RE : SELF-LUME INC., PROPERTY

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT

April 2003

Conducted by So & Co ., Inc

Submitted to Seymour Buckmeister, President

Malls-R-Us, Inc.

HO-MING so LAB #7

CONTENTS

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

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

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

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

IV POSSIBLE INTERIOR & EXTERIOR CONTAMINATION .... 15

V PHASE" ESA CONSiDERATIONS .. ....... ....... ..... ..... .. . .. ... .. 20

VI BUDGET SUMMARY ... .. .... .................. .. ..... ...... .......... ..... .. 22

APPENDIX .... .... .... ..... .. ..... .. ....... .. ....... ... ........ ... ...... .... .... ... . 23

APPENDIX

VII CONTRACT ... ..... .... .... ...... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .... ......... .... ..... ...... ... .. . 24

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

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

X MEMO FROM: TECHNICAL ASSISTANT ..... .. ..................... 27

X SEDIMENT ANALYSIS PROCEDURE .. .... ... ........ ..... .. ... .. . 28

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

X III SEDIMENT ANALYSIS lAB QUIZ 1 ... ..... .... ..... .. ..... ....... .... 30

XIV TOWNSHIP OF MORINE DIVISION OF WATER SUPPLY .. 31

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

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

So & Co. Inc., 2

XVII XVIII

XIX XX

XXI XX.II

XXIII XXV

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

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

WATER TESTING REVEAL CONTAMINATION .. .. .... ...... ..... 36

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

MARl NER INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT .. .... ...... .. .... ........... .. 38

VISIT TO MORAINE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX ..... .. .. ........ .... . 39

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

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

So &Co. Inc .. 3

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., 4

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/cm3.

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., 5

Sediment Size Analysis Continued :

rl ~~ r '. 1:1

10 2.0 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., 6

Cup Weight of Cup Weight of Cup

&Sediment

Weight of

Sediment

% of Total

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., 7

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., 8

Sediment Type & Percentage O Gravel (includ ing

boulder, cobble, pebble, and granule)

• Very coarse sand

45.00% 40.00%

o Coarse sand 35.00% 30.00%

0/0 of Total 25.00% DMedium sand

Weight 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% . Fine Sand

5.00%0.00%

I_b~~J:~~~~7 -+

e Very fine sand % of Total Initial Weight

Type of Sediment

. Mud (including I 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 simple 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., 9

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 cm2. Using this information

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

sediment sample:

K= gl

31.65cm2 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.

12So & Co. Inc.,

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

2. Topographical Surveying Initial Fee

a. per point

3. Seismic Reflection Testing

4. Magnetmetry Testing

a. per point

5. GPS Testing

a. at point

b. at point

6. Visited

a. Kilroy's Bar

questions

b . Water Supply Division

questions

c. Environmental Division

questions

d. Solid Waste & Sewers Division

So & Co. Inc.,

$100

$320 (*3)

$20 (*57)

$670 (*10)

$220

$20 (*19)

$450

$1050

$1075

$25

$9

$25

$9

$25

$9

$25

22

questions

e. Plucker's Scrap Metal

questions

f. BTEX Gas Station

questions

$9

$25

$9

$25

$9

Total costs: $11999

So & Co. Inc., 23