Charlotte Casket - EMP Signed 2-20-15-OCR

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 co nsultants 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 resu ltant 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: 2/16/2015
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Charlotte Casket Co.
Brownfields Project Number: 18040-14-060
Brownfields Property Address: 1305 Central Avenue, Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Property Area (acres): 5
Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit? D Yes ~ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click here to enter text
Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit? D Yes ~ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click here to enter text.
COMMUNICATIONS
Prospective Developer (PD): TriBridge Residential, LLC
Phone Numbers: Office: 404-352-2800 ..... Mobile: Click here to enter text.
Email: Click here to enter text.
Primary PD Contact: Stephen Bates
Phone Numbers: Office: 404-367-6546 Mobile: [e-mail]
Email:
Environmental Consultant: Amee Foster Wheeler, Attn: Andy Clark
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-357-8600 ..... Mobile: Click here to enter text.
Email: [e-mail]
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Sharon Eckard
Office: Raleigh
1
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
II
Email: [e-mail]
Other DENR Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste): Click here to enter text.
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:
Construction or grading start:
Within 10 days_~
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 D Recreational D Institutional D Commercial D Office DRetail D Industrial
D 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 D No D Unknown
b) Do plans include removal of building foundation slab(s) or pavement:
~ Yes D No D Unknown
c) Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement and other structures: Demolish 3 exisiting buildings, remove foundation slabs
of existing buildings, remove concete and asphalt paved areas. Construct 3 residential
buildings and 1 parking garage.
3) Which category of risk-based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement?
~ Residential D Non-residential or Industrial/Commercial
2
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
,,
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):
2/18/2015
See attached construction schedule
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:
D Yes D No ~ Not in the foreseeable future D Decision pending
d) Provide t he planned date of occupancy for new buildings: 2/1/2016
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
Contaminated Media (attach tabulated data summaries for each impacted media and figure(s) with
sample locations):
Part 1. Soil: D Yes ~No D Suspected
Part 2. Groundwater: DYes ~ No D Suspected
Part 3. Surface Water: D Yes ~ No D Suspected
Part 4. Sediment: D Yes ~No D Suspected
Part 5. Soil Vapor: D Yes ~ No D Suspected
Part 6. Sub-Slab Soil Vapor: D Yes ~ No D Suspected
Part 7. Indoor Air: D Yes ~ No D 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): Soil samples collected at the
site have been analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, RCRA Metals and Hexavalent Chromium. No VOC or SVOC
concentrations were reported above laboratory reporting limits, RCRA Metals concentrations
identified were consistent with naturally occurring concentrations of Piedmont soils in North
Carolina. No Hexavalent Chromium conce ntrations were identified above the laborat ory reporting
limits. See attached tables, no tables for soil voe and SVOC data are attached due to constituents
below laboratory reporting limits.
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet): No contaminated soil identified during
assessment activiites.
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet): Approximately 146, 797 square feet
3
EMP Form ver.l , October 23, 2014
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet): Up to 13 feet to relocate utilites on site. Soils will be placed
back in excavation following utility relocation .
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan): Zero export site, see
grading plan. No soil to be excavated and removed from site.
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
Contamination not anticipated to be encountered.
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable: zero
IMPORTED FILL SOIL
1) Will fill soil be imported to the site? 181 Yes D No D Unknown
2) If yes, what is the estimated volume of fill soil to be imported? 23,768 cubic yards
3) If yes, what is the depth of fill soil to be used at the property? 12 feet 6 inches.
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):
181 Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
181 Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
181 Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium (speciated), mercury, lead,
selenium and silver)
D 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)
D 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)
181 Other Constituents & Analytical Method: Hexavalent Chromium via EPA Method 7896
181 Known borrow material (DESCRIBE SOURCE AND ATTACH SAMPLING PROFILE): Borrow
material site located at 13000 Albemarle Road, Mint Hill, North Carolina. Borrow material site was
wooded from at least 1993 to 2006, when it was cleared in preparation for the construction of the
nearby Rocky River High School. The site has remained cleared from 2006 to present. Analytical
results for the above referenced analysis are pending.
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? D Yes 181 No
4
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
If yes, explain why below, including the level of knowledge regarding processes generating the
waste( include pertinent analytical results as needed). Cl ick here to enter text.
If yes, do the soils exceed the "Contained-Out" levels in Attachment 1 of the North Carolina
Contained-In Policy? 0 Yes 0 No
NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE AND EXCEEDS THE
CONTAINED-OUT LEVELS IN ATIACHMENT 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?:
0 Yes 181 No
If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).
0 lgnitability
0 Corrosivity
0 Reactivity
0 Toxicity
0 TCLP results
0 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: Analytical results indicate concentrations of VOCs, SVOCs, RCRA Metals and
Hexavalent Chromium identified in samples collected from the site are either below all NCDENR Soil
Remediation Goals and/or below laboratory reporting limits.
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):
181 Preliminary Health-Based Residential SRGs 9/1/2014
0 Preliminary Health-Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs Click here to enter a date.
0 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
EMP Form ver.l , October 23, 2014
5) Check the following action(s) to be taken during excavation and management of said soils:
1:81 Manage fugitive dust from site:
1:81 Yes D No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: Spray area with water, when necessary
1:81 Field Screening:
1:81 Yes D No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: Excavation and grading activities will be
observed by qualified personnel. If field observations indicate possible contamination, soils will be
screened with a photoionization detector (PID) for VOCs by qualified personnel and segregated for
sample collection.
1:81 Soil Sample Collection:
1:81 Yes D No
If yes, describe method (e.g., in-situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.); If no, explain rationale:
In-situ grab, if PID screening indicates possible contamination.
1:81 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.
1:81 Analyze potentially impacted soil for the following chemical analytes:
1:81 Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
1:81 Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
1:81 Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium (speciated), mercury,
lead, selenium and silver)
D 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)
D 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)
1:81 Other Constituent(s) & Analytical Method(s): Hexavalent Chromium
1:81 Proposed Measures to Obtain Pre-Approval for Reuse of Impacted Soil within the
Brownfields Property Boundary
1:81 Provide documentation of analytical report(s) to Brownfields Project Manager
1:81 Provide documentation of final location, thickness and depth of relocated soil on
site map to Brownfields Project Manager once known
D Use geotextile to mark depth of fill material (provide description of material)
1:81 Manage soil under impervious cap 1:81 or clean fill D
Describe cap or fill: Placed under building footprint. (provide location diagram)
6
EM P Form ver. l , October 23, 2014
D Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re-
recorded if actions are Post-Recordation).
D Other: Click here to enter text.
D 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):
D Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
D Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
D Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium (speciated), mercury,
lead, selenium and silver)
D 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)
D 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)
D Pesticides
0 PCBs
D Other Constituents & Analytical Method: Based on analytical results, impacted
soils are not anticipated to be encountered. However, if impacted soils are encountered, said soils
will be placed under areas of impervious cap (i.e. under building footprints) therefore, exposed soils
will not exisit, so no final grading sa mplingis proposed.
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.
D Transport and dispose of impacted soil offsite (documentation of final disposition must be sent to
Brownfields Project Manager)
D Landfill -analytical program determined by landfill
D Landfarm or other treatment facility Click here to enter text.
D Use as Beneficial Fill Offsite -provide justification: Click here to enter text
D 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 w ill 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: Clic here o Pllte• tevt
MANAGEMENT OF UTILITY TRENCHES
D Install liner between native impacted soils and base of utility trench before filling with clean fill
(Preferred)
7
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
~ 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 o No o
If no, include rationale here. Current site data indicates soil-gas concentrations below NCDENR
Residential Screening Levels
If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials
Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches: Click here to enter text.
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? 13 to 14 feet below ground surface
Is groundwater known to be contaminated by D onsite D offsite D both D or unknown
sources? Describe source(s): Contaminated groundwater was not encountered during assessment
activities.
What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property? Northwest
Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities? D Yes ~ No
If yes, describe these activities: Click here to enter te1Ct.
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): Groundwater will be removed from excavation and containerized.
Following characterization, the groundwater will be disposed offsite at a permitted facility.
RT 3. SURFACE WATER -Please fill out the information below.
Attach a map showing the location of surface water at the Brownfields Property.
Is surface water at the property known to be cont aminat ed: D Yes ~ No
Will workers or the public be in contact with surface water during planned redevelopment activities?
D 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):
8
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
PART 4. SEDIMENT-Please fill out the information below.
Is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: 0 Yes C8:J No
Will workers or the public be in contact with sediment during planned redevelopment activities?
0 Yes C8:J 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):
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: 0 Yes C8:J No 0 Unknown
Groundwater: 0 Yes C8:J No 0 Unknown
IHSB Industrial/Commercial Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor: D Yes C8:J No 0 Unknown
Groundwater: 0 Yes C8:J No 0 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? Not applicable.
Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
0 Yes C8:J No 0 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:
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? 0 Yes C8:J No 0 Unknown
If data indicate that sub-slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map showing
the location of these exceedances.
9
EMP Form ver. l, October 23, 2014
At what depth(s) is sub-slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? D 0-6 inches D Other, If other
describe:
Will workers encounter contaminated sub-slab soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
D Yes D No D Unknown
In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact: Click here to enter text.
PART 7. INDOOR AIR -Please fill out the information below.
Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? D Yes 181 No D 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?
D Yes 181 No D Unknown
In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact: Click here to enter text.
PART 8 -Vapor Mitigation System -Please fill out the information below .
Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system proposed for this Brownfields Property?
D Yes 181 No D 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?
D Yes D No D Unknown
Has the vapor mitigation plan been signed and sealed by a North Carolina professional engineer?
D Yes D No
What are the components of the vapor intrusion mitigation system?
D Sub-slab depressurization system
D Sub-membrane depressurization system
D Block-wall depressurization system
D Drain tile depressurization system
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
10
FIGURES
TABLES
Sample ID Date Depth
Collected Collected
SS-1 1/22/15 2-3
SS-2 1/22/15 2-3
SS-3 1/22/15 2-3
SS-4 1/22/15 2-3
SS-5 1/22/15 2-3
SS-6 1 /22/15 2-3
SS-7 1/22/15 2-3
IHSB Residential PSRGs
IHSB Commercial PSRGs
IHSB PoG PSRGs
Notes:
Table 1 -Summary of Analytical Results -Metals In Soil
Central Avenue Parcels
Charlotte, North Carolina
Amee Foster Wheeler Project: 6228-14-0209
Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Mercury (total)
<1.1 7.6 0.72 33.0 8.5 0.017
<1.1 40.0 0.16 10.2 6.2 0.015
<0.91 24.1 0.36 22.1 5.9 0.030
<1.3 31.7 0.16 34.8 14.4 0.045
<1.1 11.8 0.62 13.7 7.1 0.021
<1.1 133 1.0 390 1.6 <0.0059
<1.2 43.3 1.7 33.5 5.1 0.019
0.67 3,000 14.0 24,000 400 1.9
3.0 44,000 200 100,000 800 3.1
5.8 580 3.0 360,000 270 1.0
1. Depths shown in feet below ground surface.
2. Concentrations shown in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Selenium Silver Hexavalent
Chromium
<1.1 <0.54 <6.4
<1.2 <0.60 <6.6
<0.91 <0.45 <5.8
<1.3 <0.66 <6.9
<1.1 <0.56 <6.6
<1 .1 <0.57 <6.9
<1.2 <0.60 <7.1
78.0 78.0 0.3
1,200 1,200 6.3
2.1 3.4 3.8
3. IHSB Residential PSRGs =North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch, Residential Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals, dated September 2014.
4. IHSB Commercial PSRGs =North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch, Commercial Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals, dated September 2014.
5. IHSB PoG PSRGs =North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch, Protection of Groundwater Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals, dated September 2014.
6. Bold values exceed IHSB Residential PSRGs.
7. Shaded values exceed IHS B Commercial PSRGs. Prepared By/Date: AJF 2/2/15
8. Underlined values exceed IHSB PoG PSRGs. Checked By/Date: AMC 2/6/15
Constituent SG-1
Depth of Sample 5
t, 1, !-Trichloroethane <0.94
1, 1,2,2· T etrachloroethane 1.6
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane <0.74
1, 1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane <2.1
t, t -Dichloroethane <1.1
1, 1 ·Dichloroethene <1.1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <2.0
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5.3
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <2.1
t ,2-Dichlorobenzene <1.6
1,2·Dichloroethane <0.55
1,2·Dichloropropane <1.3
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1.6
1,3-Butadiene <0.60
1,3·Dichlorobenzene <1.6
1,4-Dichlorobenzene <1.6
12-Butanone (MEK) 8.7
12-Hexanone <1.1
"·Ethvttoluene 1.9
-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) <2.8
Acetone 30.6
Benzene 4.3
Bromodichloromethane <1.8
Bromoform <2.8
Bromomethane 1.8
K;arbon disulfide 1.8
Carbon tetrachloride <0.86
Chlorobenzene <1.3
Chloroethane <0.72
Chloroform <0.66
Chloromethane <0.56
Cyclohexane 24.0
D1bromochloromelhane <2.3
Dichlorodifluoromethane 2.6
Dichlorotetrafluoroethane <1.9
Ethyl acetate 13.1
Ethyl benzene 20.1
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene <2.9
Methyl-tert-buty1 ether <0.98
Methylene Chloride 66.3
Naphthalene <3.6
Propylene <0.47
Styrene 2.3 rr elrachloroelhene 1.4
Telrahydrofuran 2.9
Toluene 145
Trichloroethane 1.2
Tnchlorofluoromelhane 1.5
Vinyl acetate <0.96
Vinyl chloride <0.35
cis· 1 .2-Dichloroethene <2.7
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <1.2
m&p-Xylene 74.7
n-Heplane 50.2
n-Hexane 130
o-Xvlene 22.4
irans-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.1
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <1 .2
eltum <7.2
Table 2: Summary of Soil-Gas Analytical Results
Central Avenue Parcels
Charlotte, North Carolina
Amee Foster Wheeler Project: 6228-14--0209
SG-2 SG-3 SG-4 SG-5 SG~ DWM Residential
5 5 5 5 5 SGS La
<0.88 <t.1 <1.1 <1.3 <1.3 34,800
<0.88 <1.1 <1.1 <1.3 <1.3 16.1
<0.70 <0.86 <0.86 <t.1 <1.0 1.39
<2.0 <2.5 <2.5 <3.1 <2.9 NSL
<1.0 <1.3 <1.3 <1.6 <1.5 585
<1.0 <1.3 <1.3 <1.6 <1.5 1,390
<1.9 <2.3 <2.3 <2.9 <2.8 13.9
8 7 11.1 6.9 2.3 48.7
<2.0 <2.4 <2.4 <3.0 <2.9 1.56
<1.5 <1.9 <1.9 <2.3 <2.2 1,390
<0.52 <0.64 <0.64 <0.79 <0.75 36.0
<1.2 <1.5 <1.5 <1.8 <1.7 27.8
2.6 2.1 <1.5 <1.9 <1.8 NSL
<0.57 <0.70 <0.70 <0.86 <0.82 13.9
2.1 4.2 <1.9 <2.3 6.6 NSL
<1.5 <1.9 <1.9 <2.3 <2.2 85.1
18.8 15.2 18.6 8.4 10.7 34,800
4.0 1.9 <1.3 <1.6 <1.5 209
2.3 2.1 5.1 <1.9 <1.8 NSL
4.5 4.1 7.4 <4.0 <3.8 20,900
84 0 882 106 712 104 216,000
3.5 14 8.1 6.9 8.5 120
<1.7 <2.1 <2.1 <2.6 <2.5 25.3
<2.6 <3.3 <3.3 <4.0 <3.8 NSL
<1.0 5.5 <1.2 <1.5 <1.4 34.8
13.5 6.3 30.6 3.4 3.1 4,870
<0.81 <0.99 <0.99 <1.2 <1.2 156
<1.2 <1.5 <1.5 <1.8 <1.7 348
<0.68 <0.84 <0.84 <1.0 <0.99 NSL
<0.62 <0.77 <0.77 <0.95 <0.91 40.7
<0.53 <0.65 <0.65 1.6 <0.77 626
2.7 3.4 20.3 1.8 <1.3 41 ,700
<2.2 <2.7 <2.7 <3.3 <3.2 34.7
<1.3 2.6 3.0 2.6 2.8 695
<1.8 <2.2 <2.2 <2.7 <2.6 NSL
<0.92 <1.1 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 487
5.7 8.8 6.8 5.1 <1.6 374
<2.8 <3.4 <3.4 <4.2 <4.0 NSL
<0.92 <1.1 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 3,600
<4.4 <5.5 <5.5 11.9 7.8 4,170
<3.4 <4.1 <4.1 <5.1 <4.9 20.9
93.9 165 358 36.3 101 20,900
<1.1 1.4 10.5 <1.7 <1.6 6,950
1.1 <1.1 1.1 1.4 1.4 278
<0.76 <0.93 <0.93 <1.2 <1.1 13,900
183 173 15 6.7 8.3 34,800
<0.69 <0.85 <0.85 <1.0 <1.0 13.9
<1.4 <1.8 2.1 <2.2 <2.1 4,870
<0.90 <1.1 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 1,390
<0.33 <0.40 <0.40 <0.50 <0.48 55.9
<2.5 <3.1 <3.1 <3.9 <3.7 NSL
<1.2 < 1.4 <1.4 <1.8 <1.7 139
20.0 26.4 35.4 16.6 <3.2 695
8.2 7.9 27.4 1.8 4.3 NSL
9.2 10.0 561 3.4 5.9 4,870
7.5 8.4 8.6 5.6 <1.6 695
<1.0 <1.3 <1.3 <1.6 <1.5 NSL
<1.2 <1.4 <1 4 <1.8 <1.7 139
<7.2 <7.2 <7 2 <7.2 <7.2 NSL
DWM Non·Aeeldenllal
SGS La
438,000
21 1
17.5
NSL
7,670
17,500
175
613
20.4
17,500
472
350
NSL
175
NSL
1,110
438,000
2,630
NSL
263,000
2,720,000
1,570
331
NSL
438
61,300
2,040
4,380
NSL
533
7,880
526,000
454
8,760
NSL
6,130
4,910
NSL
47,200
52,600
263
263,000
87,600
3,500
175,000
438,000
175
61,300
17,500
2,790
NSL
1,750
8,760
NSL
61,300
8,760
NSL
1,750
NSL
Notes: Prepared By Date ____ KA_S_2'_6_•_1 s ___ _
1 Concentraltons shown 1n µg.m3 helium shown m °'ci
2 Depths shown 1n feet belo"N surface
Checked By Dale ____ AJ_F_2'_6_'_15 ___ _
3 DWM Res1denual SGSLs = Oivts1on of Waste Managemenl Residential $011-Gas Screening Levels dated June 2014
4 OWM Non-Resrdential SGSLs = OMSton of Waste Management Non-Residential Soil-Gas Screening Levels dated June 2014
5 Bold values exceed the OWM Re5'denllal SGSLs
6 Shaded values exceed the DWM Non-ReS1denoal SGSLs
7 NSL ..,. No screening level eslabllshed
Hehum used as leak check. was added to shroud surrounding sample equ1pmen1 at 11mc of sampling
Samples collecled on January 22. 2015.
Table 3: Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results
Central Avenue Parcels
Charlotte, North Carolina
Amee Foster Wheeler Project: 6228-14--0209
Constituent GW-1 GW-2 GW-4 NC 2L Stend.,da
t, t, t ,2-Tetrachloroethane <10.0
t, t, 1-Trichloroethane <10.0
1, t ,2,2-T etrachloroethane <10.0
t, 1,2· Trichloroethane <tO.O
1, 1-0ichloroethane <tO.O
1, t -Dichloroethene <10.0
t, 1-Dichlornpropene <10.0
t ,2,3-Trichlorobenzene <tO.O
1,2,3-Trichloropropane <tO.O
t ,2.4· Trichlorobenzene <10.0
t ,2-0ibromo-3-chloropropane <20.0
1,2-0ibromoethane (EOB) <10.0
1,2-0ichlorobenzene <10.0
t ,2-0ichloroethane <10.0
1,2-0ichloropropane <10.0
1,3-Dichlornbenzene <10.0
t ,3-0ichloropropane <tOO
1,4-0ichlorobenzene <10.0
~.2-Dichloropropane <tO.O
~-Butanone (MEK) <50.0
~-Chlorotoluene <10.0
2-Hexanone <50.0
4-Chlorotoluene <10.0
4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) <50.0
Acetone <250
Benzene <t O.O
Bromobenzene <10.0
Bromochloromethane <10.0
Bromodichloromethane <tO.O
Bromoform <10.0
Bromomethane <20.0
Carbon tetrachloride <10.0
Chlorobenzene <10.0
K:hloroethane <10.0
Chloroform <10.0
Chloromethane <10.0
Oib<omochloromethane <10.0
Oib<omomethane <tO.O
Oichlorodifluoromethane <10.0
Oiisopropyl ether <10.0
Ethylbenzene <10.0
Hexachloro-t ,3-butadiene <10.0
Methyl·tert·butyl ether <10.0
Methylene Chloride <20.0
Naphthalene <10.0
Styrene <10.0
IT etrachloroethene <10.0
!Toluene t4.5"
ITrichloroethene <10.0
ITrichloroffuoromethane <10.0
\iinyl acetate <20.0
Vinyl chloride <10.0
Xylene (Total) <20.0
cis· 1,2·Dichloroethene <t0.0
cis· 1,3-0ichloropropene <10.0
m&p-Xylene <20.0
lo-Xylene <10.0
p-lsopropyltoluene <100
ltJans-t ,2-Dichloroethene <10.0
ltJans-1,3-Dichloropropene <10.0
Notes
1 Concentrauons shown m micrograms per Mer (µg_ l)
Samp!es colfected on January 23. 2015
<1.0 <1.0 1.0*
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 0.2
<1.0 <1.0 0.6'
<t .O <1.0 6.0
<1.0 <1.0 350
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 0.005
<1.0 <1.0 70
<2.0 <2.0 0.04
<1.0 <1.0 0.02
<1.0 <1.0 20
<1.0 <1.0 0.4
<1.0 <1.0 0.6
<1.0 <1.0 200
<1 0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 6.0
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<5.0 <5.0 4,000
<1.0 <1.0 100
<5.0 <5.0 40*
<1.0 <1.0 24"
<5.0 <5.0 100•
<25.0 <25.0 6,000
<1.0 <1.0 1.0
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 0.6
<1.0 <1.0 4.0
<2.0 <2.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 0.3
<1.0 <1.0 50
<1.0 <1.0 3,000
<1.0 <1.0 70
<1.0 <1.0 3.0
<1.0 <1.0 0.4
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 1,000
<1.0 <1.0 70
<1.0 <1.0 600
<1.0 <1.0 0.4
<1.0 <1.0 20
<2.0 <2.0 5.0
<1.0 <1.0 6.0
<1.0 <1.0 70
<1.0 <1.0 0.7
<1.0 <1.0 600
<1.0 <1.0 3.0
<1.0 <1.0 2,000
<2.0 <2.0 86"
<1.0 <1.0 0.03
<2.0 <2.0 500
<1.0 <1.0 70
<1.0 <1.0 0.4
<2 0 <2.0 500
<1.0 <1.0 500
<1.0 <1.0 NSL
<1.0 <1.0 100
<1.0 <1.0 0.4
3 NC 2L Standards "' North Carolina 2L Ground'Hater Ouahty Standards dated Apnl 2013
4 •• lntenm Maximum Allowable Concentrations, dated Apnl 2013
... = Result may be biased high due to carryover from previous sample
NS • No standard listed Prepared By Date _____ AJ=F_2i:;;.__1_1 _1s'------
Checked By Date· _____ R_C_F_21_1_11_1_s ____ _
CONSTRUCTION
SCHEDULE
1305 Central Ave Schedule
Task Names Start Date Finish Date
Notice To Proceed 1/13/2015 1/13/2015
Abatement 1/19/2015 1/25/2019
Vertical Demo 1/25/2015 1/30/2015
Concrete Haul Off/Crush 2/2/2015 2/12/2015
Utility Demo/Proof Roll 2/10/2015 2/18/2015
Mass Grading 2/18/2015 3/2/2015
Utilities, Piers and Import 3/2/2015 6/1/2015
Parking Deck 5/25/2015 8/10/2015
Building A -Slab 6/15/2015 7/3/2015
A-Verical Construction 7/6/2015 1/29/2016
A-Owner Turn Over 2/1/2016 2/26/2016
Building B-Slab 6/29/2015 7/24/2015
B-Verical Construction 7/20/2015 4/8/2016
B-Owner Turn Over 4/11/2016 5/20/2016
Building C-Slab 7/16/2015 9/1/2015
C-Verical Construction 10/12/2015 7/13/2016
C-Owner Turn Over 5/23/2016 8/10/2016
GRADING PLAN