25046 - Environmental Management Plan - Harrelson Ford_Final_20221104

Via Email
November 4, 2022
NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management
Brownfields Program
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Attn: Mr. Bill Schmithorst, PG
Re: Environmental Management Plan
Harrelson Ford
6500 South Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 25046-21-060
H&H Project No. ACO-002
Dear Bill:
On behalf of TAC Harrelson Ford, LLC, enclosed is the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the
Harrelson Ford property (Brownfields Project No. 25046-21-060) located in Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County for your review and approval. The enclosed EMP was prepared to conduct excavation and
removal of impacted soil at the Site. A separate EMP will be prepared and submitted for Site
redevelopment.
Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Hart & Hickman, PC
Ralph McGee, PG Haley Martin, PG
Project Manager Senior Project Geologist
Enclosures:
cc: Mr. Tyson Reilly, The Ardent Companies (Via Email)
Mr. Dave Franchina, McGuireWoods (Via Email)

CONTENTS

Completed EMP Template Form

Tables

Table 1A Summary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical Data
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical Data
Table 1C Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 3 Summary of Sub-Slab Vapor Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Soil Gas Analytical Data

Figures

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

1 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
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.   

The EMP is valid only for the scope of work described herein and must be updated to be 
applicable for new phases of redevelopment or after significant changes in applicable 
regulatory guidance.   

Voluntary Metrics Tab 
The NC Brownfields Program updates estimated capital investment (from the Brownfields
Property Application) and estimated jobs created (from the Brownfields Agreement) whenever
possible. As a voluntary measure, you may opt to complete the below information for capital
investment and jobs created as estimated by your final redevelopment plans for the Brownfields
Property:

1. Estimated capital investment in redevelopment project: Confidential; See
Brownfields Property Application
2. Estimated jobs created:
a. Construction Jobs:
b. Full Time Post-Redevelopment Jobs:

2 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
Table of Contents
NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................... 1 
GENERAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................................................ 4 
COMMUNICATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 4 
NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM ............................................................................... 5 
REDEVELOPMENT PLANS ........................................................................................................................ 5 
CONTAMINATED MEDIA ......................................................................................................................... 7 
PART 1. Soil ......................................................................................................................................... 8 
PART 2. GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................................. 18 
PART 3. SURFACE WATER .................................................................................................................. 20 
PART 4. SEDIMENT ............................................................................................................................ 20 
PART 5.  SOIL VAPOR ......................................................................................................................... 20 
PART 6.  SUB‐SLAB SOIL VAPOR ........................................................................................................ 21 
PART 7. INDOOR AIR ......................................................................................................................... 22 
VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM ............................................................................................. 23 
CONTINGENCY PLAN – encountering unknown tanks, drums, or other waste materials ..................... 23 
POST‐REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING ..................................................................................................... 25 
APPROVAL SIGNATURES ....................................................................................................................... 27 

3 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
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. 

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. 

4 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
☐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.
GENERAL INFORMATION 
Date: 11/04/2022 Revision Date (if applicable): Click or tap to enter a 
date. 
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Harrelson Ford  
Brownfields Project Number: 25046‐21‐060 
Brownfields Property Address: 6500 South Boulevard, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County  
Brownfields Property Area (acres): The Brownfields property consists of one parcel totaling 
approximately 10.6 acres of land.  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): TAC Harrelson Ford, LLC  
Contact Person: Tyson Reilly   
Phone Numbers:   Office: 806‐548‐4656  Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.  
Email: [e-mail]  
Contractor for PD:  RCI  

5 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
Contact Person:  Drew Weinstock   
Phone Numbers:   Office: Click or tap here to enter text. Mobile: 704‐301‐0241   
Email:       

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

Brownfields Program Project Manager:  Bill Schmithorst, PG  
Phone Numbers:   Office: 704‐223‐6549 Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.   
Email: [e-mail]   

Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch, 
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):  
Brownfields Property Management Unit 
[e-mail] 

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: 

6 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
This Environmental Management Plan (EMP) has been prepared to conduct soil excavation and 
off‐site disposal of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) contaminated soil identified 
below Building 3 and Building 4 (Figure 3) at the Site.  A Soil Removal Work Plan (Work Plan) to 
conduct the excavation and off‐site disposal was provided to DEQ on October 6, 2022.  

Proposed redevelopment of the Brownfields property includes razing the existing Site buildings 
and leveling the Site for construction of a townhome development.  A separate EMP for Site 
redevelopment activities will be prepared and submitted under a separate cover. 

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:  
As discussed above, this EMP has been prepared to conduct soil excavation and off‐site disposal 
of PCE and TCE contaminated soil identified below Building 3 and Building 4.  A separate EMP for 
Site redevelopment activities will be prepared and submitted under a separate cover.  The future 
EMP for Site redevelopment will include redevelopment plans.  

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.  

Demolition of Site structures is not anticipated for removal and disposal of contaminated soil, 
although a limited amount of demolition activities will be conducted to allow for access to the soils 
to be removed pursuant to this EMP.  Please see the Work Plan for additional details.  However, 
the future redevelopment will require the demolition of Site structures.      

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.  

7 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

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: 11/1/2022 

b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):  
 Excavation and off‐Site disposal of contaminated soil is anticipated to be completed in 
November 2022.   

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: 
Following removal and off‐Site disposal of impacted soil, Brownfields redevelopment 
activities will be conducted at the Site.  As indicated above, a separate EMP will be provided 
under a separate cover for the redevelopment activities.  

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: TBD

CONTAMINATED MEDIA 
Please fill out the sections 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) Contaminated Media on the Brownfields Property 
Part 1. Soil:……………………………………….……………. ☒  Yes   ☐ No   ☐ Suspected  ☐ Unknown 
Part 2. Groundwater:.……………………….……..……. ☒  Yes   ☐ No   ☐ Suspected  ☐ Unknown 
Part 3. Surface Water:.……………...……..…………… ☐  Yes   ☒ No   ☐ Suspected  ☐ Unknown 
Part 4. Sediment:.……………...……..…………………… ☐  Yes   ☒ No   ☐ Suspected  ☐ Unknown 
Part 5. Soil Vapor:…..…………...……..…………………. ☒  Yes   ☐ No   ☐ Suspected  ☐ Unknown 

8 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
Part 6. Sub‐Slab Soil Vapor:……...……..…………….. ☒  Yes   ☐ No   ☐ Suspected  ☐ Unknown 
Part 7. Indoor Air:...……..…………………………………. ☐  Yes   ☐ No   ☐ Suspected  ☒ Unknown 

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 
1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list general groups of contaminants): 
Soil assessment activities were conducted at the Brownfields property in August 2021 and May 
2022.  A tabular summary of the soil sample laboratory analytical results collected at the 
Brownfields property is included as Table 1A through Table 1C and soil sample locations are shown 
in Figure 3.  A summary of the laboratory analytical results of the soil samples collected at the Site 
is provided below: 

Volatile Organic Compounds 
Soil sample analytical results indicate the presence of low‐level concentrations of volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs).  VOCs were not detected above Residential and Non‐Residential Preliminary 
Soil Remedial Goals (PSRGs).  However, VOCs were detected above their respective Protection of 
Groundwater (POG) PSRGs.  A summary of VOCs detected above POG PSRGs is provided below.  

 Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) was detected above the IHSB Protection of Groundwater (POG) PSRG 
of 0.0063 mg/kg in samples SB‐2, HL‐10, HL‐17, HL‐20, HL‐22, HL‐23, MP‐18, MP‐18A, MP‐18B. 
MP‐18C, and MP‐18D in Building 3 and in soil samples SB‐6, SB‐7, MP‐43, MP‐43B, and MP‐43C 
in Building 4 (Figure 3).  Concentrations of PCE detected above the IHSB POG PSRG ranged from 
0.014 mg/kg (HL‐17) to 1.3 mg/kg (MP‐43B).  

 Trichloroethylene (TCE) was also detected above the IHSB POG PSRG of 0.021 mg/kg in samples 
HL‐20 (0.93 mg/kg) and MP‐43B (0.031 mg/kg).  

 Naphthalene was detected in above the IHSB POG PSRG of 0.39 mg/kg in HL‐20 (0.55 mg/kg) 

 Methylene chloride was detected above the IHSB POG PSRG of 0.025 mg/kg in samples SB‐6 
(0.0748 mg/kg), SB‐7 (0.0596 mg/kg), and SB‐8 (0.0596 mg/kg). 

 No other VOCs were detected above IHSB POG PSRGs. 

Semi‐Volatile Organic Compounds 
Soil sample analytical results indicate that trace levels of semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) 
were present in Site soils. The SVOC concentrations detected were below their respective DEQ 
Residential and Non‐Residential PSRGs. 1‐Methylnapthalene was detected above the POG PSRG 
of 0.11 mg/kg in sample HL‐17 (0.18 J mg/kg).  No other SVOCs were detected above PSRGs. 

9 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

Metals 
Due to the natural presence of metals in soil, metals were detected above the laboratory method 
detection limits. The concentrations of metals detected in soil were generally within Site‐specific 
background concentrations.  However, selenium was detected slightly above the IHSB POG PSRG 
of 2.1 mg/kg and above the Site‐specific background range of 0.543 mg/kg in sample HL‐18 (2.98 
J mg/kg).   

Hexavalent chromium was not detected above laboratory method detection limits in background 
samples collected at the Site.  Hexavalent chromium was detected above the IHSB Residential 
PSRG of 0.31 mg/kg in samples HL‐18, HL‐23, SB‐1, SB‐2, SB‐4/SB‐DUP‐2, SB‐5, SB‐6, SB‐7, and MP‐
18.  Concentrations of hexavalent chromium detected above the Residential PSRG ranged from 
0.487 J mg/kg (HL‐18) to 1.47 mg/kg (MP‐18).  Concentrations of hexavalent chromium detected 
above the Residential PSRG generally correlate with the locations of former in‐ground lifts, trench 
drains associated with the OWS system, former wash bay floor drain, and near the former auto 
repair operations on the northern side of Building 3.  

The remaining metal concentrations detected were within background ranges and/or below IHSB 
PSRGs.  

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons ‐ Diesel Range Organics 
Total petroleum hydrocarbons ‐ diesel range organics (TPH‐DRO) concentrations were detected 
above the DEQ UST Section Action Level of 100 mg/kg in samples HL‐17, HL‐18, HL‐20, HL‐22, and 
HL‐23/SB‐DUP‐1.  Concentrations of TPH‐DRO detected above the DEQ UST Action Level ranged 
from 107 mg/kg (HL‐22) to 2,780 (HL‐17). 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls 
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were not detected in the Brownfields soil assessment activities 
at concentrations above the DEQ PSRGs in soil samples collected at the Site. 

2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet): 
Compounds were detected in soil above the POG PSRG at depths ranging from 0 ft to 1 ft below 
ground surface (bgs) to 8 ft to 10 ft bgs.  

3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet): 
Not applicable 

4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet): 
As discussed in the Work Plan, soil excavation will be conducted at the Site to remove PCE and 
TCE impacts.  It is anticipated that the maximum excavation depth will be 10 ft bgs based upon 
previous assessment conducted at the Site and depth to groundwater.  

5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan): 

10 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
As indicated in the Work Plan, field screening methods in conjunction with a mobile laboratory 
will be utilized to determine the lateral and vertical extent of the excavation areas. The volume 
of soil to be excavated is to be determined (TBD), but is estimated that 6,000 cubic yards of soil 
will be excavated.   

6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:             
It is anticipated that the excavated soil will be impacted. As indicated above the volume of soil is 
TBD, but it is estimated that 6,000 cubic yards of soil will be excavated.  

7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:   
It is anticipated that the excavated soil will be disposed of off‐site. As indicated above the 
volume of soil is TBD, but it is estimated that 6,000 cubic yards of soil will be excavated.  Soil will 
be disposed of at Republic Services soil waste landfill in Concord, North Carolina.  

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. 

11 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
☐ 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:  
Laboratory analysis of soil samples collected during previous assessment 
activities did not identify compound concentrations at characteristically 
hazardous levels or levels which exceed TCLP criteria using the Rule of 20. 

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

2) Screening criteria by which soil disposition decisions will be made (e.g., left in place, capped in 
place with low permeability barrier, removed to onsite location and capped, removed offsite): 
      ☒ Preliminary Health‐Based Residential SRGs  
      ☐ Preliminary Health‐Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs  
           ☐ Division of Waste Management Risk Calculator (For Brownfields Properties Only) 
    ☒ Site‐specific risk‐based cleanup level. Please provide details of methods used for 
determination/explanation.  
For the proposed soil excavation activities that are the subject of this EMP, soil impacted 
with PCE and TCE will be removed to the extent required by the Work Plan.  Soil disposition 
decisions for the redevelopment following the soil excavation will be made based‐upon the 
Residential PSRG.  
Additional comments:  
Click or tap here to enter text. 

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

12 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
☐ Manage soil under impervious cap ☐  or clean fill ☐  
☐ Describe cap or fill:  

☐ 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: 
The proposed excavation activities will occur inside Building 3 and Building 4.  As discussed 
in the Work Plan, soil will be direct loaded onto trucks for off‐site disposal, and it is not 
anticipated that impacted soil will be stockpiled outside the buildings.  In the event 
excavated soil is stockpiled in an exterior location, the remedial  contractor will take into 
account conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and moisture content of soil during 
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 and may be controlled using water application or plastic cover. 

☐ 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 excavation, a photo‐ionization detector will be utilized to screen the breathing 
zone and work area for elevated levels for organic vapors.   

☐ 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.):  
As discussed in the Soil Excavation Work Plan, post‐excavation confirmation samples for 
laboratory analysis from the sidewalls and base of the excavations will be collected.  Please 
note based on the depth to groundwater, it is not anticipated that samples will be collected 
at a depth of greater than 9 ft bgs.  

Soil sample aliquots collected from Building 3 and Building 4 will be collected from shallow 
Soil generated as part of the soil excavation activities described in the EMP will not be reused on‐Site.  

13 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
(0‐3 ft bgs), middle (3‐6 ft bgs), and deeper (6‐9 ft bgs) depth intervals at locations every 10 
linear feet of excavation sidewall and base extents.  The shallow, middle, and deep aliquot 
samples will be field screened for the presence of volatile organic vapors using a calibrated 
PID and hand‐held gas chromatograph.  The soil sample exhibiting the highest likelihood 
for impacts based on field screening results will be collected for laboratory analysis.  If field 
screening results do not indicate the potential for impact in sample aliquots collected from 
a sample location, then the middle depth (3‐6 ft bgs) aliquot will be selected for laboratory 
analysis.   

Soil samples selected for laboratory analysis will be placed in dedicated laboratory‐supplied 
sample containers, labeled with the sample identification, date, and requested analysis, 
and placed in a laboratory‐supplied cooler with ice.  The samples will be submitted to a 
North Carolina‐certified laboratory under standard chain of custody protocols for 
laboratory analysis of VOCs by EPA Method 8260.  For quality control and quality assurance 
purposes, one duplicate soil sample will be collected for every 20 soil samples collected and 
submitted for laboratory analysis for the same parameters as the parent soil sample. 

Based on the results of the confirmation sidewall and base soil samples, H&H will determine 
if over‐excavation activities are warranted.  In the event that confirmation sample analytical 
results indicate the PCE or TCE are present above concentrations described in the Work 
Plan, additional excavation activities will be completed in isolated areas as determined by 
analytical results.  After additional excavation activities are completed, another round of 
confirmation soil samples will be collected in accordance with the methodologies described 
above and as described in the Work Plan.   

☐ 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): 

☐ 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): 

14 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

☒ 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): 

☐ 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.):  

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, indicate if a work 
plan for final grade sampling may be submitted under separate cover. 
Click or tap here to enter text. 

☒ If final grade sampling was NOT selected, please explain rationale: 
Final grade sampling is not appliable to this phase of work.  A scope of work for final 
grade sampling will be provided in the future redevelopment EMP  

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 
As discussed above, it is anticipated that excavated soil will be direct loaded onto trucks for transport 
and disposal.  If soil is stockpiled on‐site in an exterior location, soil will be stockpiled in accordance 
with Figure 1 of the EMP.   

15 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
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?  
Once post‐excavation laboratory analytical results meet the criteria outlined above, the 
excavations will be backfilled with clean fill.  The clean fill will be sourced from a DEQ‐approved 
facility.  Alternatively, the excavations may be backfilled with soil from other portions of the Site 
that is not impacted.  The volume of soil needed for import is dependent on the excavation 
extents.  As such, the volume of soil import needed is TBD. 

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.) 
The range of fill depth for the soil excavation will be determined based upon the extent of the 
excavation.  However, it is anticipated fill will be placed at depths of 2 ft bgs to 10 ft bgs. 

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: 
As indicated above, import fill will be sourced from a DEQ‐approved facility.   

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. 

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): 

☐ 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.

16 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

☐ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent 
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):  

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 necessary. 

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

If fill soil is obtained from an off‐Site property that is not a Brownfields pre‐approved quarry or is 
recycled material from the Vulcan Materials Company quarry or the Martin Marietta quarries, then 
soil samples will be collected for laboratory analyses at a general rate of 1 sample per 1,000 cubic 
yards.  Representative composite soil samples (no less than 3 aliquot soil samples) will be collected 
for VOCs by EPA Method 8260, SVOCs by EPA Method 8270, and RCRA metals plus hexavalent 
chromium by EPA Methods 6020/7199.  The VOC sample would be a grab sample from the aliquot 
with the highest field screening reading.  DEQ approval of the fill soils will be obtained prior to 
transporting import soil to the Site. 

Imported fill soil laboratory analytical results will not exceed DEQ Residential PSRGs, DWM Risk 
Calculator risk thresholds, or established background metals concentrations.   

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. 
As discussed in the Work Plan, soil generated during the excavation activities will be direct 

17 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
loaded onto trucks for off‐Site disposal at Republic Services soil waste landfill in Concord, North 
Carolina.  Based upon previous assessment conducted the Site, excavated soil is anticipated to be 
primarily impacted with PCE above POG PSRGs. The extent of the excavations and volume of soil 
removed will be determined in the field utilizing field screening methods, mobile laboratory, and 
confirmation sampling.  It estimated that approximately 6,000 cubic yards of soil will be 
excavated and disposed of 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 
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). 

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 or provide the results of this evaluation in the 
Vapor Mitigation Plan. Note that if vapor mitigation is planned for site buildings, utility 
corridors will need to be evaluated as part of mitigation designs: 

18 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

☒ If no, include rationale here: 
Utility trenches will not be installed during this phase of the project. 

☐ Unknown, details to be provided in the Vapor Mitigation Plan for site buildings 

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:  

PART 2. GROUNDWATER  

1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property? 
During previously completed groundwater assessment activities, the depth to groundwater was 
measured at depths ranging from approximately 9.5 ft bgs in the eastern portion of the 
Brownfields property to approximately 17 ft bgs at higher topographic elevations located in the 
southern portion of the Brownfields property.  

2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite  ☒offsite   ☐both or ☐unknown 
sources?  Describe source(s):  
Previous groundwater assessment at the Brownfields property included collection of six (6) 
groundwater samples for laboratory analysis. A tabular summary of groundwater sample 
laboratory analytical results is included as Table 2. A brief summary of the groundwater 
assessment results is provided below. 

VOCs 
PCE was detected above the NCAC 15A 2L Groundwater Standard (2L Standard) of 0.7 µg/L in 
sample TMW‐6/TMW‐DUP (2.4 µg/L / 2.5 µg/L), but below the IHSB Residential Vapor Intrusion 
Groundwater Screening Level (GWSL).  No other VOCs were detected above 2L Standards or IHSB 
GWSLs.  The location of TMW‐6 is shown in Figure 3.  

SVOCs 
SVOCs were not detected above 2L Standards.  

Metals 
Groundwater analytical results indicate that arsenic, barium, chromium, and lead were detected 
at concentrations above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the 2L Standards.  

3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?  
Shallow groundwater is expected to mimic surface topography which slopes generally east. 

4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?   
☒Yes    ☐No  
If yes, describe these activities: 
Shallow groundwater may be encountered during excavation activities.  If groundwater is 

19 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
encountered during excavation 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 of known impacts, the contractor 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 excavation schedule or be used on the Brownfields property for dust 
control purposes.  Should the time needed for natural dissipation of accumulated water be 
deemed inadequate, an environmental professional will be contacted and 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. 

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:   

The PD is not aware of existing monitoring wells located on the Brownfields property.  The DEQ will be 
notified if newly identified monitoring wells are found on the Brownfields property. 

20 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
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 
1) Is surface water present at the property?  ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown 
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): 
Surface water is not present at the property.  The proposed excavation will be conducted inside 
Building 3 and Building 4. Therefore, it is not anticipated that surface water will enter open 
excavations. 

PART 4. SEDIMENT 

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

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

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): 
As indicated above, the proposed excavation activities will be conducted inside Building 3 and 
Building 4.   

PART 5.  SOIL VAPOR 

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 

21 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
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?  

4) Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities? 

  ☒ Yes  ☐ No ☐ Unknown  In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during 
redevelopment activities (trenches, manways, basements or other subsurface work,) list 
activities for management of such contact:  
As noted above, appropriate safety screening will be performed to protect workers during sub‐
grade excavation activities.  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, an environmental professional will monitor the work zone 
and determine if engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are warranted.   

PART 6.  SUB‐SLAB SOIL VAPOR 
1) Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the 
following vapor intrusion screening levels (current version) in sub‐slab soil vapor: 
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) 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:   
A total of ten sub‐slab soil gas samples were collected inside Building 3 and Building 4. The sub‐slab 
vapor sample locations are shown in Figure 5 and a tabular summary of the laboratory analytical 
Six soil gas samples were collected in the vicinity of in Building 3 and Building 4 (SG‐2, SG‐3, SG‐8, SG‐
12, SG‐13 and SG‐16)  are shown in Figure 3 and a tabular summary of the laboratory analytical data is 
provided in Table 3.  

Compounds detected above their respective Division of Waste Management (DWM) Residential Soil 
Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) in the soil gas samples collected in the vicinity of Building 3 and Building 
4 include: 1,1,2,2‐ tetrachloroethane, benzene, bromodichloromethane, chloroform, methyl‐tert butyl 
ether, and naphthalene.  Chloroform was also detected above the DWM Non‐Residential SGSLs in the 
soil gas samples collected in the vicinity of Building 3 and Building 4.  

22 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
data is provided in Table 4.  

Compounds detected above their respective DWM Residential SGSLs in the sub‐slab soil gas 
samples included 1,3‐butadiene, benzene, ethylbenzene, PCE, TCE, and vinyl chloride.  PCE, TCE, 
and vinyl chloride were also detected above their respective DWM Non‐Residential SGSLs in the 
sub‐slab soil gas samples collected inside Building 3 and Building 4.  

As discussed in the Work Plan, results of the recent field screening survey, sub‐slab soil gas, soil, 
and groundwater sampling activities confirm the conceptual Site models for Building 3 and Building 
4 and indicate that contributions of chlorinated compound concentrations detected in soil gas are 
attributable to soil impacts below the Site buildings.  As discussed in the Work Plan, the PD has 
proposed removal of PCE and TCE impacted soil from below Building 3 and Building 4 . 

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

☐ If no, include rationale here: 

5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list 
activities for management of such contact 
As noted above, appropriate safety screening will be performed to protect workers during sub‐
grade excavation activities.  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, an environmental professional will monitor the work zone 
and determine if engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are warranted.   

PART 7. INDOOR AIR 

1) Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes   ☒ No   ☐ Unknown 
2) Attach a map showing the location(s) where indoor air contaminants exceed site screening levels. 
3) If the structures where indoor air has been documented to exceed risk‐based screening levels will 
not be demolished as part of redevelopment activities, will workers encounter contaminated 
indoor air during planned redevelopment activities? ☐ Yes   ☐ No   ☒ Unknown 

☒ If no, include rationale here: 
No indoor air samples have been collected within the existing Site building.  The Site building and 
all other on‐Site features will be razed as part of the proposed redevelopment.  An EMP for 
future redevelopment will be submitted under a separate cover.  
4) In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list 
activities for management of such contact: 
As noted above, appropriate safety screening will be performed to protect workers during sub‐grade 
excavation activities.  Safety screening activities include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a 

23 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM 
Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) proposed for this Brownfields Property? 
☒ Yes   ☐ No   ☐ Unknown 

☐ If no or unknown, include rationale here as well as plans for pre‐occupancy sampling, as 
necessary: 

If yes, ☐ VIMS Plan Attached or ☒ VIMS Plan to be submitted separately   
If submitted separately provide date:  
The PD intends to install a DEQ Brownfields Program approved passive vapor intrusion mitigation 
system designed by a North Carolina licensed Professional Engineer during construction of the 
proposed apartment building.  The vapor intrusion mitigation plan will be submitted under 
separate cover.  

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:  

Note that approval of this EMP does not imply approval with any vapor intrusion mitigation land 
use restrictions or requirements of the recorded or draft Brownfields Agreement and that 
separate approval of mitigation measures will be required.  

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: 
calibrated photoionization detector or similar instrument.  If safety screening results indicate further 
action is warranted, an environmental professional will monitor the work zone and determine if 
engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are warranted.   

24 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
☒ 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. 
It is anticipated that former hydraulic lift components may be removed as part of the proposed soil 
excavation activities.  However, during excavation activities contractors may encounter previously 
unidentified sub‐surface environmental conditions (i.e., tanks, drums, etc.) that if encountered, will 
require management.  Prior to beginning Site work, H&H notify the redevelopment contractors to 
discuss known conditions and the DEQ approved EMP.  The discussion will include reviewing various 
scenarios when it would be appropriate and necessary to notify H&H and take additional actions.  

In the event that such conditions are encountered during soil excavation, the environmental actions 
noted below will be used to direct environmental actions to be taken during these activities and 
sampling data will be provided to DEQ. 

Underground Storage Tanks:  
In the event a 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 a UST is encountered, the UST will be removed, if possible, and the UST will be transported off‐Site 
for disposal at a suitable facility.  If the UST contains residual fluids, the fluids will be sampled for 
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals and transported off‐Site for disposal at a suitable facility based on the 
laboratory analytical results prior to removing the UST from the ground.  If a UST is encountered that 
cannot be removed or does not require removal for geotechnical or future construction purposes, it 
may be abandoned in‐place with prior DEQ approval and excavation activities 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 above in the EMP. 

25 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  

Sub‐Grade Feature/Pit: 
As indicated above, it is anticipated that former hydraulic lift components may be removed as part 
of the proposed soil excavation activities. However, if a previously unidentified sub‐grade feature or 
pit is encountered and does not require removal for geotechnical or future construction purposes, it 
will be filled with soil or suitable fill and excavation 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 – Note that if buried waste, non‐native fill, or any obviously filled materials 
is encountered, the DEQ Brownfields Program must be notified to determine if investigation of 
landfill gases is required: 
If excavation into buried wastes or previously unidentified significantly impacted soil occurs, the 
contractor is instructed to stop work in that location and notify the environmental consultant.  The 
environmental consultant will review the materials and collect samples, if warranted.  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.  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: 
Please refer to the description outlined in the Managing On‐Site Soil section (Part 1A) of the EMP 
above.   

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

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

POST‐REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING 

☒  Check this box to acknowledge that a Redevelopment Summary Report will be required for the 
project.  If the project duration is longer than one year, an annual update is required and will be 

26 
EMP Version 2, January 2021  
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 1/31/2023  

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, January 2021  

Tables
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002LocationSample IDHL-1 HL-2 HL-3 HL-4 HL-5 HL-6 HL-7 HL-8 HL-9 HL-10 HL-11 HL-12 HL-13 HL-14Depth (ft bgs)Sample DateUnitsTPH (8015C)DRO (C10-C28)<3.6 <3.8 <3.7 <4.14.1 J 4.5 J<3.94.9 J<3.81,3104.3 J<3.7 <3.710.2 ---- --100PCBs (8082A)ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ---- ----VOCs (8260D)AcetoneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.35NA NA NA NA2512,000 140,000--2-Butanone (MEK)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.031 NA NA NA NA175,500 40,000--n-ButylbenzeneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.12NA NA NA NA4.5780 12,000--sec-ButylbenzeneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0028 NA NA NA NA4.11,600 23,000--ChloroformNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0039 NA NA NA NA0.390.340 1.5--1,1-DichloroethaneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.0035 JNA NA NA NA0.0343.8 17--cis-1,2-DichloretheneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0022 NA NA NA NA0.4131 470--EthylbenzeneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.042NA NA NA NA13627--Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0022 NA NA NA NA2.3410 2,100--p-IsopropyltolueneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0031 NA NA NA NANENE NE--Methylene ChlorideNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.017 NA NA NA NA0.02558 650--Methyl-tert-butyl etherNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0024 NA NA NA NA0.0949 220--NaphthaleneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.052NA NA NA NA0.392.1 8.8--n-PropylbenzeneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0023 NA NA NA NA2.3780.0 5,100.0--TetrachloroetheneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.14NA NA NA NA0.006317 82--TolueneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.039NA NA NA NA8.3990 9,700--TrichloroetheneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.012NA NA NA NA0.0210.87 4--1,2,4-TrimethylbenzeneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.38NA NA NA NA1263 430--1,3,5-TrimethylbenzeneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.17NA NA NA NA1156 320--Xylene (Total)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.25NA NA NA NA9.9120 530--SVOCs (8270E)Di-n-butylphthalateNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.31 JNA NA NA NA351,300 16,000--bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalateNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.15 NA NA NA NA1439 160--1-MethylnaphthaleneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.13 NA NA NA NA0.1118 73--2-MethylnaphthaleneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.15 NA NA NA NA3.148 600--PhenanthreneNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.12 NA NA NA NANENE NE--Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022. 2) DEQ Division of Waste Management Underground Storage Tank (UST) Section Action Level (December 2013).Hydraulic lift samples were submitted for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals analysis for only those samples with TPH-DRO at concentrations above the DEQ UST Section Action Limit. EPA laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses. Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Bold values indicate compound exceeds the IHSB Protection of Groundwater PSRG or UST Action Level. VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons; DRO = diesel range organics NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; NE = no established standard; BDL = below laboratory method detection limits; OWS = oil/water separatorJ = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. mg/kgFormer In-Ground Hydraulic Lifts8-108/3/2021Protection of Groundwater(1)Screening Criteria Residential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Action Level (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Soil/Data Tables_JRL9/23/2022Table 1A (Page 1 of 3)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002LocationSample IDHL-15 HL-16 HL-17 HL-18 HL-19 HL-20 HL-21 HL-22 HL-24Depth (ft bgs)Sample Date8/4/2021UnitsTPH (8015C)DRO (C10-C28)<3.7 <3.72,780 338<4.1413<4.2107 874 896<4.7---- --100PCBs (8082A)ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL--------VOCs (8260D)AcetoneNA NA <0.035 <0.051 NA <0.057 NA <0.0440.18 0.20NA2512,000 140,000--2-Butanone (MEK)NA NA <0.026 <0.038 NA <0.042 NA <0.0330.13 0.15NA175,500 40,000--n-ButylbenzeneNA NA0.49<0.0037 NA0.0056 JNA <0.0027 <0.0029 <0.0027 NA4.5780 12,000--sec-ButylbenzeneNA NA0.32 0.0052 JNA <0.0039 NA <0.0030 <0.0027 <0.0025 NA4.11,600 23,000--ChloroformNA NA <0.0033 <0.0048 NA <0.0054 NA0.0056 J<0.0037 <0.0034 NA0.390.340 1.5--1,1-DichloroethaneNA NA <0.0023 <0.0033 NA <0.0036 NA <0.0028 <0.0025 <0.0023 NA0.0343.8 17--cis-1,2-DichloretheneNA NA0.0077 0.046NA <0.0030 NA0.0081<0.0021 <0.0019 NA0.4131 470--EthylbenzeneNA NA0.032<0.0037 NA0.036NA <0.0032 <0.0028 <0.0026 NA13627--Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)NA NA0.063<0.0027 NA <0.0030 NA <0.0023 <0.0021 <0.0019 NA2.3410 2,100--p-IsopropyltolueneNA NA0.60<0.0039 NA <0.0043 NA <0.0033 <0.0030 <0.0028 NANENE NE--Methylene ChlorideNA NA <0.015 <0.022 NA <0.024 NA <0.019 <0.17 <0.015 NA0.02558 650--Methyl-tert-butyl etherNA NA <0.0021 <0.0030 NA <0.0033 NA <0.0025 <0.0023 <0.0021 NA0.0949 220--NaphthaleneNA NA0.11<0.0042 NA0.55NA0.015<0.00320.0055 JNA0.392.1 8.8--n-PropylbenzeneNA NA0.19<0.0028 NA <0.0031 NA <0.0024 <0.0022 <0.0020 NA2.3780.05,100.0--TetrachloroetheneNA NA0.014<0.0025 NA0.93NA0.018 0.085 0.082NA0.00631782--TolueneNA NA0.012 0.0082NA0.026NA0.012 0.0050 J 0.0043 JNA8.39909,700--TrichloroetheneNA NA <0.0014 <0.0020 NA0.041NA <0.0018 <0.0016 <0.0015 NA0.0210.874--1,2,4-TrimethylbenzeneNA NA1.2<0.0022 NA0.73NA0.022 0.025 0.024NA1263430--1,3,5-TrimethylbenzeneNA NA0.51<0.0027 NA <0.0030 NA <0.00230.012<0.0019 NA1156320--Xylene (Total)NA NA0.014<0.0045 NA0.22NA0.0061 J 0.0094 J 0.0062 JNA9.9120530--SVOCs (8270E)Di-n-butylphthalateNA NA0.35 J 0.33 JNA0.42 JNA <0.130.37 J<0.13 NA351,30016,000--bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalateNA NA0.27 J<0.18 NA <0.19 NA <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 NA1439160--1-MethylnaphthaleneNA NA0.18 J<0.16 NA <0.17 NA <0.14 <0.13 <0.13 NA0.111873--2-MethylnaphthaleneNA NA0.25 J<0.18 NA <0.19 NA <0.16 <0.15 <0.15 NA3.148600--PhenanthreneNA NA0.14 J<0.15 NA <0.16 NA <0.13 <0.13 <0.12 NANENENE--Notes:1)North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022.2)DEQ Division of Waste Management Underground Storage Tank (UST) Section Action Level (December 2013).Hydraulic lift samples were submitted for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals analysis for only those samples with TPH-DRO at concentrations above the DEQ UST Section Action Limit. EPA laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRG or UST Action Level.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons; DRO = diesel range organicsNA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; NE = no established standard; BDL = below laboratory method detection limits; OWS = oil/water separatorJ = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Former In-Ground Hydraulic LiftsResidential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Action Level (2)HL-23 / SB-DUP-18-108/3/2021Protection of Groundwater(1)Screening Criteria mg/kghttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Soil/Data Tables_JRL9/23/2022Table 1A (Page 2 of 3)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002LocationSuspect UST Floor Drain Former USTOWSSample IDSB-1 SB-2 SB-3 SB-5 SB-6 SB-7 SB-8Depth (ft bgs)8-10 2-4 8-10 2-4 2-4 2-4 8-10Sample Date8/2/2021 8/3/2021 8/2/2021 8/3/2021 8/2/2021 8/2/2021 8/2/2021UnitsTPH (8015C)DRO (C10-C28)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA---- --100PCBs (8082A)NANANANANANANANANA--------VOCs (8260D)Acetone<0.0342 <0.0400 <0.0367 <0.0353 <0.030 <0.02830.0793 J<0.0347 <0.0342512,000 140,000--2-Butanone (MEK)<0.026 <0.030 <0.027 <0.026 <0.022 <0.021 <0.032 <0.026 <0.025175,500 40,000--n-Butylbenzene<0.0025 <0.0029 <0.0027 <0.0026 <0.0022 <0.0021 <0.0032 <0.0026 <0.00254.5780 12,000--sec-Butylbenzene<0.0023 <0.0027 <0.0025 <0.0024 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0030 <0.0024 <0.00234.11,600 23,000--Chloroform<0.0032 <0.0038 <0.0035 <0.0033 <0.0028 <0.0027 <0.0041 <0.0033 <0.00320.390.340 1.5--1,1-Dichloroethane<0.0022 <0.0026 <0.0024 <0.0023 <0.0019 <0.0018 <0.0028 <0.0022 <0.00220.0343.8 17--cis-1,2-Dichlorethene<0.0008 <0.0021 <0.0020 <0.0019 <0.0016 <0.00150.0141<0.0018 <0.00180.4131 470--Ethylbenzene<0.0025 <0.0029 <0.0027 <0.0026 <0.0022 <0.0021 <0.0031 <0.0025 <0.002513627--Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)<0.0018 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0019 <0.0016 <0.0015 <0.0023 <0.0018 <0.00182.3410 2,100--p-Isopropyltoluene<0.0026 <0.0031 <0.0028 <0.0027 <0.0023 <0.0022 <0.0033 <0.00270.0167 NENE NE--Methylene Chloride<0.0146 <0.0171 <0.0157 <0.0151 <0.0128 <0.01210.0748 0.0596 0.05960.02558 650--Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.002.0 <0.0023 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0017 <0.0016 <0.0025 <0.00200.0032 J 0.0949 220--Naphthalene<0.0028 <0.0033 <0.0030 <0.0029 <0.0025 <0.00230.0158<0.0028 <0.00280.392.1 8.8--n-Propylbenzene<0.0019 <0.0022 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0017 <0.0016 <0.0024 <0.0019 <0.00192.3780.0 5,100.0--Tetrachloroethene<0.00170.0183<0.0018 <0.0017 <0.0015 <0.00140.114 0.473<0.00170.006317 82--Toluene<0.0015 <0.0018 <0.0016 <0.0016 <0.0013 <0.00130.0209<0.0015 <0.00158.3990 9,700--Trichloroethene<0.00140.0075<0.0015 <0.0014 <0.0012 <0.00110.0116 0.0058<0.00140.0210.87 4--1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.0015<0.0017 <0.0016 <0.0015 <0.0013 <0.00120.084.9<0.0015 <0.00141263430--1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.0018 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0018 <0.0016 <0.00150.0494<0.0018 <0.00181156 320--Xylene (Total)<0.0015 <0.0035 <0.0039 <0.0031 <0.0027 <0.00250.121<0.0031 <0.00309.9120 530--SVOCs (8270E)Di-n-butylphthalate<0.14 <0.13 <0.14 <0.13 <0.13 <0.12 <0.13 <0.67 <0.13351,30016,000--bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate<0.17 <0.15 <0.16 <0.15 <0.15 <0.14 <0.15 <0.78 <0.151439160--1-Methylnaphthalene<0.15 <0.14 <0.14 <0.14 <0.13 <0.13 <0.14 <0.70 <0.130.111873--2-Methylnaphthalene<0.17 <0.15 <0.16 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.16 <0.80 <0.153.148600--Phenanthrene<0.14 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 <0.12 <0.12 <0.13 <0.65 <0.12NENENE--Notes:1)North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022.2)DEQ Division of Waste Management Underground Storage Tank (UST) Section Action Level (December 2013).Hydraulic lift samples were submitted for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals analysis for only those samples with TPH-DRO at concentrations above the DEQ UST Section Action Limit. EPA laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRG or UST Action Level.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons; DRO = diesel range organicsNA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; NE = no established standard; BDL = below laboratory method detection limits; OWS = oil/water separatorJ = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Former Wash-Bay Floor Drains Trench Drain - Building 4Action Level (2)Residential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Protection of Groundwater(1)mg/kgScreening Criteria SB-4 / SB-DUP-22-48/3/2021https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Soil/Data Tables_JRL9/23/2022Table 1A (Page 3 of 3)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1BSummary of Metals Soil Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002LocationSample IDHL-1 HL-2 HL-3 HL-4 HL-5 HL-6 HL-7 HL-8 HL-9 HL-10 HL-11 HL-12 HL-13 HL-14Depth (ft bgs)Sample DateRange MeanUnitsMetals (6020B/7471B/7199)ArsenicNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.836 JNA NA NA NA5.8 0.68 3.01.0 - 18 4.8BariumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA22.2NA NA NA NA580 3,100 47,00050-1,000 356CadmiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0958 NA NA NA NA3 14 2001.0 - 10 4.3Chromium (Total)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA7.31NA NA NA NANE-- --7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.286 NA NA NA NA3.8 0.31 6.5NS NSTrivalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA7.31NA NA NA NA360,000 23,000 350,000NS NSLeadNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA4.61NA NA NA NA270 400 800ND - 50 16MercuryNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0202 NA NA NA NANE 4.7 700.03 - 0.52 0.121SeleniumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.350 JNA NA NA NA2.1 78 1,200<0.1 - 0.8 0.42SilverNA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.0969 NA NA NA NA3.4 78 1,200ND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Hydraulic lift samples were submitted for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals analysis for only those samples with TPH-DRO at concentrations above the DEQ UST Section Action Limit.EPA laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Residential PSRG and background concentrations.Underlined values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRGs and background concentrations.NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; NS = not specified; ND = not detected; OWS = oil/water separator; UST - underground storage tankJ = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.B = Analyte was detected in the associated method blank.ML = Matrix spike recovery and/or matrix spike duplicate recovery was below laboratory control limits. Result may be biased low.R1 = RPD value was outside control limits.Protection of Groundwater PSRGs (1)mg/kgScreening Criteria 8/3/20218-10Former In-Ground Hydraulic Liftsmg/kgResidential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Background Metals (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Soil/Data Tables_JRL9/23/2022Table 1B (Page 1 of 3)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1BSummary of Metals Soil Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002LocationSample IDHL-15 HL-16 HL-17 HL-18 HL-19 HL-20 HL-21 HL-22 HL-24Depth (ft bgs)Sample Date8/4/2021 Range MeanUnitsMetals (6020B/7471B/7199)ArsenicNA NA1.42 2.77NA2.28NA1.89 0.621 J 1.02 JNA5.8 0.68 3.01.0 - 18 4.8BariumNA NA43.1 94.1NA84.0NA114 16.4 27.9NA580 3,100 47,00050-1,000 356CadmiumNA NA <0.0997 <0.107 NA0.146 JNA <0.111 <0.0966 <0.0969 NA3 14 2001.0 - 10 4.3Chromium (Total)NA NA15.5 40.8NA47.8NA34.3 27.1 19.2NANE-- --7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent ChromiumNA NA <0.2970.487 JNA <0.366 NA <0.3320.603 J<0.289 NA3.8 0.31 6.5NS NSTrivalent ChromiumNA NA15.5 40.31NA47.8NA34.3 26.49 19.2NA360000 23,000 350,000NS NSLeadNA NA8.98 7.09NA11.4NA7.66 9.10 7.53NA270 400 800ND - 50 16MercuryNA NA <0.0210 <0.0224 NA <0.0259 NA <0.0234 <0.02030.0420 JNANE 4.7 700.03 - 0.52 0.121SeleniumNA NA0.580 J 2.98 JNA1.02 JNA1.33 J<0.2030.668 JNA2.1 78 1,200<0.1 - 0.8 0.42SilverNA NA <0.101 <0.108 NA <0.124 NA <0.113 <0.0977 <0.0980 NA3.4 78 1,200ND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022. 2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils. Hydraulic lift samples were submitted for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals analysis for only those samples with TPH-DRO at concentrations above the DEQ UST Section Action Limit. EPA laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Residential PSRG and background concentrations. Underlined values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRGs and background concentrations.NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; NS = not specified; ND = not detected; OWS = oil/water separator; UST - underground storage tankJ = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. B = Analyte was detected in the associated method blank.ML = Matrix spike recovery and/or matrix spike duplicate recovery was below laboratory control limits. Result may be biased low.R1 = RPD value was outside control limits. Protection of Groundwater PSRGs (1)Screening Criteria HL-23 / SB-DUP-1Residential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Background Metals (2)8-10mg/kgmg/kgFormer In-Ground Hydraulic Lifts8/3/2021https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Soil/Data Tables_JRL9/23/2022Table 1B (Page 2 of 3)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1BSummary of Metals Soil Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002LocationSuspected USTFloor Drain Former USTOWSSample IDSB-1 SB-2 SB-3 SB-5 SB-6 SB-7 SB-8 BG-1 BG-2 BG-3Depth (ft bgs)8-10 2-4 8-10 2-4 2-4 2-4 8-10Sample Date8/2/2021 8/3/2021 8/2/2021 8/3/2021 8/2/2021 8/2/2021 8/2/2021Range MeanUnitsMetals by 6020B/7471B/7199Arsenic0.567 B,J 0.536 B,J 0.210 B,J 0.324 B,J 0.403 B,J,ML 0.454 B,J 0.541 B,J 0.456 B,J 0.932 B,J 0.910 B,J 0.813 B,J 0.750 B,J 5.8 0.68 3.01.0 - 18 4.8Barium301 55.2 11.8 10.1 10.8 5.82 149 142 38.0 81.6 123 59.7 580 3,100 47,00050-1,000 356Cadmium<0.122 <0.104 <0.103 <0.0990 <0.0997 <0.0975 <0.104 <0.102 <0.101 <0.09710.107 J<0.09223 14 2001.0 - 10 4.3Chromium (Total)28.6 17.5 2.45 J 9.44 19.3 14.8 14.7 16.9 12.9 21.2 11.5 0.989 J NE-- --7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent Chromium0.736 J 0.875 J<0.3070.865 J 1.34 1.35 0.715 J 0.882 J<0.302 <0.290 <0.282 <0.2753.8 0.31 6.5NS NSTrivalent Chromium27.86 16.63 2.45 J 8.58 17.96 13.15 13.99 16.02 12.9 21.2 11.5 0.989 J 360000 23,000 350,000NS NSLead4.87 5.99 2.90 B 4.39 6.12 5.51 1.99 B,J 3.00 B 5.32 12.6 11.5 7.38 270 400 800ND - 50 16Mercury<0.0257 <0.0219 <0.0482 <0.0463 <0.0210 ML,R1 <0.0456 <0.0219 <0.02150.0260 J 0.0226 J<0.0199 <0.0194NE 4.7 700.03 - 0.52 0.121Selenium0.305 J<0.219 <0.217 <0.208 <0.210 <0.205 <0.219 <0.2150.242 J 0.543 J 0.379 J 0.408 J 2.1 78 1,200<0.1 - 0.8 0.42Silver<0.123 <0.609 <0.104 <0.100 <0.101 <0.0986 <0.105 <0.103 <0.102 <0.0982 <0.0958 <0.09333.4 78 1,200ND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022. 2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils. Hydraulic lift samples were submitted for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals analysis for only those samples with TPH-DRO at concentrations above the DEQ UST Section Action Limit. EPA laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Residential PSRG and background concentrations. Underlined values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRGs and background concentrations.NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; NS = not specified; ND = not detected; OWS = oil/water separator; UST - underground storage tankJ = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. B = Analyte was detected in the associated method blank.ML = Matrix spike recovery and/or matrix spike duplicate recovery was below laboratory control limits. Result may be biased low.R1 = RPD value was outside control limits. 2-40-28/3/2021Protection of Groundwater PSRGs (1)Screening Criteria Former Wash-Bay Floor Drains Trench Drain - Building 4 Background8/2/2021SB-4 / SB-DUP-2mg/kgmg/kgResidential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Background Metals (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Soil/Data Tables_JRL9/23/2022Table 1B (Page 3 of 3)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1CSummary of Soil Analytical Data Harrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002Building IDLocationFormer Wash BaySample IDMP-3 MP-18A MP-18B MP-18C MP-18DDepth (ft bgs)0-1 1-2Sample DateRange Range MeanUnitsVOCs (8260D)Acetone<0.0380.10 J C7 0.097 J C7<0.037 <0.040 <0.040 <0.034 <0.0422514,000 210,000-- -- --cis-1,2-Dichlorethene<0.0020 <0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0021 <0.0021 <0.0018 <0.00220.4131 470-- -- --Methylene Chloride<0.016 <0.0210.036 C7<0.016 <0.017 <0.017 <0.015 <0.0180.02558 650-- -- --Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.0022 <0.00290.029 C7<0.0021 <0.0023 <0.0023 <0.0020 <0.00240.0949 220-- -- --Naphthalene<0.0031 <0.0040 <0.0031 <0.0030 <0.0033 <0.00330.013<0.00340.392.1 8.8-- -- --Tetrachloroethene<0.00190.65 0.16 0.21 0.53 0.18 0.022 0.0730.006317 82-- -- --Toluene<0.00170.012 0.0050 J<0.0016 <0.0018 <0.0018 <0.0015 <0.00188.3990 9,700-- -- --Trichloroethene<0.0015 <0.0020 <0.0015 <0.0015 <0.0016 <0.0016 <0.0014 <0.00170.0210.87 4-- -- --1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.00160.035 0.0071<0.0016 <0.0017 <0.00170.0094<0.00181263 370-- -- --1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.00200.021 0.0042 J<0.0019 <0.0021 <0.00210.0030 J<0.00221156 320-- -- --m&p-Xylene<0.00410.013 J 0.0061 J<0.0039 <0.0043 <0.0043 <0.0037 <0.00449.8120 500-- -- --o-Xylene<0.00260.0073 J 0.0031 J<0.0025 <0.0028 <0.0027 <0.0024 <0.00299.8140 590-- -- --Xylene (Total)<0.00340.021 0.0092 J<0.0033 <0.0036 <0.0035 <0.0031 <0.00379.9120 530-- -- --SVOCs (8270E)NAALL BDLNANANANANANA ------------Metals by 6020B/7471B/7199ArsenicNA0.93NA NA NA NA NA NA5.8 0.68 3.0 0.75 - 0.911.0 - 18 4.8BariumNA116NA NA NA NA NA NA580 3,100 47,000 59.7 - 12350-1,000 356CadmiumNA0.063 JNA NA NA NA NA NA3 1.4 20 ND - 0.107 J1.0 - 10 4.3Chromium (Total)NA26.0NA NA NA NA NA NANE NE NE 0.989 J - 21.27.0 - 300 65Hexavalent ChromiumNA1.47NA NA NA NA NA NA3.8 0.31 6.5 NDNS NSTrivalent ChromiumNA24.5NA NA NA NA NA NA360,000 23,000 350,000 0.989 - 21.2NS NSLeadNA7.3NA NA NA NA NA NA270.0 400 800 7.38 - 12.6ND - 50 16MercuryNA <0.0098 NA NA NA NA NA NANE 4.7 70 ND - 0.0226 J0.03 - 0.52 0.121SeleniumNA0.25 JNA NA NA NA NA NA2.1 78 1,200 0.379 - 0.543<0.1 - 0.8 0.42SilverNA0.23 JNA NA NA NA NA NA3.4 78 1,200 NDND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated January 2022.3) Site specific background metals collected H&H during Phase II Environmental Site Assessment activities on 8/21/2021.2)Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRG.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicableNE = not established; BDL = below laboratory method detection limits; AST = aboveground storage tankC7 = Compound is a possible laboratory contaminant.J = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.mg/kg0-1 / DUP-01MP-185/20/20220-1Site Specific Background Metals (2)Maintenance BayBuilding 3Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRGs (1)Residential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)BackgroundMetals (3)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/Additional Assessment/Report/Tables/Harrelson Ford ‐ Data Tables (combined).xlsx7/15/2022Table 1C (Page 1 of 2) Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1CSummary of Soil Analytical Data Harrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002Building IDLocationSample IDMP-30 MP-30A MP-30B MP-30C MP-30D MP-43A MP-43B MP-43C MP-43DDepth (ft bgs)0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 1-2 2-3 1-2 0-1 1-2 1-2Sample DateRange Range MeanUnitsVOCs (8260D)Acetone0.041 J C7<0.050 <0.052 <0.040 <0.037 <0.040 <0.044 <0.052 <0.045 <0.039 <0.0632514,000 210,000-- -- --cis-1,2-Dichlorethene<0.0022 <0.0027 <0.0028 <0.0021 <0.00200.0033 J 0.0066 J<0.0028 <0.0024 <0.0021 <0.00330.4131 470-- -- --Methylene Chloride<0.017 <0.0220.064 C7<0.017 <0.016 <0.017 <0.019 <0.022 <0.019 <0.017 <0.0270.02558 650-- -- --Methyl-tert-butyl ether0.019 C7<0.0029 <0.0030 <0.0023 <0.00210.0043 J<0.0025 <0.0030 <0.0026 <0.0023 <0.00370.0949 220-- -- --Naphthalene<0.0033 <0.0041 <0.0043 <0.0032 <0.0030 <0.0033 <0.0036 <0.0042 <0.0036 <0.0032 <0.00510.392.1 8.8-- -- --Tetrachloroethene<0.0020 <0.0025 <0.0026 <0.0020 <0.00180.14<0.0021 <0.00251.3 0.73<0.00310.006317 82-- -- --Toluene<0.0018 <0.0022 <0.0023 <0.0018 <0.0016 <0.0018 <0.0019 <0.0023 <0.0020 <0.0017 <0.00288.3990 9,700-- -- --Trichloroethene<0.0016 <0.0020 <0.0021 <0.0016 <0.00150.0071<0.0017 <0.00210.0310.020<0.00250.0210.87 4-- -- --1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.0017 <0.0022 <0.0022 <0.0017 <0.0016 <0.0017 <0.0019 <0.0022 <0.0019 <0.0017 <0.00271263 370-- -- --1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.0021 <0.0026 <0.0027 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0021 <0.0023 <0.0027 <0.0023 <0.0020 <0.00331156 320-- -- --m&p-Xylene<0.0043 <0.0054 <0.0056 <0.0042 <0.0039 <0.0043 <0.0046 <0.0055 <0.0047 <0.0042 <0.00679.8120 500-- -- --o-Xylene<0.0028 <0.0035 <0.0036 <0.0027 <0.0025 <0.0028 <0.0030 <0.0036 <0.0031 <0.0027 <0.00439.8140 590-- -- --Xylene (Total)<0.0036 <0.0045 <0.0046 <0.0035 <0.0033 <0.0036 <0.0039 <0.0046 <0.0040 <0.0035 <0.00569.9120 530-- -- --SVOCs (8270E)NANANANANA ALL BDL NANANANANA------------Metals by 6020B/7471B/7199ArsenicNA NA NA NA NA0.99NA NA NA NA NA5.8 0.68 3.0 0.75 - 0.911.0 - 18 4.8BariumNA NA NA NA NA227NA NA NA NA NA580 3,100 47,000 59.7 - 12350-1,000 356CadmiumNA NA NA NA NA0.1NA NA NA NA NA3 1.4 20 ND - 0.107 J1.0 - 10 4.3Chromium (Total)NA NA NA NA NA33.3NA NA NA NA NANE NE NE 0.989 J - 21.27.0 - 300 65Hexavalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA1.27NA NA NA NA NA3.8 0.31 6.5 NDNS NSTrivalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA32.03NA NA NA NA NA360,000 23,000 350,000 0.989 - 21.2NS NSLeadNA NA NA NA NA11.2NA NA NA NA NA270.0 400 800 7.38 - 12.6ND - 50 16MercuryNA NA NA NA NA <0.0087 NA NA NA NA NANE 4.7 70 ND - 0.0226 J0.03 - 0.52 0.121SeleniumNA NA NA NA NA0.23 JNA NA NA NA NA2.1 78 1,200 0.379 - 0.543<0.1 - 0.8 0.42SilverNA NA NA NA NA0.17 JNA NA NA NA NA3.4 78 1,200 NDND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated January 2022.3) Site specific background metals collected H&H during Phase II Environmental Site Assessment activities on 8/21/2021.2)Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Drugan and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Bold values indicate compound exceeds the Protection of Groundwater PSRG.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicableNE = not established; BDL = below laboratory method detection limits; AST = aboveground storage tankC7 = Compound is a possible laboratory contaminant.J = Compound was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method detection limits, but below the laboratory reporting limits resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Site Specific Background Metals (2)mg/kg5/23/2022Waste Oil AST Storage AreaBuilding 4Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRGs (1)Residential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)BackgroundMetals (3)Trench Drain MP-435/20/2022 5/23/2022https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/Additional Assessment/Report/Tables/Harrelson Ford ‐ Data Tables (combined).xlsx7/15/2022Table 1C (Page 2 of 2) Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data Harrelson FordCharlotte, North Carolina H&H Job No. ACO-002LocationDowngradient of OWSDowngradient of Undocumented USTsDowngradient of Building 4Sample IDTMW-1 TMW-3 TMW-4 TMW-5Sample DateUnitsVOCs (8260D)Acetone<5.1 <5.1 <5.120.2 J<5.1 <5.1 <5.1 <.16,000 NE NEBenzene0.39 J<0.34 <0.34 <0.34 <0.34 <0.34 <0.34 <0.341 1.6 6.92-Hexanone<0.48<0.48<0.48<0.48<0.48<0.480.83 J0.84 JNE1,6006,900Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.42<0.42<0.423.8<0.42<0.42<0.42<0.42204502,000Tetrachloroethene<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.29<0.292.42.50.71248SVOCs (8270E)ALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDL ------Metals (6020B/7470)Arsenic<1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 <1.11.3 J 0.099 J 0.10 J10-- --Barium37.7 33.4 34.4 46.6 41.2 33.4 35.7 34.6700-- --Cadmium<0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.60 <0.0602-- --Chromium (total)3.4 J 1.5 J 1.3 J<1.15.1 6.3 1.1 1.210-- --Lead<0.89 <0.89 <0.89 <0.891.7<0.890.13 J 0.13 J15-- --Mercury<0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.121 0.18 0.75Selenium<1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.40.27 J 0.27 J20-- --Silver<0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <0.070 <0.07020-- --Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A NCAC 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards (2L Standards) dated April 20222) DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) dated January 2022Compounds are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).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 values indicates compound concentration exceeds 2L Standard.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; -- = not applicable; BDL = below detection limitsUST = underground storage tank; OWS = oil/water separatorJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.µg/LAdjacent to Building 3TMW-6/ TMW-DUP6/30/2022UpgradientScreening Criteria TMW-2 / GW-DUP-12L Standards (1)Residential GWSLs (2) Non-Residential GWSLs (2)8/5/2021https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Ardent ‐ ACO/ACO.002 ‐ 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/Additional Assessment/Report/Tables/Harrelson Ford ‐ Data Tables (combined).xlsx7/15/2022Table 2 (Page 1 of 1) Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Sub-Slab Vapor Analytical Data Harrelson Ford Charlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002Evaluation AreaSample IDSSV-3SSV-4MP-3SSV-5SSV-6SSV-5MP-30MP-43Sample Date5/16/20222/17/20222/16/20222/17/20225/17/20225/16/2022Sample TypeUnitsVOCs (TO-15)1,1,1-Trichloroethane1.86 J1.84 J<0.144<0.144<0.86<64<64<2.88<0.144<2.88<0.86<0.8635,000440,0001,1-Dichloroethene<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.60<45<45<2.14<0.1071.2331,40018,0001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene1.22 J1.33 J4.421.68 J2.5<33<33<2.202.91<2.203.96.74205,3001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.236<0.2361.32 J0.408 J0.61 J<39<39<4.720.732 J<4.721.124205,3001,3-Butadiene<0.328<0.328<0.328<0.328<0.37<28<2822.1<0.32822.1<0.37<0.373.1411,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.186<0.186<0.186<0.186<0.79<59<59<3.721.67 J<3.72<0.79<0.798.51101,4-Dioxane1.03 J0.951 J4.04<0.435<0.60<45<45<8.69<0.435<8.69<0.60<0.60192502-Butanone (MEK)4.935.712.943.35<6.3<470<4709.73 J15.99.73 J<6.37.9 J35,000440,0002-Hexanone3.233.223.283.50<0.41<31<31<5.713.93<5.71<0.41<0.412102,6002-Propanol (Isopropanol)22.823.121.62.11 JB6.0 J<250<2507.67 J61.27.67 J130<3.41,40018,0004-Ethyltoluene<0.128<0.1280.777 J<0.1280.81 J<45<4511.4 J0.600 J11.4 J0.83 J1.2NENE4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.508 J<0.1211.18 J1.01 J<0.44<33<33<2.424.48<2.42<0.44<0.4421,000260,000Acetone38.942.633.533.122<860<86024.4 J39824.4 J55<11NENEBenzene0.262 J0.303 J0.668 J0.326 J1.0<36<3635.90.393 J35.92.21512160Carbon disulfide2.29 J2.25 J0.532 J1.93 J<0.58<43<4325.9 J3.86 J25.9 J1.3 J<0.584,90061,000Chloroethane<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.47<35<3512.1 J<0.16412.1 J<0.47<0.4728,000350,000Chloroform<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.08646.9<70<70<1.730.425 J<1.73<0.93<0.934.153Chloromethane<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.33<25<25<1.34<0.0673<1.341.4<0.336307,900cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.0955<0.0955<0.0955<0.0955<0.581,10099013,5001.13 J13,5001201,500NENECyclohexane<0.1614.696.916.812.5<31<3172.08.8072.0203642,000530,000Dichlorodifluoromethane2.792.752.722.763<72<72<2.682.62<2.682.22.6708,800EthanolNANANANA110 V-06<500<500NANANA50 V-0662 V-06NENEEthyl acetate<0.136<0.136<0.136<0.13662 L-03, V-05, V-34<270<270<2.72<0.136<2.72<3.6<3.64906,100Ethylbenzene0.395 J0.399 J2.09 J0.577 J0.89<38<3861.60.903 J61.62.2337490Methylene Chloride0.750 J0.750 J0.604 J0.986 J<3.2<240<240<9.750.938 J<9.75<3.2<3.23,40053,000Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.56<42<42252<0.0336252<0.56273604,700Naphthalene<0.183<0.1832.752.70<0.79<59<59<3.66<0.183<3.66<0.790.84 J2.836n-Heptane<0.143<0.1430.533 J<0.143<0.52<39<3923.8 J1.14 J23.8 J8.94.92,80035,000n-Hexane<0.0472<0.04721.10 J<0.0472<3.7<280<28050.3<0.047250.35916 J4,90061,000m&p-Xylene1.55 J1.48 J12.72.19 J2.4<73<732273.55 J2277.7107008,800o-Xylene0.734 J0.677 J12.61.15 J1.4<33<3374.61.61 J74.63.74.57008,800Propylene<0.242<0.24221.0<0.242<3.0<230<230393<0.242393<3.018021,000260,000Styrene0.430 J0.405 J0.741 J0.575 J<0.45<34<34<2.480.835 J<2.480.56 J0.65 J7,00088,000Tetrachloroethene6,6706,4401,0903.37 J 6957,00055,00032.2 J64732.2 J 874,6002803,500Tetrahydrofuran<0.1070.779 J<0.1070.457 J<0.97<73<73<2.14<0.107<2.14<0.97<0.9714,000180,000Toluene2.031.82 J4.022.727.9<32<322247.22224111735,000440,000trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.108<0.108<0.108<0.108<0.62<47<47132<0.1081320.82422803,500Trichloroethene1.54 J1.50 J<0.199<0.1991.3410370<3.9826.9<3.9838 2,00014180Trichlorofluoromethane1.12 J1.11 J1.32 J1.43 J1.5 J<100<100<2.601.33 J<2.601.4 J<1.3NENEVinyl chloride<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.46<35<3511,700<0.12711,7001.22705.6 280Xylene (Total)2.28 J2.16 J25.33.34 J3.8<106<1063025.16 J30211.414.57008,800Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated July 2022.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).Laboratory analytical method is shown in parentheses.Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values exceed the Residential SGSL.Bold Underlined values exceed the Non-Residential SGSL.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed J = Compound concentration was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.L-03 = Laboratory fortified blank/laboratory control sample recovery is outside of control limits. Reported value for this compound is likely to be based on the low sideV-05 = Continuing calibration verification (CCV) did not meet method specifications and was biased on the low side for this compound.V-06 = Continuing calibration verification (CCV) did not meet method specifications and was biased on the high side for this compound.V-34 = Initial calibration verification (ICV) did not meet method specifications and was biased on the low side for this compound. Reported result is estimated.Screening Criteria Residential SGSLs (1)Non-Residential SGSLs (1)SSV-2/SSV-DUPBuilding 3Sub-Slab Soil Gas2/16/2022MP-18/MP-DUPBuilding 45/16/2022µg/m3https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Ardent - ACO/ACO.002 - 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Sub-slab and Soil GasTable 3 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataHarrelson FordCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. ACO-002Evaluation AreaExteriorSample IDSG-2 SG-3 SG-8 SG-12 SG-13 SG-16Sample Date2/17/2022Sample TypeUnitsVOCs (TO-15)1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.75 <0.78 <0.94 <0.771.7 J<0.1041.6 211,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane0.91 J 1.3 J<0.73 <0.602.9 J1.12 J35,000 440,0001,1-Dichloroethane<0.33 <0.35 <0.42 <0.340.46 J<0.101587701,2,4-Trimethylbenzene10.5 1.6 J 8.4 10.7 12.05.67420 5,3001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene3.0 0.78 J 5.0 4.8 5.41.97 J420 5,3001,3-Dichlorobenzene6.6 7.9<1.3 <1.013.4<0.174NE NE2-Butanone (MEK)19.0 24.9 64.0 7.7 11.215.635,000 440,0002-Hexanone1.5 J<0.9317.2<0.919.9 J<0.285210 2,6002-Propanol (Isopropanol)<1.01.8 J<1.3 <1.031.7<0.1391,400 18,0004-Ethyltoluene4.6 J 3.2 J 1.8 J 1.7 J 2.5 J1.96 JNE NE4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)3.0 J 2.4 J 6.9 J 3.3 J 4.9 J3.5621,000 260,000Acetone26.6 51.3 552 354 66.672.5220,000 2,700,000Benzene1.619.1 19.4 19.210.720.912 160Bromodichloromethane5.30.65 J<0.60 <0.49 <0.57<0.1502.5 33Bromomethane0.61 J<0.320.48 J 1.9<0.36<0.11535 440Carbon disulfide42.3 101 217 6.4 39.812.04,900 61,000Carbon tetrachloride<0.57 <0.59 <0.71 <0.58 <0.671.26 JChlorobenzene<0.31 <0.33 <0.39 <0.32 <0.37<0.107350 4,400Chloroethane0.93 J 1.8<0.56 <0.46 <0.54<0.16470,000 880,000Chloroform87.61200.92 J<0.38 <0.44<0.08644.1 53Chloromethane<0.17 <0.18 <0.21 <0.183.90.977 J630 7,900Cyclohexane2.9 J 52.2 63.5 218 52.421.142,000 530,000Dibromochloromethane<1.0 <1.1 <1.3 <1.1 <1.2<0.208NE NEDichlorodifluoromethane3.3 2.3<0.47 <0.392.83.16700 8,800Ethanol7.6 29.5 66.8 13.0 82.6NANE NEEthyl acetate<0.260.67 J 1.3 J<0.2717.0<0.136490 6,100Ethylbenzene12.6 4.3 4.3 1.6 J 28.915.837 490Methylene Chloride<1.210.4<1.5 <1.23.8 J2.173,400 53,000Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.25 <0.26651<0.26 <0.30<0.0336360 4,700Naphthalene<4.4 <4.6 <5.55.8<5.22.912.8 36n-Heptane4.4 33.8 27.4 9.1 8.926.12,800 35,000n-Hexane16.9 84.0 74.1 4.3 16.357.04,900 61,000m&p-Xylene41.6 6.0 15.4 8.9 11.355.0700 8,800o-Xylene20.6 3.5 6.3 9.3 5.515.2700 8,800Propylene46.9 787<0.33 <0.27 <0.3115221,000 260,000Styrene<0.781.4 J<0.97 <0.79 <0.921.58 J7,000 88,000Tetrachloroethene23.7 1.7 16.3 1.6 1.92.44 J280 3,500Tetrahydrofuran<0.36 <0.38 <0.45 <0.37 <0.431.5714,000 180,000Toluene32.8 20.1 31.9 6.3 50.625935,000 440,000Trichloroethene<0.40 <0.41 <0.49 <0.40 <0.47<0.19914 180Trichlorofluoromethane1.2 J 0.96 J 2.6 J<0.481.5 J2.57 JNE NEVinyl chloride<0.182.0<0.22 <0.18 <0.21<0.1275.6 280Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated July 2022.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).Laboratory analytical method is shown in parentheses.Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits (MDLs).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values exceed the Residential SGSL.Bold Underlined values exceed the Non-Residential SGSL.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NE = not establishedJ = Compound concentration was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.µg/m3µg/m3Screening Criteria 8/5/2021Non-Residential SGSLs (1)Residential SGSLs (1)Building 3 and Building 4Exterior Soil Gashttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Ardent - ACO/ACO.002 - 6500 South Boulevard/Brownfields/EMP/Tables/Data Tables_JRLTable 4 (Page 1 of 1)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 May, 2020.
SITE LOCATION MAP
HARRELSON FORD6500 SOUTH BOULEVARDCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE: 6-23-21
JOB NO: ACO-002
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: S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ardent - ACO\ACO.002 - 6500 South Boulevard\Figures\Figure-1.mxdN
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
CHARLOTTE EAST, NORTH CAROLINA 2013CHARLOTTE WEST, NORTH CAROLINA 2013
QUADRANGLE7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
SITE
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. ACO-002
DATE: 2-1-22
FIGURE NO. 2
HARRELSON FORD
6500 SOUTH BOULEVARD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SITE MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
RAILROAD
TRENCH DRAIN
RECTANGULAR FLOOR DRAIN
CIRCULAR FLOOR DRAIN
WASTE OIL AST
NEW OIL AST
FORMER UST
CONCRETE SECONDARY CONTAINMENT
VENT PIPE
OUT-OF-USE IN-GROUND HYDRAULIC LIFT
OIL/WATER SEPARATOR
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
PARKING
NOTES:
1.PARCEL DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY
GIS, 2021.
2.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG
COUNTY GIS, 2021.OLD PINEVILLE ROADSOUTH BOULEVARDVICTORY CHRISTIAN CAMPUS
(7000 OLD PINEVILLE ROAD)
BANNER
(6424 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
ADAMS CAR SALES AND SERVICE
(6501 & 6511 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
FISHY FISH MARKET
(6531 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
AMERICAN AUTO SALES
(6535 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
LIFT AUTO AND SALES
(6543 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
SOUTH BOULEVARD CAR WASH CENTER
(6547 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
GOODWILL
(6607 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
LA PREFERIDA
(6625 SOUTH BOULEVARD)
PAVED PARKING
(NO ASSIGNED ADDRESS)
BUILDING #1 -
VACANT
WAREHOUSE
BUILDING #2 -
MULTI-TENANT
AUTO REPAIR
OFFICES/
STORAGE
OFFICES
BUILDING #4 -
MAINTENANCE BAYS
WITH ABOVEGROUND
HYDRAULIC LIFTS
BUILDING #3 -
MAINTENANCE BAYS WITH
OUT-OF-USE IN-GROUND
HYDRAULIC LIFTS
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ardent - ACO\ACO.002 - 6500 South Boulevard\Brownfields\Assessment\Work Plan\Figures\Figures 20220201.dwg, FIG 2, 2/2/2022 12:22:03 PM, sperry
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. ACO-002
DATE: 6-13-22
FIGURE NO. 3
HARRELSON FORD
6500 SOUTH BOULEVARD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
BUILDING #4
BUILDING #3
OFFICE/STORAGE
OFFICE
OIL/WATER SEPARATOR
HL-18 HL-17 HL-16 HL-15 HL-14
HL-13 HL-12
HL-7HL-4 HL-3
HL-6 HL-5
HL-19
HL-20
HL-21 HL-22 HL-23 HL-11 HL-10 HL-9
HL-8
HL-2
SG-7
SG-2
SB-2
SB-4
SB-5
SB-3
TMW-4/SB-1
SG-3
SG-8
SSV-6
SSV-5
SB-6
SB-7
TMW-3/SB-8
SSV-3 SSV-4
SSV-2
SG-16
SB-9
SG-13
SG-12
TMW-5
MP-1
MP-2
MP-5
MP-6
MP-9
MP-10
MP-13
MP-14
MP-17
MP-18
MP-21
MP-22
MP-25
MP-26
MP-27
MP-28
MP-23
MP-24
MP-19
MP-20
MP-15
MP-16
MP-11
MP-12
MP-7
MP-8
MP-3
MP-4
MP-29
MP-31
MP-32
MP-33
MP-34
MP-35
MP-36
MP-37
MP-38
MP-39
MP-40
MP-44
MP-42
MP-41 MP-45
MP-46
MP-47
MP-48
MP-18A
MP-18B
MP-18C
MP-18D
MP-3A
MP-3B
MP-3C
MP-3D
MP-30A
MP-30B
MP-30C
MP-30D
MP-43A
MP-43B
MP-43C
MP-43D
MP-43B 0-1'
PCE 1.3
TCE 0.031
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
SAMPLE ID
SAMPLE DEPTH
CONCENTRATION
(mg/kg)
CONSTITUENT
MP-18 0-1'1-2'
PCE 0.65 0.21
TCE ND ND
VC ND ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND ND
MP-3 0-1'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-18C 0-1'
PCE 0.022
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
MP-18D 0-1'
PCE 0.073
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
MP-18A 0-1'
PCE 0.53
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
MP-18B 0-1'
PCE 0.18
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
MP-30 0-1'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-30B 0-1'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-30A 0-1'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-30C 0-1'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-30D 0-1'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-43 1-2'2-3'
PCE 0.14 ND
TCE 0.0071 ND
VC ND ND
cis-1,2-DCE 0.0033 J 0.0066 J
MP-43B 0-1'
PCE 1.3
TCE 0.031
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
MP-43A 1-2'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-43D 1-2'
NO DETECTIONS
MP-43C 1-2'
PCE 0.73
TCE 0.020
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
MP-30
MP-43
NOTES:
1. AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG
COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2. CVOCs NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATIONS ABOVE
MDLs IN GREY SAMPLES.
3. CVOCs DETECTED AT CONCENTRATIONS BELOW DEQ
DWM VAPOR INTRUSION VISLs IN GREEN HIGHLIGHTED
SAMPLES.
4. CVOCs DETECTED AT CONCENTRATIONS ABOVE DEQ
DWM VAPOR INTRUSION VISLs IN BLUE HIGHLIGHTED
SAMPLES.
5. SOIL, GROUNDWATER, SUB-SLAB SOIL GAS, AND
EXTERIOR SOIL GAS SAMPLES COLLECTED BY H&H IN
AUGUST 2021, FEBRUARY 2022, AND MAY 2022.
6.
7.
J FLAG DENOTES ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION BETWEEN
LABORATORY REPORTING LIMIT AND METHOD
DETECTION LIMIT.
BOLD VALUE INDICATES COMPOUND EXCEEDS THE
PROTECTION OF GROUNDWATER PSRG.ONLY VOC COMPOUNDS SHOWN
ACRONYM KEY
PCE TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
TCE TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VC VINYL CHLORIDE
cis-1,2-DCE cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE
ND NOT DETECTED
CVOCs CHLORINATED VOLATILE
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
SGSLs SUB-SLAB AND EXTERIOR SOIL
GAS SCREENING LEVELS
MDLs LABORATORY METHOD
DETECTION LIMITS
HL-10 8-10'
PCE 0.14
TCE 0.012
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
HL-17 8-10'
PCE 0.014
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE 0.0077
HL-18 8-10'
PCE ND
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE 0.046
HL-20 8-10'
PCE 0.93
TCE 0.041
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
HL-22 8-10'
PCE 0.018
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE 0.0081
HL-23 8-10'
PCE 0.085
TCE ND
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
SB-2 2-4'
PCE 0.018
TCE 0.0075
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
SB-6 2-4'
PCE 0.11
TCE 0.012
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE 0.014
SB-7 2-4'
PCE 0.47
TCE 0.0058
VC ND
cis-1,2-DCE ND
LEGEND
APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF FLOOR DRAIN
SUB-SLAB SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION
SUB-SLAB SOIL GAS SURVEY MONITORING
POINT
EXTERIOR SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION
SOIL BORING LOCATION
CO-LOCATED SOIL BORING AND
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL LOCATION
MONITORING WELL LOCATION
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL LOCATION
EVALUATION AREA
EVALUATION DESIGNATION
TMW-6
A
A C E G I K M
B D F H J L N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Ardent - ACO\ACO.002 - 6500 South Boulevard\Brownfields\Additional Assessment\Figures\Figures 20220614.dwg, FIG 5, 7/12/2022 8:07:26 AM, shaynes8.