DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase I ESA Dicey Mills

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase I ESA Dicey Mills Phase I ESA Dicey Mills 430 Neisler Street Shelby, North Carolina H&H Job No. DCY-001 July 29, 2016 #C-1269 Engineering #-245 Geology Phase I ESA Dicey Mills 430 Neisler Street Shelby, North Carolina H&H Job No. DCY-001 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................1 1.1 Property Summary .................................................................................................................1 1.2 Findings, Opinions, and Conclusions ....................................................................................2 2.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................8 2.1 Purpose and Scope of Services ..............................................................................................8 2.2 Methodology ..........................................................................................................................8 2.3 Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment ...........................................................................9 2.4 Special Terms and Conditions ...............................................................................................9 2.5 Data Gaps and Limitations ..................................................................................................10 3.0 Site and Area Description ....................................................................................................11 3.1 General Site Description and Use ........................................................................................11 3.2 Site Structures and Improvements .......................................................................................11 3.3 Property Owner, Manager, and Occupant............................................................................12 3.4 Vicinity Characteristics .......................................................................................................12 3.5 Physical Setting ...................................................................................................................12 4.0 Records Review .....................................................................................................................15 4.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources – Federal, State and Local .................................15 4.2 Regulatory Agency File and Records Review .....................................................................17 4.3 Interviews ............................................................................................................................19 4.4 Historical Use Information ..................................................................................................20 5.0 Site Reconnaissance ..............................................................................................................24 5.1 Hazardous Substances .........................................................................................................24 5.2 Storage Tanks and Sumps ....................................................................................................26 5.3 Water and Wastewater Issues ..............................................................................................27 i S:\AAA-Master Projects\Dicey Mills - DCY\Report\Dicey Mills Phase I ESA.doc 5.4 Indications of PCBs .............................................................................................................28 5.5 Indications of Waste Disposal .............................................................................................29 5.6 Surface Conditions ..............................................................................................................30 5.7 Stormwater and Flood Information .....................................................................................30 6.0 Signatures of Environmental Professionals ........................................................................31 7.0 Qualifications of Environmental Professionals Conducting the Phase I ESA ................32 List of Figures Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site Map List of Appendices Appendix A User Questionnaire Appendix B Cleveland County Tax Record Appendix C EDR Reports Appendix D Supporting Documentation Appendix E Site Photographs Appendix F Curriculum Vitae ii S:\AAA-Master Projects\Dicey Mills - DCY\Report\Dicey Mills Phase I ESA.doc Phase I ESA Dicey Mills 430 Neisler Street Shelby, North Carolina H&H Job No. DCY-001 1.0 Executive Summary Hart & Hickman, PC (H&H) has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-13 on the Dicey Mills property located at 430 Neisler Street in Shelby, Cleveland County, North Carolina (Site). Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in this report. 1.1 Property Summary H&H has provided a brief summary of the current and former uses of the Site and nearby area below: Site • The Site consists of three parcels that total 23.893 acres and is developed with an approximately 160,000 sq ft manufacturing building, an approximately 4,000 sq ft storage building, four process water ponds, one freshwater pond, and associated parking areas. Dicey Mills currently owns the Site, which is leased to Valdese Weavers for yarn manufacturing. • Historical resources were available from 1937 to the present. In the earliest historical resource reviewed, a 1937 aerial, the eastern portion of the Site was developed with a residence and associated outbuildings, and the remainder of the Site was agricultural land. The Site was redeveloped in the late 1950s with portions of the current building. The building was expanded over time until the mid-1990s. From the late 1950s to the early 2000s, the Site building was utilized for yarn manufacturing, olefin filament yarn extrusion, and textile dyeing/printing operations. The Site contained weaving, fabric 1 S:\AAA-Master Projects\Dicey Mills - DCY\Report\Dicey Mills Phase I ESA.doc finishing, olefin filament yarn extrusion from the early 2000s until March 2015. Since that time, the Site has been used only for olefin filament yarn extrusion and yarn production. Nearby Area • Adjacent properties were residential, agricultural, and vacant land in the earliest historical resource reviewed. Development of the east adjacent properties for commercial operations occurred in the 1970s through the early 2000s, and a north adjacent property was developed as a solar farm in 2016. Remaining adjacent properties are currently residential and vacant land with the First Broad River to the west. 1.2 Findings, Opinions, and Conclusions The purpose of a Phase I ESA is to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) in connection with the property. RECs are environmental conditions that include the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on the property that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release in structures on the property, or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water on the property. The ASTM 1527-13 standard also identifies two subsets of RECs called controlled RECs (CRECs) and historical RECs (HRECs). A CREC is a REC resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (such as institutional or engineering controls). A HREC is a REC resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority without subjecting the property to required controls. Our findings regarding RECs are based upon our review of historical records and maps; review of regulatory database records and/or regulatory agency files; interviews with persons familiar 2 S:\AAA-Master Projects\Dicey Mills - DCY\Report\Dicey Mills Phase I ESA.doc with the property; observations during the site reconnaissance; and data evaluation. Based upon our completion of Phase I ESA activities, H&H has determined the following: This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the property, with the exception of the following: • The Site building was utilized for yarn manufacturing and textile dyeing/printing from the late 1950s to early 2000s (approximately 45 years). The Site contact reported that chemical usage associated with the former dyeing/printing operations included the use of solvent based dyes. Multiple floor drains were identified in the former dye and printing areas that collect wastewater from Site operations. This historically included wastewater from the dye house and printing operations and currently includes wastewater from the active operations including the yarn extrusion area, small air compressor room floor drain, boiler room, and yarn weaving area. H&H observed standing black fluid in a floor drain in the small air compressor room, active discharge of process water from the yarn manufacturing operations, and historic staining in the vicinity of the floor drains associated with former operations in the dye house/printing area. H&H considers the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Duke Energy WSL III Units 1 & 2 COLA
    William States Lee III Nuclear Station Environmental Report, Chapter 2 CHAPTER 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION............................................................................ 2.0-1 2.1 STATION LOCATION ................................................................................................. 2.1-1 2.1.1 REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 2.1-1 2.2 LAND........................................................................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.1 THE SITE AND VICINITY ..................................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.1.1 The Site........................................................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.1.2 The Vicinity...................................................................................................... 2.2-2 2.2.2 TRANSMISSION CORRIDORS AND OFF-SITE AREAS..................................... 2.2-5 2.2.3 THE REGION........................................................................................................ 2.2-5 2.2.4 REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 2.2-6 2.3 WATER ....................................................................................................................... 2.3-1 2.3.1 HYDROLOGY ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 72, No. 59/Wednesday, March
    Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 28, 2007 / Proposed Rules 14503 a second comment period, so anyone DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND stringent in their floodplain interested in commenting should do so SECURITY management requirements. The at this time. If we do not receive community may at any time enact comments, no further activity is Federal Emergency Management stricter requirements of its own, or planned. Agency pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State or regional entities. These For all the reasons set forth in the 44 CFR Part 67 proposed elevations are used to meet parallel direct final rule, we are [Docket No. FEMA–B 7711] the floodplain management proposing to approve the State of requirements of the NFIP and are also Arizona’s boundary redesignation of the Proposed Flood Elevation used to calculate the appropriate flood Hayden/Miami PM10 nonattainment Determinations insurance premium rates for new area into two separate PM10 buildings built after these elevations are AGENCY: nonattainment areas: Hayden and Federal Emergency made final, and for the contents in these Miami, and to determine that the Miami Management Agency, DHS. buildings. ACTION: moderate PM10 nonattainment area in Proposed rule. National Environmental Policy Act. Arizona is attaining the PM national 10 SUMMARY: Technical information or This proposed rule is categorically ambient air quality standard. A comments are requested on the excluded from the requirements of 44 determination of attainment is not a proposed Base (1% annual chance) CFR part 10, Environmental redesignation to attainment under CAA Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed Consideration. An environmental section 107(d)(3) because we have not BFEs modifications for the communities impact assessment has not been yet approved a maintenance plan as listed below.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutrients in Waters of the Santee River Basin and Coastal Drainages, North and South Carolina, 1973-93
    Nutrients in Waters of the Santee River Basin and Coastal Drainages, North and South Carolina, 1973-93 By Terry L. Maluk, Eric J. Reuber, anc/W. Brian Hughes U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4172 Prepared as part of the NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM Columbia, South Carolina 1998 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas J. Casadevall, Acting Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Stephenson Center-Suite 129 Branch of Information Services 720 Gracern Road Box 25286 Columbia, South Carolina 29210-7651 Denver, Colorado 80225-0286 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Describe how water quality is changing over (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the time. earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ Improve understanding of the primary natural tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- and human factors that affect water-quality ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound conditions. decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and This information will help support the development trends is an important part of this overall mission. and evaluation of management, regulatory, and moni­ One of the greatest challenges faced by water- toring decisions by other Federal, State, and local resources scientists is acquiring reliable information agencies to protect, use, and enhance water resources.
    [Show full text]
  • The Status of Freshwater Mussels in Some Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina Waters
    THE STATUS OF FRESHWATER MUSSELS IN SOME GEORGIA, SOUTH CAROLINA AND NORTH CAROLINA WATERS Eugene P. Keferl AUTHOR: Professor of Biology, Department of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Brunswick College, Altama at Fourth, Brunswick, Georgia 31523. REFERENCE: Proceedings of th£ 1993 Georgia Water Resources Conference, held April 20 and 21, 1993, at The University of Georgia, Kathryn J. Hatcher, Editor, Instit\J.te of Natural Resources, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. Abstract. Freshwater mussel populations in eastern had a devastating effect on these organisms (Fuller United States are in trouble. Surrey data indicates a 1974 and 1977, Ahlstedt 1984, Neves 1984, Oesch 1984, significant decline in mussel populations in North Caroli­ and Moser 1991). na, South Carolina, and Georgia. Additional work needs to be done to assess the status of mussels in all major drainages. All freshwaters need to be managed to prevent CAROLINA SURVEYS further loss. Since 1986 I have examined 896 sites on some 421 different streams and rivers in North Carolina and South A THREATENED FAUNA Carolina. My sampling efforts have focused on the Edisto River system in South Carolina, the Cooper.Santee River The management of our freshwater resources is a very system and the Pee Dee River system in North and South important issue in the United States. This vital resource Carolina, and the Neuse River system of North Carolina. is currently managed for drinking water, waste disposal, Most of this survey work was done as a part of work spon­ industry, agriculture and recreation. It is not being sored by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct managed very well to preserve our biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Santee Basin Diadromous Fish Restoration Plan
    SANTEE BASIN DIADROMOUS FISH RESTORATION PLAN PREPARED BY: NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NORTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 2017 1 | Page Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS --------------------------------------------------------------- 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 I. Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 A. Need for a Plan --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 B. Santee Basin Description ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 C. Santee River Basin Historical Perspective -------------------------------------------------------- 23 D. Santee Basin Diadromous Fish Accord ------------------------------------------------------------ 26 E. Review of Migration Barriers ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 32 II. Fishes Targeted for Restoration and Their Current Status ----------------------------------- 36 A. Atlantic Sturgeon ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36 B. Shortnose Sturgeon ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 C. American Eel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]