Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutContamination-and-Toxic-Substances-Multifamily-Partner-Worksheet.pdfOMB No. 2506-0177 (exp. 9/30/2021) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Contamination and Toxic Substances (Multifamily and Non-Residential Properties) – PARTNER https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/site-contamination 1. How was site contamination evaluated? 1 Select all that apply. ☒ ASTM Phase I ESA ☐ ASTM Phase II ESA ☐ Remediation or clean-up plan ☐ ASTM Vapor Encroachment Screening ☐ None of the above → Provide documentation and reports and include an explanation of how site contamination was evaluated in the Worksheet Summary. Continue to Question 2. 2. Were any on-site or nearby toxic, hazardous, or radioactive substances found that could affect the health and safety of project occupants or conflict with the intended use of the property? (Were any recognized environmental conditions or RECs identified in a Phase I ESA and confirmed in a Phase II ESA?) ☒ No → Explain below. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed for the project “revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs), historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs), controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs), significant data gaps, or significant business environmental risks in connection with the Project. → If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. ☐ Yes → Describe the findings, including any recognized environmental conditions (RECs), in Worksheet Summary below. Continue to Question 3. 1 HUD regulations at 24 CFR § 58.5(i)(2)(ii) require that the environmental review for multifamily housing with five or more dwelling units or non-residential property include the evaluation of previous uses of the site or other evidence of contamination on or near the site. For acquisition and new construction of multifamily and nonresidential properties HUD strongly advises the review include an ASTM Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to meet real estate transaction standards of due diligence and to help ensure compliance with HUD’s toxic policy at 24 CFR §58.5(i) and 24 CFR §50.3(i). Also note that some HUD programs require an ASTM Phase I ESA. 3. Can adverse environmental impacts be mitigated? ☐ Adverse environmental impacts cannot feasibly be mitigated → HUD assistance may not be used for the project at this site. Project cannot proceed at this location. ☐ Yes, adverse environmental impacts can be eliminated through mitigation. → Provide all mitigation requirements2 and documents. Continue to Question 4. 4. Describe how compliance was achieved. Include any of the following that apply: State Voluntary Clean-up Program, a No Further Action letter, use of engineering controls3, or use of institutional controls4. Click here to enter text. If a remediation plan or clean-up program was necessary, which standard does it follow? ☐ Complete removal ☐ Risk-based corrective action (RBCA) → Continue to the Worksheet Summary. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was completed for the project site in September 2019 that “revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs), historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs), controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs), significant data gaps, or significant business environmental risks in connection with the Project.” (EMG 2019). A Hazardous Materials Survey report was completed by PBS in September 2021 for the commercial office building that is planned to be demolished and replaced as part of the project. The following findings were documented in the report: 2 Mitigation requirements include all clean-up actions required by applicable federal, state, tribal, or local law. Additionally, provide, as applicable, the long-term operations and maintenance plan, Remedial Action Work Plan, and other equivalent documents. 3 Engineering controls are any physical mechanism used to contain or stabilize contamination or ensure the effectiveness of a remedial action. Engineering controls may include, without limitation, caps, covers, dikes, trenches, leachate collection systems, signs, fences, physical access controls, ground water monitoring systems and ground water containment systems including, without limitation, slurry walls and ground water pumping systems. 4 Institutional controls are mechanisms used to limit human activities at or near a contaminated site, or to ensure the effectiveness of the remedial action over time, when contaminants remain at a site at levels above the applicable remediation standard which would allow for unrestricted use of the property. Institutional controls may include structure, land, and natural resource use restrictions, well restriction areas, classification exception areas, deed notices, and declarations of environmental restrictions. • Asbestos containing materials (ACMs) may be present in floor mastic and there is the possibility of ACMs in concealed locations that were unable to be inspected during the site survey. PBS recommends that any ACMs (if present) in floor mastic be removed prior to construction activities, only by a qualified Washington State licensed asbestos abatement contractor according to applicable local, state and federal regulations (not limited to WAC 296-62-077). In the event that suspect ACMs are encountered during construction in concealed locations, contractors should stop work immediately and inform the owner promptly for confirmation testing. All untested materials should be presumed asbestos-containing or tested for asbestos content prior to impact during construction. • Mercury-containing fluorescent lamps are present at this site. Approximately 300 four-foot fluorescent light tubes were identified during the site survey. PBS recommends that all fluorescent lamps be carefully handled to avoid breakage, and disposed of in accordance with the contract documents and applicable regulations during demolition activities. Washington Department of Safety and Health training requirements, engineering controls and disposal practices shall be followed when performing this work. • Lead was not found in representative painted coatings. However, painted coating may exist in inaccessible areas or in secondary coatings. Unidentified paint coatings should be considered lead containing until sampled or proven otherwise. • “No PCB” labeling was observed on all light fixture ballasts inspected. PBS recommends all ballasts be inspected prior to disposal during construction. If any magnetic ballasts are present, they should be presumed to contain PCBs and properly removed and disposed of. Recommendations and applicable laws will be followed during project activities as follows: • PBS recommendations to identify previously concealed hazardous materials will be followed. • Asbestos: State and federal regulations WAC 296-62, 296-65, local clean Air Pollution Agency rules, AHERA 40 CFR 763, OSHA 29 CFR and US EPA NESHAP 40-CFR Part 61. • Mercury: Washington Department of Safety and Health requires specific training, RCRA metals training for worker protection, handling, engineering controls and disposal practices. • Lead: Washington Labor and Industries regulations for Lead in Construction (WAC-62-155) • PCBs: WAC 173-303 Dangerous Waste Regulations and 40 CFR Part 761 Subpart D. • All waste shall be handled in accordance with WAC 173-303. References: Ecology. 2019. Tacoma Smelter Plume Model Remedies Guidance. State of Washington Department of Ecology, July 2019. EMG. 2019. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Proposed Sunset Gardens, 2900 NE 10th Street, Renton, WA. EMG Corp. September 6, 2019. PBS. 2021. Hazardous Materials Survey Report, Sunset Gardens Commercial Office Building. PBS. September 9, 2021.