Good question. Honestly, if you read the definition of REC, pretty much every asphalt pavement would qualify. Certainly every place where coal-tar patch compound was used will have screaming high levels of PAHs, including the most carcinogenic ones.
I've just come across a former coal storage facility ("coal pockets") adjacent to a former railroad spur. The railroad spur and "coal pockets" were removed in the 1970s and paved over with asphalt. The asphalt is still there, and significantly deteriorated. My question is...wouldn't the asphalt paving contribute to PAHs? How could you differentiate between any potential impacts from coal and impacts from the asphalt?
Thanks for your thoughts.
No release is needed from the original client.
You have knowledge of a scientific finding. Pretending that you don't would be disingenuous. The only way I'd interpret the situation differently is if the original client required you to sign a confidentiality agreement preventing you from disclosure. In that case, you'd be best advised to refuse the assignment with the second client.
I also agree with You're Fired that a single indoor-air sampling result shouldn't be relied upon too heavily.
Thanks Matt. I landed at the same conclusion, but since we identified the VI risk to the site in the prior Phase I, presumably in the absence of the supplemental coring observations and IAQ sample results, that VI risk would still be identified in the new Phase I and can't be dismissed without referring to our "institutional knowledge", which was paid for by the prior prospective buyer. It's a bit of a tail chaser.
In general, I would say that no, the new client can't have access to the work you did for your original client without a release from the original client. Your original client probably would not be happy (and might even have reason to take action against you) if you released reports that they paid for to a 3rd party without their permission. However, this is a legal/contractual question that's not really possible to answer accurately in a forum such as this.
We also considered the lack of such a search a deviation from E1527. We often say it is not significant if the property has no regulatory listings and the owner previously had title work done that showed no ELs or AULs. In 23 years we have never seen and EL. AULs have been rare and usually take place after investigation, which shows up as regulatory listings. Current deeds for property can often be found on the local county web sites. We require our clients to perform the search, unless they request us to do it.
If the tanks were registered, the release may be covered by the SC SUPERB fund, subject to a $25,000 deductible. The deductible would be the responsibility of the owner, but it could be a bargaining tool for the purchaser. You would have to check with SCDHEC first. Also consult an environmental attorney.
Usually up to owner except a few states that require a licensed professional to report it. However, reporting requirements are generally considered a legal question and should be asked of an attorney.
Trust me, there have been plenty of complaints in Ohio. It's made little difference.
Tell your client to call the agency and complain.
This one may have slipped through the ASTM committee...
HOW TO GET RID OF A GHOST
Do you think you have a ghost? Do you want it to go away?
No, that's not a dumb question.
The easiest way to get rid of a ghost is to simply ask it to leave.