Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWS-2403_2860_CA_MRP_20230320  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511  t: 919.469.3340 | f: 919.467.6008 | www.withersravenel.com | License No. F‐1479  Asheville | Cary | Charlotte | Greensboro | Lumberton | Pittsboro | Raleigh | Southern Pines | Wilmington            FATE AND TRANSPORT MODELING REPORT    Seats Country Store  NCDEQ Incident # 2860  UST # WS‐2403  2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road  Yadkinville, Yadkin County, North Carolina  WithersRavenel Project No. 02172214.30                                            Prepared for:  State of North Carolina  Department of Environmental Quality  Division of Waste Management   Underground Storage Tank Section  Federal & State Lead Program  1646 Mail Service Center  Raleigh, North Carolina 27699‐1646    Prepared by: WithersRavenel 115 MacKenan Drive  Cary, North Carolina 27511  North Carolina Firm License No. F‐1479  March 20, 2023   WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511  t: 919.469.3340 | f: 919.467.6008 | www.withersravenel.com | License No. F‐1479  Asheville | Cary | Charlotte | Greensboro | Lumberton | Pittsboro | Raleigh | Southern Pines | Wilmington        March 20, 2023    State of North Carolina  Department of Environmental Quality  Federal & State Lead Program  Division of Waste Management‐Underground Storage Tank Section  1646 Mail Service Center  Raleigh, North Carolina 27699‐1646      Attn:  Ms. Linda Blalock    Re:  Fate and Transport Modeling Report  Seats Country Store  2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road  Yadkinville, Yadkin County, North Carolina  Groundwater Incident Number: 2860  UST Number: WS‐2403  WR Project Number:  02172214.30    Ms. Blalock,  WithersRavenel, Inc. (WR) has completed this Fate and Transport Modeling Report to document  the performance of slug testing and fate and transport modeling in association with our proposal,  numbered TA‐04, for the above referenced site, approved by the Federal & State Lead Program  on February 8, 2023.      WR appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the Federal & State Lead Program.  Should you  have any questions regarding the attached, please contact us at (919) 469‐3340.    Cordially,  WithersRavenel    Cory Nobles Elizabeth A. Allyn, P.G.  Environmental Geologist II Environmental Project Geologist II    WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  i    TABLE OF CONTENTS     SECTION A. SITE INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................... 1  SECTION B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 3  SECTION C. SITE HISTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION ............................................................................ 5  SECTION D. GROUNDWATER SAMPLING – AUGUST 2022 .................................................................... 7  SECTION E. AQUIFER TESTING AND PREDICTIVE MODELING – FEBRUARY 2023 ........................ 9  SECTION F. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 14    FIGURES   Figure 1 General Location Map  Figure 2 Site Map  Figure 3 Potential Receptor Map  Figure 4A Groundwater Elevation Contour Map (MW‐1 through MW‐3) – February  2023  Figure 4B Groundwater Elevation Contour Map (MW‐4 through MW‐7) – February  2023  Figure 5 Groundwater Analytical Results Map – August 2022  Figure 6 Dissolved Benzene Isoconcentration Map – August 2022     TABLES   Table B‐1 Site History: UST/AST System & Other Release Information  Table B‐4 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results  Table B‐4A Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Results  Table B‐5A Public & Private Water Supply Well Information  Table B‐7 Monitoring Well Construction Information and Liquid Level Data     APPENDICES   Appendix A Field Notes & Photographic Record  Appendix B GSI Mann‐Kendall Toolkit  Appendix C Aquifer Testing & Predictive Modeling Forms  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  1      SECTION A. SITE INFORMATION   1. Site Identification  Date of Report:  March 20, 2023  Facility I.D.: Not Applicable  Incident No.: 2860  UST No.: WS‐2403  Site Risk: High  Site Rank: H0285D  Land Use Category: Residential  Site Name: Seats Country Store  Site Location: 2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road  Nearest City/Town: Yadkinville  County: Yadkin  Description of Geographical Data Point:  On‐site building  Location Method:  Google Earth  Latitude: 36.066653° N  Longitude: 80.603995° W  2. Contact Information  UST Owner: Ronnie Seats  Address: 2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road, Yadkinville, NC 27055  Phone: Unknown     Property Owner: Ronnie Seats  Address: 2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road, Yadkinville, NC 27055  Phone: Unknown     Property Occupant: On‐site buildings used for storage  Address: 2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road, Yadkinville, NC 27055  Phone: Not Applicable     Consultant/Contractor: WithersRavenel  Address:  115 MacKenan Drive, Cary, NC 27511  Phone:  919‐469‐3340     Analytical Laboratory: Not Applicable   State Certification Number:   Address:   Phone:        WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  3      SECTION B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY    1. Summary of Activities Associated with Current TA    WithersRavenel, Inc. (WR) conducted slug testing and fate and transport modeling at the Seats  Country Store site located at 2513 Courtney‐Huntsville Road in Yadkinville, Yadkin County, North  Carolina in association with task authorization (TA) TA‐04 under North Carolina Department of  Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Contract #N122019B.      2. Soil, Groundwater and LNAPL Assessment Information     Soils  No soil samples were obtained in association with the monitoring activities conducted by WR  during the February 2023 event.  Soil samples were collected from monitoring wells MW‐1  through MW‐3 and an additional soil boring, as part of the Phase I Limited Site Assessment  conducted in 2006.  The collected soil samples exhibited concentrations exceeding the Soil‐to‐ Groundwater Maximum Soil Contaminant Concentrations (MSCCs) for one or more petroleum  compounds.  None of the compounds exceeded the established Residential MSCCs.  In May 2020,  S&ME collected soil samples adjacent to monitoring wells MW‐1 and MW‐2 and during the  installation of MW‐4.  The soil samples collected in May 2020 also indicated exceedances of the  Soil‐to‐Groundwater MSCCs, but not the Residential MSCCs.  Groundwater   No groundwater samples were obtained in association with the monitoring activities conducted  by WR during the February 2023 event.  WR collected groundwater samples from site monitoring  wells MW‐1 through MW‐7 and water supply wells SW‐2, SW‐4, and SW‐8 on August 5, 2022.   The collected groundwater samples and a field blank were submitted for laboratory analysis of  volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by SM6200B.  Laboratory analytical results revealed the following:   None of the concentrations exceeded the Gross Contamination Levels (GCLs).   Monitoring wells MW‐1, MW‐2, MW‐3, MW‐4, MW‐5, and MW‐6 exhibited  concentrations exceeding the North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standards (NC 2L  Standards) for one or more compounds.   Monitoring well MW‐7 did not exhibit concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards.   Irrigation well SW‐2 contained isopropyl ether (IPE) and methyl tert‐butyl ether (MTBE)  above the laboratory detection limits, but below the NC 2L Standards.   Irrigation well SW‐4 contained compounds used for disinfecting wells and their breakdown  products including bromodichloromethane and chloroform, with chloroform being above  the NC 2L Standard.   Water supply well SW‐8 did not exhibit concentrations exceeding the laboratory detection  limits.     Light Non‐Aqueous Phase Liquid   Light non‐aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) has not historically been detected in the monitoring wells  associated with the site.        WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  4      3.       Receptor Information    According to the Corrective Action Performance/Monitoring Report by S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) dated  September 29, 2020, municipal water is available to the site and surrounding area except for  properties along Brawley Road (where SW‐8 is located); two active water supply wells SW‐7 and  SW‐8 are located within 1,000 feet of the source area; and no surface water bodies were identified  within 500 feet of the source area. In June 2020, the NCDEQ abandoned four water supply wells:  SW‐1, SW‐3A, SW‐3B, and SW‐13.     4. Remediation Activities    Based on currently available information, WR is unaware of remedial actions that have been  performed at the site.     5. Recommendations    Based on the results of the fate and transport modeling, WR recommends the State Lead Program  consider closure of this incident.        WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  5      SECTION C. SITE HISTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION    The following information summarizes the site history and characterization.      1. UST Information  The Seats Country Store is not identified on the Underground Storage Tank (UST) database.  According to the Phase II Limited Site Assessment (LSA) Report dated January 12, 2007, by Pyramid  Environmental & Engineering, P.C. (Pyramid), one 1,000‐gallon gasoline UST, one 2,000‐gallon  gasoline UST, one 3,000‐gallon gasoline UST, one 5,000‐gallon kerosene UST, and one 10,000‐ gallon diesel UST were identified at the site. The USTs were removed from the site in January  1986. No closure documentation was identified. Figure 2 shows the location of the historical UST  system.    Historical UST information is provided in Table B‐1.      2.       Description of Release/General Assessment History  The following summary of the assessment history is based on WR’s review of historical files for  the subject incident including:  In December 1982, the Yadkin County Health Department requested assistance from the  Winston‐Salem Regional Office of the NCDEQ regarding a contaminated water supply well near  the site. In January 1983, a representative from the NCDEQ Winston‐Salem Regional Office  visited the site and collected water supply well samples.  Samples were collected from water  supply wells SW‐1 and SW‐2.  Both samples indicated the presence of petroleum compounds.    In 1984, the NCDEQ submitted a report indicating that the contaminant plume was most likely  moving to the north and west of the site.  The report also recommended testing of the USTs,  removal of the defective USTs, delineation of the contaminant plume, and periodic sampling of the  Seats and nearby water supply wells.  In February 1984, Mr. Seats signed an access agreement to  permit drilling at the site and NCDEQ installed one monitoring well approximately five feet west  of the store building (State MW).    On January 9, 1986, the NCDEQ hand augered a soil boring near the USTs and petroleum  contamination was identified.  Based on these findings, the NCDEQ recommended removal of the  UST system.  Upon returning to the site on January 30, 1986, the NCDEQ noted that the USTs,  product lines, and pumps had been removed from the site.  No closure documentation was  provided.  In May 1986 and February 1992, the Seats well was sampled (SW‐1) and indicated benzene  concentrations of 895 micrograms per liter (g/L) and 121.7 g/L, respectively.  On February 21,  1992, a Notice of Violation was sent to Mr. Ronnie Seats.  In June 1992, Mr. Seats submitted a  financial assistance package to the Federal Trust Fund Financial Administrator and in July 1992, it  was determined that Mr. Seats was financially eligible for inclusion in the program.  In December 2005, Pyramid performed a receptor survey.  At that time, municipal water was not  available to the site or surrounding area. A total of 13 water supply wells were identified within  1,000 feet of the site with six of those being within 500 feet of the source area.  Yadkin County  indicated that there were plans to install a municipal water line to the Courtney Elementary School  which is adjacent to the site.  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  6      In September 2006 as part of a Phase II LSA, Pyramid supervised the installation of monitoring  wells MW‐1 through MW‐3 utilizing an air hammer drill rig and also conducted soil sampling.  The  collected soil samples exhibited concentrations exceeding the Soil‐to‐Groundwater MSCCs, but  not the Residential MSCCs. Monitoring wells MW‐1 through MW‐3 contained groundwater  concentrations exceeding the 2L Standards. During the installation activities, the monitoring well  installed by the NCDEQ (State MW) was properly abandoned.  In September 2012, S&ME conducted a groundwater sampling event.  Monitoring well MW‐1  contained benzene above the GCL.  Monitoring wells MW‐2 and MW‐3 contained concentrations  exceeding the 2L Standards.  Since the 2006 Phase II LSA, a municipal water line operated by  Yadkin Utilities was installed along Courtney‐Huntsville Road.   S&ME conducted a groundwater sampling event in April 2018.  Concentrations in monitoring wells  MW‐1 through MW‐3 were detected above the 2L Standards, but not the GCLs. In May 2020,  S&ME supervised the installation of monitoring wells MW‐4 and MW‐5 and collected soil samples  during the installation of MW‐4.  In addition, soil samples were collected adjacent to monitoring  wells MW‐1 and MW‐2.  The soil samples exhibited concentrations exceeding the Soil‐to‐ Groundwater MSCCs, but not the Residential MSCCs. In June 2020, S&ME coordinated the  abandonment of water supply wells SW‐1, SW‐3A, SW‐3B, and SW‐13. In September 2020,  S&ME supervised the installation of monitoring wells MW‐6 and MW‐7.  WR conducted monitoring well and water supply well sampling in April and June 2021. None of  monitoring wells indicated concentrations above the GCLs. Monitoring wells MW‐1, MW‐2, MW‐ 4, MW‐5, and MW‐6 exhibited concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards for several  compounds. Water supply well SW‐8 exhibited a concentration of 2‐butanone exceeding the  laboratory detection limit, but below the 2L Standard.   WR conducted monitoring well and water supply well sampling in April 2022. None of monitoring  wells indicated concentrations above the GCLs. Monitoring wells MW‐1, MW‐2, MW‐4, MW‐5,  and MW‐6 exhibited concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards for several compounds.  Water supply well SW‐8 did not exhibit concentrations exceeding the laboratory detection limits.   WR conducted monitoring well and water supply well sampling in August 2022. None of  monitoring wells indicated concentrations above the GCLs. Monitoring wells MW‐1, MW‐2, MW‐ 3, MW‐4, MW‐5, and MW‐6 exhibited concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards for several  compounds. Irrigation well SW‐2 contained IPE and MTBE above the laboratory detection limits,  but below the NC 2L Standards. Irrigation well SW‐4 contained compounds used for disinfecting  wells and their breakdown products including bromodichloromethane and chloroform, with  chloroform being above the NC 2L Standard. Water supply well SW‐8 did not exhibit  concentrations exceeding the laboratory detection limits.     3.  Brief Description of Site Characteristics  The property is located in an institutional, residential, and agricultural area of Yadkinville, Yadkin  County, North Carolina (Figure 1).  The property is developed with three single‐story on‐site  buildings that are currently used for storage (see Figure 2).  The Yadkin County Geographic  Information System (GIS) website identifies the subject property as parcel number 582400576196  consisting of approximately 2.00‐acres. Photographs of site conditions observed during the  February 2023 slug testing event are included in Appendix A.       WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  7      4.       Information on Receptors/Potential Receptors  According to the Corrective Action Performance/Monitoring and Receptor Survey Update Report  completed by S&ME in September 2020, two active water supply wells were identified within  1,000 feet of the source area (SW‐7 and SW‐8), one irrigation well is present at 250 feet from the  source area (SW‐2), and three inactive wells (SW‐4, SW‐5, and SW‐9) are present within 1,000  feet of the source area. Municipal water is available to the site and surrounding area except for  properties along Brawley Road which includes the property where SW‐8 is located.  Water supply  wells located within 1,500 feet of the source area are depicted on Figure 3. Information regarding  these water supply wells is included on Table B‐5A.    Examination of the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5‐minute series topographic map of Farmington,  North Carolina Quadrangle, indicates the site is located approximately 880 feet above mean sea  level with a topographic relief to the north, towards an intermittent tributary of Harmon Creek  approximately 1,000 feet from the source area (Figure 1).      5.       Regional and Site Geology and Hydrology  The site is located within the Piedmont Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The Geologic  Map of North Carolina depicts the site as being underlain by the Newark Supergroup, Dan River  Group, Undivided which is a red to brown basin‐margin conglomerate and sandstone interfingering  with green to brown basin‐center sandstone and mudstone of the Triassic.     According to the United States Department of Agricultural (USDA) Natural Resources  Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the source area is underlain by Clover fine sandy  loam (2 to 6 percent slopes) and the Totier sandy clay loam (2 to 6 percent, moderately eroded).   Clover fine sandy loam is well drained, found on summits and interfluves, and the parent material  is residuum weathered from mudstone and/or shale and siltstone and/or sandstone.  Totier sandy  clay loam is well drained, found on summits and interfluves, and the parent material is residuum  weathered from red shale.  The boring logs for the monitoring wells indicated that soils beneath  the site are predominantly silty sand to 10 feet bgs and saprolite from 10 to 20 feet bgs.  Bedrock  was encountered at approximate depths of 25 to 30 feet bgs during the installation of monitoring  wells MW‐1 and MW‐2.     SECTION D. GROUNDWATER SAMPLING – AUGUST 2022    On August 5, 2022, WR personnel mobilized to the subject property to perform groundwater  sampling activities.  Monitoring wells MW‐1 through MW‐7 and water supply wells SW‐2, SW‐4,  and SW‐8 were sampled.  The collected groundwater samples and a field blank were submitted  for laboratory analysis of VOCs by SM6200B.  Monitoring wells MW‐1 through MW‐3 were installed to a depth of 45 feet bgs each with the  depth to screen ranging from 25 to 30 feet bgs and the static depth to water observed to be below  the screened interval since 2018.  Monitoring wells MW‐4 through MW‐7 were installed to depths  ranging from 20 to 25 feet bgs with the depth to screen ranging from 5 to 10 feet bgs.  Monitoring  wells MW‐4 through MW‐7 have had intermittently submerged screens.  As such, groundwater  flow direction at the site, as determined by the collected depth to water measurements, has been  highly variable.  Historical groundwater flow directions have been as follows:  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  8       September 2006 (MW‐1 through MW‐3): West   May 2007 (MW‐1 through MW‐3): West   September 2012 (MW‐1 through MW‐3): North‐Northwest to North   April 2018 (MW‐1 through MW‐3): North   September 2020: North‐Northwest (MW‐1 through MW‐3) and Northeast (MW‐4  through MW‐7)   June 2021: North‐Northwest (MW‐1 through MW‐3) and East‐Northeast (MW‐4 through  MW‐7)   April 2022: Northwest when plotted as MW‐1 through MW‐3 and MW‐4 through MW‐7   August 2022: North‐northwest when plotted as MW‐1 through MW‐3 and MW‐4 through  MW‐7  Groundwater flow directions as determined during the August 2022 sampling event are shown on  Figures 4A and 4B.  Historical groundwater elevation measurements are presented in Table B‐7.       Laboratory analytical results from the August 2022 sampling event indicated the following:   None of the concentrations exceeded the GCLs.   Monitoring wells MW‐1, MW‐2, MW‐3, MW‐4, MW‐5, and MW‐6 exhibited  concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards for one or more compounds.   Monitoring well MW‐7 did not exhibit concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards.   Irrigation well SW‐2 contained IPE and MTBE above the laboratory detection limits, but  below the NC 2L Standards.   Irrigation well SW‐4 contained compounds used for disinfecting wells and their breakdown  products including bromodichloromethane and chloroform, with chloroform being above  the NC 2L Standard.   Water supply well SW‐8 did not exhibit concentrations exceeding the laboratory detection  limits.   Groundwater analytical results for the water supply wells are shown on Figure 3 and for the  monitoring wells on Figure 5.  An isoconcentration map showing an estimate of benzene  concentrations in groundwater is mapped on Figure 6. Historical groundwater analytical results  are summarized in Table B‐4A.    WR utilized the GSI Environmental Inc. (GSI) Mann‐Kendall Toolkit to analyze the concentration  trends in the monitoring wells associated with the site. Wells that exhibited concentrations in  excess of the NC 2L Standard in at least one of the past four sampling events were analyzed. Based  on the trend analysis, the following trends were noted:   MW‐1: ethylbenzene, toluene, and total xylenes exhibited an “increasing” trend;  naphthalene exhibited a “probably increasing” trend; benzene exhibited a “stable” trend;  and IPE exhibited a “probably decreasing” trend.   MW‐2: benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, toluene, and total xylenes exhibited a  “stable” trend.    MW‐3: benzene and naphthalene exhibited “no trend”.   MW‐4: naphthalene exhibited a “stable” trend; benzene, toluene, and total xylenes  exhibited “no trend”.   MW‐5: benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, toluene, and total xylenes exhibited “stable”  trends.  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  9       MW‐6: benzene, naphthalene, and total xylenes exhibited “no trend”.   MW‐7: benzene exhibited a “stable” trend; naphthalene exhibited “no trend”.    Source area monitoring well MW‐1 is exhibiting “increasing” and “probably increasing” trends for  most contaminants, while downgradient MW‐5 indicates “stable” trends and further  downgradient MW‐7 exhibited no compounds above the NC 2L Standards. The GSI Mann‐ Kendall Toolkits are included in Appendix B.    SECTION E. AQUIFER TESTING AND PREDICTIVE MODELING – FEBRUARY 2023    1. Aquifer Testing  In association with TA‐04, WR completed water level recovery testing on monitoring wells MW‐ 1, MW‐3, MW‐5, and MW‐6 to determine estimates of aquifer hydraulic conductivity.  These data  were utilized in predictive modeling of contaminant movement within groundwater over time.      WR performed the water level recovery tests on February 16, 2023.  Test data were recorded  using a Solinst Level Logger pressure transducer and downloaded onto a field tablet.  The recovery  tests were conducted by removing (slug out) or adding (slug in) a slug from the monitoring well  being tested, and then measuring the subsequent rate of water level recovery using the Solinst  Level Logger. The recorded water level recovery measurements and well construction dimensions  were used to calculate an estimate of aquifer hydraulic conductivity according to the method of  Bouwer, 1989.   The calculated hydraulic conductivity (K) values are summarized in the table  below:      Results of Aquifer Slug Testing    Well ID Test Type K (ft/day) K (cm/sec)  MW‐1  Slug Out 0.036 1.3 x 10‐5  MW‐1  Slug In 0.030 1.0 x 10‐5  MW‐3 Slug In 0.059 2.1 x 10‐5  MW‐5 Slug Out 0.18 6.3 x 10‐5  MW‐5 Slug In 0.15 5.4 x 10‐5  MW‐6 Slug Out 0.25 8.9 x 10‐5  Average 0.118 4.17 x 10‐5    The average of the six derived K values (0.118 ft/day or 4.17 x 10‐5) was used in predictive  modeling, as described in the following section.  A hydraulic gradient of 0.079 ft/ft was determined  from water table elevations measured in site monitoring wells MW‐1 through MW‐3 on August 5,  2022. A hydraulic gradient of 0.013 ft/ft was determined from water table elevations measured  in site monitoring wells MW‐4 through MW‐7 on August 5, 2022. An average hydraulic gradient  of 0.047 ft/ft was used in modeling. Results of the slug testing are included in Appendix C.        WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  10      2. Contaminant Fate & Transport Modeling  WR used EPA’s BIOSCREEN® Natural Attenuation Decision Support System Model (Air Force  Center for Environmental Excellence) to simulate steady state migration and natural attenuation  of the dissolved phase hydrocarbons in the surficial aquifer using the Domenico analytical solute  transport model. This model considers advection, dispersion, absorption, aerobic decay, and  anaerobic reactions that result in the natural biodegradation of petroleum compounds over  specified times.     Contaminants of Concern:    Benzene is the petroleum‐related VOC that is currently present at the highest concentration above  the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)  in groundwater near the source area at the site, which occurs in the vicinity of monitoring wells  MW‐1, MW‐2, and MW‐5.  Source area monitoring well MW‐1 is exhibiting “increasing” trends  for ethylbenzene, toluene, and total xylenes; a “probably increasing” trend for naphthalene; a  “stable” trend for benzene; and a “probably decreasing” trend for IPE. Additional source area  monitoring well MW‐2 exhibits “stable” trends for benzene, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, toluene,  and total xylenes. Downgradient monitoring well MW‐5 indicates “stable” trends for benzene,  ethylbenzene, naphthalene, toluene, and total xylenes. Further downgradient monitoring well  MW‐7 has not exhibited concentrations above the NC 2L Standards or the USEPA MCLs (See  Table B‐4A).  Benzene also has the lowest organic carbon partitioning coefficient in comparison  to the other main petroleum‐related VOCs (ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene). Therefore, the  movement of benzene in groundwater is less attenuated in the subsurface then the other primary  petroleum‐related VOCs.    For the purposes of contaminant fate and transport modeling at the site, WR used the recently  detected concentration of benzene, MTBE, and IPE in the sample from MW‐1, and the detections  of petroleum constituents in the nearest irrigation water supply well (SW‐2), which is located  approximately 250 feet to the west.  The length of the model simulation was set to 1,000 feet.   The model calculated anticipated concentrations of the benzene, MTBE, and IPE along these flow  paths at 100 years from the present. The model was additionally run for 10 years and 30 years  from the present. Similar results were observed for each timeframe.    Concentrations of benzene in groundwater samples from source area monitoring well MW‐1 have  increased between June 2007 when monitoring began at this facility, and August 2022 when site  groundwater was most recently sampled (see Table B‐4A). Downgradient monitoring well MW‐5  benzene concentrations have remained stable.  This implies that the plume has likely stabilized.         WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  11      Representative Concentrations:  Wells and analytical concentrations utilized in the model include:   Monitoring Well:  MW‐1 (August 2022)  o Benzene – 2.45 mg/L  o MTBE – 0.234 mg/L  o IPE – 0.114 mg/L     Private Well Sample:  SW‐2 (August 2022)  o Benzene – <0.0005 mg/L  o MTBE – 0.00478 mg/L  o IPE – 0.0016 mg/L    The August 2022 benzene concentration detected in the sample from MW‐1 were used to  establish source area concentrations within the BIOSCREEN® model. For the purpose of the fate  and transport model, WR assumed an infinite source of sorbed contaminants, considered to be a  conservative or more extreme than expected modeling approach.    Model Receptor Locations:   The nearest potential receptors to the source area are irrigation water supply well SW‐2, located  about 250 feet to the west, and active water supply well SW‐8, located about 575 feet to the  west.  The model runs considered a travel distance of 1,000 feet from MW‐1.    Site‐Specific Groundwater Parameters  Groundwater parameters used in the model are based on field measurements, default values  obtained from the BIOSCREEN® manual and observed soil lithology at the site.      A hydraulic gradient of 0.079 ft/ft was determined from water table elevations measured in  site monitoring wells MW‐1 through MW‐3 on August 5, 2022. A hydraulic gradient of 0.013  ft/ft was determined from water table elevations measured in site monitoring wells MW‐4  through MW‐7 on August 5, 2022. The average hydraulic gradient value of 0.047 ft/ft was  used.   Hydraulic conductivity (K) is the average value derived from the recovery tests conducted at  MW‐1, MW‐3, MW‐5, and MW‐6  on February 16, 2023: 0.118 ft/day or 4.17 x 10‐5.    A porosity value of 35%, commonly associated with silty soils was used.    Plume dimensions used in calculating dispersivity values are based on the August 2022  analytical results.    Soil parameters including bulk density (1.7 kg/L) fraction of organic carbon (0.001) and organic  carbon partitioning coefficient (Koc) were based on default values referenced in the  BIOSCREEN user manual.  The following Koc values were used:    o Benzene – 38 L/kg  o MTBE – 12.33 L/kg  o IPE – 180 L/kg    WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  12       The values used for instantaneous reaction parameters including nitrate, iron, and sulfate  concentrations were obtained from average values of those parameters cited in the  BIOSCREEN user manual.  The dissolved oxygen field reading (4.75 mg/L) obtained at the time  of sampling monitoring well MW‐1 was used for the oxygen concentration input.    An average half‐life for benzene of 1 year was assumed from the range of half‐lives presented  in the bioscreen manual.      Model Results  The BIOSCREEN software was used to simulate (1) transport with no degradation, (2) transport  with “instantaneous” biodegradation reaction, and (3) dispersion with 1st‐order decay, each over a  100‐year duration.  It should be noted that the source area impacts were conservatively  considered to be infinite, meaning that representative source area contaminant concentrations do  not decrease with time.  In addition, BIOSCREEN uses simplified groundwater flow conditions and  assumes the aquifer and flow field are homogenous and isotropic and that vertical flow gradients  do not affect contaminant transport.    Modeling Results:     No Degradation:     Benzene: Predicted concentrations of benzene greatly exceed its NC 2L Standard at a  distance 575 feet within 100 years.  Under these conditions, concentrations of benzene at  a distance 575 feet from the source area are calculated to be between 296 and 1,219 g/L  after 100 years.  However, the benzene concentration has been observed to be non‐detect  at distances between 250 and 575 feet from the source area according to monitoring data  collected from the nearby water supply wells from 2005 through 2022.     MTBE: Predicted concentrations of MTBE greatly exceed its NC 2L Standard at a distance  575 feet within 100 years.  Under these conditions, concentrations of MTBE at a distance  575 feet from the source area are calculated to be between 45 and 119 g/L after 100  years.  The MTBE concentration has been observed to be 4.78 g/L at 250 feet from the  source area according to monitoring data collected from the SW‐2 in August 2022.     IPE: Predicted concentrations of IPE do not exceed its NC 2L Standard at a distance 575  feet within 100 years.  Under these conditions, concentrations of IPE at a distance 575  feet from the source area are calculated to be non‐detect after 100 years.  The IPE  concentration was observed to be 1.6 g/L at 250 feet from the source area in SW‐2 in  August 2022.     If No Degradation/constant source conditions existed, we would expect to see much  higher concentrations of benzene, IPE, and MTBE at a distance 250 feet from the source,  however that is not the case.  Therefore, the constant source No Degradation scenario is  not representative of conditions at the site.    Instantaneous Reaction:      Benzene: Predicted concentrations of benzene in groundwater will not exceed its NC 2L  Standard at a distance 575 feet from the source area within 100 years under the  Instantaneous Reaction scenario. This is supported by the benzene concentration observed  to be non‐detect at distances between 250 and 575 feet from the source area according  to monitoring data collected from the nearby water supply wells from 2005 through 2022.   WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  13       MTBE: Predicted concentrations of MTBE in groundwater will not exceed its NC 2L  Standard at a distance 575 feet from the source area within 100 years under the  Instantaneous Reaction scenario. This is supported by the MTBE concentration observed  to be 4.78 g/L at a distance of 250 feet from the source area and non‐detect at a distance  of 575 feet from the source area according to monitoring data collected from the nearby  water supply wells from 2005 through 2022.     IPE: Predicted concentrations of IPE in groundwater will not exceed its NC 2L Standard at  a distance 575 feet from the source area within 100 years under the Instantaneous  Reaction scenario. This is supported by the IPE concentration observed to be 1.6 g/L at  a distance of 250 feet from the source area and non‐detect at a distance of 575 feet from  the source area according to monitoring data collected from the nearby water supply wells  from 2005 through 2022.     1st Order Decay:     The graphs of predicted contaminant concentration versus time for the 1st Order Decay  scenarios for benzene, IPE, and MTBE in groundwater after 100 years are all reasonably  close to currently observed concentrations with respect to distance from the source area.   The calculated benzene, IPE, and MTBE concentrations at a distance 500 feet from the  source area for 100 years are non‐detect.  The 1st Order Decay simulations imply that a  condition of steady state or continuation of decreasing contaminant concentrations may  exist at the site.  This makes intuitive sense because the original contaminant source (the  UST system) and associated contaminated soils have been removed from the site, while  the residual concentrations of the contaminants are being lowered by other natural  attenuation processes, including dilution, dispersion and biodegradation over time.     In summary, the modelling results for the No Degradation scenario is overly conservative and not  representative of current site conditions.  The results of the 1st Order Decay scenario is more  consistent with currently observed conditions, which are more representative of a site where the  primary source of groundwater contamination has been removed, and natural attenuation  processes are occurring.  The 1st Order Decay scenario results imply that a condition of steady  state may exist, where contaminant removal by natural processes does not allow further lateral  movement of the contaminants within groundwater.  Results of slug testing and BIOSCREEN  predictive modeling are included in Appendix C.         WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report March 2023  14      SECTION F. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS    This report documents the results of field activities conducted at the site for TA‐04, which included  slug testing and fate and transport modeling.      Conclusions based on observations, analytical data and research relating to the release at the site  combined with historical information include the following:     The site is currently occupied by three buildings which are currently used for storage.    Two active water supply wells were identified within 1,000 feet of the site (SW‐7 and SW‐ 8).  Municipal water is available in the site and surrounding area except for along Brawley  Road. Water supply well SW‐8 is located on Brawley Road.   LNAPL has not been identified at the site.   None of the concentrations exceeded the GCLs during the August 2022 sampling event.   Monitoring wells MW‐1, MW‐2, MW‐3, MW‐4, MW‐5, and MW‐6 exhibited  concentrations exceeding the NC 2L Standards for one or more compounds during the  August 2022 sampling event.   Irrigation well SW‐2 contained IPE and MTBE above the laboratory detection limits, but  below the NC 2L Standards during the August 2022 sampling event.   It appears two different groundwater flow regimes may be present at the site depending  on the depth and screened intervals of the monitoring wells. The groundwater elevation  data indicated a north‐northwesterly groundwater flow direction when plotted as MW‐1  through MW‐3 and MW‐4 through MW‐7.   Source area monitoring well MW‐1 has exhibited “increasing” and “probably increasing”  trends for most contaminants, while downgradient monitoring well MW‐5 has indicated  “stable” trends.    Predictive modeling of the dissolved phase benzene, MTBE, and IPE plumes revealed the  following:  o Benzene and MTBE are anticipated to exceed the NC 2L concentration at 500 feet  from the source area in the no degradation scenario. However, the no degradation  scenario is not representative of the actual conditions that are occurring on the site.   o In the Instantaneous Reaction and 1st Order Decay scenarios, the calculated  benzene, MTBE, and IPE concentrations at a distance 500 feet from the source area  for 100 years are non‐detect. The 1st Order Decay simulations imply that a  condition of steady state or continuation of decreasing contaminant concentrations  may exist at the site.  This makes intuitive sense because the original contaminant  source (the UST system) and associated contaminated soils have been removed  from the site, while the residual concentrations of the contaminants are being  lowered by other natural attenuation processes, including dilution, dispersion, and  biodegradation over time.     Based on the results of the fate and transport modeling, WR recommends the State Lead Program  consider closure of this incident.     WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.        FIGURES     CBM LA DRAWN BY: 07/09/21 02172214.30 1 SUBJECT SITE ±2.00 ACRES SCALE:FIGURE NO.: PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY: SEATS COUNTRY STORE TF-2860 2513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROAD YADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NC GENERAL LOCATION MAP 1"=1000 ' GRAPHIC SCALE 1 inch = 1000 ft. 0 1000500 2000 WithersRavenel Engineers | Planners | Surveyors 115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: F-1479 www.withersravenel.com MW-3MW-2State MW(ABANDONED)MW-5FORMER SEATSCOUNTRY STOREGARAGERONNIESEATSRESIDENCESEATS ROADCOURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADSW-2 (IRRIGATION)SW-3 (ABANDONED)COURTNEYELEMENTARYSCHOOLMW-6MW-7MW-1MW-4SW-1 (ABANDONED)UST-1CBMLADRAWN BY:07/09/2102172214.302SCALE:FIGURE NO.:PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY:SEATS COUNTRY STORETF-28602513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADYADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NCSITE MAPWithersRavenelEngineers | Planners | Surveyors115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: F-1479 | www.withersravenel.com1"=60 '6030120LEGENDTYPE II MONITORING WELL LOCATIONWATER SUPPLY WELL LOCATIONNOTES: 1.) 2013 AERIAL OBTAINED FROM THE LOCAL COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT.UST SW-1SW-2SW-3SW-4SW-5SW-6SW-7SW-8SW-9SW-10SW-12SW-13SW-15SW-14SEATS ROADCOUR TN E Y -HUN T S V I L L E RO AD 500-FT1,000-FT1"=500 '5002501000LEGENDIRRIGATION WELL LOCATIONABANDONED WELL LOCATIONINACTIVE WELL LOCATIONACTIVE WELL LOCATIONUNKNOWN- CONNECTED TO MUNICIPAL WATERNOTES: 1.) AERIAL OBTAINED FROM THE LOCAL COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT.CBMLADRAWN BY:08/23/2202172214.303SCALE:FIGURE NO.:PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY:SEATS COUNTRY STORETF-28602513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADYADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NCPOTENTIAL RECEPTORMAPWithersRavenelEngineers | Planners | Surveyors115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: F-1479 | www.withersravenel.com MW-3MW-2State MW(ABANDONED)MW-5FORMER SEATSCOUNTRY STOREGARAGERONNIESEATSRESIDENCESEATS ROADCOURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADSW-2 (IRRIGATION)MW-6MW-7MW-1MW-4(83.25)(87.32)(85.15)SW-1 (ABANDONED)UST-1878685841"=40 '402080LEGENDTYPE II MONITORING WELL LOCATIONWATER SUPPLY WELL LOCATIONGROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR(DASHED WHERE INFERRED) GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (FT)GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTIONNOTES: 1.) AERIAL OBTAINED FROM THE LOCAL COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT. 2.) MW-4, MW-5, MW-6, AND MW-7 NOT USED TO CONSTRUCTGROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOURSCBMLADRAWN BY:08/15/2202172214.304ASCALE:FIGURE NO.:PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY:SEATS COUNTRY STORETF-28602513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADYADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NCGROUNDWATER ELEVATIONCONTOUR MAP(MW-1 THROUGH MW-3)AUGUST 2022WithersRavenelEngineers | Planners | Surveyors115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: F-1479 | www.withersravenel.com01 inch = 40 ftGRAPHIC SCALE(85.15) MW-3MW-2State MW(ABANDONED)MW-5FORMER SEATSCOUNTRY STOREGARAGERONNIESEATSRESIDENCESEATS ROADCOURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADSW-2 (IRRIGATION)MW-6MW-7MW-1MW-4(88.10)(89.50)(87.94)(88.31)SW-1 (ABANDONED)2345UST-188. 0 88.58 9 . 0 8 9 .51"=40 'GRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = 40 ft.0402080LEGENDTYPE II MONITORING WELL LOCATIONWATER SUPPLY WELL LOCATIONGROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR(DASHED WHERE INFERRED)GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (FT)GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTIONNOTES: 1.) AERIAL OBTAINED FROM THE LOCAL COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT. 2.) MW-1, MW-2, AND MW-3 NOT USED TO CONSTRUCT GROUNDWATERELEVATION CONTOURSCBMLADRAWN BY:08/15/2202172214.304BSCALE:FIGURE NO.:PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY:SEATS COUNTRY STORETF-28602513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADYADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NCGROUNDWATER ELEVATIONCONTOUR MAP(MW-4 THROUGH MW-7)AUGUST 2022WithersRavenelEngineers | Planners | Surveyors115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: f-1479 | www.withersravenel.com(88.31) MW-3MW-2State MW(ABANDONED)MW-5FORMER SEATSCOUNTRY STOREGARAGERONNIESEATSRESIDENCESEATS ROADCOURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADSW-2 (IRRIGATION)SW-3 (ABANDONED)COURTNEYELEMENTARYSCHOOLMW-6MW-7MW-1MW-4SW-1 (ABANDONED)2345UST-11"=60 'GRAPHIC SCALE1 inch = 60 ft.06030120LEGENDTYPE II MONITORING WELL LOCATIONWATER SUPPLY WELL LOCATIONNOTES: 1.) AERIAL OBTAINED FROM THE LOCAL COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT.CBMLADRAWN BY:08/23/2202172214.305SCALE:FIGURE NO.:PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY:SEATS COUNTRY STORETF-28602513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADYADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NCGROUNDWATER ANALYTICALRESULTS MAPAUGUST 2022WithersRavenelEngineers | Planners | Surveyors115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: F-1479 | www.withersravenel.com MW-3MW-2State MW(ABANDONED)MW-5FORMER SEATSCOUNTRY STOREGARAGERONNIESEATSRESIDENCESEATS ROADCOURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADSW-2 (IRRIGATION)SW-3 (ABANDONED)COURTNEYELEMENTARYSCHOOLMW-6MW-7(2,820)(1,240)(146)(474)MW-1MW-41(<0.500)SW-1 (ABANDONED)(14.2)UST-1(2,450)1"=60 '6030120LEGENDTYPE II MONITORING WELL LOCATIONWATER SUPPLY WELL LOCATIONDISSOLVED BENZENE ISOCONCENTRATIONCONTOUR (ug/L) - DASHED WHERE INFERREDDISSOLVED BENZENE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)NOTES: 1.) AERIAL OBTAINED FROM THE LOCAL COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT.CBMLADRAWN BY:08/23/2202172214.306SCALE:FIGURE NO.:PROJECT NO.:DATE:APPROVED BY:SEATS COUNTRY STORETF-28602513 COURTNEY-HUNTSVILLE ROADYADKINVILLE, YADKIN COUNTY, NCDISSOLVED BENZENEISOCONCENTRATION MAPAUGUST 2022WithersRavenelEngineers | Planners | Surveyors115 MacKenan Drive | Cary, NC 27511 | t: 919.469.3340 | license #: F-1479 | www.withersravenel.com(2,450)01 inch = 60 ftGRAPHIC SCALE WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    TABLES       UST IDNumberCapacity(in gallons)ConstructionDetailsTankDimensions (diameter x length)Description ofAssociatedPiping & PumpsDate of TankInstallationStatus ofUSTWas release associated with UST System? (Y/N)1 1,000 Unknown 64" x 6' Unknown UnknownPermanently Closed By Removal (January 1986)Y2 3,000 Unknown 64" x 18' Unknown UnknownPermanently Closed By Removal (January 1986)Y3 2,000 Unknown 64" x 12' Unknown UnknownPermanently Closed By Removal (January 1986)Y4 10,000 Unknown 10' x 17' Unknown UnknownPermanently Closed By Removal (January 1986)Unknown5 5,000 Unknown 96" x 13'4" Unknown UnknownPermanently Closed By Removal (January 1986)UnknownAST IDNumberCapacity(in gallons)ConstructionDetailsTankDimensions (diameter x length) (ft)Description ofAssociatedPiping & PumpsDate of TankInstallationStatus ofASTWas release associated with AST System? (Y/N)IncidentNumberMaterialReleasedDateofRelease2860 GasolineUnknown - Discovered January 1983 Notes:1) UST Information obtained from the January 12, 2007 Phase I Limited Site Assessment prepared by Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.GasolineGasolineKeroseneDieselGasolineTable B-1Site History: UST/AST System & Other Release InformationSeats Country StoreA release was identified in January 1983 when groundwater samples collected from water supply wells at the site and adjacent property contained petroleum compounds. Impacts were noted in soil samples collected by the NCDEQ in January 1986.2513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, Yadkin County, North CarolinaDescription of ReleaseIncident # 2860Current/LastContentsCurrent/LastContentsPage 1 of 1 Benzene Bromodichloromethane Bromomethane Butylbenzene, n‐Butylbenzene, sec‐ Chloroform Dibromoethane, 1,2‐ Ethylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Isopropyl Ether Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) Isopropyltoluene, 4‐ MBK, Methyl Butyl Ketone (2‐Hexanone) Methyl‐tert‐Butyl Ether MIBK (4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone) Naphthalene Propylbenzene, n‐Styrene Toluene Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4‐ Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5‐Xylenes, total 71‐43‐275‐27‐474‐83‐9 104‐51‐8 135‐98‐867‐66‐3 106‐93‐4 100‐41‐487‐68‐3 108‐20‐398‐82‐899‐87‐6 591‐78‐61634‐04‐4108‐10‐191‐20‐3 103‐65‐1 100‐42‐5 108‐88‐395‐63‐6 108‐67‐81330‐20‐7MW‐1 8/5/20222,450<50.0 <10055<50.0 <50.0 <50.01,980<300114 132<50.0 <100234<100567 307<50.01,180 1,880 507 8,270MW‐2 8/5/20221,240<5.00 <10.032.7 16.3<5.008.89 887<30.024.6 75.4 8.14 33 45.2<10.0377 221 6.95 4,130 1,170 362 4,190MW‐3 8/5/202214.2<0.5006.4 1.73 1.49<0.500 <0.50074.7<3.00 <0.5008.71 1.03 1.02<1.00 <1.0040.2 22.0<0.50011.2 123 45.9 277MW‐4 8/5/2022146<0.500 <1.003.87 3.19<0.5000.622 205<3.003.09 21.7 1.64 5.11 4.3 2.42 91.6 52.0<0.50086.60 384.0 98.1 910MW‐5 8/5/20222,820<5.00 <10.027.0 15.4<5.00 <5.00517<30.031.9 63.7<5.0012.6 62.8 21.7 322 140<5.001,200 946 251 2,530MW‐6 8/5/2022474<0.500 <1.009.98 5.29<0.500 <0.50091.3<3.0013.3 24.4 1.31<1.0044.4 5.26 119 37.1<0.5007.65 276 28.5 176MW‐7 8/5/2022<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.5001.21<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <3.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500SW‐2 8/5/2022<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <3.001.57<0.500 <0.500 <1.004.78<1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500SW‐4 8/5/2022<0.50018.4<1.00 <0.500 <0.50091<0.500 <0.500 <3.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500SW‐8 8/5/2022<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <3.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500FB 8/5/2022<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <3.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5001 NL 10 70 70 70 0.02 600 0.4 70 70 25 40 20 100 6 70 70 600 400 4005005,000 NL 10,000 5,900 8,800 70,000 50 80,000 400 70,000 30,500 11,700 40,000 20,000 100,000 6,000 26,100 70,000 260,000 28,500 24,100 50,000Notes:1)2)3)4)NRNABDLNLResultResultResultYadkinville, Yadkin County, North CarolinaTABLE B‐4SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSSeats Country StoreIncident # 28602513 Courtney‐Huntsville RoadGCLs for Groundwater = NCDEQ UST Section Gross Contamination Levels for Groundwater.Analytical MethodSM6200BSample IDDateCollectedNC 2L Standard GCLs for GroundwaterAll results provided in ug/L (micrograms per liter) or parts per billion.Compounds analyzed for by laboratory but not listed were not detected above laboratory detection limits. See the laboratory report included in the Appendix for a full list of constituents. NC 2L Standard ‐ North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standard as per NC Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02L.= Result Exceeds NC Gross Contaminant Level for Groundwater= Not Reported= Not Analyzed by Method Shown= Beneath Detection Limit (No Compounds Detected at Concentrations Above Laboratory Method Detection Limit)= No Regulatory Level Established= Result Exceeds Laboratory Detection Limits= Result Exceeds NC 2L Standard for Groundwater Acetone Benzene Bromodichloromethane Bromomethane Butylbenzene, n‐Butylbenzene, sec‐ Butylbenzene, tert‐ Carbon Tetrachloride Chloroform Dibromoethane, 1,2‐ Dichloroethane, 1,2‐ Ethylbenzene Isopropyl Ether Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) Isopropyltoluene, 4‐ MBK, Methyl Butyl Ketone (2‐Hexanone)  MEK (2‐Butanone )Methyl‐tert‐Butyl Ether MIBK (4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone) Naphthalene Propylbenzene, n‐Styrene Toluene Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4‐ Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5‐Xylenes, total tert‐Amyl Alcohol67‐64‐171‐43‐275‐27‐474‐83‐9 104‐51‐8 135‐98‐898‐06‐656‐23‐567‐66‐3 106‐93‐4 107‐06‐2 100‐41‐4 108‐20‐398‐82‐899‐87‐6 591‐78‐678‐93‐31634‐04‐4108‐10‐191‐20‐3 103‐65‐1 100‐42‐5 108‐88‐395‐63‐6 108‐67‐81330‐20‐79/11/2006 NR4,990NA <2.004.48BDL‐‐‐NA NA BDL BDL78 413 23BDL‐‐‐NR1920‐‐‐133 16NA34 41.8 17.6 420BDL9/23/2012 NR6,400BDL <100 BDL BDL‐‐‐NA BDL BDL72 940 270 110NA‐‐‐NR900‐‐‐640 180BDL330 630 230 3,600NA4/12/2018 NR2,100<25 <25019 J12 J‐‐‐<25 <250.23<501,300 100 82<25‐‐‐NR250‐‐‐390 160<251,100 1,000 280 5,100NA5/27/2020 < 1,2002,600< 12 <5052 16<12< 12 < 120.24< 121,400 120 867.5 J<120< 120240<120500 220< 12960 1,500 410 6,700NA4/26/2021 <10002,880<50.0 <100 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.01,470 155 98<50.0 <100 <500318<100510 217<50.01,190 1,330 359 6,260NA4/18/20221,150 1,570<50.0 <100 <50.0 <50.0 <200 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.02,000 73 115<50.0 <100 <500114<100544 307<50.01,930 1,960 513 9,010NA8/5/2022 <10002,450<50.0 <10055<50.0 <200 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.01,980 114 132<50.0 <100 <500234<100567 307<50.01,180 1,880 507 8,270NA9/11/2006 NR2,160NA <4.00 BDL22.6‐‐‐NA NA34.2BDL2,020 53.8 143 13.4‐‐‐NR BDL‐‐‐682 410NA9,110 2,930 829 10,350BDL9/23/2012 NR3,300BDL <100 BDL BDL‐‐‐NA BDL BDL BDL950BDL53BDL‐‐‐NR100‐‐‐300 130BDL9,300 1,100 300 6,300NA4/12/2018 NR2,400<25 <25015 J8.5 J‐‐‐<25 <2512<251,800 25 72<25‐‐‐NR52‐‐‐420 16012 J8,700 1,200 310 7,700NA5/27/2020 < 5,0002,700< 50 <20061< 50 <50 < 50 < 5022< 501,90044 J92< 50 <500 < 500 < 50 <500580 290< 509,200 2,200 470 8,700NA4/26/2021 <10002,990<50.0 <100 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.01,480<50.075.5<50.0 <100 <500 <100 <100425 193<50.09,090 1,380 344 6,700NA4/18/20221,130 2,730<50.0 <100 <50.0 <50.0 <200 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.02,010<50.0100<50.0 <100 <500 <100 <100623 263<50.09,440 1,890 467 9,060NA8/5/2022 <1001,240<5.00 <10.032.7 16.3<20.0 <5.00 <5.008.89<5.00887 24.6 75.4 8.1433 <50.045.2<10.0377 221 6.95 4,130 1,170 362 4,190NA9/11/2006 NR57NA <0.5006.45 5.25‐‐‐NA NA BDL BDL26.8 13.6 25.1 1.29‐‐‐NR60.2‐‐‐22.3 30.1NA0.6 34 21.6 21.49 2,6009/23/2012 NR12BDL NA0.9 5.1‐‐‐NA BDL BDL1.7 3.1 8.6 18BDL‐‐‐NR39‐‐‐0.53 J6.5BDL BDL BDL BDL0.68 JNA4/12/2018 NR <0.50 <0.50 <5.0 <0.500.60‐‐‐<0.50 <0.50 <0.020 <1.0 <0.50 <0.500.42 J<0.50‐‐‐NR <0.50‐‐‐<5.00.37 J<0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 NA5/27/20206.2 J< 0.50 < 0.50 <2.0 < 0.500.32 J<50 < 0.50 < 0.50 BDL < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 <5.0 < 5.0 < 0.50 <5.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 1.50 NA4/26/2021 <10.00.982<0.500 <1.00 <0.5002.16<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5000.716 1.01 4.39<0.500 <1.00 <5.005.47<1.00 <1.001.37<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NA4/18/2022 <10.0 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.5001.5<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5001.64<0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.001.39<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NA8/5/2022 <10.014.2<0.5006.4 1.73 1.49<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.50074.7<0.5008.71 1.031.02 <5.00 <1.00 <1.0040.2 22<0.50011.2 123 45.9 277NA5/27/2020130 J2,100< 12 <5011 J< 12 <12 < 12 < 1211< 12460 58 20< 0.50 <120100 J83<120130 49< 12720 470 130 2,820NA4/26/2021 <10.03.07<0.500 <1.009.04 2.84<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.50010.1<0.5005.84 0.887<1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.0027.6 6.05<0.5001.89 58.2 20.5 98.3NA4/18/2022 <10.01.57<0.500 <1.000.573<0.500 <2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5002.3<0.5000.54<0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.002.6 0.97<0.5000.575 8.01 3.17 18.7NA8/5/2022 <10.0146<0.500 <1.003.87 3.19<2.00 <0.500 <0.5000.622<0.500205 3.09 21.7 1.645.11 <5.00 4.3 2.4291.6 52<0.50086.6 384 98.1 910NA5/27/2020 < 2,5003,900< 25 <1004114 J<25 < 25 < 250.26< 25800 38 54< 25 <250 < 25057<250230 110< 252,600 1,500 400 6,000NA9/8/2020 < 2,5003,200<25 <10038<25 <25 <25 <250.35<251,100 38 86<25 <250 <25047<250470 240<252,500 1,600 470 6,100NA4/26/2021 <1001,870<5.00 <10.020.2 12.7<5.00 <5.00 <5.00 <5.00 <5.00331 23.9 45.7 5.73<10.0 <50.034.5<10.0239 102<5.00733 729 209 1,560NA4/18/2022 <10003,530<50.0 <100 <50.0 <50.0 <200 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0753<50.073.5<50.0 <100 <500 <100 <100224 154<50.01630 1080 292 3,890NA8/5/2022 <1002,820<5.00 <10.027.0 15.4<20.0 <5.00 <5.00 <5.00 <5.00517 31.9 63.7<5.00 12.60 <50.062.821.70322 140<5.001200 946 251 2,530NA9/8/2020 < 250260<2.5 <1013 5.4 0.90<2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.565 12 15 4.2 3025 J2718 J87 29<2.5220 410 190 990NA6/7/2021<10.016.6<0.500 <1.00 <0.5000.650<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5000.713 0.563 0.961<0.500 <1.00 <5.001.64<1.003.89 0.888<0.500 <0.5009.89 1.17 8.87NA4/18/2022<10.084.7<0.500 <1.000.67 0.848<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5009.25 4.09 3.64<0.500 <1.00 <5.0011.3<1.0013.6 3.15<0.5001.79 18 1.86 21.3NA8/5/2022<10.0474<0.500 <1.009.98 5.29<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.50091.3 13.3 24.4 1.31<1.00 <5.0044.45.26119 37.1<0.5007.65 276 28.5 176NA9/8/20205.3 J0.52<0.50 <2.0 < 0.501.3 0.17<0.50 <0.50 <0.02 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.501.3< 0.50 <5.0 <5.00.30 J<5.0 < 0.500.85< 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 <1.5 NA6/7/2021<10.0 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.5002.20<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5001.44<0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500NA4/18/2022<10.00.747<0.500 <1.00 <0.5001.97<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5002.12<0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.003.34 1.72<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500NA8/5/2022<10.0 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.5001.21<2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500NA6000 1 NL 10 70 70 70 NL 70 0.02 0.4 600 70 70 25 40 4000 20 100 6 70 70 600 400 400 500 406,000,000 5,000 NL 10,000 5,900 8,800 14,750 NL 70,000 50 400 80,000 70,000 30,500 11,700 40,000 4,000,000 20,000 100,000 6,000 26,100 70,000 260,00028,500 24,100 50,000 40,000Notes:NR = Not Reported1)NA = Not Analyzed by Method Shown2)BDL3)4)NL = No Regulatory Level Established5) Result= Result Exceeds Laboratory Detection LimitsResult= Result Exceeds NC 2L Standard for GroundwaterResult= Result Exceeds NC Gross Contaminant Level for GroundwaterCompounds analyzed for by laboratory but not listed were not detected above laboratory detection limits. See the laboratory report included in the Appendix for a full list of constituents. MW‐6GCLs for Groundwater = NCDEQ UST Section Gross Contamination Levels for Groundwater.Historical Groundwater data from Groundwater Monitoring Report by S&ME, dated September 29, 2020. = Beneath Detection Limit (No Compounds Detected at Concentrations Above      Laboratory Method Detection Limit).All results provided in ug/L (micrograms per liter) or parts per billion.NC 2L Standard ‐ North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standard as per NC Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02L.TABLE B‐4ASUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSYadkinville, Yadkin County, North Carolina2513 Courtney‐Huntsville RoadIncident # 2860Seats Country StoreSample IDDateCollectedGCLs for GroundwaterAnalytical MethodNC 2L Standard SM6200BMW‐7MW‐5MW‐1MW‐2MW‐3MW‐4 Acetone Benzene Bromodichloromethane Bromomethane Butylbenzene, n‐Butylbenzene, sec‐ Butylbenzene, tert‐ Carbon Tetrachloride Chloroform Dibromoethane, 1,2‐ Dichloroethane, 1,2‐ Ethylbenzene Isopropyl Ether Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) Isopropyltoluene, 4‐ MBK, Methyl Butyl Ketone (2‐Hexanone)  MEK (2‐Butanone )Methyl‐tert‐Butyl Ether MIBK (4‐Methyl‐2‐pentanone) Naphthalene Propylbenzene, n‐Styrene Toluene Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4‐ Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5‐Xylenes, total tert‐Amyl Alcohol67‐64‐171‐43‐275‐27‐474‐83‐9 104‐51‐8 135‐98‐898‐06‐656‐23‐567‐66‐3 106‐93‐4 107‐06‐2 100‐41‐4 108‐20‐398‐82‐899‐87‐6 591‐78‐678‐93‐31634‐04‐4108‐10‐191‐20‐3 103‐65‐1 100‐42‐5 108‐88‐395‐63‐6 108‐67‐81330‐20‐7TABLE B‐4ASUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTSYadkinville, Yadkin County, North Carolina2513 Courtney‐Huntsville RoadIncident # 2860Seats Country StoreSample IDDateCollectedAnalytical MethodSM6200B12/20/2005 NR200BDL BDL BDL2.3BDL BDL BDL0.062BDL18 13.0 5.2NA NA NA46NA41 4.7BDL63 150 42 280NA9/11/2006 NR71.2BDL BDL BDL1.14BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL10.3 14.2 5.29NA NA NA47NA19.4 3.38BDL57.6 20 5.38 74.7NA12/20/2005 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA8/5/2022 <10.0 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.5001.57<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <5.004.78<1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NASW‐3 12/20/2005 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA12/20/2005 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA8/5/2022 <10.0 <0.50018.4<1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <2.00 <0.50091<0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NA12/20/2005 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA4/12/2018 NR <0.501.7<5.0 <0.50 <0.50 BDL0.53 200<0.020 <1.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 NA NA NA <0.50 NA <5.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.50 NA12/20/2005 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA9/11/2006 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NASW‐7 5/27/2020 <50 <0.50 <0.50 <2.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <1.0 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <2.0 <2.0 <5.0 <5.0 <0.50 <5.0 <5.0 <0.50 <2.0 <0.50 <1.0 <1.0 <1.50NA12/20/2005 NR BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA NA BDL NA BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL NA9/8/20204.0J< 0.50 <0.50 <2.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.02 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 <5.0 <5.0 < 0.50 <5.0 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50 <1.5 NA4/26/2021<10.0<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.007.25<1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NA4/18/2022<10.0<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NA8/5/2022<10.0<0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <2.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <1.00 <5.00 <1.00 <1.00 <1.00 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 <0.500 NA6000 1 NL 10 70 70 70 NL 70 0.02 0.4 600 70 70 25 40 4000 20 100 6 70 70 600 400 400 500 406,000,000 5,000 NL 10,000 5,900 8,800 14,750 NL 70,000 50 400 80,000 70,000 30,500 11,700 40,000 4,000,000 20,000 100,000 6,000 26,100 70,000 260,00028,500 24,100 50,000 40,000NL 5 NL NL NL NL NL 5 NL 0.05 5 700 NL NL NL NL NL NL NL NL NL 100 1,000 NL NL 10,000 NLNotes:NR = Not Reported1)NA = Not Analyzed by Method Shown2)BDL3)4)NL = No Regulatory Level Established5) Result= Result Exceeds Laboratory Detection LimitsResult= Result Exceeds NC 2L Standard for GroundwaterResult= Result Exceeds NC Gross Contaminant Level for Groundwater= Beneath Detection Limit (No Compounds Detected at Concentrations Above      Laboratory Method Detection Limit).NC 2L Standard ‐ North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standard as per NC Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02L.SW‐1SW‐5SW‐6NC 2L Standard SW‐8GCLs for Groundwater = NCDEQ UST Section Gross Contamination Levels for Groundwater.Historical Groundwater data from Groundwater Monitoring Report by S&ME, dated September 29, 2020. SW‐2SW‐4GCLs for GroundwaterUSEPA MCLAll results provided in ug/L (micrograms per liter) or parts per billion.Compounds analyzed for by laboratory but not listed were not detected above laboratory detection limits. See the laboratory report included in the Appendix for a full list of constituents.  Notes: 1)2)Date InstalledNA1970sNAUnknown1962 (active)Unknown1989---680 feet West-northwestDowngradientDavid & Charlotte MillerRaeford Mitchell2429 Goldmine RoadYadkinville, NC 270552424 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Unknown, Connected to Municipal WaterUnknown, Connected to Municipal Water------------1,340 feet Southeast1,050 feet SouthwestUpgradientUpgradient------NA------SW-152920 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinBobbie GardnerBryan Brawley2712 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Inactive - Drinking water obtained from SW-8--- ---NA NA - Well AbandonedSW-142920 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinBobbie GardnerBryan Brawley2712 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Inactive - Drinking water obtained from SW-7--- ---680 feet West-northwestDowngradientSW-132921 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NCYadkin Ronnie Seats2513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Abandoned NA NASW-122424 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinSW-102604, 2606 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinCourtney Volunteer Fire Department2604 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 270552712 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Active Potable Unknown Unknown900 feet Southeast UpgradientSW-112610 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinUnknown, Connected to Municipal Water--- ---575 feet West DowngradientSW-1 Yadkin Ronnie Seats AbandonedSW-92529 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinYadkin County Board of Education121 Washington StreetYadkinville, NC 27055Inactive, Connected to Municipal Water510 112650 feet East-northeastCrossgradientSW-82924 Brawley RoadYadkinville, NCYadkinBobbie GardnerBryan Brawley250 feet North-northwestDowngradient2509 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkin Ronnie Seats2513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Irrigation - Owner wants to keep well~ 90 Unknown2513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC2513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055SiteWell ID Property Address County Property OwnerWell location, address, and construction information was obtained from the Corrective Action Performance/Monitoring Report by S&ME dated September 29, 2020.Well UseWell Depth(feet)Well Casing Depth(feet bgs)Well Distance from Source Area(feet)Location Relative to Groundwater FlowNA NA NAProperty Owner AddressSW-2NA - Wells AbandonedSW-4SW-32920 Seats RoadYadkinville, NCSW-52500 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkin Jacob Kemner2500 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Inactive, Connected to Municipal WaterUnknown UnknownUpgradientTwo Wells on Property - Both Abandoned2513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055YadkinAlbert Nancec/o Karen Wheeler704 Garden Terrace LaneLewisville, NC 27023---75 (active well)26 (inactive well)52 (active well)720 feet SouthwestUpgradientUpgradient320 feet SouthwestYadkin Mishelle ReevesNA NA NAYadkinRonnie and Kenneth Seats2508 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Irrigation, Connected to Municipal WaterUnknown--- --- 420 feet South2514 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCYadkin Curtis BaityUnknown260 feet Southwest2508 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCProperty owner information was obtained from Yadkin County, NC Geographic Information System on 5/25/2021.TABLE B-5APUBLIC & PRIVATE WATER SUPPLY WELL INFORMATIONSeats Country StoreIncident # 28602513 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, Yadkin County, North CarolinaCommentsTwo wells on Property - One Active Potable, One IrrigationSW-72436 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NCSW-6UnknownUpgradient2514 Courtney-Huntsville RoadYadkinville, NC 27055Well not observed, Connected to Municipal Water Well ID Date of  Installation Screened  Interval (feet) Total Depth  (feet below ground surface) Well Diameter  (inches) Top‐of‐Casing  Elevation (feet) Date Water Level  Measured Depth‐to‐LNAPL (feet) Depth‐to‐Water Uncorrected(feet) LNAPL Thickness (feet) Groundwater  Surface Elevation          (feet) 9/11/2006 NM 26.90 NM 73.10 9/23/2012 NM 29.34 NM 70.66 4/12/2018 NM 12.40 NM 87.60 5/27/2020 NM 10.51 NM 89.49 6/25/2020 NM 11.22 NM 88.78 9/8/2020 NM 13.63 NM 86.37 4/26/2021 NM 12.85 NM 87.15 6/21/2021 NM 14.74 NM 85.26 4/18/2022 NM 11.23 NM 88.77 8/5/2022 NM 14.85 NM 85.15 2/16/2023 NM 9.37 NM 90.63 9/11/2006 NM 25.95 NM 74.27 9/23/2012 NM 21.74 NM 78.48 4/12/2018 NM 11.22 NM 89.00 5/27/2020 NM 6.05 NM 94.17 6/25/2020 NM 8.56 NM 91.66 9/8/2020 NM 10.30 NM 89.92 4/26/2021 NM 9.58 NM 90.64 6/21/2021 NM 12.03 NM 88.19 4/18/2022 NM 7.99 NM 92.13 8/5/2022 NM 12.80 NM 87.32 2/16/2023 NM NM NM NM 9/11/2006 NM 25.65 NM 74.21 9/23/2012 NM 30.34 NM 69.52 4/12/2018 NM 13.64 NM 86.22 5/27/2020 NM 9.54 NM 90.32 6/25/2020 NM 9.54 NM 90.32 9/8/2020 NM 11.87 NM 87.99 4/26/2021 NM 13.59 NM 86.27 6/21/2021 NM 16.04 NM 83.82 4/18/2022 NM 12.96 NM 86.89 8/5/2022 NM 16.60 NM 83.25 2/16/2023 NM 10.42 NM 89.43 5/27/2020 NM 5.27 NM 95.16 6/25/2020 NM 7.09 NM 93.34 9/8/2020 NM 8.46 NM 91.97 4/26/2021 NM 7.99 NM 92.44 6/21/2021 NM 10.19 NM 90.24 4/18/2022 NM 5.52 NM 94.78 8/5/2022 NM 10.80 NM 89.50 2/16/2023 NM 4.27 NM 96.03 5/27/2020 NM 6.97 NM 91.24 6/25/2020 NM 7.55 NM 90.66 9/8/2020 NM 8.12 NM 90.09 4/26/2021 NM 7.40 NM 90.81 6/21/2021 NM 9.42 NM 88.79 4/18/2022 NM 5.63 NM 92.57 8/5/2022 NM 10.10 NM 88.10 2/16/2023 NM 4.58 NM 93.62 9/8/2020 NM 6.97 NM 92.70 6/21/2021 NM 10.58 NM 89.09 4/18/2022 NM 6.94 NM 92.62 8/5/2022 NM 11.25 NM 88.31 2/16/2023 NM 8.51 NM 91.05 9/8/2020 NM 6.97 NM 85.32 6/21/2021 NM 3.79 NM 88.50 4/18/2022 NM 0.00 NM 92.29 8/5/2022 NM 4.35 NM 87.94 2/16/2023 NM 0.00 NM 92.24 1) 2)3)Groundwater elevation adjusted for LNAPL is [Top of Casing Elevation ‐ Depth to Water] + [LNAPL Thickness * 0.8581]4)NM = Not Measured. Prior Top of Casing (TOC) elevations and monitoring well construction information obtained from September 29, 2020 report prepared by S&ME, Inc.LNAPL ‐ Light Non‐Aqueous Phase Liquid 100.00 100.22 99.86 100.43 98.21 23 2 2 2 20 2 25 2 20 2 MW‐6 9/3/2020 5‐20 MW‐5 5/12/2020 10‐25 45 9/3/2020 5‐20 5/12/2020 8‐23 TABLE B‐7MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION AND LIQUID LEVEL DATA Seats Country StoreIncident # 2860 2513 Courtney‐Huntsville RoadYadkinville, Yadkin County, North Carolina Notes:  MW‐2 9/6/2006 15‐45 45 MW‐1 MW‐3 9/6/2006 15‐45 45 MW‐7 MW‐4 2 9/6/2006 20‐45 99.56 92.24 100.00 100.12 99.85 100.30 98.20 92.29 99.67 Page 1 of 1 WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    APPENDIX A    FIELD NOTES & PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report Photograph Date: February 16, 2023        PHOTO 1  General site photograph facing north     PHOTO 2  Location of monitoring well MW‐1  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report Photograph Date: February 16, 2023        PHOTO 3  Location of monitoring well MW‐2     PHOTO 4  Location of monitoring well MW‐3  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report Photograph Date: February 16, 2023        PHOTO 3  Location of monitoring well MW‐4     PHOTO 4  Location of monitoring well MW‐5  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.  Seats Country Store – NCDEQ Incident #2860 WR Project # 02172214.30  Fate and Transport Modeling Report Photograph Date: February 16, 2023        PHOTO 3  Location of monitoring well MW‐6     PHOTO 4  Location of monitoring well MW‐7  WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    APPENDIX B    GSI MANN‐KENDALL TOOLKITS     Evaluation Date:Job ID: Facility Name:Constituent: Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L Sampling Point ID:MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-7 Sampling Sampling Event Date 1 9/11/06 4,990 2,160 57 2 9/23/12 6,400 3,300 12 3 4/12/18 2,100 2,400 0.5 4 5/27/20 2,600 2,700 0.5 2100 3,900 5 9/8/20 3,200 260 0.52 6 4/26/21 2,880 2,990 0.982 3.07 1,870 16.6 0.5 7 4/18/22 1,570 2,730 0.5 1.57 3,530 84.7 0.747 8 8/5/22 2,450 1,240 14.2 146 2,820 474 0.25 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Coefficient of Variation:0.53 0.27 1.68 1.83 0.25 0.98 0.40 Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-9 -1 -4 -2 -4 2 -2Confidence Factor:88.1%50.0%66.7%62.5%75.8%62.5%62.5% Concentration Trend:Stable Stable No Trend No Trend Stable No Trend Stable Notes: 1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples. 2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing; ≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable. 3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales, Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003. DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein. GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com BENZENE CONCENTRATION (ug/L) 23-Aug-22 Seats Country Store - Inc. 2860 Benzene GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT for Constituent Trend Analysis WithersRavenel 02172214.30 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23 12/25Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-7 Evaluation Date:Job ID: Facility Name:Constituent: Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L Sampling Point ID:MW-1 MW-2 MW-5 Sampling Sampling Event Date 1 9/11/06 78 2,020 2 9/23/12 940 950 3 4/12/18 1,300 1,800 4 5/27/20 1,400 1,900 800 5 9/8/20 1,100 6 4/26/21 1,470 1,480 331 7 4/18/22 2,000 2,010 753 8 8/5/22 1,980 887 517 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Coefficient of Variation:0.50 0.31 0.42 Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):19 -5 -4Confidence Factor:99.9%71.9%75.8% Concentration Trend:Increasing Stable Stable Notes: 1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples. 2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing; ≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable. 3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales, Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003. DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein. ETHYLBENZENE CONCENTRATION (ug/L) GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT for Constituent Trend Analysis 23-Aug-22 02172214.30 Seats Country Store - Inc. 2860 Ethylbenzene WithersRavenel 1 10 100 1000 10000 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23 12/25Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date MW-1 MW-2 MW-5 Evaluation Date:Job ID: Facility Name:Constituent: Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L Sampling Point ID:MW-1 Sampling Sampling Event Date 1 9/11/06 413 2 9/23/12 270 3 4/12/18 100 4 5/27/20 120 5 9/8/20 6 4/26/21 155 7 4/18/22 73 8 8/5/22 114 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Coefficient of Variation:0.68 Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):-11Confidence Factor:93.2% Concentration Trend:Prob. Decreasing Notes: 1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples. 2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing; ≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable. 3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales, Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003. DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein. ISOPROPYL ETHER CONCENTRATION (ug/L) GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT for Constituent Trend Analysis 23-Aug-22 02172214.30 Seats Country Store - Inc. 2860 Isopropyl Ether WithersRavenel 1 10 100 1000 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23 12/25Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date MW-1 MW-1 Evaluation Date:Job ID: Facility Name:Constituent: Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L Sampling Point ID:MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-7 Sampling Sampling Event Date 1 9/11/06 133 682 22.3 2 9/23/12 640 300 0.53 3 4/12/18 390 420 2.5 4 5/27/20 500 580 0.25 130 230 5 9/8/20 470 87 0.25 6 4/26/21 510 425 0.5 27.6 239 3.89 0.5 7 4/18/22 544 623 0.5 2.64 224 13.6 3.34 8 8/5/22 567 377 40.2 91.6 322 119 0.5 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Coefficient of Variation:0.35 0.29 1.65 0.93 0.35 1.00 1.28 Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):11 -1 -2 -2 0 2 3Confidence Factor:93.2%50.0%55.7%62.5%40.8%62.5%72.9% Concentration Trend:Prob. Increasing Stable No Trend Stable Stable No Trend No Trend Notes: 1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples. 2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing; ≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable. 3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales, Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003. DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein. NAPHTHALENE CONCENTRATION (ug/L) GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT for Constituent Trend Analysis 23-Aug-22 02172214.30 Seats Country Store - Inc. 2860 Naphthalene WithersRavenel 0.1 1 10 100 1000 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23 12/25Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-7 Evaluation Date:Job ID: Facility Name:Constituent: Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L Sampling Point ID:MW-1 MW-2 MW-4 MW-5 Sampling Sampling Event Date 1 9/11/06 34 9,110 2 9/23/12 330 9,300 3 4/12/18 1,100 8,700 4 5/27/20 960 9,200 720 2600 5 9/8/20 2500 6 4/26/21 1,190 9,090 1.89 733 7 4/18/22 1,930 9,440 0.575 1630 8 8/5/22 1,180 4,130 86.6 1200 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Coefficient of Variation:0.65 0.23 1.72 0.47 Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):15 -3 -2 -6Confidence Factor:98.5%61.4%62.5%88.3% Concentration Trend:Increasing Stable No Trend Stable Notes: 1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples. 2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing; ≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable. 3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales, Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003. DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein. TOLUENE CONCENTRATION (ug/L) GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT for Constituent Trend Analysis 23-Aug-22 02172214.30 Seats Country Store - Inc. 2860 Toluene WithersRavenel 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23 12/25Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date MW-1 MW-2 MW-4 MW-5 Evaluation Date:Job ID: Facility Name:Constituent: Conducted By:Concentration Units:ug/L Sampling Point ID:MW-1 MW-2 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 Sampling Sampling Event Date 1 9/11/06 420 10,350 2 9/23/12 3,600 6,300 3 4/12/18 5,100 7,700 4 5/27/20 6,700 8,700 2820 6,000 5 9/8/20 6,100 990 6 4/26/21 6,260 6,700 98.3 1,560 9 7 4/18/22 9,010 9,060 18.7 3,890 21 8 8/5/22 8,270 4,190 910 2,530 176 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Coefficient of Variation:0.52 0.27 1.35 0.51 1.56 Mann-Kendall Statistic (S):17 -5 -2 -4 0Confidence Factor:99.5%71.9%62.5%75.8%37.5% Concentration Trend:Increasing Stable No Trend Stable No Trend Notes: 1.At least four independent sampling events per well are required for calculating the trend. Methodology is valid for 4 to 40 samples. 2.Confidence in Trend = Confidence (in percent) that constituent concentration is increasing (S>0) or decreasing (S<0): >95% = Increasing or Decreasing; ≥ 90% = Probably Increasing or Probably Decreasing; < 90% and S>0 = No Trend; < 90%, S≤0, and COV ≥ 1 = No Trend; < 90% and COV < 1 = Stable. 3.Methodology based on "MAROS: A Decision Support System for Optimizing Monitoring Plans", J.J. Aziz, M. Ling, H.S. Rifai, C.J. Newell, and J.R. Gonzales, Ground Water, 41(3):355-367, 2003. DISCLAIMER: The GSI Mann-Kendall Toolkit is available "as is". Considerable care has been exercised in preparing this software product; however, no party, including without limitation GSI Environmental Inc., makes any representation or warranty regarding the accuracy, correctness, or completeness of the information contained herein, and no such party shall be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or other damages resulting from the use of this product or the information contained herein. Information in this publication is subject to change without notice. GSI Environmental Inc., disclaims any responsibility or obligation to update the information contained herein. TOTAL XYLENES CONCENTRATION (ug/L) GSI Environmental Inc., www.gsi-net.com GSI MANN-KENDALL TOOLKIT for Constituent Trend Analysis 23-Aug-22 02172214.30 Seats Country Store - Inc. 2860 Total Xylenes WithersRavenel 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 01/04 10/06 07/09 04/12 12/14 09/17 06/20 03/23 12/25Concentration (ug/L)Sampling Date MW-1 MW-2 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 WithersRavenel Our People. Your Success.    APPENDIX C    AQUIFER TESTING & PREDICTIVE MODELING FORM  Well:MW-1 (Slug In)Conducted by:Allyn Test Date:2/16/2023 Entered/date:03/06/23 Test Type:Water Level Recovery WELL DATA CALCULATION OF K SWL =9.37 (ft BTOC) K = [(rc^2 ln(Re/rw))/2Le]*(1/t)ln(yo/yt) Elapsed time Log y y WL WD =45.00 (ft BTOC)(min) (ft) (ft BTOC) WD =45.00 (ft BGS) yo =1.255 (ft) from plot 0.001 0.540 3.465 5.905 DTSP =20.00 (ft BGS) yt =0.173 (ft) from plot 0.033 0.207 1.611 7.759 rc =0.083 (ft) t =38.517 (minutes) from plot 0.050 0.198 1.577 7.793 n = 0.30 ln(Re/rw) = 3.13 0.067 0.188 1.541 7.829 0.083 0.179 1.509 7.861 rw =0.33 (ft)0.103 0.167 1.470 7.900 rc (adjusted) = 0.08 (ft)K = 3.0E-02 (ft/day)0.117 0.162 1.453 7.917 0.133 0.157 1.434 7.936 0.150 0.149 1.410 7.960 0.167 0.144 1.394 7.976 Le = 25 (ft)K = 1.0E-05 (cm/sec)0.183 0.138 1.375 7.995 Lw = 35.63 (ft)0.250 0.125 1.332 8.038 Le/rw = 75.76 0.367 0.110 1.287 8.083 H =80.00 (ft)0.483 0.099 1.255 8.115 0.633 0.090 1.229 8.141 1.017 0.076 1.190 8.180 1.517 0.063 1.155 8.215 1.983 0.047 1.115 8.255 2.667 0.029 1.070 8.300 3.250 0.015 1.035 8.335 Calculation of ln(Re/rw)3.650 0.004 1.009 8.361 4.400 -0.011 0.974 8.396 Where: Lw < H;5.600 -0.039 0.915 8.455 6.483 -0.058 0.875 8.495 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{A+Bln((H-Lw)/rw)}/(Le/rw)]^-1= 3.13 7.483 -0.079 0.833 8.537 8.483 -0.101 0.793 8.577 Where: Lw = H;9.817 -0.124 0.752 8.618 10.983 -0.146 0.714 8.656 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{C/(Le/rw)}]^-1 = 3.57 11.967 -0.173 0.672 8.698 13.067 -0.201 0.630 8.740 Calculation of Coefficients 14.217 -0.227 0.593 8.777 Value range for Le/rw from Table of Coefficients 17.067 -0.290 0.513 8.857 Le/rw A B C 21.700 -0.384 0.413 8.957 70 3.7 0.6 3.4 28.717 -0.536 0.291 9.079 80 3.9 0.65 3.6 31.133 -0.599 0.252 9.118 39.000 -0.762 0.173 9.197 Interpolated values of A, B and C for Le/rw 75.76 3.82 0.63 3.52 Coefficients Table Le/rw A Le/rw B Le/rw C 4 1.75 4 0.25 4 0.75 5 1.76 5 0.25 5 0.85 6 1.77 6 0.25 6 0.90 7 1.80 7 0.25 7 1.00 8 1.83 8 0.25 8 1.10 9 1.90 9 0.25 9 1.20 10 1.95 10 0.25 10 1.30 15 2.10 15 0.27 15 1.50 20 2.23 20 0.29 20 1.75 25 2.40 25 0.31 25 1.90 30 2.50 30 0.35 30 2.10 40 2.75 40 0.45 40 2.45 50 3.00 50 0.50 50 2.70 60 3.45 60 0.52 60 3.00 70 3.70 70 0.60 70 3.40 80 3.90 80 0.65 80 3.60 90 4.20 90 0.70 90 3.85 100 4.50 100 0.75 100 4.20 150 5.45 150 0.98 150 5.70 200 6.10 200 1.20 200 7.00 250 6.70 250 1.30 250 8.00 300 7.10 300 1.50 300 8.80 400 7.75 400 1.90 400 9.90 500 8.20 500 2.20 500 10.60 600 8.50 600 2.33 600 11.10 700 8.70 700 2.50 700 11.50 800 8.90 800 2.70 800 11.80 900 9.00 900 2.75 900 12.00 1000 9.20 1000 2.83 1000 12.40 1500 9.50 1500 3.18 1500 12.90 Reference: Bouwer(1989), Bouwer and Rice(1976) TEST DATA Seats Country Store (NCDEQ Inc. 2860) - Yadkinville, NC Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Calculation Worksheet W&R Project No. 02172214.30 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000 40.000 45.000Water Level Recovery Y (ft)Elasped Time in minutes Water Level Recovery vs Time: MW-1 Yo Yt Well:MW-1 (Slug Out)Conducted by:Allyn Test Date:2/16/2023 Entered/date:03/09/23 Test Type:Water Level Recovery WELL DATA CALCULATION OF K SWL =9.37 (ft BTOC) K = [(rc^2 ln(Re/rw))/2Le]*(1/t)ln(yo/yt) Elapsed time Log y y WL WD =45.00 (ft BTOC)(min) (ft) (ft BTOC) WD =45.00 (ft BGS) yo =1.059 (ft) from plot 0.001 0.31 2.036 11.406 DTSP =20.00 (ft BGS) yt =0.626 (ft) from plot 0.017 0.12 1.313 10.683 rc =0.083(ft) t =8.383 (minutes) from plot 0.033 0.11 1.277 10.647 n = 0.30 ln(Re/rw) = 3.13 0.050 0.09 1.242 10.612 0.067 0.09 1.219 10.589 rw =0.33 (ft)0.083 0.08 1.195 10.565 rc (adjusted) = 0.08 (ft)K = 3.6E-02 (ft/day)0.100 0.07 1.172 10.542 0.117 0.06 1.150 10.520 0.133 0.05 1.131 10.501 0.150 0.05 1.115 10.485 Le = 25 (ft)K = 1.3E-05 (cm/sec)0.167 0.04 1.106 10.476 Lw = 35.63 (ft)0.183 0.04 1.090 10.460 Le/rw = 75.76 0.217 0.03 1.075 10.445 H =80.00 (ft)0.233 0.03 1.070 10.440 0.250 0.02 1.059 10.429 0.267 0.02 1.056 10.426 0.283 0.02 1.047 10.417 0.300 0.02 1.040 10.410 0.317 0.01 1.033 10.403 0.367 0.01 1.022 10.392 Calculation of ln(Re/rw)0.400 0.00 1.010 10.380 0.417 0.00 1.003 10.373 Where: Lw < H;0.500 -0.01 0.985 10.355 0.550 -0.01 0.983 10.353 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{A+Bln((H-Lw)/rw)}/(Le/rw)]^-1= 3.13 0.583 -0.01 0.972 10.342 0.683 -0.02 0.953 10.323 Where: Lw = H;0.850 -0.03 0.943 10.313 1.084 -0.03 0.934 10.304 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{C/(Le/rw)}]^-1 = 3.57 1.433 -0.04 0.914 10.284 1.617 -0.05 0.893 10.263 Calculation of Coefficients 2.917 -0.08 0.834 10.204 Value range for Le/rw from Table of Coefficients 3.850 -0.11 0.783 10.153 Le/rw A B C 5.383 -0.13 0.733 10.103 70 3.7 0.6 3.4 7.200 -0.16 0.684 10.054 80 3.9 0.65 3.6 8.633 -0.20 0.626 9.996 10.800 -0.23 0.584 9.954 Interpolated values of A, B and C for Le/rw 75.76 3.82 0.63 3.52 Coefficients Table Le/rw A Le/rw B Le/rw C 4 1.75 4 0.25 4 0.75 5 1.76 5 0.25 5 0.85 6 1.77 6 0.25 6 0.90 7 1.80 7 0.25 7 1.00 8 1.83 8 0.25 8 1.10 9 1.90 9 0.25 9 1.20 10 1.95 10 0.25 10 1.30 15 2.10 15 0.27 15 1.50 20 2.23 20 0.29 20 1.75 25 2.40 25 0.31 25 1.90 30 2.50 30 0.35 30 2.10 40 2.75 40 0.45 40 2.45 50 3.00 50 0.50 50 2.70 60 3.45 60 0.52 60 3.00 70 3.70 70 0.60 70 3.40 80 3.90 80 0.65 80 3.60 90 4.20 90 0.70 90 3.85 100 4.50 100 0.75 100 4.20 150 5.45 150 0.98 150 5.70 200 6.10 200 1.20 200 7.00 250 6.70 250 1.30 250 8.00 300 7.10 300 1.50 300 8.80 400 7.75 400 1.90 400 9.90 500 8.20 500 2.20 500 10.60 600 8.50 600 2.33 600 11.10 700 8.70 700 2.50 700 11.50 800 8.90 800 2.70 800 11.80 900 9.00 900 2.75 900 12.00 1000 9.20 1000 2.83 1000 12.40 1500 9.50 1500 3.18 1500 12.90 Reference: Bouwer(1989), Bouwer and Rice(1976) Seats Country Store (NCDEQ Inc. 2860) - Yadkinville, NC Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Calculation Worksheet TEST DATA W&R Project No. 02172214.30 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 0.000 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000Water Level Recovery Y (ft)Elasped Time in minutes Water Level Recovery vs Time: MW-1 Yo Yt Well:MW-3 (Slug In)Conducted by:Allyn Test Date:2/16/2023 Entered/date:03/06/23 Test Type:Water Level Recovery WELL DATA CALCULATION OF K SWL =10.43 (ft BTOC) K = [(rc^2 ln(Re/rw))/2Le]*(1/t)ln(yo/yt) Elapsed time Log y y WL WD =45.00 (ft BTOC)(min) (ft) (ft BTOC) WD =45.00 (ft BGS) yo =1.395(ft) from plot 0.001 0.39 2.467 7.9630 DTSP =15.00 (ft BGS) yt =0.795(ft) from plot 0.033 0.22 1.661 8.7690 rc =0.083 (ft) t =5.450(minutes) from plot 0.050 0.21 1.630 8.8000 n = 0.30 ln(Re/rw) = 3.13 0.067 0.21 1.609 8.8210 0.083 0.20 1.577 8.8530 rw =0.33 (ft)0.100 0.19 1.558 8.8720 rc (adjusted) = 0.08 (ft)K = 5.9E-02 (ft/day)0.117 0.18 1.523 8.9070 0.133 0.18 1.526 8.9040 0.150 0.18 1.512 8.9180 0.167 0.17 1.496 8.9340 Le = 30 (ft)K = 2.1E-05 (cm/sec)0.183 0.17 1.485 8.9450 Lw = 34.57 (ft)0.200 0.17 1.475 8.9550 Le/rw = 90.91 0.217 0.17 1.465 8.9650 H =80.00 (ft)0.255 0.16 1.451 8.9790 0.267 0.16 1.444 8.9860 0.300 0.16 1.434 8.9960 0.450 0.14 1.395 9.0350 0.550 0.14 1.371 9.0590 0.800 0.12 1.332 9.0980 1.050 0.11 1.288 9.1420 Calculation of ln(Re/rw)1.300 0.10 1.253 9.1770 1.433 0.09 1.233 9.1970 Where: Lw < H;1.667 0.08 1.195 9.2350 1.967 0.06 1.152 9.2780 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{A+Bln((H-Lw)/rw)}/(Le/rw)]^-1= 3.13 2.217 0.05 1.113 9.3170 2.517 0.03 1.075 9.3550 Where: Lw = H;2.850 0.01 1.030 9.4000 3.767 -0.02 0.953 9.4770 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{C/(Le/rw)}]^-1 = 3.57 4.750 -0.06 0.875 9.5550 5.900 -0.10 0.795 9.6350 Calculation of Coefficients 7.250 -0.15 0.711 9.7190 Value range for Le/rw from Table of Coefficients 8.750 -0.20 0.632 9.7980 Le/rw A B C 10.433 -0.26 0.551 9.8790 90 4.2 0.7 3.85 12.567 -0.32 0.475 9.9550 100 4.5 0.75 4.2 15.267 -0.40 0.395 10.0350 18.700 -0.50 0.314 10.1160 Interpolated values of A, B and C for Le/rw 23.433 -0.63 0.234 10.1960 90.91 4.23 0.70 3.88 Coefficients Table Le/rw A Le/rw B Le/rw C 4 1.75 4 0.25 4 0.75 5 1.76 5 0.25 5 0.85 6 1.77 6 0.25 6 0.90 7 1.80 7 0.25 7 1.00 8 1.83 8 0.25 8 1.10 9 1.90 9 0.25 9 1.20 10 1.95 10 0.25 10 1.30 15 2.10 15 0.27 15 1.50 20 2.23 20 0.29 20 1.75 25 2.40 25 0.31 25 1.90 30 2.50 30 0.35 30 2.10 40 2.75 40 0.45 40 2.45 50 3.00 50 0.50 50 2.70 60 3.45 60 0.52 60 3.00 70 3.70 70 0.60 70 3.40 80 3.90 80 0.65 80 3.60 90 4.20 90 0.70 90 3.85 100 4.50 100 0.75 100 4.20 150 5.45 150 0.98 150 5.70 200 6.10 200 1.20 200 7.00 250 6.70 250 1.30 250 8.00 300 7.10 300 1.50 300 8.80 400 7.75 400 1.90 400 9.90 500 8.20 500 2.20 500 10.60 600 8.50 600 2.33 600 11.10 700 8.70 700 2.50 700 11.50 800 8.90 800 2.70 800 11.80 900 9.00 900 2.75 900 12.00 1000 9.20 1000 2.83 1000 12.40 1500 9.50 1500 3.18 1500 12.90 Reference: Bouwer (1989), Bouwer and Rice (1976) Seats Country Store (NCDEQ Inc. 2860) - Yadkinville, NC Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Calculation Worksheet W&R Project No. 02172214.30 TEST DATA 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000Water Level Recovery Y (ft)Elasped Time in minutes Water Level Recovery vs Time: MW-3 Yo Yt Well:MW-5 (Slug In)Conducted by:Allyn Test Date:2/16/2023 Entered/date:03/06/23 Test Type:Water Level Recovery WELL DATA CALCULATION OF K SWL =4.58 (ft BTOC) K = [(rc^2 ln(Re/rw))/2Le]*(1/t)ln(yo/yt) Elapsed time Log y y WL WD =25.00 (ft BTOC)(min) (ft) (ft BTOC) WD =25.00 (ft BGS) yo =1.090 (ft) from plot 0.0010 0.55 3.572 1.008 DTSP =10.00 (ft BGS) yt =0.122 (ft) from plot 0.0167 0.27 1.876 2.704 rc =0.083 (ft) t =12.383 (minutes) from plot 0.0500 0.14 1.389 3.191 n = 0.30 ln(Re/rw) = 2.56 0.0667 0.17 1.471 3.109 0.1000 0.11 1.295 3.285 rw =0.33 (ft)0.1167 0.11 1.274 3.306 rc (adjusted) = 0.08 (ft)K = 1.5E-01 (ft/day)0.1333 0.04 1.090 3.49 0.2333 0.03 1.080 3.5 0.2833 0.03 1.060 3.52 0.3333 0.02 1.044 3.536 Le = 15 (ft)K = 5.4E-05 (cm/sec)0.3833 0.01 1.022 3.558 Lw = 20.42 (ft)0.4667 0.00 0.996 3.584 Le/rw = 45.45 0.5333 -0.01 0.977 3.603 H =80.00 (ft)0.7500 -0.03 0.942 3.638 1.0500 -0.04 0.902 3.678 1.3167 -0.06 0.865 3.715 1.5833 -0.09 0.822 3.758 1.9167 -0.11 0.784 3.796 2.2000 -0.13 0.740 3.84 2.3500 -0.14 0.725 3.855 Calculation of ln(Re/rw)2.7500 -0.16 0.685 3.895 3.0833 -0.19 0.643 3.937 Where: Lw < H;3.4833 -0.22 0.605 3.975 3.8833 -0.25 0.563 4.017 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{A+Bln((H-Lw)/rw)}/(Le/rw)]^-1= 2.56 4.3333 -0.28 0.525 4.055 4.8167 -0.31 0.485 4.095 Where: Lw = H;5.3333 -0.35 0.445 4.135 5.9500 -0.39 0.405 4.175 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{C/(Le/rw)}]^-1 = 3.03 6.5000 -0.44 0.365 4.215 7.2500 -0.49 0.323 4.257 Calculation of Coefficients 7.9500 -0.55 0.284 4.296 Value range for Le/rw from Table of Coefficients 8.8000 -0.61 0.245 4.335 Le/rw A B C 9.6667 -0.69 0.205 4.375 40 2.75 0.45 2.45 10.9500 -0.79 0.164 4.416 50 3 0.5 2.7 12.5167 -0.91 0.122 4.458 14.3833 -1.08 0.084 4.496 Interpolated values of A, B and C for Le/rw 16.8333 -1.35 0.045 4.535 45.45 2.89 0.48 2.59 Coefficients Table Le/rw A Le/rw B Le/rw C 4 1.75 4 0.25 4 0.75 5 1.76 5 0.25 5 0.85 6 1.77 6 0.25 6 0.90 7 1.80 7 0.25 7 1.00 8 1.83 8 0.25 8 1.10 9 1.90 9 0.25 9 1.20 10 1.95 10 0.25 10 1.30 15 2.10 15 0.27 15 1.50 20 2.23 20 0.29 20 1.75 25 2.40 25 0.31 25 1.90 30 2.50 30 0.35 30 2.10 40 2.75 40 0.45 40 2.45 50 3.00 50 0.50 50 2.70 60 3.45 60 0.52 60 3.00 70 3.70 70 0.60 70 3.40 80 3.90 80 0.65 80 3.60 90 4.20 90 0.70 90 3.85 100 4.50 100 0.75 100 4.20 150 5.45 150 0.98 150 5.70 200 6.10 200 1.20 200 7.00 250 6.70 250 1.30 250 8.00 300 7.10 300 1.50 300 8.80 400 7.75 400 1.90 400 9.90 500 8.20 500 2.20 500 10.60 600 8.50 600 2.33 600 11.10 700 8.70 700 2.50 700 11.50 800 8.90 800 2.70 800 11.80 900 9.00 900 2.75 900 12.00 1000 9.20 1000 2.83 1000 12.40 1500 9.50 1500 3.18 1500 12.90 Reference: Bouwer (1989), Bouwer and Rice (1976) Seats Country Store (NCDEQ Inc. 2860) - Yadkinville, NC Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Calculation Worksheet W&R Project No. 02172214.30 TEST DATA 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 0.0000 2.0000 4.0000 6.0000 8.0000 10.0000 12.0000 14.0000 16.0000 18.0000Water Level Recovery Y (ft)Elasped Time in minutes Water Level Recovery vs Time: MW-5 Yo Yt Well:MW-5 (Slug Out)Conducted by:Allyn Test Date:2/16/2023 Entered/date:03/10/23 Test Type:Water Level Recovery WELL DATA CALCULATION OF K SWL =4.58 (ft BTOC) K = [(rc^2 ln(Re/rw))/2Le]*(1/t)ln(yo/yt) Elapsed time Log y y WL WD =25.00 (ft BTOC)(min) (ft) (ft BTOC) WD =25.00 (ft BGS) yo =1.098 (ft) from plot 0.0001 0.21 1.605 6.185 DTSP =10.00 (ft BGS) yt =0.523 (ft) from plot 0.0167 0.20 1.568 6.148 rc =0.083 (ft) t =3.567 (minutes) from plot 0.0333 0.17 1.463 6.043 n = 0.30 ln(Re/rw) = 2.56 0.0500 0.13 1.363 5.943 0.0667 0.12 1.314 5.894 rw =0.33 (ft)0.0833 0.12 1.304 5.884 rc (adjusted) = 0.08 (ft)K = 1.8E-01 (ft/day)0.1333 0.11 1.294 5.874 0.1500 0.10 1.271 5.851 0.1667 0.09 1.240 5.820 0.1833 0.08 1.212 5.792 Le = 15 (ft)K = 6.3E-05 (cm/sec)0.2167 0.07 1.186 5.766 Lw = 20.42 (ft)0.2333 0.07 1.175 5.755 Le/rw = 45.45 0.2500 0.07 1.170 5.750 H =80.00 (ft)0.2667 0.06 1.146 5.726 0.3000 0.05 1.120 5.700 0.3333 0.04 1.098 5.678 0.3667 0.03 1.076 5.656 0.4000 0.02 1.057 5.637 0.4333 0.02 1.037 5.617 0.4500 0.01 1.031 5.611 Calculation of ln(Re/rw)0.5000 0.00 1.003 5.583 0.5667 -0.01 0.979 5.559 Where: Lw < H;0.6167 -0.02 0.959 5.539 0.6833 -0.03 0.944 5.524 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{A+Bln((H-Lw)/rw)}/(Le/rw)]^-1= 2.56 0.9833 -0.05 0.883 5.463 1.2167 -0.07 0.842 5.422 Where: Lw = H;1.4500 -0.09 0.804 5.384 1.7333 -0.12 0.762 5.342 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{C/(Le/rw)}]^-1 = 3.03 2.0333 -0.14 0.722 5.302 2.3667 -0.17 0.683 5.263 Calculation of Coefficients 2.7000 -0.19 0.644 5.224 Value range for Le/rw from Table of Coefficients 3.0833 -0.22 0.603 5.183 Le/rw A B C 3.9000 -0.28 0.523 5.103 40 2.75 0.45 2.45 4.9500 -0.35 0.444 5.024 50 3 0.5 2.7 6.2667 -0.44 0.364 4.944 7.9167 -0.55 0.284 4.864 Interpolated values of A, B and C for Le/rw 10.5000 -0.69 0.203 4.783 45.45 2.89 0.48 2.59 Coefficients Table Le/rw A Le/rw B Le/rw C 4 1.75 4 0.25 4 0.75 5 1.76 5 0.25 5 0.85 6 1.77 6 0.25 6 0.90 7 1.80 7 0.25 7 1.00 8 1.83 8 0.25 8 1.10 9 1.90 9 0.25 9 1.20 10 1.95 10 0.25 10 1.30 15 2.10 15 0.27 15 1.50 20 2.23 20 0.29 20 1.75 25 2.40 25 0.31 25 1.90 30 2.50 30 0.35 30 2.10 40 2.75 40 0.45 40 2.45 50 3.00 50 0.50 50 2.70 60 3.45 60 0.52 60 3.00 70 3.70 70 0.60 70 3.40 80 3.90 80 0.65 80 3.60 90 4.20 90 0.70 90 3.85 100 4.50 100 0.75 100 4.20 150 5.45 150 0.98 150 5.70 200 6.10 200 1.20 200 7.00 250 6.70 250 1.30 250 8.00 300 7.10 300 1.50 300 8.80 400 7.75 400 1.90 400 9.90 500 8.20 500 2.20 500 10.60 600 8.50 600 2.33 600 11.10 700 8.70 700 2.50 700 11.50 800 8.90 800 2.70 800 11.80 900 9.00 900 2.75 900 12.00 1000 9.20 1000 2.83 1000 12.40 1500 9.50 1500 3.18 1500 12.90 Reference: Bouwer (1989), Bouwer and Rice (1976) Seats Country Store (NCDEQ Inc. 2860) - Yadkinville, NC Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Calculation Worksheet TEST DATA W&R Project No. 02172214.30 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 0.0000 2.0000 4.0000 6.0000 8.0000 10.0000 12.0000Water Level Recovery Y (ft)Elasped Time in minutes Water Level Recovery vs Time: MW-5 Yo Yt Well:MW-6 (Slug Out)Conducted by:Allyn Test Date:2/16/2023 Entered/date:03/06/23 Test Type:Water Level Recovery WELL DATA CALCULATION OF K SWL =8.51 (ft BTOC) K = [(rc^2 ln(Re/rw))/2Le]*(1/t)ln(yo/yt) Elapsed time Log y y WL WD =20.00 (ft BTOC)(min) (ft) (ft BTOC) WD =20.00 (ft BGS) yo =0.411 (ft) from plot 0.017 0.51 3.202 11.712 DTSP =5.00 (ft BGS) yt =0.293 (ft) from plot 0.067 0.24 1.755 10.265 rc =0.083 (ft) t =5.650 (minutes) from plot 0.085 0.10 1.255 9.765 n = 0.30 ln(Re/rw) = 2.33 0.100 0.00 1.006 9.516 0.133 -0.08 0.834 9.344 rw =0.33 (ft)0.150 -0.10 0.801 9.311 rc (adjusted) = 0.19 (ft)K = 2.5E-01 (ft/day)0.167 -0.14 0.732 9.242 0.183 -0.16 0.686 9.196 0.200 -0.18 0.657 9.167 0.217 -0.20 0.628 9.138 Le = 15 (ft)K = 8.9E-05 (cm/sec)0.233 -0.22 0.606 9.116 Lw = 11.49 (ft)0.252 -0.23 0.585 9.095 Le/rw = 45.45 0.267 -0.24 0.576 9.086 H =80.00 (ft)0.283 -0.25 0.561 9.071 0.300 -0.26 0.549 9.059 0.317 -0.27 0.543 9.053 0.333 -0.28 0.529 9.039 0.350 -0.28 0.523 9.033 0.417 -0.30 0.499 9.009 0.567 -0.33 0.468 8.978 Calculation of ln(Re/rw)0.700 -0.34 0.454 8.964 0.933 -0.36 0.434 8.944 Where: Lw < H;1.217 -0.39 0.411 8.921 1.717 -0.41 0.393 8.903 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{A+Bln((H-Lw)/rw)}/(Le/rw)]^-1= 2.33 2.400 -0.43 0.371 8.881 3.067 -0.45 0.354 8.864 Where: Lw = H;4.183 -0.48 0.332 8.842 5.350 -0.50 0.313 8.823 ln(Re/rw) = [{1.1/(ln(Lw/rw))}+{C/(Le/rw)}]^-1 = 2.70 6.867 -0.53 0.293 8.803 9.033 -0.56 0.274 8.784 Calculation of Coefficients 11.217 -0.60 0.254 8.764 Value range for Le/rw from Table of Coefficients 13.921 -0.63 0.234 8.744 Le/rw A B C 17.267 -0.67 0.214 8.724 40 2.75 0.45 2.45 21.167 -0.72 0.192 8.702 50 3 0.5 2.7 26.967 -0.76 0.173 8.683 33.267 -0.81 0.154 8.664 Interpolated values of A, B and C for Le/rw 39.850 -0.88 0.133 8.643 45.45 2.89 0.48 2.59 Coefficients Table Le/rw A Le/rw B Le/rw C 4 1.75 4 0.25 4 0.75 5 1.76 5 0.25 5 0.85 6 1.77 6 0.25 6 0.90 7 1.80 7 0.25 7 1.00 8 1.83 8 0.25 8 1.10 9 1.90 9 0.25 9 1.20 10 1.95 10 0.25 10 1.30 15 2.10 15 0.27 15 1.50 20 2.23 20 0.29 20 1.75 25 2.40 25 0.31 25 1.90 30 2.50 30 0.35 30 2.10 40 2.75 40 0.45 40 2.45 50 3.00 50 0.50 50 2.70 60 3.45 60 0.52 60 3.00 70 3.70 70 0.60 70 3.40 80 3.90 80 0.65 80 3.60 90 4.20 90 0.70 90 3.85 100 4.50 100 0.75 100 4.20 150 5.45 150 0.98 150 5.70 200 6.10 200 1.20 200 7.00 250 6.70 250 1.30 250 8.00 300 7.10 300 1.50 300 8.80 400 7.75 400 1.90 400 9.90 500 8.20 500 2.20 500 10.60 600 8.50 600 2.33 600 11.10 700 8.70 700 2.50 700 11.50 800 8.90 800 2.70 800 11.80 900 9.00 900 2.75 900 12.00 1000 9.20 1000 2.83 1000 12.40 1500 9.50 1500 3.18 1500 12.90 Reference: Bouwer (1989), Bouwer and Rice (1976) Seats Country Store (NCDEQ Inc. 2860) - Yadkinville, NC Hydraulic Conductivity (K) Calculation Worksheet W&R Project No. 02172214.30 TEST DATA 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000 0.000 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000 40.000 45.000Water Level Recovery Y (ft)Elasped Time in minutes Water Level Recovery vs Time: MW-6 Yo Yt BIOSCREEN Natural Attenuation Decision Support SystemSeats Country StoreData Input Instructions:Air Force Center for Environmental ExcellenceVersion 1.4Benzene1151. Enter value directly....orRun Name2. Calculate by filling in grey1. HYDROGEOLOGY5. GENERAL0.02cells below. (To restoreSeepage Velocity*Vs5.8(ft/yr)Modeled Area Length* 1000(ft)formulas, hit button below).or…26Modeled Area Width* 81(ft)Variable* Data used directly in model. Hydraulic ConductivityK4.2E-05(cm/sec)Simulation Time*100(yr)20 Value calculated by model.Hydraulic Gradienti0.047(ft/ft) (Don't enter any data).Porosityn0.35(-)6. SOURCE DATASource Thickness in Sat.Zone* 40(ft)2. DISPERSIONSource Zones:Longitudinal Dispersivity*alpha x7.1(ft)Width* (ft) Conc. (mg/L)*Transverse Dispersivity*alpha y0.7(ft)501Vertical Dispersivity*alpha z0.0(ft)45 0.474or100 2.45Estimated Plume LengthLp100(ft)45 0.474503. ADSORPTIONSource Halflife (see Help):Retardation Factor*R1.1(-)Infinite Infinite(yr)View of Plume Looking DownorInst. React. 1st OrderSoil Bulk Densityrho1.7(kg/l)Soluble MassInfinite(Kg) Observed Centerline Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Partition CoefficientKoc38(L/kg)In Source NAPL, SoilIf No Data Leave Blank or Enter "0"FractionOrganicCarbonfoc8.0E-4(-)7. FIELD DATA FOR COMPARISONConcentration (mg/L)2.45 .474.0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .04. BIODEGRADATIONDist. from Source (ft)0 20 65 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 8001st Order Decay Coeff*lambda6.9E+0(per yr)or8. CHOOSE TYPE OF OUTPUT TO SEE:Solute Half-Lifet-half0.10(year)or Instantaneous Reaction ModelDelta Oxygen*DO4.75(mg/L)Delta Nitrate*NO36(mg/L)Observed Ferrous Iron*Fe2+17(mg/L)Delta Sulfate*SO425(mg/L)Observed Methane*CH47(mg/L)Vertical Plane Source: Look at Plume Cross-Section and Input Concentrations & Widthsfor Zones 1, 2, and 3LWorororor12345ororView OutputPaste Example DatasetView OutputRestore Formulas for Vs, RUN CENTERLINE RUN ARRAYHelpRecalculate This DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation2.450 0.078 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Time:10 Years0.0000.5001.0001.5002.0002.5003.0000 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to Benzene DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation2.450 2.124 0.359 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Time:30 Years0.0000.5001.0001.5002.0002.5003.0000 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to Benzene DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation2.450 2.450 2.444 2.402 2.125 1.219 0.296 0.023 0.001 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction2.450 2.450 2.441 2.266 0.214 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site2.450 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Time:100 Years0.0000.5001.0001.5002.0002.5003.0000 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to Benzene BIOSCREEN Natural Attenuation Decision Support SystemSeats Country StoreData Input Instructions:Air Force Center for Environmental ExcellenceVersion 1.4MTBE1151. Enter value directly....orRun Name2. Calculate by filling in grey1. HYDROGEOLOGY5.GENERAL0.02cells below. (To restoreSeepage Velocity*Vs5.8(ft/yr)Modeled Area Length* 1000(ft)formulas, hit button below).orModeled Area Width* 81(ft)Variable* Data used directly in model. Hydraulic ConductivityK4.2E-05(cm/sec)Simulation Time*100(yr)20 Value calculated by model.Hydraulic Gradienti0.047(ft/ft) (Don't enter any data).Porosityn0.35(-)6. SOURCE DATASource Thickness in Sat.Zone* 40(ft)2. DISPERSIONSource Zones:Longitudinal Dispersivity*alpha x11.0(ft)Width* (ft) Conc. (mg/L)*Transverse Dispersivity*alpha y1.1(ft)501Vertical Dispersivity*alpha z0.0(ft)45 0.0628or100 0.234Estimated Plume LengthLp200(ft)45 0.0628503. ADSORPTIONSource Halflife (see Help):Retardation Factor*R1.1(-)Infinite Infinite(yr)View of Plume Looking DownorInst. React. 1st OrderSoil Bulk Densityrho1.7(kg/l)Soluble Massinfinite(Kg) Observed Centerline Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Partition CoefficientKoc12.33(L/kg)In Source NAPL, SoilIf No Data Leave Blank or Enter "0"FractionOrganicCarbonfoc2.0E-3(-)7. FIELD DATA FOR COMPARISONConcentration (mg/L).234 .063.0 .0048.04. BIODEGRADATIONDist. from Source (ft)0 50 65 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 8001st Order Decay Coeff*lambda6.9E-1(per yr)or8. CHOOSE TYPE OF OUTPUT TO SEE:Solute Half-Lifet-half1.00(year)or Instantaneous Reaction ModelDelta Oxygen*DO4.75(mg/L)Delta Nitrate*NO36(mg/L)Observed Ferrous Iron*Fe2+17(mg/L)Delta Sulfate*SO425(mg/L)Observed Methane*CH47(mg/L)Vertical Plane Source: Look at Plume Cross-Section and Input Concentrations & Widthsfor Zones 1, 2, and 3LWorororor12345ororView OutputPaste Example DatasetView OutputRestore Formulas for Vs, RUN CENTERLINE RUN ARRAYHelpRecalculate This DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation0.234 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay0.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction0.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site0.234 0.0628 0.00478 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Time:10 Years0.0000.0500.1000.1500.2000.2500 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to MTBE DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation0.234 0.193 0.051 0.002 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay0.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction0.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site0.234 0.0628 0.00478 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Time:30 Years0.0000.0500.1000.1500.2000.2500 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to MTBE DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation0.234 0.234 0.231 0.220 0.188 0.119 0.045 0.009 0.001 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay0.234 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction0.234 0.233 0.204 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site0.234 0.0628 0.00478 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Time:100 Years0.0000.0500.1000.1500.2000.2500 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to MTBE BIOSCREEN Natural Attenuation Decision Support SystemSeats Country StoreData Input Instructions:Air Force Center for Environmental ExcellenceVersion 1.4Diisopropyl Ether1151. Enter value directly....orRun Name2. Calculate by filling in grey1. HYDROGEOLOGY5. GENERAL0.02cells below. (To restoreSeepage Velocity*Vs5.8(ft/yr)Modeled Area Length* 1000(ft)formulas, hit button below).orModeled Area Width* 81(ft)Variable* Data used directly in model. Hydraulic ConductivityK4.2E-05(cm/sec)Simulation Time*100(yr)20 Value calculated by model.Hydraulic Gradienti0.047(ft/ft) (Don't enter any data).Porosityn0.35(-)6. SOURCE DATASource Thickness in Sat.Zone* 40(ft)2. DISPERSIONSource Zones:Longitudinal Dispersivity*alpha x7.1(ft)Width* (ft) Conc. (mg/L)*Transverse Dispersivity*alpha y0.7(ft)501Vertical Dispersivity*alpha z0.0(ft)45 0.0319or100 0.114Estimated Plume LengthLp100(ft)45 0.0319503. ADSORPTIONSource Halflife (see Help):Retardation Factor*R2.7(-)Infinite Infinite(yr)View of Plume Looking DownorInst. React. 1st OrderSoil Bulk Densityrho1.7(kg/l)Soluble Massinfinite(Kg) Observed Centerline Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Partition CoefficientKoc180(L/kg)In Source NAPL, SoilIf No Data Leave Blank or Enter "0"FractionOrganicCarbonfoc2.0E-3(-)7. FIELD DATA FOR COMPARISONConcentration (mg/L).114 .032 .0 .0 .0016.0 .0 .0 .0 .04. BIODEGRADATIONDist. from Source (ft)0 50 65 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 8001st Order Decay Coeff*lambda3.5E-1(per yr)or8. CHOOSE TYPE OF OUTPUT TO SEE:Solute Half-Lifet-half2.00(year)or Instantaneous Reaction ModelDelta Oxygen*DO4.75(mg/L)Delta Nitrate*NO36(mg/L)Observed Ferrous Iron*Fe2+17(mg/L)Delta Sulfate*SO425(mg/L)Observed Methane*CH47(mg/L)Vertical Plane Source: Look at Plume Cross-Section and Input Concentrations & Widthsfor Zones 1, 2, and 3LWorororor12345ororView OutputPaste Example DatasetView OutputRestore Formulas for Vs, Dispersivities, R, lambda, otherRUN CENTERLINE RUN ARRAYHelpRecalculate This DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site0.114 0.0016 0.000Time:10 Years0.0000.0200.0400.0600.0800.1000.120020040060080010001200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to IPE DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation0.114 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site0.114 0.0016 0.000Time:30 Years0.0000.0200.0400.0600.0800.1000.120020040060080010001200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to IPE DISSOLVED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L at Z=0)Distance from Source (ft)TYPE OF MODEL0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000No Degradation0.114 0.112 0.066 0.006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0001st Order Decay0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Inst. Reaction0.114 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Field Data from Site0.114 0.0016 0.000Time:100 Years0.0000.0200.0400.0600.0800.1000.120020040060080010001200Concentration(mg/L)Distance From Source (ft)1st Order DecayInstantaneous ReactionNo DegradationField Data from SiteNext TimestepPrev TimestepCalculateAnimationRecalculate This Return to IPE