4403_ROSCANS_2000

January 14, 2000
Mr. Joe Walker
Haywood County Solid Waste Director
278 Recycle Road
Clyde, N.C. 28786
Re: The Closed Unlined Haywood County Francis Farm Landfill (Permit
#44-03).
Dear Mr. Walker,
Thank you for meeting with Mr. Jim Patterson and me December 29, 1999 at the
Francis Farm Landfill. The additional information we gathered will benefit the
County in expediting the needed tasks at the site. The following is a summary of
the conditions at the site, based upon available data, and our discussions during the
site visit.
WATER QUALITY:
Water quality data from past sampling of the groundwater detection monitoring
wells at the site have indicated levels of chemical constituents exceeding
groundwater quality standards in all of the monitoring wells. Recently the data
have indicated a downward trend in the contaminant levels. Without further
investigation it is difficult to determine if the recent trend is a function of less
precipitation infiltration or an inadequate monitoring system. The Solid Waste
Section (Section) previously requested in a letter dated October 16, 1997 to Mr.
Jack Horton that action be taken to investigate the extent of the groundwater
problem. The Section has not received any of the information requested in that
correspondence.
The Section was informed that the County recently expanded the public water
system to all areas around the landfill, but it was not known which, if any, of
the residences in the area had hooked up to the system. Presently, the closest
house appears to be in the upgradient direction from the landfill. However,
there appears to be very little buffer between the waste boundary and adjacent
private properties.
LANDFILL GAS:
Landfill gas data collected by Ms. Wendy Shepherd during the March 30, 1999
site visit indicated levels of methane that exceeded the lower explosive limit
(LEL) at the property line. Subsequent investigation on December 29, 1999, in
the same area did not detect methane. However, at that time methane was
detected above the LEL around the County School Bus Garage water line. As

Please submit a landfill gas corrective action plan within 30 days and a plan to
address the remaining items above within 60 days. Thank you for your prompt
attention to these matters. If you have any questions, please contact me at 919-
733-0692, extension 261.
Sincerely,
Mark Poindexter
Environmental Compliance
Solid Waste Section
c: Philip Prete
Brent Rockett
Jim Patterson
Central file
A:\44-03.WPD

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE MAMAGFIENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility J{ Permit # I I
�TL� 3 sty. �,v i
c % \
Name of Facility �_..l i=1 ;,.,,r� j e.;,,, �. ?� r,. h;. r fr i 1 Location
IZ 1�
t
Date of Last Evaluation I J
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
II. operational Requirements Followed Yes No
15A N.C. Admin. Code 13B Section
A. Specific Violation(s) by number and letter.
III. Other Violations of Rule or Law
IV. Evaluator's
V. Continuation Page Required? Yes No Receiving Signature
t
Evaluation Date i- , )': ( Solid Waste Section
DEHNR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part II Canary`
Central Office Part III Pink: Regional Office)
Solid Waste Section (Review 7/94)

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid Waste management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Faci I ity. Permi t A!,
Name of Fac i I i ty.
Date of Last Evaluation
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No
A. Specific Cordition(s) Violated.
II. Operational Requirements Followed A Yes No
15A N.C. Acimin. Code 138 Section I G �, I
A. Specific Violation(s) by number and Letter.
111. Other Violations of Rule or
N/A
County
Location
IV. Evaluator's Comments C41 12 12:
V. Continuation Page Required? -Yes No Receiving Signature
Evaluation Date Solid Waste Section-
DEHUR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part II Canary: Central Office Part III Pink: Regional Office)
Solid Waste Section (Review 7/94)

October 6, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
Return Receipt Requested
Mr. Joe Walker
Haywood County Solid Waste Director
278 Recycle Road
Clyde, N.C. 28786
Re: The Closed Unlined Haywood County Francis Farm Landfill (Permit #44-03).
Dear Mr. Walker,
The plan dated June 7, 2000, and submitted by MESCO on behalf of Haywood County
did not address some of the issues raised in the Section's letters dated January 14, 2000
and October 16, 1997. These items are numbered below.
1) As you are aware, the primary reason for a required assessment is to help ensure the
protection of public health. As part of this protection it is important to determine the
extent of the groundwater contamination at the Francis Farm Landfill site.
Concentrations of several toxic, synthetic organic chemicals that exceed 15A NCAC
2L groundwater standards and EPA drinking water standards have been detected in
samples from monitoring wells located at or near the landfill property boundary.
Because of the dynamics and direction of groundwater flow, contaminants probably
have already migrated off -site at the facility. With the unknown situation of
groundwater users living around the landfill it is essential to proceed with a
groundwater assessment. Therefore, as previously requested, Haywood County is
required to prepare and submit to the Solid Waste Section a groundwater quality
assessment plan designed to define the limits and extent of the known groundwater
contamination associated with the Francis Farm Landfill. Failure to act on this only
increases the potential threat to public health and the environment and the liability to
Haywood County in the event private wells become contaminated. The Solid Waste
Section will not allow this important of an issue to be dismissed without being
adequately addressed.
Please Note: The current condition at the Francis Farm Landfill is a violation of
Solid Waste Management Rules and Law (Title 15A NCAC 13B) and failure to
adequately address this situation at once may subject Haywood County to
enforcement including an administrative penalty.
2) The gravel trenches beneath the concrete floor of the school bus garage are not
sufficient to serve as a landfill gas control for the landfill. The existence of a "cutoff'
trench between the landfill and garage must be demonstrated. If one exists, necessary
improvements shall be made to insure effectiveness. If an effective trench does not
exist, a remediation plan must be implemented that will prevent the migration of

landfill gas beneath the school bus garage.
3) Recent semi-annual water quality reports indicate that monitoring well MW-2 has not
been sampled. Because this well is crucial in the monitoring of contaminants at the
site, MW-2 must be made serviceable or replaced and sampled during all subsequent
semi-annual sampling events.
Please submit a work plan for the next phase (hereinafter referred to as Phase II) to
address the above items within 120 days.
The work plan submitted on June 7, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as Phase I), should be
implemented immediately. The following two items must be addressed during
implementation of Phase I.
1) After the installation of the proposed background well, samples from the existing
background well (MW-4) are not necessary. MW-4 should not be abandoned and
should continue to be used as a collection point for potentiometric data.
2) Proposed landfill gas probes shall be installed and constructed in accordance with the
Solid Waste Section's guidance document. Probes will be screened at such a depth to
intercept zones of gas migration from the water table up to ground surface. The
County is required to submit a routine gas monitoring plan that will be implemented
after the Phase I gas assessment proposals have been conducted.
Phase I proposals shall be completed within 90 days. If you have any questions, please
call Mark Poindexter at 919-733-0692, extension 261.
Sincerely,
Philip Prete, Head
Enforcement and Field Operations
Solid Waste Section
Mark Poindexter
Brent Rockett
Jim Patterson
central file

OPERATION/CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Municipal
Services
PO Box 97, Gamer, North Carolina 27529 [phone]
June 7, 2000
Mr. Mark Poindexter, Hydrogeologist
Solid Waste Section - NC DENR
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
CIVIL/SANITARY ENGINEERS
Enf 11`teerin
c®r�pany, P.A.
PO Box 349, Boone, North Carolina 28607 [phone]
Re: Haywood County Francis Farm Assessment (Permit #r~44-03)
Dear Mr. Poindexter:
I am writing in response to your letter dated January 14, 2000 concerning the above
referenced assessment. The County is presently monitoring groundwater at the site with two
(2) down gradient wells and one (1) supposedly upgradient well.
There presently is no monitoring of methane gas around the site with the exception of the
interior of the school bus garage. It appears that the garage was built very close to the
boundaries of the landfill. The garage has a monitoring system inside that will warn the
occupants of excess methane. This monitoring system is in the rafters of the garage area.
The building is on a concrete slab; and under the slab in the garage area, a series of gravel
trenches have been installed that are vented through a pipe system to the outside of the
building. This vent system has an electrical blower that helps evacuate any methane that may
enter the system.
A series of methane vents have been installed throughout the landfill area. Two of these vents
are adjacent to the garage. It has been reported that one of these vents will have methane
and the other will not. It has also been reported that a cutoff trench is installed at the location
of these vents. However, it is not readily apparent that this trench has been installed. If in fact
it has been installed, it has not been determined that it is functioning properly.
In this particular case, a methane cutoff trench may not work because there has been a deep
cut in the landfill and solid waste is lower than the area where this trench would have been
installed. The methane can escape through weathered rock veins that are under the trench
and appear at the surface some distance away from the waste boundary.
The County/City have installed a municipal waterline down all the state maintained roads that
are adjacent to this landfill. However, not all of the residents that Could be served by this
system have elected to tie into the system. The Gwmty has no plans to require any resident to
tie into thc:r Sy'.tcrn. It is completely viz3luml n .

Mr. Mark Poindexter
Page -3-
June 7, 2000
Enclosed, are two copies of the topo map of the landfill showing the location of the buildings
with respect to the boundary line, a boundary map depicting County owned property, existing
monitoring wells, the proposed location of MW-5, proposed locations for the methane probes,
and other methane monitoring points. Also enclosed are two copies of a 1" = 400' orthophoto
of the landfill and surrounding area depicting the location of the nearest dwellings, location of
the waterline and boundary of County owned property.
The homes that are approximately 500 feet from the landfill have City water and any homes
that were to be constructed within 500 feet of the landfill would have a public water supply
available for their use. Any of the surrounding homes, that are not currently tied into the public
water system, have the option to connect to this system at any time.
We would like to thank you for all consideration that can be given this project. If you have any
questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely yours,
MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CO.,
D. Wayne Sullivan
Project Manager
Copy: Mr. Jack Horton
Mr. Rick Honeycutt
Mr. Joe Walker
•
Edward S. Custer, Jr. Ph.®., P.G. CID
Project Geologist