SW_F_5703-MSWLF-1992_05-27-2015_SP_AC

BLE
BUNNELL-LAMMONS ENGINEERING, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL,ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS
DESIGN HYDROGEOLOGIC REPORT
PHASE 3(CELL NO.1)
MACON COUNTY MSW LANDFILL
FRANKLIN,NORTH CAROLINA
FACILITY PERMIT NUMBER 57-03
Prepared For:
MACON COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
109 Sierra Drive
Franklin, North Carolina 28734
Prepared By:
BUNNELL-LAMMONS ENGINEERING,INC.
6004 Ponders Court
Greenville, South Carolina 29615
BLE North Carolina Business License C-1538
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
May 27, 2015
BUNNELL-LAMMONS ENGINEERING, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL,ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTIONMATERIALSCONSULTANTS
6004PONDERSCOURT PHONE[phone]GREENVILLE,SOUTHCAROLINA 29615 FAX [phone]
May 27, 2015
Macon County Solid Waste Management Department
109 Sierra Drive
Franklin, North Carolina 28734
Attention: Mr. Chris Stahl
Director
Subject:Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1)
Macon County MSW Landfill
Facility Permit Number 57-03
Macon County, North Carolina
BLE North Carolina Business License C-1538
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Gentlemen:
As authorized, Bunnell-Lammons Engineering, Inc. (BLE) has completed the Design
Hydrogeologic Study for Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) at the Macon County MSW Landfill. This report
addresses the relevant site application requirements as outlined in the North Carolina Rules for
Solid Waste Management, 15A NCAC 13B .1623 (b). The attached report describes the work
performed and presents the results obtained.
We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your geological, hydrogeological, and geotechnical
consultant on this project and look forward to continue working with you at the Macon County
MSW Landfill. If you have any questions, please contact us at [phone].
Sincerely,
BUNNELL-LAMMONS ENGINEERING,INC.
Mark S. Preddy, P.G. Daniel B. Bunnell, P.E.
Senior Hydrogeologist Principal Geotechnical Engineer
Registered, North Carolina No. 1043 Registered, North Carolina No. 13814
cc: Dave Pasko, P.E. – McGill Associates, P.A.
Mark Cathey, P.E. – McGill Associates, P.A.
Andrew Alexander, P.G. – Bunnell-Lammons Engineering, Inc.
c:\msp files\macon co lf nc\1101-06 dhr ph 3 c1\7 report\1101-06 macon co lf ph3 c1 dhr.docx
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

i
TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................. iii

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ iii

LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ iii

REPORT CROSS-REFERENCE INDEX OF APPLICABLE NORTH CAROLINA
STATE SOLID WASTE REGULATIONS .......................................................................... iv

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION .................................................................................... 1

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................... 1

2.1 TEST BORING AND SOIL SAMPLING .................................................. 2
2.2 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION ...................................................... 2
2.3 LABORATORY TESTING ......................................................................... 3
2.4 FRACTURE TRACE ANALYSIS .............................................................. 3
2.5 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE ...................................................................... 3

3.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION ........................................................................... 4

3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ............................................................................. 4
3.2 REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY .............................................................. 4
3.3 STUDY AREA PHYSIOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY ...................... 5
3.4 STUDY AREA SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................ 5
3.4.1 Geologic Unit Description ................................................................... 5
3.4.1.1 Residual Soil ........................................................................ 5
3.4.1.2 Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) ..................................... 6
3.4.1.3 Fractured Bedrock ............................................................. 6
3.4.2 Fracture Trace Analysis .................................................................. 6
3.4.3 Laboratory Testing Results ............................................................ 7
3.5 STUDY AREA HYDROGEOLOGY .......................................................... 7
3.5.1 Piezometer Construction and Nomenclature ................................... 8
3.5.1.1 Deep Residual Soil Piezometers ......................................... 8
3.5.1.2 Partially Weathered Rock Piezometers ............................ 8
3.5.1.3 Bedrock Piezometers .......................................................... 8
3.5.2 Seasonal High Groundwater Elevations ........................................... 8
3.5.3 Estimated Long-Term Seasonal High Groundwater Elevations .... 9
3.5.4 Groundwater Flow Direction ............................................................. 9
3.5.5 Man-made Influences to Groundwater Levels ................................. 10
3.5.6 Hydraulic Coefficients and Groundwater Flow Velocity ................ 10
3.5.6.1 Hydraulic Conductivity ......................................................... 10
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

ii
3.5.6.2 Hydraulic Gradient ................................................................ 11
3.5.6.3 Effective Porosity and Specific Yield ................................... 11
3.5.6.4 Groundwater Flow Velocity .................................................. 11
3.6 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ................................................................... 12
3.6.1 Fault Areas ....................................................................................... 12
3.6.2 Seismic Impact Zones ...................................................................... 12
3.6.3 Unstable Areas ................................................................................. 13
3.7 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................. 13
3.7.1 Excavation ........................................................................................ 13
3.7.2 Engineered Fill ................................................................................. 14
3.7.3 Settlement Analysis .......................................................................... 15
3.7.4 Stability Analysis ............................................................................. 16

4.0 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 16

5.0 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................... 17

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

iii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 – Monitoring Well, Piezometer, and Boring Survey Information
Table 2 – Soil Test Boring and Piezometer Construction Details – Phase 3
Table 3 – Groundwater Elevation Measurements
Table 4 – Summary of In Situ Hydraulic Conductivity Testing – Slug Test Results
Table 5 – Summary of Soil Laboratory Results
Table 6 – Interstitial Groundwater Flow Velocity Calculations – Phase 3
Table 7 – Summary of Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characteristics of
Geologic Units – Phase 3

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 – Site Location Map
Figure 2 – Generalized Geologic Map of North Carolina
Figure 3 – Site Topography and Boring Location Plan
Figure 4 – Geologic Profiles: Cross-Sections A-A', B-B' and C-C'
Figure 5 – Top of Bedrock (Auger Refusal) Elevation Contour Map
Figure 6 – Groundwater Elevation Contour Map – September 26, 2014
Figure 7 – Seasonal High Groundwater Elevation Contour Map – September 2013 to
September 2014
Figure 8 – Estimated Long-Term Seasonal High Groundwater Elevation Contour Map

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A – Drilling and Sampling Procedures
Appendix B – Soil and Rock Boring Records and Well Diagrams
Appendix C – Piezometer Installation Procedures
Appendix D – Precipitation Data
Appendix E – Slug Test Procedures and Results
Appendix F – Soil Laboratory Test Procedures
Appendix G – Soil Laboratory Test Results
Appendix H – Fracture Trace Analysis Data
Appendix I – Geotechnical Calculations

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

iv
REPORT CROSS-REFERENCE INDEX OF
APPLICABLE NORTH CAROLINA STATE SOLID WASTE REGULATIONS

15A NCAC 13B .1623 (b) Design Hydrogeologic Report Requirements

STATE
REGULATIONS
LOCATION IN REPORT
(b) (1) (A) Sections 3.4.1.3, 3.5.2, 3.6.3; Table 3; Figures 5, 7; Appendix D
(b) (1) (B) Sections 3.4, 3.5; Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Figures 4, 5, 6, 7; Appendices
B, E, G, H
(b) (2) (A) From 15A NCAC 13B .1623(a)
(a) (4) (A) Sections 2.1, 3.4.1; Appendices A, B
(a) (4) (B) Sections 2.3, 3.4.3; Tables 5, 7; Appendices F, G
(a) (4) (C) Sections 3.4.1, 3.4.3; Tables 5, 7; Appendices B, G
(a) (4) (D) Sections 3.4; Tables 5, 7; Appendices B
(a) (4) (E) Sections 3.4.3, 3.5.6; Tables 4, 5, 7; Appendices E, G
(a) (5) Sections 2.4, 3.4.2; Appendix H
(a) (6) Figure 4
(a) (7) (A) Table 3
(a) (7) (B) Table 3
(a) (7) (C) Section 3.5.3; Table 3; Figure 8
(a) (7) (D) Sections 3.2, 3.5.2, 3.5.3, 3.5.5
(a) (8) Sections 3.5.4, 3.5.6; Tables 4, 5, 6, 7; Figures 4, 6, 7, 8; Appendix
E, G
(a) (9) Figures 6, 7, 8
(a) (10) Figure 3
(a) (11) Appendices B
(a) (12) Sections 3.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.4, 3.5.5; Appendix H
(b) (2) (B) Sections 3.0; Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; Figures 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
(b) (2) (C) Sections 3.0
(b) (2) (D) Sections 2.1, 3.4.1.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.1.3; Figure 5; Appendices B, H
(b) (2) (E) Figure 8
(b) (2) (F) Figure 5
(b) (2) (G) Figure 4
(b) (2) (H) Section 3.5; Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; Figures 4, 6, 7, 8
(b) (2) (I) Section 2.2
(b) (3) (A) Separate Document at a Later Date
(b) (3) (B) Separate Document at a Later Date
(b) (3) (C) Separate Document at a Later Date

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

1
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

The existing Macon County Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill is located on Lakeside Drive
in Franklin, North Carolina (Figure 1). The landfill is owned and operated by Macon County. The
existing facility boundary covers approximately 189.5 acres consisting of Phase 1 (Cell 1) and
Phase 2 (Cell 2). Macon County now plans to develop Phase 3 located east of the recycling center,
and not contiguous to the existing Phase 1 and Phase 2 waste cell units. Initial Phase 3
development will be an approximate 7.6-acre area designated as Phase 3 (Cell No. 1). As part of
the current Permit to Construct (PTC) prepared by McGill Associates, P.A. (McGill), Macon
County plans to expand and revise the site’s permitted facility boundary; Figures 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8
of this report show both the currently permitted and proposed facility boundaries. The proposed
facility boundary covers approximately 197.6 acres, and portions of future built-out Phase 3 cell
area may be located within the facility expansion area. Therefore, a Site Hydrogeologic Report
(SHR) will be prepared in the future representing the investigation of the facility expansion area.

The landfill development is being implemented in phases, as new solid waste cells are needed.
This Design Hydrogeologic Report (DHR) addresses the geological, hydrogeological, and
geotechnical investigation required for the construction permitting process of proposed Phase 3
(Cell No. 1). The investigation was performed in accordance with the applicable North Carolina
Rules for Solid Waste Management (15A NCAC 13B .1623 (b)). Relevant data pertaining to Phase
3 were also compiled in this report from the following two reports:
 Site Suitability Study For Macon County Landfill, Franklin North Carolina, dated 1990,
prepared by Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical Services, Inc. (Project No.
1351-89-369; and
 Addendum to Site Hydrogeologic Report, Macon County MSWLF, Macon County, North
Carolina dated February 28, 1997, prepared by Pin-Point Environmental Services, Inc.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

The Phase 3 area field investigation was conducted from August 2013 to September 2014. The
investigation of Phase 3 has included:

 conducting soil test borings and rock coring borings;
 installing piezometers;
 collecting monthly water level measurements from the piezometers;
 conducting hydraulic conductivity (slug) testing in piezometers;
 performing soil laboratory testing;
 measuring joint and bedding orientations from rock outcrops;
 performing a fracture trace study for the site and surrounding area; and
 performing an evaluation of location restrictions as outlined in the applicable solid waste
regulations.

A discussion of the investigative methodologies used in the site evaluation is provided below. The
field activities reported below were performed under the direction of a North Carolina licensed
geologist and engineer. A North Carolina licensed driller from Landprobe, Inc. of Greenville,
South Carolina performed the borings and piezometer installation during this phase of work. The
new boring and piezometer locations were surveyed for horizontal and vertical control, by McGill
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

2
Associates, P.A. of Asheville, North Carolina, (PLS-4626) after completion of the drilling
activities.

2.1 TEST BORING AND SOIL SAMPLING

The North Carolina Solid Waste Section (Section) requires that Design Hydrogeologic Studies
include the drilling of one boring per acre of permitted cell area. The Phase 3 area is
approximately 33.8 acres; therefore, at least 34 borings are needed for the entire Phase 3
investigation. However, only a portion of the Phase 3 area was investigated and 29 borings have
been performed within or adjacent to portions of the Phase 3 area (Table 1 and Figure 3). Borings
BLE-1 through BLE-22, B-5R, B-6R, B-16R, and B-18R were performed by BLE during the
recent investigation; the other borings in the Phase 3 area shown on Table 1 and Figure 3 were
performed by Westinghouse (1990). Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) covers approximately 7.6 acres and 11
borings have been performed in its vicinity (Figure 3). The information from the other borings
included in this investigation that are not part of Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) were performed in
accordance with the Section’s Solid Waste Management Rules 15A NCAC 13B .1623 (b) and can
be used in the future for DHR studies of other Phase 3 cells.

The new soil test boring locations and depths were selected to comply with the applicable Section
rules. Soil samples were obtained from the new soil test borings at 2.5-foot intervals within the
upper ten feet below the ground surface, and at five-foot intervals deeper than ten feet below the
ground surface. Drilling techniques during this recent investigation consisted of hollow-stem
augering and rock coring. Refer to Appendix A for discussion of the various drilling techniques
used.

Soil test boring logs were produced in the field by a geologist. The soil descriptions were based on
visual examination and grain-size estimations in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS). Upon completion of laboratory grain-size and Atterberg Limit analyses, the
preliminary field classifications were adjusted accordingly on the final boring logs. The final
boring log records are included in Appendix B.

2.2 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION

Twenty-four (24) new piezometers were installed to monitor groundwater elevations and further
characterize the study area hydrogeology. Three of the piezometers (B-6R, B-16R, and B-18R)
were installed in the approximate locations of the soil test borings completed by Westinghouse
(1990) for the site suitability study. Piezometer installation records are included with the boring
logs in Appendix B, and piezometer installation procedures are described in Appendix C. Survey
information for the soil borings, piezometers, and monitoring wells is presented on Table 1 and in
Appendix B, and piezometer construction details are summarized on Table 2.

Groundwater elevations were measured in the new piezometers at the time of boring and after 24
hours (Table 3). Additionally, monthly measurements were taken in the piezometers and
monitoring wells on site during the period from September 2013 to September 2014 to determine
the seasonal high groundwater levels. Historical water level data from December 2004 through
April 2013 are also provided on Table 3 and precipitation data for the Macon County region is
included in Appendix D.
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

3

Field permeability (slug) tests were performed in ten piezometers in the study area to measure the
in situ hydraulic conductivity of different units of the water table aquifer. Slug test field
procedures and data plots are presented in Appendix E and the results are summarized on Table 4.

The piezometers are intended only for investigation use, were not constructed as permanent
monitoring wells, and will not be part of the permanent groundwater monitoring system. Prior to
landfill cell construction activities, the piezometers will be permanently abandoned in accordance
with 15A NCAC 2C, Rule .0113(a)(2) by drilling them out and filling the resulting boreholes with
a bentonite-cement grout mixture.

2.3 LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory testing of soil samples was conducted to confirm the field classifications and quantify
pertinent engineering soil properties. Soil samples were collected using split-spoon samplers,
Shelby tubes (undisturbed), and auger cuttings (bulk bag samples). The laboratory tests were
performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM specifications, where available. Brief
descriptions of the test procedures are included in Appendix F. Soil laboratory testing results are
included in Appendix G and are summarized on Table 5.

2.4 FRACTURE TRACE ANALYSIS

The fracture trace analysis consisted of evaluating exposed rock outcrops and topographic fracture
traces and lineaments as discussed below. The data plots are included in Appendix H.

Exposed Rock Outcrops: Using a Brunton compass, the orientations of exposed bedrock fractures
(open joints, open foliation, open bedding planes) were measured. The field measurements were
plotted on a Schmidt lower hemisphere equal-area stereonet and Rose diagrams.

Topographic Fracture Traces and Lineaments: Regionally, pronounced depressions typically
develop along zones of weakness in the bedrock where fractures induce preferential weathering.
This preferential weathering along the bedrock fractures is ultimately expressed topographically as
linear valleys. The trend of fracture traces and lineaments greater than 1,000 feet in length within a
1.5-mile radius of the site were measured from topographic maps and plotted as data on Rose
diagrams.

2.5 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE

The Phase 3 study area was traversed to map rock outcrops and surface drainage features. The
information obtained was integrated with the geologic information already collected at the site
during previous phases of work. Bedrock fracture orientations were measured from the rock
outcrops as part of the fracture trace analysis.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

4
3.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

The subject site is located within the Blue Ridge geologic belt (Figure 2). 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 the lower portion of the Middle/Late Proterozoic
Coweeta Group known as the Persimmon Creek Gneiss, which overlies the Tallulah Falls
Formation (Hatcher, 1979; Rhodes and Conrad, 1985; Horton and Zullo, 1991). The Persimmon
Creek Gneiss consists of migmatitic feldspar-quartz-biotite gneiss interlayered and gradational with
biotite-garnet gneiss and amphibolite. The original protolith of the gneiss bedrock is most likely
highly metamorphosed clastic sediments.

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.

3.2 REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY

Groundwater in the Blue Ridge Belt usually occurs as unconfined, water table aquifers in three
primary geologic zones: 1) residual soil; 2) partially weathered rock; and 3) fractured bedrock.
These zones are typically interconnected through open fractures and pore spaces. The
configuration of the water table aquifer generally resembles the local topography.

In the residual soil, and partially weathered rock zone, groundwater is stored within the pore spaces
and is released to the underlying bedrock through gravity drainage. Groundwater within the
bedrock zones occurs primarily in fracture voids. Generally, fractures within the bedrock are very
small but may extend to several hundred feet.

Infiltration of precipitation to recharge the water table aquifer is primarily affected by rainfall
intensity and duration, pre-existing soil moisture conditions, temperature (evaporation), and plant
uptake (transpiration). Seasonal high-water tables are typically observed during the spring to early
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

5
summer months of the year when maximum infiltration efficiency occurs due to lower
temperatures and less plant uptake (i.e., many plants are dormant). Seasonal low-water tables are
typically observed during the fall months when minimum infiltration efficiency occurs due to
higher temperatures and greater plant uptake of water.

3.3 STUDY AREA PHYSIOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY

The landfill is located in Macon County, North Carolina, as shown on Figure 1. The Phase 3 area
is bounded on the west by the recycling center, a drainage feature, and a retention pond, on the
north by Lake Emory (Little Tennessee River), on the east by residential property and a Macon
County government transit facility, and on the south by a drainage feature, undeveloped landfill
property, and Macon County government facilities (Figure 3).

The only observed rock outcrop in the Phase 3 area is located near the southern edge of the
proposed cell footprint (west of BLE-16) and consists of feldspar-quartz-biotite gneiss.

Topographically, the ground surface elevation in the Phase 3 area drops off to the north, west, and
south from a centrally located ridgeline. The highest elevation in the Phase 3 footprint is
approximately 2159 feet above mean sea level (msl) located at the center of the Phase 3 area, and
the lowest elevation is approximately 2015 feet msl located north of the proposed Phase 3 cell
footprint. The relief across the Phase 3 area is approximately 144 feet.

Groundwater in the Phase 3 area generally flows from the ridgeline towards the north into Lake
Emory, and to the south and west into drainage features and a retention pond. The drainage features
south and west of Phase 3 drain northward into Lake Emory north of the Phase 3 area.

3.4 STUDY AREA SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Twenty-nine (29) borings have been performed in, and adjacent to, Phase 3 at the locations shown
on Figure 3. The cell footprint is underlain by residual soils, partially weathered rock (PWR), and
bedrock at depth. Subsurface geology of the Phase 3 area is shown on two cross-sections
designated A-A', B-B', and C-C' on Figure 4. A description of the subsurface materials
encountered is provided below.

3.4.1 Geologic Unit Description

3.4.1.1 Residual Soil

Residual soils are the result of in-place weathering of the gneiss bedrock. The residual soil profile
below the topsoil consists of two identifiable components based on the USCS.

The upper soil component consists of reddish-brown, pinkish-brown, and brown, slightly
micaceous, sandy silty clay and sandy clayey silt, with lesser amounts of clayey sand. Where
encountered, the thickness of this component ranges from 1.5 to 12 feet below ground surface with
an average thickness of 5.1 feet. USCS classifications of these soils are typically ML, CL, and SC.
N-values ranged from 3 to 33 with an average value of 11, indicating a stiff average consistency.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

6
The upper soil component grades with depth into a coarser grained, less plastic, brown, red-brown,
and light brown micaceous sandy silt and silty sand which extends to the depth of the partially
weathered rock and/or auger refusal. Where encountered, the thickness of this component ranged
from 5.0 to 82 feet, with an average thickness of 33.6 feet. USCS classifications of these soils are
ML and SM. N-values range from 4 to 100 with an average of 26.4, indicating a very firm average
consistency.

3.4.1.2 Partially Weathered Rock (PWR)

The transition between soil and rock at the site is irregular and consists of partially weathered rock
(PWR) overlying the parent bedrock. The PWR consists primarily of brown, light brown, and
gray, micaceous to very micaceous, silty, fine to coarse sand with varying amounts of gravel size
rock fragments. USCS classifications of these soils are typically SM. Where encountered, this
zone was found to range in thickness from 2.5 to 30.0 feet, with an average thickness of 10.3 feet.
This zone also includes various float rock and boulders indicative of the varying weathering
patterns.

3.4.1.3 Fractured Bedrock

The upper bedrock profile is fractured, severely to slightly weathered, feldspar-quartz-biotite
gneiss. Alternating rock seams and partially weathered rock zones were commonly encountered in
the rock core samples. The metamorphic foliation is shallow to moderately dipping and the
bedrock fractures (joints) are shallow to moderately dipping.

Bedrock coring was performed at eleven different locations for a total of 275.5 feet. The bedrock
core had generally “poor” recovery (range of 0 to 100 percent; average of 50 percent) and “very
poor” rock quality designation (RQD; range of 0 to 100 percent; average of 24 percent). In
general, the bedrock becomes more competent with depth.

A map of the approximate bedrock surface (auger refusal) is shown as Figure 5. Auger refusal
depths may represent competent bedrock or possibly boulders of hard rock within the residual soil
and partially weathered rock units. The depth to auger refusal can vary even over short horizontal
distances due to boulders, fractures, joints, and the presence of less resistant rock types. Therefore,
the actual depth to continuous bedrock may vary somewhat from that presented on Figure 5.

3.4.2 Fracture Trace Analysis

A fracture trace analysis was performed for this phase of work. The data plots for the fracture trace
analysis are in Appendix H and a summary of the fracture trace analysis is provided below.

The trend of 50 topographic fracture traces and lineaments within 1.5 miles of the site were
measured and plotted on a Rose diagram utilizing a 10° interval. Two primary fracture trace trends
were observed: N11°-50°E; N31°-70°W.

Bedrock outcrops are not common in the Phase 3 area. The orientation of one joint orientation was
measured near boring BLE-16, which measured N40°W, dipping 65°NE. This orientation
correlates with the N31°-70°W topographic lineament trend.
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

7

3.4.3 Laboratory Testing Results

Thirty (30) split-spoon samples, 12 undisturbed Shelby Tube samples, and 7 bulk bag samples
were collected and tested in the laboratory to measure natural soil conditions in the Phase 3 area.
The laboratory test results are summarized in Table 5. Laboratory data sheets are in Appendix G.

Testing results of the 10 samples collected from the upper residual soil component consisted of:
 Natural moisture content values ranging from 17.2 to 45.5 percent;
 Liquid Limit (LL) values ranging from 33 to 55;
 Plasticity Index (PI) values ranging from 10 to 22;
 Average gravel, sand, silt, and clay contents of 2.0, 43.9, 22.3, and 31.8 percent, respectively;
 In-situ hydraulic conductivity values ranging from 1.3 x 10-5 to 5.2 x 10-4 cm/sec;
 Remolded hydraulic conductivity values ranging from 2.1 x 10-7 to 2.1 x 10-6 cm/sec;
 Total porosity values ranging from 45.5 to 49.9 percent; and
 Effective porosity values ranging from 3.7 to 5.5 percent.

Testing results of the 31 samples collected from the deeper residual soil component consisted of:
 Natural moisture content values ranging from 10.4 to 33.8 percent;
 LL values ranging from 26 to 55;
 PI values ranging from non-plastic (NP) to 12;
 Average gravel, sand, silt, and clay contents of 2.5, 62.5, 27.3, and 7.7 percent, respectively;
 In-situ hydraulic conductivity values ranging from 3.0 x 10-6 to 4.2 x 10-4 cm/sec;
 Remolded hydraulic conductivity values ranging from 1.0 x 10-6 to 7.9 x 10-6 cm/sec;
 Triaxial testing of two in-situ samples indicated total cohesive strength (C) values of 0.0 and
0.65 kips per square foot (ksf) and effective C values of 0.0 and 0.0 ksf, respectively; the
samples also indicated total Phi () angles of 29.20 and 21.06 degrees and effective  angles of
42.25 and 38.75 degrees, respectively;
 Consolidation testing of one in-situ sample indicated a preconsolidation pressure of 7.21 ksf;
 Total porosity values ranging from 40.1 to 57.5 percent; and
 Effective porosity values ranging from 15.0 to 32.5 percent.

Testing results of the 8 samples collected from the partially weathered rock component consisted
of:
 Natural moisture content values ranging from 3.7 to 24.1 percent;
 LL values ranging from 22 to 37;
 PI values ranging from NP to 3;
 Average gravel, sand, silt, and clay contents of 3.9, 68.5, 25.1, and 2.5 percent, respectively;
 Total porosity values ranging from 47.0 to 50.0 percent; and
 Effective porosity values ranging from 27.5 to 31.0 percent.

3.5 STUDY AREA HYDROGEOLOGY

Twenty-four (24) new piezometers were installed in, or adjacent to, the Phase 3 area at the
locations shown on Figure 3. Groundwater is present both above and below the bedrock surface in
the Phase 3 area. The water-table aquifer in the Phase 3 area consists of the residual saprolitic soil,
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

8
partially weathered rock, and fractured gneiss bedrock. These units are hydraulically connected
and thus comprise a single unconfined aquifer, although recharge rates, flow rates and storativity
differ between the units based on the unique geologic conditions of each zone. The configuration
of the water table surface is a subdued replica of the ground surface (Figure 6). The hydrogeologic
conditions encountered in the Phase 3 area are consistent with the conditions encountered during
previous phases of work at the landfill. A description of the hydrogeologic conditions in the study
area is provided below.

3.5.1 Piezometer Construction and Nomenclature

Twenty-one (21) new piezometers drilled during the current site investigation in locations where no
piezometers had been installed were labeled with the identifier “BLE”. Three (3) new piezometers
drilled in locations where piezometers had been previously drilled and abandoned during the
previous site investigation conducted by Westinghouse (1990) were labeled with the identifier “B”
and the suffix “R” to indicate the piezometer’s status as a replacement. Table 2 summarizes the
piezometer depths and units screened.

3.5.1.1 Deep Residual Soil Piezometers

Seven new piezometers were installed with screened intervals in the deep residual soils. These
piezometers were: BLE-3, BLE-9, BLE-16, BLE-18, BLE-21, BLE-22, and B-6R.

3.5.1.2 Partially Weathered Rock Piezometers

Six new piezometers were installed with screened intervals in the partially weathered rock. These
piezometers were: BLE-7, BLE-11, BLE-13, BLE-14, BLE-15, and B-18R.

3.5.1.3 Bedrock Piezometers

Eleven new piezometers were installed with screened intervals in the bedrock. These piezometers
were: BLE-1, BLE-2, BLE-4, BLE-5, BLE-6, BLE-8 BLE-12, BLE-17, BLE-19, BLE-20 and B-
16R.

3.5.2 Seasonal High Groundwater Elevations

The relationship between precipitation and groundwater level trends at the site was evaluated from
2000 to 2014. The following sources of data were used to evaluate the seasonal high water level at
the site:

1. Historical National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) precipitation data were
obtained to establish seasonal trends for the Macon County area
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/climatedata.html);
2. Historical water level measurements from monitoring wells between December 2004 and April
2013; and
3. Recent monthly water level measurements from the piezometers and monitoring wells at the
facility between September 2013 and September 2014.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

9
Historical NOAA monthly precipitation data were obtained from Division 1, North Carolina for the
period of January 2000 through December 2014. The data are summarized seasonally in Appendix
D such that January-March represents winter, April-June represents spring, July-September
represents summer, and October-December represents fall.

Historically in the Macon County area, the spring and summer months will experience relatively
more amounts of precipitation, with slightly less precipitation in the winter and fall months. The
effects of evapotranspiration during the summer months offset the contribution of this precipitation
to recharge of the aquifer. The winter and spring months will experience maximum water
infiltration efficiency to recharge the uppermost aquifer because the effects of evapotranspiration
are limited (i.e., cooler weather and less plant uptake). Because of these natural trends, the amount
of groundwater recharge and subsequent increase in the water table level is typically greatest
during the months of March through July.

The region surrounding the site received normal amounts of precipitation during the period of
water level measurements from September 2013 to September 2014. Also during this time period,
the region was not in drought conditions (see precipitation and Palmer Drought Severity Index data
in Appendix D). During the period of monthly water level measurements, most piezometers and
wells monitored experienced their highest water levels during the summer months of 2013 and the
spring months of 2014 (Table 3).

Figure 7 is the seasonal high groundwater elevation contour map for the water levels collected
between September 2013 and September 2014. The groundwater elevations in the piezometers,
and the groundwater elevation contours on Figure 7 should be used for landfill subgrade design,
along with the bedrock (auger refusal) elevations shown on Figure 5.

3.5.3 Estimated Long-Term Seasonal High Groundwater Elevations

Groundwater levels were recorded monthly for a year in the new piezometers and existing
monitoring wells at the site between September 2013 and September 2014. Additionally, semi-
annual groundwater level data was available from the existing monitoring wells during the period
between December 2004 and April 2013. Historical groundwater level data is provided on Table
3. The historical groundwater levels in the existing monitoring wells have varied on the average of
4.5 feet from December 2004 to September 2014. As a conservative approach using this natural
water level trend, an estimated long-term seasonal high groundwater elevation contour map was
prepared (Figure 8). This map was prepared by adding 4.5 feet (typical seasonal variation in the
existing monitoring wells from December 2004 to September 2014) to the maximum observed
water level (from September 2013 to September 2014) in each piezometer in the Phase 3 area.
These water level calculations are included on Table 3.

3.5.4 Groundwater Flow Direction

An east-west to northwest trending topographic ridge exists in the Phase 3 footprint from which
groundwater flows to the north discharging into Lake Emory, and to the west and southwest
discharging into an unnamed drainage feature and a retention pond (Figure 3). The groundwater
table surface has a configuration similar to the site topography (Figures 6, 7, and 8). Recharge to
the unconfined aquifer occurs at the higher elevations of Phase 3 and in the areas east of Phase 3.
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

10

3.5.5 Man-made Influences to Groundwater Levels

Man-made features on the landfill property that could influence groundwater levels in the Phase 3
area include the proposed lined waste cell footprint, ditches next to access roads, existing and
proposed retention ponds. The retention ponds will have the effect of raising or mounding the
groundwater level in their vicinity. The proposed lined cell footprint will have the effect of
lowering the groundwater level in its vicinity by reducing the recharge area to the aquifer.
Currently, there is one existing retention pond northwest of the Phase 3 area (Figure 3).

There are no groundwater receptors located between the Phase 3 area and the Lake Emory north of
Phase 3, which is the downgradient groundwater discharge area from Phase 3.

3.5.6 Hydraulic Coefficients and Groundwater Flow Velocity

The velocity of groundwater flow is derived from the equation:

en
KiV
Where
V is the flow velocity;
K is the hydraulic conductivity;
i is the hydraulic gradient; and
ne is the effective porosity.

Estimated values for each of these parameters were developed based on site-specific subsurface
data and are provided below. The parameters are summarized on attached Tables 4, 5, 6, and 7.

3.5.6.1 Hydraulic Conductivity

Hydraulic conductivity is defined as the ability of the aquifer material to conduct water under a
hydraulic gradient. Ten slug tests were performed by BLE in the Phase 3 area to measure the in
situ hydraulic conductivity of the different zones of the water-table aquifer. The slug test results
were evaluated using the Bouwer and Rice Method (1976) for partially-penetrating wells in an
unconfined aquifer (Table 4 and Appendix E). The slug tests performed at the site include:

 Four tests in a piezometer set in the deep residual soil unit (BLE-3, BLE-9, BLE-18 and BLE -
21);
 Three tests in piezometers set in the partially weathered rock unit (BLE-7, BLE-13, BLE-15;
and
 Three tests in piezometers set in the bedrock unit (BLE-4, BLE-8, and BLE-17).

Based on the slug tests conducted in the Phase 3 area, the range of hydraulic conductivity values is
as follows:

 2.8 x 10-4 cm/sec (BLE-9) to 4.5 x 10-4 cm/sec (BLE-3) in the deep residual soil unit
(geometric mean 3.7 x 10-4 cm/sec);
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

11
 1.7 x 10-4 cm/sec (BLE-15) to 2.0 x 10-3 cm/sec (BLE-7) in partially weathered rock unit
(geometric mean 4.0 x 10-4 cm/sec); and
 6.8 x 10-5 cm/sec (BLE-4) to 3.9 x 10-4 cm/sec (BLE-8) in the bedrock unit (geometric mean
1.9 x 10-4 cm/sec).

3.5.6.2 Hydraulic Gradient

The hydraulic gradient is determined by dividing the difference in groundwater elevations at two
locations by the horizontal distance between those locations along the direction of groundwater
flow. Hydraulic gradients were measured from the September 26, 2014 water table elevation
contour map (Figure 6). In the Phase 3 area, the approximate range of hydraulic gradient is as
follows:

 0.041 ft/ft (measured between the 2060 and 2080-ft msl groundwater contours near boring
BLE-18).
 0.150 ft/ft (measured between the 2020 and 2070-ft msl groundwater contours north of
boring BLE-9).

3.5.6.3 Effective Porosity and Specific Yield

Effective porosity is the volume of void spaces through which water or other fluids can travel in
soil divided by the total volume of the soil. Effective porosity can be assumed to be approximately
equal to specific yield. Specific yield is defined as the ratio of the volume of water that drains from
saturated sediment owing to the attraction of gravity to the total volume of soil. The laboratory
grain size analyses were used to derive values for specific yield and effective porosity (Table 5 and
Appendix G).

Based on soil laboratory data and published geologic literature, effective porosity measurements in
the Phase 3 area range from approximately:

 3.7% to 5.5% (average = 4.9%) in the shallow residual soil unit;
 15.0% to 32.5% (average = 25.0%) in the deep residual soil unit
 27.5% to 31.0% (average = 29.3%) in the partially weathered rock unit; and
 the effective porosity can be expected to range from about 5% to 10% for fractured crystalline
bedrock unit (average = 7.5%) according (Kruseman and deRidder, 1989).

3.5.6.4 Groundwater Flow Velocity

Based on these parameters and the data provided above, the horizontal movement of groundwater
across the Phase 3 area is approximately:

 0.16 to 0.79 (average 0.40) feet/day in the deep residual soil unit;
 0.26 to 1.86 (average 0.37) feet/day in the partially weathered rock unit; and
 0.50 to 1.40 (average 0.70) feet/day in the bedrock unit.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

12
The maximum and minimum values for each unit represent a range of values using available data.
The average values are more representative of site-wide conditions. Table 6 summarizes the
groundwater seepage velocity calculations.

3.6 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS

An evaluation of the potential impact from Holocene faults, seismic impact zones and unstable
areas, as required by 15A NCAC13B.1622, is provided below in Sections 3.6.1, 3.6.2, and 3.6.3.
Other location restrictions are being addressed by other consultants working for Macon County.

3.6.1 Fault Areas

The location restrictions related to fault areas are specified in Title 15A Section 13B .1622 (4)(a),
which states “New MSWLF units and lateral expansions shall not be located within 200 feet (60
meters) of a fault that has had displacement in Holocene time unless the owner or operator
demonstrates to the Division that an alternative setback distance of less than 200 feet (60 meters) will
prevent damage to the structural integrity of the MSWLF unit and will be protective of human health
and the environment.”

BLE performed a literature review and property walkover to determine if Holocene faults exist on the
subject tracts. The geologic literature does not indicate the presence of known Holocene faults on the
proposed expansion area, or the surrounding vicinity (Horton and Zullo 1991; Howard et al. 1978).
A BLE staff geologist conducted a site walkover on January 5, 2015. No surface indications of faults
were visually observed. In conclusion, there are no Holocene-age faults documented in the literature
or observed visually within 200 feet of the Phase 3 area.

3.6.2 Seismic Impact Zones

The location restrictions related to seismic impact zones are specified in Title 15A Section 13B
.1622 (5)(a), which states “New MSWLF units and lateral expansions shall not be located in
seismic impact zones, unless the owner or operator demonstrates to the Division that all
containment structures, including liners, leachate collection systems, and surface water control
systems, are designed to resist the maximum horizontal acceleration in lithified earth material for
the site.”

BLE conducted a literature review and the most recent United States Geological Survey data
available for our use indicate that the maximum horizontal acceleration at the proposed expansion
area, expressed as a percentage of the earth's gravity (g), in rock is approximately 0.23g with a 2%
probability of being exceeded in 50 years (Petersen et al. 2014); approximately equal to 10%
probability in 250 years. Therefore, the site is located in a seismic impact zone. However, this
seismic standard is a design criterion and does not preclude landfill development. The landfill
should be designed to resist the maximum horizontal acceleration in lithified earth material at the
site.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

13
3.6.3 Unstable Areas

The location restrictions related to unstable areas are specified in Title 15A Section 13B .1622
(6)(a), which states “Owners or operators of new MSWLF units, existing MSWLF units, and lateral
expansions located in an unstable area shall demonstrate that engineering measures have been
incorporated into the MSWLF unit's design to ensure that the integrity of the structural
components of the MSWLF unit will not be disrupted.” According to the Rule, an unstable area is
defined as a location that is susceptible to natural or human induced events or forces capable of
impairing the integrity of some or all of the landfill structural components responsible for
preventing releases from a landfill. Unstable areas could include poor foundation conditions, areas
susceptible to mass movements, and karst terrains.

Surface and subsurface data obtained were evaluated to determine if unstable site areas exist in the
Phase 3 area. The site is located in the Blue Ridge Geologic Belt. The site subsurface conditions
consist of residual soils overlying partially weathered rock, with gneiss bedrock at depth, which are
not susceptible to karst conditions. Topographic expressions of karst features, such as sinkholes
and disappearing streams, are not apparent from the site topography and were not observed on site
during our reconnaissance. Limited deposits of alluvial sediments are present within the narrow
drainage features on site. These soils are susceptible to settlement upon loading; however, they are
limited in extent and can be removed if needed in areas of structural fill. No unstable areas were
noted in our literature review. Our field reconnaissance of the site did not identify any other
potential unstable areas.

3.7 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Excavation and engineered fill placement considerations for the proposed landfill development are
provided in the following sections. A geotechnical evaluation of slope stability and subgrade
settlement by BLE based on the landfill design by McGill is also included.

3.7.1 Excavation

Excavations of the existing residual soils are anticipated to achieve the design grades. An
estimated top of rock (auger refusal) contour map was developed as Figure 5 which is based on
auger refusal depths in the soil borings drilled at this site. Materials sufficiently hard to cause
refusal to the mechanical drill augers may result from continuous bedrock, boulders, lenses, ledges,
or layers of relatively hard rock within the overburden residual soil. Bedrock coring was
performed at eleven locations where refusal to augering occurred. Continuous rock was found with
varying recovery and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) as discussed above in Section 3.4.1.3. Due
to its typically varying surface, the actual occurrence of hard rock during site grading may vary
somewhat from that presented in Figure 5.

Very dense soil and partially weathered rock such as that encountered in the borings may present
some difficulty in excavating during construction. There is usually no sharp distinction between
soil and rock in residual soil areas. Typically, the degree of weathering simply decreases with
greater depth until solid rock is eventually reached. The partially weathered rock, as well as the
soil above, may also contain boulders, lenses or ledges of hard rock. The mechanical auger used in
this exploration could penetrate some of the partially weathered rock of the transitional zone. The
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

14
ease of excavation depends on the geologic structure of the material itself, such as the direction of
bedding, planes or weakness and spacing between discontinuities. Weathered rock or rock that
cannot be penetrated by the mechanical drill auger or that has a standard penetration resistance (N)
of less than or equal to 3-inches of penetration with 50 hammer blows will likely require heavy
excavating equipment with ripping tools or other methods for removal, if required.

3.7.2 Engineered Fill

The residual soils without organic material that will be excavated from the cell areas to achieve the
design subgrade elevations are suitable for use as structural fill. Some moisture modification
(wetting or drying) may be required depending on the particular area of excavation, as well as the
rainfall prior to and during excavation. Conventional compaction equipment and methods should
be appropriate.

Prior to placement of engineered fill, the stripped ground surface should be proofrolled with a
loaded dump truck or similar weight rubber tired vehicle. Areas which undergo excessive
deflection under the proofrolling should be over excavated to firm soils.

Fill soil used for raising site grades or for replacement of material that is over-excavated as a result
of poor proofrolling performance should be uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of the
standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) within 4% of the Standard Proctor optimum
moisture content.

Partially weathered rock may be mixed with the soil borrow materials provided it can be broken
down by the excavation and compaction equipment into particles with a maximum dimension of 6
inches. Larger boulders or rock pieces may be used in the lower portions of the deeper fills if the
boulders are placed individually and soil compacted around and over each boulder. Sufficient
quantities of soil should be mixed with the partially weathered rock so that voids do not result
between the pieces of partially weathered rock and the fill meets the compaction requirements. Fill
soils containing rock should not be placed within 5 vertical feet of any potential or proposed utility
locations.

Before filling operations begin, representative samples of each proposed fill material should be
collected and tested to determine the compaction and classification characteristics. The maximum
dry density and optimum moisture content should be determined. Once compaction begins, a
sufficient number of density tests should be performed to measure the degree of compaction being
obtained.

Earthwork cut or fill slopes outside of the cell area can be constructed as steep as 2H:1V
(horizontal:vertical). Structural fill slopes at the 2H:1V inclination should initially be constructed
at two to three feet beyond the design slope due to difficulty of compacting the edge of slopes, and
then trimmed to final grade leaving the exposed face well compacted. Relatively flat slopes, on the
order of 3H:1V or flatter, can be compacted in place without overfilling. Cut and fill slope surfaces
outside the cell area should be protected from erosion by grassing or other means. Where the cell
embankment is to be constructed on natural or existing fill slopes steeper than 4H:1V, we
recommend that the new fill soils be keyed into the slopes using horizontal benches to facilitate
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

15
placement and compaction of structural fill and to prevent formation of a potential slip surface.
Temporary excavation slopes should conform to OSHA regulations.

The surface of compacted subgrade soils can deteriorate and lose its support capabilities when
exposed to environmental changes and construction activity. Deterioration can occur in the form of
freezing, formation of erosion gullies, extreme drying, exposure for a long period of time, or rutting
by construction traffic. We recommend that if the fill soils within the cell become deteriorated or
softened, they be proofrolled, scarified and recompacted (and additional fill placed, if necessary)
prior to construction of the compacted cell subgrade. Additionally, any excavations through the
cell embankments should be properly backfilled in compacted lifts. Recompaction of subgrade
surfaces and compaction of backfill should be checked with a sufficient number of density tests to
determine if adequate compaction is being achieved.

3.7.3 Settlement Analysis

Site grading plans prepared by McGill (dated April 2, 2015) for construction of the proposed
landfill cell indicate primarily earthwork cut with minimal fill will be made to establish the cell
subgrade. Foundation support conditions for the landfill cell will consist of loose to dense residual
soils with typical thicknesses of 20 feet or less but extending to as much as approximately 60 feet
above bedrock in some locations, or by engineered fill overlying residual soils.

Moderate landfill subgrade settlements will be realized from compression of the residual soils and
the anticipated structural fill. The compressibility parameters for the soil and partially weathered
rock were estimated based on published correlations (Martin, R. E. 1987) with standard penetration
resistance (N-value) and our experience with similar conditions. The bedrock underlying the site is
relatively incompressible and will not realize appreciable settlements under the anticipated landfill
loading. The settlement at a given location will be a function of the waste and soil thicknesses at a
given point and the corresponding thickness and consistency of the foundation soils. Larger
settlements would be expected when placing greater heights of waste over greater thicknesses of
structural fill and residual soil. Settlement near the edge of the landfill should be minimal. The
subgrade of
Cell 1 will incur additional settlement from the construction of future adjacent waste cells that
provide for greater height of waste. The proposed load conditions from the potential future cells
are included in the settlement analysis presented in Appendix I. Settlement of the landfill base
liner system should occur relatively quickly from the compression of the residual sandy soils as the
cells are filled.

The results of the settlement analysis of areas overlying residual soil and structural fill conditions
are presented in Appendix I. Based on the proposed design grades, the estimated settlement at the
clay liner subgrade will vary from negligible to ½-foot. The anticipated settlements are well within
the tolerances of the planned HDPE geomembrane liner and liner system. The post-settlement
vertical separation between the proposed clay liner subgrade and seasonal high groundwater and
bedrock are also presented in Appendix I. The post-settlement vertical separation will be greater
than the minimum required 4 feet.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

16
3.7.4 Stability Analysis

The soil test borings and laboratory test results indicate that the on-site residual soils may be used
for landfill subgrade and for construction of earthwork cut and engineered fills and slopes to form
new cells or other required site features.

Shear strength parameters for structural fill, residual soils and the waste were developed based on
the subsurface data reported in the Design Hydrogeologic Report, our experience with similar
subsurface and site conditions and published correlations. The Macon County MSW Landfill is in
a seismic impact zone. The bedrock acceleration for the site is 0.23g based on the 2014 USGS
seismic hazard maps for a maximum horizontal acceleration with a 10 % chance of being exceeded
in 250 years. Based on the site subsurface conditions and the seismic bedrock acceleration of
0.23g, the resulting seismic coefficient within the waste mound used in the pseudo-static stability
analysis is 0.17 (RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic Design Guidance for MSW Landfill Facilities,
April 1995).

Static and pseudo-static (seismic) slope stability analyses were performed including both circular
and sliding block potential failure modes of the capped landfill, using the computer program
Slope/W by Geo-Slope International. The results of the analyses are presented in Appendix I.
The analysis indicates that the planned 3H:1V waste final slopes have a factor of safety of
approximately 2.3 for static conditions and 1.35 for seismic conditions. The analysis of interface
sliding failure along the base liner has factors of safety of 1.74 for static conditions and 1.02 for
seismic conditions. The interface sliding factor of safety is contingent upon the use of textured
geomembrane. The factors of safety were greater than 1.5 for all of the configurations under static
loads and greater than, or equal to 1.0 for seismic conditions. A safety factor of 1.5 or more is
considered acceptable for long term (steady state) static conditions. A factor of safety of 1.0 or
more is considered acceptable for seismic conditions. The analysis indicates that the planned
slopes are stable.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Phase 3 cell area is located on the western portion of the Macon County landfill
facility, and is not contiguous to the existing waste cell areas (Phases 1 and 2). Initial Phase 3
development will be an approximate 7.6-area area designated as Phase 3 (Cell No. 1). The Phase 3
area’s subsurface geology and hydrogeology are typical of Blue Ridge terrain in North Carolina.
No unusual or unexpected geologic features were observed in the Phase 3 area.

The groundwater table surface has a configuration similar to the site topography. Groundwater
flow in the Phase 3 area includes an east-west to northwest trending topographic ridge from which
groundwater flows to the north discharging into Lake Emory, and to the west and southwest
discharging into an unnamed drainage feature and retention pond. Other than these features, there
are no groundwater receptors to this landfill phase.

The landfill subgrade design should maintain a minimum four-foot post-settlement vertical
separation between the bottom elevation of the base liner system and the elevations of the bedrock
(Figure 5) and the 2013-2014 seasonal high groundwater (Figure 7). If bedrock is removed by
mechanical means during cell construction to levels below that shown on Figure 5, then any
INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

17
resulting redesign of the subgrade elevations should maintain the minimum required post-
settlement vertical separation with the final bedrock level. Likewise, if bedrock is encountered
during cell construction above the levels shown on Figure 5, then the minimum required post-
settlement vertical separation with the bedrock level should be established by raising the cell
grades as needed, unless the bedrock is removed.

This Design Hydrogeologic Report was prepared to satisfy the requirements specified in the North
Carolina Title 15A NCAC 13B .1623 (b). Based on the results of field and laboratory testing, it is
our opinion that the study area is geologically and hydrogeologically suitable for municipal solid
waste landfill cell development.

A comprehensive Environmental Monitoring Plan will be provided at a later date after the
proposed Phase 3 area has been designed by McGill. The Environmental Monitoring Plan will
include procedures and locations for groundwater, underdrain, surface water, and landfill gas
monitoring for landfill Phases 1, 2, and 3 in accordance with North Carolina Title 15A NCAC 13B
Rules .0601 and .1630 through .1637 (groundwater), 15A NCAC 13B Rule .0602 (surface water),
and 15A NCAC 13B Rule .1624(4) (landfill gas). This Plan will also include new proposed
monitoring locations for Phase 3.

5.0 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bouwer, H. and Rice, R.C., 1976, A slug test method for determining hydraulic conductivity of
unconfined aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells, Water Resources
Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 423-428.
- Slug testing data reduction procedures.

Brown, M.B., and others (compilers), 1985, Geologic Map of North Carolina: NCDNRCD, scale
1:500,000.
- General geologic setting, fault locations, and diabase dike locations.

Fetter, C.W., 1988, Applied Hydrogeology: Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, Ohio.
- Basic hydrogeologic principles and estimates of effective porosity in soils.

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.
- General geologic setting.

Hatcher, R.D., Jr., December 1979, The Coweeta Group and Coweeta Syncline: Major Features of the
North Carolina – Georgia Blue Ridge: Southeastern Geology, Volume 21, No. 1.

Howard, K.A., Aaron, J.M., Brabb, ,E.E., Borck, M.R., Gower, H.D., Hunt, S.J., Milton, D.J.,
Muehlberger, W.R., Nakata, J.K., Plafker, G., Prowell, D.C., Wallace, R.E., and Witkind, I.J.,
1978, Preliminary Map of Young Faults in the United States as a Guide to Possible Fault
Activity, United States Geological Survey Miscellaneous field Studies Map MF-916, scale
1:5,000,000.
- Holocene faults in the United States.

INC. Macon County MSW Landfill – Franklin, NC May 27, 2015
Design Hydrogeologic Report – Phase 3 (Cell No. 1) BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

18
Kruseman, G.P., and deRidder, N.A., 1989, Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data:
Publication 47, International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, Wageningen,
The Netherlands.
- Estimates of effective porosity in fractured bedrock.

Martin, R. E., Settlement of Residual Soils, Foundations and Excavations in Decomposed Rock of the
Piedmont Province, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No. 9, April 28, 1987, pp. 1-13.
- Foundation settlement.

Petersen, M.D., Moschetti, M.P., Powers, P.M., Mueller, C.S., Haller, K.M., Frankel, A.D., Zeng,
Yuehua, Rezaeian, Sanaz, Harmsen, S.C., Boyd, O.S., Field, Ned, Chen, Rui, Rukstales, K.S.,
Luco, Nico, Wheeler, R.L., Williams, R.A., and Olsen, A.H., 2014, Documentation for the
2014 update of the United States national seismic hazard maps: U.S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 2014-1091, 243 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141091.
- Seismic impact zones.

Richardson, G. N., Kavazanjian Edward, Jr., and Matasovic Neven, RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic
Design Guidance for MSW Landfill Facilities, April 1995.
- Seismic coefficient.

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.
- General geologic setting.

TABLES
TABLE 1
MONITORING WELL, PIEZOMETER, AND BORING SURVEY INFORMATION
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Soil Test Piezometer Ground TOC Status of
Boring Elevation Elevation Northing Easting Well/Piezometer
---BLE-1 2078.09 2081.10 557,993.41 693,239.72 Present
---BLE-2 2094.54 2097.47 557,870.28 693,607.21 Present
---BLE-3 2081.47 2084.33 557,666.48 693,782.19 Present
---BLE-4 2096.93 2099.80 557,238.47 693,782.94 Present
---BLE-5 2103.10 2106.17 557,841.09 693,407.97 Present
---BLE-6 2122.41 2125.43 557,674.55 693,571.99 Present
---BLE-7 2128.01 2131.11 557,464.27 693,888.05 Present
---BLE-8 2083.89 2086.97 557,233.65 693,541.51 Present
---BLE-9 2065.65 2068.76 557,376.37 693,411.58 Present
BLE-10 ---2125.43 NA 557,247.94 694,053.25 Abandoned
---BLE-11 2158.69 2161.80 557,575.33 694,139.17 Present
---BLE-12 2109.23 2112.25 557,377.54 694,294.85 Present
---BLE-13 2116.38 2119.50 557,652.86 694,424.14 Present
---BLE-14 2146.02 2148.59 557,393.99 694,599.83 Present
---BLE-15 2100.28 2103.52 557,095.96 694,432.06 Present
---BLE-16 2091.57 2094.67 556,836.77 694,273.66 Present
---BLE-17 2057.62 2060.75 557,024.62 693,860.66 Present
---BLE-18 2110.36 2113.57 557,702.85 694,721.10 Present
---BLE-19 2093.04 2096.48 557,865.75 694,291.14 Present
---BLE-20 2027.39 2030.26 558,225.18 693,574.71 Present
---BLE-21 2042.71 2045.86 558,126.50 693,339.53 Present
---BLE-22 2042.22 2044.57 558,174.37 693,064.36 Present
B-4 ---2097.30 NA NA NA Abandoned
B-5 ---2120.30 NA NA NA Abandoned
B-5R ---2121.32 NA 557,425.78 693,688.63 Abandoned
B-6 ---2147.00 NA NA NA Abandoned
---B-6R 2146.27 2149.49 557,583.84 694,576.67 Present
---B-16 2084.20 NA NA NA Abandoned
---B-16R 2079.74 2082.89 557,575.73 693,335.21 Present
---B-17 2061.50 NA NA NA Abandoned
---B-18 2082.00 NA NA NA Abandoned
---B-18R 2083.18 2086.28 557,088.88 694,199.23 Present
B-19 ---2156.90 NA NA NA Abandoned
---MW-1A NA 2012.25 NA NA Present
---MW-1B NA 2012.19 NA NA Present
---MW-1D NA 2013.65 NA NA Present
---MW-2 NA 2014.78 NA NA Present
---MW-3A NA 2070.55 NA NA Present
---MW-5D NA 2075.67 NA NA Present
---MW-10 NA 2115.08 NA NA Present
---MW-12 2056.01 2059.56 NA NA Present
---MW-14 NA 2049.54 NA NA Present
---MW-15 NA 2029.19 NA NA Present
---MW-17 NA 2133.30 NA NA Present
---MW-18 NA 2115.40 NA NA Present
---MW-19 NA 2021.00 NA NA Present
---MW-19A NA 2020.80 NA NA Present
---MW-20 NA 2015.40 NA NA Present
---MW-21 NA 2020.90 NA NA Present
---MW-22 NA 2020.92 NA NA Present
---MW-22A NA 2017.94 NA NA Present
---MW-23 NA 2007.08 NA NA Present
NOTES:
1. Bold borings represent those in the Phase 3 Area.
2. TOC = Top Of Casing
3. NA = Not Available . Information was not provided in previous SHR & DHR reports performed by others.
4. Elevations are in relative to an arbitrary site datum that is approxiamtely 0.86 FEET above mean sea level (MSL).
5. Horizontal coordinates are in feet relative to the North Carolina state plane grid NAD83(1986).
6. Surveying for locations BLE-1 through BLE-22 and B-5R through B-18R was performed by McGill Associates of Asheville, NC.
7. Surveying for locations B-4 through B-19 was provded in the Site Suitability Study for Macon County Landfill, Franklin,
North Carolina (Westinghouse Job No. 1351-89-369), dated January 17, 1990.
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Tab 1 Survey
Prepared By: PJVH
Checked By: JPU/MSP
TABLE 2
SOIL TEST BORING AND PIEZOMETER CONSTRUCTION DETAILS - PHASE 3
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Soil Test Piezometers &Ground TOC Unit Auger Auger Bedrock Drilling Screened Screened
Boring Monitoring Wells Elev.Elev.Screened Refusal Depth Refusal Elev.Depth Interval Depth Interval Elevation
---BLE-1 2078.09 2081.10 Bedrock 43.0 2035.1 43.0 -65.0 54.7 -64.7 2023.4 -2013.4
---BLE-2 2094.54 2097.47 Bedrock 34.0 2060.5 34.0 -55.0 43.7 -53.7 2050.8 -2040.8
---BLE-3 2081.47 2084.33 Deep Residuum 24.0 2057.5 ---13.8 -23.8 2067.7 -2057.7
---BLE-4 2096.93 2099.80 Bedrock 36.5 2060.4 36.5 -50.5 39.7 -49.7 2057.2 -2047.2
---BLE-5 2103.10 2106.17 Bedrock 41.0 2062.1 41.0 -71.0 57.0 -67.0 2046.1 -2036.1
---BLE-6 2122.41 2125.43 Bedrock 31.0 2091.4 31.0 -66.0 55.3 -65.3 2067.1 -2057.1
---BLE-7 2128.01 2131.11 Partially Weathered Rock 59.0 2069.0 ---48.7 -58.7 2079.3 -2069.3
---BLE-8 2083.89 2086.97 Bedrock 33.0 2050.9 33.0 -56.0 42.3 -52.3 2041.6 -2031.6
---BLE-9 2065.65 2068.76 Deep Residuum 29.5 2036.2 ---19.0 -29.0 2046.7 -2036.7
BLE-10 ---2125.43 NA ---45.5 2079.9 ---------
---BLE-11 2158.69 2161.80 Partially Weathered Rock 77.5 2081.2 ---66.7 -76.7 2092.0 -2082.0
---BLE-12 2109.23 2112.25 Bedrock 26.5 2082.7 26.5 -51.5 39.3 -49.3 2069.9 -2059.9
---BLE-13 2116.38 2119.50 Partially Weathered Rock/Residuum 55.0 2061.4 ---44.7 -54.7 2071.7 -2061.7
---BLE-14 2146.02 2148.59 Partially Weathered Rock/Residuum >90.0 <2056.0 ---77.0 -87.0 2069.0 -2059.0
---BLE-15 2100.28 2103.52 Partially Weathered Rock 36.5 2063.8 ---25.3 -35.3 2075.0 -2065.0
---BLE-16 2091.57 2094.67 Deep Residuum 36.0 2055.6 ---25.4 -35.4 2066.2 -2056.2
---BLE-17 2057.62 2060.75 Bedrock 22.0 2035.6 22.0 -46.0 34.0 -44.0 2023.6 -2013.6
---BLE-18 2110.36 2113.57 Deep Residuum 46.0 2064.4 ---35.0 -45.0 2075.4 -2065.4
---BLE-19 2093.04 2096.48 Bedrock 31.5 2061.5 31.5 -55.5 36.5 -46.5 2056.5 -2046.5
---BLE-20 2027.39 2030.26 Bedrock 7.0 2020.4 7.0 -39.5 24.2 -34.2 2003.2 -1993.2
---BLE-21 2042.71 2045.86 Deep Residuum 45.5 1997.2 ---35.2 -45.2 2007.5 -1997.5
---BLE-22 2042.22 2044.57 Deep Residuum 38.0 2004.2 ---27.6 -37.6 2014.6 -2004.6
B-4 ---2097.30 NA ---36.5 2060.8 ---------
B-5 ---2120.30 NA ---43.0 2077.3 ---------
B-5R ---2121.32 NA ---51.5 2069.8 ---------
B-6 ---2147.00 NA --->50.0 <2097.0 ---------
---B-6R 2146.27 2149.49 Deep Residuum >80.0 <2066.3 ---69.3 -79.3 2077.0 -2067.0
---B-16 2084.20 NA Bedrock 33.0 2051.2 33.0 -39.3 34.3 -39.3 2049.9 -2044.9
---B-16R 2079.74 2082.89 Bedrock 31.0 2048.7 31.0 -56.0 44.3 -54.3 2035.4 -2025.4
---B-17 2061.50 NA Partially Weathered Rock 54.5 2007.0 ---52.5 -57.5 2009.0 -2004.0
---B-18 2082.00 NA Partially Weathered Rock 40.0 2042.0 ---35.0 -40.0 2047.0 -2042.0
---B-18R 2083.18 2086.28 Partially Weathered Rock 39.0 2044.2 ---28.7 -38.7 2054.5 -2044.5
B-19 ---2156.90 NA ---76.0 2080.9 ---------
NOTES:
1. Measurements are in FEET
2. Elevations are in relative to an arbitrary site datum that is approxiamtely 0.86 FEET above mean sea level (MSL).
3. TOC = Top Of Casing
4. NA = Not Available
5. "B" indicates piezometers or soil borings drilled by Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical Services Inc.
Information is from Site Suitability Study for Macon County Landfill Franklin, North Carolina Westinghouse Job No. 1351-89-369 January 1990
6. Surveying for locations BLE-1 through BLE-22 and B-5R through B-18R was performed by McGill Associates of Asheville, NC.
7. Surveying for locations B-4 through B-19 Site Suitability Study for Macon County Landfill Franklin, North Carolina Westinghouse Job No. 1351-89-369 January 1990
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Tab 2 PZ Constr
Prepared By: PJVH
Checked By: TWM
TABLE 3
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MEASUREMENTS
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Groundwater Elevation Data Data from 2004 40 2014
Piezometer/Ground TOC 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2014 2013-2014 Seasonal Maximum Minimum Head Estimated Long-Term Piezometer/
Well Elevation Elevation TOB 24-hr 12/14/04 4/19/05 10/11/05 4/19/06 10/19/06 4/18/07 10/16/07 4/15/08 10/14/08 4/22/09 10/13/09 4/13/10 10/13/10 4/14/11 10/12/11 4/19/12 10/17/12 4/18/13 9/26/13 10/21/13 11/15/13 12/16/13 1/16/14 2/20/14 3/20/14 4/25/14 5/22/14 6/17/14 7/24/14 8/28/14 9/26/14 High Groundwater Elevation Elevation Difference Seasonal High Groundwater Well
BLE-1 2078.09 2081.10 NS 2022.69 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2021.80 2020.25 2018.93 2017.84 2018.06 2018.35 2018.76 2019.35 2019.74 2019.65 2019.00 2017.90 2017.02 2021.80 2021.80 2017.02 4.78 2026.3 BLE-1
BLE-2 2094.54 2097.47 NS 2048.74 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2050.45 2050.39 2050.35 2050.36 2050.36 2050.44 2050.42 2050.42 2050.47 2050.45 2050.37 2050.37 2050.37 2050.47 2050.47 2050.35 0.12 2055.0 BLE-2
BLE-3 2081.47 2084.33 2068.92 2067.87 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2066.63 2065.75 2064.84 2065.22 2068.17 2066.73 2066.31 2066.57 2067.10 2065.98 2065.69 2063.78 2063.02 2068.17 2068.17 2063.02 5.15 2072.7 BLE-3
BLE-4 2096.93 2099.80 NS 2059.73 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2059.63 2058.81 2058.35 2057.80 2058.66 2058.69 2058.89 2058.92 2059.32 2059.16 2058.64 2057.95 2057.48 2059.63 2059.63 2057.48 2.15 2064.1 BLE-4
BLE-5 2103.10 2106.17 NS 2045.70 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2044.90 2044.42 2044.10 2043.77 2043.61 2043.56 2043.67 2044.01 2044.12 2044.13 2044.17 2043.77 2043.57 2044.90 2044.90 2043.56 1.34 2049.4 BLE-5
BLE-6 2122.41 2125.43 NS 2067.11 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2067.27 2067.28 2067.22 2067.10 2067.14 2067.09 2067.07 2067.11 2067.10 2067.13 2067.13 2067.08 2067.02 2067.28 2067.28 2067.02 0.26 2071.8 BLE-6
BLE-7 2128.01 2131.11 2075.71 2077.06 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2076.99 2076.40 2075.86 2075.20 2075.36 2075.27 2075.35 2075.70 2075.87 2075.79 2075.64 2075.06 2074.50 2076.99 2076.99 2074.50 2.49 2081.5 BLE-7
BLE-8 2083.89 2086.97 NS 2048.29 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2047.95 2046.34 2046.19 2046.06 2048.61 2048.47 2048.36 2048.05 2048.49 2048.04 2046.26 2045.97 2045.85 2048.61 2048.61 2045.85 2.76 2053.1 BLE-8
BLE-9 2065.65 2068.76 2037.85 2043.38 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2042.36 2041.61 2040.99 2040.28 2042.21 2041.99 2042.06 2041.85 2042.56 2042.06 2041.20 2040.42 2039.91 2042.56 2042.56 2039.91 2.65 2047.1 BLE-9
BLE-11 2158.69 2161.80 2085.09 2085.29 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2085.51 2085.58 2085.42 2085.12 2084.90 2084.59 2084.59 2084.85 2085.03 2085.15 2085.44 2085.40 2085.19 2085.58 2085.58 2084.59 0.99 2090.1 BLE-11
BLE-12 2109.23 2112.25 NS 2067.73 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2066.80 2066.11 2065.57 2065.12 2066.48 2066.37 2066.26 2066.33 2066.89 2066.51 2065.84 2065.20 2064.65 2066.89 2066.89 2064.65 2.24 2071.4 BLE-12
BLE-13 2116.38 2119.50 2070.33 2072.98 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2072.30 2071.60 2071.00 2070.27 2070.48 2071.18 2071.30 2071.38 2071.58 2071.54 2070.98 2070.13 2069.50 2072.30 2072.30 2069.50 2.80 2076.8 BLE-13
BLE-14 2146.02 2148.59 2079.32 2084.62 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2084.59 2084.29 2083.85 2083.05 2083.04 2082.90 2082.91 2083.25 2083.38 2083.19 2083.04 2082.47 2081.95 2084.59 2084.59 2081.95 2.64 2089.1 BLE-14
BLE-15 2100.28 2103.52 2071.28 2077.33 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2076.25 2075.60 2075.07 2074.68 2076.22 2076.07 2076.02 2076.26 2076.75 2076.17 2075.47 2074.71 2074.16 2076.75 2076.75 2074.16 2.59 2081.3 BLE-15
BLE-16 2091.57 2094.67 2061.47 2060.17 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2059.77 2059.25 2058.79 2058.70 2059.94 2059.89 2059.83 2059.83 2060.20 2059.87 2059.17 2058.56 2058.12 2060.20 2060.20 2058.12 2.08 2064.7 BLE-16
BLE-17 2057.62 2060.75 NS 2034.52 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2034.78 2034.05 2033.69 2034.36 2034.72 2034.83 2034.67 2034.75 2034.78 2034.44 2034.20 2033.55 2033.13 2034.83 2034.83 2033.13 1.70 2039.3 BLE-17
BLE-18 2110.36 2113.57 2078.34 2082.35 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2080.95 2080.53 2079.57 2079.96 2081.37 2080.46 2080.13 2080.65 2081.07 2080.16 2079.72 2078.67 2077.81 2081.37 2081.37 2077.81 3.56 2085.9 BLE-18
BLE-19 2093.04 2096.48 NS 2058.74 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2058.64 2058.20 2057.79 2057.48 2058.42 2058.38 2058.46 2058.49 2058.73 2058.43 2057.93 2057.40 2057.07 2058.73 2058.73 2057.07 1.66 2063.2 BLE-19
BLE-20 2027.39 2030.26 NS 2014.04 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2013.89 2013.33 2012.91 2013.09 2013.75 2013.66 2013.53 2013.62 2013.75 2013.36 2012.94 2012.26 2011.96 2013.89 2013.89 2011.96 1.93 2018.4 BLE-20
BLE-21 2042.71 2045.86 2019.81 2019.89 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2018.78 2017.63 2016.52 2015.73 2016.67 2016.82 2016.94 2017.26 2017.67 2017.30 2016.46 2015.40 2014.57 2018.78 2018.78 2014.57 4.21 2023.3 BLE-21
BLE-22 2042.22 2044.57 2013.62 2012.62 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2012.37 2012.14 2011.95 2011.95 2012.06 2012.08 2012.05 2012.07 2012.07 2011.97 2011.87 2011.76 2011.65 2012.37 2012.37 2011.65 0.72 2016.9 BLE-22
B-6R 2146.27 2149.49 2074.97 2081.02 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2081.29 2080.90 2080.31 2079.45 2079.85 2079.47 2079.44 2079.78 2080.05 2079.83 2079.59 2078.83 2078.14 2081.29 2081.29 2078.14 3.15 2085.8 B-6R
B-16R 2079.74 2082.89 NS 2041.34 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2041.31 2040.15 2039.15 2038.30 2041.04 2040.56 2040.47 2040.43 2041.39 2040.52 2039.23 2038.03 2037.19 2041.39 2041.39 2037.19 4.20 2045.9 B-16R
B-18R 2083.18 2086.28 2064.73 2064.08 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP 2064.22 2063.82 2063.45 2063.24 2064.40 2064.26 2064.17 2064.23 2064.57 2064.23 2063.74 2063.23 2062.88 2064.57 2064.57 2062.88 1.69 2069.1 B-18R
MW-1A NA 2012.25 NA NA 2008.13 2007.27 2004.68 2004.84 2005.74 2005.25 2002.67 2006.39 2002.68 2006.17 2005.82 2005.75 2002.52 2007.46 2002.25 2007.60 2002.80 2007.60 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2008.13 2002.25 5.88 2012.6 MW-1A
MW-1B NA 2012.19 NA NA 2008.08 2007.21 2004.60 2004.80 2005.70 2005.25 2002.65 2006.34 2002.59 2006.11 2005.82 2005.71 2002.49 2007.39 2002.19 2007.58 2002.79 2007.59 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2008.08 2002.19 5.89 2012.6 MW-1B
MW-1D NA 2013.65 NA NA NP NP NP NP NP NP NS 2004.25 2003.21 2003.24 2008.65 2009.34 2007.15 2010.82 2007.20 2009.97 2007.89 2012.05 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2012.05 2003.21 8.84 2016.6 MW-1D
MW-2 NA 2014.78 NA NA 2002.58 2002.88 2002.31 2002.11 2001.88 2002.23 2000.96 2002.53 2000.82 2001.65 2002.07 2002.12 2000.33 2002.28 2000.55 2002.15 2000.99 2002.43 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2002.88 2000.33 2.55 2007.4 MW-2
MW-3A NA 2070.55 NA NA 2010.90 2011.33 2010.85 2010.63 2010.04 2010.63 2009.90 2010.64 2009.76 2010.30 2010.53 2011.36 2010.18 2010.74 2009.80 2010.29 2009.72 2010.64 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2011.36 2009.72 1.64 2015.9 MW-3A
MW-5D NA 2075.67 NA NA NP NP NP NP NP NP 2015.17 2016.19 2012.87 2015.12 2014.53 2015.18 2012.31 2016.64 2011.50 2015.77 2011.27 2017.13 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2017.13 2011.27 5.86 2021.6 MW-5D
MW-10 NA 2115.08 NA NA 2057.64 2059.06 2060.58 2059.04 2057.76 2056.90 2056.10 2055.02 2055.01 2054.01 2055.41 2059.06 2059.24 2057.61 2058.53 2057.80 2057.65 2058.37 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2060.58 2054.01 6.57 2065.1 MW-10
MW-12 2056.01 2059.56 NA NA NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 2043.30 2044.01 2044.08 2042.96 2043.03 2043.30 2042.68 2042.53 2041.94 2041.52 2044.08 2044.08 2041.52 2.56 2048.6 MW-12
MW-14 NA 2049.54 NA NA 2015.01 2015.14 2014.83 2014.64 2014.39 2014.70 2014.15 2014.09 2013.70 2014.63 2014.86 2015.59 2014.51 2015.21 2014.64 2015.03 2014.63 2015.42 NM NM NM 2015.14 2015.44 2015.37 2015.29 2015.39 2015.44 2015.22 2015.07 2014.79 2014.49 2015.44 2015.59 2013.70 1.89 2020.1 MW-14
MW-15 NA 2029.19 NA NA 2015.95 2015.84 2015.69 2015.46 2015.96 2015.46 2015.28 2014.64 2014.83 2015.74 2016.69 2015.97 2015.54 2016.13 2015.84 2016.38 2015.79 2016.14 NM NM NM 2016.26 2016.34 2016.51 2016.03 2016.07 2015.97 2015.79 2015.81 2015.58 2015.29 2016.51 2016.69 2014.64 2.05 2021.2 MW-15
MW-17 NA 2133.30 NA NA 2064.55 2066.23 2067.52 2066.38 2064.37 2063.19 2061.83 2059.56 2059.90 2058.58 2061.04 2065.48 2066.33 2063.68 2064.80 2063.52 2063.50 2063.49 NM NM NM 2068.80 2068.63 2068.56 2068.74 2069.23 2069.25 2069.15 2069.28 2068.96 2068.32 2069.28 2069.28 2058.58 10.70 2073.8 MW-17
MW-18 NA 2115.40 NA NA 2063.07 2064.41 2065.65 2064.59 2063.54 2062.76 2061.96 2060.59 2061.00 2059.89 2061.88 2064.12 2065.36 2063.60 2064.80 2063.93 2064.30 2064.32 NM NM NM 2067.19 2067.20 2067.30 2067.40 2067.74 2067.70 2067.60 2067.64 2067.17 2066.90 2067.74 2067.74 2059.89 7.85 2072.2 MW-18
MW-19 NA 2021.00 NA NA 2000.85 2000.90 2000.82 2000.70 2000.85 2000.70 2000.80 2001.18 2000.98 2000.65 2000.74 2000.77 2000.25 2000.48 2000.15 2000.60 2000.28 2000.50 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2001.18 2000.15 1.03 2005.7 MW-19
MW-19A NA 2020.80 NA NA 2001.39 2001.44 2001.35 2001.17 2001.27 2001.15 2001.18 2001.58 2001.33 2001.05 2001.12 2001.29 2000.70 2000.96 2000.58 2000.95 2000.69 2000.61 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2001.58 2000.58 1.00 2006.1 MW-19A
MW-20 NA 2015.40 NA NA 2003.85 2003.26 2002.78 2002.43 2003.91 2002.90 2001.76 2003.15 2002.20 2003.80 2004.97 2003.29 2002.30 2004.61 2001.85 2005.38 2003.05 2004.49 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2005.38 2001.76 3.62 2009.9 MW-20
MW-21 NA 2020.90 NA NA 2006.35 2006.11 2004.73 2004.13 2006.41 2005.30 2002.69 2005.15 2002.67 2005.80 2006.24 2005.70 2002.88 2006.10 2002.39 2006.64 2003.50 2006.85 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2006.85 2002.39 4.46 2011.4 MW-21
MW-22 NA 2020.92 NA NA 2007.97 2006.92 2004.52 2004.67 2004.02 2004.97 2002.44 2005.90 2002.42 2005.54 2005.53 2005.48 2002.36 2006.55 2001.92 2006.28 2002.55 2006.55 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2007.97 2001.92 6.05 2012.5 MW-22
MW-22A NA 2017.94 NA NA 2007.28 2006.77 2004.58 2004.68 2005.10 2005.04 2002.79 2005.89 2002.86 2005.51 2005.59 2005.55 2002.67 2006.44 2002.29 2006.28 2002.82 2006.43 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2007.28 2002.29 4.99 2011.8 MW-22A
MW-23 NA 2007.08 NA NA NP NP NP NP NP NP 2000.88 2001.98 2001.20 2001.65 2001.58 2001.46 2000.37 2001.57 2000.28 2001.95 2000.53 2001.43 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM -2001.98 2000.28 1.70 2006.5 MW-23
(11) Average Fluctuation = 4.5
NOTES:
1. Elevations are in relative to an arbitrary site datum that is approxiamtely 0.86 FEET above mean sea level (MSL).7. Bold water elevations represent the highest water level measurement in each well/piezometer.
2. TOC = Top Of Casing 8. TOB = Time Of Boring water level
3. NM = Not Measured 9. 24-hr = water level collected 24-Hours after drilling
4. NP = Not Present 10. Only the piezometers and wells for which water levels have been measured at least ten times and have been at the site longer than one year were used to calculate the Average Fluctuation
5. NA = Not Available 11. As a conservative approach, the Estimated Long-Term Seasonal High Groundwater Elevation was calculated by adding the Average Fluctuation (maximum level minus the minimum level from 2004 to 2014 in the monitoring wells) to the historical highest measured groundwater water elevation in each piezometer or well.
6. NS = Not Stable at time of measurement
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Tab 3 Water Levels
Prepared By: PJVH/IAI
Checked By: JPU/MSP
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF IN-SITU HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TESTING - SLUG TEST RESULTS
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Piezometer Method Data Type Aquifer K(ft/min)K(cm/sec)K(ft/day)
Unit
BLE-3 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Deep Residuum 8.9E-04 4.5E-04 1.28
BLE-4 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Bedrock 1.3E-04 6.8E-05 0.19
BLE-7 Bouwer-Rice Rising Head Partially Weathered Rock 4.0E-03 2.0E-03 5.698
BLE-8 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Bedrock 7.6E-04 3.9E-04 1.094
BLE-9 Bouwer-Rice Rising Head Deep Residuum 5.5E-04 2.8E-04 0.792
BLE-13 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Partially Weathered Rock 3.7E-04 1.9E-04 0.54
BLE-15 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Partially Weathered Rock 3.3E-04 1.7E-04 0.48
BLE-17 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Bedrock 5.2E-04 2.6E-04 0.74
BLE-18 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Deep Residuum 7.9E-04 4.0E-04 1.13
BLE-21 Bouwer-Rice Falling Head Deep Residuum 7.2E-04 3.6E-04 1.03
Maximum Hydraulic Conductivity 8.9E-04 4.5E-04 1.28
Deep Residuum Only Geometric Mean Hydraulic Conductivity 7.2E-04 3.7E-04 1.04
Minimum Hydraulic Conductivity 5.5E-04 2.8E-04 0.792
Maximum Hydraulic Conductivity 4.0E-03 2.0E-03 5.70
PWR Only Geometric Mean Hydraulic Conductivity 7.9E-04 4.0E-04 1.13
Minimum Hydraulic Conductivity 3.3E-04 1.7E-04 0.476
Maximum Hydraulic Conductivity 7.6E-04 3.9E-04 1.09
Rock Only Geometric Mean Hydraulic Conductivity 3.7E-04 1.9E-04 0.54
Minimum Hydraulic Conductivity 1.3E-04 6.8E-05 0.193
Maximum Hydraulic Conductivity 4.0E-03 2.0E-03 5.70
All Units Geometric Mean Hydraulic Conductivity 6.1E-04 3.1E-04 0.88
Minimum Hydraulic Conductivity 1.3E-04 6.8E-05 0.193
NOTES:
1. K = Hydraulic Conductivity
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Tab 4 Slug
Prepared by: PJVH
Checked by: MSP
TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF SOIL LABORATORY RESULTS
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Standard Proctor Remolded Permeability Conditions Consolidation Triaxial Shear
Split-Spoon Shelby Tube Bag Sample Nat. Moisture Hydraulic Cond.Opt. Moisture Max. Dry Pressure Moisture Content Dry Density Hydraulic Precon. Press.Virgin Slope Void Ratio C (ksf)f (deg)Specific Wet Unit Dry Unit Effective Total Atterberg Limits Grain Size (% by wt)% Pass
Boring Depth (ft)Depth (ft)Depth (ft)Content (%)(cm/sec)Content (%)Density (pcf)Gradient (PSI)%% Wet of Opt.pcf % of MDD Cond. (cm/sec)Pc (ksf)Cc (eo)total effective total effective Gravity Weight (pcf)Weight (pcf)Porosity (%)Porosity (%)LL PL PI Gravel Sand Silt Clay 200 Sieve USCS
BLE-1 1.0 - 2.5 --23.6%-------------------4.6%-43 23 20 0.0%49.6%19.6%30.8%50.4%CL
BLE-2 18.5 - 20.0 --8.0%-------------------31.0%47.0%28 26 2 12.8%65.0%19.8%2.4%22.2%SM
BLE-2 28.5 - 30.0 --3.7%---------------------22 22 NP 28.8%57.9%13.3%SM
BLE-3 3.5 - 5.0 --22.6%-------------------5.5%-45 28 17 5.6%42.1%24.5%27.8%52.3%ML
BLE-4 --5.0 - 10.0 19.3%-17.3%108.2 10 19.3%2.0%102.9 95.1%1.0E-06 -------2.70 122.8 102.9 --39 30 9 0.0%52.6%26.3%21.1%47.4%SM
BLE-4 -14.0 - 16.0 -20.5%2.4E-04 -----------0 0 29.20 42.25 2.74 113.5 94.2 29.5%44.9%42 39 3 2.7%71.9%22.4%3.0%25.4%SM
BLE-4 -18.0 - 20.0 -24.7%1.4E-05 ---------------2.76 121.9 97.7 24.0%43.4%38 35 3 0.0%57.4%36.4%6.2%42.6%SM
BLE-6 -6.0 - 8.0 -28.7%4.2E-04 ---------------2.78 95.2 74.0 25.5%57.5%43 32 11 1.1%68.5%22.8%7.6%30.4%SM
BLE-6 18.5 - 20.0 --25.2%-------------------27.0%-34 32 2 0.7%64.6%31.1%3.6%34.7%SM
BLE-6 28.5 - 30.0 --17.0%-------------------28.0%48.5%30 30 NP 0.0%70.6%25.6%3.8%29.4%SM
BLE-7 1.0 - 2.5 --13.0%-------------------17.0%-33 26 7 1.3%62.9%21.6%14.2%35.8%SM
BLE-7 28.5 - 30.0 --17.7%-------------------28.0%-42 40 2 0.0%67.8%29.6%2.6%32.2%SM
BLE-7 48.5 - 50.0 --24.1%-------------------30.0%47.5%33 NP NP 8.3%65.8%23.5%2.4%25.9%SM
BLE-11 -1.0 - 3.0 -26.3%1.3E-05 ---------------2.76 113.0 89.5 -47.9%44 24 20 0.0%35.2%19.9%44.9%64.8%CL
BLE-11 -5.0 - 7.0 -21.0%1.5E-04 ---------------2.79 110.1 91.0 21.0%47.8%40 31 9 0.0%54.8%37.9%7.3%45.2%SM
BLE-11 --15.0 - 20.0 17.9%-15.9%112.7 10 17.9%2.0%107.3 95.2%1.7E-06 ---0.650 0 21.06 38.76 2.79 126.5 107.3 --36 28 8 0.0%58.3%25.5%16.2%41.7%SM
BLE-11 63.5 - 65.0 --21.1%-------------------27.5%49.0%37 34 3 0.0%68.4%27.7%3.9%31.6%SM
BLE-13 38.5 - 40.0 --21.0%-------------------27.0%-37 35 2 0.0%66.6%30.3%3.1%33.4%SM
BLE-13 53.5 - 55.0 --14.9%-------------------29.0%50.0%28 26 2 0.0%68.9%29.0%2.1%31.1%SM
BLE-14 -28.0 - 30.0 -33.8%1.9E-05 ---------------2.79 112.0 83.7 22.5%52.0%53 41 12 0.0%54.8%38.6%6.6%45.2%SM
BLE-15 1.0 - 2.5 --22.5%-------------------5.0%-41 25 16 0.0%48.8%22.2%29.0%51.2%CL
BLE-15 -2.0 - 4.0 -17.2%4.5E-04 ---------------2.77 110.6 94.4 5.5%45.5%41 22 19 7.5%45.2%19.7%27.6%47.3%SC
BLE-15 --0.0 - 5.0 20.1%-18.1%107.7 10 20.1%2.0%102.3 95.0%1.9E-06 -------2.79 122.9 102.3 --43 28 15 0.6%48.3%24.6%26.5%51.1%ML
BLE-15 13.5 - 15.0 --16.1%-------------------25.5%-29 28 1 7.5%59.3%28.1%5.1%33.2%SM
BLE-15 23.5 - 25.0 --18.0%-------------------30.5%49.0%36 36 NP 0.0%71.2%27.3%1.5%28.8%SM
BLE-17 18.5 - 20.0 --8.6%-------------------31.0%47.5%29 28 1 6.3%69.6%23.1%1.0%24.1%SM
BLE-18 -18.0 - 20.0 -14.6%8.1E-05 ---------------2.77 113.4 98.9 30.5%42.8%31 30 1 0.0%77.2%20.3%2.5%22.8%SM
BLE-21 -1.0 - 3.0 -21.0%2.1E-04 --------7.21 0.18 0.78 ----2.76 121.5 100.3 15.0%41.8%43 32 11 6.5%54.4%23.2%15.9%39.1%SM
BLE-21 -8.0 - 10.0 -18.7%3.2E-05 ---------------2.77 120.6 101.7 32.5%41.2%37 34 3 1.9%78.8%18.9%0.4%19.3%SM
BLE-22 -3.0 - 5.0 -28.4%5.2E-04 ---------------2.77 110.9 86.4 3.7%49.9%55 33 22 0.0%38.0%25.9%36.1%62.0%MH
BLE-22 -6.0 - 8.0 -20.3%3.0E-06 ---------------2.77 124.3 103.3 25.0%40.1%31 27 4 19.0%49.7%24.1%7.2%31.3%SM
B-4 28.5 - 30.0 ------------------------31 30 1 ----31.0%-
B-16 --1.0 - 2.5 28.2%-21.9%101.4 unknown 22.4%0.5%97.3 96.0%2.1E-06 -------2.74 ----39 29 10 ----57.0%ML
B-16 6.0 - 7.5 --20.3%----------------------------33.5%-
B-16 8.5 - 10.0 ------------------------35 -NP -----SM
B-17 --1.0 - 5.0 21.1%-17.7%108.8 unknown 18.5%0.8%103.6 95.2%7.9E-06 -------2.76 ----35 27 8 ----44.0%ML
B-17 6.0 - 7.5 --10.4%---------------------37 -NP -----SM
B-17 8.5 - 10.0 --16.6%----------------------------29.0%SM
B-18 --1.0 - 3.0 18.2%-18.5%108.4 unknown 18.5%0.0%104.4 96.3%2.1E-07 -------2.76 ----33 20 13 ----56.0%CL
B-18 3.5 - 5.0 --13.9%----------------------------38.0%SM
B-18 6.0 - 7.5 ------------------------26 -NP -----SM
B-18 23.5 - 25.0 --25.8%----------------------------40.0%SM
B-18 28.5 - 30.0 ------------------------26 -NP ------
B-19 --1.0 - 3.0 45.5%-26.0%94.8 unknown 24.8%-1.2%91.4 96.4%5.8E-07 -------2.77 ----51 33 18 ----65.0%MH
B-19 8.5 - 10.0 --22.3%----------------------------46.5%SM
B-19 13.5 - 15.0 ------------------------44 -NP -----SM
B-19 28.5 - 30.0 --13.5%------------------------------
B-19 53.0 - 55.0 --13.8%---------------------34 -NP ------
B-19 58.5 - 60.0 --27.7%----------------------------29.0%SM
NOTES:
1. Effective Porosity (Specific Yield) is based on grain size analyses and Figure 4.11 (Fetter, 1994).
2. Total Porosity values in italic case are based on grain size analyses (Rawls and Brankensiek, 1989). Other values are based on laboratory tests.
3. USCS = Unified Soil Classification System. Refer to Appendix B for a description of the abbreviations.
4. NP = Not Plastic
5. NV = Not Viscous
6. Refer to Appendix G for lab data sheets.
13.3%
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Tab 5 Lab
Prepared by: PJVH
Checked by: MSP
TABLE 6
INTERSTITIAL GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY CALCULATIONS - PHASE 3
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Hydraulic Hydraulic Effective Groundwater
Geologic Unit Part of Velocity Calculation Conductivity (K)Gradient (i)Porosity (ne)Flow Velocity (V)
Water Table Aquifer (feet per day)(unitless)(unitless)(feet per day)
Max K, Max ne, & Min i 1.28 0.041 0.325 0.16
Deep Residuum Yes Geometric Mean K, and Average n e & i 1.04 0.095 0.250 0.40
Max K, and Average ne & i 1.28 0.095 0.250 0.49
Min K, Min n e, & Max i 0.79 0.150 0.150 0.79
Max K, Max ne, & Min i 5.70 0.041 0.310 0.76
Partially Weathered Rock Yes Geometric Mean K, and Average n e & i 1.13 0.095 0.293 0.37
Max K, and Average ne & i 5.70 0.095 0.293 1.86
Min K, Min n e, & Max i 0.48 0.150 0.275 0.26
Max K, Max ne, & Min i 1.09 0.041 0.100 0.50
Bedrock Yes Geometric Mean K, and Average n e & i 0.54 0.095 0.075 0.70
Max K, and Average ne & i 1.09 0.095 0.075 1.40
Min K, Min n e, & Max i 0.19 0.150 0.050 0.57
Notes:
1. Groundwater Flow Velocity is derived from V = Ki/ne where:
V = Groundwater Flow Velocity, K = Hydraulic Conductivity, i = Hydraulic Gradient, and ne = Effective Porosity.
2. The hydraulic conductivity values in the Residuum, Partially Weathered Rock, and Bedrock are from slug tests (Table 4).
3. Effective porosity values in the Residuum and Partially Weathered Rock are from soil laboratory tests (Table 5).
Effective porosity values in the Bedrock are from published values (5 to 10 percent) (Kruseman & deRidder, 1989).
4. Hydraulic gradient information is from the September 26, 2014 Water Table Elevation Contour Map (Figure 6).
The minimum hydraulic gradient measured in the Phase 3 area was measured between the 2060 and 2080-ft MSL groundwater contours near BLE-18 (approximately 0.041 ft/ft).
The maximum hydraulic gradient measured in the Phase 3 area was measured between the 2020 and 2070-ft MSL groundwater contours north of BLE-9 (approximately 0.150 ft/ft).
Tab 6 Flow
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Prepared By: PJVH
Checked By: MSP
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF GEOLOGIC AND HYDROGEOLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS OF GEOLOGIC UNITS - PHASE 3
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
Geologic Unit USCS Grain Size Total Porosity Effective Porosity K (cm/sec) via Slug Tests K (cm/sec) via Lab Tests
gravel sand silt clay max min geomean max min geomean max min geomean max min geomean
Shallow Residuum ML & CL 2.0%43.9%22.3%31.8%49.9%45.5%47.7%5.5%3.7%4.9%---5.2E-04 1.3E-05 1.4E-04
Deep Residuum ML & SM 2.5%62.5%27.3%7.7%57.5%40.1%45.4%32.5%15.0%24.5%4.5E-04 2.8E-04 3.7E-04 4.2E-04 3.0E-06 5.7E-05
Partially Weathered Rock SM 3.9%68.5%25.1%2.5%50.0%47.0%48.3%31.0%27.5%29.3%2.0E-03 1.7E-04 4.0E-04 ---
Bedrock Gneiss & Schist ----10.0%5.0%7.1%10.0%5.0%7.1%3.9E-04 6.8E-05 1.9E-04 ---
Notes:
1. Values are summarized from Table 4 (Summary of Slug Test Results) and Table 5 (Summary of Soil Laboratory Results).
2. Grain size values are averages
3. geomean = Geometric Mean
4. K = Hydraulic Conductivity
5. Values of porosity in Bedrock are from published values (Kruseman & deRidder, 1989).
Tab 7 Summary
1101-06 Macon Co DHR Ph3 C1.xlsx
Prepared by: PJVH
Checked by: MSP

FIGURES

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

DRILLING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES

APPENDIX A

DRILLING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES

SOIL TEST BORINGS

Soil test borings were advanced by mechanically twisting a continuous flight steel auger into the
soil. Soil sampling and penetration testing were performed in general accordance with ASTM D
1586. At regular intervals, soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4-inch ID, 2-inch OD,
split-tube sampler. The sampler was first seated 6 inches to penetrate any loose cuttings, and then
driven an additional 12 inches with blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number
of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches was recorded and designated the
"penetration resistance."

CORE DRILLING

Core drilling procedures were required to determine the character and vertical continuity of refusal
materials. Refusal to soil drilling equipment may result from hard cemented soil, soft weathered
rock, coarse gravel or boulders, thin rock seams, or the upper surface of solid continuous rock.

Prior to coring, a 4-inch diameter PVC pipe was seated in the refusal material and grouted into
place with a cement-bentonite mixture. Refusal materials were then cored according to the ASTM
D 2113 using a diamond-studded bit fastened to the end of a hollow, double-tube core barrel. The
NQ and HQ sizes designate bits that obtain rock cores 1-7/8 and 2-1/2 inches in diameter. Upon
completion of each drill run, the core inner barrel was brought to the surface, the core recovered
was measured, and the core samples were removed and placed in boxes for storage.

The core samples were returned to our laboratory where the refusal material was identified and the
percent core recovery and rock quality designation (RQD) was determined by a geologist. The
percent core recovery is the ratio of the core length obtained to the length cored, expressed as a
percent. The RQD is obtained by summing only those pieces of recovered core which are 4 inches
or longer and are at least moderately hard, and dividing by the total length cored. The percent core
recovery and the RQD are related to soundness and continuity of the refusal material. Refusal-
material descriptions, recoveries and the bit size are shown on a Test Boring Record (see
Appendix B).

APPENDIX B

SOIL AND ROCK BORING RECORDS AND WELL DIAGRAMS

APPENDIX C

PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION PROCEDURES

APPENDIX C

PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION PROCEDURES

Groundwater piezometers were installed in the boreholes resulting from the drilling process.
Approximate well locations are shown on the attached Piezometer/Boring Location Plan (Figure
3).

The piezometer consists of 2-inch diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 with flush-threaded joints)
inserted into 4.0 to 8.25-inch nominal diameter boreholes. The bottom 10 to 15-foot section of
each piezometer was a manufactured screen with 0.010-inch slots. Washed sand backfill was
placed around the outside of the pipe to at least 2 feet above the top of the well screen.

A bentonite seal (minimum 2-foot thick) was installed on top of the sand backfill up to within 5
feet of the ground surface. The upper 5 feet was filled cement-bentonite grout mixture. A PVC
cap was placed over the PVC well stickup on each piezometer. Piezometer construction records
are attached in Appendix B.

APPENDIX D

PRECIPITATION DATA
MONTHLY PRECIPITATION DATA - 2000 TO 2014
North Carolina Division 01
Macon County MSW Landfill
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Job Number J13-1101-06
Year
MONTH 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Monthly Avg.
January 4.85 3.91 5.7 2.65 2.14 2.83 5.32 4.56 2.67 4.38 6.67 2.83 5.22 10.83 3.12 4.51
February 2.85 3.92 1.6 6.45 4.59 3.87 2.44 1.86 4.69 2.51 3.98 2.86 2.29 4.44 4.01 3.49
March 4.47 5.39 6.15 4.99 3.17 4.77 1.99 4.03 5.5 5.01 3.9 8.89 5 4.82 3.38 4.76
April 6.53 1.82 2.24 6.54 3.53 4.68 5.11 2.76 3.61 4.08 3.18 6.21 5 6.89 5.32 4.50
May 3.19 3.48 4.48 9.73 4.53 2.9 3 1.58 3.03 8.87 4.87 3.37 5.3 6.69 4.02 4.60
June 4.3 5.71 3.37 5.83 6.17 8.48 5.08 3.83 2.4 4.88 3.76 5.07 2.86 8.15 5.03 4.99
July 4.2 6.19 3.68 8.21 6.24 8.3 3.56 4.73 4.26 3.89 3.79 4.28 6.95 13.57 5.39 5.82
August 3.4 3.97 3.63 6.17 4.17 6.96 5.55 2.18 6.11 5.34 4.74 2.78 4.87 5.25 3.91 4.60
September 4.24 4.69 7.03 4.34 14.01 0.88 6.6 2.64 2.17 8.71 4.54 5.75 5.23 3.77 4.43 5.27
October 0.07 1.7 4.93 2.53 2.34 3.17 4.75 3.27 2.34 6.54 3.75 3.26 4.76 1.94 5.71 3.40
November 4.86 1.88 5.37 6.22 6.4 4.79 4.66 2.29 2.51 6.03 3.53 6.58 0.91 4.88 3.91 4.32
December 2.57 3.38 6.5 4.2 5.05 4.26 3.84 4.61 6.56 8.64 4.52 5.81 6.1 8.56 3.51 5.21
SEASON Seasonal Avg.
Winter 12.17 13.22 13.45 14.09 9.9 11.47 9.75 10.45 12.86 11.9 14.55 14.58 12.51 20.09 10.51 12.77
Spring 14.02 11.01 10.09 22.1 14.23 16.06 13.19 8.17 9.04 17.83 11.81 14.65 13.16 21.73 14.37 14.10
Summer 11.84 14.85 14.34 18.72 24.42 16.14 15.71 9.55 12.54 17.94 13.07 12.81 17.05 22.59 13.73 15.69
Fall 7.5 6.96 16.8 12.95 13.79 12.22 13.25 10.17 11.41 21.21 11.8 15.65 11.77 15.38 13.13 12.93
Yearly Avg.
Yearly Totals 45.53 46.04 54.68 67.86 62.34 55.89 51.90 38.34 45.85 68.88 51.23 57.69 54.49 79.79 51.74 55.48
Notes:
1. Data Source: NOAA, public information - Updated through December 2014.
2. Monthly water levels were collected from September 2013 to Septamber 2014.
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
Ja
n
-
0
0
Ja
n
-
0
1
Ja
n
-
0
2
Ja
n
-
0
3
Ja
n
-
0
4
Ja
n
-
0
5
Ja
n
-
0
6
Ja
n
-
0
7
Ja
n
-
0
8
Ja
n
-
0
9
Ja
n
-
1
0
Ja
n
-
1
1
Ja
n
-
1
2
Ja
n
-
1
3
Ja
n
-
1
4
IN
D
E
X

V
A
L
U
E
(-)
D
r
o
u
g
h
t

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
(+
)

N
o
n
-Dr
o
u
g
h
t

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
DATE
PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX
North Carolina Division 1
Macon County MSW Landfill
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06

APPENDIX E

SLUG TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

APPENDIX E

SLUG TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

Slug tests were performed in the field to estimate the average hydraulic conductivity of the upper
formation material. Hydraulic conductivity is a constant of proportionality relating to the ease with
which a fluid passes through a porous medium. These data were used to estimate the groundwater
flow velocities of groundwater beneath the site. The field procedure was as follows:

 Measure the static groundwater elevation in the well to be tested.

 Affect an instantaneous change to the static water level in the well by removing a known
volume of water.

 Measure the rate at which shown on the attached sheets the water level recovers to its original
level.

The resulting slug test data (time versus water level) was reduced and hydraulic conductivity
values were calculated using the Bouwer and Rice (1976) Method for partially-penetrating wells in
an unconfined aquifer.

APPENDIX F

SOIL LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES

APPENDIX F

SOIL LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES

MOISTURE CONTENT AND UNIT WEIGHT

An undisturbed sample is trimmed in the laboratory into a right circular cylinder approximately
three to six inches long. The dimensions and weight of the specimen are determined and the total
unit weight calculated. Moisture contents are determined from representative portions of the
specimen. The soil is dried to a constant weight in an oven at 100 degrees C and the loss of
moisture during the drying process is measured. From this data, the moisture content and dry unit
weight are computed.

ATTERBERG LIMITS

The Atterberg Limits Tests, Liquid Limit (LL), and Plastic Limit (PL), are performed to aid in the
classification of soils and to determine the plasticity and volume change characteristics of the
materials. The Liquid Limit is the minimum moisture content at which a soil will flow as a heavy
viscous fluid. The Plastic Limit is the minimum moisture content at which the solid behaves as a
plastic material. The Plasticity Index (PI) is the numeric difference of Liquid Limit and the Plastic
Limit and indicated the range of moisture content over which a soil remains plastic. These tests are
performed in accordance with ASTM D 4318.

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

The distribution of soils coarser than the No. 200 (75-um) sieve is determined by passing a
representative specimen through a standard set of nested sieves. The weight of material retained on
each sieve is determined and the percentage retained (or passing) is calculated. A specimen may be
washed through only the No. 200 sieve, if the full range of particle sizes is not required. The
percentage of material passing the No. 200 sieve is reported. The distribution of materials finer
than No. 200 sieve is determined by use of the hydrometer. The particle sizes and distribution are
computed from the time rate of settlement of the different size particles while suspended in water.
These tests are performed in accordance with ASTM D 421, D 422, and D 1140.

HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

The ease with which water flows through a soil is characterized by its hydraulic conductivity. Two
general test methods are employed depending on the soil type.

The Constant Head method is used for coarse-grained materials (sands and gravels). The sample
is confined in permeameter chamber while water is allowed to flow through it from a constant head
level. The quantity of water flowing through the specimen in a given time period is used to
calculate the hydraulic conductivity. See ASTM D 2434 for a complete description of this test.

Fine-grained materials (silts and clays) require the use of a Flexible Wall Permeameter. The
sample is prepared in a similar manner as in the triaxial compression test. It is encased in a rubber
membrane and place inside a permeameter chamber. The specimen is back-pressure saturated and
allowed to consolidate under a specified effective stress. Water is then forced through the

specimen under a controlled hydraulic gradient. The quantity of water flowing into the sample in a
given time period is used to calculate the hydraulic conductivity. This test is performed in general
accordance wit ASTM D 5084.

APPENDIX G

SOIL LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Total Porosity from Percent Saturation, Specific Gravity, and Moisture Content
Macon County MSW Landfill - Phase 3 DHR
Franklin, North Carolina
BLE Project Number J13-1101-06
boring depth S Gs w e Vs Vv V n
BLE-4 14.0 - 16.0 69.0%2.74 20.5%0.814058 1 0.814058 1.814058 44.9%
BLE-4 18.0 - 20.0 89.0%2.76 24.7%0.765978 1 0.765978 1.765978 43.4%
BLE-6 6.0 - 8.0 59.0%2.78 28.7%1.352305 1 1.352305 2.352305 57.5%
BLE-11 1.0 - 3.0 79.0%2.76 26.3%0.918835 1 0.918835 1.918835 47.9%
BLE-11 5.0 - 7.0 64.0%2.79 21.0%0.915469 1 0.915469 1.915469 47.8%
BLE-14 28.0 - 30.0 87.0%2.79 33.8%1.083931 1 1.083931 2.083931 52.0%
BLE-15 2.0 - 4.0 57.0%2.77 17.2%0.83586 1 0.83586 1.83586 45.5%
BLE-18 18.0 - 20.0 54.0%2.77 14.6%0.748926 1 0.748926 1.748926 42.8%
BLE-21 1.0 - 3.0 81.0%2.76 21.1%0.718963 1 0.718963 1.718963 41.8%
BLE-21 8.0 - 10.0 74.0%2.77 18.7%0.699986 1 0.699986 1.699986 41.2%
BLE-22 3.0 - 5.0 79.0%2.77 28.4%0.995797 1 0.995797 1.995797 49.9%
BLE-22 6.0 - 8.0 84.0%2.77 20.3%0.669417 1 0.669417 1.669417 40.1%
Notes:
1. S = percent Saturation
2. Gs = Specific Gravity
3. w = percent Moisture Content
4. e = Void Ratio (Vv/Vs); (Gs*w/S)
5. Vs = Volume of the Solids
6. Vv = Volume of the Voids
7. V = Total Volume (Vv+Vs)
8. n = Total Porosity

APPENDIX H

FRACTURE TRACE ANALYSIS DATA
ROSE DIAGRAM OF FRACTURE TRACE AND LINEAMENT TRENDS
Percentage Expressed as Length of Fracture Traces/Lineaments
Data Collected within 1.5-Mile Radius of the Macon County MSW Landfill
Franklin, NC
BLE Job Number J13-1101-06
1101-06 Macon Co LF FTA.xls
Rose Diagram (Lineament Length)
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
NORTH
WEST EAST
SOUTH
N = 50
N31-70W
N11-50E
ROSE DIAGRAM OF FRACTURE TRACE AND LINEAMENT TRENDS
Percentage Expressed as Number of Fracture Traces/Lineaments
Data Collected within 1.5-Mile Radius of the Macon County MSW Landfill
Franklin, NC
BLE Job Number J13-1101-06
1101-06 Macon Co LF FTA.xls
Rose Diagram (Lineament Trends)
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
9.0%
10.0%
NORTH
WEST EAST
SOUTH
N = 50
N31-70W
N11-50E

APPENDIX I

GEOTECHNICAL CALCULATIONS