22019 Cone Mill Greensboro EMP 20190221

1
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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 project manager for the program.
Prospective Developers and/or their consultants must complete and submit this form and all
pertinent attachments to their project manager prior to any site earthmoving or other
development related activities. For the resultant EMP to be valid for use, it must be completed,
reviewed by the program, and signed by all signers at the bottom. Consult your project
manager if you have questions.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Date: 2/21/2019

Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Cone Mill – Greensboro (aka: Former Printworks Plant)

Brownfields Project Number: 22019-18-041

Brownfields Property Address: See Exhibit A

Brownfields Property Area (acres): 21.21

Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click here to enter text.

Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click here to enter text.

COMMUNICATIONS

Prospective Developer (PD): Printworks Ventures, LLC
Phone Numbers: Office: 608-268-8122…..Mobile:
Email: [e-mail]
Primary PD Contact: Mr. David Vos
Phone Numbers: Office: 608-268-8122 Mobile:
Email:
Environmental Consultant: ECS Southeast, LLP: Matthew H. McDuffie
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-525-5152…..Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Bill Schmithorst
Office: Raleigh Phone: [phone]
2
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
Email: [e-mail]

Other DENR Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste): N/A

NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM

Advance Notification Times to Brownfields Project Manager: Check each box to accept minimum
notice periods (in calendar days) for each type of onsite task:
On-site assessment or remedial activities: Within 10 days ☒
Construction or grading start: Within 10 days ☒
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, venting of explosive environments):
Within 48 hours ☒
Installation of mitigation systems: Within 10 days ☒
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:

2) Summary of Redevelopment Plans (attach conceptual or detailed plans as available):
a) Do plans include demolition of structure(s)?: ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
b) Do plans include removal of building foundation slab(s) or pavement:
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
c) Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement and other structures: The majority of onsite historical buildings will be
restored. However, select onsite structures as well as associated slabs/pavement are
scheduled to be razed. Redevelopment is anticipated to be mixed-use
(residential/commercial/retail) and will include parking decks, paved parking, common areas
(including a swimming pool) and greenspace.

3) Which category of risk-based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement?
☒ Residential ☒ Non-residential or Industrial/Commercial
3
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014

Note: If children frequent the property, residential screening levels shall be cited in the Brownfields
Agreement for comparison purposes.

4) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Phase I start date and anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
Notice to Proceed was sent on September 4th and minimal work is being done currently to clear
property and buildings of trash and debris. The Phase I portion will take a total of 24 months. The
current redevelopment plan is to have commercial occupancy by 09/2019 and residential
occupany by 7/2020.

b) If applicable, Phase 2 start date and anticipated duration (specify activities during each
phase): TBD

c) Additional phases planned? If yes, specify activities if known:
☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Not in the foreseeable future ☒Decision pending
d) Provide the planned date of occupancy for new buildings: 9/1/2019

CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Contaminated Media (attach tabulated data summaries for each impacted media and figure(s) with
sample locations):
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

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 specific compounds): benzo(a)anthracene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, arsenic, cadmium, hexavalent
chromium
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet): Four feet
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet): 340,000 sqft
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet): anticipated 4-5 feet
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan): 7,500 cubic yards
4
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
7,500 cubic yards
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable: Phase I
Site Development: No soil is expected to be taken off-site; however, soil from cut areas and
soil that cannot be placed back into excavations; such as utility trenches, will be reused on
site where possible. Impacted soil reused on-site will either be covered with a minimum of 2
feet of clean soil, or will be covered by hard scape such as concrete or asphalt pavement. The site is a net import site and no soil is planned to be taken off-site. Soil that is
determined to not be suitable for fill will be be stockpiled on site, covered, and sampled prior
to removal from the site (if analytical data is not already available). If petroleum impacted soil is identified that cannot be used on-site, it will be taken to EVO Corporation, 1703
Vargrave Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Once the soil is treated at the EVO facility, it will be transported to either the Hanes Mill Landfill in Winston-Salem or Kersey Valley Landfill in High Point, North Carolina to be used as daily cover, per the agreement between
EVO and the landfill (s). Additional petroleum impacted soil and non-petroleum impacted soil unable to be reused on-site will be taken to Waste Management’s Great Oak Landfill
located at 3597 Old Cedar Falls Road, Randleman, North Carolina. Soil may be taken to
other locations based on cost and or availability of space; however, no soil will be taken off-site to other disposal facilities without prior approval from the Brownfields Project Manager.
Soil transported off-site will be done so only after the facility has approved a site-specific
disposal profile. Weight tickets and manifests will be used to confirm transportation to the approved disposal facility.
IMPORTED FILL SOIL

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? 2,500 cubic yards of ABC Stone
3) If yes, what is the depth of fill soil to be used at the property? Anticipated 4-5 feet
If a range of depths, please list the range.

4) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide plan to analyze fill soil to
demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards and can be considered clean for use at the
Brownfields property (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 (speciated), mercury, lead,
selenium and silver)
☐ Metals –Hazardous Substance List -14 (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc)
☐ Metals – EPA Priority Pollutant List – 13 (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium (speciated
according to IHSB protocol), copper, mercury, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, silver, thallium, and
zinc)
☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method: Other contaminants such as PCBs or pesticides
may be analyzed based on the barrow area’s site history and after discussion and approval from the
BF Project Manager.
5
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
☒ Known borrow material (DESCRIBE SOURCE AND ATTACH SAMPLING PROFILE): ABC stone
and 57 Stone will be obtained from the Martin Marietta Salem Stone Quarry on High Point Road in
Kernersville, North Carolina. The ABC and 57 Stone wil not require analysis as long as it is documented
to NCDEQ that it is all new material and not mixed with recycled material brought into the quarry. The
Quarry will be informed that it is mandated that the stone has to be all new material and not include
recycled material. Soil may be brought in from other locations based on cost and or availability of
material; however, no soil will be brought on-site from other locations without first being sampled and
without prior approval from the Brownfields Project Manager. As per No. 3 above, the material will be
assessed following approval by DEQ.

MANAGING ONSITE SOIL

1) If soil in known or suspected areas of contamination 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).

2) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION – 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 generating the
waste( include pertinent analytical results as needed). Click 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

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 DENR
HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

3) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION – Does the soil contain a CHARACTERISTIC WASTE?:
☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).

☐ Ignitability
☐ Corrosivity
☐ Reactivity
☐ Toxicity
☐ TCLP results
☐ 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)

If no, explain rationale: Analysis of soil has not indicated concentrations above the 20 times rule for
VOCs, SVOCs, or RCRA metals.

6
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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 DENR HAZARDOUS WASTE
SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

4) 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 2/1/2018
☐ Preliminary Health-Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs 2/1/2018
☐ Site-specific risk-based cleanup level, or acceptable concentrations determined via
calculated cumulative risk. Enter details of methods used for determination/explanation:

5) Check the following action(s) to be taken during excavation and management of said soils:

☒ Manage fugitive dust from site:
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: PD will use typical construction
measuresinvolving a water truck spray as necessary to address visible dust.

☒ Field Screening:
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: Phase I Site Development: Soils to be
removed within areas of known contamination will be monitored by an environmental professional via visual and olfactory observations and screened with a photoionization detector (PID) or a flame ionization
detector (FID) or other appropriate technology in order to evaluate the potential need for additional sampling and/or characterization. In addition, the grading contractor will screen soil for staining and odor during excavation. If suspect soils are encountered, the grading contractor will stop work in the area,
ECS will be contacted and the soil will be evaluated.

☒ Soil Sample Collection:
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method (e.g., in-situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.); If no, explain rationale:
Phase I Site Development: Soil being excavated is being used for onsite fill and will be placed in
various areas on-site. If impacted soil is discovered and impacted soil will be temporarly stockpiled
until the placement area is prepared and/or sufficient, clean soil (cap) is available. If areas of
impacted soil are discovered, a sample will be collected and analyzed by EPA Methods 8260 and 8270
and RCRA metals. Additional analysis will be performed if warranted. The Brownfields Project
Manager will be notified if areas of impacted soil are discovered. The location of impacted soils to
remain on-site will be documented and included on the final Brownfields plat. Phase II Site
Development: TBD
☒ Stockpile impacted soil in accordance with NCDENR IHSB protocol in the current version of
the “Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup”, and providing erosion control, prohibiting
contact between surface water/precipitation and contaminated soil, and preventing
contaminated runoff. Explain any variances:

7
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
☒ Analyze potentially impacted soil for the following 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 (speciated), mercury,
lead, selenium and silver)
☐ Metals –Hazardous Substance List -14 (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium (speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel,
selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc)
☐ Metals – EPA Priority Pollutant List – 13 (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, mercury, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc)
☐ Other Constituent(s) & Analytical Method(s): Click here to enter text.

☒ Proposed Measures to Obtain Pre-Approval for Reuse of Impacted Soil within the
Brownfields Property Boundary
☒ 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
☒ Use geotextile to mark depth of fill material (provide description of material)
☒ Manage soil under impervious cap ☒ or clean fill ☒
Describe cap or fill: A minimum 2 foot cap of clean fill from site or borrow source and
an impervious cap consisting of the concrete building slab or asphalt parking lot. (provide
location diagram)
☒ Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re-
recorded if actions are Post-Recordation).
☐ Other: Click here to enter text.

☒ Final grade sampling of exposed soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or permanent
hardscape): [if not checked provide rationale for not needing]
Provide diagram of soil sampling locations, number of samples, and denote Chemical
Analytical Program 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 (speciated), mercury,
lead, selenium and silver)
☐ Metals –Hazardous Substance List -14 (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium (speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel,
selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc)
☐ Metals – EPA Priority Pollutant List – 13 (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, mercury, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc)
☐ Pesticides
☐ PCBs
☐ Other Constituents & Analytical Method: Phase I Site Development: If
'demonstrated' clean fill of two feet or more is placed, final grade sampling should not be required in that area. In cases of moving impacted soil, the final location of impacted soil may need final grade sampling.
Phase II Site Development: TBD
8
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
OFFSITE TRANSPORT & DISPOSITION OF EXCAVATED SOIL
NOTE: Unless soil will be transported offsite for disposal in a permitted facility under applicable
regulations, no contaminated or potentially contaminated soil may leave the site without approval
from the brownfields program. Failure to obtain approval may violate a brownfields agreement,
endangering liability protections and making said action subject to enforcement. Justifications
provided below must be approved by the Program in writing prior to completing transport activities.
☒ Transport and dispose of impacted soil offsite (documentation of final disposition must be sent to
Brownfields Project Manager)
☒ Landfill – analytical program determined by landfill
☒ Landfarm or other treatment facility EVO Corporation, 1703 Vargrave Street, Winston-
Salem, North Carolina
☐ Use as Beneficial Fill Offsite – provide justification: Click here to enter text.
☐ Use as Beneficial Fill at another Suitable Brownfields Site – (Note: a determination that a
site is a “Suitable Brownfields” site will require, at a minimum, that similar concentrations of the same
or similar contaminants already exist at both sites, use of impacted soil as beneficial soil will not
increase the potential for risk to human health and the environment at that site, and that notarized
documentation of the acceptance of such soil from the property owner of the receiving site is
provided to Brownfields. Provide justification:

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? Result: Yes □ No □
If no, include rationale here.
If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches: Phase I Site Development:
Impacted soils excavated from the areas of the utility trenches will be placed back into the trench as
fill. The soil that cannot go back into the trench, will be used as benifical fill on site or will be taken off
site to either EVO Corporation of Waste Management’s Ladfill in Randleman. Phase II Site
Development: TBD

9
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
PART 2. GROUNDWATER – Please fill out the information below and attach figure showing
distribution of groundwater contaminants at site

What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property? Approximately 2 to 12 ft.
Groundwater ranged from 2 to 12 feet in the monitoring wells installed at the site.

Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☒onsite ☐ offsite ☐ both ☐ or unknown
sources? Describe source(s): The historical use of the subject property as a rug manufacturing facility
and print works plant including unknown spills/releases from chemicals used in dyeing operations,
former USTs and ASTs that were located on the subject property, and the unknown source of fuel
from the former boiler room.

What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property? To the north-northwest.

Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities? ☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe these activities: Some areas of the site previously detected groundwater as shallow as
1.81 feet bgs. Therefore it is possible that groundwater may be encountered during development.

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, or sampling procedures): In the event groundwater is encountered it will be containerized and
transported off site for disposal or treated and, with approval, discharged to the City of Greensboro’s
POTW.

PART 3. SURFACE WATER – Please fill out the information below.
Attach a map showing the location of surface water at the Brownfields Property.

Is surface water at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No

Will workers or the public be in contact with surface water during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☒ No

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): A portion of Buffalo Creek runs
through the subject property. A fifty foot stream buffer will be in place with thirty feet of undisturbed
area on each side of the stream. The additional twenty feet on each side of the stream can be disturbed,
but must be revegetated and will not be built upon. Excavations and trenches on the site where
potentially impacted soils could be encountered shall be graded, bermed, or provided with an
equivalent barrier where necessary to help prevent stormwater from entering other areas of the site
that are clean and stormwater run-off from leaving the site boundaries. Any retrieved water where
impacted soil is know to exist will be containerized or diverted to an on-site stormwater management
basin where the water will be allowed to reinfiltrate or be sampled for disposal characterization before
it is allowed to leave the site. Based on the types of contaminants documented on the site, suspect
10
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
water samples will be analyzed for VOCs and SVOCs. If containerized water is determined to be above
regulatory standards, the Brownfields Project Manager will be contacted and the water will be disposed
in accordance with regulatory requirements. Stormwater which collects in areas where soil sampling
has shown the soil is clean, will be discharged, with approval, under the City of Greensboro’s National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit to discharge stormwater.

PART 4. SEDIMENT – Please fill out the information below.
Is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No

Will workers or the public be in contact with sediment during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☒ No

If yes, attach a map showing location of known contaminated sediment at the property.

In the event that contaminated sediment is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such events (stream bed disturbance): Click here to enter text.

PART 5. SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below.
Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the following
vapor intrusion screening levels 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

Attach a map showing the location of soil vapor contaminants that exceed site screening levels.

If applicable, at what depth(s) is soil vapor known to be contaminated? 4 to 9 feet, which is the depth
to groundwater

Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

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:
Remove workers from area until the vapor concentrations can be determined, use engineering
controls; i.e. fans to reduce vapor concentrations.

11
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
PART 6. SUB-SLAB SOIL VAPOR -please fill out the information below if existing buildings or
foundations will be retained in the redevelopment.

Are sub-slab soil vapor data available for the Brownfields Property? ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown

If data indicate that sub-slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map showing
the location of these exceedances.

At what depth(s) is sub-slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☒ 0-6 inches ☐ Other, If other
describe: The current location that contains a sub-slab soil gas exceedence is proposed to be a
courtyard and will not be on the interior of the final development.

Will workers encounter contaminated sub-slab soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown

In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact: ECS will monitor redevelopment activities and will work
with the Brownfields Project Manager to implement appropriate protections and/or engineering
controles. Vapors will be evaluated, as discussedin Part 5. Remove workers from area until the vapor
concentrations can be determined, use engineering controls; i.e. fans to reduce vapor concentrations

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

Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

If yes, attach a map showing the location where indoor air contaminants exceed site screening levels.

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 indoor air
during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown

In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact: N/A - Buildings to be demolished.

PART 8 – Vapor Mitigation System – Please fill out the information below .

Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system proposed for this Brownfields Property?
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown

If yes, provide the date the plan was submitted to the Brownfields Program.
Has not been submitted yet as it is currently being designed.
Attach the plan.
12
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014

Has the vapor mitigation plan been approved by the NC Brownfields Program?
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
Has the vapor mitigation plan been signed and sealed by a North Carolina professional engineer?
☐ Yes ☒ No

What are the components of the vapor intrusion mitigation system?
☐ Sub-slab depressurization system
☐ Sub-membrane depressurization system
☐ Block-wall depressurization system
☐ Drain tile depressurization system
☐ Passive mitigation methods
☐ Vapor barriers
☐ Perforated piping vented to exterior
☒ Other method: A vapor mitigation plan will be approved by North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) prior to installation and startup. The system will comply with Brownfields demonstration requirements for barriers and systems.

PART 9. CONTINGENCY FOR ENCOUNTERING UNKNOWN TANKS, DRUMS, OR OTHER WASTE
MATERIALS

Please provide a contingency plan in the event unknown tanks, drums, fuel lines, landfills, or other
waste materials are encountered during site activities.

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

Notification to State 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. See Notification Section on Page 1 for notification requirements.

POST-REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING
In accordance with the site’s Brownfield Agreement, provide a report within the designated schedule
to the State Brownfields Project Manager.

☒ Check box to acknowledge consent to provide a redevelopment summary report in compliance
with the site’s Brownfields Agreement.

SOURCE:
ALEXANDER COMPANY SITE
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
SOILSAMPLE LOCATIONS
FORMER PRINTWORKS PLANT
1700 FAIRVIEW STREET
GREENSBORO, GUILFORD COUNTY, NC
ECS PROJECT NO. 49:7274A
90’
LEGEND
SB-1
APPROXIMATE CONTAMINATED
SOIL SAMPLING LOCATION
SB-2
SB-3
SB-7
SB-9
SB-10
SOURCE:
ALEXANDER COMPANY SITE
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
SOILSAMPLE LOCATIONS
FORMER PRINTWORKS PLANT
1700 FAIRVIEW STREET
GREENSBORO, GUILFORD COUNTY, NC
ECS PROJECT NO. 49:7274A
90’
LEGENDAPPROXIMATE CONTAMINED
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE
LOCATION
MW-2
SOURCE:
ALEXANDER COMPANY SITE
IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION
FORMER PRINTWORKS PLANT
1700 FAIRVIEW STREET
GREENSBORO, GUILFORD COUNTY, NC
ECS PROJECT NO. 49:7274A
90’
LEGEND
SG-7
APPROXIMATE CONTAMINATED
SOIL GAS SAMPLING LOCATION
AREAS OF IMPACTION MAP

Former Print Works Plant
1700 Fairview Street
Greensboro, Guilford County, NC
ECS Project No. 49-7274A
SOURCE:

Alexander Company

Area of impacted soil to be capped
Area where vapor mitigation system will be installed
Sample ID TP-1 TP-2 TP-3 TP-4 TP-5 SB-1 SB-2 SB-3 SB-4 SB-5 SB-6 SB-7 SB-8
Sample Collection Depth (ft.)3-4 2.5-3.5 3-4 4-6 13-15 3-4 3-4 3-4 2-4 3-4 3-4 9-11 13-15
Sample Date
Method (Parameter)
Acetone <0.102 <0.103 0.0115J <0.0966 0.0133J 0.0145J <0.0747 0.0458J <0.0869 0.0247J 0.013J 0.018J 0.0473J 12,000 140,000
Chloroform 0.002J 0.0019J 0.002J 0.0018J 0.0016J 0.0018J 0.0016J 0.0016J 0.0017J 0.0023J 0.002J 0.0031J 0.002J 0.34 1.5
Methylene Chloride <0.0203 0.0073J 0.0049J 0.0094J 0.0107J <0.0197 <0.0149 <0.0163 <0.0174 0.007J 0.0064J 0.0072J <0.0206 58 650
2-Butanone <0.102 <0.103 <0.105 <0.0966 <0.0853 <0.0985 <0.0747 0.0058J <0.0869 <0.115 <0.106 <0.150 0.003J 5,500 44,000
Naphthalene 0.0024J <0.0052 <0.0053 <0.0048 <0.0043 <0.0049 <0.0037 <0.0041 <0.0043 <0.0058 <0.0053 <0.0075 <0.0051 4.1 18
Method (Parameter)
Anthracene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.191J <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 3,600 45,000
Benzo(a)anthracene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.909 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 1.1 21
Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.45 0.0747J <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.997 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 1.1 21
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.516 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 NE NE
Benzo(a)pyrene <0.0866*<0.0806*<0.0758*<0.0736*<0.0726*<0.0713*<0.0741*<0.0759*0.709 <0.0691*<0.0813*<0.081*<0.0893*0.11 2.1
Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.389J <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 11 210
Chrysene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.71 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 110 2,100
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene <0.0963*<0.0895*<0.0842*<0.0818*<0.0807*<0.0793*<0.0823*<0.0844*0.182J <0.0767*<0.0903*<0.090*<0.0992*0.11 2
Dibenzofuran <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.0718J <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 15 210
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.209J <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 39 160
Fluoranthene <0.45 0.12J <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 1.65 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 480 6,000
Fluorene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.0872J <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 480 6,000
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.45 <0.42 <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 0.497 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 1.1 21
Phenanthrene <0.45 0.0918J <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 1.28 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 NE NE
Pyrene <0.45 0.101J <0.39 <0.38 <0.38 <0.37 <0.38 <0.39 1.47 <0.36 <0.42 <0.42 <0.46 360 4,500
Method (Parameter)
Arsenic 3.0J <2.9*2.7J <4.2 <0.54*0.71J 0.68J 1.5 1.8 0.47J 1.9 2.1 0.77J 0.68 3.0
Barium 180 136 245 146 76.1 77.8 76.9 55.8 163 175 164 223 202 3,100 47,000
Cadmium 1.1 0.47J 0.54 0.37J 0.070J 0.18 0.20 0.61 1.6 0.25 0.68 0.66 0.33 14 200
Chromium 64.6 37.9 4.5 34.1 116 19 4.0 23.1 48.6 10.5 76.8 47.7 89.2 23,000 350,000
Lead 5.2 3.0 3.2 1.6J 4.9 5.3 0.85 7.2 9.9 0.9 4.3 20.7 2.3 400 800
Method (Parameter)
Mercury 0.055 0.034 0.037 0.0078 0.05 0.011 0.0043J 0.052 0.12 0.027 0.058 0.035 0.012 2.3 9.7
Method (Parameter)
Hexavalent Chromium <6.3 <6.4 <5.5 <5.4 <5.3 <5.5 <5.8 <5.9 <6.0 <4.8 <6.3 <5.5 <6.3 0.31 6.5
Method (Parameter)
Pesticides <2.4 <0.0026 <0.0024 <0.0024 <0.0023 <0..0023 <0.0024 <0.0024 <0.051 <0.010 <0.0026 <0.012 <0.0028 ----
Notes:
Results presented in parts per milliom (mg/kg)
VOC = Volatile Organic Compound
SVOC = Semi-volatile Organic Compound
IHSB = Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
PSRG = Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal
mg/kg = Milligrams per Kilogram
BQL = Below Quantitation Limit
NE = Not Established
J = estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below reporting limit
0.098* = method detection limit
Bold = Detected Above the Residential PSRG
Underlined = Detected Above both the Residential PSRG and the Industrial PSRG
EPA Method 8270
Table 1
Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results
Former Print Works Plant
1700 Fairview Street
Greensboro, Greensboro County, North Carolina
ECS Project 49:7274-A
EPA Method 8081B
Industrial
PSRG
EPA Method 8260
Residential
PSRG10/29/2018 11/1/2018
EPA Method 6010D
EPA Method 7471B
EPA Method 7196A
Sample ID MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-7 MW-8
Sample Date
Method (Parameter)
Benzene <1.0 2.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1 5,000 5
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 70 70,000 70
Chloroform <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.58J 0.98J 70 70,000 70
2-Butanone <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.1J <1.0 <1.0 4,000 4,000,000 NE
Ethylbenzene <1.0 7.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 600 84,500 700
p-Isopropyltoluene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 5.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 25 11,700 NE
Naphthalene <1.0 17.3 0.43J <1.0 0.36J <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 6 6,000 NE
Toluene <1.0 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 0.33J <1.0 0.58J <1.0 600 260,000 1,000
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone <5.0 24.6 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 100 100,000 NE
Method (Parameter)
Phenol 5.3J <11.1 16.8 4.0J 5.3J 3.0J 3.0J <10.0 30 NE NE
1,4-Dichlorobenzene <3.2*<2.8*2.6J 3.5J 3.5J <2.6*<2.6*2.6J 6 6,000 NE
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <1.7*2.0J <1.4*<1.7*<1.9*<1.4*<1.4*<1.4*3 170 6
Naphthalene <4.0*4.3J <3.2*<4.0*<4.3*<3.2*<3.2*<3.2*6 6,000 NE
Method (Parameter)
Arsenic <10 <10 <10 <10 <50*<50 <10 <10 10 NE 100
Barium 470 1,920 287 305 18,700 19,600 3,180 583 700 700,000 2,000
Cadmium 0.67J 6.3 0.71J 1.7 26 <5.0*<1.0 <1.0 2 NE 5
Chromium 251 384 34.9 86.6 2,580 2,960 1,050 231 10 10,000 100
Lead 68.9 110 10.5 69.9 947 45.4J 21.4 32.6 15 15,000 15
Selenium 6.7J <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 20 NE 50
Method (Parameter)
Mercury <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 99 0.15J <0.20 <0.20 1 NE 2
Method (Parameter)
Pesticides <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 ------
Method (Parameter)
Hexavalent Chromium <10 6.4J 5.3J <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 10,000 --
Method (Parameter)
Perfluorooctanic Acid <0.0019 <0.0019 <0.0019 0.0025 <0.0019 0.0020 0.0020 0.0068 ----0.07
Notes:
Results presented in parts per billion (ug/L)
NC2LGWQS = North Carolina 2L Groundwater Quality Standard as of September 18, 2014
(µg/L) = Micrograms per Liter
BQL = Below Quantitative Limit
NE = Not Established
J = estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below reporting limit
0.098* = method detection limit
Bold = Detected above the NC2LGWQS
Underlined = Detected above the NC2LGWQS and GCL
Currently Chromium and Hexavalent Chromium use the same NC2LGWQS Standard
EPA Method 6010
Table 2
Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results
Former Print Works Plant
1700 Fairview Street
Greensboro, Greensboro County, North Carolina
ECS Project: 49:7274A
EPA Method 537
EPA MCL
EPA Method 7470A
EPA Method 8081B
SM 3500-Cr B-2011
NC2LGWQS GCL11/5/2018
EPA Method 8260
EPA Method 8270
Sample ID SG-1 SG-2 SG-3
Sample Date
Method (Parameter)
Benzene 34 20 4.3 120 1,600
Ethylbenzene 11 BRL 7.7 370 4,900
4-Ethyltoluene 6.4 BRL 6 NE NE
Styrene 5.5 BRL 5.3 6,950 87,600
Tetrachloroethene 5,600 340 18 280 3,500
Toluene 90 87 40 35,000 440,000
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 44 BRL BRL 35,000 440,000
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 18 41 17 420 5,300
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 8.1 73 7.6 420 5,300
Total Xylenes 169 131 68 700 8,800
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3)
NCDEQ Division of Waste Management Residential and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Concentrations dated February 2018
SGSL = Soil Gas Screening Level
ug/m3 = Micrograms per Cubic Meter
NE = Not Established
BRL = Below Reporting Level
Bold = Detected Above the Residential SGSL
Residential SGSLs Non-Residential SGSLs
EPA TO-15
1700 Fairview Street
Table 3
Summary of Soil Gas Sample Analytical Results
Former Print Works Plant
Greensboro, Greensboro County, North Carolina
ECS Project 49:7274A
10/31/2018