Re: Anotherr thought on Use of Urban history

["Dan Durett" <ddurett@oncon.com>]

Thanks for the clarification. I joined the listserve to learn...I am
learning.  Wouldn't the architect's drawing and other data like that
provide further insight.  Ready to listen, observe, and become educated!


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Klafter <bklafter@orrick.com>
To: cpeo-brownfields@igc.org <cpeo-brownfields@igc.org>; ddurett@oncon.com
<ddurett@oncon.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 02, 1999 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: Use of Urban history to identify Brownfields -Reply


>Regarding the use of historical information -
>
>What you're describing (if I understand it correctly) is
>already a part of standard Phase 1 Envirnmental Site
>Assessment.  The ASTM Standard for site assessments
>calls for the use of historical maps, Sanborn maps
>(insurance company), interpretation of aerial photos, title
>reports and personal interviews.
>
>Doing an in-depth historical research effort will probably not
>yield more valuable information than those type of sources.
>It is uncommon to find historical information that reveals
>much about waste handling practices.  The key then to
>designing a followup investigation (or "Phase II") is the type
>of uses that took place on the site historically and their
>approximate locations.  For example, if the site was formally
>a foundry, you would sample for heavy metals (among other
>things) and the location of the shop and storage areas
>would be the best places to look for contamination.
>
>I cannot imagine any brownfields project proceeding without
>a well done Phase 1.   Phase 1's are a comodity, but some
>companies do a much better job than others.
>
>Attached is a brief article on how to read a Phase 1.
>
>