DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Scott

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Scott PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT SCOTT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 4700 ARIZONA AVE NE SALEM, OREGON Prepared for: Salem-Keizer Public Schools Attn: Brian Hardebeck 2450 Lancaster Drive NE Salem, Oregon 97305 DRAFTPrepared by: Offices in Portland and Bend, Oregon / San Rafael, California P.O. Box 14488, Portland, Oregon 97293 T. 503-452-5561 / E. [email protected] Site Conditions as of June 11, 2019 ENW Project No.: 689-19006-01 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT SCOTT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 4700 ARIZONA AVE NE SALEM, OREGON Prepared for: Salem-Keizer Public Schools Attn: Brian Hardebeck 2450 Lancaster Drive NE Salem, Oregon 97305 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 40 CFR § 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 requirements in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Prepared by: Heather Caporaso, Environmental Scientist And: Victoria Bennett, Senior Environmental Scientist DRAFTReviewed by: Paul M. Trone, R.G., Principal Geologist Site Conditions as of June 11, 2019 ENW Project No.: 689-19006-01 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ i TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDICES .................................................................................................. iii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. vi 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Authorization ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Objective ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Scope ................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 SITE LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................................................................... 3 2.1 Location and Legal Description ...................................................................................... 3 2.2 Site and Vicinity Description ........................................................................................... 3 2.3 Surrounding Properties .................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Topography ....................................................................................................................... 3 2.5 Geologic Setting ................................................................................................................ 3 2.6 Hydrogeologic Setting ...................................................................................................... 4 2.6.1 Surface Water ....................................................................................................... 4 2.6.2 Ground Water ....................................................................................................... 4 3.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE .............................................................................................................. 6 3.1 Observations ..................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Interior Observations ........................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Utilities .................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Interviews ........................................................................................................................... 7 3.3 Hazardous Substances and Wastes ............................................................................... 7 3.4 Storage Tanks ................................................................................................................... 7 3.4.1 Underground Storage Tank (UST) Systems ...................................................... 7 3.4.2 Above-ground Storage Tanks (ASTs) ................................................................ 8 3.4.3 In-Ground Hydraulic Equipment ......................................................................... 8 3.5 Solid Waste Disposal ........................................................................................................ 8 3.6 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) .................................................................................. 8 3.7 Water, Wastewater and Storm Water Discharge ............................................................ 8 3.7.1 Discharge Sources .............................................................................................. 8 3.7.2 Oil/WaterDRAFT Separators, Clarifiers, Sumps and Trenches ................................... 8 3.7.3 Sanitary Systems ................................................................................................. 8 3.8 Wells ................................................................................................................................... 9 3.9 Non-Scope Considerations .............................................................................................. 9 3.9.1 Asbestos ............................................................................................................... 9 3.9.2 Lead-Based Paint ................................................................................................. 9 3.9.3 Radon .................................................................................................................. 10 3.9.4 Mold ..................................................................................................................... 10 4.0 SITE HISTORY .............................................................................................................................. 11 4.1 Agency Contacts ............................................................................................................. 11 4.1.1 Building Department .......................................................................................... 11 4.1.2 Fire and Health Departments ............................................................................ 11 EVREN Northwest, Inc. i 689-19006-01, Rev. 0, 7/5/19 4.1.3 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ............................................... 11 4.2 Assessment Records ..................................................................................................... 12 4.2.1 Marion County Assessor’s Office .................................................................... 12 4.2.2 Environmental Lien Report ............................................................................... 12 4.3 Aerial Photographs ......................................................................................................... 12 4.4 Topographic Maps .......................................................................................................... 14 4.5 Historical Fire Insurance Sanborn Maps ...................................................................... 14 4.6 City Directories ................................................................................................................ 15 4.7 Previous Environmental Reports or Documents ......................................................... 15 4.7.1 Foss Environmental Services Co., Underground Storage Tank Decommissioning: Auburn Elementary School-4512 Auburn Road NE, Salem, Oregon, September 1993. ........................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.8 Summary of Site History ................................................................................................ 15 5.0 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS .......................................................................................... 16 6.0 TIER 1 VAPOR ENCROACHMENT SCREEN .............................................................................. 18 6.1 Findings ........................................................................................................................... 18 6.2 Opinion ............................................................................................................................. 18 7.0 FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................................... 19 8.0 DATA GAPS .................................................................................................................................. 21 9.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 22 DRAFT EVREN Northwest, Inc. ii 689-19006-01, Rev. 0, 7/5/19 TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDICES Tables Location 2-1 Property Identification .......................................................................................... Section 2 2-2 Surrounding Properties
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Emergency Operations Plan
    Marion County Emergency Operations Plan April 2012 Prepared for: Marion County Prepared by: ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, INC. This page left blank intentionally. Preface The Marion County Emergency Management Program is governed by a wide range of laws, regulations, plans, and policies. The program is administered and coordinated by the Marion County Department of Public Works. The program receives its authority from Oregon Revised Statutes, which are the basis for Oregon Administrative Rules. The National Response Framework, the National Contingency Plan, and the State of Oregon Emergency Management Plan provide planning and policy guidance to counties and local entities. Collectively, these documents support the foundation for this Marion County Emergency Operations Plan. This Emergency Operations Plan is an all-hazard plan describing how Marion County will organize and respond to events. It is based on and is compatible with the laws, regulations, plans, and policies listed above. The plan describes how various agencies and organizations in the County will coordinate resources and activities with other federal, state, local, tribal, and private-sector partners. Use of the National Incident Management System/Incident Command System is a key element in the overall county response structure and operations. Response to emergency or disaster conditions in order to maximize the safety of the public and to minimize property damage is a primary responsibility of government. Marion County’s goal is to respond to such conditions in the most organized, efficient, and effective manner possible. To aid in accomplishing this goal, Marion County has adopted the principles of the National Incident Management System, the National Response Framework, and the Incident Command System.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Overview December 2008
    Molalla-Pudding Subbasin TMDL Chapter 1 Overview December 2008 Chapter 1 Overview Reason for action .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Water Quality 303(d) Listed Waterbodies ................................................................................................... 2 Water Quality Parameters Addressed ........................................................................................................ 6 Water Quality Parameters Not Addressed .................................................................................................. 6 Who helped us .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Subbasin Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Climate ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Geology and Geography ............................................................................................................................. 9 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................................. 11 Water Use ................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Prepared by October 2018 This page intentionally left blank. This page intentionally left blank. Executive Summary The U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) prepared this Tier 1 environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate improved Amtrak Cascades intercity passenger rail service alternatives for the Oregon Passenger Rail Project (OPR Project). The OPR Project examines an approximately 125-mile segment of the Federally designated Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor (PNWRC) from the Eugene-Springfield urban area to Portland. In addition to this EIS, ODOT is preparing a Service Development Plan (SDP) for the corridor to guide further development and capital investment in passenger rail improvements. The PNWRC has been the subject of intercity passenger rail planning, development and operation for more than 30 years. The PNWRC is one of 11 Federally designated high-speed rail corridors in the United States. FRA designated this passenger rail corridor on October 20, 1992, as one of five original corridors called for in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. The 466-mile PNWRC serves the most densely populated regions of British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon. It links Vancouver, British Columbia, Seattle, Washington, and Portland and Eugene, Oregon, with growing intermediate communities (including the capital cities of Salem, Oregon, and Olympia, Washington). Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway owns the existing PNWRC railroad infrastructure in Washington, in British Columbia, and in Oregon north of Portland’s Union Station. Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) owns the existing PNWRC railroad infrastructure in Oregon south of Portland’s Union Station.
    [Show full text]
  • Precipitation-Runoff and Streamflow-Routing Models for the Willamette River Basin, Oregon
    Precipitation-Runoff and Streamflow-Routing Models for the Willamette River Basin, Oregon U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 95–4284 Prepared in cooperation with OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Cover photograph. Cottonwood seeds float on the Willamette River looking upstream between Harrisburg and Eugene (at river mile 169), June 24, 1993. (Photograph by Dennis A. Wentz, U.S. Geological Survey.) Precipitation-Runoff and Streamflow-Routing Models for the Willamette River Basin, Oregon By ANTONIUS LAENEN and JOHN C. RISLEY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 95–4284 Prepared in cooperation with OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Portland, Oregon 1997 I U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ For additional information Copies of this report can write to: be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey, WRD Branch of Information Services 10615 S.E. Cherry Blossom Drive Box 25286 Portland, Oregon 97216 Federal Center E-mail: [email protected] Denver, Colorado 80225 II CONTENTS Abstract .....................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Molalla-Pudding, French Prairie and North Santiam Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan
    Molalla-Pudding, French Prairie and North Santiam Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan November 2018 Developed by the Oregon Department of Agriculture Molalla, Pudding, French Prairie and North Santiam Local Advisory Committee With support from the Marion, Linn, and Clackamas Soil and Water Conservation Districts ODA Marion SWCD Clackamas SWCD Linn SWCD Water Quality Program 338 Hawthorne Ave NE 221 Molalla Ave. 33935 Hwy. 99E 635 Capitol Street NE Salem, OR 97301 Suite 102 Tangent, OR 97389 Salem, Oregon 97301 Phone: (503) 391-9927 Oregon City, OR 97045 Phone: (541) 926-2483 Phone: (503) 986-4700 marionswcd.oacd.net Phone: (503) 210-6000 linnswcd.oacd.org [email protected] http://oda.direct/AgWQPlans Table of Contents Acronyms and Terms Used in this Document ............................................................................ i Foreword .......................................................................................................................................... iii Required Elements of Area Plans ............................................................................................... iii Plan Content ..................................................................................................................................... iii Chapter 1: Agricultural Water Quality Management Program Purpose and Background 1 1.1 Purpose of Agricultural Water Quality Management Program and Applicability of Area Plans....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Little Pudding River Bridge Replacement MARION COUNTY, OREGON
    SUBMITTED TO: Marion County Public Works 5155 Silverton Road Salem, Oregon 97305 BY: Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 3990 Collins Way, Suite 100 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 503-210-4750 www.shannonwilson.com GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Silverton Road: Little Pudding River Bridge Replacement MARION COUNTY, OREGON November 27, 2018 Shannon & Wilson No: 24-1-04094 Silverton Road: Little Pudding River Bridge Replacement Geotechnical Engineering Report CONTENTS 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Project Understanding ............................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Site Description ................................................................................................................. 1 2.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Anticipated Construction Sequencing .......................................................................... 3 2.4 Scope of Services .............................................................................................................. 3 3 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC SETTING .................................................................................... 4 3.1 Regional Geology ............................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Local Geology ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Subbasin Profiles Analysis of Toxic Pollutant Sources
    Appendix C Subbasin Profiles Analysis of Toxic Pollutant Sources and Characteristics Contributing to Water Quality Impairments in the Willamette River Basin Subbasin Profile Clackamas Profile Description HUC 8 Subbasin ……. 17090011 Land cover …………... 603,343 acres (8.2% of Willamette Basin) Watersheds ……….…. 6 Subwatersheds …….. 34 Counties ……………….. Clackamas, Marion, and Wasco Impairments Watersheds ….. 4 River miles ……. 200 (5.4% of Willamette Basin) 2012 Category 5 303(d)-listed Toxic Pollutants Organochlorine Organophosphorus Metals Insecticide Insecticide Lead Dieldrin Chlorpyrifos Mercury Guthion Beneficial Uses Aquatic Life and Human Health Sources: (DEQ, 2012; OSDL, 2011, 2015a, 2017) Impairments Watershed (HUC 10) Subwatershed (HUC 12) City 170900110101 Upper Hot Springs Fork 170900110102 Nohorn Creek 170900110103 Lower Hot Springs Fork 1709001101 170900110104 Elk Lake Creek Collawash River 170900110105 East Fork Collawash River 170900110106 Happy Creek-Collawash River 170900110107 Farm Creek-Collawash River 170900110201 Cub Creek 170900110202 Headwaters Clackamas River 1709001102 170900110203 Lowe Creek-Clackamas River Upper Clackamas River 170900110204 Last Creek-Pinhead Creek 170900110205 Pot Creek-Clackamas River Headwaters Oak Grove Fork 170900110301 Clackamas River Timothy Lake-Oak Grove Fork 170900110302 Clackamas River 1709001103 170900110303 Stone Creek Oak Grove Fork Clackamas 170900110304 Shellrock Creek River Anvil Creek-Oak Grove Fork Clackamas 170900110305 River Cot Creek-Oat Grove Fork Clackamas 170900110306 River
    [Show full text]
  • Base Flood Elevation Determination for Reaches of Lake Labish Ditch and Little Pudding River, Marion County, Oregon
    State of Oregon Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Vicki S. McConnell, State Geologist BASE FLOOD ELEVATION DETERMINATION BF-13-01 BASE FLOOD ELEVATION DETERMINATION FOR REACHES OF LAKE LABISH DITCH AND LITTLE PUDDING RIVER, MARION COUNTY, OREGON 1 1 by Jed T. Roberts and Daniel E. Coe 2013 1Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 800 NE Oregon Street, #28, Suite 965, Portland, OR 97232 DISCLAIMER The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries is not liable for any claimed damage from the use of this information. The Federal Emergency Management Agency may, at any time in the future, revise the Base Flood Elevations for this study area. This study and Base Flood Elevation determination does not supersede any existing or future detailed analyses or determination performed by a licensed professional engineer. This analysis and mapping does not necessarily identify all areas subject to flooding, particularly from local drainage sources of small size. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Base Flood Elevation Determination BF-13-01 Published in conformance with ORS 516.030 This report was prepared by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries for AKS Engineering & Forestry in fulfillment of the Base Flood Elevation Determination Agreement made effective August 12, 2013. For copies of this publication or other information about Oregon’s geology and natural resources, contact: Nature of the Northwest Information Center 800 NE Oregon Street #28, Suite 965 Portland, Oregon 97232 (971) 673-2331 http://www.naturenw.org For additional information: Administrative Offices 800 NE Oregon Street #28, Suite 965 Portland, OR 97232 Telephone (971) 673-1555 Fax (971) 673-1562 http://www.oregongeology.org http://egov.oregon.gov/DOGAMI/ Reaches of Lake Labish Ditch and Little Pudding River, Marion County, Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS Study Background ............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Floodplain Management Plan
    City of Salem | April 2018 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PLAN City of Salem Floodplain Management Plan Adopted May 14, 2018 Revised April 2018 Prepared by Floodplain Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Tables iii Figures and Maps v Special Thanks and Acknowledgments vii Executive Summary ix Introduction 1 Public Involvement 5 Coordination 9 Hazard Assessment 14 Problem Evaluation 26 Setting Goals 35 Review of Possible Activities 37 Action Plan 39 Appendix A: Council Report 43 Appendix B: Agendas, Sign-in Sheets, and Minutes 47 Appendix C: Notification Letter 65 Appendix D: Possible Activities 69 April 2018 City of Salem i Floodplain Management Plan Appendix E: Proposed Action Plan Items with Goals 75 Appendix F: Flood Information and Outreach Plan 117 Appendix G: Flood Insurance Plan 137 Bibliography 145 Glossary of Abbreviations 147 ii City of Salem April 2018 Floodplain Management Plan TABLES Table 1: FEMA’s 10-Step Planning Process 4 Table 2: Floodplain Management Advisory Committee Members 6 Table 3: Floodplain Management Plan Update Committee Members 6 Table 4: Committee Meeting Topics 7 Table 5: Watershed Potential for Development 24 Table 6: Critical Transportation Corridors Affected by Flooding 27 Table 7: Zoning Designation of Buildings Within the Floodplain 29 Table 8: City-Owned Buildings 30 Table 9: Claim Payments 30 Table 10: Floodplain Management Plan Goals 35 Table 11: Flood-Related Problems 36 Table 12: Action Plan Items 40 Table 13: Key to Tables 14 and 15 69 April 2018 City of Salem iii Floodplain Management Plan Table 14: Review
    [Show full text]