7607_GreatOakMSWLF_NewLFGrossCapacityData_DIN27192_20161219

1
Chao, Ming-tai
From:Lamb, Steve <[e-mail]>
Sent:Monday, December 19, 2016 3:51 PM
To:Workman, John; Chao, Ming-tai
Cc:Sharon Korleski; Murray, John E; Patrone, John
Subject:RE: Comments on the Certified CQA Report, Great Oak MSWLF, Cell 1A, 76-07, DIN
27151
Ming:

As discussed earlier today. Here is our response to your two questions concerning the volume of Cell 1A and 1B.

I corrected the volume quantities in Cell 5 (30,000 CY) and Phase 3 (10 CY). These numbers now reflect the Tables 1 and
2 included in the Engineering Plan. All phase totals now equal 37,801,100 CY.

Please let me know if this satisfies your questions about the volumes for the Great Oak LF.

Phase 1 6,978,960
Cell 1a * 718,020
Cell 1b * 561,113
Cell 2 727,625
Cell 3 994,612
Cell 4 786,784
Cell 5 1,144,835
Cell 6 769,484
Cell 7 1,250,364
Phase 2 6,161,656
Phase 3 4,216,559
Phase 4 1,378,226
Phase 5 5,032,069
Phase 6 1,828,832
Phase 7 3,530,065
Phase 8 4,282,475
Phase 9 4,392,158

Total 37,801,000

* Cell 1A was reduced by 2,612 CY and Cell 1B by 23,511 CY
due to field modification caused by Duke guy wire.
WM of Carolinas, Inc. is not ceding the original approved capacity of 37,801,000 CY
due to this field modification.

Thanks,
2

Steve Lamb, PE
Vice President
SCS Engineers
2520 Whitehall Park Drive, Suite 450
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
Office – 704.504.3107
Direct - 704-916-1529
Mobile – 704.576.4731

From: Workman, John [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 3:09 PM
To: Chao, Ming-tai
Cc: Lamb, Steve; Sharon Korleski; Murray, John E; Patrone, John
Subject: RE: Comments on the Certified CQA Report, Great Oak MSWLF, Cell 1A, 76-07, DIN 27151

Ming,

John Patrone noticed the IUP was not signed by the City of Asheboro. Attached is the signed permit. I apologize for the
inconvenience.

From: Chao, Ming-tai [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 5:12 PM
To: Workman, John <[e-mail]>
Cc: Lamb, Steve ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; Sharon Korleski <[e-mail]>;
Murray, John E <[e-mail]>; Patrone, John <[e-mail]>
Subject: Comments on the Certified CQA Report, Great Oak MSWLF, Cell 1A, 76-07, DIN 27151

Dear Mr. Workman: DIN 27151

The Solid Waste Section (SWS) completed a review of the certified CQA Report for Cell 1A of Great Oak
MSWLF (DIN 27130). Please provide the additional information, documents, or responses to the comments
below:

Please provide a copy of the following documents and/or permits prior to receiving the permitted waste for
disposal at the landfill:
1. Vehicle scale calibration documents (Scale house).

2. Please provide a copy of the Industrial Use Permit including pretreatment requirements, if any issued by
the City of Asheboro Wastewater Treatment Plan (Appendix I-1).
The gross capacity of the Phase1 in the Facility Plan must be revised due to the following reasons:
1. The final grades at Phase 1, Cells 1A & 1B was modified due to interference of a Duke Energy power
pole anchor. The reduction of the air space volume of 26,123 cubic yards (CY) is reported in the
Section 3.2.3 of the CQA Report (DIN 27130). For the sake of consistency of documents & permits,
Waste Management (WM) can either
a. Revise the final grade elevations of the final cover system of the Phase 1 and submit a new set of the
revise drawings without changing the approved capacity or
3
b. Change the gross capacity of Phase 1, Cell 1A & B accordingly. Without sacrificing the approved
total gross capacity for the landfill, a statement in the Facility Plan that WM of Carolinas, Inc. is not
ceding the original approved capacity of 37,801,000 CY due to this field modification is required.

2. According to the Permit Condition No. 18, Part II of Attachment 2 - Permit to Construct for the Phase 1
(DIN 25142) the Phase 1 has an approved gross capacity of 6,978,961 CY. However, the sum of gross
capacity of the 7 individual cell (Cell 1 through 7) of the Phase 1, stated in the Permit Condition No. 42,
Part II of Attachment 3 – Draft Permit to Operate for the Phase 1 (DIN 25142), is 6,948,960 CY; There
is approximately 30,000- CY difference. The capacity data in the permit was incorporated from the
previously document submitted by WM; therefore, please re-examine the capacity data calculations to
confirm the gross capacity of Phase 1. The gross capacity for each Cells 1A & 1B must be provided as
well (referring item 1 above) which will be incorporated into the new Permit Approval to Operate –
Phase 1, Cell A in the coming days.
The following are comments on the CQA Report (DIN 27130) dated December 07, 2016 and received by the
Solid Waste Section on December 08, 2016.
1. (Section 8.2, Table 4) Please provide requested data, explanation or description below:
a. The survey data (easting, northing, and elevations, thickness) of the same survey points in Table 4
are different from the those in the As-built Drawing No. 03 of 3. Please clarify.
b. Survey points 7419 & 7444 are located on the 3 to 1 sloped area; the protective cover thickness (that
is measured perpendicular to the sloped surface) shall be equal to or more than 2.10 feet. Therefore,
thickness of protective cover at these areas in Table 4 (2.03 feet at point 7419 & 2.05 feet at point
7444) fail to meet the specification. Please explain why the data is acceptable.
c. Please describe how the compaction criteria for the protective soil cover layer was achieved
(referring Technical Specification Section 31 2323.13).

2. (Appendix A) The location SF-33 is not shown on the Drawing No. 1 of 1.

3. (Appendix C-4) Please provide the missing documents:
a. Samples DXP-6 and DXP-9 are shown on the drawing but not in the Geomembrane Seam
Logs. Please clarify.

b. The Geomembrane Repair Log does not contain the location of Defect Code 11R in the
Geomembrane Defect Log. This defect location is likely not tested by vacuum test, either according
to the Geomembrane Repair Vacuum Test Log. Please clarify.

c. Pane T-28 shall be seamed to secondary liner at two locations but one seam location was not
documented/available in the Geomembrane Seam Log; and the section was not vacuum tested, either
according to the Geomembrane Repair Vacuum Test Log. Please provide the data.

4. (Appendix F-3) Please provide the as-built drawing of the leachate forcemain runs/alignments and/or
manholes from the on-site lift (pump) station to the first manhole(s) located outside the landfill property
boundary, a component of the sewer system owned by the City of Asheboro. This is one of the requests
stated in the November 29, 2016 e-mail message (DIN 27069) which has not been properly responded
yet.

5. (Appendix G) Please provide the final test results produced by the soil laboratory. Draft data is not
acceptable for the Final CQA Report.

4
6. (Appendix J)
a. The as-built drawings shall be signed and sealed by the licensed surveyor or professional engineer
registered in the State of North Carolina (Section 6.8 of the CQA Plan).

b. The contour line of elevation 630 feet amsl is likely a typo of 620 feet (Drawing No. 01 of
3). Please make a correction.

c. The survey frequency and spacing shown the Drawing No. 03 of 3 do not satisfy the requirements
(100-feet grids) specified in Section 6.5 of the CQA Plan. Please explain why the survey results are
sufficient and adequate.

d. Please note the as-built layout/alignment of leachate lines (both LCS and LDS in the center of the
Cell 1A) on the Drawing No. 03 of 3.
Please contact me if you have any questions on the above-mentioned comments. Thank you and have a
wonderful evening.

Ming Chao
Ming-Tai Chao, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Permitting Branch, Solid Waste Section
NCDEQ, Division of Waste Management
(Mailing Address)
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646

(Street Address)
Green Square, 217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Tel. [phone]
[e-mail]
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wm/sw

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Chao, Ming-tai
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 5:04 PM
To: 'Workman, John' <[e-mail]>
Cc: 'Lamb, Steve' <[e-mail]>; Murray, John E <[e-mail]>
Subject: Certified CQA Report, Great Oak MSWLF, Cell 1A, 76-07

Dear Mr. Workman:

The Solid Waste Section (SWS) received the certified CQA Report for Cell 1A of Great Oak MSWLF today,
the document is uploaded to the tracking system with a DIN 27130. The SWS will review this document
shortly. Have a wonderful evening.

5
Ming Chao
Ming-Tai Chao, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Permitting Branch, Solid Waste Section
NCDEQ, Division of Waste Management
(Mailing Address)
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646

(Street Address)
Green Square, 217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Tel. [phone]
[e-mail]
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wm/sw

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Recycling is a good thing. Please recycle any printed emails.