26025_Rhyne Rd Assemblage_EMP_20230602

Via Email
June 2, 2023

NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management
Brownfields Redevelopment Section
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1646

Attn: Ms. Carolyn Minnich

Re: Environmental Management Plan
Rhyne Road Assemblage
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 26025-22-060
H&H Project No. BCP-180

Dear Carolyn:

On behalf of Beacon RCP LLC, please find the enclosed revised Environmental Management Plan
prepared for the proposed Rapid Commerce Park industrial development at the Rhyne Road
Assemblage Brownfields property located in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County.

Should you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us at
[phone].

Sincerely,
Hart & Hickman, PC
Ralph McGee, PG Loryn Smith
Senior Project Manager Project Environmental Scientist

Enclosures

cc: Mr. Pete Kidwell, Beacon Partners (Via Email)
Mr. Matt Lucarelli, Beacon Partners (Via Email)
Ms. Mary Katherine Stukes, Moore & Van Allen (Via Email)

Attachment:

Environmental Management Plan
Rhyne Road Assemblage
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 26025-22-060
H&H Job No. BCP-180

CONTENTS

Completed EMP Template Form

Tables

Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Well Construction Details
Table 3A Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 3B Summary of Groundwater PFAS Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Data
Table 5 Summary of Sediment Analytical Data
Table 6 Summary of Soil Gas Analytical Data

Figures

Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Sample Location Map
Figure 4A Groundwater Compound Concentration Map
Figure 4B Groundwater PFAS Concentration Map
Figure 4C Soil Gas Compound Concentration Map

Appendices

Appendix A Preliminary Redevelopment Plan
Appendix B Preliminary Construction Schedule
Appendix C Preliminary Grading Plan and Cut/Fill Analysis
Appendix D Monitoring Well Abandonment Approval (email correspondence)

1
EMP Version 2, January 2021
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.

The EMP is valid only for the scope of work described herein and must be updated to be
applicable for new phases of redevelopment or after significant changes in applicable
regulatory guidance.

Voluntary Metrics Tab
The NC Brownfields Program updates estimated capital investment (from the Brownfields
Property Application) and estimated jobs created (from the Brownfields Agreement) whenever
possible. As a voluntary measure, you may opt to complete the below information for capital
investment and jobs created as estimated by your final redevelopment plans for the Brownfields
Property:

1. Estimated capital investment in redevelopment project: 115,000,000
2. Estimated jobs created:
a. Construction Jobs: at least 1,000
b. Full Time Post-Redevelopment Jobs: approximately 1,100

2
EMP Version 2, January 2021
Table of Contents
NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................... 1
GENERAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................................................ 4
COMMUNICATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 4
NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM ............................................................................... 5
REDEVELOPMENT PLANS ........................................................................................................................ 6
CONTAMINATED MEDIA ......................................................................................................................... 7
PART 1. Soil ......................................................................................................................................... 8
PART 2. GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................................. 20
PART 3. SURFACE WATER .................................................................................................................. 23
PART 4. SEDIMENT ............................................................................................................................ 24
PART 5. SOIL VAPOR ......................................................................................................................... 25
PART 6. SUB‐SLAB SOIL VAPOR ........................................................................................................ 26
PART 7. INDOOR AIR ......................................................................................................................... 27
VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM ............................................................................................. 27
CONTINGENCY PLAN – encountering unknown tanks, drums, or other waste materials ..................... 28
POST‐REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING..................................................................................................... 30
APPROVAL SIGNATURES ....................................................................................................................... 32

3
EMP Version 2, January 2021
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.

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.

4
EMP Version 2, January 2021
☐ 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.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Date: 5/8/2023 Revision Date (if applicable): 6/2/2023

Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Rhyne Road Assemblage

Brownfields Project Number: 26025-22-060

Brownfields Property Address: 2515 -2622 Verde Creek Road, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC

Brownfields Property Area (acres): The Site includes three contiguous parcels (Parcel ID Nos. 05326105,
05326116, and 05325115 totaling approximately 98-acres of undeveloped wooded land located in a
primarily industrial and residential use area northwest of Uptown Charlotte. Note that the Brownfields
property does not include a 90-foot trail easement located along the western Site boundary within an
undisturbed buffer or an approximately 4.5-acre portion of Parcel 05325115 in the southernmost
portion of the Site that will be dedicated to Mecklenburg County. A Site location map is provided as
Figure 1, and the Site and surrounding area are shown in Figure 2.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit?.......................☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit….……..☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.

COMMUNICATIONS

A copy of this EMP shall be distributed to all the parties below as well as any contractors or site workers
that may be exposed to site vapors, soil, groundwater, and/or surface water. Additionally, a copy of the
EMP shall be maintained at the Brownfields Property during redevelopment activities. NOTE, THE EMP
DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF A SITE-SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN.

5
EMP Version 2, January 2021
Prospective Developer (PD): Beacon RCP LLC
Contact Person: Jon Morris
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: Click or tap here to enter text.
Email: [e-mail]

Contractor for PD: Edifice
Contact Person: Darren Bryan
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Environmental Consultant: Hart & Hickman, PC
Contact Person: Ralph McGee, PG
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Brownfields Program Project Manager: Carolyn Minnich
Phone Numbers: Office: Click or tap here to enter text. Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):
Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch – David Ramey, [e-mail]
Brownfields Property Management Unit – [e-mail]

NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM

Written advance Notification Times to Brownfields Project Manager: Check each box to accept
minimum advance notice periods (in calendar days) for each type of onsite task:

On‐site assessment or remedial activities:……………………………………….…… 10 days Prior ☒

Construction or grading start:……………………………………….………………………. 10 days Prior ☒

Discovery of stained soil, odors, USTs, buried drums or waste, landfill, or other signs of previously
unknown contamination: ……………………………….……………………………………. Within 48 hours ☒

Implementation of emergency actions (e.g. dewatering, flood or soil erosion control measures in
area of contamination, ventilation of work zones):…………….……….……… Within 48 hours ☒

Installation of mitigation systems:………………………….………………….……….. 10 days Prior ☒

Other notifications as required by local, state or federal agencies to implement redevelopment
activities: (as applicable): ……………………….…………………………………………..… Within 30 days ☒

6
EMP Version 2, January 2021
REDEVELOPMENT PLANS

1) Type of Redevelopment (check all that apply):
☐Residential ☐Recreational ☐Institutional ☒Commercial ☒Office ☒Retail ☒Industrial
☒Other specify:
Roadways, parking, truck aprons, and loading areas

2) Check the following activities that will be conducted prior to commencing earth‐moving activities
at the site:
☒ Review of historic maps (Sanborn Maps, facility maps)
☒ Conducting geophysical surveys to evaluate the location of suspect UST, fuel lines, utility
lines, etc.
☒ Interviews with employees/former employees/facility managers/neighbors

3) Summary of Redevelopment Plans (MANDATORY: attach detailed plans or conceptual plans, if
detailed plans are not available. EMP review without such information would be premature):
Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement, grading plans and planned construction of new structures:
The Brownfields property and the west-southwest adjacent properties identified as the 438-621
Rhyne Road Brownfields property (Brownfields Project No. 26016-22-060) will be developed with
an industrial park known as the Rapid Commerce Park. Development on the subject Site will be
completed by the PD and will include the construction of five industrial warehouse buildings
(Buildings A, B1, B2, C, and D), associated access roads, parking areas, and loading areas. The west-
southwest adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road Brownfields property will be developed by Crescent
Communities, LLC, and will include the construction of one industrial warehouse building (Building
E) and associated access roads, parking areas, and loading docks. Although there are two
Brownfields properties and two developers, the Rapid Commerce Park project is being completed
jointly by the PD and Crecent Communities, LLC. A copy of the preliminary Site Plan depicting the
proposed Rapid Commerce Park is provided 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.

7
EMP Version 2, January 2021

6) Which category of risk‐based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement? Note: If children frequent the property, residential screening levels shall
be cited in the Brownfields Agreement for comparison purposes.
☐ Residential ☒ Non‐Residential or Industrial/Commercial

7) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Construction start date: 7/1/2023

b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
Redevelopment activities are expected to be completed in approximately 36 months. It is
anticipated that the redevelopment activities will be completed in three phases of
construction; Phase 1 will include the construction of two buildings (Buildings C and D) which
is anticipated to be completed 7/1/2023 through 7/1/2024; Phase 2 will include the
construction of one building (Building A) which is anticipated be completed 7/1/2024 through
7/1/2025; and Phase 3 will include the construction of two buildings (Buildings B1 and B2)
which is anticipated to be completed 7/1/2025 through 7/1/2026. Note that a portion of the
Site in the area of Building A (Phase II) will be disturbed/constructed as part of Phase I for
balancing the Site and installation of stormwater/erosion control systems. A preliminary
construction schedule is provided as Appendix B.

c) Additional phases planned? ☐ Yes ☒ No

If yes, specify the start date and/or activities if known:
Start Date: 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: 7/1/2024

CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Please fill out the sections 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.

8
EMP Version 2, January 2021
1) Contaminated Media on the Brownfields Property
Part 1. Soil:……………………………………….……………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected ☐ Unknown
Part 2. Groundwater:.……………………….……..……. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected ☐ Unknown
Part 3. Surface Water:.……………...……..…………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected ☐ Unknown
Part 4. Sediment:.……………...……..…………………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected ☐ Unknown
Part 5. Soil Vapor:…..…………...……..…………………. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected ☐ Unknown
Part 6. Sub‐Slab Soil Vapor:……...……..…………….. ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected ☒ Unknown
Part 7. Indoor Air:...……..…………………………………. ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected ☒ Unknown

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.
Tabular summaries of laboratory analytical results for each sampled media are included as
attachments to this EMP.

PART 1. Soil
1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list general groups of contaminants):
Assessment activities completed at the Brownfields property included the collection of soil
samples in areas of planned soil disturbance during future grading activities and in areas of
potential environmental concern. A tabular summary of soil sample analytical data in comparison
to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Residential and
Industrial/Commercial Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) is included as Table 1 and soil
sample locations are shown in Figure 3. A brief summary of the soil assessment results is provided
below.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Laboratory analytical results indicate that low levels of several VOCs have been detected in soil
samples collected at the Site at concentrations above laboratory method detection limits, but
below the DEQ Residential and Industrial/Commercial PSRGs.

Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs)
Laboratory analytical results indicate a low level of bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate was detected in one
soil sample collected from the east-central portion of the Site at a concentration above the
laboratory method detection limit, but below the DEQ Residential and Industrial/Commercial
PSRGs. No other SVOCs were detected in the soil samples collected at the Site.

Metals
As expected, several metals were detected at concentrations above the laboratory method
detection limits in each soil sample. The detected metals concentrations are generally consistent
with both published and Site-specific background levels and are considered representative of
naturally occurring levels. No metals were detected at concentrations above the
Industrial/Commercial PSRGs in soil samples collected at the Site.

9
EMP Version 2, January 2021
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
Soil samples were collected at depths ranging from 0 to 8 ft from across the Site. However,
laboratory analytical results indicate that no compounds have been detected at concentrations
above the DEQ PSRGs (or background levels in the case of metals) in soil samples collected at the
Site.

3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
Approximately 4,000,000 square feet of the Brownfields property will be cleared and graded as
part of Site work activities. As noted above, a 90-foot trail easement located along the western
Site boundary within an undisturbed buffer and an approximately 3-acre portion of Parcel 3 in
the southernmost portion of the Site will be dedicated to Mecklenburg County and will not be
included in the Brownfields property or the proposed Rapid Commerce Park redevelopment.

4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
The preliminary grading plan with cut/fill analysis for the Rapid Commerce Park project is provided
in Appendix C (includes the subject Site and adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road Brownfields property).
As indicated on the grading plan, cut at the Site is generally planned in the northern, western, and
southeastern portions of the Site. The deepest planned cut depths are expected to extend to
approximately 30 ft below current grade elevations. Other discrete areas may include deeper
excavations for the installation of foundational footers, utility banks, etc. Remaining portions of
the Site are planned fill areas and it is expected that soil generated in areas of cut during grading
activities will be re-used on-Site.

5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
Based on review of the grading plan and cut-fill analysis (Appendix C), over 700,000 cubic yards of
soil will be excavated during grading activities completed for the entire Rapid Commerce Park
project. Excess soil generated during the proposed redevelopment of the Site will be re-used as
fill material and will likely include the transfer of soil between the Rhyne Road Assemblage and
the adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road Brownfields property.

Grading activities will be completed across the entire industrial park project resulting in the
transfer of soil from one Brownfields property to the other as needed. Given the similar soil
conditions on both properties, separate DEQ approval is not required for such soil transfer unless
field observations indicate an area of potentially impacted soil, in which case potentially impacted
soil will be managed as described in the Managing On-Site Soil section below.

6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
Based on soil sample results and review of the cut-fill analysis, it is unlikely grading activities will
encounter areas of impacted soil that will need to be managed.

7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
As described above, the discovery of impacted soil is not anticipated at this time. Based on review
of the preliminary grading plan and cut-fill analysis, excess soil generated during grading activities
will be re-used as fill material on Site or on the adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road Brownfields property.

10
EMP Version 2, January 2021
Grading activities will be completed across the entire industrial park project resulting in the
transfer of soil from one Brownfields property to the other as needed. As noted above, separate
DEQ approval is not required for such soil transfer unless field observations indicate an area of
potentially impacted soil. In the unlikely event potentially impacted soil is encountered and cannot
be reused the Brownfields properties as fill, it will be sampled and managed in accordance with
the procedures described in the following sections.

Part 1.A. MANAGING ONSITE SOIL
If soil is anticipated to be excavated from the Brownfield Property, relocated on the Brownfields
Property, or otherwise disturbed during site grading or other redevelopment activities, please
provide a grading plan that clearly illustrates areas of cut and fill (approximate areas & volumes are
acceptable, if only preliminary data available).

1) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION:
a) Does the soil contain a LISTED WASTE as defined in the North Carolina Hazardous
Waste Section under 40 CFR Part 261.31‐261.35?....................................... ☐Yes ☒No
☐ If yes, explain why below, including the level of knowledge regarding processes
generating the waste (include pertinent analytical results as needed).
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ If yes, do the soils exceed the “Contained‐Out” levels in Attachment 1 of the
North Carolina Contained‐In Policy?................................................. ☐ Yes ☐ No

b) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE AND EXCEEDS
THE CONTAINED‐OUT LEVELS IN ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
CONTAINED‐IN POLICY THE SOIL MAY NOT BE RE‐USED ON SITE AND MUST BE
DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND
REGULATIONS.
c) Does the soil contain a CHARACTERISTIC WASTE?.................................... ☐ Yes ☒ No
☐ If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).
☐ Ignitability Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Corrosivity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Reactivity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Toxicity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ TCLP results Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Rule of 20 results (20 times total analytical results for an individual
hazardous constituent on TCLP list cannot, by test method, exceed regulatory
TCLP standard)
Click or tap here to enter text.

11
EMP Version 2, January 2021
☒ If no, explain rationale:
Soil analytical data does not indicate detections capable of exceeding TCLP criteria
using the Rule of 20 and does not contain a Listed Waste as defined in the North
Carolina Hazardous Waste Section under 40 CFR Part 261.31‐261.35.

d) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A CHARACTERISTIC HAZARDOUS WASTE, THE
SOIL MAY NOT BE RE‐USED ON SITE AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE
WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

2) Screening criteria by which soil disposition decisions will be made (e.g., left in place, capped in
place with low permeability barrier, removed to onsite location and capped, removed offsite):
☐ Preliminary Health‐Based Residential SRGs
☒ Preliminary Health‐Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs
☒ Division of Waste Management Risk Calculator (For Brownfields Properties Only)
☐ Site‐specific risk‐based cleanup level. Please provide details of methods used for
determination/explanation.
Click or tap here to enter text.

Additional comments:
Click or tap here to enter text.

3) If known impacted soil is proposed to be reused within the Brownfields Property Boundary,
please check the measures that will be utilized to ensure safe placement and documentation of
same. Please attach a proposed location diagram/site map.
☒ Provide documentation of analytical report(s) to Brownfields Project Manager
☒ Provide documentation of final location, thickness and depth of relocated soil on site map
to Brownfields Project Manager once known
☐ Geotextile to mark depth of fill material.
Provide description of material:
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ Manage soil under impervious cap ☒ or clean fill ☒
☒ Describe cap or fill:
Should potentially impacted soil or fill materials be encountered during redevelopment, the
materials may be placed beneath impervious surfaces (asphalt pavement, sidewalks, access
roads, buildings, etc.) or a minimum of 2 ft of demonstrably clean fill.

☒ Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re‐recorded if
actions are Post‐Recordation).

12
EMP Version 2, January 2021
☒ GPS the location and provide site map with final location.
☐ Other. Please provide a description of the measure:

4) Please describe the following action(s) to be taken during and following excavation and
management of site soils:
Management of fugitive dust from site
☒ Yes, describe the method will include:
Areas of potentially contaminated soil are not expected to be encountered or disturbed
during Site redevelopment activities based upon soil sampling data and historical uses of the
Site (undeveloped wooded land). The grading contractor will consider conditions such as
wind speed, wind direction, and moisture content of soil during soil grading and stockpiling
activities to minimize dust generation. In the unlikely event that potentially contaminated
soil is encountered during redevelopment that requires excavation, particular attention will
be paid by contractors to implement dust control measures as needed based on site and
atmospheric conditions (i.e., by controlled water application, hydro-seeding, and/or mulch,
stone, or plastic cover). Potentially impacted soil will be managed as described below.

☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Field Screening of site soil
☒ Yes, describe the field screening method, frequency of field screening, person conducting
field screening:
During soil disturbance at the Site, the workers or contractors will observe soil for evidence
of potentially impacted soil. Evidence of potentially impacted soil includes a distinct
unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously disposed of materials of concern (i.e.,
chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be observed during Site work, the
contractor will contact the project environmental professional to observe the suspect
condition. If the project environmental professional confirms that the material may be
impacted, then the procedures below will be implemented. In addition, the environmental
professional will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48 hours to advise the
person of the condition.

☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Soil Sample Collection
☐ Yes, describe the sampling method (e.g., in‐situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ No, explain rationale:
If potential soil impacts are encountered during grading and/or installation or removal of
utilities, excavation will proceed only as far as needed to allow grading or other
Click or tap here to enter text.

13
EMP Version 2, January 2021
construction-related activity to continue and/or only as far as needed to allow alternate
corrective measures as described below. Suspect potentially impacted soil excavated
during redevelopment activities may be stockpiled and covered in a secure area to allow
for construction to continue. Suspect impacted soil will be stockpiled in accordance with
Figure 1, NCBP Diagram for Temporary Containment of Impacted or Potentially Impacted
Soil. At least one representative soil sample (no less than 3 aliquot soil samples) at a sample
ratio of 1 soil sample per approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil will be collected for
analysis of VOCs, SVOCs, RCRA metals, and hexavalent chromium. If the soil sample
laboratory analytical results indicate that the soil could potentially exceed toxicity
characteristic hazardous waste criteria, then the soil will also be analyzed by TCLP for those
compounds that could exceed the toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria.
Impacted soil will be managed in the manner described below based on the laboratory
analytical results:

i. If no organic compounds or metals are detected in a sample (other than those
attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts) above unrestricted use PSRGs, the
TCLP concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, and the cumulative risk
calculator results are acceptable, and metals concentrations are consistent with
naturally occurring levels, then the soil will be deemed suitable for use as fill at the
Rapid Commerce Park development or as off-Site fill. The proposed location(s) for
off-Site placement of soil (other than a Municipal Solid Waste Landfill [MSWLF])
will be provided to DEQ for approval prior to taking the soil off-Site.
ii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which do not exceed Industrial/Commercial
PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts), the
TCLP concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, and metals
concentrations are consistent with naturally occurring levels, then the soil may be
used at the Rapid Commerce Park development as fill without conditions.
iii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which exceed the Industrial/Commercial
PSRGs (other than those attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts or are
consistent with naturally occurring levels for metals) and the TCLP concentrations
are below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil, with prior DEQ approval, may be
used as fill at the Rapid Commerce Park development below an impervious surface,
at least 2 ft of compacted demonstrably clean soil, or overlain by a geotechnical
fabric. If the impacted soil with concentrations above Industrial/Commercial PSRGs
is moved to an on-Site location, its location and depth will be documented and
provided to DEQ, and the impacted soil will be placed beneath at least 2 ft of
compacted demonstrably clean soil, an impervious surface, or covered by a
geotechnical fabric.
iv. Impacted soil may be transported to an MSWLF or DEQ permitted landfarm provided
that the soil is accepted at the disposal facility. DEQ Solid Waste Section and DEQ
Brownfields Program approval will be requested for any potential export to an off-
Site facility other than an MSWLF or DEQ permitted landfarm. If soil is transported

14
EMP Version 2, January 2021
to an MSWLF or DEQ permitted landfarm, the facility’s written approval in the form
of waste manifests or similar will be included in an annual redevelopment summary
report. In the unlikely event that the sample data indicates concentrations above
TCLP hazardous waste criteria, then the soil must be transported off-Site to a
facility that can accept or treat hazardous waste.
If soil samples are collected for analysis, please check the applicable chemical analytes:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium
and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471

☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium,
Herbicides, etc.): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199

☒ Check to confirm that stockpiling of known or suspected impacted soils will be conducted
in accordance with Figure 1 of this EMP. Stockpile methodology should provide erosion
control, prohibiting contact between surface water/precipitation and contaminated soil,
and preventing contaminated runoff. Explain any variances or provide additional details as
needed:

☒ Final grade sampling of exposed native soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or
permanent hardscape). Select chemical analyses for final grade samples with check boxes
below (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead,
selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471

☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

Click or tap here to enter text.

15
EMP Version 2, January 2021
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199

Please provide a scope of work for final grade sampling, including a diagram of soil
sampling locations, number of samples to be collected, and brief sampling methodology.
Samples should be collected from 0-2 ft below ground surface, with the exception of VOCs
which should be taken from 1-2 ft below ground surface. Alternatively, indicate if a work
plan for final grade sampling may be submitted under separate cover.
Following completion of soil disturbance for future Site development (i.e., after grading and
utility construction), Hart & Hickman will observe the Site for areas that will not be covered
upon completion of the redevelopment with a minimum of 2 ft of demonstrably clean fill
soil, building foundations, sidewalks, asphalt or concrete parking areas, driveways, or other
impervious areas (e.g., tightly spaced pavers or bricks). If such areas exist, a Work Plan will
be prepared for final grade sampling for DEQ Brownfields review and approval. Final grade
soil sampling will be performed at a frequency approved in advance by DEQ Brownfields .

Final grade soil samples will consist of a maximum of five (5) aliquot soil samples collected
from within each evaluation area which will be combined and homogenized to form one
composite soil sample representative of that evaluation area and submitted for analysis of
SVOCs and RCRA metals plus hexavalent chromium. In addition, one grab soil sample will be
collected from each evaluation area and submitted for laboratory analysis of VOCs.

If no such areas exist, documentation will be provided to the DEQ Brownfields project
manager and/or the DEQ Brownfields Property Management Unit.

☐ If final grade sampling was NOT selected, please explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.

Part 1.B. IMPORTED FILL SOIL

NO SOIL MAY BE BROUGHT ONTO THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL
FROM THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. According to the Brownfields IR 15, “Documenting
imported soil (by sampling, analysis, and reporting in accordance with review and written
approval in advance by the Brownfields Program), will safeguard the liability protections provided
by the brownfields agreement and is in the best interest of the prospective developer/property
owner.”
Requirements for importing fill:

1) Will fill soil be imported to the site?................................................ ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

16
EMP Version 2, January 2021
2) If yes, what is the estimated volume of fill soil to be imported?
Grading for the entire Rapid Commerce Park development is expected to result in a net balance
with no import or export soil required to achieve final grade elevations.

3) If yes, what is the anticipated depth that fill soil will be placed at the property? (If a range
of depths, please list the range.)
In general, fill areas associated with the proposed redevelopment are located in the northwest,
central, and southwest portions of the Rapid Commerce Park development (Appendix C). The
proposed depth of fill ranges from approximately 1ft to 35 ft above current elevations.

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:
As indicated above, if possible, soil generated in planned cut areas will be reused as fill for the
project. In the event that additional import soil is needed, the procedures outlined in Part 1.B.
Section 7 below will be followed.

5) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide a plan to analyze fill
soil to demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards applicable to the site and can be
approved for use at the Brownfields property.
The PD plans to import limited amounts of virgin organic rich topsoil from a commercial landscape
material vendor for use in proposed landscaped areas. The PD does not plan to collect samples of
landscaping materials prior to placement at the Site. In addition, the PD may use lime or concrete
obtained from a reputable commercial vendor as needed during grading and redevelopment
activities. The PD does not plan to collect samples of lime or concrete prior to use at the Site.

The PD will follow the procedures outlined below to demonstrate import soil other than virgin
organic-rich topsoil and lime or concrete meet acceptable standards applicable to the Site.

6) Please check the applicable chemical analytes for fill soil samples. (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead,
selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471

☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Methods 7199

17
EMP Version 2, January 2021
7) The scope of work for import fill sampling may be provided below or in a Work Plan
submitted separately for DEQ review and approval. Attach specific location maps for in-situ
borrow sites. If using a quarry, provide information on the type of material to be brought
onto the Brownfields Property.
The PD will follow the procedures outlined below to demonstrate import soil meets
acceptable standards applicable to the Site:
If the PD plans to import fill material from Vulcan Materials Company quarry located near
Pineville, NC, or from the Martin Marietta quarry located on Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte,
NC, no samples of the import material will be collected as adequate analytical data is available
in the DEQ Brownfields database to demonstrate material from these facilities is suitable for use
as structural fill at a Brownfields property.
If fill soil is obtained from an off-Site property that is not a Brownfields pre-approved quarry or
is recycled material from the Vulcan Materials Company quarry or the Martin Marietta quarries,
then soil samples will be collected for laboratory analyses at a general rate of 1 sample per
approximately 1,000 cubic yards. Representative composite soil samples (no less than 3 aliquot
soil samples) will be collected for VOCs by EPA Method 8260, SVOCs by EPA Method 8270, RCRA
metals by EPA Methods 6020/7471, and hexavalent chromium by EPA Method 7199. The VOC
sample will be a grab sample from an undisturbed soil sample aliquot with the highest indication
of potential impact. DEQ approval of the fill soil will be obtained prior to transporting import soil
to the Site.

Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Site if it does not contain compound concentrations
above DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs, DWM Risk Calculator risk thresholds, or typical metals
concentrations that are consistent with naturally occurring levels in the Site area.

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.
Excavated soil is planned for use as beneficial fill at the Rapid Commerce Park development and
soil will be moved freely between the subject Site and adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road Brownfields

18
EMP Version 2, January 2021
property in accordance with this EMP. Grading activities will be completed across the entire
industrial park project resulting in the transfer of soil from one Brownfields property to the other
as needed. Given the similar soil conditions on both the properties, separate DEQ approval is not
required for such soil transfer unless field observations indicate an area of potentially impacted
soil, in which case the potentially impacted soil will be managed as described in the Managing On-
Site Soil section above (Part 1.A.).

However, if soil export is deemed necessary, in-situ or stockpile soil sampling may be performed.
If soil sampling is completed for export soil, the sampling results will be presented to DEQ
Brownfields for review prior to transporting soil off-Site.

In general, it is anticipated that export soil sampling will include the collection of a composite
sample at a rate of approximately 1 sample per approximately 1,000 cubic yards for SVOCs by EPA
Method 8270, RCRA metals by EPA Method 6020/7471, and hexavalent chromium by EPA Method
7199, and one representative grab soil sample for laboratory analysis of VOCs by EPA Method
8260. Sample volume for SVOCs and metals analysis will be collected from up to 5 sample aliquot
locations to form one (1) composite sample. Each aliquot will be field screened for the presence
of VOCs using a calibrated photo-ionization detector (PID). VOC samples will be collected as grab
samples from an undisturbed portion of the aliquot exhibiting the highest indication of impact
based on field screening results.

Following completion of the soil sampling activities and receipt of the analytical data, H&H will
prepare a data summary package for DEQ review. The data summary package will include a tabular
summary of the laboratory analytical results in comparison to the regulatory screening levels and
background metals concentrations and a copy of the laboratory analytical report. H&H assumes
that the data summary package can be reviewed by DEQ to provide guidance regarding potential
export site selection. Based on the analytical results of soil samples collected from the export soil,
the soil will be transported off-Site to a suitable location. The PD will notify DEQ Brownfields of
the location receiving the export soil. If not a permitted facility (e.g., another Brownfields
property), written approval from DEQ Brownfields and the receiving facility will be obtained prior
to transporting the soil off-Site. If the receiving facility is a non-Brownfields property, DEQ Solid
Waste Section approval will be obtained prior to transporting the soil off-Site.

2) To what type of facility will the export Brownfields soil be sent?
☒ Subtitle D/Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (analytical program to be determined by
landfill)
☒ Permitted but Unlined Landfill (i.e. LCID, C&D, etc.) Analytical program to be
determined by the accepting Landfill;
☒ Landfarm or other treatment facility
☒ Use as fill at another suitable Brownfields Property – determination that a
site is suitable will require, at a minimum, that similar concentrations of the same or
similar contaminants already exist at both sites, use of impacted soil will not increase

19
EMP Version 2, January 2021
the potential for risk to human health and the environment at the receiving Brownfields
property, and that a record of the acceptance of such soil from the property owner of
the receiving site is provided to Brownfields. Please provide additional details below.

☒ Use as Beneficial Fill off-site at a non-Brownfields Property - Please provide
documentation of approval from the property owner for receipt of fill material. This will
also require approval by the DEQ Solid Waste Section. Additional information is
provided in IR 15. Please provide additional details below.

3) Additional Details: (if transfer of soil to another property is requested above, please provide
details related to the proposed plans).
As described throughout this EMP, the subject Site and adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road Brownfields
property (Brownfields Project No. 26016-22-060) are being developed jointly as the Rapid
Commerce Park industrial park. Grading activities will be completed across the entire industrial
park project resulting in the transfer of soil from one Brownfields property to the other as needed.
Separate DEQ approval is not required for such soil transfer unless field observations indicate an
area of potentially impacted soil. If discovered, potentially impacted soil will be managed using
the procedures outlined above in Managing On‐Site Soil (Part 1.A.).

The environmental professional will contact DEQ Brownfields to obtain DEQ Brownfields and DEQ
Solid Waste approval prior to exporting soil to a non-permitted facility (i.e., landfill). If soils are
transferred to another Brownfields Property other than the adjacent 438-621 Rhyne Road
Brownfields property, DEQ Brownfields approval will be obtained prior to transport.

Part 1.D. MANAGEMENT OF UTILITY TRENCHES

☐ Install liner between native impacted soils and base of utility trench before filling with clean fill
(Preferred)

☒ Last out, first in principle for impacted soils (if soil can safely be reused onsite and is not a
hazardous waste), i.e., impacted soils are placed back at approximately the depths they
were removed from such that impacted soil is not placed at a greater depth than the original
depth from which it was excavated.

☐ Evaluate whether necessary to install barriers in conduits to prevent soil vapor transport,
and/or degradation of conduit materials due to direct impact with contaminants?
☐ If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials or provide the results of this evaluation in the
Vapor Mitigation Plan. Note that if vapor mitigation is planned for site buildings, utility
corridors will need to be evaluated as part of mitigation designs:

☒ If no, include rationale here:
Results of soil vapor assessment activities completed at the Site indicate that soil vapor
encroachment at unacceptable levels for industrial use is not a concern.

20
EMP Version 2, January 2021

☐ Unknown, details to be provided in the Vapor Mitigation Plan for site buildings

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
Although not anticipated, in the event that evidence of contaminated soil and/or vapors (e.g., unusual
odors and/or stained soil) is encountered in utility trenches during redevelopment activities, the trench
will be evacuated, and appropriate safety screening of the vapors will be performed to protect workers.
If results indicate further action is warranted in response to vapors to protect workers, appropriate
engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented.

The contractor and workers will observe soil for potential impacts during utility installation activities.
Evidence of potentially impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or
previously disposed materials of concern (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
noted during utility work, the contractor will contact the project environmental professional to
observe the suspect condition and screen the soil using a PID or other similar vapor field screening
instrument. If the project environmental professional confirms that the material may be impacted,
then the procedures outlined above in Managing On‐Site Soil (Part 1.A.) will be implemented. In
addition, the environmental professional will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48
hours to advise that person of the condition.

PART 2. GROUNDWATER

1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
During assessment activities conducted at the Site in March and June 2022, and February 2023,
the depth to groundwater was measured at depths ranging from approximately 6 ft bgs in the
northwestern portion of the Site to approximately 27 ft bgs in the northeastern portion of the
Site. A tabular summary of temporary monitoring well construction details and groundwater
depths are provided as Table 2. Locations of the temporary monitoring wells installed during the
previous assessment activities are shown in Figure 3.

2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite ☒offsite ☐both or ☐unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
Previous groundwater assessment at the Brownfields property included collection of fifteen (15)
groundwater samples for laboratory analysis. Locations of the groundwater samples are shown
in Figure 3, and a tabular summary of groundwater sample laboratory analytical results is
included in Table 3A for traditional compounds and Table 3B for per and polyfluorinated
substances (PFAS). Concentrations for traditional compounds are shown in Figure 4A and PFAS
concentrations are shown in Figure 4B. A brief summary of the groundwater assessment results
is provided below.
Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
No organic compounds were detected at concentrations above the DEQ 2L Groundwater Quality
Standards (2L Standards) or the DEQ Residential or Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion

21
EMP Version 2, January 2021
Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) in groundwater samples collected at the Site.
Metals
Groundwater assessment results indicate that total chromium (12.7 micrograms per liter {µg/L})
was detected in the central portion of the Site at a concentration slightly above the 2L Standard
of 10 µg/L. No other metals were detected in the groundwater samples collected at the Site at
concentrations above 2L Standards and/or GWSLs.

PFAS
In March 2022, groundwater samples were collected for PFAS analysis in temporary monitoring
wells TMW-1 and TMW-3 installed in the eastern portion of the Site and downgradient of the
east adjacent off-Site Livingstone Coatings facility to evaluate the potential for impact associated
with historical coating operations. Additional PFAS groundwater assessment was performed in
February 2023, to assist in delineating potential PFAS groundwater impacts in proposed deeper
excavation areas of the Site (see Figure 4B). Laboratory analytical results indicate that several
PFAS compounds were detected at concentrations above the laboratory method detection limits
in groundwater samples collected at the Site.

During the March 2022 assessment activities, perfluoroonoctanoic acid (PFOA, 0.3 µg/L) and
perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS, 0.01 µg/L) were detected in the TMW-1 sample at
concentrations above the EPA Tapwater Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) of 0.060 µg/L and the
EPA Health Advisory Level of 0.000004 µg/L. PFOA (up to 4.8 µg/L) was detected in the TMW-3
groundwater sample and its duplicate groundwater sample at concentrations above the EPA
Tapwater RSLs and the EPA Health Advisory Level.

During the February 2023 assessment activities, PFOA was detected in TMW-9 (0.558 µg/L),
TMW-10/TMW-DUP (up to 0.676 µg/L), and TMW-12 (up to 0.0978), which exceeded the EPA
Health Advisory Level, the EPA Tapwater RSL, and the EPA Proposed MCL of 0.004 µg/L. PFOA
was also detected in TMW-11 (0.0208 µg/L), TMW-13 (0.0596 µg/L), TMW-14 (0.0065 µg/L), and
TMW-15 (0.0141 µg/L), which also exceeded the EPA Health Advisory Level and the EPA Proposed
MCL.

In addition, PFOS was detected in TMW-13 (0.0042 µg/L) which exceeded the EPA Health Advisory
Level of 0.00002 µg/L and the EPA Proposed MCL of 0.004 µg/L. PFOS was also detected in TMW-
9 (0.00094 J [“J-flag” designation] µg/L), TMW-12 (0.0016 J µg/L), TMW-14 (0.0024 J µg/L), and
TMW-15 (0.0025 J µg/L) and exceeded the EPA Health Advisory Level. No other PFAS compounds
were detected at concentrations above the applicable screening criteria in the groundwater
samples collected from the Site.

3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?
Groundwater flow at the Site is expected to mimic area topography and generally flow to the
west toward an unnamed tributary of Long Creek.

4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
☒Yes ☐No
If yes, describe these activities:
As noted above, the seasonal high water table was measured at depths ranging from

22
EMP Version 2, January 2021
approximately 6 ft bgs in the northwestern portion of the Site to approximately 27 ft bgs in the
northeastern portion of the Site. Grading activities may include cut depths up to 30 ft bgs in the
central portion of the Site and in areas planned for stormwater retention ponds (see cut-fill
analysis in Appendix C). Therefore, groundwater may be encountered during redevelopment
activities. If groundwater is encountered during redevelopment activities, the procedures outlined
below will be implemented.

Regardless of the answer; in the event that contaminated groundwater is encountered
during redevelopment activities (even if no is checked above), list activities for contingent
management of groundwater (e.g., dewatering of groundwater from excavations or
foundations, containerizing, offsite disposal, discharge to sanitary sewer, NPDES permit, or
sampling procedures).
If groundwater is encountered during redevelopment, appropriate worker safety measures will
be undertaken if groundwater gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be
impacted (based on previous sampling data, strong odor, unnatural color, sheen, etc.) during
construction activities. The contractor will contact the environmental professional to observe
the area(s) suspected to be impacted. The accumulated water will be allowed to
evaporate/infiltrate to the extent that the time for dissipation does not disrupt the construction
schedule. If work in an area needs to continue and additional time is needed to allow for
evaporation/infiltration of the water, the water within an active work zone will be transferred
into other portions of the excavation or trench, or to a nearby temporary sediment basin and
allowed to naturally dissipate. Water from an active work area may also be temporarily
transferred into a frac tank and placed back in the excavation when work in that area has been
completed or into a nearby temporary sediment basin to allow for natural dissipation.

Should the time needed for the natural dissipation of accumulated water be deemed
inadequate, the water will be tested for the presence of PFAS, VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals
and disposed of at an appropriate off‐Site facility (if impacted), or tested and pumped to the
public stormwater management system (if not impacted above DEQ surface water standards)
in accordance with applicable municipal and State regulations for erosion control and
construction stormwater control. It should be noted that low levels of PFAS compounds are
widely considered to be ubiquitous in the environment and low levels of PFAS detected in water
samples collected at the Site during construction that are representative of ubiquitous
background conditions will be managed as non-impacted water.

In addition, to minimize the potential for groundwater to enter into deeper stormwater ponds,
a high-density polyethylene (HDPE) impermeable liner will be installed and sealed within the
stormwater ponds located on the eastern portion of the property, closest to the Livingstone
facility (TMW-12 and TMW-13).

5) Are monitoring wells currently present on the Brownfields Property?.................☒Yes ☐No
If yes, are any monitoring wells routinely monitored through DEQ or other
agencies?..................................................................................................................☒Yes ☐No

23
EMP Version 2, January 2021
6) Please check methods to be utilized in the management of known and previously
unidentified wells.
☒ Abandonment of site monitoring wells in accordance with all applicable regulations. It
is the Brownfields Program’s intent to allow proper abandonment of well(s) as
specified in the Brownfields Agreement, except if required for active monitoring
through another section of DEQ or the EPA.
☒ Location of existing monitoring wells marked
☒ Existing monitoring wells protected from disturbance
☒ Newly identified monitoring wells will be marked and protected from further
disturbance until notification to DEQ Brownfields can be made and approval for
abandonment is given.

7) Please provide additional details as needed:

Please note, disturbance of existing site monitoring wells without approval by DEQ is not
permissible. If monitoring wells are damaged and/or destroyed, DEQ may require that the PD
be responsible for replacement of the well.

PART 3. SURFACE WATER
1) Is surface water present at the property? ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
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):
Small intermittent unnamed tributaries of Long Creek transect the central and southern portions
of the Site. In addition, a pond is located on the northwestern portion of the Site. Although not
located on the Brownfields property, a larger perennial unnamed tributary of Long Creek is
located along the western Site boundary. The on-Site tributaries and pond effluent discharge to
the perennial stream west of the Site. In March and July 2022, a total of five (5) surface water
samples were collected at the Site from upstream, mid-stream, and downstream portions of the
unnamed tributary of Long Creek, from the unnamed tributary of Long Creek which transects the
Existing monitoring wells MW-4 and MW-7 installed as part of ongoing monitoring activities associated
with the eastern adjacent Livingstone Coatings Corporation facility are located on the Brownfields
property. The PD obtained DEQ IHSB approval to permanently abandon the monitoring wells in an
email dated December 8, 2022. A copy of the email approval is provided in Appendix D.

DEQ will be notified if newly identified monitoring wells are found on the Brownfields property.

24
EMP Version 2, January 2021
central portion of the Site, and from the influent and effluent sides of a pond located on the
northwestern portion of the Site.

The results of the March and July 2022 assessment activities did not identify the presence of
compounds in the tributaries or the on-Site pond at concentrations above DEQ Surface Water
Quality Standards (2B Standards) or In-Stream Target Values.

Although not anticipated, if surface water associated with the on-Site tributaries or pond are
suspected to be impacted (based on strong odor, unnatural color, sheen, etc.), the contractor will
contact the environmental professional to observe the suspect condition. If the environmental
professional determines that surface water may be impacted, then appropriate worker safety
measures will be undertaken to manage the surface water during construction activities (such
that dermal contact can be avoided) and a sample will be collected for laboratory analysis of
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals from the potentially impacted tributary surface water. In
addition, the environmental professional will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager
within 48 hours regarding the condition.

A tabular summary of the surface water laboratory analytical results is provided in Table 4 and
sample locations are shown in Figure 3.

PART 4. SEDIMENT

1) Are sediment sources present on the property? ☒ Yes ☐ No

2) If yes, is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

3) Will workers or the public be in contact with sediment during planned redevelopment
activities? ☒ Yes ☐ No

4) Attach a map showing location of known contaminated sediment at the property.

5) In the event that contaminated sediment is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such events (stream bed disturbance):
In March and July 2022, a total of six (6) sediment samples were collected from upstream, mid-
stream, and downstream portions of the unnamed tributary of Long Creek, from the unnamed
tributary of Long Creek which transects the central portion of the Site, and from the influent and
effluent sides of a pond located on the northwestern portion of the Site. The results of the March
and July 2022 assessment activities did not indicate the presence of compounds in sediment at the
Site at concentrations above PSRGs and background for metals. Although not anticipated, if on-
Site sediment is suspected to be impacted (based on strong odor, unnatural color, sheen, etc.), the
sediment will be managed in accordance with Part 1.A. above and the DEQ Brownfields project
manager will be notified within 48 hours regarding the condition.

25
EMP Version 2, January 2021
A tabular summary of the sediment laboratory analytical results is provided in Table 5 and sample
locations are presented on Figure 3.

PART 5. SOIL VAPOR

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?

4) Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?

☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown 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:
The environmental professional will remain on call on an as-needed-basis during redevelopment
activities at the Site. If contaminated soil vapors are suspected during redevelopment activities
(based on unusual or strong odors, dizziness, lightheadedness, coughing, difficulty breathing, etc.),
the excavation area will immediately be evacuated, and the environmental professional will be
called to perform appropriate safety screening of the vapors. Safety screening activities include
monitoring the worker breathing zone with a calibrated multi-gas monitor (or similar instrument[s]
Assessment activities completed in April and June 2022 included collection of twenty-one (21) exterior
soil gas samples for laboratory analysis within the footprint of the proposed buildings. Locations of the
soil gas samples are shown in Figure 3, and a tabular summary of the laboratory analytical data in
comparison to the DEQ Vapor Intrusion Sub-slab and Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) is
provided in Table 6. In addition, compound concentrations above the DEQ Vapor Intrusion SGSLs are
shown in Figure 4C.

Results of soil gas sampling identified hexachloro-1,3-butadiene at concentrations above the DEQ Non-
Residential Vapor Intrusion SGSLs in at least one sample. No other compounds were detected at
concentrations above the Non-Residential SGSLs.

Results of hypothetical worst-case scenario risk calculator results for the soil gas to indoor air vapor
intrusion pathway indicate the cumulative worst-case risks are orders of magnitude below the
acceptable levels for industrial use. Based on these results, there is no indication of a potential vapor
intrusion risk at unacceptable levels for the proposed buildings at the Site.

26
EMP Version 2, January 2021
capable of detecting VOCs and combustible gases) for VOCs, methane, oxygen, carbon dioxide,
and hydrogen sulfide. If results indicate further action is warranted, appropriate engineering
controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented. In addition, the environmental
professional will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48 hours regarding the
condition.

PART 6. SUB‐SLAB SOIL VAPOR
1) Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the
following vapor intrusion screening levels (current version) in sub-slab soil vapor:
IHSB Residential Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
Groundwater:.….☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
IHSB Industrial/Commercial Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
2) Groundwater:…..☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown If data indicate that sub‐slab soil vapor
concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map showing the location of these exceedances.
3) At what depth(s) is sub‐slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☐0‐6 inches ☒Other, please
describe:
No building slabs are present at the Site. However, as noted above, compound concentrations have
been detected at concentrations above the Residential and Non-Residential SGSLs in exterior soil
gas samples at the Site.

4) Will workers encounter contaminated sub‐slab soil vapor during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

☒ If no, include rationale here:
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact
No building slabs are present at the Site. The environmental professional will remain on call on an
as-needed-basis during redevelopment activities at the Site. If contaminated soil vapors are
suspected during redevelopment activities (based on unusual or strong odors, dizziness,
lightheadedness, coughing, difficulty breathing, etc.), the excavation area will immediately be
evacuated, and the environmental professional will be called to perform appropriate safety
screening of the vapors. Safety screening activities include monitoring the worker breathing zone
with a calibrated multi-gas monitor (or similar instrument[s] capable of detecting VOCs and
combustible gases) for VOCs, methane, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. If results
indicate further action is warranted, appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial
fans) will be implemented. In addition, the environmental professional will contact the DEQ
Brownfields project manager within 48 hours regarding the condition.

27
EMP Version 2, January 2021

PART 7. INDOOR AIR

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

☐ If no, include rationale here:
Click or tap here to enter text.
4) In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact:

VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM
Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) proposed for this Brownfields Property?
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

☐ If no or unknown, include rationale here as well as plans for pre-occupancy sampling, as
necessary:
Based on the results of previous assessment activities conducted at the Site (which included the
collection of soil, groundwater, and soil vapor samples for laboratory analysis), cumulative risk
calculations indicate that potential carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks associated with the
detections are within the range of acceptable limits for non-residential use. Therefore, vapor
mitigation controls are not warranted at the Site.

If yes, ☐ VIMS Plan Attached or ☐ VIMS Plan to be submitted separately
If submitted separately provide date:
Click or tap here to enter text.

VIMS Plan shall be signed and sealed by a NC Professional Engineer
If no, please provide a brief rationale as to why no vapor mitigation plan is warranted:
As described above, results of assessment activities completed at the Site indicate that there is
no unacceptable vapor intrusion risk for industrial use at the Site.
In the unlikely event there is evidence of potential indoor air issues (i.e., unusual odors are identified
or workers report lightheadedness or other unusual physical reaction), during future redevelopment
activities, the area will be evacuated, and appropriate safety screening of the indoor air will be
performed. If warranted, safety screening procedures will include periodically screening indoor air for
volatile organic vapors with a calibrated PID. If the results indicate further action is warranted,
appropriate engineering controls (such as the use of industrial fans) will be implemented.

28
EMP Version 2, January 2021

Note that approval of this EMP does not imply approval with any vapor intrusion mitigation land
use restrictions or requirements of the recorded or draft Brownfields Agreement and that
separate approval of mitigation measures will be required.

CONTINGENCY PLAN – encountering unknown tanks, drums, or other waste materials

In this section please provide actions that will be taken to identify or manage unknown
potential new sources of contamination. During redevelopment activities, it is not uncommon
that unknown tanks, drums, fuel lines, landfills, or other waste materials are encountered.
Notification to DEQ Brownfields Project Manager, UST Section, Fire Department, and/or other
officials, as necessary and appropriate, is required when new potential source(s) of
contamination are discovered. These Notification Requirements were outlined on Page 1 of this
EMP.

Should potentially impacted materials be identified that are inconsistent with known site
impacts, the DEQ Brownfields Project Manager will be notified, and a sampling plan will be
prepared based on the EMP requirements and site-specific factors. Samples will generally be
collected to document the location of the potential impacts.

Check the following chemical analysis that are to be conducted on newly identified releases:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and
silver)
EPA Methods 6020/7471

☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.

☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.)
Please note, if field observations indicate the need for additional analyses, they should
be conducted, even if not listed here.
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Methods 7199

Please provide details on the proposed methods of managing the following commonly
encountered issues during redevelopment of Brownfields Properties.
During construction activities, contractors may encounter unknown subsurface environmental
conditions (i.e., tanks, drums, or waste materials) that if encountered, will require management. Prior
to beginning Site work, H&H will attend a pre-construction kick-off meeting with the PD and the
redevelopment contractors to discuss the DEQ-approved EMP and various scenarios when it would

29
EMP Version 2, January 2021
be appropriate and necessary to notify H&H of the discovery of unknown subsurface features or
potentially impacted media at the Site.

In the event that such conditions are encountered during Site development activities, the information
provided below will be used to direct environmental actions to be taken during these activities and
sampling data for potentially impacted soil and the disposition of impacted soil will be provided to
DEQ when the data becomes available.

Underground Storage Tanks:
In the event a UST or impacts associated with a UST release are discovered at the Site during
redevelopment activities, the UST and/or UST-related impacts will be addressed through the
Brownfields Program. DEQ Brownfields will be notified within 48 hours of the discovery of the UST.

If an undocumented UST is encountered, residual fluids (if present) will be removed, sampled for
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals, and transported off-Site for disposal at a suitable facility based on
the laboratory analytical results. Following the removal of residual fluids, the tank will be removed
and closure soil sampling will be performed. The number of soil samples will be consistent with DEQ
UST Section guidelines. The soil samples will be submitted for laboratory analysis of VOCs, SVOCs,
and RCRA metals. Impacted soil will be managed in accordance with the procedures described in the
Managing On-Site Soil (Part 1.A.) section outlined above.

If the UST cannot be removed for geotechnical or construction purposes, DEQ will be notified for
approval of in-place closure. Following DEQ approval, closure soil sampling will be performed in
general accordance with the DEQ UST Section guidelines. Where appropriate, the bottom of the UST
may be penetrated before abandonment to prevent fluid accumulation. If the UST contains residual
fluids, the fluids will be removed, sampled for VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals, and transported off-
Site for disposal at a suitable facility based on the laboratory analytical results.

Sub-Grade Feature/Pit:
If a sub-grade feature or pit is encountered and does not require removal for geotechnical or
construction purposes, it will be filled with soil or suitable fill and construction will proceed. Where
appropriate, the bottom may be penetrated before backfilling to prevent fluid accumulation. If the
pit contains waste, the material will be set aside in a secure area and will be sampled for waste
characterization purposes for TCLP VOCs, TCLP SVOCs, and TCLP metals and disposed off-Site at a
permitted facility or the waste will be managed in accordance with the Managing On-Site Soil section
outlined above in the EMP, whichever is most applicable based on the type of waste present. If the
pit must be removed and the observed waste characteristics indicate the concrete may potentially be
contaminated to a significant degree, the concrete will be sampled and analyzed by methods specified
by the disposal facility.

Buried Waste Material – Note that if buried waste, non-native fill, or any obviously filled materials
is encountered, the DEQ Brownfields Program must be notified to determine if investigation of
landfill gases is required:

30
EMP Version 2, January 2021
If excavation into buried wastes or significantly impacted soil occurs, the contractor is instructed to
stop work in that location and notify Hart & Hickman. Hart & Hickman will observe the suspect
materials and collect samples for laboratory analysis if warranted. Confirmation sampling will be
conducted at representative locations in the base and the sidewalls of the excavation after the waste
or significantly impacted soil is removed. The confirmation samples will be analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs,
and RCRA metals (or other analyses as appropriate based on the type of waste material). Information
will be provided to DEQ Brownfields regarding the permitted facility used for disposal of the waste or
significantly impacted soil. Areas of suspected contaminated soil that remain at the Site after
excavation is complete above the DEQ Industrial/Commercial PSRGs will be managed pursuant to this
plan.

Re-Use of Impacted Soils On-Site:
Please refer to the description outlined in the Managing On-Site Soil section (Part 1.A.) of the EMP
above.

If unknown, impacted soil is identified on-site, management on-site can be considered after the
project team provides the necessary information, outlined in Part 1.A. Item 11, for Brownfields
Project Manager approval prior to final placement on-site.

If other potential contingency plans are pertinent, please provide other details or scenarios as
needed below:
Click or tap here to enter text.

POST‐REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING

☒ Check this box to acknowledge that a Redevelopment Summary Report will be required for the
project. If the project duration is longer than one year, an annual update is required and will be
due by January 31 of each year, or 30 days after each one-year anniversary of the effective date of
this EMP (as agreed upon with the Project Manager). These reports will be required for as long as
physical redevelopment of the Brownfields Property continues, except that the final
Redevelopment Summary Report will be submitted within 90 days after completion of
redevelopment. Based on the estimated construction schedule, the first Redevelopment Summary
Report is anticipated to be submitted on 1/31/2024

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

31
EMP Version 2, January 2021
ultimate disposition of any soil, groundwater or other materials suspected or confirmed
to be contaminated with regulated substances; and
5. removal of any contaminated soil, water or other contaminated materials (for example,
concrete, demolition debris) from the Brownfields Property (copies of all legally required
manifests shall be included).

☒ Check box to acknowledge consent to provide a NC licensed P.G. or P.E. sealed, Redevelopment
Summary Report in compliance with the site’s Brownfields Agreement.

06/02/2023

33
EMP Version 2, January 2021

Tables
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSample IDCOMP-3DateDepth (ft bgs)Sample Type Range Range UnitsVOCs (8260D)Bromomethane0.0142 J, C7,v3 0.0156 C7,v3 0.0143 C7,v3 0.0172 C7,v3<16.1<12.4<21.7<12.0<13.21.46.4----2-Butanone (MEK)<35.6<32.2<23.9<33.90.0538 J C7, v3 0.0415 J C7, v3 0.0449 J C7, v3 0.0381 J C7, v3 0.0673 J C7, v35,50040,000----Xylene (Total)<4.2<3.8<2.8<4.00.0102 J0.0051 J0.0074 J0.0054 J0.0125 J120530----o-Xylene<3.3<3.0<2.2<3.10.01020.0051 J0.0074 J0.0054 J0.0125 J140590----SVOCs (8270E)bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate0.578<0.164<1.47<0.146<139<172<178<159<16339160----Metals (6020B/7471B/7199)Arsenic0.51 J 0.84 1.5 1.4 0.92 1.0 1.1 0.77 0.71 0.68 3.0 1.4 - 2.9 1.0 - 18Barium87.189.611580.231224110815399.53,10047,00049.6 - 71.050 - 1,000Cadmium<0.039<0.0390.0970.035 J<0.0370.049 J <0.039<0.039<0.0421.420<0.039 - <0.0421.0 - 10Chromium (total)17.222.072.641.161.534.327.615.284.1NENE30.0 - 77.07.0 - 300Chromium (VI)0.539 J1.18 J1.682.251.05 J0.544 J0.381 J1.03 J2.350.316.51.68 - 2.89NSChromium (III)16.6620.8270.9038.8560.4533.7627.2214.1781.7523,000350,00028.32 - 74.11NSLead1.62.64.93.62.21.12.72.21.44008001.9 - 6.8ND - 50Mercury<0.011<0.010<0.00990.0460.0420.019 J 0.0240.011 J0.013 J4.7700.015 - 0.0500.03 - 0.52Selenium0.11 J0.23 J0.39 J0.38 J0.27 J0.17 J0.36 J0.22 J0.17 J781,2000.45 - 0.88<0.1 - 0.8Silver<0.18<0.18<0.16<0.15<0.17<0.17<0.18<0.18<0.19781,200<0.18 - 0.21ND - 5.0 Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022.2) Range values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005; Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surfaceNS = not specified; NE = not established; -- = not applicableC7 = Compound may be laboratory conaminant (not present in method blank).v3 = The continuing calibration was below method acceptance limit.J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. M1 = Matrix spike recovery exceeded the quality control limits.mg/kgWestern AreaCOMP-4/COMP-DUP-2 COMP-5/COMP-DUP-1Screening CriteriaResidential PSRGs (1)Industrial/ Commercial PSRGs (1)Site-Specific Background MetalsRegional Background Metals (2)Eastern AreaCOMP-2/COMP-DUP13/30/2022 6/29/2022 6/27/20220-5 0-5COMP-1/COMP-DUP23/31/2022Composite0-5https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMPTable 1 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSample IDBG-1 BG-2 BG-3DateDepth (ft bgs)Sample Type Range Range UnitsVOCs (8260D)Bromomethane0.0141 C7,v3 0.0187 C7,v3------1.46.4----2-Butanone (MEK)<29.8<38.6------5,50040,000----Xylene (Total)<3.5<4.6------120530----o-Xylene<2.7<3.6------140590----SVOCs (8270E)bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate<0.146 <0.144-- -- --39 160----Metals (6020B/7471B/7199)Arsenic0.28 J 0.34 J 1.4 2.9 1.6 0.68 3.0 1.4 - 2.9 1.0 - 18Barium57.364.849.6 M166.171.03,10047,00049.6 - 71.050 - 1,000Cadmium0.200.26<0.039<0.042<0.0411.420<0.039 - <0.0421.0 - 10Chromium (total)12.313.762.1 M177.030.0NENE30.0 - 77.07.0 - 300Chromium (VI)0.328 J0.368 J2.332.891.680.316.51.68 - 2.89NSChromium (III)11.9713.3359.7774.1128.3223,000350,00028.32 - 74.11NSLead1.31.81.96.85.94008001.9 - 6.8ND - 50Mercury<0.0097<0.00890.015 J0.0500.015 J4.7700.015 - 0.0500.03 - 0.52Selenium<0.090<0.0910.45 J0.880.45 J781,2000.45 - 0.88<0.1 - 0.8Silver<0.15<0.15<0.18 M10.21 J<0.19781,200<0.18 - 0.21ND - 5.0 Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022.2) Range values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005; Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surfaceNS = not specified; NE = not established; -- = not applicableC7 = Compound may be laboratory conaminant (not present in method blank).v3 = The continuing calibration was below method acceptance limit.J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. M1 = Matrix spike recovery exceeded the quality control limits.mg/kg Sanitary Septic SystemBackground SB-1/SB-DUP3/29/20226-84/4/20222-3Screening CriteriaResidential PSRGs (1)Industrial/ Commercial PSRGs (1)Site-Specific Background MetalsRegional Background Metals (2)Grabhttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMPTable 1 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2Summary of Well Construction DetailsRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Well IDTotal Depth (ft bgs)Screen Length (ft)Screen Interval (ft bgs)Depth to Groundwater (ft bgs)TMW-1301515-3019.24TMW-2*1058.5-13.5DryTMW-3351520-3527.38TMW-4351520-3527.46TMW-5351520-3525.60TMW-620155-2017.43TMW-7251510-2512.01TMW-820155-2010.75TMW-9351520-3524.96TMW-10351520-3521.44TMW-11301515-3017.15TMW-1223158-2311.29TMW-13301515-3018.46TMW-1415105-156.75TMW-15251510-2520.05Notes:Depth to groundwater measurements collected by H&H in March and June 2022 and February 2023.TMW = temporary monitoring well; ft bgs = feet below ground surface*TMW-2 encountered hollow stem auger refusal on rock at approximately 13.5 feet bgs.https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP/BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 2 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3A Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaDowngradient of Sanitary Septic SystemEastern Site BoundarySouthern Site BoundarySample IDTMW-1 TMW-2* TMW-5 TMW-7 TMW-8Date3/30/2022UnitsVOCs (8260D)1,1-Dichloroethene<0.35 NS <0.35 <0.35 <0.35350 39 160Naphthalene<0.64 NS <0.640.78 J, C8<0.646 4.6 20SVOCs (8270E)ALL BDLNSALL BDLALL BDLALL BDL------Metals (6020B/7470A)Arsenic0.15 JNS0.14 J<0.0870.16 J 10 NE NEBarium64.7NS13.9 14.1 34.0 700 NE NECadmium0.48NS0.028 J<0.060 <0.0602NENEChromium (Total)0.57NS12.70.60 J 0.72 J 10 NE NELead0.053 JNS0.21<0.077 <0.07715 NE NEMercury<0.070 NS <0.0700.52 J<0.0721NENESelenium<0.067 NS0.25 J<0.070 <0.07020 NE NESilver<0.16 NS <0.16 <0.12 <0.1220 NE NENotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A NCAC 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards (2L Standards) dated April 2022.2) DEQ Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) dated July 2022.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values exceed the 2L Standard.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; NE = not established; BDL = below laboratory method detection limit; -- = not applicable; NS = not sampledJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. * = TMW-2 was not sampled due to drill rig refesual at approximately 13.5 feet below ground surface and above the water table.µg/L4/1/20226/29/20222L Standards (1) Residential GWSLs (2)Non-Residential GWSLs (2)CentralScreening Criteria https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 3A (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3A Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSample IDDateUnitsVOCs (8260D)1,1-Dichloroethene0.61 J 0.70 J<0.35 <0.35<0.35 <0.35350 39 160Naphthalene<0.64 <0.64 <0.64 <0.64 <0.64 <0.646 4.6 20SVOCs (8270E)ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL ALL BDL-- -- --Metals (6020B/7470A)Arsenic0.16 J 0.14 J 0.095 J 0.11 J<0.087 <0.08710 NE NEBarium14.7 14.1 9.6 9.8 1.1 1.2 700 NE NECadmium<0.016 <0.016 <0.016 <0.016 <0.060 <0.0602NENEChromium (Total)2.5 2.2 2.1 2.1<0.50 <0.5010 NE NELead0.072 J 0.056 J 0.058 J 0.065 J<0.077 <0.07715 NE NEMercury<0.070 <0.070 <0.070 <0.0700.51 J 0.50 J 1 NE NESelenium0.079 J 0.073 J 0.33 J 0.33 J<0.070 <0.07020 NE NESilver<0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.16 <0.12 <0.1220 NE NENotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A NCAC 02L.0202 Groundwater Standards (2L Standards) dated April 2022.2) DEQ Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) dated July 2022.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values exceed the 2L Standard.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; NE = not established; BDL = below laboratory method detection limit; -- = not applicable; NS = not sampledJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. * = TMW-2 was not sampled due to drill rig refesual at approximately 13.5 feet below ground surface and above the water table.g/L2L Standards (1) Residential GWSLs (2)Non-Residential GWSLs (2)6/29/2022TMW-6/ GW-DUP-14/1/2022 3/30/2022TMW-3/GW-DUP-2Northeastern Site BoundaryScreening Criteria TWM-4/GW-DUP-1https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 3A (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3BSummary of Groundwater PFAS Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSanitary Septic SystemSample IDTMW-1 TMW-9 TMW-11 TMW-12 TMW-13 TMW-14 TMW-15Sample Date02/27/2023UnitsPFAS (EPA 537.1 & USEPA Draft 1633)Perfluorobutanoic acidNA NA NA0.0061 J<0.033 <0.033 <0.0040 <0.0040 <0.0038 <0.00380.0112 NE NE NEPerfluoropentanoic acidNANANA0.0031 J<0.0083<0.0083<0.0010<0.0010<0.000960.0016 J<0.0010NENENEPerfluorohexanoic acid0.00520.13 EQ0.12 EQ0.00960.0138 J0.117 J<0.000500.0013 J0.00240.0011 J0.0012 JNENENEPerfluoroheptanoic acid0.00840.17 EQ0.17 EQ0.01960.02180.02280.0014 J0.00360.00250.0011 J0.0017 JNENENEPerfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)0.34.8 Q4.70.5580.6460.6760.02080.09780.05960.00650.01410.0000040.0600.004Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)<0.0019<0.0019 <0.0019<0.00054<0.0051<0.0051<0.00061<0.00061<0.00059<0.000580.0011 JNE0.059NEPerfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS)<0.0019<0.0019<0.0019<0.00089<0.0083<0.0083<0.00100.0015 J<0.00096<0.00095<0.001026.0NEPerfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS)<0.00190.0022 Q0.002 Q<0.00089<0.0083<0.0083<0.00100.0018 J<0.00096<0.00095<0.0010NE0.39NEPerfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS)0.01<0.0019<0.00190.00094 J<0.0083<0.0083<0.00100.0016 J0.00420.00240.00250.000020.0400.004Notes1) EPA-established Health Advisory Level for life-time exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water (EPA 822-F-22-002, June 2022)2) EPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) from table dated November 2022 (Lifetime Incremental Cancer Risk of 1 x 10-6 and Non-Carcinogenic Hazard Quotient of 1.0) 3) EPA Proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) Maxmium Contaminant Levels (MCLs), March 2023Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical method for TMW-1 and TMW-3 is PFAS by EPA 537.1 and the laboratory analytical method for TMW-9 through TMW-15 is PFAS USEPA Draft 1633Only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values indicate an exceedance of EPA Health Advisory LevelUnderline values indicate an exceedance of EPA Tapwater RSLShaded values indicate an exceedance of the EPA Proposed MCLsPFAS = per and polyfluorinated substances; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentrationQ = laboratory surrogate failureE = quantitation of compound exceeds the calibration rangeTMW-10/TMW-DUPDeeper Cut Areas - Central Portion of Site02/28/2023TMW-3/GW-DUP-24/1/2022Northeastern Site Boundaryµg/LScreening CriteriaEPA Health Advisory Level (1)Tapwater RSL (2)EPA Proposed MCLs (3)02/27/202302/28/2023Stormwater Pondshttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 2 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3BSummary of Groundwater PFAS Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSample IDField Blank-1 Equipment Blank-1 Field BlankEquipment BlankSample DateUnitsPFAS (EPA 537.1 & USEPA Draft 1633)Perfluorobutanoic acidNA NA <0.0036 <0.0036NE NE NEPerfluoropentanoic acidNANA<0.00089<0.00089NENENEPerfluorohexanoic acid<0.0018<0.0018<0.00045<0.00045NENENEPerfluoroheptanoic acid<0.0018<0.0018<0.00045<0.00045NENENEPerfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)<0.0018<0.0018<0.00045<0.000450.0000040.0600.004Perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA)<0.0018<0.0018<0.00054<0.00054NE0.059NEPerfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS)<0.0018<0.0018<0.00089<0.0008926.0NEPerfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS)<0.0018<0.0018<0.00089<0.00089NE0.39NEPerfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS)<0.0018<0.0018<0.00089<0.000890.000020.0400.004Notes1) EPA-established Health Advisory Level for life-time exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water (EPA 822-F-22-002, June 2022)2) EPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) from table dated November 2022 (Lifetime Incremental Cancer Risk of 1 x 10-6 and Non-Carcinogenic Hazard Quotient of 1.0) 3) EPA Proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) Maxmium Contaminant Levels (MCLs), March 2023Concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical method for TMW-1 and TMW-3 is PFAS by EPA 537.1 and the laboratory analytical method for TMW-9 through TMW-15 is PFAS USEPA Draft 1633Only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values indicate an exceedance of EPA Health Advisory LevelUnderline values indicate an exceedance of EPA Tapwater RSLShaded values indicate an exceedance of the EPA Proposed MCLsPFAS = per and polyfluorinated substances; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentrationQ = laboratory surrogate failureE = quantitation of compound exceeds the calibration rangeQuality Control/Quality Assuranceµg/L4/1/2022Screening CriteriaEPA Health Advisory Level (1)Tapwater RSL (2)EPA Proposed MCLs (3)2/28/2023https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 2 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4Summary of Surface Water Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaPond InfluentSample IDSW-4 SW-6 SW-2DateAcute Chronic Water Supply Fish Consumption Aquatic Life Fish ConsumptionUnitsVOCs (8260D)ALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDL------------SVOCs (8270E)ALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDL------------Metals (6020B/7470A)Arsenic0.34 J0.37 J0.55 J1.72.72.62.9340150NENENENEBarium28.026.841.55015.816.917.821,000 (3)NENE NE 21,000 200,000Cadmium 0.025 J 0.025 J<0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.060 <0.0601.79 (4)0.29 (4)NENENENEChromium 5.96.14.65.10.52 J0.52 J0.58 J410.44 (5)53.39(5)NENENENELead1.00.991.11.10.18 J0.22 J0.21 J37.70 (4)1.47 (4)NENENENEMercury <0.070<0.0700.14 J0.16 J0.11 J0.12 J0.13 J0.012NENENENENESelenium0.14 J0.15 J<0.070<0.070<0.070<0.070<0.0705NE1704,200NENESilver <0.16<0.16<0.12<0.12<0.12<0.12<0.121.62 (2)0.06NE NE NE NEHardness (SM 2340B)Total Hardness NA NA 81,000 76,200 51,400 53,200 50,900-- -- -- -- -- --Notes:1) North Carolina 15A NCAC 02B.0202 Surface Water Quality Standards (2B Standards) for Class C Surface Waters dated July 2021.2) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (NRWQC) dated July 2016.3) North Carolina In-Stream Target Values for Surface Waters dated July 2021.4) Standard derived using a Site-specific geometric mean hardness concentration of 61.21 milligrams per liter (mg/L).5) Chromium 2B Acute and Chronic Standards are calculated with Chromium III values.Samples were collected from on-Site portions of an unnamed tributary of Long Creek, a Class C surface water body. Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (µg/L). Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; NE = not established; NA = Not analyzedBDL = below laboratory method detection limit; -- = not applicable J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. NC 2B Standards(1)3/29/2022SW-1/SW-DUPScreening Criteria SW-3/SW-DUP-1Pond Effluent7/1/2022Tributary of Long CreekALL BDLEPA NRWQC (2)In-Stream Target Values (3)ALL BDLµg/Lhttps://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 4 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 5Summary of Sediment Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaPond InfluentSample IDSED-4 SED-5 SED-6 SED-2Site Specific Background MetalsRegional Background Metals (2)DateRange RangeUnitsVOCs (8260D)Bromomethane0.0212 C7,v3 0.0134 J,C7,v3<16.7 <19.8 <38.6 <21.7 <28.4 <26.61.4 6.4 ---- --2-Butanone (MEK)<35.1 <33.10.0588 J, C7, v3 0.0817 J, C7, v3 0.16 J, C7, v30.0876 J, C7, v3 0.0901 J, C7, v3 0.141 J, C7, v3 5,500 40,000---- --Chloroform<4.4 <4.2 <0.0064 <0.0076 <0.0149<0.0083 <0.01090.0160 J0.34 1.5 ---- --Ethylbenzene<3.4 <3.20.0053 J<0.0058 <0.01140.0072 J<0.00840.0136 J6.1 27 ---- --Toluene<2.1 <2.0<0.003 <0.0036 <0.00690.0135 J<0.0051 <0.0048990 9,700 ---- --Xylene (Total)<4.2 <3.90.0219 0.0136 J 0.0236 J 0.0272 J<0.01020.0463 120 530---- --m&p-Xylene<5.0 <4.70.0102 J<0.0086 <0.01670.0124 J<0.01230.0243 J120 500 ---- --o-Xylene<3.2 <3.00.0116 0.0136 0.0236 J 0.0148<0.00790.0221140 590 ---- --p-Isopropyltoluene<3.6 <3.4<0.0052 <0.0062 <0.0120.117<0.0088 <0.0083NE NE ---- --SVOCs (8270E)ALL BDLALL BDL ALL BDLALL BDLALL BDLALL BDL----------Metals (6020B/7470A)Arsenic3.4 J6.63.90.691.31.31.01.30.683.0--1.4 - 1.61.0 - 18Barium39.138.525.446.113277.442.341.43,10047,000--49.6 - 71.050 - 1,000Cadmium <0.039<0.040<0.036<0.0390.088 J<0.041<0.040<0.0371.420--<0.039 - <0.0421.0 - 10Chromium (Total)83.1 M1, R126914727.358.649.528.125.7NENE--30.0 - 77.07.0 - 300Chromium (VI)2.823.312.512.22<0.4473.582.070.908 J0.316.5--1.68 - 2.89NSChromium (III)80.28265.69144.4925.0858.1545.9226.0324.8023,000350,000--28.32 - 74.1NSLead10.511.97.53.46.95.03.33.7400800--1.9 - 6.8ND - 50Mercury 0.017 J0.018 J<0.00940.014 J0.0380.0280.017 J0.015 J4.770--0.015 - 0.0500.03 - 0.52Selenium0.34 J0.56 J0.25 J0.42 J0.42 J0.29 J0.31 J0.34 J781,200--0.45 - 0.88<0.1 - 0.8Silver <0.18<0.18<0.17<0.18<0.28<0.19<0.18<0.17781,200--<0.18 - 0.21ND - 5.0 Metals (6010D TCLP)Chromium--<0.036<0.10-- -- -- -- ---- -- 5 mg/L -- --Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) dated July 2022.2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005; Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous U.S. Soils.3) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Maximum Concentrations of Contaminants for Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP) regulatory level dated November 2004.Concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) unless otherwise specified.Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.With the exception of metals, only constituents detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surfaceNS = not specified; NE = not established; -- = not applicable; BDL = below the laboratory method detection limitC7 = Compound may be laboratory conaminant (not present in method blank); v3 = The continuing calibration was below method acceptance limit.M1 = Matrix spike exceeded the quality control limits; R1 = Relative percent difference in compound was outside control limits.J = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. ALL BDLSED-1/SED-DUP3/29/2022Tributary of Long Creek7/1/2022Pond Effluentmg/kgResidential PSRGs (1)Industrial/Commercial PSRGs (1)Maximum TCLP Concentration (3)Screening Criteria SED-3/SED-DUP-1https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 5 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 6 Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSample IDSG-1 SG-2 SG-3 SG-4 SG-5 SG-6 SG-8 SG-9 SG-10Sample DateSample Type UnitsVOCs (TO-15)1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane0.644 J0.843 J<0.5610.843 J<0.561<0.561<0.561<0.561<0.561<0.5610.728 J35,000440,0001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene6.693.656.297.644.965.081.55 J1.48 J4.194.595.254205,3001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene1.47 J0.895 J1.77 J1.74 J1.05 J1.05 J0.398 J<0.2361.47 J<0.2361.34 J4205,3001,3-Butadiene9.377.9355.270.28.1517.22.181.98<0.32814.62.553.1411,3-Dichlorobenzene4.55 J1.92 J3.66 J4.76 J3.21 J4.24 J0.890 J0.944 J1.79 J2.75 J2.58 JNENE1,4-Dichlorobenzene1.32 J0.740 J1.01 J1.24 J1.26 J1.16 J<0.186<0.1860.547 J0.830 J0.758 J8.51102-Butanone (MEK)2.902.887.425.944.232.670.926 J0.749 J1.901.33 J4.2435,000440,0002-Propanol6.943.75 J7.158.074.66 J6.101.67 J1.67 J4.21 J6.8319.31,40018,0004-Ethyltoluene1.40 J0.821 J1.46 J<0.1280.964 J0.865 J<0.128<0.1281.61 J<0.1281.12 JNENE4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)0.881 J<0.121<0.1210.987 J0.504 J<0.121<0.121<0.121<0.121<0.121<0.12121,000260,000Acetone11.610.914.732.719.311.43.35 J,B3.50 J,B13.58.1715.1NENEBenzene9.0713.134.933.93.263.573.843.7919.222.711.012160Carbon disulfide8.00 B9.5544.243.56.8613.02.48 J,B2.56 J,B13.921.38.794,90061,000Carbon tetrachloride<0.155<0.1550.610 J0.610 J<0.155<0.155<0.155<0.155<0.155<0.155<0.15516200Chloroethane<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.164<0.16470,000880,000Chloroform<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.0864<0.08644.153Chloromethane<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.0673<0.06732.710.653 J6307,900Cyclohexane12.69.9522.528.4<0.1616.822.28 J2.28 J8.2817.517.842,000530,000Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.1342.62<0.134<0.1342.492.36 J2.702.532.80<0.1343.167008,800EthanolNANANANANANANANANANANANENEEthyl acetate1.40 J<0.136<0.136<0.1361.65 J1.83<0.136<0.136<0.136<0.136<0.1364906,100Ethylbenzene3.634.659.3811.73.252.181.81 J1.80 J10.24.184.4237490Heptane5.0924.564.951.93.572.503.092.9229.321.314.42,80035,000Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.0336<0.03363604,700Methylene Chloride0.945 J0.667 J<0.489<0.4890.716 J1.01 J<0.489<0.4891.00 J<0.4893.993,40053,000Naphthalene0.650 J<0.1830.660 J0.7390.776 J0.739 J<0.183<0.183<0.183<0.183<0.1832.836n-Hexane7.5617.410285.95.065.133.173.0810.640.715.64,90061,000Propylene12360.77491,10048.014017.617.2<0.24248933.721,000260,000Styrene1.52 J0.677 J2.1910.36.341.82 J<0.1240.349 J1.04 J2.4967.67,00088,000Tetrachloroethene1.68 J5.116.575.970.997 J<0.1811.46 J1.40 J11.97.582.76 J2803,500Tetrahydrofuran0.790 J<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.107<0.1072.5214,000180,000Toluene39.385.915817519.98.0220.119.615374.750.435,000440,000Trichlorofluoromethane1.50 J<0.130<0.130<0.130<0.130<0.1301.37 J1.34 J1.71 J<0.1302.25 JNENEVinyl chloride<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.127<0.1275.6280m&p-Xylene12.613.828.930.49.517.125.12 J5.01 J29.011.715.37008,800o-Xylene5.224.189.359.563.502.891.72 J1.69 J7.884.095.597008,800Xylene (total)17.818.038.340.013.010.06.84 J6.70 J36.915.820.97008,800Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated July 2022.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical method is shown in parentheses. Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values indicate an exceedance of Residential SGSLs. Underlined values indicate an exceedance of Non-Residential SGSLs. VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.B = Analyte detected in method blank.Total xylene concentrations for the June 2022 samples are based on the sum of m&p-xylene and o-xylene concentrations.April 2022 samples were analyzed by Waypoint Analytical Laboratory and June 2022 samples were analyzed by Pace Analytical Laboratory.Proposed Building Footprintµg/m3Residential SGSLs(1)Non-Residential SGSLs(1)Screening CriteriaSG-7/SG-DUP-1Exterior Soil Gas 4/1/2022https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 6 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 6 Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataRhyne Road AssemblageCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. BCP-180Evaluation AreaSample IDSG-11 SG-13 SG-14 SG-15 SG-16 SG-17 SG-18 SG-19 SG-20 SG-21Sample Date7/1/2022Sample Type UnitsVOCs (TO-15)1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane2.0<1.31.7<1.3<3.3<1.31.61.41.4<1.31.61.635,000440,0001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene1.9<0.430.94 J0.92 J<1.11.02.23.02.82.10.45 J1.64205,3001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene0.67 J<0.520.73 J<0.52<1.3<0.520.77 J1.20.96 J0.75 J<0.52<0.524205,3001,3-Butadiene<0.375.75.22.7<0.93<0.37<0.37<0.37<0.37<0.37<0.37<0.373.1411,3-Dichlorobenzene<0.67<0.67<0.67<0.67<1.7<0.67<0.67<0.67<0.67<0.67<0.67<0.67NENE1,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.79<0.790.79 J<0.79<2.0<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.798.51102-Butanone (MEK)18 J<6.3<6.3<6.3<16<6.37.7 J<6.3<6.3<6.36.3 J<6.335,000440,0002-Propanol<3.4<3.4<3.4<3.4<8.5<3.4<3.4<3.4<3.4<3.4<3.4<3.41,40018,0004-Ethyltoluene<0.60<0.60<0.60<0.60<1.5<0.60<0.60<0.60<0.60<0.60<0.60<0.60NENE4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.44<0.44<0.44<0.44<1.1<0.44<0.44<0.440.69 J<0.44<0.44<0.4421,000260,000Acetone<11<11<1125<29<11<11<112217 J<11<11NENEBenzene28109.74.35157.2180.52 J0.750.52 J5.712160Carbon disulfide706.85.2 J3.8 J<1.4108.26414172.6 J374,90061,000Carbon tetrachloride<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<2.5<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.016200Chloroethane<0.47<0.47<0.47<0.47<1.2<0.47<0.47<0.47<0.47<0.47<0.472.270,000880,000Chloroform<0.93<0.93<0.93<0.93<2.3<0.93<0.931.32.0<0.93<0.931.04.153Chloromethane1.23.12.91.3<0.82<0.33<0.33<0.330.54 J2.4<0.331.66307,900Cyclohexane8.912135.1<1.0<0.423.8<0.42<0.422.4<0.421142,000530,000Dichlorodifluoromethane3.02.93.12.82.82.72.92.72.82.72.82.77008,800Ethanol3231241720 J24358.9 J6.7 J<6.62112 JNENEEthyl acetate<3.6<3.6<3.6<3.6<9.1<3.6<3.6<3.6<3.6<3.6<3.6<3.64906,100Ethylbenzene5.20.991.30.891.4 J2.31.7122.31.9<0.511.837490Heptane191.61.81.2<1.39.33.23.6<0.520.72 J<0.521.32,80035,000Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.56<0.56<0.56<0.56<1.4<0.56<0.56<0.56<0.56<0.56<0.561.7 L-05, V-063604,700Methylene Chloride<3.2<3.2<3.2<3.2<8.1<3.2<3.2<3.2<3.2<3.2<3.2<3.23,40053,000Naphthalene<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<2.0<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.79<0.792.836n-Hexane7112 J11 J9.0 J<9.27224 J16 J5.4 J6.0 J8.1 J354,90061,000Propylene64055703917 J44053021<3.03.9 J205721,000260,000Styrene3.30.941.11.33.70.73 J2.20.850.65 J190120.68 J7,00088,000Tetrachloroethene<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<2.6<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.0<1.02803,500Tetrahydrofuran<0.97<0.97<0.97<0.97<2.4<0.97<0.97<0.974.0 J<0.97<0.97<0.9714,000180,000Toluene340433829134759259.36.80.69 J6.835,000440,000Trichlorofluoromethane2.0 J<1.31.7 J<1.3<3.3<1.31.6 J1.4 J1.4 J<1.31.6 J1.6 JNENEVinyl chloride4.52.62.4<0.46<1.20.562.50.78<0.46<0.46<0.463.55.6280m&p-Xylene5.71.4 J2.01.7 J<2.43.03.2449.15.4<0.974.67008,800o-Xylene3.30.83 J1.00.961.8 J1.91.9253.83.00.56 J2.67008,800Xylene (total)9.02.233.02.661.84.95.16912.98.40.567.27008,800Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Vapor Intrusion Sub-Slab & Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) dated July 2022.Concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Laboratory analytical method is shown in parentheses. Only compounds detected in at least one sample are shown in the table above.Bold values indicate an exceedance of Residential SGSLs. Underlined values indicate an exceedance of Non-Residential SGSLs. VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NE = not established; NA = not analyzedJ = Compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.B = Analyte detected in method blank.Total xylene concentrations for the June 2022 samples are based on the sum of m&p-xylene and o-xylene concentrations.April 2022 samples were analyzed by Waypoint Analytical Laboratory and June 2022 samples were analyzed by Pace Analytical Laboratory.µg/m3SG-12/SG-DUPProposed Building FootprintScreening CriteriaResidential SGSLs(1)Non-Residential SGSLs(1)6/30/2022Exterior Soil Gas https://harthick.sharepoint.com/sites/MasterFiles‐1/Shared Documents/AAA‐Master Projects/Beacon Partners‐ BEP or BCP/BCP‐180 Rhyne Road Brownfields/EMP/final to DEQ/Rev 1/Tables & Figures/Data Tables_EMP4/26/2023Table 6 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC

Figures
USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation
Program, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography
Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and
National Transportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S. Census
Bureau TIGER/Line data; USFS Road Data; Natural Earth Data; U.S.
Department of State Humanitarian Information Unit; and NOAA National
Centers for Environmental Information, U.S. Coastal Relief Model. Data
refreshed June, 2022.
SITE LOCATION MAP
RHYNE ROAD ASSEMBLAGE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE: 2-7-23
JOB NO: BCP-180
REVISION NO: 0
FIGURE. 1
2923 South Tryon Street - Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007 (p) 704-586-0373 (f)License # C-1269 / # C-245 Geology
TITLE
PROJECT
0 2,000 4,000
SCALE IN FEET
Path: S:\AAA-Master Projects\Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP\BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields\Figures\Figures\BCP.180_FIG 1.mxdN
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE, NORTH CAROLINA 2019
QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
SITE
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BCP-180
DATE: 3-21-23
FIGURE NO. 2
RHYNE ROAD ASSEMBLAGE
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SITE MAP
MT
H
O
L
L
Y

R
O
A
D
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
UNDEVELOPED LAND
RHYNE WEST BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY
(BPN: 25079-21-060)
UNDEVELOPED
LAND
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENCE
(10039 MOUNT HOLLY ROAD)RESIDENCES
(10109 AND 10129 MOUNT HOLLY ROAD)RHYNE ROADNOTES:
1.PARCEL DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY
GIS (2022).
2.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG
COUNTY GIS (2021).
3.IHSB = INACTIVE HAZARDOUS SITES BRANCH
BPN = BROWNFIELDS PROJECT NUMBER
RESIDENTIAL
UNDEVELOPED
LAND
FONTAINE MODIFICATION COMPANY
(120 & 126 RHYNE ROAD)
FONTAINE MODIFICATION COMPANY
(9827 MT. HOLLY ROAD)
LIVINGSTONE COATING CORPORATION
(240 RHYNE ROAD)
(IHSB NO. NONCD0002012)
RHYNE ROAD
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY
(BPN: 26016-22-060)
BRAZOS STREET
WA
X
A
H
A
C
H
I
E

A
V
E
N
U
E
RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL
RHYNE ROAD
(IHSB NO. NONCD0002397)
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
RAILROAD
DEDICATED TO
MECKENBURG COUNTY
90' TRAIL EASEMENT
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP\BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields\EMP\Figures\BCP-180 FIGURES_2023.01.26.dwg, FIG 2 SITE MAP, 3/21/2023 11:21:45 AM, tmarbuery
MW-9MW-14RW-3
MW-13
MW-4
RW-2
12
3
MW-8
Q67-MW-1
MW-2
MW-11
MW-15
MW-3MW-6
MW-7
SED-1/SW-1
SED-2/SW-2
SED-3/SW-3
SED-6/SW-6
COMP-1
COMP-2
SG-7
SG-8
SG-1 SG-2
SG-3
SG-5 SG-6
SG-4
SG-9 SG-10
BG-1
BG-2
BG-3
SG-12
SG-13
SG-16
SG-15
SG-17
SG-20 SG-19
SG-18
SG-21
COMP-4
SG-11
COMP-5
SED-5
COMP-3
SED-4/SW-4
TMW-6
TMW-4
TMW-3
TMW-7
TMW-5 TMW-1/SB-1
TMW-2*
TMW-13
TMW-14
TMW-15
TMW-9
TMW-10
TMW-11
TMW-12
TMW-8
SG-14
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BCP-180
DATE: 5-5-23
FIGURE NO. 3
RHYNE ROAD ASSEMBLAGE
RHYNE ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
LO
N
G

C
R
E
E
K

T
R
I
B
U
T
A
R
Y
MT

H
O
L
L
Y

R
O
A
D
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 GeologyRHYNE ROADLEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
RAILROAD
SEPTIC SYSTEM
POND
RECOVERY WELL (LIVINGSTONE)
SHALLOW MONITORING WELL (LIVINGSTONE)
BEDROCK MONITORING WELL (LIVINGSTONE)
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL (APRIL 2022)
CO-LOCATED SOIL BORING AND TEMPORARY
MONITORING WELL (APRIL 2022)
CO-LOCATED COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE AND
SOIL GAS POINT (APRIL 2022)
CO-LOCATED SEDIMENT AND SURFACE
WATER SAMPLE (APRIL 2022)
BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE (APRIL 2022)
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL (JUNE 2022)
COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE (JUNE 2022)
CO-LOCATED COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE AND
SOIL GAS POINT (JUNE 2022)
SEDIMENT SAMPLE (JUNE 2022)
CO-LOCATED SEDIMENT AND SURFACE
WATER SAMPLE (JUNE 2022)
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL LOCATION
(FEBRUARY 2023)
NOTES:
1. PARCEL DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY
GIS (2021).
2. MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS OBTAINED FROM THE
2018 GROUNDWATER POTENTIOMENTRIC MAP PREPARED
BY ANTENA GROUP.
3. LEACH FIELDS, SEPTIC TANKS AND PIPING LOCATIONS
ARE APPROXIMATE AND WERE OBTAINED FROM SITE MAP
PREPARED BY DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS,
INC. DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1995.
4. * TMW-2 WAS NIT INSTALLED DUE TO HALLOW STEM
AUGER REFUSAL AT 13.5' BELOW THE GROUND SURFACE.
LOCATION AND TYPE OF SEPTIC
SYSTEM LEACH FIELD
1 INDUSTRIAL
2 INDUSTRIAL
3 DOMESTIC
SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
90' TRAIL
EASEMENT
DEDICATED TO
MECKLENBURG
COUNTY
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP\BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields\Western (Additional) Phase II ESA\Additional Phase II Figures\BCP.180_20230323_Figure 3.dwg, FIG 3 SAMPLES PHASE II, 5/5/2023 11:57:46 AM, tmarbuery
1
2
3
TMW-1/SB-1
TMW-5
TMW-7
TMW-8
TMW-2*
TMW-3
TMW-4
TMW-6
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BCP-180
DATE: 5-5-23
FIGURE NO. 4A
MT

H
O
L
L
Y

R
O
A
D
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 GeologyRHYNE ROADGROUNDWATER COMPOUND
CONCENTRATION MAP
90' TRAIL EASEMENT
DEDICATED TO
MECKENBURG COUNTY
90' TRAIL EASEMENT
LEGEND
BROWNFIEDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
RAILROAD
SEPTIC SYSTEM
POND
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL (APRIL 2022)
CO-LOCATED SOIL BORING AND TEMPORARY
MONITORING WELL (APRIL 2022)
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL (JUNE 2022)
NOTES:
1. PARCEL DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS
(2022).
2. MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS OBTAINED FROM THE 2018
GROUNDWATER POTENTIOMENTRIC MAP PREPARED BY
ANTENA GROUP.
3. LEACH FIELDS, SEPTIC TANKS AND PIPING LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE AND WERE OBTAINED FROM SITE MAP
PREPARED BY DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1995.
4. * TMW-2 WAS NOT INSTALLED DUE TO HALLOW STEM AUGER
REFUSAL AT 13.5' BELOW THE GROUND SURFACE.
5. CONCENTRACTIONS REPORTED IN MICROGRAMS PER
LITER (μg/L).
6.​BOLD VALUE EXCEEDS THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ) 15A
NCAC 02L.0202 GROUNDWATER STANDARDS (2L STANDARDS)
DATED APRIL 2022.
LOCATION AND TYPE OF SEPTIC
SYSTEM LEACH FIELD
1 INDUSTRIAL
2 INDUSTRIAL
3 DOMESTIC
CONCENTRATION
SAMPLE ID
CONSTITUENT
DATE
TMW-5 3/20/22
CHROMIUM
(TOTAL)12.7
TMW-5 3/20/22
CHROMIUM
(TOTAL)12.7
RHYNE ROAD ASSEMBLAGE
RHYNE ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP\BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields\EMP\Figures\BCP-180 FIGURES_2023.01.26.dwg, FIG 4A- GW, 5/5/2023 12:02:31 PM, tmarbuery
1
2
3
TMW-13
TMW-14
TMW-15
TMW-9
TMW-10
TMW-11
TMW-12
TMW-1/SB-1
TMW-5
TMW-7
TMW-8
TMW-2*
TMW-3
TMW-4
TMW-6
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BCP-180
DATE: 5-5-23
FIGURE NO. 4B
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
PFAS COMPOUND CONCENTRATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
RAILROAD
SEPTIC SYSTEM
POND
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL (APRIL 2022)
CO-LOCATED SOIL BORING AND TEMPORARY
MONITORING WELL (APRIL 2022)
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL (JUNE 2022)
TEMPORARY MONITORING WELL
LOCATION (FEBRUARY 2023)
NOTES:
1. PARCEL DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS
(2022).
2. LEACH FIELDS, SEPTIC TANKS AND PIPING LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE AND WERE OBTAINED FROM SITE MAP
PREPARED BY DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1995.
3. * TMW-2 WAS NOT INSTALLED DUE TO HOLLOW STEM AUGER
REFUSAL AT 13.5' BELOW THE GROUND SURFACE.
4. CONCENTRATIONS REPORTED IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER
(µg/L)
5. BOLD VALUES INDICATE AN EXCEEDANCE OF
EPA-ESTABLISHED HEALTH ADVISORY LEVEL FOR LIFE-TIME
EXPOSURE TO PFOA AND PFOS FROM DRINKING WATER
(EPA 822-F-22-002, JUNE 2022).
6. UNDERLINED VALUES INDICATE AN EXCEEDANCE OF EPA
TAPWATER REGIONAL SCREENING LEVEL (RSL),
NOVEMBER 2022.
7. SHADED VALUES INDICATE AN EXCEEDANCE OF THE EPA
PROPOSED NATIONAL PRIMARY DRINKING WATER
REGULATION (NDPWR) MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS
(MCLs), MARCH 2023.
8. PFAS = PER-AND POLYFLUORINATED SUBSTANCES
PFOA = PERFLUORO-N-OCTANOIC ACID
PFOS = PERFLUOROOCTANE SULFONIC ACID
Q = LABORATORY SURROGATE FAILURE
LOCATION AND TYPE OF SEPTIC
SYSTEM LEACH FIELD
1 INDUSTRIAL
2 INDUSTRIAL
3 DOMESTIC
MT

H
O
L
L
Y

R
O
A
D
RHYNE ROAD90' TRAIL EASEMENT
DEDICATED TO
MECKENBURG COUNTY
90' TRAIL EASEMENT
RHYNE ROAD ASSEMBLAGE
RHYNE ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
TMW-13 2/28/23
PFOA 0.0596
PFOS 0.0042
TMW-9 2/27/23
PFOA 0.558
PFOS 0.00094 J
TMW-10/TMW-DUP 2/28/23
PFOA 0.646 / 0.676
PFOS <0.0083/<0.0083
TMW-11 2/27/23
PFOA 0.0208
PFOS <0.0010
TMW-12 2/27/23
PFOA 0.0978
PFOS 0.0016 J
TMW-15 2/28/23
PFOA 0.0141
PFOS 0.0025
TMW-14 2/28/23
PFOA 0.0065
PFOS 0.0024
TMW-1 4/1/22
PFOA 0.3
PFOS 0.01
TMW-3/DUP-2 4/1/22
PFOA 4.8Q / 4.7
PFOS <0.0019/<0.0019
TMW-1 4/1/22
PFOA 0.3
PFOS 0.01
SAMPLE ID
CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATION
DATE
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP\BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields\EMP\Figures\BCP-180 FIGURES_2023.01.26.dwg, FIG 4B- PFAs, 5/5/2023 12:04:01 PM, tmarbuery
1
2
3
COMP-1
COMP-2
SG-7
SG-8
SG-1 SG-2
SG-3
SG-5
SG-4
SG-9
SG-10
SG-6
SG-12SG-11
SG-14
SG-13
SG-16SG-15
SG-17
SG-20
SG-19
SG-18
SG-21
COMP-5
COMP-4
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. BCP-180
DATE: 5-5-23
FIGURE NO. 4C
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
SOIL GAS COMPOUND CONCENTRATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
SURFACE WATER FEATURE
RAILROAD
SEPTIC SYSTEM
POND
CO-LOCATED COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE AND
SOIL GAS POINT (APRIL 2022)
CO-LOCATED COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE AND
SOIL GAS POINT (JUNE 2022)
NOTES:
1. PARCEL DATA OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS
(2022).
2. LEACH FIELDS, SEPTIC TANKS AND PIPING LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE AND WERE OBTAINED FROM SITE MAP
PREPARED BY DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1995.
3. CONCENTRATIONS REPORTED IN MICROGRAMS PER METER
(μg/m³).
4.BOLD VALUES INDICATE AN EXCEEDANCE OF NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (DEQ)
VAPOR INTRUSION SUB-SLAB & EXTERIOR SOIL GAS
SCREENING LEVELS (SGSLS) DATED JULY 2022.
5.UNDERLINED VALUES INDICATE AN EXCEEDANCE OF
NON-RESIDENTIAL SGSLs.
LOCATION AND TYPE OF SEPTIC
SYSTEM LEACH FIELD
1 INDUSTRIAL
2 INDUSTRIAL
3 DOMESTIC
MT

H
O
L
L
Y

R
O
A
D
RHYNE ROADSG-11 6/30/22
BENZENE 28
SG-12/SG-DUP 6/30/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 5.7/5.2
SG-15 6/30/22
BENZENE 15
SG-17 6/30/22
BENZENE 18
SG-1 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 9.37
SG-2 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 7.93
BENZENE 13.1
SG-3 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 55.2
BENZENE 34.9
SG-4 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 70.2
BENZENE 33.9
SG-5 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 8.15
SG-6 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 17.2
SG-8 4/1/22
BENZENE 19.2
SG-9 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 14.6
BENZENE 22.7
SG-2 4/1/22
1,3 BUTADIENE 7.93
BENZENE 13.1
CONCENTRATION
SAMPLE ID
CONSTITUENT
DATE
90' TRAIL EASEMENT
DEDICATED TO
MECKENBURG COUNTY
90' TRAIL EASEMENT
RHYNE ROAD ASSEMBLAGE
RHYNE ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Beacon Partners- BEP or BCP\BCP-180 Rhyne Road Brownfields\EMP\Figures\BCP-180 FIGURES_2023.01.26.dwg, FIG 4C- SG, 5/5/2023 12:05:28 PM, tmarbuery

Appendix A

Preliminary Redevelopment Plan

RHYNE
R
O
A
D
PROPOSED BUILDING A
PROPOSED BUILDING C
PROPOSED BUILDING D
PROPOSED
BUILDING B1
PROPOSED
BUILDING B2
PROPOSED BUILDING E
BMP
BMP
BMP
BMP
BMP
BMP
MOUNT HOLLY ROADSO
N
O
M
A
VA
L
L
E
Y

D
R
I
V
EVERDE CREEKDRIVEBETHANYDALLAS DRIVEA
L
Y
S
S
A
B
R
E
N
D
O
N

L
A
N
E
APPROVED BY:
DRAWN BY:
SCALE:
DATE:
JOB #DATE September 20, 2022 - 10:13am By: JWisslerP:\21071 Rhyne Rd Logistics Master Planning\Dwg\Rezoning\21071 ILLUSTRAVTIVE.dwgTHIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED. REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY ORSBORN ENGINEERING GROUP, PA SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO ORSBORN ENGINEERING GROUP, PA. REVISIONSFORRZ-2ILLUSTRATIVE PLANRHYNE ROAD LOGISTICS PARKCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINABEACON ACQUISITIONS LLC& CRESCENT COMMUNITIESCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA21071
12/20/21
1" = 150'
JAW
JCO ... . . . . . . . .

Appendix B

Preliminary Construction Schedule

Appendix C

Preliminary Grading Plan and Cut/Fill Analysis

Appendix D

Monitoring Well Abandonment Approval
From:Adams, George
To:Ralph McGee
Cc:Day, Collin; Caldwell, Shawna; Morris, Brett L.
Subject:RE: [External] Livingstone Coatings (NONCD0002012) - monitoring well abandonment Mecklenburg
Date:Thursday, December 8, 2022 3:26:12 PM
Attachments:image005.png
Ralph,

If a groundwater monitor well is damaged or threatened with damage, I believe it needs to be
abandoned.  There are specific rules in 15A NCAC 2C that the DWR enforces (Andrew Pitner);
however, it’s not entirely clear to me which party owns the well after a real estate transaction. 

To my knowledge, remedial activities at Livingstone Coating paused in 2012.  I think another party
contacted me several times about pursuing a risk-based closure (~2018).  Perhaps your client could
agree to replace the wells if remedial activities resume? 

Thank you for contacting me and let me know if you need more information.  Please send me and
DWR copies of the monitor well abandonment forms for our records --George

George Adams (he/him/his)
Engineer, Division of Waste Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Office: [phone] ext. 2187 | Fax: [phone] |Cell: [phone] (Temporary)
[e-mail]

From: Ralph McGee <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2022 1:02 PM
To: Adams, George <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Livingstone Coatings (NONCD0002012) - monitoring well abandonment

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to Report Spam.

George,

Thanks so much for taking my call. As discussed, properties adjacent to the west and south of the
Livingstone Coatings facility are planned for redevelopment and Livingstone monitoring wells MW-4
and MW-7 (see attached) will need to be abandoned prior to disturbance/grading.  Per our call, if
these wells need to be replaced in the future, there are suitable very nearby replacement locations
within the Livingstone property boundaries.

Can you please confirm that DEQ agrees the wells will need to be abandoned prior to damage and
that if replacement is needed, there are locations within the Livingstone property boundaries that
are suitable for your assessment/monitoring purposes?

Thanks so much!
Ralph
Ralph McGee, PG, Project Manager
Hart & Hickman, PC
2923 S Tryon Street, Suite 100 · Charlotte, NC 28203
Direct: 704-887-4621 · Mobile: [phone]
www.harthickman.com