Comments
- 1-9 of 9
I have been involved with the removal of hundreds of in-ground lift removals in the past 15 years. They do leak, probably 50% of the time, especially if the reservoir is located in-ground. As suggested above though, hydraulic oil typically doesn't travel far and is pretty easy to excavate....unless there is groundwater impact, obviously. The client I represent will always want at least one boring within two feet of the excavation and a groundwater sample for single post and two or three borings for dual post or vaulted fore and aft lifts. If it is not too late, especially since he did this so "covertly" I would make him pay for soil and groundwater sampling, just to give you piece of mind.
I think it is really dependant on a lot of factors. The client, type of property, the deal (buy or sell) and how risk adverse your client is. I have worked with a very conservative client for over 15 years. They buy/sell/lease industrial and dealership properties nationally. Based on the historical use of the properties and the conservativeness of the client, generally we perform Phase IIs and remedial actions 60-70% of the time. Whether we identify RECs or not, they want some sort of subsurface evaluation. That being said, I worked with Wall Street lenders and insurance companies for about eight years and it seemed like they were checking a box that the Phase I was completed and didn't care if there were RECs identified. For me, rarely (<10%) did Phase II work come out of the lenders. That being said, I worked with a REIT that was acquiring large portfolios nationally and they wanted follow up work on every REC identified, which on a portfolio of 150 properties turning into a lot of Phase IIs (50%).
Very useful information Dianne. Thank you very much for keeping on this topic which has the potential to impact many of us in the industry. I personally really appreciate it.
The firm that I work for has a very large Canadian and European presence. I have noticed that our clients in other countries have been purchasing US assets in the last year. Since they are already a client of the firm, they are using our due diligence services in the United States.
Wow, Diane, thank you for the great summary and keeping everyone "in the know" on the issue.
I worked at an EPA response contractor firm in Region 3 for four years. The emergency response team (as part of the START contract) commonly responded to schools to respond to mercury clean ups due to broken thermometers. EPA would mobilize at least one person and the contractor would mobilize several staff for cleanup. I guess it depends on who is called and what agencies are involved but it was taken very seriously. I did not work with the EPA contract so don't know all the details but it was an emergency response with Federal oversight and reporting.
In the case for my client, dependent on the business transaction, sometimes we pump out the wastewater collection devices and inspect them. If we see no evidence of compromise, you could possibly make the determination that it is not a REC. For hoists, if there is pressure testing data on active lifts (<3 months old) or "recent" subsurface data in the vicinity of the hoists. But still, if it is active, you have 40-50 gallons of hydraulic oil under pressure...they typically leak, in my experience. I have reviewed reports by other consultants that did not make the presence of the hoists a REC at all....I disagreed with that but I guess that is the decision of the EP.
I have supported (environmental risk management) for one of the "big three" auto makers for over 15 years. They are a VERY conservative client so I have had to opportunity to investigate a lot of dealerships. At dealership/service facilities they always investigate oil-water separators, catch basins and even trench drains. They want all wastewater collection devices to be considered a REC whether we observe compromised components or not. We always advance borings adjacent to the wastewater collection devices and more times than not, we find a VOC, SVOC or metals (above state action levels) and depending on the transaction, we remove the oil-water separators and plug all devices that discharged. As far as in-ground hydraulic lifts....you have 50-gallons of hydraulic oil under pressure. They leak most of the time. And as mentioned above, concrete patchwork is usually indicative of issues. I have removed hundreds of in-ground lift systems over the past 15 years....most have leaked one time or another. When the lift repair company goes out to repair a failing lift, they do not care about the impacted soil they find. They repair the lift, backfill and resurface.
All that being said, I make oil-water separators and in-ground hydraulic lifts a REC for any client, both present a material threat of a release, as far as I am concerned.
I think REC....based on the definition below....
“recognized environmental conditions” means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, ground water, or surface water of the property.