22009_Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot EMP_20181011

Environmental Management Plan
Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot
3100 Nevada Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 22009-18-060
H&H Job No. CHK-006
October 11, 2018

CONTENTS
Completed EMP Template Form

Tables

Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 3 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Sediment Analytical Data

Figures

Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Sample Location Map
Figure 3 Areas of Concern – Groundwater Map

Appendices

Appendix A Current Redevelopment Plan
Appendix B Current Construction Schedule
Appendix C Cut-Fill Analysis (Heat Map)
Appendix D Current Grading Plan

1
EMP Version 2, June 2018
NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

This form is to be used to prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for projects in
the North Carolina Brownfields Program at the direction of a Brownfields project manager.

The EMP is a typical requirement of a Brownfields Agreement (BFA). Its purpose is to clarify
actions to be taken during the demolition and construction at Brownfields properties in an
effort to avoid delays in the event of the discovery of new contamination sources or other
environmental conditions. The EMP provides a means to document redevelopment plans and
environmental data for each applicable environmental medium to inform regulatory-compliant
decision-making at the site. As much detail as possible should be included in the EMP,
including contingency planning for unknowns. Consult your project manager if you have
questions.

Prospective Developers and/or their consultants must complete and submit this form and all
pertinent attachments, see checklist below, to their Brownfields project manager prior to any
earthmoving or other development-related activities that have the potential to disturb soil at
the Brownfields Property, including demolition. For the resultant EMP to be valid for use, it
must be completed, reviewed by the program, signed by all parties working on the project,
and approved by the Brownfields project manager. Failure to comply with the requirements of
the EMP could jeopardize project eligibility, or in the event of a completed agreement, be
cause for a reopener

So that the EMP provides value in protecting brownfields eligibility and public health, the
preparer shall ensure that the following steps have been completed prior to submitting the
EMP for review. Any EMP prepared without completing these steps is premature.

☒ Site sampling and assessment that meets Brownfields’ objectives is complete and has
been reviewed and approved by the Brownfields Project Manager.
☒ Specific redevelopment plans, even if conceptual, have been developed for the project,
submitted and reviewed by the Brownfields Project Manager.

2
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Please submit, along with the completed EMP form, the following attachments, as relevant
and applicable to the proposed redevelopment:

☒ A set of redevelopment plans, including architectural/engineering plans, if available; if
not conceptual plans may suffice if updated when detailed plans are drafted.

☒ A figure overlaying redevelopment plans on a map of the extent of contamination for
each media.

☒ Site grading plans that include a cut and fill analysis.

☐ A figure showing the proposed location and depth of impacted soil that would remain
on site after construction grading.

☐ Any necessary permits for redevelopment (i.e. demolition, etc.).

☒ A detailed construction schedule that includes timing and phases of construction.

☒ Tabulated data summaries for each impacted media (i.e. soil, groundwater, soil gas,
etc.) applicable to the proposed redevelopment.

☒ Figures with the sampling locations and contamination extents for each impacted media
applicable to the proposed redevelopment.

☐ A full final grade sampling and analysis plan, if the redevelopment plan is final.

☐ If known, information about each proposed potential borrow soil source, such as aerial
photos, historic site maps, historic Sanborn maps, a site history, necessary for
brownfields approval.

☐ Information and, analytical data if required, for quarries, or other borrow sources,
detailing the type of material proposed for importation to the Brownfields Property.

☐ A work plan for the sampling and analysis of soil to be brought onto the Brownfields
Property. Refer to Issue Resolution 15 in Brownfields Program Guidelines.

☐ A map of the Brownfields Property showing the location of soils proposed for export
and sampling data from those areas.

☒ If a Vapor Mitigation System is required by the Brownfields Program, the Vapor
Intrusion Mitigation System (VIMS) plan will be signed and sealed by a NC Professional
Engineer. The VIMS Plan may also be submitted under separate cover.

3
EMP Version 2, June 2018
GENERAL INFORMATION

Date: 10/11/2018 Revision Date (if applicable): Click or tap to enter a date.

Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot

Brownfields Project Number: 22009-18-060

Brownfields Property Address: 3100 Nevada Boulevard, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County

Brownfields Property Area (acres): 17.08
Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit?.......................☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit….……..☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.

COMMUNICATIONS

A copy of this EMP shall be distributed to all the parties below as well as any contractors or site workers
that may be exposed to site vapors, soil, groundwater, and/or surface water. Additionally, a copy of the
EMP shall be maintained at the Brownfields Property during redevelopment activities. NOTE, THE EMP
DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF A SITE-SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN.

Prospective Developer (PD): Arrowood Land Investors, LLC
Contact Person: Mr. Christopher J. Daly
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: [e-mail]

Contractor for PD: Click or tap here to enter text.
Contact Person: Click or tap here to enter text.
Phone Numbers: Office: Click or tap here to enter text. Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: Click or tap here to enter text.

Environmental Consultant: Hart & Hickman, PC
Contact Person: Mr. Justin Ballard
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Brownfields Program Project Manager: Mr. Bill Schmithorst
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: [e-mail]

Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,

4
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):
Click or tap here to enter text.

NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM

Written advance Notification Times to Brownfields Project Manager: Check each box to accept
minimum advance notice periods (in calendar days) for each type of onsite task:

On-site assessment or remedial activities:……………………………………….…… 10 days Prior ☒

Construction or grading start:……………………………………….………………………. 10 days Prior ☒

Discovery of stained soil, odors, USTs, buried drums or waste, landfill, or other signs of previously
unknown contamination: ……………………………….……………………………………. Within 48 hours ☒

Implementation of emergency actions (e.g. dewatering, flood or soil erosion control measures in
area of contamination, ventilation of work zones):…………….……….……… Within 48 hours ☒

Installation of mitigation systems:………………………….………………….……….. 10 days Prior ☒

Other notifications as required by local, state or federal agencies to implement redevelopment
activities: (as applicable): ……………………….…………………………………………..… Within 30 days ☐

REDEVELOPMENT PLANS

1) Type of Redevelopment (check all that apply):
☐Residential ☐Recreational ☐Institutional ☒Commercial ☒Office ☒Retail ☒Industrial
☒Other specify:
Warehousing, Parking

2) Check the following activities that will be conducted prior to commencing earth-moving activities
at the site:
☒ Review of historic maps (Sanborn Maps, facility maps)
☐ Conducting geophysical surveys to evaluate the location of suspect UST, fuel lines, utility
lines, etc.
☐ Interviews with employees/former employees/facility managers/neighbors

3) Summary of Redevelopment Plans (MANDATORY: attach detailed plans or conceptual plans, if detailed plans are not available. EMP review without such information would be premature):
Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement, grading plans and planned construction of new structures:
Redevelopment plans include construction of an approximate 176,000 square ft single story

5
EMP Version 2, June 2018
warehouse building for commercial, industrial, office, parking, and/or retail uses. A copy of the
current redevelopment plan is included in Appendix A.

4) Do plans include demolition of structure(s)?:
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
☐ If yes, please check here to confirm that demolition will be conducted in accordance with
applicable legal requirements, including without limitation those related to lead and asbestos
abatement that are administered by the Health Hazards Control Unit within the Division of Public
Health of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. If available, please
provide a copy of your demolition permit.

5) Are sediment and erosion control measures required by federal, state, or local regulations?
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
☒ If yes, please check here to confirm that demolition will be conducted in accordance with
applicable legal requirements. If soil disturbance is necessary to install sediment and erosion
control measures, they may not begin until this EMP is approved.

6) Which category of risk-based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement? Note: If children frequent the property, residential screening levels shall
be cited in the Brownfields Agreement for comparison purposes.
☐ Residential ☒ Non-Residential or Industrial/Commercial

7) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Construction start date: 12/4/2018

b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
Redevelopment activities are anticipated to take up to 160 days to complete. Site work is
anticipated to begin on 12/4/18 and take up to 45 days to complete. Shell construction is
anticipated to begin on 12/25/18 and take up to 145 days to complete. Note that the
construction milestones referenced above are subject to change. A copy of the current
construction schedule is included in Appendix B.

c) Additional phases planned? ☐ Yes ☐ No
If yes, specify the start date and/or activities if known:
Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:

6
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Click or tap here to enter text. d) Provide the planned date of occupancy for new buildings: Click or tap to enter a date.

CONTAMINATED MEDIA

1) Contaminated Media on the Brownfields Property
Part 1. Soil:……………………………………….……………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 2. Groundwater:.……………………….……..……. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 3. Surface Water:.……………...……..…………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 4. Sediment:.……………...……..…………………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 5. Soil Vapor:…..…………...……..…………………. ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Suspected
Part 6. Sub-Slab Soil Vapor:……...……..…………….. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 7. Indoor Air:...……..…………………………………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected

2) For the Area of Proposed Redevelopment on the Brownfields Property, attach tabulated data
summaries for each impacted media and figure(s) with sample locations.

PART 1. Soil – Please fill out the information below, using detailed site plans, if available, or estimate
using known areas of contaminated soil and a conceptual redevelopment plan. Provide a figure
overlaying new construction onto figure showing contaminated soil and groundwater locations.

1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list general groups of contaminants):
As documented in Hart & Hickman’s Brownfields Assessment Report dated June 1, 2018, a soil
assessment was conducted on the Brownfields property. A summary of the results is provided
below. A tabular summary of soil analytical data in comparison to the February 2018 North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs)
is included as Table 1. Soil sample locations are shown in Figure 2.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Assessment activities conducted on the Brownfields property have identified low levels of VOCs
at concentrations below DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs.

Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs)
Assessment activities conducted on the Brownfields property did not identify any SVOCs at
concentrations above laboratory method detection limits.

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
Assessment activities conducted on the Brownfields property did not identify any PCBs at
concentrations above laboratory method detection limits.

7
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Metals
Assessment activities conducted on the Brownfields property have identified low levels of metals
at concentrations below DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs. In addition, the metals
concentrations are within the expected range for naturally occurring levels and are therefore
considered background.
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
Click or tap here to enter text.
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
Click or tap here to enter text.

4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
Proposed grading activities are expected to include excavations of up to approximately 10 ft
below ground surface (bgs) in the central and eastern portions of the Brownfields property to
reach final proposed grade and construct the pad for the proposed structure. Construction of
building footers, foundations and utility installations may require additional excavations of up to
3 to 5 ft bgs. A Cut-Fill Analysis map (a.k.a. heat map) for the proposed redevelopment plan is
provided in Appendix C.

5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
Up to approximately 75,000 to 85,000 cubic yards of soil are planned to be excavated and re-
used on-Site as beneficial fill during grading activities. A copy of the current grading plan is
included in Appendix D.

6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
None anticipated at this time.

7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
None anticipated at this time.

Part 1.A. MANAGING ONSITE SOIL
If soil is anticipated to be excavated from the Brownfield Property, relocated on the Brownfields
Property, or otherwise disturbed during site grading or other redevelopment activities, please
provide a grading plan that clearly illustrates areas of cut and fill (approximate areas & volumes are
acceptable, if only preliminary data available).

1) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION:
a) Does the soil contain a LISTED WASTE as defined in the North Carolina Hazardous
Waste Section under 40 CFR Part 261.31-261.35?....................................... ☐Yes ☒No
☐ If yes, explain why below, including the level of knowledge regarding processes

8
EMP Version 2, June 2018
generating the waste (include pertinent analytical results as needed).
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ If yes, do the soils exceed the “Contained-Out” levels in Attachment 1 of the
North Carolina Contained-In Policy?................................................. ☐ Yes ☒ No

b) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE AND EXCEEDS
THE CONTAINED-OUT LEVELS IN ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
CONTAINED-IN POLICY THE SOIL MAY NOT BE RE-USED ON SITE AND MUST BE
DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND
REGULATIONS.
c) Does the soil contain a CHARACTERISTIC WASTE?.................................... ☐ Yes ☒ No
☐ If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).
☐ Ignitability Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Corrosivity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Reactivity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Toxicity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ TCLP results Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Rule of 20 results (20 times total analytical results for an individual
hazardous constituent on TCLP list cannot, by test method, exceed regulatory
TCLP standard)
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ If no, explain rationale:
Soil analytical data does not indicate detections capable of exceeding toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) criteria using the Rule of 20.

d) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A CHARACTERISTIC HAZARDOUS WASTE, THE
SOIL MAY NOT BE RE-USED ON SITE AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE
WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

2) Screening criteria by which soil disposition decisions will be made (e.g., left in place, capped in
place with low permeability barrier, removed to onsite location and capped, removed offsite):
☐ Preliminary Health-Based Residential SRGs
☒ Preliminary Health-Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs
☐ Division of Waste Management Risk Calculator (For Brownfields Properties Only)
☐ Site-specific risk-based cleanup level. Please provide details of methods used for
determination/explanation.
Click or tap here to enter text.

9
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Additional comments:
Click or tap here to enter text.
3) If known impacted soil is proposed to be reused within the Brownfields Property Boundary,
please check the measures that will be utilized to ensure safe placement and documentation of
same. Please attach a proposed location diagram/site map.
☐ Provide documentation of analytical report(s) to Brownfields Project Manager
☐ Provide documentation of final location, thickness and depth of relocated soil on site map
to Brownfields Project Manager once known
☐ Geotextile to mark depth of fill material.
Provide description of material:
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Manage soil under impervious cap ☐ or clean fill ☐
☐ Describe cap or fill:
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re-recorded if
actions are Post-Recordation).
☐ GPS the location and provide site map with final location.
☐ Other. Please provide a description of the measure:

4) Please describe the following action(s) to be taken during and following excavation and
management of site soils:
Management of fugitive dust from site
☒ Yes, describe the method will include:
Significant areas of contaminated soil are not expected to be encountered or disturbed
during future Site redevelopment activities based upon previous soil sampling data and field
screening soil samples during previous assessment activities. The grading contractor will
consider conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and moisture content of soil during
soil grading and stockpiling activities to minimize dust generation.

In the unlikely event that potentially contaminated soil is encountered during Site
redevelopment that requires excavation, particular attention will be paid by contractors to
implement dust control measures as needed based on Site and atmospheric conditions (i.e.
by controlled water application, hydro-seeding, and/or mulch, stone, or plastic cover).
Potentially impacted soil will be managed as described below.

☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Click or tap here to enter text.

10
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Field Screening of site soil
☒ Yes, describe the field screening method, frequency of field screening, person conducting
field screening:
During soil disturbance at the Site, the workers or contractors will observe soils for
evidence of potential significantly impacted soil that may not be suitable to leave in place
in exposed areas at the Site. Evidence of potential significant impacted soil includes a
distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously disposed materials of concerns
(i.e. chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be noted during Site work, the
contractor will contact the project environmental engineer to observe the suspect
condition. If the project environmental engineer confirms that the material may be
impacted, then the procedures below will be implemented. In addition, the environmental
engineer will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within two business days to
advise that person of the condition.

☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Soil Sample Collection
☐ Yes, describe the sampling method (e.g., in-situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ No, explain rationale:
Collection of additional soil samples is not anticipated based on results of previous Site
assessment activities. If significant soil impact is encountered during grading and/or
installation or removal of utilities, excavation will proceed only as far as needed to allow
grading and/or construction of the utility to continue and/or only as far as needed to
allow alternate corrective measures described below. Suspect significantly impacted soil
excavated during grading and/or utility line installation or removal may be stockpiled and
covered in a secure area to allow construction to progress. Suspect impacted soil will be
underlain by and covered with minimum 10-mil plastic sheeting. At least one
representative sample of the soil will be collected for analysis of total VOCs, SVOCs, and
RCRA metals plus hexavalent chromium. If the results of analysis of the sample indicate
that the soil could potentially exceed toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria, then
the soil will also be analyzed by the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) for
those compounds that could exceed the toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria.
Environmental sampling will be performed in general accordance with the DEQ IHSB
Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup (Guidelines) dated October 2015, and the most
recent versions of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IV Science and
Ecosystem Support Division (SESD) Field Branches Quality System and Technical
Procedures guidance. Impacted soil will be handled in accordance with applicable
municipal, county, DEQ, and EPA regulations and in the manner described below based
upon the laboratory analyses:

11
EMP Version 2, June 2018
i. If no organic compounds are detected in a sample (other than which are attributable
to sampling or laboratory artifacts) and metals are below Residential PSRGs or are
consistent with published and Site-specific background levels, then the soil will be
deemed suitable for use as on-Site fill or as off-Site fill. The proposed location(s) for off-
Site placement of soil (other than a permitted facility) along with the receiving facility’s
acknowledgement for acceptance of the soil will be provided to DEQ for approval prior to
taking the soil off-Site.
ii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which do not exceed the DEQ
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory
artifacts or which are consistent with Site-specific background levels for metals) and the
TCLP concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil may be used on-
Site as fill without restriction.
iii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which exceed the DEQ
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory
artifacts or which are consistent with background levels for metals) and the TCLP
concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil, with DEQ’s written
approval, may be used on-Site as fill below an impervious surface, or at least 2 ft of
compacted clean soil. If the impacted soil with concentrations above DEQ
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs is moved to an on-Site location, its location and depth will
be documented, covered with a geotextile fabric so that its location can be identified if
encountered in the future, and its location will be provided to DEQ in an updated survey
plat.
iv. Impacted soil may be transported to a permitted facility such as a landfill provided
that the soil is accepted at the disposal facility. If soil is transported to a permitted
facility, the permitted facility’s written approval to dispose of soil from the Site will be
included with the final EMP report. In the unlikely event that the sample data indicates
concentrations above TCLP hazardous waste criteria, then the soil must be transported
off-Site to a permitted disposal facility that can accept or treat hazardous waste.

If soil samples are collected for analysis, please check the applicable chemical analytes:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium
and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): EPA Method 6020 and EPA Method 7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.

12
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196

☒ Check to confirm that stockpiling of known or suspected impacted soils will be conducted
in accordance with Figure 1 of this EMP. Stockpile methodology should provide erosion
control, prohibiting contact between surface water/precipitation and contaminated soil,
and preventing contaminated runoff. Explain any variances or provide additional details as
needed:

☒ Final grade sampling of exposed native soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or
permanent hardscape). Select chemical analyses for final grade samples with check boxes
below (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): EPA Method 6020 and 7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196

Please provide a scope of work for final grade sampling, including a diagram of soil
sampling locations, number of samples to be collected, and brief sampling methodology.
Samples should be collected from 0-2 ft below ground surface, with the exception of VOCs
which should be taken from 1-2 ft below ground surface. Alternatively, a work plan for
final grade sampling may be submitted under separate cover.
Following completion of soil disturbance for any future Site development (i.e., after
grading and utility construction), an environmental professional will be contracted to
assess the Site for areas that are not covered with clean fill soil, building foundations,
sidewalks, or asphalt or concrete parking areas and driveways, or other similar impervious
areas. If such areas exist, a plan will be prepared for final grade sampling for DEQ
Brownfields review and approval. If no such areas exist, documentation will be provided to
the DEQ Brownfields project manager.

☐ If final grade sampling was NOT selected please explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.

13
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Click or tap here to enter text.

Part 1.B. IMPORTED FILL SOIL

NO SOIL MAY BE BROUGHT ONTO THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL
FROM THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. According to the Brownfields IR 15, “Documenting
imported soil (by sampling, analysis, and reporting in accordance with review and written
approval in advance by the Brownfields Program), will safeguard the liability protections provided
by the brownfields agreement and is in the best interest of the prospective developer/property
owner.”

Requirements for importing fill:

1) Will fill soil be imported to the site?................................................ ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

2) If yes, what is the estimated volume of fill soil to be imported?
The need for off-Site import of fill soil is not anticipated at this time. However, the PD plans to
import limited amounts of organic rich topsoil from a reputable landscape material vendor for use
in proposed landscaped areas.

3) If yes, what is the anticipated depth that fill soil will be placed at the property? (If a range
of depths, please list the range.)
Click or tap here to enter text.

4) Provide the source of fill, including: location, site history, nearby environmental concerns,
etc. Attach aerial photos, maps, historic Sanborn maps and a borrow source site history:
Click or tap here to enter text.

5) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide a plan to analyze fill
soil to demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards applicable to the site and can be
approved for use at the Brownfields property.
The PD does not plan to collect samples of landscaping materials prior to placement at the Site.
DEQ Brownfields will be notified of the volume of landscaping material needed and the proposed
source of the material prior to placement in proposed landscaping areas.

The need for off-Site import of fill soil is not anticipated at this time. However, should import of
structural fill be needed for future redevelopment of the Site, the PD will follow the procedures
outlined below.

If the PD plans to import fill material from Vulcan Materials Company quarry located near
Pineville, NC or from the Martin Marietta quarry located on Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte, NC,
no samples of the import material will be collected as adequate analytical data is available in the
DEQ Brownfields database to demonstrate material from these facilities is suitable for use as
structural fill at a Brownfields property.

14
EMP Version 2, June 2018

For import material from unknown borrow sources, prior to bringing fill soil to the Site, historical
information about the fill Site and a proposed sampling design will be provided to DEQ for review
and approval based upon the estimated quantity of import fill to be obtained from the fill site.
The soil sample(s) will be analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals plus hexavalent chromium.
Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Site if it does not contain compound
concentrations above DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs or typical metals concentrations which
are consistent with background levels identified at the Site.

6) Please check the applicable chemical analytes for fill soil samples. (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): EPA Method 6020 and EPA Method 7471
☒ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196

7) The scope of work for import fill sampling may be provided below or in a Work Plan
submitted separately for DEQ review and approval. Attach specific location maps for in-situ
borrow sites. If using a quarry, provide information on the type of material to be brought
onto the Brownfields Property.
The PD does not plan to collect samples of landscaping materials prior to placement at the Site.
DEQ Brownfields will be notified of the volume of landscaping material needed and the proposed
source of the material prior to placement in proposed landscaping areas.

The need for off-Site import of fill soil is not anticipated at this time. However, should import of
structural fill be needed for future redevelopment of the Site, the PD will follow the procedures
outlined below.
If the PD plans to import fill material from Vulcan Materials Company quarry located near
Pineville, NC or from the Martin Marietta quarry located on Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte, NC,
no samples of the import material will be collected as adequate analytical data is available in the
DEQ Brownfields database to demonstrate material from these facilities is suitable for use as
structural fill at a Brownfields property.
For import material from unknown borrow sources, prior to bringing fill soil to the Site, historical
information about the fill Site and a proposed sampling design will be provided to DEQ for review

15
EMP Version 2, June 2018
and approval based upon the estimated quantity of import fill to be obtained from the fill site.
The soil sample(s) will be analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals plus hexavalent chromium.
Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Site if it does not contain compound
concentrations above DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs or typical metals concentrations which
are consistent with background levels identified at the Site.

Part 1.C. EXPORTED SOIL
NO SOIL MAY LEAVE THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE
BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. FAILURE TO OBTAIN APPROVAL MAY VIOLATE A BROWNFIELDS
AGREEMENT CAUSING A REOPENER OR JEOPARDIZING ELIGIBILITY IN THE PROGRAM,
ENDANGERING LIABILITY PROTECTIONS AND MAKING SAID ACTION POSSIBLY SUBJECT TO
ENFORCEMENT. JUSTIFICATIONS PROVIDED BELOW MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PROGRAM IN
WRITING PRIOR TO COMPLETING TRANSPORT ACTIVITIES. Please refer to Brownfields IR 15 for
additional details.

1) If export from a Brownfields Property is anticipated, please provide details regarding the
proposed export actions. Volume of exported soil, depths, location from which soil will
be excavated on site, related sampling results, etc. Provide a site map with locations of
export and sampling results included.
Export soil is not anticipated at this time. Should soil need to be exported from the Brownfields
property during redevelopment, a sampling plan will be developed and submitted to DEQ
Brownfields for review and approval once the volume of soil for export is known. Generally, soil
samples will be collected from export soil at a rate of 1 sample per every 400-500 cubic yards of
export.

DEQ approval of the sampling plan and analytical results will be obtained prior to transporting
export soil from the Site. Based on analytical results of soil samples collected from the export
soil, the soil will be transported off-Site to a suitable location. The PD will notify DEQ
Brownfields of the location receiving the export soil and DEQ Brownfields approval and written
approval from the receiving facility will be obtained prior to transporting the soil off-Site.

2) To what type of facility will the export Brownfields soil be sent?
☒ Subtitle D/Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (analytical program to be determined by
landfill)
☒ Permitted but Unlined Landfill (i.e. LCID, C&D, etc.) Analytical program to be
determined by the accepting Landfill;
☒ Landfarm or other treatment facility
☒ Use as fill at another suitable Brownfields Property – determination that a
site is suitable will require, at a minimum, that similar concentrations of the same or
similar contaminants already exist at both sites, use of impacted soil will not increase
the potential for risk to human health and the environment at the receiving Brownfields

16
EMP Version 2, June 2018
property, and that a record of the acceptance of such soil from the property owner of
the receiving site is provided to Brownfields. Please provide additional details below.
☒ Use as Beneficial Fill off-site at a non-Brownfields Property - Please provide
documentation of approval from the property owner for receipt of fill material. This will
also require approval by the DEQ Solid Waste Section. Additional information is
provided in IR 15. Please provide additional details below.

3) Additional Details: (if transfer of soil to another property is requested above, please provide
details related to the proposed plans).
Click or tap here to enter text.

Part 1.D. MANAGEMENT OF UTILITY TRENCHES

☐ Install liner between native impacted soils and base of utility trench before filling with clean fill
(Preferred)

☒ Last out, first in principle for impacted soils (if soil can safely be reused onsite and is not a
hazardous waste), i.e., impacted soils are placed back at approximately the depths they
were removed from such that impacted soil is not placed at a greater depth than the original
depth from which it was excavated.

☐ Evaluate whether necessary to install barriers in conduits to prevent soil vapor transport,
and/or degradation of conduit materials due to direct impact with contaminants?
☐ If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials:
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ If no, include rationale here:
Impacted soil has not been identified at on the Site property.

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
Although not anticipated, in the event contaminated soil and/or vapors are encountered in utility
trenches during redevelopment activities, the trench will be evacuated and appropriate safety
screening of the vapors will be performed to protect workers. If results indicate further action is
warranted in response to vapors to protect workers, appropriate engineering controls (such as use of
industrial fans) will be implemented.

The contractor and workers will observe soil for potential impacts during utility installation activities.
Evidence of potential significant impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled
or previously disposed materials of concerns (i.e. chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
noted during utility work, the contractor will contact the project environmental engineer to observe
the suspect condition. If the project environmental engineer confirms that the material may be
impacted, then the procedures outlined Managing On-Site Soil above will be implemented. In
addition, the environmental engineer will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within two

17
EMP Version 2, June 2018
business days to advise that person of the condition.

PART 2. GROUNDWATER – Please fill out the information below.

1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
The depth to groundwater at the Brownfields property is highly variable. Under purview of the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), multiple phases of assessment and remediation
have been conducted at the Site as part of investigation activities for the former Charlotte Naval
Ammunition Depot (CNAD). Based on review of March 2018 groundwater assessment results,
groundwater has been identified at depths ranging from approximately 1.6 ft bgs in the central
portions of the Site to 11.2 ft bgs in the eastern portions of the Site. However, shallow depth to
groundwater measurements may not be indicative of actual groundwater elevations and may
be locally influenced by potential groundwater mounding from injection activities and/or
partially submerged wells screens in bedrock.

In addition to available information from the USACE investigation, a January 2017 geotechnical
assessment conducted at the Brownfields property indicated approximate depths to
groundwater ranging from approximately 6.0 ft bgs in the central portions of the Site to 8.0 ft
bgs in the northwestern portions of the Site. Further, groundwater elevations may also be
influenced by topography. Land surfaces at the Brownfields property slope from a topographic
high of approximately 650.6 ft above mean sea-level in the eastern portions of the Site to
approximately 614.3 ft above mean sea-level in the western portions of the Site. In general,
topographic high areas appear to exhibit deeper depth to groundwater measurements while
topographic low areas appear to exhibit shallower depth to water measurements.

It should be noted that although available information suggest that on-Site groundwater
elevations have the potential to be highly variable, current redevelopment plans propose cut for
the topographic high portions of the Site and fill for the topographic low portions of the Site.

2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite ☒offsite ☐both or ☐unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
According to historical reports, the source of the groundwater contamination was an off-Site
trichloroethylene (TCE) degreasing operation associated with the former CNAD. As part of the
USACE investigation, groundwater has been monitored on the Brownfields property. The results
of the monitoring indicated that VOC cis-1,2-dichloroethene, TCE, and vinyl chloride have
impacted on-Site groundwater at concentrations that exceed 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater
Standards (2L Standards) and DEQ Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening
Levels (GWSLs). A tabular summary of on-Site groundwater analytical data in comparison to 2L
Standards and GWSLs is included as Table 2. Groundwater data exhibiting exceedances of 2L
Standards and GWSLs from the March 2018 monitoring event are shown in Figure 3.

3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?

18
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Groundwater at the Site flows to the west.

4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
☐Yes ☒No
If yes, describe these activities:
Groundwater is not expected to be encountered during redevelopment activities. However, if
groundwater is encountered, the PD or the PD’s contractor will contact the project
environmental engineer. The environmental engineer will update the DEQ Brownfields project
manager within two business days.
Regardless of the answer; in the event that contaminated groundwater is encountered during redevelopment activities (even if no is checked above), list activities for contingent management of groundwater (e.g., dewatering of groundwater from excavations or foundations, containerizing, offsite disposal, discharge to sanitary sewer, NPDES permit, or sampling procedures).
Although not anticipated at this time, appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken if
groundwater gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted during
construction activities. The accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate, tested and
disposed off-Site (if impacted), or tested and discharged to the storm sewer (if not impacted
above DEQ surface water standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State
regulations for erosion control and construction stormwater control.

5) Are monitoring wells currently present on the Brownfields Property?.................☒Yes ☐No
If yes, are any monitoring wells routinely monitored through DEQ or other
agencies?..................................................................................................................☒Yes ☐No

6) Please check methods to be utilized in the management of known and previously
unidentified wells.
☒ Abandonment of site monitoring wells in accordance with all applicable regulations. It
is the Brownfields Program’s intent to allow proper abandonment of well(s) as
specified in the Brownfields Agreement, except if required for active monitoring
through another section of DEQ or the EPA.
☒ Location of existing monitoring wells marked
☒ Existing monitoring wells protected from disturbance
☒ Newly identified monitoring wells will be marked and protected from further
disturbance until notification to DEQ Brownfields can be made and approval for
abandonment is given.

7) Please provide additional details as needed:

Please note, disturbance of existing site monitoring wells without approval by DEQ is not
permissible. If monitoring wells are damaged and/or destroyed, DEQ may require that the PD
be responsible for replacement of the well.
The USACE and the PD are currently in process of discussing redevelopment plans and their impact on
future groundwater monitoring and remediation. At the conclusion of these discussions, an update
will be provided to the DEQ Brownfields project manager.

19
EMP Version 2, June 2018

PART 3. SURFACE WATER -Please fill out the information below.
1) Is surface water present at the property? ☒ Yes ☐ No
2) Attach a map showing the location of surface water at the Brownfields Property.
3) Is surface water at the property known to be contaminated? ☐ Yes ☒ No
4) Will workers or the public be in contact with surface water during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No
5) In the event that contaminated surface water is encountered during redevelopment
activities, or clean surface water enters open excavations, list activities for management of
such events (e.g. flooding, contaminated surface water run-off, stormwater impacts):
Unnamed intermittent surface water bodies and wetlands areas are present at the Site. The
unnamed tributaries flow into Steele Creek approximately 0.5-mile west of the Site. Based on
the DEQ classification system, Steele Creek is a Class C surface water body. As documented in
Hart & Hickman’s Brownfields Assessment Report dated June 1, 2018, a surface water
assessment was conducted on the Brownfields property. The location of the previous surface
water sample and a summary of previous surface water sample data are provided in Figure 2 and
Table 3, respectively. As shown in Table 3, no compounds have been detected in surface water
at concentrations exceeding Title 15A NCAC 2B Surface Water Standards (2B Standards) for Class
C Waters.

Based on redevelopment plans, it is not anticipated that the surface water bodies or wetlands
areas will be disturbed during redevelopment activities. Should they be disturbed, or if surface
water run-off gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted during
construction activities, appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken. The
accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate, tested and disposed off-site (if impacted), or
tested and discharged to the storm sewer (if not impacted above DEQ surface water standards)
in accordance with applicable municipal and State regulations for erosion control and
construction stormwater control.

PART 4. SEDIMENT – Please fill out the information below.

1) Are sediment sources present on the property? ☒ Yes ☐ No

2) If yes, is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No

3) Will workers or the public be in contact with sediment during planned redevelopment

20
EMP Version 2, June 2018
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No

4) Attach a map showing location of known contaminated sediment at the property.

5) In the event that contaminated sediment is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such events (stream bed disturbance):
As documented in Hart & Hickman’s Brownfields Assessment Report dated June 1, 2018, a
sediment assessment was conducted on the Brownfields property. The location of the previous
sediment sample and a summary of previous sediment sample data are provided in Figure 2 and
Table 4, respectively. As shown in Table 4, no compounds have been detected in sediment at
concentrations exceeding DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs.

Based on redevelopment plans, it is not anticipated that sediment from surface water bodies or
wetlands areas will be disturbed during redevelopment activities. Should they be disturbed, and
if field observations indicate the sediment is potentially impacted, the sediment will be managed
in accordance with the procedures described in Part 1A.

PART 5. SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below.
1) Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the following vapor intrusion screening levels (current version) in the following media:
IHSB Residential Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
Groundwater:.….☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
IHSB Industrial/Commercial Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
Groundwater:…..☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
2) Attach a map showing the locations of soil vapor contaminants that exceed site
screening levels.
3) If applicable, at what depth(s) is soil vapor known to be contaminated?
Vapor intrusion assessment has not been conducted at the Brownfields property. However, as part
of the USACE’s monitoring activities, methane in soil vapor has been assessed at off-Site properties.
Results of this data show that methane, a byproduct of the remedial activities, has been detected in
excess of 100% Lower Explosive Limit. In addition, results of USACE groundwater monitoring
indicated VOCs TCE and vinyl chloride have impacted on-Site groundwater at concentrations that
exceed DEQ Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion GWSLs. A tabular summary of groundwater analytical
data in comparison to GWSLs is included as Table 2. Groundwater sample locations are shown in
Figure 2.

21
EMP Version 2, June 2018

4) Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities
(trenches, manways, basements or other subsurface work,) list activities for management
of such contact:
In the unlikely event impacted soil vapors are encountered during future redevelopment
activities, worker breathing zone will be monitored using a calibrated photoionization detector
and calibrated methane gas detector. If results indicate further action is warranted, appropriate
engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented.

PART 6. SUB-SLAB SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below if existing buildings or
foundations will be retained in the redevelopment.
1) Are sub-slab soil vapor data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) If data indicate that sub-slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map
showing the location of these exceedances.
3) At what depth(s) is sub-slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☐0-6 inches ☐Other, please
describe:
Click or tap here to enter text.

4) Will workers encounter contaminated sub-slab soil vapor during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact
In the unlikely event impacted soil vapors are encountered during future redevelopment
activities, worker breathing zone will be monitored using a calibrated photoionization detector
and calibrated methane gas detector. If results indicate further action is warranted, appropriate
engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented.

PART 7. INDOOR AIR – Please fill out the information below.

1) Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) Attach a map showing the location(s) where indoor air contaminants exceed site screening levels.
3) If the structures where indoor air has been documented to exceed risk-based screening levels will
not be demolished as part of redevelopment activities, will workers encounter contaminated
Based on the information provided above, the PD’s contractor will utilize appropriate monitoring
devices and safety procedures during future redevelopment activities.

22
EMP Version 2, June 2018
indoor air during planned redevelopment activities? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
4) In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact:

VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM – Please fill out the information below.
Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) proposed for this Brownfields Property?
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
If yes, ☐ VIMS Plan Attached or ☒ VIMS Plan to be submitted separately
If submitted separately provide date:
A Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Plan will be submitted to DEQ for approval under separate cover
prior to construction of the proposed Site building. VIMS Plan shall be signed and sealed by a NC Professional Engineer If no, please provide a brief rationale as to why no vapor mitigation plan is warranted:
Click or tap here to enter text.

CONTINGENCY PLAN – encountering unknown tanks, drums, or other waste materials

In this section please provide actions that will be taken to identify or manage unknown
potential new sources of contamination. During redevelopment activities, it is not uncommon
that unknown tanks, drums, fuel lines, landfills, or other waste materials are encountered.
Notification to DEQ Brownfields Project Manager, UST Section, Fire Department, and/or other
officials, as necessary and appropriate, is required when new potential source(s) of
contamination are discovered. These Notification Requirements were outlined on Page 1 of this
EMP.

Should potentially impacted materials be identified that are inconsistent with known site
impacts, the DEQ Brownfields Project Manager will be notified and a sampling plan will be
prepared based on the EMP requirements and site-specific factors. Samples will generally be
collected to document the location of the potential impacts.

In the unlikely event there is evidence of potential indoor air issues (i.e. unusual odors) during future
redevelopment activities, the area will be evacuated and appropriate safety screening of the indoor
air will be performed. If warranted, safety screening procedures will include periodically screening
indoor air for volatile organic vapors with a calibrated photoionization detector and calibrated
methane gas detector. If results indicate further action is warranted, appropriate engineering
controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented.

23
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Check the following chemical analysis that are to be conducted on newly identified releases:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and
silver)
EPA Method 6020 and EPA Method 7471

☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.)
Please note, if field observations indicate the need for additional analyses, they should
be conducted, even if not listed here.
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196

Please provide details on the proposed methods of managing the following commonly
encountered issues during redevelopment of Brownfields Properties.
During construction activities, contractors may encounter unknown sub-surface environmental
conditions (i.e. tanks, drums, or waste materials) that if encountered, will require proper
management. Prior to beginning Site work, H&H will attend a pre-construction kick-off meeting
with the PD and the redevelopment contractors to discuss the DEQ approved EMP and various
scenarios when it would be appropriate and necessary to notify H&H of the discovery of unknown
subsurface features or potentially impacted media at the Site. In the event that such conditions are
encountered during Site redevelopment activities, the environmental actions noted below will be
used to direct environmental actions to be taken during these activities and sampling data for
potentially impacted soil and the disposition of impacted soil will be provided to DEQ when the data
becomes available.

Underground Storage Tanks:
In the event an underground storage tank (UST) or impacts associated with a UST release are
discovered at the Site during redevelopment activities, the UST and/or UST related impacts will be
addressed through the Brownfields Program.

If a UST is encountered and does not require removal for geotechnical or construction purposes, it
will be abandoned in-place and construction will proceed. Where appropriate, the bottom may be
penetrated before abandonment to prevent fluid accumulation. If the UST contains residual fluids,
the fluids will be removed, sampled for VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals, and transported off-Site for
disposal at a suitable facility based on the laboratory analytical results. Impacted soil will be
managed in accordance with the Managing On-Site Soil section outlined above in the EMP.

Sub-Grade Feature/Pit:

24
EMP Version 2, June 2018
If a sub-grade feature or pit is encountered and does not require removal for geotechnical or
construction purposes, it will be filled with soil or suitable fill and construction will proceed. Where
appropriate, the bottom may be penetrated before back filling to prevent fluid accumulation. If the
pit has waste in it, the waste may be set aside in a secure area and will be sampled for waste
disposal purposes for TCLP VOCs, TCLP SVOCs, and TCLP metals and disposed off-Site at a permitted
facility or the waste will be managed in accordance with the Managing On-Site Soil section outlined
above in the EMP, whichever is most applicable based on the type of waste present. If the pit must
be removed and the observed waste characteristics indicate the concrete may potentially be
contaminated to a significant degree, the concrete will be sampled and analyzed by methods
specified by the disposal facility.

Buried Waste Material:
If excavation into buried wastes or significantly impacted soils occurs, the contractor is instructed to
stop work in that location and notify the environmental consultant. The environmental consultant
will review the materials and collect samples if warranted. In this event, confirmation sampling will
be conducted at representative locations in the base and the sidewalls of the excavation after the
waste or significantly impacted soil is removed. The confirmation samples will be analyzed for
VOCs, SVOCs, and the RCRA metals plus hexavalent chromium. Areas of suspected contaminated
soil that remain at the Site after excavation is complete above the DEQ Industrial/Commercial
PSRGs will be managed pursuant to this plan and incorporated into the Brownfields plat.

Re-Use of Impacted Soils On-Site:
Please refer to description outlined in the Managing On-Site Soil section of the EMP above.

If unknown, impacted soil is identified on-site, management on-site can be considered after the
project team provides the necessary information, outlined in Part 1.A. Item 11, for Brownfields
Project Manager approval prior to final placement on-site.

If other potential contingency plans are pertinent, please provide other details or scenarios as
needed below:
Click or tap here to enter text.

POST-REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING

☒ Check this box to acknowledge that a Redevelopment Summary Report will be required for the
project. If the project duration is longer than one year, an annual update is required and will be
due by January 31 of each year, or 30 days after each one-year anniversary of the effective date of
this EMP (as agreed upon with the Project Manager). These reports will be required for as long as
physical redevelopment of the Brownfields Property continues, except that the final
Redevelopment Summary Report will be submitted within 90 days after completion of
redevelopment. Based on the estimated construction schedule, the first Redevelopment Summary

25
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Report is anticipated to be submitted on Click or tap to enter a date.

The Redevelopment Summary Report shall include environment-related activities since the last
report, with a summary and drawings, that describes:
1. actions taken on the Brownfields Property;
2. soil grading and cut and fill actions;
3. methodology(ies) employed for field screening, sampling and laboratory analysis of
environmental media;
4. stockpiling, containerizing, decontaminating, treating, handling, laboratory analysis and
ultimate disposition of any soil, groundwater or other materials suspected or confirmed
to be contaminated with regulated substances; and
5. removal of any contaminated soil, water or other contaminated materials (for example,
concrete, demolition debris) from the Brownfields Property (copies of all legally required
manifests shall be included).

☒ Check box to acknowledge consent to provide a NC licensed P.G. or P.E. sealed, Redevelopment
Summary Report in compliance with the site’s Brownfields Agreement.

27
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Table 1
Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. CHK.006
Sample ID SB-1 SB-2 SB-DUP-1 SB-3
Depth (ft bgs)0-2 2-4 2-4 2-4
Sample Date 5/1/18 5/1/18 5/1/18 5/1/18 Range Mean Range Mean Ref.
Units
VOCs (8260B)
Acetone 0.037 J <0.11 <0.10 0.023 J 12,000 140,000 ----------
SVOCs (8270D)
ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL --------------
PCBs (8082A)
ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL --------------
RCRA Metals (6020/7471B/7196A)
Arsenic 1.5 DL-15 0.63 DL-15 0.62 DL-15 1.9 DL-15 0.68 3.0 0.81-1.9 1.36 1.0-18 4.8 A
Barium 200 DL-15 250 DL-15 180 DL-15 120 DL-15 3,100 47,000 180 180 50-1,000 356 A
Cadmium 0.037 DL-15, J <0.80 DL-15 <0.84 DL-15 <0.84 DL-15 14.0 200 0.091-0.78 0.435 1.0-10 4.3 B
Total Chromium 28 DL-15 29 DL-15 25 DL-15 26 DL-15 NS NS 35-43 39 7.0-300 65 A
Hexavalent Chromium 0.23 DL-03, J 0.21 DL-03, J 0.2 DL-03, J 0.21 DL-03, J 0.31 6.5 0.21-0.31 0.26 NS NS --
Trivalent Chromium 27.77 28.79 24.8 25.79 23,000 350,000 34.79-42.69 38.74 NS NS --
Lead 16 DL-15 4.1 DL-15, J 3.3 DL-15, J 10 DL-15 400 800 5.8-14 9.9 BRL-50 16 A
Mercury 0.034 B 0.021 B, J 0.019 B, J 0.04 B 2.3 9.7 0.022-0.025 0.024 0.03-0.52 0.121 A
Selenium <1.9 DL-15 <1.8 DL-15 <1.9 DL-15 <1.8 DL-15 78 1,200 1.7-1.8 1.75 <0.1-0.8 0.42 A
Silver 0.048 DL-15, J 0.052 DL-15, J 0.053 DL-15, J 0.051 DL-15, J 78 1,200 0.047-0.05 0.049 BRL-5.0 NS C
Notes:
Regional Background
Metals in Soil(2)
mg/kg
DL-15 = sample required a dilution due to low internal standard recovery of the lesser diluted digestion, reporting limit is elevated
DL-03 = reporting limit elevated due to matrix
B = analyte was detected in the associated laboratory blank as well as in the sample
J = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in an estimated concentration
C. Soils of the conterminous USA
B. Southeastern US soils
A. North Carolina soils
Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.
Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per killogram (mg/kg).
Ref.
2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005.
1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (February 2018).
-- = not applicable; NA = Not analyzed; NS= not specified; BRL = below laboratory reporting limit; ft bgs = feet below the ground surface; RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SB-2
Residential
PSRG(1)
Industrial/
Commercial
PSRG(1)
With the exception of metals, only analytes with concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit are shown.
Site-Specific Background
Metals in Soil
File: S:\AAA-Master Projects\Childress Klein\CHK-006 Nevada Blvd and Cordage St\EMP\Tables\Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827Date: 8/27/2018
Table 1 (Page 1 of 2)
Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1
Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. CHK.006
Sample ID SB-4 SB-5 SB-BG-1 SB-BG-2
Depth (ft bgs)2-4 3-5 0-2 2-4
Sample Date 5/1/18 5/1/18 5/1/18 5/1/18 Range Mean Range Mean Ref.
Units
VOCs (8260B)
Acetone 0.034 J <0.099 NA NA 12,000 140,000 ----------
SVOCs (8270D)
ALL BRL ALL BRL NA NA --------------
PCBs (8082A)
ALL BRL ALL BRL NA NA --------------
RCRA Metals (6020/7471B/7196A)
Arsenic 1.2 DL-15 0.42 DL-15 1.9 DL-15 0.81 DL-15 0.68 3.0 0.81-1.9 1.36 1.0-18 4.8 A
Barium 130 DL-15 220 DL-15 180 DL-15 180 DL-15 3,100 47,000 180 180 50-1,000 356 A
Cadmium <0.79 DL-15 0.041 DL-15, J <0.78 DL-15 0.091 DL-15, J 14.0 200 0.091-0.78 0.435 1.0-10 4.3 B
Chromium (total)17 DL-15 9.9 DL-15 43 DL-15 35 DL-15 NS NS 35-43 39 7.0-300 65 A
Hexavalent Chromium 0.54 DL-03, J 0.2 DL-03, MS-16, J 0.31 DL-03, J 0.21 DL-03, J 0.31 6.5 0.21-0.31 0.26 NS NS --
Trivalent Chromium 16.46 9.7 42.69 34.79 23,000 350,000 34.79-42.69 38.74 NS NS --
Lead 12 DL-15 3.4 DL-15, J 14 DL-15 5.8 DL-15 400 800 5.8-14 9.9 BRL-50 16 A
Mercury 0.037 B 0.015 B, J 0.022 B, J 0.025 B, J 2.3 9.7 0.022-0.025 0.024 0.03-0.52 0.121 A
Selenium <1.8 DL-15 0.22 DL-15, J <1.7 DL-15 <1.8 DL-15 78 1,200 1.7-1.8 1.75 <0.1-0.8 0.42 A
Silver 0.048 DL-15, J 0.036 DL-15, J 0.047 DL-15, J 0.05 DL-15, J 78 1,200 0.047-0.05 0.049 BRL-5.0 NS C
Notes:
DL-15 = sample required a dilution due to low internal standard recovery of the lesser diluted digestion, reporting limit is elevated
Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per killogram (mg/kg).
Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.
-- = not applicable; NA = Not analyzed; NS= not specified; BRL = below laboratory reporting limit; ft bgs = feet below the ground surface; RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
J = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in an estimated concentration
B = analyte was detected in the associated laboratory blank as well as in the sample
Regional Background
Metals in Soil(2)
Ref.
A. North Carolina soils
B. Southeastern US soils
C. Soils of the conterminous USA
With the exception of metals, only analytes with concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit are shown.
DL-03 = reporting limit elevated due to matrix
1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (February 2018).
2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005.
mg/kg
Industrial/
Commercial
PSRG(1)
Residential
PSRG(1)
Site-Specific Background
Metals in Soil
File: S:\AAA-Master Projects\Childress Klein\CHK-006 Nevada Blvd and Cordage St\EMP\Tables\Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827Date: 8/27/2018
Table 1 (Page 2 of 2)
Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2
Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataCharlotte Naval Ammo DepotCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. CHK.006
Sample ID
Sample Date 2/27/2013 3/28/2018 2/27/2013 11/21/2014 2/19/2015 2/19/2015
(Duplicate)5/21/2015 8/18/2015 11/12/2015 2/24/2016 5/17/2016 3/25/2018
Units
1,1-Dichloroethene <1.0 <1.0 <50 <50 <25 <10 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5.1 J 350 160cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 3.1 1.9 13 J 400 1,800 1,900 2,400 2,300 J 2,200 1,600 1,700 2,300 70 NEtrans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.53 J 0.89 J <50 <50 <25 <10 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 2.6 J 100 NETrichloroethylene110392,900 3,200 530 530 13 J 140 <25 830 41 350 3.0 4.4Vinyl Chloride <1.0 <1.0 <50 <50 <25 <10 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 93 0.03 25Xylenes (Total)0.25 J <0.45 <100 <100 <25 <10 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <4.5 500 320
Notes:1) North Carolina 2L Groundwater Standards (NC 2L Standards) (April 2013).2) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) (February 2018).Compounds shown reflect the compound list referenced in the March 2017 PIKA-PIRNIE JV, LLC Remedial Action & Performance Monitoring Report.
Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Bold values exceed NC 2L Standard.Underline values exceed the DWM Non-Residential Groundwater VISL (February 2018).VOCs = volatile organic compounds.NE= Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in an estimated concentration.
DEQNon-Residential
Vapor Intrusion
GWSL(2)
µg/L
VOCs (8260B)
NADMW-38 NADMW-58 NC 2L
Groundwater
Standards(1)
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Childress Klein\CHK-006 Nevada Blvd and Cordage St\EMP\Tables\Brownfields Assessment Groundwater Table 2_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180522
8/27/2018
Table 2 (Page 1 of 2)
Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2
Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataCharlotte Naval Ammo DepotCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. CHK.006
Sample ID
Sample Date 2/27/2013 2/27/2013
(Duplicate)11/21/2014 2/19/2015 8/18/2015 11/12/2015 2/23/2016 5/17/2016 3/25/2018
Units
1,1-Dichloroethene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 350 160cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 7.6 8.4 10.0 6.2 7.3 7.8 7.8 6.9 6.5 70 NEtrans-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.21 J 100 NETrichloroethylene4147513937384237323.0 4.4Vinyl Chloride <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.03 25Xylenes (Total)<2.0 0.25 J <2.0 <1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 < 1.0 <1.0 <0.45 500 320
Notes:1) North Carolina 2L Groundwater Standards (NC 2L Standards) (April 2013).2) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) (February 2018).Compounds shown reflect the compound list referenced in the March 2017 PIKA-PIRNIE JV, LLC Remedial Action & Performance Monitoring Report.
Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Bold values exceed NC 2L Standard.Underline values exceed the DWM Non-Residential Groundwater VISL (February 2018).VOCs = volatile organic compounds.NE= Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in an estimated concentration.
NADMW-66 NC 2L
Groundwater
Standards(1)
DEQNon-Residential
Vapor Intrusion
GWS(2)
µg/L
VOCs (8260B)
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Childress Klein\CHK-006 Nevada Blvd and Cordage St\EMP\Tables\Brownfields Assessment Groundwater Table 2_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180522
8/27/2018
Table 2 (Page 2 of 2)
Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3
Summary of Surface Water Analytical Data
Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. CHK.006
Sample ID SW-1 SW-DUP-1
Sample Date 5/1/18 5/1/18Units
VOCs (8260B)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 2.2 3.0 720
Trichloroethylene 1.0 1.2 30
SVOCs (8270D)
ALL BRL ALL BRL --
RCRA Metals (6020/7471B/7196A)
Arsenic <0.80 <0.80 10
Barium 170 170 21,000
Cadmium <1.0 <1.0 --
Chromium (total)<2.0 <2.0 --
Hexavalent Chromium <4.0 <4.0 --
Lead <2.0 <2.0 --
Mercury <0.10 <0.10 0.012
Selenium <10 <10 5
Silver <1.0 <1.0 --
Notes:
1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ's) 15A NCAC 02B Surface Water Quality Standards and Criteria for Class C waters (2B Standards) (September 22, 2017).With the exception of metals, only analytes with concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit are shown.
Surface water concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).
-- = not applicable; NE = not established; BRL = below laboratory reporting limit; RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
µg/L
SW-1
NC 2B Standards(1)
File: S:\AAA-Master Projects\Childress Klein\CHK-006 Nevada Blvd and Cordage St\EMP\Tables\Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827
Date: 8/27/2018
Table 3 (Page 1 of 1)
Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4
Summary of Sediment Analytical Data
Charlotte Naval Ammo Depot
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. CHK.006
Sample ID SED-1 SED-DUP-1
Sample Date 5/1/18 5/1/18 Range Mean Range Mean Ref.
Units
VOCs (8260B)
ALL BRL ALL BRL --------------
SVOCs (8270D)
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <0.44 0.37 39 160 ----------
RCRA Metals (6020/7471B/7196A)
Arsenic 2.1 DL-15 2.2 DL-15 0.68 3.0 0.81-1.9 1.36 1.0-18 4.8 A
Barium 190 DL-15 180 DL-15 3,100 47,000 180 180 50-1,000 356 A
Cadmium 0.11 DL-15, J 0.1 DL-15, J 14.0 200 0.091-0.78 0.435 1.0-10 4.3 B
Chromium (total)40 DL-15 44 DL-15 NS NS 35-43 39 7.0-300 65 A
Trivalent Chromium 39.15 43.44 23,000 350,000 0.21-0.31 0.26 NS NS --
Hexavalent Chromium 0.85 DL-03, J 0.56 DL-03, J 0.31 6.5 34.79-42.69 38.74 NS NS --
Lead 10 DL-15 11 DL-15 400 800 5.8-14 9.9 BRL-50 16 A
Mercury 0.016 B, J 0.011 B, J 2.3 9.7 0.022-0.025 0.024 0.03-0.52 0.121 A
Selenium <1.9 DL-15 <1.8 DL-15 78 1,200 1.7-1.8 1.75 <0.1-0.8 0.42 A
Silver 0.045 DL-15, J 0.052 DL-15, J 78 1,200 0.047-0.05 0.049 BRL-5.0 NS C
Notes:
J = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in an estimated concentration
B = analyte was detected in the associated laboratory blank as well as in the sample
DL-03 = reporting limit elevated due to matrix
DL-15 = sample required a dilution due to low internal standard recovery of the lesser diluted digestion, reporting limit is elevated
mg/kg
Industrial/
Commercial
PSRG(1)
Residential
PSRG(1)
Site-Specific Background
Metals in Soil
Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.
-- = not applicable; NS= not specified; BRL = below laboratory reporting limit; RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SED-1
Regional Background
Metals in Soil(2)
C. Soils of the conterminous USA
With the exception of metals, only analytes with concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit are shown.
Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per killogram (mg/kg).
B. Southeastern US soils
1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (February 2018).
2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005.
Ref.
A. North Carolina soils
File: S:\AAA-Master Projects\Childress Klein\CHK-006 Nevada Blvd and Cordage St\EMP\Tables\Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827Brownfields Assessment Tables 1,3,4_CNAD (BPN 22009-18-060)_20180827
Date: 8/27/2018
Table 4 (Page 1 of 1)
Hart & Hickman, PC
TITLE
PROJECT
SITE LOCATION MAP
CHARLOTTE NAVAL AMMO DEPOTBROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO. 22009-18-0603100 NEVADA BOULEVARDCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE:
JOB NO:
REVISION NO:
FIGURE:
3-27-18 0
1CHK-006
SITE
0 2000 4000
APPROXIMATE
SCALE IN FEETN
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
FORT MILL, NORTH CAROLINA, 1996
CORD
A
G
E

S
T
R
E
E
T
BROO
K
F
O
R
D

S
T
R
E
E
T
VERSAR26
IW-18
IW-6
IW-7
IW-8
IW-9
IW-10
IW-11
IW-14
IW-5
IW-4
IW-3
IW-2
IW-1
IW-19
BG-1
BG-2
SB-4
SB-5
SB-1
SB-2SB-3
NADMW36
VERSAR22
NADMW65
NADMW38
NADMW66
NADMW57
NADMW58
NADMW37
SW-1/
SED-1
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. CHK-006
DATE: 7-2-18
FIGURE NO. 2
CHARLOTTE NAVAL AMMO DEPOT
BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO. 22009-18-060
3100 NEVADA BOULEVARD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
FORMER LOCATION OF
CHARLOTTE NAVAL AMMUNITION
DEPOT BUILDING 1-81
MONITORING WELL LOCATION2
BEDROCK MONITORING WELL
LOCATION2
ABANDONED MONITORING WELL
LOCATION2
INJECTION WELL LOCATION2
SURFACE WATER/ SEDIMENT
SAMPLE LOCATION (H&H; 5/2018)
SOIL BORING LOCATION
(H&H; 5/2018)
BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE
LOCATION (H&H; 5/2018)
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG CO. GIS
DEPARTMENT (2017).
2.MONITORING WELL & INJECTION WELL LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON PIKA-PIRNIE JV, LLC'S
REMEDIAL ACTION & PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORT
(MARCH 2017).NEVADA BOULEVARD
CORD
A
G
E

S
T
R
E
E
T
BROO
K
F
O
R
D

S
T
R
E
E
T
VERSAR26
IW-18
IW-6
IW-7
IW-8
IW-9
IW-10
IW-11
IW-14
IW-5
IW-4
IW-3
IW-2
IW-1
IW-19
NADMW36
VERSAR22
NADMW65
NADMW38
NADMW66
NADMW57
NADMW58
NADMW37
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. CHK-006
DATE: 7-2-18
FIGURE NO. 3
CHARLOTTE NAVAL AMMO DEPOT
BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO. 22009-18-060
3100 NEVADA BOULEVARD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
AREAS OF CONCERN - GROUNDWATER MAP
LEGEND
SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
FORMER LOCATION OF
CHARLOTTE NAVAL AMMUNITION
DEPOT BUILDING 1-81
MONITORING WELL LOCATION2
BEDROCK MONITORING WELL
LOCATION2
ABANDONED MONITORING WELL
LOCATION2
INJECTION WELL LOCATION2
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG CO. GIS
DEPARTMENT (2017).
2.MONITORING WELL & INJECTION WELL LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON PIKA-PIRNIE JV, LLC'S
REMEDIAL ACTION & PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORT
(MARCH 2017).
3.CONCENTRATIONS IN BOLD INDICATE CONCENTRATION
EXCEEDS THE TITLE 15A NORTH CAROLINA ADMINISTRATIVE
CODE 02L.0202 GROUNDWATER QUALITY STANDARD (APRIL
2013) (2L) OR INTERM MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE
CONCENTRATIONS (APRIL 2018).
4.UNDERLINED CONCENTRATIONS INDICATE AN EXCEEDANCE
OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY (NCDEQ) NON-RESIDENTIAL VAPOR INTRUSION
GROUNDWATER SCREENING LEVELS (FEBUARY 2018).NEVADA BOULEVARD
NADMW-38
3/28/2018
cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 1.9
TRICHOROETHYLENE 39
VINYL CHLORIDE <1.0
CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATION
IN MICROGRAMS
PER LITER (μg/L)
SAMPLE ID & DATESAMPLE TYPENADMW-38
3/28/2018
cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 1.9 μg/L
TRICHOROETHYLENE 39 μg/L
VINYL CHLORIDE <1.0 μg/L
NADMW-58
3/25/2018
cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 2,300 μg/L
TRICHOROETHYLENE 350 μg/L
VINYL CHLORIDE 93 μg/L
NADMW-66
3/25/2018
cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 6.5 μg/L
TRICHOROETHYLENE 32 μg/L
VINYL CHLORIDE <1.0 μg/L

Appendix A Current Redevlopment Plan
CORDAGE STREETWB-67 - Interstate Semi-TrailerR:\Drawings\2018 Projects\Cordage Street\cordage3.12.18.dwg, 3/13/2018 9:51:40 AM, 1:40

Appendix B Current Construction Schedule
IDTask NameDurationStartFinish% CompletePredecessors1Design125 daysMon 3/12/18Fri 8/31/18100%2Civil Design125 daysMon 3/12/18Fri 8/31/18100%3Site Concept Plan0 daysMon 3/12/18Mon 3/12/18100%4Site plan/Mass Grading35 daysMon 7/2/18Fri 8/17/18100%3,20SS+10 days5Permit/construction set10 daysMon 8/20/18Fri 8/31/18100%46Architectural/Structural Design33 daysFri 6/29/18Tue 8/14/18100%7Elevation and Floor Plan Schematic8 daysFri 6/29/18Tue 7/10/18100%8Design Development10 daysWed 7/11/18Tue 7/24/18100%79Permit/construction set15 daysWed 7/25/18Tue 8/14/18100%810Design/Build MEP18 daysWed 7/18/18Fri 8/10/18100%1130% progress set4 daysWed 7/18/18Mon 7/23/18100%7FS+5 days1260% progress set8 daysTue 7/24/18Thu 8/2/18100%1113Permit/construction set6 daysFri 8/3/18Fri 8/10/18100%1214Permitting127 daysMon 6/18/18Tue 12/11/1849%15Brownfield Assessment Submittal EMP for Review and Approval15 daysWed 10/10/18Tue 10/30/180%16Design of Vapor Mitigation Plan40 daysWed 8/15/18Tue 10/9/180%917Agency Vapor Mitigation Plan Review & Approval30 daysWed 10/10/18Tue 11/20/180%1618Brownfield Assessment Well Asessment0 daysTue 11/20/18Tue 11/20/180%1719Wetland - NP85 daysMon 6/18/18Fri 10/12/18100%20Confirm Delineation w/Corp20 daysMon 6/18/18Fri 7/13/18100%21Submittal/Review Period35 daysMon 8/27/18Fri 10/12/18100%20,4FS+5 days22County Stream Buffer Impact30 daysMon 7/16/18Fri 8/24/18100%2023Land Development65 daysFri 7/13/18Fri 10/12/1890%24Pre-submittal Meeting0 daysFri 7/13/18Fri 7/13/18100%2025City Engineering30 daysMon 9/3/18Fri 10/12/1890%24,526Building Standards30 daysTue 10/30/18Tue 12/11/180%27On Schedule Review Date0 daysTue 10/30/18Tue 10/30/180%13,5,1528City Review Period15 daysWed 10/31/18Tue 11/20/180%2729Second Submittal5 daysWed 11/21/18Tue 12/11/180%2830Receive Building Permit0 daysTue 12/11/18Tue 12/11/180%2931RTAP Vapor Mitigation Plan10 daysWed 11/21/18Tue 12/4/180%1732Bid Period24 daysWed 10/31/18Mon 12/3/180%33Bid Invite5 daysWed 10/31/18Tue 11/6/180%34General Contractor5 daysWed 10/31/18Tue 11/6/180%5,13,1535Bid period12 daysWed 11/7/18Thu 11/22/180%34,5,936Bid award 7 daysFri 11/23/18Mon 12/3/180%3537Construction160 daysTue 12/4/18Mon 7/15/190%38Site Work45 daysTue 12/4/18Mon 2/4/190%36,23,21,1539Shell Construction145 daysTue 12/25/18Mon 7/15/190%30,38SS+15 days3/1211/207/1310/3012/11FebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepCordage StOctober 9, 2018 Page 1Childress Klein

Appendix C Cut/Fill Analysis (Heat Map)
CORDAGE STREETW W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
W
W
W
WWWWWW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WW
WWWW
WW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WW
WWWW
WW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WWWWWW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WW
WWWW
WW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WW
WWWW
WW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WWWWWW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WWWWWW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WW
WWWW
WW
W
W
W
W
W
W
WWWWWWWW
W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWW
LEGEND+10' CUT-10' FILL

Appendix D
Current Grading Plan
CORDAGE STREETtrib 5trib 1trib 1trib 1trib 5trib 3trib 4trib 1trib 1trib 1trib 5trib 5trib 3trib 4>> 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 16+67 0+50 1+50 2+50 3+50 4+50 5+50 6+50 7+50 8+50 9+50 10+50 11+50 12+50 13+50 14+50 15+50 16+50500-K Clanton Road
Charlotte, NC 28217
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.geosciencegroup.comR:\Drawings\2018 Projects\Cordage Street\cordage8.15.18.dwg, 8/22/2018 12:09:52 PM, 1:50