NCD980602163_19971020_Warren County PCB Landfill_SERB C_Waste Mgmt. comments on the Draft PCB Landfill Site Investigation Report-OCR

TO:
FAX:
FROM:
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
919-733-4996, Ext. 201
Fax: [phone]
FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET
COMMENTS: -------------------'-----
TOT AL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: 7
DATE SENT: /0 l>,t, /'1 7 I I I ~ 11·t/r'
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
a .
DEHNR
William L. Meyer, Director October 20, 1997
Mr. Patrick Barnes
BFA ENVIRONMENT AL, INC
3655 Maguire Blvd., Suite 150
Orlando, FL 32803
Dear Patrick:
Enclosed are comments from the Division of Waste Management on the Draft PCB Landfill Site
Investigation Report, as well as copies of additional information and studies done for or by the
division. Comments on specific sections are listed with reference to the individual section
numbers from the report. I have also attached the following documents:
1) Analytical data roll-up, QA Evaluation: The division contrncted Mr. James A.
Ploscyca of ENVIRONMENT AL EFFICIENCY to go through the laboratory data and compile
into tabular form the information from the lab reports. The results are now all listed by media and
can be compared quickly and easily. Mr. Ploscyca has also completed a Quality Assurance
Laboratory Data Evaluation on the dioxin data.
2) Methane Monitoring: Last spring and again this fall, division personnel grided off the
surface of the landfill, plugged the top eight inches of soil cover and checked for methane gas.
The results of this testing are presented in tabular form / report.
3) Weather station: A weather monitoring station has been installed at the landfill, and
includes water level monitoring in the north borehole in the landfill. We anticipate hooking up the
south borehole on October 20. Temperature, wind direction and barometric pressure are likewise
monitored. The report includes a description of the system, and data from the first two weeks of
monitoring.
Please include these comments in the final report.
Jl°J.ii)
~c~l A. Kelly, CHMM, '.N:.cO'.J.----~·
Deputy Director
COPY: Dr. Joel Hirschhorn, Warren County Working Group
P.O. Box 29603, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-9603 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% Recycled / 10% Post-Consumer Paper
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT PCB LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT
October 20, 1997
SECTION2.0
2.3. LANDFILL DESIGN: It should be noted that a leachate collection system (LCS) was
installed in the landfill. While it is true that the original set of construction drawings for the
landfill showed perforated piping as a component of the LCS, the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), with the final design plan, was publicly noticed and approved by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This final plan did not show a perforated pipe in the
system. The leachate system has not necessarily operated properly, it is possible that the sand
component of the LCS is functioning properly and as designed, however the lack of flow in the
system is most likely due to improperly sized pumps which do not operate on a continuous basis,
the low moisture content of the landfill contents and the relatively low permeabilities of the landfill
soils themselves. Also, the comment that analysis of the water in the landfill compared to
seasonal rainfall indicates water is leaking into and out of the landfill is only one possible
explanation of the water level fluctuations in the landfill.
2.4 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE: The division questions how analysis ofhydroraphs for
water in and outside the landfill "found that there had been significant violations of federal
regulatory requirements with regard to monitoring and landfill design, construction, and
operation". There were no significant violations found which supports any "release of hazardous
substances that happened because of design or construction deficiencies, or because routine
monitoring had not detected the releases, or both". EPA makes no comment as to any real or
imagined release, nor made any comment on construction deficiencies.
SECTION 4.0
4.2 LANDFILL FACILITY: All PCB analysis done on soils taken from the landfill, and prior to
the material being placed in the landfill, have shown various levels of PCBs. This is consistent
with what one would expect from oil hap-hazardly dumped along miles of roadway.
The dioxin data can be considered inconclusive due to the nature of and low detection
levels of dioxin compounds found. Analysis of the dioxin data through quality assurance
evaluation shows that dioxin was found in many different places, including OCDD in every
groundwater sample collected at the site, as well as, in many of the field and laboratory blank
samples. The presence of dioxin in so many of the "blanks" indicates a probable contamination
1
problem in the laboratory. Additional sampling should be done, particularly in M W-5D and M
W-lA, where dioxins were found in higher concentrations (noted in Section 4.3).
4.5 OFF SITE SOILS AND SEDIMENTS: It is significant to note that a larger number of
samples were taken off site in the soil and sediment under the belief that if PCB 's had escaped ( or
were escaping) from the landfill through air emissions, they would be detected in the soils
surrounding the landfill where the heavy molecules of PCB (being carried by dust particles) would
fall out. No PCB's were detected in any of the samples, with the exception of a split sample from
the Leachate Collection Pond EPA analyzed in which they found .1 ppm.
4.6 AIR TESTING FOR PCB's: As noted in the report, there were three separate sampling
events that occurred from February through August 1997. One of the sampling events utilized
low flow Gil-air pumps over a period of several days and the other two events utilized high
volume air monitoring systems during two different 24 hour periods. On the recommendations of
the Science Advisors, an attempt was made to pull at least 1,500 liters of air through the Gil-air
pumps, however, the average amounts were approximately 1,200 liters, and it was on one of these
samples that PCB's were found in concentrations of approximately 3,000 ng/cubic meter. The
subsequent high volume sampling events, where over 150,000 liters of air were pulled through the
filters, no PCB's were detected. Three of the high volume samplers were placed in approximately
the same area as the one sampling pump that showed "hot" during the February testing. The
report concludes that releases would occur in locations where there were breaches in the surface
containment system, such as holes in the plastic liner or cap. While this conclusion is somewhat
valid, it does ignore the other observations and physical realities of the landfill.
There is no evidence of a catastrophic failure of the cap. In February, there were no signs
of cracks, stressed or dead patches of vegetation or gas detected in the numerous locations
checked by the state. Furthermore, methane testing done again this fall likewise did not detect
any gas coming from the landfill through the cap (see methane reports, conclusions, attached).
The conclusion that the liner has failed thus allowing PCB's to escape deals only with the plastic
liner and ignores the presence of five feet of compacted, saturated clay, which covers the landfill
as the "cap". Methane gases do not readily migrate through saturated soils, rather they choose
the path ofleast resistance, which would be a nonsaturated zone. For example, in municipal solid
waste landfill monitoring, gas is never detected in the saturated zone. Further, the transport and
fate mechanisms of the pollutant in question, PCB's, have been totally ignored in the analysis.
PCB's are large, heavy molecules which have a high affinity for sorption onto clays. It is therefore
questionable how PCB's are becoming unbound from the clays and silts in the landfill, entering the
gas phase at relatively low temperatures and then flowing, uncollected, through over five feet of
saturated, compacted, clayey material.
If in fact the PCB's detected in the one "hot" air sample did indeed come from the landfill
as a result of a belch or puff as described in the report, there is no explanation why none were
detected in the vent pipe or on the air pump sampler located beside the one that showed positive,
2
as it was downwind from the positive one. If the landfill belched or a sudden puff occurred, at
least some of that gas should come through the vent pipe which was designed for the release of
such gases. It is not plausible to believe that such a high dose of PCB's would occur in only one
spot and none even be detected in the other samplers so close to the hot spot, particularly in the
air sample being pulled from inside the landfill through the vent ( directly inside and before the
carbon filter). The high concentration found in the one sample was most likely due to lab
contamination.
As stated in the report, there is no way in which we can tell what releases through the air
may have occurred in the early 1980's. The EPA study done by Robert G. Lewis and Barry E .
Martin, after closure of the landfill found detectable PCB's in 4 of 39 ambient air samples, and
through two dispersion models showed that any concentrations downwind would be below the
detection capability of any known sampling equipment. The conclusions indicated that "emissions
of PCB .... were found to be negligible." Subsequent testing in 1983, as suggested by that report,
likewise did not show any evidence of air emissions, and therefore no continuous monitoring was
done by the state.
4. 7 LANDFILL INTEGRITY: There is absolutely no evidence that the "landfill has lost its
integrity and its ability to safeguard against future releases of PCB's and Dioxins." This is an
opinion of the Science Advisors and not supported by facts.
4. 7 .1 Top Liner: This section is devoted entirely to discussion of the 10 mil plastic liner over the
clay cap. No mention is made of the clay cap. The plastic liner was certainly not in the best
shape, however, it should be noted that based on the evaluation by S&ME it was in "fair
condition". Pinholes were found in the sample taken from the north bore hole, but no pinholes
were in the sample from the south bore hole. Only one spot appeared to have not been welded,
although it was obvious that several places on the seam had been breached by root vegetation.
The seams in some spots have deteriorated over time, probably due to the loss of plasticizer in the
parent material, or deterioration of the chemical composition of the original solvent used in 1982.
By reviewing the lab test results on the PVC liner, it appears to be in adequate shape, and aging as
expected. The seams did show shear strength and low peel strength, while the other properties
were consistent with aging due to the loss of plasticizer, particularly the increase in tensile
strength and a decrease in the elongation at break strength.
The report states ''given that only two locations were inspected and both were in poor
condition, it is likely that a significant portion of the synthetic cap has lost all practical
integrity". S&ME concluded that the cap system "appears to be providing satisfactory
performance 11
• The report further ignores the presence of the compacted clay barrier layer and
vegetative cover portion of the system. This almost five foot thick layer has permeabilities on the
order of 10 -8 cm/sec. S&ME said the surface of the clay appeared to be in good condition and
that the permeability tests are indicative of well compacted clays. They also state that the perms
are lower than typically specified (10 -7 cm/sec). The cap has a healthy stand of vegetation
which would yield high amounts of evapotranspiration, and is graded to shed water.
3
Observations of the landfill and the results of the cap inspection, at those two points, do not point
to a cap system that has lost all practical integrity.
4. 7 .2 WATER IN THE LANDFILL: When analyzing the hydrograph data, one must also
consider several other influences on the recorded levels. Primary is the influence of barometric
pressure as well as the type and placement of the pipes from which the water level data is taken.
The sensitivity of the recording instrument is also a factor. Low barometric pressure will cause an
increase in water levels and high barometric pressure will cause a "decrease" in the water level.
Barometric pressures were obtained for 1995-1997 for RDU and plotted versus the water levels
in the leachate pipe and the riser. In all cases, the water level moves with the barometric pressure.
This is not to imply that water could not be entering the landfill, rather how and how much must
be further evaluated. The state has already recorded a 13 inch change in water level in less than
48 hours. The spikes in the rainfall and the months chosen should also be carefully examined.
Infiltration may not be due to movement through the cap, but through other entries like the
leachate collection pipe, animal burrows, or other "point" penetrations of the liner. Data collected
from lysimeters beneath a cap system at the city of High Point, NC, which have been monitored
for over one year, do not show any infiltration during the warm months, regardless of the amount
of rainfall. Runoff and evapotranspiration exceed rainfall. Only during the dormant winter
months, December-February, are small amounts of infiltration registered through a two foot
vegetative layer.
The report states "the increased stress on the bottom liner system coupled with several
other complicating factors has apparently resulted in a breach of the bottom liner system". It is
assumed that the "stress" is from the water. There is, however, no evidence of a catastrophic
breach of the bottom liner system. The report fails to acknowledge that the bottom liner system
includes a leak detection zone which is monitored monthly and has never detected a leak, and that
there is a five foot clay liner system with 10 -8 cm/sec permeability on top of the PVC liner.
The analysis on the "delayed rise" is incomplete. It neglects evapotranspiration, additional
rainfall, runoff, etc. In addition it neglects the two feet of clay under the PVC liner, the one foot
of bridging material, and the additional 12-14 feet of unsaturated landfill soils, that water would
have to traverse to reach the phreatic surface. An analysis of the moisture contents of the landfill
soil samples gives no indication of a zone of saturation, wetting front, or other indication that
there is a change in moisture content in the landfill upper zone. Most of the moisture contents are
less than the field capacity of the soils.
Leakage rate: Assuming an effective porosity (specific yield) should be confirmed by
analyzing the geotechnical test results on the landfill contents. A more meaningful, and
representative number could be generated. The approximate ten inch fluctuation over a six month
period can easily be attributed to changes in barometric pressure. As mentioned previously, the
state has measured a 13 inch fluctuation in less than 48 hours, during a period of no rain, and a
very dry cap.
4
It should also be noted in the report that the rainfall data for the Arcola station is as
follows:
1992-47.95 inches
1994-40.28 inches
1996-60. 5 8 inches
1993-43 .80 inches
1995-56.85 inches
1997-20.86 inches (6 months)
4.7.3 BOTTOM LINER: Pictures 1, 2 and 3 actually show vandalism done to the bottom liner
during construction. The vandalism is to the plastic liner only, and was repaired. The clay
bottom liner was not harmed. Pictures 8 and 9 show water trapped in the landfill during the final
stages of remedial activities. Picture 10 actually shows pieces of filter fabric washed by the
torrential rains, and is not a picture of the PVC liner. There is no evidence to indicate that the
bottom liner is not intact. Even if there are potential problems with the PVC liner, as discussed
with the top liner, the report neglects the existence and contribution of five feet of compacted
clay, and the fact that the leak detection zone under the bottom liner has never shown the
presence of any water.
SECTION 5.0 CONCLUSIONS:
It was a forgone conclusion that the PCB levels vary in the landfill. However, there was
not one piece of evidence for PCB contamination outside the landfill. It should be noted that low
levels of PCB's were found in the landfill leachate. No PCB's were found in any samples,
groundwater, soil, or sediment outside of the landfill, with the exception of the one sample in the
pond area where EPA found .1 ppm PCB. The "reliable data" being used by the Science
Advisors indicating "some limited impact of the landfill on subsurface materials immediately
outside the landfill" is the presence of dioxins in two monitoring wells. Even the presence of
these various compounds do not correlate, and after evaluation of the Quality Assurance of the
dioxin data, the results are highly suspect as dioxin was also found in the lab and field blanks. It
would certainly be appropriate to re-do some of the dioxin testing, particularly in monitoring wells
5-d and 1-a. Due to the low solubilities of dioxins in water, it does not seem feasible that the
landfill would be contributing to dioxin found in monitoring wells 5-d and 1-a without also
showing some PCB's, as PCB's were found in measurable quantities in the leachate from the
landfill. Thus if one compound were leaking out, why not the other?
SECTION 6.0: RECOMMENDATIONS
The variations of PCB concentrations in the landfill probably have no effect on the
detoxification process, as most processes, including the BCD, are often utilized for sites with
greater than 10,000 ppm of PCB's, which is more than 10 times any concentration found in the
landfill. Probably of greater concern will be the wet zone at the bottom of the landfill as the
process will be affected by sudden volumes of water which could cause an immediate temperature
drop in the process. This should be studied in the Phase II report.
5
October 6, 1997
To:
From:
Re:
Bill Meyer, Director, Division of Waste Management
Mike Kelley, Deputy Director, Division of Waste Management r"J)
Ed Mussier, P.E., Solid Waste Section, Division of Waste Manageme~
Monitoring System at the PCB Landfill, Warren County, North Carolina
Gentlemen,
This memorandum provides information on the monitoring equipment which has been installed
at the PCB landfill in Warren County. The system consists of a battery powered data logger
(computer), and instruments which monitor and record rainfall, ambient temperature, ambient
pressure, and water levels within the landfill. Water levels are being monitored in the two new
boreholes which were put in the landfill in February, 1997.
The instruments take measurements once per hour, and the results are stored in the data logger
(rainfall is cumulative and the hourly total is stored). Periodically, division staff go to the landfill
and download the stored data from the data logger into a laptop computer. Reports can be
generated and the data is available in comma delimited ASCII files for import into most common
data base and spreadsheet programs. Currently the data is downloaded every 7-10 days, but the
battery is expected to last for at least 30 days in the winter, more in the summer.
The instruments were installed and the system debugged on September 23 and 24, 1997. Hourly
readings have been recorded since two PM on September 24. Data was last retrieved October 3.
One water level instrument was installed in the south borehole. Additional cable is required to
install the second instrument in the north borehole. The cable has been ordered and it is expected
that it will be installed before the 15th of October.
A summary of the equipment installed at the landfill may be found on the attached specifications
sheet. If there are any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Data Logger
VWP Interface
Battery
VS Piezometer
Software
Pressure Sensor
Rain Gauge
Temperature
PCB Landfill Monitoring Equipment
Specification Sheet
Met One Instruments, Grants Pass, Oregon. Model 457. An enhanced
Campbell Scientific CRl0 Data Logger.
Campbell Scientific digital to analog interface. Used to communicate with
the VS Piezometers.
Lowes, 12 volt, 135 amp-hour, rechargeable lawn tractor battery.
Slope Indicator, Vibrating wire strip piezometer. Used to measure
pressure, thus water level elevations and changes in the boreholes. Very
accurate,+/-0.001 feet. The instrument is used to measure water levels in
the landfill. It was zeroed with measurements taken manually with an
electronic water level indicator. The instrument converts water pressure to
a tensional load on a fixed steel strip (similar to a tuning fork). Tension
increases linearly with pressure. A magnetic coil excites the strip, which
vibrates at a known frequency. The vibration excites the strip which
vibrates and generates voltage pulses. These pulses are counted, calibrated,
and converted to an elevation of water for the output.
Custom written. Meteorological portion by Met One, VSP by Slope
Indicator, debugged by division consultant.
Met One, Model 090D-solid state barometer. Provides absolute (site
specific) pressure. Monitors and calibrated for 26-32" of Mercury (Hg)
pressure. Temperature rated for -18 to 50 degrees C (-0.4-122 degrees F).
Accurate to +/-0.04" of Hg.
Met One, tipping bucket. Model 370, 8". Measures 0.01" of rain. Mercury
switch. Accurate to+/-1 % at 1 "-3" ofrain per hour, at 70 F.
Campbell Scientific. Model 107 with a model 41301 radiation
shield. Mounted on and 8 foot PVC pole. Range -35-50 degrees C.
Sensitivity of<+/-0.4 C within -24-48 degrees C (-11.2-118.4
degrees F).
I· I
October 16, 1997
To: Bill Meyer, Director, Division of Waste Management
Mike Kelley, Deputy Director, Division of Waste Management
From: Ed Mussier, P.E., Solid Waste Section, Division of Waste Management
Re: Preliminary Data From the Monitoring System at the PCB Landfill, Warren County,
North Carolina. September 24-October 9, 1997.
Gentlemen,
Attached you will find several examples of data collected from the monitoring equipment
recently installed at the landfill, as well as similar results of historical data collected from the
landfill vent. For reference the attachments are labeled as follows:
Attachment I Example of data logger report-Data from September 25-29, 1997.
Attachment 2 Microsoft Excel spreadsheet summary of data logger data, September 24-
October 9, 1997. Note summary on page 1.
Attachment 3 Graph of Hourly barometric pressure and water levels in south borehole,
September 24-October 9, 1997.
Attachment 4 Microsoft Excel spreadsheet of water elevations measured in the landfill
air vent monitoring point. December 1994 through September 1997. This
spread sheet also contains the monthly and yearly rainfall data for the
Arcola station in Warren county. The average barometric pressure for the
day, as recorded at RDU and adjusted to sea level is also included.
Attachment 5 Air Vent water levels versus RDU(sea level adjusted) barometric pressure
graph. Monthly for 12/94 through 9/97.
Attachment 3 clearly shows that the water level measured in the south borehole fluctuates in
direct correlation with the atmospheric (barometric) pressure. During the period of record, the
water level measured in the borehole fluctuated by 13. 2 inches and the barometric pressure
varied by 0.89 inches of mercury, often showing response hourly. It is important to note that the
change registered by the VSP is in tenths of a foot (~1.2 inches) The highest reading came during
a spell when the barometric pressure was the lowest, and the lowest water level was recorded
during times when the atmospheric pressure was the highest.
When atmospheric pressure is high it "pushes down" on the water surface, thus lowering the
recorded elevation. When the pressure is "low" there is less force on the water so it "rises"
accordingly. For reference, 12" of water column is equal to 0.883 inches of mercury (Hg).
During this time period only 0.85 inches of rain fell, hardly enough to generate the water level
swing measured, even if it had all entered the landfill, a highly unlikely assumption.
Attachment 5 also clearly shows that there is a relationship between the barometric pressure and
the level of the water that is measured in the landfill air vent. Attachment 4 is a record of the data
collected by the division and used to generate the graph. Attachment 4 provides a statistical
analysis of the air vent data. The data is summarized for the period of record ( 12/94-9-97) as
well as for each year ofrecord (1995, 1996, 1997 to date). The data clearly shows that the
fluctuation in the measured air vent water level was 9" in 1995 and 13.32" to date in 1997, less
than or equal to measurements of fluctuation collected in ten days with the monitoring
equipment.
The year of 1996 showed a total fluctuation of measured water level in the air vent of 21.6
inches. HOWEVER it must be noted that the spread in the barometric pressure was almost one
inch of Hg (0.98") versus a spread of about 0.5. inches of Hg in 1995 and 1997, to date. It is also
important to note that the yearly rainfall, reported by the Arcola station, was 40.28 " in 1994,
56.85" in 1995 and 60.58" in 1996, well above the NC average of approximately 45 inches per
year.
In an effort to "even out" the air vent information, the data was analyzed for an average (mean),
medium, as well as maximum and minimum recorded value for the time period of concern. The
yearly averages were then averaged, and indicated a spread of 9.378 inches, well within the
fluctuation recorded in just 10 days in the south borehole. If one compares the borehole data
(means), there is an indication that water is entering the landfill. This is consistent with the
evaluations of both Barnes and Richardson. The average water level, as measured in the vent,
appears to be slowly increasing. The data for the summer of 1997 records that the water level in
the landfill maybe increasing. However, the rainfall for the summer of 1997 was well below
normal (August 1997 was the second LOWEST recorded rainfall amount, at RDU, in the last 100
years).Ifthe landfill were leaking any measurable amount, then why are the measured water
levels increasing?
The data clearly needs more interpretation. It is clear that the measured water levels in the
landfill fluctuate with the atmospheric pressure. Historical data from the air vent, appears to
show that the water level in the landfill is slowly increasing. In my opinion, there is no indication
that water is leaving the landfill ( as evidenced by an increase in the measured water levels
during a time of minimum rainfall).
In analyzing the data from the landfill, one must be cognizant of the relationship between the
measured water level and the barometric pressure. Analysis to date does not include the behavior
of the landfill system, including the contribution of any internal gas pressure in the landfill.
In summary, the measured level of the water in the landfill rises and falls in good correlation
with the ambient barometric pressure. The hypothesis, as presented by Barnes and Hirschom
that significant amounts of water are entering the landfill and leaving the landfill is incorrect. The
bottom liner appears to be intact. Observed increases in the water level in the landfill can be
related to barometric pressure swings, and possible, minimal infiltration of water into the landfill.
Chan:
Unit:
00:00
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
AmbT
DegF
55.68
55.79
55.63
55.54
55.51
55.49
55.27
55.1
55.07
55.35
55.94
56.57
57.25
58.7
60.49
61.93
63.63
64.49
64.15
63.32
62.1
59 .03
58.4
59 .45
Total 1399.88
SAvg 58.3283
VAvg 58.3271
Rain
inch
0.0000
0.0000
.01
.03
0.0000
.OS
0.0000
.01
.02
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0 .0000
0 .0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
BP
inHg
29.6
29 .58
29.55
29.53
29.5
29.48
29.47
29.47
29 .46
29.46
29.46
29.46
29.44
29.43
29.43
29.4
29.38
29.37
29.37
29 .37
29 .36
29.36
29.37
29.38
Batt
voe
10.97
10.97
10.97
10.96
10.95
10.93
10.94
10.93
10.93
10 .93
10.92
10.9
10.91
10.91
10.94
10.95
10.9
10.89
10.94
10.93
10 .87
10.85
10.87
10.83
H2O#1
ft
13.87
13.92
13.92
13.96
13.98
14.02
14
14.02
14.01
14.02
14.03
14.05
14.01
14.05
14.07
14.06
14.12
14.12
14 .12
14 .14
14.13
14.13
14.11
14.06
H2O#2
ft
337.1
337.1
337.1
337 .1
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.2
337.3
337.3
337.3
337.2
337.2
.12 706.679 262.09 336.92 8092 .70
.005 29.445 10.9204 14.0383 337.195
.005 29.445 10.9204 14.0383 337.195
100% Data Recovery
i
Station: STATE OF NC 94-4317 RALEIGH, NC 09/26/97 A -I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chan: AmbT Rain BP Batt H2O#1 H2O#2
Unit: DegF inch inHg VDC ft ft ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00 60.66 0.0000 29 .39 10.83 14.09 337.2 2/5
01 :00 60.9 0.0000 29.4 10.82 14 .08 337.2
02:00 60.11 0.0000 29.41 10.82 14 .09 337.2
03:00 58.23 0.0000 29.41 10.83 14.08 337.2
04:00 56 .09 0.0000 29.41 10.79 14 .08 337 .2
05:00 52.57 0 .0000 29.41 10.79 14.08 337 .2
06:00 50.85 0.0000 29.42 10.78 14.05 337 .1
07 :00 50.41 0.0000 29.45 10.76 14.03 337.1
08:00 49.39 0.0000 29.46 10.76 14 337.1
09:00 54.38 0.0000 29.49 10.75 13.96 337.1
10 :00 61.44 0.0000 29 .54 10.78 13.91 337
11:00 64 .92 0.0000 29.58 10.8 13.87 337
12:00 70.7 0.0000 29.61 10.78 13.84 336.9
13:00 72.3 0.0000 29.62 10.84 13.83 336 .9
14:00 74.9 0.0000 29 .62 10.8 13.84 336 .9
15:00 76.7 0.0000 29.62 10.86 13.84 336.9
16:00 76 .9 0.0000 29.62 10 .82 13.84 336.9
17:00 73.8 0.0000 29.62 10.85 13.8 336 .9
18:00 71. 6 0.0000 29.6 10.79 13.86 337
19:00 68.72 0.0000 29.61 10.82 13.84 337
20:00 65.69 0 .0000 29 .62 10.74 13 .84 337
21:00 62.83 0 .0000 29 .62 10.78 13 .82 336 .9
22:00 61. 5 0.0000 29 .65 10 .71 13 .8 336.9
23:00 60 .21 0.0000 29 .66 10 .74 13.8 336.9
Total 1515.8 0 708.839 259.04 334.27 8088.7
SAvg 63 .1583 0 29 .535 10.7933 13.9279 337 .029
VAvg 63.1563 0 29 .535 10.7933 13.9279 337.029
100% Data Recovery
Chan:
Unit:
00:00
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15 :00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
AmbT
DegF
58.78
58.05
58.75
58.36
58.44
58.01
57.25
56.67
55.35
56.22
61.43
66.07
71. 2
73.2
73.3
73.4
73.3
72.8
71
69.17
67.95
66.99
64 .53
64 .7
Total 1544.92
SAvg 64.3716
VAvg 64 .3699
Rain
inch
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0 .0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0 .0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0 .0000
0.0000
0.0000
0 .0000
0 .0000
BP
inHg
29.64
29.63
29.63
29.63
29.63
29.62
29.62
29.63
29.64
29.65
29.66
29.7
29.72
29.72
29.7
29.68
29.66
29.65
29.63
29.62
29.62
29.6
29.59
29.58
Batt H2O#1 H2O#2
VDC ft ft
10.68
10 .71
10.67
10.66
10.66
10.64
10.66
10.63
10.64
10.63
10.62
10.63
10.69
10.71
10.71
10.71
10 .69
10.69
10 .62
10.65
10.58
10.61
10.55
10.58
13.83
13.83
13.82
13.82
13.78
13.83
13.83
13.87
13.81
13.81
13.77
13.74
13.67
13.74
13.76
13.78
13.8
13.82
13 .84
13.84
13.85
13.86
13.88
13 .89
336 .9
337
337
337
337
337
337
337
337
337
336.9
336.9
336.9
336.9
336.9
336 .9
337
337
337
337
337
337.1
337.1
337 .1
0 711.45 255.62 331.47 8087.6
0 29.6437 10.6508 13.8112 336 .983
0 29.6437 10.6508 13.8112 336.983
100% Data Recovery
3/6
Station: STATE OF NC 94-4317 RALEIGH, NC 09/28/97 ~, ___________________________________________________________________ _A _______
Chan: AmbT Rain BP Batt H2O#1 H2O#2
Unit: DegF inch inHg voe ft ft ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00 65.88 0.0000 29.57 10 .53 13.91 337.1 4/5
01:00 65.16 0.0000 29.54 10.52 13.94 337.1
02:00 65.13 0.0000 29 .53 10.55 13.94 337.2
03 :00 65.25 0.0000 29.51 10.55 13.98 ·337.2
04:00 64.73 .03 29.48 10 .53 14.02 337 .2
05:00 64.12 0.0000 29 .46 10 .53 14.03 337 .3
06 :00 64.54 0.0000 29.45 10.48 14.03 337.3
07:00 64 .76 .02 29.45 10.47 14.05 337 .3
08:00 65.03 .03 29.43 10.51 14.07 337.3
09:00 65 .68 0.0000 29 .41 10.45 14.08 337.3
10 :00 66.52 .01 29.4 10.45 14.09 337.4
11:00 67.24 .02 29.4 10 .49 14 .11 337 .4
12:00 68.21 .02 29 .38 10.43 14.12 337.4
13:00 69.61 .01 29.36 10 .43 14 .15 337.4
14:00 70.7 .01 29.34 10.47 14.17 337.4
15:00 71.3 .02 29.31 10.42 14.21 337.5
16:00 71.5 .01 29.29 10.47 14.23 337.5
17:00 71.1 0 .0000 29.28 10.4 14.24 337.5
18:00 70.2 .01 29.27 10.44 14.25 337 .6
19:00 68 .04 0.0000 29.26 10.42 14.26 337 .6
20:00 65 .92 .02 29.26 10.36 14.24 337 .6
21:00 65 .09 0.0000 29 .27 10.34 14.24 337.6
22:00 64.62 0.0000 29 .26 10.37 14 .26 337.6
23:00 63 .98 0.0000 29 .25 10.32 14 .25 337.6
Total 1604 .31 .21 705.160 250.93 338.87 8097.4
SAvg 66.8462 .00875 29.3816 10 .4554 14.1195 337.391
VAvg 66 .8456 8.74999 29.3816 10.4554 14 .1195 337.391
100% Data Recovery
Station: STATE OF NC 94-4317 RALEIGH, NC 09/29/97 A-I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chan: AmbT Rain BP Batt H2O#1 H2O#2
Unit: DegF inch inHg VDC ft ft ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00 63.66 0.0000 29.25 10.3 14.28 337.7 5/5
01:00 63.35 0.0000 29.22 10.29 14.31 337.7
02:00 63.88 0.0000 29.2 10.28 14.33 337.8
03:00 64.16 0.0000 29.18 10.26 14.36 337.7
04:00 64.59 0.0000 29.16 10.24 14.37 337.7
05:00 64.46 0.0000 29.15 10.23 14.37 337.7
06:00 64.51 0.0000 29.16 10.25 14.36 337.6
07:00 64.51 0.0000 29.17 10.2 14.35 337.6
08:00 64.71 0.0000 29 .18 10 .18 14.32 337.6
09:00 67.05 0.0000 29.22 10.2 14.28 337.6
10:00 67.48 0.0000 29.25 10.18 14.25 337.5
11:00 68.6 0.0000 29.28 10.12 14.22 337.5
12:00 70.2 0.0000 29.34 11.61 14.01 337.3
13:00 none none none none none none
14:00 none none none none ·none none
15:00 none none none none none none
16:00 none none none none none none
17:00 none none none none none none
18:00 none none none none none none
19:00 none none none none none none
20:00 none none none none none none
21:00 none none none none none none
22:00 none none none none none none
23:00 none none none none none none
Total 851.16 0 379.76 134.34 185.81 4389
SAvg 65.4738 0 29.2123 10.3338 14.2930 337.615
VAvg 65.4733 0 29.2123 10.3338 14.2930 337.615
54.% Data Recovery
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
~,:,nt,,.mber 24-n,..tnbPr 9 1997
SOUTH MONITORING WELL BAROMETRIC PRESSURE AND WATER LEVEL DATA
Press-In H H20 Level Ft
307 ? t '!P• C) \)MM\P.
24-Sep-97 1700 29.7 337 336.7 Average 29.64359
24 1800 29.68 337 336.68 Medium 29.67
24 1900 29.66 337 336.66
24 2000 29.64 337 336.64 Stnd Dev 0.20995
24 2100 29.64 337 336.64 Variance 0.043959
24 2200 29.62 337 336.62 min 29.15
24 2300 29.62 337.1 336.62 max 30.04
25 0 29.6 337.1 336.6
25 100 29.58 337.1 336.58 Water Level Diff in in
25 200 29.55 337.1 336.55 Press Diff-Inch of Hg
25 300 29.53 337.1 336.53
25 400 29.5 337.2 336.5
25 500 29.48 337.2 336.48
25 600 29.47 337.2 336.47
25 700 29.47 337.2 336.47
25 800 29.46 337.2 336.46
25 900 29.46 337.2 336.46
25 1000 29.46 337.2 336.46
25 1100 29.46 337.2 336.46
25 1200 29.44 337.2 336.44
25 1300 29.43 337.2 336.43
25 1400 29.43 337.2 336.43
25 1500 29.4 337.2 336.4
25 1600 29.38 337.2 336.38
25 1700 29.37 337.2 336.37
25 1800 29.37 337.2 336.37
25 1900 29.37 337.3 336.37
25 2000 29.36 337.3 336.36
25 2100 29.36 337.3 336.36
25 2200 29.37 337.2 336.37
25 2300 29.38 337.2 336.38
26 0 29.39 337.2 336.39
26 100 29.4 337.2 336.4
26 200 29.41 337.2 336.41
26 300 29.41 337.2 336.41
26 400 29.41 337.2 336.41
26 500 29.41 337.2 336.41
26 600 29.42 337.1 336.42
26 700 29.45 337.1 336.45
26 800 29.46 337.1 336.46
26 900 29.49 337.1 336.49
26 1000 29.54 337 336.54
26 1100 29.58 337 336.58
26 1200 29.61 336.9 336.61
26 1300 29.62 336.9 336.62
26 1400 29.62 336.9 336.62
Page 1
12.v
337.0758
337
0.209676
0.043844
336.7
337.8
13.2
0.89
~IO!n'
26 1500 29.62
26 1600 29.62
26 1700 29.62
26 1800 29.6
26 1900 29.61
26 2000 29.62
26 2100 29.62
26 2200 29.65
26 2300 29.66
27 0 29.64
27 100 29.63
27 200 29.63
27 300 29.63
27 400 29.63
27 500 29.62
27 600 29.62
27 700 29.63
27 800 29.64
27 900 29.65
27 1000 29.66
27 1100 29.7
27 1200 29.72
27 1300 29.72
27 1400 29.7
27 1500 29.68
27 1600 29.66
27 1700 29.65
27 1800 29.63
27 1900 29.62
27 2000 29.62
27 2100 29.6
27 2200 29.59
27 2300 29.58
28 0 29.57
28 100 29.54
28 200 29.53
28 300 29.51
28 400 29.48
28 500 29.46
28 600 29.45
28 700 29.45
28 800 29.43
28 900 29.41
28 1000 29.4
28 1100 29.4
28 1200 29.38
28 1300 29.36
28 1400 29.34
28 1500 29.31
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
i:>mber 24--.:-.... g .
336.9 336.62
336.9 336.62
336.9 336.62
337 336.6
337 336.61
337 336.62
336.9 336.62
336.9 336.65
336.9 336.66
336.9 336.64
337 336.63
337 336.63
337 336.63
337 336.63
337 336.62
337 336.62
337 336.63
337 336.64
337 336.65
336.9 336.66
336.9 336.7
336.9 336.72
336.9 336.72
336.9 336.7
336.9 336.68
337 336.66
337 336.65
337 336.63
337 336.62
337 336.62
337.1 336.6
337.1 336.59
337.1 336.58
337.1 336.57
337.1 336.54
337.2 336.53
337.2 336.51
337.2 336.48
337.3 336.46
337.3 336.45
337.3 336.45
337.3 336.43
337.3 336.41
337.4 336.4
337.4 336.4
337.4 336.38
337.4 336.36
337.4 336.34
337.5 336.31
Page2
QQ7
28 1600
28 1700
28 1800
28 1900
28 2000
28 2100
28 2200
28 2300
29 0
29 100
29 200
29 300
29 400
29 500
29 600
29 700
29 800
29 900
29 1000
29 1100
29 1200
29 1300
29 1400
29 1500
29 1600
29 1700
29 1800
29 1900
29 2000
29 2100
29 2200
29 2300
30 0
30 100
30 200
30 300
30 400
30 500
30 600
30 700
30 800
30 900
30 1000
30 1100
30 1200
30 1300
30 1400
30 1500
30 1600
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
~Pn' l=!mber 24--r9
29.29 337.5 336.29
29.28 337.5 336.28
29.27 337.6 336.27
29.26 337.6 336.26
29.26 337.6 336.26
29.27 337.6 336.27
29.26 337.6 336.26
29.25 337.6 336.25
29.25 337.7 336.25
29.22 337.7 336.22
29.2 337.8 336.2
29.18 337.7 336.18
29.16 337.7 336.16
29.15 337.7 336.15
29.16 337.6 336.16
29.17 337.6 336.17
29.18 337.6 336.18
29.22 337.6 336.22
29.25 337.5 336.25
29.28 337.5 336.28
29.34 337.3 336.34
29.43 337.3 336.43
29.43 337.3 336.43
29.41 337.3 336.41
29.4 337.3 336.4
29.4 337.3 336.4
29.4 337.3 336.4
29.38 337.4 336.38
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.36 337.4 336.36
29.37 337.4 336.37
29.37 337.4 336.37
29.37 337.4 336.37
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.34 337.4 336.34
29.33 337.4 336.33
29.32 337.4 336.32
29.33 337.4 336.33
29.33 337.4 336.33
29.34 337.4 336.34
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.37 337.3 336.37
29.38 337.3 336.38
29.37 337.3 336.37
29.36 337.4 336.36
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.35 337.4 336.35
Page3
997
30 1700
30 1800
30 1900
30 2000
30 2100
30 2200
30 2300
Oct 1 199 0
1 100
1 200
1 300
1 400
1 500
1 600
1 700
1 800
1 900
1 1000
1 1100
1 1200
1 1300
1 1400
1 1500
1 1600
1 1700
1 1800
1 1900
1 2000
1 2100
1 2200
1 2300
2 0
2 100
2 200
2 300
2 400
2 500
2 600
2 700
2 800
2 900
2 1000
2 1100
2 1200
2 1300
2 1400
2 1500
2 1600
2 1700
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
~i:m 1=1mhAr 24-""•"~"'r 9 · 997
29.35 337.4 336.35
29.37 337.3 336.37
29.38 337.4 336.38
29.38 337.3 336.38
29.4 337.3 336.4
29.42 337.3 336.42
29.43 337.3 336.43
29.44 337.3 336.44
29.44 337.3 336.44
29.44 337.3 336.44
29.44 337.3 336.44
29.43 337.3 336.43
29.42 337.3 336.42
29.42 337.3 336.42
29.43 337.3 336.43
29.44 337.3 336.44
29.46 337.2 336.46
29.49 337.2 336.49
29.54 337.2 336.54
29.56 337.2 336.56
29.57 337.1 336.57
29.57 337.1 336.57
29.57 337.1 336.57
29.58 337.1 336.58
29.59 337.1 336.59
29.61 337 .1 336.61
29.61 337.1 336.61
29.61 337 .1 336.61
29.62 337.1 336.62
29.63 337.1 336.63
29.64 337 336.64
29.67 337 336.67
29.69 337 336.69
29.69 337 336.69
29.69 337 336.69
29.68 337 336.68
29.68 337 336.68
29.7 336.9 336.7
29.72 336.9 336.72
29.74 336.9 336.74
29.76 336.9 336.76
29.78 336.8 336.78
29.83 336.8 336.83
29.86 336.7 336.86
29.86 336.7 336.86
29.84 336.8 336.84
29.82 336.8 336.82
29.81 336.8 336.81
29.8 336 .8 336.8
Page4
A·~
4/8
2 1800
2 1900
2 2000
2 2100
2 2200
2 2300
3 0
3 100
3 200
3 300
3 400
3 500
3 600
3 700
3 800
3 900
3 1000
3 1100
3 1200
3 1300
3 1400
3 1500
3 1600
3 1700
3 1800
3 1900
3 2000
3 2100
3 2200
3 2300
4 0
4 100
4 200
4 300
4 400
4 500
4 600
4 700
4 800
4 900
4 1000
4 1100
4 1200
4 1300
4 1400
4 1500
4 1600
4 1700
4 1800
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
~Pnl PmhPr 24-f'"'" .. 9 997
29.79 336.8 336.79
29.77 336.9 336.77
29.73 336.9 336.73
29.71 336.9 336.71
29.71 336.9 336.71
29.7 336.9 336.7
29.7 336.9 336.7
29.69 336.9 336.69
29.68 336.9 336.68
29.67 337 336.67
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.66 337 336.66
29.68 337 336.68
29.68 336.9 336.68
29.71 336.9 336.71
29.76 336.9 336.76
29.77 336.9 336.77
29.77 336.9 336.77
29.75 336.9 336.75
29.74 336.9 336.74
29.72 336.9 336.72
29.72 336.9 336.72
29.71 336.9 336.71
29.7 337 336.7
29.67 337 336.67
29.66 337 336.66
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.65 337 336.65
29.66 337 336.66
29.67 337 336.67
29.69 337 336.69
29.71 337 336.71
29.74 336.9 336.74
29.79 336.9 336.79
29.8 336.9 336.8
29.8 336.9 336.8
29.78 336.9 336.78
29.78 336.9 336.78
29.77 336.9 336.77
29.77 336.9 336.77
29.78 336.9 336.78
Page 5
...
4 1900 29.77
4 2000 29.74
4 2100 29.74
4 2200 29.74
4 2300 29.74
5 0 29.74
5 100 29.74
5 200 29.73
5 300 29.73
5 400 29.72
5 500 29.72
5 600 29.72
5 700 29.73
5 800 29.73
5 900 29.75
5 1000 29.79
5 1100 29.84
5 1200 29.85
5 1300 29.85
5 1400 29.83
5 1500 29.82
5 1600 29.81
5 1700 29.8
5 1800 29.8
5 1900 29.79
5 2000 29.76
5 2100 29.75
5 2200 29.75
5 2300 29.75
6 0 29.76
6 100 29.76
6 200 29.76
6 300 29.76
6 400 29.75
6 500 29.75
6 600 29.77
6 700 29.77
6 800 29.78
6 900 29.8
6 1000 29.84
6 1100 29.89
6 1200 29.9
6 1300 29.89
6 1400 29.88
6 1500 29.86
6 1600 29.85
6 1700 29.85
6 1800 29.85
6 1900 29.84
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
-r ?.d-:)r-tnh,:,r 9
336.9 336.77
337 336.74
337 336.74
337 336.74
337 336.74
337 336.74
337 336.74
337 336.73
337 336.73
337 336.72
337 336.72
337 336.72
337 336.73
337 336.73
337 336.75
336.9 336.79
336.9 336.84
336.9 336.85
336.9 336.85
336.9 336.83
336.9 336.82
336.9 336.81
336.9 336.8
336.9 336.8
337 336.79
337 336.76
337 336.75
337 336.75
337 336.75
337 336.76
337 336.76
337 336.76
337 336.76
337 336.75
337 336.75
337 336.77
337 336.77
337 336 .. 78
337 336.8
336.9 336.84
336.9 336.89
336.9 336.9
336.9 336.89
336.9 336.88
336.9 336.86
336.9 336.85
336.9 336.85
336.9 336.85
337 336.84
Page6
997
~,::,n•
6 2000 29.82
6 2100 29.81
6 2200 29.8
6 2300 29.8
7 0 29.79
7 100 29.79
7 200 29.78
7 300 29.78
7 400 29.77
7 500 29.78
7 600 29.78
7 700 29.79
7 800 29.8
7 900 29.82
7 1000 29.84
7 1100 29.88
7 1200 29.89
7 1300 29.88
7 1400 29.87
7 1500 29.86
7 1600 29.85
7 1700 29.85
7 1800 29.86
7 1900 29.86
7 2000 29.84
7 2100 29.83
7 2200 29.83
7 2300 29.83
8 0 29.83
8 100 29.83
8 200 29.83
8 300 29.83
8 400 29.82
8 500 29.83
8 600 29.84
8 700 29.86
8 800 29.88
8 900 29.9
8 1000 29.92
8 1100 29.96
8 1200 29.98
8 1300 29.99
8 1400 29.98
8 1500 29.96
8 1600 29.95
8 1700 29.95
8 1800 29.95
8 1900 29.94
8 2000 29.92
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
""mber 24-'"'"•""'"'"'r 9 1
337 336.82
337 336.81
337 336.8
337 336.8
337 336.79
337 336.79
337 336.78
337 3;36.78
337 336.77
337 336.78
337 336.78
337 336.79
337 336.8
337 336.82
337 336.84
336.9 336 .88
336.9 336.89
336.9 336 .88
337 336.87
337 336.86
337 336.85
337 336.85
337 336.86
337 336.86
337 336.84
337 336.83
337 336.83
337 336.83
337 336.83
337 336.83
337 336.83
337 336.83
337.1 336.82
337.1 336.83
337 336.84
337 336 .86
337 336.88
337 336.9
336.9 336 .92
336.9 336.96
336.9 336.98
336.9 336.99
336.9 336.98
336.9 336.96
336.9 336.95
336.9 336.95
336.9 336.95
337 336.94
337 336.92
Page 7
997
8 2100
8 2200
8 2300
9 0
9 100
9 200
9 300
9 400
9 500
9 600
9 700
9 800
9 900
9 1000
9 1100
9 1200
9 1300
9 1400
9 1500
9 1600
9 1700
9 1800
9 1900
9 2000
9 2100
9 2200
9 2300
10 1200
-
29.92
29.93
29.93
29.93
29.93
29.93
29.94
29.93
29.94
29.95
29.96
29.97
29.99
30.01
30.03
30.04
30.03
30.01
29.99
29.98
29.97
29.96
29.95
29.94
29.93
29.93
29.93
29.99
PCB LANDFILL
Monitoring Data
24-~C:ll -r•9. 1997
337 336.92
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.94
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.94
336.9 336.95
336.9 336.96
336.9 336.97
336.8 336.99
336.8 337.01
336.8 337.03
336.8 337.04
336.8 337.03
336.8 337.01
336.8 336.99
336.8 336_.98
336.8 336.97
336.9 336.96
336.9 336.95
336.9 336.94
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.93
336.9 336.93
336.8 336.99
Page 8
0 LL -' s ~ > \l} ..J rl \ll r 1 338 337.5 337 336.5 336 PCB LANDFILL Hourly Barometric Pressure and Water Level REadings September 24-October 9 , 1997 A tt,e...c..t"tMt=N T 3 Wf>..TER. L~'-/e\ ~ 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73 81 89 97 105 113·121 129 137 145 153 161 169 1TT 185 193 201 209 217 225 233 241 249 257 265__273 281 289 297 305 313 321 329 337 345 353 361 *Note-Subtract 307 from Series 2 to find Barometric pressure in Inches of Mercury Water Elevation in tents of a foot Page 1
Measured Leachate Elevation at Air Vent Well -Reference Elevation= 357.07
Date Elevation Rain (in) Year Rain Ral BP
12/19/94 336.41 1 1 40.28 30.26
1/25/85 336.37 2 4.5 30.24
2/23/95 336.25 3 3.7 30.09
3/29/95 336.42 4 6.17 30.08
4/27/95 336.44 5 1.72 30.09
5/24/95 336.32 6 3.39 30.19
6/22/95 336.35 7 9.33 29.99
7/21/95 336.64 8 6.12 29.96
8/28/95 none 9 4.45 29.91
9/25/95 none 10 3.17 30.06
10/24/95 336.7 11 8.21 30.19
11/20/95 336.79 12 4.06 30.11
12/20/95 337 13 2.03 56.85 29.74
1/26/96 336.12 14 5.12 30.4
2/23/96 336.44 15 3.79 29.88
3/29/96 336.88 16 3.39 30.03
4/26/96 336.08 17 3.72 29.47
5/31/96 none 18 4.13 30.24
6/28/96 336.32 19 6.48 30.13
7/26/96 336.63 20 5.4 none
8/30/96 336.95 21 5.8 30.07
9/16/96 337.06 22 9.26 29.98
10/28/96 337.05 23 4.81 30.06
10/29/96 337.11 24 30.04
11/8/96 337.88 25 29.75
11/25/96 337.71 26 4.09 30.11
12/20/96 337.61 27 4.59 60.58 30.45
Jan-97 336.79 28 3.04 30.46
Feb-97 337.25 29 2.78 29.97
Mar-97 none 30 3.39 30.31
4/7/97 337.2 31 4.98 29.91
5/28/97 336.79 32 0.87 30.34
6/30/97 337.3 33 5.82 30.08
7/30/97 337.52 34 30.17
8/26/97 337.64 35 30.1
9/29/97 337.9 36 29.9
10/10/97 337.63 37 0. 29.97
Page 1
Attachment 4
1 of 2
H2O level
Mean
Median
Stnd Dev
VAr
Slope
Max (ft)
Min (ft)
Spread(in)
Summary, By Total and Year
of
M,:,!:a~t r,:,ri Air Vi:m W~tP.r ~I---~:.-•• ~nn I ::>rP.!;!;tJrP. fR ::i;;~---•-;, I
Total Data 1995 1996 1997 Pressure Total Data
336.8955 336.5173 336.9108 337.3356 30.07583
336.79 336.42 336.95 337.3 30.08
0.534217 0.232985 0.585654 0.379839
0.285388 0.054282 0.342991 0.144278
0.03805 0.04922 0.119551 0.099941
337.9 337 337.88 337.9 30.46
336.08 336.25 336.08 336.79 29.47
21.84 9 21.6 13.32 0.99
Page 1
nu .. -· ..., tn ~"!:I IP.11P.I)
1995 1996 1997
30.07 30.04692 30.121
30.09 30.06 30.09
30.26 30.45 30.46
29.74 29.47 29.9
0.52 0.98 0.56
"ti Q) (0 Cl) ..... 335 336 337 338 12/19/94 2/23/95 4/27/95 6/22/95 8/28/95 10/24/95 1¥-~~~~l:~~,.,:£\~~~~1 12/20/95 L!~t"~~-lt'~~~f~J~¥-•~~~~~~~~&~~~ 2/23/96 L 4/26/96 ~~~~r:mr~~~Nr~~¥~f~iH _,f~Tt~~t£~~~I1~1J:l~I~~~if:~ 6/28/96 8/30/96 10/28/96 11/8/96 12/20/96 Feb-97 4/7/97 6/30/97 8/26/97 u••~t:8ilit ~ • L l::~i~S~1lilm~~-~~¾~W~ #~I --,. .. ,,_.,. ••-.--,---,,r,a, ,-,.,_,--.,,.__...,.,_...,., •-• I ..___ -"'' ~---""'---'"'"'··· '····-········ ---0 ?5' ~ aJ V F t C " c { ~ ! i ~ t r:. l f t ............ o;) "'Cl l l)I ~ a> ~ ~ ~ •i ..._,/ u O fl',~ I-", ...... {. I\ ~ i\ .. ..... '\ l'\ ! t:, \ ~f~ 1°li ~ "t--i -"ti () CD ~ ::0 < m -z ~i ~~ ' m ::0 ...0 ,... ......... m -q < m -1 ,... en < Cl) -, (/1 C (/1 ~ ,... m G> :I: "ti -, Cl) (/1 (/1 C ro > ~I ~I t ~ 0\
Rlnfall-lnches -0 -N <,,I ... UI en ..... 011 co 0 4/1/91 7/1/91 10/1/91 1/1/92 4/1/92 7/1/92 10/1/92 1/1/93 4/1/93 7/1/93 10/1/93 --,,.,.;·· ~ .·.>t<~..J:t::'"\~l ,, I» :i" 1/1/94 .,, :I: I» 0 = en :I 4/1/94 C =r "'C !J I» ii: '< -8'i I» I» co -➔ 7/1/94 > (") <D i .... ~ =r I» 10/1/94 0 ;:i. ii .... en _,,,· 1~:::,~, ,,;0"'.:""1':~.<\t;:~~~-~1/z~II! ~ ~.: --1/1/95~~ I» : '1!'.•' -0 4/1/95 :::, 7/1/95 10/1/95 1/1/96 4/1/96 7/1/96 10/1/96 1/1/97 4/1/97 00 II
..: -
C nvlronmental
..l...Anolenoy
Quality Assurance
Laboratory Data Evaluation
for
State of North Carolina
DEHNR
Solid Waste Management Division
prepared by
James A Ploscyca
Environmental Efficiency
[phone]
prepared for
Mr. Michael Kelly
North Carolina DEHNR
Solid Waste Management Division
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
October 2, 1997
C nvlronmental
.L.ltflolenoy
Introduction:
In early August, 1997, Mr. James A. Ploscyca of Environmental Efficiency was contracted to
compile and tabulate various environmental data associated 'With the Warren County Landfill site.
This compilation of data was completed and presented to Mr. Kelly at a meeting which took place
on September 2, 1997.
Review of the tabulated data indicated that the most common contaminant being detected in the
samples was Octachlorodibenzodioxin (OCDD). This compound was reported in every
groundwater sample collected at the site, but was also detected in many of the field and laboratory
blank samples. In an effort to verify the validity of the OCDD results, Mr. Ploscyca was requested
to evaluate the data for possible field or laboratory contamination.
The evaluation utilized a USEP A, Region IV document entitled "Data Validation Standard
Operating Procedures for Polychlorinated Dibenzodioxin and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans"
September 1996, as guidance. The primary focus of the data evaluation was Section VII of the
document (See Attachment 1) which addresses method blank evaluation.
Summary of Findings:
The following tables list samples by analytical groupings referred to as Sample Delivery Groups or
SDGs The laboratory utilizes SDGs to track internal laboratory quality control associated 'With
particular samples . Each sample grouping has one or more Method Blanks associated 'With the
analysis of samples. The table lists samples in a particular SDG and then the associated Method
Blank results.
The most common compounds detected in the samples were HPCDD and OCCD and the third
column in the table lists their respective concentrations in each of the samples and blanks. A
designation of "Plus" in the third column indicates that additional compounds beyond HPCDD
and OCCD were detected in the sample.
The values listed in column 4 represent the concentration levels found in the blanks multiplied by
a factor often. The EPA data validation document (See Attachment 1) states:
"Any compound detected in the sample that was also detected in any associated blank is not
reported if the sample concentration is Jess than ten times (J Ox) the blank concentration. "
If the sample exceeded the Blank cutoff level, column five indicates an "R" flag which signifies
that the sample results are rejected due to serious deficiencies in the ability to analyze the sample
and meet quality control criteria. The presence or absence of the analyte cannot be verified.
Page 18 of the EPA document also indicates that data qualification should be based upon
comparison 'With the associated blank having the hiehest concentration of a contaminant.
2
I:" nvlronmental
.ctftolenoy
Associated blanks include the extraction method blanks.
The highest water extraction blank was BL0414WB with HPCDD and OCCD concentrations of 4
and 140 pgt'L respectively. A level of 140 pgt'L of OCDD indicates a severe laboratory
contamination problem which may be reflected in the reported sample concentrations.
Samples with a "RR"qualifier indicate they are rejected since their concentrations are less than
I Ox the levels found in the highest extraction blank. The highest soil extraction blank was
BL0414SA with HPCDD and OCCD concentrations of 1.1 and 31 ng/Kg respectively. Samples
qualified with an asterisk (*) appear to be valid reported concentrations according to the EPA
(lOx) rule. Unfortunately, the "R" or "RR" flag was determined to be applicable in the majority of
cases.
In conclusion., it is my recomendation that extreme caution be used when attempting to utilize this
data to make important environmental decisions. There is clear evidence of widespread sample
contamination during sample processing at the laboratory. The presence of this contamination
makes it difficult, if not impossible, to rely on the generated data with any degree of confidence.
Since the scope of contamination was so broad, (not limited to merely a couple of blank samples),
it is difficult to have confidence in the data set as a whole, since it may not accurately reflect
actual field conditions.
There were two water samples, JDH and QAR which yielded relatively high concentrations of
analytes compared to the other samples collected. It may be prudent to take a closer look at these
locations if additional analytical work is performed.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or comments on
this report.
Sincerely,
~ ~'I;,--~ ·....J
James A Ploscyca
Principal, Environmental Efficiency
3
Ii nvlronmental
Ltno1enoy
SDG# Sample/Blank
29087 DMA
HESS
LESS
BL04 l 4SA (Blank)
29087 ASH
JD
JAD
MMM
RAJR
RRAM
BL04 14WB (Blank )
HPCDD
OCCDConc.
Ing/Kg
47 ng/Kg
2.2 ng/Kg
432 ng/Kg
1.7 ng/Kg
245 ng/Kg
I.Ing/Kg
31 ng/Kg
ND
13 pg/L
4.5 pg/L
42 pg/L
3.8 pg/L
24 pg/L
21 pg/L
14 pg/L
4 5 pg/L
30 pg/L
ND
20 pg/L
4 pg/L
140 pg/I.
4
Blank Cutoff Qualifier
R
R
R •
R
R
11 Blank
310
(Highest Soil Blank)
-
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
-
R
40 Blank
1400
(Highest Water Blank)
C nvlronmental
Llfflolenoy
SDG# Sample/Blank
29087 ALB
BB
BT
JDW
KTB
PSG
RBAB
RPS
TB
Bl.0414 WA (Blank)
HPCDD Blank Cutoff Qualifier
OCCDConc.
2.9 pg/L R
22 pg/L R
6.8 pg/L R
48 pg/L R
3.2 pg/L R
18 pg/L R
4 pg/L R
22 pg/L R
4.8 pg/L R
26 pg/L R
4.6 pg/L R
32 pg/L R
3.9 pg/1. R
18 pg/L R
4 pg/L R
37 pg.IL R
11 pg/L R
357 pg.IL RR
4.2 pg/L 42 Blank
33 pg/L 330
5
..:: .
"C nvlronmental
.Llfflolenoy
SDGj Sample/Blank
29087 AJ
ADJ
AW
cc
CEH
DRK
JDH
JOK
RDR.I
RPAB
RPF
BL041 4WA (Blank )
28760 ADF
MB
BL03 l OWF (Blank)
28760 DM
HM
BL03 l OSC (Blank)
HPCDD Blank Cuk>ff Qualifier
OCCD Cone.
7.5 pg/L R
54 pg/L R
JO pg/L R
88 pg/L R
19 pg/L R
150 pg/L R
7.5 pg/L R
99 pg/L R
4 pg/L R
17 pg/L R
ND -
29 pg/L R
1041 pg/L •
10053 pg.II.. •
Plus
ND -
18 PF-IL R
5 pg/L R
17 pg/L R
10 pg/L R
98 pg/I . R
ND -
21 pg/L R
4.2 pg/L 42 Blank
33 pg/L 330
3.0 pg/L RR
20 pg/L R
6.1 pg/L R
40 pg/L R
ND Blank
JO pg/L 100
ND -
2.7 ng/K.g R
ND -
I 8 ng/K.g R
ND Blank
2.4 ng/Kg 24
6
Environmental
tllolenoy
SDG# Sample/Blank
28760 KM
MM
NlAB
PMB
WM
BL031 0SC (Blank)
28760 JABJ>
.!ABT
BL03 l 7SD (Blank)
287(1() JABH
N1AP
NlA T
BL0317SD (Blank)
28835 CB
MS
BL03 I 7SD (Blank)
Al02932#1
HPCDD Blank Cutoff Qualifier
OCCDConc.
ND -
1.4 ng/Kg R
ND -
2.6 ng/Kg R
2 ng/Kg R
76 ng/Kg RR
0.5 ng/Kg R
24 ng/Kg R
.3 ng/Kg R
Ing/Kg R
0.3 ng/Kg 3 Blank
24ng/Kg 24
15 ng/Kg •
249 ng/Kg RR
Plus
2lng/Kg •
789 ng/Kg •
Plus
ND Blank
0.7 ng/Kg 7
79 ng/Kg •
1660 ng/Kg •
Plus
2lng/Kg •
697 ng/Kg •
Plus
6 ng/Kg RR
219 ng/Kg RR
Plus
ND Blank
ll ng/Kg
2.3 ng/Kg RR
125 ng/Kg RR
1.3 ng/Kg RR
70 ng/Kg RR
ND Blank
ll ng/Kg 11
7
"C nvlronmental
.I::Anolenoy
SDG# Sample/Blank
28835 AR
BHB
NCB
SD
BL03 17SD
Al 02934#2
28835 CA
CRT
DA
DJ
IMB
ISB
KB
PAB
RSB
BL03 17WF
Al02941#2
HPCDD
OCCDConc.
2.7 ng/Kg
137 ng/Kg
2.2 ng/Kg
26 ng/Kg
1.8 ng/Kg
62 ng/Kg
2.7 ng/Kg
55 ng/Kg
0.4 ng/Kg
1.2 ng/Kg
ND
52 pg/L
ND
11 pg/L
ND
52 pg/L
ND
24 pg/L
ND
44 pg/L
ND
49 pg/L
3.3 pg/L
56 pg/L
ND
12 pg/L
ND
22 pg/L
ND
JO pg/L
8
Blank Cutoff Qualifier
R
RR
R
RR
R
RR
R
RR
4 Blank
12
-
R
-
R
-
R
-
R
-
R
-
R
-
R
-
R
-
R
Blank
100
"C nvlronmental
Ltno1enoy
SDG# Sampk/Blank
28844 AB
ADD
CD
LB
MR
PJD
PJR
SLB
BL03 l 7SD
Al02932#1
28844 EZM
NOV
BLO317WF
Al02941#2
28844 QAR-Reanalvsis
BL0325WB (Blank)
Al02972#l
29081 TMSS
HPCDD Blank Cutoff Qualifier
OCCDConc.
1.5 ng/Kg RR
86 ng/Kg RR
Plus
0.5 ng/Kg RR
6.0 ng/Kg R
Plus
2.3 ng/Kg RR
125 ng/Kg RR
Plus
1.7 ng/Kg RR
31 ng/Kg RR
Plus
0.9 ng/Kg RR
35 ng/Kg RR
3.1 ng/Kg RR
53 ng/Kg RR
Plus
1.2 ng/Kg RR
45 ng/Kg RR
Plus
1.8 ng/Kf! RR
83 ng/Kg RR
Plus
ND Blank
l.l l l
6.5 pg.IL RR
41 pg/L R
Plus
9.4 pg/L RR
541 pg/L RR
Plus
ND Blank
10 pg.IL 100
85 pg.IL •
1407 pg.IL •
Plus
2.4 pg.IL 24 Blank
6.4 pg.IL 64
4.6 ng/Kg RR
546 ng/Kg •
9
-C nvlronmental
.Llfflolanoy
SDG# Sample/Blank
A 103029 #2 (Blank)
HPCDD Blank Cutoff Qualifier
OCCDConc.
Could not Locate in Datapak -
10
D nvlronmental
..Dtnolenoy
Attachment 1
Selected Pages of USEPA Document
)
DATA VALIDATION STANDARD OPERATING PROCED'O'RES FOR
POLYCRLORINATED DIBENZODIOXJ:N AND POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZOP"O"RANS
ANALYSIS BY BIGB RESOL'O'TION GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/
BIGB RESOLUTION MASS SPECTR.OMETR.Y
UN I TE ~ STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
Prepa:-ec by :
SCIENCE AND ECOSYSTEM SUPPORT DIVISION
OFFICE OF QUALITY ASSURANCE
ATHE NS, GEORGIA 30605-2720
SEPTEMBER 1996
,-~~
J o rl~ -~ · Approved by: ~~ ~Bennett
Environmental Scientist Region IV QAO
t .
I -
)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OBJECTIVE
APPLICABILI7Y
PRELIMINARY REVIEW
VALIDATION DATA QUALIFIER DEFINITIONS
I.
II.
III.
IV .
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.
XIV .
xv.
XVI.
XVII.
XVIII .
Data Validation Documentation
Hold ina Times
Mass Resolution Check
GC Column Performance Check (Window Defining Mix)
I~it .:ial Calibration
Continu ing Calibration
Method B}ank A.~alysis
Perfonnance Evaluation Samples
Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate (MS/MSD) Analysis
Duplicate Sample Analysis
Ta~get Compound Identification Criteria
Compound Quantitation and Reported Detection Limits
Dilution~
Reanalyses
Secon~ Column Confirmation
Internal Standard Recoveries
Toxicity Equivalency Factor
Overall Assessment of Data
)
PCDD/PCDF Validation SOP
Rev.#: O
Date: September 1996
Page 7 of 34
VALIDATION DATA QUALIFIER DEFINITIONS
The following definitions provide brief explanations of the
qualifiers assigned to results in the data validation process.
J The analyte was positively identified; the associated
numerical value is the estimated concentration of the
analyte in the sample.
R The samp le results are rejected due to serious
deficiencies in the ability to analyze the sample and
meet quality control criteria. The presence or absence
of the analyte cannot be verified.
U Not d etect ed above the Detection Limit (DL).
PCDD/PCDF Validation SOP
Rev. #: O
Date: September 1996
Page 18 of 34
VII. METHOD BLANK ANALYSIS
A method blank should be extracted with each batch of
samples. The matrix for the method blank should be similar
to the associated samples.
Criteria:
1. The method blank should be analyzed on each DB-5 column
instrument used to analyze the associated samples. In
addition, a blank must be analyzed each 12-hour shift,
after the analysis of the continuing calibration and
prior to the analysis of the samples. This blank may
be the associated method blank, a method blank
associated with a different batch, or a system blank.
The use of instrument blanks is acceptable for DB-225
column analyses.
2. Laboratory method blanks should not contain any
2,3,7,8 -substituted PCDD/PCDF in amounts greater than
the concentration of the lowest calibration standard.
Non 2,3,7,8-substituted compounds or other potentially
interfering compounds should not be present in amounts
sreater than the concentration of the lowest
calibration standard, assuming a response factor of 1.
Ac:tiO!;:
1 . If the appropriate blanks were not analyzed with the
frequency described above, then the data reviewer
should use professional judgement to determine if the
associated sample data should be qualified. The
reviewer may need to obtain additional infonnation from
the laboratory.
2. If a target compound is found in a blank but not found
in th~ sample, no action is taken. If the contaminants
found are interfering non-target compounds at
significant concentrations, then this should be noted
in the report narrative.
3. Action in the case of blank contamination depends on
the circumstances and origin of the blank.
Qualification should be based upon comparison with the
associated blank having the highest concentration of a
contaminant. Associated blanks include the extraction
method blanks, the 12-hour shift blank(s) and the
Region IV blind blank. Field and equipment blanks are
I .
)
PCDD/PCDF Validation SOP
Rev. #: O
Date: September 1996
Page 19 of 34
not used for data qualification.
Any compound detected in the sample that was also
detected in any associated blank is not reported if the
sample concentration is less than ten times (lOx) the
blank concentration. Typically, the quantitation limit
is raised to the concentration found in the sample.
If the compound is present in the sample in an amount
less than the detection limit (DL), then the DL should
be reported with the U flag. If the compound is
present in the sample in an amount greater than the DL
but less than 100, report the next highest amount,
using one significant figure, with the U flag. If the
compound is present in the sample in an amount greater
than the DL and greater than 100, report the next
highest amount, using two significant figures, with the
U fla9 .
If use of the l0X rule causes elevated detection limits
to b e reported for any congeners, apply the -B"
qualif ier to these congeners. The B qualifier flag is
to be applied to these congeners on the internal Form I
onl y . The B qualifier is not to be reported on the
fina l Data Report Sheet.
Additionally, there may be instances where little or no
contamination was present in the associated blanks, but
qualification of the sample was deemed necessary.
Professional judgement should be used in these
situations. An explanation of the rationale used for
this de termination should be provided in the review
narra tjve .
4. If gross contamination exists (i.e., saturated peaks),
all affected compounds in the associated samples should
be considered to be unusable (R flag), due to
interference. This is a contract issue and should be
regarded as an action item.
5. If an instrument blank was not analyzed following a
sample analysis which contained an analyte(s) at high
concentration(s), sample analysis results after the
high concentration sample must be evaluated for
carryover . Professional judgement should be used to
determine if instrument cross-contamination has
affected any positive compound identification(s).
I .
)
PCDD/PCDF Validation SOP
Rev. #: 0
Date: September 1996
Page 20 of 34
6. Blanks or samples run after a Region IV blind spike,
matrix spike or standard should be carefully examined
to determine the occurrence of instrument or syringe
carry-over. Since the efficiency of sample transfer
can vary dramatically according to apparatus and
operator techniques, professional judgment should be
used in each case to determine whether sample or blank
results are attributable to carry-over. Professional
judgement should be used to determine if blank results
which are possible artifacts of carry-over should be
used in determining contamination.
7. When there is convincing evidence that contamination is
restricted to a particular instrument, matrix, or
concentration level, professional judgement should be
used to determine if the lOX rule should only be
applied to compare contaminated blanks to certain
associated samples (as opposed to all samples in the
easel.
Landfill Soils Sample lnfonnatton ~-~5-a'"!le..ieJ,_<)£8tiOO:_> __ -_ -~h -~~--No<!_i-i_ Bon ____ · ~tiJionng South Born·,glsouih -~ng1South ~ni,g Code-> ~ JA8i-Re~JAB8-Re JABP-Re, NIAT-Re ' . NIAB T NIAP-Re ----~~:;----· ----~-__ M~t-· -~r -1~ i-_MJ?o~l18 t ~:~Im --f~Ms[B+ F0[A8x~f L~•~Js~~"~~ilter ··ifoi Soil -Soil---1-Soil 7-·Soil -1-Carbon -t>tox~_& Fu_r■ns_lng/Kg) 1-------_ · 2,~8-TCOO ____ _ _ -1-------1-------+-~--1_,2,3,4,~,~:HpC[)D_ ___ -·+---cc=-c---=-cc --+--~"-"-c--1-___ ~ 99.. ocoo 218 65 22,1a-TC5F ___ -------. si 3 j~.~~f:eCDF ___ :----+-------+--+----__ :-J B ~~ 2,3,4,7,f!£'~DF ____ ---1---,ec.=-c=--+---_ 5_9 5_~ __ 1 2 3 4 7 8-HxCDF -+---------<f--166 623 16 1'.2.J:s:t.11-HxeDF_~ -~ 241 ________ JI~~. 1_,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF __ ___, ______ ,_ __ :p _1_ . -;614 _ _}Jf6 ~;-. 23 OB .. 1 08 47 03 ----~-~~ --v;~----~-1 77 83446 a~ 5;7 1---3\72~J_-h 0tlj_g~~-_ -----+----~0:-28 -1---=-= --~-____ :·---~---2 3 4 6 7 8-HxCDF -+--------1---~ 41 11 w~-"11.~-B~DF ~--___ ~9_21 __ --2519~--_-.s.~I~ .:J __ 1 02 __ 444 67 __ 1_99 95:_:J: -_ --,__ _ --. 0 358 a 3 _ _j. ___ o_ ~ --W~2 I a 516 !,_?.J~2.,8,9-HpCDF __ ___ _ 90___ 52.51 __ 10 33 _ __ 428_65 OCDF __ ··-·· ___ __ _ .. ___ 69_3_44 469 35 75 47 2894 22 2 29 Comments ·----· Reena Is QCOK? --. ··-··-···--· ---------------1-_Qg_ ~15_?_-t--"-~----· ----·------------>-------~~~~<~--. &n-ogoln Ollbclll ...,..._ PCB■ l'!9'il --I----. --+ >---·· Aroclor 1260 -441 I 9Q.3 I 001 267 8 385 7 1414 42_ J ___ -__ J_ __ 0 276 Reen~J~_ PG 9K'r--~ O_K? _Cl(; 9K?_]~ . -· ---------Did ool confirm 150 5 ND ---NO--· o 43 -r--1 53··-T 2 6 0.362 QCOK?, QC;OK.:?.._LCJg_QK_?r:ocOK? -------+ ----+-------------•------+----ND 1=· -~ ND ~D=t_f'.'Q _ _J Comment~---~== •. _LB!~_N<?led_j _ _i:3ies_~ecl~l!IS Noted j BiasNoted7 Bias.Notecf Bias Noted ·-Pests & _Herlls_(ug/g) ____ ,. _____ ~--·------+----·-ND ··---+--~D -ND BNA'~-1.~~lll_ --+------<---------. _ 1 4-dichlor~z~ne Phenenthrene ----=-----i-·-1000 1967 ND ----6~_ ·-·-1------------♦------+------1 -·-· --+-----t-----~iii!i!!~ :~~--: ~ -_ -·---467 _ __j --_ ··--Fluoranthene 1067 9000 3233 -~ -----· 800 6433 3467 --~ (a) arilhfaC!ne -12333 6167 ------· ___ :_ _t --~:~ _ L : __ r_ ---=~r ____ J_ -----+----------___ __, ___ Ch~ne -6600 3800 __ Benzo (b)Jluorenthen -5833 1800 ----~9!>Rt:-i~~~ I 970996 I ~-1-~~1 I 91099a --r 970999 Comments t--------~Bs + I PCBs + PCBs + . L _PCBs + \ICX:~~11.l_ _ Lab ID Number --·--·-·-... ----+------f-----+---!Metals I f----I ---1---------: --·-~--:--------------_-__ _j... ____ :._ __ -+_:·-•+-----1---+--+-----t-----t 911000 -t · 911001 ln:1412 ________ J_ ___ J ______ b!.10967 I 970970 I -~~•~ __ t_PC~-~r-~=t-==+-1 ND I ND 1 ---------+---------!-----~ · I 970972 I 970973 I ND ND ------+----·-··. --a--69 ___ . r-------la86 ------------35 46 056 0.34 Page 1
Sample Information Code-> :·-~"ii QAR+ d-,EZM --~ NOV _ ~amta~~lon~~~~~ai~~-"~lt-~t: 7 So~~:ell f.£r~•T~~<aM (pg/LI r ~~~------J ~ C ~•~;,~z,a~~~DD~~---1;z817 __ tit-! -.~.:s11t· 2,3, 7,8-TCOF 1,2,3,7:8-PeCOF --~3,4,7,~PeCOF . ·---· I --· ----------· . ·i---·---1 ~.3,4,7,8-HxCOF ______ ..___68.21 .f -1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCOF f1 ,2,3,-'-, 7"",8"",9-=-Hcc-xCOF-__ -_-=-_-_---1 ___ _ 3.72 75.21 11.74 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF -~;:Ht~~~~ ~~ =J_=l~ J !!! Comments · ±-R~n~~i• __ J __ ac o_K_?_ j ac OK? ·--___ QCOK? --~ ____ j ---t-------1---. '~8!~~ ;;~_ ~--·()·~ I ND 0.0006 Comments Peats &_!f_e_!!>_~{mg_Jl) j NO __ j_ _~D __ ND BNA's (U!>'L) _ 1.~~~~:~~':ene I 97~78 I 97:sr}~-97~?.L. voes (ug/L) Lab 10 Number 970985 970083 970984 Acetone · 46 3 8 f------------------+-----♦--___ , 2-Butanone ____ +--------+-----➔---24 c111orobeniene 30 f---· -----------------♦-------------+·-----+--· -1,4-0lchlorobenzene -+------+---21 -. . . --. -See comment See commen1 Metals --,---,----~~?~u=~/L)_ -=t==--~~~---~----~~r~~~4--·~;:--Landfill Leachate Page 2
°"""""'"'"' Safflplel~ ~> --~•j~~,. --· -i.c+-EA-+-=~--~~04-~;_ """ ,iii:. _J~-l-ce.<.--1...:PSO_j JOKI_.....,_ ~:'-t ,Z:;~s j-·~~o !-=~ I 'Z:i~s i1;?t~! ::i-~:s➔~4~=4~t~~f-~~---> Watef 'ii;_.~ a_,...,. (WI.) .!.~~~.CDQ___ _ _ __ ·--~--5.81 ___ _ -~~~~~QQ__ _ _ ---__:. 10 72 --+----f--!~~,a.-HicCQ_Q ____ .. _ ·--34 35 ---1,2,3,7,8,~l!_I!__ ·-. · 27 34 2.1r,~coo..=_::_ · -~---_ . --·--:--= 1,2,3,4,86&-~DD ______ ... 9.11 _ 10412 10.13 OCOD ____ 1---•~_89 _1_0<lS3 3 97]5 __ _,~8~J J__1!_!1. 2.,17 1,-TCOF ~~P.c:OF _-i--. -. ---,?,~.~~~~---,),2,l,4,7~0F __ 1.1.!,!J ~OF !1~1_3, 7,8,~.Q!_____ l~~~~~------t--_.. __ --1----· .t i .. :-i .. ·---· ! 2• 05'.': j---! --. -. 07 -i "3 88 . 2\5, ~ _-· te_e9_ 4.5G i1 e~·-· 1809 t---·· -----t--:J ---~:-~:T..: __ . -~-·• -f. ~--~l,~ ·t e'e 5022 . --1 t---1-------t---·· -+----. -1-----.... -+----+---+----f-----+---------, __ _ ·-+---+---1-. ··-+-·-. ···-I---·-._.. ____ 1-----1---1------+---·---+---. -··-· --. -+--·-·_ ·-· +--···--· f-10:,e:.t=I"cE •52a , .. 3= -a=-:-=r_:-_------·· 1-•:0J--:S,-s:l_-1-1ei12 _J!l~e_-54,~ !L~~-~-1-=~-si-=·· _-_::-Jellil --• ----+----+----4---+-·--+--· ·-1· ---------~ -----------+-------t----+----+--· .. · -~--. --· ·----1---· __ ----+-----J--+----+-:---1-----' --1-------:·1~ ··:--~t.-=---1--=t=: I -=r--· I ·--+--'---+----. • _..!_53_j___J~~J::I;2j __ ~~ -~ __ 2--W~~ __ . ---1----. --l--!--~---, ~~~~~,I.&-~-Q':_ __ _ ~4i-7,_8,~HpCOF __ OC!)':_ ___ _ ___ 4_3~ · t=·t·j. t=·t±· -------:-----:-----_---:·-·11•-siis····-:--:--.--·: -. . -J __ r=.=t ---1---·· --·· ---. ------<f---+--__ 7 ---1-------,.---------c....-, _______ _j_ -----+---+-·---+----<---~l~J _______ _ ~-~-----..... -,..-. -·!..lllltY__ ··-t~··l~_ID_ ~_ ~ voe. J..,.Y ___ .. __ _NO I NO I NO I ~-1-~ NO NO NO_ NO NO NO NO NO ND NO NO ----t----•--__ --~1~==t='1,!i,*-f 1::1 TIC TIC 97E8L LV713115_ _ l 91u91±·amiv1&1ico, NO ...i-NO +. NO . NO i: NO ·-· ·-·nc· .. ..... .. -l_OOID~_ !-=------_____ _ 97::3 I 91~=-=1=7::, 1 _ _9,1;~ C""'!'!!i _____ =tt.aw_l~ol~ll,_-~f~ ~ . 87_1!53 r 87_1_!_55 J a,1~5~ _ NO . ND_. I __ _ND_ TIC -· _: 8eftwn(.,.i.i=---ctrom~ frndl 008 I 0.01 r-008-=t::ODII I _0_08 l _jioe::J_ oo.··-~ 0' -~ap:w1ecf■-EMPC~■laccrtter1_;;;.~~;;tr,;;.·· --· I I t---·-e~: El!!lmsted MIi!,~ Pdentt~ f_~on NO NO _ND_J _ NO L_NO_j_._ ~o_:-+~ NI) i NO , NO -1--~-1 NO=t -~ r 7 ----+-·· ·--4·---1-······-+--· -+--··---+--·--+---,c--L===-t~-,OMdnollocot• RAM NO NO NO NO Nl)jNI) NO NO Nil NO NO NO -+-----+--· +--·-··· l----+----+-----1-+--· _ 97_!403t9'1<0!l-----t·uJ!..'!19 -~91~,:r e1_,~°'t 911~~91~~=p=r1JN I "1--r=_971:,eLr 9~-1~ r---1 ----NO NO NO NO NO 971400 ND NO ND NO NO NO 7 ·nc -·· · -nc · -· · -· iii,i«i-·· ·· -· ·-~ --· --------971,158 NO ~~;iJ~':r_c:~:r~t;~~---4----+-----+--97:.04-49=·· 0 11 ooe_l_oog l_o_oe __ R~-+-o·~-. 1 . 0~ I 003 I 008 I -· -::µg[=t=~_:-.:-001_:-+-------Page 3
Field QA-OC Sample lnfonnatlon Code-> ~··AOF~--·MB~· ... JtN-,--esT KTB +. ... TBRi .... i~ CAN ~ ------,,.w~· .. ·Jo __ :~~:sarnpieJocaiion:_; -Blank----~e~nk Trip Biari ·~~·: Bia!!k __ ~ --___ Bi•!!~--~ --·_ ~•nk· . -.fBpJ3fa~f-== -Bl~i_k _ --Biank ----_____ ~~m.!"_en_ts _ _ E<t_u~I!!~ C>rlll_l~~~ -~ One EqulJ>,_Rinsate Soil E(l~ip _ Rin~ Sub-Pu_mp ~in~ ~e-S_~iein9nt 4f!1 .5u~P~'!'J'-~~ ~l~~~_mpl!fli B!9nk Matrix-> Water Water Water Water Water Water Water Watfi Water 'Dioxin• & Fur111ns (pgll) -T---f ··-------+--. 2,3, 7,8-TCDO ___ ._ ______ _,___ ---·-t---1,2,3,7,8-PeCDO 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ---Jl~:::~:~~~. ~ ~--1~ 1.2.3,4,6l,_8-_tipC~ __ 3.~_ --s 13 __ -__ ~~8-TCDF _ 20-:-43 39_62 1~ ! -L-----__ ----~ 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF ·f:2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1.2.3,6-,7,8-HxCDF -------+-----tr~3. 7,8,9-HxCDF ___ _ 2,3,4,8,7,8-HxC.~DF~~--,---(2,3,4.~l,f~. 1c9_ 11,2,3,4,.7-,~9~f:tp<::OF _ _ _ --t-·---OCDF ·-----------·-----------11-------------+--··-· -Comments PC~•-('!!9'l:,L_ k---Comments _ ---+--Np_=r-_:_ _ND ___ t _ ---+--ND ---·-----t----·· -----+---· --· -----+---------2~~ --+--3~;3:.. 18.57 I 4.52 ---+-15006-t---41.89 ----+--·. ---------+--· ----+-----------1 -----·--+-----------+--------· ·--+----·-----------+·------+---------1 ----------+----. ----+----. ·--·----+ -. -··---+----·--------+-------·-----+--------+-----2 48-:: _ r_ -~_:_2 e9_::--= L~ ~-~--:~---=--=t s.n I ------2.46 30.91 9.05,:__ _ _.___ --1 ------t----------· ----+---------l 'r,.ii5 __ _ ND -----_, ·---_!';ID ------ND -------+--------+-------,t-----·--f--------------------------f--· --------•-·------------+-----Puts(mg/l) ND ND 1:ferbs (mv'l)_ ____ _ ND ND NU ND ND ---ND t-__ N_O ND ND ----1 9r4~•~_(u~)-----I I ND ·t= --__ l:ab_!_O..Nu_rnber 970994_+---·•------__ --97~~3----t~~~ E ____ --J_ 97~~ I 97~~1 Comment --+------~------+------'TEL -I --I !i I _--------Acetone ND ~~----f·-------ND ____ -23 NO 0~-I I 43 ~ 1-----1· -· Lab ID Number 970995 970664 ___________ 971439 --+--971440 ___ , _____ _ 79 7 971465 I 911441 I 911442 I Com~-------+------+----+--t-------=t --J=_:: __ Meta.=l•-'-----~!i~!!'J'!li'L_L=_ I I oos~ --,-----------,--·--0·02--chrom,um (mg/I..) --+----..j -----"---+-------+--·----+-~-·--· ----·---0.04 Page4
Stream Sediment Sample Information Code-> ___ BHB --·----------·· - -----Saf'!'lpl_~L~cation-> S~_-_1 ___ _ Comment ___ -.... Near 1st Occurrence South --------------------Soil/Sed·--+ ---------1 _CB_ i MS _ _ MR _ -1-A~+ _ t NCB_ SD ..!'~R 1 ·(00 . l-Sed. 2 +~-~~~~~3=:-~1. -~~~j~e~ce _ ~:~-:~:-~~~5-Sed. 7 Abo~~~~dge --~~~ff~~~!Je_-_ Matrix-> Oi<>xln~ & F_lJrans_(ng~g~) ........ I ______ _ ~3,7,8-T(?QQ___ 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD -~--1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD 1-:---------------------1,2,3,6, 7,8_-_H_XC ___ D_D ___ -+------1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ___________ _ @~·~J}>,J~B~Hp~D-D~~~~~_:f~=---==~~;6\~---_ ~.-~. 7,8-TCDF ~63,7,8-PeCD~------,>-------.. _ 2,3,4,7,8-PeCD ___ F _______ _ Soil/Seel. Soil/Sed. Sed. Sed. Sed. Seel. Sed. Sed. --I-------------------·---+-····--·---------•· ----·-----t--------·------t -----·------t---------t . _ _J -··122~5,f·T---6~~66-l--3°49Js ·•~r-1~?l6f~/fu~-~5~I-~;:~6 l -------2.29 ··---·--------124.56 -----·+---------·-+---------+------+----------t ------+--------j-----+-----!-----------+--------------+--------------~ 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF ___ -+----------------------+-----·--- . -----+--------1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3, 7,8,9-HXCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HXCDF -----·----+-··---1 1 ·---------+-------+-·---+-----+------! ---~-•----------------t--------------t----------------t --------+----+------+---------.... 0.42 0.27 0.23 0.43 0.24 0.28 -----+--------4--------+-----+---------•---·---------1,2,3,4,6}:-8-HpCDF 1),3,4,7,8,9-HpCD-F----+-----·------OCDF----------·--------•------------·---+----------+---------·---·--+--------·-1----------+---------------Comments PCB~l"1l'8l_ NQ __ ----C~o -+ --!-----~-------+--Comments 0.55 ND --ND ----r ND ND ND ND i I I ND -·---+--------~--1-----------t------------<f-----+----------+----------t Page 5 '·
Sample Information Code-> BJ RB -···-·--· --·---··+--------.. Sample Location-> SurS-1 Matrix-> ---------s61i------------···--PCBs~g) ND SurS-2 Soil ND l Surface Soil SB SurS-3 Soil _l N l D , MBR SurS-4 Soil ND Page 6 BR I ---1 SurS-5 I I Soil ND
Background Surface Soils Sample lnfonnatlon Code-> j TMSS LESS ~ HESS ---·---·------------·----... --··---... Sample Location-> OSW-3 OSW-2 OSW-4 Matrix-> Surface Soil Surface Soil Surface Soil Q!oX!!!~ & Furan~_ln__9IK9J____ + ________ , 2,3,7,8-TCDD ----------------+------+-----1,2,3,4,6, 7,B-HpCDD 4.59 1.66 OCDD ----------546_:,---2449--~-----------------------------------?_,3, 7._~:J.f(?F _____________ _ 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ______ -2,3,4,f,s:Pecoi= -----------------f.IJ.4. 7,8-HxCDF -------+-----------t--1,2,3:BJ,8-HxCi>F _ _ ---------➔ ----1,2,3, 7,8,9-HxCDF 2,3,4,6, 7,8-HxCDF _____ --+ 1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-HpCDF ~~~i]~Hp_C_D--F--__ ------~-==r~-::-:--__·-ocoF -----------• -···----------t------------------------+----Comment~----_ ---+ P~BsJ~_gfg) -l---~D __ +--_ ND Aroclor 1260 ----t-------Comments Pests & Herbs (ug/g) I ND J _ _!JD __ 2.16 432.6 ND ND ,BNA'~~~~~Vumber I 9_?j_~Q9 I 97~~~°-t~~9?j~D~-Metals Barium (mg~) 86 33_ · -~1=· 3_f·-Chromium (mg/Kg) 22 20 ______ __ 20 Lead (mgfKg) 20 -9.8 ,__ TCLPBarium-~ 0.63 0.75 ------0.72 ___ .. Page 7
Surface Water '· Sample Information --R~C-s I ~~~2 I -~~s•mr;iii1on-> Due soi~~::_J u~gs -I Jf is t~~ J;~st i~!-=r-ae,ow~ -------------·---· -Matrix-> Water Water 7--Water Water -vvatei---r--water I Water ---t-------Dioxins & Furans (pg/L) ~--------·-t ·----· ·---+------+------~ 2,3,7,8-TCDD ~-,2,3,7,8-PeCDD -----r----=----r--:---_-y~----~------1,2,3,4, 7,8-HxCDD --·----·---------1,2,3,6, 7,8-HxCDD 1----1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ~~·~~·6•1J.8~B~~Q_D __ -2;.3 _-__ =~I----~-;;~a--r=:-~~~-~~~--~-~~~]~s1-.9_s __ {{~•~-;_;~6DF -------~--------~-----. ---:-----1-----~ _----+------~---j--:--{~f!:::~~=-~:~F : .. _---=~:~=-=---_:_~: ~--==--~----=~-------~:---t==:---+-1----7 ------------------------------------~ ---------------•---------4------------------+------------j 1--··------t-------------------. -+--·--· ---·------+------·-----+--------1 24.14 1i.i:fifi:~i~F -i----_-: _---i :: __:_) }: -i~=-t__:+::-t-: --+------i -'-'-'---'-'-~------------------------··------------·--·----J..__ 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF -OCDF ----➔----------+-----------·I ---------+------------1-------t---------! ---------1-----------+-------------t-· ------+---------, Comments +----. -. -. +--·-----1---ND ~_!l_s (~~/L) I ND 1--~D f N_!) I NI? I ND I ~.'?-1------1 Comments Page 8
Well Boring Soils Sample Information __ ••~, IO ;ia:"'!tO w':fa.~) ~~;.,~~~~~-+~;;~,~~@_ w~j.~t ote!!;:+--5~~+0~~~ ti ti~ ti~ ti~ ti ti S~ti ti Matrix-> 1----------------+------------+-------·· ---·· -~_!!"• & Fu~ns_(r_,g~q) ____ _ ____ __ _ _ ____ :·· --· -~.3,7,~TCDD --_______________ ... ___ _ --·-+----------+---------1---------------------+ ---------t--------+-------1---------·-· -·---------1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.57 -0.3 ~i~~--I~~~--~-'t--: :::_--1~2:~~ ~-~------'~::_: =:2!'_':_~-~:__-2c .. _=t I ---_r ---I I I I I . . . . 2,3,4, 7,8-PeCDF ----=------~ -----------------: . ···---------=--·-._!_~~.4,7,~!:f-~DF --__________________________________ _ 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF --1.2.J.1.e.s-t-!_xs:_Qr_ ------------------------------------~-----!---------------+--------1---------+---2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-H,,CDF I O '·'±-·· _ [ _____ O 24 __ j _ _ 0.22 1,2,3,4~8.9:_HpCDF _ -__ -______ _ OCDF _____ ----------·------------------t---. --+---------t-------1---------+ 0.25 '" -----· -----+------------!-------l---------1 -------1 t--· ·-· ----1--------1e------+--------·I ------+----------+-----------•--Comments _____ -------•-----------+--------No Data Fou~ No Data Found L No Da1a Found -----I-------------+------ -·➔· ------. -• I ---· -••• -----t------------+----------+---------,_____-----IPCBs ~~! 1_?!50 I ND I _ __ -1---__ _ ND ND ND ND i ND Comments ----Pests a H.,b, (~tq) I ND ND ND ND ND ------... -------+--------· . -------+.··--------+-----------/-------~NA's (ug/Kg~ _ I I ND Lab ID Number 970986 ___ -_-9~~~ -I gt~? I 97:~~~t-97:~ I I ---1 -----i Metals -c-=-rium-<i:-~--,--,~--~->-r---r-2-; ---·-1•~~ f ~------+--1-110 I I I I ::.=J 1 TCLP Barium (mg/L) . --. -----. --. --' . --t--1~---t-----1-------jf-----l 1.63 1.88 1.39 1.46 1.3 Page9
Chart Leachate vs. QC Samples Landfill Leachate vs. Field QC Samples 90 ---------------------------------------80 ~--70 60 Q Q 0 c::a. 50 :Ji eo ~ vi ~ 40 C") ~ -30 20 10 •--84.84 Columns 1-3 are ,) ----------.....~ Q l P'tttt!ttttl I rtti· 1 2 3 -~·-·-~~--lumns 4-10 are eld QC Samples ---------------·-------./ -0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 X Page 10 (, 1■-sertes]
Contamination Matrix Landfill Leachates Field QA/QC Samples Dioxins & Fu~n• (pg/l) I ---->----------·-1,2,3,4,6, 7,8-H~~DD 84.84 6.485 9.42 3.05 6.13 -4.82 11.37 18.57 4.52 ---····-OCDD 1407.17 41.02 540.74 20.43 39.62 10.7 25.56 357.64 150.06 41.69 -----·---· ---2,3,4, 7 ,8-PeCDF --3.72 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 68.21 -75.21 1,2,3,6, 7 ,8-HxCDF - -11.74 1,2,3,4,6, 7 ,8-HpCDF 65.99 -77.97 1.9 - -2.48 2.89 5.77 --1,2,3,4, 7 ,8,9-HpCDF 28.99 -40.48 OCDF 264.53 3.55 387.68 ---2.46 30.91 9.05 -PC8s (mg/l) Aroclor 1260 0.006 ND 0.0006 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND ND 26 voes (ug/L) Acetone 46 3 B 97 --23 79 -.. 2-Butanone - -24 -7 Chlorobenzene --30 1,-4-Dichlorobenzene --21 -~-Toluene 97 -- - - -Xylenes 12 -- - - -Page 11
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Waste Management
James 8. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
William L. Meyer, Director
l\1EMO
TO :
FROM:
DATE:
Mike Kelly
Wendy Peacock
March I 0, 1997
a, ..:---re,---.. ~
DEHNR
RE: Methane Monitoring at the Warren County Landfill
BACKGROUND
The Warren County landfill is similar to other landfills located within the state whereas it
produces methane gas. Methane (CH4) is a colorless and odorless gas that is a by product
of anaerobic decomposition. CH4 is lighter than air by volume and very volatile. If
methane is in the 5 to 15% concentration range, a source of ignition will set off an
explosion. Gas produced in the landfill move by two forces," diffusion and pressure
gradient. Diffusion is the physical phenomenon that causes a gas to seek a uniform
concentration. In other words, the gas will move away from areas of higher
concentration towards areas of lower concentration .. The same is true for the pressure
gradient. CH4 will move from higher zones of pressure to lower zones of pressure. Yet,
changing barometric pressure, rainfall and frozen ground may also cause the gas to move
in unpredictable or not previously observed directions.
TESTING PROCEDURES
Methane readings were conducted using the LANDTEC GA-90 gas analyzer. This
instrument uses an infrared beam to a11alyze landfill specific gases such as methane,
carbon dioxide and oxygen. A balance gas consisting of nitrogen and xylene with other
atmospheric gases is also examined. The GA-90 gives a digital reading of landfill gases
pumped through the machine to be analyzed.
P.O. Box 29603, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-9603 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmawe Ac\Jon Em.1cyer SQ% Recycled/,~ Post-Consume< Pa;,-,r
SAMPLING
On January 29, 1997, during a routine inspection of the landfill, methane testing was
conducted. This testing involved the use of the center vent as the methane source. Again
the GA-90 was used as the measurement device. The data is located in Appendix A
On January 13, 1997 the Warren County landfill was surveyed. The boundary of the
plastic liner was identified and marked at 50' intervals and 12" deep bore holes were dug
and capped for future evaluation. The testing was conducted on February 7, 1997. The
results and location of the bore holes are located in Appendix B. Because of the previous
rainfall some of the borehole were saturated with water, therefore a reading could not be
conducted. Those locations are marked with an X.
The last set of gas measurements were taken from the newly installed bore holes located
on the south and north sides of the center vent. These wells were installed, on February
19 and 26, respectively, at a lower depth than the center vent. After each well was
complete a methane reading was taken. A second reading was obtained after letting the .
well vent for 1 hour. The results of this sampling episode are located in Appendix C.
APPENDIX A
Code Time Date CH4 LEL CO2 02 Bal Atmospheric Pressure Temperature Depth
% % % % % "Hg 0F Feet
PCBOOCV 1:57 1/29/97 0.8 16 0.7 20.8 77.7 30.4 42.7 24
PCBOOCV 2:01 1/29/97 1.1 22 0.7 20.8 77.4 30.4 48.3 24
APPENDIXB
Code Time Date CH4 LEL CO2 02 Bal Atmospheric Pressure Temperature Depth
% % % % % "Hg 0F Feet
C0010001 10:11 2/7/97 0 0 0.7 18.6 80.7 29.8 approx47 1
C0010004 10:18 2/7/97 0 0 0.1 20.3 79.6 29.8 1
C0010005 10:20 · 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.5 79.5 29.8 1
C0010006 10:22 2/7/97 0 0 0.1 20.3 79.6 29.8 1
C0010007 10:24 2/7/97 0 0 0.9 12.3 86.8 29.8 1
C0010008 10:27 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.5 79.5 29.8 1
C0010009 10:29 2/7/97 0 0 0.4 20.1 79.5 29.8 1
C0010010 10:31 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.5 79.5 29.8 1
C0010011 10:32 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.5 79.5 29.8 1
C0010012 10:36 2/7/97 0 0 1.3 18.4 80.3 29.8 1
C0010013 10:38 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.6 79.4 29.8 1
C0010015 10:42 2/7/97 0 0 2.9 14.3 82.8 · 29.8 1
C0010016 10:44 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.7 79.3 29.8 1
C0010017 10:46 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.7 79.3 29.8 1
C0010018 10:48 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.7 79.3 29.8 1
C0010022 10:52 2/7/97 0 0 0 20.6 79.4 29.8 1
C0010024 10:55 2/7/97 0 0 0 8.1 91 .9 29.7 1
C0010025 10:57 2/7/97 0 0 0.6 19.5 79.9 29.7 1
11 X 12 13 X 14
10 15
9 16
8 17
X=saturated 7 X
6 X X
5 X
4 18
3 X
2 19
1 22 X 21 X 20
APPENDIXC
Code Time Date CH4 LEL CO2 02 Bal Atmospheric Pressure Temperature
% % % % % "Hg 0F
PCBMW1 1:46 2/19/97 32.7 654 12.4 8.7 46.2 29.6
PCBOOCV 1:58 2/19/97 4.2 84 3.1 4.5 88.2 29.5
PCBMW2 9:05 2/27/97 64.5 1290 24.1 1.6 9.8 29.5
PCBMW1 10:49 2/27/97 44.1 882 14.3 7.8 33.8 29.4
PCBMW2 11:02 2/27/97 35.3 706 13.4 10 41.3 29.4
PCBOOCV 11:29 2/27/97 0.1 2 0 20.7 79.2 29.4
Reference: To find PPM multiply %C"4 by 10,000
CONCLUSION
Methane gas concentrations are influenced by the barometric pressure and temperature.
During the initial stages of testing the temperature ranged from the lower to mid 40' s.
As the testing increased through the month of February, temperatures did not change,
although the barometric pressure was sparatic throughout the month. As the end of
February approached, the normal North Carolina temperatures began to appear causing
methane amounts to increase. As the monthly inspections continue, the methane ranges
are expected to increase as temperatures increase.
Methane production has a predicted life of IO to 20 years during normal conditions.
Using a plastic/synthetic liner limits the amount of water infiltration thus, reducing
methane production. There appears to be sufficient water in the landfill such that gas
production levels have not dropped significantly in the past IO to 15 years. If the water
were to be removed from the landfill, it is reasonable to predict that gas production
would be significantly curtailed.
cc: Bill Meyer
Phil Prete
Larry Rose
Ed Mussier
Depth
Feet
28
24
29
29
28
24
-State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Waste Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDavitt, Secretary
William L. Meyer, Director
MEMO
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
October 6, 1997
Mike Kelly
Wendy Peacock~
Methane Monitoring at the PCB Landfill
·Methane Monitoring was conducted at the PCB Landfill located in Warren County on
Friday, October 3, 1997. Methane readings were taken using the LANDTEC GA-90 gas
analyzer. The GA-90 uses an infrared beam to analyze the amount of methane, carbon
dioxide and oxygen within landfill gas.
As the monitoring plan indicated 12 inch bore holes were placed into the landfill surface
using a bar punch probe. Each sample was taken in approximately 25 foot increments
inside the landfill liner boundary. The results and locations for the bore holes are located
in Appendix B. Additional readings were taken at the previously installed gas/water
monitoring wells.
TESTING PROCEDURES
Monitoring began by taking readings from the installed monitoring wells, starting with
the center vent and moving to the north and south areas. A reading was taken
immediately after uncovering each well and then 2 hours later after venting. These
readings are located in Appendix B.
After recording the initial readings from the wells, the surf ace monitoring began. The
four comers of the landfill cell boundary were approximately established, these are 116
feet from the center of the landfill on both the east and west side. The first bore hole and
sample was made approximately 30 feet from the east side of the pump house. Then
walking south, samples were taken every approximately 25' until the south cell boundary
was reached (Line A: East side -PCBEA). Starting from the original bore hole a
second line (Line EB) was established 35' east. Again samples were taken every 25'
along the line. A final sample line (Line EC) was made 70' from the original bore hole
and samples were taken every 25'. The same process was repeated on the west side of
the pump house. (Line A: West side -PBCWA). A diagram of the sampling process can
be found in Appendix A.
P .0 . Box 29603, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-9603 Telephone 91 ~733-4996 FAX 91 ~71 $-3605
An Equal Opportvnity Allirma!Ne Ac\Jon Em~•orer 50% R6C)'Cled / 10% Pos1-Consume< Pa;x,r
RESULTS
The temperature on the landfill was a consistent 67°F. Landfill conditions were overly
very dry. This helped tremendously with obtaining accurate samples.
The majority of the samples showed no amount of methane escaping through the surface
of the landfill, especially on the west side. A few of the samples on the east side gave a
low carbon dioxide reading along the surf ace. One east side sample showed a slight
amount of methane (EB/I). After testing the rest of the line an additional bore hole was
made from this location. No amount of methane gas was detected. This could be
caused by not purging the system after each use.
CONCLUSION
Methane gas concentration are influenced by the temperature and barometric pressure.
On the specific day of sampling the temperature and barometric pressure were constant
throughout. Both cell boundary and random surf ace testing have not shown any amount
of methane escaping through the landfill surf ace. Additional methane monitoring will
continue on a monthly basis using the installed wells as a monitoring instrument.
cc: Bill Meyer
Phil Prete
Larry Rose
Ed Mussier
X X X
X X X
X X X
South X
X X X
X X X
X X X
Code Time
PCB -cent 12:03
PCB -north 12:10
PCB -south 12:14
PCB -cent 2:10
PCB-north 2:16
PCB -south 2:13
X
X
X
X
X
X
Appendix A
X X
X X
X X
X
Center Vent
X X
X X
X X
* Orginal Bore Hole
x Sample Taken
Appendix B
Gas Analyser Data:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Date CH4 CO2 02
% %
10/3/97 0 0
10/3/97 54.6 24.2
10/3/97 1.8 1.9
10/3/97 0 0
10/3/97 17.4 7.5
10/3/97 0.6 0.5
PCB Landfill
Methane Monitoring
%
20.6
3.5
18.2
20.5
14.6
19.3
X
X
X
North
X
X
X
Bal Location
%
79.4 center vent
17.7 north well
78.1 south well
79.5 center vent
60.5 north well
79.6 south well
EAST Code Time Date CH4 % PCB EA/1 12:26 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/2 12:28 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/3 12:29 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/4 12:30 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/5 12:30 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/6 12:32 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/7 12:34 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/8 12:36 10/3/97 0 PCB EA/9 12:38 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/1 12:43 10/3/97 0.3 PCB EB/2 12:44 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/3 12:46 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/4 12:47 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/5 12:49 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/6 12:51 10/3/97 0 P,CB EB/7 12:52 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/8 12:54 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/9 12:56 10/3/97 0 PCB EB/10 12:58 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/1 1:03 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/2 1:05 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/3 1:07 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/4 1:09 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/5 1 :11 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/6 1:13 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/7 1:15 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/8 1:16 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/9 1:18 10/3/97 0 PCB EC/10 1 :19 10/3/97 0 CO2 02 % % 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0.6 20 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.4 0 20.6 0 20.6 0.1 20.5 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0 20.6 0.4 20.1 0 20.6 Bal % 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.3 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.4 79.5 79.4 Appendix B cont. PCB Landfill Methane Monitoring Code PCB WA/1 PCBWA/2 PCBWA/3 PCBWA/4 PCBWA/5 PCBWA/6 PCBWA/7 PCBWA/8 PCB WA/9 PCB WB/1 PCB WB/2 PCB WB/3 PCBWB/4 PCB WB/5 PCBWB/6 PCB WB/7 PCB WB/8 PCB WB/9 PCB WC/1 PCBWC/2 PCBWC/3 PCBWC/4 PCBWC/5 PCBWC/6 PCBWC/7 PCBWC/8 PCBWC/9 PCB WC/10 WEST Time Date CH4 CO2 02 Bal % % % % 1:26 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:27 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:29 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:30 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:32 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:33 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:34 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:35 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:36 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:39 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:40 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:42 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:43 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:44 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:46 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:47 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:50 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:52 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:54 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:55 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:57 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:58 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 1:59 10/3/97 0 .0 20.6 79.4 2:01 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 2:02 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 2:03 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 2:05 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4 2:07 10/3/97 0 0 20.6 79.4