Site Assessment and UST Removal, Boston, MA
Tata & Howard provided site assessment and underground storage tank (UST) removal services for a private client. The Site is a former commercial manufacturing and warehouse facility located in an industrial area of Boston, MA. It is occupied by a single story, 76,000 square foot commercial warehouse food market and commercial restaurant wholesaler. Initial assessment by a prior consultant identified petroleum related compounds and styrene in indoor air, the source of which was, according to them, a UST located outside the building. Tata & Howard was called in to give a second opinion and was given a very short time frame because the client would lose their $4,000,000 deposit if they did not buy the property within three weeks. Their bank told them that no other consultant could meet their deadline but the borrower’s attorney recommended they contact Tata & Howard.
We first identified that styrene is not associated with petroleum. Therefore, there had to be another source of this compound. We immediately went to the site and saw that much of the food is wrapped in plastic, and numerous plastic plates and utensils are stored there as well. This appeared to be the more likely source of the styrene as well as the petroleum in the indoor air. To test this hypothesis, we drilled several holes through the concrete slab to test the sub slab soil gas. First, we found that the slab was almost three feet thick, lending further credibility to the theory that the contaminants in the air were not from beneath the slab; the concrete was too thick to allow any vapors through. Further site testing including sub slab soil gas analyses, which had no styrene and very little petroleum present, confirmed this theory.
Based on the findings of the assessment activities, the results indicate that a level of No Significant Risk exists for presence of these compounds at the disposal site. These findings, along with the additional information presented, support the applicability of a Class B-2 RAO to the disposal site. Remedial action was not necessary to achieve a condition of No Significant Risk and the client did not lose their $4,000,000 deposit.