Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4002_GreeneCounty_GWMR_DIN28121_20160303Greene County Active C&D over Closed Unlined Landfill Walstonburg, North Carolina March 2016 MESCO Project Number: G16010.0 Semi-Annual Water Quality Monitoring Report with Corrective Action Update Prepared for Municipal Engineering Services Company, P.A. Garner and Boone, North Carolina Permit Number: 40-02 P.O. Box 97 Garner, NC 27529 License No. C-0281 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Introduction Page 1 Background Page 1 Sampling Procedures Page 2 Field Parameter Data Page 2 Laboratory Results Page 2 Quality Control Samples Page 2 Groundwater Samples Page 2 Surface Water Samples Page 3 Groundwater Characterization Page 3 Corrective Action Update Page 3 Findings Page 4 Closing Page 4 FIGURES Topographic Map with Site Location Figure 1 Potentiometric Map of Surficial Aquifer with Detections Above 2L Standards Figure 2 Biochlor Natural Attenuation Screening Protocol Matrix (MW-4) Figure 3 Bioscreen Model for Benzene Data Input Sheet (Source to MW-4 to MW-7 to Compliance Line)Figure 4 Bioscreen Model for Benzene (Current 2016) Figure 5 Bioscreen Model for Benzene (Predicted 3016) Figure 6 Bioscreen Model for Benzene (Predicted 2032) Figure 7 Time-Series Graphs of Select Detections Figure 8 Histograms of VOC Concentrations in MW-4 Figure 9 TABLES Groundwater Monitoring Well Construction Table Table 1 Sampling and Analysis Summary Table 2 Detections Above SWSL, GWP, 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL (Appendix 1) Table 3 Detections Above MDL (Appendix II) Table 4 Hydrologic Properties at Monitoring Well Locations Table 5 MNA Parameter Data Summary Table 6 APPENDIX Laboratory Analysis Reports, Field Parameter Data and Chains of Custody Appendix A October 28, 2016 Ms. Jaclynne Drummond Solid Waste Section (SWS) NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) 2090 US Highway 70 Swannanoa, NC 28778 Subject: Semi-Annual Water Quality Monitoring Report with Corrective Action Update Greene County Active C&D and Closed Unlined Landfill MESCO Project No. G16010.0 Permit No. 40-02 Event Date: March 3, 2016 Dear Ms. Drummond: Introduction On behalf of Greene County, Municipal Engineering Services Company, P.A. (MESCO) is pleased to present this Semi-Annual Water Quality Report with Corrective Action Update for spring 2016 at the active Construction and Demolition (C&D) Landfill and closed Unlined Sanitary Landfill. NCDEQ Solid Waste Rules 15ANCAC13B.1630 through .1637 requires that Greene County provide this report to the SWS on a semi-annual basis. This report documents the quality of the ground and surface waters during this monitoring event performed on March 3, 2016. A brief corrective action update and qualitative evaluation comparing current and historical data is also presented. Constituents detected in concentrations above North Carolina Groundwater Standards (2L) were benzene and vinyl chloride in sample MW-4 and vinyl chloride in sample MW-5 which are both located within the compliance boundary. Background The Greene County Active Construction and Demolition (C&D) Landfill and Closed Unlined Sanitary Landfill is located off Fire Tower Road (SR 1239), Walstonburg, Greene County, North Carolina and operates under permit #40- 02. A topographic map showing the facility location is included as Figure 1. Prior to operating as a C&D landfill, the site operated as an approximate 13-acre unlined sanitary landfill which stopped receiving waste prior to January 1, 1998 in accordance with the Greene County Transition Plan. The C&D landfill is operating on a portion of the top of the MSW unit which are monitored together. Water quality has been monitored at this facility on at least a semi-annual basis since 1994. MESCO submitted an Assessment and Corrective Action (ACM) [DIN:8776] report dated August 30, 2007. MESCO then developed a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) which was revised on February 12, 2010 (CAP-Rev. 5) [DIN:9670] and subsequently approved on February 16, 2010 [DIN:671]. Groundwater remediation using monitored natural attenuation (MNA) was initiated on March 30, 2010 and has continued on a semi-annual basis ever since. A Corrective Action Evaluation Report (CAER) was submitted to the SWS on October 16, 2012 (DIN:17502) which was reviewed by the SWS and responded to on December 6, 2012 (DIN:17837). As specified within rule 15A NCAC 13B.1632(i), the SWS Environmental Monitoring Report Form, and SWS memorandums this report contains sampling procedures, field and laboratory results, corrective action update, groundwater and surface water characterization, and findings. Well construction summary table, sampling and analysis summary table, detections compared to Standards tables, a groundwater flow directions/rates table, potentiometric map, natural attenuation screening matrix score table, quality assurance/quality control data, and field/laboratory analytical data results are enclosed herein. Sampling Procedures Environment 1 (E1) of Greenville, NC, reportedly performed this monitoring event utilizing portable monitoring methodology in accordance with the approved Sampling & Analysis Plan (SAP) contained in the CAP-Rev.5. E1 reportedly collected groundwater samples from all locations designated in the SAP which includes five downgradient groundwater monitoring wells (MW-4, MW-5, MW-6, MW-7 and MW-8), one background well (MW-1R) and both surface water points (Upstream and Downstream). Quality control measures included submittal and analysis of an equipment blank (EB), field blank (FB) and trip blank (TB). Surface water and groundwater monitoring locations are depicted on Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. A summary detailing the construction of the water monitoring wells is presented on Table 1. Static water levels in each well were measured electronically prior to purging. Samples were transported under C- O-C protocol and analyzed within the hold times specified for each method. Field Parameter Data E1 recorded the field parameters pH, specific conductance, temperature, turbidity, oxidation reduction potential (ORP) and dissolved oxygen (DO) which are presented in the laboratory analysis report in Appendix A. Laboratory Results E1 performed analysis of groundwater samples for the constituents listed in Appendix I of 40 CFR 258. Both total and dissolved metals listed in Appendix II of 40 CFR 258 were reported as requested by the SWS in the CAER response (DIN 17837). In addition, samples from MW-4 and background well MW-1, were analyzed for the full suite of MNA performance parameters as part of corrective action. MNA analysis was conducted for volatile fatty acids, methane, ethane, ethene, and dissolved hydrogen by Microseeps Inc. of Pittsburgh, PA. A sampling and analysis table summarizing the locations, constituents, and methods is presented on Table 2. Laboratory results and C-O-Cs are contained in Appendix A. Water samples were analyzed to the laboratory-established Method Detection Limits (MDL), which are at or below current Solid Waste Section Limits (SWSL). Table 3 summarizes Appendix I constituents detected in groundwater and surface water samples above the current SWSL, Groundwater Protection Standards (GWP), North Carolina Groundwater Standards (2L), the applicable Class C North Carolina Surface Water Standards (2B) and Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL) also known as “Federal Primary Drinking Water Standards”. Table 4 summarizes the few detections of an Appendix II exclusive metal tin (defined in this report as not also listed in Appendix I ) above the MDL. Quality Control Samples Ten of the seventeen (59%) targeted total metals were detected in low non-quantifiable (“j” qualified) concentrations in the FB. Since no metals were detected in excess of any regulatory Standard, any lab or field induced artifact contamination is inconsequential. 2 Groundwater Samples Metals were not detected in any sample above any applicable groundwater protection Standards. VOCs benzene and vinyl chloride have consistently been detected in concentrations above their respective 2L Standards in samples collected from MW-4 since the detection levels were reduced in March 2007. Vinyl chloride was also detected in sample MW-5 and has previously been detected during the spring events of 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015. Tin, the only Appendix II exclusive parameter, defined in this report as not also listed in Appendix I, was detected below the SWSL and applicable regulatory compliance Standard. A site map spatially depicting contaminants detected in excess of the 2L Standard during this event is presented on Figure 2. Surface Water Samples No constituents were detected in excess of applicable 2B Standard in the surface water sample collected upstream or downstream of the facility. Groundwater Characterization A single-day potentiometric map of the uppermost aquifer is presented on Figure 2, using ground water elevation data reported by E1 for this event. Reported groundwater elevations were all within their respective historically identified range. Groundwater flow direction and rates were calculated based on reported data and are included in Table 5. Estimated flow flow rates during this event, quantified through modified Darcy's equation, ranged from about 7 ft/yr (MW-4) to 431 ft/yr (MW-8) for a site-wide average of approximately 96 ft/yr. Corrective Action Update Semi-annual MNA monitoring of MW-4 was initiated on March 30, 2010 and has consistently been performed for the full suite of SWS recommended parameters for 13 consecutive semi-annual events. The most recent MNA data is presented in Table 5. The MNA data for this event at MW-4 was entered into the Biochlor natural attenuation screening protocol matrix developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The screening matrix score for this event was 18 which is between 15-20 which the USEPA interprets as adequate evidence of anaerobic biodegredation of chlorinated organics (Figure 3). Interpretation of geochemical data indicates that most of the biodegredation capacity near MW-4 is due to methanogensis the final terminal electron acceptor which should degrade the chlorinated solvents. Benzene, a fuel hydrocarbon, may persist in groundwater with the geochemistry characteristics observed near MW-4 however; it can still biologically degrade but at a slower pace and less efficiently compared to the chlorinated solvents. To predict the fate of benzene as detected at MW-4 along the eastern flow path through MW-7 modeling was performed through Bioscreen which was developed by the USEPA. The model was constructed using recent and historical field data and conservative assumptions with input data presented in Figure 4. The facility opened in 1982 and the first detection of benzene was observed 25 years later at MW-4. For modeling purposes, a conservative assumption was made that the source was located at the downgradient edge of waste and based on field quantified hydrogeological and conservatively estimated dispersion and absorption rates the release was assumed to have occurred in 2000. The concentration of benzene at the source is unknown but the initial detection at MW-4 peaked at 5.8 ug/L in 2009. The model was then calibrated by manipulating the source concentration til it reached 37 ug/L which matched the measured levels at MW-4 during each of the last 7 years. The source concentration used is conserevative since it is higher than detected in leachate samples collected from several other similar landfills throughout NC. The model was run for periods between 16 and 1,016 years which corresponds to now and 3 Figures Topographic Map with Site Location FIGURE 1 Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF QUADRANGLE LEGEND NOTE: Topographical map assembled from corresponding USGS 7.5-min. quadrangles of the subject region. 105 Landfill Road (SR1257) Walstonburg, NC Lat:35-31-29.7520 Long:-77-41-49.4325 Northing:648520.2533 Easting:2387660.4409 DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM 3,334'0 Natural Attenuation Interpretation ScoreNatural Attenuation Interpretation Score Screening 0t 5 Screening Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics 0 to 5 Protocol Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics 6to14 Score:18Protocol Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation of chlorinated organics 6 to 14 Score:18 Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics 15 to 20The following is taken from the USEPA protocol (USEPA, 1998). Th lt f thi i h l t Strong e idence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics >20 Scroll to End of Table The results of this scoring process have no regulatory significance. Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics >20 Scroll to End of Table * d ti d hl i ti g Concentration in Points* reductive dechlorinationCo ce a o osAnalysisMost Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awardedyp Oxygen*<05mg/L Tolerated suppresses the reductive pathway at higher 0Oxygen<0.5 mg/L Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher 0 concentrationsconcentrations >5mg/L Not tolerated; however VC may be oxidized aerobically 0> 5mg/L Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically 0 Nitrate*<1 mg/L At higher concentrations may compete with reductive 2 pathwaypy Iron II*>1 mg/L Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under 3og/educt e pat ay poss b e; C ay be o d ed u de 3 Fe(III)-reducing conditionsFe(III) reducing conditions Sulfate*<20 mg/L At higher concentrations may compete with reductive 2Sulfate<20 mg/L At higher concentrations may compete with reductive 2 pathwaypathway Slfid*>1 /L R d ti th ibl 0Sulfide*>1 mg/L Reductive pathway possible 0 Methane*>0.5 mg/L Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates 3ggp , Oxidation <50 millivolts (mV)Reductive pathway possible 1Oxidation<50 millivolts (mV)Reductive pathway possible 1 ReductionReduction Potential* (ORP)< 100mV Reductive pathway likely 0Potential* (ORP)<-100mV Reductive pathway likely 0 H*H9 Oi l f d i h 0pH*5 < pH < 9 Optimal range for reductive pathway 0 TOC >20 mg/L Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be 0ggy ; ; natural or anthropogenicnatural or anthropogenic Temperature*>20oC AtT>20oC biochemical process is accelerated 0Temperature>20 C At T >20 C biochemical process is accelerated 0 Cb Diid >2 b k d Ulti t id ti d ht d t 1Carbon Dioxide >2x background Ultimate oxidative daughter product 1 Alkalinity >2x background Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer 1 minerals Chloride*>2x background Daughter product of organic chlorine 0Chloride2x background Daughter product of organic chlorine 0 Hydrogen >1 nM Reductive pathway possible VC may accumulate 3Hydrogen>1 nM Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate 3 V l til F tt A id >0 1 /L I t di t lti f bi d d ti f ti 0Volatile Fatty Acids >0.1 mg/L Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic 0 compounds; carbon and energy source BTEX*>0.1 mg/L Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination 0 PCE*Material released 0PCEMaterial released 0 TCE*Daughter product of PCE a/0TCE*Daughter product of PCE 0 DCE*Daughter product of TCE. If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter 0 product of TCE a/; 1,1-DCE can be a chem. reaction product of TCAproduct of TCE ;1,1 DCE can be a chem. reaction product of TCA VC*Daughter product of DCE a/2VCDaughter product of DCE 2 111 Mt il l d 01,1,1- Material released 0 Trichloroethane* DCA Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions 0 Carbon Material released 0CarbonMaterial released 0 TetrachlorideTetrachloride Chloroethane*Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions 0ChloroethaneDaughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions 0 Eth /Eth 001 /L Dht dtfVC/th 0Ethene/Ethane >0.01 mg/L Daughter product of VC/ethene 0 >0.1 mg/L Daughter product of VC/ethene 0gg Chloroform Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride 0ChloroformDaughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride 0 Dichloromethane Daughter product of Chloroform 0DichloromethaneDaughter product of Chloroform 0 *idli* required analysis. a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product (i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL). End of FormEnd of Form BI O S C R E E N N a t u r a l A t t e n u a t i o n D e c i s i o n S u p p o r t S y s t e m Gr e e n e C l o s e d Da t a I n p u t I n s t r u c t i o n s : A ir F o r c e C e n t e r f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l E x c e l l e n c e V e r s i o n 1 . 4 M W 4 t h r u M W 7 - 3 / 3 / 1 6 1. Enter value directl y ....o r Ru n N a m e 2. Calculate b y fillin g in g re y 1. H Y D R O G E O L O G Y 5 . G E N E R A L c e l l s b e l o w . ( T o r e s t o r e Se e p a g e V e l o c i t y * Vs 7. 3 (f t / y r ) Mo d e l e d A r e a L e n g t h * 2 5 0 (f t ) f o r m u l a s , h i t b u t t o n b e l o w ) . or Mo d e l e d A r e a W i d t h * 1 0 0 (f t ) Va r i a b l e * D a t a u s e d d i r e c t l y i n m o d e l . Hy d r a u l i c C o n d u c t i v i t y K 1. 1 E - 0 4 (c m / s e c ) Si m u l a t i o n T i m e * 1 0 1 6 (y r ) V a l u e c a l c u l a t e d b y m o d e l . Hy d r a u l i c G r a d i e n t i 0. 0 0 9 (f t / f t ) ( D o n ' t e n t e r a n y d a t a ) . Po r o s i t y n 0. 1 4 (- ) 6. S O U R C E D A T A So u r c e T h i c k n e s s i n S a t . Z o n e * 1 0 (f t ) 2. D I S P E R S I O N So u r c e Z o n e s : Lo n g i t u d i n a l D i s p e r s i v i t y * al p h a x 12 . 5 (f t ) Wi d t h * ( f t ) C o n c . ( m g / L ) * Tr a n s v e r s e D i s p e r s i v i t y * al p h a y 1. 3 (f t ) 10 0 0 . 0 3 7 1 Ve r t i c a l D i s p e r s i v i t y * al p h a z 0. 0 (f t ) 10 0 0 . 0 3 7 or 10 0 0 . 0 3 7 Es t i m a t e d P l u m e L e n g t h Lp 25 0 (f t ) 10 0 0 . 0 3 7 10 0 0 . 0 3 7 3. A D S O R P T I O N S o u r c e H a l f l i f e ( s e e H e l p ) : Re t a r d a t i o n F a c t o r * R 1. 5 (- ) 2 > 1 0 0 0 (y r ) V i e w o f P l u m e L o o k i n g D o w n or In s t . R e a c t . 1 s t O r d e r So i l B u l k D e n s i t y rh o 1. 7 (k g / l ) So l u b l e M a s s 10 (K g ) O b s e r v e d C e n t e r l i n e C o n c e n t r a t i o n s a t M o n i t o r i n g W e l l s Pa r t i t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t Ko c 38 (L / k g ) In S o u r c e N A P L , S o i l If N o D a t a L e a v e B l a n k o r E n t e r " 0 " Fr a c t i o n O r g a n i c C a r b o n fo c 1. 0 E - 3 (- ) 7. F I E L D D A T A F O R C O M P A R I S O N Co n c e n t r a t i o n ( m g / L ) .0 0 3 . 0 4. B I O D E G R A D A T I O N Di s t . f r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) 50 2 5 0 1s t O r d e r D e c a y C o e f f * la m b d a 3. 5 E - 1 (p e r y r ) or 8. C H O O S E T Y P E O F O U T P U T T O S E E : So l u t e H a l f - L i f e t- h a l f 2. 0 0 (y e a r ) or I n s t a n t a n e o u s R e a c t i o n M o d e l De l t a O x y g e n * DO 1. 1 7 (m g / L ) De l t a N i t r a t e * NO 3 0. 0 2 (m g / L ) Ob s e r v e d F e r r o u s I r o n * Fe 2 + 78 . 5 8 (m g / L ) De l t a S u l f a t e * SO 4 25 . 8 (m g / L ) Ob s e r v e d M e t h a n e * CH 4 8. 6 (m g / L ) Ve r t i c a l P l a n e S o u r c e : L o o k a t P l u m e C r o s s - S e c t i o n an d I n p u t C o n c e n t r a t i o n s & W i d t h s fo r Z o n e s 1 , 2 , a n d 3 L W o r or o ror 1 2 3 4 5 or o r Vi e w O u t p u t Paste Example Dataset Vi e w O u t p u t Restore Formulas for Vs, Di s p e r s i v i t i e s , R , l a m b d a , o t h e r RU N CE N T E R L I N E RU N A R R A Y Help Recalculate This Sheet DI S S O L V E D H Y D R O C A R B O N C O N C E N T R A T I O N A L O N G P L U M E C E N T E R L I N E ( m g / L a t Z = 0 ) Di s t a n c e f r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) TY P E O F M O D E L 0 2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 5 0 1 7 5 2 0 0 2 2 5 2 5 0 No D e g r a d a t i o n 0. 0 3 7 0 . 0 3 6 0 . 0 3 1 0 . 0 2 1 0 . 0 0 9 0 . 00 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 1s t O r d e r D e c a y 0. 0 3 7 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 In s t . R e a c t i o n 0. 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 Fi e l d D a t a f r o m S i t e 0. 0 0 3 0.000 0 0 1 0 0. 0 1 5 0. 0 2 0 0. 0 2 5 0. 0 3 0 0. 0 3 5 0. 0 4 0 o n c e n t r a t i o n ( m g / L ) 1s t O r d e r D e c a y In s t a n t a n e o u s R e a c t i o n No D e g r a d a t i o n Fi e l d D a t a f r o m S i t e Ti m e : 16 Y e a r s 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 0 5 0 .01 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 2 5 0 3 0 0 C o Di s t a n c e F r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) Ne x t T i m e s t e p Pr e v T i m e s t e p Ca l c u l a t e An i m a t i o n Re c a l c u l a t e T h i s Sheet Re t u r n t o In p ut DI S S O L V E D H Y D R O C A R B O N C O N C E N T R A T I O N A L O N G P L U M E C E N T E R L I N E ( m g / L a t Z = 0 ) Di s t a n c e f r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) TY P E O F M O D E L 0 2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 5 0 1 7 5 2 0 0 2 2 5 2 5 0 No D e g r a d a t i o n 0. 0 2 1 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 02 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 2 1s t O r d e r D e c a y 0. 0 2 1 0 . 0 0 7 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 In s t . R e a c t i o n 0. 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 Fi e l d D a t a f r o m S i t e 0. 0 1 0 0. 0 1 5 0. 0 2 0 0. 0 2 5 o n c e n t r a t i o n ( m g / L ) 1s t O r d e r D e c a y In s t a n t a n e o u s R e a c t i o n No D e g r a d a t i o n Fi e l d D a t a f r o m S i t e Ti m e : 1, 0 1 6 Y e a r s 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 0 5 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 2 5 0 3 0 0 C o Di s t a n c e F r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) Ne x t T i m e s t e p Pr e v T i m e s t e p Ca l c u l a t e An i m a t i o n Re c a l c u l a t e T h i s Sheet Re t u r n t o In p ut DI S S O L V E D H Y D R O C A R B O N C O N C E N T R A T I O N A L O N G P L U M E C E N T E R L I N E ( m g / L a t Z = 0 ) Di s t a n c e f r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) TY P E O F M O D E L 0 2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 5 0 1 7 5 2 0 0 2 2 5 2 5 0 No D e g r a d a t i o n 0. 0 3 6 0 . 0 3 6 0 . 0 3 6 0 . 0 3 6 0 . 0 3 4 0 . 02 9 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 1 3 0 . 0 0 7 0 . 0 0 2 0 . 0 0 1 1s t O r d e r D e c a y 0. 0 3 6 0 . 0 1 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 . 0 0 1 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 In s t . R e a c t i o n 0. 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 Fi e l d D a t a f r o m S i t e 0 0 1 0 0. 0 1 5 0. 0 2 0 0. 0 2 5 0. 0 3 0 0. 0 3 5 0. 0 4 0 o n c e n t r a t i o n ( m g / L ) 1s t O r d e r D e c a y In s t a n t a n e o u s R e a c t i o n No D e g r a d a t i o n Fi e l d D a t a f r o m S i t e Ti m e : 32 Y e a r s 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 0 5 0 .01 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 2 5 0 3 0 0 C o Di s t a n c e F r o m S o u r c e ( f t ) Ne x t T i m e s t e p Pr e v T i m e s t e p Ca l c u l a t e An i m a t i o n Re c a l c u l a t e T h i s Sheet Re t u r n t o In p ut Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Figure 8 Time-Series Graphs of Select Constituents Current as of March 3, 2016 Event Non-Detects Represented at Detection Limit. Reduction of detection limits exposed constituents. 2L 2L 2L Greene County Active C&D and Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Figure 9 Histograms of VOC Concentrations in MW-4 (March 30, 2010-September 28, 2011) Compared to March 3, 2016 BASELINE MARCH 2010 59.30 5.30 10.30 SEPT. 2010 17.40 2.50 4.10 MARCH 2011 17.50 3.00 5.40 SEPT. 2011 19.10 3.00 5.30 BASELINE AVERAGE 28.33 3.45 6.28 CURRENT MARCH 2016 12.00 3.40 5.20 COMPARISON BENZENE -16.33 -0.05 -1.08 DIFFERENCE (%)-58 -1 -17 TOTAL VOCS (ug/l) BENZENE (ug/l) VINYL CHLORIDE (ug/l) TOTAL VOCS (ug/l) BENZENE (ug/l) VINYL CHLORIDE (ug/l) TOTAL VOCS VINYL CHLORIDE DIFFERENCE (ug/l) TOTAL VOCS BENZENE VINYL CHLORIDE 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 VOC(s)BASELINE AVERAGES COMPARED TO MARCH 2016 in MW-4 BASELINE AVERAGE MARCH 2016 ug /L Tables Greene County Active C&D and Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Table 1 Groundwater Monitoring Well Construction Table March 3, 2016 Latitude Longitude (inches) (ft) MW-1R 11/19/1981 2 18.20 3.20 15 Soil 121.78 119.79 117.16 4.62 35.525139 -77.695158 MW-4 8/26/1994 2 24.10 9.10 15 Soil 117.89 115.14 107.56 10.33 35.526914 -77.692369 MW-5 8/26/1994 2 29.00 14.00 15 Soil 115.76 113.16 103.97 11.79 35.526133 -77.692242 MW-6 8/28/1994 2 28.80 13.80 15 Soil 117.41 114.54 113.07 4.34 35.525008 -77.692431 MW-7 8/29/1994 2 18.50 6.50 12 Soil 110.48 107.75 103.14 7.34 35.526639 -77.691833 MW-8 6/21/2007 2 17.98 6.98 11 Soil 111.36 108.71 106.55 4.81 35.527039 -77.691842 PZ-2 11/19/1981 2 20.00 10.00 10 Soil 119.59 116.58 112.10 7.49 35.527278 -77.696911 NOTE: Monitoring Well Date Installed Well Diameter Total Well Depth Top of Screen Depth Screen Length Geology of Screened Interval Top of Casing Elevation Ground Elevation Groundwater Elevation Depth to Water (ft bgs)(ft bgs)(ft amsl) (ft amsl)(ft amsl)(ft btoc) bgs = below ground surface amsl= above mean sea level btoc = below top casing (PVC well casing) Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Table 2 Sampling and Analysis Summary March 3, 2016 MNA Field Parameter Me t a l s , T o t a l D i s s o l v e d Me t a l s , T o t a l Me t a l s , T o t a l D i s s o l v e d Me t a l s , T o t a l VF A Hy d r o g e n Di s s o l v e d C O 2 Al k a l i n i t y Su l f a t e Su l f i d e Ch l o r i d e TO C CO D BO D Ir o n , t o t a l Ir o n , t o t a l d i s s o l v e d Ir o n , F e r r o u s Ni t r a t e Tu r b i d i t y Di s s o l v e d O x y g e n ( D O ) Ox i d a t i o n R e d u c t i o n P o t e n t i a l ( O R P ) Te m p e r a t u r e Co n d u c t i v i t y pH La b E P A 8 2 6 0 B L a b E P A 2 0 0 . 8 L a b E P A 2 0 0 . 8 L a b E P A 2 0 0 . 8 L a b E P A 2 0 0 . 8 La b A M 2 3 G La b A M 2 0 G A X La b A M 2 0 G A X La b S M 4 5 0 0 C O 2 C La b S M 4 2 6 C La b S M 1 8 4 5 0 0 - S 2 D La b S M 4 5 0 0 - C L B La b S M 5 3 1 0 C La b H A C H 8 0 0 0 La b S M 5 2 1 0 B La b S M 3 1 1 1 B La b S M 3 1 1 1 B La b E P A 3 5 3 . 2 La b S M 2 1 3 0 B Fi e l d M e t e r Fi e l d M e t e r Fi e l d M e t e r Fi e l d M e t e r Fi e l d M e t e r MW-1R x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x MW-4 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x MW-5 x x x x x x x x x MW-6 x x x x x x x x x MW-7 x x x x x x x x x MW-8 x x x x x x x x x Downstream x x x x x x x x Upstream x x x x x x x x EB x x TB x x FB x x App. I App. II VO C s Me t h an e/ E t h e ne /E t h an e La b SM 2 3 2 0B L ab 31 1 1 B- 99 App I & II = Appendix Lists from current 40 CFR 258 Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Table 3 Detections in Water Samples Above SWSL, 2L, 2B, GWP, or MCL (Appendix I) March 3, 2016 Sample ID Result Unit MW-1R Barium, total 3/3/16 141 0.02 100 700 2000 MW-1R Barium, dissolved 3/3/16 132 0.06 100 700 2000 MW-4 Benzene 3/3/16 3.4 0.24 1 1 5 MW-4 3/3/16 1.1 0.21 1 550 70 MW-4 Vinyl Chloride 3/3/16 5.2 0.63 1 0.03 NE 2 MW-4 3/3/16 2.3 0.39 1 6 75 MW-5 Vinyl Chloride 3/3/16 1.4 0.63 1 0.03 NE 2 DOWNSTREAM Zinc, total 3/3/16 10 1.61 10 50 NE A definitive source of the detection was not determined as part of this report. L = Leachate LFG = Landfill Gas NE = Not Established BOLD = Concentration > 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL Standard Parameter Name 1 Sample Date MDL 2 SWSL 3 2L 4 2B 5 GWP 6 MCL 7 Preliminary Cause 8 ug/L ug/L ug/L L &.or LFG Ethylbenzene ug/L ug/L L &.or LFG 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/L ug/L L &.or LFG ug/L 1 Table contains constituents detected at or above SWSL, 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL 2 MDL = Method Detection Limit 3 SWSL = Solid Waste Section Reporting Limit 4 2L = North Carolina 15A NCAC 2L Groundwater Quality Standard 5 2B = North Carolina 15 NCAC 2B Surface Water Quality Standard for this Specific Stream Classification 6 GWP = Groundwater Protection Standard 7 MCL = Primary Drinking Water Standard (not currently applicable for regulatory comparisons) 8 Preliminary Cause = Refers to a preliminary analysis of the cause and/or source of a detection over the respective 2L/2B Standard. Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Table 4 Detections in Water Samples Above MDL (Appendix II Exclusive) March 3, 2016 Sample ID Result Unit MW-1R Tin, total 3/3/16 10.4J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE MW-4 Tin, dissolved 3/3/16 0.1J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE MW-5 Tin, total 3/3/16 0.24J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE MW-5 Tin, dissolved 3/3/16 0.09J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE MW-7 Tin, dissolved 3/3/16 0.3J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE MW-8 Tin, total 3/3/16 0.24J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE UPSTREAM Tin, dissolved 3/3/16 0.15J 0.06 100 NE NE DOWNSTREAM Tin, dissolved 3/3/16 0.11J 0.06 100 NE NE FB Tin, total 3/3/16 0.33J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE EB Tin, total 3/3/16 0.49J 0.06 100 NE 2000 NE A definitive source of the detection was not determined as part of this report. J =The reported value is between the laboratory method detection limit (MDL) and the laboratory method reporting limit (MRL), adjusted for actual sample preparation data and moisture content, where applicable NE = Not Established BOLD = Concentration > 2L, 2B, GWP or MCL Standard Parameter Name 1 Sample Date MDL 2 SWSL 3 2L 4 2B 5 GWP 6 MCL 7 Preliminary Cause 8 ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L 1 Table contains constituents listed in 40 CFR Appendix II but not on Appendix I that were detected at or above MDL 2 MDL = Method Detection Limit 3 SWSL = Solid Waste Section Reporting Limit 4 2L = North Carolina 15A NCAC 2L Groundwater Quality Standard 5 2B = North Carolina 15 NCAC 2B Surface Water Quality Standard for this Specific Stream Classification 6 GWP = Groundwater Protection Standard 7 MCL = Primary Drinking Water Standard (not currently applicable for regulatory comparisons) 8 Preliminary Cause = Refers to a preliminary analysis of the cause and/or source of a detection over the respective 2L/2B Standard. Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Table 5 March 3, 2016 MW-1R 1.20E-04 15 0.010 8 N32E 4.62 117.16 MW-4 1.10E-04 15 0.009 7 S51E 10.33 107.56 MW-5 1.40E-04 15 0.015 14 N75E 11.79 103.97 MW-6 1.90E-04 15 0.025 32 N42E 4.34 113.07 MW-7 1.98E-04 7 0.029 85 S47E 7.34 103.14 MW-8 1.14E-03 7 0.026 431 S12E 4.81 106.55 PZ-2 0.011 N39E 7.49 112.10 Minimum 1.10E-04 7 0.009 7 -4.34 103.14 Average 3.16E-04 12 0.019 96 -7.25 109.08 Maximum 1.14E-03 15 0.029 431 -11.79 117.16 NOTE: Data for hydraulic conductivities for MW-7 & MW-8 obtained from slug tests performed by MESCO (June, 2007) where Hydrologic Properties at Monitoring Well Locations Monitoring Well Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec) Effective Porosity (%) Hydraulic Gradient (ft/ft) Linear Velocity (ft/yr) Flow Direction Depth to Groundwater (ft btoc) Groundwater Potentiometric Elevation (ft amsl) na na na Data for hydraulic conductivities for wells except MW-7 & MW-8 obtained from GAI Consultants' Water Quality Modifications (October, 1994) Hydrologic gradient from water level elevations reportedly taken on March 3, 2016. Flow rate (Q) is defined by modified Darcy's equation: K= hydraulic conductivity ne = effective porosity dh= head difference dl= horizontal distance Q=−K ne ⋅dh dl Greene County Active C&D over Closed MSWLF Page 1 of 1 Table 6 MNA Parameters at Monitoring Well Locations Summary March 3, 2016 Parameters Method Units MW-1R MW-4 03/03/16 03/03/16 VFA – Acetic Acid AM23G 6 34j 66j AM23G 5 9.1j 8.1j AM23G 10 <10 <10 AM23G 10 <10 <10 AM23G 12 <12 <12 VFA – Lactic Acid AM23G 3 35j <3 AM23G 6 <6 <6 AM23G 1 3.4j 2.7j AM23G 12 <12 <12 Hydrogen AM20GAX 0.09 1.7 2.2 Methane AM20GAX 0.01 0.026j 8600 AM20GAX 0 0.0054j 0.2 Ethane AM20GAX 0 0.0016j 0.05 CO2-Dissolved 4500CO2C 1000 68000 426000 Alkalinity 2320B-97 1000 8000 94000 Sulfate 4500SO42E97 5000 10000j 25800j Sulfide 4500S2D-00 100 <100 <100 Chloride 4500CLB-97 5000 142000 14000 TOC 5310C-00 85 <85 6150 COD H8000-79 20000 <20000 32000 BOD 5210B-01 2000 <2000 <2000 Iron, Total 3111B-99 5.23 139j 87927 Iron, Ferrous 3500FEB-97 50 <50 78580 Nitrate 353.2 R2-93 40 2930j <40 Temperature 2550B-00 0 C 10 13 ORP 2580B 0 123 37 DO 4500OG-01 100 1620 1170 pH 4500HB-00 0.1 Units 4.9 5.8 Specific Conductance 2510B-97 1 565 418 Turbidity 2130B-01 1 NTU 9.41 4.44 Notes: VFA = Volatile Fatty Acids j = Estimated concentration greater than the set method detection limit (MDL) and less then the set reporting limit (PQL). mdl* ug/l VFA – Butyric Acid ug/l VFA – Hexanoic Acid ug/l VFA – i-Hexanoic Acid ug/l VFA – i-Pentanoic Acid ug/l ug/l VFA – Pentaonic Acid ug/l VFA – Propionic Acid ug/l VFA – Pyruvic Acid ug/l nM ug/l Ethene ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l ug/l uMhos/cm mdl* = Lowest Method Detection Limit for Lab Parameters or Lowest Field Measurement Possible Appendix A Laboratory Analysis Report Field Analysis Report Chains of Custody Page 1 of 18 Page 2 of 18 Page 3 of 18 Page 4 of 18 Page 5 of 18 Page 6 of 18 Page 7 of 18 Page 8 of 18 Page 9 of 18 Page 10 of 18 Page 11 of 18 Page 12 of 18 Page 13 of 18 Page 14 of 18 Page 15 of 18 Page 16 of 18 Page 17 of 18 Page 18 of 18