4103_GreensboroCity_GWMReport_DIN26363_20151008

White Street Landfill – Phase II
Permit No. 41-03
Assessment Monitoring October 2015
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
Prepared for:
The City of Greensboro
Prepared by:
S&ME, Inc.
8646 W Market St, Suite 105
Greensboro, NC 27409
January 29, 2016
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 ii
Table of Contents
1.0 Executive Summary...............................................................................................1
GROUNDWATER QUALITY......................................................................................................................1
Volatile Organic Compounds:.............................................................................................................1
Inorganic Constituents (Metals):.........................................................................................................1
SURFACE WATER QUALITY.....................................................................................................................2
ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES..............................................................................................2
2.0 Introduction............................................................................................................3
3.0 Scope Of Work.......................................................................................................3
4.0 Methods Employed...............................................................................................3
4.1 Monitoring Well Sampling..............................................................................................3
4.2 Statistical Analysis of Data..............................................................................................4
4.2.1 Software...............................................................................................................................4
4.2.2 Statistical Methods-Groundwater Analyses.......................................................................5
4.3 Stream Sampling...............................................................................................................6
5.0 Results......................................................................................................................6
5.1 Groundwater Analytical Results....................................................................................6
5.1.1 Phase II Appendix II Assessment Monitoring....................................................................6
Volatile Organic Compounds:.............................................................................................................6
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds:...................................................................................................7
Inorganic Constituents (Metals):.........................................................................................................7
Pesticides/Herbicides:...........................................................................................................................7
Other Targeted Appendix II Parameters:...........................................................................................8
5.2 Statistical Results..............................................................................................................8
5.2.1 Historical.............................................................................................................................8
5.2.1.1 Descriptive Statistics........................................................................................................8
5.2.1.2 Time vs. Concentration Graphs......................................................................................8
5.2.1.3 Non-Parametric Prediction Interval Tests...................................................................10
5.3 Hydraulic Conductivity.................................................................................................11
5.4 Groundwater Flow Direction and Rate.......................................................................11
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 iii
5.5 Surface Water..................................................................................................................12
5.6 Quality Assurance..........................................................................................................12
6.0 CAP Monitoring Activities................................................................................13
Additional Groundwater Quality Monitoring ........................................................................................13
Sentinel Monitoring Wells and NES Well II-9.................................................................................13
MNA Monitoring ................................................................................................................................14
Assessment Well II-3B ........................................................................................................................14
7.0 References.............................................................................................................14
8.0 Certification..........................................................................................................15
Appendices
Tables
Figures
Appendix I – Groundwater Sampling Field Data Sheets
Appendix II – Laboratory Analytical Reports
Appendix III – Descriptive Statistics
Appendix IV – Time vs Concentration Charts
Appendix V – Prediction Interval Tests
Appendix VI – CAP Monitoring Laboratory Analytical Reports and Summary Tables
Appendix VII – Electronic Data Deliverables (EDDs), CD ONLY
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 1
1.0 Executive Summary
Between October 2 and October 7, 2015, twelve monitoring wells and five stream locations which monitor
the Phase II portion of the White Street Landfill were sampled as part of the routine semi-annual
monitoring program. Monitoring wells II-1, II-2, II-3, II-4A, II-5, II-6, II-7, II-7B, II-8, II-12, MW-13 and MW-
14 comprise the groundwater monitoring system for the Phase II solid waste disposal area of the landfill.
Monitoring well MW-13 serves as a background well for both the Phase I and the Phase II areas. Monitor
well MW-14 serves as a background well for Phase II. All sampling was conducted according to North
Carolina Solid Waste Management Guidelines. Samples were analyzed by a North Carolina certified
laboratory. Samples collected from the Phase II area were submitted for analysis using the North Carolina
Appendix II assessment monitoring list. Samples from surface water locations SW-1, SW-2, SW-3, SW-4,
and SW-5 were analyzed for the federal Appendix I constituents.
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
During the October 2015 compliance monitoring event, the following NCAC 2L groundwater quality
standards (2L Standards) were exceeded.
Volatile Organic Compounds:
♦Benzene was detected at concentrations of 1.2 µg/L, 1.3 µg/L, and 1.4 µg/L in compliance wells II-
1, II-3, and II-6 respectively. The 2L Standard is set at 1 µg/L.
♦Carbon Tetrachloride was detected at an estimated concentration of 0.47 µg/L at compliance well
II-1. The 2L Standard for is set at 0.3 µg/L.
♦1,4-Dichlorobenzene was detected at a reported concentration of 7.6 µg/L in compliance well II-1.
The 2L Standard is set at 6 µg/L.
♦1,1-Dichloroethane was detected at an estimated concentrations of 14 µg/L at compliance well II-
3, which exceed the 2L Standard set at 6 µg/L.
♦1,2-Dichloroethane was detected at an estimated concentrations of 0.46 µg/L at compliance well
II-1 and 0.98 µg/L at compliance well II-2, which exceed the 2L Standard set at 0.4 µg/L.
♦Vinyl chloride was detected at 2.2 µg/L at well II-9, which is greater than the 2L Standard set at
0.03 µg/L.
Inorganic Constituents (Metals):
Groundwater analytical results indicate inorganic constituent’s antimony, cobalt, and vanadium were
detected with concentrations greater than the Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration (IMAC), and
cadmium was greater than the 2L Standard. S&ME previously prepared an Alternate Source
Demonstration (ASD) for metals at the Facility. The ASD demonstrated that antimony, cadmium, cobalt,
and vanadium were naturally occurring in the in-situ soil at the Facility and at sufficient concentrations
within the soil to influence groundwater quality. Based on the results of the ASD, the detection of
antimony, cadmium, cobalt and vanadium at concentrations above the IMAC values or 2L Standards was
not likely due to a release by the Facility, but instead may be attributed to the natural occurrence of these
metals in the native, residual soil. This finding is also supported by many of the time vs concentration
plots for these groundwater constituents, which evidence relatively stable concentrations over time.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 2
SURFACE WATER QUALITY
Two volatile organic compounds and several inorganic constituents were reported in one or more of the
samples collected. Based on the sampled locations and the reported concentrations, the compounds
detected in the surface water samples likely stem from up-stream, off-site sources.
ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES
During 2010, monitoring well II-3B was installed down-gradient of well II-3, to assess groundwater quality
conditions down-gradient of well II-3; however, at a point prior to reaching the compliance boundary. For
the groundwater sample collected at well II-3B during October 2015, the analytical results report no
volatile organic compounds were detected at concentrations that exceed the corresponding 2L Standards.
This is the 9th monitoring event to indicate that the portion of the landfill monitored by well II-3B is
currently in compliance with applicable groundwater quality standards. The detection of concentrations
greater than the 2L Standards at well II-3 reflects the close proximity of this well to the limits of waste. It
is our opinion that the analytical data for well II-3 is informative; however, the proximity of well II-3B to
the compliance boundary makes it is a better indicator of groundwater compliance in accordance with the
permit.
A Corrective Action Plan (CAP) was prepared by S&ME and approved by the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) for Phase II of the White Street Landfill. The CAP
specifies phytoremediation coupled with Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) to restore groundwater
quality. CAP related groundwater monitoring activities completed contemporaneously with the October
2015 water quality monitoring event included:
♦Collection and analysis of groundwater samples from each of the three CAP specified sentinel
monitoring wells, SMW-1, SMW-3, and SMW-4. The October 2015 analytical results for volatile
organic compounds indicated that groundwater quality at sentinel wells SMW-1 and SMW-4 met
the CAP specified cleanup goals, the 2L Standards. At sentinel well SMW-3 the estimated
concentration for vinyl chloride was greater than the CAP specified cleanup goal.
♦Monitoring wells II-7, II-7B, and II-1 function as both routine compliance monitoring wells and
CAP sentinel monitoring wells. The October 2015, groundwater analytical results for monitoring
wells II-7 and II-7B indicated that volatile organic compound concentrations at these points met
the CAP specified cleanup goals, the 2L Standards. Only monitoring well II-1 exhibited
groundwater quality which does not meet the CAP specified cleanup goals, the 2L Standards.
♦Groundwater samples were obtained from a select group of monitoring wells utilized to evaluate
the MNA component of the CAP. The collected samples were analyzed in the field and/or in the
laboratory for MNA indicator parameters.
These CAP related items are briefly discussed in this report; however, these CAP monitoring activities and
associated findings will be discussed in greater detail in a separate report.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 3
2.0 Introduction
White Street Landfill is a Solid Waste Management Facility (SWMF) located at the north end of White
Street in northeastern Greensboro. S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) was contracted by the City of Greensboro to
complete this Phase II Appendix II assessment/detection monitoring event. Phase II of the landfill is a
closed Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) landfill with an active Construction & Demolition (C&D) landfill piggy
backed on top, covered by Solid Waste Permit #41-03. Nine (9) down-gradient monitoring wells located
along the perimeter of the Phase II disposal area, one bedrock monitor well (II-7B), and one background
monitoring well (MW-13) located approximately 4,300 feet southwest of the Phase II area were sampled.
Up-gradient monitor well (MW-14) was not sampled since it was found to be dry. Five surface water
samples were collected from North Buffalo Creek and one of its tributaries in the vicinity of the Facility.
In addition to the routine semi-annual assessment monitoring program activities, groundwater samples
were collected and analyzed from the Corrective Action Plan sentinel monitoring wells SMW-1, SMW-3,
and SMW-4, and Nature and Extent Study (NES) monitoring well II-3B and II-9.
This report discusses the field procedures, field measurements, analytical results, and presents the
statistical evaluation results for the October 2015 water quality monitoring event.
3.0 Scope Of Work
To complete the scope of work, S&ME completed the following tasks:
♦Sampled 11 compliance monitoring wells and five surface water locations.
♦Sampled sentinel monitoring wells SMW-1, SMW-3, and SMW-4 and NES wells II-3B and II-9.
♦Obtained field values for pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, oxidation-reduction
potential (ORP), and conductivity at each sample location.
♦Collected depth to water measurements during well purging to monitor drawdown.
♦Had the samples analyzed for the North Carolina Solid Waste Appendix II constituents by a North
Carolina certified laboratory, using State approved methods.
♦Had the surface water samples analyzed for the North Carolina Solid Waste Appendix I
constituents by a North Carolina certified laboratory, using State approved methods.
♦Had the sentinel monitoring wells and NES well samples analyzed for Appendix II constituents by
a North Carolina certified laboratory using State approved methods.
♦Prepare a groundwater contour map and calculated groundwater flow rates.
♦Prepared and submitted reports to the City of Greensboro and the NCDEQ.
4.0 Methods Employed
4.1 Monitoring Well Sampling
The groundwater monitoring well sampling took place between October 5 and October 8, 2015. The
monitoring well locations are shown on Figure 1. A representative from S&ME opened each well and
measured the static water level from the top edge of the PVC casing in wells. An electronic water level
indicator was used to obtain depth to water measurements. These data are summarized in Table 1. With
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 4
dedicated MicroPurge™pumps previously installed in each well, the total well depth sounding data
reported for the sampling events completed during September 1997 and May 1998 were used to
determine the volume of water in the monitoring wells.
In accordance with the facility's approved Water Quality Monitoring Plan, wells II-1, II-2, II-3, II-4A, II-5, II-
6, II-7, II-8, II-12, and MW-13 were purged using the dedicated Micro Purge™pumps. Up-gradient well
MW-14 was not sampled as it was found to be dry. Sentinel monitoring wells SMW-1, SMW-3, and SMW-
4 and NES wells II-9 and II-3B were also sampled using dedicated Micro Purge™pumps. At each well, the
purge rate and the drawdown of the water table were monitored as an indicator of how much stress the
purging placed on the aquifer. The purge rates were calculated by recording the time required to fill a
graduated cylinder. The purging flow rate was approximately 100 milliliters/minute (ml/min.). During
purging, the depth to water was periodically monitored and recorded on the groundwater sampling field
data sheets. For this sampling event, the measured drawdown in the wells was generally less than 1 foot.
The purge water from the monitoring wells was monitored in the field for pH, temperature, DO, ORP, and
conductivity using a flow-through cell and multi-meter. Typically, a sample was collected when three
consecutive readings for each individual field parameter fluctuated by no more than 10 percent, between
each equipment volume. The target stabilization goal of less than 10% change was generally reached
prior to collection of the groundwater samples. Turbidity was measured separately, with field
measurements less than or equal to 10 NTUs, as a target criteria. Even with the use of low flow sampling
methods, turbidity values at some wells remained higher than the target criteria during purging.
Accordingly, some samples were collected based upon professional judgment without meeting the
turbidity goal. The field data collected during sampling was recorded on the groundwater sampling field
data sheets, which are included in Appendix I.
Groundwater samples were collected from the dedicated Teflon tubing at each of the wells with dedicated
well sampling pumps. Immediately upon collection, each sample was placed in laboratory supplied
containers, placed in a cooler with ice, and placed under chain-of custody. The sampling technician wore
nitrile gloves that were changed between wells to minimize the possibility of cross contamination.
During the October 2105 event Phase II groundwater samples (II-1, II-2, II-3, II-4A, II-5, II-6, II-7, II-7B, II-8,
II-12, and MW-13) were analyzed for Appendix II constituents. Sentinel monitoring wells SMW-1, SMW-3,
SMW-4 and NES wells II-3B and II-9 were also analyzed for the Appendix II constituents. Analyses were
conducted by Environmental Conservation Laboratories, a North Carolina certified laboratory. Laboratory
Analytical Reports are attached in Appendix II.
4.2 Statistical Analysis of Data
4.2.1 Software
All data were analyzed using ChemStat 6.2 software package. An Excel file was used to input and create
the Data files based on the recent and historic laboratory data. The Excel file was then converted to .txt
tab delimited file for use by the ChemStat software. The following procedures were used to carry out the
statistical analyses of the compliance data for each constituent.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 5
4.2.2 Statistical Methods-Groundwater Analyses
In accordance with the NCDENR-Solid Waste Management Rules 15A NCAC 13B, Section 1632, historical
up-gradient and cross-gradient groundwater monitoring data collected from the background
groundwater monitoring wells that comprise the Subtitle D monitoring well system were pooled and the
analytical results were used to create a statistical baseline for statistically significant increases in
constituent concentrations.
In accordance with the DEHNR-Solid Waste Management Rules 15A NCAC 13B, Sections 1632 (dated
1/7/97), several rounds of samples were collected from groundwater monitoring wells that comprise the
Subtitle D monitoring well system and the analytical results were used to create a statistical baseline for
statistically significant increases in constituent concentrations. This sampling round (October 2015) will be
incorporated into the baseline for the next round of sampling.
The following procedure is used to analyze each new data set:
♦A descriptive statistics program is run to provide the following information:
♦mean
♦standard deviation
♦variance
♦percentage non-detects
♦Time versus concentration graphs were prepared for each parameter detected at quantified
values and used to evaluate data trends and to identify potential data outliers.
♦Normality/Data Distribution Tests were run and used to determine the statistical distribution of
the database for each quantified parameter. The data distribution test results were utilized to
determine if a data set exhibits a normal, log-normal or non-normal distribution. Due to the large
number of non-detects for many of the wells and the lack of normality in the data sets, non-
parametric statistical methods were deemed appropriate for the evaluation of the current
compliance data set.
♦A statistical Upper limit was calculated for each of the detected parameter data sets utilizing Non-
Parametric Prediction Limits. Then the compliance data were compared via Inter-Well and Intra-
Well comparisons to the statistical Upper limit to determine if an SSI had occurred. For all
statistical analyses, the non-detect values were converted to the respective Detection Limit for
data analysis. The tests were run at a significance level of 95%.
♦Data showing statistically significant increases across the site are examined to determine the
validity of results.
For a number of years, groundwater obtained from compliance well II-4 exhibited relatively high turbidity,
despite the use of low-flow sampling methods. In a letter dated August 1, 2013, the NCDENR-SWS
approved City of Greensboro’s request to replace well II-4 with well II-4A. Subsequently during 2013,
replacement compliance well II-4A was installed. Given that the original and replacement wells are
relatively close together and since they monitor essentially the same surficial aquifer, the historic analytical
data sets for II-4 and II-4A were combined for the statistical tests discussed and presented herein.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 6
4.3 Stream Sampling
Surface water sampling took place on October 7, 2015. Four stream samples (SW-1, SW-3, SW-4, and
SW-5) were collected from North Buffalo Creek, which flows along the northwestern side of the White
Street Landfill. One surface water sample (SW-2) was collected from a tributary of North Buffalo Creek.
The locations of the stream samples are shown in Figure 2.
SW-1 was collected upstream from the landfill near the US Highway 29 Bridge. SW-2 was collected from
a southern tributary of North Buffalo Creek just before it joins the main creek west of the landfill entrance.
SW-3 was collected downstream of the North Buffalo Wastewater Treatment Plant outfall and upstream of
the landfill. SW-4 was collected downstream of the landfill at a USGS gauging station located on North
Buffalo Creek about three-quarters of a mile north of the landfill. SW-5 was collected from North Buffalo
Creek immediately downstream of the Phase II landfill disposal area.
The surface water samples were collected by immersing laboratory supplied containers in the water to be
sampled. After collection, the surface water samples were packed on ice and placed under chain-of-
custody. Stream samples SW-1, SW-2, SW-3, SW-4 and SW-5 were analyzed for Appendix I constituents.
5.0 Results
5.1 Groundwater Analytical Results
5.1.1 Phase II Appendix II Assessment Monitoring
Wells II-1, II-2, II-3, II-4A, II-5, II-6, II-7, II-7B, II-8, MW-12, MW-13 and MW-14 comprise the monitoring
system for the Phase II area.Table 3 provides a summary of the Appendix II constituents detected in the
Phase II area groundwater monitoring wells during this event.Table 4 provides a summary of the
constituents and concentrations that exceed corresponding NCAC 2L groundwater quality standards (2L
Standards) or corresponding Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations (IMAC).Appendix II contains
the laboratory analytical reports of the October 2015 sampling event.
Volatile Organic Compounds:
As summarized in Table 3, analytical results from the 12 Phase II monitoring wells indicate twelve volatile
organic compounds were detected during the October 2015 sampling event, at one or more monitoring
well locations. Of the detected volatile organic compounds, the following 15A NCAC 2L groundwater
quality standards (2L Standards) were exceeded (see Table 4).
♦Benzene was detected at concentrations of 1.2 µg/L, 1.3 µg/L, and 1.4 µg/L in compliance wells II-
1, II-3, and II-6 respectively. The 2L Standard is set at 1 µg/L.
♦Carbon Tetrachloride was detected at an estimated concentration of 0.47 µg/L at compliance well
II-1. The 2L Standard for is set at 0.3 µg/L.
♦1,4-Dichlorobenzene was detected at a reported concentration of 7.6 µg/L in compliance well II-1.
The 2L Standard is set at 6 µg/L.
♦1,1-Dichloroethane was detected at an estimated concentrations of 14 µg/L at compliance well II-
3, which exceed the 2L Standard set at 6 µg/L.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 7
♦1,2-Dichloroethane was detected at an estimated concentrations of 0.46 µg/L at compliance well
II-1 and 0.98 µg/L at compliance well II-2, which exceed the 2L Standard set at 0.4 µg/L.
♦Vinyl chloride was detected at 2.2 µg/L at well II-9, which is greater than the 2L Standard set at
0.03 µg/L.
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds:
As summarized in Table 3, analytical results from the 12 Phase II monitoring wells indicate two semi-
volatile organic compound was detected during the October 2015 sampling event. The following semi-
volatile compounds were detected.
♦Phenol was detected at compliance monitoring wells II-2, II-5, II-6, and II-7B with estimated
concentrations that are at least an order of magnitude less than the 2L Standard.
♦Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was detected at compliance monitoring well II-2 and background
monitoring well MW-13 with similar estimated concentrations.
Inorganic Constituents (Metals):
As summarized in Table 3, analytical results for samples collected from Phase II groundwater monitoring
wells report detections of antimony, barium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, nickel,
silver, vanadium, and zinc at one or more monitoring well locations during the October 2015 sampling
event. Each of the reported concentrations of these inorganic constituents was below their corresponding
NCAC 2L groundwater standard or Interim Maximum Concentrations (IMAC) value with the exception of
antimony, cadmium, cobalt, and vanadium.
Antimony, cadmium, cobalt, and vanadium were detected in the groundwater samples collected from one
or more wells during this monitoring event. Several of these detections were either “J” flag estimated
concentrations or quantified concentrations exceed the corresponding IMACs, or with regards to
cadmium the 2L Standard. S&ME previously prepared an Alternate Source Demonstration (ASD) for
metals at the Facility. The ASD demonstrated that antimony, cadmium, cobalt, and vanadium are naturally
occurring in the in-situ soil at the Facility and at sufficient concentrations within the soil to influence
groundwater quality. The reported concentrations of antimony, cadmium, cobalt, and vanadium during
the October 2015 sampling event are below the predicted groundwater concentrations calculated for
antimony, cadmium, cobalt, and vanadium using a default dilution attenuation factor (DAF). Accordingly,
the detection of antimony, cadmium, cobalt, and vanadium above their respective IMAC values or 2L
Standard may be attributed to the natural occurrence of these metals in the native residual soil. This
conclusion is in part supported by detection of vanadium in background well MW-13.
Pesticides/Herbicides:
As summarized in Table 3, no Appendix II organochlorine pesticides were detected above the method
detection limits or the solid waste section limits during this monitoring event.
As summarized in Table 3, no Appendix II chlorinated herbicides were detected above the method
detection limits or the solid waste section limits during this monitoring event.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 8
Other Targeted Appendix II Parameters:
For the groundwater samples collected, no target polychlorinated biphenols (PCBs), or cyanide was
detected above the method detection limits or the solid waste section limits during this monitoring event.
As summarized in Table 3, sulfide was detected only at well II-12. There is no 2L Standard for sulfide.
5.2 Statistical Results
5.2.1 Historical
The monitoring well network for Phase II of the White Street Landfill was upgraded in the winter of 1995
with the addition of four new monitoring wells (II-6, II-7, II-8 and MW-14). Monitoring well II-7B was
installed in December 2000, while monitoring wells II-9, II-10, II-11 and II-12 were added in March 2005,
as part of a nature and extent study. Monitoring well II-12 replaced compliance well I-5. NES wells II-3B,
II-9, II-10, and II-11 and Sentinel Wells SMW-1, SMW-3, and SMW-4 are not part of the compliance well
network; therefore, they are not included in the compliance required statistical tests discussed herein.
5.2.1.1 Descriptive Statistics
The statistics program calculates the pooled mean, background mean, pooled standard deviation,
background standard deviation, rank sum, rank mean and variance for each constituent detected. The
descriptive statistics report is included in Appendix III.
5.2.1.2 Time vs. Concentration Graphs
This graph displays a plot of the concentration of one parameter for a single well over time. The
concentration is plotted along the vertical axis and the sample dates are plotted along the horizontal axis.
These graphs are used to visually examine changes in concentration over time for a parameter at a given
well. Time series plots for all constituents detected during this monitoring event are contained in
Appendix IV. An evaluation of the time vs. concentration plots suggests:
Appendix I-Volatile Organic Compounds
♦The time series plots for the concentrations of benzene in monitoring wells II-1, II-3, II-4A, and II-6
show minor fluctuations in reported concentrations. With concentration changes of less than 1
µg/L considered insignificant, the reported concentrations were considered stable.
♦The time series plot for the concentrations of carbon tetrachloride in monitoring well II-1
evidence the October 2015 detection as the first detection at this well.
♦The time series plots for the concentrations of chlorobenzene in wells II-1, II-4A, II-6, II-8, and II-9
suggests that the detections of this constituent appear to coincide with the promulgation of the
revised SWSL. Following the revised SWSL this compound has been periodically detected with no
clear concentration trends over time.
♦The time series plots for the concentrations of chloroethane in wells II-1, II-3, and II-4A no clear
concentration trends over time.
♦The time series plots for the concentrations of 1,4-dichlorobenzene in monitoring wells II-1, II-4A,
and II-6 depict fluctuating concentrations with no discernible concentration trends recognized.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 9
♦The time series plots for concentrations of 1,1-dichloroethane in wells II-3 suggest an increasing
concentration trend. The data for wells II-1 and II-9 suggest relatively stable concentrations over
time. The data for wells II-4 and II-7B suggest trends of declining concentrations.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane in wells II-1 and II-2 evidence
infrequent detections with no clear trends recognized.
♦The time series plot of the concentrations of cis-1,2-dichloroethene in wells II-3, II-4A, and II-9
evidence periodic detections, with no clear concentration trends for the values reported following
the promulgation of the revised SWSL.
♦The time series plots of the concentrations of chloromethane in monitoring well II-2 indicate this
parameter was detected once prior to the promulgation of the revised SWSL. Following the
revised SWSL, chloromethane was only detected during this event.
♦The time series plot for concentrations of vinyl chloride in well II-9 evidence only three historic
detections, the recent concentrations are significantly lower than the first detected concentration.
♦The time series plot for the concentrations of total xylenes in well II-6 suggests that the first
detection of this constituent in well II-6 appears to coincide with the promulgation of the revised
SWSL. Following the revised SWSL, there is a slight downward trend in the data set.
Appendix I-Metals
♦The time series plots for concentrations of antimony in wells II-1, II-2, and II-3 depict the limited
number of detections in the historic record. No obvious concentration tends were observed.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of barium in the majority of the compliance wells show
minor variations in detected concentrations with no obvious trends observed. A slight upward
trend is suggested for well II-8 while a slight downward trend is indicated for well II-12.
Background well MW-13 exhibits similar fluctuations in detected concentrations as those
observed at many down-gradient compliance wells.
♦The time series plots for chromium in wells II-1, II-5, II-6, II-8, and II-12 suggests fluctuating
concentrations of over time with no discernible concentration trends apparent.
♦Time series plots of the concentrations of cobalt in wells II-1, II-3B, II-5, II-6, II-7, II-8, and II-9
suggest fluctuating concentrations over time, with no obvious or consistent trends over time
recognized. The plots for wells II-3 and II-12 suggests declining cobalt concentrations over time.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of copper in wells II-1, II-5, and II-6 depict relatively stable
concentrations following the promulgation of the revised SWSL.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of lead in wells II-4A, II-6, and II-9 evidence periodic
detections, with relatively stable concentrations.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of mercury in wells II-3 and II-7 evidence periodic
detections, with no clear trends recognized.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of nickel in wells II-3, II-3B, II-4A, II-5, II-6, II-7, II-9, and II-
12 exhibit relatively stable concentrations. The more recent data for monitoring wells II-1 and II-8
exhibit very slight upward trends.
♦The time series plot for concentrations of silver in wells II-1 and II-8 exhibit relatively stable
concentrations following the promulgation of the revised SWSL. Silver has been detected
periodically in background well MW-13.
♦The time series plots for concentrations of vanadium in compliance wells II-2, II-4A, II-5, II-6, II-8,
II-12, and background well MW-13 exhibit no obvious trends of rising or falling concentrations.
The plots for compliance well II-7B exhibits a trend of slight declining concentrations.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 10
♦The time series plots for concentrations of zinc in compliance wells II-5, II-6, II-9, II-12, and
background well MW-13 generally exhibit periodic detections with the detected concentrations
relatively stable.
Analytical data from future monitoring events will be used to re-evaluate the trends interpreted from the
time series plots.
5.2.1.3 Non-Parametric Prediction Interval Tests
In order to analyze the laboratory analytical results for evidence of statistically significant increases (SSIs)
over background values, the data distribution of all of the quantified monitored constituents was first
analyzed. Due to the large size of the pooled historical results database, the Shapiro-Francia Test of
Normality was utilized. This statistical test of data distribution can effectively determine if large data sets
are parametrically or non-parametrically distributed.
For all of the analyzed data sets, the data distribution tests indicated a non-parametric distribution likely
due to a relatively high percentage of non-detects in the analyzed database even at the 95% Confidence
Level. As a result, Non-Parametric Prediction Interval computations were employed in order to calculate
the appropriate statistical upper limit for each of the quantified monitored parameters. In order to
determine if any individual parameter concentration detected during this monitoring event represents a
statistically significant increase over the historic background concentrations, once the respective upper
limit was obtained, the compliance data were compared via an Inter-Well Comparison to the statistical
upper limit to determine if a statistically significant increase (SSI) may have occurred. For parameters
suggested to exhibit an SSI by Inter-Well comparisons, the corresponding time vs concentration plot was
review and an Intra-Well comparison was preformed to assess spatial variability and the potential
relevance of the Inter-Well comparison suggested SSI.Appendix V contains the non-parametric
Prediction Interval tests.
The statistical tests applied suggest that no inorganic parameters were detected during this monitoring
event at concentrations that exceed the corresponding statistical upper limit. The statistical tests applied
suggest that cobalt, 1,1-dichloroethane, and phenol were detected during the October 2015 monitoring
event with concentrations that exceed their corresponding statistically computed upper limit. The Inter-
Well comparison tests of the compliance results to the statistical upper limits suggest the following
represent a SSI over the historic background concentrations:
♦current cobalt concentration at compliance well II-6,
♦current 1,1-dichloroethane concentrations at compliance well II-3,
♦current phenol concentrations at compliance wells II-2, II-5, II-6, and II-7B.
A review of the time vs concentration plots indicate no consistent trends for rising concentrations for
these constituents, with the following exceptions:
♦1,1-dichloroethane at wells and II-3,
Monitoring well II-3 is positioned up-gradient of NES monitoring well II-3B for which groundwater quality
currently meets the 2L Standards. Well II-3 is located in close proximity of the limits of waste and
substantially behind the Facility’s compliance boundary.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 11
Several years ago, the NCDENR-SWS added tetrahydrofurans to the assessment monitoring constituents
list for C&D landfills. Consequently, the historic data set for this compound is limited to 8 data points for
each well. Therefore, the statistical power of the intra-well and inter-well non-parametric tolerance limits
tests is reduced. Additional time series data is needed to understand the significance of the data trends.
Prior SSIs triggered the Assessment Monitoring across Phase II. Certain constituent concentrations
required Corrective Measures that are currently conducted for portions of Phase II.
5.3 Hydraulic Conductivity
In-situ hydraulic conductivity tests were performed by BPA Environmental and Associates Inc. (BPA) on
wells I-5, II-1, II-2, II-3, II-4, II-5 and MW-13 on February 2-5, 1996. The data from these tests yielded
hydraulic conductivity values ranging from 0.042 feet/day in II-5 to 0.380 feet/day in II-3. A complete
discussion of the test methods and calculations was presented in BPA’s February 1996 report “In-Situ
Hydraulic Conductivity Testing, White Street Landfill, Greensboro, North Carolina”. In situ hydraulic
conductivity tests were performed by HDR Engineering, Inc. on monitoring wells II-6, II-7, II-8 and MW-14
in the fall of 1995. In-situ hydraulic conductivity tests were performed by S&ME on monitoring well II-4A
in the fall of 2013. The hydraulic conductivity’s determined ranged from 0.221 feet/day at well II-6 to
2.353 feet/day in well II-8. These data were used to calculate groundwater flow velocities across the site.
5.4 Groundwater Flow Direction and Rate
The static water levels in the Phase II monitoring wells were measured during October 2015. The depth to
the water table ranged from 6.00 to 19.79 feet below the top of well casing on these dates. Groundwater
and well casing elevation data are presented in Table 1. A groundwater contour map was constructed
using the data collected during October 2015 and is presented as Figure 3. The groundwater gradient at
each well was calculated assuming a constant groundwater gradient along the flow line between adjacent
groundwater elevation contours or between the well and the nearest contour. Groundwater flow lines
were drawn through each well based upon the groundwater elevation data collected during this
monitoring event. The groundwater elevation data collected during this monitoring event indicates that
the groundwater beneath Phase II generally flows toward the northwest, toward Buffalo Creek. This is, in
general, consistent with the results from previous monitoring events.
Based on a variation of Darcy’s Law, the rate of groundwater movement within the regolith aquifer was
calculated at each monitoring well using the following equation:
V = Ki ÷ N Where V = velocity (ft/day)
K = hydraulic conductivity (ft/ft)
i = groundwater gradient (ft/ft)
n =effective porosity (dimensionless)
Calculated hydraulic conductivity and gradient values and estimated effective porosity values for each well
were used in the velocity calculations. The 20 percent effective porosity value is based on porosity and
specific yield versus grain size distribution relationships presented in Fetter (1988), and is typical of the
types of soils (predominantly silts and sandy silts with some clays) comprising the regolith at the landfill.
The calculated groundwater velocities ranged from 0.008 feet/day to 0.235 feet/day and are summarized
in Table 5.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 12
5.5 Surface Water
Five surface water samples were collected on October 7, 2015. The results of the laboratory analyses for
Appendix I constituents in the surface water samples are summarized in Tables 8 and 9.Appendix II
contains the complete laboratory reports. The following summarizes the exceedances of the 2B Standards.
The following summarizes the exceedances of the 2B Standards. The complete laboratory analytical report
is included in Appendix II.
♦Cobalt, copper, and zinc were detected at concentrations greater than the corresponding 2B
Standard in sample SW-1.
♦Silver was detected at a concentration greater than the 2B Standard Action Level in sample SW-3.
♦Chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, silver, and zinc were detected at concentrations greater than the
corresponding 2B Standard or Action Levels in sample SW-4.
Surface water sample location SW-1 is up-stream of the facility. Sample location SW-5 is down-stream of
Phase I with analytical results reporting no 2B Standard exceedance. In contrast, sample location SW-4 is
even further down-stream of the facility, and along a stream segment potentially influenced by other
sources. Silver was detected solely at sample location SW-3, with an estimated concentration. With the
very low 2B Standard Action Level for silver, any detection could represent an exceedance of the Fresh
Water Action Level. In view of these findings, the landfill including Phase I are not believed to be the
source of these constituents, or the cause for these exceedances of the 2B Standards.
5.6 Quality Assurance
A qualitative review of the data was performed to verify that the detected concentrations in the laboratory
report were of known quality. A formal, quantitative data validation was not performed. Laboratory-
assigned data qualifiers were evaluated to verify that rejected or unsupportable data were not included in
the dataset. Quality control data provided in the laboratory reports were also reviewed. No rejected or
otherwise unacceptable quality data were reported from the laboratory.
A duplicate sample was collected from monitoring well II-8, as "Duplicate II,” and analyzed for the
Appendix II constituents. No target semi-volatile organic compounds, organochlorine pesticides,
chlorinated herbicides, or poly biphenyl compounds were detected in either sample suggesting good
method precision. A comparison of the two datasets reveals that the detected compounds and the
concentrations reported for sample II-2 show good correlation with the duplicate sample results. This
finding suggests good method precision.
Each of the monitoring wells in Phase II were sampled using dedicated micro-purge pumps. Therefore, no
equipment rinse samples were collected for analyses. Trip blank samples accompanied the sample bottles
from the time they left the laboratory until they returned to the laboratory. The trip blank sample for the
October 2015 monitoring event was analyzed for Appendix II volatile organic constituents. Laboratory QC
samples were analyzed for all constituents included in this sampling event. The results of the duplicate,
trip blank, and laboratory QC sample analyses are included in Appendix II.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 13
6.0 CAP Monitoring Activities
Additional Groundwater Quality Monitoring
The following additional investigations were conducted contemporaneously with the October 2015, semi-
annual compliance monitoring event.
1.In support of the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) developed and implemented for Phase II,
groundwater samples were collected at Sentinel monitoring wells SMW-1, SWM-3, SMW-4, and
NES monitoring well II-9 and submitted for laboratory analysis for Appendix II constituents.
2.In support of the CAP developed and implemented for Phase II, groundwater samples were
collected at monitoring wells II-1, II-9, and SMW-3 and submitted for laboratory analysis using
various analytical methods, to measure certain monitored natural attenuation (MNA) indicator
parameters. Monitoring well MW-14 ordinarily sampled with the suite of wells was not sampled
during this event since it was found to be dry.
3.To further evaluate and validate groundwater quality in the region down-gradient of compliance
well II-3, a groundwater sample was collected at monitoring well II-3B and submitted for analysis
for Appendix II constituents.
The monitoring well locations are depicted on Figure 4. Complete laboratory reports are included in
Appendix VI.
The following provides a brief summary of the analytical results.
Sentinel Monitoring Wells and NES Well II-9
No Appendix I volatile organic constituents were detected at Sentinel monitoring wells SMW-1 and SMW-
4. This finding suggests that the areas of concern represented by these well are compliant with the CAP
specified groundwater clean-up goals.
During this event vinyl chloride detected in NES well II-9 at a concentration greater than the
corresponding 2L Standard. No other volatile organic compounds detected at well II-9 with
concentrations greater than the corresponding 2L Standards. Sentinel well SMW-3 is located along the
estimated flow path for shallow groundwater migrating from NES well II-9 toward the Compliance
Boundary. Although the vinyl chloride concentrations detected at well SMW-3 was approximately 67%
lower than the concentration detected up-gradient at well II-9, it was greater than the 2L Standard.
Therefore, the analytical results for sentinel well SMW-3 suggest that the areas of concern represented by
this well has not achieved the CAP specified groundwater clean-up goals.
Tables VI-1A, VI-1B, VI-1C, VI-1D, VI-1E contained in Appendix VI, provides a summary of recent
Appendix I volatile organic constituent analytical results for wells SME-1, SMW-3, SMW-4 and II-9, as well
as II-7 and II-7B. The tables also summarize the data for the companion wells, located along the
individual groundwater flow path, between a sentinel well and limits of waste.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 14
MNA Monitoring
MNA parameters were collected and measured in groundwater samples collected at wells II-1, II-9, and
SMW-3. The data collected is being complied and examined as indicator that MNA processes are
occurring in portions of the shallow aquifer monitored by these wells.Tables VI-2A, VI-2B, VI-2C, and
VI-2D contained in Appendix VI, provides a summary of the October 2015 MNA parameters; however,
the MNA assessment will be presented and discussed in detail in a future Corrective Action Evaluation
Report.
Assessment Well II-3B
No Appendix I volatile organic constituents were detected above the corresponding 2L Standards at
assessment well II-3B. Well II-3B is located along the estimated flow path for shallow groundwater
migrating from the landfill toward monitoring well II-3, and further down-gradient toward Buffalo Creek
and the compliance boundary. The analytical results for well II-3B confirm the prior groundwater quality
assessment findings. The data suggests that shallow groundwater migrating from well II-3, achieves
compliance with the 2L Standards prior to reaching the point of compliance. Assessment well II-3B is
located in a position that is a better measure of groundwater compliance for this portion of the monitored
unit, rather than the location of well II-3.Tables VI-3A and VI-3B, contained in Appendix VI,provides a
summary of recent Appendix I constituent analytical results for wells II-3 and II-3B.
7.0 References
Fetter, C. W., 1988, Applied Hydrogeology, New York; Macmillian Publishing Company, 1988, 592 pp.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, Subchapter 2L, Classifications and Water Quality Standards
Applicable to the Groundwaters of North Carolina, Sections .0100, .0200, and .0300; from the
Environmental Management Commission Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, Subchapter 2B, Classifications and Water Quality Standards
Applicable to the Surface Waters of North Carolina, Section .0200; from the Environmental Management
Commission, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Solid Waste Management, subchapter 13B, Solid Waste Management, Section .1600.
White Street Landfill - Phase II (Permit # 41-03)
Water Quality Monitoring Report
Greensboro, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1584-98-081C
January 29, 2016 15
8.0 Certification
I hereby certify this 29
th day of January 2016 that this report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision.
______________________________
Edmund Q.B. Henriques, L.G.
Senior Geologist / Project Manager
Technical support provided by:
______________________________
Amanda Bloom
Staff Professional
Appendices
Tables
TABLE 1
WELL CONSTRUCTION AND GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
Well ID
Date
Installed Type
Total
Depth
Well
Diameter
Depth to
Top of
Screen
Well Screen
Interval
Geology of
Screened Interval Northing Easting
Ground
Elevation
Top of
Casing
Elevation
Depth to
Groundwater1
Groundwater
Elevation
NAD 83 NAD 83 NAVD 88 NAVD 88 October 2015 October 2015
(feet) (inches)(feet)(feet)(feet msl.)(feet msl.)(feet)(feet msl.)
II-1 7/14/1989 Compliance 25 2 15 15-25 water table aquifer 863027.3314 1787495.6766 not measured 702.78 15.64 687.14
II-2 7/14/1989 Compliance 34 2 24 24-34 water table aquifer 864184.3539 1788403.6364 not measured 704.59 19.79 684.80
II-2B 7/10/2007 NES 29 2 14 14-29 water table aquifer 864268.6031 1788403.4707 not measured 698.84 not sampled not sampled
II-3 7/14/1989 Compliance 33 2 23 23-33 water table aquifer 864245.1544 1789031.9589 not measured 699.37 16.76 682.61
II-3B 6/3/2011 NES 28 2 13 13-28 water table aquifer 864365.2295 1789116.1385 not measured 694.49 13.38 681.11
II-4A 8/13/2013 Compliance 28 2 13 13-28 water table aquifer 863581.7689 1789359.9497 not measured 707.25 16.31 690.94
II-5 7/14/1989 Compliance 29 2 19 19-29 water table aquifer 863032.9389 1789345.4003 not measured 722.01 6.0 716.01
II-6 7/14/1989 Compliance 20 2 7.5 7.5-20 water table aquifer 862513.6388 1787002.3258 not measured 704.39 12.48 691.91
II-7 7/14/1989 Compliance 28 2 12.5 12.5-27.5 water table aquifer 863701.8380 1787823.6893 not measured 697.75 13.95 683.80
II-7B 12/11/2000 NES 104 2 90.7 90.7-103.5 bedrock aquifer 863703.7309 1787839.3286 not measured 700.86 17.51 683.35
II-8 7/14/1989 Compliance 35 2 20 20-35 water table aquifer 861207.1750 1786938.1186 not measured 717.76 9.52 708.24
II-9 3/21/2005 NES 25 2 10 10-25 water table aquifer 863924.1830 1787952.6658 not measured 696.78 11.16 685.62
II-10 3/21/2005 NES 23 2 9 9-24 water table aquifer 863511.6877 1787802.3724 not measured 703.78 not sampled not sampled
II-11 3/22/2005 NES 27 2 12 12-27 water table aquifer 864183.7253 1788058.432 not measured 701.63 not sampled not sampled
II-12 3/22/2005 NES 20 2 5 5-20 water table aquifer 862084.6402 1786802.0936 not measured 699.80 10.82 688.98
SMW-1 7/8/2010 CAP 18 2 8 8-18 water table aquifer 864374.8279 1788376.0728 not measured 692.87 6.89 685.98
SMW-3 7/8/2010 CAP 25 2 10 10-25 water table aquifer 863983.9035 1787857.4169 not measured 694.16 9.97 684.19
SMW-4 7/8/2010 CAP 24 2 9 9-24 water table aquifer 862512.4617 1786835.2747 not measured 697.43 8.00 689.43
MW-13 7/14/1989 Background 34 2 19 19-34 water table aquifer 858763.9106 1783188.5206 not measured 741.24 18.01 723.23
MW-14 7/14/1989 Background 35 2 20 20-35 water table aquifer 859453.8757 1788632.2264 not measured 786.65 Not Sampled-DRY Not Sampled-DRY
City of Greensboro provided the top of casing elevations and ground surface elevations
Well Construction details obtained from Well Construction Records reported by BPA Environmental & Engineering, Inc.
feet bgs. = feet below ground surface
feet msl. = feet mean sea level
Depth to Groundwater
1= below top of casing
Groundwater Elevation = calculated groundwater elevation
T:\Projects\1998\ENV\081C White Street Landfill (2014)\2015 Compliance Monitoring\October 2015\Phase 2\Phase2_October_2015_Tables_AB_EH-SR.xlsx
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD PARAMETERS
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
DATE WELL WELL TOC DEPTH TO WATER ODOR PURGE PUMP WELL EVAC PURGED TEMP pH SPEC ORP DO Ferrous TURBIDITY
ID DEPTH ELEV. WATER ELEVATION METHOD RATE VOLUME VOLUME DRY?COND Iron
(feet) (feet msl.)(feet)(feet msl.)(mL/min) (gallons) (gallons) (yes/no) (deg C)(SU)(μs/cm)(mV-NHE) (mg/L)(mg/L)(NTU)
10/7/2015 II-1 25 702.78 15.64 687.14 None low flow 110 1.53 1.1 No 19.91 6.02 2.617 -38 0.44 3.30 0.00
10/5/2015 II-2 34 704.59 19.79 684.80 None low flow 104 1.50 1.8 No 15.46 6.56 0.757 -14 1.77 --0.35
10/6/2015 II-3 33 699.37 16.76 682.61 None low flow 92 2.16 1.1 No 16.27 5.80 0.375 -40 0.29 --5.20
10/5/2015 II-3B 28 694.49 13.38 681.11 None low flow 100 1.89 1.5 No 17.50 6.09 0.442 -42 0.19 --0.00
10/5/2015 II-4A 28 707.25 16.31 690.94 None low flow 110 2.23 1.5 No 16.12 5.82 1.369 -46 0.37 --0.00
10/5/2015 II-5 29 722.01 6.00 716.01 None low flow 104 1.63 1.8 No 18.61 6.34 0.241 6 2.91 --80.00
10/6/2015 II-6 20 704.39 12.48 691.91 None low flow 96 0.74 1.0*No 16.17 6.66 1.245 -31 5.04 --9.00
10/6/2015 II-7 28 697.75 13.95 683.80 None low flow 110 2.13 0.9 No 17.48 5.73 0.328 -29 1.79 --0.35
10/6/2015 II-7B 104 700.86 17.51 683.35 None low flow 40 13.61 1.1 No 18.75 8.83 0.395 -56.6 0.50 --0.00
10/6/2015 II-8 35 717.76 9.52 708.24 None low flow 100 3.75 1.2 No 18.65 6.00 2.922 -39 0.26 --0.00
10/7/2015 II-9 25 696.78 11.16 685.62 None low flow 104 3.75 1.1 No 14.78 6.09 0.625 -59 0.20 --12.10
10/8/2015 II-12 25 699.80 10.82 688.98 None low flow 100 1.95 0.9 No 16.96 6.39 0.387 -90 0.13 --32.90
10/7/2015 SMW-1 18 692.87 6.89 685.98 None low flow 100 1.32 1.6 No 19.57 5.27 0.150 -66 0.12 --19.20
10/7/2005 SMW-3 25 694.16 9.97 684.19 None low flow 100 3.67 1.6 No 17.46 6.21 0.298 -37 2.07 --9.30
10/7/2015 SMW-4 24 697.43 8.00 689.43 None low flow 110 2.04 0.9 No 17.73 5.51 0.270 -37 4.00 --11.10
10/8/2015 MW-13 34 741.24 18.01 723.23 None low flow 100 2.44 0.8 No 15.81 6.47 0.304 -38.4 3.80 --1.62
10/8/2015 MW-14 35 786.65 DRY DRY None low flow ----------------------
Notes:
1. TEMP = groundwater temperature, measured in degrees Celsius
2. Pump Rate, measured in milliliters/minute
3. SPEC COND = Specific Conductance, measured in μs/cm indicates micro Siemens per centimeter.
4. SU indicates Standard Units.
5. NTU indicates Nephelometric Turbidity Units.
6. ORP = Oxidation Reduction Potential, mV-NHE indicates millivolts-Normal Hydrogen Electrode.
7. EVAC = evacuated volume of groundwater
8. DO = dissolved oxygen, measured in milligrams per liter
NC SWSL NCAC 2L NCDENR Federal
Well ID II-1 II-2 II-3 II-3B II-4A II-5 II-6 II-7 II-7B II-8 II-9 II-12 MW-13 MW-14 SMW-1 SMW-3 SMW-4 Duplicate II Standards IMAC MCLs
Sample ID 4301-II1 4301-II2 4301-II3 4301-II3B 4301-II4A 4301-II5 4301-II-6 4301-II7 4301-II-7B 4103-II8 4103-II9 4103-II12 4103-MW13 4103-MW14 4103-SMW1 4103-SMW3 4103-SMW4 4103-DuplicateII
Date Collected 10/7/2015 10/5/2015 10/6/2015 10/5/2015 10/5/2015 10/5/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015 10/7/2015 10/8/2015 10/8/2015 ---10/7/2015 10/8/2015 10/7/2015 10/6/2015
Detected Analytes
(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)
16 Benzene 1.2 <0.15 1.3 <0.15 0.73 J <0.15 1.4 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 Well Dry <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 1 1 --5
36 Carbon tetrachloride 0.47 J <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Well Dry <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 1 0.3 --NS
39 Chlorobenzene 3.4 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 2.8 J <0.17 3.6 <0.17 <0.17 1.9 J 0.60 J <0.17 <0.17 Well Dry <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 2.4 J 3 50 --100
41 Chloroethane 0.94 J <0.23 1.5 J <0.23 1.2 J <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 Well Dry <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 <0.23 10 3000 --NS
71 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 7.6 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 1.2 <0.19 2.8 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 Well Dry <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 1 6 --75
75 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.86 J <0.13 14 <0.13 0.99 J <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 0.79 J <0.13 5.8 <0.13 <0.13 Well Dry <0.13 3.7 J <0.13 0.40 J 5 6 --NS
76 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.46 J 0.98 J <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 Well Dry <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 1 0.4 --NS
78 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.15 <0.15 0.85 J <0.15 0.60 J <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 13 <0.15 <0.15 Well Dry <0.15 7.6 <0.15 <0.15 5 70 --70
137 Chloromethane <0.13 1.3 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 Well Dry <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 1 3 --NS
211 Vinyl Chloride <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 2.2 <0.32 <0.32 Well Dry <0.32 0.72 J <0.32 <0.32 1 0.03 --2
346 Xylenes (Total)<0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 0.77 J <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 Well Dry <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 <0.45 5 500 --NS
458 Tetrahydrofuran 21 <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 7.2 <0.80 32.0 <0.80 <0.80 9.8 <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 Well Dry <0.80 <0.80 <0.80 12 NE NE NE NS
111 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate <1.7 2.2 J <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 1.8 J Well Dry <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 <1.7 15 3 ns ns
177 Phenol <1.4 2.4 J <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 2.9 J 1.5 J <1.4 1.8 J <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 Well Dry <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 10 30 ns ns
13 Antimony 0.418 J 2.31 J 0.344 J <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <2.220 Well Dry 0.456 J <0.220 2.43 J <0.220 6 NS 1 6
14 Arsenic <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 Well Dry <6.80 <6.80 <6.80 7.33 J 10 10 ----
15 Barium 424 57.1 J 201 178 187 102 269 87.0 J 13.4 J 150 110 221 93.3 J Well Dry 69.0 J 145 59.7 J 142 100 700 --2,000
34 Cadmium <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 Well Dry 3.45 <0.360 0.365 J <0.360 1 2 --5
51 Chromium 3.16 J <1.40 <1.40 <1.40 <1.40 5.02 J 2.47 J <1.40 <1.40 2.10 J <1.40 3.17 J <1.40 Well Dry 2.19 J <1.40 5.87 J 1.46 J 10 10 --100
53 Cobalt 42.7 <1.10 12.9 2.22 J <1.10 3.46 J 21.2 3.51 J <1.10 1.75 J 6.64 J 9.65 J <1.10 Well Dry 19.9 2.01 J <1.10 1.72 J 10 NS 1 NS
54 Copper 13.3 <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 3.17 J 9.18 J <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 Well Dry 12.9 <1.60 <1.60 <1.60 10 1000 --1,300
131 Lead <3.10 <3.10 <3.10 <3.10 4.86 J <3.10 4.05 J <3.10 <3.10 <3.10 4.51 J <3.10 <3.10 Well Dry <3.10 <3.10 <3.10 4.15 J 10 15 --NS
132 Mercury <0.170 <0.170 0.361 <0.170 <0.170 <0.170 <0.170 0.170 J <0.170 <0.170 <0.170 <0.170 <1.70 Well Dry 0.176 J <0.170 <0.170 <0.170 0.2 1 --
152 Nickel 27.7 J <1.80 12.1 J 3.75 33.4 J 2.87 J 32.5 J 4.65 J <1.80 44.4 J 2.53 J 3.06 J <1.80 Well Dry 4.18 J <1.80 <1.80 41.0 J 50 100 ---NS
184 Silver 7.83 J <1.90 <1.90 <1.90 <1.90 <1.90 <1.90 <1.90 <1.90 5.84 J <1.90 <1.90 2.79 J Well Dry 1.92 J <1.90 <1.90 5.40 J 10 20 --NS
209 Vanadium <1.40 1.9 J <1.40 <1.40 2.52 J 9.63 J 3.18 J <1.40 2.32 J 1.92 J <1.40 12.8 J 4.71 J Well Dry 5.44 J 3.74 J 3.59 J 2.08 J 25 NS 0.3 ns
213 Zinc <3.80 <3.80 <3.80 <3.80 <3.80 7.74 J 5.12 J <3.80 <3.80 <3.80 20.2 7.21 J 4.19 J Well Dry 280 <3.80 12.1 <3.80 10 1,000 --5,000
187 Sulfide <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.59 J <0.010 Well Dry <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 1000 NE NE NS
µg/L =concentrations reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L)
< = concentration is less than the method detection limit
NC SWSL =North Carolina Solid Waste Section Limit
J =Parameters are estimated values between the detection limit and the NC SWSL.
JB =analyte detected in method blank and at a concentrations between the detection limit and the NC SWSL
NCAC 2L Standards =15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2L .0200, Groundwater Quality Standards for Class GA groundwater
NCDENR IMAC = North Carolina Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration
Federal MCL = Federal Maximum Concentration Limit
shaded cells indicate detected concentration
concentrations in bold exceed the NCAC 2L standard or IMAC
NS = No Standard
NA = constituent not analyzed
Sulfide
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
TABLE 3
SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER ANALYSES RESULTS - DETECTIONS
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix I Volatile Organic Compounds
Solid
Waste
Section
ID #
Appendix I Metals
Sample Locations
Appendix I Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER STANDARD EXCEEDANCES
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
NCAC 2L NCDENR Federal
Well ID II-1 II-2 II-3 II-3B II-4A II-5 II-6 II-7 II-7B II-8 II-9 II-12 MW-13 SMW-1 SMW-3 SMW-4 Standards IMAC MCLs
Sample ID 4301-II1 4301-II2 4301-II3 4301-II3B 4301-II4A 4301-II5 4301-II-6 4301-II7 4301-II-7B 4103-II8 4103-II9 4103-II12 4103-MW13 4103-SMW1 4103-SMW3 4103-SMW4
Date Collected 10/7/2015 10/5/2015 10/6/2015 10/5/2015 10/5/2015 10/5/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015 10/6/2015 10/7/2015 10/8/2015 10/8/2015 10/7/2015 10/8/2015 10/7/2015
Detected Analytes (ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)(ug/L)
16 Benzene 1.2 <0.15 1.3 <0.15 0.73 J <0.15 1.4 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 1 ns 5
36 Carbon tetrachloride 0.47 J <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 0.3 --NS
71 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 7.6 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 1.2 <0.19 2.8 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 <0.19 6 ns 75
75 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.86 J <0.13 14 <0.13 0.99 J <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 0.79 J <0.13 5.8 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 3.7 J <0.13 6 --NS
76 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.46 J 0.98 J <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21 0.4 --NS
211 Vinyl Chloride <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 2.2 <0.32 <0.32 <0.32 0.72 J <0.32 0.03 ns 2
13 Antimony 0.418 J 2.31 J 0.344 J <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <0.220 <2.220 0.456 J <0.220 2.43 J NS 1 6
34 Cadmium <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 <0.360 3.45 <0.360 0.365 J 2 --5
51 Cobalt 42.7 <1.10 12.9 2.22 J <1.10 3.46 J 21.2 3.51 J <1.10 1.75 J 6.64 J 9.65 J <1.10 19.9 2.01 J <1.10 NS 1 NS
209 Vanadium <1.40 1.9 J <1.40 <1.40 2.52 J 9.63 J 3.18 J <1.40 2.32 J 1.92 J <1.40 12.8 J 4.71 J 5.44 J 3.74 J 3.59 J NS 0.3 ns
ug/L =concentrations reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L)
< =concentration is less than the method detection limit
J =Parameters are estimated values between the detection limit and the NC SWSL.
NCAC 2L Standards =15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2L .0200, Groundwater Quality Standards for Class GA groundwater
NCDENR IMAC =North Carolina Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration
Federal MCL =Federal Maximum Concentration Limit
concentrations in bold exceed the NCAC 2L standard or IMAC
NS =No Standard
Appendix I Volatile Organic Compounds
Appendix I Metals
Sample Locations
Solid Waste
Section
ID #
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
Well No.Hydraulic Porosity Gradient Groundwater
Conductivity Velocity
(K = feet/day)(n = %)(I = feet/foot)(V= feet/day)
II-1 0.119 0.2 0.043 0.026
II-2 0.329 0.2 0.006 0.010
II-3 0.380 0.2 0.014 0.026
II-4A 0.295 0.2 0.053 0.078
II-5 0.042 0.2 0.040 0.008
II-6 0.221 0.2 0.026 0.029
II-7 1.077 0.2 0.016 0.085
II-8 2.353 0.2 0.020 0.235
MW-14 0.740 0.2 dry well dry well
SMW-1 0.858 0.2 0.006 0.027
SMW-3 0.630 0.2 0.013 0.041
SMW-4 0.469 0.2 0.014 0.033
Notes: Hydraulic Conductivity's from slug test data by BPA Environmental & Engineering Inc.
HDR Engineering, S&ME Inc.
Porosity values from published literature, based on soil types
Gradients are based upon groundwater elevation data from this monitoring event
Velocity calculated using V = KI/n
TABLE 5
GROUNDWATER VELOCITY DATA
PHASE II - WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
T:\Projects\1998\ENV\081C White Street Landfill (2014)\2015 Compliance Monitoring\October 2015\Phase 2\Phase2_October_2015_Tables_AB_EH-SR.xlsx
NC SWSL NCAC 2B
Sample Location SW-1 SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 Standards
Sample ID 4103-SW1 4103-SW2 4103-SW3 4103-SW4 4103-SW5
Date Collected 10/07/15 10/07/15 10/07/15 10/07/15 10/07/15
Detected Analytes (µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)
28 Bromodichloromethane <0.17 <0.17 0.96 J <0.17 <0.17 3 ns
44 Chloroform <0.18 <0.18 2.4 J 0.92 J 1.0 J 5 5.6
13 Antimony 0.268 J <0.220 0.372 J 0.259 J <0.220 6 5.6
15 Barium 85.7 J 42.6 J 28.3 J 319 41.0 J 100 1000
23 Beryllium <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 1.50 <0.100 100 ns
34 Cadmium 0.784 J <0.360 <0.360 5.66 <0.360 1 ns
51 Chromium 7.93 J <1.40 <1.40 66.1 <1.40 10 50
53 Cobalt 4.34 J <1.10 2.43 J 46.5 1.92 J 10 3
54 Copper 11.30 <1.60 2.65 J 57.1 2.17 J 10 7
131 Lead 7.02 J <3.10 <3.10 93.2 <3.10 10 25**
184 Silver <1.90 <1.90 2.74 J <1.90 2.32 J 10 0.06**
152 Nickel 3.16 J <1.80 6.56 J 22.0 J 3.14 J 50 25
209 Vanadium 18.2 J 2.91 J 3.69 J 61.8 3.05 J 25 ns
213 Zinc 117 7.88 J 25.2 1,020 24.5 10 50**
J = Concentration reported greater than the method detection limit but less than the SWSL, thus it is considered estimated
* = Title 15A NCAC 2B Standards for Class C, WS-V surface water
** = Freshwater Standard
µg/L = concentrations reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L)
< = concentrations is less than the method detection limit shown
NC SWSL = North Carolina Solid Waste Section Limit
TABLE 6
SUMMARY OF SURFACE WATER ANALYSES RESULTS - DETECTIONS
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix I Metals
Solid
Waste
Section
ID #
Sample Locations
Appendix I Volatile Organic Compounds
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
Sample Locations NC SWSL NCAC 2B
Sample Location SW-1 SW-3 SW-4 Standards*
Sample ID 4103-SW1 4103-SW3 4103-SW4
Date Collected 10/07/15 10/07/15 10/07/15
Detected Analytes (µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)(µg/L)
51 Chromium 7.93 J <1.40 66.1 10 50
53 Cobalt 4.34 J 2.43 J 46.5 10 3
54 Copper 11.30 2.65 J 57.1 10 7 (AL)
131 Lead <3.10 <3.10 93.2 10 25**
184 Silver <1.90 2.74 J <1.90 10 0.06** (AL)
213 Zinc 117 25.2 1,020 10 50** (AL)
concentrations in bold print are greater than the referenced NCAC 2B Standard
µg/L = concentrations reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L)
< =concentrations is less than the method detection limit shown
* = Title 15A NCAC 2B Standards for Class C, WS-V surface water
** = Freshwater Standard
(AL) = Action Level
J =
Solid
Waste
Section ID
#
Appendix I Metals
Concentration reported greater than the method detection limit but less than the SWSL, thus it is considered
estimated
S&ME PROJECT NO. 1584-98-081C
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF 2B SURFACE WATER STANDARD EXCEEDANCES
PHASE 2 - PERMIT # 41-03
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
Figures
S
M
W
-
4
S
M
W
-
3
S
M
W
-
1
SITE BASE MAP
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
AS SHOWN DSB/RDM EQBH
1584-98-081B OCTOBER 2013 1
PHASE II
0
G
R
A
P
H
I
C

S
C
A
L
E
8
0
0
4
0
0
8
0
0
S
C
A
L
E
:

1
"

=

8
0
0
'

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L
P
H
A
S
E

I
I
L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L
P
H
A
S
E

I
PHASE II WHITE STREET LANDFILL GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA AS SHOWNDSB/RDMLE 1584-98-081DECEMBER 20072 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS 0 800 400 800 SCALE: 1" = 800'

LE
G
E
N
D
ST
R
E
A
M

S
A
M
P
L
E

L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
Y
A
R
D

W
A
S
T
E

A
N
D
C
O
M
P
O
S
T
I
N
G

A
R
E
A
WHITE STREET
N
O
R
T
H
B
U
F
F
A
L
O
C
R
E
E
K
S
M
W
-
4
S
M
W
-
3
S
M
W
-
1
GROUNDWATER FLOW MAP
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
AS SHOWN DSB/RDM SC
1584-98-081C DECEMBER 2015 3
PHASE II
0
G
R
A
P
H
I
C

S
C
A
L
E
8
0
0
4
0
0
8
0
0
S
C
A
L
E
:

1
"

=

8
0
0
'
A
R
E
A

O
F

D
E
T
A
I
L
(
F
I
G
U
R
E

4
)

(
6
8
4
.
8
0
)
(
6
8
3
.
3
5
)
(
6
8
3
.
8
0
)
(
N
O
T

S
A
M
P
L
E
D
)
(
6
9
0
.
9
4
)
(
7
1
6
.
0
1
)
(
6
8
7
.
1
4
)
(
6
9
1
.
9
1
)
(723.23)
(
N
O
T

S
A
M
P
L
E
D
-
D
R
Y
)
(
7
0
8
.
2
4
)
(748.90)
(
6
8
8
.
9
8
)
(
6
8
1
.
1
1
)
(
6
8
4
.
1
9
)
(
6
8
5
.
6
2
)
(
6
8
9
.
4
3
)
(
6
8
5
.
9
8
)
SM
W
-
3
S
M
W
-
1
DETAILED SITE MAP
WHITE STREET LANDFILL
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
AS SHOWN DSB/RDM EQBH
1584-98-081C DECEMBER 2015 4
PHASE II
0 GRAPHIC SCALE200100200SCALE: 1" = 200'PROPERTY OFTHE CITY OF GREENSBORO
N
O
R
T
H
B
U
F
F
A
L
O
C
R
E
E
K
F
L
O
W
P
H
A
S
E

I
I
(
C
L
O
S
E
D

M
S
W
L
F
)
(
6
8
1
.
4
6
)
(
7
1
6
.
0
1
)
(687.14)
(
6
9
0
.
9
4
)
(
6
8
5
.
9
8
)
(
6
8
2
.
6
1
)
(
6
8
4
.
8
0
)
(
6
8
1
.
1
1
)
(
6
8
5
.
6
2
)
(
6
8
3
.
3
5
)
(
6
8
3
.
8
0
)
(68
4
.
1
9
)
Appendix I – Groundwater Sampling Field Data Sheets
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
9.36 feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1235 Stop 1315
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 2 sec.Start 1315 Stop 1435
Off: 28 sec.
Pressure: 20 psi
2" well:
height:9.36 x .163 =1.52568
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Ferrous Iron = 3.30 mg/L (3,310 ug/L) [Collected with Metals Bottle a 1325 hrs]
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1235 10/7/2015
1240 10/7/2015 18.82 5.95 2.494 -6.3 2.61 0.85 16.03
1245 10/7/2015 18.77 5.95 2.494 -23.2 1.23 0.43 16.04
1250 10/7/2015 19.06 5.98 2.509 -26.8 1.02 0.00 16.04
1255 10/7/2015 18.82 5.96 2.509 -34.1 0.87 0.00 16.15
1300 10/7/2015 18.63 5.95 2.517 -33.9 0.64 0.00 16.22
1305 10/7/2015 19.01 5.98 2.548 -39.0 0.56 0.00 16.25
1310 10/7/2015 19.25 5.99 2.562 -38.7 0.45 0.00 16.21
1315 10/7/2015 19.91 6.02 2.617 -38.1 0.44 0.00 16.16
Final Readings 1315 10/7/2015 19.91 6.02 2.617 -38 0.44 0.00 16.16
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Bradley Keyse
40 Minutes
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
25.00
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II1
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1315
Sunny
72 *F
Height of water column:
Bladder Pump
Depth to water from measuring point:15.64
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
Sample Collection Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 4.0
110
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
9.21 feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1020 Stop 1128
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 2.0 sec.Start 1128 Stop 1205
Off: 28.0 sec.
Pressure: 26 psi
2" well:
height:9.21 x .163 =1.50123
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1020 10/5/2015
1028 10/5/2015 14.94 6.59 0.919 -14.2 5.38 0.55 20.39
1030 10/5/2015 14.92 6.46 0.915 -13.8 3.26 0.00 20.36
1035 10/5/2015 14.91 6.38 0.915 -14.7 1.84 0.00 20.43
1040 10/5/2015 14.90 6.36 0.738 -16.4 1.20 0.00 20.46
1045 10/5/2015 14.90 6.37 0.739 -17.4 0.77 0.00 20.46
1050 10/5/2015 14.98 6.40 0.737 -19.8 0.64 0.00 20.43
1055 10/5/2015 15.02 6.46 0.738 -19.6 0.83 0.00 20.47
1100 10/5/2015 15.03 6.49 0.739 -21.6 1.18 0.30 20.49
1105 10/5/2015 15.17 6.53 0.744 -17.9 1.28 0.65 20.48
1110 10/5/2015 15.21 6.54 0.747 -14.4 1.47 0.75 20.5
1115 10/5/2015 15.31 6.55 0.751 -14.0 1.67 0.6 20.49
1120 10/5/2015 15.37 6.55 0.753 -13.9 1.69 0.4 20.5
1125 10/5/2015 15.46 6.56 0.757 -14.1 1.77 0.35 20.5
Final Readings 1125 10/5/2015 15.46 6.56 0.757 -14 1.77 0.35 20.50
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 7.0
Bladder Pump
104
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Sample Collection Time
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to water from measuring point:19.79
1130
Overcast
64 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:29.00
Height of water column:
Monday, October 05, 2015
68 Minutes
Monday, October 05, 2015
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II2
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 805 Stop 850
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start 850 Stop 830
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 25 psi
2" well:
height:13.24 x .163 =2.15812
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
758 10/6/2015
800 10/6/2015
805 10/6/2015 Had P+B21ump Issues, Started Actualy Purging at 805
810 10/6/2015 13.82 5.57 0.363 82.6 3.38 13 16.90
815 10/6/2015 14.37 5.72 0.365 40.7 1.32 14 16.93
820 10/6/2015 15.07 5.78 0.368 0.8 0.68 14 16.97
825 10/6/2015 15.38 5.79 0.369 -13.7 0.51 13 16.95
830 10/6/2015 15.71 5.79 0.372 -25.8 0.42 10 16.94
835 10/6/2015 15.92 5.80 0.374 -31.9 0.35 8.9 16.98
840 10/6/2015 16.11 5.80 0.375 -34.3 0.34 9.3 17.00
845 10/6/2015 16.21 5.79 0.375 -36.8 0.31 7.6 16.97
850 10/6/2015 16.27 5.8 0.375 -40.0 0.29 5.2 16.95
Final Readings 850 10/6/2015 16.27 5.80 0.375 -40 0.29 5.20 16.95
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II3
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
850
Sunny
51 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:16.76
45 Minutes
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:30.00
Height of water column:13.24
Bladder Pump
92 Sample Collection Time
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 4.0
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1450 Stop 1545
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start 1545 Stop 1625
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 23 psi
2" well:
height:11.62 x .163 =1.89406
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1450 10/5/2015
1455 10/5/2015
1500 10/5/2015 18.36 6.13 0.445 89.2 2.92 2.40 13.54
1505 10/5/2015 18.27 6.09 0.447 56.8 1.79 0.00 13.58
1510 10/5/2015 18.30 6.10 0.450 8.7 0.67 0.00 13.63
1515 10/5/2015 18.38 6.13 0.451 -13.0 0.48 0.00 13.68
1520 10/5/2015 18.22 6.12 0.450 -23.2 0.32 0.00 13.70
1525 10/5/2015 18.02 6.11 0.448 -29.3 0.27 0.00 13.73
1530 10/5/2015 17.82 6.10 0.445 -34.3 0.23 0.00 13.75
1535 10/5/2015 17.62 6.09 0.443 -37.1 0.20 0.00 13.78
1540 10/5/2015 17.54 6.08 0.441 -38.2 0.20 0.00 13.78
1545 10/5/2015 17.5 6.09 0.442 -42.3 0.19 0.00 13.78
Final Readings 1545 10/5/2015 17.50 6.09 0.442 -42 0.19 0.00 13.78
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 5.5
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Bladder Pump
100 Sample Collection Time
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:25.00
Height of water column:11.62
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Depth to water from measuring point:13.38
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
White Street Landfill Monday, October 05, 2015
1584-98-081 55 Minutes
4103-II3B Monday, October 05, 2015
1545
Mostly Cloudy
Bradley Keyse 65 *F
Water Level & Well Data
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1640 Stop 1735
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start 1735 Stop 1605
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 23 psi
2" well:
height:13.69 x .163 =2.23147
,liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1640 10/5/2015
1645 10/5/2015 17.00 5.78 1.300 81.7 4.73 1.40 16.50
1650 10/5/2015 16.36 5.73 1.340 20.6 2.09 0.80 16.52
1655 10/5/2015 16.28 5.76 1.367 -8.6 1.43 0.00 16.54
1700 10/5/2015 16.25 5.78 1.369 -20.9 1.03 0.00 16.53
1705 10/5/2015 16.24 5.79 1.369 -25.9 0.88 0.00 16.55
1710 10/5/2015 16.11 5.79 1.365 -31.3 0.68 0.00 16.59
1715 10/5/2015 16.00 5.79 1.363 -36.6 0.51 0.00 16.56
1720 10/5/2015 16.06 5.81 1.360 -40.9 0.44 0.00 16.59
1725 10/5/2015 16.06 5.81 1.366 -42.3 0.40 0.00 16.55
1730 10/5/2015 16.03 5.81 1.367 -44.2 0.40 0.00 16.57
1735 10/5/2015 16.12 5.82 1.369 -46.3 0.37 0.00 16.55
Final Readings 1735 10/5/2015 16.12 5.82 1.369 -46 0.37 0.00 16.55
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water removed 5.5
Volume of water in well
55 Minutes
Monday, October 05, 2015
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Depth to water from measuring point:16.31
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:30.00
Height of water column:
Bladder Pump
110 Sample Collection Time
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Monday, October 05, 2015
13.69
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
1735
Overcast
65 *F
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II4A
Bradley Keyse
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1220 Stop 1330
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start 1330 Stop 1410
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 15 psi
2" well:
height:10 x .163 =1.63
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1220 10/5/2015
1225 10/5/2015 17.88 6.57 0.231 90.0 4.41 70 6.91
1230 10/5/2015 17.92 6.52 0.199 65.0 3.89 85 6.94
1235 10/5/2015 18.07 6.48 0.182 42.3 3.48 95 6.97
1240 10/5/2015 18.21 6.45 0.176 29.8 3.93 90 6.97
1245 10/5/2015 18.32 6.44 0.176 23.5 3.30 95 7.00
1250 10/5/2015 18.31 6.40 0.177 19.8 3.12 95 7.00
1255 10/5/2015 18.28 6.39 0.181 17.4 3.03 90 7.01
1300 10/5/2015 18.18 6.37 0.186 15.5 3.02 85 7.10
1305 10/5/2015 18.14 6.35 0.194 13.3 3.05 85 7.16
1310 10/5/2015 18.11 6.34 0.204 12.1 3.12 85 7.26
1315 10/5/2015 18.13 6.34 0.214 10.8 3.07 80 7.36
1320 10/5/2015 18.12 6.33 0.221 9.7 3.07 80 7.32
1325 10/5/2015 18.44 6.33 0.233 7.5 2.99 80 7.40
1330 10/5/2015 18.61 6.34 0.241 5.6 2.91 80 7.44
Final Readings 1330 10/5/2015 18.61 6.34 0.241 6 2.91 80.00 7.44
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II5
Monday, October 05, 2015
1330
Overcast
70 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:6.00
70 Minutes
Monday, October 05, 2015
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:16.00
Height of water column:10.00
Bladder Pump
104 Sample Collection Time
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 7.0
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
NOTE: The pump was pushing air through the flow throuch cell. The water level may have been at inlet of the pump.
Water Level & Well Data
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 945 Stop 1025
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 2.0 sec.Start 1025 Stop 1105
Off: 28.0 sec.
Pressure: 18 psi
2" well:
height:4.52 x .163 =0.73676
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
945
950 10/6/2015 15.85 6.05 0.647 62.7 6.59 8.80 12.50
955 10/6/2015 15.71 6.50 1.322 -19.4 4.55 16 12.68
1000 10/6/2015 15.77 6.68 1.480 -43.8 4.12 28 13.01
1005 10/6/2015 15.90 6.68 1.303 -40.8 4.24 21 13.22
1010 10/6/2015 16.00 6.68 1.231 -36.0 4.67 17 13.31
1015 10/6/2015 16.04 6.67 1.203 -33.1 4.97 13 13.38
1020 10/6/2015 16.05 6.66 1.199 -30.7 5.30 11 13.40
1025 10/6/2015 16.17 6.66 1.245 -30.7 5.04 9 13.45
Final Readings 1025 10/6/2015 16.17 6.66 1.245 -31 5.04 9.00 13.45
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II6
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
40 Minutes
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
1025
Sunny (Sampling in the Shade)
55 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:12.48
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:17.00
Height of water column:4.52
Bladder Pump
96 Sample Collection Time
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1335 Stop 1430
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 4 sec.Start 1430 Stop 1535
Off: 26 sec.
Pressure: 52 psi
The controller / compressor wouldn't cycle as necesssary; therefore, a cylce of 80 mL purged, then three cylces with very little. Approx. 40 ml/min
2" well:
height:83.49 x .163 =13.60887
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1330
1335 10/6/2015
1340 10/6/2015 18.16 8.57 0.339 70.1 3.49 0.00 18.61
1345 10/6/2015 17.90 8.68 0.383 26.3 1.61 0.00 19.22
1350 10/6/2015 18.07 8.65 0.385 -7.0 1.11 0.00 19.53
1355 10/6/2015 17.86 8.75 0.385 -29.5 0.87 0.00 19.91
1400 10/6/2015 17.93 8.73 0.385 -32.1 0.69 0.00 19.90
1405 10/6/2015 18.32 8.74 0.388 -38.6 0.69 0.00 19.97
1410 10/6/2015 18.49 8.76 0.391 -44.2 0.64 0.00 20.02
1415 10/6/2015 18.62 8.78 0.392 -51.5 0.59 0.00 20.04
1420 10/6/2015 18.76 8.82 0.394 -53.0 0.55 0.00 20.00
1425 10/6/2015 18.83 8.82 0.395 -52.8 0.53 0.00 20.02
1430 10/6/2015 18.75 8.83 0.395 -56.6 0.5 0.00 20.12
Final Readings 1430 10/6/2015 18.75 8.83 0.395 -56.6 0.50 0.00 20.12
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II7b
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
1430
Sunny
72 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:17.51
60 Minutes
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:101.00
Height of water column:83.49
Bladder Pump
Approx 40 (see the note below)Sample Collection Time
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 4.0
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1158 Stop 1245
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start 1245 Stop 1325
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 21 psi
2" well:
height:13.05 x .163 =2.12715
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1158 10/6/2015
1200 10/6/2015
1205 10/6/2015 18.38 5.95 0.335 26.7 2.46 4.7 14.20
1210 10/6/2015 17.97 5.86 0.338 20.7 1.74 0.80 14.30
1215 10/6/2015 17.81 5.82 0.327 -1.9 1.32 0.00 14.36
1220 10/6/2015 17.80 5.8 0.326 -17.0 1.25 0.20 14.41
1225 10/6/2015 17.82 5.79 0.326 -23.8 1.38 0.65 14.45
1230 10/6/2015 17.75 5.78 0.327 -26.7 1.50 0.10 14.46
1235 10/6/2015 17.60 5.76 0.326 -27.9 1.60 0.40 14.48
1240 10/6/2015 17.60 5.73 0.327 -28.3 1.70 0.20 14.50
1245 10/6/2015 17.48 5.73 0.328 -28.5 1.79 0.35 14.51
Final Readings 1245 10/6/2015 17.48 5.73 0.328 -29 1.79 0.35 14.51
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 3.5
Blader Pump
110 Sample Collection Time
Was well purged dry
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Blader Pump Purge Time
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:27.00
Height of water column:13.05
Bradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:13.95
Sunny
66 *F
Water Level & Well Data
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
47 Minutes
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II7
1245
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1645 Stop 1740
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 2.6 sec.Start 1740 Stop 1820
Off: 27.4 sec.
Pressure: 25 psi
Note: Duplicate II taken at this location. (0700 hrs)
2" well:
height:22.98 x .163 =3.74574
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1645 10/6/2015
1650 10/6/2015 19.67 6.07 2.980 65.5 2.04 0.00 9.74
1655 10/6/2015 19.32 6.01 3.003 19.0 1.17 0.00 9.84
1700 10/6/2015 19.04 5.96 2.997 -1.1 0.78 0.00 9.85
1705 10/6/2015 18.88 5.95 2.975 -7.1 0.65 0.00 9.87
1710 10/6/2015 18.55 5.94 2.941 -13.8 0.49 0.00 9.86
1715 10/6/2015 18.59 5.96 2.933 -20.8 0.40 0.00 9.88
1720 10/6/2015 18.57 5.97 2.927 -24.7 0.35 0.00 9.90
1725 10/6/2015 18.85 5.99 2.940 -29.8 0.33 0.00 9.87
1730 10/6/2015 18.86 6.00 2.942 -32.5 0.31 0.00 9.88
1735 10/6/2015 18.42 5.99 2.911 -35.8 0.28 0.00 9.87
1740 10/6/2015 18.65 6.00 2.922 -39.1 0.26 0.00 9.87
Final Readings 1740 10/6/2015 18.65 6.00 2.922 -39 0.26 0.00 9.87
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-II8
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
1740
Sunny
72 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:9.52
55 Minutes
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:32.50
Height of water column:22.98
Blader Pump
100 Sample Collection Time
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Blader Pump Purge Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 4.5
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 735 Stop 815
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 2.3 sec.Start 815 Stop 910
Off: 27.7 sec.
Pressure: 20 psi
2" well:
height:21.34 x .163 =3.47842
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Ferrous Iron = 1.61 mg/L ( 1,610 ug/L) [Collected with Metals Bottle a 0820 hrs]
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
735
740 10/7/2015 14.50 6.05 0.631 7.3 2.58 0.85 11.46
745 10/7/2015 14.68 6.12 0.627 -29.0 1.22 1.2 11.55
750 10/7/2015 14.68 6.12 0.625 -37.5 0.84 1.2 11.63
755 10/7/2015 14.70 6.13 0.624 -43.4 0.58 1.6 11.70
800 10/7/2015 14.76 6.13 0.625 -53.1 0.38 2.7 11.82
805 10/7/2015 14.83 6.11 0.626 -54.7 0.27 2.7 11.92
810 10/7/2015 14.81 6.10 0.626 -55.8 0.24 2.9 12.01
815 10/7/2015 14.78 6.09 0.625 -59.4 0.20 2.8 12.10
Final Readings 815 10/7/2015 14.78 6.09 0.625 -59 0.20 2.80 12.10
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 4.0
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Blader Pump Purge Time
Blader Pump
104 Sample Collection Time
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:32.50
Height of water column:21.34
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Depth to water from measuring point:11.16
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
White Street Landfill Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1584-98-081 40 Minutes
4103-II9 Wednesday, October 07, 2015
815
Sunny
Bradley Keyse 52 *F
Water Level & Well Data
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:No:x Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 1520 Stop 1620
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 2 sec.Start 1620 Stop 1710
Off: 28 sec.
Pressure: 20 psi
2" well:
height:8.11 x .163 =1.32193
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
1520
1525 10/7/2015 20.87 5.91 0.286 19.8 3.69 14.0 6.96
1530 10/7/2015 20.11 5.40 0.213 -21.4 1.46 20.0 6.97
1535 10/7/2015 20.06 5.32 0.174 -34.0 0.81 20.0 6.70
1540 10/7/2015 19.93 5.24 0.157 -41.4 0.46 21.0 6.70
1545 10/7/2015 19.82 5.17 0.149 -47.6 0.25 22.0 6.71
1550 10/7/2015 19.83 5.23 0.148 -55.0 0.17 25.1 6.71
1555 10/7/2015 19.79 5.22 0.149 -55.4 0.16 19.5 6.71
1600 10/7/2015 19.70 5.22 0.140 -57.6 0.14 19.0 6.72
1605 10/7/2015 19.57 5.22 0.149 -60.6 0.14 18.9 6.73
1610 10/7/2015 19.57 5.23 0.149 -61.4 0.14 19.1 6.72
1615 10/7/2015 19.52 5.23 0.150 -63.4 0.11 19.1 6.76
1620 10/7/2015 19.57 5.27 0.150 -65.9 0.12 19.2 6.74
Final Readings 1620 10/7/2015 19.57 5.27 0.150 -66 0.12 19.20 6.74
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Depth to water from measuring point:6.89
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
White Street Landfill Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1584-98-081 60 Minutes
4103-SMW-1 Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1620
Sunny
Bradley Keyse 70 *F
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:15.00
Height of water column:8.11
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Blader Pump Purge Time
Blader Pump
100 Sample Collection Time
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 6.0
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start 850 Stop 920
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start 920 Stop 1000
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 30 psi
2" well:
height:14.99 x .163 =2.44337
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
850
855 10/8/2015 15.61 6.42 0.318 -23.8 5.31 8.25 18.61
900 10/8/2015 15.50 6.41 0.318 -28.5 4.26 8.40 18.86
905 10/8/2015 15.68 6.45 0.314 -34.7 3.92 2.01 19.01
910 10/8/2015 15.78 6.48 0.311 -36.2 3.91 1.61 19.09
915 10/8/2015 15.81 6.47 0.306 -37.9 3.83 1.78 19.11
920 10/8/2015 15.81 6.47 0.304 -38.4 3.80 1.62 19.10
Final Readings 920 10/8/2015 15.81 6.47 0.304 -38.4 3.80 1.62 19.10
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-MW13
Thursday, October 08, 2015
920
Sunny
66 *FBradley Keyse
Depth to water from measuring point:18.01
30 Minutes
Thursday, October 08, 2015
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:33.00
Height of water column:14.99
Bladder Pump
100 Sample Collection Time
Measuring point:Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump Purge Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 3.0
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start Stop
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On: 3.0 sec.Start Stop
Off: 27.0 sec.
Pressure: 30 psi
2" well:
height:#VALUE! x .163 =#VALUE!mg/L
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
Final Readings
* C units mS/cm mV mg/L NTU
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 4.0
Was well purged dry
Ferrous Iron:
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to water from measuring point:DRY
1011
Sunny
68 *F
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4103-MW14
Thursday, October 08, 2015
Thursday, October 08, 2015
Bradley Keyse
Measuring point:
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
100
Top of Casing
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Bladder Pump
34.00
Purge Time
Sample Collection Time
Bladder Pump
Height of water column:#VALUE!
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
0.00 feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start Stop
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On:sec.Start Stop
Off:sec.
Pressure:psi
2" well:
height:0 x .163 =0
gallons liters
Yes No
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
Final Readings 1400 10/7/2015 18.76 7.27 0.229
* C units mS/cm
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to water from measuring point:
1400
1584-98-081
White Street Landfill
4112-SW1
Gary Simcox
Sunny
65 *F
Summit Avenue Bridge
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed
Was well purged dry
Measuring point:
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Height of water column:
Sample Collection Time
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Purge Time
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
0.00 feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start Stop
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On:sec.Start Stop
Off:sec.
Pressure:psi
2" well:
height:0 x .163 =0
gallons liters x
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
Final Readings 1320 10/7/2015 17.11 7.37 0.151
* C units mS/cm
Sample Collection Time
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to water from measuring point:
1320
Sunny
65 *FGary Simcox
Height of water column:
Measuring point:
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Purge Time
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
White Street Landfill
1584-98-081
4112-SW2
White Street and Nealtown Road
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start Stop
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On:sec.Start Stop
Off:sec.
Pressure:psi
2" well:
height:0 x .163 =0
gallons liters
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
Final Readings 154 10/7/2015 21.82 7.34 0.337
* C units mS/cm
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
Purge Time
Measuring point:
Sample Collection Time
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Height of water column:0.00
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to water from measuring point:
1545
65 *F
White Street Landfill Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1584-98-081
4112-SW3
Gary Simcox
Sunny
Waste Water Treatment Plant
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start Stop
Purge Rate ml/min
Control Settings On:sec.Start Stop
Off:sec.
Pressure:psi
2" well:
height:0 x .163 =0
gallons liters
Yes No
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
Final Readings 1445 10/7/2015 20.90 7.62 0.299
* C units mS/cm
Field Analyses
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Measuring point:
Depth to water from measuring point:
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
Height of water column:0.00
Volume of water removed
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Sample Collection Time
Was well purged dry
Purge Time
Volume of water in well
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
1445
Sunny
65 *F
White Street Landfill Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1584-98-081
4112-SW4
Gary Simcox
Rankin Mill Road Bridge
Location:Purge Date:
Project No.:Purge Time:
Source Well:Sample Date:
Sample Time:
Locked?:Yes:x No:Weather:
Sampled By:Air Temp:
feet
feet
feet
Purge Method
Sample Method Start Stop
Purge Rate gpm
Control Settings On:sec.Start Stop
Off:sec.
Pressure:psi
2" well:
height:0 x .163 =0
gallons x liters
Yes No x
*Stabilization Parameters
Time Date Temp pH Conductivity *ORP *D.O.*Turbidity DTW
Final Readings 124 10/7/2015 19.20 7.19 0.284
* C units mS/cm
Depth to well bottom from measuring point:
Purge Time
Measuring point:
Sample Collection Time
Well Purging & Sample Collection
Height of water column:0.00
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING FIELD DATA
Water Level & Well Data
Depth to water from measuring point:
1245
65 *F
White Street Landfill Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
1584-98-081
4112-SW5
Gary Simcox
Sunny
Below monitor well II-3
Was well purged dry
Field Analyses
Volume of water in well
Volume of water removed 0.0
Appendix II – Laboratory Analytical Reports