22055_Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer_EMP_2019.09.06

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: 8/30/2019 Revision Date (if applicable): Click or tap to enter a date.
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works
Brownfields Project Number: 22055-18-060
Brownfields Property Address: 2151 Hawkins Street
Brownfields Property Area (acres): 2.213
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): 2151 Hawkins, LLC
Contact Person: Harri Jarvenpaa
Phone Numbers: Office: 404-614-5073 Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Contractor for PD: DPR Construction
Contact Person: Daniel LaBadie
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-413-3890 Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Environmental Consultant: ECS Southeast, LLP
Contact Person: Joseph P. Nestor
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-525-5152 Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Cody J. Cannon
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-235-2168 Mobile: [phone]
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:
Click or tap here to enter text.

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:
Conceptual plans have been provided as Appendix I. Appendix II includes preliminary grading
5
EMP Version 2, June 2018
plans. Construction activities are to begin 4th quarter of 2019 and occupancy is scheduled for 4th
quarter of 2021.
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: 12/20/2019
b)Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
2 years
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:
Click or tap here to enter text.
d)Provide the planned date of occupancy for new buildings: 4th Quarter 2021

6
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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):
Appendix III Includes figures of the ground floor of the proposed structure on the site
superimposed over environmental sampling points with analytical results indicated. Appendix IV
includes summary analytical data tables.

Metals
Arsenic was detected at a maximum concentration of 5.3 mg/kg and exceeded the residential
and industrial/commercial PSRGs; however, the detected arsenic concentrations are not outside
the range of expected naturally-occurring concentrations in this area.

Hexavalent chromium was detected at a maximum concentration of 0.84 mg/kg and exceeded
the residential PSRG. This maximum detection is associated with a sample collected over a depth
interval of 10 – 12 feet below grade at soil boring SB-9. The soil at this depth is not expected to
be disturbed during construction with the exception of installation of deep piles which if used
will likely extend 10s to 100s of feet below grade.

Total chromium was detected at a maximum concentration of 94.8 mg/kg and exceeded the
industrial/commercial PSRG; however, based upon analysis for hexavalent chromium the
detected concentrations of total chromium are believed to be attributed to trivalent chromium.

Selenium was detected at a maximum concentration of 10.6 mg/kg and exceeded the protection
of groundwater PSRGs; however, the detected selenium concentrations are not outside the

7
EMP Version 2, June 2018
range of expected naturally-occurring concentrations in this area.

SVOCs
SVOCs were detected, but with the exception of benzo(a)pyrene, did not exceed PSRGs.
Benzo(a)pyrene was detected at a maximum estimated concentration of 0.214 mg/kg (J-flagged)
over a depth interval of 0 – 2 feet below grade at soil boring SB-9 and exceeded the residential
PSRG.
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
Arsenic appears to be present shallow soils (0-2 feet) as well as deeper soils (10-12 and 12-14
feet) at concentrations above residential PSRGs.
Arsenic appears to be present shallow soils (0-2 feet) at concentrations above
industrial/commercial PSRGs.
Although the detected concentration of arsenic exceeded PSRGs, the detected concentration are
within the expected range for naturally occurring arsenic for this region.
Hexavalent chromium was detected at 10 -12 feet below grade at SB-9.
Selinium appears to be present shallow soils (0-2 feet) as well as deeper soils (10-12 and 12-14
feet) at concentrations above protection of groundwater PSRGs.
0 -2 feet below grade at SB-9 for benzo(a)pyrene
Click or tap here to enter text.
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
~96,000

4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
Generally 2-3 feet; Foundation may involve deep piles which likely extend 10s to 100s of feet
below grade. If driven piles are utilized, no soil spoils are expected to be generated. Other
foundation types may produce soil spoils. When the final foundation design is selected, the
Brownfields Project Manager will be notified.

5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
3,347 cubic yards; Appendix II includes preliminary grading plan information

6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
3,347 cubic yards of soil is estimated to be contaminated with arsenic above residential PSRGs.

7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
This is a net export site. The expected volume of soil to be removed is 3,347 cubic yards. The
location where soil will be taken is to be determined.

Part 1.A. MANAGING ONSITE SOIL
If soil is anticipated to be excavated from the Brownfield Property, relocated on the Brownfields

8
EMP Version 2, June 2018
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
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:
Rule of 20 Results for VOCS, SVOCs, and metals and professional judgment for
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity.

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):

9
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ 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.

Additional comments:
If field observations suggest contamination which was not previously noted, samples will be
collected and analyzed and screening criteria will be applied.

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:
Hardscaping or 2 feet of clean fill will be placed over areas of known surficial soil
contamination.
☐ 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:
PD will use typical construction measures involving a water truck spray as necessary to
address visible dust.

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

10
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Click or tap here to enter text.

Field Screening of site soil
☒ Yes, describe the field screening method, frequency of field screening, person conducting
field screening:
Soil will be monitored via human sensory observations, including visual observations for
staining, debris, or indications of fill and olfactory observations for unusual odors. These
observations can be augmented by a photoionization detector (PID) to evaluate VOC
presence as needed during soil excavation activities at the site. The contractor will be
instructed to contact ECS should field observations suggest the presence of impacts. Field
instrument screening of excavated soils will occur on an as-needed basis while excavation
is occurring, and use of field instrumentation will be used more frequently in areas of
suspected impact.

☐ 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.):
Prior to initiation of excavating activities, soil borings will be advanced at the proposed
locations shown in the figure included in Appendix V. As shown in the figure, the subject
property will be subdivided into 4 quartiles of approximate similar areas. Three to four
soil borings will be advanced in each quartile and samples will be collected at discrete
intervals from each boring advanced in each quartile. The figure shows the number of
samples proposed to be collected from each boring and from what depth the samples are
to be taken. The samples from each quartile will be composited into a single sample for
SVOC and Metals analyses. A grab sample will be collected from each quartile for VOC
analyses based on PID readings or other indications of impacts.

☐ No, explain rationale:

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 6010 for silver EPA Method 6020 for arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, and selenium EPA Method 7471 for mercury

11
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ 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.): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Hexavalent chromium by EPA Method 7199

☒ 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): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ 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.): Click or tap here to enter text.

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.
It is expected that the majority of the site will be covered by buildings or hardscaping.
Areas which are not buildings or hardscaping and are not covered by a minimum of 2 feet
of documented clean fill will be sampled. A separate work plan will be prepared to address
these areas once plans become more finalized. .
Click or tap here to enter text.

12
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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

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.
Click or tap here to enter text.

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

13
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): Click or tap here to enter text.

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.
If imported fill is needed, it will be obtained from a source which has been pre-approved by the
Brownfields Program. The Brownfields Program will be notified before fill is imported to 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.
3,347 cubic yards of soil are expected to be exported. Samples will be collected for each 1,000
cubic yards exported (For each 1,000 cubic yard batch of soil, one grab sample will be analyzed
for VOCs and one composite sample [with a minimum of 5 individual aliquots] will be collected
and analyzed for SVOCs, RCRA metals, and hexavalent chromium) The location(s) where the
exported soil will be transported is to be determined at a later time and the NCBP will be
notified.

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

14
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:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
Click or tap here to enter text.

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

1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
Approximately 12 -15 feet below grade
2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite ☒offsite ☐both or ☐unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

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

15
EMP Version 2, June 2018

4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
☒Yes ☐No
If yes, describe these activities:
Groundwater may be encountered during drilling or driving of deep foundation piles but not
during site grading activities. 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).
In the event groundwater is encountered it will be containerized and transported off site for
disposal or treated at the HazMat Facility in Charlotte. The water will be solidified and
transported to the Republic Waste Subtitle D landfill in Concord, North Carolina for disposal.

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.

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.
Three permanent monitoring wells were constructed as part of the Brownfields Assessment. These
wells were abandoned on May 7, 2019.

16
EMP Version 2, June 2018
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):
In the event that contaminated surface water is encountered during redevelopment activities, or
clean surface water enters open excavations, it will be allowed to infiltrate into the ground
and/or containerized and managed in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations.

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
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):
Click or tap here to enter text.

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?

17
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:
The contractor will be instructed that before workers may enter enclosed subsurface areas
where soil vapors may accumulate, ECS needs to be contacted to perform an evaluation of
such areas. ECS will utilize a PID or similar instrument to evaluate the presence/absence of
such vapors and relative concentrations if present. Workers will not be permitted in area until
the vapor concentrations are be determined to be below appropriate risk levels or engineering
controls are in place (e.g., fans to reduce vapor concentrations).

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
The contractor will be instructed when existing building slabs are removed, ECS needs to be
contacted to perform an evaluation of such areas. ECS will utilize a PID or similar instrument to
evaluate the presence/absence of such vapors and relative concentrations if present. Workers
will not be permitted in area until the vapor concentrations are be determined to be below
appropriate risk levels or engineering controls are in place (e.g., fans to reduce vapor
concentrations).

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.
~ 0.5 foot below grade (Sub-slab)

18
EMP Version 2, June 2018
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
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:
Click or tap here to enter text. 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.

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)
Not Applicable - Buildings will be demolished.

19
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ 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
Please provide details on the proposed methods of managing the following commonly
encountered issues during redevelopment of Brownfields Properties.
Click or tap here to enter text.

Underground Storage Tanks:
If encountered, the contents of the UST will be evaluated, and based on the contents; the UST will
be removed or closed in place. If closed in place, prior Brownfield Project Manager approval will be
required. Soil samples will be collected (one per 10 feet length of UST) from the base of the UST
excavation and submitted for laboratory analysis of VOCs, SVOCS, and RCRA Metals.

Sub-Grade Feature/Pit:
If encountered, the contents of the pit and the pit itself will be removed. Soil samples will be
collected from the base of the pit excavation and submitted for laboratory analysis of VOCs, SVOCS,
and RCRA Metals.

Buried Waste Material:
If encountered, the waste will be removed, characterized, and disposed of off-site. Soil samples will
be collected from the base and side-walls (one for every 10 feet of base/side-wall) of the excavated
material and submitted for laboratory analysis of VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA Metals.

Re-Use of Impacted Soils On-Site:
If impacted soil is encountered during redevelopment activities and is able to be reused onsite
based on geotechnical characteristics, the soil will remain in place and the plat will be updated to
include the location and depth of impacted soil

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.

20
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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
Report is anticipated to be submitted on 1/5/2022

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.

APPROVAL SIG(dATURES
Brownfields Project Number: 22055-18-060
Brownfields Project Name: Charlotte flii &Fertilizer Works
Prospective Developer: 2151 Hawkins, LLC Date Click or tap to enter a date.
Printed Name/Title/Company: Click or tap here to enter text.
P~ ~ -~s~= a ~9
C ultant: EC5 Southeast, LLP bate Click or tap to enter a date.
Printed tVame/Title/Company: Joseph P. Nestor, Environmental
Senior Project Manager, ECS Sou#heart, LI.P
Brownfield ~oject Manager:Cody J. Cannon Date Clicl< ar tap to enter a date.
21
EMP Version 2, June 2018

22
EMP Version 2, June 2018

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I
CONCEPTUAL PLANS

1458
C
D
E
F
G
H
PA
PC
PD
P7 P4 P3 P2 P1
J
BA
K
L
P5
PB
2763
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:00 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 01
LEVEL 01
1458
C
D
E
F
G
H
PA
PC
PD
P7 P4 P3 P2 P1
J
BA
K
L
P5
PB
2763
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:05 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 02
LEVEL 02
1458
C
D
E
F
G
H
PA
PC
PD
P7 P4 P3 P2 P1
J
BA
K
L
P5
PB
2763
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:09 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 03
LEVEL 03
1458
C
D
E
F
G
H
PA
PC
PD
P7 P4 P3 P2 P1
J
BA
K
L
P5
PB
2763
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:13 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 04 & 05
LEVEL 04 & 05
1458
C
D
E
F
G
H
PA
PC
PD
P7 P4 P3 P2 P1
J
BA
K
L
P5
PB
2
7 6 3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:18 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 06
LEVEL 06
1458
C
D
E
F
G
H
PA
PC
PD
P7 P4 P3 P2 P1
J
BA
K
L
P5
PB
2763
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:22 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 07
LEVEL 07
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 1:53:15 PM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 08
LEVEL 08
1
4
5
8
C
D
E
F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:30 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 09
LEVEL 09
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:35 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 10
LEVEL 10
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 3:47:40 PM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 11
LEVEL 11
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:42 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 12
LEVEL 12
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:45 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 13
LEVEL 13
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:48 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 14
LEVEL 14
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:51 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 15
LEVEL 15
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:54 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 16
LEVEL 16
1
4
5
8
C
D E F G H J
B
A
K L
2
7
6
3
© GenslerGensler2018
4/11/2019 10:15:57 AM
2151 Hawkins Street
LEVEL 17
ROOF
APPENDIX II
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLANS

HAWKINS STREET
50' PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
DATE: 08-07-2019 0 40'
SCALE: 1" = 40'
60'PORTMAN SOUTHEND
PRELIMINARY GRADING EXHIBIT
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE [phone]
C 2019 NORTH
HAWKINS STREET
50' PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
DATE: 04-24-2019 0 40'
SCALE: 1" = 40'
60'PORTMAN SOUTHEND
PRELIMINARY GRADING EXHIBIT
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE [phone]
C 2019 NORTH

APPENDIX III
FIGURES OF PLANS OF GROUND FLOOR OF PROPOSED STRUCTURE SUPERIMPOSED
OVER ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING POINTS

FIGURE 1VOC/SVOC SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA (0 TO 5 FEET) MAP
SUPERIMPOSED ON GROUND FLOOR FOOTPRINT
OF PROPOSED BUILDING 2151 Hawkins, LLC2151 Hawkins StreetCharlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
SOURCE:
CONCEPTUAL PLAN PREPARED BY GENSLER
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
1 INCH = 80 FEET
SB-1/GW-1
GW-4
Soil Boring
LEGEND
N
NOTES
Analytical data shown is for soil samples collected on January 23,2019.This figure presents results for VOCs and SVOCs.Ifanindividualanalytewasnot detected,it not shown.Estimated values are flagged as J-values.Values shown in ITALICS
indicate the protection of groundwater PSRG was exceeded.Values shown in BOLD indicate the residential PSRG wasexceeded.
SB-9 (0-2 Feet)
VOCs Not Detected
SVOCs
Anthracene 0.112 J
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.2 J
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.214 J
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.271 J
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.226 J
Chrysene 0.17 J
Fluoranthene 0.319 J
Fluorene <0.0858
2-Methylnaphthalene 0.104 J
Naphthalene 0.110 J
Phenanthrene 0.36 J
bis(2-
ethylhhexyl)phthalate 0.501
Pyrene 0.292 J
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.173 J
SB-8-(0-2 Feet)
VOCs Not Analyzed
SVOCs Not Analyzed
SB-10 (0-2 Feet)
VOCs Not Detected
SVOCs
Fluoranthene 0.081 J
Fluorene 0.132 J
Phenanthrene 0.488
SB-7-(0-2 Feet)
VOCs Not Detected
SVOCs Not Detected
SB-8- (0-5 Feet)
VOCs Not Analyzed
SVOCs Not Analyzed
FIGURE 2VOC/SVOC SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA (10 TO 14 FEET) MAP
SUPERIMPOSED ON GROUND FLOOR FOOTPRINT
OF PROPOSED BUILDING 2151 Hawkins, LLC2151 Hawkins StreetCharlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
SOURCE:
CONCEPTUAL PLAN PREPARED BY GENSLER
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
1 INCH = 80 FEET
SB-1/GW-1
GW-4
Soil Boring
LEGEND
N
NOTES
Analytical data shown is for soil samples collected on January 23,2019.This figure presents results for VOCsand SVOCs.
SB-9-(10-12 Feet)
VOCs Not Detected
SVOCs Not Detected
SB-9-(10-12 Feet)
VOCs Not Detected
SVOCs Not Detected
SB-7 (12-14 Feet)
VOCS
Acetone 0.0367J
SVOCS Not Detected
FIGURE 3METALS SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA (0 TO 5 FEET) MAP
SUPERIMPOSED ON GROUND FLOOR FOOTPRINT
OF PROPOSED BUILDING 2151 Hawkins, LLC2151 Hawkins StreetCharlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
SOURCE:
CONCEPTUAL PLAN PREPARED BY GENSLER
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
1 INCH = 80 FEET
SB-1/GW-1
GW-4
Soil Boring
LEGEND
N
NOTES
Analyticaldata shown isfor soil samples collected on January23,2019.This figure presents results for VOCs andSVOCs.If an individual analyte was not detected,itnotshown.Estimatedvalues are flagged as J-values.Values shown in BOLD indicatetheresidential PSRG wasexceeded.Values shown in ITALICS indicate the protection ofgroundwaterPSRGwasexceeded.Values showninRED indicate theindustrial/commercial PSRGwasexceeded.
Itshould be noted that trivalent chromium likely comprises the majority of the total chromiumdetected and is therefore unlikely to pose a risk sincethePSRGsfor totalchromium are base upon the more toxichexavalentchromium.
SB-8-(0-2 Feet)
VOCs Not Analyzed
SVOCs Not Analyzed
BKG-1- (0-5 Feet)
VOCs Not Analyzed
SVOCs Not Analyzed
SB-7 (0-2 Feet)
METALS
Arsenic 1.6
Barium 89.4
Lead 2
Selenium 10.6
SB-9 (0-2 Feet)
METALS
Arsenic 5.3
Barium 82
Cadmium 0.50
Total Chromium 22.9
Hexavalent Chromium <0.36
Trivalent Chromium (Calculated)22.9
Lead 50.2
Mercury 0.052
Selenium 9.3
SB-10 (0-2 Feet)
METALS
Arsenic 3.6
Barium 10.7
Total Chromium 53.2
Hexavalent Chromium <0.38
Trivalent Chromium (Calculated)53.2
Lead 11.5
Mercury 0.12
Selenium 3.3
FIGURE 4METALS SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA (10 TO 14 FEET) MAP
SUPERIMPOSED ON GROUND FLOOR FOOTPRINT
OF PROPOSED BUILDING 2151 Hawkins, LLC2151 Hawkins StreetCharlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
SOURCE:
CONCEPTUAL PLAN PREPARED BY GENSLER
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
1 INCH = 80 FEET
SB-1/GW-1
GW-4
Soil Boring
LEGEND
N
NOTES
SB-9 (10-12 Feet)
METALS
Arsenic 1.3
Barium 10
Total Chromium 13.1
Hexavalent Chromium 0.83
Trivalent Chromium (Calculated)12.3
Lead 5.9
Mercury 0.031
Selenium 1.3
SB-7 (10-12 Feet)
METALS
Arsenic 2.6
Barium 25.9
Total Chromium 94.8
Hexavalent Chromium <0.36
Trivalent Chromium (Calculated)94.8
Lead 5.2
Mercury 0.051
Selenium 3.7
SB-10 (10-12 Feet)
METALS
Arsenic <0.54
Barium 33.9
Hexavalent Chromium <0.37
Total Chromium 11.6
Hexavalent Chromium <0.37
Trivalent Chromium (Calculated)11.6
Lead 4.1
Mercury 0.013
Selenium 2.9
Analyticaldata shown isfor soil samples collected on January23,2019.This figure presents results for VOCs andSVOCs.If an individual analyte was not detected,itnotshown.Estimatedvalues are flagged as J-values.Values shown in BOLD indicatetheresidential PSRG wasexceeded.Values shown in ITALICS indicate the protection ofgroundwaterPSRGwasexceeded.Values showninRED indicate theindustrial/commercial PSRGwasexceeded.
Itshould be noted that trivalent chromium likely comprises the majority of the total chromiumdetected and is therefore unlikely to pose a risk sincethePSRGsfor totalchromium are base upon the more toxichexavalentchromium.
FIGURE 5
GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA MAP
SUPERIMPOSED ON GROUND FLOOR FOOTPRINT
OF PROPOSED BUILDING
2151 Hawkins, LLC
2151 Hawkins Street
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
SOURCE:
CONCEPTUAL PLAN PREPARED BY GENSLER
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
1 INCH = 80 FEET
SB-1/GW-1
GW-4
Monitoring Well
LEGEND
N
MW-1
Arsenic 0.088 J
Barium 37.7
Chromium 0.49 J
Selenium 0.16 J
Arsenic, Dissolved 0.071 J
Barium, Dissolved 35.0
Selenium, Dissolved 0.14 J
1,1-Dichloroethane 3.0
1,2-Dichloroethane 11.1
1,1-Dichloroethene 1.8
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 138
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 2.0
Toluene 0.32 J
Vinyl chloride 1.2MW-2
Arsenic 0.25
Barium 82.8
Chromium 3.2
Lead 0.96
Selenium 0.2 J
Arsenic, Dissolved 0.085 J
Barium, Dissolved 73.8
Lead, Dissolved 0.24
Selenium, Dissolved 0.18 J
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate <1.4
Tetrachloroethene 1.1
MW-3
Barium 29.7
Chromium 1.5
Lead 0.25
Selenium 0.14 J
Arsenic, Dissolved <0.06
Barium, Dissolved 27.2
Chromium, Dissolved 0.48 J
Lead, Dissolved 0.087 J
Selenium, Dissolved 0.12 J
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 3.6 J
1,1-Dichloroethane 5.3
1,2-Dichloroethane 5.8
1,1-Dichloroethene 42.0
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 42.4
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.94 J
Tetrachloroethene 20.5
Trichloroethene 56.2
NOTES
Analytical data shown is for samples collected on January 30,2019.Samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds,semi-volatile organic compounds,total RCRA metals,and dissolved metals.Target analytes which were report to be below
laboratory detection limits are not shown.Units are expressed as micrograms per liter (µg/l).Estimated values are flaggedasJ-values.Results shown in RED denotes concentration exceeds the 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Standards.
Underlined denotes concentration exceeds the residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (VISL).
SOURCE:
PORTMAN HOLDINGS, INC.
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
1 INCH = 80 FEET
SB-1/GW-1
GW-4
N
SS-1 –02/14/2019
Tetrachloroethene(PCE)403
Trichloroethene 53.6
SS-3R -03/17/2019
Tetrachloroethene(PCE)681
Trichloroethene 47,600
SS-2 –02/14/2019
No TargetAnalytes Detected at Concentrations above VISLs
SS-4 –02/14/2019
No TargetAnalytes Detected at Concentrations above VISLs
Sub-Slab Soil Gas
Sampling Point
LEGEND NOTES
Analytical data shown is for samples collected on February 14,2019 and March 17,2019 as indicated.Samples wereanalyzed for volatile organic compounds.Target analytes which were reported to be below Vapor Intrusion Screening
Levels (VISLs)are not shown.Units are expressed as micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).Estimated values are flagged asJ-values.Results shown in RED denotes concentration exceeds Non-Residential VISL.Underlined denotes concentration
exceedsResidential VISL.
FIGURE 6
SUB-SLAB SOIL GAS ANALYTICAL DATA MAP
SUPERIMPOSED ON GROUND FLOOR FOOTPRINT
OF PROPOSED BUILDING
2151 Hawkins, LLC
2151 Hawkins Street
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
APPENDIX IV
SUMMARY ANALYTICAL TABLES

TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS
2151 Hawkins Steet, LLC
Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works
2151 Hawkins Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49:7172-D
Parameter
Sample ID SB-7 SB-7 SB-9 SB-9 SB-10 SB-10 DUP SB-8 DUP-1 BKG-1
Collection Depth
(feet bgs)0-2 12-14 0-2 10-12 0-2 10-12 0-2 0-5
Collection Date
Total Metals
Arsenic 1.6 2.6 5.3 1.3 3.6 <0.54 1.8 NA NA 2.3 0.68 3 5.8
Barium 89.4 25.9 82 10 10.7 33.9 20 NA NA 57.3 3,100 47,000 580
Cadmium <0.072 <0.081 0.50 <0.059 <0.74 <0.076 <0.081 NA NA <0.057 14 200 3.0
Total Chromium <3.8 94.8 22.9 13.1 53.2 11.6 13.0 NA NA 8.3 0.31 6.5 3.8
Hexavalent Chromium <0.33 <0.36 <0.36 0.83 <0.38 <0.37 0.84 NA NA <0.29 0.31 6.5 3.8
Triavalent Chromium (Calculated)*<3.8 94.8 22.9 12.3 53.2 11.6 12.2 NA NA 8.3 23,000 350,000 360,000
Lead 2 5.2 50.2 5.9 11.5 4.1 13.0 NA NA 5.0 400 800 270
Mercury <0.0049 0.051 0.052 0.031 0.12 0.013 0.046 NA NA 0.015 2.30 9.70 1.0
Selenium 10.6 3.7 9.3 1.3 3.3 2.9 1.5 NA NA 8.7 78 1,200 2.1
Silver <0.94 <0.86 <0.95 <0.94 <0.86 <0.87 <0.96 NA NA <0.72 78 1,200 3.4
Acetone <0.0098 0.0367 J <0.0108 <0.0118 <0.0144 <0.0134 <0.0118 NA NA NA 12,000 140,000 25
Nitrogen, Ammonia <0.34 <0.38 <0.36 <0.36 <0.41 <0.39 <0.36 NA NA <0.30 Not Established Not Established Not Established
Nitrogen, Nitrate <0.30 <1.1 <0.32 3.3 2.0 2.3 5.7 NA NA <0.54 Not Established Not Established Not Established
PCB - 1016 (Aroclor 1016)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.82 10 0.94
PCB - 1221 (Aroclor 1221)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.2 0.84 0.0059
PCB - 1232 (Aroclor 1232)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.18 0.73 0.0059
PCB - 1242 (Aroclor 1242)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.23 0.95 0.055
PCB - 1248 (Aroclor 1248)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.23 0.96 0.054
PCB - 1254 (Aroclor 1254)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.23 0.97 0.091
PCB - 1260 (Aroclor 1260)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 0.24 0.99 0.24
PCB NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0176 <0.0178 NA 7 88 14
Anthracene <0.0916 <0.491 0.112 J <0.059 <0.109 <0.102 <0.0934 NA NA NA 3,600 45,000 1,300
Benzo(a)anthracene <0.0755 <0.404 0.2 J <0.077 <0.0898 <0.0842 0.126 J NA NA NA 1.1 21 0.35
Benzo(a)pyrene <0.0779 <0.418 0.214 J <0.0795 <0.0927 <0.0869 0.115 J NA NA NA 0.11 2.1 0.12
Benzo(b)fluoranthene <0.0705 <0.378 0.271 J <0.0719 <0.0839 <0.0787 0.156 J NA NA NA 1.1 21 1.2
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <0.104 <0.557 0.226 J <0.106 <0.124 <0.116 0.113 J NA NA NA Not Established Not Established 15,600
Chrysene <0.0544 <0.292 0.17 J <0.0555 <0.0648 <0.0607 0.106 J NA NA NA 110 2,100 36
Fluoranthene <0.0594 <0.318 0.319 J <0.0606 0.081 J <0.0662 0.239 J NA NA NA 480 6,000 670
Fluorene <0.0841 <0.451 <0.0858 <0.0858 0.132 J <0.0938 <0.0858 NA NA NA 480 6,000 110
2-Methylnaphthalene <0.0878 <0.471 0.104 J <0.0896 <0.104 <0.098 <0.0896 NA NA NA 48 600 3.1
Naphthalene <0.1 <0.537 0.110 J <0.102 <0.119 <0.112 <0.102 NA NA NA 4.1 18 0.39
Phenanthrene <68.0 <0.365 0.36 J <0.0694 0.488 <0.0759 0.202 J NA NA NA Not Established Not Established 134
bis(2-ethylhhexyl)phthalate <0.111 <0.597 0.501 <0.114 <0.132 <0.124 <0.114 NA NA NA 39 160 14
Pyrene <69.3 <0.371 0.292 J <0.0707 <0.0824 <0.0773 0.227 J NA NA NA 360 4,500 440
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.0841 <0.451 0.173 J <0.0858 <0.1 <0.0938 <0.0858 NA NA NA 1.1 21 3.9
Notes:
Results presented in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), analogous to parts per million (ppm)
Feet bgs = Feet below ground surface
Bold denotes concentration exceeds the residential PSRG (February 2018)
Underline denotes concentration exceeds the residential and commercial PSRG
Italics denotes concentration exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRG
J = Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
Protection of
Groundwater
PSRG
Comparison Criteria
Industrial/
Commercial
Health-Based
PSRG
Analytical Results
Residential Use
Health-Based
PSRG
1/23/2019 1/24/2019
Nitrogen
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
*Trivalent Chromium concentration calculated by subtracting the concentration of hexavalent chromium for the concentration of total chromium. For the purpose of this calculation, concentrations of hexavalent chromium is assumed to be zero if reported as below
detection limits.
Volatile Organic Compounds
Ammonia
TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS
2151 Hawkins Steet, LLC
Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works
2151 Hawkins Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49:7172-D
Sample ID MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 DUP TB
Collection Date
Metals
Arsenic 0.088 J 0.25 <0.06 0.093 J NS 10 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Barium 37.7 82.8 29.7 39.4 NS 700 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Chromium 0.49 J 3.2 1.5 <0.59 NS 10 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Lead <0.05 0.96 0.25 0.068 NS 15 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Selenium 0.16 J 0.2 J 0.14 J 0.11 NS 20 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Arsenic, Dissolved 0.071 J 0.085 J <0.06 0.073 NS 10 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Barium, Dissolved 35.0 73.8 27.2 36.0 NS 700 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Chromium, Dissolved <0.42 <0.42 0.48 J <0.42 NS 10 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Lead, Dissolved <0.05 0.24 0.087 J <0.05 NS 15 Not Volatile Not Volatile
Selenium, Dissolved 0.14 J 0.18 J 0.12 J 0.11 J NS 20 Not Volatile Not Volatile
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 2.5 <1.4 3.6 J 2.9 J NS 3 Not Volatile Not Volatile
1,1-Dichloroethane 3.0 <0.27 5.3 2.8 <0.27 6 76 330
1,2-Dichloroethane 11.1 <0.34 5.8 7.9 <0.34 0.4 22 98
1,1-Dichloroethene 1.8 <0.24 42.0 2.1 <0.24 350 39 160
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 138 <0.29 42.4 129 <0.29 70 No Standard No Standard
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 2.0 <0.25 0.94 J 2 <0.25 100 No Standard No Standard
Ethylbenzene <0.26 <0.26 <0.26 0.32 J <0.26 600 35 150
Tetrachloroethene <0.16 1.1 20.5 <0.16 <0.16 0.7 12 48
Toluene 0.32 J <0.24 <0.24 0.6 J <0.24 600 3,800 16,000
Trichloroethene <0.22 <0.22 56.2 <0.22 <0.22 3 1 4.4
Vinyl chloride 1.2 <0.24 <0.24 1.3 <0.24 0.03 2 25
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per liter (ug/L)
Bold denotes concentration exceeds the 15A NCAC 02L .0202 Groundwater Standards
Underline denotes concentration exceeds the residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
Italics denotes concentration exceeds the non-residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
J = Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit.
Analytical ResultsParameter
Volatile Organic Compounds
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
Non-Residential
Ground Water
Screening Level
Comparison Criteria
Residential
Ground Water
Screening Level 1/30/2019
15A NCAC 02L
.0202
Groundwater
Standards
Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
2151 Hawkins Steet, LLC
Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works
2151 Hawkins Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49:7172-D
Parameter
Sample ID SS-1 SS-2 SS-3 SS-3R SS-4 DUP-1
Sample Date 3/17/2019
Acetone 45.7 23.5 61.7 52.7 76.1 26.4 2,700,000 220,000
Benzene <0.34 <0.34 2.6 4.8 1.1 <0.34 1,600 120
2-Butanone (MEK)29.6 22.9 54.6 8.6 84.6 24.0 440,000 35,000
Cyclohexane 2.3 J 13.6 1.2 J 2.2 J <0.81 <0.77 530,000 42,000
Trichlorofluoromethane (F11)<0.80 <0.82 <0.83 1.4 J 2.3 J <0.80 NS NS
Dichlorodifluoromethane (F12)2.0 J <0.66 1.8 J 2.2 2.5 2.1 J 8,800 700
1,1-Dichloroethane <0.60 2.9 32.3 3.0 2.4 <0.49 7,700 580
n-Heptane 1.2 J 1.7 J <0.86 <1.7 3.3 <0.83 35,000 2,800
n-Hexane 2.7 9.4 1.1 NA 2.7 2.3 61,000 4,900
2-Hexanone 1.8 J 3.6 J 2.7 J 2.2 J 5.5 J 2.8 J 2,600 210
Methylene Chloride 15.8 13.0 12.6 26.6 12.6 13.6 53,000 4,200
Naphthalene 9.7 12.6 11.3 6.7 17.7 10.0 260 21
Propylene <0.31 18.5 <0.32 <0.74 <0.33 0.43 J 260,000 21,000
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.48 <0.49 30.2 59.6 <0.50 <0.67 NS NS
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.62 <0.64 67.8 120 3.3 <0.62 NS NS
Chloroform <0.43 <0.44 23.8 53.3 <0.45 <0.43 530 41
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 89.3 1.6 J 19.5 33.8 59.5 137 440,000 35,000
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 2.2 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.2 J 5,300 420
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 2.6 <0.89 0.95 J 2.1 J 1.8 J 1.2 J 5,300 420
Ethyl acetate <0.42 <0.43 4.2 <1.5 <0.44 <0.42 6,100 490
Ethylbenzene 2.5 2.8 2.4 2.0 2.9 2.4 4,900 370
Toluene 35.2 35.5 52.1 27.0 62.9 30.1 440,000 35,000
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)403 13 114 681 11.7 508 3,500 280
Tetrahydrofuran <0.57 <0.58 3.1 <1.3 4.2 <0.57 180,000 14,000
Trichloroethene 53.6 1.6 10,600 47,600 13.1 92.5 180 14
Vinyl chloride <0.28 3.5 <0.28 <0.55 <0.29 <0.28 2,800 56
m,p-Xylene 8.0 8.4 7.6 6.5 9.8 7.9 8,800 700
o-Xylene 2.4 2.7 2.6 <1.9 2.8 2 8,800 700
Styrene 2.2 3.4 1.8 J <1.8 J 3.4 3.1 88,000 7,000
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3)
NCDEQ-DWM = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality-Division of Waste Management
NCDEQ-DWM Residential and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Concentrations are from update of February 2018
VISL= Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
NS = No Established Standard
Underline = Concentration Exceeds Residential VISL
BOLD = Concentration Exceeds Non-Residential VISL
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA TO-15
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF SUB-SLAB SOIL GAS ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ANALYTICAL RESULTS NCDEQ-DWM
Residential VISL
(Exterior & sub-
slab)
NCDEQ-DWM
Non-Residential
VISL (Exterior &
sub-slab)2/14/2019 2/14/2019
2151 Hawkins Steet, LLC
Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works
2151 Hawkins Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49:7172-D
Parameter
Sample ID IA-1 IA-2 IA-3 IA-4 IA-5 IA-6 IA-7
Sample Date
Acetone 290 7.7 19.5 21.3 53.2 34.9 24.1 27,000 2,200
Benzene 0.49 J 0.31 J <0.52 0.45 J 0.47 J 0.27 J 0.39 J 16 0.36
2-Butanone (MEK)1.2 J <4.8 0.81 J 1.3 J 0.87 J 0.96 J 1.4 J 4,400 1,000
Cyclohexane <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 5,300 1,300
Trichlorofluoromethane (F11)1.3 J 1.7 J 1.7 J <1.8 1.8 J 1.6 J 1.6 J NS NS
Dichlorodifluoromethane (F12)2.4 2.6 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.8 88 21
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC)<0.65 <0.66 2.4 1.9 3.8 0.60 J 1.8 0.47 0.11
n-Heptane <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 0.72 J <1.3 350 83
2-Hexanone <6.6 <6.7 <6.7 <6.6 <6.6 <6.7 <6.7 26 6.3
Methylene Chloride 3.9 J 3.4 J 3.5 J 3.9 J 7.9 3.7 J 4.5 J 530 100
Naphthalene <4.2 <4.3 <4.3 <4.2 <4.2 10.2 <4.3 0.36 0.083
Propylene <0.55 <0.56 <0.56 <0.55 <0.55 <0.56 <0.56 2,600 630
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 NS NS
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 NS NS
Chloroform <0.78 <0.80 <0.80 <0.78 <0.78 <0.80 <0.80 0.53 0.12
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 4,400 1,000
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 1.0 J 14.5 <1.6 53 13
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 3.9 <1.6 53 13
Ethyl acetate 1.5 <1.2 <1.2 0.75 J 3.6 1.4 <1.2 61 15
Ethylbenzene <1.4 <1.4 1.2 J 0.82 J <1.4 1.4 J 1.2J 4.9 1.1
Toluene 1.5 1.4 3.2 2.0 3.1 2.9 2.2 4,400 1,000
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)<1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 0.71 J 0.76 J 35 8.3
Tetrahydrofuran <0.95 <0.97 <0.97 <0.95 <0.95 <0.97 <0.97 1,800 420
Trichloroethene (TCE)<0.86 <0.88 <0.88 <0.86 0.57 J 0.85 J 0.79 J 1.8 0.42
Vinyl chloride <0.41 <0.42 <0.42 <0.41 <0.41 <0.42 <0.42 2.8 0
m,p-Xylene <2.8 <2.8 3.6 3.7 <2.8 5.4 4.0 88 21
o-Xylene <1.4 <1.4 0.71 J 0.78 J <1.4 2.9 0.82 J 88 21
Styrene <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 880 210
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3)
NCDEQ-DWM = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality-Division of Waste Management
NCDEQ-DWM Residential and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Concentrations are from update of February 2018
VISL= Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
IASL (A) = Indoor Air/Crawlspace Screening Level at target risk 1.0E -06
NS = No Established Standard
Underline = Concentration Exceeds Residential VISL IASL (A)
BOLD = Concentration Exceeds Non-Residential VISL IASL (A)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA TO-15
2/14/2019
TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF INDOOR AIR ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ANALYTICAL RESULTS NCDEQ-DWM
Residential VISL
IASL (A)
NCDEQ-DWM
Non-Residential
VISL IASL (A)
2151 Hawkins Steet, LLC
Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works
2151 Hawkins Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49:7172-D
Parameter
Sample ID IA-1 IA-2 IA-3 IA-4 IA-5 IA-6 IA-7
Sample Date
Acetone 290 7.7 19.5 21.3 53.2 34.9 24.1 27,000 2,200
Benzene 0.49 J 0.31 J <0.52 0.45 J 0.47 J 0.27 J 0.39 J 16 0.36
2-Butanone (MEK)1.2 J <4.8 0.81 J 1.3 J 0.87 J 0.96 J 1.4 J 4,400 1,000
Cyclohexane <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 <2.8 5,300 1,300
Trichlorofluoromethane (F11)1.3 J 1.7 J 1.7 J <1.8 1.8 J 1.6 J 1.6 J NS NS
Dichlorodifluoromethane (F12)2.4 2.6 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.8 88 21
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC)<0.65 <0.66 2.4 1.9 3.8 0.60 J 1.8 0.47 0.11
n-Heptane <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 0.72 J <1.3 350 83
2-Hexanone <6.6 <6.7 <6.7 <6.6 <6.6 <6.7 <6.7 26 6.3
Methylene Chloride 3.9 J 3.4 J 3.5 J 3.9 J 7.9 3.7 J 4.5 J 530 100
Naphthalene <4.2 <4.3 <4.3 <4.2 <4.2 10.2 <4.3 0.36 0.083
Propylene <0.55 <0.56 <0.56 <0.55 <0.55 <0.56 <0.56 2,600 630
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 NS NS
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 NS NS
Chloroform <0.78 <0.80 <0.80 <0.78 <0.78 <0.80 <0.80 0.53 0.12
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 4,400 1,000
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 1.0 J 14.5 <1.6 53 13
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 <1.6 3.9 <1.6 53 13
Ethyl acetate 1.5 <1.2 <1.2 0.75 J 3.6 1.4 <1.2 61 15
Ethylbenzene <1.4 <1.4 1.2 J 0.82 J <1.4 1.4 J 1.2J 4.9 1.1
Toluene 1.5 1.4 3.2 2.0 3.1 2.9 2.2 4,400 1,000
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)<1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 0.71 J 0.76 J 35 8.3
Tetrahydrofuran <0.95 <0.97 <0.97 <0.95 <0.95 <0.97 <0.97 1,800 420
Trichloroethene (TCE)<0.86 <0.88 <0.88 <0.86 0.57 J 0.85 J 0.79 J 1.8 0.42
Vinyl chloride <0.41 <0.42 <0.42 <0.41 <0.41 <0.42 <0.42 2.8 0
m,p-Xylene <2.8 <2.8 3.6 3.7 <2.8 5.4 4.0 88 21
o-Xylene <1.4 <1.4 0.71 J 0.78 J <1.4 2.9 0.82 J 88 21
Styrene <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 880 210
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3)
NCDEQ-DWM = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality-Division of Waste Management
NCDEQ-DWM Residential and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Concentrations are from update of February 2018
VISL= Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
IASL (A) = Indoor Air/Crawlspace Screening Level at target risk 1.0E -06
NS = No Established Standard
Underline = Concentration Exceeds Residential VISL IASL (A)
BOLD = Concentration Exceeds Non-Residential VISL IASL (A)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA TO-15
2/14/2019
TABLE 5: SUMMARY OF INDOOR AIR ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ANALYTICAL RESULTS NCDEQ-DWM
Residential VISL
IASL (A)
NCDEQ-DWM
Non-Residential
VISL IASL (A)
2151 Hawkins Steet, LLC
(Charlotte Oil & Fertilizer Works)
2151 Hawkins Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49:7172-F
Parameter
Sample ID IA-3 IA-5 IA-6 DUP-1
Sample Date
Acetone 36.3 47.2 36.1 35.6 27,000 2,200
Benzene 0.9 0.30J 0.29J 0.34J 16 0.36
2-Butanone (MEK)6.7 3.2J 2.5J 2.9J 4,400 1,000
Chloroform 0.54J 2.4 1.4 1.6 0.53 0.12
Chloromethane 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.97 79 19
Trichlorofluoromethane (F11)1.2J 1.5J 1.3J 1.2J NS NS
Dichlorodifluoromethane (F12)2.3 2.2 2.6 2.0 88 21
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC)4.1 3.0 0.67J 0.59J 0.47 0.11
1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.46 <4.7 <5.1 4.1J 79 0.26
n-Hexane 0.98J 0.77J <1.2 <1.1 6,100 1,500
Methylene Chloride 3.3J 3.0J 3.3J 4.4J 530 100
Ethyl acetate 2.2 6.0 3.7 3.2 61 15
Toluene 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.1 4,400 1,000
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)0.50J <1.1 0.57J <1.1 35 8.3
Trichloroethene (TCE)0.71J <0.85 1.1 <0.85 1.8 0.42
Vinyl chloride <0.39 <0.40 <0.44 <0.40 2.8 0
m,p-Xylene 6.5 1.2J 1.2J 1.1J 88 21
o-Xylene 1.3 <1.4 <1.5 <1.4 88 21
Styrene <1.3 0.82J 0.76J <1.3 880 210
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3)
NCDEQ-DWM = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality-Division of Waste Management
NCDEQ-DWM Residential and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Screening Concentrations are from update of February 2018
VISL= Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels
IASL (A) = Indoor Air/Crawlspace Screening Level at target risk 1.0E -06 and Target Hazard Quotient (THQ) of 0.2.
NS = No Established Standard
Underline = Concentration Exceeds Residential VISL IASL (A)
BOLD = Concentration Exceeds Non-Residential VISL IASL (A)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA TO-15
5/11/2019
TABLE 6: SUMMARY OF INDOOR AIR ANALYTICAL RESULTS
ANALYTICAL RESULTS NCDEQ-DWM
Residential
VISL IASL (A)
NCDEQ-DWM
Non-Residential
VISL IASL (A)
APPENDIX V
PROPOSED SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
FOR
IN SITU SAMPLES TO CHARACTERIZE SOIL TO BE EXPORTED OFF SITE

SOURCE:
PORTMAN HOLDINGS, INC.
APPROXIMATE SCALE:
As Indicated
In Situ Soil Sampling Point
LEGEND
NOTES
FIGURE 1
PROPOSED SAMPLE LOCATIONS
IN SITU SAMPLES TO CHARACTERIZE SOIL TO BE
EXPORTED
2151 Hawkins, LLC
2151 Hawkins Street
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 49-7172-E
(1’&3’)
(1’&3’)
(1’&3’)
(1’&3’)
(1’&3’)
(1’)
(1’)
(1’)
(1’)
(1’)
(1’)(1’)
(1’)(3’&6’)
Depth or Depths of Samples
Quartile C
Quartile BQuartile A
Quartile D
Prior to initiation of excavating activities, soil borings will be advanced at the proposed locations shown. As shown in thefigure, the subject property will be subdivided into 4 quartiles of approximate similar areas. Three to four soil borings will
be advanced in each quartile and samples will be collected at discrete intervals from each boring advanced in each quartile. The figure shows the number of samples proposed to be collected from each boring and from what depth the
samples are to be taken. The samples from each quartile will be composited into a single sample for SVOC and Metals analyses. A grab sample will be collected from each quartile for VOC analyses based on PID readings or other indications of impacts.
(1’&3’)