RiMassEngineer
Civil/Environmental
- Aug 27, 2012
- 3
Good Morning,
Quick question for the experienced Phase I ESA reporters. I have an industrial/manufacturing building which was part of a larger complex back in the 1950's which didn't have the best track record with the local fire department in respect to chemical storage. This building is connected to several other larger industrial buildings but was divided through the years into several smaller parcels using the dividing walls as property lines. There were several UST and above ground tanks in abutting parcels, but none was believed to be on my clients property. One abutter was actually a CORRACTS site for leaking oil tanks (not far from my property line) but has and is undergoing remediation. Groundwater was determined to flow away from my property so that's good.
Well while reviewing files at the Fire Department, a map created in the 1950's showed an existing 1,000 gallon gasoline tank in the ground between two buildings. Maps that I reviewed after that date 1970's and so forth didn't show the tank on any plan views and the facility doesn't have any UST's registered with the DEM.
Obviously there are no records showing the removal of the tank, and while on my site visit I looked at the area and discovered a lip of a pipe stick out of a built up section of soil and also, on the face of the building, a cut off section of pipe just several feet away. The pipe felt snug in the ground. I told the client of this and he has no knowledge of any such tank.
I assume I'd be correct in justifying this as an environmental concern. However, would it be a good idea to have a ground penetrating radar conclude for sure, if there is an object in the ground before i finalize my report and recommend a phase II. I feel like this could be a major issue and personally don't like getting involved with Phase II's and DEM.
My client(the seller) is looking to close on his property in two weeks, and to recommend a phase II would be devastating to his sale at this point I'm sure.
Also, beyond the gasoline tank, there are also several older transformers on site, it's possible some may have leaked at point in time but these transformers are contained on seperate levels of the building, on top of concrete slabs, would you consider these de minimus conditions as the leaks would be surficial and contained on concrete?
Sorry for the lengthy post, but any input would be appreciated, thanks!
Quick question for the experienced Phase I ESA reporters. I have an industrial/manufacturing building which was part of a larger complex back in the 1950's which didn't have the best track record with the local fire department in respect to chemical storage. This building is connected to several other larger industrial buildings but was divided through the years into several smaller parcels using the dividing walls as property lines. There were several UST and above ground tanks in abutting parcels, but none was believed to be on my clients property. One abutter was actually a CORRACTS site for leaking oil tanks (not far from my property line) but has and is undergoing remediation. Groundwater was determined to flow away from my property so that's good.
Well while reviewing files at the Fire Department, a map created in the 1950's showed an existing 1,000 gallon gasoline tank in the ground between two buildings. Maps that I reviewed after that date 1970's and so forth didn't show the tank on any plan views and the facility doesn't have any UST's registered with the DEM.
Obviously there are no records showing the removal of the tank, and while on my site visit I looked at the area and discovered a lip of a pipe stick out of a built up section of soil and also, on the face of the building, a cut off section of pipe just several feet away. The pipe felt snug in the ground. I told the client of this and he has no knowledge of any such tank.
I assume I'd be correct in justifying this as an environmental concern. However, would it be a good idea to have a ground penetrating radar conclude for sure, if there is an object in the ground before i finalize my report and recommend a phase II. I feel like this could be a major issue and personally don't like getting involved with Phase II's and DEM.
My client(the seller) is looking to close on his property in two weeks, and to recommend a phase II would be devastating to his sale at this point I'm sure.
Also, beyond the gasoline tank, there are also several older transformers on site, it's possible some may have leaked at point in time but these transformers are contained on seperate levels of the building, on top of concrete slabs, would you consider these de minimus conditions as the leaks would be surficial and contained on concrete?
Sorry for the lengthy post, but any input would be appreciated, thanks!