23022_Chapel Hill Police Property_Final EMP_20191021

Environmental Management Plan
Revision 1
Chapel Hill Police Department
Brownfields Project No. 23022-19-068
828 Martin Luther King Jr., Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-009
Original Date: October 8, 2019
Revision Date:October 15, 2019
hart � hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS
#C-1269 Engineering
#C-245 Geoloav
2923 South Tryon Street, Suite 100 3921 Sunset Ridge Rd, Suite 301
Charlotte, NC 28203 Raleigh, NC 27607 www.harthickman.com
704.586.0007 main 919.847.4241 main

Completed EMP Template Form
CONTENTS
Figures
Figure 1 NCBP Diagram for Temporary Containment of Impacted or Potentially
Impacted Soil
Figure 2 Site Location Map
Figure 3 Site Map — Proposed Interim Remedial Measures
Figure 4 Sample Location Map
Figure 5 Post -Interim Remedial Measures Sample Locations
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 3 Monitoring Well Construction and Groundwater Elevation Data
Appendices
Appendix A
August 21, 2019 General Awareness Training Plan
Appendix B
May 2, 2016 DEQ IHSB Risk Evaluation Letter
Appendix C
Non -Metal Soil and Groundwater Analytical Data Summaries
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

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.
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.
EMP Version 2, June 2018

Date: 10/8/2019
GENERAL INFORMATION
Revision Date (if applicable): 10/1S/2019
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Chapel Hill Police Department
Brownfields Project Number: 23022-19-068
Brownfields Property Address: 828 Martin Luther King Jr., Blvd., Chapel Hill, Orange County, North
Carolina (Figure 2).
Brownfields Property Area (acres): The Brownfields property is approximately 10.24 acres and
consists of one parcel. The property is generally divided into an elevated portion in the north and a
lower portion in the south that are separated by a steep embankment. The elevated portion is
developed with an approximately 21,100 square foot (sq ft) two-story building that is currently
occupied by the Town of Chapel Hill Police Department. The lower portion is vegetated with the
exception of an approximately 800 linear feet segment of Bolin Creek Trail which is a local greenway
trail. Bolin Creek is located along the southern site boundary. This Environmental Management Plan
has been prepared to address the following activities in the southern portion of the site: 1)
construction activities for the proposed expansion of the Bolin Creek Trail, and 2) interim remedial
activities to remove areas of erosional coal combustion products (CCPs) near portions of the Bolin
Creek Trail.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit? ....................... El 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): Town of Chapel Hill
Contact Person: John Richardson
Phone Numbers: Office: (919) 969-S07S
Email: [e-mail]�
Contractor for PD: S&C Construction, LLC
Contact Person: Clint Roberson
Phone Numbers: Office: (910) S20-6430
Email: Click or tap here to enter text.
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Mobile: [phone]S
Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.

Environmental Consultant: Hart & Hickman, PC
Contact Person: Justin Ballard
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Hayley Irick
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Mobile: [phone]
Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):
Amy Axon — Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch ([e-mail]; 919-707-8371)
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 onsitetask:
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:
Open space
2) Check the following activities that will be conducted prior to commencing earth -moving activities
4
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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):
Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement, grading plans and planned construction of new structures:
This EMP covers proposed activities in the lower portion of the Brownfields property along Bolin
Creek Trail. The activities include construction of a new segment of Bolin Creek Trail and
implementation of interim remedial activities related to the presence of exposed coal
combustion products (CCPs) which have migrated overtime from certain portions of the
embankment separating the upper and lower portions of the Brownfields property. Specifically,
trail construction activities will involve limited grading, excavation, and management of soil and
CCPs from the southwestern portion of the Brownfields property and from depositional CCP Area
I (Figure 3). Interim remedial activities will include excavation and management of CCPs from
depositional CCP Areas G, H, and I (Figure 3). In addition, interim remedial activities will also
include implementation of cover and migration control measures to minimize the potential for
exposed CCPs located within Areas D and F (Figure 3) to mobilize towards Bolin Creek Trail.
Further details related to proposed redevelopment activities are documented in an August 21,
2019 Draft General Awareness Training Plan — Bolin Creek Trail Construction Activities and
Interim Remedial Measures (General Awareness Training Plan) prepared by Hart & Hickman, PC.
A copy of the General Awareness Training Plan is included in 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
EMP Version 2, June 2018

7) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Construction start date: 10/16/2019
b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
Activities are expected to occur for approximately 2-3 months.
c) Additional phases planned? ❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, specify the start date and/or activities if known:
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.
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: Not applicable
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
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.
6
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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):
Multiple soil sampling events have been completed at the Brownfields property dating back to
2013. The soil assessments have indicated that the primary compounds of concern at the
Brownfields property are metals from the historical placement of CCPs. A tabular summary of
historical soil analytical data in comparison to DEQ's May 2019 Preliminary Soil Remediation
Goals (PSRGs) and Site -specific background levels is included as Table 1 and soil sample locations
are shown in Figure 4. In the initial phases of the investigation, some samples were collected for
analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi -volatile organic compounds (SVOCs),
pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbon fractions are those data
are summarized in Appendix C.
Soil assessment activities conducted in the lower portion of the Brownfields property have
identified arsenic, barium, manganese, mercury, and selenium at concentrations above the
Residential PSRGs and Site -specific background levels. Concentrations of arsenic were also
detected in several samples above the Industrial/Commercial PSRG.
In 2016, soil laboratory analytical results were used by the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) to conduct a risk evaluation.
Results of the risk evaluation for samples collected from the lower portion of the Brownfields
property indicated calculated cumulative risk levels were acceptable (calculated cumulative
carcinogenic risk below 1 x 10-4 and hazard index below 1 for a recreational user and construction
worker. A copy of the May 2, 2016 risk evaluation letter by DEQ IHSB is included in Appendix B.
A human health and ecological risk assessment is currently being performed by Rudo
Toxicological Consultants (Rudo) and Duncklee & Dunham (D&D) for existing conditions at the
Brownfields property and as part of evaluation of potential interim remedial measures. To aid in
preparation of the risk assessment, H&H conducted a soil sampling event in April 2019.
Consistent with DEQ's risk evaluation conclusion in 2016, results of the 2019 risk assessment
indicate calculated cumulative risk levels were acceptable for a recreational user and
construction worker in the lower portion of the Brownfields property. A report of this risk
assessment is currently in preparation and will be provided to DEQ upon completion.
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
Depositional CCPs are present in Areas G, H, and I at depths of up to approximately 1 foot below
ground surface (bgs). Elevated levels of metals are located in and in close proximity to these
areas.
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
Up to approximately 12,000 sq ft is expected to be disturbed during excavation activities for
EMP Version 2, June 2018

depositional CCPs Areas G, H, and I. An additional approximately 4,000 sq ft is expected to be
disturbed during trail construction activities.
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
Proposed grading and excavation activities are expected to include depths of up to
approximately 1 ft bgs.
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
Approximately 700 cubic yards of erosional CCPs and 100-200 cubic yards of soil are expected to
be excavated and disposed of off -Site.
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
See #S above.
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
See #S above.
Part 1.A. MANAGING ONSITE SOIL
If soil is anticipated to be excavated fromthe 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 preliminarydata 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 POLICYTHE 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 texl
8
EMP Version 2, June 2018

❑ Corrosivity Click or tap here to enter text.
❑ 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)
UICK or tap nere to enter text.
© If no, explain rationale:
Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) investigative derived waste
(IDW) characterization of soil and CCPs samples were collected at the
Brownfields property during assessment activities completed in 2016 and 2019.
Based on the sampling results, soil and CCPs generated during the 2016 and
2019 assessment activities did not exceed toxicity characteristic levels.
Composite samples of the erosional CCPs were recently collected for TCLP
metals analysis in advance of the interim remedial and the data are pending.
d) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A CHARACTERISTIC HAZARDOUS WASTE, THE
SOIL MAYNOT 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.
__ tap here to enter tP
Additional comments:
rii,i, — tin ko t- o i+ f—f
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
EMP Version 2, June 2018

❑ 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 ❑
❑ Describe cap or fill:
Click or tap here to enter text.
❑ 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:
Known impacted soil is not proposed to be reused on the Brownfields property at this time. If the
Town proposes reuse of known impacted soil, DEQ Brownfields will be contacted for review and
approval of the reuse plan.
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:
The environmental consultant will monitor ambient dust levels in the work zone (i.e.,
excavation areas) of on -Site personnel using a direct reading dust level meter (Casella
Microdust Pro monitor or equivalent). Work area monitoring will also be performed
immediately adjacent to excavation areas, construction areas, soil/CCP handling areas, and
other areas as needed when work is occurring. If the dust analyzer readings are greater
than 3.0 mg/cubic meter above background, Site activities will be halted, workers will move
upwind, and the work area will be wetted to lower dust levels below the 3.0 mg/cubic
meter. Monitoring will continue until measurements indicate that levels are acceptable to
continue and the conditions that caused the elevated readings have been mitigated. If dust
levels persist above 3.0 mg/cubic meter, then the Town and environmental consultant will
devise and implement an engineering control. In conjunction with the on -Site monitoring,
the environmental consultant will conduct perimeter monitoring during excavation,
soil/CCP handling, and other activities as needed when work is occurring. Perimeter
monitoring will consist of multiple fixed continuous particulate monitoring stations (Casella
Microdust Pro monitors or equivalent) to evaluate the potential migration of COCs off -Site.
Particulate monitoring stations will be established in the predominant downwind and
upwind directions. At least one of the downwind monitoring locations will established in a
downwind location between the Site and the nearest downwind residence, business, or
open portion of the trail. During these work activities, the monitors will be checked
periodically (typically every half hour) to evaluate detections against the 3.0 mg/cubic
meter action level. A windsock will be positioned on -Site nearby the construction activities
to monitor wind directions, to evaluate locations where monitoring will occur, and visibly
determine changes in wind direction. Additional information regarding management of
dust during the activities is provided in the August 2019 General Awareness Training Plan
(Appendix A).
10
EMP Version 2, June 2018

❑ 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:
Field screening during the activities will be conducted in accordance with the August 2019
General Awareness Training Plan (Appendix A).
❑ No, explain rationale:
dick or tap here to enter text.
Soil Sample Collection
® Yes, describe the sampling method (e.g., in -situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.):
During trail construction activities, excess soil will be stockpiled in general accordance
with Figure 1 and sampled for waste profiling purposes and disposal facility acceptance.
Composite soil sample(s) will be collected from the stockpile at a rate of approximately
one sample per 250 cubic yards which will, at a minimum, be submitted for laboratory
analysis of TCLP RCRA metals. Note that if samples are submitted for VOC analysis, the
samples submitted for laboratory analysis will be a centrally located grab sample from the
stockpile and not composite sample.
In advance of the interim remedial activities, three composite CCPs samples
(approximately one composite per 250 cubic yards) were recently collected from
depositional CCPs Areas G, H, and I for waste profiling purposes and disposal facility
acceptance. Depositional CCPs samples were submitted for TCLP RCRA metals plus pH,
total sulfur, and total sulfates (as requested by a possible disposal facility). These data
will be provided to DEQ upon receipt from the analytical laboratory.
❑ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
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
11
EMP Version 2, June 2018

❑ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
❑ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
l ICK or tap here to enter texi.
® Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium,
Herbicides, etc.): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
TCLP RCRA metals and additional analyses as may be requested by the accepting
facility.
© 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:
lick or tap here to enter text.
® 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 thatapply):
® 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):
❑ 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.):
arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, total chromium, cobalt, copper,
manganese, mercury, nickel, and selenium by EPA Methods 6020/7471,
strontium by EPA Method 6010, and 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 removal of erosional CCPs in Areas G, H, and I and prior to placement of fill
12
EMP Version 2, June 2018

material, shallow samples (0-1 ft) will be collected from the base of the excavation for
analysis of the above metals to be used in the post -interim remedial action risk assessment
to be prepared by Rudo/D&D. The locations of the proposed post -interim remedial
measures soil samples are indicated in Figure 5. The following number of samples will be
collected: one sample from Area G; six samples from Area H; and three samples from Area
I. The samples will be collected with a stainless steel hand auger and then thoroughly
homogenized in a stainless steel or glass bowl before being placed into jars for laboratory
analysis. For Area G, the sample will be centrally located in the excavation area, and for
Areas G and H, the samples will be evenly distributed across the areas. In addition, one
centrally located grab sample will be collected from each of the three areas for analysis of
VOCs by EPA Method 8260 and for SVOCs by EPA Method 8270. The locations of the soil
samples for VOC and SVOC analysis are indicated in Figure 5. After collection, the soil
sample locations will be determined using GPS. The results of analysis of the soil samples
will be provided in the Post Redevelopment Report (see below).
❑ If final grade sampling was NOT selected please explain rationale:
Click or tap here tn nntor to t.
Part 1.113. 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:
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?
Approximately 700 cubic yards of import material will be needed to backfill the excavation of
depositional CCPs Areas G, H, and I.
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.)
Up to approximately 1 ft bgs.
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:
To be determined. The source of the fill material will be provided to DEQ Brownfields for review
prior to placing the soil at the site.
13
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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 atthe Brownfields property.
See No. 7 below for details outlining the proposed plan to demonstrate import soil meets
acceptable standards applicable to the Brownfields property.
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):
6020/7471
❑ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text
❑ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
f lirle nr tan here to pntar fav
® Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
beryllium, cobalt, copper, manganese, nickel, and selenium by EPA Methods
6020/7471, strontium by EPA Method 6010, and 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 Town will follow the procedures outlined below to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable
criteria for Site use.
If the Town plans to import virgin fill material from a DEQ Brownfields pre -approved borrow
source, no samples of the import material will be collected because adequate analytical data is
available in the DEQ Brownfields database to demonstrate material from these facilities is suitable
for use as fill at a Brownfields property.
If fill soil (other than topsoil) is obtained from an off -Site property that is not a known permitted
quarry or is recycled material from a DEQ Brownfields pre -approved borrow source, a sampling
plan will be developed and submitted for DEQ review. The sampling plan will include historic
information about the source of the fill including historical aerial photographs and other
information as appropriate (i.e., property owner interview, etc.). 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
14
EMP Version 2, June 2018

proposed borrow source has not been previously developed (i.e., virgin land), soil samples will be
collected for laboratory analyses indicated above at a general rate of approximately one per 1,000
cubic yards. If the borrow source property has been previously developed, soil samples will be
collected for laboratory analyses indicated above at a general rate of approximately one per 500
cubic yards. The DEQ Brownfields project manager will be contacted should an alternate
sampling frequency be sought for either type of borrow source property.
Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Brownfields property if it does not contain
compound concentrations above DEQ Residential PSRGs or metals concentrations which are
consistent with Site -specific background levels.
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
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.
Approximately 700 cubic yards of CCPs and approximately 100-200 cubic yards of soil are
expected to be exported.
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 thata 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
15
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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).
It is anticipated that the erosional CCPs will be taken to a Subtitle D/Municipal Solid Waste
(MSW) Landfill. The stockpiled soil may be taken to a Subtitle D/MSW landfill, a permitted but
unlined landfill, another Brownfields property, or used as beneficial fill. The Town or the
environmental professional will contact DEQ Brownfields to obtain DEQ Brownfields and DEQ
Solid Waste approval (if warranted) prior to exporting soil to a location other than a Subtitle
D/MSW landfill.
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
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 texx,
❑ If no, include rationale here:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
Not applicable
PART 2. GROUNDWATER — Please fill out the information below.
1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
Based on depth to groundwater information collected by H&H (see Table 3), depth to
groundwater in the southern portion of the Site near Bolin Creek Trail (see wells MW-3A, MW-
4A, and MW-6) has ranged from approximately 3 ft bgs to 10 ft bgs. The most recent depths to
groundwater in the southern portion of the property collected in September 2019 ranged from
approximately 7 to 10 ft bgs.
16
EMP Version 2, June 2018

2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ®onsite ❑offsite ❑both or ❑unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
Historical groundwater assessment activities conducted at the Brownfields property have
identified the presence of arsenic, barium, cobalt, manganese, and selenium, thallium, and
vanadium at concentrations above the DEQ 2L Groundwater Quality Standards (2L Standards).
The primary metals detected above 2L Standards in the southern portion of the property are
manganese, selenium, thallium, and vanadium. A tabular summary of historical groundwater
analytical data in comparison to the 2L Standards is included as Table 2 (metals) and
groundwater sample locations are shown in Figure 4. Analysis of compounds for compounds
other than metals has not indicated the presence of detectable VOCs, SVOCs, pesticides, or PCBs.
(see Appendix C).
3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?
Groundwater flow direction mimics topography and flows towards Bolin Creek to the south-
southeast.
4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
❑Yes ®No
If yes, describe these activities:
Click or tap here to enter text.
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., dewateringof 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, the water will be tested
for analysis of the following metals: RCRA metals (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium,
mercury, lead, selenium, silver), plus cobalt, manganese, selenium, strontium, thallium, and
vanadium by EPA Methods 6020/6010/7470/. The water may be discharged off -Site at a
permitted facility, may be discharged to the municipal sewer (with approval), or discharged to
the ground surface (if not impacted above DEQ surface water standards).
5) Are monitoring wells currently present on the Brownfields Property?.................❑XYes ❑No
If yes, are any monitoring wells routinely monitored through DEQ or other
agencies?.................................................................................................................. ❑X 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
17
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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:
—lirle nr tan here to entc r fc vt
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):
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 managed as described above in
Part 2 Groundwater.
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
18
EMP Version 2, June 2018

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):
Not applicable.
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:
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?
Not applicable
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:
In the unlikely event contaminated soil vapors are encountered during the activities, the area will
be evacuated and appropriate safety screening of the vapors will be performed. If results
indicate further action is warranted, appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial
fans) will be 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
2) If data indicate that sub -slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map
showing the location of these exceedances.
19
EMP Version 2, June 2018

3) At what depth(s) is sub -slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? El 0-6 inches ❑Other, please
describe:
Click of ap here to e_.,
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
In the unlikely event impacted soil vapors are encountered during the 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:
Previous indoor samples were collected from the police station building in April 2019 for radon as a
screening for radionuclides potentially associated with coal ash. The results did not indicate radon
above the EPA guidance level of 4 Pico Curies per liter (pCi/1). No buildings are located or planned in
the southern portion of the Brownfields property.
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:
L-lick or ta, nere to enter tr
VIMS Plan shall be signed and sealed by a NC Professional Engineer
20
EMP Version 2, June 2018

If no, please provide a brief rationale as to why no vapor mitigation plan is warranted:
VOCs are not compounds of concern at the property and previous analysis of radon did not
indicate levels of concern.
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, orother 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):
❑ 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.
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, utilities, or waste materials) that, if encountered, will warrant proper
management. Prior to beginning Site work, the environmental professional will attend a pre -
construction kick-off meeting with the Town and the contractors to discuss the EMP and various
21
EMP Version 2, June 2018

scenarios when it would be appropriate and necessary to notify the environmental professional 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 previously unidentified 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.
If a previously unidentified UST is encountered, the UST will be removed and 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,
with DEQ prior approval, it may be abandoned in -place and construction will proceed. Otherwise,
the UST will be removed from ground. 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. Following UST
removal, soil samples will be collected for laboratory analysis from the base and four sidewalls of
the UST basin as well as every 10 ft along piping connected to the UST. The soil samples will be
analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method 8260, SVOCs by EPA Method 8270, and RCRA Metals by
EPA Methods 602/7471.
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 or it will
be removed. If let in place, 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 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 is 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 occurs, the contractor is instructed to stop work in that location
and notify the environmental professional. If the buried material is typical construction and
demolition type waste such as bricks, concrete, tires, metal, plastic, etc. and there is not evidence of
potential asbestos containing materials (floor tile, roofing shingles, wall board, non -fiberglass
22
EMP Version 2, June 2018

insulation, etc.), then the buried materials will be stockpiled on -site and taken to an appropriate
permitted disposal facility. In this case, no pos-excavation sampling will be performed. If the
potential asbestos containing materials are present, then those suspect materials will be sampled
for asbestos content by a North Carolina certified asbestos inspector prior to disposal. If the buried
materials contain potentially hazardous substances, then DEQ will be contacted to discuss and
implement a plan for waste material sampling, waste material removal, and post -excavation soil
sampling.
Re -Use of Impacted Soils On -Site:
Please refer to description outlined in the Managing On -Site Soil section 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:
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 To Be Determined
The Redevelopment Summary Report shall include environment -related activities since the last
report, with a summary and drawings, that describes:
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,
23
EMP Version 2, June 2018

concrete, demolition debris) from the Brownfields Property (copies of all legally required
manifests shall be included).
X❑ 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.
24
EMP Version 2, June 2018

APPROVAL SIGNATURES
Brownfields Project Number: 23022-19-068
Brownfields Project Name: Chapel Hill Police Department
Prospective Developer.' Town of Chapel Hill
Printed Name/Title/Company: Mr. Maurice Jones/Town
Manager/Town of Chapel Hill
Consultant: Hart
Printed Name/i
Manager/Hart
cltrhan, PC
ye Company: Mr. Justin Ballard, P.G./Project
Hickman, PC
Brownfields Project Manager: Hayley�lrick
25
EMP Version 2, June 2018
0-!1-! �
Date( h I
/0 Ile Ap/
Date Cii. G o, tap to eiitpf ii dale
Date � h"I t:7t, to

F igu re 1
NCBP Diagram for Temporary
Containment of Imparted or Potentially
Impacted Soil
Cross -Section View
Top Plastic Cover Sheeting: Underliner: 1 layer_ minimum of 10
(1 Layer, minimum- 10 mil thick)
mil tlti¢1: plastic
FRcrm
[Straw bales, Wcigbi
cc)mprasred earth, eu:,l Qf plastic
Cover 1LS'd)
d Lan�
Land f Contaminated Soils
Sulfaac
Straw Bale Berm
_Map View
� e .anlaminatcd Soils �
❑ Plastic
_ Shirting
Note- Adapted from NC DEQ LIST Seetion "Guidelines for Ex Situ Petrolatun C'ontaminatcd Soil Ronediation" dated Dacember, L 2013
25
EMP Version 2, June 2018

��
''i :�•+', i`
�•
s
_fir' -may
RM
EL -VI
SO
"a
�. .��,. IMF '� i.�r�wy-�.,."•�-�a="1 ��I'11�1
OMEN
�a".W
rF-` �r 1+'►4����1
�� 1.!!� w�-
MwN
-of-..
APPROXIMATE
N 0 2000 4000
SCALE IN FEET
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, 2002
QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)

LEGEND
ti ► SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
IPARKING BOLIN CREEK
t
LOT
TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR ELEVATION (FT MSL)
FENCE LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
— — EXISTING SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
C — — PROPOSED SUPER SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE
�N LOCATION)
CCP UNDER > 2 FT COVER
"J -
D PROPOSED CCP UNDER < 2 FT COVER
SUPER SILT r I CCP EXPOSED AT GROUND SURFACE
CCP DEPOSITIONAL LAYER
`'i '�`✓�`� �'_ FENCE STORMWATER CULVERT
PROPOSED TRAIL
f,
t F EXISTING
SILT FENCE
BRIDGE Y * t 328
- H
3p8 CHAIN -LINK=
- FENCE_
�. F
_ EXISTING
APPROXIMATE
-` SILT FENCE 5000
�. SCALE IN FEET
++ �_TITLE
SITE MAP - PROPOSED INTERIM REMEDIAL
GAS STATION +` - - - _
�y MEASURES
PROJECT TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
828 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
Y r
r
hart ` h i c k m a n 2923 South Tryon Street -Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f
- SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
AUTO
• ! REPAIR ` DATE: 5-22-19 REVISION NO. 0
WK iii III! 11111110111i�+ .1 JOB NO. TCH-002 FIGURE NO. 3

� Mw-s� � ' `�.� _ 8 1, : • �_' �I71 ;� �l �. � LEGEND
OF SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
c a ■■ �l aR� y
RESIDENTIA BOLIN CREEK
' ;�:� '` "�>"�O/ TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR ELEVATION FT MSL
m MONITORING WELL LOCATION (FALCON ENGINEERING)
PARKING
•�� . •''� � TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL LOCATION (FALCON
ENGINEERING)
-- +— SOIL BORING LOCATION (FALCON ENGINEERING)
0C A SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATION (FALCON
m ENGINEERING)
G
t TMW-10 ABANDONED MONITORING WELL LOCATION
p
;'' •_ M POLICE DEPARTMENT / MONITORING WELL LOCATION (H&H)
BUILDING r
H1 I SOIL BORING LOCATION (H&H)
i �
RESIDENTIAL QQ BACKGROUND SOIL BORING LOCATION (H&H)
GP10'-
RESIDENTIAL MW-tA st GP4 HH-2
HH-1A SURFACE WATER/SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATION (H&H)
B 'GP9
GP 8 14' DRAINAGE PATHWAY SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (H&H)
DRAINAGE PATHWAY SURFACE WATER SAMPLE
Gt GPz GP5 ]k LOCATION (H&H)
PARKING ~�"r�.
COVER EVALUATION BORING LOCATION
GP3
` ^ s r - -.�i S7 GP7 � � !• �"�` ' i_=.: h � CCP UNDER > 2 FT COVER
♦ F1 W M �� ��, �
r
CCP UNDER < 2 FT COVER
s4 HH-4 ss MW-8 w CCP EXPOSED AT GROUND SURFACE
CCP DEPOSITIONAL LAYER
STORMWATER CULVERT
BG-7 �� t' HH-s
BG D4 Ds ss� EXISTING SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
—D3-A HH-10 D7 MW-7
�✓ G SED-12 HH-11 D9 . y- -�
PROPOSED SUPER SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE
-SED-B MW-2 MW_g C7 8 �r .'� .'� . •f,. LOCATION)
C8 "10 C11
PROPOSED TRAIL
Jsw_10 SED-2 B BRIDGE \ H 328 ► _ _ Y �'
SED4 - - - - +ED-9 SED-11
SED-16 68 ,c '
� BG-4 • BG-3 BG_2 • '�� :, � I SS'2 HH-7 B9 MW.4 378 IL NOTES:
�.11� SED-3A SS-7 MW-3A g8 ASED-17 gg_A 3p8 CHAIN -LINK r
`� �� SS-s HH-6 MW-4A FENCE P 1. EXISTING MONITORING WELLS & OCTOBER/ NOVEMBER 2016
�Li� SED-10 SW-3/ SS_5 SS-4 SS-3A _
..mob SED-3 As ss-3 29 APARTMENTS SAMPLING LOCATIONS SURVEYED BY CE GROUP ON
��t 298 seD-ta B8 B SED-15 8 DECEMBER 8, 9, & 20, 2016.
/• r - - - � a SED-' _
"
h _GAS STATION
a _ -Sw
USED-4 HH_8 ^ 30
APPROXIMATE
• � � AUTO �;�, SED-19 SED-20 � I,� -�._.� 0 115 230
REPAIR
A SCALE IN FEET
MSTE D VE s y
HlLLSBOROUGH STREET ti �8 sw-zt
__.� •�� h seD-zt SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
•` � r ���!!� _ SED-5A -
TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
�`���►� �■ 'i -,� ' ti �� ` 828 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD
,SW-6l . CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
_ i)�•., � ��� d � � - '� , �. � 1 �� SED-6
2923 South Tryon Street -Suite 100
ti• f �� ' fir' '� �� dart 1 114kman Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLLMON5 License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
f�?IS DATE: 10-7-19 REVISION NO. 0
tr�� �• , SW-7/
a ' tr s SED-7 JOB NO. TCH-009 FIGURE NO. 4
k sa

��
r - -
EXISTING SILT
FENCE H-2
L
BRIDGE
i r
PARKING
s LOT
PROPOSED j F
SUPER SILT
FENCE D-1
D
-- PROPOSED
SUPER SILT
` FENCE F-1
E k PROPOSED
- z SUPER SILT
FENCE F-2
F --
IS TING SILT FENCE
STOCKPILE-
AUTO
~._ L *14
REPAIR
■
�aI -mm
ROPOSED
UPER SILT
ENCE F-3
ISTING SILT
Nr.F H_1
CHAIN -LINK
FENCE
LEGEND
SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
BOLIN CREEK
TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR ELEVATION (FT MSL)
--
FENCE LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
—
—
EXISTING SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
C
—
—
PROPOSED SUPER SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE
LOCATION)
�N
CCP UNDER > 2 FT COVER
CCP UNDER < 2 FT COVER
If
CCP EXPOSED AT GROUND SURFACE
CCP DEPOSITIONAL LAYER
STORMWATER CULVERT
PROPOSED TRAIL
®
SAMPLE FOR METALS ANALYSIS
O
SAMPLE FOR METALS, VOC, AND SVOC ANALYSIS
� N
APPROXIMATE
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
TITLE
POST INTERIM REMEDIAL MEASURES
SOIL SAMPLE LOCATIONS
PROJECT TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
828 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
hart ` h i c k m a n Char South Tryon Street -Stolen 282 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(�
- SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
DATE: 10-15-19 REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. TCH-002 FIGURE NO. 5

Table 1 (page 1 of 2)
Summary of Soil Analytical Data
828 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-009
®��m
00®�0000®�®000000�000®000000
���m
000�0000®�®00�®00�000�000000
®��m
00A�0000��0000000�000�000000
����
00®000000��00�000�0000000000
����
00��0000000000000�000�000000
����
000�0000��®00�000�0000000000
����
00��0000000000000�000�000000
00®�000000000��00�000�000000
®���
���
00�00000000000®00�.�000�000000
����
00®�0000000000000�000�000000
����
000�000000000��00�000�000000
���m
00��0000000000®00�0000000000
����
00®�000000000�000�000®000000
���®00��®000000®00©0
■�0®0000�®00
���®00A��00000®00�00
�000000�®0�
���®00��®00000®00000��®00�00�®0�
��®00
���00000®�®000��0®00000000
���®00
A�®00000®®0�®0��0®0000®00®
®��®00
���000000�®0®00�0�00000000
���®00
®0�00000®�®�00��0�0000®000
®��®00
®0�000000�®0®00�0�0000®00®
����
00000000�0000000000000000000
®���
00000000�®®00000000000000000
®���mm�i
�m�m����®mmm®gym®m�mmmmmm
���
00�0�00�����0000�0�0�00000®
Drainage Pathay Soil
���
Drainage Pathay Sol
1115117M,
00A®�0�0����00��0�0�00000�
�1
��
Drainage Pathway Soil
Hart & Hickman, PC

Table 1 (page 2 of 2)
Summary of Soil Analytical Data
828 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-009
Notes-
Yell— highlighting indicates samples collected as part of April 2019 data gap sampling
Moge highlighting indicates samples collected as part of August 2019 t singe pathway sampling
Soil concentrations are reposed o milligrams per kilogram (mglkg).
PSRG = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remedint— Goals (PSRGs) (May 2019); UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
95% UCL of site specific background ranges were calculated using EPA ProUCL 5.1
North Carolina Soil Background Range taken frorflemenfs m North American Soils, 2nd Edrtiorby James Dragun and Khaled Chalon
`Not available for North Carolina. Used Eastern US Background Range
Bald denotes concentration above protection of groundwater PSRG antl significantly above baokgrou
Shading indicates concentration above residential PSRG and significantly above background.'
Undedomc indicates concentration above industrial PSRG and significantly above backgrour
ND = Not Detected; NA = Not Analyzed; ITS = Not Specified; -- = statistical test not applicable to data se[
J = Detected above method detection limit but below laboratory reporting limit; therefore, result Is an estimated concentration
01 = Analyte failed the method required serial dilution test andlor subsequent post -spike criteria. These failures Indicate matrix Interference.
J6 = The sample matrix Interfered with the ability to make any accurate determination; spike value a low.
BH = Method blank greater than one-half laboratory reporting Ilmif, but sample concentration greater than 10. the method blank.
A= Continuing Calibration Verification standard recovery (82%) is less than the lower control limit (90%), Result has possible low bias.
' denotes duplicate sample taken
' 95%UCL of Site Specific Background Values were calculated using values from samples collected through the Phase II RI
Analytical Method.
Metals by EPA Method 6010C or 602OB
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196 or 7199 (Phase II RI and April 2019 Data Gap Samples)
Mercury by EPA Method 7471 B
//nrl & Ili, krnan, VC

Table 2 (page 1 of 1)
Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
828 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-009
E
E
2
°
E
MonitoringWell
Sample Date
c
2
'
o
E
w
E
ID
>
>
m
Z`
v
E
?
E
c
o
U
E
-
E
>
c
U/
:.
N
a"i
m
J
N
-�
E
E
9
V
'E
E
C
y
2
`m
Z
C
o
`0
E
2
�
x
m
;o
m
a
v
rn
c
E
m
>
o
x
m
2
8
>
>
o
c
.2
m
f0
U
76
c
f0
f6
N
2]
d
(.l
{�
U
d
L
?
0
H
0
U
0
U
o
m
N
m
E
m
E
E
E
u
C
o
O_
o
N
U!
N
w
t
>
c_
2L Standard or IMAC
NS
NS
1
10
700
4
700
2
NS
NS
NS
10
1
1,000
300
15
NS
50
1
NS
100
NS
20
20
NS
NS
0.2
0.3
1,000
MW-5
11/9/2016
3.8
NA
<0.5
<10
51
<2.0
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
NA
<5.0
0.27 J
<10
NA
<5.0
NA
580
<0.2
NA
<10
23
NA
NA
190
<2.5
0.39 J
<30
(Background)
4/3/2017
8.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4.8
NA
<10.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5/3/2013
NA
5,600
5.4
85
1,100
1.6
NA
0.17
110,000
NA
NA
15
15
25
6,500
5.8
25,000
7,600
ND
NA
12
7,600
2.5
ND
34,000
JA
1.0
38
52
2/18/2016
NS
NA
ND
67
1,300
11.0
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
100
78
170
NA
36
NA
9,600
0.26
ND
58
ND
ND
NA
2,900
ND
260
330
MW-1
2/18/20164
NS
NA
ND
52
1,100
8.8
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
86
61
130
NA
29
NA
9,000
1 0.21
ND
46
ND
ND
NA
2,700
ND
200
260
11/10/2016
475.0
NA
<0.5
19
470
4.1
NA
0.15 J
NA
NA
NA
31
32
57
NA
10
NA
8,600
<0.2
NA
21
23
NA
NA
2,200
<2.5
92
99
11/10/20164
NA
NA
1 <0.5
<10
160
0.53 J
NA
<1.0
NP
NA
NA
<5.0
1 6.0
;10
NA
<5.0
NA
8,000
<0.2
NA
2.3 J
QO
NA
NA
1 2,100
<2.5
1.2 J
<30
4/3/2019
7.76
NA
NA
22.9
1,730
<0.10
NA
<0.080
NA
NA
<0.50
1.8
0.33 J
NA
NA
NA
3,090
<0.20
NA
0.60
0.50
NA
NA
4,710
NA
NA
NA
MW-1A
9/26/2019
6.63
NA
NA
10
1,040
<0.50
NA
<0.40
NA
NA
<2.5
1.2
:2.5
NA
NA
NA
2,420
<0.20
NA
0.82J
<2.5
NA
NA
6,360
NA
NA
NA
MW-2
6/20/20131
NA
16,000
0.61
8.3
1,100
5.5
NA
0.93
260,000
NA
NA
8.4
23
1,200
13,000
27
47,000
1,200
0.18
NA
70
42,000
18
0.27
52,000
NA
0.48
71
2,200
2/5/2014
NA
NA
NA
ND
160
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
I ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
MW-3
215/2014'
NA
NA
NA
ND
250
NA
NA
ND
VD
NA
24
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
8/15/2014'
1,500
NA
51
1 830
NA
NA
ND
N'
30
NA
78
1 NA
NA
NA
30
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
N'
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
8/20/20144
13.0
NA
ND
220
NA
NA
ND
23
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
7/21/2015
5.7
r.
NA
ND
67
NA
520
ND
N,
VD
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
N,
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
N
2/17/2016
1.3
N/
VD
ND
89
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
N/
23
ND
NA
2,400
JD
"
M W-3A
2/17/20162
1.3
N/
VD
ND
80
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
23
ND
ND
ND
N/
26
ND
NA
2,100
JD
11/9/2016
1.2
NA
<0.5
<10
53
<2.0
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
NA
<5.0
<0.11
<10
NA
<5.0
NA
14
<0.2
NA
<10
N/
50
NA
NA
2,400
5.4 J
0.94 J
12 J
11/9/2016z
1.2
NA
<0.5
<10
1 53
<2.0
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
NA
I <5.0
<0.11
<10
NA
<5.0
NA
15
<0.2
NA
<10
N/
52
NA
NA
2,400
5.3 J
0.95 J
4/4/2019
0.00
NA
NA
0.15
68.2
<0.10
NA
<0.080
N
NA
NA
<0.50
0.21
0.55
NA
NA
NA
5.8
<0.20
NA
0.50 J
h' -
34.2
NA
NA
2,950
NA
AA
MW-4
2/5/2014
NA
140
6,500
NA
NA
1.7
VD
NA
930
NA
NA
NA
250
NA
NA
1.4
NA
NA
99
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
8/20/20144'1
<10
ND
75
NA
NA
ND
VD
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-
ND
NA
NA
NA
7/21/2015
24.7
NA
ND
64
NA
ND
ND
VD
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
JA
^
7/21/20154
24.7
N/
NA
ND
61
NA
ND
ND
NA
VD
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
I ND
NA
NA
N/
ND
ND
NA
JA
N/,
JA
M W-4A
2/18/2016
189.0
N/
VD
ND
26
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
7.8
NA
49
ND
ND
I ND
N/
ND
ND
NA
110
ND
ND
34
2/18/20164
189.0
NA
ND
ND
33
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
8.4
NA
41
ND
ND
ND
N/
ND
ND
NA
78
ND
ND
48
11/9/2016
4.8
NA
<0.5
<10
36
<2.0
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
1.2 J
<0.11
<10
NA
<5.0
NA
140
<0.2
NA
<10
N"
7.2 J
NA
NP
170
<2.5
<0.15
17 J
4/4/2019
9.43
NA
NA
<0.10
22.5
0.070 J
NA
<0.080
NA
NA
<0.50
0.063 J
0.63
NA
NA
NA
6.0
<0.20
NA
1.5
0.82
NA
73
NA
NA
11/9/2016
2.5
NA
<0.5
<10
340
<2.0
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
29
<0.11
1.91
NA
<5.0
NA
2,500
<0.2
NA
22
20
NA
,..,
690
<2.5
1.2J
MW-6
4/3/2017
7.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
�4.8
NA
<10.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Ni.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
h'
4/4/2019
4.48
NA
0.14
283
<0.10
NA
<0.080
NA
NA
NA
<0.50
0.33
<0.50
NA
NA
NA
2,210
<0.20
NA
0.20 J
NA
0.12 J
NA
NA
752
NA
NA
4/4/20192
4.48
NA
0.14
279
<0.10
NA
<0.080
NA
NA
<0.50
0.32
1 0.50 J
NA
NA
NA
2,160
<0.20
NA
0.19 J
0.11 J
NA
736
NA
NA
vH
MW-7
11/14/2016
8.9
�0.5
<10
10
<2.0
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
1.3 J
0.17 J
1 1.6 J
NA
<5.0
NA
140
<0.2
NA
1.6 J
<20
NA
42
<2.5
1.1 J
26 J
4/3/2019
1 8.95
N
NA
0.13
4.5
<0.10
NA
<0.080
NA
NA
<0.50
I <0.050
0.72
NA
NA
NA
20.5
<0.20
NA
0.43 J
NA
0.10 J
NA
44.9
NA
NA
NA
MW-8
9/26/2019
7.95
6.1
219
<0.10
NA
<0.080
NA
NA
0.51
4.0
0.98
NA
NA
NA
4,880
<0.20
NA
4.1
NA
<0.50
NA
NA
750
NA
NA
NA
MW-9
9/26/2019
1.74
0.75
394
<0.20
NA
<0.16
NA
NA
<1.0
1.5
2.1
NA
NA
NA
5,060
<0.20
NA
0.41 J
NA
<1.0
NA
NA
2,160
NA
NA
NA
Notes:
Yellow highlighting indicates samples collected as part of April 2019 data gap sampling -
Orange highlighting indicates samples rgllected
All results in ug/l, except turbidity which is NTUs
2L Standard = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A NCAC 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards (April 2013).
IMAC = Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration
Bold denotes above the 2L standard or IMAC and background levels
ND = Not Detected; NA = Not Analyzed; NS = Not Specified
J = Detected above method detection limit but below laboratory reporting limit; therefore, result is an estimated concentration
U = Below method detection limit
`reported to the method detection limit instead of laboratory reporting limit
Denotes sample labeled as "Well #1" in the lab report associated with the Limited Phase II ESA prepared by Falcon
2 Denotes duplicate sample taken.
s Denotes sample labeled as "Well 1" in the lab report associated with the October 3, 2014 letter prepared by Falcon
" Denotes filtered samples
s An unfiltered sample was also collected from MW-4 on August 20, 2014 and the results were reported in mg/kg-wet, presumably because of the high sediment load. These data are not included in this table.
Analytical Methods:
Metals by EPA Method 6010C, 6020A, or 6020B
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196A / SM3500
Mercury by 7470A/245.1
s--"-..,wo,.,",ee-..Hart & Hickman, PC

Table 3 (page 1 of 1)
Monitoring Well Construction Details and Groundwater Elevation Data
828 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-003
Well ID
Permanent or
Temporary
Date Installed
Date
Abandoned
Drilling
Method
Well
Material
Screen Slot
Size (in)
Total Depth
(ft bls)
Screened
Interval
TOC
Elevation
(ft)
November 9, 2016
April 3, 2019
Sepember 26, 2019
Depth to
Water (ft bls)
Groundwater
Elevation (ft)
Depth to
Water (ft bls)
Groundwater
Elevation (ft)
Depth to
Water (ft bls)
Groundwater
Elevation (ft)
MW-1
Permanent
4/29/2013
N/A
DPT
2" PVC
0.01
40
30-40
346.12
35.48
310.64
30.90
315.22
35.67
310.45
MW-1A
Permanent
9/24/2019
N/A
Sonic
2" PVC
0.01
40
25-40
345.96
--
--
--
--
31.43
314.53
MW-2
Temporary
6/20/2013
6/20/2013
HA
Unknown
Unknown
8
Unknown
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
MW-3
Permanent
1/27/2014
1/7/2015
Auger
2" PVC
0.01
11
6-11
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
MW-4
Permanent
1/27/2014
1/6/2015
Auger
2" PVC
0.01
9.2
4.2-9.2
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
MW-3A
Permanent
5/12/2015
N/A
Air Rotary
2" PVC
0.01
16
1-16
298.10
5.91
292.19
2.79
295.31
7.14
290.96
MW-4A
Permanent
5/14/2015
N/A
Air Rotary
2" PVC
0.01
19
4-19
298.00
6.72
291.28
3.20
294.80
7.83
290.17
MW-5
Permanent
11/2/2016
N/A
Air Rotary
2" PVC
0.01
27.5
27.5 - 17.5
369.33
9.27
360.06
7.03
362.30
10.24
359.09
MW-6
Permanent
11/2/2016
N/A
HSA
2" PVC
0.01
17.5
17.5 - 7.5
315.39
9.92
305.47
7.42
307.97
10.54
304.85
MW-7
Permanent
11/2/2016
N/A
Air Rotary
2" PVC
0.01
69.5
69.5 - 59.5
339.54
46.97
292.57
43.58
295.96
47.05
292.49
MW-8
Permanent
9/24/2019
N/A
Sonic
2" PVC
0.01
44.5
29.5-44.5
343.89
--
--
--
--
40.16
303.73
MW-9
Permanent
9/24/2019
N/A
Sonic
2" PVC
0.01
45.0
30-45
339.04
--
--
--
--
26.92
312.12
TMW-10
Temporary
9/24/2019
9/24/2019
Sonic
2" PVC
0.01
40.0
25-40
349.35
--
--
--
--
27.23*
322.12*
Notes:
MW-1, MW-3A, MW-4A, MW-5, MW-6, and MW-7 were surveyed by CE Group on December 8, 2016
MW-1A, MW-8, MW-9, and TMW-10 were surveyed by H&H on September 26, 2019
ft = feet; bls = below land surface; in = inches
DPT = Direct Push Technology; HA = Hand Auger; HSA = Hollow Stem Auger
TOC = Top of Casing; -- = Not Specified; N/A = Not Applicable
" = depth to water gauged on September 24, 2019.
S:\AAA-MasterPrcjects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-009 -Police Station -Remedial Services and General Support\Groundwater and Drainage Pathway Soil Sampling - September 2019\Tables\828 MLK Jr Data Gap Sampling Tables Hart & Hickman, PC

Appendix A
August 24, 2049 General Awareness Training Plan
10
hart hickman
SMARTER EN VI RON M E NTAI SOLUMNS

DRAFT
General Awareness Training Plan -
Bolin Creek Trail Construction Activities
and Interim Remedial Measures
828 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Property
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
DEQ Identification No. NONCD0001486
H&H Job No. TCH-002
August 21, 2019
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS
#C-1269 Engineering
#C-245 Geology
2923 South Tryon Street, 5uite 100 3921 Sunset Ridge Rd, Suite 301
Charlotte, NC 28203 Raleigh, NC 27607 www.harthickinan.com
704.586.0007 main 919.847.4241 main

General Awareness Training Plan
Bolin Creek Trail Construction Activities
and Interim Remedial Measures
828 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Property
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-002
Table of Contents
Section Page No.
1.0 Introduction..............................................................................................................................1
2.0 Summary..................................................................................................................................3
2.1 Brief Site Background Summary...........................................................................................3
2.2 Compounds of Concern .........................................................................................................4
2.3 Personal Protective Equipment..............................................................................................5
2.4 Monitoring.............................................................................................................................5
2.5 Pre -Construction General Awareness Meeting.....................................................................5
3.0 Expected Scope of Work........................................................................................................6
3.1 Town Personnel.....................................................................................................................6
3.2 Town Contractors..................................................................................................................6
3.3 H&H Personnel.....................................................................................................................8
4.0 Job Hazard Analysis and Monitoring...................................................................................9
4.1 Chemical Hazards..................................................................................................................9
4.2 Chemical Exposure/Air Monitoring....................................................................................11
4.3 Background Readings..........................................................................................................12
4.4 Data Logging.......................................................................................................................13
5.0 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)................................................................................14
6.0 Safe Work Practices..............................................................................................................15
1
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8- ■
2019.docx
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

List of Figures
Figure I Site Map — Proposed Trail Location
Figure 2 Site Map — Proposed Interim Remedial Measures
List of Appendices
Appendix A Hospital Route Map
Appendix B Figure of Site Sampling Locations and Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Appendix C Interim Remedial Measures Product Specifications
Appendix D Silt Fence and Hydroseeded Areas Inspection Log
ii
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Aware ess Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness hart : h i c m C� n
Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr.
Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUT1ON5

General Awareness Training Plan
Bolin Creek Trail Construction Activities
and Interim Remedial Measures
828 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Property
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-002
Emergency Contact Numbers
Site Address: 828 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
Chapel Hill, NC 28208
Location of Chapel Hill Police
Department
Site/Client Contacts:
Fire/Ambulance/Police:
Hospital:
Poison Control:
Emergency Response:
Mr. John Richardson
Community Resilience Officer
Ms. Laura Selmer
Program Coordinator
Mr. Vencelin Harris
Emergency Management Coordinator
[phone]
[phone]
[phone]
[phone]
Mr. Bill Webster [phone]
Planning and Development Manager
911
University of North Carolina Hospital [phone]
101 Manning Drive,
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
(See Hospital Route Map in Appendix A)
Poison Control Center
National Response Center
EPA Emergency Response Team
EPA RRT 4 Coordinator
[e-mail]
[phone]
[phone]
iii
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness hart �y L : h ickmC� n
Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr.
Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Hart & Hickman, PC Contact Information
Principal: Steve Hart, PG [phone]
[phone] cell
Project Manager: Justin Ballard, PG [phone]
[phone] cell
Health & Safety Officer: Shannon Cottrill [phone]
[phone] cell
On -Site Representatives: Jeffrey 011ison [phone]
[phone] cell
Patrick Stevens [phone]
[phone] cell
Subcontractor Contact Information
S&C Construction, LLC
(others to be added if needed)
Clint Roberson
[phone]
IV
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness hart : h i c m C� n
Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr.
Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Glossary of Terms, Acronyms, and Abbreviations used in this Plan
ACGIH
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists
Analyzer
Refers to the field instrument described in Section 4.2
C
Ceiling value
CAS
Chemical Abstract Service Number
CCPs
Coal Combustion Products
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
COCs
Compounds of Concern
H&H
Hart & Hickman, PC
IDLH
Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health
if
Linear foot
mg/m3
milligram per cubic meter
NCDEQ
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
NIOSH
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
OSHA
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PEL
Permissible Exposure Limit
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
ppm
parts per million
PSRG
Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal
sq ft
Square foot
STEL
Short Term Exposure Limit
TLV
Threshold Limit Value
TWA
Time -Weighted Average
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

General Awareness Training Plan
828 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Property
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-002
1.0 Introduction
On behalf of the Town of Chapel Hill (Town), this General Awareness Training Plan (Plan) has
been prepared by Hart & Hickman, PC (H&H) to assist with construction activities and interim
remedial measures proposed for areas located on the Town's property at 828 Martin Luther King
Jr., Blvd. in Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Site or subject Site). Previous assessment activities
indicate that coal combustion products (CCPs) were used in portions of the property for
structural fill in the 1960s and 1970s. The CCPs are primarily covered with soil, but exposed
coal combustion products (CCPs) are present near the Bolin Creek Trail and along a steep
embankment north of the Bolin Creek Trail. Proposed construction activities include excavation,
grading, and management of soil along Bolin Creek Trail to facilitate installation of a new
section of Bolin Creek Trail. In addition, proposed construction activities include
implementation of interim remedial measures outlined in H&H's May 23, 2019 Draft Interim
Remedial Measures Cost Evaluation to remove or stabilize areas of exposed CCPs. A Site Map
showing the existing and proposed trail locations, and the areas of exposed CCPs along the Bolin
Creek Trail (referred to as Areas H and I) and in the embankment (Areas D and F), is included as
Figure 1. (Note that the location of the Proposed Trail in Figure I may need to be modified
based upon the revised plans).
This Plan has been prepared for the Town and its contractors to provide a general awareness of
Site conditions, approximate expected locations of CCPs, compounds of concern (COCs)
identified in soil and CCPs during previous environmental assessments, recommended
procedures to be used to minimize exposure to Town personnel, the Town's contractors, and
residents during trail construction and interim remedial measures activities, and excavated
material management procedures. This Plan is not intended to be used as a United States
Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Safety Plan under
the Federal Health and Safety Regulations set forth in 29 CFR 1910 and 1926. Per OSHA, it is
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

each employer's responsibility to provide their employees with a health and safety program. It is
expected that this Plan will be used to inform Town personnel and contractors of potential
hazards associated with the CCPs in development of their own Safety Plan. The Town or
Town's contractors may to choose to perform measures that are more stringent than those
recommended herein, but the measures should not be less stringent.
Note that this Plan primarily focuses on minimizing worker exposure to potentially impacted
media that may be encountered during the activities and to minimize the potential for migration
of potentially impacted materials beyond the work areas. This Plan describes the suggested air
monitoring, personal protective equipment (PPE), and Site control measures to be implemented
during work activities. This Plan does not cover other potential hazards related to general
construction activities such as climate (heat and cold stress), biological hazards (i.e., poisonous
plants, venomous snakes, insects, etc.), and construction hazards (i.e., working around
excavations, use of tools, heavy equipment, slips/trips/falls, etc.).
The Plan includes the following sections:
• Section 2.0: A summary of background information, COCs, and personal protective
measures.
• Section 3.0: Expected scope of the activities.
• Section 4.0: Job hazard analysis and monitoring to be performed during the work
activities.
• Section 5.0: Recommended personal protection measures for workers.
• Section 6.0: Recommended safe work practices to be used during the activities.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awarene s Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

2.0 Summary
2.1 Brief Site Background Summary
The Site is comprised of one land parcel that is approximately 10.24 acres in size and contains a
two-story approximately 35,000 sq. ft building located in the north -central portion of the Site that
is currently used for police department operations. The Site topography consists of an elevated
area where the police building and associated parking lots are located which slopes along an
embankment to the south to a lower area along Bolin Creek where the Bolin Creek Trail are
located.
Previous assessment activities indicate that the Site was initially used as a borrow pit from the
late 1950s to early 1960s, and then was used as a fill site from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s.
It appears that the fill initially consisted of construction debris, and then coal combustion
products (CCPs) were placed above the construction debris for structural fill. CCPs are exposed
at the surface along the eastern and central portions of the embankment that separates the
elevated and lower portions of the site. Erosion of CCPs along some portions of the
embankment has resulted in deposition of a layer of CCPs generally less than 1 to 1.5 ft thick at
the ground surface in some of the lower portions of the site north and south of the Bolin Creek
Trail. A Site Map showing the areas where exposed CCPs were observed is included as Figure
1.
Previous environmental assessment activities were conducted from 2013 to 2017 which
culminated in the completion of a Phase II Remedial Investigation (RI) Report for the Site dated
August 14, 2017. In April 2019, H&H conducted additional assessment activities as part of a
Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment conducted by Duncklee & Dunham and Dr. Ken
Rudo of Rudo Toxicological Consultants. The additional assessment activities are documented
in a May 23, 2019 Draft Result of Data Gap Sampling letter report. A figure depicting the
locations of previous CCP, soil, and drainage pathway soil samples and a tabular summary of the
results of analysis of the samples are provided in Appendix B. Additional information and
documents concerning the conditions at the property associated with the presence of CCPs may
be reviewed on the Town's Coal Ash Disposal Site Remediation Project website:
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : hi�kman
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVI ROW ENTAL SOLUT1ON5

hitps://www.townofchapelhill. orgJtown-hall/news-events/current-issues/coal-ash-disposal-site-
remediation-project .
2.2 Compounds of Concern
As indicated in the table in Appendix B, the primary COCs detected in CCPs, shallow soil, and
drainage pathway soil are certain metals. Results of analysis of samples of CCPs indicate that
the following metals were detected above background levels and North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) in CCPs: arsenic,
barium, manganese, mercury, and selenium. The most prevalent compound detected above
background levels and PSRGs in CCPs is arsenic.
Results of analysis of shallow soil samples collected near Bolin Creek Trail indicate that the
primary metal detected above background levels and PSRGs is arsenic with less frequent
detections of manganese and selenium. Near Bolin Creek Trail, the presence of metals above
PSRGs is associated with erosion of CCPs from the embankment and resultant deposition north
and south of the trail.
Results of analysis of drainage pathway soil samples in areas where stormwater appears to flow
during wet weather conditions indicate arsenic and barium were detected above background
levels and PSRGs in samples collected near the erosional CCPs. Drainage pathway samples
located away from the erosional CCP areas generally did not indicate significantly elevated
metals or only slightly elevated metals.
In summary, the primary COCs in CCPs, shallow soil, and wet weather drainage pathway soil at
the Site are arsenic, barium, manganese, mercury, and selenium. Recommended procedures to
minimize potential exposures to the COCs based on previous assessment activities, observed
Site conditions, and the proposed scope of work are summarized below and detailed information
is presented in Sections 3.0 to 4.0.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

2.3 Personal Protective Equipment
Skin contact with impacted soil and CCPs will be minimized by wearing personal protective
clothing (as described in Section 5.0). Inhalation of airborne dust particulates during
construction activities will be minimized by chemical exposure/air monitoring, and engineering
controls if action levels (see Section 4.2) are exceeded. Ingestion of impacted materials will be
minimized by the use of good personal hygiene during decontamination (i.e., thoroughly
washing face and hands with soap and water before eating or drinking).
2.4 Monitoring
When performing activities such as clearing, excavation, grading, or other construction related
activities which may disturb surface materials, the work zone will be monitored for dust by H&H
personnel. A Microdust Pro (or equivalent) will be used to monitor the work areas for airborne
dust particulates which may contain the COCs. These handheld direct -reading instruments will
be used at periodic intervals to monitor in the immediate vicinity of the work area, as well as
other upwind and downwind locations.
2.5 Pre -Construction General Awareness Meeting
Prior to the start of the construction activities, H&H will hold a pre -construction conference to
discuss this Plan, work activities, potential hazards, PPE, and safety procedures with Town
personnel and the Town's contractors. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss
expectations, procedures, and answer questions regarding this Plan and conditions at the Site.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i C k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

3.0 Expected Scope of Work
3.1 Town Personnel
The primary Site activities to be performed by Town personnel during construction of the new
segment of Bolin Creek Trail and during interim remedial measures include the following:
• Observation, coordination, and inspection of the Town's contractor's activities during
trail construction.
• Inspections of super silt fencing, standard silt fencing, and hydroseeded areas as part of
interim remedial measures.
The initial recommended inspection frequency for silt fencing/hydroseeding is as follows:
• once per week, and
• after each significant rainfall event.
This frequency may be modified based upon the results of an initial quarter of inspection.
Possible maintenance activities for the interim remedial measures include: reinstallation of
geotextile fabric along the silt fence, chain -link backing (super silt fence only), and/or support
posts. Other maintenance activities could include removal and disposal of accumulated CCP
behind the silt fences. A Silt Fence Inspection Log to be used by Town personnel for each
inspection is included in Appendix D.
3.2 Town Contractors
The primary Site activities to be performed by the Town's contractors during construction of the
new Bolin Creek Trail segment and during interim remedial measures include the following:
Trail Construction
• Operation of heavy equipment during Site clearing, excavation, and grading activities
during trail construction.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

• Operation of heavy equipment during management of excavated material during trail
construction. Note that H&H will assist with management of excavated material by
providing the Town's contractors with guidance on the locations of CCPs and how to
identify potential CCPs (generally identifiable by their grey to dark grey color whereas
Site soils are typically brown and tan silts and clays). Excavated soil without obvious
CCPs should be segregated from excavated CCPs and placed in separate stockpiles.
Stockpiles of soil and CCPs will be underlain by and covered with minimum 10-mil
plastic sheeting. In addition, the stockpile area should have erosion control through use
of silt fencing and/or other berm mechanisms (straw bales, composted earth, etc.).
Erosion control measures for soil or CCPs stockpile will be inspected weekly and after
each significant rainfall event.
Removal of Erosional CCPs
• Excavation, transportation, and disposal (expected to be disposed at a Subtitle D landfill
to be selected by the Town) of approximately 900 tons of erosional CCPs along Bolin
Creek Greenway Trail (Areas G, H, and I in Figure 1), including implementation of
erosion and sediment control measures prior to the start of excavation.
• Site restoration in the form of backfilling the shallow excavations along the trail and
seeding with grass seed and straw cover.
• Installation of approximately 375 linear feet (If) of super silt fencing (GEOTEXO 200ST
or similar product) along the flanks and downgradient of Areas D and F where exposed
CCP is present. The proposed super silt fencing location is shown on the attached Figure
2. Product specification sheets are included in Appendix C.
• Repair of approximately 100 if of existing silt fencing (WINFABO 77SF or similar
product) in the vicinity of embankment Area F. Product specification sheets are included
in Appendix C.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

• Prior to silt fence placement, some brush removal and limited removal of fallen trees that
cross the path of the existing and/or proposed silt fence will likely need to occur.
• Application of a hydroseed mixture to embankment Areas F and G (estimated at
approximately 10,000 square feet [sq ft]). The hydroseed mixture will include both
warm -season grass seed (Bermuda or similar grass), cool -season grass seed (fescue or
similar grass), and an organic matter amendment (ProGanicsTM Biotic Soil MediaTM or
similar product) to promote sustainable vegetation. In addition, the mixture would also
include a biodegradable growth medium (Flexterra(l HP-FGMTM or similar product) to
provide erosion resistance to the embankment slope. Product specification sheets are
included in Appendix C.
3.3 H&H Personnel
H&H will provide construction assistance services that will include:
• On -Site pre -construction general awareness training with the Town and the Town's
contractors.
• Perimeter and ambient air monitoring during the activities.
• Assistance with CCP identification and stockpile management during the trail
construction activities.
• Observation, coordination, and inspection of the Town's contractor's activities for the
interim remedial measures.
• Stockpile sample collection and disposal coordination.
• Sampling of material to be excavated prior to excavation for waste profiling purposes and
disposal facility acceptance.
• Collection of post -excavation soil samples from the base of the excavation areas to
determine post -excavation concentrations of metals for use in future risk evaluations.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

4.0 Job Hazard Analysis and Monitoring
The primary hazard anticipated is the potential exposures to metals. The primary metals of
concern at the Site are arsenic, barium, manganese, mercury, and selenium. A discussion of
chemical hazards and methods to reduce exposures are provided below.
4.1 Chemical Hazards
From an occupational health standpoint, given that potential exposure to Site personnel will be
only for a short period of time (intermittent for several days), the levels of metals expected at the
Site should not represent a significant concern. Overviews of the hazards associated with
exposure to the primary COCs are presented below in terms of the following types of
occupational exposure limits:
— PEL - Permissible Exposure Limit
— C - Ceiling
— TLV - Threshold Limit Value
— TLV-STEL - Short Term Exposure Limit
— IDLH — Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health
OSHA Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs), ACGIH Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), and time -
weighted averages (TWAs) are defined as concentrations for an 8-hour workday, 40-hour
workweek to which almost all workers can be repeatedly exposed without suffering adverse
health effects.
Short Term Exposure Limit (STEL) is defined as the concentration to which workers can be
exposed for short time periods without irritation, tissue damage, or narcosis sufficient to likely
cause impairment of self -rescue or precipitate accidental injury. The STEL is typically a 15-
minute time -weighted average that should not be exceeded at any time during the workday.
A ceiling value (C) is a concentration that should not be exceeded at any time in any workday.
The current NIOSH immediately dangerous to life or health (IDLH) value is defined as the
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

situation that poses a threat of exposure to airborne contaminants when that exposure is likely to
cause death or immediate or delayed permanent adverse health effects or prevent escape from
such an environment. The following table summarizes the primary COCs expected to be present
at the Site and their respective TWA, STEL, ceiling, and IDLH values.
Air
Air
Compound
TWA (ppm) (1)
STEL/Ceiling
IDLH (ppm)
(ppm)
Arsenic (inorganic compounds, as As
0.010 m /m3
---
5 m /m3
Barium (inorganic compounds, as Ba
0.5 m /m3
---
50 m /m3
Manganese (inorganic compounds, as Mn
5 m /m3
C 5 m /m3
500 m /m3
Mercury (inorganic compounds, as H
0.1 m /m3
C 0.1 m /m3
10 m /m3
Selenium (compounds, as Se
0.2 m /m3
---
1 m /m3
Ref.- NIOSH Pocket Guide (September 2008) and ACGIHTLVs and BEis (2017)
(1) Compound TWAs with units of mg/m3 are based on dust exposure
Based on the anticipated scope of work, the following potential exposures may exist at the site:
• Skin contact with impacted materials (CCPs and/or soil);
• Inhalation of vapors or particulates (dust); and
• Ingestion of impacted materials; especially if poor personal hygiene is practiced.
Skin contact with potentially contaminated CPPs or soil will be minimized by the use of personal
protective clothing (as described in Section 5.0). Air monitoring and the use of engineering
controls will minimize inhalation of vapors or particulates during the sampling activities if action
levels (see Section 4.2) are exceeded. Ingestion of impacted materials will be minimized by the
use of appropriate personal hygiene procedures during decontamination (i.e., thoroughly washing
face and hands with soap and water after leaving the work area and prior to eating or drinking) as
described in Section 6.0.
ss S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i C k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

4.2 Chemical Exposure/Air Monitoring
Precautions will be taken to reduce the exposure potential of Site COCs to both on -Site
personnel and the public. This will be accomplished by conducting chemical exposure/air
monitoring and eliminating visible dust at the Site by wetting the work area during work
activities as necessary. Based on the potential metals that may be encountered during the course
of this project and the level of disturbance anticipated to be associated with the construction
activities, chemical exposure/air monitoring will consist of on -Site area monitoring and
perimeter monitoring as described below.
On -Site Monitoring
H&H will monitor ambient dust levels in the work zone (i.e., excavation areas) of on -Site
personnel using a direct reading dust level meter (Casella Microdust Pro monitor or equivalent).
Work area monitoring will also be performed immediately adjacent to excavation areas,
construction areas, soil/CCP handling areas, and other areas as needed when work is occurring.
If action levels are exceeded as described in the below table, Site activities will be halted and
monitoring will continue until measurements indicate that levels are acceptable to continue and
the conditions that caused the elevated readings have been mitigated.
Perimeter Monitoring
In conjunction with the on -Site monitoring, H&H will conduct perimeter monitoring during
excavation, soil/CCP handling, and other activities as needed when work is occurring. Perimeter
monitoring will consist of multiple fixed continuous particulate monitoring stations (Casella
Microdust Pro monitors or equivalent) to evaluate the potential migration of COCs off -Site.
Particulate monitoring stations will be established in the predominant downwind and upwind
directions. At least one of the downwind monitoring locations will established in a downwind
location between the Site and the nearest downwind residence, business, or open portion of the
trail. During these work activities, the monitors will be checked periodically (typically every
half hour) to evaluate detections against the below action levels. A windsock will be positioned
on -Site nearby the construction activities to monitor wind directions, to evaluate locations where
monitoring will occur, and visibly determine changes in wind direction.
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c kma n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

In the event that perimeter exposure monitoring indicates dust levels are approaching or
exceeding action levels, Site activities will be halted and monitoring will continue until
measurements indicate that levels are acceptable to continue and the conditions that caused the
elevated readings have been mitigated.
A summary of action levels and response criteria for total dust is presented in the tables that
follow.
Action Levels and Response Criteria
DUST
Microdust Pro
Analyzer
Reading*
Location
Time Period
Action
< 3.0 mg/m3
Work area, upwind
Continue periodic monitoring.
and downwind
> 3.0 mg/m3
Work area, upwind
> 1 minute
Stop work; move upwind; wet area to
or presence of
and downwind
eliminate dust; if dusty conditions persist
visible dust
notify H&H and Town contacts for
guidance on implementing engineering
solution.
* Above background readings, see Section 4.3
4.3 Background Readings
All direct -reading instrument readings will be evaluated relative to background readings, not
"meter zero'. Prior to the start of work at each shift, and whenever there is a significant shift in
wind direction, instrument readings will be obtained upwind of the work zone in order to
determine the level of "background" readings from local vehicle traffic, emissions from nearby
operations unrelated to the Site, etc. Site readings will be evaluated against these background
readings (i.e., if an action level is listed as 1 ppm and the background reading is 2 ppm, then the
action level becomes 3 ppm).
12
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLU71ON5

4.4 Data Logging
Exposure monitoring data, including background readings, will be logged in the field logbook.
The results of daily instrument calibrations will be logged in the field logbook. Monitoring
instruments will be calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and noted in the
field logbook. Calibration will also be performed when inconsistent or erratic readings are
obtained.
13
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUT1ON5

5.0 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Minimum Suggested PPE for Site Personnel:
— Hardhat
— Safety glasses/safety goggles/face shield
— Steel -toed boots
Work Zone Suggested PPE for Site Personnel:
— Hardhat
— Eye protection (face shield, goggles, and/or safety glasses)
— Chemical -resistant steel -toed boots
— Ear protection in vicinity of construction equipment
— Long sleeve shirt and long pantst
— Nitrile/latex/vinyl gloves (as needed for chemical protection when hand contact with
soil/CCPs may occur)
14
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m a n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUT1ON5

6.0 Safe Work Practices
1. Eating, drinking, chewing gum or tobacco, and smoking are prohibited in the work areas.
2. Personnel should wash their hands and face thoroughly with soap and water prior to
eating, drinking or smoking.
3. Avoid contact with potentially impacted materials. Avoid walking through puddles,
pools, mud, etc. Avoid, whenever possible, kneeling on the ground, leaning or sitting on
equipment or ground.
4. Field crewmembers should make use of their senses to alert them to potentially
dangerous situations (i.e., presence of strong, irritating or nauseating odors).
5. Only those vehicles and equipment needed to complete work tasks should be permitted
within the work zone (excavators and similar items). All non -essential vehicles should
remain outside the work zone.
6. No matches or lighters will be permitted in the work area.
7. Field crew members shall be familiar with wind direction in relation to potential
impacted areas.
8. The number of personnel and equipment in the impacted areas should be minimized but
only to the extent consistent with workforce requirements of safe operations.
9. Personal protective equipment will be used as specified.
10. Personnel are to notify as soon as possible H&H and Town contacts if there are
indications of unusual conditions or complaints or concerns from Town residents.
11. Disposable PPE (i.e., nitrile/latex/vinyl gloves) should be placed in an on -Site trash
receptable and disposed off -Site as general waste.
12. Before leaving the Site, heavy equipment should be inspected for soil, CCPs, and mud,
and the material should be removed prior to leaving the Site. This may necessitate
establishing a gravel ingress/egress pathway and equipment wash area in the work area.
13. Excessive soil and mud should be removed from steel toed boots each day prior to
leaving the Site. Depending upon Site conditions, this may necessitate establishing a
boot wash for personnel to use prior to leaving the work area.
15
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828 MLK Jr. Blvd General hart : h i c k m C� n
Awareness Training_8-2019.docxS:\AAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 - Police Station\General Awareness Training\828
MLK Jr. Blvd General Awareness Training_8-2019.docx
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUMNS

- �-
OFT
�yA
G
BRIDGE
g
TION
* PARKING
LOT
D
L
AUTO
■REPAIR
iA
F
' ..
�• '��
LEGEND
SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
BOLIN CREEK
TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR ELEVATION (FT MSL)
—
FENCE LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
UNDER > 2 FT COVER
NCCP
M
CCP UNDER < 2 FT COVER
CCP EXPOSED AT GROUND SURFACE
r
CCP DEPOSITIONAL LAYER
.
STORMWATER CULVERT
PROPOSED TRAIL
I108VIOL us] 0
CHAIN -LINK
FENCE
SILT FENCE
am
WE
9
APPROXIMATE
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
TITLE
SITE MAP - PROPOSED TRAIL LOCATION
PROJECT TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
828 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
100
hart ` h i c k m a n Char South Tryon StolenStreet-282 3
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(�
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
DATE: 5-10-19 REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. TCH-002 FIGURE NO. 1

LEGEND
ti ► SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
I PARKING BOLIN CREEK
LOT TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR ELEVATION (FT MSL)
FENCE LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
— — EXISTING SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
r` F
— — PROPOSED SUPER SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE
�N LOCATION)
CCP UNDER > 2 FT COVER
"J
- D PROPOSED � CCP UNDER < p FT COVER
SUPER SILT r I � CCP EXPOSED AT GROUND SURFACE
CCP DEPOSITIONAL LAYER
`'i '�`✓�`� �'_ F E N C E STORMWATER CULVERT
PROPOSED TRAIL
t F EXISTING
SILT FENCE
BRIDGE Y * t 328
H � S
CHAIN -LINK
ti FENCE_
_ EXISTING
S I LT FENCE APPROXIMATE
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
TITLE
• SITE MAP - PROPOSED INTERIM REMEDIAL
GAS STATION ' ' - MEASURES
J PROJECT TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
- - 828 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
Y r
r
100
hart ` h i c k m a n Char South Tryon StolenStreet-282 3
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(�
• - SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
� � � T c
! �r AUTO ` DATE: 5-22-19 REVISION NO.0
WK REPAIR + �� a i _ JOB NO. TCH-002 FIGURE NO.2

Appendix A
Hospital Route Map
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVI RONM ENTAL SOLUTIONS

7/8/2019 828 M.L.K. Jr Blvd to University of North Carolina Hospitals - Google Maps
Go gle Maps 828 M.L.K. Jr Blvd to University of North Carolina Drive 2.1 miles, 10 min
Hospitals
•X,
ri' � , • '
�. `Y
f
4n�
r••-y
;r•~y
y
pueppr Frgm
� ! `•
1Ldxu Cnildran'e M crux., �
��
s�-r,a, p�e.r„�PH�
.�-,.• � Fe[ddin0�ryubfP
Q
Q
•r axa Aludn LulFr�
"� ' • liNp.FNer9W
d
r
rd �,
•Avm,O%101 SChOd Q 1
^jp
Q �.Iir
-
Strefwd HNH •',
tlwnwpw Q n L.:la 5 UT.,
.i P.0-Cw,a,wwP 9d�^ Candurnnwme
ed'^
1 A i -"'
�.
Qunenae pro
-
W
Ero[Cr/M+n
Ahunlcn�ic3crwWr Fflcar'ah FPemmnnh
F GrneneA
{, f
f� J i
Q
f' a•& --. _ wmmwr
n:mi:eti P
snp[•. ,�.P .,�.°
•-- Y�,
i d
x
J
y i
r+erti.a•cFiuni.ium .e" eta 3
q ,�rdn
L".110
•�. - .• f .
�
"
w Mowrvnee:ler C.mwo ' ,...•• .�"
I• Eremenlery 9clw+iQ
m[ne Pars p 4
... F 110RT/IS 10E p
Q �•
f
�,•• Intl somaC
E E
ulucr+ouE
e
., ••� oe nm.rs Gnpemp T'""^ [urna s a uom�p,ei {rt°Mn Clap 1
lT—
H�II
oiewe�p
HISTG RIC �
DISTRICT
�R
n Crap Mrdine,re W DO,
�1'�hlirl/�
EM MortmrnT W.-SNM Mxee1Q n i :5 Fluer�r.oml Cele•F �y «
.,n
•.•�—.:
Oekwwb nnrr P
_n {� n vr�.��ieE[�riNi��:i *.
e Cd'a Crane G Tnr t:w�•.�i.
�uCS[We•�,m
Yxn
yayyiad _.-,,,,..
c
f .n _
P " e
5[n+ra Pnnnna.,l
Wrd
Aylymn oode P J
r„ , e ram•'
Simr Wormer C.W.
P
•wd law, apr �3 { ;] Ee v
wwae
Q
r. �i i•
:. �n..Q Qy,�c c..:_
U ran + E CAM
S£R O N -µ C C A
� • HITf]AIC PlSTR
EY
T
Lle �vnw6
Elnnrni��r 8cn�w Q
.�
[°Ina [rerainp Q .�• F
Q canrnnnuanrt.ins i
aNNee, AOM-1-11 P L J
;i rnumoa /ac�r
L
vim•
. .gym. �.
W 14 O R Hr -
��
iMwrdHe}Hn[d,
vdlns Hetpluls:
:aln�i�i 01101
..
j
SPRINGS
PopYr PIpLdQ Came
rpm--. enc.,- o sr
WEATHERHILL '�•+•
r+ min
[�J~
r•�le lAe N.Idi fauna
^le
Y
Y ourel r,tlgn apert+n!n[f P V g le
�•'g�r�
u
�j pe¢, C. S—OH Cvnw,
T,ie Cnepe[fee Y
Tnnroe ewe4 •- QxnyeNwa•4p+nnir��r,
..
.i. rypnh Ilia
QpMen
.... ... ,. �J .�
Map data ©2019 Google 1000 ft
828 M.L.K. Jr Blvd
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
t 1. Head south on M.L.K. Jr Blvd toward Bolin Creek
Trail
0.8 mi
t 2. Continue onto N Columbia St
0.3 mi
r• 3. N Columbia St turns right and becomes W
Cameron Ave
381 ft
4, 4. Use the left 2 lanes to turn left onto Pittsboro 5t
0.4 mi
►� 5. Use any lane to turn slightly left onto Manning Dr
0.3 mi
4, 6. Turn left onto Hospital Dr
t 7. Continue straight
459 ft
341 ft
University of North Carolina Hospitals
-101 Manning Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 2f514
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/828+Martin+Luther+King+Junior+Boulevard,+Chapel+Hill,+NC/University+of+North+Carolina+Hospitals,+101+Mann... 1 /2

Appendix B
Figure of Site Sampling Locations and Summary of Soil Analytical Data
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

'o
a
i�

Table B (page 1 of 2) Summary
of Soil Analytical Data 828
Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-003
Sample ID
Sample Date
Material Sampled (Soil or
CCP
Sample
Depth
p
E
C
>.
O
y...
U
E
L
-0
\
L
a)
-0
L
O
-0
_�
(p
U
C
U
M
U
E
E
O
a�
M
a)O
E
o
C
�
_2
o
L
O
O
U
L
?
O
U
O
(U
N
E
.O
M
E
(0
M
E
E
E
a�i
-O
O
E
�
to
O
Q
E
N
(n
>
fn
C
C
70
O
(A
E
O
0
(n
C
E
•(O
73
73
C
M
>
C
N
S-4
4/29/2013
CCP
1 ft
23,000
ND
14
24
ND
NA
1.5
9,900
NA
22
30
65
59,000
20
9,000
1,500
0.011
NA
43
680
1
ND
150
NA
ND
21
120
S-5
1/31/2014
CCP
0-4 ft
NA
NA
37
2,800
NA
NA
ND
NA
1.3
19.7
21
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
lqH
0.30
NA
NA
NA
3.2
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
S-6
1/31/2014
CCP
0-4 ft
NA
NA
43
3,200
NA
NA
ND
NA
2.7
19.3
22
NA
NA
NA
12
NA
NA
0.42
NA
NA
NA
6.1
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
S-7
1/31/2014
CCP
0-4 ft
NA
NA
44
2,500
NA
NA
ND
NA
1.4
27.6
29
NA
NA
NA
11
NA
NA
0.44
NA
NA
NA
4.5
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-1
2/3/2014
CCP
8-12 ft
NA
NA
3.5
86
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
8.8
8.8
NA
NA
NA
26
NA
NA
0.083
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-2
2/3/2014
CCP
26-28 ft
NA
NA
41
1,100
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
19
19
NA
NA
NA
11
NA
NA
0.24
NA
NA
NA
4.0
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-3
2/3/2014
CCP
10-12 ft
NA
NA
48
1,200
NA
NA
ND
NA
0.53
22.47
23
NA
NA
NA
39
NA
NA
0.42
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-4
2/4/2014
CCP
10-12 ft
NA
NA
59
2,900
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
20
20
NA
NA
NA
11
NA
NA
0.51
NA
NA
NA
5.8
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2/4/2014
CCP
4-6 ft
NA
NA
72
2,800
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
19
19
NA
NA
NA
9.5
NA
NA
0.33
NA
NA
NA
2.6
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-5
4/3/2019
CCP
4-6 ft
NA
NA
95.9
2,350
5.46
NA
<0.956
NA
0.836 J
12.3
13.1
7.05
50.9
NA
NA
NA
34.7
1.2
NA
11.1
NA
12.0
NA
NA
325
NA
NA
NA
4/3/20191
CCP
4-6 ft
NA
NA
95.9
2,630
6.99
NA
NA
0.712 J
16.2
16.9
10.3
62.5
NA
NA
NA
53.4
0.39
NA
17.1
NA
13.0
NA
NA
308
NA
NA
NA
GP-6
2/4/2014
CCP
9-11 ft
NA
NA
65
850
NA
NA
\JD
NA
ND
19
19
NA
NA
NA
27
NA
NA
11
NA
NA
NA
4.1
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4/4/2019
CCP
9-10 ft
NA
NA
6.73
178
0.758
NA
0.118 J
NA
<1.11
10.0
10.0
5.18
11.0
NA
NA
NA
687
0.050
NA
6.24
NA
0.880
NA
NA
21.7
NA
NA
NA
GP-7
2/4/2014
CCP
10-12 ft
NA
NA
55
1,700
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
19
19
NA
NA
NA
11
NA
NA
0.26
NA
NA
NA
4.3
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-8
2/4/2014
CCP
11-15 ft
NA
NA
54
4,100
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
20
20
NA
NA
NA
9.2
NA
NA
0.29
NA
NA
NA
4.5
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-11
2/4/2014
CCP
4-6 ft
NA
NA
16
450
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
16
16
NA
NA
NA
23
NA
W
0.35
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
GP-12
2/4/2014
CCP
2-4 ft
NA
NA
52
2,000
NA
NA
ND
NA
ND
19
19
NA
NA
NA
14
NA
0.28
NA
NA
NA
2.1
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
SS1
2/18/2016
Soil/CCP
2-12 in
NA
ND
6.7
210
1.2
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
28
25
47
NA
22
NA
2,400
0.052
ND
15
NA
ND
ND
NA
120
1.3
88
100
SS1-Dup
2/18/2016
Soil/CCP
2-12 in
NA
ND
8.5
260
1.4
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
31
28
56
NA
29
NA
3,300
0.059
ND
18
NA
ND
ND
NA
150
1.7
95
110
SS2
2/18/2016
Soil/CCP
2-12 in
NA
ND
24
830
3.5
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
27
20
57
NA
39
NA
1,700
0.21
1.7
19
NA
2.4
ND
NA
190
1.2
81
110
SS3
2/18/2016
Soil
2-12 in
NA
ND
4.5
100
0.80
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
13
6.8
22
NA
14
NA
240
0.048
ND
5.3
NA
ND
ND
NA
36
ND
41
28
SS4
2/18/2016
Soil
2-12 in
NA
ND
8.5
380
1.2
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
22
12
29
NA
25
NA
910
0.061
ND
12
NA
ND
ND
NA
51
ND
54
51
SS5
2/18/2016
Soil
2-12 in
NA
ND
4.8
130
0.89
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
17
9.4
25
NA
27
NA
460
0.091
ND
7.9
NA
ND
ND
NA
43
ND
47
48
SS6
2/18/2016
Soil
2-12 in
NA
ND
3.1
82
0.70
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
35
7.6
23
NA
17
NA
410
0.038
ND
6.5
NA
ND
ND
NA
25
ND
45
43
SS7
2/18/2016
Soil
2-12 in
NA
ND
3.1
84
0.60
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
14
6.9
15
NA
13
NA
500
0.038
ND
5.9
NA
ND
ND
NA
31
ND
37
37
HH-1
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.29
5.9
120
1.00
NA
<0.29
NA
0.45
20.55
21
7.9
25
NA
27
NA
350
0.052
NA
8.8
NA
0.69
NA
NA
31
<0.58
48
50
11/3/2016'
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.35
3.4
110
0.79
NA
<0.35
NA
0.54
19.46
20
8.4
17
NA
18
NA
360 BH
0.067
NA
12
NA
<0.71
NA
NA
30
<0.71
41
35
HH-2
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.29
4.9
140
0.93
NA
<0.29
NA
0.43
13.57
14
12
21
NA
30
NA
260
0.085
NA
5.9
NA
1.0
NA
NA
25
<0.58
48
43
HH-3
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.33
9.9
200
1.30
NA
<0.33
NA
0.46 J
17.54
18
7.8
31
NA
24
NA
350
0.076
NA
8.9
NA
2.4
NA
NA
36
<0.65
53
100
HH-4
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.28
2.4
72
1.00
NA
<0.28
NA
0.50
44.5
45
16
37
NA
2.3
NA
630
<0.023
NA
33
NA
<0.56
NA
NA
42
0.60
73
70
HH-5
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.30
2.4
73
0.75
NA
<0.30
NA
<0.14
23
23
8.4
19
NA
9.3
NA
410
<0.025
NA
14
NA
1.2
NA
NA
23
<0.60
39
51
HH-6
10/27/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.33
20
20
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HH-7
10/27/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
NP
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.61
22
22
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HH-8
10/27/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.30
3.6
100
1.00
NA
<0.30
NA
<0.35
19
19
12
29
NA
18
NA
570
0.036
NA
9.0
NA
<0.60
NA
NA
28
<0.60
52
54
HH-9
4/3/2019
CCP
0-1 ft
NA
NA
3.37
131
0.398 J
NA
0.178 J
NA
<1.29
12.7
12.7
5.97
14.5
NA
NA
NA
260
0.31
NA
3.59
NA
0.722
NA
NA
33.2
NA
NA
NA
HH-10
4/3/2019
CCP
0-1 ft
NA
NA
60.3
2,970
5.14
NA
0.162 J
NA
<1.60
13.8
13.8
9.84
51.3
NA
NA
NA
73.3
0.22
NA
17.1
NA
5.04
NA
NA
269
NA
NA
NA
HH-11
4/3/2019
CCP
0-1 ft
NA
NA
42.5
3,260
5.90
NA
0.220 J
NA
0.467 J
18.7
19.2
13.4
55.3
NA
NA
NA
113
0.43
NA
23.5
NA
9.05
NA
NA
234
NA
NA
NA
MW-6
11/2/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.26
2.9
38
0.61
NA
<0.26
NA
0.21 J
9.79
10
9.5
23
NA
12
NA
570
0.082
NA
8.2
NA
1.0
NA
NA
22
0.81
31
77
MW-7
11/1/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.30
2.6
67
0.87
NA
<0.30
NA
0.89
9.11
10
3.9
180
NA
7.6
NA
100
0.030
NA
2.9
NA
<0.59
NA
NA
6.7
<0.59
61
46
SED-3A
4/5/2019
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
3.45
33.9
0.418 J
NA
<0.582
NA
<1.16
17.4
17.4
16.5
6.97
NA
NA
560
NA
5.82
NA
0.237 J
NA
NA
9.6
NA
SED-5A
4/4/2019
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
1.25
13.5
0.156 J
NA
- --
NA
0.352 J
13.2
13.6
5.95
39.1
NA
NA
243
0.0071
NA
4.38
NA
NA
NA
10.9
NA
SED-8
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
NA
2.41
49.1
0.313 J
NA
0.122 J
NA
<1.25
12.0
12.0
7.01
14.3
NA
NA
423
0.063
NA
4.66
NA
1.01
NA
NA
15.2
NA
Nf
SED-9
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
'' A
1.16
33.8
0.199 J
NA
NA
0.461 J
21.6
22.1
9.11
10.1
NA
NA
431
0.013
NA
6.68
NA
NA
NA
16.7
NA
Ni
SED-10
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
1.29
24.4
0.118 J
NA
0.221 J
NA
0.418 J
12.0
12.4
4.43
10.8
NA
NA
195
0.037
NA
4.03
NA
0.273 J
NA
NA
8.1
NA
SED-11
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil/CCP
2-6 in
NA
5.98
285
0.768
NA
NA
<1.51
9.72
9.72 B
6.61
15.1
NA
NA
288
0.14
NA
7.03
NA
2.03
NA
NA
65.0
. ,jA
SED-12
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
NIA
3.97
122
0.499 J
NA
0.204 J
NA
<1.74
9.45
9.45 B
6.04
19.7
NA
NA
319
0.077
NA
4.95
NA
1.36
NA
NA
32.8
NA
SED-13
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
14.5
724
1.10
NA
0.171 J
NA
<1.58
14.0
14.0
7.58
27.1
NA
NA
563
0.075
NA
8.73
NA
1.69
NA
NA
70.5
SED-14
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
1.86
18.9
0.152 J
NA
NA
0.506 J
17.2
17.7
5.07
8.00
NA
NA
231
0.012
NA
3.19
NA
NA
NA
17.3
SED-15
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
5.33
98.1
0.641 J
NA
NA
<1.49
15.2
15.2
8.84
19.4
NA
NA
550
0.030
NA
8.24
NA
2.36
NA
NA
39.5
SED-16
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil/CCP
2-6 in
NA
NA
28.3
758
2.86
NA
0.238 J
NA
<2.03
22.8
22.8
13.7
48.8
NA
NA
513
0.22
NA
17.7
NA
5.42
NA
NA
165
SED-17
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil/CCP
2-6 in
NA
NA
15.3
565
1.98
NA
0.280 J
NA
<2.01
20.7
20.7
13.7
36.3
NA
NA
452
0.14
NA
14.8
NA
3.68
NA
NA
179
NA
SED-18
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
NA
4.53
137
0.534 J
NA
<0..
NA
<1.38
18.7
18.7
11.1
28.2
NA
NA
464
0.051
NA
9.00
NA
1.85
NA
NA
32.6
NA
SED-19
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
NA
1.55
20.0
0.161 J
NA
<0.588
NA
0.435 J
21.7
22.1
7.98
8.38
NA
NA
266
0.0073
NA
4.94
NA
0.334 J
NA
NA
15.0
NA
SED-20
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
NA
0.792
31.4
0.152 J
NA
<0.687
NA
<1.37
5.76
5.76 B
4.50
9.10
NA
NA
360
0.012
NA
2.19
NA
0.263 J
NA
NA
11.5
NA
iNr
SED-21
4/5/2019
Drainage Pathway Soil
2-6 in
NA
NA
1.12
25.9
0.149 J
NA
<0.591
NA
<1.18
20.9
20.9
4.44
6.58
NA
NA
221
0.011
NA
2.70
NA
0.286 J
NA
NA
12.8
NA
^'
11/2/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.30
2.1
76
0.99
NA
<0.30
NA
0.43 J
17.57
18
27
49
NA
4.0
NA
710
<0.023
NA
5.0
NA
<0.59
NA
NA
25
<0.59
190
47
MW-5 (background)
11/2/2016
Soil
6-7 ft
NA
<0.27
1.4
61
0.60
NA
<0.27
NA
0.81
38.19
39
19
18
NA
0.55
NA
940
<0.020
NA
20
NA
<0.53
NA
NA
29
2.3
67
75
BG-1
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.28
1.9
36
0.39
NA
<0.28
NA
0.87
17.13
18
6.3
16
NA
25
NA
310
0.033
NA
5.4
NA
1.6
NA
NA
15
<0.57
34
43
(background)
11/3/2016
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
<0.29
2.3
45
0.48
NA
<0.29
NA
<0.12
19
19
7.3
18
NA
43
NA
440
0.280
NA
6.2
NA
1.6
NA
NA
15
<0.57
35
49
BG-2
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.28
1.9
45
0.50
NA
<0.28
NA
0.84
16.16
17
7.4
18
NA
32
NA
410
0.045
NA
4.9
NA
1.1
NA
NA
14
<0.56
35
44
(background)
11/3/2016
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
<0.27
1.9
52
0.53
NA
<0.27
NA
0.70
23.3
24
7.5
20
NA
26
NA
450
0.038
NA
7.9
NA
1.7
NA
NA
19
<0.55
37
45
BG-3
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.30
1.7
44
0.43
NA
<0.30
NA
0.21 J
23.3
16
7.5
15
NA
25
NA
410
0.024
NA
5.1
NA
1.4
NA
NA
46
<0.60
37
40
(background)
11/3/2016
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
<0.27
2.2
56
0.54
NA
<0.27
NA
0.88
21.12
22
7.5
18
NA
29
NA
410
0.040
NA
5.2
NA
1.2
NA
NA
19
<0.53
40
46
11/3/2016
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
<0.29
1.7
50
0.50
NA
<0.29
NA
<0.13
19
19
9.5
16
NA
22
NA
450 BH
0.026
NA
6.0
NA
<0.59
NA
NA
16 A
<0.59
53
50
BG-4 (background)
11/3/2016
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
<0.33
2.0
53
0.52
NA
0.38
NA
0.50 J
22.5
23
11
23
NA
21
NA
460 BH
0.054
NA
8.5
NA
<0.65
NA
NA
19
<0.65
51
230
BG-6
4/3/2019
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
2.0501
64.4
0.625
NA
0.177 J
NA
5.34
39.4
44.7
14.4
26.4
NA
NA
NA
448 J6
0.022
NA
12.8
NA
0.562 J
NA
NA
17.0
NA
NA
NA
(background)
4/4/2019
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
NA
2.29
66.3
0.507 J
NA
0.139 J
NA
<1.19
22.9
22.9
14.7
32.3
NA
NA
NA
467
0.032
NA
7.78
NA
0.828
NA
NA
16.8
NA
NA
NA
BG-7
4/3/2019
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
1.97
52.7
0.410 J
NA
0.136 J
NA
<1.16
70.2
70.2
18.9
36.4
NA
NA
NA
813
0.025
NA
12.8
NA
0.543 J
NA
NA
22.6
NA
NA
NA
(background)
4/4/2019
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
NA
3.08
77.9
0.430 J
NA
0.108 J
NA
<1.16
27.0
27.0
16.3
32.5
NA
NA
NA
548
0.023
NA
6.20
NA
0.502 J
NA
NA
24.3
NA
NA
NA
BG-8
4/3/2019
Soil
0-1 ft
NA
NA
1.80
52.4
0.370 J
NA
0.0951 J
NA
<1.14
24.5
24.5
21.8
62.8
NA
NA
NA
759
0.0072
NA
9.04
NA
0.485 J
NA
NA
24.4
NA
NA
NA
(background)
4/4/2019
Soil
2-3 ft
NA
NA
1.66
47.6
0.293 J
NA
0.0918 J
NA
<1.14
21.7
21.7
23.5
60.2
NA
NA
NA
732
NA
7.86
NA
0.306 J
NA
NA
25.1
NA
NA
NA
Site Specific Background Range
<0.27-<0.33
1.4-3.08
36-77.9
0.293 J-0.99
<0.27-0.38
<0.12-5.34
16.16-70.2
16-70.2
6.3-27
15-62.8
0.55-43
310-940
<0.0067-0.280
4.9-20
<0.59-1.7
14-46
<0.53-2.3
34-190
40-230
95% UCL of Site Specific Background Range
2.1
58
0.58
0.18
2.19
28
25
15
27
30
591
0.114
10
1.2
29
84
147
North Carolina Background Range
7000 - >100,000
<1.0-8.8
1-18
50-1,000
ND-1.0
ND-100
1.0-10
100-280,000*
NS
NS
7-300
ND-50
2.0-20
100 - >100,000*
ND-50
50-50,000*
<2.0-7000*
0.03-0.52
<3-15*
ND
50-37,000*
<0.1-0.8
ND-5.0
<500-50,000*
ND-300
NS
15-300
11-59
PSRG - Protection of Groundwater
110,000
0.9
5.8
580
63
45
3.0
NS
3.8
360,000
3.8
0.9
700
150
270
NS
65
1.0
7.1
130
NS
2.1
3.4
NS
1,500
0.28
350
1,200
PSRG - Residential Health -based
16,000
6.3
0.68
3,100
31
3,100
14
NS
0.3
23,000
0.31
4.7
630
11,000
400
NS
2,200
2.3
78
310
NS
78
78
NS
9,400
0.16
78
4,700
PSRG - Industrial Health -based
230,000
93
3.0
47,000
470
47,000
200
NS
6.5
350,000
6.5
70
9,300
160,000
800
NS
32,000
9.7
1,200
4,700
NS
1,200
1,200
NS
140,000
2.3
1,200
70,000
SAAAA-Master Projects\Town of Chapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002 -Police Station\April 2019 Sampling and Analysis Plan\Report\updated data tables with new MAN MLK Jr Data Gap Sampling Tables Recovered Hart & Hickman, PC

Table 2 (page 2 of 2)
Summary of Soil Analytical Data
828 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-003
Notes:
Yellow highlighting indicates samples collected as part of April 2019 data gap sampling
Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
PSRG = North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (February 2018); UCL = Upper Confidence Limit
95% UCL of site specific background ranges were calculated using EPA ProUCL 5.1
North Carolina Soil Background Range taken from Elements in North American Soils, 2nd Edition by James Dragun and Khaled Chekiri
"Not available for North Carolina. Used Eastern US Background Range
Bold denotes concentration above protection of groundwater PSRG and significantly above background.
Shading indicates concentration above residential PSRG and significantly above background.
Underlining indicates concentration above industrial PSRG and significantly above background.
ND = Not Detected; NA = Not Analyzed; NS = Not Specified; -- = statistical test not applicable to data set
J = Detected above method detection limit but below laboratory reporting limit; therefore, result is an estimated concentration
01 = Analyte failed the method required serial dilution test and/or subsequent post -spike criteria. These failures indicate matrix interference.
J6 = The sample matrix interfered with the ability to make any accurate determination; spike value is low.
BH = Method blank greater than one-half laboratory reporting limit, but sample concentration greater than 1 Ox the method blank.
A = Continuing Calibration Verification standard recovery (82%) is less than the lower control limit (90%). Result has possible low bias.
' denotes duplicate sample taken
2 95% UCL of Site Specific Background Values were calculated using values from samples collected through the Phase II RI
Analytical Methods
Metals by EPA Method 6010C or 6020B
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7196 or 7199 (Phase II RI and April 2019 Data Gap Samples)
Mercury by EPA Method 7471 B
S:\AAA-MasterProjects\Tmn of Chapel Hill (TCH)ATCH-002 -Police StationVApril 2019 Sampling and Analysis Plan\ReportAupdated data tables with new UCLs\828 MLK Jr Data Gap Sampling Tables Recovered Hart & Hackman, PC

Appendix C
Interim Remedial Measures Product Specifications
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

PRODUCT DATA SHEET
WINFAB 77SF is manufactured using
high tenacity polypropylene yarns that are
woven to form a dimensionally stable network,
which allows the yarns to maintain their relative position.
WINFAB 77SF resists ultraviolet deterioration, rotting,
and biological degradation and is inert to commonly
encountered soil chemicals. It meets or exceeds the
requirements of AASHTO M288 for supported silt fence and
ASTM D6461 table 1.
"Maximum Average Roll Valve
WINFAB 77SF
�4:
Disclaimer: WINFAB assumes no liability for the completeness or accuracy of this information or the ultimate use of this information. WINFAB disclaims any and all implied,
expressed, or statutory standards, guarantees, or warranties. This includes without limitation any implied warranty as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or
arising from a course of dealing or usage of trade as to equipment, materials, or information furnished herewith. This document should not be construed as engineering advice.
Always consult the project engineer for project specific requirements. The end user assumes sole responsibility for the use of this information and product. The property values
listed above are subject to change without notice.
© 2018 WINFAB
WINFAB I www.winfabusa.com
1 Nashville Mills Rd. Nashville GA 31639
Ph: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
G/f!1► Initials: 6K # : 87
Date: 2016

..GEOTEX"'
Product Data
Woven GEOTEXO 200ST
GEOTEXO 200ST is a woven polypropylene geotextile containing heavy woven flat tape yarns and will meet the
following Minimum Average Roll Values (MARV) when tested in accordance with the methods listed below. These
characteristics make GEOTEXO 200ST ideal for the construction of embankments over soft soils, steepened
slopes, and modular block and/or wrapped -face retaining walls. The geotextile is resistant to ultraviolet
degradation and to biological and chemical environments normally found in soils.
GEOTEXO 200ST conforms to the property values listed below'. Propex performs internal Manufacturing Quality
Control (MQC) tests that have been accredited by the Geosynthetic Accreditation Institute - Laboratory
Accreditation Program (GAI-LAP). This product is NTPEP tested for AASHTO standards.
MARV2
PROPERTY TEST METHOD ENGLISH METRIC
MECHANICAL
Grab Tensile Strength
ASTM D-4632
200 Ibs
890 N
Grab Elongation
ASTM D-4632
15%
15%
CBR Puncture
ASTM D-6241
700 Ibs
3114 N
Trapezoidal Tear
ASTM D-4533
75 Ibs
334 N
ENDURANCE
UV Resistance at 500 hrs ASTM D-4355 70% 70%
HYDRAULIC
Apparent Opening Size (AOS)3
ASTM D-4751
40 US Std. Sieve
0.425 mm
Permittivity
ASTM D-4491
0.05 sec-1
0.05 sec-1
Water Flow Rate
ASTM D-4491
4 gprl
163 I/min/m2
12.5ftx432ft
3.81mx131.7m
ROLL SIZES
15.0 ft x 360 ft
4.57 m x 109.7 m
17.5ftx309ft
5.33mx94.2m
NOTES:
1. The property values listed above are effective 12/17/2018 and are subject to change without notice.
2. Values shown are in weaker principal direction. Minimum average roll values (MARV) are calculated as the typical minus two standard deviations.
Statistically, it yields a 97.7% degree of confidence that any samples taken from quality assurance testing will exceed the value reported. Values represent
testing at time of manufacture.
3. Maximum average roll value.
4. Contact your local Territory Business Manager (TBM) for custom widths and colors. Lead times may vary depending on customer requirements and volume
requested.
Propex®
ENGINEERED EARTH SOLUTIONS TM
GEOSOLUTIONS
www.propexglobal.com
Propex Operating Company, LLC - 4019 Industry Drive Chattanooga, TN 37416 • ph 800 6211273 • ph 423 855 1466
ARMORMAX®, PYRAMAT", LANDLOK®, X3®, PYRAWALL®, SCOURLOK®, GEOTEX®, PETROMAT®, PETROTAC®, REFLECTEX', and GRIDPROr" are registered trademarks of Propex Operating Company, LLC.
This publication should not be construed as engineering advice. While information contained in this publication is accurate to the best of our knowledge, Propex does not warrant its accuracy or completeness. The ultimate customer and user of the products
should assume sole responsibility for the final determination of the suitability of the information and the products for the contemplated and actual use. The only warranty made by Propex for Its products Is set forth in our product data sheets for the product,
or such other written warranty as may be agreed by Propex and individual customers. Propex specifically disclaims all other warranties, express or implied, including without limitation, warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, or arising
from provision of samples, a course of dealing or usage of trade.
© 2019 Propex Operating Company, LLC

Pro GREEN DESIGN
LL/J ProGanicsT"" ENGINEERINGr"
Biotic Soil Media EARTH-Fft1Y f7t LY SOLV itlH5
POR $[)STAIrTRBLQ QESrSLT3'
Solutions for your Environment'
Description ProGanicsTM Biotic Soil Media TM (BSMTM) is designed as an alternative to topsoil to accelerate development of
depleted soils/substrates with low organic matter, low nutrient levels and limited biological activity. This Engineered
Soil MediaTM (ESMTM) helps unleash soils to their fullest potential for vegetative establishment and more effective
erosion control. ProGanics is non -toxic with bark and wood fibers that have been phytosanitized to eliminate
potential weed seeds and pathogens - prior to the introduction of soil building components.
Recommended
e Development of Soils with Low Organic Matter (< 5%)
Applications
a Rapid Establishment and Sustained Growth of Vegetation
• Replacement of Costly or Difficult to Obtain Topsoil
Replacement of Compost, Peat, Manure and Other Sources of Organic Material
Typically Installed Beneath Hydraulically -applied and Rolled Erosion Control Products (HECPs and RECPs) as
Growing Media.
Soil Building and
Mix seed and specified Prescriptive Agronomic Formulations at recommended rates in approved hydraulic seeding/
Revegetation
mulching equipment when water has reached approximately 1/3 of the working capacity. Add ProGanicsTM Biotic
Soil Media at a rate of 100 pounds per 100 gallons of water (45 kg / 379 L) on hydraulic equipment with gear or
positive displacement pumps and 75 pounds per 100 gallons of water(34 kg / 379 L) on centrifugal pumps while
agitating; add fertilizer when the tank is approximately 3/4 full. Apply over properly prepared surfaces that are
deemed geotechnically stable. Confirm specific material loading rates with equipment manufacturer.
Erosion
Apply ProGanics as directed above being sure to include all Prescriptive Agronomic Formulations, fertilizer and
Control
seed at their recommended rates. Apply Flexterra® HP-FGMTM, ProMatrixTM EFMTM, or RECP over ProGanics as
Solution
directed by manufacturer's recommendation. Follow all manufacturer's product selection guidelines or go to
www.ProfilePS3.com for assistance.
Technical Data
Physical Properties* Test Method Units Tested Value
Organic Material ASTM D586 % >_ 94
Mass/Unit Area ASTM D6566' g/m2 (oz/yd2) >_ 392 (11.6)
Ground Cover ASTM D6567' % >_ 99
Water Holding Capacity ASTM D7367 % >_ 900
pH ASTM D1293 n/a 6.0 ± 1.0
C:N Ratio ASTM E1508 & n/a 50:1 ± 10
EPA Method 1687
Material Color Observed n/a Brown
Performance Properties* Test Method Units Tested Value
Cover Factor2 Large Scale4,5 n/a <_ 0.01
Percent Effectiveness3 Large Scale4,5 % >_ 99
Vegetation Establishment ASTM D7322' % ? 850
Environmental Properties* Test Method Units Tested Value
Ecotoxicity EPA 2021.0 % 48-hr LCso > 100%
Biodegradability ASTM D5338 n/a Yes
EPA 503 Metal Pass/Fails EPA 503 Metal Limits Pass/Fail Pass
Pathogen Reduction 40 CFR 503 Class A Compost Pass/Fail Pass
Product Composition Typical Value
Thermally Processed Bark and Wood Fibers'
89%
(within a pressurized vessel)
Proprietary blend of Polysaccharide Polymers, Biochar, Seaweed 11 %
Extract, Humic Acid, Endomycorrhizae, and Beneficial Bacteria
Moisture Content 12%
' When uniformly applied at a rate of 3,500 pounds per acre (3,900 kilograms/hectare) under laboratory conditions. 1. ASTM test methods developed for Rolled Erosion Control Products that have been modified to accommodate
Hydraulic Erosion Conbol Products. 2. cover Factor is calculated as soil loss ratio of treated surface versus an untreated control surface. 3. % Effectiveness = One minus Cover Factor multiplied by 100%. 4. Large scale testing
conductad at Utah Water Research Laboratory. For specific testing information please contact a Profile technical service representative at 800-508-8881 or+1-847-215-1144. 5. Performance Property values derived from testing
of P.Matrix Engineered Fiber Matrix (EFM) applied at 3,500 pountls per or. (3,900 kilpgramslhectare) over ProGanics at an application of 3,500 pountls per acre (3,900 kilogramslhectare). fi. A list of Metals included in the
EPA 503 Metal Limits Testing is available upon request. ]. Heated to a temperature greater than 3W tlegrees Fahrenheit (193 degrees Celsius) for 5 minutes at a pressure greater than 50 psi (345 kPa) in order to be Thermally
Refinad T^'IProcessed antl to achieve phytp-senRization.
Packaging Data
Properties Test Method Units Nominal Value
Bag Weight Scale kg (lb) 22.7 (50)
Bags per Pallet Observed # 40
UV and weather -resistant plastic bags. Pallets are weather-proof stretch wrapped with UV resistant pallet cover.
Profile Products
750 Lake Cook Road, Ste. 440
To the best of our knowledge, the information contained herein is accurate. However, Profile Products cannot assume any liability whatsoever for the
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
accuracy or completeness thereof. Final determination of the suitability of any information or material for the use contemplated, of its manner of use
800-508-8681 or [phone] and whether the suggested use infringes any patents is the sole responsibility of the user.
Profile Products 2019©
www.r)rofileproducts.com
04/2019 ProGanics DS

Pro frleIONS
®HP=FGM
GREEN DESIGN
Flexterra® T'" ENGINEERING -
High Performance Flexible Growth Medium *W FORCUSTA NABLEDLY EIcSULTS
FOR SUSTAINABLE QESrSLT3 "
Solutions for your Environment'
Description Flexterra® HP-FGMTM is a fully biodegradable, High Performance -Flexible Growth Medium
(HP-FGM) composed of 100% recycled and Thermally Refined TM wood fibers, crimped
interlocking biodegradable fibers, micro -pore granules, naturally derived cross -linked
biopolymers and water absorbents. The HP-FGM is phytosanitized, free from weed seeds,
free from plastic netting, requires no curing period and upon application forms an intimate
bond with the soil surface to create a continuous, porous, absorbent and flexible erosion
resistant blanket that allows for rapid germination and accelerated plant growth.
Recommended . Erosion control for slopes ranging from mild to severe (:50.25HAV)
Applications . Rough graded slopes
• Superior performance over rolled erosion control blankets
• Enhancement of vegetation establishment
• Ideal infill material to create the GreenArmorTM System
Technical Data Physical Properties*
Test Method
Units
Tested Value
Mass/Unit Area
ASTM D6566'
g/m2 (oz/yd2)
>_ 390 (11.6)
Thickness
ASTM D6525'
mm (in)
>_ 5.6 (0.22)
Ground Cover
ASTM D6567'
%
>_ 99
Water Holding Capacity ASTM D7367 % >_ 1,700
Material Color Observed n/a Green
Performance Properties*
Test Method
Units
Tested Value
Cover Factor
Large Scale
n/a
<_ 0.01
Percent Effectiveness3
Large Scale
%
>_ 99
Cure Time
Observed
hours
0-2
Vegetation Establishment
ASTM D7322'
%
>_ 800
Functional Longevity5
ASTM D5338
months
<_ 18
Environmental Properties*
Test Method
Units
Tested Value
Ecotoxicity
EPA 2021.0
%
48-hr LC50 > 100%
Effluent Turbidity
Large Scale
NTU
< 250
Biodegradability ASTM D5338 n/a Yes
Product Composition Typical Value
Thermally Processed Wood Fiber (within a pressurized vessel) 80 %
Wetting Agents -including high -viscosity colloidal polysaccha- 10 %
rides, cross -linked biopolymers, and water absorbents
Crimped, Biodegradable Interlocking Fibers 5 %
Micro -Pore Granules 5 %
* When uniformly applied at a rate of 3500 pounds per acre (3900 kilograms/hectare) under laboratory conditions. 1. ASTM test methods developed for Rolled Erosion Control
Products that have been modified to accommodate Hydraulic Erosion Control Products. 2. Cover Factor is calculated as soil loss ratio of treated surface versus an untreated control
surface. 3. % Effectiveness = One minus Cover Factor multiplied by 100%. 4. Large scale testing conducted at Utah Water Research Laboratory. For specific testing information
please contact a Profile technical service representative at 866-325-6262 or [phone]. 5. Functional Longevity is the estimated time period, based upon field observations,
that a material can be anticipated to provide erosion control and agronomic benefits as influenced by composition, as well as site -specific conditions, including; but not limited to —
lemperature, moisture, light conditions, soils, biological activity, vegetative establishment and other environmental factors. 6. Heated to a temperature greater than 380 degrees
Fahrenheit (193 degrees Celsius) fors minutes at a pressure greater than 50 psi (345 kPa) in order to be Thermally Refined -/Processed and to achieve phyto-sanitization.
Packaging Data Properties Test Method Units Nominal Value
Bag Weight Scale kg (lb) 22.7 (50)
Bags per Pallet Observed # 40
UV and weather -resistant plastic bags. Pallets are weather-proof stretch wrapped with UV resistant pallet cover.
Profile Products
750 Lake Cook Road, Ste. 440 To the best of our knowledge, the information contained herein is accurate. However, Profile Products cannot assume any liability whatsoever for the
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 accuracy or completeness thereof. Final determination of the suitability of any information or material for the use contemplated, of its manner of use
800-508-8681 or [phone] and whether the suggested use infringes any patents is the sole responsibility of the user.
www.profileproducts.com Profile Products 2017©
02/2017 Flexterra HP-FGM IDS

Appendix D
Silt Fence and Hydroseeded Areas Inspection Log
hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Silt Fence and Hydroseeded Areas Inspection Log
828 Martin Luther King Jr., Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Date of Inspection:
Reason for Inspection (scheduled or weather related):
Name of Inspector:
Signature of Inspector:
Inspection Task
Yes
No
N/A
Location'
Notes, Improvements Made, or Recommended Actions
1.0
Silt Fencing (areas D-1, F-1, F-2, F-3, H-1, and Soil Stockpiles, if present)
1.1
Is geotextile fabric in good condition (i.e., no signs of tears or unravelling)?
1.2
Is chain -link backing (super silt fence only) in good condition?
1.3
Are support posts in their original position and are adequately providing stability to the fence system?
1.4
Has sediment accumulated behind the silt fencing? If yes, estimate thickness in Notes.
1.5
Is sediment behind silt fence within 6 inches of top of silt fence?
1.6
Has any sediment accumulated beyond the silt fencing?
1.7
Are stockpiles underlain by and covered with minimum 10-mil plastic sheeting?
2.0
Hydroseed Areas (areas D and F)
2.1
Do hydroseeded areas shown signs of distressed or absent vegetation?
2.2
Do hydroseeded areas shown signs of erosion?
Notes:
1. Site inspection locations include silt fencing in areas D-1, F-1, F-2, F-3, H-1, Stockpile-1, and future stockpiles, and hydroseeded areas D and F (see Figure 1).
N/A = not applicable

LEGEND
ti SITE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARKING BOLIN CREEK
i
- LOT X TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR ELEVATION (FT MSL)
pr
- FENCE LINE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
EXISTING SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
PROPOSED
j F CID A— — PROPOSED SUPER SILT FENCE (APPROXIMATE
SUPER SILT w M LOCATION)
FENCE D-1 (� CCP UNDER >2FT COVER
s CID 0
q CCP UNDER < 2 FT COVER D
r CCP EXPOSED AT GROUND SURFACE
n � � CCP DEPOSITIONAL LAYER
✓ �/ PROPOSED �� � � STORMWATER CULVERT
- _ - SUPER SILT PROPOSED TRAIL
- - FENCE F-1
PROPOSED
E PROPOSED SUPER SILT
A _€ SUPER SILT FENCE F-3
_ ". - F
_ r _
EXISTING SILT
r r FENCE H-2 i
aEXISTING SILT
BRIDGE H
�.� � FENCE H-1
Y- � 32g
3�
CHAIN -LINK
FENCE
+ APPROXIMATE
r
0 50 100
mow
SCALE IN FEET
ire
O EXISTING SILT FENCE SITE MAP - PROPOSED INTERIM REMEDIAL
GAS STATION
MEASURES
STOCKPILE-1
-
rl�! -I TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
�► - 828 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
v
E _ 100
hart ` h i c k rn a H Char South Tryon StolenStreet-282 3
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f
i - SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
#r AUTO
` DATE: 5-22-19 REVISION NO. 0
— REPAIR
_ �� JOB NO. TCH-002 FIGURE NO. 1

Appendix B
May 2, 2016 DEQ IHSB Risk Evaluation Letter
hart ` hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

WasteManagement
ENVIRONMENTAL OVALITY
May 2, 2016
Mr. Lance Norris, Public Works Director
Town of Chapel Hill
405 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
Chapel Hill NC 27514
Re: Chapel Hill Police Department Property
828 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
Chapel Hill, Orange County
NONCD0001486
Dear Mr. Norris
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
MICHAEL E. SCOTT
Acting Director
This letter is written regarding the soil sample results from the requested testing in and
around the proposed greenway construction that will cross onto the Chapel Hill Police
Department Property Site (Site). The sample results were evaluated by our industrial hygienist to
determine if they exceed safe levels for park/recreational use and worker exposure. The complete
results of the evaluation are attached for your review. In summary, the risk of adverse health
effects to park visitors and construction workers is below the US EPA and NC DEQ maximum
acceptable limits.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Amy Axon, Hydrogeologist
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch
Enclosures
CC: Curtis Brooks
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Waste Management
1646 Mail Service Center 1217 West Jones Street I Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
919 707 8200 T

Axon, Amy
From: Assefa, Hanna
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 5:13 PM
To: Axon, Amy
Subject: Risk Assessment for the Chapel Hill Police Department soil contamination-828 Martin
Luther King Jr Blvd. Chapel Hill, Orange County, NONCDD0001486
Attachments: recreator risk calc chapel hil pd property 03 21 2016.pdf; Construction_Worker_chem_
22MAR2016_prg6491 Chapel Hill Police Department Soil.pdf
Amy, I have evaluated the maximum contaminant concentrations you provided for the subject site, for risk
posed for a recreational/park scenario and a construction worker scenario. I used the USEPA risk calculator for
this calculation. For the recreational/park scenario I assumed several age groups including infants going to the
park twice a week 110 days a year for 1 hr. This is likely very conservative. Under these assumptions the
risk of adverse health effects to the park visitor is below the USEPA and NCDEQ acceptable limits. Similarly, I
assumed that construction workers would be exposed to the contaminants when they are grading the land
when converting to a park. I ultra -conservatively assumed that they would work in the same area for 1 year.
The risk of adverse health effects calculated for the construction worker was also below the USEPA and
NCDEQ maximum acceptable limits.
The USEPA and the NCDEQ maximum acceptable limits are a cumulative 1.0E-04 cancer risk a hazard index
of 1.0 for non -cancer adverse health effects.
I have attached the calculations for your records.
Chapel Hill Police Department Property, 828 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd
Chapel Hill, Orange County
Incident #NONCD0001486

Site -specific
Construction Worker Equation Inputs for Soil - Other Construction Activities
Variable
TR (target cancer risk) unitless
THQ (target hazard quotient) unitless
EF ,,, (exposure frequency - construction worker) day/yr
ED ,,, (exposure duration - construction worker) yr
ET ,,, (exposure time - construction worker) hr/day
LT (lifetime) yr
BW ,,, (body weight - construction worker) kg
IR ,,, (soil ingestion rate - construction worker) mg/day
SAW (surface area - construction worker) cm z/day
AF W (skin adherence factor - construction worker) mg/cm
AT,,, (averaging time - construction worker)
EW ,,, (overall duration of construction) weeks/year
DW ,,, (days worked - construction worker) days/week
A (acres)
PR (areal extent of tilling) acres
A excav (area of excavation site) m z
A �o (areal extent of grading) acres
A,-_,,, (areal extent of dozing) acres
M, _, , (Gravimetric soil moisture content) %
M a „ (Gravimetric soil moisture content) %
&rho; 5o,i (density) g/cm 3 - chemical -specific
NA -I,,, (number of times soil is dumped)
N,,,,, (number of times soil is tilled)
s,,,, (soil silt content) %
s, , (soil silt content) %
B, (dozing blade length) m
B, (grading blade length) m
NA -I.. (number of times site was dozed)
NA -,,.I. (number of times site was graded)
S, , (dozing speed) kph
S ,o (dozing speed) kph
do „ (average depth of excavation site) m
V (fraction of vegetative cover)
z
1.0E-6
1
250
1
8
70
80
330
3527
0.3
365
50
5
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
0.13
7.9
12
1.68
2
2
18
6.9
1
1
2
4
11.4
11.4
.6
0
Value
1
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
Construction Worker Equation Inputs for Soil - Other Construction Activities
Variable
Value
U, (mean annual wind speed) m/s
4.69
U, (equivalent threshold value) m/s
11.32
t (overall duration of construction) hours
8400
F Unitless Dispersion Correction Factor
0.185837208
T (time over which traffic occurs) s
7200000
YT (g/m2s)
0.0000010282552
F(x) (function dependant on U , /U, derived using Cowherd et al. (1985))
0.194
M,,, ' (dust emitted by wind erosion) g
2289.0175219211
M, , (dust emitted from dozing operations) g
31.265918140303
M,,,, (dust emitted from tilling operations) g
655.63592234891
M ,o (dust emitted from grading operations) g
918.93655526399
Mo „ (dust emitted from excavation soil dumping) g
0.0319584249322
&Sigma;VKT, , (sum of fleet vehicle km traveled) km
1.05222
&Sigma;VKT ,o (sum of fleet vehicle km traveled) km
2.10444
Q/C (inverse of the ratio of the geometric mean air concentration to the emission flu
18.747540287861
PEPS (particulate emission factor) m 3/kg
98109416.470716
A (PEF Dispersion Constant)
2.4538
B (PEF Dispersion Constant)
17.5660
C (PEF Dispersion Constant)
189.0426
A.., (areal extent of site) m z
526.0918
A (VF,,,,, acres)
0.5
T (temperature) &deg;C
25
foc (fraction organic carbon in soil) g/g
0.006
&rho;, (dry soil bulk density) g/cm 3
1.5
&rho;. (soil particle density) g/cm 3
2.65
&theta;,,, (water -filled soil porosity) L o /L
0.15
A (VF Dispersion Constant)
2.4538
B (VF Dispersion Constant)
17.5660
C (VF Dispersion Constant)
189.0426
Q/C (inverse of the ratio of the geometric mean air concentration to the emission flu
14.31407
n (total soil porosity) L ,o/L ;,
0.43396
&theta; (air -filled soil porosity) L ,,/L
0.28396
As (VFmlm_s acres)
0.5
K
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
Construction Worker Equation Inputs for Soil - Other Construction Activities
Variable Value
&rho;b (dry soil bulk density) g/cm 3 1.5
d (average source depth) m
Q/C„ , (inverse of the ratio of the geometric mean air concentration to the emission fl 14.31407
VFmu,,,c (volitization factor) m 3air /kgso,
3
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
4
Construction Worker Screening Levels (RSL) for Soil - Other Construction Activities
ca=Cancer, nc=Noncancer, ca* (Where nc SL < 100 x ca SL),
ca** (Where nc SL < 10 x ca SL), max=SL exceeds ceiling limit (see User's Guide), sat=SL exceeds csat,
Smax=Soil SL exceeds ceiling limit and has been substituted with the max value (see User's Guide),
Ssat=Soil inhalation SL exceeds csat and has been substituted with the csat
Ingestion
Inhalation
SF
Unit
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
CAS
SFO Risk
IUR RfD
RfD
RfC
RfC
Chemical
Number
Mutagen?
VOC? (mg/kg-day) '
Ref (ug/m 3)-'
Ref (mg/kg-day)
Ref
(mg/m 3)
Ref
Arsenic,
7440-38-2
No
No 1.50E+00
I 4.30E-03
I 3.00E-04
I
1.50E-05
C
Inorganic
Barium
7440-39-3
No
No -
-
2.00E-01
A
5.00E-03
H
Beryllium and
7440-41-7
No
No -
2.40E-03
I 5.00E-03
H
2.00E-05
I
compounds
Chromium(III),
16065-83-1
No
No -
-
1.50E+00
H
5.00E-03
A
Insoluble
Salts
Cobalt
7440-48-4
No
No -
9.00E-03
P 3.00E-03
P
2.00E-05
P
Copper
7440-50-8
No
No -
-
1.00E-02
A
-
Mercury
7439-97-6
No
Yes -
-
-
3.00E-04
H
(elemental)
Molybdenum
7439-98-7
No
No -
-
5.00E-03
H
-
Nickel Soluble
7440-02-0
No
No -
2.60E-04
C 2.00E-02
H
2.00E-04
A
Salts
Selenium
7782-49-2
No
No -
-
5.00E-03
H
2.00E-02
C
Strontium,
7440-24-6
No
No -
-
2.00E+00
A
-
Stable
Thallium
7440-28-0
No
No -
-
4.00E-05
S
-
(Soluble
Salts)
Vanadium and
7440-62-2
No
No -
-
1.00E-02
A
1.00E-04
A
Compounds
Zinc and
7440-66-6
No
No -
-
3.00E-01
A
-
Compounds
Volatilization
Factor
GIABS ABS RBA (m3/kg)
1 0.03 0.6 -
0.07 - 1 -
0.007 - 1 -
0.013 - 1 -
1 -
1 7.53E+03
0.04
1
1
1
0.026
1
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
5
Construction Worker Screening Levels (RSL) for Soil - Other Construction Activities
ca=Cancer, nc=Noncancer, ca* (Where nc SL < 100 x ca SQ,
ca** (Where nc SL < 10 x ca SQ, max=SL exceeds ceiling limit (see User's Guide), sat=SL exceeds csat,
Smax=Soil SL exceeds ceiling limit and has been substituted with the max value (see User's Guide),
Ssat=Soil inhalation SL exceeds csat and has been substituted with the csat
Soil
Particulate
Ingestion
Dermal Inhalation
Carcinogenic
Ingestion
Dermal
Inhalation
Noncarcinogenic
Saturation
Emission
SL
SL SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
Screening
Concentration
Factor
TR=1.0E-6
TR=1.0E-6 TR=1.0E-6
TR=1.0E-6
THQ=1
THQ=1
THQ=1
THI=1
Level
Chemical
(mg/kg)
(m3/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg) (mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
Arsenic,
-
9.81 E+07
2.75E+01
1.72E+02 7.00E+03
2.36E+01
1.70E+02
1.06E+03
6.18E+03
1.43E+02
2.36E+01
Inorganic
ca**
Barium
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
6.79E+04
-
2.06E+06
6.57E+04
6.57E+04
nc
Beryllium and
-
9.81 E+07
-
- 1.25E+04
1.25E+04
1.70E+03
-
8.24E+03
1.41 E+03
1.41 E+03
compounds
nc
Chromium(III),
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
5.09E+05
-
2.06E+06
4.08E+05
4.08E+05
Insoluble
max
Salts
Cobalt
-
9.81 E+07
-
- 3.34E+03
3.34E+03
1.02E+03
-
8.24E+03
9.06E+02
9.06E+02
nc
Copper
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
3.39E+03
-
-
3.39E+03
3.39E+03
nc
Mercury
3.13E+00
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
-
-
9.49E+00
9.49E+00
9.49E+00
(elemental)
sat
Molybdenum
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
1.70E+03
-
-
1.70E+03
1.70E+03
nc
Nickel Soluble
-
9.81 E+07
-
- 1.16E+05
1.16E+05
6.79E+03
-
8.24E+04
6.27E+03
6.27E+03
Salts
nc
Selenium
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
1.70E+03
-
8.24E+06
1.70E+03
1.70E+03
nc
Strontium,
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
6.79E+05
-
-
6.79E+05
6.79E+05
Stable
max
Thallium
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
1.36E+01
-
-
1.36E+01
1.36E+01
(Soluble
nc
Salts)
Vanadium and
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
3.39E+03
-
4.12E+04
3.14E+03
3.14E+03
Compounds
nc
Zinc and
-
9.81 E+07
-
- -
-
1.02E+05
-
-
1.02E+05
1.02E+05
Compounds
max
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
Construction Worker Risk for Soil - Other Construction Activities
Chemical
Arsenic, Inorganic
Barium
Beryllium and compounds
Chromium(III), Insoluble
Salts
Cobalt
Copper
Mercury (elemental)
Molybdenum
Nickel Soluble Salts
Selenium
Strontium, Stable
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
Vanadium and Compounds
Zinc and Compounds
*Total Risk/HI
1.1
Ingestion
Inhalation
Soil
SF
Unit
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
Volatilization
Saturation
SFO Risk
IUR RfD
RfD
RfC
RfC
Factor
Concentration
(mg/kg-day) -'
Ref (ug/m 3)-'
Ref (mg/kg-day)
Ref
(mg/m 3)
Ref
GIABS ABS RBA
(m3/kg)
(mg/kg)
1.50E+00
I 4.30E-03
I 3.00E-04
I
1.50E-05
C
1 0.03
0.6
-
-
-
-
2.00E-01
A
5.00E-03
H
0.07 -
1
-
-
-
2.40E-03
I 5.00E-03
H
2.00E-05
1
0.007 -
1
-
-
-
-
1.50E+00
H
5.00E-03
A
0.013 -
1
-
-
-
9.00E-03
P 3.00E-03
P
2.00E-05
P
1 -
1
-
-
-
-
1.00E-02
A
-
1 -
1
-
-
-
-
-
3.00E-04
H
1 -
1
7.53E+03
3.13E+00
-
-
5.00E-03
H
-
1 -
1
-
-
-
2.60E-04
C 2.00E-02
H
2.00E-04
A
0.04 -
1
-
-
-
-
5.00E-03
H
2.00E-02
C
1 -
1
-
-
-
-
2.00E+00
A
-
1 -
1
-
-
-
-
4.00E-05
S
-
1 -
1
-
-
-
-
1.00E-02
A
1.00E-04
A
0.026 -
1
-
-
-
-
3.00E-01
A
-
1 -
1
-
-
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
Construction Worker Risk for Soil - Other Construction Activities
Particulate
Emission
Factor
Concentration
Ingestion Dermal Inhalation Carcinogenic Ingestion
Dermal Inhalation
Noncarcinogenic
Chemical
(m3/kg)
(mg/kg)
Risk Risk Risk Risk HQ
HQ HQ
HI
Arsenic, Inorganic
9.81 E+07
2.40E+01
8.72E-07 1.40E-07 3.43E-09 1.02E-06 0.1414286
0.0226736 0.0038829
0.1679851
Barium
9.81 E+07
8.30E+02
- - - - 0.0122277
- 0.0004029
0.0126305
Beryllium and compounds
9.81 E+07
3.50E+00
- - 2.79E-10 2.79E-10 0.0020625
- 0.0004247
0.0024872
Chromium(III), Insoluble
9.81 E+07
3.50E+01
- - - - 0.0000688
- 0.000017
0.0000857
Salts
Cobalt
9.81 E+07
2.80E+01
- - 8.38E-09 8.38E-09 0.0275
- 0.0033976
0.0308976
Copper
9.81 E+07
5.70E+01
- - - - 0.0167946
- -
0.0167946
Mercury (elemental)
9.81 E+07
2.10E+00
- - - - -
- 0.2213331
0.2213331
Molybdenum
9.81 E+07
1.70E+00
- - - - 0.0010018
- -
0.0010018
Nickel Soluble Salts
9.81 E+07
1.90E+01
- - 1.64E-10 1.64E-10 0.0027991
- 0.0002305
0.0030297
Selenium
9.81 E+07
2.40E+00
- - - - 0.0014143
- 2.9122E-7
0.0014146
Strontium, Stable
9.81 E+07
1.90E+02
- - - - 0.0002799
- -
0.0002799
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
9.81 E+07
1.70E+00
- - - - 0.1252232
- -
0.1252232
Vanadium and Compounds
9.81 E+07
9.50E+01
- - - - 0.0279911
- 0.0023055
0.0302966
Zinc and Compounds
9.81 E+07
1.10E+02
- - - - 0.0010804
- -
0.0010804
*Total Risk/HI
-
-
8.72E-07 1.40E-07 1.23E-08 1.02E-06 0.3598719
0.0226736 0.2319945
0.61454
Output generated 22MAR2016:15:16:25

Site -specific
Recreator Equation Inputs for Soil
Variable
Value
TR (target cancer risk) unitless
1.0E-6
THQ (target hazard quotient) unitless
1
SA rec-c (skin surface area - child) cm 2/day
2373
SA rec-a (skin surface area - adult) cm 2/day
6032
SAo-2 (skin surface area - mutagenic) cm 2/day
2373
SA2_6 (skin surface area - mutagenic) cm 2/day
2373
SA6-16 (skin surface area - mutagenic) cm 2/day
6032
SA,,-,,) (skin surface area - mutagenic) cm 2/day
6032
SA rec-a (skin surface area - adult) cm 2/day
6032
LT (lifetime - recreator) year
70
IFS_,_,,-, (age -adjusted soil ingestion factor) mg/kg
11550
DFS_ _ ,, (age -adjusted soil dermal factor) mg/kg
32494
IFSM,o ,. (mutagenic age -adjusted soil ingestion factor) mg/kg
52433.333
DFSM,o ,, (mutagenic age -adjusted soil dermal factor) mg/kg
134596
EFL_, (exposure frequency) day/year
110
EF­ (exposure frequency) day/year
110
EF,_,F (exposure frequency) day/year
110
EF,,_,, (exposure frequency) day/year
110
EFYe (exposure frequency - child) day/year
110
EFYe (exposure frequency - adult) day/year
110
EF,o (exposure frequency - adult) day/year
110
EF,o (exposure frequency - recreator) day/year
110
IRS_, (soil intake rate) mg/day
200
IRS,_ (soil intake rate) mg/day
200
IRS,, (soil intake rate) mg/day
100
IRS,,_,, (soil intake rate) mg/day
100
IRS_ (soil intake rate - child) mg/day
200
IRS_ (soil intake rate - adult) mg/day
100
IRS_ (soil intake rate - adult) mg/day
100
EDP_, (exposure duration) year
2
ED­ (exposure duration) year
4
ED,, (exposure duration) year
10
ED16-so (exposure duration) year
10
1
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
Recreator Equation Inputs for Soil
Variable
Value
ED_ (exposure duration - child) year
6
ED_ (exposure duration - adult) year
20
ED_ (exposure duration - adult) year
20
ED,o (exposure duration - recreator) year
26
ETA_, (exposure time) hr/day
1
ET- (exposure time) hr/day
1
ET,_,, (exposure time) hr/day
1
ET,,_,, (exposure time) hr/day
1
ETYe (exposure time - child) hr/day
1
ET_ (exposure time - adult) hr/day
1
ET_ (exposure time - adult) hr/day
1
ET- (exposure time - recreator) hr/day
1
BW,_, (body weight) kg
15
BW,_, (body weight) kg
15
BW,_,, (body weight) kg
80
BW,,_,, (body weight) kg
80
BW_,_, (body weight - child) kg
15
BW_,_, (body weight - adult) kg
80
BW_,_, (body weight - adult) kg
80
AFo-2 (skin adherence factor) mg/cm 2
0.2
AFz_6 (skin adherence factor) mg/cm 2
0.2
AF6_16 (skin adherence factor) mg/cm 2
0.07
AF16_30 (skin adherence factor) mg/cm 2
0.07
AFrec-c (skin adherence factor - child) mg/cm 2
0.2
AFrec-a (skin adherence factor - adult) mg/cm 2
0.07
AFrec-a (skin adherence factor - adult) mg/cm 2
0.07
City (Climate Zone) PEF Selection
Default
A (acres)
.5
Q/CWP (g/m2-s per kg/m3)
93.77
PEF (particulate emission factor) m 3/kg
1359344438
A (PEF Dispersion Constant)
16.2302
B (PEF Dispersion Constant)
18.7762
C (PEF Dispersion Constant)
216.108
z
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
Recreator Equation Inputs for Soil
Variable
Value
V (fraction of vegetative cover) unitless
0.5
U, (mean annual wind speed) m/s
4.69
U, (equivalent threshold value)
11.32
F(x) (function dependant on U , /U,) unitless
0.194
City (Climate Zone) VF Selection
Default
A (acres)
.5
Q/C , (g/m2-s per kg/m 3)
68.18
foc (fraction organic carbon in soil) g/g
0.006
&rho;b (dry soil bulk density) g/cm 3
1.5
&rho;. (soil particle density) g/cm 3
2.65
n (total soil porosity) L ,o/L ;,
0.43396
&theta; (air -filled soil porosity) L ,,/L
0.28396
&theta; (water -filled soil porosity) L ,o,/L
0.15
T (exposure interval) s
819936000
A (VF Dispersion Constant)
11.911
B (VF Dispersion Constant)
18.4385
C (VF Dispersion Constant)
209.7845
City (Climate Zone) VF m, Selection
Default
VF. (volitization factor) m 3/kg
Q/C , (g/m2-s per kg/m 3)
68.18365
A (acres)
.5
T (exposure interval) yr
26
d (depth of source) m
&rho;b (dry soil bulk density) g/cm 3
1.5
A (VF Dispersion Constant - Mass Limit)
11.911
B (VF Dispersion Constant - Mass Limit)
18.4385
C (VF Dispersion Constant- Mass Limit)
209.7845
3
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
4
Recreator Screening Levels (RSL) for Soil
ca=Cancer, nc=Noncancer, ca* (Where nc SL < 100 x ca SL),
ca** (Where nc SL < 10 x ca SL), max=SL exceeds ceiling limit (see User's Guide), sat=SL exceeds csat,
Smax=Soil SL exceeds ceiling limit and has been substituted with the max value (see User's Guide),
Ssat=Soil inhalation SL exceeds csat and has been substituted with the csat
Ingestion
SF
CAS
SFO
Chemical
Number
Mutagen?
VOC? (mg/kg-day) ' Ref
Arsenic, Inorganic
7440-38-2
No
No 1.50E+00 I
Barium
7440-39-3
No
No -
Beryllium and compounds
7440-41-7
No
No -
Chromium(III), Insoluble Salts
16065-83-1
No
No -
Cobalt
7440-48-4
No
No -
Copper
7440-50-8
No
No -
Manganese (Non -diet)
7439-96-5
No
No -
Mercury (elemental)
7439-97-6
No
Yes -
Molybdenum
7439-98-7
No
No -
Nickel Soluble Salts
7440-02-0
No
No -
Selenium
7782-49-2
No
No -
Strontium, Stable
7440-24-6
No
No -
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
7440-28-0
No
No -
Vanadium and Compounds
7440-62-2
No
No -
Zinc and Compounds
7440-66-6
No
No -
Inhalation
Unit
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
Risk
IUR RfD
RfD
RfC
RfC
(ug/m 3)-'
Ref (mg/kg-day)
Ref
(mg/m 3)
Ref
4.30E-03
I 3.00E-04
I
1.50E-05
C
-
2.00E-01
A
5.00E-03
H
2.40E-03
I 5.00E-03
H
2.00E-05
I
-
1.50E+00
H
5.00E-03
A
9.00E-03
P 3.00E-03
P
2.00E-05
P
-
1.00E-02
A
-
-
2.40E-02
S
5.00E-05
I
-
-
3.00E-04
H
-
5.00E-03
H
-
2.60E-04
C 2.00E-02
H
2.00E-04
A
-
5.00E-03
H
2.00E-02
C
-
2.00E+00
A
-
-
4.00E-05
S
-
-
1.00E-02
A
1.00E-04
A
-
3.00E-01
A
-
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
5
Recreator Screening Levels (RSL) for Soil
ca=Cancer, nc=Noncancer, ca* (Where nc SL < 100 x ca SL),
ca** (Where nc SL < 10 x ca SL), max=SL exceeds ceiling limit (see User's Guide), sat=SL exceeds csat,
Smax=Soil SL exceeds ceiling limit and has been substituted with the max value (see User's Guide),
Ssat=Soil inhalation SL exceeds csat and has been substituted with the csat
Chemical
GIABS ABS RBA
Arsenic, Inorganic
1
0.03 0.6
Barium
0.07
- 1
Beryllium and compounds
0.007
- 1
Chromium(III), Insoluble Salts
0.013
- 1
Cobalt
1
- 1
Copper
1
- 1
Manganese (Non -diet)
0.04
- 1
Mercury (elemental)
1
- 1
Molybdenum
1
- 1
Nickel Soluble Salts
0.04
- 1
Selenium
1
- 1
Strontium, Stable
1
- 1
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
1
- 1
Vanadium and Compounds
0.026
- 1
Zinc and Compounds
1
- 1
Soil
Volatilization
Saturation
Factor
Concentration
(m3/kg)
(mg/kg)
3.47E+04
3.13E+00
Particulate Ingestion Dermal Inhalation Carcinogenic
Emission
SL
SL
SL
SL
Factor
TR=1.0E-6
TR=1.0E-6
TR=1.0E-6
TR=1.0E-6
(m3/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
1.36E+09
2.46E+00
1.75E+01
6.78E+04
2.15E+00
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
1.21 E+05
1.21 E+05
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
3.24E+04
3.24E+04
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
1.12E+06
1.12E+06
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
1.36E+09
-
-
-
-
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
1.1
Recreator Screening Levels (RSL) for Soil
ca=Cancer, nc=Noncancer, ca* (Where nc SL < 100 x ca SQ,
ca** (Where nc SL < 10 x ca SQ, max=SL exceeds ceiling limit (see User's Guide), sat=SL exceeds csat,
Smax=Soil SL exceeds ceiling limit and has been substituted with the max value (see User's Guide),
Ssat=Soil inhalation SL exceeds csat and has been substituted with the csat
Ingestion
Dermal
Inhalation
Noncarcinogenic
Ingestion
Dermal
Inhalation
Noncarcinogenic
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
Child
Child
Child
Child
Adult
Adult
Adult
Adult
Screening
THQ=1
THQ=1
THQ=1
THI=1
THQ=1
THQ=1
THQ=1
THI=1
Level
Chemical
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
(mg/kg)
Arsenic, Inorganic
1.24E+02
1.05E+03
1.62E+06
1.11 E+02
1.33E+03
6.29E+03
1.62E+06
1.10E+03
2.15E+00 ca*
Barium
4.98E+04
-
5.41 E+08
4.98E+04
5.31 E+05
-
5.41 E+08
5.30E+05
4.98E+04 nc
Beryllium and compounds
1.24E+03
-
2.17E+06
1.24E+03
1.33E+04
-
2.17E+06
1.32E+04
1.24E+03 nc
Chromium(III), Insoluble Salts
3.73E+05
-
5.41 E+08
3.73E+05
3.98E+06
-
5.41 E+08
3.95E+06
3.73E+05 max
Cobalt
7.47E+02
-
2.17E+06
7.46E+02
7.96E+03
-
2.17E+06
7.93E+03
7.46E+02 nc
Copper
2.49E+03
-
-
2.49E+03
2.65E+04
-
-
2.65E+04
2.49E+03 nc
Manganese (Non -diet)
5.97E+03
-
5.41 E+06
5.97E+03
6.37E+04
-
5.41 E+06
6.30E+04
5.97E+03 nc
Mercury (elemental)
-
-
8.29E+02
8.29E+02
-
-
8.29E+02
8.29E+02
8.29E+02 sat
Molybdenum
1.24E+03
-
-
1.24E+03
1.33E+04
-
-
1.33E+04
1.24E+03 nc
Nickel Soluble Salts
4.98E+03
-
2.17E+07
4.98E+03
5.31 E+04
-
2.17E+07
5.30E+04
4.98E+03 nc
Selenium
1.24E+03
-
2.17E+09
1.24E+03
1.33E+04
-
2.17E+09
1.33E+04
1.24E+03 nc
Strontium, Stable
4.98E+05
-
-
4.98E+05
5.31 E+06
-
-
5.31 E+06
4.98E+05 max
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
9.95E+00
-
-
9.95E+00
1.06E+02
-
-
1.06E+02
9.95E+00 nc
Vanadium and Compounds
2.49E+03
-
1.08E+07
2.49E+03
2.65E+04
-
1.08E+07
2.65E+04
2.49E+03 nc
Zinc and Compounds
7.47E+04
-
-
7.47E+04
7.96E+05
-
-
7.96E+05
7.47E+04 nc
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
Recreator Risk for Soil
Ingestion
Inhalation
SF
Unit
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
Subchronic
SFO Risk
IUR RfD
RfD
RfC
RfC
Chemical
(mg/kg-day) -'
Ref (ug/m 3)-'
Ref (mg/kg-day)
Ref
(mg/m 3)
Ref
GIABS ABS
RBA
Arsenic, Inorganic
1.50E+00
I 4.30E-03
I 3.00E-04
I
1.50E-05
C
1 0.03
0.6
Barium
-
-
2.00E-01
A
5.00E-03
H
0.07 -
1
Beryllium and compounds
-
2.40E-03
I 5.00E-03
H
2.00E-05
1
0.007 -
1
Chromium(III), Insoluble Salts
-
-
1.50E+00
H
5.00E-03
A
0.013 -
1
Cobalt
-
9.00E-03
P 3.00E-03
P
2.00E-05
P
1 -
1
Copper
-
-
1.00E-02
A
-
1 -
1
Manganese (Non -diet)
-
-
2.40E-02
S
5.00E-05
1
0.04 -
1
Mercury (elemental)
-
-
-
3.00E-04
H
1 -
1
Molybdenum
-
-
5.00E-03
H
-
1 -
1
Nickel Soluble Salts
-
2.60E-04
C 2.00E-02
H
2.00E-04
A
0.04 -
1
Selenium
-
-
5.00E-03
H
2.00E-02
C
1 -
1
Strontium, Stable
-
-
2.00E+00
A
-
1 -
1
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
-
-
4.00E-05
S
-
1 -
1
Vanadium and Compounds
-
-
1.00E-02
A
1.00E-04
A
0.026 -
1
Zinc and Compounds
-
-
3.00E-01
A
-
1 -
1
*Total Risk/HI
-
-
-
-
- -
-
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
Recreator Risk for Soil
Chemical
Arsenic, Inorganic
Barium
Beryllium and compounds
Chromium(III), Insoluble Salts
Cobalt
Copper
Manganese (Non -diet)
Mercury (elemental)
Molybdenum
Nickel Soluble Salts
Selenium
Strontium, Stable
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
Vanadium and Compounds
Zinc and Compounds
*Total Risk/HI
Soil Particulate
Volatilization Saturation Emission
Factor Concentration Factor
(m3/kg) (mg/kg) (m3/kg)
- 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
3.47E+04 3.13E+00 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
- - 1.36E+09
Concentration Ingestion Dermal Inhalation Carcinogenic
(mg/kg) Risk Risk
Risk
Risk
2.40E+01 9.76E-06 1.37E-06
3.54E-10
1.11 E-05
8.30E+02 - -
-
-
3.50E+00 - -
2.88E-11
2.88E-11
3.50E+01 - -
-
-
2.80E+01 - -
8.65E-10
8.65E-10
5.70E+01 - -
-
-
3.90E+01 - -
-
-
2.10E+00 - -
-
-
1.70E+00 - -
-
-
1.90E+01 - -
1.69E-11
1.69E-11
2.40E+00 - -
-
-
1.90E+02 - -
-
-
1.70E+00 - -
-
-
9.50E+01 - -
-
-
1.10E+02 - -
-
-
- 9.76E-06 1.37E-06
1.26E-09
1.11E-05
1.1
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Site -specific
Recreator Risk for Soil
Ingestion Dermal Inhalation Noncarcinogenic Ingestion Dermal
Child
Child
Child
Child
Adult
Adult
Chemical
HQ
HQ
HQ
HI
HQ
HQ
Arsenic, Inorganic
1.93E-01
2.29E-02
1.48E-05
2.16E-01
1.81 E-02
3.82E-03
Barium
1.67E-02
-
1.53E-06
1.67E-02
1.56E-03
Beryllium and compounds
2.81 E-03
-
1.62E-06
2.81 E-03
2.64E-04
Chromium(III), Insoluble Salts
9.38E-05
-
6.47E-08
9.38E-05
8.79E-06
Cobalt
3.75E-02
-
1.29E-05
3.75E-02
3.52E-03
Copper
2.29E-02
-
-
2.29E-02
2.15E-03
Manganese (Non -diet)
6.53E-03
-
7.21 E-06
6.54E-03
6.12E-04
Mercury (elemental)
-
-
2.53E-03
2.53E-03
-
Molybdenum
1.37E-03
-
-
1.37E-03
1.28E-04
Nickel Soluble Salts
3.82E-03
-
8.78E-07
3.82E-03
3.58E-04
Selenium
1.93E-03
-
1.11 E-09
1.93E-03
1.81 E-04
Strontium, Stable
3.82E-04
-
-
3.82E-04
3.58E-05
Thallium (Soluble Salts)
1.71 E-01
-
-
1.71 E-01
1.60E-02
Vanadium and Compounds
3.82E-02
-
8.78E-06
3.82E-02
3.58E-03
Zinc and Compounds
1.47E-03
-
-
1.47E-03
1.38E-04
*Total Risk/HI
4.97E-01
2.29E-02
2.58E-03
5.23E-01
4.66E-02
3.82E-03
Inhalation Noncarcinogenic
Adult
Adult
HQ
HI
1.48E-05
2.19E-02
1.53E-06
1.56E-03
1.62E-06
2.65E-04
6.47E-08
8.85E-06
1.29E-05
3.53E-03
-
2.15E-03
7.21 E-06
6.19E-04
2.53E-03
2.53E-03
-
1.28E-04
8.78E-07
3.59E-04
1.11 E-09
1.81 E-04
-
3.58E-05
-
1.60E-02
8.78E-06
3.59E-03
-
1.38E-04
2.58E-03
5.30E-02
P]
Output generated 21 MAR2016:14:44:13

Appendix C
Non -Metal Soil and Groundwater Analytical Data Summary Tables

Table C-1 (page 1 of 1)
Groundwater Analytical Data - SVOCs, VOCs, Pesticides, and PCBs
Chapel Hill Police Department
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-002
SVOCs
VOCs
Pesticides
PCBs
Monitoring Well ID
Sample Date
(n
a
U
U)
O>
O
m
U
cn
>
a
o_
2L Standards
MW-1
5/3/2013
MW-2
6/20/2013
2/5/2014
ND
"'
ND
ND
MW-3
2/5/2014 z
ND
ND
ND
ND
8/15/2014 3
ND
ND
ND
ND
MW-3A
7/21/2015
ND
ND
ND
ND
2/5/2014
ND
ND
ND
ND
MW-4
8/15/2014
NA
7/21/2015
MW-4A
7/21/2015 4
ND
Notes:
All results in ug/L
Bold denotes above the 2L standards from Title 15A NCAC 2L .0202
ND - Not Detected; NA - Not Analyzed; NS - Not Specified
Denotes sample labeled as "Well #1" in the lab report associated with the Limited Phase II ESA prepared by Falcon
2 Denotes duplicate sample taken.
3 Denotes sample labeled as "Well 1" in the lab report associated with the October 3, 2014 letter prepared by Falcon
4 Denotes filtered samples
Analytical Methods
SVOCs = Semi -Volatile Organic Compounds by EPA Method 8270
VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds by EPA Method 8260
Pesticides by Method 8081 B
PCBs by 8082A
S:AAA-MasserProjects\Town fChapel Hill (TCH)\TCH-002-Pulice Sla6\Work Plan\Pulice Depa ,,e,,l D,Ia C—pilalion2016061 I.xls Hart & Hickman, PC

Table C-2 (page 1 of 1)
Soil and CCP Analytical Data - SVOCs, VOCs, TPH, VPH/EPH, Pesticides, and PCBs
Chapel Hill Police Department
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
H&H Job No. TCH-002
SVOCs
VOCs
TPH
GRO/DRO
VPH/EPH
Pesticides
PCBs
a�
0
m
Sample ID
Sample Date
Material Sampled
Depth (ft)
5
m
N
d
(Soil or CCP)
c
o
�
Y
9
T
U
N
U
a
a.
a-
o
w
a
S-1
4/29/2013
Soil
15
JA
NA
NA
8.0
NA
NA
S-4
4/29/2013
CCP
1
0.39
ND
ND
ND
27
JD
NA
NA
S-5
1/31/2014
CCP
0-4
ND
0.051
0.14
ND
NA
NA
W
NA
ND
ND
S-6
1/31/2014
CCP
0-4
ND
ND
0.17
0.0086
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
S-7
1/31/2014
CCP
0-4
ND
0.024
0.11
ND
NA
NA
NA
0.17
ND
PSRG - Protection of Groundwater
130
NS
24
16
--
--
--
--
0.046
0.1
PSRG - Residential
50,000
NS
12,000
5,400
--
--
--
--
0.49
NS
PSRG -Industrial
100,000
NS
1�,00038,000
--
--
--
--
2,1
NS
DEQ UST Section Action Level
——
10
10
--
--
NS
NS
Notes:
All results in mg/kg
PSRG - Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal
UST = Underground Storage Tank
Bold denotes above the protection of groundwater PSRG or UST Section action level
lue shading indicat s concentration above residential PSRG
n shadin in ' es concentration above industrial PSRG
ND - Not Detected; NA - Not Analyzed; NS - Not Specified
Analytical Methods
SVOCs = Semi -Volatile Organic Compounds by EPA Method 8270
VOCs = Volatile Organic Compounds by EPA Method 8260
TPH-GRO = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Gasoline Range Organics by EPA Method 8015C
TPH-DRO = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons - Diesel Range Organics Method 8015C
EPH = Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons by MADEP Method; VPH = Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons by MADEP Method
MADEP = Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
PCBs = Polychlorinated Biphenyls
s-wnn--r P.af.— oc hVdHa(TCH)\TCH-ooz-P�smr ,k—P— D<P— oar, Hart & Hickman, PC