J
--
U
0.71
J
--
U
3.90
J
0.682.50
J
1.1
J
Effective
11/1/2019
0.54
0.03
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
0.05
J
0.05
J
--
U
0.16
J
0.06
J
0.22
J
0.32
J
0.08
J
0.12
J
46.00
0.3
J
--
U
0.64
J
1.00 0.00 3.70 0.98 0.00 83.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.91 0.00 25.00 0.00 1.10 0.00 5.90 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.60 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.12 0.00 21.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.97 0.00 0.00 46.00 0.00 14.00 0.00 2.50 0.00 1.10 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 9 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Mercury CAS No. 7439-97-6
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MW-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
0.024 U 0.024 U 0.024 U
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.04
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
0.02
0.024 U
0.024 U
0.024 U
Jan-2010
2
1
0.03
0.03 U
0.09
0.03 U
May-2010
0.08
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
Nov-2010
0.08
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
May-2011
0.05
0.05 U
0.05 J
0.08 J
Nov-2011
0.05
0.05 U
0.05 J
0.05 U
May-2012
0.02
0.09 J
0.04 J
0.04 J
Nov-2012
0.02
1
1
1 0.02 U
0.07 J
0.03 J
0.02 J
0.05 J
0.02 U
May-2013
0.01
1
1
1 0.04 J
0.04 J
0.05 J
0.03 J
0.03 J
0.03 J
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
0.012
0.01
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01 U
0.07U--] 0.07 U
Nov-2014
0.06
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
May-2015
0.05
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
Nov-2015
0.05
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
May-2016
0.04
0.04 U
0.04 J
0.04 U
0.04 J
0.04 J
Nov-2016
0.04
0.04 U
4.93
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
May-2017
0.07
0.07 U
NA
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
Deo-2017
0.07
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
Jun-2018
0.2
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Deo-2018
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Jun-2019
0.05
0.12
J
0.06
J
0.07
J
0.08
J
0.06
J
0.13
J
--
U
0.10
J
0.10
J
0.16
J
0.05
J
0.08
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Deo-2019
Effective
11/1/2019
0.012
0.05
0.06
J
--
U
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0..05
J
0.05
J
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard = NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 10 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Nickel CAS No. 7440-02-0
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MIN-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
100
NO
NO
NO
1.6 J 5.9 1
7.4J 0.51
0.61 7.1J
0.4J 5.4J
NO
NO
NO
2.36 U 2.36 U 2.75J 2.43J 2.44 J 2.36 U 2.36 U
2.5J 0.81 2.2J 0.91 1.61 2.14J 1.01 5.2J 0.8J
2.0J 1.51 1.81 0.91 1.7J 1.11
1.81 4.1J 1.61 4.1J 2.2J 1.91
0.77J 1.11 1.2J 6.81 2.1J 0.861
0.78J 1.3J 1.2J 7.6J 1.3J 1.4J 2J
0.23J 2.3J 3.4J 5.61 3.4J 5.2J
1.3J 1.6J 2.3J 7.3J 1.7J 1.7J 1.9J
0.981 1.51 2.4J 4.SJ 0.84J 0.96J 4.4J
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.66
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
0.66 U
88
Nov-2007
0.06 E
3.3 J
3.6 J
2.7 J
9.11
9.11
7.5 J
5.3 J
Dry
2.9 J
0.7 J
May-2008
0.06
0.91
5.21
1.4J
2.1J
2.3J
4.3J
3.2J
2.0J
7.SJ
3.5J
1.4J
O.SJ
Nov-2008
0.06E
4J
6J
1.7J
3.4J
6.1J
4.6J
4.7J
Dry
4.2J
1.3J
May-2009
0.04
2.1J
1.7J
1.81
1.2J
2.5J
1.01
0.91
3.3J
1.91
0.2J
0.4J
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
2.36
3.47 J
2.36 U
3.91 J
Jan-2010
100
0.04
1.7J
3.11
5.81
2.6J
2.1J
4.8J
1.11
0.61
5.1J
1.3J
0.91
0.81
0.6J
May-2010
0.05
3.2J
1.7J
10.81
1.51
2.0J
7.1J
7.5J
10.4J
9.2J
0.4J
1.2J
0.81
0.81
Nov-2010
0.05
3.9J
6.2J
12.1J
6.4J
2.1J
16.81
5.7J
1.7J
9.11
0.7J
1.6J
0.81
0.81
May-2011
0.04
1.2J
3.1J
3.3J
1.61
1.4J
5.51
2J
2.3J
5.2J
1.31
1.81
1.11
1.51
Nov-2011
0.04
Damaged
1.4J
0.3J
1.2J
0.71J
4.3J
3.6J
1.81
6.91
2.7J
1.51
5.4J
0.881
0.991
0.76J
0.551
May-2012
0.06
2.6J
4.4J
3.61
4.8J
1.7J
4.7J
2.9J
4.3J
7.2J
3.8J
2.9J
5.0J
6.1J
Nov-2012
0.06
Damaged
2.6J
1.iJ
6.61
0.88J
5.81
8.81
1.8J
5.4J
1.4J
2.5J
8.61
0.46J
0.46J
0.78J
1.1J
May-2013
0.45
Damaged
1.8J
1.6J
4.6J
0.90J
3.5J
5.O1
1.SJ
5.6J
4.3J
5.51
9.3J
0.97J
0.65J
0.47J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
WER
0.12
1.3J
1.6J
3.1J
1.51
0.87J
22J
0.71J
3.5J
7.8J
1.3J
1.01
2.7J
5.91
1.2J
1.6J
1.1J 3.OJ
0.98J
0.89J
0.45U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.01
2.6J
5.91
5.7J
6.7J
1.51
Damaged
3.1J
6.01
8.4J
1.2J
1.81
4.5J
6.7J
1.11
6.9J
1.21
1.41
0.53J
Dry
May-2015
0.01
3.4 J
1.61
1.51
0.57 J
0.68 J
2.3 J
0.43 J
2.O J
6.4 J
1.7 J
6.8 J
4.4 J
0.87 J
1.20 J
3.20 J
4.90 J
1.40 J
1.1 J
1.601
0.67 J
0.70 J
0.601
0.74 J
Nov-2015
0.06
2.9J
1.3J
5.7J
9.7J
2.5J
10.11
2.3J
5.4J
2.5J
1.91
1.7J
4.1J
2.3J
2.5J
4.1J
0.801
0.74J
0.881
0.75J
May-2016
0.06
2.0J
2.0J
4.5J
2.6J
1.3J
DRY
5.51
6.3J
6.4J
1.2J
4.1J
3.6J
6.6J
1.4J
2.5J
0.92J
0.861
0.75J
0.78J
Nov-2016
0.06
3.8J
2.6J
8.51
5.5J
2.4J
DRY
3.6J
10.4J
10.4J
1.81
6.7J
5.2J
8.91
3.4J
3.0J
0.72J
1.01
0.64J
Dry
May-2017
0.08
4.4J
2.4J
1.31
2.5J
0.83J
4.7J
6.2J
2.1J
8.7J
1.81
4.2J
8.3J
1.5J
6.3J
9.3J
7.6J
1.81
1.7J
2.6J
1.4J
1.2J
1.11
1.4J
Deo-2017
0.08
4.4J
2.7J
1.2J
6.OJ
0.68J
6.4J
7.4J
1.51
4.4J
4.9J
5.1 J
8.01
2.1 J
3.4J
4.8J
6.91
2.3J
3.0J
4.5J
0.94J
1.7J
2.2J
Dry
0.61
0.67J
0.94J
Jun-2018
50
0.03
2.00
J
2.00
J
2.00
J
3.30
J
1.50
J
7.90
J
1.80
J
1.70
J
3.60
J
3.60
J
2.00
J
3.10
J
1.80
J
3.30
J
5.30
J
5.60
J
2.10
J
0.99
J
1.50
J
1
J
0.97
J
2.4 J
Dry
0.73
J
1.10
J
Dry
Deo-2018
1.60
J
3.10
J
1.10
J
3.90
J
1.00
J
8.10
J
7.10
J
1.50
J
3.90
J
6.30
J
6.30
J
7.4
J
12.10
5.70
J
6.60
J
3.90
J
1..40
J
1.80
J
2.10
J
1.50
J
5.20 J
2.10
0.65
J
079
J
0.75
J
Jun-2019
J
1.10
J
0.55
J
5.60
J
4.90
J
1.90
6
J
4.90
J
T.
1.70
J
9.3
J
3.80
J
9.10
J
2.20
J
180
J
4000J
1.30
J
7.00
J
1.40 J
1.80
J
0.88
J
1.60
J
0.81
J
Effectie
11/1/2019
J
5.00
5.00
J
5.00
J
3.00
J
14.70
J
8.2
J
142
2.80
2.J
6016
2.90
J
1.00
JDeo-2019
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
13.70 0.00 1.20 0.00 2.90 0.00 1.00 0.00
Page 11 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Selenium CAS No. 778249-2
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Data
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
50
NO
NO
NO
0.14U 5.6J
0.14U 0.3J
0.3J 9.81
0.3J 8.2J
NO
NO
NO
6.61 J NO 4.22J 2.78 U 2.78 U 2.78 U 2.78 U
0.12U 0.2J 0.12U 0.2J 0.51 0.12U 0.4J 2.8J 0.12U
0.32 U 0.61 0.32 U 0.32 U 0.32 U 0.32 U
0.32 U 0.32 U 0.32 U 1.3 J 0.81 0.32 U
0.20U 1.11 0.20U 1.7J 0.38J 0.44J
0.20 U 0.62 J 0.20 U 2.5 J 0.78 J 0.20 U 0.33 J
0.17U 0.93J 0.72J 3.7J 0.64J 1.4J
0.21 J 2.1 J 1.1 J 4.1 J 1.0 J 0.23 J 0.94 J
0.08 J 1.7 J 1.I 1 5.7 J 0.83 J 0.27 J 5.5 J
NO
NO
is
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.35
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
0.35 U
5
Nov-2007
0.14E
1.91
2.3J
0.14U
2.3J
7.9J
6.0J
4.7J
Dry
2.2J
0.14U
May-2008
0.14
0.3J
1.91
0.2J
1.2J
0.91
2.5J
1.7J
1.7J
5.9J
1.3J
0.9J
0.2J
Nov-2008
0.14E
1.61
4.8J
0.14U
1.2J
5.3J
5.9J
3.5J
Dry
3.0J
0.3J
May-2009
0.12
5.2J
0.12U
2.5J
0.5J
1.51
0.51
0.81
2.2J
0.81
0.12U
0.12U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
2.78
17.00
4.14 J
4.59 J
Jan-2010
50
20
0.12
5.2J
1.91
0.12U
2.7J
0.2J
5.0J
2.0J
0.2J
3.0J
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
0.12U
May-2010
0.32
1.O 1
3.5 J
11.00
1.O 1
1.11
7.3 J
7.5 J
9.81
4.4 J
0.32 U
0.7 J
0.32 U
0.32 U
Nov-2010
0.32
1.81
0.32 U
0.32 U
8.81
0.7 J
0.32 U
7.2 J
1.11
4.7 J
0.32 U
0.61
0.32 U
0.32 U
May-2011
0.20
0.46J
0.20U
3.5J
1.11
0.73J
4.9J
1.3J
31
3.0J
0.3J
0.22J
0.64J
0.331
Nov-2011
0.20
Damaged
1.2 J
0.38 J
1.3 J
0.20 U
6.6 J
2.3 J
0.61 J
5.9 J
1.6 J
1.11
1.9 J
0.20 J
0.29 J
0.21 J
0.20 U
May-2012
0.17
1.7J
13.00
3.8J
4.3J
1.61
5.01
1.51
4.3J
4.5J
0.41J
0.57J
0.17U
0.17U
Nov-2012
0.17
Damaged
1.2 J
0.55 J
15.00
0.52 J
0.3 J
11.00
1.2 J
4.3 J
0.64 J
1.9 J
6.9 J
0.17 J
0.30 J
0.26 J
0.17 U
May-2013
0.06
Damaged
1.6 J
0.06 J
14.00
0.23 J
5.4 J
4.9 J
1.1 1
4.4 J
2.7 J
9.9 J
6.S J
0.39 J
0.38 J
0 191
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
5
0.06
0.06 U
0.38 J
2.9 J
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
3.4 J
4.9 J
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
1.3 J
0.06 U
0.06 U
1.81 0.51U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.0XUDry
Nov-2014
0.44
3.0J
0.16U
0.16U
7.2J
2.6J
Damaged
1.7J
0.44U
0.16U
0.44U
1.81
0.44U
0.44U
0.62J
0.16U
0.16U
0.16U
0.1
May-2015
0.53
0.24 J
0.35 J
0.71 J
0.22 U
0.22 U
9.4 J
0.53 U
1.4 J
0.53 U
0.46 J
0.53 U
4.3 J
0.22 U
1.10 J
1.40 J
3.40 J
0.59 J
0.22 U
0.28 J
0.22 U
0.29 J
0.2
Nov-2015
0.22
0.23 J
0.26 J
0.79 J
0.22 U
1.8 J
10.00
0.811
9.6 J
1.7 J
0.22 U
2.5 J
0.911
0.911
0.63 J
0.22 U
0.46 J
0.22 U
0.2
May-2016
0.54
0.54 U
1.3 J
2 J
1.11
0.76 J
DRY
3.2 J
9.9 J
8.6 J
0.54 U
4.6 J
0.77 J
6.7 J
0.73 J
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.5U
Nov-2016
0.62
1.6 J
2.6 J
0.62 U
9.7 J
1.7 J
DRY
6.3 J
0.62 U
0.62 U
0.62 U
9.4 U
1.4 J
0.62 U
1.11
0.69 J
0.54 U
0.76 J
0.5May-2017
0.51
0.51U
0.51U
0.51U
1.3J
0.51U
0.51U
0.51U
1.O1
3.6J
0.52J
5.O1
0.51U
0.51U
5.11
0.74J
9.91
0.77J
0.51U
0.51U
0.95J
0.891
NDeo-2017
0.51
0.63J
0.71J
0.51U
0.5U
0.74J
0.51U
0.5U
0.591
3.81
0.5U
0.5U
0.5U
0.5U
3.1J
1.81
0.5U
0.77J
0.51 U
0.57J
1.81
3.0J
1.21
Dry
0.861
0.5UJun-2018
0.05
0.33
J
0.56
J
0.31
J
2.10
J
0.30
J
--
U
2.50
J
0.79
J
2.20
J
2.50
J
2.70
J
4.50
J
0.38
J
4.30
J
2.00
J
--
U
1.20
J
0.36
J
1.00
J
0.96
J
2.7
J
0.89
J
0.60
J
0.
Deo-2018
0.05
0.30
J
1.90
J
0.19
J
--
U
0.60
J
NS
NS
0.74
J
4.40
J
3.70
J
NS
NS
--
U
7.90
J
1.10
J
8.10
J
0.85
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
2.1
J
--
U
�O�D
Jun-2019
0.05
0.29
J
0.70
J
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
14.00
4.00
J
1.10
J
3.80
J
4.00
J
5.60
J
8.40
J
0.35
J
4.10
J
1.20
J
1.00
J
0.73
J
0.35
J
1.10
J
0.51
J
4.3
J
0.68
J
J
0.45
J
0.65Deo-2019
Effective
it/1/2019
5
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.44
J
--
U
27.00
19.00
2.20
J
5.80
J
10.00
9.20
J
17.00
0.62
J
7.40
J
3.50
J
16.00
1.40
J
0.31
J
2.70
J
4.10
J
3.4
J
0.65
J
J
0.54
J
0.99
J
0.26
J
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
5.40 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.38 0.00
Page 12 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Silver CAS No. 7440-224
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Data
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-1D
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
18
NO
NO
NO
0.04 U 0.04 U
0.1 J 0.04 U
0.04 U 0.11
0.04 U 0.04 U
NO
NO
NO
ETECTED IN TRIP BLANK
7.15 JB 6.95JB 6.92JB 6.87J6 6.91 JB 6.77 JB 7.2 JB
0.11 0.11 0.04U 0.11 0.11 1.11 0.11 0.2J 0.1J
0.03 U 0.03 U 0.11 0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 U
0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 U 0.11 0.03 U 0.03 U
0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U
0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U
0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.1 U
0.1U 0.1U 0.1U 0.1U 0.1U 0.1U 0.1U
0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 J 0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 U
NO
NO
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.52
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.52 U
0.06
Nov-2007
0.04 E
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
Dry
0.04 U
0.04 U
May-2008
0.04
0.04 U
0.2 J
0.04 U
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.1 J
0.04 U
0.1 J
Nov-2008
0.04 E
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.11
0.04 U
0.11
0.04 U
Dry
0.11
0.11
May-2009
0.04
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.11
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.11
0.11
0.04 U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
0.66
8.22 JB
7.15 JB
7.77 JB
Jan-2010
20
0.04
0.11
0.2J
0.2J
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.3J
0.3J
0.2J
0.11
0.2J
0.11
May-2010
0.03
0.1 J
0.03 U
0.11
0.03 U
0.11
0.11
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.11
0.03 U
0.11
0.03 U
0.03 U
Nov-2010
0.03
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
May-2011
0.02
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.02 U
Nov-2011
0.02
Damaged
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
May-2012
0.10
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
0.1 U
Nov-2012
0.10
Damaged
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
0.1U
May-2013
0.03
Damaged
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
WER=050252U
0.03
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.20U 0.20 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.04
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.06 J
Damaged
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.04 U
Dry
May-2015
0.01
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.02J
0.02J
0.01U
0.02J
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
0.01U
Nov-2015
0.01
0.01 U
0.01 U
0.01 U
0.03 J
0.02 J
0.031
0.011
0.01 U
0.02 J
0.01 U
0.01 U
0.01 U
0.03 J
0.01 U
0.02 J
0.01 U
0.01 U
0.01 U
0.03 J
May-2016
0.06
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
DRY
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
Nov-2016
0.06
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
DRY
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
Dry
May-2017
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20Deo-2017
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
0.20 U
Dry
0.20U
0.20U
0.20UJun-2018
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U0.05
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
U
--
U
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.07
J
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Deo-2019
Effective
11/1/2019
0.06
J
--
U
1.30
J
--
U
1.00
J
-
U
--
U
1.00
J
1.00
J
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
IJ
--
U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Page 13 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter : Sulfide CAS No. 18496-25-8
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
U U U U
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
0.21
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
50
134 J
U
U
Jan-2010
NE
100
100 U
100 U
100 U
May-2010
100
100 U
100 U
100 U
Nov-2010
100
1380.00
100 U
100 U
May-2011
100
544 J
100 U
100 U
Nov-2011
100
2795.00
100 U
100 U
May-2012
100
137 J
100 U
100 U
Nov-2012
100
1
1
1 100 U
100 U
100 U
644 J
100 U
100 U
May-2013
100
1
1
1 100 U
100 U
100 U
272 J
100 U
100 U
DRY
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
0.21
100
100 U
467 J
100 U
100 U
230 J
1000 1000
DRY
Nov-2014
100
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
DRY
May-2015
100
104 J
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
Nov-2015
100
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
May-2016
100
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
INN
100 U
346 J
Nov-2016
100
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
240 J
DRY
May-2017
100
1000
1000
100U
1000
1000
100U
100U
NA
NA
NA
100U
100U
4790.00
1000
537J
1000
1000
1000
NA
NA
NA
NA
Deo-2017
100
100 Ulil
U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
100 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Jun-2018
100
100.00
00
J
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
Deo-2018
100
--
UU
P16110.00
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
UUJun-2019
100
--
UU
--
U
--
U
--
UU
--
UDeo-2019
100
422.00
UU
--
U
--
U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard = NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 14 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Thallium CAS No. 7440-28-0
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
NO
NO
NO
0.04 U 0.04 U
0.04 U 0.04 U
0.04 U 0.04 U
0.03 U 0.03 U
NO
NO
NO
0.198 U 0.198 U 0.198 U 0.198 U 0.198 U 0.198 U 0.198 U
0.03U 0.03U 0.03U 0.03U 0.03U 0.03U 0.03U 0.03U 0.03U
0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U
0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U
0.02 U 0.05 J 0.02 U 0.08 J 0.04 J 0.04 J
0.08 J 0.05 J 0.12 J 0.04 J 0.07 J 0.02 U 0.05 J
0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U
0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U
0.02 U 0.02 U 0.14 J 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.30 J
NO
NO
is
Nov-01
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.07
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
Nov-2007
0.04 E
0.04 U
0.2 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.2 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
Dry
0.04 U
0.04 U
May-2008
0.04
NO
0.11
0.04 U
0.1 J
0.11
0.11
0.2 J
0.11
0.04 U
0.2 J
0.04 U
0.04 U
Nov-2008
0.04 E
0.04 U
0.11
0.04 U
0.04 U
0.11
0.11
0.04 U
Dry
0.11
NO
May-2009
0.03
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
0.03 U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
0.20
0.198 U
0.198 U
0.198 U
Jan-2010
2
0.2
0.03
0.11
0.03U
0.03U
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.03U
0.03U
0.03U
0.1J
0.11
0.11
0.03U
May-2010
0.05
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.11
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.5 J
0.11
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
Nov-2010
0.05
0.05 U
0.11
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.11
0.5 J
0.11
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
May-2011
0.02
0.02 U
0.11
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.03 J
0.07 J
0.9 J
0.24 J
0.02 U
0.05 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.09 J
Nov-2011
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.24 J
0.14 J
0.05 J
0.16 J
0.08 J
0.08 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.12 J
0.09 J
0.35 J
0.22 J
0.07 U
0.10 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.10 J
0.26 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
�02Damaged
Damaged
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.10 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.13 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.29 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
0.07 U
Damaged
0.04 J
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.18 J
0.02 U
0.08 J
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.10 J
0.20 J
0.06 J
0.05 J
0.02 U
0.06 J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
2B Std Class
C and SC
(fish)
2
0.02
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.06 J
0.02 U
0.02 J
0.02 U
0.26 J
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.13 J
0.081.1 0.081.1
0.02 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.13
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
Damaged
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.151
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
Dry
May-2015
0.02
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.06 J
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.05 J
0.07 J
0.10 J
0.10 J
0.06 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.30 J
0.02 U
0.03 J
0.02 U
0.02 J
0.03 J
0.02 J
0.03 J
0.04 J
Nov-2015
0.02
0.02 U
0.07 J
0.02 U
0.16 J
0.05 J
0.09 J
0.06 J
0.04 J
0.18 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.03 J
0.07 J
0.06 J
0.13 J
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.04 J
0.07 J
May-2016
0.05
0.05 U
0.07 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
DRY
0.18 J
0.09 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.07 J
0.07 J
0.05 U
0.06 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
Nov-2016
0.05
0.05 U
0.10 J
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
DRY
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 U
0.05 J
Dry
May-2017
0.08
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
O.OBU
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
O.OBU
0.111
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.08 J
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.081.1
0.10 J
Deo-2017
0.08
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 J
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.12 J
0.08 U
0.13 J
0.08 U
Dry
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
Jun-2018
0.05
--
U
--
U
0.11
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
--
U
0.10
J
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
I U
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
0.07
J
0.1
J
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.08
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.08
--
U
--
U
0.07
J
Jun-2019
0.05
--
U
0.14
J
0.10
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.16
J
0.12
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
U
0.07
J
0.12
J
--
U
0.05
J
--
U
0.09
J
0.06
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Deo-2019
0.02
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.06
J
0.05
J
0.02
J
--
U
0.04
J
0.02
J
0.31
J
0.10
J
0.09
J
0.06
J
0.46
J
--
U
0.11
J
0.02
J
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.07 0.00
Page 15 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Tin CAS No. 744031-5
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-1D
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MIN-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
B = DETECTED IN TRIP BLANK
5.36 JB 6.02 JB 4 JB
Ell
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin AssessmentPhase 2
1.80
12.9 JB
5.34 JB
5.12 JB
Jan-2010
2000
0.08
0.08 U
0.08 U
0.08 U
May-2010
0.11
1.5 J
3.9 J
0.4 J
Nov-2010
0.11
0.5 J
0.6 J
0.5 J
May-2011
0.16
0.23 J
0.32 J
0.95 J
Nov-2011
0.16
0.26 J
0.47 J
0.24 J
May-2012
0.10
0.15 J
0.24 J
0.10 U
Nov-2012
0.10
1
1
1 0.1 U
0.1 U
0.17 J
0.13 J
0.28 J
0.92 J
May-2013
0.06
1
1
10.24
J
0.24 J
0.20 J
0.08 J
Nov-2013_7
m
Not SapledIm
May-2014
2B Std Class C and SC
2B Std Class C and SC
(fish)
800
0.06
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 J
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.13U 0.13U
Nov-2014
0.05
0.05 U
0.96 J
0.05 U
0.22 J
0.18 J
May-2015
0.06
0.6 U
0.13 J
0.06 U
0.06 J
0.12 J
Nov-2015
0.06
0.11 J
0.14 J
0.35 J
0.20 J
0.35 J
May-2016
0.06
0.6 U
0.111
0.06 U
0.09 J
0.33 J
[a.
Nov-2016
0.06
0.6 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
0.06 U
May-2017
0.13
0.52J
0.13 U
0.14J
0.13U
0.28J
0.22 J
0.21 J
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.20 J
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Deo-2017
0.13
0.91J
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.23J
0.24J
0.13U
0.13U
0.14J
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.13U
0.24J
0.13U
0.21J
0.13U
0.181
0.221
NA
NA
NA
NA
Jun-2018
0.05
0.10
J
--
U
--
--
1.20
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
--
U
0.07
J
0.1
J
--
U
Dry
NA
NA
Dry
Deo-2018
0.05
0.17
J
1.80
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.24
J
0.55
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Jun-2019
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
Deo-2019
0.05
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.16
J
--
U
0.19
J
0.60
J
--
U
0.20
J
0.16
J
0.10
J
-
U
--
U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 16 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Vanadium CAS No. 7440-62-2
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fee. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Sld
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
NO
NO
NO
0.7 J 1.7 J
1.11 0.07 U
0.1 1 1.51
1.0 1 2.7 J
NO
NO
NO
0.586 U 0.586 U 0.586 U 0.586 U 0.586 U 0.586 U 0.586 U
4.9J 4.5J 1.3J 2.4J 4.9J 1.4J 35.00 15-7J 3.0J
0.61 3.2J 1.01 3.7J 2.4J 3.3J
0.91 1.91 0.61 4.4J 3.6J 8.51
1.2J 3.1J 0.54J 2.9J 1.01 11.81
1.3J 9.2J 0.55J 4.8J 1.4J 0.3J 8.4J
0.961 5.9J 0.78J 6.91 2.2J 31.00
0.25J 4.1J 0.44J 6.4J 3.O1 0.41J 22.7J
0.07J 4.6J 0.35J 7.SJ 2.OJ 0.07U 8.2J
NO
NO
Nov-01
48.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
124.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
98.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
115.00
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
44.00
45.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
NO
NO
NO
Nov-2007
0.42 E
1.51
0.91
6.9 J
1.61
17 J
2.5 J
1.4 J
Dry
2.O J
0.71
May-2008
0.07
0.07 U
0.8 J
0.07 U
0.07 U
3.4 J
1.2 J
4.6 J
3.11
1.0 J
40.00
1.4 J
0.8 J
Nov-2008
0.07 E
2.6 J
1.3 J
3.11
1.81
4.2 J
1.3 J
0.81
Dry
9.2 J
1.2 J
May-2009
0.28
3.5 J
2.6 J
1.81
10.O 1
1.61
7.5 J
1.81
1.3 J
30.00
2.3 J
1.91
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
0.59
0.586 U
0.586 U
0.586 U
Jan-2010
0.3
0.28
11
3.5J
2.3J
2.1J
11.4J
5.1J
11.61
0.81
0.91
18.9J
0.81
0.91
0.6J
May-2010
0.03
3.8J
2.1J
2J
0.81
8.3J
2.3J
5.81
1.3J
1.61
2.0J
1.51
1.4J
3.0J
Nov-2010
0.03
3.3J
0.61
2.6J
1.61
9.4J
3.2J
4.4J
1.11
1.91
3.1J
1.11
0.91
0.91
May-2011
0.14
1.2J
0.94J
1.4J
0.69J
7.5J
4.3J
3.9J
0.75J
0.76J
6.8JjV2
0.93J
7.2J
Nov-2011
0.14
Damaged
2.5J
2.OJ
0.75J
0.4J
3J
0.881
8.51
2.4J
3.3J
1.2J
4.1J
2.2J11JO.881
May-2012
0.10
1.7J
2.OJ
1.4J
2.0J
7.2J
S.6J
3.0J
1.3J
1.3J
9.5J
1.O1
3.OJ
Nov-2012
010
Damaged
1.2J
1.51
1.7J
0.1U
1.81
1.61
5.8J
2.OJ
4.7J
0.52J
1.2J
1.51
0.67J
2.3J
May-2013
0.07
Damaged
1.OJ
1.3J
0.62J
0.93J
1.9J
0.39J
3.3J
3.5J
1.5J
1.3J
1.3J
3.1J
3.4J
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
MI
May-2014
--
0.06
0.16J
0.07U
1.3J
0.07U
3.2J
1.11
0.34J
1.3J
1.01
0.07U
2.9J
0.07U
4.1J
1.4J
1.4J
71.0 4.5J
6.0J
0.481
1.2J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.22
0.96J
2.3J
2.5J
0.14J
0.44J
Damaged
1.2J
1.3J
1.11
0.48J
4.4J
0.34J
11.01
1.3J
4.3J
0.30J
0.06U
1.3J
Dry
May-2015
0.22
0.88 J
1.01
1.9 1
0.59 J
0.26 J
2.2 J
0.46 J
6.3 J
5.5 1
1.11
2.9 J
0.94 J
0.22 U
4.90 J
0.22 U
5.101
1.20 J
0.22 U
1.61
1.11
0.94 J
2.5 J
1.1 1
Nov-2015
0.36
2.3J
2.8J
3.2J
1.51
5.3J
1.2J
4.1J
1.91
1.2J
0.911
5.3J
0.54J
3.2J
5.8J
27.00
1.3J
0.84J
1.7J
1.51
May-2016
0.36
4.O J
0.36 U
3.4 J
1.51
3.4 J
DRY
4.9 J
3.0 J
1.81
0.36 U
8.7 J
0.36 U
16.51
10.51
5.7 J
1.61
0.70 J
1.7 J
0.531
Nov-2016
0.36
2.O J
0.39 J
3.3 J
1.91
2.7 J
DRY
5.61
1.61
3.0 J
0.36 U
8.51
0.591
16.4 J
1.51
2.6 J
0.57 J
0.54 J
1.O 1
Dry
May-2017
0.24
2.2J
2.8J
2.0J
2.4J
1.61
5.3J
4.3J
5.9J
17.2J
17.9J
4.3J
3.7J
0.241J
8.51
0.241J
17.9J
0.911
1.4.1
5.91
0.74J
0.71J
0.95J
5.6J
Deo-2017
0.24
4.1J
1.11
0.98J
5.3J
0.35J
5.2J
4.1J
4.6J
3.01
7.5J
1.11
2.7J
1.51
9.11
1.51
21.3J
6.6J
0.591
20.1J
34.0
12.0J
7.1J
1.3J
1.31
1.11
Jun-2018
0.03
1.40
J
1.20
2.70
J
0.83
J
3.00
J
5.80
J
4.00
J
5.10
J
4.60
J
1.20
J
1.30
J
1.70
J
1.20
J
8.00
J
2.70
J
16.00
J
15.00
J
0.05
J
2.10
21.2
J
8.8
J
5.2
J
1.40
J
1.80
J
Dry
Deo-2018
UPEPA Drinking
Water
Guideline
0.03
2.00
1.80
--
U
1.20
--
U
7.20
3.10
5.00
1.30
2.00
2.40
1.60
--
U
8.10
1.50
17.50
1.30
--
U
2.30
3.5
9.1
1.2
n.4
0.11
J
0.57
J
0.7
J
Jun-2019
21
0.03
--
U
1.50
--
U
0.60
J
--
U
5.90
2.50
2.70
2.80
6.20
2.90
3.10
0.54
J
9.50
3.20
40.00
1.50
--
U
4.20
5.7
11.9
2.9
0.92
J
2.4
3.2
Deo-2019
0.07
--
U
5.00
0.39
J
4.00
--
U
5.00
4.00
3.00
5.00
7.00
0.86
J
5.00
1.00
J
11.00
3.00
40.00
1.00
0.05
J
4.00
15
11.2
3.3
0.90
J
11
2
2.70 0.00 124.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 7.20 0.00 4.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 7.00 0.00 2.90 0.00 115.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 11.00 0.00 3.20 0.00 40.00 0.00 15.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 35.00 0.00 71.00 0.00 11.90 0.00 5.20 0.00 0.00 84.00 0.00 1.40 0.00 11.00 0.00 3.20 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 17 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Zinc CAS No. 7440-66-6
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Asst. BG Asst. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MIN-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1050
NO
NO
NO
3.6 J 8 J
2.6 J 1.6 J
3.3 J 3.3 J
5.9 J 5.9 J
NO
NO
NO
1.66 JB 1.29 U 1.29 U 1.29 U 4.63 JB 1.29 U 1.48 JB
7.5 J 2.6 J 2.9 J 2.8 J 8.51 21.00 4.7 J 15.0 11.000
1.51 4.0J 2.0J 1.11 7.5J 1.2J
2.6J 2.1J 3.2J 3.1J 8.51 2.6J
3.2J 3.51 2.1J 3.5J 32.00 2.6J
2.31 1.7J 1.91 1.81 3.2J 3.2J 4.7J
0.661 0.48U 1.7J 0.48U 8.11 6.2J
4.4J 3.iJ 6.4J 4.iJ 3.3J 6.iJ 4.6J
3.7J 2.iJ 3.SJ 1.9J 3.5J 4.2J 5.6J
NO
NO
Nov-01
53.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
NO
99.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
NO
57.00
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
134.00
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.2
16.00
0.2 U
19.00
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
0.2 U
26.000
0.2 U
15.000
Nov-2007
0.04 E
7.9 J
3.3 J
16.00
5.9 J
20.00
3.4 J
5.1 J
Dry
24.00
71.00
May-2008
0.04
1.00
4.5 J
2.20
1.9 J
7.8 J
4.1 J
3.0 J
3.4 J
2.7 J
43.00
7.8 J
19.00
Nov-2008
0.14 E
5.1 J
2.4 J
5.3 J
3.9 J
3.6 J
3.0 J
1.7 J
Dry
96.00
36.00
May-2009
0.14
9.4 J
14.00
5 J
12.00
3.3 J
2.5 J
2.8 J
3.2 J
21.00
4.8 J
18.00
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
1.29
1.29 U
1.29 U
1.29 U
Jan-2010
1000
0.14
2.2 J
3 J
1.3 J
3.1 J
16.00
4.8 J
3.9 J
1.51
3.1 J
15.00
8.11
14.00
8.81
May-2010
0.08
2.2J
5.81
2.3J
2.9J
8.51
4.3J
3.3J
3.81
6.3J
2.3J
5.31
11.00
3.0J
Nov-2010
0.08
5.61
3.51
3.4J
4.1J
8.11
14.00
4.5J
4.3J
5.4J
5.61
6.81
17.00
3.9J
May-2011
0.24
2.6J
3.11
3.61
3.2J
6.1J
7.4J
1.81
2.4J
5.4J
9.6J
12.00
5.8J
9.41
Nov-2011
0.24
Damaged
3.2J
1.11
2.0J
1.7J
2.7J
4.7J
9.4J
7.7J
3.3J
1.8J
5.3J
1.91
8.2J
16.00
2.4J
May-2012
0.48
1.4J
2.OJ
0.72J
5.7J
4.7J
6.6J
0.91J
0.66J
3.2J
6.4J
18.00
6.0J
0.70J
Nov-2012
0.48
Damaged
4.7J
1.8J
4.6J
2.5J
7.6J
8.4J
6.7J
5.8J
4.9J
4.6J
5.SJ
4.SJ
6.SJ
8.2J
11.00
May-2013
0.47
Damaged
0.76J
5.4J
2.4J
5.OJ
1.2J
3.8J
1.6J
6.1J
0.911
1.01
2.9J
4.iJ
5.2J
fi.BJ
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
MI
May-2014
WER
0.53
0.881
1.11
2.6J
1.4J
1.8J
2.0
0.84J
1.9J
3.4J
3.4J
1.3J
1.3J
2.0J
2.4J
2.6J
4.91 3.2J
9.9J
2.3J
2.7J
Dry
Nov-2014
0.20
1.2 J
3.2 J
2.4 J
3.01
50.00
Damaged
0t4 J
1.4 J
2.8 J
1.3 J
1.4 J
3.1 1
1.91
4.6 J
5.7 J
3.7 J
2.O J
5.7 J
Dry
May-2015
0.20
16.00
3.3 J
3.5 J
0.37 J
3.3 J
0.94 J
0.27 J
8.3 J
15.00
2.5 J
2.5 J
1.51
2.O J
1.101
3.O 1
13.00
1.30 J
11.00
16.00
2.31
3.O 1
6.4 J
5.2 J
Nov-2015
0.20
1.7J
3.2J
1.7J
6.91
5.91
6.61
6.2J
6.1J
1.3J
4.8J
2.8J
4.5J
6.0J
3.6J
35.00
4.7J
4.8J
9.4J
9.81
May-2016
1.61
3.4J
2.5J
3.81
3.7J
3.4J
DRY
3.2J
2.3J
1.91
3.11
2.1J
1.91
2.0J
4.5J
12.00
3.6J
2.4J
5.2J
6.3J
Nov-2016
1.61
1.81
1.61 U
2.5J
2.6 J
1.81
DRY
1.91
2.7J
3.5J
1.91
1.61 U
2.4J
2.0J
1.61 U
6.81
2.4J
2.9J
5.0J
Dry
ay-2017
0.66
11.00
1.81
5.4J
3.4J
5..2J
2.6J
3.7J
3.3J
27.00
6.1J
2.8J
2.9J
2.5J
1.91
2..5J
1.51
1.91
8.4J
13..00
0.76J
1.8.1
2..6J
8.1J
eo-2017
0.66
51.00
4.3J
2.7J
4.0J
2.1J
4.2J
8.2J
5.6J
2.7J
2.8J
1.11
1.91
3.7J
3.81
3.2J
5.51
2.3J
7.4J
2100
5.8J
6.9J
5.O1
Dry
2.1J
4.6J
10.00
Jun-2018
0.11
6.50
J
1.10
J
5.70
J
5.20
J
6.80
J
1.10
J
3.20
J
3.30
J
4.50
J
--
U
0.19
J
1.50
J
1.60
J
0.32
J
2.20
J
2.00
J
1.60
J
4.70
J
5.00
J
2.4
J
5.4
J
8.J
Dry
1.60
J
5.20
J
Dry
14.00
91.0
450
3Deo-2018
J
3.400
J
3.00
3.230
460
087
J
0.4
J
1.5 J
22.00
1.7
J
360
J
4.5
J
3.80
J
1.50
4.70
J
230
J
210
J
2
J
310
J
J
20
J
so
2.70
J
600
J
4.40
J
4.70
J
970un-2019
6.
J
5.
to
J
5
J
3 J
13.00
5
J
8.20
J
4.8
J
D
1.00
J
4.00
J
00
1.40
J
8.00
J
7.00
J
2.4
Jti
18 J
202.00
42
J
31
3
J20
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)' in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
202.00 0.00 96.00 0.00 71.00 0.00 11.00 0.00
Page 18 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Acetone CAS No. 67-64-1
Sample
Compliance Limit (pglL) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 3.30 J
3.50 J 5.60 J
U 4.50 J
U 2.10 J
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U
U U U 29.00 J U
U U U U UKUU
U U U U U
U U U 10.10 J U
U U U U U
U U U U U
flUU
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
1.20 E
247.00
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
1.20
20.20
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
1.20 E
U
2.20
J
U
1.80
J
2.70
J
1.70
J
2.30
J
Dry
2.30
J
2.20
J
May-2008
1.21
2.10
J
3.30
J
2.50
J
2.70
J
3.10
J
4.10
J
4.50
J
3.40
J
4.50
J
4.50
J
5.50
J
3.80
J
Nov-2008
1.2 E
1.70
J
3.40
J
1.30
J
1.50
J
2.70
J
2.40
J
2.80
J
U
3.70
J
5.30
J
May-2009
1.21
3.00
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.30
J
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
2.18
NS
NS
U
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
6000
9.06
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
9.06
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
9.06
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
9.06
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Ii
Nov-2011
9.06
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
9.06
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
9.06
U
U
U
U
il
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U9.06
U
U
U
U
U
UUU
U
U
UUUUUU
U
U
U
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
9.06
U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06U 9.O6U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
Dry
Nov-2014
9.06
U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
Damaged
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
12.50 J
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
Dry
May-2015
9.06
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.50
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.10
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
22.00
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
16.40
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.20
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
Nov-2015
9.06
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
May-2016
9.06
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
DRY
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
Nov-2016
9.06
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.60
J
12.00
J
9.06 U
DRY
9.06 U
9.06 U
17.20
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
12.30
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
NS
May-2017
9.06
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.06U
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061.1
10.30
J
9.06U
9.06U
9.06U
9.06U
9.06U
9.061.1
9.06U
9.061.1
9.061.1
9.061J
9.061-1
D9 2017
9.06
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
12.20
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
13.30
J
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
9.06 U
Dry
9.06U
9.06U
9.06U
Jun-2018
2000
9.06
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
9.06
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
10.30
J
9.63
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
11.80
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
Deo-2019
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
4.50 0.00 9.20 0.00 5.30 0.00 0.00 0.00
Page 19 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Benzene CAS No. 71-43-2
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1
1
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 1.00
U 1.10
U 2.10
U 1.50
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 0.30 J U U U
U U U 1.20 U U
U U U 0.70 J U U U
U U U 1.10 U U 0.40 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.16 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.16 E
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
0.30
J
0.70
J
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.50
J
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.16 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.50
J
U
U
U
May-2009
0.16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.07
NS
NS
1.30
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
1.90
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
1
0.24
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.24
U
U
3.10
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.24
0.60
J
U
2.10
0.90
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.24
0.30
J
U
1.00
U
U
U
U
U
0.40
J
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.24
U
U
U
U
1.10
0.60
J
U
U
U
U
0.40
J
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.24
U
U
1.00
0.60
J
U
U
U
U
1.10
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.24
U
U
0.60
J
U
1.20
0.70
J
U
U
U
U
1.60
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.24
U
U
U
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not sampled
May-2014
51
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.10
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.30
J
1.90El
U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.40
J
U
U
0.24U 0.24U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.24
0.24 U
0.60
J
2.10
0.50
J
0.24 U
Damaged
0.24 U
0.30
J
0.80
U
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.10
0.24 U
0.50
J
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
Dry
May-2015
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.50
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.60
J
0.24 UU
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.50
J
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
Nov-2015
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.70
1.70
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 UU
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
May-2016
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.30
0.24 U
0.24 U
DRY
0.24 U
0.40
J
0.90
U
0.50
J
0.24 U
1.40
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
Nov-2016
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.20
0.80
J
0.24 U
DRY
0.24 U
0.40
J
1.50U
0.60
J
0.24 U
1.90
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
Dry
May-2017
0.24
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
2.80
2.00
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
1.20U
0.40
J
0.24U
1.70
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
0.24U
Deo-2017
0.24
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
1.70
2.70
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.60
U
0.24 U
1.00
2.00
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
Dry
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24 U
0.24
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
1.20
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.30
U
I --
I U
0.90
J
1.40
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
MCI=
5
(NEW)
0.24
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
1.30
1.68
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.48
J
--
U
1.57
0.48
J
1.48
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
0.24
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
1.00
0.30
J
--
U
--
U
0.31
J
1.17
--
U
2.26
1.38
2.52
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
UU
--
U
--
U
U0.24
AU
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.44
J
--
U
1.81
1.48
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
1.13
--
U
1.28
2.56
2.12
--
U
--
U
1.47
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.10 0.00 2.70 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.60 0.00 1.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.26 0.00 2.56 0.00 2.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 20 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: 2-Butanone CAS No. 78-93-3
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fee. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
100
4200
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U U
1.00 J 1.10 J
U U
U U
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 8.90 J U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-O6
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.85 E
129.00
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.85
66.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.85 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.85 E
U
0.90
J
0.90
J
U
U
U
U
U
1.10
J
1.20
J
1.70
J
U
Nov-2008
0.85 E
U
U
1.10
J
1.50
J
1.00
J
1.00
J
U
U
U
U
May-2009
0.85
24.80
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.54
NS
NS
U
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
4000
2.21
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
2.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
2.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
2.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
2.21
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
2.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
2.21
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
2.21
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
2.21
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U 2.21U
2.30
J
2.21U
2.21U
Dry
Nov-2014
2.21
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
Damaged
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
Dry
May-2015
2.21
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
4.20
J
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21 U
Nov-2015
2.21
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
17.70
J
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
May-2016
2.21
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
DRY
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
2.21 U
Nov-2016
2.21
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
DRY
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
3.20
J
2.21U
2.21U
Dry
May-2017
2.21
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
Deo-2017
2.21
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
Dry
2.21U
2.21U
2.21U
Jun-2018
26000
2.21
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.50
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
3.50
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
2.21
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
Deo-2019
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard = NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 21 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Carbon Disulfide CAS No. 75-15-0
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Data
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U U
U U
U U
U U
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.14 E
U
U
NO
U
U
U
U
U
NO
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
NO
U
U
U
May-2009
0.14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.07
NS
NS
U
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
700
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
May-2013
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
0.23
0.40
J
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.39U 0.39U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Damaged
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
May-2015
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.50
J
0.40
J
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.40
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.50
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Nov-2015
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
May-2016
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Nov-2016
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Dry
May-2017
0.39
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.391.1
0.30
J
0.39U
1.30
J
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
Deo-2017
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.40
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Dry
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Jun-2018
0.23
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.40
J
--
U
--
U
0.40
J
--
U
0.70
J
--
U
0.40
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.23
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
Jun-2019
Deo-2019
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 22 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Chlorobenzene CAS No. 108-90-7
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U U
U U
U U
U U
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
50
0.13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.13 E
U
U
NO
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2009
0.13 E-
U
NO
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+Phase 2
0.08
NS
NS
U
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
50
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.30
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
140
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U F 0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30
J
0.30 U
0.30 U
Damaged
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Dry
May-2015
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Nov-2015
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
May-2016
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
DRY
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Nov-2016
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
DRY
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Dry
May-2017
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Deo-2017
0.30
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Dry
0.30 U
0.30 U
0.30 U
Jun-2018
0.3
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.3
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
Deo-2019
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 23 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Chloroethane CAS No. 75-00-3
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.70 J
U U
U U
U U
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U NO U NO U NO U U
U U U
U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U
U U U 1.10 J U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.29 E
U
U
U
U
U
I
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.29
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.29 E
0.30
J
0.40
J
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.29 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.29 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May_2009
0.29
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.11
NS
NS
0.17
J
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
3000
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
--
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U 0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Damaged
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Dry
May-2015
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
1.70
J
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Nov-2015
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
May-2016
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
DRY
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Nov-2016
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
DRY
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Dry
May-2017
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Deo-2017
0.48
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Dry
0.48 U
0.48 U
0.48 U
Jun-2018
0.48
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.5
J
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.48
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
Jun-2019
Deo-2019
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 24 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Chloromethane CAS No. 74-87-3
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1
2.6
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U U
0.20 J U
U 0.50 J
U U
NO
NO
NO
3.30 Uj2,9J U U 0.21 J U
U U U U U U U U
U U U U U
U U U U U
U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.18 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.18
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.18 E
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.18 E
0.30
J
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
0.20
J
U
U
U
0.30
J
U
Nov-2008
0.18 E
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
0.20
J
U
May-2009
0.18
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.15
NS
NS
U
0.15
J
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
U
Jan-2010
3
0.77
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.77
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.77
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.77
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.77
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.77
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.77
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.77
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
--
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U 0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Damaged
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Dry
May-2015
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Nov-2015
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
May-2016
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
DRY
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Nov-2016
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
DRY
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Dry
May-2017
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
DeP2017
0.77
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Dry
0.77 U
0.77 U
0.77 U
Jun-2018
0.77
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.77
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.77
Deo-2019
0.77
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard = NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 25 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter : 1,2-Dichloroethane CAS No. 78-875
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.40
U 0.40
U 0.70
U 0.50
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 0.60 U U
U U U 0.40 U U U
U U U 1.10 U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.12 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.12
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.12 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.12 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.12 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May_2009
0.12
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.08
NS
NS
U
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
U
NS
U
Jan-2010
5
0.4
0.27
U
U
U
U
0.40
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.27
U
U
0.50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.27
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.27
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.27
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.27
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.27
U
U
UUNUUTE
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.27
U
U
1.00
U
U
U
U
0.40
1.20
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
100
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U 0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Damaged
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Dry
May-2015
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Nov-2015
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
May-2016
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
DRY
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Nov-2016
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.30
J
0.27 U
0.27 U
DRY
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Dry
May-2017
0.27
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
0.27 U
Deo-2017
0.21
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 UtO2
0.21 U0.21
U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
Dry
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
Jun-2018
0.2
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
MCL=
5
(NEW)
0.02
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.24
0.13U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.34
J
0.08
J
0.13
J--
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.02
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.11
J
0.13
J
0.02
J
0.02
J
0.02
J
0.06
J
--
U
0.40
0.18
J
0.19
J
--
U
U
--
U
--
U
0.04
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U0.02
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.21
0.27
J
0.15
J
--
U
--
U
0.11
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 26 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: cis-1,2-Dichlomethene CAS No. 156-59-2
Sample
Compliance Limit (PgIL) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
PgIL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.20 J
U 0.20 J
U 1.30 J
U 0.20 J
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 0.60 J U U
U U U 1.20 J U U U
U U U 8.50 J U U
U U U 4.10 J U U U
U U U 5.90 J U U 1.40 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.14 E
1.00
J
1.40
J
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
1.60
J
May-2009
0.14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.07
NS
NS
0.67
J
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.07
J
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
70
0.25
U
U
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.25
U
U
0.50
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.25
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.25
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
0.40
J
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.25
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.25
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.25
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.25
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
720
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.70
J
0.25 U
0.30
J
0.25 U 0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Damaged
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
1.70
J
0.25 U
1.60
J
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Dry
May-2015
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.30
J
0.50
J
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Nov-2015
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
May-2016
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
DRY
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.50
J
0.25 U
0.80
J
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Nov-2016
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
DRY
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.40
J
0.30
J
1.60
J
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Dry
May-2017
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Deo-2017
0.25
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.60
1.40
J
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Dry
0.25 U
0.25 U
0.25 U
Jun-2018
0.25
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.40
J
0.50
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.25
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.31
J
--
U
0.34
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.25
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.35
J
--
U
0.40
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Deo-2019
0.25
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.52
J
0.34
J
--
U
--
U
0.46
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 27 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Ethylbenzene CAS No. 100414
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1
550
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.40 J
U 0.30 J
U 0.30 J
U 0.20 J
NO
NO
NO
0.95 J U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 2.00 J U U
U U U U U U
U U U 0.60 J U U U
U U U 2.10 J U U
U U U 1.50 J U U U
U U U 1.20 J U U 0.30 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-O6
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.16 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.16 E
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.16 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.16 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2009
0.16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.08
NS
NS
0.48
J
U
NS
NS
IU
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
600
0.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.21
U
U
0.70
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.21
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
EFU
U
U
U
May-2013
0.21
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
97
0.21
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U 0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.21
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
Damaged
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.50
J
0.21 U
0.60
J
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
Dry
May-2015
0.21
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
Nov-2015
0.21
0.21U
0.21U
0.80
J
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21U
0.21U
May-2016
0.21
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
DRY
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
Nov-2016
0.21
0.21U
0.21U
0.30
J
0.21U
0.21U
DRY
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21U
Dry
May-2017
0.21
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.30J
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
Deo-2017
0.21
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.21 U
0.40
J
0.21 U
0.21U
0.21 U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21 U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
Dry
0.21U
0.21U
0.21U
Jun-2018
0.21
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
I U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
Dry
--
Dry
Deo-2018
0.21
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.44
J
--
U
0.23
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.21
Deo-2019
0.21
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 28 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Methylene Chloride CAS No. 75-09-2
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MIN-7
MIN-8 MW-9A MW-10 MIN-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
1
4.6
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.30 J
1.00 J 0.20 J
U U
U 0.20 J
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 11.20 U U
U U U 0.90 J U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.14
U
U
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
0.20
J
Nov-2008
0.14 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
U
May-2009
0.14
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
U
U
UIII
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+Phase 2
0.10
INS
INS
U
U
INS
INS
INS
INS
U
INS
U
INS
U
Jan-2010
5
0.64
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.64
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.64
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.64
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.64
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.64
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.64
U
U
U
U 0.80
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.64
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
11000
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U 0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Damaged
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Dry
May-2015
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Nov-2015
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
May-2016
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
DRY
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Nov-2016
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
DRY
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Dry
May-2017
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Deo-2017
0.64
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Dry
0.64 U
0.64 U
0.64 U
Jun-2018
0.64
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.64
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.64
Deo-2019
0.64
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 29 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Naphthalene CAS No. 91-203 PAH 8260 scan #61
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pglL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MW-14D
MW-14S
MW-15
MW-16
MIN-17 old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
0.849U
L
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
6
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.83
0.805U
0.8671J
0.08671.1
0.8671.1
Jan-2010
6
0.47
NS
NS
NS
May-2010
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
Nov-2010
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
May-2011
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
Nov-2011
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
May-2012
0.47
0.47U
0.47 U
0.47 U
Nov-2012
0.47
May-2013
0.47
Nov-2013
0.5
May-2014
Added MW-12s
to Assessment
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47U
0.47 U 0.47 U
Nov-2014
0.47
0.47 U
2.90
J
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.471.1
May-2015
0.47
Nov-2015
0.47
0.47 U
0.47U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.471.1
May-2016
0.47
Nov-2016
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.80
J
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.60
J
May-2017
0.47
0.47 U
NS
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
7.70
J
1.80
J
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.90
J
0.47 U
0.47U
0.47 U
Deo-2017
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.70
J
3.10
J
0.47 U
0.47 U
2.50
J
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.60
J
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U 0.47 U
Jun-2018
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.471.1
0.47U
0.471.1
0.471.1
0.47U
0.47U
0.471.1
0.471.1
0.471.1
0.471.1
0.47U
0.471.1
0.471.1
1.60
J
0.47U
0.471.1
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U 0.471.1
12
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
1.08
J
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U 0.47U0.47
�e20118
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
1.34
J
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
1.14
J
0.47U
0.94
J
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U 0.47U
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
4.14
J
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.60
J
0.47U
1.56
J
0.47U
0.471.1
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U 0.471.1
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 30 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter:
Tetrahydrofumn CAS No. 109-99-9
Sample
Compliance Limit (pglL)
MDL
BG
BG
Assessment Wells
A-t.
BG
Assmt.
old B-20
Fac. BG
BG
BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pglL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MW-14D
MW-14S MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW-4
May-01
U
U
1.80
U
U
U
U
0.70
U
2.40
8.50
1.80
U
U
U
2.50
6.70
4.40
4.60
5.60
U
3.30
5.10
3.80
2.40
U
U
1.40
U
U
0.90
U
1.70
U
U
2.30
1.90
2.70
U
4.40
4.50
U
6.40
1.20
20.90
U
3.90
5.20
5.50
5.40
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
18.40
6.20
U
U
4.20
2.50
10.90
3.30
U
U
U
U
U
NS
U
U
U
U
0.90
14.00
0.70
7.40
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.60
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
Jan-2010
NE
May-2010
Nov-2010
May-2011
0.39
Nov-2011
0.39
May-2012
0.39
Nov-2012
0.39
May-2013
0.39
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
110000t39
0.39
0.39 U
1.00
6.50
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
10.80
10.20
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
5.50
0.39 U
0.80
0.39U
0.39U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.39
0.39 U
17.70
15.60
5.70
0.39 U
Damaged
3.40
7.10
7.70
0.39 U
0.39 U
2.70
10.00
0.39 U
17.30
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
Dry
May-2015
0.39
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
16.90
0.39 U
1.10
0.39 U
0.90
34.70
4.90
0.39 U
0.39 U
6.10
7.10
0.39 U
0.39 U
1.00
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
Nov-2015
0.39
0.39 U
0.39 U
20.90
8.60
0.39 U
0.50
0.39 U
1.60
2.60
0.39 U
0.39 U
2.50
1.80
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
May-2016
0.39
0.39 U
0.39 U
14.40
1.30
0.39 U
DRY
8.20
29.70
8.10
0.39 U
14.30
1.50
46.20
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
Nov-2016
0.39
0.39 U
0.39 U
10.60
6.10
0.50
DRY
5.60
16.30
11.70
0.39 U
8.80
0.39 U
49.00
0.39 U
0.60
0.70
0.90
0.39 U
Dry
May-2017
14.40
0.39U
0.39U
1.00
0.39U
19.10
12.70
0.50
1.50
0.50
12.80
15.00
0.39U
6.40
0.90
36.40
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
0.39U
1.20
0.39U
0.39U
Deo-2017
117.00
0.39 U
0.39 U
13.10
0.39 U
23.50
19.10
0.39 U
0.39 U
12.30
3.00
22.20
0.39 U
0.39 U
17.00
58.40
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
Dry
0.39 U
0.39 U
0.39 U
30.50
--
U
--
U
1.10
--
U
28.80
4.50
--
U
1.30
5.60
6.30
10.50
--
U
3.40
16.00
32.70
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
42.70
--
U
--
U
4.85
--
U
35.30
24.40
--
U
2.27
6.88
32.00
21.20
--
U
25.42
8.02
38.75
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U-43.30
0.62
J
0.51
J
3.94
0.52
J
26.60
8.44
2.44
6.80
14.40
27.00
28.10
0.67
J
29.00
17.30
64.90
1.47
--
U
0.81
J
--
U
0.59
J
--
U
0.73
J
1.10
1.14
0.40
J112.00
--
I U
--
U
27.90
--
U
1 23.10
1
1 20.50
1
1 --
U
1 2.48
14.70
2.47
32.90
--
U
31.20
43.80
40.10
--
U
--
U
10.50
--
U
--
U
0.5
J
4.22
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
4.22 0.00 1.20 0.00 1.14 0.00 0.40 0.00
Page 31 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Trichloroethene CAS No. 79-01-6
sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MIN-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U U
U U
U U
U U
NO
NO
NO
u U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 0.70 J U U
U U U U U U U
U U U 0.40 J U U
U U U U U U U
U U U UU U UU
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
DRY
U
U
May-2008
0.13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2009
013
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
UAug-2009
Begin Assessment+Phase2
0.05
NS
NS
U
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
Jan-2010
3
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.23
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
MU
U
U
May-2011
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.23
UUUU
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
DRY
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
30
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23U 0.23U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
Nov-2014
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Damaged
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
May-2015
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Nov-2015
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
May-2016
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Nov-2016
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
May-2017
0.23
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231J
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.23U
Deo-2017
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Jun-2018
0.23
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.23
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.23
Deo-2019
0.23
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 32 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Toluene CAS No. 108-8"
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MW-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.20 J
U 0.30 J
U 0.40 J
U 0.20 J
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U 0.60 J U U
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U 0.30 J
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
DRY
U
U
May-2008
0.13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.13 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.20
J
May_2009
0.13
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.08
NS
NS
0.19
J
0.12
J
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
U
NS
U
Jan-2010
1000
600
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
HU
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.30
J
U
U
U
May-2011
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.40
J
0.40
J
0.40
J
May-2012
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.50
J
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.23
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.30
J
1.30
J
U
DRY
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
11
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.231.1 F 0.23U
3.30
J
3.00
J
0.23 U
DRY
Nov-2014
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Damaged
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
DRY
May-2015
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.30
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Nov-2015
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.40
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
May-2016
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.10
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Nov-2016
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
DRY
May-2017
0.23
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.23U
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231.1
0.231J
0.231J
0.231J
0.231J
0.50
J
0.23U
0.231.1
0.23U
0.23U
0.23U
0.23U
0.231.1
Deo-2017
0.23
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.50
J
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
0.23 U
Jun-2018
0.23
--
U
2.60
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.30
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.23
--
U
2.60
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.24
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
0.38
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.23
Deo-2019
Effective
11/1/2019
11
0.23
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
3.30 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.00
Page 33 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Vinyl Chloride CAS No. 75-01.4
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assort. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-II MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
0.015
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
U 0.40 J
U U
U 0.50 J
U U
NO
NO
NO
U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U 0.80 J U U
U U U 1.90 J U U U
U U U 3.00 J U U U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.34 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.34
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.34 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.34
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.34 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May_2009
0.34
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.15
INS
INS
U
U
INS
INS
INS
INS
U
NS
INS
INS
INS
Jan-2010
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2013
0.63
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
2
0.03
2.4
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
1.10
J
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63U 0.63U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
2.00
0.63 U
0.63 U
Damaged
0.63 U
0.63 U
1.40
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
3.40
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Dry
May-2015
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
1.70
J
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Nov-2015
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.80
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
May-2016
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
DRY
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
1.90
J
0.63 U
3.70
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Nov-2016
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
DRY
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
1.70
J
0.63 U
4.30
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Dry
May-2017
0.63
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
1.10
J
0.63U
4.30
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
0.63U
Deo-2017
0.63
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.90
J
0.63 U
3.70
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Dry
0.63 U
0.63 U
0.63 U
Jun-2018
0.63
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
2.00
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
MCL=
2
(NEW)
0.12
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
1.82
J
1.09
J
--
U
--
U
0.18
J
1.25
J
1.48
J
--
U
2.20
--
U
2.21
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
Jun-2019
0.12
--
U
--
UU
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
1.77
0.69
3.33
--
U
--
U
0.13
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
UDeo-2019
MU
0.12
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U--
U
--
U
0.33
0.57
1.25
--
U
--
U2.53
J
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 1.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 1.25 0.00 1.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.69 0.00 4.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyle detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyle detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyle detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 34 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Xylenes CAS No. 1330-20-7
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment wells Assort. BG Assort. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
MCL
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D MW-3S MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8 MW-9A MW-10 MW-11 MW-12S MW-13 MW-14D MW-14S MW-15 MW-16 MIN-17 old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3 SW-4
May-01
--
NO
NO
NO
NO
U U
U U
U U
U U
NO
NO
NO
2.77 J U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U
U U U 11.70 J U U
U U U U U U
U U U U U U U
U U U 3.30 J U U
0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68U 0.68 U
0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68 U 0.68U 0.68 U
NO
NO
Nov-01
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-02
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-03
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-04
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-05
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-05
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-06
-
Damaged
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Nov-06
-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
0.48 E
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Jun-2007
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2007
0.48 E
NO
U
U
U
U
U
U
Dry
U
U
May-2008
0.48 E
U
NO
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2008
0.48 E
NO
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2009
0.48
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.07
NS
NS
0.36
J
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
U
NS
NS
NS
NS
Jan-2010
10,000
Soo
0.68
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2010
0.68
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2010
0.68
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2011
0.68
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2011
0.68
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
May-2012
0.68
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Nov-2012
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
May-2013
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Nov-2013
Not Sampled
May-2014
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68U 0.68U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Dry
Nov-2014
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Damaged
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.90
J
0.68 U
0.90
J
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Dry
May-2015
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.681.1
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Nov-2015
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
May-2016
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
DRY
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Nov-2016
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
DRY
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.70
J
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Dry
May-2017
0.68
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
O.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
O.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
1.50
J
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.68U
0.681.1
Deo-2017
670
0.68
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
1.50
J
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
o.68 U
0.68 U
Dry
0.68 U
0.68 U
0.68 U
Jun-2018
0.68
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Dry
--
U
--
U
Dry
Deo-2018
0.68
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
-
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
--
U
Jun-2019
0.68
Deo-2019
0.68
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 35 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) CAS No. 94-75-7 Herbicide/defoliant formerly a component of "Agent Orange" (still in widespread use) 8151 scan #1
Sample
Compliance Limit (Pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MIN-4
MIN-5
MIN-6
MIN-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MIN-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.61
0.6141J
0.630U
0.624U
0.613U
0.599U
0.6381.1
Jan-2010
70
0.36
-
--
--
-
May-2010
0.36
0.36U
0.361J
0.36U
Nov-2010
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
May-2011
0.36
0.36U
0.361J
0.36U
Nov-2011
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
May-2012
0.36
0.36U
0.361J
0.86
J
Nov-2012
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
May-2013
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
Nov-2013
May-2014
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36 U 0.36 U
Nov-2014
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
May-2015
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
Nov-2015
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
May-2016
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
Nov-2016
0.36
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
0.36U
May-2017
0.36
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
Deo-2017
0.36
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
Jun-2018
0.36
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
Deo-2018
0.36
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
Jun-2019
0.36
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
Deo-2019
0.36
0.36 U
0.36 U
03611
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
0.36 U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 36 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: 6-sec-butyl-2,4-dinitrophenol (Dinoseb) CAS No. 88-85-7 Herbicide/defoliant (banned since 1986) 8151 scan #2
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MIN-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MW-15
MW-16
MIN-17
old B-1s
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
-
-
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
-
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
-
Jan-2010
7
0.54
-
--
--
May-2010
0.54
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
Nov-2010
0.54
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
May-2011
0.54
0.82
J
0.54U
0.54U
EEI
Nov-2011
0.54
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
May-2012
0.54
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
Nov-2012
0.54
0.54U
0.541J
0.541J
0.54U
0.541J
0.54U
May-2013
0.54
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
Nov-2013
AM
May-2014
0.54
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
0.54U
0.54 U 0.54 U
Nov-2014
0.54
0.54U
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
May-2015
0.54
0.541J
0.541J
0.54U
0.541J
0.541J
Nov-2015
0.54
0.54U
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
May-2016
0.54
0.541J
0.541J
0.54U
0.541J
0.541J
Nov-2016
0.54
0.54U
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
0.541J
May-2017
0.54
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
Deo-2017
0.54
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.42 U
0.54 U
Jun-2018
0.54
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.42 U
0.54 U
Deo-2018
0.54
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
Jun-2019
0.54
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
Deo-2019
0.54
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.5411
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
0.54 U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 37 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: 2-(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy) propionic acid (2,4,5-TP), (Sil-) CAS No. 93-72-1 Herbicide/defoliant (banned since 1985) 8151 scan 43
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MIN-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MIN-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MIN-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-o5
May-0
Nov-O66
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.61
0.6141J
0.630U
0.624U
0.613U
0.5991J
0.6381.1
Jan-2010
50
0.42
-
--
--
-
May-2010
0.42
0.74
J
0.42U
0.42U
Nov-2010
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
May-2011
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
Nov-2011
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
May-2012
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
Nov-2012
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
May-2013
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
Nov-2013
May-2014
0.42
0.42U
0.43
J
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42 U 0.42 U
Nov-2014
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
May-2015
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.421J
0.42U
0.42U
Nov-2015
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
May-2016
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.421J
0.45
J
0.42U
Nov-2016
0.42
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
0.42U
May-2017
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
o.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
Deo-2017
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42EU
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
Jun-2018
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
Deo-2018
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
2.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
Jun-2019
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
o.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
Deo-2019
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
0.42 U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)' in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 38 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-T CAS No. 93-76-5 Herbicide/defoliant formerly a component of "Agent Orange" (banned since 1985) 8151 scan N4
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pgIL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MIN-4
MIN-5
MIN-6
MIN-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MIN-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW-4
May-01
Lo4U
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.61
0.630U
1
0.624U
0.613U
0.599U
0.6381.1
Jan-2010
NE
1
0.47
-
--
--
-
May-2010
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
Nov-2010
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
May-2011
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
Nov-2011
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
May-2012
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.77
J
Nov-2012
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
May-2013
1 0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
1.14
J
Nov-2013
AM
May-2014
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47 U 0.47 U
Nov-2014
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
May-2015
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
Nov-2015
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
May-2016
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
Nov-2016
0.47
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
0.47U
May-2017
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
Deo-2017
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
Jun-2018
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
o-20180.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
n-20190.47
PD
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
c-2019
0.47
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
0.47 U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)' in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 39 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: beta-BHC CAS No. 319.85.7 Byproduct of Lindane Pesticide banned in 1985 8081 scan 43
Sample
Compliance Limit (pglL) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MIN-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MIN-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MW-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MW-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
0.0165U
L
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
d Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.01
0.02
J
0.01701.1
0.0173U
0.0165U
Jan-2010
0.02
0.03
May-2010
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
Nov-2010
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
May-2011
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
Nov-2011
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
May-2012
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
Nov-2012
0.03
May-2013
0.03
Nov-2013
May-2014
0.03
0.31U 0.31U
Nov-2014
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
May-2015
0.03
Nov-2015
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
May-2016
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
Nov-2016
0.03
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
0.031 U
May-2017
0.03
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31 U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31 U
0.31U
0.31U
Dec-2017
0.03
0.31U
0.31U
0.316
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
Jun-2018
0.031
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.04
J
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
o-2018
0.031
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.04
J
0.31U
031U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
031U0.31U
0.31U
n-2010.031
PD
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
o-2019
0.031
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
0.07
J
0.31U
0.31U
0.3111
0.31U
0.31U
0.31U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 40 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Aldrin CAS No. 309-00-2 Pesticide (banned in 1990's) 8081 scan #1
Sample
Compliance Limit (Pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Std
2B Std
Pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MIN-11
MW-12S
MW-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MW-15
MW-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
0.0106U
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
d Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
0.01
0.0106U
0.0108U
0.0110U
0.0111U
0.0106U
Jan-2010
0.002
0.03
May-2010
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Nov-2010
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
May-2011
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Nov-2011
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
May-2012
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Nov-2012
0.03
May-2013
0.03
Nov-2013
May-2014
0.03
0.029U 0.029U
Nov-2014
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
May-2015
0.03
Nov-2015
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
May-2016
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Nov-2016
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
May-2017
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Deo-2017
0.03
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Jun-2018
0.029
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.03
J
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Deo-2018
0.029
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Jun-2019
0.029
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
Deo-2019
0.029
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
o.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
0.029U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 21- Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-1s is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 41 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Acenaphthene CAS No. 8332-9 PAH 8270 scan #1
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MW-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MW-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-1s
sW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW-4
May-01
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Mandated Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
JL
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
1.20
4.65
1.14 U
1.231.1
1.20U
1.201.1
Jan-2010
80
May-2010
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
Nov-2010
2.66
2.661.1
2.66U
2.66U
May-2011
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
Nov-2011
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
May-2012
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
Nov-2012
2.66
May-2013
2.66
Nov-2013
AM
May-2014
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U 2.66U
Nov-2014
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
May-2015
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.661.1
2.66U
2.66U
Nov-2015
2.66
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
[12.66U
2.66U
2.66U
May-2016
2.66
2.66U
4.04
J
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
Nov-2016
2.66
2.66U
10.24
J
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
May-2017
2.66
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.661.1
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
Deo-2017
2.66
2.66U
2.80
J
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
5.70
J
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66U
2.66 UM324
Jun-2018
2.66
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
5.80
J
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
Deo-2018
2.66
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
24.30
3.10
J
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.6fl U
3.57
J
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
Jun-2019
2.66
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
8.10
J
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 UDeo-2019
2.66
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.88
J
2.66 U
3.57
J
3.30
J
2.66 U
266 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
2.66 U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 42 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Benzo0perylene CAS No. 191-24-2 PAH 8270 scan #7
sample
Compliance Limit (pglL) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pglL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MW-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
1.21U
1.20U
L
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
d Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
1.24U
1.061.1
1.061.1
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
1.06
Jan-2010
200
May-2010
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Nov-2010
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
May-2011
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Nov-2011
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
May-2012
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Nov-2012
2.61
May-2013
2.M
Nov-2013
May-2014
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U 2.61U
Nov-2014
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.66U
May-2015
2.61
Nov-2015
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.66U
May-2016
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Nov-2016
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
May-2017
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.611.1
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Deo-2017
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Jun-2018
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
161U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Deo-2018
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
3.16
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Jun-2019
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
Deo-2019
2.61
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
2.61U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 43 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Diberaofuran CAS No. 132-64-9 Coal -tar derivative, aromatic, used as insecticide 8270 scan #62
Sample
Compliance Limit (pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fao. BG BG BG
Date
IMAC
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MW-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
1.89
JL
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
d Analytical Changes
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment +Phase 2
1.37
1.30U
1.401.1
1.37U
1.371.1
Jan-2010
28
May-2010
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
Nov-2010
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
May-2011
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
Nov-2011
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
May-2012
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
Nov-2012
4.28
May-2013
4.28
Nov-2013
May-2014
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.2BU 4.28U
Nov-2014
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.281.1
4.28U
4.28U
May-2015
4.28
Nov-2015
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
May-2016
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.281.1
14.28U,4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
Nov-2016
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
May-2017
4.28
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.28U
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
Deo-2017
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
n-2018
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
184.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
9.19
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U194.28
OD
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28Uo-2019
4.28
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.28U
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.28U
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.28U
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.281.1
4.28U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)' in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 44 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Endrin Aldehyde CAS No. 7421-93-4 Breakdown product of pesticide Endrin, banned since 1986 8081 scan #15
sample
Compliance Limit (PgIL) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pglL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MIN-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
0.0477U
L
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+Phase 2
0.05
0.0474U
0.053U
0.05011.1
0.0477U
Jan-2010
2
May-2010
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.053U
Nov-2010
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
May-2011
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.053U
Nov-2011
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
May-2012
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.053U
Nov-2012
0.05
May-2013
0.05
Nov-2013
May-2014
0.05
Nov-2014
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.053U
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
May-2015
0.05
Nov-2015
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
May-2016
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.053U
0.053U
Nov-2016
0.05
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
0.0531.1
May-2017
0.05
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
Deo-2017
0.05
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053UEO.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
Jun-2018
0.053
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
Deo-2018
0.053
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.10
J
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U0.053U
0.053U
0.053UJun-2019
0.053
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.08
J
0.053U
0.053U
0.07
J
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053UDeo-2019
0.053
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0053U
0053U
0053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
0.053U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 45 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Fluorene CAS No. 86-73-7 Considered a PAH generated by incomplete combustion 8270 scan #26
sample
Compliance Limit (Pg/L) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Std
pg/L
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MW-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
1.38U
L
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment + Phase 2
1.38
1.37U
1.41U
1.381.1
1.381.1
Jan-2010
300
May-2010
2.95
2.951J
2.95U
2.95U
Nov-2010
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
May-2011
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
Nov-2011
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
May-2012
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
Nov-2012
2.95
May-2013
2.95
Nov-2013
May-2014
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.951-1 2.95U
Nov-2014
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.951.1
2.951.1
2.951J
May-2015
2.95
2.95U
2.951J
2.951.1
2.95U
2.951J
Nov-2015
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.951J
2.951J
May-2016
2.95
2.95U
2.951J
2.951.1
2.95U
2.951J
Nov-2016
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.951J
2.951J
May-2017
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.951.1
2.951.1
2.951.1
2.951.1
2.951.1
2.95U
2.951.1
2.951.1
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95UJun-20182.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
295U
2.95U
2.95U
eo-20182.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
13.90
J
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
Jun-20192.95
ii�De
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
eo-2019
2.95
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
5.31
J
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
2.95U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 46 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
Parameter: Ideno[]pyrene CAS No. 193-395 PAH 8270 scan #29
sample
Compliance Limit (pglL) MDL BG BG Assessment Wells Assmt. BG Assmt. old B-20 Fac. BG BG BG
Date
2L Std
2B Sld
pglL
MW-ID
MW-1S
MW-2D
MW-2S
MW-3D
MW-3S
MW-3A
MW-4
MIN-5
MIN-6
MW-7
MW-8
MW-9A
MW-10
MW-11
MW-12S
MIN-13
MIN-14D
MW-14S
MIN-15
MIN-16
MIN-17
old B-Is
SW-1
SW-2
SW-3
SW4
May-01
1.12U
1.11U
L
Nov-01
May-02
Nov-02
May-03
Nov-03
May-04
Nov-04
May-05
Nov-05
May-06
Nov-06
May-07
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
May-2008
Nov-2008
May-2009
1.15U
1.12U
1.121.1
Aug-2009
Begin Assessment+Phase 2
1.12
Jan-2010
0.05
May-2010
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Nov-2010
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
May-2011
2.91
2.91U
2.911J
2.91U
Nov-2011
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
May-2012
2.91
2.91U
2.911J
2.91U
Nov-2012
2.91
May-2013
2.95
Nov-2013
May-2014
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U 2.91U
Nov-2014
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
May-2015
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Nov-2015
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
May-2016
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Nov-2016
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
May-2017
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Deo-2017
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.911.1
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Jun-2018
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Deo-2018
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
3.06
J
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Jun-2019
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
Deo-2019
2.91
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
2.91U
NOTES:
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard - NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)* in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 47 of 48

Appendix 2
Historical Data For Selected Analytes
rr•Begin
Assessment
Phase 2
USEPA drinking
water advisory
15
NOTES'
1. This table shows a historic summary of the monitoring data. With respect to VOC's, only those constituents that have been detected are included.
2. SWSL = Solid Waste Section Limit (June 13, 2011).
3. 2L Standard — NCAC Title 15A Subchapter 2L Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the GWs of North Carolina (April 1, 2013).
4. 2B Standard = Standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations either adopted per 15A NCAC 2B or National Criteria per EPA (Current as of 5/15/2013).
5. MDL = Method Detection Limit.
6. µg/L = micrograms per liter. mg/L = milligrams per liter.
7. ND = not detected above the method detection limit (MDL) under old analytical requirements.
8. < (Value) or (Value) U = not detected above MDL under new analytical requirements.
9. (Value) J = detected result is above MDL and below the Compliance limit.
10. NA = Not Analyzed or Not Applicable. NE = Not Established. NS = Not Sampled.
11. Red font indicates analyte detected above Method Detection Limit.
12. Bold red font indicates analyte detection above the SWSL but below the 2L Standard.
13. Yellow shading indicates analyte detected above 2L Standard.
14. Blank cell shaded blue indicates the well was not in the sampling program at the time of the sampling event.
15. Blank cell shaded green indicates the well was in the sampling program but not sampled.
16. Purple shading indicates initial Assessment Sampling event, including upgradient wells for delineation.
17. (Value)' in the 2L Standard column denotes a Groundwater Protection Standard assigned by Solid Waste Section (6/13/2011)
18. Old B-ls is located near the northeast facility boundary and is not influenced by any known solid waste activity
Page 48 of 48

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 1
Appendix 3
Final Cover Evaluation
1.1 Background
C&D Landfill, Inc. operated Phase 1 after June 30, 2008, which technically put the Facility under Solid
Waste Rule 15A NCAC 13B .0543. The rule requires capping the landfill with a 3-feet thick soil cover, the
lower 18 inches of which is required to meet soil type, compaction, and permeability Requirements. A
major portion of the cover, i.e., side slopes, was installed incrementally pursuant to Solid Waste Section
guidance. Although the Operator in charge of the cover was an experienced, former earthwork
contractor, unfortunately no portion of the final cover received professional oversight and testing, per the
.0543 requirements. The Owner and Operator did understand the final cover thickness, soil type and
density requirements.
Summit performed a "retroactive" evaluation of the cover using test pits, in -situ density, direct
measurement of layer thickness. A two -stage investigation program was outlined in a letter to the SWS
(Attachment 1) requesting approval of the evaluation process. Originally, it was intended to field classify
the soils from the excavations, collect samples for laboratory testing, and perform the field density testing.
Based on the results of this stage, the samples would be tested in a geotechnical laboratory for grain size
analysis and permeability testing. However, a decision was made based on the field evaluation
(Attachment 2), not to perform the permeability tests because the sandy soils exhibited low compaction
density and were not expected to pass the permeability requirements.
1.2 Alternative Cover Decision Process
The existing cover has adequate thickness on the slope, but not on the flatter, upper cap area
(approximately 2 acres). Vegetation is well established and appeared healthy and robust over most of the
surface. The Owner acknowledged a "lot of work" had gone into maintaining and continually improving
the vegetation. Photos of the cover conditions and vegetation (in May 2020) are presented following this
text. There are several gently sloping erosion control benches that provide access to the slopes. Erosion
issues are very minor, based on the Engineer's opinion. Conditions were very different on the upper cap
area, where cover soil thicknesses were typically 12 to 18 inches, based on the test pits.
The Engineer believes the final cover on the slopes is adequate for shedding water and isolating the waste.
Whereas this portion of the landfill were "closed" before the cutoff date, on the Owner's behalf, a
proposal is hereby made to install a .0543 cover on the 2-acre upper cap area and leave the side slopes
with even more effort to enhance the vegetation. Final closure of Phase 1 is part of the selected remedy
for the Correction Action Plan under which this document was prepared. A generalized closure plan
borrowed from the Phase 2B Permit to Construct is included as Appendix 4, in the spirit of meeting CAP
preparation guidance, which asks for plans, specifications, operations and maintenance for equipment or
appurtenances installed to implement the remedy. It is realized the closure portion must undergo
separate review and approval process.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 2

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 3

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 4

SUMMIT
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
March 18, 2020
NC DEQ - DWM
Solid Waste Section
217 W Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Attn: Sherri Stanley - Permitting Branch Head
Attachment 1
320 Executive Court, Hillsborough, NC 27278
Phone // 919.732.3883 Web // www.summitde.net
Ethan Caldwell, P.E., P.G. - Raleigh Central Office
RE: C&D Landfill, Inc., Phase 1 CDLF
Final Closure Advance Notification
Dear Sherri and Ethan:
On behalf of C&D Landfill, Inc., I am pleased to inform you that work is progressing toward the final
closure of Phase 1 of the referenced site. Pursuant to prior conversations, I wish to inform you of
necessary changes to the approved Final Closure and CQA Plans.
Background
C&D Landfill, Inc., Phase 1 covers an approximate rectangular area of a maximum 15 acres (as
permitted), with 3H:1V side slopes and a 5% cap area covering approximately 2.2 acres. The
permitted cover consists of an 18-inch thick layer of "topsoil" over 18 inches of compacted soil
barrier, with a maximum hydraulic conductivity of 1 x 10-5 cm/sec. As permitted, the soil barrier is
underlain by an interim cover soil, then inert wastes.
The approved CQA Plan specifies a testing schedule for verification of in -situ soil density and hydraulic
conductivity, discussed below, which is normally performed as the cover is installed. On this project,
however, the cover soils have been placed without engineering oversight and testing, albeit by an
experienced earthwork contractor, thus a retroactive investigation is needed to confirm the soils
comply with the properties defined in the approved CQA Plan.
An excerpt from the February 2014 Permit to Construct application (same as November 2014), i.e.,
the CQA Plan, can be found as Attachment 1. Table 4C in the attachment shows hydraulic
conductivity testing at a rate of one per acre, and moisture -density testing at a rate of four per acre
(total of 5 locations per acre) for each lift of the compacted soil barrier. Typically, the soil barrier is
placed (and tested) in three lifts of 6 inches thickness (after compaction). Check plug samples are
typically collected and returned to a soil lab for permeability testing in a triaxial cell.

C&D Landfill Phase 1 Page 2
Field moisture -density testing is commonly performed with a nuclear density gauge, targeting 90 to
95% of the maximum dry density (MDD). Note #2 states that hydraulic conductivity (permeability) is
the parameter used for pass/fail criteria, not density; that is, moisture -density (easily tested in the
field) is used to reference a predetermined relationship with the permeability. The Engineer has the
latitude to be flexible with the density readings, provided the test results are within the optimal range
of the moisture -density -permeability relationship.
Scope
We are proposing that the cover be evaluated retroactively, facilitated with shallow test pits at the
prescribed frequency to access the soils at depth intervals of 18, 24, and 30 inches. The soils below
each depth interval will be visually classified in the field by a trained technician (ASTM D-2488) and
representative samples will be collected, one per test pit location, providing the soils are consistent
with depth in the technician's opinion. A calibrated nuclear density gauge will be used to measure
the moisture and density of the soils at each interval (ASTM D-2922). At check plug sample will be
collected every fifth test pit and returned to the lab; one sample is enough, providing the soils are
consistent within the full 18-inch thickness of the barrier layer.
Upon completing the testing and sampling —this is critically important —the test pits will be backfilled,
and the barrier layer will be constructed in three compacted lifts with nuclear density testing on each
lift. Barrier soils will be tamped to reflect the surrounding soil. Topsoil is not tested, but care should
be taken not to mix the topsoil and the barrier soil when digging the test pit. A numbered wooden
marker stake will be left at each test pit location. Each stake will be flagged with high visibility tape.
Future surveying may be performed to verify final grades and topography.
Figure 1 depicts the proposed test pit targets. The test pits are numbered sequentially 1 — 45 to
provide 5 test pits per acre. Collecting a check plug every fifth test pit implies 8 soil density tests
(ASTM D-2937), based on the standard Proctor curve (ASTM D-2922 and ASTM D-698), and 8
hydraulic conductivity tests (ASTM D-5084). In addition, the 45 soil samples from the barrier layer
will be visually classified by a geotechnical engineer (ASTM D-2488). Depending on soil consistency,
a representative subset of these samples will be submitted to the laboratory for classification (ASTM
D-6913 and related procedures).
Discussion
This approach is not uncommon, especially with the older landfills closures a few years ago, but a
flaw was recently noticed that we wish to avoid moving forward. The lack of density testing of the
soils going back into the test pits was spawned disagreements with the SWS as to whether the final
cover had been compromised. Without addressing the concerns on earlier projects, we are seeking
the Section's approval, in advance, of the prescribed deviation from the approved CQA plan.
Please contact me with questions or concerns.
David Garrett, PE

TABLE 4B
CQA TESTING SCHEDULE FOR DRAINAGE AND FINAL COVER SOIL
COMPONENT
PROPERTY
TEST
METHOD
MINIMUM
TEST
FREQUENCY
RECORD TESTS:
Coarse Aggregate:
Confirm Gradation
Visual
5,000 CY'
Vegetative Soil Layer:
(In -Situ Verification)
Visual Classification
ASTM D 2488
1 per acre
Layer Thickness
Direct measure
4
Survey
Notes:
A quarry certification is acceptable for aggregate from a commercial quarry. If a byproduct
is used, i.e., crushed concrete aggregate, the gradation test frequency may be adjusted based
on project specific conditions. The Engineer shall approve all materials and alternative test
frequencies. Materials that do not meet relevant ASTM or ASHTO standard gradation
specifications (either may be used at the discretion of the Engineer) shall be rejected.
TABLE 4C
CQA TESTING SCHEDULE FOR FINAL COVER COMPACTED SOIL BARRIER
PROPERTY
TEST
METHOD
MINIMUM TEST
FREQUENCY
RECORD TESTS:
Lift Thickness
Direct measure
Survey4
Permeability
ASTM D5084'
1 per acre per lift
In -Place Density
ASTM D 29222
4 per acre per lift
Moisture Content
ASTM D 30173
4 per acre per lift
Notes:
1. Optionally use ASTM D6391. Maximum allowable soil permeability is I x I0"5 cm/sec;
higher permeability results in a failed test and the lift must reworked and retested.
2. Optionally use ASTM D 1556, ASTM D 2167, or ASTM D 2937. For every 10 nuclear
density tests perform at least 1 density test by ASTM D 1556, ASTM D 2167, or ASTM D
2937 as a verification of the accuracy of the nuclear device. Minimum required density is
dependent on the moisture -density -permeability characteristic developed for the specific
soil during initial construction; lower density or incorrect moisture may result in higher
permeability. Permeability criteria shall govern the determination of a passing test.
3. Optionally use ASTM D 2216, ASTM D 4643, or ASTM D 4959. For every ten nuclear -
moisture tests, perform at least 1 moisture test by ASTM D 2216, ASTM D 4643, or ASTM
D 4959 as a verification of the accuracy of the nuclear testing device.
4. Topographic graphic survey by licensed surveyor
C&D Landfill, Inc., Solid Waste Permit #74-07 (Rev. 3.0) February 2014
Phase 2A - PTO and Phase 213 - PTC Application Construction Plan Page 44

TPage 1 of 1
Attachment 2
SUMMIT 320 Executive Court, Hillsborough, NC 27278
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES Phone // 919.732.3883 Web // www.summitde.net
DAILY FIELD REPORT
PROJECT NO: 19-0248.003 CLIENT: C&D Landfill, Inc.
PROJECT: C&D Landfill Phase 1 WEATHER/TEMP: Clear/70s
START
END
TOTAL
DATE
TIME
TIME
HOURS
4/29/20
0700
1600
9
FIELD TESTS PERFORMED
Soil density
REMARKS:
Technician arrived on site as requested to observe placement of fill material in the following location:
Phase 1 landfill cap. Tests were performed on this date using the nuclear density gauge method (ASTM
D 6938). Compaction results indicated that the material in the areas and elevations tested did not achieve
the minimum compaction requirement of 95% for the area tested.
Test locations and elevations are based on information provided by others.
TECHNICIAN'S NAME: Matt Lill
TECHNICIAN'S SIGNATURE: ��_-—
INFORMATION STATED ON THIS REPORT IS SUBJECT TO ENGINEERING REVIEW AND COMMENT.

USUMMIT 320 Executive Court, Hillsborough, NC 27278
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES Phone // 919.732.3883 Web // www.summitile.net
Project: C&D Landfill Phase 1
Project No: 19-0248.003
Project Address:
Client: C&D Landfill, Inc.
Contractor:
Equipment:
Reviewed By:
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTING AND COMPACTION
Date: 4/29/2020
Technician:
TEST INFORMATION
METHOD
IN -PLACE SOIL DATA
PROCTOR DATA
TEST RESULTS
TEST NO.
TEST
DATE
Elevation
TEST LOCATION
FIELD TESTING
METHOD (ASTM)
DRY DENSITY
(lbs/ft�
MOISTURE
(%)
CURVE NO.:
MAX DRY
DENSITY (Ibs/ft')
OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
REQUIRED
COMPACTION (%)
RELATIVE
COMPACTION (%)
RELATIVE
MOISTURE
PASS/FAIL
1
04/29/20
SG
Phase 1 location P-9
D 6938
75.7
20.9
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
66.5
1.4
Fail
2
04/29/20
-0.5
Phase 1 location P-9
D 6938
89.2
17.8
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
78.4
-1.7
Fail
3
04/29/20
-1.5
Phase 1 location P-9
D 6938
89.8
16.5
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
78.9
-3.0
Fail
4
04/29/20
-1
Phase 1 location P4
D 6938
100.2
6.4
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
88.0
-13.1
Fail
5
04/29/20
-1.4
Phase 1 location P-4
D 6938
106.4
8.8
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
93.5
-10.7
Fail
6
04/29/20
-2
Phase 1 location P4
D 6938
98.1
9.8
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
86.2
-9.7
Fail
7
04/29/20
-0.5
Phase 1 location P-3
D 6938
95.6
9.0
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
84.0
-10.5
Fail
8
04/29/20
-1
Phase 1 location P-3
D 6938
60.9
27.6
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
53.5
8.1
Fail
9
04/29/20
SG
Phase 1 location P-1
D 6938
92.9
6.9
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
81.6
-12.6
Fail
10
04/29/20
-1
Phase 1 location P-1
D 6938
95.6
9.0
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
84.0
-10.5
Fail
11
04/29/20
-0.5
Phase 1 location P-2
D 6938
97.9
7.0
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
86.0
-12.5
Fail
12
04/29/20
-1
Phase 1 location P-2
D 6938
78.4
7.6
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
68.9
-11.9
Fail
13
04/29/20
-1
Phase 1 location P-6
D 6938
83.8
16.1
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
73.6
-3.4
Fail
14
04/29/20
-2
Phase 1 location P-6
D 6938
83.0
21.9
S-905A
113.8
19.5
95.0
72.9
2.4
Fail

12 -1 4
11 3.3O
15
3�3 0 AC. PERN
IT SHOWING
FOOTPRINT
MERCER
FINAL COVER TES TIONS
INAL COVER
TES
"o-
\101,-6sb
N/F ED ATON \
OB 70 PG\,268z

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 1
Appendix 4
Phase 1 Final Closure Plan
1.1 Background
Capping a landfill, i.e., installing a final cover to promote runoff, thereby reducing the volume of water
available to infiltrate the waste and, potentially, drive contaminants into the groundwater, is an accepted
remedy for corrective action, in addition to monitored MNA and implementing institutional controls to
supplement engineering controls. 1 As pointed out in Section 1.1, regulatory changes flagged June 30,
2008 as the cutoff date for compliance with 15A NCAC 13B .0543 requirements for final covers. C&D
Landfill, Inc. was following a prescriptive incremental closure protocol, by which portions of the side slopes
were closed (but not certified) prior to the cutoff.
An investigation was performed in 2020 to evaluate the final cover on Phase 1. Documentation of that
study is presented in Appendix 3. The study comprised test pits with field density testing and classification
of the soils, performed by the author of this report. The study determined the final cover thickness is at
least 36 inches at investigated locations on the side slopes. Soil density acquired via nuclear moisture -
density gauge indicated compaction in the lower 18 inches of the side slope cover varies from 85 to 92
percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (MDD). Visual soil classifications for the lower 18
inches of side slope cover are typically SM, ML, and CL. Less than 36 inches of final cover was observed
for the upper cap area, estimated at ±2 acres with approximately 2-5 percent slopes.
The conclusion of that study is the well vegetated side slopes should meet or exceed the original final
cover requirements at the time those areas operated. The upper cap area does not meet either the "new"
or "old" requirements, thus an upgrade is warranted to certify the unit closed. Whereas the closure of
Phase 1 (and eventually Phase 2) are included in the selected remedy specified in the 2019 Corrective
Action Permit Modification application, plans are being drawn to build a "post-2008" cover on the upper
cap area of Phase 1 and enhance the vegetation quality on the side slopes of Phase 1.
Specifics of the planned final cover upgrade for Phase 1 is discussed in the following sections. A water -
balance approach may be used to estimate the effect on the MNA screening model.
1.2 Final Cover Requirements
The December 2014 Phase 213 PTC Application, Revision 3.2 (DIN 21812) contains a Closure and Post
Closure Plan prepared in accordance with 15A NCAC 13B .0543. Relevant portions of that document are
summarized here. It should be noted that the final cover design has already been approved by the SWS
and applied to numerous prior permit applications, including the subject Facility. The description
provided here is considered generic, whereas the SWS will need to review the proposed capping approach
for Phase 1; thus, future amendments are likely.
1 EPA Publication 9203,1-021, SACM Bulletin, Presumptive Remedies for Municipal Landfill Sites, April 1992, Vol. 1, No. 1,
referenced in Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Hazardous Site Control Division 6203G, EPA 540-F-93-035, Sept. 1993.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 2
1) The final cap design ... shall conform to the minimum requirements of the Solid Waste
Rules, i.e., the compacted soil barrier layer shall exhibit a thickness of 18 inches and a
field permeability of not more than 1.0 x 10-5 cm/sec. The overlying vegetative support
layer shall be 18 inches thick.
2) The CQA plan must be followed and all CQA documentation must be submitted to the
Division. Post -settlement surface slopes must not be flatter than 5% on the upper cap.
3) Solid Waste rules require a gas venting system is required for the cap. A passive venting
system will be specified, which will consist of a perforated pipe in crushed stone -filled
trench — installed just below the final cap soil barrier layer — with a tentative minimum
vent spacing of three vents per acre. LFG controls may not be necessary, and this
requirement will be discussed with the SWS.
4) Solid Waste Rule .0543 makes a provision for an alternative cap design ... [if] the
permeability requirements for the compacted soil barrier layer cannot be met. In such
case, a synthetic liner barrier or GCL barrier will be considered.
1.3 Final Cap
The following generic description of final cap design and construction is based on the 2014 update
of the PTC for Phase 2B:
1.3.1 Elevations
Final elevations of the landfill shall not exceed those depicted on Drawing E4 when it is closed,
subject to approval of this closure plan. The elevations shown include the final cover. A periodic
topographic survey shall be performed to verify elevations.
1.3.2 Slope Ratios
All upper surfaces shall have at least a 5 percent slope, but not greater than a 10 percent slope.
The cover shall be graded to promote positive drainage. Side slope ratios shall not exceed 3H:1V.
A periodic topographic survey shall be performed to verify slope ratios.
1.3.3 Cover Section
The terms "final cap" and "final cover" both apply. The final cover will subscribe to the minimum
regulatory requirement for C&D landfills:
o 18-inches of vegetated surface layer (VSL), the "erosion layer"
over
o 18-inches compacted soil barrier layer (CSB), i.e., the "infiltration layer," with
a hydraulic conductivity not exceeding 1 x 10-5 cm/sec.
1.3.4 Construction
All soils shall be graded to provide positive drainage away from the landfill area and compacted
to meet applicable permeability requirements. Suitable materials for final cover soil shall meet

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 3
the requirements defined above. Care shall be taken to exclude rocks and debris that would
hinder compaction efforts. The surface will then be seeded in order to establish vegetation.
1) Test Pad — The ability to compact the materials in the field to achieve the required
strength and permeability values shall be verified with a field trial involving a test pad, to
be sampled with drive tubes and laboratory density and/or permeability testing, prior to
full-scale construction. The materials, equipment, and testing procedures should be
representative of the anticipated actual final cover construction.
2) Compacted Barrier — Materials shall be blended to a uniform consistency and placed in
three loose lifts no thicker than 9 inches and compacted by tamping, rolling, or other
suitable method —the targeted final thickness is 18 inches minimum.
a. The Contractor shall take care not to over -roll the cover such that the underlying
waste materials would pump or rut, causing the overlying soil layers to crack —
adequate subgrade compaction within the upper 36 inches of waste materials
and/or the intermediate cover soil underlying the final cover is critical.
b. All final cover soils shall be thoroughly compacted through the full depth to
achieve the required maximum permeability required by Division regulations of
1.Ox 10-5 cm/sec, based on site -specific test criteria (see below). Compaction
moisture control is essential for achieving adequate strength and permeability.
3) Vegetated Surface Layer — Soil shall be placed in two loose lifts no thicker than 12 inches
and lightly compacted by tamping, rolling, or other suitable method. The final layer
thickness is 18 inches minimum. A high organic content is desirable, so decayed wood
mulch or other organic admixtures, e.g., WWTP sludge, with advance permission from the
Division, is encouraged to provide nutrient and enhanced field capacity. The surface layer
is not subject to a permeability requirement.
a. The soils should be compacted sufficiently to promote stability and minimize
susceptibility to erosion, but not over -compact the materials such that vegetation
would be hindered.
b. Finished surfaces should be vegetated immediately following the seed bed
preparation.
c. Follow the seeding and mulching procedures.
4) Inspection and Testing — Soils for the barrier layer are subject to the testing schedule
outlined in the Construction Quality Assurance plan (see Section 4.0).
a. The proposed testing program includes a minimum of one permeability test per
lift per acre and four nuclear density gauge tests per lift per acre, to verify
compaction of the compacted barrier layer. The moisture -density -permeability
relationship of the materials has been established by the laboratory testing
(discussed elsewhere in this report).
b. The Contractor shall proof roll final cover subgrade materials (i.e., intermediate
cover), which consist of essentially the same materials as the compacted barrier

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 4
layer (without the permeability requirements), to assure that these materials will
support the final cover.
1.4 Construction Quality Assurance
Section 4.0 of the December 2014 Phase 2B PTC Application specifies the number and frequencies for
various tests required for the final cover construction. Relevant portions of that document are presented
in Appendix 4. Excerpts are incorporated into the following summary:
1) CQA Testing for Drainage and Final Cover Soil
a. Coarse Aggregate: Confirm Gradation Visual 5,000 CY
b. Vegetative Soil Layer: Visual Classification ASTM D 2488 1 per acre
c. Layer Thickness: Direct measure Survey
2) CQA Testing Schedule for Compacted Soil Barrier
a. Lift Thickness: Direct measure Survey
b. Permeability: ASTM D50841 1 per acre per lift
c. In -Place Density: ASTM D 29222 4 per acre per lift
d. Moisture Content: ASTM D 30173 4 per acre per lift
e. Notes: Optionally use ASTM D6391.
1.5 Vegetation Enhancement
Seedbed preparation, seeding, and mulching shall be performed accordance with specifications provided
in the plans, unless approved otherwise in advance by the Engineer.
1) In areas to be seeded, fertilizer and lime typically should be distributed uniformly at a rate
of 1,000 pounds per acre for fertilizer and 2,000 pounds per acre for lime, and
incorporated into the soil to a depth of at least 3 inches by disking and harrowing.
2) Seeding shall be in accordance with a seeding schedule to be approved by the Engineer.
3) Distribution of seed and amendments by means of an approved seed drill or hydro seeder
equipped to sow seed and distribute lime and fertilizer together will be acceptable.
4) All vegetated surfaces shall be mulched with wheat straw and a bituminous tack. Highly
erosion prone areas may require stabilization with curled -wood excelsior, installed and
pinned in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.
5) Other mulches such as ground wood mulch should not be used for protecting seeded
areas. However, wood mulch may be incorporated into the topsoil to enhance water
retention and nutrient value.
6) High velocity perimeter channels will require excelsior or turf -reinforcement mat (TRM).
All rolled erosion control materials should be installed according to the generalized layout
and staking plan found in the Construction Plans or the manufacturer's
recommendations.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 5
1.6 Miscellaneous
1.6.1 Documentation
The Owner shall complete an "as -built" survey to depict final elevations and to document
any problems, amendments or deviations from the construction drawings. Records of all
testing, including maps with test locations, shall be prepared by the third -party CQA
testing firm. All materials pertaining to the closure shall be recorded in the Operational
Record for the facility.
1.6.2 Maximum Areallolume Subject to Closure
The largest anticipated area that will require final closure at any one time within the next
5-year period is 38 acres, including all of Phases 1, 2A and 2B. Intermediate cover shall
be used on areas that have achieved final elevations until the final cover is installed. An
annual adjustment of open area is required by the Division for a bond requirement.
1.6.3 Closure Schedule
Refer to the requirements outlined in Section 6.1.5.
1.6.4 Closure Cost Estimate
Note: The Facility already has a closure bond in place for the entire 15 acre footprint.
1.7 Post -Closure Plan
1.7.1 Term of Post -Closure Care
The facility shall conduct post -closure care for a minimum of 30 years after final closure
of the landfill, unless justification is provided for a reduced post -closure care period.
1.7.2 Maintenance of Closure Systems
Inspections of the final cover systems and sediment and erosion control (S&EC)
measures shall be conducted quarterly. Maintenance will be provided during post -closure
care as needed to protect the integrity and effectiveness of the final cover. The cover will
be repaired as necessary to correct the effects of settlement, subsidence, erosion, or other
events. Refer to the Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Schedule (below).
1.7.3 Landfill Gas Monitoring — Refer to Appendix 4A.
1.7.4 Ground Water Monitoring — Refer to Appendix 3.
1.7.5 Record Keeping
During the post closure period, maintenance and inspection records, i.e., a Post Closure Record,
shall be kept as a continuation of the Operating Record that was kept during the operational
period. The Post Closure Record shall include future inspection and engineering reports, as well
as documentation of all routine and non -routine maintenance and/or amendments. The Post
Closure Record shall include the ground water and gas monitoring records.
1.7.6 Certification of Completion
At the end of the post -closure care period the facility manager shall contact the Division to
schedule an inspection. The facility manager shall make the Post Closure Record available for

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 6
inspection. A certification that the post -closure plan has been completed, signed by a North
Carolina registered professional engineer, shall be placed in the operating/post closure record.
These records should be kept indefinitely.
1.8 Inspection and Maintenance (Final Cover)
TABLE 6B
POST -CLOSURE MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE
Activity
General - Inspect access gates, locks, fences,
signs, site security
Maintain access roads, monitoring well access
Final Cover Systems/Stability - Inspect cap and
slope cover for erosion, sloughing, bare spots in
vegetation, make corrections as needed (1)
Storm Water/Erosion Control Systems — Inspect
drainage swales, pipe drains, and sediment basin
for erosion, excess sedimentation (1)
Mow cover vegetation and remove thatch
Inspect vegetation cover and remove trees
Landfill Gas Monitoring
Ground Water Monitoring System - Check well
head security, visibility
Ground Water Monitoring (4)
Frequency Frequency Frequency
Yrs. 1 - 5 Yrs. 6-15 Yrs. 16-30
Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly
As needed As needed As needed
Quarterly Semi- Annually
Annually
Quarterly Semi- Annually
Annually
Semi -Annually Annually None (2)
Annually Annually Annually
Quarterly (3) Quarterly (3) Quarterly (3)
Semi-
Semi-
Semi -
Annually
Annually
Annually
Semi-
Semi-
Semi -
Annually
Annually
Annually
Notes:
1. Inspect after every major storm event, i.e., 25-year 24-hour design storm
2. Dependent on vegetation type, periodic mowing may be required
3. The Solid Waste Section may be petitioned for discontinuation of gas monitoring if no
detections occur in gas
sampling locations or on -site buildings
4. See current Ground Water Sampling and Analysis Plan

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 7
1.9 Responsible Party Contact
C&D Landfill, Inc.
Mr. Judson Whitehurst, Owner
Mr. Wayne Bell, General Manager
802 Recycling Lane Tel [phone]
Greenville, North Carolina 27834 Fax [phone]
1.10 Planned Uses of Property
Currently, there is no planned use for the landfill area following closure. The closed
facility will be seeded with grass to prevent erosion. Any post -closure use of the property
considered in the future will not disturb the integrity of the final cover.
1.11 Post -Closure Cost Estimate
The following represents post -closure costs for Financial Assurance.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 1
Appendix 5
Water Quality Monitoring Plan
1.1. Sampling Protocols
Monitoring the Facility has been conducted mostly by the same field staff and laboratory protocols for
nearly 20 years. The work has been performed in accordance with SWS Guidelines for Groundwater, Soil,
and Surface Water Sampling and other relevant documents listed on the SWS web site. 1 This protocol
will be continued for the foreseeable future. Specific sampling protocols for the MNA parameters will be
followed as they were in the 2017-2019 sampling events, performed by Environment 1, Inc. Personnel
changes on the sampling crew will be reviewed with the Program Manager prior to the next upcoming
sampling event. All protocols concerning sampling collection and handling are expected.
1.2. Monitoring Schedule
Three distinct combinations of parameters and sampling protocols have been planned to meet
the Corrective Action schedule requirements:
Year 0 Dec 2020 Appendix I + full Appendix II + landfill specific parameters
Year 1 Jun 2021 Appendix I + Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters
Dec 2021 Appendix I + full Appendix II + landfill specific parameters
Year 2 Jun 2022 Appendix I + Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters
Dec 2022 Appendix I + full Appendix II + landfill specific parameters
Year 3 Jun 2023 Appendix I + Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters + MINA parameters
Dec 2023 Appendix I + Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters + MNA parameters
Year 4 Jun 2024 Appendix I + Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters
Dec 2024 Appendix I + full Appendix II + landfill specific parameters
Year 5 Jun 2025 Appendix I + Appendix II Detects + landfill specific parameters
Dec 2025 Appendix I + full Appendix II + landfill specific parameters
Surface waters only receive Appendix I parameters each sampling event.
1.3. Appendix 1 and Appendix II Parameters
These parameters are found in the document, NC Solid Waste Section Groundwater Protection
Standards — Constituents List (updated October 15, 2018). Changes in the parameter list or
standards that may occur during the reporting period will be incorporated as required by the SWS.
1 https:lldeg. nc.gov/aboutldivisions/waste-managementlwaste-management-permit-guidance/solid-waste-
section/environmental-monitoring

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 2
1.4. MNA Parameters
Hydrogen
Methane
EtheneA
Ethane
Carbon Dioxide
Ferrous Iron
Low Level Volatile Fatty Acids A, B
Chloride c
Sulfate c
Manganese c
Alkalinity c
Hardness
Nitrate/Nitrite
Total Dissolved Residue
TOC
BOD
COD
pH
Conductivity
Dissolved Oxygen
ORP
Temperature
Turbidity
1.5. C&D Specific Parameters
Total Dissolved Solids
Tetrahydrofuran
1,4-Dioxane
Iron
A sub -contracted to Pace Laboratories in Baton Rouge, LA
B Acetic Acid
Butyric Acid
Hexanoic Acid
Lactic Acid
Pentanoic Acid
Propionic Acid
Pyruvic Acid
i-Hexanoic Acid
i-Pentanoic Acid
c Overlaps with C&D Specific Parameters
1.6. Analysis and Reporting
These issues are addressed in the main body of the CAP (Chapter 5).
1.7. Monitoring Locations
Refer to Figure 3 in the Drawings section.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 Page 3
1.8. Special Provisions
• Field personnel shall be trained and certified for specific sampling requirements.
• Laboratory shall be required to maintain North Carolina Wastewater certification.
• Professional oversight shall be provided by a qualified and duly licensed geologist or engineer.
• Monitoring locations should be evaluated, especially background locations, to verify that these
locations are not being influenced by the groundwater impact. Locations may be adjusted as
appropriate with the express approval of the SWS.
• Data evaluation and reporting will be performed by a qualified and duly licensed geologist or
engineer. Reports shall be prepared in accordance with SWS requirements, including the annual
analysis of MINA parameters and the CAERs discussed in Section 4.1.5.
• Well -Head Management shall be performed as needed; a survey of the condition of the well heads
shall be performed for every sampling event. For the time being, vegetation shall be mowed prior
to the sampling event— no chemical weed control products shall be used.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 - DRAFT Page 1
Appendix 6
Landfill Gas Monitoring
1 Introduction
The following plan has been prepared as a standalone document in accordance with current NCDENR Solid
Waste Section (SWS) guidance. The monitoring locations, methods, and thresholds for action have not
changed, but the 2010 guidance document requires that attention be given specifically to well
construction, equipment calibration, sampling procedures, and data keeping, in a plan that is organized
in a standardized format. Landfill staff and monitoring personnel should view the SWS document Landfill
Gas Monitoring Guidance," November 2010, online at
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=da699f7e-8c13-4249-9012-16af8aefdc7b&groupld=38361.
1.1 Background Information
Monitoring of landfill gas (LFG) is required at C&D landfills by Solid Waste Rule 15A NCAC 13B .0544.
Landfill gas is a by-product from the decomposition of organic waste in a sanitary landfill, including certain
C&D wastes. Landfill gas typically comprises about 50 percent methane, which can be explosive under
certain conditions, as well as carbon dioxide, nitrogen, water, and small amounts of hydrogen sulfide. LFG
has been known to promote the migration of contaminants into ground water. The Solid Waste Rules
typically focus on the explosive properties from a public safety standpoint. Landfill gas migrates in soil
above the ground water table and is restricted laterally by streams. Highly porous soils that tend to occur
near the soil -rock interface within the Piedmont are a good pathway for gas migration.
Past experience suggests that up -gradient areas should be targeted for monitoring, especially if porous
soils are present. This zone typically is an aquifer, thus fluctuations in the water table will affect the gas
migration pattern or rate, as does surface saturation, frozen soils, and variable barometric pressure. The
ideal time to sample for subsurface gas is during times of low barometric pressure. Pipelines and utility
trenches can serve as pathways for gas migration, with the potential to convey gas for considerable
distances. Open landfills are not as likely to experience subsurface gas migration, but once a low
permeability cover is installed, lateral migration into adjacent soils may be more likely.
1.2 Current Site Conditions
Two unlined disposal units are situated on two rather flat knolls, separated by a shallow drainage feature.
Topography slopes gently south from El. 20 at US Highway 264, to El. 16 - 18 at the disposal sites; then
more abruptly into marshy drainage features that lead to Grindle Creek at approximately El. 4 - 6. The
units are situated above grade with minimal base grade earthwork. Lateral separation to the streams is
50 feet minimum; the disposal area is isolated by other drainage features. Onsite soils are highly porous
sand and silt mixtures extending to depths below the water table, typically underlain by a lower
permeability silt -clay that serves as a partial confining layer. Ground water contours mimic the
topography, with depths of 4 to 6 feet below the surface in the upper elevations, 2 feet or less within the
lower elevations. The soil conditions and site geometry provide little opportunity for landfill gas to migrate

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 - DRAFT Page 2
either vertically or horizontally beyond the facility buffers. No structures exist within the facility buffers
that would accumulate gas. No utility trenches are present.
1.3 Regulatory Requirements
Thresholds that trigger responsive action are:
Methane levels of 100 percent of the lower explosive limit (about 5 percent by volume) in soil -gas
or air at the facility boundary;
25 percent of the LEL within onsite buildings, drainage structures and utility vaults; zero in off -site
structures. The contingency plan (Section 5) discusses action required if a regulatory threshold is
exceeded.
2 LFG Monitoring
2.1 Locations and Logistics
LFG monitoring for this facility consists of sampling soil -gas adjacent to the landfill footprint via eleven
(11) bar -hole punch test locations, labeled GP-1 through GP-11, spaced approximately 500 foot apart (see
Drawing M1). The monitored locations reflect the emphasis on the east side of Phase 1 and the north
side of Phase 2, the directions in which distant structures are located outside the facility boundary. The
bar -hole punch test has been approved for other CDLF facilities; whereas the waste is typically non-
putrescible, hence no significant methane migration is anticipated. Monitoring locations will be identified
with permanent placards.
Bar -hole punch tests are warranted at this stage because no gas migration has been detected, thus there
is no data to guide the locations of permanent monitoring wells or gas probes. The waste is comprised of
mostly inert materials with paper, wood, and other potentially combustible materials — the same kind of
materials that can degrade slowly to form landfill gas — so it is conceivable that at some time in the future,
the Solid Waste Section may require permanent gas monitoring wells. If subsurface methane is detected,
additional sampling shall be performed delineate a migration pattern, and then permanent LFG
monitoring wells may be installed.
In anticipation of this requirement, this plan has been prepared with procedures for both bar -hole punch
tests and sampling of future monitoring wells. A SWS-endorsed well construction schematic is provided,
which includes sealed construction and a specialized port at the top to facilitate sampling. Presumably,
the monitoring wells would be located near the same locations as currently monitored with the bar -hole
punch test, for the same reasoning described above. This plan will be amended in the future to include
data tables for the monitoring wells, if required. Data recording protocols will remain the same.
The Solid Waste Rules require quarterly monitoring. Landfill gas monitoring will be performed during the
active life of the landfill, estimated at 20 years, and throughout the post -closure care period, 30 years
unless future data warrant a schedule revision, which will be subject to approval by the SWS.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 - DRAFT Page 3
2.2 Structures and Ambient Sampling
Within offices and any buildings on -site, atmospheric sampling for methane shall be conducted. Methane
is heavier than air and tends to accumulate in the lower zones with restricted circulations, i.e.,
crawlspaces, closets, and corners of rooms near the floor, cracks in walls, floor slabs, or foundations,
crawlspace vents, drainage pipes, and utility vaults (excluding sanitary sewer manholes). Methane
detection in and around the structures, though unlikely, would signify a problem — immediate action may
be required — refer to the Contingency Plan (Section S).
Ambient monitoring overlaps the building foundations and includes a "walk -around" at the toe of covered
(vegetated) slopes to survey for gas that may be seeping through the cover. A key to potential side slope
seepage includes stained soil, wetness with visible bubbling, or distressed (or absent) vegetation. Any
detection of methane in the ambient monitoring should be noted on a site map and a special notation
recorded in the monitoring report. Follow up sampling or close attention in future sampling events might
be warranted. The site manager should be alerted to any ambient gas detection.
2.3 Sampling Schedule
Quarterly methane monitoring will be conducted at all subsurface gas detection locations and in all
occupied structures located on the landfill property. In addition, enclosed structures, such as manholes,
utility vaults, and buried drainage pipes should be checked for gas prior to servicing, in addition to the
routine monitoring. Passive gas vents for the final cover are not required to be monitored. Monitoring
times are also important when conducting landfill gas monitoring. Proper landfill gas monitoring should
include sampling during times when landfill gas is most likely to migrate. LFG monitoring should be
conducted when the barometric pressure is low and soils are saturated. During the winter season when
snow cover is just beginning to melt or when the ground is frozen or ice covered, landfill gas monitoring
should be conducted when the barometric pressure is low.
3 LFG Sampling Program
3.1 Equipment and Calibration
Monitoring will be performed with a specialized landfill gas monitoring instrument that meets the
requirements of the SWS document, Landfill Gas Monitoring Guidance, with respect to detecting
methane, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. Calibration shall occur prior to instrument use
and according to the manufacturer's specifications. Should this element of the program change, this plan
will be amended accordingly.
3.2 LFG Sampling Procedures
The following procedure is recommended for conducting landfill gas monitoring well sampling and/or bar -
hole punch testing (shown in italics). The sampling equipment shall consist of a good -quality gas meter
capable of detecting methane (LEL) and oxygen levels — most modern meters include carbon monoxide or
carbon dioxide, depending on the meter and hydrogen sulfide readings. In deference to professionals who

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 - DRAFT Page 4
have conducted LFG sampling for years, these procedures are guidelines; no changes to the current
sampling program are warranted.
Step 1— Calibrate the instrument according to the manufacturer's specifications. In addition,
prepare the instrument for monitoring by allowing it to properly warm up as directed by the
manufacturer. Make sure the static pressure shows a reading of zero on the instrument prior
to taking the first sample.
Step 2 — Purge sample tube for at least one minute prior to taking reading. Connect the
instrument tubing to the landfill gas monitoring well cap fitted with a stopcock valve or quick
connect coupling.
Step 2 Alternate — Drive the bar into the ground to a depth of 3 feet at the sampling location
using a hammer or backhoe bucket. Heavy gauge rebar is ideal for this task. The bar -hole
needs to be near -vertical and free of obstructions. Drilling a hole with a modified concrete drill
(an extension is required to reach the desired depth) has been demonstrated to expedite the
making of a boring with less smearing of the side walls.
Step 3 — Open the valve and record the initial reading and then the stabilized reading. A stable
reading is one that does not vary more than 0.5 percent by volume on the instrument's scale.
Step 3 Alternate — Cover the hole upon extraction of the drill to retain any gas present.
Without completely lifting the cover, gently insert the sampling tube beneath the cover and
obtain an initial reading. Allow time for a stabilized reading as described above.
Step 4 — Record the stabilized reading including the oxygen concentration and barometric
pressure. A proper reading should have two percent oxygen by volume or less. Higher oxygen
levels may indicate that air is being drawn into the system, giving a false reading.
Step 5 — Turn the stopcock valve to the off position and disconnect the tubing.
Step 5 Alternate - eackfill the hole with cuttings or native soil, tamp the backfill with a rod or
equipment handle.
Step 6 — Proceed to the next landfill gas monitoring well and repeat Steps 2 — 5.
4 Record Keeping and Reporting
The sampling technician shall record the date, time, location, sampling personnel, calibration data, gas
pump rate, barometric pressure (from local weather reports), ambient temperature, general weather
conditions at the time of sampling, initial and stabilized concentrations of methane (see the Landfill Gas
Monitoring Data Form) following this text). These monitoring records shall be maintained in the landfill
operating record. Should methane be detected at any sampling location, the facility manager should be

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 - DRAFT Page 5
notified and, depending on the concentrations, a report to the Solid Waste Section might be warranted.
In any event a qualified engineer should be consulted.
5 Contingency Plan
Solid Waste Rule .0544 (d) (3) requires the following responses in the event that methane concentrations
are detected that exceed the foregoing methane concentration limits:
(A) Immediately take all steps necessary to ensure protection of human health and notify the
Division — at a minimum, occupied structures should be evacuated and ventilated until
the methane concentrations subside; close monitoring of structures shall be
implemented; for facility boundary violations, further evaluation is warranted, subject to
notification and approval by the Division.
(B) Within seven days of detection, document the methane or explosive gas levels in the
operating record with a description of steps taken to protect human health.
(C) Within 60 days of detection, implement a remediation plan for the methane or explosive
gas releases, place a copy of the plan in the operating record, and notify the Division that
the plan has been implemented. The plan must describe the nature and extent of the
problem and the proposed remedy.
(D) Based on the need for an extension demonstrated by the operator, the Division may
establish alternative schedules for demonstrating compliance with the limits.
(E) "Lower explosive limit" means the lowest percent by volume of a mixture of explosive
gases in air that will propagate a flame at 25o C at atmospheric pressure.
Beyond the regulatory mandated response outlined above, a close evaluation of the monitoring program
is warranted in the event that methane is detected above the threshold values. Should this occur, an
investigation to determine the direction and extent of the migration, involving additional bar -hole -punch
tests, shall be performed under the supervision of a qualified professional geologist or engineer. Once a
migration pattern is established, the data shall be used to establish locations for permanent monitoring
wells. The frequency of monitoring or the field or structures may require adjustment.
The data and proposed plan modifications should be reviewed with SWS staff. Other action may be
required, e.g., some type of remedial activity, but those tasks cannot be anticipated at this time. Let it
suffice to say that all steps to prevent the offsite migration of dangerous levels of methane shall be taken.
However, based on the nature of the wastes and site conditions, which are generally unfavorable to the
occurrence and migration of explosive gas, the likelihood that any sort of assessment or remedial action
will be required is quite low.

C&D Landfill, Inc. Phases 1 and 2 (7407-CDLF-2001-2009) July 9, 2020
NC Solid Waste Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Report Rev 0 - DRAFT Page 6
On the other hand, landfill gas can contain components that, while not explosive, could impact ground
water quality. Should any LFG be detected, consideration should be given to what, if any, effects might be
visible in the ground water data.
6 Professional Certification
The certification statement below must be signed and sealed by a North Carolina Professional Geologist
or Professional Engineer and submitted with the Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan. The landfill gas monitoring
plan for this facility has been prepared by a qualified geologist or engineer who is licensed to practice in
the State of North Carolina.
The plan has been prepared based on first-hand knowledge of site conditions and familiarity with North
Carolina regulations and industry standard protocol. This certification is made in accordance with North
Carolina Solid Waste Regulations, indicating this Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan should provide reasonably
early detection of an occurrence of landfill gas migration, so as to protect public health and the
environment. No other warranties, expressed or implied, are made.
Signed DRAFT,
Printed G. David Garrett, PG, PE
Date November 4, 2014
Not valid unless this document bears the seal of the above mentioned licensed professional.
If wells are installed in the future, the well locations shall be shown on a topographic
map that is signed and sealed by a registered surveyor.

IIIIIIII�C ■
I I I I
2 3 4 5
GO
o TTI-E
1
8
UU
LO
S > i "WEST" STREAM --�� ~`�' /,' \,.\ \\ v, \j
EJE RECYCLING FACILITY
\O� \ � � P\\ ` ' , ` � `� i---------- `J �- �\ Cam,/ `� /
( 1
S� o �' _ ,—'' ��� )/{ C� \// / �—,'��rf- —\--� GROUNDWATER USER (TYP.)
Ile-
C-�
----------
1 PNPSE , ---', � ,,.r°f'i_. Yii4y . 'OY•t•FJ `. �:,.,.. \_ � / I / a / /''1 I � J/ - (' \`__\ L
SOUTH STREAM
77
/
11 \ \1 \� '(\/1 \ \ I
SUSPECTED RELICT CHANNEL
✓ \ , ` -ice I / \ \\\. _ � I --
-- / \ 22 � -� ' ' \ \ I ••_:_- Y�-== ,\-� ^ ( , � �, ✓, �1 • _ \ __ -- ,�\� � 'mil
100 YEAR FLOOD BOUNDARY > >� ; ,' — ,\` ,� ( �\ ( l ��QQ • - , ,,—
� -'' /'� /i J /� \�,J%� i'�j Gam,-/�=.-J> `�� i / \\ i / � l � �1 ^ \\\ �\ �� 5 r' / •'•� �'�-' // f ` • _�'
i;\ JY.
\ r`\-,°' I i C -�/ ' y / • "r` J"" \
I
6 7
QQSS.
fZ
V.
� ( `� �' , ,� % J f v ,-_ \Q'' \��'�`. i ` 0 i C&D LANDFILL INC.
L 1 /L
J I ) �-�_ ( •� f l / - i�/,� ; /mod �' ;'. \ - ~C.� \ \\`;\ ��'. �:'�� \. I i \ j ; 802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE NC 27834
15
' ( c .r�'' i -/ �� -� OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
\ / / I
GRINDLE CREEK __—'.�%'' ; /�� i �'��\' i y\ i == 1a i _�___J i ^� �i \/ ,� )' ! (�\ �j \\\ (,/�'\1� /---_— SCALE:
`L --= --J ,i �`�—' �' % \ r c' — ' i \ \ 1� C� �'-'^� 0 250 500 750
i
III
___' ` �/i ,'\��� ice' . ' J C� `� \\� �/ %' ^'��_' , ` : ^ / ' / / --\\ , / /. l ii�/ /-� ✓✓✓' �� -� l \ ' A;
100 E. Six Forks Road
_: Suite 320
,, ---- ------ ` �� / ;\���\ �-- ;_ �'�\� ` i �J \� Raleigh, NC 27609
TEL: [phone]
REV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
1000 FEET
llA\
r7
D
www. u m m I . n s �tde et DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
SEAL SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
RQ�� DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR :
S IQ�•• �/ i JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
----- Q::--�\ r—__ i i ' ' `---- ---'\� \-��`\) ��\ `\. � '\\\� Dig y�•' DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
:David Gab)467210-2020FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
CD
\ � �\ � /� ' ••• '.I/GINE • ' DRAWING NO
- LOCATION REGIONAL TOPO
Q I/ �.� ����`-__-_`--_--_`- `\\ ----�� A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW ���V7 D cj P� ��,
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION ,���������►,�p�
4 6
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 5 1 8 9 1 0
I I I I I I

2 3 4 5 6 7 8
WOODED AREA WITH POCKET
$ WETLANDS (NOT MAPPED)
ACCESS ROAD
A 1$
1a NO KNOWN PLANS FOR
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
16 _\
j_ S
-� 1 q. / i 1 16
16
L16 1
I
PHASE 213 ACTIVE AREA
I
i �
\� 14
-- ----0***000000000000PHASE 213 INACTIVE AREA co
000
I�I
V
FACILITY BOUNDARY000
J
IREV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
I'I I I'I'I'I'I'I I I'I'I'I TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
1A--�
PHASE 1 UPPER CAP AREA CONCRETE PAVEMENT
.. .�...
/c�a'i PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
�
/ / ��---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY C
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
WEST STREAM
`` ' ° GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
'//III \� i/ r /� fi i/� /i/r \\\� ���� \\ ; \ ; \ .• .
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
_ \`
\ --- ;--'� ��'`\ \`
\`\
'_'-------------; = ` \ SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
00-0
-------------
/ / / ;, r //rrr♦♦ , r'r % /♦\\\\ \.` `\ \ \\.
=== ___ '`\ \.,\\ \\`.`\ `,`\.` LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
I \ 1 � / ����� / i � i♦ ,�i r r //r / /ir r r // i'/ / "--------------- \ � � _--------- �/ i /ii'i /%'/ / '//� "i � Q
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
,♦ , ,;__, . ..., ../ ,r, ;:'/;;� ';: ; ' LONGITUDE 77182862
// rrr, ♦ , , ♦ ,�- � , ii , ,/, I' I 111 II I //// /// j i
000.
/ ,/rr ♦,, ,/r, / /r \-G'. ♦\` `` \` \\ IIIII IIII 1 j/ % i'ii % /
111
II„II II, Ij III1I ,/„ _ „/, / _ _
� OWNER ADDRESS:
� � I I� If f 1, f �
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
' 802 RECYCLING LANE
\\ \\ �� �\\\\ \ \� \\
AREA OF CONCERN o \\\\\ \\\\\\ \�Q ; //; „ %' ; ;;; I r,
\\ \\\ \ ;\\ \ // GREENVILLE7 NC 27834
\ \� \\\ / //� / /, // , /, / / /:<
APPROXIMATE LIMITS
CENTRAL STREAM
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
"SOUTH" STREAM 0 125 250 375 500 FEET
100 YEAR FLOOD BOUNDARY
HEAVY WOODS
LIGHT WOODS AND OPEN / 1 — ���:���" %,%%;i%
FARMLAND (MOSTLY DRY / / i /� \\ %;;%%,41
1
100 E. Six Forks Road
HARDENED ALL-WEATHER ACCESS DRIVE / Suite 320
J / Raleigh, NC 27609
TEL: [phone]
41 www.summitde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
F—A VEGETATED SLOPES WITH DRAINAGE
NEGLIGIBLE LIKELIHOOD OF , BENCHES NOT DISPLAYED i
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR / � � � I � 1 ♦ �� C&D LANDFILL, INC.
GROUNDWATER USE / HEAVY WOODS /, , CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
/ / \ / / ♦ SEAL ���������SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
i�
�N C ARO< ��i DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR
LOWLYING AREA, IMPRACTICAL /6 ^ =�..•OF� SIO,�•. 9 JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
/ GROUNDWATER RECEPTOR FOR / / TO ACCESS EXCEPT THROUGH \ \ / = : �� SEAL ��': = DATE: 07-07-2010 ENGR: ASA
UPPERMOST AQUIFER / SUBJECT FACILITY / I iigitaRy'_D ftr�bd bj FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
Zvi Garret 771 -2Q20 DRAWING O N .
A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW ��.G PVC, ��,,FACILITY PLAN / LOCAL TO PO
• 2
I REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION �������►0tt
7777
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0

7
CDLF FOOTPRINTS; CONTOURS NOT
0100 _ _ I '
♦ 14 \ :'
000
co
mW 10
J .. ORIGINAL GROUND CONTOURS �
i DISPLAYED FOR DATA CLARITY o
8 I IREV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
/ 5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
Q AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
\ COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
E&S MEASURES NOT DISPLAYED LEGEND:
FOR DATA CLARITY
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
1 A�
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
MW-14D MW-1 4S 180
M W-
1 D o PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
/ ®
/ CO m W-1 S /�� I ---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
/ o/ o JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
/ 16
/ X►> CHANNEL OR SWALE
/ 8 20
18
/ I i 's..: °.b ♦ GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
N—I3CID
— LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
18
1 / 16 - SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
I 1°'
i MW-12sMW-8 LOCATION INFO:
\ ,0 18 a MW-4
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
N6 2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
ORIGINAL GROUND CONTOURS S W-1 LONGITUDE-77.182862
� o _
l \ SW-3 " DISPLAYED FOR DATA CLARITY mW — ;` :,::: — OWNER ADDRESS:
7
� / 1 �•••
D ��... � • � — C.
802RECYCLING INANE
I ,o MW-3s r, GREENVILLE, NC 27834 �
MW-3D � .•�o.•....••� OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
mw_5
I \ mw_3 SCALE:
J /40t/ 0 125 250 375 500 FEET
MW-6
100 E. Six Forks Road
i Suite 320
MW-2D
Raleigh, NC 27609
TEL: [phone]
www.summitde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
MW-2S
\ _ / C&D LANDFILL, INC.
SW-2 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
/ :,• SEAL ,����������SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
RO� ,, DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR
0�,•''��S �i�i JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
/ / \ Digi# y �i d b '; DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
/ = David G2�7710-2020=
\ rFILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
� ( r,.� � � � � � � � =c • �.NGINEF'�' ••�� �DRAWING NO.
- ` A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG I ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW MONITORING LOCATIONS 3...j
I REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD 0,118111 ,118111 ��►�
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 101

REV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
SUt*lt*11T
1A--�
/4fwww.summitde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
softW— 2S
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
SW-2 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
SEAL ������������ SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
/ 'l/ < l •`` C A ''•
• �N RO� ,,i�i DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR
�� / / / / / / ^ 0�,•''��S SIQ''•,�� �o JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
SEAL ��': = DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
/ 4
Dijitally Sin; � FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
Dlyi�Gq tt, 7-1��.Q2m DRAWING NO.
.d� ���.VVGI NE • ��
- ` A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW *" �[D G ,l••`••, TOP O F CONFINING UNIT 4
I REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION ���������►�•`
777
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 101

6 7 8 I IREV. A
TYPICAL GROUNDWATER CONTOURS
IN THE UPPERMOST AQUIFER BASED
ON 2017 OBSERVATIONS
1)
MW-14S
M W— I 4D mw_1
CO
mw 1S �
LU
� 10
mw_1 3 � m�o'-11
\:j,—�WE13
' MW-12s -m w
M —4
Nbc W
18
��/��-SW 1�0
�SW-3 mw_7
�, 70 MW-3s r1-11
<<��$ MW-3D
mw 5
MW_3A��
6
m w
MW-2D
4'T100 Suite9320
cSix Forks Road
h, NC 27609
t9+e)azz ons
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
1A--�
www.summitde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
mw— S
soft C&D LANDFILL, INC.
SW-2 CO CTIVE RRE A N PLAN
ACTION O
SEAL 111111118"###,, SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
�N C ARO ��i, DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR :
0�.•FES It JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
/ Dlgtt�tl/ • =.mooy �Id byl '
+:. DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
/ \ : Da�Id (3pMe$ , 10-202C1_ FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
DRAWING NO.
` A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW �� ID GPFz �` GROUNDWATER ELEVS (SHALLOW) 5
I REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

I
I
1
7 8
REV. A
-A&
� v
�20>
A
1
1
I
1
1
I
♦0100 110
_
14
000 3
000000
000
'
J
040
MW-14D M W- 14 S
/ GWE 12.05
16
18
MW-13 to
0
N
I 16� MW-1 2s
7",
I S W — 3
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30
70 r(
1 1000 mw_3 MW-5
mw_3
GWE 10.71
QVV47 10
2
J � �
/ m w IS,GWE 9.94
1 �
A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070
/ REV DATE JOB NO.
n
TYPICAL GROUNDWATER CONTOURS
IN THE LOWER AQUIFER BASED ON
2017 OBSERVATIONS
J)
1
�.
/ I
SW-2
l
PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW
PROJECT TYPE DES I DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION
7
100 E. Six Forks Road
Suite 320
Raleigh, NC 27609
TEL: [phone]
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
LEGEND:
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE
35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE
-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL,
INC.
802 RECYCLING
LANE
GREENVILLE, NC
27834
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
A--�
www.summitde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
L i���� SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
\A C'� RQ�� DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR :
��•••O��S SjO�,. = JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
-Digifa�y by •• DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
�'
Davkd G t46v10-2020= FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
'Al ft DRAWING NO.
R NDWATER ELEVATIONS DEEP GROUNDWATER N os( ) 6
8 9 10

I
2
<uSS SEC TION
REV. A
lllllll I
ON
E
ELEV., FT
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
- 22
- 24
-26
-28
-30
-32
-34
INCHES
i I I I i I I I I
1 2 3
TENTHS 10
I ! I I I I I I I 1 1
20 30
A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG I ASA ASA GDG
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR I CHKD ENGR APPD
4 5 6
I I I
7
ISSUED FOR REVIEW
DESCRIPTION
ELEV., FT LEGEND
.................
•.r;. i E757&73i
-C TION A -A
GROUND SURFACE
APPROX. UPPER BOUNDARY OF AQUIFER UNIT 1
OTHER STRATA BOUNDARIES
MAX SEASONAL HIGH GROUND WATER
OBSERVED WATER ELEVATION DATA POINT
GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION
o- 50/.3 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST VALUE (N), BPF
WELL SCREEN INTERVAL -ONE SCREEN PER WELL
CROSS SECTION C
-C
.,,�\
+,
SD .I � �.,t• "
;,� •aw.`rr.}"nai�.• . .raa+.xn s
,�{
�
�
.yamr
PER. .n....w......,........•.,
lx. w.e....
J� _7
{
ear eca::av
Y
ac as
JGmN A.K.TIICKER. P.E.
.cmxsl slsm
nBULTING ERG 11 EER
oas
-fA.A/Gl:
C PM YC lPP
i'NlV tl" lYMM F71M iW Nl
_ l.�JirJ OPDfM 4M -- ••-
_
w
ir
�••.JPJf JkIHMM
V-wrw. ...i ......
100 E. Six Forks Road
Suite 320
Raleigh, NC 27609
TEL: [phone]
www.summitde.net
m
D
SuSlt4IT
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F-
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
CORRECTIVE ACTION
PLAN
SEAL ,,�����►►►►►►►►►�
SCALE:
AS NOTED
DES: GDG
�-04%4 N CAR,
Q
DWG TYPE:
ANSI D 22"x34"
DFTR :
�tS
Z .�0 �,9•,.�
JOB NO:
19-0248.004
CHKD: ASA
DATE:
07-07-2020
ENGR: ASA
= Dig' ly iced fS ; -
David Cr,27-10:2029
FILENAME:
C&D LANDFILL ACM 125 2
APPD: GDG
DRAWING NO.
CROSS SECTION A
8
I
9
I
10
I
7

T
2
T
3
r�
_ :1■ 1 'NNE
EROW
EM
iiii
MEMMIMM
OL
MMMMEMMME
���
•
IIBlum
^
•
•
•
MIN►�
���■ll
��
1l
�
■��Irl��1■��
NJ
I
�I
'O
_
•
■
it
I
�
_
�
I
�
�
����ll�
��.._��i��►7l■■I■rJ/,�II�I
all
�
�����Il�����■11��1
®���■
Imo■
■fir
■��I��■1
��1����111
■I���1
��
�����1��
■IO�IIIOt��111l1��rl■��16i�1��1
NONN1�
■il
��
•fillpin
t
•��■1!.®�I!■���■1
_■_ f
■
•
STILT
w�®lei
■R■
■1■�111��111��■11©��1�
���
���1���■11�
t
r
,
NONE
s
'
•
��trllliti��11�1�iI���tt►TTI`1�11►th►l.i.7f�'�'1J��1f�IJli�__ME__■��i
■�■�■_�■■_�1�■��I�i■
■1%�■��1�NONE
1111111I____
I!
,
I
MW"tMI
new
ON ONW
:
'. W,17itt1lOT0
M M
MEME
ME
T11111
1110Il!■
■1e■
11
M
1N
111111111
11111MM
IMMM
MEME
���
����_��
■
II■
M
11MIM
ill%■111MI
III■����r�l
f■M11
�Il�■�■
�■E=11.111MMM
�MEMM■
1'
�MII
�ME
III
��
■��
111■mil
�
HOW
���
_i1�
._
-
-
1�
liii
�■
-
� II
�
1_
�
,
MMINIMMM■
��■IIII��7
■
II
g■�
MOM
111111111101100
%1110�
.11111M
111011
11111
ME
OEM
0
NMI-
r
Il
ALI
NINE
j
Iola
111111
WME
NONE!
1I0
lllr
1
�;AONNE
•
ME
■
i ■
r
!
t ■
! t
!
t
•
_____■�2■_
ME
__■Ilinks
______
_
r_ s
r _
i
r .
■i
rWool
11111110
lie'
HOW
111111MMMMEW
�(•ii�l\Ii1rll
■ +
,<ti:ii-i
t 1
___
t
�____�
_____�____
__
__-
ME
ME
J
1
1111111MOME11111����������������1�
�
MEN
���m�m■m1,
�11111111111til
ME
I11111
NONE
11111■■11111
ME111111
ME
NONE
MINES
1ME111111111IM
��M=�mmm�
�m�������
11111�
111111
11111
111111!i
1
�WMM
J
J
Ift
_
•
NEW't
r
r
1111110=11011�1�����
�mm
II
t
_ +_
.►
_
�
Jr
Jr
,
III
II
J'
III
III
_
-. - . .�•
III
r
vv of : ff of f 0 W NOW.fv fV • V MRL_L1
lip
.• 1 • 1
-T-
1 0
II
INCHES 1
3 TENTHS 10
4 5 6 7 8 9
I I I I I I

7 8
CDLF UNIT FOOTPRINTS
ORIGINAL TOPO SHOWN
EX. CONTOURS NOT DISPLAYED
FOR DATA CLARITY
TVOC 0.3 ��,
EBZ=0.3J
THE=6.4MW-14D
co
VCL=1.1 N10 41 v
TVOC 9.8 0.5 0.5. . o � W� 1XI
16 �
CO
110
� MW-11 CO
THE=0.91.
18
p 1 �
/ mw(i 3 EPTUALI Ez o 18� TVOC 0.9 � r �` `
I I S CONTO S VINYL MW-4 �
� � RID MG/L � THE-0.5
I �a
N 2 05 o MW-8 6 ` TVOC 0.5/
16 -, BZN=1.2 0-4
�.
MW-12s ', 5� , � o .. � ACE=10.8J aFT
- �
-BZN -1.7 3 -,B 2 � THE=15.0 O � �
CDS=1.3J ,� TVOC 26.5 CONCEPTUALIZED �
CHEMICAL ABBREVIATIONS DCE=1.3J � ° � �ISOCONTOURS FOR � MW-7
\ � NPH-0.9J � � o . BENZENE IN MG/L , THF-12.8-
XLN=XYLENE THE=36.4 � ���o ' �2.5 2 W TVOC 12.8 �
VCL =VINYL CHLORIDE TLN=0.5J l � � _ M F51 5 0 O `��
TLN =TOLUENE VCL=4.3 I I \ �5 - �;
TCE = TRICHLOROETHANE XLN=1.5 J � � MW_ TVOC 1.5
NPH =NAPHTHALENE TVOC 47.8 i m
MEK = 2-BUUTANONE / BZN=2.0 MW-3s
/ i � � Suite 320 E. Six Forks Road
DCE =CIS-1 2-DICHLOROETHENE � � � � � NPH=1.8J gZN = 2.8
� NO IMPACT BY COCs THE=12.7 � M W � � Raleigh, NC 27609
CLE = CHLOROETHANE _ � DETECTED IN NPH=7.7J � , � TEL: [phone]
REV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
A�
SURFACE WATER TVOC-14.7 ' www.summitde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
CDS = CARBON DISULFIDE - - THE=19.1
BZN = BENZENE TVOC 29.6 ♦ C&D LANDFILL INC.
ACE = ACETONE - • ♦ CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
TVOC =TOTAL VOCs DETECTED VOC CONSTITUENT DATA FOR SEAL SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
J / MW-2S ��'� �.��,, `N C ARO��i, DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR :
O
ALL VALUES I N (ug/L) \ / / / : �� �FES Sj0•'•�'� JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
MAY 2017 TH F=1.0 / ; z .o
i / / QI�'DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
� ^ � � _ Digitally ��I�Q by _
TVOC 1.0 : David c �1��-10;202Q FILENAME. C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
^•'•,n� �-•`�� DRAWING NO.
/ A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW ,�� I'I D VO C DISTRIBUTION -SHALLOW Q
AL AA, rn REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION ,�����������,,,
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1110 _/ &Aft e I . . : . . :.- -, %
• 14 16 MW-1D
woo
00
000 TH E=14.4
0*0
J 1TVOC 14.4
S
�Mv� 14D�10
/
I !'
I 00
o
/ i ♦ ' o /
IREV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
p '.a PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
1A--�
�W 11 2
/ �.. ..:..'. -10
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
�-° SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
1 W- 16
,9 — LOCATION INFO:
16 i 12 1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
18 a I 2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
� 12 0 —-� LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
CHEMICAL ABBREVIATIONS ti ;: _ C&D LANDFILL, INC.
802 RECYCLING LANE
\ �f— — — GREENVILLE, NC 27834 r7
1 0
` �� —
XLN XYLENE ♦'o OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
VCL = VINYL CHLORIDE ��
I \ � — � •� � �� �� SCALE:
T L N — TOLUENE I 0 125 250 375 500 FEET
TCE = TRICHLOROETHANE `
NPH = NAPHTHALENE iA
m 5/
MEK = 2-BUUTANONE
100 E. Six Forks Road
DCE =CIS-1 2-DICHLOR ETHENE
0 ��.: ': / Suite 320
i mW
— I Raleigh, NC 27609
CLE — CHLOROETHANE — /' TEL: [phone]
CDS CARBON DISULFIDE — — � � � I J � � : . www.summltde.net DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
BZN = BENZENE ♦ C&D LANDFILL INC.
ACE =ACETONE - CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
TVOC =TOTAL VOCs / DETECTED VOC CONSTITUENT DATA FOR �: SEAL SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
RQ� DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR
ALL VALUES I N (ug/L)
/ / =Q••,O��S Sj0�,• -7'�I JOB NO: 19-0248.004 CHKD: ASA
i / / / : �� ��••: DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
=Digitally y -
/� .David 7 10-2020: FILENAME. C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
/ / / / / / \ C • •,�NG INC ��;•`�� :: DRAWING NO.
A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070= PERMIT RENEWAL GDG I ASA ASA GDG I ISSUED FOR REVIEW ��AID P ���,VO C CONCENTRATIONS (DEEP) 11
AA. rn REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES I DFTR I CHKD I ENGR I APPD DESCRIPTION
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0

F
i
2 3
r
a
1
t 1
M W-9A
P ryp 8��-18 1
MW-16
I
SW-4
MW-15 / 18 /
15
r / � O I
14 \�•, � ,8 I II ►
MW-10 u i
i� •'! MW-1D �_'
M W-14SMW-14D is
/
MW-1 S .. -
il/ �// .ry.;:'' 18 0 ••.ate \ c + l
/ / 1 M W-13
M W-11 e.• `` � — � .
0.90
— ,e�'
MW 12s MW-8
MW 4
0.
, �
vs MW-3S /�'% ,
MW-3D - W_ MW-7 ,
M W- 3A
IE % I i `. D �i♦
MW-6
ETHENE ��'/��-�i�/''` MW-2D °-.:� /�•
-2S V.
DETECTED VOC CONSTITUENT DATA FOR -7 I / SW-2 < C—
BENZENE CONCENTRATIONS FOR \ l / / �� •
JUN 2018, uG/L
r
1
I
r -
W ,5 M 9 A
I
MW-16 ► ,--
I
,8 O
_-
M W-15 •� e� m � �
,S
00
14
M W-10 I
Bi MW-1D
:. MW-14S
M W-14D,,.18
MW-1 S
/ 1 MW-13
/ 18,g i
I II .38 M 11�
1
M W-12 s 'ate M W- 8
%0 v MW-4
I _ 1 — ,
� - �"d.
NJ 0.301 �
SW-3
� , � I •:o ; � / � MW-3D � MW
� W-
.�,I �M 5
I MW-3A ♦
i MW-6
ETHENE �� / / / �''':; MW-2D
DETECTED VOC CONSTITUENT DATA FOR / / 1 SW- 2
-7
_i
}e
BENZENE CONCENTRATIONS FOR
JUN 2019, uG/L
It
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4
6 7
r MW-9A
@.,8 I
1
is
I I
'I ► / ' l�
18 I i
� 1 �
M W-15 :� '@� 78 \
15
14 � I 18� I� � ►
M W-10 I
m
J
� 1.57 a -
• m MW-1D
W-14D .4MW-14S
M
.M.W-1S: .-
/ 1 M W-13
II m 0.48J M W-11 -°
I ( MW-12s a MW-g l
\ 1.48 12 /M W- 4
0.48J
�.;:... S W_
NS , ` �� MW-3S :' _.♦-- -�,
1 � MW-7 ,
i3r MW-3D W_
MW-3A ♦
JE J I ) 1.69
ETHENE //��\—�/ �..� MW-2D
MW-2S
DETECTED VOC CONSTITUENT DATA FOR I / SW -2 -
BENZENE CONCENTRATIONS FOR
DEC 2018,
r
a
1
- r -
MW 9A
MW-16Ir it; i
is O
SW-4 -
M W-15
15 I /
/ I
MW-10
MW-14S °
MW-1S -
,q, \ o r A
I m - M W-11
'
2.56
1
MW-12s ,@ MW-8
l MW-4
2.12 12 1 13 a —
\ 12� V SW / 1 100 E. Six Forks Road
, J Suite 320
NS ��� �� '� MW-3S Raleigh, NC 27609
1 MW-7 �'TEL: [phone]
` ` ► �,�V l 1.81 MW-3D ;
,► , MW_ 5 www.summitde.net
I M W- 3 A 1.49
JE
► �/
i .�. M W- 6
7.
ETHENE ��� /��—� j�/ ': MW-2D / ♦� SEAL
MW-2S �' ♦ ��
nrTrnTrn „nn //,1.If1TIT1 irIT / / 0.44J 1 • SW-2
qTA FOR
BENZENE CONCENTRATIONS FOR
DEC 2019 uG L
A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION
5 6 7
i
8 I IREV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
m
SUS �IIT
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F—
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
_
SCALE: AS NOTED
DES: GDG
,.`C ARQ�� �i��,
DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34"
DFTR :
' SIO�•• 9
CHKD. ASA
JOB NO. 19-0248.004
��••O��S
i
DATE: 07-07-2020
ENGR: ASA
'ate 7- •
Digita•lly lb :
_
DaVad Gar fq? 10 ,2020_
FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2
APPD: GDG
C '•,� ��;•`
DRAWING NO.
CHANGES WITH
TIME (BENZENE)
8
9
10
12

m
F
4 5 6
a ......
-
\J M W-16
4 16
SW-4
MW-15
�f% M W-10
m
r 1k
m-J 2.00 � o
MW-1D
M W-14D 18
M W-14S
MW-1S_ , v
/ M W-13 I@----,e �15
Im MW-11
MW-12s MW—g A
. 12
1k
12 ,5
SW-1—\
vs MW
MW-3D
W— MW-7 �/—
I
MW 3A /
IE % I ► ��
ETHENE MW-2D
MW-2S ` �/
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS )R / / SW-2
FOR JUN 2018 uG L
r
I
r
-
W .,g M 9 A
5 I
MW-16 ,g ► ,--
,@ i
I
'-
- a16
k
M W-15 e� ,@
s /
14
M W-10 I
J 1.77 ,k
a'
MW-14S • m m MW-1 D
MW-14D;
MW-1 S
i
/ M W-130.69 @�
I 11 m MW-11 G
M W-12 s 18� M IN— R
3.33 ,a
SW-1
vs SW —3
MW-3S—
1 / MW-7 ��----
I M W— 3D :� W_
�M 5
I MW-3A
ETHENE �� / / / �''':; MW-2D
BMW-2S �•
---=---- -- -- --- - -- - --R / / <
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS / e
FOR JUN 2019
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4
MW-16j
SW-4
MW-15
�po
O
►
I ,t ►
MW-9A I
►
,8 ►
I
, 1
m
IIII I
I� ►
m
1
7
M W-10
J 2.20
•'! MW—ID
MW-14S
S.
MW-14D is
MW-1 S �..
/ M W-13@r—,e
I
I m
I :.. MW 12s MW-8
A
2.21 ,2
MW 4
I .
12 a ,g
INS\\ \ SW 3 MW-3S
I ,a 1.82J� MW-3D� 1.25J MW-7 �r—
I� < < W—
I M 5
JE % I 1.091
0.18JMW6 /
ETHENE MW-2D
MW-2S
SW-2 �— C
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS l /
FOR DEC 2018 uG L
r
a
1
- r - _ MW 9A
MW-16 IsSw— is
MW-15 is\
s
' S G
m
M W-10 I ,
. I m
k
m 0.33 M 1D ��'
1 MW-14DMW-14S'
MW-1S
i
I -
� � l •.:.I � 0.57 MW-11
11 ,
M W-12 s 18
i @ MW 8 MW-4
I ,5
A � 100 E. Six Forks Road
SW_ 1 Suite 320
SW-3
Ns MW-3S _':::;:. _ _,� Raleigh, NC 27609
1 MW-7 ;'TEL: [phone]
W—
,► M 5 www.summitde.net
I MW-3A / 0.
JE
i .. M W— 6
ETHENE MW-2D / /' SEAL
VINYL CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS -J /�/// ' MW-2S
)R / / 1 SW-2 —
FOR DEC 2019, uG/L 7 /
A 07/25/2017 1 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR I CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION
5 6 7
i
8 I IREV. A
,�%��.��������••,,.
N CAR
'ES Sj O��'1,''',
Digi ally b)� ; =
David GiRff)c4i5Z 10-2020.
�v
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
q. PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
2. LATTITUDE
35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE
-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL,
INC.
802 RECYCLING
LANE
GREENVILLE, NC
27834
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
m
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
SCALE: AS NOTED
DES: GDG
DWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34"
DFTR :
JOB NO: 19-0248.004
CHKD: ASA
DATE: 07-07-2020
ENGR: ASA
FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2
APPD: GDG
DRAWING NO.
CHANGES W/ TIME (VINYL
CHLORIDE)
13
9
1
10

F
i
2 3
r
a
1
,t 1
M W-9A
11-
P ryp a��-18 1
MW-16
I
SW-4
MW-15 / 18 /
15
r / � O I
14 \�•, I ,8 I II ►
MW-10 u i
i� •'! MW-11D �_'
M W-14S /
MW-14D 14is
MW-1 S .. —
�/ �// ...•4.,:'' 18 0 '•,ate \ c + l
M W-13
m MW-11
MW 12s MW-8
o
SW-1\
vS SW-3 MW-3S
�
MW-7 �f----
�/ MW-3D
� MW-5
MW-3A /
IE
ETHENE MW-2D °-.:� /�•
—2S
/ C—
nr7T nT,-n 1inr+ nnnloT\ 11rK1T DATA FOR // SW-2
VOC CONCENTRATIONS FOR `\�;: e
} /
/
JUN 2018, uG/L \ /
r
,
I
r
W .,a M —
9 A
a I
is
MW-16 is ► ,--
I18A4/ 18 18 / SW_4 a
THE 0.40J MW-15 e� 75 is
/ �
/ �
14 I 18- I 1
M W-10 I
Bi MW-1D
:. MW-14S
M W-14D ,,4i 18
/ ii j / I I . MW-1 S
/ MW-13
/ 18,g i
I 1110, M 11�
1: = MW-12S -
'THF1.10 _
VS \ SW 3 /� MW-3S F 0.73J C�
I/BMW-3D
W—
�,I �M 5
I MW-3A
ETHENE �� / / �''':; MW-2D
—2S �•
/ DETECTED VOC CONSTITUENT DATA FOR / / 1�,_A­ SW— 2 <'/
_i
VOC CONCENTRATIONS FOR - l i `�` THE 1.10
JUN 2019 uG L
INCHES 1 2 3 TENTHS 10 20 30 4
6 7
r MW-9A
1
is
I I
'I ► / ' l�
18 I i
� 1 �
M W-15 :� '@� 7815
\
14 � I 18� I� � ►
M W-10 I
m
J
• m MW-1D
� MW-14D .4MW-14S ,a—
/ MW-1S
/ M W-13 1g—,e `
I m�
M W-11
I ( MW 8
MW-4
SW 3
NS �MW-3S TOL 0.38J
MW-3D�
MW-3A ♦
JE
ETHENE MW-2D
MW-2S ; .
nFTF('.TFf1 \/n(.. (.nM.gTITI IFNT IIATA FOR /
VOC CONCENTRATIONS FOR
, DEC 2018, uG/L
r
_
a
1
1 ►
- r —
MW 9A
MW-16 i
SW-4 - is
M W-15 'r is
,S
' S G
MW-10
MW-14S °
MW-1S —
I -
i � MW-12s MW—g
- MW-4.
"� 100 E. Six Forks Road
/,g SW 1 Suite 320
SW-3 �
NS MW-3S �THIF 4 22 ,� Raleigh, NC 27609
1 MW-7 TEL: [phone]
I / MW-3D
I (([� W_
5 ,►, � M � www.summitde.net
I MW-3A / 0:
JE
i .�. M W— 6
/
ETHENE MW-2D / �' SEAL
VOC CONCENTRATIONS FOR DATA FOR SW-2
DEC 2019 uG L -7 i / i THE 0.93J
A 07/25/2017 6468-17-7070 PERMIT RENEWAL GDG ASA ASA GDG ISSUED FOR REVIEW
REV DATE JOB NO. PROJECT TYPE DES DFTR CHKD ENGR APPD DESCRIPTION
5 6 7
i
8 I IREV. A
REFERENCE NOTES:
1. TOPOGRAPHY OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM
2006 NCDOT LIDAR DATA (NAVD 88)
2. ORIGINAL FACILITY DESIGN CA. 2000 BY JOHN TUCKER, PE
3. AS -BUILT DRAWING PREPARED BY DAVID GARRETT, PG, PE
DURING 2009 PERMITTING CYCLE
4. SEDIMENT TRAPS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS ARE DEPICTED AS
SHOWN ON JOHN TUCKER DRAWING 1 OF 1, TITLED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009
5. THE ARRANGEMENT OF WORKSPACES ON THE RECYCLING YARD
MAY VARY FROM WHAT IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING
6. CURRENT WOODS AND OPEN SPACE TAKEN FROM PUBLIC DOMAIN
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY DATED 2016
7. PLAT LINES OUTSIDE THE FACILITY BOUNDARY TAKEN FROM PITT
COUNTY GIS TAX MAPS AND ARE APPROXIMATE.
8. NO CHANGES TO FACILITY LAYOUT, WASTE STREAM, STORMWATER
DRAINAGE OR LEACHATE MANAGEMENT OR ANY DESIGN ASPECTS
ARE PROPOSED AT THE TIME OF THIS DRAWING PREPARATION
9. FACILITY BOUNDARY AND SITE FEATURES SURVEYED AT VARIOUS
TIMES BY A NC LICENSED SURVEYOR
GROUND ELEVATION (FEET, NAVD 88)
TREE LINE (FROM RECENT AERIAL PHOTO)
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PAVED OR GRAVEL -HARDENED
---------- FACILITY BOUNDARY
JURISDICTIONAL WATER FEATURE
CHANNEL OR SWALE
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL
- SURFACE WATER SAMPLING POINT
LOCATION INFO:
1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS GRIMESLAND AND LEGGETTS
m
2. LATTITUDE 35.621646 AT SCALEHOUSE
LONGITUDE-77.182862
OWNER ADDRESS:
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
802 RECYCLING LANE
GREENVILLE, NC 27834
D
OFFICE TELEPHONE [phone]
SCALE:
0 125 250 375 500 FEET
SUS �IIT
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES F—
C&D LANDFILL, INC.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
SCALE: AS NOTED DES: GDG
�N C ARQ�iDWG TYPE: ANSI D 22"x34" DFTR
�Q•..O��S SjO�•,+ 9 i JOB NO. 19-0248.004 CHKD. ASA
DATE: 07-07-2020 ENGR: ASA
Digita�ty s&by� : -
David G@rj)46-e10-2020: FILENAME: C&D LANDFILL ACM 125_2 APPD: GDG
DRAWING NO.
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
G P�
8 9 10
14