WS-29790_48898_CA_IAR_20230420

___________________________________________________________________________
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I. GENERAL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 
A. OWNERSHIP OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK (UST) .............................................................................................. 1 
B. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: .......................................................................................................................... 1 
C. CONTACTS: ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 
D. SITE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................... 1 
E. UST AND AST INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................. 3 
F. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: ......................................................................................................................................... 3 
II. CLOSURE PROCEDURES ....................................................................................................................................... 4 
A. PREPARATIONS FOR CLOSURE: ................................................................................................................................ 4 
B. TANK PULL, EXCAVATION, SOIL DISPOSAL, AND BACKFILL: ............................................................................................ 4 
III. SITE INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................................................................ 5 
A. SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURES, FIELD SCREENING, AND OBSERVATIONS: .......................................................................... 5 
B. INVESTIGATION RESULTS: ....................................................................................................................................... 7 
V. SIGNATURE OF P.E. OR LICENSED GEOLOGIST.................................................................................................... 8 

FIGURES 

1) Aerial Map of Site & Tank Locations 
2) Site Map – Cedar Rock  
3) UST Closure Map& Sample Locations 

TABLES 

1) UST and AST Details (Page 3) 
2) Post Excavation Soil Analytical Results (Page 6) 

APPENDICES 

A. Notice of Required Actions (NoRA) from NCDEQ   (02‐27‐2023) 
B. UST‐62 Form  ‐  Notification of Discharge Form   (02‐28‐2023) 
C. Cedar Rock Environmental Site Inspection Report 
D. Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NoRR) from NCDEQ  (03‐07‐2023) 
E. UST‐61 Form  ‐  Release Reporting Form   
F. Site Photographs 
G. Product & Water Disposal Manifest  
H. UST and AST Disposal Certificates 
I. Standard Field Procedures 
J. Non‐Hazardous Manifests & Weight Tickets for Soil ( 69.09 tons )  
K. Laboratory Reports & Chain‐of‐Custody Form 
Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 1
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023
I. General Information 

A. Ownership of Underground Storage Tank (UST) 
Villas Developers, LLC 
4303 Voss Ave 
Greensboro, NC 27407 

B. Property Owner Information: 
Villas Developers, LLC 
4303 Voss Ave 
Greensboro, NC 27407 

C. Contacts:  
1. Primary Contact Person: 2. Closure Contractor: 
Sonia Perez Fulp’s Environmental, Inc 
 4303 Voss Avenue 3653 North Patterson Avenue 
 Greensboro, NC 27407 Winston‐Salem, NC 27105. 
 (336)383‐2325  (336)661‐3000 

3. Primary Consultant: 4. Laboratory: 
Pyramid Environmental and Tori Kelly 
Engineering, P.C. (Pyramid) RED Lab, LLC 
503 Industrial Avenue 105 Portwatch Way 
Greensboro, NC 27416‐0265 Wilmington, NC 28409 
(336) 335‐3174 (919) 278‐8926 

D. Site Summary  
The residence is located in southeast Greensboro as shown on the aerial site map presented as 
Figure 1.  On February 27, 2023, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 
(NCDEQ), UST Section of the Division of Waste Management received a complaint of a 
petroleum discharge at 1812 Sharpe Road in Greensboro, North Carolina. In response, on 
February 28, 2023, the UST Section office mailed Ms. Sonia Perez, the current property owner, 
a Notice of Required Actions (NoRA). The NoRA outlined the required actions that would need 
to be taken to bring the site into compliance. A copy of the Notice of Required Actions is 
presented in Appendix A. That same day, the 24‐Hour Notification of Discharge Form (UST‐62) 
was submitted by Ashley Dinkins of the Guilford County Health Department. A copy of the UST‐
62 Notification of Discharge Form is presented in Appendix B. 
Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 2
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023

On March 2, 2023, at the request of Ms. Perez, Cedar Rock Environmental, P.C. (Cedar Rock) 
performed a site inspection of the property. During the investigation, it was discovered that the 
275‐gallon AST, which was located behind the bouse, had been moved to a new location behind 
the storage shed in the back yard.  The tank had a small amount of heating oil in it which had 
leaked out slowly and was present on the surface soil near the shed. 

Additionally, an inactive 550‐gallon UST was discovered via metal detector to the west of the 
back porch. The 550‐gallon UST was located using a probe rod and measured 48‐inches (4‐feet) 
in diameter and 69‐inches long. Once the orientation of the UST was determined, one soil 
boring was performed at the UST at a depth of approximately 4 feet.  Cedar Rock reported a 
strong petroleum odor in the soil and soil discoloration at 4 feet, suggesting a heating oil 
release had occurred from the UST.  

The investigation also found that the subject property utilizes a water supply well located in the 
front yard within 100 feet of the petroleum release. At least one additional well was observed 
on the neighboring property to the west within 150 feet of the release. A copy of the Cedar 
Rock Site Inspection report is presented in Appendix C.    

On March 7, 2023, a Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NoRR) was issued to Ms. Sonia Perez, 
outlining the current status of the site and actions needed in order to be considered for “No 
Further Action.” This same day, the 24‐Hour Release and UST Leak Reporting Form (UST‐61) 
was submitted to the NCDEQ by Damien Callaghan of Cedar Rock Environmental. A copy of the 
Notice of Regulatory Requirements is presented in Appendix D. A copy of the 24‐Hour Release 
and UST Leak Reporting Form (UST‐61) is presented in Appendix E.  

On March 8, 2023, Ms. Sonia Perez reached out to Pyramid to make a site visit and provide an 
estimate for doing the right work to clean up the spill and remove and cleanup the UST area. 
Also on March 8, 2023, Mike Jones of Pyramid visited the site in preparation for the upcoming 
work. Pyramid was contracted to provide UST and AST removal and clean up the heating oil 
contaminated soils at both the UST and AST areas.  

The owner arranged for the HVAC Company to disconnect and move the A/C unit that was over 
the UST before the work started.  In addition, Pyramid’s Contractor moved the Propane tank 
which was not in use and was disconnected out of the way to provide site access. Pyramid 
contacted ULOCO to mark public utilities in preparation for the work. Site photographs of the 
UST area and other site features are presented in Appendix F. 

Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 3
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023

E. UST and AST Information 
As requested by Villas Developers, LLC, Pyramid scheduled the removal of the UST/AST, 
contaminated soil excavation, and post‐excavation soil sampling for the underground storage 
tank pit and aboveground storage tank area at the residence located at 1812 Sharpe Road, 
Greensboro, NC.  The tank Locations are shown on Figure 1 and Figure 2 relative to the home. 
The work was discussed and arranged with Ms. Perez, Jordan Lerew of Guilford County, and 
scheduled for March 28, 2023.  The tank details are presented in Table 1. 

Table 1 
 Tank Details 

Tank 
No. 
UST or 
AST 
Install 
Year 
Size 
(gallons) 
Tank Dimensions Last Use 
Date 
Last 
Contents 
Removal 
Date 
1 UST ~ 1950s 550 69” long by 48” dia. Unknown Heating Oil  3/28/2023 
2 AST ~ 1980s 270 62” long by 36” dia. Unknown Heating Oil 3/28/2023 

F. Site Characteristics:  
1. Water is currently supplied by an on‐site water supply well (WSW), located in the front 
yard less than 100 feet from the petroleum release.  
2. Property use in the area is mostly residential. 

In general, both surface and groundwater flow directions are controlled by topographic 
contours with flow occurring perpendicular to the contours from high to low elevations. The 
nearest surface water is greater than 500 feet from the site. There is one active water supply 
well on the subject site in the front yard approximately 59 feet north of the release. At least 
one additional well has been observed on the neighboring property to the west that is also 
within 150 feet of the release.  

The project goals were to fully excavate the petroleum release to below NCDEQ action Levels.  

Work was planned to remove the UST and excavate soil around the tank to clean up the 
release.  The area where the AST has spilled heating oil near the shed was examined and the e 
ground was very hard; therefore, the spilled heating oil soaked up in the straw, and did not 
penetrate into the soil.  

Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 4
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023
II. Closure Procedures 
A. Preparations for Closure:  
In preparation for the removal and permanent closure of 550‐gallon UST and 275‐gallon AST, 
the following work was performed: 

1. Pyramid contacted NC‐One‐Call at least 72 hours prior to beginning the excavation 
work to have all subsurface utilities marked at the site.  
2. Ms. Perez coordinated with her HVAC company to move the A/C system in 
preparation for the UST removal 
3. Pyramid contracted with Fulp’s Environmental, Inc (Fulp’s) to provide a vacuum unit 
to remove the petroleum liquids and water from the tanks and excavation.  
Approximately 550 gallons of non‐hazardous petroleum liquids and rinse water were 
removed from the UST and AST.  A copy of the liquid disposal certificate for the 
fluids is included in Appendix G.   

B. Tank Pull, Excavation, Soil Disposal, and Backfill: 
1. The 550‐gallon UST was pumped, cleaned, and removed from the excavation. The 
tank measured 69 inches long and 48 inches in diameter and was very corroded. The 
tank was loaded on a flatbed truck and Fulp’s transported the tank to the metal 
recycler for disposal. The certificate of tank disposal is presented in Appendix H.  

2. The 275‐gallon AST was also cleaned and removed from behind the shed. The tank 
measured 62 inches long and 36 inches in diameter. The tank was loaded and  
transported to the metal recycler by Fulp’s. The certificate of tank disposal is 
presented in Appendix H. 

3. After the UST and AST were removed, Pyramid supervised the excavation of the 
remaining petroleum contaminated soils. Beginning with the UST pit, removal of 
petroleum contaminated soil was guided by Pyramid using field screening with a 
calibrated Photoionization detector (PID). The standard procedures used are 
summarized in Appendix I. The UST and AST locations are shown in Figure 3.  

4. As the excavation proceeded, Pyramid screened soils with a calibrated Photo‐
Ionization Detector (PID) at the site. The initial reading beneath the UST and in the 
shed area were > 50 parts per million (ppm) and disposal samples were collected 
from each (Disposal).  

Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 5
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023
5. Pyramid also screened the soil beneath the former location of the AST to confirm 
that a release had not occurred there. Two surface samples were collected and 
screened on the PID, but both were < 5 ppm.  

6. The contaminated soils were removed and PID readings decreased as the excavation 
proceeded deeper. The contaminated soil was loaded and transported to the 
Alternative Energy Solutions of NC (AES) facility in Thomasville, NC for treatment and 
disposal. Three truckloads of soil were removed from the UST excavation pit and PID 
readings of the post excavation soil samples were < 2.6 parts per million (ppm). One 
additional truckload of soil was removed from the shed area with PID readings of 
post excavation soil samples being < 10 ppm.  

7. Based on the four certified weight tickets, a total of 69.09 tons of petroleum 
contaminated soils were removed from the site. Copies of the Non‐Hazardous 
Material Manifests with the certified weight tickets are included in Appendix J. 

8. The UST and AST were loaded, secured, and transported by Fulp’s Environmental to 
Foss Recycling facility in Mebane, NC where they were cut up for recycling as scrap 
metal.  Copies of the Tank Disposal Certificates are included in Appendix H. 

9. No partially weathered rock, bedrock, or groundwater was encountered during the 
excavation activities.  

10. No water samples were collected since groundwater was not encountered in the 
excavation and the contaminated soil was fully excavated. 

11. The excavation was backfilled by Fulp’s Environmental using clean backfill. The 
backfill material was compacted with the track excavator bucket. Photos of the 
backfilled excavation are presented in Appendix F.  

III. Site Investigation 
A. Soil Sampling Procedures, Field Screening, and Observations: 
On March 28, 2023, Pyramid supervised the removal and permanent closure of one 550‐gallon 
heating oil UST and one 275‐gallon AST at 1812 Sharpe Road, in Greensboro, NC.  Soil samples 
were collected during the excavation of petroleum impacted soils and screened in the field with 
a PID to determine the extent of the contamination. The contaminated soil encountered near 
the UST and shed area were removed and a total of 69.09 tons of petroleum‐impacted soil was 
transported off‐site for proper disposal.   
Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 6
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023
As part of the limited site assessment required under 40 CFR 280.72 and 15A NCAC 2N .0803 
post excavation soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis from the four sidewalls and 
bottom of the completed UST excavation, as well as two samples from the shed area. The 
number of soil samples collected from the limits of the excavation and laboratory methods was 
based on the current requirements for non‐regulated (non‐commercial) heating oil UST by the 
NCDEQ.   
All soil samples were collected using the track excavator bucket and a portion of each soil 
sample was screened in the field using a PID to check for volatile organic vapors associated with 
petroleum. To prevent cross‐contamination from the sampling procedures, clean disposable 
nitrile gloves were worn by the sampling technician during these activities and were changed 
between samples. The standard field procedures used by Pyramid are included in Appendix I.  

Heating oil contaminated soils were identified during the UST/AST removal activities. Disposal 1 
was above the NCDEQ Action Limits of 50 mg/kg for Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) and 100 
mg/kg for Diesel Range Organics (DRO) and were targeted for removal. A second disposal 
sample was collected deeper in the excavation just below the tank, and the highest GRO 
detection was 10,203 mg/kg and the highest DRO detection was 66,036 mg/kg.  

In the UST pit, contaminated soils were excavated deeper and wider than the tank and cleaned 
up as the excavation proceeded with depth. The final excavation showed very low field 
screening results on the PID, less than 5.0 ppm for all sidewalls and at the bottom of the 
excavation. The final excavation measured approximately 13 feet wide, about 10 feet long, and 
about 20 feet deep. At the end of the soil removal, on March 28, 2023, five soil samples were 
collected from the limits of the UST excavation (North, South, Bottom, West, East). All soil 
samples from the UST excavation showed PID readings below 5.0 ppm. 

The area near the shed where heating oil was spilled was scraped to a depth of 6‐8 inches using 
the track hoe bucket. The straw that had been placed in the yard helped by absorbing some of 
the oil.  The soil excavation was discussed with Jordan Lerew, and guided by PID field screening.  

The final excavation yielded similarly low field screening results of less than 8.0 ppm for each of 
the two shed samples. Two soil samples were collected for analyses from the shed cleanup area 
(Shed 1 & Shed 2). The limits of the final excavations and soil sample locations are shown on 
Figure 3. The soil samples were analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) utilizing the 
QED UVF Analysis from REDLab, LLC.  The soil samples were packed in a cooler on ice and 
maintained at 4 C during shipment to REDLab, LLC in Wilmington, NC.   

Villas Developers Property – 1812 Sharpe Rd, Greensboro, NC – Home UST and AST Removal 7
Pyramid Project No. 2023-104 4/19/2023
A copy of the laboratory report and chain‐of‐custody form is included in Appendix K.  The 
analytical results of the post excavation soil samples are summarized in Table 2. 

Table 2 
Post‐Excavation Soil Analytical Results 

Sample 
Date 
Sample 
ID 
Depth 
(feet) 
PID Reading   
(ppm) 
GRO            
(mg/kg) 
DRO 
[mg/kg] 
03/28/2023 North 12’ 2.4 9.0 2.8 
03/28/2023 South  12’ 15.4 <0.61 2.1 
03/28/2023 Bottom 20’ 4.0 <0.71 2.7 
03/28/2023 West 12’ 2.6 <0.73 <0.73 
03/28/2023 East 12’ 4.4 <0.65 0.65 
03/28/2023 Shed 1 5” 7.9 12.8 89.8 
03/28/2023 Shed 2 6” 1.2 1.8 1.6 
03/28/2023 Disposal 1 Composite 349 4,900 26,425 
03/28/2023 Disposal 2 Composite 425 10,203 66,036 
 NCDEQ Cleanup Levels [mg/kg] 50 mg/kg 100 mg/kg 
ppm – parts per million      mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram 

The soil analytical results from the post‐excavation soil samples showed GRO and DRO 
concentrations were all below the NCDEQ Action Levels of 50 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) 
for GRO and less than 100 mg/kg for DRO.  This shows that the UST heating oil release was 
effectively cleaned up by excavation of contaminated soils, and that the surface spill was also 
cleaned up to below NCDEQ Action Levels.   

B. Investigation Results:  
Since the GRO and DRO analytical results for the post excavation soil samples are below the 
NCDEQ Action Levels, Pyramid requests that the NCDEQ consider the UST site for Regulatory 
Closure.  Based on these data, contaminated soils from both the UST and AST have been 
thoroughly removed from the site. Both the 24‐Hour Notification of Discharge Form (UST‐62) 
and 24‐Hour Release and UST Leak Reporting Form (UST‐61) were completed and delivered to 
the NCDEQ prior to this scope of work.  

While water supply wells were identified within 250 feet of the release area, it is of no 
consequence because the petroleum release was excavated to below NCDEQ Action Levels. 

FIGURES

4/7/23, 12:22 PM GIS Data Viewer
https://gisdv.guilfordcountync.gov/guilford/1/1
Site Map (1=42')
Disclaimer: While every effort is made to keep information provided over the internet accurate and
up-to-date, Guilford County does not certify the authenticity or accuracy of such information. No
warranties, express or implied, are provided for the records and/or mapping data herein, or for their
use or interpretation by the User.
Map Scale
1 inch = 42 feet
4/7/2023
Ms. Sonia Pereztinoco March 3, 2023
Page 4

Site Sketch. Sketch is to scale relative to itself.

Photo 1. View of the AST.
N
House
UST
Carport
7 ft
Location of soil boring
13 ft
7 ft
19 ft
Supply well
Back porch
4/7/23, 12:55 PM GIS Data Viewer
https://gisdv.guilfordcountync.gov/guilford/1/1
Figure 3 - UST Closure Map
Disclaimer: While every effort is made to keep information provided over the internet accurate and
up-to-date, Guilford County does not certify the authenticity or accuracy of such information. No
warranties, express or implied, are provided for the records and/or mapping data herein, or for their
use or interpretation by the User.
Map Scale
1 inch = 42 feet
4/7/2023

APPENDIX A

February 28, 2023

CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN
RECEIPT REQUESTED
7020 0090 0001 7206 3519
Attn: Sonia Tinoco Perez Villas Developers, LLC 4303 Voss Avenue
Greensboro, NC 27405
Re: Notice of Required Actions
G.S. 143-215.75 et seq. Oil Pollution and Hazardous Substance Control Act of 1978 Unlawful Petroleum Release
Villas Developers Property 1812 Sharpe Road Greensboro, Guilford County Incident Number: Pending Ranking: High Dear Ms. Perez:
Information received by this office of the UST Section, Division of Waste Management, in a complaint on February 27, 2023, confirms a release or discharge of petroleum at the above-referenced location as a result of a spill/illegal dumping. This office has determined that you are the property owner and are responsible for the release.
This letter explains North Carolina General Statute 143-215.75 et seq., Oil Pollution and Hazardous Substances Control Act as it relates to the release, as follows:
1) G.S. 143-215.83 (a) Unlawful Discharges: It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge oil or other hazardous substances into or upon any waters or land within the state;
2) G.S. 143-215.84 (a) Removal of Prohibited Discharges: Any person having control over oil or other hazardous substances discharged in violation of this article shall immediately undertake to collect and remove the discharge and to restore the area affected by the discharge as nearly as may be to the condition existing prior to the discharge; 3) G.S. 143-215.85, Required Notice: Any person having control over oil or other hazardous substances discharged, shall immediately notify the Department of Environmental Quality of the nature, location, and time of the discharge and of the measures taken or are proposed to be taken to contain and remove the discharge.
Page 2 of 2

The following actions are required in order to comply with the statute:
1) You must cease discharging all "oil" or other hazardous substances into or upon the waters or land of the state; 2) Immediately upon discovery of the discharge, you must submit a Notification of Discharge
Report, prepared in accordance with the most recent version of the UST Section Assessment
Guidelines (current version), to the Winston-Salem Regional Office of the UST Section; 3) You must contain and remove free product; 4) You must remove and properly dispose of all contaminated soil exceeding the TPH action level or the soil-to-groundwater maximum contaminant concentrations(MSCCs); and 5) You must perform soil assessment to confirm removal of contaminated soil using the procedures and analytical methods specified in the appropriate sections of the UST Section Assessment
Guideline (current version). 6) Within 30 days of the receipt of this notice, you must complete these corrective actions and submit an Initial Assessment Report, prepared in accordance with the Guidelines for Initial Response
and Abatement, Assessment, and Corrective Action for Non-UST Releases of Petroleum (current version), which indicates the nature and the extent of the release and describes initial response and abatement actions, including removal of free product and removal of contaminated soil and subsequent soil sampling to confirm cleanup to the Winston-Salem Regional Office of the UST Section. Failure to comply in the manner and time specified may result in the assessment of civil penalties and/or the use of other enforcement mechanisms. Because a release or discharge has been confirmed, a Licensed Geologist or a Professional Engineer, certified by the State of North Carolina, is required to prepare and certify all reports submitted to the
Department in accordance with Title 15A NCAC 2L .0103(e) and 2L .0111(b). If you have any questions regarding the actions that must be taken or the rules mentioned in this letter,
please contact Ashley Dinkins at the Guilford County Department of Health and Human Services, 400 W. Market Street, Suite 300, Greensboro, NC 27401 or [phone].
Sincerely, James Brown Regional Supervisor Winston-Salem Regional Office UST Section, Division of Waste Management, NCDEQ cc: Guilford County Department of Health and Human Services

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C

CEDAR ROCK ENVIRONMENTAL, P.C. 107 Pioneer Trail Graham, NC 27253 [phone] March 3, 2023

Ms. Sonia Pereztinoco 4303 Voss Avenue Greensboro, NC 27405
Reference: Inspection of an aboveground and underground storage tank (UST) located at
1812 Sharpe Road, Greensboro, North Carolina Cedar Rock Project # 360622590
Dear Ms. Pereztinoco:
Cedar Rock Environmental, P. C. (Cedar Rock) performed a site inspection on March 2, 2023 at the above referenced location. The purpose of the inspection was to investigate environmental impacts resulting from a reported spillage of heating oil from an above ground storage tank (AST).
It is our understanding the residence was built in 1966.
An inactive 270-gallon AST was observed to be located behind the storage shed in the back yard (see Photo 1). This tank was reportedly formerly against the rear foundation wall of the house to the northeast of the rear porch. The tank was reportedly rolled to its current location. At this time
a petroleum odor was reported in the yard, likely a result of fuel spilling from the tank as it was
rolled. No petroleum odor was observed in the back yard at the time of inspection. The AST appeared to be in decent condition. No obvious signs of surface spillage were observed. During our inspection, an inactive UST was discovered using a metal detector and located as
shown in the Site Sketch. Neither the fill nor vent pipes of the UST were observed. No petroleum
odor associated with the UST was observed at the ground surface. The depth to the top of the UST is approximately 18 inches below land surface (bls). The UST has a length of about 69 inches with an estimated diameter of approximately 48 inches and an estimated capacity of about 550 gallons. The contents of the tank could not be determined as there was no access to the tank’s
interior, however, based on sounding with a probing rod the tank appears to be full of fluid. White
flagging was installed to mark the ends of the UST (see Photo 2). No other USTs were discovered on the property using a metal detector to survey the outside perimeter of the residence where USTs are usually located. The presence of the UST suggests the AST was installed to replace the leaking UST. No petroleum odor was observed in the crawlspace from the entry on the rear of the house.
Once the orientation of the UST was determined, a soil boring was performed at the northeastern end of the UST using a 3.25-inch diameter stainless steel hand auger. The soil boring was advanced to a depth of approximately 4.0 feet bls, about 1.5 feet above the bottom of the UST. A strong petroleum odor and discoloration was observed in the soils at the base of the boring
suggesting significant leakage from the UST has occurred. The soils at the base of the boring
consist of a brownish gray micaceous sandy silt.
Cedar Rock
ENVIRONMENTAL
Ms. Sonia Pereztinoco March 3, 2023
Page 2
The property utilizes a water supply well located in the front yard about 59 feet north of the petroleum release. Because this well is within 150 feet of the petroleum release, the property
would currently be classified as “High Risk” by the State. Further, at least one additional well on
the neighboring property to the west was observed within 150 feet of the release. Based on the results of this investigation, significant contamination of the soils surrounding the UST has been confirmed. Although the petroleum release does not appear to pose a health risk,
current law (NCGS 143-215.85 (a) and (b)) requires that any significant release of petroleum be
immediately reported to the Guilford County Department of Public Health (336-641-3771) or the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Division of Waste Management, Winston-Salem Regional Office (336-776-9800). According to State law, upon reporting the release, the current property owner where a release is discovered is identified by the State as the
“Responsible Party” for any State required action relating to the UST leakage. As you requested,
Cedar Rock will submit a UST-61 form to satisfy the State’s notification requirement for the release. Currently, the property cannot be legally conveyed until a Notice of Residual Petroleum (NRP) is
filed with the Guilford County Register of Deeds office pursuant to NCGS 143B- 279.11 (d). The
NRP would contain applicable land use restrictions to minimize the risk of exposure to existing contamination. The land use restrictions prohibit any disturbance of site soils within a specified radius of the estimated extent of soil contamination and prohibit the future operation or installation of any water supply wells on the property, excluding the existing well. Further, the State will not
issue a Notice of No Further Action (NFA) letter to officially close out the release incident for
“High Risk” properties such as this wherein soil or groundwater contamination exceeding applicable standards remains onsite. Filing the NRP would not be required if all soil contamination exceeding applicable standards is removed.
The State currently will require initial abatement or remedial action (removal of the UST and
associated contaminated soils) regarding the release of heating oil from a UST on a “High Risk” property. Further, once the presence of the UST and confirmed contaminated soil is disclosed to other interested parties as required by State law, future buyers, homeowner’s insurance providers, or lenders may also require initial abatement and/or remedial actions relating to the UST prior to
making any commitments towards the property. There also exists a potential for further environmental impact to the property from continued leakage from the UST. Cedar Rock can remove the UST including up to 15 tons of contaminated soil for a charge of
$15,000.00 plus $1.50 per gallon of recovered fluids. Tonnage in excess of 15 tons will be an
added charge at the rate of $150.00 per ton. This would include appropriate environmental assessment, reporting, and site restoration. All work performed would be in accordance with the recommended practices and procedures outlined in the Guidelines for Site Checks, Tank Closure, and Initial Response and Abatement, Change 11 (May 17, 2021), published by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Waste Management, UST Section. Please keep
in mind that if all contamination cannot be removed (i.e. if it extends beyond the reach of excavating equipment or to beneath the foundation of the house) the State will require a second phase of work called a Limited Site Assessment (LSA) to check for groundwater contamination. If the groundwater is discovered to be impacted by the petroleum release, the State will require abandonment of any water supply wells within 150 feet of the release, filing an NRP and
Ms. Sonia Pereztinoco March 3, 2023
Page 3
performing Public Notification before issuing an NFA letter, which may not be possible if municipal water is not available as an alternative water supply. The overlying HVAC unit would
need to be temporarily disconnected and removed prior to excavation activities. Cedar Rock can
remove the AST for an additional charge of $400.00. Attached is an invoice for the site inspection. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions regarding the content of this report, please call me at 336-684-
3836.
Sincerely,

Josiah D. Payne, N.C. Licensed Geologist #2825

Attachment
Ms. Sonia Pereztinoco March 3, 2023
Page 4

Site Sketch. Sketch is to scale relative to itself.

Photo 1. View of the AST.
N
House
UST
Carport
7 ft
Location of soil boring
13 ft
7 ft
19 ft
Supply well
Back porch
Ms. Sonia Pereztinoco March 3, 2023
Page 5

Photo 2. View of the UST location. Both ends of the UST are marked with white flags.

APPENDIX D

March 7, 2023
Attn: Sonia Perez Tinoco
Villas Developers, LLC
4303 Voss Avenue
Greensboro, NC 27405
Re: Notice of Regulatory Requirements
15A NCAC 2L .0404 and .0405 and
Session Law 2015-241, Section 14.16A and 14.16B
Risk-based Assessment and Corrective Action for
Noncommercial Petroleum Underground Storage Tanks
Villas Developers Property
1812 Sharpe Road
Greensboro, Guilford County
Incident Number: 48898
Preliminary Risk Classification: High
Dear Ms. Perez:
To start, I would like to explain why you have been sent this Notice.
On March 3, 2023, this regional office of the UST Section, Division of Waste Management was notified
that a heating oil underground storage tank (or UST) was found to have leaked at this property.
Based on the size of this tank, and the way the fuel was used, it appears that this would qualify as a
‘noncommercial’ UST. This is important because there are different requirements for noncommercial USTs
than for commercial USTs (typically larger tanks used for fuel sales or other business purposes), in part due
to the removal of the Noncommercial Leaking Underground Storage Trust Fund through Session Law 2015-
241 in October 2015.
If there are no immediate emergency problems, the Department of Environmental Quality uses information
about the tank and local area provided by the tank owner or operator, or landowner, to determine if the leak
poses an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment
From the information that has been provided to the regional office, the risk classification for this
noncommercial UST has been conditionally determined to be high.
As the owner or operator of this UST system, you will need to do additional work to either address the
contamination caused by the leak, remove any risk factors (such as nearby water supply wells), or provide
for a better understanding of the site-specific conditions that might allow for a reduction in this risk
classification to low.
In the North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC), under Title 15A NCAC 2L .0404, there are rules that
describe the initial steps that should be taken to clean up the contamination from a leaking UST within the
Page 2 of 2

first 90 days after a leak is found. Title 15A NCAC 2L .0405 includes the rules that cover how someone
would get a better understanding of the site risk within the first 120 days after a leak is found.
As the tank owner or operator, you will need to follow the steps defined in one or both of the rules described
above, or otherwise provide this regional office with documentation that shows any and all risk factors have
been addressed.
Once a leak has been confirmed, Title 15A NCAC 2L .0103(e) and 2L .0111(b) require that a Licensed
Geologist or a Professional Engineer, certified by the State of North Carolina, write and certify any formal
reports that document the cleanup work described above. Other documentary forms of information that
you might have available, like proof that a supply well has been properly abandoned and/or city or county
water connected to the house, instead, may not require a formal report.
Also, please note that before you sell or transfer your property, or if you request a “No Further Action”
determination, where the property has not been cleaned up to what are known as “unrestricted use”
standards, you must file a Notice of Residual Petroleum ("Notice") with the Register of Deeds in the county
where the property is located (NCGS 143B-279.9 and 143B-279.11).
Failure to comply with the State's rules can result in the assessment of civil penalties and/or the use of other
legal enforcement mechanisms. However, our goal is to help you find a reasonable and cost-effective way
to reduce the risk posed by this leak to human health and the environment. If you have any questions about
anything in this letter or want to discuss different options you may be considering to clean up or otherwise
address your site risk, please contact Jordan Lerew at the Guilford County Department of Health and
Human Services, 400 W. Market Street, Suite 300, Greensboro, NC 27401 or [phone].

Sincerely,

James W. Brown
Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
UST Section, Division of Waste Management, NCDEQ

Enclosures: Title 15A NCAC 2L .0404 and 2L .0405
A Brief History of North Carolina Session Laws, Rules, and General Statutes…
cc: Guilford County Department of Health and Human Services
Bob Payne, Cedar Rock Environmental Consultants, P.C. [e-mail]

APPENDIX E

UST-61 24-Hour Release and UST Leak Reporting Form.
For Releases
in NC
This form should be completed and submitted to the UST Section’s regional office following a known or suspected release from
an underground storage tank (UST) system. This form is required to be submitted within 24 hours of discovery of a known or
suspected release
(DWM USE ONLY)
Incident # ________ Risk (H,I,L,U)_______
Received On ________ Received By ________
Reported by (circle one): Phone, Fax or Report
Region _______
Suspected Contamination? (Y/N) ________
Confirmed GW Contamination? (Y/N) ______
Confirmed Soil Contamination ?(Y/N) ______
Samples Taken?(Y/N) ______
Free Product? (Y/N) _____ If Yes, State Greatest
Thickness ______________
Facility ID Number ______________
Date Leak Discovered ___________
Comm/Non-Commercial? ________
Reg/Non-regulated? _____________
INCIDENT DESCRIPTION
Incident Name:
Address:County:
City/Town:Zip Code:Regional Office (circle one): Asheville, Mooresville, Fayetteville,
Raleigh, Washington, Wilmington, Winston-Salem
Latitude (decimal degrees): Longitude (decimal degrees) :Obtained by:
Briefly describe suspected or confirmed release: (including but not limited to: nature of release, date of release, amount
of release, amount of free product present and recovery efforts, initial responses conducted, impacts to receptors)T GPS
T Topographic map
T GIS Address matching
T Other
T Unknown
Describe location:
HOW RELEASE WAS DISCOVERED (Release Code)
(Check one)
T Release Detection Equipment or Methods
T During UST Closure/Removal
T Property Transfer
T Visual/Odor
T Water in Tank
T Water Supply Well Contamination
T Groundwater Contamination
T Surface Water Contamination
T Other (specify) _______________
SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION
Source of Release
(Check one to indicate primary
source)
Cause of Release
(Check one to indicate primary
cause)
Type of Release
(Check one)
Product Type Released
(Check one to indicate primary product type
released)
T Tank
T Piping
T Dispenser
T Submersible Turbine Pump
T Delivery Problem
T Other
T Unknown
Definitions presented on reverse
T Spill
T Overfill
T Corrosion
T Physical or Mechanical
Damage
T Install Problem
T Other
T Unknown
Definitions presented on reverse
T Petroleum
T Non-Petroleum
T Both
Location
(Check one)
T Facility
T Residence
T Other
T Gasoline/ Diesel/
Kerosene
T Heating Oil
T Other Petroleum
Products
T Metals
T Other Inorganics
T Other Organics
T Diesel/Veg. Oil
Blend
T Vegetable Oil 100%
T E10 – E20
T E21 – E84
T E85 – E99
T Ethanol 100%
T E01 – E09
Ownership
1. Municipal 2. Military 3. Unknown 4. Private 5. Federal 6. County 7. State
Operation Type
1. Public Service 2. Agricultural 3. Residential 4. Education/Relig. 5. Industrial 6. Commercial 7. Mining
UST Form 61 (02/08)Page 1 of 2
IMPACT ON DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES
Water Supply Wells Affected? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
Number of Water Supply Wells Affected __________________
Water Supply Wells Contaminated: (Include Users Names, Addresses and Phone Numbers. Attach additional sheet if necessary)
1.
2.
3.
UST SYSTEM OWNER
UST Owner/Company
Point of Contact Address
City State Zip Code Telephone Number
UST SYSTEM OPERATOR
UST Operator/Company Address
City State Zip Code Telephone Number
LANDOWNER AT LOCATION OF UST INCIDENT
Landowner Address
City State Zip Code Telephone Number
Draw Sketch of Area (showing two major road intersections) or Attach Map
UST Form 61 (02/08)Page 2 of 2
Definitions of SourcesTank: means the tank that stores the product and is part of the underground storage tank systemPiping: means the piping and connectors running from the tank or submersible turbine pump to the dispenser or other end-use equipment (Vent, vapor recovery, or filllines are excluded.)Dispenser:includes the dispenser and the equipment used to connect the dispenser to the piping (e.g., a release from a suction pump or from components located abovethe shear valve)Submersible Turbine Pump (STP) Area includes the submersible turbine pump head (typically located in the tank sump), the line leak detector, and the piping thatconnects the submersible turbine pump to the tankDelivery Problem: identifies releases that occurred during product delivery to the tank. (Typical causes associated with this source are spills and overfills.)Other: serves as the option to use when the release source is known but does not fit into one of the preceding categories (e.g., for releases from vent lines, vaporrecovery lines, and fill lines)Unknown: identifies releases for which the source has not been determined
Definitions of CausesSpill: use this cause when a spill occurs (e.g., when the delivery hose is disconnected from the tank fill pipe or when the nozzle is removed from the dispenser)Overfill: use when an overfill occurs (e.g., overfills may occur from the fill pipe at the tank or when the nozzle fails to shut off at the dispenser)Physical or Mechanical Damage:use for all types of physical or mechanical damage, except corrosion (e.g., puncture of tank or piping, loose fittings, brokencomponents, and components that have changed dimension)Corrosion:use when a metal tank, piping, or other component has a release due to corrosion (e.g., for steel, corrosion takes the form of rust)Installation Problem: use when the problem is determined to have occurred specifically because the UST system was not installed properlyOther: use this option when the cause is known but does not fit into one of the preceding categories (e.g., putting regulated substances into monitoring wells)Unknown: use when the cause has not been determined
Title Address Date
Person Reporting Incident Company Telephone Number
Topo North America™ 10
Location: 36.045257 °N / 79.744065 °WFIGURE 1. SITE LOCATION
Data use subject to license.
© DeLorme. Topo North America™ 10.
www.delorme.com
TN
MN (9.0°W)
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0 100 200 300 400 500
ftm
Scale 1 : 12,000
1" = 1,000.0 ft Data Zoom 14-3

APPENDIX F

APPENDIX G

APPENDIX H
APPENDIX I
Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 1 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
Standard Field Procedures
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.
________________________________________________________________________

1.0 Equipment Decontamination

Equipment decontamination is essential to assure representative environmental samples 
are collected and to eliminate the potential for cross‐contamination between sample points. 
Pyramid strives to clean all field equipment prior to leaving the office; however, field 
decontamination is still required on most projects. The procedures for decontamination of 
water level probes, hand augers, sampling probes, trowels, and other field equipment are 
listed below. 

1.1 EPA Region IV Decontamination Procedures  
Drilling and soil sampling equipment is decontaminated prior to each use using a pressure 
washer or steam cleaner. Reusable sampling equipment (hand augers, sampling probes, 
trowels, split spoon samplers, water sampling equipment, etc.…) are decontaminated using 
the general procedure described below.  
 Wash with non‐phosphate detergent, water, & brush to remove particulate matter 
 Rinse with tap water 
 Rinse with 10 percent nitric acid solution (only if sampling for metals) 
 Rinse with de‐ionized water 
 Rinse with pesticide‐grade isopropyl alcohol 
 Rinse with de‐ionized water 
 Air‐dry as long as possible  
The level of decontamination used is appropriate to the analytical parameters selected and 
the material of the sampling device being used for sampling. For example, if metals analyses 
are required, then the 10 % nitric acid solution is used for decontamination of stainless‐steel 
equipment. Pyramid uses de‐ionized or distilled water for decontamination. Equipment that 
is not used immediately after decontamination is wrapped in aluminum foil prior to storage. 

2.0 Soil Borings & Sampling
2.1 Soil Borings  
Soil borings are used by Pyramid to investigate and characterize the subsurface at sites.      
Soil borings provide information concerning soil types and density, depth to refusal, depth 
to bedrock, organic vapors that may be present, and can be used to obtain samples for 
laboratory analysis.  
Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 2 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
Pyramid conducts borings in several different ways, using hand augers, direct‐push 
equipment (Geoprobe), sample probes, split‐spoon samplers (ASTM D 1586‐84), auger 
drilling, air drilling, and Vibro‐Core. The following procedures are used by Pyramid 
Environmental when performing soil borings:  
1. Soil boring locations are chosen, and the ULOCO utility locating service is called to 
mark all public utilities. Pyramid locates private utilities at many project sites using 
Pyramid locating equipment, or uses a private utility locating service. 

2. Down hole drilling equipment is cleaned prior to use and between borings using 
pressure washing or steam cleaning. Additional decontamination procedures in 
Section 1.1 are used for sampling tools such as split spoons or direct‐push points.  

3. Soil borings are advanced using direct‐push, drilling rigs, hand augers, or other 
appropriate means. Near‐surface soil samples may also be collected using stainless 
steel push probes, shovels, scoops, or other sampling devices.  

4. Soil samples are normally collected at a minimum of 5‐foot intervals. Each sample is 
divided into two parts. Soil samples for laboratory analyses are jarred from the initial 
sample volume. The remaining soil is stored in a sealed container for headspace 
analysis and geological description.  

5. After screening the soil with the field instruments, each soil sample is described by 
the field geologist and a geologic description is recorded in project documentation. 

6. Soils are typically described in the field by the project geologist or soil scientist and 
are classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2488‐84). 

7. Soil samples selected for laboratory analysis are placed in properly prepared, 
laboratory supplied containers and immediately packed in a cooler on ice. Sample 
custody is maintained using standard chain‐of‐custody (COC) procedures through 
delivery to the analytical laboratory. 

8. Soil borings, which are not completed as monitoring wells, are grouted using a 
Portland cement, bentonite, or backfilled with soil cuttings.  

9. Soil cuttings are generally spread near the soil boring or monitoring well location as 
directed by State regulatory managers.  Drill cuttings are drummed (containerized) 
where site conditions or regulatory requirements prohibit spreading cuttings, and 
are disposed off‐site (after waste determination is made).  

Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 3 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
2.2 Soil Headspace Screening  
Soil samples are routinely screened for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) which may be an 
indication of organic or petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. The typical screening 
procedure includes immediately transferring the soil from the sampling devices to a sealed 
container (sealed 1‐gallon Ziplock plastic bag). The soil container is filled approximately 
halfway with soil and sealed. This creates headspace above the soil in which VOCs may 
accumulate. The container is allowed to stand for 5 to 15 minutes for the VOCs to equilibrate 
in the headspace of the container. The headspace of the container is then screened using a 
calibrated organic vapor analyzer (PID or FID). The screening is conducted by cracking the 
seal only enough to allow insertion of the probe into the headspace so as not to dilute the 
sample. In most cases where the contaminant of concern includes volatile organics, the 
highest or “Peak“ field‐screening result is documented for each sample. The soil samples 
showing the highest reading from each boring are typically selected for laboratory analysis. 

2.3 Soil Sample Collection for Laboratory Analysis   
After the targeted depth has been reached, soil samples are collected using a variety of 
sampling devices. Soil sample devices used include split‐spoons, stainless‐steel hand augers, 
stainless‐steel push‐probes and sampling scoops, and directly from the center of the 
excavator bucket. The sample technician uses disposable nitrile gloves, which are changed 
between samples to avoid cross‐contamination of samples, and each sampling device is 
decontaminated prior to use.  

Only laboratory provided containers are used for sample collection. Samples are collected 
in accordance with the preservation methods required by the requested analytical method. 
Samples are handled as little as possible and preserved in the field as specified for the 
analytical method. The samples are stored and transported to the laboratory in an insulated 
cooler chilled to approximately 4 degrees centigrade. The samples are labeled with a 
minimum of the following information: Pyramid, project name or number, sample 
identification, date collected, sampler name, and analysis requested. Sample custody is 
maintained using standard chain‐of‐custody procedures through delivery to the analytical 
laboratory. Notes of the sampling events are recorded in project documentation. 
Incremental sampling methodology (ISM) is a structured composite sampling and 
processing protocol that reduces data variability and provides a reasonably unbiased 
estimate of mean contaminant concentrations in a volume of soil targeted for sampling. 
ISM provides representative samples of specific soil volumes defined as decision units 
(DUs) by collecting numerous increments of soil (typically 30–100 increments) that are 
combined, processed, and subsampled according to specific protocols. ISM Sampling will 
be further explained in a site‐specific Work Plan documents. 
Pyramid will contract an on‐site laboratory for immediate analyses as needed.  
Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 4 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
2.4 Sediment Sample Collection for Laboratory Analysis   
Near surface sediment may be present in a surface water ditch, stream, or dry intermittent 
stream bed. Sediment samples are typically soil related samples and may be collected with 
a variety of sampling tools. Pyramid will use stainless‐steel samplers which have been 
decontaminated according to the procedure detailed in section 1.1 of this document. After 
the sediment samples are collected, the location, depth, conditions, and sample 
composition are documented in the project records. The samples will be screened in the 
field to detect volatile organic vapors and visually examined for contamination. Sediment 
samples will be preserved in laboratory prepared containers in accordance with sample 
preservation recommendation of the analytical laboratory. Samples are handled as little as 
possible and preserved in the field as specified for the analytical method. The samples are 
stored and transported in an insulated cooler chilled to approximately 4 degrees centigrade. 
The samples are labeled with a minimum of the following information: Pyramid, project 
name or number, sample identification, date collected, sampler name, and analysis 
requested. Sample custody is maintained using standard chain‐of‐custody procedures 
through delivery to the analytical laboratory. Documentation of the sampling events are 
recorded in the project documentation. 

3.0 Direct-Push Sampling Procedures

Direct‐push sampling techniques have been used at many sites to collect soil and 
groundwater samples rapidly and inexpensively.  Track‐mounted, direct‐push rigs can access 
hard to reach areas and allow borings and monitoring wells to be installed.  For soil sampling, 
typically, the direct‐push steel drive tube is decontaminated using a pressure washer, and a 
new plastic sample liner is inserted in the steel drive tube to collect soil samples. The soil 
samples are collected in new polyethylene sample tubes within the steel drive tube. The soil 
samples are then extracted from the polyethylene liner and preserved as required for 
laboratory analysis. 

For groundwater sampling, a steel probe with a retractable screen section and tubing are 
driven to depth and the screened section is opened to allow groundwater to enter the 
tubing. The water samples are withdrawn using new polyethylene and Teflon® tubing with 
either a decontaminated stainless‐steel check ball, or peristaltic pump. The groundwater 
sample is placed directly into the appropriate laboratory containers and sealed immediately. 
To prevent cross‐contamination of samples, new disposable tubing is used for each 
groundwater sample point. Disposable nitrile gloves are worn by field personnel during 
development and groundwater sampling, and gloves are changed between samples. 
Groundwater sampling procedures are detailed more in Section 5.0, as appropriate for each 
analytical method. 

Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 5 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
4.0 Monitoring Well Installation

Groundwater monitoring wells are installed in many subsurface environments; Coastal 
Plain, sedimentary, Piedmont saprolite, weathered rock formations, and mountain terrains 
to list a few. Formations encountered include unconsolidated and consolidated sediments, 
fill material, organic soils, saprolitic soils, weathered rock formations, and bedrock. 
Groundwater monitoring wells provide a stable sampling point at discrete intervals within 
the confined or unconfined aquifers. Monitoring wells are installed for a number of reasons, 
and are typically installed as 1‐inch, 2‐inch, 4‐inch, or 6‐inch diameter wells. Construction 
may be of PVC, stainless‐steel, HDPE, or other appropriate materials. The following 
procedures are used by Pyramid when performing borings and monitoring well installations.   If required, monitoring well permits are obtained from the State, County, or City. 
 Boring and monitoring well locations are chosen, and utilities are marked by the 
public utility locating company. As needed, the locations may be scanned for utilities 
by Pyramid using our locating equipment, or a private utility locating company. 
 In selecting a drill site, care is taken to avoid overhead power lines, and subsurface 
utilities whenever possible. 
 Down‐hole drilling equipment is decontaminated prior to use and between borings. 
 Borings are advanced using direct‐push, drilling rigs, hand augers, solid‐stem augers, 
hollow‐stem augers, air rotary drilling, or air hammer drilling. 
 Soil samples are normally collected at a minimum of 5‐foot intervals. Each sample is 
divided into two parts.  Soil samples for laboratory analyses are jarred from the initial 
sample volume. The remaining soil is stored in a sealed container for headspace 
analysis with an organic vapor analyzer (PID or FID).  
 After screening the soil with the field instruments, each soil sample is described by 
the field geologist and a geologic description is recorded in the project 
documentation. 

Type II monitoring wells are usually installed using 2‐inch diameter schedule 40 PVC riser 
and 2‐inch, 0.010‐inch machine slotted well screen. The screened interval length varies with 
the geologic site conditions, expected variations in water level, and the investigation goals 
for the well. The well construction details are presented on the boring log. 

Type III wells are usually installed as double‐cased wells to monitor the deeper portions of 
the aquifer. The first casing is usually a 5 to 6‐inch diameter solid PVC well casing drilled to 
bedrock or an appropriate depth within the surficial zone. The 5 to 6‐inch diameter casing 
is then set and grouted in the borehole. After the cement grout has set for 12 to 24‐hours, 
the borehole is completed to the desired depth using air rotary drilling or air hammer 
drilling. The inside casing of the Type III monitoring well is usually constructed of 2‐inch 
diameter SCH 40 PVC casing and 2‐inch diameter SCH 40 PVC 0.010‐inch slotted well screen. 

Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 6 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
In most applications, a sand filter pack of #2 well sand (or appropriately sized well sand).  
Sand is typically installed to a level of 2 feet above the top of the screen in each well.                   
A minimum 2‐foot thick bentonite seal is usually placed on top of the filter pack and 
hydrated with de‐ionized or distilled water. The remaining annular space of a typical well is 
backfilled to grade with a Portland cement/bentonite grout. In monitoring wells where the 
water table is close to surface, the amount of sand above the screen and bentonite will be 
reduced to allow for a minimum of 2–3 feet of cement grout in the well bore. 

At the surface, each well is secured with a locking cap and a steel well protector. Depending 
on the surface conditions, the well may be protected by a flush‐mounted manhole set in the 
surrounding surface in a concrete pad.  In some cases, stick‐up well protectors are used to 
secure the well and allow the well to be more easily located in wooded or open areas. 

Each groundwater monitoring well is developed by surging, pumping, or bailing to remove 
sediment before sampling. Water removed during development is managed according to 
individual State regulatory guidance. 

5.0 Water Sampling Procedures

Pyramid relies on water sampling as a primary method for assessment of subsurface 
groundwater conditions. Water sampling typically includes sampling groundwater from 
monitoring wells, water supply wells, surface water bodies, stormwater,  waste sumps, etc.   
The following provides typical sampling procedures for the water samples. 

5.1 Monitoring Wells  
Prior to sampling each monitoring well, depth to liquid and/or liquids and total well depth 
are measured using a properly decontaminated electric interface probe. If phase‐separated 
petroleum product is detected in a well, the product measurements are recorded along with 
the water level in each well.  This information is recorded in the field record and the volume 
of the water in the well casing is calculated. To purge stagnant water from each monitoring 
well, three to five well casing volumes of water are removed from each well prior to 
sampling. Alternately, for low‐flow sampling, development continues until the field 
parameters (pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, ORP, and temperature) have stabilized.   
If the water in the monitoring well is removed until the well is dry, then the well is sampled 
thereafter. Water removed from wells during purging is managed in accordance with 
individual State regulatory guidance.  

Groundwater samples are typically collected using a new disposable polyethylene bailer and 
a new length of nylon cord. To prevent cross‐contamination of samples between wells, a 
new disposable bailer is used for each well.  The bailer is lowered into the groundwater 
Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 7 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
slowly and removed slowly.  A new pair of disposable gloves is worn by field personnel 
during purging and sampling, and is changed between wells.  In the case of small diameter 
monitoring wells or direct‐push water samples, water samples may be collected using a 
peristaltic pump and new polyethylene tubing.  Another method is to use a segment of new 
sampling tubing and a stainless‐steel check ball to create a “Tube Bailer”.  
Groundwater samples selected for laboratory analysis are immediately placed in properly 
prepared, laboratory supplied containers and preserved in a cooler on ice. Samples are 
maintained under standard chain‐of‐custody procedures from sample collection through 
laboratory analysis. 

5.2 Water Supply Well Sampling  
Prior to sampling each water supply well, the well owner is contacted to provide access to 
the well. The well owner is interviewed to locate the faucet closest to the well for sampling.    
If there are no faucets located on the well, then water from an outside faucet at the building  
is usually sampled. If there are no outside faucets available, then the water samples are 
collected from an inside faucet. The location of the sample is recorded in the field record.  
The owner is interviewed to see if there is a chlorination system on the well, or if the well 
has been recently chlorinated. Recent chlorination could affect the laboratory detection 
limits. In most cases, the samples are preserved using sodium thiosulfate or ascorbic acid to 
remove the interactions of chlorine, which may be present in the samples.   
If the well is treated with a Point‐of‐Entry (POE) treatment system, then the “raw” water 
sample must be collected before the treatment system. An associated treated water sample 
is usually collected as well to demonstrate effective treatment.    
To purge stagnant water from the water supply well system, the faucet is allowed to run on 
full stream for a minimum of 15 minutes. The aerator is removed from the tap if one is 
present. Water removed from wells during purging is managed according to regulatory 
standards.  
Water supply well samples are collected using appropriate laboratory prepared containers 
for each analysis.  The analytical methods selected will vary with the contaminant of 
interest. To prevent cross‐contamination of samples between wells, disposable nitrile gloves 
are worn by field personnel during purging and sampling and are changed between wells. It 
is possible that samples may be required at several places within the water supply system. 
The samples are collected accordingly and labeled to show the source and location sampled.  
Supply well samples selected for laboratory analysis are immediately placed in properly 
prepared, laboratory supplied containers and packed in a cooler on ice, and chilled to 
approximately 4 degrees Celsius.  Samples are maintained under standard chain‐of‐custody 
procedures from sample collection through laboratory analysis. 

Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 8 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
5.3 Surface Water Sampling  
Surface water samples are obtained using several techniques including use of sample 
bailers, discrete depth interval samples, sample scoops, from boats, bridges, or wading into 
a stream. Caution should always be used when sampling surface water to ensure that the 
water collected is representative of the site conditions. Since stream or open water sampling 
is transient, careful documentation of the site conditions, weather, surface conditions, 
sediment, algal or biological material, etc. is required.  

In many studies, additional samples from upstream and downstream of the desired sample 
point are required. Surface water sampling must be planned to reflect the site‐specific 
conditions during sampling. The general procedures are similar to the supply well sampling 
procedures detailed above. Appropriate laboratory prepared containers are used for each 
analysis. The analytical methods selected will vary with the contaminant of interest. 

To prevent cross‐contamination of samples between samples, disposable nitrile gloves are 
worn by field personnel during purging and sampling and are changed between samples. It 
is possible that samples may be required at several places along the stream to check for 
influences of up‐stream facilities.  Samples will be collected accordingly and labeled to show 
the source and location sampled. Sample will always be collected upstream of the area 
disturbed by the person sampling the stream. Surface water samples selected for laboratory 
analysis are placed in properly prepared, laboratory supplied containers and immediately 
packed in a cooler on ice. Samples are maintained under strict control using standard chain‐
of‐custody procedures through laboratory analysis.  

6.0 Quality Assurance / Quality Control

The field and laboratory procedures listed above have been implemented on many sites 
with excellent results. The procedures are often verified by an appropriate use of the 
following environmental samples. 

Trip Blanks ( or Travel blanks) 
The Trip Blank (or travel blanks) are often used to verify that the environmental samples are 
not impacted during shipping, and verify that the source of the glassware is not the source 
of contamination. The trip blanks are preserved de‐ionized water, collected in the 
laboratory, and shipped with the sample containers to Pyramid or the site. The trip blank 
remains in the sample cooler and is shipped back to the laboratory with the environmental 
samples. The trip blank is most commonly analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 
and correspond to the target analyses. 

Standard Field Procedures:  Revision 10.6                            Page 9 
Pyramid Environmental & Engineering, P.C.           Revision date 01‐06‐2020 
Field Blanks  
Field Blanks are quality assurance samples which are collected in the field to represent the 
conditions present at the time the samples are collected. For water samples, the laboratory 
containers are opened and filled in the field using de‐ionized (or distilled) water from a 
known source.  The samples reflect any site conditions such as vapor sources which may 
affect the water samples.  The samples then travel to the laboratory with the other samples 
for analysis. Comparison of the field blank results with the sample results may indicate a 
pervasive site constituent detected in the samples.  

Equipment Blanks  
Equipment Blanks are used to verify whether the decontamination procedures used for the 
sample equipment (or the new equipment) may have added any contaminants to the 
sample during collection. If a non‐disposable sampling device is used (such as a sampling 
treir, scoop, hand auger, Teflon bailer, etc.…), then the decontamination of the sampling 
device is usually verified using an equipment blank. The equipment blank is collected using 
de‐ionized (or distilled) water from a known source. The equipment is decontaminated,  
allowed to air dry, the water is poured over (or through) the equipment, and a sample is 
collected in the appropriate sample containers. The equipment blank samples are preserved 
with the other environmental samples, and shipped for analyses for the target parameters. 

Duplicate Samples 
Duplicate Samples are used to verify the sampling procedures and evaluate laboratory 
analysis variability. The duplicate samples may be collected from soil, sediment, air, surface 
water, wastes, or groundwater. These samples are collected and sent to the laboratory as  
blind samples to have maximum effectiveness. Duplicate samples are generally analyzed for 
the same analytical methods as the actual environmental sample for direct comparison. 
Duplicate samples may also be split between two different laboratories to provide 
verification of laboratory detection limits or quality process verification. 

Background Samples 
Background Samples are a tool for comparison of general site conditions with source area 
site conditions. Background samples may be soil, sediment, air, surface water, waste, or 
groundwater. The goal is to reflect conditions outside the expected area of contamination. 
These samples are collected outside the expected area of contamination and sent to the 
laboratory for analyses. Background samples are generally analyzed for the same analytical 
methods as the source area environmental samples for direct comparison. Background 
samples for metals comparison are common types of background samples used in 
environmental investigations.  

APPENDIX J
APPENDIX K
Hydrocarbon Analysis Results
Client:PYRAMID Samples taken Tuesday, March 28, 2023
Address:503 INDUSTRIAL AVENUE Samples extracted Tuesday, March 28, 2023
GREENSBORO NC 27406 Samples analysed Friday, March 31, 2023
Contact:MIKE JONES Operator MAX MOYER
Project:#2023-104 ; VILLAS
12 T03308
Matrix Sample ID Dilution
used
BTEX
(C6 - C9)
GRO
(C5 - C10)
DRO
(C10 - C35)
TPH
(C5 - C35)
Total
Aromatics
(C10-C35)
16 EPA
PAHs BaP HC Fingerprint Match
% light % mid %
heavy
s NORTH 12'53.1 <1.3 9 2.8 11.8 2.5 <0.42 <0.053 93.7 5 1.3 No Match found
s SOUTH 12'24.3 <0.61 <0.61 2.1 2.1 0.56 <0.19 <0.024 0 100 0 Deg.Diesel 77.8%,(FCM),(P)
s BOTTOM 20'28.6 <0.71 <0.71 2.7 2.7 1.1 <0.23 <0.029 0 59.3 40.7 Deg.Fuel 57.7%,(FCM),(BO),(P)
s WEST 12'29.2 <0.73 <0.73 <0.73 <0.73 <0.15 <0.23 <0.029 99.5 0.5 0 Residual HC,(P)
s EAST 12'26.0 <0.65 <0.65 0.65 0.65 0.49 <0.21 <0.026 0 44.5 55.5 Residual HC,(BO),(P)
s SHED 1 28.0 <0.7 12.8 89.8 102.6 42.3 1.5 <0.028 76.7 21.8 1.5 Deg.Diesel 79.7%,(FCM)
s SHED 2 22.6 <0.57 1.8 1.6 3.4 1.4 <0.18 <0.023 84.3 11.1 4.6 No Match found
s DISPOSAL 1 16980.0 <424.5 4900 26425 31325 7956 292 <17 89.1 10.6 0.3 Deg.Diesel 95.4%,(FCM)
s DISPOSAL 2 42433.0 <1061 10203 66036 76239 21818 807.6 <42.4 85.2 14.4 0.4 Deg.Diesel 83.9%,(FCM)
Initial Calibrator QC check OK Final FCM QC Check OK 92.3 %
Results generated by a QED HC-1 analyser. Concentration values in mg/kg for soil samples and mg/L for water samples. Soil values are not corrected for moisture or stone content
Fingerprints provide a tentative hydrocarbon identification. The abbreviations are:- FCM = Results calculated using Fundamental Calibration Mode : % = confidence for sample fingerprint match to library
(SBS) or (LBS) = Site Specific or Library Background Subtraction applied to result : (PFM) = Poor Fingerprint Match : (T) = Turbid : (P) = Particulate present
Ratios