WI0100042_Complete File - Historical_20220308

MCDENR AUG 55 26
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural � esources
Division of Water Quality h; 'i'IR Fi=n;Cnl iCe
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins I / 7,1 {, r I'rofArSr reeman
Governor Director - -----
August 23, 2011
Bob Hunter, Director of General Services
Buncombe County
2229 Riverside Dr.
Asheville, NC 28804
Subject: Completion of 51 Injection Well Permit W10100042
Board of Buncombe County Commissioners
Buncombe County
Dear Mr. Hunter:
On October 13, 2009, the Aquifer Protection Section received your Final Project Evaluation / Injection Well
Abandonment Records for injection activities conducted under your permit referenced above for the Old Buncombe
County Landfill located off of NC251 approximately 4 miles north of Asheville, Buncombe County, NC 28804. This report
completes the monitoring and compliance reporting requirements of your permit. Staff from the Asheville Regional
Office confirmed that there are no outstanding reporting, compliance, or enforcement issues associated with your
permit. Any other compliance monitoring or reporting requirements of any other regulatory programs shall continue as
needed.
If you wish to conduct future injection operations you must first apply for and receive a new injection well permit.
Operating an injection well without a valid permit could result in a civil penalty of up to $25,000 per day. Please contact
Michael Rogers at 919-715-6166 or Debra Watts at 919-715-6699 if you have any questions.
Best Regards,
Michael Rogers, PIG (NC&FL)
Environmental Specialist
cc: Landon Davidson-Asheville Regional Office
Robert Westley, SCS Engineers,4041 Park Oaks Blvd.,Suite 100,Tampa,FL 33610
Geoffrey Burke,Parsons Brinkerhoff, 1400 Center Park Blvd.,Suite 810,West Palm Beach,FL 33401
Solid Waste Section,NC Division of Waste Management(Solid Waste Permit#11-01)
WI0100042 Permit File
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
1636 Mail Service Center.Raleigh.North Carolina 27699-1636
Location:2728 Capital Boulevard,Raleigh,North Carolina 276D4 One
Phone [phone] l FAX [phone],FAX 2:919-715E0481 Customer Service.1-877-623-6748 North Carolina
Internet wwvr.nmatemualiiy.om @�+
An Eons,Oppormna'.Atimiative Acton Employer Waft all✓(y�

Environmental Consultants 4041 Park Oaks Boulevard 813 621-0080
and Contractors Suite 100 FAX [phone]
Tampa, FL 33610 w .scsengineers.com
SCS ENGINE ERS
October 8, 2009
File No. 09204072.02
Jaclynne Drummond C
Compliance Hydrogeologist . a
Solid Waste Section ih
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources _1
1646 Mail Service Center (D r n
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646 __ ,
�W
Subejct: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Pilot-Scale Field Test Report 'D O
0
m
Dear Jaclynne:
On behalf of Buncombe County Solid Waste Department, SCS Engineers is submitting our
enclosed report titled "Accelerated Bioremediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Contamination
in Groundwater, Old Buncombe County Landfill, Hydrogen Release Compound Pilot-Scale
Field Test," dated October 8, 2009. Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions
regarding the information contained in the report.
Sincerely,
��
Robert L. Westly, P.G. C. Ed Hilton, Jr., P.E.
Project Director Vice President
SCS ENGINEERS SCS ENGINEERS
RLW/CEH:rw
Enclosure
cc: Thomas Slusser, NCDENR, Raleigh, w/enclosure
Landon Davidson, NCDENR, Ashville, w/enclosure &CD
Jerry Mears, Buncombe County Solid Waste, w/enclosure
Kristy Smith, Buncombe County Solid Waste, w/enclosure
Jon Creighton Buncombe County, Ass't County Manager, w/enclosure
Offices Nationwide

Buncombe County, North Carolina
OCT 13 26C3
I nffice
Accelerated Bioremediation of Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon Contaminants in Groundwater
Old Buncombe County Landfill
Hydrogen Release Compound
Pilot-Scale Field Test
Presented To:
Buncombe County
Solid Waste Department
81 Panther Branch Road
Alexander, North Carolina 28701
[phone]
Prepared By:
SCS ENGINEERS
4041 Park Oaks Blvd., Suite 100
Tampa, Florida 33610 //C� G✓��d�j
[phone]
Robert L Westly, PG
North Carolina PG No. 2166
October 8, 2009
File No. 09204072.02
F:\PROJECT\09204072.02\HRC Pilot
S t u d y\F in a IV e r s i on\P i lot St ud y_t in a Ire P or I- 100809.do

�._
'�
-" � v�:J
�', %�`
� `'J
� _ �/
r CJ
!r
\. ..' .J
� ti
�\
��

Buncombe County, North Carolina
�- 1 INTRODUCTION
The Old Buncombe County Landfill (Landfill) operated from 1973 to 1997. It occupies
approximately 227 acres and is located in a rural area of the county adjacent to the French Broad
River(Appendix A, Drawing 1 of 1). Municipal, industrial, and construction solid wastes along
with household waste and yard debris were disposed at the landfill. In 1985, a water sample
from a groundwater monitoring well at the landfill indicated the presence of trichloroethene and
tetrachloroethene in the groundwater at concentrations in excess of state regulatory standards.
Subsequent samples collected during the early 1990s continued to show the presence of volatile
organic compounds in various groundwater monitoring wells around the landfill. In 1993,
Buncombe County entered into an Administrative Agreement on Consent (AOC) with the Solid
Waste Division of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR)to investigate the groundwater and surface water conditions of the landfill.
Results of groundwater sampling in accordance with the AOC indicated that concentrations of
chlorinated organic compounds collected during contamination assessment and monitoring
activities at the Landfill appear to be naturally attenuating. As a result,Buncombe County was
requested by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
to evaluate the.effectiveness of the application of Hydrogen Release Compound (HRC) to
accelerate and enhance the observed natural attenuation of the chlorinated organics.
The most recent report of investigations of the groundwater at the landfill is the "Comprehensive
Site Assessment Report," (CSAR) prepared by PBS&J and SCS Engineers (SCS), dated April
( 2005.1 It concluded that three chlorinated hydrocarbons, trichloroethene, cis-1,2-dichloroethene,
and vinyl chloride are present in Area A-West of the landfill. The CSAR indicated that injection
of HRC into the subsurface potentially would enhance the natural attenuation of these three
chlorinated hydrocarbons. As a result of these findings and the request of NCDENR to evaluate
the effectiveness of HRC application to the groundwater, a pilot-scale chemical injection test was
proposed and performed to evaluate HRC effectiveness in treating groundwater in Area A-West
(Appendix A,Drawing 1 of 1 and Figure 1-2).
In May 2005, a Pilot Study Work Plant was prepared that described the pilot-study field test for
injecting HRC into the groundwater. The pilot-scale field test was initiated on June 12, 2007, for
a two year period including two injection events and quarterly monitoring of select groundwater
monitoring wells to observe effects of injection. This report documents this pilot-scale test and
includes the following:
• Methodology of the pilot-scale study.
• Injection procedure and groundwater monitoring program.
• Groundwater quality data collected during the two-year study period.
PBS&J and SCS Engineers. "Comprehensive Site Assessment Report for the Old Buncombe County Landfill,
Asheville,North Carolina." Prepared for Buncombe County General Services Department,April 2005.
2 PBS&J and SCS Engineers. "Pilot Study Work Plan for Old Buncombe County Landfill Asheville,North
Carolina." Prepared for Buncombe County General Services Department,May 2005.
1 -1

Buncombe County, North Carolina
• Effects of the pilot-scale injection on the three chlorinated hydrocarbons in Area A-
r'
West.
• Conclusions regarding effectiveness of injection.
• Recommendations regarding long-term corrective actions for groundwater quality.
1 -2

Buncombe: County, North Carolina
i
2 TEST METHODOLOGY
This section describes the layout and procedures used for the pilot-scale test performed in Area
A-West.
STUDY SITE LAYOUT
Major fractures in hydrogeologie units at the Landfill were identified during the contamination
assessment conducted at the facility. Exploratory boreholes were drilled in areas likely to exhibit
fractures, and geophysical logs were run to accurately assess the respective location, depth, and
size of the fractures. It was concluded that these fractures were the primary avenues of
groundwater flow controlling fate and transport of the chlorinated hydrocarbons from the
landfill. The investigations provided guidance for locating and establishing depths for two HRC
injection wells (IW-135 and IW-43) and four groundwater monitoring wells (MW-17-137,MW-
17-60, MW-17-A, and MW47-11) located hydraulically down-gradient from the injection wells
(Appendix A,Figure 1-2).
IW-135 and IW-43 (Appendix C) are set to 135 feet and 43 feet below grade,respectively,to
provide access to the deep and shallow fracture zones identified in Area A-West. The four
groundwater monitoring wells (cluster MW-17-137 and MW-17-60; and cluster MW-17-A and
MW-17-B) were installed to monitor the deep and shallow fracture zones. MW-17-137 and
MW-17-60 were previously installed for routine monitoring of the fracture zones. MW-17-A
and MW-17-B were installed to observe potential HRC injection effects near the French Broad
River.
INJECTION METHODOLOGY
R. Caldwell Well Drilling, Inc., (RCWD)provided the personnel, equipment, and expertise to
perform the HRC injection. The viscosity of the HRC compound(at room temperature it is
similar to that of honey) required RCWD to establish a technique to warm the HRC prior to
injection to decrease its viscosity. This was accomplished by use of a water reservoir within
which the temperature of buckets of HRC was raised prior to injection (Appendix D, Photograph
D-1).
Injection was performed twice during the pilot study, once at the initiation of the study (June 13,
2007), then a second time one year after the initial injection event (June 11, 2008). Both events
included pouring HRC into each injection well followed by pressure injection when gravity
ceased being effective to move the HRC into formation fractures. Injection was ceased when
back pressure exceeded the contractor's ability to maintain the position of the injection packer.
The injection equipment and method included inserting an injection tubing and packer into each
injection well to the bottom of the well then pulling back a few feet and expanding the packer to
allow placement of HRC into the gravel packed interval below the packer. The tubing consisted
of perforated stainless steel injection tubing above which was mounted a 5-foot long rubber
packer with conductor tubing passing though the center of the packer leading to the perforated
injection tubing. A photograph of this injection assembly is indluded in Appendix D, Photograph
2- 1

Buncombe County, North Carolina
No.D-2. The injection assembly was inserted into,each injection well and extended to land
surface by adding 21-foot lengths of stainless steel riser pipe with threaded couplings (Appendix
D, Photograph No. D-3).
After the injection assembly was set and packer expanded,HRC was poured down the injection
tubing under gravity feed until HRC ceased moving into the formation. After gravity feed
stopped, the injection tubing system was connected to a hopper and pump and HRC injected
under pressure. Injection continued until pressures could not be increased without dislodging the
packer assembly. Appendix D, Photograph D-4 shows the injection site setup. The hopper and
pump is located on the other side of the water storage tank.
MONITORING AND SAMPLING PROGRAM
The groundwater monitoring program for the pilot-study included quarterly sampling of four
groundwater monitoring wells: MW-17-137,MW-17-60,MW-17-A, and MW-17-13. These
groundwater monitoring wells were sampled quarterly for the following parameters and related
analytical methods and frequency:
• Chlorinated hyrdrocarbons: EPA 8260; quarterly.
• Total Organic Carbon: EPA 415.1 or 9060; semi-annually.
• Metabolic Acids (lactic, pyruvic, acetic,propionic,butyric): EPA AM21G; semi-
annually.
• Nitriate: EPA 353.1 or 9056; semi-annually.
• Sulfate: EPA 353.1 or 9056; semi-annually.
• Sulfide: Hach chlorimetric method or EPA 376.2; semi-annually.
• Carbon dioxide: AM20GAX; semi-annually.
• Methane,Ethane,Ethene: AM20GAX, semi-annually.
• Field Parameters (pH, DO, ORP, temperature): Flow-thm cell field instruments,
quarterly.
• Total/Diss. Iron: Hach chlorimetric method or EPA 600, felt, and unfilt./semi-
annually.
• Hydrogen: A20GAX; semi-annually.
In addition to the above, sample results from routine quarterly and semi-annual sampling of the
above groundwater monitoring wells were used to provide data for up to approximately two
r years prior to injection pilot-testing. These data were used for comparison of injection effects
and are included in tables and on figures in this report.
2-2

Buncombe County, North Carolina
Sampling was performed by Pace Laboratories out of Ashville,North Carolina (Pace). Pace is
certified to provide analytical laboratory services in Ashville, North Carolina under the
following:
• North Carolina Drinking Water Certification Number 37712.
• North Carolina Wastewater Certification Number 40.
• North Carolina Bioassay Certification Number 9.
INJECTION EVENTS
Two injection events were performed at the site. The initial injection event was performed on
June 13,2007. Approximately 495 pounds of Regenesis HRC were placed into injection well
IW-135 over approximately one hour. Initially, injection was by gravity feed followed by
injection under pressure. Following injection into IW-135, the packer assembly was moved to
injection well IW-43. Approximately 45 pounds of HRC were placed into injection well IW-43
over approximately a 15-minute period before injection pressures began to dislodge the packer
assembly and injection was terminated.
The second injection event was performed on June 11, 2008 and essentially the same procedure
was used. For the second event, approximately 345 pounds of Regenesis HRC were placed into
injection well IW-135 and 45 pounds were injected into IW-43.
r"
INJECTION WELL ABANDONMENT
Following completion of groundwater sampling associated with the injection events, IW-43 and
IW-135 were abandoned. Abandonment included placing bentonite grout into the injection wells
using a tremie pipe to back fill the wells from total depth to land surface (see Appendix D
photographs). Formation water and residual HRC that back flowed from the wells during
abandonment were collected in drums at land surface for testing and proper management of these
wastes. Well head concrete pads and protective risers were left in place as markers for future
reference. Well Abandonment Record forms were completed along with well construction
diagrams and submitted to the NCDENR. Copies of these documents are included in Appendix
C.
2-3

Buncombe County, North Carolina
- 3 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING EVENTS AND DATA
This section summarizes the groundwater sampling events and data. Section 4 provides the
evaluation the data and apparent effectiveness of the injection pilot test.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING EVENTS
Eight quarterly groundwater sampling events were performed during the injection pilot-testing
period. One baseline sample was collected prior to injection and four sampling events were
performed following each injection event. The sampling dates are listed in Appendix B,Table
B-1 along with the injection events and date of injection well abandonment. Sampling logs and
chains-of-custody for the samples are included in Appendix F.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
Groundwater sampling was performed by Pace in accordance with the Pace Analytical Field
Services Division "Groundwater Monitoring Field Quality Assurance Manual. Samples collected
for analysis of natural attenuation parameters by Microseeps, Inc., (Microseeps) were collected
following field sampling protocols provided by Microseeps.
GROUNDWATER SAMPLING DATA AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
Groundwater samples were collected at the injection test site as summarized in Section 2. Pace's
analytical reports are included in Appendix F. Detected compounds are listed in Appendix B,
Tables B-2 through B-5. Select data are highlighted for concentrations that exceed state
standards.
Pace provided Quality Control data for test parameters including air headspace (EPA 3810
Modified and RSK 175),metals (EPA 200.7 and 245.1, SM 3030C for sample preparation),
nitrate and nitrite analysis (EPA 353.3), sulfate (ASTM D516-90), sulfide (SM 4500-S2D),total
organic carbon (SM 5310 B), and volatile organic compounds (EPA 8260). .
Overall, the QA/QC results were acceptable and sampling data considered valid. Most
parameters fell within the recommended guidelines for method blanks,laboratory control
samples (LCS), duplicates, and matrix spikes/matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSD). Specific
quality control issues for each sampling event are listed below.
April 2007—Matrix spike recoveries for mercury and silver fell below the required range. The
sample utilized for the MS/MSD analysis of mercury was not obtained from with the Injection
test site. Since method blank and LCS results were acceptable,the low QC result is most likely
from matrix interference within that sample and not a concern to samples from the injection test
site. However, the spiked sample with the silver result came from MW-17A, and only 38% of
the sample was recovered. The non-detected silver result in MW-17A and the sampling results
for silver are considered invalid.
r"
3- 1

Buncombe County, North Carolina
September 2007—MS/MSD test results for silica fell outside the recommended range.
However, method blank and LCS results were acceptable, and the spiked sample was not
'- obtained from the injection test site. Therefore, no qualifications to the silica data are necessary
and the sampling results are considered valid.
March 2008—Vinyl acetate showed a high bias in the LCS,but was not present above the
reporting limit in any associated sample. In addition, the MS/MSD results for mercury and iron
fell outside the recommended range. However, method blank and LCS results were acceptable
for these parameters, and the spiked samples were not obtained from the injection test site.
Therefore, no qualifications to the data were necessary and the sampling results are considered
valid.
June 2008—LCS samples for three volatile organic compounds showed a high bias; however,
none of the compounds were detected above the reported limit in corresponding samples.,
MS/MSD percent recoveries were outside the recommended range for sulfate, 1,2-
dichloroethene,benzene, chlorobenzene, toluene, and trichloroethene. However, method blank
and LCS results were acceptable for these parameters, and the spiked samples were not obtained
from the injection test site. Therefore,no qualifications to the data were necessary and the
sampling results are considered valid.
September 2008—The RPD values for arsenic exceeded the recommended range in a duplicate
sample not taken from the injection test site. Since the method blank,LCS, and MS/MSD data
all fell within the recommended range, no qualifications to the data were necessary and the
r sampling results,are considered valid.
December 2008—Pace qualified the following data for the reasons indicated:
• Methane samples were qualified because the post-analysis measurements indicated
insufficient VOA sample preservation.
• Naphthalene was detected in a method blank and then in associated samples.
• LCS data was below the recommended range and suggested a low bias for
bromomethane, carbon tetrachloride, chloroethane, chloromethane,
dichlorodifluoromethane, 1,1-dichloroethene, trans-1,2-dichloroethene, methylene
chloride, MIBK, trichlorofluoromethane, and vinyl chloride.
March 2009—Pace qualified the methane samples because the post-analysis measurements
revealed insufficient VOA sample preservation. Laboratory control sample results for selenium
exceeded the recommended range and showed a high bias; however, selenium was below the
reporting limits in the associated sample results. LCS results for ethane and ethane also
exceeded RPD requirements, but method blank and matrix spike results were within the required
range.
Matrix spike sample data fell outside the required range for nitrate, nitrite, total nitrogen, sulfide,
and total organic carbon. As the method blank and LCS results were acceptable for these
r
3-2

Buncombe County, _North Carolina
parameters, and the spiked samples were not obtained from the-injection test site, no
qualifications were necessary to the data and the sampling results are considered valid.
June 2009—Pace qualified the methane samples because the post-analysis measurements
revealed insufficient VOA sample preservation. Laboratory control sample results for selenium
exceeded the recommended range and showed a high bias; however, selenium was below the
reporting limits in the associated sample results. LCS results for ethane and ethane also
exceeded RPD requirements, but method blank and matrix spike results were within the required
range. Methylene chloride was present in a blank,but no associated samples.
Matrix spike sample data fell outside the required range for iron, sulfate, and nitrite. As the
method blank and LCS results were acceptable for these parameters, and the spiked samples
were not obtained from the injection test site, no qualifications were necessary to the data and the
sampling results are considered valid.
No quality control data are provided by Microseeps. Consequently, no quality assurance
evaluation of the sampling results for metabolic acids, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen was
performed.
3-3

Buncombe County, North Carolina
—� 4 FINDINGS OF PILOT-SCALE INJECTION TEST
This section summarizes the effectiveness of HRC to reduce chlorinated hydrocarbon
concentrations in groundwater at the landfill.
OVERVIEW
The findings of the pilot-scale injection test are listed in Appendix B tables (B-2 through B-5)
and summarized on time-series graphs of groundwater quality data included in Appendix G.
These graphs show concentrations of the following selected parameters over time at the four
monitoring wells MW-17-137, MW-17-60, MW-17-A, and MW-17-B:
• Trichloroethene(TCE)
• Cis-1,2-dicWoroethene (cis-1,2-DCE)
• Vinyl chloride (VC)
• Total organic carbon (TOC)
Trichloroethene, cis-1,2-dichloroethene, and vinyl chloride are the chlorinated hydrocarbon
groundwater contaminants previously shown to be present in the groundwater in Area A-West,
which are undergoing natural attenuation. The HRC injection process was intended to
investigate whether the rate of this natural attenuation would be increased such that reduce
concentrations of these compounds would be observed during the two years of the pilot-scale
- test.
Total organic carbon graphs are shown in Appendix G to provide an indication of the arrival of
the HRC compound at a particular monitoring well. The HRC compound is a non-chlorinated
hydrocarbon that increases the concentration of TOC in groundwater as the HRC moves through
the groundwater system and is subsequently broken down during the dechlorination process.
WATER QUALITY DETECTION RESULTS
Summary tables of detected concentrations of the various parameters sampled in each sampling
event at the four monitoring wells are included in Appendix B. Concentrations that exceeded
state.standards are highlighted. This section briefly reviews these findings which include
findings associated with natural attenuation of the three target chlorinated hydrocarbons (TCE,
cis-1,2-DCE, and VC) and findings associated with other organic and inorganic parameters.
MW-17-137 Detections
Appendix B,Table B-2 lists water quality data from MW-17-137. Parameters that were detected
in excess of state standards at least once either before-or during the pilot-scale test period include
cis-1,2-DCE,VC, total and dissolved iron, total and dissolved manganese, and vanadium.
The pilot-scale injection test was intended only to address cis-1,2-DCE and VC observed at
MW-17-137. The occurrence and concentrations of iron,manganese, and vanadium (or other
metals) are not intended to be remediated by the HRC injection'process.
4- 1

Buncombe County, North Carolina 1113339E�ll
MW-17-60 Detections
Appendix B,Table B-3 lists water quality data from MW-17-60. Parameters that were detected
in excess of state standards at least once either before or during the pilot-scale test period include
benzene, cis-1,2-13CE, VC, total and dissolved iron, and thallium.
Benzene occurred once at MW-17-60 in excess of its state standard, during the final sampling
event in June 2009. Benzene is a petroleum hydrocarbon and not remediated by the HRC
injection process.
Thallium also occurred at MW-17-60. The HRC injection process is not intended to remediate
this metal.
MW-17-A Detections
Appendix B,Table B-4 lists water quality data from MW-17-A. Parameters that were detected
in excess of state standards at least once either before or during the pilot-scale test period include
1,2-dichloropropane,TCE,total and dissolved iron, total and dissolved manganese, and
vanadium.
Before and during the pilot-scale injection test, 1,2-dichloropropane occurred at MW-17-A
above its state standard. It also occurred on two occasions in the adjacent monitoring well MW-
17-B. The HRC injection process is not intended to remediate this compound. Vanadium is a
metal and also is not remediated by HRC.
MW-17-11 Detections
Appendix B,Table B-5 lists water quality data from MW-17-B. Parameters that were detected
in excess of state standards at least once either before or during the pilot-scale test period include
1,2-dichloropropane,methylene chloride, total and dissolved iron, and total and dissolved
manganese. Each of these parameters relative to the HRC injection process has been briefly
addressed above.
Ethene, Ethane, Methane Findings
Ethene,ethane, and methane findings are listed in tables in the detection tables in Appendix B.
Significant increases in methane concentrations at NM-17-60 and MW-17-137 during the
injection monitoring period clearly indicate the arrival and effects of the HRC compound on the
chlorinate organics in the groundwater at each well.
Metabolic Acids Findings
Metabolic acid concentrations listed in the detection tables in Appendix B indicate HRC affected
monitoring wells MW-17-60 and MW-17-137. However, little to no metabolic acids were
observed in the hydraulically down-gradient monitoring wells MW-17-A and MW-17-B.
r,
I
4-2

Buncombe County, North Carolina
TIME SERIES GRAPHS RESULTS
I
The time-series graphs in Appendix G, Figures G-1 through G-3, show groundwater
concentrations at the four groundwater monitoring wells leading into and during the pilot-test
period. They are presented in the order of the natural attenuation conversion process of the three
target chlorinated hydrocarbons (i.e.,TCE converts to cis-1,2-DCE then further converts to VC).
VC subsequently converts to ethene and disperses harmlessly into the groundwater regime. Each
graph presents a plot of concentration versus date of sampling before and during the pilot-scale
test period. Where concentrations are low and unchanging, they represent one-half of the
minimum detection concentration observed for the compound. Each graph also includes a
horizontal line with black boxes at each end representing the concentration standard for the
compound(e.g.,VC plots shown on Figure G-1 indicate the standard for the compound is 0.015
micrograms per liter).Each graph also shows the vertical timeline for each injection event.
Appendix G,Figure G-4, shows the change in TOC concentrations at the monitoring wells
leading into and during the pilot-scale test period. Only one sampling event was performed prior
to initiation of the pilot-scale test that included collection of TOC data.
TCE Findings
Appendix G, Figure G-1, shows concentrations of TCE in the four monitoring wells from as
early as March 2005 to June 2009. Concentrations of TCE leading into the first injection on June
13, 3007 were below the standard in three of the wells. However,just prior to the first injection,
concentrations were above the standard in all wells. Between the two injection events,
concentrations decreased to near or below the minimum detection level and remained below the
standard through the remainder of the pilot-scale test period.
Cis-1 ,2-DCE Findings
Appendix G,Figure G-2, shows concentrations of TCE in the four monitoring wells from as
early as March 2005 to June 2009. Prior to the first injection event, concentrations of cis-1,2-
DCE were well above the MCL at MW-17-137. Between the first and second injection event,
concentrations at this well decreased to the minimum detection limit and remained there.
Prior to the first injection event,concentrations of cis-1,2-DCE were fluctuating around the MCL
at MW-17-60. Between the first and second injection event, concentrations at this well
decreased to the minimum detection limit and remained there.
Prior to the first injection event, concentrations of cis-1,2-DCE were below the MCL in MW-17-
A and MW-17-B, and remained below the standard for the duration of the pilot-scale test period.
The trends in the data at these two.monitoring wells do not indicate that injection of the HRC
further reduced the concentration of cis-1,2-DCE, although there might be a slight decrease in
concentration occurring at MW-17-B.
J
4-3

Buncombe County, North Carolina
_ VC Findings
Appendix G,Figure G-3, shows concentrations of VC in the four monitoring wells from as early
as March 2005 to June 2009. Prior to the first injection event, concentrations of VC were highest
in ME-17-137 and fluctuated dramatically. Between the first and second injection event,
concentrations at this well decreased to the minimum detection level and remained there. It
should be noted that the minimum detection level cannot attain the standard set by the state of
0.015 ug/l.
TOC Findings
The TOC concentrations shown in Appendix G, on Figure G-4 are helpful in evaluating when the
HRC compound apparently reached each of the monitoring wells. The samples collected prior to
the first injection event and the initial sampling data following the first injection event indicate
little to no TOC present in the monitoring wells. The TOC concentrations related to the presence '
of the three target chlorinated hydrocarbons were very low relative to the TOC expected to be
observed as the HRC reached each well. The second TOC sample after the first injection event
was collected from each of the monitoring wells in December 2007, six months following the
first injection. At this date,TOC concentrations had noticeably increased in both MW-17-60 and
MW-17-137;the closest set of monitoring wells to the injection wells. This indicates the arrival
of the HRC. Six months later,TOC concentrations in MW-17-A and MW-17-B rose slightly,
possibly indicating arrival of HRC at those wells. Approximately six months following the
second injection event,TOC concentrations at all four monitoring wells began declining,
probably indicating passage of the HRC front at those locations. The passage of this front
probably is associated with the second injection event based on the trends in the concentrations
across the two events.
Field Parameters
Field parameters collected during groundwater sampling included pH, temperature, oxidation-
reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen (DO), specific conductance (SC), turbidity, and
static water levels (Appendix B, Table B-6). The pH values, along with ORP, DO, and SC
values can be indicators of the action of HRC on groundwater quality at a particular monitoring
well. These data are shown on time series graphs in Appendix G. Review of the graphs
indicates significant decreases in DO values at each of the monitoring wells following the initial
injection event and continuing during the period following the second injection event. With the
exception of specific conductance at MW-17-137, the other indicators did not indicate trends
useful for evaluatinjarrival and effects of HRC. Specific conductance at MW-17-137 rose
noticeably following the initial injection event and continued gradually rising following the
second event.
4-4

Buncombe County, North Carolina .�
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section provides key conclusions from the pilot-scale test and recommendations based on
the conclusions and intent of Buncombe County to address the concerns of NCDENR regarding
groundwater contamination at the landfill.
CONCLUSIONS
• Overall,the quality assurance review of the laboratory data indicated that sampling
results were acceptable and sampling data are,considered valid.
• HRC compound injected into the subsurface at the landfill is effective in increasing
the rate of natural attenuation of the chlorinated compounds,TCE,cis-DCE, and VC.
• The first injection event reduced concentrations of TCE at the four monitoring wells
below the MCL and concentrations remained below the MCL for the remainder of the
pilot-scale test period.
• The first injection event reduced concentrations of cis-1,2-DCE at two of the four
monitoring wells (MW-17-60 and MW-17-137) below the MCL and concentrations
remained below the MCL for the remainder of the pilot-scale test period.
• The first and second injection events appeared to reduce the DO at each of the
monitoring wells and caused a significant rise in specific conductance at MW-17-137.
• The first and second injection events did not appear to substantively affect
concentrations of cis-1,2-DCE at either MW-17-A or MW-17-B. However,
concentrations were below the MCL and did not need to be reduced. Changes in TOC
concentrations at these wells indicated that relatively little of the HRC reached the
wells, which may explain the lack of effect.
• Following injection of the HRC,changes in the TOC concentrations at the monitoring
wells indicated HRC began arriving at MW-17-137 and MW-17-60,the pair of
monitoring wells closest to the injection wells, in approximately six months. The
HRC began arriving at MW-17-A and MW-17-B in approximately 12 months
following the first injection event. Methane and metabolic acid concentrations
confirmed the arrival of HRC at the closest groundwater monitoring wells MW-17-
137 and MW-17-60.
• Following the second injection event, the HRC apparently reached it highest
concentration at all the monitoring wells approximately six months later,then began
declining. Because this occurred at approximately the same date at all the wells,
regardless of distance from the injection wells, these changes in concentrations are
thought to be a combination of arrival of the HRC front and degradation of the
concentration of the HRC due to several forces, including but not limited to dilution,
diffusion, and the reaction with the chlorinated hydrocarbon contaminants. Because
5-1

Buncombe County, North Carolina
of the low viscosity of the HRC upon cooling, there probably also is a substantial
amount of HRC moving very slowly away from the injection wells which has yet to
- reach the monitoring wells.
• Based on the TOC concentrations, groundwater at MW-17-137 received the greatest
amount of treatment from HRC, with a relatively lower concentration reaching MW-
17-60, and substantially lower amounts of HRC reaching the farther down-gradient
monitoring wells MW-17-A and MW-17-B.
• The second injection event may have contributed to assuring that concentrations of
the three target chlorinated compounds remained below their respective MCLs.
However, because concentrations essentially remained unchanging across the second
event,the actual effect of the second injection event is unknown.
• Other parameters not intended to be remediated by the HRC injection process
occurred in various monitoring wells before and/or during the pilot-scale injection
test including: benzene, 1,2-dichloropropane, iron,manganese, thallium, and
vanadium.
• Because of the viscosity of the HRC, the methodology to inject the HRC required
heating of the material prior to injection. It appeared that the change in viscosity with
cooling of the HRC during injection into the subsurface may have been the limiting
factor to injection.
r`
• Small doses of HRC placed into the subsurface at more frequent intervals may be a
more effective method to treating groundwater contamination.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of the pilot-scale injection test was to assess the effectiveness of the injection of
HRC to increase the rate of natural attenuation of select chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds in
the subsurface at the Landfill. The pilot-scale injection test was successful in providing this
assessment. The following recommendations are provided as potential alternatives for the next
step in the process. SCS suggests that the County and NCDENR meet to discuss these
alternatives and develop a mutual agreement on proceeding, considering NCDENR regulations
and County resources.
• Assess the source of the chlorinated hydrocarbons at the landfill. That is, assess
whether the source primarily is leachate, landfill gas, or a combination of the two.
• Assess whether other parameters being detected at the landfill in excess of state
standards should be addressed in a remedial action effort.
• Perform a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate potential long-term costs of using HRC to
remediate the known concentrations of chlorinated solvents in groundwater across the
full extent of the landfill.
5-2

Buncombe County, North Carolina
• Evaluate the effect of the HRC-improved natural attenuation process on the risk
assessment and compare that effect with the effect of unaided natural attenuation.
• Perform an alternative corrective measures evaluation of the landfill to assess and
rank the appropriateness of other remedial actions that potentially could be employed
at the landfill. This evaluation should address both organic and inorganic parameters
that exceed state standards.
• If further HRC injection is performed at the landfill, address the difficulties of
lowering the viscosity of the compound prior to injection. Inject smaller doses of the
HRC more often to reduce the difficulty of maintaining lower viscosity of the
compound during injection, thus potentially increasing the amount of HRC that can
be introduced into the subsurface.
t
C e
5-3

Buncombe County, North Carolina
i�
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
L�

!V
■
' /]
J / a-Q53QgaRa©&\ \§
' /§ /
4 |!J
0.
! „ ! ; - ■
( � \ \ \ §
) | | | ! «\ _ _ ♦ ■
\ | ®
� § § !
�
♦ ,
!; ■§ ,= aK. ssf�iN�s
" e_e ,ƒ MONITORING WELL LOCATION MAP y : BUNCOMBE COUNTY
■ - m_CARu_ BUNCOMBE COUNTY
. __mw

LEGEND
❑iw-135 LOCATION AND DESIGNATION OF HRC INJECTION WELL -
❑MW-17—so LOCATION AND DESIGNATION OF MONITORING WELL moo°
i9oo— TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR,FEET NGVD 0 25/�50
��� ADER S, LE IN FEET
BR
1900—
MW-17-B
Eb
MW-17-A
MW-17-1,37
------ —�1925 ❑ MW-17-60
as \
w \— i95o
ACCESS ROAD \
i
SC S ENGINEERS
Figure 1-2. Location of HRC Injection Wells and Associated Monitoring Wells, Buncombe County Closed Landfill

Buncombe County, North Carolina
APPENDIX B
TABLES
5'

Buncombe County, North Carolina
Table B-1 . Injection Pilot-test and Sampling Dates
Event Date Comments
Baseline sampling April 2007 Groundwater sampling, prior to injection.
Initial Injection June
Quarterly sample Set First sampling following initial injection.
Quarterly sample December
Quarterly sample March 2008
Quarterly sample June Wells sampled on day of second injection.
Second Injection June
Quarterly sample September
Quarterly sample December
Quarterly sam le March 2009
Quarterly sample June 2009 Last quarterly sample for pilot test. .
Injection well abandonment August Backfilled with bentonite grout to surface.
f
i

TY61e 8-2.Summary"Di Puamgm,Munj4 gWNMW-17d
a.mm.a.wm. �ro OLn ww A r v )
Y YO
11 pkNorwlNmr� 3Lsbi4M A lU 66 7.3 ).i 6 SI 36 SU lY IU) IY ]Y ]V
I IDkNbmeNmr LOW NS M _ _ _ _ _ M3
]IDMIibrY 3L S.d. P31 lY I SY ]V au SY IU lu IY SU lY IV ]Y
IBNrronr h3YneYJ .Np SY 5V sU sY Au 69 1.3 IS) lif $qt 19.1 I SV
Melgw %SLYduE ](tl ]SY 35Y 35u $SY ]SU x3Y mi 313 ".1 AV $sY ]su SSu
Ymrn ]LS..d ] 1V lu iu IV $u I lVu V I SU 1V
QIYmeNnr SI SLrnevC }Op] 1V IV lY IV i6U I I lu I.5 1U I.3 lu IU
[41 LukNbrwMrne ]LSYn4Xtl A A 5w M ).1 I.3 I 11 ]] ]Y
U 2 bMr ]ISIrMaC ♦6 L V xY lU SY su x.l ]u xu ]Y ]U 3Y SY lU
iqumr SUMrO Y ]Y lY lu 1V SY lu fY lU ]Y iu ]Y lu
TWbmeuwm ]LS.M ]a8 ]V I.] lU I.3 su lu lU lu lY ]U lY 1U 1
Y
Nn [hbMY ]LS P015 IV u SY Su 1V ]U ]V lY IY
knr Ypl 3LSlaidatl sA lY xY $Y 3Y IUV $Y xY 3u 3Y $Y xY 3U 3.3
slrY4
15U
xLSWWUE 50 sV SU su 5u SV su Su su $U sV 63 Su
..k DX. SLs]" sp ]6 $9 w Sa w SW UA ]66 SA9 A.tsysIuSCeklYm X3Ns $U 3VSu sY SY sV sY SV SU 3V SV su
V SV sY $V
]Y luCo Dmm ilam iM00 SW
a n.oiWlvM ]isWEH� l
— — sou SDu sou wu sou 05 m
Ore 2L#ana IY 5u au su Su Su susw333WC 9u su Su SU

ToWYJ. 131
hr.maurWw WWaM My LMbW.A.A ./Afw —
WwItW Wq.AI] 1) )
W d nkG
I.1 DiNiwwlban. 3L St3MN A 63 63 0.l 6.4 69 Sx SI 3.3 ..l S l.) IU IV
x otnbrwm.a.late 16 IY
1]plNlao ro P31 IV IU SV IV IV 1Y lY IY $Y IV I
S buuwn. aip s u
sU !V SY .0 I nu 1 3].S Ys SY III 160
H Standmd I ]1u 1u $SY HV x3V ]SY Y HY HY H 2u Iu Iu
Rsl-n I u L IY lu I I SV I I lY I V ]Y IY IY
Cbloetae{Nn. $Ls<anGarC 3KU u I I IY IV ]U IV I a 6x a IY
I.ldn< A w w w Ix. I I I $u I I
A
Me�BV�en.CNWWn• xLSYn 4b W, xY I xU xV SY $Y $V $Y IV xu SY $u I
R stand.1aam I IV 1 1. SU 1V IY lY ]V I $Y IV 1Y
31 n Stad $J IY x I 1 I 1V ]Y $Y IV lu leEaM Ast,nate o9ii 0) u a I ]u $u Iu I
rre�. nsuname sA zu xu xu m Au xu In xu zu m bu I In
w Y
uwnbwm xS Y IWY
m.DlmkaY Ns Y
n.m tan Iu
4Y xL saate Y su u su su su SY I I su sY fu M v
wIM SL s Y sY
Ba um D IL SW—d"b.m t. N I! H 1) 3 ]A! H a1J SJa Y Y.$M AA Y
m.piawNN C 143 AI—d
3LSWCaM Y! WI IAI
toNN hSnnCarC lt3 IDY
NS Y SMA
[akium DivaIVN Y Y BBPp
CMamlum Il ISW�M Y I 3Y $ sY SV I SY SY SY SY fV SY SY
Cnmmlum MmMJ Il3lmtlaN A SY
Cobau S A SY Su 3Y fU SU
GM
nM S A
3LStzitluJ ]0.4 3Y 3V 3U SY SU
Ca Wt.DimlM 3l stga�G 1� SU
woo
>el..e uswema m Yu II) w YAb ]2Y0
m XI U Su IIIsU SY IIISY IIIIIIIIISU sU SV SY
NSN
aNN x3CMm! ]S SV
_
asYnamY _
v a.wN3o xsawva SD
u 9unOmC IW III IV IV III — _

Table B-4. Summary of Detected Parameters,Monitoring Well MW-17-A
Parameter Name Standard MCL Unks 10/3/2006 4/2007 9/1 2007 12/22/2007 3/17/2009 6/11/2009 9/17/2009 12/16/20W 3/17/2009 6/I9/2009 6/19 2009
Volatile Or ank Compounds
1,1-Dichloroethane 2L Standard 70 u L 2 5U 1.5 1.7 1U 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.1
1,2-Dichloroethene(Total) NS NS u L 46.7
1,2-Dichloropropane 2L Standard 0.51 u L 2 5 U 1.5 15 1 U 1.2 1.4 IA 1 U 1.1
2-Butanone 2L Standard 4200 u L 5U 10U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U
Acetone 2L Standard 700 u L 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U 25 U
Benzene 2L Standard 1 u L 1U 5111 1U I I I 1U I 1U IU
Chlorcethane 2L Standard 2800 u L SU SOU SU lU I I I I I 1U
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 2L Standard 70 u L 45 37 46.3 49.2 22.7 33.1 40.2 49.2 31 38.8
Methylene Chloride 2L Standard 4.6 u L 2 U 5 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U
Toluene 2L Standard 1000 u L l U S U l U l U l U l U l U l U 1 U I U
Trichloroethene 2L Standard 2.8 u L 83 S U 3.2 2.3 3 U 1.2 1.1 1 U S U 1 U
Vinyl chloride I 2L Standard 1 0.015 1 u L 1 1U 5U I I I I 1 1U I 1 1U I I 1U I
% lene ITotal 2L Standard 530 u L 1 2U 20U 2U 2U 2U 2U 12U 2U 2U 2U
Metals
Aluminum NS NS u L 154
Aluminum,Dissolved NS NS u L 1000
Arsenic 2L Standard 50 u L 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5U 5.4 5U
Arsenic,Dissolved 2L Standard 50 u L 5U
Barium 2L Standard 2000 U911. 73 36 42.4 39.2 30.7 28.4 30 29.8 26.6 27.9
Barium,Dissolved 2L Standard 2000 U911. 32 -
Boron 2L Standard 325 u L 10111
Boron,Dissolved 2L Standard 315 u l 10111
Nf NS t _ _ 1]llt%n - - _
Turbidity NS NS NTU - 2.16 3.04 40 2.2 2.83 1.41
Notes:
1. 2L Standard=Tide I5A North Carolina Administrative Code(NCAC)02L.0202
2. GWPS=Groundwater Protection Standard.
3. MCL=Maximum Contaminant Level.
4. U=Analyte concentration was below the laboratory detection limit(value shown).
S. NS=No numeric standard has been set for this analyze.
6. ---=Parameter not analyzed.
7. deg C=degrees Celsius
8. mV=millivolt.
9. NTU=nephelometric turbidity units.
10. umhos/em=micromhos per centimeter.
11. %Sat=percent saturation.
12. Ye0ow shaded values indicate parameter concentrations exceed 2L or GWPS levels.

« ` b/pRReGp/ p/pRde
((|(/
!..... !!| !...... ! •
,■|..,,,,;ll■..., ;§;|_.|. ,!§, - §
CS22222/ : J: 222J2 !
. |. , , ..........
■ , , , , , ; , , , , , � , ; „ :;;;;_l;:l; „ � f
■ ;
|
■;;;;;:|| :l,E;;|! ;;;;;1;;;C
!
, , , 1 , ; l
„ ;;„;_;; ;; , = {
IF
;;;;;l;;c
■
■ , , , , , ; , , , , , 8 , ; , , ;;;;2l;;§;; , : .
l;; , : !
, !
ree@ee : @ , ww R
eG22 §

Table B6.Groundwater Collection Parameters
Old Buncombe County landfill
Apd12OD7 through June 2009
parameter Samplingdate Unit Samplingl0otlon
mW-17.60 MW-17-137 MW-17-A MW-17-B
4/4/2007 24.99 25.16 I93 8.96
9/13/2007 29.8 283 13.2 1325
12/12/2007 25.47 24.27 994 994
3/17/2008 24.11 23.11 852 SA2
Depth W Water 6/11/2008 feet 25.64 24.31 9.74 9.62
9/17/2008 25.37 23.97 10.05 10.08
12/17/2008 24.62 23.2 8.9 9
3/17/2009 24.28 23.21 8.69 8.75
6/18/2009 24.14 23.5 8.51 8.58
4/4/2007 16.84 L535 13.54 13
9/13/2D07 14.9 15.21 20.56 15.2
12/12/2007 17.17 15.32 14.91 1454
3/17/20DS 13.93 23.89 12.7 13SZ
Temperature 6112n 08 degrees C 21 15.02 15.97 15.69
9/17/2008 16.75 16.02 17.6 17.44
12/17/2001 13.59 13A6 14.14 14.26
3/17/2009 23.04 14.62 13.59 23.88
6/18/2009 26.99 16.13 16.87 17.77
4/4/2007 6.68 7.06 5.97 6.63
9/13/2007 5.97 6 6.62 5.98
12/12/2007 6.91 7.06 5.79 7.81
3/17/2008 7.06 6.62 5.99 7.64
pit 6/11/20DB standard units 744 7.46 7.55 7.58
9/17/2008 6.98 6S5 6.1 7.78
12/17/2D08 6.69 628 5.72 7.79
3/17/2009 6.77 fi34 523 7.79
6/18/20D9 6.85 6.48 5.91 7.8
4/4/2007 520 650 350 440
9/13/2D07
12/12/2007 584 658 284 279
3/17/2008 548 930 202 297
/ \ Specific Conductance 6/11/2008 uhmos 601 90 243 273
i 9/17/2008 Soo 1432 249 312
22/17/2008 fi44 1539 272 292
3/17/2009 634 1554 260 290
6/18/2009 620 1689 258 264
4/4/2007 -3 -54 47 -129
9/13/2007 367 262 327 318
12/12/2007 -75 -269 .54 -155
3/17/20M -7.5 12.4 264 23.4
Oxidation Reduction potential 6/11/2008 my -99 -fie 240 -153 '
9/17/2W8 -62.6 -30.6 120.8 -109.3
12/17/2008 -54.5 -145 123.4 -137.2
3/17/2D09 -44.3 -100.7 175.3 157.9
6/18/20D9 -45 -174 -223 171
4/4/2D07 10.4 79 9.2 65
9/13/2007 6.62 628 6.28 6A
12/12/2007 3.52 092 2.19 0.097
3/17/2008 4.75 29 2.64 1.62
Dissolved Oxygen 6/31/200H mg/L 3.5 1.96 6.1 4A7
9/17/2008 3.59 0.42 3.01 132
12/17/2008 4.81 098 2.86 157
3/17/2009 3.72 035 3.77 2.13
6/18/2009 2.97 029 227 233
4/4/2007 620 860 770 710
9/13/2007 93 91 92.8 94
12/12/2007 3.98 4A3 216 092
3/17/2008 18S 026 3.04 GSS
Turbidity 6/31/2D08 NJU 123 20 40 10
9/17/2008 5.12 153 22 0,18
12/17/2008 934 1.03 2.83 0.35
3/17/2009 21.2 1A 17.3 0.73
6/19/2009 5.86 2.26 2.41 1.74
Notes:
uhoms.microhomes
ma-milivolts
mg/L-miligrams par liter
NRI-Nephelometrie Turbidity Units
degrees C-degrees Celscius
--parameter data was not collected
F:\PROJECr\09204072.02\Tables\NLstonc GW Collection Parameter Tables

Buncombe County, North Carolina
1
APPENDIX C
INJECTION WELL CONSTRUCTION AND ABANDONMENT
DIAGRAMS & RECORDS

f�
PROTECTIVE TOP OF CASING
RISER IW-43
LAND
SURFACE,
0
4' SCH. 8D PVC
CASING EZ-SEAL
10 BENTONITE GROUT
20
3/8 BENTONITE SEAL
31 FEET BLS
30
33 FEET BLS 3/8 WASHED STONE
GRAVEL PACK
40 0.040 SLOTTED
PVC SCREEN
50 TOTAL DEPTH 43 FEET
WELL BACKFlLLED VIA
w TREMIE PIPE FROM TOTAL
U
a DEPTH TO LAND SURFACE
60 WITH BENTONITE GROUT
rn
o
70
E U
a m 80'
F
E . 90
_ a
w
100
0
110
a '
120
n
0 130
0 140
o r
ti
l I
R
R
SCS ENGINEERS
Figure 1. Construction and Abandonment Diagram of IW-43

I
F�
PROTECTIVE IW-135 TOP OF CASING
RISER
LAND
SURFACE
0
10
EZ—SEAL
20 BENTONITE GROUT
30
40 4' SCH. 80 PVC
CASING
50
U
c 60
U) WELL BACKFILLED VIA
_ o TREMIE PIPE FROM TOTAL
Z 70 DEPTH TO LAND SURFACE
- WITH BENTONITE GROUT
3
E 9
Z Wm 80
W /90
o a
W
rn
100
110 / 3/8 BENTONITE SEAL
121 FEET BLS
120
123 FEET BLS 3/8 WASHED STONE
GRAVEL PACK
v 130 0.040 SLOTTED
PVC SCREEN
g 140
TOTAL DEPTH 135 FEET
a
a
SCS ENGINEERS
Figure 2. Construction and Abandonment Diagram of IW-135

Val 10,1.aa Va.11 rt1A � .V O
08/23/2008 03:4B FAX [phone] SCS ENGINEERS 4002/005
NerAGrosn•IMPw.me er$eWrognat sad a[tT WsaoKu-nlWlbsofWrse O°d�Y
WELLCON')RACTOACIRTIQIGTfONIllg
I.wLl.oON1PAt4op L WILLai7AIM
Reuban Caldwell aTdgDg ht 43
W4I13C4111XMkrIW iiwwmms RW.nrWrptmrMw.HTsryiMk 0.
Reuben Caldwell Drill Co. wattrPs.rnte M tseKww:®rr
L�eela rat ,
s1e®arAaoortes 351 New Lelceater Hwy s. CAM01 t4µk w wa
Asheville NC 28806 w+ sptNatKbaw 3w 3 �R 4_k
chpa'fea 6Tt1/ 9fO.1e LC4M8Rnowat 0. -.F+
825 . 264.3681
AZ -W 1119 i, pVwryNRppga, 1 OX of sodium hypachlaNle
LNXLT.proAALl4r0lfi (A�eLlnfs)%,S7114k1ttl_1YOtClkrit att�
817';9ZiL10s(IrYlikmMl Ml•4"J R sYAfL1614T61)IALt
STATEN4LI.PtAIAt•P(Jf+piµ611) K•/fit• � @WCsmat laLCwrepet
coumvwHLili =$(Ntiml kib
1—i, ®1. Wmr yt
rwu+ilrnnl:sLPlnTsruaPRl�a
wel.LustloeiL maeAlev l3 Meewrb4 O n-ww*l ammtne m
17 keow4WNmt —141461MCtimmrd0t 0 Mdtdlml TAM 9314ww prrau
aim
�(/tR.11anN) - `«^ SrwnetMtl EL-SBW With Salida Snlium sontunhe(reul
f.tVLLLrAe]tt1oM Aamat 2-50 Ibe baps
eolPlri ausaombe �Ap0.ANOLKpAAds�„
1wAlts►rt(tvN; , 13heyille a lA4LAuTortaQlaeralserrorr•Arl:u•L,
HM 281 -Old Buncombe County Landfill Tmmle Goa 1OCetfO 1ob bottom of well
• (atWlwlMtw4lYYrCwrW ar�MUta.fwNanaw0.W�M0 "�-
'f0T(as•q+W)LA)ID 1BttINo: '
�atl« nymt, cPw onlaw0(u.�
.. (CYrYWMMYOa n�lyO IP, WiY7.DfAUPA1l.Mr�dtWAA taMIAdWvwnrWLae4 trNla
1AMM Sb 3«P 2' _ _ ��dMa Ntl tsoMq�oldpO.arrOWdltmMtfr�mwUfao�jrwNtay
e2 as OB itmwhsrrlhttrcal,IssrtlL efafL51(;plt(opaa�v,Wa.peuw
LOGaaVnu..._,.,,• %%i:jr1mw&;;ww. Hauled
ImtaYleyhdat4t�tr LQle ❑7q skt+rP 8120/09
21aW►e'�P.,plr+ArvnNr1AQJNPt aN�'Pd 11. TtASiWI1LY.AYANCO)rW
w}/r)dNNtp�VJWmpl Oka) IDO CRTR►TIRTT8a1aRLWA1AMnDOrtM/}t ACCpSgwAq
tw RAFUWTr•ra.wtwarWauYna.htnMMr.Y�s•d.paaw rah 7LtNa►arfc,,'NtLCatlTtVCiIaMl7ANOAIbl,ANLTrwTwadA'd
(ranAw041wtLWM,awtw lllraTalY N9rIWaaC) Taa TNT�tirIMAYIDrLTOYpiWRLLatmmc
RAwsfymrbr.anrtw
waeoRRAcaaly Old Bunwmbe,Couhty Landfill v 1 n �
71sasET AriPlabs_4 miles N;Asheville on HmY 251 .
Asheville ' NC 28804
alia as T - s APArsLO Wlli4 ttkri�
(aaleW�wwrtWMM WhrAa3+htb®a'�6.tM/rWAnrtt,.W.A
a.coTrry1R'TPOlo wiC•171em �remrawasMlfANCA(MMnI)
>tA� Jerry MOOM
gTApp III Panther Branch Rd rA1MflleasgtOrrtslePAs• W
AlOxander,NC 28701
mwoatyr 164m a`nrwd tUMslw loam shim•rWAWOA V*&ittat• raa.owns
Auv4Y�W.1,NNtKlTnml.Isii rid su.kr flwtr-Aatk4 Nt srilsl7� ►AattN•0)P)'bfasosae ttl. P%W
i

,o
,o
i
111 IF� dd
g _� S cm ? u3 o ma doY m mF 7 3
g a 3 M.
to
ig
Y -m Z s can x ''1 u H ga �� SR
- al vfi at
F
# $ 0 4WZr
'� cS
i sppjdg33$ 0 .-
0 of
a Q m
soaco
k
m E SO iz 2 � � 0 yy • �,c � a � Flo � ; OEZ � mMo is
Z m 0 gg _
�� m act � v. iT�• • 3� � a � $ � � $ �� �i � g . b; ��� 7� oa � �2
00 _
o�
NN
MM '
m tt
WO l
O

Buncombe County, North Carolina
APPENDIX D
INJECTION ACTIVITIES' PHOTOGRAPHS
f
i

Photograph D-1
V
All.
Date: 06/12/2007 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: HRC Heating Reservoir
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Photograph D-2
.x
a
O `-:, •'
1W-
x' �
Date: 06/12/2007 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: HRC Injector Packer

Photograph D-3
r-
c ��
�i
Date: 06/12/2007 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: HRC Injection Tubing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Photograph D-4
k
2
Date: 06/12/2007 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: HRC Injection Setup

Buncombe County, North Carolina
APPENDIX E
INJECTION WELL ABANDONMENT PHOTOGRAPHS

Photograph E-1
Date: 08/20/2009 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: Bentonite Grout Tremie Pipe
Photograph E-2
K
i .
Date: 08/20/2009 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: Water and HRC residual discharge

Photograph E-3
IL
Date: 08/20/2009 Site: Old Buncombe County Landfill HRC Injection Site
Description: Water and HRC residual containers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buncombe County, North Carolina
APPENDIX F
GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA LABORATORY REPORTS
CHAINS-OF-CUSTODY
FIELD SAMPLING RECORDS

Buncombe County, North Carolina
APPENDIX G
TIME SERIES GRAPHS OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA

Buncombe County Old Landfill
Figure G-l. Time Series Plot for Trichloroethene
10.0
9.0
Ist Injection 2nd Injection
8.0 • June 13,2007 June 11,2008
7.0
J
6.0
v
c
5.041
■
0
° 4.0
L
U
~ 3.0 •
2.0
1.0 T
0.0
jan jul jan jul jan jul jan jul jan jul jan
05 06 07 08 09 10
Month / Year
E MCL ♦ MW-17-B
♦ MW-17-137
♦ MW-17-60
• MW-17-A
1 Prepared by: SCS Engineers

Buncombe County Old Landfill
Figure G-2. Time Series Plot for Cis-1,2-dichloroethene
300.0
♦ 1st Injection 2nd Injection
250.0 une 13,2007 June 11,2008
rn
3 200.0
w
L
t
L
0 150.0
O
u
U
CV
100.0
U __ _� _ • _. ---
50.0 - ! • •
0.0 1 x 3K Z I
ion jul ion jul ion jul ion jul ion jul ion
05 06 07 08 09 10
Month / Year
■ MCL ♦ MW-17-B
♦ MW-17-137
♦ MW-17-60
• MW-17-A
1 Prepared by: SCS Engineers

Buncombe County Old Landfill
Figure G-3. Time Series Plot for Vinyl chloride
40.0
i
35.0 lst Injection 2nd Injection
June�3,2007 June 11,2008
30.0
rn 25.0
0 20.0
L
V
C 15.0
10.0
5.0 ` . A
0.0 * � S i AL M
ion jul ion jul ion jul ion lul ion jul ion
05 06 07 08 09 10 i
Month / Year
MCL ♦ MW-17-B —
♦ MW-17-137
♦ MW-17-60
• MW-17-A
1 Prepared by: SCS Engineers

Buncombe County Old Landfill
Figure G-4. rime Series Plot for Total Organic Carbon
500.0
450.0 _- 1st Injection 2nd Injection
June 13,2007 June 11,2008 .
400.0
rn
350.0 •
E
0 300.0
.n
a 250.0
'c
a
200.0 !
0
0 150.0
0
100.0 .
50.0
0.0 • • �!
ion apr jul Oct ion apr jul Oct ion apr jul Oct ion
07 08 09 10
Month / Year
♦ MW-17-137
♦ MW-17-60
• MW-17-A
MW-17-B
1 Prepared by: SCS Engineers

Figure G-5. Buncome County Old Landfill Groundwater Field Log Data
Dissolved Oxygen
April 2007 to June 2009
12
1st Injection,June 13, 2007 2nd Injection,June 11, 2008
10
8
c
m
O 6
0
N
N
O
4
2
0
Jan-07 Apr-07 Aug-07 Nov-07 Feb-08 Jun-08 Sep-08 Dec-08 Mar-09 Jul-09 Oct-09
Sampling Date(mm/dd/yyyy)
-4 MW-17-60 —i•—MW-17-137 —,k-MW-17-A —)—MW-17-B —1st Injection —2nd Injection

Figure G-6. Buncome County Old Landfill Groundwater Field Log Data
Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP)
April 2007 to June 2009
500
1st Injection,June 13, 2007 2nd Injection,June 11, 2008
400
300
200 - AM& 1110K�
100
E 0
a
O Jan 7 pr 7 Aug-07 N v 8 - 8 p Q 4u I-09 Oct-09
-100 - \V/ \t' 111:
-200
-300
-400
-500
Sampling Date(mm/dd/yyyy)
—4 MW-17-60 —11--MW-17-137 —a—MW-17-A —M MW-17-B —1stlnjection —2ndlnjection

Figure G-7. Buncome County Old Landfill Groundwater Field Log Data
pH
April 2007 to June 2009
9
1st Injection,June 13, 2007 2nd Injection,June 11, 2008
8
7
N 6 Ar
Y
c
7
`m 5
v
c
m
Y
N
w 4
N
7
c
a 3
2
1
0
Jan-07 Apr-07 Aug-07 Nov-07 Feb-08 Jun-08 Sep-08 Dec-08 Mar-09 Jul-09 Oct-09
Sampling Date(m/dd/M)
+MW-17-60 —FMW-17-137 —BMW-17-A M MW-17-B —1st Injection —2ndInjection

Figure G-8. Buncome County Old landfill Groundwater Field Log Data
Specific Conductance
April 2007 to June 2009
1800
1st Injection,June 13, 2007 2nd Injection,June 11, 2008
1600
1400
E 1200
0
r
1000
v
0 800
v
u
w
u
W
a, 600
400
200
0
1/18/2007 4/28/2007 8/6/2007 11/14/2007 2/22/2008 6/1/2008 9/9/2008 12/18/2008 3/28/2009 7/6/2009 10/14/2009
Sampling Date(mm/dd/yyyyj
s MW-17-60 —i—MW-17-137 —*—MW-17-A --t-MW-17-B —1st Injection —2nd Injection

\O�OF W AT F9QG Michael F.Easley,Governor
William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
h r— North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
O C Alan W.Klimek P.E.Director
Division of Water Quality
October 27, 2006 RECEIVED
Mr. Bob Hunter
Buncombe County,North Carolina NOV 0 2 2006
2229 Riverside Drive �,sFtevilie Re Asheville,NC 28804 Regional Office
- ' quiier Protection
Dear Mr. Hunter:
In accordance with your application received on August 9, 2006, we are forwarding Permit No.
WI0100042 for the operation of Type 5I injection wells at the Old Buncombe County Landfill,
Asheville,North Carolina.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2009, and shall be subject
to the conditions and limitations stated therein, including the requirement to submit a final
project evaluation as stated in PART VII—MONITORING AND REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS. Please note that the permit requires additional sampling and analysis
beyond what is proposed in the original application. These additions are listed in Part VII of the
permit. You will also need to notify this office by telephone 48 hours prior to initiation of
injection at this facility. In order to continue uninterrupted legal use of this injectant for the
stated purpose, you should submit an application to renew the permit three months prior to its
expiration date.
If you have any questions regarding your permit please contact me at(919) 715-6164.
Sincerely,
62%nA29�3
Peter Pozzo
Hydrogeologist
Groundwater Protection Unit
cc: Landon Davidson,ARO
Geoffrey Burke, Parson Brinkerhoff
CO-UIC file
Enclosures
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1636 Phone[phone] Customer Service
Internet:http://h2o.encstateoc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh,NC 27604 Fax [phone] I-877623.6748
Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Afirmatve Acton Employer—50%Recyd"l0%Post Consumer Paper

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
October 27, 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: Landon Davidson
Asheville Regional Office
FROM: Peter Pozzo, Underground Injection Control Program
RE: Issuance of injection well permit#WI0100042
Permit number has been issued to Buncombe County Board of Commissioners for the injection of
HRCTm for reductive dechlorination of dissolved chlorinated compounds at the Old Buncombe
County Landfill in Asheville,NC. A copy of this permit is enclosed for your files. The UIC
Program appreciates your staff s assistance with the review of this permit. If you have any
questions regarding this permit or the UIC Program, please call me at(919) 715-6164.
cc: UIC-CO files
Enclosures

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH,NORTH CAROLINA
PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A WELL FOR INJECTION
In accordance with the provisions of Article 7, Chapter 87; Article 21, Chapter 143, and
other applicable Laws,Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Buncombe County Board of Commissioners
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF TYPE 5I INJECTION WELLS, defined
in Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2C .0209(e)(3)(C), for up to two injections of
HRC, for the reductive dechlorination of dissolved chlorinated compounds. These injection
wells/points will be located at Old Buncombe County Landfill, 4 miles north of Ashville between
Highway 251 &the French Broad River,Asheville,Buncombe County,North Carolina, and will
be operated in accordance with the application submitted August 9,2006, and in conformity with
the specifications and supporting, all of which are filed with the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources and are considered apart of this permit.
This permit is for Construction and Operation only, and does not waive any provisions of the
Water Use Act or any other applicable Laws,Rules, or Regulations. Operation and use of an
injection well shall be in compliance with Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2C
.0100 and .0200, and any other Laws, Rules, and Regulations pertaining to well construction and
use.
This permit shall be effective, unless revoked, from the date of its issuance until April 30, 2009,
and shall be subject to the specified conditions and limitations set forth in Parts I through X
hereof.
Permit issued this the�—day of 2006.
'`Alan W. Klimek,Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission.
Permit No.W10100042 PAGE I OF 7_
ver.4/05 AP/UIC-6

PART I -WELL CONSTRUCTION GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. _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.
2. This permit shall liecome voidable unless the facility is constructed in accordance with the
conditions of this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting data.
3. 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.
4. Each injection well shall not hydraulically connect separate aquifers.
5. Each injection well shall be constructed in such a manner that water from land surface cannot
migrate into the gravel pack or well screen.
6. Each injection well shall be secured to reasonably insure against unauthorized access and use.
Each well shall be permanently labeled with a warning that it is for injection purposes and the
entrance to each well must be secured with a locking cap.
7. Each injection well shall be afforded reasonable protection against damage during
. construction and use.
8. Each injection well shall have-permanently affixed an identification plate.
9. Within 30 days of completion of well construction, a completed Well Construction Record
(Form GW-1) must be submitted for each injection well to:
Aquifer Protection Section-UIC Staff
DENR-Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1636
PART II-WELL CONSTRUCTION SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. At least forty-eight(48) hours prior to constructing each injection well, the Permittee shall
notify the Aquifer Protection Section-Underground Injection Control (UIC) Central Office
staff, telephone number(919) 715-6164 and the Asheville Regional Office Aquifer
Protection Section Staff, telephone number(828) 296-4500.
Permit No.WI0100042 PAGE 2 OF 7
ver.4/05 IAP/UIC-6

PART III- OPERATION AND USE GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature, volume of materials,rate of injection,
and number of injection wells as described in the application and other supporting data.
2. This permit is not transferable without prior notice to, and approval by, the Director of the
Division of Water Quality(Director). In the event there is a desire for the facility to change
ownership, or there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal permit amendment request
must be submitted to the Director, including any supporting materials as may be appropriate,
at least 30 days prior to the date of the change.
3. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility of complying
with any and all statutes, rules,regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by other
local, state, and federal agencies which have jurisdiction. Furthermore, the issuance of this
permit does not imply that all regulatory requirements have been met.
PART IV-PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
1. The injection facility shall be effectively maintained and operated at all times so that there is
no contamination of groundwater which will render it unsatisfactory for normal use. 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 Quality such as the repair,modification, or abandonment
of the injection facility.
2. 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.
3. The issuance of this permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility for damages to
surface or groundwater resulting from the operation of this facility.
PART V- OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
1. The injection facility shall be properly maintained and operated at all times.
2. 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.
3. At least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the initiation of the operation.of the facility for
injection, the Permittee must notify by telephone the Aquifer Protection Section-UIC, Central
Office staff, telephone number(919) 715-6164. Notification is required so that Division staff
can inspect or otherwise review the injection facility and determine if it is in compliance with
permit conditions.
Pemrit No.WI0100042 PAGE 3 OF 7
ver.4/05 AP/UIC-6

PART VI-INSPECTIONS
1. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or.representative of the Division of Water Quality
may, upon presentation of credentials, enter and inspect any property,premises, or place on
or related to the injection facility at any reasonable time for the purpose of determining
compliance with this permit,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, or injection fluids.
2. Department representatives shall have reasonable access for purposes of inspection,
observation, and sampling associated with injection and any related facilities as provided for
in N.C.G.S. 87-90.
3. Provisions shall be made for collecting any necessary and appropriate samples associated
with the injection facility activities.
PART VII- MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Monitoring wells MW-17-60 and MW-17-137 shall be sampled prior to the start of injection
three months after each injection event, six months after each injection event,nine months
after each injection event and twelve months after each injection event for the following
parameters:
a) Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds
b) Total Organic Carbon
c) Metabolic Acids (to include lactic,pyruvic, acetic,propionic, and butyric)
d) Nitrate
e) Sulfate
f) Sulfide
g) Carbon Dioxide
h) Methane, Ethane and Ethene
i) Total and Dissolved Iron
j) Hydrogen
k) RCRA Metals (to include Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Mercury,
Selenium, and Silver). Samples for metals shall be prepared by Standard Method 3030C
and analyzed by EPA Method 200.7.
1) Field Parameters (pH,DO, ORP, Temperature and Specific Conductivity)
2. Any laboratory selected to analyze samples must be certified by the Division of Water
Quality for the parameters to be analyzed
3. All sample results shall be submitted to the Aquifer Protection Section's Asheville Regional
Office and the Raleigh Central Office. Any monitoring (including groundwater, surface
water, or soil sampling) deemed necessary by the Division of Water Quality to insure surface
and ground water protection, will be established and an acceptable sampling reporting
schedule shall be followed.
Permit No.WI0100042 PAGE 4 OF 7
ver.4/05 AP/UIC-6

4. The Permittee shall produce a final project evaluation within 15 months after completing all
injection-related activity associated with the permit application. This document shall assess
the injection projects findings in a written summary. The final project evaluation shall also
contain monitoring well sampling data, contaminant plume maps and potentiometric surface
maps.
5. The monitoring results and the final project evaluation shall be submitted to:
Aquifer Protection Section-UIC Staff
DENR-Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1636
and to:
Aquifer Protection Section
DENR-DWQ Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. Highway 70
Swannanoa,NC 28778
6. The Permittee shall report by telephone,within 48 hours of the occurrence or first knowledge
of the occurrence, to the Asheville Regional Office, telephone number(828) 296-4500, any
of the following:
a) Any occurrence at the injection facility which results in any unusual operating
circumstances;
b) Any failure due to known or unknown reasons, that renders the facility incapable of
proper injection operations, such as mechanical or electrical failures.
7. Where the Permittee becomes aware of an omission of any relevant facts in a permit
application, or of any incorrect information submitted in said application or in any report to
the Director, the relevant and correct facts or information shall be promptly submitted to the
Director by the Permittee.
8. In the event that the permitted facility.fails to perform satisfactorily,the Permittee shall take
such immediate action as may be required by the Director.
PART VIII -PERMIT RENEWAL
In order to continue uninterrupted legal use of the injection facility for the stated purpose,the
Permittee must submit an application to renew the permit 120 days prior to its expiration date.
Permit No.W10100042 PAGE 5 OF 7--`
ver.4105 APIMC-6

PART IX- CHANGE OF WELL STATUS
1. The Permittee shall provide written notification within 15 days of any change of status of an
injection well. 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 to 15A NCAC 2C .0113, Well Construction Standards.
2. When operations have ceased at the facility and a well will no longer be used for any
purpose, the Permittee shall abandon that injection well in accordance with the procedures
specified in 15A NCAC 2C .0113(b), including but not limited to the following:
(A)All casing and screen materials may be removed prior to initiation of abandonment
procedures if such removal will not cause or contribute to contamination of the
groundwaters.
(B)The entire depth of each well shall be sounded before it is sealed to insure freedom
from obstructions that may interfere with sealing operations.
(C)The well shall be thoroughly disinfected, prior to sealing, if the Director determines
that failure to do so could lead to the contamination of an underground source of
drinking water.
(D)Drilled wells shall be completely filled with cement grout, or bentonite grout which
shall be introduced into the well through a pipe which extends to the bottom of the
well and is raised as the well is filled.
(E)In the case of gravel-packed wells in which the casing and screens have not been
removed,neat-cement, or bentonite grout shall be injected into the well completely
filling it from the bottom of the casing to the top.
(F) In those cases when, as a result of the injection operations, a subsurface cavity has
been created, each well shall be abandoned in such a manner that will prevent the
movement of fluids into or between underground sources of drinking water and in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit.
(G)The Permittee shall submit a Well Abandonment Record (Form GW-30) as specified
in 15A NCAC 2C .0213(h)(1) within 30 days of completion of abandonment.
3. The written documentation required in Part IX (1) and (2) (G) shall be submitted to:
Aquifer Protection Section-UIC Staff
DENR-Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1636
Penni[No.WI0100042 PAGE 6 OF 7
ver.4(05 AP/UIC-6

PART X—WORKER PRECAUTIONS DURING APPLICATION
1. Some effects reported to be associated with the product proposed to be used are as follows:
eye, skin, nose, throat and lung irritation. Ifthe 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 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.
Permit No.W10100042 PAGE 7 OF 7-
ver.4/05 AP/UIC-6

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFFFILE COPY
REPORT
Date: Ol / 7tX)(a County: &n
To: Aquifer Protection Section Central Office Permittee:
Central Office Reviewer: Project Name: oc> �pvcor�3c fib LawX
Regional Login No: Application No.: Wso 10004 2
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. This.application is (check all that apply): 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? f Yes or❑No.
a. Date of site visit: OWzacC,
b. Person contacted and contact information: as 11"'rn p- zs 0 s�966
C. Site visit conducted by: �,nlrJrd eel Jam.
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 Treatment Facilities:
a. Location:
b. Driving Directions: _
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number:
d. Latitude: Longitude:
e. Regulated Activities/Type of Wastes (e.g.,subdivision, food processing,municipal wastewater):
For Disposal and Iniection Sites:
Multiple sites either indicate which sites the information'applies to cony and paste a new section into the
document for each site or attach additional pages for each site)
a. Location(s): otij a.vrz.wRc CoeN'r i�NJJriLt
b. Driving Directions: tic ZD, N c.- /✓iAi Viitc Tc liinW�iu c,.F. !a' 1c�T
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number: _
d. Latitude: 3 39?4.1 Longitude: S231�074
II. NEWAND MAJOR MODIFICATIONAPPLICATIONS(this section not needed for renewals or minor
modifications skip to next section)
Description Of Waste(S) And Facilities
1. Please attach completed rating sheet. Facility Classification: '
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system?
FORM: Documentl 1

'A
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
®,Yes❑No ❑N/A. If no,please explain:
3. Are the new site conditions (soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) consistent with what was reported by
the soil scientist and/or Professional Engineer?;]Yes ❑No ❑N/A. If no,please explain:
4. Does the application (maps, plans, etc.) represent the actual site (property lines, wells, surface drainage)? J�
Yes❑No❑N/A. If no, please explain: _ .
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate and/or acceptable to the Division. Yes ❑No ❑
N/A..If no,please explain:
6. Are the proposed application rates for new sites (hydraulic or nutrient)acceptable?
Z Yes ❑No ❑N/A. If no, please explain:
7. Are the new treatment facilities or any new disposal sites located in a 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ®No ❑ N/A. If yes, please attach a map showing areas of 100-year floodplain and please explain
and recommend any mitigative measures/special conditions in Part IV:
8. Are there any buffer conflicts (new treatment facilities or new disposal sites)? ❑ Yes or�E No. If yes,please
attach a map showing conflict areas or attach any new maps you have received from the applicant to be
incorporated into the permit: _
9. Is proposed and/or existing groundwater monitoring program (number of wells, frequency of monitoring,
monitoring parameters, etc.) adequate? 5 ] Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. Attach map of existing monitoring well
network if applicable. Indicate the review and compliance boundaries. If No, explain and recommend any
changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
10. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? ❑ Yes ❑No ❑N/A If yes, attach list of sites
with restrictions (Certification B?)
III RENEWAL AND MODIFICATIONAPPLICATIONS(use Previous section for new or major modification
system)
Description Of Waste(S) And Facilities
1. Are there appropriately certified ORCs for the facilities? ❑Yes or❑No.
Operator in Charge: _ Certificate 4:_
Backup-Operator in Charge: _ Certificate#:_
2. Is the design, maintenance and operation (e.g. adequate aeration, sludge wasting, sludge storage, effluent
storage, etc) of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ❑ Yes or ❑ No.
If no, please explain:
3. Are the site conditions (soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) maintained appropriately and adequately
assimilating the waste? ❑ Yes or❑No. If no,please explain:
c.,nTF. .,__.._....N 2

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
4. Has the site changed in any way that may affect permit (drainage added, new wells inside .the compliance
boundary,new development, etc.)? If yes,please explain:
5. 'Is the residuals management plan for the facility adequate and/or acceptable to the Division?
❑Yes or❑No. If no, please explain: —
6. Are the existing application rates (hydraulic or nutrient) still acceptable? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If no, please
explain:
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program (number of wells, frequency of monitoring, monitoring
parameters, etc.) adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A. Attach map of existing monitoring well network if
applicable. Indicate the review and compliance boundaries. If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program:
8. Will seasonal or other restrictions be required for added sites? ❑ Yes ❑No ❑N/A If yes, attach list of sites
with restrictions (Certification B?)
9. Are there any buffer conflicts (treatment facilities or disposal sites)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If yes, please attach a
map showing conflict areas or attach any new maps you have received from the applicant to be incorporated
into the permit:
10. Is the description of the facilities, type and/or volume of waste(s) as written in the existing permit correct? ❑
Yes or❑No. If no, please explain:
11. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes or ❑ No ❑N/A. If no, please explain:
12. Has a review of all self-monitoring data been conducted (GW,NDMR, and NDAR as applicable)? ❑ Yes or
❑ No ❑ N/A. Please summarize any findings resulting from this review:
13. Check all that apply: ❑ No compliance issues; ❑ Notice(s) of violation within the last permit cycle; ❑
Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under SOC; ❑ Currently under JOC; ❑ Currently under
moratorium. If any items checked, please explain, and attach any documents that may help clarify
answer/comments (such as NOV,NOD etc):
14. Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit, (SOC, JOC, etc.) been complied with? El Yes
[I No El Not Determined ❑N/A.. If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit? ❑
Yes or❑ No ❑ N/A. If yes,please explain:
FORM: Documentl 3

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
IV. INJECTION WELL PERMIT APPLICATIONS(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(51,/"Non-Discharge")
❑ Other(Specify:
2. Does system use same well for water source and injection? ❑ Yes X No
3. Are there any potential pollution sources that may affect injection?❑Yes [R No
What is/are the pollution source(s)? What is the distance of the injection well(s) from the pollution
source(s)? ft.
4. What is the minimum distance of proposed injection wells from the property boundary? /CQ ft.
5. Quality of drainage at site: Good ❑Adequate ❑Poor
6. Flooding potential of site: ❑ Low R 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? 10 Yes ❑No. Attach
map of existing monitoring,well network if applicable. If No, explain and recommend any changes to the
groundwater monitoring program:
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.
Infection 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, explaim
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 iniections have an adverse impact on migration of the plume or management of
the contamination incident? ❑Yes ❑No. If yes explain:
4. Drilling contractor: Name:

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
Address:
Certification number:
5. Complete and attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
FORM: Documentl 5

t
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION REGIONAL STAFF REPORT
V EVALUATIONAND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Provide any additional narrative regarding your review of the application.:
2. Attach Well Construction Data Sheet-if needed information is available ✓
3. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑Yes E,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
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
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: G:' 2i Z00
ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
cnDIA. 6

Sep 12 06 11:01a p,2
�. 1 Y oN RE.SIIIENTIAL NVI:LL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
1
'VET North Camfma Depanment of Environment and Natural Resnurcxs Divoion of Water Quality
HELL CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION N ftlt0
1-WELL CONTRACTOR: d.TOP OF CASING 15 .3 FT.Above Lend Surface-
r��.�� 'Top of cosing trrrf.ted War below land wrlaee may require
♦4r r+ a vai=M it accordance with ISA NCAC 2C.0118.
{dell Cuuraclor nMividuall Name
e..YIELD later): METHOD DF TEST
—
Well Cercractar Compary Name L DISINFECTION:7ype Amount
STREETADDRESS3-SI *W L--e'�-`Cft, +•( 9. WATER ZONES(eepthl.
-1 Frtm Tc_ Frlm_TD
YIJ71W lL�o UC- Z0Bd IC From Tc From 7.
City or Tows Slate - Lp Code
Fran To— Fran_Ta
Areacade- Phonenumber 6, CASING: Thicmessf
2 WELL INFORMATION:
O .l DI Material
WELL ID A(il°ppUomkl Fram�_To��7 FL_�Lo �
�il��
STATE WELL PERM)T#O/aponcabFt Frcm_To FI.
DWQor OTHER PERLUT#(f applicable)applicable) Fmm To FL) —
WELL USE(Check Applicable Gox)LFxriloring b MurvGpaUPWWOO T. GROUT: Dwh Material Method
IMUstrtaNCommemml❑ Agriaauaal❑ Recrneryo Irgxtionm- From-5 To I�FI.&+sr_(rlterr /'ry eia,p�
IrtlgationO Other❑ stuse) Fran__To Fl.
934TE DiDl1m OC+ Fmm_Q_To_,Pt.Caerre�yr
TIME COMPLETED fSreo S. SCREEN: Depth Diameter Slut size Material
3.WELL LOCATION: Fran .Z To FL in, e
Fivn—To__fl.__In. _AL
CITY: (�iY///! COUN7Y_./ESdoGOM Ba.. ' Fmm_Ta_Ft,__In. _EL
_2. 13 RU,r r- ' Cty r1An>�t\L S. SANDWGRAVELPACK:
(Seeei Name.LArmae+s,Cwnmmury,SuanMsron.Sk P..ekbPCemi1 Depth She r"celat
TOPOGRAPHIC I LAND3FIM SEllidge Fan,[-'r-To/3.fFLh_LtRSJb!\
®Slaps (check
pFlri ❑Ridge p Other Fron Tc Ft Q...
(macs apteops,.mq
IA71TUDE -- -My be in deem
— ninutes,wcvnds m 10.DRILLING LOG
LDNGITUDE ins decivel Farrar From To Formation Description
Lalitudc/ltmgitudesource: ❑GPS LiT°popWhicrri
(araii:n tWo#mun!ee Shawntt ils) (opo mTpaM
a11`dCrled m m6 rang arts(e5llg GPs)
l FAC9JTY-N u+e�e�ne vane mnmeraveuaev.M hioerlM
FACILITY ID f(if ap'p�li,cab )le
NAME OF FACiLITT(0&.W, dbwSr [7V j�[.irb4a ll
a
STREET ADDRESS �4dGejorfirfze A-V
Y,2, / /�4-vtl lr• Ar 2g'�'dIF
CAY or Tartu Slate c
Code I
CONTACT PERSON19Ca rrs�r RWt-- pGr.
'M1A'WNG ADDRESS�f'H� PerT��w,s:s' ;d3,CnP. Sar�ff
tYaj'r �4�LN1 B►A� .zLq_ 3 3 i�i1! II.REMARKS:
City�a —Form i�State 2p Code
tS''LJ t-
Xea code- Phono nurrbei
S.WELL DETAILS: Iera NENE1310WWVr TiN6 WELL WAaW ITNCIEaN ABoWU IcE WRN
J� 1 V NCAClC.WE N L9NS1riULnarl VV ELLRCS,ANa t14TA aror OiTNs
a TOTAL DEFTH: 1M
_ �JS NEC 5 BEEHG 'pEn iOINEWELLO
b. DOES WELL REPLACE E)OSTaIG WELL? YES❑ NO Q 1 N leR TI IED W E ONTRAL-TOR
c. WATER LEVEL Belem Top of Caing: FT. l� zi ll� �\ r
(Use'.-if Abv.e Top of Casing) RRIINT EOF PER ION CONSTRUCTING THE WELL
Submit the original to the Div-Minn of Water Quality within 30 days. Alto:Information NISL. Funs GW-lb
1617 Mall Service Center-Raleigh,NC 27699-1617 Phone No.(9791 T33-7875 ext 568- Rim.T
t IVE I a
SEP 12 2006
} h;.ni�liur -aIr liurvtinn `

Sap 12 06 11:02a P.3
e.FAtto
-R NON RESIDENTIAL WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD
V
North Carolina Dcpartnent oTGmirwmeM and htawral Rcsou+roes�_Divil:ion or Water Qwiily
WELL CONTRACFOR CERTM. CATION 0 '
I-WELL CDNTRACTOR.
(( d:TOPOFCASING 193 FT,Above Land Sodas,'
�C L .I op of owing lermireled attfw below land surface eoy rmutre
tl
tr=lW(I 1 tlua9 Name - a—lance in aceBmmm wth 15A HCAC 2C.011B.
Cin/ I
(� e:YIELD Igpml: METHOD OFTE37
tradW Company Name ��1//�� .��r 1}`!�� L DISINFECTION:Type _ Amount
STR�f�E�E�Tf($gOD�DRESS ��� /C'Iw �;;ax&(J 1 W WATERZONES(depth):
L�"o_/® AIG, 2. Q�� 1 Frp�_To_— Frorn__To
Coy W Tawn tale ZIP Cole Frwn__To From TO
Fmm_To FrWrL�T
AreacWl� Pnone nomtlW S.CASING: Thidinees/
2 SITE WE INFORMATION:ON: Fri 1 Depth F D. Weight
Male,tar
SITE WELL IDQTdapplcaMe> "� th la -G'
STATE WELL PERMITtildappleabk) Frcm__To_ —L—
OWQ W OTHER PERMIT O(B apptlable) 4,, From TO FL
WELLUSE(Cheek Appficable Bos)MonitmhV[I Murligralmublie❑ 7. GROW: Depth �Maedal Method
WustdaVCDmmagal♦] Agricuhtbal U-RecomyU lrjttlim E( FramZ To�'yL FtLA54l� 'S7.r fired
brgationp Other❑(ist use) - Fmnt__TDi_Ft.
DATEDRILLED /� O FrWng_Tom Ft.�
TIME COMPLETED $_ "' AMU PMD & SCREEt✓r Depth Diameter SIatstre meffw
3.WELL LOCATION: r—a "—Ta_'0_3 Ft._'f_4bl. ova Irt am
CITY: A:Fd_elrA/G CWNTY _ Fmre —To F7.__In. In.
/ Fmm_7o__FI.__kr, m
ar/fX�N"( IAb F) S- .SANDIGRAVELPACK:
rOPO RAPHIC I LANDnm TIN;; nser<LNN,.,Parcel ' Code) Depth - Sue
TOPOGRAPHIC 7 LAND SETTING: v e Material
QSIDpc UVeteY I7FLTI Midge 13 OVvr R01u�.a.�,To��Ft.
lthcdr emromiale bod From T1 _FI:
'LATMIDE � - May be in degas, Rmj[_Tua_ft.Yo
minlda.savlds or 1 'DRILLING LOG
tDNGITINE ins dninat fomot a
iataudeAongitudescurce COPS DTopogrephic map From To Formation Description-
(A,Datkn orwelmusrbo sh,,,Wr a USES bpd map god
arrachedro arts form Knot rang Gp5)
d_FACW7Y-'.ti o+emne Mly pauescwenxatl,n lennN. ,
FACILITY ID*Cer appkeable)
NAMEOFFACiLTTY reex Lo�rn2!f:jL4)j
STREET ADDRESS /Ir oqy •�
CoyW Tcum Stale rZip CW¢/
CONTACT PERSONA .,ap,Iff /Qi�},fl
ING J1[QPRESS `ew' f) d►B/O
f—� s 3R 11.REMARKS•
Amac Phax F_- T —f-> 44 _
2Zrwmber
SWELL DETAILS: IDDreflEBYCnYIIFY 1NAr nay WELL WAS CMMWm NACCW MMWIM tSta L.WELLCDIIS1RlCrnrr SrA a piATA CCFV CFIHR
'a TOTAL DEPTH: IA7 4EH I'R!]�T I Ert
b. DOES WELL REpLA EDDSTING WELL? YES❑ ND❑
UIR1 ELL CONTRACTOR DA
F •
VEOFCERTI T
c WATER LEVEL BebrTcp WCashg; FT SI
(Use's'M Aha+e Top of Czing) fI/
- TEDI EOF PER COI UCTING TH ELL
Submit the original to the Division of Water Quality vMhlri 30 days.,Attn:.Information M9t.,
1617 Mall Service Center—Raleigh,NC ZTG"-1617 Phone No.(919)733_7015 ext S6B. Fenn GW-1b
1^ avA
,
! RECEWE
SEP 12 2006
Asheville'Regional Oftce

Sep 12 06 11:26a p,2
33 .+ NONRESIDENTIAL IVELL CONSTIZUCITON RECORD
North Cam9na Department of and Natural R wivrs-Di� v¢ion oflVa)a Qualify t\•ELLCONTRACTORCERTiFICAT)ONN A/P"e
1.WELL CONTRACTOR: d. TOP OF CASING 15 Z. FT.Above Lath swtacE-
'Topd=irgterminated eUorbelmlaid 5%rbce may require
Crmtramw(Indhdte9 Name avada a in anmrdance with 1SA NCAC 2C.011 IL
e. YIELD 19Pm1: METHOD OFTEST
Well Contractor Company Name µ L DISINFECTION:Type Arnnard
STREETADDRESS 35-1 A)CW LMet- ell. `T L�yy-.1 9• WATER ZONES Idepvt):
Fnyn_To_ Fmm To wi UL teF�City wTmrm Stare Zipp Code Cade FranTo From_To
From To Fran_Tc
Lg�r .z.5 �-3SSt —
Areaeode, Phatenumtrer 6. CASING: Tbkkm sf
L VJELLINFORMATK)N: Depth Diameter Weight Material
SITE WELL ID A(il.pphablcJ From ��TP1�Ft. 2"
STATE WELL PERMITR(II applicable) From_To_FI. _
DWO ar OTHER PERMFT t1(i appieable) RPm TD Ft.
WELL USE(CheckApplImble Box)Monliving[rMunicipelipb9c❑ 7• GROUT: Depth Material �� Melhuf
InduetrWCarrnmCbi 0 ASTlmttural0 Recaery O Injection From�_TD !�FI.�AJa.�C.A
Irripril nD Odra D pkt tree) From_To FI.
Rwn TP Ft
' DATE ORILPLETE 'J�L S. SCREEN: Depth Dfarne w Slat Sim })falafel
TiMECOMFLETED Z.d D AMD PMEr�
3.WELL LOC``atTION: Frorn�To 77_FL_2_ja D!6 in., 0�G
COLIN7Y RofJovw IQ__ FTmt_To FL_1rL in.
Frwn_TD—FL—in. _In.
(�" 6KDoa/Gntiw6Q G'r.. Ln.aa�.l ( 9. SANDIGRAVEL PACK:
(Srrcn Name,Narbers,Cammuriry.SupEi" •LPtNq Pared,Zip a) Depth SUM Mderel
TOOP/POGRAPHIC)LAND SETTING: FrPmZZL To�Ft.
126npe 0`VdIy DFINI ❑Ridge 0Other
(check eppmprate Dm)
Ryan Tv FI.
LATITUDE _ MsyWildc®ce, Fronl�To_( FI,[
mimna,secwdsw 10.DRILONG LOG
LONGITUDE__ inededmalf mat From To Formation Description
latitude fongitude sotuce: DGPS ❑Tapographic map
(beffiion d wermusl Pe thoxn M a USGStapo map✓mtl
ettvchad to ftiec/wm Trml rnirg GPS)
4.FACILn"Y.r n.m.e.,xwmasr.evrmes ailee.r.tl,
FACILITY ID 0lif appti[able) •_�
NAME OF FACILITYz��zfew4pw/ear A-R1J1-�1
STREET ADDRESS /ZG.W zT/_ Al d/ n51italUm
f y Pr Twm ff�� tlYState i Cede
CONTACT PERSONNaY �fllP.er'•- �6,
MAILING ADDRESS C'c 1w r
Ll1�at r �6w d .e—.&* 3 r[n/ 11.REMARKS:
CK Of Town State Zip Code
M a code- PApne numtrer
5.WELL DETAILS: I W pEnFaTI£R1FYTINTTMS HELL WAS CO�%faVCTEDNtUOnMNPElvmt
a TOTAL DEPTH: -
ta4N GNEIL COuSImrCiE]115GN04np5,ANDMarA000Y OC'nln
ASQtMew . TOIw -ELL R.
-
b. DOES WELL REPLACE EXISTING WrLL7 YES 1100 5ONA7URE CERT ED • LCONTRACTOR
c WATER LEVEL BCINTTopdCadrg:
(Use'+'60.hde Topd Casing) PHINTED NAME OF PERSON CONSTRUCTING THE WELL
Suhmlt the original to the Division of Water Quality wlthin 30 days. Attn:InformatlomMgt-, Fmm GW_1b�
1617 Mail Service Center—Raleigh,NC 27599-1617 Phone No.[phone] eml 569.
G� . VED
SEI' 12 2dQ6
+shcK=�V� ���io�i�4�rdfiee �
6

'Sep 12 06 11:26a p,3
�iin'rt!
ON11)
NONRESIDENTL4L -VFLLCONsrRucTION RECORD
It North Carolina Departmentm
mrnl ofFirmmana and N:niiml RccDivisim of Water Quality
WELL CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION u
1.WIE ONTRACTOR: IL TOP OF CASING I9 FT.Abma Land Sudace•
LTop cui 9 tennaa atbr below Lard surface,may tmuim
onttactor(In w Name 9varia^ca In acCOdancewilh 15A NCAC 2C.0118.
e. YIELD(gpm): METHOD OF TEST
mlractu Company Nalre //�� t. DISINFECTION:Type Amwnl
S`MnE�EET ADDRESS Ir•e 'aapVY4, 9� WATER ZONES(depth):
ffyLL"�IJIm �.. FnNn—Tit _ From—7n
Cuyor Taws State Zip Cate Ram ToFrom
(F2f(} •�S r/--3s Er I From To Frwr Ta_
Ateamde- Phonemvtber C CASING: Thickness)
2.WELL INFORMATION: Depth Diameter Weight Material
SITE WELL ID Y(¢applioiuoL Rom;I�To LD. FI._'2
STATE WELL PERMITIJ(il.,liictb4) Fro"—To Ft.
Fi= To Ft.
DWQ MOTHER PERMIT�1 app6tahlel
WE2L USE(Check ApptcaNe Sae)Monitoring If) MuNclpaYPobac❑ T. GROUT: Depth Material Method
InCImtfWJCammercialO Agriorlual0 RecuesyO Injection❑ Ft.
lrfigawill OtherO Psi me) Fruit—Tit Ft.
Frun�T.- Ft �iwn L
GATE DRILLED� i�o6
& SCREEN: Depth Otwooiu Ski Site Material
TIME LOCATION:
A os AMU] PMI3� From LO To—7O. FL�Jn. ./o In• fIC
i WELL L�OC�ATION: From—Ta Ft._irl_'_IM
/C�ITY.4jz =d/%s- COUNTY tlQa' Fmm Tr Fi. in_ _la
1% Gl1f F .Q P�,_ �i 11
-�6a--t-- S. SAND(GRAVEL PACK:
OPO RAPHIombrn.Co SETTING:
Tlm,Loth pa a(,2b Codel Depth Sim µTleral
TOPOGRAPHfCJLANO SETTING: From Ld To�FI_Sk0D -
13Stope OValley 01Tat ❑Ridge D 01tw_r From Fo Ft
(ererYapPapriate IwY! _
May 6e in de Fmm��To��Ft.,�`•
LATI7tIDE e Y &�
mirvtes temrtdser ba_DRILLINGLOG
LONGITUDE__ ina deci ml r, From To Formation Description
LatitudeAwgitude source: ❑GPS DTopographic map
Qncetun or Welmusfba drown on a USGS bpo map and
offcchodto Ills farm✓roof miv CPS)
4.FACILITY-is on iume ameluaesN.ive ar.Jtirlxaled.
FACILITY ID 6(l appl'ieahle)
NAMEOFFACILRY60 PUAYTnw�e_G-t+{
STR26TADDRESS *q ?CI AF- Ashr-11t(tc
or
h ip Fe
City Q Toxn Stale Zip Codes
CONTACT PERSOtJ F low.
MAILING DRESS
l.l}. � l— [A �3 I L REMARKS:
Ciryor Tmn Stale Zip Code
aK- )-_ 221 - 1
Area rode-Phone number
5.WELL DETAILS: 1DDt@ yC£RTPYn TT WELLWAS CpISI"a WACCDP WE Wall
1N NL G Well CON5TiWCDON SenNpg -kbfD wTACDVTDi DNS
a. TOTAL DEPTH: �O , c t A9 BEE"PR ogDTo iuE WeLLOWr 6
b, DOESWELLREPLACEMSTIMSWELL7 YESO RO❑ !/ 7
ED TIRE WELL DNTRACTOR ATE
c WATER LEVEL Below Top of Cash: FT, �� A.�J, 2 p 1��
(Use-•wit Jihue Top dCasln9l (((�'7 1' f
R ED 8ME OF PERSON-0ONSTRUCTING THE WELL
Submit the original to the Division of Water Quality Within 30 days. Atfn:Information MqL, FarmGw 1617 Moil Service Center—Raleigh,NO 27999-1617 Phone No,(919)773-TDe15 tS66 -tb
. Foam GA
105
_._W._....�
RI`
• I
5EP 12 2006
I
I
ra rsr;liar GrrSEantinn e

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
APPLICATION REVIEW REQUEST FORM Abfl 17 2006
Date: August 15, 2006
To: ® Landon Davidson, ARO-APS ❑ David May,WaRO-APS
❑ Art Barnhardt,FRO-APS ❑ Charlie Stehman,WiRO-APS
❑ Andrew Pitner,MRO-APS ❑ Sherri Knight,WSRO-APS
❑ Jay Zimmerman,RRO-APS
From: Qu Oi , Groundwater Protection Unit
Telephone: [phone] t� Fax: [phone]
E-Mail: qu.giAncmail.net
A. Permit Number: WI0100042
B. Owner: Buncombe County
C. Facility/Operation: Old Buncombe County Landfill
❑ Proposed ® Existing ❑ Facility ❑ Operation
D. Application:
I. Permit Type: ❑ Animal ❑ Surface Irrigation ❑ Reuse ❑ H-R Infiltration
❑ Recycle ❑ I/E Lagoon ❑ GW Remediation(ND)
® UIC- (51)in-situ groundwater remediation
For Residuals: ❑ Land App. ❑ D&M ❑ Surface Disposal
❑ 503 ❑ 503 Exempt ❑ Animal
2. Project Type: ® 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:
® Return a Completed Form APSARR.
❑ Attach Well Construction Data Sheet.
❑ Attach Attachment B for Certification by the LAPCU.
❑ Issue an Attachment B Certification from the RO*.
* Remember that you will be responsible for coordinating site visits, 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 a propriate Central Office-Aquifer Protection Section contact person
listed above.
RO-APS Reviewer: Date:
FORM: APSARR 02/06 Page 1 of 1

�OF WNArF90 Michael F.Easley,Governor
�c G William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
CO r- North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
>
p Alan W.Klimek,P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
August 15,2006
Bob Hunter
2229 Riverside Drive
Asheville,NC 28804
Subject: Acknowledgement of Application No. W10100042
Injection In situ Groundwater Remediation Well(5I)
Buncombe
Dear Mr. Hunter:
The Aquifer Protection Section of the Division of Water Quality(Division)acknowledges receipt of your permit
application and supporting materials on August 9,2006.This application package has been assigned the number
listed above and will be reviewed by Qu qi.
The reviewer will perform a detailed review and contact you with a request for additional information if necessary.
To ensure the maximum efficiency in processing permit applications,the Division requests your assistance in
providing a timely and complete response to any additional information requests.
Please be aware that the Division's Regional Office,copied below,must provide recommendations prior to final
action by the Division.Please also note at this time,processing permit applications can take as long as 60-90 days
after receipt of a complete application.
If you have any questions,please contact Qu qi at 919-715-6935,or via e-mail at [e-mail]. If the reviewer
is unavailable,you may leave a message,and they will respond promptly. Also note that the Division has
reorganized. To review our new organizational chart,go to hLtp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/documents/dwq orgchart.pdf.
PLEASE REFER TO THE ABOVE APPLICATION NUMBER WHEN MAKING INQUIRIES ON THIS
PROJECT.
Sincerely,
for b J. Watts
Supervisor
cc: Asheville Regional Office,Aquifer Protection Section
Geoffrey Burke—Parsons Brinkerhoff
Permit Application File WI0100042
Nam` Carolina
W MIM!!y
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Internet:w ncwateraualitv.oro Location: 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh,NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer-50%Recyded110%Post Consumer Paper Customer Service: [phone]

•- s
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJECTION
Type 5I Wells—In Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type 5T Wells—Tracer Injection
• Do not use this form for remediation systems that extract contaminated groundwater,treat it,and reinject the treated groundwater.
• Submit TWO copies of the completed application and all attachments to the address on the last page of this forth.
• Any changes made to this form will result in the application package being returned.
Application Number(to be completed by DWQ):
RECEIVED IDENR/DWO
AOJRR'PROTECTION SECTION
AUG 0 92006
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Applicant's Name(generally the responsible party): Buncombe County, North Carolina
2. Signing Official's Name:Bob Hunter Title: Director of General Services
3. Mailing address of applicant:2229 Riverside Drive
City:Asheville State:NC Zip: 28804
Telephone number:828 250 5466 Fax number: 828 232 4407
4. Property Owner's Name(if different from Applicant):Board of County Commissioners, Buncombe Co., NC
5. Property Owner's mailing address: 2229 Riverside Drive
City:Asveville State:NC Zip: 28804
6. Name and address of contact person who can answer questions about the proposed injection project:
Name:Geoffrey M. Burke Title:Sr. Project Manager
Company: Parsons Brinkerhoff
Address:1400 Centrepark Blvd Suite 810
City:West Palm Beach State:FL Zip: 33401
Telephone number:561 227 1280 Fax number: 561 227 1299
Email Address:burkegCcDpbworid.com
II. PERMIT INFORMATION:
1. Project is:O New ❑Modification of existing permit ❑Renewal of existing permit without modification
2. If this application is being submitted for renewal or modification to an existing permit,provide:
existing permit number and the issuance date
For renewal without modifications,fill out sections I&II only,sign the certification on the last page of this
form,and obtain the property owner's signature to indicate consent(if the applicant is not the owner).
UIC-51/5T ver. 12-05 Page I of 7

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJE CTION
Type 5I Wells—In Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type 5T Wells—Tracer Injection
III. INCIDENT&FACILITY DATA
A. FACILITY INFORMATION
I. Facility name:Old Buncombe County Landfill
2. Complete physical address of the facility: 4 Miles north of Asheville between Highway 251 &the French
Broad River
City:Asheville County: Buncombe State: NC Zip:28804
B. INCIDENT DESCRIPTION
1. Describe the source of the contamination:
Former unlined landfill
2. List all contaminants present in soils or groundwater at the site(contaminants may be listed in groups,e.g.,
gasoline,diesel,jet fuel,fuel oil,chlorinated ethenes,chlorinated ethanes,metals,pesticides/herbicides,etc):
Chiorinated Ethenes
i
3. Has LNAPL or DNAPL ever been observed at the site(even if outside the injection zone)?
❑Yes If yes,list maximum measured separate phase thickness: feet
®No If no,list maximum concentration of total VOCs observed at site:243 ppb
4. Agency managing the contamination incident:
❑UST Section ❑Superfund Section(including REC Program and DSCA sites)
❑DWQ Aquifer Protection Section ®Solid Waste Section
❑Hazardous Waste Section ❑Other:
5. Incident number or other site number assigned by the agency managing the contamination incident:
C. PERMITS
List all permits or construction approvals that have been issued for the facility or incident,including those not
directly related to the proposed injection operation:
1. Hazardous Waste Management program permits under RCRA:
2. DWQ Non-Discharge or NPDES permits:
3. County or DEH subsurface wastewater disposal permits:
4. Other environmental permits required by state or federal law: NC DENR Solid Waste Permit#11-01
UIC-5I/5T ver. 12-05 Page 2 of 7

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJECTION
Type 5I Wells—In Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type 5T Wells—Tracer Injection
IV. INJECTION DATA
A. INJECTION FLUID DATA
1. List all proposed injectants.
NOTE:Any substance to be injected as a tracer or to promote in situ remediation must be reviewed by the
Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Section(GEES)of the Division of Public Health.Department of
Health and Human Services. Review the list o(anoroved injectants or contact the UIC Program to determine if
the injectants you are proposing have been reviewed by OEES
InjectancRegenisis Hydrogen Releasing Compound (HRC)
Concentration at point of injection:100% HRC
Injectant:
Concentration at point of injection:
Injectant:
Concentration at point of injection:
Injectant:
Concentration at point of injection:
Injectant:
Concentration at point of injection:
2. Source of fluids used to dilute or chase the injectants listed above:
l/7 None
❑Municipal water supply
❑Groundwater from private well or any well within '/. mile of injection site
❑Air
❑Other:
3. If groundwater from a private well or any well within '/.mile of injection site is to be used as the fluid source,
supply the following information:
a. Location/ID number of source well:
b. Depth of source:
c. Formation:
d. Rock/Sedimenttype:
e. In Attachment B,provide a current,complete chemical analysis of the water from the source well,including
analyses for all contaminants suspected or historically recognized in soil or groundwater on the site.
NOTE:If contaminated groundwater is to be used as the dilution or chase fluid, this is not the proper permit
application form. You must apply for a closed-loop groundwater remediation permit using application form
G WRS.
UIC-5I/5T ver. 12-05 Page 3 of 7

X �
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJE CTION
Type 51 Wells—In Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type 5T Wells—Tracer Injection
B. PROPOSED OPERATING PARAMETERS
1. Duration of Injection:
Maximum number of separate injection events:2
Expected duration of each injection event:2 days
Expected duration between events (if more than one event): 1 year
2. Injection rate per well:2.0 gallons per minute(gpm)
3. Total Injection volume:12.5 gallons per day(gpd); 25 gallons per event(if separate events)
4. Injection pressure:1500 pounds/square inch(psi)
5. Temperature at point of injection:130 OF
6. Briefly describe how the above parameters will be measured and controlled:
Rate&duration of injection will be contingent upon the transmissivities of the fracture zones. Injection
rate, pressure&temperature will be continuously monitored with instrumentation.
7. Estimated hydraulic capacity of the well:40.3 gpm
C. INJECTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DATA
1. Injection will be via
❑ Existing well(s)proposed for use as an injection well.Provide the data in(2)through(6)below to the best of
your knowledge.
® Proposed well(s)to be constructed for use as an injection well. Provide the data in(2)through(6)below as
proposed construction specifications.
2. Well Drilling Contractor's Name: Caldwells Well Drilling
NC Well Contractor Certification number.2140
3. Date to be constructed: D 6 Number of borings: 2
Approximate depth of each boring(feet):43/135
4. Screened interval/Injection interval of injection wells:
Depth: 33/1'2 to 43M feet below ground surface(if multiple intervals,indicate shallowest and deepest depth).
5. Well casing(N/A if injection is through direct push rods):
Type: ® PVC ❑ Stainless steel ❑ Other:
Casing depth: 0 to 33/125 ft.
6. Grout(N/A if injection is through direct push rods):
Type: ® Cement ❑ Bentonite ❑ Other:—
Grout depth: 0 to 28/11 ft.
UIC-5I/5T ver. 12-05 Page 4 of 7

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJECTION
Type 5I Wells—Lr Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type 5T Wells—Tracer Injection
V. ATTACHMENTS
Provide the following items as attachments with the given headings:
A. HYDROGEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
Provide a hydrogeologic description,soils description,and cross section of the subsurface to a depth that includes the
known or projected depth of contamination. The hydrogeologic description shall include:
(1) the regional geologic setting;
(2) significant changes in lithology;
(3) the hydraulic conductivity,transmissivity,and specific yield of the aquifer to be used for injection,including a
description of the test(s)used to determine these parameters;and
(4) the depth to the mean seasonal high water table.
NOTE: G.S. 89E-18 requires that any geologic plans, reports, or documents in which the performance is related to the
public welfare or safeguarding of the environment be prepared by a licensed geologist or subordinate under his or her
direction. G.S. 89E-13 requires that all drawings, reports, or documents involving geologic work which shall have been
prepared or approved by a licensed geologist or a subordinate under his or her direction be signed and sealed by him or
her.
B. INJECTION FLUID COMPOSMON
Describe the chemical,physical,biological and radiological characteristics of each injectant.Attach the Material Safety
Data Sheet(MSDS)for each injectant. If a private well or a well within'/<mile of the injection site is used as the source
well,include chemical analysis of source fluid here.
C. INJECTION RATIONALE
Attach a brief description of the rationale for selecting the injectants and concentrations proposed for injection,including:
(1) goals of the injection project;
(2) 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;and
(3) summary results of modeling or testing performed to investigate the injectant's potential or susceptibility to change
(biological,chemical or physical) in the subsurface.
D. INJECTION PROCF.DURF. AND FQTUPMENT
Provide a detailed description of all planned activities related to the proposed injection including but not limited to:
(1) construction plans and materials;
(2) operation procedures;
(3) a detailed diagram of the surface and subsurface portions of the system; and
(4) a planned injection schedule.
E. MONITORING PLAN
Provide a plan for monitoring the results of the injection,including:
(I) a list of existing and proposed monitoring wells to be used;
(2) a list of monitoring parameters and analytical methods to be used;and
(3) a schedule for sampling to monitor the proposed injection.
NOTE: The selected monitoring wells must be located so as to detect any movement of injection fluids,process by-
products, or formation fluids outside the injection area or zone. The monitoring parameters should include the target
contaminants as well as secondary or intermediate contaminants which may result from the injection and other
parameters which may serve to indicate the progress of the intended reactions,such as pH, ORP, dissolved oxygen, and
other electron acceptors and donors. The monitoring schedule should be consistent with the pace of the anticipated
reactions and rate of transport of the injectants and contaminants.
UIC-5I/5T ver. 12-05 Page 5 of 7

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJECTION
Type 5I Wells—In Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type 5T Wells—Tracer Injection
F. WELL DATA
Provide a tabulation of data on all existing or abandoned wells within''/a mile of the injection well(s)which penetrate the
proposed injection zone,including,but not limited to,monitoring wells and wells proposed for use as injection wells.
Such data shall include a description of each well's use(water supply,monitoring, etc),total depth,screened or open
borehole depth interval,and well construction or abandonment record,if available.
G. MAPS
Attach the following scaled,site specific maps:
(1) Area map based on the most recent USGS 7.5' topographic map of the area,at a scale of 1:24,000 and
showing the location of the proposed injection site.
(2) Site map including:
a. all property boundaries;
b. all buildings within the property boundary;
c. existing and proposed injection wells or well field(s)
d. any existing sources of potential or known groundwater contamination,including waste storage,
treatment or disposal systems within '/<mile of the injection well or well system;
e. all surface water bodies within '/<mile of the injection well or well system; and
f. all existing or abandoned wells within '/mile of the injection well(s) which penetrate the proposed
injection zone,including,but not limited to,monitoring wells and wells proposed for use as injection
wells.
(3) Potentiometric surface map(s)including:
a. direction of groundwater movement
b. existing and proposed monitoring wells
c. existing and proposed injection wells
(4) Contaminant plume map(s)including:
a. the horizontal extent of the contaminant plume,including isoconcentration lines
b. existing and proposed monitoring wells
c. existing and proposed injection wells
(5) Cross-section(s)to the known or projected depth of contamination,including:
a. horizontal and vertical extent of the contaminant plume,including isoconcentration lines
b. major changes in lithology
UIC-5115T ver. 12-05 Page 6 of 7

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S)FOR INJECTION
Type 51 Wells- In Situ Groundwater Remediation/Type ST Wells- Tracer Injection
vi. CERTIFICATION
I Bob Hwter _ hereby certify under penalty of law that
I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments
thereto and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining said information,
1 believe that the information is true,accurate and complete. I am aware that there are sibmi6cant penalties,
including the possibility of fines and imprisonment, for submitting false information. I agree to construct,
operate,maintain,repair,and if applicable,abandon the injection well(s)and all related appurtenances in
accordance with the approved specifications and conditions of the Permit.
Signature: ' " A-VN- Date: 818/06
Title: Director of Rwztrre Cwtty Solid Waste
lfautharized agent i.racting on behalfgf the applicant,supply a letter.cigned by the applicant authorizing the
above agent.
VII. CONSENT OF PROPERTY OWNER (if the property is not owned by the applicant)
("Owner"means any person who holds thefee or other property rights in the well being constructed. A well it
real property and its construction on land shall be deemed to vest ownership in the land owner, in the absence of
contrary agreement in writing.)
1 ,as owner of the property on which the
injection well(s)are to be constructed and operated,hereby consent to allow the applicant to construct each
injection well as outlined in this application and agree that it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
that the injection well(s)conform to the Well Construction Standards(Title 15A NCAC 2C .0200)
Signature: Date:
Title:
Submit 33M copies of the completed application package,including all attachments,to:
UIC Program
Aquifer Protection Section
North Carolina DENR-DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center.
Raleigh,NC 27699 1636RECEIVEDACLOFKT �TM
Telephone[phone] AUG 0 8 Z006
U1C•51/5T ver. 12-05 Page 7 of 7

ATTACHMENT A
HYDROGEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
Area and Site Physiograpy
Old Buncombe County Landfill occupies approximately 227 acres between Highway 251
and the French Broad River. The site is approximately 5,000 feet long, from north to
south, and approximately 3,700 feet wide, from east to west. Currently, the area
surrounding the landfill is largely rural, with scattered homes and subdivisions nearby. A
medium-security prison occupies the property immediately adjoining the western landfill
property line. A wastewater treatment plant is located approximately one-half mile
upstream (south) of the landfill property.
Topography at the site ranges from rolling to steep. The steeper, more rugged terrain is
along the hillside facing the French Broad River to the south. Ground surface elevations
range from about 1890 feet along the French Broad River to about 2200 feet in the
eastern-central part of the site. The southern portion of the site drains to the French
Broad River by the way of several small creeks and streams. The northern portion of the
site is drained by several small creeks and streams that converge and exit the site via a
stream at the northern corner,ultimately discharging to the French Broad River.
Regional Geology
{
Mountainous areas of western North Carolina and adjacent eastern Tennessee are part of
the Blue Ridge Physiographic and Structural Province. This province is composed of a
great, three-dimensional mass of deformed and metamorphosed rocks. These rocks are
undoubtedly allochthonous, being underlain in the subsurface by thrust faults of Late
Paleozoic age. The Blue Ridge rocks have been moved northwestward on these faults at
least 30 miles and probably more than 125 miles.
The central part of Buncombe County is underlain mainly by garnet-muscovite schist and
biotite gneiss. To some extent, they alternate in discontinuous northeast-trending belts,
together with elongate bodies of hornblende gneiss. There are irregular granitic bodies
scattered throughout the area, and small pegmatite dikes and quartz veins intrude the
schist and gneiss almost everywhere.
The geologic map of North Carolina indicates that the Old Buncombe County Landfill is
underlain by muscovite-biotite gneiss of the Ashe Metamorphic Suite. The muscovite-
biotite gneiss of this suite is typically medium gray to medium dark gray, thin to medium
layered, and is commonly sulfidic. The rock appears to be massive, but where it is
weathered, foliation is discernible. Color banding and compositional layering occur
parallel to foliation. Quartz augen, some of which appear to be relict pebbles that have
been deformed, are present at widely scattered localities. Unweathered calcite and
dolomite streaks may be seen in the rock at fresh exposures.

Virgin soils at the landfill are the residual product of in-place chemical weathering of the
underlying rock. In undisturbed areas, the typical residual soil profile consists of clayey
soils near the surface, where soil weathering is more advanced, underlain by sandy silts
and silty sands. The boundary between soil and rock is not sharply defined, and a
transitional zone of partially weathered rock or saprolite is normally found. Weathering is
facilitated by fractures,joints and the presence of less resistant rock types. Consequently,
the profile of the partially weathered rock and hard rock is quite irregular and erratic,
even over short horizontal distances. Lenses and boulders of hard rock and zones of
partially weathered rock are often found within the soil mantle, well above the general
bedrock level.
A cross section depicting the topography, bedrock, groundwater, and waste areas of the
proposed injection site is shown on Figure 4-8.
Groundwater
Groundwater in the Blue Ridge physiographic province occurs in the pore space of the
regolith and in secondary opening such as joints, fractures, cleavage planes, bedding planes
and solution channels in the underlying bedrock. Although the storage capacity is higher in
the saprolite than the underlying bedrock, the ability to transmit water is greater in the
fractured bedrock. As a result,the saprolite functions as a reservoir that supplies water to the
underlying fractured bedrock. Recent investigations at other sites overlying fractured
bedrock aquifers have indicated that the transition zone between saprolite and bedrock may
i also provide an avenue of preferential flow and contaminant transport in the subsurface.
Fractured crystalline rocks tend to exhibit a high degree of heterogeneity, with highly
transmissive fracture zones embedded within a less permeable fracture network. In such a
setting, flow paths are highly tortuous. If high transmissivity zones occur at different
depths, fluid flow will involve significant vertical components, as the fluid move from a
high-transmissivity zone at one depth through less permeable factures to another high-
transmissivity zone at another depth.
Aquifer Testing
Major fractures at the Old Buncombe County Landfill were identified during the
contamination assessment conducted at the facility. Exploratory boreholes were drilled in
areas likely to exhibit fractures, and geophysical logs were run to accurately assess the
respective depth and magnitude of the fractures.
Based on the results of borehole geophysics, discreet fracture zones within the bedrock
boreholes were selected and sealed off with a packer assembly for aquifer testing. The
testing consisted of pumping the sealed off fracture zones and measuring the observed
drawdown with time.

0091
r .
0091
t
oocL
0ORL
0061
OOOZ
OOIZ
OOZZ
00H
004Z

. +iry✓SSiJ hSy,.._�,��C:�i
• JrI✓✓J✓�Ih✓i IS+I✓S+I �yry+19i�I�I > ^'i•Jx
♦ - rI✓rnyh+ivyl�;h�y+IrJI✓ h.Yr'�rh����h�`;�+i:
Iryj Nyhry. y ✓jrI �lJII,i y
� � - o✓>Ir yI�.LS>i I^IhIJ Ihy�M,h hg'J✓I:
.� .� 1 v y✓Shhr+ •fir+i ,�Ir;: hh✓I✓ ,yy.�I�hp rI�.I✓i:
+ 'rS°++++++M++�'�f✓Iryry��hS�iS°++ISil�ir�S S�'+I S+i
.,��< ✓IrySh✓y r hry>✓ I'r�ryhi>++I syi✓I✓I Mr�, I✓�
Si✓Irj✓'y�Mr�ir++j>'�ii;?r +,il�'✓+Jia9+✓ry++i:r'•'i>;
S ✓+is^)+N+h41Sh>itS.r+Iidv�•✓i+�.�ry+✓'+✓+i+++ry� 5�y✓S
rr�NiJf�✓Sh �h�'�'h�✓S+iJr9rjy+S'ylSli�9i+�Y�rS+I'Ihi'.�+SS'L:
., �ryaj>+✓aj>hs,J+✓JI�JI✓j�rJ+,rl•Irl�r++IIIJ)✓IS+IIy'I!✓j I+IIIjJ�
• �+5+%y'S+jr;S i�rS+js�S+jll'�r+ih'v+°+i�++ry��+j✓ishSiji I'V✓'✓i✓
' � S+jhrShS�S+ijSLryJSs✓15.E�+iry�h✓I+ry•W I�+Sh��rl�+S ir+�OS�.
iiS+jh✓S+jlf,;'j✓�Srj�irl!yd•.y�:I+Sl��ri��Oy✓S+j✓frh:�iry+Sri
>�+SShf✓S>�'+iSli��i+'^I+,3r✓ f'I'i��+i✓ iiS°irj�r+'i�ryJ+iy>+�.
.. I✓ Ir II ✓> IryS ry IryI✓>✓ rr✓J r✓I!✓aI IryJ
I�✓S+IS�jhlj:+�✓++✓'!I'j+I j�jry✓S'I j✓S'I.r'i✓'�+I I++IS++IIaS>+rI✓
• • ,Srjr�LSJI+I.t�>✓++hhrlh>'JI'>'i+Nhll✓SI+I✓++++�+I++++jJ+fiJ'I+IS`�'
� j+ tjlirly�3;�✓M+�rSSiS�SSi�ylSSihjv+i+S��!+�5���1�+�S�rp
r ✓✓ II r
'•'iajr+iaiSh�Shh�✓yiS°i y+i✓j✓+iryS+it✓'�J'+irl•4+i✓I$�rryS+ial,+,ri
11 l�j��l�>!��!�S��+�lj�j js��I+Ihry+1O✓IIJ++a+I✓h+jl�}II�S�✓IMj✓ �
1 r+iijl+ihf+i�S+irlS+irj+i.y+drryh'yhS�h,+�+irlS+isj�i�iry+S9r
♦ .. • +IJjj IJ✓SJIi)I>jh✓✓I✓✓ r+rl' !+✓y✓++I++�NI.I''IOjr+Ihj�Igem. h!
• .,4�yl,+y{S✓I!y+�p�+iljry+S+j jOYiSiS•6 iJ�iS+j+�jiSiSh��S+i�IShS++
� 1! ii � I • � I�AIJS✓+ryh✓.I•�i+i✓�yj.•r+hJryhlS�+jr��6 i[�i>Sry>eiSr+:yih��✓iyM+i.
• , � : ♦ it�SSrSI✓SIh4'�+SiS�;LS�^6��jd:�h✓Si°Sf�r`Y✓✓hJj�+I j✓SLI•�rhr�✓+,.�i�
• it • • ;fhhyl'I+✓>S✓39y�h•WI�>gi 3�i�i•�iby>��J�✓4✓S�S✓+hJ >I�+i�h✓r
.. • i �Lr',�+5+✓�SSiLp✓$+i%i✓++Slip+yMS�Shi:+i�SljhrS✓Iv>+ry+0'�+>��
• :h�SSryi°S✓+ !++�+'+rl�'�,��SLryy✓S+jJI'9d!y++✓fD°$+j+ii iS>�h�rS: i_�
• 11 iS>I�Srjy+S':ilp+i✓iS✓S+i✓�•JI�h✓j+•�r ��aii✓S+SIJS+I ii3
+i,3SS
��,+,hS•9M�'+
• ��+�sSSr+•I,rrS��✓S ,QiS��•iS�Sr+iS�,+.IjIS���>irySISSiShJSili✓ +i> �
.. ?iSiShy'+S°+%i° tSJj✓f✓he•Y✓IIj+S✓Ojlry,��>Ihy+SJj•,iah•I'iIryS�Srj✓;S'paS
♦ hJlir✓hS✓i�y+iryShLSh yS+irlS+ih�i✓IS+irf°+✓I¢.roN+iry•Q+i✓j✓!�
• •> ✓�r+h0hljJ�I�j+ISM JI�+�JyI•J+I�GrySIJi+✓�+S✓j��SJj�Jh•I',yl,✓JU.+i �
j j,I•+I jr++I j!j�Ij IljjhS>S''NjJ+I✓�✓+315>SrAyrll++I✓IJALih✓�✓�+I✓SfhJ C.1
? ✓ hrI>I+�ayo p h✓++hS,+i✓++i✓>hri+ir++ii++i.%�`
✓ ,'�I +•WM+hpy��irih.' +yhr�9 i
: ++✓ry+-0i✓I'S.�S✓f�SL++�rS° 'fiJA.•D^yS�riSO�p� y r �+SiShSI •�L✓'r
J I✓ J IJ r✓ I+ hJ IO' I> Ir
I NI j✓j h jS+I�j+ISMS+I✓j✓+i.��llSjj+jhl�ISM✓h j✓S+j+��'l�j'"M0Jj✓N
- �✓hljj NISI JjS+jJ�lljJ�✓rI jrS IIjS+I j�NI j'rS h.✓•�✓+I� L�j�
11 !h✓+H✓+haS�VjJr+hJh✓�'rS'�+IJJ+✓hS'I MJ�✓hS✓j h'+ hj✓?7012;j'•+Jrjl
• •� • +j.�raS+ISj•.+jJjj+jlj,+r+jlj•.+jJ✓j+jl�,r+jl�r+I j+✓j✓j++l�,.�Jjj+j+jr+IS�•r•IJj
� �Sry�+iry�+J��+Irfl'�JjJ�j jr�M�+•I•✓IS j�Ih✓S++hJ✓r++I i�hlljr�j+jJ�•+.•'I.
♦ • ,!✓III+JIrSJJd J°hhlS✓h✓✓S✓IYS+y++✓I'prh ''j✓>+>+II✓+O✓!hiJj ✓�I�
IiI�SI�jJ :ISJ�� I+ ✓�J+�IJ i.r I! h+ �! N �! �„II rI✓.N..r.✓✓ - rll.r✓!vN ✓L✓s.A1.r I✓.✓,.N .I✓ rha
n
t �

The packer assembly consisted of a 10-foot length of 4-inch, flush-threaded, schedule 40
PVC screen with inflatable rubber packers mounted on either end. For each fracture zone,
the packer assembly was lowered to the appropriate depth and the packers were then inflated
to seal off the targeted fracture zone. A 4-inch submersible pump was then lowered through
the 4-inch PVC casing into the screened section of the packer assembly. Once in place, the
pump was momentarily activated and water levels in the borehole annulus and within the 4-
inch casing were measured to test the effectiveness of the seal. Once assured of a competent
seal, a pressure transducer was installed to a depth just above the pump and was connected
to a datalogger. The datalogger was programmed to collect the water level data on a
logarithmic sampling schedule, which optimized the data collection speed. The pump was
then activated and the drawdown test was run until either the water level reached
equilibrium, or the packer assembly was pumped dry, at which point the pump was stopped
and the test stepped or restarted to record the recovery data. The collected data was
evaluated in order to provide an estimate of the fracture conductivity.
Fracture conductivities were also estimated by slug testing selected monitoring wells. The
response of an aquifer to rapid changes in water level were measured by raising or
depressing the head in the monitoring wells and rapidly recording the head at a number of
time intervals. A solid PVC slug was employed to raise or lower the head in the monitoring
wells. For each test well,the initial water level was measured prior to introducing the slug.
The slug was then lowered into the test well (slug-in test). Head measurements were
recorded using a pressure transducer and datalogger. The data collected was transferred to
I a microcomputer for storage and analysis. After the well recovered subsequent to the slug-
in test,the slug was removed from the test well and the process repeated.
The data obtained during the discreet interval testing was evaluated using an empirical
equation in order to estimate fracture conductivities. The test results from the bedrock
boreholes revealed a wide range of conductivities for the various fracture zones, implying
that some of the fracture zones transmit significant quantities of water while others do
not. Estimated conductivities of the tested intervals ranged from 1.7 to 118.6 feet/day.
Slug test data collected from the selected monitoring wells were evaluated using
computer software, Super Slug 3.1 to determine hydraulic conductivities by the Bouwer
and Rice Method. A wide range of conductivities (4.8 to 725 feet/ day) were also
calculated for the tested fracture intervals.
A summary of the aquifer test results is provided in Table 5-1.
Groundwater Table Elevations
The water table measurements with their respective calculated elevations are summarized in
Table 5-5. Water level data from the landfill indicates that the potentiometric surface
essentially mimics the topography and generally flows toward the French Broad River.

TABLE 5-1
SUMMARY OF AQUIFER TEST RESULTS
OLD BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL
ASHEVILLE,NORTH CAROLINA
BOREHOLEIMONITORING WELL INTERVAL AQUIFER TEST RESULTS
ID TESTED TEST TRANSMISSIVITY CONDUCTIVITY
TYPE (gal/day/ft) (fttday)
25-35 Constant 3571 47.7
BH-13 Rate
122132 Constant 267 3.6
Rate
62 72 Constant 436 5.8
BH-15 Rate
138148 Constant 125 17
Rate
73-83 Constant 518 6.9
BH-16 Rate
84-94 Constant 5000 66.8
Rate
28 38 Constant 1760 23.5
BH 18 Rate
68 78 Constant 6933 92.7
Rate
15-25 Constant
923 12.3
Rate
BH-19 65-75 Constant 533 7.1
Rate
100-110 Constant 250 3.3
Rate
1121 Constant 1183 15.8
Rate
58-68 Constant 408 5.5
BH 21 Rate
70-80 Constant 344 4.6
Rate
84-94 Constant 8874 118.6
Rate
MW-12-8 5-8 Slug 626.7 27.9
MW-13-10 5-10 Slug 177.7 4.8
MW-15 62-72 Slug 389.7 5.2
MW-16 84-94 Slug 54230 725
MW-22-143 133-143 Slug 1732 23.2
MW-23-119 109-119 Slug 4196 56.1

TABLE 5-5
WATER TABLE ELEVATIONS CALCULATIONS
OLD BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL
ASHEVILLE,NORTH CAROLINA
SPrin2 2003 Fall2003 Sp rin 2004 Fall2004
Top of Casing Depth Depth Depth Depth
Site ID Groundwater to Groundwater to Groundwater to Groundwater
Water Elevation Elevation ater Water ater Water ater Elevation
MW-A 2063.37 0 2063.37 0 2063.37 0 2063.37 0 2063.37
MW-B 1960.86 0 1960.86 5.24 1955.62 5.38 1955.48 4.95 1955.91
MW-2 2205.33 110.6 2094.73 108.12 2097.21 107.64 2097.69 108 2097.33
MW-3 1991.15 69.24 1921.91 69.21 1921.94 67.92 1923.23 66.25fld
MW-4 2014.27 69.4 1944.87 69.42 1944.85 69.23 1945.04 69.4
MW-4A 2083.1 6e.24 2014.86 67.55 2015.55 68 2015.1 67.2
MW-5 2019.73 49.55 1970.18 48.65 1971.08 48.98 1970.75 46.15
MW-6 2002.8 0 2002.80 0.7 2002.10 0 2002.8 0
MW-6-192 2009.02 23.97 1985.05 24.8 1984.22 23.47 1985.55 25.5
MW-7 2079.02 dry dry MW-8 2108.86 25.5 2083.36 25.8 2083.06 27.69 2081.17 25.5
MW-9 2061.59 17.1 2044.49 14.77 2046.82 13.21 2048.38 12.4 2049.19
MW-10 2049.67 7.8 2041.87 8.39 2041.28 6.26 2043.41 6.4 2043.27
MW-12-8 2028.03 5.95 2022.08 6.76 2021.27 6.43 2021.6 6.52 2021.51
MW-12-26 2029.98 7.34 2022.64 8.11 2021.87 7.08 2022.9 7.03 2022.95
MW-13-10 2012.26 2.04 2010.22 3.12 2009.14 2.3 2009.96 2.04 2010.22
MW-13-35 2017.68 5.46 2012.22 6.24 2011.44 5.66 2012.02 5.52 2012.16
MW-13-132 2012.89 1 26.13 1986.76 1 23.6 1989.29 23.5 1989.39 1 22.44 1990.45
MW-14 2053.46 8.9 2044.56 9.25 2044.21 1 8.63 2044.83 5.65 2047.81
MW-15 2028.08 7.83 2020.25 6.72 2021.36 6.49 2021.59 6.53 2021.55
MW-16 2048.13 9.47 2038.66 8.66 2039.47 7.52 2040.61 7.24 2040.89
MW-17-60 1922.97 25.36 1897.61 25.95 1897.02 25.55 1897.42 23.56 1899.41
MW-17-137 1921.73 23.81 1897.92 24.37 1897.36 24.27 1897.46 22.83 1898.9
MW-17-310 1918 0 1918.00 0 1918.00 0.02 1917.98 0 1918
MW-I8-3 1895.62 5.1 1890.52 dry dry dry
MW-18-78 1894.62 1 6.91 1887.72 7.51 1887.12 7.511 1887.11 5.561 1889.06
MW-194 1902.27 dry dry dry dLy
MW-19-75 1900.72 9.4 1891.32 10.1 1890.62 10.18 1890.54 7.73 1892.99
MW-19-110 1901.43 10.12 1891.31 16.84 1890.59 10.86 1890.57 8.411 1893.02
MW-20-3 1898.9 dry d dry dry
MW-20-32 1899.57 6.35 1893.22 7.08 1892.49 7.14 1892.43 4.45 1 1895.12
MW-214 1900.33 6.35 1893.98 dry dry 4.37 1895.96
MW-21-21 1900.49 5.85 1894.64 6.91 1893.58 6.74 1893.75 4.2 1896.29
MW-21-94 1901.06 7.75 1893.31 8.47 1892.59 8.5 1892.56 5.75 1895.31
MW-22-78 2068.13 25.55 2042.58 25.88 2042.25 25.18 2042.95 25.49 2042.64
MW-22-143 2068.34 43.6 2024.74 42.75 2025.59 42.36 2025.98 41.79 2026.55
MW-23-119 2076.61 44.22 2032.39 61 2015.61 42.32 2034.29 42.47 2034.14
MW-23-186 2076.43 51.75 2024.68 50.74 2025.69 50.32 2026.11 50.63 2025.8
MW-24-45 1932.07 40.94 1891.13 38.49 1893.58 1 40.88 1891.19 1 dry
MW-24-160 1933.24 73 1860.24 72.82 1860.42 75.8 1857.44 65.19 1868.05
DPG2 2112.15 78.25 2033.90 75.15 2037.00 17.39 2094.76 77.25 2034.9
DPGI 2040.73 1 64.281 1976.45 dry I dry dry

ATTACHMENT B
INJECTION FLUID COMPOSITION
HRC is a polylactate ester that is manufactured as a viscous gel and has a consistency
similar to that of cold honey.The specific chemical and physical characteristics are
provided on the attached Material Safety Data Sheet.

Hydrogen Release Compound (HRO
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET(MSDS)
Last Revised: February 10,2004
Section 1 - Material Identification
Supplier:
i
41
REGENESIS
1011 Calle Sombra
San Clemente, CA 92673
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]"
E-mail: info(a),reaenesis.com
Chemical Name: Propanoic acid,2-12-12-(2-hydroxy-l-oxopropoxy)-1-
oxopropoxyl-l-oxopropoxy)-1,2,3-propanetriyl ester
Chemical Family: Organic Chemical
Hydrogen Release Compound®(HRC )
Trade Name: Glycerol tripolylactate and Glycerol
Product Use: Used to remediate contaminated soil and groundwater
(environmental applications)
Section 2—Chemical Identification
CAS# Chemical
201167-72-8 Glycerol Tripolylactate
56-81-5 Glycerol
50-21-5 Lactic Acid
Section 3- Physical Data
Melting Point: Not Available(NA)
Boiling Point: Not Determined(ND)
Flash Point: ND
Density: 1.3 g/cc

Regenesis—HRC MSDS
Section 3—Physical Data (cont)
Solubility: Acetone and DMSO
Appearance: Viscous amber gel/liquid
Odor: Not detectable
Vapor Pressure: None
Section 4-Fire and Explosion Hazard Data
Extinguishing Media: Carbon Dioxide,Dry Chemical Powder or Appropriate Foam.
Water may be used to keep exposed containers cool.
For large quantities involved in a fire,one should wear full protective clothing and a NIOSH
approved self contained breathing apparatus with full face piece operated in the pressure
demand or positive pressure mode as for a situation where lack of oxygen and excess heat
are present.
Section 5-Toxicological Information
May be harmful by inhalation, ingestion, or skin absorption.
May cause irritation. To the best of our knowledge, the
Acute Effects: chemical, physical, and toxicological properties of the glycerol
tripolylactate have not been investigated. Listed below are the
toxicological information for glycerol and lactic acid.
MA8050000
RTECS#: Glycerol
SHIN-RBT 500 MG/24H MLD BIOFX"94/1970
85JCAE-,207,1986 85JCAE-,207,1986
Irritation data: EYE-RBT 126 MG MLD 85JCAE-,656,86
EYE-RBT 500 MG/2411 MLD AJOPAA 29,1363,46
SKN-RBT 5MG/24H SEV
EYE-RBT 750 UG SEV
J:\Operations\MSDS\HRC MSDS Page 2

{
I
" Regenesis—HRC MSDS
I
Section 5—"Toxicological Information (cont)
ORL-MUS LD50:4090 MG/KG NEMN 6,215,1982
FRZI , (6),56,1977 ' FEPRA7 4,142,1945
SCU-RBT LD50:100 MG/KG RCOCB8 56,125,1987
ORL-RAT LD50:12600 MG/KG ARZNAD 26,1581,1976
IHL- ARZNAD 26,1579,1978
RATLC50:>570MG/M3/1HBIO NIIRDN 6,215,1982
FX*94/1970 IPR-RAT LD50: JAPMA8,39,583,1950
4420 MG/KG DMDJAP 31,276,1959
IVN-RAT LD50: 5566 MG/KG BIOFX*94/1970
IPR-MUS LD50: 8700 MG/KG NIIRDN 6;215,1982
Toxicity data: SCU-MUS LD50: 91 MG/KG FMCHA2-,C252,91
IVN-MUS LD50: 4250 MG/KG FMCHA2-,C252,91
ORL-RBT LD50: 27 GM/KG FAONAU 40,144,67
SKN-RBT LD50:>IOGM/KG JIHTAB 23,259,41
IVN-RBT LD50: 53 GM/KG FMCHA2-,C252,91
ORL-GPG LD50: 7750 MG/KG JIHTAB 23,259,1941
ORL-RAT LD50:3543 MG/KG
SKN-RBT LD50:>2 GM/KG
ORL-MUS LD50: 4875 MG/KG
ORL-GPG LD50: 1810 MG/KG
ORL-QAL LD50: >2250 MG/KG
Behavioral (headache), gastrointestinal (nausea or vomiting),
Target Organ data: Paternal effects (spermatogenesis, testes,.epididymis, sperm
duct), effects of fertility (male fertility index, post-implantation
mortality).
RTECS#: OD2800000
Lactic acid
Only selected registry of toxic effects'of chemical substances-(RTECS) data is presented
here. See actual entry in RTECS for complete information onlactic acid and glycerol.
J:\Operations\MSDS\HRC MSDS Page 3

Regenesis—HRC MSDS
i
Section 6-Health Hazard Data
Handling: Avoid continued contact with skin. Avoid contact with eyes.
In any case of any exposure which elicits a response, a physician should 1E consulted
immediately. ,
First Aid Procedures
Remove to fresh air. If not breathing give artificial respiration.
`Inhalation: In case.of labored breathing give oxygen. Call a physician.
No effects expected. Do not give anything to an unconscious
Ingestion: person. Call a physician immediately.
Flush with plenty of water. Contaminated clothing may be
Skin Contact: washed or dry cleaned normally.
Wash eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes lifting
Eye contact: both upper and lower lids. Call a physician.
Section 7-Reactivity Data
Conditions to Avoid: Strong oxidizing agents,bases and acids
Hazardous None known
Polymerization:
Further Information: Hydrolyses in water to form Lactic Acid and Glycerol.
Section 8-Spill,Leak or Accident Procedures
After Spillage or Neutralization is not required. This material may be burned in a
Leakage: chemical incinerator equipped with an afterburner and scrubber.
Laws and regulations for disposal vary widely by locality.
Disposal: Observe all applicable regulations and laws. This material, may
be disposed of in solid waste.Material is readily degradable and
hydrolyses in several hours.
No requirement for a reportable quantity(CERCLA)of a spill is known.
J:\OperationsWSDS\HRC MSDS Page 4

Regenesis—HRC MSDS
Section 9-Special Protection or.Handling
Should be stored in plastic lined,steel,plastic,glass; aluminum,stainless steel,`or reinforced
fiberglass containers.
Protective Gloves: Vinyl or Rubber
'Eyes: Splash Goggles or Full Face Shield
Area should have approved means of washing eyes.
Ventilation: General exhaust.
Storage: Store in cool, dry, ventilated area. Protect from incompatible
materials.
Section 10- Other Information
This material will degrade in the environment by hydrolysis to lactic acid and glycerol.
Materials containing reactive chemicals should be used only by personnel with appropriate
chemical training.
The information contained in this document is the best available to the supplier as of the
time of writing. Some possible hazards have been determined by analogy to similar classes
of material. No separate tests have been performed on the toxicity of this material. The
items in this document are subject to change and clarification as more information becomes
available. '
v
JAOperations\MSDS\HRC MSDS Page 5

ATTACHMENT C
INJECTION RATIONALE
Groundwater concentrations of chlorinated organic compounds collected during
contamination assessment and monitoring activities at the Old Buncombe County
Landfill appear to be naturally attenuating. The County, consultants, and NCDENR Solid
Waste Section decided to initiate a program for one impacted transect on the site as a
short-term study to evaluate the effectiveness of the application of Hydrogen Release
Compound (HRC) in a fractured rock environment to accelerate and enhance the
observed natural attenuation of the chlorinated organics. Through discussion among the
parties it was determined that a two year program would allow sufficient time to observe
and evaluate the impacts.
The use of Hydrogen Release Compound (HRC) is being considered in order to
accelerate the breakdown of chlorinated compounds by naturally occurring
microorganisms that obtain energy by transferring electrons from donors to acceptor
compounds.
During a process called reductive dechlorination, electrons are transferred from donor
compounds (such as carbon substrates, petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile fatty acids,
and/or natural organic compounds) to chlorinated compounds (such as tetrachloroethene,
trichloroethene, dichloroethene, trichloroethane, dichloroethane, and polychlorinated
benzenes). In this process, electrons are transferred to chlorinated compounds, and
chlorine atoms are replaced with hydrogen atoms. For instance, chlorinated ethenes are
biodegraded by sequential replacement of chlorine atoms from tetrachloroethene (four
chlorine atoms) to trichloroethene (three chlorine atoms) to dichloroethene (two chlorine
atoms) to vinyl chloride (one chlorine atom) to ethene(no chlorine atoms).
HRC is a polylactate ester that is manufactured as a viscous gel and has a consistency
similar to that of cold honey. When the HRC is mixed with water, lactate is slowly
released providing additional electron donor compounds (food sources), thus increasing
the rate of the reductive dechlorination process. Under the influence of HRC, this
process may continue at an accelerated rate for up to 18 months.

ATTACHMENT D
INJECTION PROCEDURE AND EQUIPMENT
A pilot-scale test will be conducted in order to determine whether the introduction of
HRC will accelerate the observed natural attenuation of chlorinated hydrocarbons at the
Old Buncombe County Landfill.
The pilot-scale test will consist of injecting HRC into bedrock fractures located
upgradient of monitoring well cluster 17 and monitoring the effect on groundwater
concentrations in MW-17-60 and MW-17-187. The injection depths will be determined
based on the geophysical analysis performed on an exploratory borehole installed within
25 feet of well cluster 17. Temperature, fluid resistivity, and caliper logging will be
conducted and a downhole video camera will be .utilized to identify the major fracture
zones to a depth of approximately 200 feet. In the event that the pilot borehole only
intercepts as single fracture, a second borehole will be considered in the vicinity of
monitoring well cluster 17. The approximate location of the exploratory borehole is
shown in Figure 1, and historical chlorinated hydrocarbon concentrations are shown in
Table 1.
HRC will be placed in the two most conductive fracture zones using separate boreholes
and injection wells to prevent possible cross contamination between factures. The
injection boreholes will be drilled to the fracture depths, and the fracture zone intervals
will be screened using 4-inch diameter 0.40-inch slotted Schedule 80 PVC screen. A
pneumatic packer assembly will be emplaced above the top of the screen and the HRC
will be pressure injected using a Geoprobe GS 2000 injection pump..

� rF
I Vw
-"150 75 0 150 MW-
SCALE: 1" = 150'
LEGEND
MW-21-
GROUNDWATER3"
Mw MONITORING WELL fall '
HRC APPLICATION® ' M `�r ` i
y w BOREHOLE ��� m ;€#+s O'K
j APPROXIMATE AREAL EXTENT
r OF LANDFILL WASTE ' P` MwTh
`3'fI Ali 's#r t tFu ,
Fo
j4v 'tit s
r'^S�
"'04'�j+y�#� �i "1�'r'h
m lE 1tJ,.1 4 ''.f ,r,
17 (ABAN , 3: E� 1 �3€ igi h
Tivi�jftx > L,�'r Rra ty t ��y lG¢}[ �i�FhLt 3
44fft'.yv dir7r€}R-fLi i
�('i
t�c 'rx S �r'Iy° 1LiY`rt 5 -m{lf zb xltrsryt, +*r �!`-
L x ! F { '1""1! �%16
�i s'���,�t��
•u MW i 2 S R� i Ki y u� r�hu k L jsey{i��2 u,b�y4+�� § "�P
{yr� �iR Ef `1�t ?tY�I 7St'y� egrg'�ia.� 1I l
�.:�i
ro t rs ' r -iwp s'e'$t a(r ki St1t'jii�{ki�'.#lCf4 b �"3'rrt t'+ -
_
b`-
k4
3 Y iart 'i} 9 i r r
Mill�
i
3 h j.5
if
�K 1ns
r z�>�r wwvvwrw �r qbh�ll�ti�i u
ve
x' 1 #n I ♦ - #f e
IV . PILOT STUDY/NRC APPLICATION LOCATION FIGURE
Z
J
m
OLD BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL
Y 1

r
TABLE 1
HISTORICAL CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON
CONCENTRATIONS IN PILOT STUDY AREA
Sep-99 Nov-99 Apr-00 Nov-00 May-01 Oct-01 May-02 Oct-03 Apr-03 Sep-03 Mar-04 Sep-04
chloroethane 3 3 6 2 <10 <2 2 <10 <10 <1 <1 <1
1,1-dichloroethane 9 14 15 14 13 12 10 14 11 9 8 14
MW-17-60 cis-1,2-Dichloroeth lene 30 44 40 39 55 78 71 98 87 68 51 110
trichloroethene 3 4 3 <5 <5 <2 2 <5 <5 1 1 <1
vinyl chloride <1 <1 2 <1 <10 7 <1 <10 <5 <1 <1 2.5
chloroethane <1 2 <1 <10 <10 <2 2 <10 <10 <1 <1 <1
1,1-dichloroethane 4 6 7 9 8 8 7 11 9 7 8 <1
MW-17-137 1,1-dichloroethene <1 <1 <1 <5 <5 <2 <1 <5 <5 <1 1 <1
cis-1,2-dichloroethene 75 82 67 72 140 220 210 360 230 230 200 230
trichloroethene 8 9 6 7 11 7 5 10 9 6 8 7
vinyl chloride 7 6 4 <10 <10 9 6 <10 7 7 33 7
MW-17-310 cis-1,2-dichloroethene NS NS 4 <5 <5 <2 <1 <5 1 <5 <1 <1 <1

ATTACHMENT E
MONITORING PLAN
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of natural attenuation processes (via HRC-enhance
treatment), groundwater monitoring will be conducted at selected wells. Groundwater
samples will be collected from monitoring wells MW-17-60 and,MW-17-137 for a two
year period after the initial injection of HRC. The parameters, methods, and frequency
that will be used to monitor the progress of the HRC pilot project are provided in Table 2.
At the end of the two year evaluation period, the results will be complied and evaluated
and submitted to NCDENR. Once the MNA evaluation and pilot test have been
completed, an Assessment of Corrective Measures will be submitted detailing the
findings and the selected remedial alternative£or the landfill.

L t �
TABLE 2
GROUNDWATER MONITORING PARAMETERS
Analyte Method Frequency
Chlorinated Volatile
Organic Compounds EPA 8260 Quarterly
CVOCs
Total Organic Carbon EPA 415.1 or EPA 9060 Semi-annual)
Metabolic Acids (lactic,
pyruvic, acetic, propionic, AM21 G Semi-annually
and butyric)
Nitrate EPA 353.1 or EPA 9056 Semi-annual)
Sulfate EPA 353.1 or EPA 9056 Semi-annual)
Sulfide Chlorimetric Hach Method Semi-annually
or EPA 376.2
Carbon Dioxide AM20GAX Semi-annual)
Methane, Ethane, Ethene AM20GAX Semi-annual)
Field Parameters (pH, DO, Meter reading taken in flow. Quarterly
ORP, Temperature) through cell
Colorimetric Hach Method
Total/Dissolved Iron or EPA,600 series with Semi-annually
filtered and unfiltered
samles
Hydrogen AM20GAX Semi-annual)

L G �
ATTACHMENT F
WELL DATA
Groundwater is used as a drinking water source for residences located in the general vicinity
of the landfill. However, residences in the immediate vicinity of the landfill (ie. along
highway 251) were connected to city water as a precautionary measure. A survey was.
conducted to locate all private and municipal wells within a '/a milt radius of the site. The
locations of identified wells are shown on Figure 4-10. In addition to the private wells, a
network of monitoring wells exists on the landfill property. Well construction details for
these monitoring wells are provided in Table 5-3.

�11111111111
VI)M-
f e 1
I _ 1

aw, T uruao m^aopm aio
w a 1W N 0WO HLLION
STEM 318V1od
�xom :
¢-I1F4MU O 3fsIl4� MWWAWVG.3SW3 30MGLs
�°iao,m°mc°°•�s�aa° °Q � - IbH�N011VIQ1Ql�3RV�VAVN6O3SlI��P1OQ1YJQ1
HLWOW
\ - 1 � ^• � i t, fib. ..
tl y
,, . Y r n r I � 1• ./��, 2p
\
W MILVAlUdOr
_ •.� Y }•\.1. 1
- •
I
y .
r• �
• a1 .•� -
t. �.
1•
F
i M OIA qis::.. �.
\ ,to;
r�
. 10
e�
m

C
h
' V
TABLE 5-3
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY
OLD BUNCOMBE COUNTY LANDFILL
ASHEVILLE,NORTH CAROLINA
Site1D Top of CasingN20O60..,73n
d Bedrock Bedrock Total Well Bottom Sereen Depth to Top of Depth to Bottom of Top of Sereen Bottom of Screen
Elevation on De FlI n Death F.levntinn Len h Screen en F.lev.Linn F.levntlun
MW-A 2063.379 6 2055.9 33 2028.9 10 - 23.0 33.0 20389' 2028.90
MW-B 1960686 6 1954.3 15A 1944.9 10 5.4 15.4 1954.9 1944.90
MW-2 2205.334 70 2133.4 175 2028A 30 145 175.0 2058.4 2028.40
MW-3 1991.159 - 22 1867.9 90 1799.9 30 60 90.0 1829.9 1799.90
MWJ 2014.276 20 1993.6 : 75 1938.6 20 55 75.0 1958.6 1938.60
MW-0A 2083.1 5 67 2015.5 77 2005.5 10 67 77.0 2015.5 2005.50
MW-5 2019.73 35 1984 80 1939 10 70 $0.0 1949 1939.00
MW-6 2002.08 17 1983.3 40 1960.3 10 30. 40.0 1970.3 1960.30
MW-6-192 2009.02 3 I7 1989.73 192 1814.73 10 I82 192.0 1824.73 1814.73 ,
MW-7 2079.02 20772 NA NA 29 2048.2 IS 14. 29.0 20632 2049.20
MW-8 2108.86 2107.7 NA NA 38 2069.7 15 23 39.0 2084.7 2069.70
MW-9 2061.59 2060 NA NA 1 29 2031 IS 14 29.0 2046 2031.00
MW-10 2049.67 2047.4 NA NA 1 19 2028.4 10 9 19.0 2038A 2028.40
MW-12-8 2028.03 2024.94 8 2016.94 8 2016.94 4 4 8.0 2020.94 2016.94
MW-12-26 2029.98 202636 8 2018.36 26 2000.36 10 16 26.0 2010.36 2000.36
MW-13-10 2012.26 2009.85 10 1999.85 10 1999.85 6 4 10.0 2005.85 1999.85
MW-13-35 2017.68 2014.13 10 2004.13 35 1979.13 10 25 35.0 1989.13- 1979.13
MW-13-132 2012.89 200958 10 1999.58 132 1877.58 10 122 132.0 1887.58 187768.
MW-14 2053.46 2049.61 30 2019.61 55 1994.61 IS 40 - 55.0 2009.61 1994.61
MW-15 2028.08 2024.08 51 1973.08 72 1952.08 10 62 - 72.0 1962.08 1952.08
MW-16 2048.13 2045.13 55 1990.13 94 1951.13 10 84 94.0 1961.13 1951.13
MW-17-60 1922.97 1920.35 0 1920.35 60 1860.35 10 50 60.0 1870.35 1860.35
MW-17-137 1921.73 1919.24 0. 1919.24 137 1782.24 10 127 137.0 1792.24 1782.24 "
MW-17-310 1918 0 1918 1 310 1608 10 300 310.0 1618 1608.00
MW-18-3 1895.62 1892.62 3 E1889.62 3 1889.62 2 I 3.0 1891.62 1889.62
MW-18.78 - 1894.62 1891.62 3 78 1813.62 10 68 79.0 1823.62 1813.62
MW-194 1902.27 1898.97 4 7 4 1894.97 2 2 4.0 1896.97 1894.97
MW-19-75 1900.72 1898.02 4 2 75 1823.02 10 65 75.0 1833.02 I823.02
M1V-19-110 1901.43 1898.53 4 3 110 1788.53 10 100 110.0 1798.53 1798.53
MW-20-3 1898.9 1895.9 3. 3 1892.9 1 2 3.0 1893.9 1892.90
MW-20-32 1899.57 _ 1896.67 3 7 32 1864.67 10 22 32.0 1874.67 1864.67
MW-21-4 1900.33 1896.73 4 3 4 1892.73 2 2 4.0 1994.73 1892.73MW-21-21 1900.49 1897.49 4 9 21 1876.49 10 11 21.01886.49 1876.49MW-21-94 1901.06 1897.76 4 6 94 1803.76 10 84 94.0 1813.76 1803.76
MW-22-78 2069.13 2065.92 51 2014.92 1 79 1996.92 10 69 79.0 1996.92 1986.92
MW-22-143 2068.34 2066.17 51 2015.17 .. 148 1918.17 10 138 148.0 1928.17 1918.17
MW-23-119 2076.61 2074.37 60 2014.37 120 1954.37 10 110 120.0 196437 1954.37
MW-23-186 2076.43 2074.29 60 2014.29 186 1888.29 10 176 186.0 1898.29 1888.29
MW-25 1932.07 1929.82 6 1923.82 45 1884.82 10 35 45.0 1894.82 1884.92
MW-24-4i160 1933.24 I930.93 6 1924.93 I60 1 1770.93 10 I50 160.0 1780.93 .1770.93
DPL-1 1 1040.73 203813 15 2023.23 65 1 197313 1 10 55 1 65.0 1983.23 1973.23
DPL-2 2112.15 2109.65 IS 2094.65 97 2012.65 10 87 197.0 2022.65 2012.65

ATTACHMENT G
MAPS
1) USGS Topographic Map
2) 2-1 Site Map
3) 5-12 Potentiometric Surface Map
4) 5-5 OW Analytical Results

lif
Alexander Ch' y
? V
VN
� ��V� � �.' �'tl a ns I � ��/ � �• /1�����"mil.' (�-�
\�l� \�r V • KWm\
S
III �
nK
yp S,
r� ° w- �- `• � � it � a
vj
s ' ` �• , r
�"�� ����•�� L � yy try' ' o ' � �
'\ �/r-�vv .� BM J 136
E I C E S1932
` iN
— -- --- 1 i
Res
( 17ountam soy z.
_ «nudfill
n ,
1yWkaFHunF4mte Scr ��'-^�����\�1)iOLD
���.�+ • / 4��0i �!L • ` �,
` l
NVPM
��' (� � � it •.;-1 � e •� �A 7P�Prlson ;� �-� �� �,. % _
354 930000 FEET 1355 l356 35' A-
357

_ w����e�as moo•
w�•
nr•s�a
/ /7C2
v ray t -
I-13-
9 ,
L
l 1 1
1
I
t
a
a ;>
1 a
H
-W-Mw XX
-MR
A
a
0
> a
� o
-Mw
�I -MPI
a
m

116KWi AllNf100 33900"MO
0� VI�1
�°•• —� 3LSVM CNV-I — 3 ,9
a�cu 30 LJ 1M W=7"
mmmmm
'009 ,00£ 0 .om
HI.WON
- ItlVOMOB um3cmw m
318VM TkiO d0
U3LX3IY=NV 3LV1'DCOUJ"
THM01l101I10W
k9LVMO KM
CN3031 3
era
l-
1
1'
I I
�. J
A� o vaw
1
♦ O vaw
1 1
♦♦ I_ `
k
I
1 1
. s
I 1
I
1 1 I
� 1 1

a � vv3w
a .
� a
ON
H
-Mn
-AAn
\ 0
a
0
A
O
C
m
s
}

v waon
- 30v=am OmE rivalod uwio� aorr�e f!
.009 OOf 0 ,OOf NOILVA3H-=KN=A 6
OULMOUNMOd
TM ONMI"
!$LtlMQ)f10k�
H16iON
_ aNR03'I
i
09M
4
� _ a
1
-� stoz
Graz
n a va
L
1
• St-
I 1
i 1
1 1
I
1 t '
1 1
1 1 1
1 1
� 1 1

rI�1���eyaa�•�a
wl�
tIPPwIw�
azNP>®s
a
nsm Ott 4
71Y7 OZ ow
ZZ + D m +my3>n rei+aNt
LT >PJPP9 aoV+oD it acaVla>aiwo.tat
�I .0 auoM,do:alVgp �'t
011 .L w ;q as4lao:cpuip-L".
I avu43aO,o1V%0-L'l
9"9 ow4toojwpW-t't
Sa swzwpoPPPM_a'l
Z >ut2 z
awzwpo nP4,10 y
Y
OS
ZZ > UO9*oxPIO-Z'l 99 �wV�O OSL au!Z
SC xaOGoL Z"f aD91na!V u q oo l a aw4laoxol4>txl
.:n,wPop 9 5 n wpo^ 6
OSl w�B a:;ax rag S"S P�p!N
061 w^W8 Y9 Poal
t t awao iw-
1l awlpaaolyaopolO-z't->
Ott aw4laoaoNgO-l'l
>t!Z
V*6PJ 8l roGOD
aPIPD 11 uopPD 9'6 uwu»ayD
6o : O" L"C aPUWW woPD
wnlxo8
M III - N OOl wnlo8 lL lywA+PB
/�VQ 0-0-M11
U vrav
e
l
000a 202
OOOLI P)P.N
aL oulzLE
OOLL -ddJ
r. .y ppw6 OD98 1P4aD
LL IPP!N 3L } �
ri; aia4)a:�nlWi.U--Z'r..a Ct aw4laoaol4a!0-Z'l-a 19 writlPsg
• It awlNeonl4at0-l't LZ :adOoO LZ w^nB
OL w^!a9 9l 1104100IF I rC4, vcc:Y
- -MNI 9L wnwv43 ♦w
01Y UNVAS
� IIMt
l a OI >4IZ
0 9 Pool a
L wnuog L9 >42
3 9 a:Y4ia0AllIJ!
". Z ua43aozolW�O-L t-#
�l w7ao8
0 9'9 aw,g4o
,a Z'l wa4laoaoPPu1
uwa
61 *41*W IPpwj'i t
l t auo4taoa>I4>!D-Z't OSL avua�o 4
C, fL Umgl aupp!a-t'1 pt.9 uaayow1
V 8 awzwpu+oN>!0-Yl Z'1 ..11aa+PF(atx1
('taw4laun+uM/o+MW.+1 9l 1PVa7 061 PqN
1 .z awVlaoaoM!0-L'l 11 a UwgoP1140
awVlaaaol41 9'l awzuapaPPq
C 8Z aP9t^MD wVrJ 6 t aualpmaopgO-Z'l-a
G"f "PPP uopaJ aw4lawowa-vt
a Ott uUmme 09L awn1:8 t'8 awxwVwoNmQ-f'1
-MN S"t QwZuogojoMma t't
OZf Addc7
ZL >lR Ol9 1P9oD
9Y07
01 go
'S PMaIN ty awz PO
y ac wnw8 8-a aw47+oaoPP!O-I'l L"1 aP9NPN Uo4=3
C'Z +moo 6t uaa_lµxa8
z't aw43 14]
a9 aur( Zt aP9PPD uo4P3
Cl awyWoo4aM-Z'l-> Z't wMuraoD 1 -1 -MP n
CS awVlaaaoPPIO-t`t Ott wlgm8
t Z awzwwbPM �'I , _I
9'C auol8a0xom
S6 ua!o8
- t-MM
96
ZY awy{auPn8o 4au1 ♦'6 wrvyow/t
Ul a::aV;ao.c-.,:ai:; L9 Pasl
awVtaoulW!+1-l't'l Ol o�'J
Qy uaaDowA !y Cf wnwwlp
It o Njpj1 Iallo!N 9t "IoaIP w4oD
'Et PaoIN It a %40"M M-Z'1-a OLl wrl!ea
>�3 Zl awVlooxg4a!0-Z'l-> Z aw44waoP4*M-I'l s-
lauon^WmNPPl 9L aw4laaIONO!0-1'l Dot awVWoxoNa10-['1
Waoaoppp-Z%-a BZ Z Z"S awzu gaxnpa-t'1
�a 4>M-l'l II aZ aw41—ND
� � a L 1P903 Z"f aa9~ uoVPD
aw 9'h kUrdUJOAa f 1, zua0
wurw.1 uoyoD SL awtNaox*a OLZ awno8
-MN 11-1
98 uaaag
r t

Barium 0
CNaeborzene 12
2 Cbkroelbane 17 Barium W- eeo
1.5 1�40-dDirJtl«aEsnxwie 5.t ITIpoDmtzene 7.1
2 N- 7. 1.1-DkAlorae aro 26
3-9Nik"w 5.5
1.1
1.75-192 16 Bark. 24
Carbm OiwlBae 4.1
L\ 1
J 1
1 4
1
1
w-
Mtknany 5.6
BarkWn I60
. l � ( 1 Bnyllium 1.9
CMamWn 3.7
YW
Mtimany 6
'1 ♦ Bari m 59
♦ Ber Ium 1.3
♦ Leoa 5.3
I Bar um 58
Carbon aiwlfide 5.7
7.2
AMA Copper .
♦
Z.cino 1e
Yw-
Bari+m 710
Chromium 11
ABFAC Coppar 7.3
f 1 E 10
Zinc 12
1 A flan dadfMe 13
YW
Barium 8 2
B _ _ clrami
cgnw m .
Bwum 70 Lead t11
23
Lena wm 114 Nickel 7.5
Zinc 23 Vama6km 16
Bo Hen .2
WON l9-1 W- Chrornnrm 54
Acetom, 18 Lead 7.g
Barium 1000 Zk1c 110
Chromium 12
7.9
kt - Bark" 46
Bares 20 Cad,, `C
romium 2 Carbon arWAfe 3
Cobalt 6.9
Z� 4.2
ar 120
Barium too
Fun 1.3
Acet«m AAC an 6bulMe 5 Barium 610
Benzne
CMwobenzene 13
Cabot 32
CCeabpder 69
1.2-�ilWarabanzam 26
i,t-0' I«obenzene 11c
a-1,2-OkNormanr SI L
Et-h yDenmzmne< 3A
24
Yethyt etnN ietmc 96o GROUNDWATER
e�y-T-pnto a 2 AAOIRORINO WH.1
Tokw w
Ymy ChlariCe 18 a PROPERTY BOUDARY
400 0 400' 800'
D CONSTMENTS ARE SHOWN N PARTS PER BLLION(ppb).
SHOWN N FED NOICATE EXCE®ANCE OF D83 WATER OUALRY i fAfDAROfl
Cifi0120WA78i
ANALYTICAL FEBLLTS r_ Iwo Fl01/E
BUNC C#ME COUNTY, T°AL1..2001 ___— eWau War rp
NORTH CAROLNA rer a r
MD BUNCO�OOIMTY LA DPLL
CtA1lt>001