B08_SOL_ATT-2_(Exhibits_10-14).pdf

FONSI 1

DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024-EA

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

Four Rivers Field Office 3948 Development Ave

Boise, Idaho 83705

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

Boise Foothills Acquisitions

DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024-EA

INTRODUCTION:

The Four Rivers Field Office has completed an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Boise Foothills Acquisitions (DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024-EA). Under the proposed action, BLM would acquire two separate parcels of land located within the Foothills Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA). The South Fork Willow Creek (SFWC) parcel is a 320-acre property is within Boise County bordering BLM public lands, State land, and private property. The Rocky Canyon (RC) 30-acre parcel is near Table Rock and is contiguous to existing Bureau managed public lands.

The proposal would be in accordance with Secretarial Order (SO) 3362: Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migratory Corridors by retaining big game winter range at risk for residential development. The 2023 Four Rivers Resource Management Plan recommends acquisition of lands that contribute to management of important natural resources with specific goals for big game populations, and the Federal Land Management Policy Act (FLPMA) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (acting through the BLM) to acquire lands consistent with the mission of the department and applicable land use plans using the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

Acquisition of the Boise Foothills parcels would; 1) consolidate land ownership in the Boise Front to facilitate effective management and recreation access; 2) ensure retention of crucial winter range habitat and other BLM lands; 3) contribute to the conservation and protection of wildlife habitat as well as cultural and recreational values; and 4) retain open space in the Boise Foothills.

The Boise Foothills Acquisitions Environmental Assessment (DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024- EA) is incorporated by reference for this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Two alternatives, acquisition of the parcels and a no action alternative were analyzed in the EA.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT:

Based on my review of the attached EA and supporting documents, I have determined that the action alternative will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required. This finding is based on the degree of the effects described in the following sections within the identified affected environment.

RFA ATT-2 / EX10

FONSI 2

Potentially Affected Environment (40 CFR § 1501.3(b)(1))

The two parcels identified for acquisition are located near Boise, Idaho. The 320-acre South Fork Willow Creek (SFWC) parcel is adjacent to 3,560 acres of BLM-administered lands in the west Boise Foothills about a mile east of the Avimor development in Boise County. The Rocky Canyon (RC) 30-acre parcel is adjacent to about 9,000 acres of BLM managed lands in the east Boise foothills in Ada County. Both parcels are crucial winter range for mule deer and Rocky Mountain elk and are within the Smokey-Boise Complex Priority Area

Degree of Effects (40 CFR § 1501.3(b)(2))

The following have been considered in my evaluation of the selected alternative:

i. Short- and long-term effects

The degree of long-and short-term effects of the proposed action is considered in the EA’s analysis. Neither long-nor short-term effects of this action would be significant. The effects of the parcel acquisitions would occur once the sale of land is complete and last in perpetuity. The acquired parcels would no longer be privately owned and would be managed for wildlife habitat and recreational purposes in tandem with the adjoining BLM lands and no longer be available for development. Beneficial and adverse effects

ii. Beneficial and adverse effects The acquisition of these parcels would further the goals and objectives of SO 3362, specifically by avoiding developments that would fragment winter range and by limiting disturbance on big game winter range. Additional benefits include recreational opportunities including the linking of trail systems and big game hunting opportunities. Because of existing livestock use agreements with private landowners in the pastures, the acquisition would not affect grazing management.

Minor changes to tax revenue for Ada and Boise Counties due to the net loss of private property would be negated through Payments in lieu of taxes (PILT).

iii. Effects on public health and safety No public health and safety issues were identified in the EA (EA Section 1.6.2).

iv. Effects that would violate Federal, State, Tribal, or local laws protecting the environment.

The project does not violate any known federal, state, local or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. State, local, and tribal interests were given the opportunity to participate in the environmental analysis process. The project was presented to Shoshone- Paiute Tribes and no comments were received. The project is consistent with applicable land management plans, policies, and programs.

FONSI 3

APPROVAL:

Brent Ralston Date Field Manager Four Rivers Field Office

Digitally signed by BRENT RALSTON Date: 2023.09.29 08:04:12 -06'00'

DECISION RECORD

Boise Foothills Acquisitions

DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024-EA

September 29, 2023 Introduction: The Four Rivers Field Office has completed an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Boise Foothills Acquisitions (DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024-EA). Under the proposed action, BLM would support the acquisition of two separate parcels of land both located within the Foothills Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA). The South Fork Willow Creek (SFWC) parcel is a 320-acre property within Boise County bordering BLM public lands, State land, and private property. The Rocky Canyon (RC) 30-acre parcel is near Table Rock and is contiguous to existing Bureau managed public lands.

Section 205 of the Federal Land Policy Management Act (1976), as amended (43 USC 1715), provides BLM the authority to acquire lands, at fair market value, consistent with the mission of the department and applicable land use plans and to use the Land and Water Conservation Funds to purchase lands, and the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (41 USC 2301), allows for the reconfiguration of land ownership patterns to better facilitate resource management such as retaining and protecting winter range for big game.

The BLM determines fair market value through an appraisal overseen by the Appraisal and Valuation Services Office of the United States Department of the Interior. The appraisal and evaluation were prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation; the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute; and the requirements of the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (UASFLA). Fair market value is the amount in cash, or on terms reasonably equivalent to cash, for which in all probability the property would have sold on the effective date of value, after a reasonable exposure time on the open competitive market, from a willing and reasonably knowledgeable seller to a willing and reasonably knowledgeable buyer, with neither acting under compulsion to buy or sell, giving due consideration to all available economic uses of the property.

Plan Conformance and Consistency: The Four Rivers Field Office Resource Management Plan (FRFO RMP) Record of Decision (ROD) was signed on August 17, 2023. The proposed acquisition and management would support the following FRFO RMP ROD goals, objectives, and management actions:

Lands Approve land tenure adjustments, classifications, withdrawals, easements, purchased interest, acquisitions, and land use authorizations when consistent with other resource uses and values (GL-LR-01 & MD-LR-02, p35-36).

Wildlife – Maintain or improve big game winter habitat (OB-FW-03, p19).

Recreation - Foothills SRMA: Provide a high-quality system of trails for the enjoyment of

Treasure Valley residents and visitors to the Boise Foothills while maintaining an open space

United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Four Rivers Field Office 3948 Development Ave.

Boise, ID 83705

2 | P a g e environment to support public demand for open space, special status plant habitat, and big game winter range. (GL-REC-04, p30).

Decision: It is my decision to authorize the acquisition of 350-acres described in Alternative A, Proposed Action in Environmental Assessment #DOI-BLM-ID-B010-2023-0024-EA (See Exhibit A: Maps).

Rationale for Decision: The acquisition of these properties will enhance public recreational access and the retain big game winter range and migratory corridors on public lands. The Foothills SRMA is used for recreation, enjoyment and open space for thousands of people every year and these acquisitions will provide additional area for those activities while also ensuring these areas remain as open space and provide important wildlife habitat for the species that utilize this area, and specifically providing for wintering habitat for big game.

Public Involvement: A public scoping period occurred from April 28 to May 28, 2023. The scoping package was posted on ePlanning during that time and mailed to over 60 individuals and organizations.

There were 26 comments received in response to scoping with all but a few supporting the proposal.

Formal government-to-government tribal consultation with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes was initiated in February 2023.

Authority: Section 302 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) directs that public lands be managed under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield in accordance with the land use plans developed under Section 202 of the Act. The 2023 FRFO RMP provides the additional management direction required by FLMA.

Right of Appeal: The decision may be appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, Office of the Secretary, in accordance with the regulations contained in 43 CFR Part 4 and Form 1842-1. The appeal must be filed within 30 days following receipt of the Decision. The appeal must be filed in the office of the authorized officer, as noted:

Four Rivers Field Office Attn: Brent Ralston 3948 Development Avenue Boise, Idaho 83705

In accordance with 43 CFR § 4.401 (c), the BLM does not accept fax or email filing of a notice of appeal.

Any notice of appeal must be sent or delivered to the office of the authorized officer by mail or personal delivery. The appellant must also serve copies of any appeal on other persons named in the copies sent to section of this decision in accordance with 43 CFR § 4.400 and on the Office of the Field Solicitor located at the address below in accordance with 43 CFR §§ 4.413.

Office of the Solicitor, Field Solicitor U. S. Department of the Interior University Plaza, 960 Broadway Avenue, Suite 400, Boise, Idaho, 83706 Filing an appeal does not by itself stay the effectiveness of a final BLM decision. If you wish to file a petition for a stay of the effectiveness of this decision, pursuant to 43 CFR 4.21, the petition for stay must accompany your notice of appeal. If you request a stay, you have the burden of proof to demonstrate that a stay should be granted. A petition for stay is required to show sufficient justification based on the

3 | P a g e standards listed below.

Standards for Obtaining a Stay Except as otherwise provided by law or other pertinent regulation, a petition for a stay of a decision pending appeal shall show sufficient justification based on the following standards:

1. The relative harm to the parties if the stay is granted or denied.

2. The likelihood of the appellant’s success on the merits.

3. The likelihood of immediate and irreparable harm if the stay is not granted.

4. Whether or not the public interest favors granting the stay.

Brent Ralston Date Field Manager Four Rivers Field Office

Exhibit A – Maps on pages 4-6

4 | P a g e

5 | P a g e

Map 1. Proposed South Fork Willow Creek Acquisition

6 | P a g e

Map 2. Proposed South Fork Willow Creek Acquision

7 | P a g e

Map 3. Rocky Canyon Acquisition

D:\loc\gis\Projects_GISuser\FourRiversFO\Realty\LWCF_Submission\LWCF_Submission.aprx

Boise River

Pi ck et Pin Creek

Cottonwood Creek

Warm Springs Cre ek

Freesto ne Cre ek

22 23

34 35

11 12

23 24

07 08

19 20

31 32

21 22 23

262728

09 10

21 22 23

262728

3N 2E 4N 2E

3N

E 3N

E

4N

E 4N

E

3N 3E 4N 3E

BOISE COUNTY

ADA COUNTY

Boise

£¤20

I-184

Rocky Canyon R d

H ar ri so n B lv d

State St

Cartw rig h t

Rd

I- 84

Warm Springs Ave

B og us B as in

Rd

Boise R idge

Rd

Park CenterBlvd

8th

Stre et

§̈¦84

Boise Front ACEC

Boise Front ACEC

Boise

I d a h o

Map Location

Project Location 0 31

Miles

ÜRocky Canyon Parcel

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

Bureau of Land Management

Forest Service

Bureau of Reclamation

Military

Other Federal

State of Idaho

Local Government

Private (all other land)

Map 1 of 3

Land and Water Conservation Fund: Rocky Canyon

Date: 2/10/2023

Rocky Canyon

RFQ ATT-2 / EX-12

Subject Property Site Visit Track

Coordinates 43.61656, ‐116.12419, West boundary of subject parcel.

RFQ ATT-2 / EX-13

Appendix C Environmental

Records Verification

RFQ ATT-2 / EX-14

Subject Property

Idaho DEQ

2055 E. Rio Salado Pkwy Tempe, AZ 85381 480-967-6752

Rocky Canyon prepared for: BLM Ref: LWCF

2023-03-15

Environmental Radius Report

Summary Federal

< 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites 0 0 0 Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites 0 0 - Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders 0 0 - Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP 0 0 - Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action 0 0 - Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities 0 0 - Lists of Federal RCRA generators 0 - - Federal institutional control/engineering control registries 0 - - Federal ERNS list 0 - -

State < 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1

Lists of state and tribal Superfund equivalent sites 0 0 0 Lists of state and tribal hazardous waste facilities 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks 0 - - State and tribal institutional control/engineering control registries 0 - - Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 0 0 - Lists of state and tribal brownfields sites 0 0 -

Other < 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1

Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites

The National Priorities List (NPL) is the list of sites of national priority among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States and its territories. The NPL is intended primarily to guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation. The NPL is updated periodically, as mandated by CERCLA.

There were no Federal NPL sites found within a one-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites

The EPA may delete a final NPL site if it determines that no further response is required to protect human health or the environment. Under Section 300.425(e) of the NCP (55 FR 8845, March 8, 1990), a site may be deleted when no further response is appropriate if EPA determines that one of the following criteria has been met: 1) EPA, in conjunction with the state, has determined that responsible parties have implemented all appropriate response action required, 2) EPA, in consultation with the state, has determined that all appropriate Superfund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented and that no further response by responsible parties is appropriate,

3) A remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) has shown that the release poses no significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore, remedial measures are not appropriate.

There were no Federal Delisted NPL sites found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders

CERCLA identifies the classes of parties liable under CERCLA for the cost of responding to releases of hazardous substances. In addition, CERCLA contains provisions specifying when Federal installations must report releases of hazardous substances and the cleanup procedures they must follow. Executive Order No. 12580, Superfund Implementation, delegates response authorities to EPA and the Coast Guard. Generally, the head of the Federal agency has the delegated authority to address releases at the Federal facilities in its jurisdiction.

There were no Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and/or orders found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP

No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) is a decision made as part of the Superfund remedial site evaluation process to denote that further remedial assessment activities are not required and that the facility/site does not pose a threat to public health or the environment sufficient to qualify for placement on the National Priorities List (NPL) based on currently available information. These facilities/sites may be re-evaluated if EPA receives new information or learns that site conditions have changed. A NFRAP decision does not mean the facility/site is free of contamination and does not preclude the facility/site from being addressed under another federal, state or tribal cleanup program.

There were no Federal CERCLA sites with No Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) decisions found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action

Corrective action is a requirement under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) that facilities that treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes investigate and cleanup hazardous releases into soil, ground water, surface water and air. Corrective action is principally implemented through RCRA permits and orders. RCRA permits issued to TSDFs must include provisions for corrective action as well as financial assurance to cover the costs of implementing those cleanup measures. In addition to the EPA, 44 states and territories are authorized to run the Corrective Action program.

There were no Federal RCRA facilities undergoing corrective action(s) found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities

The final link in RCRA's cradle-to-grave concept is the treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) that follows the generator and transporter in the chain of waste management activities. The regulations pertaining to TSDFs are more stringent than those that apply to generators or transporters. They include general facility standards as well as unit-specific design and operating criteria.

There were no Federal RCRA treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs) found within a half-mile radius of target property.

Lists of Federal RCRA generators

A generator is any person who produces a hazardous waste as listed or characterized in part 261 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Recognizing that generators also produce waste in different quantities, EPA established three categories of generators in the regulations: very small quantity generators, small quantity generators, and large quantity generators. EPA regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to ensure that these wastes are managed in ways that protet human health and the environment. Generators of hazardous waste are regulated based on the amount of hazardous waste they generate in a calendar month, not the size of their business or facility.

There were no Federal RCRA generators found at the target property and/or adjoining properties.

Federal institutional control/engineering control registries

Institutional Controls (IC) are defined as non-engineered and/or legal controls that minimize the potential human exposure to contamination by limiting land or resource use. Whereas, Engineering Controls (EC) consist of engineering measures (e.g, caps, treatment systems, etc.)

designed to minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination by either limiting direct contact with contaminated areas or controlling migration of contaminants through environmental media.

There were no Federal institutional or engineering controls found at the target property.

Federal ERNS list

The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is a database used to store information on notification of oil discharges and hazardous substances releases. The ERNS program is a cooperative data sharing effort encompassing the National Response Center (NRC), operated by the US Coast Guard, EPA HQ and EPA regional offices. ERNS data is used to analyze release notifications, track EPA responses and compliance to environmental laws, support emergency planning efforts, and assist decision-makers in developing spill prevention programs.

There were no Federally recorded releases of oil and/or hazardous substances at the target property.

Lists of state and tribal Superfund equivalent sites

In order to maintain close coordination with the states and tribes in the NPL listing decision process, the EPA's policy is to determine the position of states and tribes on sites that EPA is considering for listing. Consistent with this policy, since 1996, it has been the EPA's general practice to seek the state or tribe's position on sites under consideration for NPL listing by submitting a written requiest to the governor/state environmental agency or tribe. Various states may have their own program for identifying, investigating and cleaning up sites where consequential amounts of hazardous waste may have been disposed that work in conjunction with the EPA's Superfund remedial program.

There were no State and/or tribal Superfund equivalent sites found within a one-mile radius of target property.

Lists of state and tribal hazardous waste facilities

EPA established basic hazardous waste management standards for businesses who produce hazardous waste and categorized three businesses based on the volume of hazardous waste produced in a calendar month. On the federal level, there are three generator categories: large quantity generator, small quantity generator, and conditionally exempt small quantity generator. Some states are authorized to establish generator categories that are different from those that federal EPA set up. State regulatory requirements for generators of hazardous waste may be more stringent than the federal program.

There were no State and/or tribal hazardous waste facilities found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities

Title 40 of the CFR parts 239 through 259 contain the regulations for non-hazardous solid waste programs set up by the states. EPA has requirements for state solid waste permit programs, guidelines for the processing of solid waste, guidelines for storage and collection of commercial, residential and institutional solid waste, and the criteria for municipal solid waste landfills. State solid waste programs may be more stringent than the federal code requires.

There were no State and/or tribal landfills or solid waste disposal facilities found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks

A typical leaking underground storage tank (LUST) scenario involves the release of a fuel product from an underground storage tank (UST) that can contaminate surrounding soil, groundwater, or surface waters, or affect indoor air spaces. Once a leak is confirmed, immediate response actions must be taken to minimize or eliminate the source of the release and to reduce potential harm to human health, safety, and the environment. Each state has unique requirements for initiating responses to a release, and it is up to the UST owner or operator to conduct actions in compliance with his/her local rules.

There were no State and/or tribal leaking storage tanks found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks

EPA initially issued UST regulations in 1988. In 2015, EPA modified the UST regulation, which was effective October 13, 2015 in Indian Country and states without State Program Approval. EPA recognizes that, because of the size and diversity of the regulated community, state and local governments are in the best position to oversee USTs: 1) State and local authorities are closer to the situation in their domain and are in the best position to set priorities, 2) Subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act allows state UST programs approved by EPA to operate in lieu of the federal program, 3) the state program approval (SPA) regulations set criteria for states to obtain the authority to operate in lieu of the federal program. State programs must be at least as stringent as EPA's. A complete version of the law that governs USTs can be found in U.S. Code, Title 42, Chapter 82, Subchapter IX.

There were no State and/or tribal registered storage tanks found at subject and adjoining properties.

State and tribal institutional control/engineering control registries

Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments such as administrative and legal controls that help minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of the remedy. Engineering controls consist of engineering measures (e.g, caps, treatment systems, etc.) designed to minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination by either limiting direct contact with contaminated areas or controlling migration of contaminants through environmental media. It is EPA's expectation that treatment or engineering controls will be used to address principal threat wastes and that groundwater will be returned to its beneficial use whenever practicable.

There were no State and/or tribal institutional and/or engineering controls found filed against the target property.

Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites

State cleanup programs play a significant role in assessing and cleaning up contaminated sites. State cleanup programs typically are programs authorized by state statutes to address brownfields and other lower-risk sites that are not of federal interest. The EPA has historically supported the use of state cleanup programs and continues to provide grant funding to establish and enhance the programs.

This approach was codified in 2002 as Section 182 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

(CERCLA).

There were no State and/or tribal voluntary cleanup sites found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Lists of state and tribal brownfields sites

Since its inception in 1995, EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program has grown into a proven, results-oriented program that has changed the way communities address and manage contaminated property. The program is designed to empower states, tribes, communities, and other stakeholders to work together to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reuse brownfields. Beginning in the mid-1990s, EPA provided small amounts of seed money to local governments that launched hundreds of two-year Brownfields pilot projects and developed guidance and tools to help states, communities and other stakeholders in the cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields sites.

There were no State and/or tribal brownfields sites found within a half-mile radius of the target property.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice

This report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR). It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. NATIONWIDE ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE RESEARCH, LLC SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL NATIONWIDE ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE RESEARCH, LLC, BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF NATIONWIDE ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE RESEARCH, LLC, IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this report "AS-IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property.

Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2022 by Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR). All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC, or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR) and its logos are trademarks of Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.