20088_Ark_Les_Labs_VIA_20170113

January 13, 2017 Mr. Bruce Nicholson VIA EMAIL: [e-mail] Program Manager NC Division of Waste Management Brownfields Program 217 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Re: VAPOR INTRUSION INDOOR AIR TESTING REPORT FORMER ARK‐LES LABORATORIES 3400 YONKERS ROAD – RALEIGH, WAKE COUNTY, NC BROWNFIELD PROJECT NO. 20088‐16‐92 MCADAMS PROJECT NO. SPEC-17000 Dear Mr. Nicholson: On behalf of John S. Carbone, LLC (Carbone), the John R. McAdams Company (McAdams) is pleased to present this report summarizing the vapor intrusion air testing that was performed on December 29-30, 2016 at the above site. The work was completed in general accordance with the approved work plan that was submitted to your office on December 23, 2016. This report includes background information regarding the site, the air sampling methodology, laboratory results, a comparison of detected analyte concentrations to current Non-Residential Indoor Air Screening Levels (NRIASLs), and an opinion of the findings as relates to risk to occupants from vapor intrusion at the site. 1.0 BACKGROUND The subject site is currently used for commercial purposes and has an open warehouse-type floor plan with a smaller showroom area. Groundwater sampling conducted by the EI Group (EI) in February 2014 and October 2016 noted the presence of chlorinated solvents in four of the seven groundwater monitoring wells (MW-3 through MW-6) at the site. Figures from that report are provided in Attachment 1, which include: • Figure 1 - Site Location Map • Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph • Figure 3 – Site Map W/Monitoring Well Locations • Figure 4 – Groundwater Flow Map (10/24/16) 1,1-dichloroethane (1,1-DCA), 1,1-dichloroethylene (1,1-DCE), and cis-1,2-DCE were detected in MW-3, MW-4, and MW-5; however, the reported
Mr. Bruce Nicholson Vapor Intrusion Indoor Air Testing Report 3400 Yonkers Road Project - Raleigh, NC January 13, 2017 Page 2 of 6
SPEC-17000
concentrations did not exceed the respective NC 2L standards. There were no other detectable concentrations of VOCs in any of the groundwater samples. The EI report concluded that concentrations in MW-5 and MW-6 exceed the NC 2L groundwater quality standard for trichloroethylene (TCE). The summary table of results from the EI testing is included as Attachment 2 to this report. Prior sub-slab and soil gas testing at the site in October 2015 and December 2016 by Highland Environmental Solutions Raleigh NC (HES) indicated that two site contaminants of concern (COCs) were detected at concentrations exceeding applicable non-residential soil gas screening levels. These were TCE (at vapor pin sub-slab location VP-7) and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene (in soil gas samples VP-1b and VP-3). The summary table of results from the HES testing is included as Attachment 3. Figure 3 from the HES report received by the client on January 11, 2017 is included in Attachment 1, which denotes the soil gag and sub-slab sampling locations. The presence of these COCs in sub-slab and soil gas samples above non-residential levels initiated the indoor air sampling process described in this report. The target analyte lists from the HES and EI investigation were used to develop the COC list for indoor air sampling. 2.0 AIR SAMPLING METHODOLOGY 2.1 Pre-Testing Survey (1/28/2016) A pre-test site visit was conducted by McAdams on December 28, 2016 to finalize the sampling locations across the building floorplan. The tour was led by the owner, Mr. John Carbone. Since the site is partially occupied by a plumbing supply company, Hughes Kitchen and Bath, McAdams brought a portable Mini RAE 3000 monitor to determine if volatile organic compounds (VOCs) may be present that could interfere with the air sampling due to use and/or storage of products. Although there were numerous containers and packages of VOC-containing materials in the plumbing counter sales area and the warehouse, all items were in new unopened containers/packaging. No detectable VOC readings odors or obvious sources of COCs were noted during the site walkthrough.

Mr. Bruce Nicholson Vapor Intrusion Indoor Air Testing Report 3400 Yonkers Road Project - Raleigh, NC January 13, 2017 Page 3 of 6
SPEC-17000
2.2 Indoor Air Sampling (1/29/16 – 1/30/16) The indoor air sampling was conducted after working hours on the day following our pre-testing survey (December 29, 2016). McAdams arrived on-site shortly before 4 pm and met with the manager, Mr. John Hazelton, to obtain a key for access to the building. Placement of the canisters began at 4:30 pm once personnel had departed the site. The sampling began at 4:42 pm and continued until 1:24 am on December 30, 2016. As a condition of work plan approval, one additional indoor air sample was added in the former Ark-Les Laboratory space to ensure that the separate indoor spaces were represented during testing. The HVAC systems for the occupied tenant space and the unoccupied former Ark-Les Labs were operating at and maintaining set point temperatures of 68 to 72 °F throughout the sampling, with the blower fans in automatic cycling mode. The building pressurization was neutral to slightly positively pressurized. The exterior doors of the building were locked to prevent ingress/egress except for two times during checks of canister pressure and once again at final canister collection. This was conducted to minimize outdoor air exchange during testing and, in conjunction with performing the testing after-hours, represent worst-case conditions for indoor air quality as it relates to vapor intrusion potential. The testing methodology is described in further detail below. 2.2.1 Indoor Air Testing
• Seven (7) indoor air samples and one (1) outdoor/ambient air sample were collected over an 8-hour period for analysis of COCs only, using EPA Compendium Method TO-15 Determination of VOCs in Air Collected in Specially-Prepared Canisters and Analyzed by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)”.
o The testing involved obtaining air samples at six indoor locations using 6-liter Summa canisters fitted with 8-hour flow regulators.
o One of the indoor locations (the western half of the warehouse) involved collection of a duplicate sample (via two canisters connected with an inline tee and employing one 8-hour flow regulator). This location was chosen near the vapor pin location
Mr. Bruce Nicholson Vapor Intrusion Indoor Air Testing Report 3400 Yonkers Road Project - Raleigh, NC January 13, 2017 Page 4 of 6
SPEC-17000
that had an elevated sub-slab concentration of 222 ug/m3 of TCE during the HES testing event (e.g., VP-7).
o The ambient sample was collected at ground-level at the southwest of the building at the center loading dock near monitoring wells MW-5 and MW-6.
o The air sample locations are noted in Figure 5 (see Attachment 1).
3.0 LABORATORY RESULTS No COCs were detected above or near their respective non-residential screening levels (NRIASLs). The concentrations of the laboratory detected analytes for the indoor air samples were very low for the entire panel of site-specific COCs. With the exception of benzene and styrene, the concentrations of the COCs were generally consistent across sample locations with no evidence of isolated “hot spots”. A slightly increased benzene concentration was noted in Sample A-6, the source of which could not be identified. A slightly increased styrene concentration was observed in the Warehouse West Duplicate sample that could potentially be associated with fiberglass tub enclosures stored in the area. Other than these two findings, the detected analytes and their respective concentrations in the indoor air mirrored those found in the outdoor/ambient sample. The detected analytes are summarized in Table 1 (Attachment 4). The full laboratory report included in Attachment 5. 4.0 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the air testing results, McAdams concludes the following: • The analyses showed no exceedances of the NRIASLs for the site-specific COCs.
• TCE, the only COC from sub-slab testing to warrant further assessment, was detected in one indoor air sample (A-4 – Former Ark-Les Lab), but the concentration was estimated since it was below the laboratory reporting limit (J-flag). The estimated concentration of 0.09 ug/m3 is only 5% of the NRIASL of 1.75 ug/m3.
Mr. Bruce Nicholson Vapor Intrusion Indoor Air Testing Report 3400 Yonkers Road Project - Raleigh, NC January 13, 2017 Page 5 of 6
SPEC-17000
• 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, the only COC from the soil gas testing to warrant further assessment, was detected in each indoor air sample and at a consistent concentration (average indoor level concentration was 0.32 ug/m3. However, the levels were very low (near the detection limit of the method) and only ranged from 3.1 to 6.0% of the NRIASL of 6.13 ug/m3.
• Due to the lack of and/or low levels of detected site COC contaminants in the indoor air and generally uniform concentrations across sample locations, these results do not indicate evidence of significant indoor sources of air contaminants such as concrete floors and building surfaces impacted by COCs.
• Sampling was conducted under “worst case” conditions (e.g., Section 2.2 of the Guidance – higher temperatures indoors relative to outdoors during the heating season).
• Available data indicates that the existing concrete floor is effectively attenuating COCs detected in sub-slab soil gas samples as described in the previous HES report.
• Based on the data presented in this report, Brownfield Program guidance criteria has been satisfied that detected COCs in the indoor air throughout the building are below the NRIASLs, which are derived for a target risk of 1E-06 and Hazard Index of 0.2. Thus, the findings indicate that no further assessment or mitigation is required to address VI risk at the site (per Section 5.4 of the Guidance, which states when “indoor air sampling results are below the IASL for a target risk of 1E-06 and Hazard Index of 1 - no further sampling is required”.)
• Given the prior assessment work at the site by others, coupled with the testing information contained in this report (i.e., multiple lines of evidence), it is McAdams’ opinion that the risk from vapor intrusion at the site appears minimal and that a second testing event to evaluate VI risk is unnecessary according to the current Guidance.
5.0 CLOSING We respectfully request your evaluation of the data presented herein to determine if you concur with our assessment that no further assessment is required. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions that you may have.

ATTACHMENT 1 FIGURES
SITE LOCATION MAP
3400 Yonkers Road-Kimshe
Raleigh, North Carolina
N
Not AvailableORIGINAL SCALE:
QUAD:Raleigh East, NC
PROJECT NUMBER:ENMO160157.00
FIGURE NUMBER:1
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
3400 Yonkers Road-Kimshe
Raleigh, North Carolina
N
Not availableSCALE:
SOURCE:
PROJECT NUMBER:ENMO160157.00
FIGURE NUMBER:2
2012, Wake GIS website
Saint David’s School Athletic Field
Transport
Truck
Center
House of Lights Inc.
Storage Trust Properties
Intrex Inc.
SITE MAP W/ MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
3400 Yonkers Road
Raleigh, North Carolina
N
1 in = 120 ftAPPROX. SCALE:
DRAWN BY:DMA
PROJECT NUMBER:ENMO160157.00
FIGURE NUMBER:3
Approximate Property Boundary
Solid Waste Dumpster
Pad-Mounted Transformer
Generator
Empty 55-Gallon Drum
Groundwater Monitoring Well)
SW
wooded
Saint David’s School
Athletic Fields
I-440
SW
M. Alder’s Son, Inc.,
florist supplies distribution
grassed
grassed
wooded
pipe and materials
storage
Ark-Les
(vacant)
distributionwarehouse
M. Alder’s Son, Inc.,
florist supplies distribution
Fmr Ark-Les space, interior transformer, drains, etc.
Fmr Ark-Les space, possible
laboratory, heavy equipment,
processing room
Transport Truck Center
Well Built Properties
Intrex
Inc.
Storage Trust Properties
MW-5
MW-1
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
MW-6
MW-7
GROUNDWATER FLOW MAPOCTOBER 24, 2016
3400 Yonkers Road-Kimshe
Raleigh, North Carolina
N
1 in = 120 ftAPPROX. SCALE:
DRAWN BY:DMA
PROJECT NUMBER:ENMO160157.00
FIGURE NUMBER:4
Approximate Property Boundary
Solid Waste Dumpster
Pad-Mounted Transformer
Generator
Empty 55-Gallon Drum
Groundwater Monitoring Well
Groundwater Flow Direction
SW
wooded
Saint David’s School
Athletic Fields
I-440
SW
M. Alder’s Son, Inc.,
florist supplies distribution
grassed
grassed
wooded
pipe and materialsstorage
Ark-Les
(vacant)
distributionwarehouse
M. Alder’s Son, Inc.,
florist supplies distribution
Fmr Ark-Les space, interior transformer, drains, etc.
Fmr Ark-Les space, possible
laboratory, heavy equipment,
processing room
Transport Truck Center
Well Built Properties
Intrex
Inc.
Storage Trust Properties
MW-5
MW-1
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
MW-6
MW-7
92.91
83.83
75.89
76.76
77.65
83.29
75.75
SITE MAP W/ MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
3400 Yonkers Road
Raleigh, North Carolina
N
1 in = 120 ftAPPROX. SCALE:
DRAWN BY:DMA
PROJECT NUMBER:ENMO160157.00
FIGURE NUMBER:3
Approximate Property Boundary
Solid Waste Dumpster
Pad-Mounted Transformer
Generator
Empty 55-Gallon Drum
Groundwater Monitoring Well)
SW
wooded
Saint David’s School
Athletic Fields
I-440
SW
M. Alder’s Son, Inc.,
florist supplies distribution
grassed
grassed
wooded
pipe and materials
storage
Ark-Les
(vacant)
distributionwarehouse
M. Alder’s Son, Inc.,
florist supplies distribution
Fmr Ark-Les space, interior transformer, drains, etc.
Fmr Ark-Les space, possible
laboratory, heavy equipment,
processing room
Transport Truck Center
Well Built Properties
Intrex
Inc.
Storage Trust Properties
MW-5
MW-1
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
MW-6
MW-7

Project Name
Client
Project # Drawn by
Fig. # Scale Date
N
Soil Vapor Point Location Diagram Base diagram from Google Maps, 2016
Soil Vapor Evaluation
3400 Yonkers Road; Raleigh, NC
John S. Carbone, LLC
394001 BF
As Shown December 2016 3
VP-4
VP-5
VP-3
VP-2
VP-1b
VP-6
VP-7
VP-8
Approximate Scale
feet
0 110 55
VP-8 Soil Vapor Monitoring Point (subslab points are red)
VP-1b, VP-2, and VP-3 contained elevated concentrations of primarily petroleum compounds. VP-7 contained an elevated concentration of TCE.
MW-1
MW-3
MW-6
MW-5
MW-7
Groundwater Monitoring Well (locations approximate)
Inferred Groundwater Contaminant Plume

ATTACHMENT 2 SUMMARY TABLE OF RESULTS FROM THE 11/4/16 EI GROUNDWATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
TA
B
L
E

1
GR
O
U
N
D
W
A
T
E
R

E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N

D
A
T
A

34
0
0

Y
o
n
k
e
r
s

R
o
a
d
Ra
l
e
i
g
h
,

N
C
EI

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

N
o
.

E
N
M
O
1
6
0
1
5
7
.
0
0
MW
-
1

2
/
1
7
/
1
4

2
5
.
0
0

1
0
-
2
5

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
8
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
7
.
4
"

8
8
.
8
1

1
3
.
0
6

1
1
.
9
4

7
5
.
7
5
MW
-
2

2
/
1
7
/
1
4

2
5
.
0
0

1
0
-
2
5

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
8
.
5
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
3
.
8
"

9
3
.
1
1

9
.
2
8

1
5
.
7
2

8
3
.
8
3
MW
-
3

2
/
1
7
/
1
4

2
3
.
0
0

8
-
2
3

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
7
.
6
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
8
.
5
"

8
5
.
9
3

1
0
.
0
4

1
2
.
9
6

7
5
.
8
9
MW
-
4

2
/
1
7
/
1
4

2
5
.
0
0

1
0
-
2
5

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
5
.
8
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
7
.
8
"

8
7
.
9
4

1
1
.
1
8

1
3
.
8
2

7
6
.
7
6
MW
-
5

2
/
1
8
/
1
4

2
5
.
0
0

1
0
-
2
5

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
5
.
9
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
6
.
5
"

8
9
.
6
3

1
1
.
9
8

1
3
.
0
2

7
7
.
6
5
MW
-
6

2
/
1
8
/
1
4

2
5
.
0
0

1
0
-
2
5

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
5
.
2
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
6
.
8
"

9
4
.
8
7

1
1
.
5
8

1
3
.
4
2

8
3
.
2
9
MW
-
7

2
/
1
8
/
1
4

2
7
.
0
0

1
2
-
2
7

1
5

3
5
º
4
7
'
4
5
.
3
"
,
-
7
8
º
3
5
'
1
4
.
4
"

1
0
4
.
5
8

1
1
.
6
7

1
5
.
3
3

9
2
.
9
1
NO
T
E
:
NA

=

n
o
t

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
NS
=

n
o
t

s
a
m
p
l
e
d
NM

=

n
o
t

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
Sc
r
e
e
n

Le
n
g
t
h
As
s
i
g
n
e
d

T
o
p

o
f

Ca
s
i
n
g

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(f
e
e
t
)
De
p
t
h

t
o

W
a
t
e
r

(f
t
.

b
e
l
o
w

T
O
C
)

Oc
t
o
b
e
r

2
4
,

20
1
6
Water Column (feet)Groundwater Elevation (feet)
Wa
t
e
r

c
o
l
u
m
n

i
s

t
h
e

d
e
p
t
h

o
f

w
a
t
e
r

i
n

t
h
e

sc
r
e
e
n
e
d

i
n
t
e
r
v
a
l
GP
S

C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
s

(
L
a
t
/
L
o
n
g
)
We
l
l

D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

D
a
t
e
To
t
a
l

D
e
p
t
h

(
f
t
.

be
l
o
w

T
O
C
)
Sc
r
e
e
n
e
d

In
t
e
r
v
a
l

(
f
e
e
t
)
TA
B
L
E

2
La
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

A
n
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

R
e
s
u
l
t
s

-

G
r
o
u
n
d
w
a
t
e
r

34
0
0

Y
o
n
k
e
r
s

R
o
a
d
Ra
l
e
i
g
h
,

N
C

EI

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

N
o
.
:

E
N
M
O
1
6
0
1
5
7
.
0
0
MW
-
1

M
W
-
1

M
W
-
2

M
W
-
2

M
W
-
3

M
W
-
3

M
W
-
4

M
W
-
4

M
W
-
5

M
W
-
5

M
W
-
6

M
W
-
6

M
W
-
7

M
W
-
7
2/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6

2
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6

2
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6

2
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6

2
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6

2
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6

2
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
4

1
0
/
2
4/2016
Ac
e
t
o
n
e

6
,
0
0
0

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

6
.
4

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L
Tr
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

3

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

1
.
2

0
.
6
7

1
.
2

2
.
4

2
.
9
23
1.7 18 BRL

B
R
L
1,
1
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
a
n
e

6

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

2
.
5

1
.
8

B
R
L

B
R
L

0
.
5
9

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L
1,
1
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

3
5
0

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

3
.
5

3
.
1

B
R
L

B
R
L

0
.
8
0

1
.
6
0

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L
cis
-
1
,
2
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

7
0

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

4
.
0

2
.
6

B
R
L

0
.
6
9

3
.
3

3
.
5

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L
All

r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g

a
n
a
l
y
t
e
s

N
/
A

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L

B
R
L
Al
l

R
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g

A
n
a
l
y
t
e
s
N/
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A

N
A
BR
L

=

b
e
l
o
w

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

l
i
m
i
t
s

f
o
r

t
h
e

m
e
t
h
o
d
,

u
g
/
L

(
m
i
c
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

p
e
r

l
i
t
e
r
)

=

p
a
r
t
s

p
e
r

b
i
l
l
i
o
n

(
p
p
b
)
NA

=

n
o
t

a
n
a
l
y
z
e
d
N/
A

=

n
o
t

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
J =

d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

b
u
t

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e

R
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

L
i
m
i
t
;

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d

c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

S
a
m
p
l
e

I
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
Se
m
i
v
o
l
a
t
i
l
e

O
r
g
a
n
i
c

C
o
m
p
o
u
n
d
s

GC
M
S

8
2
7
0

S
a
m
p
l
e

D
a
t
e
2L

G
W

St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

(
u
g
/
L
)
2L

G
W

St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

(
u
g
/
L
)
La
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

A
n
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

R
e
s
u
l
t
s

(
u
g
/
L
)
La
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

A
n
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

R
e
s
u
l
t
s

(
u
g
/
L
)
La
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

G
C
M
S

82
6
0
/
5
0
3
5

V
O
C
s

ATTACHMENT 3 SUMMARY TABLE OF SOIL VAPOR RESULTS FROM THE HES TESTING ON 10/27/15 AND 12/1/16
VP
-
1
b

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

d
e
e
p

s
o
i
l

v
a
p
o
r

1
3
6

<
1
.
2
30
0
20
4

<
5
.
1

<
1
.
6

<
2
.
1

<
1
.
7

<
3
.
9

6
2
.
6

<
6
.
5

<
1
.
9

4
8
.
2

2
1
3

<
1
.
2

2
3
0

1
9
J

<
2
.
8
10
9
0
19
3

4
0
4

2
5
3
0

8
9
2

2
0

3
6
5
a

1
8

9
9
6

<
1
.
3
821 353

3
3
3

<
0
.
6
4

<
3
.
1

<
2
.
7

3
1
6
0
a
34 <0.49

<
1
3890

7
2
5

4
6
0
0
BDL
VP
-
2

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

s
h
a
l
l
o
w

s
o
i
l

v
a
p
o
r

<
1
.
7
35
.
2

1
8
3
24

<
5
.
1
80
.
6
<2
.
1

<
1
.
7
18
7
58
.
9

<
6
.
5

<
1
.
9

<
1
.
2

2
3

<
1
.
4

1
2
J

<
2
.
2

8
6
.
7
63
0
<5
.
4

2
6
3

2
0
9
0

1
0
1
0

4
4

1
9

<
2
.
9

1
2
7
0

<
1
.
3
600 214

3
2
4

<
3
.
3
40 <2.7

2
1
4
0

<
2
.
0

<
2
.
5

8
.
2
J
3180

6
5
2

3
8
3
0
BDL
VP
-
3

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

s
h
a
l
l
o
w

s
o
i
l

v
a
p
o
r

<
1
.
7

<
1
.
2

<
2
.
0

<
2
.
0

<
5
.
1

<
1
.
6

<
2
.
1

<
0
.
3
4
10
9
0
<1
.
1

<
6
.
5

<
1
.
9

<
1
.
2

<
1
.
7

<
1
.
4

<
1
.
7

<
2
.
2

3
4
.
5

<
3
.
6

<
5
.
4

1
1
8
0

1
8
0
0

3
5
2

1
8

2
1

<
2
.
9

1
0
7
0

<
1
.
3
4340a 1520

1
6
9

<
3
.
3

1
7
2

<
2
.
7

3
9
6
0
a

1
2

2
2

<
1
6560

1
2
6
0

7
8
2
0
BDL
VP
-
4

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

s
h
a
l
l
o
w

s
o
i
l

v
a
p
o
r

4
3
.
7

<
0
.
2
4

1
4

6
6
.
6

<
5
.
1

9
.
8
J

<
2
.
1

<
1
.
7

6
1

<
1
.
1

<
6
.
5

<
1
.
9

<
1
.
2

<
1
.
7

<
1
.
4

<
1
.
7

<
2
.
2
80
.
8

2
0

6
4
.
1

<
1
.
6

4
4
.
3

5
6

3
2
.
4

<
1
.
7

<
2
.
9

7
3
7

<
1
.
3

3
3

<
4
.
4

<
2
.
1

<
3
.
3

7
.
5

<
2
.
7

7
7
.
3

<
2
.
0

<
2
.
5

<
1

8
0
.
4

1
8
98.2 BDL
VP
-
5

1
0
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
5

s
u
b
s
l
a
b

1
3

<
0
.
2
4

<
0
.
4
2

2
.
6

<
1
.
0

4
.
3

<
0
.
4
3

<
0
.
3
4

8
.
8

<
0
.
2
2

<
1
.
3

1
3

<
0
.
2
5

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
2
8

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
4
4

6
3
.
3

<
0.7
4

2
2

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
3
3

3
.
9

1
3

1
8

<
0
.
9
0

<
0
.22

<
0
.
2
6

2
.
1
J

<
0
.
8
8

1
3

<
0
.
6
4

8
.
1

<
0
.
5
3

4
.
9

0
.
8
6

<
0
.
4
9

<
0
.
2
1

4
.
8

1
.
7
J

6
.
5

B
D
L
VP
-
6

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

s
u
b
s
l
a
b

1
7

<
0
.
2
4

<
0
.
4
2

<
0
.
4

<
1
.
0

2
.
6
J

<
0
.
4
3

<
0
.
3
4

<
0
.
7
5

<
0
.
2
2
8.
5
4

<
0
.
2
5

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
2
8

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
4
4

1
0
7

<
0
.
7
4

2
7

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
3
3

2
.
5
J

<
1
.
5

8
.
7

2
.
3
J

<
0
.
2
2

<
0
.
2
6

<
0
.
3
0

<
0
.
8
8

<
0
.
4
3

4
.
5

<
0
.
6
2

<
0
.
5
3

3
.
7

<
0
.
4
0

<
0
.
4
9

<
1

2
.
1
J

<
0
.
8
7

2
.
1
J
BDL
VP
-
7

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

s
u
b
s
l
a
b

1
7

<
0
.
2
4

7
6

1
.
3
J

5
.
1
31
0
<0
.
4
3

1
8
2
66
7
3.8

<
1
.
3

1
0

2
.
1
J

7
.
1

4
.
9

4
0
.
8

6
.
3

3
6
.
9

2
.
9
J

3
6

<
0
.
3
3

1
.
8
J

1
1

9
.
8

2
0

2
.
9

<
0
.
2
2

1
.
7
J

<
0
.
3
0

<
0
.
8
8

5
.
6

<
0
.
6
4
538 1.4J

2
5
7
222 3.4J

2
.
0
J

7
.
4

2
.
0
J

9
.
6

B
D
L
VP
-
8

1
2
/
1
/
2
0
1
6

s
u
b
s
l
a
b

2
4
.
2

<
0
.
2
4

<
0
.
4
2

<
0
.
4
0

<
1
.
0

1
1

0
.
8
1
J

<
0
.
3
4

1
8

<
0
.
2
2

<
1
.
3
43
8

<
0
.
2
5

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
2
5

1
.
9
J

<
0
.
4
4

5
8

3
3

4
2
.
1

<
0
.
3
3

<
0
.
3
3

3
.
3

2
0

1
6

2
.
9

<
0
.
2
2

2
12

1
.
9
J

<
0
.
8
8

1
.
9
J

3
.
9

6
.
6

2
.
6

6
.
4

1
.
6

2
.
5
J

<
0
.
2
1

4
9
.
5

1
1

6
0
.
4

B
D
L
21
6
0
0
0

1
3
.
9

1
2
0

4
8
7
0

3
4
8

4
0
.
7

6
2
6

1
5
6

4
1
7
0
0

1
.
5
6

6
9
5

5
8
5

1
3
9
0

3
6

3
7
4

4
8
7

4
8
7
0
41
7
0

3
4
8
0
0

2
0
9
0
0

6
9
5
0

4
8
.
7

2
7
.
8

1
3
9
0
0

3
4
8
0
0

1
3
.
9

5
5
.
9

6
9
5

6
9
.
5

6
9
.
5

C
S
27
2
0
0
0
0

1
7
5

1
5
7
0

6
1
3
0
0

4
3
8
0

5
3
3

7
8
8
0

2
0
4
0

5
2
6
0
0
0

2
0
.
4

8
7
6
0

7
6
7
0

1
7
5
0
0

4
7
2

4
9
1
0

6
1
3
0

6
1
3
0
0

5
2
6
0
0

4
3
8
0
0
0

2
6
3
0
0
0

8
7
6
0
0

6
1
3

3
5
0
0

1
7
5
0
0

4
3
8
0
0

1
7
5

2
7
9
0

8
7
6
0

8
7
6
0
8,760

C
S
No
t
e
s
:
"N
D
"

d
e
n
o
t
e
s

n
o
t

d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

"
J
"

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d

v
a
l
u
e
Bo
l
d
de
n
o
t
e
s

c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

g
r
e
a
t
e
r

t
h
a
n
t

t
h
e

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

I
A
S
L
.
Bo
l
d

de
n
o
t
e
s

c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

g
r
e
a
t
e
r

t
h
a
n

t
h
e

N
o
n
-
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

I
A
S
L
.
Ta
b
l
e

2
Ca
r
b
o
n
e

P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
34
0
0

Y
o
n
k
e
r
s

R
o
a
d
;

R
a
l
e
i
g
h
,

N
C
HE
S

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

#
3
9
4
0
0
1
Su
m
m
a
r
y

o
f

A
n
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

D
a
t
a
So
i
l

V
a
p
o
r

D
a
t
a
Co
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n

Da
t
e
E
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
Trichlorofluoromethane (ug/m3)
NC
D
E
Q

V
a
p
o
r

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n

S
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g

Co
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

(
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

-

S
u
b
s
l
a
b

a
n
d

Ex
t
e
r
i
o
r

S
o
i
l

G
a
s

S
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g

L
e
v
e
l
)

-

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

20
1
6
NC
D
E
Q

V
a
p
o
r

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n

S
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g

Co
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

(
N
o
n
-
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

-

S
u
b
s
l
a
b

a
n
d

Ex
t
e
r
i
o
r

S
o
i
l

G
a
s

S
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g

L
e
v
e
l

-

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

20
1
6
De
t
e
c
t
e
d

C
o
m
p
o
u
n
d
Styrene (ug/m3)All Other Compounds (ug/m3)
Sa
m
p
l
e

I
D

Nu
m
b
e
r
An
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

M
e
t
h
o
d

(
i
.
e
.
,

V
O
C
s

b
y

M
e
t
h
o
d

8
2
6
0
)
Co
n
s
t
i
t
u
e
n
t

o
f

C
o
n
c
e
r
n
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Total Xylenes (ug/m3)
1
,
3

B
u
t
a
d
i
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
C
y
c
l
o
h
e
x
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
1
,
1
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
c
i
s
-
1
,
2

D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
E
t
h
a
n
o
l

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
4
-
E
t
h
y
l
t
o
l
u
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
o-Xylene
B
e
n
z
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
C
a
r
b
o
n

D
i
s
u
l
f
i
d
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
C
h
l
o
r
o
f
o
r
m

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
C
a
r
b
o
n

T
e
t
r
a
c
h
l
o
r
i
d
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
H
e
p
t
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
H
e
x
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
I
s
o
p
r
o
p
y
l

A
l
c
o
h
o
l

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
M
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

C
h
l
o
r
i
d
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
P
r
o
p
y
l
e
n
e

(ug/m3)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene (ug/m3)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene (ug/m3)2,2,4-Trimethylpentane (ug/m3)Tetrachlorothylene (ug/m3)Toluene (ug/m3)Vinyl Chloride (ug/m3)m,p-Xylene (ug/m3)
A
c
e
t
o
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
E
t
h
y
l

A
c
e
t
a
t
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
1
,
1
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
Trichloroethylene (ug/m3)
1
,
2
-
D
i
b
r
o
m
o
e
t
h
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
d
i
f
l
u
o
r
o
m
e
t
h
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
M
e
t
h
y
l

E
t
h
y
l

K
e
t
o
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
Tertiary Butyl Alcohol (ug/m3)
C
h
l
o
r
o
b
e
n
z
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
3
-
C
h
l
o
r
o
p
r
o
p
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
1
,
2
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
t
r
a
n
s
-
1
,
2

D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)
Tetrahydrofuran (ug/m3)
C
h
l
o
r
o
m
e
t
h
a
n
e

(
u
g
/
m
3
)

ATTACHMENT 4 TABLE 1 - 12/29/2016 VAPOR INTRUSION AIR SAMPLING RESULTS
Table 1 - 12/29/2016 Vapor Intrusion Air Sampling Results
Former Ark-Les Laboratories Site3400 Yonkers Road - Raleigh, Wake County, NCBrownfield Project No. 20088-16-92McAdams Project No. SPEC-16571
A-1 Showroom A-2 Warehouse
(East)
A-3a Warehouse
(West) - Duplicate
A-3b Warehouse
(West) - Duplicate
A-4 Former Ark-
Les Lab
A-5 Former Ark-Les
Office Space (West)
A-6 Former Ark-Les
Office Space (East)
A-7 Ambient/
Background (Loading
Dock)
Sampling Date/Time TCR = 1.0E-06
THQ = 0.2
TCR = 1.0E-05
THQ = 0.2
TCR = 1.0E-04
THQ = 0.2
12/30/2016
1:17 AM
12/30/2016
12:11 AM
12/30/2016
1:20 AM
12/30/2016
1:20 AM
12/30/2016
1:29 AM
12/30/2016
1:15 AM
12/30/2016
1:13 AM
12/30/2016
1:24 AM
EPA TO-15Acetone 27200 27200 27200 30 22 22 34 30 27 24 8.9Benzene1.57 15.7 26.3 0.58 0.60 0.66 0.74 0.74 0.57 1.0 0.561,3-Butadiene 0.409 1.75 1.75 ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)2-Butanone (MEK)4380 4380 4380 9.2 7.3 11 11 7.6 5.5 5.8 1.5 JCarbon Disulfide 613 613 613 0.24 J 0.085 J 0.087 J 0.066 J 0.079 J 0.079 J 0.061 J 0.039 JCarbon Tetrachloride 2.04 20.4 87.6 0.51 0.53 0.52 0.50 0.51 0.48 0.47 0.49Chlorobenzene43.8 43.8 43.8 ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)Chloroform 0.533 5.33 53.3 0.14 J 0.082 J 0.079 J 0.075 J 0.089 J 0.099 J 0.089 J 0.075 J
Chloromethane 78.8 78.8 78.8 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.6 1.1
Cyclohexane 5260 5260 5260 0.47 0.31 0.24 0.14 0.38 0.31 0.29 0.13
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)0.0204 0.204 2.04 ND (0.060)ND (0.060)ND (0.060)ND (0.060)ND (0.060)ND (0.060)ND (0.060)ND (0.060)
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)87.6 87.6 87.6 2.3 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.5 1.8
1,1-Dichloroethane 7.67 76.7 767 ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)ND (0.040)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.472 4.72 6.13 ND (0.039)ND (0.039)ND (0.039)ND (0.039)ND (0.039)0.071 J ND (0.039)ND (0.039)1,1-Dichloroethylene 175 175 175 ND (0.034)ND (0.034)ND (0.034)ND (0.034)ND (0.034)ND (0.034)ND (0.034)ND (0.034)Ethyl Acetate ~~~0.61 0.40 1.6 0.38 1.0 1.4 0.70 0.22Ethylbenzene4.91 49.1 491 0.30 0.23 0.23 0.21 0.41 0.43 0.33 0.064 JHexane6136136130.43 J 0.52 J 0.52 J 0.43 J 0.60 J 0.47 J 0.57 J 0.25 JMethylene Chloride 526 526 526 0.63 J 0.37 J 0.36 J 0.41 J 0.97 J 0.97 J 1.0 J 0.37 JPropene263026302630ND (0.18)ND (0.18)ND (0.18)ND (0.18)ND (0.18)ND (0.18)ND (0.18)ND (0.18)Styrene 876 876 876 7.0 11 76 71 7.6 5.3 4.5 0.045 J
Tetrachloroethylene 35 35 35 0.071 J ND (0.068)ND (0.068)ND (0.068)0.27 0.99 0.12 J 0.13 J
Tetrahydrofuran 1750 1750 1750 27 23 28 27 15 11 9.5 0.066 J
Toluene 4380 4380 4380 3.8 1.7 1.8 1.2 5.1 4.6 3.0 0.56
Trichloroethylene 1.75 1.75 1.75 ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)0.091 J ND (0.056)ND (0.056)ND (0.056)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 6.13 6.13 6.13 0.37 0.19 0.35 0.31 0.33 0.36 0.32 0.062 JVinyl Chloride 2.79 27.9 87.6 ND (0.038)ND (0.038)ND (0.038)ND (0.038)ND (0.038)ND (0.038)ND (0.038)ND (0.038)Xylene, m&p 87.6 87.6 87.6 0.66 0.59 0.60 0.54 0.99 0.99 0.80 0.21 JXylene, o-87.6 87.6 87.6 0.28 0.23 0.28 0.24 0.36 0.34 0.30 0.070 JNOTES:1. ND = Not detected above the lab reporting limits shown in parenthesis.2. NT = Not tested.3. ~ = No IHSB Residential or Non-Residential screening limits limits.
4. Values in italics exceed the IHSB Residential Indoor Air Screening Limits.
Parameter
SAMPLING LOCATION
6. IHSB Residential/Non-Residential screening limits displayed for Xylenes are for the summation of all isomers and not for the individual isomer. Cells for individual isomers might not be in italics, and/or shaded when the summation (total amount of all
isomers) exceeds the limits for these parameters. User discretion is advised when interpreting these results.
7. J-flag qualifier - Detected but below the Reporting Limit (lowest calibration standard); therefore, result is an estimated
concentration (CLP J-Flag).
Non-Residential
Indoor Air (A),
ug/m3
Non-Residential
Indoor Air (B),
ug/m3
Non-Residential
Indoor Air (C),
ug/m3
5. Bold values denote possible exceedance of IHSB Non-Residential Indoor Air Screening Limit (A) due to reporting limit greater than screening level.

ATTACHMENT 5 LABORATORY RESULTS AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY FORM
Page 1 of 20
Page 2 of 20
Page 3 of 20
Page 4 of 20
Page 5 of 20
Page 6 of 20
Page 7 of 20
Page 8 of 20
Page 9 of 20
Page 10 of 20
Page 11 of 20
Page 12 of 20
Page 13 of 20
Page 14 of 20
Page 15 of 20
Page 16 of 20
Page 17 of 20
Page 18 of 20
Page 19 of 20
Page 20 of 20