4407_ROSCANS_1993

File Code ��� COMPLAINT
Date Received`��� 1
How Received: Letter, Phone,,
INVESTIGATION
County
Received By .5thA i'i erjrf��
0 Raleigh Referral, Other
WMS :.JIlvt ���lt�:_ r�� _, COMPLAINANT:
ADDRESS: I,LI r—�
PHONE:
COMPLAINT: !-ilkcs4s;,,:� �i"ii. kZh,,--firs
DIRECTIONS: 1�}�,: 4: t r �-�i s i-itr+c+� la►-y►-+ `��=w-C�
RESPONSIBLE PARTY: vynsrs Disres-rtn-
ADDRESS :
PHONE: ' 7 kr 5 z- - t , �� -"►
NATURE OF COMPLAINT:
NON —FACILITY:
OPEN DUMP, STORAGE, TRANSP., BURNING
LAND APPLICATION, UNMANAGED DUMP
USED OIL, MEDICAL WASTE, SCRAP TIRE, SEPTAGE,
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WASTE, C&D WASTE, LCI WASTE
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL WASTE
FACILITY:
�MSW LANDFILL, C&D LANDFILL, LCI LANDFILL,_,MSW INCINERATOR,
MW INCINERATOR, MIXED WASTE PROCESSING, YARD WASTE COMPOST,
SCRAP TIRE COLLECTION, MSW COMPOSTING, TRANSFER,
SEPTAGE, INDUSTRIAL WASTE LANDFILL, MONOFILL,
TREATMENT & PROCESSING, MRF l
DATE/ACTION: �'1S A -3 VeAZA ►)(Alb4it, T C'ogg�' aPtsep Lpa& M'�-rby-erocj
DATE/ACTION• 71S - Y, 12�,czr w E rn e-R.-n
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION: --
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION•
•(Use an extra sheet if necessary for detailed documentation)
DISPOSITION: NO SOLID WASTE. VIOLATION
VIOLATION CORRECTED
CLOSED ON SITE, REMOVED TO
REFERRAL,REFERRED TO
REMARKS:
FOUND DATE q l�2 43
DATE
APPROVED SITE
COPIES TO: 71,Li-1►tiO 1=42SO,W DISPOSI N DATE:
('r BY:

File Code COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION PggztWO'Dc=L
— U County
Date Received' / Received By�JtiC'���tn
How Received: Letter, Phone, KRaleigh Referral, Other
WMS : ��h-v `e�-� ,� COMPLAINANT: {VYc✓G�
ADDRESS: �'Yr� ►n �'��
PHONE: -�
DIRECTIONS:r0�i
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
NATURE OF COMPLAINT:
NON -FACILITY:
OPEN DUMP, STORAGE, TRANSP., BURNING
LAND APPLICATION, UNMANAGED DUMP
USED OIL, MEDICAL WASTE, SCRAP TIRE, SEPTAGE,
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WASTE, C&D WASTE, LCI WASTE
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL WASTE
FAITY:
MSW LANDFILL, C&D LANDFILL, LCI LANDFILL, _MSW INCINERATOR,
MW,INCINERATOR, MIXED WASTE PROCESSING, YARD WASTE COMPOST,
SCRAP TIRE COLLECTION, MSW COMPOSTING, TRANSFER,
SEPTAGE, INDUSTRIAL WASTE LANDFILL, MONOFILL,
TREATMENT & PROCESSING, MRF
DATE/ACTI ON: -„
DATE/ACTION• _
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION:
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION•
•(Use an extra sheet if necessary for detailed documentation)
DISPOSITION: 0 SOLID WASTE VIOLATION FOUND
VIOLATION CORRECTED,
CLOSED ON SITE, REMOVED
REFERRAL,REFERRED TO
REMARKS:
COPIES TO:
TO APPROVED
DATE
DATE
SITE
DISPOSITION DATE:
BY:

File Code COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION fP✓z6�
County
Date Received % _5 Received Byi
How Received:k:�—Letter, Phone, Raleigh Referral, Other
WMS: COMPLAINANT:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
COMPLAINT•
DIRECTIONS:
RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
NATURE OF COMPLAINT:
NON -FACILITY:
OPEN DUMP, STORAGE, TRANSP., BURNING
LAND APPLICATION, UNMANAGED DUMP
USED OIL, MEDICAL WASTE, SCRAP TIRE, SEPTAGE,
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WASTE, C&D WASTE, LCI WASTE
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL WASTE
�ACILITY:
A-- MSW LANDFILL, C&D LANDFILL, LCI LANDFILL, _MSW INCINERATOR,
MW INCINERATOR, MIXED WASTE PROCESSING, YARD WASTE COMPOST,
SCRAP TIRE COLLECTION, MSW COMPOSTING, TRANSFER,
SEPTAGE, INDUSTRIAL WASTE LANDFILL, MONOFILL,
TREATMENT & PROCESSING, MRF
DATE/ACTION: - e e ell
DATE/ACTION j
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION•
DATE/ACTION•
.(Use an extra sheet if necessary for detailed documentation)
DISPOSITION: NO SOLID WASTE VIOLATION FOUND DATE
�V�OLATION CORRECTED DATE
CLOSED ON SITE, REMOVED TO APPROVED SITE
REFERRAL,REFERRED TO
REMARKS:
COPIES TO: DISPOSITION DATE:
BY:

Board of Commissioners:
Edwin Russell, Chairman
Ronald C. Leatherwood
Grover L. Bradshaw
William M. Edwards
John M. Queen, III
August 9, 1993
N.C. y
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Jim Coffey
Solid Waste Management Division
PO Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR OPERATING PERMIT
WHITE OAK SUBTITLE D LANDFILL
HAYWOOD COUNTY, NC
Dear Mr. Coffey:
County Manager:
C. Jack Horton
Clerk to the Board:
Gwen S. Chambers
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of Haywood County's intents
to seek an Operating Permit and operational status at subject landfill on
September 8, 1993. Construction will be completed in early September.
To obtain an Operating Permit on the subject facility, we understand will
require:
1. Requesting an inspection by the Division of Solid Waste Management.
We are hereby making such a request, and the purpose of this letter
is to serve as notification.
2. Submission of CQA report containing results of testing and
narratives.
3. Record Drawings and panel layout.
4. Operator training.
S. Engineers report certifying that construction was substantially
in accordance with the project plans and specifications.
6. Submission of background Groundwater sampling results.
If there are other items you or your staff may require in order to effect
a timely review and issuance of the OPERATING PERMIT, please advise us so
ve may have such items resolved or ready.
420 North Main Street • Courthouse Annex • Waynesville, North Carolina 28786
s
[phone]
1 ti''

Mr. Jim Coffey
Solid Waste Management Division
August 9, 1993
Page 2
We understand the inspection may involve the following Division staff
personnel; accordingly, we ask that you coordinate their schedules for their
on site inspection activities on Wednesday, September 8, 1993. We understand
the Division inspection staff will include:
Gary Alberg, Permit Review Engineer
Jan McHargue, Western Region Engineer
Jim Patterson, Solid Waste Specialist
It is the County's intent and need, due to the capacity situation, at the
Francis Farm landfill, to be ready to operate and receive waste at the White
Oak landfill the week of September 13, 1993.
Please respond to this letter. On behalf of the Citizens of Haywood County,
we would be most appreciative if you would do all that is possible in helping
us achieve a timely opening to the landfill facility.
Si4c,C. rton, County Manager
Haywood County, NC
CJH:bdr
cc: Gary Alberg, NC Division of Solid Waste Mgmt.-DSWM
Jean McHargue, DSWM
✓Jim Patterson, DSWM
Chip Killian, County Attorney
Max Hainer, NC Div. of Environmental Mgmt., Water Quality Section
Jeff Bradley, Perry M. Alexander Constr. Co., Inc.
Ned Divers, DSA Design Group
Gerald Horton, P.E., DSA Design Group
Haywood County Board of Commissioners

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
September 29, 1993
Mr. Jack Horton, County Manager
Haywood County
Courthouse
Waynesville, NC 28786
A74 0
V**
rA
RE: Review of Pre -Operational Documentation
White Oak Sanitary Landfill, Permit 11 44-07; and
Haywood County Mixed Waste Processing Facility, Permit ## 44-08-TP
Dear Mr. Horton:
On September 24, 1993 the Division received a request from DSA Design Group to
authorize Haywood County to operate the two facilities referenced. As noted in the request,
operation of the baling facility is an integral part of the operation plan for the MSWLF.
Representatives from the Division inspected both facilities on September 13, 1993. The decision
to issue a Permit to Operate either facility must be based on compliance with the conditions of
the Permit to Construct. Modifications to the approved plans must be consistent with the permit
and must meet the applicable standard(s) of 15A NCAC 13B.
Mixed Waste Processing_OI M) Facility
Based on the information submitted to date, the Division denies Haywood County's
request for a Permit to Operate. Issued on October 5, 1992, the Conditions of Permit to
Construct It 44-08-TP establish the pre -operative requirements. Haywood County has not
submitted complete information to demonstrate compliance with Construction and Operation Plan
conditions #13 and #14.
The Division will re-evaluate its decision after Haywood County has submitted the
following information:
1. Copies of additional permits necessary to operate the facility. The Division has
not received the required documentation for management of wastewater at the
facility.
2. Method for determining the amount of waste transported for disposal. Staff
observed a location for scales during the site inspection. Please refer to the
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper
m

permit conditions which require a plan to be prepared.
3. As -built drawings (2 sets). The Division has not received any documentation
indicating that the facility was constructed according to the plans approved by the
permit.
White Oak Sanitary Landfill
The Division has received several volumes of bulky construction documentation, and
summaries and certifications from Law Engineering and DSA Design Group. The certifications
address compliance with the CQA Plan and Design Standards approved by the permit. In
addition to construction documentation, the Division has received copies of supplemental permits
and operational information. The Division has reviewed the construction record for
completeness and evaluated the certifications for adequacy in demonstrating compliance with the
permit conditions. Based on the information submitted to date, the Division denies Haywood
County's request for a Permit to Operate the constructed portion of the MSWLF. Haywood
County has not submitted complete information to demonstrate compliance with the Construction
Conditions of Permit to Construct #44-07, issued July 22, 1992. Specifically, complete
information has not been submitted for the following conditions: Construction Lh., LL, 1.1(2),
1.1(3), 3.f., and 3.h..
The Division will re-evaluate its decision after Haywood County has submitted the
following information:
1. Complete information for modifications to the facility design. Item #5 of the 20
Sept 93 DSA certification (DSA cert.) infers that multiple finger drains were
installed as a result of "undercut excavation", and references the Record
Drawings for more information. Review of the Record Drawings indicated only
one groundwater seep was encountered approximately 10 ft. below the FML
design grade. The existence and location of additional seeps requires clarification
and a description of the nature and extent of the unstable conditions is necessary.
How is the term "unstable" used in the Law Report and was this an "Unstable
Area" as defined in 40 CFR Part 258?
2. Installation of a valve in the leachate discharge line. The Division specified this
permit condition for leachate management under conditions that may exceed the
design basis, allowing temporary storage of leachate within the landfill when the
lagoon was at capacity. A valve in the 10 inch HDPE line was not included in
the Record Drawing.
3. Complete documentation in the CQA Report.
The conditions of the Permit to Construct acknowledge that actual field
conditions during construction may require modifications to the approved
Horton 29 Sept 93

design plans. However, they also require complete documentation and a
demonstration of compliance with the applicable standards. The nature
and extentof the features causing the modification must be defined in the
project summary. Refer to the discussion of the Monitoring System (#S)
for more specific requirements.
• The DSA Daily Observation Reports referenced in item #4 of the 20 Sept
93 DSA certification (DSA cert.) are illegible. A summary of the
pertinent information is required.
• Documentation of the thickness of the soil liner is required.
• The location/elevation of the drainage system under the leachate lagoon
must be shown on the Record Drawing. A detail must be provided to
illustrate the general components of the system.
• Has the security fence been installed as specified in the approved plan?
4. Clarification and additional information related to the Operation Plan supplement.
The supplement plans for a daily cover source "from areas south of Phase
I." No borrow areas are delineated on the approved plan at such a
location. Are these areas off the permitted facility boundary (104 acres)?
If so provide a copy of the Land Quality permit. Further information is
required. Note changes from the approved plans.
The following information must be incorporated in a plan describing
operation of the leachate lagoon: a) lagoon capacity; b) required storage
for normal design storm and corresponding levels in the lagoon which will
allow storage of this storm; c) normal operating conditions (pumping
requirements), and; d) a contingency plan for leachate generation rates
exceeding the storage capacity.
5. Field conditions effecting the Groundwater Monitoring System. As referenced
previously in Item #3 above, a more detailed description of the geologic features
and hydrogeologic characteristics associated with the features exposed during
construction is required. This description and the following comments shall be
addressed in a Final Monitoring plan sealed by a Professional Geologist.
a. The location/elevation and extent of rock excavation shall be identified.
Describe rock type(s), competency/degree of fracturing, structural trends
of any fracturing. Were any preferential flow paths identified that would
effect the adequacy of the monitoring system?
Horton 29 Sept 93

b. Further describe the nature and extent of all the "perched" groundwater
and "soft, wet, unsuitable, subgrade soils" encountered during excavation.
C. Document conditions at proposed monitoring well locations which require
changes to the monitoring system.
d. How does the information from b. and c. above compare with the
potentiometric data provided in the hydrogeologic study?
e. How do rock elevations compare with prior data?
f. Were any preferential flow paths identified during general excavation?
g. Did blasting effect the groundwater flow regime?
h. Utilizing all the information available to date, describe how the final
monitoring system adequately monitors the landfill and leachate facilities.
6. Additional monitoring. A monitoring plan shall be established for the underdrain
system installed below the leachate lagoon.
7. Monitoring well construction and sampling. All well records, dri lung logs, and
water level data shall be submitted. Sampling shall be completed prior to
accepting waste.
Should you or Haywood County's representatives have any questions concerning the
requirements of this letter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Jwfies C. Coffey, Supervi
Xrmitting Branch
Solid Waste Section
cc: Jan McHargue
Jim Patterson
vJblian Foscue
DSA Design
Bobby Lutfy
Horton 29 Sept 93
31

Fax Vansmittal Memo
7o
r_9mpany .
FAx#
Gur.,manra
)�
..._..-.. - ..... _ ._ ... A.1: ..�
PAX MERSO
7672 No Cla,yYe � 7u;:ay'sfaty r„n,
From i44/C�I�j i 0'Z
7t\ct( 1=1j1�1h
• Dear Ch°r;a
Fax #
Onp:na,
04A'sr:•nn� C,DItVh, �ge;urn nn
L+ Cd!I rIX JICFiJp
TO: Mr. Jack Horton, County Manager
FAX # [phone]
PROM; NC Solid Waste Section
RE: Permit to Operate Requirculents
Haywood County Landfill
nATE: August 20, 1993
In order to issue a Pennit to operate, HayWOM County Must demonstrate compliInen
perrnit conditions listed in Construction # 3 C_3
requirements with the project engineer (DSA Design); most of the issues with the
e staff has discUSSd the Scopd in hesc
09 Aug 93 letter, 1n order to complete the submittal and facilitate the Section's revfeiv, the
following comments are provided. The numbered items in your letter are addressed first ().
(1) As We have advised DSA, the Section catulot elect on Sept. $ as requested, Flowevcr,
we CUuld inspect the site on lilliri(lay, Sept, 2. The site inspection should be made when
the landfill and leitchate facilities are substantially complete. Please contact Gary
Ahlberg to confirm a date, Elmo, and agenda, Baling Facility during the We would also request to inspect the
same visit,
(2) The CQA Report n7ust also $Ullin 411712e Colistrilcticnl of each camponetit of the liner
System (i.e, clay liner, gec�tnemebratle, LCS, etc. —landfill or lagoon), Tte report anti
professional engineer's cerltificatiou must be detemlincd to be complete by the Section
to qualify for a permit to operate. Previously, the staff has discussed the importance of
timely submittals when components of the landfill have been partially or fidty completed.
Furthermore, a, a prompt CQA determination by the Section is dependent o tlrrrel.
submittals and a tact: of Conditions placed on the project engineer-s statement, which
ceritifies that construction of the landfill Ind le:�chate facilities has been completed
according to the minimcrrn rNuiremerlts set forth in the Permit to Coustrnct (Approved
Platt and Construction cc,t,cl;tions).
(5) The professional engineer's report shall specify where modifications to be approved
practice and the conditions of per
pl�u�s (Attachment 1 to the pernilt) were made in accordance with aeceptahle engineering
mit.
Also, all Well Completion records must be submitted to tilt) Section.
Ad iti 1 6mm_�l
• C-3.f. requires the Primp and Haul permit to be in -place before beginning opt)-ation,
The operation Of the pre-treatment systerm (notYnal operating levels) and allowable

(I N 3 : + +
j I
dlschar,
management apemen colts for the
"gemt ANn. This mA and Ilau,
storm rnan ems m, into � shall detln narmahall be discuss
ed
• avetav mon hIy tin !n art update
Be advised 8 conditions f
that generation rotes or th.
• It is a General pe - now requires Pei
obtained throt s al oo� pe
�mtion O f the rmlts for
cc; J Mc e balrng facilityan 1 t`�cation process,
mar rs me Q� of the ,
�pattersonue Bra! pair of thls
Coffey facility's apAroved 1
aner _ D an,
� Asheville

r ,
q,
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
DIVISION OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor TELEPHONE: (919) 733-M2 Jonathan R Howes, Secretary
June 22, 1993
Mr. Norman Divers, III, Project Manager
DSA Design Group
5511 Capital Center Drive
Suite P-100
Raleigh, NC 27606
Dear Mr. Divers:
The Solid Waste Section has reviewed the information submitted in support of the
proposed rock excavation activities at the referenced landfill. As summarized in your letter
dated June 14, 1993, Law Engineering reviewed the blasting plan and determined that the plan
will not have any detrimental affects on the site hydrologic or geologic characteristics of the site,
indicating no need to revise the approved ground -water monitoring plan.
Based upon the information submitted, the Section hereby approves the proposed rock
excavation activities with the following conditions:
(1) Any changes to the approved construction plan including the ground -water
monitoring plan, which may be necessary following rock excavation shall be
incorporated in the application for permit to operate, including a detailed technical
explanation of those changes.
(2) If no changes are necessary as a result of the rock excavation, technical
information in support of that determination shall be incorporated in the
application for a permit to operate.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] fax N 919-733-0513
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
cMc.« 4..4/t OIL r,,....,,.,,umrr n•�..

Mr. Norman Divers
June 22, 1993
Page 2
If there are any questions, please contact me at [phone].
ncerely,
'a4rtad C�
James C. Coffey, S 'sor
Permitting Branch
Solid Waste Section
JCC/mju
cc: %— im Patterson
Julian Foscue

DESIGN GROUP
June 14, 1993
Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
& Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
201 Oberlin Road
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
SUBJECT: ROCK EXCAVATION AT THE WHITE OAK SANITARY LANDFILL
HAYWOOD COUNTY, NC
DSA PROJECT NO. 92052.03
Dear Mr. Coffey:
'JUN 51993.
We are writing this letter to confirm the results of our meeting on June 7, 1993 and to provide information to
DSWM to facilitate the needed rock excavation for the above mentioned project. As discussed in our meeting,
a rock outcropping approximately 100 feet long by 50 feet wide requires removal to reach the grades to
establish a bench slope in Waste Cells 1 and 2 of the facility, Approximately 5 to 10 feet of rock removal is
required. Our contractor has exhausted every means available to remove the rock, other than blasting, to no
avail. .
We discussed the possibility of blasting this rock outcropping in our meeting, where upon DSWM requested
certain information concerning anticipated blasting procedures, expected impacts to the site, and affects to
the site design. Attached you will find letters from Law Engineering, the geotechnical consultant on the project,
and Austin Powder Co., the firm to perform the blasting. These letters address the aforementioned concerns,
and should provide the needed information to facilitate your approval.
To summarize the attached letters, the Contractor, Perry M. Alexander Construction Co., Inc., will contract
Austin Powder Co., a certified blasting company, to remove the upper 5 to 10 feet of the rock ridge via "light"
blasting efforts. The blasting plan is described in the attached letter from Austin Powder Co. Law Engineering
has reviewed the proposed blasting plan and has determined that same will not have any detrimental affects
on the site hydrologic or geologic characteristics of the site, indicating no need to revise the approved
groundwater monitoring plan.
5511 Capital Center Dr.
Sulte P-100
Raleigh, NC 27606
919/851-6866
fax:[phone]

Mr. Jim Coffey
NC Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources '
June 14, 1993
Page 2
We are Oroceeding with the rock removal as discussed herein and as allowed per our understanding at the
previously mentioned meeting. Should you have any questions concerning this matter please do not hesitate
to contact us. .
/ned
Enclosures:
Law Engineering letter dated June 11, 1993
Austin Powder Co. letter dated June 10, 1993
cc:
Mr. Jack Horton, Haywood County, NC
Mr. Gary. D. McKay, PE, Haywood County,' NC
Mr. Gerald Horton, PE, DSA Design Group
Mr. Jeff Bradley, Perry M. Alexander Const. Co.
Mr. Tom Schipporeit, Law Engineering

LAW ENGINEERING
GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL
& CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
CONSULTANTS
June 11, 1993
DSA Group
5511 Capital Center Drive
Suite P-100
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
Attention: Mr. Norman Divers, III
SUBJECT: PROPOSED BLASTING
WHITE OAK SANITARY LANDFILL
HAYWOOD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
LAW ENGINEERING JOB NO. 472-07913-03
DSA JOB NO. 92052.03
Dear Mr. Divers:
We understand that the Contractor, Perry M. Alexander Construction, plans to blast
the rock encountered above the landfill baseliner design subgrade elevations on the
west slopes of Cell Nos. 1 and 2. The area is at the approximate location indicated
on the attached field sketch. The exposed rock ridge is approximately 50 feet wide
and 100 feet long. About 5 to 10 feet of rock excavation (i.e., cut) is required in this
area to achieve final grade.
We have received a copy of a letter dated June 10, 1993, from Austin Powder
Company to the Contractor discussing the proposed blasting. Austin Powder plans
to drill 3-inch diameter holes on a 5-feet by 5-feet pattern in plan. They state that this
would allow a charge weight of less than 1 pound per cubic yard of blasted rock.
Austin Powder believes this will reduce the risk of shattering or loosening rock under
the blast zone.
3301 ATLANTIC AVE.
P.O. BOX 18288
RALEIGH, NC 27619
919-876-0416

0
DSA Group
June 11, 1993
Page 2
Based on a recent telephone conversation with Mr. Gene Laughrun of Austin Powder,
we understand that Austin Power plans to use dynamite consisting of 40% Extra
Gelatin in 2-inch-diameter by 16-inch-long sticks. Each hole will contain one charge
and one cap. The stick(s) of dynamite will be placed at the bottom of the hole. Drill
holes will be advanced at least one foot below the required rock removal depth.
Delays between holes will be utilized to blast the rock ridge in sections. If the flexible
membrane liner (FML) is in place in Cell No. 3 at the time of blasting, the rock will be
covered with 4 to 5 feet of fill soil to mat the blast and to prevent flyrock damage to
the FML.
The project specifications indicate that rock removal will be necessary to a depth of
18 inches below the subbase soil liner design subgrade elevations. We recommend
that blast drill holes and charges extend no more than 1.5 feet below the required
rock removal depth (i.e. 3 feet below subbase soil liner subgrade). We believe that
Austin Powder's blasting plans are suitable for this project.
If the blasting program is properly performed, we believe that fracturing of the rock
underlying the blast zone can be minimized. Blasting should have no significant
impacts on groundwater levels and the hydrogeologic characteristics of the landfill
site.
The general construction of the landfill cells, whether or not blasting is performed, will
tend to lower long-term groundwater levels at the site. The lined landfill cells will
cover the majority of groundwater recharge areas at the site, which is bounded by a
hill to the south and ridges to the east and west. A spring relief system has been
constructed below the subbase soil liner in Cell No. 2. The construction excavation
also removes the more permeable, moist to wet overburden soils and tends to lower
groundwater levels.

DSA Group
June 11, 1993
Page 3
In addition, the proposed blasting area corresponds to an area where the subbase soil
liner will be sloped (3H:1 V). Therefore, leachate flow will tend to be downslope,
rather than vertically downward. We believe the risk of increased contaminant
transport potential due to blasting in this area is minimal.
Please call us if you have any questions concerning this letter.
Very truly yours,
LAW ENGINEERING, INC.
Thomas M. Schipporeit, E.I.T.
Geotechnical Project Engineer
Stephen J. Criscenzo, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
Registered, North Carolina 16507
TMS/BCH/SJC/pap/tag
Attachment: Field Sketch
cc: Craig Brown - Law Engineering (Asheville)
Barney C. Hale, P.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Registered, N.C. 11285

z
in
a
m
1—
z
w
O
w
N
0
0
0-
9
Q
J
N
w
O�1
n
w
Z
u
J O
a
li
w
w
^
N
o
�j
^V
Z
Q
m
C7
W Z
o 0
-O
0
a
N
a o
JJ
t{
3
W
a
Q
w
w
;
$
U
U
O O
6
W Q
a
0
r
m
0
w
a
a
w
w
a
N
m
rn
a.
a
V)
0
a
0
z
a
a;
0
z -
n
w
U
z
La
m
w
w
w
m

06/14/93 10:27 704 298 2934
JUN 14.'93 10:25 ALEXAI R CONSTR
P.1/1
450 GGLOVinw. Rr,.
June 10, i993
TO: Perky N. Alexander Conatructi.or-, Art,�: ,elf Bradley
FROM: Austin Powder Cornpat)y
RED Rock Exr_avation on Maywood Co. L.ind E i l l Pro j+ecs,
After- meeting with Mr. Bradley and diat;LIssing t►ta outccoping of roe.k
found on a slope at the Haywood County Landfill, we Propose to use
blasting as 3 means of economically remo�jj.ng the rock found.
To .reduce tFe risk of shattering or loo-sening any r.ack' tulder. sub -
grade we suggest drilling with a 3 inch bit and placing holPa cart,u.
5' x 5' pattern. This would allow a p;:udtir f kindei r .1 lb. per yar-d
of material.
tree. IP-el t;h s proce.gS cOuld be aced to .MofI.)vc tiff? Cflclt fColl) the
sltet without any detriajont'al effects to t hit suceounding area.
Nowevec, without knowing the exact aea].t�rJira.i IT op. there can ;
be no gUarartLee on the results.
Post -it", brand fax transmittal memo 7671
Not paws ►
From .
�.�
o
a . P/\-I 4C- z Ij
De
Deft.
Phon -r
Fax j �
axx _ O� �-�I•�..���

ed R
State of North Carolina
MICHAEL F. FASL Y 1)eparlment Of JUSIICe
A IT01AN iv GENEM1. P. O. 110X 629
RALEIGII
27602.0620
March 2, 1993
John D . Runkle
Attorney at Law
Post Office Box 4135
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27515
Re: White Oak Chapter of the Izaak Walton League, Inc.,
and National Parks and Conservation Association, Inc.
v. DEHNR, 92 EHR 0881
Dear John:
Gary Ahlberg has contacted Ned Divers of DSA Design Group,
project engineers for the Haywood County sanitary landfill,
regarding your report from your clients that the contractor has
been "blasting" to construct the landfill. Mr. Divers stated that
no blasting had occurred. He noted that the contractor has been
using air hammers and hydraulic equipment to do some heavy
excavation at the site, beginning approximately ten days ago.
Sincerely yours,
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
`Attorney General
N cy E. Scott
Assistant Attorney General
Phone: [phone]
NES:gg
cc: Gary Ahlberg
Peter McGrath
An I?dual Opportunity / Affirnmative Ac H011 Finployer

gym%$ 6 i9�
Z)SA
February 11, 1993 ��'��� r��'� ;.
Mr. Gary Ahlberg
NC Dept. of Environ., Health & Natural Resources
Solid Waste Section
P.O, Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INCORPORATION OF FRENCH Dr`3 tVFfNGEnB"'Ik HE�,6641AUQ'P1QN OF THE SPRING RELIEF SYSTEM FOR THE WHITE OAK SANITARY LANDFILL HAYWOOD
COUNTY, NORTH CAROUNA .
DSA PROJECT NO. 92052.03
Dear Mr. Ahlberg:
We are writing to inform DSWM that the construction of the Spring Relief System will incorpora#s: he'use of
gravel trench 'fingers" that will extend out from the Spring Relief Box. ' This' modification is' requlrQd to,
convey wet weather springs located approximately 100 feet South and approximately 35 feet Southeast of
the Spring Relief Box (Southern limit) respectively.
The use of these "fingers" as you should recall, was discussed and anticipated during the original review and approval process of the Spring Relief System with NCDEM and NCDSWM..
The location of these "fingers" will be established by the Engineer. Field data W. be collected ,by the
Engineer to establish discharge (flow). The gravel trench "fingers".will be oversized to convey the,gpged '
flow to the Spring Relief System. This information will be provided to the DSWM.
Should you have any questions, please call.

0'.
February 11, 1993
Mr. Gary Ahlberg
NC Dept. of Environ., Health & Natural Resources
Solid Waste Section
P.O. Sox 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS ON THE SPRING 'RELIEF.
SYSTEM FOR HAYWOOD COUNTY'S WHITE OAK SANITARY LANDFILL `
DSA PROJECT NO. 92052.03
Dear Mr. Ahlberg:
We are writing to Inform you of the status of the construction for the Spring Relief,$Yetem >tc�1 t�1hite Qak
Sanitary Landfill in Haywood County, NC. Enclosed are cross -$actions indicating the exGayatlgfl xto date,
the limits of the rock outcrops, the proposed grades of the Spring Relief System and the, ,bo4om ,Qf thq
landfill liner (clay liner).
As you can see, the rock outcrops greatly effect the excavation efforts required to obtain tha proosed
grades for the system. Further, the rock excavation is necessary to meet,the State,roquirernerwtstfor
separation of groundwater and waste. F
As discussed in our meeting on February 2, 1993, we ,are requesting the State allow HayMYgA,CRoCt#�+� '<
through their contractor Perry M. Alexander Construction Company, to perform light, ia'sting`t" �i illtat�
required rock excavation. This is necessary as the rock Is very competent $nd serlquely., ff 'tir
construction progress. Austin Powder has provided a description of.the blaSting' 66thW,,, prvpos4,1. Ar ;ftin
Powder Company is one of the most experienced explosive manufacturers and o(?QI'atOrs'in-Ithe`Unite`
States.
Based on the photos and cross -sections provided, we respectfully request pSWM to, allow Ilght glaating pf
the rock outcroppings in the general vicinity of the Spring Relief System. As'part of this request, Wa will
produce and/or provide the following data/materials to support the proposed ,excavatiAn.m#hod';:
• Provide a blasting plan by a certified operator. .
• Methods to minimize as much as physically possible the effected area.:
• Schedule to perform the excavation in.a prompt and timely manner.
• Document number and depth of pre -drilled holes for actual blast areas,
� b�511 qQi if �l P,4 r��Cf,
sultp R 1 QQ
fplei gh,�
• 2?bQb � "
.919
f4K
ui � '

. ,._ F- ''}tin}f •.
- .. :f 'fie 1 {• a
F r S it try tF Yak}rr4 }.
Mr. Gary Ahlberg z
NC Dept, of Environ., Health & Natural Resources
February 11, 1993
Page 2
• Overlay Bentonite Geo Composite Liner over these areas ,hetweon the prepared suggrada and flay
liner to provide additional barrier measures.
On behalf of Haywood County, we would appreciate an expedient review and approval of this request In
order to minimize the effects this delay has and will have on the Overall project schedule,; Should
require additional information, or would like to discuss this further, please do ngt•.hesltate to call u ,
Sin erely,
No art. ivers
Project Manager -
NED/dtw
`.I
Enclosures
cc: Gerald W. Horton, P.E. - DSA Design Group
Jack Horton, County Manager - Haywood Co.
2��
Jeff Bradley - Perry M. Alexander Construction Y"
Rick Bahnson - Perry M. Alexander Construction
1
Mark Landis - Law Engineering
J f'u-u„✓

FAX MEMO
TO: Mr. Jack Horton, County Manager
FAX # [phone]
FROM: NC Solid Waste Section
RE: Permit to Operate Requirements
Haywood County Landfill
DATE: August 20, 1993
In order to issue a Permit to Operate, Haywood County must demonstrate compliance with the
permit conditions listed in Construction # 3 (C-3). The staff has discussed the scope of these
requirements with the project engineer (DSA Design); most of the issues are outlined in your
09 Aug 93 letter. In order to complete the submittal and facilitate the Section's review, the
following comments are provided. The numbered items in your letter are addressed first ( ).
(1) As we have advised DSA, the Section cannot meet on Sept. 8 as requested. However,
we could inspect the site on Thursday, Sept. 2. The site inspection should be made when
the landfill and leachate facilities are substantially complete. Please contact Gary
Ahlberg to confirm a date, time, and agenda. We would also request to inspect the
Baling Facility during the same visit.
(2) The CQA Report must also summarize construction of each component of the liner
system (i.e. clay liner, geomemebrane, LCS, etc ... landfill or lagoon). The report and
professional engineer's ceritification must be determined to be complete by the Section
to qualify for a Permit to Operate. Previously, the staff has discussed the importance of
timely submittals when components of the landfill have been partially or fully completed.
Furthermore, a prompt CQA determination by the Section is dependent on timely
submittals and a lack of conditions placed on the project engineer's statement, which
ceritifies that construction of the landfill and leachate facilities has been completed
according to the minimum requirements set forth in the Permit to Construct (Approved
Plan and Construction conditions).
(5) The professional engineer's report shall specify where modifications to the approved
plans (Attachment 1 to the permit) were made in accordance with acceptable engineering
practice and the conditions of permit.
(6) Also, all well completion records must be submitted to the Section.
Additional comments
• C-3.f. requires the Pump and Haul permit to be in -place before beginning operation.
The operation of the pre-treatment system (normal operating levels) and allowable

discharge limits for the Pump and Haul permit shall be discussed in an updated leachate
management plan. This plan shall define normal operating conditions for the leachate
management system, incorporating average monthly generation rates and peak design
storm management.
• Be advised that DEM now requires SW-NPDES permits for operation of the landfill.
It is a General Permit, obtained through a notification process.
Operation of the baling facility is an integral part of this facility's approved plan.
cc: J. McHargue
Patterson
J. Coffey
M. Haner - DEM Asheville

State of North Carolina
Department of En onment,
Health and Natural Resources A
• t
Division of Solid Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan Q. Howes, Secretary
September 29, 1993
Mr. Jack Horton, County Manager
Haywood County
Courthouse
Waynesville, NC 28786
RE: Review of Pre -Operational Documentation
White Oak Sanitary Landfill, Permit #/ 44-07; and
Haywood County Mixed Waste Processing Facility, Permit 1l 44-08-TP
Dear Mr. Horton:
On September 24, 1993 the Division received a request from DSA Design Group to
authorize Haywood County to operate the two facilities referenced. As noted in the request,
operation of the baling facility is an integral part of the operation plan for the MSWLF.
Representatives from the Division inspected both facilities on September 13, 1993. The decision
to issue a Permit to Operate either facility must be based on compliance with the conditions of
the Permit to Construct. Modifications to the approved plans must be consistent with the permit
and must meet the applicable standard(s) of 15A NCAC 13B.
Mixed Waste Processing (MWP) Facility
Based on the information submitted to date, the Division denies Haywood County's
request for a Permit to Operate. Issued on October 5, 1992, the Conditions of Permit to
Construct 11 44-08-TP establish the pre -operative requirements. Haywood County has not
submitted complete information to demonstrate compliance with Construction and Operation Plan
conditions #/3 and #14.
The Division will re-evaluate its decision after Haywood County has submitted the
following information:
1. Copies of additional permits necessary to operate the facility. The Division has
not received the required documentation for management of wastewater at the
facility,
2. Method for determining the amount of waste transported for disposal. Staff
observed a location for scales during the site inspection. Please refer to the
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 10% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper
m

permit conditions which require a plan to be prepared.
3. As -built drawings (2 sets). The Division has not received any documentation
indicating that the facility was constructed according to the plans approved by the
permit.
White Oak Sanitary Landfill
. The Division has received several volumes of bulky construction documentation, and
summaries and certifications from Law Engineering and DSA Design Croup. The certifications
address compliance with the CQA Plan and Design Standards approved by the permit. In
addition to construction documentation, the Division has received copies of supplemental permits
and operational information. The Division has reviewed the construction record for
completeness and evaluated the certifications for adequacy in demonstrating compliance with the
permit conditions. Eased on the infc.,m..ation submitted to date, the Division denies Haywood
County's request for a Permit to Operate the constructed portion of the MSWLF. Haywood
County has not submitted complete information to demonstrate compliance with the Construction
Conditions of Permit to Construct 1144-07, issued July 22, 1992. Specifically, complete
information has not been submitted for the following conditions: Construction 1.h., 1.i., 1.1(2),
1.1(3), 3.f., and 3.h..
The Division will re-evaluate its decision after Haywood County has submitted the
following information:
1. Complete information for modifications to the facility design. Item #5 of the 20
Sept 93 DSA certification (DSA cert.) infers that multiple finger drains were
installed as a result of "undercut excavation", and references the Record
Drawings for more information. Review of the Record Drawings indicated only
one groundwater seep was encountered approximately 10 ft. below the FML
design grade. The existence and location of additional seeps requires clarification
and a description of the nature and extent of the unstable conditions is necessary.
How is the tern "unstable" used in the Law Report and was this an "Unstable
Area" as defined in 40 CFR Part 258?
2. Installation of a valve in the leachate discharge line. The Division specified this
permit condition for leachate management under conditions that P.aay exceed th-e
design basis, allowing temporary storage of leachate within the landfill when the
lagoon was at capacity. A valve in the 10 inch HDPE line was not included in
the Record Drawing.
3. Complete documentation in the CQA Report.
• The conditions of the Permit to Construct acknowledge that actual field
conditions during construction may require modifications to the approved
Horton 29 Sept 93

b. Further describe the nature and extent of all the "perched" groundwater
and "soft, wet, unsuitable, subgrade soils" encountered during excavation.
C. Document conditions at proposed monitoring well locations which require
changes to the monitoring system.
d. How does the information from b. and c. above compare with the
potentiometric data provided in the hydrogeologic study?
e. How do rock elevations compare with prior data?
f. Were any preferential flow paths identified during general excavation?
g. Did blasting effect the groundwater flow regime?
h. Utilizing all the information available to date, describe how the final
monitoring system adequately monitors the landfill and leachate facilities.
6. Additional monitoring. A monitoring plan shall be established for the underdrain
system installed below the leachate lagoon.
7. Monitoring well construction and sampling. All well records, dri Iling logs, and
water level data shall be submitted. Sampling shall be completed prior to
accepting waste.
Should you or Haywood County's representatives have any questions concerning the
requirements of this letter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Barytes C. Coffey, Su
Wrmitting Branch
Solid Waste Section
cc: Jan McHargue
✓Jim Patterson
Julian Foscue
DSA Design
Bobby Lutfy
Horton 29 Sept 93
IE

observation #3�`�
ROUTING/FILING
date:
project:
Y
location:
weather:
temp. range:
observation report
m t wQf sat 19 g—
(`%tt/Iy� ee�a•+• �"-� Q= DSA# 42,052 21
sunny overcas rainy dark cold mil hot
�l3' 6q° lZ36
❑ 5511 Capital Ctr. Or
Suite P-100
Raleigh, N.C. 27606
[phone]
Fax: [phone]
j purpose of / ❑ 1365 Westgate Ctr. Dr.
t S �� d�� � Suite F-1
Observation: P.O. Box 24339
9)t734N.C.7114 a339
observer: Winston-Salem,
Fax: [phone]
others present:
work observed: general electrical I plumbing I heating/air conditioning I site I other
! no. of workers:
..........
_—
....... —`- (P„�,�� �%�Q..a w�� c�.%i�._!�.� JG..r�..aC� ✓iGsla.� ^^".au�.1<"�(c�F
1
�.f-
4..
- s{�G��t��,...Aet......��3�a,Rt�e�.Fr�._.a�c�,aw..s�6• _=___s�:r a--L�.,_„_,,,1�6G,.1.(���_,..�_^�_s�aa+.�...=._?9i.�.�,7.t��
v 6�.haw-aY}p.�..,a•��..rr��...�,,.�.;a.,�.N,��.o-,�.p�,.�.-'y'._f�...�zenc.._._�.�s.:!Ana.i..-.a�..�..#.�Z..,�s�(�s'
ltaa�_�....�---1�-�-A.at.L.__.iAa.tt�.�..�cim.,�gi ±►a_.��.�,�! �.�..�r�t...�.c.R....�,.,�:a�:.,�,�..�,�..LP
1
� kl�,i.. �l c�.r +'�, � an �„ia,���____�-•'t.,�,,..a,..��sn.s...�,�m...._Ctisr..�..,..� .�, -.11. sue: i.,..._....
•rt PAGE —s' OF

observation report observation #
PAGE 2 OF

g, ;
State of tJorth UjioIIna
Deparlrnpnt of Environment,
Neallti and Natural Resources
James 13. 1 Lunt, Jr., Governor
Jonalhan B. I loweS, SoCretnry
•
Mr. Jack Horton
Haywood County Manager
Courthouse Annex
Waynesville, NC 28786
Dear Mr. Horton:
04 F.04
AUG 12 199-
1••
This office has reviewed the erosion and sedimentation control plan submitted for the
project listed below. We find the plan to be acceptable and hereby issue this Letter of Approval.
Please be advised that Title 15A, North Carolina Administrative Code 48.0017(a), requires that
a copy of the approved soil erosion control plan be on file at the job site. Also, you should
consider this letter to give the Notice required by NCGS § 113A-61(d) of our right of periodic
inspection to ensure compliance with the approved plan,
The State's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is a performance -•oriented program
requiring protection of the natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following
commencement of this project, it is determined that the plan is inadequate to meet the
requirements of NCGS § 113A-51 to 66, this office may require revisions to the plan and
implementation of the revisions to ensure compliance with the Act.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided
in the Financial Responsibility Form which you have provided. You are requested to file an
amended form if there is any change in the information included on the form. In addition, it
would be helpful if you notify this office of the proposed starting date for this project. Your
cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely,
,—De,z� 6.Z3�-4
Dennis Q. Owenby
Am. Regional Engineer
Project name: White Oak Landfill Revisions
Location: Haywood County
Date recelvef: 8/9/93
New submittal () Revision (d )
"'C"C113"R' RuIL6,.K, 39 \X(111lln (lore A01-.111, NC )Root • "W-1. Tu.iu.r++1.
A,r r,I,r.rl (11,1• ,tent• AI(irMIt1%, Artlon F•1-06ryYr

s.7,rt. e c • 11,
observation report
date: m@ th f sat __ AAJ 13 19 u
�.,,.=. project: DSA# 4�os 2.v3
...�.; location:
weather: sunny overcast rainy dark cold mild
temp. range:
purpose of
observation: Ze S ;Jeri
yy4observer:
others present: �l1 ...�U��
observation # I I Z4S'
ROUTING/FILING
❑ 5511 Capital Mr. Dr.
Suite P-100
Raleigh, N.C. 27606
(919) 851-68M
Fax: [phone]
❑ 1365 Westgate Ctr. Dr.
Suite F-1
P.O. Box 24339
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27114-4339
[phone]
Fax: [phone]
work observed: general electrical plumbing heating/air conditioning site other
no. of workers: _ I I I I
I
'A, 4L��G�.-�..�
iu
TIC D'A ,1 eccs4
rl t_ .Il r._ ► r ��
TIC D'A ,1 eccs4
rl t_ .Il r._ ► r ��

observation report observation #_
Ll
__-__ M� il:� M�,(d.. ,�• a; �J Diu i � � 1aT
._ � l.U�. i�nt /14 � i �/ i � i � W� NN(� d. / ♦ � S.�OM..,.? +�.2 !.'..�!�---�+-�'-�-''" "�'li/,��,-..-..a..
i T Lu�
PAGE 2 '0F

State of North Corc_ a
Department of Envlronment,
Health and Natural Resources
Divislon of Solid Waste Management
Jamos B, Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
Poet -It" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 1# oipooee ► a
i" Ij
rpm
o.
o.
opt,
Phone N
e 04 4(�Z. Ozs ]lax,
September 29, 1993 )O.S(.0 � *'
Mr, Jack Horton, County Manager
Haywood County
Courthouse
Waynesville, NC 28786
RE: Review of Pre -Operational Documentation
White Oak Sanitary Landfill, Permit # 44-07; and
Haywood County Mixed Waste Processing Pacility, Permit # 44-08-TP
Dear Mr. Horton:
On September 24, 1993 the Division received a request from DSA Design Group to
authorize Haywood County to operate the two facilities referenced. As noted in the request,
operation of the baling facility is an integral part of the operation plan for the MSWLF.
Representatives from the Division inspected both facilities on September 13, 1993. The decision
to issue a Permit to Operate either facility must be based on compliance with the conditions of
the Permit to Construct, Modifications to the approved plans must be consistent with the permit
and must meet the applicable standard(s) of 15A NCAC 13B.
Based on the information submitted to date, the Division denies Haywood County's
request for a Permit to Operate. Issued on October 5, 1992, the Conditions of Permit to
Construct # 44-08-TP establish the pre -operative requirements, Haywood County has not
submitted complete information to demonstrate compliance with Construction and Operation Plan
conditions #3 and #4.
The Division will re-evaluate its decision after Haywood County has submitted the
following information:
] . Copies of additional permits necessary to operate the facility. The Division has
not received the required documentation for management of wastewater at the
facility.
2. Method for detetnrtning the amount of waste transported for disposal. Staff
observed a location for scales during the site inspection. Please refer to the
P,O, Box 27687. Ralolgh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Atf?ma'Ivo Aclion F-Djoyar 50%'ecyc!ed/ � 0% Post-Co-sumar odvd,

FF'i_it9 NC UEHNF.. SOLIC !JH=TE ECTIOhJ -4810 09,29,1993 15'57
P. 2
permit conditions which require a plan to be prepared.
3, As -built drawings (2 sets). The Division has not received any documentation
indicating that the facility was constructed according to the plans approved by the
Permit,
The Division has received several volumes of bulky construction documentation, and
summaries and certifications from Law Engineering and DSA Design Group. The certifications
address compliance with the CQA Plan and Design Standards approved by the permit. In
addition to construction documentation, the Division has received copies of supplemental permits
and operational information, 7'he Division has reviewed the construction record for
completeness and evaluated the certifications for adequacy in demonstrating compliance with the
permit conditions. Based on the information submitted to date, the Division denies Haywood
County's request for a Permit to Operate the constructed portion of the MSWI.F. Haywood
County has not submitted complete information to demonstrate compliance with the Construction
Conditions of Permit. to Construct #44-07, issued July 22, 1992. Specifically, complete
information has not been submitted for the following conditions: Construction l,h., l,i,, 1,l(2),
1.1(3), 3.f,, and 3.h.,
The Division will reevaluate its decision after Haywood County has submitted the
following information:
1. Complete ir{fonnatlon for modtflcatlons to the faclllty design. Item #5 of the 20
Sept 93 DSA certification (DSA Bert.) infers that multiple finger drain] were
Installed as a result of "undercut excavation", and references the Record ,
Drawings for more information, Review of the Record Drawings indicated onlyyw�
one groundwater seep was encountered approximately 10 ft. below the FML 94'
design grade. The existence and location of additional seeps rewires clarifications 0
and a description of the nature and extent of the tstable conditions is necessary. ,ct°,
How is the tern "unstable" used in the Law Report and was this an "Unstablebi�
Area" as defined in 40 CPR Part 2587 �a . 1 ? r
2, Installation of a valve in the leachate discharge line, The Division specified this inpj
permit condition for leachate management under conditions that may exceed the
design basis, allowing temporary storage of leachate within the landfill when the
lagoon was at capacity. A valve in the 10 inch HDPE line was not included in
the Record Drawing.
3, Complete documentation in the CQA Report,
The conditions of the Permit to Construct acknowledge that actual field
conditions during construction may require modifications to the approved
Horton 29 Sept 93

FROM NO GEHNR SOLID IJH TE SECTI0,H
P.
design plans. However, they also require complete documentation and a a
demonstration of compliance with the applicable standards, The natu
and extent of the features causing the modification must be defined in the
project summary. Refer to the discussion of the Monitoring System (#5)
for more specific requirements.
• The DSA Daily Observation Reports referenced in item #4 of the 20 Sept
93 DSA certification (DSA cent.) are illegible. A summary of the
pertinent information is required,
• Documentation of the thickness of the soil liner is required. N' Arsb,-;- E f
• The location/elevation of the drainage system under the lc>achate lagoon
must be shown on the Record Drawing, A detail must he provided to
illustrate the general components of the system.
• Has the security fence been installed as specified in the approved plan? eo"JjP(('ks t�
4. Clar(flcatlon and additional tr{fblmation related to the Operation Plan supplement.
The supplement plans for a daily cover source "from areas south of Phase
L" No borrow areas are delineated on the approved flan at such a
location. Are these areas off the permitted facility boundary (104 acres)?
If so provide a copy of the Land Quality permit. Further infonnation is
required, Note changes from the approved plans.
The following information must be incorporated in a plan describing
operation of the leachate lagoon: a) lagoon capacity; b) required storage
for normal design storm and corresponding levels in the lagoon which will
allow storage of this storm; c) normal operating conditions (pumping
requirements), and; d) a contingency plan for leachate generation rates
exceeding the storage capacity.
5. Meld conditions eecting the Groundwater uol;ltaling 4stem, As referenced
previously in Item #3 above, a more detailed description of the geologic features
and hydrogeologic characteristics associated with the features exposed during
construction is required. This description and the following comments shall be
addressed in a Final Monitoring plan sealed by a Professional geologist.
a. The location/elevation and extent of rock excavation shall be identified.
Describe rock type(s), competency/degree of fracturing, structural trends
ofanyfracturing. Were any preferential flow paths identii led ; hat --oidd
'h- j}(�Y1+`(:-T•lTlo •.!cltm`%
-I k- � a&*J

FROM NC DEHFIR _OLID IJPSTE SECTION 4:10 09.29.1993 15:58
.a
P. 4
b. Further describe the nature and extent of all the "perched" groundwater re' (
and "soft, wet, unsuitable, subgrade soils" encountered during excavation,
c. Document conditions at proposed monitoring well locations which require l,��OrV O
changes to the monitoring system.
d. How does the information from b. and c. above compare with the®wmw,s
potentiometric data provided in the hydrogeologic study? 2
e. How do rock elevations compare with prior data? 41f&o ,
f. Were any preferential flow paths identified during general excavation?,- ? (�o.
g. Did blasting effect the groundwater flow regime? ari Abe ,A3'(tf6,I � LA"I'
h. Utilizing all the information available to date, describe how the final
monitoring system adequately monitors the landfill and leac,hate facilities.
6. Additional monitoring. A monitoring plan shall be established for the underdrain Pknl
system installod below the leachate lagoonj
7. Monitoring well construction and sampling, All well records, drilling logs, and
water level data shall be submitted. Sampling shall be completed prior to
accepting waste.
Should you or Haywood County's representatives have any questions concerning the
require,nents of this letter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
dapies C. Coffey, S
rmitting Branch
Solid Waste Section
cc: Jan McHargue
Ain Patterson
Julian Foscue
DSA Design
Bobby Lutfy
Horton 29 Sept 93
�441
54p1tvl',
C"),P't jC t'-]

September 30, 1993
1
Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,.. -
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
401 Oberlin Road
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
kEf[IVFD
o 0 1 1993
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO REVIEW COMMENTS ON PRE -OPERATIONAL DOCUMENTATION
DATED SEPTEMBER 29, 1993, PERMIT #44-07
DSA PROJECT NO. 92052.03
Dear Mr. Coffey:
We are writing to respond to comments made by your department on the pre -operational documentation for
the White Oak Sanitary Landfill located in Haywood County, NC. A copy of your comments is attached for
ease in reference during review of the enclosed responses. We understand those comments made on
DSWM Permit #44-08-TP regarding the Materials Recovery Facility have been responded to by County staff
and should be received by your office no later than Friday, October 1, 1993.
The following responses have been numbered to correspond with the comments made in the above
mentioned document.
1.) As discussed in Items B.4 and B.5 of the Construction Documentation Report finger drains
were installed to provide an outfall for groundwater encountered below the subgrade
elevations for the subject facility. Note that subgrade elevations refers to the grade beneath
the subbase soil liner (bentonite augmented soil layer, i.e., 2 feet below FML). The reason
these finger drains were installed was to provide a suitable subgrade surface that could be
compacted and allow for the installation of the (bentonite enriched) subbase soil liner. Soft,
wet subgrade soils do not provide a well compacted surface, nor do they provide a suitable
foundation for the subbase soil liner. When removed, the groundwater source required an
outlet to allow the suitable structural backfill material to be compacted so as to provide the
subgrade needed to install the subbase soil liner.
The Record Drawings provided, indicate the finger drain extensions into Waste Cell No. 2.
Additionally, the attached field drawing prepared by the Engineer's onsite representative
indicates the horizontal location of the subject finger drains. Vertical dimensions were taken
by survey personnel and indicate the top of the finger drains are at least 4 feet below the
flexible membrane liner (FML) grade.
5511 Capital Center Drive, Suite P-100, Raleigh, NC 27606 919/851-6866 (fax) 919/851-7024
Winston-Salem • Raleigh • Charlotte

Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
September 30, 1993
Page 6
f.) No preferential flow paths were observed during construction in the hard rock. [Ref.
Item 5.a of this letter]
g.) Blasting did not effect the groundwater flow regime for this site. [Ref. Blast Monitor
Report prepared by LAW]
h.) This has been discussed herein in Item 6. Reference the letter dated October 1,
1993 prepared by LAW for this information and a more extensive discussion.
6.) As discussed in Item 3 above, the drainage system installed under the leachate lagoon
does not convey a steady flow of water to its discharge. However, there are several means
of monitoring for groundwater contamination around the leachate lagoon area. The primary
means for monitoring is the use of the shallow and deep nest of groundwater monitoring
wells installed downgradient from the leachate lagoon. The waters discharged by the
drainage system in question can be monitored by the surface water monitor station number
2 located directly downgradient from the storm culvert. By using this surface water monitor
station and the upgradient surface water monitor station (SWM-1), the discharge
characteristics for the drainage system can be isolated. Should contamination be detected
in the surface water monitoring stations, the same should be true for the monitoring of the
nested wells at GWM-3.
7.) We understand the monitoring wells are required to be installed before the acceptance of
waste at the facility. The wells were completed on September 30, 1993. Sampling of the
wells will be completed by October 6, 1993, and will be performed prior to accepting waste
at the facility. DSWM has indicated the groundwater well installation and sampling data can
be submitted within 30 days of the last sampling event, and the Operation Permit will not be
delayed until this data is submitted. We are continuing to provide the required information
as quickly as it can be derived and prepared for submission.
We trust the above provides you with the understanding and information needed to secure an Operations
Permit for the subject facility. We know you are aware of Haywood County's situation regarding the
implementation of the facility as well as with the overall solid waste management program for the County.

Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
September 30, 1993
Page 2
The term "unstable" as used in the construction documentation predates and does not
reflect the same definition as stated in USEPA Subtitle D regulations (specifically 40 CFR
Part 258). The term "unstable" is used in the geotechnical sense indicating soils were
encountered that were unsuitable for the intended use. "Unsuitable material" has been
defined in the construction documents and job specifications by both DSA Design Group
and Law Engineering as that material which may not be incorporated into the job due to its
condition such as wetness, contamination, organic content, or other reasons that may
render it unusable. Unsuitable soils required undercutting as observed by the Engineer's
onsite representatives. Undercutting refers to the excavation and removal of unsuitable
soils, followed by backfilling with compacted suitable fill soils. Undercut areas were
excavated and backfilled with suitable materials as documented in the submitted report.
2.) As stated in the Permit to Construct, a gate valve will be installed in the outfall leachate line
that discharges to the Leachate Holding Basin. This valve will be installed by October 5,
1993 and will be functional prior to acceptance of waste at the subject facility.
3.) The nature and extent of field conditions that caused the design modifications have been
defined in the submitted construction documentation. Additionally, a letter of clarification
regarding those issues defined as: rock type(s), fracturing and competency, structural
trends, preferential flow paths, and groundwater conditions have been addressed in a letter
from Law Engineering submitted and dated October 1, 1993. We understand that upon
further review of the blasting report, daily observation reports, correspondence between the
State and the Engineer, and site investigation reports performed by DSWM staff; that the
field conditions in question are further identified.
0 We understand the copy of the daily observation report referenced in Item B.4 of the
DSA certification is illegible. A legible copy is attached to this response letter.

Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
September 30, 1993
Page 3
• The thickness of the subbase soil liner was documented throughout the construction
of the project by the Engineer's onsite representatives. This documentation was via
survey measurements and exploratory probes. The hand or field checks that were
made of the subbase thickness used a 2 inch diameter auger. Probes with auger
were made and measurements were taken to ensure that at least 24 inches of
bentonite augmented soils (subbase liner) was installed. Probe holes were then
filled with pure sodium bentonite. Visual differences were apparent, when probing,
as to color and texture differences between the subbase and the subgrade
materials. Grading stakes were placed and survey shots were taken as checks
along the subgrade surface (that surface prepared to receive the subbase bentonite
augmented soils) prior to placement of the subbase soil liner. The record drawings
indicate via contours, the subbase surface and boxes annotate the final surface
elevations. You will note the two foot difference. In some areas the Contractor
overbuilt the subbase soil liner surface up to 6 inches as a sacrificial layer to
accommodate fine grading and thus ensure the minimum depth of 24 inches of
subbase soil liner was achieved after the fine grading.
• The location of the drainage system installed beneath the leachate lagoon is shown
on the attached field drawing. The field drawing was prepared by the Engineer's
onsite representative. The depth of the drainage system varies from 10 to 15 feet
below the FML grades at the leachate lagoon. The system was installed due to
dampness encountered in this area, though no running flow of water was observed.
The intent of the effort was to enhance the structural integrity of the subgrade at the
lagoon. The drains are in effect french drains with pipes therefrom terminated into
the envelope of stone backfill surrounding the nearby 54 inch diameter storm
culvert. A discharge from the drainage system under the leachate lagoon would
appear at the terminus of the storm culvert from the riprap. The flow would be
detectable as it exits the riprap and proceeds to the sediment basin. Surface water
monitoring station number 2 is located at the ouffall of the storm culvert.
• The security fence will be constructed and completed by October 4, 1993, and will
be completed prior to the acceptance of waste at the facility.

Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
September 30, 1993
Page 4
4.) The attached erosion control plan for the soil stockpile areas to the south of the facility
indicate the borrow areas of the Operation Plan supplemental document. An approval letter
from the Land Quality Section of DEM in Asheville is also attached for the referenced plan.
The lagoon capacity has been stated in the construction documentation to be approximately
500,000 gallons. The lagoon was simply expanded to provide additional storage if needed
during the course of operating the facility. The operation of the leachate lagoon with
reference to pump and haul schedule, volume, method of removal, and anticipated flows is
unchanged from the approved plan.
A gage has been installed that will indicate the depth of leachate contained in the lagoon at
any given time. A table indicating volume as related to depth will be used by the operator
to determine the leachate generation of the facility and the time, and volume of leachate to
be removed during any event. This data will become a part of the operating record of the
facility.
5.) The geologic features and hydrogeologic characteristics associated with the features
exposed during construction were similar to those identified in Law Engineering's
Hydrogeologic Study dated latest revision July 29, 1991. The profile of the excavated
overburden soils included a surficial stratum of sandy -silt or silty sand, underlain by more
coarsely grained sandy silts with depth. In general, the overburden soils excavated
throughout the waste cells were 20 to 50 feet thick. The overburden soils were underlain by
partially weathered rock which was typically 5 to 10 feet thick and was removed using a
ripping device on a D-8 bulldozer. Hard rock consisting generally of granitic gneiss was
encountered below the partially weathered rock in isolated areas and as defined by field
sketches contained in the construction documentation.
a.) The rock outcroppings encountered during excavation were located: in the Spring
Relief Box, the west slope of Waste Cells 1 and 2, and the northeast corner Waste
Cell No. 1. The orientation of these rock outcroppings was in a northeast direction
which is consistent with the regional foliation and structural features identified in the
previously mentioned hydrogeological report. Hard rock located in the Spring Relief
Box was excavated using a hydraulic hoe ram hammer to the extent discussed in
DSA's certification. Hard rock encountered in the west slope of Waste Cell No. 2
was removed using light blasting as approved by DSWM. The design grades in
Waste Cell No 1 were revised such that rock removal was not required. This
revision is discussed in Item B.8 of the certification issued by DSA Design Group.

Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
September 30, 1993
Page 5
The hard rock removed from the west slope of Waste Cell #2 and the Spring Relief
Box generally consisted of coarse to very coarse foliated granitic gneiss. The rock
was fresh to very slightly weathered and hard to very hard. Joint spacing was close
to moderately close (2 inches to 3 feet) and foliation spacing was thin to medium (2
inches to 3 feet). Joints observed were stained and very slightly weathered.
Structural trends (strikes and dips) of fracturing were not measured but appeared to
conform to the description stated in the hydrogeological report prepared by LAW.
There were no preferential flow paths observed during excavation within the hard
rock. Preferential flow paths are defined as zones of highly fractured rock or veins
of quartzite that provide a conduit for groundwater flow. A Seep was observed in
the Spring Relief Box area from the partially weathered rock overlying the hard rock.
Seeps located below the subgrade surface were observed in partially weathered
rock in Waste Cell No. 2. During construction, groundwater flow from the seeps in
Waste Cell No. 2 were observed for a period of approximately 1 week at which time
the seeps appeared to have stopped flowing.
b.) This information has been provided in this letter as well as in the construction
documentation reports prepared by DSA and LAW. Also refer to discussion under
item 1.) herein.
c.) The data regarding the monitoring well installation will be submitted as part of the
well data package discussed in Item 7 of this letter. We understand DSWM will
require this data to be submitted within 30 days of the last sampling event and
should not delay or affect the issuance of an Operations Permit for the facility.
Additionally, the Engineer, and LAW have been in close communication with Mr.
Bobby Lufty, DSWM Hydrogeologist, concerning this installation of the monitoring
wells.
d.) Reference the letter dated October 1, 1993 prepared by LAW for this information.
e.) As discussed, rock outcroppings were encountered above design grades in isolated
areas of Waste Cells 1 and 2, providing the conclusion that rock was higher than
prior data indicated. Though extensive soil borings were performed, of necessity
straightline interpolation of rock surfaces would not indicate every surface anomoly.
However, the majority of the site upon excavation activities tended to reflect that
which was stated in the hydrogeological report.

Mr. Jim Coffey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
September 30, 1993
Page 7
We believe the enclosed should provide your department the information needed to issue an Operations
Permit by October 8, 1993. We are standing by to offer any assistance needed to acquire this permit for
Haywood County.
Sincerely,
DSA Design Group of NC, Inc.
Norman E. Divers, III
Project Manager
/ned
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Jack Horton, Haywood County Manager
Mr. Gary D. McKay, P.E., Haywood County Engineer
Mr. Gerald W. Horton, P.E., DSA Design Group
Mr. Tom Schipporeit, P.E., Law Engineering
Mr. Gary Ahlberg, Solid Waste Section, DSWM
File

VAHr1Ow•SwlEu
RµtICH
CHARLOM
FACSIMILE TRANSM117AL COVER SHEET
TO I�hlh ,l
COMPANYj - FROM � LJI✓4
DATE" Pl - TIM,F . 0 a
PROJECT o
PROJECT NO. ZLI °-
RE;
TELEPHONE el� 7, -
FAX PHONE Z;�' 4016
TOTAL PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET �
ORIGINAL TO BE SENT 0
REMARKS
p 11r--Ze-e Ift." �441" 4/" 'c
,21
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
5511 Capital Center Drive, Suite P•100
Raleigh, NC 27606
919.851.6866
Fax: [phone]
TOOd EPS'ON OTOh SCE ET6 E- -iud dnOJO N91S3G USG LS: TT 26/P /0T

z 5A
I ol P [e 4 e'' •
WINSTOW&MIM AALEJOH CHARLOTTE
r „w�� l twuaic . iY
PRWEOTNO. c'o SHEET OF
BY ----'SJr7 DATE
CHECKED BY_- e DATE
P44,ls 441,/ v,qy $ sr-P2A4;pi�'
E�?u/� C7ai2.9c� 1/Uc., =
L ✓,
S 4
vac_
CIE vo G.
e ✓O L
/O J
y
/, 7 7�
01
y, N3
0,779
Oo" zSS
o
9 79
�,72
SZ
5379
9,323
2l, i `l
/Sty, z&a
6,9 7 9
qr5
3. yB Z
Say �l6
G,J
.36,7, (;o/S- -4 (oOADF -/ UPt?F,
7
fig, N33
`O d EPS'ON ©TSp 22L GTG F -idd dnOd9 NOIS3Q USG LS:TT 26ibO/OT

DESIGN GROUP
VMWOU4 LLEM RALEIGH CHARLOT7M
:•s �ti 7,s
eGe✓ DeP7
Qa is,
S'5
3
V5
yr,0
4 C
Q
0
PROJECT NO. �� r � � � SHEET Z Of Z
4Y DATE 7- v - Y-
CHECKED BY DATE -o 3
/0a,000 z;qc*0 sw goo qW, 000 S-Z�P, 000'
410 (—L""ne (Gyp4-
200d ZbS'ON OTBP 22L 6T6 E- -idd dnoaO NOIS3G USG 8S:TT 26/PO/OT

ra