Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6C (6)Community & Economic Development 1200 County -City Building, 227 West Jefferson, South Bend, Indiana 46601 -1830 Phone 574/235 -9371 Fax 574/235 -9021 To: Redevelopment Commission From: Bill Schalliol, ADED i 7 Subject: Professional Service Proposal — Phase II Environmental Site Assessment at Ivy Tower Site (600 United Drive) Date: March 9, 2012 Attached to this staff report is a professional service proposal from Wightman Petrie to provide Phase II Environmental Services at the Ivy Tower site at 600 United Drive. The purpose of the Phase II is to do some site specific testing to determine environmental conditions and to set baseline levels for potential cross site contamination. In January 2012, Wightman Petrie was hired by the Commission to complete the Phase I ESA for the site and this proposal is a continuation of that work. The proposal amount for the scope of work is $12,600.00 and will allow for a complete report to be prepared for the Ivy Tower property. The Ivy Tower site is located within the proposed Renaissance District and the site study is a component of work to be done in the future. Staff requests Commission approval of this proposal. What We Do Today Makes A Difference! 6e6 February 27, 2012 City of South Bend Community and Economic Development 227 West Jefferson Boulevard South Bend, Indiana 46601 Attention: Mr. Bill Schalliol, Economic Development Planner RE: PROPOSAL FOR PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR THE IVY TOWER SITE, 635 S. LAFAYETTE BLVD. AND 600 UNITED DRIVE, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, PROPOSAL NUMBER WP 12 -012 Dear Mr. Schalliol: Wightman Petrie is pleased to provide the following Proposal for Phase II Environmental Site Assessment services associated with the existing Ivy Tower facilities, located at 635 S. Lafayette Blvd. and 600 United Drive, South Bend, Indiana. The following presents a review of the background information, as well as the proposed scope of such recommended services, project schedule and estimate of costs. PROJECT INFORMATION The Ivy Tower complex consists of three (3) land parcels, two of which have been developed with larger industrial facilities. The third parcel encompasses a thin tract of land located between the existing buildings and the adjacent Penn Central Railroad property (vacant and undeveloped). The facilities together operate as the South Bend Warehousing and Distribution Corporation, a provider of space for the storage of goods and materials for local businesses, as well as an area for vehicle storage during winter months. Excluding the more recent construction of a small office area at the westernmost extent of the property, all existing buildings (referred to as Buildings 84, 112 and 113) date to prior use as part of the former Studebaker Corporation, which ceased operations in 1963. Portions of Building 112 also serve as a base for manufacturing operations of WEDI, Inc., a manufacturer of "backer boards" for bathroom, spa and sauna installations, and McGowan Wire Specialties, Inc., a straightener and cutter of rolled wire to manufacturer specifications. Similarly, Therm- o -Lite Windows operates from the extreme eastern end of Building 113, along S. Lafayette Blvd., as a manufacturer of specialty window systems. As part of a recently completed (February 2012) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Recognized Environmental Conditions were identified with respect to the historical manufacturing operations conducted at the subject site under Studebaker Wagon Works (prior to current building construction), and later as Studebaker Automotive (paint shop, blacksmith shop, machine shop, foundry, metal fabrication). IGHT IA ETRIE ARCHITECTURE GIS CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING RENEWABLE ENERGY LAND SURVEYING Ivy Tower Phase 11 February 27, 2012 Page 2 of 7 Such concerns stem from the identified location of a former UST system along Building 113, the potential presence of additional undocumented UST systems, undocumented spills and /or releases, and the absence of any documentation regarding historical disposal practices. In addition we note that for other areas immediately adjacent to the subject site, abandoned features such as cisterns (32,000 gallons) and historically impacted soils, have been unearthed, and are therefore potentially present on the subject site. We note that such historical uses (automotive manufacture) may have involved the use of underground storage tanks for purposes of fueling, storage of solvents (lacquer thinner), and /or storage of heating oils, etc. During the reconnaissance, signage along the south - central exterior wall of Building 113 was identified as reading "Safety First, Absolutely No Gas Pumped While Your Motor Is Running ". In the immediate area of the signage, Wightman Petrie noted a grassy area among a series of small concrete drives that would be consistent with that of a former fueling area. There was no existing fuel fill ports or dispenser units that would indicate that the systems remained in the ground; however there was no documentation that the systems had been removed, the condition the system(s) were in at the time of removal, or if any environmental sampling had been performed as verification that the UST system(s) had not resulted in environmental impact. As such, the area of this presumed former UST system constitutes a Recognized Environmental Condition for which additional site investigation is warranted. Although the incidental release of oils associated with the transfer of oils and lubricants as a part of ongoing manufacturing activities are regarded as an environmental concern for which preventive measures should be taken (i.e., secondary containment, application of oil -dri and use of catch basins); such incidental spills and /or releases of oils to the concrete flooring of the subject site buildings are unlikely to result in significant environmental impacts to the subject site as a whole, based on the methods of construction (i.e., 12" -16" thickness of the concrete floors, ceilings and brick curtain walls of 12" thickness, etc.), minimal presence of floor drains, and floor drains being connected to the municipal sewer system. Furthermore, materials that are currently being warehoused at the facility were not identified as having any "release condition ". Wightman Petrie did not observe any outside storage or use of petroleum products or hazardous substances. The presence of subsurface impacts to the subject site as a result of historical manufacturing operations in close proximity to the subject site have been documented by prior investigation of those specific sites (groundwater plume migration). In most instances, review of the data by the Indiana Brownfields Program identified the level of remedial action necessary to minimize potential exposure pathways and allow for property re- development and re -use. Such actions have typically involved the removal of up to 24" of cover soils that were deemed as having been directly impacted by prior manufacturing (i.e., hot spot excavations), and /or an attachment of an Environmental Restrictive Covenant to the property deed. Such Environmental Restrictive Covenant generally prohibits the use of groundwater, prohibits agricultural use of the land, and prevents development of the property for residential uses. However, the potential for on -site migration of contaminants from off -site sources are noted as a Recognized Environmental Condition. Additional Recognized Environmental Conditions were identified with respect to the presence of PCB - laden di- electric fluids within larger industrial transformer units on the first level of Building 84 (transformers appropriately labeled), as well as the presence of asbestos - containing materials and lead - based and /or lead- containing paint. However, we note that the aforementioned PCB contaminated transformers, as well as the asbestos - containing materials and lead -based paint are to be addressed as part of any proposed re- development of the subject site, having been previously identified and quantified as additional services concurrent with the Phase I effort (submitted under separate cover). Based on the aforementioned Recognized Environmental Conditions being identified with respect to historical uses at the subject site and the potential for migration of contaminants from near -by, off -site sources; Wightman Petrie has been requested to submit a proposal for conducting a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment for the subject site. Ivy Tower Phase II February 27, 2012 Page 3 of 7 PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES Ground Penetrating Radar Survey Prior to the initiation of any Phase II Environmental Site Assessment activities, Wightman Petrie proposes to conduct an extensive Ground Penetrating Radar Survey of the subject site for the purpose of identifying the potential presence of features such as previously abandoned and /or removed underground storage tank systems, cisterns and tunnels, as well as the presence of possible fill materials from prior demolition activities. Key areas of initial GPR Survey will be along the south side of Building 113 where the location of a former UST is thought to exist, as well as the cleared lot to the south of the entry drive from S. Lafayette Blvd. We would also propose the use of GPR for the basement area of Building 84, as confirmation that there were no buried features such as cisterns (approximately 32,000 gallons based upon identification at other locations on the Studebaker property). However, we understand that the thickness of the existing concrete flooring within the basement may have some bearing on the ability to perform such survey with any accuracy. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) offers the means to detect buried objects that are not otherwise detectable. In addition to the ability to locate metal objects (i.e., underground storage tanks, drums), GPR is able to detect non - metallic objects. The system sends radar pulses into the surface, receives, and processes the reflected energy. Through advanced processing technology, the system calibrates the di- electric constant of the surrounding material. When the signal is reflected from the material having a different di- electric constant, the signal is displayed on the screen as an anomaly. Depth can also be determined by processing the sampling interval and determining the size and comparing relative data to other objects detected. Characteristics of underlying soils effect the penetration of the radar through the ground. Sands and gravel offer the greatest depth penetration and clearest resolution. Whereas, dense saturated clays offer limited penetration of the radar signal. For purposes of this proposal, Wightman Petrie has assumed a depth limitation for the GPR of approximately 8 feet below land surface. Areas of the suspect former UST system location(s) will be scanned by GPR and delineated using varying interval grid patterns. Multiple scans in a north -south and east -west direction will be performed utilizing the GPR, looking for anomalies. Any identified anomalies (i.e., disturbed subsurface soils) will be marked on the surface using paint, as appropriate for utility locators and for soil boring locations by Wightman Petrie. Soil Sampling via Geoprobe Methodology Using Geoprobe methodologies (small track mounted hydraulically driven sampling probe) soil samples will be collected from a total of seven (7) locations. Boring locations will be determined based upon the results of historical document review and field data gathered from the completion of the Ground Penetrating Radar. In general, Wightman Petrie would propose to install at least three (3) soil borings within the cleared area to the south of Building 113 as a location for which the potential migration of contaminants may occur. Wightman Petrie would also propose the installation of a minimum of two (2) soil boring along the southern wall of Building 113 (area of likely historical UST system), depending upon the findings of the GPR survey. One (1) of the remaining proposed soil borings would be installed along the southern walls of Building 112 and Building 84. The final soil boring, as proposed would be located within the small grassy area to the west of Building 112, nearest United Drive and the former Industrial Fuels and Resources facility. For each of the Geoprobe boring locations, discrete soil samples will be collected at 5 -foot intervals throughout the soil profile until saturated soil conditions are encountered (assumed to be approximately 25 feet below land surface). Each soil sample interval will be screened for the presence of volatile organics by placing a portion of the soil sample into a plastic bag, allowing time for equilibration, and insertion of a photoionization detector (PID) probe to observe a reading of "total VOCs" in parts per million Ivy Tower Phase II February 27, 2012 Page 4 of 7 (ppm). All data associated with the field screening of VOCs will be recorded for future reference (Soil Boring Logs). In addition, a portion of each discrete sampling interval will also be collected for submittal to a laboratory. Wightman Petrie proposes to submit two (2) soil samples from each of the seven (7) boring locations based on the PID field screening results and /or other indications of the presence of potential contamination (visual or olfactory). In the event that field screening with a PID, visual or olfactory observations do not indicate the presence of contamination; the soil sample collected from the upper two (2) feet within the boring, as well as the interval immediately above the soil /groundwater interface will be submitted for laboratory analysis. Each of the soil samples selected for laboratory analysis will be analyzed for the presence of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) via EPA Method 8260, and carcinogenic Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (cPAHs). Wightman Petrie will utilize IDEM guidance Terra -Core Methods to collect soil samples from each discrete sampling interval for the analysis of VOC constituents. All soil samples will be labeled, packed on ice and forwarded to the laboratory under chain - of- custody procedures. Temporary Geoprobe Well Installation for Groundwater Sampling Wightman Petrie proposes to convert each of the seven (7) Geoprobe soil borings to temporary wells with insertion of a Geoprobe groundwater sampling device, which allows for the extension of a stainless steel slotted screen for collection of a groundwater sample from the point at which the saturated or water - bearing zone is encountered. For this proposal, Wightman Petrie has assumed that the water - bearing zone will be encountered within 25 -feet of land surface. We would also note that each of the three (3) borings /temporary wells installed within the vacant lot south of Building 113, as well as the boring /temporary well proposed for the grassy area west of Building 112 include the sampling of groundwater at various depths, based on the presence of a chlorinated solvent plume being identified in at a depth approximately 10 to 15 ft. greater than the depth at which the groundwater aquifer was originally encountered (i.e., 40 feet below ground surface). Once installed, each temporary well would be purged until such time as the water discharge becomes relatively free of solids or until at least three (3) gallons of water has been removed. Wightman Petrie proposes that groundwater from each of the temporary wells be analyzed for Volatile Organic Compounds via EPA Method 8260, and carcinogenic PAHs via EPA Method 8270 SIM. For those temporary wells at which multiple groundwater samples will be collected (total of four); Wightman Petrie proposes that groundwater sample from the deeper of the screened intervals be analyzed for the presence of VOCs only. Each groundwater sample will be appropriately labeled, packed on ice, and forwarded to the laboratory (priority overnight delivery) under chain -of- custody procedures. Analysis will also include the analysis of a water sample for QA/QC purposes (Volatile Organic Compound only). Wightman Petrie will plug the boreholes /wells with bentonite once soil and groundwater sampling activities have been completed. Reporting Upon receipt of the laboratory analyses, data will be reviewed and tabularized. Comparison of the data for each respective chemical constituent will be made to the Risk Integrated System of Closure (RISC) Default Closure Values for Residential and Industrial /Commercial Properties. Upon completion of the initial data review, a "Letter Report" will be prepared which presents the sample collection and analytical methodologies used during the field phase of the assessment. Copies of the sample location maps, tabulated data and comparison to RISC Default Closure Values will also be incorporated. Recommendations for any additional assessment activities will be made for review and comment. Ivy Tower Phase II February 27, 2012 Page 5 of 7 SCHEDULE Wightman Petrie proposes to commence site investigation activities within one (1) week of receipt of notification to proceed, depending on weather, utility clearance and Geoprobe availability. Our Ground Penetrating Radar Survey work will be completed prior to the initiation of and soil boring installation activity, and can commence immediately following the receipt of Authorization to Proceed. Once a specific date for the field component of the Phase II has been established, Wightman Petrie will notify the client. Upon mobilization, we anticipate completion of the Geoprobe sampling requiring two (2) days. Laboratory analyses will be completed by Pace Analytical on standard one -week turnaround from receipt by the laboratory. Our initial discussion of results will occur within one (1) day of receipt of laboratory analytical results. Our written "Summary Letter Report" will be submitted within one (1) week of the initial conference. COST ESTIMATE An ESTIMATED COST for Phase II Environmental Assessment Services is presented as follows: Field Engineering Services /Project Management $2,000 Limited Ground Penetrating Radar Survey $ 900 Geoprobe Rental (assumes 2 -days $1,700 /day, including mobilization) $3,400 Laboratory Analysis: 14 soil samples for % Moisture @ $10 /sample $ 140 14 soil samples for analysis of VOC constituents @ $95 /sample $1,330 14 soil samples for analysis of carcinogenic PAHs @ $95 /sample $1,330 11 groundwater samples for analysis of VOC constituents @ $95 /sample $1,045 7 groundwater samples for analysis of carcinogenic PAHs @ $95 /sample $ 665 TerraCore Soil Sampling Kits (36 kits @$15 /kit) $ 540 Reporting $1,250 ESTIMATED COST $12,600 Please note that this ESTIMATED COST should be considered a Project Maximum, which Wightman Petrie will not exceed without prior approval. However, should the scope of services require modification (i.e., additional borings) based upon field conditions and /or circumstances that would not have otherwise been anticipated, Wightman Petrie will notify the client of such "changed conditions" and resultant cost implications to the project. LIMITATIONS /QUALIFICATIONS The sampling and testing of soil, groundwater and /or other materials not specifically identified in this proposal is beyond the scope of services for this project. Cost estimates for our proposed services have been prepared based on the following assumptions: • Wightman Petrie will have unlimited access to the site during daylight hours; • No subsurface obstructions (buried utilities or fill debris) will interfere with our work; • Sufficient access /clearance will be provided for exterior Geoprobe locations; • Groundwater will be encountered within 25 -feet of ground surface; • Inclement weather will not interfere with the completion of our field work; • Soil cuttings and purge waters will be returned to the boring from which they were generated, with the remainder of the boring filled with bentonite pellets to land surface. This Phase II Environmental Site Assessment should be considered as a "tool' in the evaluation of the subject site relative to the potential presence of contaminants, and does not necessarily fulfill Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) guidelines for delineation of contaminants identified within soil or groundwater as required under UST Closure Guidelines. Ivy Tower Phase II February 27, 2012 Page 6 of 7 AUTHORIZATION Wightman Petrie appreciates the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (574) 232 -4388. Please acknowledge acceptance of this proposal by signature, where indicated, as authorization for Wightman Petrie to proceed. Since>dly, Conley B. Phifer, HMM Environmental Department Manager I: \Proposals \City of South Bend \Ivy Tower Facilities \Ivy Tower Phase II ESA 2- 27- 12.doc Ivy Tower Phase II February 27, 2012 Page 7 of 7 PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE This proposal (FOR A PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR THE IVY TOWER FACILITY, 635 S. LAFAYETTE BLVD. AND 600 UNITED DRIVE, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA) is hereby accepted and authorization to proceed hereby granted: Accepted By: Printed name and title: Business name: Billing address: Billing /account manager: Phone No.: E -mail: Fax No.: Date: The party that signs this proposal is directly responsible for the charges incurred during the completion of our work. (:\Proposals \City of South Bend \Ivy Tower Facilities \Ivy Tower Phase 11 ESA_2- 27- 12.doc