24043_Environmental Management Plan R1_Gas Fired Products Assembly Warehouse_02.03.2021

Via Email
February 2, 2021 NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management Brownfields Program
1646 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1646 Attn: Mr. Cody Cannon, PG

Re: Environmental Management Plan Gas Fired Products Assembly Warehouse 421 W. Tremont Avenue
Charlotte, North Carolina Brownfields Project No. 24043-20-060 H&H Project No. RMR-012
Dear Mr. Cannon: On behalf of Ram Realty Acquisitions V LLC, please find the enclosed Environmental Management Plan prepared for the proposed redevelopment at the Gas Fired Products Assembly Warehouse Brownfields property located in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. The EMP was revised to address
DEQ comments provided on December 21, 2020. Should you have questions or need additional information prior to providing approval, please do not hesitate to contact us at [phone]. Sincerely,
Hart & Hickman, PC
Alexis McKenzie, EI Ralph McGee, PG
Project Engineer Project Manager Enclosure
cc: Ms. Rachel Russell Krenz, Ram Real Estate Advisors (Via Email) Ms. Karen Geller, Ram Real Estate Advisors (Via Email) Mr. Taylor Hall, Ram Real Estate Advisors (Via Email) Ms. Amanda Short, McGuireWoods (Via Email)
#C-1269 Engineering #C-245 Geology

Environmental Management Plan

Gas Fired Products Assembly Warehouse
421 W. Tremont Avenue
Charlotte, North Carolina

Brownfields Project No. 24043-20-060

H&H Job No. RMR-012
Revised February 2, 2021

CONTENTS
Completed EMP Template Form
Tables

Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Well Construction and Groundwater Elevation Data
Table 3 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Data
Figures

Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Sample Location Map
Appendices

Appendix A Redevelopment Plan
Appendix B Construction Schedule
Appendix C Grading Plan and Cut-Fill Analysis

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: 12/3/2020 Revision Date (if applicable): Click or tap to enter a date.

Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Gas Fired Products Assembly Warehouse

Brownfields Project Number: 24043-20-060

Brownfields Property Address: 421 W. Tremont Avenue, Charlotte, NC 28203

Brownfields Property Area (acres): The Site includes one approximately 2.44 acres parcel (Parcel ID
number 11906106). A Site location map is provided as Figure 1 and the Site and surrounding area are
shown in Figure 2. .
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): Ram Realty Acquisitions V LLC, or its assignee
Contact Person: Rachel Russel Krenz
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-377-6735 Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: [e-mail]

Contractor for PD: Kaufman Lynn Construction
Contact Person: To Be Determined
Phone Numbers: Office: 919-891-0010 Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: Click or tap here to enter text.

Environmental Consultant: Hart & Hickman, PC
Contact Person: Ralph McGee
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-887-4621 Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Brownfields Program Project Manager: Cody Cannon
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-235-2168 Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

4
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):
Brownfields Property Management Unit
Jordan Thompson
Office: 704-235-2166; Mobile: [phone]

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

5
EMP Version 2, June 2018
detailed plans are not available. EMP review without such information would be premature):
Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement, grading plans and planned construction of new structures:
Redevelopment plans for the Site include razing the existing buildings (approximate 15,500
square foot (sq ft) warehouse building and wood shed located behind) for construction of a
multi-story high-density luxury residential apartment complex with a multi-story parking garage.
Grading plans generally include leveling the Site for construction of the apartment complex and
parking garage, outdoor amenity areas, access roads, and the stormwater detention area on the
southern Site boundary. A copy of the most recent redevelopment plan is included in Appendix
A.

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

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

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

7) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Construction start date: 8/2/2021

b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
A detailed construction schedule is included in Appendix B. The construction activities are
proposed to begin in August 2021 with completion and scheduled occupancy in July 2023.

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:
There are no additional phases of redevelopment planned.

Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.

6
EMP Version 2, June 2018
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: Click or tap to enter a date.

CONTAMINATED MEDIA

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

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

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

1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list general groups of contaminants):
A tabular summary of available soil sample analytical data is included as Table 1. The soil
analytical data is compared to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs). Soil sample
locations are shown in Figure 3 and a brief summary of the soil assessment results is provided
below.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Laboratory analytical results indicate that a low level of the common laboratory contaminant
methylene chloride was detected in soil sample SB-1, however it was not detected above the
laboratory method detection limit in the duplicate sample from the same location. The detected
estimated concentration (0.0253 J mg/kg) is well below the DEQ IHSB Residential PSRG of 58
mg/kg. No other VOCs were detected in soil samples collected at the Site above the laboratory

7
EMP Version 2, June 2018
method detection limits.

Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs)
Laboratory analytical results indicate that no SVOCs were detected above laboratory method
detection limits in soil at the Site.

Metals
Several metals were detected at low-level concentrations above the laboratory method detection
limits in each soil sample. In addition, cadmium and silver were detected in COMP-2 and selenium
was detected in COMP-1. With the exception of lead and hexavalent chromium concentrations
detected in background soil sample BKG-2, metals concentrations detected in soil samples
collected at the Site appear to be consistent with naturally occurring levels in North Carolina soil.

Elevated levels of lead (1,870 mg/kg) and hexavalent chromium (0.715 J mg/kg) were detected in
background soil sample BKG-2 at concentrations above typical background levels and the DEQ
IHSB Residential PSRGs of 400 mg/kg and 0.31 mg/kg, respectively.

2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
The elevated hexavalent chromium and lead detections in BKG-2 were detected at a depth of
approximately 2 feet below ground surface (ft bgs) to 4 ft bgs. The sample was collected in an
area of buried metal debris and is expected to be limited in horizontal and vertical extent.

3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
Grading will generally be completed across the Site for redevelopment prior to the start of
construction (approximately 106,300 sq ft).

4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
Based on review of the preliminary cut-fill analysis and grading plan, shallow cut is proposed for
the central part of the Site, the pool area, and the western and northern Site boundaries. The
cut depths across the majority of the Site are to approximately 3 ft bgs, however limited areas
along the eastern side of the proposed parking deck are to approximately 6 ft bgs. Please note
this grading plan does not include the additional soils which may be generated during geopier
and elevator bank installation during building construction.

5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
Based on the cut-fill analysis, the areas of cut at the Site will result in the generation of
approximately 3,500 cubic yards of soil. A copy of the cut-fill analysis is included in Appendix C.

6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
Soil sample BKG-2 was collected in an area which appears to be at the border of cut and fill
sections. However, based on observations made in the field, it is unlikely the soil will be
structurally suitable and may be excavated for re-use on Site or export. The anticipated volume
of impacted soil is anticipated to be limited to the area around BKG-2 and total approximately 20
to 30 cubic yards.

8
EMP Version 2, June 2018

7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
Based on review of the cut-fill analysis, approximately 3,500 yards of cut will need to be exported
off-Site. The Site is a net import, however geotechnical results indicate re-use of the soil on-Site
is unlikely due to lack of structural suitability. Soil samples collected in and near areas of
proposed cut do not indicate compounds were detected at concentrations above the DEQ IHSB
PSRGs or naturally occurring background metals concentrations. The impacted soil in the vicinity
of BKG-2 is not proposed to be exported for disposal off-Site.

In the unlikely event potentially impacted soil is encountered and cannot be re-used on-Site as
fill, it will be sampled and managed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the following
sections.

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

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

9
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ 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:
Laboratory analytical results of the soil collected as COMP-2 and BKG-2,
indicated the concentrations of lead detected in each sample exceeded the
toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria using the Rule of 20 (Table 1).
Therefore, the soils were analyzed for lead using the Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure (TCLP) extraction method. Results of the TCLP analysis did
not indicate the lead was present in either sample at concentrations above the
characteristically hazardous levels. A summary of the soil analytical data is
included in Table 1.

If soils are disturbed during grading which are suspected to contain
concentrations above toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria (based on
visual observations or field screening with a calibrated photoionization detector
[PID]), the soil will be sampled and managed in accordance with the procedures
outlined below.
d) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A CHARACTERISTIC HAZARDOUS WASTE, THE
SOIL MAY NOT BE RE-USED ON SITE AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE
WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

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

Additional comments:
Click or tap here to enter text.

3) If known impacted soil is proposed to be reused within the Brownfields Property Boundary,
please check the measures that will be utilized to ensure safe placement and documentation of
same. Please attach a proposed location diagram/site map.

10
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☒ 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:
Documented impacted soils will be covered with impervious surface (asphalt pavement,
sidewalks, access roads, buildings, etc.) or a minimum of 2 ft of documented clean fill during
redevelopment.
☒ 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:
Areas of contaminated soil are not expected to be encountered or disturbed during future
Site redevelopment activities based upon previous soil sampling data and field screening
during previous assessment activities. However, the grading contractor will take into
account conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and moisture content of soil during
soil grading and stockpiling activities to minimize dust generation. Particular attention will
be paid by contractors to implement dust control measures as needed based on Site and
atmospheric conditions (i.e., by controlled water application, hydro-seeding, and/or mulch,
stone, or plastic cover). Potentially impacted soil will be managed as described below.

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

Field Screening of site soil
☒ Yes, describe the field screening method, frequency of field screening, person conducting
field screening:
During soil disturbance at the Site, the workers or contractors will observe soils for
evidence of potential significantly impacted soil. Evidence of potential significantly
impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously
disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
Click or tap here to enter text.

11
EMP Version 2, June 2018
noted during Site work, the contractor will contact Hart & Hickman to observe the suspect
condition. If Hart & Hickman confirms that the material may be impacted, then the
procedures below will be implemented. In addition, Hart & Hickman will contact the DEQ
Brownfields project manager within 48-hours to advise that person of the condition.

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

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

☒ No, explain rationale:
In the unlikely event unknown significant soil impact is encountered during grading
and/or installation or removal of utilities, excavation will proceed only as far as needed to
allow grading and/or construction of the utility to continue and/or only as far as needed
to allow alternate corrective measures described below. Suspect significantly impacted
soil excavated during grading and/or utility line installation or removal may be stockpiled
and covered in a secure area to allow construction to progress. Suspect impacted soil will
be underlain by and covered with minimum 10-mil plastic sheeting as shown in the Figure
on the final page of the EMP form below. At least one representative soil sample (no less
than 3 aliquot soil samples at a sample ratio of 1 soil sample per every approximately
1,000 cubic yards of soil) will be collected for analysis of total VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA
metals (note the VOC sample will be a grab sample from one aliquot soil sample). If the
results of analysis of the sample indicate that the soil could potentially exceed toxicity
characteristic hazardous waste criteria, then the soil will also be analyzed by TCLP
methods for those compounds that could exceed the toxicity characteristic hazardous
waste criteria. Impacted soil will be managed in the manner described below based upon
the laboratory analyses:
i. If no organic compounds are detected in a sample (other than which are
attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts) and metals are below the Protection of
Groundwater or Residential PSRG (whichever is lower for the detected compounds) and
are consistent with Site-specific background levels, then the soil will be deemed suitable
for use as on-Site fill or as off-Site fill. The proposed location(s) for off-Site placement of
soil (other than a permitted facility) along with receiving facility written approval for
acceptance of the soil will be provided to DEQ for approval prior to transporting soil off-
Site.
ii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which do not exceed the DEQ IHSB
Residential PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts or
which are consistent with Site-specific background levels for metals) and the TCLP
concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil may be used on-Site as
fill without conditions.
iii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which exceed the DEQ IHSB

12
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Residential PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts or
which are consistent with background levels for metals) and the TCLP concentrations are
below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil, with DEQ written approval, may be used
on-Site as fill below an impervious surface, or at least 2 ft of verified compacted clean soil.
If the impacted soil with concentrations above Residential PSRGs is moved to an on-Site
location, its location and depth will be documented, and its location will be provided to
DEQ.
iv. Impacted soil may be transported to a permitted facility such as a landfill or
landfarm provided that the soil is accepted at the disposal facility. DEQ Soil Waste Section
and DEQ Brownfields program approval will be requested for any potential export to an
off-Site facility other than a Subtitle D lined facility. If soil is transported to a permitted
facility, permitted facility written approval to dispose of soil from the Site will be included
with the final redevelopment report. In the unlikely event that the sample data indicates
concentrations above TCLP hazardous waste criteria, then the soil must be transported
off-site to a permitted disposal facility that can accept or treat hazardous waste.
*Please note that should the PD elect to transport export soil to a permitted facility or to
a DEQ Brownfields pre-approved receiving facility, soil will be direct loaded onto trucks
for transport off-Site.

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 Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): 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:
Click or tap here to enter text.

13
EMP Version 2, June 2018

☒ Final grade sampling of exposed native soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or
permanent hardscape). Select chemical analyses for final grade samples with check boxes
below (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): EPA Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199

Please provide a scope of work for final grade sampling, including a diagram of soil
sampling locations, number of samples to be collected, and brief sampling methodology.
Samples should be collected from 0-2 ft below ground surface, with the exception of VOCs
which should be taken from 1-2 ft below ground surface. Alternatively, a work plan for
final grade sampling may be submitted under separate cover.
Following completion of soil disturbance for future Site development (i.e., after grading
and utility construction), Hart & Hickman will observe the Site for areas that will not be
covered upon completion of the redevelopment with a minimum of 2 ft of documented
clean fill soil, building foundations, sidewalks, asphalt or concrete parking areas and
driveways, or other similar impervious areas (e.g., tightly spaced pavers or bricks). If such
areas exist, a Work Plan will be prepared for final grade soil sampling for DEQ Brownfields
review and approval.

Based on the current Site redevelopment plan, one final grade soil sample will be collected
for laboratory analysis for each approximately 100 ft of linear landscape area or every
approximately 1,000 sq ft of open area. If no such areas exist, documentation will be
provided to the DEQ Brownfields project manager and/or the DEQ Brownfields Property
Management Unit. Final grade soil samples will consist of a maximum of five (5) aliquot
soil samples collected from within each evaluation area which will be combined and
homogenized to form one composite soil sample representative of that evaluation area
and submitted for analysis of SVOCs and RCRA metals plus hexavalent chromium. In
addition, one grab soil sample will be collected for each evaluation area and submitted for
laboratory analysis of VOCs.

14
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?
Based on the initial cut-fill plan, approximately 3,800 cubic yards of soil will need to be imported.

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.)
Fill areas are located along the eastern and western Site boundaries (Appendix C), framing the cut
area in the middle of the Site. The western side of the Site will require a fill depth of
approximately three feet and the eastern side will require up to approximately 12 feet of fill.

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:
Where possible, the soil from the cut areas will be utilized in the fill areas on-Site. However, as
indicated above, approximately 3,800 cubic yards of import fill will be needed as part of the
redevelopment. The PD plans to import virgin fill material from known quarry (i.e., Vulcan
Materials Company quarry located near Pineville, NC , Martin Marietta quarry located on Beatties
Ford Road in Charlotte, NC, or Martin Marietta quarry located on Arrowood Road in Charlotte,
NC). Alternatively, if the PD elects to not import soil from a known quarry, upon determination of
the borrow source, DEQ will be notified and the procedures outlined below will be implemented.

5) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide a plan to analyze fill
soil to demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards applicable to the site and can be
approved for use at the Brownfields property.
The PD plans to import limited amounts of virgin organic rich topsoil from a commercial
landscape material vendor for use in proposed landscaped areas. The PD does not plan to collect
samples of landscaping materials prior to placement at the Site. In addition, the PD may use
limited amounts of lime or concrete as an amending agent for drying soil as needed during
grading and redevelopment activities. The PD does not plan to collect samples of lime or
concrete used as an amending agent prior to use at the Site.

15
EMP Version 2, June 2018

If soil is imported from quarry that has been pre-approved for import to Brownfields properties,
soil samples will not be collected prior to placement on Site. For import soil needed during
grading that is sourced from an unapproved borrow site, the procedures outlined below will be
followed to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable standards applicable to the Site

6) Please check the applicable chemical analytes for fill soil samples. (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s): EPA Method 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s): Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.): Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199

7) The scope of work for import fill sampling may be provided below or in a Work Plan
submitted separately for DEQ review and approval. Attach specific location maps for in-situ
borrow sites. If using a quarry, provide information on the type of material to be brought
onto the Brownfields Property.
The PD will follow the procedures outlined below to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable
standards applicable to the Site.

If the PD obtains soil from an off-Site property that is not a quarry that has been pre-approved for
import to a Brownfields property, a sampling plan will be developed and submitted for DEQ
review. DEQ approval of the sampling plan and analytical results will be obtained prior to
transporting import soil to the Site.

The specific sampling rate will be outlined in the aforementioned sampling plan. However, if the
proposed borrow source has not been previously developed (i.e., virgin land), soil samples will be
collected for laboratory analyses indicated above at a general rate of one per 1,000 cubic yards. If
the borrow source property has been previously developed, soil samples will be collected for
laboratory analyses indicated above at a general rate of approximately one per 500 cubic yards.

Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Site if it does not contain compound
concentrations above DEQ IHSB Residential PSRGs, DWM Risk Calculator risk thresholds, or typical
metals concentrations which are consistent with background levels identified at the Site.

16
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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.
Based on the geotechnical reports for the Site, soil may need to be exported from the
Brownfields property during redevelopment, a sampling plan will be developed and submitted to
DEQ Brownfields for review and approval once the volume of soil for export is known. Generally,
soil samples will be collected from export soil at a rate of 1 composite sample consisting of 3 to 5
soil sample aliquots for every approximately 1,000 cubic yards of export.

DEQ approval of the sampling plan and analytical results will be obtained prior to transporting
export soil from the Site. Based on analytical results of soil samples collected from the export
soil, the soil will be transported off-Site to a suitable location. The PD will notify DEQ
Brownfields of the location receiving the export soil. If not a Subtitle D lined facility, DEQ
Brownfields and DEQ Soil Waste Section approval and written approval from the receiving facility
will be obtained prior to transporting the soil off-Site.

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

17
EMP Version 2, June 2018
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).
Hart & Hickman will contact DEQ Brownfields to obtain DEQ Brownfields and DEQ Solid Waste
approval prior to exporting soil to a non-Brownfields property, non-permitted disposal facility,
or permitted disposal facility other than a Subtitle D landfill.

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:
Results of soil gas assessment activities completed within the proposed building footprints
indicate that no compounds are present at concentrations that pose unacceptable vapor
intrusion risks. However, chlorinated solvent impacts were discovered in groundwater in a
limited area located in the northwestern portion of the Site. Note that the developer plans to
proactively install a passive vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) during construction of the
residential apartment complex. As part of the VIMS design, the locations of sub-grade utilities
will be evaluated to confirm that the proposed VIMS will effectively minimize potential vapor
intrusion from soil vapor associated with groundwater impacts potentially migrating
preferentially through sub-grade conduits.

☐ If no, include rationale here:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
The contractor and workers will observe soil for potential impacts during utility installation activities.
Evidence of potential significant impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled
or previously disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
noted during utility work, the contractor will contact Hart & Hickman to observe the suspect
condition. If Hart & Hickman confirms that the material may be impacted, then the procedures
outlined in Managing On-Site Soil above will be implemented. In addition, Hart & Hickman will

18
EMP Version 2, June 2018
contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48-hours to advise that person of the condition.

Should impacted soil be discovered during utility trenching activities, appropriate safety screening will
be performed by an environmental professional to protect workers during utility installation activities.
Safety screening activities include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a calibrated
photoionization detector or similar instrument at all times when in utility trenches. If safety screening
results indicate further action is warranted, the work zone will be evacuated until appropriate
engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are implemented.

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

1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
During Brownfields assessment activities conducted at the Site in September 2020, the
potentiometric groundwater surface was measured at a depth ranging from approximately 5 ft
bgs to 10 ft bgs. A tabular summary of temporary monitoring well and existing monitoring well
construction details and groundwater elevations is provided as Table 2. Locations of the
temporary monitoring wells installed during the September 2020 assessment activities and the
existing monitoring well are shown in Figure 3.
2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite ☒offsite ☐both or ☐unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
A tabular summary of the analytical data for groundwater samples collected at the Site in
December 2019 is provided as Table 3. Groundwater sample locations are shown in Figure 3.

Low levels of PCE above the 2L Standard, but below the DWM Residential Vapor Intrusion GWSL
of were detected in the TMW-5 and the duplicate sample DUP-1 collected at the same temporary
monitoring well. Existing monitoring well MW-1 groundwater sample results indicate that
elevated levels of petroleum related compounds detected in samples collected in 1998 are no
longer present in the area of the former UST. However, consistent with the 1998 MW-1
groundwater sample results, a low level of PCE (3.2 µg/L) was detected in the recent MW-1
sample at a concentration above the 2L Standard, but below the DWM Residential Vapor
Intrusion GWSL.

As shown in Figure 3, existing monitoring well MW-1 and temporary monitoring well TMW-5 and
are located in the northern and northwestern portions of the Site, respectively. Based on
topographic gradient and groundwater sample results from remaining portions of the Site, the
PCE groundwater impacts above the 2L Standard appear to be limited to northern portions of the
Site and appear to be associated with an unknown off-Site source located to the east-northeast.

Low levels of several metals were detected at concentrations above the laboratory method
detection limits in each groundwater sample. With the exception of the MW-1 and TMW-4
groundwater sample results, metals concentrations in Site groundwater are below the 2L
Standards and appear to be consistent with naturally occurring levels. Laboratory analytical
results indicate that chromium and lead were detected at concentrations above the 2L Standards

19
EMP Version 2, June 2018
in the MW-1 groundwater sample. Lead was also detected above the 2L Standard in the TMW-4
groundwater sample collected along the southwestern Site boundary.

3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?
Based on the measured water levels at the Site, shallow groundwater is expected to mimic
surface topography and flow generally toward the west toward Irwin Creek.

4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
☒Yes ☐No
If yes, describe these activities:
Shallow groundwater may be encountered during utility installation activities. If groundwater is
encountered during redevelopment activities, the procedures outlined below will be
implemented. 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).
Based on previous assessment activities, contractors will be made aware of areas at the Site
where groundwater is impacted and an environmental professional will be contacted to
conduct safety screening if groundwater is encountered in these predetermined areas. Should
groundwater be encountered outside of areas on known impacts, the contractors will contact
an environmental professional to observe conditions to determine if there are impacts that may
pose a potential risk to workers. Appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken if
groundwater gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted during
construction activities.
The accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate/infiltrate to the extent time for dissipation
does not disrupt the construction schedule. Should the time needed for natural dissipation of
accumulated water be deemed inadequate, the water will be tested and disposed off-Site (if
impacted), or tested and discharged to the stormwater retention systems (if not impacted
above DEQ surface water quality standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State
regulations for erosion control and construction stormwater control.

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

6) Please check methods to be utilized in the management of known and previously
unidentified wells.
☒ Abandonment of site monitoring wells in accordance with all applicable regulations. It
is the Brownfields Program’s intent to allow proper abandonment of well(s) as
specified in the Brownfields Agreement, except if required for active monitoring
through another section of DEQ or the EPA.
☐ Location of existing monitoring wells marked

20
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ 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.
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):
When excavating during construction activities at the Site, the workers or contractors will
observe soils for evidence of potential significantly impacted soil. Evidence of potential
significantly impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously
disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be noted
during excavation work, the contractor will contact Hart & Hickman to observe the suspect
condition. If Hart & Hickman confirms that the material may be impacted, then safety screening
will be conducted during work in this area.
If surface water run-off gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted
during construction activities, appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken. The
accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate/infiltrate to the extent time for dissipation does
not disrupt the construction schedule. Should the time needed for natural dissipation of
accumulated water be deemed inadequate, the water will be tested and disposed off-Site (if
impacted), or tested and discharged to the storm sewer (if not impacted above DEQ surface
water standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State regulations for erosion
control and construction stormwater control.

DEQ will be notified if newly identified monitoring wells are found on the Brownfields property.

21
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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):
Not applicable

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?

Eleven soil gas samples were collected at depths of approximately 5.5 to 8 ft bgs within the footprint
of each proposed building. Locations of the soil gas samples are shown in Figure 3 and a tabular
summary of the soil gas sample laboratory analytical results is provided as Table 4.

Laboratory analytical results indicate that several VOCs were detected at concentrations above the
laboratory method detection limits in each of the soil gas samples. No compound concentrations
were detected above their respective DWM Residential SGSLs, with the exception of m&p-xylene in
SGP-2 and SGP-10. The calculated cumulative carcinogenic risk and non-carcinogenic risk for the Site
worst-case scenario using the highest concentrations of any detected compound are below the DEQ
and EMP acceptable levels for cumulative risks for residential use.

22
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:
As noted above, appropriate safety screening will be performed by an environmental
professional to protect workers during utility installation activities in areas of known impacted
groundwater that may impact soil vapor at unacceptable levels. Safety screening activities
include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a calibrated photoionization detector or
similar instrument. If safety screening results indicate further action is warranted, the work zone
will be evacuated until appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are
implemented.

PART 6. SUB-SLAB SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below if existing buildings or
foundations will be retained in the redevelopment.
1) Are sub-slab soil vapor data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) If data indicate that sub-slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map
showing the location of these exceedances.
3) At what depth(s) is sub-slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☐0-6 inches ☐Other, please
describe:
Not applicable

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

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.

23
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:
The developer has elected to proactively install a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS)
during construction of the proposed Site buildings in accordance DEQ Brownfields approved
VIMS Plan. The VIMS Plan will be submitted to DEQ for approval under separate cover prior to
construction of future proposed Site buildings. 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.
In the unlikely event there is evidence of potential indoor air issues (i.e., unusual odors) during future
redevelopment activities, the area will be evacuated and appropriate safety screening of the indoor
air will be performed. If warranted, safety screening procedures will be conducted by an
environmental professional and will include periodically screening by an environmental professional
indoor air for volatile organic vapors with a calibrated photoionization detector when workers present
in the Site buildings identify potential indoor air issues. If results indicate further action is warranted,
appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented.

24
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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)
EPA Methods 6020/7471

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

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

☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.)
Please note, if field observations indicate the need for additional analyses, they should
be conducted, even if not listed here.
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199 Please provide details on the proposed methods of managing the following commonly
encountered issues during redevelopment of Brownfields Properties.
During construction activities, contractors may encounter unknown sub-surface environmental
conditions (i.e., tanks, drums, or waste materials) that if encountered, will require proper
management. Prior to beginning Site work, Hart & Hickman will attend a pre-construction kick-off
meeting with the PD and the redevelopment contractors to discuss the DEQ approved EMP and
various scenarios when it would be appropriate and necessary to notify H&H of the discovery of
unknown subsurface features or potentially impacted media at the Site.

In the event that such conditions are encountered during redevelopment activities, the
environmental actions noted below will be used to assist in appropriate management of sub-surface
environmental conditions and determination of the most suitable final disposition of potentially
impacted Site media.

Underground Storage Tanks:
In the event that an unknown UST or impacts associated with a UST release are discovered at the
Site during redevelopment activities, the UST and/or UST related impacts will be addressed through
the Brownfields Program. DEQ Brownfields will be notified within 48-hours of discovery of the UST.

If an unknown UST is encountered, the UST will be removed, if possible, and transported off-Site for

25
EMP Version 2, June 2018
disposal at a suitable facility. Prior to removing the UST from the ground, residual fluids, if any, will
be sampled for VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals as needed for disposal purposes. If a UST is
encountered that cannot be removed, it may be abandoned in-place with prior DEQ approval and
construction will proceed. Where appropriate, the bottom of the UST may be penetrated before
abandonment to prevent fluid accumulation. Impacted soil in the vicinity of the UST will be
managed in accordance with the Managing On-Site Soil section outlined in this EMP.

Sub-Grade Feature/Pit:
If a sub-grade feature or pit is encountered, it will be removed from the Site, if possible and
construction will proceed. Where appropriate, the bottom may be penetrated before back filling to
prevent fluid accumulation. If the pit has waste in it, the waste will be set aside in a secure area and
will be sampled for waste disposal purposes for TCLP VOCs, TCLP SVOCs, and TCLP metals and
disposed off-Site at a permitted facility or the waste will be managed in accordance with the
Managing On-Site Soil section outlined above in the EMP, whichever is most applicable based on
the type of waste present. If the pit must be removed and the observed waste characteristics
indicate the concrete may potentially be contaminated to a significant degree, the concrete will be
sampled and analyzed by methods specified by the disposal facility.

Buried Waste Material:
If excavation into buried wastes or significantly impacted soils occurs, the contractor is instructed to
stop work in that location and notify Hart & Hickman. Hart & Hickman will observe the suspect
materials and collect samples for laboratory analysis, if warranted. Confirmation sampling will be
conducted at representative locations in the base and the sidewalls of the excavation after the
waste or significantly impacted soil is removed. The confirmation samples will be analyzed for
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals (or other analyses as appropriate based on the type of waste
material). Information will be provided to DEQ Brownfields regarding the permitted facility used for
disposal of the waste or significantly impacted soil. Areas of suspected contaminated soil that
remain at the Site after excavation is complete above the DEQ IHSB Residential PSRGs will be
managed pursuant to this plan.

Re-Use of Impacted Soils On-Site:
Click or tap here to enter text.

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

26
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 1/31/2022

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.

28
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Tables
Table 1Summary of Soil Analytical DataGFP Assembly WarehouseCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. RMR-012 LocationUST DispenserUST Product LineCrossgradient of USTCrossgradient of USTDowngradient of UST Sample IDDI-1 LS-1 S-1, 8' S-2, 8' GP-1 GP-2 GP-3 Sample Date9/4/1997 9/4/1997 9/4/1997 9/4/1997 7/10/1998 7/10/1998 7/10/1998 Sample TypeGrab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Grab Depth (ft bgs)22887.5-8 7.5-8 7.5-8 Range Mean Unitsmg/LTPH (3550/5030)Diesel TPH<10430<10 <1.0 NA NA NA100-- -- -- --Gasoline TPH<1.02,100 3<1.0 NA NA NA50-- -- -- --VPH/EPH (MADEP)NANANANAALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL------ ----VOCs (8260B)Methylene ChlorideNA NA NA NA ND ND ND --58-- ----SVOCs (8270D)NANANANAALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL------ ----Metals (6020D/7471B/7199)ArsenicNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--0.681.0 - 18 4.8--BariumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--3,10050-1000 356--CadmiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--141.0 - 10 4.3--Chromium (Total)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA--NE7.0 - 300 65--Hexavalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--0.31NS NS--Trivalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--23,000NS NS--LeadNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--400ND - 50 16--MercuryNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--2.30.03 - 0.52 0.121--SeleniumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--78<0.1 - 0.8 0.42--SilverNA NA NA NA NA NA NA--78ND - 5.0 NS--TCLP Lead (6010D TCLP) (mg/L)LeadNANANANANANANA------ --5Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Underground Storage Tank (UST) Section Action Limits for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) dated July 2016.2) North Carolina Department of Environmental 3) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005.4) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Toxicity Characteristic Hazardous Waste Threshold Level (dated October 2009)Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Compounds are reported to the laboratory method detection limit. With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). TCLP concentrations are reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L).Bold indicates compound exceeds the Residential PSRG or Site-specific background concentrations. Underline indicates compound exceeds the Industrial/Commercial PSRG.MADEP = Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection; VPH = Volatile Petroluem Hydrocarbons; EPH = Extractable Petroleum HydrocarbonsVOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-VOCs; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; TCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Analyzed; BDL = below laboratory method detection limit; ND = Not Detected; NS = Not Specified; NE = Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. ML = Matrix spike or duplicate recovery was below the laboratory control limits and results may be biased low. UST BasinTPH Action Level (1)Residential PSRGs (2)Regional Background Metals in Soil (3)Toxicity Characteristic Hazardous Waste Threshold Level (4)\\hhfs01\MasterFiles\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\EMP\data tables_rev1 1.xlsm12/3/2020Table 1 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1Summary of Soil Analytical DataGFP Assembly WarehouseCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. RMR-012 LocationSouthern Septic Tank Sample IDSB-2BKG-1 BKG-2 Sample Date9/8/20209/8/2020 9/8/2020 Sample TypeGrab Composite Grab Composite Grab Grab Grab Depth (ft bgs)4-50-2 2-4 Range Mean Unitsmg/LTPH (3550/5030)Diesel TPHNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA100-- -- -- --Gasoline TPHNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA50-- -- -- --VPH/EPH (MADEP)NANANANANANANANANA------ ----VOCs (8260B)Methylene Chloride0.0253 J<0.0098 <0.0113NA<0.0064NA<0.0075NANA--58-- ----SVOCs (8270D)ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDLNAALL BDLNANANA------ ----Metals (6020D/7471B/7199)Arsenic1.761.39 J2.00 4.29NA4.60NA4.09 7.23--0.681.0 - 18 4.8--Barium45.644.597.9 68.9NA126NA59.3 61.0--3,10050-1000 356--Cadmium<0.576<0.634<0.587 <0.514 NA1.24 JNA<0.57510.2--141.0 - 10 4.3--Chromium (Total)44.150.922.1 67.8 MLNA38.7NA60.7 66.0--NE7.0 - 300 65--Hexavalent Chromium<0.361<0.398<0.368 <0.323 NA <0.332 NA<0.3610.715 J--0.31NS NS--Trivalent Chromium44.150.922.1 67.8NA38.7NA60.7 65.3--23,000NS NS--Lead13.39.149.13 97.8NA236NA14.31,870--400ND - 50 16--Mercury0.0503 J0.0462 J0.0720 0.0522NA0.117NA0.0673 0.108--2.30.03 - 0.52 0.121--Selenium<1.43<1.58<1.461.34 JNA <1.32 NA<1.43 <1.09 --78<0.1 - 0.8 0.42--Silver<0.302<0.332<0.308 <0.270 NA0.286 JNA<0.3013.10--78ND - 5.0 NS--TCLP Lead (6010D TCLP) (mg/L)LeadNA NA NA NA NA0.238NA NA0.506-- -- -- --5Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Underground Storage Tank (UST) Section Action Limits for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) dated July 2016.2) North Carolina Department of Environmental 3) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005.4) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Toxicity Characteristic Hazardous Waste Threshold Level (dated October 2009)Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Compounds are reported to the laboratory method detection limit. With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). TCLP concentrations are reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L).Bold indicates compound exceeds the Residential PSRG or Site-specific background concentrations. Underline indicates compound exceeds the Industrial/Commercial PSRG.MADEP = Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection; VPH = Volatile Petroluem Hydrocarbons; EPH = Extractable Petroleum HydrocarbonsVOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-VOCs; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; TCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Analyzed; BDL = below laboratory method detection limit; ND = Not Detected; NS = Not Specified; NE = Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. ML = Matrix spike or duplicate recovery was below the laboratory control limits and results may be biased low. Toxicity Characteristic Hazardous Waste Threshold Level (4)TPH Action Level (1)SB-1/SB-DUP-19/8/2020Grab4-5Northern Septic Tank0-8Regional Background Metals in Soil (3)mg/kgResidential PSRGs (2)Background Soil9/8/2020COMP-1Proposed Pool AreaProposed Cut AreasCOMP-29/8/20200-5\\hhfs01\MasterFiles\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\EMP\data tables_rev1 1.xlsm12/3/2020Table 1 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2Summary of Well Construction and Groundwater Elevation DataGFP Assembly WarehouseCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. RMR-012TMW-1100.00166-169.6790.33TMW-298.622010-205.2193.41TMW-395.942010-205.7190.23TMW-493.122010-2010.3282.80TMW-592.09166-166.9485.15MW-193.689--7.2986.39Notes:Elevations are referenced to an arbitrary datum of 100.00 ft assigned to TMW-1.Depth to groundwater measurements collected on September 9, 2020.ft = feet; bgs = below ground surface; TOC = top of casing; -- = not knownScreen Interval (ft below TOC)Depth to GroundwaterGroundwater Elevation (ft)Well IDTOC Elevation (ft)Well Depth(ft below TOC)S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\EMP\data tables_rev1 112/3/2020Table 2 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataGFP Assembly WarehouseCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. RMR-012Sample IDTMW-1 TMW-2 TMW-3 TMW-4Date9/10/20209/10/20209/10/20209/10/20207/10/19989/10/2020LocationUpgradientUpgradientUpgradientDowngradientUnitsVOCs (8260B)1,1-Dichloroethane<0.27 <0.27 <0.270.71 J<0.27 <0.27NA<0.27676cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.29 <0.29 <0.290.42 J<0.29 <0.29NA<0.2970NEMethyl-tert-butyl-ether<0.28 <0.28 <0.280.92 J 3.5 4.0NA1.720 4,500Tetrachloroethene<0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.161.9 1.9NA3.20.7 12Purgeable Hydrocarbons (601/602)TetrachloroetheneNA NA NA NA NA NA1NA0.7 12NaphthaleneNANANANANANA660NA20 35Base/Neutrals and Acids (625)NANANANANANAALL BDLNA----VPH/EPH (MADEP)NANANANANANAALL BDLNA----SVOCs (8270D)ALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLNAALL BDL----Metals (6020/7470)Arsenic<0.735 <0.735 <0.7354.09<0.735 <0.735 NA1.75 J10 --Barium47.770.935.151.321.622.2NA174700--Cadmium<0.478<0.478<0.4781.56<0.4780.521 JNA<0.4782--Chromium (total)5.841.73 J<1.492.93<1.491.90 JNA11.510--Lead<2.49<2.49<2.4949.8<2.49<2.49NA18.115--Mercury<0.100<0.100<0.100<0.100<0.100<0.100NA<0.10010.18Selenium<0.6570.663 J, B<0.657<0.657<0.657<0.657NA0.942 J, B20--Silver<0.513<0.513<0.513<0.513<0.513<0.513NA<0.51320--Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A NCAC 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards (2L Standards) dated April 2013.2) DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) dated February 2018.Compounds are reported to the laboratory method detection limits. With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Bold indicates compound concentration exceeds 2L Standard. Underline indicates compound concentration exceeds Residential GWSL.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compoundsMADEP = Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection; VPH = Volatile Petroluem Hydrocarbons; EPH = Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons-- = not applicable; BDL = below laboratory method detection limits; NE = not establishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. B = Compound was detected in associated laboratory method blank. 2L Standards (1)Residential GWSLs(2)TMW-5/TMW-DUP-19/9/2020DowngradientMW-1Downgradient of Former UST Basinµg/LS:\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\EMP\data tables_rev1 112/3/2020Table 3 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataGFP Assembly WarehouseCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. RMR-012Sample IDSGP-1 SGP-2 SGP-4 SGP-5Date9/9/20209/9/20209/8/20209/8/2020Depth (ft bgs)5.55.565.5UnitsVOCs (TO-15)Acetone19 J140190180<11<11220,000Benzene9.51268662.3131201,3-Butadiene<0.32<0.32<0.32<0.32<0.321.9142-Butanone (MEK)2.5 J17 J2523 J3.4 J3.7 J35,000Carbon Disulfide130314443<1.6<1.64,900Carbon Tetrachloride<0.330.40 J<0.33<0.33<0.330.43 J160Chloroform5.918<0.24<0.24<0.24<0.2441Cyclohexane<0.34<0.34<0.34<0.34<0.34<0.3442,000Dichlorodifluoromethane1.6<0.31<0.31<0.31<0.31<0.31700Ethanol11 J5.4 J7.6 J<4.6196.1 JNEEthylbenzene1701901501409.2403704-Ethyltoluene11012090853.510NEHeptane1.8103503303.2212,800Hexane<1.3<1.3300300<1.3314,900Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE)2.52.2<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.293,6004-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)2.0223029<0.43<0.4321,000Naphthalene<0.59<0.59<0.59<0.59<0.59<0.5921Propene11 J<1.2140130110<1.221,000Tetrachloroethylene561613133.38.2280Toluene4304803403304920035,000Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)4.0 J1.0 J0.97 J<0.851.1 J1.4 JNE1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene3103402402209.7244201,3,5-Trimethylbenzene759976722.87.4420m&p-Xylene67072054051036140700o-Xylene2502602001901250700Notes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-slab and Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated February 2018.Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3)Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Bold indicates concentration exceeds Residential SGSL.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surface; NE = Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.SGP-3/SGP-DUP9/9/20205.5ResidentialSGSLs (1)µg/m3S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\EMP\data tables_rev1 112/3/2020Table 4 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataGFP Assembly WarehouseCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. RMR-012Sample IDSGP-6 SGP-7 SGP-8 SGP-9 SGP-10 SGP-11Date9/8/20209/8/20209/8/20209/8/20209/8/20209/8/2020Depth (ft bgs)86.585.57.57UnitsVOCs (TO-15)Acetone<1127026<11<11<11220,000Benzene0.69100.846734<0.191201,3-Butadiene<0.322.6<0.3214<0.32<0.32142-Butanone (MEK)<2.012 J3.7 J23 J4.0 J2.3 J35,000Carbon Disulfide<1.6<1.610393908.74,900Carbon Tetrachloride<0.33<0.33<0.33<0.330.83 J<0.33160Chloroform<0.24<0.24<0.24<0.245.13.741Cyclohexane<0.34<0.34<0.34140<0.34<0.3442,000Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.31<0.31<0.31<0.311.6<0.31700Ethanol<4.66510 J<4.65.4 J9.1 JNEEthylbenzene0.36 J650.87893701.13704-Ethyltoluene<0.30300.87 J31160<0.30NEHeptane<0.3522<0.35873.8<0.352,800Hexane<1.347<1.311019 J<1.34,900Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE)<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.293,6004-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.43<0.43<0.43<0.43<0.43<0.4321,000Naphthalene<0.593.42.18.5<0.59<0.5921Propene<1.271<1.223027<1.221,000Tetrachloroethylene2.3254.1123758280Toluene0.63 J2403.54501,4005.135,000Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)0.99 J2.0 J4.1 J1.3 J1.1 J17NE1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.2295<0.2299360<0.224201,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.26240.63 J32100<0.26420m&p-Xylene1.4 J2503.63501,3004.4700o-Xylene0.54 J952.0150460<0.23700Notes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-slab and Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated February 2018.Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3)Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Bold indicates concentration exceeds Residential SGSL.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surface; NE = Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.ResidentialSGSLs (1)µg/m3S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\EMP\data tables_rev1 112/3/2020Table 4 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC

Figures
USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP ElevationProgram, Geographic Names Information System, National HydrographyDataset, National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset,and National Transportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S.
Census Bureau TIGER/Line data; USFS Road Data; Natural Earth Data;U.S. Department of State Humanitarian Information Unit; and NOAANational Centers for Environmental Information, U.S. Coastal ReliefModel. Data refreshed February, 2020.
SITE LOCATION MAP
GFP ASSEMBLY WAREHOUSE
421 WEST TREMONT AVENUE CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE: 7-8-20
JOB NO: RMR-012
REVISION NO: 0
FIGURE. 1
2923 South Tryon Street - Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007 (p) 704-586-0373 (f)License # C-1269 / # C-245 Geology
TITLE
PROJECT
0 2,000 4,000
SCALE IN FEET
Path: \\HHFS01\Redirectedfolders\sperry\My Documents\ArcGIS\PROJECTS\RAM-012\Figure 1 - Site Location Map.mxdN
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
CHARLOTTE EAST, NORTH CAROLINA 2013
QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
SITE
MW-1
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. RMR-012
DATE: 10-29-20
FIGURE NO. 2
GFP ASSEMBLY WAREHOUSE
421 W. TREMONT AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SITE MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
POLE-MOUNTED TRANSFORMER
SEPTIC TANK
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMERUST
MONITORING WELL
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
OFFICES
WAREHOUSE/ASSEMBLY AREA
LOADINGDOCKS
AIR COMPRESSORSHED
MATERIALS STORAGE
WOOD SHED
W. TREMONT AVENUEW. TREMONT AVENUE
S. TRYON STREETS. TRYON STREETNOTES:
1. PARCEL INFORMATION OBTAINED FROMMECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS (2019).
2. AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAP(2019).
3. UST REMOVED ON SEPTEMBER 3, 1997.
4. MONITORING WELL MW-1 INSTALLED ANDSAMPLED BY GEOLOGIC AND ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES ON JULY 10, 1998.
INDUSTRIAL OVEN MUSIC HALL LANEMUSIC HALL LANEMUSIC HALL LANEMUSIC HALL LANECORTRAN(527 W. TREMONT AVENUE)(COREY TRANSMISSION SERVICE -
BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO.
23018-19-060)
COMMERCIAL BUILDING UNDERCONSTRUCTION(536 W. TREMONT AVENUE)(POWERS SITE - BROWNFIELDSPROJECT NO. 20045-16-060)
UNDEVELOPED LAND(510 W. TREMONT AVENUE)(ADAMS PROPERTY - BROWNFIELDSPROJECT NO. 21022-17-060)
TREMONT SQUARE TOWNHOMESUNDER CONSTRUCTION(MUSIC HALL LANE)(BEACHAM PROPERTY -BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO.
21033-17-060)
COMMERCIAL TENANT BUILDING(2036 S. TRYON STREET)(S. TRYON STREET -BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO.
21033-17-060)
COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING(2100 S. TRYON STREET)
(2100 S. TRYON STREET -
BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NO.21033-17-060)
RESIDENTIAL(BROOKHILL ROAD)INNER PEAKS(2220 S. TRYON STREET)MARATHON GAS(2200 S. TRYON STREET)
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ram Realty - RMR\RMR-012 W. Tremont Ave\Figures\Site Map.dwg, 10/29/2020 3:11:12 PM, amckenzie
710720700710 720SGP-2/MP-2/SB-2
SGP-10/MP-10
MW-1
COMP-1
SGP-11/MP-11
SGP-1/MP-1
TMW-1/SB-1
SGP-8/MP-8
SGP-9/MP-9
SGP-3/MP-3
SGP-7/MP-7
SGP-6/MP-6
SGP-4/MP-4
SGP-5/MP-5
TMW-2
TMW-5
TMW-3/BKG-1
TMW-4/BKG-2
COMP-2
MP-12
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. RMR-012
DATE: 10-29-20
FIGURE NO. 3
GFP ASSEMBLY WAREHOUSE421 W. TREMONT AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
TOPOGRAPHIC ELEVATION (FT ABOVE MSL)
PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE FOOTPRINT
SEPTIC TANK
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMER UST
PERMANENT MONITORING WELL
SOIL BORING (1997-1998 UST CLOSUREACTIVITIES)
SOIL BORING
SOIL ALIQUOT LOCATION
TEMPORARY GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
CO-LOCATED SOIL BORING AND TEMPORARYGROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
CO-LOCATED SOIL GAS AND LANDFILL GASMONITORING POINT
LANDFILL GAS MONITORING POINT
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
W. TREMON
T

A
V
E
N
U
E
W. TREMONT

A
V
E
N
U
E
NOTES:
1.PARCEL INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURGCOUNTY GIS (2019).
2.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAP (2019).
3.LIDAR ELEVATION DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURGCOUNTY (2019).
4.SOIL BORING LOCATIONS FROM UST CLOSURE ACTIVITIESOBTAINED FROM HISTORICAL CLOSURE AND LIMITED SITEASSESSMENT REPORTS.
5.SOIL BORINGS ADVANCED DURING UST CLOSUREACTIVITIES COMPLETED BY PHILLIP R. THOMPSON, PG, ONSEPTEMBER 4, 1997 AND JULY 10, 1998.
6.RECENT SAMPLING ACTIVITIES COMPLETED BY H&H ONAUGUST 31-SEPTEMBER 1 AND SEPTEMBER 8-10, 2020.
720
POOL
EXTERIORCOURTYARD
MULTI-STORY
PARKING DECKACCESSS-1 S-2 DL-1
PL-1
GP-1
GP-2
GP-3

Appendix A Redevelopment Plan

Appendix B Construction Schedule
421 W. Tremont
Task Name Duration Start Finish
Mobilize 1 Day 8/2/2021 8/3/2021
Erosion Control 5 days 8/2/2021 8/6/2021
Demolition 10 days 8/9/2021 8/20/2021
Mass Grading 20 days 8/23/2021 9/17/2021
Utilities 25 days 9/6/2021 10/22/2021
Deep Foundations 20 days 10/4/2021 10/29/2021
Footings 6 weeks 10/25/2021 12/3/2021
Parking Deck 12 weeks 11/8/2021 2/4/2022
CMU Towers 8 weeks 11/22/2021 1/14/2022
Slab on Grade 8 weeks 1/3/2022 2/25/2022
Podium Deck 14 weeks 1/31/2022 5/6/2022
Wood Framing 40 weeks 2/28/2022 10/8/2022
Building Envelope 50 weeks 3/28/2022 3/10/2023
Interior Finishes 54 weeks 5/16/2022 5/26/2023
Punchlist 4 weeks 5/29/2023 6/23/2023
Final Inspections 4 weeks 6/19/2023 7/14/2023
Owner Acceptance 4 weeks 7/3/2023 7/28/2023
Occupancy 1 day 7/31/2023 7/31/2023
Baseline Draft Overall Schedule 2/2/21

Appendix C Grading Plan and Cut-Fill Analysis
511-527 W. TREMONT AVE.GENE & GREG, LLCTax #119-061-012100-2120 S. TRYON ST.W 2100 DEVELOPMENT, LLCTax #119-061-05MB 33 PG 722DB 19822 PG 532DB 33336 PG 94W TREMONT AVE.60' PUBLIC R/W510 W. TREMONT AVE.FFE709.33FFE709.33FFE721.33TT710715707708709711712713714716717715711712
713
7147
1
6
717
718
719719 7107087097087077087097067
0
6
FFE721.33FFE709.33FFE709.21FFE721.33FFE709.33FFE709.00710
709
711
708 708
Elevations TableNumber123456Minimum Elevation-6.000-3.0000.0003.0006.0009.000Maximum Elevation-3.0000.0003.0006.0009.00012.500ColorC4.1CUT & FILLANALYSIS COPYRIGHT c SEAMON, WHITESIDE & ASSOCIATES, INC.THIS DRAWING SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED IN ANY MANNER OR USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.CL1103TLLCAB10/23/20DATE:501 WANDO PARK BOULEVARD, SUITE 200 | MOUNT PLEASANT, SC 29464 | 508 RHETT STREET, SUITE 101 | GREENVILLE, SC 29601
RAM REALTY ADVISORS, LLC
421 W TREMONT APARTMENTSREVISION HISTORYDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:SW+ PROJECT:421 W TREMONT AVE.
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINAParcel ID 119-061-06 WWW.SEAMONWHITESIDE.COM1111METROPOLITAN AVE.SUITE 1050CHARLOTTE, NC 28204980.312.545010/23/20SCHEMATICDESIGN0 10 2040SCALE: 1" = 20'SEWNRKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallCUT/FILL ANALYSIS:SITE CUT:2,500 CYUG DETENSION CUT: 1,000 CYTOTAL CUT:3,500 CYTOTAL FILL:7,300 CYNET*:3,800 CY FILL* NOTE: PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SOIL GENERATED BYCUT WILL LIKELY NOT BE SUITABLE FOR USE ASSTRUCTURAL FILL.