19070_Polo_EMP_20170130

1
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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 project manager for the program.
Prospective Developers and/or their consultants must complete and submit this form and all
pertinent attachments to their project manager prior to any site earthmoving or other
development related activities. For the resultant EMP to be valid for use, it must be completed,
reviewed by the program, and signed by all signers at the bottom. Consult your project
manager if you have questions.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Date: 1/30/2017

Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Polo Enterprises Redevelopment

Brownfields Project Number: 19070-15-025

Brownfields Property Address: 223 Craven St., New Bern, Craven County, NC – See Figure 1.

Brownfields Property Area (acres): 0.165

Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click here to enter text.

Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click here to enter text.

COMMUNICATIONS

Prospective Developer (PD): Polo Enterprises, LLC
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone]…..Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Primary PD Contact: James Polo
Phone Numbers: Office: [phone] Mobile: [phone]
Email:
Environmental Consultant: Terraquest Environmental Consultants, P.C. (Jonathan Grubbs, P.G.)
Phone Numbers: Office: (919)-563-9091…..Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Lebeed Kady
Office: 919-707-8378
2
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
Email: [e-mail]

Other DENR Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste): Sylvia Hunneke – UST Section

NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM

Advance Notification Times to Brownfields Project Manager: Check each box to accept minimum
notice periods (in calendar days) for each type of onsite task:
On-site assessment or remedial activities: Within 10 days ☒
Construction or grading start: Within 10 days ☒
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, venting of explosive environments):
Within 48 hours ☒
Installation of mitigation systems: Within 10 days ☒
Other notifications as required by local, state or federal agencies to implement
redevelopment activities: (as applicable): Within 30 days ☒

REDEVELOPMENT PLANS

1) Type of Redevelopment (check all that apply):
☒ Residential ☐ Recreational ☐ Institutional ☐ Commercial ☐ Office ☐Retail ☐ Industrial
☐ Other specify: Click here to enter text.

2) Summary of Redevelopment Plans (attach conceptual or detailed plans as available):
a) Do plans include demolition of structure(s)?: ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
b) Do plans include removal of building foundation slab(s) or pavement:
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
c) Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement and other structures: The building will occupy the same foot print as the
current building with first floor commercial, second and third floor residential, and the
addition of a second-story residence over the western end of building. Open space will
be located between the two buildings with parking located beneath the second story
residence on the western end of the building. The western portion of the property will
remain an asphalt driveway/parking area. See Figure 2 for the pre-construction layout
aerial and Figure 3 for the architectural site plan of the development.

3
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
3) Which category of risk-based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement?
☒ Residential ☐ Non-residential or Industrial/Commercial

Note: If children frequent the property, residential screening levels shall be cited in the Brownfields
Agreement for comparison purposes.

4) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Phase I start date and anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
11/30/2016
Project Completion: Late 2017/Early 2018

b) If applicable, Phase 2 start date and anticipated duration (specify activities during each
phase): Click here to enter a date.
Click here to enter text.

c) Additional phases planned? If yes, specify activities if known:
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Not in the foreseeable future ☐Decision pending
d) Provide the planned date of occupancy for new buildings: Late 2017/Early 2018

CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Contaminated Media (attach tabulated data summaries for each impacted media and figure(s) with
sample locations):
Part 1. Soil: ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 2. Groundwater: ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 3. Surface Water: ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 4. Sediment: ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 5. Soil Vapor: ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 6. Sub-Slab Soil Vapor: ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 7. Indoor Air: ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected

PART 1. SOIL – Please fill out the information below, using detailed site plans, if available, or estimate
using known areas of contaminated soil and a conceptual redevelopment plan. Provide a figure
overlaying new construction onto figure showing contaminated soil and groundwater locations.

1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list specific compounds): Naphthalene, 4-
Isopropyltoluene, 4-chlorotoluene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, ; C9-C18 Aliphatics, C9-C22 Aromatics,
lead (See included Table 1 and 1A for list of contaminants and Figure 4 for location of soil samples)
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet): 0 to 6-7 feet below ground surface
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet): 200
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet): 8
4
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan): ~60
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
~60
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable: ~60
IMPORTED FILL SOIL

1) Will fill soil be imported to the site? ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
2) If yes, what is the estimated volume of fill soil to be imported? ~60
3) If yes, what is the depth of fill soil to be used at the property? 0, backfill of soil excavation
If a range of depths, please list the range.

4) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide plan to analyze fill soil to
demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards and can be considered clean for use at the
Brownfields property (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 (speciated), mercury, lead,
selenium and silver)
☐ Metals –Hazardous Substance List -14 (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc)
☐ Metals – EPA Priority Pollutant List – 13 (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium (speciated
according to IHSB protocol), copper, mercury, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, silver, thallium, and
zinc)
☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method: lead and chromium and hex. chromium
☐ Known borrow material (DESCRIBE SOURCE AND ATTACH SAMPLING PROFILE): To be
determined

MANAGING ONSITE SOIL

1) If soil in known or suspected areas of contamination 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).

2) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION – 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 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
5
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014

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 DENR
HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

3) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION – Does the soil contain a CHARACTERISTIC WASTE?:
☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).

☐ Ignitability
☐ Corrosivity
☐ Reactivity
☐ Toxicity
☐ TCLP results
☐ 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)

If no, explain rationale: The source for contaminated soils on the properties originated from
petroleum-based uses (i.e. varsol storage tanks from former dry cleaning operations).
Contaminant levels detected in a soil sample collected in the vicinity of the varsol AST do
exceed the NCDEQ DWM-UST Sections S-t-G MSCCs. No known releases of hazardous waste
have occurred on the properties.

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 DENR HAZARDOUS WASTE
SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.

4) 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 Click here to enter a date.
☐ Preliminary Health-Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs Click here to enter a date.
☐ Site-specific risk-based cleanup level, or acceptable concentrations determined via
calculated cumulative risk. Enter details of methods used for determination/explanation:
Click here to enter text.

5) Check the following action(s) to be taken during excavation and management of said soils:

☒ Manage fugitive dust from site:
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: Dust suppression will include periodic
watering of effected area as needed; however, no contaminants are suspected in dust-
producing surface soils.

☒ Field Screening:
6
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: Field screening will be completed using a
Photoionization Detector (PID). Suspected soils will be placed in Ziploc bags and screened using the
PID.

☐ Soil Sample Collection:
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method (e.g., in-situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.); If no, explain rationale:
Yes, if areas of previously unknown contamination are discovered during the screening process;
☒ Stockpile impacted soil in accordance with NCDENR IHSB protocol in the current version of
the “Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup”, and providing erosion control, prohibiting
contact between surface water/precipitation and contaminated soil, and preventing
contaminated runoff. Explain any variances:
Click here to enter text.
☒ Analyze potentially impacted soil for the following 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 (speciated), mercury,
lead, selenium and silver)
☐ Metals –Hazardous Substance List -14 (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium (speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel,
selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc)
☐ Metals – EPA Priority Pollutant List – 13 (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, mercury, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc)
☒ Other Constituent(s) & Analytical Method(s): lead and chromium and hex.
chromium

☒ Proposed Measures to Obtain Pre-Approval for Reuse of Impacted Soil within the
Brownfields Property Boundary
☒ 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
☐ Use geotextile to mark depth of fill material (provide description of material)
☐ Manage soil under impervious cap ☐ or clean fill ☐
Describe cap or fill: Click here to enter text. (provide location diagram)
☐ Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re-
recorded if actions are Post-Recordation).
☐ Other: Click here to enter text.

☐ Final grade sampling of exposed soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or permanent
hardscape): [if not checked provide rationale for not needing]
Provide diagram of soil sampling locations, number of samples, and denote Chemical
Analytical Program with check boxes below (Check all that apply):
7
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
☐ 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 (speciated), mercury,
lead, selenium and silver)
☐ Metals –Hazardous Substance List -14 (antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium (speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel,
selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc)
☐ Metals – EPA Priority Pollutant List – 13 (arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium
(speciated according to IHSB protocol), copper, mercury, nickel, lead, antimony, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc)
☐ Pesticides
☐ PCBs
☐ Other Constituents & Analytical Method: Final grade sampling of exposed soil is
not necessary based upon the know areas of impacted soils and their locations below the
buildings and permanent hardscape.
OFFSITE TRANSPORT & DISPOSITION OF EXCAVATED SOIL
NOTE: Unless soil will be transported offsite for disposal in a permitted facility under applicable
regulations, no contaminated or potentially contaminated soil may leave the site without approval
from the brownfields program. Failure to obtain approval may violate a brownfields agreement,
endangering liability protections and making said action subject to enforcement. Justifications
provided below must be approved by the Program in writing prior to completing transport activities.
☐ Transport and dispose of impacted soil offsite (documentation of final disposition must be sent to
Brownfields Project Manager)
☒ Landfill – analytical program determined by landfill
☐ Landfarm or other treatment facility Landfill - Waste Industries – Sampson County Landfill
Roseboro, NC.
☐ Use as Beneficial Fill Offsite – provide justification: Click here to enter text.
☐ Use as Beneficial Fill at another Suitable Brownfields Site – (Note: a determination that a
site is a “Suitable Brownfields” site will require, at a minimum, that similar concentrations of the same
or similar contaminants already exist at both sites, use of impacted soil as beneficial soil will not
increase the potential for risk to human health and the environment at that site, and that notarized
documentation of the acceptance of such soil from the property owner of the receiving site is
provided to Brownfields. Provide justification: Click here to enter text.

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? Result: Yes □ No □
If no, include rationale here. Click here to enter text.
8
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials

Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches: Contaminant levels in soil
are not elevated enough to be considered a potential source for soil vapor intrusion.

PART 2. GROUNDWATER – Please fill out the information below and attach figure showing
distribution of groundwater contaminants at site

What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property? ~5 to 6 feet below ground surface

Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☒onsite ☐ offsite ☐ both ☐ or unknown
sources? Describe source(s): Onsite sources of groundwater contamination include the former
varsol AST. Groundwater contamination in this location is documented in the groundwater
analytical results of monitoring wells MW1, MW2, and MW3, collected as part of the Limited
Comprehensive Site Assessment and November 2015 and November 2016 groundwater
sampling events. See Table 2 for list of contaminants and Figure 5 for location of monitoring
wells.

What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property? East-Northeast.
Groundwater flow direction is depicted on Figures 5 and 6.

Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, describe these activities: Click here to enter text.

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, or sampling procedures): If groundwater is encountered, the general contractor will notify the
environmental consultant and the environmental consultant will collect groundwater sample(s) from
the excavation. The groundwater sample(s) will be submitted to a NCDEQ-certified analytical
laboratory for analysis per EPA Method 6200B. The property developer and the environmental
consultant are currently evaluating options for the management of contaminated groundwater if
encountered and removal is required. Currently, groundwater removal via pumping groundwater to
tanker trucks and offsite disposal is the preferred groundwater management option. Other options
include discharge via an Industrial Pre-Treatment Permit to the City of New Bern sanitary sewer
system. The final groundwater management method will be determined once groundwater disposal
is required and the amount of groundwater to be disposed is assessed. The Brownfields Section will
be notified of the groundwater management option that will be employed during the site
redevelopment activities.

PART 3. SURFACE WATER – Please fill out the information below.
Attach a map showing the location of surface water at the Brownfields Property.

9
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
Is surface water at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No

Will workers or the public be in contact with surface water during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☒ No

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): Click here to enter text.

PART 4. SEDIMENT – Please fill out the information below.
Is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No

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

If yes, attach a map showing location of known contaminated sediment at the property.

In the event that contaminated sediment is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such events (stream bed disturbance): Click here to enter text.

PART 5. SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below.
Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the following
vapor intrusion screening levels 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

Attach a map showing the location of soil vapor contaminants that exceed site screening levels.

If applicable, at what depth(s) is soil vapor known to be contaminated? See Table 3

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: If
contaminated soil vapor is encountered, the EC will confer with the PD, notify the Brownfields
Section. Soil vapor sampling and abatement requirements will be evaluated based upon the
depth and location of the encountered vapor. If necessary, soil vapor samples will be collected
10
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
from the affected area(s) and submitted to NC-certified laboratory for analysis. Based upon the
location, depth, and analysis of the soil vapor samples (if necessary), the appropriate
abatement method will be approved by the Brownfields Section and implemented.

PART 6. SUB-SLAB SOIL VAPOR -please fill out the information below if existing buildings or
foundations will be retained in the redevelopment.

Are sub-slab soil vapor data available for the Brownfields Property? ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown

If data indicate that sub-slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map showing
the location of these exceedances.

At what depth(s) is sub-slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☐ 0-6 inches ☐ Other, If other
describe: See Table 3

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

In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact: If contaminated sub-slab soil vapor is encountered, the
EC will confer with the PD, notify the Brownfields Section. Soil vapor sampling and abatement
requirements will be evaluated based upon the depth and location of the encountered vapor.
If necessary, soil vapor samples will be collected from the affected area(s) and submitted to NC-
certified laboratory for analysis. Based upon the location, depth, and analysis of the soil vapor
samples (if necessary), the appropriate abatement method will be approved by the Brownfields
Section and implemented.

PART 7. INDOOR AIR – Please fill out the information below .

Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

If yes, attach a map showing the location where indoor air contaminants exceed site screening levels.

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

In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact: If contaminated indoor air is encountered, the EC will
confer with the PD, notify the Brownfields Section. Indoor air sampling and abatement
requirements will be evaluated based upon the depth and location of the encountered indoor
11
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
air contaminants. If necessary, indoor air samples will be collected from the affected area(s)
and submitted to NC-certified laboratory for analysis. Based upon the location and analysis of
the indoor air samples (if necessary), the appropriate abatement method will be approved by
the Brownfields Section and implemented.

PART 8 – Vapor Mitigation System – Please fill out the information below .

Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system proposed for this Brownfields Property?
☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown

If yes, provide the date the plan was submitted to the Brownfields Program.
Click here to enter a date.
Attach the plan.

Has the vapor mitigation plan been approved by the NC Brownfields Program?
☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
Has the vapor mitigation plan been signed and sealed by a North Carolina professional engineer?
☐ Yes ☐ No

What are the components of the vapor intrusion mitigation system?
☐ Sub-slab depressurization system
☐ Sub-membrane depressurization system
☐ Block-wall depressurization system
☐ Drain tile depressurization system
☐ Passive mitigation methods
☐ Vapor barriers
☐ Perforated piping vented to exterior
☐ Other method: Click here to enter text.

PART 9. CONTINGENCY FOR ENCOUNTERING UNKNOWN TANKS, DRUMS, OR OTHER WASTE
MATERIALS

Please provide a contingency plan in the event unknown tanks, drums, fuel lines, landfills, or other
waste materials are encountered during site activities.

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

Notification to State Brownfields Project Manager, UST Section, Fire Department, and/or other
Compound B-1 B-2
Analytical
Method
Soil to
Groundwater
MSCC (mg/kg)
Industrial/Commercial
MSCC (mg/kg)
Acetone 0.113 ND 8260 24 360,000
Benzo(a)anthracene ND 8.40 8270 0.35 8
Benzo(a)pyrene ND 8.65 8270 0.096 0.78
Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND 7.79 8270 1.2 8
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ND 5.46 8270 6400 12,264
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND 7.18 8270 12 78
Chrysene ND 8.95 8270 39 780
Fluoranthene ND 14.00 8270 290 16,400
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ND 5.09 8270 3.4 8
Phenanthrene ND 5.45 8270 56 12,264
Pyrene ND 11.30 8270 270.0 12,264
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.019 ND 8260 9 20,440
Remainng VOCs ND ND 8260 Varies Varies
Remaining SVOCs ND ND 8270 Varies Varies
Notes:
Parameters reported in milligrams per liter (mg/kg)
MSCC = Maximum Soil Contaminant Concentration
ND = Not Detected, NA = Not Analyzed
Bold values represent concentrations above Industrial MSCC Standards
Samples collected on January 22, 2015
New Bern, Craven County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 22-22171
Table 1
Summary of Soil Analytical Results
223 Craven Street
Gussman Cleaners
T
P
H

3
5
5
0
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
/
8
2
7
0
C
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
6
0
B
8
2
7
0
C
8
2
7
0
C
8270C 8270C 8270C MADEP VPH MADEP VPH/EPH MADEP EPH MADEP VPH/EPH 6010 C 7196A 6010 C TCLP
Da
t
e

C
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d

S
a
m
p
l
e

D
e
p
t
h
Mid
d
l
e

B
o
r
i
n
g

(
0
‐
1
)

1
1
/
3
0
/
1
6
0‐
1
2,
4
8
0
0.
0
6
6
4
J

0
.
1
8
6
J

0
.
3
4
5
J

2
.
8
8

2
.
4
3

0
.
9
0
6

5
.
5
9

0
.
5
6
3

0
.
1
7
2
J

2
.
8
3
/
0
.
7
9
5
J

1
.
0
5

1
2.
9

0
.
8
6
6
<0
.
5
1
9

<
0
.
4
9
5
2.8 4 <0.620

<
0
.
6
7
3
16.5

1
,
5
9
2

2
,
7
9
0 1,967

0
.
7
4
3
J

0
.
2
9
2
X 681

1
.
4
7
Mi
d
d
l
e

B
o
r
i
n
g

(
6
‐
6
.
5
)

1
1
/
3
0
/
1
6
6‐
6
.
5
97
2
<0
.
0
3
6
8

<
0
.
0
3
5
4
<0
.
1
2
0
0.
8
7
0
X
2.
0
5

0
.
5
7
8
X
<0
.
0
5
0
1
0.
3
7
<0
.
0
3
4
6
<0
.
0
0
2
/0
.
0
7
9
6
J
0.4
0
7
<0
.
0
4
5
1

<
0
.
0
5
0
9
0.
0
9
2
5

0
.
1
2
1
J

0
.
4
0
8
J

0
.
1
9
9
J

0
.
1
3
5
J

1
9
.
4 652 X 225 X 355.5 <0.0751 0.0413J

1
0
.
9

‐
‐

4
.
3

4
.
9

4
.
6

4
.
3

3
.
3

3
.
4

0
.
1
2

1
.
7

0
.
1

0
.
1
6

1
.
7

8
.
5

8
.
3

4
.
7

4
7

2
9
0

3
.
6

5
6

6
8

5
4
0

#
#

3
1

4
,
2
0
0

5
.
4

2
7
0

2
7
0
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
o
i
l

C
l
e
a
n
u
p

L
e
v
e
l
s

‐

1
,
2
0
0

1
,
5
6
0

3
,
1
2
9

6
2
6

6
2
6

6
2
6

1
0
0

1
,
5
6
4

1
,
0
0
0
.
0
31
3

6
2
6

7
8
2

7
8
2

6
2

6
2
0

6
2
0

6
3

4
6
9

9
3
9

1
,
5
0
0

3
1
,
0
0
0

4
6
9

2
3
,
4
6
0

4
7

4
0
0

4
0
0
10
No
t
e
s
:
1.

A
l
l

r
e
s
u
l
t
s

i
n

m
g
/
k
g
.

2.

Bo
l
d
 d
e
n
o
t
e
s

a

c
o
m
p
o
u
n
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
.

3.

S
h
a
d
i
n
g

d
e
n
o
t
e
s

a

S
o
i
l
‐
t
o
‐
g
r
o
u
n
d
w
a
t
e
r

M
S
C
C

v
i
o
l
a
t
i
o
n

o
r

a

T
PH

A
c
t
i
o
n

L
i
m
i
t

v
i
o
l
a
t
i
o
n
.

4.

"
<
"

=

l
e
s
s

t
h
a
n

s
a
m
p
l
e

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
5.

S
a
m
p
l
e

d
e
p
t
h
s

a
r
e

i
n

f
e
e
t

b
e
l
o
w

g
r
o
u
n
d

l
e
v
e
l
.
6.

N
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e

r
e
s
u
l
t
s

b
y

m
e
t
h
o
d

8
2
6
0
B
/
8
2
7
0
C
7.

"
‐
"

=

c
o
m
p
o
u
n
d

n
o
t

t
e
s
t
e
d

p
e
r

t
h
a
t

m
e
t
h
o
d
8.

"
#
"

=

h
e
a
l
t
h

b
a
s
e
d

l
e
v
e
l

>

1
0
0
%
9.

"
M
S
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
10
.

"
D
"

=

T
h
e

s
a
m
p
l
e
(
s
)

w
e
r
e

d
i
l
u
t
e
d

d
u
e

t
o

t
a
r
g
e
t
s

d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d

o
ve
r

t
h
e

h
i
g
h
e
s
t

p
o
i
n
t

o
f

t
h
e

c
a
l
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

c
u
r
v
e
,

o
r

d
u
e

t
o

m
a
t
r
i
x i
n
t
e
r
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
.

D
i
l
u
t
i
o
n

f
a
c
t
o
r
s

a
r
e

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

f
i
n
a
l

r
e
s
u
lt
s
.

T
h
e

r
e
s
u
l
t

i
s

f
r
o
m

a

d
i
l
u
t
e
d

s
a
m
p
l
e
.
11
.

"
F
"

=

R
P
D

e
x
c
e
e
d
e
d

l
a
b

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

l
i
m
i
t
s
.
12
.

"
J
"

=

T
h
e

t
a
r
g
e
t

a
n
a
l
y
t
e

w
a
s

p
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
l
y

i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e q
u
a
n
t
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t

a
n
d

a
b
o
v
e

t
h
e

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
.
13
.

"
X
"

=

I
n

o
u
r

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

r
e
v
i
e
w

o
f

t
h
e

d
a
t
a

a

Q
C

d
e
f
i
c
i
en
c
y

w
a
s

o
b
s
e
r
v
e
d

a
n
d

f
l
a
g
g
e
d

a
s

n
o
t
e
d
.

M
S
/
M
S
D

r
e
c
o
v
e
r
i
e
s

w
e
r
e

fo
u
n
d

t
o

b
e

o
u
t
s
i
d
e

o
f

t
h
e

l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

l
i
m
i
t
s

d
u
e

t
o

p
o
s
si
b
l
e

m
a
t
r
i
x
/
c
h
e
m
i
c
a
l

i
n
t
e
r
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
,

o
r

a

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

o
f

t
a
r
g
e
t analyte high enough to affect the recovery of the spike conce ntration. This condition could also affect the relative percent  differ eFacility ID No.: NA

I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t

N
a
m
e
:

C
o
x

A
u
t
o

‐

P
a
r
k
e
r

P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y

I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t

N
o.
:

P
E
N
D
I
N
G

SU
M
M
A
R
Y

O
F

S
O
I
L

S
A
M
P
L
I
N
G

R
E
S
U
L
T
S

(
B
o
i
l
e
r

R
o
o
m

S
u
b
s
l
a
b
)
An
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

M
e
t
h
o
d

Sa
m
p
l
e

I
D
Co
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t

o
f

C
o
n
c
e
r
n
T
o
l
u
e
n
e
E
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
T
o
t
a
l

X
y
l
e
n
e
s
Ta
b
l
e

1
A
Da
t
e
:

1
2
/
1
6
/
1
6
I
s
o
p
r
o
p
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
N
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
n
‐
P
r
o
p
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
1
,
2
,
4
‐
T
r
i
m
e
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
1
,
3
,
5
‐
T
r
i
m
e
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
n
‐
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
s
e
c
‐
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
t
e
r
t
‐
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
4
‐
I
s
o
p
r
o
p
y
l
t
o
l
u
e
n
e
4
‐
C
h
l
o
r
o
t
o
l
u
e
n
e
C19‐C36 Aliphatics C9‐C22 Aromatics
So
i
l
‐
t
o
‐
g
r
o
u
n
d
w
a
t
e
r

M
S
C
C
TP
H

A
c
t
i
o
n

L
i
m
i
t
T
P
H

D
R
O
Phenanthrene 2‐Methylnaphthalene C5‐C8 Aliphatics Lead Chromium Hexavalent Chromium Lead
D
i
b
e
n
z
o
f
u
r
a
n
F
l
u
o
r
e
n
e
C9‐C18 Aliphatics bis(2‐ethylhexyl) phalate
Ta
b
l
e

2
Da
t
e
:

1
/
1
2
/
1
7
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6
2
0
0
B
6200B 6200B 6200B 6200B 6200B 625BNA MADEP VPH MADEP VPH/EPH MADEP EPH MADEP VPH/EPH
We
l
l

I
D
Da
t
e

C
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
11
/
2
3
/
1
5

<
0
.
1
1
9

<
0
.
0
5
7
0

<
0
.
0
9
2
0

<
0
.
2
9
8

<
0
.
1
6
9

<
0
.
0
9
2
0
10
.
4

4
1
.
3

2
3
.
4

1
0
.
2

0
.
6
4
<0
.
0
9
8
0
1.
2
5
<0
.
0
8
9
0

<
0
.
0
8
8
0

<
0
.
0
9
0

<
0
.
3
5
2

<
0
.
0
9
7
0

<
0
.
0
8
5
42.7

5
4
.
7

0
.
2
7
0

J
<0.0870

<
1
.
4
0

<
0
.
0
1
5
0
760.5 <93.5 496.5
11
/
2
3
/
2
0
1
5

*
*
‐‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
9.73 JK ‐‐‐‐
11
/
3
0
/
1
6

<
0
.
1
1
9
0.
0
8

J
<0
.
0
9
2
0

<
0
.
2
9
8

<
0
.
1
6
9

<
0
.
0
9
2
0
1.
8
4

J

1
7

1
2
.
4

4
.
6
1
<0
.
0
9
4
0

<
0
.
0
9
8
0

<
0
.
0
6
7
0

<
0
.
0
8
9
0

<
0
.
5
0
0

<
0
.
5
0
0
32
.
8

8

5
.
3

1
7

1
1
.
7
<0.103

<
0
.
0
8
7
0
7.14 J

7
4
.
2

8
3
5
.
1
2
3
<0.0800 453.105
11
/
2
3
/
1
5

<
0
.
1
1
9
0.
2
7
0

J
<0
.
0
9
2
0
2.
6
7
<0
.
1
6
9

<
0
.
0
9
2
0
5.9
6

8
.
6
9

1
0
.
2

2
4
.
7

1
.
7
6

0
.
4
6
0

J

4
.
7
4

1
3
.
6
<0
.
0
8
8
0

<
0
.
0
9
0

<
0
.
3
5
2

<
0
.
0
9
7
0

<
0
.
0
8
5
6.89

1
1

0
.
3
4
0

J
<0.0870 1.59 J <0.0150 575.5 <93.5 385.5
11
/
3
0
/
1
6

<
0
.
1
1
9
0.
2
5

J

0
.
1
5

J

1
.
5
1
<0
.
1
6
9

<
0
.
0
9
2
0
1.
3
4

J

4
.
8
7

6
.
1
2

1
2

1
.
3
3

0
.
3
2

J

3
.
3
7

J
<0
.
0
8
9
0
0.6
5

0
.
2
6

J

1
.
8
7

J
<1
.
0
0

<
0
.
5
0
0
4.19

2
.
5
9

0
.
3
6

J
<0.0870 6.6 J

7
6
.
7

4
4
6
.
1
3

0
.
0
6
2
3

3
2
3
.
0
1
1
11
/
2
3
/
1
5

<
0
.
1
1
9

<
0
.
0
5
7
0

<
0
.
0
9
2
0

<
0
.
2
9
8

<
0
.
1
6
9

<
0
.
0
9
2
0
4.
5
1

1
8

1
4
.
7
<0
.
1
0
5

<
0
.
0
9
4
0

<
0
.
0
9
8
0

<
0
.
0
6
7
0

<
0
.
0
8
9
0

<
0
.
0
8
8
0

<
0
.
0
9
0

<
0
.
3
5
2

<
0
.
0
9
7
0

<
0
.
085 19.2

1
9
.
8
<0.103

<
0
.
0
8
7
0
2.16 J <0.0150 353.5 <93.5 267.5
11
/
2
3
/
2
0
1
5

*
*
‐‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
<1.40 ‐‐‐‐
11
/
3
0
/
1
6

<
0
.
1
1
9
0.
0
6

J
<0
.
0
9
2
0
0.
2
2

J
<0
.
1
6
9

<
0
.
0
9
2
0

<
2
.
0
0
5.
3
9

7
.
6
5

2
.
6
1
<0
.
0
9
4
0

<
0
.
0
9
8
0

<
0
.
0
6
7
0

<
0
.
0
8
9
0

<
0
.
2
0
0

<
0
.
5
0
0
2.
5
1

J
<1
.
0
0

<
0
.
5
0
0
5.47

0
.
1
7

J
<0.103

<
0
.
0
8
7
0

<
1
.
4
0
65.3

3
1
3
.
1
0
1
X <0.0800 188
1

6
0
0

6
0
0

5
0
0

2
0

7
0

7
0

7
0

7
0

5
0

2
0

2
0
0

6

2
5

1
0
0

2
4

6
,
0
0
0
10
0

3

7
0

7
0

4
0
0

4
0
0

1

4
0
0

7
0
0

1
0
,
0
0
0 200
No
t
e
s
:
1.

A
l
l

r
e
s
u
l
t
s

i
n

µ
g
/
L
.

2.

Bo
l
d
 d
e
n
o
t
e
s

a

c
o
m
p
o
u
n
d

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

3.

S
h
a
d
i
n
g

d
e
n
o
t
e
s

a

2
L

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

v
i
o
l
a
t
i
o
n
4.

<

‐

d
e
n
o
t
e
s

l
e
s
s

t
h
a
n

s
a
m
p
l
e

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
5.

"
J
"

‐

T
h
e

t
a
r
g
e
t

a
n
a
l
y
t
e

w
a
s

p
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
l
y

i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d

b
e
l
o
w

t
h
e 
q
u
a
n
t
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t

a
n
d

a
b
o
v
e

t
h
e

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
i
m
i
t
.

"
X
"

‐

G
e
n
e
ra
l

Q
C

F
a
i
l
u
r
e
6.

*
*
T
h
e

i
n
i
t
i
a
l

6
2
5

B
N
A

a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

f
o
r

M
W
1

a
n
d

M
W
3

h
a
d

l
o
w

s
u
r
r
og
a
t
e

r
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
,

w
e
r
e

r
e
a
n
a
l
y
z
e
d
,

a
n
d

w
e
r
e

r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d

a
s

t
h
e

M
W
1

R
E 
a
n
d

M
W
3

R
E

a
n
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

r
e
s
u
l
t
s
.
Facility ID No.:  NA
Co
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t

o
f

C
o
n
c
e
r
n
B
e
n
z
e
n
e
T
o
l
u
e
n
e
E
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
T
o
t
a
l

X
y
l
e
n
e
s
M
T
B
E
B
r
o
m
o
m
e
t
h
a
n
e
Chloromethane C19‐C36 Aliphatics C9‐C22 Aromatics
1
,
3
‐
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
1
,
4
‐
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
4
‐
I
s
o
p
r
o
p
y
l
t
o
l
u
e
n
e
Isopropylbenzene n‐Propylbenzene 1,2,4‐Trimethylbenzene
2L

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
4
‐
C
h
l
o
r
o
t
o
l
u
e
n
e
A
c
e
t
o
n
e
1,3,5‐Trimethylbenzene 1‐Methylnaphthalene C5‐C8 Aliphatics
I
P
E
n
‐
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
s
e
c
‐
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
t
e
r
t
‐
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
2
‐
C
h
l
o
r
o
t
o
l
u
e
n
e
MW
1
MW
2
MW
3

S
U
M
M
A
R
Y

O
F

G
R
O
U
N
D
W
A
T
E
R

S
A
M
P
L
I
N
G

R
E
S
U
L
T
S

I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t

N
a
m
e
:

G
u
s
s
m
a
n

C
l
e
a
n
e
r
s

I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t

N
o
.
:

9
3
2
5
4

C9‐C18 Aliphatics
C
h
l
o
r
o
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
1
,
2
‐
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
An
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l

M
e
t
h
o
d
Parameter ANALTYCIAL
RESULTS
ANALTYCIAL
RESULTS
Sample ID SG-1 SG-2
Collection Date 1/22/2015 1/22/2015
Acetone 34.0 30.1 2,720,000
Benzene 5.7 1.6 1,570
2-Butanone (MEK)14.1 9.0 438,000
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)3.3 3.0 876
Ethyl acetate BRL 9.1 6,130
Ethylbenzene 3.4 BRL 4,910
4-Ethyltoluene 2.4 2.2 NS
n-Heptane 5.0 3.8 NS
n-Hexane 11.4 29.6 61,300
2-Hexanone 1.7 BRL 2,630
Methylene Chloride 7.0 33.7 52,600
Propylene 9.6 7.1 263,000
Tetrachloroethene 3.3 3.2 3,500
Tetrahydrofuran 10.9 BRL 175,000
Toluene 14.5 7.8 438,000
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 9.4 8.3 613
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 2.5 2.1 NS
total Xylenes 18.6 9.1 8,760
Notes:
Results presented in micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), analogous to parts per billion (ppb)
BRL = Compound not detected at a concentration above the method reporting limit
Compounds not listed were not detected above laboratory reporting limits
NS = No NCDENR IHSB Standard Available
NCDENR IHSB Non-
Residential Sub-Slab and
Exterior Soil Gas
Screening Level (ug/m3)
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch Standard
(current as of June 2014)
Table 3
Summary of Soil Gas Analytical Results
Gussman Cleaners
223 Craven Street
New Bern, Craven County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 22-22171