Phase 2 Site Investigation (Draft) prepared by BL dated January 2018.pdf

355 Research Parkway ▪ Meriden, CT 06450 ▪ T (203) 630-1406 ▪ F (203) 630-2615 ▪ www.blcompanies.com

DRAFT

PHASE II SITE INVESTIGATION

Allyn Street Assemblage Hartford, Connecticut

Prepared for:

Mr. Garrett Heher Director of Capital Projects

Shelbourne Global Solutions, LLC 20 Church Street

Hartford, CT 06103

Prepared By:

BL Companies, Inc.

355 Research Parkway Meriden, Connecticut 06450

January 23, 2018 BL Companies Project No. 1800389

An Employee-Owned Company

This report was prepared by the individuals listed below. Any questions or comments regarding the information provided herein should be directed to these individuals.

Prepared by:

Wesley Johnson Project Scientist

Reviewed by:

Sam Haydock, MS, LEP Principal

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Description Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Site Description

1.2 Site History

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Geology and Hydrogeology

2.2 Groundwater and Surface Water

3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

4.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Connecticut Transfer Act

4.2 Remediation Standard Regulations

5.0 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SURVEY….………………………………..8

6.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

6.1 Data Quality Objectives

6.2 AOC 1 – Former Gasoline Service Station

6.3 AOC 2 – Former Steam Laundry Facility

6.4 AOC 3 – Former Auto Repair/Sales and Machine Shop

6.5 AOC 4 – Former Repair and Body Shop

6.6 AOC 5 – Former Car Rental Facility, Dress Factory, and Printing Operation…………………………………………………………………...12

6.7 AOC 6 – Former Gengras Motor Cars, Universal Auto Co., and Clothing Factory

6.8 AOC 7 – Former Battery Station, Sheet Metal Works, and

Woodworking Facility

6.9 AOC 8 – Urban Fill of Unknown Origin (Site Wide)

7.0 PHASE II SITE INVESTIGATION

7.1 Summary of Work and Rationale

7.2 Analytical Results and Comparison to RSR Criteria

8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Summary of Findings

8.2 Recommendations

8.3 CTA Obligations

8.4 Potential Remedial Options

9.0 LIMITATIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(continued)

APPENDICES

Appendix A Site Plans Site Location Map Site Plan (SP-01)

GPR Survey Transect Map (GPR-01) Site Investigation Plan (SI-01) Ground-Water Contour Plan (GW-01)

Appendix B Tables Table 1 – Soil Analytical Data Table 2 – Ground-Water Analytical Data

Appendix C Boring Logs and Well Completion Diagrams

Appendix D Laboratory Analytical Data Reports

Phase II Site Investigation 1 1800389

Allyn Street Assemblage, Hartford, Connecticut DRAFT January 2019

1.0 INTRODUCTION

BL Companies was retained by Shelbourne Global Solutions, LLC (Shelbourne) to complete a Phase II Site Investigation (SI) at the Allyn Street Assemblage, in Hartford, Connecticut. The Site (Allyn Street Assemblage) consists of the following parcels:

• 329 Church Street,

• 339 Church Street,

• 98 High Street,

• 106 High Street,

• 112 High Street,

• 122 High Street,

• 108 Allyn Street,

• 112 Allyn Street,

• 128 Allyn Street, and

• 154 Allyn Street (combined with 180 Allyn Street but recorded as 154).

The Phase II SI has been completed as part of due diligence associated with the potential acquisition of the Site. BL Companies completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the Site in December 2018. The Phase I ESA identified the former industrial/commercial uses of the Site as recognized environmental conditions (RECs).

Based on the Phase I ESA, BL Companies identified four RECs in connection with the Site. Based on further review and investigation, BL Companies identified 8 areas of concern (AOCs), as described by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CTDEEP) Site Characterization Guidance Document (SCGD), to be investigated as part of the Phase II SI. This Phase II SI report summarizes the soil and ground-water sampling conducted to determine if a release of petroleum products and/or hazardous substances had occurred at the Site within the identified AOCs.

This Phase II SI was conducted in general accordance with standard and accepted practices and the CTDEEP SCGD dated September 2007, revised December 2010. The results of BL Companies’ Phase II SI and the regulatory implications are discussed in this report.

1.1 Site Description

The Site consists of ten contiguous parcels, totaling 2.16-acres, located at 329 Church Street, 339 Church Street, 98 High Street, 106 High Street, 112 High Street, 122 High Street, 108 Allyn Street, 112 Allyn Street, 128 Allyn Street, and 154 Allyn Street. The Site is bound by Church Street to the north, Allyn Street to the south, High Street to the west, and a church and restaurants to the east. The Site consists of a secure parking area with pay gate access points from each street. The Site is currently utilized as a parking service managed by Propark America, and is situated in an area of primarily commercial and residential land usage. See Figure 1 (Site Location Map) and the Site Plan (SP-01).

Phase II Site Investigation 2 1800389

Allyn Street Assemblage, Hartford, Connecticut January 2019

1.2 Site History

Based on historical sources, and municipal and state records, the Site was developed as early as 1885 with residential and educational structures. By 1900, a blacksmith and a wagon working shop were present at 128 Allyn Street and a carriage repository was located at 112 Allyn Street.

By 1950, a printing operation, tire sales and service, auto sales and service, and a clothing manufacturer were located on 128 Allyn Street and 154-180 Allyn Street. A warehouse was present at 98 High Street, and a restaurant and a store were located at 112 High Street. In addition, a gas station was operating at 122 High Street, and a machine shop was present at 329 Church Street.

By 1979, 112 High Street was vacant, and a wholesale dry goods store was located at 112 Allyn Street. In 1986, an auto body operation was present at 98 High Street.

By 1992, a dress factory, a parking garage, and Universal Auto Company (auto repair and parts storage) were present at 128 Allyn Street and 154-180 Allyn Street. The YMCA and a parking garage were located on 98 High Street, and a battery station, sheet metal works, and a woodworking operation were present at 128 Allyn Street. Residential dwellings were present at 112 Allyn Street, and office and auto supplies and retail stores were located at 108 and 112 Allyn Street. A steam laundry and auto repair operations were present at 329 and 339 Church Street.

From approximately 1986 to 1988, all of buildings were demolished to make way for a proposed redevelopment project that was never built. It appears that the Site remained vacant and undeveloped for approximately 17 years. In 2005 the Site was paved and developed as a private parking lot.

The Site formerly maintained heating oil and/or waste oil above-ground storage tanks (ASTs) from at least the 1920s to the 1960s associated with 98-100 High Street and 128-150 Allyn Street. Between 1950 and 1986, the Site maintained gasoline, diesel, heating oil, and waste oil underground storage tanks (USTs), and/or hydraulic lifts associated with 112-122 High Street, 128-150 Allyn Street, 339-343 Church Street, and 154-164 Allyn Street.

Various industrial operations were identified as hazardous waste generators including High Street Mobile (aka Atlas oil Company), Godell’s Repair and Body Shop, ISS Prudential Maintenance Services, Inc., Driscoll Motors, Inc., and the Hertz Corporation.

Based on Information on file at the Connecticut DEEP, all the parcels except 108 Allyn Street and 112 Allyn Street have been the subject of Form III fillings under the Connecticut Transfer Act (CTA) and likely will be subject to its requirements in the event of a future transfer.

Phase II Site Investigation 3 1800389

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Geology and Hydrogeology

Geologically, the Site is located in the Central Lowlands Physiographic Province of Connecticut and is underlain by the Portland Arkose, consisting of reddish-brown arkose (brownstone) (Rodgers, 1985). Bedrock outcrops are not present at the Site and was not encountered during this investigation.

According to the "Surficial Materials Map of Connecticut", dated 1992, surficial materials within the project area consist of fines (very fine sand, silt, and clay), which is composed of well sorted, thin layers of alternating silt and clay, or thicker layers of very fine sand and silt. Very fine sand commonly occurs at the surface and grades downward into rhythmically bedded silt and clay varves (lake bottom deposits). Based on observations during boring installation, surficial materials consist of urban fill, in each boring except SB-9, SB-14, and SB-20, in general at depths of approximately 5’ bgs or less. In certain areas, such as SB-29, urban fill was noted as deep as 10’ bgs. Beneath the urban fill consists of reddish brown to brown silt and clay with varying amounts of sand, gravel, and cobbles. Boring logs are included as Appendix C.

According to the USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Map of Hartford, Connecticut, the Site is relatively flat and is situated at an elevation of approximately 60 feet above mean sea level. Topography in the vicinity of the Site generally slopes to the southeast towards the Connecticut river, approximately 3,200 feet from the Site. Groundwater elevations determined during this Phase II Site investigation infers groundwater flow direction to the southeast.

2.2 Groundwater and Surface Water

According to the CTDEEP mapping, groundwater beneath the Site is classified as GB.

The GB classification indicates that groundwater at the Site is presumed unsuitable for direct human consumption without treatment. Also, according to CTDEEP mapping, the Site is not located within an Aquifer Protection Area.

No surface water bodies were observed on the Site. The Park River is a river flows underneath the City of Hartford and is located approximately 1,700 feet to the south-southwest of the Site. In addition, the Connecticut River is located approximately 3,200 feet to the southeast of the Site. Both the park River and the Connecticut River are classified as “SB” surface water bodies, according to the above-referenced DEEP map.

Class SB surface waters are designated for use as marine fish, shellfish and wildlife habitat, shellfish harvesting for transfer to approved areas for purification prior to human consumption, recreation, industrial and other legitimate uses including navigation.

Phase II Site Investigation 4 1800389

3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Allyn Street Assemblage, Hartford, Connecticut, prepared by BL Companies, December 13, 2018.

According to the Phase I ESA conducted by BL Companies in December 2018, the Site was developed as early as 1885 and has an extended history of industrial operations including blacksmith shop, wagon working shop, carriage repository, dress factory, clothing manufacturing, parking garage, auto repair and parts storage, sheet metal works, woodworking, auto supplies and retail stores, steam laundry, printing operation, tire sales and service, and warehouse. Gasoline, heating oil and waste oil USTs, hydraulic lifts, and heating oil ASTs have been present in the past at the Site.

Various operations were hazardous waste generators and The Hertz Corporation, Gadell's Repair & Body Shop, Inc. at 98 High Street, ISS Prudential Maintenance Services, Inc. at 100 High Street, and Driscoll Motors, Inc. at 132 Allyn Street were identified in 1986 as Establishments with Form III filings. In addition, the Atlas Oil Company at 112 and 122 High Street was identified as an Establishment in 1986 with a Form III filing. Correspondence from a legal firm indicates that 128-164 Allyn Street, 84- 110 High Street, and 317 to 331 Church Street are Establishments.

The report identified the following recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the Site:

• The Site has historically operated with a gas station at 112-122 High Street, auto repair, a printing operation, and manufacturing operations at 128 and 154-180

Allyn Street, auto body operations at 98 High Street, and a machine shop and auto repair at 329 Church Street. Limited information was available regarding former Site processes, potential chemicals utilized, and potential or actual wastes generated. Although no documented releases were reported to the CTDEEP, the

Site maintained various gasoline, heating oil, and waste oil USTs and heating oil

ASTs, and several releases of gasoline and heating oil were identified in municipal records. Hazardous waste manifests document wastes transported from 1986 to 1991 associated with the auto body operation and the gas station.

Based on the Form III filing for 112 and 122 High Street, this portion of the Site is considered an "Establishment" due to historic Site operations. In addition, correspondence from a legal firm to the CTDEEP in 1986 indicates that a subsequent Form III was filed for 128-164 Allyn Street, 84-110 High Street, and 317 to 331 Church Street. Based on the correspondence, the Site is considered an Establishment with the exception of 108 Allyn Street and 112 Allyn Street. The Site would likely be subject to the legal and technical requirements of the CTA in the event of a transfer.

Phase II Site Investigation 5 1800389

4.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Connecticut Transfer Act

Connecticut General Statute (CGS) Section 22a-134 is known as “The Connecticut Transfer Act” (CTA) and regulates the transfer, investigation and remediation of Hazardous Waste Establishments. An Establishment is defined as any real property at which or any business from which:

• on or after November 19, 1980, there was generated, except as a result of remediation of polluted soil, ground water or sediment more than 100 kilograms of hazardous waste in any one month;

• hazardous waste generated at a different location was recycled, reclaimed, reused, stored, handled, treated, transported or disposed of;

• the process of dry cleaning was conducted on or after May 1, 1967;

• furniture stripping was conducted on or after May 1, 1967; or

• a vehicle body repair facility was located on or after May 1, 1967.

Facilities that are considered Establishments under the CTA are subject to certain reporting requirements to the CTDEEP when a transfer of ownership occurs. One of four filing forms (Form I, II, III, IV) and an ECAF must be submitted to the CTDEEP.

As identified in the Phase I ESA, all of the parcels were identified as Establishments with Form III fillings in 1986 with the exception of 108 Allyn Street and 112 Allyn Street. The Site would therefore likely be subject to the legal and technical requirements of the CTA in the event of a transfer. BL Companies is not aware of any environmental investigation or remediation completed at the Site subsequent to the 1986 filings under the CTA. It appears that the CTA obligations associated with the previous Form III filings remain open.

In order to achieve compliance with the CTA and achieve CTDEEP approval or verification by an LEP, it is necessary to demonstrate that all potential release areas at the Site have been investigated in accordance with standard and prevailing guidelines, and that remediation (if necessary) has been completed, including any post-remediation groundwater monitoring.

4.2 Remediation Standard Regulations

The CTDEEP has promulgated the RSRs, Sections 22a-133k-1 through 3 of the Regulations of the Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA), that specify the allowable levels of regulated compounds in soil and ground water for both GA (ground water presumed drinkable without treatment) and GB (presumed unsuitable for drinking without treatment) ground water classification areas.

Phase II Site Investigation 6 1800389

4.2.1 Soil Criteria

The RSRs define two criteria that apply to soil: the Direct Exposure Criteria (DEC) and the Pollutant Mobility Criteria (PMC). The DEC defines the maximum level of regulated compounds allowed in soil to a depth of 15 feet bgs without posing a threat due to direct human exposure, while the PMC sets the maximum level of regulated compounds allowed in soil without posing a threat to ground-water quality. Each criterion is further divided into two categories; the DEC is based upon Site usage (i.e., residential or industrial/commercial use), while the PMC is based on the ground water classification (i.e., GA/GAA or GB). The Site is located in a GB ground-water classification area and therefore is required to meet the GB PMC.

The residential DEC must be met if a Site is to be used for residential purposes. The CTDEEP and the RSRs define “residential activity” to include any activity related to a residence or dwelling, or to a school, hospital, day care center, playground, or outdoor recreation area. If a Site or property is not to be used for residential purposes, then the industrial/commercial DEC may be met if an Environmental Land Use Restriction (ELUR) is filed for the Site. The ELUR would limit the Site to only industrial or commercial usage.

The current use of the Site meets the definition of industrial/commercial.

The DEC does not apply if soil meets the definition of “inaccessible,” and the PMC does not apply if soil meets the definition of “environmentally isolated.” In either case, an ELUR is required.

Soil can be rendered “inaccessible” if the impacted soil is covered by four feet of clean fill (non-polluted material), or covered by two feet of clean fill and a minimum of three inches of asphalt, or covered by a building or other permanent structure. A 2013 Amendment to the RSRs allows for fill material which has been impacted by “semi-volatile substances or petroleum hydrocarbons that are normal constituents of bituminous concrete” and/or metals that are less than two times the DEC to be capped with asphalt and deemed inaccessible, even at depths between 0-2’ bgs. The ELUR put in place during this scenario would no longer need the CTDEEP approval, financial assurance, or reporting requirements associated with an engineered control as it would have prior to the amendment.

Soils that are isolated beneath a building or other impermeable structure may be considered “environmentally isolated,” such that with the use of an ELUR, the PMC does not apply. Asphalt is not considered impermeable and cannot be used to render soil environmentally isolated.

Additionally, the RSRs also provide several self-implementing options for assessment of regulated compounds in soil.

4.2.2 Groundwater Criteria

The RSRs define three criteria that apply to groundwater: the ground water protection

Phase II Site Investigation 7 1800389 criteria (GWPC), the surface water protection criteria (SWPC), and the groundwater volatilization criteria (GWVC). The GWPC defines the maximum levels of regulated compounds allowed in ground water for protection of the groundwater as a potable water source. In areas that are classified as GA or GAA, the remediation goal may be to achieve the GWPC or more stringent background conditions, depending on if municipal water is available for all area residents or if a public water supply is nearby. The GWPC generally does not apply to GB areas unless water supply wells are located within the vicinity of an identified plume. The Site is located in a GB ground water classification area, and potable supply wells are not suspected to be present in the Site vicinity, therefore the GWPC does not appear to apply to the Site.

The SWPC applies to impacted ground water that is discharging to a surface water body, including wetlands, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, and Long Island Sound. One standard has been set for all surface water bodies, regardless of quality classification. The SWPC specifies the levels of compounds allowable in ground water just prior to discharging into surface water. Compliance with the SWPC is established at the point at which the plume discharges to the surface water body. The RSRs also allow the evaluation of an alternative SWPC, based on available dilution in the receiving water body. There is no surface water on or adjacent to the Site.

The GWVC sets the allowable levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in ground water that is less than 15 feet bgs. The GWVC is designed to protect humans from exposure to VOCs present in shallow ground water. Residential and industrial/commercial GWVC have been established, with the residential GWVC being more stringent, and the industrial/commercial GWVC requiring the use of an ELUR. The GWVC may not have to be met if monitoring of soil vapor above the water table or indoor air quality demonstrates that there is no exposure hazard.

Phase II Site Investigation 8 1800389

5.0 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SURVERY

BL Companies mobilized a Mala HDR ground-penetrating-radar (GPR) unit to the Site on December 20, 2018. The GPR unit was utilized to determine if potential former USTs identified during the Phase I ESA remain at the Site. Due to the active use of the Site as parking area, the GPR survey was conducted after normal business hours when the parking lot was as empty as possible. However, automobiles present at the Site during the survey still impacted access to portions of the Site. A best effort was made to identify all subsurface utilities and any potential buried metallic objects present at the Site.

Approximately 103 GPR transects were made in a grid format with an average spacing between transects of 2 feet. Several image anomalies were identified during the GPR survey and were further investigated with the GPR to designate the approximate horizontal dimensions of the anomalies. Some of the anomalies had a clear parabolic signature indicative of potential USTs. In addition to the potential USTs, a possible former fuel dispenser pad was identified during the GPR survey. Finally, two less definable unknown anomalies were located during the GPR survey and were identified as areas of interest.

The GPR transects, potential USTs, potential former fuel dispenser pad, and areas of interest are depicted on the GPR Survey Transect Map (GPR-01) included in Appendix A.

Phase II Site Investigation 9 1800389

6.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

BL Companies prepared a Conceptual Site Model (CSM) for the Site based upon the geology, hydrogeology, the historical use of the Site as defined in the Phase I ESA, and a GPR utility survey. A CSM is a description of the environmental system at a Site that provides a framework for communicating the rationale for the Site investigation process.

The CSM describes potential release areas as well as release mechanisms, contaminant fate and transport characteristics, and potential migration pathways at the Site.

The following AOCs have been identified at the Site:

• AOC 1: Former Gasoline Service Station.

• AOC 2: Former Steam Laundry Facility.

• AOC 3: Former Auto Repair/Sales and Machine Shop.

• AOC 4: Former Repair and Body Shop.

• AOC 5: Former Car Rental Facility, Dress Factory, and Printing Operation.

• AOC 6: Former Gengras Motor Cars, Universal Auto Co., and Clothing Factory.

• AOC 7: Former Battery Station, Sheet Metal works, and Woodworking Facility.

• AOC 8: Urban Fill of Unknown Origin (Site Wide).

The CSM was used to develop an investigative approach in order to characterize each AOC. The goal of the Phase II SI was to determine the presence or absence of a release of regulated compounds at the Site. Soil borings and ground-water monitoring wells were advanced/installed to collect soil and ground-water samples for analysis for the presence of specific constituents of concern (COCs) identified in the preliminary CSM.

The location of the AOCs are depicted on the Site Plan (SP-01) and Site Investigation Plan (SI-01) included in Appendix A.

6.1 Data Quality Objectives

Development, revision and validation of the CSM process are dependent upon the complexity of the Site conditions and the project-specific data quality objectives (DQOs) that are established to adequately characterize the Site. The DQOs for the Site characterization process are developed to ensure data of sufficient quality and quantity are collected to support decisions and conclusions made during Site characterization and to aid in the ultimate validation of the CSM.

DQOs are statements that clarify objectives, define the appropriate type and quantity of data to be collected, establish the appropriate conditions for data collection, and specify acceptable levels of error and laboratory reporting levels that will be used as the basis for establishing the quantity and quality of the data needed to support decision made based upon the use of that data. The DQO process used on this project was developed to help guide data collection activities, develop a defensible rationale for collecting samples and to ensure that the data used in the decision-making process was appropriate for the intended use.

Phase II Site Investigation 10 1800389

6.2 AOC 1: Former Gasoline Service Station

Historical file review conducted during the Phase I ESA indicated that 112-122 High Street formerly contained a gasoline service station. This portion of the Site is listed with one 1,000-gallon waste oil UST in 1937, one waste oil UST abandoned in 1958, and two 4,000-gallon gasoline USTs in 1958. The 4,000-gallon USTs reportedly replaced two 1,000-gallon USTs in 1958. In addition, one 275-gallon heating oil tank from 1940 was replaced with a 500-gallon tank in 1959. A 1970 Building Record indicated that the Site maintained two 4,000-gallon and one 2,000-gallon gasoline USTs. The Site was identified as High Street Mobil in 1979 and one 10,000-gallon gasoline UST was scheduled to be installed. In 1982, the Site is listed with one 4,000-gallon waste oil UST, one 4,000-gallon gasoline UST, and one 10,000-gallon gasoline UST.

An April 1986 Underground Storage Facility Notification form (EPHM-6) notes the registration of one 10,000-gallon gasoline UST installed in 1982, two 4,000-gallon gasoline USTs installed in 1961, and one 550-gallon waste oil UST installed in 1961 as currently in use. One 1,000-gallon unidentified UST was listed as abandoned-in-place in 1969.

An additional EPHM-6 form, dated December 1986, indicated that the USTs were removed in 1986. A rough sketch included with the form depicts the gas station in the northwest corner of the Site, at the intersection of High Street and Church Street. The gasoline UST locations are illustrated as adjacent to the building in the northwest corner and the waste oil UST is in the northwestern-most corner of the Site.

This area was investigated during the GPR survey. No anomalies or signatures were identified within the AOC.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks.

Potential Migration Pathways: To surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Extractable Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (ETPH), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PCBs), and Total RCRA 8 Metals.

6.3 AOC 2: Former Steam Laundry Facility

Historical file review and historical Sanborn Fire Insurance maps depict a steam laundry facility located at 339-343 Church Street circa 1922-1950. In addition, prior to drilling, a GPR utility survey was conducted and a potential UST was discovered adjacent to the southwestern corner the former steam laundry facility building. An application for a heating permit indicates that faciality maintained a boiler room. According to the Hartford Fire Marshal, a heating oil leak in the boiler room of “Sanitary Laundry” is reported in 1965

Phase II Site Investigation 11 1800389 and 1966 due to an overfill. Additional information pertaining to the steam laundry facility operational practices and procedures were not available for review. There is no indication of any dry-cleaning operation at this facility.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks. Spills or leaks from potential waste containment systems.

Potential Migration Pathways: To surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table. Through cracks or imperfections in the building floor, to underlying soils, then downward through subsurface soils to the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, and ETPH.

6.4 AOC 3: Former Auto Repair/Sales and Machine Shop

Historical file review and historical Sanborn Fire Insurance maps depict an Auto Repair/Sales and Machine Shop at 329-331 Church Street, located in the northeastern portion of the Site from at least 1922 to at least 1950. In addition, during the GPR survey, a possible UST and dispenser were discovered to the east of the former building. A plan dated April 1987 depicts a fuel fill and gas pump in this general vicinity. However, they appear to be associated with the factory to the south, located at 128-150 Allyn Street.

Additional information pertaining to the operational practices and procedures for this facility were not available for review.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of equipment and storage containers, and spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks.

Potential Migration Pathways: Through cracks or imperfections in the concrete floor, to underlying soils, then downward through subsurface soils to the water table, and to surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, ETPH, and RCRA 8 metals.

6.5 AOC 4: Former Repair and Body Shop

Historical file review and historical Sanborn Fire Insurance maps depict Gadell’s Repair and Body Shop, circa 1978-1988, located at 98-100 High Street. In addition, this portion of the Site is listed with one 550-gallon UST, one pump, one 275-gallon tank, and one 1,000-gallon UST reportedly associated with Intertown Motors which occupied the Site from 1931 to 1965. A Building Record from 1971 identified a 1,000-gallon heating oil tank on the north side of the Site building. In addition, the tenant was listed with a 1,000-gallon heating oil UST and a 275-gallon waste oil aboveground storage tank (AST). Additional

Phase II Site Investigation 12 1800389 information pertaining to the operational practices and procedures for this facility were not available for review.

This area was investigated during the GPR survey. No anomalies or signatures were identified within the AOC.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of equipment and storage containers, and spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks.

Potential Migration Pathways: Through cracks or imperfections in the concrete floor, to underlying soils, then downward through subsurface soils to the water table and/or to surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, ETPH, PCBs and RCRA 8 metals.

6.6 AOC 5: Former Car Rental Facility, Dress Factory, and Printing Operation

Historical file review and historical Sanborn Fire Insurance maps depict Hertz Rent a Car and a dress factory associated with 154-164 Allyn Street circa 1950s-1990s. In addition, a printing operation was associated with 154-164 Allyn Street circa 1950s. This portion of the Site is listed with one 1,000-gallon UST, one 550-gallon UST, and two pumps.

Permits believed to be associated with fuel storage and dispensing were approved in

October 1920, March 1921, March 1941, November 1955, and June 1965. The 1965 permit notes the replacement for the existing pump and tank. A permit listing for 160 Allyn

Street notes the presence of one 1,000-gallon UST and one pump approved in

September 1931. In addition, in 1955, replacement of a 1,000-gallon gasoline tank was approved for Hertz-U-Drive. In 1964, a 550-gallon gasoline tank is noted on the Site. In

1969, a gasoline spill was noted in the Hertz Garage. In 1979, Incident No. 79-067-12 is listed for a release of gasoline at Hertz. In 1982, one 550-gallon gasoline UST and one

1,100-gallon gasoline UST, and a dispenser are noted as present on the Site for Hertz.

Additional information pertaining to the operational practices and procedures for these facilities were not available for review. This area was investigated during the GPR survey and no anomalies were identified, suggesting that the above-mentioned USTs have been removed.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of equipment and storage containers, and spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks.

Potential Migration Pathways: Through cracks or imperfections in the concrete floor, to underlying soils, then downward through subsurface soils to the water table and/or to surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table.

Phase II Site Investigation 13 1800389

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, ETPH, and RCRA 8 metals.

6.7 AOC 6: Former Gengras Motor Cars, Universal Auto Co., and Clothing Factory

Historical file review and historical Sanborn Fire Insurance maps depict Gengras Motor

Cars, Circa 1986, a clothing factory, circa 1950, and Universal Auto Company, Circa

1922-1950, associated with 128-150 Allyn Street. This portion of the Site is listed with one 1,000-gallon UST and one pump in 1920. A factory is noted in 1949 on the third floor of the Site building and a proposed machine shop for the second floor was noted in 1950.

Two unpermitted oil burners are noted in 1955, and an oil spill was reported in 1957. The

Site is listed with two 5,000-gallon steel gasoline and diesel USTs in 1981. A Building

Record in 1973 notes the presence of one 275-gallon heating oil tank and one 1,100-gallon heating oil tank in the basement of the Site building.

An EPHM-6 form on file at the CTDEEP dated July 23, 1986 notes the registration of one

3,000-gallon gasoline UST and one 5,000-gallon diesel UST, installed in 1979, and one

1,000-gallon waste oil UST, installed in the 1940s as currently in use. A drawing depicts the entire Site and the locations of the USTs in the southeast corner of the Site. Additional information pertaining to the operational practices and procedures for these facilities were not available for review.

This area was investigated during the GPR survey. One potential UST was identified at the boundary between AOC-6 and AOC-7. The tank was investigated as part of AOC-7.

No other anomalies or signatures were identified within the AOC-6.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of equipment and storage containers, and spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks.

Potential Migration Pathways: Through cracks or imperfections in the concrete floor, to underlying soils, then downward through subsurface soils to the water table and/or to surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, ETPH, and RCRA 8 metals.

6.8 AOC 7: Former Battery Station, Sheet Metal Works, and Woodworking Facility

Historical file review and historical Sanborn Fire Insurance maps depict battery station, a sheet metal works, and a woodworking business circa 1922 associated with 120-124 Allyn Street located in the southeastern portion of the Site. In addition, during the GPR utility survey, three potential USTs and one area of interest was discovered. Additional

Phase II Site Investigation 14 1800389 information pertaining to the operational practices and procedures for these facilities were not available for review.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Spills or leaks from failure of equipment and storage containers, and spills or leaks from failure of the tanks or discharge pipes or spills during filling of the tanks.

Potential Migration Pathways: Through cracks or imperfections in the concrete floor, to underlying soils, then downward through subsurface soils to the water table and/or to surficial soil or subsurface soil, then downward through the subsurface soils towards the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, ETPH, and RCRA 8 metals.

6.9 AOC 8: Urban Fill of Unknown Origin (Site Wide)

Urban fill placed at the site is of unknown origin and composition. Urban fill is expected Site wide.

Potential Release Mechanisms: Urban fill impacted with contaminants of concern placed at the site.

Potential Migration Pathways: Downward through subsurface soils to the water table.

Constituents of Concerns: VOCs, PAHs, ETPH, PCBs, and RCRA 8 metals.

Phase II Site Investigation 15 1800389

7.0 PHASE II SITE INVESTIGATION

The following is a discussion of the investigation approach conducted by BL Companies as part of the Phase II SI completed at the Site in January 2019. The field-sampling program described herein was designed to fulfill the DQO of determining the presence or absence of contamination in the soil and/or ground-water that may have resulted from releases of petroleum and/or hazardous substances.

7.1 Summary of Work and Rationale

BL Companies mobilized a track-mounted Geoprobe 7822DT drill rig operated by Cummins Envirotech, Inc. (CEI) on January 2, 3, and 4, 2019, to advance soil borings and install groundwater monitoring wells at the Site. A total of 39 soil borings, identified as SB-1 through SB-39, and five groundwater monitoring wells, identified as MW-1 through MW-5, were installed at Site. Soil borings and their associated AOCs are listed on Table 1. Soil borings and monitoring wells were completed in the following locations:

• AOC-1: Soil borings SB-1 through SB-10 were advanced throughout the area of the former High Street Mobil at 112-122 High Street. In particular, soil borings were advanced at the approximate locations of former USTs and dispensers identified during the Phase I ESA. Monitoring well MW-1 was installed at the SB- 4 location.

• AOC-2: Two soil borings, identified as SB-11 and SB-17, were advanced in the area of the former steam laundry facility located at 339-343 Church Street. SB-11 was advanced in a presumed downgradient location of a possible UST identified during a GPR survey. SB-17 was advanced approximately in the center of the former steam laundry building.

• AOC-3: Five soil borings, identified as SB-12 through SB-16, were advanced in the area of the former auto repair/sales and machine shop building. SB-12 was advanced adjacent to a possible UST that was identified during the GPR survey.

SB-13 and SB-14 were advanced within and adjacent to a possible former dispenser pad that was identified during the GPR survey. SB-16 was advanced approximately in the center of the former building. Monitoring well MW-2 was installed at the SB-15 location which is presumed downgradient of the possible UST and possible former dispenser.

• AOC-4: Nine soil borings, identified as SB-18 through SB-26, were advanced within the approximate location of the former Gadell’s Repair and Body Shop building formerly located at 98-100 High Street. Monitoring well MW-3 was installed at the SB-26 location.

• AOC-5: Two soil borings, identified as SB-38 and SB-39, were advanced within the approximate location of the former Hertz Rent A Car, dress factory, and printing operation building located at 154-64 Allyn Street.

Phase II Site Investigation 16 1800389

• AOC-6: Seven soil borings, identified as SB-32 through SB-37, were advanced throughout the former clothing factory, Gengras Motor Cars, and Universal Auto Company formerly located at 128-150 Allyn Street. Monitoring well MW-4 was installed at the SB-27 location.

• AOC-7: Four soil borings were advanced in the vicinity of the battery station, sheet metal works, and woodworking building formerly located at 120-124 Allyn Street.

Three possible USTs were identified in this location during the GPR survey. Soil borings were advanced in a presumed downgradient location of each potential tank. Monitoring well MW-5 was installed at the SB-28 location.

• AOC-8: Thirty-nine soil borings were advanced throughout the entire Site.

Soil borings were advanced to depths ranging from 5 to 15 feet bgs. The completion depth of each boring was determined based on the likely depth of impact according to the CSM developed for the Site.

The five groundwater monitoring wells were set to a depth between 13 and 18 feet bgs.

Monitoring wells, MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, and MW-5 were constructed with 10 feet of 2-inch diameter, 0.010-inch slotted, schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well screens with an appropriate length of 2-inch diameter solid PVC riser pipe. Monitoring well MW-4 was constructed with 15 feet of 2-inch diameter, 0.010-inch slot, scheduled 40 PVC with an appropriate length of 2-inch diameter riser pipe. A #1 grain size morie sand pack was installed in the annular space between the well screens and the borehole sidewalls to a depth of approximately one foot above the top of the well screens. An approximately 1 to 2.5-foot thick bentonite seal was installed above the sand pack in monitoring wells MW- 3, MW-4, and MW-5. The remainder of the borehole annular space was backfilled with drill cuttings and sand. Monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-2 have no bentonite seal due to formation collapse and soil bridging. The monitoring wells were completed with flush mount covers set in a concrete surface seal.

The location of the soil borings and groundwater monitoring wells are depicted on the Site Investigation Plan (SI-01) included in Appendix A. Boring logs documenting subsurface conditions and well completion diagrams are included in Appendix C.

7.1.1 Soil Sampling

Soil samples were collected from each boring in five-foot intervals using acetate Geoprobe sampling sleeves. Soil samples were visually inspected for the presence of contamination and field screened for organic vapors with a calibrated photoionization detector (PID). A representative portion of each soil core was screened with a calibrated photoionization detector (PID) to detect estimated quantities of total VOCs in vapor emitted from the soil. The PID was equipped with a 10.6 eV bulb that was calibrated to isobutylene standard gas (100 parts per million (ppm)). The results of the PID screening ranged from 0.0 ppm to 183 ppm in the soil screened. The highest PID reading was recorded in boring SB-4/MW-1 corresponding with stained soil and a strong petroleum

Phase II Site Investigation 17 1800389 odor. In addition, SB-32 contained a 1-inch thick layer of stained soil with accompanying petroleum odor and PID reading of 14.4.

Based on observations during boring installation, surficial materials consist of urban fill, in each boring except SB-9, SB-14, and SB-20, in general at depths of approximately 5’ bgs or less. In certain areas, such as SB-29, urban fill was noted as deep as 10’ bgs.

Beneath the urban fill consists of reddish brown to brown silt and clay with varying amounts of sand, gravel, and cobbles. PID readings and soil lithologies are depicted on the Boring logs included as Appendix C.

In the absence of PID readings above background and/or visual evidence of a release, soil samples were collected from the interval that, based on the release scenario identified in the CSM, had the highest potential to contain COCs. Soil samples were also collected from the depths where debris was observed in some of the above stated boring locations in order to assess the potential for impacted urban fill at the Site. For example, in the absence of field evidence of a release, shallow samples were collected from depths ranging from 0-4’ bgs to look for COCs related to urban fill and/or shallow releases related to historical Site usage. In soil borings investigating potential USTs, in the absence of field evidence of a release, soil samples were collected from depths of 10-12’ bgs, the presumed depth of impact had a release from a UST occurred.

The soil samples were stored on ice and shipped under proper chain-of-custody protocols to Phoenix Environmental laboratories for chemical analysis. A total of 39 soil samples were submitted for analysis for the presence of VOCs via EPA Method 8260C, ETPH via the CT ETPH Method, PAHs via EPA Method 8270D, and/or RCRA 8 Metals via EPA 6010D.

7.1.2 Groundwater Sampling

BL Companies collected groundwater samples from monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-5 on January 8, 2019 using low flow sampling techniques. Groundwater quality parameters (i.e., turbidity, temperature, conductivity, pH, oxygen reducing potential, and dissolved oxygen) were monitored during well purging. Once water quality parameters were stabilized as defined in the CTDEEP “Low Flow Sampling Procedures” guidance document, ground-water samples were collected. During low flow sampling, due to the tight geologic formation at MW-2 and MW-4, these monitoring wells were pumped dry prior to reaching stabilization. Due to this, MW-2 and MW-4 were sampled as grab samples once the wells had recharged. Groundwater samples were placed into laboratory prepared glassware, stored on ice, and shipped under proper chain-of-custody protocols to the laboratory for analysis of ETPH via CT ETPH method, VOCs via EPA Method 8260C, PAHs via Method 8270D, and/or RCRA 8 metals via EPA Methods 6010D.

Phase II Site Investigation 18 1800389

7.1.3 Groundwater Elevation Survey

BL Companies conducted a groundwater monitoring well elevation survey on January 8, 2019. Groundwater elevations were calculated based on water levels measured on January 7, 2019 and a groundwater contour map was developed. Based on the survey and depth to ground water, groundwater flow direction was calculated to be generally to the southeast. Groundwater flow direction is depicted on Groundwater Contour Plan (GW-01) included in Appendix A.

The following table summarizes the monitoring well elevations surveyed and the depths to water measured on January 7, 2019.

Well Identification Well Elevation (ft)* Depth To Water (ft)

GW Elevation (ft)*

MW-1 111.2 3.29 107.91

MW-2 101.65 7.29 94.36

MW-3 103.73 6.06 97.67

MW-4 99.59 12.45 87.14

MW-5 95.95 10.39 85.56

* = elevations based on an assumed datum

7.2 Analytical Results and Comparison to RSR Criteria

Phase II SI soil and groundwater analytical results are summarized in Tables 1 and Table 2 included in Appendix B. Laboratory analytical reports are included in Appendix D.

7.2.1 AOC 1: Former Gasoline Service Station

Ten soil borings, SB-1 through SB-10, were advanced in the vicinity of the former High Street Mobil. Soil boring locations were chosen based on the approximate area of the former USTs and dispensers identified during the Phase I ESA.

The soil was screened to determine if a release associated with the UST was present.

No visual/olfactory evidence of a release or PID readings above background (0.0 ppm) were observed or detected in the soil screened, with the exception of SB-4. SB-4 contained visually stained soil, a petroleum odor, and a PID reading of 183 ppm. In addition, indications of urban fill (brick, plastic, and/or glass) were observed in each boring at shallow depths, except SB-9.

Four discrete soil samples were collected at depths ranging from 0.5-3’ bgs to determine if shallow soil had been impacted by releases associated with fuel dispensers. Two discrete soil samples were collected at depths ranging from 1-3.5’ bgs to determine of shallow soil had been impacted by surface releases, releases from UST piping, and/or impacted urban fill. Six soil samples were collected at depths ranging from 5-6’ bgs and 10-12.5’ bgs to determine if deeper soils had been impacted by releases associated with USTs. No sample was collected from soil boring SB-10. The soil samples were submitted

Phase II Site Investigation 19 1800389 for laboratory analysis for the presence of VOCs, ETPH, PCBs, PAHs, and/or RCRA 8 Metals.

• VOCs: Three soil samples, identified as SB-3 (0.5-2.5’), SB-4 (0.5-1.5’), and SB-4 (5-6’), were submitted for laboratory analysis for VOCs. 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene and M&P-Xylenes were detected in sample SB-4 (5-6’) at concentrations above the GB PMC. VOCs were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in the other two samples analyzed.

• PAHs: Seven soil samples were submitted for laboratory analysis for PAHs. PAHs were detected in sample SB-4 (0.5-1.5’) at concentrations above the RES DEC, I/C DEC, and/or GB PMC. PAHs were detected in samples SB-1 (0.5-1.5’), SB-4 (5-6’), and SB-9 (1-3’) at concentrations below applicable RSR criteria. PAHs were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in the remaining samples analyzed.

• ETPH: Each sample was submitted for laboratory analysis of ETPH. ETPH was detected in sample SB-9 (1-3’) at a concentration of 840 mg/kg, above the RES DEC. ETPH was detected in samples SB-1 (0.5-1.5’) and SB-4 (0.5-1.5’) at concentrations below applicable RSR criteria. ETPH was not detected at concentrations above laboratory reporting limits in the remaining samples.

• PCBs: One sample, identified as SB-9 (1-3’), was submitted for laboratory analysis of PCBs. PCBs were not detected at concentrations above laboratory reporting limits.

• Metals: Four samples identified as SB-1 (0.5-1.5’), SB-3 (0.5-2.5’), SB-4 (0.5-1.5’), and SB-4 (5-6’), were submitted for laboratory analysis of RCRA 8 metals. Total arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, and/or mercury were detected in each sample at concentrations below applicable RSR criteria and at concentrations potentially indicative of naturally occurring metals in soil. Selenium and silver were not detected above laboratory reporting limits

Conclusion: Based on the field screening evidence and analytical results, a release related to the former UST and dispenser system appears to have impacted soils within AOC-1 in the vicinity of borings SB-1 and SB-4. Additional investigation is required to further delineate this release, both horizontally and vertically. In addition, based on the analytical data, a release appears to have impacted shallow soils at boring SB-9.