Laserfiche WebLink
7.3.B. - Page 67 <br /> ENVIRON was retained by the project applicant to perform a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the <br /> properties that comprise the project site. The objective of the Phase I ESA, which was conducted in conformance <br /> with the scope and limitations of ASTM International's "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: <br /> Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E 1527 -05" (the `ASTM Standard'), was to identf Recognized <br /> Environmental Conditions (RECs), as defined in the ASTM Standard. RECs are defined (ENVJRON, p 3) as "the <br /> presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that <br /> indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or <br /> petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the <br /> property.... The term is not intended to include "de minimis" conditions that generally do not present a threat to <br /> human health or the environment[.]" <br /> The ESA revealed no evidence of RECs except for the following: <br /> Contamination Related to Former Automobile Fueling and Repair Operations. Historical resources indicate a <br /> gasoline service station operated from approximately the 1930s through 1960s . on the western part of the <br /> currently vacant portion of the project site (along Jefferson Avenue). Based on a review of documents obtained <br /> from the San Mateo County Environmental Health Division (SMCEHD), five gasoline underground storage <br /> tanks (USTs) (two 1,000 - gallon USTs and three 500- gallon USTs) were removed from the location in December <br /> 1989. An investigation conducted prior to the UST removals indicated the presence of total petroleum <br /> hydrocarbons as gasoline ( TPHg) and TPH as diesel (TPHd) in soil and groundwater beneath the site. <br /> Following removal of the USTs, multiple soil excavation events and additional site investigation took place between <br /> approximately 1990 and 1994. Sampling activities identified TPH contamination in soil beneath the southern <br /> portion of the parcel, beginning at approximately seven feet below ground surface (bgs) and extending to <br /> groundwater, which appears to be encountered between eight and eleven feet bgs. Other chemicals typically <br /> associated with TPH contamination - such as benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylenes (BTEX) - were generally <br /> not detected in soil or were detected at relatively low concentrations, and according to SMCEHD documentation, <br /> benzene was never detected in groundwater beneath the site. Excavation activities were implemented to remove <br /> contaminated soil in proximity to the former USTs and in the vicinity of the historical location of auto repair <br /> equipment, including a subgrade sump. It appears that some soil was disposed off-site, while other soil may have <br /> remained at the site and used as backfll. In 1994, a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) prepared for the former gas <br /> station parcel selected excavation and on -site aeration of soil as a final cleanup remedy, and a revised CAP <br /> prepared in 1995 recommended additional excavation and remedial activities to address TPH contamination in soil <br /> at depth across the parcel, but it does not appear that the CAP was ever implemented. <br /> Based on the lack of significant groundwater impacts beneath the parcel and in accordance with a San Francisco <br /> Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) directive regarding the closure of "low risk" sites, the SMCEHD <br /> issued "no further action " for the former USTs in August 1997. <br /> The case closure report stated that approximately 910 cubic yards of contaminated soil remained on the parcel at <br /> the time closure was issued, with residual concentrations up to 710 mg /kg TPHg, which is elevated above the <br /> current, established regulatory screening level of 100 mg /kg. Closure documentation also contained information <br /> regarding construction activities for the adjacent Jefferson Street railroad underpass, a project that began in 1997 <br /> and included excavation and grading on a portion of the project site to meet the new (lowered) elevation of <br /> Jefferson Avenue. The full extent of on -site excavation and associated grading as part of the underpass project is <br /> not clear. In addition, SMCEHD closure documentation indicated that a due diligence investigation performed for <br /> the northern portion of the project site in the mid -1990s (presumably on behalf of the City of Redwood City when it <br /> acquired the current vacant parcels at the site, including the former gas station parcel) identified a concentration of <br /> TPHg in excess of current regulatory screening values in a grab groundwater sample. The detection was not <br /> confirmed through installation of permanent well(s), and the source was reportedly not known; no further <br /> investigation was conducted or required. <br /> Although the case received closure from the SMCEHD and human health risks associated with the presence of <br /> residual contamination in this portion of the project site are likely to be low, residual impacts in soil in excess of <br /> current regulatory screening criteria is considered to represent an REC. Site excavation for construction of the <br /> proposed parking garage could encounter contaminated soils. Therefore, in conformance with the DTPP program <br /> EIR (Chapter 14, Hazards and Hazardous Materials — Exposure to Existing Hazardous materials Contamination, <br /> pp. 14 -13 and 14 -14), the proposed project would be subject to compliance with all applicable existing local -, <br /> county-, regional -, and State - mandated site assessment, remediation, removal, and disposal requirements of the <br /> City of Redwood City, San Mateo County Environmental Health Division (SMCEHD), Regional Water Quality <br /> Control Board (RWQCB), State Water Resources Control Board, California Department of Toxic Substances <br /> Control (DTSC), and other responsible agencies. <br /> 18 <br />