1)_Phase_I_ESA_Hodges_Corporate.pdf

Phase I Environmental Site

Assessment

Hodges Corporate Park

Hodges, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

PREPARED FOR:

Greenwood Partnership Alliance

104 Maxwell Avenue, 6th Floor

Greenwood, South Carolina 29646

PREPARED BY:

S&ME, Inc.

48 Brookfield Oaks Drive, Suite F

Greenville, SC 29607

August 20, 2018

S&ME, Inc. | 48 Brookfield Oaks Drive, Suite F | Greenville, SC 29607 | p 864.297.9944 | www.smeinc.com

August 20, 2018

Greenwood Partnership Alliance

104 Maxwell Avenue, 6th Floor

Greenwood, South Carolina 29646

Attention: Mr. James Bateman

Reference: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment

Hodges Corporate Park

U.S. Highway 25 North and Corporate Court

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

Dear Mr. Bateman:

S&ME, Inc. has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the referenced subject property. The attached report presents the findings of S&ME’s Phase I ESA which was performed in general accordance with

ASTM E1527-13 and S&ME Proposal Number 42-1800738 rev.2 dated August 2, 2018. The purpose of the Phase I

ESA was to identify, to the extent feasible, recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the subject property. No RECs were revealed on the subject property.

Sincerely, S&ME, Inc.

Sergey Goretoy Nathan Williams

Staff Professional Senior Geologist sgoretoy@smeinc.com nwilliams@smeinc.com

T:\Projects\2018\ENV\4226-18-101_Greenwood Partnership Alliance_Hodges Corporate Park\Working_Documents\Phase 431 Phase I ESA\Phase I

ESA Hodges Corporate Park_Final.docx

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment

Hodges Corporate Park

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 ii

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Purpose

2.2 Detailed Scope of Services

2.3 Significant Assumptions

2.4 Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment

2.5 Special Terms and Conditions

2.6 User Reliance

3.0 General Site Description

3.1 Site Location

3.2 Site and Vicinity Characteristics

4.0 User Provided Information

4.1 Title Records

4.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations

4.3 Specialized Knowledge

4.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information

4.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues

4.6 Owner, Property Manager and Occupant Information

4.7 Reason for Performing the Phase I ESA

4.8 Other

5.0 Records Review

5.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources

5.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources

5.2.1 EDR Supplementary Sources

5.2.2 Tribal Record Sources

5.2.3 Other Record Sources

5.2.4 State Agency File Review

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 iii

5.3 Physical Setting Sources

5.4 Historical Use Information on the Subject property

5.5 Historical Use Information on Adjoining Properties

5.6 Vapor Encroachment Screening

6.0 Site Reconnaissance

6.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions

6.2 General Site Settings

6.2.1 Current Use(s) of the Subject Property

6.2.2 Past Use(s) of the Subject Property

6.2.3 Current Use(s) of Adjoining Properties

6.2.4 Past Use(s) of Adjoining Properties

6.2.5 Geologic, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic, and Topographic Conditions

6.2.6 Description of Structures and Roads

6.2.7 Potable Water Supply and Sewage Disposal System

6.3 Exterior Observations

6.4 Interior Observations

7.0 Interviews

7.1 Interview with Past and Present Owner

7.2 Interview with Key Site Managers

7.3 Interview with Occupants

7.4 Interview with Local Government Officials

7.5 Interviews with Others

8.0 Findings

8.1 On-Site

8.2 Off-Site

9.0 Opinions

9.1 On-Site

9.2 Off-Site

9.3 Data Gaps

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 iv

10.0 Conclusions

11.0 Deviations

12.0 Additional Services

13.0 References

14.0 Signature(s) Of Environmental Professional(s)

15.0 Qualification(s) Of Environmental Professional(s)

Appendices

Appendix I – Figures

Appendix II – Representative Photographs

Appendix III – Greenwood County Information User Provided Information

Appendix IV – EDR Radius Map™ Report Aerial Photo Decade Package Certified Sanborn® Map Report

Appendix V – Proposal and Agreement for Services

Appendix VI – Resumes

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 1

1.0 Executive Summary

S&ME has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the Hodges Corporate Park located near the intersection of U.S. Highway 25 North and Corporate Court in Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina (i.e.

“the subject site or subject property”). This Phase I ESA was prepared in general accordance with American

Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E1527-13: Standard Practice for Environmental Assessments: Phase I

Environmental Site Assessment Process. Our services were also performed pursuant to S&ME Proposal No. 42-

1800738 rev.2 dated August 2, 2018. This summary is intended as an overview of the Phase I ESA for the convenience of the reader. The complete report must be reviewed in its entirety prior to making decisions regarding this subject property.

The information in this report was obtained from a site reconnaissance, environmental records review, interviews, and historical research.

The subject site is a new industrial park that is being developed near Hodges in Greenwood County, SC. The subject site will be comprised of seven tax parcels and a portion of an eighth identified as Greenwood County tax parcels 6839-003-983 (81.14 acre), 6829-870-959 (55.23 acre), 6829-814-999 (9.77 acre), 6920-725-034 (53.26 acre), 6829-971-959 (7.82 acre), 6829-935-957 (2.93 acre), 6930-042-124 (10.86 acre), 6920-883-325 (13.64 acre portion of) for an approximate total of 235 acres. The subject site is bordered by U.S. Highway 25 North and

Corporate Court shown as shown on the attached Figure 1. The subject property consists of woodland, fields, and light residential development.

The subject site did not appear on any of the regulatory databases reviewed for this assessment. However, several off-site facilities appeared on databases within the ASTM-designated search distance of the subject property.

Based on their distance from the subject property, the intervening topography and/or their regulatory status, none of the off-site facilities are considered a recognized environmental condition (REC).

This assessment has revealed no evidence of a recognized environmental condition (REC) or a controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC) on the subject property.

A vapor encroachment condition (VEC) in connection with the subject property does not exist.

2.0 Introduction

S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) conducted a Phase I ESA on an approximate 235-acre property located near Hodges in

Greenwood County, SC. The subject site is bordered by and southwest of U.S. Highway 25 North and Corporate

Court. The Phase I ESA was conducted for Greenwood Partnership Alliance using ASTM E1527-13: Standard

Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process.

2.1 Purpose

The purpose of this Phase I ESA was to identify, to the extent feasible using the processes described herein, recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the subject property. The ASTM defines the term

“recognized environmental condition” as “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 2 petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment”.

ASTM defines the term controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC) as “a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls

(for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls)”.

ASTM defines the term historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) as a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and 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 any required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls).

These terms do not include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimis conditions are not RECs nor CRECs.

2.2 Detailed Scope of Services

S&ME's approach to performing this Environmental Site Assessment consisted of four major tasks in accordance with ASTM E1527-13.

Task 1 - A review of reasonably ascertainable public records for the subject property and the immediate vicinity was conducted. This review was performed to characterize environmental features of the site and to identify past and present land use activities, on or in the vicinity of the site, which may indicate a potential for recognized environmental conditions. The review of the reasonably ascertainable public records included:

1. Examination of federal, state, tribal, and reasonably ascertainable local public records for the subject property and immediate vicinity.

2. Examination of one or more of the following standard sources: aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, tax files, building department records, zoning/land use records, street directories, and topographic maps of the site and vicinity for evidence suggesting past uses that might have involved hazardous substances or petroleum products.

Task 2 - A site reconnaissance was performed to identify visual signs of past or existing contamination on or adjacent to the subject property. This reconnaissance was also performed to evaluate evidence found in our public record review that might indicate activities resulting in hazardous substances or petroleum products being used or deposited on the site. The site reconnaissance included the following activities:

1. A reconnaissance of the subject property and adjacent properties was performed to look for evidence of current and past property uses including signs of spills, stressed vegetation, buried waste, underground or

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 3 above ground storage tanks, subsidence, transformers, or unusual soil discoloration which may indicate the possible presence of contaminants on the properties. Photographs were taken to document these conditions.

2. The exterior reconnaissance involved a viewing of the periphery of the subject property and a walk-through of accessible areas of the site interior.

Task 3 - Interviews with past and present subject property owners, operators, occupants, and appropriate local officials were attempted to consider any local knowledge of hazardous substances or petroleum products on the subject property or on adjacent properties.

Task 4 - Report preparation.

Unless specifically authorized as an addition to the Phase I ESA work scope, the assessment will not include any assessment of environmental conditions not specifically included in the ASTM E 1527-13 standard including, but not limited to sampling of materials (i.e., soil, surface water, groundwater or air), or the assessment of business risk issues such as wetlands; asbestos-containing materials; lead-based paint; lead in drinking water; mold, fungi or bacteria in on-site buildings; regulatory compliance; cultural/historic resources; industrial hygiene; health/safety;

ecological resources; endangered species; indoor air quality including any assessment of vapor intrusion; radon or high voltage power lines.

2.3 Significant Assumptions

Information obtained from the User, the User’s representatives, individuals interviewed, and historical sources were considered to be accurate unless S&ME’s reasonable inquiries clearly revealed otherwise.

The groundwater within the local geologic province is typically contained in an unconfined (water table) aquifer.

The slope of the water table under static conditions (no pumping interference) often approximates the land surface topography. Thus, the interpreted groundwater flow direction is assumed to be approximately the same as the topography of the ground surface. Perennial surface waters (creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, etc.) are assumed to act as discharge points for groundwater flow.

2.4 Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment

The Phase I ESA was conducted using ASTM E1527-13. The findings of this report are applicable and representative of conditions encountered at the subject property on the date of this assessment, and may not represent conditions at a later date. The review of public records was limited to that information which was available to S&ME at the time this report was prepared. Interviews with local and state government authorities were limited to those people whom S&ME was able to contact during the preparation of this report. Information was derived from “reasonably ascertainable” and “practically reviewable” sources in compliance with our understanding of the standards set forth by ASTM E1527-13.

Additional limitations to this Phase I ESA are as follows:

• Standard historical sources to trace the historical usage of the subject property back to before first developed use in five-year intervals were not reasonably ascertainable.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 4

• Due to large scale and in some cases poor resolution of historical aerial photographs, only limited detailed review of historic site conditions was feasible.

2.5 Special Terms and Conditions

This Phase I ESA was conducted in general accordance with S&ME Proposal Number 42-1800738 rev.2 dated

August 2, 2018 and the Agreement for Services (AS-071) attached thereto. A copy of the proposal and agreement is included in Appendix V.

2.6 User Reliance

The resulting report is provided for the sole use of Greenwood Partnership Alliance. Use of this report by any third parties will be at such party’s sole risk except when granted under written permission by S&ME. Any such authorized use or reliance by third parties will be subject to the same Agreement under which the work was conducted for Greenwood Partnership Alliance. The additional party's use and reliance on the report will be subject to the same rights, obligations, and limitations imposed on the client by our Agreement, unless otherwise agreed. However, the total liability of S&ME to all parties of the Phase I ESA shall be limited to the remedies and amounts as provided in the Agreement as a single contract. The additional party's use and reliance on the report shall signify the additional party's agreement to be bound by the proposal and contract that make up the

Agreement between S&ME and Greenwood Partnership Alliance.

According to ASTM E1527-13, certain components of the Phase I ESA will expire 180 days from the date of that component and will require updating if the date of property acquisition exceeds this time period. The entire report will expire in one year. The following table lists the dates for pertinent components:

Component Date of Initiation

Environmental Database Search August 10, 2018

Site Reconnaissance August 10, 2018

Interviews August 10/17, 2018

Declaration by Environmental Professional Date of the Report

3.0 General Site Description

3.1 Site Location

The subject site is located near Hodges in Greenwood County, South Carolina. The subject site is bordered by U.S.

Highway 25 North and Corporate Court. The subject site was comprised of seven tax parcels and a portion of an eighth identified as Greenwood County tax parcels 6839-003-983 (81.14 acre), 6829-870-959 (55.23 acre), 6829-

814-999 (9.77 acre), 6920-725-034 (53.26 acre), 6829-971-959 (7.82 acre), 6829-935-957 (2.93 acre), 6930-042-124

(10.86 acre), 6920-883-325 (13.64 acre portion of) for an approximate total of 235 acres. The location of the subject property is shown on Figures 1 and 2, located in Appendix I.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 5

3.2 Site and Vicinity Characteristics

The subject site is approximately 235 acres of wooded land and fields with light residential rural development.

There are five structures on the subject site. A residential house (that the current owners reside in), a garage with an attached lodge, two abandoned tenant houses, and a cell tower compound. Topography generally slopes downward from south to north/northwest. A creek flows south to north in the western portion of the subject site.

A pond is located near the center of the subject site (northeastern portion of parcel 6839-003-983). A stream discharges from the pond and flows north. An overhead power line right-of-way passes through the subject site along the southern boundary of tax parcels 6920-883-325 and 6930-042-124. There are commercial and industrial businesses located to the east and north of the subject site. The remaining property in the nearby area is woodland and fields with light residential development.

4.0 User Provided Information

The Users of the subject site provided completed Phase I User Questionnaires. Copies of these documents are included in Appendix III.

4.1 Title Records

As of the date of this report, the User has provided no title records for the subject property. At the time any information is provided, it will be reviewed and an addendum letter to this Phase I ESA report will be issued if the provided information alters our findings and conclusions presented herein.

4.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations

The User provided no specialized knowledge regarding environmental liens, activity, or use limitations of the subject property.

4.3 Specialized Knowledge

The User provided no specialized knowledge regarding environmental issues on the subject property.

4.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information

The User provided no commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information regarding the subject property.

4.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues

The User indicated the property is priced at fair market value.

4.6 Owner, Property Manager and Occupant Information

John and Laura Snead are the current owners and property managers of the six tax parcels (6920-725-034, 6829-

814-999, 6829-870-959, 6839-003-983, 6829-971-959, and 6829-935-957) that comprise the southern portion of the subject site. Mr. and Mrs. Snead currently live in a house located near the center of tax parcel 9829-935-957.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 6

Mulberry Creek Farms, LLC is the current owner of the two tax parcels (6930-042-124 and portion of 6920-883-

325) that comprise the northern portion of the subject site. PJ Poore is the current property manager for Mulberry

Creek Farms, LLC. This portion of the subject site is not occupied.

4.7 Reason for Performing the Phase I ESA

The Phase I ESA is being performed to assist the User in qualifying for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability.

4.8 Other

5.0 Records Review

5.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources

S&ME contracted Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to conduct an environmental search and prepare a

Radius Map™ Report compiling federal and state environmental database information from the regulatory records of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the South Carolina Department of Health and

Environmental Control (SCDHEC). The purpose of the Radius Map™ Report was to identify environmental sites and activities within a radius of potential concern from the subject property as outlined by ASTM E1527-13. The

Radius Map™ Report is attached as Appendix IV and includes a list of the databases searched, an explanation of each database, search distances, and figures depicting the approximate locations of regulated facilities within the respective search distance. Regulatory listings include only those facilities or incidents that are known to the regulatory agencies at the time of publication.

S&ME reviewed the Radius Map™ Report and noted the subject property did not appear on any of the databases reviewed. However, several off-site facilities appeared on databases within the ASTM specified search distance of the subject property.

1. Crown Casting (108 Corporate Court) is located approximately 100 feet north of the subject property and at a lower elevation. This facility appears on the RCRA-LQG database.

2. Wards Grocery (HWY 25 and HWY 254) is located approximately 170 feet east of the subject property and appears on the LUST and UST databases. The facility is situated upgradient of the subject property.

3. Greenwood Excavation (218 Daniel Road) is located approximately 2900 feet south-southeast of the subject property and is at a lower elevation. The facility appears on the SHWS database.

The Preliminary Radius Map™ Report contained an Orphan Summary with listed sites that cannot be located by

EDR due to incomplete address information. Facilities known to be in the area were plotted and appear in the final report. Facilities known to be out of the area were removed from the final report. To locate the five remaining facilities is considered not practically reviewable.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 7

5.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources

5.2.1 EDR Supplementary Sources

The Radius Map™ Report also references supplementary environmental records in addition to those required by

ASTM E1527-13. The subject property did not appear on these supplementary databases. Any off-site facility that appeared on a supplementary database and was located near the subject property was discussed in Section 5.1.

5.2.2 Tribal Record Sources

The EDR Radius Map™ report includes a search of available tribal record sources, which did not reveal any listings on tribal environmental records.

5.2.3 Other Record Sources

A search of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) EnviroMapper website revealed no listings for the subject property and no new off-site facilities near the subject property.

5.2.4 State Agency File Review

Because the subject property had no regulatory listing, a file review was not performed.

5.3 Physical Setting Sources

The subject property is on the 1971 and 2017 editions of the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 7.5-minute series Topographic Map, Cokesbury, South Carolina Quadrangle. A Site Topographic Map, prepared using a portion of the 1971 quadrangle map, is included as Figure 2 in Appendix I.

The subject property is shown to be mostly open and undeveloped. The western portion of the subject property is wooded. Portions of the wooded areas are used for managed pine planting. The eastern portion of the subject property is mostly fields. The northern portion of the subject property is vacant and used for what appears to be hunting purposes, based on the trails and hunting stands. The subject property generally slopes down from southeast to north/northwest. The topographic lines indicated on the subject property generally resemble the ground surface observed during the site reconnaissance. The elevation of the site ranges from approximately 590 feet above the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29) at the northwestern portion to an approximate high of 650 feet at the southeastern portion. Surface runoff on the property would be to a pond and unnamed stream located near the center of the subject site, and the unnamed stream near the western portion of the subject site.

According to The Geology of the Carolinas (Horton, Jr. J. Wright and Zullo A. Victor, University of Tennessee Press, 1991), the subject site lies within the Piedmont Geologic Province of South Carolina. The Piedmont Geologic

Province is primarily comprised of biotite quartzofeldspathic gneiss and biotite-muscovite schist. Crystalline rock is overlain by a variable thickness of a highly weathered soil/rock mixture called saprolite that retains the structure of the weathered bedrock. In areas, weathering has resulted in a structureless soil termed residuum. In general, there is a gradual downward lithologic and textural change from residuum to saprolite to bedrock.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 8

In the Piedmont Geologic Province, the saprolitic and residual soils typically have high porosities but low hydraulic conductivities; thus, they do not readily transmit groundwater. The saprolite and residuum are considered leaky

(semi-permeable) beds that may store and recharge groundwater to the underlying bedrock aquifer.

Groundwater occurs within the saprolite and residuum between the clay, silt and sand grains. Groundwater also occurs within the bedrock along fractures, joints, and planes of weakness in the rock, and flows primarily through these zones in the rock.

The movement of groundwater through the crystalline rock aquifers and overlying saprolite is strongly influenced by topography which generally controls the location of recharge and discharge zones. Groundwater within the

Piedmont generally moves from topographically high areas (recharge zones) to topographically low areas within and along stream valleys (discharge areas). The flow of groundwater is also influenced by fracture zones which may occur in the bedrock (and may be retained within the saprolite), and foliation trends in the saprolite and partially weathered bedrock. These zones usually have the greatest hydraulic conductivities.

5.4 Historical Use Information on the Subject property

Aerial Photographs

Aerial photographs were reviewed in order to examine past land use of the subject property and vicinity. These aerials were reviewed on the Spartanburg County GIS web site and were acquired from EDR. The 2016 aerial photograph is included as Figure 3 in Appendix I. The following table presents the findings of the aerial photograph review. The aerial photographs acquired from EDR are included in Appendix IV.

Source Year of

Flight Scale Comments

EDR 2017 1” ≈ 500’

The subject property and adjoining properties appear similar to their appearance during the site reconnaissance.

EDR 2013 1” ≈ 500’

No significant change from the 2017 aerial. A wooded area in the western portion of the subject site appears to have been thinned out.

EDR 2009 1” ≈ 500’

No significant change from the 2013 aerial. Trees were removed in the northern portion of the subject site.

EDR 2006 1” ≈ 500’ No significant change from the 2009 aerial.

EDR 1999 1” ≈ 750’

A commercial facility, Crown Casting, is not present to the north of the subject site. Cell tower compound in the southeast appears to not be present.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 9

Source Year of

Flight Scale Comments

EDR 1994 1” ≈ 500’

No significant change from the 1999 aerial. Wooded areas in the western portion have been cleared.

EDR 1989 1” ≈ 750’

No significant change on the subject property from the 1994 aerial.

The Colgate-Palmolive facility is not present to the north. The gravel road, which leads to the power substation, is not present.

EDR 1981 1" = 500'

No significant change on the subject property from the 1989 aerial.

Power substation is not located to the north of the subject site. Residential structure does not appear to be present near the center of the subject site. A residential structure is present near Highway 25 in the eastern portion of the subject site. The surrounding area is mostly farmland and woodland.

EDR 1970 1" = 5'

No significant change on the subject property from the 1981 aerial. Residences were not located to the east.

EDR 1964 1" = 500'

No significant change on the subject property from the 1970 aerial.

EDR 1961 1" = 500'

No significant change from the 1964 aerial.

The surrounding area is mostly farmland.

EDR 1951 1" = 500'

No significant change from the 1961 aerial. Pond is not located in the center of the subject site.

City Directories

City Directories for Hodges, SC do not exist.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps for the subject site were not available from EDR, which owns the Sanborn Map

Company.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 10

Historical Topographic Maps

Historic USGS topographic maps that were available on the USGS web site were reviewed. The only 7.5-minute series maps available were the 1971 and 2017 editions of the Cokesbury, South Carolina Quadrangles that were described in Section 5.3. The topographic maps from 1971 and 2017 indicated the subject property was mostly open and was undeveloped. No commercial structures were present on the subject site.

Zoning Records

The current zoning of the subject site varies since the subject site is comprised of multiple parcels. The two parcels located in the northern portion of the subject site (6930-042-124 and portion of 6920-883-325) are zoned

I-1 Light Industrial District. The remaining six parcels of the subject site are zoned Rural Development.

Building Records

The Greenwood County Property Reports indicate that there are structures on tax parcels 6829-870-959, 6829-

935-957, and 6829-971-959. The property reports are included in Appendix III.

5.5 Historical Use Information on Adjoining Properties

Historical information including aerial photographs and regulatory records were reviewed to assess off-site historical land uses. In summary, the adjoining properties have generally been woodland or fields. Residences have been present to the east since the 1980s. A large commercial structure and power substation with gravel access road appeared north of the subject site in the 1994 aerial. An additional commercial structure and

Corporate Court, located to the north of the subject site, appears to have been built between 1999 and 2006.

5.6 Vapor Encroachment Screening

As part of this Phase I ESA, Vapor Encroachment Screening (VES), as described in ASTM Standard Guide E 2600-15:

Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved with Real Estate Transactions, was performed to identify releases or potential releases of chemicals of concern near the subject property and to evaluate the likelihood of vapors migrating to the subsurface of the subject property from releases. The presence or likely presence of vapors containing chemicals of concern in the subsurface of the subject property would constitute a Vapor Encroachment Condition (VEC), and may also constitute a REC, as defined by ASTM E1527-13.

Evaluation Process

The following information was reviewed to identify releases or potential releases of chemicals of concern on or near the subject property and to evaluate the likelihood of vapors migrating from the releases via the subsurface to the subject property:

• The type of contaminant (petroleum product vs. non-petroleum product) known or suspected to have been stored on-site or at identified off-site sources;

• The distance between identified off-site sources and the nearest subject property boundary;

• Information of known or assumed groundwater flow directions(s) with respect to the subject property;

• The potential for preferential pathways or barriers to exist between the identified off-site sources and the subject property boundary; and, Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 11

• Physical setting and other information sources.

The ASTM E2600-15 Tier 1 Screening process recommends initial screening distances to estimate contaminant plume length and width with no empirical plume data. In cases where the direction of groundwater flow is known or can be reasonably assumed, those distances were refined under a conservative scenario using calculations presented by Buonicore (2009). The resulting vapor screening distances (i.e., distances from a potential off-site contaminant source to the nearest boundary of the subject property) are presented in the following table with respect to the type of contaminant and the known or presumed direction of groundwater flow. These distances establish the area of concern (AOC).

Containment Type

Source Location with respect to the nearest Subject Property boundary and considering known or assumed groundwater flow direction(3)

Up-gradient Cross-gradient Down-gradient

Non-petroleum COC(1) 1,760 feet (1/3rd mile) 365 feet 100 feet

Petroleum COC

NAPL (2)

528 feet (1/10th mile) 165 feet 100 feet

Petroleum COC

Dissolved 528 feet (1/10th mile) 95 feet 30 feet

Notes: (1) COC – Chemicals of Concern

(2) NAPL – Non Aqueous Phase Liquid (i.e., free product)

(3) Groundwater Flow Direction – if not known or assumed, use search distance of 1,760 feet for up-gradient, cross-gradient, and down-gradient

Based on our review of the physical setting data and information reviewed in sections 5.1 through 5.5, the direction of groundwater flow in the shallow aquifer in the immediate site vicinity is estimated to be to the northwest.

Potential Natural or Man-made Preferential Pathways:

Potential man-made preferential pathways for vapor migration near the subject property appear to exist in the form of underground utilities along Highway 25 and Corporate Court.

Sites with Government/Historical Records On or Near the Subject Property:

Review of regulatory, physical setting, and historical records, indicated no listings for the subject property on regulatory databases. One facility with a confirmed release, near the subject property, appeared on the databases within the appropriate AOC. Wards Grocery is located approximately 170 feet east of the subject site. The facility appears on the LUST and UST databases. A petroleum release was reported on April 13, 1995. The release was confirmed on September 14, 1995 and cleanup was initiated. The Cleanup Complete Date was recorded as

August 22, 2000. Both underground storage tanks on the offsite facility are listed as abandoned. The site ranking is 5B, which is the lowest ranking for UST sites. Due to the low site ranking and the length of time since the initial release, a VEC does not appear to exist.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 12

Conclusion:

A VEC in connection with the subject property does not exist.

6.0 Site Reconnaissance

A site reconnaissance was performed by Mr. Bill Kea and Mr. Sergey Goretoy of S&ME on August 10, 2018. The purpose of the site reconnaissance was to identify RECs at the subject property and identify sites of similar environmental concern located in the immediately surrounding area. The subject property was observed for evidence of past or present activities which could have led to the deposition of hazardous substances or petroleum products. The weather at the time of the reconnaissance was clear and warm. Selected photographs of the subject property taken during the site reconnaissance are included in Appendix II.

6.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions

The methodology used during the site reconnaissance consisted of a walk-over of the subject property. This was followed by a vehicular survey of the surrounding area by public roads to observe adjoining and nearby properties.

The borders of the subject property were estimated using an aerial photograph with tax lines overlain that was acquired from the Greenwood County GIS web site.

6.2 General Site Settings

6.2.1 Current Use(s) of the Subject Property

The southern portion of the subject property, owned by Mr. and Mrs. Snead, is currently used by the property owners as their residence. Portions of the wooded areas are used for managed pine planting. The fields are used for hay production. A portion of the property during the site reconnaissance was planted with sunflowers. Cattle are raised on this portion of the subject site also.

The northern portion of the subject property, owned by Mulberry Creek Farms LLC, is currently vacant land. It appears the land is used for hunting.

6.2.2 Past Use(s) of the Subject Property

Two apparent old tenant houses were observed near the center of the subject site. Other past uses of the subject property were not apparent during the site reconnaissance.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 13

6.2.3 Current Use(s) of Adjoining Properties

The shape of the subject property is irregular. Thus, the following directions are general.

North - Wooded, vacant property. A power substation, with gravel access road, is located to the north.

Corporate Court road followed by Crown Casting and Colgate-Palmolive commercial structures are to the north.

East - Highway 25 followed by Wards Grocery and residential homes are to the east.

South - Wooded property and residential structures are to the south.

West - Primarily wooded undeveloped property is to the west.

6.2.4 Past Use(s) of Adjoining Properties

Past uses of adjoining properties were not apparent during the site reconnaissance.

6.2.5 Geologic, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic, and Topographic Conditions

Information pertaining to geologic and hydrogeologic conditions obtained from standard resources is provided in

Section 4.3.

The subject property consists of woodland and fields and generally slopes down from southeast to north/northwest. A creek flows north in the western portion of the subject site (photograph 1). A pond is located near the center of the subject site (photograph 2). A stream flows to the north from the pond. No rock outcrops were observed on the subject property.

6.2.6 Description of Structures and Roads

The subject property is developed with five structures (photographs 3-7,). The structures consist of a residential house, a garage with an attached lodge, two abandoned tenant houses, and a cell tower compound. A residential house is located near the center of tax parcel 6829-935-957. A garage with an attached lodge is located in southeastern portion of tax parcel 6829-870-959, just west of the residential house. An abandoned tenant house is located to the south of the residential house, on the boundary between tax parcels 6829-935-957 and 6829-

971-959. An additional abandoned tenant house is located to the west of the pond, in the western portion of tax parcel 6839-003-983. A cell tower with compound is located in the eastern portion of tax parcel 6839-003-983.

The subject property borders Highway 25 North to the east and Corporate Court to the north.

6.2.7 Potable Water Supply and Sewage Disposal System

A water supply well is located near the residential structure. The water supply well is used by the current owners

(photographs 8 and 9). A septic tank, used for sewage disposal, is likely to be near the residential structure. The location of the septic tank was not observed on the subject property during the site reconnaissance.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 14

6.3 Exterior Observations

The subject property consists of mostly woodland (photograph 10) and fields (photograph 11). Portions of the wooded areas are used for managed pine planting (photograph 12). The fields are used for hay production. A portion of a field near the center of the property was planted with sunflowers (photograph 13).

A household debris burn pile was located to the west of the residential structure (photograph 14). One 55-gallon drum was observed near a vacant horse stable located to the northeast of the residential house (photograph 15).

However, no evidence was observed to indicate the drum had leaked contents onto the property.

No aboveground storage tanks, evidence of an underground storage tank (fill pipe or vent pipe), stained soil, stressed vegetation, landfilling, pits, sumps, or foul odors were observed during the site reconnaissance.

6.4 Interior Observations

Interior observations were conducted on the garage, well house, and unmaintained tenant houses (photographs

16-18). The garage contained a gym and was used to store household items. The well house contained a well pump and corresponding equipment. One of the old tenant houses contained household debris. Interior observations were not conducted on the residential house.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 15

7.0 Interviews

7.1 Interview with Past and Present Owner

On August 10, 2018, Bill Kea and Sergey Goretoy interviewed John and Laura Snead during their site reconnaissance. Mr. and Mrs. Snead are the current owners of the southern portion of the subject site indicated as Greenwood County tax parcels 6839-003-983 (81.14 acre), 6829-870-959 (55.23 acre), 6829-814-999 (9.77 acre), 6920-725-034 (53.26 acre), 6829-971-959 (7.82 acre), and 6829-935-957 (2.93 acre). Mr. and Mrs. Snead indicated the following:

• The property has been in the family since the early 1900s.

• The residential house used to be located close to the highway. It was moved to its current position near the center of the subject site.

• The fields are used for hay production. To their knowledge, the property has not been used for row crop farming.

• They are unaware of any dumps on the subject property. They are unaware of any aboveground or underground storage tanks on the subject property.

• They are unaware of any environmental concerns on the subject property from in-site or off-site sources.

• No hazardous waste has been generated on the subject property.

On August 17, 2018, Sergey Goretoy interviewed Mr. PJ Poore (864-889-0176). Mr. Poore is the current owner and property manager of the two parcels (6930-042-124 and portion of 6920-883-325) that comprise the northern portion of the subject site. Mr. Poore indicated the following:

• He has owned the property for five years and uses it for recreational purposes.

• The previous owner used the property for recreational purposes.

• He is unaware of any above or underground storage tanks on the property.

• He is unaware of any septic tanks on the property.

• To his knowledge there are no dump sites on the property.

• He is unaware of any environmental concerns regarding the property.

7.2 Interview with Key Site Managers

See the interviews in Section 7.1.

7.3 Interview with Occupants

See the interviews in Section 7.1.

7.4 Interview with Local Government Officials

On August 17, 2018, Sergey Goretoy interviewed Steve Holmes, Deputy Chief of the Hodges Cokesbury Fire

Department (864-374-3311). Mr. Holmes has been with the fire department since 1993. Mr. Holmes stated that to his knowledge, no hazardous material response was ever made to the subject property or the surrounding area.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 16

7.5 Interviews with Others

No others were interviewed.

8.0 Findings

8.1 On-Site

1. A minor amount of household trash, in a burn pile, was observed near the center of the subject property.

2. One old steel drum was observed next to the horse stable located near the center of the subject property.

The drum appeared to be used as an old trash barrel.

8.2 Off-Site

1. Crown Casting (108 Corporate Court) is located approximately 100 feet north of the subject property and at a lower elevation. This facility appears on the RCRA-LQG database.

2. Wards Grocery (HWY 25 and HWY 254) is located approximately 170 feet east of the subject property and appears on the LUST and UST databases. The facility is situated upgradient of the subject property.

3. Greenwood Excavation (218 Daniel Road) is located approximately 2900 feet south-southeast of the subject property and is at a lower elevation. The facility appears on the SHWS database.

9.0 Opinions

9.1 On-Site

1. Based on the limited amount of trash and debris that was observed on the subject property and/or its composition, it is not considered a REC.

2. Because the drum appeared to be an old trash can, the drum observed on the subject property is not considered a REC.

9.2 Off-Site

1. Based on its regulatory status and nearby topography, Crown Casting is not considered a REC.

2. Based on the cleanup and the low UST site ranking, Wards Grocery is not considered a REC.

3. Based on its distance from the subject property, the intervening topography and its regulatory status, Greenwood Excavation is not considered a REC.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 17

9.3 Data Gaps

A data gap occurs when required information is missing despite a good faith effort made by the environmental professional to gather such information. The following data gaps were noted during the course of this Phase I

ESA.

• The operational history of the subject property was not documented in five-year intervals back to 1951 or first developed use (whichever is earliest) because the standard historical sources to achieve that level of documentation were not reasonably ascertainable.

Based on its use documented by aerial photographs and the lack of a regulatory listings for the subject property, and information obtained from the property owner, these data gaps are not considered significant to the environmental professional’s ability to determine RECs on the subject property.

10.0 Conclusions

We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of

ASTM E1527-13 of the Hodges Corporate Park Property located Near U.S. Highway 25 and Corporate Court in

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina. Limitations or exceptions to the standard practice are described in

Section 2.4. Deviations from this standard practice are discussed in Section 11.

This assessment has revealed no evidence of a REC or a CREC in connection with the subject property.

A VEC in connection with the subject property does not exist.

11.0 Deviations

S&ME has endeavored to perform this Phase I ESA in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM E1527-

13 without deviation.

12.0 Additional Services

No additional services were performed for this Phase I ESA.

13.0 References

• ASTM E1527-13, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site

Assessment Process.

• ASTM E2600-15, Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Properties Involved in Real Estate

Transactions.

• Greenwood County website – (http://www.greenwoodsc.gov/) - aerial photographs and land records.

• The Geology of the Carolinas, (Horton, Jr. J. Wright and Zullo A. Victor, University of Tennessee Press, 1991.

Hodges, Greenwood County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4226-18-101

February 15, 2018 18

• United State Geologic Service (USGS), 7.5-minute series Topographic Map, Cokebury, SC Quadrangles, 1971 and 2017 editions.

• EDR Radius Map™ Report, Inquiry Number 5384621.2s, dated August 10, 2018.

• EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package, Inquiry Number 5384621.5, dated August 7, 2018.

• Certified Sanborn® Map Report, Inquiry Number 5384621.3, dated August 7, 2018.

14.0 Signature(s) Of Environmental Professional(s)

We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental

Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312 and we have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a subject property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property.

We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

Sergey Goretoy Nathan Williams

Staff Professional Senior Geologist/EP

15.0 Qualification(s) Of Environmental Professional(s)

The environmental professionals for this project are Mr. Sergey Goretoy, Mr. William C. Kea, and Mr. Nathan

Williams.

Mr. Goretoy conducted the site visit and prepared the report. Mr. Goretoy, a Staff Professional with S&ME, graduated from Clemson University with B.S. and M.S. degrees in Geology/Hydrogeology and has two years of experience.

Mr. William C Kea helped conduct the site visit. He holds a BS and MS degree in Entomology from Clemson

University and has over 40 years of experience in agricultural research and environmental consulting. He has performed over 800 environmental assessments for real estate transactions. Mr. Kea has attended ASTM training for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments.

Mr. Williams, a Senior Geologist with S&ME, Inc., has over 30 years of experience. Mr. Williams provided senior review for the project. He holds a BS degree in Geology from the University of South Carolina and is a registered professional geologist. He has managed and provided senior review for numerous environmental assessments for real estate transactions and has also attended ASTM training for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments.

Resumes of these individuals are included in Appendix VI.

Appendices

Appendix I – Figures

43-05-02-001-000

43-00-05-003-000

42-00-04-011-000

43-00-05-013-000

67-00-06-001-010

67-16-01-005-000

68-00-09-012-000

67-16-04-004-000

68-00-01-015-000

43-05-02-006-000

67-15-01-004-000

68-07-01-001-000

67-00-01-001-040

67-00-02-001-000

43-00-05-006-000

42-00-04-015-000

68-00-01-016-000

43-06-01-019-000

43-00-05-014-000

68-00-02-002-000

43-06-01-005-000

67-16-04-006-000

42-00-04-023-000

43-03-01-012-000

67-00-01-001-030

42-00-04-008-000

42-00-04-013-000

67-00-06-001-000

42-00-04-007-000

67-00-02-025-000

42-00-04-006-000

43-06-01-004-000 43-11-01-007-000

67-16-02-002-000

42-00-04-009-000

68-00-09-017-000

67-00-01-001-05041-00-04-019-000

42-00-04-022-000 67-16-03-003-00042-00-04-021-000

68-02-01-006-000

68-00-09-018-000 68-00-01-013-000

67-15-01-006-000

42-00-04-020-000

43-03-01-008-000

43-03-01-010-000

68-00-09-014-010