23061_Caraustar Mill_Comprehensive Data Summary and WP_20220309

Via Email
March 9, 2022
NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management
Brownfields Program
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Attn: Mr. Bill Schmithorst, PG
Re: Comprehensive Data Summary and
Additional Brownfields Assessment Work Plan
Caraustar and Savona Mill
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 23061-19-060
H&H Project No. POR-001
Dear Bill:
On behalf of Savona II, LLC, Savona LLC, and 410SG Partner, LLC, please find the enclosed
Comprehensive Data Summary and Additional Brownfields Assessment Work Plan prepared for
the Caraustar and Savona Mills Brownfields property for your review and approval. Should you
have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us at (704)
586-0007.
Sincerely,
Hart & Hickman, PC
Haley Martin, PG Ralph McGee, PG
Senior Project Geologist Project Manager
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Bill Anderson, Portman Holdings (Via Email)
Mr. John Farmer, Portman Holdings (Via Email)
Mr. Greg Pappanastos, Argos Real Estate Advisors (Via Email)
i

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
Comprehensive Data Summary and
Additional Brownfields Assessment Work Plan
Caraustar and Savona Mills
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. POR-001

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................1 
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................1 
1.2 Brownfields Program .............................................................................................................3 
2.0 Comprehensive Data Summary .............................................................................................5 
2.1 Soil Sampling ........................................................................................................................6 
2.2 Groundwater Sampling ..........................................................................................................8 
2.3 Exterior and Sub-Slab Soil Gas Sampling ...........................................................................10 
2.4 Indoor Air Sampling ............................................................................................................15 
2.5 Subsurface Methane Gas Measurements .............................................................................16 
3.0 Additional Brownfields Assessment Activities ...................................................................18 
3.1 Soil Sampling Activities ......................................................................................................18 
3.2 Sub-Slab and Exterior Soil Gas Sampling Activities ..........................................................20 
3.3 Quality Assurance – Quality Control ..................................................................................23 
3.4 Investigation Derived Waste (IDW) Management ..............................................................24 
3.5 Reporting .............................................................................................................................25 

List of Tables

Table 1A Summary of Organic Constituent Analytical Data
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 3 Summary of Soil Gas Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Indoor Air Analytical Data
Table 5 Summary of Methane Data
Table 6 Proposed Sample Summary Table
ii

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
List of Figures

Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Sample Location Map
Figure 4 Soil Sample Location Map
Figure 5 Groundwater Sample Location Map
Figure 6 Sub-Slab Gas and Soil Gas Sample Location Map
Figure 7 Indoor Air Sample Location Map
Figure 8 Proposed Sample Location Map

List of Appendices

Appendix A DEQ Risk Calculators (June 2021)

1

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
Comprehensive Data Summary and
Additional Brownfields Assessment Work Plan
Caraustar and Savona Mills
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. POR-001

1.0 Introduction

On behalf of Savona II, LLC, Savona, LLC, and 410SG Partners, LLC (collectively, the
Prospective Developer or PD), Hart & Hickman, PC (H&H) is providing this Comprehensive
Data Summary and Additional Brownfields Assessment Work Plan (Work Plan) for the
Caraustar and Savona Mills Brownfields property (Brownfields Project No. 23061-19-060)
located at the intersection of South Turner Street and Chamberlain Avenue in Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Site). The Site is comprised of nine contiguous parcels
(Parcel ID Nos. 07111209, 07111412, 07111410, 07111418, 07111417, 07110551,
07110552, 07110501, and 7110503) that collectively total approximately 30.8 acres of land
located in a rapidly densifying area of the Seversville neighborhood less than one mile
northwest of uptown Charlotte. A Site location map is provided as Figure 1.

Northern portions of the Site along Chamberlain Avenue are developed with an approximately
14,500 square foot (sq ft) industrial warehouse building (2426 Chamberlain Avenue), an
approximately 22,500 sq ft industrial warehouse building (2425 Chamberlain Avenue), an
approximately 9,500 sq ft light manufacturing building (410 S. Gardner Avenue), and an
approximately 31,000 sq ft industrial warehouse building and an approximately 4,500 sq ft office
building (401 S. Gardner Avenue). The eastern portion of the Site along S. Turner Avenue is
developed with an approximately 186,000 sq ft former mill building. Remaining portions of the
Site consist of undeveloped vacant land except for foundations of former mill buildings, paved
access roads, and paved parking areas. The Site and surrounding area are shown on Figure 2.

1.1 Background

Savona Manufacturing Company
The eastern portion of the Site was developed with the southern portion of the main Savona Mill
building by 1915. The central portion of the Savona Mill building was constructed as an addition
2

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
in 1921 for yarn spinning operations. The Savona Mill building was utilized as a textile mill from
the 1910s until the 1930s. Additional structures located at the Site were utilized for mill purposes
and included a filter house, a bleaching and finishing building, warehouses, and a 285,000-gallon
water reservoir. Textile production operations at the Site ceased by the mid-1930s.

Old Dominion Box Company – 401 and 411 South Gardener Avenue
In 1935, Old Dominion Box Company (Old Dominion) began manufacturing boxes and
paperboard products in the former Savona Mill building. Operations were expanded in the early
1950s, when Old Dominion constructed a three-story paper warehouse at the northern end of the
Savona Mill building and several buildings near the intersection of Chamberlain Avenue and
Gardner Avenue (currently 401 and 411 South Gardner Avenue). Based on information provided
in available historical sources, Old Dominion continued operations at the Site until the late-1980s
or mid-1990s.

Carolina Paperboard Corporation / Caraustar Corporation
In the 1940s, Carolina Paperboard Corporation constructed a paperboard manufacturing facility
northwest of the Old Dominion operation. The Carolina Paperboard facility included a pulp mill,
offices, finishing room, machine shop, settling basin, and other ancillary structures. Information
provided in the environmental documents prepared for the Site indicates Carolina Paperboard
operated one 3,000-gallon underground gasoline storage tank (UST), one 2,000-gallon diesel UST,
one 4,000-gallon diesel UST, one 10,000-gallon diesel UST, and six 30,000-gallon fuel oil USTs
that were installed in the north-central portion of the Site between 1968 and 1982. According to
information provided in an Underground Storage Tank Closure Report, Carolina Paper Board, 443
S. Gardner Street, Charlotte, NC, prepared by SPATCO Environmental dated February 26, 1993,
six 30,000-gallon fuel oil USTs, one 6,000-gallon magnesium chloride above ground storage tank
(AST), and one 4,000-gallon sulfuric acid AST were removed from the Site in February 1993.
Information related to closure of the remaining reported USTs is not available.

By the 1980s, Carolina Paperboard merged with Caraustar Industries, Inc. (Caraustar). Paper
manufacturing operations continued until the 2010s. Limited recycling and storage operations
continued until the mid-2010s. Between 2000 and 2010, buildings and ancillary structures located
3

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
in the southern and central portions of the Site were razed. Remaining Caraustar buildings include
the former paper storage building located at 2425 Chamberlain Avenue and the former paperboard
processing building located at 2426 Chamberlain Avenue.

Wikoff Color – 410 South Gardner Avenue
The Wikoff Color facility is located southwest of the intersection of Chamberlain Avenue and S.
Gardner Avenue at 410 South Gardner Avenue. Based on information provided in environmental
documents prepared for the Site, the facility historically manufactured inks utilized for printing of
food packaging products from 1965 until 2015. Wikoff Color previously generated ignitable
hazardous wastes as part of its operations. Based on review of previous environmental documents,
multiple waste management compliance violations were reported in connection with the Wikoff
Color facility in the 1980s and 1990s. Wikoff Color ceased operations at the Site in 2015.

Parcels East of South Turner Avenue
Based upon review of available historical aerial photographs, the parcels located east of South
Turner Avenue were developed with ancillary structures and single-family residences as early as
the late 1930s. By the late 1940s, parking areas associated with Savona Mill were developed on
the Site east of S. Turner Avenue. The eastern Site parcels have primarily been utilized for trailer
storage and parking areas since the 1980s. One single family residence remains at 524 State Street.

1.2 Brownfields Program

To address potential environmental concerns associated with historical on-Site and nearby off-Site
operations, Savona II, LLC elected to enter the Site into the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) Brownfields Program and received eligibility in a letter dated
January 14, 2020 and an amended letter of eligibility dated January 13, 2022, which include
Savona II, LLC, Savona, LLC and 410SG Partners, LLC as joint Prospective Developers and
added the 410 S. Gardner Avenue parcel (PIN 07111410) to the Brownfields property and removed
the 532 State Street parcel (PIN 07110502) from the Brownfields property.

In the Brownfields Program, the Prospective Developer (as defined by the Brownfields statutes)
of a property and DEQ enter into an agreement which provides for State liability protection for
4

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
cleanup of identified soil, groundwater, or other impacts in exchange for making the Site safe for
its future intended use. Making the Site safe for its intended use is typically accomplished by
implementing land use restrictions (i.e., restriction on groundwater usage) and engineering
controls (such as capping impacted soil) and not through remediation.

Provided that the Site is developed in accordance with the Brownfields agreement, the developer
receives State liability protection for impacts identified at the Site. This liability protection also
applies to any future owner of the property, occupants of the facility, a successor or assign, and
any lender or fiduciary (provided they are not otherwise potentially responsible parties). Impacts
at the Site are being evaluated under purview of the DEQ Brownfields Program and will be
addressed through implementation of land use restrictions in the pending Brownfields agreement.

Planned redevelopment includes renovation for adaptive re-use of select existing Site buildings for
non-residential use (i.e., 401, 410, and 411 S. Gardner and former Savona Mill building) and
construction of new multi-family residential buildings and parking decks in undeveloped portions
of the Site. The proposed Site plan is shown on Figure 2.

An Environmental Management Plan (Rev 1) prepared for the proposed redevelopment was
approved DEQ Brownfields Program on June 24, 2021. H&H understands that the DEQ
Brownfields Program has requested that additional sampling be completed and that a
comprehensive data summary be provided. This Comprehensive Data Summary and Additional
Brownfields Assessment Work Plan has been prepared to address DEQ Brownfields requests. A
summary of previous assessment activities completed at the Site is included in Section 2.0, and
the scope of work for additional assessment activities is outlined in Section 3.0.

5

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
2.0 Comprehensive Data Summary

As part of property transaction due diligence activities and the Brownfields Agreement process,
multiple environmental assessments were completed at the Site from 2016 through 2021. Previous
assessment activities have included collection of soil, soil gas, indoor air, and groundwater
samples for laboratory analysis. In addition, subsurface methane gas measurements were
collected from select areas across the Site. To prepare a comprehensive summary of available
environmental data and document known environmental condition at the Site, H&H reviewed the
following reports:

 Underground Storage Tank Closure Report, Carolina Paper Board, 443 South Gardner
Street, Charlotte, North Carolina, prepared by SPATCO Environmental (SPATCO) and
dated February 26, 1993;

 Limited Site Investigation, Caraustar Site, Chamberlain Avenue and Gardner Avenue,
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, prepared by Terracon Consultants, Inc.
(Terracon) and dated March 11, 2016;

 Limited Site Investigation, Caraustar Site, Chamberlain Avenue and Gardner Avenue,
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, prepared by Terracon and dated May 23,
2018;

 Data Gap Assessment Report, Caraustar and Savona Mills, South Turner Avenue and
Chamberlain Avenue, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, prepared by
Terracon and dated June 8, 2021;

 draft Methane Soil Gas Assessment Report, Caraustar and Savona Mills, South Turner
Avenue and Chamberlain Avenue, prepared by SCS Engineers, P.C. (SCS) dated August
3, 2021; and

6

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
 Brownfields Indoor Air and Sub-Slab Soil Gas Testing Report, Caraustar and Savona
Mills, South Turner Avenue and Chamberlain Avenue, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina, prepared by Terracon dated December 20, 2021

Previous sample locations are shown on Figure 3. A brief summary of information provided in
the environmental reports is provided below.

2.1 Soil Sampling

Soil assessment activities completed at the Site have included advancement of forty-four (44) soil
borings and collection of soil samples for laboratory analysis to evaluate the potential for impact
from on-Site and nearby off-Site sources. Soil sampling methodologies and results are
documented in the Limited Site Investigation Report dated March 11, 2016, a Limited Site
Investigation report dated May 23, 2018, and a Data Gap Assessment Report dated June 8, 2021
each prepared by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon).

In 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2021, soil samples were collected from potential areas of concern
including the 1) Wikoff Color facility; 2) former clarifier area; 3) former AST located near the
pulp mill; 4) former UST area; 5) former boiler room; 6) former aeration pond; 7) former textile
mill areas including suspected dye room, bleach/finishing room, and pump manufacturing area; 8)
former machine shop; 9) former diesel AST area; and 10) old rail spur. In addition, several soil
borings were advanced in areas of planned cut and grading to assist in management of soil during
redevelopment of the Site.

The soil sample laboratory analytical results were compared to the most recent versions of the
DEQ Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021. In addition to the PSRGs,
metals results were compared to published concentrations for naturally occurring metals in North
Carolina soil. Organic constituent soil analytical data is summarized as Table 1A, metals in soil
analytical data is summarized as Table 1B, and soil sample locations are shown on Figure 4. A
brief discussion of the soil sample results is included below.

7

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
 Several volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in several soil samples collected
at the Site at concentrations above the laboratory reporting limits, but below their
respective PSRGs. The compounds bromomethane (up to 0.0508 milligrams per kilogram
[mg/kg]), methylene chloride (up to 0.0878 mg/kg), 4-methyl-2-pentanone (up to 4.11
mg/kg), naphthalene (up to 0.437 mg/kg), and tetrachloroethylene (up to 0.0173 mg/kg)
were detected in soil samples collected at the main mill property and the Wikoff Color
property at concentrations above the DEQ Protection of Groundwater PSRGs, but below
the DEQ Residential and Industrial/Commercial PSRGs. No other VOCs were detected at
concentrations above their respective DEQ IHSB PSRGs.

 The polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) benzo(a)pyrene (up to 8.08 mg/kg) was
detected at concentrations that exceed the DEQ Residential and Commercial/Industrial
PSRGs of 0.11 mg/kg and 2.1 mg/kg, respectively, in soil samples collected in the former
bleach/finishing room (DUP-01-2252016) located in the central portion of the Site and
adjacent to the former Caraustar paper storage building (2018-SB-04). The PAHs
benzo(a)anthracene (up to 9.19 mg/kg), benzo(b)fluoranthene (up to 11.6 mg/kg),
dibenz(a,h)anthracene (up to 1.32 mg/kg), and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (up to 3.95 mg/kg)
were detected at concentration above the DEQ Residential PSRGs in samples collected at
the Savona Mill parcel and former Caraustar paper storage building. The compound bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate (up to 82.8 mg/kg) was detected at a concentration that exceeds the
DEQ Residential PSRG in shallow soils (0-1 ft below ground surface [bgs]) on the Wikoff
Color property.

 As expected, several metals were detected at concentrations above laboratory method
detection limits in the soil samples collected at the Site. The concentrations of metals
detected were generally consistent with published background levels. Potential exceptions
include:

Arsenic (up to 19.8 mg/kg) was detected at concentrations above the DEQ Residential and
Commercial/Industrial PSRGs in two samples (2016-SB-07 and 2016-SB-21) collected on
the Savona Mill parcel. Selenium was detected at a concentration slightly above the DEQ
8

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
Protection of Groundwater PSRG of 2.1 mg/kg in soil sample 2020-GW-02 (2.8 mg/kg)
collected at the former Caraustar paper storage building.

Lead (8,990 mg/kg) and barium (3,330 mg/kg) were detected at concentrations above the
DEQ IHSB PSRGs in shallow soil (0-1 ft bgs) sample 2021-SB-01 collected near the
northwestern corner of the Wikoff Color building.

Metals in shallow soils near the northwestern corner of the Wikoff Color building have not been
fully delineated and may need to be managed if disturbed during planned redevelopment activities.
H&H proposes to advance additional soil borings in the area of former sample 2021-SB-01 and
collect soil samples for laboratory analysis to further evaluate the vertical and lateral extent of
metals in shallow soils at the Wikoff Color property.

In summary, results of previous soil assessment activities completed at the Site indicate that
compounds at concentrations above the applicable PSRGs are limited to discrete areas and there
does not appear to be evidence of widespread significant impacts. Based on results of the previous
soil assessment activities, soil at the Site can easily be managed in accordance with the DEQ
Brownfields approved EMP, and no further soil assessment other than delineation of metals near
the northwestern corner of the Wikoff Color Site building is warranted. PD also plans to conduct
additional soil sampling near the off-site day care as requested by DEQ.

2.2 Groundwater Sampling

Based on information provided in the environmental documents, nine (9) temporary groundwater
monitoring wells were installed and sampled during previous Brownfields assessment activities
completed at the Site. Installation and sampling activities are documented in a Limited Site
Investigation Report dated March 11, 2016 and a Data Gap Assessment Report dated June 8, 2021
both prepared by Terracon.

Temporary monitoring wells were installed in potential areas of concern including the 1) Wikoff
Color facility; 2) downgradient of the Wikoff Color facility; 3) former clarifier area; 4) former
AST located near the pulp mill; 5) former UST area; 6) downgradient of the Savona Mill building;
9

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
7) downgradient of the former Caraustar paper storage building; 8) adjacent to a suspected UST;
and 9) on parcels located east of South Turner Avenue.

Groundwater analytical data were compared to the DEQ 2L Groundwater Quality Standards (2L
Standards) dated April 2013 and the DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Residential
and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) dated June 2021.
A tabular summary of the groundwater sample laboratory analytical results is presented in Table 2
and the locations of the temporary monitoring wells are shown in Figure 5. A discussion of the
groundwater analytical results in comparison to the regulatory screening levels is included below.

 Laboratory analytical results identified several VOCs in the groundwater samples collected
at the Site. The petroleum compound naphthalene (16.9 micrograms per liter [µg/L]) was
detected at a concentration above the 2L Standard and DEQ DWM Residential GWSL in
a groundwater sample collected in the former AST area located in the southwestern portion
of the Site. Toluene (up to 2.7 µg/L) and p-isopropyl toluene (up to 0.57 J µg/L) were
detected at concentrations above the laboratory method detection limits, but below their
respective 2L Standards and DEQ DWM GWSLs in samples collected at the Site. No other
VOCs (including chlorinated solvents) were detected at concentration above the laboratory
method detection limits in groundwater samples collected at the Site.

 Laboratory analytical results did not identify SVOCs at concentrations above the laboratory
method detection limits in the groundwater samples collected at the Site. No other organic
compounds were detected at concentrations above laboratory method detection limits in
the groundwater samples collected at the Site.

 Chromium was detected at concentrations above the 2L Standard of 10 µg/L in
groundwater sample 2020-GW-02 (72.8 µg/L) collected downgradient of the Savona Mill
building, and 2021-GW-01 (414 µg/L) collected at the Wikoff Color property. It is of note
that based on information provided in the environmental reports, groundwater samples
2020-GW-02 and 2021-GW-01 were collected with elevated turbidity levels (greater than
200 NTU). The detected concentrations of chromium may be a result of elevated turbidity
10

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
in the groundwater samples. In addition, hexavalent chromium was not detected at
concentrations above the laboratory method detection limits in groundwater sample 2020-
GW-02. Low levels of arsenic (up to 5.3 J µg/L), barium (up to 232 µg/L), cadmium (up
to 0.53 J µg/L), and lead (up to 14.4 µg/L) were detected at concentrations above the
laboratory method detection limits, but below the 2L Standards in groundwater samples
collected at the Site.

Results of groundwater assessment activities indicate that petroleum VOC impacts were identified
at concentrations above the 2L Standards and the DEQ DWM Residential Vapor Intrusion GWSLs
in the southwestern portion of the Site. Based on results of previously completed assessment
activities, groundwater conditions at the Site have been adequately evaluated and no further
sampling is warranted. In the unlikely event groundwater is encountered during future
redevelopment activities, it will be managed in accordance with the DEQ Brownfields approved
EMP.

2.3 Exterior and Sub-Slab Soil Gas Sampling

In 2020 and 2021, eleven (11) exterior and eleven (11) sub-slab soil gas monitoring points were
installed and sampled to evaluate the potential for structural vapor intrusion into existing buildings,
proposed residential buildings, and along the northern Site boundary near an off-Site day care
facility. Soil gas sampling activities are documented in a Data Gap Assessment Report dated June
8, 2021 and a Brownfields Indoor Air and Sub-Slab Soil Gas Testing Report dated December 20,
2021 both prepared by Terracon.

Laboratory analytical results for the soil gas samples were compared to the DEQ DWM Residential
and Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab and Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs)
dated June 2021. A summary of the analytical results is provided as Table 3, and the soil gas
monitoring point locations are shown on Figure 6.

H&H utilized the DEQ Risk Calculator (June 2021) to further evaluate potential cumulative risks
for the soil gas to indoor air vapor intrusion pathway for the proposed development. H&H
calculated the cumulative risks using the highest concentration of any compound detected in any
11

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
soil gas sample collected at the Site to model the potential for vapor intrusion under a hypothetical
“worst-case” scenario. Typically, mitigation for a building is not considered unless the lifetime
incremental carcinogenic risk (LICR) exceeds the DEQ acceptable risk 1 x 10-4 for potential
carcinogenic effects and/or the hazard index (HI) exceeds 1 for potential non-carcinogenic effects.
Copies of completed risk calculators are provided in Appendix A.

A discission of the laboratory analytical results for existing commercial buildings and proposed
residential buildings in comparison to the regulatory screening levels and cumulative risk
calculations are provided below.

Proposed Residential Buildings No. 1 through No. 7 and Proposed Parking Deck
The compounds benzene, 1,3-butadiene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, ethylbenzene,
naphthalene, and vinyl chloride were detected at concentrations above the DEQ DWM Vapor
Intrusion Residential SGSLs in soil gas samples collected within the footprint of proposed
residential Building No. 1 through No. 7 and within the footprint of the proposed parking deck.
Lower levels of several other compounds were detected in the samples collected within the
footprint of proposed residential buildings at concentrations above the laboratory method detection
limits, but below the DEQ DWM Vapor Intrusion SGSLs.

Risk calculator results indicate that under a hypothetical worst-case scenario for the soil gas to
indoor air vapor intrusion pathway for residential use, the cumulative LICR is 2.3 x 10-5 and the
cumulative HI is 0.73. Risk calculator results for compound concentrations detected in the soil
gas samples collected from within the footprints of proposed residential Building No. 1 through
No. 7 indicate that the calculated risk levels are below the acceptable risk levels of LICR of 1 x 10-4
and a HI of 1.0.

Proposed Residential Buildings No. 8 and No. 9
The compounds chloroform, 1,2-dichlooethane, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene were detected at
concentrations above the DEQ DWM Vapor Intrusion Residential SGSLs in soil gas samples
(2020-SV-10, 2021-SV-01, and 2021-SV-02) collected within the footprint of proposed residential
Building No. 8 and No. 9. Low levels of several other compounds were detected in the samples
12

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
collected within the footprint of proposed residential buildings at concentrations above the
laboratory method detection limits, but below the DEQ DWM Vapor Intrusion SGSLs.

Risk calculator results indicate that under a hypothetical worst-case scenario for the soil gas to
indoor air vapor intrusion pathway for residential use, the cumulative LICR is 8.6 x 10-6 and the
cumulative HI is 0.22. Risk calculator results for compound concentrations detected in the soil
gas samples collected from within the footprints of proposed residential Building No. 8 and No. 9
indicate that the calculated risk levels are below the acceptable risk levels of LICR of 1 x 10-4 and
a HI of 1.0.

Although hypothetical worst-case scenario risk calculator results for the soil gas to indoor air vapor
intrusion pathways did not exceed acceptable risk levels for residential use, the PD plans to
proactively install vapor mitigation systems for each of the proposed residential buildings (i.e.,
Buildings Nos. 1-9). Based on review of the laboratory analytical data and risk evaluation results,
potential structural vapor intrusion can be managed through installation of passive vapor
mitigation measures during construction of the proposed residential buildings.

Savona Mill Building – Proposed Commercial Use
Low levels of several compounds were detected in sub-slab soil gas samples (2020-SV-01, 2020-
SV-02, 2021-SV-11, and 2021-SV-11B) collected within the Savona Mill building. No
compounds were detected in these samples at concentrations above the DEQ DMW Vapor
Intrusion Non-Residential SGSLs.

Risk calculator results indicate that under a hypothetical worst-case scenario for the soil gas to
indoor air vapor intrusion pathway for non-residential use, the cumulative LICR is 1.4 x 10-6 and
the cumulative HI is 0.22. Risk calculator results for compound concentrations detected in the
sub-slab soil gas samples collected from existing Savona Mill building indicate that the calculated
risk levels are below the acceptable risk levels of LICR of 1 x 10-4 and a HI of 1 for the planned
commercial use of the mill building.

13

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
It is of note that soil gas samples 2020-SV-03, 2020-SV-04, and 2021-SV-12 were also collected
within the Savona Mill Site building. Based on information provided in reports prepared by
Terracon, sub-slab soil gas samples 2020-SV-03 and 2021-SV-12 were collected in an area of the
mill building that has a basement with earthen floors, rather than in an area interpreted to be slab-
on-grade. The approximate extent of the basement area is shown on Figure 6. A low level of
trichloroethylene or TCE (0.84 J µg/m3) was detected at a concentration above the laboratory
method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit and below the DEQ DWM Vapor
Intrusion Residential SGSLs and Indoor Air Screening Levels (IASLs) in sub-slab soil gas/indoor
air sample 2021-SV-12 collected in the northern portion of the Savona Mill building. Terracon
reports that the sub-slab soil gas sample was representative of a ten (10) minute indoor air sample.
TCE was not detected in sample 2020-SV-03 at a concentration above the laboratory method
detection limits. Due to the sampling methodology associated with collection of 2020-SV-03 and
2021-SV-12, analytical data for these sample locations summarized in Table 3 are shaded in grey,
and the sample locations are depicted in grey on Figure 6 to denote these data were not used in
risk evaluations for the Site building.

It is important to note that the 8-hour indoor air sample (2021-IA-01) that was collected in the
same area of 2021-SV-12 (on the first floor if the mill building) in November 2021 did not detect
TCE at concentrations above the laboratory method detection limits. Based on the lack of validity
in the data from 2021-SV-12, the lack of chlorinated compounds detected during groundwater
assessment activities completed downgradient of the mill building, and the lack of TCE detected
in 2021-IA-01, the low-level detection of TCE in the 2021-SV-12 does not represent indoor air
conditions within the Site building and was not included in cumulative hypothetical risk
calculations. Copies of completed risk calculators are provided in Appendix A.

Based on information provided in the Terracon reports, the helium leak test performed prior to
collecting sub-slab soil gas sample 2020-SV-04 did not pass. Although the sample point did not
pass the helium leak check, a sub-slab soil gas sample was still collected. Therefore, the detected
compound concentrations in sample 2020-SV-04 are not representative of sub-slab soil gas
condition at the Site and were not included in cumulative hypothetical risk calculations.

14

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
Based on results of groundwater samples, sub-slab soil gas samples, and indoor air samples
(discussed below) collected in and around the mill building, the hypothetical worst-case scenario
risk calculator results, and the proposed commercial use of the mill building, there does not appear
to be a potential risk for structural vapor intrusion into the mill building and no further sampling
in this portion of the Site appears to be warranted. Proposed renovation and upfit activities for the
Savona Mill building do not include structural changes to the building foundation that would affect
vapor migration patterns beneath the Site building. Based on result of previous sub-slab soil gas
and near slab soil gas sampling activities,, groundwater analytical results for samples collected
downgradient of the mill building, results of risk calculations for the Site building, and lack of
structural changes to the Site building foundation during planned redevelopment, post-
construction/pre-occupancy sampling does not appear to be warranted for the Savona Mill
building.

Former Wikoff Color Site Building – Proposed Commercial Use
Low levels of several compounds were detected in sub-slab soil gas samples (2021-SV-13 and
2021-SV-14) collected within the Wikoff Color building at concentrations above the laboratory
reporting limits, but below the DEQ DMW Vapor Intrusion Residential and Non-Residential
SGSLs.

Risk calculator results indicate that under a hypothetical worst-case scenario for the soil gas to
indoor air vapor intrusion pathway for non-residential use, the cumulative LICR is 2.1 x 10-8 and
the cumulative HI is 0.0016. Risk calculator results for compound concentrations detected in the
sub-slab soil gas samples collected from existing Wikoff Color building indicate that the calculated
risk levels are below the acceptable risk levels of LICR of 1 x 10-4 and a HI of 1.0. Based on the
risk calculator results, there does not appear to be a potential risk for structural vapor intrusion into
the existing buildings in this portion of the Site, and no further sampling regarding vapor intrusion
into this Site building appears to be warranted.

Proposed renovation and upfit activities for the Wikoff Color building do not include structural
changes to the building foundation that would affect vapor migration patterns beneath the Site
building. Based on results of previous sub-slab soil gas sampling activities,, groundwater
15

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
analytical results for samples collected adjacent to and downgradient of the Wikoff Color building,
results of risk calculations for the Site building, and the lack of structural changes to the Site
building foundation during planned redevelopment, post-construction/pre-occupancy sampling
does not appear to be warranted for the Wikoff Color building.

2.4 Indoor Air Sampling

As briefly mentioned above, two (2) indoor air samples were collected within the northern portion
of the Savona Mill building in 2021. Indoor air sampling activities are documented in a
Brownfields Indoor Air and Sub-Slab Soil Gas Testing Report dated December 20, 2021, prepared
by Terracon.

Laboratory analytical results for the indoor air samples were compared to the DEQ DWM Vapor
Intrusion Indoor Air Screening Levels (IASLs) dated June 2021. A summary of the analytical
results is provided as Table 4, and the indoor air sample locations are shown on Figure 7. A
discission of the laboratory analytical results in comparison to the regulatory screening levels is
provided below.

 Results of indoor air sampling identified benzene (up to 1.9 micrograms per cubic meter
[µg/m3]) and naphthalene (up to 0.61 µg/m3) at concentrations above the DEQ DWM
Vapor Intrusion Residential and slightly above the Non-Residential IASLs. Low levels of
chloroform, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, and ethylbenzene were also detected at concentrations
above the DEQ DWM Vapor Intrusion Residential IASLs but below DEQ DWM Vapor
Intrusion Non-Residential IASLs in the indoor air samples collected in the mill building.
Risk calculator results indicate that under a hypothetical worst-case scenario for the indoor
air vapor intrusion pathway for non-residential use, the cumulative LICR is 4.6 x 10-6 and
the cumulative HI is 0.15.

Risk calculator results for compound concentrations detected in the indoor air samples
collected from existing Savona Mill building indicate that the calculated risk levels are
below the acceptable risk levels of LICR of 1 x 10-4 and a HI of 1.0.  Risk calculator results
16

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
indicate that cumulative carcinogenic and cumulative noncarcinogenic risks do not exceed
unacceptable levels under a non-residential use scenario.

A low level of TCE (0.079 J µg/m3) was detected at a concentration above the laboratory method
detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit and two (2) orders of magnitude below the
DEQ DWM Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion IASL of 1.8 µg/m3 in indoor air sample 2021-IA-02
collected in the northern portion of the Savona Mill building. It is important to note that sub-slab
soil gas samples 2021-SV-11 and 2021-SV-11B collected in the same area of the mill building as
2021-IA-02 did not indicate the presence of TCE at concentrations above the laboratory method
detection limits.

Based on indoor air and sub-slab soil gas results, there does not appear to be a significant VOC
source at the mill building or a completed vapor intrusion pathway from sub-slab soil gas to indoor
air under current Site building conditions. The low-level detection of TCE in indoor air sample
2021-IA-02 was likely from an above slab source or a laboratory artifact based on results of the
co-located sub-slab soil gas sample. There does not appear to be a potential risk for structural
vapor intrusion into the mill building, and no further sampling in this portion of the Site appears
to be warranted (including post-construction, pre-occupancy sampling).

2.5 Subsurface Methane Gas Measurements

Methane gas may pose a potential risk of explosion when present in the atmosphere or enclosed
spaces at levels between 5% and 15% by volume air. Soil is a flame arrestor which prevents the
propagation of flame in the subsurface rendering methane in soil gas non-explosive. Therefore, a
driving mechanism (such as a pressure gradient) is needed to move methane in soil gas to the
surface for there to be a potential risk of explosion. To evaluate potential risks associated with
methane in soil gas, methane levels and static pressure measurements are collected concurrently
at sample locations to evaluate subsurface to atmospheric differential pressure.

In July 2021, methane readings were collected from select sub-slab soil and exterior soil gas
monitoring point locations. Methane sampling activities are documented in a draft Methane Soil
Gas Assessment Report prepared by SCS Engineers, P.C. (SCS) dated August 3, 2021. According
17

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
to information provided in the SCS report, during previous sampling activities completed by
Terracon in April 2021, methane was detected in select soil gas monitoring point locations 2021-
SV-01, 2021-SV-04, 2021-SV-08, and 2021-SV-09 at concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 5.4
percent by volume of air.

Information provided in the environmental documents indicated that several of the soil gas
sampling probes were compromised due to water within the sampling lines. Subsequently,
additional methane soil gas probes were installed and resampled in July 2021 by SCS. The July
2021 methane gas and pressure reading are summarized in Table 5, and soil gas probe locations
are shown on Figure 6.

As shown in Table 5, methane was not measured at concentrations above the lower explosive limit
(LEL) or the DEQ Brownfields Program 30% by volume air residential use screening criteria in
soil gas measurements collected at the Site. In addition, Site-wide static pressure is not present at
levels above the accuracy threshold of the instrument and do not pose a significant concern for the
Site as a whole. In accordance with the NCDEQ Brownfields Program Threshold Criteria for
Methane Site Development, the negligible static pressure levels measured at the Site within 200
feet of the proposed buildings are acceptable for residential use.

The purpose of the additional Brownfields assessment activities described herein are proposed to
address DEQ Brownfields Program requests provided in an email dated January 26, 2022 for
collection of sub-slab soil gas samples within the 401 and 411 South Gardener Avenue Site
buildings, additional soil sampling at the Wikoff Color property, and additional soil and soil gas
sampling adjacent to an off-Site daycare facility. A summary of the proposed additional
Brownfields assessment activities is provided below.
18

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
3.0 Additional Brownfields Assessment Activities

The proposed assessment activities will be performed in general accordance with the DEQ IHSB
Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup of Contaminated Sites (Guidelines) dated July 2021, the
DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Guidance (VI Guidance) dated
March 2018, and most recent versions of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region
IV Laboratory Services and Applied Science Division (LSASD) Field Branches Quality System
and Technical Procedures guidance.

Prior to conducting the proposed assessment field activities, H&H will contact North Carolina 811,
the public utility locator, to mark subsurface utilities located on the Site. H&H will also contract
with a private utility locator to screen proposed sample locations for subgrade utilities that may
not be marked by the public locator.

3.1 Soil Sampling Activities

H&H will conduct soil sampling to further evaluate metal impacts identified at the Wikoff Color
property located in the northern portion of the Site and to further evaluate the potential for impact
in areas near the adjacent daycare facility. Locations of the proposed soil borings are shown in
Figure 8. A tabular summary of proposed soil sample depths, objectives, and laboratory analyses
are summarized in Table 6.

H&H will team with a qualified drilling contractor to advance soil borings at the Site. During
boring advancement, soil will be logged for lithological description and field screened for
indication of potential impacts by observation for obvious staining, unusual odors, and the
presence of volatile organic vapors using a calibrated photoionization detector (PID). Soil samples
will be collected from the depth interval that exhibits the highest potential for impact or as
described below.

19

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
Adjacent Daycare Facility
Two soil borings (HH-SB-01 and HH-SB-02) will be advanced to approximately 2 ft bgs in the
vegetated area at the Site south of the adjacent daycare facility located at 318 and 322 South
Gardner Avenue. Based upon field observations, one soil sample will be collected from each
boring for laboratory analysis from a shallow depth interval (i.e., no greater than 2 ft bgs). The
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 delivered to a North Carolina certified
laboratory under standard chain of custody protocols for laboratory analysis of VOCs by EPA
Method 8260, SVOCs by EPA Method 8270, RCRA metals by EPA Methods 6020/7471, and
hexavalent chromium by EPA Method 7199.

Former Wikoff Color Property
One soil boring (HH-SB-03) will be advanced to approximately 5 ft bgs in the vicinity of former
soil boring 2021-SB-01 located near the northwestern corner of the former Wikoff Color building
to evaluate the vertical extent of barium and lead concentrations detected in this location
previously. In addition, up to seven (7) “step-out” soil borings (HH-SB-04 through HH-SB-10)
will be advanced to approximately 5 ft bgs on each side of former soil sample 2021-SB-01.

H&H will conduct soil assessment at the Wikoff Color property utilizing a X-Ray Fluorescence
(XRF) analyzer. An XRF analyzer is a portable hand-held device that can provide in-situ
quantitative measurements of metal concentrations in soil. The XRF analyzer will be utilized to
define the vertical and lateral extent of lead and barium impacts in the vicinity of former soil boring
2021-SB-01. The soil assessment utilizing the XRF analyzer will be conducted in general
accordance with the US EPA SESD Operating Procedure for Field X-Ray Fluorescence
Measurement dated February 2, 2022.

Based upon field observations, one soil sample will be collected from each boring for laboratory
analysis from the depth interval with the highest potential for impacts. If no obvious impacts are
observed during field screening, a sample will be collected from a shallow depth interval (i.e., no
greater than 2 ft bgs).
20

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
The 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 delivered to a North Carolina certified
laboratory under standard chain of custody protocols for laboratory analysis. One soil sample will
be collected from the 0-1 ft bgs depth interval from soil sample HH-SB-03, and will be submitted
for analysis of RCRA metals by EPA Methods 6010/7471 using the toxicity characteristic leachate
procedure (TCLP) and hexavalent chromium by EPA Method 7199. The vertical delineation
sample collected from soil boring HH-SB-03 will be analyzed for RCRA metals and hexavalent
chromium by EPA Methods 6020/7471/7199 and TCLP RCRA metals by EPA Methods
6010/7471.

Lateral delineation borings HH-SB-04 through HH-SB-07 will be submitted for analysis of RCRA
metals and hexavalent chromium by EPA Methods 6020/7471/7199 and TCLP RCRA metals by
EPA Methods 6010/7471. Soil samples collected from delineation borings HH-SB-08 through
HH-SB-10 will be submitted for analysis of RCRA metals and hexavalent chromium by EPA
Methods 6020/7471/7199 and TCLP RCRA metals by EPA Methods 6010/7471 and placed on
hold pending analytical results from soil borings HH-SB-04 through HH-SB-07.

Following sampling activities, the soil borings will be properly abandoned and the surfaces will
be repaired similar to pre-drilling conditions. Additionally, the soil sample locations will be
estimated using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) unit.

3.2 Sub-Slab and Exterior Soil Gas Sampling Activities

To further evaluate the potential for structural vapor intrusion, H&H will collect seven (7) sub-slab
soil gas samples (HH-SSV-01 through HH-SSV-07) within the existing Site buildings located at
401 and 411 South Gardner Avenue. The approximate locations of the proposed temporary sub-
slab soil gas sampling points are shown on Figure 8, and are described further below:

 three (3) sub-slab soil gas samples (HH-SSV-01 through HH-SV-03) will be collected in
the western portion of the 401 South Gardner Avenue building,
21

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
 two (2) sub-slab soil gas samples (HH-SSV-04 and HH-SSV-05) will be collected in
eastern portion of the 401 South Gardner Avenue building; and
 two (2) sub-slab soil gas samples (HH-SSV-06 and HH-SSV-07) will be collected in the
411 South Gardner Avenue building.

The sub-slab soil gas sample locations shown in Figure 8 may be adjusted to 1) minimize damage
to floors or floor coverings, and 2) to analyze sub-slab conditions in areas separated by building
footers if indications of building footers are observed during field sample location selection. H&H
will inspect the 401 and 411 S. Gardner Avenue buildings prior to installation of the sub-slab soil
gas sampling points to confirm that no basements or crawlspaces are present in the buildings. If
basements or crawlspaces are identified, H&H will contact DEQ to discuss modifications to the
proposed sampling.

H&H will also install two (2) temporary exterior soil gas sampling points (HH-SG-01 and HH-
SG-02) to further evaluate the potential for structural vapor intrusion into the adjacent daycare
facility. The locations of the temporary exterior soil gas sampling points are shown on Figure 8.
The sub-slab soil gas sampling points will be installed using a rotary hammer drill and 1½-inch
diameter drill bit to advance a pilot hole into the concrete slab to a depth of approximately 1¾
inches below the slab surface. A drill guide will then be placed within the pilot hole, and a 5/8-
inch diameter drill bit will be utilized to advance a boring through the concrete slab and
approximately 6-inches into the underlying soil. Following borehole advancement, loose concrete
cuttings will be removed from each boring, and a Cox-Colvin Vapor PinTM (vapor pin) assembly
(brass sampling point and silicone sleeve) will be seated in the borehole using an
installation/extraction tool and dead blow hammer to form an air tight seal.

The exterior soil gas sampling points will be installed to a depth approximately 5 ft above the water
table and no shallower than 5 ft bgs. Based on previous assessment activities completed at the
Site, the temporary exterior soil gas sampling point will be installed to a depth of approximately
5.5 ft bgs. The soil gas sampling point boring will be advanced using a decontaminated stainless-
steel hand auger to approximately 5 ft bgs and a direct-push technology (DPT) capable drill-rig to
depth. An approximate 6-inch stainless steel vapor implant screen attached to Teflon® sample
22

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
tubing will then be placed at the base of the borehole. Annular space around the vapor implant
screen will be filled with filter sand to a depth of approximately 6-inches above the vapor screen.
Following installation of the sand, hydrated bentonite will be installed in the boring from the top
of the sand to near the ground surface. The soil gas sampling points will be allowed to equilibrate
after installation and prior to sample collection.

The sub-slab and exterior soil gas samples will be collected utilizing a laboratory supplied batch
certified stainless-steel Summa® canister (1-liter or 3-liter canisters depending on laboratory
availability) connected to an air-flow regulator calibrated by the laboratory to collect the soil gas
sample at a rate of approximately 100 milliliters per minute. Prior to sample collection, a “shut-
in” test will be conducted on the sampling train and helium leak checks will be conducted at each
sampling point. The purpose of the shut-in test and helium leak check is to ensure short circuiting
with ambient air does not occur during sampling. A description of the shut-in test and helium leak
testing procedures is provided below.

The shut-in test will be conducted by connecting the flow regulator with the vacuum gauge to the
Summa® canister and sealing the flow regulator with the laboratory provided brass cap. Once the
sampling train is “closed”, the sample valve on the Summa® canister will be opened and the
reading on the vacuum gauge will be recorded. The Summa® canister sample valve will then be
closed and the vacuum gauge will be observed to ensure no vacuum loss occurs. If the vacuum
reading remains the same, the shut-in test will be considered successful. If vacuum loss occurs,
the flow regulator and/or brass cap will be reseated and the shut-in test will be repeated until the
vacuum reading remains stable.

Following the shut-in test, the Summa® canister will be connected to the sample point via Teflon®
sample tubing using a brass nut and ferrule assembly to create an air tight seal and the leak check
will be performed. The leak check will be performed by constructing a shroud over the sample
train at each sampling point and flooding the air with helium gas. Helium concentrations inside
the shroud will be measured using a calibrated helium gas detector and maintained at
concentrations of approximately 15% to 30% for the duration of the leak check. Once helium
concentrations stabilize within the shroud, the sample tubing will be purged outside of the shroud
23

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
using a syringe and a three-way valve to collect purged soil gas into a Tedlar® bag. The purged
soil gas will then be analyzed using the helium gas detector to ensure that helium concentrations
in the sampling train are less than 10% of the helium concentrations measure within the shroud.

Following a successful leak check, the intake valve on the Summa® canister will be fully opened
to begin collection of the soil gas sample. Vacuum readings on the Summa® canister will be
recorded prior to and following the sampling period to ensure adequate sample volume was
collected. A vacuum of approximately 5 inches of mercury or more will be maintained within the
canisters at the conclusion of the sampling event in accordance with DEQ DWM guidance.

Following sample collection, the Summa® canisters will be placed in laboratory supplied shipping
containers, properly labeled, and shipped under standard chain-of-custody protocols to a qualified
laboratory for analysis of VOCs by EPA Method TO-15. The laboratory will be requested to use
reporting limits that are below DEQ DWM Residential Vapor Intrusion SGSLs.

After sample collection, the sample locations will be estimated by measuring from known
benchmarks within the building (e.g., doors, windows, exterior walls, etc.) or with a hand-held
GPS.

3.3 Quality Assurance – Quality Control

Non-dedicated equipment and tools will be decontaminated prior to use at each boring or sampling
location or following exposure to soil or groundwater. The following samples will be collected for
quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) purposes:

 One duplicate soil sample will be collected and analyzed for the same parameters as the
parent samples.
 One duplicate sub-slab soil gas sample will be collected using a laboratory supplied “t-
fitting” which allows for two soil gas samples to be collected from one sub-slab soil gas
monitoring point simultaneously. The duplicate soil gas sample will be submitted for
analysis of VOCs by EPA Method TO-15.
24

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
Laboratory QA/QC procedures will be employed to ensure appropriate sample handling and
analysis and to aid in the review and validation of the analytical data. QA/QC procedures will be
conducted in accordance with the method protocols and will include regular equipment
maintenance, equipment calibrations, and adherence to specific sample custody and data
management procedures. Samples will be analyzed in conjunction with appropriate blanks,
laboratory duplicates, continuing calibration standards, surrogate standards, and matrix spiking
standards in accordance with approved methodologies to monitor both instrument and analyst
performance. Laboratory reporting limits for each analyte will be at or below appropriate screening
criteria, where possible. Additionally, H&H will request that the laboratory include estimated
concentrations for compounds that are detected at levels above the laboratory method detection
limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit (J flags).

The laboratory analytical data report and QA package for each group of samples submitted to and
analyzed by the subcontracted laboratory will be provided in an appendix to the final report.
Laboratory QA data consistent with Level II documentation will be provided for this project. A
copy of the completed chain of custody record and shipping receipt will be appended to the
corresponding laboratory analytical report included with the final report.

3.4 Investigation Derived Waste (IDW) Management

Investigation derived waste (IDW) generated during the proposed assessment activities adjacent
to the daycare facility is expected to be minimal and will be thin spread on-Site. However, if
significant impacts are suspected (i.e., free-product) the soil cuttings will be containerized in
labeled 55-gallon drums and staged on-Site pending analytical results of a composite IDW sample.
IDW generated during delineation borings at the Wikoff Color property will be containerized in
55-gallon drums and staged on-Site pending analytical results of a composite IDW sample. Based
on laboratory analytical results of IDW samples, the drums will be transported off-Site to a suitable
facility for disposal or thin spread on-Site.

25

https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/masterfiles-1/shared documents/aaa-master projects/portman holdings/caraustar &
savona mill/additional brownfields assessment/work plan/data summary and additional assessment work plan.docx
3.5 Reporting

Following completion of the assessment activities and receipt of the analytical data, H&H will
document our findings in an Additional Brownfields Assessment Report. The report will include
a description of Site activities, rationale for potential deviations from the work plan (if warranted),
a figure depicting sample locations, tabular summaries of the data, laboratory analytical data, a
discussion of the data in comparison to regulatory screening levels, cumulative risk calculations
for sub-slab soil gas analysis (if warranted based upon the data), and conclusions and
recommendations concerning our activities.
01675-001/00368845
Tables
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationDowngradient of Wikoff Color PropertyFormer Clarifier Area Former AST Area Former UST Area Former Boiler Room Former Aeration PondSample ID2016-SB-01 2016-SB-02 2016-SB-03 2016-SB-04 2016-SB-05 2016-SB-06Depth of Sample (ft bgs)4-5 0.5-5 2-5 4-5 4-5 2-5Sample Date2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.114 <0.0963 <0.0962 <0.0826 <0.132 <0.0920Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0114 <0.0096 <0.0096 <0.0083 <0.0132 <0.0092Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.00464-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0568 <0.0482 <0.0481 <0.0413 <0.0659 <0.0460Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0227 <0.0193 <0.0192 <0.0165 <0.0264 <0.0184Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.00461,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.00461,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0114 <0.0096 <0.0096 <0.0083 <0.0132 <0.0092o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0057 <0.0048 <0.0048 <0.0041 <0.0066 <0.0046Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0114 <0.0096 <0.0096 <0.0083 <0.0132 <0.0092SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.3860.807<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.3860.631<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.3860.895<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.3860.403<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.3860.734<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.3892,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.3861.66<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.3891-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.3892-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.3892-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.3893&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.3861.20<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.386 <0.397 <0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.3861.43<0.429 <0.392 <0.461 <0.389Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Screening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 1 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationFormer Textile Mill AreaFormer Machine ShopFormer Pump ManufacturingSample ID2016-SB-07 2016-SB-09 2016-SB-10Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2-4 2-5 2-5 0.5-2 2-5Sample Date2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0988 <0.0933 <0.105 <0.0968 <0.0831Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0099 <0.0093 <0.0105 <0.0097 <0.0083Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.00424-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0494 <0.0466 <0.0524 <0.0484 <0.0415Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0198 <0.0187 <0.0210 <0.0194 <0.0166Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.00421,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.00421,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0099 <0.0093 <0.0105 <0.0097 <0.0083o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0049 <0.0047 <0.0052 <0.0048 <0.0042Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0099 <0.0093 <0.0105 <0.0097 <0.0083SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.375 <0.4140.965<0.413 <0.389AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.375 <0.4142.45<0.413 <0.389Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.3750.475 4.47<0.413 <0.389Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.375 <0.4143.57<0.413 <0.389Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.3750.4594.09<0.413 <0.389Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.375 <0.4141.46<0.413 <0.389Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.375 <0.4141.73<0.413 <0.389bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.375 <0.4143.29<0.413 <0.389Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.375 <0.4140.521<0.413 <0.389Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.375 <0.4140.670<0.413 <0.3892,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.3751.00 10.1<0.413 <0.389Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.375 <0.4141.32<0.413 <0.389Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.375 <0.4141.80<0.413 <0.3891-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.3892-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.3892-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.3893&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.3750.661 8.08<0.413 <0.389Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.375 <0.414 <0.405 <0.413 <0.389Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.3750.789 6.60<0.413 <0.389Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Former Bleach/Finishing RoomScreening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)2016-SB-08 / DUP-01-2252016https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 2 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2016-SB-12 2016-SB-13Depth of Sample (ft bgs)0.5-2 0.5-2 4-5 0.5-2Sample Date2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0866 <0.0844 <0.0808 <0.0859Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0087 <0.0084 <0.0081 <0.0086Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.00434-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0433 <0.0422 <0.0404 <0.0430Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0173 <0.0169 <0.0162 <0.0172Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.00431,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.00431,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0087 <0.0084 <0.0081 <0.0086o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0043 <0.0042 <0.0040 <0.0043Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0087 <0.0084 <0.0081 <0.0086SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.002,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.001-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.002-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.002-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.003&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.396 <0.384 <0.376 <4.00Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Diesel AST Area (Caraustar)2016-SB-11 / DUP-02-02262016Main Mill Property https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 3 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2016-SB-14 2016-SB-15 2016-SB-16 2016-SB-17 2016-SB-18Depth of Sample (ft bgs)0.5-2 0.5-2 2-4 4-5 4-5Sample Date2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/26/2016VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0876 <0.0965 <0.0994 <0.0952 <0.0940Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0088 <0.0097 <0.0099 <0.0095 <0.0094Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.00474-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0438 <0.0483 <0.0497 <0.0476 <0.0470Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0175 <0.0193 <0.0199 <0.0190 <0.0188Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.00471,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.00471,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0088 <0.0097 <0.0099 <0.0095 <0.0094o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0044 <0.0048 <0.0050 <0.0048 <0.0047Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0088 <0.0097 <0.0099 <0.0095 <0.0094SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.4042,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.4041-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.4042-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.4042-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.4043&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.398 <0.390 <0.401 <0.416 <0.404Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Main Mill Property Former Old Dominion Box Co.https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 4 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2016-SB-19 2016-SB-20 2016-SB-21 2016-SB-22 2016-SB-23Depth of Sample (ft bgs)1-2 2-5 2-5 2-5 4-5Sample Date2/26/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0765<0.09200.177<0.0930 <0.0978Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0076 <0.0092 <0.0089 <0.0093 <0.0098Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.00494-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0382 <0.0460 <0.0443 <0.0465 <0.0489Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0153 <0.0184 <0.0177 <0.0186 <0.0196Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.00491,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.00491,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0076 <0.0092 <0.0089 <0.0093 <0.0098o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0038 <0.0046 <0.0044 <0.0046 <0.0049Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0076 <0.0092 <0.0089 <0.0093 <0.0098SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.4182,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.4181-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.4182-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.4182-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.4183&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.376 <0.405 <0.405 <0.409 <0.418Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Main Mill Property Screening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 5 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationFormer Clarifier AreaSouthern Portion of SiteOld Rail SpurFormer Bleaching/ Dyeing RoomFormer Mill WarehouseSample ID2016-SB-24 2016-SB-25 2016-SB-26 2016-SB-27 2020-SB-01Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2-4 4-5 2-4 0.5-2 0-2.5Sample Date2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 8/13/2020VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.09630.147<0.0827 <0.102<0.0413Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0039Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0096 <0.0117 <0.0083 <0.0102<0.0087Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0052Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0035p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.00314-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0481 <0.0584 <0.0413 <0.0509<0.0468Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0193 <0.0233 <0.0165 <0.0204<0.0082Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0035Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0031Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0027Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.00510.0047J1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.00401,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0033m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0096 <0.0117 <0.0083 <0.0102<0.0085o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0048 <0.0058 <0.0041 <0.0051<0.0032Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0096 <0.0117 <0.0083 <0.0102<0.0032SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0994AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0914Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1000Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1230Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1670Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1560Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1630Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1510bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1260Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1120Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1550Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.09662,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0962Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0953Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.2200Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1170Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1030Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.17701-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.10302-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.09832-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.08563&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0972Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0925PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0973Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.0922Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.427 <0.436 <0.343 <0.344<0.1060Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 6 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2018-SB-01 2018-SB-02 2018-SB-03 2018-SB-04 2018-SB-05Depth of Sample (ft bgs)4-5 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3Sample Date3/23/2018 3/23/2018 3/23/2018 3/23/2018 3/23/2018VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,0000.0285J 0.0123J<0.01070.0091J<0.0096Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0016 <0.0019 <0.0017 <0.0011 <0.0015Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0025 <0.0030 <0.0027 <0.0017 <0.0024Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0018 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0013 <0.0017Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0019 <0.0023 <0.0020 <0.0013 <0.0018p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE0.0020J<0.0020 <0.0018 <0.0012 <0.00164-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0038 <0.0044 <0.0040 <0.0026 <0.0036Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0030 <0.0036 <0.0032 <0.0021 <0.0029Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0015 <0.0018 <0.0016 <0.0010 <0.0014Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0012 <0.0014 <0.00130.0171<0.0012Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0017 <0.0020 <0.0018 <0.0012 <0.0016Toluene8.3 990 9,700<0.0018 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0013 <0.00171,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0020 <0.0024 <0.0021 <0.0014 <0.00191,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0018 <0.0021 <0.0019 <0.0013 <0.0017m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0037 <0.0043 <0.0039 <0.0025 <0.0035o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0019 <0.0023 <0.0020 <0.0013 <0.0018Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0037 <0.0043 <0.0039 <0.0025 <0.0035SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.0941 <0.0967 <0.10301.28<0.0924AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.0966 <0.0993 <0.10500.292J<0.0948Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.0916 <0.0942 <0.10004.03<0.0900Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.0755 <0.07760.505 9.190.725Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.0780 <0.08020.4518.080.328JBenzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.0706 <0.07250.58511.60.535Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.0805 <0.0827 <0.08783.64 0.268JBenzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.1040 <0.10700.326J 4.20 0.128Jbis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.1110 <0.1150 <0.1220 <0.096 <0.1090Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.0545 <0.05600.428J 7.83 0.772Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.0867 <0.0891 <0.09461.32<0.0851Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.0668 <0.0687 <0.07301.36<0.06572,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.1610 <0.1650 <0.1760 <0.1440 <0.1580Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.0668 <0.0687 <0.0730 <0.0598 <0.0657Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.0854 <0.0878 <0.0933 <0.0764 <0.0839Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.0594 <0.06111.01 21.9 0.490Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.0842 <0.0865 <0.09192.39<0.0827Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.0842 <0.08650.260J3.950.0985J1-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.1060 <0.1090 <0.11600.503<0.10502-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.0879 <0.0904 <0.09600.709<0.08632-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.1240 <0.1270 <0.1350 <0.1110 <0.12203&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.1610 <0.1650 <0.1760 <0.1440 <0.1580Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.1000 <0.1030 <0.10900.947<0.0985PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.0681 <0.07000.442J 15.6 0.166JPhenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.1230 <0.1260 <0.1340 <0.1100 <0.1200Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.0693 <0.07130.699 10.2 0.406Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Former Caraustar Paper Storagehttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 7 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationNear Former Savona Mill BuildingSample ID2020-SB-02 2020-SB-02 DUP 2020-GW-02 SOIL 2020-SB-04Depth of Sample (ft bgs)0-2.5 0-2.5 5-10 2-2.5Sample Date8/13/2020 8/13/2020 10/1/2020 8/13/2020VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0430 <0.0420 <0.0496 <0.0392Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0041 <0.0040 <0.0047 <0.0037Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0091 <0.0089 <0.01050.0508Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0054 <0.0053 <0.0062 <0.0049Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0036 <0.0036 <0.0042 <0.0033p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0032 <0.00310.499<0.00294-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0487 <0.0476 <0.0563 <0.0444Methylene Chloride0.025 58 6500.0818<0.00830.0878<0.0078Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0037 <0.0036 <0.0043 <0.0034Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0032 <0.0032 <0.0037 <0.0030Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0029 <0.0028 <0.0033 <0.0026Toluene8.3 990 9,7000.0048J 0.0036J<0.00380.0042J1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0041 <0.0040 <0.0048 <0.00381,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0034 <0.0034 <0.0040 <0.0031m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0089 <0.0086 <0.0102 <0.0081o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0033 <0.0032 <0.0038 <0.0030Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0033 <0.0032 <0.0038 <0.0030SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.0983 <0.1020 <0.0993 NAAcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.0904 <0.0940 <0.0913 NAAnthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.0991 <0.1030 <0.1000 NABenzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.1220 <0.1260 <0.1230 NABenzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.1660 <0.1720 <0.1670 NABenzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.1540 <0.1600 <0.1560 NABenzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.1610 <0.1670 <0.1630 NABenzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.1490 <0.1550 <0.1510 NAbis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.1250 <0.1300 <0.1260 NAChrysene36 110 2,100<0.1110 <0.1150 <0.1120 NADibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.1530 <0.1590 <0.1540 NADibenzofuran10 16 230<0.0955 <0.0993 <0.0965 NA2,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.0952 <0.0990 <0.0961 NADi-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.0942 <0.0980 <0.0952 NADi-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.2180 <0.2260 <0.2200 NAFluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.1150 <0.1200 <0.1170 NAFluorene110 480 6,000<0.1020 <0.1060 <0.1030 NAIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.1750 <0.1820 <0.1770 NA1-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.1020 <0.1060 <0.1030 NA2-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.0972 <0.1010 <0.0982 NA2-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.0846 <0.0880 <0.0855 NA3&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.0961 <0.0999 <0.0971 NANaphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0915 <0.0951 <0.0924 NAPhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.0962 <0.1000 <0.0972 NAPhenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.0912 <0.0949 <0.0922 NAPyrene440 360 4,500<0.1050 <0.1090 <0.1060 NANotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Former Caraustar Paper Storage Screening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 8 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SB-03 2020-SB-05 2020-SB-06 2020-SB-09Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2.5-5 2-2.5 0-2.5 2.5-5Sample Date8/13/2020 8/13/2020 8/13/2020 8/13/2020VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0439 <0.0376 <0.0440 <0.397Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0042 <0.0036 <0.0042 <0.0038Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0093 <0.0079 <0.0093 <0.0084Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0055 <0.0047 <0.0055 <0.0050Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0037 <0.0032 <0.0037 <0.0034p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0032 <0.0028 <0.0033 <0.00294-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.0498 <0.0426 <0.0498 <0.0450Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0087 <0.0075 <0.0087 <0.0079Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0038 <0.0032 <0.0038 <0.0034Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.0033 <0.0028 <0.00330.0034JTetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0029 <0.0025 <0.0029 <0.0026Toluene8.3 990 9,7000.0044J 0.0043J 0.0043J 0.00571,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0042 <0.0036 <0.0042 <0.00381,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 320<0.0035 <0.0030 <0.0035 <0.0032m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0090 <0.0077 <0.0091 <0.0082o-Xylene9.8 140 590<0.0034 <0.0029 <0.0034 <0.0030Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0034 <0.0029 <0.0034 <0.0030SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.1080 <0.0983 <0.1050 <0.0949AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.0992 <0.0905 <0.0969 <0.0873Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.1090 <0.0992 <0.1060 <0.0956Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<0.1330 <0.1220 <0.1300 <0.117Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<0.1820 <0.1660 <0.1770 <0.160Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<0.1690 <0.1540 <0.1650 <0.149Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<0.1770 <0.1610 <0.1720 <0.155Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<0.1640 <0.1490 <0.1600 <0.144bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<0.1370 <0.1250 <0.1340 <0.121Chrysene36 110 2,100<0.1220 <0.1110 <0.1190 <0.107Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<0.1680 <0.1530 <0.1640 <0.147Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.1050 <0.0956 <0.1020 <0.9222,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,300<0.1040 <0.0952 <0.1020 <0.918Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.1030 <0.0943 <0.1010 <0.910Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<0.2390 <0.2180 <0.2330 <0.210Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<0.1270 <0.1150 <0.1240 <0.111Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.1120 <0.1020 <0.1100 <0.987Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<0.1920 <0.1750 <0.1870 <0.1691-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.1120 <0.1020 <0.1090 <0.09822-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.1070 <0.0973 <0.1040 <0.09392-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200<0.0929 <0.0847 <0.0907 <0.08173&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,000<0.1050 <0.0961 <0.1030 <0.0927Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.1000 <0.0915 <0.0980 <0.883PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.1060 <0.0963 <0.1030 <0.0929Phenol0.34 3,800 49,000<0.1000 <0.0913 <0.0977 <0.880Pyrene440 360 4,500<0.1150 <0.1050 <0.1130 <0.101Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Parcels East of S. Turner Avenue Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Screening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 9 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1ASummary of Organic Constituent Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SB-07 2020-SB-08 2021-SB-01 2021-SB-02Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2-2.5 0-5 0-1 2-4Sample Date8/13/2020 10/1/2020 1/7/2021 1/7/2021VOCs (8260)Acetone25 12,000 140,000<0.0385 <0.06340.679<0.0523Benzene0.01 1.2 5.4<0.0036 <0.0060 <0.0046 <0.0032Bromomethane0.05 1.4 6.4<0.0081 <0.0065 <0.0181 <0.0129Carbon Disulfide4.1 160 740NA NA NA NAEthylbenzene13 6.1 27<0.0048 <0.00800.0277<0.0038Isopropylbenzene (cumene)2.3 410 2,100<0.0033 <0.00540.0493<0.0028p-IsopropyltolueneNE NE NE<0.0028 <0.00470.348<0.00404-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.45 7,000 30,000<0.437 <0.07194.11<0.0079Methylene Chloride0.025 58 650<0.0077 <0.0126 <0.0314 <0.0223Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE)0.09 49 220<0.0033 <0.0054 <0.0043 <0.0030Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.80.0055<0.00480.4370.0172Tetrachloroethylene0.0063 17 82<0.0026 <0.00420.0173<0.0026Toluene8.3 990 9,7000.0088<0.00490.0173<0.00231,2,4-Trimethylbenzene12 63 370<0.0037 <0.00611.07<0.00221,3,5-Trimethylbenzene11 56 3200.0035J<0.00510.646<0.0027m&p-Xylene9.8 120 500<0.0079 <0.01310.152<0.0056o-Xylene9.8 140 5900.0038J<0.00480.132<0.0036Total Xylene9.9 120 530<0.0029 <0.00480.284<0.0046SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene16 720 9,000<0.952 <0.114 <1.210 <0.1040AcenaphthyleneNE NE NE<0.876 <0.105 <1.110 <0.0954Anthracene1,300 3,600 45,000<0.960 <0.115 <1.220 <0.1050Benzo(a)anthracene0.35 1.1 21<1.180 <0.141 <1.500 <0.1280Benzo(a)pyrene0.12 0.11 2.1<1.600 <0.193 <2.040 <0.1750Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.2 1.1 21<1.490 <0.179 <1.900 <0.1620Benzo(k)fluoranthene12 11 210<1.560 <0.187 <1.980 <0.1700Benzo(g,h,i)peryleneNE NE NE<1.450 <0.174 <1.840 <0.1580bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate14 39 160<1.120 <0.14582.80.252JChrysene36 110 2,100<1.070 <0.129 <1.370 <0.1170Dibenz(a,h)anthracene0.38 0.11 2.1<1.480 <0.178 <1.880 <0.1610Dibenzofuran10 16 230<0.925 <0.111 <1.180 <0.10102,4-Dimethylphenol2.4 250 3,30034.1<0.111 <1.170 <0.1000Di-n-butylphthalateNE NE NE<0.913 <0.11013.8<0.0995Di-n-octylphthalateNE NE NE<2.110 <0.2537.47<0.2300Fluoranthene670 480 6,000<1.120 <0.134 <1.420 <0.1220Fluorene110 480 6,000<0.990 <0.119 <1.260 <0.1080Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene3.9 1.1 21<1.690 <0.203 <2.150 <0.18401-Methylnaphthalene0.11 18 73<0.985 <0.118 <1.250 <0.10702-Methylnaphthalene3.1 48 600<0.942 <0.113 <1.040 <0.10302-Methylphenol (o-cresol)6.5 630 8,200104<0.985 <1.180 <0.08933&4-Methylphenol (m&p phenol)17 1,300 16,00059.4<0.112 <1.180 <0.1010Naphthalene0.39 2.1 8.8<0.886 <0.106 <1.130 <0.0965PhenanthreneNE NE NE<0.932 <0.112 <1.180 <0.1020Phenol0.34 3,800 49,00030.7<0.106 <1.120 <0.0963Pyrene440 360 4,500<1.020 <0.122 <1.290 <0.1110Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above. Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.Wikoff Color PropertyScreening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Undeveloped Area (NE Corner of Property)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1A (Page 10 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationDowngradient of Wikoff Color PropertyFormer Clarifier Area Former AST Area Former UST Area Former Boiler Room Former Aeration PondSample ID2016-SB-01 2016-SB-02 2016-SB-03 2016-SB-04 2016-SB-05 2016-SB-06Depth of Sample (ft bgs)4-5 0.5-5 2-5 4-5 4-5 2-5Sample DateRange Mean2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8<0.911.5<0.91 <0.67 <0.872.4Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 149 343 160 37.5 29.6 244Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3<0.0910.77<0.091 <0.067 <0.087 <0.078Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 3.0 9.7 7.0 16.0 21.5 6.7Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NA NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 2.3 141 3.2 3.4 5.9 38.2MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS<0.00480.016 0.011 0.015 0.025 0.24Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.91 <0.71 <0.91 <0.67 <0.87 <0.78Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.46 <0.35 <0.46 <0.34 <0.44 <0.39Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzed< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Screening Criteria J = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 1 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationFormer Textile Mill AreaFormer Machine ShopFormer Pump ManufacturingSample ID2016-SB-07 2016-SB-09 2016-SB-10Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2-4 2-5 2-5 0.5-2 2-5Sample DateRange Mean2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.818.02.0NA<1.1<1.1Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 85.5 141NA50.2 68.2Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3 0.090 9.1NA<0.11<0.11Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 18.4 18.2NA38.8 18.5Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 16.6 54.6NA36.6 7.2MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.63 0.075NA0.056 0.019Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121 1.4<0.92NA<1.1<1.1Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.30 <0.46NA<0.54<0.55Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Former Bleach/Finishing Room2016-SB-08 / DUP-01-2252016Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 2 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2016-SB-12 2016-SB-13Depth of Sample (ft bgs)0.5-2 0.5-2 4-5 0.5-2Sample DateRange Mean2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8<0.75NA<0.71 <3.8Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 29.3NA90.2 128Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3<0.075NA<0.071 <0.38Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 31.9NA13.4 40.0Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 6.0NA1.4 51.6MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.011NA<0.00270.030Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.75NA<0.71 <3.8Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.38NA<0.36 <1.9Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)2016-SB-11 / DUP-02-02262016Diesel AST Area (Caraustar)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Main Mill Property https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 3 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2016-SB-14 2016-SB-15 2016-SB-16 2016-SB-17 2016-SB-18Depth of Sample (ft bgs)0.5-2 0.5-2 2-4 4-5 4-5Sample DateRange Mean2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/26/2016RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8 1.4<0.95 <4.3 <0.64 <5.8Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 107 88.5 84.7 29.0 203Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3<0.12 <0.095 <0.43 <0.064 <0.58Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 21.7 12.5 24.1 34.3 14.9Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 63.8 4.8 3.5 3.8 22.4MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.068 0.014<0.00520.038 0.0080Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<1.2 <0.95 <4.3 <0.64 <5.8Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.59 <0.48 <2.2 <0.32 <2.9Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Main Mill Property Former Old Dominion Box Co.Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 4 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2016-SB-19 2016-SB-20 2016-SB-21 2016-SB-22 2016-SB-23Depth of Sample (ft bgs)1-2 2-5 2-5 2-5 4-5Sample DateRange Mean2/26/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8<0.94 <1.119.8<1.0 <0.70Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 64.0 785 119 207 18.6Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3<0.094 <0.11 <0.080 <0.10 <0.070Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 15.8 24.0 37.3 6.8 33.6Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 10.4 7.1 24.9 3.2 8.3MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.012 0.15 0.048 0.0077 0.013Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.94 <1.11.5<1.00.81Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.47 <0.53 <0.40 <0.50 <0.35Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Main Mill Property https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 5 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationFormer Clarifier AreaSouthern Portion of SiteOld Rail SpurFormer Bleaching/ Dyeing RoomFormer Mill WarehouseSample ID2016-SB-24 2016-SB-25 2016-SB-26 2016-SB-27 2020-SB-01Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2-4 4-5 2-4 0.5-2 0-2.5Sample DateRange Mean2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 8/13/2020RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8<0.912.3<0.961.1 1.5Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 98.3 157 36.7 38.7 98.2Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3<0.0910.59<0.096 <0.0600.53Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 28.6 21.7 1.2 8.7 55.4Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NA<0.321Lead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 3.8 183 1.2 4.2 3.0MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.027 0.13<0.00450.010 0.013Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.91 <1.0 <0.96 <0.60<0.44Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.46 <0.52 <0.48 <0.30<0.22Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 6 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2018-SB-01 2018-SB-02 2018-SB-03 2018-SB-04 2018-SB-05Depth of Sample (ft bgs)4-5 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3Sample DateRange Mean3/23/2018 3/23/2018 3/23/2018 3/23/2018 3/23/2018RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8 1.8 3.6 6.2 2.5 4.1Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 88.5 95.9 112 64.1 87.3Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3<0.0350.064J 0.065J1.5 0.15Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 9.8 21.6 42.1 35.0 35.7Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NENA NA NA NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 6.1 8.4 9.3 52.5 45.1MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.0049<0.0033 <0.0017 <0.00160.11Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.35 <0.580.49J<0.29 <0.50Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.17 <0.29 <0.211.4<0.25Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Former Caraustar Paper Storage https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 7 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationNear Former Savona Mill BuildingSample ID2020-SB-02 2020-SB-02 DUP 2020-GW-02 SOIL 2020-SB-04Depth of Sample (ft bgs)0-2.5 0-2.5 5-10 2-2.5Sample DateRange Mean8/13/2020 8/13/2020 10/1/2020 8/13/2020RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8<0.41 <0.455.7NABarium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 171 194 84.3NACadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3 0.46 0.49 0.97NAChromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 10.1 12.4 115NAChromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NE<0.278 <0.283 <0.327 NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 2.5 2.4 8.2NAMercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.022 0.010 0.040NASelenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.41 <0.452.8NASilver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.21 <0.220.83NANotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Former Caraustar Paper Storage Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 8 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SB-03 2020-SB-05 2020-SB-06 2020-SB-09Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2.5-5 2-2.5 0-2.5 2.5-5Sample DateRange Mean8/13/2020 8/13/2020 8/13/2020 8/13/2020RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8 1.0 1.3 1.3 0.56JBarium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 68.5 71.4 89.8 73.4Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3 0.42 0.42 0.33 0.36Chromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 60.0 29.3 70.7 64.2Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NE<0.320 <0.3091.19<0.315Lead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 4.9 5.4 7.2 5.4MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.040 0.067 0.029 0.028Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.51 <0.42 <0.47 <0.42Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.26 <0.21 <0.23 <0.21Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Parcels East of S. Turner AvenueScreening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 9 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1B Summary of Metals Soil Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SB-07 2020-SB-08 2021-SB-01 2021-SB-02Depth of Sample (ft bgs)2-2.5 0-5 0-1 2-4Sample DateRange Mean8/13/2020 10/1/2020 1/7/2021 1/7/2021RCRA Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic5.8 0.68 3 1.0-18 4.8 2.1 6.41.6J<0.46Barium580 3,100 47,000 50-1,000 356 65.4 58.03,33070.2Cadmium3 14 200 1.0-10 4.3 0.26 0.27 0.520.063JChromium (Total)*360,000 23,000 350,000 7.0-300 65 162 23.3 1,960 70.8Chromium VI3.8 0.31 6.5 NE NE 1.75 1.86NA NALead250 400 800 BRL-50 16 3.6 6.08,9909.7MercuryNE 4.7 70 0.03-0.52 NS 0.0083 0.011 0.024 0.025Selenium2.1 78 1,200 <0.1-0.8 0.121<0.420.70J<0.542.0Silver3.4 78 1,200 BRL-5.0 0.42<0.21 <0.200.78<0.23Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated June 2021.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Historical analytical data was generated by The Environmental Group of the Carolinas, Inc. (2005) and Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).*Total chromium is compared to the trivalent chromium PSRGs.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'ft bgs = feet below ground surface; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.< = Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit as no method detection limits were available in laboratory reports.BOLD concentrations exceed their respective Protection of Groundwater PSRG.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Residential PSRG.GRAY SHADING indicates concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential PSRG. Wikoff Color PropertyUndeveloped Area (NE Corner of Property)Screening Criteria Protection of Groundwater PSRG (1)Residential PSRG (1)Commercial / Industrial PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 1 - Soil Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 1B (Page 10 of 10)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR.001 Sample LocationDowngradient of Wikoff ColorFormer Clarifier AreaFormer AST Area Former UST AreaDowngradient of Savona Mill BuildingDowngradient of Former Paper Storage BuildingNorth of Savona Mill BuildingWikoff Color PropertySample ID2016-GW-01 2016-GW-02 2016-GW-03 2016-GW-04 2016-GW-05 2020-GW-02 2020-TW-03 2020-TW-03 DUP 2020-GW-04 2021-GW-01Sample Date2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016 2/26/2016 10/1/2020 8/14/2020 8/14/2020 10/1/2020 1/7/2021VOCs (8260)Naphthalene6 4.620<1.0 <1.016.9<1.0 <1.0<0.35 <0.35 <0.35 <0.35 <0.35Toluene600 3,80016,0001.8<1.0 <1.01.6 2.7<0.24 <0.24 <0.24 <0.24 <0.24p-IsopropyltolueneNE NENE<1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.00.57 J<0.21 <0.21 <0.21 <0.21VPH (MADEP)-- ----NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NASVOCs (8270)-- ----ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL ALL BRL All BRLRCRA Metals (6010/7196)Arsenic10 NE NENA NA NA NA NA <4.7 <4.75.3 J<4.7 <4.7Barium700 NE NENA NA NA NA NA25.8 19.4 18.5 33.0 232Cadmium2NENENA NA NA NA NA <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.400.53 JChromium (Total)10 NE NENA NA NA NA NA72.8<3.7 <3.76.0414Chromium (VI)NE NE NENA NA NA NA NA <0.0060 <0.0060 <0.0060 <0.0060 NALead15 NE NENA NA NA NA NA7.2<4.5 <4.5 <4.514.4Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 02L.0202 Groundwater Quality Standard (NC 2L Standard) dated April 20132) DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) dated June 2021Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (μg/L).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above. Laboratory analytical methods and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2016-2021).Bolded values exceed the 2L Standard and Residential GWSL.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; VPH = volatile petroleum hydrocarbons; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; 'NE = not established; NA = not analyzed; -- = not applicable; BRL = below reporting limitsJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.<= Analyte was not detected in the sample, and is reported to the method detection limit. Where italic font is used, concentrations are reported to the reporting limit.Parcel East of S. Turner AvenueNC 2L Standards(1)Residential GWSLs (2)Non-Residential GWSLs (2)Screening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 2 - GW Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 2 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SV-01 2020-SV-02 2021-SV-11 2021-SV-11BSample Date8/19/2020 8/19/2020 1/11/2021 11/12/2021Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Sub-Slab Sub-Slab Sub-Slab Sub-SlabVOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000 55 20 130 280Benzene 12 160163.6 1.4<0.771,3-Butadiene 3.1 41<0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <1.52-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 8.8 J<2.06.2 J 28 JCarbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000<1.6 <1.64.8 J<7.9Carbon Tetrachloride 16 200751.3<0.33 <1.9Chloroethane 70,000 880,000<0.52 < 0.52 <0.52 <1.9Chloroform 4.1 534.7<0.24 <0.242.3 JChloromethane 630 7,900<0.32 <0.321.0<0.85Cyclohexane 42,000 530,000<0.34 <0.342.5<2.31,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE<0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <1.51,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110<0.27 <0.27 <0.27 <2.4Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800<0.31 <0.312.7 2.8 J1,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <1.5Ethanol NE NE 150 59 190 270Ethyl Acetate 490 6100<4.3 <4.3 <4.3 <21Ethylbenzene 37 490 3.2 1.6 6.6 2.0 J4-Ethyltoluene NE NE<0.30 <0.304.5 160Heptane 2,800 35,000 2.7<0.355.2 1.7 JHexane 4,900 61,000 2.9 J<1.33.8 J<122-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000<0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <2.1Isopropanol 1,400 18,000 72 25 120 150Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700<0.29 <0.29 <0.29 <1.4Methylene Chloride 3,400 53,000<1.6 <1.626<8.04-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000<0.43 <0.43 <0.43 <2.1Naphthalene 2.8 3612 6.8 29 6.7Propene NE NE<1.2 <1.22.2 J<5.8Styrene 7,000 88,000 2.0 0.85 0.26 J<1.3Tetrachloroethylene 280 3500 15 8.4 25 160Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <7.3Toluene 35,000 440,000 17 5.4 13 5.81,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.361.3<2.5Trichloroethylene 14 180<0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <2.0Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE 1.6 J 1.9 J 1.1 J<2.21,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <2.71,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300<0.223.3 6.02,8001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 1.0 0.87 J 1.82,000Vinyl Chloride 5.6 280<0.29 <0.29 <0.29 <1.0m&p-xylene 700 8,800 13 6.4 13 11o-Xylene 700 8,800 4.3 2.3 4.8<1.2Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold concentrations exceed their respective Residential SGSL(1)Non-Residential SGSL(1)Screening Criteria Savona Mill Buildinghttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 1 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SV-04 UnAdj.** 2020-SV-04 Adj.**Sample Date8/19/2020 8/19/2020 8/20/2020 8/19/2020Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Sub-Slab* Sub-Slab* Sub-Slab Sub-SlabVOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000 240 210 8,700 11,869Benzene 12 16022 15<0.19 NA1,3-Butadiene 3.1 4112 8.1<0.32 NA2-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 77 56 42 57Carbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000<1.6 <1.6 <1.6 NACarbon Tetrachloride 16 200<0.33 <0.33 <0.33 NAChloroethane 70,000 880,000<0.52 <0.52 <0.52 NAChloroform 4.1 53<0.24 <0.24 <0.24 NAChloromethane 630 7,900<0.32 <0.32 <0.32 NACyclohexane 42,000 530,000<0.34 <0.34 <0.34 NA1,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE<0.44 <0.44 <0.44 NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110<0.27 <0.27 <0.27 NADichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800<0.31 <0.31 <0.31 NA1,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.30 <0.30 <0.30 NAEthanol NE NE 120 91 650 887Ethyl Acetate 490 6100<4.3 <4.3 <4.3 NAEthylbenzene 37 490 4.8 3.7<0.18 NA4-Ethyltoluene NE NE 3.9 2.8 180 246Heptane 2,800 35,000 5.0 4.3 5.0 6.8Hexane 4,900 61,000<1.333 53 722-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000 41<0.46 <0.46 NAIsopropanol 1,400 18,000 86 5912,000 16,371Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700<0.29 <0.29 <0.29 NAMethylene Chloride 3,400 53,000<1.619 32 444-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000<0.43 <0.43 <0.43 NANaphthalene 2.8 364233 99135Propene NE NE<1.2 <1.2 <1.2 NAStyrene 7,000 88,000 5.3 3.6<0.24 NATetrachloroethylene 280 3500 1.1 J<0.4469 94Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.5 <1.5 <1.5 NAToluene 35,000 440,000 22 16 55 751,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.36 <0.36 NATrichloroethylene 14 180<0.40 <0.40 <0.40 NATrichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE<0.851.6 J<0.85 NA1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.2 <1.2 NA1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 34 26590 8051,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 8.8 6.6690 941Vinyl Chloride 5.6 280<0.29 <0.29 <0.29 NAm&p-xylene 700 8,800 11 9.5<0.30 NAo-Xylene 700 8,800 5.1 4.5<0.23 NANotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold concentrations exceed their respective Underlined concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential SGSL.*Per Terracon, a crawl space was discovered beneath the 2020-SV-03 and 2021-SV-12 sample locations so data is not representative of sub-slab conditions. Screening Criteria Residential SGSL(1)Non-Residential SGSL(1)Savona Mill Building 2020-SV-03* / DUP-01**Per Terracon, 2020-SV-04 did not pass the helium tracer test. During sampling, the helium concentration within the shroud was maintained at approximately 15% helium. 2020-SV-04 was analyzed for helium via EPA Method 3C and determined to have a concentration of 4% helium, indicating breakthrough of approximately 26.7%. Detected VOC concentrations were adjusted upward to account for introduction of ambient air into the sample, conservatively assuming that VOC compounds were not present within ambient air and therefore, assuming that the introduced air acted solely to dilute the detected concentrations within the sub-slab. Unadjusted concentrations are shown in the left column and adjusted concentrations in the right column. https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 2 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSavona Mill Building Sample ID2021-SV-12* 2021-SV-13 2021-SV-14Sample Date1/11/2021 1/11/2021 1/11/2021Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Sub-Slab Sub-Slab Sub-SlabVOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000 25 17 J 37Benzene 12 160 2.6 0.93 0.661,3-Butadiene 3.1 41<0.32 <0.32 <0.322-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 3.5 J 2.4 J 2.7 JCarbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000<1.6 <1.62.7 JCarbon Tetrachloride 16 200 0.45 J 1.5<0.33Chloroethane 70,000 880,000<0.52 <0.52 <0.52Chloroform 4.1 53 0.35 J<0.24 <0.24Chloromethane 630 7,900 0.63 J<0.320.50 JCyclohexane 42,000 530,000 1.3 0.91 0.59 J1,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE<0.44 <0.44 <0.441,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110<0.27 <0.27 <0.27Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800 2.3 2.3 2.51,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.30 <0.30 <0.30Ethanol NE NE 54 66 210Ethyl Acetate 490 6100<4.3 <4.3 <4.3Ethylbenzene 37 490 3.7 3.0 2.14-Ethyltoluene NE NE 3.1 3.5 2.8Heptane 2,800 35,000 2.6 1.9 1.4Hexane 4,900 61,000 3.4 J<1.3 <1.32-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000<0.46 <0.46 <0.46Isopropanol 1,400 18,000 13 J 29 39Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700<0.29 <0.29 <0.29Methylene Chloride 3,400 53,000 17 1.8 J 3.9 J4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000<0.43 <0.43 <0.43Naphthalene 2.8 36<0.59 <0.59 <0.59Propene NE NE 6.2 J 1.2 J 2.4 JStyrene 7,000 88,000<0.24 <0.24 <0.24Tetrachloroethylene 280 3500 0.62 J 0.52 J 6.8Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.5 <1.5 <1.5Toluene 35,000 440,000 18 12 161,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.360.63 JTrichloroethylene 14 180 0.84 J<0.40 <0.40Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE 1.3 J 1.2 J 1.2 J1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.2 <1.21,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 3.1 3.7 3.11,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 0.81 J 0.94 J 0.87 JVinyl Chloride 5.6 280<0.29 <0.29 <0.29m&p-xylene 700 8,800 12 11 7.8o-Xylene 700 8,800 4.7 4.0 2.8Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold Underlined concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential SGSL.*Per Terracon, a crawl space was discovered beneath the 2020-SV-03 and 2021-SV-12 sample locations so data is not representative of sub-slab conditions. Screening Criteria Residential SGSL(1)Non-Residential SGSL(1)Wikoff Color Propertyhttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 3 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SV-09*** 2021-SV-09Sample Date8/13/2020 1/12/2021Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Soil Gas (5.5-6') Soil Gas (7-8')VOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000<11290 25 16 JBenzene 12 16068 23 12101,3-Butadiene 3.1 41<0.32 <0.32 <0.32 <0.322-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 15 J 7.7 J 3.9 J 3.0 JCarbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000 59 19 41 27Carbon Tetrachloride 16 200<0.33 <0.330.38 J<0.33Chloroethane 70,000 880,000 3.7<0.52 <0.52 <0.52Chloroform 4.1 53 1.7 2.810 10Chloromethane 630 7,900<0.320.69 J 0.61 J 0.38 JCyclohexane 42,000 530,000 17 30 2.2 1.31,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE<0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <0.441,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110 0.77 J 0.34 J<0.27 <0.27Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800<0.311.2 2.2 2.21,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.300.42 J<0.30 <0.30Ethanol NE NE 18 7.8 J 7.4 J 22Ethyl Acetate 490 6100 11<4.3 <4.3 <4.3Ethylbenzene 37 49071 8233 354-Ethyltoluene NE NE 110 150 48 53Heptane 2,800 35,000 170 160 55 21Hexane 4,900 61,000 39 81 28 8.1 J2-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000<0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <0.46Isopropanol 1,400 18,000 5.8 J<4.5 <4.58.2 JMethyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700<0.290.50 J<0.29 <0.29Methylene Chloride 3,400 53,000 8.5 15 17 5.5 J4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000<0.43 <0.43 <0.43 <0.43Naphthalene 2.8 363.51.3<0.593.9Propene NE NE<1.21,100 330 100Styrene 7,000 88,000 14 0.85 0.60 J 0.58 JTetrachloroethylene 280 3500 0.79 J 11 6.1 5.5Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5Toluene 35,000 440,000 200 400 250 2301,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.36 <0.36 <0.36Trichloroethylene 14 180 0.64 J<0.40 <0.40 <0.40Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE<0.85 <0.851.1 J 0.94 J1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.21,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 120 140 43 491,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 30 39 13 14Vinyl Chloride 5.6 28011<0.29 <0.29 <0.29m&p-xylene 700 8,800 240 290 110 120o-Xylene 700 8,800 94 100 35 38Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold concentrations exceed their respective Underlined concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential SGSL.***Per Terracon, helium concentration within shroud was maintained during sample, and sample also analyzed for helium via EPA Method 3C. Helium not detected above method detection limit.Screening Criteria Residential SGSL(1)Non-Residential SGSL(1)Proposed Residential Building Nos. 1 & 22021-SV-10 / 2021-DUP-011/12/2021Soil Gas (7-7.5')https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 4 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2021-SV-05 2021-SV-08 2020-SV-07 2020-SV-08Sample Date1/12/2021 1/12/2021 8/13/2020 8/13/2020Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Soil Gas (7-7.5') Soil Gas (7-7.5') Soil Gas (4.5-5') Soil Gas (4.5-5')VOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000<11250 180 130Benzene 12 160 8.821 48 131,3-Butadiene 3.1 41<0.32 <0.32 <0.3242-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 2.0 J 15 J 41 11 JCarbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000 20 51 33 5.2 JCarbon Tetrachloride 16 200<0.33 <0.332.229Chloroethane 70,000 880,000<0.52 <0.521.2<0.52Chloroform 4.1 53 3.6131.7 1.8Chloromethane 630 7,900 0.39 J 0.44 J 12 0.64 JCyclohexane 42,000 530,000 0.45 J 10 5.4 211,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE<0.44 <0.44 <0.44 <0.441,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110 0.70 J 0.51 J 0.63 J 0.29 JDichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800 3.8 0.57 J 11 141,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30Ethanol NE NE 4.8 J 93 30 26Ethyl Acetate 490 6100<4.3 <4.35.4 J 9.9Ethylbenzene 37 49086 110 49 434-Ethyltoluene NE NE 190 190 80 70Heptane 2,800 35,000 9.7 39 81 28Hexane 4,900 61,000 3.5 J 24 J 22 J 26 J2-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000<0.46 <0.46 <0.46 <0.46Isopropanol 1,400 18,000<4.5260 26 7.6 JMethyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700 0.52 J 0.82<0.290.29 JMethylene Chloride 3,400 53,000 11 15 2.9 J 3.6 J4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000 1.8 5.8<0.43 <0.43Naphthalene 2.8 36 1.3 1.716 5.8Propene NE NE 21 120 200 30Styrene 7,000 88,000 0.90 1.2 20 0.61 JTetrachloroethylene 280 3500 48 15 12 53Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.52.5 J<1.53.9 JToluene 35,000 440,000 360 590 150 1301,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.360.59 J 11Trichloroethylene 14 180<0.40 <0.40 <0.401.9Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE 21<0.853.3 J 151,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.21.3 J 2.2 J1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 210 200 100 841,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 52 54 25 26Vinyl Chloride 5.6 280<0.29 <0.294.4<0.29m&p-xylene 700 8,800 330 390 170 160o-Xylene 700 8,800 120 140 71 70Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold concentrations exceed their respective Underlined concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential SGSL.Proposed Residential Building Nos. 3 & 4 Proposed Parking Deck / Parking Area Screening Criteria Non-Residential SGSL(1)Residential SGSL(1)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 5 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SV-05 2020-SV-06 2021-SV-04Sample Date10/8/2020 10/6/2020 1/11/2021Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Soil Gas (6.5-7') Sub-Slab Soil Gas (6.5-7')VOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000 17 J 32 620Benzene 12 160 0.45 J 0.20 J161,3-Butadiene 3.1 41<0.32 <0.32 <0.322-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 2.8 J 2.8 J 56Carbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000 8.5<1.62.6Carbon Tetrachloride 16 200<0.33 <0.33 <0.33Chloroethane 70,000 880,000<0.52 <0.52 <0.52Chloroform 4.1 53 0.84 J<0.241.1Chloromethane 630 7,900<0.32 <0.3210Cyclohexane 42,000 530,000<0.34 <0.34181,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE 26 14<0.441,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110<0.27 <0.270.65 JDichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800<0.31 <0.31 <0.311,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.30 <0.300.31 JEthanol NE NE 5.8 J 220 52Ethyl Acetate 490 6100<4.3 <4.3 <4.3Ethylbenzene 37 490 2.9 0.42 J494-Ethyltoluene NE NE 1.3<0.30110Heptane 2,800 35,000 2.8<0.3555Hexane 4,900 61,000<1.3 <1.32002-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000<0.46 <0.46 <0.46Isopropanol 1,400 18,000<4.556 15 JMethyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700<0.29 <0.291.4Methylene Chloride 3,400 53,000<1.6 <1.65.9 J4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000<0.43 <0.436.9Naphthalene 2.8 36<0.590.99 J 2.2Propene NE NE<1.2 <1.2380Styrene 7,000 88,000<0.24 <0.241.1Tetrachloroethylene 280 3500 1.6 5.1 5.1Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.5 <1.511Toluene 35,000 440,000 4.3 1.4 1701,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.36 <0.36Trichloroethylene 14 180<0.40 <0.40 <0.40Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE 1.2 J 1.4 J<0.851,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.2 <1.21,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300<0.22 <0.22991,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300 0.71<0.2625Vinyl Chloride 5.6 280<0.29 <0.29 <0.29m&p-xylene 700 8,800 12 1.6 J 150o-Xylene 700 8,800 4.5 0.75 J 86Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold concentrations exceed their respective Residential SGSL.Underlined concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential SGSL.Screening Criteria Residential SGSL(1)Non-Residential SGSL(1)Proposed Residential Building Nos. 5, 6, & 7 https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 6 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2020-SV-10 2021-SV-01 2021-SV-02Sample Date10/6/2020 1/12/2021 1/11/2021Sample Type (depth in ft bgs)Sub-Slab Soil Gas (5-5.5') Soil Gas (6.5-7')VOCs (TO-15)Acetone 220,000 2,700,000 23 78<11Benzene 12 160<0.1911 4.41,3-Butadiene 3.1 41<0.32 <0.32 <0.322-Butanone (MEK) 35,000 440,000 3.3 J 5.6 J<2.0Carbon Disulfide 4,900 61,000<1.642 13Carbon Tetrachloride 16 200<0.330.60 J<0.33Chloroethane 70,000 880,000<0.52 <0.52 <0.52Chloroform 4.1 53 2.2180.84 JChloromethane 630 7,900<0.323.3<0.32Cyclohexane 42,000 530,000<0.348.3 1.01,3-Dichlorobenzene NE NE 4.1<0.44 <0.441,4-Dichlorobenzene 8.5 110<0.270.53 J<0.27Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12) 700 8,800 110 1.0 2.51,2-Dichloroethane 3.6 47<0.304.0<0.30Ethanol NE NE 270 10 J 26Ethyl Acetate 490 6100<4.3 <4.3 <4.3Ethylbenzene 37 490 0.23 J38284-Ethyltoluene NE NE<0.3072 48Heptane 2,800 35,000<0.3578 26Hexane 4,900 61,000<1.323 J 5.9 J2-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone) 21,000 260,000<0.46 <0.46 <0.46Isopropanol 1,400 18,000 41<4.5 <4.5Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 360 4,700<0.290.29 J<0.29Methylene Chloride 3,400 53,000<1.613 9.44-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 21,000 260,000<0.43 <0.43 <0.43Naphthalene 2.8 36<0.592.9<0.59Propene NE NE<1.2180 12 JStyrene 7,000 88,000<0.240.6 J<0.24Tetrachloroethylene 280 3500 4.5 5.7 4.1Tetrahydrofuran 14,000 180,000<1.51.7 J<1.5Toluene 35,000 440,000 0.63 J 240 1201,1,1-Trichloroethane 35,000 440,000<0.36 <0.36 <0.36Trichloroethylene 14 180<0.40 <0.40 <0.40Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) NE NE 1.2 J 1.1 J 381,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113) 35,000 440,000<1.2 <1.2 <1.21,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300<0.2285 551,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 420 5,300<0.2621 14Vinyl Chloride 5.6 280<0.29 <0.29 <0.29m&p-xylene 700 8,800 0.89 J 140 110o-Xylene 700 8,800 0.36 J 53 41Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated June 2021.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method and units are shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2020-2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NA = not applicable; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limits; ft bgs = feet below ground surface J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Bold concentrations exceed their respective Residential SGSL.Underlined concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential SGSL.Residential SGSL(1)Non-Residential SGSL(1)Proposed Residential Building Nos. 8 & 9Screening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 3 - Soil Vapor Data Table.xlsx3/4/2022Table 3 (Page 7 of 7)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4Summary of Indoor Air Analytical DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001LocationSample ID2021-IA-01 2021-IA-02Sample Date11/11/2021 11/11/2021Sample TypeIndoor Air Indoor AirVOCs (TO-15)Acetone6,500 27,000 98 190Benzene0.36 1.61.81.92-Butanone (MEK)1,000 4,400 2.9 J 4.3Carbon Tetrachloride0.47 2.0 0.43 0.44Chloroform0.12 0.530.25 0.32Chloromethane19 79 0.97 1.0Cyclohexane1,300 5,300 1.0 1.01,4-Dichlorobenzene0.26 1.10.32 0.57Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)21 88 2.4 2.41,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (Freon 114)NE NE 0.13 J 0.13 JEthanolNE NE 20 25Ethyl Acetate15 61 1.3 2.1Ethylbenzene1.1 4.91.5 1.34-EthyltolueneNE NE 0.40 0.57Heptane83 350 3.5 36Hexane150 610 12 11Isopropanol42 180 2.5 J 5.9Methylene Chloride100 530 1.5 0.71 JNaphthalene0.083 0.360.610.55Styrene210 880 0.54 0.77Tetrachloroethylene8.3 35 1.2 1.6Tetrahydrofuran420 1,800 0.52 J<0.25Toluene1,000 4,400 7.9 7.01,1,1-Trichloroethane1,000 4,400 0.18 J<0.088Trichloroethylene0.42 1.8<0.0690.079 JTrichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)NE NE 1.3 1.31,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (Freon 113)1,000 4,400 0.61 J 0.49 J1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene13 53 1.9 2.51,3,5-Trimethylbenzene13 53 0.46 0.77m&p-xylene21 88 3.5 4.1o-Xylene21 882.0 1.8Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Indoor Air Screening Levels (IASLs) (June 2021).Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) unless otherwise noted.Only compounds detected in one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical method is shown in parentheses.Historical analytical data was generated by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (2021).VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NE= not established; < = less than laboratory method detection limitsBOLD concentrations exceed their respective Residential IASL.UNDERLINED concentrations exceed their respective Non-Residential IASL.J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit but below the laboratory reporting limit, resulting in an estimated concentration.Northern End of Savona Mill BuildingScreening Criteria Residential IASL(1)Non-Residential IASL(1)https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 4 - IA Data Table.xlsx2/26/2022Table 4 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 5Summary of Methane DataCaraustar & Savona MillsCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. POR-001Sample ID Date TimeStatic Pressure (in wc)TimeMethane Concentration (%)Carbon DioxideConcentration (%)OxygenConcentration (%)Barometric Pressure (in Hg)7/21/2021 1023 0.02 1026 0.0 0.0 14.7 29.287/22/2021 1041 0.01 1045 0.0 0.0 13.2 29.357/21/2021 1033 0.03 1035 0.0 5.3 8.5 29.287/22/2021 1100 0.03 1104 0.0 5.3 8.6 29.357/21/2021 1041 0.04 1044 0.0 3.5 11.9 29.287/22/2021 1121 -0.01 1125 0.0 3.5 11.8 29.357/21/2021 0938 -0.01 0942 0.0 0.4 5.3 29.287/22/2021 1001 -0.01 1005 0.0 1.1 6.7 29.357/21/2021 1050 -0.01 1055 0.0 9.8 9.5 29.287/22/2021 1145 0.02 1149 0.0 9.7 9.5 29.357/21/2021 1100 -0.03 1104 0.0 0.1 11.1 29.287/22/2021 1159 -0.01 1203 0.0 3.2 9.9 29.357/21/2021 1007 0.02 1011 0.0 0.0 14.9 29.287/22/2021 1021 0.01 1025 0.0 2.1 14.7 29.357/21/2021 0926 0.02 0931 0.0 8.2 12.0 29.287/22/2021 0955 0.03 0959 0.0 7.8 12.8 29.357/21/2021 0955 0.02 1000 0.0 3.9 15.1 29.287/22/2021 1009 0.02 1013 0.0 3.1 14.9 29.35Notes:2021-SV-01A2021-SV-02A2021-SV-032021-SV-042021-SV-05% = percent; in Hg = inches of mercury; in wc = inch of water2021-SV-062021-SV-08A2021-SV-09A2021-SV-10AData collected by SCS Engineers P.C. (SCS) in 2021. Per SCS, 2021-SV-07A could not be installed due to collapsing soils.https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Tables/Table 5 - Soil Gas Methane Table_HHM.xlsx2/26/2022Table 5 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 6Proposed Sample Summary TableCaraustar and Savona Mills South Turner Avenue Charlotte, North Carolina H&H Project No. POR-001HH-SB-01 and HH-SB-02 Soil Evaluate Soil Conditions Adjacent to Daycare Facility 2 0-2 2VOCs (8260), SVOCs (8270), RCRA metals (6020/7471), and hexavalent chromium (7199) 0-1 1TCLP RCRA metals (6010/7471) and hexavalent chromium (7199)TBD 1RCRA metals (6020/7471), TCLP RCRA metals (6010/7471), and hexavalent chromium (7199)HH-SB-04 through HH-SB-10 Soil Evaluate Lateral Extent of Soil Impacts at Wikoff Color Property 5 TBD 7RCRA metals (6020/7471), TCLP RCRA metals (6010/7471), and hexavalent chromium (7199)HH-SSV-01 through HH-SSV-07 Sub-Slab Soil Gas Evaluate Potential VI Risks 7VOCs (TO-15), differential pressure, and Methane, CO2, and O2 (Field Meter)HH-SG-01 and HH-SG-02 Exterior Soil Gas Evaluate Potential VI Risks 5.5 5-5.5 2 VOCs (TO-15)HH-SB-DUP Soil 2 0-2 1VOCs (8260), SVOCs (8270), RCRA metals (6020/7471), and hexavalent chromium (7199)SSV-DUP Sub-Slab Soil Vapor 1 VOCs (TO-15) Notes:EPA method number follows the laboratory parameter in parenthesis. VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds; RCRA = Resource Conservation Recovery Actft = Feet; QA/QC = Quality Assurance/ Quality Control; VI = Vapor Intrusion; TBD = To Be DeterminedSample IDsApproximate Boring Depth (ft)Number of SamplesBelow slabHH-SB-03Laboratory AnalysisSample ObjectiveSample TypeApproximate Sample Depth (ft)QA/QCBelow slabSoil Evaluate Vertical Extent of Soil Impacts at Former Soil Boring 2021-SB-015https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Portman Holdings/Caraustar & Savona Mill/Additional Brownfields Assessment/Work Plan/Sample Summary Table.xlsxTable 6 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
01675-001/00368845
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 August, 2021.
SITE LOCATION MAP
CARUASTAR AND SAVONA MILLSSOUTH TURNER AVENUECHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE: 2-17-22
JOB NO: POR-001
REVISION NO: 0
FIGURE NO: 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
SITE
Path: \\harthick.sharepoint.com@SSL\DavWWWRoot\sites\MasterFiles-1\Shared Documents\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\Figure-1.mxdN
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
CHARLOTTE EAST, NORTH CAROLINA 2019
QUADRANGLE7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER
STORAGE
SAVONA MILLS
BUILDING
(FORMER
SPINNING MILL)
FORMER
INK
MANUFACTURING
FACILITY
FORMER
BOILER ROOM S. TURNER AVENUESTATE STREET
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
RO
Z
Z
E
L
L
E
S

F
E
R
R
Y

R
O
A
D
S. GARDNER AVENUESTEWART CREEKBLUE
BLAZE
BREWING
WIKOFF
COLORCC
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
FORMER S. TURNER AVENUETURNER AVENUCH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
HA
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
RO
Z
Z
OZ
Z
S. GARDNER AVENUEGARDNER AVENUBOIIIIIIIIIILERLLLLLLLLLL ROOM
FORMER UST
AREA
(REMOVED)FORMER
PULP MILL
FORMER
CLARIFIERS FORMER FINISHING,
ROTARY DRY AREA,
AND MACHINE SHOP
FORMER
WAREHOUSE
FORMER
AERATION
BASIN
FORMER
AST AREA
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPER STORAGE
BUILDING)
RES.08
RES.09
RES.07
RES.05
RES.06
RES.04
RES.03
RES.02
RES.01
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 2
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SITE MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
PROPOSED RESIDENIAL BUILDING
PROPOSED PARKING DECK
NOTES:
1. AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\SITE MAP.dwg, FIG 2, 2/24/2022 5:00:11 PM, sperry
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER
STORAGE
FORMER UST
AREA
(REMOVED)FORMER
PULP MILL
FORMER
CLARIFIERS FORMER FINISHING,
ROTARY DRY AREA,
AND MACHINE SHOP
SAVONA MILLS
BUILDING
(FORMER
SPINNING MILL)
FORMER
INK
MANUFACTURING
FACILITY
FORMER
WAREHOUSE
FORMER
AERATION
BASIN
FORMER
BOILER ROOM
FORMER
AST AREA S. TURNER AVENUESTATE STREET
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
R
O
Z
Z
E
L
L
E
S

F
E
R
R
Y

R
O
A
D
S. GARDNER AVENUESTEWART CREEKBLUE
BLAZE
BREWING
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPER STORAGE
BUILDING)
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 3
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
CO-LOCATED SOIL SAMPLE AND
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION
SUB-SLAB GAS AND SOIL GAS SAMPLE
LOCATION
INDOOR AIR SAMPLE LOCATION
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2.SAMPLE LOCATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON HISTORICAL
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS.
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
2021-GW-01/SB-01
2016-GW-01
2020-GW-02
2016-GW-04/SB-04
2020-GW-04
2016-GW-03/SB-03
2016-GW-02/SB-02
2016-GW-05
2020-TW-03/SB-03
2016-SB-13
2016-SB-12
2016-SB-11
2020-SB-09
2020-SB-05
2020-SB-06
2020-SB-01
2016-SB-27
2016-SB-26
2016-SB-07
2016-SB-05
2016-SB-25
2016-SB-09
2016-SB-06
2016-SB-08
2016-SB-10
2016-SB-22
2016-SB-21
2016-SB-20
2016-SB-24
2020-SB-04
2016-SB-23
2016-SB-17
2016-SB-18
2020-SB-08
2016-SB-16
2016-SB-15
2016-SB-01
2021-SB-02
2018-SB-01
2018-SB-03 2018-SB-02
2020-SB-022018-SB-04
2018-SB-05
2016-SB-19
2020-SB-07
2021-SV-01
2020-SV-10
2021-SV-02
2021-SV-13
2021-SV-14
2020-SV-052021-SV-04
2020-SV-06
2020-SV-09
2021-SV-10
2021-SV-09
2021-SV-11/
2021-SV-11B
2020-SV-04
2021-SV-08
2021-SV-05
2020-SV-08
2020-SV-03 2021-SV-12
2020-SV-022020-SV-07
2020-SV-01
2021-IA-02
2021-IA-01
2016-SB-14
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\SITE MAP.dwg, FIG 3, 2/24/2022 4:39:26 PM, sperry
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER
STORAGE
FORMER UST
AREA
(REMOVED)FORMER
PULP MILL
FORMER
CLARIFIERS FORMER FINISHING,
ROTARY DRY AREA,
AND MACHINE SHOP
SAVONA MILLS
BUILDING
(FORMER
SPINNING MILL)
FORMER
INK
MANUFACTURING
FACILITY
FORMER
WAREHOUSE
FORMER
AERATION
BASIN
FORMER
BOILER ROOM
FORMER
AST AREA S. TURNER AVENUESTATE STREET
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
RO
Z
Z
E
L
L
E
S

F
E
R
R
Y

R
O
A
D
S. GARDNER AVENUESTEWART CREEKBLUE
BLAZE
BREWING
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPER STORAGE
BUILDING)
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 4
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
2016-SB-13
2016-SB-12
2016-SB-28
2016-SB-11
2020-SB-09
2020-SB-05
2020-SB-06
2020-SB-01
2016-SB-27
2016-SB-26
2016-SB-07
2016-SB-05
2016-SB-25
2016-SB-09
2016-SB-06
2016-SB-08
2016-SB-10
2016-SB-22
2016-SB-21
2016-SB-20
2016-SB-24
2020-SB-04
2016-SB-23
2016-SB-17
2016-SB-18
2020-SB-08
2016-SB-16
2016-SB-15
2016-SB-01
2021-SB-022018-SB-01
2018-SB-02
2020-SB-022018-SB-04
2018-SB-05
2016-SB-19
2020-SB-07
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
CO-LOCATED SOIL SAMPLE AND
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION
NOTES:
1. AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2. SAMPLE LOCATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON HISTORICAL
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS.
2021-GW-01/SB-01
2016-GW-04/SB-04
2016-GW-03/SB-03
2016-GW-02/SB-02
2020-TW-03/SB-03
2018-SB-032016-SB-14
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\SITE MAP.dwg, FIG 5, 2/24/2022 4:39:47 PM, sperry
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER
STORAGE
FORMER UST
AREA
(REMOVED)FORMER
PULP MILL
FORMER
CLARIFIERS FORMER FINISHING,
ROTARY DRY AREA,
AND MACHINE SHOP
SAVONA MILLS
BUILDING
(FORMER
SPINNING MILL)
FORMER
INK
MANUFACTURING
FACILITY
FORMER
WAREHOUSE
FORMER
AERATION
BASIN
FORMER
BOILER ROOM
FORMER
AST AREA S. TURNER AVENUESTATE STREET
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
RO
Z
Z
E
L
L
E
S

F
E
R
R
Y

R
O
A
D
S. GARDNER AVENUESTEWART CREEKBLUE
BLAZE
BREWING
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPER STORAGE
BUILDING)
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 5
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
2016-GW-01
2020-GW-02
2020-GW-04
2016-GW-05
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
CO-LOCATED SOIL SAMPLE AND
GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
NOTES:
1. AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2. SAMPLE LOCATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON HISTORICAL
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS.
2021-GW-01/SB-01
2016-GW-04/SB-04
2016-GW-03/SB-03
2016-GW-02/SB-02
2020-TW-03/SB-03
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\SITE MAP.dwg, FIG 4, 2/24/2022 4:39:37 PM, sperry
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER
STORAGE
FORMER UST
AREA
(REMOVED)FORMER
PULP MILL
FORMER
CLARIFIERS FORMER FINISHING,
ROTARY DRY AREA,
AND MACHINE SHOP
FORMER
INK
MANUFACTURING
FACILITY
FORMER
WAREHOUSE
FORMER
AERATION
BASIN
FORMER
BOILER ROOM
FORMER
AST AREA S. TURNER AVENUESTATE STREET
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
R
O
Z
Z
E
L
L
E
S

F
E
R
R
Y

R
O
A
D
S. GARDNER AVENUESTEWART CREEKBLUE
BLAZE
BREWING
SAVONA MILLS
BUILDING
(FORMER
SPINNING MILL)
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 6
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SUB-SLAB GAS AND SOIL GAS
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
PROPOSED BUILDING OUTLINE
PROPOSED PARKING DECK
SUB-SLAB GAS AND SOIL GAS SAMPLE
LOCATION
APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF BASEMENT
SAMPLE NOT USED FOR EVALUATION
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
2021-SV-01/01A
2020-SV-10
2021-SV-02/02A
2021-SV-13
2021-SV-14
2020-SV-052021-SV-04
2020-SV-06
2020-SV-09
2021-SV-10/10A
2021-SV-09/09A
2021-SV-11/
2021-SV-11B 2020-SV-04
2021-SV-08/08A
2021-SV-05
2020-SV-08
2020-SV-03 2021-SV-12
2020-SV-022020-SV-07
2020-SV-01
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2.SAMPLE LOCATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON HISTORICAL
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS.
3.METHANE GAS READINGS COLLECTED by SCS
ENGINEERS, P.C. IN JULY 2021 FROM SAMPLE
LOCATIONS 2021-SV-01A, 2021-SV-02A, 2021-SV-03, 2021-
SV-04, 2021-SV-05, 2021-SV-06, 2021-SV-08A, 2021-SV-09A,
AND 2021-SV-10A.
BASEMENT LEVEL
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\SITE MAP.dwg, FIG 6 (2), 2/28/2022 2:40:57 PM, shaynesRES.03
RES.02
RES.04
RES.06
RES.05
RES.07
RES.08
RES.09
RES.01
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER
STORAGE
FORMER UST
AREA
(REMOVED)FORMER
PULP MILL
FORMER
CLARIFIERS FORMER FINISHING,
ROTARY DRY AREA,
AND MACHINE SHOP
SAVONA MILLS
BUILDING
(FORMER
SPINNING MILL)
FORMER
INK
MANUFACTURING
FACILITY
FORMER
WAREHOUSE
FORMER
AERATION
BASIN
FORMER
BOILER ROOM
FORMER
AST AREA S. TURNER AVENUESTATE STREET
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
R
O
Z
Z
E
L
L
E
S

F
E
R
R
Y

R
O
A
D
S. GARDNER AVENUESTEWART CREEKBLUE
BLAZE
BREWING
FORMER
CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPER STORAGE
BUILDING)
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 7
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
INDOOR AIR SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
INDOOR AIR SAMPLE LOCATION
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
2021-IA-02
2021-IA-01
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2.SAMPLE LOCATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON HISTORICAL
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS.S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\SITE MAP.dwg, FIG 7, 2/24/2022 4:39:57 PM, sperry
FORMER CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE
(PAPERBOARD
PROCESSING)
WIKOFF
COLOR
FORMER OLD
DOMINION BOX CO.
SCRAP PAPER STORAGE
FORMER UST AREA
(REMOVED)
CH
A
M
B
E
R
L
A
I
N

A
V
E
N
U
E
R
S. GARDNER AVENUEFORMER CARAUSTAR
WAREHOUSE (PAPER STORAGE
BUILDING)
2021-GW-01/SB-01
2016-GW-01
2020-GW-02
2016-SB-11
2016-SB-22
2016-SB-21
2016-SB-20 2016-SB-23
2016-SB-17
2016-SB-18
2020-SB-08
2016-SB-16
2016-SB-15
2016-SB-01
2021-SB-02
2018-SB-01
2018-SB-03
2018-SB-02
2020-SB-022018-SB-04
2018-SB-05
2016-SB-19
2020-SB-07
2020-SV-10
2021-SV-02
2021-SV-13
2021-SV-14
2020-SV-05
2021-SV-04
2020-SV-06
2020-SV-09
2021-SV-092021-SV-05
2016-SB-14
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. POR-001
DATE: 2-17-22
FIGURE NO. 8
CARAUSTAR AND SAVONA MILLS
SOUTH TURNER AVENUE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL LINE
PREVIOUS GROUNDWATER SAMPLE
LOCATION
PREVIOUS CO-LOCATED SOIL SAMPLE
AND GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
PREVIOUS SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION
PREVIOUS SUB-SLAB GAS AND SOIL GAS
SAMPLE LOCATION
PREVIOUS INDOOR AIR SAMPLE
LOCATION
PROPOSED SOIL BORING LOCATION
PROPOSED SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION
PROPOSED DELINEATION SOIL BORING
LOCATION (HH-SB-04 THROUGH HH-SB-10)
PROPOSED SUB-SLAB SOIL GAS SAMPLE
LOCATION
NOTES:
1. AERIAL IMAGERY AND BASE DATA OBTAINED FROM
MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS, 2021.
2. SAMPLE LOCATIONS ESTIMATED BASED ON HISTORICAL
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS.
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
HH-SG-01
HH-SG-02
HH-SB-01
HH-SB-02
HH-SSV-01
HH-SSV-02
HH-SSV-03
HH-SSV-04
HH-SSV-05
HH-SSV-06
HH-SSV-07
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Portman Holdings\Caraustar & Savona Mill\Figures\PROPOSED SAMPLE MAP.dwg, FIG 8, 2/24/2022 4:32:30 PM, sperryHH-SB-03
01675-001/00368845
Appendix A

DEQ Risk Calculators (June 2021)
Version Date:
Basis:
Site Name:
Site Address:
DEQ Section:
Site ID:
Exposure Unit ID:
Submittal Date:
Reviewed By:
Residential Building Nos. 1-7 - Hypothetical Worst Case
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Risk Calculator
Caraustar and Savona Mills
Multiple Addresses
Division of Waste Management - Brownfields Program
23061-19-060
June 2021
May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Prepared By:Haley Martin, PG
Ralph McGee, PG
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Complete Exposure Pathways
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 1-7 - Hypothetical Worst Case
Note: Risk output will only be calculated for complete exposure pathways.
Receptor Pathway
Check box if
pathway
complete
Soil
Groundwater Use
Soil
Groundwater Use
Construction Worker Soil
Soil
Surface Water
Groundwater to Indoor Air
Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Indoor Air
Groundwater to Indoor Air
Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Indoor Air
Source Soil
Source Groundwater
Source Soil
Source Groundwater
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION PATHWAYS
Groundwater
Surface Water
Input Form 1A
VAPOR INTRUSION PATHWAYS
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER PATHWAYS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Exposure Point ConcentrationsVersion Date: June 2021Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL TableSite ID: 23061-19-060Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 1-7 - Hypothetical Worst CaseDescription of Exposure Point Concentration Selection:Exposure Point Concentration (ug/m3)Notes: CAS Number ChemicalMinimum Concentration (Qualifier)Maximum Concentration (Qualifier)UnitsLocation of Maximum ConcentrationDetection FrequencyRange of Detection LimitsConcentration Used for ScreeningBackground ValueScreening Toxicity Value (Screening Level) (n/c)Potential ARAR/TBC ValuePotential ARAR/TBC SourceCOPC Flag (Y/N)Rationale for Selection or Deletion620 67-64-1 Acetoneug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202168 71-43-2 Benzeneug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/20204 106-99-0 Butadiene, 1,3-ug/m32020-SV-08 8/13/202059 75-15-0 Carbon Disulfideug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/202029 56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachlorideug/m32020-SV-01 8/19/202013 67-66-3 Chloroformug/m32021-SV-01 1/12/202112 74-87-3 Chloromethaneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/202030 110-83-8 Cyclohexeneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20210.77 106-46-7 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-ug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/202014 75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m32020-SV-10 10/6/20200.42 107-06-2 Dichloroethane, 1,2-ug/m32021-SV-01 1/12/202111 141-78-6 Ethyl Acetateug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/20204 75-00-3 Ethyl Chloride (Chloroethane)ug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/2020110 100-41-4 Ethylbenzeneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/202111 109-99-9 ~Tetrahydrofuranug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/2021170 142-82-5 Heptane, N-ug/m32020-SV-09 44056200 110-54-3 Hexane, N-ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/2021260 67-63-0 Isopropanolug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/202156 78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/20216.9 108-10-1 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone (4-methyl-2-pentanone)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/20211.4 1634-04-4 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202117 75-09-2 Methylene Chlorideug/m32021-SV-10 1/12/202116 91-20-3 ~Naphthaleneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/20201100 115-07-1 Propyleneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/202120 100-42-5 Styreneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/202053 127-18-4 Tetrachloroethyleneug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/2021590 108-88-3 Tolueneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20212.2 76-13-1 Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2-ug/m32020-SV-08 8/13/202011 71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-ug/m32020-SV-08 8/13/20201.9 79-01-6 Trichloroethyleneug/m32020-SV-08 8/13/202021 75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m32021-SV-02 1/11/2021210 95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202154 108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202111 75-01-4 Vinyl Chlorideug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/2020390m&p-xylene concentration106-42-3 Xylene, P-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/2021140 95-47-6 Xylene, o-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/2021Input Form 2DSoil Gas Exposure Point Concentration TableNote: Chemicals highlighted in orange are non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.If the chemical list is changed from a prior calculator run, remember to select "See All Chemicals" on the data output sheet or newly added chemicals will not be included in risk calculationsNorth Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Risk for Individual Pathways Output Form 1A
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 1-7 - Hypothetical Worst Case
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Construction Worker Soil NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Surface Water* NC NC NC
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air 2.3E-05 7.3E-01 NO
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Pathway Source
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
3. NM = Not Modeled
4. NC = Pathway not calculated
2. * = If concentrations in groundwater exceed the NC 2L Standards or IMAC, or concentrations in surface water exceed the
NC 2B Standards, appropriate remediation and/or institutional control measures will be necessary to be eligible for a risk-based
closure.
Surface Water Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
VAPOR INTRUSION CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION CALCULATORS
Target Receptor Concentrations Exceeded?
Groundwater Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
1. If lead concentrations were entered in the exposure point concentration tables, see the individual calculator sheets for lead
concentrations in comparison to screening levels. Note that lead is not included in cumulative risk calculations.
Notes:
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
DEQ Risk Calculator - Vapor Intrusion - Resident Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 1-7 - Hypothetical Worst Case
CAS # Chemical Name:
Soil Gas
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Calculated
Indoor Air
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Target Indoor
Air Conc. for
Carcinogens @
TCR = 1E-06
Target Indoor Air
Conc. for Non-
Carcinogens @
THQ = 0.2
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Non-
Carcinogenic
Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 620 18.6 - 6.5E+03 5.8E-04
71-43-2 Benzene 68 2.04 3.6E-01 6.3E+00 5.7E-06 6.5E-02
106-99-0 Butadiene, 1,3- 4 0.12 9.4E-02 4.2E-01 1.3E-06 5.8E-02
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide 59 1.77 - 1.5E+02 2.4E-03
56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride 29 0.87 4.7E-01 2.1E+01 1.9E-06 8.3E-03
67-66-3 Chloroform 13 0.39 1.2E-01 2.0E+01 3.2E-06 3.8E-03
74-87-3 Chloromethane 12 0.36 - 1.9E+01 3.8E-03
110-83-8 Cyclohexene 30 0.9 - 2.1E+02 8.6E-04
106-46-7 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- 0.77 0.0231 2.6E-01 1.7E+02 9.1E-08 2.8E-05
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 14 0.42 - 2.1E+01 4.0E-03
107-06-2 Dichloroethane, 1,2- 0.42 0.0126 1.1E-01 1.5E+00 1.2E-07 1.7E-03
141-78-6 Ethyl Acetate 11 0.33 - 1.5E+01 4.5E-03
75-00-3 Ethyl Chloride (Chloroethane) 4 0.12 - 2.1E+03 1.2E-05
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 110 3.3 1.1E+00 2.1E+02 2.9E-06 3.2E-03
109-99-9 ~Tetrahydrofuran 11 0.33 - 4.2E+02 1.6E-04
142-82-5 Heptane, N- 170 5.1 - 8.3E+01 1.2E-02
110-54-3 Hexane, N- 200 6 - 1.5E+02 8.2E-03
67-63-0 Isopropanol 260 7.8 - 4.2E+01 3.7E-02
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 56 1.68 - 1.0E+03 3.2E-04
108-10-1 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone (4-methyl-2-pentanone) 6.9 0.207 - 6.3E+02 6.6E-05
1634-04-4 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 1.4 0.042 1.1E+01 6.3E+02 3.9E-09 1.3E-05
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 17 0.51 1.0E+02 1.3E+02 5.0E-09 8.2E-04
91-20-3 ~Naphthalene 16 0.48 8.3E-02 6.3E-01 5.8E-06 1.5E-01
115-07-1 Propylene 1100 33 - 6.3E+02 1.1E-02
100-42-5 Styrene 20 0.6 - 2.1E+02 5.8E-04
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene 53 1.59 1.1E+01 8.3E+00 1.5E-07 3.8E-02
108-88-3 Toluene 590 17.7 - 1.0E+03 3.4E-03
76-13-1 Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2- 2.2 0.066 - 1.0E+03 1.3E-05
71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- 11 0.33 - 1.0E+03 6.3E-05
79-01-6 Trichloroethylene 1.9 0.057 4.8E-01 4.2E-01 1.2E-07 2.7E-02
75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 21 0.63 - -
95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4- 210 6.3 - 1.3E+01 1.0E-01
108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5- 54 1.62 - 1.3E+01 2.6E-02
75-01-4 Vinyl Chloride 11 0.33 1.7E-01 2.1E+01 2.0E-06 3.2E-03
106-42-3 Xylene, P- 390 11.7 - 2.1E+01 1.1E-01
95-47-6 Xylene, o- 140 4.2 - 2.1E+01 4.0E-02
Cumulative: 2.3E-05 7.3E-01
All concentrations are in ug/m3
Output Form 3B
Carcinogenic risk and hazard quotient cells highlighted in orange are associated with non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion
risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Version Date:
Basis:
Site Name:
Site Address:
DEQ Section:
Site ID:
Exposure Unit ID:
Submittal Date:
Reviewed By:
Residential Building Nos. 8 & 9 - Hypothetical Worst Case
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Risk Calculator
Caraustar and Savona Mills
Multiple Addresses
Division of Waste Management - Brownfields Program
23061-19-060
June 2021
May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Prepared By:Haley Martin, PG
Ralph McGee, PG
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Complete Exposure Pathways
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 8 & 9 - Hypothetical Worst Case
Note: Risk output will only be calculated for complete exposure pathways.
Receptor Pathway
Check box if
pathway
complete
Soil
Groundwater Use
Soil
Groundwater Use
Construction Worker Soil
Soil
Surface Water
Groundwater to Indoor Air
Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Indoor Air
Groundwater to Indoor Air
Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Indoor Air
Source Soil
Source Groundwater
Source Soil
Source Groundwater
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION PATHWAYS
Groundwater
Surface Water
Input Form 1A
VAPOR INTRUSION PATHWAYS
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER PATHWAYS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Exposure Point ConcentrationsVersion Date: June 2021Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL TableSite ID: 23061-19-060Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 8 & 9 - Hypothetical Worst CaseDescription of Exposure Point Concentration Selection:Exposure Point Concentration (ug/m3)Notes: CAS Number ChemicalMinimum Concentration (Qualifier)Maximum Concentration (Qualifier)UnitsLocation of Maximum ConcentrationDetection FrequencyRange of Detection LimitsConcentration Used for ScreeningBackground ValueScreening Toxicity Value (Screening Level) (n/c)Potential ARAR/TBC ValuePotential ARAR/TBC SourceCOPC Flag (Y/N)Rationale for Selection or Deletion78 67-64-1 Acetoneug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202111 71-43-2 Benzeneug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/202042 75-15-0 Carbon Disulfideug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/20200.6 56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachlorideug/m32020-SV-01 8/19/202018 67-66-3 Chloroformug/m32021-SV-01 1/12/20213.3 74-87-3 Chloromethaneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/20208.3 110-83-8 Cyclohexeneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20210.53 106-46-7 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-ug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/2020110 75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m32020-SV-10 10/6/20204 107-06-2 Dichloroethane, 1,2-ug/m32021-SV-01 1/12/202138 100-41-4 Ethylbenzeneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20211.7 109-99-9 ~Tetrahydrofuranug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202178 142-82-5 Heptane, N-ug/m32020-SV-09 4405623 110-54-3 Hexane, N-ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202141 67-63-0 Isopropanolug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20215.6 78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/20210.29 1634-04-4 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202113 75-09-2 Methylene Chlorideug/m32021-SV-10 1/12/20212.9 91-20-3 ~Naphthaleneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/2020180 115-07-1 Propyleneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20210.6 100-42-5 Styreneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/20205.7 127-18-4 Tetrachloroethyleneug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/2021240 108-88-3 Tolueneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/202138 75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m32021-SV-02 1/11/202185 95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202121 108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/2021140m&p-xylene concentration106-42-3 Xylene, P-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/202153 95-47-6 Xylene, o-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/2021Input Form 2DSoil Gas Exposure Point Concentration TableNote: Chemicals highlighted in orange are non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.If the chemical list is changed from a prior calculator run, remember to select "See All Chemicals" on the data output sheet or newly added chemicals will not be included in risk calculationsNorth Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Risk for Individual Pathways Output Form 1A
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 8 & 9 - Hypothetical Worst Case
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Construction Worker Soil NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Surface Water* NC NC NC
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air 8.6E-06 2.2E-01 NO
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Pathway Source
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
3. NM = Not Modeled
4. NC = Pathway not calculated
2. * = If concentrations in groundwater exceed the NC 2L Standards or IMAC, or concentrations in surface water exceed the
NC 2B Standards, appropriate remediation and/or institutional control measures will be necessary to be eligible for a risk-based
closure.
Surface Water Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
VAPOR INTRUSION CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION CALCULATORS
Target Receptor Concentrations Exceeded?
Groundwater Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
1. If lead concentrations were entered in the exposure point concentration tables, see the individual calculator sheets for lead
concentrations in comparison to screening levels. Note that lead is not included in cumulative risk calculations.
Notes:
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
DEQ Risk Calculator - Vapor Intrusion - Resident Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Residential Building Nos. 8 & 9 - Hypothetical Worst Case
CAS # Chemical Name:
Soil Gas
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Calculated
Indoor Air
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Target Indoor
Air Conc. for
Carcinogens @
TCR = 1E-06
Target Indoor Air
Conc. for Non-
Carcinogens @
THQ = 0.2
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Non-
Carcinogenic
Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 78 2.34 - 6.5E+03 7.2E-05
71-43-2 Benzene 11 0.33 3.6E-01 6.3E+00 9.2E-07 1.1E-02
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide 42 1.26 - 1.5E+02 1.7E-03
56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride 0.6 0.018 4.7E-01 2.1E+01 3.8E-08 1.7E-04
67-66-3 Chloroform 18 0.54 1.2E-01 2.0E+01 4.4E-06 5.3E-03
74-87-3 Chloromethane 3.3 0.099 - 1.9E+01 1.1E-03
110-83-8 Cyclohexene 8.3 0.249 - 2.1E+02 2.4E-04
106-46-7 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- 0.53 0.0159 2.6E-01 1.7E+02 6.2E-08 1.9E-05
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 110 3.3 - 2.1E+01 3.2E-02
107-06-2 Dichloroethane, 1,2- 4 0.12 1.1E-01 1.5E+00 1.1E-06 1.6E-02
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 38 1.14 1.1E+00 2.1E+02 1.0E-06 1.1E-03
109-99-9 ~Tetrahydrofuran 1.7 0.051 - 4.2E+02 2.4E-05
142-82-5 Heptane, N- 78 2.34 - 8.3E+01 5.6E-03
110-54-3 Hexane, N- 23 0.69 - 1.5E+02 9.5E-04
67-63-0 Isopropanol 41 1.23 - 4.2E+01 5.9E-03
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 5.6 0.168 - 1.0E+03 3.2E-05
1634-04-4 Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 0.29 0.0087 1.1E+01 6.3E+02 8.1E-10 2.8E-06
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 13 0.39 1.0E+02 1.3E+02 3.8E-09 6.2E-04
91-20-3 ~Naphthalene 2.9 0.087 8.3E-02 6.3E-01 1.1E-06 2.8E-02
115-07-1 Propylene 180 5.4 - 6.3E+02 1.7E-03
100-42-5 Styrene 0.6 0.018 - 2.1E+02 1.7E-05
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene 5.7 0.171 1.1E+01 8.3E+00 1.6E-08 4.1E-03
108-88-3 Toluene 240 7.2 - 1.0E+03 1.4E-03
75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 38 1.14 - -
95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4- 85 2.55 - 1.3E+01 4.1E-02
108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5- 21 0.63 - 1.3E+01 1.0E-02
106-42-3 Xylene, P- 140 4.2 - 2.1E+01 4.0E-02
95-47-6 Xylene, o- 53 1.59 - 2.1E+01 1.5E-02
Cumulative: 8.6E-06 2.2E-01
All concentrations are in ug/m3
Output Form 3B
Carcinogenic risk and hazard quotient cells highlighted in orange are associated with non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion
risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Version Date:
Basis:
Site Name:
Site Address:
DEQ Section:
Site ID:
Exposure Unit ID:
Submittal Date:
Reviewed By:
Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst Case
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Risk Calculator
Caraustar and Savona Mills
500 and 528 South Turner Avenue
Division of Waste Management - Brownfields Program
23061-19-060
June 2021
May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Prepared By:Haley Martin, PG
Ralph McGee, PG
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Complete Exposure Pathways
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst Case
Note: Risk output will only be calculated for complete exposure pathways.
Receptor Pathway
Check box if
pathway
complete
Soil
Groundwater Use
Soil
Groundwater Use
Construction Worker Soil
Soil
Surface Water
Groundwater to Indoor Air
Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Indoor Air
Groundwater to Indoor Air
Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Indoor Air
Source Soil
Source Groundwater
Source Soil
Source Groundwater
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION PATHWAYS
Groundwater
Surface Water
Input Form 1A
VAPOR INTRUSION PATHWAYS
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER PATHWAYS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Exposure Point ConcentrationsVersion Date: June 2021Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL TableSite ID: 23061-19-060Exposure Unit ID: Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst CaseDescription of Exposure Point Concentration Selection:Exposure Point Concentration (ug/m3)Notes: CAS Number ChemicalMinimum Concentration (Qualifier)Maximum Concentration (Qualifier)UnitsLocation of Maximum ConcentrationDetection FrequencyRange of Detection LimitsConcentration Used for ScreeningBackground ValueScreening Toxicity Value (Screening Level) (n/c)Potential ARAR/TBC ValuePotential ARAR/TBC SourceCOPC Flag (Y/N)Rationale for Selection or Deletion280 67-64-1 Acetoneug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202116 71-43-2 Benzeneug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/20204.8 75-15-0 Carbon Disulfideug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/202075 56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachlorideug/m32020-SV-01 8/19/20204.7 67-66-3 Chloroformug/m32021-SV-01 1/12/20211 74-87-3 Chloromethaneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/20202.5 110-83-8 Cyclohexeneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20212.8 75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m32020-SV-10 10/6/20206.6 100-41-4 Ethylbenzeneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20215.2 142-82-5 Heptane, N-ug/m32020-SV-09 440563.8 110-54-3 Hexane, N-ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/2021150 67-63-0 Isopropanolug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/202128 78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/202126 75-09-2 Methylene Chlorideug/m32021-SV-10 1/12/202129 91-20-3 ~Naphthaleneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/20202.2 115-07-1 Propyleneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20212 100-42-5 Styreneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/2020160 127-18-4 Tetrachloroethyleneug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202117 108-88-3 Tolueneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20211.9 75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m32021-SV-02 1/11/20212800 95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/20212000 108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202113m&p-xylene concentration106-42-3 Xylene, P-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20214.8 95-47-6 Xylene, o-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/2021Input Form 2DSoil Gas Exposure Point Concentration TableNote: Chemicals highlighted in orange are non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.If the chemical list is changed from a prior calculator run, remember to select "See All Chemicals" on the data output sheet or newly added chemicals will not be included in risk calculationsNorth Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Exposure Point ConcentrationsVersion Date: June 2021Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL TableSite ID: 23061-19-060Exposure Unit ID: Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst CaseDescription of Exposure Point Concentration Selection:Exposure Point Concentration (ug/m3)Notes: CAS Number ChemicalMinimum Concentration (Qualifier)Maximum Concentration (Qualifier)UnitsLocation of Maximum ConcentrationDetection FrequencyRange of Detection LimitsConcentration Used for ScreeningBackground ValueScreening Toxicity Value (Screening Level) (n/c)Potential ARAR/TBC ValuePotential ARAR/TBC SourceCOPC Flag (Y/N)Rationale for Selection or Deletion190 67-64-1 Acetoneug/m31.9 71-43-2 Benzeneug/m30.44 56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachlorideug/m30.32 67-66-3 Chloroformug/m31 74-87-3 Chloromethaneug/m31 110-82-7 Cyclohexaneug/m30.57 106-46-7 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-ug/m32.4 75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m32.1 141-78-6 Ethyl Acetateug/m31.5 100-41-4 Ethylbenzeneug/m30.52 109-99-9 ~Tetrahydrofuranug/m336 142-82-5 Heptane, N-ug/m312 110-54-3 Hexane, N-ug/m35.9 67-63-0 Isopropanolug/m34.3 78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)ug/m31.5 75-09-2 Methylene Chlorideug/m30.61 91-20-3 ~Naphthaleneug/m30.77 100-42-5 Styreneug/m31.6 127-18-4 Tetrachloroethyleneug/m37.9 108-88-3 Tolueneug/m30.61 76-13-1 Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2-ug/m30.18 71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-ug/m32.5 95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-ug/m30.77 108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-ug/m34.1m&p-xylene concentration 106-42-3 Xylene, P-ug/m32 95-47-6 Xylene, o-ug/m3Input Form 2EIndoor Air Exposure Point Concentration TableNote: Chemicals highlighted in orange are non-volatile chemicals. Risks are calculated for these chemicals if indoor air concentrations are entered and indoor air screening levels have been established, but it should be noted that detections of these chemicals are likely not associated with vapor intrusion.If the chemical list is changed from a prior calculator run, remember to select "See All Chemicals" on the data output sheet or newly added chemicals will not be included in risk calculationsNorth Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Risk for Individual Pathways Output Form 1A
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst Case
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Construction Worker Soil NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Surface Water* NC NC NC
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air 1.4E-06 2.2E-01 NO
Indoor Air 4.6E-06 1.5E-01 NO
Pathway Source
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
3. NM = Not Modeled
4. NC = Pathway not calculated
2. * = If concentrations in groundwater exceed the NC 2L Standards or IMAC, or concentrations in surface water exceed the
NC 2B Standards, appropriate remediation and/or institutional control measures will be necessary to be eligible for a risk-based
closure.
Surface Water Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
VAPOR INTRUSION CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION CALCULATORS
Target Receptor Concentrations Exceeded?
Groundwater Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
1. If lead concentrations were entered in the exposure point concentration tables, see the individual calculator sheets for lead
concentrations in comparison to screening levels. Note that lead is not included in cumulative risk calculations.
Notes:
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
DEQ Risk Calculator - Vapor Intrusion - Non-Residential Worker Indoor Air
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst Case
CAS # Chemical Name:
Indoor Air
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Target Indoor
Air Conc. for
Carcinogens @
TCR = 1E-06
Target Indoor Air
Conc. for Non-
Carcinogens @
THQ = 0.2
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Non-
Carcinogenic
Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 190 - 2.7E+04 1.4E-03
71-43-2 Benzene 1.9 1.6E+00 2.6E+01 1.2E-06 1.4E-02
56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride 0.44 2.0E+00 8.8E+01 2.2E-07 1.0E-03
67-66-3 Chloroform 0.32 5.3E-01 8.6E+01 6.0E-07 7.5E-04
74-87-3 Chloromethane 1 - 7.9E+01 2.5E-03
110-82-7 Cyclohexane 1 - 5.3E+03 3.8E-05
106-46-7 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- 0.57 1.1E+00 7.0E+02 5.1E-07 1.6E-04
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 2.4 - 8.8E+01 5.5E-03
141-78-6 Ethyl Acetate 2.1 - 6.1E+01 6.8E-03
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 1.5 4.9E+00 8.8E+02 3.1E-07 3.4E-04
109-99-9 ~Tetrahydrofuran 0.52 - 1.8E+03 5.9E-05
142-82-5 Heptane, N- 36 - 3.5E+02 2.1E-02
110-54-3 Hexane, N- 12 - 6.1E+02 3.9E-03
67-63-0 Isopropanol 5.9 - 1.8E+02 6.7E-03
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 4.3 - 4.4E+03 2.0E-04
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 1.5 1.2E+03 5.3E+02 1.2E-09 5.7E-04
91-20-3 ~Naphthalene 0.61 3.6E-01 2.6E+00 1.7E-06 4.6E-02
100-42-5 Styrene 0.77 - 8.8E+02 1.8E-04
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene 1.6 4.7E+01 3.5E+01 3.4E-08 9.1E-03
108-88-3 Toluene 7.9 - 4.4E+03 3.6E-04
76-13-1 Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2- 0.61 - 4.4E+03 2.8E-05
71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- 0.18 - 4.4E+03 8.2E-06
95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4- 2.5 - 5.3E+01 9.5E-03
108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5- 0.77 - 5.3E+01 2.9E-03
106-42-3 Xylene, P- 4.1 - 8.8E+01 9.4E-03
95-47-6 Xylene, o- 2 - 8.8E+01 4.6E-03
Cumulative: 4.6E-06 1.5E-01
All concentrations are in ug/m3
Output Form 3F
** - Note that the EPA has no consensus on reference dose or cancer slope factor values for lead, therefore it is not possible to calculate carcinogenic risk
or hazard quotient. Lead concentrations are compared to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard of 0.15 μg/m3.
Carcinogenic risk and hazard quotient cells highlighted in orange are associated with non-volatile chemicals. Risks are calculated for these values if
indoor air concentrations are entered and indoor air screening levels have been established, but it should be noted that detections of these chemicals are
likely not associated with vapor intrusion.
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
DEQ Risk Calculator - Vapor Intrusion - Non-Residential Worker Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Savona Mill Building - Hypothetical Worst Case
CAS # Chemical Name:
Soil Gas
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Calculated
Indoor Air
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Target Indoor
Air Conc. for
Carcinogens @
TCR = 1E-06
Target Indoor Air
Conc. for Non-
Carcinogens @
THQ = 0.2
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Non-
Carcinogenic
Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 280 2.8 - 2.7E+04 2.1E-05
71-43-2 Benzene 16 0.16 1.6E+00 2.6E+01 1.0E-07 1.2E-03
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide 4.8 0.048 - 6.1E+02 1.6E-05
56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride 75 0.75 2.0E+00 8.8E+01 3.7E-07 1.7E-03
67-66-3 Chloroform 4.7 0.047 5.3E-01 8.6E+01 8.8E-08 1.1E-04
74-87-3 Chloromethane 1 0.01 - 7.9E+01 2.5E-05
110-83-8 Cyclohexene 2.5 0.025 - 8.8E+02 5.7E-06
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 2.8 0.028 - 8.8E+01 6.4E-05
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 6.6 0.066 4.9E+00 8.8E+02 1.3E-08 1.5E-05
142-82-5 Heptane, N- 5.2 0.052 - 3.5E+02 3.0E-05
110-54-3 Hexane, N- 3.8 0.038 - 6.1E+02 1.2E-05
67-63-0 Isopropanol 150 1.5 - 1.8E+02 1.7E-03
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 28 0.28 - 4.4E+03 1.3E-05
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 26 0.26 1.2E+03 5.3E+02 2.1E-10 9.9E-05
91-20-3 ~Naphthalene 29 0.29 3.6E-01 2.6E+00 8.0E-07 2.2E-02
115-07-1 Propylene 2.2 0.022 - 2.6E+03 1.7E-06
100-42-5 Styrene 2 0.02 - 8.8E+02 4.6E-06
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene 160 1.6 4.7E+01 3.5E+01 3.4E-08 9.1E-03
108-88-3 Toluene 17 0.17 - 4.4E+03 7.8E-06
75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.9 0.019 - -
95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4- 2800 28 - 5.3E+01 1.1E-01
108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5- 2000 20 - 5.3E+01 7.6E-02
106-42-3 Xylene, P- 13 0.13 - 8.8E+01 3.0E-04
95-47-6 Xylene, o- 4.8 0.048 - 8.8E+01 1.1E-04
Cumulative: 1.4E-06 2.2E-01
All concentrations are in ug/m3
Output Form
Carcinogenic risk and hazard quotient cells highlighted in orange are associated with non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion risk,
no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Version Date:
Basis:
Site Name:
Site Address:
DEQ Section:
Site ID:
Exposure Unit ID:
Submittal Date:
Reviewed By:
Wikoff Color - Hypothetical Worst Case
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Risk Calculator
Caraustar and Savona Mills
410 South Gardner Avenue
Division of Waste Management - Brownfields Program
23061-19-060
June 2021
May 2021 EPA RSL Table
2/17/2022
Prepared By:Haley Martin, PG
Ralph McGee, PG
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Exposure Point ConcentrationsVersion Date: June 2021Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL TableSite ID: 23061-19-060Exposure Unit ID: Wikoff Color - Hypothetical Worst CaseDescription of Exposure Point Concentration Selection:Exposure Point Concentration (ug/m3)Notes: CAS Number ChemicalMinimum Concentration (Qualifier)Maximum Concentration (Qualifier)UnitsLocation of Maximum ConcentrationDetection FrequencyRange of Detection LimitsConcentration Used for ScreeningBackground ValueScreening Toxicity Value (Screening Level) (n/c)Potential ARAR/TBC ValuePotential ARAR/TBC SourceCOPC Flag (Y/N)Rationale for Selection or Deletion37 67-64-1 Acetoneug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/20210.93 71-43-2 Benzeneug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/20202.7 75-15-0 Carbon Disulfideug/m32020-SV-09 8/13/20201.5 56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachlorideug/m32020-SV-01 8/19/20200.5 74-87-3 Chloromethaneug/m32020-SV-07 8/13/20200.91 110-83-8 Cyclohexeneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20212.5 75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m32020-SV-10 10/6/20203 100-41-4 Ethylbenzeneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20211.9 142-82-5 Heptane, N-ug/m32020-SV-09 4405639 67-63-0 Isopropanolug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20212.7 78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)ug/m32021-SV-04 1/11/20213.9 75-09-2 Methylene Chlorideug/m32021-SV-10 1/12/20212.4 115-07-1 Propyleneug/m32021-SV-09 1/12/20216.8 127-18-4 Tetrachloroethyleneug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202116 108-88-3 Tolueneug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20210.63 71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-ug/m32020-SV-08 8/13/20201.2 75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m32021-SV-02 1/11/20213.7 95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/20210.94 108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-ug/m32021-SV-11B 11/12/202111m&p-xylene concentration106-42-3 Xylene, P-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/20214 95-47-6 Xylene, o-ug/m32021-SV-08 1/12/2021Input Form 2DSoil Gas Exposure Point Concentration TableNote: Chemicals highlighted in orange are non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.If the chemical list is changed from a prior calculator run, remember to select "See All Chemicals" on the data output sheet or newly added chemicals will not be included in risk calculationsNorth Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
Risk for Individual Pathways Output Form 1A
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Wikoff Color - Hypothetical Worst Case
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Groundwater Use* NC NC NC
Construction Worker Soil NC NC NC
Soil NC NC NC
Surface Water* NC NC NC
Receptor Pathway
Carcinogenic
Risk Hazard Index Risk exceeded?
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air 2.7E-07 2.0E-02 NO
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Groundwater to Indoor Air NC NC NC
Soil Gas to Indoor Air 2.1E-08 1.6E-03 NO
Indoor Air NC NC NC
Pathway Source
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
Source Soil NC
Source Groundwater NC
3. NM = Not Modeled
4. NC = Pathway not calculated
2. * = If concentrations in groundwater exceed the NC 2L Standards or IMAC, or concentrations in surface water exceed the
NC 2B Standards, appropriate remediation and/or institutional control measures will be necessary to be eligible for a risk-based
closure.
Surface Water Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2B at Receptor?
VAPOR INTRUSION CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
CONTAMINANT MIGRATION CALCULATORS
Target Receptor Concentrations Exceeded?
Groundwater Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
Exceedence of 2L at Receptor?
1. If lead concentrations were entered in the exposure point concentration tables, see the individual calculator sheets for lead
concentrations in comparison to screening levels. Note that lead is not included in cumulative risk calculations.
Notes:
DIRECT CONTACT SOIL AND WATER CALCULATORS
Resident
Non-Residential Worker
Recreator/Trespasser
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
DEQ Risk Calculator - Vapor Intrusion - Resident Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Wikoff Color - Hypothetical Worst Case
CAS # Chemical Name:
Soil Gas
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Calculated
Indoor Air
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Target Indoor
Air Conc. for
Carcinogens @
TCR = 1E-06
Target Indoor Air
Conc. for Non-
Carcinogens @
THQ = 0.2
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Non-
Carcinogenic
Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 37 1.11 - 6.5E+03 3.4E-05
71-43-2 Benzene 0.93 0.0279 3.6E-01 6.3E+00 7.8E-08 8.9E-04
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide 2.7 0.081 - 1.5E+02 1.1E-04
56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride 1.5 0.045 4.7E-01 2.1E+01 9.6E-08 4.3E-04
74-87-3 Chloromethane 0.5 0.015 - 1.9E+01 1.6E-04
110-83-8 Cyclohexene 0.91 0.0273 - 2.1E+02 2.6E-05
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 2.5 0.075 - 2.1E+01 7.2E-04
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 3 0.09 1.1E+00 2.1E+02 8.0E-08 8.6E-05
142-82-5 Heptane, N- 1.9 0.057 - 8.3E+01 1.4E-04
67-63-0 Isopropanol 39 1.17 - 4.2E+01 5.6E-03
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 2.7 0.081 - 1.0E+03 1.6E-05
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 3.9 0.117 1.0E+02 1.3E+02 1.2E-09 1.9E-04
115-07-1 Propylene 2.4 0.072 - 6.3E+02 2.3E-05
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene 6.8 0.204 1.1E+01 8.3E+00 1.9E-08 4.9E-03
108-88-3 Toluene 16 0.48 - 1.0E+03 9.2E-05
71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- 0.63 0.0189 - 1.0E+03 3.6E-06
75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.2 0.036 - -
95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4- 3.7 0.111 - 1.3E+01 1.8E-03
108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5- 0.94 0.0282 - 1.3E+01 4.5E-04
106-42-3 Xylene, P- 11 0.33 - 2.1E+01 3.2E-03
95-47-6 Xylene, o- 4 0.12 - 2.1E+01 1.2E-03
Cumulative: 2.7E-07 2.0E-02
All concentrations are in ug/m3
Output Form 3B
Carcinogenic risk and hazard quotient cells highlighted in orange are associated with non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion
risk, no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator
DEQ Risk Calculator - Vapor Intrusion - Non-Residential Worker Soil Gas to Indoor Air
Version Date: June 2021
Basis: May 2021 EPA RSL Table
Site ID: 23061-19-060
Exposure Unit ID: Wikoff Color - Hypothetical Worst Case
CAS # Chemical Name:
Soil Gas
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Calculated
Indoor Air
Concentration
(ug/m3)
Target Indoor
Air Conc. for
Carcinogens @
TCR = 1E-06
Target Indoor Air
Conc. for Non-
Carcinogens @
THQ = 0.2
Calculated
Carcinogenic
Risk
Calculated
Non-
Carcinogenic
Hazard
Quotient
67-64-1 Acetone 37 0.37 - 2.7E+04 2.7E-06
71-43-2 Benzene 0.93 0.0093 1.6E+00 2.6E+01 5.9E-09 7.1E-05
75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide 2.7 0.027 - 6.1E+02 8.8E-06
56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride 1.5 0.015 2.0E+00 8.8E+01 7.3E-09 3.4E-05
74-87-3 Chloromethane 0.5 0.005 - 7.9E+01 1.3E-05
110-83-8 Cyclohexene 0.91 0.0091 - 8.8E+02 2.1E-06
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 2.5 0.025 - 8.8E+01 5.7E-05
100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 3 0.03 4.9E+00 8.8E+02 6.1E-09 6.8E-06
142-82-5 Heptane, N- 1.9 0.019 - 3.5E+02 1.1E-05
67-63-0 Isopropanol 39 0.39 - 1.8E+02 4.5E-04
78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) 2.7 0.027 - 4.4E+03 1.2E-06
75-09-2 Methylene Chloride 3.9 0.039 1.2E+03 5.3E+02 3.2E-11 1.5E-05
115-07-1 Propylene 2.4 0.024 - 2.6E+03 1.8E-06
127-18-4 Tetrachloroethylene 6.8 0.068 4.7E+01 3.5E+01 1.4E-09 3.9E-04
108-88-3 Toluene 16 0.16 - 4.4E+03 7.3E-06
71-55-6 Trichloroethane, 1,1,1- 0.63 0.0063 - 4.4E+03 2.9E-07
75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.2 0.012 - -
95-63-6 Trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4- 3.7 0.037 - 5.3E+01 1.4E-04
108-67-8 Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5- 0.94 0.0094 - 5.3E+01 3.6E-05
106-42-3 Xylene, P- 11 0.11 - 8.8E+01 2.5E-04
95-47-6 Xylene, o- 4 0.04 - 8.8E+01 9.1E-05
Cumulative: 2.1E-08 1.6E-03
All concentrations are in ug/m3
Output Form
Carcinogenic risk and hazard quotient cells highlighted in orange are associated with non-volatile chemicals. Since these chemicals do not pose a vapor intrusion risk,
no risk values are calculated for these chemicals.
North Carolina DEQ Risk Calculator