09014_Asheville Mica Property_Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation_20060111

January 11, 2006
Ms. Regina Trantham
Mica Village, LLC
f/k/a T.R. Enterprises, LLC
25 Lollie Lane
Weaverville, North Carolina 28787
Subject:Proposal for Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation
Future Mica Village
Former Asheville Mica Property
Asheville, Buncombe County, North Carolina
NC DENR Brownfields Project # 09014-05-11
RMA Project # R2005-512
Dear Ms. Trantham:
Rindt-McDuff Associates, Inc. (RMA) is pleased to present this report concerning the limited
Phase II Subsurface Investigation that was conducted at the above-referenced property (Site).
The objective of this investigation was to provide updated information regarding real or potential
subsurface environmental contamination.We understand that Mica Village, LLC and Capital
Bank will rely on this report as part of due diligence efforts for the proposed purchase of the Site.
RMA also understands that the State of North Carolina’s Department of Environment & Natural
Resources (NC DENR) and the Land-of-Sky Regional Council (LOS)will rely upon the report
for Mica Village’s inclusion in the Brownfields Program.
Background
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) completed in 1991 identified potential
environmental concerns associated with previous Site uses. Subsequent Phase II investigations in
1992 and 2001 identified elevated levels of petroleum hydrocarbons in the soil and solvents in
the groundwater.Based on these two previous subsurface investigations and RMA’s Phase I
ESA Update in 2005, the source of the soil contamination is thought to originate from the Site
and the source(s) of the groundwater contamination is thought to originate off-site.RMA
coordinated the number of borings, their locations, and the laboratory analyses with Ms. Tracy
Wahl of the NC DENR Brownfields Program.
P. O. Box 210, Blaine, TN 37709 Office: [phone] Fax: [phone]
www.rindt-mcduff.com
Rindt-McDuff Associates, Inc.
Environmental Consulting Services
Mica Village
75 Thompson Street
Phase II Investigation
January 11, 2006
Page 2 of 6
Protocol
RMA utilized a truck-mounted direct push rig with a two-inch inside diameter spoon to collect
most of the soil borings and a CME auger rig to set the two-inch inside diameter groundwater
monitoring wells.Alpha Environmental Services Inc.(Alpha)of Waynesville, North Carolina
provided the drilling services.Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc.(STL) analyzed the samples
according to methods requested by NC DENR.
Borings 1, 2, 3, and 6 were located between the Factory Building and the Sorting Building in an
area of previously identified petroleum-contaminated soil.RMA collected soil samples from
Borings 1, 2, and 3 and a groundwater sample from Boring 6. STL analyzed the samples for
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B, Semi-Volatile Organic
Compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270C,Hazardous Substance List Metals by EPA
Methods 6010B and 7471A, and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) for Diesel Range
Organics (DRO) and Gasoline Range Organics (GRO) by EPA Method 8015B.
Boring 4 was located east of the Factory Building in the former area of a 20,000-gallon heating
oil aboveground storage tank. The sample from Boring 4 was analyzed for TPH-DRO and TPH-
GRO.
Borings 7 and 8 were located off the northeast corner of the Main Building in an area of a former
heating oil aboveground storage tank and where solvent-contaminated groundwater previously
was identified. The samples from Borings 7 and 8 were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, Metals, and
TPH-DRO and TPH-GRO.
RMA attempted to locate Borings 7 and 8 as close as possible to a monitoring well developed in
2001 in this area. While the monitoring well in Boring 8 was located within approximately 10
feet of the former monitoring well from 2001,Boring 7 was drilled approximately 20 feet from
the 2001 monitoring well. Overhead utility lines prevented Alpha and RMA from moving the
soil boring closer to the former monitoring well location.
Each sample was collected in laboratory-supplied containers using dedicated disposable latex
gloves. The samples were properly labeled and placed on ice for delivery to the laboratory. The
samples were delivered to the laboratory following standard chain-of-custody protocol.
Mica Village
75 Thompson Street
Phase II Investigation
January 11, 2006
Page 3 of 6
Field Investigation
RMA mobilized to the Site on December 6, 2005 with the direct-push rig. RMA collected
subsurface soil samples from Borings 1 through 4. Groundwater was encountered at
approximately 6.5 feet below ground surface (bgs)in each boring.Soil samples were collected
from approximately two (2) to six (6) feet bgs and placed into re-sealable plastic bags. RMA
field-screened each sample using an HNU photo ionization detector (PID). None of the PID
readings were above three (3) parts per million. After field screening, the samples were
transferred into in laboratory-supplied containers.
On December 7, 2005, RMA mobilized to the Site with the CME auger rig. RMA advanced
Boring 5 in an effort to establish a groundwater monitoring well. RMA encountered auger
refusal at approximately 13.5 feet bgs and did not develop a well.
In Boring 6, RMA encountered auger refusal at approximately 13 feet bgs. RMA set a
groundwater monitoring well at this location despite not being able to drill to 10 feet below the
water table,as requested by Ms. Wahl and proposed for this project.
Since auger refusal was already encountered once in attempting to establish a monitoring well
and that a natural gas line was located in the work area, RMA, with the permission of Ms. Wahl,
chose not to attempt a third groundwater boring. RMA set a monitoring well at Boring 6. RMA
did not feel it was safe, given the uncertain location of the underground natural gas line, or cost
effective to attempt a third groundwater boring in this area.
A soil sample was collected from Boring 7 between approximately two (2) and six (6) feet bgs
using the CME auger rig.RMA advanced Boring 8 to a depth of approximately 19.5 feet bgs.
RMA encountered groundwater in Boring 8 at approximately seven (7) feet bgs.
The vertical stratigraphy of the soil strata was fairly consistent for each boring. Organic material
consisting of grasses, roots, and decayed vegetation, was present in the top six inches. Small
gravel pieces were observed between six and 18 inches from Borings 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6.From 18
inches to the water table,the soil contained high amounts of clay with a brown, grey or black
color and often a significant micaceous component. Small cobble (diameter of two inches) was
encountered at approximately 11 feet bgs.
Mica Village
75 Thompson Street
Phase II Investigation
January 11, 2006
Page 4 of 6
After allowing the monitoring wells to settle for at least 12 hours, RMA returned to the Site on
December 8 to sample the wells. Before purging the wells of at least three (3) well volumes or 15
gallons, RMA collected data on the geochemical characteristics of the well water using an YFI
Water Quality Meter.
BORING 6 BORING 8
Groundwater Elevation 6.0 feet bgs 5.2 feet bgs
Boring Depth 13.0 feet bgs 19.3 feet bgs
Water Column 7.0 feet 14.1 feet
pH 6.47 6.14
Conductivity 0.116 mho/cm 0.116 mho/cm
Turbidity 6.1 NTU 72.4 NTU
Dissolved Oxygen 6.69 %6.43 %
Temperature 12.04°C 11.87°C
Salinity 0 0
Laboratory Analysis
Analytical laboratory analysis indicates levels of TPH-DRO in soil Borings 1 and 3 at 59 mg/kg
and 420 mg/kg, which are above NC DENR limit of 40 mg/kg.The levels identified are much
less than the 4,000 and 1,700 mg/kg reported in the 1992 report for the same general area.
Manganese was detected in soil Borings 1 and 2, and in groundwater Borings 6 and 8 above NC
DENR limits. Manganese is a natural component in some types of mica.Ms. Wahl was not
particularly concerned about the manganese levels when presented with the information a few
weeks ago.
TPH-DRO was detected in the Borings 6 and 8 water samples at levels of 200 ug/L and 58 ug/L.
Trichloroethylene (TCE) was detected in the Boring 8 water sample at 3.1 ug/L, approximately
10% higher than the NC DENR 2L limit of 2.8 ug/L. Previous levels of TCE in this area were 8
ug/L and 5.1 ug/L in 1992 and 2001.
The final laboratory reports are included as an attachment.
Mica Village
75 Thompson Street
Phase II Investigation
January 11, 2006
Page 5 of 6
Conclusions
The elevated constituent levels of TPH-DRO and TCE identified in the soil and groundwater,
though above NC DENR limits, are less than previous years. This indicates two things, that the
constituents are naturally degrading (attenuating)in the subsurface and that the sources have
been removed or decreased.
Elevated levels of TPH-DRO can usually be remedied easily through excavation or monitoring
of the natural attenuation.TPH-DRO is not particularly mobile in soil or groundwater.Boring 8,
which contained TCE, is located approximately 250 feet from the Swannanoa River.Though
TCE can be mobile and readily migrate in groundwater, sampling closer to the river in 1992 did
not identify any TCE above NC DENR limits.
As frequently occurs on Brownfield properties, Mica Village may be expected to adhere to Land
Use Restrictions (LURs).LURs may be employed to protect human health from the elevated
levels of contaminants found in the soil and groundwater.The LURs could include restrictions
on drinking water or irrigation wells on the Site, or basements or foundations below a certain
depth.
The testing performed as part of this report was proposed by NC DENR for the purpose of
identifying those areas most likely to affect the potential purchase of the Site.Based on the
information obtained to date, it appears that Site conditions are improving as related to known
contamination from petroleum and volatile products.Another benefit for the Site is the high clay
content in the soils. Clays usually retard the movement of contaminants in soil or groundwater
and have quicker natural degradation periods than sandy soils.
To complement this investigation, NC DENR proposes additional work to further delineate and
identify real or potential sources of contamination on the Site. This testing will be paid for
through a federal grant secured by LOS.RMA is in the process of preparing this proposal for
LOS, for the benefit of Mica Village, LLC.
RMA is optimistic that the low levels of contaminants identified at the Site can be managed in a
cost-effective manner that would allow the Mica Village project to proceed.
Mica Village
75 Thompson Street
Phase II Investigation
January 11, 2006
Page 6 of 6
RMA appreciates the opportunity to have been of service during this project. Should you have
any questions concerning this report or the investigative activities, please contact our office at
your convenience.
Sincerely,
RINDT-MCDUFF ASSOCIATES, INC.
Robert A. Jackson Reginald Dawkins, P.G.(Georgia)
Project Manager Project Geologist
Brian A. Rindt, P.E., Esq.
Chief Executive Officer
attachments
C:\RINDT-MCDUFF ASSOCIATES\Projects\2005\2005-512(TR Ent Phase II)\2005-512_Rpt.doc
APPENDIX A
Figures
Main Bldg
F a c t o r y B ld g
Boring 6
Boring
4
Boring 2
Boring 3
Boring 1
Boring 7 Boring 8
2005
BORING
LOCATIONS
Water Sampling:
Borings 6 & 8
Soil Sampling:
Borings 1, 2, 3, 4, & 7
Fmr 10k gal
diesel UST, 680
ppm DRO @ 12’
Fmr
Well
S o ilS t a in ‘9 1
Oil Hse ‘46 &
Drum Stg ‘91
F m r 2 0 k
g a l o i l A S T
Fmr
Furn Vat
B-1 8 ppb
TCE
SS-2 1,700
ppm &
SS-3 4,000
ppm TPH
Main Bldg
S o rt in g B ld g
F a c t o r y B ld gBorings
6,2,1,3
Boring
4
Borings
7 & 8
386 ppmMnBoring 2
5.1 ppbTCEGP-6
8 ppbTCEB-1
4,000 ppmTPHSS-3
1,700 ppmTPHSS-21992
42 ppbTCEGP-7
120 ppb
1.7 ppb
TCE
PCE
GP-52001
3.1 ppbTCEBoring 8water
200 ppbDROBoring 6water
420 ppmTPHBoring 3
59 ppm
651 ppm
TPH
Mn
Boring 12005
AMOUNT,
if above
NC DENR
limit
ITEMI.D.DATE
GP-1 GP-2
GP-3
GP-6
GP-4
GP-5
GP-7
1992
1992
2005
1992
2001
2005
DATE
5.1 ppbTCEGP-6
420 ppmTPHBoring 3
8 ppbTCEB-1
3.1 ppbTCEBoring 8
4,000 ppmTPHSS-3
1,700 ppmTPHSS-2
AMOUNTITEMSAME
AREAS
APPENDIX B
Photographs
PHOTOGRAPH 1
Looking west,view of the locations of Borings 1 and 2.
The Factory Building is to the south and the Sorting Building is to the north.
PHOTOGRAPH 2
Looking east, view of the location of Boring 3.
The Factory Building is to the north and the Sorting Building is to the south.
PHOTOGRAPH 3
Looking northeast, view of the location of Boring 4.
PHOTOGRAPH 4
Looking north, view of the location of Boring 6.
PHOTOGRAPH 5
Looking east, view of the location of Boring 7.
PHOTOGRAPH 6
Looking west, view of the location of Boring 8.
APPENDIX C
Analytical Laboratory Results
H5L070225 Analytical Report 1..............................................
Sample Receipt Documentation 54..........................................
Total Number of Pages 60........................................................
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
H5L080138 Analytical Report 1..............................................
Sample Receipt Documentation 35..........................................
Total Number of Pages 39........................................................
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
H5L090204 Analytical Report 1..............................................
Sample Receipt Documentation 57..........................................
Total Number of Pages 63........................................................
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63