You are on page 1of 23

RE : SELF-LUME INC.

, PROPERTY

PHASE I
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE

ASSESSMENT REPORT

April 2003

Conducted by So & Co ., Inc


Submitted to Seymour

Buckmeister, President

Ma lls-R-Us, Inc.

HO-MING

so

LAB #7

CONTENTS
LETTER TO SEYMOUR BU CKMEISTER ... ...... .. ...... ............ . 4

I
II
III

IV
V
VI

SUBSURFACE SITE DESCRIPTION .............. ..... ... ....... .... ... 5

AQUIFER DESCRiPTION ...... ..... .. .. .... ...... ..... ...... .... ........ .... 10

TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE DESCRIPTION ..... .... ... .......... ..... . 13

POSSIBLE INTERIOR & EXTERIOR CO NTAMINATION .... 15

PHASE" ESA CO NSiDERATIONS .. ....... ....... ..... ..... .. . .. ... .. 20

BUDGET SU MMA RY ... .. .... .................. .. ..... ...... .......... ..... .. 22

AP PENDIX .... .... .... ..... .. ..... .. ....... .. ....... ... ........ ... ...... .... .... ... . 23

APPENDIX

VII

VIII

IX
X
X
XII
X III
XIV
XV
XVI
So & Co. Inc.,

CONTRACT ... ..... .... .... ...... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .... ......... .... ..... ...... ... .. . 24

SELF-LUME INC .... ....... ....... ..... .. .... .......... .. ...... .. .. ....... .. ...... 25

VISUAL RECONNAISSANCE ... ... .......... .. ....... .. ......... .. ... ... 26

MEMO FROM: TECHNICA L ASSISTANT ..... .. ..................... 27

SEDIMENT ANALYS IS PROCEDURE .. .... ... ........ ..... .. ... .. . 28

SEDIMENT ANALYSIS RESULTS ...... .. .. ..... .. ... .. ..... .... ... 29

SEDIMENT ANALYSIS lAB QUIZ 1 ... ..... .... ..... .. ..... ....... .... 30

TOWNSHIP OF MORINE DIVISION OF WATER SUPPLY .. 31

APPLICAT10N TO BUILD OR ALTER-SEPTIC SYSTEM ... 32

WATER QUALITY REPORT ... .. ........ .... ...... .. .. . ... ............ 33

XVII

XVIII

XIX

XX
XXI
XX.I I
XXIII
XXV

So & Co. Inc ..

LOCAL RESIDENTS REACT TO PROSPECT OF MALL .... 34

WATER TESTING RESULTS STILL PENDING ... ... ... .. ..... ... 35

WATER TESTI NG REVEA L CONT AMINATION .. .. .... ...... ..... 36

RYAN 'S EXPRESS INTERViEW ........ ....... .. ... ....... ..... .... ... .. 37

MARl NER INTERVIEW TRA NSCRIPT .. .... ...... .. .... ........... .. 38

VISIT TO MORAIN E MUNICIPAL COMPLEX ..... .. .. ........ .... . 39

STANDARD PRACTICE FOR ESA ... ......... ....... .... .... ......... 40

BROWNFIELD ACTION 2.1 .............. ........... ............... .... ... 41

SO & CO. INC.,

April 10th , 2004

Dear Mr. Buckmeister,

As per our contractual agreement regarding the property of Self-Lume Inc. , in the
township of Morraine, New Jersey, on behalf of my company, we hereby submit
to you So & Co., Inc.'s Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report. Given the
interest of Malls-R-Us in the potential acquisition of the property for potential
development of a mini-mall, we have fulfilled our duty in completing what we
believe to be a detailed and accurate account of the suitability of the site, and
have identified potential sources of difficulties that Malls-R-Us may encounter if
your company chooses to undertake its project. In our thorough examination of
the former Self-Lume Inc. , factory site, it is ultimately our conclusion and
recommendation that Environmental Site Assessment has reason to continue
onto Phase 1\, as we have identified several potential problems that necessitate
further discovery before a decision and resolution can be made.

Included amongst these materials are physical descriptions of the Self-Lume


property's subsurface, aquifer, topography, as well as the description, location,
and preliminary analysis of any interior or exterior conditions or contaminations
on the property and its surrounding areas. We hope that the provision of these
documents as well as our ultimate assessment that follows will aid you in making
the decision to continue further site assessment before the acquisition of the
property.

For your convenience, we have attached the budget summary for all
expenditures thus far, as well as an appendix of other relevant documents we
feel you may be interested in . Please feel free to contact us should you have any
questions.
Best,

Ho-Ming So
So & Cp ., Inc.

So & Co . Inc.,

I. SUBSURFACE DESCRIPTION

The following segment consists of a physical description of the subsurface of Self-lume


Inc.'s property. The sediment sample was obtained from a well at the Self-Lume site,
and consists specifically of a bulk sample of the sediment gathered from a company that
drilled the well at the Self-Lume Factory. The sediment that was analyzed came from
"waste sediment as a result of drilling", and can be said to be a mixed average of all the
sediment brought up during the drilling.

A. Bulk Density of Sediment: To arrive at the bulk density of the sediment, we took a
portion of the sample and measured first its mass, and then its volume. Yielding these
two numbers, we calculated density utilizing the following formula:

Mass

Density

Volume

The estimated bulk density of the sediment sample is approximately 1.517 g/cm

B. Sediment Size Analysis:

By running the sediment through a sieve set of varying mesh sizes, we were able to
obtain the sediment size analysis in accordance with the range of particle sizes, which
then help us classify what sediment size class the particles belonged to.

So & Co. Inc.,

Sediment Size Analysis Continued :


rl

~~

10

2.0

'. 1:1

x 72.00

Gravel:
boulder
cobble
pebble
-granule

18

1.0

2.00> x > 1.00

Very course sand

35

0.5

1.00> x > 0.05

Coarse sand

60

0.25

0.5> x > 0.25

Medium Sand

120

0.125 (1 25 microns)

0.25> x> 0.125

Fine Sand

230

0.0625 (62 5
microns)

0.125> x < 0.0625

Very fine sand

Bottom Pan

none

<0.0625mm

Mud:
.coarse silt
-medium silt
-fine silt
-very fine silt

-day

C. Sediment Type

Having the basis to judge what categories the sediment sample can be classified under,
we now return to raw data in order to form an analysis on what portion of the sediment
sample falls under the various categories of sediment type .

We began fi rst with a total initial weight of sediment weighing 75.85 grams.

So & Co . Inc.,

Cup

Weight of Cup

Weight of Cup

Weight of

% of Total

& Sediment

Sediment

Initial Weight

#10

14.35g

16.2 9

1.85g

2.44%

#18

12.5g

22g

9.5g

12.52%

#35

12.5g

45.7g

33.2g

43.77%

1#50

11 .8g

14.29

2.49

3.16%

#1 20

12.9g

40.99

28g

36.91%

#230

11.4g

11.89

O.4g

0.53%

Bottom pan

14.2g

14.659

0.45g

0.59%

From this data, we derived that the Total weight of sediment recovered from the
sieve set was 75 .8 grams, which means that the total percentage of recovered sediment
material is 99.2%, assuring us that the data hereon collected would be relevant in terms
of being able to accurately reflect the average soil sample of the Self-Lume's site
subsurface.

The percentage of total weight indicates to us the percentage of sediment that fell to
each category. We also determined possible reasons for the fractional percentage of
sediment gained to two sources: First, material might have been stuck in the sieve
mesh . Second, particles may have been lost to the floor when pouring or transferring
the sediment sample from a container to the sieve.

So & Co. Inc.,

From our above data on the different sediment classes, we can break down and
combine the percentage of each sediment class in the average Self-Lume subsurface
soil sample.
Tlll:!e of Sediment

% of Total Initial Weight

Gravel (including boulder, cobble, pebble,


and granule)

2.44%

Very coarse sand

12.52%

Coarse sand

43.77%

Medium sand

3.16%

Fine Sand

36.91%

Very fine sand

0.53%

Mud (including coarse silt, medium silt, fine


silt, very fine silt, and clay)

0.59%

First let us caveat the above data with the understanding that scientific analysis lends
very specific meaning to terms such as "gravel", "sand", and "mud". Though in a day to
day usage, gravel commonly refers to mostly coarse, pebble-like compositions used to
pave roads and such, as referred to above, gravel is defined strictly by the
measurements we previously laid out in the Sediment Size Analysis chart. This means
that gravel refers to those particles of a range from x72 .00mm. The same restrictions on
definition apply to all the above terms.

In graph form, this demonstrates that the type of sediment of greatest prevalence within
the Self-Lume Property's subsurface is coarse sand.

So & Co. Inc.,

Sedim e nt Type & Perce ntage


O Gravel (includ ing
boulder, cobble,
pebble, and
granule)
Very coarse sand

45.00%
40.00%
35.00%
30.00%
0/0 of Total 25.00%
Weight 20.00%
15.00%
10.00%

o Coarse sand

DMedium sand

. Fine Sand

5.00% I _b~~J:~~~~7
0.00% -+
% of Total Initial Weight
Type of Sediment

e Very fine sand

. Mud (including
coarse silt, medium
silt, fine silt, very
. fine silt, and clay)

D. Porosity
Porosity was calculated by measuring the amount of pore space in the soil sample. The
method yielded a porosity percentage of 37.63%

E. Permeability
Permeability aims to measure the connectivity of the pore spaces within the sediment
sample, in essence determining how well fluids can move through the sediment. Utilizing
a soil sample and a permeameter, we fo llowed a sim ple procedure for determining the
permeability constant (K in the equation of O'Arcy's Law wh ich will be addressed further
onwards in this report) for the sediment sample at the Self-Lume Site.

So & Co. Inc.,

Simply put, we allowed water to run through the sediment, a sample from the Self-Lume
site, and then timed the amount of time it took for a set volume of water to run through
the sediment. That gave us the co-efficient "q", which is the rate of flow of water through
sediment. We know the length "I" of the column of water to be 14, and the height of the
hydraulic head "h" to be 40. We also knew the base is 31.65 cm

Using this information

and the following formula, we attempted to find the permeability constant for the
sediment sample:

K=

gl
2

31.65cm hcm

K= _______(=5=00=/=64~)~~1~4______
31.65 40

The resulting calculation left us with the permeability constant of 0.086 cm/sec, which is
equivalent to 8.6394 10-4 m/sec.

So & Co. Inc.,

10

II. THE AQUIFER

Aquifers are defined as rock or regolith that contain water within them. Most aquifers
have the potential to be exploited by humans, water being removed through pump
systems to then be utilized as a drinking source . Deep aquifers that are located far in the
reaches beneath the ground can also be pumped without significant immediate response
to the surface. Aquifers also tend to respond to seasonal changes, where the water table
alters and adjusts in accordance to rainfall . That the Self-Lume site rests upon an aquifer
that has the potential to be connected to the water resources of the entire township of
Morraine, NJ , is very significant in this particular aspect of our Environmental Site
Assessment analysis .

GROUNDWATER BASICS

Soil

Zone of Aeration

Capillary Fringe

---Water Table--- -

---

-- - -

.-.

...

Zone of Saturation

Ground Water

Aquifer

Bedrock

Aquiclude

I. Groundwater Table Elevation


The aquifer that runs under the township of Morraine has a water table elevation whose
highest point runs from the Northeastern part of Morraine Township to the Southwestern
Township of Morraine- Water Table

'1=1 .t
Self-Lume

*drawing not to scale

II. Direction of Flow


As the approximation of Morraine township's water table shows above, the water from
the Self-Lume factory site, located on a relatively high point in terms of elevation of water
table, runs downhill to the southeastern portion of the township.

The Self-Lume factory site in effect has the potential to distribute any materials
deposited into its portion of the aquifer into the town well, which follows a directly
perpendicular path downhill from the factory property's well.

So & Co. Inc.,

12

III. TOPOGRAPHICAL DESCRIPTION

A. Physical Description of Self-Lume Property

Topography helps describe the slope and relief of a particular site's terrain, elements
that become particularly important later on when assessing groundwater flow and
attempting to understand contamination plume movements. In an attempt to describe
Self-Lume property's topographical terrain, we first attempted to find the slope and relief
between two pOints: co-ordinates from the highest point on the Self-Lume site (elevation
842 feet above sea level), and the city well (elevation 822ft). The resultant numbers
calculated determined that slope was 0.59 and the relief was -1150.

The numbers above indicate that the terrain from the Self-Lume site heads downhill
towards the city well. Both the slope and the relief serve to emphasize, along with the
topographic map itself, that the general shape of the site and the terrain would function
to possibly contaminate the city well, given the downhill nature of the well to the site, as
well as:the perpendicular pathway indicated by the topographic map. Naturally, the slope
is not constant over the map, as particular areas are steeper and flatter than others, and
comparatively, change in elevation between different points of different elevations would
yield a different slope. This might serve to adversely affect the rate of contamination
from one area to another. Overall, we can generalize that the steepness of the Self
Lume site averages out to be approximately two feet of change per 1000 ft on the site.

The topographical contour map of the Self-Lume property indicates that the highest
elevation of the site is located on the Northeast corner of the site. At 842.2 feet above

So & Co. Inc.,

13

sea level, the topography of the area then descends in downward diagonals stretching
towards the southwest direction. The area of lowest topographical elevation is 835.8 feet
above sea level in the Southeast corner of the site.

Taken in greater context with the general topography of the region, the Self-Lume site's
topography is significant in that it's location means that it is located uphill from the
township well, which is also located downhill from the point of highest topographical
elevation within the township, marked by the location of the water tower in the
Northwestern quadrant of the township map.

B. Topographical Methodologies
Topographical surveys can measure land slope, elevation, and the depth of a body of
water. Often times, topographical surveys can help identify potential problems in surface
flooding and run-off. Some particular methods of survey take into account the curvature
of the earth, and are all geodetic surveys. Others utilized sophisticated satellite
technology known as the Global Positioning System (GPS) to observe the site and
collect data. Typically, however, a surveyor will rely on simpler tools like the theodolite to
observe the site and collect data. This main instruments functions like a telescope, ruler,
and protractor all at once. Theodlites, used in combination with basic trigonometry, can
help yield differences in elevation measurements. Level rods and aerial photographs can
also achieve the same function. These other methods sometimes configure topographic
maps with the aid of aerial photographs utilizing a technique called photogrammetry.

So & Co. Inc.,

14

IV. POSSIBLE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR CONTAMINATION

This portion of the environmental site assessment

ESA will serve to provide the description, location, and preliminary analysis of any
interior or exterior condition or contamination on the Self-Lume property and on nearby
that might require a Phase Two ESA

A Potential Interior Sites for Contamination


The initial sites that were annotated for further examination due to high potentiality for
contamination were split into two subfields: on-site underground storage tanks (USTs)
and on-site disturbances of land, both of which should be further investigated.

There are a total of five areas of potential contamination on site. Of the USTs, we
located two particular areas that may become a cause for concern:
1. Fuel pumps, abandoned , 100ft down Kame Kondos on the
west side of Erratic Ave
2. UST in the fire room where former boilers were stored.
Possibly a former utility room.
Of the land disturbances, three particular areas caught our attention:
3. South of the old fuel pumps there stands a once cleared lot
at the edge of the parking lot. It appears that it might have

So & Co . Inc.,

15

been a possible old landfill of sorts before.


4. A 40ft clear zone from the west wall, as well as a once
cleared area about center of the west wall, extending 140ft
5. Rusted tire rim and poison ivy area needs to be cleared, as
it warrants some inspection

B. Potential Exterior Sites for Contamination


We were most concerned with potential issues springing from wells and their interlinkage
through the sharing of a common aquifer. We made a special note of all wells in the area
in order to safeguard against the potential possibility of necessitating greater gathering
of information from any of these sites. We made a list of the following five wells for
consideration :
1. Northeast 40-50 feet from Boulder
Boulevard is the Township of
Morraine, Division of Water-Supply
well.
2. South end of parking lot to Kilroy's

Bar, there is a small shed close to


Wedging Nursery
3. Water tank at Self-Lume on roof
indicateive of well
4. Room on Self-Lume site marked
with an "x", old well pump connected

So & Co. Inc.,

16

to 3. above
5. 2 active wells on the East and West
of the vineyard building\
Other potential off-site contamination include:
1. The BTEX Gas Station
2. Septic Field

C. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR):


Ground penetrating radar (GPR) is an extremely important and cost-effective method for
studying underground features of a contaminated or potentially contaminated
abandoned site. Essentially, GPR uses high frequency radio waves to probe the
subsurface without affecting or disturbing the ground surface. That GPR is a non
invasive geophysical technique and that GPR data is collected continuously by a
machine that does not disturb the topsoil is a primary reason why GPR is utilized so
often to determine possible initial contamination. In essence, GPR systems operate
much like radar systems by sending radio frequency signals known as radar pulses
downward into the earth. Some of the waves are reflected back as an echo, and these in
turn are "heard" by a receiver. The data collected is used to create a continuous cross
section profile of subsurface objects and features.

We tested the following places that bespoke of possible contamination through GPR
technology:
1. Landfill

So & Co. Inc.,

17

2. BTEX Gas Station


3. Gas Tanks
4. Heating Oil Tanks
5.

Diesel tanks

6. Septic Field

D. Assessing Conditions or Contaminations


In the collection of data to assess potential sources of contamination and to provide for a
description, location, and preliminary analysis of any condition or contamination on
surrounding property impacting the Self-Lume property, we believe it imperative to
attempt to answer several questions. The first that we have already provided with the
above lists is where and what the potential sources of contamination are. Now we must
be prepared to discuss whether or not these potential sites within and without Self-Lume
are contaminating each other, and if any of these places, Self-Lume included, are
contaminating the town well.

It is unfortunate to note several weeks prior to the submission of this report, water testing
long requested by residents of Moraine, New Jersey have confirmed suspicions of
potential water contamination of Township Well #3. And while the township's decision to
higher a private investigative team to determine the sources of contamination seems a
wise one, the implications for Malls-R-Us and its desire to possibly acquire the Self
Lume site is inherently linked to this current township matter.
While direct correlations have yet to be made, there is strong evidence suggesting that

So & Co. Inc.,

18

there are various potential sources of contamination on the Self-Lume site itself that may
have contributed to the Township Well's current situation. Though we cannot
conclusively derive these linkages, prior to the purchase of Self-Lume, it appears to be
imperative for the welfare of Malls-R-Us to determine conclusively whether or not these
sites are linked to the Township problems.

To garner a better understanding for the potential gravity of the situation, we utilized
D'Arcy's Law to determine the velocity of water flow in the aquifer at the Township of
Moraine between the well at the Self-Lume Site and the Township Well. We found the
velocity or rate of water flow to be approximately 45.33 meters per year. Given this rate,
we then utilized a second formula (Time

=DistanceNelocity) to determine how many

years it would take for a contaminant to go from the Self-Lume site to the Township well.
We arrived at the number of 10.8936 years. As Self-Lume's factory was built in 1974 and
has been operational for close to 21 years prior to its being shut down, there is a large
bracket of time for any potential sources of contamination on the factory site itself to
have traveled to the Township well, thereby polluting it. These include but are not limited
to the septic field, the various underground storage tanks, and possibly the landfill as
well. There have also been previous incidence with gasoline leaks and some other
questionable activities that may warrant further investigation.

Off-site sources of pollution also may have had the potentiality to contaminate the
township aquifer. These include the BTEX Gas Station and other various underground
storage tanks in the peripheries of the Township of Moraine. However, the possibility
largely remains that Self-Lume may have been a large contributor to the township well's
problems. We will further assess the rationale for Phase II ESA below.
So & Co. Inc.,

19

v.

PHASE 2 ESA CONSIDERATIONS

So & Co. lnc.,'s does not recommend a continued further Phase Two ESA in lieu of
Malls-R-Us' projected plans for the former Self-Lume factory site. In our capacity as
advisories to Malls-R-Us, we will attempt to outline for Malls-R-Us the rationale behind
this particular suggestion.

From our thorough Phase I ESA completed regarding the former Self-Lume factory site,
we have found many apparent, potential problems. Some of these appear to have been
confirmed by GPR, and include issues with far reaching consequences, such as leaking
underground storage tanks, septic field contamination, and the potential that a former
gasoline leak might have had some more extended results. We have also received
recent news that I am sure the company has kept abreast of regarding the issue of the
contamination of the Township well #3 . That there is a high potentiality of linkage
between these recent events to the potential sources of contamination on the Self-Lume
factory site is extremely likely. At this point, ESA should be allowed to continue onto
Phase II , but for the strict purposes of the interests of Malls-R-Us, the cost of this phase
two and, indeed, its entire conduction should reside within the agents of the Township of
Moraine's city council, or should be borne by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) instead .

Strictly speaking , the site is a high risk for Malls-R-Us. For the purposes of erecting a
mini-ma11, the site has far too great a potential for long term issues of pollution and
contamination from its previous owners to be a worthwhile, cost-efficient brownfield

So & Co. Inc ,

20

consideration for the erection of the desired mini mall. Under federal regulations that
would hold Malls-R-Us accountable for any contamination conducted left by previous
owners or circumstances, the shouldering of this legacy is not a worthwhile cost for
Malls-R-Us to acquire this land. Phase I has sufficiently shown that the potential for
contamination is extremely likely. And while it may be prudent to enter Phase 1\ to
determine for sure, there is a wide availability of other plots to choose from, and the
certainty that these issues exist, the data from the Phase I ESA is almost conclusive
enough to guarantee that this will not ultimately be a piece of purchasable brownfield
without great monetary repercussions and implications for clean up.

Our contention is that Phase I was sufficient to determine that the site has a tremendous
likelihood of contaminating the township well. This likelihood is great enough to relegate
the conducting of a Phase II site assessment by Malls-R-Us to be unnecessary. Our
recommendation is that the site is more than likely contaminated, and that if purchased,
Malls-R-Us would then incur the cost of clean up for the Self-Lume factory site would
mean that the project would start off without any profit and only expense. While the issue
of whether or not Self-Lume's factory site did in fact harm the city drinking water supply
must be addressed, it is certainly not the responsibility of Mall-R-Us to incur the costs of
making this more than likely already known discovery.

So & Co. Inc.,

21

VI. BUDGET SUMMARY

A. Money Matters
Expenses:
1. Visual Reconnaissance

$100

2. Topographical Surveying Initial Fee

$320 (*3)

a. per point

$20 (*57)

3. Seismic Reflection Testing

$670 (*10)

4. Magnetmetry Testing

$220

a. per point

$20 (*19)
$450

5. GPS Testing
a. at point

$1050

b. at point

$1075

a. Kilroy's Bar

$25

6. Visited

questions
b . Water Supply Division
questions
c. Environmental Division
questions
d. Solid Waste & Sewers Division
So & Co . Inc.,

$9
$25
$9
$25

$9
$25
22

questions
e. Plucker's Scrap Metal
questions
f. BTEX Gas Station
questions

Total costs:

So & Co. Inc.,

$9
$25
$9
$25
$9

$11999

23