5601_ROSCANS_2008

8109 Ebenezer Church Road
Raleigh, NC 27612
919 510-0228 Telephone
919 510-0141 Fax
January 7, 2008
Shield Engineering
4301 Taggart Creck Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Attn: David Wallace
P&A
%tj A C
Web Site: www.rw-labs. coin
PROJECT: Former McDowell County Landfill; PO 1070249
RTP Labs # 07-265
"Ri
_P.
NELAC Accredited NJ# NCO03
Enclosed with this letter is the report on the chemical analyses for the samples received December 21,
2007 for a normal turnaround. One Tedlar bag and one XD-2 sorbent tube samples were received in
good condition. The Tedlar bag sample was analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method TO-] 5 GUMS for 60
VOC Target Compounds. In addition, a library search was perfornied for the top 30 organic C0111POUDds
(Tentatively Identified Compounds) using EPAfNIST 149,000 mass spectral database. TheTedlarbag
samples were also analyzed forsulfur 00111POUrlds by EPA Modified Method 15/16 GC/FPD and for
Fixed Gases by EPA Method 3C GC/TCD. The XAD-2 sorbent tubes were analyzed for Siloxancs by
GUMS using an in-house RTP Labs inethod.
Please note that ND means not detected at the reporting limits expressed.
Sincerely,
Alstou. Sykes, Principal Chemist
Attachments: Sulfur & Fixed Gases report, Siloxanes report; TO- 15 report, COC forin.
File; ShieldEng 07-265,doc/als Page I of 7

IRCINVI&I'VII Parh 111c.
0
8109 Ebenezer Church Road \tl A. Co
Q
Raleigh, NC 27612
919 510-0228 Telephone
919 510-0141 Fax Web Site: www.r tp-labs.corn
Laboratory Report
Client. Shield Engincering
Contact: David Wallace
Client Proj. #: Fonner McDowell Cty LaDdfill
Sample Date: 12/20/2007
Matrix: XAD-2 Sorbent
RTP Labs Proj. #:07-265
Date Received: 12/21/2007 Analysis Date.- 1/4/2008
JU —a-
NELAC Accredited NJ# NCO03
EPA Method 1.5/16 for Sulfurs by GC/FPD
Sample
H,S
Cos
CH,S
(CH3)2S
C2H6S2
CS2
Detection
ID
Hydrogen
Carbonyl
Methyl
Dimethyl
Dimethyl
Carbon
Limit
Sulfide
Sulfide
Mercaptan
Sulfide
Disulfide
Disulficle
T
P
EPA Method 3C for Fixed Gases by GC/TCD
Sample
H,
CO,
02
N,
CH,
CO
Detection
ID
Hydrogen
Carbon
Oxygen
Nitrogen
Methane
Carbon
Limit
Dioxide
Monoxide
File: ShieldEng 07-265.doc/als Page 2 of 7

till c Pb,,& Labouaf�)Acs,
8109 Ebenezer Church Road
Raleigh, NC 2761.2 Ri
NELAC Accredited NO NCO03
919 510-0228 Telephone
919 510-0141 Fax Web Site: wkvw.rtp-labs.coin
Laboratory Report
Client: Shield Engineering
Contact: David Wallace
Client Proj. #: Former McDowell Cty Landfill
Sample Date; 12/20/2007
Matrix: XAD-2 Sorbent
RTP Labs Proj. #:07-265
Date Received: 12/21/2007 Analysis Date: 1/4/2008
Siloxanes Analysis by GC/MS
Samp[e Description
Reporting
Limits
Compound Units, Vg
ppbv 20L
Hexarnethylcyclotrisiloxane (D3)
ND
1.0�lg
6 ppbv
Octa methylcycl otetrasil oxa ne
3.7 jig
1.0[Ig
(D4)
14,8 ppbv
4 ppbv
Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane
ND
1.0�lg
(D5)
3ppbv
K�;
Bodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane
ND
Mpg
(D6)
3 ppbv
ND = Non -detect at Reporting Unit, Units are Total rnicrograins found on the sample tube, Parts per
billion by volurne (ppbv) is based on a assurned 20 liter air samples.
File: ShieldEng 07-265.doc/als Page 3 of 7

8109 Ebenezer Church Road P/
'T
Raleigh, NC 27612 C,
NELAC Accredited NJ# NCO03
919 510-0228 Telephone
919 510-0141 Fax Web Site: www.rtp-labs.coni
EPA Method TO-15 GC/MS VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS REPORT
Data File: c:\varianws�wsdatafiles\vocO22707\07-265-Olb.sms
Acquisition Date:
12/24/2007 12:03
Comment: Shield Eng/Former McDowelf Cty LF 41 12/20/07; 10ml-
DF=50
CAS NO.
COMPOUND
CONCENTRATION
UNITS
Method Detection Limit
75-71-8
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
43,74
ppbv
0.5
76-14-2
1,2-Chloro-1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethar)e
Not Found
ppbv
0,5
74-87-3
Chloromethane
20.55
ppbv
0,5
75-01-4
Vinyl chloride
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
106-99-0
1,3-Butadiene
NotFound
ppbv
0,5
74-83-9
Bromomethane
NotFound
ppbv
0.5
75-00-3
Chloroethane
Not Found
ppbv
0-5
75-69-4
Trichlorornonof I uorom ethane
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
75-35-4
1, 1 -dichloroethene
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
76-13-1
1,1 , 2-trich loro- 1,2,2-tr i fluoroe than e
NotFound
ppbv
0.5
64-17-5
Ethanol
22.37
ppbv
0.5
75-15-0
Carbon disulfide
Not Found
ppbv
O�5
67-63-0
Isopropyl alcohol
9.89
ppbv
0.5
75-09-2
Methy)ene chloride
Not Found
ppbv
0,5
67-64-1
Acetone
210-10
ppbv
0.5
156-60-5
t-1,2-dichloroethene
NotFound
ppbv
0.5
11-06-3
Hexane
80.94
ppbv
0.5
1634-04-4
Methyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE)
1.46
ppbv
0.5
75-34-3
M-Dichloroethane
Not Found
ppbv
0,5
108-05-4
Vinyl acetate
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
156-59-2
cis-1,2-dichloroethene
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
110-82-7
Cyclohexane
17.81
ppbv
0.5
67-66-3
Chloroform
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
141-78-6
Ethyl Acetate
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
109-99-9
Tetrahydrofuran
75�31
ppbv
0.5
71-55-6
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
56-23-5
Carbon Tetrachloride
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
78-93-3
2-Butanone
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
142-B2-5
Heptane
21.67
ppbv
0,5
71-43-2
Benzene
63.90
ppbv
0.5
107-06-2
1,2-dichloroethane
Not Found
ppbv
0-5
79-01-6
Trichloroothylene
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
78-87-5
1,2-diGNOTOpropane
Not Fourd
ppbv
0.5
75-27-1
Brom odichlorom ethane
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
123-91-1
1,4-dioxane
Not Found
PPbv
0.5
10061-01-5
cis-1,3-dichloropropene
Nol Found
ppbv
0.5
108-88-3
Toluene
22.36
ppbv
0,5
108-10-1
4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MlBK)
21.78
ppbv
0.5
1006-02-6
t-1,3-dichloropropene
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
127-18A
Tetrachloroethylene
Noll'ound
ppbv
0.5
79-00-5
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
124-48-1
Dibromochloromethane
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
106-93-4
1,2-dibromoethane
Not Found
ppbv
0,6
591-78-6
2-1-lexanone
140.31
ppbv
0.5
100-41A
Ethylbenzene
189.57
ppbv
0.5
108-90-7
Chlorobenzene
38.88
ppbv
0.5
1330-20-7
m1p-Xylene
246.93
ppbv
0.5
95A7-6
o-Xylene
49.92
ppbv
0,5
100-42-5
Styrene
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
75-25-2
Tribromomethane
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
79-34-5
1.1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
NotFound
ppbv
0.5
622-96-8
1-ethyl-4-methylbenzene
55-10
ppbv
0.5
108-67-8
1,3,5-triniethylbenzene
137.57
ppbv
0.5
95-63-6
1,2,4-trimethylbonzene
58.73
ppbv
0.6
541-73-1
1,3-dichtorobenzene
Not Found
ppbv
0,5
106A6-7
1,4-dichlorobenzene
NotFound
ppbv
0.5
100-44-7
Benzyl chloride
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
95-50-1
1,2-dichlorobenzene
Not Found
ppbv
0,5
67-68-3
1,1 2,3,4,4-hexachloFo-1,3-butadiene
Not Found
ppbv
0-5
120-82-1
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Not Found
ppbv
0.5
File: ShieldEng 07-265.doc/als Page 4 of 7

'11111'xibunggh, ]P)n-rh Laboratwios, Lau,,
8109 Ebenezer Church Road A . Co,?o
Raleigh, NC 27612 IRIP
4. NELAC Accredited NJ# NCO03
919 510-0228 Telephone
919 510-0141 Fax Web Site: www.rtp-labs.com
TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS
EPA Method TO-15 GCIMS VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS
REPORT
Data File:
G:\varianws\wsdatafiles\vocD22707\07-265-Olb.sms
Acquisition Date:
12124/2007 12:03
Comment:
Shield Eng/Former McDowell Cty LF #1 12120/07; 10ml- DF=50
CAS NO.
COMPOUNDNAME
Retention Time Estimated
Concentration,
79-46-9
Propane, 2-nitro-
8.78
116,91
ppbv
1768-25-8
Cyanic acid, 2-methylpropyl ester
17.1
199.84
ppbv
37533-06-5
N-(2,6-Dichlorophenyl)-N-[(2E)-3-methyl-
17.4
538.42
ppbv
625-74-1
Propane, 2-methyl- I -nitro-
18.5
285.98
ppbv
6236-88-0
Cyclohexane, I-ethyl-4-methyl-, trans-
19.0
258.85
ppbv
625-74-1
Propane, 2-methyl-1 -nitro-
19.6
302.79
ppbv
75991-61-6
2,7-0cladione-1,6-diol, 2,6-dirnethyl-,
19.7
140-11
ppbv
4558-27-4
5-Bromo-l-hexene
19.8
579.05
ppbv
51677-41-9
Butane, 2-azido-2,3,3-trimethyl-
20.0
681,04
ppbv
625-74-1
Propane, 2-methyl-1 -nitro-
20.0
354,80
ppbv
66407-26-9
Cyclopenta(c)pyran-1,3-dione, 4,4a,5,6-t
20.4
142,93
ppbv
625-74-1
Propane, 2-rnethyl-1 -nitro-
20.5
523.78
ppbv
99-82-1
I-Methyl-4-(I-methylethyl)-cyclohexane
20.6
506.65
ppbv
103-65-1
Benzene, propyl-
M6
373.47
ppbv
3404-77-1
1-Hexene, 3,3-dimethyl-
20.7
429.99
ppbv
None
6-Chloro-2,2,9,9-teiramethyl-3,7-decadiy
20.9
228.75
ppbv
7214-61-1
Benzene, (1-nitroethyl)-
21.1
352.55
ppbv
498-51-1
2-Heptanone, 6-methyl-5-methylone-
21.4
178.91
ppbv
21195-59-5
1,3,13-p-Menthatriene
21,6
134.58
ppbv
(IS) is BF6 Internal Standard and (SS) are Surrogate Standards that are added to each sample.
1/7/2008 15�30 Page 1 of I CLP TIC 07-265-01b.sms
File: ShieldEng 07-265.doc/als Page 5 of 7

A C!
8109 Ebenezer Churob Road
Raleigb, NC 27612
919 510-0228 Tellepbone
919 510-0141 Fax Web Site: www,llp-labs.com
A
NELAC Accredited NJ# NCO03
mcounts 07-265-Olb-SMS TIC
4-
3-
2-
0-
--T
5 10 15 20 25 minutes,
File: ShieldEng 07-265.doc/als Pz3ge 6 of 7

jrTUU51,11,11e )P`M�jk LfIthOlrdim�aes, Lau.
8 109 Ebenezer Church Road
Raleigh, NC 27612
919 510-0228 Telephone
919 510-0141 Fax--- Web Sii
5
I D �
Z. /
.R_T
KOS,
NELAC Accredited ND NCO03
rl�
0
C, 0
71
(:WD)
;�L_
,ir,,.
m
_4�
F
('�4' R
v
irk,
c'
th
C�w
File: ShieldEng 07-265.doc/als Page 7 of 7

ENGINEERING, INC.
February 8, 2008
Mr. Stan Steury
Program Manager
ASU Energy Center
Appalachian State University
130 Poplar Grove Road Connector
Boone, North Carolina 28608
FEB 1 1 2008
SOLID WASTE SECTION
ASHEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Reference: Metliane Extraction Test — PO H0003227
Former McDowell County Landfill
Transfer Station Permit 95602T
Dear Mr. Steury:
"i9d
Shield Engineering, Inc. (Shield) is pleased to submit this letter report summarizing our work
related to the findings associated with the initial methane field investigation, the installation of the
three methane extraction wells, and the subsequent execution of a methane extraction test on the
former McDowell County Landfill. Shield was subcontracted by Appalachian State University
(ASU) Energy Center to install three methane extraction wells and perform a methane extraction
test for a period of 48-�hours. In. so doing, Shield had proposed a preliminary investigation of the
landfill to determine the optimum locations for the three proposed methane extraction wells.
The former McDowell County landfil I is located adjacent to a permitted Transfer Station referenced
above) just off NC Highway 226, south of the 1-40. This landfill was operational during the 1970s
through to final closure in 1994. ASU recently approached McDowell County in regard to
assessing the. methane potential at this landfill for possible use as asource for renewable energy for
businesses located in the area around the landfill.
The preliminary investigation proposed by Shield consisted of performing a Series of Geoprobe
borcholes to determine the presence of methane immediately below the landfill cover. These 68
borcholes were laid out on an approximate 100' x 100' grid. pattern as shown on Figure 1. The
landfill cover was found to consist of tan micacous fine to medium sandy silt and exhibited varying
thicknesses across the landfill, ranging from 2 up to 10 feet thick. The average thickness of the
landfill cover is 4A feet, A map of the landfill cover thickness is shown oil Figure 2. The landfill
cover thickness was thinner along the southern side of the landfill (see Figure 2).
Following the completion of each of the borings the percentage of methane in air was measured
using a LatictTec GEM-500 portable gas analyzer. The percentage of methane in air readings for the
former McDowell County Landfill is shown on Figure 3. The percentage of methane in air ranged
from 3.8 to 64.8% across the landfill, with an average methane percentage of 40.7%. Following the
Z�'
recording of each methane measurement, each borehole was backfilled with a bentonite slurry mix
to seal the landfill cover.
4301 Taggarl Crook Road Telephone [phone]
Charlotte, NC 28200 www.shicidengineering.com Fax [phone]

Former McDowell County Landfill —Methane Extraction Test
Energy Center - Appalachian State University
Februaty 8, 2008 Page 2 of 5
The waste found in these borings, beneath the landfill cover, ranged from paper, textiles, wood,
cardboard, plastic, foam rubber, asphalt, concrete, etc, The most commonly encountered waste in
these borings was plastic, paper, and wood debris, Based on the methane readings collected from
these shallow borings, three locations were proposed to ASU for the installation of a methane
extraction well. With ASU concurrence these three sites were selected for the installation of a
methane extraction well.
The three methane extraction wells were drilled by Kellett Drilling of Simpsonville, South Carolina
from December 14 to 18, 2007. These three extraction wells were drilled as a 36-inch diameter
borehole, with a 6-inch diameter perforated PVC Screen installed to the total depth with a PVC
casing up to ground surface. The methane extraction wells installed were labeled from MDW-1
through MDW-3 and their locations are shown on Figure 3. The waste encountered in these three
extraction wells consisted of a mix of paper, wood, textiles, plastic, etc, There was preponderance
of textile material in the form of spools of thread immediately below the landfill cover at MDW-2.
Additionally, there was appreciably more plastic (e.g., IV bags) found in MDW-3 compared to the
other two wells,
Each methane extraction well was drilled down to a total depth at the water table for each of the
locations shown. The total depth at MDW- I was 47 feet below ground surface. The total depths at
MDW-2 and MDW-3 were 33 and 31 feet below ground surface, respectively, The depth to ground
water in MDW-1 was 34 feet below ground surface, in MDW-2 the depth to ground water was 21
feet, and 13 feet in MDW-3. The top of the perforated casings were about 7 feet below ground
surface, A two -foot thick bentonite seal was installed about two feet above each of the PVC screens
and then a second bentonite seal was installed at a depth corresponding to the bottom of the landfill
cover at each location. The landfill cover in northern area of the landfill at MDW-1 was about 5
feet, MDW-2 about 4 feet, and MDW-3 is about 2 feet.
The methane extraction test was setup with ternporary flexible vacuum hoses running along the top
of the landfill ground surface from each of the three extraction wells to a central location near
MDW-2, where a skid -mounted vacuum pump and generator were located. Each of the dedicated
vacuum hoses was combined at a manifold, next to the vacuum purnp equipment, The manifold
included vacuum gages and valves, A knock -out tank was included at the inflow point to these two
units. EaGh methane extraction well was equipped with a LandTec Accu.-Flow Wellhead. These
wellheads were designed to reduce the gas flow from a 6-inch diameter well down to a 2-inch pipe
with an access port for mbasuring the gas flow rate and simultaneously allowing the collection of
the methane gas data using a Lanffec GEM-500 gas analyzer.
The methane extraction test commenced at 10:30 a.m. on December 19, 2007 and was continued
through a methane recovery phase ending at 1.40 p.m. on December 21, 2007. Since the optimum
vacuum and methane extraction rates for this landfill were. unknown, the test was commenced with
a vacuum of 65 inches of water at the vacuum pump. Due to inherent line losses and friction losses,
the wellhead vacuums ranged from 31 to 33 inches of water as shown in Table 1. The methane
percentage was monitored at each extraction wellhead throughout the test, Additionally, the gas
flow rate, other gas percentages, thermal value of gas, and temperature were also monitored through
out the meth ' ane extraction test. These data are exhibited in Tables 2 through 4 for each of the
methane extraction wells. The gas flow rates for the duration of the methane extraction test for each
methane extraction well are shown in Figure 4. The mix of different gases during the methane
SHIELD

Forrner McDowell County Landfill — Methane Extraction Test
Energy Center - Appalachian State University
Februafy 8, 2008 Page 3 of 5
extraction test is shown for each extraction well for the duration of the test oil Figures 5 through 7.
The component labeled "other gases" shown on Figures 5 through 7 consist of nitrogen, ammonia,
alcohols, hydrogen, volatile organic compounds, and other miscellaneous trace gases.
Unfortunately, the vacuum to each of the wellheads was impacted due to freezing of moisture
within the vacuum lines causing blockages along these lines during the night of December 19-20,
and especially in the early morning of December 20, 2007 as evidenced in Table I and Figure 4.
The vacuum readings on the pump and at each of the wellheads started rising at midnight and
continued to rise to a peak value in the early morning, The ice blockages were dislodged from the
vacuum lines in the early morning, and the vacuum line to MDW-3 had. to be completely broken
down into separate hose lengths in order to dislodge the ice. The complete system was able to get
back to a stable equilibrium after 11:00 am. Subsequently, the system was able to maintain stable
conditions for the remainder of the test (see Figure 4). Table I includes the average vacuum
pressures for the stable portion of the extraction test from 1:30 p.m. through to the following
morning of December 21, 2007. The data for each of the methane extraction wells (see Tables 2
through 4) also exhibit stable conditions from 1.30 p.m. through to the following morning of
December 21, 2007 for the, methane extraction test. Average values for the main parameters are
exhibited at the bottom of each table for this period of time. Hence the average vacuum pressures at
the wellhead for each of the extraction wells ranged from 40.2 to 42 inches of water.
The methane extraction test did attain a good steady state condition for the last 18 hours of the test
(see Figures 5 through 7). As a result the vacuum pump was discontinued at 8:00 a.m. December
21, 2007 in order to assess the rebound conditions for the landfill in terins of attaining previous
methane production rates following the shutdown. The rebound conditions of each extraction well
are evident in Figures 8 through 10. Methane Extraction Well MDW-1 attained similar methane
production rates 5 hours after shutdown, MDW-2 took 6 hours, and MDW-3 took about 5 hours.
The average methane production in MDW- I for the latter portion of the test was 17% of methane in
air at a flow rate of 40 standard cubic feet per minute (scfrn). The average methane production in
MDW-2 for the latter portion of the test was 3.7% of methane in air at a flow rate of 53 sofin. The
average methane production in MDW-3 for the latter portion of the test was 1.5% of methane, in air
at a flow rate of 65 scfm. Varying leakage or short-circuiting from the atmosphere into cacti of the
methane extraction wells was evident based on the oxygen data for the three extraction wells. The
landfill cover was a fine to rnediurn sandy silt which also varied in thickness across the landfill,
Such a soil is relatively pervious and the thiclaiess of unsaturated waste capable of producing
methane decreased in each extraction well, from MDW-1 through to MDW-3. The results of the
methane extraction test indicate that the vacuum pressures were higher than ideal for the specific
situation at the McDowell County Landfill. As required within the original request for proposal
(RFQ), the methane extraction test was conducted as a constant -rate test and not as a stepped
vacuum test, Therefore, once the test commenced the system variables were maintained as much as
possible at the same constant settings. However, based on our review of the test data, if the test was
run as a variable rate test that would have enabled the variation of the vacuum at each of the
wellheads. Thus, the gas flow from the wells would have been fine-tuned so that they would be
commensurate with their ability to produce methane at higher percentage rates of methane in air at
lowerflow rates.
An air sample was collected on the evening of December 20, 2007 and shipped to Research
Triangle Park Laboratories, hic for analysis of siloxanes, volatile organic compounds, methane,
* OEtjC;INrIIAtNG, 1140.

Former McDowell County Landfill — Methane Extraction Test
Energy Center - Appalachian State University
Februafy 8, 2008 Page 4 of 5
hydrogen, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, oxygen, reduced sulfur, hydrogen sulfur and sulfur compounds.
The results of this analysis are attached. The siloxanes are important in regard to wear and tear on
using electrical generating engines such as microturbines or reciprocating engines. Numerous
manufacturers are now requiring the removal of siloxanes in the application of their engines for
power generation, otherwise warranties may be voided. Only one siloxane
(octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane - D4) was identified in the air sample at a concentration of 14.8 parts
per billion per 20 liter volume (ppbv). This concentration is low compared to some of the engine
warranty requirements. Typically the D4 siloxane is the largest contributor to the total siloxane
concentration, and landfills with older wastes usually have lower siloxane concentrations. Other
constituents that were identified were hydrogen sulfide at a concentration of 2.4 pails per million
per 20 liter volume (ppmv) and numerous volatile organic constituents (see attached analytical
laboratory report).
The power production potential for each methane extraction well is shown on each of 'Fables 2
through 4. The power production variation over the duration of the methane extraction test is
shown for each of the extraction wells in Figures I I through 13. The power potential as measured
during the latter stable portion of the test was 124 kilowatts for MDW-1, 35 kilowatts for MDW-2,
and 17 kilowatts for MDW-3. A combination of thin landfill cover and less unsaturated thickness
of waste contributed to the variation of power potential for these three extraction wells.
A review of the former McDowell County Landfill was made in the context of methane percentage
measured under the land.fill cover (see Figure 3) and cover thickness (see Figure 2) in order to
identify optimum areas of the landfill for possible development of a methane collection and
extraction system, The area slated for possible development of a methane collection and extraction
systern is outlined on Figure 14. An area of approximately 8 acres was identified for exploitation of
the potential methane resources within this landfill. Based on the literature (well spacing ranges
upward from 200 feet) and the EPA assumption for their interactive landfill gas model of one well
per acre (equivalent to a well spacing of 210 feet) a methane collection system is feasible at this
landfill consisting of a total of 9 methane extraction wells. Hence, if the, decision was made to
proceed with methane recovery, Shield would recommend a series of 7 additional methane
extraction wells for installation at the landfill at the locations shown on Figure 14. The optimum
vacuum for operating such a methane collection system would be about 60 inches of water, with
vacuum reducing valves at each wellhead in order to optimize the methane percentages with lower
gas flow rates from each well. This setup would permit the fine-tuning of the system, so that the
operation of the vacuum system is commensurate with the ability of the waste in the vicinity of the
respective well locations to sustain a flow of methane and simultaneously maintain as high a
methane percentage as feasible, In so doing this optimization, of methane flow from each extraction
well will permit system operations to compensate for both the limited thicknesses of the unsaturated
waste, especially in the southwestern area of the land -fill (i.e,, as evidenced in MDW-2, and
particularly in MDW-3) and the poor confining capabilities of the landfill cover.
The, potential power production from a series of 9 methane extraction wells located the fori-ner
McDowell County Landfill may be estimated from the power production rates exhibited during the
methane extraction test frorn MDW-1 and MDW-2. Therefore, assuming that about five of the
extraction wells are capable of producing at least 100 kilowatts each and the remaining four
extraction wells are capable of producing about 30 kilowatts each, then the total power production
SHIELD

Former McDowell County Landfill — Methane Extraction Test
Energy Center - Appalachian State University
February 8, 2008 — Page 5 of 5
from the proposed methane collection system would be as much as 620 kilowatts. This power is
equivalent to 105 scfrn of 33% methane gas in air or 3S scfm of 100% methane gas.
The projected demand in the vicinity of the landfill is approximately 21 scfm of methane gas for 10
years for International Timber & Lumber, Inc. (ITL), and 30 sch-n of methane gas for a proposed
animal processing facility, Hence, assuming these projected demands are constant, the estimated
methane production from the proposed methane extraction well network- will be capable of meeting
the demand for either ITL or the proposed animal processing facility. The capability of the
proposed methane extraction system to meet both of the projected demands is dependent on the gas
demand schedule for ITL and the proposed animal processing facility.
We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to provide you with this submittal, Should you have any
questions, -please contact Dave Wallace either by telephone at (704)-394-6913, facsimile at (704)-
394-6968 or e-mail at Jwa
lLace Qashielden lineering com.
Sincerely,
SHIELD ENGINEERING, INC.
*_V i d ea I'l
SRnbr Engineor
Principal Engineer
cc: Mike Gladden - Public Works Director (McDowell County)
Larry Frost — Solid Waste Section, NCDENR
Attachments: Tables I through 4
Figures I through 14
RTP Analytical Report
SHIELD

TABLE 1
Methane Extraction Test Vacuum Pressures
Methane Extraction Test
Former McDowell County Landfill
Shield Project 41070249
MDW-1
MDW-2
MDW�3
Vacuum Pump
Well -head
Well -head
Well -head
Pressure
Vacuum
Vacuum
Vacuum
Time
Date
(inches of
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
Water)
(inches of
(inches of
(inches of
Water)
Water)
Water)
10:47
12119t2DO7
65
k
31
33
11;03
12t1912007
65
32
31
33
11:24
12119/2007
65
32
31
33
11:50
12tl9/2007
65
32
32
33
12:20
12/fl912007
65
32
32
33
12:45
12/1912007
65
32
32
33
13:13
12/19/2007
66
32
32
34
13:48
12/1912007
65
33
32
34
14:25
12!/19/2007
65
33
32
34
14,55
12/19/2007
65
33
33
34
15:55
12/19/2007
65
33
32
34
16:50
12/1912007
65
1 33
33
34
17:50
12/1912007
66
35
34
36
18:50
12M912007
67
36
34
34
19;50
12119/2007
66
35
34
35
20:50
12f`1912007
66
36
33
35
21;50
12/19/2007
67
36
33
34
22:50
12/1912007
68
35
1 34
34
23:50
12/19/2007
68
37
37
38
1:00
12/2012007
70
48
48
50
1:53
12/2012007
72
55
55
58
2:57
12/2012007
72
55
55
58
3:53
12/2012007
72
55
55
55
4:51
12f20/2007
72
55
55
57
5:51
12/20/2007
72
55
55
56
6:53
12/2012007
72
55
55
56
7:50
12/2012007
72
55
55
56
8:50
12/20/2007
73
5a
58
60
9:58
12/2012007
76
73'
74*
75�
10:45
12/20/2007
72
62
63
11:45
12120/2007
65
40
40
43
12:50
12/20/2007
64
40
40
42
13:45
12/2012007
64
40
40
42
14:45
12120/2007
64
40
40
42
15:45
12/2012007
64
40
40
42
16:50
12/20/2007
64
40
40
41
17:60
12/20/2007
64
40
40
41
18:50
12/2012007
64
40
41
42
119;50
12/20/2007
64
41
40
41
20:50
12/20/2007
65
40
40
43
21:50
12120/2007
65
40
40
43
23:50
12/2012007
65
41
40
42
0:50
12/21/2007
65
41
40
42
1:51
1212112007
65
41
40
42
2:51
12/2112007
65
1 41
40
42
3:50
12121/2007
66
41
40
41
4:52
12/2112007
65
41
40
41
5:54
12/21/2007
65
41
40
42
6:53
12/21/2007
65
42
4`1
43
7:50
12/21/2007
65
42
42
44
Average %/,gives for Period
from 13:45 (12120) to 7:50
64.6
40.7
40.2
42.0
(12/21)
NOTES:
fee Blockages in Vacuum Lines

TABLE2
Methane Extraction Well MDW-I
Methane Extraction Test
Former McDowell County Landfill
Shield Project #1070249
Time
Date
Methane
Carbon
Dioxide
Oxygen
Gar
Balance
Static
Pressure
Differential
Pressure
Temperature
C01'reGled
Gas Flow
Energy
Power
-
(inches
(inches of
(kW -Hour)
(kilowatts)
ofWater)
Water)
Rate (scfim)
(Percentage of gas in ai�)-
10:34
12/19/2007
41.8
32.7
6�3
19.2
-&9
0.43
70
39
4.83
290
10:51
12/19/2007
27
19.3
12.2
41.5
-22.9
0.36
70
36
2.88
173
11:11
1 2/19/20071
24.9
17.8
12.2
45.1
-23.3
0.68
71
so
3.69
221
11:30
12tl9/2007
24
17.1
12.2
46.7
-23
1.17
71
67
4.77
286
12:07
12119/2007
23.8
16.8
13.1
4U
-13.8
0.96
70
62
4.38
262
12:31.
12119/2007
23.2
16.3
-1-2.9
47.6
-23
0.35---
70
35
2.41
144
13:04
12119/2007
22.8
16.2
12.6
48.4
-21.6
1.46
70
75
5.07
304
13:31
12/19/2007
22.4
15,9
12,9
48.8
-23.1
0.37
70
36
2.39
143
13'59
12/1912007
22.2
15.9
13
48.9
-24�6
0.61
70
47
3.09
186
14:31
12/19/2007
22
M8
13.1
49.1
-22
0.35
70
35-
2.28
137
15:33
12/19/20071
21.9
16.1
13.1
48.9
-22
0.15
69
22
1.43
86
16;32
12119120071
21.2
15.6
1 13
50.2
-24.8
0,21
1 69
26
1.63
98
17:31
12h 9/20071
211.1
15.9
13.3
49.7
-26.1
0.37
68
36
2.26
135
18:30
12/19120071
20.9
16
13.5
49.6
-26A
0.68
69
66
4.03
242
19:36
12/19120071
20.5
15.9
13.9
49.7
1 -25.9
1.74
68
81
4.92
295
20:35
12/19/20071
21.5
16.4
133
48.8
-19.2
0.76
69
53
3A
203
21:29
12119/20071
20.9
16A
13
49.7
-23
1
0.68
68
50
3.10
186
22:37
12tlg/20071
19,3
15.4
14.3
51
-21.8
1.01
68
62
3.65
213
2136
12(ig/20071
20.1
16.�
13,2
50.5
-24.9
0A6
67
iio
2.38
143
0:41
12/20/20071
13.6
11.2
15.5
59.8
-19.8
-0-98
66
0
0.00
0
1;35
12120/20071
19.2
15.7 1
13.7
51.4
-11
0.14
1 64
22
1.25
76
2:39
12/20/2007
20.9
16.7
12.7
49.7
-12.6
0.12
64
20
1.24
74
3:34
12/2012007
20.8
16.6
1
13.3
49.3
-13.8
0.13
64
21
1�30
78
4:35
12/20/2007
20.6
16.4
12.9
50.1
-14.8
0.14
63
22
1.34
81
5:36
12120/2007
20.4
16.2
12.9
50.5
-16.1
0.15
64
23
1.39
83
6:36
12/2012007
19.7
15.7
12.7
51.9
-17.4
0.19
64
25
1.46
88
7!34
12/2012007
19-9
16.1
13.4
50.6
-162
0.1
64
19
1.12
67
8:31
12/2012007
19.5
15.8
13-5
51.2
-18.4
0.16
64
23
1.33
80
9:41
1212012007
17.9
14.4
13.5
54.2
-4.5
0.02
60
5
0.21
16
9:4
12120120071
20.8
16.4
12.7
50.1
-5.3
0.02
60 1
6
0.37
22
10:30
12/20/2007
23.6
18.5
11.8
46.1
-12.8
0.14
64
22
1.64
92
11:30
12/20/2007
19.7
15.8
13
51.5
-29,2
0.39
65
36
2.10
126
12:34
1212012007
18.7
15.3
13.2
62,8
-28.9
0.42
65
38
2,11
126
13,30
12/20/2007
18.4
15
13
53.6
-29
0.46
65
40
2.18
131
14;32
1212012007
18.1
14.9
12.9
541
-28.4
0.35
65
34
1.83
109
15;30
12/2012007
17J
14.7 1
12.9
541 1
-28.4
0.42
65
38
1 �99
120
16:33
12/20/2007
17A
14. .3
1 3.2
65.4
-2&6
0.87
65
57
2.89
i73
17:33
12120/20071
17.7
14.6
13.2
54.5
-28.8
0.42
65
38
1.99
120
18�39
12120/2007
17.4
14.4
13.4
54.8
-28.9
0.42 1
65
38
1.96
118
18:39
12/201200 7
1 / .4
14.4
13.4
54.8
-28.9
04
* '
65
38
1.96
118
119,35
1
12120120071
17.5
14.6
3.4
54.5
-28.9
GA2
1
63
38
1.97
118
20A0
12/20/2007
17,7
14.7
1 3.2
54.4
-29.2
0 , 411
65
38
1.99
120
21:38
12/20/20071
1 7,4
1 4,4
13.9
54.3
-29,3
0.43
62
39
2.01
121
22:42
12/20/20071
17.1
14.1
13.3
55.6
-29.5
0AI
65
40
2.03
122
23:40
12J20120071
17
14.2
13.1
55.7
-29.4
0.85
64
66
2.82
169
0:38
12/21/2007
17
14.1
13.2
55.7
-29.5
0.44
63
39
1.97
118
1:36
12/21/2007
16.7
13.9
13.1
66.3
-29.8
0.44
63
39
1 .93
1 1 6
2:36
12/21/2007
16.8
13.9
13
56.3
-22.4
6.08
63
38
1.89
114
3:36
12121/2007
16.9
14.1
13.1
65-9
-30.2
0.45
63
39
1.95
117
436
1212112007
17.1
14.2
131
55�6
-30.3
0.44
63
39
1.98
119
5:36
12121/2007.
17.2
14.4 1
13.6
64.8
-30A
0.41
63
38
1.94
116
6:36
1212112007
16.8
14.1
13.3
65.8
-30.6
0,41
63
38
1.89
7:37
12/21/2007
17.4
14.5
13.1
55
-30.6
0.44
62
39
2-01
121
8:07
12121/2007
0
0.2
20.9
7&9
.2
0.01
48
3
U0
0
8:36
12121/2007
0
0.3
20.8
78.9
-0.5
0
40
0
0�00
0
9:02
12121/2007
0
0
20.4
79.6
0
0
46
0
0,00
0
9�38
12121/2007
3.5
3.8
19
73.7
0
0
46
0
0.00
0
10-06
12121/2007
8.8
7.1
17.6
66Z
0
0
45
0
0.00
0
10:37
12121/2007
9.2
7.4
17.6
65.8
0.1
0
41
0
0.00
0
1 -P39
12/21/2007
20
13.5 1
13.3
53.2
0
0
41
0
0.00
0
12:341
12/21/2007
29.9
19.2
10.1
40.8
0,3
0.04
41
9
0.80
48
113:39
11V2112007
40,9
24.8
7.1
27.2
0.4
0
0
0.00
0
Average Values
for Period from
13:30 (12/20) to
173
14.4
13.2
551
-29.1
0.70
63.9
40.2
2.06
123,6
7:37 (12121)

TABLE3
Methane Extraction Well MDW-2
Methane Extraction Test
Former McDowell County Landfill
Shield Project #1070249
Carbon
Gas
Static
Differential
Gas Flow
Corrected
Energy
Time
Date
Methane
I Dioxide
Oxygen
Balance
Pressure
Pressure
Temperature
Rate
Gas Flo w
(kW-
Power
(inches of
(inches of
ft)
(scfm)
Rate
Hour)
(kilowatts)
Water)
Water)
(schn)
(Percentage of gas in air)
10:39
12/1912007
25.7
18.4
12.5
43.4
-16.9
0.5a
63
47
48
3.66
219
10:55
12/1912007
20.3
15.1
13.6
51
-17.4
0.53
63
45
46
2.71
162
11:16
12/19/2007
15,1
12.6
13,8
58.5
-17.8
0.79
63
55
55
2.46
148
11:39
12/1912007
13.4
11.8
14.2
60.6
-17.5
0.57
62
46
47
1.87
112
12:11
12119/2007
11
1U
15.2
63,5
A7.2
1,52
62
78
78
2.54
153
12:36
12/19/2007
9.9
9.5
15.3
65.3
-14.8
O�54
62
45
45
1. 2
13:09
12/19/2007
9
8.8
15.5
66.7
-17.6
0.54
62
45
45
1.20
72
13;37
12/1912007
8.4
8.4
15.8
67.4
-13,8
2-58
62
103
103
2.57
154
13:401
12/19/20071
8,3
8.3
15.6
67.8
-17.2
0.14
62
22
22
0.54
32
14:11
12/1 9/20071
7.8
8
15-7
6B.6
-Ici
0-42
62
40
40
0.93
55
14:3B
12/19/2007
7,5
7.7
16.2
68.6
-17.7
0.32
62
35
34
0.76
45
15:38
12ji9/2007
7
7.5
16A
69.1
-16.8
0,46
62
41
42
0.87
52
16:39
12/19/2007
63
7.1
16.2
70.4
-19.6
0.68
62
51
51
0.95
57
17:36
12/19/2007
6.2
7.1
1 6.6
70,1
-19.7
2.54
61
101
101
1.86
111
1&37
12119/2007
6
7
16.9
70A
-19.8
1.84
60
85
86
1 �53
92
19:36
12/19/2007
5�9
17.3
71.8
-19.1
2.4
60
98
98
1.45
87
20A1
12/1912007
5.7
6.8
16.8
70.7
-15.1
1-94
60
90
89
1- 50
90
21:351
12/11112007
5.7
6.7
16-7
70.9
.17.2
2,19
60
94
94 --
1.59
95
22:36
12/19/2007
4.9
6
17.6
71�5
-16.3
0,54
59
45
45
0.65
39
23:42
12/19/2007
5.2
6.4
16.6
71.8
-17.6
1.97
60
90
90
1139
83
0:48
1212012,007
3.8
5.1
17.8
73.3
-17.1
0,35
60
34
36
0.41
24
1;43
12120/2007
4
5.5
17
73.5
-7A
0.07
5&
16
14
0.17
10
2:45
12120/2007
4.6
53
17.4
72.3
-8.7
0.18
58
24
26
0.35
21
3:42
12/2012007
5.2
1 6.4
16.4
72
-9.8
0.18
58
28
26 1
0.40
24
3;42
12/20/2007
5�2
6.4
16.4
72
-0.2
0.03
68
28
7
0.11
6
4:421
1212012007
5.1
6.1
16.6
72�2
-10.4
0.24
58
30
30
0.45
27
5:421
1212012007
5.2
6.1
16.5
72.2
-11
0.28
57
32
33
0.51
31
6!4311212012007
4-9
5.8
16.4
72.9
-11-3
0,29
57
33
33
0.48
29
7:39
1212012007
5
5.9
16.9
72.2
-10
0.16
57
23
23
0-34
20
8:40
12120/2007
5
5.8
17.3
71-9
-11.4
0,24
58
33
0.44
27
9:50
1 2/2012007
3,3
4.7
17.6
74.4
-2.2
0
56
1
130
0
0.00
0
10:36
12/20/2007
6.8
7.2
16.5
69.5
-30.8
12
59
67
67
1,35
81
11:36
12/20/2007�
4.8
5�6
1 17.2
72A
1 -22.5
0.73
58
52
53
0.75
45
12:40
12/2012007
4.5
6.4
17.3
72.8
-22.4
O�7
58
51
51
0.68
41
13:35
12/2012007
4.2
5.2
17.4
73.2
-22.3
0.74
5a
53
53
0�66
40
14:37
12/20/2007
4.2
5A
17.6
73.1
-22
0,68
57
51
51
0.64
38
15:36
12/201260
4
5
17.4
73.6
-22
0,69
57
51
51
0.61
36
1 6:391
12/20//2007
4
4�9
17.2
719
136
57
74
73
0.87
52
17:38
12t2O 2007
3.8
C8
17.5
73.9
--22
21.9
0,68
57
50
50
-5j
0-56
34
18-441
12120/2007
3.7
4.7
17.5
74, 1
-22, 1
0.7
57
5j-
fT56
34
19:421
12/2012007
3.8
4-7
17.2
74.3
-22,11
0.72
67
52
52
0.59
35
20:47
12120120071
3.8
4.8
17.3
1 74.1
-22.2
0.68
57
50
1 51
0.67
34
21 A 21
12/2012007
3.7
4.5
17.9
73.9
-&4
0. 73
57
52
53
0.58
35
22:48
1 2/2012007
3.6
4.3
17.7
74.4
-22.4
0,7
57
52
51
0.54
33
23:44
12/2012007
3.6
1 4.6
17.8
74.1
-22.5
0.71
1 67
52
52
0.56
33
0:431
12/21/2007
3A
4.3
17.4
74.9
-22,8
0,7
56
52
51
0.51
31
1AI
1 2/2112007
3.5
4.3
17.6
74,6
-2Z9
0.71
57
52
52
0.54
32
2:41
12/21/2007
14
4.2
17,7
74.7
1 -22.8
0.61
57
52
48
0,48
29
3:411
1 2/21/2007
3.4
4.2
17.9
74.5
-23.2
O�73
57
54
52
O�52
31
4:41
12/21/2007
3.6
4.3
18A
74
-23.4
OY3
57
54
52
0�56
33
5:40
12121/2007
3.6
4.3
1 17.8
74.3
-23.5
OJ2
56
51
52
0.66
33
6:401
12/211/20071
3.6
4,3
18
74.1
-23.6
0.74
57
62
53
O�57
34
7:41
1212 12007
3.7
4A
1 8.4
73.5
-23.7
OY7
56
55
55
0.60
36
8;12
12/2-1/2007
0
0
21
79
-0.3
1 0
41
0
Cl
0.00
0
8:121
121211//2007
0
0
21.1
78.9
-0.3
0
41
0
0
0.00
0
8:41
212 2007
0
0.1
20-9
79
-01
0
42
0
a
0,00
0
9!0
12/21/2007
0
0
20.5
79.5
0
0
42
0
0
0.00
0
9:411
12/21/2007
0
0.2
20.7
79.1
0
0
40
0
0
0.00
0
1 0:12
12/21/2007
0.5
0.8
20.6
78,1
0
0
40
0
0
0.00
0
1 () :421
12/21 12007
1,4
1.7
20
76.9
0
0
42
0
0
1 0.00
0
11:441
12/21/2007
12.3
9.4
15.7
62.6
0
0
40
0
1
0.04
2
12:381
12/2112007
22
16.1
12.8
49.1
0
0
41
0
0
0.00
0
13;441
12/21/2007
20.5
1
13.1
51.9
1 0
0-
41
0
0
0.00
0
Average Values
for Period from
3.7
4,6
17.7
74.1
-22.6
0,7
56*9
53,2
52,11
1,58
35
13:35 (12/20) to
'-7:41 (12/21)

TABLE4
Methane Extraction Well MDW-3
Methane Extraction Test
Former McDowell County Landfill
Shield Pfolect#1070249
Carbon
Gas
Static
Differential
Corrected
Time
Date
Methane
Dioxide
Oxygen
I
Balance
Pressure
Pressure
Temperature
Gas Flow
Energy
Power
(inches of
(inches of
(OF)
Rate
(kW -Hour)
(kilowatts)
Water)
Water)
(scfm)
(Percentage of gas in air)
10:43
12119/2007
4.6
3.4
19.5
72 ' 5
-7,7
0.76
60
56
0.76
46
11:00
12119/2007
4.1
2.8
20.1
73
-7.4
0.6
61
49
0.60
36
.11:21
12/19/20071
3.7
2.5
19
74.8
-8.1
0,75
60
56
0,61
37
11:44
12119/20071
3.6
2.4
19.8
74.2
-8
0,73
61
55
; 0,59
35
12:17
12/19/20071
3.4
2.3
19.8
745
-7.2
0.4
60
40
0.40
24
12:42
12/19/20071
3.2
2.3
1918
74.7
-7.7
0.61
60
50
0.47
28
13:14
12119/20071
3
2.2
19.8
75
-7.2
0.74
60
55
0.49
29
1 3;44
12/19/20071
2.9
2.1
19,7
75.3
-7.2
0.67
60
52
0.45
27
1 4:18
12119/20071
2.8
2.1
19.9
75.2
-6.6
0.7-
60
54
0.45
27
14:46
12119/2007
2.7
2.1
20.1
75.1
-8,4
0,76
60
56
0.45
27
15;45
12/1912007
2.8
2.4
19.7
75.1
-9.1
031
60
54
0,45
27
16:47
12119/2007
2.6
2.3
19.6
75.6
-9.6
0.85
60
59
OAS
27
17:43
12/1912007
2.5
2.4
19.8
75.3
-9.7
0.87
60
60
0.44
27
18:41
12/1912007
2.4
2.4
19.6
75.6
-9.2
1.67
59
85
0.61
36
19:48
12/19/2007
2.3
2.4
19.7
75.6
1 -8.6
1.3
59
1 74
0.50
1 30 1
21:42
12119/2007
2.2
2.5
19.5
75,8
-7.9
6.98
58
64
0.42
25
122:50
12/19/2007
2.3
2.6
19.7
75.4
-7.9
0.94
58
63
0.43
26
23:47
12/19/20071
2.3
2.6
19.3
75.8
-8.5
0.7 6
57
56
0.38
23
0:53
12120/2007
2.1
2.6
19.6
75.7
-9.3
1.54
56
at
0.50
30
1;50
12/20/2007
21
2.6
19.5
75.8
-10.2
0.83
56
59
0.37
22
2:52
12/2012007
1.9
2A
19.5
76.2
-8.6
0.49
57
0.25
16
3;49
12/20/2007
2
2.5
19.5
76
-8.6
0.63
57
-44--
60
0.30
18
4;48
12/20/2007
2
2.5
19A
76.1
-8,2
0.62
56
50
0.30
18
SA8
12/2012007
2
2.4
19.5
76A
1 -7.9
0.58
56
49
1 0.29
17
6:51
12/2012007
1.9
2.3
19.4
76.4
-7.6
0�58
56
49
0.28
17
7:45
12120120071
2
2A
20
75.6
.7
0A4
56
43
0.26
15
8A6
12/20/20071
2
2A
%9
75.7
-7.7
0.57
56
48
0.28
17
9;55
12/20/20071
3.7
Z9
19�6
73.8
-0.2
-0.01
48
0
0.00
0
11:40
12/20120071
z2
2.5
19.6
75.7
-11�6
0.95
56
63
0.41
25
12:45
12/20/20071
1.9
2.3 1
19.6
76.2
-11.5
0.97
56
63
0.36
21
13:40
12/20/20071
1.8
2.2
19.5
76.6
-11.3
0.96
56
63
6.34
20
14:41
12120/20071
1.6
2
19.7
76.7
-11
0.98
55
64
0,30
18
15:40
12/20120071
1.6
2
19.7
76.7 1
-10,9
0.96
55
63
0.30
18
16:45
12120t2007
1.5
1.9
19.6
77
-10.4
-591
55
92
0.41
25
17:42
12/2012007
1.4
1.9
19.7
77
-10.6
0,97
55
64
0.27
16
18:50
1212012007
1.3
1.9
19.7
77.1
-10.4
0.95--
55
63
0.24
15
19:T7
I TliO-12007
1.3
1.9
19.7
77.1
-10.6
6.94
53
63
0.24
15
20:53
1212012007
1.5
2
19.5
77
-11
0.99
53
65
0.29
17
21:47
12/20/2007
1,5
1.9
19.9
76.7
-11
0.92
53
63
0.28
17
22:55
12/20/2007
1.4
1. 8
19.8
77
-11
0.95
63
64
0.27
16
23:50
12/20/2007
1.4
1�9
19.7
77
-11.2
0.96
63
64
0.27
16
0;47
12/2112007
1.4
1.8
19�6
77.2 1
-11.3
0.96 1
52
64 1
0,27
16
1:46
12/2112007
1.4
1.8
19. 7
77. 1
-11.6
0.96
52
64
0.27
16
2:46
12/2112007
1,3
1.8
19.8
77.1
_103
-012
51
64
0.25
15
3:46
12/2112007,
1.4
1.8
1U
77
-12A
0.99
51
65
0.27
16
4:46
12121120071
1.5
1.9
19,7
76.9
-12,2
0.97
52
64
0.28
17
6:46
12/21120071
1.5
1-9
19.9
76.7
-12.4
0.96
62
64
0.28
17
6'47
121'21120071
1.6
1,9
19.7
76.8
0 1
-0.06
52 1
62
0.29
18
7:47
12/21/2007
1.7
2
19.9
76.4
.13
0.98
51
64
0.32
19
8:21
12121/2007
1.7
2
19.8
76.5
0
0
43
0
0.00
0
8:46
12121/2007
1 ' 6
1.9 1
19.8
76.7
0
0
42
0 1
0.00
0
9:17
12121/2007
1.7
2
19.6
76.7
0
0
42
0
O-OD
0
9:48
12/2112007
1.3
1,13
20.1
77
0
0.02
42
4
0.02
1
10:17
12/2112007
6.5
5
19.1
69.4
0
0
40
0
0.00
0
10:46
12/21/2007
17.5
11.3
15.1
56A
0
0
40
0
0.00
0
11:50
12/21/2007
19
12,1
14.6
K3
0
0
40
0
0.00
0
12:431
1212112007
22.4
13.0
13.1
50.6 1
D
0
42
0
0.00
0
13A 9112121/2007
25
1 4
46.5
0
0
44
0.00 1
0
AverageValues
for Period from
13.140 (12/20) to
1.48
1 .01
1 :9-12
76.89
-10.66
0.90
5111
65�21,
UT91-1
7A7 (12/21) 1
1

N
I
lo
LEGEND
-X- PROPOSED BORING LOCATION
. .. I � -I...... -
BOUNDARY OF
CLOSED LANDFILL
0 1w zw
. r
APPROXIMATE SCAI-Ei I In. - 200 ft.
CHARLOTTE. NG 2B208
SHIEL_D �.11A..AA' R.I(R.A.
ENGINEERING, INC.
PROPOSED METHANE INVESTIGATION
PROBE LAYOUT
FORMER McDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
MARION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SHIELD # 1070249-01
DATE 10119117 DRAWN BY: RBS
SCALE AS SHO'

LEGEND
N
LANDFILL COVER THICKNESS (FEET)
+ 23 APPROXIMATE 5 COVER THICKNESS CONTOUR (FEET)
4-0 BOUNDARY OF
2.1 CLOSED LANDFILL
3.0 3
0 4.0 N
3.0
5.0
4.5
4.0 3.2
4.5 0 3.0�
4.5 0
3.0 4.0
5.5 * A 4.50
5.0 2.6
5.0
3.0 0 4.2 3
4.5 3.1
9 4.5 0 2.2
5,0 5.0
3.0 4.5
4. 2.5
V 0 4,2
14 4.0 0 3.0
5.0 15 9
3,8 2.0
0 A 5.5 All 4,D
4 0 A
5.0 4.0
5 5.0 15 3.5
3.5
6 10.0 3 9 5.0
10 3.0
2'0
3.0
4. 2,0 5.0
0 SHIELD
5.0 2.0
6 5.3 A LANDFILL COVER THICKNESS MAP
A FORMER MCDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
6 6 54 3 IYAPION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
""" "OT .....
rDATE : 01/09/08 DRAWN BY: RBS
I SCALE: AS SHOWN FIGURE: 2

N
44.0 31.7 1:
+ 61J 8.4 40 51.0
10,5
26.4
30, 56-0
57.6 0
0 50 a
58.8 57�98
0 56.7 .5
mDW-1 0
56.
55.3 18.7
0 24.0 58.6
0 64.8
57.6 3 0
0 40 46.0 50
0
55,0 49.0
0 57.9 0
-0- 0 40
MDW-2 0 43,5 30
39.6 -110 59.0 3211 0 25.2
31.9 1 w 5,7
6
56.8 60.2
45.1 &7 0 14.9
41.3 0 36.2
0 61.7 5 6,8
61.8 50 50 0 59.2,0 061.5 c-- 0
0 57.4 57.4
MDW-3 0
37.9 0 59.5
5�.9 56.1
3.2 0 19.7 58,7 0
30- 0 56.4
0 0.3
0
LEGEND
51.7 METHANE GAS CONCENTRATION (% IN AIR)
0
APPROXIMATE -To- PERCENTAGE OF METRANE GAS IN AIR CONTOUR
BOUNDARY OF
CLOSED LANDFILL PROPOSED METHANE EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION
4.9
35.3
4 9� 3
31.9 So
17.1
o 1� 1.
S�: 1 1, - 1. 1

120
100
80
H
60
ui
40
LL
20
0
FIGURES 4
GAS FLOW RATE vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELLS MDW-1, MDW-2, and MDW-3
McDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
eQ 4 6 R 5!
Sa 2 2
TIME

100
No
L-PA
70
in
CD
(D 60
(D
50
Z6
75
E
40
30
0911
10
0
FIGURE 5
GAS MIX % vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELLIMIDW-1
McDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
OTHER GASES
(Nitrogen, Volatile Organic Compounds,
Ammonia, Hydrogen, Alcohols and
other trace gases)
"N'
% A ... . ............. -
TIME

111161
all
RK
70
In
60
n 50
0
2.
E
40
30
20
10
Fol
FIGURE 6
GAS MIX % vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-2
�7! 'R IR IR R
�2 �2 z L, Z, Z� Q
TIME

100
rue
[Of
70
cn
cu
60
50
40
30
20
10
roll
FIGURE 7
GAS MIX % vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-3
McDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
TIME

100
90
80
70
60
(D
50
D
2
4G
30
20
10
0
FIGURE 8
GAS % vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-1
McDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
TIME

FIGURE 9
GAS % vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-2
loo
90
Methane
80
e 0
. ........... .... ..... .. -
70
60
50
P
40
30
20
10
No
0
65 to
17
zq Z�i Z11 izq F�
TIME

FIGURE 10
GAS % vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-3
lco
9
Methane
80
e 0
70
60
CD
50
CL
40
30
20
1 0 i
0
TIME

400
300
200
100
FIGURE 11
KILOWATTS vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-1
McDOWELL COUNTY LANDFILL
E�4
TIME

400
300
,2
200
loo
FIGURE 12
KILOWATTS vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-2
PACUUVV
TIME
y L
La
-r,4F,' �--e

:A[$I#M
300
200
100
0
FIGURE 13
KILOWATTS vs. TIME
METHANE EXTRACTION WELL MDW-3
MCL)0VVl--LL UOUN I Y LANDPILL
I
F. R
�6 66 6
Z-1 iq Z:4
TIME

LEGEND
-0- METHANE EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION
-e±�- PROPOSED METHANE EXTRACTION WELL
`Zp,
BORDER OFAREA WITH OPTIMUMMETKANE
POTENTIAL (BASED ON LANDFILL COVER
THICKNESS AND METHANE DATA)

,03/04/2008 12:30 8286522688
PAGE 01/02
FAX COVER SHEET
MCDOWELL COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
60 EAST COURT STREET
3849 HWY 226 SOUTH
MANON, NC 28752
[phone], FAX# [phone]
DATE- March 4,2008
TO: Bin Wagner
RE: Proposed McDowell County Fixing Range
FAX 4: 828-299-7043
FROM; Mike Gladden
Please find enclosed a. wap of the County's proposed Firing Range. This range is for
use by the McDowell County Sheriff's Department, the McDowell Technical
Community College and the NC Department of Corrections, for qualifications.
The range is not open to the public and is controlled access only. The project will not
cause any disturbances to the closed out landfill, The access road (9 used) win only
cross the edge of the old footprint.
I believe the project is going before the County Commission on March 10, 2008.
Let me know what you think ASAP.
If you do not receive the map in readable condition, please let me know, and I win send
a hard copy via the post office.
Mike
YOU SHOULD RECEIVE (2) PAGES, INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET.
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES5 PLEASE CALL [phone]

fin Ulf 134,
(cox 7xe)11z;r1
C�41