8803_ROSCANS_1998

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid waste Management
Solid waste Section
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility Permit N County
Name of Facility Location
Date of Last Evaluation
I_ Permit Conditions Followed
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
Yes No N/A
II. Operational Requirements Followed �' Yes No
15A N.C. Admin. Code 138 Section
A. Specific Violation(s) by number and letter.
III. other Violations of Rule or Law
IV. Evaluator's Consents / l % ✓ / /'`1.) .»- ',
v
V. Continuation Page Required? Yes No Receiving Signature
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)

Anywo: GO, 13GA-294 requires that an evaluation rmcgTam be established for the
rperstion ot solid weste watnoageme-M. ,11ve, t f acilities rn a statrudde basis. The
Solid Waste Manm4enwat hA and Solid Waste Mrit'Rules wdified at
15A 3VXY,-,xC1. list rcxpJxew.--ytS Vshicil Bw& bVe follcxved by s-olid waste
lid was--,te- �15v�Lion pe-,rsaviel shall Cruplete t1w wAIMMOn ATIn MY
they concb-,ct. official evaluatioornoo Ow, form rl-iall be signed by
YXI.17-71-21 (S) rMAY&I Wa X110300 -
;U:t- f 1114dta.
Fort III AM QVIMI&I. off loe file crp
w
-k-rim rt'oy- retained in aim. with the Record Retentwn argiliinjAkAthaa wnwhow of time 031id Waste Sectiaii, SoAdWaste Ptnlag .tent
;Uie LX�r -k th z -Ad Natural. Resc="ces.
�axtxwiiL of Ywircument, I -,al ea

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility Permit # County. 1 6Y15,I
Name of Facility `''`' .{�L14t,)Z. CU• ���i��� t^�'>Y�� �� Location_;01,r1� ^T/I _'P1t�`3�4hA1
Date of Last Evaluation
I_ Peniit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
II. Operational Requirements Followed Yes No
15A N.C_ Admin. Code 138 Section
A_ Specific Violations) by runber and letter.
III. Other Violations of Rule or Law
IV. Evaluator's Comments � fttu_ 1 -U, �thJ�h` St+C, n. �V�a t��.rx�' •
V. Continuation Page Requireri7 Yes No Receiving Signature
Evaluation Date � I - r' 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)

K
G.S. 1,30A--2,94 m4udres that an 4--valuation program be establisaied for the
r pyr
n of sal id Tw�t-e mmy ig � Pnt ft,?cj lities on a statmide basis. 7h-e.
SOj,_jd waragenjent � aryl &3lid wade" Managenent kAes codified at
'L:3-B ]J'st re-quiremm-,ts, idiiclb must hx,- follaix-d ky 1xilid 'fora—ste
form each
lid Se,�AIon persopme-I shall elate the evaluation
fig -;-me tl,,fsl t-,-,n.Jact - official cmaduatims. The Foy- n s1hall be signed by
rerx-Aving the repmt.
ow Payt I Cam
Pawz- J - I Zm- -Y�- ibled.cya c-mtXal Offl(m file 00py I ir
rt. Fiiik-. Rer kraal office file cxw �p . f
1.1his form may be, reta-iyk-yl in aocordance with the Record, Pet-ention and
"C -xion, Solid Waste Mamqewmt
-'Va'sition SC-how"Ie CA tile SOIJ-d Waste Sa-t
of the rxapaxtwnt of Mrivircimen-it, lath cuid Natural Re -sources.

r
AM
WDENR
JAMES B. HUNTJR.
.:.GOVERNOR
WAYNE MCDEVITT
''SECRETARY
WILLIAM L. MEYER
DIRECTOR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
July 9, 1998
Mr. Will Sagar
Transylvania County Solid Waste Director
28 East Main Street
Brevard, N.C. 28712
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
�g1d,%1i , G 1 .7
�s
40
�f JUL 1998
� N
MOVED
VED
SWS-WSRO tiff
p
�� ti
�-e'
Re: Water Quality Assessment Plan for the Closed Calvert Land iill-(Permit
488-03).
Dear Mr. Sagar,
The Solid Waste Section (Section) has reviewed the water quality
assessment plan, submitted on behalf of Transylvania County (County), for the
closed Calvert Landfill. The County should begin at once to implement the
work plan once the following comments, additions and/or modifications are
addressed.
1) Based on the evidence of landfill gas migration at the site an
investigation into the occurrence and extent of gas needs to be performed
with the water quality assessment. Please include a proposal in the phase
I report.
2) The Section noted that a 45-foot screen was used in the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) bedrock monitoring well, MW-
50. Justification for the extended length of screen was not included on
the well construction record, nor were important details, such as the
number and location of water producing fracture zones. If this well is
screened across several fracture zones it may obscure true vertical
gradient at depth and dilute contaminant concentrations. Without
additional information the Section considers MW-50 a less than optimal
monitoring point.
3) The County shall demonstrate the following:
Page 9, section 5.2, first paragraph; a demonstration is needed to confirm
that metals are not migrating from the landfill.
Page 9, section 6.1, second paragraph; is the shallow plume migrating
southwest to the drainage feature located south of the landfill? A well
nest south of MW-105S/D and east of MW-3 would answer some water
quality questions and provide needed potentiometric data points for the
bedrock and saprolitic aquifers in that area. The nest may also prove
401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUITE ISO, RALEIGH, NC 27605
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

useful when NCDOT begins their pumping test at the adjacent site.
4) Because the County does not own the property to the assumed discharge points, the
assessed risks would only be applicable to the present receptors and would not allow for
future changes in risk and receptors.
5) Page 10, section 7; where appropriate, the Section prefers single well pumping tests to
slug testing.
6) The Section has the following understanding on how the proposed deeper well in MW-
106 nest will be installed to determine the depth of contamination in the aquifer. MW-
106D will be screened in the first water -producing fracture(s) encountered in the bedrock.
If contaminants are present at that depth, additional investigation in the next phase will be
required. If the Section's understanding is incorrect, please inform me before the
proposed activities commence.
7) The Section requests adding the following to the sample parameter list: chlorides, total
dissolved solids, and iron.
8) If natural attenuation is being considered by the County as a possible remedial approach,
the Section recommends the County use the information available through the EPA on
data gathering and evaluation of natural attenuation investigations.
9) A site conceptual model is a three-dimensional representation that conveys what is known
or suspected about contamination sources, release mechanisms, and the transport and fate
of those contaminants and is a valuable tool for understanding the dynamics of the site
geology and hydrogeology. "Site conceptual model" is not synonymous with "computer
model"; however, a computer model may be helpful for understanding and visualizing
current site conditions or for predictive simulations of potential future conditions.
Development of a conceptual model at the beginning of an investigation can highlight
areas where additional data is needed and areas that may be irrelevant to the investigation,
thus saving time and expenditures. As the investigation progresses and new field data
collected, continual refinement of the site conceptual model will make possible a more
accurate interpretation of the site. The conceptual model also provides the basis for
assessing potential remedial technologies at the site. The Section believes the model
(narrative and illustration) should be an integral part of future reports.

If you have any questions, please call me at 919-733-0692, extension 261.
Sincerely,
Mark Poindexter, Hydrogeologist
Groundwater Compliance Unit, Solid Waste Section
c: Philip Prete - Branch Head, Field Operations
Julian Foscue - Western Region Supervisor
Jim Patterson - Waste Management Specialist
Central file
C:\ W PDOCS\COUNTIES\TP ANSYLV\88-03#2.AST