WI-928_6939_CA_RMR_20221206

Arcadis of Michigan, LLC
300 S Washington
Square
Suite 315
Lansing
Michigan 48933
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.arcadis.com

1/1
Mr. Clark Wipfield
State of North Carolina
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
Division of Waste Management – UST Section
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405

Date: December 6, 2022
Our Ref: 30080096
Subject: LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report
Former Ideal Cement Site
UST Incident # 6939

Dear Mr. Wipfield:

Arcadis has prepared the following Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report on behalf of
Holcim regarding clean-up and site closure efforts at the former Ideal Cement plant (the Site) located near Castle
Hayne, New Hanover County, North Carolina. A summary of light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) recovery is
discussed in this report. Also included in this report are the results of follow-up fluid level gauging and the
methods and results of the August 2022 groundwater monitoring event. The next groundwater monitoring event is
scheduled for August of 2023.

Sincerely,
Arcadis of Michigan, LLC

Christopher S. Peters, C.P.G.
Vice President

Email: [e-mail]
Direct Line: 517.927.3611

CC. Travis Weide – Holcim

LNAPL Recovery and
Groundwater Monitoring Report
August 2022
Former Ideal Cement Site
6411 Ideal Cement Road
Castle Hayne, North Carolina
UST Incident No. 6939
Risk Classification: High
Property Information
Land Use Category: Industrial
Responsible Party: Holcim
1435 Ford Avenue
Alpena, MI 49707
989.358.3321
Contact: Mr. Travis Weide
Current Property Owner: Castle Hayne Development, Inc.
Contractor: ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina, Inc.
Wade 1
5420 Wade Park Blvd.
Suite 350
Raleigh, NC 27607
919.854.1282
Release Information
Date Discovered: 1989
Estimated Quantity of Release: Unknown
Cause of Release: Unknown
Source of Release: Diesel USTs
Latitude: 34.3760° North
Longitude: 77.8450° West
ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina, Inc.
J. Alan Pinnix, L.G. (NC)

Holcim

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery
and Groundwater Monitoring
Report

Former Ideal Cement Site
Groundwater Incident No. 6939

December 6, 2022

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

This document is intended only for the use of the individual or entity for which it was prepared and may contain information
that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of
this document is strictly prohibited.
www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final i
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and
Groundwater Monitoring Report
Former Ideal Cement Site
December 6, 2022

Prepared By: Prepared For:
Arcadis U.S., Inc. Mr. Clark Wipfield
300 S Washington Square, Suite 315 State of North Carolina, DENR
Lansing Wilmington Regional Office
Michigan 48933 Division of Waste Management-UST Section
Phone: [phone] Cardinal Drive Extension
Fax: [phone] Wilmington, NC 28405

Our Ref:
30113014

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final ii
Contents
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Risk Classification and Clean-Up Standards ........................................................................................ 1
1.3 Corrective Action Summary ................................................................................................................... 2
1.3.1 Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) Recovery ..................................................................... 2
1.3.2 Soil ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
1.3.3 Groundwater ........................................................................................................................................ 3
1.4 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................................................. 3
2 Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) .................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Summary of Historical LNAPL Presence .............................................................................................. 4
2.2 Historical LNAPL Recovery .................................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Current LNAPL Recovery........................................................................................................................ 5
2.3.1 Oil-Absorbent Socks ........................................................................................................................... 6
2.3.2 Aggressive Fluid-Vapor Recovery ..................................................................................................... 6
2.3.3 Hand Bailing ......................................................................................................................................... 6
3 Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................................................................................. 6
3.1 Monitoring Well Network......................................................................................................................... 6
3.2 Historical Groundwater Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 6
3.3 Groundwater Sampling Methods ........................................................................................................... 7
3.4 Groundwater Flow ................................................................................................................................... 7
3.4.1 Hydrogeologic Units ............................................................................................................................ 8
Shallow Groundwater Zone .........................................................................................................8
Deep Groundwater Zone ..............................................................................................................8
3.4.2 Depth to Water and Water Table/Potentiometric Surface Fluctuations ......................................... 8
3.4.3 Groundwater Flow ............................................................................................................................... 9
Shallow Groundwater Flow..........................................................................................................9
Deep Groundwater Flow ..............................................................................................................9
3.4.4 Horizontal Gradients ........................................................................................................................... 9
3.4.5 Vertical Hydraulic Gradients............................................................................................................... 9
3.5 Groundwater Quality ............................................................................................................................. 10
3.5.1 Historical Groundwater Quality ........................................................................................................ 10
3.5.2 August 2022 Groundwater Sampling Results................................................................................. 11
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final iii
4 Waste Disposal .............................................................................................................................................. 11
5 Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 12
5.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 12
5.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 12
6 References ..................................................................................................................................................... 13

Tables
Table 1 Summary of Well Construction Details
Table 2 Summary of LNAPL Thickness Measurements in Active Wells (1995-2022)
Table 3 Summary of Water Level Data (2002-2022)
Table 4 Summary of LNAPL Recovery
Table 5 Summary of AFVR Events (2006-2022)
Table 6 2021 Groundwater Elevations
Table 7 Groundwater Sampling Field Parameters (August 8, 2022)
Table 8 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 9 Summary of Analytes Detected in Groundwater (August 8, 2022)

Figures
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3a MW-11 LNAPL Thickness
Figure 3b MW-11 LNAPL Thickness Comparison to Time Elapsed between Measurements
Figure 4 Groundwater Elevation Trend Graph
Figure 5 TW-1 Concentration Trend Graph
Figure 6 RW-1 Concentration Trend Graph
Figure 7 MW-14 Concentration Trend Graph
Figure 8 MW-15 Concentration Trend Graph

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final iv
Appendices
Appendix A Field Notes
Appendix B Laboratory Analytical Reports and Chain-of-Custody Forms
Appendix C Field Sampling Logs
Appendix D Waste Manifests

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Arcadis G&M of North Carolina, Inc. (Arcadis) has prepared the following LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater
Monitoring Report, for sampling and analysis performed in August 2022, on behalf of Holcim now Holcim
associated with clean-up and site closure efforts at the former Ideal Cement plant (the Site) located near Castle
Hayne, New Hanover County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The Site was the location of an underground storage
tank (UST) incident that involved the release of an unknown amount of petroleum from two 15,000-gallon diesel
USTs (Figure 2). A UST Closure Notification Report prepared by Ideal Basic Industries (Ideal, 1990) documented
the source of the release and the removal of the USTs from the Site in December 1989. The UST incident is
regulated by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) (formerly North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources [NCDENR]), Division of Waste Management, Underground
Storage Tank Section under North Carolina’s Risk-Based Corrective Action Rule for Underground Storage Tanks
(15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 2L 0.0115) as incident number 6939.
Between October 2003 and September 2009, Arcadis submitted Free Product Recovery and Annual Groundwater
Monitoring Reports on a semi-annual basis. These reports were submitted on an annual basis starting in 2010.
Additionally, the following is a summary of documents submitted by Arcadis (except where otherwise noted) along
with the respective submittal dates, regarding free petroleum product, or light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL),
recovery and groundwater monitoring activities at the Site:
• LNAPL Assessment Work Plan – June 2004
• Corrective Action Plan [CAP]– July 2005
• Amended Corrective Action Plan [ACAP]– September 2005
• Memorandum regarding First AFVR Event – April 2006
• Memorandum regarding Second AFVR/Groundwater Sampling – August 2006
• Memorandum regarding Third AFVR Event – October 2006
• Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Work Plan – August 2007
• Monitoring Well Abandonment Reports – October 2013, June 2014, April 2015, and April 2016
• MW-11 AFVR Summary by Holcim (US) – November 2013
1.2 Risk Classification and Clean-Up Standards
As indicated in the October 26, 2011 Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NORR) letter (NCDEQ, 2011), the UST
Section of the NCDEQ reassigned the Site a risk classification of “high” in accordance with 15A NCAC 2L .0406.
Prior to this date, in accordance with the January 12, 2004 NORR letter, the UST Section of the NCDEQ had
assigned a risk classification of “intermediate” to the Site in accordance with 15A NCAC 2L .0400.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 2
Under 15A NCAC 2L .0406, the appropriate soil and groundwater clean-up standards for UST incidents depend
on risk classification, current and anticipated future land use, and the presence or absence of potential receptors.
As the Site is currently ranked high risk by the NCDEQ, the following clean-up standards are appropriate for the
Site:
• for soil, the Maximum Soil Contaminant Concentration (MSCC) Levels; and
• for groundwater, the NCAC 2L.0202 Groundwater Quality Standards for Class GA groundwaters.
The MSCCs for soils are standards published by the NCDEQ and are composed of two parts. First, there is a soil
to groundwater leaching standard and secondly there is a human health exposure standard. On a specific
constituent basis, the Site must meet the more conservative of these two standards to obtain closure.
1.3 Corrective Action Summary
1.3.1 Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) Recovery
Measurable LNAPL is defined in the NORR letter issued January 12, 2004 by the UST Section as any
accumulation greater than 0.02-feet within a well. On-Site measurable LNAPL has been removed from existing
Site monitoring and recovery wells utilizing manual bailing, jet pumps, Aggressive Fluid-Vapor Recovery (AFVR),
and the use of oil-absorbent socks. Prior to 2006, LNAPL was removed from monitoring wells primarily by manual
bailing. AFVR was implemented for LNAPL recovery during four separate events between April 2006 and
December 2006. Between July 2007 and April 2014 LNAPL- absorbent socks were placed in monitoring wells for
continued removal of LNAPL. The AFVR methodology was reinitiated at the Site on a limited number of
monitoring wells during the November 2013, August and November 2014, May and November 2015, May and
November 2016, May and October 2017, May and November 2018, April and October 2019, October 2020, May
and October 2021, and May and November 2022 gauging events. These efforts are discussed in more detail in
Section 2.2.
1.3.2 Soil
Soil at the Site contains petroleum-related constituents at concentrations that exceeded the North Carolina Soil-
to-Groundwater leaching standards in two soil boring samples (R-4 [5-7’] and R-3 [20-22]) (Figure 2). If the Site
remains ranked as intermediate or high risk, then these impacts could require future corrective action prior to
obtaining Site closure.
If the Site is re-ranked in the future to low risk and provided there are no exceedances of the human health
exposure MSCC, closure can be pursued through filing of a Notice of Residual Petroleum. Re-ranking of the Site
to low risk would require the removal of LNAPL from Site monitoring wells and the abandonment of the potable
water supply well located within 1,000-feet of the Site (see Figure 1).

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 3
1.3.3 Groundwater
As discussed in detail in the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) (BBL, 2005a), groundwater samples collected from
select monitoring wells at the Site contained dissolved petroleum-related contaminants of concern (COCs) at
concentrations exceeding the 15A NCAC 2L .0202 Groundwater Standards (NC 2L Standards). Well construction
details for the current and abandoned Site monitoring wells are presented in Table 1. In a letter dated April 25,
2007, the NCDEQ requested that Holcim conduct two additional groundwater sampling events for a select group
of wells, which were chosen based on location and historical data. These sampling events and select wells are
outlined in the Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Work Plan (Work Plan) (Arcadis, 2007a). Because LNAPL
was still present in some monitoring wells after the additional two sampling events, the NCDEQ, in an August 4,
2008 letter, required that semi-annual groundwater monitoring continue. Furthermore, four consecutive quarters
of gauging without the presence of LNAPL within the monitoring wells must be completed prior to their
consideration of No Further Action (NFA) status for the Site. The groundwater sampling frequency was reduced to
annual since 2009, based upon the recommendations contained in the Free Product Recovery and Groundwater
Monitoring Report – February 2009 (Arcadis, 2009) (and approved by the NCDEQ in a July 13, 2009 letter). In
addition, in a letter dated October 26, 2011 (NCDEQ, 2011), risk was reclassified as high based on the presence
of a potential potable water supply well within 1,000 feet of the Site; therefore, groundwater concentrations must
achieve the NC 2L Standards to comply with the requirements of Title 15A NCAC 2L .0407.
1.4 Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this report is to summarize the results of the revised groundwater monitoring program and
additional LNAPL removal activities recommended in the NCDEQ’s April 25, 2007 letter (NCDEQ, 2007), October
26, 2011 letter (NCDEQ, 2011), and outlined in the Work Plan. The scope of the groundwater monitoring and
LNAPL removal activities are currently based upon the NCDEQ April 25, 2007 letter to Holcim (NCDEQ, 2007),
the Work Plan, and subsequent revisions recommended by Arcadis in 2008 (Arcadis 2008a, 2008b) and 2009
(Arcadis 2009), plus the risk re-classification letter from the NCDEQ October 26, 2011 (NCDEQ, 2011). The most
recent revisions to the groundwater monitoring and program were approved by the NCDEQ on January 21, 2015.
The nature and extent of the Site COCs and detailed Site information are documented in the CAP (BBL, 2005a).
This report has been prepared consistent with the guidance provided by the NCDEQ UST Section’s Guidelines for
Assessment and Corrective Action (NCDEQ, 2008), and the NCDEQ May 22, 2009 letter to Holcim (NCDEQ,
2009). Per those guidelines, this report is to be submitted within 120 days after the annual groundwater sampling
event.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 4
2 Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL)
2.1 Summary of Historical LNAPL Presence
Fluid-level gauging and depth-to-water measurements have been performed, as outlined in the CAP (BBL,
2005a), and will continue quarterly as described in the Work Plan. All LNAPL and water levels are recorded to the
nearest 0.01 foot using a water level indicator and/or oil/water interface probe. However, when oil-absorbent
socks were placed in monitoring wells, the primary indicator of the presence of LNAPL was the relative saturation
level on the oil-absorbent socks.
The number of wells with measurable LNAPL has decreased over time. This is notably observed by comparing
the gauging event completed in August 1995 to those of subsequent years. Of the seven wells that were gauged
in August 1995, one well exhibited an LNAPL sheen, and four wells were observed to contain a measurable
amount of LNAPL (Table 2). In August of 2007, three of nine wells contained measurable LNAPL.
Since 2007, with exception of the observation of 0.1 feet or less of LNAPL in monitoring well RW-1 in 2019 and
2020, measurable LNAPL has only been observed in monitoring well MW-11. AFVR was instituted in 2006 at the
Site to remove LNAPL in wells exhibiting measurable LNAPL. The apparent LNAPL thicknesses in monitoring well
MW-11 decreased from 2.35 feet of LNAPL in April of 2006 to 0.24 feet in February 2007 (Table 2). Following this
time, absorbent socks were placed in monitoring wells containing LNAPL, thus the measurement of LNAPL
thickness was not used as a measure of remaining LNAPL in the wells. AFVR was reinstituted in monitoring well
MW-11 in November 2013. Beginning with the November 2014 gauging event absorbent socks have not been
used in monitoring well MW-11, so that the apparent thickness of LNAPL could be measured during the
subsequent gauging event(s). Thereafter, LNAPL thicknesses in monitoring well MW-11, based on subsequent
measurements, generally increased until 2016. During this time there was a general correlation between
groundwater depth and LNAPL thickness; that is, as depth to groundwater increased, LNAPL thickness
increased, and as depth to groundwater decreased, LNAPL thickness decreased. Since 2016 a decline in
thickness has been observed, and apparent LNAPL thicknesses do not appear to follow this general trend
(Figure 3a). One other possible explanation for the apparent LNAPL thickness plots is that it is a function of the
elapsed time between measurements. In other words, the greater the time between measurements, the greater
the thickness of LNAPL, as it has more time to accumulate in the well. Figure 3b indicates that there is no
correlation between the length of time between LNAPL thickness measurements and LNAPL thickness. If this
were the case, the data points would show a trend line sloping upward to the right side of the graph. While there
has been some fluctuation in the LNAPL thickness in 2019, the overall downward trend in LNAPL thickness since
2016 suggests that the AFVR events are successfully removing LNAPL from the formation.
In monitoring well RW-1 during the October 2019 AFVR event, 0.1 feet of LNAPL was measured and during the
October 2020 AFVR event 0.05 feet of LNAPL was measured. Prior to these occurrences, measurable LNAPL
thicknesses were last observed in monitoring RW-1 in April 2006. The reason for the reappearance of LNAPL
here is unknown at this time.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 5
2.2 Historical LNAPL Recovery
Since the discovery of the UST release and subsequent occurrence of LNAPL in monitoring wells on Site (Table
2), several different methods for LNAPL recovery have been implemented, including jet pumps, manual bailing,
AFVR, and oil-absorbent socks. These removal efforts are described in the reports listed in Section 1.1. Historical
measurements of LNAPL are presented in Tables 2 and 3.
Between August 2007 and November 2013, oil absorbent socks were placed in the wells. During this period,
LNAPL thickness measurements were made within 24 hours of removing oil-absorbent socks, and thus should
not be considered an accurate reflection of the volume of LNAPL at the well. The estimated volume of LNAPL
removed from the well during this time was based upon the relative saturation with LNAPL that was observed on
the oil-absorbent socks. The socks are three feet long by 1.5 inches in diameter. The oil-absorbent socks were
routinely replaced on a quarterly basis. Following removal from a monitoring well, the absorbent socks were
placed in 55-gallon drums for future off-site disposal.
Apart from the observations of LNAPL in monitoring well RW-1 in 2019 and 2020, which is discussed above,
since 2007, the only Site monitoring well with measurable thicknesses of LNAPL present had been MW-11.
Based on the estimated volume of LNAPL that a fully saturated absorbent sock can hold (0.5 liters) and the
observed percent saturation from each gauging event (Table 4), approximately 2.75 gallons of LNAPL were
removed from this monitoring well between August 2007 and November 2013 (the last gauging event to utilize an
absorbent sock for removal).
Absorbent socks were removed permanently from monitoring wells TW-1 and TW-5 during the August 2011
Groundwater Sampling event. Four consecutive rounds of gauging were completed without observed LNAPL at
these wells; therefore, as recommended in the August 2011 Free Product Report (Arcadis, 2011) the absorbent
socks were removed, and these wells were added to the sampling list In February 2015, monitoring well TW-5
was abandoned after three years of groundwater sampling data indicated that the monitoring well was not
impacted. LNAPL monitoring will continue to be performed on a quarterly basis at monitoring wells MW-11, MW-
14, MW-15, TW-1, and RW-1.
Four AFVR events were completed in 2006 to remove LNAPL from Site monitoring wells. AFVR LNAPL removal
was resumed in November 2013 and was performed again in August and November 2014, May and November
2015, May and November 2016, May and October 2017, May and November 2018, April and October 2019,
October 2020, May and October 2021, and May and November 2022. AFVR was performed at monitoring well
MW-11 during all but the August 2014 event. During 13 of these events, AFVR was also performed in monitoring
well RW-1, in an effort to reduce the elevated COC concentrations observed in previous groundwater sampling
events. A summary of AFVR events from 2006 to November 2022 are presented in Table 5.
2.3 Current LNAPL Recovery
Field notes for the February 7, 2022, May 4, 2022, August 8, 2022 and November 14, 2022 fluid level gauging
events and LNAPL removal efforts are included in Appendix A. During these gauging events, LNAPL was only
observed in monitoring well MW-11.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 6
2.3.1 Oil-Absorbent Socks
Oil-absorbent socks are currently not being used to remove LNAPL from monitoring well MW-11.
2.3.2 Aggressive Fluid-Vapor Recovery
During the May 2022 AFVR event, approximately 6,500 gallons of total fluid (groundwater plus LNAPL) and
during the November 2022 AFVR event, approximately 6,250 gallons of total fluid were removed from monitoring
wells MW-11 and RW-1 (Table 5).
2.3.3 Hand Bailing
Hand bailing removal of LNAPL has been utilized when measurable amounts of LNAPL have been observed
within the monitoring well and when AFVR removal was not being employed. During gauging events when AFVR
is being completed, the measurable LNAPL was not removed by hand bailing prior to completing AFVR. During
the February 2022 gauging event, 0.13 feet of LNAPL was observed in monitoring well MW-11 and approximately
200 milliliters were removed by hand bailing. During the August 2022 gauging and groundwater sampling event,
0.20 feet of LNAPL was observed in monitoring well MW-11 and approximately 300 milliliters were removed by
hand bailing.
Removed LNAPL and used polyethylene bailers were disposed of in a 55-gallon steel drum. Waste disposal is
further discussed in Section 4.
3 Groundwater Monitoring
3.1 Monitoring Well Network
Well construction details for both current and abandoned Site monitoring wells are provided on Table 1. Between
2013 and 2016, the following monitoring wells were abandoned with the approval of the NCDEQ: MW-1, MW-2,
MW-3, MW-4, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, MW-9, TW-5, TW-6, TW-7, TW-8, TW-9, RW-2, and RW-3. The five
remaining monitoring wells are MW-11, MW-14, MW-15, TW-1, and RW-1.
3.2 Historical Groundwater Monitoring
Prior to the most recent sampling event, 19 groundwater sampling events had been completed since approval of
the CAP (BBL, 2005a) and ACAP (BBL, 2005b):
• July 2006, immediately prior to the start of the second AFVR event.
• February 2007, two months after the fourth AFVR event.
• August 2007, prior to the placement of absorbent socks in wells containing LNAPL.
• February and August 2008, February and September 2009, August 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and
2016, September 2017, August 2018 and 2019, July 2020, August 2021, and August 2022.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 7
The groundwater sampling event completed in August 2022 was the 20th sampling event overall and the 18th
event in the reduced groundwater monitoring program described in the Work Plan. As outlined in this document,
the reduced groundwater monitoring program has consisted of sampling events approximately six months apart.
However, starting with the sampling event in August 2010, the frequency of groundwater sampling events was
reduced to annual, per the May 22, 2009 NCDEQ letter issued to Holcim (NCDEQ, 2009). In a letter dated
January 22, 2013 (NCDEQ, 2013), NCDEQ approved the removal of three wells (MW-6, MW-9, and TW-6) from
the sampling and analysis program. Monitoring wells MW-6 and MW-9 were mistakenly included in the sampling
program for 2013 and were abandoned in 2014, as discussed in Section 3.2 of the Free Product Recovery and
Groundwater Sampling Report submitted by Arcadis on October 29, 2014. Monitoring well TW-5 was removed
from the sampling plan and abandoned in February 2015 upon approval from the NCDEQ in correspondence
dated February 4, 2015. On February 8, 2016, monitoring well RW-2 was abandoned (Arcadis, 2016), upon
approval from the NCDEQ in an email correspondence dated November 4, 2015.
3.3 Groundwater Sampling Methods
The groundwater sampling event conducted on August 8, 2022, followed the groundwater sample collection
methodology outlined in the UST Section Guidelines for Sampling, July 15, 2008 Version (NCDEQ, 2008). As
specified by the NCDEQ, purging and sampling was completed using dedicated disposable polyethylene bailers.
Prior to purging, water levels were measured from all Site wells using a water-level probe and recorded to the
nearest 0.01 foot (Table 6). During well purging, field parameters were collected and recorded using a water
quality meter measuring for pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), oxygen-reduction potential (ORP), specific conductance,
temperature, and turbidity (Table 7). After stabilization of all water quality parameters and/or removing three well
volumes, groundwater samples were collected in NCDEQ-approved containers provided by the analytical
laboratory. Field notes for the August 2022 groundwater sampling event and the February 2022, May 2022, and
November 2022 fluid level gauging rounds are attached in Appendix A.
Monitoring well MW-11 was not sampled due to the presence of LNAPL in the well. All samples were packed on
ice in coolers and submitted with a chain-of-custody to a North Carolina-certified laboratory for analysis. The
chain-of-custody is included in Appendix B. The field sampling logs are included in Appendix C.
A total of four monitoring wells were selected for sampling based on the previous sample frequency, historical
groundwater quality results, and location in relation to wells previously containing LNAPL. The monitoring wells
sampled during the August 2022 sampling event included MW-14, MW-15, TW-1, and RW-1 (Figure 2). During
the August 2022 event, a blind duplicate sample was collected at monitoring well MW-15. Samples were analyzed
for semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), including 1- and 2-methylnaphthalene, using EPA Method 625.
3.4 Groundwater Flow
Groundwater elevations for the February 2022, May 2022, August 2022, and November 2022 events are provided
in Table 6. Historical groundwater elevations are provided in Table 3 and groundwater elevation trends can be
observed on Figure 4.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 8
3.4.1 Hydrogeologic Units
For the purpose of evaluating Site hydrogeology, the wells have been grouped into two hydrogeologic units (see
Table 1), as follows:
• shallow wells, screened within and/or above the clay-rich stratum, including TW-1; and
• deep wells, screened within the lower portion of the clay-rich stratum, shell hash, or limestone, including MW-
11, MW-14, MW-15, and RW-1.
Shallow Groundwater Zone
The shallow groundwater zone is characterized by two primary units:
• Surficial Sand and Fill: A gray to black, clayey and silty fine to medium sand is present from the ground
surface to 7 to 10 feet below ground surface (bgs). The first several feet of this unit typically include some fill
material and/or disturbed/compacted soil.
• Clay-Rich Stratum: Underlying the surficial sand and fill is a clay-rich stratum consisting of brown to dark gray,
highly organic, soft silty-clay. The clay-rich stratum is approximately 10 feet thick across the Site and acts as
a partial confining unit, separating the overlying sand from the underlying weathered limestone. The clay-rich
stratum is not present in the immediate vicinity of the former UST pit and the conveyor tunnels, where it
appears to have been disturbed by excavation and backfilling activities.
The geology of the shallow zone is described in more detail in the CAP (BBL, 2005a).
Deep Groundwater Zone
The geology of the deep groundwater zone consists of a mixed deposit of white to medium gray organic clay,
shell hash and weathered limestone. The top of this unit is typically encountered between 22-24 feet bgs. During
the 2004 LNAPL assessment, drilling tool refusal was encountered at or near the top of this stratum. This unit is
likely the Castle Hayne Formation, as described by Bain (1970). The upper 10-foot section of the Castle Hayne
Formation is commonly referred to as “shell hash,” which historically had been quarried near the Site for cement
manufacturing (Bain, 1970).
3.4.2 Depth to Water and Water Table/Potentiometric Surface
Fluctuations
Groundwater elevation in the shallow groundwater zone was observed at approximately 16.49 to 18.14 feet above
mean sea level (amsl) in monitoring well TW-1 during the past four rounds of gauging (Table 6). This groundwater
elevation is similar to what was observed in previous monitoring events. Monitoring well TW-1 is the only well
screened in the shallow groundwater zone.
The potentiometric surface elevation observed in the deep monitoring wells during the past four gauging events
varied from 16.44 (MW-15 and RW-1) to 18.18 feet amsl (MW-15) (Table 6). The potentiometric surface elevation
in the deep unit exhibits little variability across the Site.
Groundwater elevations have fluctuated over the years, as seen in Figure 4. Years of significant rainfall and
drought have caused fluctuations in groundwater in both the shallow and deep zones. In general, there has been
an overall increasing trend in groundwater elevation across the Site since 2008 as shown on Figure 4, suggesting
overall wetter conditions at the Site.
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 9
3.4.3 Groundwater Flow
Shallow Groundwater Flow
Shallow groundwater flow has historically converged near the crusher building conveyor tunnel. The clay layer is
absent in this area (because of excavation and fill replacement related to the construction of the crusher and
conveyor tunnel), causing an inward radial groundwater flow pattern. With the elimination of several monitoring
wells from the monitoring well network, constructing a meaningful groundwater contour map is not possible.
However, given that subsurface conditions at the Site have not changed since 2013, the current shallow
groundwater flow is believed to continue to exhibit a similar pattern as in previous years.
Deep Groundwater Flow
There is not a consistent flow pattern observed at the Site in the deep groundwater zone based on the
groundwater elevation data. This is similar to past groundwater measurements from the deep groundwater zone
(Tables 3 and 6). Even during past gauging events (corresponding with the construction of a potentiometric
surface map), the horizontal hydraulic gradients within the deep groundwater zone have been 0.001 foot/foot or
less. In some cases, the difference in depth to water level measurements between the monitoring wells screened
in this unit has been as small as 0.01 foot.
In the past, a general easterly gradient was observed in this unit. The potentiometric surface elevation in the deep
wells is generally slightly higher where the shallow clay is absent. Lower potentiometric surface elevations are
present in the northeastern outlying wells, where the clay is present.
3.4.4 Horizontal Gradients
Mean horizontal gradients and the average groundwater flow velocities in the shell hash and weathered limestone
unit have historically been calculated for the Site. Due to the reduction in the monitoring well network at the Site,
these calculations were discontinued during the August 2015 Groundwater Monitoring Report. Based upon the
2009 through 2014 groundwater elevations, the mean horizontal hydraulic gradient within the deep groundwater
zone ranged between 0.00013 foot/foot (August 2011) to 0.0011 foot/foot (August 2013). During this same time
frame, the estimated average deep groundwater flow velocity varied between 0.0038 ft/day (August 2012) to
0.0094 ft/day (August 2011) based on the range of observed flow gradients on laboratory-derived hydraulic
conductivity and effective porosity values of 2.68 ft/day and 0.37, respectively, for the shell hash (shallow) and
weathered limestone (deep) units (BBL, 2005a). Additional information regarding the historical calculations of
groundwater flow velocity and hydraulic gradient in the deep groundwater zone as well as historical groundwater
elevation flow maps can be found in Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Reports submitted by
Arcadis between 2010 and 2014 (Arcadis 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014).
3.4.5 Vertical Hydraulic Gradients
An area of the Site was excavated for construction of the crusher pit and conveyor tunnel, and in doing so, a
portion of the confining clay layer was removed and backfilled with coarser-grained soils. The locations of the
crusher pit and conveyor tunnel are shown on Figure 2. Therefore, a vertical hydraulic gradient has been
calculated for both where the clay layer is present and where it is absent (Arcadis 2014). A strong vertical
hydraulic gradient reflects the presence of the confining clay layer between adjacent shallow and deep wells.
Historically, where the clay layer is absent the data has indicated a very slight downward or neutral gradient
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 10
based on the comparison of water level elevations between shallow and deep monitoring wells. In the excavated
areas where the clay layer has been removed, there is no confining layer so the hydraulic heads for each unit can
equilibrate.
Since January 2002, the calculated magnitude of the vertical component of the hydraulic gradient where the clay
layer is present has varied from 0.055 foot/foot (downward) to 0.42 foot/foot (downward). These areas are
represented by monitoring wells RW-3 (shallow zone) and RW-1 (deep zone). Between these two wells, the
vertical gradient has generally decreased since 2002. Where the clay layer is absent (represented by monitoring
wells TW-1 [shallow] and TW-9 [deep]), the calculated magnitude of the vertical gradient has varied only from
0.001 foot/foot (downward and upward) since January 2002. The vertical hydraulic gradient between monitoring
wells TW-1 and former TW-9 has remained generally stable since January 2002.
3.5 Groundwater Quality
3.5.1 Historical Groundwater Quality
Historical groundwater data (Table 8) indicate that water quality at the Site has improved over time. As discussed
in Section 3.4.3.1, shallow groundwater flow at the Site has historically migrated toward the crusher building
conveyor tunnel, where the clay layer is absent because of excavation and fill replacement related to the
construction of this tunnel. As such, the water quality impacts in the shallow zone have been limited to the area
between the former diesel pit and the tunnel (see Figure 2). Historically the impacted shallow wells included TW-
1, TW-5 (now abandoned), TW-6 (now abandoned), TW-7 (now abandoned), and RW-3 (now abandoned) (Table
8). Concentrations of 1-methylnaphthalene and 2-methylnaphthalene have decreased over time as indicated on
Figure 5. Figure 5 presents concentrations of these two analytes since 2008, as they have been the primary
COCs detected over that time period. Concentrations of 2-methylnaphthalene have been less than the NC 2L
Standard (30 ug/L) since 2012 and mostly less than the reporting limit. Concentrations of 1-methylnaphthalene
have exhibited fluctuations since 2008, but in more recent years the concentration fluctuations are less
pronounced.
Shallow groundwater flow has historically converged on the area near the location of shallow monitoring well TW-
1, where the clay layer is absent, and it subsequently recharges the deep groundwater zone. The deep
groundwater zone became impacted due to the hydraulic connection between the two groundwater zones in this
area. Over time groundwater impacts spread radially in the deep groundwater zone. However, the extent of
groundwater impacts in this zone remained limited as evidenced by the historically unimpacted monitoring wells,
including MW-1, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, and MW-9 (see Figure 2 and Table 8). All these wells have been
abandoned. Water quality in other historically impacted deep monitoring wells, including TW-9 (now abandoned)
and RW-2 (now abandoned) improved over time because of remedial actions conducted at the Site (see Table 8).
Since the 2014 groundwater sampling event, the only deep monitoring well that has exhibited elevated
concentrations of more than one COC is monitoring well RW-1, although the number of exceedances observed in
this well have decreased over the last several years. Concentrations of COCs in RW-1 are presented on Figure
6. Figure 6 demonstrates the impact on groundwater quality in this well as a result of implementing AFVR.
Following the initiation of AFVR in this well COC concentrations decreased significantly. As indicated on Figure 6
AFVR was temporarily discontinued for the 2nd quarter 2020 event due to COVID-19, and concentrations
increased. During the July 2020 sampling event RW-1 exhibited five exceedances (acenaphthene, fluorene,
phenanthrene, 1-methylnaphthalene, and 2-methylnaphthalene), at concentrations similar to those observed in
2013, before AVFR was initiated in this well. AFVR on RW-1 was restarted in October 2020 and completed again
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 11
in May 2021 and COC concentrations subsequently decreased. COC’s continue to exhibit a decrease in
concentration in 2022.
Monitoring well RW-1 is located within the area of the former diesel UST basin, where residual soil impacts
remain in place. Note that this well contained a small thickness of LNAPL in October 2020 (Table 2). These
factors have contributed to the elevated COC concentrations
Concentrations of 1-methylnaphthalene in monitoring well MW-14 (Figure 7), which is only COC with detectable
concentrations (except as discussed in Section 3.5.2), have fluctuated since 2008, but since 2019 have
decreased to less than reporting limits. Concentrations of 1-methylnaphthalene in MW-15 (Figure 8), which has
historically been the only COC with detectable concentrations (except as discussed in Section 3.5.2), have been
relatively stable over time and since 2016 have gradually decreased to less than reporting limits starting in August
2021.
Monitoring well MW-11 still contains LNAPL, therefore no water quality samples are currently collected from this
well.
3.5.2 August 2022 Groundwater Sampling Results
As stated in Section 1.2, the NC 2L Standards are appropriate standards to which the groundwater data are
compared.). In 2022 1-methylnaphthalene was updated to a NC 2L Standard from a previously established
Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration. Table 9 presents a summary of the groundwater analytes detected
and their respective concentrations during the August 2022 groundwater sampling event.
During the August 2022 groundwater sampling event, monitoring well RW-1 exhibited a concentration
exceedance of the NC 2L Standard for 1-methylnaphthalene. A decrease in concentrations were observed since
the July 2020 groundwater sampling event. Monitoring well RW-1 was subjected to 13 AFVR events (April 2006,
August 2014, May 2015, May 2016, May 2017, May 2018, April 2019, October 2019, October 2020, May 2021,
October 2021, May 2022, and November 2022) to attempt to further reduce COC concentrations. As discussed
above the AFVR events performed at monitoring well RW-1 improved the water quality at this well.
Monitoring well TW-1 exceeded the NC 2L Standard for 1-methylnaphthalene. A decrease in 1-
methylnaphthalene concentration was observed from the 2021 to 2022 groundwater sampling events. Overall, the
groundwater concentrations are stable to decreasing over time in the shallow groundwater zone.
COC concentrations in monitoring wells MW-14 and MW-15 did not exceed the NC 2L Standards.
The analytical laboratory report is attached in Appendix B.
4 Waste Disposal
All waste liquids and materials generated during the current LNAPL recovery efforts and groundwater sampling
events are contained in 55-gallon drums and stored in a secure area on-Site. A total of two 55-gallon drums
containing sampling purge water and one 55-gallon drum containing spent absorbent socks, removed LNAPL,
and used hand bailers which were generated during February 2022 through November 2022 groundwater
monitoring and fluid-level gauging events.
The AFVR event in May 2022 resulted in the removal of approximately 6,500 total gallons and in November 2022
resulted in the removal of approximately 6,250 total gallons of total fluid (groundwater plus LNAPL) from
monitoring wells MW-11 and RW-1. Copies of the waste manifests from the AFVR event are included in
Appendix D.
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 12
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1 Conclusions
The information in this LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report summarizes the activities and
results from the August 2022 groundwater sampling event, LNAPL recovery efforts conducted in May 2022 and
November 2022, and the gauging results in February 2022. Based upon the data collected during these events,
the following conclusions can be reached:
• Although LNAPL has historically been present in some wells at the Site, the number of monitoring wells with
measurable LNAPL has decreased due to LNAPL recovery efforts. Since 2007, except for the observation of
LNAPL in monitoring well RW-1 in 2019 and 2020, measurable LNAPL has only been observed in monitoring
well MW-11.
• Based on the Site’s risk classification, land use, and receptor information, the NCAC 2L standards are
appropriate clean-up standards.
• Concentrations observed during the 2022 groundwater sampling event did exhibit detection of a COC above
reporting limits in the shallow screened monitoring well, TW-1. Monitoring well RW-1, screened in the deep
groundwater zone, exhibited a detection of a COC above reporting limits. Monitoring wells MW-14 and MW-
15 did not have exceedances of the NC 2L Standards. In 2020, an increase in COC concentrations was
observed in monitoring well RW-1. This was the first year since 2015 that AFVR was not performed in the 2nd
quarter prior to the groundwater sampling event. This trend appeared to correlate with the absence of an
AFVR event during the 2nd quarter. The observed increase in concentrations in RW-1 may be related to the
presence of a small thickness of LNAPL observed in this well. In 2021, a decrease in COC concentrations
was observed in monitoring well RW-1. Two AFVR events, October 2020 and May 2021, were completed
prior to this sampling event which may correlate with this observed decrease. COC’s continue to exhibit a
decrease in concentrations in 2022.
5.2 Recommendations
Based upon the results of the August 2022 groundwater sampling event, Arcadis has the following
recommendations:
• Continue to sample and analyze groundwater samples on an annual basis. If LNAPL is observed in
monitoring well RW-1, no groundwater sample will be collected.
• Continue to gauge LNAPL on a quarterly basis using an oil/water interface probe.
• Utilize hand bailing methods to remove accumulated LNAPL. Conduct hand bailing to remove LNAPL
immediately after taking the quarterly LNAPL thickness reading.
• Complete two additional AFVR events, one during the 2nd quarter 2023 and one during the 4th quarter 2023,
on monitoring wells MW-11 and RW-1.

August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 13
6 References
ABBL, 2007. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne,
North Carolina, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan. March 2007.
Arcadis, 2007. Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling Work Plan, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North
Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan. August 2007.
Arcadis, 2007b. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle
Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, November 2007.
Arcadis, 2008a. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle
Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, May 2008.
Arcadis, 2008b. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle
Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, November 2008.
Arcadis, 2009. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne,
North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, February 2009.
Arcadis, 2010. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne,
North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, November 2010.
Arcadis, 2011. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne,
North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, January 2012.
Arcadis, 2012. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne,
North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, December 2012.
Arcadis, 2013. Monitoring Well Abandonment Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No
6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, October, 2013.
Arcadis, 2013. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, November, 2013.
Arcadis, 2014. Monitoring Well Abandonment Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No
6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, June, 2014.
Arcadis, 2014. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan, October, 2014.
Arcadis, 2015. Monitoring Well Abandonment Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No
6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, April, 2015.
Arcadis, 2015. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, October, 2015.
Arcadis, 2016. Monitoring Well Abandonment Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No
6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, April, 2016.
Arcadis, 2016. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, November, 2016.
Arcadis, 2017. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, December, 2017.
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 14
Arcadis, 2018. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, December, 2018.
Arcadis, 2019. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, December, 2019.
Arcadis, 2020. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, November, 2020.
Arcadis, 2021. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Lansing, Michigan, November, 2021.
Bain, 1970. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of New Hanover County, North Carolina. George L. Bain,
Geologist, U.S. Geological Survey. Groundwater Bulletin No. 117. Prepared by the United States Geological
Survey in cooperation with the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners and the North Carolina
Department of Water and Air Resources. April 1970.
BBL, 2003. Groundwater Monitoring and LNAPL Recovery Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North
Carolina, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No. 6939. Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina. October
2003.
BBL, 2004a. LNAPL Assessment Work Plan, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ
Groundwater Incident No. 6939. Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina. June 4, 2004.
BBL, 2004b. Interim Data Submittal, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ Groundwater
Incident No. 6939. Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina. November 8, 2004.
BBL, 2005a. Corrective Action Plan, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident
No. 6939, Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina, July 2005.
BBL, 2005b. Amended Corrective Action Plan, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ UST
Incident No. 6939, Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina, September 26, 2005.
BBL, 2006a. Memorandum regarding First AFVR Event, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North Carolina,
NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina. April 28, 2006.
BBL, 2006b. Memorandum regarding Second AFVR/ Groundwater Sampling, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle
Hayne, North Carolina, NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
August 22, 2006.
BBL, 2006c. Correspondence regarding Follow-up to AFVR Event – Castle Hayne, NC from Chris Peters, P.G.,
Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc. to Meg Garakani, P.E., Ph.D., Holcim (US) Inc. September 6, 2006.
BBL, 2006d. Memorandum regarding Third AFVR Event, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne, North Carolina,
NCDEQ UST Incident No. 6939, Blasland, Bouck, & Lee, Inc., Cary, North Carolina. October 23, 2006.
BBL, 2006e. Free Product Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former Ideal Cement Site, Castle Hayne,
North Carolina, NCDEQ Groundwater Incident No. 6939, Arcadis (US) Inc., Brighton, Michigan. December 2006.
Ideal, 1990. Letter regarding Notification of Underground Storage Tank Closures from Mr. Doug Sweeney, Ideal Basic
Industries to Mr. Kirk McDonald, P.G., North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
February 14, 1990.
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

www.arcadis.com
August 2022 Groundwater Monitoring Report_Final 15
NCDEQ, 1998. Groundwater Section Guidelines for the Investigation and Remediation of Soil and Groundwater,
Volume II – Petroleum Underground Storage Tanks. NCDEQ Division of Waste Management UST Section.
January 2, 1998.
NCDEQ, 2001. North Carolina Guidelines for Assessment and Corrective Action, NCDEQ Division of Waste
Management UST Section, April 2001.
NCDEQ, 2003. UST Section Guidelines for Sampling, Version 1.2. NCDEQ Division of Waste Management UST
Section. September 1, 2003.
NCDEQ, 2004. Notice of Regulatory Review (Letter). NCDEQ Division of Waste Management UST Section. January
12, 2004.
NCDEQ, 2007. Letter regarding No Further Action and Site closure from Deborah Mayo, NCDEQ to Meg Garakani,
P.E., Ph.D., Holcim (US) Inc. April 25, 2007.
NCDEQ, 2008. North Carolina Guidelines for Assessment and Corrective Action, NCDEQ Division of Waste
Management UST Section, December 2008.
NCDEQ, 2009. Letter regarding review of Monitoring Report from Deborah Mayo, NCDEQ to Meg Garakani, P.E.,
Ph.D., Holcim (US) Inc., May 22, 2009.
NCDEQ, 2009b. Letter regarding review of Monitoring Report from Deborah Mayo, NCDEQ to Meg Garakani, P.E.,
Ph.D., Holcim (US) Inc., July 13, 2009.
NCDEQ, 2011. Letter Regarding Notice of Regulatory Requirements, from Deborah Mayo, NCDEQ to Meg Garakani,
P.E., Ph.D., Holcim (US) Inc., October 26, 2011.
NCDEQ, 2013. Letter regarding review of Free Product and Groundwater Monitoring Report, from Deborah Mayo,
NCDEQ to Joel Bolduc, Holcim (US) Inc. January 22, 2013.
NCDEQ, 2014. Letter regarding response to your request for LNAPL monitoring, from Deborah Mayo, NCDEQ to
Joel Bolduc, Holcim (US) Inc. January 15, 2014.
August 2022 LNAPL Recovery and Groundwater Monitoring Report

Tables

TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Well Type Date
Completed
Diameter
(in)
Completed
Depth
(ft bgs)
Screen
Length (ft)
Geology at Screen
Depth Interval
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Top of
Screen
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Remarks
MW-1 II 1/30/1991 2 24.0 10 Clay / LS 23.55 25.59 9.55 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-5 II 8/8/1991 2 25.0 10 Clay / Shell Hash 25.33 27.46 10.33 Abandoned on 11/30/2009
MW-6 II 8/8/1991 2 23.5 10 Clay / Shell Hash 22.98 25.18 9.48 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-7 II 8/8/1991 2 24.0 10 Clay / Shell Hash 23.74 26.36 9.74 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-8 II 12/13/1991 2 22.0 10 Not Recorded 21.75 24.2 9.75 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-9 II 12/13/1991 2 22.0 10 Not Recorded 21.25 23.71 9.25 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-10 NA NA 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Not associated with former UST
area
MW-11 II 9/12/1995 2 22.0 10 Clay / Shell Hash 22.89 25.09 10.89
MW-12 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Well construction details not
available for this well
MW-13 II 9/12/1995 2 22.0 10 Clay / LS 21.56 24.53 9.56 Abandoned on 11/30/2009
MW-14 III 1/21/1997 2 26.5 4 LS 22.38 25.43 -0.12
MW-15 III 1/21/1997 2 24.7 2.5 LS 22.86 26.17 0.66
TW-9 II 9/13/1995 2 25.0 5 Sand / LS 22.89 23.94 2.89 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
RW-1 III 6/8/1992 4 30.0 15 Clay / Shell Hash / LS 22.67 21.74 7.67 Former active recovery well
RW-2 III NA NA 24.5 15 Clay / LS 23.1 22.92 13.60 Abandoned on 2/8/2016
MW-2 II 2/14/1991 2 15.0 10 Sand / Clay 23.24 25.53 18.24 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-3 II 2/14/1991 2 15.0 10 Sand / Clay 23.23 25.61 18.23 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
MW-4 II 2/14/1991 2 15.0 10 Sand / Fill 22.72 24.95 17.72 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
TW-1 II 5/1/1995 2 15.0 10 Sand 22.84 24.83 17.84
TW-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Well construction details not
available for this well
TW-3 II 5/1/1995 2 15.0 10 Sand / Clay 19.66 21.66 14.66 Well not found
TW-4 II 5/1/1995 2 15.0 10 Sand 19.82 20.4 14.82 Well not found
TW-5 II 5/2/1995 2 15.0 10 Sand / Clay 22.75 25 17.75 Abandoned on 2/6/2015
TW-6 II 5/2/1995 2 15.0 10 Sand / Clay 22.49 22.32 17.49 Abandoned on 8/29/2013
TW-7 II 9/11/1995 2 14.0 10 Sand 22.93 23.01 18.93 Abandoned on 8/29/2013
TW-8 II 9/11/1995 2 14.0 10 Sand 23.15 23.12 19.15 Abandoned on 8/29/2013
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
WELLS SCREENED IN SHALLOW SAND/CLAY ZONE
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 2
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Well Type Date
Completed
Diameter
(in)
Completed
Depth
(ft bgs)
Screen
Length (ft)
Geology at Screen
Depth Interval
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Top of
Screen
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Remarks
RW-3 II 5/2/1995 2 14.3 10 Sand 22.68 24.82 18.43 Abandoned on 4/21/2014
P-1 NA NA NA NA NA NA 22.72 24.91 NA Abandoned on 11/30/2009
P-2 NA NA NA NA NA NA 18.10 20.10 NA Well not found
Notes:
All wells constructed using Schedule 40 PVC risers and 0.010-inch slotted PVC well screens.
Bold indicates active monitoring well network
amsl above mean sea level
ft feet
in inches
bgs Below ground surface.
TOC Top of casing.
NA
MW Monitoring Well
RW Recovery Well
TW Temporary Well
P Piezometer
UST Underground storage tank
II Standard single-cased monitoring well.
III Double-cased monitoring well.
Sand Gray and black fine to medium SAND and shell fragments (upper stratigraphic layer).
Clay Gray and brown sandy clay to clayey sand (intermediate stratigraphic layer; semi-confining; discontinuous).
Shell Hash Loosely cemented shell fragments, sand, and clay.
LS Castle Hayne Limestone (lower stratigraphic layer).
Not available / not applicable.
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 2 of 2
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Date
Measured RW-1 RW-2 TW-1 TW-5 MW-11 MW-14 MW-15
5/2/1995 NM NM 0.10 NI NI NI NI
5/3/1995 NM NM 0.42 0 NI NI NI
5/4/1995 1.63 NM 0.01 0 NI NI NI
5/5/1995 NM NM 0 0 NI NI NI
5/9/1995 NM NM NM 0 NI NI NI
5/26/1995 0.44 <0.01 0 0 NI NI NI
6/7/1995 0 0 0 0 NI NI NI
6/16/1995 0.42 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
6/23/1995 0.33 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
6/30/1995 0.33 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
7/7/1995 0.25 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
7/13/1995 0.25 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
7/21/1995 0.13 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
7/28/1995 0.07 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
8/4/1995 0.08 NM 0 0 NI NI NI
8/10/1995 0.13 NM 0 0.05 NI NI NI
8/18/1995 0.01 NM 0 0 SHEEN NI NI
10/3/1995 0.01 SHEEN 0 0 0.15 NI NI
11/8/1995 0.01 0 0 0 0.02 NI NI
12/8/1995 0.01 0 0.04 0 0.02 NI NI
1/15/1996 0.01 0 0.04 0 0.06 NI NI
2/9/1996 0 0 0 0 0.01 NI NI
3/30/1996 0 0 0 0 0.22 NI NI
4/25/1996 0 0 0 0 0.15 NI NI
5/22/1996 0.13 0 0 0 0.61 NI NI
6/13/1996 0.06 0 0 0 0.11 NI NI
6/12/1996 0.06 0 0 0 0.11 NI NI
6/24/1996 0.02 0 0 0 0.01 NI NI
11/25/1996 0.04 0 0 0 0.68 NI NI
12/24/1996 0.05 0 NM NM 0.41 NI NI
1/15/1997 <0.01 0 NM NM 0.14 NI NI
1/21/1997 0.01 0 0 0 0.11 NI NI
2/11/1997 0.01 0 NM NM 0.12 0 0
2/28/1997 SHEEN 0 NM NM 0.06 0 0
4/18/1997 SHEEN 0 NM NM 0.15 0 0
4/3/1997 0.01 0 NM NM 0.09 0 0
5/2/1997 SHEEN 0 NM NM 0.04 0 0
5/5/1997 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/1/1997 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/8/1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/6/1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/28/2002 0 0.01 0.08 0.02 1.1 0 0
4/15/2002 0.16 0 0 0 0.03 0 0
8/23/2002 0.1 0 0 0 0.41 0 0
9/17/2003 0.07 SHEEN 0 0.52 0.59 0 0
12/9/2003 0.06 0 SHEEN 0.13 0.49 0 0
2/10/2004 0.02 SHEEN SHEEN SHEEN 0.07 0 0
6/21/2004 0 0 0.17 0.14 0.62 0 0
Well ID and Apparent LNAPL Thickness (ft)
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 3
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Date
Measured RW-1 RW-2 TW-1 TW-5 MW-11 MW-14 MW-15
Well ID and Apparent LNAPL Thickness (ft)
4/25/2006 0.01 0 0.05 0 2.35 0 0
5/15/2006 0 0 0.1 0.06 0.15 0 0
7/24/2006 0 0 0.05 0 0.35 0 0
8/31/2006 0 0 0.03 0 0.23 0 0
10/19/2006 0 0 0 0 0.44 0 0
12/19/2006 0 0 0 0 0.46 0 0
2/8/2007 0 0 0 0 0.24 0 0
8/13/2007 0 0 0.51 0.02 0.71 0 0
9/26/2007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12/20/2007 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0
2/28/2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/14/2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2/11/2009 SHEEN 0 0 0 0.02 0 0
9/8/2009 0 0 SHEEN 0 0.05 0 0
5/17/2010 0 0 0 0 0.19 0 0
8/5/2010 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0
12/8/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3/11/2011 0 0 0 0 0.35 0 0
6/10/2011 0 0 0 0 0.70*0 0
8/23/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11/14/2011 0 0 0 0 0.5 0 0
2/3/2012 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0
5/25/2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/30/2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/31/2012 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2/6/2013 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0
5/29/2013 0 0 0 0 0.12 0 0
8/29/2013 0 0 0 0 0.69 0 0
11/8/2013 0 0 0 0 0.16 0 0
2/28/2014 0 0 0 0 0.50 0 0
4/22/2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/12/2014 0 0 0 0 1.15 0 0
11/6/2014 0 0 0 0 1.25 0 0
2/6/2015 0 0 0 0 0.32 0 0
5/27/2015 0 0 0 NA**1.94 0 0
8/10/2015 0 0 0 NA**1.27 0 0
11/11/2015 0 0 0 NA**1.31 0 0
2/8/2016 0 0 0 NA**1.40 0 0
5/12/2016 0 0 0 NA**2.20 0 0
8/17/2016 0 NA**0 NA**2.17 0 0
11/21/2016 0 NA**0 NA**2.45 0 0
2/3/2017 0 NA**0 NA**1.11 0 0
5/1/2017 0 NA**0 NA**1.88 0 0
9/1/2017 0 NA**0 NA**1.65 0 0
10/19/2017 0 NA**0 NA**1.05 0 0
2/26/2018 0 NA**0 NA**1.30 0 0
5/11/2018 0 NA**0 NA**0.55 0 0
8/1/2018 0 NA**0 NA**0.30 0 0
11/13/2018 0 NA**0 NA**0.54 0 0
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 2 of 3
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Date
Measured RW-1 RW-2 TW-1 TW-5 MW-11 MW-14 MW-15
Well ID and Apparent LNAPL Thickness (ft)
2/13/2019 0 NA**0 NA**0.21 0 0
4/18/2019 0 NA**0 NA**0.40 0 0
8/12/2019 0 NA**0 NA**1.78 0 0
10/30/2019 0.1 NA**0 NA**0.65 0 0
2/28/2020 0 NA**0 NA**0.30 0 0
7/31/2020 0 NA**0 NA**0.87 0 0
10/28/2020 0.05 NA**0 NA**0.45 0 0
2/26/2021 0 NA**0 NA**0.44 0 0
5/21/2021 0 NA**0 NA**0.23 0 0
8/27/2021 0 NA**0 NA**0.35 0 0
10/22/2021 0 NA**0 NA**0.26 0 0
2/7/2022 0 NA**0 NA**0.13 0 0
5/4/2022 0 NA**0 NA**0.12 0 0
8/8/2022 0 NA**0 NA**0.20 0 0
11/14/2022 0 NA**0 NA**0.29 0 0
Notes:
LNAPL Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
NA Not Available
NI Well not installed as of measurement date.
NM Not measured
Sheen Product present as a sheen, not sufficiently thick to measure.
* Accumulated product observed due to fluctuating groundwater.
** Monitoring Well abandoned
LNAPL thickness at MW-11 was measured within 2 hours of removal of the absorbent sock beginning in 9/26/2007 through 8/10/2015.
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 3 of 3
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
MW-1 1/28/2002 23.55 25.59 26.0 NA 13.24 13.24 NA 12.35
4/15/2002 NA 11.17 11.17 NA 14.42
8/23/2002 NA 12.88 12.88 NA 12.71
9/17/2003 NA 8.28 8.28 NA 17.31
12/9/2003 NA 8.08 8.08 NA 17.51
2/10/2004 NA 8.18 8.18 NA 17.41
6/21/2004 NA 9.73 9.73 NA 15.86
7/24/2006 NA 10.08 10.08 NA 15.51
8/31/2006 NA 9.72 9.72 NA 15.87
10/19/2006 NA 8.32 8.32 NA 17.27
2/8/2007 NA 7.34 7.34 NA 18.25
8/13/2007 NA 11.21 11.21 NA 14.38
9/26/2007 NA 11.65 11.65 NA 13.94
12/20/2007 NA 13.11 13.11 NA 12.48
2/28/2008 NA 10.90 10.90 NA 14.69
8/14/2008 NA 10.16 10.16 NA 15.43
2/10/2009 NA 9.30 9.30 NA 16.29
9/8/2009 NA 9.00 9.00 NA 16.59
5/17/2010 NA 9.35 9.35 NA 16.24
8/5/2010 NA 9.59 9.59 NA 16.00
12/8/2010 NA 8.85 8.85 NA 16.74
3/11/2011 NA 7.22 7.22 NA 18.37
6/10/2011 NA 10.32 10.32 NA 15.27
8/23/2011 NA 11.16 11.16 NA 14.43
11/14/2011 NA 8.89 8.89 NA 16.70
2/13/2012 NA 10.35 10.35 NA 15.24
5/25/2012 NA 10.00 10.00 NA 15.59
8/30/2012 NA 8.15 8.15 NA 17.44
10/31/2012 NA 8.71 8.71 NA 16.88
2/6/2013 NA 8.25 8.25 NA 17.34
5/29/2013 NA 8.74 8.74 NA 16.85
8/29/2013 NA 7.10 7.10 NA 18.49
11/8/2013 NA 7.82 7.82 NA 17.77
2/28/2014 NA 7.45 7.45 NA 18.14
MW-5 1/28/2002 25.33 27.46 24.5 NA 13.50 13.50 NA 13.96
4/15/2002 NA 13.05 13.05 NA 14.41
8/23/2002 NM NM NM NM NM
9/17/2003 NM 7.84 7.84 NM 19.62
12/9/2003 NM NM NM NM NM
2/10/2004 NM NM NM NM NM
6/21/2004 NM 11.70 11.70 NM 15.76
7/24/2006 NA 11.95 11.95 NA 15.51
8/31/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
10/19/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
2/8/2007 NA 9.15 9.15 NA 18.31
8/13/2007 NA 13.11 13.11 NA 14.35
9/26/2007 NA 13.51 13.51 NA 13.95
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONEMW-5 12/20/2007 NA 15.04 15.04 NA 12.42
(cont)2/28/2008 NA 12.82 12.82 NA 14.64
8/14/2008 NA 12.10 12.10 NA 15.36
2/10/2009 NA 11.15 11.15 NA 16.31
9/8/2009 NA 10.90 10.90 NA 16.56
MW-6 1/28/2002 22.98 25.18 22.8 NA 12.87 12.87 NA 12.31
4/15/2002 NA 10.71 10.71 NA 14.47
8/23/2002 NA 12.55 12.55 NA 12.63
9/17/2003 NA 7.91 7.91 NA 17.27
12/9/2003 NA 7.67 7.67 NA 17.51
2/10/2004 NA 7.75 7.75 NA 17.43
6/21/2004 NA 9.36 9.36 NA 15.82
7/24/2006 NA 9.70 9.70 NA 15.48
8/31/2006 NA 9.35 9.35 NA 15.83
10/19/2006 NA 7.89 7.89 NA 17.29
2/8/2007 NA 6.95 6.95 NA 18.23
8/13/2007 NA 10.80 10.80 NA 14.38
9/26/2007 NA 11.21 11.21 NA 13.97
12/20/2007 NA 12.69 12.69 NA 12.49
2/28/2008 NA 10.49 10.49 NA 14.69
8/14/2008 NA 9.79 9.79 NA 15.39
2/10/2009 NA 8.88 8.88 NA 16.30
9/8/2009 NA 8.61 8.61 NA 16.57
5/17/2010 NA 7.46 7.46 NA 17.72
8/5/2010 NA 9.20 9.20 NA 15.98
12/8/2010 NA 8.37 8.37 NA 16.81
3/11/2011 NA 6.75 6.75 NA 18.43
6/10/2011 NA 9.95 9.95 NA 15.23
8/23/2011 NA 10.75 10.75 NA 14.43
11/14/2011 NA 8.41 8.41 NA 16.77
2/13/2012 NA 9.85 9.85 NA 15.33
5/25/2012 NA NM NM NA NA
8/30/2012 NA 7.76 7.76 NA 17.42
10/31/2012 NA 8.28 8.28 NA 16.90
2/6/2013 NA 7.76 7.76 NA 17.42
5/29/2013 NA 8.30 8.30 NA 16.88
8/29/2013 NA 6.66 6.66 NA 18.52
11/8/2013 NA 7.37 7.37 NA 17.81
2/28/2014 NA 6.97 6.97 NA 18.21
MW-7 1/28/2002 23.74 26.36 24.9 NA 14.08 14.08 NA 12.28
4/15/2002 NA 11.91 11.91 NA 14.45
8/23/2002 NA 13.75 13.75 NA 12.61
9/17/2003 NA 9.08 9.08 NA 17.28
12/9/2003 NA 8.87 8.87 NA 17.49
2/10/2004 NA 8.95 8.95 NA 17.41
6/21/2004 NA 10.56 10.56 NA 15.80
7/24/2006 NA 10.92 10.92 NA 15.44
Well Abandoned 5/30/2009
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 2 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONEMW-7 8/31/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
(cont)10/19/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
2/8/2007 NA 8.15 8.15 NA 18.21
8/13/2007 NA 12.00 12.00 NA 14.36
9/26/2007 NA 12.40 12.40 NA 13.96
12/20/2007 NA 13.89 13.89 NA 12.47
2/28/2008 NA 11.68 11.68 NA 14.68
8/14/2008 NA 10.98 10.98 NA 15.38
2/10/2009 NA 10.08 10.08 NA 16.28
9/8/2009 NA 9.82 9.82 NA 16.54
5/17/2010 NA 10.15 10.15 NA 16.21
8/5/2010 NA 10.40 10.40 NA 15.96
12/8/2010 NA 9.57 9.57 NA 16.79
3/11/2011 NA 7.97 7.97 NA 18.39
6/10/2011 NA 11.14 11.14 NA 15.22
8/23/2011 NA 11.92 11.92 NA 14.44
11/14/2011 NA 9.60 9.60 NA 16.76
2/13/2012 NA 11.07 11.07 NA 15.29
5/25/2012 NA 10.75 10.75 NA 15.61
8/30/2012 NA 8.98 8.98 NA 17.38
10/31/2012 NA 9.48 9.48 NA 16.88
2/6/2013 NA 8.99 8.99 NA 17.37
5/29/2013 NA 9.50 9.50 NA 16.86
8/29/2013 NA 7.87 7.87 NA 18.49
11/8/2013 NA 8.58 8.58 NA 17.78
2/28/2014 NA 8.16 8.16 NA 18.20
MW-8 1/28/2002 21.75 24.2 21.2 NA 11.85 11.85 NA 12.35
4/15/2002 NA 9.76 9.76 NA 14.44
8/23/2002 NA 11.45 11.45 NA 12.75
9/17/2003 NA 6.84 6.84 NA 17.36
12/9/2003 NA 6.68 6.68 NA 17.52
2/10/2004 NA 6.78 6.78 NA 17.42
6/21/2004 NA 8.31 8.31 NA 15.89
7/24/2006 NA 8.66 8.66 NA 15.54
8/31/2006 NA 8.30 8.30 NA 15.90
10/19/2006 NA 6.93 6.93 NA 17.27
2/8/2007 NA 5.95 5.95 NA 18.25
8/13/2007 NA 9.81 9.81 NA 14.39
9/26/2007 NA 10.22 10.22 NA 13.98
12/20/2007 NA 11.71 11.71 NA 12.49
2/28/2008 NA 9.50 9.50 NA 14.70
8/14/2008 NA 8.76 8.76 NA 15.44
2/10/2009 NA 7.90 7.90 NA 16.30
9/8/2009 NA 7.50 7.50 NA 16.70
5/17/2010 NA 7.95 7.95 NA 16.25
8/5/2010 NA 8.15 8.15 NA 16.05
12/8/2010 NA 7.45 7.45 NA 16.75
3/11/2011 NA 5.82 5.82 NA 18.38
6/10/2011 NA 8.91 8.91 NA 15.29
MW-8 8/23/2011 NA 9.75 9.75 NA 14.45
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 3 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE(cont)11/14/2011 NA 7.48 7.48 NA 16.72
2/13/2012 NA 8.95 8.95 NA 15.25
5/25/2012 NA 8.57 8.57 NA 15.63
8/30/2012 NA 6.65 6.65 NA 17.55
10/31/2012 NA 7.26 7.26 NA 16.94
2/6/2013 NA 6.85 6.85 NA 17.35
5/29/2013 NA 7.35 7.35 NA 16.85
8/29/2013 NA 5.75 5.75 NA 18.45
11/8/2013 NA 6.44 6.44 NA 17.76
2/28/2014 NA 6.05 6.05 NA 18.15
MW-9 1/28/2002 21.25 23.71 22.0 NA 11.36 11.36 NA 12.35
4/15/2002 NA 9.25 9.25 NA 14.46
8/23/2002 NA 10.99 10.99 NA 12.72
9/17/2003 NA 6.37 6.37 NA 17.34
12/9/2003 NA 6.18 6.18 NA 17.53
2/10/2004 NA 6.26 6.26 NA 17.45
6/21/2004 NA 7.84 7.84 NA 15.87
7/24/2006 NA 8.19 8.19 NA 15.52
8/31/2006 NA 7.80 7.80 NA 15.91
10/19/2006 NA 6.42 6.42 NA 17.29
2/8/2007 NA 5.45 5.45 NA 18.26
8/13/2007 NA 9.30 9.30 NA 14.41
9/26/2007 NA 9.70 9.70 NA 14.01
12/20/2007 NA 11.21 11.21 NA 12.50
2/28/2008 NA 8.99 8.99 NA 14.72
8/14/2008 NA 8.25 8.25 NA 15.46
2/10/2009 NA 7.40 7.40 NA 16.31
9/8/2009 NA 7.03 7.03 NA 16.68
5/17/2010 NA 7.46 7.46 NA 16.25
8/5/2010 NA 7.70 7.70 NA 16.01
12/8/2010 NA 6.92 6.92 NA 16.79
3/11/2011 NA 5.30 5.30 NA 18.41
6/10/2011 NA 8.44 8.44 NA 15.27
8/23/2011 NA 9.24 9.24 NA 14.47
11/14/2011 NA 6.95 6.95 NA 16.76
2/13/2012 NA 8.41 8.41 NA 15.30
5/25/2012 NA 8.06 8.06 NA 15.65
8/30/2012 NA 6.17 6.17 NA 17.54
10/31/2012 NA 6.76 6.76 NA 16.95
2/6/2013 NA 6.31 6.31 NA 17.40
5/29/2013 NA 6.82 6.82 NA 16.89
8/29/2013 NA 5.75 5.75 NA 17.96
11/8/2013 NA 5.91 5.91 NA 17.80
2/28/2014 NA 5.54 5.54 NA 18.17
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 4 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONEMW-11 1/28/2002 22.89 25.09 25.4 12.59 13.69 12.72 1.10 12.37
4/15/2002 10.62 10.65 10.62 0.03 14.47
8/23/2002 12.36 12.77 12.41 0.41 12.68
9/17/2003 7.71 8.30 7.78 0.59 17.31
12/9/2003 7.51 8.00 7.57 0.49 17.52
2/10/2004 7.60 7.67 7.61 0.07 17.48
6/21/2004 9.18 9.80 9.25 0.62 15.84
7/24/2006 9.55 9.90 9.59 0.35 15.50
8/31/2006 9.20 9.43 9.23 0.23 15.86
10/19/2006 7.75 8.19 7.80 0.44 17.29
2/8/2007 6.78 7.02 6.81 0.24 18.28
8/13/2007 10.61 11.32 10.70 0.71 14.39
9/26/2007 ND 11.10 11.10 ND(2)13.99
12/20/2007 12.58 12.60 12.58 0.02 (2)12.51
2/28/2008 ND 10.38 10.38 ND(2)14.71
8/14/2008 ND 9.65 9.65 ND(2)15.44
2/10/2009 8.78 8.80 8.78 0.02 (2)16.31
9/8/2009 8.44 8.49 8.45 0.05 (2)16.64
5/17/2010 8.81 9.00 8.83 0.19 16.26
8/5/2010 9.10 9.09 9.10 0.01 15.99
12/8/2010 ND 8.31 9.62 ND(2)15.47
3/11/2011 6.63 6.98 6.67 0.35 18.42
6/10/2011 9.75 10.45 9.83 0.70 15.26
8/23/2011 ND 10.62 10.62 ND(2)14.47
11/14/2011 8.26 8.76 8.32 0.50 16.77
2/13/2012 9.77 9.87 9.78 0.10 15.31
5/25/2012 ND 9.45 9.45 ND(2)15.64
8/30/2012 ND 7.60 7.60 ND(2)17.49
10/31/2012 ND 8.15 8.15 ND(2)16.94
2/6/2013 7.70 7.71 7.70 0.01 17.39
5/29/2013 8.20 8.32 8.21 0.12 16.88
8/29/2013 6.51 7.20 6.59 0.69 18.50
11/8/2013 7.27 7.43 7.29 0.16 17.80
2/28/2014 6.85 7.35 6.91 0.50 18.18
4/22/2014 ND 5.28 5.28 ND(2)19.81
8/12/2014 5.15 6.30 5.29 1.15 19.80
11/6/2014 7.30 8.55 7.45 1.25 17.64
2/6/2015 5.55 5.87 5.59 0.32 19.50
5/27/2015 6.81 8.75 7.04 1.94 18.05
8/10/2015 7.68 8.95 7.83 1.27 17.26
11/11/2015 4.84 6.15 5.00 1.31 20.09
2/8/2016 4.20 5.60 4.37 1.40 20.72
5/12/2016 6.50 8.70 6.76 2.20 18.33
8/17/2016 7.13 9.30 7.39 2.17 17.70
11/21/2016 6.9 9.35 7.19 2.45 17.90
2/3/2017 6.59 7.70 6.72 1.11 18.37
5/1/2017 6.12 8.00 6.35 1.88 18.74
9/1/2017 4.65 6.30 4.85 1.65 20.24
10/19/2017 7.00 8.05 7.13 1.05 17.96
2/26/2018 5.95 7.25 6.11 1.30 18.98
MW-11 5/11/2018 6.35 6.90 6.42 0.55 18.67
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 5 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE(cont)8/1/2018 4.60 4.90 4.64 0.30 20.45
11/13/2018 4.10 4.64 4.16 0.54 20.93
2/13/2019 4.95 5.16 4.98 0.21 20.11
4/18/2019 5.60 6.00 5.65 0.40 19.44
8/12/2019 6.72 8.50 6.93 1.78 18.16
10/30/2019 6.85 7.50 6.93 0.65 18.16
2/28/2020 5.25 5.55 5.29 0.30 19.80
7/31/2020 5.25 6.12 5.35 0.87 19.74
10/28/2020 5.62 6.07 5.67 0.45 19.42
2/26/2021 4.91 5.35 4.96 0.44 20.13
5/21/2021 7.84 8.07 7.87 0.23 17.22
8/27/2021 5.75 6.10 5.79 0.35 19.30
10/22/2021 6.98 7.24 7.01 0.26 18.08
2/7/2022 6.91 7.04 6.93 0.13 18.16
5/4/2022 8.02 8.14 8.03 0.12 17.06
8/8/2022 7.09 7.29 7.11 0.20 17.98
11/14/2022 8.60 8.89 8.63 0.29 16.46
MW-13 1/28/2002 21.56 24.53 NM NM NM NM NM NM
4/15/2002 NM 10.26 10.26 NA 14.27
8/23/2002 NM 11.90 11.90 NA 12.63
9/17/2003 NM 7.33 7.33 NM 17.20
12/9/2003 NM NM NM NM NM
2/10/2004 NM NM NM NM NM
6/21/2004 NM 8.92 8.92 NM 15.61
7/24/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
8/31/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
10/19/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
2/8/2007 NA 6.42 6.42 NA 18.11
8/13/2007 NA 10.27 10.27 NA 14.26
9/26/2007 NA 10.68 10.68 NA 13.85
12/20/2007 NA 12.15 12.15 NA 12.38
2/28/2008 NA 9.95 9.95 NA 14.58
8/14/2008 NA 9.23 9.23 NA 15.30
2/10/2009 NA 8.35 8.35 NA 16.18
9/8/2009 NA 8.05 8.05 NA 16.48
MW-14 1/28/2002 22.38 25.43 30.7 NA 13.10 13.10 NA 12.33
4/15/2002 NA 10.95 10.95 NA 14.48
8/23/2002 NA 12.74 12.74 NA 12.69
9/17/2003 NA 8.08 8.08 NA 17.35
12/9/2003 NA 7.91 7.91 NA 17.52
2/10/2004 NA 7.96 7.96 NA 17.47
6/21/2004 NA 9.58 9.58 NA 15.85
7/24/2006 NA 9.93 9.93 NA 15.50
8/31/2006 NA 9.56 9.56 NA 15.87
10/19/2006 NA 8.13 8.13 NA 17.30
2/8/2007 NA 7.15 7.15 NA 18.28
8/13/2007 NA 11.03 11.03 NA 14.40
9/26/2007 NA 11.45 11.45 NA 13.98
MW-14 12/20/2007 NA 12.92 12.92 NA 12.51
(cont)2/28/2008 NA 10.71 10.71 NA 14.72
Well Abandoned 5/30/2009
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 6 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE8/14/2008 NA 10.00 10.00 NA 15.43
2/10/2009 NA 9.13 9.13 NA 16.30
9/8/2009 NA 8.80 8.80 NA 16.63
5/17/2010 NA 9.19 9.19 NA 16.24
8/5/2010 NA 9.43 9.43 NA 16.00
3/11/2011 NA 7.00 7.00 NA 18.43
6/10/2011 NA 10.16 10.16 NA 15.27
8/23/2011 NA 10.96 10.96 NA 14.47
12/8/2010 NA 8.64 8.64 NA 16.79
11/14/2011 NA 8.67 8.67 NA 16.76
2/13/2012 NA 10.12 10.12 NA 15.31
5/25/2012 NA 9.78 9.78 NA 15.65
8/30/2012 NA 7.96 7.96 NA 17.47
10/31/2012 NA 8.50 8.50 NA 16.93
2/6/2013 NA 8.05 8.05 NA 17.38
5/29/2013 NA 8.55 8.55 NA 16.88
8/29/2013 NA 6.94 6.94 NA 18.49
11/8/2013 NA 7.63 7.63 NA 17.80
2/28/2014 NA 7.23 7.23 NA 18.20
4/22/2014 NA 5.62 5.62 NA 19.81
8/12/2014 NA 5.65 5.65 NA 19.78
11/6/2014 NA 7.80 7.80 NA 17.63
2/6/2015 NA 5.92 5.92 NA 19.51
5/27/2015 NA 7.40 7.40 NA 18.03
8/10/2015 NA 8.18 8.18 NA 17.25
11/11/2015 NA 5.35 5.35 NA 20.08
2/8/2016 NA 4.70 4.70 NA 20.73
5/12/2016 NA 7.08 7.08 NA 18.35
8/17/2016 NA 7.33 7.33 NA 18.10
11/21/2016 NA 7.55 7.55 NA 17.88
2/3/2017 NA 7.05 7.05 NA 18.38
5/1/2017 NA 6.70 6.70 NA 18.73
9/1/2017 NA 5.20 5.20 NA 20.23
10/19/2017 NA 7.45 7.45 NA 17.98
2/26/2018 NA 6.43 6.43 NA 19.00
5/11/2018 NA 6.72 6.72 NA 18.71
8/1/2018 NA 4.98 4.98 NA 20.45
11/13/2018 NA 4.30 4.30 NA 21.13
2/13/2019 NA 5.32 5.32 NA 20.11
4/18/2019 NA 5.95 5.95 NA 19.48
8/12/2019 NA 7.49 7.49 NA 17.94
10/30/2019 NA 7.25 7.25 NA 18.18
2/28/2020 NA 5.60 5.60 NA 19.83
7/31/2020 NA 5.68 5.68 NA 19.75
10/28/2020 NA 6.03 6.03 NA 19.40
2/26/2021 NA 5.30 5.30 NA 20.13
5/21/2021 NA 8.21 8.21 NA 17.22
8/27/2021 NA 6.10 6.10 NA 19.33
MW-14 10/22/2021 NA 7.35 7.35 NA 18.08
(cont)2/7/2022 NA 7.28 7.28 NA 18.15
5/4/2022 NA 8.40 8.40 NA 17.03
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 7 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE8/8/2022 NA 7.45 7.45 NA 17.98
11/14/2022 NA 8.97 8.97 NA 16.46
MW-15 1/28/2002 22.86 26.17 26.0 NA 13.84 13.84 NA 12.33
4/15/2002 NA 11.68 11.68 NA 14.49
8/23/2002 NA 13.47 13.47 NA 12.70
9/17/2003 NA 8.83 8.83 NA 17.34
12/9/2003 NA 8.64 8.64 NA 17.53
2/10/2004 NA 8.71 8.71 NA 17.46
6/21/2004 NA 10.31 10.31 NA 15.86
7/24/2006 NA 10.66 10.66 NA 15.51
8/31/2006 NA 10.30 10.30 NA 15.87
10/19/2006 NA 8.87 8.87 NA 17.30
2/8/2007 NA 7.88 7.88 NA 18.29
8/13/2007 NA 11.78 11.78 NA 14.39
9/26/2007 NA 12.18 12.18 NA 13.99
12/20/2007 NA 13.67 13.67 NA 12.50
2/28/2008 NA 11.45 11.45 NA 14.72
8/14/2008 NA 10.74 10.74 NA 15.43
2/10/2009 NA 9.86 9.86 NA 16.31
9/8/2009 NA 9.53 9.53 NA 16.64
5/17/2010 NA 9.92 9.92 NA 16.25
8/5/2010 NA 10.16 10.16 NA 16.01
12/8/2010 NA 9.38 9.38 NA 16.79
3/11/2011 NA 7.75 7.75 NA 18.42
6/10/2011 NA 10.90 10.90 NA 15.27
8/23/2011 NA 11.71 11.71 NA 14.46
11/14/2011 NA 9.39 9.39 NA 16.78
2/13/2012 NA 10.85 10.85 NA 15.32
5/25/2012 NA 10.52 10.52 NA 15.65
8/30/2012 NA 8.66 8.66 NA 17.51
10/31/2012 NA 9.25 9.25 NA 16.92
2/6/2013 NA 8.75 8.75 NA 17.42
5/29/2013 NA 9.30 9.30 NA 16.87
8/29/2013 NA 7.67 7.67 NA 18.50
11/8/2013 NA 8.35 8.35 NA 17.82
2/28/2014 NA 7.97 7.97 NA 18.20
4/22/2014 NA 6.35 6.35 NA 19.82
8/12/2014 NA 6.38 6.38 NA 19.79
11/6/2014 NA 8.52 8.52 NA 17.65
2/6/2015 NA 6.50 6.50 NA 19.67
5/27/2015 NA 7.90 7.90 NA 18.27
8/10/2015 NA 8.85 8.85 NA 17.32
11/11/2015 NA 6.10 6.10 NA 20.07
2/8/2016 NA 8.85 8.85 NA 17.32
5/12/2016 NA 7.71 7.71 NA 18.46
8/17/2016 NA 8.30 8.30 NA 17.87
11/21/2016 NA 8.28 8.28 NA 17.89
MW-15 2/3/2017 NA 7.75 7.75 NA 18.42
(cont)5/1/2017 NA 7.40 7.40 NA 18.77
9/1/2017 NA 5.86 5.86 NA 20.31
10/19/2017 NA 8.20 8.20 NA 17.97
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 8 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE2/26/2018 NA 7.15 7.15 NA 19.02
5/11/2018 NA 7.45 7.45 NA 18.72
8/1/2018 NA 5.72 5.72 NA 20.45
11/13/2018 NA 5.25 5.25 NA 20.92
2/13/2019 NA 6.06 6.06 NA 20.11
4/18/2019 NA 6.70 6.70 NA 19.47
8/12/2019 NA 8.18 8.18 NA 17.99
10/30/2019 NA 7.98 7.98 NA 18.19
2/28/2020 NA 6.35 6.35 NA 19.82
7/31/2020 NA 6.41 6.41 NA 19.76
10/28/2020 NA 6.77 6.77 NA 19.40
2/26/2021 NA 6.00 6.00 NA 20.17
5/21/2021 NA 8.92 8.92 NA 17.25
8/27/2021 NA 6.83 6.83 NA 19.34
10/22/2021 NA 8.09 8.09 NA 18.08
2/7/2022 NA 7.99 7.99 NA 18.18
5/4/2022 NA 9.12 9.12 NA 17.05
8/8/2022 NA 8.19 8.19 NA 17.98
11/14/2022 NA 9.73 9.73 NA 16.44
TW-9 1/28/2002 22.89 23.94 15.3 NA 11.64 11.64 NA 12.30
4/15/2002 NA 9.46 9.46 NA 14.48
8/23/2002 NA 11.24 11.24 NA 12.70
9/17/2003 NA 6.53 6.53 NA 17.41
12/9/2003 NA 6.37 6.37 NA 17.57
2/10/2004 NA 6.45 6.45 NA 17.49
6/21/2004 NA 8.01 8.01 NA 15.93
7/24/2006 NA 8.35 8.35 NA 15.59
8/31/2006 NA 8.05 8.05 NA 15.89
10/19/2006 NA 6.63 6.63 NA 17.31
2/8/2007 NA 5.59 5.59 NA 18.35
8/13/2007 NA 9.54 9.54 NA 14.40
9/26/2007 NA 9.95 9.95 NA 13.99
12/20/2007 NA 11.43 11.43 NA 12.51
2/28/2008 NA 9.21 9.21 NA 14.73
8/14/2008 NA 8.48 8.48 NA 15.46
2/10/2009 NA 7.57 7.57 NA 16.37
9/8/2009 NA 7.36 7.36 NA 16.58
5/17/2010 NA 7.63 7.63 NA 16.31
8/5/2010 NA 7.85 7.85 NA 16.09
12/8/2010 NA 7.13 7.13 NA 16.81
3/11/2011 NA 5.45 5.45 NA 18.49
6/10/2011 NA 8.57 8.57 NA 15.37
8/23/2011 NA 9.50 9.50 NA 14.44
11/14/2011 NA 7.11 7.11 NA 16.83
2/13/2012 NA 8.57 8.57 NA 15.37
5/25/2012 NA 8.22 8.22 NA 15.72
TW-9 8/30/2012 NA 6.48 6.48 NA 17.46
(cont)10/31/2012 NA 6.93 6.93 NA 17.01
2/6/2013 NA NM NM NA NM
5/29/2013 NA NM NM NA NM
8/29/2013 NA 5.33 5.33 NA 18.61
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 9 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE11/8/2013 NA 6.06 6.06 NA 17.88
2/28/2014 NA 5.70 5.70 NA 18.24
RW-1 1/28/2002 22.67 21.74 28.1 ---9.38 9.38 ---12.36
4/15/2002 7.26 7.42 7.28 0.16 14.46
8/23/2002 9.00 9.10 9.01 0.10 12.73
9/17/2003 4.40 4.47 4.41 0.07 17.33
12/9/2003 4.16 4.22 4.17 0.06 17.57
2/10/2004 4.22 4.24 4.22 0.02 17.52
6/21/2004 ND 5.81 5.81 ND 15.93
7/24/2006 ND 6.20 6.20 ND 15.54
8/31/2006 ND 5.85 5.85 ND 15.89
10/19/2006 ND 4.44 4.44 ND 17.30
2/8/2007 ND 3.40 3.40 ND 18.34
8/13/2007 ND 7.31 7.31 ND 14.43
9/26/2007 ND 7.75 7.75 ND 13.99
12/20/2007 ND 9.25 9.25 ND 12.49
2/28/2008 ND 7.03 7.03 ND 14.71
8/14/2008 ND 6.30 6.30 ND 15.44
2/10/2009 ND 5.42 5.42 SHEEN 16.32
9/8/2009 ND 5.11 5.11 ND 16.63
5/17/2010 ND 5.45 5.45 ND 16.29
8/5/2010 ND 5.69 5.69 ND 16.05
12/8/2010 ND 4.93 4.93 ND 16.81
3/11/2011 ND 3.28 3.28 ND 18.46
6/10/2011 ND 6.41 6.41 ND 15.33
8/23/2011 ND 7.27 7.27 ND 14.47
11/14/2011 ND 4.95 4.95 ND 16.79
2/13/2012 ND 6.43 6.43 ND 15.31
5/25/2012 ND 6.06 6.06 ND 15.68
8/30/2012 ND 4.25 4.25 ND 17.49
10/31/2012 ND 4.82 4.82 ND 16.92
2/6/2013 ND 4.25 4.25 ND 17.49
5/29/2013 ND 4.85 4.85 ND 16.89
8/29/2013 ND 3.16 3.16 ND 18.58
11/8/2013 ND 3.90 3.90 ND 17.84
2/28/2014 ND 3.48 3.48 ND 18.26
4/22/2014 ND 1.85 1.85 ND 19.89
8/12/2014 ND 1.85 1.85 ND 19.89
11/6/2014 ND 4.05 4.05 ND 17.69
2/6/2015 ND 2.16 2.16 ND 19.58
5/27/2015 ND 3.65 3.65 ND 18.09
8/10/2015 ND 4.45 4.45 ND 17.29
11/11/2015 ND 1.60 1.60 ND 20.14
2/8/2016 ND NA NA ND NA
RW-1 5/12/2016 ND 3.35 3.35 ND 18.39
(cont)8/17/2016 ND 3.98 3.98 ND 17.76
11/21/2016 ND 3.78 3.78 ND 17.96
2/3/2017 ND 3.27 3.27 ND 18.47
5/1/2017 ND 2.95 2.95 ND 18.79
9/1/2017 ND 1.40 1.40 ND 20.34
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 10 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE10/19/2017 ND 3.70 3.70 ND 18.04
2/26/2018 ND 2.63 2.63 ND 19.11
5/11/2018 ND 2.92 2.92 ND 18.82
8/1/2018 ND 1.15 1.15 ND 20.59
11/13/2018 ND 0.83 0.83 ND 20.91
2/13/2019 ND 1.52 1.52 ND 20.22
4/18/2019 ND 2.15 2.15 ND 19.59
8/12/2019 ND 3.88 3.88 ND 17.86
10/30/2019 3.5 3.60 3.51 0.10 18.23
2/28/2020 ND 1.85 1.85 ND 19.89
7/31/2020 ND 2.01 2.01 ND 19.73
10/28/2020 2.32 2.37 2.33 0.05 19.41
2/26/2021 ND 1.51 1.51 ND 20.23
5/21/2021 ND 4.46 4.46 ND 17.28
8/27/2021 ND 2.36 2.36 ND 19.38
10/22/2021 ND 3.65 3.65 ND 18.09
2/7/2022 ND 3.60 3.60 ND 18.14
5/4/2022 ND 4.70 4.70 ND 17.04
8/8/2022 ND 3.72 3.72 ND 18.02
11/14/2022 ND 5.30 5.30 ND 16.44
RW-2 1/28/2002 23.1 22.92 24.2 10.55 10.56 10.55 0.01 12.37
4/15/2002 ND 8.51 8.51 ND 14.41
8/23/2002 ND 10.19 10.19 ND 12.73
9/17/2003 SHEEN 5.61 5.61 SHEEN 17.31
12/9/2003 ND 5.39 5.39 ND 17.53
2/10/2004 SHEEN 5.55 5.55 SHEEN 17.37
6/21/2004 ND 7.06 7.06 ND 15.86
7/24/2006 ND 7.40 7.40 ND 15.52
8/31/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
10/19/2006 NM NM NM NM NM
2/8/2007 ND 4.66 4.66 ND 18.26
8/13/2007 ND 8.51 8.51 ND 14.41
9/26/2007 ND 8.95 8.95 ND 13.97
12/20/2007 ND 10.45 10.45 ND 12.47
2/28/2008 ND 8.25 8.25 ND 14.67
8/14/2008 ND 7.51 7.51 ND 15.41
2/10/2009 ND 6.65 6.65 ND 16.27
9/8/2009 ND 6.35 6.35 ND 16.57
5/17/2010 ND 6.65 6.65 ND 16.27
8/5/2010 ND 6.91 6.91 ND 16.01
12/8/2010 ND 6.17 6.17 ND 16.75
3/11/2011 ND 4.53 4.53 ND 18.39
6/10/2011 ND 7.65 7.65 ND 15.27
8/23/2011 ND 8.50 8.50 ND 14.42
RW-2 11/14/2011 ND 6.20 6.20 ND 16.72
(cont)2/13/2012 ND 7.68 7.68 ND 15.24
5/25/2012 ND 7.32 7.32 ND 15.60
8/30/2012 ND 5.50 5.50 ND 17.42
10/31/2012 ND 6.03 6.03 ND 16.89
2/6/2013 ND 5.55 5.55 ND 17.37
5/29/2013 ND 6.05 6.05 ND 16.87
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 11 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE8/29/2013 ND 4.42 4.42 ND 18.50
11/8/2013 ND 5.25 5.25 ND 17.67
2/28/2014 ND 4.75 4.75 ND 18.17
4/22/2014 ND 3.10 3.10 ND 19.82
8/12/2014 ND 3.10 3.10 ND 19.82
11/6/2014 ND 5.30 5.30 ND 17.62
2/6/2015 ND 3.45 3.45 ND 19.47
5/27/2015 ND 4.90 4.90 ND 18.02
8/10/2015 ND 5.65 5.65 ND 17.27
11/11/2015 ND 2.85 2.85 ND 20.07
2/8/2016 ND 2.15 2.15 ND 20.77
MW-2 1/28/2002 23.24 25.53 17.5 NA 12.28 12.28 NA 13.25
4/15/2002 NA 9.94 9.94 NA 15.59
8/23/2002 NA 11.40 11.40 NA 14.13
9/17/2003 NA 7.30 7.30 NA 18.23
12/9/2003 NA 7.29 7.29 NA 18.24
2/10/2004 NA 7.15 7.15 NA 18.38
6/21/2004 NA 8.75 8.75 NA 16.78
7/24/2006 NA 8.88 8.88 NA 16.65
8/31/2006 NA 8.54 8.54 NA 16.99
10/19/2006 NA 7.44 7.44 NA 18.09
2/8/2007 NA 6.44 6.44 NA 19.09
8/13/2007 NA 10.40 10.40 NA 15.13
9/26/2007 NA 10.78 10.78 NA 14.75
12/20/2007 NA 12.32 12.32 NA 13.21
2/28/2008 NA 8.56 8.56 NA 16.97
8/14/2008 NA 8.85 8.85 NA 16.68
2/10/2009 NA 6.65 6.65 NA 18.94
9/8/2009 NA 7.90 7.90 NA 17.63
5/17/2010 NA 8.55 8.55 NA 16.98
8/5/2010 NA 8.55 8.55 NA 16.98
12/8/2010 NA 8.25 8.25 NA 17.28
3/11/2011 NA 5.85 5.85 NA 19.68
6/10/2011 NA 9.21 9.21 NA 16.32
8/23/2011 NA 10.20 10.20 NA 15.33
11/14/2011 NA 7.99 7.99 NA 17.54
2/13/2012 NA 9.25 9.25 NA 16.28
5/25/2012 NA 9.02 9.02 NA 16.51
8/30/2012 NA 6.05 6.05 NA 19.48
10/31/2012 NA 7.47 7.47 NA 18.06
2/6/2013 NA 7.40 7.40 NA 18.13
MW-2 5/29/2013 NA 7.88 7.88 NA 17.65
(cont)8/29/2013 NA 6.40 6.40 NA 19.13
11/8/2013 NA 7.00 7.00 NA 18.53
2/28/2014 NA 6.58 6.58 NA 18.95
MW-3 1/28/2002 23.23 25.61 NM NA 11.86 11.86 NA 13.75
4/15/2002 NA 9.81 9.81 NA 15.80
8/23/2002 NA 11.33 11.33 NA 14.28
WELLS SCREENED IN SHALLOW SAND/CLAY ZONE
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Well Abandoned 2/8/2016
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 12 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE9/17/2003 NA 6.16 6.16 NA 19.45
12/9/2003 NA 6.50 6.50 NA 19.11
2/10/2004 NA 6.05 6.05 NA 19.56
6/21/2004 NA 7.18 7.18 NA 18.43
7/24/2006 NA 7.28 7.28 NA 18.33
8/31/2006 NA 6.86 6.86 NA 18.75
10/19/2006 NA 6.21 6.21 NA 19.40
2/8/2007 NA 5.62 5.62 NA 19.99
8/13/2007 NA 8.31 8.31 NA 17.30
9/26/2007 NA 9.21 9.21 NA 16.40
12/20/2007 NA 10.85 10.85 NA 14.76
2/28/2008 NA 7.68 7.68 NA 17.93
8/14/2008 NA 6.55 6.55 NA 19.06
2/10/2009 NA 6.95 6.95 NA 18.66
9/8/2009 NA 4.58 4.58 NA 21.03
5/17/2010 NA 6.62 6.62 NA 18.99
8/5/2010 NA 7.30 7.30 NA 18.31
12/8/2010 NA 7.65 7.65 NA 17.96
3/11/2011 NA 5.46 5.46 NA 20.15
6/10/2011 NA 7.46 7.46 NA 18.15
8/23/2011 NA 5.97 5.97 NA 19.64
11/14/2011 NA 7.20 7.20 NA 18.41
2/13/2012 NA 8.38 8.38 NA 17.23
5/25/2012 NA 6.80 6.80 NA 18.81
8/30/2012 NA 3.75 3.75 NA 21.86
10/31/2012 NA 6.76 6.76 NA 18.85
2/6/2013 NA 6.51 6.51 NA 19.10
5/29/2013 NA 6.42 6.42 NA 19.19
8/29/2013 NA 5.22 5.22 NA 20.39
11/8/2013 NA 6.18 6.18 NA 19.43
2/28/2014 NA 5.30 5.30 NA 20.31
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 13 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONEMW-4 1/28/2002 22.72 24.95 17.1 NA 12.39 12.39 NA 12.56
4/15/2002 NA 10.40 10.40 NA 14.55
8/23/2002 NA 12.07 12.07 NA 12.88
9/17/2003 NA 7.47 7.47 NA 17.48
12/9/2003 NA 7.31 7.31 NA 17.64
2/10/2004 NA 7.29 7.29 NA 17.66
6/21/2004 NA 8.87 8.87 NA 16.08
7/24/2006 NA 8.92 8.92 NA 16.03
8/31/2006 NA 8.80 8.80 NA 16.15
10/19/2006 NA 7.41 7.41 NA 17.54
2/8/2007 NA 6.20 6.20 NA 18.75
8/13/2007 NA 10.45 10.45 NA 14.50
9/26/2007 NA 10.83 10.83 NA 14.12
12/20/2007 NA 12.42 12.42 NA 12.53
2/28/2008 NA 10.02 10.02 NA 14.93
8/14/2008 NA 9.28 9.28 NA 15.67
2/10/2009 NA 8.38 8.38 NA 16.57
9/8/2009 NA 8.01 8.01 NA 16.94
5/17/2010 NA 8.40 8.40 NA 16.55
8/5/2010 NA 8.47 8.47 NA 16.48
12/8/2010 NA 7.92 7.92 NA 17.03
3/11/2011 NA 6.02 6.02 NA 18.93
6/10/2011 NA 9.13 9.13 NA 15.82
8/23/2011 NA 10.23 10.23 NA 14.72
11/14/2011 NA 7.81 7.81 NA 17.14
2/13/2012 NA 9.38 9.38 NA 15.57
5/25/2012 NA 9.05 9.05 NA 15.90
8/30/2012 NA 6.95 6.95 NA 18.00
10/31/2012 NA 7.57 7.57 NA 17.38
2/6/2013 NA 8.99 8.99 NA 15.96
5/29/2013 NA 7.60 7.60 NA 17.35
8/29/2013 NA 5.95 5.95 NA 19.00
11/8/2013 NA 6.44 6.44 NA 18.51
2/28/2014 NA 6.22 6.22 NA 18.73
TW-1 1/28/2002 22.84 24.83 16.8 12.49 12.57 12.50 0.08 12.33
4/15/2002 ND 10.35 10.35 ND 14.48
8/23/2002 ND 12.11 12.11 ND 12.72
9/17/2003 ND 7.37 7.37 ND 17.46
12/9/2003 SHEEN 7.26 7.26 SHEEN 17.57
2/10/2004 SHEEN 7.33 7.33 SHEEN 17.50
6/21/2004 8.85 9.02 8.87 0.17 15.96
7/24/2006 9.23 9.28 9.24 0.05 15.59
8/31/2006 8.92 8.95 8.92 0.03 15.91
10/19/2006 ND 7.50 7.50 ND 17.33
2/8/2007 ND 6.46 6.46 ND 18.37
8/13/2007 10.35 10.86 10.41 0.51 14.42
9/26/2007 ND 10.82 10.82 ND 14.01
12/20/2007 ND 12.35 12.35 ND 12.48
2/28/2008 ND 10.10 10.10 ND 14.73
TW-1 8/14/2008 ND 9.35 9.35 ND 15.48
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 14 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE(cont)2/10/2009 ND 8.48 8.48 ND 16.35
9/8/2009 SHEEN 8.20 8.20 SHEEN 16.63
5/17/2010 ND 8.46 8.46 ND 16.37
8/5/2010 ND 8.75 8.75 ND 16.08
12/8/2010 ND 8.02 8.02 ND 16.81
3/11/2011 ND 6.31 6.31 ND 18.52
6/10/2011 ND 9.45 9.45 ND 15.38
8/23/2011 ND 10.27 10.27 ND 14.56
11/14/2011 ND 8.02 8.02 ND 16.81
2/13/2012 ND 9.50 9.50 ND 15.33
5/25/2012 ND 9.12 9.12 ND 15.71
8/30/2012 ND 7.16 7.16 ND 17.67
10/31/2012 ND 7.86 7.86 ND 16.97
2/6/2013 ND 7.35 7.35 ND 17.48
5/29/2013 ND 7.85 7.85 ND 16.98
8/29/2013 ND 6.20 6.20 ND 18.63
11/8/2013 ND 6.94 6.94 ND 17.89
2/28/2014 ND 6.55 6.55 ND 18.28
4/22/2014 ND 4.80 4.80 ND 20.03
8/12/2014 ND 4.72 4.72 ND 20.11
11/6/2014 ND 7.12 7.12 ND 17.71
2/6/2015 ND 5.18 5.18 ND 19.65
5/27/2015 ND 6.65 6.65 ND 18.18
8/10/2015 ND 7.50 7.50 ND 17.33
11/11/2015 ND 4.50 4.50 ND 20.33
2/8/2016 ND 3.68 3.68 ND 21.15
5/12/2016 ND 6.38 6.38 ND 18.45
8/17/2016 ND 7.00 7.00 ND 17.83
11/21/2016 ND 6.86 6.86 ND 17.97
2/3/2017 ND 6.37 6.37 ND 18.46
5/1/2017 ND 6.00 6.00 ND 18.83
9/1/2017 ND 4.37 4.37 ND 20.46
10/19/2017 ND 6.78 6.78 ND 18.05
2/26/2018 ND 5.72 5.72 ND 19.11
5/11/2018 ND 6.00 6.00 ND 18.83
8/1/2018 ND 4.10 4.10 ND 20.73
11/13/2018 ND 3.75 3.75 ND 21.08
2/13/2019 ND 4.59 4.59 ND 20.24
4/18/2019 ND 5.22 5.22 ND 19.61
8/12/2019 ND 6.70 6.70 ND 18.13
10/30/2019 ND 6.58 6.58 ND 18.25
2/28/2020 ND 4.90 4.90 ND 19.93
7/31/2020 ND 5.00 5.00 ND 19.83
10/28/2020 ND 5.35 5.35 ND 19.48
2/26/2021 ND 4.59 4.59 ND 20.24
5/21/2021 ND 7.50 7.50 ND 17.33
8/27/2021 ND 5.41 5.41 ND 19.42
10/22/2021 ND 6.65 6.65 ND 18.18
2/7/2022 ND 6.69 6.69 ND 18.14
TW-1 5/4/2022 ND 7.67 7.67 ND 17.16
(cont)8/8/2022 ND 6.75 6.75 ND 18.08
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 15 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE11/14/2022 ND 8.34 8.34 ND 16.49
TW-5 1/28/2002 22.75 25 17.6 12.23 12.25 12.23 0.02 12.77
4/15/2002 ND 10.48 10.48 ND 14.52
8/23/2002 ND 11.53 11.53 ND 13.47
9/17/2003 6.42 6.94 6.48 0.52 18.52
12/9/2003 6.54 6.67 6.56 0.13 18.44
2/10/2004 SHEEN 6.44 6.44 SHEEN 18.56
6/21/2004 7.9 8.04 7.92 0.14 17.08
7/24/2006 ND 8.15 8.15 ND 16.85
8/31/2006 ND 7.48 7.48 ND 17.52
10/19/2006 ND 6.22 6.22 ND 18.78
2/8/2007 ND 5.50 5.50 ND 19.50
8/13/2007 9.60 9.62 9.60 0.02 15.40
9/26/2007 ND 10.11 10.11 ND 14.89
12/20/2007 ND 12.06 12.06 ND 12.94
2/28/2008 ND 8.94 8.94 ND 16.06
8/14/2008 ND 7.91 7.91 ND 17.09
2/10/2009 ND 7.48 7.48 ND 7.48
9/8/2009 ND 5.21 5.21 ND 19.79
5/17/2010 ND 7.73 7.73 ND 17.27
8/5/2010 ND 7.90 7.90 ND 17.10
12/8/2010 ND 7.50 7.50 ND 17.50
3/11/2011 ND 5.03 5.03 ND 19.97
6/10/2011 ND 8.71 8.71 ND 16.29
8/23/2011 ND 9.46 9.46 ND 15.54
11/14/2011 ND 7.24 7.24 ND 17.76
2/13/2012 ND 8.78 8.78 ND 16.22
5/25/2012 ND 7.70 7.70 ND 17.30
8/30/2012 ND 4.11 4.11 ND 20.89
10/31/2012 ND 6.58 6.58 ND 18.42
2/6/2013 ND 6.68 6.68 ND 18.32
5/29/2013 ND 7.03 7.03 ND 17.97
8/29/2013 ND 5.35 5.35 ND 19.65
11/8/2013 ND 5.96 5.96 ND 19.04
2/28/2014 ND 5.61 5.61 ND 19.39
4/22/2014 ND 3.68 3.68 ND 21.32
8/12/2014 ND 3.50 3.50 ND 21.50
11/6/2014 ND 6.41 6.41 ND 18.59
2/6/2015 ND 4.05 4.05 ND 20.95
TW-6 1/28/2002 22.49 22.32 13.7 9.65 9.78 9.67 0.13 12.82
4/15/2002 ND 7.60 7.60 ND 14.89
8/23/2002 9.20 9.28 9.21 0.08 13.28
9/17/2003 NA 4.40 4.40 NA 18.09
12/9/2003 NA 4.44 4.44 NA 18.05
2/10/2004 NA 4.18 4.18 NA 18.31
6/21/2004 NA 5.54 5.54 NA 16.95
7/24/2006 NA 8.36 8.36 NA 14.13
TW-6 8/31/2006 NA 7.95 7.95 NA 14.54
(cont)10/19/2006 NA 6.49 6.49 NA 16.00
2/8/2007 NA 5.46 5.46 NA 17.03
Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 16 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE8/13/2007 NA 9.65 9.65 NA 12.84
9/26/2007 NA 10.11 10.11 NA 12.38
12/20/2007 NA 11.96 11.96 NA 10.53
2/28/2008 NA 8.78 8.78 NA 13.71
8/14/2008 NA 7.98 7.98 NA 14.51
2/10/2009 NA 7.50 7.50 NA 14.99
9/8/2009 NA 5.90 5.90 NA 16.59
5/17/2010 NA 6.30 6.30 NA 16.19
8/5/2010 NA 7.68 7.68 NA 14.81
12/8/2010 NA 7.30 7.30 NA 15.19
3/11/2011 NA 3.50 3.50 NA 18.99
6/10/2011 NA 8.70 8.70 NA 13.79
8/23/2011 NA 3.35 3.35 NA 19.14
11/14/2011 NA 7.40 7.40 NA 15.09
2/13/2012 NA 8.77 8.77 NA 13.72
5/25/2012 NA 7.11 7.11 NA 15.38
8/30/2012 NA 3.25 3.25 NA 19.24
10/31/2012 NA 6.50 6.50 NA 15.99
2/6/2013 NA 6.62 6.62 NA 15.87
5/29/2013 NA 7.18 7.18 NA 15.31
8/29/2013 NA 5.65 5.65 NA 16.67
TW-7 1/28/2002 22.93 23.01 18.0 NA NA NA NA NA
4/15/2002 NA NA NA NA NA
8/23/2002 NM 10.23 10.23 NA 12.70
9/17/2003 NA 5.59 5.59 NA 17.34
12/9/2003 NA 5.50 5.50 NA 17.43
2/10/2004 NA 5.50 5.50 NA 17.43
6/21/2004 NA NM NM NA NM
7/24/2006 NA 10.94 10.94 NA 11.99
8/31/2006 NA 7.84 7.84 NA 15.09
10/19/2006 NA 6.43 6.43 NA 16.50
2/8/2007 NA 5.35 5.35 NA 17.58
8/13/2007 NA 9.35 9.35 NA 13.58
9/26/2007 NA 9.75 9.75 NA 13.18
12/20/2007 NA 11.26 11.26 NA 11.67
2/28/2008 NA 9.00 9.00 NA 13.93
8/14/2008 NA 8.25 8.25 NA 14.68
2/10/2009 NA 7.35 7.35 NA 15.58
9/8/2009 NA 7.05 7.05 NA 15.88
5/17/2010 NA 7.38 7.38 NA 15.55
8/5/2010 NA 7.65 7.65 NA 15.28
12/8/2010 NA 6.94 6.94 NA 15.99
3/11/2011 NA 4.98 4.98 NA 17.95
6/10/2011 NA 8.35 8.35 NA 14.58
8/23/2011 NA 9.25 9.25 NA 13.68
11/14/2011 NA 6.95 6.95 NA 15.98
TW-7 2/13/2012 NA 8.44 8.44 NA 14.49
(cont)5/25/2012 NA 8.06 8.06 NA 14.87
8/30/2012 NA 6.13 6.13 NA 16.80
10/31/2012 NA 6.75 6.75 NA 16.18
Well Abandoned 8/29/2013
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 17 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE2/6/2013 NA 6.25 6.25 NA 16.68
5/29/2013 NA 6.75 6.75 NA 16.18
8/29/2013 NA 5.05 5.05 NA 17.88
TW-8 1/28/2002 23.15 23.12 NM NA 10.84 10.84 NA 12.31
4/15/2002 NA 8.80 8.80 NA 14.35
8/23/2002 NA 10.50 10.50 NA 12.65
9/17/2003 NA 5.75 5.75 NA 17.40
12/9/2003 NA 5.63 5.63 NA 17.52
2/10/2004 NA 5.65 5.65 NA 17.50
6/21/2004 NA NM NM NA NM
7/24/2006 NA 10.82 10.82 NA 12.33
8/31/2006 NA 10.48 10.48 NA 12.67
10/19/2006 NA 9.04 9.04 NA 14.11
2/8/2007 NA 8.05 8.05 NA 15.10
8/13/2007 NA 11.97 11.97 NA 11.18
9/26/2007 NA 12.38 12.38 NA 10.77
12/20/2007 NA 13.88 13.88 NA 9.27
2/28/2008 NA 11.66 11.66 NA 11.49
8/14/2008 NA 10.92 10.92 NA 12.23
2/10/2009 NA 10.05 10.05 NA 13.10
9/8/2009 NA 9.73 9.73 NA 13.42
5/17/2010 NA 10.06 10.06 NA 13.09
8/5/2010 NA 10.32 10.32 NA 12.83
12/8/2010 NA 9.60 9.60 NA 13.55
3/11/2011 NA 7.90 7.90 NA 15.25
6/10/2011 NA 11.05 11.05 NA 12.10
8/23/2011 NA 11.90 11.90 NA 11.25
11/14/2011 NA 9.58 9.58 NA 13.57
2/13/2012 NA 11.10 11.10 NA 12.05
5/25/2012 NA 10.71 10.71 NA 12.44
8/30/2012 NA 8.89 8.89 NA 14.26
10/31/2012 NA 9.41 9.41 NA 13.74
2/6/2013 NA 8.97 8.97 NA 14.18
5/29/2013 NA 9.45 9.45 NA 13.70
8/29/2013 NA 7.80 7.80 NA 15.35
RW-3 1/28/2002 22.68 24.82 17.1 NA 12.04 12.04 NA 12.78
4/15/2002 NA 9.81 9.81 NA 15.01
8/23/2002 NA 11.35 11.35 NA 13.47
9/17/2003 NA 6.15 6.15 NA 18.67
12/9/2003 NA 6.25 6.25 NA 18.57
2/10/2004 NA 6.29 6.29 NA 18.53
6/21/2004 NA 7.83 7.83 NA 16.99
7/24/2006 NA 8.02 8.02 NA 16.80
8/31/2006 NA 7.35 7.35 NA 17.47
RW-3 10/19/2006 NA 5.03 5.03 NA 19.79
(cont)2/8/2007 NA 5.18 5.18 NA 19.64
8/13/2007 NA 8.90 8.90 NA 15.92
9/26/2007 NA 9.58 9.58 NA 15.24
12/20/2007 NA 11.35 11.35 NA 13.47
Well Abandoned 8/29/2013
Well Abandoned 8/29/2013
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 18 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE2/28/2008 NA 8.36 8.36 NA 16.46
8/14/2008 NA 5.45 5.45 NA 19.37
2/10/2009 NA 7.36 7.36 NA 17.46
9/8/2009 NA 3.68 3.68 NA 21.14
5/17/2010 NA 6.05 6.05 NA 18.77
8/5/2010 NA 7.80 7.80 NA 17.02
12/8/2010 NA 7.20 7.20 NA 17.62
3/11/2011 NA 4.63 4.63 NA 20.19
6/10/2011 NA 8.55 8.55 NA 16.27
8/23/2011 NA 6.65 6.65 NA 18.17
11/14/2011 NA 7.12 7.12 NA 17.70
2/13/2012 NA 8.57 8.57 NA 16.25
5/25/2012 NA 7.65 7.65 NA 17.17
8/30/2012 NA 3.55 3.55 NA 21.27
10/31/2012 NA 5.80 5.80 NA 19.02
2/6/2013 NA 6.35 6.35 NA 18.47
5/29/2013 NA 6.83 6.83 NA 17.99
8/29/2013 NA 5.22 5.22 NA 19.60
11/8/2013 NA 5.30 5.30 NA 19.52
2/28/2014 NA 5.40 5.40 NA 19.42
P-1 1/28/2002 22.72 24.91 NM NM 9.77 9.77 NA 15.14
4/15/2002 NM NM NA NA NM
8/23/2002 NM NM NA NA NM
9/17/2003 NM 5.72 5.72 NA 19.19
12/9/2003 NM NM NA NA NM
2/10/2004 NM NM NM NM NM
6/21/2004 NA 7.13 7.13 NM 17.78
7/24/2006 NA 7.34 7.34 NA 17.57
8/31/2006 NA 6.28 6.28 NA 18.63
10/19/2006 NA 4.69 4.69 NA 20.22
2/8/2007 NA 5.05 5.05 NA 19.86
8/13/2007 NA 8.13 8.13 NA 16.78
9/26/2007 NA 8.31 8.31 NA 16.60
12/20/2007 NA 9.51 9.51 NA 15.40
2/28/2008 NA 6.16 6.16 NA 18.75
8/14/2008 NA 6.29 6.29 NA 18.62
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 19 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Date
Sampled
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft amsl)
TOC
Elevation
(ft amsl)
Depth to
Bottom
(ft btoc)
Depth to
LNAPL
(ft btoc)
Depth to
Water
(ft btoc)
Corrected
Depth to
Water(1)
(ft btoc)
Apparent
LNAPL
Thickness (ft)
Water Level
Elevation
(ft amsl)
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONEP-1 2/10/2009 NA 6.10 6.10 NA 18.81
(cont)9/8/2009 NA 4.55 4.55 NA 20.36
Notes:
(1) Corrected Depth to Water = Depth to Water - (0.88 x product thickness), where 0.88 is the density of the product
(2) Product thickness was measured within 24 hours of removal of the absorbent socks.
ft Feet
BTOC Below top of casing.
TOC Top of casing
AMSL Above mean sea level
LNAPL Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid
NA Not applicable.
NM Not measured.
ND Not detected
MW-10, MW-12, TW-2, TW-3, TW-4, and P-2 are not included due to lack of historical data for these wells.
Groundwater elevation for wells TW- 6,- 7,- 8 was calculated by subtracting the corrected depth to water from the ground surface elevation.
Well Abandoned 11/30/2009
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 20 of 20
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
MW-11 TW-1 TW-5
4/25/2006 AFVR performed on well AFVR performed on well AFVR performed on well
7/26/2006 AFVR performed on well AFVR performed on well --
10/19/2006 AFVR performed on well ----
12/2006*AFVR performed on well ----
8/14/2007 Placed sock in well Placed sock in well Placed sock in well
9/26/2007 50% Full 50% Full 50% Full
12/20/2007 Noticeable LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed Noticeable LNAPL Observed
2/28/2008 100% Full 25% Full 25% Full
8/14/2008 100% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
2/10/2009 50% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
5/14/2009 75% Full 25% Full No LNAPL Observed
9/8/2009 100% Full 25% Full No LNAPL Observed
11/30/2009 50% Full 25% Full No LNAPL Observed
3/25/2010 50% Full 25% Full 12.5% Full
5/17/2010 100% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
6/1/2010 25% Full ----
8/1/2010 50% Full No LNAPL Observed 25% Full
12/1/2010 75% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
3/11/2011 50% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
6/10/2011 50% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
8/23/2011 33% Full No LNAPL Observed No LNAPL Observed
11/14/2011 100% Full No LNAPL Observed*No LNAPL Observed*
2/13/2011 100% Full No LNAPL Observed*No LNAPL Observed*
5/25/2011 100% Full No LNAPL Observed*No LNAPL Observed*
8/30/2011 100% Full No LNAPL Observed*No LNAPL Observed*
11/14/2011 100% Full
2/13/2012 100% Full
5/25/2012 100% Full
8/30/2012 100% Full
10/31/2012 75% Full
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Date Well ID
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 3
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
MW-11 TW-1 TW-5DateWell ID
2/6/2013 50% Full
5/29/2013 100% Full
8/29/2013 NA*
11/8/2013 100% Full, AFVR performed on well
2/28/2014 NA**
4/22/2014 NA*
8/12/2014 NA**
11/6/2014 NA**; AFVR performed on well
2/6/2015 NA**; Removed approximately 200 mL of LNAPL Absorbent sock no longer used in well Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
5/27/2015 NA**; AFVR performed on well Absorbent sock no longer used in well Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
8/10/2015 NA**; Removed approximately 750 mL of LNAPL Absorbent sock no longer used in well Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
11/11/2015 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
2/8/2016 Removed approximately 1.0 L of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
5/12/2016 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
8/17/2016 Remove approximately 1.2 L of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
11/21/2016 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
2/3/2017 Removed approximately 800 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
5/1/2017 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
9/1/2017 Removed approximately 1.0 L of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
10/19/2017 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
2/26/2018 Removed approximately 1.0 L of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
5/11/2018 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
8/1/2018 Removed approximately 100 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
11/13/2018 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Discontinue use of absorbent socks
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Absorbent sock no longer used in wells
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 2 of 3
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
MW-11 TW-1 TW-5DateWell ID
2/13/2019 Removed approximately 50 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
4/18/2019 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
8/12/2019 Removed approximately 0.25 gallons of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
10/30/2019 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
2/28/2020 Removed approximately 70 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
7/31/2020 Removed approximately 600 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
10/28/2020 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
2/26/2021 Removed approximately 200 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
5/21/2021 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
8/27/2021 Removed approximately 400 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
10/22/2021 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
2/7/2022 Removed approximately 200 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
5/4/2022 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
8/8/2022 Removed approximately 300 mL of LNAPL No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
11/14/2022 AFVR performed on well No LNAPL Observed Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
Notes:
-- LNAPL recovery methods not performed
** Exact date unknown
AFVR Aggressive fluid-vapor recovery
mL Milliliter
L Liter
LNAPL Light non-aqueous phase liquid
NA** Absorbent sock not replaced in previous round to monitor presence of LNAPL in well.
NA* Absorbent sock was submerged in well due to high groundwater elevations during the groundwater sampling event, therefore no LNAPL was
absorbed by the sock.
* Oil-absorbent socks were removed from TW-1 and TW-5 during the August 2011 groundwater sampling event. These wells were added to
the groundwater sampling list and were gauged quarterly using an electronic water/oil interface probe.
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 3 of 3
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Date Well ID Water Removed
(gallons)
Product Removed
(gallons)Vendor
4/25/2006 MW-11, RW-1, TW-1,
TW-5, TW-6, RW-2 1,475 0.65 Fruits and Associates
7/26/2006 MW-11, TW-1 6,500 9.5 A&D Environmental
10/19/2006 MW-11 6,900 19.5 A&D Environmental
12/2006*MW-11 7,031 8 A&D Environmental
11/8/2013 MW-11 4,000 ND 3R of Charleston
8/13/2014 RW-1 3,500 ND A&D Environmental
11/6/2014 MW-11 2,591 ND A&D Environmental
5/27/2015 MW-11, RW-1 5,777 ND A&D Environmental
11/11/2015 MW-11 2,966 ND A&D Environmental
5/12/2016 MW-11, RW-1 5,283 ND A&D Environmental
11/21/2016 MW-11 2,981 ND A&D Environmental
5/1/2017 MW-11, RW-1 5,796 ND A&D Environmental
10/19/2017 MW-11 2,819 ND A&D Environmental
5/11/2018 MW-11, RW-1 6,006 ND A&D Environmental
11/13/2018 MW-11 2,889 ND Herr, Inc.
4/18/2019 MW-11, RW-1 5,329 ND Herr, Inc.
10/30/2019 MW-11, RW-1 2,600 ND Herr, Inc.
10/28/2020 MW-11, RW-1 6,000 ND Herr, Inc.
5/21/2021 MW-11, RW-1 6,795 ND Herr, Inc.
10/22/2021 MW-11, RW-1 6,584 ND Herr, Inc.
5/4/2022 MW-11, RW-1 6,500 ND Herr, Inc.
11/14/2022 MW-11, RW-1 6,250 ND Herr, Inc.
Notes:
ND Not determined
* Exact date unknown
AFVR Aggressive fluid-vapor recovery
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 1
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Depth to
LNAPL
(feet btoc)
Depth to
Water
(feet btoc)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet amsl)
Depth to
LNAPL
(feet btoc)
Depth to
Water
(feet btoc)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet amsl)
Depth to
LNAPL
(feet btoc)
Depth to
Water
(feet btoc)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet amsl)
Depth to
LNAPL
(feet btoc)
Depth to
Water
(feet btoc)
Groundwater
Elevation
(feet amsl)
MW-1 25.59
MW-5*27.46
MW-6 25.18
MW-7 26.36
MW-8 24.20
MW-9 23.71
MW-11(1)25.09 6.91 7.04 18.16 8.02 8.14 17.06 7.09 7.29 17.98 8.6 8.89 16.46
MW-13*24.53
MW-14 25.43 ---7.28 18.15 ---8.40 17.03 ---7.45 17.98 ---8.97 16.46
MW-15 26.17 ---7.99 18.18 ---9.12 17.05 ---8.19 17.98 ---9.73 16.44
TW-9 23.94
RW-1 21.74 ---3.60 18.14 ---4.70 17.04 ---3.72 18.02 ---5.30 16.44
RW-2 22.92
MW-2 25.53
MW-3 25.61
MW-4 24.95
TW-1 24.83 ---6.69 18.14 ---7.67 17.16 ---6.75 18.08 ---8.34 16.49
TW-3 21.66 ---NA NA ---NA NA ---NA NA ---NA NA
TW-4 20.40 ---NA NA ---NA NA ---NA NA ---NA NA
TW-5 25.00
TW-6(2) *22.49
TW-7(2) *22.93
TW-8(2) *23.15
RW-3 24.82
P-1 24.91
Notes:
LNAPL Light non-aqueous phase liquid
NM Not measured.
NA Not available / not applicable.
btoc Below top of casing.
amsl Above mean sea level.
--- No LNAPL observed
* casing of well damaged above ground.
(1) Groundwater elevation corrected for LNAPL thickness effect. Corrected Depth to Water = Depth to Water - (0.88 x LNAPL thickness), where 0.88 is the density of the LNAPL.
(2) Water level elevation for wells TW-6, -7, -8 were calculated using the ground surface elevation as measuring point instead of top-of-casing.
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONEDWELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED
Top of
Casing
Elevation
(feet amsl)2/7/2022 5/4/2022 11/14/2022
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
8/8/2022
Monitoring
Wells
WELLS SCREENED IN SHALLOW SAND/CLAY ZONE
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONEDWELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONEDWELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONEDWELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONEDWELL ABANDONED
WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONED WELL ABANDONEDWELL ABANDONED
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 1
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Sample ID MW-14 (1)MW-15 (2)TW-1 RW-1
Total Well Depth (ft BTOC)30.22 25.92 16.62 28.50
Depth to Water (ft BTOC)7.45 8.19 6.75 3.72
Height Water Column (ft)22.77 17.73 9.87 24.78
Well Diameter (inches)2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
One Casing Volume (gal)3.64 2.84 1.58 16.35
Three Volumes (gal)10.93 8.51 4.74 49.06
Actual Purge Volume (gal)10.9 8.51 4.74 52.5
Date Sampled 8/8/2022 8/8/2022 8/8/2022 8/8/2022
Time Sampled 1125 1200 1230 1340
Purge Method Bailer Bailer Bailer Geosub
Pump/Bailer
Sampling Method Bailer Bailer Bailer Bailer
Field Parameters
pH 6.77 6.84 7.02 6.78
Specific Conductance (mS/cm)0.764 0.815 0.834 0.696
Temperature (C°)20.6 21.2 22.1 20.9
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)0.54 0.77 0.60 0.46
ORP (mV)-47.1 -37.5 -153.5 -84.1
Turbidity (NTU)185 94.8 19.3 8.55
Notes:
BTOC Below top of casing.
ft feet
gal gallon
mS/cm Millisiemens per centimeter.
C Centigrade.
mg/L Milligrams per liter.
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units.
mV Millivolts.
(1) Matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate collected at MW-14.
(2) Duplicate Sample collected at MW-15.
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 1
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
MW-1(1) (2)14-24 West.2/1/1991 1.9 0.3 ---4.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ---NA NA
West.3/1/1991 ------------12.7 15.2 ---NA ---58.6 NA ---6.1 ---NA NA
West.2/4/1992 NA NA NA NA 12 35 ---NA ---78 NA 19 ------NA NA
Unknown 4/25/1994 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995 ------------0.8 ------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ------------1.6 ------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/25/2006 <2.0 <10 <2.0 <4.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA NA
MW-5 15-25 West.8/16/1991 NA NA NA NA ---------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/9/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
MW-6 13.5-23.5 West.8/16/1991 NA NA NA NA ---------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ---------3 ------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/24/2006 <2.0 <10 <2.0 <4.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA NA
Arcadis 2/28/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Well Abandoned 11/30/2009
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
MW-7 14-24 West.8/16/1991 NA NA NA NA ---------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
MW-8 12-22 West.2/4/1992 NA NA NA NA ---------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
MW-9 12-22 West.2/4/1992 NA NA NA NA ---------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---20.6 ---------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/24/2006 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA NA
Arcadis 2/28/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5
MW-11 (1) (2)12-22 S&ME 10/3/1995
S&ME 6/13/1996 ------------58 136 9.3 NA ---23 NA 258 100 ---NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------3 ---------------------NA ---15 ---NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002
Arcadis BBL 2/8/2007
Arcadis BBL 8/13/2007
Arcadis 2/11/2009
Arcadis 9/8/2009
Arcadis 8/5/2010
Arcadis 8/23/2011
Arcadis 8/30/2012
Arcadis 8/29/2013
FREE PRODUCT OBSERVED IN ABSORBENT SOCK
FREE PRODUCT = 0.02 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT OBSERVED IN ABSORBENT SOCK
FREE PRODUCT = 0.01 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
FREE PRODUCT = 0.05 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.24 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 1.1 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.69 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.15 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.71 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 2 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
MW-11 (1) (2)Arcadis 8/12/2014
(cont)Arcadis 8/10/2015
Arcadis 8/17/2016
Arcadis 9/1/2017
Arcadis 8/1/2018
Arcadis 8/12/2019
Arcadis 7/31/2020
Arcadis 8/27/2021
Arcadis 8/8/2022
MW-13 12-22 S&ME 10/3/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
MW-14 22.5-26.5 Kogut 2/5/1997 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/25/2006 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/14/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA NA
Arcadis 2/28/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 17 <9.3
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 19 <9.3
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 10 <9.5
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 49 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 4.5 J <28 <28 <28 <28 3.8 <28 <28 1.4 J <28 45 0.71 J
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 27 <11
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 38 <9.5
Arcadis 8/12/2014 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]72 [66]<11 [<11]
Arcadis 8/10/2015 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Arcadis 8/17/2016 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 81 <10
Arcadis 9/1/2017 NA NA NA NA <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 83 <11
Arcadis 8/1/2018 NA NA NA NA <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 76 <11
Arcadis 8/12/2019 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 36 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Arcadis 7/31/2020 NA NA NA NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5
Arcadis 8/27/2021 NA NA NA NA <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 12 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8
Arcadis 8/8/2022 NA NA NA NA <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 F1 <9.9 F1 <9.9 F1 <9.9 F1 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 F1 <9.9 F1 <9.9 <9.9
Well Abandoned 11/30/2009
FREE PRODUCT = 0.30 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 1.27 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.20 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.35 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 1.15 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 0.87 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 1.78 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 2.17 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
FREE PRODUCT = 1.65 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 3 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
MW-15 22-24.5 Kogut 2/5/1997 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/25/2006 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 19 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/14/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 NA NA
Arcadis 2/29/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 NA <9.4 <9.4 NA <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 77 <9.4
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 71 <9.6
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 32 <9.8
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 86 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 83 <9.3
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 88 <11
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 82 <9.5
Arcadis 8/12/2014 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 86 <11
Arcadis 8/10/2015 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]130 [<10]<10 [<10]
Arcadis 8/17/2016 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 99 <10
Arcadis 9/1/2017 NA NA NA NA <9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]<9.6 [<9.7]72 [73]<9.6 [<9.7]
Arcadis 8/1/2018 NA NA NA NA <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 78 F1 <11
Arcadis 8/12/2019 NA NA NA NA <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 30 <11
Arcadis 7/31/2020 NA NA NA NA <9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]<9.9 [<9.8]12 [15]<9.9 [<9.8]
Arcadis 8/27/2021 NA NA NA NA <10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [12]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]<10 [<9.8]
Arcadis 8/8/2022 NA NA NA NA <10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]
RW-1 (1) (2)15-30 S&ME 10/3/1995
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---0.5 1.1 ---34.6 3.3 7.8 NA ---21.4 7.4 24 NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------4 15 14 ------------16 NA ---18 ---NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------51 ------------63 NA 47 150 ---NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 21 <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 50 <9.8 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/14/2007 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<2.0 [<2.0]120 [130]<93 [<93]20 J [22 J]NA 5.7 J [6.1 J]120 [130]NA <93 [22 J]270 [290]13 J [13 J]NA NA
Arcadis 2/29/2008 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<2.0 [<2.0]25 [14]<9.8 [<9.5]<9.8 [<9.5]NA <9.8 [<9.5]28 [18]NA <9.8 [<9.5]53 [35]<9.8 [<9.5]290 [200]330 [240]
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<2.0 [<2.0]16 [15]<9.8 [<9.3]<9.8 [<9.3]NA <9.8 [<9.3]21 [20]NA <9.8 [<9.3]37 [34]<9.8 [<9.3]200 [260]230 [290]
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]2.1 [<2.0]110 [160]<47 [<48]<47 [<48]<47 [<48]<47 [<48]130 [210]<47 [<48]<47 [<48]250 [450]<47 [<48]NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<2.0 [<2.0]<230 [63]<230 [<9.3]<230 [<9.3]<230 [<9.3]<230 [<9.3]<230 [66]<230 [<9.3]<230 [<9.3]310 [200]<230 [11]1,400 [850]2,000 [1,200]
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]8.3 [14]230 J [220 J]<260 [<260]<53 [<260]<53 [<260]11 J [8.4 J]<260 [230 J]<260 [<260]<260 [<260]450 [460]25 J [25 J]2,200 [2,100]3,000 [2,800]
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]2.4 [1.4]<5.0 [<5.0]170 [210]<47 [<47]<47 [<47]19 J [<47]21 J [10 J]220 [220]<47 [<47]<47 [<47]400 [370]25 J [21 J]1,800 [2,000]2,400 [2,700]
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 2.3 <5.0 200 <110 <110 <110 <110 <110 <110 <110 390 <110 1,500 2,000
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 9.2 380 87 120 180 <76 410 100 <76 1,000 <76 4,700 6,700
Arcadis 8/12/2014 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 35 <11 <11 <11 <11 30 <11 <11 63 <11 440 480
FREE PRODUCT = 0.01 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 4 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
RW-1 (1) (2)Arcadis 8/10/2015 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 56 <10 <10 <10 <10 78 <10 <10 150 <10 690 690
(cont)Arcadis 8/17/2016 NA NA NA NA 11 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]12 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]14 [<10]<10 [<10]80 [120]97 [43]
Arcadis 9/1/2017 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 89 <10
Arcadis 8/1/2018 NA NA NA NA <11 [<11]<11 [<11]36 [33]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<54 [<53]<54 [<53]140 [120]<11 [<11]430 [420]500 [480]
Arcadis 8/12/2019 NA NA NA NA <10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]<10 [<10]59 [54]21 [18]
Arcadis 7/31/2020 NA NA NA NA 470 <97 350 <97 <97 410 <97 <97 1,200 <97 3,500 5,700
Arcadis 8/27/2021 NA NA NA NA 87 <9.7 100 <9.6 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 320 <9.7 1,700 2,700
Arcadis 8/8/2022 NA NA NA NA <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 61 <9.4
RW-2 (1) (2)9.5-24.5 Unknown 4/24/1994 ---------3 ------------------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995 ------------2.1 4.3 ---NA ---8.6 NA 2.8 ------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---0.8 0.6 ---69.4 ---46.5 NA 2.2 32.1 NA 30.2 96.2 ---NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 23 24 14 74 ---------25 ------NA 69 15 ---NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 1.4 ------3.2 12 ------61 ---12 NA 8.4 5.9 ---NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/9/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 10 NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/14/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 11 J <46 0.76 J NA <46 <46 NA 2.6 J 1.4 J <46 NA NA
Arcadis 2/29/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 36 28
Arcadis 8/14/2008 1.2 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 ------<9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 NA <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 49 36
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 10 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 18 <9.3
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 11 <11 <11 <11 <11 15 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 10 J <94 <94 <94 <94 12 J <94 <94 <94 <94 4.0 J 2.8 J
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]<11 [<11]14 [18]<11 [12]
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<1.0 [<1.0]<5.0 [<5.0]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]13 [37]<9.5 [<12]10 [<12]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]<9.5 [<12]
Arcadis 8/12/2014 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 13 <11 <11 <11 <11 15 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/10/2015 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
TW-9 (2)20-25 S&ME 10/3/1995 1.2 ---7.8 1.6 2.8 4.9 ---NA ---5.6 NA 39.1 ------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---0.6 ------2.5 4.8 ---NA ---10.5 NA 4.7 2.8 ---NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/25/2006 <2.0 <10 <2.0 <4.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 11 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Well Abandoned 2/8/2016
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 5 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
MW-2 5-15 West.2/1/1991 ------------NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ---NA NA
West.3/1/1991 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Unknown 4/25/1994 ---1 ------------------------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ------NA 0.9 ------NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/24/2006 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
MW-3 5-15 West.2/1/1991 ------------NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ---NA NA
West.3/1/1991 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Unknown 4/25/1994 1 ------3 ------------------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995 ---------------------NA 1.7 ---NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/25/2006 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 49 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/9/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 NA NA
MW-4 5-15 West.2/1/1991 ------------NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ---NA NA
West.3/1/1991 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Unknown 4/25/1994 1 2 ---1 ------------------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/8/1995 ---------------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995 ---------------0.6 ---NA ------NA ---------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ------NA ---1.1 ---NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 7/24/2006 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
WELLS SCREENED IN SHALLOW SAND/CLAY ZONE
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 6 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
RW-3 (2)4.3-14.3 S&ME 6/8/1995 ------22.7 ------17.3 ---NA ------NA 152 6.8 ---NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995 1.1 ---16.6 2.5 3.6 27.2 1.7 NA 28.7 24.6 NA 29.5 ------NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 ------4 ---6.7 ------NA ------NA 3.8 ------NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/9/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
TW-1 (1) (2)5-15 S&ME 6/13/1996 ------19.5 ---13.9 9.4 ---NA 0.7 12.7 NA 9.2 5 ---NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ---------------------------130 NA ---310 ---NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/13/2007
Arcadis 2/29/2008 1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 18 <9.6 <9.6 NA <9.6 24 NA <9.6 52 <9.6 210 75
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 <5.0 1.4 <2.0 18 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 24 NA <9.5 51 <9.5 200 42
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 11 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 11 <9.4 <9.4 17 <9.4 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 2.1 <2.0 <250 <250 <250 <250 <250 <250 <250 <250 530 <250 1,300 310
Arcadis 8/5/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 25 <11 58 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 34 J <48 20 J <48 2.7 J 44 J <48 7.3 J 110 5.3 J 240 48
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 31 <9.5 19 <9.5 <9.5 35 13 <9.5 150 <9.5 310 20
Arcadis 8/12/2014 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 14 <11 <11 <11 <11 19 <11 <11 52 <11 72 <11
Arcadis 8/10/2015 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Arcadis 8/17/2016 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Arcadis 9/1/2017 NA NA NA NA <48 <48 <48 <9.6 <48 <48 <9.6 <9.6 120 <9.6 77 <9.6
Arcadis 8/1/2018 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 70 <10 98 15
Arcadis 8/12/2019 NA NA NA NA <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Arcadis 7/31/2020 NA NA NA NA <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 *<9.4 <9.4 18 *<9.4 *38 <9.4
Arcadis 8/27/2021 NA NA NA NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 62 <9.7 100 <9.7
Arcadis 8/8/2022 NA NA NA NA 16 <10 13 <10 <10 22 <10 <10 41 <10 70 <10
TW-3 (1)5-15 S&ME 6/8/1995 ---11.6 ---------------NA ------NA 1.4 0.8 ---NA NA
S&ME 10/3/1995
S&ME 6/13/1996 ------------18.9 11 0.6 NA 0.6 14.7 NA 11.9 11.8 ---NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
TW-4 (1)5-15 S&ME 6/13/1996 ------6.4 ------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Cannot Locate
FREE PRODUCT = 0.51 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Cannot Locate
Well Abandoned 4/21/2014
FREE PRODUCT = 0.29 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 7 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
TW-5 (1) (2)5-15 S&ME 6/8/1995 69.1 ---71.8 32 6.4 10.3 1.5 NA ---7.8 NA 283 4.5 ---NA NA
S&ME 6/13/1996 7.9 ---15.8 ------------NA ------NA ---------NA NA
Kogut 9/13/1998 ------------------------------NA ---------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ---NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/9/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 11 <9.5 <9.5 NA <9.5 14 NA <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/13/2007
Arcadis 8/5/2010
Arcadis 8/23/2011
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/29/2013 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5 <9.5
Arcadis 8/12/2014 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
TW-6 (1) (2)5-15 S&ME 6/13/1996 6.8 ---47 ------------NA ------NA 0.9 ------NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ------------57 ------------66 NA ---130 ---NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/9/2007 <1.0 <5.0 2.7 3.7 730 <190 <190 NA <190 1,900 NA <190 2,100 220 NA NA
Arcadis BBL 8/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 60 <28 <28 NA 14 J 100 NA 17 J <28 <28 NA NA
Arcadis 2/28/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 15 <9.9 <9.9 NA <9.9 18 NA <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9 <9.9
Arcadis 8/14/2008 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7
Arcadis 2/10/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <28 <28 <28 <28 <28 <28 <28 <28 <28 <28 NA NA
Arcadis 9/8/2009 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6 <9.6
Arcadis 8/11/2010 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
Arcadis 8/23/2011 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3 <9.3
Arcadis 8/30/2012 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11 <11
TW-7 4-14 S&ME 6/13/1996 ------0.9 ---11 36 ---NA ---33.8 NA 5.4 12.9 ---NA NA
BBL 1/28/2002 ---------------------25 ------NA ---------NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 NA NA
Well Abandoned 8/26/2013
Well Abandoned 8/26/2013
FREE PRODUCT = 0.02 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
Well Abandoned 2/6/2015
NO FREE PRODUCT OBSERVED IN ABSORBENT SOCK
FREE PRODUCT OBSERVED IN ABSORBENT SOCK
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 8 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID
MW Screen
Interval (ft
bgs)
Sampled By Date
Sampled
Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Fluoranthene Fluorene Isophorone Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 1-Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylnaphthalene1 600 600 500 80 200 2,000 3 300 300 40 6 200 200 1 30
5,000 260,000 80,000 50,000 1,950 8,000 2,000 135 300 845 NA 6,000 550 200 1,000 400,000
WELLS SCREENED IN CLAY, SHELL HASH, AND LIMESTONE
Concentrations (ug/L)
NC 2L STANDARDS
GROSS CONTAMINATION LEVEL
TW-8 4-14 S&ME 6/13/1996 ---------------------NA ---1.4 NA ---------NA NA
Arcadis BBL 2/12/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 NA <9.7 <9.7 <9.7 NA NA
P-1 NA Arcadis BBL 2/13/2007 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <2.0 <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 NA <9.8 <9.8 <9.8 NA NA
Notes:All concentrations are reported in units of micrograms per liter (ug/L).
Sampling analysis completed by method 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds.
Concentrations listed in bold are in exceedance of the NC 2L Standard.
Gray highlighting indicates that free product was present in a well during the corresponding sampling event.
(1) Well has historically contained light non-aqueous phase liquid (free product).
(2) Well has historically contained concentrations of BTEX and/or PAHs in excess of the North Carolina 2L Groundwater Quality Standards.
bgs below ground surface
ft feet
F1 MS and/or MSD Recovery is outside acceptance limits/exceeds control limits.J Result is less than the RL but greater than or equal to the MDL and the concentration is an approximate value.* Lab control sample (LCS) of lab control sample dup (LCSD) is outside acceptance limits.
NA Not analyzed/Not Available
--- Not detected, reporting limit unknown.
[ ] Duplicate sample
< Less than laboratory reporting limit.
GCL Gross Contamination Levels for Groundwater. Dated September 7, 2022 https://deq.nc.gov/media/28090/download?attachment
NC 2L Standards effective April 1, 2022 http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20l/15a%20ncac%2002l%20.0202.pdf
Well Abandoned 8/26/2013
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 9 of 9
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF LNAPL THICKNESS MEASUREMENTS IN MONITORING WELLS (1995 - 2022)
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
Well ID Sampled By Date Sampled Acenaphthene Anthracene Fluorene Phenanthrene 1-Methylnaphthalene
80 2,000 300 200 1
1,950 2,000 845 550 1,000
MW-11 (1) (2)Arcadis 8/8/2022
MW-14 Arcadis 8/8/2022 <9.9 <9.9 F1 <9.9 F1 <9.9 F1 <9.9
MW-15 Arcadis 8/8/2022 <10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]<10 [<9.9]
RW-1 (1) (2)Arcadis 8/8/2022 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 <9.4 61
TW-1 Arcadis 8/8/2022 16 13 22 41 70
Notes:
All concentrations are reported in units of micrograms per liter (mg/L).
Sampling analysis completed by method 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds.
Concentrations listed in bold are in exceedence of the NC 2L Standard.
Gray highlighting indicates that free product was present in a well during the corresponding sampling event.
(1) Well has historically contained light non-aqueous phase liquid (free product)..
(2) Well has historically contained concentrations of BTEX and/or PAHs in excess of the North Carolina 2L Groundwater Quality Standards.
* Lab control sample (LCS) of lab control sample dup (LCSD) is outside acceptance limits.
F1 MS and/or MSD Recovery is outside acceptance limits/exceeds control limits.
BTEX Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes.
PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
NA Not analyzed.
[ ] Duplicate sample
< Less than laboratory reporting limit.
GCL Gross Contamination Levels for Groundwater. Dated September 7, 2022 https://deq.nc.gov/media/28090/download?attachment
FREE PRODUCT = 0.20 FOOT APPARENT THICKNESS
NC 2L STANDARDS
Gross Contamination Level
NC 2L Standards effective April 1, 2022 http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20l/15a%20ncac%2002l%20.0202.pdf
Tables 1-9 2022 Edited AR Page 1 of 1

Figures

FIGURE1
SITE LOCATION MAP
I
0 2,000 4,000
Feet
CITY: LANSING DIV: ENV DB: D.AKENS PIC: PM: TM: TR: PROJECT NUMBER: COORDINATE SYSTEM: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina FIPS 3200 Feet C:\Users\akens\OneDrive - ARCADIS\BIM 360 Docs\Lafargeholcim\2018\b0025483.2017\01-DWG\SiteLocation.mxd PLOTTED: 12/1/2022 11:34:53 AM BY: AKENSAPPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF ROANOKE CEMENTWATER SUPPLY WELL
SITE LOCATION NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCE: Base Map Source USGS 7.5 Min. Topo. Quad., Scotts Hill, NC 1997 and Mooretown, NC 1997.
Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society,HOLCIM FORMER IDEAL CEMENT SITE CASTE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA LNAPL RECOVERY & GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - AUGUST 2022
SITE LOCATION
1500'
FIGURESITE MAPHOLCIM FORMER IDEAL CEMENT SITE CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA LNAPL RECOVERY & GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT - AUGUST 2022 2IMAGES: aerials.jpg Arcadis-Logo.pngXREFS: 25444X01 PROJECTNAME: ----CITY: SYRACUSE DIV/GROUP: ENV/CAD DB: ADF LAF KLS PIC:(Opt) PM:C.PETERS TM:C.PETERS LYR:(Opt)ON=*;OFF=*REF*C:\Users\akens\OneDrive - ARCADIS\BIM 360 Docs\Lafargeholcim\2018\b0025483.2017\01-DWG\25483B01.DWG LAYOUT: 2 SAVED: 12/1/2022 11:35 AM ACADVER: 24.0S (LMS TECH) PAGESETUP: ---- PLOTSTYLETABLE: PLTFULL.CTB PLOTTED: 12/1/2022 11:36 AM BY: AKENS, DAVID
FIGURE 3A
MW-11 LNAPL THICKNESS
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
Apparent LNAPL Thickness (feet)Corrected Depth to Water
Apparent LNAPL Thickness
DateCorrected Depth to Water (feetbtoc)
FIGURE 3B
MW-11 LNAPL THICKNESS COMPARISON TO TIME ELAPSED BETWEEN MEASUREMENTS
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Apparent LNAPL Thickness (feet)Time Elapsedbetween Measurements (days)
FIGURE 4
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION TREND GRAPH
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
MW-14
MW-15
RW-1
MW-11
TW-1
DateGroundwaterElevation (feet above mean sea level)Shallow Well
Deep Wells
FIGURE 5
TW-1 CONCENTRATION TREND GRAPH
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1-Methylnaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
DateConcentrations (ug/L)
FIGURE 6
RW-1 CONCENTRATION TREND GRAPH
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Acenaphthene and Phenanthrene Concentrations (ug/L) 1-Methylnaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Phenanthrene
Date1-Methylnaphthalene and 2-Methylnaphthalene Concentrations (ug/L)Start AFVR at RW-1
on 8/13/2014.
Performed during the
second quarter annually.
Start performing
AFVR biannually in
2019.
Second quarter
2020 AFVR
cancelled
due to COVID.
FIGURE 7
MW-14 CONCENTRATION TREND GRAPH
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1-Methylnaphthalene
DateConcentrations (ug/L)
FIGURE 8 MW-15 CONCENTRATION TREND GRAPH
HOLCIM
CASTLE HAYNE, NORTH CAROLINA
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1-Methylnaphthalene
DateConcentrations (ug/L)

Appendix A

Field Notes

Appendix B

Laboratory Analytical Reports and Chain-of-Custody Forms
ANALYTICAL REPORT
Eurofins Pensacola
3355 McLemore Drive
Pensacola, FL 32514
Tel: [phone]
Laboratory Job ID: 400-224157-1
Laboratory Sample Delivery Group: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Client Project/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Revision: 1
For:
ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
300 South Washington Square
Suite 315
Lansing, Michigan 48933
Attn: Amanda M Robinson
Authorized for release by:
8/25/2022 3:46:23 PM
Taylor Bruzzio, Project Manager I
[phone]
[e-mail]
The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC, 2009 TNI, and 2016 TNI
requirements for accredited parameters, exceptions are noted in this report. This
report may not be reproduced except in full, and with written approval from the
laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or
telephone number listed on this page.
This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory. Electronic
signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten
signature.
Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s) as received by the laboratory.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Table of Contents
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
Project/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Laboratory Job ID: 400-224157-1
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Page 2 of 33 Eurofins Pensacola8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
Cover Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Case Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Detection Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
Sample Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Client Sample Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Surrogate Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
QC Sample Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
QC Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
Chronicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Method Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Certification Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
Chain of Custody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Receipt Checklists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Case Narrative
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.Job ID: 400-224157-1
Project/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Job ID: 400-224157-1
Laboratory: Eurofins Pensacola
Narrative
Job Narrative
400-224157-1
Comments
The report was revised on 08/25/22 to update the results for sample TW-1, replacing the final report generated on 08/19/22.
Receipt
The samples were received on 8/9/2022 9:08 AM. Unless otherwise noted below, the samples arrived in good condition, and, where
required, properly preserved and on ice. The temperature of the cooler at receipt time was 0.6°C
GC/MS Semi VOA
Method 625.1: The matrix spike / matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) recoveries for preparation batch 400-588679 and analytical batch
400-588848 were outside control limits.
Method 625.1: The matrix spike duplicate (MSD) precision for preparation batch 400-588679 and analytical batch 400-588848 was
outside control limits.
Method 625.1: The continuing calibration verification (CCV) associated with batch 400-589015 recovered outside acceptance criteria, low
biased, for 2,4-Dinitrophenol and Hexachlorocyclopentadiene. A reporting limit (RL) standard was analyzed, and the target analytes are
detected. Since the associated samples were non-detect for the analytes, the data are reported.
Method 625.1: The RPD of the laboratory control sample duplicate (LCSD) for preparation batch 400-589270 and analytical batch
400-589335 recovered outside control limits for the following analyte: Benzidine.
Method 625.1: Six surrogates are used for this analysis. The laboratory's SOP allows one of these surrogates to be outside acceptance
criteria without performing re-extraction/re-analysis. The following sample contained an allowable number of surrogate compounds
outside limits: TW-1 (400-224157-3). These results have been reported and qualified.
Method 625.1: The laboratory control sample (LCS) for preparation batch 400-588679 and analytical batch 400-588848 recovered outside
control limits for the following analyte: Benzidine. The associated samples were re-prepared and/or re-analyzed outside holding time.
Both sets of data have been reported.
Method 625.1: Surrogate recovery for the MS was outside the upper control limit: MW-14 (400-224157-1[MS]).
No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/ Glossary page.
Eurofins PensacolaPage 3 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Detection Summary
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Client Sample ID: MW-14 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1
No Detections.
Client Sample ID: MW-15 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-2
No Detections.
Client Sample ID: TW-1 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-3
Acenaphthene
RL
10 ug/L
MDLAnalyteResultQualifier Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type
Total/NA116625.1
Anthracene 10 ug/L Total/NA113625.1
Fluorene 10 ug/L Total/NA122625.1
Phenanthrene 10 ug/L Total/NA141625.1
1-Methylnaphthalene 10 ug/L Total/NA170625.1
Client Sample ID: RW-1 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-4
1-Methylnaphthalene
RL
9.4 ug/L
MDLAnalyteResultQualifier Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type
Total/NA161625.1
Client Sample ID: MW-15 DUP Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-5
No Detections.
Eurofins Pensacola
This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results.
Page 4 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Sample Summary
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.Job ID: 400-224157-1
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received
400-224157-1 MW-14 Water 08/08/22 11:25 08/09/22 09:08
400-224157-2 MW-15 Water 08/08/22 12:00 08/09/22 09:08
400-224157-3 TW-1 Water 08/08/22 12:30 08/09/22 09:08
400-224157-4 RW-1 Water 08/08/22 13:40 08/09/22 09:08
400-224157-5 MW-15 DUP Water 08/08/22 12:00 08/09/22 09:08
Eurofins PensacolaPage 5 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1Client Sample ID: MW-14
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 11:25
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
RL MDL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.9 9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12,4,6-Trichlorophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12,4-Dichlorophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12,4-Dimethylphenol <9.9
30 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 19:39 12,4-Dinitrophenol <30
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12,4-Dinitrotoluene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12,6-Dinitrotoluene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12-Chloronaphthalene <9.9 F2
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12-Chlorophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12-Nitrophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 19:39 13,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 14,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 14-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 14-Chloro-3-methylphenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 14-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 14-Nitrophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Acenaphthene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Acenaphthylene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Anthracene<9.9 F1
25 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Benzidine<25 F1 *-
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Benzo[a]anthracene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Benzo[a]pyrene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Benzo[b]fluoranthene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Benzo[k]fluoranthene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Butyl benzyl phthalate <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Chrysene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Di-n-butyl phthalate <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Di-n-octyl phthalate <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Diethyl phthalate <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Dimethyl phthalate <9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Fluoranthene<9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Fluorene<9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Hexachlorobenzene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Hexachlorobutadiene<9.9
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 19:39 1Hexachlorocyclopentadiene<20 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Hexachloroethane<9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1N-Nitrosodimethylamine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Naphthalene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Nitrobenzene<9.9
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Pentachlorophenol<20
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Phenanthrene<9.9 F1
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 6 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1Client Sample ID: MW-14
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 11:25
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
RL MDL
Phenol <9.9 9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Pyrene<9.9 F1
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1Isophorone<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 11-Methylnaphthalene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12-Methylnaphthalene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 12,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 11,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<9.9 F1
Unknown 59 T J ug/L 4.24 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 19:39 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/15/22 21:3708/13/22 10:10T JUnknown58 ug/L 4.58
108/15/22 21:3708/13/22 10:10T JUnknown81 ug/L 15.86
2-Fluorobiphenyl 89 32-109 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
2-Fluorophenol 60 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 110-104
Nitrobenzene-d5 73 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 131-111
Phenol-d5 47 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 110-110
Terphenyl-d14 100 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 130-129
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 59 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 21:37 115-135
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RERA
RL MDL
Benzidine <24 H *1 24 ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 20:42 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
Tentatively Identified Compound None H ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 20:42 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
2-Fluorobiphenyl 73 32-109 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 20:42 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
Nitrobenzene-d5 64 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 20:42 131-111
Terphenyl-d14 98 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 20:42 130-129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 7 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-2Client Sample ID: MW-15
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:00
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
RL MDL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12,4,6-Trichlorophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12,4-Dichlorophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12,4-Dimethylphenol <10
30 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:00 12,4-Dinitrophenol <30
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12,4-Dinitrotoluene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12,6-Dinitrotoluene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12-Chloronaphthalene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12-Chlorophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12-Nitrophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:00 13,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 14,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 14-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 14-Chloro-3-methylphenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 14-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 14-Nitrophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Acenaphthene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Acenaphthylene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Anthracene<10
25 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Benzidine<25 *-
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Benzo[a]anthracene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Benzo[a]pyrene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Benzo[b]fluoranthene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Benzo[k]fluoranthene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Butyl benzyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Chrysene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Di-n-butyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Di-n-octyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Diethyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Dimethyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Fluoranthene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Fluorene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Hexachlorobenzene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Hexachlorobutadiene<10
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:00 1Hexachlorocyclopentadiene<20
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Hexachloroethane<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1N-Nitrosodimethylamine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Naphthalene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Nitrobenzene<10
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Pentachlorophenol<20
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Phenanthrene<10
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 8 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-2Client Sample ID: MW-15
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:00
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
RL MDL
Phenol <10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Pyrene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1Isophorone<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 11-Methylnaphthalene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12-Methylnaphthalene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 12,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 11,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<10
Tentatively Identified Compound None ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/16/22 20:0008/13/22 10:10T JUnknown62 ug/L 4.24
2-Fluorobiphenyl 83 32-109 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
2-Fluorophenol 53 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 110-104
Nitrobenzene-d5 72 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 131-111
Phenol-d5 42 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 110-110
Terphenyl-d14 92 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 130-129
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 60 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:04 115-135
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RERA
RL MDL
Benzidine <24 H *1 24 ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:04 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
Tentatively Identified Compound None H ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:04 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
2-Fluorobiphenyl 69 32-109 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:04 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
Nitrobenzene-d5 58 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:04 131-111
Terphenyl-d14 91 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:04 130-129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 9 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-3Client Sample ID: TW-1
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:30
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
RL MDL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12,4,6-Trichlorophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12,4-Dichlorophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12,4-Dimethylphenol <10
31 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:22 12,4-Dinitrophenol <31
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12,4-Dinitrotoluene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12,6-Dinitrotoluene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12-Chloronaphthalene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12-Chlorophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12-Nitrophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:22 13,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 14,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 14-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 14-Chloro-3-methylphenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 14-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 14-Nitrophenol <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Acenaphthene16
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Acenaphthylene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Anthracene13
26 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Benzidine<26 *-
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Benzo[a]anthracene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Benzo[a]pyrene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Benzo[b]fluoranthene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Benzo[k]fluoranthene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Butyl benzyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Chrysene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Di-n-butyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Di-n-octyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Diethyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Dimethyl phthalate <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Fluoranthene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Fluorene22
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Hexachlorobenzene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Hexachlorobutadiene<10
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:22 1Hexachlorocyclopentadiene<20
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Hexachloroethane<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1N-Nitrosodimethylamine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Naphthalene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Nitrobenzene<10
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Pentachlorophenol<20
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Phenanthrene41
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 10 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-3Client Sample ID: TW-1
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:30
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
RL MDL
Phenol <10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Pyrene<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1Isophorone<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 11-Methylnaphthalene 70
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12-Methylnaphthalene <10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 12,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<10
10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 11,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<10
Unknown 63 T J ug/L 4.24 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:22 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T J NBenzene, 1-ethyl-2,3-dimethyl-933-98-236ug/L 5.72
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T JUnknown32 ug/L 6.20
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T J N1H-Indene, 2,3-dihydro-1,6-dimethyl-17059-48-242ug/L 6.51
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T J NDodecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl-3891-98-378ug/L 6.83
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown100 ug/L 7.11
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T J NNaphthalene, 1,6-dimethyl-575-43-9240ug/L 7.14
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T JUnknown52 ug/L 7.33
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown87 ug/L 7.42
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T J NNaphthalene, 1,4,6-trimethyl-2131-42-255ug/L 7.45
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T J NNaphthalene, 2,3-dimethyl-581-40-891ug/L 7.53
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T J NNaphthalene, 1,4-dimethyl-571-58-483ug/L 7.59
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T J NNaphthalene, 2,3,6-trimethyl-829-26-584ug/L 7.63
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown63 ug/L 8.20
108/16/22 20:2208/13/22 10:10T JUnknown110 ug/L 8.22
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown90 ug/L 8.35
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown55 ug/L 8.41
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown110 ug/L 8.54
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T J NHexadecane, 2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-638-36-8100ug/L 8.65
108/15/22 22:3108/13/22 10:10T JUnknown210 ug/L 15.93
2-Fluorobiphenyl 96 32-109 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
2-Fluorophenol 56 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 110-104
Nitrobenzene-d5 80 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 131-111
Phenol-d5 45 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 110-110
Terphenyl-d14 96 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 130-129
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 89 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:31 115-135
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RERA
RL MDL
Benzidine <26 H *1 26 ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:26 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
1-Phenyl-1-butene 95 T H J N ug/L 6.23 824-90-8 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:26 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H JUnknown110 ug/L 6.57
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H JUnknown100 ug/L 7.33
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H J NNaphthalene, 2,3-dimethyl-581-40-8180ug/L 7.35
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H J NNaphthalene, 2,3-dimethyl-581-40-889ug/L 7.49
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H J NNaphthalene, 1,6,7-trimethyl-2245-38-7150ug/L 7.65
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H J NNaphthalene, 1,6,7-trimethyl-2245-38-7140ug/L 7.72
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 11 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-3Client Sample ID: TW-1
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:30
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RERA (Continued)
Naphthalene, 1,4,5-trimethyl-87 T H J N ug/L 7.88 2131-41-1 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:26 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H JUnknown130 ug/L 8.43
108/18/22 21:2608/18/22 09:28T H JUnknown110 ug/L 8.49
2-Fluorobiphenyl 91 32-109 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:26 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
Nitrobenzene-d5 76 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:26 131-111
Terphenyl-d14 98 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:26 130-129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 12 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-4Client Sample ID: RW-1
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 13:40
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
RL MDL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.4 9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12,4,6-Trichlorophenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12,4-Dichlorophenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12,4-Dimethylphenol <9.4
28 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:43 12,4-Dinitrophenol <28
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12,4-Dinitrotoluene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12,6-Dinitrotoluene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12-Chloronaphthalene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12-Chlorophenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12-Nitrophenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:43 13,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 14,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 14-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 14-Chloro-3-methylphenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 14-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 14-Nitrophenol <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Acenaphthene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Acenaphthylene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Anthracene<9.4
23 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Benzidine<23 *-
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Benzo[a]anthracene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Benzo[a]pyrene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Benzo[b]fluoranthene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Benzo[k]fluoranthene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Butyl benzyl phthalate <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Chrysene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Di-n-butyl phthalate <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Di-n-octyl phthalate <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Diethyl phthalate <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Dimethyl phthalate <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Fluoranthene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Fluorene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Hexachlorobenzene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Hexachlorobutadiene<9.4
19 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:43 1Hexachlorocyclopentadiene<19
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Hexachloroethane<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1N-Nitrosodimethylamine <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Naphthalene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Nitrobenzene<9.4
19 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Pentachlorophenol<19
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Phenanthrene<9.4
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 13 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-4Client Sample ID: RW-1
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 13:40
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
RL MDL
Phenol <9.4 9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Pyrene<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1Isophorone<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 11-Methylnaphthalene 61
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12-Methylnaphthalene <9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 12,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<9.4
9.4 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 11,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<9.4
Unknown 70 T J ug/L 4.24 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 20:43 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/16/22 20:4308/13/22 10:10T J NBenzene, 1,2,3,4-tetramethyl-488-23-316ug/L 5.87
108/16/22 20:4308/13/22 10:10T J N.alpha.,.beta.,.beta.-Trimethylstyrene 769-57-322ug/L 6.20
108/16/22 20:4308/13/22 10:10T J NNaphthalene, 2,7-dimethyl-582-16-122ug/L 7.14
108/15/22 22:5708/13/22 10:10T JUnknown21 ug/L 15.85
2-Fluorobiphenyl 86 32-109 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
2-Fluorophenol 55 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 110-104
Nitrobenzene-d5 80 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 131-111
Phenol-d5 42 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 110-110
Terphenyl-d14 100 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 130-129
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 66 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 22:57 115-135
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RERA
RL MDL
Benzidine <24 H *1 24 ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:48 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
Benzene, 1-ethenyl-4-ethyl-39 T H J N ug/L 6.23 3454-07-7 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:48 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/18/22 21:4808/18/22 09:28T H JUnknown17 ug/L 7.21
2-Fluorobiphenyl 83 32-109 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:48 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
Nitrobenzene-d5 72 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:48 131-111
Terphenyl-d14 103 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 21:48 130-129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 14 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-5Client Sample ID: MW-15 DUP
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:00
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
RL MDL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.9 9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12,4,6-Trichlorophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12,4-Dichlorophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12,4-Dimethylphenol <9.9
30 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 21:04 12,4-Dinitrophenol <30
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12,4-Dinitrotoluene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12,6-Dinitrotoluene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12-Chloronaphthalene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12-Chlorophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12-Nitrophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 21:04 13,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 14,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 14-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 14-Chloro-3-methylphenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 14-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 14-Nitrophenol <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Acenaphthene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Acenaphthylene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Anthracene<9.9
25 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Benzidine<25 *-
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Benzo[a]anthracene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Benzo[a]pyrene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Benzo[b]fluoranthene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Benzo[k]fluoranthene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Butyl benzyl phthalate <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Chrysene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Di-n-butyl phthalate <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Di-n-octyl phthalate <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Diethyl phthalate <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Dimethyl phthalate <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Fluoranthene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Fluorene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Hexachlorobenzene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Hexachlorobutadiene<9.9
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/16/22 21:04 1Hexachlorocyclopentadiene<20
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Hexachloroethane<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1N-Nitrosodimethylamine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Naphthalene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Nitrobenzene<9.9
20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Pentachlorophenol<20
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Phenanthrene<9.9
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 15 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Client Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-5Client Sample ID: MW-15 DUP
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:00
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
RL MDL
Phenol <9.9 9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Pyrene<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1Isophorone<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 11-Methylnaphthalene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12-Methylnaphthalene <9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 12,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<9.9
9.9 ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 11,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<9.9
Tentatively Identified Compound None ug/L 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
108/16/22 21:0408/13/22 10:10Tentatively Identified Compound None ug/L
2-Fluorobiphenyl 87 32-109 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
2-Fluorophenol 54 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 110-104
Nitrobenzene-d5 72 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 131-111
Phenol-d5 42 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 110-110
Terphenyl-d14 99 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 130-129
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 61 08/13/22 10:10 08/15/22 23:24 115-135
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - RERA
RL MDL
Benzidine <25 H *1 25 ug/L 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 22:10 1
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDResultQualifier
Unknown 23 T H J ug/L 11.45 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 22:10 1
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedUnitDQualifierEst. Result CAS No.RT
2-Fluorobiphenyl 79 32-109 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 22:10 1
Surrogate Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedQualifierLimits%Recovery
Nitrobenzene-d5 64 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 22:10 131-111
Terphenyl-d14 101 08/18/22 09:28 08/18/22 22:10 130-129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 16 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Definitions/Glossary
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Qualifiers
GC/MS Semi VOA
Qualifier Description
*-LCS and/or LCSD is outside acceptance limits, low biased.
Qualifier
*1 LCS/LCSD RPD exceeds control limits.
F1 MS and/or MSD recovery exceeds control limits.
F2 MS/MSD RPD exceeds control limits
H Sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time
S1+Surrogate recovery exceeds control limits, high biased.
GC/MS Semi VOA TICs
Qualifier Description
H Sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time
Qualifier
J Indicates an Estimated Value for TICs
N Presumptive evidence of material.
T Result is a tentatively identified compound (TIC) and an estimated value.
Glossary
These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report.
¤Listed under the "D" column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis
Abbreviation
%R Percent Recovery
CFL Contains Free Liquid
CFU Colony Forming Unit
CNF Contains No Free Liquid
DER Duplicate Error Ratio (normalized absolute difference)
Dil Fac Dilution Factor
DL Detection Limit (DoD/DOE)
DL, RA, RE, IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis, Re-extraction, or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample
DLC Decision Level Concentration (Radiochemistry)
EDL Estimated Detection Limit (Dioxin)
LOD Limit of Detection (DoD/DOE)
LOQ Limit of Quantitation (DoD/DOE)
MCL EPA recommended "Maximum Contaminant Level"
MDA Minimum Detectable Activity (Radiochemistry)
MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration (Radiochemistry)
MDL Method Detection Limit
ML Minimum Level (Dioxin)
MPN Most Probable Number
MQL Method Quantitation Limit
NC Not Calculated
ND Not Detected at the reporting limit (or MDL or EDL if shown)
NEG Negative / Absent
POS Positive / Present
PQL Practical Quantitation Limit
PRES Presumptive
QC Quality Control
RER Relative Error Ratio (Radiochemistry)
RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit (Radiochemistry)
RPD Relative Percent Difference, a measure of the relative difference between two points
TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor (Dioxin)
TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient (Dioxin)
TNTC Too Numerous To Count
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 17 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Surrogate Summary
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Prep Type: Total/NAMatrix: Water
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID (32-109)(10-104)(31-111)(10-110)(30-129)(15-135)
FBP 2FP NBZ PHL TPHL TBP
89 60 73 47 100 59400-224157-1
Percent Surrogate Recovery (Acceptance Limits)
MW-14
73 64 98400-224157-1 - RERA MW-14
122 S1+80 126 S1+138 S1+68 90400-224157-1 MS MW-14
87 62 89 8854 64400-224157-1 MSD MW-14
83 53 72 9242 60400-224157-2 MW-15
69 58 91400-224157-2 - RERA MW-15
96 56 80 9645 89400-224157-3 TW-1
91 76 98400-224157-3 - RERA TW-1
86 55 80 10042 66400-224157-4 RW-1
83 72 103400-224157-4 - RERA RW-1
87 54 72 9942 61400-224157-5 MW-15 DUP
79 64 101400-224157-5 - RERA MW-15 DUP
90 67 92 9259 68LCS 400-588679/2-A Lab Control Sample
81 83 93LCS 400-589270/2-A Lab Control Sample
79 80 91LCSD 400-589270/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup
78 53 68 8741 53MB 400-588679/1-A Method Blank
72 69 99MB 400-589270/1-A Method Blank
Surrogate Legend
FBP = 2-Fluorobiphenyl
2FP = 2-Fluorophenol
NBZ = Nitrobenzene-d5
PHL = Phenol-d5
TPHL = Terphenyl-d14
TBP = 2,4,6-Tribromophenol
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 18 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Client Sample ID: Method BlankLab Sample ID: MB 400-588679/1-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
RL MDL
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1
MB MB
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedDUnitResultQualifier
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,4,6-Trichlorophenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,4-Dichlorophenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,4-Dimethylphenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,4-Dinitrotoluene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,6-Dinitrotoluene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12-Chloronaphthalene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12-Chlorophenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12-Nitrophenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 14,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 14-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 14-Chloro-3-methylphenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 14-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 14-Nitrophenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Acenaphthene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Acenaphthylene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Anthracene
<25 25 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Benzidine
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Benzo[a]anthracene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Benzo[a]pyrene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Benzo[b]fluoranthene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Benzo[g,h,i]perylene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Benzo[k]fluoranthene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Butyl benzyl phthalate
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Chrysene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Di-n-butyl phthalate
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Di-n-octyl phthalate
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Diethyl phthalate
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Dimethyl phthalate
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Fluoranthene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Fluorene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Hexachlorobenzene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Hexachlorobutadiene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Hexachloroethane
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1N-Nitrosodimethylamine
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Naphthalene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Nitrobenzene
<20 20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Pentachlorophenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Phenanthrene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Phenol
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Pyrene
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 19 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Client Sample ID: Method BlankLab Sample ID: MB 400-588679/1-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
RL MDL
Isophorone <10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1
MB MB
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedDUnitResultQualifier
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 11-Methylnaphthalene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12-Methylnaphthalene
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 11,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
Tentatively Identified Compound None ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1
MB MB
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacPreparedAnalyzedDUnitQualifierEst. Result RT CAS No.
2-Fluorobiphenyl 78 32-109 08/15/22 19:50 1
MB MB
Surrogate
08/13/22 10:09
Dil FacPreparedAnalyzedQualifierLimits%Recovery
53 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12-Fluorophenol 10-104
68 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Nitrobenzene-d5 31-111
41 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Phenol-d5 10-110
87 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 1Terphenyl-d14 30-129
53 08/13/22 10:09 08/15/22 19:50 12,4,6-Tribromophenol 15-135
Client Sample ID: Method BlankLab Sample ID: MB 400-588679/1-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 589015 Prep Batch: 588679
RL MDL
2,4-Dinitrophenol <30 30 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/16/22 18:57 1
MB MB
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedDUnitResultQualifier
<10 10 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/16/22 18:57 13,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
<20 20 ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/16/22 18:57 1Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Tentatively Identified Compound None ug/L 08/13/22 10:09 08/16/22 18:57 1
MB MB
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacPreparedAnalyzedDUnitQualifierEst. Result RT CAS No.
Client Sample ID: Lab Control SampleLab Sample ID: LCS 400-588679/2-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120 74.3 ug/L 62 57-130
Analyte
LCS LCS
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
%Rec
Limits
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 120 111 ug/L 92 52-129
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120 111 ug/L 92 53-122
2,4-Dimethylphenol 120 102 ug/L 85 42-120
2,4-Dinitrophenol 240 182 ug/L 76 10-173
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 120 111 ug/L 93 48-127
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 120 113 ug/L 94 68-137
2-Chloronaphthalene 120 82.8 ug/L 69 65-120
2-Chlorophenol 120 109 ug/L 91 36-120
2-Nitrophenol 120 119 ug/L 99 61-163
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 240 148 ug/L 62 10-213
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 240 219 ug/L 91 53-130
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 120 106 ug/L 88 65-120
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 20 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Client Sample ID: Lab Control SampleLab Sample ID: LCS 400-588679/2-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 120 104 ug/L 87 41-128
Analyte
LCS LCS
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
%Rec
Limits
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 120 96.0 ug/L 80 38-145
4-Nitrophenol 240 145 ug/L 60 13-129
Acenaphthene 120 97.8 ug/L 81 60-132
Acenaphthylene 120 96.2 ug/L 80 54-126
Anthracene 120 118 ug/L 98 43-120
Benzidine 240 <20 *-ug/L 0 5-130
Benzo[a]anthracene 120 119 ug/L 99 42-133
Benzo[a]pyrene 120 123 ug/L 102 32-148
Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 112 ug/L 93 42-140
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 120 103 ug/L 86 10-195
Benzo[k]fluoranthene 120 128 ug/L 106 25-146
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 120 111 ug/L 93 49-165
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 120 127 ug/L 106 43-126
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 120 138 ug/L 115 29-137
Butyl benzyl phthalate 120 132 ug/L 110 10-140
Chrysene 120 122 ug/L 101 44-140
Di-n-butyl phthalate 120 126 ug/L 105 10-120
Di-n-octyl phthalate 120 138 ug/L 115 19-132
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 120 110 ug/L 92 10-200
Diethyl phthalate 120 123 ug/L 102 10-120
Dimethyl phthalate 120 119 ug/L 99 10-120
Fluoranthene 120 130 ug/L 108 43-121
Fluorene 120 107 ug/L 89 70-120
Hexachlorobenzene 120 107 ug/L 89 10-142
Hexachlorobutadiene 120 68.9 ug/L 57 38-120
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 120 23.0 ug/L 19 10-130
Hexachloroethane 120 68.5 ug/L 57 55-120
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene 120 110 ug/L 92 10-151
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 120 123 ug/L 102 14-198
N-Nitrosodimethylamine 120 80.0 ug/L 67 31-130
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 119 108 ug/L 91 57-130
Naphthalene 120 90.0 ug/L 75 36-120
Nitrobenzene 120 106 ug/L 88 54-158
Pentachlorophenol 240 174 ug/L 73 38-152
Phenanthrene 120 118 ug/L 99 65-120
Phenol 120 81.3 ug/L 68 17-120
Pyrene 120 121 ug/L 101 70-120
Isophorone 120 115 ug/L 96 47-180
1-Methylnaphthalene 120 82.7 ug/L 69 53-130
2-Methylnaphthalene 120 90.5 ug/L 75 53-130
2,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]120 105 ug/L 88 63-139
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
120 117 ug/L 98 40-130
2-Fluorobiphenyl 32 -109
Surrogate
90
LCS LCS
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
672-Fluorophenol 10 -104
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 21 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Client Sample ID: Lab Control SampleLab Sample ID: LCS 400-588679/2-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
Nitrobenzene-d5 31 -111
Surrogate
92
LCS LCS
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
59Phenol-d5 10 -110
92Terphenyl-d14 30 -129
682,4,6-Tribromophenol 15 -135
Client Sample ID: MW-14Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1 MS
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.9 122 121 ug/L 100 44-142
Analyte
MS MS
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
Sample
Result
Sample
Qualifier
%Rec
Limits
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <9.9 122 151 ug/L 124 37-144
2,4-Dichlorophenol <9.9 122 155 ug/L 128 39-135
2,4-Dimethylphenol <9.9 122 144 ug/L 118 32-120
2,4-Dinitrophenol <30 244 274 ug/L 113 12-191
2,4-Dinitrotoluene <9.9 122 163 ug/L 134 39-139
2,6-Dinitrotoluene <9.9 122 163 ug/L 134 50-158
2-Chloronaphthalene <9.9 F2 122 138 ug/L 114 60-120
2-Chlorophenol <9.9 122 144 ug/L 119 23-134
2-Nitrophenol <9.9 122 166 ug/L 136 29-182
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <9.9 244 180 ug/L 74 10-262
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <9.9 244 326 ug/L 134 4-181
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <9.9 F1 122 172 F1 ug/L 142 53-127
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <9.9 122 148 ug/L 122 22-147
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <9.9 122 162 ug/L 133 25-158
4-Nitrophenol <9.9 244 218 ug/L 89 4-132
Acenaphthene <9.9 122 160 ug/L 131 47-145
Acenaphthylene <9.9 122 155 ug/L 127 33-145
Anthracene <9.9 F1 122 181 F1 ug/L 148 60-140
Benzidine <25 F1 244 <25 F1 ug/L 0 60-140
Benzo[a]anthracene <9.9 122 172 ug/L 142 33-143
Benzo[a]pyrene <9.9 122 178 ug/L 146 17-163
Benzo[b]fluoranthene <9.9 122 169 ug/L 139 24-159
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <9.9 122 165 ug/L 135 4-219
Benzo[k]fluoranthene <9.9 122 195 ug/L 160 11-162
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <9.9 122 163 ug/L 134 33-184
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <9.9 122 166 ug/L 136 12-158
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <9.9 F1 122 196 F1 ug/L 161 8-158
Butyl benzyl phthalate <9.9 F1 122 189 F1 ug/L 155 4-152
Chrysene <9.9 122 178 ug/L 146 17-168
Di-n-butyl phthalate <9.9 F1 122 189 F1 ug/L 156 1-120
Di-n-octyl phthalate <9.9 F1 122 199 F1 ug/L 164 4-146
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <9.9 122 169 ug/L 139 4-227
Diethyl phthalate <9.9 F1 122 172 F1 ug/L 141 4-120
Dimethyl phthalate <9.9 F1 122 163 F1 ug/L 134 4-120
Fluoranthene <9.9 F1 122 186 F1 ug/L 153 26-137
Fluorene <9.9 F1 122 165 F1 ug/L 135 59-121
Hexachlorobenzene <9.9 122 164 ug/L 135 4-152
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 22 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Client Sample ID: MW-14Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1 MS
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
Hexachlorobutadiene <9.9 122 129 ug/L 106 24-120
Analyte
MS MS
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
Sample
Result
Sample
Qualifier
%Rec
Limits
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <20 F1 122 37.2 F1 ug/L 31 60-140
Hexachloroethane <9.9 F1 122 109 ug/L 89 40-120
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <9.9 122 168 ug/L 138 4-171
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <9.9 122 171 ug/L 140 4-230
N-Nitrosodimethylamine <9.9 122 96.2 ug/L 79 60-140
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <9.9 121 157 ug/L 130 60-140
Naphthalene <9.9 122 147 ug/L 121 21-133
Nitrobenzene <9.9 122 155 ug/L 127 35-180
Pentachlorophenol <20 244 283 ug/L 116 14-176
Phenanthrene <9.9 F1 122 177 F1 ug/L 146 54-120
Phenol <9.9 122 82.0 ug/L 67 5-120
Pyrene <9.9 F1 122 178 F1 ug/L 146 52-120
Isophorone <9.9 122 167 ug/L 137 21-196
1-Methylnaphthalene <9.9 122 137 ug/L 112 60-140
2-Methylnaphthalene <9.9 122 156 ug/L 128 60-140
2,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<9.9 122 151 ug/L 124 36-166
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<9.9 F1 122 173 F1 ug/L 142 60-140
2-Fluorobiphenyl S1+32 -109
Surrogate
122
MS MS
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
802-Fluorophenol 10 -104
126 S1+Nitrobenzene-d5 31 -111
68Phenol-d5 10 -110
138 S1+Terphenyl-d14 30 -129
902,4,6-Tribromophenol 15 -135
Client Sample ID: MW-14Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1 MSD
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <9.9 123 83.7 ug/L 68 44-142 37 50
Analyte
MSD MSD
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
Sample
Result
Sample
Qualifier
%Rec
Limits LimitRPD
RPD
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol <9.9 123 109 ug/L 89 37-144 32 58
2,4-Dichlorophenol <9.9 123 114 ug/L 93 39-135 31 50
2,4-Dimethylphenol <9.9 123 106 ug/L 86 32-120 31 58
2,4-Dinitrophenol <30 245 208 ug/L 85 12-191 27 132
2,4-Dinitrotoluene <9.9 123 109 ug/L 89 39-139 39 42
2,6-Dinitrotoluene <9.9 123 117 ug/L 96 50-158 32 48
2-Chloronaphthalene <9.9 F2 123 94.1 F2 ug/L 77 60-120 38 24
2-Chlorophenol <9.9 123 103 ug/L 84 23-134 34 61
2-Nitrophenol <9.9 123 114 ug/L 93 29-182 37 55
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine <9.9 245 143 ug/L 58 10-262 23 108
4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol <9.9 245 236 ug/L 96 4-181 32 203
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether <9.9 F1 123 118 ug/L 96 53-127 37 43
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol <9.9 123 113 ug/L 92 22-147 27 73
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether <9.9 123 114 ug/L 93 25-158 35 61
4-Nitrophenol <9.9 245 153 ug/L 62 4-132 35 131
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 23 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Client Sample ID: MW-14Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1 MSD
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
Acenaphthene <9.9 123 110 ug/L 90 47-145 37 48
Analyte
MSD MSD
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
Sample
Result
Sample
Qualifier
%Rec
Limits LimitRPD
RPD
Acenaphthylene <9.9 123 108 ug/L 88 33-145 36 74
Anthracene <9.9 F1 123 121 ug/L 98 60-140 40 66
Benzidine <25 F1 245 <26 F1 ug/L 0 60-140 NC 40
Benzo[a]anthracene <9.9 123 120 ug/L 98 33-143 36 53
Benzo[a]pyrene <9.9 123 129 ug/L 105 17-163 32 72
Benzo[b]fluoranthene <9.9 123 120 ug/L 98 24-159 34 71
Benzo[g,h,i]perylene <9.9 123 108 ug/L 88 4-219 41 97
Benzo[k]fluoranthene <9.9 123 125 ug/L 102 11-162 44 63
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane <9.9 123 116 ug/L 95 33-184 34 54
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether <9.9 123 108 ug/L 88 12-158 42 108
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate <9.9 F1 123 136 ug/L 111 8-158 36 82
Butyl benzyl phthalate <9.9 F1 123 129 ug/L 106 4-152 37 60
Chrysene <9.9 123 126 ug/L 103 17-168 34 87
Di-n-butyl phthalate <9.9 F1 123 129 ug/L 105 1-120 38 47
Di-n-octyl phthalate <9.9 F1 123 137 ug/L 111 4-146 37 69
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <9.9 123 113 ug/L 92 4-227 40 126
Diethyl phthalate <9.9 F1 123 121 ug/L 99 4-120 34 100
Dimethyl phthalate <9.9 F1 123 115 ug/L 94 4-120 34 183
Fluoranthene <9.9 F1 123 131 ug/L 107 26-137 35 66
Fluorene <9.9 F1 123 117 ug/L 96 59-121 34 38
Hexachlorobenzene <9.9 123 110 ug/L 90 4-152 39 55
Hexachlorobutadiene <9.9 123 82.1 ug/L 67 24-120 45 62
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <20 F1 123 26.3 F1 ug/L 21 60-140 35 40
Hexachloroethane <9.9 F1 123 <10 F1 ug/L 0 40-120 NC 52
Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene <9.9 123 112 ug/L 91 4-171 40 99
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine <9.9 123 116 ug/L 95 4-230 38 87
N-Nitrosodimethylamine <9.9 123 75.6 ug/L 62 60-140 24 40
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine <9.9 122 110 ug/L 90 60-140 36 40
Naphthalene <9.9 123 103 ug/L 84 21-133 36 65
Nitrobenzene <9.9 123 110 ug/L 90 35-180 34 62
Pentachlorophenol <20 245 187 ug/L 76 14-176 41 86
Phenanthrene <9.9 F1 123 121 ug/L 99 54-120 38 39
Phenol <9.9 123 67.5 ug/L 55 5-120 19 64
Pyrene <9.9 F1 123 120 ug/L 98 52-120 39 49
Isophorone <9.9 123 118 ug/L 96 21-196 35 93
1-Methylnaphthalene <9.9 123 97.9 ug/L 80 60-140 33 40
2-Methylnaphthalene <9.9 123 108 ug/L 88 60-140 37 40
2,2'-oxybis[1-chloropropane]<9.9 123 102 ug/L 83 36-166 39 76
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as
Azobenzene)
<9.9 F1 123 119 ug/L 97 60-140 37 40
2-Fluorobiphenyl 32 -109
Surrogate
87
MSD MSD
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
622-Fluorophenol 10 -104
89Nitrobenzene-d5 31 -111
54Phenol-d5 10 -110
88Terphenyl-d14 30 -129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 24 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Sample Results
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method: 625.1 - Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Client Sample ID: MW-14Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1 MSD
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848 Prep Batch: 588679
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 15 -135
Surrogate
64
MSD MSD
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
Client Sample ID: Method BlankLab Sample ID: MB 400-589270/1-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 589335 Prep Batch: 589270
RL MDL
Benzidine <25 25 ug/L 08/18/22 09:27 08/18/22 19:36 1
MB MB
Analyte Dil FacAnalyzedPreparedDUnitResultQualifier
Tentatively Identified Compound None ug/L 08/18/22 09:27 08/18/22 19:36 1
MB MB
Tentatively Identified Compound Dil FacPreparedAnalyzedDUnitQualifierEst. Result RT CAS No.
2-Fluorobiphenyl 72 32-109 08/18/22 19:36 1
MB MB
Surrogate
08/18/22 09:27
Dil FacPreparedAnalyzedQualifierLimits%Recovery
69 08/18/22 09:27 08/18/22 19:36 1Nitrobenzene-d5 31-111
99 08/18/22 09:27 08/18/22 19:36 1Terphenyl-d14 30-129
Client Sample ID: Lab Control SampleLab Sample ID: LCS 400-589270/2-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 589335 Prep Batch: 589270
Benzidine 240 26.0 ug/L 11 5-130
Analyte
LCS LCS
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
%Rec
Limits
2-Fluorobiphenyl 32 -109
Surrogate
81
LCS LCS
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
83Nitrobenzene-d5 31 -111
93Terphenyl-d14 30 -129
Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample DupLab Sample ID: LCSD 400-589270/3-A
Matrix: Water Prep Type: Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 589335 Prep Batch: 589270
Benzidine 240 43.2 *1 ug/L 18 5-130 50 40
Analyte
LCSD LCSD
DUnitResultQualifier %Rec
Spike
Added
%Rec
Limits LimitRPD
RPD
2-Fluorobiphenyl 32 -109
Surrogate
79
LCSD LCSD
Qualifier Limits%Recovery
80Nitrobenzene-d5 31 -111
91Terphenyl-d14 30 -129
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 25 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Association Summary
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
GC/MS Semi VOA
Prep Batch: 588679
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch
Water 625400-224157-1 MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-2 MW-15 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-3 TW-1 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-4 RW-1 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-5 MW-15 DUP Total/NA
Water 625MB 400-588679/1-A Method Blank Total/NA
Water 625LCS 400-588679/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-1 MS MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-1 MSD MW-14 Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 588848
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-1 MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-2 MW-15 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-3 TW-1 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-4 RW-1 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-5 MW-15 DUP Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679MB 400-588679/1-A Method Blank Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679LCS 400-588679/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-1 MS MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-1 MSD MW-14 Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 589015
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-1 MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-2 MW-15 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-3 TW-1 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-4 RW-1 Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679400-224157-5 MW-15 DUP Total/NA
Water 625.1 588679MB 400-588679/1-A Method Blank Total/NA
Prep Batch: 589270
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch
Water 625400-224157-1 - RERA MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-2 - RERA MW-15 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-3 - RERA TW-1 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-4 - RERA RW-1 Total/NA
Water 625400-224157-5 - RERA MW-15 DUP Total/NA
Water 625MB 400-589270/1-A Method Blank Total/NA
Water 625LCS 400-589270/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA
Water 625LCSD 400-589270/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA
Analysis Batch: 589335
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch
Water 625.1 589270400-224157-1 - RERA MW-14 Total/NA
Water 625.1 589270400-224157-2 - RERA MW-15 Total/NA
Water 625.1 589270400-224157-3 - RERA TW-1 Total/NA
Water 625.1 589270400-224157-4 - RERA RW-1 Total/NA
Water 625.1 589270400-224157-5 - RERA MW-15 DUP Total/NA
Water 625.1 589270MB 400-589270/1-A Method Blank Total/NA
Water 625.1 589270LCS 400-589270/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 26 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
QC Association Summary
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
GC/MS Semi VOA (Continued)
Analysis Batch: 589335 (Continued)
Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch
Water 625.1 589270LCSD 400-589270/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 27 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Lab Chronicle
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.Job ID: 400-224157-1
Project/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Client Sample ID: MW-14 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-1
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 11:25
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Prep 625 STC08/13/22 10:10 EET PEN588679
Type
Batch
Method
Batch
Prep Type LabAnalystRun
Prepared
or Analyzed
Initial
Amount Amount
Final Batch
NumberFactor
Dil
Total/NA 251.6 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 589015 08/16/22 19:39 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 588679 08/13/22 10:10 STC EET PENTotal/NA 251.6 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 588848 08/15/22 21:37 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 RERA 589270 08/18/22 09:28 BKL EET PENTotal/NA 257.2 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 RERA 1 589335 08/18/22 20:42 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Client Sample ID: MW-15 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-2
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:00
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Prep 625 STC08/13/22 10:10 EET PEN588679
Type
Batch
Method
Batch
Prep Type LabAnalystRun
Prepared
or Analyzed
Initial
Amount Amount
Final Batch
NumberFactor
Dil
Total/NA 250.4 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 589015 08/16/22 20:00 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 588679 08/13/22 10:10 STC EET PENTotal/NA 250.4 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 588848 08/15/22 22:04 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 RERA 589270 08/18/22 09:28 BKL EET PENTotal/NA 265 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 RERA 1 589335 08/18/22 21:04 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Client Sample ID: TW-1 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-3
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:30
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Prep 625 STC08/13/22 10:10 EET PEN588679
Type
Batch
Method
Batch
Prep Type LabAnalystRun
Prepared
or Analyzed
Initial
Amount Amount
Final Batch
NumberFactor
Dil
Total/NA 244.8 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 589015 08/16/22 20:22 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 588679 08/13/22 10:10 STC EET PENTotal/NA 244.8 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 588848 08/15/22 22:31 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 RERA 589270 08/18/22 09:28 BKL EET PENTotal/NA 243.4 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 RERA 1 589335 08/18/22 21:26 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Client Sample ID: RW-1 Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-4
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 13:40
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Prep 625 STC08/13/22 10:10 EET PEN588679
Type
Batch
Method
Batch
Prep Type LabAnalystRun
Prepared
or Analyzed
Initial
Amount Amount
Final Batch
NumberFactor
Dil
Total/NA 266.8 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 589015 08/16/22 20:43 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 588679 08/13/22 10:10 STC EET PENTotal/NA 266.8 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 588848 08/15/22 22:57 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 RERA 589270 08/18/22 09:28 BKL EET PENTotal/NA 260 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 RERA 1 589335 08/18/22 21:48 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 28 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Lab Chronicle
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.Job ID: 400-224157-1
Project/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Client Sample ID: MW-15 DUP Lab Sample ID: 400-224157-5
Matrix: WaterDate Collected: 08/08/22 12:00
Date Received: 08/09/22 09:08
Prep 625 STC08/13/22 10:10 EET PEN588679
Type
Batch
Method
Batch
Prep Type LabAnalystRun
Prepared
or Analyzed
Initial
Amount Amount
Final Batch
NumberFactor
Dil
Total/NA 252.8 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 589015 08/16/22 21:04 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 588679 08/13/22 10:10 STC EET PENTotal/NA 252.8 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 1 588848 08/15/22 23:24 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Prep 625 RERA 589270 08/18/22 09:28 BKL EET PENTotal/NA 251.6 mL 1 mL
Analysis 625.1 RERA 1 589335 08/18/22 22:10 S1B EET PENTotal/NA
Laboratory References:
EET PEN = Eurofins Pensacola, 3355 McLemore Drive, Pensacola, FL 32514, TEL [phone]
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 29 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Method Summary
Job ID: 400-224157-1Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.
SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GWProject/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC
Method Method Description LaboratoryProtocol
40CFR136A625.1 Semivolatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)EET PEN
40CFR136A625Liquid-Liquid Extraction EET PEN
Protocol References:
40CFR136A = "Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal Industrial Wastewater", 40CFR, Part 136, Appendix A, October 26, 1984 and
subsequent revisions.
Laboratory References:
EET PEN = Eurofins Pensacola, 3355 McLemore Drive, Pensacola, FL 32514, TEL [phone]
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 30 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Accreditation/Certification Summary
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.Job ID: 400-224157-1
Project/Site: Holcim, Castle Hayne, NC SDG: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Laboratory: Eurofins Pensacola
The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report.
Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date
North Carolina (WW/SW)State 314 12-31-22
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 31 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Page 32 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Login Sample Receipt Checklist
Client: ARCADIS U.S., Inc.Job Number: 400-224157-1
SDG Number: LaforgeHolcim Annual GW
Login Number: 224157
Question Answer Comment
Creator: Whitley, Adrian
List Source: Eurofins Pensacola
List Number: 1
N/ARadioactivity wasn't checked or is </= background as measured by a survey
meter.
N/AThe cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact.
N/ASample custody seals, if present, are intact.
TrueThe cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or
tampered with.
TrueSamples were received on ice.
TrueCooler Temperature is acceptable.
TrueCooler Temperature is recorded.0.6°C IR9
TrueCOC is present.
TrueCOC is filled out in ink and legible.
TrueCOC is filled out with all pertinent information.
TrueIs the Field Sampler's name present on COC?
TrueThere are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC.
TrueSamples are received within Holding Time (excluding tests with immediate
HTs)
TrueSample containers have legible labels.
TrueContainers are not broken or leaking.
TrueSample collection date/times are provided.
TrueAppropriate sample containers are used.
TrueSample bottles are completely filled.
N/ASample Preservation Verified.
TrueThere is sufficient vol. for all requested analyses, incl. any requested
MS/MSDs
N/AContainers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is
<6mm (1/4").
TrueMultiphasic samples are not present.
TrueSamples do not require splitting or compositing.
N/AResidual Chlorine Checked.
Eurofins Pensacola
Page 33 of 33 8/25/2022 (Rev. 1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Appendix C

Field Sampling Logs

Appendix D

Waste Manifests

Arcadis. Improving quality of life.
Arcadis U.S., Inc.
300 S Washington Square, Suite 315
Lansing
Michigan 48933
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.arcadis.com