Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1107_Buncombe_MSWLF_CDLF_Permit_WQMP_FID1576824_20210408WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL ALEXANDER, NORTH CAROLINA Permit No. 1107-MSWLF-1996 Permit No. 1107-CDLF-1998 Prepared For: Buncombe County BLE Project Number J21-9378-11R %0111 �1 +1 1 `►f.' • February 19, 2021 A41 I NS 1 5 wAkJ . ,. ����1l111f141115 SEAL 1043 �111 ;IJ �Ilf �- e�-1111 BLE North Carolina Business Licenses C-284 & C-1538 JJ IM IM BLJNNELL LAMMONS ENruNEERING 6004 Ponders Court I Greenville, 5C 29615 864-288.1265 A 864,286.4330 a info@ble[orp.rom BLECORMOM � CANNONS ENGINEERING February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Solid Waste Department 81 Panther Branch Road Alexander, North Carolina 28701 Attention: Ms. Kristy Smith Subject: Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill Alexander, North Carolina Facility Permit Numbers: 1107-CDLF-1998 & 1107-MSWLF-1996 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11R Dear Ms. Smith: Bunnell-Lammons Engineering, Inc. (BLE) is pleased to present this Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP) for the Buncombe County Landfill located in Alexander, North Carolina. This plan is being submitted in general accordance with North Carolina Rules for Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B .0601, and .1630 through .1637 (groundwater), 15A NCAC 13B .0602 (surface water), and 15A NCAC 13B .1626(12)(c) (leachate) for the Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWLF); and 15A NCAC 13B .0544(b) (groundwater) and 15A NCAC 13B 0544(c) (surface water) for the Construction and Demolition Landfill (CDLF). The plan contained herein includes procedures performed at the facility in the past and incorporates the future development of the CDLF Phase 7 expansion area. In summary, this plan includes the use of existing groundwater monitoring wells and surface water monitoring points with no additions for the CDLF Phase 7 expansion area or for the MSWLF. We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your geological and environmental consultant on this project and look forward to continued work with you at the Buncombe County Landfill. If you have any questions, please contact us at (864) 288-1265. Sincerely, BUNNELL-LAMMONs ENGINEERING, INC. aC/ Andrew W. AA1ex1rJ1i1er, P.U., RS Senior Hydrogeologist Registered, NC No. 1475 cc: Ms. Jaclynne Drummond — DWM-ARO *arrS. /Preddy, P.G. Senior Hydrogeologist Registered, NC No. 1043 Attachments: Table of Contents Tables Figures Appendices 6004 Ponders Court, Greenville, SC 29615 (,864.288.1265 a 864.288.4430 Wg info@hleMrp.com BLECORP.COM 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina TABLE OF CONTENTS February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... I 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS......................................................................................................... 2 3.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN.............................................................................. 3 3.1 Groundwater Monitoring................................................................................................................. 3 3.1.1 Monitoring Well Network..................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2 Changes in Groundwater Elevations..................................................................................... 5 3.1.3 Monitoring Well Construction.............................................................................................. 5 3.1.4 Monitoring Well Development............................................................................................. 6 3.1.5 Maintenance and Recordkeeping.......................................................................................... 7 3.1.6 Monitoring Well Abandonment............................................................................................ 7 3.1.7 Detection Monitoring Program............................................................................................. 8 3.1.7.1 Sampling Frequency......................................................................................................... 8 3.1.7.2 Establishment of Baseline Data........................................................................................ 9 3.1.7.3 Evaluation of Detection Monitoring Data......................................................................... 9 3.1.$ Assessment Monitoring Program.......................................................................................... 9 3.19 Groundwater Sampling Methodology................................................................................. 10 3.1.9.1 Sample Collection Sequence........................................................................................... 11 3.1.9.1.1 Sampling Frequency.................................................................................................11 3.1.9.1.2 Static Water Elevations.............................................................................................11 3.1.9.1.3 Well Evacuation........................................................................................................11 3.1.9.1.3.1 Standard Evacuation Procedures........................................................................11 3.1.9.1.3.2 Low -Flow Procedures........................................................................................12 3.1.93A Sample Collection Sequence.....................................................................................13 3.1.9.1.5 Decontamination.......................................................................................................14 3.1.9.2 Sample Preservation and Handling................................................................................. 14 3.1.9.3 Chain -of -Custody Program............................................................................................. 15 3.1.9.3.1 Sample Labels...........................................................................................................15 3.1.9.3.2 Sample Seal...............................................................................................................15 3.1.9.3.3 Field Logbook...........................................................................................................15 3.1.9.3A Chain -of -Custody Record.........................................................................................16 3.1.9.4 Analytical Procedures..................................................................................................... 16 3.1.9.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program........................................................... 17 3.1.10 Statistical Methods (Optional)............................................................................................ 18 3.2 Surface Water Monitoring............................................................................................................. 18 3.2.1 Sampling Locations............................................................................................................. 18 3.2.2 Monitoring Frequency......................................................................................................... 18 3.2.3 Surface Water Sampling Methodology............................................................................... 18 3.2.3.1 Sample Collection........................................................................................................... 19 3.2.3.1.1 Dipper Method..........................................................................................................19 3.2.3.1.2 Direct Method...........................................................................................................19 3.2.3.1.3 Decontamination.......................................................................................................19 3.2.3.2 Sample Preservation and Handling................................................................................. 19 3.2.3.3 Chain -of -Custody Program............................................................................................. 20 i of ii 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 3.2.3.3.1 Sample Labels........................................................................................................... 20 3.2.3.3.2 Sample Seal...............................................................................................................20 3.2.3.3.3 Field Logbook...........................................................................................................20 3.2.3.3.4 Chain -of -Custody Record......................................................................................... 21 3.2.3.4 Analytical Procedures..................................................................................................... 21 3.2.3.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program........................................................... 22 3.3 Leachate Monitoring...................................................................................................................... 23 3.3.1 Sampling Location.............................................................................................................. 23 3.3.2 Monitoring Frequency and Parameters............................................................................... 23 3.3.3 Leachate Sampling Methodology....................................................................................... 23 3.4 Reporting....................................................................................................................................... 24 3.4.1 Monitoring Well Installation and Abandonment Reports ................................................... 24 3.4.2 Water Quality Reports........................................................................................................ 24 4.0 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................25 Tables Table 1 Groundwater Monitoring Well Data Table 2 Sampling Matrix Table 3 Sampling and Preservation Procedures Table 4 Surface Water Sampling Point Data Figures Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Water Quality and Landfill Gas Environmental Monitoring Systems Figure 3 Groundwater Elevation Contour Map — October 26-30, 2020 Figure 4 Groundwater Monitoring Well Detail Appendices Appendix A Monitoring Well Construction Records Appendix B Appendix I and Appendix II Constituent Lists Appendix C NCDEQ Memoranda and Reporting Limits and Standards Appendix D Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form Appendix E Low -Flow Groundwater Purging and Sampling Guidance ii of ii 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 1.0 INTRODUCTION The subject 654-acre landfill site is located in Buncombe County, North Carolina, approximately nine miles north of the city of Asheville with a physical address of 81 Panther Branch Road in Alexander, North Carolina (Figure 1). Buncombe County owns and operates a Subtitle D MSWLF, which includes Cell 1 through Cell 6 and a CDLF consisting of Phase 1 through Phase 5. Currently, Cell 6 of the MSWLF and Phase 6 of the CDLF are the active waste units. MSWLF Cell 7 has been permitted for construction and MSWLF Cells 8 through 10 are planned (but not permitted) for fixture expansion. Buncombe County intends to expand the existing CDLF facility by constructing the next planned expansion area designated Phase 7 which is approximately 13.4 acres. Phase 7 includes 8.8 acres designed as a piggyback on top of CDLF Phases 5 and 6 and 4.6 acres of new expansion area north and west of CDLF Phase 6. SCS Engineers, PC (SCS) has been retained by Buncombe County to prepare an application for a permit to construct for Phase 7. SCS has been retained by Buncombe County to conduct a design hydrogeologic investigation for Phase 7 required under North Carolina's Solid Waste Management Rules, Title 15A Section 13B .0538(b)(1-2) for a Design Hydrogeologic Report (DHR). That work is reported under separate cover. Buncombe County has requested that BLE prepare a comprehensive Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP) for submittal to the North Carolina Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section (SWS), which consolidates the monitoring plans for the operational and permitted expansion areas of the MSWLF with the operational and expansion areas of the CDLF. We understand that this WQMP will be included as part of the application for a permit to construct CDLF Phase 7, which will be prepared by SCS. The objective of this project is to prepare a WQMP, which will include procedures and locations for groundwater, surface water, and leachate monitoring as required following North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Solid Waste Management Rules: • MSWLF Groundwater —North Carolina Rules for Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B Rules .0601, and .1630 through .1637. • MSWLF Surface Water — North Carolina Rules for Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B Rule .0602. • MSWLF Leachate — North Carolina Rules for Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B Rule .1626(12)(c). • CDLF Groundwater —North Carolina Rules for Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B Rule .0544(b). • CDLF Surface Water —North Carolina Rules for Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B Rule .0544(c). The WQMP herein is designed to detect and quantify contamination, as well as to measure the effectiveness of engineered disposal systems. The groundwater and surface water monitoring networks for this site will be designed to provide an early warning of a potential disposal system failure. The locations of the groundwater, surface water, and leachate monitoring points are indicated on the attached Figure 2 titled Water Quality and Landfill Gas Environmental Monitoring Systems. 1 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The subject site is located within the Blue Ridge geologic belt. The geology of the Blue Ridge Belt consists of metamorphic Precambrian basement rock overlain with unconformable younger Precambrian metamorphosed sedimentary and igneous rocks. The Blue Ridge belt is bordered to the southeast by the Brevard belt and to the northwest by the Valley and Ridge. The Precambrian basement has undergone several episodes of uplift, deformation, faulting, intrusion, metamorphism, and erosion. Locally, the site is geologically underlain by Middle Proterozoic biotite granitic gneiss and migmatitic biotite hornblende gneiss interlayered with amphibolite and calc-silicate rocks (Rhodes and Conrad, 1985; CDM, 2009). The typical residual soil profile consists of clayey and silty soils near the surface, where soil weathering is more advanced, underlain by micaceous sandy silts and silty sands. Residual soil zones develop by the in situ chemical weathering of bedrock, and are commonly referred to as "saprolite." Saprolite usually consists of micaceous sand with large rock fragments and lesser amounts of clay and silt. The boundary between soil and rock is not sharply defined. A transitional zone of partially weathered rock (PWR) is normally found overlying the parent bedrock. Partially weathered rock is defined, for engineering purposes, as residual material with standard penetration resistance (ASTM D 1586) in excess of 100 blows per foot (bpf). Fractures, joints, and the presence of less resistant rock types facilitate weathering. Consequently, the profile of the partially weathered rock and hard rock is quite irregular and erratic, even over short horizontal distances. Also, it is not unusual to find lenses and boulders of hard rock and zones of partially weathered rock within the soil mantle, well above the general bedrock level. 2 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.0 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R This Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP) will serve as a guidance document for collecting and analyzing groundwater, surface water, and leachate samples, evaluating the associated analytical results, and for monitoring existing and potential releases from the Buncombe County Landfill. This WQMP complies with Title 15A, Subchapter 13B Rules .0601, and .1630 through .1637 pertaining to groundwater monitoring, Rule .0602 for surface water monitoring, and Rule .1626(12)(c) for leachate monitoring, Rule .0544(b) for groundwater monitoring, and Rule .0544(c) for surface water monitoring. 3.1 Groundwater Monitoring 3.1.1 Monitoring Well Network The proposed groundwater monitoring network for the Buncombe County Landfill is designed to monitor for potential releases to the uppermost saprolite/PWR and bedrock aquifers at the site (Table 1). The proposed network will consist of two (2) upgradient (background) wells (MW-1 and MW-1D) and twenty- seven (27) downgradient (compliance) wells (MW-2, MW-2D, MW-3R, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-5, MW- 5D, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, MW-8D, MW-10, MW-IOD, MW-11, MW-11D, MW-12, MW-12D, MW-13, MW-13D, MW-14, MW-14D, MW-15, MW-15D, MW-16, MW-16D, MW-17R, and MW-17DR). All monitoring locations currently exist except for MW-16, and MW-16D. Monitoring wells MW-16 and MW-16D are permitted to be installed in conjunction with the development of MSWLF Cell 7. Please note that monitoring wells MW-17R and MW-17DR (for CDLF Phase 7) were already installed in conjunction with the abandonment and replacement of CDLF Phase 6 monitoring wells MW-17 and MW-17D. The location of each well is indicated on the Water Quality and Landfill Gas Environmental Monitoring Systems (Figure 2). A groundwater elevation contour map, which includes the proposed CDLF Phase 7 expansion area, was prepared from water level data collected on October 26-30, 2020 (Figure 3). A description of each groundwater monitoring point in the network and the proposed sequence of installation is provided below. Monitoring Proposed and Existing Monitoring Well Location and Justification Location MW-1 and Existing upgradient (background) monitoring wells installed in the saprolite/PWR and MW-lD bedrock east-southeast of the MSWLF. See Table 1 for additional information. These 2 (existing) wells have been established as the background wells for the facility including MSWLF Cells 1 through 10, CDLF Phases 1 through 6, and are proposed as background wells for CDLF Phase 7. 3 of 26 1s 1M 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R Monitoring Proposed and Existing Monitoring Well Location and Justification Location MW-2, Existing downgradient (compliance) monitoring well locations set to intercept north, south, MW-2D, and west flowing groundwater from the MSWLF Cell 1 through Cell 6 waste units. These MW-3R, wells are set in varying strata including shallow saprolite, PWR, and bedrock. See Table MW-4, 1 and Appendix A for additional information. MW-4D, MW-5, MW-5D, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, MW-8D, MW-10, MW-1 OD, MW-11, MW-11D, MW-13, and MW-13D (existing) MW-12, Existing downgradient (compliance) monitoring well locations set to intercept north and MW-12D, west flowing groundwater from the CDLF Phase 1 through Phase 5 waste units. These MW-14, wells are set in varying strata including saprolite, PWR, and bedrock. See Table 1 and MW-14D, Appendix A for additional information. MW-15, and MW-15D (existing) MW-16 and Future permitted downgradient (compliance) monitoring well locations will be set to MW-16D intercept northern flowing groundwater from the MSWLF Cell 7 waste unit when (future constructed. permitted) MW-17R and Existing downgradient (compliance) monitoring well pair set to intercept north flowing MW-17DR groundwater from operational CDLF Phase 6 and proposed CDLF Phase 7. These wells (existing) are set in bedrock. See Table 1 and Appendix A for additional information. The existing and proposed well locations are selected to yield groundwater samples representative of the conditions in the uppermost saprolite/PWR and bedrock aquifers underlying the facility, and to monitor for potential releases from the landfill units. Well placement, well construction methods, well development, well maintenance, and well abandonment procedures are discussed in the following sections. Groundwater monitoring wells shall be sampled during the active life of the landfill as well as the post -closure period, in accordance with 15A NCAC 13B Rule .1630 and .0544. 4 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.1.2 Changes in Groundwater Elevations February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R After each sampling event, groundwater surface elevations will be evaluated to determine whether the monitoring system remains adequate, and to determine the rate and direction of groundwater flow. The direction of groundwater flow will be determined semiannually by comparing the groundwater surface elevations among the monitoring wells, and constructing a groundwater surface elevation contour map. The groundwater flow rate shall be determined using the following modified Darcy equation: Ki V=— ne where V = the groundwater flow rate (feet/day) K = the hydraulic conductivity (feet/day) i = the hydraulic gradient, Ah/Al (foot/foot) ne = the effective porosity of the host medium (unitless) Ah = the change in groundwater elevation between two wells or groundwater contours (feet) Al = the distance between the same two wells or groundwater contours (feet) If the evaluation shows that the groundwater monitoring system does not satisfy the requirements of the Rules, the monitoring system will be modified accordingly. These modifications may include a change in the number, location, and/or depth of the monitoring wells. 3.1.3 Monitoring Well Construction The well completion information for the existing groundwater monitoring wells are included on Table 1. Completed boring and well construction logs for ten (10) of the existing wells are included in the Appendix A. Boring logs/well construction records for proposed monitoring wells will be submitted to the Solid Waste Section (SWS) following installation. Drilling and installation of any new monitoring wells will be performed in accordance with the specifications outlined in 15A NCAC Subchapter 2C, Section .0100. Further guidance is provided in the Draft North Carolina Water Quality Monitoring Guidance Document for Solid Waste Facilities; Solid Waste Section, Division of Solid Waste Management; Department of Environment, and Natural Resources (March 1995). Each groundwater monitoring well will consist of 2-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC, Schedule 40 ASTM 480, NSF -rated) casing with flush -threaded joints installed in a 5.0-inch (or larger) nominal diameter augered or air -hammered borehole in soil, PWR, or bedrock. The bottom 10-foot to 15-foot section of each well will be a manufactured well screen with 0.010-inch wide machined slots with a 0.20-foot long sediment trap threaded onto the bottom of the screen section. The screen section of each well will be set to intersect the water table in the residual soil or the water -producing fractures in the bedrock. The length of the screen section may be reduced to 5-feet to maintain vertical separation and/or to intercept water -bearing fractures in wells screened in bedrock. Silica filter sand will be placed around the outside of the pipe up to 5 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R approximately 2-feet above the top of the well screen. A hydrated bentonite seal will be installed on top of the filter sand backfill to seal the monitoring well at the desired level. The borehole will then be grouted with a bentonite-cement grout mixture up to the ground surface. The surface completion of each well consisted of a PVC cap and a lockable 4" x 4" x 5' standup protective steel cover, with a 3-foot by 3-foot concrete pad at the base of the steel cover. Each well will be constructed with a vent hole in the PVC casing near the top of the well and a weep hole near the base of the outer protective steel cover. An identification plate will be fastened to the protective steel cover that specifies the well identification number, drilling contractor, date installed, total depth, and construction details. A typical groundwater monitoring well construction detail is attached as Figure 4. A geologist or engineer will oversee drilling activities and prepare boring and well construction logs for each newly installed well. As -built locations of new wells will be located by a surveyor licensed in North Carolina to within +0.1 foot on the horizontal plane and +0.01 foot vertically in reference to existing survey points. A boring log, well construction log, groundwater monitoring network map, and well installation certification will be submitted to the SWS upon completion. 3.1.4 Monitoring Well Development Newly constructed wells will be developed to remove particulates that are present in the well due to construction activities, and to interconnect the well with the aquifer. Development of new monitoring wells will be performed no sooner than 24 hours after well construction. Wells may be developed with disposable bailers, a mechanical well developer, or other approved method. A surge block may be used as a means of assessing the integrity of the well screen and riser. In the event a pump is employed, the design of the pump will be such that any groundwater that has come into contact with air is not allowed to drain back into the well. Each well will be developed until sediment -free water with stabilized field parameters (i.e., temperature, pH, and specific conductance) is obtained. Well development equipment (bailers, pumps, surge blocks) and any additional equipment that contacts subsurface formations will be decontaminated prior to on -site use, between consecutive on -site uses, and/or between consecutive well installations. The purge water will be disposed on the ground surface at least 10 feet downgradient of the monitoring well being purged, unless field characteristics suggest the water will need to be otherwise disposed. If field characteristics suggest, the purge water will be containerized and disposed in the facility's leachate collection system, or by other approved disposal means. Samples withdrawn from the facility's monitoring wells should be clay- and silt -free; therefore, existing wells may require redevelopment from time to time based upon observed turbidity levels during sampling activities. If redevelopment of an existing monitoring well is required, it will be performed in a manner similar to that used for a new well. 6 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.1.5 Maintenance and Recordkeeping February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R The existing monitoring wells will be used and maintained in accordance with design specifications throughout the life of the monitoring program. Routine well maintenance will include inspection and correction/repair, as necessary, of identification labels, concrete aprons, locking caps and locks, and access to the wells. Should it be determined that background or compliance monitoring wells no longer provide samples representative of the quality of groundwater passing the relevant point of compliance, the SWS will be notified. The owner will re-evaluate the monitoring network, and provide recommendations to the SWS for modifying, rehabilitating, abandoning, or installing replacement or additional monitoring wells, as appropriate. Laboratory analytical results will be submitted to the SWS semiannually, along with sample collection field logs, statistical analyses (if used), groundwater flow rate and direction calculations, and groundwater contour map(s) as described in the following sections. Analytical data, calculations, and other relevant groundwater monitoring records will be kept throughout the active life of the facility and the post -closure care period, including notices and reports of any groundwater quality standards (15A NCAC 2L, .0202) exceedances, re -sampling notifications, and re -sampling results. 3.1.6 Monitoring Well Abandonment Piezometers and wells installed within the proposed landfill footprint will be properly abandoned in accordance with the procedures for permanent abandonment, as described in 15A NCAC 2C Rule .0113(b). The piezometers and wells will be progressively abandoned as necessary to complete construction activities. The piezometers and wells that are within proposed waste unit footprints will be over -drilled to remove well construction materials, and then grouted with a cement-bentonite grout. Other piezometers and wells that will potentially interfere with clearing and construction activities will be grouted in place without over -drilling by grouting the well in place with a cement-bentonite grout and removing all surface features, such as concrete aprons, protective casings, and stickups. In each case, the bentonite content of the cement-bentonite grout shall be approximately 5%, and a tremie pipe will be used to ensure that grout is continuously placed from the bottom of the borehole/monitoring well upward. If a monitoring well becomes unusable during the monitoring period of the landfill, the well will be abandoned in accordance with the procedures described above. Approval from the SWS will be obtained prior to abandoning any monitoring well. For each monitoring well abandoned, the following information will be provided to the SWS in a report sealed by a licensed geologist in accordance with 15A NCAC 13B Rule .1623 of the Rules: the monitoring well name, a description of the procedure by which the monitoring well was abandoned, the date when the monitoring well was considered to be taken out of service, and the date when the monitoring well was abandoned. 7 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3,1.7 Detection Monitoring Program February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R Groundwater samples will be obtained and analyzed semiannually for the NC Appendix I list of constituents (Appendix B), as defined in the Detection Monitoring Program for the MSWLF (15A NCAC 13B .1633) and for the CDLF [15A NCAC 13B .0544(a)(1)(D)], during the life of the facility and the post -closure care period (Table 2). Please note that detection monitoring for the CDLF includes analysis of groundwater for tetrahydrof Iran per the North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding Tetrahydofuran Analysis at Construction and Demolition Landfills dated June 25, 2010 (Table 2 and Appendix B). Also note that detection monitoring for the MSWLF and CDLF includes analysis of groundwater for 1,4-dioxane per the North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum 1,4-Dioxane Analysis, Solid Waste Section Limits, and Laboratory Analytical Methods dated May 29, 2018 (Table 2 and Appendix B). The SWS has issued six (6) memoranda concerning guidelines for electronic submittal of monitoring data and environmental reporting limits and standards for constituents. Those memoranda include: 1) New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Monitoring Data (dated October 27, 2006), 2) Addendum to the October 27, 2006 North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Data (dated February 23, 2007), 3) Environmental Monitoring Data for North Carolina Solid Waste Facilities (dated October 16, 2007), 4) Groundwater, Surface Water, Soil, Sediment, and Landfill Gas Electronic Document Submittal (dated November 5, 2014), 5) North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding Guidelines for 14-Day Notification of Groundwater Exceedances Form Submittal per rule: 15A NCAC 13B. 1633(c) (1) (dated September 9, 2016) and 6) North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum New Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Format (dated July 20, 2020). The SWS has also issued a Solid Waste Environmental Monitoring Reporting Limits and Standards — Constituent List (dated October 15, 2018) which consolidates reporting standards and limits for each required constituent. Copies of the memoranda and constituent list are included in Appendix C. The results of the groundwater data (and statistical analysis, if the owner so chooses to perform) will be submitted to the SWS semiannually in accordance with the documents in Appendix C. Sampling reports will be submitted electronically with analytical data submitted in the required format, and be accompanied by the required Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form, which will be signed and sealed by a licensed geologist in the State of North Carolina. A copy of this form is also included in Appendix D for reference. 3.1.7.1 Sampling Frequency Groundwater samples will be collected semiannually and analyzed for NC Appendix I Detection Monitoring constituents (Table 2 and Appendix B) plus required field parameters, including but not limited to, pH, conductivity, turbidity, and temperature. Additional analytical requirements for the CDLF include alkalinity, total dissolved solids, tetrahydrofuran, mercury, chloride, manganese, sulfate, and iron. New monitoring wells will be sampled one time prior to waste placement and then as prescribed in Section 3.1.7.2 of this plan followed by routine semi-annual sampling. If the facility's groundwater monitoring program must progress to Assessment Monitoring, notification and sampling will be conducted according to the schedule specified in Rule .1634 and/or Rule .0545. 8 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 3.1.7.2 Establishment of Baseline Data During future phases of facility development of the CDLF, a minimum of one sample from new each well, background and downgradient, must be collected and analyzed for the required CDLF constituents before waste placement. Routine semiannual sampling and analysis is required for each new monitoring well thereafter. During future phases of facility development of the MSWLF, a minimum of one sample from each new well, background and downgradient, must be collected and analyzed for the required MSWLF constituents before waste placement. Three additional samples must be collected and analyzed from each new monitoring well either before or after waste starts being accepted. All four samples must be collected within a 6-month period. The data will be submitted to the SWS. 3.1.7.3 Evaluation of Detection Monitoring Data If the owner or operator determines that there is an exceedance of the groundwater protection standards (15A NCAC 2L, .0202) for one or more of the required constituents (Table 2, Appendix B) at any monitoring well at the relevant point of compliance, the following procedures will be performed: 1) Notify SWS within the timeframe required in the Rules of the finding and place a notice in the site operating record indicating which constituents have exceeded groundwater protection standards. 2) Within the timeframe required in the Rules, establish an Assessment Monitoring Program meeting the requirements of Rule .1634 and/or Rule .0545, except as discussed below. The data may be re-evaluated within the timeframe required in the Rules to determine that a source other than a landfill unit caused the exceedance, or the exceedance resulted from an error in sampling, analysis, or natural variation in groundwater quality. If it can be demonstrated that one of these factors occurred, a report (Alternate Source Demonstration) certified by a North Carolina licensed geologist or engineer will be submitted to the SWS within the timeframe required in the Rules. A copy of this report will be placed in the operating record. If the SWS approves the demonstration, the Detection Monitoring Program will be resumed with the required semiannual sampling and analysis. If the SWS does not accept the demonstration within the timeframe required in the Rules, the Assessment Monitoring Program will be initiated. 3.1.$ Assessment Monitoring Program Assessment Monitoring (15A NCAC 13B .1634 and .0545) is required whenever a violation of the groundwater quality standards (15A NCAC 2L, .0202) has occurred, and no source of error, alternate source, or naturally occurring condition can be identified. Within the timeframe required in the Rules of triggering the Assessment Monitoring Program, and annually thereafter, groundwater will be sampled for analysis of the NC Appendix II list of constituents (Appendix B). A minimum of one groundwater sample will be collected from each well and submitted for analysis during each Assessment Monitoring sampling event. However, the Rules allow for petitions to the SWS for an appropriate subset of wells or a reduction in the NC Appendix II sampling list. If any NC Appendix 11 constituents are detected in groundwater from the downgradient wells, a minimum of four independent samples will be collected from each background and downgradient well to establish background concentrations for the detected Appendix 11 constituents. 9 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R Within the timeframe required in the Rules and after receipt of the initial or subsequent sampling analytical data, a report identifying the detected NC Appendix II constituents will be submitted to the SWS, and a notice will be placed in the operating record. Background concentrations of any detected NC Appendix II constituents will be established and reported to the SWS. Within the timeframe required in the Rules and on at least a semiannual basis thereafter, the wells will be sampled and analyzed for the NC Appendix I list plus any additional detected Appendix II constituents. An analytical results report of each sampling event will be submitted to the SWS and placed in the facility operating record. The SWS will determine whether Groundwater Protection Standards must be established for the facility [Rules .1634(g) and (h) & Rules .0545(b)(3) and (b)(4)], and may specify a more appropriate alternate sampling frequency for repeated sampling and analysis for the full set of NC Appendix II constituents. Groundwater monitoring will continue in one of two ways, based on the results of the water quality analyses: 1) If the NC Appendix II constituent concentrations are equal to or less than the approved Groundwater Protection Standards for two consecutive sampling events, the facility may resume Detection Monitoring with the approval of SWS. 2) If one or more NC Appendix II constituents are detected in excess of the approved Groundwater Protection Standards, and no source of error can be identified, within the timeframe required in the Rules the SWS will be notified, a notice will be placed in the operating record, and appropriate local government officials will be notified. The facility operator will proceed to characterize the nature and extent of the release [Rule .1634(f)(1) and/or Rule .0545(b)(1)]. Next, the operator will initiate an assessment of corrective measures (ACM) and corrective action plan (CAP), and proceed according to Rules .1635 through .1637 and/or Rules .0545(c) and (d). If the facility proceeds to corrective action, a revised WQMP will be submitted to the SWS with the Corrective Action Plan, if necessary. The results of the groundwater data will be submitted to the SWS semiannually in accordance with the documents in Appendix C. Reports will be submitted on electronic media, or electronically, with analytical data submitted in the required format, and be accompanied by the required Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form, which will be signed and sealed by a licensed geologist or engineer in the State of North Carolina. A copy of this form is also included in Appendix D. 3.1.9 Groundwater Sampling Methodology Groundwater samples will be collected in general accordance with Solid Waste Management Rule .1632, Rule .0544, and guidance provided in the Solid Waste Section Guidelines for Groundwater, Soil, and Surface Water Sampling (April 2008). Procedures for well purging, sample withdrawal, and decontamination methods as well as chain -of -custody procedures are outlined below. Field parameter measurements will be submitted electronically to the SWS in accordance with the documents in Appendix C. 10 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 3.1.9.1 Sample Collection Sequence The procedures for collecting groundwater samples are presented below. The background wells (MW-1, and MW-1D) will be sampled first, followed by the downgradient compliance wells (MW-2, MW-2D, MW-3R, MW-4, MW-4D, MW-5, MW-5D, MW-6, MW-7, MW-8, MW-8D, MW-10, MW-10D, MW-11, MW-11D, MW-12, MW-12D, MW-13, MW-13D, MW-14, MW-14D, MW-15, MW-15D, MW-16, MW- 16D, MW-17R, and MW-17DR). The downgradient wells will be sampled so that the most contaminated well, if one is identified from the previous sampling event, is sampled last. Note that MW-16 and MW- 16D are not currently installed. 3.1.9.1.1 Sampling Frequency The above -mentioned samples will be collected on a semiannual basis during the Detection and/or Assessment Monitoring programs. 3.1.9.1.2 Static Water Elevations The static water level and total well depth will be measured with an electronic water level indicator on a single day, to the nearest 0.01 foot, in each well prior to sampling. Static water elevations will be calculated from water depth measurements and top of casing elevations. A reference point will be marked on the top of casing of each well to ensure the same measuring point is used each time static water levels are measured. 3.1.9.1.3 Well Evacuation The preferred well evacuation and sampling procedure for the site is conventional bailed well technology (standard evacuation) which is presented below. 3.1.9.1.3.1 Standard Evacuation Procedures Monitoring wells will be evacuated with a laboratory cleaned bailer, disposable bailer, or submersible pump. If a pump or bailer is used for multiple wells, it and any other non -dedicated equipment will be decontaminated before use and between each well. A low -yield well (one that yields less than 0.5 gallon per minute) will be purged so that water is removed from the bottom of the screened interval. Low -yield wells will be evacuated to dryness once. However, at no time will a well be evacuated to dryness if the recharge rate causes the formation water to vigorously cascade down the sides of the screen and cause an accelerated loss of volatiles. Upon recharging of the well and no longer than a time period of 24 hours, the first sample will be field-tested for pH, temperature, and specific conductivity. Samples will then be collected and containerized in the order of the volatilization sensitivity of the target constituents. A high -yield well (one that yields 0.5 gallon per minute or more) will be purged so that water is drawn down from above the screen in the uppermost part of the water column to ensure that fresh water from the formation will move upward in the screen. If a pump is used for purging, a high -yield well should be purged at less than 4 gallons per minute to prevent further well development. A minimum of three casing volumes will be evacuated from each well prior to sampling. An alternative purge will be considered complete if the monitoring well goes dry before removing the calculated minimum purge volume. The well casing volume for a 2-inch well will be calculated using the following formula: 11 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R where: V, (gallons) = 0.163 x hw V, = volume in the well casing = (d,2/4) x 3.14 x h,,, x 7.48 gallons/cubic foot) d, = casing diameter in feet (d, = 0.167) h, = height of the water column (i.e., well depth minus depth to water) The purge water will be disposed by pouring on the ground surface at least 10 feet downgradient of the monitoring well being purged, unless field characteristics suggest the purge water may be contaminated. In that case, the purged water will be containerized and disposed in the facility's leachate collection system (or by other approved disposal means). The monitoring wells will be sampled using laboratory cleaned or disposable bailers within 24 hours of completing the purge. The bailers will be equipped with a check valve and bottom -emptying device. The bailer will be lowered gently into the well to minimize the possibility of degassing the water. Field measurements of temperature, pH, specific conductance, and turbidity will be made before and after sample collection as a check on the stability of the groundwater sampled over time. The direct -reading equipment used at each well will be calibrated in the field according to the manufacturer's specifications prior to each day's use. Calibration information should be documented in the instrument's calibration logbook and the field book. 3.1.9.1.3.2 Low -Flow Procedures Under normal conditions, monitoring wells will be purged and sampled using the Standard Evacuation Procedures specified above. However, at the discretion of the owner/operator a low -flow sampling method in accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Low -Flow (Minimal Drawdown) Sampling Procedures (EPA, April 1996), may be implemented as allowed under the Rules. A summary of these procedures is listed below, and a copy of the procedures is presented in Appendix E. Depth -to -water measurements will be obtained using an electronic water level indicator capable of recording the depth to an accuracy of 0.01 foot. A determination of whether or not the water table is located within the screened interval of the well will be made. If the water table is not within the screened interval, the amount of drawdown that can be achieved before the screen is intersected will be calculated. If the water table is within the screened interval, total drawdown should not exceed 1 foot so as to minimize the amount of aeration and turbidity. If the water table is above the top of the screened interval, the amount of drawdown should be minimized to keep the screen from being exposed. If the purging equipment is non -dedicated, the equipment will be lowered into the well, taking care to minimize the disturbance to the water column. If conditions (i.e., water column height and well yield) allow, the pump will be placed in the uppermost portion of the water column (minimum of 18 inches of pump submergence is recommended). The minimum volume/time period for obtaining independent Water Quality Parameter Measurements (WQPM) will be determined. The minimum volume/time period is determined based on the stabilized flow rate and the amount of volume in the pump and the discharge tubing (alternatively, the volume of the flow 12 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R cell can be used, provided it is greater than the volume of the pump and discharge tubing). Volume of the bladder pump should be obtained from the manufacturer. Volume of the discharge tubing is as follows: 3/8-inch inside diameter tubing: 20 milliliters per foot 1/4-inch inside diameter tubing: 10 milliliters per foot 3/16-inch inside diameter tubing: 5 milliliters per foot Once the volume of the flow -cell or the pump and the discharge tubing has been calculated, the well purge will begin. The flow rate should be based on historical data for that well (if available) and should not exceed 500 milliliters per minute. The initial round of WQPM should be recorded and the flow rate adjusted until drawdown in the well stabilizes. Water levels should be measured periodically to maintain a stabilized water level. The water level should not fall within 1 foot of the top of the well screen. If the purge rate has been reduced to 100 milliliters or less and the head level in the well continues to decline, the required water samples should be collected following stabilization of the WQPM, based on the criteria presented below. If neither the head level nor the WQPM stabilize, a passive sample should be collected. Passive sampling is defined as sampling before WQPM have stabilized if the well yield is low enough that the well will purge dry at the lowest possible purge rate (generally 100 milliliters per minute or less). WQPM stabilization is defined as follows: • pH (+/- 0.2 S.U.); • conductance (+/- 5% of reading); • temperature (+/- 10% of reading or 0.2 C); • dissolved oxygen [+/- 10% of reading or 0.2 mg/L (whichever is greater)]; and • oxidation reduction potential (ORP) may also be measured and ideally should also fall within +/- 10% of reading; however, this is not a required field parameter. Stabilization of the WQPM should occur in most wells within five to six rounds of measurements. If stabilization does not occur following the removal of a purge volume equal to three well volumes, a passive sample will be collected. At a minimum, turbidity measurements should also be recorded at the beginning of purging, following the stabilization of the WQPM, and following the collection of the samples. The optimal turbidity range for micropurging is 25 NTU or less. Turbidity measurements above 25 NTU are generally indicative of an excessive purge rate or natural conditions related to excessive fines in the aquifer matrix. The direct -reading equipment used at each well will be calibrated in the field according to the manufacturer's specifications prior to each day's use and checked at a minimum at the end of each sampling day. Calibration information should be documented in the instrument's calibration logbook and the field book. Each well is to be sampled immediately following stabilization of the WQPM. The sampling flow rate must be maintained at a rate that is less than or equal to the purging rate. For volatile organic compounds, lower sampling rates (100 - 200 milliliters/minute) should be used. Final field parameter readings should be recorded prior to and after sampling. 3.1.9.1.4 Sample Collection Sequence 13 of 26 1s 1M 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R Samples will be collected and containerized in the order described below. • Volatile Organic Compounds; • Semi -Volatile Organic Compounds; • Herbicides; • Pesticides; • Polychlorinated Biphenyls; • Cyanide and Sulfide; and • Total Metals. Total metals samples may be collected out of sequence if the turbidity increases during sample collection. Samples will be transferred directly from field sampling equipment into pre -preserved, laboratory -supplied containers. Containers for volatile organic analyses will be filled in such a manner that no headspace remains after filling. 3.1.9.1.5 Decontamination Non -dedicated field equipment that is used for purging or sample collection shall be cleaned with a phosphate -free detergent, and triple -rinsed with distilled water. Any disposable polyethylene tubing used with non -dedicated pumps should be discarded after use at each well. Clean, chemical -resistant nitrile gloves will be worn by sampling personnel during well evacuation and sample collection. Measures will be taken to prevent surface soils, which could introduce contaminants into the well being sampled, from coming in contact with the purging and sampling equipment. 3.1.9.2 Sample Preservation and Handling Upon containerizing the water samples, the samples will be packed into pre -chilled, ice -filled coolers and either hand -delivered or shipped overnight by a commercial carrier to the laboratory for analysis. Sample preservation methods will be used to retard biological action and hydrolysis, as well as to reduce sorption effects. These methods will include chemical preservation, cooling/refrigeration at 4° C, and protection from light. The type of sample container, minimum volume, chemical preservative, and holding times for each analysis type are provided in Table 3. 14 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.1.9.3 Chain -of -Custody Program February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R The chain -of -custody program will allow for tracing sample possession and handling from the time of field collection through laboratory analysis. The chain -of -custody program includes sample labels, sample seal, field logbook, and chain -of -custody record. 3.1.9.3.1 Sample Labels Legible labels sufficiently durable to remain legible when wet will contain the following information: • Site identification; • Monitoring well number or other location; • Date and time of collection; • Name of collector; • Parameters to be analyzed; and • Preservative, if applicable. 3.1.9.3.2 Sample Seal The shipping container will be sealed to ensure that the samples have not been disturbed during transport to the laboratory. The tape used to seal the shipping container will be labeled with instructions to notify the shipper if the seal is broken prior to receipt at the laboratory. 3.1.9.3.3 Field Logbook The field logbook will contain sheets documenting the following information: • Identification of the well; • Well depth; • Field meter calibration information; • Static water level depth and measurement technique; • Purge volume (given in gallons); • Time well was purged; • Date and time of collection; • Well sampling sequence; • Types of sample containers used and sample identification numbers; • Preservative used; • Field analysis data and methods; • Field observations on sampling event; • Name of collector(s); and • Climatic conditions including air temperatures and precipitation. 15 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.1.9.3.4 Chain -of -Custody Record February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R The chain -of -custody record is required for tracing sample possession from time of collection to time of receipt at the laboratory. A chain -of -custody record will accompany each individual shipment. The record will contain the following information: • Sample destination and transporter; • Sample identification numbers; • Signature of collector; • Date and time of collection; • Sample type; • Identification of well; • Number of sample containers in shipping container; • Parameters requested for analysis; • Signature of person(s) involved in the chain of possession; • Inclusive dates of possession; and • Internal temperature of shipping container upon opening in laboratory (noted by the laboratory). A copy of the completed chain -of -custody form will accompany the shipment and will be returned to the shipper after the shipping container reaches its destination. The chain -of -custody record will also be used as the analysis request sheet. 3.1.9.4 Analytical Procedures A laboratory certified by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) will be utilized for analysis of groundwater samples from the facility. Analyses will be performed in accordance with U.S. EPA SW-846 methods in accordance with the EPA guidance document (EPA, June 1997). For Detection Monitoring, method numbers and reporting limits to be used will be those listed in accordance with the documents in Appendix C. Alternate SW-846 methods may be used if they have the same or lower reporting limit. The laboratory must report any detection of any constituent even if it is detected below the solid waste section limit (Appendix C). The laboratory certificates -of -analyses shall, at a minimum, include the following information: Narrative: Must include a brief description of the sample group (number and type of samples, field and associated lab sample identification numbers, preparation and analytical methods used). The data reviewer shall also include a statement that all holding times and Quality Control (QC) criteria were met, samples were received intact and properly preserved, with a brief discussion of any deviations potentially affecting data usability. This includes, but is not limited to, test method deviation(s), holding time violations, out -of -control incidents occurring during the processing of QC or field samples and corrective actions taken, and repeated analyses and reasons for the re- analyses (including, for example, contamination, failing surrogate recoveries, matrix effects, or dilutions). The narrative shall be signed by the laboratory director or authorized laboratory representative, signifying that all statements are true to the best of the reviewer's knowledge, and that the data meet the data quality objectives as described in this plan (except as noted). One narrative is required for each sample group. 16 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R • Original Chain -of Custody Form. • Target Analyte List (TAL)/Target Compound List (TCL): The laboratory shall list all compounds for which the samples were analyzed. The TAL/TCL is typically included as part of the analytical reporting forms. • Dilution factors with a narrative of the sample results, including the reasons for the dilution (if any). • Blank Data: For organic analyses, the laboratory shall report the results of any method blanks, reagent blanks, trip blanks, field blanks, and any other blanks associated with the sample group. For inorganic analyses, the laboratory shall provide the results of any preparation or initial calibration blanks associated with the sample group. • QC Summary: The laboratory will provide summary forms detailing laboratory QC sample results, which include individual recoveries and relative percent differences (if appropriate) for the following Quality Assurance (QA)/QC criteria: surrogates, MS analyses, MSD analyses, LCS, and sample duplicate analyses. QC control limits shall also be reported; if any QC limits are exceeded, a flag or footnote shall be placed to indicate the affected samples. Additional QA data and/or other pertinent data may be reported as requested by the owner/operator of the facility. 3.1.9.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program Trip and field blanks will be collected and analyzed during each monitoring event to verify that the sample collection and handling process has not affected the quality of the samples. The trip blank will be prepared in the laboratory each time a group of bottles is prepared for use in the field. The appropriate number of bottles for VOA analysis will be filled with Type II reagent grade water, transported to the site, handled like the samples, and shipped to the laboratory for analysis. The field blank will be prepared in the field and exposed to the sampling environment. As with all other samples, the time of the blank exposure will be recorded so that the sampling sequence is documented. The field blank will be analyzed for the same list of constituents as the groundwater samples. The trip blank will be analyzed for volatile organic compounds only. The assessment of blank analysis results will be in general accordance with EPA guidance documents (EPA, 1993 and 1994). No positive sample results will be relied upon unless the concentration of the compound in the sample exceeds 10 times the amount in any blank for common laboratory contaminants (see next paragraph), or five times the amount for other compounds. If necessary, resampling will be performed as necessary to confirm or refute suspect data; such resampling will occur within the individual compliance monitoring period. Concentrations of any contaminants found in the blanks will be used to qualify the groundwater data. Any compound (other than those listed below) detected in the sample, which was also detected in any associated blank, will be qualified `B" when the sample concentration is less than five times the blank concentration. For common laboratory contaminants (methylene chloride, acetone, 2-butanone, and common phthalate esters), the results will be qualified "B" when the reported sample concentration is less than 10 times the blank concentration. The `B" qualifier designates that the reported detection is considered to represent 17 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R cross -contamination and that the reported constituent is not considered to be present in the sample at the reported concentration. 3.1.10 Statistical Methods (Optional) If the landfill owner or operator chooses, groundwater monitoring data for landfill compliance wells screened in the uppermost and/or bedrock aquifers may be evaluated using statistical procedures. However as specified in the Rules, this is optional (not required) under 15A NCAC 13B .1632(g) for the MSWLF. The statistical test used to evaluate the groundwater monitoring data will be the prediction interval procedure unless the test is inappropriate with the data collected. If statistical evaluation of groundwater monitoring data is selected, it will be performed in compliance with 15A NCAC 13B Rule .1632 (g), (h), and (i) and the USEPA's Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities, Unified Guidance, Office of Solid Waste, Waste Management Division, US EPA, dated March 2009. 3.2 Surface Water Monitoring 3.2.1 Sampling Locations In accordance with Rule .0602 and Rule .0544(c), eight (8) surface water monitoring locations have been established for the facility to monitor water quality surrounding the proposed and existing waste footprint (Table 4). The surface water locations consist of one (1) upstream (background) point (SW-1) and seven (7) downstream (compliance) points (SW-2 through SW-8). All surface water sampling locations currently exist. Surface water sampling locations SW-8 has been established for CDLF Phase 6 and for the development of CDLF Phase 7. The location of each surface water sampling point is indicated on the Water Quality and Landfill Gas Environmental Monitoring Systems (Figure 2). 3.2.2 Monitoring Frequency The surface water sampling locations will be sampled semiannually (Table 2) for analysis of the NC Appendix I list of constituents, tetrahydrofuran and 1,4-dioxane (Appendix B) and required or typical water quality parameters (e.g. pH, ORP, specific conductivity, temperature, and turbidity). Site specific monitoring frequency and monitoring constituents may be modified upon approval from the SWS. The results of the analysis of the surface water data will be submitted to the SWS semiannually in conjunction with the groundwater data. 3.2.3 Surface Water Sampling Methodology The surface water samples should be collected using the Dipper Method or the Direct Method described below. In surface water sampling, extreme care must be used to obtain a representative sample. The greatest potential source of inadvertent sample contamination is incorrect handling by field personnel. Therefore, extreme care should be used during sample collection to minimize the potential for inadvertent contamination. 18 of 26 1s 1M 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 3.2.3.1 Sample Collection Surface water samples will be obtained from areas of minimal turbulence and aeration. Samples will only be collected if flowing water is observed during the sampling event. 3.2.3.1.1 Dipper Method A dip sampler is useful for situations where a sample is to be recovered from an outfall pipe or where direct access is limited. The long handle on such a device allows sample collection from a discrete location. Sampling procedures are as follows: 1. Assemble the dip sampler device in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. 2. Extend the device to the sample location and collect the sample. 3. Retrieve the sampler and transfer the sample to the appropriate sample container. 3.2.3.1.2 Direct Method The sampler should face upstream and collect the sample without disturbing the sediment. The collector submerses the closed sample container, opens the bottle to collect the sample and then caps the bottle while sub -surface. The collection bottle may be rinsed two times by the sample water. Collect the sample under the water surface avoiding surface debris. When using the direct method, pre -preserved sample bottles should not be used because the collection method may dilute the concentration of preservative necessary for proper sample preservation. Samples will be collected using dedicated, clean, laboratory -provided bottles, and then the samples are carefully transferred into the pre -preserved bottles for transport to the laboratory. 3.2.3.1.3 Decontamination Non -dedicated field equipment that is used for sample collection shall be cleaned with a phosphate -free detergent, and triple -rinsed with distilled water. Clean, chemical -resistant nitrile gloves will be worn by sampling personnel during sample collection. Measures will be taken to prevent surface soils, which could introduce contaminants into the location being sampled, from coming in contact with the sampling equipment. 3.2.3.2 Sample Preservation and Handling Upon containerizing the water samples, the samples will be packed into pre -chilled, ice -filled coolers and either hand -delivered or shipped overnight by a commercial carrier to the laboratory for analysis. Sample preservation methods will be used to retard biological action and hydrolysis, as well as to reduce sorption effects. These methods will include chemical preservation, cooling/refrigeration at 4° C, and protection from light. The type of sample container, minimum volume, chemical preservative, and holding times for each analysis type are provided in Table 3. 19 of 26 1s 1M 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.2.3.3 Chain -of -Custody Program February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R The chain -of -custody program will allow for tracing sample possession and handling from the time of field collection through laboratory analysis. The chain -of -custody program includes sample labels, sample seal, field logbook, and chain -of -custody record. 3.2.3.3.1 Sample Labels Legible labels sufficiently durable to remain legible when wet will contain the following information: • Site identification; • Sampling location identifier; • Date and time of collection; • Name of collector; • Parameters to be analyzed; and • Preservative, if applicable. 3.2.3.3.2 Sample Seal The shipping container will be sealed to ensure that the samples have not been disturbed during transport to the laboratory. The tape used to seal the shipping container will be labeled with instructions to notify the shipper if the seal is broken prior to receipt at the laboratory. 3.2.3.3.3 Field Logbook The field logbook will contain sheets documenting the following information: • Sampling location identifier; • Flow conditions observations; • Field meter calibration information; • Date and time of collection; • Sequence of sampling locations; • Types of sample containers used and sample identification numbers; • Preservative used; • Field analysis data and methods; • Field observations on sampling event; • Name of collector(s); and • Climatic conditions including air temperatures and precipitation. 20 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina 3.2.3.3.4 Chain -of -Custody Record February 19, 2021 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R The chain -of -custody record is required for tracing sample possession from time of collection to time of receipt at the laboratory. A chain -of -custody record will accompany each individual shipment. The record will contain the following information: • Sample destination and transporter; • Sample identification numbers; • Signature of collector; • Date and time of collection; • Sample type; • Number of sample containers in shipping container; • Parameters requested for analysis; • Signature of person(s) involved in the chain of possession; • Inclusive dates of possession; and • Internal temperature of shipping container upon opening in laboratory (noted by the laboratory). A copy of the completed chain -of -custody form will accompany the shipment and will be returned to the shipper after the shipping container reaches its destination. The chain -of -custody record will also be used as the analysis request sheet. 3.2.3.4 Analytical Procedures A laboratory certified by the DEQ will be utilized for analysis of surface water samples from the facility. Analyses will be performed in accordance with U.S. EPA SW-846 methods in accordance with the EPA guidance document (EPA, 1997). For Detection Monitoring, method numbers and reporting limits to be used will be those listed in accordance with the documents in Appendix C. The monitoring parameters are also included in Appendix C, along with the proposed analytical methods and reporting limits. Alternate SW-846 methods may be used if they have the same or lower reporting limit. The laboratory must report any detection of any constituent even if it is detected below the solid waste reporting limit (Appendix C). The laboratory certificates -of -analyses shall, at a minimum, include the following information: Narrative: Must include a brief description of the sample group (number and type of samples, field and associated lab sample identification numbers, preparation and analytical methods used). The data reviewer shall also include a statement that all holding times and Quality Control (QC) criteria were met, samples were received intact and properly preserved, with a brief discussion of any deviations potentially affecting data usability. This includes, but is not limited to, test method deviation(s), holding time violations, out -of -control incidents occurring during the processing of QC or field samples and corrective actions taken, and repeated analyses and reasons for the reanalyzes (including, for example, contamination, failing surrogate recoveries, matrix effects, or dilutions). The narrative shall be signed by the laboratory director or authorized laboratory representative, signifying that all statements are true to the best of the reviewer's knowledge, and that the data meet the data quality objectives as described in this plan (except as noted). One narrative is required for each sample group. 21 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R • Original Chain -of Custody Form. • Target Analyte List (TAL)/Target Compound List (TCL): The laboratory shall list all compounds for which the samples were analyzed. The TAL/TCL is typically included as part of the analytical reporting forms. • Dilution factors with a narrative of the sample results, including the reasons for the dilution (if any). • Blank Data: For organic analyses, the laboratory shall report the results of any method blanks, reagent blanks, trip blanks, field blanks, and any other blanks associated with the sample group. For inorganic analyses, the laboratory shall provide the results of any preparation or initial calibration blanks associated with the sample group. • QC Summary: The laboratory will provide summary forms detailing laboratory QC sample results, which include individual recoveries and relative percent differences (if appropriate) for the following Quality Assurance (QA)/QC criteria: surrogates, MS analyses, MSD analyses, LCS, and sample duplicate analyses. QC control limits shall also be reported; if any QC limits are exceeded, a flag or footnote shall be placed to indicate the affected samples. Additional QA data and/or other pertinent data may be reported as requested by the owner/operator of the facility. 3.2.3.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program Trip and field blanks will be collected and analyzed during each monitoring event to verify that the sample collection and handling process has not affected the quality of the samples. The trip blank will be prepared in the laboratory each time a group of bottles is prepared for use in the field. The appropriate number of bottles for VOA analysis will be filled with Type II reagent grade water, transported to the site, handled like the samples, and shipped to the laboratory for analysis. The field blank will be prepared in the field and exposed to the sampling environment. As with all other samples, the time of the blank exposure will be recorded so that the sampling sequence is documented. The field blank will be analyzed for the same list of constituents as the surface water samples. The trip blank will be analyzed for volatile organic compounds only. The assessment of blank analysis results will be in general accordance with EPA guidance documents (EPA, 1993 and 1994). No positive sample results will be relied upon unless the concentration of the compound in the sample exceeds 10 times the amount in any blank for common laboratory contaminants (see next paragraph), or five times the amount for other compounds. If necessary, resampling will be performed as necessary to confirm or refute suspect data; such resampling will occur within the individual compliance monitoring period. Concentrations of any contaminants found in the blanks will be used to qualify the surface water data. Any compound (other than those listed below) detected in the sample, which was also detected in any associated blank, will be qualified `B" when the sample concentration is less than five times the blank concentration. For common laboratory contaminants (methylene chloride, acetone, 2-butanone, and common phthalate esters), the results will be qualified "B" when the reported sample concentration is less than 10 times the 22 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R blank concentration. The `B" qualifier designates that the reported detection is considered to represent cross -contamination and that the reported constituent is not considered to be present in the sample at the reported concentration. 3.3 Leachate Monitoring 3.3.1 Sampling Location In accordance with 15A NCAC 13B .1626(12)(c) of the Rules, nine (9) sampling locations has been established for the facility. The locations include six existing leak detection sampling locations associated with each MSWLF cell (Cells 1 through 6) designated LD-1 through LD-6, one permitted future leak detection sampling location for MSWLF Cell 7 designated LD-7, one leachate leak detection sampling location near the leachate pond designated Lechate LD, and the Leachate Pond itself. All nine sampling locations are on the attached Figure 2 titled Water Quality and Landfill Gas Environmental Monitoring Systems. 3.3,2 Monitoring Frequency and Parameters All existing leak detection locations will be sampled semiannually (Table 2) for analysis of the Appendix I VOC and metals. The Leachate Pond will be sampled semiannually for the leachate monitoring parameters (Table 2). The results of the analysis of the leachate leak detection and leachate samples will be submitted to the SWS semiannually in conjunction with the groundwater and surface water data. 3.3.3 Leachate Sampling Methodology The leachate sampling methodology including sample collection, sample preservation and handling, chain - of -custody program, and quality assurance and quality control program will be in general accordance with those specified herein for surface water. 23 of 26 1s 1M 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 3.4 Reporting 3.4.1 Monitoring Well Installation and Abandonment Reports Groundwater monitoring well installation and abandonment reports will be prepared upon completion of well installation or abandonment prior to waste disposal into a new cell in accordance with the phased landfill construction plans. The monitoring well installation reports will include documentation of boring logs, well diagrams, development results, and field procedures. The abandonment reports will include documentation of abandonment logs and field procedures. Monitoring well installation and abandonment reports will be submitted in electronic format in general accordance with the procedures in Appendix C and if physical copies are required to the SWS at the following mailing address: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Waste Management -- Solid Waste Section 1646 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 Additionally, copies of all installation and abandonment reports will be kept at the landfill as part of the facility's operating record. 3.4.2 Water Quality Reports Copies of all laboratory analytical data will be forwarded to the SWS within 120 calendar days of the sampling event. The analytical data submitted will specify the date of sample collection, the sampling point identification and include a map of sampling locations. Should a significant concentration of contaminants be detected in ground and surface water, as defined in North Carolina Solid Waste Management Rules, Groundwater Quality Standards, or Surface Water Quality Standards, the owner/operator of the landfill shall notify the SWS and will place a notice in the landfill operating records as to which constituents were detected. All monitoring reports will be submitted with the following: 1. An evaluation of potentiometric surface; 2. Analytical laboratory reports and summary tables; 3. An Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form (included in Appendix D); and 4. Laboratory Data submitted in accordance with the Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Template. Monitoring reports will be submitted electronically by e-mail, electronic media, or in paper copy form if requested. Copies of all laboratory results and water quality reports for the Rutherford County Landfill will be kept at the landfill office as part of the facility's operating record. Reports summarizing all groundwater quality results and data evaluation will be submitted in electronic form in accordance with the procedures in Appendix C and if physical copies are required to the SWS at their current mailing address. 24 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R 4.0 REFERENCES Bunnell-Lammons Engineering, Inc., 2017, Design Hydrogeologic Report, Phase 6 C&D, Buncombe County Landfill. Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc.; April 2009, C&D Landfill Expansion, Part 2: Site Hydrogeological Investigation, Buncombe County Solid Waste Facility. Horton, J.W. and Zullo, V.A., 1991, The Geology of the Carolinas: Carolina Geological Society fifteenth anniversary volume: The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, TN. North Carolina Dept. Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), 2006, N.C. New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Monitoring Data. North Carolina Dept. Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR), 2007, N.C. Addendum to October 27, 2006, North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Monitoring Data. North Carolina Dept. Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR), 2007, Environmental Monitoring Data for North Carolina Solid Waste Management Facilities. North Carolina Dept. Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), 2008, Solid Waste Section, Guidelines for Groundwater, Soil, and Surface Water Sampling. North Carolina Dept. Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), 2010, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, Tetrahydrofuran Analysis at Construction and Demolition Landfills. North Carolina Dept. Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), 2014, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, Groundwater, Surface Water, Soil, Sediment, and Landfill Gas Electronic Document Submittal. North Carolina Dept. of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), 2016, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, Guidelines for 14-Day Notification of Groundwater Exceedances Form Submittal per rule: 15A NCAC 13B .1633(c)(1). North Carolina Dept. of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), 2018, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, 1,4-Dioxane Analysis, Solid Waste Section Limits, and Laboratory Analytical Methods. North Carolina Dept. of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), 2020, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, New Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Format. Rhodes, Thomas S., and Conrad, Stephen G., 1985, Geologic Map of North Carolina: Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Division of Land Resources, and the NC Geological Survey, 1:500,000-scale, compiled by Brown, Philip M., et al, and Parker, John M. III, and in association with the State Geologic Map Advisory Committee. SCS Engineers P.C., 2020, Monitoring Well Installation and Landfill Gas Well Installation and Abandonment Report — Buncombe County Landfill 1107-MSWLF-1996; 1107-CDLF-1998. 25 of 26 1s 1m 1i Water Quality Monitoring Plan February 19, 2021 Buncombe County Landfill —Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11 R USEPA. September 1986. RCRA Ground -Water Monitoring Technical Enforcement Guidance Document (TEGD). USEPA. 1996. Low -Flow (Minimal Drawdown) Ground -Water Sampling Procedures. Puls, Robert W. and Barcelona, Michael J. USEPA. 1993. Region III Modifications to Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Inorganic Analyses, EPA 540/R-01-008. April. USEPA, 1994. Region III Modifications to National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review Multi -Media, Multi -Concentration (OLMOLO-OLMO0.9), EPA 540/R-99-008. September. USEPA. June 1997. SW-846 Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, Final Update III. USEPA. March 2009. Statistical Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities — Unified Guidance. EPA/530-R-09-007. Office of Solid Waste. Washington, D.C. 26 of 26 Tables Table 1 Well Construction and Monitoring Well Data Buncombe County Landfill Alexander, North Carolina Permit No. 1107-CDLF-1998 Permit No. 1107-MSWLF-1996 BLE Project Number J21-9378-11R Monitoring Point MSW or C&D Northing' Easting' TOC Elevation (ft)' Ground Surface Elevation (ft)' Depth to GW (ft) October 26-30, 2020 Groundwater Elevation (ft) Well Depth (ft)1 Screen Depth (below GS)' Waste Unit Monitored Installation Date' Geology Monitored' Well Status/Purpose Well Diameter (in)' MW-1 Facility 737,383.3 923,481.5 2021.22 2019.28 65.12 1956.10 76 61.0 - 76.0 Facility 1990's Saprolite/PWR Background 2.0 MW-lD Facility 737,371.0 923,468.7 2021.57 2019.97 66.81 1954.76 200 85.0 - 95.0 Facility 1990's Bedrock Background 2.0 MW-2 MSW 739,569.6 921,033.3 1920.86 1918.54 8.06 1912.80 20 5.0 - 20.0 Cell 1990's Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-213 MSW 739,565.7 921,027.7 1920.51 1918.63 8.65 1911.86 55 45.0 - 55.0 Cell 1990's Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-3R MSW 739,499.1 920,384.3 1973.18 1975.67 53.46 1919.72 55 45.0 - 55.0 Cell 7/28/2014 PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-4 MSW 739,263.0 920,192.1 1944.35 1942.48 13.13 1931.22 25 9.0 - 24.0 Cell 1011011996 Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-4D MSW 739,261.0 920,177.3 1944.64 1942.79 13.56 1931.08 55 45.0 - 55.0 Cell 1011111996 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-5 MSW 739,111.5 920,246.7 1977.12 1975.39 33.81 1943.31 50 35.0 - 50.0 Cell 101911996 Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-513 MSW 739,103.6 920,242.3 1976.92 1975.31 35.60 1941.32 81 71.0 - 81.0 Cell 1011011996 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-6 MSW 738,767.9 920,223.6 1987.34 1985.39 24.16 1963.18 50 35.0 - 50.0 Cell 101811996 Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-7 MSW 738,286.3 920,586.8 2022.83 2020.72 41.83 1981.00 61 42.0 - 61.0 Cell 101411996 Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-8 MSW 738,102.0 920,801.7 1962.06 1959.85 29.20 1932.86 70 55.0 - 70.0 Cell 1990's Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-8D MSW 738,116.7 920,812.0 1962.47 1960.57 27.84 1934.63 95 85.0 - 95.0 Cell 1990's Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-10 MSW 739,324.0 921,597.0 2010.54 2007.50 68.40 1942.14 73 58.0 - 73.0 Cell 3/6/2002 Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-lOD MSW 739,324.0 921,590.8 2010.56 2007.50 69.08 1941.48 117 102.0 - 117.0 Cell 3/6/2002 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-11 MSW 738,169.2 921,422.1 1966.71 1963.70 31.82 1934.89 50 35.0 - 50.0 Cell 3/6/2002 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-1113 MSW 738,154.0 921,406.0 1966.15 1963.20 32.73 1933.42 70 60.0 - 70.0 Cell 3/6/2002 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-12 C&D 738,703.7 919,192.4 1947.39 1944.70 9.96 1937.43 17 7.0 - 17.0 Phases 1 - 5 6/25/2002 Saprolite/PWR/Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-12D C&D 739,489.5 921,966.6 1947.10 1944.30 9.14 1937.96 37 27.0 - 37.0 Phases 1 - 5 6/25/2002 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-13 MSW 739,489.5 921,966.6 1953.92 1951.30 3.64 1950.28 16 6.0 - 16.0 Cell 612412005 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-13D MSW 738,761.6 919,055.7 1953.82 1951.40 6.70 1947.12 44 39.0 - 44.0 Cell 6/23/2005 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-14 C&D 738,782.5 919,037.1 1952.77 1949.80 28.37 1924.40 49 39.0 - 49.0 Phases 1 - 5 4/5/2006 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-14D C&D 738,703.7 919,192.4 1953.76 1950.70 28.77 1924.99 88 78.0 - 88.0 Phases 1 - 5 4/6/2006 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-15 C&D 739,143.4 919,829.3 1973.29 1970.21 21.23 1952.06 26 16.0 - 26.0 Phases 1 - 5 6/7/2012 Saprolite/PWR Compliance 2.0 MW-15D C&D 739,143.4 919,829.3 1973.51 1970.25 24.09 1949.42 43 33.0 - 43.0 Phases 1 - 5 6/7/2012 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-16 MSW Pending Cell? Pending Compliance MW-16D MSW Pending Cell? Pending Compliance MW-17 Abandoned - September 7, 2020 MW-17D Abandoned - September 7, 2020 MW-17R C&D 738,579.7 918,662.0 1891.61 1888.96 14.55 1877.06 23.5 8.5 - 23.5 Phases 6 - 7 9/3/2020 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 MW-17DR C&D 738,569.7 918,659.3 1891.70 1889.14 13.13 1878.57 39 34.0 - 39.0 Phases 6 - 7 9/2/2020 Bedrock Compliance 2.0 - Data from Table 3, Well Construction, New Buncombe County Landfill, Buncombe County, North Carolina, provided by SCS Engineers. Some well installation dates appear inconsistent with water level records and may not be accurate. Changes to some dates (italics) made based on water level records and dates from SHR and DHR documents by CDM. The top of casing and ground surface elevations for MW-3R are a probable error (reversed) based on April 2016 water levels in the SCS Engineers report. The top of casing and ground surface elevations for MW-14 and MW-14D do not match those in the SHR and DHR documents by CDM. The well construction and survey data for MW-17R and MW-17DR are from a report by SCS dated October 13, 2020 z - Based on visual observation of Sheet No 1 Groundwater and Methane Monitoring Well Locations by CDM Smith dated August 2014. TOC - Top of Casing. GS - Ground Surface. All depth measurments in feet -- All elevations in feet above an arbitrary site datum. BCLF 9378-11R WQMP Tables.xlsx Prepared by: RLB T1 (10-30-20) MW Points Checked by: IAI Table 2 SWS Approved Sampling Matrix Buncombe County Landfill Permit No.1107-CDLF-1998 Permit No. 1107-MSWLF-1996 Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11R April October Station ID *Analytical Suite* 1,4-Dioxane *Analytical Suite* 1,4-Dioxane 0 a o h o MW-1 A-1 Plus A-1 Plus ao u R CO MW-ID A-1 Plus A-1 Plus MW-2 A-1 A-1 MW-213 A-1 A-1 MW-3R A-1 A-1 MW-4 A-1 yes A-1 yes MW-413 A-1 yes A-1 yes MW-5 A-1 A-1 MW-5D A-1 A-1 MW-6 A-1 A-1 MW-7 A-1 A-1 MW-8 A-1 A-1 MW-813 A-1 A-1 MW-10 A-1 yes A-1 yes MW-10D A-1 yes A-1 yes d = MW-11 A-1 A-1 y 3 MW-11D A-1 A-1 0 U MW-12 A-1 Plus yes A-1 Plus yes MW-12D A-1 Plus yes A-1 Plus yes MW-13 A-1 A-1 MW-13D A-1 A-1 MW-14 A-1 Plus A-1 Plus MW-14D A-1 Plus A-1 Plus MW-15 A-1 Plus yes A-1 Plus yes MW-15D A-1 Plus yes A-1 Plus yes MW-16 A-1 yes A-1 yes MW-16D A-1 yes A-1 yes MW-17 Abandoned September 14, 2020 MW-17D Abandoned September 14, 2020 MW-17R A-1 Plus yes A-1 Plus yes MW-171311 A-1 Plus yes A-1 Plus yes SW-1 A-1 yes A-1 yes SW-2 A-1 yes A-1 yes SW-3 A-1 yes A-1 yes d SW-4 A-1 yes A-1 yes y, R 7 � SW-5 A -IT yes A-1T yes SW-6 A-1T yes A-1T yes SW-7 A-1 yes A-1 yes SW-8 A-1T yes A-1T yes LD-1 A-1 A-1 LD-2 A-1 A-1 0 u LD-3 A-1 A-1 A x LD-4 A-1 A-1 v LD-5 A-1 A-1 yes a d LD-6 A-1 A-1 R LD-7 A-1 A-1 I� Leachate LD A-1 A-1 Leachate Pond I LMP LMP Notes: A-1 = Appendix I VOCs & Metals A-lT = Appendix I VOCs plus Tetrahydrofuran & Metals A-1 Plus = Appendix I VOCs plus Tetrahydrofuran, & Metals plus Mercury, Manganese, Iron, Sulfate, Chloride, Alkalinity, & Total Dissolved Solids LMP (Leachate Monitoring Parameters) = Appendix I VOCs & Metals, pH, specific conductance, BOD, COD, Nitrates, Sulfates, & Phosphates. LD = Leak Detector Do Not Exist - Permitted for Future MSWLF Cell 7 1,4-Dioxane removed for these points Table revised July 16, 2019 (SW-8 and 1,4-doxane) Table revised February 27, 2020 (BLE Project No. 9378-20 for Spring 2020) Table revised June 19, 2020 (Change 1,4-Dioxane Matrix) Table revised October 14, 2020 (Abandon MW-17/MW-17D) Prepared by: AWA Checked by: TJD \\BLEGVLSVR I \SolidWasteProj ects\Buncombe County LF, NC\9378-11R BCLF Phase 7 CnD EMP\WQMP\BCLF 9378-11R WQMP Tables.xlsx Table 3 Sampling and Preservation Procedures Buncombe County Landfill Permit No.1107-CDLF-1998 Permit No.1107-MSWLF-1996 Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11R Parameter Container & Volume Preservative Maximum Holding Time Cyanide P,G; 500 mL 4°C NaOH to pH>12, add Sodium Arsenite 14 days Sulfide P,G; 500 mL 4°C, add Zinc Acetate and NaOH 7 days Chloride P,G; 500 mL 4°C 28 days Alkalinity P,G; 500 mL 4°C 14 days Total Dissolved Solids P,G; 500 mL 4°C 7 days Mercury (total) P; 500 mL HNO3 to pH<2 28 days Metals (total) except mercury P; 500 mL HNO3 to pH<2 6 months Base Neutrals & Acids G, Teflon -lined cap; 1000 mL 4°C 7 days to extraction, 40 days after extraction Chlorinated Pesticides/PCBs G, Teflon -lined cap; 1000 mL VC 7 days to extraction, 40 days after extraction Chlorinated Acids G, Teflon -lined cap; 1000 mL VC 7 days to extraction, 40 days after extraction Purgeables 2-40 mL VOA w/G, Teflon -lined septum VC; HCl to pH<2 14 days BOD P; 1000 mL VC 48 hours COD P; 250 mL VC, H2SO4 to pH<2 28 days Sulfate P; 250 mL VC 28 days Nitrate P; 250 mL VC 48 hours ortho-Phosphate P; 250 mL 4°C 148 hours Notes: P - Plastic, G - Glass, T - Fluorocarbon Resin (PTFE, Teflon®, FEP, etc.) No headspace should be allowed in the volatile organic compound containers. Prepared by: AWA Checked by: MSP/MPH \\BLEGVLSVRI\SolidWasteProjects\Buncombe County LF, NC\9378-11R BCLF Phase 7 CnD EMP\WQMP\BCLF 9378-11R WQMP Tables.xlsx Table 4 Surface Water Sampling Point Data Buncombe County Landfill Permit No. 1107-CDLF-1998 Permit No. 1107-MSWLF-1996 Alexander, North Carolina BLE Project Number J21-9378-11R Monitoring Point Water Body Monitored' Existing Waste Unit Monitored Current Status/Purpose Proposed Waste Unit Monitored Proposed Status/Purpose Northing Easting SW-1 Blevin Branch Facility Upstream Facility Upstream DNA DNA SW-2 Blevin Branch MSWLF Downstream MSWLF Downstream DNA DNA SW-3 Unnamed Tributary MSWLF Downstream MSWLF Downstream DNA DNA SW-4 Unnamed Tributary MSWLF Downstream MSWLF Downstream DNA DNA SW-5 Unnamed Tributary C&D -- Phases 1-5 Downstream C&D -- Phases 1-5 Downstream DNA DNA SW-6 Blevin Branch MSWLF and C&D Downstream MSWLF and C&D Downstream DNA DNA SW-7 Unnamed Tributary MSWLF Downstream MSWLF Downstream DNA DNA SW-8 Unnamed Tributary C&D -- Phase 6 Downstream C&D -- Phases 6-7 Downstream DNA DNA - Information from USGS Topographic Map 7.5 Minute Series, Leicester and Weaverville, NC Quads., 1990 & 1993. z - Based on visual observation of Sheet No I Groundwater and Methane Monitoring Well Locations by CDM Smith dated November 2012. SW - Surface Water Location DNA - Data Not Available Table 4 revised January 22, 2021 Prepared by: AWA Checked by: MSP \\BLEGVLSVRI\SolidWasteProjects\Buncombe County LF, NC\9378-11R BCLF Phase 7 CnD EMP\WQMP\BCLF 9378-11R WQMP Tables.xlsx Figures 70 0 T vy. o � 1750 Z 141 D O J I c�^OI Q9 \ 0 R � � 251 y � RTi -RD 2oG o ° Alexander 2000 1000 0 2000 4000 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET DRAWN: KLW DATE: 1-22-21 ' IM I BUNNELL � LAMMONS CHECKED: AWA CAD: BCLFIIR-SLM ENGINEERING 6004 Ponders Court, Greenville, SC 29615 APPROVED: AWA JOB NO: J20-9378-11 R Phone: (864) 288-1265 Fax: (864] 288-4430 REFERENCE: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, 7.5 MINUTE SERIES, LEICESTER AND WEAVERVILLE, N.C. QUADRANGLES, PHOTOREMSED 2017 AND PHOTOREMSED 2017. SITE LOCATION MAP I BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL ALEXANDER, NORTH CAROLINA FIGURE 4/ 1 / 1 CONVENIENCE CENTER 1 LANDFILL OFFICE r BUILDING �L SW-1 N BLEVIN BR4N �,i .. �. ♦ �J� �'��p F—LU�), �t SW-2 - - 0 _ Ae --__,A _ _WELL _ ��� M 4 HOUSE MW-2 SW-7 7 SCALE HOUSE M-5� / oMW-3R MW-2D MW-13 BMW-13D NOT -16 %�MW-16D PRESENT NOT PRESENT � ► � � � PANTHER BRANCH (< FLOW) �� 1 - MW-10D MW-10Z� z° � I w 4 � LID Q� �_------T------ JkSW-8 ♦ MW-4D M-10 MW-5D/ \ 1 I � 0 1 I I I MW-17R 0 MW-17DR NEW PHASE U WASTE LIMIT (4.6 AC.) L BMW-15 `W-15D I � SW-5 MW-14 ®MW-MW 12I I MW-12D / BUNCOMBE COUNTY I EMERGENCY SERVICES RADIO TOWER EXISTING PHASE 1-5 I _ C&D AREA I 1 � MW-5 / INACTIVE \ SW-3 A \ I \ CELL 3 INACTIVE I \ CELL 4 I INACTIVE CELL 1 III I PERMITTED LD-1 I \ 1 I � / FUTURE `�` I \\ 11 I CELL 7 MW-6 I A �-- - - - - -- �� ACTIVE � CELL 6 INACTIVE �� CELL 2 INACTIVE / CELL 5 `� // ♦ / �. MW-7 LLD _L� - / � \ M-2 LEACHATE J LID MW-11D I MW-11 �� I FUTURE PERMITTED MW-8D I CELL 10 PHASE 6 \ � / z°2° I BLOCK / C&D AREA 1 / EMPLOYEE BUILDING LEACHATE TRAILER / I � - I / I / GARAGE POND o i / FUTURE I FUTURE (MAINTENANCE BUILDING) CELL 9 I HHW � i // CELL 8 BUILDING A LEGEND —1980 TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR - - - - - WASTE UNIT BOUNDARY PHASE 7 UNIT BOUNDARY (PIGGYBACK) PHASE 7 UNIT BOUNDARY (NEW) FACILITY BOUNDARY MW-10 EXISTING GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL �MW- 16 PERMITTED FUTURE GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL SW-492 / EXISTING SURFACE WATER / I - SW-2 MONITORING LOCATION �- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -'o- MW-1 PIGGYBACK PHASE 7 LIMITS j �M-9 own 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tom♦ � F' - FRENCH BROAD RIVER nZN CARP/ � •H•pN � aO JC,E NS. 9 i Z Gr ��• tv FOLOG.%P�tell it M-8 ,16111*� LOCATION ACCURACY OF THE FEATURES SHOWN IS LIMITED BY THE REFERENCES THEMSELVES. MW-1D REFERENCES: 1) SHEET NO. 1 GROUNDWATER AND METHANE MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS, CDM SMITH, PROJECT NO. 6447-105257. FILE: SITEMAP 2014.DWG. 2) SURFACE WATER LOCATIONS FROM SHEET NO. 1 GROUNDWATER AND METHANE MONITORING WELL LOCATION MAP, CDM SMITH, NOVEMBER 2012 PROJECT NO. 6447-93318. FILE: SITEMAP. DWG. 3) PHASE 6 C&D BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY MCGILL. 4) SHEET NO. OP-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS, CDM SMITH, PROJECT NO. 6447-97693. FILE: OP-1.DWG. 5) FIGURE NO. 3-1 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN CELL 6 AREA, CDM, PROJECT NO. 6447, DATED NOVEMBER 2004. 6) SURVEY DATA FOR MW-17R, MW-17DR AND M-12R IN SCS REPORT DATED OCTOBER 13, 2020 7) PHASE 7 C&D BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY SCS * LD-1 LEAK DETECTOR * LD-7 PERMITTED FUTURE LEAK DETECTOR 0 M-3 EXISTING LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL �M-5 PERMITTED FUTURE LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WE EXISTING STRUCTURE MONITORED FOR LANDFILL GAS (AB) ABANDONED 200 100 0 200 400 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION BY DRAWN: RLB CHECKED: TJD APPROVED: AWA DATE: 1-22-21 CAD FILE: BCLF 9378-11R WQUALITY JOB NO: J20-9378-11 R is 1IM I BUNNELL BUNNELL ENGINEERING 6004 Ponders Court, Greenville, SC 29615 Phone; (864) 288-1265 Fax; (864) 288-4430 WATER QUALITY AND LANDFILL GAS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL ALEXANDER, NORTH CAROLINA FIGURE NO. 2 ♦1 N N � CONVE IE CE CENTER LANDFILL OFFICE BUILDING o� lot it _.� �_���_ r � �SW 2 1 �� � WELL, � 2 HOUSE - MW-2 -� SW-6,� SCALE HOUSE \ MW-2D* MW-3R / �1919,72 1911 86 i PANTHER BRANCH (� FLOW) � ���/ 1 � ,� 1942�14�MW-10D� MW-10 � �\ _ I /-1931,22� _ 1941,48 ',—icxxx>a LU ��� MW-4�- �� - — �SW-8 ♦ / MW-4D*Ql p �/ i 1931.08 1 1_941,32 �� MW—SDI. _,��� MW 156 \ MW-5,1943,31 11 INACTIVE 1 G11e SW-31 CELL 3 — ' INACTIVE 11` f � MW-15D� I = 1 �� _- � — 1 CELL 4 1949.42 I -- I ..INACTIVE ................ CELL 1 / \ 1 1924.40 SW-5 I 1 CD 10 CD ao 0o I c cc � � I I I r o MW-17R C� M-12RO(1877.06) CD j I MW-17DR) (1878.57' I I I I I 1 y NEW PHASE 7 WASTE LIMITS- 2 4,99 \ \I I /� `®MW-14D� e. MW�-12 1 93i.43 -- / MW-12D) 1937,96 I BUNCOMBE COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES RADIO TOWER EXISTING `\ \ PHASE 1 _5 I C&D AREA \ PERMITTED PHASE 6 C&D AREA to N m 90ANVA MW-13 1950.28 MW-13D)K 1947.12 --, 7 .� O I-- \ i- I MW - 6 ................................ - - - - - - - 1963,18 INACTIVE o CELL 2 I INACTIVE CELL 5 �. �.. +�9�p 1 MW-7 LD- •-— 11 LLD 0 �i 1981.00�/ - M-2 /-LACHATE ,/ i_D /� �M W - 8 t\, 1932.86 S ' MW B MW-8D MW-11 1934.89� 193: • / 1934.63 ' EMPLOYEE E LEACHATE TRAILER POND - o HHW (4.6 AC.) / ,/ BUILDING \ SW-4 PIGGYBACK - PHASE 7 LIMITS \ \ 1 8 1 M-9 °\1,0 93°\ 1 ti ti90 O 1 - �2050 / 1 1890 2030 2o,o 1 1970 � 1 950 ,3 1 � O g70 ,850 30- 1 �1830- 1 \\ \ _—Z 7 1 >80 1 >6n FRENCH BROAD RIVER �4�5�19 554wi} 1 f IA�+r: E. AL 2653 # f 06 %rtiti 19Sp V MW-16��MW-16D NOT NOT PRESENT PRESENT -------�-- ----------------------�\ PERMITTED FUTURE CELL 7 � i ACTIVE �� CELL 6 M-8 l�i1I1*� LOCATION ACCURACY OF THE FEATURES SHOWN IS LIMITED BY THE REFERENCES THEMSELVES. 1956,10 1960 MW-1 S MW-1D* 1954.76 �-- 1950 970 REFERENCES: 1) SHEET NO. 1 GROUNDWATER AND METHANE MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS, CDM SMITH, PROJECT NO. 6447-105257. FILE: SITEMAP 2014.DWG. 2) SURFACE WATER LOCATIONS FROM SHEET NO. 1 GROUNDWATER AND METHANE MONITORING WELL LOCATION MAP, CDM SMITH, NOVEMBER 2012 PROJECT NO. 6447-93318. FILE: SITEMAP. DWG. 3) PHASE 6 C&D BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY MCGILL. 4) SHEET NO. OP-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS, CDM SMITH, PROJECT NO. 6447-97693. FILE: OP-1.DWG. 5) FIGURE NO. 3-1 WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN CELL 6 AREA, CDM, PROJECT NO. 6447, DATED NOVEMBER 2004. 6) SURVEY DATA FOR MW-17R, MW-17DR AND M-12R IN SCS REPORT DATED OCTOBER 13, 2020 7) PHASE 7 C&D BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY SCS LEGEND —1980 TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR — — — — — WASTE UNIT BOUNDARY PHASE 7 UNIT BOUNDARY (PIGGYBACK) PHASE 7 UNIT BOUNDARY (NEW) FACILITY BOUNDARY MW-10 EXISTING GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL �MW— 16 PERMITTED FUTURE GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL EXISTING SURFACE WATER SW-2 MONITORING LOCATION * LD-1 LEAK DETECTOR * LD-7 PERMITTED FUTURE LEAK DETECTOR 0 M-3 EXISTING LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WELL _($�M-5 PERMITTED FUTURE LANDFILL GAS MONITORING WE \ EXISTING STRUCTURE MONITORED FOR LANDFILL GAS 1950 POTENTIOMETRIC ELEVATION CONTOUR (FEET MSL) CONTOUR INTERVAL = 10 FEET ■ GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION * DEEP WELL NOT USED FOR CONTOURING PURPOSES (AB) ABANDONED 200 100 0 200 400 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET REVISIONS No. DESCRIPTION BY DRAWN: RLB CHECKED: TJD APPROVED: AWA )ATE: 1-22-21 ;AD FILE: BCLF 9378-11 R WTM NO: J20-9378-11R is 1IM I BUNNELL BUNNELL ENGINEERING 6004 Ponders Court, Greenville, SC 29615 Phone; (864) 288-1265 Fax; (864) 288-4430 GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP—OCTOBER 26-30, 2020 BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL ALEXANDER, NORTH CAROLINA FIGURE NO. 3 WELL CAP WITH LOCK WELL ID PLATE WELL CAP STEEL PROTECTOR CAP 1/4" GAS VENT DRAIN/WEEP HOLE SURVEYOR'S PIN (FLUSH MOUNT) GROUND SURFACE 3' x 3' x 4" CONCRETE PAD -SLOPE TO DRAIN T C~n w CONTINUOUS POUR CONCRETE CAP 3 FEET MIN. � p ~ AND WELL APRON IJ_ N NEAT CEMENT GROUT, CEMENT/BENTONITE GROUT, OR HIGH SOLIDS SODIUM BENTONITE GROUT WELL DIAMETER 2" PVC THREADED BOREHOLE DIAMETER 5 INCHES MINIMUM BENTONITE LAYER (NOMINAL DIMENSION) (1.0 FEET MIN.) SILICA FILTER PACK SAND POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE LU Q w =_ SCREENED INTERVAL 0.010 INCH SLOT MANUFACTURED SCREEN (NOT TO EXCEED � z0 __ 15 FEET WITHOUT AMPLE JUSTIFICATION Q N = WELL INSTALLATION.) A BOTTOM CAP NOTES: 1. IF THE WELL IS SET IN SOIL, THE SCREEN WILL BE SET TO BRACKET THE 24-HOUR WATER LEVEL WITH APPROXIMATELY 12-FT OF WATER IN THE WELL. IF THE WELL IS SET INTO BEDROCK, THE SCREEN WILL BE SET TO ENCOUNTER WATER -PRODUCING FRACTURES. 2. PLACE PEA GRAVEL IN ANNULAR SPACE BETWEEN PVC STICK UP AND STEEL PROTECTIVE CASING. GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL JOB NO.: J20-9378-11 R Is 6004 Ponders Phone: � B U N N E L L LAMMONS IIENGINEERING Court, Greenville, SC 29615 (864) 288-1265 Fax: (864) 288-443, GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL DETAIL BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL ALEXANDER, NORTH CAROLINA FIGURE DATE: 1-21-21 SCALE: NOT TO SCALE APPENDIX A Monitoring Well Construction Records LOG OF BORING BORING MW-10 Project Buncombe County Cell 4&5 MW In Location Buncombe County Subtitle D Landfill Page 1 of 1 Date Drilled 6-Mar-02 Drilling Co.: Reuben Caldwell Well Drilling Total Depth 73 ft. bis Method Used: 6 in. Air Rotary Job #: 6447-35174 Inspector Mat Colone Water elev: dry Depth feet Sample No.. Blows/6" 140lbs. Sample Inter. Recover inches Org. Vap m Sample Description Strata Change Remarks time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Mostty fill material, some boulders throughout profile. Natural ground at about 55 feet. Bedrock ® 68' bls Terminate Boring @ 73' bis PWR - Bedrock MW-10.xls C ld�� � om WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Project: Buncombe County Cell 4R5 MW Installation Well No.: MW-10 TOC elev.: 2010.54 Location: Buncombe County SubTilie D Landfill Protec5ve Type: Monitoring Well Casing DRILLING SUMMARY Drilling Company: Reuben Caldwell Drillers: Billie Nash Drill Rig/Model: TamRock D25K Riser Borehole Diameters: 6 in Drilling Fluid: Air Cement Bits: 6-Inch Air Hammer Grout Total Depth: 73 ft. Depth To Water: 71.85 it. btoc (staitL Geologist: Mat Colone WELL DESIGN Casing Material: Schedule 40 PVC Diameter: 2-in. Screen Size: 15 ft. Diameter: 2-in- Slot Size: 0.010-in. Setting: 58 to 73 ft. bis Filter Material: #2 Filter Sand Setting: 56 to 73 ft. bls Seal Material: 3/8 in. bentonite pellet Setting: 54 to 56 ft. bis Grout: type I portiand cement Setting: 0 to 54 ft. bis Surface Casing Material: Above Grade Steel TIME LOG 54 Bentonite 56 Started Completed Seal 58 Drilling: 315102 316J02 Installation: 316102 3/11 /02 Gravel i _ Development: 317102 317/02 Pack Screen C MW-10.xIS LOG OF BORING BORING MW-10d Project Buncombe County Cell 4&5 MW In Location Buncombe County Subtitle D Landfill Pagel of 1 Date Drilled 6-Mar-02 Drilling Co.: Reuben Caldwell Well Drilling Total Depth 115 ft. bls Method Used, 6 in. Air Rotary Job #: 6447-35174 Inspector Mat Colone Water elev: 11 4'bls (0 hr) Depth feet Sample No. Blows/6" 140lbs. Sample Inter. Recover inches Org. Vap m Sample Description Strata Change Remarks time 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 g0 100 110 120 130 140 Mostly fill material, some boulders throughout profile. Natural ground at about 55 feet. Bedrock @ 68' bls Very competent bedrock, little fracturing to 115 feet. -Small fracture, damp cuttings Terminate Boring 41115 ft bis PW R Bedrock MW-10d.xis RCK)M WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Project: Buncombe County Cell 4&5 MW Installation Location: Buncombe County SubTitle D Landfill Well No.: MW-10d TOG elev.: 2010.56 Protective Type: Monitoring Well Casing DRILLING SUMMARY Drilling Company: Reuben Caldwell Drillers: Billie Nash Drill Rig/Model: TamRock D25K Riser Borehole Diameters: 6 in Drilling Fluid: Air Cement Bits: 6-inch Air Hammer Grout Total Depth: 115 ft. Depth To Water: 70.08 ft. btoc (static) Geologist: Mat Colone WELL DESIGN Casing Material: Schedule 40 PVC Diameter: 2-in. _ Screen Size: 15 ft. Diameter: 2-1n. Slot Size: 0.010-in. Setting: 100 to 115 ft. bis Filter Material: #2 Filter Sand Setting: 98 to 115 ft. bis Seal Material: 3/8 In. bentonite pellet Setting: 96 to 98 ft. bEs _ Grout: type I portland cement Setting: 0 to 96 ft. bls Surface Casing Material: Above Grade Steel TIME LOG Started Completed Bentonit Drilling: 316/02 3/6/02 Seal 96 Installation: 3/6/02 3/11 /02 98 Development: 3)7/02 3/7/02 100 _ Gravel _ Pack _ Screen 115 MW-10d.xls CDM LOG OF BORING BORING MW-11 Project Buncombe County Cell 4&5 MW In Location Buncombe County Subtitle D Landfill Page 1 of 1 Date Drilled 5-Mar-02 Drilling Co.: Reuben Caldwell Well Drilling Total Depth 50 ft. bls Method Used: 6 in. Air Rotary Job #: 6447-35174 Inspector Mat Colone Water elev: 49' bls Depth feet Sample No. Blows/6" 140lbs. Sample Inter. Recover inches Org. Vap m Sample Description Strata Change Remarks time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Saprollte/PWR to 24' bls. Fracture @ 37' bls Small fracture 0 49' bts Boring Terminated @ 50' bis Sa Loci roc M W-11.xis WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Project: Buncombe County ell 4&5 MW Installation Location: Buncombe County SubTitle D Landfill Well No.: MW-11 TOC elev.: 1966.71 Protective Type: Monitoring Well Casing _ DRILLING SUMMARY Drilling Company: Reuben Caldwell Drillers: Billie Nash r. Drill Rig/Model: TamRock D25K Riser Borehole Diameters: 6 in Drilling Fluid: Air Cement Bits: 6-inch Air Hammer Grout Total Depth: 50 ft. Depth To Water. 34.93 ft. btoc (static) _ Geologist: Mat Colone WELL DESIGN Casing Material: Schedule 40 PVC Diameter: 2-in. Screen Size: 15 ft. Diameter: 2-in, 31 Slot Size: 0.010-in. Setting: 35 to 50 ft. bis Bentonite 33 Filter Material: #2 Filter Sand Setting: 33 to 50 ft. bis Seat 35 Seal Material: 3/8 in. bentonite pellet Setting: 31 to 33 ft. bis Grout: type I portiand cement Setting: 0 to 31 ft. bis _ Surface Casing Material: Above Grade Steel Gravel _ Pack Screen TIME LOG 50 Started Completed Drilling: 3/4/02 3/5/02 Installation: 3/5/02 3/11 /02 - Development: 3a/02 3/7/02 MW-11.xls LOG OF BORING BORiNG 4 MW-11d Project Buncombe County Cell 4&5 MW In Location Buncombe County Subtitle D Landfill Pagel of 1 Date Drilled 6-Mar-02 Drilling Co.: Reuben Caldwell Well Drii_ling Total Depth 70 ft. bis Method Used: 6 in. Air Rotary Job #: 6447-35174 Inspector Mat Colone Water elev: 67' bis Depth feet Sample No. Blows/6' 140lbs. Sample Inter. Recover Inches Org. Vap m Sample Description Strata Change Remarks time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 5aprolite/PWR to 24' bls. Fracture ® 37' bis Small fracture ® 4V bis Water producing fracture 0 67' bis Terminate Boring @ 70' bts S2 R. a roc M W-11 d.xts -qw�mfi WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Project: Buncombe County Cell 4&5 MW Installation Well No.: MW-11d TOC elev.: 1966.13 r--I Protective Type: Monitoring Well Casing w/m/1 DRILLING SUMMARY Cement Grout Seal Gravel Pack Location: Buncombe County SubTitle D Landfill Drilling Company: Reuben Caldwell Drillers: Billie Nash Drill Rig/Model: TamRock D25K Riser Borehole Diameters: 6 in Drilling Fluid: Air Bills: 6-inch Air Hammer Total Depth: 70 ft. Depth To Water: 35.55 ft. btoc (static) Geologist: Mat Colone WELL DESIGN Casing Material: Schedule 40 PVC Diameter: 2-in. Screen Size: 10 ft_ Diameter: 2-in. Slot Size: 0.010-in. Setting: 60 to 70 ft. bis Filter Material: #2 Filter Sand Setting: 58 to 70 ft. bis Seal Material: 3/8 in, bentonite pellet Setting: 56 to 58 ft. bis Grout: type I portland cement Setting: 0 to 56 ft. bis Surface Casing Material: Above Grade Steel TIME LOG 56 58 Started Completed 60 Drilling: 315/02 3/5102 Installation: 315/02 3/11 /02 _ Development: 317/02 317/02 — Screen 70 MW-11d.xls JUL-05-OZ 10:36 FROM- T-760 P 0041007 F-213 LOG OF BORING BORING N. MW-12 Project Buncombe County C&O MW InsWp Location Buncamba County C&D Landfill Expansion Page 1 or 1 Date Drilled 5Jun-02 Drilling Co.:7euban Caldwell Well Drillin Total Depth 17 h. big Mathod used: 6 In. Air Rotary Job a: 6447-35174 Inspector Mal Cotone Water elev: 13 B. big Depth leer) Sample No. 1 Blows6" 1 140 lbs. Sample Inter, Recover inches Ora. Vap m) Sample Description Stratia Change Remarks (time) 2 4 6 B 10 12 74 16 1B 20 22 24 26 Saprolite/PWR to 15' bls. Boring Terminated b /7' li Sap/PWR Wet tunings ® 13' bis Bedrock MW-12.xts d0L-05-02 10:36 FROM- T-760 P 005/007 F-113 cm WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Project: Buncombe County C3D MW Installation Location: Buncombe County C&D Landfill Expansion Well No.: MW-12 TOC elay.: �"pilecl ve Type: Monitoring WON ing '' „ ORIL SUMMA Y Cement Grout 3 Riser Drilling Company: Reuben Caldwell Drillers: Billie Nash Bentonile Seal $e; 5 Drill Rig/Model: 7amRock Borehole Diameters' 6 in Drilling Fluid: Air 7 Bits: 6-inch Air Hammer _ Total Depth: 17 ft. Depth TO star: 13.85 ft, btoc (static) _ Gravel Pack Geologist: Mat Colone _ Screen WELL DESIGN 17 Casing Material: Schedule 40 PVC Diameter: 2-in. Screen Size: 15 ft. Diameter. 2-in. Slot Sits: 0.010-in. Selling' 7 to 17 ft. ble Filler Matenal: n2 Filter Sand Setting: 510 17 ft. bls Seal Material' 318 in. bentoniie pellet Setting: 3 to 5 ft. bls Grout: type I Portland cement Selling: 0 to 3 ft. bls Surface Casing Materiah: Above Grade Steel TIM5 LOG Started Completed Drilling: 3/25/02 3125/02 Installation: 32WO2 3/26102 Development: 3/25102 3125/02 MW-12.xls Jut-lu-uz 10:36 FR067- cm LOG OF BORING Project Buncombe County C&D PAW Install Lc Date Drglad 25-Jun-02 D61fin Total Depth 37 h. ble Method T-760 P 006/007 F-213 BORING a MW12d Page 1 of 1 Jab a: 644735174 water elev: 2a ft. bis Depth Teel Sample No. elowsB" 140lbs. Sample Inter, Reeover incha6 Org. Vap m Sample Description Strata Change Ramaftfa (time) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 so 55 60 65 Saprolae/PWR to 15'bls. Fraeldfe B 20' Ws (dry) Fracture set from 24' io 26' bls (producing into water) Fracture sal from 28' to W bts (producing water) Boring Terminated ® 37' Ills Sa /PWR Bedrock MW-12d.xis JUL-uS-uZ 10:37 FROW T-760 P OOV007 F-213 cm WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Project: Buncombe County C&O MIN Installation Location: Buncombe County CAD Landfill Expension Well No.: MW-12d TOC elev.: Protective Type: Monitoring Walt Ca ;ng DRILLING SUMMARY Drilling Company: Reuben Caldwell Drillers: Billie Nash Drill Rill TamRock b25K Riser Borehole Diameters: 6 in Drilling Fluid; Air Cement Sits: 6-inch Air Hommar Grout Total Depth: 37 h. Depth To Water: 16.12 ft. btoc (static) Geologist: Mat Colone WELL D SIGN Casing Malarial: Schedule 40 PVC Diameter: 2-in, Screen Size: 1511. Diamate: 2-In. Slot Size: 0.010-in. Setting: 27 to 37 N. bls Filter Material: 02 Filter Send Setting: 2510 37 tt. bls Seal Material: /fi in. Dentonila pellet Setting: 2310 25 ft. bis Grout:.rypa 1 pOrdand _cement Setting: 0 to 233 bis Surface Casing Material: Above Grade teal 23 Sentonite fi3: Seal +c± :�a. 25 TIME LOG 27 Gravel Started Completed Pack _ Screon Drilling: 6125/02 6/25/02 _ Installation: 625/02 626/02 Development: 6/25/02 6/25/02 37 MW-12d.Kls Sm■th FIELD BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE NO.: MW-15s 5400 Glenwood Avenue Suite 300 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 TOTAL DEPTH: 26 ft (919) 787-5620 tel (919) 781-5730 fax PROJECT INFORMATION DRILLING INFORMATION PROJECT: Phase 5 Expansion DRILLING CO.: Reuben Caldwell Drilling, Inc SITE LOCATION: Buncombe County C&D Landfill DRILLER: Billie Nash JOB NO.: 5000-90099 RIG TYPE: Schramm T450 GEOLOGIST: Mat Colone METHOD OF DRILLING: Air Rotary PROJECT MANAGER: Mat Colone SAMPLING METHODS: Visual inspection DATE DRILLED: 6/27/12 HAMMER WT./DROP NA Depth Soil Soil Description Sample Blows (Recovery) Boring Completion Well Symbol Description Locking Protective 0 ��� Cover Glop. FILL: Tan to reddish brown, silt/sand/clay. QD OOp� d _5 � OoDQ 2" Schedule 40 PVC Riser pQ Od Bentonite/Portland Q0�I < Cement Grout -10 �0 p Ood Bentonite Seal Q� —15 op� On; lop Q�< #2 Sand Filter Pack opo O^� - 2 0 ... T ... T _. .T. TTTTT SILTY SAND: Medium sand with silt, gray to brown, micaceous, trace rock TTTTT fragments. Saprolite/PWR. 2" Schedule 40 0.010" T T T T T TTTTT Slotted Screen T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T - 2 5 T T T T T T T LLLL GNEISS: Fractured Rock - Undifferentiated Gneiss Notes: Damp cuttings at 23 ft bls. Initially dry after installation. Static water level -20 ft bls. Page 1 of 1 S�■�rMi■th 5400 Glenwood Avenue Suite 300 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 (919) 787-5620 tel (919) 781-5730 fax PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT: Phase 5 Expansion SITE LOCATION: Buncombe County C&D Landfill JOB NO.: 5000-90099 GEOLOGIST: Mat Colone PROJECT MANAGER: Mat Colone DATE DRILLED: 6/27/12 Depth Soil Soil Description Symbol 0 —5 -10 -15 -20 -25 —30 -35 -40 FILL: Tan to reddish brown, QD< silt/sand/clay. �Da �Oa o �Da � �Da � �Oa o �O^o r T T.-r. T -r.SILTY SAND: Medium sand with silt, T gray to brown, micaceous, trace rock r T T T T T fragments. Saprolite/PWR. rT-rT-rT r T -r T -r T GNEISS: Fractured Rock - Undifferentiated Gneiss FIELD BOREHOLE LOG BOREHOLE NO.: MW-15d TOTAL DEPTH: 43 ft DRILLING INFORMATION DRILLING CO.: Reuben Caldwell Drilling, Inc DRILLER: BillieNash RIG TYPE: Schramm T450 METHOD OF DRILLING: Air Rotary SAMPLING METHODS: Visual inspection HAMMER WT./DROP NA Sample Blows (Recovery) Boring Completion Well Description Locking Protective Cover 2" Schedule 40 PVC Riser Bentonite/Portland Cement Grout Bentonite Seal #2 Sand Filter Pack 2" Schedule 40 0.010" Slotted Screen Notes: Bedrock @ 25 ft bls. Water bearing fracture @ 38 ft bls. Page 1 of 1 Date Started : 9/2/2020 f Date Completed :9/3/2020 LOG OF BORING MW-17R Hole Diameter : 8 in Drilling Method : H.S.A. / Air Hammer (Page 1 of 1) Depth to water JOC) : 15.31 ft SCS Personnel : B.Eigenberger/ J. Hamela Buncombe County Landfill Well Material : PVC 85 Panther Branch Road Northing Coord. : 738579.72 Well Diameter : 2 inch Facility Permit 11-07 Easting Coord. : 918661.95 Driller / Company : Gary Winbourn / IET Logged By : B.Eigenberger Well Slot : 0.01" Sand Pack : GP #1 Total Well Depth : 23.5 ft Alexander, NC 28701 Project # 02220306.04 Q Well: MW-17R u- Surf. = Elev.:1891.61 .S -E Elev. 07 IL DESCRIPTION Cover Q 1888.96 j o Surface Casing 0 SILTY SAND, saprolitic with PWR fragements, dry, brown, tan, gray 1888 Grout -a: SM �, :e Riser y� :e Auger refusal at 4' r\ r\ r Seal 5 Rock fragments - gray, black, white, dry, assumed gneiss. 1883 llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r 10 llv llv ll llv llv ll r\ r\ r 1878 r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll Sand Pack GN r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r 15 llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r 1873 l lv l lv l l Screen r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r 20 llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r llv llv ll r\ r\ r LU Boring terminated at 23.5 feet bgs bgs = below ground surface SAA = same as above PWR = partially weathered rock NA = not applicable TBD = to be determined 0 N N m 0 Started : 9/1/2020 MMIDate Date Completed :9/2/2020 LOG OF BORING MW-17DR Hole Diameter : 8 in Drilling Method : H.S.A. / Air Hammer (Page 1 of 1) Depth to water JOC) : 14.05 ft Buncombe County Landfill SCS Personnel : B. Eigenberger/ J.Hamela Well Material : PVC 85 Panther Branch Road Northing Coord. : 738569.66 Well Diameter : 2 inch Facility Permit 11-07 Easting Coord. : 918659.32 Well Slot : 0.01" Alexander, NC 28701 Driller / Company : Gary Winbourn / IET Sand Pack : GP #1 Project # 02220306.04 Logged By : B.Eigenberger Total Well Depth :39 ft Q Well: MW-17DR u- .S Surf. = Elev.:1891.70 Elev. U Q DESCRIPTION Cover n 1889.14 �� 0 j (D Surface LU Casing 0 1889 5 -� 1884 10-+ 1879 15--� 1874 20 -+ 1869 25 --� 1864 30 -+ 1859 35--� 1854 SM SILTY SAND, saprolitic with PWR fragements, dry, brown, tan, gray PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK, sand, silt, dry, tan, brown, white r\ r\ r Auger refusal at 5' til til til r\ r\ r Rock fragments- gray, black, white, dry, assumed gneiss. til til�}1 r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til til til til r\ r\ r til til til til til�}1 r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r apparent fracture zone 18' -19' til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r l_til_til GIN ti r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til til til til til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r til til til r\ r\ r apparent fracture zone 36' - 39', increased water production til til�}1 r\ r\ r til til til 40 1 Boring terminated at 39 feet bgs bgs = below ground surface SAA = same as above PWR = partially weathered rock NA = not applicable TBD = to be determined Riser Grout Seal Sand Pack Screen APPENDIX B Appendix I and Appendix II Constituent Lists Constituents for Detection Monitoring (40 CFR 258, Appendix I) Common name Antimony ArsenicTotal ECASRN Barium BerylliumTotal Cadmium Chromium Total Cobalt (Total) Copper Total Lead (Total) Nickel Total Selenium (Total) Silver Total Thallium (Total) Vanadium Total Zinc (Total) Acetone 67-64-1 Acrylonitrile 107-13-1 Benzene 71-43-2 Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 Bromoform; Tribromomethane 75-25-2 Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 Chloroethane; Ethyl chloride 75-00-3 Chloroform; Trichloromethane 67-66-3 Dibromochloromethane; Chlorodibromomethane 124-48-1 1,2-Dibromo-3-chlo ro ane; DBCP 96-12-8 1,2-Dibromoethane; Ethylene dibromide; EDB 106-93-4 o-Dichlorobenzene; 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 Dichlorobenzene; 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 110-57-6 1,1-Dichloroethane; Eth lidene chloride 75-34-3 1,2-Dichloroethane; Ethl ene dichloride 107-06-2 1,1-Dichloroethylene; 1-1-Dichloroethene; Vinylidene chloride 75-35-4 cis-1,2-Dichloroeth lene; cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene; trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 1,2-Dichlo ro ane; Propylene dichloride 78-87-5 cis- 1,3-Dichlo ro ene 10061-01-5 trans- l,3-Dichlo ro ene 10061-02-6 Eth lbenzene 100-41-4 2-hexanone; Methyl butyl ketone 591-78-6 Methyl bromide; Bromomethane 74-83-9 Methyl chloride; Chloromethane 74-87-3 Methylene bromide Dibromomethane 74-95-3 Methylene chloride; Dichloromethane 75-09-2 Methyl ethyl ketone; MEK; 2-Butanone 78-93-3 Methyl iodide; Iodomethane 74-88-4 4-Methyl-2-pentanone; Methyl isobutyl isobutyl ketone 108-10-1 Styrene 100-42-5 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 Tetrachloroethylene; Tetracholorethene; Perchloroeth lene 127-18-4 Toluene 108-88-3 1,1,1-Trochlorethane; Meth lhloroform 71-55-6 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 Trichloroeth lene; Trichlorethene 79-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane; CFC-11 75-69-4 1,2,3-Trichloro ro ane 96-18-4 Vinyl acetate 108-05-4 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 X lens 1330-20-7 Constituents for Assessment Monitoring (40 CFR 258, Appendix II) Common Name CAS RN Acena hthene 83-32-9 Acena hth lene 208-96-8 Acetone 67-64-1 Acetonitrile; Methyl cyanide 75-05-8 Aceto henone 98-86-2 2-Ace laminofluorene; 2-AAF 53-96-3 Acrolein 107-02-8 Acrylonitrile 107-13-1 Aldrin 309-00-2 All 1 chloride 107-05-1 4-Aminobi hen 1 92-67-1 Anthracene 120-12-7 Antimony (Total) Arsenic (Total) Barium (Total) Benzene 71-43-2 Benzo[a]anthracene; Benzanthracene 56-55-3 Benzo[b]fluoranthene 205-99-2 Benzo[k]fluoranthene 207-08-9 Benzo[ hi] e lene 191-24-2 Benzo[a] ene 50-32-8 Ben 1 alcohol 100-51-5 Beryllium (Total) al ha-BHC 319-84-6 beta-BHC 319-85-7 delta-BHC 319-86-8 gamma-BHC; Lindane 58-89-9 Bis 2-chloroethox methane 111-91-1 Bis 2-chloroeth 1 ether; Dichloroeth 1 ether 111-44-4 Bis-(2-chlor-l-methyl) ether; 2, 2-Dichloro- diiso ro 1 ether; DCIP, See note 6 108-60-1 Bis(2-eth lhex 1phthalate 117-81-7 Bromochloromethane; Chlorobromomethane 74-97-5 Bromodichloromethane; Dibromochloromethane 75-27-4 Bromoform; Tribromomethane 75-25-2 4-Bromo hen 1 phenyl ether 101-55-3 Butyl benzylphthalate; Benz 1 butyl phthalate 85-68-7 Cadmium (Total) Carbon disulfide 75-15-0 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 Chlordane See NOTE 1 -Chloroaniline 106-47-8 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 Chlorobenzilate 510-15-6 -Chloro-m-cresol; 4-Chloro-3-meth 1 henol 59-50-7 Chloroethane; Ethyl chloride 75-00-3 Chloroform; Trichloromethane 67-66-3 2-Chlorona hthalene 91-58-7 2-Chloro henol 95-57-8 4-Chloro hen 1 phenylether 7005-72-3 Chloro rene 126-99-8 Chromium Total Chrysene 218-01-9 Cobalt 218-01-9 Copper Total m-Cresol; 3-meth 1 henol 108-39-4 o-Cresol; 2-methl henol 95-48-7 -Cresol; 4-meth 1 henol 106-44-5 Cyanide 57-12-5 2,4-D; 2,4-Dichloro henox acetic acid 94-75-7 4,4-DDD 72-54-8 4,4-DDE 72-55-9 4,4-DDT 50-29-3 Diallate 2303-16-4 aDibenz a,h anthracene 53-70-3 Dibenzofiran 132-64-9 Dibromochloromethane; Chlorodibromomethane 124-48-1 1,2-Dibromo-30chloro ro ane; DBCP 96-12-8 1,2-Dibromoethane; Ethylene dibromide; EDB 106-93-4 Di-n-but 1 phthalate 84-74-2 o-Dichlorobenzene; 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 m-Dichlorobenzene; 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 -Dichlorobenzene; 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 110-57-6 Dichlorodifluoromethane; CFC 12; 75-71-8 1, 1 -Dichloroethane chloride 75-34-3 1,2-Dichloroethane; Ethylene dichloride 107-06-2 1,1-Dichloroethylene; 1,1-Dichloroethane; Vin lidene 75-35-4 chloride Total cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene; cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 2,4-Dichloro henol 120-83-2 76-Dichloro henol 87-65-0 1,2-Dichloro ro ane; Propylene dichloride 78-87-5 1,3-Dichloro ro ane; Trimeth lene dichloride 142-28-9 2,2-Dichloro ro ane; Isopropylidene chloride 594-20-7 1,1-Dichloro ro ene 563-58-6 cis- 1,3-Dichloro ro ene 10061-01-5 trans- 1,3-Dichloro ro ene 10061-02-6 Dieldrin 60-57-1 Dieth 1 phthalate 84-66-2 0,0-Diethyl 0-2-pyrazinyl phosphorothioate; thionazin 297-97-2 Dimethoate 60-51-5 - Dimeth lamino azobenzene 60-11-7 7,12-Dimeth lbenxz a anthracene 57-97-6 3,3-Dimeth lbenzidine 119-93-7 2,4-Dimethl henol; m-X lenol 105-67-9 Dimeth 1 phthalate 131-11-3 m-Dinitrobenzene 99-65-0 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol4,6-Dinitro-2-meth 1 henol 534-52-1 2,4-Dinitro henol 51-28-5 74-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 Dinoseb; DNBP; 2-sec-But 1-4,6-dinitro henol 88-85-7 Di-n-octyl phthalate 117-84-0 Di hen lamine 122-39-4 Disulfoton 298-04-4 Endosulfan I 959-98-8 Endosulfan II 33213-65-9 Endodulfan sulfate 1031-07-8 Endrin 72-20-8 Endrin aldehyde 7421-93-4 Eth lbenzene 100-41-4 Ethyl methac late 97-63-2 Ethyl methanesulfonate 62-50-0 Fam hur 52-85-7 Fluoranthene 206-44-0 Fluorene 86-73-7 Heptachlor 76-44-8 Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 Hexachloroc clo entadiene 77-47-4 Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 Hexachloro ro ene 188-71-7 2-Hexanone; Methyl butyl ketone 591-78-6 Indeno11,2,3-cd rene 193-39-5 Isopbutyl alcohol 78-83-1 Isodrin 465-73-6 Iso horone 78-59-1 Isosafrole 120-58-1 Ke one 143-50-0 Lead Total Mercury Total Methac lonitrile 126-98-7 Metha rilene 91-80-5 Methox chlor 72-43-5 Methyl bromide; Bromomethane 74-83-9 Methyl chloride; Chloromethane 74-87-3 3-Meth lcholanthrene 56-49-5 Methyl ethyl ketone; MEK; 2-Butanone 78-93-3 Methyl iodide; lodomethane 74-88-4 Methyl methac late 80-62-6 Methyl methanesulfonate 66-27-3 2-Meth lna hthalene 91-57-6 Methylparathion; Parathion methyl 298-00-0 4-Meth 1-2- entanone; Methyl isobut 1 ketone 108-10-1 Meth lene bromide; Dibromomethane 74-95-3 Methylene chloride; Dichloromethane 75-09-2 Naphthalene 91-20-3 1,4-Na htho uinone 130-15-4 1-Na hth lamine 134-32-7 2-Na hth lamine 91-59-8 Nickel Total o-Nitroaniline; 2-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 m-Nitroaniline; 3-Nitroanile 99-09-2 -Nitroaniline; 4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 o-Nitro henol; 2-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 -Nitro henol; 4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 N-Nitrosodi-n-but lamine 924-16-3 N-Nitrosodieth lamine 55-18-5 N-Nitrosodimeth lamine 62-75-9 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine, N-Nitroso-N-Di-n- ro lnitrosamine 86-30-6 N-Nitrosodi ro lamine; di ro lamine; 621-64-7 N-Nitrosometh lethalamine 10595-95-6 N-Nitroso i eridine 100-75-4 N-Nitroso rrolidine 930-55-2 5-Nitro-o-toluidine 99-55-8 Parathion 56-38-2 Pentachlorobenzene 608-93-5 Pentachloronitrobenzene 82-68-8 Pentachloro henol 87-86-5 Phenacetin 62-44-2 Phenanthrene 85-01-8 Phenol 108-95-2 -Phen lenediamine 106-50-3 Phorate 298-02-2 Polychlorinated bi hen is (PCBs); Aroclors see NOTE 2 Pronamide 23950-58-5 Pro ionitrile; Ethyl cyanide 107-12-0 P rene 129-00-0 Safrole 94-59-7 Selenium Total Silver Total Silvex; 2,4,5-TP 93-72-1 Styrene 100-42-5 Sulfide 18496-25-8 2,4,5-T; 2,4,5-Trichloro henox acetic acid 93-76-5 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 95-94-3 1, 1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 Tetrachloroethylene; Tetrachloroethene; Perchloroeth lene 127-18-4 2,3,4,6-Tetrachloro henol 58-90-2 Thallium Total Tin Total Toluene 108-88-3 o-Toluidine 95-53-4 Toxa hene See NOTE 3 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane; Meth lchloroform 71-55-6 172-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 Trichloroeth lene; Trichloroethene 79-01-6 Trichlorrofluoromethane; CFC-11 75-69-4 214,5-Trichloro henol 95-95-4 2,4,6-Trichloro henol 88-06-2 1,2,3-Trichloro ro ane 96-18-4 0,0,0-Trieth 1 phosphorothioate 126-68-1 s m-Trinitrobenzene 99-35-4 Vanadium Total Vinyl acetate 108-05-4 Vinyl chloride; Chloroethene 75-01-4 X lene total See NOTE 4 Zinc Total 1. Chlordane: This entry includes alpha -chlordane (CAS RN 5103-71-9), beta -chlordane (CAS RN 5103-74-2), gamma -chlordane (CAS RN 5566-34-7), and constituents of chlordane (CAS RN 57-74-9 and CAS RN 12789-03-6) 2. Polychlorinated biphenyls (CAS RN 1336-36-3); this category contains congener chemicals, including constituents of Aroclor-1016 (CAS RN 12674-11-2), Aroclor-1221 (CAS RN 11104-28-2), Aroclor-1232 (CAS RN 11141-16-5), Aroclor-1242 (CAS RN 53469-21-9), Aroclor-1248 (CAS RN 12672-29-6), Aroclor-1254 (CAS RN 11097-69-1), and Aroclor-1260 (CAS RN 11096-82-5) 3. Toxaphene: This entry includes congener chemicals contained in technical toxaphene (CAS RN 8001-35-2), ie, chlorinated camphene 4. Xylene (total): This entry includes o-xylene (CAS RN 96-47-6), m- xylene (CAS RN 108-38-3), p-xylene (CAS RN 106-42-3), and unspecified xylenes (dimethylbenzenes) (CAS RN 1330-20-7) A,LTT4 NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Dexter Matthews, Director Division of Waste Management Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor Dee Freeman, Secretary June 25, 2010 MEMORANDUM To: Solid Waste Directors, Landfill Owners/Operators, and North Carolina Certified Laboratories From: North Carolina Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Re: Tetrahydrofuran Analysis at Construction and Demolition Landfills Based upon historical sampling results, health and environmental concerns, and an ongoing EPA evaluation of tetrahydrofuran (THF), the Solid Waste Section (Section) is requiring, in accordance with 15A NCAC 13B .0601, that Construction and Demolition Landfills (CDLFs) begin analyzing ground and surface water samples collected after January 1, 2011 for THE The purpose of this memorandum is to inform CDLF owners and operators and laboratories that are involved in the collection or analysis of environmental samples of this requirement. Although the North Carolina Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch previously established a health based standard for THF, there are currently no established Maximum Contaminant Levels or 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Standards due to the lack of historical toxicological data necessary to promulgate regulatory standards. However, THF analysis is currently required at CDLFs located in several states throughout the U.S. and has been shown to be a constituent of concern in groundwater at CDLFs for several years. In addition, THF has been documented as a contaminant associated with CDLF leachate. Due to the potential health hazards associated with THF and its documented presence at CDLFs, the Section has determined that CDLFs should begin analyzing ground and surface water samples for THF to ensure protection of human health and the environment. Although regulatory standards have not yet been established for THF, its presence in groundwater must be determined in order to accurately assess the risks at each CDLF and determine if regulatory standards need to be established. The Section will reevaluate monitoring requirements for THF in the future after enough data has been collected to determine the extent of THF at C&D facilities. Laboratories are advised to contact the Division of Water Quality -Laboratory Section - Certification Branch prior to initiating THF analysis using Method 8260. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Jaclynne Drummond (919-508- 8500) or Ervin Lane (919-508-8516). Thank you for your continued cooperation with this matter. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 One Phone: 919-508-84001 FAX: 919-715-4061 1 Internet: www.wastenotnc.org NofthC arohna An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer - 50 % Recycled 110 % Post Consumer Paper ;Vaturully ROY COOPER Governor K.1 MICHAEL S. REGAN � 0_ Waste Management MICHAEL SCOTTDirenu, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY May 29, 2018 MEMORANDUM To: Solid Waste Directors, Landfill Owners/Operators, and North Carolina Certified Laboratories From: Ed Mussler, Section Chief North Carolina Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Re: 1,4-Dioxane Analysis, Solid Waste Section Limits, and Laboratory Analytical Methods 1,4-Dioxane Sampling In accordance with 15A NCAC 13B .0601, .0544, and .1632, the Solid Waste Section (Section) is requiring that all groundwater and surface water samples collected at landfills after July 1, 2018 be analyzed for the constituent 1,4-Dioxane. It is primarily used as a stabilizer for chlorinated solvents, however also used in many products including paint strippers, dyes, greases, varnishes and waxes. Additionally, it is found in a variety of consumer products such as detergents, shampoos, deodorants, and cosmetics. The current 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Standard for 1,4- Dioxane is 3.0 µg/1. Due to the potential health hazards associated with 1,4-Dioxane, the Section has determined that all landfills should begin analyzing groundwater and surface water samples for 1,4-Dioxane to ensure protection of human health and the environment. A USEPA Technical Fact Sheet for 1,4-Dioxane is provided in Appendix A of this Memorandum. Solid Waste Section Limits & Laboratory Analytical Methods In 2006, the Solid Waste Section made a policy decision to develop and use Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSLs). The purpose for this policy decision was to ensure that low level analytical data was consistently being reported for the purpose of making the correct choices when designing site remediation strategies, alerting the public to health threats, and protecting the environment from toxic contaminants. Over the past 12 years, technologies have advanced such that the majority of the SWSLs are outdated. Given the rapid pace of technology, the need for the Section to attempt to continuously update and/or maintain the SWSLs is not warranted. State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Waste Management 217 West ]ones Street 1 I646 Mail ServiCe Center I Raleigh, NOrth Carolina 27699-1646 9l9 707 8200 Although the use of the SWSLs will be discontinued, facilities should choose EPA approved analytical methods sufficiently sensitive to quantify the presence of a pollutant at or below applicable standards. Consistently achieving low level data is key for the continued purpose of making the correct choices when designing site remediation strategies, alerting the public to health threats, and protecting the environment from toxic contaminants. Facilities should communicate and coordinate with their analytical laboratory(s) to use sufficiently sensitive analytical methods to achieve analytical results with detection limits below the applicable groundwater standards and surface water standards. For guidance purposes, the Section recommends the use of the following analytical methods for groundwater and surface water samples. Volatile Organic Compounds SW 846 Method 8260 1,4-Dioxane SW 846 Method 8260 SIM SW 846 Method 8270 SIM Semi -Volatile Organic SW 846 Method 8270 Compounds Metals, Pesticides, PCBs, SW 846 Methods, USEPA Dioxins, Cyanide, methods, or method published Formaldehyde, and any other in Standard Methods for the constituents not covered by Examination of Water and above methods Wastewater having the lowest detection limits or having detection limits below applicable standards Notes: • The analytical methods should be the most recent versions of the analytical methods tabulated above. For SW- 846 Methods, the latest edition of SW-846, including any subsequent updates which have been incorporated into the edition, must be used. Sampling must be planned so that required holding times for analytical methods are met. • Select Ion Monitoring (SIM) is recommended when analyzing for 1,4-Dioxane in order to achieve applicable detection limits. SIM may be useful for other VOCs/SVOC constituents. • SW-846 Method 1610 does not have detection limits below the 1 SA NCAC 2L standards for all of the hazardous substance list metals. • The Section considers "J" flag values valid and relevant in the decision making process and hence all "J" flag values should be reported. If you have any questions, please contact Adam Ulishney at (919) 707-8210 or via email at adam.ulishney&ncdenr.gov. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Waste Management 217 West ]ones Street 1 I646 Mail ServiCe Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 9l9 707 8200 APPENDIX A State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Waste Management 217 West ]ones Street 1 I646 Mail ServiCe Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 9l9 707 8200 ■=. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Technical Fact Sheet — 1,4-Dioxane January 2014 Introduction This fact sheet, developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO), provides a summary of the contaminant 1,4-dioxane, including physical and chemical properties; environmental and health impacts; existing federal and state guidelines; detection and treatment methods; and additional sources of information. This fact sheet is intended for use by site managers who may address 1,4-dioxane at cleanup sites or in drinking water supplies and for those in a position to consider whether 1,4-dioxane should be added to the analytical suite for site investigations. 1,4-Dioxane is a likely human carcinogen and has been found in groundwater at sites throughout the United States. The physical and chemical properties and behavior of 1,4-dioxane create challenges for its characterization and treatment. It is highly mobile and has not been shown to readily biodegrade in the environment. What is 1,4-dioxane? ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is a synthetic industrial chemical that is completely miscible in water (EPA 2006). ❖ Synonyms include dioxane, dioxan, p-dioxane, diethylene dioxide, diethylene oxide, diethylene ether and glycol ethylene ether (EPA 2006; Mohr 2001). ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is unstable at elevated temperatures and pressures and may form explosive mixtures with prolonged exposure to light or air (DHHS 2011; HSDB 2011). ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is a likely contaminant at many sites contaminated with certain chlorinated solvents (particularly 1,1,1-trichloroethane [TCA]) because of its widespread use as a stabilizer for chlorinated solvents (EPA 2013a; Mohr 2001) ❖ It is used as: a stabilizer for chlorinated solvents such as TCA; a solvent for impregnating cellulose acetate membrane filters; a wetting and dispersing agent in textile processes; and a laboratory cryoscopic solvent for molecular mass determinations (ATSDR 2012; DHHS 2011; EPA 2006). ❖ It is used in many products, including paint strippers, dyes, greases, varnishes and waxes. 1,4-Dioxane is also found as an impurity in antifreeze and aircraft deicing fluids and in some consumer products (deodorants, shampoos and cosmetics) (ATSDR 2012; EPA 2006; Mohr 2001). Disclaimer: The U.S. EPA prepared this fact sheet from publically-available sources; additional information can be obtained from the source documents. This fact sheet is not intended to be used as a primary source of information and is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. United States Office of Solid Waste and EPA 505-F-14-011 Environmental Protection Agency Emergency Response (5106P) January 2014 1 What is 1,4-dioxane? (continued) ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is used as a purifying agent in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals and is a by- product in the manufacture of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic (Mohr 2001). ❖ Traces of 1,4-dioxane may be present in some food supplements, food containing residues from packaging adhesives or on food crops treated with pesticides that contain 1,4-dioxane as a solvent or inert ingredient (ATSDR 2012; DHHS 2011). Exhibit 1: Physical and Chemical Properties of 1,4-Dioxane (ATSDR 2012; Howard 1990; HSDB 2011) Property Value Abstracts Service (CAS) Number 123-91-1 Physical Description (physical state at room temperature) Clear, flammable liquid with a faint, pleasant odor Molecular weight (g/mol) 88.11 Water solubility Miscible Melting point (°C) 11.8 Boiling point (°C) at 760 mm Hg 101.1 °C Vapor pressure at 25°C (mm Hg) 38.1 Specific gravity 1.033 Octanol-water partition coefficient (log Kow) -0.27 Organic carbon partition coefficient (log Kos) 1.23 Henry's law constant at 25 °C (atm-m3/mol) 4.80 X 10-6 Abbreviations: g/mol — grams per mole; °C — degrees Celsius; mm Hg — millimeters of mercury; atm-m3/mol — atmosphere -cubic meters per mole. What are the environmental impacts of 1,4-dioxane? ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is released into the environment from surface water bodies (DHHS 2011; EPA during its production, the processing of other 2006). chemicals, its use and its generation as an impurity during the manufacture of some consumer products. It is typically found at some solvent release sites and PET manufacturing facilities (ATSDR 2012; Mohr 2001). ❖ It is short-lived in the atmosphere, with an estimated 1- to 3-day half-life as a result of its reaction with photochemically produced hydroxyl radicals (ATSDR 2012; DHHS 2011). Breakdown products include aldehydes and ketones (Graedel 1986). ❖ It may migrate rapidly in groundwater, ahead of other contaminants and does not volatilize rapidly ❖ Migration to groundwater is weakly retarded by sorption of 1,4-dioxane to soil particles; it is expected to move rapidly from soil to groundwater (EPA 2006; ATSDR 2012). It is relatively resistant to biodegradation in water and soil and does not bioconcentrate in the food chain (ATSDR 2012; Mohr 2001). As of 2007, 1,4-dioxane had been identified at more than 31 sites on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL); it may be present (but samples were not analyzed for it) at many other sites (HazDat 2007). What are the routes of exposure and the health effects of 1,4-dioxane? ❖ Potential exposure could occur during production Inhalation is the most common route of human and use of 1,4-dioxane as a stabilizer or solvent exposure, and workers at industrial sites are at (DHHS 2011). greatest risk of repeated inhalation exposure Exposure may occur through inhalation of vapors, (ATSDR 2012; DHHS 2011). ingestion of contaminated food and water or dermal contact (ATSDR 2012; DHHS 2011). What are the routes of exposure and the health effects of 1,4-dioxane? (continued) ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is readily adsorbed through the lungs and gastrointestinal tract. Some 1,4-dioxane may also pass through the skin, but studies indicate that much of it will evaporate before it is absorbed. Distribution is rapid and uniform in the lung, liver, kidney, spleen, colon and skeletal muscle tissue (ATSDR 2012). ❖ Short-term exposure to high levels of 1,4- dioxane may result in nausea, drowsiness, headache, and irritation of the eyes, nose and throat (ATSDR 2012; EPA 2013b; NIOSH 2O10) ❖ Chronic exposure may result in dermatitis, eczema, drying and cracking of skin and liver and kidney damage (ATSDR 2012; HSDB 2011). ❖ 1,4-Dioxane is weakly genotoxic and reproductive effects in humans are unknown; however, a developmental study on rats indicated that 1,4-dioxane may be slightly toxic to the developing fetus (ATSDR 2012; Giavini and others 1985). ❖ Animal studies showed increased incidences of nasal cavity, liver and gall bladder tumors after exposure to 1,4-dioxane (DHHS 2011; EPA IRIS 2013). ❖ EPA has classified 1,4-dioxane as "likely to be carcinogenic to humans" by all routes of exposure (EPA IRIS 2013). ❖ The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that 1,4-dioxane is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in experimental animals (DHHS 2011). ❖ The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has classified 1,4-dioxane as a Group A3 carcinogen — confirmed animal carcinogen with unknown relevance to humans (ACGIH 2O11). ❖ The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) considers 1,4-dioxane a potential occupational carcinogen (NIOSH 2010). Are there any federal and state guidelines and health standards for 1,4-dioxane? ❖ Federal and State Standards and Guidelines: ■ EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database includes a chronic oral reference dose (RfD) of 0.03 milligrams per kilogram per day (mg/kg/day) based on liver and kidney toxicity in animals and a chronic inhalation reference dose (RfC) of 0.03 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) based on atrophy and respiratory metaplasia inside the nasal cavity of animals (EPA IRIS 2013). ■ The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has established minimal risk levels (MRLs) for inhalation exposure to 1,4-dioxane : 2 parts per million (ppm) for acute -duration (14 days or less) inhalation exposure; 0.2 ppm for intermediate -duration (15 to 364 days) inhalation exposure; and 0.03 ppm for chronic -duration (365 days or more) inhalation exposure (ATSDR 2012). ■ Oral exposure MRLs have been identified as 5 mg/kg/day for acute -duration oral exposure; 0.5 mg/kg/day for intermediate - duration oral exposure; and 0.1 mg/kg/day for chronic -duration oral exposure (ATSDR 2012). • The cancer risk assessment for 1,4-dioxane is based on an oral slope factor of 0.1 mg/kg/day and the drinking water unit risk is 2.9 x 10-6 micrograms per liter (pg/L) (EPA IRIS 2013). ■ EPA risk assessments indicate that the drinkinP water concentration representing a 1 x 10- cancer risk level for 1,4-dioxane is 0.35 µg/L (EPA IRIS 2013). ■ 1,4-Dioxane may be regulated as hazardous waste when waste is generated through use as a solvent stabilizer (EPA 1996b). ■ No federal maximum contaminant level (MCL) for drinking water has been established; however, an MCL is not necessary to determine a cleanup level (EPA 2012). ■ 1,4-Dioxane was included on the third drinking water contaminant candidate list, which is a list of unregulated contaminants that are known to, or anticipated to, occur in public water systems and may require regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act (EPA 2009). Are there any federal and state guidelines and health standards for 1,4-dioxane? (continued) ❖ Federal and State Standards and Guidelines (continued): ■ The EPA has established drinking water health advisories for 1,4-dioxane, which are drinking water -specific risk level concentrations for cancer (10-4 cancer risk) and concentrations of drinking water contaminants at which noncancer adverse health effects are not anticipated to occur over specific exposure durations. The EPA established a 1-day health advisory of 4.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and a 10-day health advisory of 0.4 mg/L for 1,4-dioxane in drinking water for a 10-kilogram child. EPA also established a lifetime health advisory of 0.2 mg/L for 1,4-dioxane in drinking water (EPA 2012). ■ The EPA's drinking water equivalent level for 1,4-dioxane is 1 mg/L (EPA 2012). ■ EPA has calculated a screening level of 0.67 pg/L for 1,4-dioxane in tap water, based on a 1 in 10-6 lifetime excess cancer risk (EPA 2013c). ' , 2 ■ EPA has calculated a residential soil screening level (SSL) of 4.9 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and an industrial SSL of 17 mg/kg. The soil -to -groundwater risk -based SSL is 1.4 x10-4 mg/kg (EPA 2013c). ■ EPA has also calculated a residential air screening level of 0.49 micrograms per cubic meter (pg/m3) and an industrial air screening level of 2.5 pg/m3 (EPA 2013c). Screening Levels are developed using risk assessment guidance from the EPA Superfund program. These risk -based concentrations are derived from standardized equations combining exposure information assumptions with EPA toxicity data. These calculated screening levels are generic and not enforceable cleanup standards but provide a useful gauge of relative toxicity. 2 Tap water screening levels differ from the IRIS drinking water concentrations because the tap water screening levels account for dermal, inhalation and ingestion exposure routes; age -adjust the intake rates for children and adults based on body weight; and time - adjust for exposure duration or days per year. The IRIS drinking water concentrations consider only the ingestion route, account only for adult -intake rates and do not time -adjust for exposure duration or days per year. ❖ Workplace Exposure Limits: ■ The Occupational Safety and Health Administration set a general industry permissible exposure limit of 360 mg/m3 or 100 ppm based on a time -weighted average (TWA) over an 8-hour workday for airborne exposure to 1,4-dioxane (OSHA 2013). ■ The ACGIH set a threshold limit value of 72 mg/m3 or 20 ppm based on a TWA over an 8- hour workday for airborne exposure to 1,4- dioxane (ACGIH 2O11). ■ The NIOSH has set a ceiling recommended exposure limit of 3.6 mg/m3 or 1 ppm based on a 30-minute airborne exposure to 1,4-dioxane (NIOSH 2O10). ■ NIOSH also has established an immediately dangerous to life or health concentration of 500 ppm for 1,4-dioxane (NIOSH 2O10). ❖ Other State and Federal Standards and Guidelines: ■ Various states have established drinking water and groundwater guidelines, including the following: Colorado has established an interim groundwater quality cleanup standard of 0.35 pg/L (CDPHE 2012); California has established a notification level of 1 pg/L for drinking water (CDPH 2011); — New Hampshire has established a reporting limit of 0.25 pg/L for all public water supplies (NH DES 2011); and — Massachusetts has established a drinking water guideline level of 0.3 pg/L (Mass DEP 2012). • The Food and Drug Administration set 10 mg/kg as the limit for 1-4-dioxane in glycerides and polyglycerides for use in products such as dietary supplements. FDA also surveys raw material and products contaminated with 1,4-dioxane (FDA 2006). • 1,4-Dioxane is listed as a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act (CAA) (CAA 1990). ■ A reportable quantity of 100 pounds has been established under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (EPA 2011). What detection and site characterization methods are available for 1,4-dioxane? ❖ As a result of the limitations in the analytical methods to detect 1,4-dioxane, it has been difficult to identify its occurrence in the environment. The miscibility of 1,4-dioxane in water causes poor purging efficiency and results in high detection limits (ATSDR 2012; EPA 2006). ❖ Conventional analytical methods can detect 1,4-dioxane only at concentrations 100 times greater than the concentrations of volatile organic compounds (EPA 2006; Mohr 2001). ❖ Modifications of existing analytical methods and their sample preparation procedures may be needed to achieve lower detection limits for 1,4-dioxane (EPA 2006; Mohr 2001). ❖ High -temperature sample preparation techniques improve the recovery of 1,4-dioxane. These techniques include purging at elevated temperature (EPA SW-846 Method 5030); equilibrium headspace analysis (EPA SW-846 Method 5021); vacuum distillation (EPA SW-846 Method 8261); and azeotrophic distillation (EPA SW-846 Method 5031) (EPA 2006). ❖ The presence of 1,4-dioxane may be expected at sites with extensive TCA contamination; therefore, some experts recommend that groundwater samples be analyzed for 1,4-dioxane where TCA is a known contaminant (Mohr 2001). NIOSH Method 1602 uses gas chromatography — flame ionization detection (GC-FID) to determine the concentration of 1,4-dioxane in air. The detection limit is 0.01 milligram per sample (ATSDR 2012; NIOSH 2O10). ❖ EPA SW-846 Method 8015D uses gas chromatography (GC) to determine the concentration of 1,4-dioxane in environmental samples. Samples may be introduced into the GC column by a variety of techniques including the injection of the concentrate from azeotropic distillation (EPA SW-846 Method 5031). The detection limits for 1,4-dioxane in aqueous matrices by azeotropic microdistillation are 12 pg/L (reagent water), 15 pg/L (groundwater) and 16 pg/L (leachate) (EPA 2003). EPA SW-846 Method 8260B detects 1,4-dioxane in a variety of solid waste matrices using GC and mass spectrometry (MS). The detection limit depends on the instrument and choice of sample preparation method (ATSDR 2012; EPA 1996a). A laboratory study is underway to develop a passive flux meter (PFM) approach to enhance the capture of 1,4-dioxane in the PFM sorbent to improve accuracy. The selected PFM approach will be field tested at 1,4-dioxane contaminated sites. The anticipated projection completion date is 2014 (DoD SERDP 2013b). ❖ EPA Method 1624 uses isotopic dilution gas chromatography — mass spectrometry (GC -MS) to detect 1,4-dioxane in water, soil and municipal sludges. The detection limit for this method is 10 pg/L (ATSDR 2012; EPA 2001 b). ❖ EPA SW-846 Method 8270 uses liquid -liquid extraction and isotope dilution by capillary column GC -MS. This method is often modified for the detection of low levels of 1,4-dioxane in water (EPA 2007, 2013a) ❖ GC -MS detection methods using solid phase extraction followed by desorption with an organic solvent have been developed to remove 1,4-dioxane from the aqueous phase. Detection limits as low as 0.024 pg/L have been achieved by passing the aqueous sample through an activated carbon column, following by elution with acetone- dichlormethane (ATSDR 2012; Kadokami and others 1990). ❖ EPA Method 522 uses solid phase extraction and GC/MS with selected ion monitoring for the detection of 1,4-dioxane in drinking water with detection limits ranging from 0.02 to 0.026 pg/L (EPA 2008). What technologies are being used to treat 1,4-dioxane? ❖ Pump -and -treat remediation can treat dissolved 1,4-dioxane in groundwater and control groundwater plume migration, but requires ex situ treatment tailored for the unique properties of 1,4-dioxane (such as, a low octanol-water partition coefficient that makes 1,4-dioxane hydrophilic) (EPA 2006; Kiker and others 2010). ❖ Commercially available advanced oxidation processes using hydrogen peroxide with ultraviolet light or ozone is used to treat 1,4-dioxane in wastewater (Asano and others 2012; EPA 2006). ❖ A study is under way to investigate facilitated - transport enabled in situ chemical oxidation to treat 1,4-dioxane-contamined source zones and groundwater plumes effectively. The technical approach consists of the co -injection of strong oxidants (such as ozone) with chemical agents that facilitate the transport of the oxidant (DoD SERDP 2013d). What technologies are being used to treat 1,4-dioxane? (continued) ❖ Ex situ bioremediation using a fixed -film, moving - bed biological treatment system is also used to treat 1,4-dioxane in groundwater (EPA 2006). ❖ Phytoremediation is being explored as a means to remove the compound from shallow groundwater. Pilot -scale studies have demonstrated the ability of hybrid poplars to take up and effectively degrade or deactivate 1,4-dioxane (EPA 2001 a, 2013a; Ferro and others 2013). ❖ Microbial degradation in engineered bioreactors has been documented under enhanced conditions or where selected strains of bacteria capable of degrading 1,4-dioxane are cultured, but the impact of the presence of chlorinated solvent co - contaminants on biodegradation of 1,4-dioxane needs to be further investigated (EPA 2006, 2013a; Mahendra and others 2013). ❖ Results from a 2012 laboratory study found 1,4-dioxane-transforming activity to be relatively common among monooxygenase-expressing bacteria; however, both TCA and 1,1-dichloroethene inhibited 1,4-dioxane degradation by bacterial isolates (DoD SERDP 2012). ❖ Several Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (DoD SERDP) projects are under way to investigate 1,4-dioxane biodegradation in the presence of chlorinated solvents or metals. Laboratory studies will (1) identify microbial cultures as well as biogeochemistry, which generate desirable enzymatic activity for 1,4-dioxane biodegradation; (2) assess biodegradation by methane oxidizing bacteria in coupled anaerobic -aerobic zones; (3) and evaluate branched hydrocarbons as stimulants for the in situ cometabolic biodegradation of 1,4-dioxane and its associated co -contaminants (DoD SERDP 2013c, a and f). ❖ Photocatalysis has been shown to remove 1,4-dioxane in aqueous solutions. Laboratory studies documented that the surface plasmon resonance of gold nanoparticles on titanium dioxide (Au — TiO2) promotes the photocatalytic degradation of 1,4-dioxane (Min and others 2009; Vescovi and others 2010). ❖ Other in -well combined treatment technologies being assessed include air sparging; soil vapor extraction (SVE); and dynamic subsurface groundwater circulation (Odah and others 2005). ❖ SVE is known to remove some 1,4-dioxane, but substantial residual contamination is usually left behind because of 1,4-dioxane's high solubility, which leads to preferential partitioning into pore water rather than vapor. The DoD SERDP is conducting a project to evaluate and demonstrate the efficacy of enhanced or extreme SVE, which uses a combination of increased air flow, sweeping with drier air, increased temperature, decreased infiltration and more focused vapor extraction to enhance 1,4-dioxane remediation in soils (DoD SERDP 2013a). Where can I find more information about 1,4-dioxane? ❖ Asano, M., Kishimoto, N., Shimada, H., and Y. Ono. 2012. "Degradation of 1,4-Dioxane Using Ozone Oxidation with UV Irradiation (Ozone/UV) Treatment." Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering. Volume A (1). Pages 371 to 279. ❖ Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2012. "Toxicological Profile for 1,4-Dioxane." www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tpl 87.pdf ❖ American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). 2011. "2011 Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents Biological Exposure Indices." Cincinnati, Ohio. ❖ California Department of Public Health (CDPH). 2011. "1,4-Dioxane." Drinking Water Systems. www.cdoh.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/1,4- dioxane.aspx ❖ Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA). 1990. "Hazardous Air Pollutants". 42 USC § 7412. ❖ Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment (CDPHE). 2012. "Notice of Public Rulemaking Hearing before the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission." Regulation No. 31 and No. 41. www.sos.state.co.us/CCR/Upload/NoticeOfRulem aking/ProposedRuleAttach20l 2-00387. PDF ❖ Ferro, A.M., Kennedy, J., and J.C. LaRue. 2013. "Phytoremediation of 1,4-Dioxane-Containing Recovered Groundwater." International Journal of Phytoremediation. Volume 15. Pages 911 to 923. ❖ Giavini, E., Vismara, C., and M.L Broccia. 1985. "Teratogenesis Study of Dioxane in Rats." Toxicology Letters. Volume 26 (1). Pages. 85 to 88. Where can I find more information about 1,4-dioxane? (continued) ❖ Graedel, T.E. 1986. Atmospheric Chemical Compounds. New York, NY: Academic Press. ❖ Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB). 2011. 1,4-Dioxane." http://toxnet.nim.nih.gov/cqi-bin/ sis/htmlgen?HSDB ❖ HazDat. 2007. "1,4-Dioxane." HazDat Database: ATSDR's Hazardous Substance Release and Health Effects Database. Atlanta, GA: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. ❖ Howard, P.H. 1990. Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chemicals. Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI. Pages 216 to 221. ❖ Kadokami, K, Koga, M. and A. Otsuki. 1990. "Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometric Determination of Traces of Hydrophilic and Volatile Organic Compounds in Water after Preconcentration with Activated Carbon." Analytical Sciences. Volume 6(6). Pages 843 to 849. ❖ Kiker, J.H., Connolly, J.B., Murray, W.A., Pearson, S.C.; Reed, S.E., and R.J. Robert. 2010. "Ex -Situ Wellhead Treatment of 1,4-Dioxane Using Fenton's Reagent." Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on Soils, Sediments, Water and Energy. Volume 15, Article 18. ❖ Mahendra, S., Grostern, A. and L. Alvarez -Cohen. 2013. "The Impact of Chlorinated Solvent Co - Contaminants on the Biodegradation Kinetics of 1,4-Dioxane." Chemosphere. Volume 91 (1). Pages 88 to 92. ❖ Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (Mass DEP). 2012. "Standards and Guidelines for Contaminants in Massachusetts Drinking Waters." www.mass.gov/dep/water/dwstand.pdf ❖ Min, B.K., Heo, J.E., Youn, N.K., Joo, O.S., Lee, H., Kim, J.H., and H.S. Kim. 2009. "Tuning of the Photocatalytic 1,4-Dioxane Degradation with Surface Plasmon Resonance of Gold Nanoparticles on Titania." Catalysis Communications. Volume 10 (5). Pages 712 to 715. ❖ Mohr, T.K.G. 2001. "1,4-Dioxane and Other Solvent Stabilizers White Paper." Santa Clara Valley Water District of California. San Jose, California. ❖ National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2010. "Dioxane." NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards. www.cdc.gov/niosh/npq/npqd0237.htmi ❖ New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NH DES). 2011 "Change in Reporting Limit for 1,4-Dioxane." http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/waste/hwr b/sss/hwrp/documents/report-limits 14dioxane. pdf ❖ Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2013. "Dioxane." Chemical Sampling Information. www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/ data/CH 237200.html ❖ Odah, M.M., Powell, R., and D.J. Riddle. 2005. "ART In -Well Technology Proves Effective in Treating 1,4-Dioxane Contamination." Remediation Journal. Volume 15 (3), Pages 51 to 64. ❖ U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP). 2012. "Oxygen ase-Catalyzed Biodegradation of Emerging Water Contaminants: 1,4-Dioxane and N-Nitrosodimethylamine." ER- 1417. www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/ Environmental-Restoration/Contam inated- Groundwater/Emerging-Issues/ER-1417/ER-1417 ❖ DoD SERDP. 2013a. "1,4-Dioxane Remediation by Extreme Soil Vapor Extraction (XSVE)." ER- 201326. www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/ Environmental-Restoration/Contaminated-Ground water/Emerging-Issues/ER-201326/ER-201326 ❖ DoD SERDP. 2013b. "Development of a Passive Flux Meter Approach to Quantifying 1,4-Dioxane Mass Flux." ER-2304. www.serdp.org/Program- Areas/Environ mental-Restoration/Contam inated- Groundwater/Emerging-Issues/ER-2304/ER-2304/ ❖ DoD SERDP. 2013c. "Evaluation of Branched Hydrocarbons as Stimulants for In Situ Cometabolic Biodegradation of 1,4-Dioxane and Its Associated Co -Contaminants." ER-2303. www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/Environmental- Restoration/Contam i nated-Groundwater/ Emerging-Issues/ER-2303/ER-2303 ❖ DoD SERDP. 2013d. "Facilitated Transport Enabled In Situ Chemical Oxidation of 1,4- Dioxane-Contaminated Groundwater." ER-2302. www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/Environmental- Restoration/Contam i nated-Groundwater/ Emerging-Issues/ER-2302/ER-2302/(language)/ eng-US ❖ DoD SERDP. 2013e. "In Situ Biodegradation of 1,4-Dioxane: Effects of Metals and Chlorinated Solvent Co -Contaminants." ER-2300. www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/Environmental- Restoration/Contam i nated-Groundwater/ Emerging-Issues/ER-2300/ER-2300 Where can I find more information about 1,4-dioxane? (continued) ❖ DoD SERDP. 2013f. "In Situ Bioremediation of 1,4-Dioxane by Methane Oxidizing Bacteria in Coupled Anaerobic -Aerobic Zones." ER-2306. www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/Environmental- Restoration/Contaminated-Groundwater/ Emerging- Issues/ER-2306/ER-2306 ❖ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). 2011. "Report on Carcinogens, Twelfth Edition." Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program. 12t" Edition. http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/rocl2.pdf ❖ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1996a. "Method 8260B: Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)." www.epa.gov/osw/ hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8260b.pdf ❖ EPA. 1996b. "Solvents Study." EPA 530-R-96- 017. ❖ EPA. 2001a. "Brownfields Technology Primer: Selecting and Using Phytoremediation for Site Cleanup." EPA 542-R-01-006. www.brownfieldstsc.orq/pdfs/phytorem primer.pdf ❖ EPA. 2001 b. "Method 1624." Code of Federal Regulations. Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR Part 136. Pages 274 to 287. ❖ EPA. 2003. "Method 8015D: Nonhalogenated Organics Using GC/FID." SW-846. www.epa.gov/ osw/hazard/testmethods/pdfs/8015d r4.pdf ❖ EPA. 2006. "Treatment Technologies for 1,4-Dioxane: Fundamentals and Field Applications." EPA 542-R-06-009. www.epa.gov/tio/download/remed/542r06009.pdf ❖ EPA. 2007. "Method 8270D: Semivolatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)." ❖ EPA. 2008. "Method 522: Determination of 1,4-Dioxane in Drinking Water By Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) with Selected Ion Monitoring (SIM)." EPA/600/R-08/101. ❖ EPA. 2009. "Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3 - Final." Federal Register Notice. www.federalregister.gov/articles/2009/10/08/E9- 24287/drinking-water-contaminant-candidate-list- 3-final ❖ EPA. 2011. "Reportable Quantities of Hazardous Substances Designated Pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water Act. Code of Federal Regulations." 40 CFR 302.4. www.gpo.gov/fdsVs/pkq/CFR-2011-title40- vol28/pdf/CFR-2011-title40-vo128-sec302-4. pdf ❖ EPA. 2012. "2012 Edition of Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories." water. epa.gov/action/advisories/d ri nki ng/upload/d wstandards2012. pdf ❖ EPA. 2013a. "1,4-Dioxane." www.clu-in.org/conta minantfocus/default.focus/sec/1,4-Dioxane/ cat/Overview/ ❖ EPA. 2013b. "1,4-Dioxane (1,4-Diethyleneoxide)." Technology Transfer Network Air Toxics Website. www.epa.gov/ttnatwOl/hlthef/dioxane.html ❖ EPA. 2013c. Regional Screening Level (RSL) Summary Table. www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb- concentration table/Generic Tables/index.htm ❖ EPA. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). 2013. "1,4-Dioxane (CASRN 123-91-1)." www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0326.htm ❖ U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2006. "Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption; Glycerides and Polyglycides." Code of Federal Regulations. 21 CFR 172.736. ❖ Vescovi, T., Coleman, H., and R. Amal. 2010. "The Effect of pH on UV -Based Advanced Oxidation Technologies - 1,4-Dioxane Degradation." Journal of Hazardous Materials. Volume 182. Pages 75 to 79. Additional information on 1,4-dioxane can be found at www.cluin.org/contaminantfocus/default.focus/sec/1,4-Dioxane/cat/Overview Contact Information If you have any questions or comments on this fact sheet, please contact: Mary Cooke, FFRRO, by phone at (703) 603-8712 or by email at cooke.maryt(o)epa.gov. APPENDIX C NCDEQ Memoranda and Reporting Limits and Standards e;A NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Dexter R. Matthews, Director Division of Waste Management Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary October 27, 2006 To: SW Director/County Manager/Consultant/Laboratory From: NC DENR-DWM, Solid Waste Section Re: New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Monitoring Data The Solid Waste Section receives and reviews a wide variety of environmental monitoring data from permitted solid waste management facilities, including the results from groundwater and surface water analyses, leachate samples, methane gas readings, potentiometric measurements, and corrective action data. We are in the process of developing a database to capture the large volume of data submitted by facilities. To maintain the integrity of the database, it is critical that facilities, consultants, and laboratories work with the Solid Waste Section to ensure that environmental samples are collected and analyzed properly with the resulting data transferred to the Solid Waste Section in an accurate manner. In order to better serve the public and to expedite our review process, the Solid Waste Section is requesting specific formatting for environmental monitoring data submittals for all solid waste management facilities. Effective, December 1, 2006, please submit a Solid Waste Environmental Monitoring Data Form in addition to your environmental monitoring data report. This form will be sent in lieu of your current cover letter to the Solid Waste Section. The Solid Waste Environmental Monitoring Data Form must be filled out completely, signed, and stamped with a Board Certified North Carolina Geologist License Seal. The solid waste environmental monitoring data form will include the following: 1. Contact Information 2. Facility Name 3. Facility Permit Number 4. Facility Address 5. Monitoring Event Date (MM/DD/YYYY) 6. Water Quality Status: Monitoring, Detection Monitoring, or Assessment Monitoring 7. Type of Data Submitted: Groundwater Monitoring Wells, Groundwater Potable Wells, Leachate, Methane Gas, or Corrective Action Data 8. Notification of Exceedance of Groundwater, Surface Water, or Methane Gas (in table form) a. Signature 10. North Carolina Geologist Seal 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 Phone: 919-508-84001 FAX: 919-733-48101 Internet http://wastenotnc.org An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer — Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper Page 2 of 2 Most of these criteria are already being included or can be added with little effort. The Solid Waste Environmental Monitoring Data Form can be downloaded from our website: hllp://www.wastenotnc.org/swhome/enviro monitoring.asp. The Solid Waste Section is also requesting a new format for monitoring wells, potable wells, surface water sampling locations, and methane probes. This format is essential in the development and maintenance of the database. The Solid Waste Section is requesting that each sampling location at all North Carolina solid waste management facilities have its own unique identification number. We are simply asking for the permit number to be placed directly in front of the sampling location number (example: 9901-MW1 = Permit Number 99-01 and Monitoring Well MW-1). No changes will need to be made to the well tags, etc. This unique identification system will enable us to accurately report data not only to NCDENR, but to the public as well. We understand that this new identification system will take some time to implement, but we feel that this will be beneficial to everyone involved in the long term. Additionally, effective December 1, 2006, the Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs) established in 1994 will change. The Solid Waste Section is requiring that all solid waste management facilities use the new Solid Waste Reporting Limits (SWRL) for all groundwater analyses by a North Carolina Certified Laboratory. Laboratories must also report any detection of a constituent even it is detected below the new SWRL (e.g., J values where the constituent was detected above the detection limit, but below the quantitation limit). PQLs are technology -based analytical levels that are considered achievable using the referenced analytical method. The PQL is considered the lowest concentration of a contaminant that the lab can accurately detect and quantify. PQLs provided consistency and available numbers that were achievable by the given analytical method. However, PQLs are not health -based, and analytical instruments have improved over the years resulting in lower achievable PQLs for many of the constituents. As a result, the Solid Waste Section has established the SWRLs as the new reporting limits eliminating the use of the PQLs. We would also like to take this opportunity to encourage electronic submittal of the reports. This option is intended to save resources for both the public and private sectors. The Solid Waste Section will accept the entire report including narrative text, figures, tables, and maps on CD-ROM. The CD-ROM submittal shall contain a CD-ROM case and both CD-ROM and the case shall be labeled with the site name, site address, permit number, and the monitoring event date (MM/DD/YYYY). The files maybe a .pdf, .txt, .csv, .xls, or .doc type. Also, analytical lab data should be reported in an .xls file. We have a template for analytical lab data available on the web at the address listed above. If you have any questions or concerns, please call (919) 508-8400. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. North Carolina Dexter R. Matthews, Director MEMORANDUM 4 'A ,A_�79 0 . NCDENR Department of Environment and Division of Waste Management February 23, 2007 Natural Resources Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary To: Solid Waste Directors, Landfill Operators, North Carolina Certified Laboratories, and Consultants From: North Carolina Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Re: Addendum to October 27, 2006, North Carolina Solid Waste Section Memorandum Regarding New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Data. The purpose of this addendum memorandum is to provide further clarification to the October 27, 2006, North Carolina Solid Waste Section memo titled, "New Guidelines for Electronic Submittal of Environmental Data." The updated guidelines is in large part due to questions and concerns from laboratories, consultants, and the regulated community regarding the detection of constituents in groundwater at levels below the previous practical quantitation limits (PQLs). The North Carolina Solid Waste Section solicited feedback from the regulated community, and, in conjunction with the regulated community, developed new limits. The primary purpose of these changes was to improve the protection of public health and the environment. The North Carolina Solid Waste Section is concerned about analytical data at these low levels because the earliest possible detection of toxic or potentially carcinogenic chemicals in the environment is paramount in the North Carolina Solid Waste Section's mission to protect human health and the environment. Low level analytical data are critical for making the correct choices when designing site remediation strategies, alerting the public to health threats, and protecting the environment from toxic contaminants. The revised limits were updated based on readily available laboratory analytical methodology and current health -based groundwater protection standards. Definitions Many definitions relating to detection limits and quantitation limits are used in the literature and by government agencies, and commonly accepted procedures for calculating these limits exist. Except for the Solid Waste Section Limit and the North Carolina 2L Standards, the definitions listed below are referenced from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The definitions are also an attempt to clarify the meaning of these terms as used by the North Carolina Solid Waste Section. Method Detection Limit (MDL) is the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero. Method Reporting Limit or Method Quantitation Limit (MRL or MQL) is the minimum concentration of a target analyte that can be accurately determined by the referenced method. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 Phone 919-508-84001 FAX 919-715-36051 Internet http://wastenotnc.org An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer— Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) is a quantitation limit that represents a practical and routinely achievable quantitation limit with a high degree of certainty (>99.9% confidence) in the results. Per EPA Publication Number SW-846, the PQL is the lowest concentration that can be reliably measured within specified limits of precision and accuracy for a specific laboratory analytical method during routine laboratory operating conditions in accordance with "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes, Physical/Chemical Methods. The PQL appears in older NCDENR literature; however, it is no longer being used by the North Carolina Solid Waste Section. Solid Waste Section Limit (SWSL) is the lowest amount of analyte in a sample that can be quantitatively determined with suitable precision and accuracy. The SWSL is the concentration below which reported analytical results must be qualified as estimated. The SWSL is the updated version of the PQL that appears in older North Carolina Solid Waste Section literature. The SWSL is the limit established by the laboratory survey conducted by the North Carolina Solid Waste Section. The nomenclature of the SWRL described in the October 27, 2006, memorandum has changed to the SWSL. North Carolina 2L Standards (2L) are water quality standards for the protection of groundwaters of North Carolina as specified in 15A NCAC 2L .0200, Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the Groundwaters of North Carolina. Method Detection Limits (MDLs) Clarification of detection limits referenced in the October 27, 2006, memorandum needed to be addressed because of concerns raised by the regulated community. The North Carolina Solid Waste Section is now requiring laboratories to report to the method detection limit. Method detection limits are statistically determined values that define the concentration at which measurements of a substance by a specific analytical protocol can be distinguished from measurements of a blank (background noise). Method detection limits are matrix -specific and require a well defined analytical method. In the course of routine operations, laboratories generally report the highest method detection limit for all the instruments used for a specific method. In many instances, the North Carolina Solid Waste Section gathers data from many sources prior to evaluating the data or making a compliance decision. Standardization in data reporting significantly enhances the ability to interpret and review data because the reporting formats are comparable. Reporting a method detection limit alerts data users of the known uncertainties and limitations associated with using the data. Data users must understand these limitations in order to minimize the risk of making poor environmental decisions. Censoring data below unspecified or non -statistical reporting limits severely biases data sets and restricts their usefulness. Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSLs Due to comments from the regulated community, the North Carolina Solid Waste Section has changed the nomenclature of the new limits referenced on Page 2 of the October 27, 2006, memorandum, from the North Carolina Solid Waste Reporting Limits (SWRL) to the Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSL). Data must be reported to the laboratory specific method detection limits and must be quantifiable at or below the SWSL. The SWSLs must be used for both groundwater and surface water data reported to the North Carolina Solid Waste Section. The PQLs will no longer be used. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 2 Phone 919-508-84001 FAX 919-715-36051 Internet http://wastenotnc.org An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer— Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper The North Carolina Solid Waste Section has considered further feedback from laboratories and the regulated community and has made some additional changes to the values of the SWSLs. These changes may be viewed on our webpage: http://www.wastenotnc.org/sw/swenvmonitoringlist.asp Analytical Data Reporting Requirements The strategy for implementing the new analytical data reporting requirements involves reporting the actual laboratory method detection limit with all analytical laboratory results along with the following requirements: 1) Any analyte detected at a concentration greater than the MDL but less than the SWSL is known to be present, but the uncertainty in the value is higher than a value reported above the SWSL. As a result, the actual concentration is estimated. The estimated concentration is reported along with a qualifier ("J" flag) to alert data users that the result is between the MDL and the SWSL. Any analytical data below quantifiable levels should be examined closely to evaluate whether the analytical data should be included in any statistical analysis. A statistician should make this determination. If an analyte is detected below the North Carolina 2L Standards, even if it is a quantifiable concentration, compliance action may not be taken unless it is statistically significant increase over background. These analytical results may require additional confirmation. 2) Any analyte detected at a concentration greater than the SWSL is present, and the quantitated value can be reported with a high degree of confidence. These analytes are reported without estimated qualification. The laboratory's MDL and SWSL must be included in the analytical laboratory report. Any reported concentration of an organic or inorganic constituent at or above the North Carolina 2L Standards will be used for compliance purposes, unless the inorganic constituent is not statistically significant). Exceedance of the North Carolina 2L Standards or a statistically significant increase over background concentrations define when a violation has occurred. Any reported concentration of an organic or inorganic constituent at or above the SWSL that is not above an North Carolina 2L Standard will be used as a tool to assess the integrity of the landfill system and predict the possibility that a constituent concentration may exceed the North Carolina 2L Standards in the future. These analytical results may be used for compliance without further confirmation. Failure to comply with the requirements described in the October 27, 2006, memorandum and this addendum to the October 27, 2006, memorandum will constitute a violation of 15A NCAC 13B .0601, .0602, or .1632(b), and the analytical data will be returned and deemed unacceptable. Submittal of unacceptable data may lead to enforcement action. Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Submittal The North Carolina Solid Waste Section would also like to take this opportunity to encourage electronic submittal of the reports in addition to the analytical laboratory data. This option is intended to save resources for both the public and private sectors. The North Carolina Solid Waste Section will accept the entire report including narrative text, figures, tables, and maps on CD-ROM. Please separate the figures and tables from the report when saving in order to keep the 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 3 Phone 919-508-84001 FAX 919-715-36051 Internet http://wastenotnc.org An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer— Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper size of the files smaller. The CD-ROM submittal shall contain a CD-ROM case and both CD-ROM and the case shall be labeled with the site name, site address, permit number, and the monitoring event date (MM/DD/YYYY). The reporting files maybe submitted as a .pdf, .txt, .csv, .xls,. or .doc type. Also, analytical lab data and field data should be reported in .xls files. The North Carolina Solid Waste Section has a template for analytical lab data and field data. This template is available on our webpage: http://www.wastenotnc.org/swhome/enviro_monitoring.asp. Methane monitoring data may also be submitted electronically in this format. Pursuant to the October 27, 2006, memorandum, please remember to submit a Solid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form in addition to your environmental monitoring data report. This form should be sealed by a geologist or engineer licensed in North Carolina if hydrogeologic or geologic calculations, maps, or interpretations are included with the report. Otherwise, any representative that the facility owner chooses may sign and submit the form. Also, if the concentration of methane generated by the facility exceeds 100% of the lower explosive limits (LEL) at the property boundary or exceeds 25% of the LEL in facility structures (excluding gas control or recovery system components), include the exceedance(s) on the North Carolina Solid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Jaclynne Drummond (919-508-8500) or Ervin Lane (919-508-8520). Thank you for your continued cooperation with this matter. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 4 Phone 919-508-84001 FAX 919-715-36051 Internet http://wastenotnc.org An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer— Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper 46PA NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Dexter R. Matthews, Director MEMORANDUM Division of Waste Management October 16, 2007 Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary To: Solid Waste Directors, Landfill Operators, North Carolina Certified Laboratories, and Consultants From: North Carolina Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section Re: Environmental Monitoring Data for North Carolina Solid Waste Management Facilities The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a reiteration of the use of the Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSLs), provide new information on the Groundwater Protection Standards, and provide a reminder of formats for environmental monitoring data submittals. The updated guidelines are in large part due to questions and concerns from laboratories, consultants, and the regulated community regarding the detection of constituents in groundwater at levels below the previous Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs). The North Carolina Solid Waste Section solicited feedback from the regulated community, and, in conjunction with the regulated community, developed new limits. The primary purpose of these changes was to improve the protection of public health and the environment. Data must be reported to the laboratory specific method detection limits and must be quantifiable at or below the SWSLs. The SWSLs must be used for both groundwater and surface water data reported to the North Carolina Solid Waste Section. The PQLs will no longer be used. In June 2007, we received new information regarding changes to the Groundwater Protection Standards. If a North Carolina 2L Groundwater Standard does not exist, then a designated Groundwater Protection Standard is used pursuant to 15A NCAC 13B .1634. Toxicologists with the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services calculated these new Groundwater Protection Standards. Questions regarding how the standards were calculated can be directed to the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 Phone 919-508-84001 FAX 919-715-36051 Internet http://wastenotnc.org 1 An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer— Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper We have reviewed the new results from the North Carolina Department of Public Health and have updated our webpage accordingly. The list of Groundwater Protection Standards, North Carolina 2L Standards and SWSLs are subject to change and will be reviewed every year or sooner if new scientific and toxicological data become available. Please review our website periodically for any changes to the 2L NC Standards, Groundwater Protection Standards, or SWSLs. Specific updates will be noted on our website. http://www.wastenotnc.org/sw/swenvmonitorin lig st.asp In addition, the following should be included with environmental monitoring data submittals: 1. Environmental Monitoring Data Form as a cover sheet: http://www.wastenotnc. org/swhome/EnvMonitoring/NCEnvMonRptFonn.pdf 2. Copy of original laboratory results. 3. Table of detections and discussion of 2L exceedances. 4. Electronic files on CD or sent by email. These files should include the written report as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and the laboratory data as an excel file following the format of the updated Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) template on our website: http://www.wastenotnc.org/swhome/enviro monitoring.asp If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Donald Herndon (919- 508-8502), Ervin Lane (919-508-8520) or Jaclynne Drummond (919-508-8500). Thank you for your continued cooperation with these matters. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 2 Phone 919-508-84001 FAX 919-715-36051 Internet http://wastenotnc.org An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer— Printed on Dual Purpose Recycled Paper A� L&� NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Waste Management Pat McCrory John E. Skvarla, III Governor Secretary November 5, 2014 MEMORANDUM To: Solid Waste Directors, Public Works Directors, Landfill Operators, and Landfill Owners From: Solid Waste Section Re: Groundwater, Surface Water, Soil, Sediment, and Landfill Gas Electronic Document Submittal The Solid Waste Section is continuing its efforts to improve efficiencies in document management. All groundwater, surface water, soil, sediment, and landfill gas documents submitted to the Solid Waste Section are stored electronically and are made readily available for the public to view on our webpage. Please remember that hard copies/paper copies are not required, and should not be submitted. The submittal of these electronic documents following a consistent electronic document protocol will also assist us in our review. Please follow these procedures when submitting all groundwater, surface water, soil, sediment, and landfill gas documents to the Solid Waste Section. Submittal Method and Formatting • All files must be in portable document format (pdf) except for Electronic Data Deliverables (EDDs) unless otherwise specified by the Solid Waste Section. All pdf files should meet these requirements: o Optical Characteristic Recognition (OCR) applied; o Minimum of 300 dpi; o Free of password protections and/or encryption (applies to EDDs as well); o Optimized to reduce file size; and o Please begin using the following naming convention when submitting all electronic files: Permit Number (00-00)_Date of Document (YYYYMMDD). For example: 00-00_20140101. • Please submit all files via email or by file transfer protocol (FTP) via email to the appropriate Hydrogeologist unless otherwise specified by the Solid Waste Section. If the electronic file is greater than 20 MB, please submit the file via FTP or on a CD. If submitting a CD, please mail the CD to the appropriate Hydrogeologist. The CD should be labeled with the facility name, permit number, county, name of document, date of monitoring event (if applicable), and the date of document. • Please be sure a signed Environmental Monitoring Data Form is submitted as part of the electronic file for all water quality and landfill gas documents (monitoring, alternate source demonstration, assessment, investigation, corrective action). This completed form should be the first page of the document before the cover/title page and should not be submitted as an individual file. Blank forms can be downloaded at http://www.wastenotnc.org/swhome/EnvMonitoring/NCEnvMonRptForrnpdf Monitoring Data Monitoring data documents may include any or all of the following: 1) groundwater and surface water monitoring; 2) soil and sediment, and 3) landfill gas monitoring. In addition to the above procedures, at a minimum, please include the following: Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring • A copy of the laboratory report(s). • A copy of the sampling log(s). • A separate table of detections and exceedances for each monitoring location. 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 2090 US Highway 70, Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778-82111 Phone: 919-707-8200 Phone: 828-296-4500 http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wm/ An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer o All analytical results should be reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L) except for field parameters and specific Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) parameters. o Please also include the laboratory's method detection limit (MDL) in ug/L, the Solid Waste Section Limit (SWSL) in ug/L, the appropriate NC regulatory standard in ug/L (2L, 213, GWPS, IMAC), and the Federal Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) in ug/L. o Please BOLD each exceedance result. • A separate table of field parameters for each monitoring location. • An Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) spreadsheet for each monitoring event submitted in the correct format. All analytical results should be reported in micrograms per liter (ug/L) except for field parameters and specific Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) parameters. The blank EDD template can be downloaded at hqp://www.wastenotnc.org,/swhome/enviro_monitoring.asp. Please pay attention to the formats within the spreadsheet. Any EDD received that is not formatted correctly will be emailed back to be resubmitted via email within five (5) days. • A separate groundwater monitoring well construction table. o Please also include the date the well was drilled, well diameter, total well depth, depth to top of screened interval (in feet), screened interval (in feet), geology of screened interval, TOC elevation, ground elevation, groundwater elevation, GPS coordinates (latitude and longitude), and depth to water (in feet). • A separate groundwater table with groundwater flow rate(s). • A recent facility figure that includes labeled groundwater and surface water monitoring locations. • A groundwater flow map with an arrow(s) indicating flow direction(s), including date the measurements were taken. Soil and Sediment Sampling • A copy of the laboratory report(s). • A copy of the sampling log(s). • A separate table of detections and exceedances for each sampling location. o Please also include the results in micrograms per liter (ug/L), the laboratory's method detection limit (MDL) in ug/L, and the appropriate NC regulatory standard (PSRG) in ug/L. o Please BOLD each exceedance result. • A separate table of soil and/or sediment characteristics. • A recent facility figure that includes labeled sampling locations. Landfill Gas Monitoring • A blank Landfill Gas Monitoring Data Form can be found within the Landfill Gas Monitoring Guidance document and can be downloaded at http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_librar/get file?uuid=da699f7e-8cl3-4249-9012- 16af8aefdc7b&groupId=3 8361. • A separate table of landfill gas detections and exceedances for each monitoring location. Please BOLD each exceedance result. • A recent facility figure that includes labeled landfill gas monitoring locations (both permanent and temporary). If you have any questions or concerns regarding electronic submittals, please feel free to contact the Hydrogeologist overseeing your facility. The Solid Waste Section greatly appreciates your assistance on this matter. Working together, we can continue to provide excellent customer service to you and to the public. • Jackie Drummond, Asheville Regional Office, 828-296-4706, jaclynne.drummond a,ncdenr.gov • Ervin Lane, Raleigh Central Office, 919-707-8288, ervin.lane(a),ncdenngov • Elizabeth Werner, Raleigh Central Office, 919-707-8253, elizabeth.werner(a),ncdenngov • Christine Ritter, Raleigh Central Office, 919-707-8254, christine.ritter(d),ncdenngov • Perry Sugg, Raleigh Central Office, 919-707-8258, perry.sugg(a)ncdenr.gov 2 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 2090 US Highway 70, Swannanoa, North Carolina 28778-82111 Phone: 919-707-8200 Phone: 828-296-4500 http://poftal.ncdenr.org/web/wm/ An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer Waste Management ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY September 9, 2016 MEMORANDUM PAT MCCRORY Governor DONALD R. VAN DER VAART Secretary MICHAEL SCOTT Director To: Solid Waste Directors, Public Works Directors, Landfill Operators, and Landfill Owners From: The Solid Waste Section Reference: Guidelines for 14-Day Notification of Groundwater Exceedances Form Submittal per rule: 15A NCAC 13B .1633(c)(1) • The 14-day notification form should be submitted whenever a groundwater protection standard (GWPS) is exceeded for the first time. o As defined in 13B .1634(g)(h), a GWPS will be either of the following: the 2L standard (most cases); 2L Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration; a groundwater protection standard calculated by the SWS; or a site -specific statistical background level approved by the SWS. • If a facility is undergoing assessment or corrective action, the 14-day notification form should be submitted ONLY when the constituent with the reported exceedance is not being addressed through assessment or corrective action. • If a facility plans to conduct a re -sampling event to confirm the initial exceedance, the 14-day notification form should be submitted .ONLY. when the re -sampling event analytical data confirms the initial exceedance. State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Waste Management 1646 Mail Service Center 1217 West Jones Street I Raleigh, NC 27699-1646 919 707 8200 T NCDWM Solid Waste Section 14-Day Notification of GWPS Exceedances Flowchart [per Rule 15A NCAC 13B .1633(c)(1)] No 14-Day Notification STOP / Is Facility Groundwater Currently in Protection Assessment 7 � YES Standard YES or Corrective Exceedance* Action? No No '< Does Verification Sampling Confirm GWPS Exceedance(s)? I YES NOTE: *GWPS = see Rule 15A NCAC 13B .1634(g)(h) No Will verification resampling & Analysis be conducted? No Submit 14-Day Notification Form to SWS Is Assessment or CA addressing the Constituent w/ current exceedance value(s)? No 14-Day Notification STOP Proceed with Alternative Source Demonstration (ASD) or Assessment YES August 2016 NC DEQ 14-Day Notification of Groundwater Division of Waste Management - Solid Waste Protection Standard Exceedance(s) per rule: 15A NCAC 136.1633(c)(1) Notice: This form and any information attached to it are "Public Records" as defined in NC General Statute 132-1. As such, these documents are available for inspection and examination by any person upon request (NC General Statute 132-6). Instructions: Prepare one form for each individually monitored unit. Please type or print legibly. Attach a notification table with values that attain or exceed applicable groundwater protection standards. Send the original signed and sealed form, any tables, and Electronic Data Deliverable to: Compliance Unit, NCDEQ-DWM, Solid Waste Section, 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1646. Solid Waste Monitoring Data Submittal Information Name of entity submitting data (laboratory, consultant, facility owner): Contact for questions about data formatting. Include data preparer's name, telephone number and E-mail address: Name: Phone: E-mail: Actual sampling dates (e.g., Facility name: Facility Address: Facility Permit # October 20-24, 2006) Environmental Status: (Check all that apply) ❑ Initial/Background Monitoring ❑ Detection Monitoring ❑ Assessment Monitoring ❑ Corrective Action Additional Information: ❑ A notification of values exceeding a groundwater protection standard as defined in 15A NCAC 13B .1634(g)(h) is attached. It includes a list of groundwater monitoring points, dates, analytical values, NC 2L groundwater standard, NC Solid Waste GWPS and preliminary analysis of the cause and significance of any concentration. ❑ A re -sampling event was conducted to confirm the exceedances. ❑ Alternate Source Demonstration(s) have been approved for the following constituents with report date: Certification To the best of my knowledge, the information reported and statements made on this data submittal and attachments are true and correct. Furthermore, I have attached complete notification of any sampling values meeting or exceeding groundwater standards or explosive gas levels, and a preliminary analysis of the cause and significance of concentrations exceeding groundwater standards. I am aware that there are significant penalties for making any false statement, representation, or certification including the possibility of a fine and imprisonment. Facility Representative Name (Print) Signature Facility Representative Address Title NC PG/PE Firm License Number (if applicable effective May 1, 2009) Revised 6/2016 Date (Area Code) Telephone Number Affix NC Licensed/Professional Geologist or Professional Engineer Seal ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary MICHAEL SCOTT Director NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality July 20, 2020 To: Solid Waste Facility Owners and Operators/ SW Directors/County Managers/Consultants/Laboratories From: NC DEQ-DWM, Solid Waste Section Re: New Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Format The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (Department) has procured an environmental data management system to streamline the submittal, organization, and presentation of environmental data collected across the state. The Department has adopted a standardized Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) format across all its divisions to regiment how data is transmitted to the Department in order to achieve the above objectives, as well as to better facilitate data review and decision making. Since all divisions will be using the same EDD format, this should also ease the burden of reporting on facilities, laboratories, and environmental consultants. The Division of Waste Management's Solid Waste Section (Section) is requiring that all solid waste facilities begin submitting environmental data using the new EDD format on or before July 1, 2021. While the EDD format has changed slightly from the existing EDD employed by the Section in the past, the information being requested, and the Excel format being used, remains similar. The new EDD, along with comprehensive guidance documents can be obtained on the Solid Waste Section's Environmental Monitoring Webpage. To assist facilities in gravitating to this new reporting condition, the Section also intends to hold training sessions, which will be posted on the website at a later date. To maintain the integrity of the Department's environmental data management system, it is critical that facilities, consultants, and laboratories work with their Solid Waste Section contacts to ensure that environmental data and the associated new EDD format is being used and transferred in an accurate manner. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. NORTHCAROUNAD_E Q�I Uapartmmt of Envirentnental quality North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Waste Management 217 West Jones Street 1 1646 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 919.707.8200 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List NCSolid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring Groundwater Protection Complianceaandards-ConstituentsList (updated October 15, 2018) All units are ug/ L unless otherwise noted. NE = Not Established Groundwater Protection Standards DEQ Calculated CASRN2 SINSID3 CHEMICAL NAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d Reference List° 67-64-1 3 Acetone 107-13-1 8 Acrylonitrile 60M NE NE NE Appendix 1 NE NE NE A j2 e NE 7440-36-0 13 Antimony NE 1 6 NE endix I 7440-38-2 14 Arsenic 10 NE 10 NE Appendix 1 7440-39-3 15 Barium 700 NE 2000 NE Appendix 1 71-43-2 16 Benzene 1 NE 1 5 NE Agpendix I 7440-41-7 23 Beryllium NE 4 4 NE endix 1 74-97-5 28 Bromochloromethane; Chlorobromethane NE NE NE 0.6 endix 1 75-27-4 29 Bromodichloromethane; Dibromochloromethane 0.6 NE 80 NE endix 1 75-25-2 30 Bromoform; Tribromomethane 4 NE 80 NE endix I 7440-43-9 34 Cadmium 2 NE 5 NE endix 1 75-15-0 35 Carbon disulfide 700 NE NE I NE Ap2endix I 56-23-5 36 Carbon tetrachloride 0.3 NE 5 NE Appendix 1 108-90-7 39 Chlorobenzene 50 NE 100 NE Aippendix I I AW-dix 1 75-00-3 41 Chloroethane; Bhyl chloride 3000 NE NE NE 67-66-3 44 Chloroform; Trichloromethane 70 NE 80 NE A endix I 7440-47-3 51 Chromium 10 NE 100 NE endix 1 7440-48-4 53 Cobalt NE 1 1 NE NE endix 1 7440-50-8 54 Copper 1000 NE 1300 NE endix I 124-48-1 66 Dibromochloromethane; Chlorodibromomethane 0.4 NE 80 NE endix I 96-12-8 67 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane; DBCP 0.04 NE 0.2 NE endix I 106-93-4 68 1,2-Dibromoethane; Bhylene dibromide; ®B o-Dichlorobenzene; 1,2-17ichlorobencene 0.02 NE 1 0.05 NE Appendix 1 endix I 95-50-1 69 20 NE 600 NE 106-46-7 71 p-Dichlorobencene; 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 6 NE 75 NE endix I 110-57-6 73 trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene NE NE NE NE endix1 75-34-3 75 1,1-Dichloroethane; Bhyldidenechloride 6 NE I NE NE endixI 107-06-2 76 112-Dichloroethane; ghylenedichloride 0.4 NE 5 NE endixI 75-35-4 1 77 1,1-Dichloroethylene; 1,1-Dichloroethene; 350 NE 7 NE AMendix) Pagel of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 C4SRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEIMIG4LNAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d Reference List 4 Vinylidene chloride cis- 1,2-Dichloroethylene; as-1,2- Dichloroethene 70 NE 70 NE Appendix I 156-59-2 78 156-60-5 79 trans- 1,2-Dichloroet hylene; trans- 1,2-Dichloroet hene 100 NE 100 NE Aopenclix 1 78-87-5 82 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.6 NE 5 NE endix I 10061-01-5 86 cis- 1, 3-Dichloropropene 0.4 NE I NE NE endix I 10061-02-6 87 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.4 600 NE NE NE 40 NE 700 NE NE NE NE -clixl -clixI Appendix I 100-41-4 110 Ethylbenzene 591-78-6 124 2-Hexanone; Methyl butyl ketone 7439-92-1 131 Lead 15 NE 15 NE A endix I 74-83-9 136 Methyl bromide; Bromomethane NE 10 NE NE endix I 74-87-3 137 Methyl chloride; Chloromethane Methylene bromide; Dibromomethane 3 NE NE NE Appendix 1 Agpendix I 74-95-3 139 NE 70 NE NE 75-09-2 140 Methylene chloride; Dichloromethane 5 NE 1 5 NE -clixI 78-93-3 141 Methyl ethyl ketone; MB( 2-Butanone 4000 NE NE NE Appendix 1 74-88-4 142 Methyl iodide; lodomethane 4-Methyl-2-pentanone; Methyl isobutyl ketone Nickel Selenium giver NE NE NE NE endix I 108-10-1 147 NE 100 NE NE -clixI 7440-02-0 152 100 NE I NE NE endix I 7782-49-2 183 20 NE 50 NE endix I 7440-22-4 184 20 70 NE NE NE 100 NE NE Appendix 1 Aipipendix 1 100-42-5 186 3yrene 630-20-6 190 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane NE 1 1 NE NE -clixI 79-34-5 191 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.2 NE NE NE endix I 127-18-4 192 r orce ene; r oro ene; Pbrchloroethylene 0.7 NE 5 NE endix I 7440-28-0 194 Thallium NE 0.2 2 NE endix I 108-88-3 196 Toluene 600 NE 1 1000 NE endix I 71-55-6 200 1,1,1-Trichloroethane; Methylchloroform 200 NE 200 NE endix 1 79-01-6 201 Trichloroethylene; Trichloroethene 3 NE 5 NE endix I 79-00-5 202 1,1,2-Trichloroethane Trichlorofluoromethane; CFG11 NE 0.6 5 NE Appendix 1 AMendix 1 endix I 75-69-4 203 2000 0.005 NE NE NE NE NE NE 96-18-4 206 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 7440-62-2 209 Vanadium NE 0.3 NE NE I AW-clix 1 108-05-4 210 Vinyl acetate Vinyl chloride; Chloroethene NE 88 NE NE endix I 75-01-4 211 0.03 NE 2 NE endix I Page 2 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 C4SRN2 SNSID3 CHBMIGALNAME Zinc Xylene(total) DED Calculated 2L 2LIMAC MCL GINPBd erenceList 4 7440-66-6 213 1000 NE NE NE endix I NE 10000 NE AMendix I 1330-20-7 346 500 83-32-9 1 Acenaphthene 80 NE NE NE Appendix II NE NE NE &Lgndix II 208-96-8 2 Acenaphthylene 200 75-05-8 4 Acetonitrile; Methyl cyanide NE NE NE NE Ajovendix II 98-86-2 5 Acetophenone NE 700 NE NE A j2pendix II 53-96-3 6 2-Acetylaminofluorene; 2-AAF NE NE NE NE A2pendix II 107-02-8 7 Acrolein NE 4 NE NE AMELndix II 309-00-2 9 Aldrin NE 0.002 NE NE A pLendix II 107-05-1 10 AIIyl chloride NE NE NE NE Aimendix II 92-67-1 11 4-Aminobiphenyl NE NE NE NE Aopendix II &vendix II 120-12-7 12 Anthracene 2000 NE NE NE 56-55-3 17 Benzo[a]anthracene; Benzanthraoene 0.05 NE NE NE Armendix II 205-99-2 18 Benzo[b]fluoranthene 0.05 NE NE NE Appendix II Aopendix II 207-08-9 19 Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0.5 NE NE NE 191-24-2 20 Benzo[ghi]perylene 200 NE NE NE AMqndix II 50-32-8 21 Benzo[a]pyrene 0.005 NE 0.2 NE &Lndix II 100-51-6 22 Benzyl alcehol NE 700 NE NE Avvendix II &Pendix II 319-84-6 24 alpha-BHC NE 0.006 NE NE 319-85-7 25 beta-BHC NE 0.02 NE NE Avvendix II 319-86-8 26 delta-BHC NE NE NE 0.019 Armendix II 58-89-9 27 gamma-BHC Lindane 0.03 NE 0.2 NE &pendix II 101-55-3 31 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether NE NE NE NE Appendix II &Lendix II &Lffindix II 85-68-7 32 Butyl benzyl phthalate; Benzyl butyl phthalate 1000 700 NE NE NE NE NE NE 84-74-2 33 Di-n-butyl phthalate 106-47-8 38 p-Chloroaniline NE NE NE NE Amendix II 510-15-6 40 Chlorobenalate NE NE NE NE Appendix II endix II 111-91-1 42 Bs(2-chloroethoxy)methane NE NE NE NE 111-44-4 43 ENs(2-chloroethyl)ether; Dichloroethyl ether NE NE NE 0.031 AMqndix II 59-50-7 45 p-Chloro-m-cresol; 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol NE NE NE NE Armendix II 108-60-1 46 Bs(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) ether; 2,2'- Dichlorodiisopropyl ether; DClP NE NE NE NE Appgndix II 91-58-7 47 2-Chloronaphthalene NE NE NE NE Appendix II Page 3 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 C4SRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEIM IGAL NAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWPad PleferenceList 4 2-Chlorophenol 0.4 NE NE I NE avendix II 95-57-8 48 7005-72-3 49 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether NE NE NE NE Appendix II AQpendix II 126-99-8 50 Chloroprene NE NE NE NE 218-01-9 52 Chrysene 5 NE I NE NE A pglndix II 95-48-7 56 o-Cresol; 2-Methylphenol NE 400 NE NE Ajovendix II Appendix II &pendix II 57-12-5 58 Cyanide 2,4-D; 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyaceticadd 4,4'-DDD 4,4'-DDE 70 NE 200 NE 94-75-7 59 70 NE 70 NE 72-54-8 60 0.1 NE I NE NE AWELndix II 72-55-9 61 NE NE NE NE Aivendix II 50-29-3 62 4,4'-DDT 0.1 NE NE NE Armendix II 2303-16-4 63 Diallate NE NE NE NE Amendix II Appendix II 53-70-3 64 Dibanz[a,h]ant hracene 0.005 NE NE NE 132-64-9 65 Dibenzofuran NE 28 NE NE Armendix II 541-73-1 70 m-Dichlorobemmine; 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 200 NE NE NE Appendix II Amendix II 91-94-1 72 3,3-Dichlorobenadine NE NE NE NE 75-71-8 74 Dichlorodifluoromethane; CFC12 1000 NE NE NE &Lqndix II 120-83-2 80 2,4-Dichlorophenol NE 0.98 NE NE Armendix II 87-65-0 81 2,6-Dichlorophenol NE NE NE NE Appendix II A=Lndix II 142-28-9 83 1,3-Dichloropropane; Trimethylene dichloride NE NE NE NE 594-20-7 84 2,2-Dichloropropane; Isopropylidene chloride NE NE NE NE Avvendix II 563-58-6 85 1,1-Dichloropropene NE NE NE NE Ap j2endix II 60-57-1 88 Dieldrin O,O-Diethyl 0-2-pyra2inyl phosphorothioate; Thionaan Diethyl phthalate Dimethoate 0.002 NE NE NE Armendix II 297-97-2 89 NE NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 84-66-2 90 6000 NE NE NE 60-51-5 91 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 60-11-7 92 p-(Dimethylamino)azoben2Bne 57-97-6 93 7,12-Dimethylbenz[a]ant hraoene NE NE 100 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE A2p2ndix II Appgndix II Appendix II 119-93-7 94 3,3'-Di methylbenadine 105-67-9 95 2,4-Dimethylphenol; m-Xylenol 131-11-3 96 Dimethyl phthalate NE NE NE NE Appendix II 99-65-0 97 m-Dinitrobemmine NE NE NE NE Appendix II 534-52-1 98 1 4,6-Dinitro-o-aresol; 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol NE NE NE I NE endix II Page 4 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 CASRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEMIIALNAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d PleferenceList 4 2,4-Dinitrophenol NE NE NE NE avendix II 51-28-5 99 121-14-2 100 2,4-Dinitrotoluene NE 0.1 NE NE Appendix II AQpenclix II 606-20-2 101 2,6-Dinitrotoluene NE NE NE NE 88-85-7 102 Dinoseb; DNBP, 2-seo-Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol NE 7 7 NE endix II 122-39-4 103 Diphenylamine NE NE NE NE Ajovendix II Appendix II 298-04-4 104 Disulfoton 0.3 NE NE NE 959-98-8 105 Endosulfan I 40 NE NE NE AUenclix II 33213-65-9 106 Endosulfan II NE NE NE 42 Armendix II 1031-07-8 107 Endosulfan sulfate NE 40 NE NE Aivendix II 72-20-8 108 Endrin 2 NE 1 2 NE AMndix II 7421-93-4 109 Endrin aldehyde 2 NE NE NE Aopendix II Appendix II 117-81-7 111 l3is(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 3 NE NE NE 97-63-2 112 Ethyl methacc:rylate NE NE NE NE &Lndix II 62-50-0 113 Ethyl methanesulfonate NE NE NE NE Appendix II endix II 52-85-7 114 Famphur NE NE NE NE 20644-0 115 Ruoranthene 300 NE NE NE &Lqndix II 86-73-7 116 Ruorene 300 NE NE NE Appendix II 76-44-8 117 Heptachlor 0.008 NE 0.4 NE Appendix II apendix II 1024-57-3 118 Heptachlor epobde 0.004 NE 0.2 NE 118-74-1 119 Hexachlorobenzene 0.02 NE 1 NE Avvenclix II 87-68-3 120 Hexachlorobutadiene 0.4 NE NE NE Arvendix II 77-47-4 121 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene NE NE 50 50 Appendix II Aopendix II 67-72-1 122 Hexachloroethane NE NE NE 2.5 1888-71-7 123 Hexachloropropene NE NE NE NE AMenclix II 193-39-5 125 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.05 NE NE NE &Lffinclix II 78-83-1 126 Isobutyl aloohol NE NE NE NE Appendix II 465-73-6 127 Isodrin NE NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 78-59-1 128 Isophorone 40 NE NE NE 120-58-1 129 Isosafrole NE NE NE NE Appendix II 143-50-0 130 Kapone NE NE I NE NE AMndix II 7439-97-6 132 Mercury 1 1 NE 2 1 NE I App. II / t&D 126-98-7 133 1 Met hacrylonit rile NE NE NE I NE I App2ndix II Page 5 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 CASRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEIM IALNAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d PleferenceList 4 Methapyrilene NE NE NE NE avendix II 91-80-5 134 72-43-5 135 Methoxychlor 40 NE NE NE NE I NE NE NE Appendix II AQpendix II 56-49-5 138 3-M ethyl chol ant hrene Methyl methacrylate 80-62-6 143 NE 25 NE NE &Sftndix II 66-27-3 144 Methyl methanesulfonate 2-Methylnaphthalene Methyl parathion; Parathion methyl Naphthalene 1,4-Naphthoquinone 1-Naphthylamine NE NE NE NE Ajovendix II &Lndix II AMendix II 91-57-6 145 30 NE NE NE 298-00-0 146 NE NE I NE NE 91-20-3 148 6 NE NE NE AWELndix II 130-15-4 149 NE NE NE NE AWELndix II 134-32-7 150 NE NE NE NE NE I NE NE NE AMndix II Appendix II Appendix II 91-59-8 151 2-Naphthylamine 99-09-2 153 m-Nitroaniline; 3-Nitroaniline NE NE NE NE 88-74-4 154 o-Nitroaniline; 2-Nitroaniline NE NE NE NE Agp.Lndix II 100-01-6 155 p-Nitroaniline; 4-Nitroaniline NE NE NE NE Appendix II Amendix II 98-95-3 156 Nitrobenzene NE NE I NE NE 99-55-8 157 5-Nitro-o-toluidine NE NE NE NE AMqndix II 88-75-5 158 o-Nitrophenol; 2-Nitrophenol NE NE NE NE Armendix II 100-02-7 159 p-Nitrophenol; 4-Nitrophenol NE NE NE NE Avvendix II apendix II Appendix II 55-18-5 160 N-Nitrosodiethylamine NE 0.0007 NE NE I NE NE NE NE 62-75-9 161 N-Nitrosodimethylamine N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine 924-16-3 162 NE NE NE NE &Lndix II 86-30-6 163 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine NE NE NE NE Agp.Lndix II 621-64-7 164 N-Nitrosodipropylamine; N-Nitroso-N-dipropylamine; Di- n-propylnitrosamine N-Nitrosomethylethalamine N-Nitrosopiperidine N-Nitrosopyrrolidine Di-n-octyl phthalate NE NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 10595-95-6 165 NE NE NE NE 100-75-4 166 NE NE NE NE A2p2ndix II 930-55-2 167 NE NE NE NE A2p2ndix II 117-84-0 168 100 NE NE NE NE I NE NE NE A2p2ndix II A2pgndix II 56-38-2 169 Parathion 1336-36-3 170 Pblychlorinated biphenyls; PCBs NE 0.09 0.5 NE Appendix II 608-93-5 171 Pentachlorobenzene NE NE NE NE Appendix II 82-68-8 172 Pentachloronitrobenzene I NE NE NE NE Appendix II 87-86-5 173 Pentachlorophenol 0.3 t NE 1 1 NE L AMendx II Page 6 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 C4SRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEIM IGAL NAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d PleferenceList 4 Phenaoetin NE NE NE NE avendix II 62-44-2 174 85-01-8 175 Phenanthrene 200 NE NE NE Appendix II Ampendix II 101 -50-3 176 p-Phenylenediamine NE NE NE NE 108-95-2 177 Phenol 30 NE NE NE Arvendix II 298-02-2 178 Phorate 1 NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 23950-58-5 179 Pronamide NE NE NE NE 107-12-0 180 Propionitrile; Rhyl cyanide NE NE NE NE A2pendix II 129-00-0 181 Pyrene 200 NE NE NE ADvendix II 94-59-7 182 81role NE NE NE NE ADvendix II 93-72-1 185 Slvex; 2,4,5-TP 50 NE NE NE Aopendix II 18491 -25-8 187 Silfide NE NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 93-76-5 188 2,4,5-T; 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyaceticacid NE NE NE NE 95-94-3 189 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene NE 2 NE NE Armendix II 58-90-2 193 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 200 NE NE NE Appendix II Awendix II 7440-31-5 195 Tin NE 2000 NE NE 95-53-4 197 o-Toluidine NE NE I NE NE AMqndix II 8001-35-2 198 Toxaphene 0.03 NE 3 NE A2Lndix II 120-82-1 199 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 70 NE 70 NE Appendix II A=Lndix II AMendix II 95-95-4 204 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol NE 63 NE NE 88-06-2 205 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol NE 4 1 NE NE 126-68-1 207 O,O,O-Triethyl phosphorothioate NE NE NE NE A2Lndix II 99-35-4 208 sym-Trinitroben2Bne NE NE NE NE Appendix II Appendix II 57-74-9 339 Chlordane 0.1 NE NE NE 106-44-5 344 p-Cresol; 4-Methylphenol 40 NE NE NE endix II 108-39-4 345 m-Cresol; 3-Methylphenol 400 NE NE NE A2LELndix II 122-09-8 386 Benzeneethanamine, alpha,alpha-dimethyl NE NE NE NE AMndix II 1746-01-6 440 2,3,7,8-TCDD; 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- p-dioxin .0002 ng/L NE 0.03 NE Appendix1l 123-91-1 422 1,4-dioxane 3 NE NE NE ALL W301 301 Chloride Total Dissolved Solids 250000 NE NE NE C&D C&D SN311 311 500000 NE NE NE 14808-79-8 315 Silfate 250000 NE NE NE C&D/ Leachate SN337 337 1 Alkalinity NE NE I NE NE C&D Page 7 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 CaSRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEMIGALNAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d Pleferenoe List 4 Iron 300 NE NE NE C&D 7439-89-6 340 7439-96-5 342 Manganese 50 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE C&D C&D 109-99-9 441 Tetrahydrofuran SN316 316 Biological Oxygen Demand NE NE NE NE Leachate NE Leachate SN317 317 Chemical Oxygen Demand NE NE NE SN419 419 No21No3 (nitrate & nitrite reported together) NE NE NE NE Leachate SN437 437 Orthophosphate Phosphorus pH (lab) NE NE NE NE Leachate SN321 321 7.0 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE Leachate Leachate SN324 324 Epedbnd (lab) 226-36-8 385 1,25,6-Dibenzacridine NE NE NE NE Other 122-66-7 394 1,2-Diphenylhydraane 1-2-3-Trichi orobenzene NE NE NE NE Other 87-61-6 371 NE NE NE NE Other 120-36-5 352 2-(2-4-iichlorophenoxy)propionicacid NE NE NE NE Other 94-82-6 350 2-4DB NE NE NE NE Other 110-75-8 358 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether NE NE NE NE Other 109-06-8 390 2-Picoline NE NE NE NE Other 56-57-5 388 4-nitroquinoline-1-oxide NE NE NE NE Other 64-19-7 416 Acetic Add NE 5000 NE NE Other 62-53-3 381 Aniline NE NE NE NE Other 140-57-8 382 Aramite NE NE NE NE Other 12674-11-2 401 Arodor 1016 NE NE NE NE Other 11104-28-2 402 Arodor 1221 NE NE NE NE Other 11141-16-5 403 Arodor 1232 NE NE NE NE Other 53469-21-9 404 Arodor 1242 NE NE NE NE Other 12672-29-6 405 Arodor 1248 NE NE NE NE Other 11097-69-1 406 Arodor 1254 NE NE NE NE Other 11096-82-5 407 Arodor 1260 NE NE NE NE Other 92-87-5 383 Benadine NE NE NE NE Other 7440-42-8 428 Boron 700 NE NE NE Other SN347 347 Bicarbonate (as CaO03) NE NE NE NE Other 101-84-8 423 biphenyl ether NE NE NE NE Other 108-86-1 360 Bromobemmne NE NE NE NE Other Page 8 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 C4SRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEIM IGAL NAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWP3d PleferenceList 4 Butyric Add NE NE NE NE Other SN418 418 7440-70-2 375 Calcium NE NE NE NE Other Other SN413 413 Carbon Dioxide (002) Carbonate (as CaCD3) NE NE I NE NE SN348 348 NE NE NE NE Other 12789-03-6 400 Chlordane(constituents) NE NE NE NE Other 79-06-1 429 Acylamide 0.008 NE NE NE Other 5103-71-9 379 Chlordane, alpha Chlordane, beta NE NE NE NE Other 5103-74-2 378 NE NE 2 NE Other 5566-34-7 399 Chlordane, gamma NE NE NE NE Other 75-99-0 355 Dalapon NE 200 200 NE Other SN318 318 Depth To Water (ft) NE NE NE NE Other Other Other 1918-00-9 353 Dicamba NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE SN334 334 Ferrous Iron- Dissolved SN427 427 Groundwater Elevation (feet) NE NE NE NE Other SN319 319 Head (ft mean sea level) NE NE NE NE Other 70-30-4 387 Hexachlorophene NE NE NE NE Other SN338 338 Hydrogen Sulfide NE NE NE NE Other SN415 415 LacticAdd NE NE NE NE Other SN329 329 Landfill Gas m-&p-Cresol (combined) 1,1-biphenyl NE NE NE NE Other SN374 374 NE NE NE NE Other 92-52-4 421 400 NE NE NE Other SN359 359 m-&p-Xylene (combined) NE NE NE NE Other 1563-66-2 430 Carbofuran 40 NE 40 NE Other 107-21-1 424 ethyleneglycol 10000 NE NE NE Other 142-82-5 432 Heptane 400 NE NE NE Other 7439-95-4 376 Magnesium NE NE NE NE Other 94-74-6 351 MCPA NE NE NE NE Other 76-13-1 398 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane 200000 NE NE NE Other 93-65-2 354 Mecopop, MCPP NE NE NE NE Other SN333 333 Methane- Dissolved NE NE NE NE Other 7439-98-7 397 Molybdenum NE NE NE NE Other 108-38-3 409 m-Xylene NE I NE NE I NE Other Page 9 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring List Groundwater Protection -Standards 1 C4SRN2 SNSID3 DED Calculated CHEIMIG4LNAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWPad PleferenceList 4 N-nitrosodiphenylamine/diphenylamine NE NE NE NE Other SN426 426 SN439 439 N-Nit rosod i phenyl ami net Di phenyl ami ne NE NE NE NE Other 65-85-0 395 BenzoicAcid 30000 NE I NE NE Other 39638-32-9 384 Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 0.03 NE NE NE Other 59-89-2 389 N-Nitrosomorpholine NE NE NE NE Other SN309 309 lbliform (total) 1 NE 5 NE Other SN310 310 lblor (oolor units) 15 NE NE NE Other SN336 336 Oxygen (eduction Potential (m\J) NE NE NE NE Other SN313 313 Foaming Agents 500 NE NE NE Other SN314 314 Gross Alpha 15 NE NE NE Other 10643-4 365 4-Chlorotoluene NE 24 NE NE Other 99-87-6 368 p-Gymene NE 25 NE NE Other 108-20-3 366 Isopropyl ether 70 NE NE NE Other 98-82-8 367 Isopropylbenzene 70 NE NE NE Other 76-01-7 380 Pentachloroethane NE NE NE NE Other SN335 335 Manganese -Dissolved 50 NE NE NE Other 108-67-8 373 Mesitylene(1-3-5-trimethylbenzene) 400 NE NE NE Other 7440-09-7 377 Potassium NE NE NE NE Other 1634-04-4 369 Methyl-tert-butyl ether (M1BE) 20 70 NE NE NE NE NE NE Other Other 104-51-8 361 n-Butylbenzene PropionicAcid SN417 417 NE NE NE NE Other 10642-3 410 p-Xylene NE NE NE NE Other 103-65-1 370 n-Propylbenzene 70 NE NE NE Other 95-49-8 364 o-Chlorotoluene 100 NE NE NE Other 110-86-1 391 Pyridine NE NE NE 7 Other SN414 414 PyruvicAcid NE NE NE NE Other 7440-23-5 322 Sodium NE NE NE 20000 Other SN323 323 EpecOond (field) NE NE NE NE Other Other SN307 307 petroleum aliphatic carbon fraction dass CI - C36 10000 NE NE NE SN305 305 petroleum aliphatic carbon fraction class 05 - C8 400 NE NE NE Other SN306 306 petroleum aliphatic carbon fraction dass C9 - C18 700 NE NE NE Other SN308 1 308 petroleum aromatics carbon fraction class C9 - C22 200 NE NE I NE Other Page 10 of 11 NCS:)lid Waste Section Environmental Monitoring Lid Groundwater Protection Standards C4SFN2 SINSID3 DED Calculated CHEMICALNAME 2L 2LIMAC MCL GWPSd PleferenceList 4 pH (field) 7.0 NE NE NE Other SN320 320 95-63-6 372 Pseudocumene (1-24-trimethylben2Bne) 400 NE NE NE Other 3689-24-5 392 Salfotep NE NE I NE NE Other SN325 325 Temp (oC) NE NE NE NE Other 135-98-8 362 sec-Butylbencene 70 NE NE NE Other SN328 328 Top Of Casing (ft mean sea level) NE NE NE NE Other SN425 425 Total BHC 0.02 NE NE NE Other SN436 436 Total Fatty Adds NE NE NE NE Other E-10195 357 Tot al Organic Carbon NE NE NE NE Other 98-06-6 363 tert-Butylben2Bne 70 NE NE NE Other SN396 396 Total Organic Halides Total Suspended Solids NE NE NE NE Other SN343 343 NE NE NE NE Other SN411 411 Total Well Depth (ft) NE NE NE NE Other SN330 330 Turbidity NE I NE NE NE Other NOTE GWPS-as listed are current as of October 15, 2018 and are subject to change. Refer to originating sources for any changes. t Groundwater Protection Standard (GVVPS)- For compliance purposes, the applicable GWPSisthe lower of the listed standards. 2 CASRN = Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number. For listed contituentswith no CA$ the SNSID is used. 3 SWSID = Solid Waste Section ID. Unique ID assigned bythe Section. 4 ConstituentSP--ferenceLists APPENDIX I - Condituentsfor Detection Monitoring per 40 CFRPart 258 (7-1-2017 Edition) APPENDIX II -List of Hazardous Inorganic& Organic Constituents per 40 CFRPart 258 (7-1-2017 Edition). Appendix II lid includes all Appendix I constituents. C&D-Additional monitored constituents required for Construction & Demolition landfills(CDLFs) LE4CHATE- Monitored condituentsfor leachate sampling as specified in permit conditions. Other - Other constituents, field testing, field measurements, or miscellaneous data that maybe required by the Sad ion. 5 ALL-1,4-Dioxane sampling required for all MStN, C&D, & Industrial landfills (active and dosed) per SNSMemo dated May 29, 2018. GVV Protection Standards References 2L- NCgroundwater water standards per 15A NCAC 02L.0202 2LIMAC (Interim Maximum Allowable Concentrations)- Interim NCgroundwater standards per 15A NCAC 02L.0202 MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level) -National primary drinking water standards per _rWe Drinking Water Act under 40 CFRPart 141 NC GWPSd (NCGroundwater Protected Standard) -Groundwater value calculated by NCDH2for constituents with no established 2Lstandard. Values are calculated using criteria 1 & 2 of the NC Groundwater standards and do not consider taste, odor, MCLs, MCLG, and secondary drinldng water standards. Weblink for 40 CFR Part 258 Page 11 of 11 APPENDIX D Environmental Monitoring Reporting Form DEN R USE ONLY ❑Paper Report ❑Electronic Data - Email CD (data loaded: Yes / No Doc/Event #: NC DENR I IEnvironmental Monitoring Division of Waste Management - Solid Waste Reporting Form Notice: This form and any information attached to it are "Public Records" as defined in NC General Statute 132-1. As such, these documents are available for inspection and examination by any person upon request (NC General Statute 132-6). Instructions: Prepare one form for each individually monitored unit. Please type or print legibly. Attach a notification table with values that attain or exceed NC 2L groundwater standards or NC 2B surface water standards. The notification must include a preliminary analysis of the cause and significance of each value. (e.g. naturally occurring, off -site source, pre-existing condition, etc.). Attach a notification table of any groundwater or surface water values that equal or exceed the reporting limits. Attach a notification table of any methane gas values that attain or exceed explosive gas levels. This includes any structures on or nearby the facility (NCAC 13B .1629 (4)(a)(i). Send the original signed and sealed form, any tables, and Electronic Data Deliverable to: Compliance Unit, NCDENR-DWM, Solid Waste Section, 1646 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1646. Solid Waste Monitoring Data Submittal Information Name of entity submitting data (laboratory, consultant, facility owner): Contact for questions about data formatting. Include data preparer's name, telephone number and E-mail address: Name: Phone: E-mail: NC Landfill Rule: Actual sampling dates (e.g., Facility name: Facility Address: Facility Permit # (.0500 or .1600) October 20-24, 2006) Environmental Status: (Check all that apply) Initial/Background Monitoring Detection Monitoring Assessment Monitoring Corrective Action of data submitted: (Check all that apply) Groundwater monitoring data from monitoring wells Groundwater monitoring data from private water supply wells El Leachate monitoring data El water monitoring data Methane gas monitoring data Corrective action data (specify) Other(specify) Notification attached? e No. No groundwater or surface water standards were exceeded. Yes, a notification of values exceeding a groundwater or surface water standard is attached. It includes a list of groundwater and surface water monitoring points, dates, analytical values, NC 2L groundwater standard, NC 2B surface water standard or NC Solid Waste GWPS and preliminary analysis of the cause and significance of any concentration. El Yes, a notification of values exceeding an explosive methane gas limit is attached. It includes the methane monitoring points, dates, sample values and explosive methane gas limits. Certification To the best of my knowledge, the information reported and statements made on this data submittal and attachments are true and correct. Furthermore, I have attached complete notification of any sampling values meeting or exceeding groundwater standards or explosive gas levels, and a preliminary analysis of the cause and significance of concentrations exceeding groundwater standards. I am aware that there are significant penalties for making any false statement, representation, or certification including the possibility of a fine and imprisonment. Facility Representative Name (Print) Title (Area Code) Telephone Number Signature Facility Representative Address Date Affix NC Licensed/ Professional Geologist Seal NC PE Firm License Number (if applicable effective May 1, 2009) Revised 6/2009 APPENDIX E Low -Flow Groundwater Purging and Sampling Guidance United States Office of Office of Solid Waste EPA/540/S-95/504 Environmental Protection Research and and Emergency April 1996 Agency Development Response %=,EPA Ground Water Issue LOW -FLOW (MINIMAL DRAWDOWN) GROUND -WATER SAMPLING PROCEDURES by Robert W. Puls' and Michael J. Barcelona' Background The Regional Superfund Ground Water Forum is a group of ground -water scientists, representing EPA's Regional Superfund Offices, organized to exchange information related to ground -water remediation at Superfund sites. One of the major concerns of the Forum is the sampling of ground water to support site assessment and remedial performance monitoring objectives. This paper is intended to provide background information on the development of low -flow sampling procedures and its application under a variety of hydrogeologic settings. It is hoped that the paper will support the production of standard operating procedures for use by EPA Regional personnel and other environmental professionals engaged in ground -water sampling. For further information contact: Robert Puls, 405-436-8543, Subsurface Remediation and Protection Division, NRMRL, Ada, Oklahoma. I. Introduction The methods and objectives of ground -water sampling to assess water quality have evolved over time. Initially the emphasis was on the assessment of water quality of aquifers as sources of drinking water. Large water -bearing units were identified and sampled in keeping with that objective. These were highly productive aquifers that supplied drinking water via private wells or through public water supply systems. Gradually, with the increasing aware- ness of subsurface pollution of these water resources, the understanding of complex hydrogeochemical processes which govern the fate and transport of contaminants in the subsurface increased. This increase in understanding was also due to advances in a number of scientific disciplines and improvements in tools used for site characterization and ground -water sampling. Ground -water quality investigations where pollution was detected initially borrowed ideas, methods, and materials for site characterization from the water supply field and water analysis from public health practices. This included the materials and manner in which monitoring wells were installed and the way in which water was brought to the surface, treated, preserved and analyzed. The prevailing conceptual ideas included convenient generali- zations of ground -water resources in terms of large and relatively homogeneous hydrologic units. With time it became apparent that conventional water supply generalizations of homogeneity did not adequately represent field data regard- ing pollution of these subsurface resources. The important role of heterogeneity became increasingly clear not only in geologic terms, but also in terms of complex physical, 'National Risk Management Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA 'University of Michigan —I- ATlON y Superfund Technology Support Center for s r, Ground Water echnology upport National Risk Management Research Laboratory • roject Subsurface Protection and Remediation Division Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center t-a;) 5`yAda, Oklahoma Technology Innovation Office Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, US EPA, Washington, DC Walter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D. Director chemical and biological subsurface processes. With greater appreciation of the role of heterogeneity, it became evident that subsurface pollution was ubiquitous and encompassed the unsaturated zone to the deep subsurface and included unconsolidated sediments, fractured rock, and aquitards or low -yielding or impermeable formations. Small-scale pro- cesses and heterogeneities were shown to be important in identifying contaminant distributions and in controlling water and contaminant flow paths. It is beyond the scope of this paper to summarize all the advances in the field of ground -water quality investiga- tions and remediation, but two particular issues have bearing on ground -water sampling today: aquifer heterogeneity and colloidal transport. Aquifer heterogeneities affect contaminant flow paths and include variations in geology, geochemistry, hydrology and microbiology. As methods and the tools available for subsurface investigations have become increas- ingly sophisticated and understanding of the subsurface environment has advanced, there is an awareness that in most cases a primary concern for site investigations is characterization of contaminant flow paths rather than entire aquifers. In fact, in many cases, plume thickness can be less than well screen lengths (e.g., 3-6 m) typically installed at hazardous waste sites to detect and monitor plume movement over time. Small-scale differences have increasingly been shown to be important and there is a general trend toward smaller diameter wells and shorter screens. The hydrogeochemical significance of colloidal -size particles in subsurface systems has been realized during the past several years (Gschwend and Reynolds, 1987; McCarthy and Zachara, 1989; Puls, 1990; Ryan and Gschwend, 1990). This realization resulted from both field and laboratory studies that showed faster contaminant migration over greater distances and at higher concentrations than flow and trans- port model predictions would suggest (Buddemeier and Hunt, 1988; Enfield and Bengtsson, 1988; Penrose et al., 1990). Such models typically account for interaction between the mobile aqueous and immobile solid phases, but do not allow for a mobile, reactive solid phase. It is recognition of this third phase as a possible means of contaminant transport that has brought increasing attention to the manner in which samples are collected and processed for analysis (Puts et al., 1990; McCarthy and Degueldre, 1993; Backhus et al., 1993; U. S. EPA, 1995). If such a phase is present in sufficient mass, possesses high sorption reactivity, large surface area, and remains stable in suspension, it can serve as an important mechanism to facilitate contaminant transport in many types of subsurface systems. Colloids are particles that are sufficiently small so that the surface free energy of the particle dominates the bulk free energy. Typically, in ground water, this includes particles with diameters between 1 and 1000 nm. The most commonly observed mobile particles include: secondary clay minerals; hydrous iron, aluminum, and manganese oxides; dissolved and particulate organic materials, and viruses and bacteria. These reactive particles have been shown to be mobile under a variety of conditions in both field studies and laboratory column experiments, and as such need to be included in monitoring programs where identification of the total mobile contaminant loading (dissolved + naturally suspended particles) at a site is an objective. To that end, sampling methodologies must be used which do not artificially bias naturally suspended particle concentrations. Currently the most common ground -water purging and sampling methodology is to purge a well using bailers or high speed pumps to remove 3 to 5 casing volumes followed by sample collection. This method can cause adverse impacts on sample quality through collection of samples with high levels of turbidity. This results in the inclusion of otherwise immobile artifactual particles which produce an overestima- tion of certain analytes of interest (e.g., metals or hydrophobic organic compounds). Numerous documented problems associated with filtration (Danielsson, 1982; Laxen and Chandler, 1982; Horowitz et al., 1992) make this an undesir- able method of rectifying the turbidity problem, and include the removal of potentially mobile (contaminant -associated) particles during filtration, thus artificially biasing contaminant concentrations low. Sampling -induced turbidity problems can often be mitigated by using low -flow purging and sampling techniques. Current subsurface conceptual models have under- gone considerable refinement due to the recent development and increased use of field screening tools. So-called hydraulic push technologies (e.g., cone penetrometer, Geoprobe®, QED HydroPunch®) enable relatively fast screening site characterization which can then be used to design and install a monitoring well network. Indeed, alternatives to conventional monitoring wells are now being considered for some hydrogeologic settings. The ultimate design of any monitoring system should however be based upon adequate site characterization and be consistent with established monitoring objectives. If the sampling program objectives include accurate assessment of the magnitude and extent of subsurface contamination over time and/or accurate assessment of subsequent remedial performance, then some information regarding plume delineation in three-dimensional space is necessary prior to monitoring well network design and installation. This can be accomplished with a variety of different tools and equipment ranging from hand -operated augers to screening tools mentioned above and large drilling rigs. Detailed information on ground -water flow velocity, direction, and horizontal and vertical variability are essential baseline data requirements. Detailed soil and geologic data are required prior to and during the installation of sampling points. This includes historical as well as detailed soil and geologic logs which accumulate during the site investigation. The use of borehole geophysical techniques is also recom- mended. With this information (together with other site characterization data) and a clear understanding of sampling objectives, then appropriate location, screen length, well diameter, slot size, etc. for the monitoring well network can be decided. This is especially critical for new in situ remedial approaches or natural attenuation assessments at hazardous waste sites. In general, the overall goal of any ground -water sampling program is to collect water samples with no alter- ation in water chemistry; analytical data thus obtained may be used for a variety of specific monitoring programs depending on the regulatory requirements. The sampling methodology described in this paper assumes that the monitoring goal is to sample monitoring wells for the presence of contaminants and it is applicable whether mobile colloids are a concern or not and whether the analytes of concern are metals (and metal- loids) or organic compounds. II. Monitoring Objectives and Design Considerations The following issues are important to consider prior to the design and implementation of any ground -water monitoring program, including those which anticipate using low -flow purging and sampling procedures. A. Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) Monitoring objectives include four main types: detection, assessment, corrective -action evaluation and resource evaluation, along with hybrid variations such as site - assessments for property transfers and water availability investigations. Monitoring objectives may change as contami- nation or water quality problems are discovered. However, there are a number of common components of monitoring programs which should be recognized as important regard- less of initial objectives. These components include: 1) Development of a conceptual model that incorporates elements of the regional geology to the local geologic framework. The conceptual model development also includes initial site characterization efforts to identify hydrostratigraphic units and likely flow -paths using a minimum number of borings and well completions; 2) Cost-effective and well documented collection of high quality data utilizing simple, accurate, and reproduc- ible techniques; and 3) Refinement of the conceptual model based on supplementary data collection and analysis. These fundamental components serve many types of monitor- ing programs and provide a basis for future efforts that evolve in complexity and level of spatial detail as purposes and objectives expand. High quality, reproducible data collection is a common goal regardless of program objectives. High quality data collection implies data of sufficient accuracy, precision, and completeness (i.e., ratio of valid analytical results to the minimum sample number called for by the program design) to meet the program objectives. Accu- racy depends on the correct choice of monitoring tools and procedures to minimize sample and subsurface disturbance from collection to analysis. Precision depends on the repeatability of sampling and analytical protocols. It can be assured or improved by replication of sample analyses including blanks, field/lab standards and reference standards. B. Sample Representativeness An important goal of any monitoring program is collection of data that is truly representative of conditions at the site. The term representativeness applies to chemical and hydrogeologic data collected via wells, borings, piezometers, geophysical and soil gas measurements, lysimeters, and temporary sampling points. It involves a recognition of the statistical variability of individual subsurface physical proper- ties, and contaminant or major ion concentration levels, while explaining extreme values. Subsurface temporal and spatial variability are facts. Good professional practice seeks to maximize representativeness by using proven accurate and reproducible techniques to define limits on the distribution of measurements collected at a site. However, measures of representativeness are dynamic and are controlled by evolving site characterization and monitoring objectives. An evolutionary site characterization model, as shown in Fig- ure 1, provides a systematic approach to the goal of consis- tent data collection. r — --1 Dal my Pmgrarn Ohlarl ivx Erlshliph Dala ❑uallry 1� --1W aVFI'D 5A' plirl!l Urld Evolullonory $Ile Aimlyllca l PI VIouol% Crluras lei iral Karl 1 Apply P rratoca Is 1 4 . RoilnoPratocola 4.. . _y MalooSilo Decmions Figure 1. Evolutionary Site Characterization Model The model emphasizes a recognition of the causes of the variability (e.g., use of inappropriate technology such as using bailers to purge wells; imprecise or operator -dependent methods) and the need to control avoidable errors. 1) Questions of Scale A sampling plan designed to collect representative samples must take into account the potential scale of changes in site conditions through space and time as well as the chemical associations and behavior of the parameters that are targeted for investigation. In subsurface systems, physical (i.e., aquifer) and chemical properties over time or space are not statistically independent. In fact, samples taken in close proximity (i.e., within distances of a few meters) or within short time periods (i.e., more frequently than monthly) are highly auto -correlated. This means that designs employing high -sampling frequency (e.g., monthly) or dense spatial monitoring designs run the risk of redundant data collection and misleading inferences regarding trends in values that aren't statistically valid. In practice, contaminant detection and assessment monitoring programs rarely suffer these over -sampling concerns. In corrective -action evaluation programs, it is also possible that too little data may be collected over space or time. In these cases, false interpreta- tion of the spatial extent of contamination or underestimation of temporal concentration variability may result. 2) Target Parameters Parameter selection in monitoring program design is most often dictated by the regulatory status of the site. However, background water quality constituents, purging indicator parameters, and contaminants, all represent targets for data collection programs. The tools and procedures used in these programs should be equally rigorous and applicable to all categories of data, since all may be needed to deter- mine or support regulatory action. C. Sampling Point Design and Construction Detailed site characterization is central to all decision -making purposes and the basis for this characteriza- tion resides in identification of the geologic framework and major hydro-stratigraphic units. Fundamental data for sample point location include: subsurface lithology, head -differences and background geochemical conditions. Each sampling point has a proper use or uses which should be documented at a level which is appropriate for the program's data quality objectives. Individual sampling points may not always be able to fulfill multiple monitoring objectives (e.g., detection, assessment, corrective action). 1) Compatibility with Monitoring Program and Data Quality Objectives Specifics of sampling point location and design will be dictated by the complexity of subsurface lithology and variability in contaminant and/or geochemical conditions. It should be noted that, regardless of the ground -water sam- pling approach, few sampling points (e.g., wells, drive -points, screened augers) have zones of influence in excess of a few feet. Therefore, the spatial frequency of sampling points should be carefully selected and designed. 2) Flexibility of Sampling Point Design In most cases well -point diameters in excess of 1 7/8 inches will permit the use of most types of submersible pumping devices for low -flow (minimal drawdown) sampling. It is suggested that short (e.g., less than 1.6 m) screens be incorporated into the monitoring design where possible so that comparable results from one device to another might be expected. Short, of course, is relative to the degree of vertical water quality variability expected at a site. 3) Equilibration of Sampling Point Time should be allowed for equilibration of the well or sampling point with the formation after installation. Place- ment of well or sampling points in the subsurface produces some disturbance of ambient conditions. Drilling techniques (e.g., auger, rotary, etc.) are generally considered to cause more disturbance than direct -push technologies. In either case, there may be a period (i.e., days to months) during which water quality near the point may be distinctly different from that in the formation. Proper development of the sam- pling point and adjacent formation to remove fines created during emplacement will shorten this water quality recovery period. III. Definition of Low -Flow Purging and Sampling It is generally accepted that water in the well casing is non -representative of the formation water and needs to be purged prior to collection of ground -water samples. However, the water in the screened interval may indeed be representa- tive of the formation, depending upon well construction and site hydrogeology. Wells are purged to some extent for the following reasons: the presence of the air interface at the top of the water column resulting in an oxygen concentration gradient with depth, loss of volatiles up the water column, leaching from or sorption to the casing or filter pack, chemical changes due to clay seals or backfill, and surface infiltration. Low -flow purging, whether using portable or dedi- cated systems, should be done using pump -intake located in the middle or slightly above the middle of the screened interval. Placement of the pump too close to the bottom of the well will cause increased entrainment of solids which have collected in the well over time. These particles are present as a result of well development, prior purging and sampling events, and natural colloidal transport and deposition. Therefore, placement of the pump in the middle or toward the top of the screened interval is suggested. Placement of the pump at the top of the water column for sampling is only recommended in unconfined aquifers, screened across the water table, where this is the desired sampling point. Low- flow purging has the advantage of minimizing mixing between the overlying stagnant casing water and water within the screened interval. A. Low -Flow Purging and Sampling Low -flow refers to the velocity with which water enters the pump intake and that is imparted to the formation pore water in the immediate vicinity of the well screen. It does not necessarily refer to the flow rate of water discharged at the surface which can be affected by flow regulators or restrictions. Water level drawdown provides the best indica- tion of the stress imparted by a given flow -rate for a given hydrological situation. The objective is to pump in a manner that minimizes stress (drawdown) to the system to the extent practical taking into account established site sampling objectives. Typically, flow rates on the order of 0.1 - 0.5 L/min are used, however this is dependent on site -specific hydrogeology. Some extremely coarse -textured formations have been successfully sampled in this manner at flow rates to 1 L/min. The effectiveness of using low -flow purging is intimately linked with proper screen location, screen length, and well construction and development techniques. The reestablishment of natural flow paths in both the vertical and horizontal directions is important for correct interpretation of the data. For high resolution sampling needs, screens less than 1 m should be used. Most of the need for purging has been found to be due to passing the sampling device through the overlying casing water which causes mixing of these stagnant waters and the dynamic waters within the screened interval. Additionally, there is disturbance to suspended sediment collected in the bottom of the casing and the displacement of water out into the formation immediately adjacent to the well screen. These disturbances and impacts can be avoided using dedicated sampling equipment, which precludes the need to insert the sampling device prior to purging and sampling. Isolation of the screened interval water from the overlying stagnant casing water may be accomplished using low -flow minimal drawdown techniques. If the pump intake is located within the screened interval, most of the water pumped will be drawn in directly from the formation with little mixing of casing water or disturbance to the sampling zone. However, if the wells are not constructed and developed properly, zones other than those intended may be sampled. At some sites where geologic heterogeneities are sufficiently different within the screened interval, higher conductivity zones may be preferentially sampled. This is another reason to use shorter screened intervals, especially where high spatial resolution is a sampling objective. B. Water Quality Indicator Parameters It is recommended that water quality indicator parameters be used to determine purging needs prior to sample collection in each well. Stabilization of parameters such as pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, oxida- tion-reduction potential, temperature and turbidity should be used to determine when formation water is accessed during purging. In general, the order of stabilization is pH, tempera- ture, and specific conductance, followed by oxidation- reduction potential, dissolved oxygen and turbidity. Tempera- ture and pH, while commonly used as purging indicators, are actually quite insensitive in distinguishing between formation water and stagnant casing water; nevertheless, these are important parameters for data interpretation purposes and should also be measured. Performance criteria for determi- nation of stabilization should be based on water -level draw - down, pumping rate and equipment specifications for measur- ing indicator parameters. Instruments are available which utilize in -line flow cells to continuously measure the above parameters. It is important to establish specific well stabilization criteria and then consistently follow the same methods thereafter, particularly with respect to drawdown, flow rate and sampling device. Generally, the time or purge volume required for parameter stabilization is independent of well depth or well volumes. Dependent variables are well diam- eter, sampling device, hydrogeochemistry, pump flow rate, and whether the devices are used in a portable or dedicated manner. If the sampling device is already in place (i.e., dedicated sampling systems), then the time and purge volume needed for stabilization is much shorter. Other advantages of dedicated equipment include less purge water for waste disposal, much less decontamination of equipment, less time spent in preparation of sampling as well as time in the field, and more consistency in the sampling approach which probably will translate into less variability in sampling results. The use of dedicated equipment is strongly recom- mended at wells which will undergo routine sampling over time. If parameter stabilization criteria are too stringent, then minor oscillations in indicator parameters may cause purging operations to become unnecessarily protracted. It should also be noted that turbidity is a very conservative parameter in terms of stabilization. Turbidity is always the last parameter to stabilize. Excessive purge times are invariably related to the establishment of too stringent turbidity stabilization criteria. It should be noted that natural turbidity levels in ground water may exceed 10 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). C. Advantages and Disadvantages of Low -Flow (Minimum Drawdown) Purging In general, the advantages of low -flow purging include: • samples which are representative of the mobile load of contaminants present (dissolved and colloid-assock ated); • minimal disturbance of the sampling point thereby minimizing sampling artifacts; • less operator variability, greater operator control; • reduced stress on the formation (minimal drawdown); • less mixing of stagnant casing water with formation water; • reduced need for filtration and, therefore, less time required for sampling; • smaller purging volume which decreases waste disposal costs and sampling time; • better sample consistency; reduced artificial sample variability. Some disadvantages of low -flow purging are: • higher initial capital costs, • greater set-up time in the field, • need to transport additional equipment to and from the site, • increased training needs, • resistance to change on the part of sampling practitio- ners, concern that new data will indicate a change in conditions and trigger an action. IV. Low -Flow (Minimal Drawdown) Sampling Protocols The following ground -water sampling procedure has evolved over many years of experience in ground -water sampling for organic and inorganic compound determinations and as such summarizes the authors' (and others) experi- ences to date (Barcelona et al., 1984, 1994; Barcelona and Helfrich, 1986; Puls and Barcelona, 1989; Puls et. al. 1990, 1992; Puls and Powell, 1992; Puls and Paul, 1995). High - quality chemical data collection is essential in ground -water monitoring and site characterization. The primary limitations to the collection of representative ground -water samples include: mixing of the stagnant casing and fresh screen waters during insertion of the sampling device or ground- water level measurement device; disturbance and resuspension of settled solids at the bottom of the well when using high pumping rates or raising and lowering a pump or bailer; introduction of atmospheric gases or degassing from the water during sample handling and transfer, or inappropri- ate use of vacuum sampling device, etc. A. Sampling Recommendations Water samples should not be taken immediately following well development. Sufficient time should be allowed for the ground -water flow regime in the vicinity of the monitor- ing well to stabilize and to approach chemical equilibrium with the well construction materials. This lag time will depend on site conditions and methods of installation but often exceeds one week. Well purging is nearly always necessary to obtain samples of water flowing through the geologic formations in the screened interval. Rather than using a general but arbitrary guideline of purging three casing volumes prior to sampling, it is recommended that an in -line water quality measurement device (e.g., flow -through cell) be used to establish the stabilization time for several parameters (e.g. , pH, specific conductance, redox, dissolved oxygen, turbidity) on a well -specific basis. Data on pumping rate, drawdown, and volume required for parameter stabilization can be used as a guide for conducting subsequent sampling activities. The following are recommendations to be considered before, during and after sampling: • use low -flow rates (<0.5 L/min), during both purging and sampling to maintain minimal drawdown in the well; • maximize tubing wall thickness, minimize tubing length; • place the sampling device intake at the desired sampling point; • minimize disturbances of the stagnant water column above the screened interval during water level measurement and sampling device insertion; • make proper adjustments to stabilize the flow rate as soon as possible; • monitor water quality indicators during purging; • collect unfiltered samples to estimate contaminant loading and transport potential in the subsurface system. B. Equipment Calibration Prior to sampling, all sampling device and monitoring equipment should be calibrated according to manufacturer's recommendations and the site Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and Field Sampling Plan (FSP). Calibration of pH should be performed with at least two buffers which bracket the expected range. Dissolved oxygen calibration must be corrected for local barometric pressure readings and eleva- tion. C. Water Level Measurement and Monitoring It is recommended that a device be used which will least disturb the water surface in the casing. Well depth should be obtained from the well logs. Measuring to the bottom of the well casing will only cause resuspension of settled solids from the formation and require longer purging times for turbidity equilibration. Measure well depth after sampling is completed. The water level measurement should be taken from a permanent reference point which is surveyed relative to ground elevation. D. Pump Type The use of low -flow (e.g., 0.1-0.5 L/min) pumps is suggested for purging and sampling all types of analytes. All pumps have some limitation and these should be investigated with respect to application at a particular site. Bailers are inappropriate devices for low -flow sampling. 1) General Considerations There are no unusual requirements for ground -water sampling devices when using low -flow, minimal drawdown techniques. The major concern is that the device give consistent results and minimal disturbance of the sample across a range of low flow rates (i.e., < 0.5 L/min). Clearly, pumping rates that cause minimal to no drawdown in one well could easily cause significant drawdown in another well finished in a less transmissive formation. In this sense, the pump should not cause undue pressure or temperature changes or physical disturbance on the water sample over a reasonable sampling range. Consistency in operation is critical to meet accuracy and precision goals. 2) Advantages and Disadvantages of Sampling Devices A variety of sampling devices are available for low - flow (minimal drawdown) purging and sampling and include peristaltic pumps, bladder pumps, electrical submersible pumps, and gas -driven pumps. Devices which lend them- selves to both dedication and consistent operation at defin- able low -flow rates are preferred. It is desirable that the pump be easily adjustable and operate reliably at these lower flow rates. The peristaltic pump is limited to shallow applications and can cause degassing resulting in alteration of pH, alkalinity, and some volatiles loss. Gas -driven pumps should be of a type that does not allow the gas to be in direct contact with the sampled fluid. Clearly, bailers and other grab type samplers are ill - suited for low -flow sampling since they will cause repeated disturbance and mixing of stagnant water in the casing and the dynamic water in the screened interval. Similarly, the use of inertial lift foot -valve type samplers may cause too much disturbance at the point of sampling. Use of these devices also tends to introduce uncontrolled and unacceptable operator variability. Summaries of advantages and disadvantages of various sampling devices are listed in Herzog et al. (1991), U. S. EPA (1992), Parker (1994) and Thurnblad (1994). E. Pump Installation Dedicated sampling devices (left in the well) capable of pumping and sampling are preferred over any other type of device. Any portable sampling device should be slowly and carefully lowered to the middle of the screened interval or slightly above the middle (e.g., 1-1.5 m below the top of a 3 m screen). This is to minimize excessive mixing of the stagnant water in the casing above the screen with the screened interval zone water, and to minimize resuspension of solids which will have collected at the bottom of the well. These two disturbance effects have been shown to directly affect the time required for purging. There also appears to be a direct correlation between size of portable sampling devices relative to the well bore and resulting purge volumes and times. The key is to minimize disturbance of water and solids in the well casing. F. Filtration Decisions to filter samples should be dictated by sampling objectives rather than as a fix for poor sampling practices, and field -filtering of certain constituents should not be the default. Consideration should be given as to what the application of field -filtration is trying to accomplish. For assessment of truly dissolved (as opposed to operationally dissolved [i.e., samples filtered with 0.45 pm filters]) concen- trations of major ions and trace metals, 0.1 pm filters are recommended although 0.45 pm filters are normally used for most regulatory programs. Alkalinity samples must also be filtered if significant particulate calcium carbonate is sus- pected, since this material is likely to impact alkalinity titration results (although filtration itself may alter the CO2 composition of the sample and, therefore, affect the results). Although filtration may be appropriate, filtration of a sample may cause a number of unintended changes to occur (e.g. oxidation, aeration) possibly leading to filtration -induced artifacts during sample analysis and uncertainty in the results. Some of these unintended changes may be unavoidable but the factors leading to them must be recognized. Deleterious effects can be minimized by consistent application of certain filtration guidelines. Guidelines should address selection of filter type, media, pore size, etc. in order to identify and minimize potential sources of uncertainty when filtering samples. In -line filtration is recommended because it provides better consistency through less sample handling, and minimizes sample exposure to the atmosphere. In -line filters are available in both disposable (barrel filters) and non - disposable (in -line filter holder, flat membrane filters) formats and various filter pore sizes (0.1-5.0 pm). Disposable filter cartridges have the advantage of greater sediment handling capacity when compared to traditional membrane filters. Filters must be pre -rinsed following manufacturer's recom- mendations. If there are no recommendations for rinsing, pass through a minimum of 1 L of ground water following purging and prior to sampling. Once filtration has begun, a filter cake may develop as particles larger than the pore size accumulate on the filter membrane. The result is that the effective pore diameter of the membrane is reduced and particles smaller than the stated pore size are excluded from the filtrate. Possible corrective measures include prefiltering (with larger pore size filters), minimizing particle loads to begin with, and reducing sample volume. G. Monitoring of Water Level and Water Quality Indicator Parameters Check water level periodically to monitor drawdown in the well as a guide to flow rate adjustment. The goal is minimal drawdown (<0.1 m) during purging. This goal may be difficult to achieve under some circumstances due to geologic heterogeneities within the screened interval, and may require adjustment based on site -specific conditions and personal experience. In -line water quality indicator parameters should be continuously monitored during purging. The water quality indicator parameters monitored can include pH, redox potential, conductivity, dissolved oxygen (DO) and turbidity. The last three parameters are often most sensitive. Pumping rate, drawdown, and the time or volume required to obtain stabilization of parameter readings can be used as a future guide to purge the well. Measurements should be taken every three to five minutes if the above suggested rates are used. Stabilization is achieved after all parameters have stabilized for three successive readings. In lieu of measuring all five parameters, a minimum subset would include pH, conductivity, and turbidity or DO. Three successive readings should be within ± 0.1 for pH, ± 3% for conductivity, ± 10 my for redox potential, and ± 10% for turbidity and DO. Stabilized purge indicator parameter trends are generally obvious and follow either an exponential or asymptotic change to stable values during purging. Dissolved oxygen and turbidity usually require the longest time for stabilization. The above stabiliza- tion guidelines are provided for rough estimates based on experience. H. Sampling, Sample Containers, Preservation and Decontamination Upon parameter stabilization, sampling can be initiated. If an in -line device is used to monitor water quality parameters, it should be disconnected or bypassed during sample collection. Sampling flow rate may remain at estab- lished purge rate or may be adjusted slightly to minimize aeration, bubble formation, turbulent filling of sample bottles, or loss of volatiles due to extended residence time in tubing. Typically, flow rates less than 0.5 L/min are appropriate. The same device should be used for sampling as was used for purging. Sampling should occur in a progression from least to most contaminated well, if this is known. Generally, volatile (e.g., solvents and fuel constituents) and gas sensitive (e.g., Fe", CH4, H2S/HS-, alkalinity) parameters should be sampled first. The sequence in which samples for most inorganic parameters are collected is immaterial unless filtered (dis- solved) samples are desired. Filtering should be done last and in -line filters should be used as discussed above. During both well purging and sampling, proper protective clothing and equipment must be used based upon the type and level of contaminants present. The appropriate sample container will be prepared in advance of actual sample collection for the analytes of interest and include sample preservative where necessary. Water samples should be collected directly into this container from the pump tubing. Immediately after a sample bottle has been filled, it must be preserved as specified in the site (QAPP). Sample preservation requirements are based on the analyses being performed (use site QAPP, FSP, RCRA guidance document [U. S. EPA, 1992] or EPA SW-846 [U. S. EPA, 1982] ). It may be advisable to add preservatives to sample bottles in a controlled setting prior to entering the field in order to reduce the chances of improperly preserving sample bottles or introducing field contaminants into a sample bottle while adding the preservatives. The preservatives should be transferred from the chemical bottle to the sample container using a disposable polyethylene pipet and the disposable pipet should be used only once and then discarded. After a sample container has been filled with ground water, a Teflon TM (or tin) -lined cap is screwed on tightly to prevent the container from leaking. A sample label is filled out as specified in the FSP. The samples should be stored inverted at 4°C. Specific decontamination protocols for sampling devices are dependent to some extent on the type of device used and the type of contaminants encountered. Refer to the site QAPP and FSP for specific requirements. I. Blanks The following blanks should be collected: (1) field blank: one field blank should be collected from each source water (distilled/deionized water) used for sampling equipment decontamination or for assisting well development procedures. (2) equipment blank: one equipment blank should be taken prior to the commencement of field work, from each set of sampling equipment to be used for that day. Refer to site QAPP or FSP for specific require- ments. (3) trip blank: a trip blank is required to accompany each volatile sample shipment. These blanks are prepared in the laboratory by filling a 40-mL volatile organic analysis (VOA) bottle with distilled/deionized water. V. Low -Permeability Formations and Fractured Rock The overall sampling program goals or sampling objectives will drive how the sampling points are located, installed, and choice of sampling device. Likewise, site - specific hydrogeologic factors will affect these decisions. Sites with very low permeability formations or fractures causing discrete flow channels may require a unique monitor- ing approach. Unlike water supply wells, wells installed for ground -water quality assessment and restoration programs are often installed in low water -yielding settings (e.g., clays, silts). Alternative types of sampling points and sampling methods are often needed in these types of environments, because low -permeability settings may require extremely low - flow purging (<0.1 L/min) and may be technology -limited. Where devices are not readily available to pump at such low flow rates, the primary consideration is to avoid dewatering of the well screen. This may require repeated recovery of the water during purging while leaving the pump in place within the well screen. Use of low -flow techniques may be impractical in these settings, depending upon the water recharge rates. The sampler and the end -user of data collected from such wells need to understand the limitations of the data collected; i.e., a strong potential for underestimation of actual contami- nant concentrations for volatile organics, potential false negatives for filtered metals and potential false positives for unfiltered metals. It is suggested that comparisons be made between samples recovered using low -flow purging tech- niques and samples recovered using passive sampling techniques (i.e., two sets of samples). Passive sample collection would essentially entail acquisition of the sample with no or very little purging using a dedicated sampling system installed within the screened interval or a passive sample collection device. A. Low -Permeability Formations (<O.1 L/min recharge) 1. Low -Flow Purging and Sampling with Pumps "portable or non -dedicated mode" - Lower the pump (one capable of pumping at <0.1 L/min) to mid -screen or slightly above and set in place for minimum of 48 hours (to lessen purge volume requirements). After 48 hours, use procedures listed in Part IV above regard- ing monitoring water quality parameters for stabiliza- tion, etc., but do not dewater the screen. If excessive drawdown and slow recovery is a problem, then alternate approaches such as those listed below may be better. b. "dedicated mode" - Set the pump as above at least a week prior to sampling; that is, operate in a dedicated pump mode. With this approach significant reductions in purge volume should be realized. Water quality parameters should stabilize quite rapidly due to less disturbance of the sampling zone. 2. Passive Sample Collection Passive sampling collection requires insertion of the device into the screened interval for a sufficient time period to allow flow and sample equilibration before extraction for analysis. Conceptually, the extraction of water from low yielding formations seems more akin to the collection of water from the unsaturated zone and passive sampling techniques may be more appropriate in terms of obtaining "representa- tive" samples. Satisfying usual sample volume requirements is typically a problem with this approach and some latitude will be needed on the part of regulatory entities to achieve sampling objectives. B. Fractured Rock In fractured rock formations, a low -flow to zero purging approach using pumps in conjunction with packers to isolate the sampling zone in the borehole is suggested. Passive multi -layer sampling devices may also provide the most "representative" samples. It is imperative in these settings to identify flow paths or water -producing fractures prior to sampling using tools such as borehole flowmeters and/or other geophysical tools. After identification of water -bearing fractures, install packer(s) and pump assembly for sample collection using low -flow sampling in "dedicated mode" or use a passive sampling device which can isolate the identified water -bearing fractures. VI. Documentation The usual practices for documenting the sampling event should be used for low -flow purging and sampling techniques. This should include, at a minimum: information on the conduct of purging operations (flow -rate, drawdown, water -quality parameter values, volumes extracted and times for measurements), field instrument calibration data, water sampling forms and chain of custody forms. See Figures 2 and 3 and "Ground Water Sampling Workshop -- A Workshop Summary" (U. S. EPA, 1995) for example forms and other documentation suggestions and information. This information coupled with laboratory analytical data and validation data are needed to judge the "useability" of the sampling data. VII. Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development funded and managed the research described herein as part of its in-house research program and under Contract No. 68-C4-0031 to Dynamac Corporation. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommenda- tion for use. VIII. References Backhus, D,A., J.N. Ryan, D.M. Groher, J.K. McFarlane, and P.M. Gschwend. 1993. Sampling Colloids and Colloid - Associated Contaminants in Ground Water. Ground Water, 31(3):466-479. Barcelona, M.J., J.A. Helfrich, E.E. Garske, and J.P. Gibb. 1984. A laboratory evaluation of groundwater sampling mechanisms. Ground Water Monitoring Review, 4(2):32-41. Barcelona, M.J. and J.A. Helfrich. 1986. Well construction and purging effects on ground -water samples. Environ. Sci. Technol., 20(11):1179-1184. Barcelona, M.J., H.A. Wehrmann, and M.D. Varljen. 1994. Reproducible well purging procedures and VOC stabilization criteria for ground -water sampling. Ground Water, 32(1):12- 22. Buddemeier, R.W. and J.R. Hunt. 1988. Transport of Colloidal Contaminants in Ground Water: Radionuclide Migration at the Nevada Test Site. Applied Geochemistry, 3: 535-548. Danielsson, L.G. 1982. On the Use of Filters for Distinguish- ing Between Dissolved and Particulate Fractions in Natural Waters. Water Research, 16:179. Enfield, C.G. and G. Bengtsson. 1988. Macromolecular Transport of Hydrophobic Contaminants in Aqueous Environ- ments. Ground Water, 26(1): 64-70. Gschwend, P.M. and M.D. Reynolds. 1987. Monodisperse Ferrous Phosphate Colloids in an Anoxic Groundwater Plume, J. of Contaminant Hydrol., 1: 309-327. Herzog, B., J. Pennino, and G. Nielsen. 1991. Ground -Water Sampling. In Practical Handbook of Ground -Water Moni- toring (D.M. Nielsen, ed.). Lewis Publ., Chelsea, MI, pp. 449- 499. Horowitz, A.J., K.A. Elrick, and M.R. Colberg. 1992. The effect of membrane filtration artifacts on dissolved trace element concentrations. Water Res., 26(6):753-763. Laxen, D.P.H. and I.M. Chandler. 1982. Comparison of Filtration Techniques for Size Distribution in Freshwaters Analytical Chemistry, 54(8):1350. McCarthy, J.F. and J.M. Zachara. 1989. Subsurface Transport of Contaminants, Environ. Sci. Technol., 5(23):496-502. McCarthy, J.F. and C. Degueldre. 1993. Sampling and Characterization of Colloids and Ground Water for Studying Their Role in Contaminant Transport. In: Environmental Particles (J. Buffle and H.P. van Leeuwen, eds.), Lewis Publ., Chelsea, MI, pp. 247-315. Parker, L.V. 1994. The Effects of Ground Water Sampling Devices on Water Quality: A Literature Review. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, 14(2):130-141. Penrose, W.R., W.L. Polzer, E.H. Essington, D.M. Nelson, and K.A. Orlandini. 1990. Mobility of Plutonium and Ameri- cium through a Shallow Aquifer in a Semiarid Region, Environ. Sci. Technol., 24:228-234. Puls, R.W. and M.J. Barcelona. 1989. Filtration of Ground Water Samples for Metals Analyses. Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, 6(4):385-393. Puls, R.W., J.H. Eychaner, and R.M. Powell. 1990. Colloidal - Facilitated Transport of Inorganic Contaminants in Ground Water: Part I. Sampling Considerations. EPA/600/M-90/023, NTIS PB 91-168419. Puls, R.W. 1990. Colloidal Considerations in Groundwater Sampling and Contaminant Transport Predictions. Nuclear Safety, 31(1):58-65. Puls, R.W. and R.M. Powell. 1992. Acquisition of Representa- tive Ground Water Quality Samples for Metals. Ground Water Monitoring Review, 12(3):167-176. Puls, R.W., D.A. Clark, B.Bledsoe, R.M. Powell, and C.J. Paul. 1992. Metals in Ground Water: Sampling Artifacts and Reproducibility. Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, 9(2): 149-162. Puls, R.W. and C.J. Paul. 1995. Low -Flow Purging and Sampling of Ground -Water Monitoring Wells with Dedicated Systems. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, 15(1):116-123. Ryan, J.N. and P.M. Gschwend. 1990. Colloid Mobilization in Two Atlantic Coastal Plain Aquifers. Water Resour. Res., 26: 307-322. Thurnblad, T. 1994. Ground Water Sampling Guidance: Development of Sampling Plans, Sampling Protocols, and Sampling Reports. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. U. S. EPA. 1992. RCRA Ground -Water Monitoring: Draft Technical Guidance. Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC EPA/530/R-93/001, NTIS PB 93-139350. U. S. EPA. 1995. Ground Water Sampling Workshop -- A Workshop Summary, Dallas, TX, November 30 - December 2, 1993. EPA/600/R-94/205, NTIS PB 95-193249, 126 pp. U. S. EPA. 1982. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA SW-846. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C. 10 Figure 2. Ground Water Sampling Log Project Well Depth Sampling Device Measuring Point Sampling Personnel Type of Samples Collected Site Screen Length Tubing type Well No. Otherinfor Well Diameter Information: 2 in = 617 ml/ft, 4 in = 2470 ml/ft: Vol,y, = rrrzh, Volsphe e = 4/3rr r3 Date Casing Type Water Level Is Figure 3. Ground Water Sampling Log (with automatic data logging for most water quality parameters) Project Well Depth Sampling Device Measuring Point Sampling Personnel Type of Samples Collected Site Screen Length Tubing type Well No. Otherinfor Well Diameter Information: 2 in = 617 ml/ft, 4 in = 2470 ml/ft: Vol,Y, = rrrzh, Volsphe e = 4/3rr r3 Date Casing Type Water Level 12