At the request of  ­  (“Client” or “User”),  ­  has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the property located at 123 Street Road­ Doylestown­PA­18901­  (“Site” or “Subject Property”).yeahwhehbaf

This ESA was conducted in accordance with  ­'s proposal dated 12/1/2013­, and with the requirements of ASTM E-1527-05, “Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process.”

The assessment was conducted to evaluate and identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances and petroleum products on, at, in, or to the Site.  Although not required by ASTM E-1527-2013, a visual determination of the likelihood of the presence of suspect asbestos-containing materials (ACMs), lead-based paint (LBP), and wetlands was conducted as non-ASTM considerations. ­

­'s Phase I ESA sought to gather information regarding: (1) current and past property uses and occupancies; (2) current and past uses of hazardous substances and petroleum products; (3) waste management and disposal activities; (4) current and past corrective actions and response activities at the Site; (5) engineering controls at the Site; (6) institutional controls at the Site; and (7) properties adjoining or located nearby the Site.   ­ obtained this information through: 

• Interviews with past and present owners, operators and occupants;
• Review of historical sources of information;
• Review of federal, state, tribal and local government records; and
• Visual inspections of the buildingfacility and portions of the adjoining properties. 
  

This Phase I ESA was conducted under the supervision/responsible charge of an environmental professional, as defined by ASTM E-1527-05.  The interviews and Site reconnaissance portions of this assessment were performed by a person possessing sufficient training and experience necessary to conduct the interviews and Site reconnaissance, and having the ability to identify issues relevant to recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the Subject Property this is something that .

Based on the reported construction date of the Site building, the general presence of ACMs is not suspected.  In addition, no debris piles suspected of containing ACMs were observed at the Subject Property during the reconnaissance.  Sampling for ACMs was not performed within the scope of this assessment.

The following data gaps³ were encountered in completion of this inquiry:

To the best of LCS’ knowledge, the information contained in this report is true and accurate. LCS personnel have exercised due diligence in the compilation of the information contained herein appropriate to environmental professionals engaged in investigations of this sort. LCS makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy of information gained from other sources.­

Refer to Section 10.12 for additional limitations.­

³ A data gap is defined by 40 CFR 312.10 as “a lack of or inability to obtain information required by the standards and practices” of preparation of this document “despite good faith efforts by the environmental professional” or others to gather such information. This is something. The primary purpose of this study was to document the inquiry of the environmental professional for all appropriate inquiries for the subject property. Specifically, this document is intended to provide the “all appropriate inquiries” for the purposes of CERCLA Section 101(35)(B). Such is applicable to persons seeking to qualify for (i) the innocent landowner defense pursuant to CERCLA Sections 101(35) and 107(b)(3); (ii) the bona fide prospective purchaser liability protection pursuant to CERCLA Sections 101(40) and 107(r); and, (iii) the contiguous property owner liability protection pursuant to CERCLA Section 107(q). This report was not intended as part of the site characterization and assessment with use of a grant awarded under CERCLA Section 104(k)(2)(B). More specifically, the scope is intended to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property. Xxx keep only this paragraph if YES CERCLAxxx .

LCS authorizes­  ­­ to use the above-referenced LCS report in order to determine its interest in the said subject property.­

I declare that, to the best of my professional knowledge and belief, I meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in 40 CFR 312.10. [See Qualifications in­ Appendix O.]

I have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history and setting of the subject property. I have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR part 312.­

Xxremove names not involved xx

Mary Beth Facklam
Environmental Professional

Heather Lamb
Environmental Professional

xxWriter: include observations from site visit ONLY in this sectionxx

A visual site review of the subject property was completed to document site conditions and to identify recognized environmental conditions. The site reconnaissance included a walkthrough of xxall/selectxx units/spaces on-site, including interior and exterior areas with the exception of xxx due to xxx. (xxxadd any special information on walking large parcels or other modifications to the inspectionxxx) Limitations also included xxxsnow cover, vegetation, debris, vehicles, etc.xxx

The following summarizes LCS’ observations.

Current Owner/Operator Interviews

The owner of the subject property had been identified as ­. The Key Site Manager of the subject property had been identified as xxxx (take from Schedule B last page).

At the time of the site inspection, LCS was accompanied by xxx, who provided access and background information about the subject property. xxAdditional background information was provided by xxx via the LCS Owner/Operator Questionnairexxx. Such information has been incorporated herein and is included in the LCS Owner/Operator Questionnaire.

XXXOR
The LCS Owner/Operator Questionnaire was forwarded to Mr. /Mrs. xxx, the current owner/operator on xxx, 2013, for completion. As of the date of this report, LCS has yet to receive the completed questionnaire. Any response information that would alter or affect the findings and conclusions of this report will be forwarded as an addendum to this report when it is received by LCS.xxxx xxxcopy this to appendix page also not yet receivedxxx

Overview

Refer to Sections 10.2 SITE SURVEY/TAX MAP, 10.3 SITE CONDITION REPORT and 10.5 OWNER/ OPERATOR QUESTIONNAIRE.

Storage Tanks

During the LCS site inspection, there was no indication of any on‑site USTs or ASTs for the containment of petroleum products (e.g., fill ports, vent pipes, accessways, etc.).

xxxORxxx

At the time of the site inspection, the following tanks were noted on-sitexxx Evidence of tanks noted on-site include vent pipes, fill ports, monitoring wells, etc.xxx

XX OR XXX LCS noted the following, indicative of USTs on-site. (NOTE HERE THE OBERVATIONS, SUCH AS FILL PORTS, VENT PIPES, ETC. BE SURE TO NOTE THE LOCATIONS.) xxxAlthough no signs or evidence of petroleum USTs were observed during the site inspection, the potential for the former presence of USTs is possible based upon the past use of the subject property as xxx.

xxSee Regulatory and Municipal information below for additional information on site tanks.xx

Hazardous or Regulated Materials

XxxThe only hazardous and/or regulated materials stored or utilized on the subject property are associated with sanitary cleaning and/or maintenance practices. These materials were noted properly stored within xxxx. There xxxxwas or was noxxx evidence of any releases (staining, odors, etc.) in the area of these materials at the time of the site inspection.

or

Hazardous and/or regulated materials were noted stored and utilized on the subject property at the time of the site inspection. These were as follows:

There xxxxwas or was noxxx evidence of any releases (staining, odors, etc.) in the area of these materials at the time of the site inspection. Relevant MSDS, if provided, are included in the appendix of this report.

There were no visible signs of unidentified substance containers (unlabeled drums, etc.) noted at the time of the site inspection.

Solid, Hazardous or Regulated Waste

xxxOperations on the subject property produce xx wastes associated with xxx operations/residential living. Refuse is stored in xxxxx a dumpster and transferred off-site by xxxxxxx. xxxHazardous and/or regulated wastes are also generated on-site and are, as detailed below.

Any relevant disposal documentation, if provided, is included in the appendix of this report.

Or xxx Currently, there is no hazardous or regulated waste generated on-site.

Staining, Corrosion, Stressed Vegetation and/or Dead Vegetation

xxxDuring the LCS site reconnaissance, there were no stained soils, stained pavement, stressed vegetation or corroded surfaces noted on-site.

Fill Dirt or Land Disposal

xxxDuring the LCS site reconnaissance, there was no evidence of placement of fill dirt or land disposal activities currently or previously conducted on-site.

Wastewaters

Municipal sanitary and storm sewers service the subject property. According to xxx, the subject property has been supplied with municipal sanitary sewer since approximately xxx. xxxOperations on the subject property are not believed to produce wastewaters that require treatment or monitoring. Xx or Due to xxx, LCS’ experience suggests that treatment or monitoring of the site’s wastewater is typically required prior to discharge to the site’s sewer system. Typically, this would include (add silver recovery unit, oil/water separator, etc.).xxx

Floor drains xxand/or sump pumpsxx were noted in the xxx and are reportedly connected into the municipal sanitary sewer system. Storm drains are located xxx; these reportedly discharge to xxx. XxxAt the time of the site inspection, neither floor drains nor storm drains were noted.xxx

There was no evidence of a current or historic private septic system or cesspool on the subject property. Additionally, there was no evidence of any pits, ponds or lagoons used in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal.

Potable Water Supply/Wells

The subject property is served by a municipal water supply system. There was no evidence of an active or abandoned supply well, drywell, monitoring well or irrigation well on-site.
or
The subject property is served by a private on-site groundwater well. The well casing was noted near xxx. According to the site contact, analytical testing for water quality has not been conducted on the well, to his knowledge. Xxxor include resultsxxx There was no evidence of other active or abandoned supply, dry, monitoring or irrigation wells on-site.

Air Emissions

There were no process exhaust systems noted on-site at the time of the LCS site investigation.

Suspect PCBs

The following suspect PCB-containing materials were noted on-site.

*Utility-owned transformers and any subsequent contamination that may result are the responsibility of the utility company.
**According to ASTM, PCB-containing light ballasts are not considered a recognized environmental condition.

Suspect ACMs

For newer structures:

A full asbestos inspection was not completed. Although the age of the facility would not generally pose a significant asbestos concern, it is important to note that asbestos can be found in several building materials regardless of the age of the structure. Federal (as well as several states’) rules, laws and regulations require the sampling and analysis of suspect asbestos containing materials prior to disturbance, particularly when renovation/demolition activities are contemplated. As a precaution, LCS recommends that any and all suspect materials be sampled and analyzed prior to disturbance or removal.

For older structures:

A cursory visual assessment for ACMs was undertaken as a part of this environmental site assessment. At the time of the cursory inspection, there were XXXX suspect ACMs located within the subject structure(s). Asbestos may be present in the following partial list of suspect materials:

*It should be noted that a cursory visual assessment was conducted by LCS; the observations listed above are based on the limited areas observed during the LCS site reconnaissance, additional suspect materials may be present on-site.

Caution is recommended if renovation and/or remodeling of this facility are to take place. Prior to renovation, remodeling or demolition of this facility, a detailed asbestos inspection and sampling protocol is recommended. All federal, state and local government rules, laws and regulations must be followed.

Suspect Lead Based Paint

The Consumer Product Safety Commission banned the manufacture of lead-based paints for residential and commercial application in 1978; Federal regulations enforced this ban in 1993. Structures completed prior to 1978 may contain lead-based paints. The subject building was constructed in xxx, according to the Town of XXX municipal records. xxxThe possibility exists for the presence of lead-based paints in the existing structure.xxx or Due to the age of the subject structure, lead-based paint is not anticipated.xxx Painted surfaces, including walls, ceilings, doors, windows and exterior surfaces were noted during the site investigation. Damaged materials noted by LCS are listed below.

*It should be noted that a cursory visual assessment was conducted by LCS; the observations listed above are based on the limited areas observed during the LCS site reconnaissance. Additional suspect materials may be present.

Xx or xx

The painted surfaces observed by LCS were in good condition with no significant peeling or chipping paint. If the painted surface(s) peel, chip and/or is intended to be removed, safety precautions should be taken to prevent inhalation or digestion. This cursory lead-based paint review did not include identification of suspect lead-based paint dust associated with windows, doors, etc.

Lead in Drinking Water

xxxAccording to public water analysis conducted by the xxxEriexxx County Water Authority, the 90th percentile for lead for the year 2010 was 0.003 mg/L. According to the USEPA, the action level applicable to municipal potable water supplies and distribution systems is 0.015 mg/L.

xx or xx

xxxAttempts to obtain information regarding the average lead concentrations for the xxx have been made by LCS. However, as of the date of the LCS report, no such response has been received. Based upon LCS’ experience, the average lead concentration is likely in compliance with the USEPA action level applicable to municipal potable water supplies and distribution systems of 0.015 mg/L.

It should be noted that at the time of the site inspection, lead pipes xxwere/were notxx noted within the subject structure(s). xxxSuch are possible due to the age of the subject structure(s).xxxorxxx Such are not anticipated due to the age of the subject structure. xxxuse approx. 1970 for cut-off datexxx

Or

The subject property is served by a private on-site groundwater well. The well casing was noted near xxx. According to the site contact, analytical testing for water quality has not been conducted on the well, to his knowledge. Xxxor include resultsxxx There was no evidence of other active or abandoned supply, dry, monitoring or irrigation wells on-site.

Suspect Mold

Mold can germinate and colonize when a food source (i.e., drywall, wood, insulation, paper), a certain temperature and moisture are present. The speed of the growth all depends on the combination of these conditions; roof leaks often lead to accelerated mold growth. The musty odor commonly present with mold is associated with the mVOCs produced by molds. Some, but not all, molds produce a Mycotoxin that is considered a poison and may have negative health effects on humans.

xxxAt the time of the site inspection, there were no suspect mold covered areas or mold-related odors noted within the subject structure(s). This does not preclude the presence of molds in hidden areas (behind walls, moldings, etc.) or the potential for future mold growth.xxx

xx OR xx

At the time of the site inspection, the following areas of suspect mold were noted on-site.

*It should be noted that a cursory visual assessment was conducted by LCS; the observations listed above are based on the limited areas observed during the LCS site reconnaissance.

Xx and/orxx

LCS noted the following water damaged areas/areas of moisture: xxx. Such areas may promote the growth of mold in the future. XX

Other Issues

xxxAt the time of the site inspection, there was no evidence of any other issues of concern associated with the subject property.

The adjacent properties were visually inspected from the subject property at the time of the site reconnaissance. Physical limitations included xxx.

The surrounding property uses include the following:

xxrecord the actual name of facilitiesxxx xxxalso, apparent past use is based on SITE OBSEVATIONS ONLY xx

Photographs of the subject property were taken by LCS on SITE INSPECTION DATE. Photographs were taken with the objective of documenting the physical condition of the subject property and any improvements thereon. Photographs are included in Appendix D.

Based solely on observations made during LCS’ site reconnaissance, the following conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property were identified:

Xxbullet or table here , as needed xx

Xxorxx

No conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property were identified during LCS’ site reconnaissance.

Historical aerial photographs serve to reveal former topography, buildings, structures and man-made works such as canals, lagoons and railroads that may have been altered or may no longer be in existence.

Historical aerial photographs were reviewed at the xxx County Soil and Water Conservation Service in xxx, New York on xxx, 2013. Changes in land use and general subject property characteristics were noted and are described below. Copies of the aerial photographs, if available, are included in Section 10.8 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. LCS’ observations of the subject property and surrounding properties are detailed below.

xxNone of the aerial photographs suggest environmental concerns, such as exterior storage areas, fill, disturbed areas, etc.xx

Sanborn Maps

EDR provided, and LCS reviewed, historical Sanborn maps. Based on those maps, included within the appendix of this report, the historical uses of the subject property and those of adjacent properties are described as below.

Xx be sure to note whether/when the current structures are identified xx

xxOrxx

Historical Sanborn Maps were ordered by LCS through EDR for information regarding the subject property and surrounding area. However, EDR forwarded a letter to LCS indicating that there is no Sanborn coverage for the subject property. This letter is included in the appendix of this report.

City Directories

Historic city directories, available through the xxx, were reviewed for additional information regarding the subject property. Past occupants of the subject property and those of adjacent/nearby properties have been identified through the city directories as listed below.

XxorxxAs the historical use of the subject property was adequately determined based on Sanborn maps, directories were not reviewed.xx

Xxorxx

Historic city directories were not readily available through the local library or other source identified during the course of this assessment.

Xxx LCS also reviewed a City Directory Abstract provided by EDR, which researches former on-site occupants through available street directories. Based on EDR’s research, xxx.

Historic Topographic Maps

The subject property is included on the ­ Quadrangle Topographic Map dated ­. According to this map, the subject property is xxx. Xx or xx Due to the extensive development in the area of the subject property, individual structures are not indicated on this map.

Historic topographic maps, available through http://historical.mytopo.com, were reviewed for additional information regarding the subject property. The subject property is included on the xxxx Quadrangle Topographic Map dated xxxx. This map indicates that the subject property was xxxx at that time. xxxorxxx Due to the extensive development in the area of the subject property, individual structures are not indicated on this map. xxxxx

Other Sources

LCS contacted the following sources for additional historical information about the subject property. However; these sources revealed no findings.

XxorxxIn addition, as the historical use of the subject property was adequately determined based on xxx, xxx were not reviewed.xx

According to the site contact, the existing subject structure(s) was (were) constructed in xxx and has been used asxxx. Xxadd any other additional info.xx

XxorxxOther historical sources were not readily ascertainable from local sources.

xx separate multiple buildings, SBL #s, etc. with a / or comma. xx

Municipal research available through local municipalities was completed by LCS and is summarized below.

Permits for the subject property include the following.

xxThere was no indication of historic heating systems or previous site development.xx

OR (use this statement instead if in MD- “The records do not include information pertaining to previous site development”)

LCS contracted NREIS for a search of environmental liens on the subject property (attached). The results of that search indicate that xxxno environmental liens or Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) xxx are on file for the subject property.

xxAccording to the Abstract of Title Search provided to LCS, the following summarizes site ownership.xxxx

Or

The Abstract of Title Search for the subject property was not available for review.

xxxNo previous studies were supplied to LCS for review relative to the subject property. or LCS reviewed “xxx,” prepared by xxx for xxx, dated xxx. Xxx concluded that “xxx.” Based on that study. . .

Based upon this previous study, the site history has been identified as including xxxx.

The historical use of the subject property has been researched through review of historic maps, historic aerial photographs, municipal records, city directories and/or other reasonably obtainable documents, as detailed below.

The following conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property were identified based on LCS’ historical research:

• Xx

xx or xx

xxNo conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property were identified based on LCS’ historical research.xx

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Lorraine, Trenton and Black River Groups, consisting of the Normanskill Shale. The Normanskill Shale is characterized by minor mudstone and sandstone. Thickness ranges from zero to 4,500 feet (zero to 1,400 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Lockport Group, primarily the Guelph, Oak Orchard, Eramosa and Goat Island Dolostones; and local biotherms of Gasport Limestone. Thickness ranges from 150 to 200 feet (45-60 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Clinton Group, primarily the Decew Dolostone; Rochester Shale; Irondequoit and Merriton Limestones. Thickness ranges from 100 to 150 feet (30-45 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Clinton Group, primarily the Decew Dolostone; and local biotherms of Rochester Shale. Thickness ranges from 100 to 150 feet (30-45 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Clinton Group, primarily Irondequoit and Hickory Corners Limestones; Rockway Dolostone; Neahga Shale and Kodak Sandstone. Thickness ranges from 100 to 150 feet (30-45 meters).

Bedrock mapping indicates the underlying bedrock to be of the Ludlow Formation of the Hamilton Group. Ludlow Formation members include Deep Run Shale, Tichenor Limestone, Wanakah and Ledyard Shales and Centerfield Limestone. The thickness of bedrock ranges from 60 to 150 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates the underlying bedrock to be of the Marcellus Formation, an Oatka Creek Shale member of the Hamilton Group. Thickness of bedrock ranges from 60 to 150 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates the subject property is underlain by bedrock belonging to the Moscow Formations of the Hamilton Group with thickness ranging from 60 to 150 meters. The Moscow Formation includes members of the Windom and Kashong Shales and Menteth Limestone. Portions of the subject property may also be underlain by bedrock of the West River Shales Formations belonging to the Genesee Group with bedrock ranging from 3 to 45 meters. The West River Shales includes members of the Genundewa Limestone; Penn Yan and Geneseo Shales; and North Evans Limestones.

Bedrock mapping indicates the underlying bedrock to be of the Java Group that includes the Hanover Shale, sandstone and shale of the Wiskoy Formation and the Pipe Creek Shale. Thickness of this bedrock is approximately 30-60 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates the underlying bedrock to be of the West Falls Group, which includes Angola and Rhinestreet Shales. Thickness varies from 400 to 950 feet (120 to 290 meters).

Bedrock mapping indicates that the subject property is underlain by bedrock of the Akron Dolostone and Salina Group. Primarily the Camillus, Syracuse and Vernon formations, comprised of shale, dolostone, salt and gypsum. Thickness ranges from 120 to 210 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates that the subject property is underlain by bedrock of the Akron Dolostone and Salina Group. Primarily the Akron Dolostone and Bertie Formation, comprised of shale and dolostone. Thickness ranges from 120 to 210 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates that the subject property is underlain by bedrock of the Akron Dolostone, Cobleskill Limestone and Salina Group. Primarily the Vernon Formation comprised of shale and dolostone. Thickness ranges from 210 to 300 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates that the subject property is underlain by bedrock of the Akron Dolostone, Cobleskill Limestone and Salina Group. Primarily the Syracuse Formation and the Cobleskill Limestone/Bertie and Camillus Formations comprised of dolostone, shale, salt and gypsum. Thickness ranges from 210 to 300 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates that the subject property is underlain by bedrock of the Onondaga and Bois Blanc Limestone. The Onondaga has Seneca, Morehouse (cherty) and Clarence Limestone Members and Edgecliff cherty Limestone Member, having local coral biotherms. The Bois Blanc limestone is thin, sandy and discontinuous. This formation has a thickness ranging from 60 to 150 meters.

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the primary underlying bedrock as belonging to the Hamilton Group. Composed primarily of the Skaneateles Formation having Levanna Shale and Stafford Limestone Members. Thickness ranges from 60 to 150 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates that the subject property is underlain by bedrock comprised of primarily shale and siltstone belonging to the Ellicott and Dexterville Formations of the Conneaut Group and the Machias Formation of the Canadaway Group. The Conneaut Group ranges in thickness from 75-200 meters; the Canadaway Group ranges from 210-370 meters. The Machias Formation includes Rushford and Canaseraga Sandstones; Canisteo, Caneadea and Hume Shales; and South Wales and Dunkirk Shales.

Stueben County is in the Allegheny Plateau physiographic province. Bedrock mapping indicates the underlying bedrock to belong to the West Falls Group, primarily the Nunda Formation sandstone and shale; the West Hill Formation shale and siltstone; and Corning Shale. Thickness varies from 340 to 490 meters.

Bedrock mapping indicates the underlying bedrock to be of the Queenston Shale Group, an member of the Medina Group and Queenston Formation. Thickness of this bedrock is approximately 250 meters.

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Canadaway Group, primarily of the Machias Formation. This includes the Northeast, Westfield, Gowanda, South Wales and Dunkirk Shales. The Machias Formation includes shales and siltstones; Rushford siltstone; Caneadea, Canisteo and Hume Shales; Canaserage siltstones and South Wales and Dunkirk Shales. Thickness ranges from 700 to 1200 feet (210-370 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Genesee Group, primarily the West River Shale; Genundewa Limestone; Penn Yan and Geneseo Shales; and the North Evans Limestone. Thickness ranges from 10 to 150 feet (3-45 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Sonyea Group. This group consists of the Cashaqua and Middlesex shales. Thickness of the group varies from 50 to 200 feet (15-60 meters).

Geologic mapping of the area reveals the underlying bedrock as belonging to the Lorraine, Trenton and Black River Groups, primarily the Schenectady Formation and the Normanskill Shale. The Schenectady Formation is characterized by graywacke, sandstone, siltstone and shale, while the Normansill Shale is characterized by minor mudstone and sandstone. Thickness ranges from zero to 4,500 feet (zero to 1,400 meters).

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of dunes. Dunes are fine to medium sands that are well storted, unconsolidated, wind re-worked lake sediments. Thickness varies from one to ten meters.

Surficial geologic mapping of the area indicates that the subject property is underlain primarily by recent deposits. Recent deposits are typically confined to floodplains within a valley. The soil is generally oxidized and non-calcareous fine sand to gravel and may be overlain by silts. The thickness of the recent deposits is 1 to 10 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of alluvial fans that is described as fan shaped accumulations. The poorly stratified silts, sands and boulders are typically located at the foot of steep slopes and are permeable.

Surficial geologic mapping of the area indicates that the subject property is underlain primarily by till xxxwith areas of bedrock within one to three meters of the surface and with possible bedrock outcroppings.xxx Till, deposited beneath glacier ice, is described as being poorly sorted and variably textured (clay, silt-clay, boulder-clay). The thickness of the till is variable from 1 to 50 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of lacustrine sand that is described as generally well sorted sand deposits associated with large bodies of water; stratified; generally a near shore deposit or near a sand source; and consists of quartz sand. Thickness ranges from 2 to 20 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of lacustrine beach that is described as generally well sorted sand and gravel; stratified; permeable and well drained; deposited at lake shorelines; generally non-calcareous and may have wave winnowed lag gravel with thickness variable from one to five meters.

The surficial geology of the surrounding area includes, recent deposits along the Chadakoin River and Kame and till deposits. The recent deposits are generally confined to the flood plains and in a valley. They consist of oxidized, non‑calcarious, fine sand to gravel. Thickness ranges from 1 to 10 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist primarily of outwash sand and gravel. This layer is described as well rounded and stratified course to fine gravel with sand, proglacial fluvial deposition, generally finer texture away from ice border. Deposition may be calcerated beyond Wisconsonian glacial limit. The thickness of the deposition is variable from 2 to 20 meters.

Kame deposits are course fine gravel or sand, which were deposited adjacent to ice, have lateral variability in sorting, coarseness and thickness. Thickness is variable from 10 to 30 meters. Till deposits are described as variable textured till (e.g. clay, silt‑clay and boulder clay). Till has variable clasts, is poorly sorted and relatively impermeable (has a loamy matrix) and was deposited beneath glacier ice. The thickness of till varies from 1 to 50 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of kame moraine. Kame moraine was deposited at an ice margin during glaciation and has variable texture (size and sorting) from boulders to sand. The relief is above elevation of associated outwash. Kame moraine is locally cemented with calcareous cement. Thickness varies from 10 to 30 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of kame deposits. Kame deposits were deposited at an ice margin during glaciation and has variable texture (size and sorting) from course to fine gravel and/or sand. The relief is below elevation of associated outwash. Kame deposits may be calcreted beyond the Wisconsinan glacial limit. Thickness varies from 10 to 30 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist primarily of lacustrine silt and clay. Lacustrine silt and clay was deposited in pro‑glacial lakes and is generally laminated and calcareous. It has the potential for land instability. The thickness varies up to 100 meters. Lacustrine silt and clay typically is not conducive to contamination migration.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist primarily of lacustrine silt and clay where the bedrock may be within one to three meters of the surface, may sporadically crop out and consists of a variable mantle of rock debris and glacial till. Lacustrine silt and clay was deposited in pro‑glacial lakes and is generally laminated and calcareous. It has the potential for land instability. The thickness varies up to 100 meters.

Mapping indicates the surficial geology of the area to consist of till moraine. Till moraine was deposited adjacent to ice and is more variably sorted and more variably drained than till. It may include ablation till. Thickness varies from 10 to 30 meters.

The subject property is situated regionally in the xx Major Drainage Basin and locally within the xxx Sub-Basin.

The subject property xxx does not xxx have any open water bodies or surficial water bodies located on-site xxx. Surface drainage appears to flow in a direction toward the lowest elevated points on-site and/or toward the closest storm drains on-site. Localized groundwater flow would be influenced by utilities, subsurface structures, etc. A site-specific hydrogeologic study would be required to confirm specific on-site groundwater flow direction.

xxx If site is not in NY State, please use Database wording from appropriate template xxx

Federal and state environmental regulatory information was provided by EDR.

xxx [It should be noted that the search radii has been adjusted due to the metropolitan area in which the subject property is located.]xxx

Refer to MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY pages within the EDR report for a tabulated list of databases reviewed and sites identified within specified radii.

Any sites unplottable by EDR were also reviewed, to the extent practical based on site name and address, to assess whether they are also present within their appropriate radii. Any listings for the subject property or any adjacent sites are included in the details below.

No sites were identified within the appropriate radii, except for the following:

SUBJECT PROPERTY:

According to the EDR report, the subject property was identified as xxxx (include details, spill #s, status, tank install/remove dates, etc.

ADJACENT SITES:

The following adjacent properties were also identified in the EDR report:

• Xxxxxxxxx identify the database, site name and address, direction and hydraulic gradientxxxx xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx do not need to include tank info for AST/UST facilities

This information xxxis/is notxxx considered a potential environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the status(es) of the listed site(es) and/orxx the distance to the subject property.

OTHER LISTINGS:

The following sites were also identified in the EDR report:

According to the EDR report, there are xxx NPL or “Superfund” hazardous waste sites located within a one-mile radius of the subject property. The closest NPL site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property. XxxAny sites within ½ mile of the subject property should be discussed relative to nature of site, regulatory status, etc.xxx This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the distance to the subject property. xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx

There are xxx RCRA CORRACTS listed facilities located within a one-mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property. XxxAny sites within ½ mile of the subject property should be discussed relative to nature of site, regulatory status, etc.xxx This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the distance to the subject property. xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx

There are xxx NYSDEC listed hazardous waste sites (equivalent to NPL sites) located within a one-mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property. XxxAny sites within ½ mile of the subject property should be discussed relative to nature of site, regulatory status, etc.xxx This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the distance to the subject property. xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx

There are xxx NYSDEC listed hazardous substance sites (similar to CERCLIS listed sites) located within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property. XxxAny sites within ½ mile of the subject property should be discussed relative to nature of site, regulatory status, etc.xxx This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the distance to the subject property. xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx

There are xxx CERCLIS listed hazardous waste sites located within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property. XxxAny sites within ½ mile of the subject property should be discussed relative to nature of site, regulatory status, etc.xxx This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the distance to the subject property. xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx

There are xxx CERCLIS-NFRAP listed hazardous waste sites located within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site is (xxThis site isxx or These sites arexx) located over xxx mile from the subject property. This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the distance to the subject property and the status of the listed site(s).

There are xxx RCRA-TSD facilities located within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property. XxxAny sites within 1/4 mile of the subject property should be discussed relative to nature of site, regulatory status, etc.xxx This information is not considered a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the lack of reasonably ascertainable or practically reviewable records indicating a significant release at the listed facility(ies) and/or the distance to the subject property. xxx and status of the listed site(s)xxx

There are xxx NYSDEC listed spill sites attributed to LTANKs and xxx additional spill sites located within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. xx[It should be noted that EDR also includes some of these spills in historic LTANK and historic NY Spills databases.] Of these xxx spill sites, xxx are still considered “active” by the NYSDEC, while the remaining sites are classified as either “inactive” or “closed.” [A status of “closed” indicates the spill was remediated and the NYSDEC file closed with no further remediation required. A status of “inactive” indicates the contamination may remain but no further remediation is required. A status of “active” indicates further remediation or investigation is necessary.] The closest “active” site is located approximately xxx miles xxx from the subject property and involved xxxx. Based on this limited information, this spill xxis/is notxx likely to pose a significant concern to the subject property. In addition, LCS’ experience suggests the property owner would not be liable for on-site contamination that resulted from such an off-site release.xx This information is not a potential environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed spill site(s) due to the “closed” or “inactive” status of xxmany ofxx the listed spill(s) and/or the distance to the subject property.

There are xxx NYSDEC listed solid waste facilities located within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. The closest such site xx(This site is xx These sites are)xx is located over xxx mile from the subject property and is listed as a xxxlandfill/recycling facility/transfer station/etc.xxx. XxxMake sure this makes sense; municipal landfills are often identified by EDR as the municipal office address and not the location of the LF.xxx This information is not a recognized environmental condition at the subject property based on the listed site(s) due to the lack of reasonably ascertainable or practically reviewable records indicating a significant release at the listed facility(ies) and/or the distance to the subject property.

xxxinsert additional info. here regarding Manufactured Gas Plants, FUDS, xxx also need to add any tribal information or other additional requirements.xxx MUST include Brownfield sites and VCP sites within one-half mile radius xxx

xxxcheck orphans summaryxxx

The discussion included above regarding adjacent and/or nearby properties is based on information supplied to LCS as well as LCS’ observations of nearby properties at the time of the site reconnaissance. It should be noted that any property can be affected by various sources of point and non‑point source pollution. The number of reported spills and complaints in the vicinity of the subject property may be an indicator of point source pollution in the area of the subject property. Non-point sources are common in rural areas (e.g., runoff from agricultural fields). Further study would be required to positively confirm whether the subject property has been impacted by nearby properties. Refer to Section 10.6 REGULATORY INFORMATION.­

According to obtainable information to date, there have been xxnoxx enforcement actions, orders or institutional controls imposed against the referenced subject property.

According to obtainable information to date, the subject property does xxnotxx appear to be subject to any environmental permit activities. XxWriter: any RCRA, AIRS, SPDES, PBS or other permits identified for the subject property need to be discussed here xxx

Local Regulators
An interview with the Town of xx Building Inspector, Mr. xxx, revealed that there are no complaints or notices of violations on file for the subject property. Mr. xxx did not reveal any conditions on-site that would be material to identifying recognized environmental conditions regarding the subject property. According to the Building Inspector, the subject property has been supplied with municipal sanitary sewer since approximately xxx.

An interview with the Town of xx Fire Inspector, Mr. xxx, revealed that there are no complaints or notices of violations on file for the subject property. Mr. xxx did not reveal any conditions on-site that would be material to identifying recognized environmental conditions regarding the subject property.

Or

XxxAs required by that municipality, a FOIA request was forwarded to the Town of xxx Building/Fire Inspector’s office on xxx, 2013. As of the date on this report, LCS has not received a response. Any response information that would alter or affect the findings and conclusions of this report will be forwarded as an addendum to this report when it is received by LCS.xxx

xxxAttempts to interview the Town of xxx Building/Fire Inspector have been made by LCS. However, as of the date on this report, LCS has not received a response. Any response information that would alter or affect the findings and conclusions of this report will be forwarded as an addendum to this report when it is received by LCS.xxx

xxxAs required by that agency, a FOIA request was forwarded to the xxx County Health Department on xxx, 2013. As of the date on this report, LCS has not received a response. Any response information that would alter or affect the findings and conclusions of this report will be forwarded as an addendum to this report when it is received by LCS.xxx

State Regulators
To augment the information provided by EDR, a FOIA request was forwarded to the xxappropriate regulatory agenciesxx for information concerning the subject property. To date, a complete response has not been received by this agency.

User Xxxxif this report is for non-CERCLA protection, use this:xxx
xxx is currently considering a lending relationship and associated mortgage for the subject property. In this regard, LCS was informed that the Bank maintains no specialized knowledge of environmental concerns at the subject property. As such, xxx could not provide useful answers to the ASTM 1527-05 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment User Questionnaire. [As required under 40 CFR 312, only those seeking liability protection under CERCLA must provide the environmental professional certain information and documentation.] xxx

Person Seeking Liability Protection
As required under 40 CFR 312, those seeking liability protection under CERCLA, for which this report is prepared, must provide the environmental professional certain information and documentation (See Appendix 10.13). LCS has requested that information from the appropriate party and the response to that inquiry is as follows (See Appendix 10.11).

Environmental Liens

According to XXX, there are no environmental cleanup liens against the subject property that are filed or recorded under federal, tribal, state or local law.

Xx OR xx

The following governmental cleanup liens against the subject property were identified to LCS by XXX

• list

OR
The user did not provide this information to LCS.

Specialized Knowledge or Experience

According to XXX, he/she has the following specialized knowledge or experience regarding the subject property, the area surrounding the subject property, the conditions of adjoining properties and other experience relative to this inquiry indicative of releases or threatened releases at the subject property.

Xx OR xx

According to XXX, he/she has no specialized knowledge or experience regarding the subject property, the area surrounding the subject property, the conditions of adjoining properties or other experience relative to this inquiry indicative of releases or threatened releases at the subject property.

OR
The user did not provide this information to LCS.

Purchase Price

According to XXX, he/she has concluded that the purchase price of the subject property reflects the fair market value of that property, if the property were not contaminated.

Xx OR xx

According to XXX, he/she has concluded that the purchase price of the subject property does not reflect the fair market value of that property, if the property were not contaminated. He/She does/does not believe that this is due to the presence of hazardous substances on-site.

OR
The user did not provide this information to LCS.

Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information

XXX has provided the following commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information regarding the subject property which may be indicative of releases or threatened releases at the subject property.

• List

XX knows of no commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information regarding the subject property which may be indicative of releases or threatened releases at the subject property.

OR
The user did not provide this information to LCS.

Current Owner/Operators
LCS also requested information from the current property owner and site contact relative to pending, threatened or past litigation, administrative proceedings or any notices from any governmental entity regarding any possible violation of environmental laws or possible liability relating to hazardous substances or petroleum products. xxxNo concerns were identified.xxx see last three questions on Owner/Op questxxx

XXXOR

The LCS Owner/Operator Questionnaire was forwarded to xxx on xxx, 2013. As of the date of this report, LCS has yet to receive the completed questionnaire. Any response information that would alter or affect the findings and conclusions of this report will be forwarded as an addendum to this report when it is received by LCS.

Former Owner/Operators
As required by 40 CFR 312.23, LCS has attempted to contact and interview the former owners and/or operators of the subject property to discuss historic use and storage of hazardous substances. LCS identified XXX as one of the former site owners xx(and/or operators)xx and, on xxx xx, 2013, interviewed this person by phone. The following is a list of relevant information from that interview:

• Bullet the highlights, dates of ownership or operator, site uses, handling and disposal practices, tank issues. Etc.

Xx OR xx

As required by 40 CFR 312.23, LCS has attempted to contact and interview the former owners and/or operators of the subject property to discuss historic use and storage of hazardous substances. LCS identified XXX as one of the former site owners xx(and/or operators)xx. To-date, LCS has been unable to interview any relevant previous owners or operators. X we should we ask on the owner questionnaire if they have a contact for a previous owner xxx

The following conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property were identified based on LCS’ review of regulatory information:

• Xx detail any concerns and the source of info (i.e. database, interview, owner questionnaire, etc.)

xx or xx

xxNo conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property were identified based on LCS’ review of regulatory information.xx