MO-1679_27848_CA_LSA_19920814_Preliminary Site Assessment of 19 Potential Environmental Sites Report Pages 23-27

Beverly, Trudy
From: Box, Gordon H
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2020 12:32 PM
To: Beverly, Trudy
Cc: Box, Gordon H
Subject: RE: Galleria 27 Antique/ MLM Auto - Hwy 24/27 & Old Camden Road, Midland
Attachments: R-0615B As Built Plans 6.669004T_ROADWAY-STRUCTURE - Copy.pdf, R-0615B
PSA 19 Sites-.pdf
ah„ also this
Gordon
From: Beverly, Trudy <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 1:36 PM
To: Box, Gordon H <[e-mail]>
Subject: Galleria 27 Antique/ MLM Auto - Hwy 24/27 & Old Camden Road, Midland
Gordon,
I'm trying to locate a Preliminary Site Assessment Report prepared by NCDOT in 1992 for an underground
storage tank site in our inventory (NCDOTsite #5/MLM Auto Resale, Incident #27848, 100 Hwy 24/27 @ Old
Camden Road, Midland, Cabarrus County). We have a July 1993 letter referencing the report. But, do not have
a copy of the report in our records (link to UST electronic site files below).
https://edocs.deg.nc.gov/WasteManagement/Search.aspx?dbid=0&searchcommand=%7b%5bWM%5d%3a%5b
Subdivision%5d%3d%22UST%22%2c%5bProgram ID%5d%3d%22*MO-1679*%22%7d
I was so sorry to hear about Cyrus' passing. My thoughts and prayers are with your group.
Thanks for your assistance,
Trudy
Trudy Beverly, L.G.
Hydrogeologist, Division of Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
�r UST Section, Mooresville Regional Office
704.235.2182 (Office)
Trudy.Beverlya,ncdenr.gov
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Office Mailing Address:
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Branch's Underground Storage Tanks Website Address: hops://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/waste-management/ust
Branch's Above Ground Storage Tanks Website Address: https:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/waste-management/ust/ast-proeram
INTERACTIVE MAPS WITH DWM SITES AND PERMITTED FACILITIES:
httDs://dea.nc. uov/about/divisions/waste-manaeement/waste-manaeement-rules-data/waste-manaeement-eis-maps
File Review Procedures:
hops://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/waste-manaaement/ust/file-review-procedures#mooresville-regional-office
ONLINE ACCESS TO UST SECTION DOCUMENTS (Laserfiche):
httns://dea.nc. eov/about/divisions/waste-manaeement/laserfiche
Document Submittal & UST File Names for Laserfiche Policies:
https://filcs.ne.,gov/nedeq/ W astc%20Management/D WM/UST/Corrective%20ActionBlectronic%20Document%20Subniittal%20Memo%20Update.pdf
https:Hfiles.nc. gov/ncdeq/Waste%20Management/DViM[UST/Corrective%20Action/UST%20filc%20names%20for%20Laserfiche.docx
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

e5y 8q
C
I
r;
0
.11
P
0
I
F
�eOpllex, Ad
605 Mercury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
[phone]
August 14, 1992
Mr. W.L. Moore, III
State Engineering Geologist
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Subject: Final Report for the Preliminary Site Assessments of 19 Potential Environmental Sites
Located along NC 24/27, Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, and Stanly Counties, North Carolina.
Geophex Job No. 258.
Ref: NC DOT Project: 6.689001T Tip R-2* R- 0Ps'S
Dear Mr. Moore:
Enclosed is a final report for the 19 subject PSAs. In the original task order, NC DOT requested
Geophex conduct PSAs at 13 sites; during our work, we encountered additional suspect UST
sites, and with NC DOT's approval added 5 more sites. Included also in this report is the
assessment of a former gold assay parcel in Cabarrus County. If you have questions or comments
concerning the report, please contact us.
Si.nc`r*," r1st"„
44.
Q` r
C
0 %�L OG!Sr a5
George R.UPields, P.G_
Project Manager
Enclosures
GRAF/ah
I.J. Won, Ph.D., P.G.
Technical Director
1J,

G
Table of Contents
a We -
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
1.0 Project Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Scope of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
�J 2.0 Methods and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.1 Site Walkover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2.2 Magnetic and GPR Surveys 1
2.3 Soil Borings and Soil -gas Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.0 Regional Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.0 Preliminary Site Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 5
4.1
Site 1 Handy Pantry Food Store (Mecklenburg County). . . . . . . . .
. . 5
4.2
Site 2 Quick Stop Night Club (Mecklenburg County). . . . . . . . . .
. 10
4.3
Site 3 Bumette's Auto Service (Cabarrus County). . . . . . . . . . .
. 14
4.4
Site 4 Better Built Bedding & Upholstery (Cabarrus County). . . . . . .
. 18
4.5
4.6
Site 5 Galleria 27 Antique Shop (Cabarrus County). . . . . . . . . . .
Site 6 Preslar's Store (Exxon) (Cabarrus County). . . . . . . . . . .
. 23
. 28
4.7
Site 7 (14) Fertilizer Business/Bethel Milling Co. (Cabarrus County). . . .
. 33
4.8
4.9
Site 8 D&S Clothing Outlet (Cabarrus County). . . . . . . . . . . .
Site 9 Morrison's Wrecker Service (Cabarrus County).
. 37
42
4.10
Site 10 Service Distributing Co. (Cabarrus County).. . . . . . . . . .
. 47
4.11
Site 11 (13) B&D Mart/Mobil Station (Cabarrus County).. . . . . . . .
. 52
4.12
Site 12 (15) Midland Wallcoverings and Carpet (Cabarrus County)..
54
4.13
Site 16 Joyce Beatty Property/Former Service Station (Cabarrus County). .
. 59
4.14 Site 17 Carriker Service Grocery & Produce (Cabarrus County) . . . . . . 64
4.15 Site 18 Tucker Furniture & Appliance (Cabarrus County) 68
4.16 Site 19 Presnell Insulation Company (Cabarrus County) . . . . . . . . . 70
4.17 Site 20
Consignment Shop (Cabarrus County) . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 75
4.18 Site 21
Antique Shop (Cabarrus County)
79
4.19 Site 22
Former Gold Assay Office (Cabarrus County) . . . . .
. . . . . 81
5.0 References .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 86
Appendices
Appendix A. Reference letters for the Preliminary Site Assessment of 18 UST sites.
Appendix B. Laboratory Analyses and Chain -of -Custody Records for TPH.
Appendix C. Laboratory Analyses and Chain -of -Custody Records for ICP and TCLP.
r
II

Final Report
NC DOT - PSAs along NC 24/27
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
aEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Geophex, Ltd.., was retained by the State of North Carolina, Department of Transportation,
Raleigh, in December 1991 for the Preliminary Site Assessments (PSAs) of 19 potential
environmental sites under NC DOT Project 6.689001T; Tip R-2104. The potential sites were
located along a 10.8-mile section of NC 24/27 in Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, and Stanly Counties.
The investigation was conducted as part of a proposed corridor expansion of NC 24/27 between
Allen and Locust, North Carolina.
t
The objectives of the investigation were to evaluate the potential environmental sites for
underground storage tanks (USTs) and for evidence and extent of petroleum, hazardous waste,
and/or heavy metal contamination. Table I summarizes the results of the investigation. The
number of USTs found, the presence or absence of soil contamination, and brief recommendations
are included in Table I.
Of the 19 potential environmental sites investigated, 15 require additional tasks to be performed
i (see Table I). These sites require either additional borings, upgrading, or closure of the UST
systems. Of the four remaining sites (Sites 7, 18, 21, and 22) requiring no further action, only
Site 7 presently contains a UST within the surveyed area. This final report includes the assessment
and recommendations for each of the 19 potential sites.
c
G
C
I
0
r

0
G
0
0
Final Report
NC DOT - PSAs along NC 24/27
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
Table L Executive summary table of 19 potential environmental sites located along NC 24/27.
Number Soil contamination
of USTs exceeds
Site ID Description found Regulatory levels* Recommendations
1 Handy Pantry Food Store 2 Yes Perform Tank Tightness Test, then
2
Quick Stop Night Club
1
No
3
Bumeue's Auto Service
1
Yes
4
Better Built
Bedding & Upholstery
1
No
5
Galleria Antique Shop
0
Yes
6
Preslar's Store (Exxon)
4
None above
4 feet
7
Fertilizer Business/
Bethel Milling Co.
1
No
8
D&S Clothing Outlet
0
Yes
9
Morrison's Wrecker Service
1
Yes
10
Service Distributing Co.
1
Yes
L:
11
B & D Mart
6
Unknown
12
Midland Wallcovering
3
Yes
and Carpet
'
16
Joyce Beatty Property
2
Yes
17
Carriker's Service
'
Grocery & Produce
1
No
18
Tucker Furniture & Appliance
0
No Borings
Advancod
19
Presnell insulation Company
2
Yes
0
0
20 Consignment Shop
21 Antique Shop
22 Former Gold Assay Office
2
0
No
No Borings
Advanced
No
upgrade or closure of the piping or
entire UST system and remove
contaminated soil.
Conduct UST closure.
Conduct UST closure and remove
contaminated soil.
Conduct UST closure.
Remove contaminated soil and
dispenser island.
Conduct UST closure of Tank T1.
No further action necessary.
Remove contaminated soil and
dispenser island.
Conduct UST closure, remove
contaminated soil and dispenser
island.
Advance three additional borings to
determine lateral extent of
petroleum contamination around
dispenser island.
Were not allowed on property to
conduct soil borings, recommend
five soil borings prior to parcel
aquisition.
Conduct UST closure, remove
contaminated soil and dispenser
island.
Conduct UST closure, remove
contaminated soil and dispenser
island.
Conduct UST closure.
No further action necessary.
Conduct UST closure, remove
contaminated soil and dispenser
island.
Conduct UST closure.
No further action necessary.
No further action necessary.
* For Sites 1 through 21 the regulatory/action level for TPH is 10 ppm.
a For Site 22 the regulatory levels for TCLP Metals are located in Appendix C.
Sites 13 through 15 are duplicate sites (see Appendix A).
r
rii

w
R
U
zu
O w y 0
� t�
V
N UO
0 �
�� NW
4-e
rn
� ,~ N
N NN
V]
ogg-<
1
a�.
IsN p
Q 40
IL) a-4
44c
r�o"o
�UA�
u
o •a a
os�d�
•� E.-r c, N
n
� ^r
N
w
U
S
v
Cn
-2-

0
0
I
r
C
I
P
0
a
C
0
0
11
Final Report
NC DOT - PSAs along NC 24/27
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
1.0 Project Introduction
1.1 Project Description
This report summarizes activities conducted during Preliminary Site Assessments (PSAs) of 19
potential environmental sites along a 10.8-mile section of NC 24/27 in Mecklenburg, Cabarrus,
and Stanly Counties. The 19 potential sites, 18 are suspect underground storage tank (UST) sites
and 1 is a former gold assay office, are located on both the north and south sides of NC 24/27
(Figure 1.1-1) and are referenced to two letters in Appendix A. The investigation has been
conducted as part of a proposed corridor expansion of NC 24/27 by the North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NC DOT) between Allen and Locust, North Carolina.
1.2 Scope of Work
The purpose of the investigation of the 18 UST sites was (i) to locate USTs on the suspect UST
sites, (ii) to document the presence of any petroleum hydrocarbon contamination, and (iii) to
determine if remediation or removal of contaminated soils will be need prior to corridor expansion,
and relate these findings to the proposed NC DOT right-of-way. For the former gold assay office
(Site 22), the purpose was to determine the presence of any heavy metal contamination and
detem-line extent and volume of contaminated soil that should be removed
2.0 Methods and Procedures
2.1 Site Walkover
Prior to individual surveys, a site walkover was performed to delineate boundary conditions. An
orthogonal grid was constructed for site mapping and data collection purposes. Structures, site
conditions, and other relevant features were noted.
2.2 Magnetic and GPR Surveys
Following a visual site inspection, geophysical surveys were conducted to locate USTs. Surveys
consisted of: 1) a total -field or a vertical -gradient magnetic survey, and 2) a ground -penetrating
radar survey. Field survey instruments used included:
Total Field Magnetometer: Model 846, manufactured by EG&G Geometrics, with a 1
gamma accuracy.
Gradient Magnetometer: Model GA-72CV, manufactured by Schonestedt, and modified
by Geophex.
Ground -Penetrating Radar (GPR): SIR System-3, manufactured by GSSI, Inc.; Model
PR-8304 Profiling Recorder, Model 3102 transducer with a center frequency of
500 MHz and a 2 ns pulse width; CC-30111 Control Cable with a 30 in length; and
Model 10 Remote Marker.
-1-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSAs along NC 24/27
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
A magnetic survey detects variations, or anomalies, that deviate from the earth's main field that is
distorted by man-made structures, mainly ferromagnetic objects such as steel containers, tanks,
�J and drums buried in the earth. For both total -field and vertical -gradient magnetic data, the spatial
variations of the field (rather than their absolute values or signs) are indicative of buried targets.
D The main guideline on interpreting the magnetic data is isolating magnetic highs or lows (with
sufficient magnitude) whose lateral extent is comparable to, or slightly larger than, the size of the
suspected target.
GPR anomalies result when there is a contrast in bulk dielectric property between the buried
materials and the host geologic formation. Metals having high electrical conductivities typically
produce strong radar reflections. Used in conjunction with a magnetic survey, GPR enables the
�J investigator to delineate the size and shape of a target. Due to the cumbersome nature of GPR
records, individual profiles for each site will not be included in this report, an example profile is
represented in Figure 2.2-1. We will however retain the original records in our files.
2.3 Soil Borings and Soil -gas Survey
Soil borings were conducted to determine the absence or presence of petroleum hydrocarbon
contamination. Soil samples were collected at 3-foot intervals and analyzed using a
photoionization detector (PID), for organic vapor content by means of a head -space technique
modified from a method based on Robbins and others (1989). The results of the soil -gas surveys
are presented in tabular format in Sections 4.1 through 4.19. Selected soil samples from each site,
excluding Site 22, were submitted to a laboratory (IFA, Inc. in Cary, NC) for total hydrocarbon
(TPH) analysis under EPA Methods 3550 (diesel fraction) and/or 5030 (gasoline fraction). Soil
samples collected at Site 22 (Former Gold Assay Office) were analyzed for heavy metal
concentrations.
The soils in Stanly, Cabarrus, and Mecklenburg counties vary little within the project corridor.
Typically they are composed of sandy clay loam to silty clay loam, with 0 to 8 percent slopes. The
soils are well to moderately well drained, formed on the residuum of acidic igneous and/or
a metamorphic rock. Depths to bedrock average three to five feet (USDA SCS, 1980, 1988, 1989).
Soil boring depths, within the project corridor, ranged from 1.5 to 20 feet, with an average of 7
feet. Auger refusal depths averaged 5.5 feet during the PSAs.
3.0 Regional Geology
j j Within the proposed project corridor the regional geology is comprised of metavolcanic and
U igneous assemblages of the Charlotte Belt (CB), along with metasedimentary and metavolcanic
suites of the Carolina Slate Belt (CSB) (Gair, 1989). The Floyd Church Formation of the CSB,
d along the eastern edge of the corridor, is typically composed of siltstone and mudstone beds 20 to
60 cm thick (Milton, 1984). It is estimated to be 900 to 6,000 meters thick in the Albemarle area
(Stromquist and Sundehus, 1969; Seiders, 1978). The Gold Hill -Silver Hill fault zone separates
the two litho -tectonic belts in this area. The shear zone is comprised primarily of phyllite
equivalent to the Tillery and Cid,FOrmations (late Proterozoic -early Cambrian). It is the dominant
-3-

-4-

G
r-,
0
0
I
is
I
I
C
0
I
4
CI
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #1
August 14, 1992 (Geophez, Ltd.)
lithology of the CSB, found within the project corridor. West of the Gold Hill Fault,
metavolcanics of the CB are intruded by a non- to weakly -foliated granodiorite (Ordovician -
Devonian) (Gair, 1989).
4.0 Preliminary Site Assessments
The following sections report the assessment, conclusions, and recommendations for the
individual sites.
4.1 Site 1 Handy Pantry Food Store (Mecklenburg County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 east of the intersection with Arlington Church
Road (SR 3110). The proposed DOT right-of-way (ROW) currently lies to the south of the
building and travels through the present UST location. Visual site inspection and geophysical
surveys delineated two USTs (labeled T1 and T2 in Figure 4.1-1). Table 4.1-1 lists the available
information on the USTs.
Table 4.1-1. Inventory of two USTs located at Site 1 (Handy Pantry Food Store).
Tank locations (T1 & T2) are shown in Figure 4.1-1.
Approximate Size Current
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
TI Gasoline 21 96 8,000 Steel In Use
T2 Gasoline 21 96 8,000 Steel In Use
Seven borings surrounding the USTs and the dispenser island (see Figure 4.1-2; labeled B 1
through B7) were advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.1-2.
Two borings (B3 and B4) hit auger refusal at seven feet or less. The remaining borings (B 1, B2,
and B5 through B7) were advanced to depths of 15 feet and contained reddish -brown clayey silt.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.1-2. All of the borings analyzed with
the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels generally below 60 ppm except for borings B5
through B7 (around the dispenser island) which had elevated readings throughout the soil column.
PID senses a wide range of hydrocarbon gases. Elevated PID levels may also indicate the presence
of non -fuel related hydrocarbons.
Four soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 5030
D (gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table 4.1-2.
Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
D

�k
X
a
E
K C r
Imo■
� N
�9 S
4U
Ln Nt
U
U
ed
�w
U
s
12
p Q
oA �
C7
�U o
� N
r
N
N
z
ZI
cd
N
to
.�i
O
,Ly
y
U
1-r
Q �
CO Q
O
wL°a',�
QI
xC3
�a
W
00
C4 U
'd
u Cd
cn �+
N
i-+
b!J
w

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #1
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.1-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site I
(Handy Pantry Food Store).
Depth
Sample
TPH
Interval
Soil
Interval
Petroleum
PID
5030
Boring
(feet)
Description
(feat)
Odor
(ppm)
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
M H
26
-
1.0 - 4.0
Red -Brown to Orange -Red Silty FELL
6
L-M
7
-
4.0 - 11.0
Tan -Yellow Medium Sand FILL
9
L -M
2
-
11.0 - 13.0
Red Silty CLAY
12
L -M
7
-
13.0 - 15.0
Mottled Yellow -Tan SILT
15
L -M
46
-
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
B-2
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
N
*
-
1.0 - 8.5
Red -Brown to Orange -Red Clayey SILT
6
L
42
-
8.5 - 10.5
Orange -Red -Yellow Clayey SILT
9
L
49
-
10.5 - 12.0
Yellow Clayey SILT
12
L
52
-
12.0 - 15.0
Orange -Brown Clayey SILT
15
L
57
<2.0
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 2.0
Brown Clay and Gravel FILL
2.0 - 3.0
Red Clay FILL
3
N
22
-
3.0 - 7.0
Red Clay and Gravel FILL.
6
N
27
-
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
&4
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 3.5
Red -Brown Silty Clay FILL
3
L
32
-
3.5 - 4.5
Tan Medium -grained Sand FILL
Auger Refusal @ 4.5 ft
B-5
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
H
>2,000
-
1.0 - 6.0
Red -Brown Silty CLAY
6
H
>2,000
-
6.0 - 11.0
Rod -Brown Silty CLAY
9
H
>2,000
-
11.0 - 13.0
Maroon -Tan mottled Silty CLAY
12
H
>2,000
-
13.0 - 15.0
Maroon -Tan mottled Silty CLAY
15
H
>2,000
4100
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
B-6
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
H
960
-
1.0 - 7.5
Red -Orange -Brown Silty CLAY
6
H
1587
-
7.5 - 9.0
Red -Orange -Yellow Clayey SILT
9
H
868
-
9.0 - 12.0
Red -Orange -Yellow Clayey SILT
12
H
941
-
12.0 - 15.0
Red -Orange -Yellow Clayey SILT
15
H
322
4.7
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
B 7
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
H
1227
-
1.0 - 4.0
Brown -Green Clay and Gravel FILL
6
H
>2,000
-
4.0 - 9.0
Red -Orange Silty CLAY
9
H
>2,000
-
9.0 - 12.0
Purple -Red powdery Clayey SILT
12
H
>2,000
-
12.0 - 15.0
Maroon -Purple to White Clayey SILT
15
H
>2,000
5000
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol '-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
Symbol'*' denotes that sample jar broke prior to analysis.
10
E

IM
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #1
August 14,1992 (Geophex; Ltd,)
The North Carolina Department of Environmental Management (DEM) document entitled
"Guidelines for Remediation of Soil Contaminated by Petroleum" dated August, 1990, specifies an
action level of 10 parts per million (ppm) for TPH determined by laboratory methods. Above the
action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the site. The
guideline may allow a higher action level if the Site Sensitivity Evaluation (SSE) score is low. Soil
samples from borings B-5 and B-7 exceeded the action level.
�. Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
a 1) Although elevated PH) and TPH results were not identified adjacent to the USTs, a tightness
test should be performed on both UST systems. If any part of the system fails it should be
corrected. This may involve replacement of the supply lines and/or upgrade or closure of the
f j system. During the supply line replacement and/or UST system upgrade or closure, all soil
greater than the DEM's site specific action level should be removed. If the total excavated soil
is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without a fee. However, if the amount of
soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site and allowed to volatilize. Once the
TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory methods, the soil can be used as fill.
The material may also be transported off -site to an approved facility for treatment or other uses.
�-' 2) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the replacement, upgrade or
closure activities, the following additional procedures should be initiated:
" • Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
0 contamination; and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified w/
Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), Ethylene Dibromide (EDB), and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
3) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
1.!
c
I
I
0-9-

pFhW Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #2,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.2 Site 2 Quick Stop Night Club (Mecklenburg County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 east of the intersection with Arlington Church
D Road (SR 3110). The proposed ROW currently lies to the north of the building. Visual site
inspection and geophysical surveys delineated one above ground storage tank (AST) (heating oil
tank, T2, in Figure 4.2-1) and one UST (labeled TI in Figure 4.2-2). Table 4.2-1 lists the
available information on the UST and AST.
Table 4.2-1. Inventory of one UST and one AST located at Site 2 (Quick Stop Night
Club). Tank locations (Tl & T2) are shown in Figure 4.2-1___
Approximate Size Current
UST/AST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
k
Number _ Type _ (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material _ (gallons)
----
T1 Unknown* 6 48 500 Steel Unknown*
CT2 Heating Oil 5 42 400 Steel in Use
C* No Fill Pipe was located for the UST.
Four borings surrounding the UST (see Figure 4.2-2; labeled B 1 through B4) were advanced.
Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.2-2. All four borings were advanced
to depths of 12 feet and contained reddish -brown silty clay.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.2-2. All of the borings analyzed with
athe PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels below 40 ppm. PID senses a wide range of
hydrocarbon gases. Elevated PID levels may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related
hydrocarbons.
Three soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550
(diesel fraction) and 5030 (gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the
last two columns of Table 4.2-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are
included in Appendix B.
0
I
0
0
0 -10-

-0
cd
0
C4
s
0
s
U
c
0
eo
0
r,
cn
04
oa
Area of Enlargement for Figure 4.2-2
i \1-1 � Heating Oil
s, 1ti -ze z� T� l 2)
LEGEND
Background Field: 52,900 gamma
Contour Interval: 400 gamma
20 10 0 20
Graphic Scale (fcct)
Figurc 4.2-1. Site details of UST Site 2 Quick Stop Night Club, showing
-�P magnetic data, magnetic contours, and area of enlargement
G e op h ex
represented in Figure 4.2-2..

0
c
I
0
P.
0
A
0
0
0
I
0
0
0

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #2.,
August 14, 1992 (Geophez, Ltd.)
Table 4.2-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 2
(Quick Stop Night Club).
Depth Sample TPH TPH
Interval Soil Interval Petroleum PID 3550 5030
Boring (feet) Description (feet) Odor (ppm) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
B-1 0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.0
Red -Brown Gravelly CLAY
2.5 - 12.0
Red -Orange CLAY
Boring Terminated @ 12.0 ft
B-2 0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.0
Red -Brown Gravelly CLAY
2.0 - 12.0
Red -Orange CLAY
Boring Terminated @ 12.0 ft
B-3 0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.5
Red -Brown Gravelly CLAY
1.5 - 6.0
Red -Orange CLAY
6.0 - 9.0
Red -Orange -Yellow mottled CLAY
9.0 - 12.0
Red CLAY
Boring Terminated @ 12.0 ft
B-4 0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.5
Red -Brown Gravelly CLAY
1.5 - 12.0
Red -Orange CLAY
Boring Terminated @ 12.0 ft
r
Petroleum Odor:N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
3 N 34 - -
6 N 27 - -
9 N 39 - -
12 N 29 <2.0 <2.0
3 N 24 - -
6 N 24 - -
9 N 37 - -
12 N 37 <2.0 <2.0
3
N
32 - -
6
N
29 - -
9
N
34 - -
12
N
37 <2.0 <2.0
3
N
32 - -
6
N
29 - -
9
N
29 - -
12
N
24 - -
The DEM action level of 10 ppm was not exceeded for any of the soil samples submitted (borings
B-1, B-2, and B-3).
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Tank T 1 is unused and should undergo closure.
2) During the UST closure, although no soils are expected to exceed 10 ppm TPH, soils
should be screened and all soil above 10 ppm TPH should be removed.
3) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM if soil contamination exceeds the action level
of 10 ppm.
-13-

I
I
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #3,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.3 Site 3 Burnette's Auto Service (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 approximately 3700 ft west of the intersection
with SR 1132. The proposed ROW currently lies well to the south of the building encountering
only the edge of the existing concrete pavement. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys
delineated five USTs (labeled Tl through T5 in Figure 4.3-1) and two ASTs (T6, and T7, also in
Figure 4.3-1). Table 4.3-1 lists the available information on these USTs and ASTs.
Table 4.3-1.
Inventory of five USTs and two ASTs located at Site 3 (Burnette's Auto
0
Service). Tank locations (T1 through T7) are shown in
Figure 4.3-1 .____
Approximate Size
Current
UST/AST
Product
Length Diameter Volume
Construction Volume
Number
Type
(feet) (inches) (gallons)
Material
(gallons)
T1
—
Gasoline
14 84 4,000
Steel
--- —`
160*
T2
Gasoline
14 84 4,000
Steel
160*
T3
Gasoline
14 84 4,000
Steel
160*
6 48 560
Steel
40*
T4
Diesel
T5
Kerosene
5 42 400
Steel
30*
T6
Waste Oil
Behind security fence
Steel
In Use
T7
eating Oi1R�_—Behind
security fence
Use
------ N_�N�Strxl
* Probably a mixture of fuel, water, and sludge.
____In
_____ __
According to conversations with site employees, Tanks T1 through T3, and T5 were removed on
27 April 1992. Garage employees recalled the loss of approximately 600 gallons of diesel fuel
from Tank T4 due to loose fittings. One mechanic told Geophex personnel that fuel could be seen
at the surface, east of the building, and through cracks in the concrete slabs adjacent to the former
dispenser islands.
Four borings (see Figure 4.3-1; labeled B1 through B4) were advanced, surrounding UST (T4).
Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.3-2. All four borings were advanced
ato depths of six to nine feet and contained greenish -gray clay.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.3-2. All of the borings analyzed with
a the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels greater than 30 ppm. PID senses a wide range of
hydrocarbon gases. Elevated PID levels may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related
hydrocarbons.
DThree soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550
(diesel fraction) and 5030 (gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the
0 -14-

0
u No
V �
u
� c
� �
u
�
U
o
a
�
Iq O
N
nu!d 1 T/
X
.wu.a
f
f]d Tfy
b
a
1 �� � � r, !A �
-
•�
rL
•ry �
O
5
U
O
�
o
O
�
t
� f
�
e
$
o
U
U
II.
-15-
6

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #3,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
last two columns
of Table 4.3-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain
-of -Custody Record are
included in Appendix B.
Table 4.3-2. Soil
boring descriptions, water levels, PID data,
and laboratory results collected from
aSite
3 (Burtlette's Auto Service).Depth
Sample Sample
TPH TPH
Interval
Soil
Interval
Petroleum
PID 3550 5030
Boring (feet)
Description ��--
(feet)
Odor
(Ppm)--(mg/kg) (mg/kg)
B-1 0.0 - 1.0
CONCRETE & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 4.0
Olive -Brown CLAY
3
L-M
34
`
4.0 - 6.0
Yellow & Gray Silty CLAY
6
N
_ =
47
6.0 - 9.0
Yellow & Gray Clayey SILT
9
N
107 50 <2.0
Water @ 5.5 ft
Boring Terminated @ 9.0 ft
B-2 0.0 - 1.0
CONCRETE & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 4.0
Olive -Brown CLAY
4.0 - 5.0
Greenish -Blue Silty CLAY
3
L
19 - -
5.0 - 6.0
Grayish -Green -Brown SAPROLITE
6
H
138 600 <2.0
Auger Refusal @ 6.0 ft
B-3 0.0 - 1.0
CONCRETE & GraveI FILL
1.0 - 3.5
Brown -Gray CLAY
3
N
23 - -
3.5 - 4.0
Grocnish-Gray CLAY
4.0 - 7.0
Greenish -Gray Clayey SAPROLITE
6
N-L
257 210 <2.0
Water @ 6.0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B-4 0.0 - 1.0
CONCRETE & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 3.5
Brown to Green -Gray CLAY
3
L-M
34 - -
3.5 - 7.0
Greenish -Gray CLAY
6
N-L
32 - -
7.0 - 9.0
Mottled Orange -Purple -Gray SAPROLITE 9
N L
32 14 <2.0
Water @ 3.5 ft
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
____-__________--
Symbol '-'denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. Soil samples from
each boring (B-1 through B-4) exceeded the action level.
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Tank T4 is unused and should undergo closure.
2) During the UST closure, all soil greater than the DEM's site specific action level should be
removed If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without
a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site
-16-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site U.
August 14. 1992 (Geophex. Ltd.)
LJ
and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory
methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an
Capproved facility for treatment or other uses.
3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the UST closure activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
• Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
1 groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination, and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
M OE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
rj If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study (including
�� JJ an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
f "j 4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
0
I
0
11
0
I
0
0 -17-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site K
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
p
4.4 Site 4 Better Built Bedding & Upholstery (Cabarrus County)
Formerly Better Built Bedding & Upholstery, Enlightened Daze now occupies this site, which is
located along the north side of NC 24/27 approximately 3500 feet west of the intersection with SR
1132. The proposed ROW currently lies through the canopy attached to the building's south side.
Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated one UST (labeled T1 in Figure 4.4-1)
and one AST (heating oil tank, T2, also in Figure 4.4-1). Table 4.4-1 lists the available
information on this UST and the AST.
Table 4.4-1. Inventory of one UST and one AST located at Site 4 (Enlightened Daze).
�J Tank locations (T1 and T2) are shown in Figure 4.4-1.
Approximate Size �^ Current
a UST/AST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
Tl —� Diesel 4 ��..._ 42 — 300 __...___.Steel 40*
T2 Heating Oil 5 27 x 45 250 Steel In Use
* Probably a mixture of fuel, water, and sludge. �_�—_______—_--_--------
Soil borings surrounding the UST were not advanced due to its distance from the proposed ROW.
Seven borings surrounding the dispenser island and canopy (see Figure 4.4-2; labeled B 1 through
B7) were advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.4-2. All seven
borings were advanced to depths greater than four feet, except for boring B-6 which encountered
aaugered refusal at three feet, and contained greenish -brown silty clay.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.4-2. All of the borings analyzed with
the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels lower than 15 ppm. Three soil samples were
submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550 (diesel fraction) and 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last two columns of Table
a4.4-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
Soil samples analyzed for TPH from each boring (B-3, B-5, and B-7) did not exceed the DEM
action level of 10 ppm. As inferred from Table 4.4-2, PID levels in the remaining borings (B-
1, B-2, B-4, and B-6), give no indication that TPH levels in the soil exceed 10 ppm.
0
11
1
rj -18-

0
0
I
0
G
c
c
pi
n
11
I
I
I
G
0
G
C
-19-

c
Fil
0
0
I
C
0
P
0
0
I
I
0
0
I
C
0
_20_

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #4,
August 14. 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.4-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 4
(Better Built Bedding & Upholstery currently Enlightened Daze).
Depth Sample TPH TPH
Interval Soil Interval Petroleum PID 3550 5030
Boring (feet) Description (feet) Odor (ppm) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.5
Dark Brown Gravelly FILL
2.5 - 4.5
Orange -Brown Silty CLAY w/rock frags
3
N
16 - -
Auger Refusal @ 4.5 ft
B-2
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.0
Dark Brown Gravelly FILL
1.0 - 3.5
Yellow -Brown Clayey SILT w/rock frags
3
N
14 - -
3.5 - 5.5
Yellow -Orange -Gray SAPROLITE
5.5
N
8 - -
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-3
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE & GraveI FELL
0.5 - 1.5
Dark Brown Gravelly FILL
1.5 - 4.0
Yellow -Brown Silty CLAY w/rock (rags
3
N
12 - -
4.0 - 8.0
Gran -Brow SILT w/saprolite frags
6
N
10 - -
8.0 - 9.0
Yellow -Orange -Gray S APROLITE
9
N
10 <2.0 <2.0
Auger Refusal @ 9.0 ft
B4
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.5
Dark Brown -Black Gravelly FILL.
1.5 - 4.0
Yellow -Orange Brown Silty CLAY
3
N
8 - -
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-5
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 2.5
Dark Brown Gravelly FILL
2.5 - 4.0
Yellow -Green Gray Silty CLAY
3
N
8 <2.0 <2.0
4.0 - 5.0
Yellow -Brown SILT w/saprolite frags
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
B{
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
1.0 - 3.0
Dark Brown Gravelly FILL
3
N
10 - -
Auger Refusal @ 3.0 ft
B-7
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.5
Dark Brown -Black Gravelly FILL
2.5 - 4.0
Greenish Brown -Black Silty CLAY
3
N-L
9 - -
4.0 - 5.0
As Above w/Yellow-Orange Saprolite
5
L
8 <2.0 <2.0
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
-21-

0
0
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #f4,
August 14, 1992 (Geophrz, Lid.)
a1) Although Tank T1 is well beyond the proposed ROW, it is unused and should undergo
closure.
2) During the UST closure, all soil greater than DEM's site specific action level should be
removed If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without
a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site
L+ and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory
methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an
approved facility for treatment or other uses.
�j 3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during closure activities, the following
additional procedures should be initiated:
• Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
0 4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
I
0
0
it,
0
0
-22-

0
0
0
r
c
P
C
I
C
r
It
11
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #5,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.5 Site 5 Galleria 27 Antique Shop (Cabarrus County)
The Galleria 27 Antique Shop site, currently the location of MLM Auto Resale, Inc., is located
along the north side of NC 24/27 east of the intersection with Old Camden Road (SR 1132). The
proposed ROW currently lies through the canopy attached to the front of the building. Visual site
inspection and geophysical surveys delineated no USTs on site, however one AST, used for
kerosene, was found (see Figure 4.5-1). Table 4.5-1 lists the available information on this AST.
Table 4.5-1. Inventory of one AST located at Site 5 (MLM Auto Resale, Inc.). Tank
location (T 1) is shown in Figure 4.5-1.
Approximate Size Current
AST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material �WWrYYY(gallons)___
T1 Kerosene 10 48 1,000 Steel In Use
Mr. George Lowell, property owner, stated that gasoline had not been sold at the site since 1970.
Three USTs were at the site until removal in 1985. In addition to the AST, a series of 55-gallon
drums (four total) connected together via galvanized piping serve as an oil/water separator. A 4-
inch polyvinyl -chloride pipe extends from the building's cast side and empties into the first of four
drums.
Ten borings surrounding the dispenser island and the previous tank pit (see Figure 4.5-2; labeled
B 1 through B 10) were advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.5-
2. Two borings (132 and B9) hit auger refusal at depths of less than six feet. The remaining
borings (B 1, B3 through B8, and B 10) were advanced to depths of nine feet or greater and
contained reddish -brown -silty clay.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.5-2. PID senses a wide range of
hydrocarbon gases. Elevated PID levels may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related
hydrocarbons.
Five soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table 4.5-2.
Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. The soil sample
from boring B-1 exceeded the action level.
r; -23-

0
-24-

.�i
o c
•� N
K
G
C4
'moo � ", o
a bo
L
.�-. �J Cct
o ci — O
L. C7 ,O
1
F• e bil
+ D
u �
o • 6 N
a 3 �
o I v a/
d I
W, _s
Q
� 3 �
I
I � �
I rL
va
.I--cn
u a
+ a T11 f-+
�" C/Z
❑
1
Ou I+
CA
+ a + N <i g
+
ON S U ,a f� -'
' W
y ti 9+J'0 4 U
::�O.pti o ii cV
a pq
I13
I u >r
I pq ; > bbA
C7 s'rht PL*Wr Ao �I
00
��s a m
pq swt pt�u
c u,
, o V
+ c
c
e) -
pt0 Zt t t -as
a
--25-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #5,
August 14,1992 (Geophez, Ltd.)
Table 4.5-2. Soil boring descriptions, MID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 5
(Galleria Antique Shop/MLM Auto Resale, Inc.).
Boring
De th
Interval
(feet)
Soil
Description
Sample
Interval
(feet)
- -
Petroleum
Odor
PID
(ppm)
TPH
5030
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
M-H
283�
0.5 - 7.5
7.5 -9.0
Red -Bin Gravelly Clay ELL
Orange -Red Sil CLAY
6
9
H
H
1109
>2,000
-
820
Auger Refusal 9.0 ft
B-2
0.0 - 2.0
ASPHALT & Green. Gravelly Clay FIIL
2
N L
59
-
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 1.0
3.0
ASPHALT & Gravelly Ci yY FILL
Green Silty Clay FILL.
3
M
66
-
1.0 -
3.0 - 4.0
-Gray
Green -Gray Silt FILL w/gravel
6
M
44
-
4.0 - 7.0
Red -Brown Silty CLAY
9
M
140
-
7.0 - 15.0
Orange -Red powdery Clayyey SILT
12
M
96
15.0 - 17.0
Orange -Yellow mottled Clayey SILT
15
18
M
M
158
93
3.0
-
17.0 - 20.0
Orange -Red Clayey SILT
T',munatrd 20.0 ft
Boring @
B-4
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Gravelly Clay FILL
M
96
-
1.0 - 3.0
3.0 4.0
Mottled Green Silty Cl FILL
Green -Gray Silt FILL IWUvel
3
6
M
64
-
-
4A - 8.0
Red -Brown Silty CLAY
9
M
L-M
66
51
-
8.0 - 13.0
13.0 -15.0
Bright Orange -Red Clayey SILT
Bright Orange -Yellow Clayey SILT
Bornng Tenrunated @ 15.0 ft
12
15
M
93
-
-
B-5
0.0 - 1.0
1.0 - 3.0
ASPHALT & Gravelly Clay FIIL
Mottled Green Silt FILL w/gravel
3
M-H
111
-
3.0 - 5.0
5.0 - 9.0
Green -Gray Silt FILL
Red -Brown Silty CLAY
6
9
M-H
M-H
54
96
-
<2.0
Boring Terminated @ 9.0 ft canopy overhead
B-6
0.0 - 1.5
1.5 - 4.0
ASPHALT & Gravelly Clay FILL
Blue -Gray -Green Silty Clay FILL
3
L-M
108
-
4.0 - 6.0
6.0 - 10.0
Red -Brown Silty CLAY
Red -Orange -Yellow mottled Silty CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 10.0 ft
6
9
I'm
L-M
103
128
-
-
B-7
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & Graven Clay �FELL
3
6
N-L
N-L
44
32
-
-
1.0 - 1.5
1.5
Gray -Brown Silty Clay FELL
Purple Clayey SILT
N
-15.0
-Red powdery
12
5 6
-
15
M
74
<2.0
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
B-8
0.0 - 0.75
Gravel FILL
3
L
44
-
0.75 - 5.5
Red-Brn to Gin -Gray Silty Clay FILL
6
L
L-M
34
46
-
-
5.5 - 10.5
10.5 - 13.0
Red-Ora�n� e Sil CLAY
Orange -Yellow laye SILT
9
12
I'M
44
41
-
<2.0
13.0 -15.0
Yellow Tan Clayey SILT
Boring Terminated @ 15.0 ft
15
L-M
B-9
0.0 - 2.0
Red -Brown to Gray and Tan Silty Clay FILL
N
29
-
2.0 - 4.0
4.0 - 5.5
Brown Silty Clay FILL
Dark Brown -Red Silty CLAY
3
5-5
N
29
-
Auger Refusal @ 5S ft
B-10
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
3
N-L
L
29
37
-
0.5 - 2.5
2.5 -9.0
Red-Brn-Green Silty Clay FILL
Red -Bin to Orange Yellow Silty CLAY
6
9
L
39
-
-
Boring Terminated @ 9.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L-= Low, M = Moderate, H = High�r^--�
Symbol ' 'denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
WZ

0
r
I
0
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site i15,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) An isolated area of soil contamination exists west of the dispenser island in the vicinity of
boring B-1. The dispenser island and associated piping is unused and should be removed.
2) During the piping removal, all soil greater than the DEM's site speck action level should be
removed If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without
a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site
and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory
methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an
approved facility for treatment or other uses.
3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the removal activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
• Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
P, 4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
(i
11
0
0
J
0
0 -27-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #6,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
rj 4.6 Site 6 Preslar's Store (Exxon) (Cabarrus County)
�J This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 east of the intersection with Preslar Lane. The
(� proposed ROW currently lies well to the north of the building. Visual site inspection and
L1 geophysical surveys delineated four USTs (labeled Tl through T4 in Figure 4.6-1) and two ASTs
(heating oil tanks, T5 and T6, also in Figure 4.6-1). Table 4.6-1 lists the available information on
the four USTs and the two ASTs.
Table 4.6-1. Inventory of four USTs and two ASTs located at Site 6 (Preslar's Store).
Tank locations (T1 thru T6) are shown in Figure 4.6_1.__W-
Approximate Size Current
UST/AST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
Tl Gasoline 12 64 — 2,000 �r Steel Fill Cap Locked
Lt T2 Gasoline 18 64 3,000 Steel In Use
T3 Gasoline 18 64 3,000 Steel In Use
T4 Kerosene 8 42 560 Steel In Use
T5 Heating Oil 5 27 x 45 250 Steel In Use
T6 Heating Oil 5 27 x 45 250 Steel In Use
- _— ---� --_^_- w_ for mid -grade Mr. Preslar, store owner, told Geophex personnel that Tank T1 was used o ggasoline
r
and is no longer used. The mid -grade pump had been removed from the dispenser island prior to
this survey. Nine borings surrounding the USTs and the dispenser island (see Figure 4.6-2;
' labeled B 1 through B9) were advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in
Table 4.6-2. One boring (B3) was advanced to a depth of 6.5 feet and contained yellow -brown
Csilty clay. The remaining borings (B 1, B2, B4 through B9) hit auger refusal or water at depths of
four feet or less.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.6-2. All of the borings analyzed with
the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels generally below 100 ppm except for boring B7,
which had an elevated reading of 188 ppm in the 3-foot sample. PID senses a wide range of
hydrocarbon gases and elevated readings may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related
hydrocarbons.
L1 Four soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table 4.6-2.
Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
0 -28-

U
U
LL
C
4
d
C
O
~x� 0
CR
� u �
:J E •
� O
E
G
U
F
� 1
1
m o a I
TR
.-
.,�
Y
1
F \
7
�
I c
v
00
W O 1
�
`o
PQ +
'
a
I r
a f
^,
ni
C
F
Q1
CA 1
W 1
it
I �
1 II
1 I I
e+e
N
0
01

}
L'
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site 46,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table
4.6-2. Soil boring descriptions, water levels, PID data, and laboratory results collected
from Site 6 (Preslar's Store [Exxon]).
Depth
Sample
TPH
5030
Interval
Soil interval
Petroleum PID
Boring
(feet)
Description (feet)
Odor (ppm) (mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 - 4.0
Grass and Top Soil -
Gray -Brown Gravelly Clay FILL 3
N-L 92 <2.0
Water @ 3.5 ft
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-2
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 - 3.5
Grass and Top Soil
Brown Clayey Silt FILL w/gravel 3
N-L 67
3.5-4.0
Yellow -Brown Silty CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 0.5
Grass and Top Soil
3
N-L 71 -
0.5 - 1.5
Brown Clay FILL
6
N-L 49
1.5 - 6.5
Yellow -Brown Silty CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
Top Soil
B-4
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 - 3.5
Grass and
Brown to Yellow -Brown Silty CLAY 3
N-L 58 -
Q
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
B-5
0.0 - 0.5
Grass and Top Soil
0.5 - 1.5
Brown Silty Clay FILL w/gravel
3
N-L 55 <2.0
1.5-3.5
Brown -Yellow CLAY trace of gravel
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 - 2.5
Grass and Top Soil
Brown Gravelly Clay FILL
No Sample
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-7
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE and Gravel FILL
3
H 188 <2.0
0.5 - 3.0
Green -Brown Sand and Gravel FILL
Auger Refusal @ 3.0 ft
B-8
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE and Gravel FM L
3
H 57 <2.0
0.5 - 3.5 .
Greta -Brown Sand and Gravel FILL
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
'
B-9
0.0 - 0.25
0.25 - 1.5
ASPHALT
Brown Sand and Gravel FILL
No Sample
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
D
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
The DEM action level of 10 ppm was not exceeded for any of the soil samples submitted (borings
-
B-1,
B-5, B-7, and B-8).
1
-31-

4rl
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #6,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Tank T1 is unused and should undergo closure.
a2) During the UST closure, although no soils are expected to exceed 10 ppm TPH, they should
be screened and all soil above 10 ppm TPH should be removed. Furthermore, soils should be
carefully screened at the base of the excavation since only one boring (B-3) attained a depth
greater than four feet.
a3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the removal activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
• Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM if soil contamination exceeds the action level
of 10 ppm, and to remove the tank from the state's inventory register of USTs.
G
0
0
G
0
E
0 -32-

a
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #7 (14),
August 14. 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.7 Site 7 (14) Fertilizer Business/Bethel Milling Co. (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 approximately 1600 feet west of the
intersection with Bethel Church Road (SR 1125). The proposed ROW currently lies through the
existing UST and dispenser at the southeast corner of the site. Visual site inspection and
Q geophysical surveys delineated one UST (Tl) on site, and two ASTs (M and73) (see Figure 4.7-
1). Table 4.7-1 lists the available information on these three tanks.
Q Table 4.7-1. Inventory on one UST and two ASTs located at Site 7 (Bethel Milling Co.).
Tank locations (T1 thru T3) are shown in Figure 4.7-1.
Approximate Size Current
UST/AST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
Ti Diesel 8 48 1,000 Steel In Use
T2 Molasses 28 64 4,600 Steel In Use
OT3 Nitrogen 17 120 10,000 _ Steel _ In Use
Seven borings surrounding the UST (see Figure 4.7-2; labeled B1 through B7) were advanced.
Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.7-2. Two borings (B2 and B3) were
advanced to a depth of nine feet or greater and contained orange to yellow clayey silt. The
remaining borings (B1, B4 through B7) hit auger refusal at depths less than seven feet.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.7-2. PID senses a wide range of
a hydrocarbon gases and elevated readings may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related
hydrocarbons.
Five soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 3550
(diesel fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table 4.7-2.
Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
0
0
0
G
0 -33-

(a) *M.L
V
1
L
O
�•
/
1
V
w
i
1
/
r
a
'•
O
oaf
••�
io
I
i
i
Q�} r
N
i
t
i
t
C
N
U
9
3
1
i
u 1
U I
1
nf
1
3 r
y �1
° i
5 i
z �
F
=
P
r
c
4
4
ca
as
bA
E
W
. p�•l
a
y a
cs
w •�
U�
U
�.O
U
a--1
u �
c
E'•1 cam.
O
v� U
•� U
a)
bo
v cd
A�
l -
U
�M
tw
w

0
0
0
0
I
0
0
G
r
0
a
0
I
I
0
0

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #7 (14).
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.7-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 7
(Bethel Milling Co.).
_
Depth
Sample
TPH
Interval
Soil
Interval
Petroleum
PID
3550
Boring
(feet)
Description
(feet)
Odor
(ppm)
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
Brown Sand and Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.0
Yellow -Brown Sandy Silt FILL
1.0 - 3.5
Red Brown Clayey SILT
3
N L
96
-
3.5 - 5.5
Yellow -Tan Sandy powdery SILT
5.5
N L
121
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-2
0.0 - 4.0
Orange -Yellow Clayey SILT
3
N-L
311
-
4.0 - 7.0
As above w/ Red and White Clayey SILT 6
L
180
-
7.0 - 9.5
Yellow -Tan Silty CLAY
9
H
214
<2,0
Auger Refusal @ 9.5 ft
B-3
0.0 - 0.5
Grass and Top Soil
3
N-L
339
-
0.5 - 10.0
Orange -Red Clayey SILT
6
N-L
52
-
9
L
146
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 10.0 ft
B-4
0.0 - 0.5
Gravel and Top Soil
0.5 - 1.5
Red Silty CLAY
1.5 - 3.5
Orange -Tan mottled Silty CLAY
3
N-L
96
-
3.5 - 4.5
White -Tan powdery Clayey SILT
Auger Refusal @ 4.5 ft
B-S
0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 5.0
Orange -Red Clayey SILT
3
N-L
78
-
5.0 - 5.5
Yellow -Brown Clayey SILT
5-5.5
L
99
-
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 3.5
Red -Brown Clayey SILT
3
N-L
144
-
3.5 - 6.5
Yellow -Tan Sandy SILT trace gravel
6
N-L
46
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
B-7
0.0 - 0.5
Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.5
Red -Brown Silty CLAY
3
N
*
-
2.5 - 6.5
Orange -Tan powdery Clayey SILT
6
N-L
133
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
Petroleum Odor. N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
Symbol '*'denotes that sample jar broke prior to PID analysis
The DEM action level of 10 pptn was not exceeded for any of the soil samples submitted (borings
B-1, thru B-3, B-6, and B-7).
Based on data from this site we recommend that no further action is necessary.
9981

r
I
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site N8,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
© 4.8 Site 8 D&S Clothing Outlet (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 west of the intersection with Bethel Church
Road (SR 1125). The proposed ROW currently runs through the existing canopy structure and
dispenser island north of the building. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated
no USTs at the site.
Upon interviewing Mr. Don Stallings, owner of the clothing outlet, it was determined that the
— USTs associated with the former service station no longer exist. Mr. Stallings told Geophex
n personnel that the building had been a service station for only 10-15 years. Approximately 35-40
years ago the service station was abandoned and the USTs removed. An addition to the building
was erected ten years ago and now both structures house the current business.
A magnetic survey was conducted to verify the non-existence/existence of USTs (Figure 4.8-1).
Once completed a single anomaly at the northwest corner of the canopy was investigated with
[� GPR. The GPR survey delineated a buried mass of metallic debris whose reflection signature was
uncharacteristic of a UST. The material most likely was left in place after UST removal and has
areal dimensions of 2 ft x 2 ft.
Seven borings surrounding the dispenser island (see Figure 4.8-2; labeled B 1 through B7) were
advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.8-2. All borings were
advanced to a depth of five to six feet and contained greenish -gray silty clay.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.8-2. Most soil samples analyzed with
the PID show hydrocarbon levels above 100 ppm, except for borings B5, and B6. Three soil
samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550 (diesel
fraction) and 5030 (gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last
column of Table 4.8-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in
Appendix B.
a The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
© site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. The soil samples
from borings B-1, B-4, and B-7 exceeded the action level.
11
I
0
r-.
-37-

0
N
ti
g i0 w Y cV
.ca -�
•o ' c� az
u � � u
fl. �nw
o o Cd
o 00
N �
ppoU qoLmqD IQtpz$ SZI I US p �
.....: x o
::•
.:
00
w C
4-1
cd
Xt
3 K apt •. h o� ao
O O cl
O CL,' + N I
1 �
NX
u
P
o I�
u
°° I N Q)
o

n
6
n
0
n
0
r
6
-39_-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site lib,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.8-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 8
(D & S Clothing Outlet).
�- Depth
�
Sample
TPH
TPH
interval
Soil
Interval Petroleum
PID
3550
5030
Boring (feet)
Description
feet Odor
()
(ppm)
(mglkg)
(mg/kg)
B-1 0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.5
Brown Sand and Gravel FILL
1.5 - 4.5
Yellow Silty CLAY w/Gravel
3 H
H
353
873
-
130
-
75
4.5 - 5.5
White -Gray powdery SAPROLITE
5.5
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-2 0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 4.0
Gray Gravelly Clay FILL
3
4.0 - 5.0
White -Gray Clayey SILT (Sweet Odor)
4-5
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
B-3 0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.0
Gray Silty Clay FULL w/organics
2.0 - 4.0
Rust Brown Clayey SILT
3
4.0 - 4.5
Gray -Green mottled Silty CLAY
4.5 - 6.0
Orange -Brown Sandy SILT
6
Auger Refusal @ 6.0 ft
B4 0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.0
Brown Gravel and Clay FILL
2A - 5.0
Yellow -Orange Silty CLAY w/gravel
3
5.0-5.5
SAPROLITE Chips and Rock
5.5
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-5 0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 3.5
Green -Gray Silty Clay FILL
3
3.5 - 5.5
Brown -Gray Clayey SILT
5
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-6 0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 1.5
Brown Sand and Gravel FULL
1.5 - 4.0
Yellow -Orange Silty CLAY
3
4.0 - 5.0
Gray Slatey SAPROLITE Chips
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
B-7 0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & Gravel FILL
0.5 - 4.0
Yellow -Orange to Gray Gravelly CLAY
3
4.0 - 5.0
White -Gray -Tan SAPROLTTE
4.5-5
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
M 205 - -
M 20 - -
N-L 38 - -
L 122 - -
M-H 288 - -
H 667 230 170
M 84 - -
L 31 - -
N-L 59 - -
N 5 - -
H 508 160 85
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) An isolated area of soil contamination exists along the western one-half of the dispenser

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site K8,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
island. The dispenser island and associated piping should be removed.
2) During the piping removal, all soil with TPH levels greater than the DEM's site specific
action level should be removed. If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be
landfarmed on -site without a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd; it
LLJJ should be stockpiled on -site and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as
determined by laboratory methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be
transported off -site to an approved facility for treatment or other uses.
3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the removal activities, the following
additional procedures should be initiated:
• Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
aMTBE, EDB, and isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
0 4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
F
F -41-

0
0
c
r
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #9,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.9 Site 9 Morrison's Wrecker Service (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 at the intersection with Jim Sossoman Road
(SR 1123). The proposed ROW currently lies to the north of the existing dispenser island on site
(Figure 4.9-1). Visual site inspection and interviews with the site owner, Mr. Kaye Morrison,
indicate one UST (Tank Tl), and one AST (Tank T2) on site (see Figure 4.9-1). Due to scattered
metal debris and the cluttered nature of the site no magnetic or GPR surveys were conducted.
Table 4.9-1 lists the available information on the two tanks.
Table 4.9-1. Inventory on one UST and one AST located at Site 9 (Morrison's Wrecker
�+ Service). Tank locations (T1 and 12) are shown in Figure 4.9-1.
j Approximate Size Current
1 UST/AST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
T1 Waste Oil 11 48 1,000 Steel 57--
T2 Hydraulic Motor Oil 5 27 x 45 250 Steel In Use
Mr. Morrison stated that two USTs were removed in 1978, when gasoline sales at the site were
discontinued. The USTs, 550- and 1000-gallon capacities, were located along the west side of the
building. Beneath the paint shop bay a 1000-gallon UST has been used for waste oil storage (Tl;
see Figure 4.9-1). Seven borings within the previous UST pit, surrounding the dispenser island,
and in the vicinity of Tank T1 (see Figure 4.9-2; labeled B1 through B7) were advanced.
Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.9-2. One boring (B6) was advanced
to a depth of 5.5 feet and contained greenish -orange silty clay. The remaining borings (B 1 thru
B5, and B7) hit auger refusal at approximately three feet.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.9-2. Most soil samples analyzed with
the PID show hydrocarbon levels above 100 ppm, except for borings B 1, B2, and B5.
Four soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table 4.9-2_
Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM. may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. The soil samples
D from borings B-3, B-4, B-6, and B-7 exceeded the action level.
G
-42-

0
0
0
r
[V
V
N
--,wpssos "''f
ti
O
xi
V3

]
�
/
/40
0
g
0
q
^
0
_
/
�
�
/ \
�
C/3
)
�
m
.
2
&
2
§
�
2
O
2
7
m
. & G
$
k
�
o
\
_«
m
&
i
\ f
�
---
z
.
�
\
�
«
-44-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site IN.
August 14, 1992 (Geophea, Ltd.)
Table 4.9-2. Soil boring descriptions, water levels, PID data, and laboratory results collected from
Site 9 (Morrison's Wrecker Service).
Depth Sample TPH
Interval Soil Interval Petroleum PID 5030
Boring (feet) Description (feet) Odor (ppm) (mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 2.5
Gravel & Clay FILL
2.5
N
14
-
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-2
0.0 - 3.0
Gravel & Clay FILL
3
N
13
-
Water @ 4.0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B 3
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
0.5 - 3.5
Yellow -Orange Gravelly CLAY
3
H
1299
180
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
B-4
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
0.5 - 3.5
Brown Sandy SILT
3
M
242
23
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
B-5
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
0.5 - 2.5
Green -Brown Sandy SILT/Silty CLAY
2.5
N-L
38
-
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
0.5 - 5.5
Greenish -Orange Gravelly Silty CLAY
3
M-H
615
-
with increasing amounts of red saprolite
5.5
M-H
477
43
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B-7
0.0 - 0.5
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
0.5 - 2.0
Green -Orange Sandy SILT
2.0 - 3.0
Orange -Tan Sandy SILT
3
M
284
26
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) An area of soil contamination exists north of the office and surrounding the dispenser island.
Tank TI is not being used for gasoline storage and should undergo closure. Due to its location
under the paint: shop it may be best to close the UST in place. If this option is chosen, DEM
may require soil samples from below the UST. These soil samples may be omitted if the tank
can pass a tightness test. This would require removing the waste oil and sludge currently in the
tank prior to testing. The dispenser island and associated piping, however, should be removed
regardless.
2) During the piping removal and UST closure, all soil with TPH levels greater than the DEM's
site specific action level should be removed. Soils should be carefully screened at the base of
-45-

D
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #9,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Lid.)
the excavation since only one boring (B-6) attained a depth greater than four feet. If the total
excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without a fee. However, if
the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site and allowed to
volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory methods, the soil
D can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an approved facility for
treatment or other uses.
D 3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the removal activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
• Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
D
0
0
11
0
i�
0
IM

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #10,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.10 Site 10 Service Distributing Co. (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 west of the intersection with US 601. The
proposed ROW currently runs through the existing canopy structure and dispenser island
northwest of the building. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated one UST
(labeled Tl in Figure 4.10-1) and four ASTs (labeled T2 through T5 in Figure 4.10-1). Table
4.10-1 lists the available information on these ASTs and the lone UST.
Table 4.10-1, inventory of one UST and four ASTs located at Site 10 (Service
Distributing Co.). Tank locations (Tl thru T5) are shown in Figure 4.10-1.
Approximate Size Current
UST/AST Product Length Diamcter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)'
Tl Gasoline 24 64 4,000 Steel In Use
L; T2 Gasoline 21 120 12,000 Steel In Use
T3 Gasoline 21 120 12,000 Steel In Use
T4 Diesel 21 120 12,000 Steel In Use
TS Kerosene 17 120 10,000 S tcclIn Use
Nine borings surrounding Tank Tl and the dispenser islands, north and northwest of the building,
D(see Figure 4.10-2; labeled B 1 through 139) were advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings
are included in Table 4.10-2. Six borings (B 1 through B6) were advanced to depths of seven feet
or greater and contained orange -brown to light gray clayey silt. Three borings (137 through B9) hit
auger refusal at shallow depths of four feet or less.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.10-2. PID senses a wide range of
hydrocarbon gases. Elevated PID levels may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related
hydrocarbons.
Three soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table
4.10-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record arc included in Appendix B.
is
0
0
1 -47-

0
0
I
11
c
0
I
P.
0
A
I
I
0
0
P.
I
-48-

0
0
I
0
I
0
0
I
11
I
G
0
0
0
I
I

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site 4#10,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.10-2. Soil boring descriptions, water levels, PID data, and laboratory results collected
Boring
from Site 10 (Service Distributing Co.).
Depth Sample
Interval Soil Interval
(feet) Description (feet)
Petroleum
Odor
PID
(ppm)
TPH
5030
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 - 4.0
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
Orange -Brown Silty CLAY
3
N
56
-
4.0 - 6.0
Green -Gray Mottled Gravelly CLAY
6
N-L
60
-
6.0 - 7.5
Gray Mottled Gravelly CLAY
Water @ 7.0 ft
Boring Terminated @ 7.5 €t
B-2
0.0 - 2.5
2.5 - 3.5
Orange Sand & Gravel FILL
Orange Sand &Gray -Green Clay FILL
3
M-H
1523
-
3.5 - 6.0
Yellow Coarse Sand FILL
6
M-H
237
<2.0
6.0 - 8.0
Gray Coarse Sand FILL
Water @ 6.5 ft
Boring Terminated @ 8.0 ft
B -3
0.0 - 1.0
1.0 - 4.5
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
Orange -Green Gravelly Clayey SILT
3
NL
68
-
4.5 -7.5
Olive -Gray CLAY, sparse carbon. mat.
6
LM
300
24
7.5 - 9.5
-Orange & Gray Mottled Sandy CLAY
9
N
20
-
9.5 - 11.5
Meta-Sed. Rx frags w/ Orange -Gray CLAY
11.5
N
23
-
Auger Refusal @ 11.5 ft
B-4
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT & GRAVEL
1.0 - 2.0
2.0 - 6.5
Green -Gray Gravelly Clayey SILT
Orange -Brown Gravelly Clayey SILT
3
L-M
155
-
6.5 -8.0
Lt Gray Gravelly CIayey SILT
6
L
17
<2.0
8.0 - 9.0
Orange -Gray Mottled Clayey SILT
9
N
8
-
Water @ 7.0 to 8.0 ft Dry below 8-0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 9.0 ft
B-5
0.0 - 0.5
Top Soil and FILL
0.5 - 1.0
Black unconpacted ASPHALT
3
N
17
-
1.0 - 5.0
Gm -Gray Clayey SILT w/rock fragments
5.0 - 7.0
Grn-Gray Clayey SILT
6
N
N
4
10
-
7.0-10.0
Gray-Brn Mottled Silty CLAY
9
Water @ 7.5 ft
Auger Refusal @ 10.0 ft
B-6
0.0 - 0.5
Top Soil and FILL
0.5 - 2.5
Yellow-Brn Silty Gravelly CLAY
2.5 - 4.0
Mottled Gm -Gray Brn-Yellow CLAY
3
N
7
-
4.0 - 6.0
Grn-Gray Brn-Yellow Gravelly CLAY
6
9
N
M-H
5
152
-
<2.0
6.0 - 10.0
As Above with Saprolite Chips
Water @ 7.0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 10.0 ft
B-7
0.0 - 0.5
0.5 -3.5
Top Soil
Yellow -Brown to Tan Sandy SILT
3
N
7
-
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
B-8
0.0 - 0.5
Top Soil
0.5 - 2.0
Orange -Red to Black mottled Silty CLAY
5
2.0 - 4.0
As Above with Saprolite chips
3
N
-
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-9
0.0 -0.5
0.5 -3.5
Top Soil
Yellow -Gray to Grn Brn Silty CLAY
3
N
7
-
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 It
Petroleum Odor. N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-'
denotes that
no analysis is done for the sample.
carbon.
mat. = carbonaceous material Meta-Sed. Rx frags = Meta -sedimentary rock fragments
-50-

0
0
0
0
P
C
0
0
0
C
Final Report
NC DOT - FSA of UST Site #10,
August 14, 1992 (Geophez, Ltd.)
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. The soil sample
from boring B-3 exceeded the action level.
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Collect soil samples from three additional borings around Boring B-3 where an isolated area
of soil contamination exists west of the dispenser island TPH results from these borings will
determine if the integrity of the piping to the dispensers needs to be tested.
2) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
I
-51-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #11(13),
August 14. 1992 (Geophex, Lad.)
4.11 Site 11 (13) B & D Mart/Mobil Station (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 approximately 400 feet cast of US 601. The
proposed ROW currently runs through the existing canopy structure and dispenser island south of
the building. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated six USTs (labeled Tl
through T6 in Figure 4.11-1). Table 4.11-1 lists the available information on these USTs.
Table 411-1. Inventory of six USTs located at Site 11 (B & D Mart/Mobil Station).
UST locations (Tl through T6) are shown in Figure 4.11-1.
Approximate Size Current
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
T1
Gasoline
21 N
96
8,000
Steel
In Use
T2
Gasoline
21
96
8,000
Steel
In Use
T3
Diesel
21
108
10,000
steel
In Use
T4
Diesel
21
108
10,000
Steel
In Use
T5
gene
24
64
4,000
Steel
In Use
T6
Heating Oil
6
48
500
Steel
Locked*
* UST-T6 is located within a secured area. We are estimating size and location from
conversation with property owner and position of fill pipe.
No borings were advanced surrounding the USTs or the dispenser islands. Mr. Doug McCoy,
station owner, would not allow the placement of soil borings on his property outside of the current
ROW. We recommend five borings and TPH analyses be completed prior to NC DOT's aquisition
for the new ROW.
-52-

�x
�xM .-.
b
x
x
xF
La K
o
x
0
0
N
{Q
Y
g 0
[J
1�1�x
�y
nx�
1
IA
U1 ii
YK�
lST1 9
O%
Cl
Ln
�AW
---w-1 kl i'
t
r
N
U
z
—53—

II
Final Report
NC DOT - PS of UST Site #12 (15),
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
a4.12 Site 12 (15) Midland Wallcoverings and Carpet (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 approximately 2.2 miles west of SR 1142.
The proposed ROW currently runs through the existing canopy structure attached to the south side
of the building. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated three USTs (labeled T1
through T3 in Figure 4.12-1). Table 4.12-1 lists the available information on these USTs.
Table 4.12-1. Inventory of three USTs located at Site 12 (W.P. Welch property).
UST locations (TI through T3) are shown in Figure 4.12-1.
Approximate Size Current
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
T1 Gasoline 7 48 700 Steel __-- Unknown*
A
72 Gasoline 7 48 700 Steel Unknown*
T3 Kerosene 6 48 500 Steel 200**
* Unable to open fillports on tanks therefore contents if any are unknown.
** Probably a mixture of fuel, water, and sludge.
C Nine borings surrounding the USTs (see Figure 4.12-2; labeled B-1 through B-9) were advanced.
Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.12-2. Two borings (B-1 and B-5)
were advanced to depths of six to seven feet and contained reddish -brown to light greenish -brown
a clayey SUL The remaining borings (B-2 through B-4, B-6 and B-7) hit auger refusal at
approximately three to five feet.
�i The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.12-2. Most soil samples analyzed with
LL�I the PID show hydrocarbon levels below 100 ppm, except for boring B-4. Four soil samples were
submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550 (diesel fraction) and 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last two columns of Table
' 4.12-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods. Above
the action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the site. The
guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. Soil samples from borings B-4
and B-5 exceeded the action level.
C
I
I
0 -54-

41,
-55-

DFinal
Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #12 (15),
August 14.1992 (Geophex Ltd.)
a
Table 4.12-2. Soil
boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 12
(W.P. Welch property).
Depth
Sample
TPH TPH
Interval
Soil Interval Petroleum PID 3550 5030
Boring
(feet)
Description (feet)
Odor
(ppm) (mgAcg) (mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE 3
N
13 _ -
0.5 - 6.5
Lt Green -Brown Clayey SILT 6
N
10 <2.0
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
B-2
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE
0.5 - 2.0
Orange -Tan Clayey SILT
2.0 - 4.5
Lt Grn-Brn Clayey SILT w/rock frags 3
N
12 - -
Auger Refusal @ 4.5 ft
B-3
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE
0.5 - 4.5
Lt Grn-Brn Clayey SILT w/rock (rags 3
N
45 - <2.0
Auger Refusal @ 4.5 ft
B-4
0.0 - LO
Lt Green -Brown Clayey SILT
1.0 - 3.0
Greenish Gray Clayey SILT w/rock frags 3
M-H
222 3000 <2.0
Material was saturated with petroleum hydrocarbons
J
Boring Terminated @ 3.0 ft
r+
B-5
0.0 - 3.0
Orange -Brown Clayey SILT
�JI
3.0 - 5.5
Reddish Brown Clayey SILT 3
N
29 -
5.5 - 7.0
Orange -Yellow Clayey SILT (mottled) 6
N
19 7.7 <2.0
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B-6
0.0 - 3.5
Lt Grn-Brn Clayey SILT w/rock frag 3
L
32 - -
3.5 - 5.0
As above with increasing rock fragments and mottling
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
'
3
N
22 - -
L
B-7
0.0 - 3.0
Lt Grn-Orange-Brn Clayey SILT
3.0 - 4.0
Lt Gm Clayey SILT slightly mottled
Auger Refusal @ 4.5 ft
B-8
0.0 - 3.5
Lt Grn-Orange-Brn Clayey SILT 3
N
20 -
w/decomposed rock fragments
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
}
B-9
0.0 - 3.5
Lt Grn-Orange-Brn Clayey SILT 3
L
63 - -
w/decomposed rock fragments
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
Petroleum Odor:�N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
aSymbol'-'
denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
-57-

0
0
I
0
e
C
P
0
G
r
P
r
0
r
I
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #12 (15),
August 14,1992 (Geophe), Ltd.)
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) All three USTs (T1 through T3) are unused and should undergo closure as well as the
dispenser island and associated piping.
2) During the UST closure, all soil greater than the DEM's site specific action level should be
removed. If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without
a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site
and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory
methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an
approved facility for treatment or other uses.
3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the removal activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
-58-

0
0
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #16,
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.13 Site 16 Joyce Beatty Property/Former Service Station (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 at the intersection with US 601. The
a proposed ROW is north of an existing dispenser island/concrete pull through of the former service
station. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated two USTs (labeled Tl and T2 in
j Figure 4.13-1). Table 4.13-1 lists the available information on these USTs.
Li Table 4.13-1. Inventory of two USTs located at Site 16 (Joyce Beatty property).
UST locations (Tl and T2) are shown in Figure 4.13-1.
Approximate Size ����---- Current N�
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Mattrial (gallons)
4+ Tl � Gasoline 24 64 r� 4,00(} Steel �__-------- 650*---
T2 Gasoline 24 � 64 — 4,00() SteeI ___-----_ 850*____
* Probably a mixture of fuel, water, and sludge.
Ten borings surrounding the USTs and dispenser island (see Figure 4.13-2; labeled B-1 through
B-10) were advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.13-2. Six
borings (B-2, and B-4 through B-8) were advanced to depths of six feet or greater, and contained
brown -green silty clay. The remaining borings (B-1, B-3, B-9, and B-10) hit auger refusal at
approximately three to four feet. A perched water table appears to exist at a depth of four feet.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.13-2. Most soil samples analyzed with
the PID show hydrocarbon levels below 100 ppm, except for boring B-4. Four soil samples were
submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 5030 (gasoline fraction). Results
of the laboratory analysis are included in the last column of Table 4.13-2. Original laboratory data
and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM. may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. Soil samples from
borings B-4 and B-8 exceeded the action level.
0
0
1. -59-

0
L!
-60-

0
u
--61-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #16,
aAugust 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.13-2. Soil boring descriptions, water levels, PID data, and laboratory results collected
D
from Site 16 (Joyce Beatty Property).
Depth
Sample -
-
__-_-TPH
_
�j
Interval
Soil
Interval
petroleum
PID
5030
'4Uti
Boring
(feet)
Description
(feet)
Odor
(ppm)
(mg/kg)
B-1�-
O.D - 2.5
Brown Gravel FILL
2.5
N
84
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-2
0.0 - 3.0
Brown Gravel & Sand FILL
3
N
T7
-
3.0 - 6.0
Orange Sand FILL
6
N
31
-
Water @ 4.0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
B-3
0.0 - 2.5
Brown Silty Gravel FILL
2-5-3.5
Orange Silty Sand FILL
3
N
26
-
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 It
B-4
0.0 - 3.5
Brown Silty Gravel FILL
3
N
25
-
3.5-4.0
Orange Silty Sand FILL
4.0 - 4.5
Black Silty Sand FILL
4.5 - 6.0
Blade do Orange Stilly Sand FILL
6
M-H
115
16
Water @ 4.0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 3.5 ft
B-5
0.0 - 3.0
Brown Clayey Gravel FILL
3.0 - 4.0
Orange Silty Sand FILL
3
N
29
4.0 - 7.5
Greenish -Yellow to Black Silty CLAY
6
N-L
7
7.5 - 8.5
Blue -Gray to Orange -Brown Sandy CLAY
8.5
N
20
<2.0
Water @ 4.0 ft
Auger Refusal @ 8.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 2.5
Brown Silty Gravel FILL w/Brick
15 - 3.5
Orange Silty Sand FILL
3
N
56
3.5-8.5
8.5 - 9.5
No Material -encountered a VOID
Green Silty CLAY w/Gravel
9
N
14
Water @ 4.0 ft
Boring Terminated @ 9.5 ft
B-7
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE and Gravel FILL.
0.5 - 4.0
Brown sand and travel FILL
3
N
5
4.0-6.5
Yellow -Brown CLAY w/Green slatey SAPROLITH 6
N-L
38
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
D
B-8
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE and Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.5
Brown sand and gravel FILL w/bricks
2.5 - 5.5
Yellow -Brown to Orange Clayey SILT
3
N
4
-
5.5 - 6.5
Yellow -Brown to Green -Gray Clayey SILT
6
M
219
I6
Water @ 6.5 ft
Boring Terminated @ 6.5 ft
B-9
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE and Gravel FILL
0.5 - 3.0
Brown sand and gravel FILL
3
N
2
a
3.0 - 4.0
Orange Gravelly Clay FILL
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-10
0.0 - 0.5
CONCRETE and Gravel FILL
0.5 - 2.5
Brown sand and gravel FILL
2.5 - 3.0
SAPROLiTE and Rock fragments
No Sample
Auger Refusal @ 3.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N =
None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
----------------
Symbol'-'
denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
0
0 -62-

0
0
0
0
0
0
G
0
0
0
0
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #16,
August 14,1992 (Geophex„Ltd.)
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Both USTs (T1 and T2) are unused and should undergo closure as well as the dispenser
island and associated piping.
2) During the UST closure, all soil greater than the DEM's site specific action level should be
removed If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfarmed on -site without
a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site
and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory
methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an
approved facility for treatment or other uses.
3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the removal activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
contamination; and
Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
a
10111

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #f 17
0 August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.14 Site 17 Carriker Service Grocery & Produce (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 approximately 1350 feet west of the
intersection with Sam Black Road (SR 1127). The proposed ROW is north of the existing site
buildings. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated one UST (TI, see Figure
4.14-1).
Table 4.14-1. Inventory of one UST and located at Site 17 (Carriker Service Grocery
and Produce). Tank location (T1) is shown in Figure 4.14-1.
Approximate Size _ Current
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (fm) (inches) (gallons) Material rr (gallons)
Tl Gasoline* 24 64 4,000 Steel Unknown*
* No Fill Pipe was located for the UST, product and contents determined from conversation with owner.
Upon interviewing Mr. Foil Carriker, owner of the grocery store, it was determined that the 4000-
gallon UST was installed in the late 1970s and was used exclusively for gasoline bulk -storage. A
magnetic survey was conducted to verify the existence of the UST (Figure 4.14-1). Magnetic data
shows the location of the 4000-gallon UST (see Figure 4.14-1). This anomaly was investigated
with GPR; however, the depth of signal penetration was less than three feet. GPR was only able
to detect a buried vent pipe.
L.l Six borings (see Figure 4.14-2; labeled B1 through B6) were advanced, surrounding the UST.
L! Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.14-2. Five borings (B 1 thru B3, and
B5, and B6) were advanced to depths of seven feet or greater. Boring B4 hit auger refusal at four
r j feet. All borings contained red to orange silty clay/clayey silt.
�1 The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.14-2. All of the borings analyzed with
the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels below 10 ppm. PID senses a wide range of
hydrocarbon gases.
Three soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Method 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last two columns of Table
a4.14-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
I
G
c
1 -64-

1
u
W
� a �
s
14x
a O
Pxi Px na
^K Pa hx Px ea �x �i ryY o Q V]
_ O
:J
mi Px PS na O �K c 5V
•-1 � .w� 1+w GU
^xvxx IOa LJ
O . r'•��{ � y U
a a �
U
nx PM P
J4.
4-4
0 cd
4-4
r.
as � .. :;�:•.':.:...
uK nK � Via' a-_•: � •. ••• � .. • . ..,'� ` Y �
[0 _
yy r.x Ld ^. ::.• ....;i-x;.'.'.t1r.
AS Tx na ` aKj•:•'•_+;e•titi:•i'c?rr: ••_.- O _
a
w a�
0 lx'
3 h
n ai nx � ri
• x aK of !K
• �a as ,U� C it
a � U
- � H
7 c �
coo g
•C-) U
+ -65-

I
p
I
�
I
I
�
I
�
u
I
C.1
qQ
5
��
�
U�
•� vQi
I
O
I
48
e
1
O
bA O
w
cli
c
a c
e
w
pq
c�
4]
0
-66-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #17
August 14,1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
Table 4.14-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 17
(Carriker Service Grocery and Produce).
Depth
�
Sample--
�---^
TPH �-
Interval
Soil
Interval
Petroleum
PID
5030
Boring
(feet)
Description
(feet)
Odor
(ppm)
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.3
ASPHALT
3
N
2
-
0.3 - 2.5
Green -Brown Silty Clay w/gravel FILL
6
N
2
-
2.5 - 7.0
Red Silty CLAY
9
N
2
-
7.0 - 10.5 Orange -Red Clayey SILT
10.5
L
2
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 10.5 ft
B-2
0.0 - 0.3
ASPHALT
0.3 - 2.0
Green -Black Silty Clay w/gravel FILL
3
N
2
-
2.0 - 7.0
Orange -Red -Tan Clayey SILT
6
N
4
-
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 0.3
ASPHALT
0.3 - 1.5
Orange -Red Clayey SILT
3
N
2
-
1.5 - 3.5
Orange -Tan Clayey SILT
6
N
2
-
3.5 - 4.0
Orange -Red Gravelly CLAY
9
N
4
-
4.0 - 10.5
Orange -Tan -White Clayey SILT
10.5
N
2
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 10.5 ft
B-4
0.0 - 0.3
ASPHALT
0.3 - 1.5
Orange -Brown Clayey SILT
1.5 - 4.0
Red -Brown Clayey SILT
3
N
2
-
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-5
0.0 - .0.3
ASPHALT
3
N
2
-
0.3 - 6.5
Red -Green Silty CLAY
6
L
2
-
6.5 - 9.5
Greenish -Yellow to Black Silty CLAY
9
L
8
<2.0
Boring Terminated @ 9.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 0.3
ASPHALT
0.3 - 1.0
Green -Brown Silty Clay w/graveI FILL
3
N
2
-
1.0 - 5.0
Red -Brown Clayey SILT
6
N
2
-
5.0 - 10.0
Green Silty CLAY w/Gravel
9
N
2
-
Auger Refusal @ 10.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol ' ' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Tank T1 is unused and should undergo closure.
2) During the UST closure, although no soils are expected to exceed 10 ppm TPH, soils
should be screened and all soil'above 10 ppm TPH should be removed.
3) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM if soil contamination exceeds the action level
of 10 ppm.
96 /SA

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #18
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.15 Site 18 Tucker Furniture & Appliance (Cabarrus County)
aThis site is located along the north side of NC 24/27, east of the intersection with Jim Sossman
Road (SR 1123). The proposed ROW is south of the existing site buildings. Visual site
a inspection and a magnetic survey delineated no USTs at the site; however, one 300-gallon AST
with dimensions of 6' x 4' x 2.5' was observed at the site (see Figure 4.15-1). Soil borings were
not conducted at the site. We recommend that no further action be undertaken.
0
r.
r
C
It
0
0
G
0
0
11
I
0 -68-

v
u
u
�
�
U
u s
u
bA
xCL
,
O Q
V
V P
N
u
�
�
+tj
U
O X

0
Ff
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #b19,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd.)
4.16 Site 19 Presnell Insulation Company (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27 west of the intersection with US 601. The
proposed ROW currently lies south of the buildings on site. Visual site inspection and geophysical
surveys delineated two USTs (labeled T1 & 12 in Figure 4.16-1). Adjacent to the southern end of
the two tanks and along the edge of the landscaped island is another magnetic anomaly. The
dispenser island, if it exists, most likely produces this anomaly. Due to the landscaped area GPR
was not attempted. Table 4.16-1 lists the available information on the two USTs.
Table 4.16-1. Inventory of two USTs located at Site 19 (Presnell Insulation Co.).
Tank locations (Tl and 72) are shown in Figure 4.16-1.
Approximate Size � ���---- Current
--
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches) (gallons) Material (gallons)
Tl Gasoline/Diesel _ 24 � 64 4,000 Steel 714*
T2 Gasoline/Diesel 24 64 4,000 Steel 143*
___________-
* Probably a mixture of fuel, water, and sludge.
Seven borings surrounding the USTs (see Figure 4.16-2; labeled B-1 through B-7) were
advanced. Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.16-2. All seven borings
were advanced to depths of five feet or greater and contained yellow -orange silty clay.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.16-2. All of the borings analyzed with
the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels above 100 ppm except for the 3-foot samples in
borings B-4, B-5, and B-6. PID senses a wide range of hydrocarbon gases. Elevated PID levels
may also indicate the presence of non -fuel related hydrocarbons.
Five soil samples were submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550
(diesel fraction) and 5030 (gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the
last two columns of Table 4.16-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are
included in Appendix B.
The DEM specifies an action level of 10 ppm for TPH determined by laboratory methods.
Above the action level, DEM may require additional investigation and/or remediation of the
site. The guideline may allow a higher action level if the SSE score is low. Soil samples from
borings B-1, B-3 through B-5, and B-7 exceeded the action level.
-70-

J.
C
�
k[U
R
I `�
�
•
X
�
O
cOO
U
Or
kh
K
x� •
K
N
Y
xry
i
m
n xn
_
Ko
K
•�
U
K�
X�
Rw
.� xo-
�
R,
h
V
Ka N
KN
In
e� u
ry x�v
a
b
O
N
X
K
.K
c
F�
x�
%�
Y� x�
K•� � ti
x.6
q
f
x�
%�a
R•o
Xu Xn
x� x� Ki
N
K��

Parking Lot
Probable location for dispense island
Landscaped Island
Fill Pipes
B2 0
r.,
B3
••f
i B5
1
Asphalt
Weer Meters --�,
Utility Pole �#
•
4) V
B4 B7
10 5 0 10
Graphic Scale (feet)
0
B6
J Edge of pavement
N. C. HIGHWAY 24127
LEGEND
A —ter. GPR Profile Line
BI Soil Boring Location
Figure 4.16-2. Enlarged area from Figure 4.16-1, showing GPR
-� Geophex profile lines, UST location and orientation, location
of soil borings, and probable location of dispenser
island as inferred from the magnetic data.
-72-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #19,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd,)
Table 4.16-2. Soil boring descriptions, water levels, PID data, and laboratory results collected
from Site 19 (Presnell Insulation Co.).
---------
Depth _ Sample`--- H --- TPH TP_
Interval Soil Interval Petroleum PID 3550 5030
Boring (feet) Description (feat) Odor (ppm) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT, Gravel & Fill
----
------___-__
1.0 - 4.0
Green, Gray & Brown Gravelly CLAY
3
M
110
- -
4.0 - 8.0
Green & Gray Gravelly Saprolitic Clay
6
H
458
<2.0 90
Water @ 3.5 ft
Auger Refusal @ 8.0 ft
B-2
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT, Gravel & Fill
1.0 - 3.5
Green, Gray & Brown Gravelly CLAY
3
M-H
715
- -
3.5 - 6.0
Green, Gray & Brown Gravelly CLAY
6
M-H
383
- -
6.0 - 7.0
Brownish -Gray Gravelly CLAY
H
Water @ 3.5 ft
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT, Gravel & Fill
1.0 - 4.5
Yellow & Brown Gravelly CLAY
3
N L
1345
- -
4.5 - 5.5
Yellow, Red & Gray Saprolitic CLAY
5.5
M-H
615
<2.0 32
Auger Refusal @ 5.5 ft
B4
0.0 - LO
ASPHALT, Concrete, Gravel & Fill
H
1.0 - 2.5
Green, Gray & Brown Silty CLAY
M-H
2.5 - 4.5
Orange -Tan Silty Saprolitic CLAY
3
H
31
- -
4.5 - 7.0
Gray -Tan Gravelly Saprolitic SILT
6
H
144
<2.0 25
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B-5
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT, Gravel & Fill
1.0 - 3.0
Yellow & Brown Gravelly CLAY
3
N-L
67
- -
3.0 - 5.0
Green & Gray Gravelly CLAY
M-H
5.0 - 7.0
Yellow, Red & Gray Saprolitic CLAY
6
H
719
- -
7.0-9.0
Yellow, Red & Gray Saprolitic CLAY
9
M-H
383
<2.0 43
Boring Terminated @ 9.0 ft
B-6
0.0 - 1.0
ASPHALT, Gravel & Fill
1.0 - 2.5
Orange & Brown Gravelly CLAY
N
2.5 - 4.0
Green & Gray Gravelly CLAY
3
L -M
12
- -
4.0 - 7.0
Green & Yellow Silty CLAY
6
H
515
- -
7.0-9.0
Yellow, Red & Gray Saprolitic CLAY
9
M-H
1065
- -
Boring Terminated @ 9.0 ft
B-7
0.0 - 1.5
ASPHALT, Concrete, Gravel & Fill
1.5 - 3.0
Black & Green, Sandy Gravelly CLAY
3
H
600
- -
3.0 - 7.0
Orange & Gray Silty CLAY
6
H
339
- -
7.0-9.0
Orange & Brown Silty Gravelly CLAY
9
H
736
<2.0 12
Water @ 7.5 ft
Boring Terminated @ 9.0 ft
Petroleum Odor. N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol '-'denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
-73-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #19,
QAugust 14, 1992 (Geoph m Ltd.)
j Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
LJ 1) Both USTs (T1 and T2) are unused and should undergo closure.
a 2) During the UST closure, all soil greater than the DEM's site specific action level should be
removed. If the total excavated soil is less than 50 cuyd, it may be landfalmed on -site without
a fee. However, if the amount of soil is greater than 50 cuyd, it should be stockpiled on -site
and allowed to volatilize. Once the TPH level is below 10 ppm as determined by laboratory
methods, the soil can be used as fill. The material may also be transported off -site to an
approved facility for treatment or other uses.
3) If a substantial release of hydrocarbons is detected during the closure activities, the
following additional procedures should be initiated:
" • Install, develop, sample, survey, and aquifer test three shallow, temporary
P P Y Q P rary
groundwater monitor wells to determine the lateral movement of groundwater
acontamination, and
• Chemical analyses of two groundwater samples for EPA Methods 602 modified with
MTBE, EDB, and Isopropyl ether.
If the groundwater is found to be contaminated, DEM may initiate a risk assessment study
(including an SSE) involving the groundwater usage in the site vicinity.
4) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM of the results of this study.
0
0
I
0
0
in
01
1 -74-

t
I
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #20,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
a4.17 Site 20 Consignment Shop (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/27 approximately 1000 ft west of the intersection
0 with Reed Mine Road (SR 1100). The proposed ROW currently lies along the north side of the
consignment shop. Visual site inspection and geophysical surveys delineated two USTs (labeled
Tl & 12 in Figure 4.17-1). Table 4.17-1 lists the available information on this USTs.
Table 4.17-1. Inventory of two USTs located at Site 20 (Consignment Shop).
Tank locations (T1 and T2) are shown in Figure 4.17-1.
Approximate Size ^�—__�--- Current
UST Product Length Diameter Volume Construction Volume
Number Type (feet) (inches)^ (gallons) Material (gallons)--
Tl Gasoline/Diesel 10 48 1,000 Steel Unknown*
T2 Gasoline/Diesel 6 48 560 -- Steel ---_T Unknown*—
* Fill pipe could not be located.
Six borings surrounding the USTs (see Figure 4.17-2; labeled B-1 through B-6) were advanced.
Lithologic descriptions of the borings are included in Table 4.17-2. All six borings were advanced
to depths of four feet or greater and contained a reddish -brown silty sand or clayey silt.
The results of the soil -gas survey are presented in Table 4.17-2. All of the borings analyzed with
the PID revealed soils having hydrocarbon levels below 100 ppm. Three soil samples were
submitted to the laboratory for TPH analysis under EPA Methods 3550 (diesel fraction) and 5030
(gasoline fraction). Results of the laboratory analysis are included in the last two columns of Table
4.17-2. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of Custody Record are included in Appendix B.
-75-

-76-

-77-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #20,
August 14,1992 (Geophtx, Ltd)
Table 4.17-2. Soil boring descriptions, PID data, and laboratory results collected from Site 20
(Consignment Shop).
Depth
Sample
TPH
TPH
Interval
Soil
interval
Petroleum
PID
3550
5030
Boring
(feet)
Description
(feet)
Odor
(ppm)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 0.5
Gravel & F1LL
0.5 - 4.5
Orange & Brown Saprolitic CLAY
3
N
12
-
-
4.5 - 7.0
Red & Brown Saprolitic CLAY
6
N
18
<2.0
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B 2
0.0 - 1.5
Gravel & FILL
1.5 - 4.0
Red & Brown Saprolitic CLAY
3
N
14
-
-
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 1.5
Gravel & FILL
1.5 - 4.5
Red & Brown Gravelly Silty SAND
3
N
14
-
-
4.5 - 7.0
Brown Gravelly SAND
6
N
16
<2.0
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 7.0 ft
B-4
0.0 - 0.5
Gravel & FILL
0.5 - 4.0
Red & Brown Gravelly SAND
3
N
12
-
-
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
B-5
0.0 - 1.5
Gravel & FILL
1.5 - 2.5
Brown Silty SAND
N
-
-
2.5 - 5.5
Red & Brown Clayey SILT
3
N
5
-
-
5.5 - 6.5
Black Gravelly CLAY
6
N
7
<2.0
<2.0
Auger Refusal @ 6.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 0.5
Grass & Top Soil
0.5 - 4.0
Red & Brown Silty Gravelly SAND
3
N
5
-
-
Auger Refusal @ 4.0 ft
Petroleum Odor: N = None, L = Low, M = Moderate, H = High
Symbol'-' denotes that no analysis is done for the sample.
The DEM action level of 10 ppm was not exceeded for any of the soil samples submitted (borings
B-1, B-3, and B-5).
Based on data from this site we recommend the following:
1) Tank T1 and T2 are unused and should undergo closure.
2) During the UST closure, although no soils are expected to exceed 10 ppm TPH, soils
should be screened and all soil above 10 ppm TPH should be removed.
3) Notify the Mooresville Regional Office of DEM if soil contamination exceeds the action level
of 10 ppm.
-78-

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of UST Site #21,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
a4.18 Site 21 Antique Shop (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the south side of NC 24/2.7, approximately 600 ft east of the intersection
with Reed Mine Road (SR 1100). The proposed ROW is along the north side of the antique shop.
Visual site inspection and a magnetic survey delineated no USTs at the site (see Figure 4.18-1).
For this reason, soil borings were not conducted at the site. We recommend that no further action
ri be undertaken.
0
I
r
0
P,
C
G
I
0
ri
0 -79-

CL cn
T E
U
U CD x CD
x 'X A ^x
x 1PX Tx nx
x Fx3� x �x x `ix ui
x c �
CD
o j
lD
t�I 2
1 'a Y x ' Lb04 LeiQ}
�-
RX cn
o.
0
� +U
Y X U U
N
Q. x n% r� 0
N
v O 0
N
di U
x> rx Nx U U
C
60
to
W mX Nx �x FUi
A �
-a bJ3
c �
n - w
x
v x ! �• nX A.
D tl O
E vv
•� 4 u
fx � x ox �
o
cn O � F1
113 � ti \J
o o V
o
V O
u �
>

0
0
C
I
r
F
0
a
0
0
a
C
in
Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of Site #22,
August 14.1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
4.19 Site 22 Former Gold Assay Office (Cabarrus County)
This site is located along the north side of NC 24/27, approximately 1000 ft west of the
intersection with Reed Mine Road (SR 1100). The proposed ROW is approximately 200 feet north
of the center line of NC 24/27 (see Figure 4.19-1). Visual site inspection produced the current site
map. According to Ms. Emmy Pharr and Mr. Robert Long, property owners, a gold assay office
was in operation during the early 1930s. Potential gold bearing ore was brought here by local
miners to be processed During the processing, different reagents and/or heavy metals may have
been introduced with the crushed gold ore. These chemicals were added to leach the gold directly
from the ore or to form a gold alloy. As a result of introducing these reagents, high concentrations
of heavy minerals became by-products. Table 4.19-1 lists elements or compounds that may have
been added to the gold ore or were a result of the assaying process.
Table 4.19-1 *. List of possible elements and chemicals believed to be reagents or by-
products in the assaying of gold at Site 22 (Former Gold Assay Office)
Element or Chemical Purpose/Result
Arsenic
By-product from assaying
Lead
Flux, oxidizing and desulphurizing agent
Mercury
By-product from assaying
Molybdenum
By-product from assaying
Selenium
By-product from assaying
Tin
By-product from assaying
Total Cyanide
Flux, reducing and desulphurizing agent
Zinc
By-product from assaying
* Table compiled from (Ricketts, 1895)
Eighteen soil boring sites were selected as to best characterize the operational (assay) area of the
property (see Figure 4.19-1). Soil samples were collected from each boring and analyzed for the
parameters above using Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP). Results can be found in Table 4.19-2.
Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix C. ICP
analysis is a cost effective means of screening for abnormally high concentrations of a particular
element or compound, and becomes part of a complimentary and systematic approach when used
in conjunction with a Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) screen for metals.
A TCLP metals screen was performed on one sample, from boring B-14, which had elevated
levels of arsenic, lead, and mercury as identified by ICP analysis (see Table 4.19-2). Table 4.19-3
shows the results of the TCLP analysis compared to North Carolina regulatory levels for the same
elements. Original laboratory data and the Chain -of -Custody Record are included in Appendix C.
0
M.

—VZ—
rir4r•

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of Site #22,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
Table 4.19-2. Soil boring descriptions and laboratory results collected from Site 22
(Former Gold Assay Office).
Depth
- ---
sample
Interval
Soil
Interval
Arsenic
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Boring
(feet)
Description
(feet)
(mglkg)
(mg)kg)
(-a&)
(mg/kg)
B-1
0.0 - 1.0
Red & Orange Silty Saprolitic CLAY
1
3.2
11
<0.25
<200 _
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-2
0.0 - 2.0
Red & Orange Silty Saprolitic CLAY
2
2.7
30
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 1.5
Red & Orange Saprolitic CLAY
1.5
3.0
23
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B-4
0.0 -1.5
Brown & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
1.5
2.1
9.6
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B-5
0.0 - 1.5
Brown & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
1.5
3.6
33
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 1.5
Red & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
1.5
4.2
23
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B-7
0.0 - 2.0
Red & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
2.0
2.9
24
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-8
0.0 - 2.0
Red & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
2.0
3.5
31
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-9
0.0 - 1.0
Brown & Tan Silty Saprolitic CLAY
1.0
4.2
14
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-10
0.0 - 3.0
Red CLAY
3.0
3.1
10
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 3.0 ft
B-11
0.0 - 3.0
Yellow & Orange Saprolitic CLAY
3.0
36
57
<0.25
<200
3.0-5.0
Pink & Yellow Saprolitic CLAY
5.0
6.5
34
<0,25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
B-12
0.0 - 1.0
Red CLAY
1.0
4.6
33
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-13
0.0 - 2.5
Red & Brown Saprolitic CLAY
2.5
1.7
8.3
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-14
0.0 - 1.0
Red & Brown Saprolitic CLAY
1.0
100
290
0.25
Q00
Auger Refusal [@ 1.0 ft
B-15
0.0 - 3.0
Brown Clayey SILT
3.0
94
109
<0.25
Q00
3.0-6.0
Red & Yellow Saprolitic CLAY
6.0
21
45
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 6.0 ft
B-I6
0.0 - 2.0
Brown Clayey SILT
2.0
28
290
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-17
0.0 - 2.5
Brown Clayey SILT
2.5
I6
31
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-18
0.0 - 2.5
Brown Clayey SILT
2.5
9.1
27
<0.25
<200
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
Bolded entries indicate laboratory results greater than 100 mgikg.

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of Site #22,
August 14,1992 (Gwphex, Ltd)
Table 4.19-2 continued. Soil boring descriptions and laboratory results collected from Site 22
(Former Gold Assay Office).
Depth
Interval
son
Boring
(feet)
Description
B-1
0.0 - 1.0
Red & Orange Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-2
0.0 - 2.0
Red & Orange Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-3
0.0 - 1.5
Red & Orange Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B-4
0.0 - 1.5
Brown & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1-5 ft
B-5
0.0 - 1.5
Brown & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B-6
0.0 - 1.5
Red & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.5 ft
B 7
0.0 - 2.0
Red & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-8
0.0 - 2.0
Red & Yellow Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
13-9
0.0 - 1.0
Brown & Tan Silty Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-10
0.0 - 3.0
Red CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 3.0 ft
B-11
0.0 - 3.0
Yellow & Orange Saprolitic CLAY
3.0-5.0
Pink & Yellow Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 5.0 ft
B-12
0.0 - 1.0
Red CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-13
0.0 - 2.5
Red & Brown Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 2-5 ft
B-14
0.0 -1.0
Red & Brown Saprotitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 1.0 ft
B-15
0.0 - 3.0
Brown Clayey SILT
3.0 - 6.0
Red & Yellow Saprolitic CLAY
Auger Refusal @ 6.0 ft
B-16
0.0 - 2.0
Brown Clayey SILT
Auger Refusal @ 2.0 ft
B-17
0.0 - 2.5
Brown Clayey SILT
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
B-18
0.0 - 2.5
Brown Clayey SILT
Auger Refusal @ 2.5 ft
Bolded entries indicate laboratory results greater than 100 mglkg.
Sample
Total
Interval
Selenium
Tin
Cyanide
Zinc
(feet)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(M&W
(mg*L)
1
<1.0
QAO.
<1.0
39
2
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
56
1.5
<L0
<200.
<1.0
25
1.5
4.0
Q00.
4.0
25
1.5
<1.0
<200.
4.0
34
1.5
4.0
<200.
4.0
40
2.0
<1.0
<200.
<I.0
23
2.0
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
45
1.0
4.0
<200.
4.0
24
3.0
<1.0
<200.
4.0
21
3.0
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
15
5.0
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
18
1.0
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
25
is
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
28
1.0
4.0
<200.
<1.0
58
3.0
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
590
&0
<1.0
<200.
4.0
170
2.0
<1.0
<200.
<1.0
73
2.5
4.0
<200.
<1.0
26
2.5
4.0
<200.
<1.0
50

Final Report
NC DOT - PSA of Site #22,
August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
Table 4.19-3. Results of TCLP Metals analyses of a soil sample from boring B-14 at Site 22
(Former Gold Assay Office) as compared against N.C. Regulatory Levels.
N. C.
TCLP Metals Regulatory Level Results
Parameter (mg/L,) (mg/L)
Arsenic
0.50
--- <0.05
Barium
10.00
<1.0
Cadmium
0.10
<0.01
Chromium
0.50
<0.05
Lead
0.50
<0.05
Mexury
0.02
<0.002
Selenium
0.10
<0,08
Silver
0.50
<0.05
The TCLP analysis indicates no elemental concentrations above North Carolina regulatory levels.
Original laboratory data are included in Appendix C. We recommend that no further action be
undertaken.
am

a
Final Report
NC DOT - PSAs along NC 24/27
0 August 14, 1992 (Geophex, Ltd)
0 5.0 References
Gair, I E., ed., 1989, Mineral resources of the Charlotte 10 x 20 quadrangle, North Carolina
and South Carolina: U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1462, 171 p.
Milton, D.1., 1984, Revision of the Albemarle Group, North Carolina: U.S. Geological
Survey Bulletin 1537-A, p. 69-72.
Ricketts, P, D., 1895, Notes on Assaying and Assay Schemes: New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
D Robbins, G. A., Bristol, R. D., and Roe, V. D., 1989, A field screening method for gasoline
contamination using a polyethylene bag sampling system: Ground Water Monitoring
Review, v. 9, no. 4, p. 87-97.
Seiders, V. M., 1978, A chemically bimodal, calc-alkalic suite of volcanic rocks, Carolina
volcanic slate belt, central North Carolina: Southeastern Geology, v. 19, p. 241-265.
Stomquist, A. A., and Sundelius, H. W., 1969, Stratigraphy of the AIbemarle Group of the
Carolina slate belt in central North Carolina: U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1274-B,
22 p.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1980, Soil survey of
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, 97 p.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1988, Soil survey of
Cabarrus County, North Carolina, 130 p.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1989, Soil survey of
Stanly County, North Carolina, 111 p.

4r
Appendix A.
Reference letters for the
Preliminary Site Assessment of 18 UST sites.
Description Page
UST Sites 1 thru 16 (referenced in December 20, 1990 letter) . . . . . . . . . A-1
UST Sites 17 thru 21 (referenced in February 14,1991 letter) . . . . . . . . . A-3

G
9--OPLX, Ad
a605 Mercury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
0
[phone]
December 20, 1991
Mr. W.L Moore, III
State Engineering Geologist
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
QSubject: Preliminary Site Assessment; Project 6.689001T; TIP R-2104; Meck-Cab-Stan
CDear Mr. Moore:
We have reviewed your letter dated December 18 concerning the PSA that includes location of all
USTs and soil screening to demmine the absence or presence of petroleum hydrocarbon
contamination the following locations along a 10.8-mile section of NC =7 in Mecklenburg,
Cabarrm, and Stanley Counties:
List from Sinrine ROM to DOT dated March 1
1. Handy Pantry Food Store - northside; intersection of NC 24/27 and Arlington Ch. rd. (Meek);
2. Quick Stop Night Club - southside; intersection of NC 24/27 and Arlington Ch. rd. (Meek);
3. Burnette Auto Service - northside; 3,800 ft west of 1132 (Cab);
4. Mattress Shop (Better Built Bedding & Upholstery) - northside; 3,700 ft west of 1132 (Cab);
5. Galleria 27 Antique Shop - southside; SE of 1132 (Cab);
6. Preslar's Store (Exxon) - northside; Preslar Ln (Cab);
7. Fertilizer Business - northside; 1,300 ft of 1125 (Cab);
8. D&S Clothing Outlet - soudWde; SW corner of 1125 (Cab);
9. Morrison's Wrecker Service - southside; SE comer of 1123 (Cab);
10. Service Distributing Co. - southside; SW corner of US601 (Cab);
11. B&D Mart - northside, 400 east of US601 (Cab);
12. Midland Carpet and Wallpaper - northside (Cab);
p on b Mr. DougHowc • NCDOT
Additions based on Site In
a13. Mobile Station - northside; new; NE corner of US601;
14. Bethel Milling - northside; NW corner of 1125;
Addi&ns basod on letter C.B. Litfie of DOT Q2g—rlo—ttr to Mr. Howc dalgd MU 14 1991
15. Former service station - southside; SE corner of US601; and
16. Former service station - southside; SE corner of US601.
0
0
A7

I�
The planned PSA will consist of -
site walkover,
• geophysical (magnetic and possibly GPR) survey;
• about 10 soil borings per site to auger refusal depths;
• PID soil -gas survey;
• laboratory analysis of selected soil samples for TPH; and
a• PSA report.
Our estimated not ta-exceed cost per site is $5,000 for the above -stated scope of work. As you
D know, our invoice will be for the actual work performed- Should we find significant deviations
during the work, we will certainly discuss them with you and obtain your approval before
proceeding. We will also notify you if we suspect other sites on the south side of the corridor.
I hope this proposal merits your favorable consideration.
U Sincerely,
c
I
G
II
0
11
I.J. Won, PhD, PG
Technical Director
UW/ah
i
.-2

605 Mercury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
[phone]
February 14, 1991
�j
Mr. W.L Moore, III
State Engineering Geologist
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
OSubject: Preliminary Site Assessment of 5 additional UST Sites over a 10.8 Mile Section along
NC 24/27; Project 6.689001T; TIP R-2104; Meck-Cab-Stan
Geophex Job No. 258
Dear Mr. Moore:
L1
We received your authorization to proceed with the original subject project (PSA's of 15 UST
Sites, December 20, 1991). During our investigation of these sites two localities were listed as
individual sites bringing the total number of UST sites down from 15 to 13 sites. Upon further
examination along the proposed corridor project an additional 8 potential UST sites were
discovered. Following local interviews with residents along the corridor this number has been
reduced to 5 sites which have been targeted for further survey work.
0 These include the following:
1. an Antique Shop - southside; 600 ft east of Pine Bluff rd. (Cab);
Property owner: Tom L. Beatty.
2. a consignment shop - southside; 900 ft west of Pine Bluff rd. (Cab);
a Property owner: Doris Loving.
3. Presnell Insulation Co. - northside; NW corner of US 601 (Cab);
Property owner: Jack T. Presnell.
4. Tucker Furniture & Appliance - northside; NE corner of SR 1123 (Cab);
Property owner: Margaret Tucker.
5. Carriker Grocery - southside; 1350 ft west of Sam Black rd. (Cab);
Property owner: Foil B. Carriker.
With the addition of these five UST sites the total number of sites for preliminary site assessment is
eighteen. This yields three more sites than originally budgeted. We request an additional $15,000
be authorized on a not -to -exceed cost of $5,000 per site.
0
0
1�3

The total estimated cost for the project will raise from $75,000 to $90,000. As you know, our
invoice will be for the actual work performed. Our invcstigation is currently under way, please
notify us as soon as possible to keep the total cost to a minimum.
Sincerely,
T.J. Won, PhD, PG
Technical Director
IJW/gf
�. A-4

0
ILI
Appendix B.
Laboratory Analytical Results and
Chain -of -Custody Records
Total petroleum hydrocarbon H using SW-846 Methods 3550 and/or 5030.
Description Page
Site 1 B-2
B-5
15'
15' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B-1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-2
B-6
15' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-3
B-7
15' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-4
Site 2 B-1
12' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-5
B-2
12' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-6
B-3
12'
B-7
Site 3 B-1
6' - 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-8
B-2
3' - 6' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-9
B-3
3' 6' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . B-10
B-4
_
6' 9' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-11
Site 4
B-3
9'
B-12
B-5
3'
. B-13
B-7
5' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-14
Site 5
B-1
9'
B-15
B-3
15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-16
B-5
9' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-17
a
B-7
15'
B-18
B-8
15' .
B-19
Site 6
B-1
3'
B-20
B-5
3'
B-21
B-7
3'
. . . . B-22
B-8
3' . . . . . .
B-23
Site 7
B-1
5.5' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-24
B-2
9' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-25
B-6 6' B-27
B-7 6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-28
L;
I

Appendix B continued.
Laboratory Analytical Results and
Chain -of -Custody Records
Total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) using SW-846 Methods 3550 and/or 5030.
Demon
Page
Site 8 B-1
5.5' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . B-29
B-4
5.5' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-30
B-7
4.5' - 5' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-31
Site 9 B-3
3' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-32
B-4
3' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-33
B-6
5.5' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-34
B-7
3' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-35
Site 10 B-2
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-36
B-3
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-37
B-4
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-38
B-6
9' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-39
Site 12 B-1
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-40
B-3
3' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-41
B-4
3' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-42
B-5
6` . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-43
Site 16 B-4
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-44
B-5
8.5' . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-45
B-7
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-46
B-8
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-47
Site 17 B-1
10.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-48
B-3
10.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-49
B-5
9' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-50
Site 19 B-1
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-51
B-3
5.5' . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-52
B-4
6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-53
B-5
9' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-54
B-7
9' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . B-55

G
a
e
Appendix B continued.
Laboratory Analytical Results and
Chain -of -Custody Records
I hydrocarbon H using SW-846 Methods 3550 and/or 5030.
Total petroleum y (Tp ) g
Description
Page
Site 20 B-1 6' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B-3 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-56
B-57
B-5 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-58
QC Blank for Methods 3550 and 5030
B-59
LL.}1
QC Blank for Method 5030 . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-60
QC Blank for Method 5030 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-61
QC Blank for Methods 3550 and 5030 . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-62
QC Blank for Method 5030 . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-63
QC Blank for Methods 3550 and 5030 . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-64
QC Blank for Method 5030 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-65
QC Blank for Methods 3550 and 5030 . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-66
QC Blank for Methods 3550 and 5030
B-67
QC Blank for Method 5030 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-68
Chain -of -Custody Records . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . B-69
0
G
P,
I

a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
TEA Sample No: 646-057-1 Date Sampled: 03-12-92
i� Client Sample No: site #1 B-2 15• Date Received: 03-17-92
11 Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
a
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
a
f
FAX
B-I

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
YEA Sample No: 646-057-2 Date Sampled:
Client Sample No: Site #1 E-5 15, Date Received:
LLJJJ Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
03-12-92
03-17-92
aPurge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FYD analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-22-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 4100 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 50 mg/kg.
pComment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to sample dilution prior to analysis.
Sample diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
L.'
FAX
i
A
B-2

O
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-3 Date Sampled: 03-12-92
Client Sample No: Site *1 11-6 15, Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
a
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 4.7 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
aComment:
C
LJ
VAX
L.I
B-3

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-4 Date Sampled: 03-12--92
Client Sample No: Site $1 B--7 15' Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-22-92 Analyzed by:.Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar.to gasoline. Total concentration is 5000 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 50 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to sample dilution prior to analysis.
Sample diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
LJ
FAX
lJ
B-4

L1
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-5 Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Client Sample No: Site #2 B-1 12' Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 -- 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
C
Comment:
FAX
LJ
B-5

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-6 Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Client Sample No: Site #2 B-2 12' Date Received: 03-17-92
CClient Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
C
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC--FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-9.2 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
C
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
�j The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
L distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
i
FAX
L;
k
t
C -
B-6

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646-057--7 Date Sampled: 03-11-92
aClient Sample No: Site #2 B-3 12, Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
�! distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Li
Comment:
U
FAX
O
L,
B-7
I

IEA
An Aquarian Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-065-1
Date Sampled: 05-22-92
aClient
Sample No: B-1
Date Received: 05-27-92
Client Project No: 258
Date Extracted: 05-29-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to #2 fuel oil.
The concentration is 50 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0
mg/kg.
Comment:
a
CPurge
and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
B-8

D
IEA
An Aquo lon Company
D
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
DIBA Sample No: 646-065-2 Date Sampled: 05-22-92
Client Sample No: S-2 Date Received: 05-27-92
Client Project No: 258 Date Extracted: 05-29-92
D
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-02-92 Analyzed by: Smith
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to #2 fuel oil. The concentration is 600 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 100 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
D
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
111 Date Analyzed: 06-01-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
DThe sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
D2.0 mg/kg.
DComment:
D
PAX
�D
D
B-9

a
IEA
An Aquarion Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
aIEA
05-22-92
Sample No:
646-065-3 Date Sampled:
Client Sample No:
B-3 Date Received: 05-27-92
Client Project No:
258 Date Extracted: 05-29-92
Extraction (SW 846 -
3550) / GC-»FID analysis (for.#2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains
a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to #2
fuel oil. The concentration is 210 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
O
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID
analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum
hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline.
The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
C
�L

IEA
An Aquarian Company
a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
1EA Sample No: 646-065-4
DClient Sample No: E-4
Client Project No: 258
a
Date Sampled: 05-22-92
Date Received: 05-27--92
Date Extracted: 05-29-92
a Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-F1D analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
aThe sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to #2 fuel oil. The concentration is 14 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
a
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FiD analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
a2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
B-11

IEA
An Aquadon Company
aTotal
Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-070-1
Date sampled: 06-01-92
CClient
06-08-92
Sample No: Site 4 S-3
91 Date Received:
r"
Client Project No: 258
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID
analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-12-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
�+
distillation range referenced
above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
a
a
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
E
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
LJ
iComment:
FAX
Li
B-12

IEA
An Aquadon Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
06-01-92
IEA Sample No: 646-070-2
Date Sampled:
Client Sample No: Site 4 B-5
3' Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No: 258
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID
analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced
above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
LJ
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
LLL
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
L:
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
k
2
B-13

IEA
An Aquarion Company
0
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
DIEA
06-01-92
Sample No: 646-070-3
Date Sampled:
Client Sample.No: Site 4 B-7
5' Date Received: 06-08--92
Client Project No: 258
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
a
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for $2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced
above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
0
Comment:
D
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
'i
FAX
a
B-14

U
i
a
0 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
DIEA Sample No: 646-057-8 Date sampled: 03-10-92
Client Sample No: Site #5 B-1 9' Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-22-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 820 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 25 mg/kg.
0
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to sample dilution prior to analysis.
QSample diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
C
FAX
4J
B-15

U .
Li •
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-9 Date Sampled: 03-10-92
Client Sample No: Site *5 B-3 15, Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 3.0 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
aComment:
FAX
B-16

D
DTotal Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
DIEA Sample No: 646-057-10 Date Sampled: 03-10-92
Client Sample No: Site #5 B-5 91 Date Received: 03-17-92
DClient Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
D
D Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC -FIB analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
D The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
D
DComment:
D
D
D
D
D FAX
D
D
B-17

aTotal Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-11 Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Client Sample No: Site #5 B-7 15, Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
a
Purge and Trap (Sw 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not. contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
L distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
aComment:
LJ
0
FAX
LJ
C
B-18

U
D
D
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-12 Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Client Sample No: Site #5 B-8 15, Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
D
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03--21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
D
D
0
D _
FAX
LJ
8-19

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-13
aClient Sample No: Site f6 B-1 3'
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Date Received: 03-17-92
aPurge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain z petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Li
L+'
l:
4J
B--20

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646-057-14
Client Sample No: site #6 B-5 3•
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Date Received: 03-17-92
a Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
aComment:
FAX
B-21

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-15
Client Sample No: Site #6 B-7 3'
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
LJ
Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Date Received: 03-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
E
I
a
0
FAX
a
B_22

U
a
M L 0
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-16 Date Sampled: 03-11-92
Client Sample No: Site #6 S-8 3' Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
111 distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Q
FAX
! 11
B-23

o�
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
QIEA Sample No: 646-057-17 Date Sampled: 03-09-92
aClient Sample No: Site #7 B-1 5.51 Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC--FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
B-24

L.J
r � •
U
Total. Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 545-057--18 Date Sampled: 03-09-92
Client Sample No: Site #7 B-2 9' Date Received: 03-17-92
p
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
a
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
a
Comment:
O
L1
O
a
0
FAX
i.J
B-25

LJ
D
D
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646-057-19 Date Sampled: 03-09-92
Client Sample No: Site #7 H-3 9• Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
D
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
D
0
Li
D .
D
D
FAX
D
D
8-26

U
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057-20 Date Sampled: 03-09-92
aClient Sample No: Site #7 B-6 6• Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258--NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
ll
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for $2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
CThe sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2 0 mg/kg.
Comment:
a
c
c
FAX
k
B-27

U
a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646-057-21 Date Sampled: 03-09-92
Client Sample No: Site #7 B-7 6• Date Received: 03-17-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17--92
a Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-21--92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
O
FAX
a
B-28

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No:
646-056-1
Date Sampled: 03-04-92
a
Client Sample No: Site #k8 B-1 5.51
Date Received: 03-09-92
Client Project
No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus
Date Extracted: 03-10-92
CExtraction
(SW
846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis
(for #k2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed:
03-14-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to varsol. The concentration is 130 mg/kg.
r. The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-15-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
L,
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 75 mg/kg.
j The quantitation limit is 5.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
FAX
a

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
OIEA Sample No: 646-056-2 Date Sampled: 03-04-92
Client Sample No: Site #8 B-4 5.51 Date Received: 03-09-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus Date Extracted: 03-10--92
Extraction SW 846 - 3550 GC-FID anal sis for
( ) / y ( #2 fuel oll,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03--14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to varsol. The concentration is 230 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap -(SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-15-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 170 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 12.5 mg/kg.
a
a Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
FAX
L.
B-30

a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
TEA Sample No: 646-056-3 Date Sampled: 03-05-92
aClient Sample No: Site #8 B-7 4.5'-5• Date Received: 03-09-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus Date Extracted: 03-10-92
aExtraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a. petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to varsol. The concentration is 160 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-15-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
i range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 85 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 5.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
B-31

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-1
Client Sample No: Site 9 B-3 3•
Client Project No: 258
D
Date Sampled: 02-11-92
Date Received: 02-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
�1 Date Analyzed: 02-23-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 180 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 5.0 mg/kg.
D
DComment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
DExtract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
D
D
D
D
�D
D
FAX
D
E
B-32

o7L re
0
n
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-2
aClient Sample No: Site 9 B-4 31
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 02-11-92
Date Received: 02-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 -- 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-23-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 23 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.5 mg/kg.
aComment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
a
.a
0
a
a
FAX
B-33

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-3
Client Sample No: Site 9 B-6 5.5•
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 02-11-92
Date Received: 02-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
3 Date Analyzed: 02-23-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 43 Mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.5 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
f
t
E
i
eFAX
I
1
B-34

Total Petroleum hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-4
aClient Sample No: Site 9 S-7 3•
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 02-11-92
Date Received: 02-17--92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-23-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin -
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 26 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.5 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
L,
LJ
PAX
B-35

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-7
Client Sample No: Site 10 B-2 6'
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 02--12--92
Date Received: 02-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-24-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
D
a
0
a
a
FAX
B-36

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-8
aClient Sample No: Site 10 B-3 6'
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 02-12-92
Date Received: 02-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-24-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
aThe sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 24 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.5 mg/kg.
D
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
D
L�
D
D
FAX
B- 37

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-054-9
Client Sample No: Site 10 B-4 6'
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 02-12-92
Date Received: 02-17-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-24--92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
a The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
a
a
o
0
0
FAX
B-38

D
7
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
D .
IEA Sample No: 646-056-4 Date Sampled: 03-04-92
DClient Sample No: Site 10 B-6 91 Date Received: 03-09-92
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus
D
DPurge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
DThe sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
0
D
D
D
D .
D
D
FAX
D
D
D
B-39

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
�! IEA Sample No: 646-052-1
DClient Sample No: B-1 6'
U Client Project No: 258
D
Date Sampled: 01-09-92
Date Received: 01-14--92
DPurge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 01--19--92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
DThe sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
D
Comment:
D
D
D
D
D
�D
D
FAX
D
D
�D
B-40

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
aIEA Sample No: 646-052-2 Date Sampled: 01-09-92
QClient Sample No: B-3 3' Date Received: 01-14-92
Client Project No: 258
a
Purge and Trap (SW 846 -- 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 01-18-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
D
0
i FAX
a
B-41

o�
0
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-052-3
Client Sample No: H-4 3'
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 01-09-92'
Date Received: 01-14-92
Date Extracted: 01--17-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 01-21-92 Analyzed by: Correa
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to kerosene. The concentration is 3000 mg/kg.
aThe quantitation limit is 200 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
DExtract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 01-18-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
i 2.0 mg/kg.
D
Comment:
d
FAX
i

a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
D
IEA Sample No: 646-052-4 Date Sampled: 01-10-92
CClient Sample No: B-5 6• Date Received: 01-14-92
Client Project No: 258 Date Extracted: 01-17-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 01-21-92 Analyzed by: Correa
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to #2 fuel oil. The concentration is 7.7 mg/kg.
DThe quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
aComment:
a .
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 01-19-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
` distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
a
Comment:
D
FAX
�D
a
D
B-43

aTotal. Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
aIEA Sample No: 646-054-5 Date Sampled: 02-11-92
Client Sample No: Site 16 B-4 6' Date Received: 02-17-92
Client Project No: 258
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-23-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
UUU range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 16 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.5 mg/kg.
QComment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
FAX
B-44

DNJ
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No. 646-054-6 Date Sampled: 02--12-92
Client Sample No: Site 16 B-5 8.5' Date Received: 02-17--92
Client Project No: 258
L1
Purge and Trap (SW 846 -- 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-24-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
D
aComment:
D
.0
D
D
r FAX
I r€ j
B-45

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646-056-5
" Client Sample No: Site 16 B-7 6'
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus
LJ
Date Sampled: 03-04-92
Date Received: 03-09-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030). / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
LJ
FAX
8-46

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-056-6
CClient Sample No: Site 16 B-8 6'
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus
Date Sampled: 03-05-92
Date Received: 03-09-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 16 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.5 mg/kg.
Comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
LJ
LJ
U
p
B-47 -

11
1EA
An Aquarion Company
Ca
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646--092-1
aClient Sample No: SITE 17 B-1 10.5'
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 08-03-92
Date Received: 08-05-92
Purge and Trap
(SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID
analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed:
08-10-92
Analyzed by: Burke
Time Analyzed:
2346
The sample does
not contain a petroleum
hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline.
The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
E B--48

IEA
An Aquarion Company
a
L+
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-092-2
Client Sample No: SITE 17 B-3 10.5•
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 08-03-92
Date Received: 08-05-92
Purge and Trap
(SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID
analysis (for gasoline only)
C
Date Analyzed:
08-11-92
Analyzed by: Burke
Time Analyzed:
0022
The sample does
not contain a petroleum
hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline.
The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
B-49

L2
IEA
An Aquarion Comp2ny
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-092-3
'! client Sample No: SITE 17 B-5 9•
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 08-03-92
Date Received: 08-05-92
Purge and Trap
(SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed:
08-11-92
Analyzed by: Burke
Time Analyzed:
0058
The sample does
not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range
similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
B-50

IEA
An Aquarion Company
a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-070-4
Client Sample No: Site 19 8-1 61
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: 06--02-92
Date Received: 06-08-92
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit 1B
2.0 mg/kg.
r Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 -- 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
DThe sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 90 mg/kg.
DThe quantitation limit is 5.0 mg/kg.
comment:
Quantitation limit elevated due to extract dilution prior to analysis.
Extract diluted due to the presence of target compounds.
FAX
B--51

L;
IEA
An Aquarion Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
OIEA Sample No: 646-070-5 Date Sampled: 06-02-92
Client Sample No: Site 19 B-3 5.5' Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No: 258 Date Extracted: 06-12--92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 ,'analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
LLL Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
JJJ range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 32 mg/kg.
The quanti.tation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
i
Comment:
FAX
a
B-52

IEA
An Aqunrion Company
aTotal
Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No:
646-070-6
Date Sampled: 06-03-92
Client Sample No:
Site 19 B-4 6'
Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No:
258
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
Extraction (SW 846
- 3550) / GC-FID
analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
a distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 25 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
i
B-53

D
IEA
An Aquadon Company
DTotal Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA sample No: 646-070-7 Date Sampled: 06-03-92
Client Sample No: Site 19 B-5 91 Date Received: 06-08-92
DClient Project No: 258 Date Extracted: 06-12-92
D
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg-
Comment;
L,
LJ
k
L• Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
�J Date Analyzed: 06-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 43 mg/kg.
The quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
DComment:
D FAX
a
B-54

a
IEA
An Aquarion Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No:
646-070-8
Date Sampled: 06-03-92
DClient
Sample No:
Site 19 B-7 9'
Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No:
258
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
p
rj
Extraction (SW 846
- 3550) / GC-FID
analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-12-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
aThe
sample does not
contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range
referenced above.
The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
f Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
E
The sample contains a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a distillation
range similar to gasoline. Total concentration is 12 mg/kg.
DThe quantitation limit is 2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
1
B-55

IEA
An Aquahon Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
06-02-92
IEA Sample No: 646-070-9
Date Sampled:
Client Sample No: Site 20 H-1 61 Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No: 258
Date Extracted: 06-12-92
Extraction (SW 846 -- 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-12-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced
above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
a
_____---_____--______-____--____
f?
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
Q2.0
mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
h
5-56

IEA
An Aquzrion Company
Total
Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No:
646-070-10 Date Sampled: 06-02-92
a
Client Sample No:
Site 20 8-3 6' Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No:
258 Date Extracted: 06-12-92
Extraction (SW 846
-- 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not
contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range
referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.,
Comment:
Purge and Trap (SW
846 -- 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not
contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range
similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
B-57

IEA
An Apuarion Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-070-11 Date Sampled: 06-02-92
Client Sample No: Site 20 B-5 6' Date Received: 06-08-92
Client Project No: 258 Date Extracted: 06-12-92
C
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced
above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
a
DComment:
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
'
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
aThe
sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
FAX
L:
B-58

77-7=M=
7L r�*
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-052 Date Sampled: N/A
L Client Sample No: QC Blank Date Received: N/A
Client Project No: 258 Date Extracted: 01-17-92
Extraction'(SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 01-21-92 Analyzed by: Correa
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
comment:
UUU N/A=Not applicable
Corresponding samples: 646-052-3 through 646-052-4
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 01-18-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
lJ
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A=Nat applicable
Corresponding samples: 646-052-2 and 646-052-3
FAX
a
r
B-59

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646--052
Client Sample No: QC Blank
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: N/A
Date Received: N/A
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 01-19-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
comment:
N/A=Not applicable
Corresponding samples: 646-052-1 and 646-052-4
,
B-60

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
YEA Sample No: 646-054
Client Sample No: QC Blank
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: N/A
Date Received: N/A
CPurge
and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 02-23-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A = Not Applicable
CCorresponding Samples: 646-054-1 through 646-054--9
i
0
a
FAX
M.

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
O IEA Sample No: 646-056 Date A Sampled: N
r /
aClient Sample No: QC Blank Date Received: N/A
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus Date Extracted: 03-10-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
D2.0 mg/kg.
a Comment:
N/A = Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-056--1 through 646-056-3
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC--FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-15-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
DThe sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A = Not applicable
aCorresponding Samples: 646-056-1 through 646-056-3
FAX
.i

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
aIEA Sample No: 646-056
Client Sample No: QC Blank
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus
I p
Date Sampled: N/A
Date Received: N/A
Date Extracted: 03-10-92
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03=14-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
O
Comment:
N/A = Not applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-056-4 through 646-056-6
L;
U
FAX
Q
B-63

7L !re�
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057 Date Sampled: N/A
Client Sample No: QC Blank Date Received: N/A
D
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-22-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
D2.0 mg/kg.
pComment:
N/A=Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-057-2
646-057-4
646-057-8
FAX
B-64

0
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-057 Date Sampled: N/A
Client Sample No: QC Blank Date Received: N/A
Client Project No: 258-NC DOT Cabarrus 24/27 Date Extracted: 03-17-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 03-20-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A=Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-057-5 through 646-057-7
646-057-17 through 646-057-21
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 03-21-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A=Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-057-1,3,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16
FAX
0
8-65

1E'A
An Aquarion Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IRA Sample No: 646-065
Date Sampled: N/A
IUI
Client Sample No: QC Blank
Date Received: N/A
Client Project No: 258
Date Extracted: 05--29-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil,kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 05-30-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
DThe
sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced
above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
D
N/A=Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-065-1 through 646-065-4
DPurge
and Trap (SW 846 - 5030)
/ GC-FID analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-01-92
Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a
petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to
gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A=Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-065-1
through 646-065-4
FAX
B-66

IEA
An Aquarion Company
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-070
Client Sample No: QC Blank
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: N/A
Date Received: N/A
Date Extracted: 06--12-92
Extraction (SW 846 - 3550) / GC-FID analysis (for #2 fuel oil, kerosene,varsol)
Date Analyzed: 06-12-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend in the
distillation range referenced above. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A = Not Applicable
corresponding Samples: 646-070-1 through 646-070-11
Purge and Trap (SW 846 - 5030) / GC -FIB analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed: 06-13-92 Analyzed by: Joaquin
The sample does not contain a petroleum hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline. The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A = Not Applicable
Corresponding Samples: 646-070-1 through 646-070-11
FAX
0
B-67

L:
IEA
An Aquarion Company
a
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Analysis
IEA Sample No: 646-092
Client Sample No: QC Blank
Client Project No: 258
Date Sampled: N/A
Date Received: N/A
Purge and Trap
(SW 846 - 5030) / GC-FID
analysis (for gasoline only)
Date Analyzed:
08-10-92
Analyzed by: Burke
Time Analyzed:
2234
The sample does
not contain a petroleum
hydrocarbon blend with a
distillation range similar to gasoline.
The quantitation limit is
2.0 mg/kg.
Comment:
N/A=Not Applicable
DCorresponding Samples: 646-092-1 through 646-092-3
f
D
FAX
B-68

0
G
El
aU
LL
0
D z
a
x
U
o
N
D
w a
�L�2
0e2
U,6
O.C2
�mlz o5
� Z r-
O
�
C
Y
LL ti
CC
ir
J 4
O
O
E
u
r
�
rr
c
10
cr
CC
z o z
f-
~ y
z
-
'.
F
ar
Tj
O
41,
w
4a
o
Ci t q
a
u�

�
C
v
�
r
�
n
N
A
d
x
a
�
�
w
IOU
I
C,
a
a
O
l
u
u
�
•i"
F=
�
M
Y
u
2
•
c
Y
_-
PS
ti
a
\
c
�
c
1
o o z
`
4
C
t
v
-M
m
Qpo
u fib
u ..
as
to
•
fam-
w
y
3
Q
L
Qp
N
a
a
oc3-
N
a
H
y
O
�
l
ir
cq
_.•..
n '7
f1

D
D
t!�
D x
a
M
D
D
00
in
D
H
N
f0U � a
� zoQa
o r
O QO
r`
Q a
` z n
,ro00 o
LU sC )C
a `A awoo
z � x
h
w A
of usqvV4N y h cn
.1 .
1
>\\ 1 I,-,
N
h
V
H
i
G
I

Owwlpri
c
G
W
u
�
u
'
E
E
o
�
p
ML
U
Y
_
2
O
Y
1
vcr
pfl
�
F
zU.
o z
U
o `� try J
s
a4
Ci
`
C1
•
.,
r f
x
s
o
.
-
a0
a
cr!a
`
d
H Cl
a (Z
CEj
cz§
a0
r
r
7j-
E
E
1�
1� �l1 1
l■
�11 c
,�
h
�yt
E�
�U
t•
a
v
L
o
C
.
t!J 60'
W
aWOo
z I—
114
Y
d
a
a
a
A
...
It
N
l7 rl p')
s+f Tq
N1
M
th
M
M
C7
M
3 V,
a
z
# t
at
*
#
f
�f
It
#
a
V
�
a

w
LL
U. z W
0 0 Z
CQ.
43
CID
NIA
t3
C4
ul
cr
cj�
7,5
C5 's —M
a!
z it
gn
i
v<
<
tc 8
Sr-
Q)
%n

fi
6119-
'i
0.
Wim .P.Mlml
41
AS
Zzzl
0
_j
1� Lu
—J Z) w
L) U) co
DOD
U, Cc LU
-J U)LU
ul Ia.Jcc m
inC)
a-
DOE]
B— 74

Co
CWD
00
CV w c`j
o ,
z3.
• 4,
W
rx
Lt w
a � �
= w
z
1F, ` T r=;
°" d ,.
Izi
r g
w a
M.Z - fee"
cC o J o[
w y a tr t� 4
�:
tLi'r co 43
CO U' 11 G] p
U
w w

CO
C7
OD
N
•
E
Q
ao
a
W
LI w
o� o
N
C� EL
LL a
00.
Z
Z Y
Z
EEC �
,_ ❑
0 �'
Y co
�LO
Q.ZN
0 o WZ
C 4 c a.
4114
x x x xx x
lWWWWAMMM
mam-la ps-assmsm
:-,Te —><I-/,I->.(I-,<I7-IxI'`
n
4
Ti-
W
o
_
�
N
4
�
�
rn
V
3
60
V

0
V
a
w
'w 0
C)
❑
W
LL. �a
0
P.�.v
Z
Z
� a
V LU
w
Q 0-
Z
0}
Y c�
g cm: z �r
ti
as CL0�
EEF
ci
oOwZ z
w V o °[
m+ c0U C)
U)
rr
D w
u w
�I
W
F-:
^Q
yc i -K. I u:
Z
`
i
U
I
O
- I
w
r
Q
U
1
cr-
9VHO
r -,
dwoo
LLI
Z
-
c?
w
In
Q
U
(6
�•
p
_'..
—
w
�
`..
Er--
w
w
�.
(Q
a
f=-
F
SV
a`
-.
03
Y
ir
CO
i
jr
}
10
J
a
� C. - j
w
> iL
p
w
W
� w
U
cc
Y" >
J
(L � F y
U
U > C
w o 2
c s
w cl)
J � w Z)
d U Un cn
!� ❑
a
cn -
Loin
Y Z W
°C ? a
Q W w
J W J
J
cr Lu
C a _
co a U

Appendix C.
Laboratory Analytical Results and
Chain -of -Custody Records for Site #22
Deagiption Page
Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP)
results for all soil borings at Site #22 . . . . . . . . C-1
QC Blank for ICP Metal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-5
Chain of Custody Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-6
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP)
results for boring B-14 at Site #2.2 . . . . . . . . . C-8
TCLP and Prep Blanks for TCLP Metal analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-9

P.
IEA
An Aquadon Company
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
IRA Project: 646-063
Client Name: Geophex, LTD
Date
a
Sample
Client ID
Parameter
Results
Analyzed
5
B-5
Lead
33
mg/kg
05/27/92
rj
6
B-6
Lead
23
mg/kg
05/27/92
LJ
7
B-7
Lead
24
mg/kg
05/27/92
8
B-8
Lead
31
mg/kg
05/27/92
9
B-9
Lead
14
mg/kg
05/28/92
10
B-10
Lead
10
mg/kg
05/28/92
11
B-11
(0.31)
Lead
57
mg/kg
05/27/92
12
B-11
(3.5•)
Lead
34
mg/kg
05/27/92
13
B-12
Lead
33
mg/kg
05/27/92
14
B-13
Lead
8.3
mg/kg
05/28/92
15
B-14
Lead
290
mg/kg
05/27/92
16
B-15
(0-31)
Lead
109
mg/kg
05/27/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Lead
45
mg/kg
05/27/92
18
B-16
Lead
.290
mg/kg
05/27/92
f"+
19
B-17
Lead
31
mg/kg
05/27/92
]1i
20
B-18
Lead
27
mg/kg
05/27/92
1
B-1
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
2
B-2
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
3
B-3
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
4
B-4
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
5
B-5
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
6
B-6
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
7
B--7
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
8
B-8
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
9
B-9
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
10
B-10
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
11
B-11
(0.31)
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
12
B-11
(3.51)
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
13
B-12
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
14
B-13
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
15
B-14
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
16
B--15
(0-31)
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
18
B-16
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
19
B-17
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
20
B-18
Molybdenum
<200
mg/kg
05/27/92
1
B-1
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
2
B--2
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
3
B-3
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
4
B-4
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
5
B-5
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
6
B-6
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
7
B-7
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
8
B-8
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
9
B-9
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
10
B-10
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
C-1

IEA
An Aquarion Campany
a
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
D IEA Project #: 646-063
Client Name: Geophex, LTD
Bate
Sample #
Client ID
Parameter
Results
Analyzed
TOTAL METALS:
1
B-1
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
2
B-2
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
3
B-•3
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
j
4
B-4
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
5
B-5
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
6
B-6
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
7
B-7
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
8
B-8
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
9
B-9
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
10
3-10
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
D
11
B-11
(0.31)
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
12
B-11
(3.51)
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
13
B-12
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
14
B-13
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
15
B-14
Mercury
0.25
mg/kg*
05/27/92
16
B-15
(0-3-)
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
18
B-16
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
19
B-17
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
20
B-18
Mercury
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
1
B-1
Arsenic
3.2
mg/kg
05/26/92
2
B-2
Arsenic
2.7
mg/kg
05/26/92
3
4
B-3
B-4
Arsenic
Arsenic
3.0
2.1
mg/kg
mg/kg
05/26/92
05/26/92
UUU
5
B-5
Arsenic
3.6
mg/kg
05/26/92
6
B-6
Arsenic
4.2
mg/kg
05/26/92
7
B-7
Arsenic
2.9
mg/kg
05/26/92
8
3-8
Arsenic
3.5
mg/kg
05/26/92
9
B-9
Arsenic
4.2
mg/kg
05/26/92
10
B-10
Arsenic
3.1
mg/kg
05/26/92
11
B-11
(0.31)
Arsenic
36
mg/kg
05/26/92
12
B-11
(3.5•)
Arsenic
6.5
mg/kg
05/26/92
13
11-12
Arsenic
4.6
mg/kg
05/26/92
14
B-13
Arsenic
1.7
mg/kg
05/26/92
15
B-14
Arsenic
100
mg/kg
05/26/92
16
B-15
(0-3-)
Arsenic
94
mg/kg
05/26/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Arsenic
21
mg/kg
05/26/92
18
B-16
Arsenic
28
mg/kg
05/26/92
19
B-17
Arsenic
16
mg/kg
05/26/92
20
B-18
Arsenic
9.1
mg/kg
05/26/92
1
B-1
Lead
11
mg/kg
05/28/92
2
B-2
Lead
30
mg/kg
05/27/92
3
B-3
Lead
23
mg/kg
05/27/92
4
B-4
Lead
9.6
mg/kgbt
05/28/92
C-2�
,,..

a
PJ IEA
An Aquadon Company
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
IEA Project #: 646-063
Client Name: Geophex, LTD
Date
Sample #
Client ID
Parameter
Results
Analyzed
B-11
(0.31)
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
Q
12
B-11
(3.51)
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
13
B-12
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
14
B-13
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
15
B-14
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
16
B-15
(0-31)
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
18
19
B-16
B-17
Selenium
Selenium
<1.0
<1.0
mg/kg
mg/kg
05/27/92
05/27/92
20
B-18
Selenium
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
1
B-1
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
C
2
B-2
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
3
B-3
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
4
B-4
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
�!
5
B-5
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
6
B-6
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
7
B--7
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
8
B-8
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
9
B-9
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
i
10
B-10
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
11
B-11
(0.31)
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
12
B-11
(3.51)
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
a
13
B-12
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
14
B-13
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
15
16
8-14
B-15
(0-31)
Tin
Tin
<200
<200
mg/kg
mg/kg
06/04/92
06/04/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
18
B-16
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
19
B-17
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
20
B--18
Tin
<200
mg/kg
06/04/92
1
B-1
Zinc
39
mg/kg
05/27/92
2
B-2
Zinc
56
mg/kg
05/27/92
3
B--3
Zinc
25
mg/kg
05/27/92
4
B-4
Zinc
25
mg/kg
05/27/92
5
11-5
Zinc
34
mg/kg
05/27/92
6
B-6
Zinc
40
mg/kg
05/27/92
7
B-7
Zinc
23
mg/kg
05/27/92
8
B-8
Zinc
45
mg/kg
05/27/92
9
B-9
Zinc
24
mg/kg
05/27/92
10
B-10
Zinc
21
mg/kg
05/27/92
11
B-11
(0.31)
Zinc
15
mg/kg
05/27/92
12
B--11
(3.5-)
Zinc
18
mg/kg
05/27/92
13
B-12
Zinc
25
mg/kg
05/27/92
14
B-13
Zinc
28
mg/kg
05/27/92
15
B-14
Zinc
58
mg/kg
05/27/92
0
16
B-15
(0-31)
Zinc
590
mg/kg
05/27/92
C-3

a
IEA
An Aquarion Company
C!
11
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
IEA Project #: 646-063
Client Name: Geophex, LTD
Date
Sample #
Client ID
Analyzed
17
B-15
------Parameter
(3.61)
-----------------------Results
Zinc
170
mg/kg
05/27/92
18
B-16
Zinc
73
mg/kg
05/27/92
19
8-17
Zinc
26
mg/kg
05/27/92
20
B-18
Zinc
50
mg/kg
05/27/92
1
B-1
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
i
2
B--2
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
3
B-3
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
4
5
B-4
B-5
Total Cyanide
Total Cyanide
<1.0
<1.0
mg/kg
mg/kg
06/01/92
06/01/92
t
6
B-6
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
7
B-7
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
8
B-8
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
9
B-9
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
10
B-10
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
11
B-11
(0.31)
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
12
B-11
(3.51)
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
13
B-12
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
14
B-13
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
15
B-14
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
16
B-15
(0-31)
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
17
B-15
(3.61)
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
18
B-16
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
11+1
19
B-17
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
20
8-18
Total Cyanide
<1.0
mg/kg
06/01/92
*Results
confirmed through reanalysis.
G
I'll
G
0
I
G
C-4

IEA
An Aquarion Company
IEA Project #:
Client Name:
Client ID
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
QC Blank
a
D
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
646-063
Geoghex, LTD
Parameter
TOTAL METALS:
Mercury
Arsenic
Lead
Lead
Molybdenum
Selenium
Tin
Zinc
Total Cyanide
C-5
Date
Results Analyzed
<0.25
mg/kg
05/27/92
<1.0
mg/kg
05/26/92
<1.0
mg/kg
05/28/92
<5.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
<200
tug/kg
05/27/92
<1.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
<200
tug/kg
06/04/92
<5.0
mg/kg
05/27/92
<0.010
mg/L
06/01/92

®
®
Z
a
/► X r h ,c
� n rL r
r � �
11**\\
1
1
.
Nz
Ll
r 1
C-6
a
z
a
W
n
J
Q F UJ
w U
} Q
oz Ul
cc
ILLS
Uw c'n
❑ ❑ ❑
U
Zw
i Q) J
i..- w
m a U
BlIMILE

rm
...... ....
N.
OM-
CV
• co
. kn
co
I
f
LU
tu
w
51
7
ILI
w
lu
IL
r%
to
"N
LU
Eli
w
35
<
tU
(a z
CL 0 C4
0 CO
0
z LU
0 LU
CC
L- LU 0
/ I
_j
CO D Lm < uwj
j
0 (D U)
0 0 D
4.
Z7
LLI
%All w
W
Z tu
>
Lu CC
lu
-1 LU Lu
0 0:
CO a-
, <
tu
0 11 1:1

IEA
An Aquadon Company
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
rTCLP
L�
SCREEN
IEA Project:
646-063(0)
Client Name:
Geophex, LTD
N.C.
Regulatory
Date
Sample # Client ID
Parameter
Level
Results
Analyzed
Q
TCLP METALS:
1 B-14
Arsenic
0.50 mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
1 B-14
Barium
10.00 mg/L
<1.0
mg/L
07/06/92
1 B-14
Cadmium
0.10 mg/L
<0.01
mg/L
07/06/92
1 B-14
Chromium
0.50 mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
1 8-14
Mercury
0.02 mg/L
<0.002
mg/L
07/05/92**
r+
1 B-14
Lead
0.50 mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
1 B-14
Selenium
0.10 mg/L
<0.08
mg/L
07/06/92
1 B-14
Silver
0.50 mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
a
Comments:
O*Please
note that this
report does not include
matrix
spike and corrected
results as required in
the TCLP Method
(40 CFR, Part
261, Subpart
C,
Appendix 1).
r
**Analysis date exceeded the protocol holding time specified by the
method.
FORM N.C. TCLP-METLSCN
Rev. 041492
C-8

IEA
An Aquarion Company
J '
ri
IEA LABORATORY RESULTS
TCLP SCREEN
IEA Project #: 646--063(0)
Client Name: Geophex, LTD
N.C.
Regulatory
Date
Client ID
Parameter
Level
Results
Analyzed
TCLP METALS:
TCLP
Blank
Arsenic
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
Prep
Blank
Arsenic
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
TCLP
Blank
Barium
10.00
mg/L
<1.0
mg/L
07/06/92
Prep
Blank
Barium
10.00
mg/L
<1.0
mg/L
07/06/92
TCLP
Blank
Cadmium
0.10
mg/L
<0.01
mg/L
07/06/92
Prep
Blank
Cadmium
0.10
mg/L
<0.01
mg/L
07/06/92
TCLP
Blank
Chromium
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
LLLJJJ
Prep
Blank
Chromium
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
TCLP
Blank
Mercury
0.02
mg/L
<0.002
mg/L
07/05/92
Prep
Blank
Mercury
0.02
mg/L
<0.002
mg/L
07/05/92
TCLP
Blank
Lead
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
Prep
Blank
Lead
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
TCLP
Blank
Selenium
0.10
mg/L
<0.08
mg/L
07/06/92
Prep
Blank
Selenium
0.10
mg/L
<0.08
mg/L
07/06/92
TCLP
Blank
Silver
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
P+
Prep
Blank
Silver
0.50
mg/L
<0.05
mg/L
07/06/92
FORM N.C. TCLP-METLSCN Rev. 041492
C-9