HomeMy WebLinkAbout21015 Five Points EMP 201708071
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: 8/7/2017
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Five Points Gateway Redevelopment
Brownfields Project Number: 21015-17-090
Brownfields Property Address: 320-322 E. Franklin Street, Monroe NC 28112
Brownfields Property Area (acres): Approx. 1.8
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): City of Monroe, a North Carolina Municipal Corporation
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-2921705 X6040…..Mobile:
Email: bborne@monroenc.org
Primary PD Contact: Brian Borne
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-2921705 X6040 Mobile: Click here to enter text.
Email:
Environmental Consultant: Resolve Environmental Services, PLLC
Phone Numbers: Office: 704-289-5881…..Mobile: 704-617-1730
Email: resolve@carolina.rr.com
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Carolyn Minnich
Office: 704-661-0330
2
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
Email: Carolyn.Minnich@ncdenr.gov
Other DENR Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste): UST Section: Edward Leach 704-235-2171
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: Final redevelopment plans have not been finalized. At
this time, the City of Monroe plans to demolish both existing buildings on the property
(located 320 and 322 E. Franklin St) prior to any future property development. The City will
maintain the concrete and/or asphalt cap on the property until further development of the
property. In the meantime, the capped property may be utilized as a parking lot. Any
demolition and/or renovation of any or all buildings on the Brownfields Property shall be in
accordance with applicable legal requirements, including without limitation those related to
lead and asbestos abatement that are administered by the Health Hazards Control Unit within
the Division of Public Health of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services.
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):
7/3/2017
The building at 320 E. Franklin St. will be demolished, including the building slab, without prior soil
sampling. The building at 322 E. Franklin St. will be demolished without prior soil sampling, but
the slab will be left intact until soil sampling has taken place at the site as described herein. Three
coreholes will be drilled through the 322 E. Franklin St. building slab and subslab soil samples will
be collected at a depth of approximately 0.5 feet below grade surface. Resolve Environmental
Services, PLLC also proposes to conduct soil sampling and a 1500’ receptor survey. Soil sampling
will be limited to 6 soil samples for VOCs by EPA Method 8260, SVOCs by EPA Method 8270 and
eight (8) RCRA metals including trivalent and hexavalent chromium.
b) If applicable, Phase 2 start date and anticipated duration (specify activities during each
phase): Unknown. No Phase 2 investigation is planned at this time.
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: Unknown. No new buildings are
planned at this time.
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
4
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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): TCE (known) and petroleum
compounds (suspected)
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet): 8 feet
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet): None at this time. Current plans are to
demolish the existing buildings as described herein and maintain the concrete and/or asphalt cap at
the property until the property is further developed. Final property development plans have yet to
be determined.
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet): Likely less than 1 foot during initial demo work.
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan): Less than 10 yards.
During foundation removal at 322 E Franklin Street, soil will be shaken off, scraped off, knocked off
or otherwise removed from the debris leaving the Brownfields site. No soils will be exported from
the site.
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
None
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable: None
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? Proposed demoliton of the
buildings does not include any disturbance to the soils at the site. Only soils that may adhere to
foundation materials will be removed. No fill, excavation or disposal of soil will be required.
3) If yes, what is the depth of fill soil to be used at the property?
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: Chromium (Tri & Hex)
5
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
☐ Known borrow material (DESCRIBE SOURCE AND ATTACH SAMPLING PROFILE): Imported
soil is not expected on this project, however, if necessary the borrow source will be provided to DEQ
prior to importing on the Brownfields Property.
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
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 known concentration of TCE does not exceed the NCDEQ’s Unrestricted Use
Health Based PSRG.
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.
6
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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 1/1/2020
☒ Preliminary Health-Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs 1/1/2020
☐ Site-specific risk-based cleanup level, or acceptable concentrations determined via
calculated cumulative risk. Enter details of methods used for determination/explanation:
Final development plans for the site may include recreational area(s. Screening using the
residential RSGs will be conducted in these areas.)
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: Current data for soil contamination at the
site , including the depth of the contamination does not warrant fugitive dust management.
Significant areas of contaminated soil are not expected to be encountered or disturbed during future
Site redevelopment activities based upon previous Phase I Assessment. The demolition contractor
will take into account conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, to minimize dust generation. In
the unlikely event that contaminated soil is encountered during Site redevelopment that requires
excavation, particular attention will be paid by contractors to implement dust control measures as
needed based on Site and atmospheric conditions (i.e. by controlled water application, hydro-seeding,
and/or mulch, stone, or plastic cover). Potentially impacted soil will be managed as described below.
☐ Field Screening:
☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, describe method; If no, explain rationale: All excavated soils will be stockpiled and
sampled. During soil disturbance at the Brownfields Property, the workers or contractors will observe
soils for evidence of potential significantly impacted soil that may not be suitable to leave in place in
exposed areas at an industrial/commercial use Site. Evidence of potential significant impacted soil
includes a distinct unnatural color, staining, strong odor, or filled or previously disposed materials of
concerns (i.e. chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be noted during Site work, the
contractor will contact the project environmental engineer to observe the suspect condition. If the
project environmental engineer confirms that the material may be impacted, the environmental
engineer will contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within two business days to advise that
person of the condition.
☒ Soil Sample Collection:
☒ Yes ☐ No
If yes, describe method (e.g., in-situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.); If no, explain rationale:
All excavated soils, if any, will be stockpiled and sampled prior to reuse or disposal.
☒ 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:
7
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
Soils may be loaded directly onto trucks and transported to a permitted
disposal facility. if appropriate.
☒ 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): Click here to enter text.
☐ 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: Current plans are to demolish the existing buildings as described
herein and maintain the concrete and/or asphalt cap at the property until the property is further
developed. Final property development plans have yet to be determined. (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):
☐ 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
8
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
☐ Other Constituents & Analytical Method: Click here to enter text.
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 Id allowable concentruions of contaminats of
concern do not exceed the landfarm’s permit requirements.
☐ Use as Beneficial Fill Offsite – provide justification: All unrestricted end use soils may be
reutilized on-site.
☐ 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.
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? Approximately 10-15 feet
Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☒onsite ☐ offsite ☐ both ☒ or unknown
sources? Describe source(s): on-site and potential off-site sources
9
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property? Unknown
Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, describe these activities: Ground water is not anticipated to be encountered during demolition
of the buildings as described herein. Final property development plans have yet to be determined.
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): Any ground water requiring removal will be placed in a frac tank and
transported to a permitted disposal facility.
PART 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 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): N/A
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): No surface water located on site.
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
10
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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? 8’-15’
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: All
current redevelopment activities (i.e., demolition of existing buildings) will be conducted outdoors
which will limit potential exposure.
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: Unknown.
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: All current redevelopment activities (i.e., demolition of
existing buildings) will be conducted outdoors which will limit potential exposure.
11
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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: All current redevelopment activities (i.e., demolition of
existing buildings) will be conducted outdoors which will limit potential exposure.
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
12
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
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
officials, as necessary and appropriate, is required when new potential source(s) of contamination are
discovered. See Notification Section on Page 1 for notification requirements.
POST-REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING
In accordance with the site’s Brownfield Agreement, provide a report within the designated schedule
to the State Brownfields Project Manager.
☒ Check box to acknowledge consent to provide a redevelopment summary report in compliance
with the site’s Brownfields Agreement.
APPROVAL SIGNATURES
Prospective Developer Date
Printed Name/Title/Company
Consultant Date
Printed Name/Title/Company
13
EMP Form ver.1, October 23, 2014
Brownfields Project Manager Date
Date :11/10/16
8260B
Sample ID Date
Collected
Sample Depth (in
feet)
TMW-1-10'10 <0.10 6.5 39.0
TMW-2-10'10 <0.0019 10.4 15.9
TMW-4-8'8 0.138 5.7 29.7
TMW-5-5'5 NR 12.2 20.0
0.019 NE 5.4
4.6 NE 47
0.018 0.67 0.30
• NE: Not established.
• J: Estimated concentration.
• NR: Analysis not requested.
• <: Less than the method detection specified in the laboratory report.
Ar
s
e
n
i
c
Ch
r
o
m
i
u
m
IHSB PSRGs (mg/kg)
• IHSB PSRG: Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch Preliminary Soils Remediation Goals (September 2014 addition).
• Results reported in mg/kg.
• MSCC: Maximum soil contaminant concentrations.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS
320-322 E. FRANKLIN STREET
Analytical Method
Contaminant of Concern
Tr
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
6010D
• Concentrations in bold face type exceeded the MSCCs and/or the IHSB PSRGs.
10/27/16
NCDEQ Soil-to-Groundwater MSCCs (mg/kg)
NCDEQ Residential MSCCs (mg/kg)
Notes:
7470A
Sample ID
Date
Collected
(m/dd/yy)
TMW-1 1,570 301 369 2,530 1,150 213 65.1 362 83.1 380 3,230 977 172 111 237 419 1,030 3,090 5.0
TMW-2 <0.20 <0.20 <0.25 <0.56 <1.0 <0.43 <0.28 <0.33 <0.28 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.31 <0.44 <0.44 <500 1,280 1,650 2.7
TMW-3 1,740 2,180 986 5,350 1,520 80.5 <5.7 277 91.7 392 1,510 984 <6.3 204 436 216 569 1,710 1.5
TMW-5 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 23.0 37.3 29.7 <0.50
1 600 600 500 6 70 0.4 70 25 70 400 400 0.03 1 30 10 10 15 1
5,000 260,000 84,500 85,500 6,000 6,900 400 25,000 11,700 30,000 28,500 25,000 30 1,000 12,500 NE 10,000 15,000 NE
15.9 3,840 34.9 76.9 34.8 NE 22.4 NE NE NE 5.80 NE 2.03 NE NE NE NE NE 0.178
Notes:
• MAC: Maximum allowable concentration specified in T15A NCAC 2L .0202.
• GCL: Gross contamination level.
• GWSL: Ground water screening level specified in the Division of Waste Management Residential Vapor Instrusion Screening Concentrations (March 2016).
• < : Less than the method detection limit specified in the laboratory report.
• Concentrations in boldface exceed the 2L Standard.
• A concentration of acetone was reported in TMW-3; however, the concentration does not exceed the 2L Standard.
• NR: Analysis not requested.
1,
3
,
5
-
T
r
i
m
e
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
Vi
n
y
l
C
h
l
o
r
i
d
e
2-
M
e
t
h
y
l
n
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
1-
M
e
t
h
y
l
n
a
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
8260B 8270D
Na
p
h
t
h
a
l
e
n
e
To
l
u
e
n
e
Et
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
Xy
l
e
n
e
s
1,
2
,
4
-
T
r
i
m
e
t
h
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
1,
2
-
D
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
e
t
h
a
n
e
Is
o
p
r
o
p
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
p-
I
s
o
p
r
o
p
y
l
t
o
l
u
e
n
e
n-
P
r
o
p
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
10/27/2016
6010C
GCL (µg/L)
Contaminant of Concern
Be
n
z
e
n
e
Ch
r
o
m
i
u
m
Le
a
d
n-
B
u
t
y
l
b
e
n
z
e
n
e
GWSL (µg/L)
Me
r
c
u
r
y
2L Standard (MAC) (mg/L)
• NE: Not established.
• Results reported in ug/L (micrograms per Liter).
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF GROUND WATER SAMPLING RESULTS
320-322 E. FRANKLIN STREET
Ar
s
e
n
i
c
Analytical Method
Page 2 of 2