5001_ROSCANS_1994

LANDFILL CLOSURE &
TRANSFER STATION
- - ---- - - ------OPERATION PLAN
WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY
LANDFILL NO. 50-01
CULLOWHEE
JACKSON COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
JENSEN ENGINEERING
80 TEAGUE ROAD
MARSHALL, N.C. 28753
PROJECT NO. 93118

I. -INTRODUCTION
To pursue the permanent closure of the current Category 2 Municipal Solid
Waste Landfill (MSWLF) under the current closure regulations by the State
of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Solid Waste Management Rules 15A NCAC 13B as amended through
January 4, 1994, and the federal criteria as published in part 40 CFR Part
258 and revisions to 40 CFR 257 under authority of Subtitle D of the
Re —source Conservation and Recovery Act, the following in ormation is
provided for approval.
Western Carolina University County operated a MSWLF on a 31.5 acre tract
of land located within two and one half miles of its campus (see location
map, on the plan.)
The current landfill consists of a Category 2 (the landfilling of
municipal solid waste ceased prior to October 9, 1993), discrete landfill
area as delineated on the attached plans.
II. LANDFILL CLOSURE
A. Final contours for this portion of the landfill have
essentially reached the proposed final contours of the
original plan.
B. Final cover and cap system will be provided to have an 18
inch low -permeability layer of soil with a permeability of no
greater then 1 x 10 - 5 which is available on site in
quantities sufficient to cover the entire category (2) two
MSWLF. A minimum of (6) six inches of soil will be placed above
the low permeability cap system to encourage growth of native
planting and provide for erosion protection and to protect root
penetration into the cap system.
C. Permanent erosion control measures will be implemented as shown
on the attached plan which includes a riprap ditch line and
drainage directed to the ditch line by diversion berms.
D. Drainage Control will be accomplished with the use of diversion
berms and controlled cross slope of the landfill surface.
E. Vegetative cover will be provided upon completion of all cover
operations. The seeding, fertilizing and mulching will be in
accordance with the vegetative cover specifications on the
plans which include native grasses as included in the original
operational plan.

Page 2
II. con't
F. Leachate control will be provided if conditions warrant for
containment on site and properly disposed of —but at present
there is no evidence that there is a leachate problem from
the operation.
G. Written notification and certification of the facility
compliance with the closure conditions will be provided by
the owner/operator and his N.C. Registered Professional
Engineer.
H. An inspection by the NCDEHNR Division Representative
concerning compliance with the closure conditions will be
requested as soon as practicable and prior to the October 9,
1994 deadline.
III. POST -CLOSURE CONDITIONS
Post closure care will consist of maintaining all erosion control
storm drainage measures and vegetative cover in compliance with
the closure conditions as approved. A comprehensive water quality
monitoring program will be continued during the post closure time
period as required by the Division in accordance with the N.C.
Water Quality Monitoring Guidance Document for Solid Waste
Facilities. During the period of post -closure care attention will
be given to the potential for concentrations of explosive gases
and if conditions warrant measures will be designed to mitigate
any adverse effects.
Access to the closed MSWLF will be controlled by fencing and or
gate structures at the access road preventing unauthorized access
by the public. The final grading of the site is designed to
prevent ponding and any excessive settlement which appears to
provide a potential ponding situation will be dealt with as part
of the post closure care of the MSWLF. During Post -closure care
the Owner/operator will comply fully with current ground water
regulations.

t I -
IV. POST -CLOSURE OPERATIONS
To provide for solid waste collection and disposal after closure
1 the MSWLF, the University has applied for a temporary
construction permit for a transfer station to transfer MSW from
the proposed station sited within the boundary of the landfill
property to a remote permitted MSWLF. The above operation will be
sited a minimum of 100 feet from the closed MSWLF and will in no
way affect the closure/post-closure operations of the discrete MSWLF
unit.
A. TRANSFER STATION
1. Source of transferred waste will be 100% University generated
waste including office, academic, dormitory and cafeteria
All recycling is accomplished at the source. Destination of
transferred waste will be the Jackson County, Dillsboro (Public
Landfill.)
2. Proposed location within landfill facility; including buffer
distances to waste, property boundary, dwellings, wells,
streams, etc., as shown on attached plan.
3. There are no proposed management activities in addition to the
transfer of solid waste at this site. Recycling operations are
conducted at the source and yard waste is composed at a
different site. Total solid waste volume to be transferred is
estimated to be 400 tons per year.
4. Operational procedures to manage waste in a sanitary manner;
including wastewater, windblown waste, vector control, fire
control, etc. Waste will be dumped directly into watertight
containers.

Transfer Station Con't
_- -A. No wash down facilities areplanned for this site
since the majority of the solid waste is dry paper
and plastic materials with very little liquid and the
waste hauling containers have water tight seals.
B. The area is policed daily to collect any wind blown
trash.
C. Containers are hauled away daily at 4:00 P.M. so there
will be no problem with vector control.
D. Each truck hauling solid waste is equipped with a fire
extinguisher and the Cullowhee Volunteer Fire
Department is only three miles from the site.
5. Transition schedule; there are no additional waste
management activities planned for this site.
6. Determination that operation of these facilities will not
interfere in any way with the closure and post -closure
requirements of the MSWLF unit; Transfer of solid waste
within the MSWLF unit following closure will not interfere
with post closure cover operations because of its remote
location.
V. Addition Information From Western Carolina
A. Letter of Intent concerning landfill closure and request
for a temporary permit to operate a transfer station on the
landfill property.
B. Letter from Jackson County indicating that there is no zoning
at the landfill.

Page 5
C. Soils reports from LAW ENGINEERING TESTING COMPANY
concerning the density and perme-abil-it-y of the-avaia-bl-e---
soils to be used for final cover. While the soil testing
shows a permeability in the range of 4.5 to 2.7 x 10 -5, the
geotechnical consultants believe that by using two to three
percent moisture over optimum and or using a modified proctor
that the soil will be suitable for final cover providing a
permeability of 1.0 x 10 -5 or less.

OFFICE OF THE PHYSICAL PLANT
[phone]
September 27, 1993
Ms. Jan McHargue
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
3025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100
Winston-Salem, NC 27106-3203
Reference: Western Carolina University
Landfill Closure (Permit No. 50-01)
Dear Ms. McHargue:
The University will cease solid waste disposal activities at its
landfill on October 5, 1993. However, the landfill facility will
continue to be used as a collection site for solid waste
generated by the University. The solid waste will be collected
in 40 cubic yard containers rented from and hauled away by a
solid waste collector.
A closure plan is being developed by Jensen Engineering and will
include the siting of a convenience facility for placement of 40
cubic yard containers for deposit of University generated wastes.
As an interim, we request temporary approval to continue use of
the landfill facility for a waste management activity.
The following information is provided in accordance with DEHNR
memo updated August 1, 1993, page 5:
A. The solid waste is generated by activities in administrative,
academic, dormitory and cafeteria facilities. It also includes
litter that is collected around the campus. The collected waste
will be disposed of at a permitted MSWLF. A request for
proposals will be opened on October 1, 1993. We anticipate the
contract hauler will utilize Jackson County's landfill.
B. The location of the convenience facility is shown on the
,attached plan.
C. No other waste management activities are planned for the
landfill facility. Recycling/product separation is accomplished
at the source.
CULLOWHEE, NORTH CAROLINA 28723
Western Carolina University is one of the sixteen senior
restitutions of The University of North Carolina and an
affirmative action/equal opportunity employer.

Ms. Jan McHargue
September 27, 1993
Page 2
D. Operational procedures will be addressed in the permanent
application, if necessary, within 180 days of temporary approval.
Windblown waste will be policed daily by both the operator and
hauler.
E-. A -permanent app-lic-ation will be prepared (see par-agr-aph-D- ) .
F. The convenience facility is located in the borrow area, well
clear of the disposal area and will not interfere with closure or
post -closure activities of the MSWLF.
Please call if you require additional information.
Sincerely,
drew B. Comrie
Director of Physical Plant
ABC/rg
Attachment
c: Julian Foscue
Jim Patterson
George Jensen

m
MARCH 31, 1994
0
JACKSON COUNTY
AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
401 GRINDSTAFF COVE ROAD, SUITE 204
SYLVA, NORTH CAROLINA 28779
Mr. George Jensen
Jensen Engineering
80 Teague Rd.
Marshall, NC 28753
Dear Mr. Jensen:
This letter is written confirmation that Jackson County does not
have any zoning laws outside of municipal limits currently. Con-
sequently, any solid waste handling facility permitted upon the
property of the old Cullowhee Landfill would be an allowable land
usage.
If you have any questions, please call.
Since ely,
L. Massie, Director
Planning and Economic Development

' i r
171
1
- I ¢
I
O '
U
a`
-
C, -5 p o
i a o o v z Al
1
-- 1 � � � � i 1 i � ' I
o
-- a o a z v - -- -.el
0
+ w O OC iF ' , II 9
°C V
-,
z be0 i 1r
z�A �� I pO j (0'O'8'b)431�IOOW _
a aab'ONviS
LL% dsN 's3dnss3ad ; I j �I I w
a z 9-NINUN00
V ! ICE!
v V
no lvlxviHi
r�. (�47
vnn ldlxvlal I �'
,� Q w MOO S•S InOH11M
W '� CE I �WO0 a3NIdNOONf1 - I
Z vi 2AUM NWHIS-SS3 US/H1IM I I I �i III
'dW00 (13NIaNO.)Nn
cr. I Ism ll3MS
W 0
LV M
w N �313wOa01.H 1
•O ;
� o0Z N a3Nid °6
,�.II� '� 3/U35/M 00Z HS`dM i t
Juj
.� ! OIr
UJ
J S�.IWI� 3�Jtl�INIdHS I— I I I I
o --
u s�lwn �daed�ud
= � AllAdaV 3tA103dS
Z n 1NOO 1SIOW 9 'N30 'fvN
O1HOI3M imn
I I 1N31N00 S�1n1SI0W I'
- 7 (Il) S1SAlbNd 43N19V400 _ i
I W z H1d3O 3ldINVS
�1CL
„� 4 3d113_ldW'Sfr
W I �
—T—

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY ICST I NO
Western Carolina University
LAW Job No. AVE 2279
CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST
1. Date of Test : 11/9 to 11/13/90
II. Material Description: Sample 8 / Red Drown Sli Mi Fi-Co Sa Si
III.Material Condition Remolded
IV. Proctor Data /
Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 95.4
Optimum Moisture Content '%.) 24.1
V. Test Data:
Smcifio Gravity: 2.69
Dry Density (pcf): 94.6
initial Moisture Content (%): 27.0
Final Moisture Content (%.): 35.8
Sample Length (cm): 5.1
Sample Area (cm 2): 41.7
Head (cm): 351.7
Quantity of Water Passing Through Sample (cm-): 201.0
Elapsed Time (sec): 2,550
Temperature (0C): 23
Correction Factor : None
Coefficient of Permeability -k (cm/sec): 2.7 x 10-5
VI. Comments: None

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING
Western Carolina University
LAW Job No. AVE 2279
CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST
I. Date of Test : 11/9 to 11/13/90
II Material Description: Sample -A / Brown Red Sli- M Fi-Co sa sd
III.Material Condition Remolded
IV. Proctor Data /
Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 95.2
Optimum Mnisture Content K ) 23.6
V. Test Data:
Specific Gravity: 2.66
Dry Density (pcf): B6.5
Initial Moisture Content (%): 23.6
Final Moisture Content (%): 39.2
Sample Length (cm): 5.1
Sample Area (cm 2): 41.7
Head (cm): 351.7
(quantity of Water Passing Through Sample (cm-): 556.3
Elapsed Time (sec): 4,320
Temperature ( aC): 23
Correction Factor : None
Coefficient of Permeability -k (cm/sec): 4.5 x 10-5
VI. Comments: gone

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
V�
w 40
A
Z
}
F-
�+ 30--
u
F-
cc
J
a- 20
10
0
v
I
CH or OH
CL or OL
j
I '
I
I
I
I
HATCHED
AREA is
ML-CL
j
ML or OL
MH or OH
10 20 30
Location + Description
SAMPLE A
HAT. MOIST., :'. = 15.
• SAMPLE B
HAT. MOIST. , :: = 21 .
LV - Pion-k: i sc ous rir, -
Project No.: AWE-2279
Project: W C Y
Client:
Location:
40 50 60 70
LIQUID LIMIT
LL PL PI -200
Nv NP (None ( 31. 0
NV I HP ,None I 2-16. 0
Da.t e . 1 1-8-90
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
LAW ENGINEERING
ASTM D 2487-85
SM, Silty sand
SM, Silty sand
Remarks:
Fig. No.

n
r�
L
l 1 I
X+75 a.
% GRAVEL
?: SAND
% SILT
X CLAY
0.0
0.1
68.9
31.0
0.0
0.4
73.5
26.1
LL ! PI i D85 D60 D50 D30
1.04 0.31 0.16 I
0. 57 0.24 0.15 10.081
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Project No.: AVE-2279
Project: W C Y
;) Location: SAMPLE A
Location: SAMPLE B
Date: 11-8-90
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT
LAW EFT I 14EER I N G
D15 D10 Cc Cu
U-SC S i AASHTO
Remarks:
Figure No.

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA Test No.:
Date: 11-8-'_-�0
Project No.: AVE-2279
Project: W C Y
Sample Data
Location of (ample: SAMPLE .1
Sample Description:
USCS Class: Liquid limit:
AASHTO Class: Plasticity i nde:r:
Notes
Remarks:
Fig. 1\10 . .
Mechanical Analysis Data
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial After wash
Dry sample and tare= ? 7 1. 14 271.14
Tare = 3.00 0.00
Dry sample weight = 271.14 271.14
Minus #200 from wash= 0.0
Tare for cumulative weight retained= 0
Sieve Cumul. Wt. Percent
retained finer
0.375 inches 0.00 i00.0
# 4 0.30 9
# 10 13.49 95.0
# 20 51.47 81.0
it 40 91.19 66.4
# 60 120.18 55.7
# 140 156.60 42.2
it 200 187.13 31.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fractional Components
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
o 4- 3 in. = 0.0 3a GRAVEL = 0.1 % SAND = 68.9
FI14ES = 31.0
D85= 1.04 D60= 0.313 D50= 0.160

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA Test No.: 16
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11-9-90
Project. ^10. AVE-3379
- Project: vJ C Y - - - - -
Sample Data
Vocation of Sample: SAMPLE B
Sample Descript.i0n:
TjSC'S Class: Liquid limit:
AASHTO Class: Plasticity index:
Notes
------------------------------------------
Remarks:
Fig. No. .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mechanical Analysis Data
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial After wash
Dry sample ind tare= 285.25 285.25
Tare = 0.00 0.00
Dry sample weight = 285.25 285.25
Minus #200 from wash= 0.0
Tare for cumulative weight retained= 0
Sieve Cumul. Wt. Percent
retained finer
0.375 inches 0.00 100.0
# 4 1.18 99.6
# 10 6.22 97.8
# 20 25.86 90.9
# 40 64.13 77.5
# 60 110.78 61.3
i40 172.2 6.?'?.6
# 200 210.95 26.0
Fractional Components
% + -in. - 0 . 0 GRAVEL = 0 . 4 0 SAND = 73.5
FINES = 26.1
D85= 0.57 D60= 0.240 LSO= 0.155
D30= 0.0612

LAW ENGINEERING
STANDARD PROCTOR REPORT
ASTM-D 698
DATE : -
PROJE-C-T NUMBER: - --AVE- 2279
PROJECT NAME: CY
CLIENT:
SAMPLE NUMBER: CURVE #1
FIELD MOISTURE:
SOIL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSED USE:
SOURCE LOCATION:
SAMPLE A
105
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT
100
95
LBS
/FT3
90
15
20
MOISTURE - DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
25
30
WATER CONTENT — PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT
ZERO AIR VOID FOR:
G = 2.75
s
G n 2.70
s
G . 2.65
s
35
OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT 23.9 MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 95.1

LAW ENGINEERING
PROCTOR REPORT
DATE:
11-8-90
-PROJECT- NU BEI
AVE 2 -
_FR VJEC - NAME-:- ----
WCY
-CLIENT:
--
SAMPLE NUMBER:
CURVE #1
PROCTOR TYPE:
STANDARD ASTM-D 698
WEIGHT OF MOLD:
4220.00 grams
MOLD FACTOR:
30.06000
FIELD MOISTURE:
NUMBER OF POINTS:
4
SOIL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSED USE:
SOURCE LOCATION:
SAMPLE A
PROCTOR READINGS
NUMBER
WET SOIL & TARE
DRY SOIL & TARE
TARE
SOIL
& MOLD WEIGHT
1
500.00
410.60
0.00
5944.00
2
500.00
403.60
0.00
5998.00
3
500.00
396.40
0.00
6004.00
4
500.00
389.20
0.00
5996.00
PROCTOR RESULTS
NUMBER
MOISTURE CONTENT
DRY
DENSITY
1
21.8
93.8
2
23.9
95.1
3
26.1
93.7
4
28.5
91.6

LAW ENGINEERING
PROJECT NUMBER:
-
PROJECT-NAME:
CLIENT:
SAMPLE NUMBER:
FIELD MOISTURE:
SOIL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSED USE:
SOURCE LOCATION:
SAMPLE B
100
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT
95
LBS
/FT3
85
20
STANDARD PROCTOR REPORT
ASTM—D 698
90
279
CURVE #2
25
MOISTURE — DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
30
35
WATER CONTENT — PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT
ZERO AIR VOID FOR:
G . 2.75
s
G . 2.70
s
G . 2.65
s
40
OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT 24.7 MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 94.9

LAW ENGINEERING
PROCTOR REPORT
DATE: 11-8-90
PRO JECT=MUMBER- - - _ =A- VE 22-79
-PROJECT—NAME:
CLIENT:
SAMPLE NUMBER:
PROCTOR TYPE:
WEIGHT OF MOLD:
MOLD FACTOR:
FIELD MOISTURE:
NUMBER OF POINTS:
SOIL DESCRIPTION:
PROPOSED USE:
SOURCE LOCATION:
SAMPLE B
- -WCY -
CURVE #2
STANDARD ASTM-D 698
4220.00 grams
30.06000
�. I
NUMBER WET SOIL & TARE
1
500.00
2
500.00
3
500.00
4
500.00
PROCTOR READINGS
DRY SOIL & TARE
406.40
399.20
391.80
384.50
PROCTOR RESULTS
NUMBER MOISTURE CONTENT
1 23.0
2 25.3
3 27.6
4 30.0
TARE SOIL & MOLD WEIGHT
0.00
5969.00
0.00
6012.00
0.00
5985.00
0.00
5962.00
DRY DENSITY
94.2
94.8
91.7
88.8

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING
1A� q rn co re b� U*4 W,vs � k y
LAW Job No. A VC 7-7.79
CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST
I. Date of Test: al-114o -- 11/0�46
II. Test Location:5A&PLC A Depth:
III. 'Material Description: T5ro..m, P","d
IV Material Condition: kx-md kt�e4
V. Proctor Data:
Maximum Dry Density (pcf): 45 2-
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 7-3.4
VI. Test Data:
Dry Density (pcf) : $& S
Initial Moisture Content (%): 7---3.6
Final Moisture Content (y): 3'%2-
Sample Length (cm): 5.1
Sample Area (cm2): 9/.7
Head (cm) : 3 5/. 7
Quantity of Water Passing Through Sample (cm3):5 54,3
Elapsed Time (sec): 111126
Temperature (oC): 7-1-
Correction Factor: 4kiA)f
Coefficient of Permeability -k (cm/sec): i4, 5 x 10 S
VII . Comments: NeN6

CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITYv TEST SYSTEM NO Z
CELL NO K- I
JOB NO 7Z?`) BORING NO 7AMPI# DEPTH
DATETECHNICIAN" 1ktx-.i/ CHECKED
WEIGHT TUBE & SOIL(lb)
WEIGHT SOILOb' 3G2.9
LENGTH OF TUBE(in)
END SPACE(in)
LENGTH OF SOIL(in)
VOLUME SOIL(cu ft) o,o07`t$7
WET UNIT WEIGHT(pcf) /06.4
SAMPLE TYPEa_D_ES_CR.I.P_T_10N —
11 . vq& S/ +x i F-C moo, s
DIAMETER(D) ZgZ in �9 cm
HEIGHT(L) �.yo in 5.011 cm
AREA(A) (, �7 sq in Y sq cm
CELL PRESSURE(psi) 3 Z
FORE PRESSURE(psi) 3o
BACK PRESSURE(psi) zS
h(.psi) 5 X 70.34 = sl• 7 h(cm)
TEMP�Z7-- (Co)
VISCOSITY CORR(RT)��
K= 0XLXRT
h X A X t
051.7)(9t, 4�(937d)
MOISTURE INITIAL FINAL
WET WEIGHT(gr) Yo5,5°
DRY WEIGHT(gr) 2_93.5G Z9T,S7
WEIGHT WATER(gr) 69,31/ �►z,oz
MOISTURE %
PAN `fq
WATER TABLE - FT
TIME
ELP TIME(t)
READING
FLOW cc
ST
END
MIN
SEC
ST
END
/o:z
(o"yr
t
s�to
7,4 9
0,0
V.
0:06
tt'tq
(3
7-(67
L0
z3.7
//:
(j:33�
12,�_
760
zq
017 '
7-t0
-3,01
3 �12_
11
660
Z3,5
1,
77—t
:11
`?'ZS
I 1
660
z�L, 5
(, S
Z,3,D
1 :t 1
-� : sl
to i
6 3 0
7-d.
9
zs�, a
ToYo l Tne � � T,-W(Q) = y!.
CORRECTED (Q X?gzL)

i
LAIC E.NGINttRING !E! _GHEE-
t JOB NAM.,
GEOTECHNICAL. ENVIRONMENTAL BYDATE
&-CONS-T-RUC-T-ION-MATERIALS
t
CONSULTANTS ! CHECKED -DATE -
!
'-�J
I
zY; Y
7-4,3
CAC13QA-fICJ a
11 kkM, pAUEt-
g5. (G q : 3. 911-714{;,r.
gs,17g = 1.933_/J,v.
C'o�Zy v
Vc. d
V.113 _ 3.6 33 �/4y
`il.l0 3.73q
4V6 _ 3 695ylmv
FORM 17

a -1 L) e -
,fall K-
;7" 7
'N I
WC U
T-'
-2 77q 1,0 MNMER AVC
T 1:: T.
3 Z-3.7 It
ZY., 7 0, c
-'H A t-
2-
F T R' I C i 'i -11A F 1E T I I-'!E I-F.---F-, r
1,3 3 -- i
07
0,6 0,0
L24
4f tj
7;
zy 9
0,0
17—
ter If
1113
Z-3, 0 7-17
562 -HT
1/0,
L FT
--HT.
I DATE TIME: iLEFI i
R T (31+T
1/ 41*
2-� 71
0.6
_7y
3.7
CIA
.7. J.
C. A7 E. I F I i", U: i
I I DATE I T I ME RIGHT
,- iLEFT !LEFT I

32- JOB
wc U
AV C_
P' E
0. t�
Tl
24 --IA,
T T l,'E
'FIHE
1 Cj: - F
LI
i Fe. I T
yr.
T Mf!7
'ATE T
GHT
LEF I ME T
C:3HT. I
I DATE I T 1 ME, L E F T
c3iA-r
C'-
F,. I GL H T
CHANGE
C HA i E
A I 1:LEFT
I GHT
DATE T I IME i LEFT
T
--HT
;RIGHT

LAW ENGINEERING TESTING CO
JO 8 NO AVE 2z-7q
REMOLDED SAMPLE
sAsfPZ"'- A
CELL Lr l
BORING NO DEPTH ;DATE t 9 to
LTESTED 01 1- 1osp-
JOB NAME —w�
CHECKED
OPTIMUM MOISTURE Z3•�, %
MAX DRY DENSITY 75-.2- pcf
Q�
I'• . 1
�'
COMPACTED TO 0(%tF/PROCTOR
AT �"3' 6 % MOISTURE
0/0
WET UNIT WEIGHT L�2 ,(, pcf
MOISTURE ZL,'y
Initial Moisture
Content
(I;ot Plate)
Soil Wet= 7-01-12- grs
Soil
Soil Dry= I40.31 grs
Wet= Z� U grs
Soil
Dry-- ! 5 EL grs
o Moisture ZO, 3
n R5 Moisture Z5• G
'3eoop
Actual Moisture Content
N P , F%Q NQ (Oven Dried)
lo.$ Soil Wet=Soo.Bl
grs (min, 500grs)
`{^C z`f. 9d Soil Dry- Yoj. %
grs
% Moisture Z7-, $
TUBE NO 3A
TUBE DIAMETER 7-$-7-L
in
TUBE LENGTH
in
SOIL LENGTH
7,0
,n
TUBE WEIGHT
S7sj
gr
SOIL WEIGHT _
3GZ.9
gr
TOTAL
738.6
537.2-
qr
VOLUME _0.
Or�7 5I19S
cu f t
WEIGHT
Ib
WEIGHT
36Z, 9
gr
WEIGHT
gr/in
10.5
TUBE NO
TUBE DIAMETER
TUBE LENGTH
in
SOIL LENGTH
in
in
TUBE WEIGHT
gr
SOIL WEIGHT
gr
TOTAL
gr
VOLUME
cuff
WEIGHT
Ib
WEIGHT
gr
WEIGHT
gr/in
TUBE NO
TUBE DIAMETER
in
TUBE LENGTH
in
SOIL LENGTH
in
TUBE WEIGHT
gr
SOIL WEIGHT
gr
TOTAL
gr
VOLUME
cu f t
WEIGHT
Ib
WEIGHT
gr
WEIGHT
gr/in

FHIJU I UH UAIA SHEET
SC
U.
U
n.
- 5 r_
r
tr-
z Sy
W
C
c�
�z
---
--------
MOLD NO?,-,,, r�
MOISTURE %
MOLD WT 422 °
WATER CONTENT
CAN
NO
WET WT
SOIL
DRY WT
SOIL
WEIGHT
WATER
%
MOISTURE
c4_►
s �o
�►,0 6
�5,y
zi,�
R,
'411,,.4
356,
ion
ZC,
MOLD VOL(cu ft) L, ° C,
COMPACTED
SAMP
SOIL +
MOLD (qr)
SOIL -
MOLD(gr)
SOIL WT
LBS
WETUNIT
WEIGHT
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT
WATER
ADDED
55q 41
172 y
�, F o
Pq, Z
s9�8'
1�7�
�,S Z
�►�, P
S�`,
�� o
zooq
���Y
3-S
�� F,z
5.7, F
L
r1�,7
5 1,
Zoe
JOB NOA�L 2-Z25 JOB NAME _ w c Y
JOB LOCATION S4� ,glr A
CLIENT
CURVE NO I
TEST METHOD ST])
DESCRIPTION
PROPOSED USE
SOURCE LOCATION
OPTIMUM -MOISTURE I°lo)
MAXIMUM CRY DENSITY
FIELD MOISTURE
WETWT
DRY WT /y o
WTWATER 7'0,t
%MOISTURE_
PAN
RUN BY a k DATE -
CALCULATED -i Ic DATE
CHECKED DATE

5,1,.l
Celt
V-
5
1,7
�5 -7
157.
7 T,'IE
RI C HT DA HE t'E 'I -EFT 5 17cq4o-�!
I -JT
0,12.
i T- I mvl-E
T
T M� 'Y
I M-i T "D A T F F T I Q T GHT
T TI i'l E i LEFT I P'l G H T: I i DA TE T 1 ME LEFT FR I GHT
4a
F I i,'.E LEFT
'I ir -i- H T
C I N G E
DATE I T I ME i L.;- F T
!RIGHT

Q:C-LL 0 - I i U-1
WC
J i MMER
AVE 2Z-79
P R' E
-T;177
'VI 2- 10-- L41
5(c.L4
41B
71 1 -9
R' I C i ljii FE'
1 T Ulf-
1-Er
- -G!--cr
59-0
Q to
Vvr:
4 -7
4'-Zz
(D.(O
4:.Tq
tora
Coto.?
1 7
1515 cc-
:7--- 55
55.5
-2.0
-4*. 3Lo
0.0
58,0
1 �IrV
.rut.
i
T
A -Z
51,3
518.3
1 Rl r3T
CIA T!7- rH
2-1- F- (GHT
3:,57;:Z
O
I 44.4
,.I E
LEFT
FR GHT
I LEFT
f-'l G H T.
L T 1, E
Z-
T P D ".E
-H-r
I;--': E LEFT rN, i GHT DATE ITINE ILEFT ::RIGHT

LA'S'✓=,iGINEERING T ESTING CO
J 0 8 0_, VC _z _7 9- -
JOB MAIM E __L_)L0
REMOLDED SAMPLE
BORING NO
OP71,,1UM M0_IS7URE 2-4,/ 0/0
MAX DRY DENSITY 15, 9 pcf
COMPACTED TO %OFPROCTOR
AT �z5: I
4
°o MOISTURE
Z. Sa
% = L 5,
WET UNIT WEIGHT - 107.1 '/ pcf
MOISTURE 2?7
Initial roisture Content
Wot Plate)
Soil Wet= Za8'L49 ars
Soil Wet= grs
Soil Dr, -- yl 6 7 z;� Qrs
Soil Dry-- grs
Moisture Z
Moisture
Actual Moisture Content
(Oven Dried)
g41.od
Soil Wet=Jq4&.�9 qrs (min. 500grs)
Soil Dry- �17q 7 ars
% Moisture Zy, S
Pan R.1'C r
MOISTURE Car= AT 'TIME OF REMOIDING
0
HOT PIA7LE10= DRIED
DEPTH--_
DATE �' 9 Ro
TESTED BYr'.6r!fas,
CHECKED
TUBE NO 3A
TUBE DIAMETER z.87G in
TUBE LENGTH
in
SOIL LENGTH Z_O
1n
TUBE WEIGHT __ -1S 7
gr
SOIL WEIGHT �a -56S /
gr CyA
TOTAL _ gYd,sr
—or qMY
VOLUME 4.00751K
tuft
WEIGHT — D_ 805
Ib
WEIGHT 365�. /
or
WEIGHT 1S-b `�
gr/in
`wry- 713 ?
TUBE NO
TUBE DIAMETER
TUBE LENGTH
in
in
SOIL LENGTH
in
TUBE WEIGHT
or
SOIL WEIGHT
9r
TOTAL
4r
VOLUME
cuff
WEIGHT
Ib
WEIGHT
or
WEIGHT
TUBE NO
Win
TUBE DIAMETER
in
TUBE LENGTH
in
SOIL LENGTH
in
TUBE WEIGHT
—or
SOIL WEIGHT
or
TOTAL
or
VOLUME
cuft
WEIGHT
Ib
WEIGHT
or
WEIGHT
gr/in

r-rxuu I vrZ UHIiA -Drir- c I
5y
57
IF�
�'p
Lp -L� t /- t 6 ti ZQj fe
MOLD NO ?" V' s S �O
MOISTURE %
MOLD WT 9 ZZ o
WATER CONTENT
CAN
NO
WET WT
SOIL
DRY WT
SOIL
WEIGHT
WATER
%
MOISTURE
o
3 99 Z
l 0 0, �
MOLD VO L(cu f t) 1 , o 4
COMPACTED
SAMP
SOIL +
MOLD (gr)
SOIL —
MOLD(gr)
SOIL WT
LBS
WETUNIT
WEIGHT
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT
WATER
ADDED
9
I-)
.?, F G
1
914, 1
N+r-
�o/Z
1--)1 Z
1,5.3'
11
9 4, r
o
S�S Fj—
17, 1-
9
CL
1--)4 L
,Ll
Fy,
JOB No 4vF- -73'7 9 JOB NAME _ wc FIELD MOISTURE
JOB LOCATION Sa,,,�lc_ a
WETWT
CLIENT DRY WT ti�
CURVE NO 2 WTWATER 7a�
TEST METHOD S-rZ %MOISTURE__
DESCRIPTION PAN
PROPOSED USE
SOURCE LOCATION RUN BY DATE
OPTIMUM -MOISTURE t%) CALCULATED DATE
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (A�f) 9s. `� CHECKED DATE

LAW ENGINEERING
GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL
&=C O N S TRU N O N=MATERIALS
CONSULTANTS
-5PC<IFK' 4kAJ I-r ,
�14SG 61 /
hz0 ,J-
A1ew
I4y.GS
Otsp(.
5.6.
mo�4"� eow.icg 2 `f, 5z
JOB NO. AVE z z) 9 SHEET OF
JOB NAME t/Cu(
BY ATE �l�o/4D
CHECKED BY DATE
FORM 17

I I V V 1 VI\ VP'11 r1 V 11 L_Le 1
LL
U
a. 7
1—
z S ��
W
0
} S^
LIC
0
� cl
(7
MOLD NO
MOISTURE %
MOLD WT cI 7 7 J
WATER CONTENT
CAN
NO
WET WT
SOIL
DRY WT
SOIL
WEIGHT
WATER
%
MOISTURE
Ll
3 74, q
Z
I i o r
Z- S
t
MOLD VOL(cu ft)
COMPACTED
SAMPLE
SOIL +
MOLD (gr)
SOIL —
MOLD(gr)
SOIL WT
L13S
WETUNIT
WEIGHT
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT
WATER
ADDED
?S/-/ //
1-)2 (4
Pq, L
•2
'5f
Goo
7,
7, F
JOB NOA2e 11-75 JOB NAME w C, Y
JOB LOCATION A
FIELD MOISTURE
WETWT
CLIENT DRY WT /y'
CURVE NO I WTWATER ��
TEST METHOD STD %MOISTURE
DESCRIPTION PAN
PROPOSED USE l N
SOURCE LOCATION -G S '� RUN BY k DATE
OPTIMUM -MOISTURE (%) a3• CALCULATED _b DATE I1-5 -S
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcfj CHECKED DATE

rmuu I un uiAiA JC1CC I
•) a
MOLD NO
b t-7 LY t
MOISTURE %
MOLD WT y 2 z 0
WATER CONTENT
CAN
NO
WET WT
SOIL
DRY WT
SOIL
WEIGHT
WATER
%
MOISTURE
3 -7/, 'T"�
1- i . z
?— L
l
3)'41,)"
z)
a
MOLD VOL(cu ft) .L a
COMPACTED
SAMPLE
SOIL +
MOLD (gr)
SOIL -
MOLD NO
SOIL WT
L8S
WET UNIT
WEIGHT
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT
WATER
ADDED
9 I,
JOB N0 42F_ -��7S JOB NAME `^Jc `i FIELD MOISTURE
JOB LOCATION 5�,��/� 3
WETWT
CLIENT DRY WT k)
CURVE NO z WTWATER 24�,
TEST METHOD S7-Z %MOISTURE
DESCRIPTION PAN
PROPOSED USE
SOURCE LOCATION RUN BY 7 1c _ DATE r' 5
OPTIMUM -MOISTURE (%) A,� CALCULATED �� DATE
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcf) CHECKED DATE

LAW ENGINEERING TESTING CO
ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST
JOB NAME .11r Y
BORING NODEPTH
SAMPLE DESCRIPTIONl��n )LO , -
cr
w
a
3
F-
z
w
U
cr
w
CL
SAMPLE CLASSIFICATION #�-
DATE 0- -7' G O
TECHNICIAN
C H-FP ..K-E
CALCULA-TF-D BY
CONTAINER NUMBER
TYPE OF TEST
LL
LL
LL
PL
PL
NUMBER OF BLOWS (LL)
WEIGHT WET SOIL + CAN
WEIGHT DRY SOIL + CAN
WEIGHT OF WATER
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER
WEIGHT DRY SOIL
WATER CONTENT
W
20 30 40
NUMBER OF BLOWS, N, FOR 1/2" CLOSURE
PA N
NATURAL MOISTURE
0
WET WEIGHT SOIL + CAN
, 1
DRY WEIGHT SOIL + CAN
qo-gy
OF WATER
L4. 9 7
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER
WEIGHT OF DRY SOIL
2q.9
WATER CONTENT %
CONTAINER NO.
/ILo.3
�"II
LIQUID LIMIT NL
PLASTIC LIMIT
PLASICITY INDEX
NOTE' LIQUID LIMIT IS WATER CONTENT
AT WHICH 25 BLOWS ARE REQUIRED
TO CLOSE THE GROOVE 1/2 INCH
DRAW BEST STRAIGHT LINE THROUGH
POINTS DETERMINED BY LIQUID LIMIT
TEST TO FIND WATER CONTENT AT 25 BLOWS
25 BLOW LINE MUST BE BRACKETED BY
LL TEST POINTS

LAW ENGINEERING TESTING CO
% FINER
JOB NO. �� -? 2 `��� BORING NO. �rarrtQ�,-- � DEPTH
-- JOB NAME \A]
DATE U-7` Qn TECHNICIAN �sl(� CHECKED
WET W E_i-G-H_T_ (g m)_
3I_(D-Q Z
DRY WEIGHT(gm)
2r71 . lq
MOISTURE %
I(o u
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION-�'lJ�t�-�1 �L4C
SIEVE NO,
DI A.
M.M.
WEIGHT RETAINED
% RETAINED
% PASSING
SPECIFICATIONS
O
Z.O
1 . y
4
I.
I Lin
PA N
I �39 go

LAW ENGINEERING TESTING CO
% FINER
--2- ig BORING NO, -/CIA- R DEPTH
-90 TECHNICIAN �� CHECKED
(gm)295.
25
211w.Lo
nn ''��
l�0
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION "i
S 1 I -p— r
SIEVE NO.
DIA'
M. M.
WEIGHT RETAINED
% RETAINED
% PASSING
SPECIFICATIONS
.18
I
2
40
60
10.
U o
1"72.2(o
'L�o.9S
Z1S• 40

j LAW ENGINEERING TESTING CO
ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST
DATE 1 1 -_7- O
(� TECHNICIAN 2
- - .1nR ►�uToFp _ ���=�_7-Z�-`� GHECK�6
J 0 B NAME _ -\t` )- �f- CA LC-U-LA-T-ED-a-Y-_
BORING NO C� �- DEPTH
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
c S a- . s
w
W
F—
Q
3
F-
z
W
U
ce
W
CL
SAMPLE CLASSIFICATIONim��e.
CONTAINER NUMBER
(Q
14 k
Z.
TYPE OF TEST
LL
LL
LL
PL
PL
NUMBER OF BLOWS (LL)
WEIGHT WET SOIL + CAN
WEIGHT DRY SOIL + CAN
WEIGHT OF WATER
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER
02
I
Ill $O
lonto
II•o$
WEIGHT DRY SOIL
WATER CONTENT
10 20 30 40
NUMBER OF BLOWS, N, FOR 1/2" CLOSURE
PA N
NATURAL MOISTURE %
WET WEIGHT SOIL + CAN
I
DRY WEIGHT SOIL + CAN
Q. Q
WEIGHT OF WATER
4. L
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER
I I.3S
WEIGHT OF DRY SOIL
2q.145
WATER CONTENT %
'L)•
CONTAINER NO.
ZO
LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTIC LIMIT
PLASICITY INDEX
NOTE' LIQUID LIMIT IS WATER CONTENT
AT WHICH 25 BLOWS ARE REQUIRED
TO CLOSE THE GROOVE I/2 INCH
DRAW BEST STRAIGHT LINE THROUGH
POINTS DETERMINED BY LIQUID LIMIT
TEST TO FIND WATER CONTENT AT 25 BLOWS
25 BLOW LINE MUST BE BRACKETED BY
LL TEST POINTS

LAW E G'INEERING
GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
—I &-CONSTRUCTION-MATERIALS
�< CONSULTANTS
5AJK0L-r- A
S VEC (f1C G ZTTY
�11 VW.
7-q-7
. /Z
�0�4!
(I6,$Ss
/lew �oJa!
(.SS.lz
Ois P(.
l (.1-b
hy-
/V 0 ► SC� u S 90
JOB NO.4-f-, ��7�SHEET OF
JOB NAME Lt)(_V
BY�1�S�.� aDAT-E iF�z- 4�
l
CHECKED BY DATE
FORM 17

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING
WesEarw Care (1,zc,_, �-i1L ve-�s'� �y
LAW Job No. AYE �z79
CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST
I. Date of Test: il/glgo--11/13(go
II. Test Location:3A,*AC.E 13 Depth:
III. Material Description: Q-4
grewr• St ju i
IV Material Condi-tion: - p,.el14.t
V. Proctor Data:
Maximum Dry Density (pcf) : 45-`f
Optimum Moisture Content
VI. Test Data: Gce L.r.i
c
Dry Density (pcf): SY,6
Initial Moisture Content (y.) : z7.0
Final Moisture Content (Y.) : -35•B
Sample Length (cm): 5_1
Sample Area (cm2) : 'qE• 7
Head (cm) : 3547
Quantity of Water Passing Through Sample (cm3): 7z(.0
Elapsed Time (sec) : z-,SSo
Temperature (oC):'ZZ
Correction Factor: .flos g
Coefficient of Permeability -k (cm/sec): Z. 7 x 10 S
VII. Comments: Neill£

CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST SYSTEM NO L
CELL NO 6-1.6-1
JO B NO AVk -z"7779 BORING N0��E 13 DEPTH
J O-B-N-A-M E WC- q
DATE "A 0 TECHNICIAN fi M657� CHECKED
WEIGHT TUBE & SOIL(Ib)
WEIGHT-TUBE(lb)
WEIGHT SOIL(" �i6S.1
LENGTH OF TUBE(in)
END SPACE(in)
LENGTH OF SOIL(in) 7--00
VOLUMESOIL(cu ft) e-nn-7'fS75
WET UNIT WEIGHT(pcf) f07.5
SAMPLE TYPE a DESCRIPTION
Z. 17
DIAMETER(D) F-,6=:P in 7. ZI cm
HEIGHT(L) Z.00 in S,O$ cm
AREA(A) 4,1J: sq in-9L ZZ sq cm
CELL PRESSURE(psi) '37-
FORE PRESSURE(psi) -30
BACK PRESSURE(psi)z5
h(,psi) S X70.34= 35'/,7 h(cm)
TEMP Zz- (Co)
VISCOSITY CORR(RT)_
K= Q X L X R T
h X A X t
IG = C20 t. 0 5, 05 0
( -351.-7yr.7gY 7-550
IQ_Q_j FTC S( 41: F,C Sa_ s"
..Z7x Lc1s
MOISTURE INITIAL FINAL
WET WEIGHT(gr) -'445, 1 370.3g
DRY WEIGHT(gr) 22.2-7-3--5
WEIGHT WATER(gr) n 4,6.
MOISTURE % Z7.0 4-5,;-4
PA N TEE
WATER TABLE FT
l0Z 9
TIME
ELP TIME(t)
READING
FLOW cc
ST
END
MIN
S C
04e
t6cK
it/
9? j
95,
lesf 7
!/:oo
7YZo
!. 7
k'7 i`
95.7
l�:des
11.1.5
7
92c
LZ
48.9
4°77
ct�
/It
7
yZ©
0.5
y`a,
T - 1 Time I To-[q1(Q) = z8
CORRECTED (QXO,7.) z�ti

NC DEPARTMENT OF E2, _ 1RONMENT, HEALTH AND NATUR- , RESOURCES
Division of Solid waste Management
Solid waste Section
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT '
Type of Faci l i Permi t �� county+
- _ -
Name -of Facility dfflE i. r �? i� Location
Date of Last Evaluation
I. Permit Conditions FollowedK Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
i
I
I
II. Operational Requirements Followed y Yes No
i
15A N.C_ Admin. Code 13B Section <
�I A. Specific Violation(s) by number and letter.
I
I
V fig
I
j III. Other Violations of Rule or Law
i
I
IV. Evaluator
's Ccmmients a i'1 � JV t.+� �$'1 �'.f �i"►? i / � 1� t C l r' a,-m ek d
V. Continuation Page Required? Yes No Receiving Signature
Evaluation Date 7 Solid waste Sq tiony�ii"-
DENNR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part II Canary Central office Part III Pink: RegionaL Office)
Solid waste Section (Review 7/%)

NC DEPARTMENT OF L .'IRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATUi—L RESOURCES
Division of Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE KAJI&GENENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type of Facility ­,))%�,, �Wf, Permit # y county
V
Name of FaciL--. e�cLocation
(j
Date of Last Evaluation
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
II. Operational Requirements Followed Yes
15A N.C- Admin. Code 13B Section o yo
A. Specific Violation(s) by number and Letter.
111. Other Violations of Rule or Law
No
4
IV. Evaluator's Comments j10bb0L5 4104el 19/0 �ZtO'AAA C- 4,L:'Ln)rAoe(
0"
r
V. Continuation Page Required? -Yes No Receiving Signature
Evaluation Date r 1 Solid Waste Section
DEHNR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part II Canary: Central Office Part III Pink- Regional Office)
Solid Waste Section (Review 7/94)

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid waste Management
Solid Waste Section
SOLID WASTE KANAGENENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type -of -Facility. Permi t # county— A)
I
Nam of Facility. W,eS1c,,Aj W Al Location 1A 1�?34,6116w%'<A�
Date of Last Evaluation g,
I. Permit Conditions Followed Yes No N/A
A. Specific Condition(s) V
II. Operational Requirements Followed Yes No
15A N-C. Admin. Code 13B Section
A. Specific Violation(s) by number and Letter.
Lek(
R// I;, lik(
41A. 1/mId/.o1
III. Other Violations of Rule or Law
lij
IV. Evaluator's Comments 4A11-1Qr11_4. ///u po7—geyel_ty tet ;7-r 51xlck,— Oer Y
'>55 A/'�'r/ A/c tF � C
re, e.. /G
V. Continuation Page Required 7 Yes No Receiving Signature
Evaluation Date Solid Waste Section
DEHNR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part II Canary: Central (Yffice Part III Pink: Regional Office)
Solid Waste Section (Review 7/%)

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Solid waste Management
Solid waste Section
SOLID WASTE MA ME)ENT FACILITY EVALUATION REPORT
Type -of FaciTit1/ 14+ ir, 1 / f ; Permit ii County
Name of Facility rt��iM ?t'i�,e dl �� Lcation,.)R 13v., OW —
Date of Last Evaluation % L/ -5 / -3
1. Permit Conditions Followed Yes _
A. Specific Condition(s) Violated
No N/A
II. Operational Requirements Followed Yes No
15A N-C. Admin. Code 138 Section
A_ Specific Violations) by number and letter.
bu t'k.
l �l�C r S I�'. i� f� c.,�.J (,� r' � r /• G•�! ra GJfi t
III. other Violations of Rule or Law
p B '
IV. Evaluator's Comtents7hdbw IiG, Jnrr% /^fC l! J /a+r (l toy" CC%) t? (2cr 1 l •f ��Gl fie^
t'f�, l" � t r F,a,, - � /•l� �' /fit-� �Jc � w
V. Continuation Page Required? Yes No Receiving Sigsatu
Evaluation Date e' '� - Solid Waste Secti
r)EHNR 3793 (Part I White: Facility Part II Canary: C
oLid Waste Section (Review 7/%)
traC`bffice Part III Pink: Regional Office)

AMTH RMEMEMUT
Civil Engineering * Site Development
541/z Broadway, Suite 200
Asheville, NC 28801
October 20, 1994
Ms. Jan McHargue
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27106-3203
RE: Western Carolina University
Project Number: 93118
Dear Jan
This is our official certification that the cap system for Western
Carolina University Landfill No. 50-01 for the Category 2 MSWLF' has been
completed in accordance with the Solid Waste Permit, the conditions of
Permit Rule .0510 and additional Rule .1627 for the Category 2 MSWLF.
This final cap system was in place with the additional six inch earth
cover for plant growth all erosion control measures and primary seeding
prior to October 9, 1994.
Enclosed are the certified soils reports concerning the low permeability
18 inch cap system showing a permeability of less than 1 x 10 - 5 CM/SEC
as required.
Please note our change of address:
Sincerely,
Jens ep--Epgineefing
IKAMI�
!M\f�
en
Phone:
Fax:
7
XC: Andy Comrie W/Encl.
Jim Patterson W/Encl.t$`
JENSEN ENGINEERING
54 1/2 Broadway, Suite 200
Asheville, N.C. 28801
(704) - 252 - 0537
(704) - 252 - 4428
Registered P.E. In: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina & Ten:)essee
Phone [phone] FA-: [phone]

LAW
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
July 15, 1994
Mr. Roger F. Turk
Western Carolina University
Physical Plant
Cullowhee, North Carolina 28723
Subject: Report of Permeability and Field Density Testing
Western Carolina University
Landfill Closure and Transfer Station - Landfill No. 50-01
Jackson County, North Carolina
Law Engineering Job 2430227902
Dear Mr. Turk:
As verbally authorized by Mr. Roger F. Turk on June 6, 1994, and referencing our Ce,ifirming
Proposal, dated June 20. 1994, Law Engineering has performed permeability and fielt density
testing on the soil cap placed over Landfill No. 50-01. This report summarizes t;ie work
performed and presents the results of our testing.
Permeability Testing
Two samples of the soil cap were obtained for permeability testing. These samples were obtained
by driving a four inch diameter tube into the soil cap after removing 2 to 6 inches o organic
material. These samples were marked with identifying sample numbers and then sealed t, prevent
disturbance and loss of moisture. The samples were then transported to our Charlotte, North
Carolina laboratory.
Upon arrival at the Charlotte laboratory, the samples were prepared and tested for permeability in
accordance with ASTM D 5084, "Test Method for Hydraulic Conductivity of Saturated Porus
Materials Using a Flexible Wall Permeameter".
LAW ENGINEERING, INC.
1308-C PATTON AVENUE • ASHEVILLE, NC 28806
[phone] • FAX [phone]
b
ONE OF THE LAW COMPANIES

Western Carolina Landfill - Report of PenneabiMy and Field Density Testing July 15, 1994
Law Engineering Job 2430227902
One -of the -samples, P-2, could not be tested as the soil layers were not bound together, and
- - d-when-rem d-from-the-samglertube.-
The permeability result of the sample tested is 6.2 x 10-1. The results of our testing are shown on
the attached "Summary of Laboratory Permeability Testing" sheet.
Field Density Testffij
Kline field density tests were performed in addition to the permeability test to determine the in -place
density of the soil cap. These tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2937.
"Standard Method for Density of Soil In Place by the Drive Cylinder Method". The moisture
content was determined in accordance with ASTM D 2216 except that the soil was dried to a
constant weight using a hot plate instead of an oven.
The dry density as determined by this method was compared with the maximum dry density as
determined by test method ASTM D 698, "Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics
of Soil using Standard Effort", performed on representative samples of the soil. This comparison
is expressed as percent compaction. The results of these field density tests are shown on the
attached "Report of Field Density Tests" sheets.
Standard Proctor Tests
One sample representing the soil type encountered was obtained and returned to our labora,ory for
standard Proctor testing. This sample was prepared and tested in accordance with ASTM D 698.
The results of this test are shown on the attached "Proctor Test Report" sheet.
2

Western Carolina Landfill - Report of Penneability and Field Density Testing Jul 15, 1994
Law Engineering Job 2430227902
Law Engineering appreciates the opportunity to provide our services on this project. If \ ou have
any ques ions -concerning this report, or any other matter, please contact us at your conv::nience.
Very truly yours,
Law Engineering, Inc.
Michael K. Sagedy
Asheville Manager
Allen J. Hu s PE
Principal Engineer
MKS/AJH:llt
Attachments
cc: Jensen Engineering
Mr. George Jensen

-SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING - - - - - -
W.C.U. Landfill Closure
Law Engineering Asheville Project 243-02279-01
Law Engineering Charlotte Project 226-09998-04
CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST
- ASTM D5084 -
I. Date of Test: June 26-27, 1994
II. Test Location: Perm #1 - adjacent to density test # 3 performed on 06-20-94.
III.. Material Condition: Undisturbed Tube Sample
IV. Proctor Data:
Maximum Dry Density (pcf): 107.0
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 19.0
V.. Test Data:
Dry Density (pcf):
� 98.3
Initial Moisture Content (%):
19.4
Final Moisture Content (%):
24.2
Sample Length (cm):
5.41
Sample Area (cm2):
40.60
Head (cm):
140.68
Quantity of Water Passing Through Sample (cm'):
41.6
Elapsed Time (sec):
5880
Temperature (°F):
73
Viscosity Correction Factor:
0.931
Coefficient of Permeability -k (cm/sec):
6.2 x 10'
VI. Cormnents: Tested at 2 psi head difference.

PROCTOR TEST REPORT
1?0
115
4- 110
U
Q
i
OOA
INN
-
J1ITL
130
ZAV for
Sp.C,.=
c.65
95
12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5
Water content, %
"Standard" Proctor, ASTM D 698, Method A
Elev/
Depth
Classification
Nat.
Moist.
S G
P .
LL
PI
% l
No. 4
i <,
No. 200
USCS
AASHTO
17.8 %
TEST RESULTS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION -
Optimum moisture = 19.0 %
Maximum dry density = 107.0 pcf
RED BROWN F_=NE TO MEDIUM
SANDY SILT
Project No.: 2130227902
Project: WCU LANDFILL CLOSURE
Location: CULLOWHEE, NORTH CAROLINA
Date: JUNE 9, 1994
Remarks:
JOB SITE
Figure No. 3
PROCTOR TEST REPORT
LAW ENGINEERING
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

LAW ENGINEERING
1308-C PATTON AVENUE ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28EJ6
-- - -- REPORT OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS ---- --
CLIENT: WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY JOB NO.: 243-0227902
PROJECT: WCU LANDFILL CLOSURE
CULLOWHEE, NORTH CAROLINA
PROCTOR
I COMPACTION
SPECIFIED
COMPACTION TEST
ELEVATION
OR
TEST
MOISTURE
CONTENT
DRY
DENSITY
NUMBER
M
(PCF)
NUMBER
(%)
(%) METHC.D
DEPTH
Tests] Performedj on 06 09
94
1
18.5
104.1
3
97
=._
2
18.2
102.9
3
96
-_
-116"
3
17.0
106.8
3
100
=_
i
I
-1'6"
TEST
i
I
I
I
I
LOFATIONS:
I
j
1
30' N AND 30' E OF
MAIN
ENTRANCE'
2
50' N i.ND 60' E OF
MAIN
ENTRANCE
3
80' N AND 15' E pF
1 I
i I I
I
I '
I
MAIN
ENTRANCE
j
i
j
TEST COMPARED TO: REMARKS
PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY OPTIMUM Performed In General Acco,.--dance With:
NUMBER DENSITY MOISTURE 1 - ASTM D2 9 3 7
(PCF) (%)
3 107.0 19.0
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
1161",, S�, "�

Q
C)L
CL
0
.22
x
LLJ
<
Or
09t
.0 C'
—091
<0/xI
\ \ ` /ems � / ��
Oct
OZI
'I
9. �
11P
014
I

LAW ENGINEERING
1308-C PATTON AVENUE ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 288�6
REPORT -OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
CLIENT: WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY JOB NO.: 2_43-0227902
PROJECT. WCU LANDFILL CLOSURE
CULLOWHEE, NORTH CAROLINA
TEST
NUMBER
MOISTURE
CONTENT
(%)
DRY
DENSITY PROCTOR
(PCF) NUMBER
COMPACTION
(%)
SPECIFIED --I-ELEVATION
COMPACTION TEST OR
(%) METHOC DEPTH
Tests Performedlon
06 15
p4
1 18.6
103.8 3
97
1 -1'
2 1 18.9
102.3 3
96
I 1 -I
3 1 19.3
104.6 11 3
i I
i 98
1 -I
�
TEST LO'.CATIONS :
I
I
I
,
1 90' E iiND
5' N OF ENTRANCE1
2 75' N AND
15' E OF ENTRANCE
3 95' N AND
35' E OF ENTRANCE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
; '
TEST COMPARED TO: REMARKS
PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY OPTIMUM Performed In General Accor lance With: -
NUMBER DENSITY MOISTURE 1 - ASTM D2 9 3 7
(PCF) P )
3 107.0 19.0
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
IV it,
L✓

I I 74g
ro
0,
0 0
a
— cc
ci uj
r,J 0
-091
u a vOr%aS _ --�
OV

LAW ENGINEERING
1308-C PATTON AVENUE ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28r06
REPORT OF.FIELD DENSITY TESTS
CLIENT: WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY JOB NO.: 243-0227902
PROJECT: WCU LANDFILL CLOSURE
CULLOWHEE, NORTH CAROLINA
MOISTURE
DRY
SPECIFIED
ELEVATION
TEST
CONTENT
DENSITY PROCTOR
COMPACTION
COMPACTION
TES- OR
NUMBER
(%)
(PCF) NUMBER
(%)
(%)
METHOD DEPTH
Testsj
Performedl
on 06 20
94
1
17.2
101.4
3
95
-611
2
17.8
104.0
3
97
3
! 17.5
I
103.5
I
3
97
�
TEST LOCATIONS:
1 25' N AND 30' E PF ENTRANC�
2 �'�91' S ADM 60' E OF ENTRANC�
3 100' N IAND 75' EI OF ENTRANr-E
i
i
I I
! I
I
TEST COMPARED TO: REMARKS
PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY OPTIMUM Performed In General Acco,-dance With:
NUMBER DENSITY MOISTURE 1 - ASTM D2 9 3 7
(PCF) ("'^)
3 107.0 19.0
RESPECTFULLY SU3MITTED:
/c t'w-S� ,

�10 \
:d ,,^ \