44A_ROSCANS_1993

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, XTXMA1
Health and Natural Resources • •
Winston-Salem Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Governor y � H N F1
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretor
Leesha Fuller, Regional Manager
June 30, 1993
Mr. Norman Divers, III
DSA Design Group
5511 Capital Center Drive
Suite P-100
Raleigh, NC 27606
Subject: Completeness Review
Proposed Haywood County Construction and Demolition Landfill
Dear Mr. Divers:
The Solid Waste Section has conducted a preliminary completeness review of the referenced
application. The purpose of this review is to determine whether the information required
in the Solid Waste Management Rules has been submitted. After a complete application is
received, another review will be conducted to evaluate the technical merits of the project.
The following comments must be addressed in order to continue the review on this project:
1. An aerial photograph and a blueprint of the photo must be submitted as
required by 15A NCAC 13B .0504(1)(a). The photo that was submitted shows
nothing to the west of the site, and does not specifically identify property
boundaries, zoning and land use, homes, buildings, utilities, springs, wells, or
the floodplain.
2. A two mile map as required by 15A NCAC 13B .0504(1)(b) must be
submitted.
3. Local government approval as required by 15A NCAC 13B .0504(1)(e) must
be submitted.
4. The following siting and design requirements must be addressed:
a) The information submitted does not demonstrate that this project will
not damage or destroy an archaeological site, as required by 15A
NCAC 13B .0503(1)(b)(iii).
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100, Winston -Salem, North Carolina 27106-3203
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Page Two
June 30, 1993
Mr. Divers
b) The application does not demonstrate compliance with the buffer
requirements of .0503(2)(0, specifically the 500 foot minimum buffer
between private dwellings and wells and disposal areas.
c) Documentation should be provided which shows that requirements of
the Sedimentation Pollution Control Law have been met.
There is another matter that concerns us regarding the development of this landfill. It has
come to our attention that excavation and placement of waste have already been initiated
on this site. Please be advised that the Solid Waste Management Rules, 15A NCAC 13B
.0201(b)(1) state, "...An applicant shall not clear or grade land or commence construction
for a solid waste management facility until a construction permit has been issued." If it is
Haywood County's intention to fill this site according to plans approved with LCID permit
No. 44-A, then the construction plan submitted for the C&D landfill should be revised to
reflect the excavation and LCID disposal activities.
These comments are intended to expedite the review process, and in no way do they restrict
the Section's right to request additional information following further review. For
clarification or discussion of these comments, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Janis D. McHargue
Western Area Engineer
Solid Waste Section
cc: Julian Foscue
Jim Coffey
Jim Patterson ,/

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
September 28, 1992
Gary D. McKay
Haywood County Courthouse Annex
Waynesville, NC 28786
Subject: Completeness Review
Haywood County Demolition Landfill
Haywood County
Dear Mr. McKay:
Margaret Plemmons Foster
Regional Manager
The Solid Waste Section has conducted a preliminary review of the referenced application for completeness.
The following information must be submitted in order to continue the review process.
1. A copy of the deed or other legal description of the site and property owner's name should
be provided.
2. The landfilling limits should be clearly shown on the construction plan, both horizontal
boundaries and final contours.
3. It must be shown that waste will be a minimum of four (4) feet above the seasonal high
water table.
These comments are intended to expedite the review process, and in no way do they restrict the Section's
right to request further information following further review. For clarification or discussion of these comments,
please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Janis D. McHargue
Western Area Engineer
Solid Waste Section
cc: Jim Coffey
Julian Foscue
Jim Patterson ✓"
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100, Winston-Salem, N.C. 27106-3203 • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

[Fwd: Re: Haywood County LCID (44-A)]
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Haywood County LCID (44-A)]
From: Jim Patterson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:53:12 -0500
CC: Deborah Aja <[e-mail]>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Haywood County LCID (44-A)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:42:55 -0500
From: [e-mail]
To: "Jim Barber" <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail],Wayne.Sullivan"
<[e-mail]>"@scco91.its.state.nc.us
Jim,
Before I left the office this evening, I rummaged around my cube, Bill
Holcutt's
old cube (where John Murray sits), and downstairs in the room across the
hall from the file room (where there is a box or two from when we worked
in the basement). Downstairs, I found the transmittal from Lisa Hampton
of MESCO for the renewal of Haywood County's LCID landfill (addressed to
Jim Coffey and stamped into the Raleigh Office 6/13/2001). It included
drawings
showing existing elevations, proposed final elevations, and a life
expectancy
calculation - not enough to upgrade an old site permitted under demo
rules
to an LCID permit. However, the volume calcs only estimated an
aditional
life of 0.72 years (8.6 months) from June of 2001 (until approximately
March
of 2002), so it would appear the site should be closed anyway.
I'll copy Jim P. with this message and call him tomorrow about the site
to
see if it is still operating. If not, do you want me to request the
county
to verify cover depth in order to complete closure?
Interestingly, the MESCO drawings show the location of "MW #2" in the
upper
center of the existing and proposed fill drawings for the LCID.
However,
the well is not tied to any physical feature, property boundary, or to
any
contour lines. Monitoring well A (or #1) is not referenced. I've left
a
copy on my desk in case you want to look at it.
If we can get abandonment records for this well and cover depth info for
the LCID, then perhaps we can do a combined closure for both facilities
as
we discussed on Tuesday.
Let me know what you think.
Tim
Tim Jewett
Western Area Engineer
Solid Waste Section
1 of 1 12/2/2004 4:54 PM

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Winston-Salem Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Governor ok
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretory
Leesha Fuller, Regional Manager
June 30, 1993
Mr. Norman Divers, III KC I � ' ��
DSA Design Group i
5511 Capital Center Drive
Suite P-100
Raleigh, NC 27606
Subject: Completeness Review
Proposed Haywood County Construction and Demolition Landfill
Dear Mr. Divers:
The Solid Waste Section has conducted a preliminary completeness review of the referenced
application. The purpose of this review is to determine whether the information required
in the Solid Waste Management Rules has been submitted. After a complete application is
received, another review will be conducted to evaluate the technical merits of the project.
The following comments must be addressed in order to continue the review on this project:
1. An aerial photograph and a blueprint of the photo must be submitted as
required by 15A NCAC 13B .0504(1)(a). The photo that was submitted shows
nothing to the west of the site, and does not specifically identify property
boundaries, zoning and land use, homes, buildings, utilities, springs, wells, or
the floodplain.
2. A two mile map as required by 15A NCAC 13B .0504(1)(b) must be
submitted.
3. Local government approval as required by 15A NCAC 13B .0504(1)(e) must
be submitted.
4. The following siting and design requirements must be addressed:
a) The information submitted does not demonstrate that this project will
not damage or destroy an archaeological site, as required by 15A
NCAC 13B .0503(1)(b)(iii).
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100, Winston -Salem, North Carolina 27106-3203
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Page Two
June 30, 1993
Mr. Divers
b) The application does not demonstrate compliance with the buffer
requirements of .0503(2)(0, specifically the 500 foot minimum buffer
between private dwellings and wells and disposal areas.
c) Documentation should be provided which shows that requirements of
the Sedimentation Pollution Control Law have been met.
There is another matter that concerns us regarding the development of this landfill. It has
come to our attention that excavation and placement of waste have already been initiated
on this site. Please be advised that the Solid Waste Management Rules, 15A NCAC 13B
.0201(b)(1) state, "...An applicant shall not clear or grade land or commence construction
for a solid waste management facility until a construction permit has been issued." If it is
Haywood County's intention to fill this site according to plans approved with LCID permit
No. 44-A, then the construction plan submitted for the C&D landfill should be revised to
reflect the excavation and LCID disposal activities.
These comments are intended to expedite the review process, and in no way do they restrict
the Section's right to request additional information following further review. For
clarification or discussion of these comments, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Janis D. McHargue
Western Area Engineer
Solid Waste Section
cc: Julian Foscue -�
Jim Coffey
Jim Patterson

01
Memo to File from J. McHargue
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS: Haywood County C&D
Project
December 1, 1992: LCID Permit #44A issued
This permit was reviewed and issued under the Demolition Landfill rules; 15A
NCAC 13B .0506 and .0507 (now repealed).
February 9, 1993:
Site visit was made at the County's request to discuss the possibilities of upgrading
this landfill, which had not been constructed, to a C&D landfill. Individuals present
included Jan McHargue, Sherri Hoyt, Mackie MacKay, Jim Patterson, and Keith
Burruss (County Solid Waste Director). It was pointed out that several siting and
design issues would have to be addressed if the site were to be issued a C&D permit,
including all of .0503 and .0504, and information regarding these landfills found in
Policy Memo # 16. Specific issues that were discussed on site included the presence
of the floodplain, buffers, and hydrogeological issues. It was my understanding that
the County would engage a consultant to prepare an application to submit for our
review.
June 15, 1993:
An application that had been prepared by DSA Design Group was assigned to me
for review, with the hydrogeological study being reviewed in Raleigh.
June 29, 1993:
I had a phone conversation with Jim Patterson and Keith Burruss in which I learned
that the County was already excavating and utilizing this site, and had been doing so
for several months.
June 30, 1993:
I issued a preliminary completeness review, which outlined several areas that needed
to be further addressed. In addition to this, I expressed concern that this site was
already in use. In addition to being a violation of our rules, the premature
development of the site presents a technical problem for this reviewer, since the
existing conditions shown on the submittal have been altered.
July 7, 1993:

E
On July 7,1993, Jan McHargue, Jim Patterson, and Jim Barber visited the referenced
site to look into reports that the County was disposing of waste in this proposed
facility. The following observations were made:
1. There was a sign at the entrance indicating that this was the Haywood County
Wood Waste Landfill, and there were scales and a scalehouse in use. The site
was utilized while we were there. The site manager, Charles George, was
present.
2. Although it is difficult to estimate the area and depth of fill from visual
observations, it appeared that approximately 1/2 to 3/4 acre had been filled.
Portions of the waste had been covered with soil, but the exposed waste
consisted of pallets, brush, and wood waste. The total area of disturbed land
is probably between 1 and 2 acres, with the excavation reaching depths of 10-
15 feet at the deepest point.
3. A berm had been partially constructed along the lower edge of the disturbed
area. There was no visible indication that the location of the berm had been
surveyed and staked prior to beginning its construction, and Mr. George
indicated that he had been instructed to build this berm along a fence line.
It is not known whether this berm is constructed as indicated on the plans that
are currently under review by this Section.
4. No sediment control devices were visible on the site.