17-Exhibit O Environmental Site Assessment.pdf

WH TAKER 2500 Tremont Road • Savannah, Georgia 31405

912.234.0696 • www.whitakerlab.net

LAB B ENGINEERING

November 5, 2025

Curtis L. Coltrane Coltrane & Wilkins, LLC PO Box 6808 Hilton Head Island SC 29938

Report No. E25-274

843.785.5551 curtis@coltraneandwilkins.com

Re : Phase I Environmental Site Assessment

PIN (R550 015 00C 0233 0000)

9 Park Lane Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina

Dear Mr. Coltrane, We have completed the above study and are pleased to present this report with our findings and conclusions. This evaluation was performed to identify conditions that may impose an environmental liability or restrict the property's land use. Should any questions arise concerning the results of this report, or if we can be of further assistance, please contact us.

Res ed, W TORY, INC.

Donald Martin, Jr., Env. Prof.

1 cc: Curtis L. Coltrane

11Page curtis@coltraneandwilkins.com

IIID

Exhibit O

IFB 2026-15

PHASE I

ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

CONDUCTED ON

PIN (R550 015 00C 0233 0000)

9 Park Lane Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina

Report No. E25-274 for

Curtis L. Coltrane Coltrane & Wilkins, LLC PO Box 6808 Hilton Head Island SC 29938

Jason H. Follo, PE Lead Engineer

Donald Martin. Jr.

Environmental Professional

Rachael Yates Environmental Administrator

WHITAKER LABORATORY, INC.

2500 Tremont Road Hilton Head Island, Georgia 31405

Phone: (912) 234-0696 Fax: (912) 233-5061

November 5, 2025

2[Page

843.785.5551 curtis@coltraneandwilkins.com

II-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 Location

1.2 Environmental Commentary

1.2.1 On-Site

1.2.2 Off-Site

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Purpose of Performing Phase I (ESA)

2.2 Procedures

2.3 Qualifications of Personnel I AAI Certification

2.4 Limitations

2.5 User Reliance

2.6 Signature of Qualified PE

3.0 Site Setting

3.1 General Description

3.2 Hydrology

3.2.1 Geologic Setting

3.2.2 Surface Drainage I Surface Waters

3.2.3 Flood plains / Floodways

3.2.4 Groundwater

3.3 Wetlands

4.0 Regulatory Information

4.1 Agency Data Review

4.2 Agency Contacts

4.3 Site Specific Interviews I Site Questionnaire

4.3.1 Site Owner

4.3.2 Site Manager

4.3.3 Site Occupant

4.3.4 Local / State Government Contacts

4.3.5 Additional Interviews (Others)

4.4 Specialized Knowledge

4.5 Environmental Liens

4.6 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues

5.0 Site Information and Use

5.1 Current Site Use

5.1.1 Storage Tanks

5.1.2 Hazardous Petroleum Products Containers /Drums

5.1.3 Heating and Cooling

5.1.4 Solid Waste

5.1.5 Sewage Disposal / Septic Tanks

3[Page mIrm

5.2

5.3

5.4

6.0

4]Page

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED

5.1.6 Hydraulic Equipment

5.1.7 Contracted Maintenance Services

5.1.8 Electrical Transformers / PCB's

5.1.9 Water Supply and Wells

5.1.10 Drains and Sumps

5.1.11 Pits, Ponds, Lagoons

5.1.12 Surface Waters/ State Waters

5.1.13 Stressed Vegetation

5.1.14 Odors

5.1.15 Utilities

5.1.16 Chemical Use

5.1.17 Water Leaks / Mold

5.1.18 Asbestos

5.1.19 Lead Based Paint

5.1.20 Radon

5.1.21 Lead in Drinking Water

5.1.22 PCB's

5.1.23 Site Investigation (Target Site)

Past Site Use

5.2.1 Data Gaps

5.2.2 Deed Research / Title Information

5.2.3 Aerial Photographs and Topographic Maps

5.2.4 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

5.2.5 City Directories

5.2.6 Previous Environmental Studies

5.2.7 Interviews and Contacts

Current Surrounding Land Use

5.3.1 North

5.3.2 East

5.3.3 South

5.3.4 West

Past Surrounding Land Use

5.4.1 North

5.4.2 East

5.4.3 South

5.4.4 West

Conclusions

6.1 On-Site

6.2 Off-Site

EIrI

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX E

APPENDIX F

APPENDIXG

APPENDIXH

5[Page

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED

Maps and Figures Photographs Regulatory Search Information Cursory Review of Title Phase II Report Previous Environmental Reports Qualifications of Personnel Proof of Insurance mIqr

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Location

This one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site is located on Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina. The site is located along Park Lane to the north and east as well as William Hilton Parkway to the south.

The subject site is also identified on a Beaufort County Tax Assessors' Map as residing within Tax Parcel (R550 015 OOC 0233 0000).

Access to the site is achieved from William Hilton Parkway and/or Park Lane.

Currently, this site is generally flat with surface drainage noted as generally west within the (EDR) Radius Map.

See the SITE PLAN in Appendix A and Photographs in Appendix B for clarity.

6[Page IIr

1.2 Environmental Commentary

1.2.1 On-Site

We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) in general conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard (E-1527-21). Any exceptions to, or deviations from, this practice are described in Section (2.4) of this report. The following is a summary of our findings:

Our historical records review and reconnaissance of this one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site revealed that the subject site was developed in (1987) with a

(±3,999) square foot restaurant according to the property tax card.

Currently, the site is utilized by "Nick's Steak & Seafood" restaurant.

Aboveqround Storaqe Tanks I Underqround Storaqe Tanks (AST's I UST's):

During our reconnaissance, as conducted on October 28, 2025, we observed no evidence of former and/or current aboveground storage tanks (AST's).

However, we did observe one (1) storage vat for "used cooking oil" which is serviced by "Allied Renewal." (See Photograph Plate 4 for clarity.)

Additionally, we observed one (1) underground storage tank (UST) of propane for use within the restaurant. (See Photograph Plate 22 for clarity.)

No Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's) were identified from these observations.

Landfill Commentary:

Our review of aerial photographs, historical documents and public records revealed no indications this parcel had been used as a landfill.

Environmental Data Resources (EDR):

As a part of the (ASTM) required due diligence, Whitaker Laboratory contracted with Environmental Data Resources (EDR) on October 23, 2025, to provide a governmental records documentation search for the assigned target site. This review was conducted in an attempt to satisfy the search requirements of the EPA's Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries Criteria (40 CFR Part 312) and the search provisions of (ASTM

1527-21).

7[Page

EDR Data On-Site Usaqe Overview:

At the time of this facility review, the (EDR) report did not identify regulated activity within the target site.

An overview of general site conditions and/or changes as illustrated by the reports within the (EDR) as well as observations during our reconnaissance were observed as follows:

• 1951 -1986 Undeveloped Woodland(s)

• 1987 - 2025 Restaurant

Additionally, commercial and retail facilities began to develop in proximity to the subject property circa the late (1980's) in a similar manner and geographical rate with no heavy industrial construction readily noted.

EDF Data Adjacent Sites Jsage Qyeryiew:;

Additionally, as a supplement to our review of available (FINDS) and (FRS) information, Whitaker Laboratory, Inc., also contracted with Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to perform an additional search of available State and Federal environmental regulatory files for all sites within a one-quarter mile radius around the target site. This review was conducted in an attempt to satisfy the search requirements of the EPA's Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries Criteria (40 CFR Part 312) and the search provisions of (ASTM 1527-21 ).

One (1) current or formerly regulated facility located within a one-eighth (1/8) mile radius of the site was identified within the (EDR) report and is summarized as follows:

• Clothes Press, located at 1 Park Plaza, is reported as a Historic Cleaner as a "garment pressing and cleaners' agents" in (1994) through (1996) with no violations reported by the (SC DES). To the best of our research, this facility operates as a pick-up/drop-off location with no halogenated solvents being used or stored on-site.

8[Page mI

UR

Due to the previous information and/or suspected groundwater flow away from or parallel to the target site as shown by the (EDR) Report, the one (1) current or formerly regulated facility within a one eighth (1/8) mile radius should not be considered as representing a Historic Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC), Recognized Environmental Condition

(REC) or Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition (CREC) at this time.

Further, the (EDR) report identified three (3) current or formerly regulated facilities in an excess of one-eighth (1/8) mile and up to a one (1) mile radius of the property. However, due to proximity, the three (3) facilities should not be considered as representing Historic Recognized Environmental Conditions (HREC's), Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's) or Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CREC's) at this time.

EDR Vapor Intrusion Data Overview:

No "visual" evidence was discovered during this Phase I (ESA) due diligence period which would facilitate the need to conduct an independent assessment for vapor intrusion (ASTM E 2600-22) within the property.

Additionally, an (EDR) Vapor Encroachment Screen performed within a

(1/10) mile radius of the target site did not reveal any "unresolved" regulated facilities within the search radius.

EDR Topographic Map Data Overview:

The limited USGS Topographic Maps as reasonably ascertainable and provided by EDR, Inc. confirmed similar growth and land usage within the various maps spanning (1918) to (2020). Please refer to the complete reports within the Appendix for clarity.

EDR Building Permit Data Overview:

In addition to the Radius Report, EDR, Inc. was contracted to provide a

Building Permit Report for the subject property and adjacent properties as reasonably ascertainable spanning the years (1994) to (2025).

9[Page mIrI

In a cursory review of this document, no information was readily identified which would be considered as representing Historic Recognized Environmental Conditions (HREC's), Recognized Environmental Conditions

(REC's) or Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CREC's) within or to the subject property at this time. (See the EDR Building Report in the Appendix for clarity.)

EDR (AUL) and Leqal Title Data Overview:

At the time of our regulatory review, there were no federal environmental liens or issues associated with tribal legislation discovered against the property. Additionally, no "activity use limitations" (AUL's) were identified for the site parcels during our cursory review of reasonably ascertainable documentation obtained through third party vendors.

Please note that in addition to these federal and state listings, (AUL's) can be recorded at the county and municipal level that may not be listed in the

(EDR) regulatory database report. Environmental lien as well as activity and use limitation records recorded against the site were not provided by the client. As well, performance of a review of these additional records was not included as part of the scope of services and unless notified otherwise, we assume that the client is evaluating this information outside the scope of this report.

Additionally, a complete and full "title search" dating back to at least (1980) was not performed by Whitaker Laboratory, Inc. and should be obtained and reviewed by retained legal counsel prior to any real estate transaction to ensure any and all "liability defenses" are available to the purchaser as a part of an "All Appropriate Inquiry" (AAI) for the subject property or properties should any deficient conditions be identified at a later date.

EDR Sanborn Map Data Overview:

Sanborn Maps searches for this area of Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County revealed "no coverage" was available and therefore Sanborn Maps were not considered as a part of our historic due diligence.

10 I Page mII

EDR City Directory Map Data Overview:

City Directory searches for the target property were reviewed as a part of our historical data review as follows:

• 1995

• 2005 - 2022

• 2022

Applebee's Neighborhood Grill Nicks Steak & Seafood Brandon Brown George Nikiforakis

In a cursory review of this document, no information was readily identified which would be considered as representing Historic Recognized Environmental Conditions (HREC's), Recognized Environmental Conditions

(REC's) or Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CREC's) within or to the subject property at this time. (See the EDR City Directory Report in the Appendix for clarity.)

FINDS & FRS Data Overview:

The Environmental Protection Agency publishes a Facility Index System (FINDS) report that lists facilities in this area involved in regulatory activities relating to the use, storage or generation of hazardous materials. A review of our most current (FINDS) report indicates this site has not been reported as being involved in regulated activity.

A cursory examination of available information within EPA's Facility Regulatory System (FRS) was also conducted as part of our regulatory review. This review indicates the target property (TP) is not currently identified within the seventeen (17) available national databases within the Envirofacts Facility Tables of the (FRS).

Data Gap / Specialized Knowledqe Commentary:

One (1) data gap was identified as property tax map data was unobtainable as required by the (ASTM) Practice. However, in the opinion of Whitaker

Laboratory, Inc., the data gap is considered as "insignificant," and did not affect the ability of the environmental professional to identify recognized environmental conditions (REC's) during the completion of this Phase I

Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and no recognized environmental conditions (REC's) were identified from the data gap at this time.

11[Page EIrD

Additionally, aerial photography was not available or published by McIntosh

County (GIS) services for release to (EDR) prior to (1951). However, this "data gap" for information dating back to (1940) is also considered "insignificant" or "de Minimis" and of no environmental consequence or Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC) for the property.

PFAS Commentary:

At this time, no information has been identified to lead us to suspect the storage of Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) or Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) materials within the target site or immediately adjacent site(s).

Additionally, no historical documents, interviews or emergency response records were identified which would lead the environmental professional to suspect (PFAS) or (AFFF) usage, spillage or a migratory release has occurred within or towards the target site as well.

However, please understand that no study, invasive investigations or assessments have been performed within the target site for the presence of

(US EPA) "emerging contaminants", specifically (PFAS) "polyfluoroalkyl substances" or for Aqueous Film Forming Foam.

Finally, at this time, no (PFAS) or (AFFF) receptor sites as well as airport related regulated facilities have been identified within one-eighth (1/8) mile of the target site.

Perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) are resistant to heat, water, and oil. Because of these characteristics, (PFAS) chemicals have a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses.

Over time, researchers have studied the health effects of various (PFAS) chemicals, including (PFOA), (PFOS), (PFBS), and (GenX), with early research focusing primarily on (PFOA) and (PFOS).

Therefore, at this time, abstract determinations for (US EPA) "emerging contaminants", specifically (PFAS) "polyfluoroalkyl substances" or (AFFF) aqueous film forming foam within soil and/or groundwater, without provocation, remain "non scope" issues of this Phase I (ESA).

However, the US Environmental Protection Agency has recently released a proposal for enforceable standards for six (PFAS) compounds in drinking water. The agency aims to finalize the proposal by the end of the year (2025). As of April 28, 2025, the following statement was released by the (US

EPA) regarding (PFAS) Contamination:

12IPage

IIID

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin outlined upcoming agency action to address Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). In this suite of actions, Administrator Zeldin announced a long list that included in part the designation of an agency lead for PFAS, the creation of effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) for certain PFAS to stop these forever chemicals from entering drinking water systems, and initiatives to engage with Congress and industry to establish a clear liability framework that ensures the polluter pays and passive receivers are protected. In line with Administrator Zeldin's Powering the Great American Comeback initiative, EPA's work in this space will advance Pillar 1: Clean

Air, Land, and Water for Every American, and Pillar 3: Permitting Reform, Cooperative Federalism, and Cross-Agency Partnership.

"I have long been concerned about PFAS and the efforts to help states and communities dealing with legacy contamination in their backyards. With today's announcement, we are tackling PFAS from all of EPA's program offices, advancing research and testing, stopping PFAS from getting into drinking water systems, holding polluters accountable, and providing certainty for passive receivers. This is just a start of the work we will do on PFAS to ensure Americans have the cleanest air, land, and water," said EPA Administrator Zeldin.

These actions are guided by the following principles: strengthening the science, fulfilling statutory obligations and enhancing communication, and building partnerships. With this approach, EPA will provide the foundation and investment necessary for a toolbox that will help states and communities dealing with PFAS contamination. This list is the first, not the last, of all decisions and actions EPA will be taking to address PFAS over the course of the Trump Administration. There will be more to come in the future across EPA's program offices to help communities impacted by PFAS contamination.

Bulk Chemical I Methane I Radon / Commentary:

During our site reconnaissance, we observed no evidence of any former bulk chemical processing or manufacturing within the property.

A review of available geologic, hydrologic and subsurface soils information indicates no reason to suspect the presence of subsurface materials which would cause excessive concentrations of naturally occurring methane.

13[Page

EIID

Individual radon tests were not conducted as a part of this Phase I ESA.

However, due to the geographical setting of Beaufort County, there should be no problems with elevated radon levels (greater than 2.0 picocuries per liter).

Mold / Lead-based Paint/ Asbestos Containing Materials Commentary:

At the time of our reconnaissance, individual Mold, Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) and Lead Based Paint (LBP) inspections were not performed within the building within the property.

14]Page mI«II

1.2.1 On-Site Concluding Opinion

A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment is recommended when there is probable cause or evidence of environmental concern at a site. Based upon the completion of our Phase I (ESA), in our opinion, it is unlikely that any releases of petroleum products and/or hazardous substances to soil and/or groundwater have occurred as a result of any former on-site commercial/retail activities and/or any nearby off-site activities. Therefore, there is no reason to suspect environmental conditions which would adversely affect the site soils and/or groundwater at this time.

Additionally, no Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's), Historic

Recognized Environmental Conditions (HREC's), or Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CREC's) were identified for the target site (TS) nor were any "significant" data gaps observed during our review of all reasonably ascertainable due diligence materials.

As such, at this time, the site should be considered a "low risk" for environmental contamination and it is our opinion that no additional environmental assessment of this site is warranted at this time.

1.2.2 Off-Site Concluding Opinion

There were no unresolved off-site concerns identified at the time of this assessment. Please refer to Section 4.0 for a discussion of adjacent and surrounding regulated facilities.

15[Page mIE

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Purpose

The purpose of this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for an LLP to CERCLA liability. In addition to this qualification, this Phase I (ESA) served to evaluate the potential of the property to contain contamination. Contamination of a site can occur within the subsurface soils, surface water, groundwater and / or existing structures. In general, contamination of a site occurs as a result of present or past activities on or adjacent to the property. The following report addresses the findings of this assessment.

2.2 Procedures

The scope of this investigation was to identify and report any existing conditions, or potential conditions, which might impose an environmental liability or restrict the use of this property. Asbestos and lead based paint fieldwork as well as mold inspections were not applicable to the scope of this assessment.

As such, WHITAKER LABORATORY, INC. generally provided the following scope of services for this project:

1. A physical examination of the site in an attempt to determine its current and/or past usage.

16]Page EIr

2. An examination of available aerial photographs for indications of prior usage or site disturbance.

3. An historical review of ownership by examining real estate title records and performing interviews with applicable authorities or record-keeping bodies.

4. A records review of appropriate local, state or federal environmental agencies for any problems involving the site or any property within a one mile radius (i.e., the CERCLIS, FINDS, NPL, etc, printouts).

5. The performance of a PCB and hazardous substance (i.e., radon, paints, solvents, petroleum products, asbestos, if applicable) investigation.

6. The examination of reasonably ascertainable property records for the existence, if any, of environmental liens and/or tribal legislation, past or present, upon the site.

7. An examination to determine the existence and condition of any underground storage tanks or aboveground storage tanks.

2.3 Qualifications of Personnel / AAI Certification

Resumes of key environmental professionals are attached in Appendix G.

The individuals listed have been responsible for conducting this Phase I and preparation of this report. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental

Professional as defined in §312.10 of this part [40 CFR Part 312]. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property.

We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

17[Page mIII

2.4 Limitations

Whitaker Laboratory, Inc. performed this assessment in accordance with the provisions of ASTM Standards (E-1527-21) for Environmental Phase I Site

Assessments.

A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA's) comprises a number of individual elements whose basic nature and extent are determined in accordance with the standard of care applicable to Phase I ESA's. In addition, the contents of an ESA are governed by items such as the specified scope of work and fees. As such, we believe we have prepared this report in accordance with the applicable standard of care and specified scope of work. However, please note our services intentionally did not include actual analyses with respect to PFAS (polyfluoroalkyl substances), asbestos, lead based paint, outdoor air quality, mold, methane gas generation and/or assessment for vapor intrusion (ASTM E 2600-22). Additionally, this assessment did not include inquiries with respect to geotechnical concerns, wetlands or the identification of endangered or protected plant and animal species. Similarly, the determination of historical and archaeological sites is beyond the scope of this assessment.

If applicable, proper design considerations for any of these non-scope items should be provided as part of development.

18]Page

Phase I Environmental Site Assessments by their very nature are limited.

WHITAKER LABORATORY, INC. and its professional engineers/ employees have endeavored to meet what it believes is the applicable standard of care and, in so doing, is obliged to advise its client of the above-mentioned limitations.

Within any site reconnaissance, there are a number of physical constraints which can and/or may affect the ability of the Assessor to obtain site specific information. These include physical obstructions such as buildings, paved areas and bodies of water, as well as limiting conditions such as weather constraints, heavily wooded or brushy areas, inaccessible areas, ongoing physical operations and/or safety considerations.

This environmental assessment, unless otherwise noted within the report, was non-destructive and visual in nature. Every reasonable effort was made to obtain all pertinent and available information as to the condition of the site. However, the site reconnaissance was restricted to those items that were previously known through historical discovery and/or disclosure, viewed in plain sight and/or areas readily accessible to the Assessor.

I Page rID

WHITAKER LABORATORY, INC. and its professional engineers/ employees believe that providing information about limitations is essential to help its client identify and thereby manage its risk. These risks cannot be eliminated but can be further minimized through additional research not generally associated with a standard Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.

The findings and opinions conveyed in this report are based on information that we obtained from a variety of sources which we believe are reliable.

Nonetheless, WHITAKER LABORATORY, INC. and its professional engineers / employees cannot and do not guarantee the authenticity or reliability of the information it has relied upon.

It is possible for unknown site conditions to exist and for conditions we observed to have changed since initial review. Therefore, this report does not warrant or guarantee that the site is free of environmental defects.

Accordingly, by acceptance and reliance on this report, WHITAKER

LABORATORY INC. and its professional engineers/employees' liability for sole negligence specifically related to this report is limited to ($100,000) or the fee for this report, whichever is greater.

20[Page EDIrD

2.5 User Reliance

This report is for the sole use and benefit of our clients, Coltrane & Wilkins, LLC, Curtis L. Coltrane, and/or their assign(s), and may not be used or relied upon by any person or entity without expressed written consent. When applicable, any additional eligible lender or tenant will be issued reliance letters upon request.

2.6 Signature of Qualified P.E. as to the Report Date: November 5, 2025

Donald R. Martin, Jr.

Environmental Professional

211Page

EID

3.0 SITE SETTING

3.1 General Conditions

This one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site is located on Hilton Head Island, Beaufort

County, South Carolina. The site is located along Park Lane to the north and east as well as William Hilton Parkway to the south.

The subject site is also identified on a Beaufort County Tax Assessors' Map as residing within Tax Parcel (R550 015 00C 0233 0000).

Access to the site is achieved from William Hilton Parkway and/or Park Lane.

Currently, this site is generally flat with surface drainage noted as generally west by the (EDR) Radius Map.

Our historical records review and reconnaissance of this one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site revealed that the subject site was developed in (1987) with a (±3,999) square foot restaurant according to the property tax card.

Currently, the site is utilized by "Nick's Steak & Seafood" restaurant.

See the SITE PLAN in Appendix A and Photographs in Appendix B for clarity.

221Page mrD

3.2 Hydrology

3.2.1 Geologic Setting

This overall project area lies near the eastern edge of the South Atlantic

Coastal Plain. In South Carolina and Georgia, this broad, gently sloping region extends southeastward from the Fall Line (Chesterfield-Columbia

Augusta-Macon-Columbus) to the Atlantic Ocean. The soils encountered are sedimentary in origin and consist of layered marine deposits of sands, silts and clays. These deposits have since been subjected to successive erosion and re-deposition by fluctuations of sea levels, storm tides and winds. Many of the surface sands are the result of depositional forces along ancient beaches which formed during the changing shoreline and river conditions. Intermittent deposits of shells occur within the strata at irregular intervals. The surface soils in a majority of this Coastal Plain area were deposited during the Pleistocene Era; however, surface soils near the coast are likely of the Holocene Era.

The surface soils in the eastern portion of the Coastal Plain are underlain by

Miocene Era deposits of the Hawthorne formation, consisting of consolidated sandy clays, clays and silts. Beneath these Miocene deposits are found the porous limerock known as the Floridian Aquifer. The Floridian

Aquifer is one of the major productive aquifers for the region.

231Page IIrm

3.2.2 Surface Drainage/ Surface Waters

Currently, this site is generally flat with surface drainage noted as generally west by the (EDR) Radius Map.

3.2.3 Flood Plains / Floodways

The Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) Historical Flood

Insurance Map, General Community Panel Numbers (4502500013D) indicated that this site resides within a (1%) Special Flood Hazard Area

"known" floodplain. Please refer to the FEMA information contained within the (EDR) Report for clarity.

3.2.4 Groundwater

Groundwater flow is suspected to be generally west by the Geophysical

Report of the (EDR) Radius Map.

Groundwater information was estimated or approximated using the Hilton

Head & Bluffton, Georgia, USGS (15633296 & 15633270) 7.5-minute topographic quad index.

24[Page mIrD

3.3 Wetlands

During our site reconnaissance, we did not observe any low areas within the site. Additionally, the (EDR) report did not identify areas of historical State and/or Federal Wetlands within the project site.

Please be reminded, this assessment does not include specific investigations with respect to geotechnical concerns, wetlands or the identification of endangered or protected plant and animal species.

Similarly, any determination of historical and archaeological sites is beyond the scope of this assessment.

25[Page

EIIE

4.0 REGULATORY INFORMATION

4.1 Agency Data Review

Additionally, as a supplement to our review of available (FINDS) and (FRS) information, Whitaker Laboratory, Inc., also contracted with Environmental

Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to perform an additional search of available

State and Federal environmental regulatory files for all sites within a one quarter mile radius around the target site. This review was conducted in an attempt to satisfy the search requirements of the EPA's Standards and

Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries Criteria (40 CFR Part 312) and the search provisions of (ASTM 1527-21).

One (1) current or formerly regulated facility located within a one-eighth

(1/8) mile radius of the site was identified within the (EDR) report and is summarized as follows:

• Clothes Press, located at 1 Park Plaza, is reported as a Historic

Cleaner as a "garment pressing and cleaners' agents" in (1994) through (1996) with no violations reported by the (SC DES). To the best of our research, this facility operates as a pick-up/drop-off location with no halogenated solvents being used or stored on-site

26[Page mIID

Due to the previous information and/or suspected groundwater flow away from or parallel to the target site as shown by the (EDR) Report, the one (1) current or formerly regulated facility within a one eighth (1/8) mile radius should not be considered as representing a Historic Recognized

Environmental Condition (HREC), Recognized Environmental Condition

(REC) or Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition (CREC) at this time.

Further, the (EDR) report identified three (3) current or formerly regulated facilities in an excess of one-eighth (1/8) mile and up to a one (1) mile radius of the property. However, due to proximity, the three (3) facilities should not be considered as representing Historic Recognized Environmental

Conditions (HREC's), Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's) or

Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CREC's) at this time.

No visual or historical evidence was discovered during this Phase I (ESA) due diligence period which would facilitate the need to conduct an independent assessment for vapor intrusion (ASTM E 2600-22) within the site.

27[Page

Additionally, an (EDR) Vapor Encroachment Screen performed within a

(1/10) mile radius of the target site did not reveal any Recognized

Environmental Conditions (REC's) for the site.

4.2 Agency Contacts

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. -- EDR Radius Map Report & EDR Sanborn Map Search Environmental Data Resources, Inc. - Historical Topographic Maps & Historical Directory Listings Beaufort County Tax Assessors' Office

Bluffton, Beaufort County Public Works I Engineering Bing, Inc, 2022, Google Map, 2022 United States Department of the Interior- USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Maps (2020) United States FEMA - Flood Map Division 2020 US EPA, Radon Reporting, Land Protection Division Beaufort County Inspections and Building Department Telephone Duty Officer, SC DHEC UST Division, Senior Project Administrator Coltrane & Wilkins, LLC- Curtis Coltrane

4.3 Site Specific Interviews / Site Questionnaire

At the time of our due diligence, an environmental questionnaire was completed by Mr. Curtis Coltrane of Coltrane & Wilkins, LLC. (A copy of the questionnaire is available in Appendix "D" for clarity.) During our cursory review of the (EQ), no Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's) were noted within the document.

4.3.1 Site Owner

During our due diligence, were able to ascertain that the last published owner of the property for Parcel (R550 015 00C 0233 0000) is "SP4 Land Co., LLC."

28[Page rID

4.3.2 Site Manager

Currently, the site is managed by owners and employees of "Nick's Steak &

Seafood" restaurant.

4.3.3 Site Occupant

Currently, the site is occupied by "Nick's Steak & Seafood" restaurant.

4.3.4 Local / State Government Contacts

In a review of available Beaufort County historical tax records, we discovered no ascertainable information indicating the presence of pending, threatened or past environmental liens or fines to date.

There were also no records of proceedings or notices of possible code violations relating to environmental statutes in connection with the property as maintained by (SC DES).

A telephone interview was conducted with the "duty officer" of the (SC DES)

UST Division for the purposes of confirming the collected information regarding the target property and nearby regulated facilities. At the time of our telephone interview, no contrary documentation, was revealed which would differ from the documentation which has been presented within this report.

29[Page

4.3.5 Additional "Other" Interviews

At the time of our reconnaissance, no additional interviews were required with regards to the target site.

4.4 Specialized Knowledge

With regard to client supplied "specialized knowledge", our clients, Coltrane

& Wilkins, LLC, Curtis L. Coltrane, and/or their assign(s), at no time related to us in any of our communications that they were in possession of any specialized knowledge and/or environmental experiences related to the site or any adjacent property.

4.5 Environmental Liens

At the time of our regulatory review, there were no federal environmental liens or issues associated with tribal legislation discovered against the property.

Additionally, no "activity use limitations" (AUL's) were identified for the site parcels during our cursory review of reasonably ascertainable documentation obtained through third party vendors.

Please note that in addition to these federal and state listings, (AUL's) can be recorded at the county and municipal level that may not be listed in the (EDR) regulatory database report. Environmental lien as well as activity and use limitation records recorded against the site were not provided by the client.

30[Page EIrm

As well, performance of a review of these additional records was not included as part of the scope of services and unless notified otherwise, we assume that the client is evaluating this information outside the scope of this report.

Additionally, a complete and full "title search" dating back to at least (1980) was not performed by Whitaker Laboratory, Inc. and should be obtained and reviewed by retained legal counsel prior to any real estate transaction to ensure any and all "liability defenses" are available to the purchaser as a part of an "All Appropriate Inquiry" (AAI) for the subject property or properties should any deficient conditions be identified at a later date.

4.6 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues

One (1) data gap was identified as property tax map data was unobtainable as required by the (ASTM) Practice. However, in the opinion of Whitaker

Laboratory, Inc., the data gap is considered as "insignificant," and did not affect the ability of the environmental professional to identify recognized environmental conditions (REC's) during the completion of this Phase I

Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and no recognized environmental conditions (REC's) were identified from the data gap at this time.

31[Page mIrm

Additionally, aerial photography was not available or published by McIntosh

County (GIS) services for release to (EDR) prior to (1951 ). However, this "data gap" for information dating back to (1940) is also considered "insignificant" or "de Minimis" and of no environmental consequence or Historical

Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC) for the property.

Further, no information was identified which would lead Whitaker Laboratory, Inc. to offer an opinion for a valuation change for the overall target site (TS).

32]Page

5.0 SITE INFORMATION & USE

5.1 Current Site Use

This one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site is located on Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina. The site is located along Park Lane to the north and east as well as William Hilton Parkway to the south.

The subject site is also identified on a Beaufort County Tax Assessors' Map as residing within Tax Parcel (R550 015 00C 0233 0000).

Access to the site is achieved from William Hilton Parkway and/or Park

Lane.

Currently, this site is generally flat with surface drainage noted as generally west by the (EDR) Radius Map.

Our historical records review and reconnaissance of this one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site revealed that the subject site was developed in (1987) with a

(±3,999) square foot restaurant according to the property tax card.

Currently, the site is utilized by "Nick's Steak & Seafood" restaurant.

See the SITE PLAN in Appendix A and Photographs in Appendix B for clarity.

33[Page EIqr

5.1.1 Storage Tanks

During our reconnaissance, as conducted on October 28, 2025, we observed no evidence of former and/or current aboveground storage tanks (UST's).

However, we did observe one (1) storage vat for "used cooking oil" which is serviced by "Allied Renewal." (See Photograph Plate 4 for clarity.)

Additionally, we observed one (1) underground storage tank (UST) of propane for use within the restaurant. (See Photograph Plate 22 for clarity.)

No Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's) were identified from these observations.

5.1.2 Hazardous & Petroleum Products / Containers and/or Drums

During our site reconnaissance, we did not observe any hazardous and/or petroleum products within the site other than the storage vat for "used cooking oil."

5.1.3 Heating and Cooling

Heating and cooling was observed to be via electricity at the time of our reconnaissance.

5.1.4 Solid Waste

Our review of aerial photographs, historical documents and public records revealed no indications this parcel had been used as a landfill.

34[Page

5.1.5 Sewage Disposal / Septic Tanks

We noted that sewage service for the site is assumed to be via South Island

Public Service District.

5.1.6 Hydraulic Equipment

No hydraulic equipment was observed within the site.

5.1.7 Contracted Maintenance Service

At the time of our reconnaissance, dumpster service was observed to be provided by "Waste Management." (See Photograph Plate 3 for clarity.)

5.1.8 Electrical Transformers / PCB's

At the time of our reconnaissance, two (2) pedestal mounted transformers were observed within the site with no Recognized Environmental Conditions

(REC's) noted at the time of inspection. (See Photograph Plates 15 and 20 for clarity.)

5.1.9 Water Supply and Wells

To the best of our knowledge, "potable" water service for the site is furnished via South Island Public Service District.

35[Page mIIE

5.1.10 Drains and Sumps

One (1) stormwater concrete drain was observed within the site at the time of our reconnaissance. (See Photograph Plate 1 for clarity.)

5.1.11 Pits, Ponds, Lagoons

While on-site, we did not observe pits, ponds or lagoons within the site.

5.1.12 Surface Waters I State Waters

While on-site, we observed no surface water and/or state waters within the site.

5.1.13 Stressed Vegetation

Within the site, at the time of our inspection, we observed no evidence of distressed vegetation.

5.1.14 Odors

No unusual odors were observed at the time of our inspection.

5.1.15 Utilities

Electrical, telecommunication, water and sewer utilities were observed as available at the site.

36[Page

5.1.16 Chemical Use

We observed no production or storage of bulk chemicals within the site at the time of our reconnaissance.

5.1.17 Water Leaks / Mold

At the time of our reconnaissance a Mold inspection was not performed within the building on the target site.

5.1.18 Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM's)

At the of our reconnaissance, an Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) inspection was not performed within the building on the target site.

5.1.19 Lead Based Paint (LBP)

At the time of our reconnaissance a Lead Based Paint (LBP) inspection was not performed within the building on the target site.

5.1.20 Radon

Individual radon tests were not conducted as a part of this Phase I ESA.

However, due to the geographical setting of this area, there should be no problems with elevated radon levels (greater than 2.0 picocuries per liter).

Within this area, the typical radon concentration for buildings ranges from

(1.2 to 2.0) picocuries per liter.

371Page

II«II

5.1.21 Lead in Drinking Water

We have been informed that the South Island Public Service District performs periodic testing of city/county water in compliance with all local, state and federal drinking water standards.

5.1.22 PCB's

Polychlorinated biphenyl's (PCB's) are one of several aromatic compounds containing two (2) benzene molecules that have two (2) or more substituent chlorine atoms.

They are colorless, denser than water liquids and have an oily appearance.

Because of their persistence, toxicity and ability to cause ecological damage by way of water pollution, their manufacture was discontinued in the U.S. in 1976.

(PCB's) were typically used in transformers and capacitors due to other good heat exchange and dielectric properties.

See Item 5.1.8 for discussion of (PCB's).

38[Page

5.1.23 Site Investigation

At the time of this Phase I (ESA), a site investigation (Limited Phase II) was not deemed necessary for this site.

5.2 Past Site Use

Our historical records review and reconnaissance of this one (1) parcel, (±1.49) acre site revealed that the subject site was developed in (1987) with a

(±3,999) square foot restaurant according to the property tax card.

5.2.1 Data Gaps

One (1) data gap was identified as property tax map data was unobtainable as required by the (ASTM) Practice. However, in the opinion of Whitaker

Laboratory, Inc., the data gap is considered as "insignificant," and did not affect the ability of the environmental professional to identify recognized environmental conditions (REC's) during the completion of this Phase I

Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and no recognized environmental conditions (REC's) were identified from the data gap at this time.

Additionally, aerial photography was not available or published by McIntosh

County (GIS) services for release to (EDR) prior to (1951). However, this

"data gap" for information dating back to (1940) is also considered

"insignificant" or "de Minimis" and of no environmental consequence or

Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC) for the property.

39[Page

5.2.2 Deed Research

During our due diligence, were able to ascertain that the last published owner of the property for Parcel (R550 015 00C 0233 0000) is "SP4 Land Co., LLC."

5.2.3 Aerial Photographs and Topographic Map

Aerial Photographs from the years (1951) thru (2023) are exhibited in

Appendix A. These photographs revealed no indications of unusual ground features.

5.2.4 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

Sanborn Maps searches for this area of Hilton Head Island, Beaufort County were reported as "unmapped" and therefore were not considered as a part of our historic due diligence.

5.2.5 City Directories

City Directory searches for the target property were reviewed as a part of our historical data review as follows:

• 1995 Applebee's Neighborhood Grill

• 2005 - 2022 Nicks Steak & Seafood

• 2022

40]Page

Brandon Brown

George Nikiforakis

In a cursory review of this document, no information was readily identified which would be considered as representing Historic Recognized

Environmental Conditions (HREC's), Recognized Environmental Conditions

(REC's) or Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CREC's) within or to the subject property at this time. (See the EDR City Directory

Report in the Appendix for clarity.)

5.2.6 Previous Environmental Studies

No previous Phase I Environmental Site Assessments were discovered or reviewed as a part of our due diligence historical searches.

5.2.7 Interviews and Contacts

See Section 4.2, Agency Contacts and Section 4.3 Site Specific Interviews for a listing and discussion of interviews and contacts in relation to this

Phase I (ESA).

41[Page mIIE

5.3 Current Surrounding Land Use

5.3.1 North

The north property line is bordered by William Hilton Parkway.

5.3.2 East

The eastern property line is bordered by Charter One Real Estate Office.

5.3.3 South

The southern property line is bordered by Park Lane.

5.3.4 West

The western property line is bordered by Park Lane.

5.4 Previous Surrounding Land Use (1951)

5.4.1 North

The northern property line was bordered by undeveloped woodland(s).

5.4.2 East

The eastern property line was bordered by undeveloped woodland(s).

5.4.3 South

The southern property line was bordered by undeveloped woodland(s).

5.4.4 West

The western property line was bordered by Park Lane.

421Page EDIrm

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCLUSION

6.1 On-Site

A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment is recommended when there is probable cause or evidence of environmental concern at a site. Based upon the completion of our Phase I (ESA), in our opinion, it is unlikely that any releases of petroleum products and/or hazardous substances to soil and/or groundwater have occurred as a result of any former on-site commercial/retail activities and/or any nearby off-site activities. Therefore, there is no reason to suspect environmental conditions which would adversely affect the site soils and/or groundwater at this time.

Additionally, no Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC's), Historic

Recognized Environmental Conditions (HREC's), or Controlled Recognized

Environmental Conditions (CREC's) were identified for the target site (TS) nor were any "significant" data gaps observed during our review of all reasonably ascertainable due diligence materials.

As such, at this time, the site should be considered a "low risk" for environmental contamination and it is our opinion that no additional environmental assessment of this site is warranted at this time.

43]Page

6.2 Off-Site

There were no unresolved off-site concerns identified at the time of this assessment. Please refer to Section 4.0 for a discussion of adjacent and surrounding regulated facilities.

44]Page EDIr

PHASE I DOCUMENTATION:

45]Page mID

APPENDIX A-MAPS I FIGURES

Site Plan

1951 through 2023 Aerial Maps

Historical Topographic Maps

City Directory Searches

FEMA / FIRM Map Search

46]Page m rDD

Ste Vcntq Map 9Park Lane

Hilton head lsland, Deaufort Cauntau, 5auth Cardna

N

WHITAKER LABORATORY, INC.

Ia

5e Location Flan

9Park Lane

Hilton head Island, eaufort, Count4, south Cardlira

N

WHITAKER LABORATORY. INC.

mr

N

Digital Data Available

No Digital Data Avallable

Unmapped

Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A. V A99

WIth BFE or Depth zone AE. AO, AH. VE. AR

Regulatory Floodway

The pin displayed on the map Is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location.

I) O

(G)2± cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 1Zs Water Surface Elevation s-- - Coastal Transect Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)= Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary

Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline

Hydrographic Feature

OTHER

FEATURES

MAP PANELS

This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps it it is not void as described below.

The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards

The flood hazard Information Is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 10/24/2025 at 3:00 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time.

This map Image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: base map Imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identlflers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes.

NO SCREEN Area Of Minimal Flood Hazard zone xr)…