Caswell County officials outline PFAS testing, await work plan for closed landfill

Caswell County solid-waste staff told the Board of Commissioners on Oct. 6 that state regulators have asked the county to expand testing for PFAS — the group of so-called "forever chemicals" — around the county's closed landfill, and that the county is waiting on a written proposal and work plan from its environmental consultant before any field work begins.

The county's solid-waste supervisor, AJ Fuqua, said the state asked counties in 2022 to perform receptor surveys and in 2023'024 to sample monitoring wells and surface water for PFAS. Caswell has 11 monitoring wells and three surface-water sampling locations, Fuqua said; recent results showed elevated PFAS compounds in the landfill network compared with most background locations. Fuqua said the consultant SME has proposed additional work that likely will include installing three to five new monitoring wells at or near the landfill property and preparing a formal work plan the state must approve before drilling begins.

The county manager, Scott Whitaker, and Fuqua told the board the next steps are: receive SME's proposal to write the receptor survey and work plan; negotiate scope and cost; submit the plan to the state; and, upon state approval, carry out drilling and sampling. Fuqua and Whitaker said the consultant expects much of the field work to occur in the next budget year and that, if work must start sooner, county funding will need to be identified.

Fuqua summarized the technical situation: PFAS is a suite of many compounds; three PFAS analytes have shown relatively high levels across most monitoring wells on county property. Surface-water samples from three creek locations are reportedly "normal," he said. The consultant will pick well locations based on subsurface flow patterns, fracture zones and pressure gradients rather than uniform spacing. If testing shows contamination only within county property lines, the county may avoid corrective action beyond continued monitoring. If elevated readings appear beyond the property line, Fuqua said the work plan could require additional steps, including wells on neighboring property and a corrective-action program.

Board members asked about costs and timing. Fuqua estimated (not a firm bid) that drilling three wells with associated road access in prior work ran close to $60,000; he cautioned costs vary by access needs, road-building and contractor mobilization. Whitaker said the state has not determined whether monitoring obligations will be extended indefinitely beyond the standard 30-year post-closure period and that North Carolina is still developing policy because many closed landfills across the state are now in a second phase of review.

Fuqua said SME will also handle procurement for drilling; these wells require track-mounted drill rigs and are different from residential well drilling. The county will assist with road access and site logistics to reduce contractor mobilization costs. Fuqua offered to bring SME staff to a future work session if the board wants a technical briefing.

Board members did not take any formal action on Oct. 6; staff said they would return with SME's proposal and the draft work plan for board review and possible budget consideration.