1203_ROSCANS_1997

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE PAMAGENENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility. Perri t # County.
Name of Facility_ Location
Date of Last Evaluation
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
11. 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
TV. Evaluator's Comments
V. Continuation Page Required? -Yes No Receiving Signature
Evaluation Date
/ /. -, ' / / -, / I A/' - Solid Waste Section
DEHUR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part IT 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 (taste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility. Permit # County. , ,9
i �J
Name of Facility. () ,. l%, �� Location �.?f % ,f-t-:=.._y
Date of Last Evaluati
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
II. Operational Requirements Followed Yes No
d
15A N.C. Ad•in. Code 138 Section
A. Specific Violations) by number and letter.
III. Other Violations of Rule or
IV. Evaluator's Comments
V. Continuation Page Required? Yes No Receiving Si
Evaluation Date Solid Waste Section
DEHNR 3793 (Part I bite: Facility Part II Canary: Central Office Part III Pink: Regional Office)
Solid Waste Section (Review 7/94)

Prepared for:
Board of Commissioners
County of Burke
P.O. Box 1486
Morganton, North Carolina 28680
JEI Project No. 277.00, Task 4
WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN
FOR THE
JOHN'S RIVER WASTE MANAGEMENT
FACILITY
PROPOSED C&D LANDFILL
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
October 1997
Prepared by:
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
436 Spring Garden Street
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
[phone]

WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IV.
Water Quality Monitoring Plan .........................................
IV - 1
1.0
Introduction And Purpose .............................................
IV
- 1
2.0
Site Description And Hydrogeology.....................................
IV-
1
3.0
Groundwater Monitoring Network ......................................
IV-2
4.0
Groundwater Monitoring Program .......................................
IV
- 3
4.1 Introduction..................................................IV
-3
4.2 Monitoring Constituents ........................................
IV
- 3
4.3 Assessment Monitoring Program (Rule .1634) .......................
IV
- 3
5.0
Sampling And Analysis Requirements ...................................
IV
- 4
6.0 Evaluation of Groundwater Monitoring Data ................... I ........... IV - 5
6.1 Statistical Analyses ............ ............. .... .......... IV - 5
6.1.1 Reporting of Low and Zero Values .... .................... IV - 6
6.1.2 Normality Testing ....................................... IV - 7
6.1.3 Missing Data Values ..................................... IV - 7
6.1.4 Outliers ................................................ IV - 7
6.2 Changes in Groundwater Elevations ............................... 1V - 8
7.0 Reporting And Record Keeping ......................................... IV - 9
8.0 Surface Water Monitoring Plan (Rule .0602) .............................. IV - 9
8.1 Surface Water Monitoring Locations ............................... IV - 9
8.2 Surface Water Sampling and Analysis Requirements ................. IV - 10
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - i D:XPROJECTS%BURKE'27700T081REPORTS%C&DAP%WQKP.WPD

TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued
DRAWINGS
Drawing No. 6 Water Quality Monitoring and Gas Monitoring Plan
Appendix IV-1
Boring Logs and Monitoring Well Data
Appendix IV-2
Drilling Specifications - Groundwater Monitoring Wells
Appendix IV-3
Monitoring Well Abandonment Procedure
Appendix IV-4
Sampling and Analysis Plan
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill
Burke County, North Carolina IV - ii
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
October 1997
D1PROJECTSIBURKM27700TOMPORTSICBDAPMWQ W. WPD

IV. WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The John's River Waste Management Facility (JRWMF) has been performing water quality
monitoring at the site since November 1987. At that time, the entire 318-acre site was permitted as
a solid waste landfill. Disposal of municipal solid waste (MSW) began in an unlined, 28-acre area
in the southwest corner of the property. To continue operations in the unlined unit until January 1,
1998, Burke County submitted a Transition Plan in accordance with the North Carolina Solid Waste
Management Rules. Disposal of MSW will be discontinued on December 31, 1997. Burke County
is submitting this Water Quality Monitoring Plan in an application to the North Carolina Division
of Environment and Natural Resources/Solid Waste Section (the Section) to begin disposal of
construction and demolition (C&D) debris on January 1, 1998, on top of closed portions of the MSW
landfill unit. The vertical expansion area for the C&D disposal unit is indicated on Drawing No. 6.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HYDROGEOLOGY
A Site Hydrogeologic Report was prepared by Joyce Engineering, Inc. (November 30, 1995, revised
October 11, 1996) as part of a Site Study application for development of a separate area of the site
into a lined landfill. The document was reviewed and approved by the Solid Waste Section. The
reader is referred to that document for an in-depth discussion of site hydrogeology; however, the
significant findings from that report are summarized here.
The John's River Waste Management Facility is located in the north -central portion of Burke
County, North Carolina. The 318-acre property is bounded by the Catawba River (Lake Rhodhiss)
to the south, and Lower Creek to the north and east. The adjacent property to the west consists of
undeveloped, heavily wooded land adjacent to the John's River. The site has rolling topography with
elevations ranging from 975 to 1150 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The central portion is
generally gently sloping and contains the higher elevations; relatively steep slopes and significant
drainage features are located around the perimeter.
The majority of the site drains to the south, east, and west towards drainage features that flow into
the Catawba River. Surface water flow on the northern -most portions of the property is to the north
towards drainage features that flow into Lower Creek and ultimately into Lake Rhodhiss. A 100 year
flood limit for the Catawba River is present on the site at the southern property boundary. The 100
year flood elevation is 1005 feet MSL, according to the operator of Duke Power's Rhodhiss Dam
located approximately 10 miles downstream from the facility.
The site is located in the Inner Piedmont Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province in western
North Carolina. The site area is underlain by biotite gneiss and schist. Less than one mile to the
northwest, the bedrock is likely to be foliated -to -massive migmatitic granitic gneiss with biotite
gneiss and amphibolite. Approximately two miles to the east of the site is a small area that has been
mapped as metamorphic granitic rock. A major diabase dike system oriented northwest -southeast
has been mapped over a distance of more than 40 miles and passes less than one mile to the northeast
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 1 D:\PROJECTS\DURKEA27700T08\REPORTS\C&DAPP\WQMP.WPD

of the site. A magnetometry survey performed on the site found no indication that a diabase dike
is present on the landfill property.
The site regolith is typical of the Inner Piedmont, with depths to bedrock (interpreted from auger
refusal depth) ranging up to approximately 75 feet below ground surface. No clear correlation exists
between topographic expression and this depth. Knolls and hollows across the site exhibit highly
variable thicknesses of regolith. Outcrops at the site are scarce and, where present, are highly
weathered. In general, the density of regolith materials increases gradually downward through the
section with irregular occurrences of relatively competent rock which measure less than two feet in
thickness.
Aquifer testing indicated that the upper water table aquifer is fairly isotropic across the site. The
estimated hydraulic conductivity from in situ slug tests are all on the order of 104 centimeters per
second, with an average of 3.14 x 104 cm/sec, or 325 feet per year. In the vicinity of the disposal
area, the predominant groundwater flow is southerly towards the Catawba River. Flow also moves
laterally towards drainage features located to the west and east of the landfill footprint.
3.0 GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORK
To comply with the Transition Plan requirements, the original eight -well network was reevaluated
in 1994 and revised to the five well groundwater monitoring network now in use at the site. Water
quality monitoring for the unlined area is currently being conducted in accordance with the Water
Quality Monitoring Plan submitted in the Transition Plan for the facility. Monitoring well MW-9,
located approximately 150 feet north of the waste boundary, is the upgradient well. The four
downgradient wells are: monitoring well MW-10, located 40 feet from the southwestern waste
boundary; wells MW-I I and MW-12, located 20 and 70 feet, respectively, from the southern waste
boundary; and well MW-13, located 90 feet from the southeastern waste boundary. Data from two
of the original wells (MW-1 and MW-8) may be considered to provide additional background data
for inorganic parameters. The site plan and monitoring network are shown on Drawing No. 6.
Boring logs and well construction data are provided in Appendix IV-1.
The existing monitoring wells will be used and maintained in accordance with design specifications
throughout the life of the monitoring program. Routine monitoring well maintenance will include
inspection and correction or repair, as necessary, of identification labels, cement surface pads,
locking caps and locks, and access to the wells. If it is determined that the background or a
compliance monitoring well no longer provides samples representative of the quality of groundwater
passing the relevant point of compliance, the Solid Waste Section will be notified. Burke County
will reevaluate the monitoring network, and recommendations will be made for modifying,
rehabilitating, abandoning, or installing replacement or additional monitoring wells, as appropriate.
If new monitoring wells are installed at the landfill in the future, the installations will be performed
in accordance with the Groundwater Monitoring Well Construction Specifications provided in
Appendix IV-2 of this report. If existing monitoring wells require abandonment, the procedures
provided in Appendix IV-3 of this report, Groundwater Monitoring Well Abandonment Procedure,
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October. 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 2 D:\PROJECTSIBLR.W7700TO81REPORTS\CRDAPP\WQAV.WPD

will be utilized.
4.0 GROUNDWATER MONITORING PROGRAM
Groundwater monitoring at the John's River Waste Management Facility is currently being
performed in general accordance with the requirements for an Assessment Monitoring program,
described in Rule .1634. The Assessment Monitoring program was initiated after statistically
significant increases were reported in one of the downgradient compliance wells (MW-11) during
the Detection Monitoring program.
4.1 Introduction
The John's River Waste Management Facility began an Assessment Monitoring program in August
1995. Assessment Monitoring is required whenever a statistically significant increase over
background has been detected for one or more EPA Appendix I constituents, or whenever a violation
of the North Carolina Groundwater Classifications and Standards (15A NCAC 2L) has occurred.
Four background monitoring events were completed between August 1995 and May 1996. Since
that time, groundwater has been sampled semiannually.
4.2 Monitoring Constituents
The "annual event" consists of sampling and analysis for the complete EPA Appendix II list of
constituents, while the "semiannual event" has consisted of sampling and analysis for the EPA
Appendix I list of constituents and additional Appendix II constituents, if they were reliably detected
during the annual sampling event. The additional EPA Appendix II constituents currently on the
semiannual sampling list are sulfide, dichlorodiflouromethane, and alpha-BHC. The presence of
alpha-BHC is highly suspect; if future monitoring events do not confirm its presence in groundwater,
it will be deleted from the semiannual sampling list.
4.3 Assessment Monitoring Program (Rule .1634)
The Assessment Monitoring program is described as follows:
(1) Within 90 days of triggering an Assessment Monitoring program, and annually thereafter,
sample groundwater for all Appendix II List of Hazardous Inorganic and Organic
Constituents (EPA Appendix II). A minimum of one groundwater sample will be collected
from each downgradient well and submitted for analysis during each Assessment Monitoring
sampling event. However, Burke County can elect to petition the Director for an appropriate
subset of wells or a reduction in the EPA Appendix II sampling list.
(2) If any EPA Appendix II constituents are reported in groundwater from the downgradient
wells, a minimum of 4 independent samples will be collected from each background and
downgradient well to establish background concentrations for the detected EPA Appendix
rV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 3 D:\PROJGCTMURKE\27700TOB\RFPORTS\C&DAPMWQMP.WPD

II constituents. However, per the Section's policy memoranda, there is no need to sample
four times to establish background values for the organic constituents if the owner is willing
to accept the detected amount as a statistical increase.
(3) Within 14 days after receipt of the initial or subsequent sampling analytical data, a report
identifying the detected EPA Appendix II constituents will be submitted to the Section, and
a notice will be placed in the operating record. Background concentrations of any detected
EPA Appendix II constituents will be established and reported to the Section.
(4) Within 90 days, and on at least a semiannual basis thereafter, all wells will be resampled and
analyzed for the full Appendix I list plus any detected EPA Appendix II constituents. An
analytical results report of each sampling event will be submitted to the Section.
(5) The Section will determine whether Groundwater Protection Standards must be established
for the facility.
(6) The Section may specify a more appropriate alternate sampling frequency for repeated
sampling and analysis for the full set of EPA Appendix II constituents.
Groundwater monitoring will continue in one of three ways, based on the results of the Assessment
Monitoring statistical analyses:
(1) If the EPA Appendix II constituents are at or less than background values using approved
statistical procedures for 2 consecutive sampling events, the facility may resume Detection
Monitoring with the approval of Section.
(2) If the concentrations of any EPA Appendix II constituents exceed the background
concentrations, but all concentrations are below the approved Groundwater Protection
Standards, the facility will continue Assessment Monitoring. Or:
(3) If one or more EPA Appendix II constituents are detected at statistically significant
concentrations in excess of the approved Groundwater Protection Standards, and no source
of error can be identified, the Section will be notified of this finding within 14 days. The
facility will proceed to a characterization of the nature and extent of the release (Rule
.1634(g)). Next, the facility will initiate an assessment of corrective measures and proceed
according to Rules .1635 through .1637. If the facility proceeds to an Assessment of
Corrective Measures, a revised Water Quality Monitoring Plan will be submitted to the
Section.
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Sample collection, preservation, shipping, and analysis are presently conducted by PACE, Inc. of
Asheville, North Carolina under contract to Burke County Public Works. Their field and laboratory
procedures are detailed in their Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for Solid Waste Landfill
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 4 DiPROIECTS\BURKEU7700TOR\REP0RTMCBDM%WQhP.WPD

Monitoring... at the John's River Waste Management Facility... (February 25, 1994; revised
December 1995 and May 1996) included as Appendix IV-4. If Burke County contracts with a
different firm for these services, the new firm's sampling and analysis procedures will be verified
for compliance with Rule .1632 and the Section's technical guidance documents. A copy of the new
SAP will be inserted in the landfill Operating Record and will replace the present Appendix IV-4
to this plan.
6.0 EVALUATION OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA
Groundwater monitoring data will be evaluated semiannually following each sampling event, and
the reports will be submitted to the Solid Waste Section.
6.1 Statistical Analyses
The statistical test used to evaluate the groundwater monitoring data will be the prediction interval
procedure unless the test is inappropriate with the data collected. Possible statistical test methods,
as described in Rule .1632 of the regulations are:
1) A parametric analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by multiple comparisons procedures
to identify statistically significant evidence of contamination. The method will include
estimation and testing of the contrasts between each compliance well's mean and the
background mean levels for each constituent;
2) An analysis of variance (ANOVA) based on ranks followed by multiple comparisons
procedures to identify significant evidence of contamination. The method will include
estimation and testing of the contrasts between each compliance well's median and the
background median levels for each constituent;
3) A tolerance or prediction interval procedure in which an interval for each constituent is
established from the distribution of the background data, and the level of each constituent
in each compliance well is compared to the upper tolerance or prediction limit;
4) A control chart approach that gives control limits for each constituent; or
5) Another statistical test method that meets the performance standards specified by the
Section. A justification for the alternate test method will be submitted to the Section for
approval.
The statistical analysis chosen to evaluate the groundwater data will meet the following performance
standards:
1) The statistical method used to evaluate groundwater monitoring data shall be appropriate for
the distribution of monitoring parameters or constituents. If the distribution is shown by the
owner or operator to be inappropriate for a normal theory test, then the data should be
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 5 D:IPROJRCTS%BURKE\27700T081REPORTS\C&DAPP\WQMP.WPD

transformed or a distribution -free theory test should be used. If the distributions for the
constituents differ, more than one statistical method may be needed.
2) If an individual well comparison procedure is used to compare an individual compliance
well constituent concentration with background constituent concentrations or a groundwater
protection standard, the test shall be done at a Type I error level no less than 0.01 for each
testing period. If a multiple comparisons procedure is used, the Type I experiment -wise
error rate for each testing period shall be no less than 0.05; however, the Type I error of no
less than 0.01 for individual well comparisons must be maintained. This performance
standard does not apply to tolerance intervals, prediction intervals, or control charts.
3) If a control chart approach is used to evaluate groundwater monitoring data, the specific type
of control chart and its associated parameter values shall be protective of human health and
the environment. The parameters shall be determined after considering the number of
samples in the background data base, the data distribution, and the range of the concentration
values for each constituent of concern.
4) If a tolerance interval or a prediction interval is used to evaluate groundwater monitoring
data, the levels of confidence and, for tolerance intervals, the percentage of the population
that the interval must contain, shall be protective of human health and the environment.
These parameters shall be determined after considering the number of samples in the
background data base, the data distribution, and the range of the concentration values for
each constituent concern.
5) The statistical method shall account for data below the limit of detection with one or more
statistical procedures that are protective of human health and the environment. Any
quantitation limit (QL) that is used in the statistical method shall be the lowest concentration
level that can be reliably achieved within specified limits of precision and accuracy during
routine laboratory operating conditions that are available to the facility.
6) If necessary, the statistical method shall include procedures to control or correct for seasonal
and spatial variability as well as temporal correlation in the data.
6.1.1 Reporting of Low and Zero Values
Chemical constituents that are not present above the detection limit of the analytical procedure are
reported as "NOT DETECTED" (ND) rather than as zero or not present, and the laboratory's limit
of detection is provided on the analytical report. There are a variety of ways to deal with data that
include values below detection. General guidelines that will be used to handle the data when less
than 100 percent of the data are detected are provided in Chapter 2 of Statistical Analysis of
Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities, Addendum to Interim Final Guidance, USEPA
(July 1992), and as agreed on with the Section on a case -by -case basis. In those cases where 100
percent of the background data are "non -detects," the downgradient concentrations shall be compared
against the QLs for each constituent.
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 6 D1PRO7ECTMURKEU7700TOBUtEPORTS%C&DAPKWQW.WPD

6.1.2 Normality Testing
The original data can be tested for normality using the Shapiro -Wilk Test of Normality (either single
group or multiple group version) for sample size up to 50 and the Shapiro-Francia Test of Normality
for sample size more than 50, or other acceptable test methods. The following are used for
decisions:
(a) If the original data shows that the data are not normally distributed, then the data
must be log -transformed and tested for normality using the above methods.
(b) If the original or the log -transformed data confirm that the data are normally
distributed, then a normal distribution test must be applied.
(c) If neither the original nor the log -transformed data fit a normal distribution, then a
distribution free test must be applied.
6.1.3 Missing Data Values
Missing data values may result in an incomplete measure of environmental variability and an
increased likelihood of falsely detecting contamination. Also, if Assessment Monitoring data are
missing, there is a danger that the full extent of contamination may not be characterized. If data are
missing for critical constituents (i.e., those that could affect a change in the status of the monitoring
.program), resampling will occur within 30 days of discovery of the missing data. If data are missing
for non -critical constituents, the results of the next scheduled sampling event will be used to replace
the missing or suspect data.
Any missing data will be noted, and treatment of the missing data will be described in the data report
to the Section.
6.1.4 Outliers
An outlier is a value that is much different from most other values in a data set for a given
groundwater chemical constituent. The reasons for outliers may include:
• Sampling errors or field contamination;
• Analytical errors or laboratory contamination;
• Recording or transcription errors;
• Faulty sample preparation or preservation, or shelf -life exceedance; or
• Extreme, but accurately detected environmental conditions (e.g. spills, migration
from facility, etc.).
Formal testing for outliers should be done only if an observation seems particularly high (by orders
of magnitude) compared to the rest of the data set. If a sample value is suspect, one should run an
acceptable outlier test, such as the one described in EPA's Statistical Analysis of Ground -Water
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 7 D:\PROJECTSIBURKEv27700TOB\REPORTSIC&DAPP\WQNW.WPD

Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities - Interim Final Guidance. However, some outlier tests,
including the one referenced in EPA's Interim Final Guidance, assume that the rest of the data
values, except for the suspect observation, are normally distributed (Barnett and Lewis, 1978). Since
log -normally distributed measurements often contain one or more values that appear high relative
to the rest, it is recommended that the outlier test be run on the logarithms of the data instead of the
original observations. That way, one can avoid classifying a high log -normal measurement as an
outlier just because the test assumptions were violated.
Let the sample of observations of a hazardous constituent of groundwater be denoted by XI, ..., XD.
For specificity, assume that the data have been ordered and that the largest observation, denoted by
Xw is suspected of being an outlier. Generally, inspection of the data suggests values that do not
appear to belong to the data set. For example, if the largest observation is an order of magnitude
larger than the other observations, it would be suspect.
Step 1. Calculate the mean, x, and the standard deviation, S, of the data including all
observations.
Step 2. Form the statistic, TB:
TD=(XD - x)/S
Note that T„ is the difference between the largest observation and the sample mean,
divided by the sample standard deviation.
Step 3. Compare the statistic TD to the critical value given the sample size, n, in
Table 8, Appendix B of EPA's statistical analysis document mentioned
above. If the TB statistic exceeds the critical value from the table, this is
evidence that the suspect observation, XB, is a statistical outlier.
If the test designates an observation as a statistical outlier, the sample should not be treated as such
until a specific reason for the abnormal measurement can be determined. Valid reasons may, for
example, include contaminated sampling equipment, laboratory contamination of the sample, or
errors in transcription of the data values. Once a specific reason is documented, the sample should
be excluded from any further statistical analysis. If a plausible reason cannot be found, the sample
should be treated as a true but extreme value, not to be excluded from further analysis.
6.2 Changes in Groundwater Elevations
At least annually, the groundwater surface elevations will be evaluated to determine whether the
requirements for locating the monitoring wells continue to be satisfied. If the evaluation shows that
the groundwater monitoring system does not satisfy the requirements of the Rules, the monitoring
system will be modified accordingly. These modifications may include a change in the number,
location, or depth of the monitoring wells.
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 8
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
October 1997
D:\PROJECTS\BURKX�I7700T08%REPORTSICBDAPMWQW. W PD

7.0 REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING
The results of the statistical analysis of groundwater data will be submitted to the Section at least
semiannually. The following measurements, analytical data, calculations, and other relevant
groundwater monitoring records will be kept throughout the active life of the facility and the post -
closure care period:
• Records of the background groundwater quality data, including all concentration
measurements and the background values established during Detection (and
Assessment, if applicable) Monitoring;
• The results of subsequent sample analyses for groundwater quality and all resulting
statistical evaluations;
• Associated sample collection field logs and measurements, such as static water level
measured in compliance wells at the time of sample collection; and
• Notices and reports of statistical exceedances, reporting or data error, missing data,
evaluation method substitution, etc.
8.0 SURFACE WATER MONITORING PLAN (RULE .0602)
This surface water monitoring plan has been prepared specifically for and is limited to monitoring
any potential releases to the surface water originating from the existing MS W disposal unit, proposed
for vertical expansion for C&D disposal. According to Draft... Water Quality Monitoring
Guidance... (March 1995), landfill sites that contain or border small streams should include surface
water sampling as part of the monitoring program for each sampling event. JRWMF has conducted
surface water monitoring since April 1987.
8.1 Surface Water Monitoring Locations
Surface water downgradient of the MSW/C&D disposal area will be sampled at the previously
established monitoring points, identified as S-5 and S-6 (see Drawing No. 6). The surface water
monitoring locations are below the two sediment ponds located in the drainage features southwest
and southeast of the landfill. The ponds will collect all of the surface runoff from the landfill. Thus,
the discharge points of the ponds will represent the quality of the surface water flowing from the
landfill towards the downstream receptor (i.e., the Catawba River). S-5 is downstream from the
southwest sediment basin, while S-6 is downstream from the southeast sediment basin. Sampling
from the Catawba River is not proposed, since potential contaminants would be diluted below
detectable or representative concentrations upon entering the river. No upstream sampling points
are available.
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 9 D:\PROJECTSOURKEU77ODT08VREPORTS\C&DAPRWQWPWPD

8.2 Surface Water Sampling and Analysis Requirements
Surface water will be sampled semiannually in conjunction with the groundwater sampling, and for
the same list of constituents. Samples will be collected according to the guidelines recommended
in the Draft Water Quality Monitoring Guidance Document ...(March 1995). The recommended
procedure is as follows:
Hold the container near the base with one hand, and with the other hand remove the cap.
2. Rinse the sample container with the water to be sampled prior to filling the container unless
it has a pre -measured amount of preservative.
3. If the bottle does not contain preservative, push the sample container rapidly into the water
(mouth down) and tilt upwards toward the current to fill. A depth of about 6 inches is
satisfactory. Do not breach the water surface while filling the container.
4. During times of little current flow, move the container laterally slowly through the water.
5. During times of drought when stream water depths are too shallow to allow submersion of
the container, a pool may be scooped out of the channel bottom and allowed to clear prior
to sampling.
6. Lift the container from the water and leave one-half inch of air space and place the cap on
the container. Volatile organic samples should have no head space.
7. Place the samples on ice and transport to the laboratory with completed paperwork.
IV. Water Quality Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina IV - 10 D:IPROJECTSVIURKM770OT09XREPORTS\C&DAPMWQNV.WPD

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE MAMAGE?ENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility 1f <..z r Permit # ! county
Name of Facility €� mac.. /!� G;r r�, �c l (( Location
Date of Last Evaluation
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
II. Operational Requirements Followed / Yess 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 Convents
V. Continuation Page Required? Yes No Receiving Si
Evaluation Date 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)

FROM ENNR. RRD 12.19.1997 12:45 P. 2
I IIUI11I %JIVIIf7C1
and NatUralfPesou Gee *4
Regional Office,
^tir*I
Hunt, Governor E)
i B. Howes, Secretary u
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
SOLID WASTE SECTION
TO:
Solid Waste Generators and Collectors
In Burke County, North Carolina
FROM:
North Cumlina Division of Waste Management
Solid Waste section
SUBJ13CT:
Burke County Municipal Solid Waste landfill
Permit No. 12-03
DATEt
December 19, 1997
Tht purpose of this memorandum is to inform ail generators and collectors of solid waste in
Burke MY that the existing yulip�j Burke County Landfill must close and cease operation
Prior to January 1.1098, in accordance with State Rules.
RuNte County is constructing a now transfer station which may not be operational on January
1,1998. This transfer station cannot receive solid waste until construction activities are complete
and a p4mit to operate is issued by this office.
P148c. consider this memorandum 11MEW AMM.. that you should prepare a contingency plats
to tran>fer solid waste, which you generate or collaM to a properly permitted municipal solid
waste landfill or waste-te-energy facility outside Burke County, during this interim time frame.
Th@ North Carolina Solid Waste Management Rules in Sections .0105 and .0106 require that
solid w/ to generators and collectors cz= that their waste is disposed of only at a site or facility
which in permitted to receive the waste,
Out: office would be happy to assist any local government, federal agency, or other pri-
vateJpublie entity with questions about this issue. If you have any questions, please feel free to
contact Al lfetwil, Waste Management Specialist, at [phone],
AAL:sb
Interchange Bulldlng,
59 Wooden Place,
uVINo. NoOh Corollno 2
V01ce 704-251-62M FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportwnity Atermativa Aatlon Employer
...END...

State of North Carolina Al
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources ` • •
Division of Solid Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Adafta
ID � � Fp
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary 1
William L. Meyer, Director -
December 19, 1997
Ms. Jan McHargue, P.E.
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
436 Spring Garden Street
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
Re: Burke County C&D Debris Landfill Permit (Over MSW)
Results of Application Review
Dear Jan:
The Division of Solid Waste Management has completed its initial review of the Burke County
C&D Debris Over MSW Landfill application. Based upon this review, please address the
following issues to facilitate final approval of the project and subsequently allow the issuance of
the Permit to Operate for the facility.
• Referencing Operations Plan page III-1, Section 1.2:
The application describes a ten -foot (10') lift at the end of the first five-year period.
Please provide cross -sections for each major axis to facilitate review and
operation/ inspection activities.
• Referencing Operations Plan page III-2, Section 1.3:
The current calculations for available air space volume and life span of the facility
are based on monthly cover of the waste. How much volume will be affected by
using weekly cover as specified by the Division?
• Referencing Operations Plan page III-2, Section 1.3:
A value of 15001bs/cu.yd. is used for facility life and volume calculations in the
application. Typically, C&D material falls in the range of 750 to 12001bs/cu.yd.
Please verify this value or indicate the method used to achieve this level of
compaction.
• Referencing Operations Plan page III-9, Section 5.2:
Please provide a landfill gas monitoring plan similar to the one included in the
Transition Plan.
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

Ms. Jan McHargue
December 19, 1997
Page 2 of 2
Hopefully, this letter fully explains the Division's concerns and will enable you to address the
items listed. If you have additional questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me
at [phone] ext. 204.
Sincerely,
Timothy A. Jewe
Western Area Engineer
Solid Waste Section
cc, Jim Coffey
Julian Foscue
CAWPDOCS\CQA\BURKEIS.LIR

Prepared for:
Board of Commissioners
County of Burke
P.O. Box 1486
Morganton, North Carolina 28680
JEI Project No. 277.00, Task 8
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING PLAN
FOR THE
JOHN'S RIVER WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY
PROPOSED C&D LANDFILL
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
October 1997
(Revised December 22, 1997)
Prepared by:
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
436 Spring Garden Street
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
[phone]

Table of Contents
1.0 General................................................................1
2.0 Monitoring Procedure .................................................... 1
3.0 Response to Detected Combustible Gases ..................................... 2
Attachment 1 Gas Monitoring Equipment
Attachment 2 Dwg. No. 6 - Site Monitoring Plan
Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill December 1997
Burke County, North Carolina
HAC&DPER-1%C&DGAS.WPD i

1.0 General
During the active life of the landfill, landfill gas will be allowed to migrate laterally and vertically
from the waste through the cover soils and intermediate MSWLF cap. After closure of the
construction and demolition debris landfill (CDLF), if landfill gases are observed to be accumulating
beneath the final closure cap, passive gas vents will be installed through the cap to allow the gas to
passively vent to the atmosphere.
Gas monitoring at the John's River Waste Management Facility will be performed during the active
life of the landfill and throughout the post -closure care period. At a minimum, quarterly monitoring
will be performed at all subsurface gas detection probes and in all structures located within 1,000
feet of the waste area. Only one structure (i.e., a storage shed), located southwest of the unlined
disposal area, is located within 1000 feet. However, the County will also monitor the other on -site
buildings, such as the structure(s) at the shooting range, the recycling center, garage, offices and
adjacent building.
Potential horizontal gas migration is limited by the Catawba River to the south and the John's River
to the west. Landfill gas migration to the east should be vented to the atmosphere in a drainage
feature located within the property boundary. As such, no probes are considered necessary along the
southern, western or eastern boundaries. Three subsurface gas detection probes are located to the
north and northeast of the disposal area. Refer to Drawing No. 6 or Attachment 2 for locations of
the landfill gas monitoring points.
2.0 Monitoring Procedure
Record Keeping: The operator will record the date, time, location, sampling personnel, atmospheric
temperature, reported barometric pressure, and general weather conditions at the time of sampling,
in addition to the concentration of combustible gases. The records will be maintained in the Landfill
Operating Record.
On -site Structures: Gas monitoring in on -site structures will attempt to identify the "worst case"
concentrations. Monitoring will be performed at the earliest possible time after the structure has
been unused (e.g., a morning after a weekend or holiday). The monitoring locations will be in
corners along floors and ceilings, at cracks in the floor, and at other areas likely to accumulate gas.
Gas monitoring will also be performed in any confined space requiring the entry of personnel for
maintenance or inspection prior to entry by personnel in accordance with OSHA regulations.
Gas Detection Probes: Gas monitoring in the detection probes will consist of attaching the monitor
to each tubing located within the probes and recording both the initial concentration and steady state
concentration of combustible gases.
Equipment: A portable combustible gas monitor, measuring the concentration of combustible gases
in units of percent of lower explosive limit (LEL), shall be used to perform the gas monitoring.
"Lower explosive limit" means the lowest percent by volume of a mixture of combustible gas in air
Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill December 1997
Burke County, North Carolina 1
H1C&DPER-IXC&DGAS. WPD

that will propagate a flame at 25' C and atmospheric pressure. The gas monitor shall be calibrated
to methane using the manufacturer's calibration kit and procedure before the monitoring activities
begin (see Attachment 1). If another type of gas monitor is proposed, it must be approved by Burke
County prior to its use.
3.0 Response to Detected Combustible Gases
The regulatory action levels for combustible gas monitoring in gas detection probes are 100% LEL
at the facility boundary and 25% LEL in on -site structures. No gas probes are present along the
property boundaries. The three existing gas detection probes are in the middle of the site and were
installed to provide an indication of gas migration towards the on -site buildings. Readings exceeding
the regulatory action levels in the monitored buildings shall be reported to Burke County
immediately. The County will notify the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources, Solid Waste Section in writing and will take immediate steps to ensure safety and
protection of human health.
At a minimum, the following actions will be taken if the methane concentration exceeds 25% in any
structure:
• Put out all smoking materials and turn off all ignition sources;
• Evacuate all personnel;
• Vent the structure;
• Do not allow personnel to reenter the building except to perform gas monitoring until
the results of additional monitoring indicate that methane concentrations are
sustained or stabilized below 25% LEL;
• Begin continuous monitoring within the structure; and
• Undertake an assessment to determine the origin and pathways of the gas migration.
Within 7 days of detection, the monitoring results will be placed in the Operating Record and the
County will indicate what has been done or is planned to be done to resolve the problem. Within
60 days of detection, the County will develop and implement a plan for the combustible gas releases
and notify the Division that the plan has been implemented. The plan will describe the nature and
extent of the problem and the proposed remedy.
The County will also use a monitoring action level of 15% LEL in the on -site structures. If the gas
readings exceed the monitoring action level, the monitoring frequency will be increased to monthly
until three consecutive readings below those levels are recorded. If the monitoring action level
continues to be exceeded in on -site structures, options will be evaluated to permanently reduce the
current levels and to prevent a further increase in gas levels in the affected structures.
Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill December 1997
Burke County, North Carolina 2
IVC&DPCR-IXC&DGAS. WPD

Attachment 1
Gas Monitoring Equipment- Calibration Procedure
The calibration procedure shall be as prescribed by the manufacturer. The following procedure
applies to an Industrial Scientific Model LD_-2 Combustible Gas Monitor. which shall be used
initially for gas monitoring at the John's River Waste Management Facility. If other instruments are
used at a later date, the calibration procedure shall be supplied to the County prior to monitoring and
shall be kept on file with the Operation Plan and submitted to the Division.
"Before calibrating the LD222. switch on the instrument and allow the sensor to warm up for 15
minutes. In clean air. adjust the zero potentiometer (through the hole labeled "z") to obtain a 000
readout. See Figure 1 in Appendix II for control locations.
Use the calibration cup (P/N 1700-6933) to apply 50% LEL calibration gas to the instrument. See
Figure 2 in Appendix II. The gas used for calibration should, if possible, be the same gas that is to
be measured when the instrument is in use. The rate of gas flow should be 0.1 (�.OS) liters per
minute. Use the span potentiometer (through the hole labeled "s") to set the readout to 500X0.
Variations in the flow rate will cause inaccurate calibration of the instrument. Remove the test aas
and wait for approximately one minute for the gas to completely disperse. Check that the instrument
readout returns to 000. Place the potentiometer access cover in its operating position and tighten the
knurled collar.
If the instrument cannot be calibrated, the span potentiometer may be at such a low setting that the
instrument cannot respond properly. Turn the span potentiometer approximately 15 turns
counterclockwise and then repeat the calibration procedure described above. Mote that the
calibration procedure calls for the adjustment of the zero potentiometer first. The span potentiometer
should not be readjusted until the zero potentiometer is properly set."

Attachment 1
Gas Monitoring Equipment
DISPLAY
SWITCH
31h DIGIT LIOUIO
CRYSTAL OISPLAY
READOUT
CALIBRATION
\
COVER
10�2
2
ONIOFF
KNURLED
0
SWITCH
COLLAR
IS
w
o
a
SPAN ADJUST
ZERO ADJUST
POTENTIOMETER
POTENTIOMETER
Figure 1.
Location of Instrument
Controls and Adjustments
HOSE CONNECTING TO
CALIBRATION GAS
REGULATOR -FLOW RATE
��-�— OF 0.5 (--.05I LITERS
PER MINUTE
CALIBRATION CUP
ISC PIN 1100.6233
BEVELED SURFACE
WITH S
WITH SENSORS,
BEZEL, ANO
STAINLESS STEEL
O( I SCREENS
1�2Z2
0
ACCESSTO
CALIBRATION
POTENTIOMETERS �.
Figure 2.
Calibration of Industrial Scientific Corp.
200 Series Instrument
Paaa 7 of 7

Attachment 2

WON
w =mlw 50' �27 7. 0 �8
SITE MONITORING PLAN
QRAWINQ NO
�
u

SOLID WASTE ENGINEERING
AND MANAGEMENT
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
436 Spring Garden Street
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
December 23, 1997
Mr. Timothy A. Jewett, Western Area Engineer
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Solid Waste Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Re: Response to Application Review Letter
Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill Permit Application
Burke County, North Carolina
JEI Project No. 277.00, Task 08
Dear Mr. Jewett:
On behalf of Burke County, Joyce Engineering, Inc., is pleased to submit this response to your
Application Review letter dated December 19, 1997. Each of your review comments is shown in
bold print below, followed by our response. Three copies of the revised application are provided
as an attachment to this document.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS IN DECEMBER 19,1997 DSWM LETTER
1. Referencing Operations Plan page III-1, Section 1.2: The application describes a ten -
foot (10') lift at the end of the first five-year period. Please provide cross -sections for
each major axis to facilitate review and operation/inspection activities.
Cross -sections have been added to Drawing No. 5 to facilitate your review and
operation/inspection activities. Note that the projected grades on Drawing Nos. 2-5 have
been modified from the original submittal to better depict the proposed waste placement, and
also to provide a better representation of the interim MSW grade.
2. Referencing Operations Plan page III-2, Section 1.3: The current calculations for
available air space volume and life span of the facility are based on monthly cover of
the waste. How much volume will be affected by using weekly cover as specified by the
Division?
The life span of the facility has been recalculated using an assumed waste to soil cover ratio
of 10:1. The estimated life span of the facility under this assumption is 13.8 years.
Our mission is total client satisfaction through technical excellence and employee empowerment.
1i Printed on recycled paper

Mr. Timothy A. Jewett
December 23, 1997
Page Two
Supporting calculations for the total landfill volume, the waste storage capacity, and the
projected life span are provided in Appendix III-2.
3. Referencing Operations Plan page III-2, Section 1.3: A value of 1500 lbs/cu yd is used
for facility life and volume calculations in the application. Typically, C&D material
falls in the range of 750 to 1200 lbs/cu yd. Please verify this value or indicate the
method used to achieve this level of compaction.
Facility life calculations have been revised using an estimated in -place density of 1230 lbs
per cubic yard of compacted waste. The estimated density is based on density values
observed at other C&D landfills with which we are familiar. (Refer to Appendix III-2)
4. Referencing Operations Plan page III-9, Section 5-2: Please provide a landfill gas
monitoring plan similar to the one included in the Transition Plan.
A landfill gas monitoring plan has been added to the application. The plan is provided in
Appendix III-3.
In addition to addressing your comments, we have modified Section 4.0 (Cap Construction)
to reflect additional borrow soil testing and associated construction parameters. We hope that
this submittal meets your needs at this time, and we will be transmitting construction quality
assurance documentation as it becomes available.
If you have any questions regarding this revised submittal, please contact us at (336) 230-
1992.
Sincerely,
JOYCE ENGINEERING, INC.
Janis D. McHargue, P.E.
Project Manager
enclosure
cc: Mr. Dale Meyer, Burke County
John P. Driscoll, P.E.
Sr. Project Engineer
ILANNA"M
�r�rr
g, Printed on recycled paper

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. GENERAL.......................................................... I-1
DRAWINGS
Drawing No. 1 (11" x 17") Existing Conditions
II. CLOSURE PLAN ................................................... II - 1
1.0 Introduction...................................................II-1
2.0 Area to Be Capped .............................................. II - 1
3.0 Cap Design....................................................II-1
4.0 Cap Construction ............................................... II - 2
5.0 Erosion and Sediment Control ..................................... II - 3
6.0 Maintenance and Inspection ....................................... II - 3
DRAWINGS
Drawing No. 2 (11" x 17") Projected Capped MSW Grades as of 12/31/97
APPENDICES
Appendix II-1 Laboratory Testing Data
III. OPERATION PLAN ................................................
1.0 Landfill Development Plan ...................................... III - 1
2.0 General Operating Conditions .................................... III - 2
3.0 Random Waste Screening Program ................................ III - 5
4.0 Waste Compaction and Equipment ................................ III - 7
5.0 Environmental Monitoring Programs .............................. III - 9
6.0 Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements ........................ III - 9
7.0 Record Keeping Requirements ................................... III - 9
Permit Application Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County, North Carolina Revised December 22, 1997
D:%PROJECTS\BURY.E127700T08\REPORTS\CR.DAPP�C&D2TOC.WPD t

Prepared for:
Board of Commissioners
County of Burke
P.O. Box 1486
Morganton, North Carolina 28680
OPERATION PLAN
FOR THE
JOHN'S RIVER WASTE MANAGEMENT
FACILITY
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION LANDFILL
BURKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
JEI PROJECT NO. 277.00, TASK 4
October 1997
(Revised December 22,1997)
Prepared by:
Joyce Engineering, Inc.
436 Spring Garden Street
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
[phone]

OPERATION PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. Operation Plan .................................................... III - 1
1.0 Landfill Development Plan ........................................... III - 1
1.1 Existing Conditions .......................................... III - 1
1.2 Proposed Development ........................................ I11- 1
1.3 Remaining Capacity .......................................... III - 2
2.0
General Operating Conditions ........................................
III - 2
2.1 Hours of Operation ...........................................
III - 2
2.2 Site Access and Safety ........................................
III - 2
2.3 Acceptable Waste ............................................
III - 2
2.4 Prohibited Waste ............................................
III - 3
2.5 Special Wastes ..............................................
III - 4
2.6 Litter Control ...............................................
III - 4
2.7 Air Quality .................................................
III - 4
2.8 Dust, Odor, Fire and Vector Control .............................
III - 4
2.9 Scavenging/Salvaging.........................................
III - 5
3.0
Random Waste Screening Program ....................................
III - 5
3.1 Authority ..................................................III-5
3.2 Random Selection ............................................
III - 5
3.3 Record Keeping .............................................
III - 6
3.4 Training ...................................................
III - 6
3.5 Site Location ...............................................
III - 6
3.6 Action Plan .................................................
III - 6
4.0
Waste Compaction and Equipment .....................................
III - 7
4.1 Filling Operation .............................................
III - 7
4.2 Landfill Equipment ...........................................
III - 8
4.3 Cover Material ..............................................
III - 8
5.0
Environmental Monitoring Programs ...................................
III - 9
5.1 Water Quality ...............................................
III - 9
5.2 Landfill Gas ..............................................
III - 9
6.0
Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements .............................
III - 9
7.0 Record Keeping Requirements ........................................ III - 9
III. Operation Plan Joyce Engineering; Inc.
Johns River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke Count}, North Carolina Revised December 22. 1997
D:\PROJECIS\BURIM?7700TOSUkEPORTS`.C&DAPP\i0PPL-N.IATP

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMS
5.1 Water Quality
The water quality monitoring program for groundwater and surface water is described in the Water
Quality Monitoring Plan. Refer to that document in Section IV of this application for a discussion
of the program.
5.2 Landfill Gas
A Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan was prepared for the facility as part of the Transition Plan. Gas
Monitoring activities of the closed MSWLF unit beneath the active CDLF will continue throughout
the post -closure period for the MSWLF. A copy of the updated Landfill Gas Monitoring Plan is
provided in Appendix III-3.
6.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
The operator shall not cause a discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States, including
wetlands, that violates any requirements of the Clean Water Act, including, but not limited to, the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, pursuant to Section 402,
or cause the discharge of a nonpoint source of pollution to waters of the United States, including
wetlands, that violates any requirement of an area -wide or State-wide water quality management plan
that has been approved under Section 208 or 319 of the Clean Water Act, as amended. Surface water
shall be diverted from the operational area and shall not be impounded over or in waste.
An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for the John's River Waste Management Facility was
approved by the Land Quality Section on September 23, 1996. Erosion and sediment control
activities for the CDLF will be in performed in accordance with the approved Plan.
7.0 RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
The following records will be maintained in the Operating Record at the landfill office:
• The landfill's permit and pertinent correspondence;
• Operation Plan;
• Emergency Response Plan;
• Inspection records, waste determination records, and training procedures for waste
screening programs;
• Amounts by weight of construction/demolition debris received at the facility,
including the source of generation;
II1. Operation Plan Joyce Engineering, Inc.
John's River Facility Proposed C&D Landfill October 1997
Burke County. North Carolina Revised December 22, 1997
D:XMOMC1"URIMS-'"oMtdtMRTS,C"APMOPPN PD IIl - 9
IwW