WQ0036621_Complete File - Historical_20130626

1
Weston Solutions, Inc.
® 1400 Weston Way
P.O.
P.O. Box 2653
West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380
610-701-3000 • Fax [phone]
® www.west6nsolutions.com
The Trusted Integrator for Sustainable Solutions
DWQ — Aquifer Protection Section
Attn: Thomas Slusser
1636 Mail Service Center
Greensboro, NC 27405
Re: Non-Dicharge and Notification or Intent Permit Applications
Cotton Mill Square Project Site
801 Merritt Drive, Greensboro, Guildford County, NC
NCDENR Groundwater Incident # 86348
Dear Mr. Slusser:
-June 24, 2013
W.O. No. 11621.043.006.0003
Weston Solutions, Inc. (WESTON@), on behalf of Alcatel -Lucent, is pleased to submit to the North
Carolina Department of Environment- and Natural Resources (NCDENR) two copies of the Non -
Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Form and Attachments for the Cotton Mill
Square (CMS) site located in Greensboro, NC. This permit application is submitted to allow for
passive injection of bioremediation enhancing substrate as outlined in the NCDENR approved
Remedial Action Plan (RAP). This permit application is submitted as a 9_ o
Discharge Permit v16Q.,64966751. As no systems are being constructed -or operated and as discussed
with NCDENR personnel, this permit has been sealed by a NC Professional Geologist in lieu of a NC
Professional Engineer: ,
Also included is a single copy of a Notification of Intent to Constrect or Operate Injection Wells for
Small -Scale Injection Operations. This submittal is for the injection of bioremediation enhancing
substrate on the Norfolk Southern property located to the south of the CMS site. This permit
application is intended to replace NCDENR Type 5I Injection Permit WI0400084.
Please feel free to contact Tom Cornuet at 610-701-3776 ([e-mail]) or me
directly at 610-701-3781 ([e-mail]) with any questions or comments you may
have.
Very truly yours,
WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.
Steve E. Johnson
Senior Project Manager
cc: S. Oberkrom — Lucent
M. Eliason-- Weston
an employee -owned company
JUN 26 Z013
Aquifer protection Section
c.la��c3

State of North Carolina pp��e�1�'�,��®®
Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division ot��/dJUN � � 1�i3
IRrf OMiN Secti,,
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Form
THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS ALL APPLICABLE ITEMS ARE INCLUDED
APPLICATION INFORMATION
Application Date:
6/19/2013
Application Type:
nttj cl i W
* New Projects — DWQ to assign application #
G�rn q
** Renewals/Modifications —Enter Permit #
WQ!04900:73- 1i`' Q b 03 64 2 /
Fee Submitted: (refer to fee schedule at
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/aps/lau/fees)
$810 (minor) NJV 0O073
* For new projects: complete this page, signature page, and supply all attachments.
** For renewals: complete this page and signature page.
For modifications: complete this page, signature page, and supply relevant attachments.
Applicant's Name (specify the name of the
municipality, corporation, individual, etc.):
Weston Solutions, Inc., representing Alcatel
Lucent
Owner or Signing Official's Name and Title
(person legally responsible for the facility
and its compliance):
Jaikishen N. Motwani, Vice President/Principal
Client Service Manager, Weston Solutions, Inc.
Mailing Address:
1400 Weston Way, West Chester, PA, 19380
Telephone Number:
610-701-3788
Email Address:
[e-mail]
Facility -Name (name of the project site; be
consistent throughout application package):
Cotton Mill Square Site (CMS)
Physical Address:
SE of Spring Garden Street and Merritt Drive
County:
Guilford
Geographic Coordinates:
36.059117,-79.853235
Contact Person (who can answer
questions about application):
Steve E. Johnson, Senior Project Manager, Weston
Solutions, Inc.
Telephone Number:
610-701-3781
Email Address:
[e-mail]
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application
- Revised January 30, 2013

ATTACHMENTS
The following shall be included as separate attachments to this application form. Failure to
include the following information as part of the application package will result in the
application package being returned as incomplete.
A. Site Description and Incident Information. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(a), the
applicant must briefly describe the site, noting pertinent site information including:
(1) Contaminant(s) of concern,
(2) Source(s) and date(s) of the contaminant release,
_ (3) Remedial actions to date,
(4) Current land use,
(5) Potential receptors, and
(6) Incident number and name of oversight agency.
a
B. Soils Evaluation. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(b), for systems with proposed
- discharge within seven feet of land surface and above -the seasonal high water table, a soil
evaluation of the disposal site shall be provided to the Division by the applicant. If required by
G.S. 89F, a soil scientist shall submit this evaluation. This evaluation shall be presented in a
report that includes the following components:
(1) Field description of soil profile. Based on examinations of excavation pits or
auger borings, the following parameters shall be described by individual -
diagnostic horizons to a depth of seven feet below land surface or to bedrock:
(A) Thickness ofthe'horizon;
B Texture;
(C) Color and other diagnostic features;
(D) Structure;
(E) Internal drainage;
(F) Depth, thickness, and type of restrictive horizon(s);
(G) pH;
(H) Cation exchange capacity; and
(1) Presence or absence and depth of evidence of any seasonal high water
table.
(2) Recommendations concerning annual and instantaneous loading rates of
liquids, solids, other wastewater constituents and amendments. Annual
hydraulic loading rates shall be based on in -situ measurement of saturated
hydraulic conductivity in the most restrictive horizon.
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Revised January 30, 2013

r.
C. Hydrogeologic Evaluation. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(c), a hydrogeologic
- evaluation of the disposal site shall be provided to the Division by the applicant. This
evaluation shall be conducted to a depth that includes the depth of existing contamination and
the total depth of the injection well(s) or infiltration gallery(ies). This evaluation shall be based
on borings for which the numbers, locations, and depths are sufficient to define the
components of the hydrogeologic evaluation. In addition to borings, other techniques may be
used to investigate the subsurface conditions at the site. These techniques may include
geophysical well logs, surface geophysical surveys, and tracer studies. This evaluation shall be
presented in a report that includes the following components:
(1) A description of the regional and local geology and hydrogeology;
(2) A description, based on field observations of the site, of the site topographic
setting, streams, springs and other groundwater discharge features, drainage
features, existing and abandoned wells, rock outcrops, and other features that
may affect the movement of the contaminant plume and treated wastewater;
(3) Changes in lithology underlying the site;
(4) Depth to bedrock and occurrence of any rock outcrops;
(5) The hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and storativity (specific yield if
unconfined aquifer) of the affected aquifer(s);
(6) Depth to the seasonal high water table;
(7) A discussion of the relationship between the affected aquifers of the site to
local and regional geologic and hydrogeologic features; and
(8) A discussion of the groundwater flow regime of the site focusing on the
relationship of the plume and remediation system to groundwater receptors,
groundwater discharge features, and groundwater flow media.
D. Demonstration of Hydraulic Control. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(d), computer
modeling or predictive calculations based on site -specific conditions shall be provided to the
Division by the applicant to demonstrate that operation of the system will not cause or
contribute to:
(1) The migration of contaminants into previously uncontaminated areas, and
(2) A violation of the groundwater standards specified in 15A NCAC 02L .0202 at
the compliance boundary as described in 15A NCAC 02L .0107.
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Revised January 30, 2013

E. Maps and Cross -Sections. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(e), site plans or maps shall be
provided to the Division by the applicant depicting the location, orientation, and relationship of
facility components
including:
(1)
A scaled map of the site, with site -specific topographic contour intervals and
showing all facility -related structures and fences within the treatment, storage
and disposal areas;
(2)
Locations of all test auger borings or inspection pits;
(3)
The location of all wells (including usage and construction details if available),
designated wellhead protection areas, streams (ephemeral, intermittent, and
perennial), springs, lakes, ponds, other surface drainage features, and any other
site activities or features that may involve possible exposure to contamination
within 500 feet of all waste treatment, storage, and disposal sites;
(4)
Setbacks specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1606;
(5)
Delineation of property boundaries, review boundaries, and compliance
boundaryies;
(6)
The horizontal and vertical extent of the contaminant plume for each of the
contaminants of concern, including isoconcentration lines and plume cross -
sections;
(7)
Cross -sections depicting soil and rock layers and features to a depth including
the depth of existing contamination and the total depth of the injection wells or
infiltration galleries; and
(8)
Hydrologic features such as potentiometric surface / water table contours and
the direction of groundwater flow.
F. Engineering Design Documents. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(f), the following
documents shall be provided to the Division by the applicant:
(1) Engineering plans for the entire system, including treatment, storage,
application, and disposal facilities and equipment except those previously
permitted unless they are directly tied into the new units or are critical to the
understanding of the complete process;
(2) Specifications describing materials to be used, methods of construction, and
means for ensuring quality and integrity of the finished product; and
(3) Plans that include construction details of recovery, injection, and monitoring
wells and infiltration galleries.
NOTE: Recovery and monitoring wells shall be constructed in accordance with
the requirements of 15A NCAC 02C .0108. Injection wells shall be constructed
in accordance with the requirements of 15A NCAC 02C .0225(g).
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Revised January 30, 2013
I'

G. Operating and Monitoring Plans. As specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1604(g), an operation and
monitoring plan shall be provided to the Division by the applicant. These documents shall be
- specific to the site and include:
(1) The operating plan shall include:
(A) The operating schedule including any periodic shut -down times,
(B) Required maintenance activities for all structural and mechanical
elements,
(C) All consumable and waste materials with their intended source and
disposal locations,
(D) Restrictions on access to the site and equipment, and
(E) Provisions to ensure the quality of the treated effluent and hydraulic
control of the system at all times when any portion of the system ceases
to function.
(2) If injection wells are to be used then the operating plan shall also include:
(A) The proposed average and maximum daily rate and quantity of injectant;
- (B) The average maximum injection pressure expressed in units of pounds per
square inch (psi); and
(C) The total or estimated total volume to be injected.
(3) The monitoring plan shall be prepared in accordance with 15A NCAC 02T .1607
and include:
(A) The monitoring well(s) that will be sampled,
(B) The constituent(s) for which those samples will be analyzed, and
(C) The schedule for sampling.
H. In Situ Remediation Additives. The following shall be provided to the Division by the
applicant if the remediation system includes additives to promote remediation in situ:
NOTE: Approved injectants can be found online at http://PortaLncdenr.ora/weblwglaps/awpro. All other
substances must be reviewed by the' Division of Public Health, Department of Health and Human Services as
required by 15A NCAC 02C .0225(a). Contact the U1C Program for more information (Ph# 919-807-6464).
(1) MSDS, concentration at the point of injection, and percentage if present in a mixture
with other injectants;
(2) A description of the rationale for selecting the injectants and concentrations proposed
for injection, including an explanation or calculations of how the proposed injectant
volumes and concentrations were determined;
(3) A description of the reactions between the injectants and the contaminants present
including specific breakdown products or intermediate compounds that may be formed
by the injection;
(4) A summary of results if modeling or testing was performed to investigate the injectant's
potential or susceptibility for biological, chemical, or physical change in the subsurface;
and
(5) An evaluation concerning the development of byproducts of the injection process,
including increases in the concentrations of naturally occurring substances. Such an
evaluation shall include the identification of the specific byproducts of the injection
process, projected concentrations of byproducts, and areas of migration as determined
through modeling or other predictive calculations.
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Revised January 30, 2013

1
Professional Engineer's Certification:
Name and Complete Address ofEngineering Firm: Reston Solutions, Inc.
City: West Chester State: PA Zip: 19380
Telephone Number.. 610-701-3781 Fax Number_ 610-701-3501 IRECEIVEDw ON
I, Edward d- Mackey_ _ attest that this application for
JUN 26 201
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application Aquifer Protection Section
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I further attest
that to the best of my knowledge the proposed design has been prepared in accordance with the
- applicable regulations, Although certain portions of this submittal package may have ji ft joped
- by other professionals, inclusion of these materials under my signature and seal s� e
reviewed this material and have judged it to be consistent with the proposed
t �
North Carolina Professional �o s Seal, Signature, and Date:
`�- 'c4R64,�•
Signature. 021MwQ t1l Date f -
A&lieant's Certification (sWft authority most b� - co fiance with 15A NCAC 2T .0106(b)
anal Le :
I, TA I V 1 s H "A I M OT V� ft'N Z 1 attest that this application for
Non -Discharge Groundwater Remediation Permit Application
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge- I understand
that if all required parts of this application are not completed and that if all required supporting
information and attachments ar cot included, this application package will be returned to me as
incomolete. n 7
Signature
a .s.
M
OF THE COMPLETE APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCLUDING ALL
)RMATION ANO MATERIALS, 'rO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
DWQ - AQUH ERFROTEC`H0N SECnON
1636 MAM SERVICE CEICI`Elt
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROUNA 276991636
Non Discharge Groundwater Remedliabon Permit Application Revised January 30, 2013

ATTACHMENTS
X:1Folders.G-LUCotton MUM Permitting%Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

List of Figures
A-1 USGS Topo Quad
A-2 Existing Site Layout
A-3 MIP Survey Maximum ECD Responses
A-4 ISB Zones (Historic Site Configuration)
A-5 ISB Zones (Present Site Configuration)
C-1 Soil Boring Locations*
C-2 Stratigraphic Cross Section A -A'
C-3 Stratigraphic Cross Section B-B'
C-4 Stratigraphic Cross Section C-C'
C-5 Stratigraphic Cross Section D-D'
C-6 Stratigraphic Cross Section Location Map
C-7 Total VOCs Saprolite Unit - 2003
C-8 Total VOCs Intermediate Unit - 2003
C-9 Total VOCs Bedrock Unit - 2003
C-10 Groundwater Saprolite Wells Potentiometric Map — 2006
C-11 Groundwater Saprolite Wells Potentiometric Map — 2012
C-12 Groundwater Intermediate Wells Potentiometric Map — 2006
C-13 Groundwater Intermediate Wells Potentiometric Map — 2012
C-14 Bedrock Surface Elevation
X:Tolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 PermittingTermit Renewal 2013\Nondischarge Renewal\NonDischarge permit attachment vIdoc

C-15 Groundwater Bedrock Wells Potentiometric Map — 2006
C-16 Groundwater Bedrock Wells Potentiometric Map — 2012
E-1 Topographic Elevation NW Portion of the Site
E-2 Topographic Elevation Central Western Portion of the Site
E-3 Topographic Elevation SW Portion of the Site
E-4 Topographic Elevation Eastern Portion of the Site
E-5 Total VOCs Saprolite Unit - 2013
i'
E-6 Total VOCs Intermediate Unit - 2013
E-7 Total VOCs Bedrock Unit - 2013
Tables
C-1 Well Summary Table
C-2 Summary of Step-Drawdown Test Observations
C-3 Summary of Step-Drawdown Results
F-1 ISB Injection Plan — 2013
Attachments
C-S-A Aquifer Test Calculation Sheets
H-1-A Amendment MSDS Sheets
H-2-A Amendment Calculation Sheets
X:\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permilling\Permit Renewal 2013\Nondischarge Renewal\NonDischarge permit attachment v2.d0c

A. SITE DESCRIPTION AND INCIDENT INFORMATION
This permit modification has been prepared for the former Cotton Mill Square (CMS) property
located in Greensboro, North Carolina on behalf of Alcatel -Lucent by Weston Solutions, Inc.
(WESTON). Alcatel -Lucent retains the environmental liability for environmental issues related
to previous environmental practices, but otherwise has no association with either of the present
owners. A site location map is provided as Figure A-1 and an aerial of the present configuration
of the site is provided as Figure A-2.
(1) Contaminants of Concern
Characterization of the site indicated that chlorinated volatile organic compounds (CVOCs) were
the only contaminant of concern (COC) and primarily emanated from source zones, labeled
Zones 1 and 3, with a lesser contribution from Zone 2, which has undergone a source zone
excavation. As a result of site characterization and remediation, it has been demonstrated that
CVOCs are presently restricted to the groundwater.
The primary site CVOCs and their degradation byproducts are as follows:
• 1,1,1-trichlrorethane (TCA) and associated degradation products including 1,1-
dichloroethene (DCE); 1,1-dichlroethane (DCA), and chloroethane CA.
• Trichloroethene (TCE), and to a lesser extent its parent compound tetrachloroethene
(PCE) and their degradation. products the cis-1,2-dichloroethene (c-DCE); trans-1,2-
dichloroethene (t-DCE); and vinyl chloride (VC).
• Carbon tetrachloride and associated degradation products methylene chloride and
chloroform.
Evaluation of groundwater monitoring data collected over the period 2000 through present,
demonstrates that CVOC plume dimensions are stable and gradually diminishing. This
evaluation also has demonstrated that metals originallyconsidered a contaminant of concern,
ern, are
not present in groundwater at concentrations in exceedance of the respective 15A NCAC 2L
(Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to the Groundwaters of North Carolina)
groundwater standards. The majority of metals analyses resulted in non -detect results, and
concentration trends for those metals consistently detected from 2000 through the present
monitoring period were stable. Metals are not a contaminant of concern at CMS. There has been
XAFolders.GL\L\Cotton MiUM Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

no apparent change to metals concentrations following the emulsified oil applications completed
at the site. Inclusion of metals sampling in the CMS CAP is unnecessary, and it has been
recommended in the RAP that metals be removed from the CMS sampling program.
(2) Source(s) and date(s) of the contaminant release.
The CMS site has been fully characterized as detailed in the Comprehensive Site Assessment
Report (CSA, ENSR, 2003). Site characterization of soils and groundwater resulted in the
delineation of three source areas of CVOC contamination as shown on Figure A-3 adapted from
- the DNAPL investigation report (ENSR, 2004). These source zones were subsequently labeled
Zones 1 through 3 as shown on Figure A-4. In order to label areas for implementation of in situ
bioremediation of the CVOC plume downgradient of the source zones, Zones 4 through 6 were
defined. The six remedial zones in relation to historic and current site building configurations are
presented on Figures A-4 and A-5, respectively.
The timing of the release of CVOCs is not known, but likely occurred following the change of
use of the property from textiles at the Pomona Cotton Mill over the period 1895-1950 to
Western Electric for telephone and military equipment manufacturing over the period 1950-
1976. 11
(3) Remedial Actions Conducted to Date.
Zone 1 — Amendment application of emulsified vegetable oil (EO) and pH buffer compounds
was conducted by recirculation, of amended groundwater from October 2006 through January
2007 and September throug
h gh December 2009.
Zone 2 — Source area soil excavation and removal conducted February through March 2007.
Amendment application of EO using recirculation of amended groundwater was conducted from
December 2006 through January 2007 and September through December 2009.
Zone 3 - Emulsified Zero-Valent Iron (EZVI) pilot test conducted in July/August 2005. Dual
phase vapor extraction system initiated for shallow soil and groundwater initiated in 2007.
Amendment application of EO and pH buffer compounds using recirculation of amended
XAFolders.GLUCotton Mill\13 Perrnitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

i
groundwater was conducted from October 2006 through January 2007 and September through
December 2009.
Zone 4 (Tributary A) - Amendment application of EO and pH buffer compounds using
recirculation of amended groundwater was conducted from October 2006 through January 2007
and September through December 2009.
Zone 5 — Initiation of site wide groundwater recirculation system including addition of EO to
reinjected water in December 2006.
Zone 6 - Amendment application of EO using recirculation of amended groundwater was
conducted from July through August 2007
(4) Current Land Use.
The CMS site consists of approximately 31 acres bounded to the North by Spring Garden Street,
to the West by Merritt Drive, and to the south and east by the rail and rail yard operations by
Norfolk Southern. The area surrounding CMS has a mix of residential, office/commercial, light
industrial and heavy industrial zoning assignments.
The CMS property was purchased from Lucent Technologies Inc. by Mr. Carl Johnson in 1980.
Mr. Johnson divided the property into 2 parcels sold approximately 13 of the approximately 31
acres on the eastern portion of the Cotton Mill Property to Place Properties, LLC of Atlanta,
Georgia. The Place Properties parcel lies on the previously wooded, undeveloped eastern portion
of the site, which was developed into a multi -unit off -campus apartment complex named Spring
Place, intended for University of North Carolina Greensboro students. Mr. Johnson then sold the
remaining approximately 18 acres, which comprise the western previously developed portion of
the facility, to The Dinnerstein Companies. The western portion of the property was also
developed into a multi -unit off -campus apartment complex named Sterling Cottages. In order to
facilitate the sale and redevelopment of the remaining property, all of the historical CMS
structures and pavement were demolished and removed by Applied Abatement Concepts of
Kings Mountain, NC, a subcontractor to Mr. Johnson. Extensions to Clifton Road and Hewitt
Street bisect the Sterling Cottages property, and link both apartment complexes with Merritt
Drive. The present configuration of the property is presented as Figure A-5.
XAFclders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

(5) Potential Receptors
Potential receptors as a result of impacted media present on and off the CMS site include
groundwater use, surface water contact or use, soil vapor intrusion and soil direct contact.
Potential receptor surveys are reported in the Phase II Report: Comprehensive Site Assessment
(VEETech 2002), and in the Comprehensive Site Assessment Report (ENSR 2003).
Water Supplv
A water supply well survey was completed for properties within 1/2 mile of the Cotton Mill
Square plume in January 2002. This distance includes the full extent of the dissolved
groundwater plume as currently delineated. The survey verified with the local municipality that
residences and businesses in this part of Greensboro are serviced by protected, municipal water
supplies. Both evaluation surveys included visual reconnaissance of the area underlain or
potentially underlain by the groundwater plume, in a search for private water supply wells, with
no private wells found. Presently, the source of water for the fire main lines is the municipal
water supply system.
The site and surrounding areas within % mile of the site are serviced by municipal water and
sewer lines as indicated by fire hydrants, water meter boxes and sanitary sewer manholes.
Communication with the City of Greensboro Water Resources Department indicated that the area
within the region of the site is serviced by the municipal water supply and sewer systems.
Communication with the Guilford County Department of Public Health indicated that there were
no public water supply wells or wellhead protection areas existing within the region of the site.
The site is not located in the coastal plain aquifer. The area is serviced by the City of Greensboro
which obtains its water supply from Lake Townsend, Lake Brandt, Lake Higgins, and Lake
Jeanette which are all located more than 5 miles to the north of the site.
Surface Water
Two small tributaries are located downgradient of the site and have been designated as tributary
"A" and tributary `B", see Figure A-5. Both tributaries flow into South Buffalo Creek located
approximately 2,800 feet south of the site. Because South Buffalo Creek is designated as a
"Class C" fresh water body under North Carolina 15A NCAC 2B regulations, all tributaries
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

flowing into it will have a minimum Class "C" designation unless otherwise specified by the
NCDENR. Tributary "A" (East) Tributary "A", whose ephemeral headwaters began as the
drainage ditch on the south central portion of the Cotton Mill Square property prior to
I'
i encapsulation, flows off -site in a south-southeast direction. Once it leaves the Cotton Mill Square
property, this tributary flows through commercial and residential properties and through City -
owned utility easements until its confluence with South Buffalo Creek. Surface water samples
locations include SW-A-3 at the southern property boundary and off -site sample locations SW-
A-4 and SW-A-6. Tributary "B" (West) Tributary "B" is located southwest of the Cotton Mill
Square property and a portion of its headwaters begin near the northwest quadrant of the
Patterson Street/Merritt Drive interchange (see Figure A-5).
Review of aerial photos from 1937, 1963, and 1970, demonstrate that the former
springs/headwaters of tributary `B" are clearly visible before and during commercial and
residential development of this area. For example, by 1963 Patterson Street had been extended
through this area and a portion of tributary `B" was diverted and contained in an underground
culvert pipe that channeled the stream flow beneath Patterson Street. Aerial photos from 1963
and 1970 both show undeveloped, open land around the springs/headwaters of this tributary. By
1995 this area had been fully developed and the springs/headwater flow of tributary `B"
appeared to have been buried and contained by a network of drop inlets and underground drain
pipes presumably installed during commercial property development. Subsurface drain pipes in
this area are tied to a network of underground storm drains along Merritt Drive, located south
and southwest of the Cotton Mill Square property. The original location of the springs/stream
headwaters of tributary `B" appears to be buried on property currently occupied by American
Flag Self Storage located at 1102 Merritt Drive. Tributary `B" first exits the underground culvert
pipe to discharge as a surface flow on the south side of Patterson Street. From the underground
culvert pipe it flows south through the original stream course to its confluence with South
Buffalo Creek in Hunter Hills Community Park. Surface water sampling was conducted in
Tributary `B" at the exit of the underground culvert pipe south of the Patterson Street ramp and
at three other downstream locations. At off -site locations in both tributaries, one' or more VOCs
are present in surface water above the 15A NCAC 2B.0208 surface water standards.
XAFclders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

The following sections describe the proposed continued application of organic substrate and
buffer materials to enhance the naturally occurring degradation of chlorinated volatile organic
compounds (CVOCs).
Surficial soils
Characterization of soils above the groundwater table reported in the CSA, CSA Addendum and
Non Aqueous Phase Liquid (NAPL) Survey and Soil Investigation reports, indicated that site
soils contained CVOCs and metals.
As detailed in the CSA Addendum (ENSR, 2003) the soil sampling data indicated that the
highest detection of residual CVOCs occurred in the source Zones 1, 2, and 3. Soil sampling in
Zone 1 indicated that elevated soil sample results were limited to a 1,600 ft area, and that a
sorbed phase DNAPL below the water table was the suspected source of elevated groundwater
detections. Soil sampling results from Zone 3 demonstrated that elevated soil detections occurred
at or below the water table interface, suggesting that the CVOC source exists below the water
table. Soil sampling from Zone 2 demonstrated a larger area of CVOC impact above the water
table.
Deed and land use restrictions in place under the Brownfield's Agreement for the property
redevelopment led to the NCDENR directive that site soil clean-up levels be residential based,
(NCDENR CAP approval letter, dated 16 August 2004). The more conservative soil -to -
groundwater clean-up levels were not used because the land use deed restrictions are designed to
prevent future use of site groundwater for any purpose; hence the objective of the CAP was to
prevent human and ecological exposures. Comparison of site CVOC analytical results collected
from unsaturated soils over the period 1996 through 2006 to the Residential Maximum Soil
I
Contaminant Concentration (MSCC) cleanup guidelines demonstrated that exceedances were
limited to Zone 2.
Soil excavation was conducted in Zone 2 to remove the impacted surficial soils in accordance
with the NCDENR approved workplan. A SVE/DPVE system was installed in Zone 3 to target
the majority of CVOC mass delineated to be below the water table (ENSR, 2004b), with the
added benefit of mitigating the shallow thickness of the unsaturated zone which fluctuates from 4
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton MUM Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc
I
s

to 10 ft below ground surface (bgs), limiting the potential impacted areas. Confirmatory
sampling of the Zone 2 excavation shown in Figure 3, indicated that 39 of 41 confirmatory
samples were below the MSCC cleanup goal. The remaining 2 locations were only marginally in
exceedance of -the 1.6 mg/L TCE goal at TCE concentrations of 1.7 and 3.2 mg/kg, hence,
remediation was -considered complete with any residual soil contamination to be addressed by
the ISB remedial treatment of Zone 2.
As discussed in the NCDENR approved CAP (ENSR, 2004a), detection of metals in onsite soils
at concentrations in exceedance of two times background levels occurred for arsenic, barium,
chromium, copper, lead, mercury, and nickel occurred in one or more location(s). Metals in soils
are ubiquitous, hence the two times background comparison was used to determine samples
having the highest probability of impact from historical site operations. Laboratory soil leaching
tests demonstrated that metals will not leach from site soils at concentrations above the 15A
NCAC 2L groundwater standards.
f Soil metals analytical results were compared to the range of naturally occurring soil, two times
site background concentrations, and the NCDENR remediation goal for soil (RG) in CSA
Addendum (ENSR, 2003), and in Table 4 of the CAP. Additional metals soil results are reported
in Attachment A, Table 3 of the CSA (VeeTech, 2002). These results indicated soil exceedances
of the background concentration by greater than two times the standard for ' arsenic, barium,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and mercury in one or more sample. The CSA
Addendum also concluded that site background soil concentrations of chromium, thallium, and
mercury exceed the NCDENR soil -to -metals MSCC, and therefore site soils for these metals
should only be compared to 2X site background concentrations. Comparison of soil analytical
results to current Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal (PSRG) (NCDENR, February 2012a)
indicates that only arsenic and thallium have been detected at concentrations in exceedance of a
respective PSRG concentration. Note that the arsenic PSRG is for inorganic arsenic, and the
thallium PSRG is for soluble salts and may not be directly comparable to the soil analytical
results. Arsenic has been detected in four locations at a concentration more than two times
background, with a maximum above background of 9.7 mg/L in comparison to the 2.94 average
background concentration. Thallium has not been detected at a concentration of greater than two
times background, and had a maximum detection of 4.9 mg/Kg.
XAFolders.G-LUCotton Mill\13 Permitting%ondischarge Renewal 20131NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

Leachability analysis of metals and VOCs from soil results presented in the CSA Addendum
(ENSR, 2003) indicated that soil samples collected from the site in 2002 demonstrated that only
r-
TCE and methylene chloride are likely to leach to groundwater at concentrations above the 15A
NCAC 2L groundwater standards in effect at the time. It was noted that the methylene chloride
may be the result of laboratory contamination. The TCE soil leaching detection from one of the
' four tested samples resulted in a leached concentration of 13 ug/Kg which the CSA listed as in
exceedance of the 3 µg/L 2L standard. However, the value is less than the 18 µg/L Preliminary
w Soil Remediation Goal (PSRG) Protection of Groundwater standard (NCDENR, February 2012).
The leachability data indicate that with the possible exception of the potential laboratory
contaminant methylene chloride, that site soils generally are below acceptable criteria for PSRG
and that the residential cleanup criteria approved by NCDENR in the CAP approval letter should
6 _ ' remain in effect. Further, additional unsaturated soil remediation at the site is technically
impracticable due to the limited access. resulting from the high density student housing, which
has effectively provided a cap to surficial soils in Zones 1 and 2.
Sediments
Sediment samples were collected from on -site locations from the on -site drainage ditch,
4
Tributary A, and are reported on Attachment A, Table 7 (VeeTech, 2002), Attachment B, Table
9 (ENSR, 2003), and Attachment C, Table 6 (ENSR, 2004). Comparison of the sediment results
to the January 2003 NCDENR remediation goal (RG) for sediment in effect at the time of the
approved CAP, indicated that only TCE and a single arsenic sample result were detected at
concentrations in exceedance. Tributary A exhibits hydraulic behavior consistent with a
receiving stream for a shallow aquifer during all or part of the year and was therefore not
compared to the soil -to -groundwater leaching standards (ENSR, 2003). TCE detections are likely
the result of source area Zone 3. Groundwater and surface water CVOCs detections in samples
_u
adjacent to the 2002 and 2003 TCE sediment detections have demonstrated dramatic decrease
since the Zone 3 and Tributary A bioremediation applications, hence, this may no longer be a
contaminant of concern in site sediments. In addition, the on -site portion of Tributary A has been
encapsulated (piped) across the site, with the exception of a small section coincident with SW-A-
3 at the southern property boundary, which is fenced and difficult to access.
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013WonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

Soil Vapor
Investigation of soil vapor is under consideration as part of the Remedial Action Plan (RAP)
currently being reviewed by NCDENR. Please refer to that document for further information.
- Underground Utilities
Underground utilities are present in the vicinity of the release(s) at this site. These include storm
sewers, fire main lines, sanitary sewer lines, telephone, electric, natural gas, and municipal water
main lines. All of the utilities are likely well above the groundwater table on the former CMS
property with the probable exception of the encapsulated portion of Tributary A which runs north
to south across the eastern portion of the site as shown on Figure A-5.
(6) Incident Number and Name of Oversight Agency
The CMS site is administered under NCDENR Groundwater Incident No. 86348. The site has
been administered by the NCDENR Aquifer Protection Section but is now being administered by
the NCDENR Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB).
B. SOILS EVALUATION
Injection of fluids will not occur within 7 feet of the ground surface in any of the proposed
injection zones. The shallowest proposed injection interval commences at 30 ft bgs for well IW-
205 in Zone 3. Hence the soils evaluation is not required for submittal of this injection permit.
C. HYDROGEOLOGIC EVALUATION
(1) A Description of the Regional and Local Geology and Hydrogeology
Regional Geologic Setting
The site lies within the Carolina Slate Belt in the Central Piedmont Province of North Carolina.
Basement rocks are Late Proterozoic to Cambrian in age (520-650 million years old). These
rocks were part of the Carolina Terrain, which was separate from the North American continent
until post -Cambrian time. Stratified rocks in this area of the Carolina Slate Belt are mainly
c : volcaniclastic and calc-alkaline. In the Greensboro area, the crystalline basement is composed of
X Tolders.GL\L\Cotton Mill\13 PermittingWondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

megacrystic and well foliated metamorphosed granitic rocks. A mantle of saprolite varying in
thickness and degree of weathering overlies the basement rocks in this area.
I
Groundwater in North Carolina east of the Blue Ridge Mountains flows generally east to
southeast toward the Atlantic Ocean. Groundwater flow in the Greensboro area is influenced by
the numerous streams and the topography within the region. Groundwater elevation contours
generally mimic topography and the direction of groundwater flow is perpendicular to these
contours.
Site Geology and Hydrogeology
The site geologic and hydrogeologic conditions were determined from the lithologic and
hydrogeologic information obtained from over 130 soil borings and 72 monitoring wells
completed at the site. Existing and abandoned site well locations are shown on Figure A-4, and
the existing well locations are presented on Figure A-5. Boring locations are shown on Figure C-
1.
Soils at the site have been reported to consist of "residual soils overlying saprolite, .weathered
rock, and competent bedrock. The saprolite is generally composed of red, tan silt with some clay
and silty sand. Much of the soil is most likely fill material brought on site during development of
the property (VEETech, 2002).
Depth to bedrock ranges from 1 foot to 70 feet below ground surface (ft bgs) across the site. The
top of saprolite has been encountered at ground surface to 35 ft bgs. Based on depth to bedrock
measurements obtained during well installations, the bedrock appears to form a north/south
trending ridge dipping to the south. A seismic refraction geophysical survey conducted at the
site revealed a refraction anomaly that may indicate the presence of this bedrock ridge or a
change in density of the bedrock lithology in this area (VEETech, 2002). This north -south
trending anomaly appears to influence the groundwater flow and VOC migration directions.
Figures C-2, C-3, C-4 and C-5 show stratigraphic cross sections A -A' through D-DI which trend
west to east and north to south across the site (see Figure C-6 for cross section locations). These
cross sections show the strati a hic units from the competent bedrock to the �' p p ground surface, the
water table and the vertical distribution of contaminants in this area.
XAFolders.G-LUCotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

Static water levels recorded on 2001 to 2012 indicate a depth to water ranging from 2.92 to 36.73
I�
ft bgs. The direction of groundwater flow in the surficial shallow saprolite aquifer is generally to
the east/southeast across the site and the horizontal hydraulic gradient for this aquifer is
approximately 0.017 foot per foot. The intermediate (partially weathered bedrock) aquifer and
I_ deep (competent bedrock) aquifer have similar groundwater flow directions. The approximate
hydraulic gradients of the intermediate and deep aquifers are 0.020 foot per foot and 0.023 foot
_ per foot, respectively (VEETech, 2002).
(2) Site Description
Site topography across the former CMS property has been graded to be generally flat lying
across the Spring Place and Sterling Cottages developments. Topography dips to the south
towards the Buffalo Creek Tributaries A and B. There have been no rock outcrop, springs or
seeps observed at the CMS or offsite areas,- though it is likely that groundwater feeds Tributaries
A and B, and that groundwater seeps may exist along the Tributary A or B banks, at least
seasonally. Site drainage for both Spring Place and Sterling Cottages is through storm water
drains.
The lateral extent of the off -site VOC plume in groundwater has been adequately delineated by
the installation of offsite monitoring wells as shown on Figures C-7 through C-9, which
demonstrate the contaminant plume delineation. These plume maps demonstrate the delineation
of the plume from wells installed into the three site lithologic zones, the saprolite, partially
weathered rock (PWR) and bedrock zones. A well construction summary table of existing and
abandoned wells is provided as Table C-1. VOC plume migration in the PWR and shallow
bedrock appears to be influenced by northeast -to -southeast trending factures and weathered rock
patterns, which were identified by geophysical survey. VOC plume migration in the saprolite
appears to be primarily influenced by groundwater potentiometric flow patterns.
(3) (4) (6) (7) Lithology, Depth to Bedrock, Seasonal High Water Table and Relationship
Between Geologic and Hydrogeologic Features
As described in response 2 above, site geology is into the three site lithologic zones, the
saprolite, partially weathered rock (PWR) and bedrock zones.
i
XAFclders.GL\L\Cotton MjlI\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

Sgprolite Hydro eolo i
Residual soils (regolith) and saprolite in the study area are described as sandy silt to silty clay of
moderate to low permeability. Some areas of the site contain fill. Saprolitic soils contain relict
structures and textures of the parent bedrock from which it is weathered. The frequency of relict
soil structures in the saprolite increases with depth. Thickness of the surficial regolith/saprolite
unit is highly variable across the site and is dependent on topographic elevation and depth to the
underlying bedrock. The combined regolith and saprolite thickness is greatest on the Cotton Mill
i
Square property, where it varies from 30 to 50 feet. While the water table is found primarily in
the regolith/saprolite unit on the Cotton Mill Square property, the saturated thickness of the
saprolite unit decreases off -site toward the south and southwest. In these off -site areas, the depth
to bedrock is shallower and at some locations such as wells DW-19(dl) and DW-18(i) the water
table resides in the PWR unit.
Figures C-10 and C-I I display groundwater elevation contour maps for the regolith/saprolite unit
prior to and following site redevelopment. These maps were developed with water level data
from the "s" wells, indicating their completion in the saprolite (or surficial) hydrostratigraphic
unit. Water levels for many of the wells in this group represent water table conditions.
Groundwater flow on the north part of the Cotton Mill Square property is generally toward the
southeast. Prior to redevelopment shallow groundwater flow on the central and southern portions
of the property diverged away from an apparent local hydraulic divide situated approximately
along a line between wells MW-17(s) and MW-42(s). This pattern appears to persist following
redevelopment likely due to the depth to groundwater of approximately 25 feet. East of this local
i divide groundwater flow appears to have converged on a discharge point in the on -site ditch and
- tributary "A" prior to redevelopment and with the encapsulation of Tributary A appears to be
directed in a more southerly direction upon encapsulation of Tributary A across the site.
Shallow. groundwater west of this local divide appears to flow toward tributary `B". These data
and field observations demonstrate that the surficial regolith/saprolite aquifer unit is
hydraulically connected to streams and tributaries in this area.
X.Tolders.GL\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc
' I

Transitional Zone (PWRHydrostratig_raphic Unit
The transition zone hydrostratigraphic unit is unique because it is usually more permeable than
the overlying saprolite and it exhibits structural and textural features of both the saprolite and the
_;
underlying bedrock. Thickness of the transition zone is highly variable across the site, ranging
from a few feet to more than 30 feet. The thickness of PWR is controlled by differential
weathering of the bedrock, which is often related to the presence of fractures and joints in the
rock.
Figures C-12 and C-13 show groundwater elevation contour maps for the PWR unit. These maps
were developed with water level data from the "i" (intermediate depth) wells, indicating their
completion in the PWR hydrostratigraphic unit. Some of the "i"—labeled wells extend into the
upper few feet of fractured rock. On the north and central portions of the Cotton Mill Square
property, groundwater flow in this unit is similar to that observed for the saprolite zone. In these
areas the flow direction is generally toward the southeast and a subdued convergence of flow
lines is manifested around the onsite headwaters of tributary "A". For the remaining on -site areas
-' and for the off -site study areas a dominant southwest groundwater flow direction is seen. It is
likely that groundwater from the PWR also discharges to local streams and tributaries, especially
in downstream areas of lower topographic elevation.
Bedrock Hydrostratigraphic Unit
According to the 1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina, bedrock in this part of Greensboro is
described as an intrusive "metamorphosed granitic rock" that is megacrystic and well folliated.
Granite was described on several boring logs for deeper wells. However, subsequent downhole
OPTV color camera logs and drill cuttings logs indicate that bedrock actually has a more mafic
composition and contains metamorphic structure with the appearance of gneissic banding.
This rock description is consistent with the pluton of "metamorphosed gabbro and diorite" that
the State geologic map identifies approximately one mile west of the site. Based on these data, it
appears that the rock type beneath the site consists of a foliated to massive metagabbro or
metadiorite. The estimated top of bedrock elevation throughout the site is shown in Figure C-14.
XAFclders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

This map suggests that the bedrock surface is undulating, with higher pinnacles separated by
deeply weathered troughs.
Figures C-15 and C-16 show groundwater elevation contour maps for the shallow bedrock unit.
These maps were developed with water level data from the. "dl" wells, indicating their_
completion in the shallow bedrock hydrostratigraphic unit. This group of wells does not extend
any deeper than 25 feet into fractured rock. On the Cotton Mill Square property the decrease in
potentiometric heads in this unit is generally toward the south-southeast. As was observed in the
PWR zone, a subdued convergence of flow lines is manifested around tributary "A" and appears
to be stronger around the off -site portions of the tributary.
A potentiometric map was not constructed for the deeper "d2" wells because there are too few
data points to develop a meaningful contour map. However, the water level elevations in these
deep wells indicate that the potentiometric heads decrease from northwest to southeast, similar to
the direction observed in the shallow bedrock.
Depths to rock range from approximately 15 feet bgs to 80 feet bgs, depending on location and
topographic elevation of land surface. Geophysical methodology combined with boring log
interpretations were used to create the estimated bedrock surface elevation map depicted in
Figure C-14. Geophysical data, combined with boring logs, indicate that the bedrock surface
elevation varies from approximately 825 feet mean sea level (msl) to 780 feet msl across the site.
It is noted that in some areas geophysical data did not show a distinct bedrock interface. These
areas were interpreted to be thick, deeply weathered PWR or zones of alternating PWR and
denser rock. The depth to bedrock was greatest in Zone 1 at depths of 80 ft or more, and
alternating bedock/saprolite was observed in Zone 3 during the installation of well.
(5) Aquifer Properties
Estimates of the aquifer properties for the saturated zones in the saprolite and bedrock were
obtained by conducting slug tests on 31 site monitoring wells (VEETech, 2002). The slug tests
were analyzed using the Bouwer and Rice (1976, 1989) Method. Based on analysis of the rising
` head slug test data, the hydraulic conductivity at the site ranges from 0.002 feet per day (ft/day)
to 1.002 ft/day with an average of 0.153 ft/day for the shallow saprolite aquifer; from 0.149
X Wolders.GLUCotton Mi1l\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\Non Discharge permit attachment v a.doc
i

ft/day to 0.731 ft/day with an average of 0.346 ft/day for the intermediate aquifer; and from
4
0.055 ft/day to 0.776 ft/day with an average of 0.271 ft/day for the deep (bedrock) aquifer. The
graphical analysis sheets are provided in Attachment C-5.
Estimations of groundwater seepage velocity for the three groundwater zones were made using
! the measured flow gradients presented in the preceding section; the average hydraulic
conductivities derived from the slug tests; and assumed effective porosities of 15% (shallow),
j 5% (intermediate), and 2.5% (deep). The calculated average groundwater seepage velocities are
i_
✓ approximately 0.017 ft/day in the shallow zone, 0.14 ft/day in the intermediate zone, and 0.25
ft/day in the deep zone. The hydraulic conductivity values determined during calibration of the
groundwater model constructed for the site were higher than the average slug test values for both
the intermediate and bedrock units. A hydraulic conductivity value of 4 ft/day was input to the
model for the intermediate unit. Using this hydraulic conductivity value, and the aforementioned
hydraulic gradient and effective porosity for this unit, results in a seepage velocity of 1.6 ft/day.
A hydraulic conductivity value of 0.8 ft/day was input for the non -fractured bedrock, and 4
ft/day for the fractured bedrock. This results in a seepage velocity of 0.74 ft/day and 3.7 ft/day
for the non -fractured and fractured bedrock zones, respectively.
Single -well aquifer pumping/yield tests were conducted on wells DW-3(dl), DW-8(i), and DW-
13(dl) in December 2003 (ENSR, 2004). 'The tests were performed to obtain additional well
yield performance data and to collect groundwater samples for water treatability analyses to
support wastewater treatment design. Each test was conducted as a multi-step-drawdown test of
approximately three hours in duration. Recovery data were also collected at the end of the
pumping phase of each test. The test data and calculations are provided in Attachment C-5.
Data from the single -well pumping tests were downloaded into the AQTESOLVO program for
analysis. The Theis (1935) solution for a step-drawdown and recovery test in a confined aquifer
was used in the program to analyze the data. The data were also analyzed using the empirical
equation developed by Driscoll (1986). The Driscoll method is a derivation of the Cooper -Jacob
(1946) equation and allows an estimate of aquifer transmissivity (T) to be calculated from
specific capacity data for both confined and unconfined aquifers. The maximum short-term
X.Tolders.GLUCotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 201MonDischarge permit attachment v—a.doc
I

specific capacity recorded at the end of each single -well pumping test was used to solve the
following empirical equation:
Q/s = T/n
Where:
Q = well yield (gpm)
S = drawdown in the well (ft)
T = transmissivity (gpd/ft)
n = 2,000 for a confined aquifer; 1,500 for an unconfined aquifer
The following table summarizes the' results from the single -well pumping tests. Transmissivity
values that were calculated from the Theis (1935) recovery solution and values derived from the
Driscoll (1986) method are both shown for comparison.
Well Name Max. Yield (gpm)/Drawdown (ft) % of Available Drawdown Obtained Short -
Term Specific Capacity (gpm/ft) Transmissivity (ft2/day)
DW-3(dl) 2.78 gpm/2.77 ft
DW-8(i) 3.33 gpm/6.46 ft
DW-13(dl) 2.22 gpm/19.92 ft
3.7% 1.00 343a/267b
14.3% 0.52 892a/139b
45.2% 0.11 90a/29.4b
a Calculated by Theis (1935) solution for recovery stage of a step-drawdown pumping test in a
single well.
b Calculated by the Driscoll (1986) empirical equation developed from the Cooper -Jacob (1946)
solution.
An aquifer test conducted on well DW-17(d2) was analyzed using the methods of Theis (1935)
and Hantush (1960). The well yield and drawdown indicated a specific capacity of 0.16 gpm/ft
in the bedrock aquifer at well DW-17(d2).
XAFolders.GL\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

Data analysis by the Theis (1935) method for a step-drawdown test in a single well determined
that the bedrock aquifer has a transmissivity (T) value of 0.0321 ft2/minute (46.2 ft2/day) and a
storativity (S) value of 6.4x10-5. Using an assumed 20-foot aquifer thickness (the open borehole
length for well DW-17(d2)), a hydraulic conductivity (K) value of 2.31 ft/day was derived for
the bedrock unit on the basis of the Theis solution (ENSR, 2003).
Pump test data analysis by the Hantush (1960) method for time -distance drawdown in a leaky
semiconfined aquifer produced a T value of 0.0588 ft2/minute (84.6 ft2/day) and a storativity
value of 1.5x10-4 for the bedrock unit. Using an assumed aquifer thickness of 20 feet for the
pumped bedrock zone, a K value of 4.23 ft/day was estimated from the Hantush solution.
Analysis by this method was conducted only on the test data from observation well DW-10(dl)
and pumping well DW-17(d2).
A second round of short-term step-drawdown pumping tests were performed on wells DW-
1(BR), DW-2(BR), DW-3(BR), DW-8i, DW-17(BR), and MW-17s in August 2005. The tests
were performed to obtain sustainable yields for these wells, estimates of the hydraulic properties
for each aquifer in which these wells are installed, and to determine whether the saprolite,
shallow bedrock and deeper bedrock aquifers are hydraulically connected in each of these areas.
The short-term step-drawdown tests consisted of pumping each well sequentially at 3 to 4
different flow rates consisting of 30 to 45 minutes each. The water level responses to pumping
were recorded in the pumping well and nearby monitor wells. The data obtained from these tests
are summarized in Table C-2. As shown in Table C-2, during .the step-drawdown tests
performed in monitoring wells installed in the bedrock aquifer, a water -level response to
pumping was observed in wells installed in the saprolite. This indicates that these hydrogeologic
units are hydraulically connected.
Data from the single -well pumping tests were downloaded into the AQTESOLV® program for
analysis. The Theis (1935) solution was -used to analyze the data collected from the pumping
well only at those locations where drawdown was minimal compared to the saturated thickness.
In these locations, the well loss effects will be minimal and an accurate analysis of the data can
be performed. The recovery data collected from the pumping well and nearby observation wells
screened in the same hydrogeologic unit as the pumping well were analyzed using the Kawecki
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

;r
recovery method (1993). This method takes into account the variable rates used during the
pumping periods of the test.
A summary of the aquifer parameters calculated from the step-drawdown tests is presented in
Table C-3. The transmissivity values calculated for the bedrock aquifer range from 20.6 to 219
ft2/day, with a geometric mean of 96.1 ft2/day. The hydraulic conductivity values calculated for
it
the bedrock aquifer range from 0.6 to 4.4 ft/day, with a geometric mean of 1.8 ft/day. These
ranges in transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity are comparable to the results obtained from
previous aquifer tests. The transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity values for the step-
drawdown test performed in saprolite monitor well MW-17s were 2.2 ft2/day and 0.2 ft/day,
respectively. These results confirm that the saprolite unit is less permeable than the underlying
bedrock aquifer. The complete data analyses for these step-drawdown tests are included as
Attachment C-5.
(8) Groundwater Plume Relationship to Receptors and Remediation System
Groundwater remediation injection locations to which bioremediation additives are intended to
be applied at the CMS site are shown on Figure A-5. Injection is proposed to be conducted into
zones 1 and 3 to assist in mass reduction of the VOC source areas, and into Zone 5 to reduce the
VOC levels at the southern property boundary and ultimately to reduce the VOC concentrations
of groundwater discharging to Tributarys A and B. An additional bioremediation application is to
be conducted into Zone 6 under NCDENR Injection Permit WI0400084. The dual barrier
application into Zones 5 and 6 will stimulate the reductive dechlorination of VOCs over a greater
portion of the plume than to Zone 6 alone. The application is to be conducted passively and
should therefore have minimal if any impact on the groundwater flow regime other than adding
organic substrate.
D. DEMONSTRATION OF HYDRAULIC CONTROL
' As will be presented in Attachment F -(below), the application of fluids will be primarily
groundwater obtained from areas that will lessen rather than increase plume dimensions.
Bioremediation fluids will comprise approximately 25% of the injectate in each area. The
additional fluid will be less than 1% of the aquifer volume and hence will be inconsequential to
X:\Folders.&BUCotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013WonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc
1

the flow regime and will have no or very limited impact on the plume as a whole. Please refer to
i
Attachment F for a more thorough review of the application system and relationship to
groundwater flow.
E. MAPS AND CROSS -SECTIONS
Site figures in accordance with 15A NCAC 02T .1604(e).
(1) A scaled map of the site is provided as as -built sheets for the construction of Spring Place
and Sterling Cottages (Figures E-1 through E-4).
(2) Locations of all site borings is provided as Figure C-1.
(3) Well locations of existing and abandoned onsite wells are shown on Figure A-4 and or
Figure C-14. Figure A-5 shows the location of existing onsite wells. Abandoned and
existing offsite wells are shown on Figure C-14.. Also presented on Figure C-14 are
Tributaries A and B and the interception of Tributary A with South Buffalo Creek.
Tributaries A and B are the .only surface water bodies or other site feature that could
sever as an exposure pathway that is located within 500 feet of impacted groundwater.
(4) Setbacks as specified in 15A NCAC 02T .1606. Setback requirements for injection are
met or not achievable as follows:
• No well exists within 100 feet of injection other than approved monitoring or injection
wells. As discussed in Attachment A (5), there are no wells within %Z mile of the site
plume.
• Injection well EW-507 is the only injection point located proposed injection location
within 100 feet of surface water. Sample collection point SW-A-3 is an open culvert
primarily recharged by flow from the storm water flow pipe shown running north to south
-' across the property. This well is screened from 47 to 77 ft bgs, and as such injected fluids
should not impact the side -gradient surface water monitoring point.
• All injection is to be conducted within the CMS property boundary and no injection
location is within 50 feet of the property boundary, with the exception of wells EW-501
j XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton MUM PermittingWondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

through EW-505 along the southern boundary 500 series wells. These wells appear to be
approximately 40 feet from the property boundary. It is impractical to relocate these wells
due to the proximity to residential dwellings would likely result in safety concerns during
installation. As will be detailed in Attachment F below, addition of amendment into these
wells utilizing dilution water from an adjacent well will not result and subsequently
reversing the process should have a net zero impact on the distribution of contaminants
and will not alter the spread of the plume. In addition, the planned injection volume of
amendment and substrate represents approximately 0.1 % of the volume of the treatment
zone. An additional line of injection is planned for the Norfolk Southern site located to
the south under Permit # WI0400084.
• No injection location is located within 10 feet of an above -ground building or retention
wall.
• No injection location is within 15 feet of a subsurface structure such as a basement or
swimming pool. Subsurface utilities are within 15 feet of injection wells in Zones 1 and
5, however, no injection well has a casing that is less than 30 feet bgs. Hence there is
sufficient separation to ensure that the utilities will not be impacted.
• Water line separation of at least.10 feet is satisfied as it does not appear that any line is
located horizontally within 10 feet of injection and the vertical separation is at least 30
feet, ensuring that the water lines will not be impacted.
• There are no rock outcrops identified at the CMS or surrounding area.
• All of the injection areas are located at least 15 feet from embankments or cuts of two
feet or greater.
• There are no groundwater lowering ditches in the design.
• No surface water ephemeral streams, waterways or ditches are within 25 feet of injection.
• There are no subsurface groundwater lowering drainage systems.
X:\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton MUM Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

(5) Delineation of Boundaries.
Property boundaries for the CMS site and adjoining properties are provided on Figure E-4.
Contaminant plume review and compliance boundaries are evaluated using the downgradient
monitoring wells as provided in the Semiannual Monitoring Report submittals.
(6) Horizontal/Vertical Extent of Contamination
The horizontal extent of VOC contamination as depicted in the most recent, full round of
groundwater monitoring is provided for the shallow, intermediate and bedrock monitored zones
as Figures E-5, E-6 and E-7, respectively. The vertical extent of contamination is also reflected
on these Figures, as well as on cross-section Figures provided as Figures C-2 through C-5, as
located on Figure C-6.
(7) Cross -sections
Cross -sections depicting geologic features and contaminant extent are provided as Figures C-2
through C-5 and are located on Figure C-6. All injection will be conducted within the
contaminant zone indicated on these cross -sections.
(8) Hydrogeologic Features
Groundwater potentiometric surface contour maps for the October 2012 monitoring event
shallow, intermediate and bedrock monitoring zones are provided as Figures C-11, C-13 and C-
16.
F ENGINEERING DESIGN DOCUMENTS
(1) Engineering Plan
Application of substrate will be conducted via passive injection from portable poly tanks directly
--' into the injection well(s). The injection system will consist of the portable poly tank filled to
approximately 25% from portable totes of amendment and diluted with groundwater. The tote
will be plumbed directly into the injection location as has been previously conducted for
X:\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013%onDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

injection Zones 1, 3 and 6. The injection rates will be monitored such that significant mounding
of the watertable does not occur.
The only possible infrastructure to be used may be the existing piping system in Zone 5,
previously used to pump groundwater from Zone 5 to Zone 4. The logistics of using the existing
piping system have not yet been assessed. However, it is likely that due to the simplicity of
injection from poly tanks into each injection location that this method will be utilized for each
application area. The injection wells and wells to be used for makeup water generation are
provided on Figure A-5 and on Table F-1.
(2) Materials, Construction Methods
i As discussed above, materials for injection will consist of portable poly tanks of approximately
250 gallons, injection piping or hose to allow flow directly from the tank to the individual
injection well(s), and potentially the use of the existing plumbing in Zone 5. There is no
construction anticipated other than the temporary plumbing to connect the portable poly tank to
the injection location(s).
(3) Injection Construction Details
Injection and extraction well construction information is provided for each of the proposed
groundwater extraction and injection locations proposed for Zones 1, 3 and 5 are provided on
Table C-1. Construction details for the site monitoring well system are also included on this
table. All of these locations have already been completed and no additional construction for
injection is anticipated.
G OPERATING AND MONITORING PLAN
(1) Operating Plan
(A) Schedule
Amendment application is anticipated to require a period of approximately upon receipt of
permit approval and amendment delivery. Application will be conducted during daylight hours
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

and likely only during a standard working day. No amendment application will be conducted
unless an operator is onsite to monitor the injection.
(B) Maintenance
There is no anticipated maintenance required for the application of fluids.
(C) Consumable Materials
The only waste material that will be generated as part of the amendment application is the
packaging tote for the food grade edible oil amendment which will be disposed of with normal
trash disposal.
(D) Access Restrictions
i Temporary fencing or banner will be maintained surrounding the application areas restriction in
Zones 1 and 5 as these are located in the parking/driveway areas of the Sterling Cottages housing
complex. The application will likely be conducted out of a box truck so that there_ will be no
surface expression of application during nonworking hours. The Zone 3 area is in an unused
portion of the site, and will be segregated by banner guard during the application process.
(E) System Fail Safe Precautions
The amendment to be applied is a food grade edible oil substrate, which will be applied passively
into individual injection wells. There is minimal opportunity for system failure as the only
operating part will be check valves that allow or curtail flow into the injection well from the
I
portable injection tank. Injection will be conducted at a rate to minimize mounding, and the
potential for further movement of the VOC plume. The use of extracted groundwater for makeup
water is intended to curtail further distribution of the VOC plume by increasing the gradient in a
direction that will not impact the plume and by minimizing the amount of additional water in the
groundwater system by minimizing the addition of potable water.
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

(2) Injection Well Operating Plan
(A) Average daily injection rate will likely be on the order of 250 to 500 gallons of injectate and
dilution water. It is unlikely that more than 1,000 gallons will be injected during any given day.
(B) Based upon previous amendment applications at this site, it is anticipated that injection
pressure will be conducted at atmospheric conditions and that no pressure build up will occur.
(C) The estimated total volume of injectate is provided on Table F-1.
(3) Monitoring Plan
- The monitoring plan will be conducted in accordance to the RAP, which is currently under
review with NCDENR. The semiannual groundwater and surface water monitoring required by
the RAP will be used throughout the permitted application. Requirements of the RAP are
sufficient to monitor the progress of this remedial action, and no additional monitoring will be
necessary.
Ali
H IN SITU REMEDIATION ADDITIVES
(1) Amendment Information
MSDS sheets for the edible oil (EO) amendment and buffer are provided in Attachment H-1-A.
EO will be diluted at a ratio of approximately 4:1, resulting an approximately 25% EO injectate.
Buffer will be added to the injectate for Zones 1 and 3 at a concentration of approximately 0.2
grams/liter (g/L) over the treatment area.
(2) Injection Rationale
EO application has been demonstrated to result in complete biodegradation of site contaminants
in areas surrounding/downgradient of application areas, as well as resulting in mass reduction in
source areas as demonstrated by the creation and degradation of contaminant breakdown
products. Complete reduction of VOCs have been observed in wells downgradient of previous
Zone 3, 4 and 6 amendment applications and contaminant reduction has been observed in
XAFolders.G-LUCotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

downgradient or deep monitoring locations in Zone 1 as detailed in the October 2012
Semiannual Monitoring Report.
Calculation sheets used to determine organic substrate loading rates required to satisfy the
demand for each of the treatment zones (1, 3 and 5) are included in Attachment H-2-A. Buffer
loading rates were calculated to achieve a dosage of 0.2 g/L across the treatment zone which
should satisfy both the aquifer demand and the increased demand to negate the pH lowering
effect of the increase of free hydrogen as the result of organic substrate addition.
(3) Injection Related Reactions
Addition of organic substrate to induce anaerobic groundwater conditions and to provide organic
substrate for microbial growth are common remedial strategy to induce the reductive
dechlorination of the site CVOCs. The introduction of pH buffer to bring or keep groundwater
in the range of 6 to 7.5 pH units considered optimum for reductive dechlorination of CVOCs is
also an important component of this methodology.
A simplistic reductive dechlorination degradation sequence for chlorinated aliphatic
hydrocarbons present at the CMS facility is presented below:
1. tetrachloroethene (PCE) —> trichloroethene (TCE) --)- cis-1,2-dichloroethene (c-DCE)
- * vinyl chloride (VC) —* ethene
2. 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA) --+ 1,1-dichloroethane (DCA) -* chloroethane (CA) —>
ethane
l�
3. carbon tetrachloride (CT) —> chloroform (CFM) -+ methylene chloride (MC)
methane
4. 1,1-dichloroethene (DCE) --+ vinyl chloride (VC) --> ethene
Each sequence involves the successive replacement of a chlorine atom with a hydrogen atom. In
general, increases in high order chlorine -containing compounds (referred to as parent) (PCE,
TCE TCA DCE and CT) is undesirable; increases in intermedia
ry and end member compounds
(c-DCE, VC, DCA, CA, ethene, and ethane) is generally desirable; and, ultimately, depletion of
high order, intermediary, and end member compounds is very desirable.
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

(4) Inj ectant Applicability
The use of EO and sodium bicarbonate buffer have been previously demonstrated to be effective
for the enhancement of reductive dechlorination at the CMS site. There have been no negative
results observed, such as the accumulation of undesirable degradation products such as vinyl
chloride. The only observation of undesirable byproducts has been the temporal, seemingly
random observation of acetone and. methylene chloride. Neither of these compounds has been
observed for more than one or two monitoring events following amendment applications, and
both analytes degrade rapidly under aerobic conditions present in the downgradient portions of
the VOC plume. Neither of these compounds have been observed in the plume boundary
monitoring wells.
(5) Amendment Bybroduct Generation
As discussed in the H4 response there has been no observation of accumulation of undesirable
byproducts such as vinyl chloride and the generation of temporal byproducts has been limited to
acetone and methylene chloride have proven to be short lived and limited.
XAFolders.G-L1L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

REFERENCES CITED
BPA Environmental & Engineering, Inc. 1996. Environmental Site Investigation, Cotton Mill
Square, 801 Merritt Drive, Greensboro, North Carolina. December 18, 1996.
Cooper, H.H., and Jacob, C.E. 1946. A generalized graphical method for evaluating formation
constants and summarizing well field history. Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Vol.
27, NoA.'
Driscoll, F.G. 1986. Groundwater and Wells. Second Edition. Johnson Filtration Systems, Inc.
St. Paul, Minnesota, 1108 pp.
ENSR Consulting and Engineering, Inc. 2004. Corrective Action Plan Report, Cotton Mill
Square Project Site, Greensboro, North Carolina. January 29, 2004.
ENSR Consulting and Engineering, Inc. 2003. Comprehensive Site Assessment Report:
Addendum No. 1, Cotton Mill Square Project Site. June 16, 2003.
Theis, C.V. 1935. The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and
duration of discharge of wells using groundwater storage. Transactions, American Geophysical
Union, Vol. 16, pp 519-524.
VEETech, P.C. 2001. Site Assessment Report, Cotton Mill Square, Greensboro, North
Carolina. January 16, 2001.
VEETech, P.C. 2002. Phase II Report: Comprehensive Site Assessment, Cotton Mill Square,
Greensboro, North Carolina. April 26, 2002.
j X.Tolders G-L\L\Cotton Md1113 PermittingTennit Renewal 2013\Nondischarge Renewal\NonDischarge permit attachment Q.doc

TABLES
I

Table C-1
Well Summary Table
Fomer Cotton Mill Square Site, Greensboro, NC
Well Name
Install
Date
Well
Aband-
oned
Aquifer Unit
Monitored
TOC Elevation
- At Present (ft
MSL)
TOC Elevation
- Historical (ft
MSL)
Difference
to 2013
survey (ft)
Diameter
(inch)
Total
Depth (ft
bgs)
Top
Screen
(ft bgs)
Bottom
Screen
(ft bgs)
Screen
Slot (in.)
MW_01_s
Feb-98
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
865.28
2
30.10
15.10
30.10
0.01
MW_02_s
Feb-98
sSAP
867.09
858.49
8.6
2
28.70
13.70
28.70
0.01
MW_03_s
Feb-98
sSAP
850.69
837.54
13.15
2
33.65
18.65
33.65
0.01
MW_04_s
Feb-98
sSAP
852.97
853.71
-0.74
2
19.76
4.76
19.76
0.01
MW_05_s
May-98
Abd.
SSAP
Abd.
883.2
-
35.85
25.85
35.85
-
MW_06_s
Aug-00
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
881.39
-
35.00
15
35
-
MW_07_s
Aug-00
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
873.15
-
30.00
10
30
-
MW_08_s
Aug-00
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
877.6
-
35.00
20
35
-
MW_09_s
Aug-00
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
867.39
-
30.00
15
30
-
MW_10_s
Aug-00
I Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
848.43
-
15.00
5
15
-
MW_11_s
Aug-00
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
869.29
-
35.00
15
35.
-
MW_12_s
Aug-00
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
834.58
2
12.00
2
12
-
MW_13_s
Aug-00
SSAP
851.81
851.81
0
2
15.00
5
15
-
MW_14_s
Aug-00
sSAP
853.06
846.86
6.2
2
14.20
3
8
-
MW_15_s
MW_16_s
Aug-00
Aug-00
Abd.
Abd.
sSAP
sSAP
Abd.
Abd.
854.12
858.3
-
-
15.00
20.00
5
5
15
20
-
-
MW_17_s
Aug-00
Abd.
SSAP
Abd.
860.6
2
30.00
15
30
-
MW_18_i
Feb-05
T(PWR)
853.63
853.61
0.02
1
40.02
30
40
0.01
MW_19_i
Feb-05
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
848.44
1
27.00
17
27
0.01
MW_20_s
MW_21_i
Feb-05
Feb-05
Abd.
Abd.
sSAP
T(PWR)
Abd.
Abd.
871.87
880.2
1
1
46.00
59.00
26
54
46
59
0.01
0.01
MW_22_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
867.45
1
59.00
49
59
0.01
MW_23_i
Feb-05
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
865.29
1
62.00
52
62
0.01 -
MW_24_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
877.92
1
63.00
53
63
0.01
MW_25_i
Feb-05
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
881.83
1
70.00
60
70
0.01
MW_26_i
Feb-05
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
868.43
2
51.00
31
51
0.01
MW_27_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
866.6
2
50.00
40
50
0.01
MW_28_s
Feb-05
sSAP
850.99
842.95
8.04
2
43.04
15
35
0.01
MW_29_i
Feb-05
T(PWR)
. 853.76
853.76
0
2
35.00
25
35
0.01
MW_30_i
Feb-05
Abd.
T(PWR) I
Abd.
857.25
2
40.00
30
40
0.01

Table C-1
Well Summary Table
Fomer Cotton Mill Square Site, Greensboro, NC
Well Name
Install
Date
Well
Aband-
oned
Aquifer Unit
Monitored
TOC Elevation
- At Present (ft
MSL)
TOC Elevation
- Historical (ft
MSL)
Difference
to 2013
survey (ft)
Diameter
(inch)
Total
Depth (ft
bgs)
Top
Screen
(ft bgs)
Bottom
Screen
(ft bgs)
Screen
Slot (in.)
MW_31_s
Feb-05
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
881.89
2
40.00
25
40
0.01
'MW 32 s
Feb-05
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
881.27
2
40.00
25
40
0.01
MW_33_s
Feb-05
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
868.62
2
40.00
25
40
0.01
MW_34_s
Feb-05
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
866.4
2
24.00
14
24
0.01
MW_35_s
Feb-05
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
856.26
1
25.00
5
25
0.01
MW_36_s
Feb-05
dSAP
876.32
881.28
-4.96
2
55.04
40
60
0.01
MW_37_s
Feb-05
dSAP
876.07
881.51
-5.44
2
54.56
40
60
0.01
MW_38_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
875.08
2
59.00
39
59
0.01
MW_39_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
874.51
2
50.00
1 30
50
0.01
MW_40_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
869.22
2
45.00
25
45
0.01
MW_41_s
Feb-05
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
849.58
2
25.00
15
25
0.01
MW_42_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP
Abd.
853.89
2
38.00
18
38
0.01
MW_43_s
Feb-05
Abd.
dSAP/T(PWR)
Abd.
854.72
2
40.00
20
40
0.01
MW_44_dl
Sep-02
Abd.
sBR
Abd.
853.86
2
125.00
115
125
0.02
MW_45_s
Sep-02
Abd.
sSAP
Abd.
850.03
2
40.00
30
40
0.02
MW_45_i
Sep-02
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
849.6
2
48.00
38
48
0.02
MW_46_s
Sep-02
Abd.
dSAP
850.53
850.01
0
2
43.00
33
43
0.02
MW_46_i
Sep-02
T(PWR)
Abd.
850.53
2
75.00
65
75
0.02
MW_47 d2
Sep-02
Abd.
OR
Abd.
834.11
2
135.00
114
124
0.02
MW_48_i
Mar-03
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
843.67
2
35.00
25
35
0.02
MW_49_i
Mar-03
T(PWR)
832.24
832.24
0
2
47.50
37.5
47.5
0.02
MW_50_i
Apr-03
T(PWR)
833.37
833.37
0
2
27.00
17
27
0.02
MW_51_i
Apr-03
T(PWR)
812.65
812.65
0
2
28.00
18
28
0.02
DW_01_dl
Feb-05
SBR
882.69
2
95.00
90
95
0.01
DW_02_d1
Feb-05
sBR
873.83
867.53
6.3
2
87.80
76.5
81.5
0.01
DW_03_dl
Feb-05
sBR
871.81
868.68
3.13
2
100.13
92
97
0.01
DW_04_dl
Feb-05
Abd.
SBR
Abd.
865.54
2
90.00
85
90
0.01
DW_05_dl
Feb-05
sBR
852.95
853.61
-0.66
2
59.34
55
60
0.01
DW_06_dl
Feb-05
sBR 1
856.92
858.4
-1.48
2
62.52
59
64
0.01
DW 07_i
Feb-05
T(PWR) 1
851.02
850.75
0.27
2
52.27
47
52
0.01

Table C-1
Well Summary Table
Fomer Cotton Mill Square Site, Greensboro, NC
Well Name
Install
Date
Well
Aband-
oned
Aquifer Unit
Monitored
TOC Elevation
- At Present (ft
MSL)
TOC Elevation
- Historical (ft
MSL)
Difference
to 2013
survey (ft)
Diameter
(inch)
Total
Depth (ft
bgs)
Top
Screen
(ft bgs)
Bottom
Screen
(ft bgs)
Screen
Slot (in.)
DW_08_i
Feb-05
Abd.
T(PWR)
Abd.
849.56
2
52.00
47
52
0.01
DW_09_dl
Feb-05
SBR
875.25
878.3
-3.05
2
81.95
80
85
0.01
DW_10_d1
Feb-05
SBR
874.79
875.26
-0.47
2
84.53 -
80
85
0.01
DW_11_dl
Feb-05
OR
854.87
854.87
0
2
75.00
70
75
0.01
DW_12_d1
Feb-05
OR
853.53
853.53
0
2
60.00
55
60
0.01
DW_13_dl
Feb-05
sBR
849.41
849.41
0
2
62.00
57
62
0.01
DW_14_d2
Feb-05
iBR
851.58
851.64
-0.06
6
129.94
100
130
open hole
DW_15_dl
Feb-05
OR
853.41
853.41
0
6
78.00
43
78
open hole
DW_16_d2
Feb-05
iBR
848.75
848.75 .
0
6
142.00
100
142
open hole
DW_17_d2
Feb-05
iBR
875.1
878.37
-3.27
6
136.73
120
140
open hole
DW_18_i
Feb-05
T(PWR)/sBR
833.82
833.82
0
2
33.00
28
33
0.01
DW_19_dl
Feb-05
sBR
815.92
815.92
0
2
37.00
32
37
0.01
PMW 01
sSAP
nm
1
41.00
0.01
PMW_02
sSAP
nm
1
38.00
0.01
TMW_01
sSAP
nm
2
57.00
0.01
IW-201
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
876.06
881.77
-5.71
2
84.29
40
90
0.02
IW-202
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
-876.55
880.13
-3.58
2
81.43
40
85
0.02
IW-203
Mar-06
Sap/Trans
869.66
867.44
2.23
2
80.23
42
77
0.02
IW-204
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
870.45
865.30
5.16
2
87.16
42
82
0.02
IW-205
Mar-06
Ovb/Sap
854.80
855.27
-0.47
2
61.53
18
53
0.02
IW-206
Apr-06
Ovb/Sap/Bdrx
853.71
853.77
-0.06
2
75.94
30
75
0.02
IW-207
Apr-06
Ovb/Sap/Bdrx
859.70
863.98
-4.27
2
71.73
40
75
0.02
IW208
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrx
858.00
861.15
-3.15
2
63.85
37
67
0.02
IW-209
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrx
854.52
856.72
-2.20
2
63.80
35
65
0.02
IW-210
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrx
859.67
855.45
4.22
2
79.22
40
75
0.02
IW-301
TransMthd/Comp
846.34
846.34
0.00
2 ,
59.00
28.48
58.48
0.02
IW-302
Bdrx
849.56
849.56
0.00
2
58.48
40.47
75.47
0.02
IW-303
Wthd/Comp
852.45
852.45
0.00
2
75.47
39.2
74.2
0.02
IW-304
•Apr-07
Wthd/Comp
854.93
854.93
0.00
2
74.20
45
80
0.02
IW-305
Apr-07
Wthd/Comp
849.91
849.91
0.00
2
85.00
39.19
84.19
0.02

Table C-1
Well Summary Table
Fomer Cotton Mill Square Site, Greensboro, NC
Well Name
Install
Date
Well
Aband-
oned
Aquifer Unit
9
Monitored
TOC Elevation
- At Present (ft
MSL)
TOC Elevation
- Historical (ft
MSL)
Difference
to 2013
survey (ft)
Diameter
(inch)
Total
Depth (ft
bgs)
Top
Screen
(ft bgs)
Bottom
Screen
(ft bgs)
Screen
Slot (in.)
IW-306
Apr-07
Wthd/Comp
850.57
850.57
0.00
2
84.19
39.7
74.7
0.02
IW-307
Apr-07
Wthd/Comp
848.68
848.68
0.00
2
74.70
50.19
75.19
0.02
IW-401
Mar-06
Sap/Trans
876.26
880.28
-4.02
4
71.17
37.5
72.5
0.02
IW-402
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
874.75
879.49
-4.74
4
77.26
40
80
0.02
IW-403
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
873.06
877.57
-4.51
4
71.49
40
75
0.02
IW-404
Mar-06
Sap/Trans
872.94
873.36
-0.42
4
79.58
31
77
0.02
IW-405
Mar-06
Sap/Trans
871.44
871.85
-0.41
4
74.59
40
75
0.02
IW-406a
Apr-06
TranslWthd/Comp
870.68
870.35
0.33
4
75.33
40
75
0.02
IW-407a
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
871.28
870.42
0.86
4
75.86
33.5
68.5
0.02
EW-501
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrk
857.71
854.55
3.16
4
73.16
35
70
0.02
EW-502
Apr-06
Trans/Wthd/Comp
857.03
853.43
3.6
4
79.60
40
75
0.02
EW-503
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrk
856.93
847.87
9.06
4
80.06
41
71
0.02
EW-504
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrk
856.92
846.91
10.01
4
81.01
40.5
70.5
0.02
EW-505
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Bdrk
852.09
845.66
6.43
4
71.43
35
65
0.02
EW-506
Apr-06
Trans/Wthd/Comp
849.57
846.21
3.36
4
69.36
46
66
0.02
EW-507
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
848.95
837.11
11.84
4
77.84
35
65
0.02
EW-508
Apr-06
Saps/Trans
874.92
877.77
-2.85
4
82.15
55
85
0.02
EW-509
Apr-06
Sap/Trans/Wthd
874.27
875.58
-1.31
4
84.69
55
85
0.02
EW-510
Apr-06
Sap/Trans
869.44
865.91
3.53
4
85.53
42
82
0.02
EW-511
Apr-06
Trans/Wthd/Comp
870.01
864.94
5.07
4
97:07
48.5
88.5
0.02
EW-512
Mar-06
Wthd(trans)/Comp
851.88 1
852.80
0.00
4
71.00
41
71
0.02
EW-513
Apr-06 I
I
_Sap/trans/Bdrx 1
850.43 1
851.94
0.00
4
75.00
40
75
0.02
�- i

z
D
u
z
0
D
v
Cr
CD
V
f0
v
co
Z
C N
W
N
-�
P
W
N
W
A
W
N
S
�.i
W
N
--•
?
W
N
-�
W
N
W
� '�
1
" v
a
a
a
w
W
co
co
co
.p-N
A
A
w
w
w
w
�A
y
v
N
M
Ul
Ul
CD
O
CD
CD
CD
CT
CT
Ul
CT
CD
O
CD
CD
v
co
Cn
C ry ID
�
co
CA
CA
CT
� 0
C
O
w
O
CA
co
N
O
9)
A
O
N
O
O
O
A
O
N
O
CT
Cn
W
''
N
O
.-.
3
'C
co
CO
O
CT
OD
Ul
Cfl
�1
Cn
C0
W
CA
Ul
O
IV
CO
CA
OD
Cn
CO
A
v
to
O
W
C''7
OWD
�1
O
N
C�
�C j
p
�l
W'
s�
S
O
.A
-•
O
S�
A
W
N
0
M
N
C
N� is
�I
Cn
Cb
►�
4
O
O
C'7
`
00
A
V
W
W
Cn
W
M�
CD
CT
CA
Un
�l
`
N
0
N
WO
O
O
V
W
cn
v`
CA
CD , CL CD
y
CD
O
CO
4
W
pD
CN
N
�
v O � C
3 a 3
S»
Z
DDDD
Z
Z
Z
0
Cninw
0
0
Cl
cn
K)
N
:,,,
O
n�
cn�W�
00
0
���o
0
0
0
O
Co
O
P.
O
-�
y
fl, a
O
P
CJl
Cn
N
CA
V
V
CC
-P
OD
A
�
OD
CJl
N
�
h
.Dk
W
OD
�
.�i C
o
Vl.
r
3 a3
3
v
Z
Z
Z
Z
U'io°��+
O
O
O
$ O
`
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
O
�-4
O
O
O
N
N
W
co"iN
N
S
C
fa K
CL
DDDD
�CD
cnC
DDDDD
DDDDD
-�
0)rn
0) rnh
Cprntb�
�O �
C
3 CL al
O
n �
O 'o
C
CD
tj
C'
y
CD
to
r
C
0

Table 'C-3
Summary of Step-Drawdown Results
Cotton Mill Facility
. August 2005
Pumping
Well
Observation
Well
Distance to
Pumping
Well
(feet)
Unit
Theis Drawdown Method
Kawecki Recovery Method
Transmissivity
(ft2/day)
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(ft/day)
Transmissivity
(ft2/day)
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(ft/da Y)
DW-1
DW-1
0
BR
108.9
1.9
88
1.5
MW-21 i
15
BR
60.6
1.0
81
1.4
DW-2
DW-2
0
BR
NC
NC
165
3.2
DW-3
DW-3
0
BR
116.8
1.7
208
3.1
MW-26i
10
BR
120.4
1.8
219
3.3
DW-8i
DW-8i
0
BR
68.71
1.9
81
2.3
MW-19i
25
BR
20.67
0.6E
44
1.2
DW-17
DW-17
0
BR
NC
NC
70
0.9
DW-10
152
BR
125.1
1.7
89
1.2
DW-9
8
BR
157.5
4.4
158
2.1
MW-17s
MW-17s
0
SAP
NC
NC
2.2
0.2
NC = Data could not be analyzed due to excessive well loss effects in the pumping well.

Tabe F-1
ISB Injection Plan - 2013
Area
Area
(ftz)
Depth
(ft)
GW
Volume
(L)
GW
Volume
Gallons
Bicarbona
EVO to
(Ibs) (Ibs)
Gal
Dilution
Total
Injectate
(Gal)
Injection Summary
# injectors
Gal/Inj.
Zone 5
1 20,000
1 30
13,392,92814,488,0001
6,221
1 0
1 3.016
1 3,770
7
39
Zone 3
20,000
35
3,958,416
5,236,000
10,485
1,749
5,084
6,355
277
#15194
Zone 1
14,000
35
2,770,891
3,665,200
6,428
1,224
3.117
3.896
28
1 ULai
Note:
Total injectate sum of amendment and dilution water.
ZJ,1J4 Z,9/4
14,021
c)O a_9
Zone 1
Zone 3
Zone 5
Injection
i
Well
IW-201
I EW-509
IW-206
I IW-205
EW-501
EW-502
EW-503
EW-504
I EW-505
I EW-506
I EW-507
I
IW-
Extraction
EW-509
Potable
IW-210
206/IW-
Potable
EW-501,
EW-502,
EW-503,
EW-504,
EW-505,
Potable
Well(s)
Water
210/EW-
Water
EW-503
EW-504
EW-505
EW-506'
EW-506
Water
512
0 %

ATTACHMENT C-5
Aquifer Test Calculation Sheets
X.\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton KUM Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

ATTACHMENT C-5
SLUG TEST RESULTS
XAFolders G-L1L\Cotton KUM Perm itting%Nondischarge Renewal 20131NonDischarge permit attachment v_a doc

r
Cotton Milt Square
` Slud Test MW-1
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW-1
Test Date:
11/28700
'Nell Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
40. feet
Screen Length:
i5. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
i Static Waier Level:
20.81 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 9.29 feet
-- Anisotropy Ratio:
1
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 30 time and drawdown
Maximum head is 0.49 feet
measurements
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial' Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
(minutes)
1
(minutes) _ (feet)
)
(feet)
Head Ratio
0.
2 0.25
0. 21.3
0.25 21.14
0.49
1.
3 0.5
0.5
0.33
0.5735 '
4 0.75
0.75 21.09
0.29
0.5918
5 1.333
1 ( 6
1
1.333 21.08
0.28
0.27
0.5714
0.551
.
SY 7
1.75 21.07
0.26
8 2-25
2• 21.06
2.25
0'25
0.5306
0.5402
9 2.5
21.05
2.5 21.04
0.24
0.4898
10 2.75
2.75 2.1.03
0.23
0.22
0.4694
11 3.
12 3.417
3. 2�'.02 • �
3-417
0.21
Q.449
0.4286
- 13 3.833
21.01
3.833 21.
0.2
0.4082
14 4.25
4.25 20.99
0.19
0.3878
15 4.667
4.667 20.98
0.18
0.17
0.3673
15.333
17
5.333 20.97
9.16
0.3469
5.917
18 6.5
5.917 20.96
0.15
0.3265
0.3061
19 167
7.
6.5 20.95
7.167 20.94
0.14
0.2857
20 8.16
8.333 20.93
0.13
0.12
0.2653
21 9.167
22 9.917
9.167 20.92
0.11
0-2449
0.2245
�23 10.92
9.917 20.91
10.92 20.9
1-e-001
0.2041
24 12.33
12.33 20.89
9.e-002
0.1837
25 13.75
13.75 20.99
8 e-002
0.1633
28 15.5
27 18.33
.20.87
0.18
S.e-002
0.3673
0.1224
� I .
t8.33 20.8628
22,17
5.e-002
0.102
2g 25.
20.86
25. 20.84
4.e-002
8.163e-002
30 38.08
38.08 20.83
3.e-002
6.122e-002
2 R 002 .
4.082e-002

Cotton obit square
Slug Test MW-9 91/28/40
Cotton Mill Square MW-1
Hydrauifc Conductivity = 7.4 t 2e-006 feetlsecond
Transmissivity = 5.6a8e-005 foSee
5 10 i5
20
Analysis by Starpoint Software
2010mi 02
Souwer and Rice Graph
1 Scuwer and Rice parameter A = 2.305
3ouwer uid Rice parameter a = 0.43t9
tniP.elRw) = 2.'s5195ee•�a00 l
Analysis starts at time 30. seconds
Analysis ends at time 25. minutes
27 Measurements analyzed "Om 3 to 29
0
S 30 35
. AiUS-bd lime lmirutos) r
eao is 0.29 rent at 30. sacanao I
i
i
f
it
• F
t
i
)
• � I
. f
t
i

Cotton Mill S4uare
Siug Test MW-2
Site Name:
Cotton MITI
Square
Location:
MN-2
Test Date:
11128100
'Nell Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
35 feet
Screen Length:
15.feet
Casing Radios:
8.33e-002
feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
10.44 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 9.66 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment.
0, Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 32 time and drawdown
lvlaximum head is 0.6 feet
measurements
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
(minutes)
. 1
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
Head Ratio
0.
2 0.25
.. 0•
0.25
11.04
0.6
1.
3 0.5 -
0 5
1.8
10 78
0.38
0,633-3
5 �'75
0.75
10,74
0,34
6 1.25
1•
1.25
10,72
0.27
0.5667
0.4667
7 1.5
1.5
10.71
10.69
0.27
0.45
8 1.76
1.75
10,68
0.25
0,4167 -
9 2'
10 2.167
2,
2.167
10.67
0.24
0.23
0.4
0.3833
11 '-2.417
2.417
10.66
10.66
0.22
0.3667
12 2.75
2.75
10.64
0.21
0
0.35
13 3.
14 3.33
3,
3.33
.
1063
.2
0.9
0.3333
0,3167
15 3.583
3.583
1062
10,61
0.18
0.3
16 4.
4.
106
017
0.2833
17 4.33
18
4.33
.
10.
0.16
0.15
0.2667
4.75
19 5.25
4.75
5.25
10,58
0.14
0.25
0.2333
20 5.583
5.583
10.57
10.56,
0,13
0.2167
21 6.25
22
6.25
10.55
0.12
0.11
0.2
6,917
23 7.417
6.917
7.417
10.54
1.e-001
0.1833
0.1667
24 8.083
8.083
10.53
10.52
9,e-002
0.15
25 9.
8.e-002
0.1333
26 10.
19.0.
10.51
10.5
7.e-002
0.1167
27 11.25
11.25
10.49
6,e-002
5.e-002
0.1
28 12.83
12,83
10.48
8.333e-002
29 14.25
14.25
10.47
4.e-002
6.667e-002
30 16.5
16.5
70.46
3.e-002
5•e-002
` 20,25
20.25
10.45
2'e-002
3,333e-002
3
32 25.75
26,75
10.44
1.a-002
1.667e-002
0.
0.
21 OUlio2

COttOn Mill Square
Slug Test MW-2 1 0182'1/ 0
Cotton Mill Square MiN-2
t —
1.e .002
Hydraulic Conductivity = 2485e-006 fee/second
7ransmissivih/ = 8.696e-005 fi2lsec
0 S 10
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
CiOuvrer and Pice Para —ter A = 2.329 j
SOWder and P,ice parameter 9 = 0.4415
;n(RaR'v) - 2.375515e*00()
AnWySiS starts at time 30. seconds j
Analysis ands at time 26.75 minutes
30 Measurements analyzed from 3 to 32
t Pants not plotted because head ratio c= I r
These points are ao[ included in the znalysss
1' 20 25
Aaiustea ,tne (minutes)
Ho 7s 0.3;r Seel at 30. semnOs
I �
3
ttS
F,
s
s
f
I
i

r
rh
..... . ..........: .Y.•.. .....tea-....... ...+.......... �....•.. .:<�.' ..
..... . ..........: .Y.•.. .....tea-....... ...+.......... �....•.. .:<�.' ..
Cotton Pfau Square
Slug Test MW-3
Site Name:
Cotton bolt
Square
Location:
�W 3
Test Date:
s 1128/00
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
30. feet
Screen Length:
?5. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
5.54 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 18. feet
Anisotropy Rafio:
1
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 35 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.46 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
{minutes}
{minutes}
(feet)
}
Head ratio
1 0•
0.
{feet}
2 0,25
3
0.25
6.75
1.461.
?.21
fl.5
4
0.5
6.6.5
0�96
0.8288
0.75
5
0.75
0.9
0.6675
1.
6 125
1
1.25
6.35
0.81
0.6164
0.5548
7 1.5
� 5
6.26
6.16
0.72
0.4932
8 1.75
t.75
6.
0.62
0.4247.
9 2
2.
.
6.0208
0.54
0.3699
10 2.25
2.25
598
0.48
0.3288
11 2.5
2.5
.
5.93
0.44
0.3014
12 2.75
2.75
5.89
0.35
O.Z671
13 3.
3.
5.86
0.35
0.2397
14 3.25
3.25
5.83
0.32
0.2192
15 3.5
:3.5
0.29
0.1986
16 3.75
3.75
5.8$
0.26
0.1781
17 4.
4.
5.78
0.24
0_?644
18 4.25
4.26
5.73
0.19
0.1438
19 4.5
4.5
5.72
0.19
0.130?
21 4.75
4.75
0.16
0.1233
21 g
5.
5.69
0.16
0.1096
22 5.33
5.33
5.68
0.15
0.1027
23 5.667
5.667
5.68
0.14
9.589e-002-
24 5,917
5.917
5.66
0.13
8.904e-002
25 8.25
6.25
5.65
0.12
8.219e-002
26 6.667
6.&s7
5.64
0.11
7.534e-002
27 7.083
7.083
5 63
1.e-001
6.849e-002
28 TM
7.833
562
9 •e-002
6.164e-002
29 8.75
8.75
.
5.61
8.e-002
5.479e-002
30 9.5
9.5
5-6
7.e-002
4.795e-002
31 10.67
10.67
6•e-002
4.11e-002
32 115
11,5
$58
5.e-002
3.425e-002
33 13.
13.
5,57
4•e-002
2.74e-002
34 1633
16.83
5.56
3.e-002
02
35 28.25
28.25
5.55
2:e-002
1.37e-0O2
1.37e-002
1.e-002
6.849e-003
2 GI/O7o2

............
cotton WR Square
Slug Test MW-3 11/28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW-3 BOuwer and Rice —Gr­aph-7,
•
Bouwer and Pice parameter A = 2.858
• souwrer and Rice Parameter B = 0 5792
ln(Rer—w) = 2.59478 1 e-000
Analysis starts at time 30. seconds
Analysis ends at time 13. minutes
37 -Measurements analyzed from a to 33
X•
M
Hydraulic Conductivity = 3,046e-006 feet/sOOcnd
T'ransmi3sivity w 9,139e-005 (,2jw
5 , 10
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/D-,02
0
25
Adiusted Time iminut")
HO'S 0-96 feet at 30. seccnaS

I'
Cotton MR1
Square
--'
Siug Test MW-4
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MVV-4
Test Date:
11/28/00
Weil Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
25. feet
Screen Length:
15. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 beet
Effective Radius-,
0.3333 feet
�1
Static Water Level:
9.65 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 10.85 feet
--
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
r
Test starts with trial 0
'
There are 26 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.37 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
!
Trial Time
Adjusted Time
prawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
{feet}
{;eel)
1 0.
0.25
0.
0.25
10.02
0.37
1'
3 0.5
0.5
9.94
0.29
0,7838
4 075..
75
9.91
9 °
0.26
0.7027
5 1.
0
0.25
0.6757
_
= 6 1.5
'
1.5
9.89
9.88
0.24
0.23
0.6486
7 1.75
1.75
9.87
0.22
0.6216
0.5946
9 2.417
2
2.417
9.86
9.86
0.21
0.5676
10 2.917
2.917
9.84
0.2
0.19
0.5405
11 3.33
3
" .33
9.83
0.18
0.5135
0.4865
12 3.917
13 4.583
3.33
9.82
0.17
0.4595
14 5.417
4.583
5.417
9.81
9.8
0.16
0.4324
15 .6.33
$.33
9'79
0.15
0.14
0.4054
16 7.33
7.33
9.78
0.13
0.3784
0.3514
17 8.33
18 9.75
8.33
9.75
9.77
0.12
0.3243
19 11.17
11.17
9.76
9.75
0.11
0.2973
20. 12.5
12.5
9.74
i.e-001
0.2703
21 14.75
14.75
9.73
9.e-002
8.e-002
0.2432
0.2162
I
22 16.75
23
16.75
9.72
7.e-002
0.1892
18.92
24 211.92
18.92
9.71
6.e-002
0.1622
-I
25 25.08
21.92
25.08
9.7
.
5a-002
0.1351
26 29.83
29.83
9.69
9.68
4.e•002
0.1081
3.e-002
8.108e-002
21/0110102

Conon min Square
Slug Test MW-41 !2/8 0
Cotton Mill Square MW 4
i, — _._
f.a00
Hydraulic Conductivity = 9.717e.007 feel/second
7ransmissivity = 2.a29e.005 .t2/sec
70
Analysis by Starpoint Software
Zt/Ol�`Ot02
is
BouWer and Rice Graph
8o❑wer and Pica parameter A = 2,449
8auwer and Rice parameter 8 = 0.4642
iriReiRm - 2.445473e+000
Analysis starts at time 30. secpnds
Analysis ands at time 29.83 minutes
24 Measuremcnts anafyzed from 3 m 26
20 25
Adjusted i ne tnfinutesj
kd rs 0.28 reef at 30. seconds

cotron Mil Square
... Slug Test M W-5
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MW 5
Test Date:
11/28100
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
28.66 feet
Screen Length:
10. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
34.34 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 4.51 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
30. Seconds
Test starts with trial 1
There are 30 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 309.4 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
(minutes)
Adjusted Time Drawdown
(minutes)
head
Head Ratio
1 0
-0.5
(feet)
34.8
(feet)
2 0.25
-0.25
343.7
0.46
309.:
1.487e-003
3 0.5
4 0.75
0•
0.25
34.66
0.34
1
1.099e-003
5 1,
0.5
34.6
34 65
0.32
1.034e-003
6 1.333
0.833
34.64
0.31
0.3
1.002e-003
`mac: 7 1.667
1.167
34.63
0.29
8 2.167
1.667
34.62
0.28
9.374e-004
-
9 2.667
2.167
34.61
0-27
9.05e-004
10 417
3. 41
2.917
34.6
0.26
8.727e-004
11 .
12
3.75
34.5
0.25 .
6.404e-004
8.081e=604
5.25
13 6.333
4.75
5.833
34.58
34.57
0.24
7.757e-004
14 7
6 5
34.56
0.23
7.434e•004
15 8.583
8.083
�-55
0.22
0.21
7.111e-004
•
16 9.75
9.25
34.54
0.2
6.78ee-004
17 11.17
10.67
34.53
0.19
6.465e-004
18 73,
12.5
34.52
0.18
6.141 e-004
19 15.
14.5
34.51
0.17
6.818e-004
20 16.68
1fi.38
34.5
0.16
5.495e-004
21 18.88
16.38
34.49
0.15
5.172e-004
22 20.5
L0,
34.48
0.14
4-848e-004
23 22.58
22.08
34.47
0.13
4.525e-004
24 25•
24.5
34.46
0.11
4.202e-004
'
25 27.33
26.83
34.44
3.879e-004
26 31.08
27
30.58
34.44
1-e-
1.e_001
3.555e-004 #F
3.232e-004 S
34.88
28 37.33
34.36
36.83
34.43
9.e W2
2.909e-004 }
29 42.08
41.58
34.42
34.41
8.e-002
2.586e-004
30 48.5
48.
34.4
7.2-002
2.263e-004 F.
6.e-002
1.939e-004 :
•
j;t•
7
3
201; �toi02
r
F
is

Ccnan -tilt Square {
Slug Vest MW-5 11/28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW-5 BOUWef and Rice Graph
8fll,wer and Rice parameter A = 1.S5r'
$Ouwer and Rice parameter 3 = 0.2873
tr,(4e1R4v) a 1.850822-- � 000 " i
Analysis starts at time 30. seconds
Anal' ends at time 42.08 minutes
27 Measurements analyzed from 3 to 290. t
o
0
z ,-
o ,
m
I
r
Hydraulic Conductivity - 9.013e-007 feeUsecond
Transmissivity = 2.5E3e-005 ft?15ec
0 s t0 is 20 ,
25 30 33 40 45
Analysis by Starpoint Software Adjusted7ne(mnuesl
HO is 0.34 feet at 30. sa=nas
2010'• r0102

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test - MW-6
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MVV-o"
Test Date:
11l281C0
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
40. feet
Screen Length:
20 feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002
feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
31.22 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 3.78 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 27 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.38 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
1 (minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
reef
Head Ratio
0.
2 6.25
0.
0.25
31.6
0.38
1.
3 0.5
0.5
3155
315
0.33
0.8684
4 1-
1.
31..5
51
0.3
0.7895
5 1.333
1.333
315
0.29
0.7632
6 1.667
.7
1.667
31.
0.28
0.27
0.7368
2.5
a 3.3.
2 5
31.49
0.26
0.7105
0.G:857g
9 3.333
3.333
31.47
31.46
0.5
10 4.
11
4.
31.45
0 24
0.23
0.8316
S.
12 6.25
5.
6.25
31.44
0.22
0.6053
0.5789
13 7.
7.
.
3143
31.43
0.21
0.5628
14 7.833
7.833
31.41
0.2
0.5263
15 9.5
.
95
31.4
0.19
0.28
0.5
16 11.
17 12.25
11.
12.25
31.
0.17
0.4737
0.4474
18 13.25
13.25
31.38
31.37
0.16
0.4211
19 14.25
20
14.25
31.35
0.15
0.14
0.3947
75.5
21
i5.5
31.3
0.13
0.3684
17.75
22 19.25
17.75
19.25
31.34
0,12
0.3421
0.3158 ,
23 2 i .
21,
31.33
31.32
0.1 i
0.2895
24 24.5
24.5
1.e-001
0.2632
25 29.5
29.5
31.31
° e 402
0.2368
26 32-25
32.25
31.29
0•z1fl5
27 40,
40.
31.28
7.e-002
0.1842
6.e-002
0.1579
20101:C t r,2

conon Mill square
Slug Test - M W-6 11 /28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW-6
!
t a•00
draulic Conductivity pg feet/second
Transrnissivi y = 5.a2e-005 `1213ec
15 20
Analysis by Starpoint Software
20101 r0102
t
Bouwer and Rice Graph j
3cuwer and Rice parameter A 1.51 i
Bouwer and r?fce parameter B = 0,2355
rn(RelRw) = 1.978008e+000
Analysis starts at time 0, second$
�natysis ends at time 40. rninuies
271,ieasuMments analyzea from 1 to 27 I
1
i
1
t
t I
2s 30 J5 !
- �djusta0 Tlme rmirwtest -
;ta ie 0 38 feet at 0. see nas
I
i
t
5 � '
E
F '
i
s
t
i
i
I

Cotton Mill Square
.. Slug Test MW-7
Site Name:
cotton Mill Square
Location:
��W-7
Test Date:11/28100
N/eil Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
44'0. feet
Screen Length:
0, 0. feet
et
Casing Radius:
8efeet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
25.21 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
4.79 feet
Time Adjustment:
1
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 33 time and drawdown
Maximum head is 0.5 feet
measurements
Minimum head is -0.66 feet
Trial Time
(minutes}
Adjusted Time Drawdown
{minutes)
Head
Head Ratio
1 0
(feet)
0
(feet)
2 0.25
25.71
0.25 25.8
0.5
1'
3 0.5
4 0.75
0.5 25.57
0.39
Q.36
0.78
0.72
5 1
0.75
1 24.55
-0.66
-1.32
1.25
25
1.25 25.53
0.33
0.66
7 1.75
8
1.75 25.52
0.32
0.64
2
9
2. 25.51
0.31
0.3
0.62
2.417
10 3.167
2.417 25.5
3.167
0.29
0.6
0.58
11 3.75
25.49
3.75 25.48
0.28
0.56
12 4.167
13
4.167 25.4
0.27
0.26
0.54
4.687
14 5.333
4.667 25.46
0.25
0.5
15 6.167
5.333 25.45
6.167
0.23
.52
0.48
16 7.
26-4-40.24
0.48
17. 7.833
25.4
7.833 25.43
0 22
0.44
18 9.167
9.167 25.41
021
0.42
19 9.833
20
9.833 25.4
0.2
0.19
0.4
11.17
21
11.17 25.39
0.18
0.38
12.58
22 14.17
12.58 25.38
14.17
0.17
0.36
0.34
23 15.58-
25.37
1548 25.37
0.16
0.32
24 17.42
17.42 25.36
0.15
0.3
25
26
19. 25.34
0.13
0.13
0.28
1.9.
21.42
27
21.42 25.33
0.12
0.26
23.42
28 26.
23.42 25.32
0.11
0.24
0.22
29 28.83
26. 2531
.
28.83
1.e-001
0.2
30 31.67
25.3
31.67 5.29
9.e-002
0.18
31 35•.33
35.33 25.28
8.e-002
0.16
32 39.5
39.25.27
7.e-002
0.14
33 45.83
45.83 25.26
6.e-002
0.12
5.e-002
1.e-001
20/0110'o2
A

Cotton Meft Square
Slug Test MW-7 11/28100
Cotton Mill Square MW--7
1. _ __
Bouwer and Rice Graph
1
Bouwer and Rice parameter A = ; 985
BOUwer and Rice parameter 3 = 0.2947 f
ln(Re/Rw) = 2.133509ea000
Analysis starts at time 0. seconds I
Analysis ends at time.45.83 minutes
33 Measurements analyzed from t to 33
t Points not plotted because head ratio c= 0.0
These pants are not included in the anaiysis
t.e•Off2
Hydrau}icCGiIdUCEIYIty, = 1.271e-0O6 fEet/SECOnd '
Transmissivity = 5,083e-005 ftvsec
0 5 10 t5 20 25 30 35
w a5
Adjusted Time (minutes)
Analysis by Starpoint Software HO Ja 0.5 feet at o setA4Cs

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-8
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MW-8
Test Date:
11/28/00
11:1eli Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
31. feet
Screen Length,
15. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feat
Static Water Level:
29.21 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom. 5.79 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1,
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 35 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.51 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
2
0.
29.72
0.51
1.
0.25
3 0.5
0.25
29.61
0.4
0.7843
4 0.75
0.5
0.75
29.58
29.57
0.37
0.36
0.7255
5 1 •
6
1 •
29.56
0.35
0.7059
0,6863
1.25
7 -1.5
1IS
29.55
0.34
0.6667
8 1.75
.1.5 -
1.75
29.54
0.33
O'.6271
9 2•
2•
29.53
0.32
0.875
10 2.4.17
2,417
29.52
29.51
0,31
0.3
0-6078
11 2.833
2.833
29.5
0.29
0.5882
0.5686
12 3.417
13
3.417
29.49
0.28
0.549
4.
14 4-667
4.
4.667
29,48
29.47
0.27
0.26
0.5294
15 5.5
5.5
29.46
0.25
0.5098
0.4902
16 6.333
17
6.333
29.45
0.24
0.4706
7.
18 8.5
7.
8.5
29.44
0.23
0.451
19 9.833
9.833
29.43
29,42
0.22
0,21
0,4314
210.83
10.83
29.41
0.2
0.4118
0.3922
21 12,
22 13,5
12.
13.5
29.4
0.19
0.3725
23 14.67
44.67
29.39
29.38
0.18
0.17
0.3529
2d 16.17
16.17
29.37
0.16
0.3333
0.3137
25 17.67
26
17.67
29.36
0.15
0.2941
19.25
27
19.25
29.35
0.14
0.2745
20.67
20.67
29.34
0.13
0.2549
28 23.5
23.5
29.33
0.12
0.2353
29 26.
26,
29.32
0.11
0.2157
30 27.75
27,75
29.31
1.e-001
0.1961
31 30.25
30.25
29.3
9.e-002
0,1765
32 32.5
32.5
29.29
8.e-002
0.1569
33 35.08
35.08
29.28
7.e-002
0.1373
34 39.25
39.26
29.27
6.e-002
0.1176
35 43.5
43.5
29.26
5,e-002
9.804e-002
20/0 v, 02

Cotton :L-,iit Square
Slug Test MW-8 11/28/00
Canon (Mill Square MW-8
1. —_
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Botrner and Rice•pararneler Am 2.45?
EOuWer and Rice parameter 3 = 0.3255
3n(Re/Rw) = 2.163682e-000
Analysis starts at time 0. seconds
Analysis ends at time 43.5 minutes
35 Measurements analyzed from 1 to 35
LHy�dra�WcCond�uctivity•,1.082e 008 feet/secand 3.355e-005 ft2/sec
5 tC1 t5
20
25 30 35
40
Analysis by Sta►point Software Aequsrac Time (mina esj
rto is 0.51 I'm at 0. xea: ds
20/0 1/0102

r�
1
f,
�
{. •.,
Cotton HUiI Square
Slug Test MW-9
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW-9
"
Test Date:
11/28/00
'Neff Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
40. feet
Screen Length:
15. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
20.73 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
9.27 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1,
Time Adjustment:,
15% Seconds
-
Test starts with trial 0
T here are 20 time and drawdown measurements,
Maximum head is 0.3 feet
r
Minimum head is O. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time
Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
feel
--
�
- 1 0.
_
• 0.25
21.0 3
0.3
1.
2 0.25
0.
20.96
0.22
O.7333
3 0.75
0.5
20.94
0.21
0.7
4 2.167
1.917
20.93
0.2
0.6667
5 3.333
3-083
20.92
0.19
0.6333
6 4A 67
3.917
20.91
0.18
0.6
7 4.833
4.583
20.9
0.17
0.5667
8 5.833
5.583
20.89
0.16
0.5333
--
9 7.25
7.
20.88
0.15
0.5
10 &.583
8.333
20.97
a.14
0.4667
11- 9.833
9,583
20.86
0.13
0.4333
12 11.25
11.
20.65
0.12
0.4
13 12.58
12.33
20.84
0.11
0.3667
14 13.83
13.58
20.83
1.e-001
0.3333
15 1 S142
15.17
20.82
9.e-002
0.3
16 18.5
18.25
20.81
8.e-002
0.2667
17 21.67
21.42
20.8 -
7,e-002
0,2333
18 24.75
24.5
20.79
6,e-002
0.2
19 29.83
29.58
20.78
5.e•OO2
0.1667
a 1
I
20 34.17
33.92
20.77
4,e-002
0.1333
1 �r
f
i 20/0i/0902
i
l �

Slug Test MW-9 11128/00
Cotton Mill Square MW-9
x
Cotton Will Square
Bouwer and Rice Graph
8ouwer and Rice parameter A = 2.303
BaUwer and Rice parameter B = 0.4313
ln(Re/Rw) = 2.35.1 94e*000
• Analysis starts attime 15. seconds
Analysis ends at time 34.17 minutes
19 Measurements analyzed From 2 to 20
HydraLllc ConducGvitjr'= 7.S61e-007'feef/second
Transmissivity = 3.0240-005 tt2/see
o S la is
zo 25 30
Analysis by Starpoint Software Aajuved 71ne (Mnutes)
Ha is 0.22 .eel at I5_ Smeond5
2010110102

Cotton Min Square
Slug Test MW 10
-
F
Site Name:
Cotton Milt Square
Location:
MW 10
Test Date:
1128/00
-
r_
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
20. feet
Screen Length:
10. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
r-_
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level-
10.23 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
4.77 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts uvlth trial 0
There are 16 time and drawdown measurements
-
Maximum head is 0.58 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Tms
Adjusted Time
Drawdown
Bead
Head Ratio
- ••
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
0::: : -
.10.81
2 025
0.25
10.75
0.52
0.8966
3 0.5
0.5
10.72
0.49
0.8448
4 0.75
0.75
10.71
0.48
0.8276 '
;. •.
5 1.
1.
10.7
0.47
0.6103
6 1.5
1.5
10.69
0-46
0.7931
7 2.33
2.33
10.68
0.46
0.7759
--
8 3.417
3.417
10.67
0.44
0.7586
9 5.5
5.5
10.66
0.43
0.7414
10 9.33
9.33.
10.65
.0.42
0.7241
11 15.08 '
15.08
10.64
0.41
0.7069
12 20.
20.
10.63
0.4
0.6897
13 21.25
21.25
10.62
0.39
0.6724
- ,
14 55.
55,
10.59
0.36
0.6207
15 89:
89.
10.56
0,33;.-
0.569
_--
16 145.
145,
10.5
0.27
0.4655
I
21/0110102

Cotton Mill Square
SI•ug Test MW-10 11/28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW 10
1.
HydraU6c Conductivity = 8.838e-008 iedtisecond
Transmissivity = t.768e-006 f0sec
t
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
BOUwer and Rice Graph
BouvvW and Rice parameterA = 1.985
Bouvrer and Rice parameter B = 0.2942
In(ReJRW) = 1.934203e+•000
Analysis -starts at time 3a. seconds
Analysis ends at time 145. minutes
14 Measurements analyzed from 3 to 16
t
Adjusted Tune (?mr3)
Ho -s 0.49 fee a130. seconds

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MWA I -
Site Name: Cotton Mill Square
Location: MW-11
Test Date: 11/28/00
Well Label•
Aquifer Thickness:
30.61 feet
Screen Length:
20. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
24.39 feet
Water Table 16 Screen Bottom: 10.61 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment.
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 29 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.43 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Bead Ratio
(minutes) -
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
. 1 0,:
0.
24.62
0.43.:
- _1.
2 0.25
0.25
24.75
0.36 '
.
0.8372
3 0.5
0.5
24.71
0.32
0.7442
4 0.75
0.75
24.69
0.3
0.6977
5 1.
1.
24.67
0.28
0.6512
6 1.25
1.25
24.65
0.26
0.6047
7 1.5
1.5
24.64
0.25
0.5814
8 1.75
1.75
24.63
0.24
0.5581
9 2,
2•
24.62
0.23
0,5349
10 2.5
2.5
24.6
0.21
0,4884
11 2.833
2,833
24.59
0.2
0.4651
12 3.167
3.167
24.57
0.18
0.4186
13 3.5
3.5
24.56
0.17
0,3953
14 3.833
3.833
24.55
0.16
0.3721
f 15. 4.083
4.083
24.54
0.15
0.3488
i6 4.583
4.583
24.53
0.14
0.3258
17 5.
S.
24.52
0.13
0,3023
18 5.5
5.5
24.51
0.12
0.2791
19 6.
6.
24.5
0.11
0.2558
20 6.
6.
24.49
l.e-001
0.2326
21 7.667
7.667
24.48
9.e-002
0.2093
22 8.417
8.417
24.47
8.e-002
0,186
23 9.083
9.083
24.46
7.e-002
0.1628
24 10.17
10.17
24.45
6.e-002
0.1395
25 11.5 r
11.5
24.44
5.e-0.02
011163
26 13.58
13.58
24.43
4,e-002
9.3O2e-002
27 15.75
15.75
24.42
3.e-002
6.977e 002
28 19.92
19,92
24.41
2.e-002
4.661 e-002
29 27,25
27.25
24.4
1.e-002
2.326e-002
20ro110102

cotton Mill Square
............... ...

I
i
! I
Cotton Min Square
Slug Test MW-12
-
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW 12
.`
Test Date:
11/28/00
Well Label:
---------------
Aquifer Thickness;
0. feet
�
Screen Len ��
10. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
_
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
2.01
' WaterTable to Screen. Bottom:
9,99 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
I
Time Adjustment:
30, Seconds
j~
Test starts with trial 0
There are 14 time and drawdown
Maximum head is 0.74 feet
measurements
Minimum head is 0, feet
Trial Time
(minutes)
Adjusted Time Crawdown
(minutes)
Head
Head Ratio
.. 0.
(feet)
'0 5 )
(feet)
_'
2,- .:•,•••
0.25 .:.- -
2.75
0.74
1•
I, I3
0.5
0. 2.53
0:728T
4 0.75
0.25 2.52
0 52
1
0.7027
6
2.51
0.5
0.6892
1.33
7
0.3 2.5
0.49
0.6757
2.167
8 3.417
1.667 2 49
2.917
0.48
0.6622
622
0.6486
4.417
2.48
3.917 2.47
0.47
0.6351
-
1
10 6,917
6,417 2.46
0 46
0.6216
11 13.25
12.75 2.46
0-45
0.6081
12 26,33
25.83 2.44
0.44
0.5946
13 60.
59.5 2.43
0.43
015811
14 95.
94.5 2.42
0.42
0.5676
0.41
0,5541
'I
I
- r
f
t
i
z
r
1
f
i
��
21/01/0102
r

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-12 11/28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW-12
f. -
o _
e
m
a
• •t.e-D02
Hydraulic Conductivity = 2.696e,008 feet/second
Transmissivity = 5.392e-007 ft2/sec
o ,
Analysts by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice parameter A = 2.349
80uwer and Rice parameter 8 = 0.4498
tn(Re/Rw) = 2.208420e*000
Analysis starts at- time 30. seconds
Analysis ends at time 95. minutes
12 Measurements analyzed from 3 to 14
Adjusled rime thoyrm)
He is 032 feet at 3a. sem,,ds

Cotton Mitt square
Slug Test MW-13
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW 13
Test Date:
t 1/28/00
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
25. feet
-
Screen Length:
t0. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e•002
feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
9.49 feet
Water cable•to Screen Bottom: 5.51 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:'
1.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test sfarts with trial 0
There are 26 time and drawdown
Maximum head is 0.39 feet
measurements
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trio! Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
H 'ead
"• (minutes)
�
(minutes}
(feet]
Heacr Ratio
0
3 0.25
p
0.25
-
9.88
(feet)
0.39
1.
0'S
0.5
9.79
9.77
0.7692
4 0,75
5
0.75
9.76
0.27
0,6979
1.
6 1.33
1•
9.75
0.27
0.26
Q.o923
7 2'
1.33
2-
g 74
0.25
0.6667
0.641
8 2'5
2.5
9.73
9.72
0.24
0.6154
9
9 3.25
3.25
9.71
0.23
0,22
0.5897
4.
11 5.• •
4
5
9.7
0.21
0.5641
0.5385
12 ' 6.33
.
633
9,69
0.2
0,5128
13 7.667
7.667
99'6$
0.67 .19
0.4872
14 8.917
8.917
9.67
0.18
0.4615
15 10.92
10.92
9
0.17
0.403
16 -"12.5
t2:5
.65
9,64• _
0,16
0.4103
17 14.92
14.92
9.63
0.15
0.3
18 17.5
17.5
9.62
0.1
59
0.333
19 20.
20.
9.81
0.12
3
0.33
20 22.92
22,92
0.1
0.821
21 25.42
25.42
9.59
0.11
02821
22 28.58
28.58
9.58
1-e-001
0.2564
23 32.42
32.42
9.58
9•e-002
0.2308
24 35.92
35.92
9.56
8.e-002
0.2051
25 41.17
41.17
7.e-002
0.1795
2B 48.5
48.5
9.54
6 .e-002
0.1538
5.e-002
0.1282
2110110102

l
E� Colton Mill Square
1.,... t
Slug Test MW-13 1 1 /28/00 -
Cotton Mill Square MW-13 BouWer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice parameter A = 2.034
9ouwer and Rice parameter a - 0.3159
1n(Re/Rw) = 1.988553e+000
'A+~alysis starts at time 30. seconds
Analysis ends at time 48.5 minutes
24 Measurements analyzed from 3 io 26
Q
a
Hydraulic Conductivity = 7.561e-OOT feet/second
7•ransmissivity ; t_89e•005 112lsec
,3 20 28 30
35 40 45
Analysis by Starpoint Software AajuatedTme'(-nutea)
Ho is 028 feet at 30, "toads
f
• S
ir.
f
l
i
r
i
. r
l
i
r
t
21101/0102
i

Cotton Mill Square
Siug Test MW-14
Site Name:
Cotton Milt Square
Location:
MW 14
Test Date:
11/28/00
Well Label:.
Aquifer Thickness:
30. feet
Screen Length:
S. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
- Effective Radius:
0.25 feet
Static Water Level:
6.22 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 1.78'feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
-- Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 47 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.58 feet
Minimum head is -0.63 feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
head Ratio
..(minutes)
(minutes) -
(feet}
{feet)•
1 0.
2 0.25
0.
0.25
7-8
7.65
1.58
1.43
i
3 0.5
4
0.5
7.5
1.28
0.9051
0.8101
0.75
5 1
0.75
7,45
1.23
0.7785
•
6 1.25
1 •
1.25
7.3
7.23
1.08 •
101
0.6835
7 1.5
8
1.5
7.14
.
0.92
0.6836
0.5823
1.75
9 2.
1.75
7.06
0.84
0.5316
10 2,25•
2.
2.25
7.
6.93
0'78
0.71
0.4937
112.5
,
12
25
.
6.87
0.65
0.4494
0.4114
2.75
13 3.
2.75
6.82
0:6
0,3797
_
14 3.25
3,
3.25
6.77
6.73
0.55
0.51
0.3481
15 3.5
3.5
6.69
0.47
0,3228
0.2975
16 3.75
17
3.76
• 6-66
0.44
0.2785
4.
18 4.25
4.
4.25
6.63
5.59
0.41
0.2595
19 4.5
4.5
6.56
-0.63
0.34
-0,3987
0.2152
20 4.75
21 5.
4.75
6,54
0.32
0.2025
025
22 5.25
5.
5.25
6.52
6.5
0.3
0.28
0.1899
23 5.5
5.5
6.48
0.26
0.1772
0.1646
- 24 5.75
25 5.917
5.75
6.47
0.25
0.1582
26 6.083
5.917
6.083
6.46
6.46
0.24
0.23
0.1519
27 6.25
625
6.44
0.22
0.1456
0.1392
28 6.5
29 6.667
6.5
6-667
6.43
0.21
0.1329
30 6.833
6.833
6,42
6.41
0.2
0.19
0.1266
0.1203
31 7.
32 7.167
7.
7.167
6.4
6.39
0.18
0.17
0,1139
! 33 7,417
7.417
6,38
0.16
0.1076
0:1013
34 7,75
7.76
6.37
0.15
9.494e-002
35 8•
8.
6,36
0.14
8.861e-002
36 8.33
8-33
6.35
0.13
8;228e-002
21/01/0102

Cotton Min Square
37
38
8.667
9.417
8_667
9.417
6.3
0.12
7.595e-002
39
9.75
9.75
6.33
6.32
0.11
6.962e-002
40
10.33
10.33
6.31
0.1
9.e-002
6.329e-002
41
11,
11.
6.3
5.656e-002
42
11.58
11.58
6.29
8-e-002
5.063e-002
43
13.25
13.25
6.28
7.e-002
4.43e-002
44
14.42
14.42
6.27
6.e-002
5.e-002
3.797e-0Q2
45
16.
16.
6.26
1165e-002
46
17.83
17.83
6.25
4.e-002
2.532e-002
47
23.17
23,17
6.24
3.e-002
1,895e-002
2.e-002
1.266e-002
21/01/0102

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW- 4411/28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW 14
t.
3S:**
BOuwer and -Rice Graph
�Bouwer
er and Rice parameter A = 7.713
and Rice parameter B = 0.2315
Rw) = 1.a27086e;0D0
Analysis shirts at time 0, seconds
Analysis ends at time 17.63 minutes
46 Measurements analyzed from 1 to 46
t Points not Plotted be tread ratio <= 0.0
These points are not included in the analysis
•
Hydraulic Conductivity=1,176e-005 feetisecond
Transmissivlty = 3.528e.D04 ft2isec
D s
20
0o is
Analysis by Starpoint Software Adjusted 7tne tmmiea>
Ho is 1.5a feet alb. seCWda
21/01/0102

S
Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-15
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW-15
Test Hate:
11/28/00
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
36. feet
Screen Length:
10. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0,3333 feet
Static Water Level;
6.64 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 8.36 feet
Anisotropy Ratio,
1.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 26 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0,46 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Mead
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes}
(feet)
(feet)
1 0:
2 0.25
0.
0.25
.
71•
6.99
0.4fi
_ .
1,
3 0.5
0.6
6.95
0.35
0,31
-0.7609
4 0.75
5
0.75
6.92
0.28
0,6739
0.6087
1.
6 1.33
1.
1.33
6.91
6.9
0.27
0,587
7 1,833
1.833
6.88
0.26
0.24
0.5652
0.5217
8 2.25
9
2.25
6.87
0.23
2.5
10
2.5
6'�
0�22
6.6
.4783
3.083
11 3.667
3.083
3.667
6.86
0.21
0.4565
i2 4.33
4.33
6.84
6.83
0:2 •
0.19
0.4348 -
13 4.917
4.917
6,82
0.18
0.413
0.3913
14 5.683
15
5.583
6.81
0.17
0.3696
6.33
16 7.187
6.33
7.167
6.8
6.79
0.16
0.3478
17 8.167
8.167
6.78
0.15
0.14
0.3261
0.3043
18 9.5
19 10.67
9-5
6.77
0.13
0.2826
20 12.
10,67
12.
6,76
0.12
0.2609
21 13.67
13.67
6.75
6.74
0,11
0.1
Q.2391
22 16.17
16.17
6-73
9.e_002
0.2174
0.1957
23 18.06
24 21.33
18.08
6.72
8.e-002
0.1739
25 23.92
21.33
23.92
6.71
6.7
7.e-002
0:1522
26 30.26
30.25
6.69
6.e-002
5.e-002
0.1304
0.1087
21/01/0102

Cotton MR Square
Slug Test IVIW-95 11/2 1000
Cotton Mill Square MW.15
1.
0.1
a
C
1.e-00
Hydraulic Conductivity = 9.634e-007 feetlsecond
Transmissivity = 3.372e-0o5 foie,
s 10
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/0110102
15
BOUWer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice param7mInutes
Bouwer and Rice param58
In(Re/Rw) = 2.103960a
Analysis starts at time S
Analysis ends at Gme 2321 Measurements analy25
20 25 0
AdjjuTim
e me [minut ao
Ho is 0.27 feet et ao. seconds
i

}
Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-16
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MW-16
Test Date:.
11/28100
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
25. feet
Screen Length:
15. feet
Casing Radius,
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
14.29 feet
Watet Table to Screen Bottom: 5.71 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1,
_
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 29 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.43 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet.
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
minutes
- (minutes).
(minutes)
(feel}
(feet)
1 0,
2 0.25
0•
0.25
14.72
0.43
1.
3 0.5
0.5
14.82
14.6
- 0.33
0.7674
4 0.75
5
0.75
14.58
0.31
0.29
0.7209
0.6744
1 •
6 1.33
1.
1.33
14.57
0.28
0.6512
7 1.833
1.833
14.56
14.54
0.27
0.25
0.6279
8 2.417
9
2.417
14.53
0.24
0.5814
0.5581
2.833
10 3,25
2.833
3,25
14.52
0.23
0,5349
11 3,667
3.667
14.51
14.5
0.22
0.21
0.5116
12 4,417
13
4.417
14,49
0.2
0.4884
0.4651
5,083
14 6.5
5.083
14,46
0.19
0.4419
1.5 7.583
6,5
7.583
14.47
14.46
0.18
0.17
0.4186
16 8.33
17
8.33 -
14.45
0.16
0,3953
0.3721
9.33
18 10.83
9.33
10.83
14.44
0.15
0.34848 8
19 1'1.58
11.58
14.43
14,42
0,14
0.13
0.3
20 12,76
12.75
14,41
0.12
0.3258
023
0,2791
21 14,
22 15.5
14,
15.5
14.4
0.11
0.2558
23 17.
17.
14.39
1. a-001
0.2326
24 18.67
18,67
14.38
14.37 -
9.e-002
S.e-002
0.2093
0.186
25 20.83
26
20,83
14,36
7.e-002
0.1628
23.17
27 26.
23.17
14.35
6,e-002
0.1395
28 29.83
26.
29.83
14.34
14,33
5.e-002
fl.1163
29 37.
37.
14.32
4.e-002
3.e-002
9.302e.002
6.977"02
21/01/0102

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-1611/28/()o
Cotton Mill Square MW-16
1,
Hydraulic Conductivity =1.492e-006 feet/second
Transmissivity = 3.729e-006 ft2hec
0 5 to is
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/0110102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rite parameter A = 2.046
Souwer and Rice parameter 8 = 0.3231
tn(Re/Rw) = 2.168446e+000
Analysis starts at time 15. secoids
Analysis ends at time 37. minutes
28 Measurements analyzed from 2 to 29
25 30 j
A(#UWed Torte (mmUft)
Hd is 0.33 tees at 15. sewn ds

Cotton AAIII Square
j Slug Test MW-17 11/28/00
Cotton Mill Square MW-17
s.aao
Hydraulic Conductivity 4 1.338e-006 teeTfsecona
Transmissivity, = 6.023e-005 ft2lsec
0 S s0
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
BOUWer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice parameter A = 2.33a
Bouwer and Rice parameter B = 0.445
in(ReAiw) = 2.36205ae*000
Analysis starts at time 45. Seconds
Analysis ends at time 30. minutes I
30 Measurements analyzed from 4 to 33 1
Aaiustes! Pmarrunu[aS)
No is 0.31 feet at 45, semnas

Cotton UP Square
Slug Test MW-26
Site Name:
Cotton Milk Square
location:.
MW-26
Test Date:
7/19101
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
55. feet
Screen Length:
20. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-0O2 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
_
Static Water Level:
23.7 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
27.3' feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
60..Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 12 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.55 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time
Orawdown `
*Head
Head Ratio
.(minutes)
-(minutes) -
(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
-1.
24.25
0.55
1.
2 0.25
-0.75
23.98
0.28
0.5091
3 0.5
-0.5
23.88
0.18
0.3273
4 0.75
-0.25
23.84
0.14
0.2545
5 1.
6 1.25
0.
23.6
0.1
0.1818
0.25
23.78
8.e-002
0.1455
7 1.5
0-5
23.77
7.e-002
0.1273
8 1.75
0.75
233.766.e-002
0.1091
9 2.
1.
23.75
5.e-002
9.091e-002
10 2.5
1.5
23.74
4.e-002
7,273e-002
11 3.5
2.5
23.73
,
3.e-002
5.455e-002
i2 7.5
6.5
23.72
2.e-002
3.636e-002
21/01/0102
i

` Slug Test MW-28
Site Name.
Location:
Test Date:
Cotton mli Square
Cotton Mill Square
MW-28
7120/01
Weil Label:
- - -----------
Aquifer Thickness:
30. feet
Screen Length:
20, feet
Lasing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
8.57 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
26.43 feat
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment: •
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 50 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.53 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial
Time
Adjusted Time
Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1
0.
0.
10.1
1.53
1.
2
0.25
0.25
9,98
1.41
0.9216
3
0.5
0.5
9.89
1,32
0.8627
4
0, 75
0.75
9.83
126
0.8235
5
1.
1.
9.73
1.16
0.7582
6
1.25
1.25
9.64
1.07
0.6993
7
1-.5
1.5
9.57
1.
0,6536
8
1.75
1.75
9.51
0.94
0.6144
9
2.
2.
9.45
0.88
0.5752
10
2.25
2.25
9.39
0.82
0.5359
11
2,5
2.5
9.33
0.76
0.4967
1.2
2.75
2.75
9.29
0.72
0.4706
13
3.
3.
9.25
0.68
0.4444
14
3.25
3.25
9.21
0.64
0.4183
15
3.5
3.5
9.16
0.59
0.3856
16
3.75
3.75
9,12. •
0.55
0.3595
17
4.
4.
9.09
0.52
0.3399
18
4.25
4.25
9.05
0.48
0.3137
19
4.5
4.5
9.02
0.45
0.2941
20
4.75
4.75
8.99
0.42
0.2745
21
5.
5.
8.97
0.4
0.2614
22
5.25
5.25
'8.94
0.37
0.2418
23
5.5
5.5
8.91
0.34
0.2222
24
5.75
5.75
8.89
0.32
0.2092
25
6,
6.
8.87
0.3
0.1961
26
6.25
6.25
8.85
0.28
0,183
27
6.5
6.5
8.83
0.26
0.1699
28
6.75
6.75
8.81
0.24
0.1569
29
7.
7.
8.8
0.23
0,1503
30
7167
7.167
8.79
0.22
0.1438
31
' 7.417
7.417
8,78
0,21
0.1373
32
7.563
7.583
8.77
0.2
0.1307
33
7.833
7.833
8.76
0.19.
0, t 242
34
S.
8.
8.75
0.18
0.1176
35
8.167
8.167
8.74
0.17
0.1111
36
8.333
8.333
8.73
0.16
0.1046
2i10110102
I

Cotton Mill Square
r.
37
8.583
8.583
8.72
0.16
9.804e-002
38
8.75
8.75
8.71
0.14
9.15e-002
39
9.
%
8.7
0.13
8.497e-002
40
9,333
9.333
8.69
0.12
7.843e-002
41
9.667
9.667
8.68
0.11
7.19e-002
42
10.08
10.08
8.67
i.e-001
6.536e-002
43
10.42
10.42
8.66
9.e-002
5.882e-002
44
10.83
10.83
8.65
8.e-002
5.229e-002
45
11.25
11.25
8.64
7.e-002
4.575e-002
46
11.75
11.75
8.63
6.e-002
3.922e-002
47
12.58
12.58
8.62
5.e•002
3.268.e-002
48
14.
14.
8.61
4.e-002
2.614e-002
49
16.5
16.5
8.5
3.e-002
1.961 a-002
50
22.25
22.25
8.59
2.e-002
1.307e-002
21101/0102

Cotton :Mill Square
Slug Test MW-28 7/20/01
Cotton Mill Square MW-28
t- --
-j Hydraulic Conductivity = 2.342e-MS'eetfsecond j
11 7ransmissivity = 7.02Se-006 ft2tsec it
0 5 t0
Analysis by Starpoint Software
2110,10102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
I
8ouvver and Rice parameter A - 3.3 !
Bouvier and Rice parameter 8 = 0_6772 E
In(Re9Rw) = 3.000404e-000 .
Analysis starts at time 0. seconds
Analysis ends at time 14. minutes
48 Measurements analyzed from 1 to 48 t
15 20 t
A,yuSret, 'rime imnutas)
Ha is 1.50 feet at 0. s =rws

Cotton Mon Square
�r•-
`,... Slug Test
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW-29
Test Date:
7120101
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
24. feet
Screen Length:
10. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
11.81 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
23.19 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 25 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.14 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time
Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
0,
12.95
1.14
1.
2 0.25
0.25
12.66
0.84
0.7368
3 0.5
0.5
12.5
0.69
0.6053
4 0.75
0.75
12.39
0.58
0.5088
5 1.
1.
12.31
0.5
0.4386
6 1.25
1.25
12.23
0.42
0.3684
7 1.5
1.5
12.17
0.36
0.3158
8 1.75
1.76
12.13
0.32
0.2807
9 2.
2.
12.08
0,27
0.2368
10 2.25
2.25
12.06
0.24
0.2105
11 2.5
2.5
12.02
0.21
0.1842
12 2.75
2.75
12-
0.19
0.1667
13 3.
3.
11.98
0.17
0,1491
14 3.25
3.25
11.96
0.15
0.1316
15 3.5
3.5
11.95
0.14
0.1228
16 3.75
3.75
11.94
0.13
OA 14
17 4,
4.
11.93
0.12
0.1053
18 4.25
4.25
11.91
1.e-001
8.772e-002
19 4,75
4.75
11.9
9.e-002
7,895e-002
20 5.25
5.25
11.89
8.e-002
7,018e-002
21 5.58
5.58
11.88
7.e-002
6.14e-002
22 5.83
5.83
11.87
6 e-002
5.263e-002
23 6.58
6.58
11.86
5.e-002
4.386e-002
24 10.08
10.08
11.85
4.e-002
3.509e-002
25 16.17
16.17
11.84
3.e-002
2.632e-002
MGW=

Ems...,
t
Cotton Mill Square
Slug -Test 7120/01
Cotton Mill Square MW-29
1. s
riydrautic Conductivity = 8:462r--008 teevsecond
Transmissivity = 2.03le-004 R2/sec
0 3
Analysis by Starpoint Software
20 4110102
Bouwer and Rice Grap�
Botnver ano Rice parameter C u 2.
in(.4elRLV) - 3.057914e-000
Ps atysis starts at t;ma t 5. seconds
f naWl s ands at time 5.83 minutes
21 Measurements analyzed from 2 to 22
0
10 j$
Adjusted Tirm {minutes)
Ho is 0.64 tees at 15. seconds

COttw W Squarp
Slug Test OW-11
Site Name:
Cotton Nfill
Square
Location:
OW-1 i
Test Date:
1/10/02
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
50. feet
Screen Length:
5. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:-
29.1 feet
Water Table to sr -,e'en aOtIOM: 45,9 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
'rime Adjustment
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 82 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.79 feet
Minimum head is 0, feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
2 0.25
0.
0.25
30.89
1.79
1.
3 0.5
0.5
30.76
1.66
0.9274
4 0-75
0.75
30.67
30,6
1.57
0,8771
5 1.
6
1.
30-53
1.5
1.43
0.838
0.7989
1.25
7 1.5
1.25
30,46
1.36
0.7598
8 1,75
1,5
1.75
30.4
30
-1.3
0.7263
9 2.
2.
.34
114
0.6927
10 2.25
2.25
30.29
30.25
1.19
0.6648
11 2.5
25
30.21
1.15
0.6425
12 2.75
13
2.75 .
30.18
1.08
0-52CI
0.6034
3,
14 3.25
3.
3.25
30.15
30.12
1.05
0.5868
15 3.5
3.5
30.08
1.02
0.98
OZ698
0.5475
16 3.75
17
3.75
30.05
0.95
0.5307
4.
18 4.25
4.
4.25
30.02
0.92
0.514
19 4.6
4.5
30.
29,98
0.9 •
0.88
0.5028
20 4.75
4.75
29.96
0.86
0.4916
0.4804
21 5.
22 5.25
5.
5.25
29.95
0.85
0.4749
23 5.5
5.5
29.93
0.83
0.4637
24 5.75
5.75
29.91
29.9
0.81
0.4525
25 6,
6.
29.89
0.8
0-79
0.4469
0.4413
26 6.25
27
6.25
29.87
0.77
0.4302
6.5
28 6.75
6.5
6.75
29.86
0.78
0.4246
29 7.
T
29.85
0.75
0:419
30 7-25
7.25
29.84
29.83
0.74
0.73
0.4134
31 7.5
15
1 -
29.82
0.72
0,4078
0.4022
32 7.75
7.75
29.81
0.71
0.3966
33 8.
34 8.25
8.
8.25
29.8
2-9.79
0.7
0.33855911
35 8.5
8.5
29.78
0.69
0.68
0-.-
0.3799
36 8.75
8.75
29.77
0.67
0.3743
2110110102

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
82
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
9.083
9.083
9.417
9.417
9.833
9.833
10.17
10.17
10.75
10.75
11.08
11.08
11.58
12.
12.
12.58
12.58
13.
13.
13.42
13.42
14.08
14.08
14.75
14.75
15.5
15.5
16.
16,
16.5
16.5
17.08
17.08
17.5
17.5
18.25
_
18.26
18.83
18.83
19.33
19.33
20.17.
20.17
20,
20.
22.
22.
23.25
23.25
24.33
24.33
25.22
25.22
26.67
26.67
27.67
27.67
28.58
28.58
29.67
29.67
31.08
31.08
32.67
32.67
36.
36.
39.58
39.58
41.58
41.58
43.75
43.76
46.75
45.75
47.42
47.42
48.83
48.83
50.75
50.75
52.75
52.75
56.5
55.5
58.83
58.83
61.17
61.17
64,08
64.08
Cotton V;a Square
2976
0.88
29.75
0.65
29.74
0.64
29.73
0.63
29.72
0.62
29.71
0.61
. 29.7
0.6
29.69
0.59
29.68
0.58
29.67
0.57
29.66-
0.56
29.85
0.55
29.64
0.54
29.63
0.53
29.62
0.52
29.61
0.51
29.6
0.5
29.59
0.49
29.58
0.48
29.57
0.47
29.56
0.48
-29.55
0.45
29.54
0.44
29.53
0.43
29,52
0.42
29.51
0.41
29.5
0.4
29.49
0.39
29.48
0.38
29.47
0.37
29.46
0.36
29.45
0.36
29.44
0.34
29,43
0.33
29.42
0.32
29-.41
0.31
-29.4
0.3
29.39
0,29
29.38
0.28
29.37
0.27
29.36
0.26
29.35
0.25
29.34
0.24
29.33
0.23
29.32
0.22
29.31
0.21
21101:0102
0.3687
0.3631
0.3575
0.352
0,3464
0.3408
0.3352
0.3296
0.324
0.3184
0,3128
0.3073
0.3017
0,2961
0.2905
0.2849
0.2793
0.2737
0,2682
0.2626
0.257
0.2514
0.2458
0.2402
0.2346
0.2291
0.2235
0.2179
0.2123
0.2067
0.2011
0.1955
0.1899
Q. i$44
0.1788
0.1732
0.1676
0.16Z
0,1564
0.1508
0.1453
0.1397
0.1341
0.1285
0.1229
0.1173

Cotton Miff Square
Slug Test DW-11 1/10102
Cotton Mill Square OW 11
1.
Hydraulic Conductivity = 6.442-007 feeUsecond
Trartsmissivity = 3.22e.005 ft2/sec
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouvier and Rice parameter A = 2.
Bouvier and Rice parameter 8 = 0.3
ln(Re/Rw) = 2.457870e+000
ArtaWs stars at time 390, seconds
Analysis wtds at time 54.08 minutes
58 Measuremants analyzed from 27 to 82
_,. Adueced 1 ure Owurs)
Analysis by Starpoint Software
PHo is 0.78 feet At 390. seconds
27rn'.602

Cotton M-11 Square
Slug Test DEN-18 1/10102
Cotton Mill Square OW-18
Hydraulic Conductivity = 420ae-006 Feet/secord
Transmissivity = 1.261 e-004 f0sec
0 1
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21i01/0102
BOuwer and Rice Graph
Souwer and Rice naramet_r A = 2.
Bouwer and Rice parameter 8 = 0.3
IniReiRw) = 2.209124e-M-o
Andysis stars at time 45, seconds
Analpis ends at time 7.5a3 minutes
10 Measurements analyzed from 4 to 13
AxIijuzied Time trnim,fes}
Ho is 0.14 feet at 45. secanas
,

I
Cotton Mill square
r•-
Slug Test DW-18
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
DVJ-18
Test Date:
1110/02
Well Label:
Aquifer• Thickness:
30. feet
Screen Length:
5. fest
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
9.76 feet
Water• T able to Screen Bottom:
23.24 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1•
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 13 time and drawdown measurements
-Maximum head is 0.32 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time
Drawdewn
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
2 0.2S
0.
0.25
10:08.
9.95
0.32
1.
3 0.5
0.5
9.92
0.19
0.16
05937
0.5
4 0.75
5 1.
0.75
9.9
0.14
0.4375
i :':::': 6 1.25
1.
1.25
9.88
9.87
0.12
0.11
0.375
•
-•-' 7 1.5•
8
1.5
9.86
1.e-001
0.3437
0.3125
2.5
9 3-25
2.5
3.25
9.85
9,e-002
0.2812
10 4.5
4.5
9.84
9.83
8.e-002
7.e-002
0.25
11 5.5
12
5.5
9.82
6.e-002
02188
0.1875
6.585
13
6.586
9.81
5.e-002
0.1563
7,583
7,583
9.8
4.e-002
0.125
21101101.02

Cotton MR! Square
Slug Test DW-19
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
DW-19
Test Oate:
1110/02
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
40. feet
Screen Length:
5. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0,3333 feet
Static Water Level:
3.22 feet
Water Table to Screen Bcttorn: 33.78 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 97 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum heed is 1.19 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet '
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet)
1 D.
0.
4.41
1.19
1.
2 0.25
0.25
4.35
1.13
0.9496
3 0.5
0.5
4.33
1.11
0.9328
4 0.75
0.75
4.32
1.1
0.9244
5 1.
1.
4.3
1.08
0.9076
6 1.25
1.26
4.28
1.06
0,8908
7 1.5
1.5
4.27
1105"
0.8824
8 1.75
1.75
4.25
1.03
0.8655
9 2.
2.
4.24
1.02
0.8571
10 2.25
2.25
4.22
1.
0.8403
11 2.5
2.5
4.2
0.98
0.8235
12. 2.75
2.75
4.19
0.97
0.8151
13 3.
3.
4.18
0.96
0.8087
14 3.25
3.25
4,17
0.95
0.7983
15 15
3.5
4.15
0.93
0.7815
16 3.75
3.75
4.14
0.92
0.7731
17 4.
4,
4.13
0,91
0.7547
18 4.25
4.26
4.11
0.89
0.7479
19 4,5
4.5
4.1
0,88
0.7395
20 4.715
4.75
4.09
0.87
0.7311
21 5.
5.
4.07
0.85
0.7143
22 5.25
5.26
4.06
0.84
0.7059
23 5.5
5.5
4.05
0.83
0.6975
24 5.75
5.75
4.04
0.82
0.6891
25 6.
6.
4.03
0.81
0.6807
26 6.25
6.25
4.02
0.8
0.6723
27 6.5
6.5
4.01
0.79
0,6639
28 6.75
6.75
3.99
0.77
0.5471
29 7.
7.
3.98
0.76
0.6387
30 7.25
7.25
3.97
0.75
0,6303
31 7.5
7.5
3.96
0.74
0.6218
32 7.75
7.75
3.95
0.73
0.6134
33 8.083
8.083
3.94
0.72
0.605
34 8.333
8,333
3.93
0.71
0.5966
35 8.583
8,583
3.92
0.7
0.5882
�6 8.917
8.917
3.91
0.69
0.5798
•
2zro �+CtG2

I
Cotton Mall Square
37
9.083 '
9.083
3.9
0.68
0-5714
38
9.333
9.333
3.89
0.87
0.563
39
9.583
9.583
3.88
0.66
0.5546
40
9.917
9.917
3.87
0.65
0.5462
41
10.25
10.25
3.86
0.64
0.5378
42
10.58
10.58
3.85
0.63
0.5294
43
10.92
10.92
3.84
0.62
0.521
44
11.17
11.17
3.83
0.61
0.5126
45
11.42
11.42
3.82
0.6
0.5042
46
11.83
11.83
3.81
0.59
0.4958
47
12.08
12.08
3.8
0.58
0.4874
48
12.42
12.42
3.79
0.57
0.479
49
12.83
12.83
3.78
0.56
0.4706
50
13.08
13.08
3.77
0.55
0.4622
51
13.42
13.42
3,76
0,54
0.4538
52
13.75
13.75
3.75
0.53
0.4454
53
14.25
14.25
3.74
0.52
0.437
54
14.58
14.58
3.73
0.51
0.4286
55
14.92
14.92
3.72
0.5
0,4202
56
15.25
15.25
3.71
0.49
0.4118
57
15.67
15.67
3.7
0.48
0.4034
58
16.08
16.08
3.69
0.47
0.395
59
16.5
16.5
3.68
0.46
0.3866
60
16.92
16.92
3.67
0.45
0.3782
61
17.5
17.5
3.66
0.44
0-3697
62
17-92
17.92
3.65
0.43
0.3613
63
18.25
18.25
3.64
0.42
0.3529
64
18.67
18.67
, 3.63
0.41..
0.3445
65
19.25
19.25
3.62
0.4
0.3361
66
19.67
19,67
3.61
0.39
0.3277
67
20.17
20,17
3.6
0.38
0.3193
68
20.67
20.67
3:69
0.37
0.3109
69
21.25
21.25
3.58
0.36
0.3025
70
21.83
21.83
3.57
0.35
0.2941
71
22.41
22.41
3.56
0.34
0.2857
72
22.92
22.92
3.55
0.33
0.2773
73
23.58
23.58
3.54
0.32
0,2689
74
24.17
24.17
3-53
0.31
0.2605
75
24.92
24.92
3.52
0.3
0.2521
76
25.5
25.5
3.51
0.29
0.2437
77
26.06
26,08
3.5
0.28
0.2353
78
26.83
26.83
3.49
0.27
C.2269
79
27.67
27.67
3.48
0.26
0.2185
80
28.25
28.25
3.47
0.25
0.2101
81
29.17
29.17
3,46
0,24
0.2017
82
30.
30.
3.45
0.23
0.1933
83
31.08
31:08
3.44
0.22
0.1849
64
32-
32.
3.43
0.21
0.1765
85
32.55
32.55
3.42
0.2
0.1681
86
33.92
33.92
3.41
0.19
0.1597
87
34.92
34.92
3.4
0.18
0.1513
88
36.17
36.17
3.39
0.17
0.1429
89
37.56
37.58
3.38
0.16
0.1345
90
38.83
38.83
3.37
0.15
0,1261
91
40.
40.
3.36
0.14
0,11.76,
92
41.67
41.57
3.35
0.13
0.1092
93
43.17
43.17
3.34
0.12
0.1008
2110 ,10102

If.
Conan t+r,( Square
Slug Test MW-17
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
U,W-17
Test Date:
11/28100
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
45. feat
Screen Length:
15. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002
feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
20.2 feet
Water Table to Screen Batton: 9.8 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
I.
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 33 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.5 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
-
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes )
(minutes)(feet)
(feet)
1 0.
2 0.25
0.
0.25
20.7
20.56
• 0.5
1.
.
3 0.5
0.5
20.54
0.36
0.34
0.72
0.68
4 0.75
0.75
20.51
0.31
0.62
8 1.25
1.25
20.6
20.49
0.3
0.6
7 1.417
1.417
20.48
0.29
0.28
0.58
a 1.583
9
1.583
'1.833
20.47
0.27
0.56
0.54
1,833
10 2.083
20.46
0.26
0.52
11 2
,
2083
2,33
20.45
0.25
0.5
12 2.75
2.75
20.44
20.43
0.24
0.23
0,48'
13 3.167
3.167
20.42
0.22
0.4
0.44
14 3.583
15 3917
3.583
20.41
0.21
0.42
14.417
.4.917
3.9? 7
4.417
20.4
20.39
0.2
0.4
17
4.917
20,38
0.19
0.18
0.38
0.36
18 5.667
19
5.667
20.37
0.17
0.34
6.25
20
6.25
20.36
0.16
0.32
6,833
21
6.833
20,35
0.15
0.3
7.667
22 8.417
7.867
8.417
20.34
0.14
0.28
23 9.25
9.25
20.33
20.32
0,13
0.12
0.26
24 10.17
10.17
20.31
0.11
024
0.22
25 10.92
10.92
20.3
0.1
0.2
26 12.17
12.17
20.29
9. a-002
0.18
27 13.83
G8
13.83
20.28
8.e-002
0.16
15.58•
29
15.58
20.27
7.e-002
0.,4
17.25
30
17.25
20.26
6.e-002
0.12
18.92
31 21.5
18.92
20.25
5.e-002
1.a-001
32 24.83
21.5
24.83
20.24
20.23
4."02
8.e-002
33 30.
30.
20.22
3.e-002
2.e-002
6.a-002
4.e-002
21'C1/0102

94
44.5
44.5
95
46.5
46.5
96
48.33
48.33
97
$1.08
51.08
Cotton Mill Square
3.33
0.11
3.32
1-e-001
3.31
3-e-002
3.3
8-e-002
21/0110102
9.244e-002
8.403e-0002
7.563e-002
6.723e-002
I

,r-
Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test DW-19 1110/02
Cotton Mill Square DW 19
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and :Rice parameter A = 2.
cou:ver and Rice parameter 8 = 0.3
7nfRe/R-.0 = 2.325485e-000
Analysiz starts at time 0, seconds
Aialysis ends at time 57.08 minutes J
97 Measurements analyzed from 1 ro 97
2
HydrauiloConductivity = i.424e-006 ieevsecond
Transmfssivity = 5.698e-005 fisec
0 s 70
75 20 25 30 35
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21J0110102
40 45 50
Adjusted Time (minutes)
140 is 1.19 ""at 9, seconds

Conon Mill Square
Slug Test DW-9 7/19/01
Cotton Mill Square DW-9
I
Bouwer and Rice -Graph
Souwer and Rice parameter
2r-, metwr C = 1.4
In(ReIR-) = a.2 18545e+000
Analysis Starts at time 0. Seconds
Analysis ends at time 10.75 minutes
4-. 'Measurements arlalYzed from 1 to 44
1 Points not Plotted'because head rado <= o.0
These points are not included in the analysis
00 0
0
0
0
0
Hydraul ic Canductiviry = 5.e-006 feetfrseco`nd
Transmissivity = 4,95e.()04 Vjsee
O
'-S 2-0 25 3.0 3.5 4.0 45 5.0 5.5 a 0 6.6 'a 75
9.0 9.5 10.0 1 10.5. 1- .0 —20 12-$ 73.0 134 !4.0
AnalysisbStrpoiAdiuvmi$ Time itafware f"O's 1-63 feet Of 0. seconea
2!X-vo,02
I

Caton Mhf Square
Slug Test MW-32
Site Name.
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MW_32
Test Date:
7/19/01
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
45. feet
Screen Length:
15. feet
Casing Radius:
8,33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
27.36 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 12.64 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1,
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0•
There are 32 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0,49 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
(minutes)
(minutes)
(feet)
r
(,eel)
� 0
2
0.
27.85
0.49
1.
0.25
3
0.25
2i.74
0.38
0.7755
0.5
4 0.75
0.5
0.75
27.71
0.35
0.7143
5 1
27.69
0.33
0.6735
•
6 1.25
1 •
1.25
27.68
27.66
0.32
0.6531
4::... 7 1.5
1.5
27.65
0.3
0.29
0.6122
0.5918
8 1.75
9 2.25
1.75
27.64
0.28
0.5714
10 2.75
2.25
2.76
27.63
27.62
0.27
0.551
11 3.
3.
0.28
0.5306
12 3.5
3.5
27.61
0.25
0.5102
13 4.25
4.25
27.6
27.59
0.24
0.23
0.4.898
14 5.
5• .
27.58
0.22
0.4694
0.449
15 5.5
16 6.15
5.5
6.15
27.57•
0.21
0.4286
17 7.
7.
27.56
0.2
0.4082
i8 7.75
7.T5
27.55
27,54
0.19
0.3878
19 8.5
8.5
27.53
0.18
0.17
0,3673
0.3469
20 9.417
21
9.417
27.52
0.16
0.3265
10.33
22 11.67
10.33
27.51
0.15
0.3061
23 13.17
11.67
13.17
27.5
27.49
0.14
0.13
0.2857
24 14.83
14.83
27.48
0.12
0.2653
0.2449
25 16,92
26 19.83
16.92
27.47
0.11
0.2245
27 21.92
19.83
21.92
27.46
27.45
1.e-001
0,2041
28 24,33
24.33
27.44
9.e-C-02
8.e-002
0.1837
0.1633
29 28.33
28.33
27,43
7.e-002
0.1429
30 32.33
32.33
27.42
6.e-002
0,1224
31 38.17
38.17
27,41
5.e-002
0.102
32 44,25
44.25
27.4
4.e-002
8.163e-002
21101,10102
r�
I

Slug Test MW-32 7119/01
Cotton Mill Square MW 32
I
•
Cotton mill Square
t.aao
Hydraulic Conductivity = 5.7ale-007 feet/Second
Transmfssiolly - 2.601e.005 R2/sec
5 10 t5
Zo
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
6ouwer and Ric G areRic are ph
8ouwer and Rice parameter A = 2.635
Bower and Rice parameter S = 0,a907
In(Re1Rw) = 2.433020e+0oo
AnalYsis starts at time 30. seconds
Analysis ends at time 44.25 minutes
30 Measurements analyzed from 3 to 32
_i
•
2630 3s
ao
AdjuSted TiMe (f MUWSl,
HO is 0.3S fed B 30. mconvs

Cotton Mill square
Slug Test MW-33
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
MW-33
Test Date:
7119101
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
46. feet
Screen Length:
15. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
24.51 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 15.49 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment:
15. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 27 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 0.44 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
(minutes)
Adjusted Time Drawdown
Head
Head Ratio
1 0.
(minutes)
(feet)
(feet )
2 0.25
-0.25
0.
24.95
0.
1.
3 0.5
0.25
24.84
24.81
0.33
0. 75
4 0.75
5
0.5
24.79
0.3
0 28
0,6818
1.
6 1.25
0.75
.
2476
0.25
0.8364
0.5682
7 1.5
1.
1.25
2476
24.73
0.23
0.5227
8 1.75
9
.
15
24.72
0.22
0.21
0.5
2•
10 33
2.
1. 75
24.71
0.2
0.4773
0,4545
11 2.33
.
2.417
24.7
24.69
0.19
0.4318
12 2.917
2.667
24.68
0.17 0.1
4091
0.3864
13 3,d83
14 3.5
2.833
24.6
0.16
0.864
0.3636
15 3.833
3.26
3.583
24.66
24.65
0.15
0.3409
16 4:25
4.
24.64
0.14
0.13
0.3182
17 4.75
18 5.5
4.5
24.63
0,12
0.2955
0.2727
19
6.
5.25
5.8
24.62
0.11
20 6.833
6.583
24.6
24.6
1.e-001
0.2273
21 7.833
7.583
24.59
9.e-002
8.e-002
0.2045
22 8.917
23 9.833
8.667
24.58
7.e-002
0.1818
0,1581
24 10.92
9.567
10.67
24.57
24.56
66
6.e-002
0.1364
25 13.42
13.17
24.55
S.e-002
0.1136
26 16.58
16.33
24.54
4.e-002
3.e-002
9.091e-002
27 21.5
21.25
24.53
2.e-002
6.818e-002
4.545e-002
21101 /0102

Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-33 7119/01
Cotton Mill Square MW 33
• •
•
•
•
o •
$ 0.7
c
b '
A
is
Hydraulic Conduc6vrty =1.36e-006 teet/sacond
Transmissivitya 6,11Se•005 ff2/sec
O 5
so
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21101/01 O2
Bouwer and Rice Graph
BOuwer and Rice Parameter A = 2.858
Bouwer and Rice parameter 8 = 0.5792
ln(Re1Rwi = 2.452418e+000
Analysis starts at time 15. seconds
Analysis ends at time 21.5 minutes
26 Measurements analyzed from 2 to 27
is 20
Adjusted Tkne rminutts)
HO is 0.33 }eel at 15, se=d$

!"
Cotton M11 square
Slug Test MW-36
Site Name:
Cotton Mill
Square
Location:
MW-36
Test Date:
7/19101
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
40. feet
Screen'Length:
20. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
31.19 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 28.81 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
T
Time Adjustment.
0- Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 17 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.0T feet
• Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
(minutes)
Adjusted Time Drawdbwn
(minutes)
Head
Head Ratio
1 0.
0.
(feet)
(feet)
2 6.25
0.25
32.2
31.81
1.01
1:
3 0'5
0.5
31.81
0.62
0.
0.8139
4 0.75
5 1'
0.75
31.53
0.3
34
0.4257
0.3366
.y
`:.,,.. 6 1.25
1.
1.25
.
3145
314
0,26
0.2574
7 1.5
8
1.5
31.36
0.21
0.17
0.2079
1.75
9 2'
1.75
31.34
0.15
0.1683
0.1485
10 2•25
2
2.25
31.32
31.31
0.13
0.1287
11 2.5
2.5
31.3
0.1188
12 2.75
13 3683
2.75
31.29
0,1 T
1.e-001
0.1089
9.901e-002
14 4.333
3.583
4.333
31.28
31.27
9.e-002
8.911e-002
15 5.083
5.083
31.26
8.e-002
7.921e-002
16 6.5
6.5
31.25
7.e-002
6.931 a-002
17 t2.33
12 33
31,24
6.e-002
5.941 e-002
5.e-002
4.95e-002
21/01/0102

r Cotton Weill square
Slug Test MW-36 ?119t'01
Cotton Mill Square MW-36 BOUWer and Rice Graph
4.
flamer and Rice parameter A = 3.3
c Souwer and Rice parameter 8 = 0.6772
ln(Ret*RW) = 2.929821e4,OM
Analysis starts at time 90. seconds
Analysis ends at dme 6.5 minutes
10 Measurements analyzed from 7 to 16
0
i
HydrauNc Conductivity =1.729e-O06 feet,second
Transmissivity a 6.915"05 ft21sec
i U
0.0 0.5 1.0, tS 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4-0 4.5 5.0 5_5 8.a 8.5 TA 7.5 tL0 aS B4O 9.5 t0.0 40.5 4t,b (t.5 t2.0 Analysis by Starpoint Software Adjusts Tm,e {„ ,,, ,
` 4o is D.i 7 feel at 90. WIldt
1
1
i
i
[i
i
I t
i r
l
+_ 1
i
. i
21/01/0102
f

...........
Cotton Mill Square
Slug Test MW-40
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
'Test
MW-40
Date:
7/19/01
Well Label.
Aquifer Thickness:
40. feet
Screen Length,
20. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
static Water Level:
23.39 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom,- 21.61 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1.
Time Adjustment
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 29 time and drawdown
Maximum head is 1.06 feet
measurements
Minimum head Is -18.91 feet
-Trial Time
Adjusted Time Drawdown
H d
(minutes)
I 0.
(minutes) (feet)
(feet)
Head Ratio
2 0.25.
0. 24-45
0.25
1.06
1.
3 0.6
24.25
0.5 24.13
0.86
0,8113
4 0.75
0.75 24.
0.74
0.6981
5
6 1 .
1.25
I . 23.91
1.25
0-61
0.52
0.5755
0.4906
7 1.5
2183
1.5 23'76
0.44
0.4151
8 1.75
9
1.75 23.72
0.37
0.33
0.3491
2.
10 2.25
Z
2.26 23.68
0.29
0.3113
0.2736
11 2.5
2.6 23.64
23.6
0.25
0.2358
12 2,75
.
275
0.21
0.1981
13 3.'
.23.5.7
3. 23.55
0.18
0.1698
14 3.25
3.*25
0.16
0. M9
15 3.5
3.5 .23.54
23.53
0.15
0.1416
16. 3.75
3.75
0.14
0.1321
17 4,
4. .23.$2
23.51
0.13
0.1226
18 4.25
4.25 23.5
0.12
0.1132
19 4.5
4.5 23.49
0.11
0.1038.
20 4.75
4.75 4.48
I.e-001
9.434e-002
21 5.
5. 23.47
A8.91
-17.64
22 5.25
5.25 23.46
8.e-002
7.547e-002
23 5.75
5,75 23-45
7-e-002
6.604e-002
24 6.5
25
6.5 23,44
6.e-002
5-e-002
7.5
7.5 23.43
4.717e-002
26 9.
9. 23.42
4-e-002
3.774e-002
27 10.75
10.75 23.41
3.e-002
2.83e-002
28 13.08
13.08 23.4
2.e-002
1.887e-002
29 15.92
15.92 23.39
I.e-002
9.434e.003
s.
21/01/0102

Cotton tUtl11 Square
Slug Test MW-40 7/19/01
Cotton Mill Square MW-40
•
•
•
•
5 (Lt ••
s !•
o_
1.e-Om
Hydraulic, Conductivity - 3.1890 006 f"Useprid
Transmissiwty = 1.276e pp4 (/
0 5
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice param:inthe
-3
SOuwer and Rice param.6772
ln(R0IRW) C 2.747805e+
Analysis starts at fte.q.
Analysis ends at time 15.es
29 Measurements analyzto 29
2 Points not plotted becaratio -= 0.0
These points are not incfue analysis
10
•
•
1S
?dfusled Time (minutes)
He Is 1.06 lest 8t O seconds
I

Cotton mx square
Slug Test DW-1
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
QW_1
Test Date:
7119101
Well Label:
Aquifer Thickness:
64. feet
Screen Length:
5. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
33.81 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom:
61.19 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1
Time Adjustment:
0. Seconds
Test starts with trial 0 -
There are 8 time and drawdown measuremerts
Maximum head is 0.17 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time
(minutes)
)
Adjusted Time
(minutes)
arawdown
Head
Head Ratio
1 0.
0.
(feet)
(feet)
2 0-25
0.25 •
33.98
3389
0.17
1.
3 0.5
0.5
.
33.86
8.e-002
0.4706
4 0.75
0.75
33.85
5•e-002
0.2941
5 1.
1
33.84
4.e-002
0.2353
6 1.5
1.5
33.83
3.e-002
0.1765
7 2.75
2.75
33 82
2.e-002
0.1176
8 6.75
6.75
33.81
1.e-002
.882e Otl2 i
0.
0
0.
F
s
f
t
3
i
f
r
f
4
f
VuOiioin
{

r
r`
1
Cotton Milt Square
Slug Test DW-1 7119/01
Cotton Mill Square DW 1
1. -
•
•
•
0
i 0.1 i
z_
3
a
z
t_e-00
tH%ydZrauffc �o�IuCIIVOYW 4.03r-005 eetldand
fOfv583e-003 c o 2 3i
Analysis by Stalpoint Software
21101/0102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice parameter C = 1.4
tn(Re/Rw) - 3.285871e+000
Analysis starts at time 0. seconds
Analysis ends at time 6,75 minutes
8 Measurements analyzed from 1 to 8
1 Points not Plotted because head ratio � 0.0
These points are not included in the analysis
Atrj+sled Tune tminutesf
t40 4 0,S 7 teat at 0, seconds

Cotton Mill Squat, -
Slug Test DW-4
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
DW-4
Test Date:
7/20/01
Well Label:
-
Aquifer Thickness:
70. feet
Screen Length:
S. feet
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
21.8 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 88.4 feet
Anisotropy Ratio:
1
Time Adjustment:
30. Seconds
Test starts with trial p
There are 109 time and drawdown
Maximum head is 1.7 feet
measurements
Minimum head is 0. feet
'Trial Time
(minutes)
Adjusted Time Drawdown
(minutes) Head
Head Ratio
1 0.
(feet)
-0.5
(feet)
2- 0.25
23.3 • •
0.25
1.7
1.
3 0.5
23.23
0.
1.83 -
0.9588
4 0.75
5
23.2
0.25 237
1.6
0.9412
1
6 1.25
.10.5 23.1
0.75
1.57
1,64
0.9235
0.9059
7 1.5
8
23.1
1 • 23.08
1.5
0.8824
1.75
9
1.25 23.05
1.4
0.8706
2.
10 2.25
1.5 02 23.
1.75
1.45
1.42
0.8529
29
0.8353
11 2.5
2.
2. 2299
1.39
0.8176
12 2.75
.
2.25 2297
1.37
0.8059
13 3.
14
2.5 22.92
1.34
1.32
0.7882
3.25
is 3.5
2.75 22.89
1.29
0.7765
0.7588
16 3.75
3 22 87
3.25
1.27
0.7471
17 4.
18
3.5 2.83
1.25
1.23
0.7353
4.25
19
3.75 2.8
1.2
0.7235
4.5
20 4.
4 2.78
4.25
1.18
0.7059
0.6941
21 5,
22.76
4.5 22.74
1.14
824
22 5•25
4.75 22629
1.1706
0.60.6
23 5.5
.71
S. 22.69
1.11
0.629
24 5.75
25
5,25
1.09
1.07
0,6412
6.
26 6.25
5.5 ���
5.75
1.05
0.6294
0.6176
27 6.
8 22.63
1.03
0,6059
28 &.75
22.61
6.25 22.6
1.01
0.5941
29 7
30
6.5 2.58
1.
0:98
0.5882
7.25
31
6.75 22.56
0.96
0.5765
7.5
32 7.75
7. 22.54
0.94
9
0, 5529
0529
33 8.
7.25 22.52
7.5
0.92
0.547-2
34 8.25
22.5
7.75 22.49
b.9-
0.5294
35` 8.5
8, 2
0.89
235
0.5118
36 8.75
8.25 22A6
0.87
0.86
0.5.47
0.505958
21/01/0102

37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
' S6
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
•68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
9.
8:5
9.25
8.75
9.5
9_
9.75
9.25
10,
9.5
10.25
9,75
10.5
10..
10.75
10.25
11.
10.5
11.25
10.75
11.5
11.
11.75
11.25
12•
11.5
12.25
11,75
12,5
12.
12.75
12.25
13.
12.5
13.25
12.75
13.5
13.
13.75
13.26
14.
13.5
14.25
13.75
14.5 '
.14.
14.75
14.25
15.08
14.58
15.33
14.83
15.58
15.08
15.92
15.42
16.17
15.67
16.5
16.
16.83
16.33
17.08
16.58
17.33
16.83
17.67
17.17
17.92
17.42
18.33
17.83
18.75
18.25
19.
18.5
19.Q .
18.92
19.76
19.25
20.08
19.58
20.42
19.92
20.75
20.25
21.17
20.67
21.67
21.17
22.08
21.58
22,5
22„
23,
22.5
23.58
23.08
24.17
23.67
24.67.
24.17
25.17
24.67
25.75
25.25
26.25
25.75
26.83
26.33
27.33
26.83
28.
27.5
Colton lvih Square
22.45
0.85
22.43
0.83
22.41
0.81
22.4
0_8
22.38
0.78
22.36
0.78
. 22.35
0.75
22.34
0.74
22.33
0.73
22.31
0.71
22.3
0.7
22.29
0_69
22.28
0.68
22.26
0.66
22.25
0.65
22.24
0.64
22.23
0.63
22.22
0.62
22.21
0.61
22:2..
0.6
22.18
0.58
22.17
0.57
22.16
0,56
22.15
0.55
22.14
0.54
22.13
0.53
22.12
0.52
22.11
0.51
22.1
0,5
22.09
0.49
22.08
0.48
22.07
0.47
22•06
0.48
22.05
-0-45
22.04
0,44
22.03
0.43
22.02
0.42
22,01
0.41
22. .
0.4
21.99
0.39
21,98
0.38
21.97
Q.37
21.96
0.36
21.95
0.35
21.94
0.34
21.93
0.33
21.92
0.32
21.91
0.31
21.9
d.3
21.89
0.29
21.88
0.28
21.87
0.27
21.86
0.26
21.85
0.26
21.84
0.24
21.83
0.23
21.82
0.22
21/0VO102
0.5
0.4882
0.4765
0.4706
0.4588
0.4471
0.4412
0.4353
0.4294
0.4176
0.4118
0.4059
0.4
0.3882
0.3824
0.3765
0.3706
0.3647
0.3588
• .0,3629
0.3412
0,3353
0.3294
0.3235
0.3176
0.3118
0.3059
0.3
0.294.1
02882
0.2824
0.2765
0:2706
0.2647
0.2588
0.2529
0.2471
0.2412
0.2353
0,2294
0.2235
0.2176
0.2118
0,2059
0.2
0.1941
0.1882
0.1824
0.1765
0.1706
0.1647
0.1588
0.1529
0.1471
0.1412
0.1353
0.1294

Cotton Wn square
94
95
28.75
29.5
28.25
21.81
0.21
0.1235
95
30.42
29.
29.92
21.8
21.79
0.2
0.1176
97
31.25
30.75
21.78
0.19
0.18
0.1118
98
32-17
31.67
21.77
0.17
0.105,9
99
32.92
32.42
21.76
0.16
1."Ol
100
33-92
33.42
21.75
9.412e-002
101
35.42
34.92
21.74
0.15
8.824002
t-0.14
102
36.83
36.33
21.73
0.13
8.236e-002
103
38.25
37.75
21-72
0.12
7.647e.()02
104
39.75
39.25
21,71
0.11
7.059e-002
105
41-33
40.83
21.7
1-e-001
6.471e-002
106
44.25
.43.75
21.69
'g,e-002
5.882e-002
107
47.25
46.75
21.68
8-e-002
5.294e-002
108
50.67
50.17
21.67
7.e-002
4.706e-002
109
55.33
54.83
21.66
6-e-002
4. 1 lBe-002
3.529e-002
21/0110102

j—�
u
J '
1 ;
i f
Cotton min square
Slug Test DW-4 7/20/01
Cotton Mill Square DW-4
1- --
90.1
Bouwer and Rice Graph
80uwef and Rice paramet7d,
fn(Re/Rw) = 3.334035e+00
Analysis starts at time 30.
Analysis ends at time 41.33
103 Measurements analyze
0
1-,— 0 O
Hydraulfa•Conductivity = 2,717e-006(eet/seeond
Transtnissivity = 1.902e-004 42/sec • '
0 g 30 3$
2S 30 35
40 sg 50 53
Analysis by Starpoint Software Adjusted rye (mules)
Ho Ie 1.6 feet at 30, sawnda
21/01/0102

9
- - -- --- - ----
3
N
m
Or
W
0
m
1n M c- 00 (O tqj cy 1p(�! �}
m m� l�t�PPIN�Mh�A N((U c ,� (Mp
O) Cn CA CA 619>6f C" giaCD0000000 Opp 0000000 aWD aMD aM00N0�tp W 0�1� t �01(D0c��
OtOopC�OOOO CO QC7G7OOc7OOOO(� it, N U
N W(ND.�7,q OWn1V();MN
.i .."... �-mr r�-�-• re- ,.: s-e-e- TZ ��„•wrM-�M( M ,••��,+ NcjN NN(1# W
3
All T tp et cQ
c fl oWr,:t,:
OD W
w to � � a' r~����tie:r�►�r�r.n:nt`°�•tt°`'`�.•n�.r�.'
0,0 w c m
m a V
{M{ryry •�• U tq 0j.
N
cq N m co
u�iuiQiam� Cj v E N�ti Nto 'n to u�
'Q e_• O O O O .= r .- .= (y N N N t') N In t*. 0i N � n to to W t[f
10
'U MMM �!'��tl'1!l wi tD t(j tU CD(U (D (�1�f� 1: 0700 co N
0 306
o
a) p .
N h
O N cD bl G (t) tt((��
y rN aC%j p =E N Vf OC7OOrfw~ N W ~ N4nti N(oko to
to M7 W tl7 W
p C�CCU m o 3 W N '-tVN(V (V t7MMM'a''d" Vj W (A (O CO tD co N �n
07 i•'•.J iY qy � m 4 � � � E
w 2 N E
E
.<P,�UWin�}�'c�,coxs'c
*'NM 7 COh W OQer--TN're�-• �W. �..�-�mNCV N el N N NNNNNMMMMt�T c'7M
.. .- . ., .. .':s,.v ..:tom ,. . r,•,•., ... .. _. ", - ..•-:�:..:. ., � .. ,... .
3
N
m
Or
W
0
m
1n M c- 00 (O tqj cy 1p(�! �}
m m� l�t�PPIN�Mh�A N((U c ,� (Mp
O) Cn CA CA 619>6f C" giaCD0000000 Opp 0000000 aWD aMD aM00N0�tp W 0�1� t �01(D0c��
OtOopC�OOOO CO QC7G7OOc7OOOO(� it, N U
N W(ND.�7,q OWn1V();MN
.i .."... �-mr r�-�-• re- ,.: s-e-e- TZ ��„•wrM-�M( M ,••��,+ NcjN NN(1# W
3
All T tp et cQ
c fl oWr,:t,:
OD W
w to � � a' r~����tie:r�►�r�r.n:nt`°�•tt°`'`�.•n�.r�.'
0,0 w c m
m a V
{M{ryry •�• U tq 0j.
N
cq N m co
u�iuiQiam� Cj v E N�ti Nto 'n to u�
'Q e_• O O O O .= r .- .= (y N N N t') N In t*. 0i N � n to to W t[f
10
'U MMM �!'��tl'1!l wi tD t(j tU CD(U (D (�1�f� 1: 0700 co N
0 306
o
a) p .
N h
O N cD bl G (t) tt((��
y rN aC%j p =E N Vf OC7OOrfw~ N W ~ N4nti N(oko to
to M7 W tl7 W
p C�CCU m o 3 W N '-tVN(V (V t7MMM'a''d" Vj W (A (O CO tD co N �n
07 i•'•.J iY qy � m 4 � � � E
w 2 N E
E
.<P,�UWin�}�'c�,coxs'c
*'NM 7 COh W OQer--TN're�-• �W. �..�-�mNCV N el N N NNNNNMMMMt�T c'7M
.. .- . ., .. .':s,.v ..:tom ,. . r,•,•., ... .. _. ", - ..•-:�:..:. ., � .. ,... .

N(DOOChlnrEgtA(W11h M— (30(p Q)(�
Anti0tA Ol Wn (�gQ!1W`d' N to C71 m gm ew-yQyQgQ) W(0: s¢�}•OR sl co Do co
gyp.
00000 t] OOQ Op Ot'JOOOOZ> ptO 4)to' W W �LL7toM V) �1htj O4W" m COMCOh W co �N
OOCOC40t]C7COciC; 0UOCi00©O OOpp o Q
OCDhCp tt)tt M t�
rr,-r; �„ DOOOOOOOOQ ��O!(np'WjWOOY OaDnn<ON(O
,� "r'0000.0000a OCR (n WNW W W�o0mwm OO Cuhfb to a} `t M(h �lnn
" C1 0 C] b p Q O C'S O O O p O O b 0 C,7 0 0 0 0 0 Ci 0 0 0 0 0
2 '
C '
4O ee}}
() n W) W 1C)nvmi trNi to to VO'dM"� V V'V; 'M?. NQ.w OdOnh(D U7 itM -
00
nnnhnnhn4�.h�ht.ht�h.t�FA(�hnt�1�1.-t�t�l�t�t�t:Itit.:N}�t�t:t�i�t..-hf�n (2)cD�� N N
cli W In
Nto PW. CV to Ntpti Ntq^ - ED N
tliDit7igj OOQO.r r,w-.N- N�C11.m- C4 CVtoh Nam^ Nth tl) N W
r
w M ���w O(O (O tp� Cl7 tv Owp�CO�tri CA CI)NNNNNNN~CY Cli 'CO)
N N N N N N
tr) to tC� .
to to
N�hC000.- .-�� NCAn Nglh Nlh�in
�
� C71 C7i 01 r -�- r,r (Ni CV CJ M-� eM.. � .M- •�-• ems- `r r ttd !2 T' (O IO CA tD � T h � � T � � � � Iro, In Cn O C7 tj O e4 �U3 wi to Cy W) Cy
40
r'N NNNNC14 4 MCV NN
co
C'7 t'W3, M t} '� dN' �f tl' tf tr V 14) tO
h-nr. hnnn W W �OMp �t io (OhR7 fh0*'NM
. �mmmr000rnrnrnm

Cotton Mill Square
`r• .
94
95
23.75
24.08
23.75
24.08
7.11
Q.69
0.4259
96
24.5
24.5
7.7
7.09
0.68
0.4198
9i
24.83
24.83
7.08
0.67
0.65
0.4134
98
99
25.25
25.25
7.07
0.65
0.4012
100
25.67
26.58
25.67
26.08
7.06
0.64
0.4012
0.3951
101
2fi.58
26.58
7,05
7.04
0.63
0.3889
102
27.08
26.58
7.03
0.62
0.3827
103
27.5
27.5
7.02
0.61
0.6
0.3765
104
27.92
27.92
7_01
0.59
704
0.3642
• 105
28.89
28.89
7•
0.3642
106
28.92'
28,92
6,99
0.58
0.35$
107
29.33
29.33
6, 98
0.57
0.3519
106
29.75
29.75
6.97
0.56
0.55
0.3457
109
110
30.25
30.75
3025
6.98
0'64
0,3395
0.3333
111
37.25
30.75
31.25
6.9
6.94
0.53
.0.3272
112
31.92,,
31,92
6.93
0.52
0.321
03
32.5 :'
32.5
6.92
0.51
0.3148
114
33.08
33.08
5.91
0.5
0.3086
1 r6
33'.5
33.5
6.9
0.49
0.3025
-
.. 116
34,17•
34.17
6.
88
0.48
0.47,
.0.2963
117
1 i 8
34.88
35.33
34.88
B_88
0.46
0.2901
0.284
119
35.88
35.33
35.33
6,87
6.86
0.46
0,2778
120
36.5
36.5
6.85
0.44
0.2716
121
37.5
37.5
0.43
0.42
0.2654
1
38.17
3$• 17
6.83
0.41
0.2593
123
38.92
38.92
6.82
0.4
0.2531
124
39,59
39.59
6.$i
0.39
0,2489
125
.
4042
40.42
6.8
• Q-38
0.2407
126
727
41.42 •
42.
47.42
6.79
`
0.37
0.2346
0.2264
128
42.67
42.
42.67
6.78
6'77
0.36
0.2222
129
4325
.
4925
6.76
0.35
0.34
0.216
130
43,75
43.75
6.75
0.33
0.2099
131
132
44,67
44.67
6.74
0.32
0.203?
0.1975
133
45.75
46.67
45.75
46.67
6,73
.
037
0.1914
134
47.5
47.5
6, 72
6.71
0.3
0.1852
135
48.25
48.E
6.7
029
0.179
136
49.08
49.08
6,69
0.28
0.27
0.1728
137
50.33
50.33
6.68
0.26
0.1667
138
51.5
51.5
6.67
0.25
0.1605
139
52.88
52.88
6.66
0,24
0.1543
140
53;92
53.92•
6.65
0.23
0.7481
741
55.08
55.08
6,64
0-22
0.142
142
56.33
56.33
6.63
0.21
0.1358
143
58
58.
6.62
0.2
0.1296
144
59.67
59.67
6.61
0.19
0.1235
145
60.88
60.88
6,6
0.18
0.11
346
62.92
62.92
6.59
0.17
0.11 11
147
64.83
64.83
6.58
0.16
0.1049
148
6725
67.25
6.57
0.15
9.877e-002
149
69.75
69.75
6.66
0.14
9.259e-002
150
72.92
72.92
6.55
0.13
8.642e-002
8.025e-002
21101/oi02

152
75.33
79.67
Cotton Mill Square
75-33 6.54 0.12
79.67 6.53 0.11
2110110102
7-407e-002
6.7ge-002

Cotton Min Square
Slug Test OW-5 7/20101
Cotton Mill Square OW-5
r.
r.e.002
Hydraunc Conductivity = 1.329e-006 feeUsecond
Transiniss;My = 7.312e-005 ft2lsec
0
Analysis by Starpoint Software
21/01/0102
Bouwer and Rice Graph
Bouwer and Rice parameter 1.4 C =
fn(Re/Rw) = 3.227172e*000
Analysis starts at time 0. seconds
Analysis ends at time 79.67 minutes
152 Measurements analyzed from 1 t0152
r '
Adiusted rime (Mammy
Ha is 1,62 rest ai D. seconds

1�
�t
.
Cotton Mill
Square
-
i:•_
Slug Test DW-9
Site Name:
Cotton Mill Square
Location:
OW-9
Test Date:
7/19/01
Well Label:
f
Aquifer Thickness:
55. feet
Screen Length:
5. feet
-'
Casing Radius:
8.33e-002 feet
Effective Radius:
0.3333 feet
Static Water Level:
32.45 feet
Water Table to Screen Bottom: 52.55 feet
-
Anisotropy Ratio:
-
Time Adjustment:
1,
0, Seconds
Test starts with trial 0
There are 53 time and drawdown measurements
Maximum head is 1.53 feet
Minimum head is 0. feet
Trial Time'
(minutes)
Adjusted Time Drswdown
Head
head Ratio
1 0-
(minutes) (feet)
(feet)
2 0.25
0. 33.98
0.2-5 33.98
1.53
1.
3 0.5
4
0,5 33.79
1.4.
1.34
. 0.915
0.75 -
5 1,
0, 75 33.73
1.28
0.8758
0.8366
6 1.25
1 • 33,68
33.61
1.23
0.8039
1.2
1.26
33.55
1.16
0.7682
8 1.75
9
1•.75 33.51
1.1
1.06
0.719
�•
10 2.25
2.
2.25 33.46
1.01
0.6928
0.6601
i 1 2 5
2.5 33.4
33,35.
0.95
0.6209
12,75
2.75 33, 3
0.9
0.85 -
0.5882
13
3'
3• 33.25
O,g
0.5556.
14 3.25
3.25 33.2
0:75
0.5229
i
15 3 5
• 16 3.75
9.5 33.17
0.72
0.4902
0.4706
17 4.
3.75 33.13
4
0.68 -
0.4444
18 4
4.25 33.1
33.07
0.65
0.62
0-4248
19 4-5
4.5 33.03
0.58
0.4052
20 4.76
4.75 33.01
0.56
0.3791
21 5
22 5.25
U
5 32.98
0.53
0.366
0.3464
1
23
5.55 32.94
0.49
0.3203
i
24 5.5
32.91
5.75 32.89
0,46
0.44
0.3007
25 6.
26 6.25
6. 32.86
0.41
0.2876
0,268
_
27 6.5
6.25 32.84
6.5
0.39
0.2549
28 B.75
32.82'
6.7g 32.7
0,37
0,2418
-
29 7.
7•
0,35
0.2288
30 7 25
32.77
7.25 32.75
0.32
0.2092
31 7.5
_
7.5 32.73
0.3
0,28
0.1961
32 7.75
7.75 32.71
0.26
0.183
33 8'
34 8.25
8, 32.69
0.24
0.1699
0.1569
j t
35 8.5
g, 32.67
8.5
0.2 2
0. i43$
36 8.75
32.65
8.75 32.64
0.2
0.1307
0.19
0.1242
21/01/U102
E
I

,Y • .,
Cotton Mill Square
• �:... '
37
38
9.
9.25
9.
32.63
0.18
0.1176
39
9.5
9.25
9.5
32.62
0.17
0.1111
40
9.75
9.75
32.6
32.59
0.15
9.804e-002
41
10
10.
32.58
0.14•
9.15e-002
42
10.25
10.25
32.57
0.13
0.12
8.497e-002
43
10.5
10.5
32.56
0.11
7.843e-002
44
45
10.75
10.75
32.55
1.e-001
7.19e-002
6.536e-002
46
11
11.25
11.
11.25
32.53
8.e-002
5.229e-002
47
11.5
11,5
32.52
7.e-002
4.575e-002
48
11.
11.
32.51
32.5
.e-002
65.e-002
3.922e-002
49
12.33
3
12.33
3
32.49
3.268e-002 ✓
50
12.75
12.75
32.48
4, a-002
2.614e-002 -
51
13, t 7
13.17
32.47
a.e-002
2.e-002
1.961 a-002
5
53
13.58
13.58
32.46
1.e-002
1.307e-002
6.536e-003
14.17
14.17
32.45
0,
0.
21 /01/0102

ATTACHMENT C-5
PUMPING TEST RESULTS
X 1Folders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a doc

D 1.6
s
p
I
c 1.2
e
m
e
t 0.8
(
f
) 0.4
10. 100. 1000.
Time (min)
DW-17 STEP TEST
i Dgta Set: C:\Lueent\Cotton Mill\Stepteats\gWl7pumpDW106bs aqt
t Date; 10/04/05 Time: 16:45:23
_PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Client: Cotton Mill
Test Location: Greensboro, NC
Test Well: DW-17
Test Date: 8/18/05
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 75. ft
Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA
Pumping Wells
Well Name I
Observation Wells
X ft
Y ft Well Name X {ft) Y
DW-17 j 0
0 o DW-10 , 0 _
f Aquifer Model: Confined
T = 125.1 ft2/day
Sw = 0.
SOLUTION
Solution Method: Theis (Step Test)
S = 9.36617-05
C = 0. min2/ft5

2.
D 1.6
i
s
p
I
c 1.2
e
m
e
t 0.8
(
f
t 0.4
10. 100. 1000.
Time (min)
I
DW 17 STEP TEST
Data Set: C:\Lucent\Cotton Mill\Steptests1DW17pumpDWlOobs.agt
Date: 10/04/05
Time: 16:08:26
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: Weston Solutions, 'Inc.
Client: Cotton Mill
Test Location: Greensboro, NC
Test Well: DW 17
Test Date: 8118/05
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 75. ft
Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA
Pumping Wells
Observation Wells
i Well Name X (ft) ; Y (fit) I Well Name T X:
DW-17 __I 0
j 0 i j o DW-10
SOLUTION _ —
Aquifer Model: Confined
Solution Method: Theis (SteD Test
T = 125.1 ft2/day
S = 9.366F-0.
Sw=O,.
C =0. mn /ft5
w

35
30
C
b 25
C' 20'
15
10
5
�.M
DW-17 STEP PUMPING TEST
Kawecki recovery method
DW-17 recovery data
Hydraulic Estimates
T-- 70 112/day
............... ...... ................... ..............
b = 75 ft -------- -------------------------- --------------- —
I ----------------------------
K= 0.9 ft/day 00 0 b
................. ......... ............ -------- --- -------
........................ - .......... ............. ----------------------
..................
........... . ..... ............ ---------------------------------
------------------------- -----------
. .................. ...... ........ --------
----------- --------- -------- ...................... ------
---------------- -------- I ---------------------------
................. ...................
------------ ---------- ------------------------
----------- -------------- I --------------- ---------------
.................................. .. .................. ............ -------------------------------------------------------
-------------- ....... ..............................................
........... ....... .......... .. ............ ................. ............. ------------ ........
---------- ........... ...... - ------ ----- -------- ...... .........................
................. . ................
--------------------- ....... .... - -------- ------------------------- ........... ......... -------------------
V U.0 1.5 2 2.5 3
3.5 4
Log F(t)
[--(5----Res1du'-a-1 -Draw-d-;-wn----­
Regression Line -, I , I

`�•--■■ v■■-.■- i VIwIrI1Vl7 Ir-01
Kawecki recovery method
DW-9 recovery data
Hydraulic Estimates
T= 15$ ft2/day I
b=75ft
K= 2.1 ------------ - -- ----------------------------•--------- - .. day --------------------••---...---- ---•- .
------------
MMMOD
ao 0 0 0
Lag F(t)

4
01
1
n
DW-17 STEP PUMPING TEST
Kawecki recovery method
DW-10 recovery data
Hydraulic Estimates
T= 89 ft2/day
b=75ft
K = 1.2 May
----- - ....
..:............
-------------
v.� u.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 j
Log F(t) 1
�� O Residual Drawdown — Regression Line

MW-17s STEP PUMPING TEST
Kaweckl recovery method
MW-17s recovery data
Kawecki results-,
----------------}--------- --------••--------
}---•--------------------- --
T = 2.22 it/bay
K - 0.22 ft./day
-------•------------ ---
------------------
--------------------------
-----••--.-
'r-----_... -------•----------- ........
u.uz 0,04 0.06. 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Log F(t)
ry 0 Residual Orawdawn Regression Line

ATTACHMENT H-1-A
Amendment MSDS Sheets
XTolders GL\L\Cotton Mill\13 Permitting\Nondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a.doc

MODIFIED MATERIAL -SAFETY DATA SHEET: USA
Page 1 of 3
__J
Remediation and Natural Attenuation Services Incorporated
6712 West River Road
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Product Information: 763-585-6191 Issue Date: December 7, 2007
"ecton�.:.3=; � „� � �� �. IDEN.TIFI:CATIONe;,�; ,�� � � M�: ���:.�_ � -�;_, .:� � � �=Ea - .. .�� � �'•� °°� � - -
1.1 Product Name: Newman Zone -Buffered Nonionic Formulation 190-6730
1.2 Product Type: Edible Industrial Nutrient for Microbial Organisms
1.3 Hazard Rating: Health: 1 Fire: 1 Reactivity: 1
1.4 Formula: Proprietary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Substances Subject to SARA 313 Reporting Are Indicated by "#"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is our opinion that the above named product does not meet the definition of "hazardous Chemical" as defined in
the OSHA "Hazard Communication Standard" regulation 29 CFR 1910.1200. This material Safety Data Sheet is provided
as general information for health and safety guidelines.
(mg/m' )
CAS No. % PEL TWA
Soybean Oil (food grade) 8001-22-7 46 15(Mist) 10(Mist)
Sodium-L-Lactate 867-56-1 4
Sodium Bicarbonate 144-55-8 1
Food Additives/Emulsifiers/Preservatives (Proprietary) <10
Water <45
EMERGENCY ONLY, 24-HOUR SERVICE: CHEMTREC: 1-800-424-9300
S,ectonF3- PHYSICAL' AND. CHEblIGALCHARACTERISTIC z
This section completed per formulation ingredient data unless stated.
• Solubility: Dispersible in water (product)
• PH: 8.3 (product)
• Specific Gravity: 0.99 (product)
• Boiling Point: NA
• Vapor Pressure: NA
• Vapor Density: NA
• Percent Volatile By Volume (%): NA
• Evaporation Rate: NA
• Viscosity: 23.6 cps @ 68°F (Brookfield)(product)
• Product Appearance and Odor: White opaque liquid,
vegetable oil odor.

Page 2 of 3
C
PT-RM "A,.W, E XPLOSION '14AZARD
This section completed per formulation ingredient data unless stated.
4.1 Special Fire Hazards: Product - none, does not support combustion._
Flash Point: >540 degrees F .(Pure Soybean Oil Closed Cup).
Flammable Limits
LtL ND
UEL ND
4.2 Fire Fighting Methods: Use method appropriate for surrounding fire.
4.3 Extinguishing Media:. Dry Chemical or CO2 Preferable; water may cause
spattering or spreading.
Section
HEALTH -
5.1 THIS PRODUCT IS USED FOR SOIL AND GROUND WATER REMEDIATION BUT IS
FORMULATED USING FOOD AND FOOD GRADE ADDITIVES. PROCESSING, PACKAGING,
,SANITATION AND STORAGE OF THE PRODUCT FOLLOWS THE BEST PRACTICES USED
FOR FOOD PRODUCTS.
5.2 Effects of Overexposure: NA
5.3 Emergency and First Aid Procedures:. If inhaled, remove from
contaminated atmosphere. For eye contact immediately flush eyes with
large amounts of water. Ensure rinsing entire surface of eye & under
lid. For skin contact wash affected areas thoroughly with soap and
water. Seek medical help for persistent irritation.
5.4 Hydrolyzed soy protein has been identified by the United States Food
and Drug Administration as a food allergen. Symptoms include swelling
of the lips, stomach cramps, vomiting, diarrhea, skin hives, rashes,
eczema and breathing problems.
5.5 Occupational Exposure Limits [8-hour time weighted averages (TWA)]:
mg/m 3
CAS No. OSHA PEL/ACGIH TLV
Soybean oil (food grade) 8001-22-7 15(Mist)/10(mist)
Til 7-7- il-
ec mon:
This section completed per formulation ingredient data unless stated.
6.1 Stability: Stable under normal conditions.
6.2 Conditions to Avoid: NA
6.3 Incompatibilities: None known
6.4 Hazardous Decomposition Products: Product - None identified.
Ingredients - Carbon oxides. Biological decomposition (spoilage) may
result in offensive odors.
6.5 Hazardous Polymerization; None known

Page 3 of 3
.
Sec,ti'on ; 7> LEAK PRO _ -
SP2hL":OR
--• CEDURE •S "
This section completed per formulation ingredient data unless stated.
7.1 Spill Response: Water dispersible. Same as for vegetable oil spills:
isolate spill, prevent"from entering waterways, and sewer systems. Sorb
or remove spilled materials as soon as possible. Oils and specific
quantities of oils may be reportable under federal, state, or local
regulations.
7.2 Waste Disposal Method: This product is not hazardous, however, wastes
must be disposed in accordance with local, state or federal
regulations. Consult with local sewer authority, or solid waste
facility prior to disposition.
(Section 8 SPECIAL PRE 4
•
No protective equipment is necessary under normal use conditions.
8.1 Eyes: If splashing may occur, eye protection recommended.
8.3 Skin: Wear impervious gloves for prolonged or repeated exposure.
8.4 Respiratory: Avoid breathing mists of this product
Section�;9• TRANSPORTATION`'PRECAUTIO
This section completed per formulation ingredient data unless stated.
9.1 Transportation Considerations: This product is not classified as
dangerous in the meaning of transport regulations. Shippers and
transporters may need to meet packaging and transportation requirements
for certain oils and respective quantities under CFR 49 Part 130.
The above information is believed to be correct with respect to the formula
used to manufacture the product in the country of origin. As data,
standards, and regulations change, and conditions of use and handling are
beyond our control, NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,• IS MADE AS TO THE
COMPLETENESS OR CONTINUING ACCURACY OF THIS -INFORMATION.

a
--
Material Safety Data Sheet
Sodium Bicarbonate
MSDS #: 144-55-8
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Version 1
This MSDS has been prepared to meet U.S. OSHA Hazard Communication Standard 29 CFR 1910.1200
and Canada's Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) requirements.
PR I <tJC ` D r IDE<
Ta g,x
Product name Sodium Bicarbonate
Pure substance/preparation Substance
i Formula NaHCO3
Synonyms Baking Soda, Bicarbonate of Soda .
�- Recommended use Leavening agent, cleaner ingredient, bath salt ingredient, water softener, diaper rinse ingredient, feed
additive.
Manufacturer Emergency telephone number
+1 307.872.2452 (Plant - Green River, WY)
FMC Wyoming Corporation
+1 303.595.9048 (Medical - Call Collect)
Alkali Chemicals Division
1735 Market Street
For leak, fire, spill or accident emergencies, call:
Philadelphia, PA 19103
+1 800.424.9300 (CHEMTREC - U.S.A.)
+1 703.527.3887 (CHEMTREC - Collect - All Other Countries)
s..r. �r t 3 • .y � �'=3.�� `�, 3u 9i f _ �"ih„y'K, ''w'!'�".,'€��� I
Emergency Overview
Not classified as hazardous
White crystalline powder
Potential health effects
Acute toxicity No significant health effects anticipated
Chronic Toxicity No known effect.
`Co�npo ifionf/ for` atllon on ><n >redie is N-
Tnuredienta
Chemical Name
CAS -No
Weight %
Sodium Bicarbonate
144-55-8
100
Page 1 / 6

Sodium Bicarbonate MSDS #: 144-55-8
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Version 1
Eye contact Flush eyes with water as a precaution. Get medical attention if irritation develops and persists.
Skin contact Wash skin with soap and water. Get medical attention if irritation develops and persists.
Inhalation Remove person to fresh air. If signs/symptoms continue, get medical attention.
Ingestion Drink plenty of water. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Get medical
attention if symptoms occur.
ire asa e _ g fix' F
1` x
Flammable properties Noncombustible.
Flash Point Not combustible
Suitable extinguishing media Water spray, dry chemical, carbon dioxide (COZ), or foam.
Hazardous combustion products None.
I
Explosion Data
Sensitivity to Mechanical Impact Not sensitive.
Sensitivity to Static Discharge Not sensitive.
Specific hazards arising from the None in particular.
chemical
NFPA Health Hazard 0 Flammability 0 Stability 0 Special Hazards -
NFPA/HMIS Ratings Legend Severe = 4; Serious = 3; Moderate = 2; Slight = 1; Minimal = 0
Personal precautions Avoid dust formation.
Methods for containment Material may be recycled when contamination is not a problem.
Methods for cleaning up Sweep up and shovel into suitable containers for disposal. Dispose of in accordance' with all
applicable national environmental laws and regulations.
f. a= Alma "toga erE ESP
t
Handling Use air conveying/mechanical systems for bulk transfer to storage. Provide appropriate exhaust
ventilation at places where dust is formed. In case of insufficient ventilation, wear suitable
respiratory equipment. { I
Storage Keep in a dry, cool and well -ventilated place. Keep away from heat. Keep away from incompatible -1
products (acids).
I
Specific use(s) None known
cs <;r z " _ tee-+.; � :1"'s t; "ofl' :. Fwr ,zt•fx'x . :fis�`s'^`'�' ;els' f af'�. �'�;.. x'„ �;;A `.�:� �:tr• -�.
su�reeo�tF o s/
Exposure guidelines This product does not contain any hazardous materials with occupational exposure limits established
by the region specific regulatory bodies. Local nuisance dust standards apply.
Page 2 / 6

1 �
Sodium Bicarbonate MSDS #: 144-55-8
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Version 1
Occupational exposure controls
Engineering measures Where reasonably practicable this should be achieved by the use of local exhaust ventilation and
good general extraction.
- Personal protective equipment
General Information If the product is used in mixtures, it is recommended that you contact the appropriate protective
equipment suppliers, These recommendations apply to the product as supplied
Respiratory protection Whenever dust in the worker's breathing zone cannot be controlled with ventilation or other
engineering means, workers should wear respirators or dust masks approved by NIOSH/MSHA, EU
CEN or comparable organization to protect against airborne dust.
Eye/face protection Safety glasses with side -shields
Skin and body protection Wear suitable protective clothing. Protective shoes or boots.
Hand protection Protective gloves
Hygiene measures Handle in accordance with good industrial hygiene and safety practice.
eg
w�Ph sca �a ' d�cleiniical=�r,'' e"r�ies-=�x _ `��� �•:� ���- �� &•:�r� : � - ,�x�� :��� � ��� �ti ,.���;
Appearance
Color
Physical State
Odor
Odor Threshold
pH
Melting Point/Range
Freezing point
Boiling Point/Range
Flash Point
Evaporation rate
Autoignition Temperature
Flammable properties
Vapor pressure
Vapor density
Density
Specific Gravity
Relative density
Bulk density -
Molecular Weight
Water solubility
Percent volatile
Partition coefficient:
Viscosity
Oxidizing properties
crystalline powder
white
Solid
odorless
not applicable
8.3 (1% solution) @ 25 °C
Decomposes
No information available
not applicable
Not combustible
not applicable
not applicable
Noncombustible
not applicable
No information available
0.88 g/cm3 (particle)
2.22
No information available
66 lb/cu ft
84.01
9.0%@20°C
No information available
not applicable
No information available
not applicable
itbs.�as;. r$...„ ,.�; '*�.SFPt+ �.>.�''.ti� ,z�� - r�,F"z;�, ��ry,r - �;�u'r,-a9 d -,t u;, .a��r .;,r _ r M .,zst6% ,%a':Y-'. 'vim .: �r'az • ..t,,c _ Y>Ct;..r:;+ve;- .y5 �_'' . 5r_ 'sf ; ,.d?-.?, i ,a2'k?„"';;(;'"n'.`•E,t =ix �'7;`.., yid: G-�'.iY-�.t,> {i +5;5 I -t"
ll� .�a'n ��'�.aC'1t1V1,t.,#r�5'%��'.�,¢t,r,�.�X�:Y��r,,aa t��;;r3,.,-r- �*�sr,� Re�i• _s.,,=`;a ,�+"`�N��` ��x`4� ��� �.� ��^� �'i��'��,�'��
Stability
Stable
Page 3 / 6
r-
I
l �

Sodium Bicarbonate
Conditions to avoid
Materials to avoid
Hazardous decomposition products
Hazardous polymerization
Excessive heat
Except under controlled conditions: Acids
Reacts with acids to release carbon dioxide gas and heat
Hazardous polymerization does not occur
MSDS #: 144-55-8
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Version 1
max..,.
1=. �o. =ico' ist•a
Acute effects
Remarks This product is approved for use as a food ingredient and is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS).
Eye irritation Non -irritating (rabbit)
Skin irritation Non -irritating (rabbit)
May irritate abraded skin when moisture is present
LD50 Oral 20% slurry 4,300 mg/kg (rat)
50% slurry: 6,000 mg/kg (rat)
LD50 Dermal No information available
LC50 Inhalation: No information available
Chronic Toxicity
Chronic Toxicity No known effect.
-��;•'. ac�:`ha` .,x u* �C.Y".n '�z°-� ssasu�r,.r.�.t�,s'�3. � °�'�`;=:%a=,°,` �' ��3,_'ti „�';,`Sf` f `< ',g°; •-;�-'"�'"s' � �4ar vsF"-• „s� fi•` � -W ���'':�-<'
Ecotoxicity
Not expected to have significant environinental effects
Chemical Name
Toxicity to algae
Toxicity to fish
Toxicity to microorganisms
Toxicity to daphnia and other
aquatic invertebrates
Sodium Bicarbonate
650 mg/L EC50 120 h
LC50 8250-9000 mg/L
EC50 2350 mg/L 48 h
(Nitzschia linearis)
Lepomis macrochirus 96 h
Persistence and degradability
Bioaccumulation
Mobility
Biodegradability does not pertain to inorganic substances. .
Does not bioaccumulate.
Dissociates into ions.
Waste disposal methods This material, as supplied, is not a hazardous waste according to Federal regulations (40 CFR 261).
This material could become a hazardous waste if it is mixed with or otherwise comes in contact with
a hazardous waste, if chemical additions are made to this material, or if the material is processed or
otherwise altered. Consult 40 CFR 261 to determine whether the altered material is a hazardous
waste. Consult the appropriate state, regional, or local regulations for additional requirements
Contaminated packaging Dispose of in accordance with local regulations
Page 4 / 6

t �
Sodium Bicarbonate
1
MSDS #: 144-55-8
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Version 1
ry". tit �- .. u v�
�'�'� "* ,k_Q„�rk� .F'" '�` � t�3s�"
.WO +��.���. .i .,�f €.d'1A: -�}�?� ' '. +` �.,'�1h
DOT not regulated
TDG not regulated
ICAO/IATA not regulated
IMDG/IMO not regulated
.05 ; ad 141 Y granWSIXON
International Inventories
- TSCA Inventory (United States of Complies
America)
_i DSL (Canada) Complies
NDSL (Canada) Complies
EINECS/ELINCS (Europe) Complies
ENCS (Japan) Complies
IECSC (China) Complies
KECL (Korea) Complies
PICCS (Philippines) Complies
AICS (Australia) Complies
NZIoC (New Zealand) Complies
U.S. Federal Regulations
SARA 313
Section 313 of Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). This product does not contain any chemicals
which are subject to the reporting requirements of the Act and Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 372.
SARA 311/312 Hazard Categories
- Acute Health Hazard No
Chronic Health Hazard No
- Fire Hazard No
Sudden Release of Pressure Hazard No
Reactive Hazard No
CERCLA
This material, as supplied, does not contain any substances regulated as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (40 CFR 302) or the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) (40 CFR
i 355). There may be specific reporting requirements at the local, regional, or state level pertaining to releases of this material.
International Regulations
Mexico - Grade No information available
Page 5 / 6

Sodium Bicarbonate MSDS #: 144-55-8
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Version 1
Canada
This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the Controlled Products Regulations (CPR) and the MSDS
contains all the information required by the CPR.
WHMIS Hazard Class
Non -controlled
[7071 � 710 '1
RMIS Health Hazard 0 Flammability .0 Stability 0 Special precautions
NTPA/HMIS Ratings Legend Severe = 4; Serious = 3; Moderate = 2; Slight = 1; Minimal = 0
Revision Date: 2010-09-29
Reason for revision: No information available
Disclaimer
FMC Corporation believes that the information and recommendations contained herein (including data and statements) are accurate as of the date
hereof. NO WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR ANY OTHER
WARRANTY, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE CONCERNING THE INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREIN. The information provided
herein relates only to the specified product designated and may not be applicable where such product is used in combination wish any other materials or
in any process Further, since the conditions and methods of use are beyond the control of FMC Corporation, FMC corporation expressly disclaims any
and all liability as to any results obtained or arising from any use of the products or reliance on such information
Prepared By
FMC Corporation
FMC Logo - Trademark of FMC Corporation
0 2011 FMC Corporation. All Rights Reserved
End of Material Safety Data Sheet
Page 6 / 6

ATTACHMENT H-2-A
Amendment Calculation Sheets
XAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton WK13 PermittingWondischarge Renewal 2013\NonDischarge permit attachment v_a doc

Substrate Estimating Tool (Versa,:;., .2)
Table S.5 .Output-fbr-Substrat6_Rdquirements in Hydrogen Equivalents-
RETURN TO COVER PAGE
Site Name:. Zone-1 CMS - 2013. -
_2
1: Treatment Zone Physical Dimensions"_ ,
Values - Units Values units
Width (perpendicularto-groundwater flow) -140 - - feet 43 - meters
Length (parallel to groundwater flow) 100 - feet " 30.5 meters
Saturated Thickness 35 - feet 10.7 meters
Design Period of Performance 3 years 3 years
2. Treatment Zone Hydrogeologic Properties
Total Porosity
Effective Porosity
Average Aquifer Hydraulic Conductivity
Average Hydraulic Gradient
Average Groundwater Seepage Velocity
Average Groundwater Seepage Velocity
Effective Treatment Zone Pore Volume
Groundwater Flux (per year)
Total Groundwater Volume Treated
(over entire design period)
3. Distribution of Electron Acceptor Demand
Aerobic Respiration
Nitrate Reduction
Sulfate Reduction
Manganese Reduction
Iron Reduction
Methanogenes is
Dechlorination
Perchlorate Reduction
Values
Units
percent
percent
ft/day
ft/ft
ft/day
ft/yr
gallons
gallons/year
gallons total
0.25
0.2
0.3
0.002
0.00
1
733,236
8,029
757,323
Hydrogen
P.-of of TM.I n.--i nki
0.6%
0.557
0.2%
0.207
2 4%
2.122
0.2%
0.162
0.3%
0.228
35.8%
31.756
60.5%
53.664
0.0%
0.000
Totals: luu.u0%u 88.70
Hydrogen demand in pounds/gallon: 1.17E-04
Hydrogen demand in grams per liter: I 1.40E-02
Values
0.25
0.2
1.1E-04
0.002
9.1E-02
0.3
2,775,523
30,392
2,866,699
Units
percent
percent
cm/sec
m/m
cm/day
m/yr
liters
liters/year
liters total
I
Distribution of Electron Acceptors
0.6 %
OAerobic Respirnhan I
II
0
0.2%
oNdrate Reduction l
d0.2%
i 1
17Manganese Reduction
01ron Reduction I
Q0.3%
=O
2.4% -
MSulfate Reduction
U
'+.... 35.8%
OMelhanogenesls
{ lil
60.5%
i
■Dechlonna+ion i
0.0%
OPerchlorate Reduction
I
--.----T-"----T-- ----- -_--------
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
-
100%
!
Percent
Substrate Equivalents: Design Factor = 5.0
Effective
Quantity Quantity Concentration Effective concentration is for total
Product (lb) (gallons) (mg/L) volume of groundwater treated.
1. Sodium Lactate Product
2. Molasses Product
3. Fructose Product
4. Ethanol Product
5. Sweet Dry Whey (lactose)
6. HRC®
7. Linoleic Acid (Soybean Oil)
8."Emulsified Vegetable Oil
20,556
1,869
15,688
1,307
12,388-
1,106
.6,334
918
9,771
sold by pound
7,511
sold by pound
3,857
494
6,428
824
1,568
as lactic acid
1,489
as sucrose
1,568
as fructose
802
as ethanol
1,082
as lactose
951
as 40% lactic acid/40% glycerol
610
as soybean oil
610
as soybean ciI
Notes:
1. Quantity assumes product is 606/o sodium lactate by weight.
2. Quantity assumes product is 60% sucrose by weight and weighs 12 pounds per gallon.
3. Quantity assumes product is 80% fructose by weight and weighs 11.2 pounds per gallon.
4. Quantity assumes product is 80% ethanol by weight and weighs 6.9 pounds per gallon.
5. Quantity assumes product is 70% lactose by weight.
6. Quantity assumes HRCO is 406/6 lactic acid and 40% glycerol by weight.
7. Quantity of neat soybean oil, corn oil, or canola oil.
8. Quantity assumes commercial product is 60% soybean oil by weight.
ER-200627_Substrate_Design_Tool(Zone 1).xlsm S-5 4/17/2013

Substrate Estimating Tool (Vers"',, ,".2)
Tatile''S.5'= Output,for 4 state Requirements, in'_Hydrogen:;Equivalents
RETURN TO COVER PAGE
- = Site Name:' Zone,3 CMS :- 2013
1,.-:TreatmeetZonePhysical Dimensions
Values Units =', Values Units
--Width (perpendi cular to groundwater flow) : 200, feet 61 ' = meters
Lefigth (parallel to groundwater flow) . 100 feet 30.5'- meters
Saturated Thickness 35 feet -10.7 meters
Design Period of Performance = 3 years - 3 years
2. Treatment Zorie Hydrogeologic Properties
Values Units Values Units
Total Porosity
0.25
percent
Effective Porosity
0.2
percent
Average Aquifer Hydraulic Conductivity
0.3
ft/day
Average Hydraulic Gradient
0.002
ft/ft
Average Groundwater Seepage Velocity
0.00
ft/day
Average Groundwater Seepage Velocity
1
ft/yr
Effective Treatment Zone Pore Volume
1,047,480
gallons
Groundwater Flux (per year)
11,470
gallons/year
Total Groundwater Volume Treated
1,081,890
gallons total
(over entire design period)
3. Distribution of Electron Acceptor Demand
Aerobic Respiration
Nitrate Reduction
Sulfate Reduction
Manganese Reduction
Iron Reduction
Methanogenes is
Dechlorination
Perchlorate Reduction
Hydrogen
P--f of TM.1 n-na rlhi
O
CL
m
U
la
C
L
v
Totals: - -inn nn% - 144.no 01
W
Hydrogen demand in pounds/gallon: 1.34E-04 j
Hydrogen demand in grams per liter: 1.60E-02
0.6%
0.796
0.2%
0.295
2.1%
3.032
0.2%
0.232
0.2%
0.326
31 4%
45.366
65.4%
94.635
0.0%
0.000
0.25
0.2
1.1E-04
0.002
9.1 E-02
0.3
3,965,032
43,417
4,095,284
percent
percent
cm/sec
m/m
cm/day
m/yr
liters
liters/year
liters total
Distribution of Electron Acceptors
0.6
0.2
0.2 %
0.2
2.1 % 1
'�-i'r rt� i'',�j 111 I
$ W31.4 %
65.4%,
0.0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Percent
oAerobic Respiration
I " ■Nitrate Reduction
i I-
oManganese Reduction
olron Reduction
i■Sulfate Reduction -
o Methanogenesis I I
i i I
N Dechlonnation
- I OPerchlorate Reduction
100%
Substrate Equivalents: Design Factor = 5.0 1 -
Effective
Quantity Quantity Concentration Effective_ concentration is for total
Product (lb) (gallons) (mg/L). volume of groundwater treated.
1. Sodium Lactate Product
2. Molasses Product
3. Fructose Product
4. Ethanol Product
5. Sweet Dry Whey (lactose)
6. HRC®
7. LinoleicAcid (Soybean Oil).
8. Emulsified Vegetable Oil
Notes:
33,531
3,048
- 25 589
2,132
20,207
1,804
10,332
1,497
15,938
sold by pound
'12,252 -
sold by pound
6,291
807
10,485
1,344
1,790
as lactic acid
1,701
as'sucrose
1,791
as fructose
916
as ethanol
1,236
-as lactose
1,086,
as 46% lactic acidl40% glycerol
697
as soybean of I
697 '
as soybean of I
1. Quantity assumes product is 60% sodium lactate by weight.
2. Quantity assumes product is 60% sucrose by weight and weighs 12 pounds per gallon.
3. Quantity assumes product is 80% fructose by weight and weighs 11.2 pounds per gallon.
4. Quantity assumes product is 80% ethanol by -weight and weighs 6.9 pounds per gallon.
5. Quantity assumes product is 70% lactose by weight
6. Quantity assumes HRC® is 40% lactic acid and 40% glycerol by weight.
7. Quantity ofneat soybean oil, corn oil, or canola oil. -
8. Quantity assumes commercial product is 60% soybean oil by weight.
ER-200627_Substrate_Design_Tool( Zone 3).xlsm S-5 4/17/2013

l /
Substrate Estimating Tool (Version 1.2)
Table S.5 Output for Substrate Requirements in
Site Name:
Zone 5 CMS - 2013
1. Treatment Zone Physical Dimensions
Values
Units
Width (perpendicular to groundwater flow)
25
feet
Length (parallel to groundwater flow)
800
feet
Saturated Thickness
30
feet
Design Period of Performance
3
years
2. Treatment Zone Hydrogeologic Properties
Values
Units
Total Porosity
0.25
percent
Effective Porosity ,
0.2
percent
Average Aquifer Hydraulic Conductivity
0.3
ft/day
Average Hydraulic Gradient
0.002
ft/ft
Average Groundwater Seepage Velocity
0.00
ft/day
Average Groundwater Seepage Velocity
1
ft/yr
Effective Treatment Zone Pore Volume
897,840
gallons
Groundwater Flux (per year)
1,229
gallons/year
Total Groundwater Volume Treated
901,527
gallons total
(over entire design period)
3. Distribution of Electron Acceptor Demand
Aerobic Respiration
Nitrate Reduction
Sulfate Reduction
Manganese Reduction
Iron Reduction
Methanogenesis
Dechlorination
Perchlorate Reduction
Hydrogen
0--f of Tnf.l nn... A nk%
1.4%
0.853
0.4%
0.245
30.9%
18.949
0.3%
0.193
0.4%
0.272
61.6%
37.803
4.9%
3.006
0.0%
0.000
Totals: 100.00% 61.32
Hydrogen demand in pounds/gallon: 6.80E-05
Hydrogen demand in grams per liter: -8.15E-03
n Equivalents
RETURN TO COVER PAGE
Values
Units
8
meters
243.8
meters
9.1 -
meters
3
years
Values
0.25
0.2
1.1E-04
0.002
9.1 E-02
0.3
3,398,599
4,652
3,412,555
Units
percent
percent
cm/sec
m/m
cm/day
m/yr
liters
liters/year
liters total
Distribution
of Electron
Acceptors
1.4 %
:Aerobic Respiration
C 0.4%
■ Nitrate Reduchon
Q
4) 0.3%
:Manganese Reduction
v
Q0.4%
:Iron Reduction
C 30•
%
■Sulfate Reduction
61.6%
:Methanogenesis
l
■Dechlorination
:Perchlorate Reduction
0% 20% 40%
60% 60%
100%
Percent
Substrate Equivalents: Design Factor = 7.0
Effective"
Quantity Quantity, Concentration Effective concentration is for total
Product (lb) (gallons). (mg/L) '' , volume of groundwater treated.
1. Sodium Lactate Product
2. Molasses Product,
3. Fructose Product
4. Ethanol Product
5: Sweet Dry Whey (lactose)
6. HRC®
7. Linoleic Acid (Soybean Oil)
8. Emulsified Vegetable Oil
19,896
1,809
15;184
1,265, `
11,990 ,' .'
1,071
6,131,,
889
9,457,
sold by pound .
7,270
sold by pound"
3,733
479 `
6,221,
798
1,275
as lactic acid,
1,211 •
as sucrose _
1,275 '..
as fructose
652
-as ethanol; "
880
as lactose' ,
7,73 `
" -'as 40% lactic acid/40% glycerol
496 =
as soybean oil
496, ,,-
as soybean oil
Notes:
1. Quantity assumes product is 60% sodium lactate by weight.
2. Quantity assumes product is 60% sucrose by weight and weighs 12 pounds per gallon.
3. Quantity assumes product is 80% fructose by weight and weighs 14.2 pounds per gallon_.
4. Quantity assumes product is 80% ethanol by weight and weighs 6.9 pounds per gallon.
5. Quantity assumes product is 70% lactose by weight.
6. Quantity assumes HRC@ is 40% lactic acid and 40% glycerol by weight.
7. Quantity of neat soybean oil, com oil, or canola oil.
8. Quantity assumes commercial product is 606/6 soybean oil by weight.
ER-200627_Substrate_Design_Tool( Zone 5).xlsm S-5 6/18/2013

..
FIGURES

Li jj I r
e l +
' i � r i - �, i -.� I� �� �• - 'tea tll. - -
4
r
r
ASOM V, 40
Elm
u
,
f t }
r
'
r ,
' Sterling• • '
E
• • Place
1
1
Legend
Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Y t Scale in Feetw
1 150 300
mil Feet
yt
.. v
i I 1
Figure A-2
ar'• -..
►
`o° ;. _ir"7• � 1�Layout
j
'^ �T
��
�, o _ • � � =� - �soLu`! ions

IA-
°
>1.000000/f24�-`ta y
• W-37(s) to-SS2 - mw-g(y)1..
G eu-ill `�
01-8-MP2
387.000/493
DW-17(d2) ����-�
OW-9(
SEE NOTE 5
soa
Q 1C-53I
762.~4 /1
-
-
Q 2A-SS 1
11
SEE NOTE 5
S q
-A-H 2P2 2-A
846;000/41.7 '4' 17
i 58-6tQ
'
2=Cf.YP.L -23(i
770.000/23 )
c-sst""
DW-3(dt)+
+VW-26(i) x
+WN-I I(s)
Q20-S51
' HEWm STREET
SEE NOTE 5
0622.rO0D�/31
LEGEND
LIY/-34(s) -`f
SAPROUTE ZONE MONITORING WELL
UW-30(i) +
PWR/TRANSHION ZONE MONITORING WELL
DW-4(411)
SHALLOW BEDROCK MONITORING WELL
OW- 17(d2)-�-
DEEP BEDROCK MONITORING WELL
SO-61 Q
SOIL BORINO/SMIP M LOCATION (2002)
3G-SS3 Q
SOIL BORNO/SAMPLING LOCATION (WY 2004)
1-8-MP2
MEMBRANE INTERFACE PROBE (HIP) BORING
(WY 2004)
387.000/49.5
MAXIMUM ECD RESPONSE (uV)/DEPTH (FT.)
INTERMITTENT STREAM OR DRAINAGE DITCH -
AREAS 1 AND 2
ELECTRON CAPTURE DETECTOR (ECD)
f "m. 500.000 - 750,000 uV
�— 750.000 - 1,000.000 uV
1.000.000 - 1.250.000 UV
® > 1,250.000 UV
NOTES
1. MONITORING WELL -LOCATIONS HAVE BEEN SURVEYED RELATIVE TO
INC PLANAR COORDINATES, WITH TIE -INTO Cm OF GREENSBORO
CONTROL BENCHMARKS FOR BOTH LOCATION AND ELEVATION.
THE BOUNDARY -AND ELEVATION INFORMATION FOR THE COTTON
HILL SQUARE PROPERTY ONLY WAS TAKEN FROM A PLAT SURVEY
PREPARED BY HUG H CREED ASSOCIATES, INC., P.A. FOR LANDIN
LTD. (DAIW 12/8/93). SUBSEQUENT WELL SURVEYS WERE
PEfIFORYED BY CAVANAUGH AND ASSOCIATES, AND ARE BASED
ON THECREEDPLAT SURVEY.
2. LOCATIONS OF ROADS, STREAMS. BUILDINGS AND OTHER FEATURES
OUTSIDE OF THE COTTON HILL SQUARE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
HAVE NOT BEEN SURVEYED. THE POSITIONS OF THESE FEATURES
WERE DEVELOPED BY DIGITIZING AVAILABLE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS,
TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS, AND DEED MAPS. IN SOME CASES, THE
POSITION Of THESE NON -SURVEYED FEAlU11ES NAPE BEEN
ADJUSTED TO MATCH THEIR RELATIVE POSITION TO A KNOWN
SURVEYED CONTROL POINT (LE. A WELL OR CULVERT PIPE).
3. THE HIP SURVEY BORINGS WERE SURVEYED FOR ELEVATION AND
COORDINATE LOCATION. SOIL BORINGS INSTALLED IN MAY 2004
WERE NOT SURVEYED: THEIR LOCATIONS ARE BASED ON FIELD
MEASUREMENTS RELATIVE TO SURVEYED HIP POINTS AND OTHER
PROPERTY FEATURES.
4. ECO RESPONSES HAVE BEEN ROUNDED TO NEAREST SW uV FOR
ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES.
5. INTERPRETATION OF ECD RESPONSES BETWEEN HIP BORINGS IS
SUBJECTIVE. THE OUTER BOUNDARY OF ECD RESPONSES
>500.000 uV IS NOT WELL DEFINED AND S ESTIMATED IN AREAS
WHERE HIP DATA POINTS ARE ABSENT.
AREA 3
40 0 40 80
SCALE IN FEET
I" = W
U
Z
7-
E.9 ~
Z In to
C
W pn
Z ON ®Z dO
W �Wzow0toZ
C OQ'in O�fW
Z �U^n
Q W=aDN
(7 Q C^pn0\
Z
J JZ���
N O Cy7N IZ
Z a4 JO>Cm
U n�aLZ3
a
0
m
� M
= o
G
V)
X
m C
N
O
V)
a
.°
0 U
20
} a
N
o J=
ior
N2
I*
>�
=e
�
..a:
xc
NU
00
L LJ
O
Tull

MAIN BUILDING (BRICK)
MW-20-s+
TORE
1 ZoneI
W-01-d1 I IW- 05 I
��� It —t _ IW-40z r 57-- --_ --
SMW-25-i+ 5 s j C.O.— — _ _ I MW-351s� IW 206 II
• V
_ p MW-1 MW iS s �I
1- MW-18-i
IW-003 IW 404 IW�O
OS I� 06 I6 rB-02-d1 ® D�11-05 p II
6� �
i`B-03 ¢ 1
i S PMW-
IDi oW 1I� IW-123
1 � TMW-1 1122Q 0
MAIN BUILDING (BRICK) i 2' +DyV-14-d2 Ir 0 1 120
D \ _ ®: EW-513 ®IW-105 Q 0 1 119
IW-10
-201 ZOO \ IW-107, ' -� O IW-102
1= W_-202 MW-22-s \ ti
IW-103
' lti2 MI-109
Mi-37-s i ,�� MW-04-s OIW-104
+ MW-09-s �P �MW-2 -i
1 ® I MW-38-s TDW-07-i
i j + + DW-02-d1 1w-110 As
\ IW-111 0 + MW-14-s
1 W-17 I \ D IW-112
�W-09-d MW-24-s i FORMER \
11 � IW-113
® ®EVW-509 AUTO \ MW-13-s+
REPAIR \ 0 IW-114
SHOP Zone
203 C.O. Zone 4 01W-115
I----------I
1 • 1W-204 \ /L IW-116
1 CONCRETE MW-01-s •E$ \\ & IW-117
1
1 +� MW-23-i \ & IW-118
DW-03-d1 I DW-04A1 II \
MW-11-s
+ MW-26-i EW-510VV 511 \
\
\
I \
+MW-17-s \
\
\ EW-507 +
MW-0�
IW-208 IW-209 \
• W-207 \
C.O. EW-
CDW-084 MW-12-s
Z MW-27-s + EW-505 +
—1
N MW-10-s
m Zone 5 EW-504 MW-19-i �I
' I
EW-503
i
i
i
i I
EW-502
i
i
i
i
EW-501
y� � \�RoPO
00Y�SO��N�RN�
' NORFK
+ MW-28-s
Zone 6 IW-304 ++ MW-43-s
DW-11-dl
+ MW-454
+MW-45-s MW-42-s ++
DW-12-dl
IW-303
IW-302
MW-41-s +
+ DW-13<l1
+
DW-16-d2
IW-301
W-3O6
IW-305
RN-307
■.
-tioiin icinti
DW-06-dl +
MW-16-s +
MW 30-i +
DW-19d1
+
D
++
18-1
M -47d2
Legend
Figure A-4
--
Property Boundary
0
Former UST
Z
ISB Extraction Well
GroundwaterTranmission Pipe
EW-501
ISB Zones
_
(Above Ground)
O
ISB Recharge Well
(Historic Site Configuration)
— _
Groundwater Tranmission Pipe
Borings and Wells
W-401
(Buried)
o
ISB Injection Well 25 feet deep
Cotton Mill Square Facility
0
Cleanout
�
Test Monitor Well
(DISB
Injection Well 40 feet deep
Greensboro, North Carolina
Q
Electric Outlet
®
Test Boring
Saprolite Monitor Well
0
ISB Injection Well 60 to
N
S❑
Groundwater Treatment Shed
+
Transition Zone Monitor Well
lw-205
90 feet deep
0 100
Light/ Power Pole
+
Bedrock Monitor Well
5 -
Shallow DPVE Well 25 feet deep
W E I ' I Feet
D= Duke
❑
Performance Monitor Well
Deep DPVE Well 35 feet deep
S
W= Weston
\CMS\MXD\ISB_base_map.mxd, 5/20/2013 3:25:43 PM, johna

M W-50-i
►
►
► _
%4 ►
W E
1
1,. M W-02-s A `
1 + 1
1 MW-20-s 1
/ C1 I W-210 1
(Y� Zoe 1
DW-01-d1 �iW-205 IW20fi
1 rtw-25-t® Mw;ass I0 �03 IW407 � 1
- MW-2t-f ' �(/ - IW405 ` MVV
1 1 �.-,- C�,r �:. MW-18-i 1
IW401 IW404 �' IW409 `- 1
IW402 W406 DW-05-d1
1 vIW409 DW-14-d2 1
1
1 ,- Dw-06-d1 1
Zone 1 EW-512 Mw-16-s 1
1 IW 20.1. MW-os-s EW-513 Mw•3ai
1
MW-36 s IW-202 MW-04 s 1
MW-37-s Mw-31-s MW-22-s 1 bk'MW-29-i 1
1, `�:YbW-02-d1 / DW-07-i'• MW-14-s
1 DW-17-d2 MW-24-s MW-13-s 1
® 1
1 EW-508 yEWTa09� Zone 2 1
1 DW-09 d1 IW-203 Zone 4 1
1 MW-39-s j W-204 1
1 - DW-10-d1 DW-03'dt M .01-e MW.21; MW-28-s 1
DW-oa-dt
1 MW-tt s� r EW-511 b 1
1 MW26-i EW510
1
1 1
+ MNt7 MW-03-s 1
1 IW-207 f•lIW-208 :1:IW-209 „�-�4 1
,. EW507
1
Mw-27-a _•_ EW-506
1 EW505 /�Mw-12-s
DW-Os-1 CfJ i
i
1 -1''
Zone 5 EwSoa MwyA-fe .T.
r
1 ♦ ♦ ♦ 1
1
EW502 ♦ ♦ 1 ♦ �'
1 - ♦ ♦ ® - o � i � MW-44-dt
E W-501 ♦ '
Zone 6
�Mw-46-s�� 1! ♦ ♦ ♦ • ' N°RF°�\�&S° DW11-d1 �A
♦ Mw-40-5 DW-15-d1
MW46-1 O t ♦ w•as-i IW-304
MW-45-3
MIN-42-s --Y-
DW-12-d1 I
IW-302 ;IW-303 IW-306
MW-at-s
DW-13-d1- IW-305
I W-301
T DW-1652 IW-307r:
Tributary A
DW-19-d1
.'s DDjW-18-i
(lT
T MW-47-d2
M W-49-i
MW-48 i
e
Tributary B
MW514
v
Legend
O Injection Well
I] Extraction Well
+ Saprolite Monitor Well
Q Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
-�}- Bedrock Monitor Well
Abandoned Saprolite Monitor Well
Abandoned Intermediate
Zone Monitor Well
. Abandoned Bedrock Monitor Well
® Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads
-84o-Groundwater Elevation Contour
(feet above mean sea level)
Interpreted Direction of
Groundwater Flow
829.43Groundwater Elevation (Feet)
Scale in Feet
0 200 400
�'� Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure A-5
ISB Present Site Configuartion
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
File: Y:\CMS\MXD\GW base.mxd, 5/20/2013 3:37:54 PM, johna

;
l O _
Sx
Mw-2
j x
nuwea
S 2 SS-- 0 SSR19
S
1
H SS 1
__jr
3PS
SS 44 SS 333aa1
2SX1
`� 7x 3 2SS 20
SS 15
SS 10
SS 43X R SS 21
SE; 62� TB-6 R
R
SSR14
q R11
SS3,-4; 5 21,-22, X
SS32
TX , 24
SS 17 SS_16
X
X
rr
° a aawra L
SS 64 3c1 S 3 3bXa1
SS_58 ll SS 42 R X 3c4- .4SS-100jSS-101
-
a1
SS_5 S_56 ,__
- SSR55 x X
x
SSR53 3c 3ca2
SS-4 XSS- a �—
X 3cca1
I
SS_57 SS 9
X'
SSR62 SBR60 3d1X1 Sx6l
1b1 -
x
x
ss-s�ssa
R
I
SS 40
10 TS-2 R
K4
SS-27330,-34
x S_2 XX SS 26 SS 37 2a1
SS 23
S 3 TB 1R��2bl
SS-2 R2
k3X
j
f
STMK34 B-3 X�SS7X SB-81
SX SS_24
32
SS-9 X S RSSS 6 30 2X1 S 28 S 38
-
itXss 39
,
S35
S
SS 5
F
1
' xrap0"0
SS-28
X
S$_8
X Soil Boring Location
— — — Property Boundary
N
W E
S
Scale in Feet
O 100 200 300 400 500 I
1 inch = 150 Feet
Figure C-1
Soil Boring Locations
Cotton Mill Square
WrorrtCoton M�LUB [
I MapeSuder Maps-Pend-ApPGmbonH-1 So�Bomps.vl

West East
A A,
890
880
870
860
y
850 VADOSE ZONE N
SAPROLITE
840
830 SATURATED
SAPROLITE
fi 820
z
0
Q 810
> TRANSITION ZONE
w
w 800
790
780 BEDROCK
770
760
750
740
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
FEET
I:\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton M%06 Data\Figures and Maps\Surfer Maps\PemiltApplicailon\Core) DraWngs\FIgN4 xsecA cdr
890
880
870
860
850
840
830
820
z
0
810 Q
w
800 w
790
780
770
760
750
740
LEGEND
Inferred TCE Isoconcentration
Shell (ug/L)
■ 25,000 - 50,000
0 10,000 - 25,000
■ 1,000 - 10,000
■ 500 - 1000
. 100 - 500
■ 50 -100
. 5-50
Water Table
0 Geologic Zone
Monitoring
Well
Screen
Lucent Technologies, Inc
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro, NC
Figure C-2
Stratigraphic Cross Section
A-X

North
B
890
880
870
860
850
840
J 830
F- 820
z
O
F— 810
w
I j 800
790
780
770
760
750
740
0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
FEET
I:\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\06 Data\Figures and Maps\Surfer
South
B'
890
880
870
860
850
in
840
830
CO
VADOSE ZQNE
SAPROLITE
820
LL
z
O
810
�
1
w
800
—j
w
• • 790
780
B 770
760
-
1740
750
1600 1800 2000 2200
LEGEND
Inferred TCE Isoconcentration
Shell (ug/L)
■ 25,000 - 50,000
® 10,000 - 25,000
■ 1,000 - 10,000
■ 500 - 1000
■ 100 - 500
■ 50 - 100 -
■ 5-50
Water Table
0 Geologic Zone
Monitoring
Well
Screen
Lucent Technologies, Inc
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro, NC
Figure C-3
Stratigraphic Cross Section
B-B'

North
South
C
C,
890
890
Generalized Groundwater Flow Direction
880
880
870
VADOSE ZONE
870
SAPROLITE
860
860
850
850
SATURATED
SAPROLITE
840
840
MW32s
Mat
-
830
830
TRANSITION ZONE
I~iv
820
820
OMW37s
O
Q
810251
810
Q
>
MW24s
>
Lu
w
800
800
BEDROCK
790
790
780
780
770
770
760
MOM
760
750
oWVdz
ow16d2 750
740
0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
740
1400 1600
FEET
I:\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton MIIg06 Data\Figures and Maps\Surfer Maps\Permit Application\Core) Drawings\F1gN6_xsecC.cdr
LEGEND
Inferred TCE Isoconcentration
Shell (ug/L)
■ 1,000 - 10,000
■ 500 -1000
. 100 - 500
■ 50 - 100
■ 5-50
Water Table
0 Geologic Zone
Monitoring
Well
Screen
Lucent Technologies, Inc
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro; NC
Figure C-4
Stratigraphic Cross Section
C-C,

6
West East
D D'
890
880
870
860
850
840
2 830
820
z
Q810
w
w 800
790
780
770
760
750
740
890
880
870
860
850
840
830
820 I~i
z
810 Q
w
800 w
790
780
770
760
750
740
0 100 200 300 400 500 -600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
FEET
IAFolders.G-L\L\Cotton MilROO Data\Figures and
DravAngs\FigN7_zseCD.cdr
LEGEND
Inferred TCE Isoconcentration
Shell (ug/L)
25,000 - 50,000
© 10,000 - 25,000
■ 1,000 - 10,000
■ 500 - 1000
■ 100 - 500
■ 50 -100
. 5-50
Water Table
0 Geologic Zone
Monitoring
Well
Screen
Lucent Technologies, Inc
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro, NC
Figure C-5
Stratigraphic Cross Section
D-D'

TOTAL VOCs IN GROUNDWATER:
SAPROLITE UNIT C-7
Cotton MITI Square
Greensboro, North Carollno
SCAM IWTE: PROM NNYGEP. DRAWING NUNBM
1' c 200' 1 05/28/03 1 04364-103 1 1 L30265C-12
immm
INSULTING AND ENGINEERING (NC), INC.
41 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE 103
LEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27616
ONE: [phone]
K: [phone]
[7
is

10 ■
TOTAL VOCs IN GROUNDWATER:
TRANSITIONAL/PARTIALLY C-8
WEATHERED ROCK UNIT
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro, North Carolina
F77a7-- � PROJEW Nu"T OPAVANa NUMOM
1- n 200' 05/28/03 04364-103 L30266C_13
)NSULTING AND ENGINEERING (NC); INC.
41 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE 103
LEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27616
ONE. [phone]
X: [phone]
�^f"fi77A�
•��i.•

r
TOTAL VOCs IN GROUNDWATER:
SHALLOW BEDROCK ZONE C-9
Colton MITI Square
Greensboro, North Carolina
SCALEI DATE. PROJECT NUMBER: DUMNO NUMBER.
1' a 200- 05/28/03 04364-103 L30267C-14
MOLTING AND ENGINEERING (NC), INC.
141 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE 103
&SIGH, NORTH CAROUNA 27616
IONE: [phone]
Y: [phone]

GROUNDWATER POTENTIOMETRIC
MAP FOR SAPROLITE ZONE
('s') WELLS C-10
Cotton MITI Square
Greensboro, North Carolina
SCAM I DATE, PROJEN NUYBFIa DRAVANe NUNBERt
1' = 200' 1 0;128/03 04364-103 C30245C_9
wrhm
ONSULTING AND ENGINEERING (NC), INC.
D41 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE 103
ALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27616
HONE:
(919)[phone]
4X: 872-7996

�Nry'� tM
:0iy�r
NiCs
t
q� Y1Fip
iCiatl
IIY9�ib
4t
Ow
�oM+rs-rrr /
\� owoau
1
Scale -in Feet
0 t 00 200 300 400
1 inch = 300 Feet
Legend Figure C-6
ao is Saprolite Monitor Well — — — Property Boundary Location of Stratigrapbic
A' Cross -Sections
mr Transition Zone Monitor Well A Stratigrahic Cotton Mill Square Facility
u+ Bedrock Monitor Well B B
Cross -Sections Greensboro, NC

M W-504
1 , -
1
MW:02-s ♦ % c
1 �9.71 1 V
MW.20-s gyp 1
Q i IW-210 1
P' p
DW-01 !dl IW-205
1 MW-25.1 MW-05-s I IW-403 [W-407 MW-36-s ;I IW-206 1
p MW-21-1 •1 •=% - IW-405 Q MW-15•s p
IW-401 �: t MW-18,1�� 1
1 IW-402 IW 404 IW-406' • 'IW 409 k DW 05-d1
1 $y2 I W-0O8 1
DW-14-d2
1 -{l/DW-06-d1 I
f EW-512 1-1] EW-513 MW-16-1
MW-3r-s IW-201 W-202 MW-09-s s MW-04-s MW-30-, 1
850.68
848.44
MW-37-S MW-38s M s MW-29-I 1
'' M W-14-S 1
1 �Y/ DW-02-d1 DW-07-i 844.98 p
1 Mw-24-s qP
DW-17-d2 ���Q� qf6 MW-13-s I
1 YF 09�5.44
EW-508 EW-5 1
0 DW-09-d1 <1�03 / 1
I W-204 1
1 � DW-1 1 MW-01-s
DW 3-dow-04-d1 1
.-p± MW-23-I
1 MW-28-s
7 l �- 839.18 1
1 MW-11-sQ MW-26-,' EW-511
EW510 1
/ 1
1 Mw-n-sQ M W-03-s 1
1 .• 839.61
IW-207 {-AW-208 IW-209 �o Q 1
1 / EW5D7 1
MW-27-s EW505 EW506 MW-129 ®r 1
1 MW-10-s\1 Q r r r
r
1 —1 EW-503
r
p oEW-504 o P r r r
r
1 EW502 r ' r MW-44-d1
\ EW_-I501 0 0 0 0 '0P"0 Q
\ r
teso�NRN
M W-46-s 1i� 9 o 'K p,
P� r o r NORFO0
�\ MW-46-I ® ¢MW.43-s
O o w-45-, - - IW-304:� 1
MW-45-sefi" MW-42-5DW-11-d1 Q,
DW-12-d1 DW-15-di
IW-302-;IW-303
Mw-41-s IW-306
' IW-305
DW-13-d1 QDW-16-d2
IW-007,•;•
IW-301
1s �DW-18-i
T MW-47-d2
DW-19-d1
i
Legend
0 Injection Well
E Extraction Well
Saprolite Monitor Well
Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
QBedrock Monitor Well
(� Abandoned Saprolite Monitor Well
Abandoned Intermediate
MW-49-i Zone Monitor Well
MW-46-,
'$ Q Abandoned Bedrock Monitor Well
® Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads
—840—Groundwater Elevation Contour
(feet above mean sea level)
Interpreted Direction of
Groundwater Flow
839.61 Groundwater Elevation (Feet)
d
VVFST�=,
sut.U11Un5
Scale -in Feet
0 200 400
Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure C-11
Groundwater Elevation Contour Map
October 2012
Saprolite Unit
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
File: Y:\CMS\MXD\GW Contour Saprolite_Oct2012.mxd, 5/21/2013 10:32:21 AM, johna

GROUNDWATER POTENTIOMETRIC
MAP FOR PARTIALLY WEATHERED
ROCK/TRANSITION ZONE ('I') WELLS
Cation MITI Square
Greensboro, North Carolina
SCALE: DAM PBOJECf NUMBEf1�
1' c 200- 05/28/03 04364-103
ONSULTING AND ENGINEERING (NC), INC.
)41 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE 103
1LEIGH, NORTH CAROUNA 27616
TONE: [phone]
1X: [phone] _ __

,
MW-02-s'
$
1
1
Mw-zo-s ivy,-210
/ 850 ,/ 849.78
1
,III W-205 .►�,
848.40 IW-2��06
1
/
DW-01-d1
Mw.25; Q MWyam/ IW 403 W raw•35-s �. 847.35
i
1
A
MW-2121il -
(.y W-005, Mw45
IW 40
IW-404 i�> 409 �d�'
1
.' .�'IW
IW 402 IW-406` DW 05
�-) I W-408
1
r
DW-14-d2
6
%
DW-06-d1
- 1
A
E512 1-� EW-513
W
IW^201
M W-O9-a
IW-202 6 MW-044S ;
�� �
1
A
MW-38-s MW-28-I
MW-37-s Mw-zz-a DW-07-i., . . 1
A
842.56 +M W-14-s
DW-02-d1
1- DW-17-d2
i mMw•2a-s —� MW-13s
1
1
EW508 ��('_� I EW509
1
A
DW-09-d1 IW-203
1
IW-204
1
DW-10-d1
1 _
MW0r-s MW-28-s
DW d1 MW-23,i
1
1
b
£� '� ow-o4' dt E�
UW5'11
1
MW-26-FEW-5A0 844.11
844.08
1
�o
Mw-17-s MW-03-s -
f �, iW-z07 842 • �;_J'IW-209 zos,�.� ,:
!
1
EW507
1
EW505� EW506 837.75
837�77 ,i 838.49
1
,
r MW-27-s _
OW-08-1-
-8
a?8
MW 1e
s
1
• - '. �� -�- -4 1 EV11--503 -
832.72 EV�504 a
.
8W-
1
1
i EW-502
7`, 830.14 832
\
EW50,1 r
829.81 ' OPp
e o NRp1�R
MW-46-s \
®i 830 (L
��P \\
• .'_N�4FbK&5
j831.42
®®�
MW-46-1 \ s
'
IW-304C �rnw-a3 s
*Mw-45-i 828—
DW-11-d1
L MW-a2-s
m MW-45-a
T
�
DW-15-d1
� 822
820
M W-50-i
818.55
818
816
M W-49-1
- 814.71
i814
812
810 �,
808
`806 ftMW-51-i
soN11—`
M W-46-,
Q
r-306
-,i, DW-19-d1
Legend
J Injection Well
EI Extraction Well
+ Saprolite Monitor Well
Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
y_ Bedrock Monitor Well
Abandoned Saprolite Monitor Well
Abandoned Intermediate
Zone Monitor Well
.0 Abandoned Bedrock Monitor Well
- - Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads
-84o-Groundwater Elevation Contour'
(feet above mean sea level)
Interpreted Direction of
Groundwater Flow
814.71 Groundwater Elevation (Feet)
MW.44-d1
Scale in Feet
0 200 400
1 1 Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure C-13
Groundwater Elevation Contour Map
October 2012
Intermediate Unit
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
File: Y:\CMS\MXD\GW—Contour—intermediate—Oct2Ol2.mxdi 5%20/2013 2:57:47 PM, johna

1�m
BEDROCK SURFACE
ELEVATION WITH
GEOPHYSICAL RESULTS
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro, North Carolina
SCALEI DATE. PROJECT NUMSM
1' 200- 05/28/03 04364-103
4SULTING AND ENGINEERING (NC), INC.
1 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE 103
:IGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27616
NE: (919) '872_ 6600

GROUNDWATER POTENTIOMETRIC
MAP FOR SHALLOW BEDROCK
('d1') WELLS C-15
Cotton Mill Square
Greensboro, North Carolina
SCALES MIEi PROJECT NUMBER: DRAWING NUMDER:
1' = 200' 1 05/28/03 1 04364-103 1 C30241C_11
i \ k I k
JSULTING AND ENGINEERING (NC), INC.
1 OLD WAKE FOREST ROAD SUITE'103
"IGH, NORTH CAROUNA 27616
NE: (919) 672_ 6600
s�
�e

M W-50-i
,JET, - - _ _ :W E
L �%7r
j'MW-02-s
j c
p
' MW-20-s
► IW-210 1.
DW-01-d1 IW-205 Ir tvSW.25v1� mvy�ms �!»') �-403 IW�IW-206
07 MW [Z'1 ��M15�.1
r
,IW-405 w
-, _ mow//
IW-401 i MW 18 i r
► IW-402 IW-404 IW 40fi �rJIW 409 DW-05-d1
► ' ` UIW-408 850.07 DW-14-d2 DW-0651 1
► �t� q.
( EW5134 } i846.04 1
j846.83 M r
1 IW-201 r EW-.56 -
/ MW-08•& 848.56 � w- MW20-I p
M W-36-s },I W-202 M W-04-s
p
�yi
(�j` ,�.M�W- 9-i
�- MW-37-s Mw.3s-s .` ,
@ Mw-az-s : ' 1
DW-07-iMW-14s
► DW-17-d2 �� 1W-02 d1 p
I 845,45 Mw;2a-s .848.45 MW'13�
1
1 EW508 Y [] EW-509 1
DW-09-d1
DW-10:d1 _ I �03 IW-204 � 1
(• p
1, U 89.69 ` , 7 D, Mw-01-�, MW=-�28
! ., f11 DW-04-d7 MW-2�3•! i p
r _ ,
-M` : t-s,�" .28•i EW-510 ' �-= EW=599 p .
1 1
M
W-2W-03-s 1
:Io7 C��'IW-zo9 ( IW-209'
► i s EW-507 1
MW-27-s - W 506
EW505 MW-12•s �-
1 DW-sa
t � EW=504 Mwja-N
1 m ; o d
EW-503 m p ®r
4 .1
1 1 EW--502 s e ► ®w: �,
EW-501
p ' �\4aOp
�MW-46V10iZFO�.�&��
MW-46-1 O 'A Mw-as-� IW-3044-DW-11 d1
m MW-45-SEF MW-4z-s 831.88 DW-15 d1
DW-12 1 827.97
IW-302 - IW-303
MW-at-s /I�/y-306
DW-13 d1 C/ �W-3— C1
832.31
IW 301 ,,oeDW-16 d2 /IW-307k-
W 19-d1
�l 814.00
DW-184
AVW-47-d2
M W-49-1
MW-48-1
MW-514
Legend
o Injection Well
C° 11 Extraction Well
Saprolite Monitor Well
Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
-- Bedrock Monitor Well
Abandoned Saprolite Monitor Well
Abandoned Intermediate
Zone Monitor Well
-p- Abandoned Bedrock Monitor Well
® Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads,
-840-Groundwater Elevation Contour
(feet above mean sea level)
-0Interpreted Direction of
1. Groundwater Flow
814.00Groundwater Elevation (Feet)
Scale in Feet
0 200 '400
1 Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure C-16
Groundwater Elevation Contour Map
October 2012
Bedrock Unit
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
ile: Y:\CMS\MXD\GW Contour Oct2012.mxd, 5/20/2013 2:39:32 PM, johna
.: StJ-LU I I U�n

pm q
W E
A G ' M W-02-s
'MW-20-� ?
1�
Q DW-01-d1 IW-206 -20 '-e ' IW j
j Mw.25,rI Mtryio5,a / IW-403 IW-407 MW35 -
MW-21 i 0 � W 405
IW�019 ci _MW-18i d
�I W-404
yy ' IW-402? -• - IW�OBr DW-05-d1
f - 0IW-408, DW-14-d2
a one 3, 1 I
DW-08�d1
_ ...'. EW-512 1rw-15.
IW- 01,E -.`i/ Mv�o9s EW513� �MW-30.r
MW-38=s QIW-202 MW-04-s ! 0
t
r "�J
Q` "-MW-37-S 1 MW.3e-s ''" ' MW-22-s �,I,MW-29-
i y� r
f DW-07-:I MW-14-s
1 Zone 1---; ._ .� ° Dw-o2-d�t ��. ° f
�.,DW-17-d2 M�wha-s ? j MW-13-s -
EW
DW-09-d1 S
I W-203
IW-204
MW-39-s; 0 .
DW-10 d1 gnl- 3'-d� LOpfl$ MW-33•i MW-28-s
EW-511
r
d� r
.. 26-1 EW-510," i Zone 4
MW-17
1 ��WLL// MW-03-s _
Q J`S ; S �IW-20i (•yIw-zo9 0IW-209; i
�� _.V 507 1
W--506
M W-27B
MW-12-s - - - - - --
E- 504 •1 MW-Wi
Tn
.��� �... - jv1W-44-d1
EW-509 C/tY,7
g��,� ®� ®.• ; :`�"K&S°��N 00
XV
Zone 6 -
MW-as-s f �R O 'DW-11-d1
-TMW-46A ® ® „� IW-304 - W-43-s DW-15-d1
W-45-1
MW.46- MW42- '`:y —h-'
"I DW-12-d1
IW-302 OIW-303 IW-306
MW
DW 3-d1• IW-305 0
4-1�DW-1642 IW-3070 C")
IW-301 '
W
i�MW-47•d2
M W-50-i
yM W-49-I
.�MW-484
MW514' -
• � a
�gDW-19-d1
1
Legend
4W, Extraction Well
+ Saprolite:i 6 itor Well
11�- Intermediate Zone=Monitor W6II
-� Bedrock,Monitor. Well,
Abandoned Saprolite Monitor Well
Abandoned Intermediate
Zone Monitor Well
Abandoned Bedrock Monitor Well
®— Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads
—84o—Groundwater Elevation Contour
(feet above mean sea level)
Interpreted. Direction of
Groundwater Flow
829.43Groundwater Elevation (Feet)
Scale in Feet
0 200 400
1mmml Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure C-17
Remedial Zones and Well
Location Map
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
a
File: Y:\CMSWIXD\Remedial_ZonesAnd_Well_locations.mxd, 6/17/2013 12:39:31 PM, johna -
0

e^, GEA'D
]aaNDARY LINE
1GHT OF 'NAY
--
ADJACENT LOT UNE
_ gM; Nf LINE ..OFF '
6EwEfl 'INE
EMSTIHG $AN'i•.PY
_�- F --
EAISYnG WATER LINE
eullDivc sETBAcx
GRzv PIPE
Ew PER CORNER
PROPERTY
1 RO
5 EMSPrvC IRON $TAKE
O
I5i c'! ST.KE SET
rye EXISTING RCN PIPE
ONI r•.7RING WELL,
a
n M0,11-SENT
•�
EnSI,N.: 5ANITAR" SEER
EX SING ',.A -'ER VALVE
E%ISPfIG ur..E HMgANI
R/W NCJUMENi
WATER UNE
STORM SEWER 1J�E,uc _-
S
PRIVATE DRAINAGE CERTIFICATION NOTE;
ERS CERTIFICATE Si Y THE CITY OF GREENSBORO THE
ENGINE
STOR,tfWATER QUANTITY CONTROL
UPON ric.- B
ENGINEER OF RECORD WALL SUBMIT A CERTIFICATION
Water Quality Certification
The slormwOter management study inaivdad witn this
flooding
AS TO CONSTRUCTION AND FUNCTIONALITY FOP, ALL
STORM ORAINAGc" CONVEYANCE IN A
J
development shown on this plan is consistent with the
plan indicates that there Will be no downstream
of this
PRIVATE
pEVELOPED SITE DEVELOPERS SHOULD UNDERSTAND
__
The
contained on the plan enhlled "Cotton Mill Square"
drainage. or erasion control problems as a result
discharges
THAT IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT THE
_
CONSTRUCTION STAKING Ttc7E
provisions
b DMP, Inc. and therefore na additional
development between the point where the runoff
represents
DESIGN ENGINEER FOR ANY CHANGES MADE TO THE
(2010 --)• Y
lit Control s required.
from the property to where the site development
Therefore no
APPROVED PLAN FAILURE TO HAVE CHANGES
CONSTRUCTION STAKING FOR ALL
Quan I y less than 10% of the total drainage area.
I•t trol Impro'.ement is proposed APPROVED BY THE CITY OF GREENSBCRO CAN RESULT STRUCTURES SHALL BE BASED ON - rsT 't t1
NG PLANS DO NOT
Know what's below.
fall before you di.
Dial 8-1.1
1 I
I �II
I
1 1
�K flu i
I
t \w
fJ7 fl�� Jf� ll I 1
T � I
Ly
if
1
Jx ,,
o
�---� GO
1 U)
i lJ�i 880.0
I hNNNf a
56
3
z GRADING NOTES:
1 LANDINGS OUTSIDE ALL DOORS SHALL BE SIZED PER NCOC
Ar:O NC VOL. 1-C, BE AT THE SAME ELEVATION AS THE FFE,
AND SHALL HAVE A MAX 2X SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION
INCLUDING I`1 THE DIACONAL
R� 2 ME SLOPES IN THE H.-
NOT PPRKING SPACEJACCESS AISLE AREA SHALL
NOT EXCEED 28 IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL,
_ 3 THERE SHALL BE LEVEL TURNING AREAS (MAX 2X SLOPE IN ANY
DIRECTION INCLVOING IN THE DIACONAL) ON ALL SIDEWALKS WHERE
W WHERE AN INTERSEOPNG $IOEWA- CONNECTS WIM IT.
'$ 1. THERE
SHALL BE NO OESIGNAEED PECESTRIAN RWTES/SIDEWALKS
MTMH THE SITE, EXCEPT 11MERE LABELED AS A RAMP WITH RAILS,
WHICH EXCEED A 5R SLOPE IN T4E DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND A
AND A 2S CROSSLOPE- IG ANY, APE
m 5 ALL PEDESTRIAN ROUTES GREATER THAN 6% (1.20).
LABELED AS 'RAMPS SHO.No SLOPES. LEVEL LANDINGS AT TOP AND
8 DOTTCM (A{Ax 27. SLOPE M ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE
DIAGONAL), RAILINGS/GUARCRAiLS SHALL CCMPLLI MTH NCBC AND
o VO_ I NC
6 ALL STAIRS SHALL HAVE SLIGHTLY SLOPED LA) AT T (MAX. 2% SLOPE
V1 ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL) AT THE TOP. AND
90TTCM AND SHALL COMPLY MTH THE NCBC AND VOL I-C,
7. STARS/STEPS WITH LESS_`MAN A 12- ELEVATION CHANGE SHALL
f 661 Y,tTH tim, IuUJ e.T
< B ALL C STAND&RII SHALL BC J CITY OG GREENSBORO/
9
quan,l y con LATEST BUILDI
C A "NOTICE F VIOLATION AND/OR A HOLD ON THE USE THIS PLAN To STACK BUILDING
CERITIF{CATE OF OCCUPANCY, I "'lll���,,✓✓✓sss � Z
Of z
Y _ - - Sr pZIJ�� RAILROAD RIGHT OF tYAY NOTE: VICINITY MAP L� W -J LU
NT.S
NO OTHER CONSTRUCTION YATHIN THE NORTH Q
�1AP?'_ +T'lcT�Tyyy-� I CAROLINA RAILROAD CORRIDOR SHALL BE �L Z z 0
'-i A' w 1e ►-�. _ �� _ - DONE EXCEPT WHAT IS SHOWN ON PL4N.
_ W :It
092' 70 ttlC Q o u7
J < z JLL
Y
_ -- _. T \l \`+I lie '� I �_ ` _ _ '- _ - - _ _ ` ---._' ` ' - _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - _-_ �-- � -'- ��L=:_�_�%`�"vc•:./ j% ' / � � -_ _ �_ I_ � y�
370'T.4PER
TOP WALL 873.50 _ ^ - _ _ - _ _ __ _ _ �u _. _ r50, C/) n:
GROUND 8Y3,.00 _?-��-�"-+___I--_±-_ , .7
TOP WALL- 873 50 - -
-'-_ _ _ Lt�`��!! ; •4�` _ _ J/ _ --- I `---- �. _ GRO_UIiD 87T---
SEGMENTED 'TOP WALL 872
--I
RETAINING r GROUND 869.00 TOP 'h'ALL`871.50 T
y } WALL ` v,FGROUND 871 Ga'-
50' Rlcur __
Gh'N1:2[AI. A'V ICJ: It REWIFFA PARxwO
2 - { eR VIeT3 n12 UNNS) + (2 a NF6T)
= 224 SPATES
1. TOTAL AREA 7/8 928 SF = 17.193t ACRES
7 8-POI
.
24 - 3 eR u•1In: ( 24 UNITS) + (I.7s NNm
( 44 Ia4Rl +FI-� NwT)
a2 SPACES
r4 SPAIFS
NI
P• CURRENT ZO`-
{a - 2 BR UWiS
1-Cta'JwJSF/ratc 0r/ s T5J + (TG Ixaisl
7 SPACES
3 a ELCUR EB76, 2536
MTAL PEWIFW
- 3. SP-s
4. P5 174 PG 16
5 PIN DO-00-0300-o-0017-0'U-DCl (PART)
REaM[a 41CAPPES
SPACES
7 SPACES
= 3M SPACE9
a THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT L'E WTMN A ROOD ZONE
2aFLM
AS PER FIRM PANEL 375351 Is" J GATED 6-IB-07
7. SOIL' Or (UPBAN) & LMU9 (MECK'_EHBURG URBAN)
v
B.LAND USE LUC2
Ffa1LNi PFtttwa �AtEs = sGa
9 BUILDING SETBACKS
- 9
ANDICAPPFD PAPxe,C SAAce' - 5a
FROM PUBLIC STREETS er IAIN
,at & REAR -YARDS 20' MIN
PEGJLNI E cin BA¢s
u+a1CAPPED CJRPORT sPaCEs = Ins �A¢5
10, BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMAPON TAKEN FROM
BY MUCH CREED ASSOCIATES, INC. PA C011SULTLNG
ICTA_ Pl- N.I.-
SURVEY
& LAND SURY_YORS. DAT_C 6-5-2DIO
BUA CALLULATICNS 'MERE DONE USING COG 2008 CIS & AN ACTUAL SURVEY
21 PROVIDE 10' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN 'HATER &SERER
PERFORMED BY BORVM WAGE & ASSOCIATES
12. ALL ACCESS YdLL BE THROUGH CUFTON ROAD AND
HEWITT 5TREET TO BE GATED AT
LINES OR 18 VERTCA- SPARAPON PER NCOWC STD.
UPON AREAS.
HEMTT STREETS
22. NO METERS WILL BE SET UNTIL ESk'TS ARE RECORDED
25. BUILT
END OF CUL-OE-SAC.
13. ANY EXISTING CURB, GUTTER, & SIDEWALK THAT IS EITHER
23. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES THAT TIE INTO MANHOLES MUST GO SO
SITEEXI
SITE = 834.445# SF. = 1,5 ± AC = IO561 A
COVERAGE - 111,558# S.F, - 2.561 AC - 13.354R
OAMAGEC OR NON-COMPUANT, SHALL BE REPLACED AS
AT SHELF
ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE TO CITY OF GREENSBORO/
BUILDING
pAbEMENT/SIGEWALK COVERAGE _ 352.134t SF - 5772 AC, = 45.79(
PART OF 7H15 PROJECT.
I4 My STRUCTUREPERTo A
24.
NCDWQ STANDARD
pERNOUS COVERAGE - 340.806# SY = 7.324 AC = 4080%
PUN CN BUILDING INSPECTIONS
IS TOTAL NUMBER PROPOSED LOTS 3
25 TANDEM BAWLOWS ARE REQUIRED IF
27 PROPOSED BUILT UPCN AREAS
I& EXISTING BOA. 493,692 SF = Id ]34 AC (592�
MULTIPLE USERS
BUILDING COVERAGE = 211591# SF = 4925 AC - 257147
17. PROPOSED BUA 500,860 SF > R.495 AC (6002%)
PAVEMENT COVERAGE = 231,649# S F S 3I5 AC. = 2T-760%
18. HANDICAP SPACES/ACCESS AISLES ARE TO BE PAVED
ROAD COVERAGE 5- 5Z - 1,254 m a 5455
IS. ALL LANDINGS SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 27. SLOPE IN ANY
333.26t
6
PERVIOUS COVERAGE = 33,53t SF. = 7`v9 AC = 399BD7.
DIRECTION
20. ALL PRIVATE ON SITE WATER & SVAE,R TO BE MAINTAINED BY COINER
GRAPHIC SCALE
30 60 0 30 120
t
= 30 FEET
OWNER:
GREENSBORO D/E/P, LLC
3411 RICHMOND AVENUE
SUITE 200
HOUSTON. Ty. 770-5
PHONE- [phone]
CONTACT- CARL HUSMANN
email Carl.Husmann®dmcdavelopers com
i;l of sl �

°RiVATE DRENA.GE CERTIFICATION NOTE:
BEmaarDimE _ �-
LINE
- -
ENGPtiEERS CERTIFICATE
UPON REOUES' BY THE CITY OF GREENSBORO, THE
RIGHT OF = -
ADJACENT LOT LNE
EASEMENT
Water Quality Certification
Y
STORM"TY_9TER QUANTITY CONTROL
ENGINEER CF RECORD WILL SUBMIT a CERTIFICATICN
LINE _ _ _ _ _
E SANEA-I a u:= — �—
FACING SANRAR' Sc::ER LINE S
The development shown on this Ian is consistent With the
p p
The stormwater nonayement stud included with this
plan indicates that there till be no downstream flooding
9
AS TO CONSTRUCTION AND FUNCTIONAL I-Y FOR ALL
CE
PRIVATE STORM CRA:^JAGS CCNVEYAINx IN A
L"I'Rllr •fit E',,L+E• `^-IEP
provisions con tatned on the plan entitled "Cotton (dill Square"
drainage, or erosion cont­' 2oblems as D result of this
DEVELOPED SITE. DEVELOPERS SHOULD UNDERSTAND
C'a.nNO •fA'G^ LINE w w r
E.STING FENCE X — X -- (2010-__)" by DMP. Inc. and therefor. no additional development between the point 34 the runoff discharges THAT IT IS THEIR RESPONSTc1L.T- TO CONTACT -HE CONSTRUCTION STAKING- .
L.,.*Ini I_r i•_ccr.•;Gr,[ Eli_-',i - ---- -- Quantity Control Is required. from the property to where the site deveia^ner.t represents DESIGN ENGINEER FOR ANY CHANGES M,4DE TO ThE �r3>E
BUILDING SETBACK _ less than 107 of the total drainage area There:cse, no APPROVED PLAN. FAILURE TO HAVE CHANGES OO,.STRUCVON STAKING FCR ALL e
BUILDNG SETBA DRAIN PIaE '------'--'------------ -" i ._ ______
PRO PITY CORNER O - quantity control improvement is proposed APPROVED BY THE CITY OF GREENSBORO CAN RESULT STRUCTUBE,S SHALL BE BASED ON
EIS EASIING IRON SIAKE o IN A `NOTICE OF VIOLATION" AND/OP. A HOLD ON THE LATEST BIr. D PLANS. DO NOT
KS IRON STAKC SET a
OF „ EXISTING RON PIPE 0 L.:I RIIIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY USE THIS PZI TO STACK BUILDING
140NITVFe;G wri-L
NCGS NONJMENT
a
U
F --.-rm- _
-I E C
d
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE'STING
0�o�
WATER'JAIISRNG FRE f•"ORzNT2/1,
MCNIJPIEN7
❑
WATER LIE
^ W --
L
STORM SEWER LINE
SANITARY SEWER LINE
— S —
W
Know
KRDWhat'S IUeIODU.
Call before you dig.
Dial 8-1.1
`I •4• u7 I t M ,N - - -
s ® RIGHT --OF-
i
C 7� li
I ,1 S17
Jl.
I I !J �i,1
Ot 1�) 80.0 I 879.5
m- --
�1' 56 1.. 19
1 ( O 7�' ' M M _� Al I _ _ ! ; (r) 8745
20
it
8795
J
55
A
a QQ
. 97a v 3 8
R''�OAD RIGHT Ea" ':NA.Y NOTE:
NO 3",'t •SR CONSTRUCTION THE NORTH
CAROLINA RAILROAD CORRILIC)n <,1� ,LL BE
DONE EXCEPT WHAT IS SH01N1: ':;di='_AN.
Al ��. � � `-'�"•'°.=� � � -- - � � \� jJ, \
Tv W
72.5
25
/"' -a } —
-
d-L G � ',r I r - __ _ - i ! �{�`41,F+rilrrt(ik7L,� I+� J-� ` � • � I 1 -
9-'- )' 878 5 f1
( - - )v 'P:4KT • h F ,`,{y``t{'' _, 1I
!' _ - - rl{7.
i 1 (V ( �. I�{r+• ,4N,; It 'I I1L s
MATCHLINE — SEE SHEET C.9B FOR CONTINUATION
GRADING NOTES:
1 LANDINGS OUTSIDE A.I.DOOIRS SHALL BE SIZED PER NCBC
AND NO VOL I-C. BE AT THE SAME ELEVATION AS THE FFE,
AND SHALL NAVE SLOPE A MAX. 22 IN ANY DIRE-GN
INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL
ZTHE SLOPES IN THE H C. PARKING SPACE/ACCESS AISLE AREA SHALL ' NOT EXCEED 2% IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL
1 3 THERE SHALL BE LEVEL TUPNING AREAS (MAX 28 SLOPE IN ANY
' DIRECTION INCLUDING IN DIAGONAL) ON ALL SOEWALKS WHERE
WHERE AN INTERSEC71NO SIDEWALK CONNECTS WITH IT.
4. -HERE SHALL BE NO DESIGNATED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES/SIDEWALKS
Wi1HIN THE SIM EXCEPT WHERE LABELED AS A P.AMP WITH RAILS.
_ WHICH EXCEED A 57. SLOPE IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND A
AND A 29. CROSS,OPE.
5- ALL PEDESTRIAN ROUTES GREATER THAN $R (1.20). IF ANY, ARE
LABELED AS 'RAMPS* SIOYANG SLOPES, LEVEL LANCINGS AT TOP AND
BOTTOM (MAX. 2A SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IV THE
DIAGONAL). RAILINGS/GUARDRAILS SHALL COMPLY WITH NCBC AND
VOLE I-C
6 ALL STAIRS SHALL HAVE SLIGHTLY SLOPED LANDINGS (MAX 29 SLOPE
IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL) AT THE TOP AND
J BOTTOM AND SHALL. COMPLY VAIN THE NCDC AND VOL. I-C
7. STAIRS/STEPS WITH LESS THAN A 12- ELEVATION CHANGE SHALL
i COMPLY W1TI NCBC 10032.7
8 ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE TO GTY OF GREENSBORO/
-, NCOWO STANDARD
23 k
11;11 GROUND' 361,0;
*rl
Txr
a.._(PR
= _ - �_ OPD2)
B -WF L I'0:5i�___ FENCE
• ' IIVD h53i�1--
24 u.zfa?nl f_
r4l,I A, . 'I'I 2
TOP WA.LL''855870 5
';
lGROUND 5
TOP' 858 i
GROUND,`855. 0
(•
(
1'
TOP WALL 8555 '
'
GROUND 854 8
- •
N 82•s8'36.•
GENERAL NOTES: IL
Ar. Eg PARwuc
BUA CALCULATIONS WERE DONE USING COG J.008 a5 & AN AC111AL SURVEY
tt1 - 4 9R NNiis
(n2 uwTi) . (2o Nxrt) = 224 9+ACE5
12. ALL ACCESS WILL BE THROUGH NFTON ROAD AND
21, PROVIDE 10' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER k SEWER
PERFORMED BY BDRUM WAGE .k ASSOCIATES
1 TOTAL AREA = 741,92B SF 17 19JS ACRES
x - ] eR uwii
(21 uNlrs� . (I 75 NNIT) - 43 iPARs
HEWITT STREETS• HEW1Ti STREET TO 8E GATED AT
LINES OR l8" VERTICAL SEPARATION PER NCDWO STD.
2 WRRENi ZONING D-Ppl
J D B. 6878, PG. 2538
4 PB 174 PG ;6
40 - z as uwr
t-ttUerc..,. L
(Ta urvlis) . (t S M+iO - Ea mA cs
p/15 arn15) . (n5 UNIIs) - x SPAc6
END OF CUL-OE-SAC.
13 ANY EXISTING CURB. GUTTER, k SIDEWALK THAT IS EITHER
22• NO METERS WILL BE SET UNTIL ESM•TS ARE RECORDED
23. SANITARY SEWER SERVICES THAT TIE INTO MANHOLES MUST p0 50
26 EXISTING BUILT UPON AREAS
SIZE = 834,49et S.F. 19.157 AC. = IC0007.
5 PIN.00-00-0300-0-0017-OD-COI (PART)
'arAL REW1RFp = ]]] SRADES
RFADLTLD HANGITAP1. - T SPACES
DAMAGED OR NON-COM- ANT. SHALL BE REPLACED AS
AT SHELF
BUILDING (AVERAGE 111.5581 S F - 2.561 AG - 13 369%
6 THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT UE YATHIN A FLOOD ZONE
REc+JIn.¢ SPACES - Jze SPACES
PART OF THIS PROJECT.
14 ANY STRUCTURE TO BE MOVED SHALL REWIRE A
24. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE TO CITY OF GREENSBORO/
PAVEMENT/SIDEWALK COVERAGE - 382,1341 ST. = B.772 AC = 45 790%
AS PER FIRM -PANEL 375351 7844 J. DATED 6-18-07
TON PERMIT FROM BU'LDING INSPECTIONS
NCOWO STANDARD
PERVIOUS COVERAGE - 340.806f SF = 7824 AC = 408415
7. SOIL. U. URBAN) & MuB (MECKLENBURG URBAN)
PROMrm PAeWnt
TOTALDEMO
15 TOTAL NUMBER PROPOSED LOTS 3
25. TANDEM BACKFLOWS ARE REQUIRED IF
8 LAND USE' LUC2SETBACKS
9 BURRING SETBACKS
RESutAR PARrcWa SPACES
- 594
18 EXISTING BUA: SF 1411.4 AC (6(600
MULTIPLE USERS
27. PROPOSED BUILT UPON AREAS -
-
FROM PUBLIC STREETS 8•
RAACeAPPm PARKS.
SPACE6 = 9
17. PROPOSED 8Uh SGO,fifi6 SF = 11.698 AC (600'LM.
5CO,2
COVERAGE = 4 006 AC = 25 77
SIDE &REAR YARDS 2a' MIN
M11
REao CMPCRT.TOSS - 54
HAMDDA DARFv iPAQS - 6
I8. HANDICAP SPACES/ACCESS AISLES ARE TO BE PAVED
231,612 ; S.F.= 6
PAVF EN COVERAGE 231,649t S5313 AC. = 277EOR
ROAD
10 BOUNDARY k INFORMATION
TDTAL P4MWG PRaNDW - S]l SPAsd6
19, ALL LANDINGS SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 29 SLOPE IN ANV
= 1.254 AG = 6.546X
ROAD COVERAGE , 5
CO- 5_
INC.TAKEN CFROMONSULTING
SURVEY BY HUGH CREED ASSOCIATES INPA CONSULTNG
GH CREED A
DIRECTION
G 333, 33
PERVIOUS COVERAGE 333,633i S F 7 659 AL` - 39.E5GR
& LAND SURVEYORS, GATED 6-5-2010
20 ALL PRIVATE ON 511E WATER k SEWER TO 0E MAINTAINED BY OWNER
VICINITY MAP
N.T S
GRAPHIC SCALE
30 60 0 30 120
1" = 30 FEET
OWNER:
GREENSBORO D/E/P, LLC
3411 RIChMOND AVENUE
SUITE 200
HOUSTON, TX 77046
PHONE: [phone]
CONTACT: CARL HUSMANN
email- Carl Husma Odnicdevelopers.com
1
0
Z Z
Z ?of z z
LLJ
i U W
ET_ >-
Z Z U)
'c W J
L!3
C t0
a�
C5
99 Z U O u
�f C z UL K
L ooZ
o p_ 3
ri �x
It�
W
W
Q i
a �
a tL�0Z
Uwx�a
d w z
N
Z Go a
M O
I�H
O
U
Figure E-2
SHEET 140
C.9A
OF 24
El

LEGEND: +� - �3 PRIVATE DIWNAGF CERTIFICATION NOTE:
BOUNDARY LINE _ - - ENGINEERS CERTI$'ICATE UPON REQUEST BY THE CITY OF GREENSBORO, THE
RDA N WAY
OT _ _ _ _ STORMWATER QUANTITY CONTROL
I AGHT OF LOT LINE - - ENGINEER OF RECORD WILL SUBMIT A CERTIFICATION
i EASEMENT U IE - - - - - m Water Quality Certification The stormwater management study Included with this AS TO CONSTRUCTION AND FUNCTIONAUTY FOR ALL
EX SING S-iTARY S-EP _wE --- - -- 3 -- The development shown on this plan is consistent with the Dicn Indicates that there will be no downstream flooding PRIVATE STORM DRAINAGE CONVEYANCE IN A
` u: "' 1,,11 s -- r provisions contained on the plan entitled "Cotton Mill Square" drainage. or erosion control problems as a result of tnis DEVELOPED SITE. DEVELOPERS SHOULD UNDERSTAND
EXISTNG NAT'-R LINE W
E]a SING FENC2 - X -- \ (2010-_)' by DMP, Inc. and therefore no additional d-Wprne-it between the p-L where the runoff d-hurges THAT IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT THE
89ILDUIC SETBACKDuontlty Control is required. from the property to where the site development represents DESIGN ENGINEER FOR ANY CHANGES MADE TO THE
Ew6TNG Sranv DRAMI -E _____------ ___ less tnon 10% of the total drainage area. Therefore, no APPROVED PLAN. FAILURE TO HAVE CHANGES
________________ i PROP3HTY vCCRNER!,Q t'S quan tdy control improvement s proposed APPROVED BY 1-IE CITY OF GREENSBORO CAN RESULT
Eis =n-nrr •earl SAYE ° IN A 'NOTICE OF VIOLATION- AND/OR A HOLD ON THE
5 IRON I - E- O /
EP E>JSTINC IPQV PIPE o CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
MONITORING Wf_L
"CGS MOt.VMENT
EAISDNG SANITARY SE'%ER MANHOLE
E,ISTING WATER VALVE r- M1J
E ISD,G =1PE Hn)RANT
.DLIT, c
R/`N I10T JMENT D -
WATER DRE -" W - Know what's below.
STORM SEWER LINE '
I SANITARY SEWER DNE - S Call before Du di
CONSTRUCTION STAKING NOTE a
CONSTRUCTION STAKING FOR ALL gg n!;irE's, S+ITFir
STRUCTURES SHALL BE BASED ON
LATEST BUILDING PLANS. DO NOT `
USE THIS PLAN TO STACK BUILDING
8
RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY NOTE: VICINITY 111A
NO OTHER CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE NORTH NT5.
CAROLINA RAILROAD CORRIDOR SHALL BE
DONE EXCEPT WHAT IS SHOWN ON PLAN
Y 9•
Dial 8.9.1
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C.9A FOR CONTINUATION
4y nr4Lpz��i I TOP 'NALL 363.0
do I I 54 f e SUR p1 3755 fr \i �i� I 804.5 it 6 SEGMENTED - GROUND 858.5/ ;
GE , CLUBNOUSE s o j' RETAINING WALLIII, I. I �I (� I�
.26
872.5 I I' `' TOP WALL BA3.0
1 $•
874.5 I T , „ I) r-7 ROUND 8 8.4 \y
l r I� �� �r r 877 5 f 1.�T-(tlh u��} , I ° � I' 58.5 ,Ai � �+ - `i' I '-"^'•
��
1
I W (, F • l F `-_ - 1 I `r`) I / r; 8 e4 5 I 1 _ _ _ _ TOP WAL 863.
3 / ' . ': Il GROUND 858.2 -
I� i IW(W! A
806 j �i r / r ,'rW) ir/ 1 i _ W I TOP 'W5LL
I , W' 5 1� _ - �874.5 3 '!• (POURRFErpD,�l�,��fr Ir,f� GROUND 8611Y1 1�_'
• W '� _ 876,0 ' I �t' _ _ - _ - 3''r / �T CONCR,e3TE,! ! t I . ' r; '� _ _ �1 I i �(_ GROUN�ITOP LL BfiO1.5
'W 53 d a - ( S3 '/ RETAININ�j(, It�'i.. +��l,',I o
U W r , WALL,jh 'fl ( .�
IY E s a �' 1' 1' 111 11 �,!tr, - Cry to j
Q w + 45 I r s 1 1,,, I,,,, ( ,,, ,II TOP WALL 76S it
N O I, sE 1 46 ( `,�}f(�;le, II,II'W Wr I, I;Wb�i; c0 GRO 869.5 11
r i T W 'lt T) f ,;IIiI ��/ TOP WAN/8705 `
GROUND 856 0
I 87 � - `_ _ ._ __-_ - 3 ",v Ij yr. 1 1 , ��1 �i1 lt� 8 If% i r: ! •
w
1 152 t w� w
I ( w _,..� i �d � � "'����\ ,' I � rr ,• `)OfIT � � � ,I I�..,
/872-3 `� '' s I TOR�WALL 870.5
I;; T r f
, , I / 3 -r✓, � �� w� �i � �• ss '„ ,I ,, � ! GR?UND 857.0It
�'_r', y TOP WALL 8705
75_ G UND 8570
I�-J,r��117I 50874 "
p
z
LU
z z
Z
w _j w
�
a-
V
LL1 Q
®
J
;f2
�
NT
N
azmq-
In2 J 3
zi
(
-
w
w
2I
IL^JD©©El©CST
N
w�2z��_-_cam
N
30 NIP / I W
w�'^®.`_= _ _ - j ;j ,s/�,o l�-�'`'� Z <
38
fl _ _ - _ _ - _ -=_- ti
E P��lY - 'f v -�. H
AND 868.0 _ I t r;'J (,V (yy ay
TOP'�..= 1,, w TOP 870.0 I I r o
v w w W OD 664.0 ( iZ Q
(POURED) CONCRF�TE TOP Q7 .0 Q v x
t I - �--�y TOP 8700 RETAMING WAL GN 30 I �� C", H
5 _ ;' "\ GND 8 5.4 l',. ,-�) NIPrn
° / a o
GRADING NOTES.,
I LANDINGS OUTSIDE ALL DOORS SHALL BE S12M PER NCBC
AND NO VOL, I-C. BE AT THE SAME ELEVATION AS THE FEE,
AND SHALL HAVE A MAY 2% SLOPE IN ANY OIRECTGN
INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL.
2 THE SLOPES IN THE H C FARMING SPACE/ACCESS AISLE AREA SHALL
NOT EXCEED 2% IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL
3 THERE SHALL BE LEVEL TURNING AREAS (VAX. 2% SLOPE IN ANY
DIRECTION INCLUDING IN PIE DIAGONAL) ON ALL SIDEWALKS WHEPE
WHERE AN INTERSECTING SDEWALK CONNECTS WITH IT
4 THERE SHALL BE NO DESIGNATED PEDESTRIAN ROJTES/SIDEWALKS
_ WITHIN THE SITE. EXCEPT YMERE LABELED AS A RAMP W1TH RAILS,
WHICH EXCEED A 5% SLOPE IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ANO A
AND A 2% CROSSLOPE.
5. ALL PEDESTRIAN ROJTES GREATER THAN 5% (1,20). IF ANY. ARE
x LABELED AS 'RAMPS SHOWING SLOPES, LEVEL LANDINGS AT TOP AID
i BOTTOM (MAX. Z7. SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE
DIAGONAL, RAIUNGS/GUARDP.AILS SHALL COMPLY W-,H NCBC AND
VOL I-C
6 ALL STAIRS SHALL HAVE SLIGHTLY SLOPED LAND'NGS (MAX 2% SLOPE
IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING iN THE DIAGONAL) AT THE TOP AND
30TTOM AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE NCBC AND VOL 1-C
7- STAIRS/STEPS WITH LESS THAN A 12ELEVATION CHANGE SHALL
CC'dPLY WITH NCBC 10012.7
B ALL CONSTRUCTTON SHALL BE TO CITY OF CREENSBGRO/
] NCDWO STANDARD
GENERAL NOTES: 1t
PPWiRFD Pu«wc
BJA CALCULATIONS wFJtE DONE USING COO 200E G15 & AN ACTUAL SURVEY
- eq u'xIrs
12+
(nz MRn6) + (xO Nxm - zz4 svACEs
12 ALL ACCESS WILL BE THROUGH CUFTON ROAD AND
21. PROVIDE 10' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN WATER & SEWER
PERFORMED BY BORUM WAGE & ASSOCIATES
1. TOTAL AREA = 74B,928 SF = I7 193! ACRES
Z. CURRENT ZONING. GO -PDT
3 09 697Q PG. 2538
- 3 eR uxlrs
O - x eR uws
(z4 UVKW e 0 7s /Mn'J - a] SPANS
(w uarsl . D s Nw0 - Eo �ACEs
HE IT STREETS. HEWITT STREET TO BE GATED AT
END OF CUL-DE-SAC.
ONES OR 18• VERTICAL SEPARATION PER NCDWQ STD
22. NO METERS WILL BE SET UNTIL ESM'TS ARE RECORDED
25. EXISTING BUILT UPON AREAS.
4 PS 174 PG I6
1,CEueHousE/POOL
ORS VI s) .07E oars) - SPACE6
]]] SPACES
13. ANY EXISTING CURB, GUTTER. &SIDEWALK THAT IS EITHER
23 SANITARY SEWER SERVICES THAT TIE INTO MANHOLES MU S DO SO
SITE = 834,499t S F. = 19.157 AC. = 100.00%
(PART)
5. PIN: 00-00-03DO-0-0017-00-001 PAP
1aTAL 16atI]tEa -
REQUIRED-CIcAPPM - 7 SPACES
DAMAGED OR NON -COMPLIANT, SHALL BE REPLACED AS
AT SHELF
BUILDING COVERAGE - 111,5583 SF - 2 561 AC = 13 369%
o'. THIS PROPCRT" DOES NOT UE `MP11N q FLOOD ZONE
'A6
PEGULM SPAG£e - ]]G 5vA¢5
PART OF THIS PROJECT.
14 ANY STRUCTURE TO BE MOVED SHAD- REQUIRE A
24 ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE TO CITY OF GREENSBORO/
PAVEVENT/SIDEWALK COVERAGE = 382.134* SF = B772 AC = 45790%
PER F.RM PANEL 375351 7844 J, DATED 6-18-07
7. SOIL- Ur (URBAN) & MuB (M4CKLENBURC URBAN)
GEMgJTION PERMIT FROM BUILDING INSPECTIONS
NCDWQ STANDARD
PERVIOUS COVERAGE - 340,8062 SF = 7824-AC. - 40-841%
B. LAND US-_
rPOIOm Pua«I
PEW- PARKING SPACES - M4
15 TOTAL NUMBER PROPOSED LOTS 3
16 EXISTING BUA- 493,692 SF - 14.334 AG (59 220
25. TANDEM BACKFLOWS ARE REQUIRED IF
27. PROPOSED BUILT UPON AREAS:
AC
S.BUILDING SETBACKS
FROM PUBDC STREETS` 8' MIN
-IX -Es PARIWIG
SPACES - a
17 PROPOSED 9UA: 500,866 SF - 11.498 AC 60 02%)
(
MULTIPLE USERS
BUILDING COVERAGE - 214. 91t SF - ; 926 AC = 25.714%
SIDE & REAR YARDS : 20' MIN
RE- C-11T ;PACES - 54
1-1wPPEe tARPDRT -01M - 6
18 HANDICAP SPACES/ACCESS AISLES ARE TO BE PAVED
PAVEMENT COVERAGE = 231,6495 S F e 5 318 AC - 27 760%
10 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION TAKEN FROM
TOTAL PMMHG PROIDID
- E]] SPACES
19 ALL LANDINGS SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 2% ROPE IN ANY
ROAD COVERAGE - 54,6263 S.F. - 1.254 AC. = 6.546%
SURVEY BY HUGH CREED ASSOCIATES. INC., PA CONSULTING
DIRECTION
PERVIOUS COVERAGE - 3}3,633t S F 7.659 AC = 39 980%
& LAND SURVEYORS. DATED 6-5-2010
20. ALL PRIVATE ON SITE WATER & SEWER TO BE MAINTAINED BY OVMER
VJ �
__ z
U
GRAPHIC SCALE a', z
m U
z Do
30 60 0 30 120 Q 0
1' = 30 FEET v i-
O
OWNER:
Figure E-3
GREENSBORO D/E/P, LLC
SHEET NQ.
3411 RICHMOND AVENUE
SUITE 200
HOUSTON, TX 77046
PHONE' [phone]
C,9B
CONTACT: CARL HUSMANN
email' Carl.Husmann§dmcdevelopers.com
OF -a

LEGEND: BOVNDARYY LINE
RIGHT OF WAY
ADJACENT LOT L'NE
EASEMENT
E UI'.
El STINn AIIITARY ER N
S S_ _ L _
EXISTING 'W47ERrLITIF
EXISn"o PENCE
X %
_ J',C=-.P�lI L zi nip
BUILDING`SETBACK
PROPElG STORM ORAN PIPE
PROPERTY CORNER
------------------'----___-__
a5 FIDNI ST KE S 6-111E
ISS IRON STARE SE-
a
a
rIP .,. -XISTI NG IRON PIKE
VELL
x
IJCCS MONUMENT
NCCS MONU
j\
E•1-1 z-I _IrHT •I
EXISTING SM411ARY SE'P£R MANH0_E
GENERAL NO=
tt
n =
ace Ar �N -
12 ALL ACCESS VALL BE THROUGH CLIFTCN ROA) AND
21. PROVIDE 10' HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BEMSEN WAIER & SEWER
BUA CALCULATIONS SERE DOVE COG 2008 GIS & AN ACTUAL SURVEY I
TOTAL AREA - .. 17 3 AO -
1 0 L E id8 326 SF 193 a
ev U•-tr (11± UNNS1 . I- /-T)
2a - ! ea Von 2a aMirs + ( ) (t 75 Nx1Y)
- 221 SPatFs
-a2 aACEs
-`[RiiT TO BE AT
HE STREETS HEIITi > GATED
LINES OR 18' VERTICAL SEPARATION PER NCDWO STO
LNE>
PERFORM D CR N
E BY B U WADE &ASSOCIATES
ASSOCIATES.
2 CURRENT ZONING Y13-PDT
M - ? ea UM urns) + (r s /Vr.NI
ao ands
END OF CULL -OE -SAC.
12 NO METERS WILL BE SET UNTIL EBIA'TS ARE RECORDED
26 Er6TI`1G gull T UPON AREAS
1 D 5 fi876, PC 2516
1-aLCllal;E/4CR V/26 UIe ;) x (::8 Ural
- ) sPnCEs
13. ANY EXISTING CJRB, GUTTER & 90EWALK THAT IS EEITHER
23 SANITARY SEH'ER SERNFFS THAT 11E INTO MANHOLES MUST 00 50
4 P9 174 PG 16
5 PIN 00-00- -NOT ( P0.P
oraL FEtt�PEo
DAMAGED OR NON-COMPUANT, SHAL BE REPLACED AS
AT SHELF
SIT = 834, 398� 6F. 19.ISJ AC = TOO CO.
6UILDING COVERAGE = ItL558x SF. = 2581 AC 133699.
US -O01
6 TN15 PROPERTY GOES NOT US :ATH,N A FLOOD ZONE
Y DOE
Ealw� uMwcaaPFa
PEww! aACES
7 gnCEs
ue mncFs
PR ECT PART 0- TH S C.
RECTION
24 ALL OF SHALL BE TO CITY Or [YLEElISdORO
a = 8.%/'L
AS PER FlRM PANG 7344 J, DATED 8-18-07
A
14. ANY STRUCTURE ER TO BE MOVED I N IN
DEMOLITION PERMIT FROM BUILDING
NCDWO STANDARD
PAVEMENT
n•J?JES'COVERA'_K COVERAGE = 3F. - 7; 4 AC 45.790R
COVERAGE 340,805t SF. _ ]824 AC - 40841R
M,q
7 SOIL Ur (URBAN) & MuB (MECKLENBURG URBAN)
P xKixc
3INSPECTI0.N6.
16. TOTAL NUMBER PROPOSED :075: 3
26 TANDEM BACKFLOW6 ARE REQUIRED IF
a LAND USE WG2
Ew1u+ vaagnG EPaeE6 - 5sa
r1-
S
1fi. EXISTING BUA 493 e92 SF = Ia 334 AC (59 2x)
MULTIPLE USERS
27. PROPOSED BUILT UPON AREAS.
9 B'3ILOING SETBACKS
FROM PU9UC STREETS' 8' IN
HumiC,vPE6 PMXNG `sAce` a
`D- --T
17 PROPOSED RUA 500,266 SF = 11 498 AC (8002%)
_
BUILDING CCOVERAGVEPAGE = 2231.64 • S r 4 AC ^a7.760
SINE &REAR YARDS 20' YIN
S NXS - S6
H-11P. c N, E^ACE6 - e
I8 HANDICAP SPACES ACCES AISLES ARE TO BE PAVED
/
P4VENENT COVERAGE = 231,649f SF- = 5318 AC - 27.ToDZ
- 5 31
10 BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC NFORMATION TAKEN FROM
TainE Pavlov, RlaleEa - eJJ S+AU3
19. ALL LANDINGS SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 2% SLOPE W ANY
COVERAGE - 54,528: S.F. = 1.254 6548x
SUR`VE BY HUGH CREED ASSOCIATES. INC, PA CONSULTING
DIRECTION
=0A0
AC
ERNOUS COVERAGE = 333,631} SF. = i. v9 AC. = 39.980R
& LAND SURVEYORS, DATED 6-5-2010
20. AL PRIVATE ON SITE WATER & SEWER TO BE MAINTAINED BY OME0.
J
EXISTING WATER VALVE p4
EXISTING FIRE HTRANT
R/i umuLt fir p ��ryyy
WATER ALINESEW RLINE
1 SANITARY SEY/ER UNE S W - N �� A' _�_�_= ±� -- _
- ' ' NSW; rr - - _ '" ,`- w• __ �
PRIVATE DRAINAGE CERTIFICATION NOTE. �� - 1 w w
UPON REQUEST BY THE CITY OF GREENSBORO, THE O _ _�i
FI.IGINEER OF RECORD RILL SUBMIT A CERTIFICATION
AS TO CONSTRUCTION AND FUNCTIONALITY FOR ALL
PRIVATE STORM DRAINAGE CONVEYANCE IN A
DEVELOoED SITE DEVELOPERS SHOULD UNDERSTA14D
THAT IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTACT THE
DESIGN ENGINEER FOR ANY CHANGES MADE TO THE
APPROVED PLAN. FAILURE TO HAVE CHANGES
APPROVED BY THE CITY OF GREENSBORO CAN RESULT fr111-Ire 1
IN A "NOTICE OF VIOLATION- AND/OR A HOLD ON THE �)IL I' r lxJ 115�
_ ~
CERITIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. `e'
I I I I I
ENGINEERS CERTIFICATE a / �T' - - - ) 8625
STORb4WATER QUANTITY CONTROL T �2. 7 ? 600
The stormwote- management study Included with th's -� 1• I 1 GND 860.0 / i, 3 ' I
plan indicates that there will be no downstream flooding I I' `• - _S(Y HC % 11
croinage, or erosion control problems as a result of this
development between the point where the runoff discharges
Porn the property to where the site development represents
less than 10% of the total drainage area. Therefore, no
cucnti[y control Improvement Is proposed.
6ea61
7�c
3tW, _3 5
854 5 n N
Water Quality Certification 6a6 9 v £
The development shown on this plan is consistent with the _ '\t R8a15t CJ
provisions contained on the plan entitled -Cotton Mill Square"-
(2010-_)" by DMP. Inc and therefore no additional I \\. `. - ` • \` � i4
Quantity Control Is required. X v ° chi`, a ,.,, 'c1 •i
\
.Y T GND 850.8
CONSTRUCTION STAKING NOTE
CONSTRUCTION STAKING FOR ALL t' t
maw
.i
G
6
C - -
g u
4
= 5 •r)Mxi L--� i�
+ ; ' SITE z z
a Z z
VICINITY MAP z _j LU
Z z (n
Uj Q
29 %;;��'
- 30 _ �' �� % NIP i Q�
� o
869.5 i / -�I, "I -ya � o z a^o w
y _ GNO 8680 Q o V
T1111111%E-i.6()
•x TOP 870.0 5V W yY �- 'n -'� GND 864 0 3 f� / ® s co " -I 3
(POURED) CONCREETE =
TOP 870.0 RETAINING WAL - f GN o3 0 I
GND 885
M ,� s
7 7 B e g
Ia62S
7 5
_
I ' / f"
I,i L?i1 I oo�. aq u060.0
s
858. •,' I7'!' II ('" g m
858.5
o
1 1'I 8 0 f 3 11
1 -_ I I 0 J I!� 1 TOP 856.5
62 YY 7 GND 855.0
1 /
860.0 ~� 14 _ s ;� TOP 856 5
(f--1 o% _ \ r:_t -� _ ' i GND 853.0
STRUCTURES SHALL BE BASED ON _6'{ • t\TOP 861 5
LATEST BUILDING PLANS. DO NOT +~ - '� \ \W W GND 8494 I `! ty So. x I
USE THIS PLAN TO STACK BUILDING \ ` T• 1 S _ - -i TOP 857.5
GNO 853 0
TOP 859.0
1 '•\ `\ \ t• W M ,S�.. ONO 851.0
LIJ
RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY NOTE: N, Al '` # 6 4 / ' TOP 859.0 Z ill
,W t r / TOP 851.0 ONG 853.0 �-'
NO OTHER CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE NORTH I � \ �'�., /, , t \ •, 1 ��-1 •--�.%"' � GND s5t.0 _
CAROLINA RAILROAD CORRIDOR SHALL BE ` W,W; `. 1N la -"�✓
FJP 86110 \ W \ a II 1 i \ % (POURED) CONCRETE ,t''1 XA 1•�` a" 0- z
DONE EXCEPT WHAT IS SHOWN ON PLAN. C D 84a+d '\ \ _ _ 1 �) 1� �� TOP 859.0 �T--IG WALL
\ \ \,\ GND 850.0
its l
a TO
846.
ND 86.t1
\ \ \ X \ I TOP 859.0
' GRADING NOTES' \ \\N \ \ \ \ 1 t ,' _ GND 853.0
\ 7 v�
0 1 LANDINGS OUTSIDE ALL ODORS SHALL LE ATIO PER HE F \ ` t \ 8`I?9.�J•
- AND NC VOL 1-C. DE AT THE SAME ELEVATION AS THE FEE, •, .`e-
> AND SHALL HAVE A MAX. 2% SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION `\\
eINCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL-
2 THE SLOPES IN THE H C PARKING SPACE/ACCESS AISLE AREA SHALL \ ,'1 T• ��`
n TOP 860.0,
NOT EXCEED 2.. IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE DIAGONAL
GtYD 844 0 _
a 3 THERE SHALL BE LEV1 TURNING AREAS (MAX 2% SLOPE ANY TOP 959.0
\ \ ` \�
DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THES DIACONAL) QV ALL SIDEIYALKWHERE
\
WHERE AN INTERSECTING SDEWAUK CONNECTS WITH IT ` GND 852.0
4 THERE SHALL BE NO DESIGNATED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES/SIDEWALKS 4+ 1
WITHIN THE SIZE, E%CEPT WHERE LABELED AS A RAMP MTH RAILS, W \,
WHICH EXCEED A 5•^. SLOPE IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND A \ \ S 'W,T (TO BE REMOVED)
AND A 2% CROSSLCPE \ 30' BEND
5. ALL PEDESTRIAN ROJTES GREATER THAN 5% (1.20), IF Y, ARE \ STA 42.5 45
AN
LABELED AS 'RAMPS' SMO•'AING SLOPES. LEVEL LANDINGS AT -OP AND V \ IN V 62.SG
_ BOTTOM (MAY. Z7. SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE
\
DIAGONAL), RAIUNGS/GJARDRAILS SHALL COMPLY WITH NCBC ANO11 \ EX $$h11 t
VOL I-C. TOP 860.0 8
6 ALL STAIRS SHALL HAVE SLIGHTLY SLOPED LANDINGS (MAX. 2% SLOPE GND 843.0 \\ \ EXPINV. I IN0835 67
,! IN ANY DIRECTION INCLUDING IN THE 01 ED AL) AT THE TOP AND \
BOTTOM AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE NCBC AND VCL 1-C. ` INN CUT 830 39
7 STAIRS/STEPS WW LESS THAN A 12- ELEVATION CHANGE SHALL
COMPLY WITH NCBC 1003.27
8. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE TO CITY OF GREENSBORO/ ,
NCDWO STANDARD
>C72009 DOTS-MarOn 'o JI & Aeso-t- Inc
/ TOP 859.0 \,yYy7yj��
ONO 852.0 \�
�00
5. a
Know what's below.
Cali before you dig.
Dial 8-1.1
z
LJJ 0.'I a
¢�HS0
wit
GRAPHIC SCALE
W 9 Q
30 so 0 30 120
-j Z
7" = 30 FEET a
F4
: 0 W
z DO w
v
u
OWNER:
Figure E-4
GREENSBORO D/E/P, LLC
,-
3411 RICHMOND AVENUE
SHEET NO.
SUITE 200
HOrJSTTX 7704
�
/
PHONE: (
PHONE: [phone]
C,ID
O
CONTACT' CARL HUSMANN
amoB- Carl Hunmann9dmcdevelopers com

0.56 1
-
�( MAIN BUILDING(BRICK) - j A'z1o� 1
ne 3 1
1 w->o5
— - .., �w-•soave aos PMW-1 w 2oa
0 �40.19�1�-�0� ,�,
i 1- f _--fwfaal ow;w-��'`iWaoa <7
w r s - �O• r�n-oa�a�� - 1
10,E iw zcc �W-anr PMW-02
`100 TMVV-1 r 6,472 1
✓1 # M LD�
ING�t BRICK) �, 149,808-ow-ia•a2 ' - 1
I rh flW-C6-.1t
t ' ��ti • iW-2OiZone
MW-36-s 1,783,40
��MW-04-s � 1
110.88 . - � IW-202 o 2,508.7
/ 1
MWM_.37-s - 75�420 I ��
19,760 i 9- f)W o2 a i o v a7 , MW-14-s 1
gyp` `f-FgRMER 53.4
1,
II e} as $� �.��� 2 9069.. 9H O UT
Zone 2 -Z _ e 4 , .
IR 1
ow os m O00 w-aoa� M W,13-s 1
1 iW 2na
ovd-�o-a1 �O 243.9 1
1� ow oa if r MW-28-s
j0 ' C\ +3.5 1
MW 03-s 1
w o r 112 1
one;5-
„
t , Qew soa �.0
,h E-1
SO Zone 6
0 1
'0 DIV I I I! 1
iDW-1?-rfi
o
t� ,W.w o ,
iw soz " tw ao5
oov �3 d+ NVM,
t1V7 is az w 3or
ON 301
10 di
DIN 181 -
MW 5,, -.
Legend
z Extraction Well
Injection Well
0 Recharge Well
Saprolite Monitor Well
+ Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
+ Bedrock Monitor Well
Inferred Total cVOC
Concentration Contour
— — Property Boundary
112 Total cVOC concentration (ug/L)
Scale in Feet
0 200 400
Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure E-5
Approximate Total cVOC
Distribution in Groundwater
October 2012
Saprolite Unit
Cotton Mill, Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
File: Y:\CMS\MXD\Oct12_GW Saprolite.mxtl, 5/20/2013 4:23-1 1 NM, gonna

r
; l;
� J -
- MAIN BUILDING (BRICK)
. - • �w,:o�: 11, ,1
1 ._ ItV, 40t Q tti
I BUILDING (BRICK)
1
MVd 3G r, 2Ut
f: i -
I
O 1 i
F ER
o)w-; / d2 M
` A
R "''D4' AIR
�• � "� EW bOH:- _ -e�i
UW 69 s op Zone
� Iw-,>os
�- 10dl
1 - EW-510
4,957
1 �
Zone 5
o E
EW-502
9.1
00
O 7
EW-501 i
ew <b . ��� 05,62400
1 .. �! o00
N�
MW-46-i
3.7 �L
MW-50-i
ND
-J
"I \ 1.1`N0a- '
N 507
i.06 /� 1
�0
O
C.V111 Ji �
-tZ-
VV-a0t
1.01
I;N' 11 dI
I
Legend
z Extraction Well
- Injection Well
0 Recharge Well
Saprolite Monitor Well
Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
~>- Bedrock Monitor Well
Inferred Total cVOC
Concentration Contour
132 Total cVOC concentration (ug/L)
Scale in Feet
0 200 400
r 1 -=mod Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure E-6
Approximate Total cVOC
Distribution in Groundwater
October 2012
Intermediate Unit
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
e: Y:\CMSWIXD\Octoberl2_gv _Intermediate.mxd, 5/21/2013 10:27:04 AM, johna

: J,
1% W E
?10
MAIN BUILDING (BRICIQ - T° I o 1
o
w4pv J,C+iq ,� 1
�rW.402 ate 1W ao� j r �,+rnW.,s?� rry cos
- - kW 40f CTWd Ot dt !W 404 �•`� :i C'i �F'-6�?Ud1 �fd�W 18�i i
r - NV•505 IW A07 G TY Phti �
0 o DW-05-d1 DW-06-d1 1
- _ Q 59 690 1
MAIN B�- ING (BRICKi� 1.1
s° one
W 20, _ DW-1.4-d2 i
VJ 3b �00 95,618 taw n 1
. .02
—cly- �
t f I °F MW-37 r, T I • 'W-2a 1
07
DW-17??�°2/ `�1 • 00/ r hVv 5? <;� 1
0
-`4,A ! 1 FORMER '�• I•ttN'3-sAUTO
1
-� O
• -IEVJ50aI REPAIR 1
00 DW-09<:9--'v 5°' I SHOP Zone 2
D- ne 4
V1F10 d1 IW 203 i_ 1V) Poo 1
ND1 �DW-03=d1 1
CW-5t 0
O
o 1
RS_W-03, 1.
O Li, 50 /1
1
O
1 ` Zone 5
♦
J
� .E ew.5s2
I
1
LJ eo, i „ ®� �RN�a�R0
i
Zo e 6 N 4,0111-d1 DV1h15 d1
✓, 4� , � .� , - _ ., ND
-�-n•J+ rz ,r, �o
Em
Legend
R Extraction Well
Injection Well
o Recharge Well
+ Saprolite Monitor Well
+ Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
Bedrock Monitor Well
Inferred Total cVOC
Concentration Contour
— — Property Boundary
4,011 Total cVOC concentration (ug/L)
Scale in Feet
0 200 400
I Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure E-7
Approximate Total cVOC
Distribution in Groundwater
October 2012
Bedrock Unit
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
I
rue: r:%L;mJxmxu\Uctlz_Gw_Bedrock.mxd, 5/21/201311:05:08AM, johna

z�gers, Michael
From: Rogers, Michael
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:56 AM
To: 'Kane, David'; Qi, Qu
Cc: Sharon,iCihak;sMotani, Jay; Kathy Roush; Eliason, W. Mark; Mackey, Edward
Subject: W 00 6621 fto otton Mill Update- Sampling Revision
Based upon QQ's recommendation, your request to revise the sampling schedule is approved.
Regards
From: Kane, David[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:52 AM
To: Qi, Qu <[e-mail]>
Cc: Sharon Cihak <[e-mail]>; Motwani, Jay <[e-mail]>; Kathy Roush
<[e-mail]>; Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>; Mackey, Edward
<[e-mail]>; Rogers, Michael <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Cotton Mill Update
Thanks so much! We will move forward combining the events.
Senior Project Manager
Weston Solutions
Office - [phone]
Mobile — [phone]
David. [e-mail]
Sri
$SOLUTIONS
If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be.
Now put the foundations under them.
from the "Conclusion" to Walden, Henry Thoreau
From: Qi, Qu [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 10:43 AM
To: Kane, David <[e-mail]>
Cc: Sharon Cihak <[e-mail]>; Motwani, Jay <[e-mail]>; Kathy Roush
<[e-mail]>; Eliason, W. Mark <W.M.Eliason WestonSolutions.com>; Mackey, Edward
<[e-mail]>; Rogers, Michael <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Cotton Mill Update
David
I think it's a good idea to combine these two sampling events into one. I have forwarded your e-mail to Mike Rogers
with the DWR, who is in charge of the underground injection permit program, for his approval for this minor schedule
change. I have called Mike and he is fine with this modification.
1

Mike: The open permit # WQ0036621 is for monitoring associated with the vegetable oil injection at the site. ThanV-;1,
�,
Qu Qi, LG
Central Region Unit Supervisor
Inactive Hazardous Site Branch — SF Section - DWM
Department of Environmental Quality
919 707 8213 office
gu.gi(a-)-ncdenr.gov
217 West Jones Street
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Kane, Davidfmailto: David. [e-mail]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 9:58 AM
To: Qi, Qu <[e-mail]>
Cc: Sharon Cihak <[e-mail]>; Motwani, Jay <[e-mail]>; Kathy Roush
<[e-mail]>; Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>; Mackey, Edward
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Cotton Mill Update
Qu,
I just wanted to let you know that Weston finally has approval and green light to move forward with the installation of
the final off site monitoring well for Cotton Mill site. We are scheduled to install this well on 4/27 with sampling of all 8
off site wells to be conducted late the following week (15t week of May).
On a related note; we are also required by to sample the 7 permit wells on site by the end of April with results to be
provided to the State by end of May.
Would it be acceptable to conduct this sampli`ngirl�LLa_, =on�urrent�wifh="smpliri of the 8 off site wells? It would
reduce the equipment and personnel costs to do both at the same time. We would still report the results by the end of
May deadline. If this is unacceptable just let me know and I will be sure to schedule the permit well sampling before the
end of the month.
Please advise at your convenience.
Best Regards,

IV Sdrnior Project Manager
Weston Solutions
Office - [phone]
Mobile — [phone]
[e-mail]
st
�r
5G1LtITEC1l+1S.
If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be.
Now put the foundations under them.
from the "Conclusion" to Walden, Henry Thoreau
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

Rogers, Michael
From: a g, Shuyying
Sent: onday,�-Jul 18 2016
To: Saum, Kristopher
Cc: Motwani, Jay; Eliason, W. Mark; Watts, Debra; Rogers, Michael; Knight, Sherri
Subject: Re: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square
Site for permit #WQ0036621.
Attachments: Shuying Wang Fe resp July 2016.pdf, Permit wells Fe - historical data.pdf, Lab Fe
datapack for DEQ Ite.pdf
Dear Mr. Saum,
I have reviewed -the attached letter and data. Based on the data, the elevated concentrations of iron detected in the
monitoring wells mentioned in previous email do not appear to be resulted from injections performed under the subject
permit.
Thank you very much for the provided information!
Shuying Wang, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
450 W Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq
Nothing Comparesr,,-
E-►nail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Saum, Kristopher [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 3:03 PM
To: Wang, Shuying <[e-mail]>
Cc: Motwani, Jay <[e-mail]>; Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
1

Shuying,
Please find our cover letter and the data that you requested for the Cotton Mill Square Project.
Please call me with questions.
Thank you for your patience with our response.
5Z ziej� Saaw
Senior Project Manager
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
P.O. Box 2653
West Chester, PA 19380
Phone: [phone]
Mobil: 610-662-6957
FAX: [phone]
�C.S�nlll!ti`
From: Wang, Shuying[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 9:01 AM
To: Saum, Kristopher <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
It is OK with me. Thanks for informing me!
Shuying Wang, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
450 W Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/­wq
Nt�c& Nothing Compares
2

E-mail correspondence to and froG is address may be subject to the North,—, lina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Saum, Kristopher [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 8.51 AM
To: Wang, Shuying <[e-mail]>
Cc: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>; Motwani, Jay <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
Good morning, Shuying.
We are still assembling the information that you requested and will get the data package next week.
Please call me with questions.
Thank you.
5ZV em c sa: cw
Senior Project Manager
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
P.O. Box 2653
West Chester, PA 19380
Phone: [phone]
Mobil: 610-662-6957
FAX: [phone]
)
From: Wang, Shuying[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 11:15 AM
To: Saum, Kristopher <[e-mail]>
Cc: Mackey, Edward<[e-mail]>; Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>;
Knight, Sherri <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
Hi Mr. Saum,
Due to traffic or road constructions, I have just got in office for a few minutes . The field inspection went well and
quickly. No noncompliance issue was noted. All injection wells and monitoring wells related to this permit have been
properly maintained.
As part of this inspection, monitoring reports received since last inspection were reviewed. As we discussed in the field,
elevated iron concentrations were found in several monitoring wells that are located at or outside compliance
boundary. I need to know whether iron was ever analyzed for MW-36-s, DW-10-d1, EW-511, DW-02-d1, MW-13-s, MW-
3

14-s and DW-06-d1 before injections 60ribucted under this permit. If yes, could yo;;'N,°tease provide me some previous
groundwater sampling results (any reports, part of a report or just lab analyses will be fine) prior to this permit issued o '
the first injection event conducted under this permit? This will help me a lot in determining whether this is a 2L violation
caused from activities conducted under this permit.
If you have any questions, please call or email me. Thank you!
Shuying Wang, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: (.336) 403-5429
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
450 W Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq
K!`Z�.
--:'-'Nothing Compares — ,---
E-mail E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Saum, Kristopher [mailto:[e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 10:02 AM
To: Wang, Shuying <[e-mail]>
Cc: Mackey, Edward<[e-mail]>; Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
Good morning.
have heard from Ed Mackey about this morning's inspection. From our end, everything went smoothly and we
appreciate your help with this site.
I wanted to follow-up with you and see if there was anything else that you needed from us to complete the inspection
from your end.
Please call me or e-mail me with questions.
Thank you.
�a tbA, e sa"M
4

Senioryroject Manager —
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
P.O. Box 2653
West Chester, PA 19380
Phone: [phone]
Mobil: 610-662-6957
FAX: [phone]
1 FS11�`�i
From: Wang, Shuying[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 8:57 AM
To: Saum, Kristopher <[e-mail]>
Cc: Motwani, Jay <[e-mail]>; Mackey, Edward<[e-mail]>;
Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>; Knight, Sherri <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]
Subject: RE: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
I will be there (the utility shed) at 9:00 nest Tuesday (6/16/16) to meet Ed Mackay. Thank you!
Shuying Wang, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: Shuying.Wang@ncderingov
450 W Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq
a Nothing Compares-,,
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Saum, Kristopher [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 3:13 PM
To: Wang, Shuying <[e-mail]>
Cc: Motwani, Jay <Jay.Motwani @WestonSolutions.com>; Mackey, Edward<[e-mail]>;
Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>; Knight, Sherri <[e-mail]>;
5

1 1
[e-mail] -
Subject: Thursday 6/16/16 - 9 AM - Compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621.
Good afternoon, Shuying.
My name is Kris Saum.
I have taken over the Project Management responsibilities for this project from Mr. Steve Johnson who has retired as of
the beginning of May 2016.
We would like to schedule the routine site inspection for permit #WQ0036621 for Thursday 6/16/16 at 9 AM.
Your point of contact will be Ed Mackey— [phone]. He will meet you at the site.
Please call me with questions.
Senior Project Manager
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
P.O. Box 2653
West Chester, PA 19380
Phone: [phone]
Mobil: 610-662-6957
FAX: [phone]
Hi Steve,
It is time to schedule another routine compliance inspection at the former Cotton Mill Square Site for permit
#WQ0036621. I will be available next Tuesday (6/14), Thursday (10/16, morning only), and Friday (6/17), Please let me
know what day and time will work better for you. If you are not available, you can send anyone who is familiar with the
permit conditions and the system operation and maintenance there to meet me. I will be checking whether all permit
conditions are met during the inspection. Copy of the permit and 0&M records should be available at the site. All
components (monitoring wells, injection well, etc.) of the system should be operated and maintained properly.
Look forward to hearing from you!
Shuying Wang, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

450 W Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

Weston solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
610-701-3000 • Fax [phone]
• • ® www.westonsolutions.com
Ms. Shuying Wang, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
450 W Haines Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Re: Cotton Mill Square Project Site (Site)
Groundwater Incident Number (GWI No.) 86346
Submittal of Historic Groundwater Iron Concentration Data
Dear Ms. Wang:
15 July 2016
Weston Solutions, Inc. (WESTON®) would like to take this opportunity to thank you and
the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) for your time during
the site inspection to review the site conditions in observance of permit conducted at the
former Cotton Mill Square project site conducted on June 16, 2016. WESTON
appreciates your observation that the site was free of any compliance issues and that all
injection and monitoring wells have been properly maintained.
In response to the request for historical groundwater iron concentration data from the
seven wells included in Permit #WQ0036621 (MW-36-s, DW-10-dl, EW-511, DW-02-
dl, MW-13-s, MW-14-s and DW-06-dl), all groundwater iron concentration data
collected from these wells since 2008 is provided as Table 1. The laboratory analytical
data sheets are provided as Attachment 1.
NCDEQ has requested the iron data to determine if the application of remedial fluids
conducted in December 2013 and August 2014 resulted in increased iron concentrations
at remedial area boundary wells. The October 2013 and December 2013 monitoring
events were conducted prior to the December 2013 remedial fluid application and can
therefore serve as part of the baseline data set.
There is no indication of any impact to iron concentrations in relation to the remedial
fluid applications. Wells DW-2, DW-6(dl), DW-10(dl), MW-36(s), and EW-511 show
iron concentrations that are similar before and after the remedial applications.
Monitoring well MW-14s, which indicates maximum iron concentration over the period
April 2012 through April 2014, has exhibited these concentration both before and after
the remedial applications indicating that there was no technically identifiable impacts
from the application.
YMoldecsk-UL Cotton MUMCDEQ Communicatiom\Shuying Wang Fe resp July 2016.doc

SOLUTIONS.
Ms. Shuying Wang
North Carolina NCDEQ
15 July 2016
Page 2
In addition, analytical results from well MW-13 (s) indicate that higher iron
concentrations are traditionally present during the spring monitoring events and even the
highest concentration of 68 mg/l is in the comparable range of previously collected data
sets including the concentration of 45 mg/L detected from the April 2010 monitoring
event, or the 30 mg/L detections from October 2012, and the post injection data collected
in April 2016 of 25 mg/l.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 610-701-3971.
Very truly yours,
WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.
Kristopher Saum
Senior Project Manager
cc: Jai Motwani - WESTON
YAFolders.G-LT\Cotton Mill\NCDEQ CommunicationAhuying Wang Fe Tesp July 2016.doc

Table 1
Injection Permit Number WQ0036621 Groundwater Iron Monitoring Results
Former Cotton Mill Project Site, Greensboro, North Carolina
Location
Sample
Date
Iron, Total
mgll
Iron, Dissolved
mgll
DW-2
Dec-13
0.17 JB
Mar-14
0.22
Sep-14
0.065 J
Apr-15
2.1
Oct-15
1.0
Apr-16
0.2 U
DW-06(d1)
Dec-13
0.16 JB
Mar-14
0.20 U
Se -14
0.14 J
Apr-15
0.26
Oct-15
0.2 U
Apr-1 6
0.38
DW-10(d1)
Oct-13
0.11 J
Apr-1 4
0.13 J
Se -14
0.084 J
Apr-15
0.19 J
Oct-15
0.17 J
Apr-16
0.84
MW-13(s)
Oct-08
1.5
A r-09
Oct-09
*
4.4
Apr-10
45
24
Oct-10
14
9.5
Apr-11
2.4
0.16 J
Oct-11
1.5
Apr-12
11
9.1
Oct-12
30
28
Apr-13
11 B
7.1 B
Oct-13
18
Mar-14
68
Se -14
12
Apr-15
17
Oct-15
8.0
Apr-16
25

Table 1
Injection Permit Number W00036621 Groundwater, Iron Monitoring Results
Former Cotton Mill Project Site, Greensboro, North Carolina
MW-14(s)
Ma -08
0.1 U
0.1 U
Oct-08
9.3
0.046 J
A r-09
16
Oct-09
14
8.7
Apr-10
13
13
Oct-10
7.7
8.1
Apr-11
1 5.2
5.2
Oct-11
*
19
Apr-12
30
30
Oct-12
32
31
Apr-13
29 B
29 B
Oct-13
24
A r-14
32
Se -14
20
Apr-15
18
Oct-15
16
Apr-16
11
MW-36(s)
Oct-13
0.080J
Mar-14
0.19 J
Se -14
0.22
Apr-1 5
0.2 U
Oct-15
1.1
Apr-1 6
0.2 U
EW-511
Feb-08
2.6
Oct-08
6.5
A r-09
1
0.02
Oct-09
0.047
'
Apr-10
0.09
Oct-10
0.4
0.2 U
Apr-11
0.28
Oct-11
0.4
Apr-12
3.1
Oct-12
0.091 J
Apr-13
0.2 U
Dec-13
0.18 JB
Mar-14
0.20 U
Se -14
0.044 J
A r-15
0.75
Oct-15
1 0.2 U
Apr-16
I 0.19 J
Note:
U - Analyte not detected at or above reporting limit.
J - estimated value.
* - not anlyzed.

COVER PAGE
METALS dL
Lab Name: TestAmerica Chicago Job Number: 500-110960-1
SDG No.:
Project: Cotton Mill Square Project
Client Sample ID
DW-06-DI
MW-14S
MW-13S
MW-36S
DW-10-Dl
EW-511
Comments:
Lab Sample ID
500-110960-1
500-110960-2
500-110960-3
500-110960-4
500-110960-5
500-110960-6
500-110960-7
Page 290 of 701 05/16/2016

vv 3 6 i
2P 1 3
Goodrich, David
From:
Goodrich, David
Sent:
Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:47 PM
To:
'Eliason, W. Mark'
Cc:
Wang, Shuying; Knight, Sherri
Subject:
RE: Recission of Old Permit WQ0029385 and issuance of New Groundwater
Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for notifying us of your intended setup for injection on December 9th. Your email satisfies the notification
requirement, and I am forwarding this correspondence to Shuying Wang and Sherri Knight at our Winston-Salem
Regional Office.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Division of Water Resources
From: Eliason, W. Mark fmailto:W.M.Eliason(a)WestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:27 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Cc: scihaKbco.Quilford.nc.us
Subject: �RE: Recission of Old Permit WQ0029385 and issuance of New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
We are planning to pickup material, setup and potentially initiate injection under Permit WQ0036621 on Monday the 9th
of December. Please confirm that this notice would satisfy the notification requirement and if anyone else should be
alerted. The_,incident manager for this site, Sharon Cihak (Guilford County), is copied on the notification as she also
expressed interest in potentially observing the application.
Site cell phone will be 610-715-0876.
TY
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
W.M. Eliason(aD_WestonSolutions.com
From: Goodrich, David[mailto:david.goodrich(abncdenr.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 11:57 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: Recission of Old Permit WQ0029385 and issuance of New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Programs
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder
Governor ' Director .
November 22, 2013
Jaikishen N. Motwani — Vice President/Principal Client Service Manager
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
Subject: Groundwater Remediation Permit Number .'�QQ0662=1�`"
Cotton Mill Square Site (CMS)
Guilford County
Dear Mr. Motwani:
Resources
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
In accordance with your request for permit issuance received June 26, 2013, we are forwarding herewith Permit No.
WQ0036621, dated• ovenlb-er 261B1, to Weston Solutions, Inc., for the operation of the subject groundwater
remediation facility.
This permit shall be effective from the date of is uane une til90ctober3l, 2078 and shall be subject to the conditions and
limitations as specified therein. Please pay particular attention to the monitoring requirements in this permit. Failure to
establish an adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required operational information will result in future
compliance problems.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the right to request an
adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this permit. This request must be in
the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the
Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714. Unless such demands are made
this permit shall be final and binding.
If you need any additional information concerning this matter, please contact David Goodrich at [phone] or at
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
r tic �Le
for Thomas A. Reeder
cc: Guilford County Health Department
Winston-Salem Regional Office, Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Steve•E. Johnson, Weston Solutions, 1400 Weston Way, West Chester, PA 19380
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
Pemii(File WQ00366ZI
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity\ Affirmative Action Employer

Permit Number WQ0036621
Program Category
Non -discharge
Permit Type
Groundwater Remediation
Primary Reviewer
david.goodrich
Coastal SW Rule
Central Files: APS SWP
11/25/13
Permit Tracking Slip
Status Project Type
Active New Project
Version Permit Classification
1.00 Individual
Permit Contact Affiliation
Steve E. Johnson
Manager Project Senior
1400 Weston Way
West Chester PA 19380
Permitted Flow
Facility
Facility Name Major/Minor Region
Cotton Mill Square Site (CMS) Minor Winston-Salem
Location Address
Se Of Spring Garden St Merritt Dr
Greensboro NC 27407
Owner
Owner Name
Weston Solutions Inc
County
Guilford
Facility Contact Affiliation
Owner Type
Non -Government
Owner Affiliation
Jaikishen N. Motwani
President Vice
1400 Weston Way
Dates/Events
West Chester PA
19380
_ Scheduled
Orig Issue App Received Draft Initiated Issuance
Public Notice Issue Effective
Expiration
11 /22/13 06/26/13
11 /22/13 11 /22/13
10/31 /18
Regulated Activities
Requested/Received Events
Groundwater remediation
RO staff report requested
07/02/13
Additional information requested
07/03/13
RO staff report received
07/16/13
Additional information received
07/23/13
Additional information received
07/24/13
Additional information received
07/24/13
Other agency comments received
07/26/13
Other agency comments requested
07/26/13
Other agency comments received
08/27/13
Additional information requested
09/16/13
Additional information received
10/02/13

Central Files: APS SWP
11/25/13
Additional information requested 10/08/13
Additional information received 10/09/13
Outfall NULL
Waterbody Name Stream Index Number Current Class Subbasin
J

Goodrich, David
From: Knight, Sherri
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 12:12 PM
To: Goodrich, David; Wang, Shuying
Subject: RE: Issuance of New Permit WQ0036621 and rescission of Old Permit WQ0029385
No, I don' t have any either.
Sherri Knight, PE
Assistant Supervisor
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
NC Division of Water Resources
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 12:02 PM
To: Wang, Shuying; Knight, Sherri
Subject: RE: Issuance of New Permit WQ0036621 and rescision of Old Permit WQ0029385
Shuying, does Sherri have any issues?
Thanks! David
From: Wang, Shuying
Sent: Thursday, Nove
To: Goodrich, David; N
Subject: RE: Issuance) /
I do not have any oth {
From: Goodrich, Davie
Sent: Thursday, Novel
To: Knight, Sherri; Wa
Subject: Issuance of I
Sherri and Shuying, I i
We are in the process I project, as well
as rescinding existing i
Does the WSRO have any issues with either the issuance of the new permit or the rescission of the old permit (other
than those expressed in Shuying's email of November 4, 2013)?
Thank you.

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 5:35 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
THanks - yes that appears to be acceptable classification.
From: Goodrich, David [[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 11:32 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
We are finalizing the permit, and also taking action to rescind Permit WQ0029385. As part of this effort, I am revising the
status of the injection wells that were approved and activated under Permit WQ0029385.
The status classification assigned to each well reflects both the present and future applications of that well. So far, I have
IW-201 as an injection well; IW-202, 203 and 204 as monitor wells; IW-205 as an injection well; IW-206 as a
recovery (extraction) well and an injection well; IW-207, 208, and 209 as monitor wells; and IW-210 as a recovery
well. Do these status classifications agree with your plans?
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:58 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Great — please submit!
TY
From: Goodrich, David[mailto:[e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:08 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your reply. In view of the situation and possible incapacitation of well IW-402, I would suggest that well
DW-2(d1) be used instead. If it is acceptable to you, I would like to include we lace of well IW-402 and submit the draft permit to my
supervisor for approval.

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:58 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Great— please submit!
W
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:08 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your reply. In view of the situation and possible incapacitation of well IW-402, I would suggest that well
DW-2(d1) be used instead.
If it is acceptable to you, I would like to include well DW-2(d1) in place of well IW-402 and submit the draft permit to my
supervisor for approval.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark [mailto:W.M.Eliason(cbWestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 10:47 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
As always ty for the prompt response! Well list is fine with possible exception of IW-402. I am not sure of the condition
of this former injection well, we have not sampled it in years and it may have significant bacterial growth as the IW-400
series wells all demonstrated significant loss of productivity as we injected EVO amended groundwater from the EW-500
extraction wells. This well may be monitorable, but I simply am not sure. Redevelopment of any of these wells is
problematic or maybe impossible due to the proximity of student housing.
Either we could take a let's see approach, and use a different well if it can't be sampled or I could suggest DW-2(d1) or
IW-210 in its place.
Ty
Mark
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:david.goodrichC�ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 8:12 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621

Goodrich, David
From:
Goodrich, David
Sent:
Wednesday, November 13, 2013 8:08 AM
To:
'Eliason, W. Mark'
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your reply. In view of the situation and possible incapacitation of well IW-402, I would suggest that well
DW-2(d1) be used instead.
If it is acceptable to you, I would like to include well DW-2(d1) in place of well IW-402 and submit the draft permit to my
supervisor for approval.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 10:47 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
As always ty for the prompt response! Well list is fine with possible exception of IW-402. I am not sure of the condition
of this former injection well, we have not sampled it in years and it may have significant bacterial growth as the IW-400
series wells all demonstrated significant loss of productivity as we injected EVO amended groundwater from the EW-500
extraction wells. This well may be monitorable, but I simply am not sure. Redevelopment of any of these wells is
problematic or maybe impossible due to the proximity of student housing.
Either we could take a let's see approach, and use a different well if it can't be sampled or I could suggest DW-2(d1) or
IW-210 in its place.
Ty
Mark
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:david.goodrichCai)ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 8:12 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your informative email. Our rules and policies require that a number of monitoring wells that are located
outside the Compliance Boundary be sampled to ensure that the injectants do not go into other areas. I understand
that, based on past observations, testing, and injection activities, the probability of impacts beyond the Compliance
Boundaries for both Zones 1 and 3 is very low.

I would suggest that the monitoring,wU;ls around the Compliance Boundary for 1 be wells DW-10-d1, EW-511, IW-
402, and MW-36-s. Those wells around the Compliance Boundary for Zone 3 would be wells DW-06-d1, MW-13-s, and
M W-14-s.
Please let me know if there are any issues with any of these wells (besides those you have already told me about).
Thank you for your help.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark fmailto:W.M.Eliason(aWestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:21 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
The October 2013 monitoring event conducted under the NCDENk'approved RAP was completed last week. In -addition,
RAP monitoring locations MW-36(s), DW-10(d1), DW-03(d1), DW-14(d2), MW-13(s), and MW-14(s) are also being
monitored for the, expanded VOC list and monitoring parameters required by this permit. The October 2013 semiannual
monitoring event is intended to serve as the preinjection monitoring event.
Of the wells proposed in your email -
• DW-01(d1) and MW-39(s) no longer exist.
• Well EW-501 is proposed to be part of the downgradient injection array of a soon to be filed WI permit (The 500
series portion which was initially part of this permit).
• Well EW-511 demonstrated a moderate impact from injection in Zone 2, but will not demonstrate any impact
from injection in Zones 1 or 3.
• Well DW-06(d1) has been demonstrated by years of monitoring data to be outside of the zone of influence of
the VOC plume and any injection that might occur in Zone 3.
• Well IW-208 has never demonstrated any end member VOC degradation (chloroethane or vinyl chloride) and
seems to have been unaffected by past Zone 2 or 3 amendment applications.
• Well MW-28(s) has almost no VOC detections and has never demonstrated any degradation product increase
despite the much closer Zone 4 application of amendment conducted into the IW100 series wells IW-101
through IW-123.
Wells MW-36(s), DW-06(d1), MW-28(s) and EW-511 are currently monitored semiannually under the RAP and EW-501,
and IW-208 are annual locations under the RAP.
Hope this helps.
TY
Mark
From: Goodrich, David FinaiIto: david.cloodrich(JEi)ncdenr.gov],
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:24 PM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
z

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 8:12 AM
To: 'Eliason, W. Mark'
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your informative email. Our rules and policies require that a number of monitoring wells that are located
outside the Compliance Boundary be sampled to ensure that the injectants do not go into other areas. I understand
that, based on past observations, testing, and injection activities, the probability of impacts beyond the Compliance
Boundaries for both Zones 1 and 3 is very low.
I would suggest that the monitoring wells around the Compliance Boundary for Zone 1 be wel
.1� ,tinsa ua�. x arc un. hha C«nrr�n'iame:P o,u, rrnfi�ar0-@. 9.wauld.be wells D
Please let me know if there are any issues with any of these wells (besides those you have already told me about).
Thank you for your help.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:21 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
The October 2013 monitoring event conducted under the NCDENR approved RAP was completed last week. In addition,
RAP monitoring locations MW-36(s), DW-10(d1), DW-03(d1), DW-14(d2), MW-13(s), and MW-14(s) are also being
monitored for the expanded VOC list and monitoring parameters required by this permit. The October 2013 semiannual
monitoring event is intended to serve as the preinjection monitoring event.
Of the wells proposed in your email -
• DW-01(d1) and MW-39(s) no longer exist.
• Well EW-501 is proposed to be part of the downgradient injection array of a soon to be filed WI permit (The 500
series portion which was initially part of this permit).
• Well EW-511 demonstrated a moderate impact from injection in Zone 2, but will not demonstrate any impact
from injection in Zones 1 or 3.
• Well DW-06(d1) has been demonstrated by years of monitoring data to be outside of the zone of influence of
the VOC plume and any injection that might occur in Zone 3.
• Well IW-208 has never demonstrated any end member VOC degradation (chloroethane or vinyl chloride) and
seems to have been unaffected by past Zone 2 or 3 amendment applications.
• Well MW-28(s) has almost no VOC detections and has never demonstrated any degradation product increase
despite the much closer Zone 4 application of amendment conducted into the IW100 series wells IW-101
through IW-123.

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:21 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
The October 2013 monitoring event conducted under the NCDENR approved RAP was completed last week. In addition,
RAP monitoring locations MW-36(s), DW-10(d1), DW-03(d1), DW-14(d2), MW-13(s), and MW-14(s) are also being
monitored for the expanded VOC list and monitoring parameters required by this permit. The October 2013 semiannual
monitoring event is intended to serve as the preinjection monitoring event.
Of the wells proposed in your email -
• DW-01(d1) and MW-39(s) no longer exist.
• Well EW-501 is proposed to be part of the downgradient injection array of a soon to be filed WI permit (The 500
series portion which was initially part of this permit).
• Well EW-511 demonstrated a moderate impact from injection in Zone 2, but will not demonstrate any impact
from injection in Zones 1 or 3.
• Well DW-06(d1) has been demonstrated by years of monitoring data to be outside of the zone of influence of
the VOC plume and any injection that might occur in Zone 3.
✓ • Well IW-208 has never demonstrated any end member VOC degradation (chloroethane or vinyl chloride) and
seems to have been unaffected by past Zone 2 or 3 amendment applications.
• Well MW-28(s) has almost no VOC detections and has never demonstrated any degradation product increase
despite the much closer Zone 4 application of amendment conducted into the IW100 series wells IW-101
through IW-123.
Wells MW-36(s), DW-06(d1), MW-28(s) and EW-511 are currently monitored semiannually under the RAP and EW-501,
and IW-208 are annual locations under the RAP. ✓� W— z d I
OL
Hope this helps.
TY
Mark
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:24 PM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Cc: Wang, Shuying; [e-mail]; Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas; Mackey, Edward J.
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
1

Thank you for your quick response Cu my email. I have selected a number of posswie monitor wells outside of the
compliance boundary (established by the injection wells) for the permit, and welcome your comments on their
appropriateness. The following is the section of the draft permit pertaining to the monitoring wells.
PART VIII - MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The proposed monitoring plan included in the application shall be followed with some modification. The monitoring
will consist of sampling existing wells DW-01-d1, EW-501, EW-511, MW-36-s and MW-39-s (for Zone 1); and DW-06-
d1, MW-28-s and IW-208 (for Zone 3) for Chloride, Conductivity, Dissolved Oxygen, pH, ReDox (ORP), Sulfate,
Temperature, Total Iron, Total Organic Carbon, and Volatile Organic Compounds before the injections begin and
thereafter every six months (twice every year) for at least two years. The parameters of Nitrate Nitrogen and Nitrite
Nitrogen shall be sampled during the final sampling event. Any additional monitoring, including groundwater,
surface water, or soil sampling, deemed necessary by the Division of Water Resources to ensure surface water and
groundwater protection may be established and an acceptable sampling reporting schedule shall be followed.
I appreciate your assistance with this process.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark fmailto:W.M.Eliason(i5)WestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:27 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Cc: Wang, Shuying; Steve. oberkrom Cci)alcatel-lucent.com; Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas; Mackey, Edward J
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
Please find attached the system abandonment plan for wells and piping not associated with a proposed WQ or WI
permit, or the RAP. The discussion below concerning injection/extraction locations and the injection and dilution volume
is correct with the exception that the make up (dilution) water may also be derived from a potable water source and the
emulsified vegetable oil (EVO) product may be Newman Zone or a similar NCDENR approved EVO product. I hope that
this information will allow you to approve the WQ permit currently in review such that we can move forward with
application prior to the onset of winter. Thank you for your continued attention to this matter.
TY
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
W.M.EliasonCaD-WestonSolutions.com
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:david.goodrich Ca ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:25 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark

From: Goodrich, David[mailto:david.goodrichCalncdenr.goy]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:25 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Cc: Wang, Shuying
Subject: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
I am working towards issuance of the new remediation permit at Cotton Mill Square, and need to confirm the activity
plans.
It is my understanding that Zone 1 will have ground water extracted from well EW-509, have the extracted water added
to Newman Zone —Buffered Nonionic Formulation, and injected into wells IW-201 and EW-509. Zone 3 will have ground
water extracted from wells IW-206, IW-210, and EW-512; have the extracted water added to Newman Zone — Buffered
Nonionic Formulation, and injected into wells IW-205 and IW-206.
Approximately 1,500 gallons of the Newman Zone formula will be mixed with the extracted ground water, resulting in a
dilution of 4 to 10 times. The total maximum injection volume of the injection mixture that is foreseen is approximately
16,500 gallons.
I further understand that the remediation system that was constructed and operated under existing permit WQ0029385
has served its purpose and is no longer functioning. Some portions of this system may be used under the new permit
(WQ0036621). Since the existing permit did not employ the use of infiltration galleries, "closure" of such structures is
not taking place. Underground piping associated with the operation of this system, unless it will be utilized and included
under the new permit, will need to be removed before permit WQ0029385 is rescinded. We will need a written
description of the proposed closure procedure to satisfy 15A NCAC 02T .1608(a)(3).
Please confirm these details at your earliest convenience.
Thank you for your assistance.
Regards,
David
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
4

Cc: Wang, Shuying; Steve. oberkron .66 catel-lucent.com; Johnson, Steve E.; Coi':_-,", Thomas; Mackey, Edward J.
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your quick response to my email. I have selected a number of possible monitor wells outside of the
compliance boundary (established by the injection wells) for the permit, and welcome your comments on their,
appropriateness. The following is the section of the draft permit pertaining to the monitoring wells. -
PART Vill - MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The proposed monitoring plan included in the application shall be followed with some modification. The monitoring
will consist of sampling existing wells DW-01-d1, EW-501, EW-511, MW-36-s and MW-39-s (for Zone 1); and DW-06-
d1, MW-28-s and IW-208 (for Zone 3) for Chloride, Conductivity, Dissolved Oxygen, pH, ReDox (ORP), Sulfate,
Temperature, Total Iron, Total Organic Carbon, and Volatile Organic Compounds before the injections begin and
thereafter every six months (twice every year) for -at least two years. The parameters of Nitrate Nitrogen and Nitrite
Nitrogen shall be sampled during the final sampling event. Any additional monitoring, including groundwater,
surface water, or soil sampling, deemed necessary by the Division of Water Resources to ensure surface water and
groundwater protection may be established and an acceptable sampling reporting schedule shall be followed.
I appreciate your assistance with this process.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark fmailto:W.M.Eliason(abWestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:27 AM
To: Goodrich, David -
Cc: Wang, Shuying; Steve.oberkrom('Oalcatel-lucent.com; Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas; Mackey, Edward J.
Subject: RE: New Groundwater Remediation Permit WQ0036621
David,
Please find attached the system abandonment plan for wells and piping not associated with a proposed WQ or WI
permit, or the RAP. The discussion below concerning injection/extraction locations and the injection and dilution volume
is correct with the exception that the make up (dilution) water may also be derived from a potable water source and the
emulsified vegetable oil (EVO) product may be Newman Zone or a similar NCDENR approved EVO product. I hope that
this information will allow you to approve the WQ permit currently in review such that we can move forward with
application prior to the onset of winter. Thank you for your continued attention to this matter.
TY
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401(Fax)
W.M.Eliason(c-WestonSolutions.com

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 4:10 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
David,
Our targeted volume of oil is likely less than 1,500 gallons with a dilution volume of water ranging from 4 to 10 fold
dependent upon how well the injection zone accepts the injectate.
Thank You
Mark
-----Original Message -----
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:31 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
Mark,
Could you confirm the total anticipated injection volume for the five injection wells?
Thank you.
David
-----Original Message -----
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 6:22 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
David,
I redlined the document with comments. Hopefully this will be acceptable to the Department. I tried to adjust the
monitoring to be most useful for monitoring the progress of the remediation, and to monitor locations most likely to be
impacted, if EVO migrated significantly downgradient, or moved toward offsite locations. The monitoring in the permit is
backed up by a much larger monitoring program administered under the RAP.
Thanks
Mark
From: Goodrich, David [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 8:29 AM

r
Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 6:22 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: Red lineresp_WQ0036621d p 13 1011 (3).doc
David,
I redlined the document with comments. Hopefully this will be acceptable to the Department. I tried to adjust the
monitoring to be most useful for monitoring the progress of the remediation, and to monitor locations most likely to be
impacted, if EVO migrated significantly downgradient, or moved toward offsite locations. The monitoring in the permit is
backed up by a much larger monitoring program administered under the RAP.
Thanks
Mark
From: Goodrich, David [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 8:29 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
Mark,
I have adjusted the attached draft of the permit to reflect the removal of the Zone 5 treatment zone, and have restored
the language pertaining to the Compliance Boundary and Review Boundary. The monitor wells specified in Condition
IV.1. may have to be changed somewhat, as their purpose is to serve as sentries around the injection area to make sure
the injectant does not leave the treatment area.
I welcome your comments on this version of the draft permit.
Thank you for your continuing assistance.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
-----Original Message -----
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 3:00 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
David,

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amended,
and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Weston Solutions, Inc.
Guilford County
FOR THE
operation of an existing groundwater remediation injection system which will allow application of up to 1,000
GPD of amended ground water on a periodic schedule (several weeks per year). The remediation system will
consist of fear -five 45 extraction wells W-509, IW-201, IW-205-and, IW-206. and ENV 12 to obtain dilution _ comment [WME1]: inserting well Ew-512 a's an
t
water for the injection of diluted Newman Zone emulsified vegetable oil (EVO), or similar EVO, NCDENR- extraction location to aid in distribution ofEVO over
approved product, with sodium bicarbonate pH buffer into eleveli four intltertreatment zone. Thrsrshistoricaayavery .
jection wells (EW-509. IW-201. IW-205. Productive, relatively cVOC impacted ioeation that
IW-206same as ex1fae'i^ft wells to remediate saturated soil and ground water impacted by chlorinated volatile was origninallyinstalled asaninjection-location.
organic compounds (CVOCs), with no discharge of wastes to the surface waters, pursuant to the application
received June 26, 2013, and subsequent additional information received by the Division of Water Resources
(Division), and in conformity with the project plan, specifications, and other supporting data subsequently filed '
and approved by the Division and considered a part of this permit. Although this permit has approved this system
as a groundwater remediation facility, the operation of this facility will be limited to the periodic gravity injection
of groundwater amended with bioremediation-enhancing compounds into existing wells. Potable water may be
used in lieu of groundwater as necessary to facilitate the EVO 6plication-onCommenf [wME2]: This may be necessary due
------------------------------------------------- to well low productivity, in particular welllW-201.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 2018 and shall be subject to
the following specified conditions and limitations:
I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
1. Approval of the remedial application granted in this remediation permit has been certified by a North
Carolina Professional Geologist. This remediation permit has been issued for the application of
bioremediation fluids and does not require construction -related systems or activities that would warrant
the review and approval of a professional engineer.
2. The Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number, shall be notified at least forty-eight (48) hours in
advance of operation of the remedial facilities, including the initiation of injection operations, so that an
in -place inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made during the
normal office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State Holidays.
3. The treated water discharged into the injection wells must not exacerbate or cause a violation of Class GA
Standards for any constituent beyond the Compliance Boundary, nor cause the migration of the
_ contamination into unaffected areas. If the treatment system fails to consistently achieve this standard,
additional treatment units or changes in operational needs may be required.
Redlineresp W00036621dp131011 (3`'emit Sheli'Page 1 of7
viQ©O3 �� I yr 1,0

4. This permit shall become voidable if the soils fail to adequately assimilate the bioremediation-promoting
injected substrates and may be rescinded unless the facilities are maintained and operated in a manner -
which will protect the assigned water quality standards of the surface and groundwaters, In the event that
the facility fails to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of nuisance conditions or failure of the
injection zone to adequately assimilate the injection fluid, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective ,
actions including those actions that may be required by the Division of Water Resources such as the
repair, modification, or abandonment of the injection facility. The Permittee may be required to reduce or
eliminate the permitted activity to protect the assigned water quality standards of surface and
groundwaters.
5. The injection facility shall be effectively maintained and operated at all times so that there is no increase
of contamination of groundwater which will render it unsatisfactory for normal use at location(s) beyond
the Compliance Boundary. -r
6. The Permittee shall be required to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit, even if
compliance requires a reduction or elimination of the permitted activity.
7. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility for damages to surface or -
groundwaters resulting from the operation of this facility.
H. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
1. The injection facility shall be properly maintained and operated as a non -discharge system to prevent the
discharge of any wastewater resulting from the operation of this facility. The groundwater recovery,
treatment and disposal system shall be inspected daily during periodic injection activities. If it is
determined that the system is malfunctioning or leading to the release of wastes to the environment, a
threat to human health, or a nuisance, all repairs should be made as soon as possible and reported to the
Winston-Salem Regional Office (see Section VI. NONCOMPLIANCE NOTMCATIONI. All
components of the groundwater recovery, treatment, and disposal system shall be properly '
weatherproofed to prevent freezing and failure of the system.
2. If requested by the owner, the Division will consider remote monitoring in lieu of (frequency) physical
inspections, on a case -by -case basis, following at least two years of successful operation.
3. The Permittee shall maintain an inspection log or summary including at least the date and time of
inspection, observations made, and any maintenance, repairs, or corrective actions taken by the Permittee. <
This log of inspections shall be maintained by the Permittee for a period of three years from the date of
the inspection and shall be made available to the Division or other permitting authority, upon request.
4. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or representative of the Division may, upon presentation of -
credentials, enter and inspect any property, premises or place on or related to the disposal site or facility at
any reasonable time for the purpose of determining compliance with this permit (including inspection,
observation, and sampling associated with injection and any related facilities as provided for in N.C.G.S. ;
87-90), may inspect or copy any records that must be maintained -under the terms and conditions of this
permit, and may obtain samples of groundwater, surface water, injection fluids, or leachate.
III. WELL CONSTRUCTION/ABANDONMENT CRITERIA
1. The construction and operation of Type 5I injection wells shall conform to Title 15A North
Carolina Administrative Code 2C .0209(e)(3)(C), to inject Newman Zone EVO, or similar ;
NCDENR-approved EVO product. with sodium bicarbonate, for the facilitation of natural `
biodegradation of chlorinated volatile organic compounds.
Redlinereso W00036621de131011 (31FemitzS}ae44 Page 2 of 10

2. Within fifteen days of any change of status of an injection well, the Permittee shall provide
written notification to the Division. Such a change would include the discontinued use of a well
for injection. If a well is taken completely out of service temporarily, the Permittee must install a
'
sanitary seal. If a well is not to be used for any purpose, that well must be permanently
abandoned according tol5A NCAC 2C .0113, Well Construction Standards.
;
3. Any well that is no longer to be used for any purpose by the Permittee shall be abandoned in
accordance with the procedures specified in 15A NCAC 2C .0113(b).
4. Flow measurement of the volumes injected at each injection well will be monitored and recorded. Also,
any injection well that will require injection at pressures greater than gravity feed shall be equipped to
measure the injection pressure at the screened interval. If the injection pressure is greater than
atmospheric pressure, the mechanical integrity of the injection well(s) shall be demonstrated according to
15A NCAC 2C .0207.
IV. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
" Comment 1WME3]: Well MW-39(s) has been
1. Monitor wells DW-03-dl, EW 58SDW-l0(dl),_ and MW-36-s, xxxr 202 ,.,rxxr zo G for Zone 1 and :
O
'
.abandoned as approved byxCDENR. Well Iw-201 '
`
' -(------------)-----------''
,.axx7 , o , rxxr �, n ...,,t nx� ,BSMW_L; s) and MW-14(�Sl for Zone 3 shall be sam led before the
�T'�PTT''-���� (--. �_-�-----------------------------
. and IW-202 are very poorly productive, and well
IW-202will not demons ,irateany impact fromthe
injections begin and thereafter every six months (twice every year) for the parameters listed below:
injection, It is also moniiored on an annual bases
under the RAP.
Nitrate Nitrogen* Oil and Grease* Volatile Organic Compounds
'
Comment 1wME41: Revtewofsite topography
and groundwater flow cause wells IW-210 and IW--
Chloride Sulfate Total Organic Carbon
g
-
408 to be inappropriate to monitor the amendment
application with the exception as background .
locations as they are both topogiaphically
Total Iron pH Conductivity Nitrite Nitrogen*
significantly elevated,from the IW-205i-206 "
injection locations and also located at upgradient to
- -
sidegiadientlocations. "
Temperature ReDox (ORP) Dissolved Oxygen
>
*These parameters are to be sampled during the final sampling event only.
2. Prior to sampling the parameters, the measurement of water levels must be taken. The depth to water in
each well shall be measured from the surveyed point on the top of the casing. The measuring points (top
of well casing) of all monitoring wells shall be surveyed relative to a common datum.
3. For Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) sampled every six months, use only one of the following
;x'?
methods:
a. Standard Method 6230D, Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) at 0.5 ug/L or less
b. Standard Method 6210D, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
c. EPA Method 8021, Low Concentration, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
d. EPA Method 8260, Low Concentration, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
e. Another method with prior approval by the Aquifer Protection Chief.
Any of the referenced methods used for VOCs must at a minimum, include all the constituents
listed in Table VIII of Standard Method 6230D. This analyte list, as well as the historic 8260 monitoring
list sampled under the CAP/RAP will be monitored for three years following the initiation of permit
finalization. Any analyte included in the 6230D list that is not part of the historic 8260 VOC monitoring
list either not detected at a concentration significantly greater than the Method Detection Limit (MDL) or
above the corresponding NCDENR 2L standard will be deleted from the monitoring list in future
-
monitoring events.
Redlmereso W0003662ldo131011 (3`nefftic' � l Page 3 of 10

The 8260 VOC Reporting Limit for the primary site constituents of concern (COCs) range from 0.5 to 1
ug/L. Analytical results will be reported to the qualified (estimated) MDL, resulting in a reported
qualified (estimated) concentration of 0.5 ug/L or less for all undiluted COCs.
4.
Any laboratory selected to analyze parameters must be Division of Water Resources certified for those
parameters required.
5.
Any additional groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed necessary by the Division, shall be provided.
V.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
'`�
1.
Three (3) copies of the following forms shall be mailed to the address below:
a. GW-1 Well Construction Record
b. GW-30 Well Abandonment Record
c. GW-59 Groundwater Quality Monitoring: Compliance Report Form
d. GW-59A Compliance Report Form
Mail these documents to the following address: Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Information Processing Unit
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617'_
;.
Updated blank forms (GW-1, GW-30, GW-59, GW-59A) may be downloaded from the Division of Water
Resources website at http://`h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ or requested from the address mentioned above.
2.
The results of the sampling and analysis must be received on forms GW-59 and GW-59A on or before the
,5: •,'
last working day of the month following the sampling month. The data of all groundwater sampling
' • -,J`-
analyses required by the permit conditions must be reported using the most recent GW-59 and GW-59A
"
forms along with attached copies of the laboratory analyses.
3.
The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, including calibration and maintenance
.,
records, continuous monitoring data and reports required by this permit, for at least 3 years from the date
of the sample measurement, report or application. Records of this monitoring information shall include,
but not be limited to, the following:
a. the date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements,
b. the individual who performed the sampling or measurements,
c. the date the analyses were performed,
<x'
d. the analytical techniques or methods used, and
e. the results of such sampling, measurements, and analyses.
4.
The pennittee shall report to the Winston-Salem Regional Office (see Section VI. NONCOMPLIANCE
NOTIFICATION), within 48 hours of the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence, or any
monitoring or other information which indicates:
a. any contaminant may cause an endangerment to an underground source of drinking water,
b. any noncompliance with a permit condition due to a malfunction of the system, or
c. any cause of fluid migration outside the injection zone or area.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of
noncompliance, including exact dates and times. If the noncompliance is not corrected and is expected to
,
Redlinereso W00036621do131011 (31 kgnA-She11 Page 4 of 10
- s "

continue, steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance
shall be provided to the Regional Office in a timely manner.
5. The permittee shall submit an annual report summarizing the volume and injection pressure(s) of effluent
discharged into the injection well(s) and the summary results of related groundwater, influent, and
effluent monitoring. Isoconcentrations (horizontal and vertical direction) and water level
contour/potentiometric surface maps shall be prepared on an annual basis and submitted with this report.
If an annual report containing this information (e.g. corrective action plan) is required by a regulatory
agency, the permittee may submit two (2) copies of that report in lieu of the preceding information within
thirty days of its publication. The permittee shall submit this report to the following address: Aquifer
Protection Section, Groundwater Protection Unit, 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1636.
VI. NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION
1. The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number (336)
771-5000, as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours or on the next working day following ,
the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following:
a. Any occurrence at the groundwater remediation facility which results in any unusual operating
circumstances, or in the treatment of significant amounts of contaminated groundwaters which are
abnormal in quantity or characteristic, such as the dumping of the contents of a basin or tank, the
known passage of a slug of hazardous substance through the facility, or any other unusual '
circumstances;
b. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons, that renders the groundwater treatment f
and disposal system, including injection wells, incapable of adequate treatment and disposal, such as F ,
mechanical or electrical failures of pumps, aerators, compressors, etc.;
c. Any failure of a pumping station, sewer line, or treatment facility resulting in a by-pass directly to
receiving waters without treatment of all or any portion of the influent to such station or facility; or T
d. Any time that self -monitoring information indicates that the groundwater treatment and disposal
system is not in compliance with any specified permit limitations.
2. Occurrences outside normal business hours may also be reported to the Division's Emergency Response
personnel at telephone number [phone] or to the Emergency Management's switchboard at (919)
733-3300. Also, persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall file a written report within five
(5) days following first knowledge of the occurrence. This report must outline the actions taken or
proposed to be taken to ensure that the problem does not recur.
VII. APPLICABLE BOUNDARIES
1. The COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY for the disposal system is specified by regulations in 15A NCAC 2L, -
Groundwater Classifications and Standards. The Compliance Boundary for the disposal system "
individually permitted after December 30, 1983 is established at either (1) 250 feet from the waste
disposal area, or (2) 50 feet within the property boundary, whichever is closest to the waste disposal area. '
This is illustrated on Figure 1. An exceedance of Class GA Standards at or beyond the Compliance
Boundary is subject to remediation action according to 15A NCAC 2L .0106(d)(2). Please be aware that
the Compliance Boundary designation refers to the injectant substances and not the contaminant plume.
2. The REVIEW BOUNDARY is established around the disposal systems midway between the Compliance
Boundary and the perimeter of the waste disposal area. An exceedance of Class GA Standards at the
Review Boundary may require action in accordance with 15A NCAC 2L .0106(d)(1). Please be aware
that the Review Boundary designation refers to the injectant substances and not the contaminant plume.
VIH. WORKER PRECAUTIONS DURING MANUAL APPLICATION OF INJECTION
(Manual Application Only)
Redhneresv W00036621 dp131011 (31PemkP-S1ae11 Page 5 of 10

1. Some effects reported to be associated with the product proposed to be used are as follows- eye, F
skin, nose, throat, and lung irritation. If the product is released into the environment in a way that
°>
could result in a suspension of fine solid or liquid particles (e.g., grinding, blending, vigorous
shaking or mixing), then proper personal protective equipment should be used. The application
process should be reviewed by an industrial hygienist to ensure that the most appropriate personal
protective equipment is used.
2. Persons workingwith these products should wear safe lasses goggles or a face shield loves,
P safety glasses, g gg , g
.F.
and protective clothing. Face and body protection should be used for anticipated splashes or
,.
sprays.
>' `
3. Eating, drinking, smoking, handling contact lenses, and applying cosmetics should not be
.
permitted in the application area during or immediately following application.
4. Safety controls should be in place to ensure that the check valve and the pressure delivery systems,
y-> •. >�`x;;z`:_ ,�;
are working properly.
5. The Material Safety Data Sheets should be followed to prevent incompatible or adverse reactions,
and injuries.
$`F
IX. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Issuance of this permit does not constitute approval for reimbursement from the Leaking Petroleum
Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (15A NCAC 2P) or any other fund. Additionally, the issuance
of this permit does not remove the Permittee's responsibility to comply with the corrective action
requirements of the Division of Waste Management. Furthermore, the permittee should notify and report
all changes concerning the remedial system to the Division of Waste Management. It is the Permittee's
responsibility to comply with the requirements of all involved agencies.
;
2. This permit shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with the conditions"5,
of this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting data.
3. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes described in the application
and other supporting data,
4. The Permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit and with the standards and criteria specified
in Criteria and Standards Applicable to Injection Wells (15A NCAC 2C .0200). Any noncompliance with
conditions of this permit constitutes a violation of the North Carolina Well Construction Act and is
grounds for enforcement action as provided for in N.C.G.S. 87-94.
5. This permit is valid only for construction of the number of injection wells described in the
-:2,,,
application and other supporting data. Construction of additional injection wells must be
„
approved in advance by the Aquifer Protection Section.
;s-
6. This permit is not transferable. In the event there is a desire for the facilities to change ownership, or
`
there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal permit request must be submitted to the Division
• .
accompanied by an application fee, documentation from the parties involved, and other supporting
materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits and may or
may not be approved
'
Redlineresn W0003662&131011 (31FemiESkeN Page 6 of 10

7. A set of approved plans and specifications for the subject project must be retained by the Permittee for the
life of this project.
8. The Permittee must notify the Division and receive prior written approval from the Director of any
planned physical alterations or additions in the permitted facility or activity not specifically authorized by
the permit. A permit modification is usually required before these changes can take place. Where the
Permittee becomes aware of an omission of any relevant facts in a permit application, or of any incorrect
'
information submitted on said application or in any report to the Division, the relevant and correct facts
`
shall be promptly submitted to the Division by the Permittee.
Y
9. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the Permittee to an
"
enforcement action by the Division in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to
143-215.6C.
10. The annual administering and compliance fee must be paid by the Permittee within thirty (30) days after
;
being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee accordingly may cause the Division to initiate action
to revoke this permit as specified by 15A NCAC 2T .0105 (e) (3).
11. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complyingwith an and all statutes,
P P Y`
rules, regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by other government agencies (local, state, and
federal), which have jurisdiction.
'
12. Sixty (60) days prior to closure of the injection wells, the permittee must request a rescission of the permit
from the Division of Water Resources. Guidelines for the closure of the injection wells may be obtained
<�`, `- -'''� , "";:-;` <•,:' `?; x�`; a �x:
from httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us or requested from the Division of Water Resources.
y F.V,
A'
13. If the permittee wants to continue operation of this s ste at least six 6 months prior to the expiration
^:_ '° z '
of this permit, the permittee shall request its extension. Upon receipt of the request, the Commission will
`
review the adequacy of the facilities described therein, and if warranted, will extend the permit for such
F
period of time and under such conditions and limitations as it may deem appropriate.
;• Formatted: Highlight
Permit issued this the JI did-' _ of October 2013
------------------------------------ ----------------- -'"
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
'
for Thomas A. Reeder, Director
Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number W00036621
RedlinerespW00036621dn131011 (3iFeatit-Ske11 Page 7 of 10

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 8:29 AM
To: 'Eliason, W. Mark'
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: WQ0036621dp131011.doc
Mark,
I have adjusted the attached draft of the permit to reflect the removal of the Zone 5 treatment zone, and have restored
the language pertaining to the Compliance Boundary and Review Boundary. The monitor wells specified in Condition
IV.1. may have to be changed somewhat, as their purpose is to serve as sentries around the injection area to make sure
the injectant does not leave the treatment area.
I welcome your comments on this version of the draft permit.
Thank you for your continuing assistance.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
-----Original Message -----
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 3:00 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
David,
In lieu of attempting to acquire a shift of the compliance boundary onto the adjoining parcel, could the portion of the
permit involving the injection of amended groundwater into the Zone 5 wells be redacted? This will leave us with just
amendment applications in Zones 1 and 3 in this permit. The monitoring requirement for the Zone 5 wells should also
be removed from this permit. I'm hoping this would be acceptable for approval.
A separate permit will be filed to initiate injection of bioremediation enhancing substrate into the Zone 5 wells using a
potable water source, similar to our existing Zone 6 permit.
The incident manager for this site is Sharon Cihak, with Guilford County.
Please consider this approach and let me know if there is anything I can do to assist in moving it forward. Thank you for
your continued attention to this site.
TY
Mark
W. Mark Eliason

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 3:00 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: Sharon Cihak
David,
In lieu of attempting to acquire a shift of the compliance boundary onto the adjoining parcel, could the portion of the
permit involving the injection of amended groundwater into the Zone 5 wells be redacted? This will leave us with just
amendment applications in Zones 1 and 3 in this permit. The monitoring requirement for the Zone 5 wells should also
be removed from this permit. I'm hoping this would be acceptable for approval.
A separate permit will be filed to initiate injection of bioremediation enhancing substrate into the Zone 5 wells using a
potable water source, similar to our existing Zone 6 permit.
The incident manager for this site is Sharon Cihak, with Guilford County.
Please considee this approach and let me know if there is anything I can do to assist in moving it forward. Thank you for
your continued attention to this site.
TY
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
[e-mail]
-----Original Message -----
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:15 PM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your correspondence of October 7, 2013. 1 have discussed the options available with my supervisor and
have learned that injection zones can only be granted to "WI" permits. Our agency is currently working to change the
rules to allow injection zones to be used in "WQ" permits as well, but right now we have to work with the restrictions.
The re -injection of ground water requires that a "WQ" permit be utilized.

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:15 PM
To: 'Eliason, W. Mark'
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your correspondence of October 7, 2013. 1 have discussed the options available with my supervisor and
have learned that injection zones can only be granted to "WI" permits. Our agency is currently working to change the
rules to allow injection zones to be used in "WQ" permits as well, but right now we have to work with the restrictions. v
The re -injection of ground water requires that a "WQ" permit be utilized.
Given the area you want to remediate and the restrictions involved, the best course of action for obtaining injection in
Zone 5 along the southern border of the subject property appears to be obtaining an easement running with the land (as
per 15A NCAC 02L .0107 (f)) from the owner of the neighboring property to the south of the site to move the
Compliance Boundary from the southern portion of the Cotton Mill Square property onto the northern portion of that
neighboring property. As you know, the Compliance Boundary is ordinarily placed 50 feet inside the property bounday
or 250 feet from the waste boundary, whichever is closest to the waste. An easement would allow the Compliance
Boundary to be placed elsewhere. Alternatively, a variance might be obtained from the Environmental Management
Commission under rule 15A NCAC .02L .0113.
It is my understanding that you currently have permission to install wells and perform monitoring on the neighboring
property to the south. We would require a copy of the easement allowing the Compliance Boundary to be moved onto
the neighboring property, and a copy of documentation from the owner of the Cotton Mill Square property permitting
you to act on their behalf.
Could you send us the name and contact information for the incident manager of the Cotton Mill Square site?
Thank you for your assistance.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
-----Original Message -----
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 2:04 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
Good Afternoon David,
Upon further review of the permit modification issued 10/3/13, might I suggest that we switch our injection in Zone 6
(covered under a separate permit) to use well DW-13(d1) in lieu of IW-302. Switching of these wells does not appear to
be a problem for the other permit as both are located within the approved injection area, and in the past well DW-
13(d1) has essentially been an injection well based upon the amount of emulsion that is detected in it upon injection

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 2:04 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit-WQ0036621
Attachments: SRS-SD_Specifications_2011-Ol.pdf, Emulsified Oils Family.doc
Good Afternoon David,
Upon further review of the permit modification issued.10/3/13, might I suggest that we switch our injection in Zone 6
(covered under a separate permit) to use well DW-13(dl) in lieu of IW-302. Switching of these wells does not appear to
be a problem for the other permit as both are located within the approved injection area, and in the past well DW-
13(d1) has essentially been an injection well based upon the amount of emulsion that is detected in it upon injection
from IW-302. The planned gravity injection into DW-13(d1) will likely not result in the same distribution of EVO into
upgradient well IW-302.
Switching of these two wells would result in two wells downgradient of the Zone 5 injection area (IW-302 and DW-
11(d1) that would likely not be impacted, or impacted in a very minimal manner by the injections into Zones 5 and 6.
Essentially the permit that you have provided as it presently stands would not need to be amended, with the possible
exception that we modify the language in the IV. Monitoring Requirements to allow for sampling of wells used for active
injection to be modified or omitted as necessary during injection periods, or something similar. In particular monitoring
of DW-13(d1) assuming it is used for injection, and well IW-304 (also planned for injection).
In the past monitoring of wells with abundant emulsion has been problematic due to matrix effects during analysis. This
has been particularly important for sulfate. Samples which contain actual edible oil, or high concentrations of TOC have
resulted in absurdly high detection of sulfate. This is the result of a matrix effect from the emulsion, and in no way
reflects actual sulfate concentrations. The application of edible oil (electron donor material) results in the depletion of
the available sulfate as it is an electron acceptor. Sampling for VOCs has had a similar, matrix effect resulting in high
detection limits for well samples also containing emulsion.
Also I would like to remove Newman Zone from the second sentence of the permit. We intend to use an emulsified
vegetable oil product, and may still use the Newman Zone product that we have used in the past, but are also
contemplating switching the EVO brand. I have attached the other two products being considered - manufactured by
Terra Systems and EOS remediation. They are all EVO products with essentially the same ingredients.
Thank you,
e,� r
�
Please feel free with any alternative suggestions or questions. w
Mark ��'do
�0 X� o mall
W. Mark Eliason � y '7 D����p�
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401(Fax)
[e-mail]
-----Original Message -----
From: Eliason, W. Mark

USDA
-` CERTIFIED
EOS PRO BIOBASED
PRODUCT
rvDucr 95%
Emulsified Oils Family
Description
EOS PRO is a nutrient -enriched, DoD-validated, food -grade oil/water emulsion designed to quickly
stimulate microbial activity while providing long-term nourishment to enhance anaerobic
bioremediation of chlorinated solvents, nitrates, perchlorate, energetics, acid mine drainage and other
recalcitrant chemicals in contaminated groundwater. EOS PRO can also be used to reduce redox
sensitive metals and radionuclides. The negative surface charges on the droplets combined with small
droplet size promote effective transport in the subsurface.
EOS PRO benefits:
• Includes biostimulating vitamins and nutrients
• Rapidly -biodegradable substrates to "jump start" bacterial growth
• Slow release biodegradable substrates to promote long-term biological activity
• Small oil droplet size
• Negative surface charge
• Neutral pH
• Extensive third party validation
EOS PRO incorporates the proven patented EOS technologies that clients have trusted for more than a
decade. Made in the USA with US farmed soybean oil.
Chemical and Physical Properties
Oil Emulsion Concentrate: EOS PRO Typical
Refined and Bleached US Soybean Oil (% by wt.) 59.8

r-
Rapidly Biodegradable Soluble Substrate (% by wt.) 4
Other Organics (emulsifiers, food additives, etc.) (% by wt.) 10
Specific Gravity 0.96 — 0.98
pH (Standard Units) 6.0-7.0
Median Oil Droplet Size (microns) 1.0
Organic Carbon (% by wt.) 74
Mass of Hydrogen Produced (lbs. Hz per lb. EOS PRO) 0.25
Packaging
Shipped in 55-gallon drums, 275-gallon IBC totes or bulk tankers (40,000 lbs.)
Handling & Storage
EOS PRO is shipped as a ready -to -use concentrated emulsion that can be diluted with water in the field
to prepare a high quality suspension for easy injection. EOS PRO has a low viscosity and can be
distributed with commonly available pumps or continuous metering with a diluter (e.g., Dosatron TM).
Dilution ratios for EOS PRO commonly range from 4:1 to 20:1 (water: EOS PRO) depending on site
conditions. EOS PRO injections should be followed with additional chase water to maximize distribution
of EOS PRO into the formation.
For best performance, use EOS PRO within 60 days of delivery and store at a temperature between 40°F
(4°C) to 100-F (38°C).
Rev. 04.18.2013
Select Language
��� Search
What's New

EOS 100 Receives PE Editor's Choice Award 2013
Raleigh, NC (July 8, 2013) — EOS Remediation, LLC, the global leader for innovative in -situ (...1
EOS Remediation Offers Free Consultations and Customer Support
Bioremediation costs less than traditional/conventional environmental cleanup technologies, vet
provides the longest sustained treatment option f... l
New Bioremediation Webinar Series Begins September 2013
EOS Remediation, LLC is pleased to present the 2013 — 2014 Webinar Series. !... 1
Upcoming Conferences & Trade Shows — Mark Your Calendars!
EOS Remediation regularly presents and exhibits at scientific and industry conferences related to site
remediation. See l... l
See All News
See All Events
Webinars
EOS Remediation has lined up new webinars being presented bimonthly for 2013 - 2014. Send me a
webinar invitation!>>
Next Webinar: November 2013 - 12:0013M (EDT) Details Here!>>
Stay in the Know
Keep informed with technical tips, new product releases, special promotions, and more. Sign up>>
0 Home
I

• Contact
• Log In
• Family of Products
• Find the Right Solution
• Log In
• Site Evaluation Forms
• Quick Links
• Log In
• Events
• News
• Log In
r i
3�

e�rra Systems, Inc. _
SRS°-SD Small Droplet Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO)
Substrate for Maximum Radius of Influence
United States Patent# RE40,448
The anaerobic bioremediation process uses native or introduced microorganisms to degrade chlorinated solvents such as
tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) to innocuous end products including ethene and ethane. An organic substrate must
be added to the groundwater to generate reducing conditions and provide the necessary carbon and hydrogen to support
biodegradation of the chlorinated solvents. The organic substrate can be a slow release substrate like Terra Systems' small droplet
SRS®-SD emulsified vegetable oil substrate. SRSQi-SD is designed to release bio-available hydrogen over a period of 3 to 5 years
thus enhancing the long-term anaerobic biodegradation of the chlorinated solvents. SRS®-SD optimizes the naturally occurring
biodegradation system by supplying the rate limiting factor (in this case hydrogen) in the degradation of VOC's, certain
pesticides/herbicides, perchlorate, and immobilization of certain metals (Cr, As, and some radionucleides).
SRS®-SD Substrate Specifications
Terra Systems, Inc.'s manufacturing facility is configured to allow us to provide our customers with custom blended substrate
packages without a cost premium. The SRS®-SD package contains the following components:
"Ingredient : � : ' •se `. �.:
Percent
Description •
Terra Systems operates its own state-of-the-art manufacturing facility
Food grade soy bean oil
40 - 60%
for SRS®-B,,ffe,ed production and can custom blend substrate packages
as site conditions require.
Emulsifiers and proprietary nutrient
Organic and inorganic nutrients support growth of the anaerobic
package containing nitrogen and
5 —15%
phosphorus,
microbial population.
He et al. 2007 demonstrated that vitamin B12 is an important
Vitamin Blz
<1%
micronutrient to enhance dechlorination activity. They found that 25
b of Vitamin B12 gave the maximum stimulation of dechlorination.
Sodium Lactate
4 - 7%
Soluble substrate to rapidly enerate anaerobic conditions
Water
20-50%
KEY BENEFITS OF SRS®-SD Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) Substrate Include:
• SRS®-SD promotes biodegradation of PCE and TCE to non -toxic end products
• SRS®-SD's mean droplet size of 0.6 micron is ideal for maximum radius of influence in the formation
• SRS®-SD's low viscosity of <50 centipoise injected improves radius of influence
• SRS®-SD's slow release formula eliminates the need for continuous substrate additions
• SRS®-SD contains only non -toxic food grade materials, which results in green, sustainable remediation
• SRS®-SD can be used as a PRB to cuts off plume migration
• SRS®-SD is effective in treating source zones
• The in situ application of. SRS®-SD minimizes site disruptions
• Using SRS®-SD reduces treatment time from decades to months and years
As a result of its low viscosity, small droplet size and longevity, SRS®-SD is an ideal substrate for injection using direct -push
technology. The low viscosity allows a greater volume of SRS®-SD to be applied in a shorter period of time and increases the
substrate delivery radius per point. This results in fewer direct push delivery points and overall shorter delivery time requirements per
site. Terra Systems, Inc. has applied this technology at military bases, dry cleaners and manufacturing sites throughout the USA and in
Brazil, Taiwan and Japan.
For more information contact: Michael Free
Terra Systems, Inc. 1035 Philadelphia Pike Suite E, Wilmington, DE 19809
(office) 302-798-9553 or (cell 484-889-2214
e-mail: mfree(&terrasystems.net
On the Web@ hqp:/www.terrasystems.net/

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 7:58 AM
To: Eliason, W. Mark([e-mail])
Subject: FW: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: WQ0036621dp131011.doc
Mark,
I have changed the draft permit to reflect the establishment of an injection zone. The changes include the elimination of
the Compliance Boundary and Review Boundary; and the monitoring wells have now been selected to be at locations
beyond the injection zone. I welcome your comments, and will subsequently finalize the permit and forward it to my
supervisor for approval.
Regards,
David Goodrich
-----Original Message -----
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 11:33 AM
To: 'Eliason, W. Mark'
Subject: RE: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your detailed email correspondence. I will change the permit to be in agreement with the establishment
of the three intended injection zone areas. Since monitoring potential migration of injectant substances beyond an
injection zone requires the sentinel wells to be outside of the injection zone area, I will be changing a several of the
monitoring wells listed under the "Monitoring Requirements" section of the permit. I will send you another draft permit
as soon as I can make these changes.
Thank you for your assistance with the permit drafting process.
Regards,
David Goodrich
-----Original Message -----
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 9:50 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit WQ0036621
David,

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 9:50 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: WQ0036621dp130726 (3).doc; GW_base.pdf, TOC Cummalative-Aprl3.xlsx; Zone 6
Access Email from NS.DOC; RR 2006 Access Agreement.pdf
9
l
David,
Attached is a revised permit � cPa
oon and amended injection zone boundaries. Below is an explanation of the
applicability of these boundaries. Tso altered the front page of the permit to indicate that alternate, very similar,
NCDENR approved emulsified vegetable oil (EVO) products could be substituted for Newman's Zone. A separate EVO
injection is scoped under a separate permit for wells in located in Zone 6, identified as IW-301, IW-302, IW-303, IW-304,
and DW-12(d1).
To complete the approval of Permit WQ0036621 by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Natural Resources
(NCDENR) for the Cotton Mill Square site located in Greensboro, NC, a revision to the injection zone stipulated in the
draft permit originally submitted on 26 June 2013 is rovided as Figure A-1. T,lae propasedxevlsion=assbeen_rn ____5 n
—
infection zones are presente on Figure A-1. T e zones extend rom the proposed injection locations in Zone 1, 3, and 5
to a distance downgradient beyond which it is unlikely that significant increases in the detection of injectants introduced
for the acceleration of natural biodegradation of chlorinated volatile organic compound (cVOC) would be observed.
The intended injecate is emulsified vegetable oil (EVO) and pH buffering material. The pH buffer material is primarily
applied to negate the pH lowering impact of application of EVO and will not likely be observed outside the immediate
area of EVO application. Distribution of EVO to wells downgradient of application can be monitored by the detection of
white emulsified fluids or by the concentration of total organic carbon (TOC). Historical concentrations of TOC
concentrations are provided as Table 1.
Application of EVO has been previously conducted at CMS in separate events conducted from 2006 through 2009 in
zones 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. In addition, groundwater was pumped from zone 5, amended with EVO, and recirculated into the
400 series wells (wells IW-401 through IW-409) + a-n frf orn-,t-he=xgroundwatererrionitoringgc-oTducted=prior t ao nd
fvl ` w'ng te�e�a�plicati-ands= � tzdistribution=of�vi i� b€UO�is�.timitedrto=manitoring�po�iTrts�within-20ifeet o�'sa�ofr�`
—k-a— a �� tea Th. White emulsified oil has been observed only in wells immediately adjacent to an injection point, for
example observed in well MW-37(s) located next to injector IW-201, and in well DW-13(d1) located adjacent to injector
IW-302. Very large increases in TOC concentrations can be observed in these wells, as well as in wells located in the
vicinity of injection applications, e.g. MW-04(s), EW-509, and PMW-2. Wells located more distant from injection zones
have demonstrated minimal or no increase in TOC concentrations, e.g. wells MW-03(s), EW-505, DW-19(d1), and MW-
49(i). The consumption of the EVO by anaerobic microbial consortia, and dilution and dispersion processes limit the
extent to which EVO impact will be observed outside of the treatment zone.
The extension of the Injection Zone from Zone 5 onto the Norfolk Southern property is acceptable based upon the
attached correspondence. I hope the permit alterations I have made ar�acceptable and the final permit can be issued.
Thank you very much for your continued attention to this project.
0u/G16r

Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 12:00 PM
To: Eliason, W. Mark
Subject: [BULK] Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site under Permit
WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your recent phone call regarding Conditions VII (1) and (2) of the draft permit.
I have discussed the options available with my supervisor, and the options are as follows:
1) The amount of injectant could be reduced from 1,000 GPD to a quantity that would allow it to remain within the
250-foot Compliance Boundary, or
2) An "injection zone" could be established under Rule 15A NCAC 02C .0225 (e)(2) which would allow the injectant to
occupy a larger area at each location that is being considered for injection.
You are welcome to meet with us to discuss these options.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and proprietary.
Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written permission of Weston
Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and
delete this email from your system. Thank you.

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMNIISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amended,
and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Weston Solutions, Inc. <<r__
Guilford County
FOR THE
operation of an existing groundwater remediation injection system which will allow application of up to 1,000
GPD of amended ground water on a periodic schedule (several weeks per ye) a . The remediation system will
consist of eleven (11) extraction wells (BW,.501—E$502V�=59-3--1✓VSS4� 595,'HW=5=06;V<58, EW-
509, IW-201, IW-205 and IW-206) to obtain dilut'oater for the injection of diluted Newman Zone emulsified
vegetable oil (EVO),r Ian " _ �' ' - 11i =alppxeri dot with sodium bicarbonate pH buffer into
eleven injection wells (same as extraction wells) to remediate saturated soil and ground water impacted by
chlorinated volatile organic compounds (CVOCs), with no discharge of wastes to the surface waters, pursuant to
the application received June 26, 2013, and subsequent additional information received by the Division of Water
Resources (Division), and in conformity with the project plan, specifications, and other supporting data
subsequently filed and approved by the Division and considered a part of this permit. Although this permit has
approved this system as a groundwater remediation facility, the operation of this facility will be limited to the
periodic gravity injection of groundwater amended with bioremediation-enhancing compounds into existing
wells.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until July 31, 2018 and shall be subject to the
following specified conditions and limitations:
I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
1. Approval of the remedial application granted in this remediation permit has been certified by a North
Carolina Professional Geologist. This remediation permit has been issued for the application of
bioremediation fluids and does not require construction -related systems or activities that would warrant
the review and approval of a professional engineer.
2. The Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number, shall be notified at least forty-eight (48) hours in
advance of operation of the remedial facilities, including the initiation of injection operations, so that an
in -place inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made during the
normal office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State Holidays.
3. The treated water discharged into the injection well must not exacerbate or cause a violation of Class GA
Standards for any constituent beyond the Compliance Boundary, nor cause the migration of the
contamination into unaffected areas. If the treatment system fails to consistently achieve this standard,
additional treatment units or changes in operational needs may be required.
W 0036621d 130726 3 _ Page 1 of 7

4. This permit shall become voidable if the soils fail to adequately assumiate the bioremediation-promoting
injected substrates and may be rescinded unless the facilities are maintained and operated in a manner
which will protect the assigned water quality standards of the surface and groundwaters. In the event that
the facility fails to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of nuisance conditions or failure of the
injection zone to adequately assimilate the injected fluid, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective
actions including those actions that may be required by the Division of Water Resources such as the
repair, modification, or abandonment of the injection facility. The Permittee may be required to reduce or
eliminate the permitted activity to protect the assigned water quality standards of surface and
groundwaters.
5. The injection facility shall be effectively maintained and operated at all times so that there is no increase
of contamination of groundwater which will render it unsatisfactory for normal use at location(s) beyond
the Compliance Boundary.
6. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility for damages to surface or
groundwaters resulting from the operation of this facility.
7. Any residuals generated from these treatment facilities must be disposed in accordance with General
Statute 143-215.1 and in a manner approved by the Division.
8. Diversion or bypassing of the untreated groundwater from the treatment facilities is prohibited.
H. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
The facilities shall be properly maintained and operated as a non -discharge system to prevent the
discharge of any wastewater resulting from the operation of this facility. The groundwater recovery,
treatment and disposal system shall be inspected daily during periodic injection activities. If it is
determined that the system is malfunctioning or leading to the release of wastes to the environment, a
threat to human health, or a nuisance, all repairs should be made as soon as possible and reported to the
Winston-Salem Regional Office (see Section VI. NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION). All
components of the groundwater recovery, treatment, and disposal system shall be properly
weatherproofed to prevent freezing and failure of the system.
2. If requested by the owner, the Division will consider remote monitoring in lieu of (frequency) physical
inspections, on a case -by -case basis, following at least two years of successful operation.
The Permittee shall maintain an inspection log or summary including at least the date and time of
inspection, observations made, and any maintenance, repairs, or corrective actions taken by the Permittee.
This log of inspections shall be maintained by the Permittee for a period of three years from the date of
the inspection and shall be made available to the Division or other permitting authority, upon request.
4. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or representative of the Division may, upon presentation of
credentials, enter and inspect any property, premises or place on or related to the disposal site or facility at
any reasonable time for the purpose of determining compliance with this permit (including inspection,
observation, and sampling associated with injection and any related facilities as provided for in N.C.G.S.
87-90), may inspect or copy any records that must be maintained under the terms and conditions of this
permit, and may obtain samples of groundwater, surface water, injection fluids, or leachate.
WQ0036621dp 130726 3 Page 2 of 10

M. WELL CONSTRUCTYun/ABANDONMENT CRITERIA
The construction and operation of Type 5I injection wells shall conform to Title 15A North
Carolina Administrative Code 2C .0209(e)(3)(C), to inject Newman Zone with sodium
bicarbonate, for the facilitation of natural biodegradation of chlorinated volatile organic
compounds. ,
2. Within fifteen days of any change of status of an injection well, the Permittee shall provide
written notification to the Division. Such a change would include the discontinued use of a well
for injection. If a well is taken completely out of service temporarily, the Permittee must install a
sanitary seal. If a well is not to be used for any purpose, that well must be permanently
abandoned according to15A NCAC 2C .0113, Well Construction Standards.
Any well that is no longer to be used for any purpose by the Permittee shall be abandoned in
accordance with the procedures specified in 15A NCAC 2C .0113(b).
4. Flow measurement of the volumes injected at each injection well will be monitored and recorded. Also,
any injection well that will require injection at pressures greater than gravity feed shall be equipped to
measure the injection pressure at the screened interval. If the injection pressure is greater than
atmospheric pressure, the mechanical integrity of the injection well(s) shall be demonstrated according to
15A NCAC 2C .0207.
C—w -51s
IV. MONITORING REQUIREMENTSc:- VJ — `� UJ—,.
1. Monitor well(s) MW-36-s, HIB 8(td=}(for Zone 1);V" 12,1VI3s), MW=(s) )(for
Zone 3); and DW-11(d1), DW-13(d1),4�)�8- forand-� 1,9(�1) (for Zone 5) shall be sampled before
the injections begin and thereafter every six months (twice every year) for the parameters listed below:
i JJ
Nitrate Nitrogen* Oil and Grease* Volatile Organic Compounds 1 vs ` 3P Z
Chloride Sulfate Total Organic Carbon "
Total Iron pH Conductivity Nitrite Nitrogen*
Temperature ReDox (ORP) Dissolved Oxygen
v
*These parameters are to be sampled during the final sampling event only.
2. Prior to sampling the parameters, the measurement of water levels must be taken. The depth to water in
each well shall be measured from the surveyed point on the top of the casing. The measuring points (top
of well casing) of all monitoring wells shall be surveyed relative to a common datum.
3. For Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) sampled every six months, use only one of the following
methods:
a. Standard Method 6230D, Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) at 0.5 ug/L or less
b. Standard Method 6210D, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
c. EPA Method 8021, Low Concentration, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
d. EPA Method 8260, Low Concentration, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
e. Another method with prior approval by the Aquifer Protection Chief.
W 0036621d 130726 3 _ Page 3 of 10

=Any of the referenced methods used for VOCs must at a minimum, iriciude all the constituents
listed in Table VIII of Standard Method 6230D. This analyte list, as well as the historic 8260 monitoring
list sampled under the CAP/RAP will be monitored for three years following the initiation of permit
finalization. Any analyte included in the 6230D list that is not part of the historic 8260 VOC monitoring
list either not detected at a concentration significantly greater than the Method Detection Limit (MDL) or
above the corresponding NCDENR 2L standard will be deleted from the monitoring list in future
monitoring events.
The 8260 VOC Reporting Limit for the primary site constituents of concern (COCs) range from 0.5 to 1
ug/L. Analytical results will be reported to the qualified (estimated) MDL, resulting in a reported
qualified (estimated) concentration of 0.5 ug/L or less for all undiluted COCs.
4. Any laboratory selected to analyze parameters must be Division of Water Resources certified for those
parameters required.
5. Any additional groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed necessary by the Division, shall be provided.
V. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Three (3) copies of the following forms shall be mailed to the address below:
a. GW-1 Well Construction Record
b. GW-30 Well Abandonment Record
c. GW-59 Groundwater Quality Monitoring : Compliance Report Form
d. GW-59A Compliance Report Form
Mail these documents to the following address: Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Information Processing Unit
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Updated blank forms (GW-1, GW-30, GW-59, GW-59A) may be downloaded from the Division of Water
Resources website at http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/ or requested from the address mentioned above.
2. The results of the sampling and analysis must be received on forms GW-59 and GW-59A on or before the
last working day of the month following the sampling month. The data of all groundwater sampling
analyses required by the permit conditions must be reported using the most recent GW-59 and GW-59A
forms along with attached copies of the laboratory analyses.
3. The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, including calibration and maintenance
records, continuous monitoring data and reports required by this permit, for at least 3 years from the date
of the sample measurement, report or application. Records of this monitoring information shall include,
but not be limited to, the following:
a. the date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements,
b. the individual who performed the sampling or measurements,
c. the date the analyses were performed,
d. the analytical techniques or methods used, and
e. the results of such sampling, measurements, and analyses.
W 0036621 dp 130726 3 _ Page 4 of 10

4. The permittee shall report-Lu the Winston-Salem Regional Office (see -oz; ' tion VI. NONCOMPLIANCE
NOTIFICATION), within 48 hours of the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence, or any
monitoring or other information which indicates:
a. any contaminant may cause an endangerment to an underground source of drinking water,
b. any noncompliance with a permit condition due to a malfunction of the system, or
c. any cause of fluid migration outside the injection zone or area.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of
noncompliance, including exact dates and times. If the noncompliance is not corrected and is expected to
continue, steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance
shall be provided to the Regional Office in a timely manner.
The permittee shall submit an annual report summarizing the volume and injection pressure(s) of effluent
discharged into the injection well(s) and the summary results of related groundwater, influent, and
effluent monitoring. Isoconcentrations (horizontal and vertical direction) and water level
contour/potentiometric surface maps shall be prepared on an annual basis and submitted with this report.
If an annual report containing this information (e.g. corrective action plan) is required by a regulatory
agency, the permittee may submit two (2) copies of that report in lieu of the preceding information within
thirty days of its publication. The, permittee shall submit this report to the following address: Aquifer
Protection Section, Groundwater Protection Unit,1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1636.
VI. NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION
The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number (336)
771-5000, as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours or on the next working day following
the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following:
a. Any occurrence at the groundwater remediation facility which results in any unusual operating
circumstances, or in the treatment of significant amounts of contaminated groundwaters which are
abnormal in quantity or characteristic, such as the dumping of the contents of a basin or tank, the
known passage of a slug of hazardous substance through the facility, or any other unusual
circumstances;
b. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons, that renders the groundwater treatment
and disposal system, including injection wells, incapable of adequate treatment and disposal, such as
mechanical or electrical failures of pumps, aerators, compressors, etc.;
c. Any failure of a pumping station, sewer line, or treatment facility resulting in a by-pass directly to
receiving waters without treatment of all or any portion of the influent to such station or facility; or
d. Any time that self -monitoring information indicates that the groundwater treatment and disposal
system is not in compliance with any specified permit limitations.
2. Occurrences outside normal business hours may also be reported to the Division's Emergency Response
personnel at telephone number [phone] or to the Emergency Management's switchboard at (919)
733-3300. Also, persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall file a written report within five
(5) days following first knowledge of the occurrence. This report must outline the actions taken or
proposed to be taken to ensure that the problem does not recur.
VH. APPLICABLE BOUNDARIES
The COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY for the disposal system is specified by regulations in 15A NCAC 2L,
Groundwater Classifications and Standards. The Compliance Boundary for the disposal system
individually peFfflitted DeeeflibeF 30, 1983 is established a4 eithef (1) 250 feet ffem the waste dispesal
.,. .x, .. ��.. .... ....... .... ....., r...t......�--
liovidellsigurA An exceedance of Class GA Standards at or beyond the Compliance Boundary is
subject to remediation idualLyeirnit�edcDecembec=3.O.n Ia}5��sah}ish�daezfiiaer{�2�OyFeer
-._
�fo=e=vas%c clas osal area =oL �5`Yeeiivihinlier - : e�=b-oiirdax ' . ihever Is=olasett-tlie
p1�
W 0036621d 130726 QPage 5 of 10

u¢astedis ,,salFre. ac"ion according to 15A NCAC 2L' .Ol-;o(d) (2). Please be aware that the
Compliance Boundar designation refers to the injectant substances and not to the contaminant plume.
2. The REVIEW BOUNDARY is established around the disposal systems midway between the Compliance
Boundary and the perimeter of the waste disposal area. Any exceedance of Class GA Standards at the
Review Boundary may require action in accordance with 15A NCAC 2L .0106(d) (1). Please be aware
that the Review Boundary designation refers to the injectant substances and not to the contaminant plume.
VM. WORKER PRECAUTIONS DURING MANUAL APPLICATION OF INJECTION
(Manual Application Only)
1. Some effects reported to be associated with the product proposed to be used are as follows: eye,
skin, nose, throat, and lung irritation. If the product is released into the environment in a way that
could result in a suspension of fine solid or liquid particles (e.g., grinding, blending, vigorous
shaking or mixing), then proper personal protective equipment should be used. The application
process should be reviewed by an industrial hygienist to ensure that the most appropriate personal
protective equipment is used.
2. Persons working with these products should wear safety glasses, goggles or a face shield, gloves,
and protective clothing. Face and body protection should be used for anticipated splashes or
sprays.
3. Eating, drinking, smoking, handling contact lenses, and applying cosmetics should not be
permitted in the application area during or immediately following application.
4. Safety controls should be in place to ensure that the check valve and the pressure delivery systems
are working properly.
5. The Material Safety Data Sheets should be followed to prevent incompatible or adverse reactions
and injuries.
IX. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Issuance of this permit does not constitute approval for reimbursement from the Leaking Petroleum
Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (15A NCAC 2P) or any other fund. Additionally, the issuance
of this permit does not remove the Permittee's responsibility to comply with the corrective action
requirements of the Division of Waste Management. Furthermore, the permittee should notify and report
all changes concerning the remedial system to the Division of Waste Management. It is the Permittee's
responsibility to comply with the requirements of all involved agencies.
2. This permit shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with the conditions
of this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting data.
3. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes described in the application
and other supporting data.
4. The Permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit and with the standards and criteria specified
in Criteria and Standards Applicable to Injection Wells (15A NCAC 2C .0200). Any noncompliance with
conditions of this permit constitutes a violation of the North Carolina Well Construction Act and is
grounds for enforcement action as provided for in N.C.G.S. 87-94.
5. This permit is valid only for construction of the number of injection wells described in the
W 003 6621 dp 130726 QPage 6 of 10

application and other supporting data. Construction of adanonal injection wells must be
approved in advance by the Aquifer Protection Section.
6. This permit is not transferable. In the event there is a desire for the facilities to change ownership, or
there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal permit request must be submitted to the Division
accompanied by an application fee, documentation from the parties involved, and other supporting
materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits and may or
may not be approved.
7. A set of approved plans and specifications for the subject project must be retained by the Permittee for the
life of this project.
The Permittee must notify the Division and receive prior written approval from the Director of any
planned physical alterations or additions in the permitted facility or activity not specifically authorized by
the permit. A permit modification is usually required before these changes can take place. Where the
Permittee becomes aware of an omission of any relevant facts in a permit application, or of any incorrect
information submitted on said application or in any report to the Division, the relevant and correct facts
shall be promptly submitted to the Division by the Permittee.
Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the Permittee to an
enforcement action by the Division in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to
143-215.6C.
10. The annual administering and compliance fee must be paid by the Permittee within thirty (30) days after
being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee accordingly may cause the Division to initiate action
to revoke this permit as specified by 15A NCAC 2T .0105 (e) (3).
11. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any and all statutes,
rules, regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by other government agencies (local, state, and
federal), which have jurisdiction.
12. Sixty (60) days prior to closure of the injection wells, the permittee must request a rescission of the permit
from the Division of Water Resources. Guidelines for the closure of the injection wells may be obtained
from http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us or requested from the Division of Water Resources.
13. If the permittee wants -to continue operation of this system, at least six (6) months prior to the expiration
of this permit, the permittee shall request its extension. Upon receipt of the request, the Commission will
review the adequacy of the facilities described therein, and if warranted, will extend the permit for such
period of time and under such conditions and limitations as it may deem appropriate.
Permit issued this the 9th day of August 2013
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
for Thomas A. Reeder, Director
Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number WQ0036621
W 0036621 d 130726 3 Page 7 of 10

fi t
s
I Tributary A
DW-19-d1
-zj - -
Injection Well
Extraction Well
+ Saprolite Monitor Well
4- Intermediate Zone Monitor V
+ Bedrock Monitor Well
Abandoned Saprolite Monito
Abandoned Intermediate
Zone Monitor Well
? Abandoned Bedrock Monitor
Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads
Injection Zones
—sao—Groundwater Elevation Cont(
(feet above mean sea level)
Interpreted Direction of
Groundwater Flow
829.43Groundwater Elevation (Feet
Q--1- ;_ Co-+

Table 1
Total Organic Carbon Groundwater Analytic Results
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Injection Zone 1
in ection Zone 2
Injection Zone 3
Injection Zone 5
Injection Zone 6
Wells Downgradlent of
Injection
EW-509
DW-
09(dl)
DW-
17(d2)
MW-
37(s)
DW-
04(d1)
EW-511
MW-
03(s)
MW-
04(s)
MW-
13(s)
MW-
14(s)
I MW-
18(I)
DW-
05(d1)
DW-
07(I)
DW-
14(d2)
EW-
613
IW-
205
PMW
2
TMW-
1
EW-
606
MW-
10(s)
DW-
08(I)
DW-
11(d1)
DW-
13(d1)
DW-
18(d2)
DW-18(1)
DW-
19(d1)
MW 49(I)
8/2/2006
61
1.6
12
54
170
92
79
1
3.5
15
3.5
2.4
1
2/11/2007
5.9
1.1
1.6
76
2
220 B
110
31
1.6
3.9
2.5
1
8/15/2007
598
1.5 B
1 J B
1.4 B
45 B
2.2 B
380 B
2.3 B
55000 B
4 2 B
2.4 B
2.9 B
1.1 B
12/10/07
56
'
2/5/08
2800 B
5.3 B
1.3 B
18 B
10 B
12 B
3.6 B
180
178
120
2.8 B
0.92 J B
2800
3.2 B
2.8 B
2.6 B
0.79 J B
5/30/08
1100
36
1.6
1.5
3
'
10121 /06
150
0.73
360
3.2
6
11
1.7
190
29
082
16000
29
21
26
0.72
4/9/09
48
0.73
96
4.8
93
8.5
7.9
2.9
3.6
4.2
5800
3.4
1.8
3.7
0.73
10/14/09
5.5
410
31
48
1300
82
3.8
210
16
1600
31
3.1
4.7
0.93
4/6/10
96
24
096
480
5
29
13
160
24
570
19
2.9
16
350
3.5
2.3
5.2
'
10/12/10
100 B
35
12
280
2.9
16
20 B
45 B
39 B
470
4.9 B
3 B
190 B
52
1.6
130
35
4113111
11
3.2
"
9
28
55
190
3.6
240
18
96
5.1E
10/6/11
180
0.87 J
34
7.0
12
84
480
98
13
630
330
11
2.2
2.0
130
•
6.7
4/9/12
51
0.46 J
1.5
4.9
9.3
46
13
3.7
3
650
480
4
10/22/12
520
2.8
3 0
3.7
10
69
5
5.3
0.87
780
420
47
3.2
'
7 7
6.
.9
4
6.
.9
0
0
8.6
Note: ' - not anlyzed.
U - Analyte not detected at or above reporting limit. J - estimated value.
B-Analyte detected in blank Results reported in mg/L.

{
F
1
,
} !-.------------
}
#
I
{
{
f
Zone 11 ?
I
zs`y }
ems. 1 :s€ jr ..,` ` # ?t�- ..._.l Zone 3 _ €
} in,
€
m'
on g Zone
-
ii i 1€
t ,y-- OYF06E1 1 # S ;
ex-513
+�<,aw-zoz� # i; „j j t_ M, �!► ram,-o�'*� i,-_^" ^s � - ss
a
4
Ny1742 i.' dG'Rn.. '�}• � �I t' nN.OQ41� f! l 13s��t F��"k 'u.•�„,.,.Sr � � f j � � } €
# f jjj
(.nvzmone 2
' 10d1 �.•d;G- �5 r'c `. i1 # M11VV-2B-s rt . t
_ ��; III I i' PhC4.. 'ly 'Y'.,t� V•" # # } ''• t i }
v , L`-.x..;a1'v�•' R SEW-510 z .'i-`."„'..-j ij -} �` ✓"'i-.,^.• ,; } 1
...t i_�d^�--_...,,#_ } Div �W 1Z�;M1Y ]OB :IW.2(9sf __.,.',�•,,.'
^E"7 €
M
In
iiiiii my.•ae, m".ss'we°x„
� w Zone 6
`'��4 i � ✓ .n °' � ��a'�ts"^; ti��` RN-t141 j_ I ON-1sa1
� � y_, � � uinvaa+ • -h-
1 s
zn;�rc: ;act" } •'_^Yaaf
iwaa
'bw-,6i�{
. i
a
3
I
�
a � E �
i
ti
[
s1$
j
1
1
i TributaryA
M-1841
-E-
h
Legend `t -
`Injectionmell-1 Wa
El Extraction Well
Y Saprolite Monitor Well
Intermediate Zone Monitor Well
4; Bedrock Monitor Well
Abandoned Saprolite Monitor Well
Abandoned Intermediate
Zone Monitor Well
Abandoned Bedrock Monitor Well
Cotton Mill Square Boundary
Buildings/Roads
® Injection Zones
-a4o-Groundwater Elevation Contour
(feet above mean sea level)
Interpreted Direction of
Groundwater Flow
e29 43Groundwater Elevation (Feet)
Scale in Feet
0 200 40o
' i 'Feet
1 inch = 200 Feet
Figure A-1
ISB Injection Zone Configuration
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Greensboro, North Carolina
He Y 1CMS1MXr1GW_ba nad, Sr1 SR01354642 PM, nciac

q; ,
,;i

Table 1
Total Organic Carbon Groundwater Analytic Results
Cotton Mill Square Facility
Injection Zone 1
Injection Zone 2
Injection Zone 3
Injection Zone 5
Injection Zone 6
Wells Downgradient of
Injection
EW-609
DW-
09(d1)
DW-
17(d2)
MW-
37(s)
DW-
04(dl)
EW-511
MW-
03(s)
MW-
04(s)
MW-
13(s)
MW-
14(s)
MW-
18(I)
DW-
06(dl)
DW-
07(I)
DW-
14(d2)
EW-
513
IW-
206
PMW
2
TMW-
1
EW-
606
MW-
10(s)
DW.
08(1)
DW.
11(d1)
DW-
13(d1)
DW-
16(d2)
DW-18(1)
DW-
19(d1)
MW-49(I)
8/2/2006
6.1
1.6
12
54
170
9.2
79
3.5
1.5
3.5
2.4
1
2/11/2007
5.9
1.1
1.6
76
2
220 B
110
3.1
1.6
3.9
2.5
1
8/15/2007
59B
1 5 B
1JB
1.4B
45B
2.2B
380B
2.3B
550008
4.2B
2.4B
2.9B
1.1B
12/10/07
5.5
2/5/08
2800B
53B
1.3B
18B
1.0B
12B
3.6B
180
17B
120
2.88
0.92JB
2800
32B
2.8B
2.6B
0.79JB
5/30/08
1100
'
36
1.6
1.5
•
3
10/21/08
150
0.73
360
3.2
6
11
1.7
190
2.9
0.82
16000
2.9
2.1
2.6
0.72
4/9/09
48
0.73
96
4.8
9.3
8.5
7.9
2.9
3.6
42
5800
3.4
1.8
3.7
0.73
10/14/09
5.5
410
31
4.8
1300
82
3.8
210
1.6
1600
3.1
3.1
4.7
0.93
416/10
95
24
0.96
480
5
29
13
160
24
570
19
29
16
350
35
23
5.2
'
10/12/10
100 B
3.5
1.2
280
2.9
15
20 B
45 B
39 B
470
4.9 B
3 B
190 B
52
16
130
3.5
4/13/11
1.1
32
9
28
55
190
3.6
240
1.8
96
5.1
10/6/11
180
0.87 J
3.4
7.0
12
84
480
9.8
13
630
330
11
2.2
2.0
130
6.7
'
4/9/12
51
0.46 J
1.5
4.9
9 3
46
13
3.7
3
650
480
4
10/22/12
520
'
2.8
3.0
3 7
10
69
1 5
5.3
0.87
780
420
47
32
190
6.
3.
6
6
3.
.3
170
2.
8'6
Note: ' - not anlyzed
U - Analyte not detected at or above reporting limit. J - estimated value
B-Analyte detected in blank Results reported in mg/L

Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 12:03 PM
To: Cornuet, Thomas; Johnson, Steve E.
Cc: Foreman, Pauline
Subject: Greensboro, NC -Cotton Mill Square Site
Messrs. Cornuet and Johnson:
I am in receipt of your letter to Gayle Jordan regarding the Cotton Mill Square Site in Greensboro, NC.
Ms. Jordan retired in early 2012, so future correspondence on this matter should be directed to my
attention.
Your letter seeks signature by Norfolk Southern on the injection well permit application for your
remediation work on Norfolk Southern property. While I understand that Norfolk Southern signed the
older permit form in 2008 as property owner, those forms and the corresponding certification listed on
those forms have changed since that time. The older form included a "Consent of Property Owner"
section, which was signed by an NS VP in 2008. That consent section simply indicated the owner's
consent to allow you to construct the wells and specifically stated that all responsibilities for that well
belong to the applicant, not the property owner. The certification in the current form, however, is not
merely a consent and instead requires a broader certification by the property owner. Norfolk Southern
declines to sign such a certification because it is neither our remediation activity nor our well(s), and we
are not willing to accept responsibility for either. As we have advised others in NC with similar requests,
and as NCDENR has accepted in the past in relation to other locations, you are more than welcome to
use the existing Environmental Right of Entry Agreement between us to evidence property owner
consent to you conducting your activities on our property.
Thank you.
Helen M. Hart
General Solicitor
Norfolk Southern Corporation
3 Commercial Place
Norfolk, VA 23510
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Please consider the environneent before printing this email.

Lucent Te�ies
sell Labs Innova#iom
0
Stephen L Oberkrom Lucent Technologies hx.
Renreciawn Project Manager 1067 NW High Point Dr
Lees Summit. %40 t,4091
Telephone$]b246-7108 E-mail: [e-mail]
Facsimile Rib-525-8594
January 5, 2006
Ms. Pauline Mapp
Norfolk Southern Corporation
Law Department
Three Commercial Place
Norfolk, Virginia 23510-9241
Re: Greensboro, NC — ROE Third Amendment Agreement between Lucent
Technologies, Inc. and Norfolk Southern Railway Company; Norfolk Southern Law
Dear Ms. Mapp
Enclosed please find one original of a third amendment for the captioned entry signed by me
as an authorized representative for Lucent Technologies. I have retained one of the original
signed copies of this amendment.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 816-246-7108.
Sincerelv,
Stephen L. Oberkrom
Enclosure

THIRD AMENDMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT
This Amendmdnt is entered into as of 2-1 , 2005, between Lucent
Technologies, Inc. ("Licensee-'), a Delaware corporation and NORFOLK SOUTHERN
RAILWAY COMPANY, ("Company"), a Virginia corporation.
WHEREAS, Company and Licensee have entered into an Environmental Right of Entry
License Agreement, made as of May 7, 2001 ("Agreement"), covering the entry of Licensee onto
Company's intermodal facility ("Property") at Greensboro, North Carolina for the purpose of
installing and sampling six monitoring wells; and the parties subsequently entered into First and
Second Amendments to the Agreement, dated June 27, 2001 and July 1, 2002 which led,
respectively, to the installation of two and then three additional five, with the eleven flush
mounted monitoring wells (MW-451, MW-45s, MW-41, DW-13, DW-16, MW-42, DW-12, DW-
11, MW-43s, DW-15 and DW-19);
WHEREAS, Licensee wishes to renew and extend the teens of the Agreement to cover
all past monitoring done on the Property, and the past installation of pumps on six wells MW-
45i, MW-41, DW-13, DW-16, DW-15 and DW-19, plus to allow continued periodic monitoring
of all wells and to perform in -situ injections for groundwater remediation per the attached work
plan (Exhibit A).
WHEREAS, Company is agreeable to renewing the Agreement, as amended, and
extending the terns of the Agreement as requested by Licensee:€riaEl-:t�-=dal;:
THEREFORE, the parties, acknowledging mutual consideration and intending to be
legally bound, agree as follows:
The parties agree that the Agreement, as amended, is hereby renewed and the
tern of this Third Amendment is extended to and includes Imi;15�?1:
The one (1) year expiration provision of Paragraph 4, line 4 of the Agreement is
no longer in effect.
2. Licensee shall be authorized to continue monitoring the existing wells on the
Property as shown in Exhibit D and to undertake the in -situ injection described in
Exhibit E subject to the terms and limitations of the original Agreement.
Licensee shall give1`ttY':r required by Paragraph 3 prior to each entry
to Division Engineer i64.-.42k'�his designee Assistant
Track Supervisor ly-tw a_f)ar:(33.Cx}:fl9}en
4. Paragraph I of the Agreement is revised to insert "is damaged or" after "in the
event any well installed" in line 13.
In the event of any inconsistency or ambiguity between the provisions of
Agreement, and those of this Amendment, the provisions of this Amendment shall
prevail. However, except as expressly modified by this Amendment, the terms
and conditions of Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.
Each of the parties therefore has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly
authorized representative.

NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY
COMPANY
By:
Title:y,, Ge prey-, lc;.
(ANIDS11.4 fi.amendldcc)
LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
By: f a-c-
Title: 6"-'-6t-r

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 12:00 PM
To: Eliason, W. Mark([e-mail])
Subject: Options for addressing Compliance Boundary Issues at the Cotton Mill Square site
under Permit WQ0036621
Mark,
Thank you for your recent phone call regarding Conditions VII (1) and (2) of the draft permit.
I have discussed the options available with my supervisor, and the options are as follows:
1) The amount of injectant could be reduced from 1,000 GPD to a quantity that would allow it to remain within the
250-foot Compliance Boundary, or -
2) An "injection zone" could be established under Rule 15A NCAC 02C .0225 (e)(2) which would allow the injectant
to occupy a larger area at each location that is being considered for injection.
You are welcome to meet with us to discuss these options.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
1

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 2:19 PM
To: Eliason, W. Mark([e-mail]);
[e-mail]
Cc: Wang, Shuying
Subject: Revised Draft of Cotton Mill Square Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: WQ0036621dp130726.doc
Mark and Steve,
I am attaching herewith a revised draft of the subject permit for your review and comment. Most of the redline revisions
you suggested to us in your transmission of August 26, 2013 have been made.
Former Permit Condition 11.2 has been removed from the permit, since it pertains to securing an Operator in Responsible
Charge and that does not apply to this type of permit.
In Permit Condition IV.3, the minimum amount of time required for the sampling of any analyte being considered for
removal from the monitoring program is three years.
Permit Conditions VITA and VI1.2 are being left as -is.
I welcome your comments on this revision.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
I

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 11:23 AM
To: Wilcox, Betty
Subject: RE: WQ0036621 VOC Sampling
Betty,
Thank you for your comments on changes to the draft permit proposed by the permittee. I intend to keep the
monitoring parameters for a minimum of four sampling events (two years), as per your recommendation.
Your assistance is appreciated.
David
From: Wilcox, Betty
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 10:18 AM
To: Goodrich, David
Cc: Wilcox, Betty
Subject: WQ0036621 VOC Sampling
David,
I have reviewed the referenced draft permit (WQ0036621) "VOC" language and other relevant information from the
CAP/RAP and application file regarding groundwater VOC detections and monitoring plans you provided for review. I
have the following comments:
The analyte list and other VOC monitoring language proposed by the permittee in the draft should be adequate;
however, I don't believe deleting parameters from the list after one year of sampling is appropriate since sampling will
only occur two times (every six months). Chlorinated solvent constituents have a tendency to rebound in some
situations, and for some parameters (example: vinyl chloride) the degradation products will increase as other primary
constituents decrease. I recommend at least 4 sampling events or more before deleting parameters from the list, if
supported by the results.
Betty
Betty Wilcox
Environmental Chemist
Division of Water Quality
Aquifer Protection Section
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC27699-1636
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
E-mail address: [e-mail]
APS Website: http://portaLncdenr.org/web/wq/ays
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to
third parties.

Goodrich, David -
From:
Wang, Shuying
Sent:
Tuesday, August 27, 2013 4:35 PM
To:
Goodrich, David
Cc:
Knight, Sherri
Subject:
RE: Draft of Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Hi David,
I look at this yesterday. It will be up to you whether the standard language or individual permit specific language is to be
used. If the permit specific is to be used, check the grammar again. For example, in Section I and Paragraph 1, the
second sentence:... is has been ... needs to be corrected.
Technical comments: (1) there were more 11 extraction wells (see Table F-1, in application) will be used, but the permit
states as 11. (2) based on the nature of injection and the distance between each monitoring well picked to be monitored
and the injection wells, I will suggest that all injection wells be sampled for all parameters listed in the permit except for
OVC during the final sampling event.
If this is not clear to you, please call or email me. Shuying
Shuying Wang, PG
Hydrogeologist
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Resources, Aquifer Protection Section
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone] or 771-4632
shuying.wang0)ncdenr.gov
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to
the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 8:11 AM
To: Wang, Shuying
Subject: FW: Draft of Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621 -
Shuying,
I welcome any comments you might have regarding any of these requested changes.
Thank you!
David Goodrich
From: Eliason, W. Mark(mai[to:W.M.EliasonOfflestonSolutions. com]
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:57 PM

Goodrich, David
From: Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 4:57 PM
To: Goodrich, David; Johnson, Steve E.
Cc: Wang, Shuying
Subject: RE: Draft of Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: Permit Redline WQ0036621dp130726 (2).doc
David,
Per our conversation, attached is a redline version of Permit WQ0036621 to more accurately reflect the Cotton Mill
Square Site proposed remedial activities. Please review and approve.or comment as necessary. Thank you in advance
for your consideration.
Sincerely,
W. Mark Eliason
-Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
W.M.Eliasonca-)WestonSolutions.com
From: Goodrich, David [mailto:david.goodrich(a)ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 9:34 AM
To: Johnson, Steve E.; Eliason, W. Mark
Cc: Wang, Shuying
Subject: Draft of Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Steve and Mark,
I am sending you a draft of the subject permit for your review and comment. Please pay particular attention to the
monitoring requirements, and get back to me with your comments and any concerns or recommendations.
Thank you for your assistance.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
f GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION PERMIT
In accordance L the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amended,
and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
I PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Weston Solutions, Inc.
Guilford County
FOR THE
eon tnietien and peration of an existing 1$09 GPP groundwater remediation €aeility ini ection system which will
allow application,6f up to 1,000 gpd of amended groundwater on a periodic, schedule
(several weeks p r year, based on monitoring results). The remediation system will consisting of eleven (11)
extraction wellsJo obtain dilution watere for injection of diluted Newman Zone emulsified vegetable oil (EVO)
with sodium bicarbonate pH buffer into eleven (I1) injection wells o '
' bieafbanatc pil uffi r and _laccelerate natural bioremediationi
saturated soil and ground water impacted by chlorinated volatile organic Compounds (CVOCs), with no discharge
of wastes to the surface waters, pursuant to the application received June 26.2013, and subsequent additional
information received by the Division of Water Resources (Division), and in conformity with the project plan,
specifications, and other supporting data subsequently filed and approved by the Divisio and considered a part of
this Dermit. Although this Dermit has been aoproved as a eroundwater remediation facilit _ the operation of this
compounds into existing wells.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until July 31, 2018 and shall be subjectto the
following specified conditions and limitations:
I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
1
bioremediation fluids and does not require construction related systems or activities that would warrant
the review of a professional engineer.
pefmiaed faeikty has been installed in aeeerdaneewith this peFmit, the appFeved plans and speeifleatioas-,
shall retain the r-eseensibilit—ta tr-aek fuf4her eefistpaetian aeoreved tmdeF the same pefmit, and shall
provide a final eef4ifieaie of the entife prei-et has been eted. mailCenter--{ke
r Raleigh, -
Pen pit Redline W0003662ldpt30726 (2)PeFmi' Redid...,. NVO0036621,a030726 emit etienPage 1 of 7

2. The Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number, shall be notified at least forty-eight (48) hours in
advance of operation of the iwA41ed-remedial facilities, including the initiation of injection operations, so
that an in -place inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made during
the normal office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State
Holidays.
3. The treated water discharged into the injection well must not exacerbate or cause a ew—a-violation of
Class GA Standards for any constituent beyond the Compliance Boundary, nor cause the migration of the
contamination into unaffected areas. If the treatment system fails to consistently achieve this standard,
additional treatment units or changes in operational needs may be required.
4. This permit shall become voidable if the soils fail to adequately assimilate the bioremediation promotins
injected substrates and may be rescinded unless the facilities are installed; maintained,
and operated in a manner, which will protect the assigned water quality standards of the surface and
groundwaters. In the event that the facility fails to perform satisfactorily, including the creation .
nuisance conditions or failure of the injection zone to adequately assimilate the injected fluid, the
Permittee shall take immediate corrective actions including those actions that may be required by the
Division of Water Resources such as the repair, modification, or abandonment of the injection facility.
The Permittee may be required to reduce or eliminate the permitted activity to protect the assigned water
quality standards of surface and groundwaters.
5. The injection facility shall be effectively maintained and operated at all times so that there is no increase
of contamination of groundwater which will render it unsatisfactory for normal use at location(s) beyond
the Compliance Boundary.
6. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility for damages to surface or
groundwaters resulting from the operation of this facility.
7. Any residuals generated from these treatment facilities must be disposed in accordance with General
Statute 143-215.1 and in a manner approved by the Division.
8. Diversion or bypassing of the untreated groundwater from the treatment facilities is prohibited.
H. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REOUIREMENTS
1. The facilities shall be properly maintained and operated as a non -discharge system to prevent the
discharge of any wastewater resulting from the operation of this facility. The groundwater recovery,
treatment and disposal system shall be inspected daily during periodic injection activities. If it is
determined that the system is malfunctioning or leading to the release of wastes to the environment, a
threat to human health, or a nuisance, all repairs should be made as soon as possible and reported to the
Winston-Salem Regional Office (see Section VI. NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION). All
components of the groundwater recovery, treatment, and disposal system shall be properly
weatherproofed to prevent freezing and failure of the system as aWlicable.
2. Operation of this remedial system is intended to periodically deliver bioremediation diluted fluids to
f
- i
treatment facility this system does not require. the Perrnittee Upen-to seek classification of the wastewate
treatment arid-remediation facilities by the Water Pollution Control System Operators Certification „
Commission (WPCSOCC), the -nor does it to require the Permittee shall to designate and employ a
certified operator to be in responsible charge (ORC) h&or one or more certified operator(s) to be back-
up ORC(s) of the facilities in accordance with IPA NCAC,8,eG .0201. The ORG shall visit the c eilkie _
periodic monitoringevent.
vent.
Permit Redline W00036621do130726 O"emitRed! ine W00026621df)130?2 (2)-do p i shell
2of10
Page

3. If requested by the owner, the Division will consider remote monitoring in lieu of (frequency) physical
inspections, on a case -by -case basis, following at least two years of successful operation.
4. The Permittee shall maintain an inspection log or 'summary including at least the date and time of `
inspection, observations made, and any maintenance, repairs, or corrective actions taken by the Permittee.
This log of inspections shall be maintained by the Permittee for a period of three years from the date of
the inspection and shall be made available to the Division or other permitting authority, upon request.
5. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or representative of the Division may, upon presentation of
credentials, enter and inspect any property, premises or place on or related to the disposal site or facility at ,
any reasonable time for the purpose of determining compliance with this permit (including inspection,
observation, and sampling associated with injection and any related facilities as provided for in N.C.G.S.
87-90), may inspect or copy any records that must be maintained under the terms and conditions of this
permit, and may obtain samples of groundwater, surface water, injection fluids, or leachate.
III.
WELL CONSTRUCTION/ABANDONMENT CRITERIA
1.
The construction and operation of Type 5I injection wells shall conform to Title 15A North
Carolina Administrative Code 2C .0209(e)(3)(C), to inject Newman Zone with sodium
bicarbonate, for the facilitation of natural biodegradation of chlorinated volatile organic -
compounds.
2.
Within fifteen days of any change of status of an injection well, the Permittee shall provide
written notification to the Division. Such a change would include the discontinued use of a well
for injection. If a well is taken completely out of service temporarily, the Penrittee must install a
sanitary seal. If a well is not to be used for any purpose, that well must be permanently
abandoned according to15A NCAC 2C .0113, Well Construction Standards.
3.
Any well that is no longer to be used for any purpose by the Permittee shall be abandoned in
accordance with the procedures specified in 15A NCAC 2C .0113(b).
l
4.
Flow measurement f the volumes injected at each injection well will
be monitored and recorded. Also eaelraninjection well that will require injection at pressures greater
than gravity feed headshallbe equipped to measure the injection pressure at the screened interval. If the
injection pressure is greater than atmospheric pressure, the mechanical integrity of the injection well(s)
shall be demonstrated according to 15A NCAC 2C .0207.
9
Comment(WMEl]:,WellsMW38(s)-MW-'� ,
IV.
7
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS t ¢ (�
39(s), MW=12(s`), MW-17(s), Mw-42(s),rMW-43(s)
and MW-45(s) have been abandoned or lost for "
_ various reasons including train derailment,-.,
1.
Monitor wells MW-36-s,DW-10(d]),DW-03(dl)nR"'9 "�"1° forZone l;DW-14-d2,-
( - ) Imo--------------------------
oonsiructiorir'elateddamage, not riecessayas
consistently no,V'OCs detected ,v' .a,;. ,,-
40' "�,--N A'-O=-sMW-13(s), MW-14( ) (for Zone 3); andDW-11(dl), DW-13(dl), DW-18(i), and DW-
' -- --------------------------`----------------------------- ---`" --------------
-. ,'..n'.
'
CommentIWME2]:Well M-407is'completely`:'
19(d1)I AI 302, aP A' 12 for'; -17, INP 1' 42,�Z3 s, afid NNI 45 s for Zone 5 shall be sampled ( ) P
sidegradient and atop asteep embanlim indicating,'
before the injections begin and thereafter every six months (twice every year) for the parameters listed
an approximately zero percent ehancethat it"-w6uia•;�
below:
'be impacted by the amendment application.
`
Siniilazly„weliMW-02(s)isypgradien'tofiiiei
injection and'will not demonstrate arty impact Well
Nitrate Nitrogen* Oil and Grease* Volatile Organic Compounds
Mw oz(s)"is included in the RAP mandated• `
Asamphng
scheme. WellsMW-13(s) and MW-14(s)
Chloride Sulfate Total an OI lc Carbon
g
are far more appropriate to demonstrate immact of
� amendment addition.
"
IW-302 is an injection location for the ofrsite
Total Iron pH Conductivity Nitrite Nitrogen*
"
bioremediation injection permit issued for Zone 6. In=
addition monitoring of this location would be a '
duplicauon'of monitoring well DW-13(dl, screened
Temperature ReDox(ORP) Dissolved Oxygen
inasimifarini�rvA,andDWa6(d2),'screeried,`ia
'
-deeper• interval wells to replace theZone 5 injection
should include monitoring wells DW-11(dl); DW-
13(dO,DW-18(dl),andDW-19(di);"- s _
Pennrt
Redline lk'0003662ldn130726 (2)n..__.i! n dlifi..,,,.,,0,«.'Idf3l-q0?2< „) a,...r,einl. Slie
Page
3of10

*These parameters are to be sampled during the final sampling event only.
2.
Prior to sampling the parameters, the measurement of water levels must be taken. The depth to water in
each well shall be measured from the surveyed point on the top of the casing. The measuring points (top
of well casing) of all monitoring wells shall be surveyed relative to a common datum.
3.
For Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) sampled every six months, use only one of the following
methods:
a. Standard Method 6230D, Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) at 0.5 ug/L or less
b. Standard Method 6210D, PQL 0.5 less
at ug/L or
c. EPA Method 8021, Low Concentration, PQL at 0.5 ugtL or less
d. EPA Method 8260, Low Concentration, PQL at 0.5 ug/L or less
e. Another method with prior approval by the Aquifer Protection Chief.
". In
Any of the referenced methods used for VOCs must at a minimum, include all the constituents
;?
a
listed in Table VIII of Standard Method 6230D. This analyte list, as -well as the historic 8260 monitoring
"`
list sampled under the CAP/RAP will be monitored for one-yeat=foilowing the initiation of permit
F
finalization. Any analyte included in the 6230D list that is not part of the historic 8260 VOC monitoring
`
list either not detected at a concentration significantly greater than the Method Detection Limit (MD or
above the corresponding NCDENR 2L standard will be deleted from the monitoring list in future
monitoring events.`:`
The 8260 VOC Reporting Limit for the nrimary site constituents of concern (COCs) range from 0.5 to 1
'o
ug/L. Analytical results will be reported to the qualified (estimated) MDL, resulting in a reportedr
r 3X u
:f � '
qualified (estimated) concentration of 0.5 ug! or less for all undiluted COCs.
.' :.• >
ifed
4.
Any laboratory selected to analyze parameters must be Division of Water Resources certified for those
parameters required.
5.
Any additional groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed necessary by the Division, shall be provided.
V.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
h
1.
Three (3) copies of the following fortes shall be mailed to the address below:
a. GW-1 Well Construction Record
b. GW-30 Well Abandonment Record
r
r "z
•
c. GW-59 Groundwater Quality Monitoring: Compliance Report Form
:
d. GW-59A Compliance Report Form
n: -
Mail these documents to the following address: Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
;
Information Processing Unit
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Updated blank forms (GW-1, GW-30, GW-59, GW-59A) may be downloaded from the Division of Water
Resources website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ or requested from the address mentioned above.
Permit Redline WQ0036621 do130726 (2)Pes" • ReOn- 3*0003662 Page
4of10

2. The results of the sampling and analysis must be received on forms GW-59 and GW-59A on or before the
last working day of the month following the sampling month. The data of all groundwater sampling
analyses required by the permit conditions must be reported using the most recent GW-59 and GW-59A
forms along with attached copies of the laboratory analyses.
3. The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, including calibration and maintenance
records, continuous monitoring data and reports required by this permit, for at least 3 years from the date
of the sample measurement, report or application. Records of this monitoring information shall include,
but not be limited to, the following:
a. the date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements,
b. the individual who performed the sampling or measurements,
c. the date the analyses were performed,
d. the analytical techniques or methods used, and
e. the results of such sampling, measurements, and analyses.
4. The permittee shall report to the Winston-Salem Regional Office (see Section VI. NONCOMPLIANCE
''-'' '. • H`..n
NOTIFICATION), within 48 hours of the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence, or any
monitoring or other information which indicates:
a. any contaminant may cause an endangerment to an underground source of drinking water,-
b_ any noncompliance with a permit condition due to a malfunction of the system, or
c. any Eanse increase of fluid contaminant concentration or distribution as a result off
,'
the -fluid infection_ zene er-afea.
.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause, the period of
'
noncompliance, including exact dates and times. If the noncompliance is not corrected and is expected to
continue, steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance
shall be provided to the Regional Office in a timely manner.
5. The permittee shall submit an annual report summarizing the volume and injection pressure(s) of effluent
"
discharged into the injection well(s) and the summary results of related groundwater, influent, and
effluent monitoring. Isoconcentrations (horizontal and vertical direction) and water level
contour/potentiometric surface maps shall be prepared on an annual basis and submitted with this report.
If an annual report containing this information (e.g. corrective action plan) is required by a regulatory
agency, the permittee may submit two (2) copies of that report in lieu of the preceding information within
thirty days of its publication. The permittee shall submit this report to the following address: Aquifer
Protection Section, Groundwater Protection Unit, 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1636.
VL NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION
"
1. The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number (336)
.-
771-5000, as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours or on the next working day following
,
the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following:
a. Any occurrence at the groundwater remediation facility which results in any unusual operating
circumstances, or in the treatment of significant amounts of contaminated groundwaters which are
abnormal in quantity or characteristic, such as the dumping of the contents of a basin or tank, the
known passage of a slug of hazardous substance through the facility, or any other unusual
"
circumstances;
b. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons, that renders the groundwater treatment
and disposal system, including injection wells, incapable of adequate treatment and disposal, such as
mechanical or electrical failures of pumps, aerators, compressors, etc.;
c. Any failure of a pumping station, sewer line, or treatment facility resulting in a by-pass directly to
receiving waters without treatment of all or any portion of the influent to such station or facility; or
Permit Redline w00036621dn130726 (2)Pennt 1 'a1' W00036621d 110 ,L (2) ll
Page
5of10

d. Any time that self -monitoring information indicates that the groundwater treatment and disposal
system is not in compliance with any specified permit limitations.
2. Occurrences outside normal business hours may also be reported to the Division's Emergency Response
personnel at telephone number [phone] or to the Emergency Management's switchboard at (919)
733-3300. Also, persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall file a written report within five
(5) days following first knowledge of the occurrence. This report must outline the actions taken or
proposed to be taken to ensure that the problem does not recur..
VII. APPLICABLE BOUNDARIES
1. The COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY for the disposal system is specified by regulations in 15A NCAC 2L,
Groundwater Classifications and Standards. The Compliance Boundary for the disposal system`.
``
individual) permitted December 30, 1983 is established at either 1 250 feet from the waste disposal
YP () P
k =
a, O property rty boundary, whichever is closest to the waste disposal area. An
are or 2 50 feet within the roe bound
exceedance of Class GA Standards at or beyond the Compliance Boundary is subject to remediation
action according to 15A NCAC 2L .0106(d)(2). Please be aware that the Compliance Boundary
designation refers to the increases in the concentration or distribution of '
..,:
„�= , - r fL
the contaminant plume•a's a result of the injection of bioremediation enhancing additives.
ol
'
2. The REVIEW BOUNDARY is established around the disposal systems midway between the Compliance
v „•.,5; . ' ° -
+"r' �'
Boundary and the perimeter of the waste disposal area. Any exceedance of Class GA Standards at the
Review Boundary in 15A NCAC 2L Please be
• w;`" ..;?' •` :.; °%' . Nis
may require action accordance with .0106(d)(1). aware
that the Review Bound designation refers to the increases in the concentration or distribution of the Boundary gn
h"
contaminant plume as a result of the injection of bioremediation enhancing additives.injeetant substanees
#
and net to the eentaFainafft phime.
VIII. WORKER PRECAUTIONS DURING MANUAL APPLICATION OF INJECTION
(Manual Application Only)
1. Some effects reported to be associated with the product proposed to be used are as follows: eye,
skin, nose, throat, and lung irritation. If the product is released into the environment in a way that
could result in a suspension of fine solid or liquid particles (e.g., grinding, blending, vigorous
shaking or mixing), then proper personal protective equipment should be used. The application
'
process should be reviewed by an industrial hygienist to ensure that the most appropriate personal
"
protective equipment is used.
2. Persons working with these products should wear safety lg asses. goggles or a face shield, gloves,
F
and protective clothing. Face and body protection should be used for anticipated splashes or
sprays. -
3. Eating, drinking, smoking, handling contact lenses, and applying cosmetics should not be
y ;
permitted in the application area during or immediately following application.
4. Safety controls should be in place to ensure that the check valve and the pressure delivery systems
are working properly.
5. The Material Safety Data Sheets should be followed to prevent incompatible or adverse reactions
and injuries.
Permit Redline WQ0036621dr130726 (2 _ 1 dal 30726 42)-deepemkPage
6of10

IX. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Issuance of this permit does not constitute approval for reimbursement from the Leaking Petroleum
Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (15A NCAC 2P) or any other fund. Additionally, the issuance
of this permit does not remove the Permittee's responsibility to comply with the corrective action
requirements of the Division of Waste Management. Furthermore, the permittee should notify and report
all changes concerning the remedial system to the Division of Waste Management. It is the Pemvttee's
responsibility to comply with the requirements of all involved agencies.
2. This permit shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with the conditions _
of this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting data.
3. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes described in the application
and other supporting data
4. The Permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit and with the standards and criteria specified
in Criteria and Standards Applicable to Injection Wells (15A NCAC 2C .0200). Any noncompliance with
conditions of this permit constitutes a violation of the North Carolina Well Construction Act and is
grounds for enforcement action as provided for in N.C.G.S. 87-94.
5. This permit is valid only for construction of the number of injection wells described in the ' =
application and other supporting data. Construction of additional injection wells must be
approved in advance by the Aquifer Protection Section.
6. This permit is not transferable. In the event there is a desire for the facilities to change ownership, or
there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal permit request must be submitted to the Division
accompanied by an application fee, documentation from the parties involved, and other supporting '
materials as may be appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits and may or
may not be approved
7. A set of approved plans and specifications for the subject project must be retained by the Permittee for the
life of this project.
8. The Permittee must notify the Division and receive prior written approval from the Director of any
planned physical alterations or additions in the permitted facility or activity not specifically authorized by
the permit. A permit modification is usually required before these changes can take place. Where the
Permittee becomes aware of an omission of any relevant facts in a permit application, or of any incorrect
information submitted on said application or in any report to the Division, the relevant and correct facts
shall be promptly submitted to the Division by the Permittee.
9. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the Permittee to an
enforcement action• by the Division in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to
143-215.6C.
10. The annual administering and compliance fee must be paid by the Permittee within thirty (30) days after
being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee accordingly may cause the Division to initiate action
to revoke this permit as specified by 15A NCAC 2T .0105 (e)(3).
11. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any and all statutes,
rules, regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by other government agencies (local, state, and
federal), which have jurisdiction.
12. Sixty (60) days prior to closure of the injection wells, the permittee must request a rescission of the permit
from the Division of Water Resources. Guidelines for the closure of the injection wells may be obtained
from http://h2o enr.state.nc.us or requested from the Division of Water Resources.
Permit Redline WQ0036621(IV 130726 (2 _ _ Page ,
7of10

13. If the permittee wants to continue operation of this system, at least six (6) months prior to the expiration
of this permit, the permittee shall request its extension. Upon receipt of the request, the Commission will
review the adequacy of the facilities described therein, and if warranted, will extend the permit for such
period of time and under such conditions and limitations as it may deem appropriate.
Permit issued this the 9th day of August 2013
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
for Thomas A. Reeder, Director
Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number W0003662131
Pennit Redline W00036621dn130726 (2 _ _ Page -
8of10

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 9:34 AM
To: [e-mail]; Eliason, W. Mark
([e-mail])
Cc: Wang, Shuying
Subject: Draft of Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: WQ0036621dp130726.doc
Steve and Mark,
I am sending you a draft of the subject permit for your review and comment. Please pay particular attention to the
monitoring requirements, and get back to me with your comments and any concerns _or recommendations.
Thank you for your assistance.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
1

.-WL.1 VLUlUC1VK11)Q
Weston solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
610-701-3500 0 Fax [phone]
• • a www.westonsolutions.com -
The Trusted Integrator for Sustainable Solutions
DWQ — Aquifer Protection Section
Attn: David Goodrich
1636 Mail Service Center
Greensboro, NC 27699-1636
RE: Non -Discharge Permit Application Monitoring Plan
Cotton Mill Square Project Site
801 Merritt -Drive, Greensboro, Guildford County, NC
NCDENR Groundwater Incident # 86348
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
JUL 2 S 2013
Aquifer Protection Section
25 July 2013
W.O. No. 11621.043.006.0003
Weston Solutions, Inc. (WESTON@), on behalf of Alcatel -Lucent, is pleased to provide copies
(enclosed on CD) of the most recent- Semiannual Monitoring Report and the approved Remedial
Action Plan (RAP) for the Cotton Mill Square (CMS) site located in Greensboro, NC. These
documents have been previously submitted to the North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (NCDENR). The enclosed CD has been reformatted such that computers
running versions earlier than Windows XP can open it.
WESTON appreciates your attention to this permit submittal, please feel free to contact Tom
Cornuet at 610-701-3776 ([e-mail]) or me directly at 610-701-3781
(s.iohnson@,westonsolutions.co with any questions or comments you may have.
Very truly yours,
WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.
Steve E. Johnson
Senior Project Manager
cc: T. Cornuet - Weston
M. Eliason -- Weston
E. Mackey - Weston
1.7oldem.G•LUCotton MUM CommunimLonslNC_DENR1Permit Resp. 20131Goodrich2013 Permit Momtodng Plan Response CD t bmn do

REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
Former Western Electric Facility
Cotton Mill Square Project Site
801 Merritt Drive
Greensboro, North Carolina 27405
NCDENR Groundwater Incident No. 86348
Docket # 11-SF-344
June 2012
Prepared for
Alcatel -Lucent USA Inc.
Murray Hill, New Jersey
Prepared by
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380-1499
W.O. No. 11621.043.001.0015
Steve E. Joh son
Senior Projecl Manager
Ed Mackey, P.G.
Project Geologist

range or anticipated to be reduced below the target range due to inadequate natural buffering
capacity, will be addressed by the addition of sodium or potassium bicarbonate or alternately
effective buffer. Buffers including sodium carbonate or hydroxide are reported to provide
unstable pH control, and lime (CaO) addition can lead to calcite precipitation and reduced
permeability (McCarty et. al., 2007). Buffer control may be used for source zone bioremediation
due to the greater concentrations of liberated Cl
4.2 GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER MONITORING
Groundwater sampling and equipment decontamination procedures will be conducted in the
same manner prescribed in the previously approved CAP and existing permits as described in the
most recent groundwater monitoring report (WESTON, 2012). The wells included in the
sampling plan are those prescribed in the CAP and permits, with the exception of those wells that
were destroyed during demolition and construction activities or abandoned as approved by
NCDENR. The sampling frequency of wells that are used for amendment application may be
altered to accommodate injection events.
A summary of the proposed groundwater and surface water monitoring program is presented in
Table 4. VOCs will be collected from each listed location, and as in the past, parameters
monitored for natural attenuation parameters will be collected from a minimum of approximately
10 locations as appropriate to best monitor the impact and effectiveness of the bioremediation
application. Upon RAP approval monitoring events will be conducted semiannually for the first
2 years during passive ISB application, and then reduced to an annual frequency after the site has
progressed to MNA status. Analysis for metals has been eliminated from the four wells and
single stream point monitoring locations as they have never been observed to be a contaminant
of concern. Surface water monitoring has been reduced from quarterly to semiannual during the
first two years following RAP approval and will be reduced to an annual frequency in the third
year to coincide with the groundwater monitoring program in accordance with the CAP Section
7. Monitoring event reduction is appropriate as the data gathered will be sufficient to exhibit
plume stability trends when compared to the groundwater historical record which dates to 2000.
4.3 SITE SAFETY AND MAINTENANCE
Environmental activities related to the proposed passive amendment application include
amendment application, groundwater monitoring, well maintenance and abandonment, and
general housekeeping.
No additional well installation is anticipated due to the adequacy of the existing injection well
network, as well as the technical impracticability associated with well installation in the high
density development which now exists on the property. Well abandonment will be conducted
when appropriate and will follow NCDENR guidelines as detailed in the CAP and permits
following 15A NCAC 02C.0113 by a NCDENR approved driller. Due to the nature of the
passive injection process, only limited maintenance is anticipated.
T Tddm: GL%L1 mMRIM W-M RIPMWAP MIIMW RAM—d RAP 0=12_mtdm 4-2

Table 4
Summary of Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Program:
Alcatel -Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
W_
% "k
C unit M- M­
[monitoring Wells (On -site and Off -site)
MW-02(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-03(s)
Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-04(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-1 3(s)
Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-14(s)
—CAP,
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-18(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-28(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-36(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-37(s)
Recirc
Annual
MW-46(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-49(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-50(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-51(i)
Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-02(d1)
—CAP,
Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-03(dl)
-CAP,
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-05(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-06(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-07(l)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-09(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-10(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-11(d1)
CAP, Z6, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-13(d1)
CAP, Z6, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-14(d2)-
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-15(d1)-
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-16(d2)-I
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-17(d2)-
Recirc
Annual
DW-18(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-19(d1)
CAP, Z6, Recirc
Semi -Ann
PMW-1
Recirc
Annual
PMW-2
Recirc
Annual
TIVIWA
Recirc
Annual
ISurface Water Sampling Locations
(On -site and Off -site)
SW-A-3
CAP Quarterly
SW-A-4
CAP, Z6 Quarterly
SW-A-6
CAP, Z6 Quarterly
SW-B-2
CAP, Z6 Quarterly
SW-B-3
CAP, Z6 Quarterly
lInjection and Extraction Well Locations
IW-201
Recirc
Annual
IW-202
Recirc
Annual
IW-203
Recirc
Annual
IW-204
Recirc
Annual
IW-205
Recirc
Annual
IW-206
Recirc
Annual
IW-207
Recirc
Annual

Table 4
Summary of Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Program:
Alcatel -Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
Well Number
Cureat Regulatory Program •
Sampling Fi equency"F
IW-208
Recirc
Annual
IW-209
Recirc
Annual
IW-210
Recirc
Annual
EW-501
Recirc
Annual
EW-502
Recirc
Annual
EW-503
Recirc
Annual
EW-504
Recirc
Annual
EW-505
Recirc
Semi -Ann
EW-506
Recirc
Annual
EW-507
Recirc
Annual
EW-508
Recirc
Annual
EW-509
Recirc
Semi -Ann
EW-510
Recirc
Annual
EW-511
Recirc
Semi -Ann
EW-512
Recirc
Annual
EW-513
Recirc
Semi -Ann
Notes:
2 Field parameters include: PH, Conductivity, Temperature, Redox (ORP) and DO for sampled wells.
3 PWR = Partially weathered rock / Intermediate
Monitoring of MEE, sulfate, total iron,TOC, and chloride from up to 10 wells coincident with semiannual or annual monitoring of VOCs.
MEE - methane, ethane, ethene; Cl- - chloride;TOC - total organic carbon.
* Well completed as an open borehole in bedrock (6" diameter). No inner cassing or screen was installed.

• Air Emissions Permit: Permits to construct and to operate will be required from the NCDENR
Division of Air Quality (DAQ) for emissions from the remediation treatment systems, including
any source control air treatment equipment. Based on the expected magnitude of untreated
emissions, this system has the potential to be classified for "Synthetic Minor' or even "Title V"
permitting status by DAQ. Emissions modeling will likely be required to support the permit
application.
• Underground utility location: Subgrade utilities should be located and marked by each utility
company no more than 48 hours prior to any excavation or drilling work.
• Access agreements/encroachment agreements: Access agreements will be required for work on
affected properties. Agreements are currently in place with off -site property owners where
monitoring wells are located. These agreements may have to be updated periodically. Likewise,
the access agreement with the Cotton Mill Square property owner will have to be updated in a
manner consistent with the Brownfields Agreement.
• City or County Construction Permits: The City of Greensboro and/or Guilford County have
permit requirements for construction of buildings, piping, and electrical systems. These will be
identified and permits obtained prior to construction.
6.5 Monitoring and Reporting
This section presents a monitoring program for groundwater and surface water to verify progress for
the remediation program. A reporting schedule to present the results of the monitoring program also is
specified.
A soil monitoring program is not specified in this CAP. Soil monitoring and sampling will be performed
in the latter stages of remediation to verify that an appropriate level of soil cleanup has been achieved.
Soil gas probes or VMPs may be used to measure vapor -phase VOCs as an indicator of soil cleanup
prior to conducting final soil sampling.
Soil excavation activities performed for, the CAP will be subject to applicable sampling and disposal
requirements, to the extent that these activities involve contaminated materials. Persons engaged in
redevelopment activities at the site are required to comply with applicable statutes, regulations, and the
site Brownfields Agreement as well.
6.5.1 Groundwater Monitoring Locations and Frequency
The groundwater monitoring wells identified in the following table will be sampled on a semi-annual
basis. Monitoring will continue until applicable standards have been met, a variance to the standards
is granted, or an alternate, appropriate sampling program is requested and approved.
CAP Repor _text 1-29-04 6-8 January 29, 2004

Location,"
Frequency
" Purpose
DW-2(d1), DW-3(d1), DW-4(d1), DW 5(d1),
Monitor plume on -site and
DW-9(d1), DW-11(d1), DW-13(d1),
Semi -Annual
off -site in n bedrock
DW 14(d2), DW-16(d2)
MW-4(s), MW-13(s), MW-14(s), MW-18(i),
Monitor remediation effectiveness
DW 7(i), MW-24(s), MW-26(i), MW-23(i),
Semi -Annual
in center portions of the plume in
MW 10(s), DW-8(i), MW-45(i), MW-41(s)
saprolite and PWR.
MW 2(s), MW-30(i), MW-36(s), MW-46(i),
Semi -Annual 1st
Monitor background & sidegradient
MW 50(i), DW-6(d1), DW-10(d1), DW-15(d1)
year, then Annual
conditions during remediation.
MW-12(s), MW-28(s), MW-51(i), MW-49(i),
Semi -Annual
Monitor downgradient portions
DW-18(i), DW-19(d1)
and leading edge of plume
With the exception of monitoring wells proposed for abandonment (see Section 6.6 below), the site
wells not listed in the above table will remain active for the first few years of remediation. These
remaining wells are not part of the scheduled sampling program, but they will be available to
supplement the program and will be used for water level gauging events.
6.5.2 Surface Water Monitoring
Surface water locations in the following table will be monitored on a quarterly basis for the first year of
remediation. An alternate monitoring schedule may be proposed after one year if conditions warrant.
Location k
Frequency
Purpose _
SW-A-2, SW-A-3, SW-A-4, SW-A-6
Quarterly
Water quality: Tributary "A"
SW-B-2, SW-13-3
Quarterly
Water quality: Tributary "B"
On -site and off -site surface water samples will be analyzed for VOCs. using Method 8260 analyses.
Additionally,- samples from on -site surface water location SW-A-3 will be analyzed for priority pollutant
metals on a semi-annual basis. Monitoring of the on -site portions of Tributary "A" will cease if access
to this surface water body is eliminated by pipe encapsulation or by other site redevelopment drainage
modifications.
CAP Report_teM 1-29-04 6-9 January 29, 2004

6.5.3 Analytical Parameters
Groundwater and surface water samples will be analyzed for the following analytical suites as specified
for each media in accordance with the proposed sampling schedule.
Field- ParameterslMeth6d
Wells Monitored
pH; temperature; conductivity; dissolved oxygen;
All monitoring wells in the quarterly or semi-
redox potential (electrode, field meter)
annual groundwater sampling program
carbon dioxide; iron (II); chloride; sulfate; nitrate
For all listed parameters: Up to 10 plume wells
(colorimetric field Hach® kit)
(frequency and locations to be determined)
Laboratory Parameters
- Wells and'Surface Water Monitored..,
VOCs (USEPA Method 8260)
Wells and surface water locations listed in Section
6.5.1 and Section 6.5.2 tables
Monitoring wells: MW-4(s), MWA2(s), MW-13(s)
Priority Pollutant Metals (Methods 6010/7470)
and MW-14(s)
Surface water. SW-A-3 (semi-annual)
Total Iron, Sulfate
10 wells semi-annually (locations to be
Methane (SW3810, mod.)
determined)
6.5.4 Reporting
Semi -Annual Reports
Groundwater and surface water monitoring reports will be submitted to the NCDENR on a semi-
annual basis, or on an alternate schedule that is accepted by the NCDENR. Results from the semi-
annual and quarterly sampling events will be summarized in the reports. Reports will include a
potentiometric map, trend graphs of key analytical parameters, data summary tables and a chronology
of monitoring events. A treatment system evaluation and status report will be submitted to the
NCDENR in one of the semi-annual groundwater monitoring reports. The semi-annual system report
will contain a remediation system effectiveness and progress evaluation, with recommendations for
improvements or changes.
CAP Report text 1-29-04 6-10 January 29, 2004

t . 1
S
INTERN, TlON.fL
CAP Addendum (Optional)
An addendum to this CAP report will be submitted if significant modifications to the scope of the
proposed remedy are required. Alternate corrective actions may include one or more of the
treatment methods that were identified during the technology screening process described in Section
4 and Section 5 of this Report. A CAP addendum will not be submitted for expansion of an existing
system using the same or similar treatment processes.
6.6 Monitoring Well Closures and Replacements
Some of the existing monitoring wells that were installed during previous groundwater investigations
have no beneficial use for future remediation or monitoring. Most of these are very shallow ("s")
background or sidegradient wells that have never shown detectable concentrations of contaminants.
As such, Lucent proposes to permanently close these wells during the first year of remediation.
Wells will be abandoned with grout in accordance with the NCDENR regulations.
The following wells are selected for closure:
• MW-6(s)
• MW-7(s)
• MW 8(s)
• MW-16(s)
• MW-17(s)
• MW-31(s)
• MW-32(s)
• MW-33(s)
• MW-34(s)
• MW-40(s)
As the remediation program progresses, additional wells will be proposed for permanent closure.
Because groundwater extraction will be ongoing throughout the site, some of the shallow monitoring
wells are expected to go dry due to dewatering of the saprolite aquifer zone. If certain wells in the
monitoring program go dry due to dewatering, monitoring will cease in those wells, but the wells may
remain in place for future use.
The casing of well MW-12(s) near the southeast property corner is damaged, and this well is not
useable. This is a strategic location for shallow plume monitoring; therefore, the existing MW-12(s)
will be permanently closed and a replacement well will be drilled in this area. The replacement well
will be deeper than the existing well so that it does not go dry during groundwater pumping.
6.7 Preliminary Schedule
The following table presents the preliminary schedule for implementation of pilot tests, design,
installation and monitoring under this CAP. This schedule is subject to change based on developing
site conditions and pilot test results. It is also dependent on the NCDENR review and approval of the
CAP Report_text 1-29-04 6-11 January 29, 2004

Goodrich, David
From:
Wang, Shuying
Sent:
Friday, July26, 2013 3:13 PM
To:
Goodrich, David
Cc:
Knight, Sherri
Subject:
RE: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Hi David,
I have read the Monitoring Requirements section only. Since the injection will create an anaerobic condition, we may
want to add nitrite to be monitored.
However, because the injection is going to be passive, effective radius will be very small. Most of monitoring wells are
pretty far from injection points. I think that is why nitrate/nitrite was not detected at higher concentrations in the past.
You may ask them to sample injection wells for nitrate, nitrite, and oil & grease during their last sampling event and
submit the results in the last report. Thank you for your patience!
Shuying
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to
the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 1:23 PM
To: Wang, Shuying
Subject:'RE: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Shuying,
Could you examine the attached draft of this new injection permit and comment on it? If you are OK with it, I will send it
along to the consultant for their comments.
Thank you.
David
From: Wang, Shuying
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 9:45 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
I am OK if you do not see any problems. Otherwise, let me try to get back to you tomottow afternoon. I have been in the
field since Monday. Sorry for this late response. Shuying
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 8:45 AM
To: Wang, Shuying
Subject: FW: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Shuying,

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 1:23 PM
To: Wang, Shuying
Subject: RE: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Attachments: WQ0036621dp130726.doc
Shuying,
Could you examine the attached draft of this new injection permit and comment on it? If you are OK with it, I will send it
along to the consultant for their comments.
Thank you.
David
From: Wang, Shuying
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 9:45 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: RE: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
I am OK if you do not see any problems. Otherwise, let me try to get back to you tomottow afternoon. I have been in the
field since Monday. Sorry for this late response. Shuying
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 8:45 AM
To: Wang, Shuying
Subject: FW: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Shuying,
What do you think of their proposed monitoring plan? I welcome your comments on this.
Regards,
David
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:W.M.Eliason(@WestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 5:00 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Cc: Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas; Mackey, Edward J.
Subject: FW: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Goodrich,
In answer to your question — yes the wells listed on Table 4 are the intended monitoring locations and the
field parameters and VOCs are collected from each location. The remaining parameters (TOC, sulfate... etc.)
are collected from a select group of wells that appear to be demonstrating the impact of treatment. The
superseded CAP, and recently approved RAP call for up to 10 locations. The number and locations dictated
by what has been observed during previous monitoring events, and observations made during sample

r
Goodrich, David
From:
Goodrich, David
Sent:
Friday, July 26, 2013 7:52 AM
To:
'Eliason, W. Mark'
Cc:
Wang, Shuying
Subject:
RE: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Eliason,
Thank you for clarifying the intended monitoring for this permit. I will look forward to receiving the CD you are
preparing, and will contact you if we have any further questions or concerns.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
From: Eliason, W. Mark[mailto:W.M.Eliason(&WestonSolutions.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 5:00 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Cc: Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas; Mackey, Edward J.
Subject: FW: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Goodrich,
In answer to your question — yes the wells listed on Table 4 are the intended monitoring locations and the
field parameters and VOCs are collected from each location. The remaining parameters (TOC, sulfate... etc.)
are collected from a select group of wells that appear to be demonstrating the impact of treatment. The
superseded CAP, and recently approved RAP call for up to 10 locations. The number and locations dictated
by what has been observed during previous monitoring events, and observations made during sample
collection, such as odor, pH, ORP and DO readings, etc. This same approach is taken in the RAP. It is
preferred to have a single monitoring plan for both documents to simplify the monitoring scheme.
The problem with the CD maybe that it was burned for XP and greater versions of windows. I,am creating
a version readable by earlier versions and will send it along.
I hope this provides greater clarity. Please feel free to address me or Steve Johnson with any additional
comments or concerns.
Thank You
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
W.M.Eliason(cDWestonSolutions.com

Goodrich, David
From:
Eliason, W. Mark<[e-mail]>
Sent:
Wednesday, July 24, 2013 5:00 PM
To:
Goodrich, David
Cc:
Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas; Mackey, Edward J.
Subject:
FW: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Goodrich,
In answer to your question — yes the wells listed on Table 4 are the intended monitoring locations and the
field parameters and VOCs are collected from each location. The remaining parameters (TOC, sulfate... etc.)
are collected from a select group of wells that appear to be demonstrating the impact of treatment. The
superseded CAP, and recently approved RAP call for up to 10 locations. The number and locations dictated
by what has been observed during previous monitoring events, and observations made during sample
collection, such as odor, pH, ORP and DO readings, etc. This same approach is taken in the RAP. It is
preferred to have a single monitoring plan for both documents to simplify the monitoring scheme.
The problem with the CD maybe that it was burned for XP and greater versions of windows. I am creating
a version readable by earlier versions and will send it along.
I hope this provides greater clarity. Please feel free to address me or Steve Johnson with any additional
comments or concerns.
Thank You
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401(Fax)
W.M. EliasonCc�WestonSolutions.com
From: Goodrich, David[mailto:david.goodrich(a)ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 8:53 AM
To: Johnson, Steve E.
Cc: Wang, Shuying
Subject: Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Johnson,
The Central Office is in receipt of your letter of July 18, 2013, its attached monitoring data, and enclosed disk containing
the Remedial Action Plan and October 2012 Semiannual Monitoring Report.
Unfortunately, the disk does not run on my computer. As a point of clarification, do the wells listed in Table 4 (with their
included respective monitoring schedules), in combination with the parameters listed in your letter, constitute your
proposed monitoring plan for the injection permit?
Regards,

Goodrich, David
From:
Goodrich, David
Sent:
Wednesday, July 24, 2013 8:53 AM
To:
[e-mail]
Cc:
Wang, Shuying
Subject:
Cotton Mill Square Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Johnson,
The Central Office is in receipt of your letter of July 18, 2013, its attached monitoring data, and enclosed disk containing
the Remedial Action Plan and October 2012 Semiannual Monitoring Report.
Unfortunately, the disk does not run on my computer. As a point of clarification, do the wells listed in Table 4 (with their
included respective monitoring schedules), in combination with the parameters listed in your letter, constitute your
proposed monitoring plan for the injection permit?
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
1

Weston solutions, Inc.
� 1400 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
610-701-3500 0 Fax [phone]
www.westonsolutions.com
The Trusted Integrator for Sustainable Solutions -
DWQ — Aquifer Protection Section
Attn: David Goodrich
1636 Mail Service Center
Greensboro, NC 27699-1636
RECEOVEMENrVU
Dinwo
JUL 2 3 2013
Aquifer Protection Section
RE: Non -Discharge Permit Application Monitoring Plan
Cotton Mill Square Project Site
801 Merritt Drive, Greensboro, Guildford County, NC
NCDENR Groundwater Incident # 86348
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
July 18, 2013
W.O. No.-11621.043.006.0003
Weston Solutions, Inc. (WESTON@), on behalf of Alcatel -Lucent, is pleased to provide -copies
(enclosed on CD) of the most recent Semiannual Monitoring Report and the approved Remedial
Action Plan (RAP) for the Cotton Mill Square (CMS) site located in Greensboro, NC. These
documents have been previously submitted_ to the North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
The RAP contains the monitoring plan for the CMS which is also used to monitor the progress of
the remedial action conducted at the site to date. - The recently submitted RAP is essentially the
same as the past site remedial action plan for which this monitoring plan was acceptable. The
monitoring plan includes the collection of water levels, field parameters including temperature,
pH, oxidation reduction potential (ORP), specific conductance and dissolved oxygen. In
addition, the plan includes the collection of�laboratory parameters including: VOCs, sulfate, total
iron, total organic carbon (TOC) and methane, ethane, and ethene (MEE). Table 4 from -the
approved RAP outlining the monitoring plan is attached for your convenience. Table 4 has been
amended to reflect that this -is a new permit submittal and not a renewal of the -existing
recirculation permit for which a request has been made to be rescinded. In addition, alkalinity is
also collected from the monitoring points from which chloride, sulfate, total- iron, and MEE are
collected.
The monitoring results from 2005 and 2006 demonstrated that nitrate concentrations at the CMS
are typically less than the method detection limit or present at very low concentrations, see the
Attached Table 5 from the 2004 through 2006 Semiannual Monitoring Reports. As shown in
Table 5 from these reports, nitrate is either not present or present at very low concentrations
indicating that it is approximately five times less than the 10 mg/L NCDENR groundwater
standard, and that it is too -low to be useful in monitoring the impact of an organic substrate
injection (such as emulsified vegetable oil (EVO)). In addition, the application of electron donor
I IPoldms G-LU.\Cotro M111D2 Commwtmti.ANC_DEM2tPem it Rmp 2013Cm&ich2013 Pe t Mmtmmg Plmt Resp — do

�T :,
SOLU7IONS
David Goodrich
DWQ — Aquifer Protection Section
18 July 2013
Page 2
substrate (EVO) results in the further depletion of electron acceptors, in particular nitrate.
Hence, with NCDENR concurrence nitrate was eliminated from the analyte suite instituted to
monitor .the progress of VOC reduction as the result of electron donor, see the attached letter
documenting NCDENR concurrence.
The Aquifer Protection Section's (APS) request for the addition of, oil and grease to the
monitoring suite is not supported by a review of the literature for determination of the progress
of VOC degradation in response to organic substrate reduction. Discussion with several organic
substrate vendors and practitioners resulted in the conclusion that it could potentially be useful in
the evaluation of EVO distribution, but that there were no known instances where it has been
utilized: The industry standard parameter for the evaluation of EVO distribution is TOC, which
is included in the approved RAP monitoring plan.
WESTON appreciates your attention to this permit submittal, please feel free to contact Tom
Cornuet at 610-701-3776(tom.comuetnwestonsolutions.com) or me directly at 610--701-3781
(s [e-mail]) with any questions or comments you may have. -
Very truly yours,
WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.
Steve E. Johnson
Senior Project Manager
cc: S. Wang - DWQ — Aquifer Protection Section
S. ' Oberkrom — Lucent -
T. Cornuet - Weston
M. Eliason -- Weston
E. Mackey = Weston

Table 4
Summary of Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Program:
Alcatel -Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro. North Carnlinn
Well Number
Current Regulatory Program
Sampling Frequency
[monitoring Wells (On -site and Off -site)
MW-02(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-03(s)
Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-04(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-13(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-14(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-18(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-28(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-36(s)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-37(s)
Recirc
Annual
MW-46(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-49(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-50(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
MW-51(1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-02(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-03(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-05(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-06(d1) _
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-07(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-09(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-10(d1)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-11(d1)
CAP, Z6, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-13(d1)
CAP, Z6, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-14(d2)"
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-15(d1)*
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-16(d2)*
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-17(d2)*
Recirc
Annual
DW-18(i)
CAP, Recirc
Semi -Ann
DW-19(d1)
CAP, Z6, Recirc
Semi -Ann
PMW-1
Recirc
Annual
PMW-2
Recirc
Annual
TMW-1
Recirc
Annual
Surface Water Sampling Locations
(Onsite and Off -site)
SW-A-3
CAP
Quarterly
SW-A-4
CAP, Z6
Quarterly
SW-A-6
CAP, Z6
Quarterly
SW-B-2
CAP, Z6
Quarterly
SW-B-3
CAP, Z6
Quarter)
Injection and Extraction Well Locations
IW-201
Recirc
Annual
IW-202
Recirc
Annual
IW-203
Recirc
Annual
IW-204
Recirc
Annual
IW-205
Recirc
Annual
IW-206
Recirc
Annual
IW-207
Recirc
Annual

Table 4
Summary of Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Program:
Alcatel -Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
Well,Number
Current Regulatory Program 1
Sampling Frequency
IW-208
Recirc
Annual
IW-209
Recirc
Annual
IW-210
Recirc
Annual
EW-501
Recirc
Annual
EW-502
Recirc
Annual
EW-503
Recirc
Annual
EW-504
Recirc
Annual
EW-505
Recirc
Semi -Ann
EW-506
Recirc
Annual
EW-507
Recirc
Annual
EW-608
Recirc
Annual
EW-509
Recirc
Semi -Ann
EW-510
Recirc
Annual
EW-511
Recirc
Semi -Ann
EW-512
Recirc
Annual
EW-513
Recirc
Semi -Ann
Notes:
2 Field parameters include: PH, Conductivity, Temperature, Redox (ORP) and DO for sampled wells.
3 PWR = Partially weathered rock / Intermediate
Monitoring of MEE, sulfate, total iron;TOC, and chloride from up to 10 wells coincident with semiannual or annual monitoring of VOCs.
MEE - methane, ethane, ethene; Cl- - chloride;TOC - total organic carbon.
* Well completed as an open borehole in bedrock (6" diameter). No inner cassing or screen was installed.

Weston Solutions, Inc.
Weston Way
P.O. I
P.O. Box 2653
West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380
610-701-3000 • Fax 610-7ol -3186
www.westonsolutions.com
7 September 2006
Sharon Cihak
Environmental Health Division
Guilford County Department of public Health
1203 Maple Street
Greensboro, NC 27405 W.O. No. 11621,043,007.0005
Re: Semiannual Monitoring Analyte List Change
Cotton Mill Square Project Site
801 Merritt Drive, Greensboro, Guildford County, NC
NCDENR Groundwater Incident # 86348
Dear Ms. Cihak:
Weston Solutions, Inc. (WESTON@), is providing this letter at your request, as a follow-up to our letter
dated 13 July 2006 requesting removal of nitrate and hexavalent chromium from the semiannual
monitoring program, and to confirm our conversation on 26 July 2006 in which you approved the
requested monitoring program change.
Please feel free to contact me at 610-701-7360 (tom.cOmuel a7westonsolutions com) or Steve Johnson
at 610-701-7291 (s.tohnsonna westonsolutions com) with any questions or comments you may have.
Very truly yours,
WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.
7A4.3.-� asz"114-
Thomas Cornuet
Technical Manager
cc: S. Oberkrom — Lucent
A. Dawson — (Attorney to C. Johnson)
S. Johnson - Weston
an employee -owned company
F.1flnd-tria1To1den.G-"%Coaon 1,1002 CommunicatiowNC_DENM Cihak Analyse Removal Sep 2M.doc

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in Groundwater - October 2004
Lucent : Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
LOCATION COMPOUND
DATE
CONCENTRATION
Mw-10(s)
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/19/04
ND
CHLORIDE
10/19/04
1$0
IRON
10/19/04
<0.05
IRON, FERROUS
10/19/04
16
METHANE
10/19/04
14.3
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
<0.1
SULFATE
-- -------------- •---------------------------------
10/19/04
31
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/21/04
150
CHLORIDE
10/21/04
570 J
IRON
10/21/04
0.096 J
IRON, FERROUS
10/21/04
1.6
METHANE
10/21/04
43.5 J -
NITRATE AS N
- 10/21/04
R
SULFATE
---------•-••------•- -•-•-•-•---..
10/21/04
49 J
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/19/04
26
CHLORIDE
10/19/04
94
IRON
10/19/04
0.21
IRON, FERROUS
10/19/04
ND
METHANE
10119/04
10
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
0.1
SULFATE
10/19/04
42_-
MW-24(s)
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/21104
26
CHLORIDE
10/21/04
76
IRON
10/21/04
0.26
IRON, FERROUS -
10/21/04
0
METHANE
10/21/04
12.8
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
0.45
SULFATE
-----------------•----------------•---------•----•----••-•-•---
10/21/04
5.9
MW-30(i}
_.........-........
• --••--------------•---
- CARBON DIOXIDE
10/19/04
30
- CHLORIDE
10/19/04
6.9
IRON
10/19/04
0.33
IRON, FERROUS
10119/04
0
METHANE
10/19/04
10
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
0.15
SULFATE
..............................
10/19/04
36
•---------------
MW-41(s}
-•-•-- --•.._._....................................
.._........ .......
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/19/04
26
CHLORIDE
10119/04
13
IRON
10/19/04
0.12
IRON, FERROUS
10/19/04
0
METHANE
10/19/04
10
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
<011
SULFATE
I Otl9104
<5
1: Results in mg1L, except Methane results In ug/L
2.• J = estimated; R = rejected
3: Ferrous iron and carbon dioxide were field analyzed by Hach",' Kit co/orimetric methods.
Page 1 of 2

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in Groundwater - October 2004
Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
LOCATION
COMPOUND
DATE
CONCENTRATION
MW-49(i)
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/19/04
20
CHLORIDE
10/19/D4
69
IRON
10/19/04
0.06
IRON, FERROUS
10/19/04
0
METHANE
10/19/04
10
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
0.72
-----•--••
-SULFATE -
-10/19/04
23
•-----
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/19/04
22 -
CHLORIDE
10/19/04
35
IRON
10/19/04
0.53
IRON, FERROUS
10/19/04
0.4
METHANE
10/19/04
10
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
<0.1
- -----------•• •--------------------
SULFATE
- -•-•-------•
IOil 9/04
26
............ -----•-•-•----
---------.-........ ------------
-- -------------DW-9(1)
CARBON DIOXIDE
10/20/04
65
CHLORIDE.
10/20/04
72 J
IRON
10/20/04
-<0.05 UJ
IRON, FERROUS
10/20/04
0.2
METHANE
-10/20/04
12.6 J
NITRATE AS N
10/20/04
1.6 J
SULFATE
10/20/04
49 J
DW-18(i)
CARBON -DIOXIDE
10/19/04
10
CHLORIDE
10/19/04
100
IRON
10/19104
1.4
IRON, FERROUS
10/19/04
ND
METHANE
10/19/04 _
10
NITRATE AS N
10/21/04
1.9
SULFATE
10/19/04
33 '
NOTES:
1: Results in mg/L, except Methane results in ug/L
2 J = estimated; R = nocted
3: Ferrous iron and carbon dioxide were field analyzed by Hach7m Kit colMmetric methods. Page 2 of 2

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in Groundwater - February 2006
Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
Location
Sample
Date
Chloride
(mg/L)
Iron, Total
(mg/L)
Nitrate as
N (mg/L)
Nitrite as
N (mg/L)
Sulfate
(mg/L)
Total
Alkalinity
(mg/L)
Total
Organic
Carbon
(mg/L)
Total
Sulfide
(mg/L)
Methane
(Ng/L)
Ethane
(pg/L)
Ethene
(Ng/L)
DW-07(i)
2/15/2006
6.9
1.29
0.41
< 0.05
11.6
112
< 1
5.8 B
15
0.14
0.073
DW 08(i)
2/15/2006
56.4
< 0.1
1.4
< 0.05
47.6
151
0.31 B
< 3
200
3.3
1.2
DW 09(dl)
2/15/2006
125
1.17
0.15
< 0.05
1.2
101
< 1
< 3
6.4
4.3
0.83
DW-09( 1) DUP
2/15/2006
*
*
102
DW 16(d2)
2/16/2006
119
< 0.1
< 0.05
< 0.05
54.9
148
1.6
2.2 B
230
340
50
W-16(d2)X2
2/ 6/2006
119
< 0.1
< 0.05
< 0.05
55
168
1.3
20.8 B
220
350
51
DW 18(i)
2/14/2006
79.4
2.32
1.9
0.062
33.2
130
< 1
< 3
3.4
0.15
0.22
MW-03 s
2/14/ 0006
7.8
0.0805 B
0.88
< 0.05
60.2
126
< 1
< 3
2.4
0.055
0.088
MW 10(s)
2/14/2006
15.8
3.17
0.047 B
< 0.05
75.4
58.9
1
< 3
2.5
0.061
0.12
MW-18(i)
2/15/2006
892
16
< 0.05
< 0.05
12.6
61.4
62.8
5.2 B
280
1000
590
MW 23(i)
2/14/2006
70
1.75
0.87
0.095
44.1
95.1
< 1
< 3
5.8
0.28
0.34
M -23(I) dup
2/14/2006
95.7
MW-24(s)
2/16/2006
187
1.03
0.2
< 0.05
0.69 B
79.8
1.7
< 3
MW-49(i)
2 4 2006
60.3
0.106
0.62
< 0.05
26.5
89.4
< 1
< 3
Note:
B = estimated result for inorganic data.
* = not analyzed.
F:\I\Industrial\Folders.G-L\L\Cotton Mill\09 Weston Reports\Feb 2006 G-W Sample Rpt\Final Tbls\Table 5 Summ of NA and Inorganic Parameters in GW-feb-2006.xis Page 1 of 1

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in
Groundwater - August 2005
Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
LOCATION
COMPOUND
DATE
CONCENTRATIONI
MW-3(s)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
103
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
1503
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
7.3 JB2
IRON
8/31/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
ND
METHANE
8/31/2005
1.2
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
0.89
SULFATE
8/31/2005
67.3 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
1.3 J
MW-10(s)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
78.6
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
125
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
204 JB
IRON
8/31/2005
118 ug/L
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
0.01 mg/L
METHANE
8/31/2005
13
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
ND
SULFATE
8/31/2005
31.5 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
4.6 J
MW-18(i)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
ND
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
240
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
374 JB
IRON
8/31/2005
1400
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
1.23
METHANE
8/31/2005
1100
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
ND
SULFATE
8/31/2005
51.7 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
32.5 J
MW-23(i)
ALKALINITY
ND
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/29/2005
56
CHLORIDE
8/29/2005
76.2 JB
IRON
8/29/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/29/2005
0.04
METHANE
8/29/2005
4
NITRATE as N
8/29/2005
0.73
SULFATE
8/29/2005
45.9 JB
SULFIDE
8/29/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/29/2005
1.7
Note:
1 Results in mg/L, except for Methane and Iron results in ug/L
2 J = estimated value; B = analyte also detected in Blank; ND = non -detected
3 Ferrous Iron and Carbon Dioxide were field analyzed by Hach Kit colorimetric methods.
Table 5 Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in GW Page 1 of 4

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in Groundwater - August 2005
Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
LOCATION COMPOUND DATE CONCENTRATION
MW-24(s)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
72.7
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
753
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
171 JB2
IRON
8/31/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
0.053
METHANE
8/31/2005
3.4
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
0.21
SULFATE
8/31/2005
0.76 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
3.6 J
MW-30(i)
MW-45(i)
MW-49(i)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
103
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
125
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
3.9 JB
IRON
8/31/2005
274
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
0.19
METHANE
8/31/2005
2.5
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
0.1
SULFATE
8/31/2005
38.7 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
1.4 J
ALKALINITY
8/30/2005
80.4
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/30/2005
80
CHLORIDE
8/30/2005
31 JB
IRON
8/30/2005
39
IRON, FERROUS
8/30/2005
ND
METHANE
8/30/2005
3.8
NITRATE as N
8/30/2005
2
SULFATE
8/30/2005
25 JB
SULFIDE
8/30/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/30/2005
1.4
ALKALINITY
8/30/2005
70.8
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/30/2005
58
CHLORIDE
8/30/2005
62 JB
IRON
8/30/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/30/2005
0.28
METHANE
8/30/2005
2.8
NITRATE as N
8/30/2005
0
SULFATE
8/30/2005
27 JB
SULFIDE
8/30/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/30/2005
0.99 B
Note:
t Results in mg/L, except for Methane and Iron results in ug/L
2 J = estimated value; B = analyte also detected in Blank; ND = non -detected
3 Ferrous Iron and Carbon Dioxide were field analyzed by Hach Kit colorimetric methods.
Table 5 Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in GW Page 2 of 4

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in Groundwater - August 2005
Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
LOCATION
COMPOUND
DATE
CONCENTRATION'
DW-7(i)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
91.2
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
803
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
7.2 JB2
IRON
8/31/2005
178
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
0.113
METHANE
8/31/2005
0.78
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
0.36
SULFATE
8/31/2005
12.2 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
0.98 JB
DW-8(i)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
125
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
130
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
57.7 JB
IRON
8/31/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
0.03
METHANE
8/31/2005
140
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
1.6
SULFATE
8/31/2005
50.2 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
2.0 J
DW-9(d)
DW-16(d)
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
80
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/31/2005
45
CHLORIDE
8/31/2005
109 JB
IRON
8/31/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/31/2005
0.23
METHANE
8/31/2005
6.25
NITRATE as N
8/31/2005
0.15
SULFATE
8/31/2005
1.6 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
1.5 J
ALKALINITY
8/30/2005
221
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/30/2005
45
CHLORIDE
8/30/2005
117 JB
IRON
8/30/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/30/2005
0.02
METHANE
8/30/2005
340
NITRATE as N
8/30/2005
ND
SULFATE
8/30/2005
56 JB
SULFIDE
8/30/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/30/2005
3.5
Note:
1 Results in mg/L, except for Methane and Iron results in ug/L
2 J = estimated value; B = analyte also detected in Blank; ND = non -detected
3 Ferrous Iron and Carbon Dioxide were field analyzed by Hach m Kit colorimetric methods.
Table 5 Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in GW Page 3 of 4

Table 5
Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in Groundwater - August 2005
Lucent - Cotton Mill Square: Greensboro, North Carolina
LOCATION COMPOUND DATE . CONCENTRATION
DW-18i
ALKALINITY
8/31/2005
136
CARBON DIOXIDE
8/30/2005
403
CHLORIDE
8/30/2005
80 JB2
IRON
8/30/2005
ND
IRON, FERROUS
8/30/2005
0.043
METHANE
8/30/2005
2.4
NITRATE as N
8/30/2005
1
SULFATE
8/30/2005
36 JB
SULFIDE
8/31/2005
ND
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
8/31/2005
2.2
Note:
1 Results in ma, except for Methane and Iron results in ua
2 J = estimated value; B = analyte also detected in Blank; ND = non -detected
3 Ferrous Iron and Carbon Dioxide were field analyzed by Hach Kit colorimetric methods.
Table 5 Summary of Natural Attenuation and Inorganic Parameters in GW Page 4 of 4

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:17 AM
To: [e-mail]; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Knight, Sherri; Wang, Shuying
Subject: FW: Additional Information needed for the Cotton Mill Square Site Injection Permit
WQ0036621
Mr. Johnson,
I am sending you this email in order to clarify the information we need to issue the subject permit.
Please send us a detailed monitoring plan which specifies the monitoring wells that are used only for monitoring the
injection activities granted by this permit. The purpose of the monitoring is to determine if the proposed injection has
any adverse impact on the groundwater quality and dimensions of the contaminant plume. This is not the same as the
monitoring included in the Remedial Action Plan. The monitoring wells in the monitoring plan of this permit should
consider the locations of the injection wells that will be used and the form of injection that will take place. Passive
injection methods usually do not impact the quality of the groundwater at large distances from the injection points.
The monitoring plan needs to include the wells that will be monitored (pre -injection and post -injection groundwater
sampling), the parameters that will be sampled (these should include the Water Level, Nitrate Nitrogen, Oil & Grease,
VOCs, Chloride, Sulfate, Total Iron, and possibly TOC), and the sampling schedule.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central Office
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 9:08 AM
To: '[e-mail]'
Cc: Knight, Sherri
Subject: Additional Information needed for the Cotton Mill Square Site Injection Permit WQ0036621
Mr. Johnson,
The Aquifer Protection Section is in receipt of Weston Solution's application for obtaining a groundwater remediation
permit to perform remediation activities at the Cotton Mill Square Site in Greensboro, NC.
I am requesting a detailed description of the groundwater monitoring plan that will be used in association with the
intended injection/extraction activities (pre -injection and post -injection groundwater sampling) to assess the area
impacted by the remediation activities. Please contact me by email or at [phone] if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central

-3
Goodrich, David
From: Wang, Shuying
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 3:28 PM
To: Johnson, Steve E.
Cc: Mackey, Edward J.; Eliason, W. Mark, Cornuet, Thomas; Goodrich, David; Knight, Sherri
Subject: RE: Cotton Mill Square - Site Inspection
Hi Ed,
I would like to meet you at the site by 9:00 Friday morning. In addition to check general site conditions, I need to see all
injection wells to be used and which monitoring wells you are going to use to monitor if the injection has any adverse
impact on groundwater quality and the plume dimensions. In your application, there is not_such a monitoringaplan. The
- -
permit cannot be issued until a reasonable monitoring plan is provided. You may want to make one and bring it to me
when you meet me there. Please note that this plan may or may not be the same one you presented in the CAP.
It is also noted that permits WQ0029385 and W10400297 are still active. When I am at the site, I would also like to make
routine compliance inspections on these parts of the site.
In addition, W10400084 is mentioned in your application, I need to know what this permit is for and when it was issued.
Please pass me your cell phone number. Mine is 336-403-5429.
Call or email me if you have any questions regarding this message.
Thank you!
Shuying Wang
Hydrogeologist
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality, Aquifer Protection Section
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone] or 771-4632
shuying.wangCd)ncdenr.gov
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/aps
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to
the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
****************
From: Johnson, Steve E. [mailto:S.Johnson WestonSolutions.com1
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 2:47 PM
To: Wang, Shuying
Cc: Mackey, Edward J.; Eliason, W. Mark; Cornuet, Thomas
Subject: Cotton Mill Square - Site Inspection
Shuying,
1

Ed Mackey can meet you at the site on the morning of Friday July 12th to assist you with the site inspection. Please
contact Ed directly (484-354-0215) to arrange a time. I would suggest that you meet at the soil vapor extraction trailer
located on site. Please let me or Ed know if you have any questions.
Regards,
S.E. Johnson
Senior Project Manager _
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
P.O. Boa 2653
West Chester, PA 19380
Phone: [phone]
Mobil: 610-505-6546
FAX: [phone]
Email: s�.'ohnson(c�r�,westonsolutions.com
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

Goodrich, David
From: Goodrich, David
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 9:08 AM
To: '[e-mail]'
Cc: Knight, Sherri
Subject: Additional Information needed for the Cotton Mill Square Site Injection Permit
WQ0036621
Mr. Johnson,
The Aquifer Protection Section is in receipt of Weston Solution's application for obtaining a groundwater remediation
permit to perform remediation activities at the Cotton Mill Square Site in Greensboro, NC.
I am requesting a detailed description of the groundwater monitoring plan that will be used in association with the
intended injection/extraction activities (pre -injection and post -injection groundwater sampling) to assess the area
impacted by the remediation activities. Please contact me by email or at [phone] if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Regards,
David Goodrich
Aquifer Protection Section Central

Goodrich, David
From: Watts, Debra
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:56 PM
To: Goodrich, David
Subject: FW: Cotton Mill Non Discharge Submittal
David
This is in relation to a new groundwater remediation permit you should be receiving soon (assigned to you). Let me
know if you have questions. Debra
From: Eliason, W. Mark jmailto:[e-mail]1
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:06 PM
To: Watts, Debra
Cc: Johnson, Steve E.; Cornuet, Thomas
Subject: Cotton Mill Non Discharge Submittal
Debra,
Thank you very much for taking the time to talk to us, my apology for the confusion. The correct Permit # that we were
attempting to modify was WQ0029385. We will write a letter to rescind that permit and the current permit application
can be treated as a new submittal as you suggested. The previous permit was a major permit capable of injecting greater
than 10,000 gpd, and the present submittal would be a minor permit as we will inject far less than that volume on any
given day, with a total application of less than 20,000 gallons over approximately 2 weeks. Please don't hesitate to
contact us if you feel any additional discussion or clarification is required.
Thank you again for attention to this submittal.
Mark
W. Mark Eliason
Weston Solutions, Inc.
610-701-3145
610-701-3401 (Fax)
W.M. Eliason(cD-WestonSolutions.com
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email and attachments may contain information which is confidential and
proprietary. Disclosure or use of any such confidential or proprietary information without the written
permission of Weston Solutions, Inc. is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete this email from your system. Thank you.

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder
Governor Acting Director
July 1, 2013
Jaikishen N. Motwani — Vice President/Principal Client Service Mgr.
Weston Solutions, Inc.
1400 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380
Dear Mr. Motwani:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Subject: Acknowledgement of
Application No. WQ0036621
Cotton MITI Square Site (CMS)
Groundwater Remediation
System
Guilford County
The Aquifer Protection Section acknowledges receipt of your permit application and supporting
documentation received on 06/26/2013. Your application package has been assigned the number listed
above, and the primary reviewer is David Goodrich.
Central and Winston-Salem Regional Office staff will perform a detailed review of the provided
application, and may contact you with a request for additional information. To ensure maximum
efficiency in processing permit applications, the Aquifer Protection Section requests your assistance in
providing a timely and complete response to any additional information requests.
Please note that processing standard review permit applications may take as long as 60 to 90 days
after receipt of a complete application. If you have any questions, please contact
David Goodrich at (919) 807-g352 or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
for De a , Watts
Groundwater Protection Unit Supervisor
cc: Winston-Salem Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Steve E. Johnson — Weston Solutions, Inc.
erm<t File WQ003662
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] NorthCa.1 ofina
Internet: www.nawaterauality.org -11 1 /I
An Equal Opportunity 4 Affirmative Action Employer

Name -4.0
Date
to
Check Number
Amount
11

Budget Code: 24300
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources 07/01/13
Cash Receipts Batch Details
Divison of Water Quality
Page#: I
Date: 07/01,113 Name: Tonya Godwin Batch Number: PR2013070103
IR
Processed Dat Name
07/01/13 WQ0036621 - Weston Solutions Inc - Cotton Mill
Square Site (CMS)
Mn,.
or
'00'�
E�
- jp
Payor
Weston Solutions, Inc.
M
Ch
g
BatchTotal: $810.00
Amount
Check Number
Pmt Rcv'd Date
$810.00
000232930
06/26/13
taich"T

AQUIFER PROTECTIONI SECTIOIeT
APPLICATION REVIEW RE �.c ®e� ,''01ENR
ITEST FORM
Date: July 2, 2013 JUL , 3 2013
To: ❑ Landon Davidson, ARO-APS Regional Salem
office
❑ Art Barnhardt, FRO-APS ❑ David May, WaRO-APS
on-
❑ Andrew Pitner, MRO-APS ❑ Morella Sanchez King, WiRO-APS
❑ Rick Bolich, RRO-APS
TJ0W&,X Sherri Knight, WSRO-APS
David Goodrich , Land Application Unit
Telephone: [phone]
F' : I9)�8a'
E-Mail: [e-mail] D7=649 "
A. Permit Number -:--_WOO_ 03�661
B. Owner: Weston Solutions Inc.
C. Facility/Operation: Cotton Mill Square Site (CMS)
❑ Proposed X Existing X Facility X Operation
D. A p cation:
L Permit Type: ❑ Animal ❑ Surface Irrigation g El Reuse ❑ H-R Infiltration
❑ Recycle ❑ I/E Lagoon X GW Remediation
(ND)orSI Injection
❑ UIC - (5A7) open loop geothermal
For Residuals: ❑ Land App. ❑ D&M
❑ Surface Disposal
❑ 503 ❑ 503 Exempt ❑ Animal
2. Project Type: X New ❑ Major Mod. ❑ Minor Mod. ❑ Renewal ❑ Renewal w/ Mod.
E. Comments/Other Information: ❑ I would like to accompany you on a site visit.
Attached, you will find all information submitted in support of the above -referenced application for your
review, comment, and/or action. Within 30 calendar days, please take the following actions:
X Return a Completed APSARR Form. - Please comment
❑ Attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
❑ Attach Attachment B for Certification by the LAPCU.
El Issue an Attachment B Certification from the RO.*
* Remember that you will be responsible for coordinating site visits and reviews, as well as additional
information requests with other RO-APS representatives in order to prepare a complete Attachment B for
certification. Refer to the RPP SOP for additional detail.
When you receive this request form, please write your name and dates in the spaces below, make a copy
of this sheet, and return it to the appropriate Central Office -Aquifer Protection Section contact person
listed above.
RO-APS Reviewer: s !' 1 (,� G
Date: 7
RECEIVEDIDENR/D
!NQ
FORM: APSARR 07/06 Page 1 of 1 JUL 16 ZG'f3
Aqt ifer%tection Section

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION UNIT
REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
Date: 07/15/2013 Permittee(s): Weston Solutions Inc.
Permit No.: W00036621
To: APS Central Office County: Guilford
Central Office Reviewer: David Goodrich Project Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
Regional Login No:
L GENERAL INFORMATION
1. This application is (check all that apply): ❑ SFR Waste Irrigation System ❑ UIC Well(s)
® New ❑ Renewal
❑ Minor Modification ❑ Major Modification
❑ Surface Irrigation ❑ Reuse ❑ Recycle ❑ High Rate Infiltration ❑ Evaporation/Infiltration Lagoon
❑ Land Application of Residuals ❑ Attachment B included ❑ 503 regulated ❑ 503 exempt
❑ Distribution of Residuals _ ❑ Surface Disposal
❑ Closed -loop Groundwater Remediation ® Other Injection Wells (including in situ remediation)
Was a site visit conducted in order to prepare this report? ® Yes or ❑ No.
a. Date of site visit: July 12, 2013
b. Person contacted and contact information: Edward Mackey, Weston Solusions,
[e-mail], 484-345-0215 (cell)
C. Site visit conducted by: Shuying Wang
d. Inspection Report Attached: ❑ Yes or ® No.
2. Is the following information entered into the BIMS record for -this application correct?
® Yes or ❑ No. If no, please complete the following or indicate that it is correct on the current application.
For SFR Treatment Facilities:
a. Location:
b. Driving Directions:
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number:
d. Latitude: Longitude: Method Used (GPS, GoogleTM, etc.);
e. Regulated Activities / Type of Wastes (e.g., subdivision, food processing, municipal wastewater):
For UIC Injection Sites:
(If multiple sites either indicate which sites the information applies to, copy and paste a new section into the
document for each site, or attach additional pages for each site)
a. Location(s):
b. Driving Directions:
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number:
d. Latitude:, Longitude: Method Used (GPS, GoogleTM, etc.): Trimble Geo XH
APS-GPU Regional Staff Report (Sept 09) Page I of 6 Pages

r
AQUIFER PROTECTIONN SECTION - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION UNIT
REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
IV. INJECTION WELL PERMITAPPLICATIONS (Complete these two sections for all systems that use injection
wells, including closed -loop groundwater remediation effluent injection wells, in situ remediation injection wells, and heat
pump injection wells.)
Description of Well(s) and Facilities — New, Renewal, and Modification
1. Type of injection system:
❑ Heating/cooling water return flow (5A7)
❑ Closed -loop heat pump system (5QM/5QW)
® In situ remediation (5I)
❑ Closed -loop groundwater remediation effluent injection (5L/"Non-Discharge")
❑ Other (Specify: )
2. Does system use same well for water source and injection? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Are there any potential pollution sources that may affect injection? ❑ Yes ® No
What is/are the pollution source(s)? No. What is the distance of the injection well(s) from the pollution
source(s)?
4. What is the minimum distance of proposed injection wells from the property boundary? 45 ft.
5. Quality of drainage at site: ❑ Good ® Adequate ❑ Poor
6. Flooding potential of site: ® Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High
7. For groundwater remediation systems, is the proposed and/or existing groundwater monitoring program
(number of wells, frequency of monitoring, monitoring parameters, etc.) adequate? ❑ Yes ® No. Attach
map of existing monitoring well network, if applicable. If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program: No specific plan is included in the application.
8. Does the map presented represent the actual site (property lines, wells, surface drainage)? ® Yes or ❑ No. If
no or no map, please attach a sketch of the site. Show property boundaries, buildings, wells, potential pollution
sources, roads, approximate scale, and north arrow.
Injection Well Permit Renewal and Modification Only:
1. For heat pump systems, are there any abnormalities in heat pump or injection well operation (e.g. turbid water,
failure to assimilate injected fluid, poor heating/cooling)?
❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
2. For closed -loop heat pump systems, has system lost pressure or required make-up fluid since permit issuance
or last inspection? ❑ Yes ❑ No. If yes, explain:
3. For renewal or modification of groundwater remediation permits (of any type), will
continued/additional/modified injections have an adverse impact on migration of the plume or management of
the contamination incident? ❑ Yes ® No. If yes, plain:
APS-GPU Regional Staff Report (Sept 09) Page 4 of 6 Pages

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION UNIT
REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
4. Drilling Contractor: Name:
Address:
NC Certification number:
5. Complete and attach NEW Injection Facility Inspection Report, if applicable
V. EVALUATIONAND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Provide any additional narrative regarding your review of the Application:'
2. Attach new Injection Facility Inspection Form, if applicable
3. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes ® No. If yes, please explain
briefly.
4. List any items that you would like APS Central Office to obtain through an additional information request.
Make sure that you provide a reason for each item:
Item
Reason
A table that lists
There is not a specific monitoring plan in the
monitoring wells that are
application. Please not that the purpose of the
used only for monitoring
monitoring required by this pen -nit to monitor if the
injection activities to be
injection has any adverse impact on groundwater
oranted by this permit,
quality and dimensions of the plume, which is different
parameters, and
from what proposed in the Corrective Action Plan
frequency of sampling.
(CAP) mentioned in the application. Monitoring wells
picked for this monitoring purpose should reflect
locations of the injection wells to be used. Since the
proposed injection is passive, monitoring down
gradient wells or deepest bedrock wells may not be
necessary. Parameters including nitrate and oil and
grease in addition to VOC, Cl, Sulfate, total Fe, and
TOC listed in the CAP should be considered.
5. List specific Permit conditions that you recommend to be removed from the permit when issued. Make sure
that you provide a reason for each condition:
Condition Reason
APS-GPU Regional Staff Report (Sept 09)
Page 5 of 6 Pages

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION UNIT
REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
6. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules that you recommend to be included in the permit when
issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for each special condition:
Condition Reason
7. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office; ❑ Hold,
pending review of draft permit by regional office; ® Issue upon receipt of needed additional information; ❑
Issue; ❑ Deny. If deny, please state reasons:
8. Signature of report Preparer(s):
Signature of APS regional supervisor: �.
Date: ri r
VZ ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONAND SITE MAP (Sketch of site showing house and waste irrigation
system, spray or drip field, location of well(s), and/or other relevant information- SHOW NORTHARROW)
APS-GPU Regional Staff Report (Sept 09) Page 6 of 6 Pages

GW-59A COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM Permit -1WLX- ry_U(J-S6-L� -
(Submit One each monitoring period tvith GW-59 fornis.)
i
Enter date monitoring results were due. ) Will this monitoring report (GW-59 and GW-59A)
YES
O
be submitted after the established due date?
2
Was any required information missing on the G*V-59 report forms?
YES
O
IF the answer to question I or 2 is "YES", list in the space provided below the well identification number(s) and
explain the problems encountered in obtaining the required information.
3
Are any of the monitor wells in need of repair or maintenance (damaged casing, unlocked or missing cap, missing
YES
identification plate, area overgrown, etc.)? If the answer is "Yes ", contact the Regional Office for guidance.
4
Are any monitored constituents equal to or above the established standards?
YES
O
If the answer to question 4 is "NO", skip to section 8.
If the answer to question 4 is "YES" list the affected wells individually with constituent(s) and concentration(s)
exceeding standards in the space provided below.
Voc- "D r'e-2x % s++ /�s . f s ere awe
AO rz x co-eA.c,.,^-c,e,� i ti rp-W�O, -fin -rke- LJ Q003 G 6 Z 1
5
For the constituents identified in question 4 above, have standards been exceeded previously for the
NO
same constituent(s) in the same well(s) in the last two years?
If the answer to question 5 is "NO", skip to section 8.
If the answer to question 5 is "YES", list in the space provided below, each well with constituent(s) exceeding
standards, concentration(s) reported, and sample collection date for each occurrence (for the last two years).
Lj —13 (S) Pt w - I L- (s), t W -s 1�� M w -36(s)
/s Goo ��at�l- rc�,�;-for, ,� `Z-0— a -t.
Are the monitoring wells listed in section 5 located at or beyond the review boundary?
YES
NO
If the answer is "YES"' a groundwater quality problem may be occurring. CO TOE R9BIONAL
OFFICE IMMEDIATELY FOR GUIDANCE. If the answer is "NO', monitoring wef LAnajEPe iroperly
UJI
t-
located; contact the Regional Office. Ncc
uj o^ z
7
Is the permittee implementing previously approved actions required by the DivLTn Rkol his
YES
NO
groundwater quality problem? �pr
if the answer to question 7 is "YES", describe those actions in the space provided below.
If the answer to question 7 is "NO", contact the Regional Office within 90 days; an evaluation may be
required to determine the impact the waste disposal system is having at the review and compliance
boundaries surrounding this facility. Failure to do so may subject the permittee to a Notice of Violation,
fines, and/or penalties[. 1 j
I-C) rno +Qdc� co /+an!lO-/�5 ,
8
The person completing this portion (GW-59A) of the monitoring report should sign below and submit this
form with GW-59,forms for required wells to the address provided at the top of the current GW-59 form.
hereb' ackri' wo led" eahatethe above informatiori.was.eviluated'and th ne forrria't_iorI-submiited,in this:-
Lr'ikAa(Coan'ce •Report-GW`59A)'is true and`°complete to the best-of;mjr knowledge`:. ` � ._� �'
/ ` 0r S S f
Signature of Permittee (or Authorized Agent) Date
r
GW-59A 12/8/2003
r

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
DEPARTMENT'OF ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY -INFORMATION PROCESSING UNIT ,
COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH,.NC 27699.1617 Phone: [phone]
FACILITY INFORMATION
Please Print Clearly or Type
PERMIT Number: WQ0036621 Expiration Date: October31, 2018
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Non -Discharge x UIC
Permit Name (if different):
NPDES Other
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
TYPE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
Greensboro (Street) NC
27405 County Guilford
❑ Lagoon ❑ Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
(city) (stato)
(Zip)
❑ Spray Field ❑■ Remediation: Bioremediation
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Telephone#: [phone]
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
from Permit)
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): DW-06
Date sample collected: 4/29116
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: 64 ft.
Well Diameter: 2 in.
pH 00400: 6.4 units Temp. 000lo: 17.6 eC
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 10.46 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 59 ft.
to 64
—
ft. Spec. Cond. 00094: 246 µMhos
time of
sampling,
Measuring Point is -0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 856.92
ft.
Odor 00085: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: ❑ YES
❑■ NO and field acidified: W1 YES
❑ NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5/13/16
Laboratory Name: Test America -Chicago
Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved
and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO2) as N 00615 Not detected
mg/L Pb - Lead 61051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (NO3) as N 00620 1.7
mg/L Zn -Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100ml-
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mg/L
(Note: Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 7030o NA
mg/L
AI - Aluminum 01105 NA
mg/L Note DO- 0.8 mg/L; ORP - 138 mV
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Ba - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
TOC 00680 1.4
mg/L
Ca - Calcium oo916 NA
mg/1=
Chloride 0094o 25
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L
Cotton Mill Square Project Site.
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L
NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu -Copper 01042 NA
mg/L ORGANICS: (by GC, GC/MS, HPLC)
Phenol 32730 NA
ug/L
Fe - Iron 01045 380
ug/L
(Specify test and method A ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 5.3
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 719oo NA
ug/L
Lab Report Attached? ❑■ Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
Specific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L VOC 78732: method # 8260B
Total Ammonia oo610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L method #
(Ammonia Nitrogen; NH3asN, Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese of o55 NA
ug/L
, method #
TKN as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L
method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports)
Influent Total VOCs: See Note
mg/L
Effluent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L VOC Removal% see Note
GW-59 Rev. 2/2010

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
Client Sample ID: DW-06-D1
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-1
Date Collected: 04/29/16 10:50
Matrix: Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Bromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Chloroform
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
cis-1,2-[Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45 '
1
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Dibromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13116 02:45
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Dichlorodifluoromethane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,3-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Isopropy] benzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
- 05/13/16 02:45
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13116 02:45
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
TestAmerica Chicago
i lz
I
Page 8 of 40 5/16/2016

Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
Client Sam p le Results
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
1;
(J
;
Client Sample ID: DW-06-D1
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-1
Date Collected: 04/29/16 10:50
Matrix:
Water
`
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30.;t
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
`,} I
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0:39
u /L
05/13/16 02:45
1
c `
tert-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Tetrachloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1_
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1x,."
ai
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
-"
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1.,2-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Trichloroethene
<0.50
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
iri}
! .
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0
1.0
b.46
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
Vinyl chloride
<0.50
0.50
0.20
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
L! yP<
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 02:45
1
j Surrogate %Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
100
71-120
05113116 02 45
1
Dibromofluoromethane
96
70 -120
05113116 02:45
1
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (Surr)
106
71-127
05113116 02:45
1
Toluene -dB (Surr)
100
75 -120
05113116 02:45
1
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
0.38
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25 05/03/16 05:31
1
General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Nitrate as N
1.7
0.20
0.046
mg/L
04/30/16 21:23
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20
0.20
0.075
mg/L
04/30/16 21:23
1
Sulfate
5.3
0.20
0.13
mg/L
04/30/16 21:23
1
Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
1.4
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/10/16 00-55
1
Chloride
25
2.0
1.2
mg/L
05/06/16 01:31
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 9 of 40 5/16/2016

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
Mail
originaij
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
.
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY -INFORMATION PROCESSING UNIT
COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
e
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-16'17 'Phone: [phone]
FACILITY INFORMATION
Please Print Clearly or Type
PERMIT Number: W00036621 Expiration Date: October 31, 2018
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Non -Discharge x UIC
Permit Name (if different):
NPDES Other
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
TYPE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
Greensboro iee4� NC
27405 CountyGuilford
El Lagoon El Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
(City) (State)
(zip)
❑ Spray Field IN Remediation: Bloremedlatlon
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Telephone#: [phone]
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
'
(from Permit
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): MW-13(s)
Date sample collected: 4/29/16
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: 15 ft.
Well Diameter: 2 in.
pH 00400: 6.6 units Temp. 000lo: 15.9 °C
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 5.75 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 5 ft.
to 15
—
ft. Spec. Cond. 00094. 862 µMhos
time of
sampling,
Measuring Point is -0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 851.81
ft.
Odor 00085: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: El YES
❑■ NO and field acidified: ® YES
El NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5/13/16
Laboratory Name: Test America - Chicago
Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved
and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO2) as N 00615 Not detected
mg/L Pb -Lead 01051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (l as N 00620 0.090 J
mg/L Zn -Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100mL
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mg/L
(Note Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 7030o NA
mg/L
Al -Aluminum 01105 NA
mg/L Note: DO 0.7 mg/L; ORP - -26.7 mV
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Ba - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
TOC 00680 12
mg/L
Ca - Calcium 00916 NA
mg/L
Chloride 00940 16
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L
Cotton Mill Square Project Site,
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L
NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu -Copper 01042 NA
mg/L
ORGANICS: (by GC, GC/MS, HPLC)
Phenol 3273o NA
ug/L
Fe - Iron 01045 25000
ug/L
(Specify test and method #. ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 160 B
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 719oo NA
ug/L
Lab Report Attached? ❑■ Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
Specific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L
VOC 78732: method # 8260B
Total Ammonia 00610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L
method #
(Ammonia Nittogen; NH3asN; Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese 01055 NA
ug/L
method #
TKN as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L
method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports): Influent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L Effluent Total VOCS: See Note mg/L VOC Removal% See Note
Steve E. Johnson - Project Manager, W. Mark Eliason - Geologist, for SEJ
Permittee (or Authorized Agent) Name and Title - Please print or type
GW-59 Rev.2/2010

Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
Client Sample Results
J TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: MW-13S
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-3
Date Collected: 04/29/16 12:25
Matrix:
Water
`-
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
r ; 71
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
C j
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
I `•� ;
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Bromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1_.
_.
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
;
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
r 1.
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
Chloroform
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
-
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
s[
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
I
?m
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
47
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
r
Dibromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1F=:i
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1,h`-a-
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
x"
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Dichlorodifluoromethane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
4.8
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,1-Dichloroethene
21
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1'
1,3-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Isopropylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13116 03:38
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 12 of 40 5/16/2016

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: MW-13S
tab Sample ID: 500-110960-3
Date Collected: 04/29/16 12:25
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
'
Method: 8260E - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac`
{
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
tert-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
L
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane -
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Tetra chloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1r
_
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
r
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
"
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Trichloroethene
5.9
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
-
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
t
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1�
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Vinyl chloride
110
0.50
0.20
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 03:38
1
Y W„
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
100
71-120
05113116 03:38
1
Dibromofluoromethane
97
70-120
05/13/16 03:38
1
1,2-Dichlorcethane-d4 (Surr)
109
71-127
05113116 03:38
1
Toluene -dB (Surr)
102
75 -120
05/13/16 03:38
1
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
25
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25 05/03/16 05:40
1
General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Nitrate as N
0.090 J
0.20
0.046
mg/L
04/30/16 22:13
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20 ,
0.20
0.075
mg/L
04/30/16 22:13
1
Sulfate
160 B
4.0
2.5
mg/L
05/10/16 21:54
20
Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
12
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/08/16 20:25
1
LChloride
16
2.0
1.2
mg/L
05/06/16 01:33
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 13 of 40 5/16/2016

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
DEPARTMENTAF ENVIRONMENT'& NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY -INFORMATION PROCESSING UNIT
COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617 Phone: [phone]
FACILITY INFORMATION
Please Print Clearly or Type
PERMIT Number: WQ0036621 Expiration Date: October31, 2018
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Non -Discharge x UIC
Permit Name (if different):
NPDES Other
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
TYPE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
Greensboro (Street) NC
27405 County Guilford
❑ Lagoon ❑ Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
(City) (State)
(Zlp)
❑ Spray Field X Remediation: Bloremedlation
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Telephone#: [phone]
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
(from Permit)
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): MW-14(s)
Date sample collected: 4129/16
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: NM ft.
Well Diameter: 2 in.
pH 00400: 6.5 units Temp. 000lo: 17.2 eC
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 7.29 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 5 ft. to
15 ft.
Spec. Cond. 00094: 618 µMhos
time of
sampling,
Measuring Point is -0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 853.06 ft.
Odor 00085: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: ElYES
❑■ NO and field acidified: ® YES ❑ NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5/13/16
Laboratory Name: Test America -Chicago
Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved
and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO2) as N 00615 Not detected
mg/L
Pb -Lead 01051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (NO3) as N 00620 0.13 J
mg/L
Zn - Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100mL
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mg/L
(Note, Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L
Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 703oo NA
mg/L
Al -Aluminum 01105 NA
mg/L
Note: DO- 0.8 mg/L; ORP -35.6 mV
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Ba - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
TOC 0068o 6.0
mg/L
Ca - Calcium oo916 NA
mg/L
Chloride 0094o 45
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L
Cotton Mill Square Project Site.
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L
NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu - Copper 01042 NA
mg/L
ORGANICS: (by GC, GC/MS, HPLC)
Phenol 3273o NA
ug/L
Fe - iron 01045 11000
ug/L
(Specify test and method #. ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 61
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 719oo NA
ug/L
Lab Report Attached? X Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
Specific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L
VOC 78732. method # 8260B
Total Ammonia 00610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L
method #
(Ammonia Nitrogen; NH,,as N; Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese 01055 NA
ug/L
method #
TKN as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L
method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports):
Influent Total VOCs: See Note
Steve E. Johnson - Project Manager, W. Mark Eliason - Geologist, for SEJ
Permittee (or Authorized Agent) Name and Title - Please print or type
mg/L Effluent Total VOCs: See Note
mg/L
VOC Removal% See Note
GW-59 Rev.2/2010

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: IUW-14S Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-2
Date Collected: 04/29/16 11:35 Matrix: Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Bromochlorom ethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Chloroform
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13116 03:11
1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
7.3
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05113/16 03:11
1
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Dibromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Dichlorodifluoromethane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
3.5
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
11-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05113/16 03:11
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,3-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Isopropylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L'
05/13/16 03:11
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0 -
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Ir
Page 10 of 40 5/16/2016

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: MW-14S
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-2
Date Collected: 04/29/16 11:35
Matrix:.
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
tert-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Tetrachloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Trichloroethene
0.95
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Vinyl chloride
2.0
0.50
0.20
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 03:11
1
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
99
71-120
05/13/16 03:11
1
Dibromofluoromethane
100
70 -120
05113116 03:11
1
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (Surr)
108
71-127
05113116 03:11
1
Toluene-d8 (Surr)
97
75-120
05113116 03:11
1
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
11
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25 05/03/16 05:35
1
General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Nitrate as N
0.13 J
0.20
0.046
mg/L
04/30/16 21:48
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20
0.20
0.075
mg/L
04/30/16 21:48
1
Sulfate
61
2.0
1.3
mg/L
04/30/16 22:00
10
Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
6.0
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/08/16 20:05
1
Chloride
45
2.0
1.2
mg/L
05/06/16 01:32
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 11 of 40 5/16/2016

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
DEPARTMENT OF -ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
DIVISION OFWATER'QUALITY-INFORMATION PROCESSING UNIT
COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
and
a
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617 Phone: [phone]
FACILITY INFORMATION
Please Print Clearly or Type
PERMIT Number: WQ0036621 Expiration Date: October 31, 2018
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Non -Discharge WQ0029385 UIC
Permit Name (if different):
NPDES Other
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
TYPE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
Greensboro (street) NC
27405 CountyGuilford
El Lagoon El Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
(city) (slate)
(4)
❑ Spray Field ❑■ Remediation: Bioremediation
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Telephone#: [phone]
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
from Permit)
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): DW-02
Date sample collected: 4/29/16
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: 80.82 ft.
Well Diameter: 2 in.
pH 00400. 7.2 units Temp. 000lo• 18.5 °C
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 23.13 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 75.82 ft.
to 80.82 ft. Spec. Cond. 00094: 95 µMhos
time sampling,
Measuring Point is -0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 873.83
ft. Odor 00085: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: ❑ YES
❑■ NO and field acidified: 0 YES
❑ NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5/13116
Laboratory Name: Test America -Chicago Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved
and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO2) as N 00615 Not detected
mg/L Pb -Lead 01051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (NO3) as N 00620 0.57
mg/L Zn -Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100mL
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mg/L
(Note: Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 703oo NA
mg/L
Al - Aluminum o11o5 NA
rng/L Note: DO - 3.2 mg/L; ORP 61.9 mV
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Ba - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
TOC 00690 2.4
mg/L
Ca - Calcium oo916 NA
mg/L
Chloride 00940 1.9 J
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L Cotton Mill Square Project Site.
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu -Copper 01042 NA
mg/L ORGANICS: (by GC, GC/MS, HPLC)
Phenol 3273o NA
ug/L
Fe - Iron 01045 Not detected
ug/L (Specify test and method #. ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 4.6
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 7190o NA
ug/L Lab Report Attached? ❑■ Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
Specific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L VOC 78732. , method # 8260B
Total Ammonia 00610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L method #
(Ammonia Nitrogen, NH3as N, Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese 01o55 NA
ug/L method #
TKN as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports)
Influent Total VOCs: See Note
Steve E. Johnson - Project Manager, W. Mark Eliason - Geologist, for SEJ
Permittee (or Authorized Agent) Name and Title - Please print or type
mg/L Effluent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L VOC Removal% See Note
GW-59 Rev.2/2010

Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Ptoject/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
Client Sample Results
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
` k
Client Sample ID: DW-2-D1
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-4
Date Collected: 04/29/16 13:15
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
° I
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
e i
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
;.
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
I
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13116 04:04
1
_t
Bromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
L
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
!
i :y i
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
- -
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
i. is:va
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Chloroform
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
i
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
2.1
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1�
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1A,
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Dibromochloro methane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
T`
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Dichlorodifluoromethane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,1-Dichloroethene
2.5
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,3-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Isopropylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0
0.18
ug/L
05/13116 04:04
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 14 of 40 5/16/2016

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
`-
Client Sample ID: DW-2-D1
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-4
Date Collected: 04/29/16 13:15
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic
Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
r
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Faci
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
_ I
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1'
i 1
tert-Butyl benzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Tetrachloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
(;y
{
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
I _!
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1-�1
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
t4"s
f
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
u /L
05/13/16 04:04
1
as
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1;1,2-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
; ..
Trichloroethene
4.7
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
I
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,1,2-Tnchloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
t T!
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Vinyl chloride
<0.50
0.50
0.20
ug/L
05/13/16 04:04
1
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 64:04
1
= `>
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
101
71-120
05/13/16 04.04
1
Dibromofluoromethane
96
70 -120
05113116 04:04
1
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (Surr)
107
71-127
05113116 04:04
1
Toluene-d8 (Surr)
97
75-120
05113116 04:04
1
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
<0.20
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25 05/03/16 05:44
1
General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
- RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Nitrate as N
0.57
0.20
0.046
mg/L
04/30/16 22:38
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20
0.20
0.075
mg/L
04/30/16 22:38
1
Sulfate
4.6
0.20
0.13
mg/L
04/30/16 22:38
1
-Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
2.4 F1
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/08/16 20:44
1
Chloride
1.9 J
2.0
1.2
mg/L
05/06/16 01:34
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 15 of 40 5/16/2016

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES .
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
copy to:.
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY -INFORMATION PROCESSING UNIT
COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617 Phone: [phone]
FACILITY INFORMATION
Please Print Clearly or Type
PERMIT Number: WQ0036621 Expiration Date: October 31, 2018
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Non -Discharge x UIC
Permit Name (if different):
NPDES Other
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
TYPE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
Greensboro (Street) NC
27405 County Guilford
❑ Lagoon ❑ Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
(City) (S=a1e)
(-ire)
❑ Spray Field Remediation: Bioremed"Iatlon
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Telephone#: [phone]
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
from Permit)
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): MW-36(s)
Date sample collected: 4/29/16
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: 58.92 ft.
Well Diameter: 2 in.
pH 00400: 5.8 units Temp. 000lo: 18.4 °C
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 18.31 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 34 ft.
to 54 ft.
—
Spec. Cond. 00094. 96 µMhos
time of
sampling,
Measuring Point is -0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 876.32
ft.
Odor 00085: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: ❑ YES
❑ NO and field acidified: ❑ YES
❑ NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5/13/16
Laboratory Name: Test America -Chicago
Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved
and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO2) as N 00615 0.68
mg/L
Pb -Lead 01051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (NO3) as N 00620 Not detected
mg/L
Zn -Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100mL
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mg/L
(Note. Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L
Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 7o3oo NA
mg/L
Al -Aluminum o11o5 NA
mg/L
Note: DO- 4.2 mg/L; ORP - 139 mV
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Be - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
TOC 00680 Not detected
mg/L
Ca - Calcium 00916 NA
mg/L
Chloride 00940 14
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L
Cotton Mill Square Project Site.
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L
NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu -Copper 01042 NA
mg/L
ORGANICS: (by GC, GC/MS, HPLC)
Phenol 3273o NA
ug/L
Fe - Iron 01045 Not detected
ug/L
(Specify test and method #. ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 0.45
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 719oo NA
ug/L
Lab Report Attached? 0 Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
Specific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L
VOC 78732• method # 8260B
Total Ammonia oo610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L
method #
(Ammonia Nitrogen; NH3as N, Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese 01055 NA
ug/L
, method #
TKN'as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L
method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports):
Influent Total VOCs: See Note
mg/L
Effluent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L VOC Removal% See Note
GW-59 Rev. 2/2010

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: iVW-36S Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-5
Date Collected: 04/29/16 14:30 Matrix: Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Bromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Chloroform
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Dibromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Dichlorodifluoro methane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,1-Dichloroethene
140
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05113/16 04:31
1
1,3-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Isopropylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 16 of 40 5/16/2016

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
i�
:--
!
Client Sample ID: MW-36S
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-5
°-
Date Collected: 04/29/16 14:30
Matrix:
Water
-
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
i =1
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
i
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
tert-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
-
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Tetrachloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
_#
f_
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
i
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
r i
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05113/16 04:31
1
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05l13/16 04:31
1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1.4
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
035
ug/L _
05/13/16 04:31
1
Trichloroethene
0.65
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
-- ,
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0 '
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
}
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Vinyl chloride
<0.50
0.50
0.20
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 04:31
1'
; =�
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
98
71-120
05/13/16 04:31
1
Dibromofluoromethane
98
70 -120
05113116 04:31
1
1,2-Dichlorcethane-d4 (Surr)
106
71-127
05113116 04:31
1
Toluene -dB (Surr)
97
75 -120
05113116 04:31
1
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
<0.20
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25 05/03/16 05:48
1
[General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac'
Nitrate as N
0.68
0.20
0.046
mg/L
04/30/16 23:29
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20
0.20
0.075
mg/L
04/30/16 23:29
1
Sulfate
0.45
0.20
0.13
mg/L
04/30/16 23:29
1
Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
<1.0
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/08/16 21:41
1
LChloride 12 2.0 1.2 mg/L 05/06/16 01:35 1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 17 of 40 5/16/2016

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
;OUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
IMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
FACILITY INFORMATION Please Pnnt cteanyor type
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Permit Name (if different):
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
Greensboro (Street) NC 27405 County Guilford
(City) (:;fate) (""P)
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
Telephone#: [phone]
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
�ARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES
ISION OF WATER QUALITY -INFORMATION PROCESSING,UNIT ,
7 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617 Phone: [phone]
RMIT Number: WQ0036621 Expiration Date: October 31, 2018
n-Discharge x UIC
'DES Other
PE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
❑ Lagoon ❑ Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
❑ Spray Field 0 Remediation: Bioremediation
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
from Permit)
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): DW-10
Date sample collected: 4/29/16
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: 64 ft.
Well Diameter: 2 in.
pH 0040o: 6.9 units Temp. 000lo: 18.5 eC
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 23.66 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 59 ft. to
64 ft.
Spec. Cond. 00094. 130 µMhos
time of
sampling,
Measuring Point is -0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 874.79 ft.
Odor 000e5: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: ElYES
❑■ NO and field acidified: 0 YES ❑ NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5/13/16
Laboratory Name: Test America - Chicago
Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO.) as N 00615 0.089 J
mg/L
Pb -Lead 01051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (NO3) as N 00620 Not detected
mg/L
Zn - Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100mL
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mg/L
(Note Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L
Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 7o3oo NA
mg/L
Al -Aluminum 01105 NA
mg/L
Note: DO - 2.5 mg/L: ORP- -210 mV.
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Ba - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
TOC 00680 1.4
mg/L
Ca - Calcium 00916 NA
mg/L
Chloride 0094o 4.6
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L
Cotton Mill Square Project Site.
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L
NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu -Copper 01042 NA
mg/L
ORGANICS: (by GC, GUMS, HPLC)
Phenol 3273o NA
ug/L
Fe - Iron 01045 840
ug/L
(Specify test and method #. ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 0.33
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 71900 NA
ug/L
Lab Report Attached? 0 Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
pecific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L
VOC 78732: , method # 8260B
Total Ammonia 00610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L
method #
(Ammonia Nitrogen, NH3as N; Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese 01055 NA
ug/L
method #
TKN as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L
method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports)
Influent Total VOCs: See Note
mg/L
Effluent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L VOC Removal% See (vote
GW-59 Rev.2/2010

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: DW-10-D1
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-6
Date Collected: 04/29/16 15:25
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Bromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Chloroform
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
_ 1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Dibromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Dichlorodifluoromethane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,1-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
' 1,3-6ichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
65/13/16 04:57
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Isopropylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0
0.18
ug/L
05/13116 04:57
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 18 of 40 5/16/2016

Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
Client Sample Results
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
-�
Client Sample ID: DW-10-D1
Lai Sample ID: 500-110960-6
Date Collected: 04/29/16 15:25
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
i
i -
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
j
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
? F
tert-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
L u
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Tetrachloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
,_ f
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
< <,
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1'_.,
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
µ
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
! .
Trichloroethene
<0.50
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
r r a
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1Y
i..
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
_
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1M,=(
Vinyl chloride
<0.50
0.50
0.20
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 04:57
1
Surrogate %Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
DR Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
102
71-120
05113116 04:57
1
Dibromofluoromethane
97
70 -120
05/13/16 04:57
1
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (Surr)
106
71-127
05113116 04:57
1
Toluene-d8 (Surr)
97
75-120
05113116 04:57
1
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
0.84
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25 05/03/16 05:52
1
General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Nitrate as N
0.089 J
0.20
0.046
mg/L
04/30/16 23:54
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20
0.20
0.075
mg/L
04/30/16 23:54
1
Sulfate
0.33
0.20
0.13
mg/L
04/30/16 23:54
1
Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
1.4
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/08/16 22:00
1
Chloride
4.6
2.0
1.2
mg/L
05/06/16 01:40
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 19 of 40 5/16/2016

SUBMIT FORM ON YELLOW PAPER ONLY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY -INFORMATION PROCESSING UNIT
COMPLIANCE REPORT FORM
1617 MAIL.SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617 Phone: [phone]
FACILITY INFORMATION
Please Print Clearly or Type
PERMIT Number: Expiration Date: October 31, 2018
Facility Name: Cotton Mill Square Site -groundwater Remediation Facilities
Non -Discharge WQ0036621 UIC
Permit Name (if different):
NPDES x Other
Facility Address: 801 Merritt Drive
TYPE OF PERMITTED OPERATION BEING MONITORED
Greensboro (street) NC
27405 CountyGuilford
❑Lagoon El Remediation: Infiltration Gallery
(aty� ("rate)
(`fe)
❑ Spray Field ❑■ Remediation: BioreMedlation
Contact Person: Steve E. Johnson
Telephone#: [phone]
❑ Rotary Distributor ❑ Land Application of Sludge
Well Location/Site Name: Cotton Mill Square Site
No. of wells to be sampled: 7
❑ Water Source Heat Pump ❑ Other:
from Permit
SAMPLING INFORMATION
If WELL
WELL ID NUMBER (from Permit): EW-511
Date sample collected: 4/29/16
FIELD ANALYSES:
WAS
Well Depth: 88.35 ft.
Well Diameter: 4 in.
pH 00400. 6.5 units Temp. 000lo• 18.1 °C
DRY at
Depth to Water Level 82546: 22.19 ft. below measuring point Screened Interval: 48 ft.
to 88
ft. Spec. Cond. 00094: 127 µMhos
time sampling,
Measuring Point is 0.3 ft. above land surface
Relative M.P. Elevation: 870.11
ft.
Odor 00085: None
check
Volume of water pumped/bailed before sampling:
3
gallons
Appearance Clear
here:®
Samples for metals were collected unfiltered: ❑ YES
❑■ NO and field acidified: ❑ YES
■❑ NO
LABORATORY INFORMATION
Date sample analyzed: 5113/16
Laboratory Name: Test America -Chicago
Certification No. 291
PARAMETERS NOTE: Values should reflect
dissolved and colloidal concentrations.
COD 00335 NA
mg/L
Nitrite (NO2) as N 00615 0.11 J
mg/L Pb -Lead 01051 NA ug/L
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 NA
/100mL
Nitrate (NO3) as N 00620 Not detected
mg/L Zn -Zinc 01092 NA mg/L
Coliform: MF Total 31504 NA
/100mL
Phosphorus: Total as P 00665 NA
mglL
(Note Use MPN method for highly turbid samples)
Orthophosphate 70507 NA
mg/L Other (Specify Compounds and Concentration Units):
issolved Solids:Total 7030o NA
mg/L
Al - Aluminum oilo5 NA
mg/L Note: DO - 3.5 mg/L; ORP - 124mV
pH (Lab) 00403 NA
units
Ba - Barium 01007 NA
ug/L
Note: See SemiAnnual Monitoring
TOC 0068o 5.7
mg/L
Ca - Calcium 00916 NA
mg/L
Chloride 0094o 8.0
mg/L
Cd - Cadmium 01027 NA
ug/L
Arsenic 01002 NA
ug/L
Chromium: Total 01034 NA
ug/L
NCDENR Groundwater Incident #86348.
Grease and Oils 00552 NA
mg/L
Cu -Copper 01042 NA
mg/L ORGANICS: (by GC, GC/MS, HPLC)
Phenol 32730 NA
ug/L
Fe - Iron 01045 190 J
ug/L
(Specify test and method #. ATTACH LAB REPORT.)
Sulfate 00945 9.1
mg/L
Hg - Mercury 719oo NA
ug/L
Lab Report Attached? ❑■ Yes (1) ❑ No (0)
Specific Conductance 00095 NA
µMhos
K - Potassium 00937 NA
mg/L VOC 78732: method # 8260B
Total Ammonia 00610 NA
mg/L
Mg - Magnesium 00927 NA
mg/L method #
(Ammonia Nitrogen, NH3asN, Ammonia Nitrogen, Total)
Mn - Manganese 01055 NA
ug/L
, method #
TKN as N 00625 NA
mg/L
Ni - Nickel 01067 NA
ug/L
method #
For Remediation Systems Only (Attach Lab Reports): Influent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L Effluent Total VOCs: See Note mg/L VOC Removal% See Note
GW-59 Rev.2/2010

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
Client Sample ID: EW-511
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-7
Date Collected: 04/29/16 16:35
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
Acetone
<5.0
5.0
1.7
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Benzene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Bromobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Bromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Bromodichloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Bromoform
<1.0
1.0
0.48
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Bromomethane
<2.0
2.0
0.80
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Carbon disulfide
<2.0
2.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Carbon tetrachloride
<1.0
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Chlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Chloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.51
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Chloroform
1.3
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Chloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
2-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.31
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
4-Chlorotoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24_
1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
37
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
cis- 1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.42
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Cyclohexanone
<100
100
41
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Dibromochloromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.49
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2-Dibromoethane
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Dibromomethane
<1.0
1.0
0.27
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.33
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Dichlorodifluoromethane
<2.0
2.0
0.67
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1-Dichloroethane
12
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2-Dichloroethane
5.5
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13116 05:24
1
1,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,3-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
2,2-Dichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.44
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.30
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Ethylbenzene
<0.50
0.50
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
<1.0
1.0
0.45
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
2-Hexanone
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Isopropylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Methyl acetate
<5.0
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Methylcyclohexane
<1.0
1.0
0.32
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Methylene Chloride
<5.0
5.0
1.6
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.1
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
methyl isobutyl ketone
<5.0
5.0
2.2
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Methyl tert-butyl ether
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
m&p-Xylene
<1.0
1.0
0.18
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Naphthalene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
n-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
N-Propylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
o-Xylene
<0.50
0.50
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
p-Isopropyltoluene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
sec-Butylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 20 of 40 5/16/2016

Client Sample Results
Client: Weston Solutions, Inc.
Project/Site: Cotton Mill Square Project
TestAmerica Job ID: 500-110960-1
€'
Client Sample ID: EW-511
Lab Sample ID: 500-110960-7
Date Collected: 04/29/16 16:35
Matrix:
Water
Date Received: 04/30/16 11:30
f_3
f
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) (Continued)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
i f
Styrene
<1.0
1.0
0.39
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
tert-Butyl benzene
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.40
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Tetrachloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.37
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Toluene
<0.50
0.50
0.15
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
i 4
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
<1.0
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
r---
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.34
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23
1.0
0.38
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
7.5
1.0
0.35
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Trichloroethene
59
0.50
0.16
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Trichlorofluoromethane
<1.0
1.0
0.43
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
<1.0
1.0
0.41
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane
<1.0
1.0
0.46
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
.n
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.36
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
<1.0
1.0
0.25
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Vinyl
Y
<0.50
0.50
0.20
u /L
9
05/13/1605:24
1
Xylenes, Total
<1.0
1.0
0.22
ug/L
05/13/16 05:24
1
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
102
71-120
05113116 05:24
1
Dibromofluoromethane
97
70 -120
05/13/16 05:24
1
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (Surr)
106
71-127
05/13/16 05:24
1
Toluene-d8 (Surr)
99
75=120
05113116 05:24
1
Method: 8260B - Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) - DL
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared
Analyzed
Dil Fac
1,1-Dichloroethene
380
5.0
2.0
ug/L
05/13/16 05:50
5
Surrogate
%Recovery Qualifier
Limits
Prepared
Analyzed
Dil Fac
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Surr)
101
71-120
05113116 05:50
5
Dibromofluoromethane
99
70 -120
05/13/16 05:50
5
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 (Surr)
109
71-127
05113116 05.50
5
Toluene-d8 (Surr)
98
75 -120
05113116 05:50
5
Method: 6010C - Metals (ICP)
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared
Analyzed
Dil Fac
Iron
0.19 J
0.20
0.10
mg/L
05/02/16 09:25
05/03/16 06:08
1
General Chemistry
Analyte
Result Qualifier
RL
MDL
Unit
D Prepared
Analyzed
Dil Fac
Nitrate as N
0.11 J
0.20
0.046
mg/L
05/01/16 00:19
1
Nitrite as N
<0.20
0.20
0.075
mg/L
05/01/16 00:19
1
Sulfate
9.1
0.20
0.13
mg/L
05/01/16 00:19
1
Total Organic Carbon - Duplicates
5.7
1.0
0.23
mg/L
05/08/16 22:19
1
Chloride
8.0
2.0
1.2
mg/L
05/06/16 01:41
1
TestAmerica Chicago
Page 21 of 40 5/16/2016

Reviewer:
Owner:
Facility:
Existi: rxmit No. Rc ") l9 V c,
LJ Misting Owner Type: [_q Non -Government
❑ Unknown %v ElGovernment —►
w
E roposed Facility Tyae: ❑ Facility
❑ Existing '❑ Operation
Assiened Date: G+ 2
Date to Processin : L 2 -7 AM PM
Lj Individual P-Irganization
❑ Municipal ❑ Federal ❑ County ❑ State
Ret=ulated Activities:
Fees: Category
New — Standard
Major Mod — Standard
New — Express
Major Mod —Express
❑ Non -Discharge Major
❑ $1,310
❑ $395
❑ $5,635
❑ $4,488
JW,Non-Discharge Minor
810
❑ $245
❑ $5,013
❑ $4,308
❑ Reuse Distribution Line
❑ $480
❑ N/A
❑ $4,600
❑ N/A
❑ SFR
❑ $60
❑ $20
❑ $4,075
El $4,
El Wastewater Recycling
El$360
❑ $110
❑ $4,450
❑ $4,13535
Permit Tvae:
❑ Closed Loop Recycle Systems
❑ Distribution of Residual Solids (503 exempt)
❑ Distribution of Residual Solids (503)
❑ High -Rate Infiltration
❑ Land Application of Residual Solids (503 exempt)
❑ Land Application of Residual Solids (503)
❑ Other NonODischarge Wastewater System
Aaalication Type:
Notes:
❑ Reclaimed Water
❑ Reclaimed Distribution Line
❑ Single Family Residence Wastewater Irrigation
❑ Surface Disposal of Residual Solids (503 exempt)
❑ Surface Disposal of Residual Solids (503)
El Wastewater igatio
Othher:er:
R5—New ❑ Major Modification ❑ Minor Modification
❑ Name Change
❑ Ownership Change ❑ Renewal ❑ Renewal w/ Modification ❑ Rescission
;.1 a!J r"o9