3402-MSWLF-1997_HanesMillRoad_GWMReport_DIN26507_20160310

FIRST SEMI-ANNUAL 2016
SAMPLING EVENT
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina

Submitted To:

Winston-Salem/Forsyth County City/County Utilities Commission 325 Hanes Mill Road
Winston-Salem, NC 27105 USA

Submitted By: Golder Associates NC, Inc.
5B Oak Branch Drive Greensboro, NC 27407 USA

May 2016 0939-668715
WA
T
E
R

Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y

M
O
N
I
T
O
R
I
N
G

RE
P
O
R
T

May 2016 i 0939-668715

Table of Contents
COVER LETTER
1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Site Description and Background ................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Compliance Monitoring History .................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Hydrogeologic Setting .................................................................................................................. 3
2.0 FIELD PROGRAM, MONITORING RESULTS, AND DISCUSSION ............................................... 4
2.1 Visual Inspection Program ........................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Well Networks and Groundwater Elevation Measurements ........................................................ 4
2.3 March 2016 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Event ................................................. 5
2.4 Laboratory Analysis Program ....................................................................................................... 6
2.5 March 2016 Sampling Results ..................................................................................................... 6
2.5.1 Closed Unlined Landfill ............................................................................................................ 6
2.5.2 Closed Subtitle D Landfill ......................................................................................................... 7
2.5.3 Active Subtitle D Landfill .......................................................................................................... 7
3.0 LABORATORY AND FIELD QA/QC ................................................................................................ 8
4.0 DATA EVALUATION ........................................................................................................................ 8
4.1 March 2016 Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Standard Comparisons ........................... 8
4.1.1 Closed Unlined Landfill ............................................................................................................ 8
4.1.2 Closed Subtitle D Landfill ......................................................................................................... 9
4.1.3 Active Subtitle D Landfill ........................................................................................................ 10
4.2 March 2016 Statistical Evaluations ............................................................................................ 10
4.2.1 Closed Unlined Landfill .......................................................................................................... 10
4.2.2 Closed Subtitle D Landfill ....................................................................................................... 10
4.2.3 Active Subtitle D Landfill ........................................................................................................ 11
5.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 11
6.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 11
Tables
Table 1 Historical Static Water Level Data for the Closed Unlined Landfill Table 2 Historical Static Water Level Data for the Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Table 3 Historical Static Water Level Data for the Active Subtitle D Landfill Table 4 Summary of Estimated Horizontal Flow Velocities
Table 5 Summary of Well Construction Information Table 6 Summary of Detected Constituents in Monitoring Wells at the Closed Unlined Landfill
Table 7 Summary of Field Parameters from Monitoring Wells at the Closed Unlined Landfill Table 8 Summary of Detected Constituents in Surface Water Monitoring Point
Table 9 Summary of Field Parameters from Surface Water Monitoring Points Table 10 Summary of Detected Constituents in Monitoring Wells at the Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Table 11 Summary of Field Parameters for Monitoring Wells at the Closed Subtitle D Landfill Table 12 Summary of Detected Constituents in Monitoring Wells at the Active Subtitle D Landfill
Table 13 Summary of Field Parameters for Monitoring Wells at the Active Subtitle D Landfill Table 14 Summary of Detected Constituents and Field Parameters in Leachate
May 2016 ii 0939-668715

Drawings
Drawing 1 March 7, 2016, Groundwater Surface Contour Map
Appendices
Appendix A Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling Logs
Appendix B March 2016 Groundwater, Surface Water, and Leachate Certificate-of-Analysis, Chain-of-Custody Forms and Laboratory Data Review
Appendix C Statistical Evaluation Worksheets & Summary Table
May 2016 1 0939-668715

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the monitoring results from the March 7 - 10, 2016, groundwater and surface
water sampling and analysis event at the Hanes Mill Road Landfill in Winston-Salem, North Carolina (NC)
in accordance with Title 15A of the NC Administrative Code (NCAC) Subchapter 13B.1632 and NCAC
Subchapter 13B.0544. The Hanes Mill Road Landfill, which comprises a closed, unlined municipal solid
waste (MSW) landfill; a closed Subtitle D MSW landfill; and an active Subtitle D MSW landfill, is
maintained by the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County City/County Utilities Commission (CCUC) under Permit
No. 34-02 issued by the NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ, formerly NC Department of
Environment and Natural Resources).
1.1 Site Description and Background
The location of the facility is shown on the inlay on Drawing 1. As presented, the Hanes Mill Road Landfill
is located within the boundaries and jurisdiction of the City of Winston-Salem off Hanes Mill Road. The
CCUC operates an approximately 500-acre landfill facility that consists of a closed unlined MSW facility, a
closed Subtitle D MSW facility, and an active Subtitle D MSW facility. The facility has been in operation
since 1972 under Permit Number 34-02. The closed facility operated as an unlined unit until 1995;
between 1995 and 2005, the unit operated as a Subtitle D lined unit that ‘piggy-backed’ over the unlined
facility. The unlined and ‘piggy-backed’ areas were closed in 2005. The CCUC currently operates a
Subtitle D facility west of the closed unit. The unlined MSW facility is subject to Assessment Monitoring
and Corrective Action in accordance with .1634 through .1637 of the Solid Waste Management Rules
(SWMR) and the Transition Plan for the facility. The closed Subtitle D facility and the active Subtitle D
MSW facility are subject to water quality monitoring in accordance with the Detection Monitoring Program
(.1633 of the SWMR).
The landfill is bounded to the south by industrial development, to the north, west, and southwest by
residential subdivisions and undeveloped wooded properties, and to the east by U.S. 52. Topographic
relief at the landfill ranges from approximately 790 to 940 feet above mean sea level. Surface drainage
from the facility is predominantly radial toward several streams along the northern and southern portions
of the property that flow into Grassy Creek, which transects the property from north to south and
separates the closed landfill and the active landfill. Grassy Creek drains into Mill Creek located south of
the Hanes Mill Road Landfill.
1.2 Compliance Monitoring History
The CCUC monitors water quality at the closed, unlined MSW facility by monitoring 10 downgradient
monitoring wells (OW-3, OW-4, OW-6, OW-7DA, OW-10D, OW-11, OW-12, OW-13D, OW-14D, and
OW-17D) semi-annually. The upgradient monitoring well and surface water sampling points are shared
with the ‘piggy-backed’ closed Subtitle D unit as described below. According to correspondence from NC
DEQ dated March 4, 2010, NC Appendix II parameters should be monitored once every two years with
the next NC Appendix II event being conducted during the spring 2017 event. During the other semi-
May 2016 2 0939-668715

annual events, analysis of NC Appendix I plus ‘detects’ is required. Based on the March 4, 2010,
correspondence, the NC Appendix II detects include mercury, tin, dichlorodifluoromethane, and
naphthalene. According to correspondence from NC DEQ dated September 22, 2008, approval was
granted to reduce the number of, and sampling frequency for, monitored natural attenuation (MNA)
parameters and wells to include nitrate, sulfate, chloride, and total organic carbon for wells MW-1RR,
OW-3, OW-4, OW-10D, OW-12, OW-14D, and OW-17D. Every third year (next events in 2018),
methane, ethane, and ethene must also be analyzed semi-annually for MNA wells, and every fifth year
(events in March and September 2016), hydrogen, sulfide, alkalinity, and volatile fatty acids must also be
analyzed semi-annually.
Based on recent sampling results for the unlined MSW facility, several volatile organic constituents
(VOCs) continue to be detected at levels above applicable groundwater standards in samples from one or
more monitoring wells. Based on these documented VOC exceedances of applicable groundwater
standards, the CCUC initiated corrective action.
The CCUC monitors water quality at the closed Subtitle D MSW facility by monitoring one upgradient
monitoring well (MW-1RR), and six downgradient monitoring wells (MW-6, MW-6D, MW-7, MW-8, MW-9,
and MW-11) semi-annually. Due to historical detections of 1,1-dichloroethene in MW-8 at concentrations
above the groundwater standard, Assessment Monitoring was initiated for this facility and the first
complete Assessment Monitoring background event was conducted in October 2009. The March 2011
event was the fourth of four background events for Assessment Monitoring. The background results
indicated that no NC Appendix II constituents were detected above applicable groundwater protection
standards in the groundwater at the closed, Subtitle D facility, with the exception of chromium, cobalt, and
vanadium, which appear to be representative of background conditions. Per NCAC Subchapter 13B
Rule.1634(e), the closed Subtitle D facility was to remain in the Assessment Monitoring Program until two
consecutive NC Appendix II sampling events indicate that concentrations of all NC Appendix II
groundwater concentrations below applicable standards. The September 2012 event was the second of
these events; the results indicated that no Appendix II constituents were above background. Therefore,
the closed Subtitle D facility reverted to Detection Monitoring. Two upstream surface water monitoring
points (NBC-1 and SW-3) and two downstream monitoring points (NBC-2 and SW-4) are used to monitor
both of the closed units and are sampled semi-annually for analysis of NC Appendix I parameters.
The CCUC monitors water quality at the active Subtitle D facility by testing one upgradient monitoring well
(MW-12), and seven downgradient monitoring wells (MW-13, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-17, MW-18,
MW-19) semi-annually. Three former piezometers converted to monitoring wells (MW-20,
MW-21, and MW-22) were added to the monitoring network as part of the Cell 3/4 expansion. Two
surface water points (upstream point SW-1 and downstream point SW-2) are used to monitor the active
facility. Samples from the wells and surface water monitoring points are analyzed for NC Appendix I
VOCs. A composite leachate sample is collected semi-annually from the two leachate holding tanks for
May 2016 3 0939-668715

both lined units and analyzed for the approved NC leachate parameter list plus other required
parameters.
1.3 Hydrogeologic Setting
Geologically, the facility is located within the Carolina Slate Belt of the central Piedmont Physiographic
Province of North Carolina (NCGS, 1985 and 2004). The Carolina Slate Belt is comprised of late
Proterozoic to Cambrian volcanic and sedimentary rocks that have been metamorphosed to lower
greenschist facies by plutons (Butler and Secor, 1991). The facility is underlain primarily by the Ashe
Formation, which consists of fine grained, thinly layered sulfidic biotite-muscovite gneiss interlayered with
mica schist and phyllite. The Ashe Formation also consists of amphibolite and garnet amphibolite (HDR,
2003).
The uppermost groundwater beneath the facility is present in a shallow, unconfined aquifer comprised of
partially weathered, fractured, metamorphic intrusive rock. Groundwater occurs at depths ranging from
approximately 3 to 50 feet below grade. Depth-to-water measurements obtained during the March 2016
monitoring event are summarized in Tables 1 through 3 and were used to prepare a groundwater surface
contour map presented as an overlay on Drawing 1.
As presented, the groundwater flow in the uppermost aquifer beneath the closed landfills is generally
toward the southwest toward Grassy Creek, which separates the closed facility from the active facility.
Groundwater flow in the uppermost aquifer beneath the active landfill is semi-radial, flowing primarily east
toward Grassy Creek, but also north and south to tributaries of Grassy Creek. The groundwater contour
map and interpreted flow directions are generally consistent with previously submitted groundwater
contour maps and flow directions.
Based on the March 7, 2016, groundwater surface contour map, the average hydraulic gradient in the
shallow aquifer underlying the closed landfills was calculated to be approximately 0.018 foot/foot
(Table 4). The hydraulic gradient underlying the active landfill was calculated to be approximately 0.041
foot/foot (Table 4). The hydraulic gradient calculations are consistent with values from previous reports.
A hydraulic conductivity of 5.68E-04 centimeters/second is used based on an average of previous
hydraulic conductivities calculated for the unconsolidated upper aquifer (HDR, 2003). An estimated
effective porosity of 0.20 was used for the shallow aquifer to represent a range from saprolite to fractured
rock (HDR, 2003).
Using the above values, the estimated rate of groundwater flow for the uppermost aquifer beneath the
facility was calculated using the following modified Darcy equation:
Vgw = Ki/ne
May 2016 4 0939-668715

where Vgw = average linear velocity (feet/year), K = hydraulic conductivity (feet/year), i = horizontal
hydraulic gradient, and ne = effective porosity.
The average estimated linear groundwater flow velocity under the closed landfills is approximately 54
feet/year and the average estimated linear groundwater flow velocity under the active landfill is
approximately 119 feet/year (Table 4). The range of groundwater flow is expected to vary depending on
the hydrogeologic unit in which it occurs. However, the linear velocity equation above makes the
simplified assumptions of a homogeneous and isotropic aquifer. Therefore, this equation represents a
likely average value for the uppermost aquifer and does not account for heterogeneous and/or anisotropic
conditions that may be present in the uppermost aquifer at the facility.
2.0 FIELD PROGRAM, MONITORING RESULTS, AND DISCUSSION
Field activities conducted for the March 2016 sampling event are discussed in the following sections.
2.1 Visual Inspection Program
In order to ensure that a potential release is detected at the earliest possible time, the visual inspection
program is used by sampling personnel at the Hanes Mill Road Landfill. This program includes physical
indicators such as potential water table mounding beneath the waste management unit, physical
examination of any stresses in biological communities, visible signs of leachate migration (i.e., leachate
seeps), unexplained changes in soil characteristics, and any other change to the environment due to the
waste management units. During the March 2016 compliance monitoring event, no physical indicators of
a potential release were observed in the vicinity of the waste management areas.
2.2 Well Networks and Groundwater Elevation Measurements
The network of groundwater monitoring wells at the closed unlined landfill consists of one upgradient
monitoring well (MW-1RR) and 10 downgradient monitoring wells (OW-3, OW-4, OW-6, OW-7DA,
OW-10D, OW-11, OW-12, OW-13D, OW-14D, and OW-17D) and are monitored during each semi-annual
monitoring event. Four surface water monitoring points (NBC-1, NBC-2, SW-3, and SW-4) are monitored
semi-annually. Monitoring well and surface water point locations are shown on Drawing 1. Monitoring
wells OW-3, OW-4, OW-6, OW-11, and OW-12 are screened in the shallow, unconfined aquifer.
Monitoring wells MW-1RR, OW-7DA, OW-10D, OW-13D, OW-14D, and OW-17D are screened in
fractured bedrock. A summary of well construction details is provided in Table 5.
The network of groundwater monitoring wells at the closed Subtitle D landfill consists of six downgradient
monitoring wells (MW-6, MW-6D, MW-7, MW-8, MW-9, and MW-11). The upgradient monitoring well
(MW-1RR) and surface water sampling points (NBC-1, NBC-2, SW-3, and SW-4) are shared by the
closed unlined landfill. Monitoring wells MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, and MW-11 are screened in the shallow,
unconfined aquifer. Monitoring wells MW-6D and MW-9 are screened across saprolite and partially
weathered rock. A summary of well construction details is provided in Table 5.
May 2016 5 0939-668715

The network of groundwater monitoring wells at the closed Subtitle D landfill consists of one upgradient
monitoring well (MW-12), and 10 downgradient monitoring wells (MW-13, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16,
MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-20, MW-21, and MW-22). Two surface water points (SW-1 and SW-2) are
used to monitor the active facility. Monitoring wells MW-13, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-17, MW-18,
MW-19, MW-20, and MW-22 are screened in the shallow, unconfined aquifer. Monitoring well MW-21 is
screened in fractured bedrock. Upgradient monitoring well MW-12 is screened in fractured bedrock. A
summary of well construction details is provided in Table 5.
Depth-to-water measurements were recorded to the nearest 0.01 foot prior to initiating groundwater
purging and sampling activities. A summary of the historical water level elevations are presented in
Tables 1 through 3. As presented, the data indicate that the hydraulic head level in the uppermost aquifer
beneath the facility is fairly consistent, with an average variation of approximately 1.5 feet.
2.3 March 2016 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Event
Golder visited the facility on March 7 - 10, 2016, to purge and sample the 28 monitoring wells, sample 6
surface water monitoring points, and sample the facility leachate at the closed and active landfills. Depth-
to-water measurements were obtained from the monitoring wells to the nearest 0.01 foot using an
electronic water level indicator prior to purging the wells.
Monitoring wells were purged and sampled with a combination of portable and dedicated pumps and
micropurge procedures. Measurements of pH, specific conductivity, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-
reduction potential, temperature, and turbidity were recorded on approximately 3- to 5-minute intervals
during the purge, depending on the purge rate. In general, the purge rate for each well was matched to
the yield of the monitoring well, as determined by continuously monitoring the depth to water, up to a
maximum purge rate of 500 milliliters per minute. Purging was continued until stabilization was indicated
by the field parameters.
Prior to sampling, the laboratory-supplied sample containers were prepared. Each sample container was
labeled with the sample identification number, sampling personnel, date and time of sample collection,
project name and number, and requested chemical analyses.
The required groundwater samples were collected directly from the pump discharge lines in the labeled,
laboratory-supplied, pre-preserved sample containers after purging was completed based on stabilization
of all field parameters. After collection, the samples were placed in a cooler on ice, under chain-of-
custody control. Copies of the sampling logs are presented in Appendix A. Included in each log is a
description of the sampling location, sampling equipment, sampling method, field observations, and field
parameters.
The surface water samples were collected directly from stream flow, by lowering the sample containers
into the stream with the opening facing away from the current flow, taking care to prevent the overflow of
May 2016 6 0939-668715

the sample containers and to minimize sample-induced turbidity. Measurements of pH, specific
conductivity, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-reduction potential, temperature, and turbidity were recorded
during the collection of the surface water samples.
A composite leachate sample was collected from Tank A and Tank B. The leachate holding tanks collect
leachate from both lined facilities. Measurements of pH, specific conductivity, and temperature were
recorded during the collection of the leachate sample.
After collection, the samples were placed in a cooler on ice, under chain-of-custody control. Copies of the
sampling logs are presented in Appendix A. Included in each log is a description of the sampling
equipment, sampling location, sampling method, field observations, and water quality measurements.
2.4 Laboratory Analysis Program
The groundwater, surface water, and leachate samples were shipped to Environmental Conservation
Laboratories, Inc. (ENCO) of Cary, NC and Pace Analytical Energy Services, LLC of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania under chain-of-custody control, and were received within the dates of March 9 - 15, 2016.
The samples were received at the laboratory in good condition and properly preserved. Groundwater
samples from OW-6, OW-7DA, OW-11, and OW-13D at the closed unlined landfill were analyzed for the
NC Appendix I list of parameters plus ‘detects,’ which include mercury, tin, naphthalene, and
dichlorodifluoromethane. Groundwater samples from MW-1RR, OW-3, OW-4, OW-10D, OW-12,
OW-14D, and OW-17D at the closed unlined landfill were analyzed for the NC Appendix I list of
parameters plus ‘detects’ and required MNA indicator parameters. Groundwater samples from the
Subtitle D landfills (active and closed) were analyzed for the NC Appendix I list of parameters. Surface
water samples were analyzed for the NC Appendix I list of parameters. The leachate sample was
analyzed for the NC leachate list of parameters and other permit-required parameters.
2.5 March 2016 Sampling Results
Analytical results from groundwater, surface water, and leachate samples from the March 2016 water
quality monitoring event are presented in the following sections.
2.5.1 Closed Unlined Landfill
Analytical results for the March 2016 groundwater samples at the closed unlined landfill are summarized
in Table 6. Field parameters for the groundwater samples at the closed unlined landfill are summarized in
Table 7. The laboratory certificates-of-analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory data reviews for
the sampling event are included in Appendix B.
At the closed unlined landfill, two inorganic constituents (barium and cobalt) were detected at
concentrations above their respective Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSLs) in samples from one or more
downgradient monitoring wells during the March 2016. Eleven organic constituents (benzene;
chlorobenzene; dichlorodifluoromethane; 1,4-dichlorobenzene; 1,1-dichloroethane; 1,1-dichloroethene;
May 2016 7 0939-668715

cis-1,2-dichloroethene; 1,2-dichloropropane; tetrachloroethene; trichloroethene; and vinyl chloride) were
detected above their respective SWSLs in samples from one or more downgradient monitoring wells at
the closed unlined landfill during the March 2016 event, as they have been during previous sampling
events.
One NC Appendix I inorganic constituent (zinc) was detected above the SWSL in upstream surface water
monitoring point SW-3 during the March 2016 event. No NC Appendix I organic constituents were
detected above the SWSLs in samples from surface water monitoring points associated with the closed
unlined landfill during the March 2016 event. The surface water analytical results are summarized in
Table 8 and the field parameters are summarized in Table 9.
2.5.2 Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Analytical results for the March 2016 groundwater samples at the closed Subtitle D landfill are
summarized in Table 10. Field parameters for the groundwater samples at the closed Subtitle D landfill
are summarized in Table 11. The laboratory certificates-of-analysis, chain-of-custody form, and
laboratory data reviews for the sampling event are included in Appendix B.
Four NC Appendix I inorganic constituents (barium, chromium, cobalt, and zinc) were detected above
their respective SWSLs in samples from one or more downgradient monitoring wells during the March
2016 event. There were no NC Appendix I organic constituents detected above the SWSL in samples at
the closed Subtitle D landfill during the March 2016 event.
One NC Appendix I inorganic constituents (zinc) was detected above the SWSL in the surface water
monitoring points for this facility during the March 2016 event. No NC Appendix I organic constituents
were detected above the SWSLs in samples from surface water monitoring points associated with the
closed unlined landfill during the March 2016 event. The surface water analytical results are summarized
in Table 8 and the field parameters are summarized in Table 9.
The leachate sampling results are summarized in Table 14. Concentrations of detected constituents were
generally consistent with historical data.
2.5.3 Active Subtitle D Landfill
Analytical results for the March 2016 groundwater samples at the active Subtitle D landfill are
summarized in Table 12. Field parameters for the groundwater samples at the active Subtitle D landfill
are summarized in Table 13. The laboratory certificates-of-analysis, chain-of-custody form, and
laboratory data reviews for the sampling event are included in Appendix B.
At the active Subtitle D landfill, two NC Appendix I inorganic constituents (barium and cobalt) were
detected at concentrations above the SWSLs in the sample from one or more downgradient monitoring
wells during the March 2016 event. No NC Appendix I organic constituents were detected in groundwater
samples above the SWSLs during this event at the active Subtitle D facility.
May 2016 8 0939-668715

As presented on Table 8, no NC Appendix I inorganic constituents were detected above the SWSLs from
surface water points associated with the active Subtitle D landfill during the March 2016 event. The
surface water analytical results are summarized in Table 8 and the field parameters are summarized in
Table 9.
The leachate sampling results are summarized in Table 14. Concentrations of detected constituents were
generally consistent with historical data.
3.0 LABORATORY AND FIELD QA/QC
A field blank was collected by Golder personnel as part of the March 2016 groundwater, surface water,
and leachate sampling event. In addition to the field blank, a laboratory-prepared trip blank accompanied
the volatile sample containers for the March 2016 sampling event to and from the laboratory. ENCO
analyzed the field blank for the NC Appendix I list of parameters plus mercury, tin,
dichlorodifluoromethane, and naphthalene and the trip blank for NC Appendix I VOCs plus
dichlorodifluoromethane, and naphthalene. Reviews of the laboratory data were performed by Golder
personnel and are presented in Appendix B.
Antimony was detected in the field blank and lab blank at estimated concentrations. Also, lactic acid was
detected in the method blank at an estimated concentration. Based on data reviews performed by
Golder, the concentrations of antimony are considered blank-qualified in the following samples:
MW-1RR, OW-3, OW-4, OW-11, OW-12, OW-14D, MW-6D, MW-13, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-17,
NBC-1, and NBC-2. The concentrations of lactic acid are considered blank-qualified for OW-10D,
OW-12, and OW-14D.
4.0 DATA EVALUATION
The results of the data evaluations are presented in the following sections.
4.1 March 2016 Groundwater and Surface Water Quality Standard Comparisons
The concentrations of detected NC Appendix I or NC Appendix II inorganic and organic constituents in
samples collected from monitoring wells at each landfill are to be compared to their applicable NC 2L
Water Quality Standards (NC 2L Standards) or Solid Waste Section Groundwater Protection Standards
(GWPS). Concentrations of NC Appendix I inorganic and organic constituents in samples collected from
surface water monitoring points are to be compared to applicable surface water standards. The results of
comparisons to groundwater and surface water quality standards are presented in the following sections.
4.1.1 Closed Unlined Landfill
As presented in Table 6, barium and cobalt were detected in the sample from OW-3 at concentrations
above their respective SWSLs and NC 2L Standards and/or GWPSs at the closed unlined facility. As
described below, the concentrations were statistically determined to be below background and no further
action is warranted. Cobalt was also detected at a concentration below the SWSL, but above the GWPS,
May 2016 9 0939-668715

in the sample from downgradient well OW-4. Vanadium was detected at concentrations below the SWSL,
but above the GWPS, in samples from downgradient wells OW-6, OW-7DA, OW-10D, OW-11, and OW-
14D. These inorganic constituents have been detected at similar concentrations during previous events.
Eleven NC Appendix I organic constituents (benzene; chlorobenzene; dichlorodifluoromethane;
1,4-dichlorobenzene; 1,1-dichloroethane; 1-1-dichloroethene; cis-1,2-dichloroethene;
1,2-dichloropropane; tetrachloroethene; trichloroethene; and vinyl chloride) were detected at
concentrations that exceeded their respective SWSLs and NC 2L Standards in samples from one or more
downgradient wells during the March 2016 event. Benzene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene were detected in
the samples from OW-3 and OW-4 at concentrations above their respective SWSLs and NC 2L
Standards. 1,1-Dichloroethane was detected in the sample from OW-10D at a concentration above its
SWSL and NC 2L Standard. Cis-1,2-dichloroethene and 1,2-dichloropropane were detected in the
sample from OW-3 at concentrations above their respective SWSLs and NC 2L Standards.
Tetrachlorothene and trichloroethene were detected in the samples from OW-4 and OW-10D at
concentrations above their respective SWSLs and NC 2L Standards. Trichloroethene was also detected
at OW-17D above the SWSL and NC 2L Standard. Vinyl chloride was detected at concentrations above
SWSLs and the NC 2L Standard at OW-3, OW-4, and OW-10 (estimated). The concentrations of organic
constituents in groundwater samples from the closed unlined landfill are generally consistent with
historical data.
As presented in Table 8, no NC Appendix I inorganic or organic constituents were detected above their
applicable surface water standards in surface water monitoring points associated with the closed unlined
landfill during the March 2016 event.
4.1.2 Closed Subtitle D Landfill
As presented in Table 10, two NC Appendix I inorganic constituents (chromium and cobalt) were detected
above their respective SWSLs and applicable groundwater standards in samples from one or more
downgradient monitoring wells during the March 2016 event at the closed Subtitle D facility. Chromium
was detected above the SWSL and NC 2L Standard in the sample from MW-11 and cobalt was detected
at a concentration above the SWSL and GWPS in the sample from MW-6. As described below, the
chromium and cobalt concentrations were statistically evaluated and were determined to be
representative of background conditions.
Cobalt was also detected in the sample MW-7 at a concentration below the SWSL, but above the GWPS.
Vanadium was detected at concentrations below the SWSL, but above the NC 2L Standard, in samples
from downgradient wells MW-6 and MW-6D. No further action is warranted for these estimated
detections and concentrations are generally consistent with historical data.
No NC Appendix I organic constituents or ‘detects’ were detected at concentrations that exceeded their
respective SWSLs and groundwater standards during the March 2016 event at the closed Subtitle D
landfill. As presented in Table 8, no NC Appendix I inorganic or organic constituents were detected
May 2016 10 0939-668715

above their applicable surface water standards in surface water monitoring points associated with the
closed Subtitle D landfill during the March 2016 event.
4.1.3 Active Subtitle D Landfill
As presented in Table 12, one NC Appendix I inorganic constituent (cobalt) was detected above the
SWSL and applicable groundwater standards in the sample from downgradient well MW-19 during the
March 2016 event. As described below, the cobalt concentration was statistically determined to be below
background and no further action is warranted. Cobalt was detected at concentrations below the SWSL
but above the NC 2L Standard from downgradient wells MW-18 and MW-22. Barium was detected at
concentrations above the SWSL but below the NC 2L at downgradient wells MW-13, MW-15, MW-16,
MW-20, and MW-22. Because the concentrations of vanadium are below the SWSL, no further action is
warranted for these detections.
No NC Appendix I organic constituents were detected above the SWSLs and applicable groundwater
standards during the March 2016. As presented in Table 8, no NC Appendix I inorganic or organic
constituents were detected at concentrations that exceeded the applicable surface water standards in
samples from surface water monitoring points associated with the active Subtitle D landfill during the
event.
4.2 March 2016 Statistical Evaluations
In order to determine the source of the above-standard quantifiable groundwater concentrations,
statistical analyses were performed as allowed by 15A NCAC 13B.1632 (g) and (h). A summary of the
statistical evaluations for each landfill are presented in the following sections.
4.2.1 Closed Unlined Landfill
Barium and cobalt were detected above their respective SWSLs and applicable groundwater standards
during the March 2016 event in samples from one or more downgradient wells of the closed unlined
landfill. The concentrations of the constituents detected in downgradient monitoring wells were
statistically evaluated to determine if the reported concentrations exceeded the facility background
concentrations. The statistical worksheets are presented as Appendix C. The concentrations of barium
and cobalt were determined to not be statistically significant and are interpreted to represent naturally
occurring conditions.
4.2.2 Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Chromium and cobalt were detected above their respective SWSLs and applicable groundwater
standards in samples from one or more downgradient monitoring wells during the March 2016 event at
the closed Subtitle D facility. The concentrations of the constituents detected in downgradient monitoring
wells were statistically evaluated to determine if the reported concentrations exceeded the facility
background concentrations. The statistical worksheets are presented as Appendix C. The
May 2016 11 0939-668715

concentrations of chromium and cobalt were determined to be below background and are interpreted to
represent naturally occurring conditions.
4.2.3 Active Subtitle D Landfill
Cobalt was detected above the SWSL and applicable groundwater standard in the samples from one or
more downgradient groundwater monitoring wells at the active Subtitle D facility during the March 2016
event. The concentrations of cobalt were statistically evaluated to determine if the reported
concentrations exceeded the facility background concentrations. The statistical worksheets are
presented as Appendix C. The concentrations of cobalt were determined to be below background and
are interpreted to represent naturally occurring conditions.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Due to the continued presence of VOCs above applicable groundwater standards in monitoring wells
associated with the closed unlined landfill, the CCUC will continue to monitor the facility in accordance
with the requirements of the Corrective Action Plan. The CCUC will monitor the closed Subtitle D facility
and active Subtitle D facility in accordance with the Detection Monitoring Program, as outlined in Title 15A
NCAC 13B.1633. The next compliance monitoring event for this facility is tentatively scheduled for
September 2016.
6.0 REFERENCES
Butler, J.R., and D.T. Secor, Jr., 1991. The Central Piedmont (Chapter 4) in J.W. Horton, Jr. and V.A.
Zullo, eds., The Geology of the Carolinas (Carolina Geological Society Fiftieth Anniversary Volume): The
University of Tennessee Press, pp. 2, 4, 24, 36, 44-45.
HDR, November 2003. Assessment of Corrective Measures Report, Hanes Landfill, Winston-Salem,
North Carolina.
HDR, July 2008. Semi-Annual Monitoring Report; Spring 2008. Hanes Mill Road Sanitary Landfill,
Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
North Carolina Geologic Survey, 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina
North Carolina Geologic Survey, 2004. Modified from 1991 Generalized Geologic Map (digital
representation
g:\projects\winston-salem-forsyth county\groundwater\wqmr\march 2016\final_hanes_mill_1st_semi-annual_wqmr_2016.docx

TABLES
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
Monitoring Wells
TOC Elevation
(ft AMSL)
Date Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
03/27/09 853.84 42.98 811.38 8.75 803.22 6.15 808.95 18.17 796.48 5.04 801.17 18.92 803.15 3.54 795.78 4.36 800.68 5.73 800.41 3.54 795.44 5.03
10/08/09 854.47 42.35 811.15 8.98 802.25 7.12 806.11 21.01 793.91 7.61 797.74 22.35 799.94 6.75 792.61 7.53 797.92 8.49 797.60 6.35 793.36 7.11
03/16/10 855.74 41.08 811.60 8.53 803.85 5.52 810.84 16.28 797.08 4.44 801.95 18.14 804.01 2.68 796.26 3.88 801.77 4.64 800.92 3.03 795.94 4.53
09/08/10 856.37 40.45 811.29 8.84 802.29 7.08 807.09 20.03 793.77 7.75 798.12 21.97 800.59 6.10 792.21 7.93 798.50 7.91 797.83 6.12 792.65 7.82
03/21/11 855.53 41.29 811.52 8.61 803.33 6.04 809.07 18.05 796.28 5.24 800.99 19.10 803.38 3.31 794.86 5.28 800.07 6.34 800.30 3.65 795.23 5.24
09/12/11 855.54 41.28 811.22 8.91 802.13 7.24 806.53 20.59 794.08 7.44 798.36 21.73 800.63 6.06 792.32 7.82 798.40 8.01 798.14 5.81 793.57 6.90
03/12/12 854.98 41.84 811.42 8.71 803.08 6.29 808.76 18.36 795.73 5.79 800.81 19.28 802.87 3.82 795.24 4.90 800.41 6.00 800.15 3.80 795.11 5.36
10/01/12 854.38 42.44 811.68 8.45 802.58 6.79 805.61 21.51 794.41 7.11 798.84 21.25 801.02 5.67 793.09 7.05 798.20 8.21 799.15 4.80 794.03 6.44
03/11/13 854.13 42.69 811.83 8.30 803.54 5.83 808.60 18.52 796.60 4.92 801.20 18.89 803.18 3.51 795.89 4.25 800.51 5.90 800.59 3.36 795.63 4.84
09/09/13 856.98 39.84 811.55 8.58 802.63 6.74 808.48 18.64 795.34 6.18 799.71 20.38 801.77 4.92 793.87 6.27 799.80 6.61 798.95 5.00 794.23 6.24
03/12/14 856.95 39.87 811.77 8.36 803.88 5.49 809.70 17.42 797.22 4.30 802.03 18.06 803.86 2.83 796.56 3.58 801.35 5.06 800.97 2.98 796.07 4.40
09/08/14 857.42 39.40 810.97 9.16 802.15 7.22 805.82 21.30 793.83 7.69 797.68 22.41 799.77 6.92 792.29 7.85 797.86 8.55 797.43 6.52 793.22 7.25
03/09/15 849.91 46.91 811.56 8.57 803.02 6.35 807.97 19.15 795.67 5.85 800.89 19.20 802.84 3.85 782.47 17.67 800.06 6.35 800.29 3.66 795.51 4.96
09/14/15 854.70 42.12 811.42 8.71 801.61 7.76 805.23 21.89 793.58 7.94 797.43 22.66 799.59 7.10 791.83 8.31 797.41 9.00 797.94 6.01 793.12 7.35
03/07/16 856.28 40.54 811.87 8.26 803.29 6.08 810.00 17.12 796.61 4.91 801.40 18.69 803.19 3.50 795.72 4.42 801.20 5.21 800.47 3.48 795.39 5.08
MEAN 855.15 41.67 811.48 8.65 802.86 6.51 807.92 19.20 795.37 6.15 799.89 20.20 801.99 4.70 793.40 6.74 799.61 6.80 799.41 4.54 794.57 5.90
MAXIMUM 857.42 46.91 811.87 9.16 803.88 7.76 810.84 21.89 797.22 7.94 802.03 22.66 804.01 7.10 796.56 17.67 801.77 9.00 800.97 6.52 796.07 7.82
MINIMUM 849.91 39.40 810.97 8.26 801.61 5.49 805.23 16.28 793.58 4.30 797.43 18.06 799.59 2.68 782.47 3.58 797.41 4.64 797.43 2.98 792.65 4.40
Notes:ft AMSL = feet above mean sea level
TOC = top of casing
MW = monitoring well
OW = observation well
OW-17D
TABLE 1
Historical Static Water Level Data for the Closed Unlined Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
MW-1RR OW-3 OW-4 OW-6 OW-7DA OW-10D
Closed Unlined Landfill
OW-11 OW-12 OW-13D OW-14D
806.69 800.14 806.41 803.95 800.47820.09896.82 820.13 809.37 827.12 801.52
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
Monitoring Wells
TOC Elevation
(ft AMSL)
Date Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
03/27/09 839.83 27.95 839.42 28.47 829.51 15.82 826.07 10.84 822.36 21.24 825.58 19.65
10/08/09 838.86 28.92 838.50 29.39 827.96 17.37 824.91 12.00 821.27 22.33 823.91 21.32
03/16/10 840.94 26.84 840.57 27.32 830.45 14.88 826.66 10.25 823.02 20.58 827.38 17.85
09/08/10 839.56 28.22 839.15 28.74 828.37 16.96 825.04 11.87 821.27 22.33 824.65 20.58
03/21/11 840.17 27.61 839.93 27.96 829.52 15.81 826.12 10.79 822.51 21.09 825.58 19.65
09/12/11 839.27 28.51 839.03 28.86 827.91 17.42 825.06 11.85 819.95 23.65 824.02 21.21
03/12/12 840.26 27.52 839.71 28.18 829.44 15.89 825.96 10.95 820.99 22.61 825.61 19.62
10/01/12 839.08 28.70 838.76 29.13 828.24 17.09 825.60 11.31 820.10 23.50 823.48 21.75
03/11/13 840.20 27.58 839.77 28.12 829.71 15.62 826.51 10.40 821.75 21.85 825.85 19.38
09/09/13 840.24 27.54 839.78 28.11 829.18 16.15 825.64 11.27 820.48 23.12 825.80 19.43
03/12/14 841.19 26.59 840.61 27.28 830.43 14.90 826.64 10.27 821.85 21.75 826.70 18.53
09/08/14 839.87 27.91 839.60 28.29 828.36 16.97 825.25 11.66 819.99 23.61 823.78 21.45
03/09/15 840.44 27.34 839.98 27.91 829.63 15.70 826.36 10.55 822.79 20.81 825.31 19.92
09/14/15 838.98 28.80 838.60 29.29 827.29 18.04 824.60 12.31 819.65 23.95 823.08 22.15
03/07/16 841.03 26.75 840.39 27.50 830.27 15.06 826.31 10.60 821.35 22.25 827.25 17.98
MEAN 839.99 27.79 839.59 28.30 829.08 16.25 825.78 11.13 821.29 22.31 825.20 20.03
MAXIMUM 841.19 28.92 840.61 29.39 830.45 18.04 826.66 12.31 823.02 23.95 827.38 22.15
MINIMUM 838.86 26.59 838.50 27.28 827.29 14.88 824.60 10.25 819.65 20.58 823.08 17.85
Notes:ft AMSL = feet above mean sea level
TOC = top of casing
MW = monitoring well
OW = observation well
TABLE 2
Historical Static Water Level Data for the Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
845.23
Closed Subtitle D Landfill
MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-8 MW-9
867.78 867.89 845.33 836.91 843.60
MW-11
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
Monitoring Wells
TOC Elevation
(ft AMSL)
Date Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
DTW
(ft)
03/27/09 877.03 62.02 800.86 19.55 795.18 19.35 794.22 9.10 793.11 5.47 796.35 4.83 800.40 8.12 804.41 6.94 ------------
10/08/09 877.51 61.54 798.90 21.51 793.83 20.70 792.85 10.47 791.23 7.35 795.01 6.17 800.18 8.34 804.25 7.10 ------------
03/16/10 877.81 61.24 801.99 18.42 795.82 18.71 795.07 8.25 793.87 4.71 796.87 4.31 800.65 7.87 804.93 6.42 ------------
09/08/10 879.54 59.51 799.46 20.95 793.73 20.80 792.67 10.65 790.91 7.67 795.48 5.70 799.92 8.60 804.02 7.33 ------------
03/21/11 879.69 59.36 801.10 19.31 794.22 20.31 793.51 9.81 793.14 5.44 796.57 4.61 800.43 8.09 804.31 7.04 819.74 12.17 845.58 44.82 801.85 13.85
09/12/11 878.84 60.21 799.21 21.20 794.04 20.49 792.68 10.64 791.09 7.49 795.39 5.79 800.01 8.51 803.97 7.38 817.42 14.49 844.65 45.75 800.84 14.86
03/12/12 878.25 60.80 800.61 19.80 794.97 19.56 793.93 9.39 792.76 5.82 796.56 4.62 800.32 8.20 804.33 7.02 819.12 12.79 843.83 46.57 802.06 13.64
10/01/12 877.41 61.64 798.93 21.48 794.42 20.11 794.21 9.11 791.59 6.99 796.07 5.11 800.08 8.44 804.14 7.21 817.82 14.09 843.89 46.51 800.29 15.41
03/11/13 877.09 61.96 800.79 19.62 795.39 19.14 794.34 8.98 793.19 5.39 796.58 4.60 801.48 7.04 804.48 6.87 816.30 15.61 843.15 47.25 802.21 13.49
09/09/13 876.82 62.23 799.95 20.46 794.65 19.88 793.45 9.87 791.96 6.62 792.10 9.08 800.30 8.22 804.15 7.20 818.53 13.38 844.50 45.90 801.48 14.22
03/12/14 878.10 60.95 801.13 19.28 796.17 18.36 795.49 7.83 793.93 4.65 797.06 4.12 800.90 7.62 805.09 6.26 821.76 10.15 845.42 44.98 802.82 12.88
09/08/14 879.89 59.16 798.67 21.74 794.10 20.43 792.72 10.60 791.01 7.57 795.50 5.68 800.10 8.42 804.10 7.25 817.41 14.50 847.11 43.29 800.25 15.45
03/09/15 879.86 59.19 800.37 20.04 795.40 19.13 794.39 8.93 793.53 5.05 796.80 4.38 800.63 7.89 804.55 6.80 820.34 11.57 845.55 44.85 802.10 13.60
09/14/15 878.54 60.51 798.25 22.16 793.66 20.87 792.36 10.96 790.68 7.90 795.17 6.01 799.81 8.71 804.12 7.23 817.24 14.67 844.52 45.88 799.68 16.02
03/07/16 877.93 61.12 801.26 19.15 795.43 19.10 794.51 8.81 793.49 5.09 796.85 4.33 800.53 7.99 804.35 7.00 819.75 12.16 845.00 45.40 802.62 13.08
MEAN 878.29 60.76 800.10 20.31 794.73 19.80 793.76 9.56 792.37 6.21 795.89 5.29 800.38 8.14 804.35 7.00 818.68 13.23 844.84 45.56 801.47 14.23
MAXIMUM 879.89 62.23 801.99 22.16 796.17 20.87 795.49 10.96 793.93 7.90 797.06 9.08 801.48 8.71 805.09 7.38 821.76 15.61 847.11 47.25 802.82 16.02
MINIMUM 876.82 59.16 798.25 18.42 793.66 18.36 792.36 7.83 790.68 4.65 792.10 4.12 799.81 7.04 803.97 6.26 816.30 10.15 843.15 43.29 799.68 12.88
Notes:ft AMSL = feet above mean sea level
TOC = top of casing
MW = monitoring well
OW = observation well
814.53 803.32 798.58 801.18 808.5
TABLE 3
Historical Static Water Level Data for the Active Subtitle D Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
MW-21 MW-22
811.35
Active Subtitle D Landfill
MW-12 MW-13 MW-14 MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20
831.91 890.40 815.70939.05 820.41
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
Gradient Calculation
Segment Flow Direction Gradient Segment
Length (feet)
Gradient Segment
Elevations (feet)
Horizontal Gradient
(i, feet)
Effective
Porosity
(ne)
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(K, cm/sec)
Velocity
(Vgw, feet/year)
850
820
850
800
840
800
Gradient Calculation
Segment Flow Direction Gradient Segment
Length (feet)
Gradient Segment
Elevations (feet)
Horizontal Gradient
(i, feet)
Effective
Porosity
(ne)
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(K, cm/sec)
Velocity
(Vgw, feet/year)
860
810
840
800
870
800
Notes: Horizontal velocities based on the modified Darcy equation Vgw = Ki/ne.
Value for K is for the saprolite aquifer as presented in the HDR, 2003.
Value for ne is an estimated effective porosity used in previous HDR reports.
131.07
i 6 SE 2926 0.0239 0.20 5.68E-04 70.30
i 5 E 897 0.0446 0.20 5.68E-04
48.08
Active Landfill - March 2016
i 4 E 946 0.0529 0.20 5.68E-04 155.38
i 3 SW 2445 0.0164 0.20 5.68E-04
5.68E-04 56.04
i 2 SW 2552 0.0196 0.20 5.68E-04 57.57
i 1 WSW 1573 0.0191 0.20
TABLE 4
Summary of Estimated Horizontal Flow Velocities
City of Winston-Salem Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Closed Landfill - March 2016
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
Northing Easting
MW-1RR 5/31/2001 891222.48 1620651.44 893.60 896.82 2 59.0 44.0-59.0 Bedrock
OW-3 9/13/1994 888851.47 1620210.52 817.75 820.13 2 16.0 6.0-16.0 Saprolite
OW-4 9/14/1994 888381.20 1619630.70 806.83 809.37 2 16.0 6.0-16.0 Saprolite
OW-6 9/13/1994 890727.15 1618831.90 824.74 827.12 2 27.0 12.0-27.0 Saprolite
OW-7DA 5/21/2001 888763.30 1618927.54 798.80 801.52 2 115.0 110.0-115.0 Bedrock
OW-10D 5/3/2001 889765.20 1618759.62 817.30 820.09 2 80.0 75.0-80.0 Bedrock
OW-11 9/15/1994 890240.94 1618632.60 804.47 806.69 2 16.0 6.0-16.0 Saprolite
OW-12 8/1/1999 888315.57 1619056.47 798.40 800.14 2 15.0 5.0-15.0 Saprolite
OW-13D 5/15/2001 889353.88 1618800.48 803.80 806.41 2 115.0 110.0-115.0 Bedrock
OW-14D 5/21/2001 889587.90 1618501.92 801.20 803.95 2 80.0 70.0-80.0 Bedrock
OW-17D 5/10/2001 888909.84 1618684.17 798.80 801.54 2 80.0 70.0-80.0 Bedrock
MW-1RR 5/31/2001 891222.48 1620651.44 893.60 896.82 2 59.0 44.0-59.0 Bedrock
MW-6 1/20/1997 890347.86 1621345.34 865.60 867.78 2 35.0 20.0-35.0 Saprolite
MW-6D 1/20/1997 890341.76 1621318.45 865.60 867.89 2 65.0 54.5-64.5 Saprollite/PWR
MW-7 1/22/1997 891367.95 1619472.34 843.10 845.33 2 25.0 10.0-25.0 Saprolite
MW-8 1/21/1997 891259.86 1619183.64 833.80 836.91 2 20.0 5.0-20.0 Saprolite
MW-9 1/23/1997 891177.69 1619026.90 840.40 843.60 2 30.0 15.0-30.0 Saprollite/PWR
MW-11 1/23/1997 890405.22 1616810.23 843.20 845.23 2 30.0 15.0-30.0 Saprolite
MW-12 7/22/2002 890405.22 1616810.23 936.80 939.05 2 82.0 67.0-82.0 Bedrock
MW-13 7/24/2002 889497.99 1618313.81 818.50 820.41 2 32.0 17.0-32.0 Saprolite
MW-14 7/22/2002 888763.43 1618559.47 812.50 814.53 2 29.0 14.0-29.0 Saprolite
MW-15 7/23/2002 888370.53 1618517.81 800.90 803.32 2 22.0 5.0-20.0 Saprolite
MW-16 7/22/2002 887727.16 1618443.32 796.40 798.58 2 20.0 5.0-20.0 Saprolite
MW-17 7/23/2002 887333.74 1617864.55 799.10 801.18 2 20.0 5.0-20.0 Saprolite
MW-18 7/23/2002 887638.88 1617424.75 806.30 811.35 2 19.0 4.0-19.0 Saprollite/PWR
MW-19 7/23/2002 887899.38 1617138.22 809.10 811.35 2 20.0 5.0-20.0 Saprolite
MW-20 1/12/2009 888799.88 1616654.25 829.03 831.91 2 25.0 15.0-25.0 Saprolite
MW-21 1/20/2009 889414.61 1616730.40 888.72 890.40 2 56.0 46.0-56.0 PWR
MW-22 1/13/2009 889935.47 1618145.25 812.81 815.70 2 28.0 18.0-28.0 Saprolite
Notes:ft AMSL = feet above mean sea level
ft bgs = feet below ground surface
PWR = partially weathered rock
Well construction information collected from HDR historical reports.
Well MW-9 was re-surveyed after repairs were made in September 2011.
Coordinates Well
Diameter
(in)
Active Subtitle D Landfill Monitoring Wells
TABLE 5
Summary of Well Construction Information
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Closed Unlined Landfill Monitoring Wells
Closed Subtitle D Landfill Monitoring Wells
Well
Identification
Construction
Date
Well
Depth
(ft bgs)
Geology of
Screened
Interval
Screened
Interval
(ft bgs)
Measuring
Point
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
Ground
Surface
Elevation
(ft AMSL)
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-1RR OW-3 OW-4 OW-6 OW-7DA OW-10D OW-11 OW-12 OW-13D OW-14D OW-17D
Antimony ug/L 3/7/2016 1 6 0.220 6 0.437 B 0.621 B 0.709 B ND ND ND 0.280 B 0.420 B ND 0.301 B ND 0.655 J
Arsenic ug/L 3/7/2016 10 --5.40 10 ND 7.36 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Barium ug/L 3/7/2016 700 2000 1.00 100 27.6 J 1090 149 48.2 J 4.95 J 35.0 J 124 45.0 J 3.98 J 20.7 J 30.3 J ND
Chromium ug/L 3/7/2016 10 100 1.40 10 ND ND ND 6.86 J 2.23 J ND ND 3.29 J ND ND ND ND
Cobalt ug/L 3/7/2016 1 --1.10 10 ND 12.7 2.51 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Nickel ug/L 3/7/2016 100 --1.80 50 ND 17.9 J 4.22 J ND ND 3.07 J 2.21 J ND ND ND ND ND
Thallium ug/L 3/7/2016 0.28 2 0.110 5.5 ND 0.118 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Vanadium ug/L 3/7/2016 0.3 --1.40 25 ND ND ND 2.87 J 6.51 J 1.60 J 1.51 J ND ND 3.67 J ND ND
Benzene ug/L 3/7/2016 1 5 0.15 1 ND 4.9 1.2 ND ND 1.2 ND ND ND ND ND ND
Chlorobenzene ug/L 3/7/2016 50 100 0.17 3 ND 6.7 1.2 J ND ND 0.57 J ND ND ND ND ND ND
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 3/7/2016 20 600 0.19 5 ND 2.6 J 0.98 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 3/7/2016 6 75 0.19 1 ND 29 6.9 ND ND 2.1 ND ND ND ND 0.44 J ND
Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/L 3/7/2016 1000 --0.20 5 ND ND 1.2 J ND 0.63 J 5.0 ND 0.71 J ND ND 0.77 J ND
1,1-Dichloroethane ug/L 3/7/2016 6 --0.13 5 ND 3.1 J 3.5 J 0.57 J ND 10 ND ND 0.59 J 0.94 J 3.8 J ND
1,1-Dichloroethene ug/L 3/7/2016 7 7 0.21 5 ND ND ND 5.8 ND 0.44 J ND ND ND 0.49 J ND ND
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L 3/7/2016 70 70 0.15 5 ND 85 19 ND ND 16 ND ND ND 0.63 J 10 ND
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/L 3/7/2016 100 100 0.21 5 ND 3.6 J 0.72 J ND ND 0.48 J ND ND ND ND ND ND
1,2-Dichloropropane ug/L 3/7/2016 0.6 5 0.10 1 ND 1.7 0.48 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Methylene chloride ug/L 3/7/2016 1 5 0.23 1 ND ND ND ND ND 0.68 J ND ND ND ND ND ND
Tetrachlorothene ug/L 3/7/2016 0.7 5 0.17 1 ND ND 5.1 ND ND 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND
Trichloroethene ug/L 3/7/2016 3 5 0.15 1 ND 0.49 J 6.6 ND ND 7.1 ND ND ND ND 7.4 ND
Trichlorofluoromethane ug/L 3/7/2016 2000 --0.24 1 ND ND ND ND ND 0.66 J ND ND ND ND ND ND
Vinyl chloride ug/L 3/7/2016 0.03 2 0.32 1 ND 78 1.4 ND ND 0.79 J ND ND ND ND ND ND
Sulfide ug/L 3/7/2016 ----10 1000 ND ND ND ----ND --ND --ND 11 J ND
Chloride mg/L 3/7/2016 250 250 2.20 --65 220 40 ----3.8 J --3.1 J --3.5 J 3.6 J ND
Nitrate as N mg/L 3/7/2016 10 10 0.025 10 0.84 J ND ND ----ND --0.33 J --0.17 J ND ND
Sulfate as SO4 mg/L 3/7/2016 250 --2.90 250 5.7 J 6.9 J 3.6 J ----ND --0.45 J --0.47 J ND ND
Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 3/7/2016 ----14 --36.0 180 110 ----110 --49 --66 980 ND
Total Organic Carbon mg/L 3/7/2016 ----340 --0.7 J 17.0 1.8 ----0.54 J --0.37 J --ND 0.39 J ND
Pyruvic Acid ug/L 3/7/2016 ----0.012 --ND ND ND ----ND --0.012 J --ND ND ND
Acetic Acid ug/L 3/7/2016 ----0.16 --ND 19 1.1 ----ND --ND --ND ND ND
Propionic Acid ug/L 3/7/2016 ----0.065 --ND 13 ND ----0.19 --ND --ND ND ND
Butyric Acid ug/L 3/7/2016 ----0.089 --ND ND ND ----ND --ND --ND ND ND
Nitrate/Nitrite as N mg/L 3/7/2016 ----340 --0.84 ND ND ----ND --0.33 --0.17 ND ND
iso-Hexanoic Acid ug/L 3/7/2016 ----0.44 --ND ND ND ----0.57 B --0.59 B --0.58 B ND 0.85
Lactic Acid/HIBA (2-Hydroxyisobutyric Acid)ug/L 3/7/2016 ----0.095 --ND 26 0.87 ----0.17 --ND --ND ND ND
Hydrogen (no Standard)nM 04/07/11 ----0.088 --1.4 1.3 1.3 ----1.3 --1.3 --1.4 1.6 --
Ferrous Iron (field)mg/L 03/07/16 --------0.0 2.5 0.0 ----0.0 --0.0 --0.0 0.0 --
Notes:mg/L =milligrams per liter
ug/L =micrograms per liter
nM =nano mols
NC 2L =North Carolina Water Quality Standard
GWPS =Solid Waste Section Groundwater Protection Standard
EPA MCL =United States Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Limit
J =estimated value
B =blank-qualified data
ND =not detected above the laboratory detection limit
-- =no data or no limit established
# =EPA Action Level
* = EPA Secondary MCL
Blanks =field, trip and method blanks
Bold =concentrations above applicable GWPS and/or NC 2L have been bolded.
Shaded = concentrations above applicable EPA MCL have been shaded.
MDL =laboratory method detection limit
1.The following dilutions were noted for the March 2016 event: chloride at OW-3 (3x).
SWS
Reporting
Limit
Upgradient Downgradient
Blanks
TABLE 6
Summary of Detected Constituents in Monitoring Wells at the Closed Unlined Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
NC2L/
GWPS MDLEPA MCLDetected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample
Date
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-1RR OW-3 OW-4 OW-6 OW-7DA OW-10D OW-11 OW-12 OW-13D OW-14D OW-17D
pH (field)S.U.03/07/16 7.21 5.58 5.66 6.05 7.72 6.22 6.81 6.11 7.28 6.64 6.47
Specific Conductance (field)µS/cm 03/07/16 322 1030 364 103 173 231 258 123 278 162 207
Temperature (field)°C 03/07/16 15.9 14.8 14.5 16.1 14.8 14.8 13.6 13.5 14.5 14.6 14.4
Turbidity (field)NTU 03/07/16 1.30 3.07 1.61 9.70 0.35 0.65 1.08 1.64 0.96 0.46 0.33
Oxidation-Reduction (field)mV 03/07/16 57.0 -5.6 116.7 41.6 30.2 48.3 69.6 145.1 -117.0 87.1 9.1
Dissolved Oxygen (field)mg/L 03/07/16 3.68 0.36 0.37 1.16 5.38 0.71 0.78 2.26 0.43 1.51 0.55
Notes:mg/L =milligrams per liter
S.U. =Standard Units
NTU =nephelometric turbidity units
nM =nano mols
ND =not detected above the laboratory detection limit
uS/cm=microsiemens per centimeter
mV =millivolts
oC =degrees Celsius
-- =no data or no limit established
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample
Date
TABLE 7
Summary of Field Parameters from Monitoring Wells at the Closed Unlined Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Upgradient Downgradient
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
NBC-1 NBC-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-1 SW-2
Antimony ug/L 03/07/16 ------0.220 6 0.329 B 0.242 B ND ND ND ND 0.347 J
Barium ug/L 03/07/16 200000 ----1.00 100 73.1 J 55.5 J 84.6 J 97.9 J 72.8 J 70.2 J ND
Cobalt ug/L 03/07/16 ------1.10 10 1.21 J 1.13 J 1.25 J 2.03 J ND ND ND
Nickel ug/L 03/07/16 --140 16 1.80 50 ND ND ND 2.23 J ND ND ND
Vanadium ug/L 03/07/16 ------1.40 25 ND ND 1.74 J ND 1.77 J 2.47 J ND
Zinc ug/L 03/07/16 --36 36 3.80 10 5.03 J ND 15.9 5.29 J ND ND ND
Notes:ug/L =micrograms per liter
mg/L =milligrams per liter
J =estimated value
B =blank-qualified data
ND =not detected above the laboratory detection limit
-- =no data or no limit established
Blanks =field, trip and method blanks
Bold = concentrations above the Surface Water Standards have been bolded.
SW Standard =NC Freshwater Aquatic Life or Human Health Standards as defined in 15A NCAC 2B (Grassy Creek - Class C Waters)
MDL =laboratory method detection limit
* Surface Water Standard is an Action Level Standard
** Surface Water Standard is a Narrative Standard
1
2
NBC-1 and SW-3 are upstream monitoring points and NBC-2 and SW-4 are downstream monitoring points for the Closed unlined landfill and Closed Subtitle D landfill.
SW-1 is an upstream monitoring point and SW-2 is a downstream monitoring point for the Active Subtitle D landfill.
Active Subtitle D Landfill
Blanks
TABLE 8
Summary of Detected Constituents in Surface Water Monitoring Points
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample Date SWS Reporting
Limit
Closed Unlined and Closed Subtitle D LandfillsChronic
Aquatic Life
Standard
MDL
Freshwater
Aquatic Life
Chronic
Standard
Human Health
Standard
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
NBC-1 NBC-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-1 SW-2
pH (field)S.U.03/07/16 7.00 6.62 6.66 6.74 6.95 6.75
Specific Conductance (field)uS/cm 03/07/16 140 154 151 250 87 90
Temperature (field)°C 03/07/16 15.5 14.0 14.2 14.2 12.5 12.4
Turbidity (field)NTU 03/07/16 5.61 0.85 12.5 9.25 15.3 11.8
Oxidation-Reduction Potential (field)mV 03/07/16 14.1 88.7 35.9 35.0 19.1 113.5
Dissolved Oxygen (field)mg/L 03/07/16 10.50 9.70 8.71 9.85 10.33 10.63
Notes:mg/L =milligrams per liter
S.U. =Standard Units
NTU =nephelometric turbidity units
oC =degrees Celsius
uS/cm=microsiemens per centimeter
mV =millivolts
-- =no data or no limit established
1.
2.
*Specific Conductance value for SW-4 during the September 2015 event is considered suspect and is believed
to be a transcription error.
SW-1 is an upstream monitoring point and SW-2 is a downstream monitoring point for the Active Subtitle D landfill.
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample Date
Closed Unlined and Closed Subtitle D Landfills Active Subtitle D Landfill
TABLE 9
Summary of Field Parameters from Surface Water Monitoring Points
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
NBC-1 and SW-3 are upstream monitoring points and NBC-2 and SW-4 are downstream monitoring points for the Closed unlined landfill
and Closed Subtitle D landfill.
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-1RR MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-8 MW-9 MW-11
Antimony ug/L 3/7/2016 1 6 0.220 6 0.437 B ND 0.250 B ND ND ND ND 0.347 J
Barium ug/L 3/7/2016 700 2000 1.0 100 27.6 J 663 50.7 J 90.9 J 32.5 J 105 104 ND
Beryllium ug/L 3/7/2016 1 4 0.100 1 ND ND ND 0.256 J ND ND 0.135 J ND
Chromium ug/L 3/7/2016 10 100 1.40 10 ND ND 1.55 J 1.49 J ND ND 11.2 ND
Cobalt ug/L 3/7/2016 1 --1.10 10 ND 16.0 ND 4.45 J ND ND ND ND
Nickel ug/L 3/7/2016 100 --1.80 50 ND ND ND ND ND ND 7.31 J ND
Vanadium ug/L 3/7/2016 0.3 --1.40 25 ND 2.08 J 2.37 J ND ND ND ND ND
Zinc ug/L 3/7/2016 1000 5000*3.80 10 ND ND ND 5.52 J ND ND 12.4 ND
1,1-Dichloroethene ug/L 3/7/2016 7 7 0.21 5 ND ND ND ND ND 1.2 J 0.47 J ND
Notes:ug/L =micrograms per liter
mg/L =milligrams per liter
NC 2L =North Carolina Water Quality Standard
GWPS =Solid Waste Section Groundwater Protection Standard
EPA MCL =United States Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Limit
J =estimated value
B =blank-qualified data
S.U. =Standard Units
NTU =nephelometric turbidity units
ND =not detected above the laboratory detection limit
TABLE 10
Summary of Detected Constituents in Monitoring Wells at the Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample
Date
SWS Reporting
Limit
Upgradient DowngradientNC2L /
GWPS BlanksMDLEPA MCL
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-1RR MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-8 MW-9 MW-11
pH (field)S.U.03/07/16 7.21 6.37 6.13 5.14 6.05 5.67 5.62
Specific Conductance (field)µS/cm 03/07/16 322 700 219 26 116 82 75
Temperature (field)°C 03/07/16 15.9 17.8 19.1 14.2 14.3 15.1 17.1
Turbidity (field)NTU 03/07/16 1.30 3.51 1.35 3.09 7.85 1.54 3.84
Oxidation-Reduction (field)mV 03/07/16 57.0 -76.0 133.1 274.7 106.1 203.4 206.0
Dissolved Oxygen (field)mg/L 03/07/16 3.68 0.84 4.08 7.06 1.64 4.90 6.57
Notes:mg/L =milligrams per liter
S.U. =Standard Units
NTU =nephelometric turbidity units
uS/cm=microsiemens per centimeter
mV =millivolts
oC =degrees Celsius
-- =no data or no limits established
Downgradient
TABLE 11
Summary of Field Parameters for Monitoring Wells at the Closed Subtitle D Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample
Date
Upgradient
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-12 MW-13 MW-14 MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-21 MW-22
Antimony ug/L 3/7/2016 1 6 0.220 6 ND 0.849 B 0.538 B 0.378 B 0.390 B 0.280 B ND ND ND ND ND 0.347 J
Barium ug/L 3/7/2016 700 2000 1.00 100 35.7 J 106 84.9 J 102 105 51.6 J 92.3 J 42.1 J 112 39.8 J 190 ND
Beryllium ug/L 3/7/2016 4 4 0.100 1 ND ND 0.161 J ND ND ND 0.131 J ND ND ND ND ND
Chromium ug/L 3/7/2016 10 100 1.40 10 ND 7.11 J 1.94 J 5.72 J 3.60 J 1.82 J 1.70 J ND 1.50 J 1.94 J 2.55 J ND
Cobalt ug/L 3/7/2016 1 --1.10 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.95 J 22.5 ND ND 2.14 J ND
Nickel ug/L 3/7/2016 100 --1.80 50 ND ND ND ND ND ND 3.37 J 5.10 J 2.26 J 2.78 J ND ND
Vanadium ug/L 3/7/2016 0.3 --1.53 25 2.25 J 4.86 J ND 4.09 J 3.18 J 2.96 J 2.21 J 3.09 J ND 1.75 J 2.24 J ND
Zinc ug/L 3/7/2016 1000 5000*3.80 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND 9.08 J ND 8.42 J ND ND ND
Chloroform ug/L 3/7/2016 70 80 0.18 5 ND ND 1.1 J ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Notes:ug/L =micrograms per liter
mg/L milligrams per liter
NC 2L =North Carolina Water Quality Standard
EPA MCL =United States Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Limit
GWPS =Solid Waste Section Groundwater Protection Standard
J =estimated value
B =blank-qualified data
ND =not detected above the laboratory detection limit
-- =no data or no limits established
# =EPA Action Level
* = EPA Secondary MCL
Blanks =field, trip and method blanks
Bold = concentrations above applicable GWPS and/or NC 2L have been bolded.
Shaded = concentrations above applicable EPA MCL have been shaded.
TABLE 12
Summary of Detected Constituents in Monitoring Wells at the Active Subtitle D Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample Date SWS Reporting
Limit
Upgradient Downgradient
NC2L / GWPS BlanksMDLEPA MCL
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-12 MW-13 MW-14 MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-21 MW-22
pH (field)S.U.03/07/16 6.61 6.17 5.52 5.84 6.09 6.23 5.28 6.11 5.30 6.28 6.21
Specific Conductance (field)µS/cm 03/07/16 88 94 58 97 107 63 44 100 26 53 155
Temperature (field)°C 03/0716 13.8 14.6 14.6 13.5 14.8 13.0 11.5 10.9 14.2 14.7 14.8
Turbidity (field)NTU 03/07/16 0.61 5.11 1.81 11.9 6.98 6.92 16.5 30.2 2.32 10.5 49.1
Oxidation-Reduction (field)mV 03/07/16 -16.6 193.1 247.7 214.0 192.9 164.5 205.3 -13.7 237.2 146.1 57.9
Dissolved Oxygen (field)mg/L 03/07/16 5.46 6.66 3.92 2.44 3.88 1.74 0.81 0.65 4.52 7.96 0.89
Notes:mg/L =milligrams per liter
S.U. =Standard Units
NTU =nephelometric turbidity units
uS/cm=microsiemens per centimeter
mV =millivolts
oC =degrees Celsius
Downgradient
TABLE 13
Summary of Field Parameters for Monitoring Wells at the Active Subtitle D Landfill
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituents/Analytes Units Sample Date
Upgradient
May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Tables\Hanes Mill Road LF Mar 2016.xlsx
Antimony ug/L 03/07/16 2.20 6 16.2 J 0.347 J
Arsenic ug/L 03/07/16 5.40 10 30.1 ND
Barium ug/L 03/07/16 1.00 100 712 ND
Chromium ug/L 03/07/16 1.40 10 32.6 ND
Cobalt ug/L 03/07/16 1.10 10 14.2 ND
Copper ug/L 03/07/16 1.60 10 1.76 J ND
Nickel ug/L 03/07/16 1.80 50 50.2 ND
Vanadium ug/L 03/07/16 1.40 25 23.0 J ND
Zinc ug/L 03/07/16 3.80 10 34.3 ND
Acetone ug/L 03/07/16 50 100 1900 ND
Benzene ug/L 03/07/16 0.15 1 4.1 J ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L 03/07/16 0.19 1 8.5 J ND
Ethylbenzene ug/L 03/07/16 1.3 1 4.9 J ND
2-Butanone ug/L 03/07/16 45 100 950 ND
4-Methyl-2-pentanone ug/L 03/07/16 1.1 100 37 J ND
Toluene ug/L 03/07/16 1.4 1 6.5 J ND
Xylenes (Total)ug/L 03/07/16 4.5 5 19 J ND
Sulfate as SO4 mg/L 03/07/16 2.9 250 6 J ND
Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/L 03/07/16 2.00 --240 ND
Chemical Oxygen Demand mg/L 03/07/16 10 --580 ND
Total Suspended Solids mg/L 03/07/16 1.00 --160 ND
Phosphorus mg/L 03/07/16 0.025 --0.470 ND
Ammonia as N mg/L 03/07/16 12 --230 ND
pH (field)S.U.03/07/16 ----7.14 --
Specific Conductance (field)uS/cm 03/07/06 ----2440 --
Temperature (field)°C 03/07/16 ----20.20 --
Turbidity (field)NTU 03/07/16 ----37.8 --
Notes:
mg/L =milligrams per liter
ug/L =micrograms per liter
J =estimated value
B =blank-qualified data
ND =not detected above the laboratory detection limit
-- =no data or no limits established
Blanks =field, trip and method blanks
S.U. =Standard Units
NTU =nephelometric turbidity units
oC =degrees Celsius
uS/cm=microsiemens per centimeter
mV =millivolts
1.The following dilutions were noted for the March 2016 event:
VOCs (10x), Antimony (10x), Thallium (10x), Ammonia (180x), BOD (10x),
COD (2x), TSS (13.3x).
TABLE 14
Summary of Detected Constituents and Field Parameters in Leachate
Hanes Mill Road Landfill, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring Constituent Units Sample
Date
SWS
Reporting
Limit
Leachate BlanksMDL

DRAWING
SOUTH BRANCH CREEK
MAINTENANCE BUILDING
RESIDENTIAL DROP-OFF
OFFICE BUILDING
PIGGY BACK / OVERLINER AREA
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILROAD
CLOSED SUBTITLE D FACILITY
CLOSED UNLINED FACILITY
GRASSY CREEK
LEACHATE TANK
LOCATIONS
820
8
1
0
83
0
84
0
850
860
870
870
860
850 840
830
820
810
80
0
800
810
820
83
0
84
0
85
0
810
82
0
83
0
840
850
880
880
MM-8
MM-7
MM-6
MM-5
MM-4
MM-3
MM-2
MM-1
MW-12
SW-4
804.35
800.53
796.85
793.49
794.51
795.43
801.26
NBC-1
NBC-2
H
G
F
E
D
C
B
A
V
U
N
M
L
K
SW-3
MW-1RR856.28
MW-6841.03
OW-3
811.87
OW-4803.29
OW-12795.72
OW-11803.19
OW-6810.00
MW-9821.35
MW-8826.31
MW-7830.27
MW-6D840.39
OW-7DA796.61
OW-17D795.39
OW-10D801.40
877.93
MW-19
MW-18
MW-17
MW-16
MW-15
MW-14
MW-13
P
MW-21845.00
MW-20819.75
MW-22802.62
OW-14D800.47
OW-13D801.20
OW-7DNM
MW-11827.25
SW-1
SW-2
i1
i2
i3
i4
i5 i6
TOPOGRAPHY AND OTHER
EXISTING SITE FEATURES INSIDE
OF DASHED LINE BASED ON
JANUARY 6, 2016 AERIAL SURVEY.
EXISTING CONDITIONS OUTSIDE
OF DASHED LINE BASED ON
JANUARY 4, 2014 AERIAL SURVEY.
SITE LOCATION
IF

T
H
I
S

M
E
A
S
U
R
E
M
E
N
T

D
O
E
S

N
O
T

M
A
T
C
H

W
H
A
T

I
S

S
H
O
W
N
,

T
H
E

S
H
E
E
T

S
I
Z
E

H
A
S

B
E
E
N

M
O
D
I
F
I
E
D

F
R
O
M
:

A
N
S
I

D
CONSULTANT
DESIGN
PREPARED
REVIEW
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
TITLE
PROJECT No.Rev.
PROJECT
CLIENT
Pa
t
h
:

\
\
a
t
l
a
n
t
a
\
C
a
d
d
\
0
9
3
9
6
6
8
7

-

C
i
t
y

o
f

W
i
n
s
t
o
n
\
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
\
_
D

-

2
0
1
5

G
W
\

|

F
i
l
e

N
a
m
e
:

0
9
3
9
6
6
8
7
1
4
D
0
0
2
.
d
w
g
0
1
i
n
0939668715
PHASE
200
DRAWING
10
2016/04/25
SEP
DYR
DYR
RPK
HANES MILL ROAD LANDFILL
PERMIT NO. 34-02
FORSYTH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WINSTON SALEM / FORSYTH COUNTY CITY /
COUNTY UTILITIES COMMISSION
GROUNDWATER SURFACE CONTOUR MAP
MARCH 7, 2016
VICINITY MAP
LEGEND
NOTES
810
i1
EXISTING 10-FOOT GROUND SURFACE CONTOUR
EXISTING 2-FOOT GROUND SURFACE CONTOUR
EXISTING ROAD
MONITORING WELL AND IDENTIFICATION
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION 5 FT CONTOURS
GROUNDWATER FLOW ARROW
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF WASTE
SURFACE WATER MONITORING POINT
METHANE MONITORING POINT
PROPERTY LINE
1. TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2 FEET
2. GROUNDWATER SURFACE CONTOUR INTERVAL = 10 FEET
3. GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS MEASURED ON MARCH 7, 2016.
4. GROUNDWATER CONTOURS BASED ON LINEAR INTERPOLATION BETWEEN AND EXTRAPOLATION
FROM KNOWN DATA, TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS, AND KNOWN FIELD CONDITIONS. THEREFORE,
GROUNDWATER CONTOURS MAY NOT REFLECT ACTUAL CONDITIONS.
5. GROUNDWATER CONTOUR LINES SHOW THE WATER TABLE SHAPE AND ELEVATION. THESE
CONTOURS ARE INFERRED LINES FOLLOWING THE GROUNDWATER SURFACE AT A CONSTANT
ELEVATION ABOVE SEA LEVEL. THE GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION IS GENERALLY
PERPENDICULAR TO THE GROUNDWATER SURFACE CONTOURS, SIMILAR TO THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN SURFACE WATER FLOW AND TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS.
6. BASE MAP PROVIDED BY BRADY SURVEYING COMPANY BASED ON JANUARY 4, 2013 AERIAL SURVEY.
TOPOGRAPHY AND OTHER EXISTING SITE FEATURES INSIDE OF DASHED LINE UPDATED BASED ON
JANUARY 6, 2016 AERIAL SURVEY.
7. COORDINATE SYSTEM IS N.C. STATE PLANE GRID.
OW-3811.87
SW-1
H
NM NOT MEASURED
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC.

APPENDIX A
GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER SAMPLING LOGS

Caption Text

CLOSED UNLINED LANDFILL

CLOSED SUBTITLE D LANDFILL

ACTIVE SUBTITLE D LANDFILL

APPENDIX B
SEPTEMBER 2015 GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER, AND LEACHATE CERTIFICATE-
OF-ANALYSIS, CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY FORMS AND LABORATORY DATA REVIEWS

Caption Text

CLOSED UNLINED AND CLOSED SUBTITLE D LANDFILL

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 1 of 3
Project Name: Hanes Mill Landfill – Closed Unlined
Project Reference Number: 0939-668715.200
Sampling Event Date: March 09-10, 2016
Review Date: March 31, 2016 Initials: TM
Report #: CZ02252, CZ03763
Person(s) performing the review are to initial each item on this form as acknowledgement of data acceptance, or as acknowledgement of a review issue. In the case of the latter, a
brief explanation should follow the applicable item.

Golder Associates Inc. has reviewed the laboratory certificates of analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory provided sample group quality assurance and quality control data for the
above referenced sample group to identify potential bias or inaccuracy, in general accordance
with the following United States Environmental Protection Agency documents:
• Region III Modifications to Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, September 1994;
• Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, April 1993; and
• Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, July
1998. COMPLIANCE ANALYTE LIST(S) (check all that apply) NC Closed Facility/C & D List
NC Appendix I
NC Appendix I + Detects
X NC Appendix II
NC Subtitle D Leachate List
Other: MW-1RR: App II + methane, ethane, ethane and MNA parameters
1.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) REVIEW

TM COC was properly signed by all parties.
TM Correct project name and number are on the form.
TM Sample receipt condition at laboratory was acceptable.
TM Each sample and blank submitted for analysis appears in the report.
2.0 SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES

TM Holding times for extraction and/or analysis were met for each analytical Method (see below for reference).

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 2 of 3

Review Criteria
Method Analytes Holding Time
SW-846 Method 8260 and 8011 VOCs 14 days
SW-846 Methods 8270, 8080,
8081, 8082, and 8151
SVOCs, PCBs,
pesticides and herbicides
7 days for extraction, 40 days
from extraction for analysis
SW-846 Methods 6000 and 7000 Series Metals except mercury 6 months (no temperature requirements)
SW-846 Method 7470 Mercury 28 days
SW-846 Method 376.1 Sulfide 7 days
SW-846 Method 9010 Cyanide 14 days
EPA Method 300 Nitrate/Sulfate 48 hours/28 days
EPA Method 405.1 BOD 48 hours
EPA Method 410.4 COD 28 days
EPA Method 365.4 Phosphorous 28 days
3.0 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
TM Laboratory analyzed at least one internal blank for each method, where applicable.
TM Laboratory blank is interference-free.
TM Surrogate recoveries are provided for each analytical method, where applicable.
TM Surrogate recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least 50% of the surrogates were within range).
TM MS/MSD/LCS data results are provided for each analytical method.
TM MS/MSD/LCS recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at
least 1 of the 3 were within range).
 The spike recovery of Benzene was outside of control limits for the 8260B MSD sample. The QC batch was approved based on acceptable LCS recovery of this analyte.
4.0 ANALYTE LISTS/METHODS
TM The proper number of constituents are present for each analyte list as identified
above (including detects where applicable).
TM Proper EPA SW-846 analytical methods were used for analysis.
5.0 DATA REPORTING
TM All analytical reporting associated with the event was performed by the contracted lab.

TM Trip, field and/or equipment, and laboratory blank results have all been reported. All
detects for blanks are listed below by constituent. All laboratory method blanks, if any, have been ‘flagged’ with a ‘B’ where detected in other samples as appropriate
and a laboratory narrative was provided. If the sample was flagged by the laboratory
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 3 of 3
and is not within 5X of the concentration in the blank (or 10X for commonly detected
laboratory contaminants-acetone, methylene chloride and phthalates), list below with
explanation if flags should be removed. If flags need to be added for samples, also list below.

 Field Blank o Antimony @ 0.347 ug/L (J)

 B-flags o OW-11
TM It is clear from the laboratory report that samples have or have not been diluted during analysis, and if the samples have been diluted, the result is reported as a multiple of
the dilution (e.g., a sample diluted 10x resulting in an analytical detection of 1.0 should be reported as 10). Those that have been diluted are listed below with the dilution factor.
TM The report provides the reporting limit for each constituent.
TM The results were reported at or below their proper reporting limits (e.g., NC Solid
Waste Section Reporting Limits-SWSLs). Those that are not reported correctly are
listed below (by constituent) with the proper reporting limit listed beside them. State if the reporting limit error is due to dilutions.

TM No inorganic or organic constituents were reported above their respective NC 2L Drinking Water Standards or Groundwater Protection Standards (GPS) in wells or
field/equipment/trip blanks or above applicable Surface Water Standards for surface
water points.

 Vanadium (GWPS = 0.3 ug/L)
o OW7DA @ 6.51 ug/L (J) o OW11 @ 1.51 ug/L (J)
o OW6 @ 2.87 ug/L (J)
TM No quantifiable inorganic or organic constituents were detected in a well or surface water point at concentrations outside of their historical range (more than 5X previous
concentrations or first-time detections). TM Other report issues/Communications with laboratory/etc.:

Page 1 of 81
Page 2 of 81
Page 3 of 81
Page 4 of 81
Page 5 of 81
Page 6 of 81
Page 7 of 81
Page 8 of 81
Page 9 of 81
Page 10 of 81
Page 11 of 81
Page 12 of 81
Page 13 of 81
Page 14 of 81
Page 15 of 81
Page 16 of 81
Page 17 of 81
Page 18 of 81
Page 19 of 81
Page 20 of 81
Page 21 of 81
Page 22 of 81
Page 23 of 81
Page 24 of 81
Page 25 of 81
Page 26 of 81
Page 27 of 81
Page 28 of 81
Page 29 of 81
Page 30 of 81
Page 31 of 81
Page 32 of 81
Page 33 of 81
Page 34 of 81
Page 35 of 81
Page 36 of 81
Page 37 of 81
Page 38 of 81
Page 39 of 81
Page 40 of 81
Page 41 of 81
Page 42 of 81
Page 43 of 81
Page 44 of 81
Page 45 of 81
Page 46 of 81
Page 47 of 81
Page 48 of 81
Page 49 of 81
Page 50 of 81
Page 51 of 81
Page 52 of 81
Page 53 of 81
Page 54 of 81
Page 55 of 81
Page 56 of 81
Page 57 of 81
Page 58 of 81
Page 59 of 81
Page 60 of 81
Page 61 of 81
Page 62 of 81
Page 63 of 81
Page 64 of 81
Page 65 of 81
Page 66 of 81
Page 67 of 81
Page 68 of 81
Page 69 of 81
Page 70 of 81
Page 71 of 81
Page 72 of 81
Page 73 of 81
Page 74 of 81
Page 75 of 81
Page 76 of 81
Page 77 of 81
Page 78 of 81
Page 79 of 81
Page 80 of 81
Page 81 of 81
Page 1 of 1
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 1 of 4
Project Name: Hanes Mill Landfill – Closed Unlined MNA
Project Reference Number: 0939-668715.200
Sampling Event Date: March 8-9, 2016
Review Date: March 22, 2016 Initials: TM
Report #: CZ02253, CZ03665
Person(s) performing the review are to initial each item on this form as acknowledgement of data acceptance, or as acknowledgement of a review issue. In the case of the latter, a
brief explanation should follow the applicable item.

Golder Associates Inc. has reviewed the laboratory certificates of analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory provided sample group quality assurance and quality control data for the
above referenced sample group to identify potential bias or inaccuracy, in general accordance
with the following United States Environmental Protection Agency documents:
• Region III Modifications to Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, September 1994;
• Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, April 1993; and
• Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, July
1998. COMPLIANCE ANALYTE LIST(S) (check all that apply) NC Closed Facility/C & D List
NC Appendix I
NC Appendix I + Detects
X NC Appendix II
NC Subtitle D Leachate List
Other: Methane, Ethane, Ethene, Chloride, Mercury, Nitrate, Nitrite, Sulfate, & TOC
1.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) REVIEW

TM COC was properly signed by all parties.
TM Correct project name and number are on the form.
TM Sample receipt condition at laboratory was acceptable.
TM Each sample and blank submitted for analysis appears in the report.
2.0 SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES

TM Holding times for extraction and/or analysis were met for each analytical Method (see below for reference).

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 2 of 4

Review Criteria
Method Analytes Holding Time
SW-846 Method 8260 and 8011 VOCs 14 days
SW-846 Methods 8270, 8080,
8081, 8082, and 8151
SVOCs, PCBs,
pesticides and herbicides
7 days for extraction, 40 days
from extraction for analysis
SW-846 Methods 6000 and 7000 Series Metals except mercury 6 months (no temperature requirements)
SW-846 Method 7470 Mercury 28 days
SW-846 Method 376.1 Sulfide 7 days
SW-846 Method 9010 Cyanide 14 days
EPA Method 300 Nitrate/Sulfate 48 hours/28 days
EPA Method 405.1 BOD 48 hours
EPA Method 410.4 COD 28 days
EPA Method 365.4 Phosphorous 28 days
3.0 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
TM Laboratory analyzed at least one internal blank for each method, where applicable.
TM Laboratory blank is interference-free.
 Method Blank -Antimony @ 0.655 ug/L (J)
 The reported concentrations of Antimony, Hexanoic Acid, and iso-Hexanoic Acid should be considered to have a possible high bias due to positive results in the associated method blanks, and or a possible high bias in the associated LCS samples. Iso-Hexanoic Acid is a common laboratory contaminant.
TM Surrogate recoveries are provided for each analytical method, where applicable.
TM Surrogate recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least
50% of the surrogates were within range).
TM MS/MSD/LCS data results are provided for each analytical method.
TM MS/MSD/LCS recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least 1 of the 3 were within range).

 Precision between duplicate analyses of benzene were outside of control limits for the 8260B MS and MSD samples; however, the individual recoveries were within acceptance
limits. The QC batch was approved based on acceptable recovery of this analyte and completeness of the QC data.

 Spike recoveries of alkalinity, sulfate, and sulfide were outside of control limits for the MS and or MSD samples. The QC batches were approved based on acceptable recovery of these analytes.
4.0 ANALYTE LISTS/METHODS
TM The proper number of constituents are present for each analyte list as identified
above (including detects where applicable).

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 3 of 4
TM Proper EPA SW-846 analytical methods were used for analysis.
5.0 DATA REPORTING
TM All analytical reporting associated with the event was performed by the contracted lab.
TM Trip, field and/or equipment, and laboratory blank results have all been reported. All
detects for blanks are listed below by constituent. All laboratory method blanks, if any, have been ‘flagged’ with a ‘B’ where detected in other samples as appropriate
and a laboratory narrative was provided. If the sample was flagged by the laboratory and is not within 5X of the concentration in the blank (or 10X for commonly detected laboratory contaminants-acetone, methylene chloride and phthalates), list below with
explanation if flags should be removed. If flags need to be added for samples, also list below.

 Method Blank
o Antimony @ 0.655 ug/L (J) o Iso-Hexanoic acid @ 0.85 (J)

 Field Blank
o Antimony @ 0.347 ug/L (J)
 B-flags o Iso-Hexanoic acid: OW-10D, OW-12, OW-14D
o Antimony: OW-3, OW-4, OW-12, OW-14D, MW-1RR
TM It is clear from the laboratory report that samples have or have not been diluted during analysis, and if the samples have been diluted, the result is reported as a multiple of the dilution (e.g., a sample diluted 10x resulting in an analytical detection of 1.0
should be reported as 10). Those that have been diluted are listed below with the dilution factor.

 Chloride (x3) o OW-3
TM The report provides the reporting limit for each constituent.
TM The results were reported at or below their proper reporting limits (e.g., NC Solid
Waste Section Reporting Limits-SWSLs). Those that are not reported correctly are listed below (by constituent) with the proper reporting limit listed beside them. State
if the reporting limit error is due to dilutions.
TM No inorganic or organic constituents were reported above their respective NC 2L
Drinking Water Standards or Groundwater Protection Standards (GPS) in wells or
field/equipment/trip blanks or above applicable Surface Water Standards for surface water points.

 Barium (NC 2L = 700 ug/L)
o OW-3 @ 1090 ug/L
 Cobalt (GWPS = 1 ug/L) o OW-3 @ 12.7 ug/L

 Vanadium (GWPS = 0.3 ug/L)
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 4 of 4
o OW-10D @ 1.60 ug/L (J)
o OW-14D @ 3.67 ug/L (J)

 Benzene (NC 2L = 1 ug/L) (EPA MCL = 5 ug/L)
o OW-3 @ 4.9 ug/L o OW-4 @ 1.2 ug/L
o OW 10D @ 1.2 ug/L
 1,1-Dichloroethane (NC 2L = 6 ug/L) o OW-10D @ 10 ug/L

 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (NC 2L = 6 ug/L)
o OW-3 @ 29 ug/L o OW-4 @ 6.9 ug/L

 Cis-1,2 Dichloroethene (NC 2L = 70 ug/L) (EPA MCL = 70 ug/L)
o OW-3 @ 85 ug/L
 1,2-Dichloropropane (NC 2L = 0.6 ug/L) o OW-3 @ 1.7 ug/L

 Tetrachloroethene (NC 2L = 0.7 ug/L) (EPA MCL = 5 ug/L)
o OW-4 @ 5.1 ug/L o OW-10D @ 10 ug/L

 Trichloroethene (NC 2L = 3 ug/L) (EPA MCL = 5 ug/L)
o OW-4 @ 6.6 ug/L o OW-10D @7.1 ug/L
o OW-17D @ 7.4 ug/L
 Vinyl chloride (NC 2L = 0.03 ug/L) (EPA MCL = 2 ug/L) o OW-3 @ 78 ug/L
o OW-4 @ 1.4 ug/L o OW-10D @ 0.79 ug/L (J)
TM No quantifiable inorganic or organic constituents were detected in a well or surface
water point at concentrations outside of their historical range (more than 5X previous
concentrations or first-time detections).
TM Other report issues/Communications with laboratory/etc.:

Page 1 of 15
Page 2 of 15
Page 3 of 15
Page 4 of 15
Page 5 of 15
Page 6 of 15
Page 7 of 15
Page 8 of 15
Page 9 of 15
Page 10 of 15
Page 11 of 15
Page 12 of 15
Page 13 of 15
Page 14 of 15
Page 15 of 15
Page 1 of 30
Page 2 of 30
Page 3 of 30
Page 4 of 30
Page 5 of 30
Page 6 of 30
Page 7 of 30
Page 8 of 30
Page 9 of 30
Page 10 of 30
Page 11 of 30
Page 12 of 30
Page 13 of 30
Page 14 of 30
Page 15 of 30
Page 16 of 30
Page 17 of 30
Page 18 of 30
Page 19 of 30
Page 20 of 30
Page 21 of 30
Page 22 of 30
Page 23 of 30
Page 24 of 30
Page 25 of 30
Page 26 of 30
Page 27 of 30
Page 28 of 30
Page 29 of 30
Page 30 of 30
Page 1 of 1
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 1 of 4
Project Name: Hanes Mill Landfill – Closed Sub D
Project Reference Number: 0939-668715.201
Sampling Event Date: March 8-9, 2016
Review Date: March 22, 2016 Initials: TM
Report #: CZ02251
Person(s) performing the review are to initial each item on this form as acknowledgement of data acceptance, or as acknowledgement of a review issue. In the case of the latter, a
brief explanation should follow the applicable item.

Golder Associates Inc. has reviewed the laboratory certificates of analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory provided sample group quality assurance and quality control data for the
above referenced sample group to identify potential bias or inaccuracy, in general accordance
with the following United States Environmental Protection Agency documents:
• Region III Modifications to Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, September 1994;
• Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, April 1993; and
• Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, July
1998. COMPLIANCE ANALYTE LIST(S) (check all that apply) NC Closed Facility/C & D List
X NC Appendix I
NC Appendix I + Detects
NC Appendix II
NC Subtitle D Leachate List
Other:
1.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) REVIEW

TM COC was properly signed by all parties.
TM Correct project name and number are on the form.
TM Sample receipt condition at laboratory was acceptable.
TM Each sample and blank submitted for analysis appears in the report.
Notes:

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 2 of 4
2.0 SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES

TM Holding times for extraction and/or analysis were met for each analytical method (see below for reference).

Review Criteria
Method Analytes Holding Time
SW-846 Method 8260 and 8011 VOCs 14 days
SW-846 Methods 8270, 8080, 8081, 8082, and 8151 SVOCs, PCBs, pesticides and herbicides
7 days for extraction, 40 days from extraction for analysis
SW-846 Methods 6000 and 7000
Series
Metals except mercury 6 months (no temperature
requirements)
SW-846 Method 7470 Mercury 28 days
SW-846 Method 376.1 Sulfide 7 days
SW-846 Method 9010 Cyanide 14 days
EPA Method 300 Nitrate/Sulfate 48 hours/28 days
EPA Method 405.1 BOD 48 hours
EPA Method 410.4 COD 28 days
EPA Method 365.4 Phosphorous 28 days
3.0 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW TM Laboratory analyzed at least one internal blank for each method, where applicable.
TM Laboratory blank is interference-free.
TM Surrogate recoveries are provided for each analytical method, where applicable.
TM Surrogate recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least
50% of the surrogates were within range).
TM MS/MSD/LCS data results are provided for each analytical method.
TM MS/MSD/LCS recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least 1 of the 3 were within range).

• The spike recoveries of Barium and Cadmium were outside of control limits for the 6010D MS,
MSD, and/or Post Spike samples. The QC batch was approved based on acceptable LCS recovery of these elements.

4.0 ANALYTE LISTS/METHODS

TM The proper number of constituents are present for each analyte list as identified above (including detects where applicable).

TM Proper EPA SW-846 analytical methods were used for analysis.
5.0 DATA REPORTING TM All analytical reporting associated with the event was performed by the contracted lab.
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 3 of 4

TM Trip, field and/or equipment, and laboratory blank results have all been reported. All
detects for blanks are listed below by constituent. All laboratory method blanks, if
any, have been ‘flagged’ with a ‘B’ where detected in other samples as appropriate and a laboratory narrative was provided. If the sample was flagged by the laboratory
and is not within 5X of the concentration in the blank (or 10X for commonly detected laboratory contaminants-acetone, methylene chloride and phthalates), list below with explanation if flags should be removed. If flags need to be added for samples, also
list below.
 Field Blank
o Antimony @ 0.347 ug/L (J) -Add B flag to MW-6D @ 0.250 ug/L (J) and MW-1RR @ 0.437 ug/L (J) TM It is clear from the laboratory report that samples have or have not been diluted during analysis, and if the samples have been diluted, the result is reported as a multiple of
the dilution (e.g., a sample diluted 10x resulting in an analytical detection of 1.0 should be reported as 10). Those that have been diluted are listed below with the
dilution factor.
TM The report provides the reporting limit for each constituent.
TM The results were reported at or below their proper reporting limits (e.g., NC Solid
Waste Section Reporting Limits-SWSLs). Those that are not reported correctly are
listed below (by constituent) with the proper reporting limit listed beside them. State if the reporting limit error is due to dilutions.
TM No inorganic or organic constituents were reported above their respective NC 2L Drinking Water Standards or Groundwater Protection Standards (GPS) in wells or
field/equipment/trip blanks or above applicable Surface Water Standards for surface
water points.
 Antimony (GWPS = 1 ug/L) o MW-6 @ 2.20 ug/L (J)
 Chromium (NC 2L = 10 ug/L) o MW-11 @ 11.2 ug/L

 Cobalt (GWPS = 1 ug/L)
o MW-6 @ 16.0 ug/L o MW-7 @ 4.45 ug/L (J)
o MW-8 @ 1.81 ug/L (J)
 Vanadium (GWPS = 0.3 ug/L) o MW-6 @ 2.08 ug/L (J)
o MW-6D @ 2.37 ug/L (J)
TM No quantifiable inorganic or organic constituents were detected in a well or surface water point at concentrations outside of their historical range (more than 5X previous
concentrations or first-time detections).

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 4 of 4
N/A Other report issues/Communications with laboratory/etc.

Page 1 of 37
Page 2 of 37
Page 3 of 37
Page 4 of 37
Page 5 of 37
Page 6 of 37
Page 7 of 37
Page 8 of 37
Page 9 of 37
Page 10 of 37
Page 11 of 37
Page 12 of 37
Page 13 of 37
Page 14 of 37
Page 15 of 37
Page 16 of 37
Page 17 of 37
Page 18 of 37
Page 19 of 37
Page 20 of 37
Page 21 of 37
Page 22 of 37
Page 23 of 37
Page 24 of 37
Page 25 of 37
Page 26 of 37
Page 27 of 37
Page 28 of 37
Page 29 of 37
Page 30 of 37
Page 31 of 37
Page 32 of 37
Page 33 of 37
Page 34 of 37
Page 35 of 37
Page 36 of 37
Page 37 of 37
Page 1 of 1
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 1 of 3
Project Name: Hanes Mill Landfill – Closed - SW
Project Reference Number: 0939-668715.201
Sampling Event Date: March 8-10, 2016
Review Date: March 22, 2016 Initials: TM
Report #: CZ02250, CZ03622
Person(s) performing the review are to initial each item on this form as acknowledgement of data acceptance, or as acknowledgement of a review issue. In the case of the latter, a
brief explanation should follow the applicable item.

Golder Associates Inc. has reviewed the laboratory certificates of analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory provided sample group quality assurance and quality control data for the
above referenced sample group to identify potential bias or inaccuracy, in general accordance
with the following United States Environmental Protection Agency documents:
• Region III Modifications to Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, September 1994;
• Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, April 1993; and
• Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, July
1998. COMPLIANCE ANALYTE LIST(S) (check all that apply) NC Closed Facility/C & D List
X NC Appendix I
NC Appendix I + Detects
NC Appendix II
NC Subtitle D Leachate List
X Other: Appendix II List for Field Blank only.
1.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) REVIEW

TM COC was properly signed by all parties.
TM Correct project name and number are on the form.
TM Sample receipt condition at laboratory was acceptable.
TM Each sample and blank submitted for analysis appears in the report.
Notes:

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 2 of 3
2.0 SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES

TM Holding times for extraction and/or analysis were met for each analytical Method (see below for reference).

Notes:
Review Criteria
Method Analytes Holding Time
SW-846 Method 8260 and 8011 VOCs 14 days
SW-846 Methods 8270, 8080, 8081, 8082, and 8151 SVOCs, PCBs, pesticides and herbicides
7 days for extraction, 40 days from extraction for analysis
SW-846 Methods 6000 and 7000
Series
Metals except mercury 6 months (no temperature
requirements)
SW-846 Method 7470 Mercury 28 days
SW-846 Method 376.1 Sulfide 7 days
SW-846 Method 9010 Cyanide 14 days
EPA Method 300 Nitrate/Sulfate 48 hours/28 days
EPA Method 405.1 BOD 48 hours
EPA Method 410.4 COD 28 days
EPA Method 365.4 Phosphorous 28 days
3.0 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
TM Laboratory analyzed at least one internal blank for each method, where applicable.
TM Laboratory blank is interference-free.
TM Surrogate recoveries are provided for each analytical method, where applicable.
TM Surrogate recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least
50% of the surrogates were within range).
TM MS/MSD/LCS data results are provided for each analytical method.
TM MS/MSD/LCS recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least 1 of the 3 were within range).

4.0 ANALYTE LISTS/METHODS
TM The proper number of constituents are present for each analyte list as identified
above (including detects where applicable).
TM Proper EPA SW-846 analytical methods were used for analysis.

5.0 DATA REPORTING

TM All analytical reporting associated with the event was performed by the contracted lab.
TM Trip, field and/or equipment, and laboratory blank results have all been reported. All
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 3 of 3
detects for blanks are listed below by constituent. All laboratory method blanks, if
any, have been ‘flagged’ with a ‘B’ where detected in other samples as appropriate
and a laboratory narrative was provided. If the sample was flagged by the laboratory and is not within 5X of the concentration in the blank (or 10X for commonly detected
laboratory contaminants-acetone, methylene chloride and phthalates), list below with
explanation if flags should be removed. If flags need to be added for samples, also list below.

 Field Blank o Antimony @ 0.347 ug/L (J)

 B-Flags o NBC-1 @ 0.329 ug/L (J), NBC-2 @ 0.242 ug/L (J)
TM It is clear from the laboratory report that samples have or have not been diluted during analysis, and if the samples have been diluted, the result is reported as a multiple of
the dilution (e.g., a sample diluted 10x resulting in an analytical detection of 1.0
should be reported as 10). Those that have been diluted are listed below with the dilution factor.

TM The report provides the reporting limit for each constituent.
TM The results were reported at or below their proper reporting limits (e.g., NC Solid Waste Section Reporting Limits-SWSLs). Those that are not reported correctly are
listed below (by constituent) with the proper reporting limit listed beside them. State if the reporting limit error is due to dilutions.

TM No inorganic or organic constituents were reported above their respective NC 2L Drinking Water Standards or Groundwater Protection Standards (GPS) in wells or field/equipment/trip blanks or above applicable Surface Water Standards for surface
water points.

TM No quantifiable inorganic or organic constituents were detected in a well or surface water point at concentrations outside of their historical range (more than 5X previous
concentrations or first-time detections).
N/A Other report issues/Communications with laboratory/etc.

ACTIVE SUBTITLE D LANDFILL

Page 1 of 60
Page 2 of 60
Page 3 of 60
Page 4 of 60
Page 5 of 60
Page 6 of 60
Page 7 of 60
Page 8 of 60
Page 9 of 60
Page 10 of 60
Page 11 of 60
Page 12 of 60
Page 13 of 60
Page 14 of 60
Page 15 of 60
Page 16 of 60
Page 17 of 60
Page 18 of 60
Page 19 of 60
Page 20 of 60
Page 21 of 60
Page 22 of 60
Page 23 of 60
Page 24 of 60
Page 25 of 60
Page 26 of 60
Page 27 of 60
Page 28 of 60
Page 29 of 60
Page 30 of 60
Page 31 of 60
Page 32 of 60
Page 33 of 60
Page 34 of 60
Page 35 of 60
Page 36 of 60
Page 37 of 60
Page 38 of 60
Page 39 of 60
Page 40 of 60
Page 41 of 60
Page 42 of 60
Page 43 of 60
Page 44 of 60
Page 45 of 60
Page 46 of 60
Page 47 of 60
Page 48 of 60
Page 49 of 60
Page 50 of 60
Page 51 of 60
Page 52 of 60
Page 53 of 60
Page 54 of 60
Page 55 of 60
Page 56 of 60
Page 57 of 60
Page 58 of 60
Page 59 of 60
Page 60 of 60
Page 1 of 1
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 1 of 3
Project Name: Hanes Mill Landfill – Active Sub D
Project Reference Number: 0939-668715.202
Sampling Event Date: March 7, 2016
Review Date: March 22, 2016 Initials: TM
Report #: CZ02249, CZ03622

Person(s) performing the review are to initial each item on this form as acknowledgement
of data acceptance, or as acknowledgement of a review issue. In the case of the latter, a
brief explanation should follow the applicable item.

Golder Associates Inc. has reviewed the laboratory certificates of analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory provided sample group quality assurance and quality control data for the
above referenced sample group to identify potential bias or inaccuracy, in general accordance
with the following United States Environmental Protection Agency documents:
• Region III Modifications to Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, September 1994;
• Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, April 1993; and
• Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, July 1998.
COMPLIANCE ANALYTE LIST(S) (check all that apply)
NC Closed Facility/C & D List
X NC Appendix I
NC Appendix I + Detects
NC Appendix II
NC Subtitle D Leachate List
Other:
1.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) REVIEW

TM COC was properly signed by all parties.
TM Correct project name and number are on the form.
TM Sample receipt condition at laboratory was acceptable.
TM Each sample and blank submitted for analysis appears in the report.
Notes:

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 2 of 3
2.0 SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES

TM Holding times for extraction and/or analysis were met for each analytical Method (see below for reference).
Review Criteria
Method Analytes Holding Time
SW-846 Method 8260 and 8011 VOCs 14 days
SW-846 Methods 8270, 8080,
8081, 8082, and 8151
SVOCs, PCBs,
pesticides and herbicides
7 days for extraction, 40 days
from extraction for analysis
SW-846 Methods 6000 and 7000
Series
Metals except mercury 6 months (no temperature
requirements)
SW-846 Method 7470 Mercury 28 days
SW-846 Method 376.1 Sulfide 7 days
SW-846 Method 9010 Cyanide 14 days
EPA Method 300 Nitrate/Sulfate 48 hours/28 days
EPA Method 405.1 BOD 48 hours
EPA Method 410.4 COD 28 days
EPA Method 365.4 Phosphorous 28 days
3.0 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW TM Laboratory analyzed at least one internal blank for each method, where applicable.
TM Laboratory blank is interference-free
TM Surrogate recoveries are provided for each analytical method, where applicable.
TM Surrogate recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least
50% of the surrogates were within range).
TM MS/MSD/LCS data results are provided for each analytical method.
TM MS/MSD/LCS recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least 1 of the 3 were within range).

4.0 ANALYTE LISTS/METHODS
TM The proper number of constituents are present for each analyte list as identified
above (including detects where applicable). TM Proper EPA SW-846 analytical methods were used for analysis.

5.0 DATA REPORTING
TM All analytical reporting associated with the event was performed by the contracted lab.

TM Trip, field and/or equipment, and laboratory blank results have all been reported. All
detects for blanks are listed below by constituent. All laboratory method blanks, if any, have been ‘flagged’ with a ‘B’ where detected in other samples as appropriate
and a laboratory narrative was provided. If the sample was flagged by the laboratory
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 3 of 3
and is not within 5X of the concentration in the blank (or 10X for commonly detected
laboratory contaminants-acetone, methylene chloride and phthalates), list below with
explanation if flags should be removed. If flags need to be added for samples, also list below.

 Field Blank o Antimony @ 0.347 ug/L (J)
 B-flags o MW-13 @ 0.849 ug/L (J), MW-14 @ 0.538 ug/L (J), MW-15 @ 0.378 ug/L (J)
MW-16 @ 0.390 ug/L (J), MW-17 @ 0.280 ug/L (J)
TM It is clear from the laboratory report that samples have or have not been diluted during
analysis, and if the samples have been diluted, the result is reported as a multiple of the dilution (e.g., a sample diluted 10x resulting in an analytical detection of 1.0
should be reported as 10). Those that have been diluted are listed below with the
dilution factor.
TM The report provides the reporting limit for each constituent.
TM The results were reported at or below their proper reporting limits (e.g., NC Solid Waste Section Reporting Limits-SWSLs). Those that are not reported correctly are listed below (by constituent) with the proper reporting limit listed beside them. State
if the reporting limit error is due to dilutions. TM No inorganic or organic constituents were reported above their respective NC 2L
Drinking Water Standards or Groundwater Protection Standards (GPS) in wells or field/equipment/trip blanks or above applicable Surface Water Standards for surface
water points.

 Cobalt (GWPS = 1 ug/L)
o MW-18 @ 2.95 ug/L (J) o MW-19 @ 22.5 ug/L
o MW-22 @ 2.14 ug/L (J)
 Vanadium (GWPS = 0.3 ug/L) o MW-12 @ 2.25 ug/L (J)
o MW-13 @ 4.86 ug/L (J) o MW-15 @ 4.09 ug/L (J)
o MW-16 @ 3.18 ug/L (J) o MW-17 @ 2.96 ug/L (J)
o MW-18 @ 2.21 ug/L (J) o MW-19 @ 3.09 ug/L (J)
o MW-21 @ 1.75 ug/L (J) o MW-22 @ 2.24 ug/L (J)

TM No quantifiable inorganic or organic constituents were detected in a well or surface water point at concentrations outside of their historical range (more than 5X previous
concentrations or first-time detections).
N/A Other report issues/Communications with laboratory/etc.:

LEACHATE

Page 1 of 22
Page 2 of 22
Page 3 of 22
Page 4 of 22
Page 5 of 22
Page 6 of 22
Page 7 of 22
Page 8 of 22
Page 9 of 22
Page 10 of 22
Page 11 of 22
Page 12 of 22
Page 13 of 22
Page 14 of 22
Page 15 of 22
Page 16 of 22
Page 17 of 22
Page 18 of 22
Page 19 of 22
Page 20 of 22
Page 21 of 22
Page 22 of 22
Page 1 of 1
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 1 of 4
Project Name: Hanes Mill Rd Landfill – Leachate
Project Reference Number: 0939-668715.202
Sampling Event Date: March 8, 2016
Review Date: March 22, 2016 Initials: TM
Report #: CZ02255
Person(s) performing the review are to initial each item on this form as acknowledgement of data acceptance, or as acknowledgement of a review issue. In the case of the latter, a
brief explanation should follow the applicable item.

Golder Associates Inc. has reviewed the laboratory certificates of analysis, chain-of-custody form, and laboratory provided sample group quality assurance and quality control data for the
above referenced sample group to identify potential bias or inaccuracy, in general accordance
with the following United States Environmental Protection Agency documents:
• Region III Modifications to Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, September 1994;
• Region III Modifications to the Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, April 1993; and
• Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, July
1998. COMPLIANCE ANALYTE LIST(S) (check all that apply) NC Closed Facility / C&D List
NC Appendix I
NC Appendix I + Detects
NC Appendix II
X NC Subtitle D Leachate List
Other: Mercury
1.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) REVIEW

TM COC was properly signed by all parties.
TM Correct project name and number are on the form.
TM Sample receipt condition at laboratory was acceptable.
TM Each sample and blank submitted for analysis appears in the report.

Notes:

GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 2 of 4
2.0 SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES

TM Holding times for extraction and/or analysis were met for each analytical Method (see below for reference).

Review Criteria
Method Analytes Holding Time
SW-846 Method 8260 and 8011 VOCs 14 days
SW-846 Methods 8270, 8080, 8081, 8082, and 8151 SVOCs, PCBs, pesticides and
herbicides
7 days for extraction, 40 days from extraction for analysis
SW-846 Methods 6000 and 7000
Series
Metals except mercury 6 months (no temperature
requirements)
SW-846 Method 7470 Mercury 28 days
SW-846 Method 376.1 Sulfide 7 days
SW-846 Method 9010 Cyanide 14 days
EPA Method 300 Nitrate/Sulfate 48 hours/28 days
EPA Method 405.1 BOD 48 hours
EPA Method 410.4 COD 28 days
EPA Method 365.4 Phosphorous 28 days
3.0 LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW

TM Laboratory analyzed at least one internal blank for each method, where applicable.
TM Laboratory blank is interference-free.
TM Surrogate recoveries are provided for each analytical method, where applicable.
TM Surrogate recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at least 50% of the surrogates were within range).
TM MS/MSD/LCS data results are provided for each analytical method.
TM MS/MSD/LCS recoveries for each method are within the acceptable limits (i.e., at
least 1 of the 3 were within range).

 Precision between duplicate spikes of benzene exceeded acceptance criteria for the 8260B MS and MSD samples; however, the individual recoveries were within control limits. The
QC batch was approved based on acceptable LCS recovery of this analyte.
 The spike recoveries of Ammonia and Total Phosphorous were outside of control limits for the MS and MSD samples, and precision between duplicate spikes of Total Phosphorous exceeded acceptance criteria. The QC batches were approved based on acceptable LCS recovery of these analytes.
4.0 ANALYTE LISTS/METHODS

TM The proper number of constituents are present for each analyte list as identified above (including detects where applicable).

TM Proper EPA SW-846 analytical methods were used for analysis.
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 3 of 4

5.0 DATA REPORTING

TM All analytical reporting associated with the event was performed by the contracted lab.
TM Trip, field and/or equipment, and laboratory blank results have all been reported. All
detects for blanks are listed below by constituent. All laboratory method blanks, if any, have been ‘flagged’ with a ‘B’ where detected in other samples as appropriate and a laboratory narrative was provided. If the sample was flagged by the laboratory
and is not within 5X of the concentration in the blank (or 10X for commonly detected laboratory contaminants-acetone, methylene chloride and phthalates), list below with
explanation if flags should be removed. If flags need to be added for samples, also
list below.
 The oxygen depletion of the BOD method blank exceeded the method requirement
of less than 0.2 mg/L. Due to method constraints, the test cannot be repeated.
 Field Blank o Antimony @ 0.347 ug/L (J)
TM It is clear from the laboratory report that samples have or have not been diluted during
analysis, and if the samples have been diluted, the result is reported as a multiple of the dilution (e.g., a sample diluted 10x resulting in an analytical detection of 1.0
should be reported as 10). Those that have been diluted are listed below with the
dilution factor.
 Leachate o VOCs (10x))
o Antimony (10x) o Thallium (10x)
o Ammonia (180x) o BOD (10x)
o Chemical Oxygen Demand (2x) o Total Suspended Solids (13.3x)
TM The report provides the reporting limit for each constituent.
TM The results were reported at or below their proper reporting limits (e.g., NC Solid
Waste Section Reporting Limits-SWSLs). Those that are not reported correctly are
listed below (by constituent) with the proper reporting limit listed beside them. State if the reporting limit error is due to dilutions.
N/A No inorganic or organic constituents were reported above their respective NC 2L Drinking Water Standards or Groundwater Protection Standards (GPS) in wells or
field/equipment/trip blanks or above applicable Surface Water Standards for surface water points.

N/A No quantifiable inorganic or organic constituents were detected in a well or surface water point at concentrations outside of their historical range (more than 5X previous
GOLDER ASSOCIATES NC, INC. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL
LABORATORY DATA REVIEW
Page 4 of 4
concentrations or first-time detections).

TM Other report issues/Communications with laboratory/etc.:

APPENDIX C
STATISTICAL EVALUATION WORKSHEETS & SUMMARY TABLES

Caption Text

CLOSED UNLINED LANDFILL & CLOSED SUBTITLE D LANDFILL

May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Stats\Closed\Hanes Mill Road CLF Stats Summary Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-6 MW-6D MW-7 MW-8 MW-9 MW-11
Chromium ug/L Interwell Non-Parametric Prediction Interval 6800 ND 1.55 J 1.49 J ND ND 11.2
Cobalt ug/L Interwell Non-Parametric Prediction Interval 800 16.0 ND 4.45 J ND ND ND
OW-3 OW-4 OW-6 OW-7DA OW-10D OW-11 OW-12 OW-13D OW-14D OW-17D
Barium ug/L Interwell Non-Parametric Prediction Interval 12000 1090 149 48.2 J 4.95 J 35.0 J 124 45.0 J 3.98 J 20.7 J 30.3 J
Cobalt ug/L Interwell Non-Parametric Prediction Interval 800 12.7 2.51 J ND ND 3.07 J 2.21 J ND ND ND ND
Notes:1. Shaded values represent apparent statistical significant increases (SSIs) over background concentrations.
2. Statistical worksheets are provided in Appendix C.
3. ug/L = micrograms per liter
4. J = estimated concentration below the Solid Waste Section Limit
5. ND = Not detected at the laboratory detection limit
6. B = Blank-qualified data
March 2016
Closed Subtitle D Landfill Downgradient Monitoring Wells and Concentrations
Summary of Statistical Analysis
Hanes Mill Road Closed Landfills, Permit No. 34-02
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituent/Analytes
Reporting
Units Statistical Evaluation Method
Prediction
Interval
Detected Monitoring
Constituent/Analytes
Reporting
Units
Prediction
IntervalStatistical Evaluation Method
Closed Unlined Landfill Downgradient Monitoring Wells and Concentrations
March 2016

ACTIVE SUBTITLE D LANDFILL

May 2016 Page 1 of 1 0939-668715
G:\Projects\Winston-Salem-Forsyth County\Groundwater\WQMR\March 2016\Stats\Active\Hanes Mill Road ALF Stats Summary Mar 2016.xlsx
MW-13 MW-14 MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 MW-18 MW-19 MW-20 MW-21 MW-22
Interwell Non-Parametric Prediction Limit 1.10
MW-19 Intrawell Tolerance Prediction Limit 53.4
Notes:1. Shaded values represent apparent statistical significant increases (SSIs) over background concentrations.
2. Statistical worksheets are provided in Appendix C.3. ug/L = micrograms per liter4. J = estimated concentration below the Solid Waste Section Limit (not included in statistical analyses)
5. ND = Not detected at the laboratory detection limit
6. B = Blank-qualified data
ND 2.14 JNDNND2.95 J 22.5 NDCobaltug/L ND ND ND
Summary of Statistical Analysis
Hanes Mill Road Active Subtitle D Landfill, Permit No. 34-02Forsyth County, North Carolina
Detected Monitoring
Constituent/Analytes
Reporting
Units
Prediction
IntervalStatistical Evaluation Method
March 2016
Active Subtitle D Landfill Downgradient Monitoring Wells and Concentrations

Golder Associates NC, Inc.
5B Oak Branch Drive
Greensboro, NC 27407 USA
[phone] - Phone
[phone] - Fax