1203_BurkeCDLF_SiteSuitabilityReevaluateRequest_DIN27499_20160829

Environmental Engineers, Scientists & Consultants
2211 W. Meadowview Road,
Boone Buildiing, Suite 101 Greensboro, NC 27407
tel: [phone]
fax: [phone]
www.JoyceEngineering.com
August 29, 2016
Mr. Perry Sugg
Permitting Hydrogeologist
Division of Waste Management/Solid Waste Section
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
RE: John’s River Waste Management Facility, Permit No. 12-03
C&D Landfill Expansion Conditional Site Suitability – Request for Reevaluation
JOYCE Project No. 00277.1701.12, Task No. 01
Dear Perry:
On behalf of Burke County, North Carolina, Joyce Engineering (JOYCE) is
submitting this request to reevaluate the site suitability of Phases 1B, 2B, and 3 of the C&D
landfill expansion at the John’s River Waste Management Facility (Permit No. 12-03). The
facility is currently operating in Phase 1A of the C&D expansion, which began accepting
waste in September 2014. JOYCE is currently preparing a permit-to-construct application for
Phases 2A and 4 of the C&D expansion, which are scheduled to be constructed in 2018. The
County has limited capacity to operate in Phase 1A; therefore, they requested that JOYCE
revisit the Conditional Site Suitability Approval and present this request to the Section for
review. The County wishes to gain site suitability approval for Phases 1B, 2B, and 3 in order
to obtain a permit to construct Phase 1B.
On February 28, 2014, the NCDEQ Solid Waste Section (the Section) issued a
Conditional Site Suitability Determination (DIN 20647) for the John’s River C&D Landfill
Expansion. The Section determined the Site Plan Application met the requirements of 15A
NCAC 13B.0536 and .0538, and that the proposed Phases 1A, 2A, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were
suitable for landfill construction and operation; however, the Section determined that the
Phases 1B, 2B, and 3 were not suitable for landfill construction and operation due to a
groundwater contaminant plume from the old C&D-over-MSW landfill (old landfill)
impinging on these phases. In our conversations with the Section about this issue in late 2013
and early 2014, we agreed to monitor the landfill gas and groundwater plume in the area
between the old landfill and the new C&D expansion area for two years; after such time, we
could request a reevaluation of site suitability for Phases 1B, 2B, and 3.
The groundwater contaminant plume on the northeast side of the old landfill, between
the old landfill and the C&D expansion area, was determined to be the result of landfill gas
migration. JOYCE submitted an Addendum to the Corrective Action Plan (ACAP) in August
Mr. Perry Sugg
August 29, 2016
Page 2 of 3

2013 on behalf of Burke County, which added Control of Landfill Gas (LFG) as a remedy for
the area between the old landfill and new C&D expansion area. The Section approved the
ACAP for immediate implementation on September 5, 2013 (DIN19655). In November
2013, seven passive landfill gas vents (GVs) were installed on the northeast side of the old
landfill and JOYCE submitted a Gas Vent Installation and Monitoring Report to the Solid
Waste Section on December 12, 2013.

JOYCE has conducted quarterly LFG monitoring of the area between the two landfills
following the approved ACAP, including the eight GVs, nine temporary gas probes (TGPs),
and several piezometers and monitoring wells (PZ-30S, PZ-31, PZ-34, PZ-35, MW-36, and
MW-38). Table 1 presents the LFG monitoring data for these locations from April 2014
through August 2016, and Drawing 1 shows the locations of the monitoring points.
Unfortunately, one piezometer (PZ-34) and two temporary gas probes (TGP-3 and TGP-6)
have been inadvertently destroyed.

There have been no exceedances of the LEL and few detections of methane in
piezometers PZ-30S, PZ-31, PZ-35, or in temporary gas probes TGP-5, TGP-7, or TGP-8;
therefore, there have been no exceedances of the LEL for methane within the footprint of
Phases 1B. TGP-4 and TGP-9, which are near the boundary between Phases 2B and 3, have
consistently had exceedances of the LEL for methane.

Burke County also agreed to monitor several wells and piezometers in the area
between the two landfills to evaluate migration of the groundwater plume and its potential
impact on Phases 1B, 2B, and 3. Piezometers PZ-36 and PZ-38 were converted to permanent
monitoring wells MW-36 and MW-38, respectively, to serve as performance wells for the
Control of LFG remedy. MW-38 also serves as a compliance well for Phase 1A. In addition,
piezometers PZ-12, PZ 30S, PZ-31, PZ-35 and monitoring well MW-15S are sampled with
each semiannual sampling event for the constituents of concern (COCs) associated with the
northeastern portion of the groundwater plume. The COCs for the northern portion of the
groundwater plume are benzene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, methylene chloride,
tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,2-dichloroethane, and vinyl
chloride. The well and piezometer locations are shown on Drawing 1, and Table 2
summarizes the analytical results for COCs from these wells between February 2013 and May
2016. Chart 1 shows the total COCs (the sum of the detected concentrations of all COCs)
versus time for these wells.

There have been no exceedances of groundwater standards or detections above the
solid waste section reporting limits for any of the COCs in PZ-12, PZ-30S, PZ-31, or PZ-35
since July 2013; so the COC plume does not appear to extend very far, if at all, into the
footprints of Phases 1B, 2B or 3. Also, the concentrations of total COCs appear to show
downward trends in MW-36, MW-15S, and PZ-31, and the concentrations in MW-38 appear
stable (see Chart 1). This indicates that the groundwater plume in this area is receding, not
expanding.
Mr. Perry Sugg
August 29, 2016
Page 3 of 3

It is our understanding that nothing in the NC Solid Waste Management Regulations
precludes permitting a landfill over an existing groundwater plume; however, we understand
the Section’s concern about monitorability. Given that the plume does not extend far under
Phases 1B, 2B, or 3, and that the plume appears to be receding, we contend that the existing
plume will not prevent adequate monitoring of the proposed new phases. On behalf of Burke
County, we request that the Section reevaluate site suitability for Phases 1B, 2B, and 3 of the
John’s River C&D Landfill Expansion. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding
this request.

Sincerely,
JOYCE ENGINEERING

Van Burbach, Ph.D., P.G.
Senior Technical Consultant

Attachments: Table 1, Table 2, Chart 1, Drawing 1

cc: Chris Hollifield – General Services Director, Burke County, NC
Allen Gaither, NCDEQ-SWS
Jackie Drummond, NCDEQ-SWS

TA
B
L
E

1
:

L
a
n
d
f
i
l
l

G
a
s

(
L
F
G
)

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

in

v
i
c
i
n
i
t
y

o
f

P
h
as
e
s

1
B
,

2
B
,

a
n
d

3
4/
9
/
2
0
1
4

8
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
2
/
2
0
1
4

3
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
5

5
/
2
1
/
2
0
1
5

7
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5

1
2
/
9
/
2
0
1
5

2
/
1
9
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
1
7
/
2
0
1
6

8
/
2
3
/
2
0
1
6
GV
-
1

5
8
.
0

5
7
.
7
63
.
3

6
1
.
4

5
6
.
4

5
8
.
4

5
9
.
6

6
0
.
0

5
9
.
1

4
8
.
7
GV
-
2

5
7
.
9

5
9
.
1
65
.
1

6
2
.
9

5
7
.
4

6
0
.
5

6
0
.
3

6
0
.
1

6
1
.
5

6
0
.
0
GV
-
3

5
7
.
9

5
8
.
5
64
.
8

6
2
.
8

5
7
.
3

6
0
.
4

6
0
.
1

6
0
.
2

6
1
.
6

6
0
.
5
GV
-
4

6
2
.
5

6
2
.
3
66
.
1

6
2
.
9

5
9
.
8

6
2
.
8

6
1
.
8

6
1
.
2

6
4
.
9

6
1
.
1
GV
-
5

5
9
.
9

6
0
.
0
60
.
4

6
2
.
0

5
7
.
3

6
0
.
8

5
9
.
0

5
9
.
4

6
1
.
2

4
3
.
7
GV
-
6

2
7
.
9

5
9
.
3
65
.
6

6
3
.
1

5
6
.
8

6
0
.
2

6
0
.
8

6
0
.
2

6
1
.
0

6
0
.
2
GV
-
7

1
.
1

4
0
.
5
28
.
5

1
6
.
2

3
4
.
4

3
1
.
1

4
0
.
1

4
1
.
1

4
0
.
1

3
2
.
1
GP
-
1

S

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
GP
-
1

D

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
GP
-
2

S

5
7
.
1

5
6
.
9
62
.
5

6
2
.
0

5
5
.
2

5
6
.
2

5
9
.
9

6
0
.
1

5
8
.
7

5
6
.
3
GP
-
2

I

6
0
.
2

5
8
.
1
62
.
8

6
1
.
7

5
5
.
8

5
7
.
9

5
8
.
5

5
8
.
6

5
8
.
6

5
8
.
2
GP
-
2

D

5
9
.
8

5
8
.
3
63
.
0

6
1
.
6

5
5
.
9

5
8
.
1

5
7
.
9

5
8
.
1

5
8
.
7

5
6
.
4
GP
-
3

S

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
GP
-
3

D

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
2

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
GP
-
4

n
y
i

n
y
i
62
.
2

4
1
.
7

5
5
.
4

5
6
.
2

5
7
.
7

5
2
.
1

5
8
.
5

3
3
.
2
GP
-
5

n
y
i

n
y
i
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
1

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
GP
-
6

n
y
i

n
y
i
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
2

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
TG
P
-
1

4
5
.
6

3
1
.
5
23
.
9

3
6
.
4

3
6
.
0

1
9
.
1

2
8
.
7

4
5
.
2

3
0
.
8

1
3
.
3
TG
P
-
2

3
3
.
7

1
6
.
8
9.
8

2
7
.
7

2
2
.
8

6
.
8

6
.
8

1
6
.
1

1
1
.
4

2
.
7
TG
P
-
4

3
3
.
3

6
7
.
8
50
.
9

5
4
.
2

6
2
.
2

3
6
.
1

8
3
.
6

3
0
.
3

5
6
.
1

3
4
.
3
TG
P
-
5

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
1

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
1

0
.
0
TG
P
-
6

2
9
.
5

2
1
.
7
0.
0

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-
-

-
-
-

-
-
-
TG
P
-
7

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
1

0
.
1

0
.
1

0
.
1

0
.
0

0
.
0
TG
P
-
8

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
TG
P
-
9

1
0
.
0

1
8
.
7
0.
0

1
4
.
9

1
7
.
6

5
.
2

1
8
.
3

6
.
1

1
1
.
0

9
.
2
TG
P
-
1
0

0
.
1

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
PZ
-
3
0
S

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
PZ
-
3
1

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
PZ
-
3
5

0
.
0

0
.
0
0.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0

0
.
0
MW
-
3
6

0
.
4

5
7
.
6
42
.
6

5
1
.
9

4
2
.
3

4
8
.
5

5
7
.
3

1
6
.
8
2.
5

3
5
.
0
MW
-
3
8

0
.
5

0
.
0
2.
2

0
.
0

5
.
0

1
0
.
7

8
.
7
43
.
8

0
.
5

0
.
0
CH
4 =

M
e
t
h
a
n
e
.

G
P

=

G
a
s

P
r
o
b
e
.

M
W

=

M
o
n
i
t
o
i
r
n
g

W
e
l
l
.

n
y
i

=

N
o
t

y
e
t

i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
.
GV

=

G
a
s

V
e
n
t
.

T
G
P

=

T
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y

G
a
s

P
r
o
b
e
.

P
Z

=

P
i
e
z
o
m
e
t
e
r
.

-
-
-

=

N
o

l
o
n
g
e
r

e
x
i
s
t
s
.
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH 4 (%Vol.)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
r

LF
G

W
e
l
l

I
D
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
CH
4

(%
V
o
l
.
)
Bu
r
k
e

C
o
.

-

J
o
h
n
'
s

R
i
v
e
r

L
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
Pe
r
m
i
t

#

1
2
-
0
3
Joyce Enginering
TABLE 2: Constituents of Concern (COCs) in vicinity of Phases 1B, 2B, and 3
Analyte Sample Date DL SWSL MW-38 MW-36 MW-15S PZ-12 PZ-30S PZ-31 PZ-35
Benzene 18-Feb-13 0.25 1.0 ---8.0 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.25 1.0 --- --- --- --- ---7.6 ---
NC 2L = 1 µg/L (10/23/07) 6-May-14 0.25 1.0 6.5 8.7 4.6 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.25 1.0 5.9 8.3 3.3 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.25 1.0 4.9 5.8 2.0 ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.25 1.0 4.4 5.8 1.2 ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.25 1.0 5.4 6.7 1.3 ND ND ND ND
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 18-Feb-13 0.33 1.0 ---18.0 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.33 1.0 --- --- --- ---6.5 ---
NC 2L = 6 µg/L (01/01/10) 6-May-14 0.33 1.0 13.5 10.0 2.3 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.33 1.0 12.9 15.2 1.6 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.33 1.0 12.3 18.7 1.4 ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.33 1.0 12.2 19.6 1.0 ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.33 1.0 13.3 16.5 0.9JNDNDNDND
1,1-Dichloroethane 18-Feb-13 0.32 5.0 ---7.9 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.32 5.0 --- --- --- --- ---11.3 ---
NC 2L = 6 µg/L (01/01/10) 6-May-14 0.32 5.0 8.1 11.6 7.1 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.32 5.0 6.9 9.0 4.9JNDNDNDND
21-May-15 0.32 5.0 5.5 4.8 J 2.4JNDNDNDND
9-Dec-15 0.32 5.0 7.2 5.9 2.2 J ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.32 5.0 6.5 5.9 1.5 J ND ND ND ND
1,2-Dichloroethane 18-Feb-13 0.12 1.0 ---1.0 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.12 1.0 --- --- --- --- --- 0.54 J ---
NC 2L = 0.4 µg/L (01/01/10) 6-May-14 0.12 1.0 ND 0.78 J ND --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.12 1.0 0.63 J 0.92 J ND ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.12 1.0 0.00 0.00 ND ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.24 1.0 0.70 J 0.66 J ND ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.24 1.0 0.74 J 0.92 J ND ND ND ND ND
Methylene Chloride 18-Feb-13 0.97 1.0 ---17.9 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.97 1.0 --- --- --- --- ---16.4 ---
NC 2L = 5 µg/L (01/01/10) 6-May-14 0.97 1.0 ND 24.1 16.7 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.97 1.0 ND 15.7 1.6 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.97 1.0 ND 9.5 B 4.4 B ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.97 1.0 ND 11.2 B 2.6 B ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.97 1.0 ND 3.1 2.0 ND ND ND ND
Tetrachloroethene 18-Feb-13 0.46 1.0 ---5.5 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.46 1.0 --- --- --- --- ---7.8 ---
NC 2L = 0.7 µg/L (10/23/07) 6-May-14 0.46 1.0 ND 7.9 6.9 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.46 1.0 ND 7.3 5.2 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.46 1.0 ND 6.0 3.3 ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.46 1.0 ND 5.0 2.1 ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.46 1.0 ND 4.5 2.0 ND ND ND ND
Trichloroethene 18-Feb-13 0.47 1.0 ---3.6 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.47 1.0 --- --- --- --- ---5.8 ---
NC 2L = 3 µg/L (01/01/10) 6-May-14 0.47 1.0 2.1 6.0 4.3 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.47 1.0 1.8 5.1 3.4 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.47 1.0 0.9 J 3.5 2.1 ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.47 1.0 2.1 2.9 1.1 ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.47 1.0 1.7 3.1 ND ND ND ND
Vinyl chloride 18-Feb-13 0.62 1.0 --- 1.2 --- --- ND --- ND
18-Jul-13 0.62 1.0 --- --- --- --- --- ND ---
NC 2L = 0.03 µg/L (01/01/10) 6-May-14 0.62 1.0 ND 1.1 ND --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 0.62 1.0 ND 0.87 J ND ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.62 1.0 ND 0.00 ND ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 0.62 1.0 ND 0.80 J ND ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 0.62 1.0 ND 0.80 J ND ND ND ND ND
Methane 18-Feb-13 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
(Dissolved Methane) 18-Jul-13 --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
6-May-14 0.66 2.0 4150 348 9940 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 3.30 6.6 6820 8450 13000 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 0.63 10.0 4900 173 4680 2.0 J 1.5 J 1.7 J 2.0 J
9-Dec-15 0.63 10.0 3112 3780 8550 3.0 J 2.5 J 4.8 J 2.7 J
4-May-16 0.49 10.0 4040 8920 7860 1.6 J 1.6 J 1.8 J 2.3 J
Sum of COCs:18-Feb-13 ND 63.10 --- --- ND --- ND
(Sum of above constituents, 18-Jul-13 --- --- --- --- --- 55.94 ---
excluding methane.) 6-May-14 30.20 70.18 41.90 --- ND ND ND
22-Oct-14 28.13 62.39 20.00 ND ND ND ND
21-May-15 23.62 48.30 15.60 ND ND ND ND
9-Dec-15 26.60 51.86 10.20 ND ND ND ND
4-May-16 27.64 41.52 7.65 ND ND ND ND
All concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/l) = parts per billion. ND = Not Detected above the DL.
DL = Laboratory Detection Limit. J = Estimated value - Concentration is less than the SWSL but greater than the DL.
SWSL = Solid Waste Section Reporting Limit. B = Blank-Qualified (Concentration suspected to reflect laboratory or field contamination).
NC 2L = Groundwater Standard from 15A NCAC 2L.0202. --- = Not reported or not sampled.
Values above the NC 2L Standard are bold.
Burke Co. - John's River Landfill
Permit # 12-03
Joyce Engineering
Bu
k
e
 Co
.
,
 Jo
h
n
'
s
 Ri
v
e
r
 La
n
d
f
i
l
l
Pe
r
m
i
t
 #1
2
‐03
Joyce  Engineering
0.
0
0
10
.
0
0
20
.
0
0
30
.
0
0
40
.
0
0
50
.
0
0
60
.
0
0
70
.
0
0
80
.
0
0
F
e
b
‐
1
3
M
a
r
‐
1
3
A
p
r
‐
1
3
M
a
y
‐
1
3
J
u
n
‐
1
3
J
u
l
‐
1
3
A
u
g
‐
1
3
S
e
p
‐
1
3
O
c
t
‐
1
3
N
o
v
‐
1
3
D
e
c
‐
1
3
J
a
n
‐
1
4
F
e
b
‐
1
4
M
a
r
‐
1
4
A
p
r
‐
1
4
M
a
y
‐
1
4
J
u
n
‐
1
4
J
u
l
‐
1
4
A
u
g
‐
1
4
S
e
p
‐
1
4
O
c
t
‐
1
4
N
o
v
‐
1
4
D
e
c
‐
1
4
J
a
n
‐
1
5
F
e
b
‐
1
5
M
a
r
‐
1
5
A
p
r
‐
1
5
M
a
y
‐
1
5
J
u
n
‐
1
5
J
u
l
‐
1
5
A
u
g
‐
1
5
S
e
p
‐
1
5
O
c
t
‐
1
5
N
o
v
‐
1
5
D
e
c
‐
1
5
Jan‐16 Feb‐16 Mar‐16 Apr‐16 May‐16
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
µ
g
/
l
)
Ch
a
r
t
 1:

To
t
a
l
 CO
C
s
 vs
.
 Ti
m
e
 in
 vi
c
i
n
i
t
y
 of
 Ph
a
s
e
s
 1B
,
 2B
,
 & 3
MW ‐38 MW ‐36 MW ‐15S PZ ‐12 PZ ‐30S PZ ‐31 PZ ‐35