20013_Kinston_USTclosure_20160720

INITIAL ABATEMENT ACTION REPORT
FORMER KINSTON SHIRT FACTORY
(HAMPTON INDUSTRIES, INC.)
501 E. CASWELL STREET
KINSTON, LENOIR COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA INCIDENT NO.: NOT ASSIGNED (This Tank)
FACILITY I.D. NO.: 00-0-0000013230 MID-ATLANTIC JOB NO. 000R2611.00 TASK 4035

UST Section Risk Classification: Unassigned
Land Use: Residential
Latitude: N 35.2595
Longitude: W 77.5736
Date Discovered: May 20, 2016 Estimated Quantity of Release: Unknown
Cause/Source of Release: #6 Fuel Oil from System Lines

Prepared For:

Mr. Adam Short
City of Kinston
207 E. King Street
Kinston, North Carolina 28502

Prepared By:

Mid-Atlantic Associates, Inc.
409 Rogers View Court
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610

July 20, 2016

July 20, 2016

Ms. Sylvia Hunneke, Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Office – DENR Division of Waste Management UST Section 943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889

Subject: INITIAL ABATEMENT ACTION REPORT
FORMER KINSTON SHIRT FACTORY (HAMPTON INDUSTRIES, INC.)
501 EAST CASWELL STREET
KINSTON, LENOIR COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
INCIDENT NO.: NOT ASSIGNED (This Tank); PREVIOUS NO. 11461
FACILITY I.D. NO.: 00-0-0000013230
MID-ATLANTIC JOB NO. 000R2611.00 TASK 4035

Dear Ms. Hunneke,

On behalf of the City of Kinston, Mid-Atlantic Associates, Inc. submits the enclosed Initial
Abatement Action Report for the above-referenced site. This report is being submitted with
reference to recently reported petroleum contamination discovered at the site associated with
supply lines from a UST previously used to distribute #6 fuel oil to a facility boiler. This UST was
previously closed-in-place in 1993 by UTTS/Environmental. If you have any questions, please
contact me at [phone].

Sincerely,
MID-ATLANTIC ASSOCIATES, INC.

Eric B. Aufderhaar, P.G.
Senior Geologist

cc: Mr. Adam Short, City of Kinston

Attachment: Initial Abatement Action Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 SITE HISTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Owner/Operator of the UST ........................................................................................ 2
1.3 Property Owner .......................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Facility Information ..................................................................................................... 2
1.5 Contacts ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.6 UST Information ......................................................................................................... 3
1.7 Site Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 4
2.0 UST CLOSURE PROCEDURES .................................................................................... 4 2.1 Pre-Closure Procedures ............................................................................................. 4 2.2 Excavation Procedures ............................................................................................... 5 2.3 Excavated Soil ............................................................................................................ 5 2.4 Sampling Procedures ................................................................................................. 5
2.5 Quality Control Measures ........................................................................................... 6
2.6 Investigative Results ................................................................................................... 6
2.7 Backfilling Procedures ................................................................................................ 6

3.0 INITIAL RESPONSE AND ABATEMENT ACTION ........................................................ 7

4.0 REGULATORY STATUS ............................................................................................... 7

5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 7

DRAWINGS

Drawing 1.1 Topographic Site Map
Drawing 1.2 Site Map
Drawing 2.1 Tank/Monitoring Well Prior to Closure
Drawing 2.2 Soil Sample Location Map
Drawing 2.3 Soil Contaminants Above Action Levels (mg/kg)
TABLES

Table 2.1 Summary of OVA Measurements for Soil Samples
Table 2.2. Summary of TPH Detected in UST Closure Soil Samples Table 2.3 Summary of VOCs, semi-VOCs, and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Detected in UST Closure Soil Samples
APPENDICES

Appendix A Previous UST Closure Report
Appendix B Well Abandonment Record
Appendix C Waste Disposal Documentation
Appendix D Mid-Atlantic Soil Sampling Procedure
Appendix E Laboratory Analytical Report and Chain-of-Custody Record
Appendix F UST-61 24-Hour Release and UST Leak Reporting Form

1.0 SITE HISTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION

1.1 Introduction

The former Kinston Shirt Factory (KSF) site consists of several parcels of land located near the
intersection of E. Caswell Street and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (N.C. Highway 11/55) in
Kinston, North Carolina (Drawing 1.1). Parcel B (Parcel ID No. 4525–1952–8317) of the KSF site
formerly contained buildings used for manufacturing textiles (primarily shirts). The street address
for Parcel B is 501 E. Caswell Street. Hampton Industries, Inc. occupied the site from
approximately 1978 to 2002. In April 2006, the Call Kinston Home Corporation acquired the site
and all buildings were subsequently removed. Recently, the City of Kinston acquired the property.
The current ownership of the subject site is documented in Section 1.3. The subject site consists
of a large open tract with no structures. The concrete slabs for many of the original buildings
remain.

Previous investigations and reports conducted at the subject site include a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment (PESA) report completed by Mid-Atlantic Associates (dated
February 29, 2016) for the Kinston Shirt Factory site. The PESA identified two recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with the petroleum related contaminant sources at Parcel B of the KSF site based on a May 27, 2015 site visit: • The reported presence of releases associated with petroleum USTs formerly operated
at the subject site (Incident No. 11461) were considered a controlled REC based upon
closure of the incident by a Land Use Restriction; and,
• The historical operation of a textile mill/shirt manufacturer which included the
documented releases of petroleum to soil and groundwater, and solvents detected in
groundwater.

In October 1993, two petroleum USTs were removed from the site while a third was closed in
place (Section 1.6). The two removed USTs were observed to be in poor condition and
contaminated soil and free product were observed in the tank pits of the two tanks removed
from the site. The condition of the third closed in place UST (10,000 gallon #6 fuel oil) was not
known due to its abandonment below ground; however, soil samples collected around the tank
by the closure contractor (UTTS Environmental (UTTS/E)) did not indicate a release. Follow-up
assessment work was completed by Hampton Industries related to the two removed USTs after
the UST Section, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR1) assigned incident number 11461 to the site and requested additional assessment.
A Preliminary Groundwater Assessment (report dated August 4, 1994) and Comprehensive
Site Assessment (report dated June 5, 1995) documents the work performed and results. On
November 2, 2000, the NCDENR issued a No Further Action letter in reference to Incident
Number 11461.

Mid-Atlantic is currently completing a Limited Environmental Site Assessment Report (Limited
ESA) associated with use of the property as a textile mill. Contaminant sources being
addressed include former USTs associated with gasoline and fuel oil (# 2 and #6), the use of solvents in a dyeing house, and off-site sources including a former dry-cleaner and a former bulk fuel facility operated one city block north of E. Caswell Street. One monitoring well installed
1 Precursor agency to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 2
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

by others near the former #6 fuel oil UST was sampled and groundwater contaminants were not
detected above laboratory method detection limits (Drawing 1.2). Additional groundwater
monitoring wells installed by Mid-Atlantic detected toluene and tetrachloroethylene (PCE);
however, only PCE was exhibited at a concentration above the 0.7 ug/L North Carolina
Groundwater Quality Standard (NCGQS). Soil sample testing results for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and semi-VOCs revealed seven semi-VOCs at one soil sample location
(MA-B6 4-5 feet) where the semi-VOCs where exhibited in the duplicate soil sample. Two semi-
VOCs (benzo(a) pyrene and benzo(b)flouranthene) are polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) that exceeded the Protection of Groundwater Preliminary Soil Remediation Goal
(PSRG), the Residential health-based PSRG or the Soil to Water Maximum Soil Contaminant
Concentration (MSCC). The concentration of benzo(a)pyrene in MA-B6 also exceeded the
Residential MSCC. The Limited ESA will be submitted to our client, the City of Kinston, the
Brownfields Program and the Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) of the Division of Waste
Management (DWM).

The objective of this report was to document the removal of the 10,000-gallon #6 fuel oil UST
that was closed in place during 1993, prior to potential acquisition of the property by others.
This report presents background information, the laboratory analytical results, and our findings,
conclusions and recommendations. The opinions included herein are based on our experience
and the information obtained during the study. This report is based on limited observations made on the dates noted using the procedures described herein. If additional information becomes available, we request the opportunity to review the information, reassess the potential environmental concerns and modify our conclusions and recommendations, if appropriate.
1.2 Owner/Operator of the UST

According to a GW UST–2 form submitted by UTTS/E and dated October 10, 1993, the UST
was owned and operated by Hampton Industries Inc. at the time it was closed in place in 1993.

1.3 Property Owner

City of Kinston
207 E. King Street
P.O. Drawer 339
Kinston, NC 28502
[phone]

1.4 Facility Information

Former Kinston Shirt Factory (Hampton Industries, Inc.)
501 E. Caswell Street
Kinston, NC 28501
Facility I.D. #: 00-0-0000013230
Latitude: N 35.2595
Longitude: W 77.5736
Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 3
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

1.5 Contacts

Primary Contacts: City of Kinston
c/o Mr. Adam Short, Planning Director
207 E. King Street
Kinston, NC 28502
[phone]

Closure Contractor: A&D Environmental Services
2718 Uwharrie Road
Archdale, NC 27263
336-434-7750

Consultant: Mid-Atlantic Associates, Inc.
409 Rogers View Court
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610 [phone] Mr. Darin M. McClure, PE Laboratory: Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road
P.O. Box 240543
Charlotte, NC 28224
Angela D. Overcash
[phone]

1.6 UST Information

The subject of this report is one registered 10,000-gallon steel tank that was formerly used to
supply #6 fuel oil to an on-site boiler room. Tank closure documents prepared by UTTS/E,
indicate that the tank was operated until an unknown date prior to 1993. Two other tanks
existed on the property and contained #6 fuel oil (6,000 gallon) and gasoline (1,000 gallon), and
were removed in 1993 (Drawing 1.2). All three tanks were registered under Facility ID No. 00-
0-0000013230. Soils containing greater than 10 mg/kg were discovered adjacent to the 1,000
gallon UST and free product was found adjacent to the 6000 gallon UST. No release was
identified associated with the 10,000 gallon UST. The 10,000 gallon #6 fuel oil UST was closed
in place (CIP) during August 1993 under the supervision of UTTS/E. A closure report and UST-
2 form documenting the UST closure was submitted to the UST Section during October 1993
(Appendix A). The tank closure documents indicated that the tank was CIP by first emptying
the tank and lines, cutting the lines at the tank location and filling the tank annular space with
flowable concrete slurry.

Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 4
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

1.7 Site Characteristics

The site formerly contained textile factories used for the production of clothing including dyeing
and knitting operations. The site is under consideration for redevelopment purposes and is located
in an urban setting within the east portion of Kinston, at the intersection of East King Street and
Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (N.C. Highways 11 and 55). Land use is primarily residential to
the north, east and west. Commercial property is located to the south. The Southeast Kinston
Elementary School is located on the southeast adjacent property. Surface drainage and
groundwater flow, determined based on topography (Drawing 1.1) and during previous
investigations is generally towards the southeast.

2.0 UST CLOSURE PROCEDURES

2.1 Pre-Closure Procedures

Mid-Atlantic submitted UST Section form UST-3, Notice of Intent to remove a UST, on April 20,
2016 after receiving notice by the Washington Regional Office that submittal of the form was
required for a tank that was previously closed and reportedly filled with concrete. GEL Geophysics (GEL), a subcontractor to Mid-Atlantic, mobilized to the site on April 11, 2016 to identify the orientation of the existing UST and to locate nearby underground utilities. Rebar or steel present in the concrete slabs at the surface prevented acquisition of strong positive signals
with ground penetrating radar (GPR).

Existing monitoring well MW-8 was drilled within a two foot distance of the southeast corner of the
tank. It was determined that removal of the tank would jeopardize the integrity of the well.
Therefore, a certified well driller from Mid-Atlantic (Gary Fischer, No. 3339) abandoned the well in
accordance with the State well construction standards prior to removal of the tank. The monitoring
well abandonment record is included in Appendix B.

On May 2, 2016, A&D Environmental Services, Inc. (A&D) a subcontractor to Mid-Atlantic,
uncovered the UST system including approximately 50 feet of fuel oil product and return lines.
The top of the tank was located at a depth of 3.5 feet below land surface (BLS), beneath a steel I-
beam 2 feet in width and 28 feet long running length-wise along the center of the 17 foot long
tank. The purpose of the I-beam is not known; however, it is inferred that its purpose was to hold
down the tank during events causing unusually high water tables. The product lines, vent line, fill
port and manway were noted on the east end of the tank (Drawing 2.1). The top of the tank was
opened on the west and east ends to view the tanks interior. The concrete slurry previously used
to abandon the tank partially filled the void space, ranging in thickness from 2 feet on the west end
to 3.5 feet thick on the east end. The tank was 10 feet in diameter. A & D measured a 1.5 foot
thickness of waste fuel in the west end of the tank and approximately 796 gallons of fuel oil and
sludge were removed on May 3, 2016. The tank was subsequently cleaned by A&D and rinse
water was removed. Waste disposal documents are included in Appendix C.
Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 5
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

2.2 Excavation Procedures

On May 3, 2016, A & D attempted to remove the UST however it was too heavy because of the
concrete fill remaining in the tank. The top of the tank was removed allowing access for digging
equipment to break up and remove the concrete fill within the tank. The tank was removed after
sufficient fill had been removed. The tank measured approximately 10 feet in diameter by 17 feet
long and is estimated at 10,000 gallons in capacity. The UST appeared in poor condition and was
corroded. Three holes approximately 0.25 inch in diameter were located on the bottom of the
tank. It was unclear if the holes might have been created in the tank during its removal. The
approximate location of the former UST and the approximate excavation area is shown on Drawing 2.2.

Three steel lines were observed extending from the east end of the tank in a diagonal manner
towards a raised area on the property with a concrete slab. These lines included a 1.5 inch
diameter product line (inferred use), a 1 inch diameter line inferred as a return line and a 2 inch
diameter line inferred as a vent line. The line orientations were traced by excavating and uncovering the pipes for a distance of approximately 50 feet to a concrete slab. The lines were buried at a depth of approximately 1.5 feet BLS. 2.3 Excavated Soil and Concrete from inside the tank

During excavation activities, soils were routinely screened for the presence of volatile organic
vapors with an Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA). Based on field observations, soil samples taken
above the tank as well as those taken after excavation did not exhibit elevated OVA readings
(Table 2.1).

Based on the presence of waste fuel oil in contact with the concrete slurry, A & D transported two
dump truck loads of the removed concrete fill to A & D’s permitted solidification pit in Archdale,
North Carolina for eventual disposal at the Republic Services’ Uwharrie Environmental Landfill.
Disposal documents are included in Appendix C.

2.4 Sampling Procedures

Upon removal, UST closure samples were collected according to procedures outlined in the
NCDEQ’s Underground Storage Tank Section Guidelines for Site Checks, Tank Closure, and
Initial Response and Abatement. Tank pit samples were collected at the locations shown in
Drawing 2.2. Groundwater was noted in the excavation at a depth of approximately 11 to 11.5
feet BLS, therefore six sidewall samples were collected from around the excavation at depths
ranging from 8 to 9 feet BLS. The sidewall samples were identified as SS#1 to SS#6. A duplicate
soil sample was also collected from SS#3 for QA/QC purposes. The line soil samples were
collected at intervals of approximately 10 feet and are designated LS#1 to LS#5. They were
collected from 2 to 2.5 feet BLS.

Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 6
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

The UST and piping soil samples were submitted to Prism Laboratories, Inc. (Prism) and analyzed
for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Diesel Range Organics (DRO). Soil samples from the
UST pit were also tested for VOCs by EPA method 8260 based on the former discovery and
reported presence of chlorinated VOCs at the subject site. Soil samples from the UST pit and
lines were also placed in laboratory containers for potential “risk-based” testing depending upon
the TPH results. The risk-based analytical tests included semi-volatile organic compounds (Semi-
VOCs) according to EPA method 8270D and extractable petroleum hydrocarbons according to
methods developed by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP-
EPH). Based on the TPH results, line soil samples LS#1, LS#2, LS#3 and LS#4 were tested for
risk-based parameters.

2.5 Quality Control Measures

The UST closure sidewall soil samples and line soil samples were retrieved using the excavator
bucket with care being taken so that sampled soil did not have contact with the bucket. New nitrile
gloves were worn during the collection and handling of soil samples. The samples were placed into pre-labeled, laboratory-supplied glassware, placed into an ice-filled cooler and shipped under chain-of-custody control to Prism for analysis. Further quality control measures are described in the sampling procedures outlined in Appendix D and the laboratory chain-of-custody record is included in Appendix E.

2.6 Investigative Results The laboratory analytical report for the soil samples collected at the site is provided in Appendix E. As summarized in Table 2.2 and shown on Drawing 2.3, test results indicated the presence of
TPH-DRO exceeding the regulatory action level of 10 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in grab soil
samples collected from beneath the piping. The concentrations of TPH detected in the line soil
samples ranged from 25 to 50 mg/kg in the grab samples. The risk-based laboratory results (Table 2.3) exhibited three semi-VOCs at estimated concentrations above the most stringent
action level (Soil to Water MSCC or Residential health-based MSCC2) at sample LS#2 and one
semi-VOC each (1-methylnaphthalene) at an estimated concentration in samples LS#1 and LS#3. For the carbon fraction class results (MADEP-EPH), samples LS#1, LS#2, LS#3 and LS#4 exhibited detectable concentrations but the levels were below established MSCCs.

2.7 Backfilling Procedures

Backfilling was conducted upon removal of the USTs on May 4, 2016. Six loads of sand backfill
from a borrow pit in Kinston were provided by Ernie Everett Demolition and Site Preparation
(Everett Demolition) out of Kinston, NC. Two loads of concrete were transported from the site
by Everett Demolition.

2 Sample LS#2 only.
Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 7
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

3.0 INITIAL RESPONSE AND ABATEMENT ACTION

Visibly impacted soils were not observed adjacent to the tank or under the lines during the UST
closure. Concrete slurry that was in contact with the waste fuel was excavated and transported
by dump truck to A&D’s facility in Archdale North Carolina.

A & D personnel cleaned the tank onsite and then loaded the tank onto a trailer for transport.
The steel UST and steel I-beam were transported by A & D to Martin Metals Recycling in
Kinston North Carolina for disposal on May 4, 2016. Disposal documentation is included in
Appendix C.

4.0 REGULATORY STATUS

A release from the lines of the UST system has been confirmed at the site. Mr. Adam Short from
the City of Kinston authorized Mid-Atlantic to notify the UST section, DEQ, about discovery of the
release on June 30, 2016. Later on June 30, 2016, Mid-Atlantic submitted form UST-61, 24-Hour
Release and UST Leak Reporting Form, to NCDEQ regarding the release from the former heating oil UST. This copy is included in Appendix F. On form UST-61, we incorrectly reported that PCE
was detected in one of the sidewall samples.
Based on a Flowchart of Requirements for Petroleum Releases (Figure 2) of Guidelines for
Assessment and Corrective Action for UST Releases July 15, 2008 with Change 2, Effective October 1, 2012), the UST Section will review the IAAR report and decide if further action is necessary. Additional work may include the performance and submittal of a Limited Site
Assessment (LSA). Previous assessment work, including a preliminary groundwater assessment
and CSA were completed at the site in reference to documented releases from the other USTs
formerly present on the site (Section 1.1). Since contaminated soils are present at the site and
include petroleum contamination associated with the UST, the NCDEQ will make a final
determination regarding further regulatory requirements

5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary:

• One approximately 10,000-gallon steel #6 fuel oil UST was removed during closure
activities. The tank had previously been closed in place by UTTS/E in August 1993.

• A total of 796 gallons of #6 fuel oil and sludge was removed from the site during UST
closure activities. The water was transported to an A & D facility operated at 2718
Uwharrie Road, Archdale, NC 27263.

Initial Abatement Action Report July 20, 2016
Former Hampton Industries Inc. Page 8
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston, North Carolina

Conclusions:

• The UST closure conditions that were observed varied from the closure conditions
reported for the tank in the 1993 UST closure report, including the tank was not emptied of
fuel, the product lines were not cut/capped, and the concrete slurry fill used to close the
tank filled approximately one-third of the tank’s interior;

• Laboratory analytical results confirm a release from the UST product and or return lines
with contaminant concentrations above NCDEQ’s action level of 10 mg/Kg for TPH-DRO
and three semi-VOCs at estimated concentrations above the most stringent action levels
(benzo(a)pyrene also exceeded the residential MSCC of 0.088 mg/Kg); and

Recommendations:

• We recommend the submittal of this report to the NCDEQ, DWM, Washington Regional
Office UST Section for their review.

DRAWINGS
´
TOPOGRAPHIC SITE MAPREMOVAL OF FORMER
CLOSED IN PLACE#6 FUEL OIL TANK
KINSTON SHIRT FACTORY KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA
DRAWN BY:
DATE:
ENG.
CHECK:
JOB NO:
APPROVAL:
DRAFTCHECK:
GIS NO:
DWG NO:
REFERENCES:SCALE:
LENOIR
JONES
PITT
DUPLIN
CRAVEN
WAYNE
GREENE
AREA SHOWNWITHIN LENOIR COUNTY
JULY 2016
000R2611.00 T4035
01G-R2611.00 T4035 - Topo
1.1
1. KINSTON, NC DIGITAL RASTER GRAPHIC, USGS. SCANNED FROM 1:24,000-SCALE KINSTON, NC TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, PUBLISHED 1998, USGS.2. INSET MAP DIGITAL DATA FROM 2002 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION ATLAS, BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS, WASHINGTON, D.C.
CONTOUR INTERVAL = 10 FEET
0 1,000 2,000Feet
1:12,000
SITE
EBA
UST LOCATION
EBA
DMM
!A
0 100 200 300Feet
´
EAST CASWELL STREET
EAST KING STREET
D
R
.

M
A
R
T
I
N

L
U
T
H
E
R

K
I
N
G

J
R

B
O
U
L
E
V
A
R
D
SO
U
T
H

T
I
F
F
A
N
Y

A
V
E
1:1,200
N
C
R
R

C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R

L
I
N
E
Legend
PROPERTY LINES
!A UTTS EXISTING WELL (MW-8)
SUBJECT SITE
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF 10,000 GALLON TANK
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMER 1,000 GALLON TANK
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMER 6,000 GALLON TANK
SITE MAP
REMOVAL OF FORMER
CLOSED IN PLACE#6 FUEL OIL TANK
KINSTON SHIRT FACTORY
KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA
DRAWN
BY:
DATE:
ENG.
CHECK:
JOB NO:
APPROVAL:
DRAFT
CHECK:
GIS NO:
DWG NO: 1.2
JULY 2016
000R2611.00 T4035
1G-R2611.00 T4035-UST SM
REFERENCES: PARCEL AND ROAD DATA FROM LENOIR COUNTY GIS. 2012 AERIAL IMAGERY FROM NC ONEMAP. MONITORING WELL LOCATION FROM UTTS 1995 CSA. MID-ATLANTIC FIELD NOTES.
MW-8
N
EBA
A
B
L
C D E F G H I J K M
O
USTsUSTsUSTs
EBA
DMM
JIE
EBA
EBA
DMM
JIE
EBA
EBA
DMM
JIE
EBA
EBA
DMM

TABLES
REMOVAL OF FORMER CLOSED-IN-PLACE #6 FUEL OIL TANK
SS #1 4.61 2.23
SS #2 2.49 1.87
SS #3 4.49 2.99
SS #4 3.21 1.34
SS #5 2.94 1.77
SS #6 3.20 1.48
Duplicate UST
(of SS#3)4.49 2.99
LS #1 12.97 1.49
LS #2 13.91 1.07
LS #3 14.29 2.79
LS #4 13.71 2.28
LS #5 13.97 1.87
Notes:
FT - Feet
BLS - Below Land Surface
OVA - Organic Vapor Analyzer
PID - Photo Ionization Detector
FID - Flame Ionization Detector
ppm - Parts per million
TABLE 2.1SUMMARY OF OVA MEASUREMENTS FOR SOIL SAMPLES
FORMER KINSTON SHIRT FACTORYKINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA
MID-ATLANTIC JOB NO. R2611.00 TASK 4035
SAMPLE
IDENTIFICATION
DATE
COLLECTED
DEPTH
(FT BLS)PID READING (ppm)FID READING
(ppm)
SIDEWALL SAMPLES FROM TANK EXCAVATION (No floor samples taken - groundwater in excavation)
5/3/2016 8 TO 9
PIPING SAMPLE
5/2/2016 2 TO 2.5
REMOVAL OF FORMER CLOSED-IN-PLACE #6 FUEL OIL TANK
SS #1 --
SS #2 --
SS #3 --
SS #4 --
SS #5 --
SS #6 --
Duplicate UST
(of SS#3)--
LS #1 50
LS #2 25
LS #3 32
LS #4 45
LS #5 --
Notes:
FT - Feet
BLS - Below Land Surface
mg/kg - Milligrams per kilogram
TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
GRO - Gasoline Range Organics
DRO - Diesel Range Organics
-- = Not Detected above method detection limit.
BOLD values exceed the TPH Action Level of 10 mg/kg
8 TO 9
MID-ATLANTIC JOB NO. R2611.00 TASK 4035
SIDEWALL SAMPLES FROM TANK EXCAVATION (No floor samples taken - groundwater in excavation)
TPH-DRO
CONCENTRATION
(mg/kg)
SAMPLE
IDENTIFICATION
DATE
COLLECTED
DEPTH
(FT BLS)
Not Tested. Tank
contained #6 Fuel Oil.
Not Tested. Tank
contained #6 Fuel Oil.5/2/2016 2 TO 2.5
5/3/2016
TABLE 2.2
SUMMARY OF TPH DETECTED IN UST CLOSURE SOIL SAMPLES
FORMER KINSTON SHIRT FACTORY
TPH-GRO
CONCENTRATION
(mg/kg)
KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA
PIPING SAMPLE
LS

#
1

L
S

#
2

L
S

#
3

L
S

#
4

L
S

#
5
2
t
o

2
.
5
'

2

t
o

2
.
5
'

2

t
o

2
.
5
'

2

t
o

2
.
5
'

2

t
o

2
.
5
'
5/
2
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
2
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
2
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
2
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
2
/
2
0
1
6
Be
n
z
e
n
e
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
0.
0
0
5
6
18 164
Et
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
4.
9
15
6
0
40000
m,
p
-
X
y
l
e
n
e
s
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
o-
X
y
l
e
n
e
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
Na
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
0.
1
6
313 8176
Tr
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
0.
0
1
9
4.6 120
1,
1
,
2
,
2
-
T
e
t
r
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
a
n
e

8
2
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
0.
0
0
1
0.78 20
Te
t
r
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
82
6
0
B

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
0.
0
0
7
4
1.1 10
1-
M
e
t
h
y
l
n
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
82
7
0
D
0.
1
6
J

0
.
1
6
J

0
.
2
4
J

<
0
.
0
7
3
NT
0.
0
0
4
20 100
2-
M
e
t
h
y
l
n
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

0
.
1
8
J

0
.
2
1
J

0
.
2
6
J
--
NT
3.
6
63 1635
Be
n
z
o
(
a
)
a
n
t
h
r
a
c
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

-
-
0.
1
8
J
0.
3
9
J
--
NT
0.
3
5
0.88 8
Be
n
z
o
(
a
)

p
y
r
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

-
-
0.
1
7
J
--
--
NT
0.
0
9
6
0.
0
8
8
0.78
Be
n
z
o
(
b
)
f
l
u
o
r
a
n
t
h
e
n
e

8
2
7
0
D

-
-
0.
2
3
J

0
.
2
7
J

0
.
1
8
J

N
T
1.
2
0.88 8
Be
n
z
o
(
g
,
h
,
i
)
p
e
r
y
l
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

-
-
0.
1
2
J
--
--
NT
64
0
0
469 12264
Ch
r
y
s
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

0
.
1
1
J

0
.
2
6
J
--
0.
1
9
J

N
T
39
88 780
Fl
u
o
r
a
n
t
h
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

-
-
0.
3
2
J

0
.
2
3
J

0
.
1
8
J

N
T
29
0
620 16400
Na
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

0
.
1
3
J
0.
1
8
J
--
--
NT
0.
1
6
313 8176
Ph
e
n
a
n
t
h
r
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

0
.
2
2
J

0
.
4
5

0
.
4
2
J

0
.
2
3
J

N
T
56
469 12264
Py
r
e
n
e
82
7
0
D

-
-
0.
4
1

0
.
2
7
J

0
.
1
6
J

N
T
27
0
469 12264
C5
-
C
8

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

V
P
H

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
68
939 24528
C9
-
C
1
2

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

V
P
H

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
C9
-
C
1
8

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

E
P
H

3
.
2
J

3
.
5
J

4
.
5
J

2
.
7
J
NT
C1
9
-
C
3
6

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

E
P
H

-
-
4.
6
2.
5
7.
6
J
NT
#
31
0
0
0
810000
C9
-
C
1
0

A
r
o
m
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

V
P
H

N
T
NT
NT
NT
NT
C1
1
-
C
2
2

A
r
o
m
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

E
P
H

9
.
6
J
15
20
14
NT

N
o
t
e
s
:
mg
/
k
g

-

M
i
l
l
i
g
r
a
m
s

p
e
r

k
i
l
o
g
r
a
m
MS
C
C

-

M
a
x
i
m
u
m

S
o
i
l

C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
m
g
/
K
g
)
.

V
a
l
u
e
s

s
h
o
w
n

f
r
o
m

A
p
r
i
l

1
6
,

2
0
1
2

U
S
T

S
e
c
t
i
o
n

T
a
b
l
e

(
m
o
s
t

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

a
s

o
f

2
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
6
)
.
--

=

N
o
t

D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

a
b
o
v
e

m
e
t
h
o
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
.

F
o
r

d
i
l
u
t
e
d

s
a
m
p
l
e
s
,

e
l
e
v
a
t
e
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t

i
s

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e

M
S
C
C
s
.

J
-

D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e

l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

l
i
m
i
t
,

b
u
t

a
b
o
v
e

t
h
e

m
e
t
h
o
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
;

c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d

a
n

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d

v
a
l
u
e
.
#
-

N
o

M
S
C
C

E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
NT

-

N
o
t

T
e
s
t
e
d
Bo
l
d
v
a
l
u
e
s

e
x
c
e
e
d

S
o
i
l
-
t
o
-
W
a
t
e
r

M
S
C
C
Sh
a
d
e
d

a
n
d

Bo
l
d
=

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

e
x
c
e
e
d
s

t
h
e

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

a
n
d

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
/
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

M
S
C
C
s
.

Industrial / Commercial Soil MSCC
CO
N
C
E
N
T
R
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
g
/
k
g
)
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
o
i
l

MS
C
C
SE
M
I
-
V
O
L
A
T
I
L
E

O
R
G
A
N
I
C

C
O
M
P
O
U
N
D
S

(
S
V
O
C
s
)
,

m
g
/
k
g
VO
L
A
T
I
L
E

A
N
D

E
X
T
R
A
C
T
A
B
L
E

P
E
T
R
O
L
E
U
M

H
Y
D
R
O
C
A
R
B
O
N
S

(
V
P
H

&

E
P
H
)
,

m
g
/
k
g
CH
E
M
I
C
A
L

C
O
N
S
T
I
T
U
E
N
T
AN
A
L
Y
S
I
S

ME
T
H
O
D
VO
L
A
T
I
L
E

O
R
G
A
N
I
C

C
O
M
P
O
U
N
D
S

(
V
O
C
s
)
,

m
g
/
k
g
31

4
6
9

1
2
6
1
4
54
0

1
5
0
0

4
0
0
0
0
TA
B
L
E

2
.
3

(
P
A
G
E

2

O
F

2
)
SU
M
M
A
R
Y

O
F

V
O
C
s
,

S
E
M
I
-
V
O
C
s

A
N
D

P
E
T
R
O
L
E
U
M

H
Y
D
R
O
C
A
R
B
O
N
S

D
E
T
E
C
T
E
D

I
N

U
S
T

C
L
O
S
U
R
E

S
O
I
L

S
A
M
P
L
E
S
RE
M
O
V
A
L

O
F

F
O
R
M
E
R

C
L
O
S
E
D
-
I
N
-
P
L
A
C
E

#
6

F
U
E
L

O
I
L

T
A
N
K
4.
6

3
1
2
9

8
1
7
6
0
FO
R
M
E
R

K
I
N
S
T
O
N

S
H
I
R
T

F
A
C
T
O
R
Y
So
i
l
-
t
o
-
W
a
t
e
r

MS
C
C
KI
N
S
T
O
N
,

N
O
R
T
H

C
A
R
O
L
I
N
A
MI
D
-
A
T
L
A
N
T
I
C

J
O
B

N
O
.

R
2
6
1
1
.
0
0

T
A
S
K

4
0
3
5
SS

#
1

S
S

#
2

S
S

#
3
Du
p
l
i
c
a
t
e

U
S
T

(o
f

S
S

#
3
)
SS

#
4

S
S

#
5

S
S

#
6
8
t
o

9

8

t
o

9

8

t
o

9

8

t
o

9

8

t
o

9

8

t
o

9

8

t
o

9
5/
3
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
3
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
3
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
3
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
3
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
3
/
2
0
1
6

5
/
3
/
2
0
1
6
Be
n
z
e
n
e

8
2
6
0
B

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

0
.
0
0
5
6

1
8

1
6
4
Et
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e

8
2
6
0
B

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

4
.
9

1
5
6
0

4
0
0
0
0
m,
p
-
X
y
l
e
n
e
s

8
2
6
0
B

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-
o-
X
y
l
e
n
e

8
2
6
0
B

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-
Na
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e

8
2
6
0
B

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

0
.
1
6

3
1
3

8
1
7
6
Te
t
r
a
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e

8
2
6
0
B

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

-
-

0
.
0
0
7
4

1
.
1

1
0
1-
M
e
t
h
y
l
n
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e

8
2
7
0
D
0.
0
0
4

2
0

1
0
0
2-
M
e
t
h
y
l
n
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e

8
2
7
0
D
3.
6

6
3

1
6
3
5
An
t
h
r
a
c
e
n
e

8
2
7
0
D
94
0

4
6
0
0

1
2
2
0
0
0
Na
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e

8
2
7
0
D
0.
1
6

3
1
3

8
1
7
6
C5
-
C
8

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

V
P
H
68

9
3
9

2
4
5
2
8
C9
-
C
1
2

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

V
P
H
C9
-
C
1
8

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

E
P
H
C1
9
-
C
3
6

A
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

E
P
H
#

3
1
0
0
0

8
1
0
0
0
0
C9
-
C
1
0

A
r
o
m
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

V
P
H
C1
1
-
C
2
2

A
r
o
m
a
t
i
c
s

M
A
D
E
P

E
P
H

N
o
t
e
s
:
mg
/
k
g

-

M
i
l
l
i
g
r
a
m
s

p
e
r

k
i
l
o
g
r
a
m
MS
C
C

-

M
a
x
i
m
u
m

S
o
i
l

C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
m
g
/
K
g
)
.

V
a
l
u
e
s

s
h
o
w
n

f
r
o
m

A
p
r
i
l

1
6
,

2
0
1
2

U
S
T

S
e
c
t
i
o
n

T
a
b
l
e

(
m
o
s
t

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

a
s

o
f

2
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
6
)
.
--

=

N
o
t

D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

a
b
o
v
e

m
e
t
h
o
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
.

F
o
r

d
i
l
u
t
e
d

s
a
m
p
l
e
s
,

e
l
e
v
a
t
e
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t

i
s

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e

M
S
C
C
s
.

J
-

D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e

l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

l
i
m
i
t
,

b
u
t

a
b
o
v
e

t
h
e

m
e
t
h
o
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
;

c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d

a
n

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d

v
a
l
u
e
.
#
-

N
o

M
S
C
C

E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
Bo
l
d
v
a
l
u
e
s

e
x
c
e
e
d

S
o
i
l
-
t
o
-
W
a
t
e
r

M
S
C
C
Sh
a
d
e
d

a
n
d

Bo
l
d
=

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

e
x
c
e
e
d
s

t
h
e

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

a
n
d

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
/
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

M
S
C
C
s
.

No
t

T
e
s
t
e
d
,

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

D
i
e
s
e
l

F
u
e
l

R
a
n
g
e

(
s
e
m
i
-
v
o
l
a
t
i
l
e
)

T
P
H

n
o
t

d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

i
n

s
a
m
p
l
e
s

>

1
0

m
g
/
k
g
.
SE
M
I
-
V
O
L
A
T
I
L
E

O
R
G
A
N
I
C

C
O
M
P
O
U
N
D
S

(
S
V
O
C
s
)
,

m
g
/
k
g
VO
L
A
T
I
L
E

A
N
D

E
X
T
R
A
C
T
A
B
L
E

P
E
T
R
O
L
E
U
M

H
Y
D
R
O
C
A
R
B
O
N
S

(
V
P
H

&

E
P
H
)
,

m
g
/
k
g
31

4
6
9

1
2
6
1
4
TA
B
L
E

2
.
3

(
P
A
G
E

1

O
F

2
)
SU
M
M
A
R
Y

O
F

V
O
C
s
,

S
E
M
I
-
V
O
C
s

A
N
D

P
E
T
R
O
L
E
U
M

H
Y
D
R
O
C
A
R
B
O
N
S

D
E
T
E
C
T
E
D

I
N

U
S
T

C
L
O
S
U
R
E

S
O
I
L

S
A
M
P
L
E
S
RE
M
O
V
A
L

O
F

F
O
R
M
E
R

C
L
O
S
E
D
-
I
N
-
P
L
A
C
E

#
6

F
U
E
L

O
I
L

T
A
N
K
4.
6

3
1
2
9

8
1
7
6
0
FO
R
M
E
R

K
I
N
S
T
O
N

S
H
I
R
T

F
A
C
T
O
R
Y
CH
E
M
I
C
A
L

CO
N
S
T
I
T
U
E
N
T
AN
A
L
Y
S
I
S

ME
T
H
O
D
So
i
l
-
t
o
-
W
a
t
e
r

MS
C
C
KI
N
S
T
O
N
,

N
O
R
T
H

C
A
R
O
L
I
N
A
MI
D
-
A
T
L
A
N
T
I
C

J
O
B

N
O
.

R
2
6
1
1
.
0
0

T
A
S
K

4
0
3
5
VO
L
A
T
I
L
E

O
R
G
A
N
I
C

C
O
M
P
O
U
N
D
S

(
V
O
C
s
)
,

m
g
/
k
g
54
0

1
5
0
0

4
0
0
0
0
Industrial / Commercial Soil MSCC
CO
N
C
E
N
T
R
A
T
I
O
N

(
m
g
/
k
g
)
Residential Soil MSCC
No
t

T
e
s
t
e
d
,

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

D
i
e
s
e
l

F
u
e
l

R
a
n
g
e

(
s
e
m
i
-
v
o
l
a
t
i
l
e
)

T
P
H

n
o
t

d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

i
n

s
a
m
p
l
e
s

>

1
0

m
g
/
k
g
.

APPENDIX A

PREVIOUS (1993) UST CLOSURE REPORT

APPENDIX B
WELL ABANDONMENT RECORD

APPENDIX C
WASTE DISPOSAL DOCUMENTATION

APPENDIX D
MID-ATLANTIC SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURE
Soil Sampling Procedures

I. Sample Collection

Direct Push Technology (DPT, or “Geoprobe”)
DPT uses a vehicular-mounted hydraulic rig to push a steel sampling probe into the
subsurface to collect soil and/or groundwater samples. The sampling device used to
collect the soil samples during this investigation was the “macrocore” sampler. This
sampler consists of a four-or-five-foot long, two-inch diameter stainless steel spoon
containing a clear, acetate liner. When the macrocore sampler is driven into the subsurface, the soil is collected into the acetate liner and then retrieved to the land
surface. The liner is then cut open and the soil lithology is characterized and soil samples
are collected.

Split Spoon Sampling

This method of soil sampling is typically used during advancement of hollowstem augers
for the construction of monitoring wells. Soil samples are obtained from the borings by
driving a prewashed, 1-3/8-inch inner-diameter split-spoon sampler at five foot intervals to termination in general accordance with ASTM D-1586 (Standard Penetration Test)
specifications. Blow counts for each six inches of split-spoon penetration are recorded
during advancement of the spoon. Samples are then retrieved to the land surface, the
split-spoon is opened, and the soil lithology is characterized and soil samples are
collected.

Hand Augering

This method is typically used for shallow sampling in areas where access is limited or underground obstacles such as utilities may be present. A pre-washed, three-inch
diameter steel auger bucket is attached to extension rods and manually turned to
penetrate the subsurface to the desired sampling depth. Samples are then retrieved to the
land surface and the soil lithology is characterized and soil samples are collected directly
from the hand auger bucket.
Excavator Bucket Sampling

This method is typically used during UST excavation and soil excavation projects. The soil
samples are collected from the excavator bucket when it is not safe to collect the samples by other means. Care is taken when collecting samples from the bucket to avoid soil that
has come in contact with the bucket itself to avoid cross contamination.
II. Headspace Field Screening

A portion of each sample is removed from the sampling device and placed in a pre-
labeled, plastic "ziploc" bag. After several minutes, the gas contained in the "headspace" or void area within the bag is tested with a photoionization detection (PID) and/or Flame Ionization Detector (FID). These are useful as scanning devices to detect the presence of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) but are not relied upon to determine specific levels of
contamination. Typically, the samples exhibiting the highest headspace readings will be
submitted to the laboratory for analysis. III. Preparation for Laboratory Analysis

The sample collector dons new nitrile sampling gloves prior to handling each sample. The
samples are placed into laboratory-prepared, pre-labeled, sampling containers, packed in ice, and shipped to a certified laboratory under chain-of-custody control. The sampler places an executed custody seal on the cooler prior to leaving the sampler’s custody.
Laboratory analyses to be performed on the samples, along with other sampling
information, are specified on the chain-of-custody, which is placed in the cooler with the
samples.

APPENDIX E

LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
AND CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD
Page 1 of 50
Page 2 of 50
Page 3 of 50
Page 4 of 50
Page 5 of 50
Page 6 of 50
Page 7 of 50
Page 8 of 50
Page 9 of 50
Page 10 of 50
Page 11 of 50
Page 12 of 50
Page 13 of 50
Page 14 of 50
Page 15 of 50
Page 16 of 50
Page 17 of 50
Page 18 of 50
Page 19 of 50
Page 20 of 50
Page 21 of 50
Page 22 of 50
Page 23 of 50
Page 24 of 50
Page 25 of 50
Page 26 of 50
Page 27 of 50
Page 28 of 50
Page 29 of 50
Page 30 of 50
Page 31 of 50
Page 32 of 50
Page 33 of 50
Page 34 of 50
Page 35 of 50
Page 36 of 50
Page 37 of 50
Page 38 of 50
Page 39 of 50
Page 40 of 50
Page 41 of 50
Page 42 of 50
Page 43 of 50
Page 44 of 50
Page 45 of 50
Page 46 of 50
Page 47 of 50
Page 48 of 50
Page 49 of 50
Page 50 of 50

APPENDIX F

UST-61 24-HOUR RELEASE AND UST LEAK REPORTING FORM

UST-61 24-Hour Release and UST Leak Reporting Form.
For Releases
in NC
This form should be completed and submitted to the UST Section’s regional office following a known or suspected release froman underground storage tank (UST) system. This form is required to be submitted within 24 hours of discovery of a known orsuspected release
(DWM USE ONLY)Incident # ________ Risk (H,I,L,U)_______Received On ________ Received By ________
Reported by (circle one): Phone, Fax or ReportRegion _______
Suspected Contamination? (Y/N) ___Y_____ Confirmed GW Contamination? (Y/N) _Y_____ Confirmed Soil Contamination ?(Y/N) __Y____
Samples Taken?(Y/N) __Y____Free Product? (Y/N) __N___ If Yes, State Greatest Thickness ______________
Facility ID Number 0-0000013230 Date Leak Discovered 5/20/2016 Comm/Non-Commercial? Commercial
Reg/Non-regulated? Regulated
INCIDENT DESCRIPTION
Incident Name:
Address:County:
City/Town:Zip Code:Regional Office (circle one): Asheville, Mooresville, Fayetteville,Raleigh, Washington, Wilmington, Winston-Salem
Latitude (decimal degrees):Longitude (decimal degrees) :
Briefly describe suspected or confirmed release: (including but not limited to: nature of release, date of release, amount
of release, amount of free product present and recovery efforts, initial responses conducted, impacts to receptors)
Obtained by:
T GPS
T Topographic map T
GIS Address matching T
Other: GoogleEarth T
Unknown
Describe location: NW
quad., E. King St./MLK
Jr. Blvd.
HOW RELEASE WAS DISCOVERED (Release Code)(Check one)
T Release Detection Equipment or Methods
T During UST Closure/Removal
T Property Transfer
T Visual/Odor
T Water in Tank
T Water Supply Well Contamination
T Groundwater Contamination
T Surface Water Contamination
T Other (specify) _______________
SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION
Source of Release
(Check one to indicate primary
source)
Cause of Release
(Check one to indicate primary
cause)
Type of Release
(Check one)
Product Type Released
(Check one to indicate primary product type
released)
T Tank
T Piping
T Dispenser
T Submersible Turbine Pump
T Delivery Problem
T Other
T Unknown
Definitions presented on reverse
T Spill
T Overfill
T Corrosion
T Physical or Mechanical
Damage
T Install Problem
T Other
T Unknown
Definitions presented on reverse
T Petroleum
T Non-Petroleum
T Both
Location
(Check one)
T Facility
T Residence
T Other
T Gasoline/ Diesel/
Kerosene
T Heating Oil
T Other Petroleum
Products
T Metals
T Other Inorganics
T Other Organics
T Diesel/Veg. Oil
Blend
T Vegetable Oil 100%
T E10 – E20
T E21 – E84
T E85 – E99
T Ethanol 100%
T E01 – E09
Ownership1. Municipal 2. Military 3. Unknown 4. Private 5. Federal 6. County 7. State
Operation Type1. Public Service 2. Agricultural 3. Residential 4. Education/Relig. 5. Industrial 6. Commercial 7. Mining
UST Form 61 (02/08)Page 1 of 2
Former Hampton Industries, Kinston Shirt Factory
501 East Caswell Street
Kinston
Lenoir
N 35.2595 W 77.5736
On May 3-4, 2016, Mid-Atlantic removed a previously closed-in-place #6 fuel oil
UST that was closed in 1993 and 10,000-gallons in size. The tank was found
improperly closed - about 1/3 of the tank was filled-in and approximately 960
gallons of fuel oil and sludge remained. Contamination was found above action
levels in one sidewall soil sample (PCE - not UST related) and two line soil
samples (semi-volatile organic compounds). In groundwater only PCE was
found above the Groundwater Standard (not UST related). An Initial Abatement
Action Report is pending submittal to the N.C DEQ, City of Kinston and EPA.
28501
IMPACT ON DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES
Water Supply Wells Affected? 1. Yes 2. No 3. Unknown
Number of Water Supply Wells Affected __________________
Water Supply Wells Contaminated: (Include Users Names, Addresses and Phone Numbers. Attach additional sheet if necessary)
1.2.3.
UST SYSTEM OWNERUST Owner/Company
Point of Contact Address
City State Zip Code Telephone Number
UST SYSTEM OPERATOR
UST Operator/Company Address
City State Zip Code Telephone Number
LANDOWNER AT LOCATION OF UST INCIDENT
Landowner Address
City State Zip Code Telephone Number
Draw Sketch of Area (showing two major road intersections) or Attach Map
Person Reporting Incident: E. Aufderhaar Company: Mid-Atlantic Associates, Inc. (Agent for City of Kinston)Telephone Number: [phone]
Title: Senior Geologist Address: 409 Rogers View Court, Raleigh, N.C. 27610 Date: June 30, 2016
UST Form 61 (02/08)Page 2 of 2
Definitions of Sources
Tank: means the tank that stores the product and is part of the underground storage tank system
Piping: means the piping and connectors running from the tank or submersible turbine pump to the dispenser or other end-use equipment (Vent, vapor recovery, or fill
lines are excluded.)
Dispenser:includes the dispenser and the equipment used to connect the dispenser to the piping (e.g., a release from a suction pump or from components located above
the shear valve)
Submersible Turbine Pump (STP) Area includes the submersible turbine pump head (typically located in the tank sump), the line leak detector, and the piping that
connects the submersible turbine pump to the tank
Delivery Problem: identifies releases that occurred during product delivery to the tank. (Typical causes associated with this source are spills and overfills.)
Other: serves as the option to use when the release source is known but does not fit into one of the preceding categories (e.g., for releases from vent lines, vapor
recovery lines, and fill lines)
Unknown: identifies releases for which the source has not been determined
Definitions of Causes
Spill: use this cause when a spill occurs (e.g., when the delivery hose is disconnected from the tank fill pipe or when the nozzle is removed from the dispenser)
Overfill: use when an overfill occurs (e.g., overfills may occur from the fill pipe at the tank or when the nozzle fails to shut off at the dispenser)
Physical or Mechanical Damage:use for all types of physical or mechanical damage, except corrosion (e.g., puncture of tank or piping, loose fittings, broken
components, and components that have changed dimension)
Corrosion:use when a metal tank, piping, or other component has a release due to corrosion (e.g., for steel, corrosion takes the form of rust)
Installation Problem: use when the problem is determined to have occurred specifically because the UST system was not installed properly
Other: use this option when the cause is known but does not fit into one of the preceding categories (e.g., putting regulated substances into monitoring wells)
Unknown: use when the cause has not been determined
Hampton Industries (Former)
Hampton Industries (Former) - See Above
Ref: UST-2 form, UTTS/E, 10/10/93
P.O. Box 614
Kinston NC 28501 [phone]
City of Kinston 207 East King Street (P.O. Box 339)
Kinston NC 28502 [phone]