HomeMy WebLinkAbout23045 Acme Spinning Mill Environmental Management Plan 20200521Via Email
May 21, 2020
NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management
Brownfields Program
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Attn: Mr. Bill Schmithorst, PG
Re: Environmental Management Plan
Acme Spinning Mill
Belmont, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 23045-19-036
H&H Project No. BMT-001
Dear Bill:
On behalf of Belmont Industrial, LLC, enclosed is the Environmental Management Plan for the
Acme Spinning Mill Brownfields property (Brownfields Project No. 23045-19-036) located in
Belmont, Gaston County for your review and approval.
Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact
us at (704) 586-0007.
Sincerely,
Hart & Hickman, PC
Ralph McGee, PG Haley Martin, PG
Project Manager Assistant Project Geologist
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Scott Bortz, Tribek Properties, Inc. (Via Email)
#C-1269 Engineering
#C-245 Geology
Environmental Management Plan
Acme Spinning Mill
Woodlawn Street and Cason Street
Belmont, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 23045-19-036
May 21, 2020
H&H Job No. BMT-001
CONTENTS
Completed EMP Template Form
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data – Former Milling Areas
Table 2 Summary of Soil Analytical Data – Northern Site Parcel
Table 3 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Sediment Analytical Data
Table 5 Summary of Soil Vapor Analytical Data
Figures
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Sample Location Map
Appendices
Appendix A Redevelopment Plan
Appendix B Construction Schedule
Appendix C Preliminary Grading Plan and Cut-Fill Analysis (Phase I)
1
EMP Version 2, June 2018
NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
This form is to be used to prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for projects in
the North Carolina Brownfields Program at the direction of a Brownfields project manager.
The EMP is a typical requirement of a Brownfields Agreement (BFA). Its purpose is to clarify
actions to be taken during the demolition and construction at Brownfields properties in an
effort to avoid delays in the event of the discovery of new contamination sources or other
environmental conditions. The EMP provides a means to document redevelopment plans and
environmental data for each applicable environmental medium to inform regulatory‐compliant
decision‐making at the site. As much detail as possible should be included in the EMP,
including contingency planning for unknowns. Consult your project manager if you have
questions.
Prospective Developers and/or their consultants must complete and submit this form and all
pertinent attachments, see checklist below, to their Brownfields project manager prior to any
earthmoving or other development‐related activities that have the potential to disturb soil at
the Brownfields Property, including demolition. For the resultant EMP to be valid for use, it
must be completed, reviewed by the program, signed by all parties working on the project,
and approved by the Brownfields project manager. Failure to comply with the requirements of
the EMP could jeopardize project eligibility, or in the event of a completed agreement, be
cause for a reopener
So that the EMP provides value in protecting brownfields eligibility and public health, the
preparer shall ensure that the following steps have been completed prior to submitting the
EMP for review. Any EMP prepared without completing these steps is premature.
☒ Site sampling and assessment that meets Brownfields’ objectives is complete and has
been reviewed and approved by the Brownfields Project Manager.
☒ Specific redevelopment plans, even if conceptual, have been developed for the project,
submitted and reviewed by the Brownfields Project Manager.
2
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Please submit, along with the completed EMP form, the following attachments, as relevant
and applicable to the proposed redevelopment:
☒ A set of redevelopment plans, including architectural/engineering plans, if available; if
not conceptual plans may suffice if updated when detailed plans are drafted.
☒ A figure overlaying redevelopment plans on a map of the extent of contamination for
each media.
☒ Site grading plans that include a cut and fill analysis.
☐ A figure showing the proposed location and depth of impacted soil that would remain
on site after construction grading.
☐ Any necessary permits for redevelopment (i.e. demolition, etc.).
☒ A detailed construction schedule that includes timing and phases of construction.
☒ Tabulated data summaries for each impacted media (i.e. soil, groundwater, soil gas,
etc.) applicable to the proposed redevelopment.
☒ Figures with the sampling locations and contamination extents for each impacted media
applicable to the proposed redevelopment.
☐ A full final grade sampling and analysis plan, if the redevelopment plan is final.
☐ If known, information about each proposed potential borrow soil source, such as aerial
photos, historic site maps, historic Sanborn maps, a site history, necessary for
brownfields approval.
☐ Information and, analytical data if required, for quarries, or other borrow sources,
detailing the type of material proposed for importation to the Brownfields Property.
☐ A work plan for the sampling and analysis of soil to be brought onto the Brownfields
Property. Refer to Issue Resolution 15 in Brownfields Program Guidelines.
☐ A map of the Brownfields Property showing the location of soils proposed for export
and sampling data from those areas.
☐ If a Vapor Mitigation System is required by the Brownfields Program, the Vapor
Intrusion Mitigation System (VIMS) plan will be signed and sealed by a NC Professional
Engineer. The VIMS Plan may also be submitted under separate cover.
3
EMP Version 2, June 2018
GENERAL INFORMATION
Date: 5/21/2020 Revision Date (if applicable): Click or tap to enter a date.
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Acme Spinning Mill
Brownfields Project Number: 23045‐19‐036
Brownfields Property Address: Woodlawn Street and Cason Street
Brownfields Property Area (acres): The Brownfields property consists of three contiguous parcels that
total approximately 58 acres in size. A Site location map is provided as Figure 1, and the Site and
surrounding area are shown in Figure 2.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit?.......................☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit….……..☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.
COMMUNICATIONS
A copy of this EMP shall be distributed to all the parties below as well as any contractors or site workers
that may be exposed to site vapors, soil, groundwater, and/or surface water. Additionally, a copy of the
EMP shall be maintained at the Brownfields Property during redevelopment activities. NOTE, THE EMP
DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF A SITE‐SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN.
Prospective Developer (PD): Belmont Industrial, LLC
Contact Person: Mr. Scott Bortz
Phone Numbers: Office: 704‐714‐2860 Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: sbortz@tribek.com
Contractor for PD: Vannoy Construction
Contact Person: Mr. Jason Lathrop
Phone Numbers: Office: 864‐261‐8458 Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: Jason.lathrop@jrvannoy.com
Environmental Consultant: Hart & Hickman, PC
Contact Person: Mr. Ralph McGee
Phone Numbers: Office: 704‐887‐4621 Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: rmcgee@harthickman.com
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Mr. Bill Schmithorst
Phone Numbers: Office: 919‐707‐8159 Mobile:
Email: William.schmithorst@ncdenr.gov
4
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):
Click or tap here to enter text.
NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM
Written advance Notification Times to Brownfields Project Manager: Check each box to accept
minimum advance notice periods (in calendar days) for each type of onsite task:
On‐site assessment or remedial activities:……………………………………….…… 10 days Prior ☒
Construction or grading start:……………………………………….………………………. 10 days Prior ☒
Discovery of stained soil, odors, USTs, buried drums or waste, landfill, or other signs of previously
unknown contamination: ……………………………….……………………………………. Within 48 hours ☒
Implementation of emergency actions (e.g. dewatering, flood or soil erosion control measures in
area of contamination, ventilation of work zones):…………….……….……… Within 48 hours ☒
Installation of mitigation systems:………………………….………………….……….. 10 days Prior ☐
Other notifications as required by local, state or federal agencies to implement redevelopment
activities: (as applicable): ……………………….…………………………………………..… Within 30 days ☒
REDEVELOPMENT PLANS
1) Type of Redevelopment (check all that apply):
☐Residential ☐Recreational ☐Institutional ☒Commercial ☒Office ☐Retail ☒Industrial
☐Other specify:
The Brownfields property will be redeveloped with an industrial park and will be completed in
two phases.
2) Check the following activities that will be conducted prior to commencing earth‐moving activities
at the site:
☒ Review of historic maps (Sanborn Maps, facility maps)
☐ Conducting geophysical surveys to evaluate the location of suspect UST, fuel lines, utility
lines, etc.
☐ Interviews with employees/former employees/facility managers/neighbors
3) Summary of Redevelopment Plans (MANDATORY: attach detailed plans or conceptual plans, if
detailed plans are not available. EMP review without such information would be premature):
5
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement, grading plans and planned construction of new structures:
The Site consists of three contiguous parcels totaling approximately 58 acres of vacant land. The
two southernmost Site parcels are separated by a north‐south trending railroad corridor. The
northern Site parcel consists of undeveloped wooded land. Phase I of the redevelopment plan
includes Site‐wide clearing and grading for construction of one approximately 380,700 square
foot (sq ft) industrial warehouse building west of the railroad tracks in the southwestern portion
of the Brownfields property, and construction of one approximately 200,000 sq ft industrial
warehouse building east of the railroad tracks in the southeastern portion of the Brownfields
property. Phase II of the redevelopment plan includes construction of one industrial warehouse
building in the northern portion of the Brownfields property. In addition to construction of the
three industrial facilities, redevelopment plans include construction of new access roads, paved
parking and loading areas, two stormwater retention ponds, and landscaped areas.
The northern parcel (Parcel No. 203503) was added to the Brownfields property in a revised
Brownfields Property Application dated March 23, 2020. Additional assessment activities may be
required by DEQ prior to redevelopment of the northern parcel, with the exception of the
southern‐most portion of the northern parcel which will be redeveloped with a stormwater
retention basin and is included in the first phase of the proposed redevelopment. A revised EMP
will be prepared prior to development of the northern parcel. A copy of the Site Plan for the first
phase of proposed redevelopment is provided as Appendix A.
4) Do plans include demolition of structure(s)?:
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
☐ If yes, please check here to confirm that demolition will be conducted in accordance with
applicable legal requirements, including without limitation those related to lead and asbestos
abatement that are administered by the Health Hazards Control Unit within the Division of Public
Health of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. If available, please
provide a copy of your demolition permit.
5) Are sediment and erosion control measures required by federal, state, or local regulations?
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
☒ If yes, please check here to confirm that demolition will be conducted in accordance with
applicable legal requirements. If soil disturbance is necessary to install sediment and erosion
control measures, they may not begin until this EMP is approved.
6) Which category of risk‐based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement? Note: If children frequent the property, residential screening levels shall
be cited in the Brownfields Agreement for comparison purposes.
☐ Residential ☒ Non‐Residential or Industrial/Commercial
7) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Construction start date: 6/1/2020
6
EMP Version 2, June 2018
b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
Site work is scheduled to begin in June 2020. Mass grading is scheduled to begin in the
western portion of the Site in July 2020. Building construction is expected to begin in
January 2021 and construction activities are expected to last 8 to 12 months. The
redevelopment is expected to be completed and occupied by January 2022. A copy of the
construction schedule is provided as Appendix B.
c) Additional phases planned? ☐ Yes ☐ No
If yes, specify the start date and/or activities if known:
Start Date: 12/1/2020
Planned Activity:
The PD plans to redevelop the northern portion of the Site with an industrial warehouse
building, new access roads, paved parking and loading areas, and landscaped areas. Site work
is scheduled to begin in December 2020. Grading activities are scheduled for January 2021
and building construction is scheduled for June 2021. A copy of construction schedule is
provided as Appendix B.
Please note that the EMP form is locked for editing and does not allow for marking the space
indicated for “Yes” above.
Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:
Click or tap here to enter text.
d) Provide the planned date of occupancy for new buildings: 1/1/2022
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
1) Contaminated Media on the Brownfields Property
Part 1. Soil:……………………………………….……………. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 2. Groundwater:.……………………….……..……. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 3. Surface Water:.……………...……..…………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 4. Sediment:.……………...……..…………………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 5. Soil Vapor:…..…………...……..…………………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 6. Sub‐Slab Soil Vapor:……...……..…………….. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 7. Indoor Air:...……..…………………………………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
7
EMP Version 2, June 2018
2) For the Area of Proposed Redevelopment on the Brownfields Property, attach tabulated data
summaries for each impacted media and figure(s) with sample locations.
PART 1. Soil – Please fill out the information below, using detailed site plans, if available, or estimate
using known areas of contaminated soil and a conceptual redevelopment plan. Provide a figure
overlaying new construction onto figure showing contaminated soil and groundwater locations.
1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list general groups of contaminants):
Soil samples were collected in southern portions of the Brownfields property October 2014
during Phase II ESA activities completed by ECS Carolinas, LLP to evaluate the potential for
impacts associated with historical milling operations and in December 2014 as part of
supplemental Phase II ESA activities completed in the southern portions of the Brownfields
property by H&H. H&H collected soil samples in the northern portion of the Brownfields
property as part of a Phase II ESA completed in February 2016. H&H also collected additional soil
samples in former milling areas in the southern portion of the Brownfields property as part of
Brownfields assessment activities conducted in February 2020. Collectively, soil assessment
activities completed at the Brownfields property have included collection of 27 soil samples for
laboratory analysis. A tabular summary of the soil sample laboratory analytical results for
samples collected in the southern portion of the Brownfields property are included as Table 1. A
tabular summary of the soil sample laboratory analytical results for samples collected on the
northern Site parcel are included as Table 2. Soil sample locations are shown in Figure 3. A
summary of the previously completed soil assessment results is provided below:
Volatile Organic Compounds
Soil sample analytical results indicated that low levels of several volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) including acetone (up to 0.23 milligram per kilogram [mg/kg]), naphthalene ( up to 0.0052
J mg/kg), and trichlorofluoromethane (up to 0.14 mg/kg) were detected at concentrations above
the laboratory reporting limits, but below the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Industrial/Commercial Preliminary Soil
Remediation Goals (PSRGs). No other VOCs were detected at concentrations above the
laboratory reporting limits in the soil sample collected at the Brownfields property.
Semi‐Volatile Organic Compounds
Soil sample analytical results have identified low levels of benzo(a)pyrene (up to 4.22 mg/kg) at
concentrations slightly above the DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial PSRG of 2.1 mg/kg in shallow
soil samples (HHSB‐2 and HHSB‐7) collected in the area of former milling operations west of the
railroad corridor. No other SVOCs were detected at concentrations above the DEQ IHSB
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs in soil samples collected at the Brownfields property.
PCBs
Shallow soil sample analytical results for the northern Site parcel identified the presence of
8
EMP Version 2, June 2018
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) including Aroclor 1248 (13 mg/kg) and Aroclor 1254 (8.9 mg/kg)
at concentrations above the DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial PRSGs in the northern portion of
the northern Site parcel. No other PCBs were detected at concentrations above the DEQ IHSB
Industrial/Commercial PRSGs in soil samples collected at the Brownfields property.
Metals
Soil sample laboratory analytical results indicate that arsenic (22 mg/kg) was detected at a
concentration above the DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial PSRG in the north‐central portion of
the Site. The detected arsenic concentration is consistent with naturally occurring levels and is
believed to represent background levels for the Site area.
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
Detections of PCBs in soil in the northern portion of the northern Site parcel (SB‐4) were
detected in a soil sample collected from the 0 to 2 ft below ground surface (bgs) depth interval.
Arsenic identified in the north‐central portion of the Site (SB‐2) was detected in a soil sample
collected from the 4 to 5 ft bgs interval. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected at the 0 to 2 ft bgs and 2
to 4 ft bgs depth intervals in soil samples collected in the central portion of the parcel located
west of the railroad corridor. No other compounds have been detected at concentrations above
the DEQ IHSB Industrial PSRGs (or background levels in the case of metals) in soil samples
collected at the Site.
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
The entire Site is expected to be disturbed during grading, which totals an approximate area of
58 acres (2.5 x106 sq ft). Soil will be disturbed as part of leveling and grading activities to prepare
the Site for construction of the industrial warehouses. A grading plan for redevelopment
associated with the northern Site parcel is not yet available. A copy of the preliminary Phase I
grading plan is provided as Appendix C.
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
Based review of the preliminary Phase I grading plan, planned cut depths are expected to range
from approximately 1 to 20 ft bgs. Following completion of grading activities, soils are not
expected to be disturbed at depths greater than approximately 8 ft bgs for installation of new
utilities.
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
Site grading will include shallow (i.e., no greater that 1 foot below current ground surface)
grubbing/stripping across the Site. Site work will include cut in western and southern portions of
the Brownfields property and is expected to generate approximately 200,000 cubic yards of
excess soil. Based on review of the Phase I preliminary grading plan, the west‐central and
eastern portions of the Brownfields property will require approximately 257,000 cubic yards of
fill. Additional fill required to balance the Site will be cut from the northern Site parcel.
9
EMP Version 2, June 2018
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
PCBs were previously detected in a limited area in the northern portion of the northern Site
parcel. It is unknown at this time if soil in the northern portion to the northern Site parcel will be
disturbed during grading activities. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected above the DEQ IHSB
Industrial/Commercial PSRG in the central portion of the parcel located west of the railroad
corridor. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected above the DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial PSRG in an
area of planned fill and will be beneath the slab of a proposed industrial warehouse building
upon completion of redevelopment activities. Aside from background levels of metals, no other
compounds have been detected at concentrations above the DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial
PSRGs in other portions of the Brownfields property.
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
It is anticipated that grading and leveling will result in a net balance with no import or export soil
needed to achieve proposed final grade elevations.
Part 1.A. MANAGING ONSITE SOIL
If soil is anticipated to be excavated from the Brownfield Property, relocated on the Brownfields
Property, or otherwise disturbed during site grading or other redevelopment activities, please
provide a grading plan that clearly illustrates areas of cut and fill (approximate areas & volumes are
acceptable, if only preliminary data available).
1) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION:
a) Does the soil contain a LISTED WASTE as defined in the North Carolina Hazardous
Waste Section under 40 CFR Part 261.31‐261.35?....................................... ☐Yes ☒No
☐ If yes, explain why below, including the level of knowledge regarding processes
generating the waste (include pertinent analytical results as needed).
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ If yes, do the soils exceed the “Contained‐Out” levels in Attachment 1 of the
North Carolina Contained‐In Policy?................................................. ☐ Yes ☐ No
b) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE AND EXCEEDS
THE CONTAINED‐OUT LEVELS IN ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
CONTAINED‐IN POLICY THE SOIL MAY NOT BE RE‐USED ON SITE AND MUST BE
DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND
REGULATIONS.
c) Does the soil contain a CHARACTERISTIC WASTE?.................................... ☐ Yes ☒ No
☐ If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).
☐ Ignitability Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Corrosivity Click or tap here to enter text.
10
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ Reactivity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Toxicity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ TCLP results Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Rule of 20 results (20 times total analytical results for an individual
hazardous constituent on TCLP list cannot, by test method, exceed regulatory
TCLP standard)
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ If no, explain rationale:
Laboratory analysis of soil samples collected during previous assessment
activities did not identify compound concentrations at characteristically
hazardous levels or levels which exceed TCLP criteria using the Rule of 20.
d) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A CHARACTERISTIC HAZARDOUS WASTE, THE
SOIL MAY NOT BE RE‐USED ON SITE AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE
WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.
2) Screening criteria by which soil disposition decisions will be made (e.g., left in place, capped in
place with low permeability barrier, removed to onsite location and capped, removed offsite):
☐ Preliminary Health‐Based Residential SRGs
☒ Preliminary Health‐Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs
☒ Division of Waste Management Risk Calculator (For Brownfields Properties Only)
☐ Site‐specific risk‐based cleanup level. Please provide details of methods used for
determination/explanation.
Click or tap here to enter text.
Additional comments:
Click or tap here to enter text.
3) If known impacted soil is proposed to be reused within the Brownfields Property Boundary,
please check the measures that will be utilized to ensure safe placement and documentation of
same. Please attach a proposed location diagram/site map.
☒ Provide documentation of analytical report(s) to Brownfields Project Manager
☒ Provide documentation of final location, thickness and depth of relocated soil on site map
to Brownfields Project Manager once known
☐ Geotextile to mark depth of fill material.
Provide description of material:
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Manage soil under impervious cap ☒ or clean fill ☒
11
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☒ Describe cap or fill:
Documented impacted soils will be covered with impervious surfaces (asphalt pavement,
sidewalks, access roads, buildings, etc.) or a minimum of 2 ft of demonstrably clean fill
during redevelopment.
☒ Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re‐recorded if
actions are Post‐Recordation).
☒ GPS the location and provide site map with final location.
☐ Other. Please provide a description of the measure:
4) Please describe the following action(s) to be taken during and following excavation and
management of site soils:
Management of fugitive dust from site
☒ Yes, describe the method will include:
Significant areas of contaminated soil are not expected to be encountered or disturbed
during future Site redevelopment activities based upon previous soil sampling data and field
screening during previous assessment activities. However, the grading contractor will take
into account conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and moisture content of soil
during soil grading and stockpiling activities to minimize dust generation. Particular
attention will be paid by contractors to implement dust control measures as needed based
on Site and atmospheric conditions (i.e., by controlled water application, hydro‐seeding,
and/or mulch, stone, or plastic cover).
☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Field Screening of site soil
☒ Yes, describe the field screening method, frequency of field screening, person conducting
field screening:
During soil disturbance at the Site, the workers or contractors will observe soils for
evidence of potential significantly impacted soil. Evidence of potential impacted soil
includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously disposed materials of
concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be noted during Site work,
the contractor will contact the project environmental engineer to observe the suspect
condition. If the project environmental engineer confirms that the material may be
impacted, then the procedures below will be implemented. In addition, the environmental
engineer will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48‐hours to advise that
person of the condition.
☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Click or tap here to enter text.
12
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Soil Sample Collection
☐ Yes, describe the sampling method (e.g., in‐situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ No, explain rationale:
Collection of additional soil samples is not anticipated based on results of previous Site
assessment activities. If previously unknown significant soil impact is encountered during
grading and/or installation or removal of utilities, excavation will proceed only as far as
needed to allow grading and/or construction of the utility to continue and/or only as far
as needed to allow alternate corrective measures described below.
Suspect impacted soil excavated during grading and/or utility line installation or removal
may be stockpiled and covered in a secure area to allow construction to progress.
Suspect impacted soil will be underlain by and covered with minimum 10‐mil plastic
sheeting. At least one representative soil sample (no less than 3 aliquot soil samples) at a
sample ratio of 1 soil sample per every approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil will be
collected for the analyses selected below (i.e., total VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals plus
hexavalent chromium). If the soil sample laboratory analytical results indicate that the
soil could potentially exceed toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria, then the soil
will also be analyzed by TCLP for those compounds that could exceed the toxicity
characteristic hazardous waste criteria.
Impacted soil will be managed in the manner described below based upon the laboratory
analyses:
i. If no organic compounds are detected in a sample (other than which are
attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts) and metals are below the Protection of
Groundwater or Residential PSRG (whichever is lower for the detected compounds) and
are consistent with Site‐specific background levels with acceptable cumulative risk
calculator results, then the soil will be deemed suitable for use as on‐Site fill or as off‐Site
fill. The proposed location(s) for off‐Site placement of soil (other than a permitted
facility) along with the receiving facility’s written approval for acceptance of the soil will
be provided to DEQ for approval prior to taking the soil off‐Site.
ii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which do not exceed the DEQ IHSB
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory
artifacts or which are consistent with Site‐specific background levels for metals), the TCLP
concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, and cumulative risk calculator results
are acceptable, then the soil may be used on‐Site as fill without conditions.
iii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which exceed the DEQ IHSB
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory
artifacts or which are consistent with background levels for metals) and the TCLP
concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil, with DEQ written
approval, may be used on‐Site as fill below an impervious surface, or at least 2 ft of
documented compacted clean soil. If the impacted soil with concentrations above
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs is moved to an on‐Site location, its location and depth will
be documented, and its location will be provided to DEQ
13
EMP Version 2, June 2018
iv. Impacted soil may be transported to a permitted facility such as a landfill or
landfarm provided that the soil is accepted at the disposal facility. If soil is transported to
a permitted facility, the permitted facility’s written approval or acceptance to dispose of
soil from the Site will be included with the final redevelopment report. In the unlikely
event that the sample data indicates concentrations above TCLP hazardous waste criteria,
then the soil must be transported off‐Site to a permitted disposal facility that can accept
or treat hazardous waste.
*Please note that should the PD elect to transport export soil to a permitted facility or to
a DEQ Brownfields pre‐approved receiving facility, soil will be direct loaded onto trucks
for transport off‐Site.
If soil samples are collected for analysis, please check the applicable chemical analytes:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium
and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium,
Herbicides, etc.): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
☒ Check to confirm that stockpiling of known or suspected impacted soils will be conducted
in accordance with Figure 1 of this EMP. Stockpile methodology should provide erosion
control, prohibiting contact between surface water/precipitation and contaminated soil,
and preventing contaminated runoff. Explain any variances or provide additional details as
needed:
☒ Final grade sampling of exposed native soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or
permanent hardscape). Select chemical analyses for final grade samples with check boxes
below (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead,
Click or tap here to enter text.
14
EMP Version 2, June 2018
selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
Please provide a scope of work for final grade sampling, including a diagram of soil
sampling locations, number of samples to be collected, and brief sampling methodology.
Samples should be collected from 0‐2 ft below ground surface, with the exception of VOCs
which should be taken from 1‐2 ft below ground surface. Alternatively, a work plan for
final grade sampling may be submitted under separate cover.
Following completion of soil disturbance for future Site development (i.e., after grading
and utility construction), an environmental engineer will be contracted to assess the Site
for areas that will not be covered upon completion of the redevelopment with a minimum
of 2 ft of documented clean fill soil, building foundations, sidewalks, asphalt or concrete
parking areas and driveways, or other similar impervious areas (e.g., tightly spaced pavers
or bricks). If such areas exist, a Work Plan will be prepared for final grade soil sampling for
DEQ Brownfields review and approval.
Based on the current Site redevelopment plan, one final grade soil sample will be collected
for laboratory analysis for each approximately 100 ft of linear landscape area or every
approximately 1,000 sq ft of open area. If no such areas exist, documentation will be
provided to the DEQ Brownfields project manager.
☐ If final grade sampling was NOT selected please explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Part 1.B. IMPORTED FILL SOIL
NO SOIL MAY BE BROUGHT ONTO THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL
FROM THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. According to the Brownfields IR 15, “Documenting
imported soil (by sampling, analysis, and reporting in accordance with review and written
approval in advance by the Brownfields Program), will safeguard the liability protections provided
by the brownfields agreement and is in the best interest of the prospective developer/property
owner.”
Requirements for importing fill:
15
EMP Version 2, June 2018
1) Will fill soil be imported to the site?................................................ ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) If yes, what is the estimated volume of fill soil to be imported?
As previously discussed, grading is expected to result in a net balance with no import or export
soil needed to achieve final grade elevations.
3) If yes, what is the anticipated depth that fill soil will be placed at the property? (If a range
of depths, please list the range.)
In general, fill areas associated with Phase I of the proposed redevelopment are located in the
central and northern portions of the southern Site parcels (Appendix C). The thickness of the fill
ranges from approximately 1 ft to 22 ft.
4) Provide the source of fill, including: location, site history, nearby environmental concerns,
etc. Attach aerial photos, maps, historic Sanborn maps and a borrow source site history:
Soil from the cut areas will be re‐used on‐Site in areas planned for fill. However, as indicated
above, approximately 57,000 cubic yards of import fill will be needed as part of the Phase I
redevelopment which will be borrowed from the southern portion of the northern Site parcel.
5) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide a plan to analyze fill
soil to demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards applicable to the site and can be
approved for use at the Brownfields property.
The PD plans to import limited amounts of virgin organic rich topsoil from a commercial
landscape material vendor for use in proposed landscaped areas. The PD does not plan to collect
samples of landscaping materials prior to placement at the Site. In addition, the PD may use
limited amounts of lime or concrete as an amending agent for drying soil as needed during
grading and redevelopment activities. The PD does not plan to collect samples of lime or
concrete used as an amending agent prior to use at the Site.
Although not anticipated, if import soil is required at the Site, the PD will follow the procedures
outlined below to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable standards applicable to the Site.
6) Please check the applicable chemical analytes for fill soil samples. (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead,
selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
16
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
7) The scope of work for import fill sampling may be provided below or in a Work Plan
submitted separately for DEQ review and approval. Attach specific location maps for in‐situ
borrow sites. If using a quarry, provide information on the type of material to be brought
onto the Brownfields Property.
The PD will follow the procedures outlined below to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable
standards applicable to the Site, if necessary.
If the PD plans to import virgin fill material from Vulcan Materials Company quarry located near
Pineville, NC, or from the Martin Marietta quarry located on Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte, NC,
no samples of the import material will be collected as adequate analytical data is available in the
DEQ Brownfields database to demonstrate material from these facilities is suitable for use as
structural fill at a Brownfields property.
If fill soil is obtained from an off‐Site property that is not a DEQ pre‐approved quarry or is recycled
material from the Vulcan Materials Company quarry or the Martin Marietta quarries, a sampling
plan will be developed and submitted for DEQ review. DEQ approval of the sampling plan and
analytical results will be obtained prior to transporting import soil to the Site.
The specific sampling rate will be outlined in the aforementioned sampling plan. However, if the
proposed borrow source has not been previously developed (i.e., virgin land) or is a permitted
quarry that has not been pre‐approved by DEQ, soil samples will be collected for laboratory
analyses indicated above at a general rate of one per 1,000 cubic yards.
Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Site if it does not contain compound
concentrations above DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial PSRGs, DWM Risk Calculator risk
thresholds, or typical metals concentrations which are consistent with background levels
identified at the Site.
Part 1.C. EXPORTED SOIL
NO SOIL MAY LEAVE THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE
BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. FAILURE TO OBTAIN APPROVAL MAY VIOLATE A BROWNFIELDS
AGREEMENT CAUSING A REOPENER OR JEOPARDIZING ELIGIBILITY IN THE PROGRAM,
ENDANGERING LIABILITY PROTECTIONS AND MAKING SAID ACTION POSSIBLY SUBJECT TO
ENFORCEMENT. JUSTIFICATIONS PROVIDED BELOW MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PROGRAM IN
WRITING PRIOR TO COMPLETING TRANSPORT ACTIVITIES. Please refer to Brownfields IR 15 for
additional details.
1) If export from a Brownfields Property is anticipated, please provide details regarding the
17
EMP Version 2, June 2018
proposed export actions. Volume of exported soil, depths, location from which soil will
be excavated on site, related sampling results, etc. Provide a site map with locations of
export and sampling results included.
Although exporting soil from the Site is not anticipated at this time, should export be required,
the following sampling plan will be implemented. Prior to transporting the soil off‐Site, a
sampling plan will be developed and submitted to DEQ Brownfields for review and approval.
Generally, soil samples will be collected from export soil at a rate of 1 sample per every 1,000
cubic yards of export material which will include a minimum of three combined composite
locations and one grab location. Export soil sampling may be conducted in‐situ prior to the onset
of grading and an In Situ Soil Characterization Assessment Work Plan will be provided to DEQ for
review and approval.
DEQ approval of the sampling plan, sampling locations, and analytical results will be obtained
prior to transporting export soil from the Site. Based on analytical results of soil samples
collected from the export soil, the soil will be transported off‐Site to a suitable location. The PD
will notify DEQ Brownfields of the location receiving the export soil. If not a permitted facility,
DEQ Brownfields approval and written approval from the receiving facility will be obtained prior
to transporting the soil off‐Site.
2) To what type of facility will the export Brownfields soil be sent?
☒ Subtitle D/Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (analytical program to be determined by
landfill)
☒ Permitted but Unlined Landfill (i.e. LCID, C&D, etc.) Analytical program to be
determined by the accepting Landfill;
☒ Landfarm or other treatment facility
☒ Use as fill at another suitable Brownfields Property – determination that a
site is suitable will require, at a minimum, that similar concentrations of the same or
similar contaminants already exist at both sites, use of impacted soil will not increase
the potential for risk to human health and the environment at the receiving Brownfields
property, and that a record of the acceptance of such soil from the property owner of
the receiving site is provided to Brownfields. Please provide additional details below.
☒ Use as Beneficial Fill off‐site at a non‐Brownfields Property ‐ Please provide
documentation of approval from the property owner for receipt of fill material. This will
also require approval by the DEQ Solid Waste Section. Additional information is
provided in IR 15. Please provide additional details below.
3) Additional Details: (if transfer of soil to another property is requested above, please provide
details related to the proposed plans).
The environmental engineer will contact DEQ Brownfields to obtain DEQ Brownfields and DEQ
Solid Waste approval prior to exporting soil to a non‐Brownfields property or non‐permitted
disposal facility.
18
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Part 1.D. MANAGEMENT OF UTILITY TRENCHES
☐ Install liner between native impacted soils and base of utility trench before filling with clean fill
(Preferred)
☒ Last out, first in principle for impacted soils (if soil can safely be reused onsite and is not a
hazardous waste), i.e., impacted soils are placed back at approximately the depths they
were removed from such that impacted soil is not placed at a greater depth than the original
depth from which it was excavated.
☐ Evaluate whether necessary to install barriers in conduits to prevent soil vapor transport,
and/or degradation of conduit materials due to direct impact with contaminants?
☐ If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials:
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ If no, include rationale here:
Results of soil vapor assessment activities completed at the Site indicate that no compounds are
present at concentrations that pose unacceptable vapor intrusion risks on the Brownfields
property.
Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
The contractor and workers will observe soil for potential impacts during utility installation activities.
Evidence of potential significant impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled
or previously disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
noted during utility work, the contractor will contact the project environmental engineer to observe
the suspect condition. If the project environmental engineer confirms that the material may be
impacted, then the procedures outlined in Managing On‐Site Soil above will be implemented. In
addition, the environmental engineer will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48‐
hours to advise that person of the condition.
Should impacted soil be discovered during utility trenching activities, appropriate safety screening will
be performed to protect workers during utility installation activities. Safety screening activities
include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a calibrated photoionization detector or similar
instrument at all times when in utility trenches. If safety screening results indicate further action is
warranted, the work zone will be evacuated until appropriate engineering controls (such as use of
industrial fans) are implemented.
PART 2. GROUNDWATER – Please fill out the information below.
1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
19
EMP Version 2, June 2018
During previously completed groundwater assessment activities, the depth to groundwater
surface was measured at a depth ranging from approximately 2 ft bgs in lower lying areas in the
central portion of the Brownfields property to approximately 14 ft bgs at higher elevations
located in the eastern and northern portions of the Brownfields property.
2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite ☐offsite ☐both or ☒unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
Groundwater assessment at the Brownfields property included collection of four (4)
groundwater samples for laboratory analysis. Locations of the groundwater samples are shown
in Figure 3 and a tabular summary of groundwater sample laboratory analytical results is
included as Table 3. A brief summary of the groundwater assessment results is provided below.
Groundwater sample results indicated that the chlorinated solvents tetrachloroethylene (PCE;
250 micrograms per liter [µg/l]) and trichloroethene (TCE; 5.4 µg/L) were detected in a
groundwater sample collected in the north‐central portion of the parcel located west of the
railroad corridor (B4‐GW) at concentrations that exceed the DEQ 2L Groundwater Quality
Standards (2L Standards) and the DEQ Division of Waste Management (DMW) Non‐Residential
Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs). No other organic compounds were
detected at concentrations above the DEQ 2L Standards or DEQ DWM Non‐Residential GWSLs.
No inorganic compounds were detected at concentrations above the 2L Standards in
groundwater samples collected at the Site.
3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?
Shallow groundwater is expected to mimic surface topography which slopes toward and
unnamed tributary of Fites Creek located in the eastern portion of the Brownfields property
(Figure 3).
4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
☐Yes ☒No
If yes, describe these activities:
Please note that shallow groundwater was encountered approximately 2 ft bgs in lower lying
areas located in the central portion of the Brownfields property. Grading activities will result in
an increased surface elevation in lower areas the south‐central and eastern portions of the Site
of up to 20 ft. The deepest trenches for utility installations are proposed for 8 ft bgs following
grading activities have leveled the Site. Therefore, encountering groundwater during
redevelopment activities is not anticipated at this time.
Regardless of the answer; in the event that contaminated groundwater is encountered
during redevelopment activities (even if no is checked above), list activities for contingent
management of groundwater (e.g., dewatering of groundwater from excavations or
foundations, containerizing, offsite disposal, discharge to sanitary sewer, NPDES permit, or
sampling procedures).
Although not anticipated at this time, appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken if
groundwater gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted during
construction activities. The accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate/infiltrate to the
extent time for dissipation does not disrupt the construction schedule. Should the time needed
for natural dissipation of accumulated water be deemed inadequate, an environmental
20
EMP Version 2, June 2018
professional will be contacted and the water will be tested and disposed off‐Site (if impacted),
or tested and discharged to the storm sewer (if not impacted above DEQ surface water
standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State regulations for erosion control
and construction stormwater control.
5) Are monitoring wells currently present on the Brownfields Property?.................☐Yes ☒No
If yes, are any monitoring wells routinely monitored through DEQ or other
agencies?..................................................................................................................☐Yes ☐No
6) Please check methods to be utilized in the management of known and previously
unidentified wells.
☐ Abandonment of site monitoring wells in accordance with all applicable regulations. It
is the Brownfields Program’s intent to allow proper abandonment of well(s) as
specified in the Brownfields Agreement, except if required for active monitoring
through another section of DEQ or the EPA.
☐ Location of existing monitoring wells marked
☐ Existing monitoring wells protected from disturbance
☒ Newly identified monitoring wells will be marked and protected from further
disturbance until notification to DEQ Brownfields can be made and approval for
abandonment is given.
7) Please provide additional details as needed:
Please note, disturbance of existing site monitoring wells without approval by DEQ is not
permissible. If monitoring wells are damaged and/or destroyed, DEQ may require that the PD
be responsible for replacement of the well.
PART 3. SURFACE WATER ‐Please fill out the information below.
1) Is surface water present at the property? ☒ Yes ☐ No
2) Attach a map showing the location of surface water at the Brownfields Property.
3) Is surface water at the property known to be contaminated? ☐ Yes ☒ No
4) Will workers or the public be in contact with surface water during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No
5) In the event that contaminated surface water is encountered during redevelopment
activities, or clean surface water enters open excavations, list activities for management of
such events (e.g. flooding, contaminated surface water run‐off, stormwater impacts):
An unnamed tributary of Fites Creek is present near the eastern Brownfields property boundary.
Phase I redevelopment activities do not include disturbance to the unnamed tributary.
The PD is not aware of existing monitoring wells located on the Brownfields property. DEQ will be
notified if newly identified monitoring wells are found on the Brownfields property.
21
EMP Version 2, June 2018
If surface water run‐off gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted
during construction activities, appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken. The
accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate/infiltrate to the extent time for dissipation does
not disrupt the construction schedule. Should the time needed for natural dissipation of
accumulated water be deemed inadequate, the water will be tested and disposed off‐Site (if
impacted), or tested and discharged to the storm sewer (if not impacted above DEQ surface
water standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State regulations for erosion
control and construction stormwater control.
PART 4. SEDIMENT – Please fill out the information below.
1) Are sediment sources present on the property? ☒ Yes ☐ No
2) If yes, is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No
3) Will workers or the public be in contact with sediment during planned redevelopment
activities? ☒ Yes ☐ No
4) Attach a map showing location of known contaminated sediment at the property.
5) In the event that contaminated sediment is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such events (stream bed disturbance):
In February 2016, H&H collected three (3) sediment samples for laboratory analysis from culvert
outfalls observed on the northern Site parcel by others. The sediment sample locations are
shown in Figure 3, and a tubular summary of the laboratory analytical results is provided as
Table 4.
As shown in Table 4, no organic compounds were detected at concentrations exceeding the DEQ
IHSB Industrial/Commercial PSRGs. Metals concentrations detected in the sediment samples
appear to be consistent with naturally occurring levels.
An unnamed tributary of Fites Creek is present near the eastern Brownfields property boundary.
Phase I redevelopment activities do not include disturbance to the unnamed tributary.
PART 5. SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below.
1) Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the
following vapor intrusion screening levels (current version) in the following media:
22
EMP Version 2, June 2018
IHSB Residential Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
Groundwater:.….☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
IHSB Industrial/Commercial Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
Groundwater:…..☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
2) Attach a map showing the locations of soil vapor contaminants that exceed site
screening levels.
3) If applicable, at what depth(s) is soil vapor known to be contaminated?
4) Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities
(trenches, manways, basements or other subsurface work,) list activities for management
of such contact:
As noted above, appropriate safety screening will be performed to protect workers during sub‐
grade work including utility installation activities should potentially impacted media be
encountered. Safety screening activities include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a
calibrated photoionization detector or similar instrument. If safety screening results indicate
further action is warranted, an environmental professional will be contacted and the work zone
will be evacuated until appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are
implemented.
PART 6. SUB‐SLAB SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below if existing buildings or
foundations will be retained in the redevelopment.
1) Are sub‐slab soil vapor data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
H&H collected soil vapor samples for laboratory analysis in December 2014 and supplemental soil
vapor samples in February 2020. The soil vapor samples were collected within the footprints of
proposed building to evaluate the potential for structural vapor intrusion. The December 2014 and
February 2020 soil vapor sample locations are shown in Figure 3, and a tabular summary of the
laboratory analytical results is provided in Table 5.
As shown in Table 5, soil vapor sample laboratory analytical results indicate that no compounds were
detected at concentrations exceeding the DEQ DWM Non‐Residential Vapor Intrusion Sub‐slab and
Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs). Hypothetical worst‐case risk calculator results using the
highest concentration of any compounds detected in soil vapor samples collected at the Site indicate
that the calculated cumulative LICR and HI values are orders of magnitude below the DEQ and EPA
acceptable levels.
23
EMP Version 2, June 2018
2) If data indicate that sub‐slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map
showing the location of these exceedances.
3) At what depth(s) is sub‐slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☐0‐6 inches ☐Other, please
describe:
Not Applicable
4) Will workers encounter contaminated sub‐slab soil vapor during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact
If impacted soil vapors are encountered during future redevelopment activities, worker
breathing zone will be monitored using a calibrated photoionization detector. If results indicate
further action is warranted, appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will
be implemented..
PART 7. INDOOR AIR – Please fill out the information below.
1) Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) Attach a map showing the location(s) where indoor air contaminants exceed site screening levels.
3) If the structures where indoor air has been documented to exceed risk‐based screening levels will
not be demolished as part of redevelopment activities, will workers encounter contaminated
indoor air during planned redevelopment activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
4) In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact:
Soil gas to indoor air vapor intrusion pathways were analyzed using DEQ risk calculators based on
“worst case scenario” assessment data. The highest concentrations encountered at the Site indicated
calculated risk for the soil gas to indoor air pathway are within acceptable risk levels for non‐
residential workers. In the unlikely event there is evidence of potential indoor air issues (i.e., unusual
odors) during future redevelopment activities, the area will be evacuated and appropriate safety
screening of the indoor air will be performed. If warranted, safety screening procedures will include
periodically screening indoor air for volatile organic vapors with a calibrated photoionization detector
when workers present in the Site buildings identify potential indoor air issues. If results indicate
further action is warranted, appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be
implemented.
24
EMP Version 2, June 2018
VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM – Please fill out the information below.
Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) proposed for this Brownfields Property?
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
If yes, ☐ VIMS Plan Attached or ☐ VIMS Plan to be submitted separately
If submitted separately provide date:
Click or tap here to enter text.
VIMS Plan shall be signed and sealed by a NC Professional Engineer
If no, please provide a brief rationale as to why no vapor mitigation plan is warranted:
As noted above, risk calculations indicate acceptable risk levels for potential structural vapor
intrusion under a non‐residential use scenario. Based on the planned industrial use of the
Brownfields property and results of previous assessment activities, no significant risk for
structural vapor intrusion has been identified that would warrant additional assessment or vapor
intrusion mitigation measures. Although additional vapor intrusion assessment is not required at
this time based on available environmental data, results of risk evaluations, and the proposed
use of the Brownfields property, DEQ may request additional assessment to confirm that
building vapor intrusion testing will not be necessary. .
CONTINGENCY PLAN – encountering unknown tanks, drums, or other waste materials
In this section please provide actions that will be taken to identify or manage unknown
potential new sources of contamination. During redevelopment activities, it is not uncommon
that unknown tanks, drums, fuel lines, landfills, or other waste materials are encountered.
Notification to DEQ Brownfields Project Manager, UST Section, Fire Department, and/or other
officials, as necessary and appropriate, is required when new potential source(s) of
contamination are discovered. These Notification Requirements were outlined on Page 1 of this
EMP.
Should potentially impacted materials be identified that are inconsistent with known site
impacts, the DEQ Brownfields Project Manager will be notified and a sampling plan will be
prepared based on the EMP requirements and site‐specific factors. Samples will generally be
collected to document the location of the potential impacts.
Check the following chemical analysis that are to be conducted on newly identified releases:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and
silver)
EPA Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
25
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.)
Please note, if field observations indicate the need for additional analyses, they should
be conducted, even if not listed here.
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
Please provide details on the proposed methods of managing the following commonly
encountered issues during redevelopment of Brownfields Properties.
During construction activities, contractors may encounter unknown sub‐surface environmental
conditions (i.e., tanks, drums, or waste materials) that if encountered, will require proper
management. Prior to beginning Site work, H&H will attend a pre‐construction kick‐off meeting
with the PD and the redevelopment contractors to discuss the DEQ approved EMP and various
scenarios when it would be appropriate and necessary to notify H&H of the discovery of unknown
subsurface features or potentially impacted media at the Site.
In the event that such conditions are encountered during site development activities, the
environmental actions noted below will be used to direct environmental actions to be taken during
these activities and sampling data for potentially impacted soil and the disposition of impacted soil
will be provided to DEQ when the data becomes available.
Underground Storage Tanks:
In the event a UST or impacts associated with a UST release are discovered at the Site during
redevelopment activities, the UST and/or UST related impacts will be addressed through the
Brownfields Program. DEQ Brownfields will be notified within 48‐hours of discovery of the UST.
If a UST is encountered, the UST will be removed, if possible and the UST will be transported off‐Site
for disposal at a suitable facility. If the UST contains residual fluids, the fluids will be sampled for
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals, and transported off‐Site for disposal at a suitable facility based on
the laboratory analytical results prior to removing the UST from the ground. If a UST is encountered
that cannot be removed or does not require removal for geotechnical or construction purposes, it
may be abandoned in‐place with prior DEQ approval and construction will proceed. Where
appropriate, the bottom may be penetrated before abandonment to prevent fluid accumulation.
Impacted soil in the vicinity of the UST will be managed in accordance with the Managing On‐Site
Soil section outlined above in the EMP.
Sub‐Grade Feature/Pit:
If a sub‐grade feature or pit is encountered and does not require removal for geotechnical or
construction purposes, it will be filled with soil or suitable fill and construction will proceed. Where
appropriate, the bottom may be penetrated before back filling to prevent fluid accumulation. If the
pit has waste in it, the waste may be set aside in a secure area and will be sampled for waste
26
EMP Version 2, June 2018
disposal purposes for TCLP VOCs, TCLP SVOCs, and TCLP metals and disposed off‐site at a permitted
facility or the waste will be managed in accordance with the Managing On‐Site Soil section outlined
above in the EMP, whichever is most applicable based on the type of waste present. If the pit must
be removed and the observed waste characteristics indicate the concrete may potentially be
contaminated to a significant degree, the concrete will be sampled and analyzed by methods
specified by the disposal facility.
Buried Waste Material:
If excavation into buried wastes or significantly impacted soils occurs, the contractor is instructed to
stop work in that location and notify the environmental consultant. The environmental consultant
will review the materials and collect samples if warranted. In this event, confirmation sampling will
be conducted at representative locations in the base and the sidewalls of the excavation after the
waste or significantly impacted soil is removed. The confirmation samples will be analyzed for
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals. Areas of suspected contaminated soil that remain at the Site after
excavation is complete above the DEQ IHSB Industrial/Commercial PSRGs will be managed pursuant
to this plan.
Re‐Use of Impacted Soils On‐Site:
Please refer to description outlined in the Managing On‐Site Soil section (Part 1A) of the EMP above.
If unknown, impacted soil is identified on‐site, management on‐site can be considered after the
project team provides the necessary information, outlined in Part 1.A. Item 11, for Brownfields
Project Manager approval prior to final placement on‐site.
If other potential contingency plans are pertinent, please provide other details or scenarios as
needed below:
Click or tap here to enter text.
POST‐REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING
☒ Check this box to acknowledge that a Redevelopment Summary Report will be required for the
project. If the project duration is longer than one year, an annual update is required and will be
due by January 31 of each year, or 30 days after each one‐year anniversary of the effective date of
this EMP (as agreed upon with the Project Manager). These reports will be required for as long as
physical redevelopment of the Brownfields Property continues, except that the final
Redevelopment Summary Report will be submitted within 90 days after completion of
redevelopment. Based on the estimated construction schedule, the first Redevelopment Summary
Report is anticipated to be submitted on 1/31/2021
The Redevelopment Summary Report shall include environment‐related activities since the last
report, with a summary and drawings, that describes:
27
EMP Version 2, June 2018
1. actions taken on the Brownfields Property;
2. soil grading and cut and fill actions;
3. methodology(ies) employed for field screening, sampling and laboratory analysis of
environmental media;
4. stockpiling, containerizing, decontaminating, treating, handling, laboratory analysis and
ultimate disposition of any soil, groundwater or other materials suspected or confirmed
to be contaminated with regulated substances; and
5. removal of any contaminated soil, water or other contaminated materials (for example,
concrete, demolition debris) from the Brownfields Property (copies of all legally required
manifests shall be included).
☒ Check box to acknowledge consent to provide a NC licensed P.G. or P.E. sealed, Redevelopment
Summary Report in compliance with the site’s Brownfields Agreement.
29
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data - Former Milling AreasAcme Spinning MillBelmont, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BMT-001Sample IDB-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 HHSB-1 HHSB-2A HHSB-3 HHSB-3A HHSB-4 HHSB-4AHHSB-5Date10/13/2014 10/13/2014 10/13/2014 10/13/2014 12/23/2014 2/5/2020 12/23/2014 2/5/2020 12/24/2014 2/5/202012/24/2014Depth (ft bgs)8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 0-2 0-2 8-10 2-4 0-2 2-4 0-2 2-40-2Sample LocationRange MeanUnitsVOCs (8260)Trichlorofluoromethane <0.0006 <0.00042 <0.000460.14<0.002 <0.0019 <0.0031 NA0.0035 JNA <0.0022 NA <0.00219,000-- --Naphthalene 0.0046 J<0.000380.0052 J<0.00031 <0.0011 <0.001 <0.0017 NA <0.001 NA <0.0012 NA <0.001145,000-- --SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene 0.34 J<0.0590.46 J<0.056 <0.0934 <0.929 <0.109 NA <0.897 NA <0.106 NA <0.1029,000-- --Acenaphthylene<0.078 <0.0630.20 J<0.059 <0.0959 <0.953 <0.112 NA <0.920 NA <0.109 NA <0.105NE-- --Anthracene 1.1<0.0700.86<0.066 <0.0911.72 J<0.106 NA <0.873 NA <0.103 NA <0.099445,000-- --Benzo(a)anthracene 2.1<0.0571.8<0.054 <0.0753.89 J<0.0873 NA1.21 JNA <0.085 NA <0.081921-- --Benzo(a)pyrene 1.8<0.0471.4<0.044 <0.07743.82 J<0.0902 NA1.24 JNA <0.0878 NA <0.08462.1-- --Benzo(b)fluoranthene 2.1<0.0511.9<0.048 <0.07013.68 J<0.0816 NA <0.672 NA <0.0794 NA <0.076521-- --Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1.0<0.0480.94<0.045 <0.1031.84 J<0.120 NA <0.991 NA <0.117 NA <0.113NE-- --Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.85<0.0570.75<0.054 <0.07993.16 J<0.093 NA <0.767 NA <0.0906 NA <0.873210-- --Chrysene 2.0<0.0551.8<0.052 <0.05414.22<0.063 NA1.31 JNA <0.0613 NA <0.05912,100-- --Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.24 J<0.0530.22 J<0.050 <0.086 <0.855 <0.0687 NA <0.826 NA <0.0975 NA <0.0942.1-- --Dibenzofuran 0.23 J<0.0660.35 J<0.062 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA210-- --bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 0.26 J<0.065 <0.069 <0.061 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA160-- --Fluoranthene 4.7<0.0564.6<0.052 <0.0599.71<0.0687 NA2.99 JNA <0.0669 NA <0.06456,000-- --Fluorene 0.41 J<0.0630.43 J<0.059 <0.0836 <0.831 <0.0973 NA <0.802 NA <0.0947 NA <0.09136,000-- --Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1.2<0.0501.0<0.047 <0.08362.08 J<0.0973 NA <0.802 NA <0.0947 NA <0.091321-- --Naphthalene<0.086 <0.0700.12 J<0.066 <0.0996 <0.990 <0.116 NA <0.956 NA <0.113 NA <0.10918-- --Phenanthrene 4.2<0.0574.8<0.053 <0.06766.5<0.0787 NA2.09 JNA <0.0766 NA <0.0739NE-- --Pyrene 4.20<0.0584.3<0.054 <0.06887.30<0.0801 NA2.53 JNA <0.078 NA <0.07524,500-- --Metals (6010/6020/7196/7199)ArsenicNA NA NA NA NA NA NA6.02NA3.59NA1.44NA3.0 1.0 - 18 4.8BariumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA105NA39.7NA81.6NA47,000 50 - 1,000 356CadmiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.382 JNA <0.100 NA <0.103 NA200 1.0 - 10* 4.3Chromium (total)NA NA NA NA NA NA NA66.1NA47.4NA99.3NANE 7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA1.61NA <0.319 NA <0.328 NA6.5 NS NSTrivalent ChromiumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA64.5NA47.4NA99.3NA350,000 NS NSLeadNA NA NA NA NA NA NA22.8NA9.21NA3.44NA800 ND - 50 16MercuryNA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.0765NA0.0583NA0.00825 JNA9.7 0.03 - 0.52 0.121SeleniumNA NA NA NA NA NA NA0.782NA0.853NA0.556 JNA1,200 <0.1 - 0.8 0.42SilverNA NA NA NA NA NA NA <0.197 NA <0.194 NA <0.199 NA1,200 ND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (December 2019)2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Background Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous US soils.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Aside from metals, only those compounds detected in one or more samples are shown in the table above. VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds; SVOCs = Semi-Volatile Organic CompoundsNE = Not Established; NA = Not Analyzed; NS = Not Specified; ND = Not Detected; ft bgs = feet below ground surfaceJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. Industrial/ Commercial PSRGs (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Former Textile Milling AreasHHSB-212/23/2014mg/kgS:\AAA‐Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\EMP\Tables\AcmeSpinningMill_BF_Tables4/14/2020Table 1 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data - Former Milling AreasAcme Spinning MillBelmont, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BMT-001Sample IDHHSB-7 COMP-1 COMP-2 COMP-3 COMP-4 COMP-5Date12/23/2014 12/23/2014 12/24/2014 2/5/2020 2/5/2020 2/5/2020 2/5/2020 2/5/2020Depth (ft bgs)0-2 8-10 2-4 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1Sample LocationRange MeanUnitsVOCs (8260)Trichlorofluoromethane <0.0029 <0.0029 <0.0027 NA NANA NA NA NA NA9,000-- --Naphthalene<0.0016 <0.0016 <0.0015 NA NANA NA NA NA NA45,000-- --SVOCs (8270)Acenaphthene<0.0993 <0.09990.967 JNA NANA NA NA NA NA9,000-- --Acenaphthylene<0.102 <0.103 <0.954 NA NANA NA NA NA NANE-- --Anthracene<0.0967 <0.09732.85 JNA NANA NA NA NA NA45,000-- --Benzo(a)anthracene<0.0797 <0.08025.53NA NANA NA NA NA NA21-- --Benzo(a)pyrene<0.0829 <0.08284.22NA NANA NA NA NA NA2.1-- --Benzo(b)fluoranthene<0.0745 <0.07493.81 JNA NANA NA NA NA NA21-- --Benzo(g,h,i)perylene<0.110 <0.1102.46 JNA NANA NA NA NA NANE-- --Benzo(k)fluoranthene<0.085 <0.08554.37NA NANA NA NA NA NA210-- --Chrysene 0.0743 J 0.0670 J 5.72NA NANA NA NA NA NA2,100-- --Dibenz(a,h)anthracene<0.0915 <0.092 <0.857 NA NANA NA NA NA NA2.1-- --DibenzofuranNA NA NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA210-- --bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalateNA NA NA NA NANA NA NA NA NA160-- --Fluoranthene 0.159 J 0.131 J 12.6NA NANA NA NA NA NA6,000-- --Fluorene<0.0889 <0.08941.04 JNA NANA NA NA NA NA6,000-- --Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene<0.0889 <0.08942.25 JNA NANA NA NA NA NA21-- --Naphthalene<0.106 <0.106 <0.991 NA NANA NA NA NA NA18-- --Phenanthrene 0.0737 J<0.072312.4NA NANA NA NA NA NANE-- --Pyrene 0.134 J 0.129 J 10.1NA NANA NA NA NA NA4,500-- --Metals (6010/6020/7196/7199)ArsenicNA NA NA3.33 3.39 3.88NA3.70NA NA3.0 1.0 - 18 4.8BariumNA NA NA28.2 30.0 53.6NA107NA NA47,000 50 - 1,000 356CadmiumNA NA NA <0.102 <0.1020.194 JNA1.06NA NA200 1.0 - 10* 4.3Chromium (total)NA NA NA29.4 26.7 42.7NA26.4NA NANE 7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent ChromiumNA NA NA <0.326 <0.3270.774 JNA1.01 JNA NA6.5 NS NSTrivalent ChromiumNA NA NA29.4 26.7 41.9NA25.4NA NA350,000 NS NSLeadNA NA NA8.23 7.12 36.7 23.6 52.9 69.434.2 800 ND - 50 16MercuryNA NA NA0.061 0.0579 0.0787NA0.0646NA NA9.7 0.03 - 0.52 0.121SeleniumNA NA NA0.838 0.654 1.01NA1.29NA NA1,200 <0.1 - 0.8 0.42SilverNA NA NA <0.198 <0.199 <0.190NA<0.189NA NA1,200 ND - 5.0 NSNotes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (December 2019)2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Background Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous US soils.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Aside from metals, only those compounds detected in one or more samples are shown in the table above. VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds; SVOCs = Semi-Volatile Organic CompoundsNE = Not Established; NA = Not Analyzed; NS = Not Specified; ND = Not Detected; ft bgs = feet below ground surfaceJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. Former Textile Milling Areamg/kgFormer ResidencesRegional Background Metals in Soil (2)Industrial/ Commercial PSRGs (1)2-42/5/2020HHSB-7A/SB-DUPHHSB-6S:\AAA‐Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\EMP\Tables\AcmeSpinningMill_BF_Tables4/14/2020Table 1 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2 Summary of Soil Analytical Data - Northern Site ParcelAcme Spinning Mill Belmont, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BMT-001 Sample IDSB-1 SB-2 SB-3 SB-4 SB-5 Date2/8/2016 2/8/2016 2/8/2016 2/8/2016 2/8/2016 Depth (ft bgs)0-2 4-5 0-2 0-2 2-3 Sample Location UnitsVOCs (8260)Acetone0.23 0.044 0.11 0.22NA140,000 --Isopropyltoluene<0.000270.0067<0.00024 <0.00026 NANE --PAHs (8270)BDL BDL BDL BDL NA-- --Metals (6010/7471/7196)Arsenic 4.6222.2 2.7 2.0 3.0 4.8Barium 51 87 81 62 260 47,000 356Cadmium<0.0075 <0.0065 <0.00679.3<0.0067200 4.3Chromium (total) 36 49 34 30 15 NE 65Hexavalent Chromium<0.23 <0.21 <0.21 <0.24 NA6.5 NSTrivalent Chromium 36 49 34 30NE350,000 NSLead 15 23 8.7 27 3.3 800 16Mercury 0.033 0.52 0.024 0.039<0.00159.7 0.121Selenium<0.052 <0.045 <0.046 <0.052 <0.0461,200 0.42Silver <0.0058 <0.0051 <0.0052 <0.0058 <0.00521,200 NSPCBs (8082)Aroclor 1248<0.014 <0.013 <0.01313NA0.94 --Aroclor 1254<0.017 <0.016 <0.0168.9NA0.97 --Notes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (December 2019)2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Background Cd and Ag concentrati were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous US soils.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits. Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses. Aside from metals, only those compounds detected in one or more samples are shown in the table above. VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds; RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; PCBs = Polychlorinated Biphenyls; PAHs = Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons ft bgs = feet below ground surface; BDL = Below Detection Limits; NA = Not Analyzed; NS = Not Specified; NE = Not EstablishedBold results designate an exceedance of Industrial PSRGs and background range in the case of metals.Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)Industrial/ Commercial PSRGs (1)NSMean mg/kg----NSND - 50----Northern Site ParcelRange 0.03 - 0.521.0 - 1850 - 1,0001.0 - 107.0 - 300<0.1 - 0.8ND - 5.0--S:\AAA-Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\EMP\Tables\Sediment Table.xlsx4/20/2020Table 2 (Page 1 of 1))Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3 Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataAcme Spinning MillBelmont, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BMT-001Sample IDB1-GW B3-GW B4-GW TMW-1Date10/13/2014 10/13/2014 10/13/2014 2/8/2016Sample LocationNorthern ParcelUnitsVOCs (8260)Acetone17 29 5.7<0.3106,000 19,000,000Chloroform<0.08911 1.4<0.07670 36cis-1,2-dichloroethylene<0.076 <0.07628<0.05670 NETetrachloroethylene<0.0690.81250<0.0980.7 48Trichlorofluoromethane<0.088 <0.088570<0.0622,000 NETrichloroethylene<0.0540.825.4<0.0783 4.41,1-Dichloroethylene<0.07865 1.7<0.083350 160SVOCs (8270)Fluoranthene<1.85.1 J<0.94 <4.5200 NEPyrene<2.75.8 J<1.4 <4.3300 NENotes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 02L.0202 Groundwater Quality Standard (2L Standard) (April 2013)2) DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) (February 2018)Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L). Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.Bold indicates concentration exceeds 2L Standard and the Non-Residential GWSL. Only those compounds detected in at least one or more samples are shown in the table above.VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds; SVOCs = Semi-Volatile Organic CompoundsNE = Not EstablishedJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. Former Textile Milling Areasµg/L2L Standard(1) Non-Residential GWSLs (2)S:\AAA‐Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\EMP\Tables\AcmeSpinningMill_BF_Tables4/14/2020Table 3 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4 Summary of Sediment Analytical DataAcme Spinning Mill Belmont, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BMT-001 Sample IDSED-1 SED-2 SED-3 Date2/8/2016 2/8/2016 2/8/2016 Sample LocationMean UnitsVOCs (8260)Acetone0.18 0.10 0.11 100,000 --PAHs (8270)Benzo(b)fluoranthene<0.42 <0.420.75 21 --Chrysene<0.42 <0.420.61 2,100 --Fluoranthene<0.420.49 1.1 6,000 --Phenanthrene<0.42 <0.420.66 NE --Pyrene<0.42 <0.420.94 4,500 --Metals (6010/7471/7196)Arsenic 5.2 12 2.4 3.0 4.8Barium 62 51 58 44,000 356Cadmium<0.0068 <0.0066200 <0.32Chromium (total) 85 110 38 100,000 65Hex Chromium<0.21 <0.21 <0.276.5 NSTrivalent Chromium 85 110 38 350,00 NSLead 67 15 22 800 16Mercury 0.030<0.0280.049 3.1 0.121Selenium<0.047 <0.045 <0.0581,200 0.42Silver<0.053 <0.0051 <0.00661,200 NSNotes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardhous Sites Branch - Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (December 2019)2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Background Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous US soils.Sediment concentrations are reportied in miligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Compound concetrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits. Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses. Aside from metals, only those compounds detected in one or more samples are shown in the table above. VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds; PAHs = Polycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsNA = Not Analyzed; NS = Not Specified; NE = Not EstablishedBold results designate an exceedance of the Freshwater Ecological Screening Value.(mg/kg)Northern Site Parcel RangeIndustrial Health Based PSRG (1)Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)--1.0-1850-10001.0-107.0-300----------NS<0.1-0.8ND-5.0NSND-500.03-0.52\\hhfs01\MasterFiles\AAA-Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\EMP\Tables\Sediment Table4/20/2020Table 4 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 5 Summary of Soil Vapor Analytical DataAcme Spinning MillBelmont, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BMT-001 Sample IDVMP-2 VMP-2A VMP-3 VMP-3A VMP-4 VMP-4A TVMP-1 TVMP-2 TVMP-3 Date12/26/2014 12/26/2014 2/8/2020 12/26/2014 2/8/2020 12/26/2014 2/8/2020 2/8/2020 2/8/2020 2/8/2020 Depth (ft bgs)15 10 6.5 6.5 9.5 8 10 10 10 Sample LocationUnitsVOCs (TO-15)AcetoneNA2.5 J 2.2 JNA5.2NA4.0NA6.0 4.6 22.2 16.72,700,000BenzeneNA<0.25 <0.25NA39.7NA28.0NA36.1 38.0 10.2 11.21,6002-Butanone (MEK)NA<0.59 <0.59NA<0.55NA<0.57NA<0.55 <0.512.0 J 6.7440,000Carbon DisulfideNA<0.35 <0.35NA49.5NA26.5NA44.1 61.1 25.1 34.461,000Carbon TetrachlorideNA<0.69 <0.69NA1.3 JNA0.96 JNA1.3 J 1.1 J 1.0 J<0.622,000ChloroformNA133 132NA<0.29NA<0.30NA<0.2918.8<0.30 <0.28530ChloromethaneNA<0.25 <0.25NA0.73NA1.1NA<0.23 <0.22 <0.240.47 J7,900CyclohexaneNA<0.57 <0.57NA26.9NA17.4NA39.9 46.7 15.3 8.2530,0001,3-DichlorobenzeneNA1.7 J 1.7 JNA12.8NA14.5NA28.1 28.5 46.0 11.4NEDichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)NA2.2 2.2NA2.6NA2.6NA2.7 2.8 2.7 2.48,8001,1-Dichloroethane<0.40<0.36 <0.36<0.40<0.34<0.40<0.35<0.40<0.34247<0.35 <0.327,7001,1-DichloroetheneNA<0.44 <0.44NA<0.41NA<0.42NA<0.411,280<0.42 <0.3918,000cis-1,2-DichloroetheneNA<0.35 <0.35NA<0.33NA<0.34NA<0.332.1<0.34 <0.32NEEthyl AcetateNA<0.31 <0.31NA<0.28NA<0.29NA<0.281.6<0.291.0 J6,100EthylbenzeneNA<0.49 <0.49NA26.2NA34.5NA42.1 51.6 16.6 13.74,9004-EthyltolueneNA<0.92 <0.92NA2.1 JNA5.7NA8.3 14.3 4.1 2.5 JNEn-HeptaneNA<0.61 <0.61NA46.2NA35.6NA53.2 62.9 25.7 12.735,000n-HexaneNA<0.50 <0.50NA37.4NA19.1NA58.7 66.9 23.3 11.761,000Methylene ChlorideNA<1.9 <1.9NA<1.8NA2.4 JNA2.0 J 2.3 J<1.92.0 J53,000NaphthaleneNA<2.1 <2.1NA<2.0NA<2.0NA<2.012.0<2.0 <1.9260PropyleneNA<0.23 <0.23NA19.3NA48.2NA236 109 154 139260,000StyreneNA<0.55 <0.55NA<0.51NA<0.53NA0.73 J 1.1 J 4.3<0.5088,000Tetrachloroethylene 13.016.1 16.01.77.912.08.22.09.7 163 7.3 6.33,500TolueneNA<0.57 <0.57NA462NA357NA435 511 111 114440,0001,1,1-TrichloroethaneNA<0.50 <0.39NA<0.46NA<0.48NA<0.4670.7<0.48 <0.44440,000Trichloroethene<0.54<0.41 <0.41<0.54<0.380.21 J<0.390.40 J<0.3822.3<0.39 <0.36180Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)NA1.5 J 1.5 JNA1.6 JNA2.5NA46.8 8.4 1.8 1.5 JNE1,1,2-TrichlorotrifluoroethaneNA<0.91 <0.91NA<0.84NA<0.87NA1.2 J 1.8 J 1.6 J 0.86 JNE1,2,4-TrimethylbenzeneNA<0.73 <0.73NA4.9NA11.1NA17.7 26.9 7.4 4.75,3001,3,5-TrimethylbenzeneNA<0.64 <0.64NA2.1NA4.5NA6.4 9.6 3.2 2.15,300Vinyl Chloride<0.26<0.20 <0.20<0.26<0.19<0.26<0.200.490.28 J<0.18 <0.20 <0.182,800m&p-XyleneNA<1.1 <1.1NA85.1NA124NA151 190 58.6 48.48,800o-XyleneNA<0.55 <0.55NA35.3NA47.5NA58.5 73.0 19.3 18.28,800Notes:1) NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-slab and Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) (February 2018) Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Bold indicates concentration exceeds Residential SGSLOnly those compounds detected in at least one or more sample are shown in the table above.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surface; NE = Not EstablishedJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.µg/m32/7/2020VMP-1 / SG-DUP15Western Proposed Warehouse BuildingEastern Proposed Warehouse BuildingNon-Residential SGSLs (1)S:\AAA-Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\EMP\Tables\AcmeSpinningMill_BF_Tables4/14/2020Table 5 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Figures
TITLE
PROJECT
SITE LOCATION MAP
ACME SPINNING MILL
WOODLAWN STREET AND CASON STREET
BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE:
JOB NO:
REVISION NO:
FIGURE NO:
11-15-2019 0
1BMT-001
0 2000 4000N
APPROXIMATE
SCALE IN FEET
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
MOUNT HOLLY, NORTH CAROLINA 2013
SITE
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BMT-001
DATE: 4-14-20
FIGURE NO. 2
ACME SPINNING MILL
WOODLAWN STREET & CASON STREET
BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
SITE MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
RAILROAD
APPROXIMATE FORMER BUILDING
FOOTPRINT LOCATION
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
CENTERVIEW STREET
JADE
C
I
R
C
L
E
ACM
E
R
O
A
D
W
O
O
D
L
A
W
N
S
T
R
E
E
T CASON STREETOAKS PARKWAYROPE
R STREET
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM NC ONEMAP (2019).
2.APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF FORMER BUILDINGS
WERE OBTAINED USING HISTORICAL AERIAL
PHOTOGRAPHS AND SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAP
OVERLAY.
WILBERT PLASTIC
SERVICES, LLC.
(1000 OAKS PARKWAY)
CARUS CORPORATION, INC.
(181 WOODLAWN STREET)
GOSHEN
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
(1380 WOODLAWN STREET)
GREENWAY CHEMICAL
SYSTEMS & SERVICES
(2101 ACME ROAD)
CATAWBA HEIGHTS
BAPTIST CHURCH
(311 BELMONT MT HOLLY ROAD)
SOCKS, INC.
(160 WOODLAWN STREET)CASON STREETQUALITY RV SERVICE
(721 CASON STREET)
PIEDMONT VENDING
(707 CASON STREET)
DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS
(709 CASON STREET)
CARPENTRY & STONE SHOP
(700 CASON STREET)
RAILROAD EQUIPMENT
STAGING AND PARKING AREA
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\Brownfields Assessment WP\Figures\Site Map.dwg, FIG 2, 4/14/2020 2:02:28 PM, sperry
SB-1
TMW-1
SED-1
SB-2
SB-5
SED-2SB-3
SB-4
SED-3
VMP-3
HHSB-2
HHSB-6HHSB-5
HHSB-1
HHSB-3
HHSB-4
HHSB-7B-2
VMP-4A
VMP-3A
HHSB-2A
HHSB-3A
HHSB-4A
HHSB-7A
VMP-1
VMP-4
VMP-2 VMP-2A
TVMP-3
TVMP-2
TVMP-1
COMP-1
COMP-2
COMP-3
COMP-4
COMP-5
B-1/B-1GW
B-3/B-3GW
B-4/B-4GW
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BMT-001
DATE: 4-14-20
FIGURE NO. 3
ACME SPINNING MILL
WOODLAWN STREET & CASON STREET
BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
RAILROAD
STREAM
STORMWATER DRAINAGE FEATURE
CULVERT
SOIL BORING LOCATION (OCTOBER 2014)
SOIL BORING LOCATION (DECEMBER 2014)
SOIL BORING LOCATION (FEBRUARY 2016)
ALIQUOT SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION
CO-LOCATED SOIL BORING AND TEMPORARY
MONITORING WELL
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL
SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATION
PERMANENT SOIL VAPOR MONITORING
LOCATION
TEMPORARY SOIL VAPOR MONITORING POINT
ABANDONED PERMANENT SOIL VAPOR
MONITORING POINT
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
CENTERVIEW STREET
ACM
E
R
O
A
D (
N
E
W
ALI
G
N
M
E
N
T)WOO
D
L
AW
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
OAKS PARKWAYROPER ST
REET
NOTES:
1.SOIL SAMPLE B-1 THROUGH B-4 AND GROUNDWATER
SAMPLES B-1GW, B-3GW, AND B-4GW WERE COLLECTED
BY ECS IN OCTOBER 2014.
2.SOIL VAPOR MONITORING POINTS VMP-1 THROUGH
VMP-4 WERE INSTALLED AND SAMPLED BY H&H IN
DECEMBER 2014.
3.SOIL SAMPLES HHSB-1 THROUGH HHSB-7 WERE
COLLECTED BY H&H IN DECEMBER 2014.
4.SOIL SAMPLES SB-1 THROUGH SB-4, SEDIMENT
SAMPLES SED-1 THROUGH SED-3, AND GROUNDWATER
SAMPLE TMW-1 WERE COLLECTED BY H&H IN
FEBRUARY 2016.
5.PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS PREPARED BY
SEAMON WHITESIDE AND PROVIDED BY THE
PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPER.CASON STREETUNNAMED TRIBUTARY
OF FITES CREEK
PROPOSED STORM
WATER POND
PROPOSED STORM
WATER POND
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Belmont Industrial\Brownfields Assessment WP\Figures\Site Map.dwg, FIG 3, 4/14/2020 2:00:05 PM, sperry
Appendix A
Redevelopment Plan
SSMH5/8"EIR5/8"EIR5/8"EIR5/8"EIR5/8"EIR1/2"EIR5/8"EIR1/
2
"E
I
R 1"EIP
1/2"E
IR1/2"EIR1/2"EIR1/2"EIR1/2"EIR1"EIP1"EIP 6"X6"GRANITEMONUMENT 1/2"EIR4"X4"ECM1/2"EIR1/2"EIR5/8"EIR5/8"EIR1/2"EIRENECMSTONE @ EIP MARKER5/8"EIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIRNN1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"NIR 1/2"NIR
1/2
"N
IR
1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2"N
IR CPCP1/2"NIR1/2"NIR1/2
"N
IR
1/2"NIR1/2"NIR5/8"EIR1"EIPDISTURBED 1/2"NIR
RIM:722.89IN(A):718.29IN(B):715.69OUT:715.29CP5/8"EIR1-1/2"EIPDISTURBEDSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMH2"
E
I
P SSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHRIM:728.86IN:722.56OUT:721.76RIM:728.08IN(A):721.98IN(B):722.28OUT:721.88SDMHRIM:728.71RIM:741.18OUT:736.18SSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMHSSMH8"TERR
A
8
"
TERRARIM:727.90IN:721.40OUT:721.30(A)(B)8"TERRA8"TERRA8"TERRA(A)(B)RIM:728.79IN(A):723.14IN(B):722.89OUT:722.59RIM:733.56IN:729.26OUT:729.068"TERRA EU
(A
)
(B
)RIM:725.82IN:719.92OUT:719.12 8"TERR8"
T
ERR
A
RIM:722.50IN:718.60OUT:718.408"TERRARIM:712.42IN:707.72OUT:706.728"TERRA8"
T
E
R
R
A
8"T
E
R
R
A
8"TERRA1
2
"
TERRA12"TERRA
8"TER
R
A
8"TERRARIM:699.47IN:694.97OUT:694.77RIM:698.38IN:691.08OUT:690.68RIM:688.07IN(A):683.27IN(B):681.67OUT:680.07RIM:695.84IN(A):690.74IN(B):690.34IN(C):689.44OUT:689.14RIM:695.17IN:688.57OUT:688.17RIM:700.46IN:691.81OUT:691.51(A)
(B
)
(A
)(B)(C)RIM:720.86OUT:717.36RIM:710.94IN:706.94OUT:706.74RIM:708.11IN:703.01OUT:702.81RIM:702.91IN:698.51OUT:697.618"
T
E
R
R
A
8"TERRA8"TERRA8"TERRAHOUSESHEDSHEDAPPROX EASEMENTTO SOUTHERN BELL(DB. 1875 PG. 744)APPROXIMATE 20'SANITARY SEWEREASEMENT (MB. 52 PG. 79)10' SETBACK(MB. 52 PG. 79)8' SETBACK(MB. 52 PG. 79)3
0
'
S
E
T
BA
C
K
(MB
.
5
2
PG
.
7
9
)FORMER LOCATIONOF DUKE ENERGYSUBSTATION LOT(D.B. 2509 PG. 96)(D.B. 430, PG. 157)SSMHSSMHSSMHRIM:701.62IN:693.35OUT:693.35RIM:739.07OUT:734.16RIM:738.04OUT:730.58APPROXIMATE8" FORCE MAINLOCATIONAP
P
R
O
X
I
M
A
T
E
8"
F
O
R
C
E
M
A
I
N
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
NAPPROXIMATE PRIVATE6" FORCE MAINLOCATIONAPPROXIMATE PRIVATE6" FORCE MAINLOCATION8"TERRASSMH NOTFOUND.POSSIBLY BURIEDOR DESTROYED145'60'24'24'RELOCATED ACME RDCENTERVIEW STTO BE ABANDONED141412131213121322 TRAILER SPACES11 TRAILER SPACES41 TRAILER SPACES99171778 PARKING SPACES107 PARKING SPACESSTORMWATER POND380,700 SF470' X 810'FFE: 722.0WOODLAWN AVE.EX WATER TOWER195'
60'50'54'28'1313195'±625 SFRETAINING WALL25' MIN. STREAM BUFFERAPPARENT STREAM22 TRAILER SPACESSTORMWATER POND30'±625 SFRETAINING WALL101610161514181722 TRAILER SPACES189 PARKING SPACES199,962 SFFFE: 710.0185'13171191210ADDITIONAL PARKING47'54'28'62'756'250'203'54'R125'R115'
60'
60'60'10-12%50'5
0
'60'R75'R75'R75'R
7
5
'R75'R75'R7
5
'R75'NON-TRUCK ACCESS DRIVENOTE: THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGECONCEPTUAL SITE PLANWOODLAWN INDUSTRIAL PARKGASTON COUNTY, NC3/5/2020R50'R130'R10'5'5'
Appendix B
Construction Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish1Design/Permit23Early Grading & Utility Design/Permit93 days3/1/206/1/204Remaining Grading & Site Design/Permit62 days5/1/207/1/205Acme, Cason, Woodlawn Road Designs62 days6/1/208/1/206Acme, Cason, Woodlawn Permit62 days8/1/2010/1/207Building Design & Permit62 days10/1/2012/1/2089West Track1011Mobilize/Erosion Control31 days6/1/207/1/2012Acme Water Bypass31 days6/1/207/1/2013Clear, Strip Topsoil15 days7/1/207/15/2014Mass Grading110 days7/15/2011/1/2015Rear Sewer & Storm Installations62 days9/1/2011/1/2016Pad Settlement62 days10/1/2012/1/2017New Acme Construction/Switch Over93 days10/1/201/1/2118Building Contract/Early Steel32 days12/1/201/1/2119Building Construction212 days1/2/218/1/2120Final Grading/Paving Access Stone60 days1/1/213/1/2121Asphalt Paving62 days3/1/215/1/2122Concrete Paving62 days5/1/217/1/2123Landscape Irrigation, Striping32 days7/1/218/1/2124Punch List/ Close Out31 days8/1/218/31/212526East Track West of Existing Cason2728Mobilze, Erosion Constrol31 days6/15/207/15/2029Clear, Strip Topsoil18 days7/15/208/1/2030Mass Grading32 days8/1/209/1/2031Water, Sewer, Force Mains @ Cason45 days9/1/2010/15/2032New Cason Street62 days10/1/2012/1/203334East Track East of Existing Cason3536Erosion Control/ Demo46 days12/1/201/15/2137Remaining Mass Grading 60 days1/1/213/1/2138Site Water, Storm32 days3/1/214/1/2139Pad Settlement62 days3/1/215/1/2140Asphalt Paving62 days4/1/216/1/2141Building Construction154 days6/1/2111/1/2142Concrete Paving62 days8/1/2110/1/2143Landscape Irrigation, Striping32 days10/1/2111/1/2144Punch List/ Close Out31 days11/1/2112/1/21Mar '20Apr '20May '20Jun '20Jul '20Aug '20Sep '20Oct '20Nov '20Dec '20Jan '21Feb '21Mar '21Apr '21May '21Jun '21Jul '21Aug '21Sep '21Oct '21Nov '21Dec '21Woodlawn Industrial ParkProgram SchedulePage 14/28/20
Appendix C
Preliminary Grading Plan and Cut-Fill Analysis (Phase I)
728730734735725720720719719722722723720715710705705700695690685705700695690685705700695690685680685690695700705710715710705
7006957207207217207257257207157107057007007057107157
2
0
725
7
3
0728730735730735738739735735735738738730731730725
720715710
730728727728
730725720715714
715
710
705
7
0
5
70
5
700
695700696703700704702702705710715720725 728728725723740735742 740735730725-4.52%-4.78%-3.11%-11.76%720725730735720725730700705710715710710715715720710710715715720720-4.96-17.55-14.10-6.81-3.53-2.47-1.47-22.91-22.97-19.92-15.70-11.93-8.32-7.43-0.15-12.42-21.76-22.38-17.08-13.25-8.28-5.75-11.40-14.49-0.74-14.81-16.28-12.62-9.37-4.95-3.36-11.49-13.13-8.60-9.98-6.16-4.45-0.950.56-7.58-11.90-4.75-5.54-1.663.2215.5413.064.37-5.76-6.44-2.63-2.711.136.8219.4018.7513.184.08-11.13-2.22-1.912.8616.8320.1221.3615.126.05-9.07-2.03-0.293.228.5520.0122.1516.639.82-4.19-0.53-0.741.611.974.9817.3222.1418.7116.383.20-0.621.783.073.205.659.1918.2718.7112.747.13CUT FILL ANALYSISNumber12345678Minimum Elevation-10.000-5.0000.0015.00110.00115.00120.00125.001Maximum Elevation-5.0010.0005.00010.00015.00020.00025.00026.000ColorCUT/FILL ANALYSISNumber12345678910Minimum Elevation-25.000-20.000-15.000-10.000-5.0000.0005.00010.00015.00020.000Maximum Elevation-20.000-15.000-10.000-5.0000.0005.00010.00015.00020.00025.000ColorNOTE: THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGECONCEPTUAL CUT/FILL PLANWOODLAWN INDUSTRIAL PARKGASTON COUNTY, NC3/5/2020SEWN04080160SCALE: 1" = 80'