May 4, 2012

via FedEx

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Region 3 Division of Materials Management 21 South Putt Corners Road New Paltz, New York 12561 Attention: Martin D. Brand, P.G. Regional Materials Management Supervisor LANDFILL DISTURBANCE/WASTE HANDLING, RELOCATION, & DISPOSAL PLAN THE JOURNAL NEWS FACILITY 1 GANNETT DRIVE SECTIONS 62 AND 63, BLOCK 631, LOT 12 HARRISON, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK WHITESTONE PROJECT NO.: EJ1111574.005

Regarding:

Dear Mr. Brand: Whitestone Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit for your review the attached revised Landfill Disturbance/Waste Handling, Relocation, & Disposal Plan (Landfill Plan) for the above-referenced property. The Landfill Plan has been revised based on the New York State Department of Environmental Conservations April 27, 2012 comment letter and our recent conversations. Please contact us with any questions or comments regarding the enclosed document. Sincerely, WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Keith T. D'Ambrosio, P.E. Principal, Environmental Services Professional Engineer License No. 076095
CS/pjp Enclosure Copy:

Christopher Seib Director, Environmental Division

Stephanie Harris, Life Time Fitness Jeff Melby, Life Time Fitness Larry M. Wertheim, Esq., Kennedy & Graven Linda Whitehead, Esq., McCullough, Goldberger & Staudt, LLP Dale Henn, Esq., Gannett Co., Inc. Shelly Lucas, Esq., Gannett Co., Inc. William A. Stone, Jr., ENVIRON

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page i

LANDFILL DISTURBANCE/WASTE HANDLING, RELOCATION, & DISPOSAL PLAN

THE JOURNAL NEWS FACILITY PROPOSED LIFE TIME FITNESS FACILITY 1 GANNETT DRIVE SECTIONS 62 AND 63, BLOCK 631, LOT 12 HARRISON, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK

Prepared for: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Region 3 - Solid Waste Program 21 South Putt Corners Road New Paltz, New York 12561

Prepared by: WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC. 35 Technology Drive Warren, New Jersey 07059

Keith T. DAmbrosio, P.E. Principal, Environmental Services Professional Engineer License No. 076095

Christopher Seib Director, Environmental Division

Whitestone Project #EJ1111574.005 March 1, 2012 (Revised May 4, 2012)

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page ii

LANDFILL DISTURBANCE/WASTE HANDLING, RELOCATION, & DISPOSAL PLAN The Journal News Facility 1 Gannett Drive Harrison, Westchester County, New York
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 2.2 3.0 Current/Former Site Use Proposed Site Redevelopment 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 8 8 9 9 10 11 12 12 14 14 14 15 15

SITE INVESTIGATION 3.1 Site Investigation Scope of Work and Methodology 3.1.1 Boring/Test Pit Investigation - April to June 2010 3.1.2 Supplemental Boring Investigation - December 2011 3.1.3 Concrete Investigation - April 2011 3.1.4 Laboratory Analytical Data Site Investigation Sampling and Analyses Data Summary 3.2.1 Site Lithology 3.2.2 Boring/Test Pit Investigation Summary - April 2011 3.2.3 Supplemental Boring/Test Pit Investigation Summary 3.2.4 Soil Analyses Data Summary 3.2.4.1 April 2011 Investigation 3.2.4.2 May/June 2011 Investigation 3.2.4.3 December 2011 Investigation 3.2.5 Concrete Analyses Data Summary 3.2.6 Groundwater Analyses Data Summary

3.2

4.0

CONCLUSIONS 4.1 Conclusions 4.1.1 Soil 4.1.2 Groundwater 4.1.3 Concrete

5.0

LANDFILL DISTURBANCE/WASTE HANDLING, RELOCATION, AND DISPOSAL PLAN 16 5.1 5.2 5.3 Existing Landfill Conditions Proposed Site Redevelopment Off-Site Disposal of Landfill Materials 16 16 17

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page iii

LANDFILL DISTURBANCE/WASTE HANDLING, RELOCATION, & DISPOSAL PLAN The Journal News Facility 1 Gannett Drive Harrison, Westchester County, New York
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
5.0 Landfill Disturbance/Waste Handling, Relocation, and Disposal Plan (continued) 5.3.1 Children Activities Area 5.3.2 Stormwater Quality Basin and Pervious Pavement Areas On-Site Re-Use of Landfill Materials 5.4.1 Existing Landfill Areas Not to be Disturbed Engineering Controls 5.5.1 Asphalt 5.5.2 Concrete 5.5.3 Landscape/Clean Fill Cover 5.5.4 Pavers 5.5.5 Leachate Control Measures 5.5.6 Landfill Gases Control Measures 5.5.7 Future Operation and Maintenance Considerations Deed Notice Construction Health and Safety 5.7.1 Site-Specific Construction HASP 5.7.2 Air and Health & Safety Monitoring 5.7.3 Other Construction Considerations 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 22 22

5.4 5.5

5.6 5.7

FIGURES
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 Site Location Map Site, Boring/Test Pit/Core Location, and Contaminant Plan Site/Grading/Utilities Plan Soil Removal and Re-Use Areas Proposed Engineering Controls

TABLES
TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3 TABLE 4 TABLE 5 TABLE 6 Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - April 2011 Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - June 2011 Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - December 2011 Groundwater Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - December 2011 Concrete Sampling and Analyses Data Summary TCLP Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - June 2011

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page iv

LANDFILL DISTURBANCE/WASTE HANDLING, RELOCATION, & DISPOSAL PLAN The Journal News Facility 1 Gannett Drive Harrison, Westchester County, New York
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT C Boring Logs Deed Notice Analytical Data

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page v

SECTION 1.0 Executive Summary

Whitestone Associates, Inc. (Whitestone) was retained by Life Time Fitness (perspective purchaser) to prepare a Landfill Disturbance/Waste Handling, Relocation, and Disposal Plan (Landfill Plan) for the subject site. The Landfill Plan has been prepared in accordance with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservations (NYSDECs) March 11, 2011 draft guidance to request an exemption from the NYSDEC 6 NYCRR Part 360 regulations involving the disturbance of an old inactive landfill as allowed by 6 NYCRR Part 360-1.7(b)(9). Based on the site history outlined in Section 2.1, the old inactive landfill ceased operations prior to December 31, 1988, is not subject to an Order on Consent or permit, does not have a NYSDEC-approved closure plan, and is not on the Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal sites. As described herein, the disturbance activities are associated with the redevelopment/construction of a new fitness center on the property. Impacts to water quality, exposed solid waste, or leachate discharges have not been identified in association with the site. Site Investigation (SI) activities conducted to evaluate subsurface conditions and fill materials at the site and prepare this Landfill Plan were conducted between April 2011 and December 2011. Specifically, Whitestones SIs included soil, groundwater, and concrete sampling and analyses programs as outlined in Section 3.0. This Landfill Plan has been prepared to address the fill materials identified at the site during the SI activities. The Landfill Plan outlines the contaminants documented in the fill materials and the ways in which the fill materials will be managed during the proposed site redevelopment. Management options include leaving the fill materials in-place, re-use of the fill materials on site, and off-site disposal of the fill materials at a regulated facility which may include beneficial reuse at an already permitted site. Consideration has been given to the types of contaminants at the site (specifically, those exceeding NYSDEC Restricted Residential and Protection of Groundwater Soil Cleanup Objectives [SCOs]) and how they will be managed in relation to the stormwater quality areas (basins and pervious pavement) and children activities areas proposed to be constructed at the site. The Landfill Plan also outlines the health and safety considerations to be implemented during the proposed construction activities as well as longterm notification and monitoring to ensure future exposure to the fill materials does not occur.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 1

SECTION 2.0 Site/Project Description

2.1

CURRENT/FORMER SITE USE

The subject property is located at 1 Gannett Drive, Harrison, Westchester County, New York, Latitude 41.0226 North, Longitude 73.7238 West. The property is identified further as Sections 62 and 63, Block 631, Lot 12, and comprises 22.62 acres. The subject property houses a multi-story commercial structure consisting of a four-story office building and attached one and two-story newspaper production buildings currently occupied by The Journal News. Asphalt-paved parking areas are located to the north, east, and south of the site building and in the northwestern portion of the site. A stormwater management basin is located to the northwest of the site building. The remaining portions of the site consist of wooded land. Wetland areas and a ditch/swale are located in the northern portion of the site. Site location and conditions are shown on Figures 1 through 5. Newspaper printing operations reportedly ceased at the site in March 2010, and The Journal News currently is utilizing the building only for office use and equipment storage. The majority of the equipment associated with the former printing operations including presses and ink tanks has been removed from the building. Portions of the site building initially were constructed in 1972, and the facility has been used as a newspaper printing facility since that time. According to historical sources reviewed by Whitestone, prior to the early 1970's, the subject property consisted of undeveloped, primarily wooded land dating back to at least 1947. 2.2 PROPOSED SITE REDEVELOPMENT

Life Time Fitness proposes to purchase the site and construct a stand-alone, approximately 209,000 square feet fitness center on the property along with related parking, landscaping, and stormwater quality improvements. In addition to traditional health club offerings, the proposed fitness center will include an extensive selection of premium amenities and services in a resort-like setting. Amenities include indoor and outdoor swimming pools, an outdoor Bistro and patio, basketball and squash courts, indoor tennis facilities, cycling and mind-body studios, personal training and group fitness programming, an indoor and outdoor children activities/care center, cafes, an outdoor member activity area, and indoor and outdoor spas. The proposed site redevelopment including utilities is shown on Figures 3 and 5. The proposed redevelopment of the site will require extensive earthwork operations to accommodate the proposed improvements. The project also requires upgrades in stormwater management including the construction of retention basins and belowground collection systems including pervious pavement areas.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 2

As discussed in more detail in Section 5.0, the construction of the stormwater components will require contaminated fill material excavation and management to prevent stormwater from infiltrating through impacted soils in these areas. The off-site disposal of contaminated fill materials is also required at the site. The off-site disposal may include the beneficial reuse of the fill materials at an already permitted site. Concrete generated during the demolition of the existing site building is proposed to be crushed and re-used on site. The proposed site redevelopment will include the use of public utilities. Accordingly, potable water wells and septic disposal systems will not be present on site.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 3

SECTION 3.0 Site Investigation

3.1

SITE INVESTIGATION SCOPE OF WORK AND METHODOLOGY

The SI activities outlined in this Landfill Plan included the following tasks: advancing 71 borings with Geoprobe drilling equipment at interior and exterior locations of the site to facilitate soil screening and select soil sample collection; collecting soil samples from select environmental and geotechnical borings and test pits; logging and field screening soils with a photoionization detector (PID) for the potential presence of volatile organic (VO) contamination from the Geoprobe borings; submitting select soil samples for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), target analyte list (TAL) metals, and/or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) analyses; further analyzing select soil samples for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) metals; submitting 10 concrete samples collected from the building floor slab for VOC, SVOC, TAL metal, and/or PCB analyses; and submitting one groundwater samples for VOC and SVOC analyses. Boring/Test Pit Investigation - April to June 2010

3.1.1

Twelve borings (EB-1 through EB-12) were advanced during the initial SI utilizing track-mounted Geoprobe equipment subcontracted from Tri-State Drilling Technologies, Inc. (Tri-State). Soil samples were collected by advancing a two-inch diameter by four-feet long Macro-Core sampler through the soil profile. Soil samples were collected as the sampler was advanced. Samples were field screened to identify the presence of VO contamination. Soil samples were also collected from select borings (B-24D, B-24F, and B-26C) and test pits (TP-7, TP-9, TP-10, TP-11, TP-12, and TP-13) advanced during Whitestones supplemental Geotechnical Investigation. Soil samples were collected from the intervals within the borings and test pits that exhibited the greatest potential for contamination based upon field screening and/or visual observations. If elevated PID readings were not encountered, the soil samples were collected from within the fill material horizon or at the anticipated inverts of the current or former structures/vessels being evaluated. Soil sampling equipment was decontaminated between successive uses. Groundwater samples were not collected during the initial SI activities as groundwater was not

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 4

encountered. Soil sampling equipment was decontaminated between successive uses. Following soil sample collection, the borings and test pits were backfilled to the surface. Boring and test pit locations are depicted on Figure 2. 3.1.2 Supplemental Boring Investigation - December 2011

Fifty-nine borings (EB-13 through EB-69, EB-15-2, and EB-50A) were advanced during the supplemental SI utilizing track-mounted Geoprobe equipment subcontracted from Tri-State. Soil samples were collected from 57 of the 59 borings. Soil samples were collected by advancing a two-inch diameter by four-feet long Macro-Core sampler through the soil profile. Soil samples were collected as the sampler was advanced. Samples were field screened with a PID to identify the presence of VO contamination. Soil samples were collected from the intervals that exhibited the greatest potential for contamination based upon field screening and/or visual observations. One soil sample was collected from each five-foot interval of fill material encountered in the borings. Soil sampling equipment was decontaminated between successive uses. Following soil sample collection, the borings were backfilled to the surface. One groundwater sample was collected during the supplemental SI from boring EB-32 (the only boring to encounter groundwater during the supplemental SI activities) by installing a temporary, one-inch diameter, slotted pipe (temporary wellpoint) across the groundwater table. Following groundwater sample collection, the screen was withdrawn, and the boring was backfilled to the surface. Boring locations are depicted on Figure 2. 3.1.3 Concrete Investigation - April 2011

Whitestones sampling activities were conducted to evaluate the environmental quality of concrete building materials. Hand tools and a concrete coring drill were utilized to collect samples of concrete building materials (floor slab) throughout the site building. Ten concrete samples were collected and analyzed for SVOCs, VOCs, TAL metals, and/or PCBs. Concrete sample locations are shown on Figure 2. 3.1.4 Laboratory Analytical Data

Soil, concrete, and groundwater samples collected by Whitestone were analyzed at HamptonClarke/Veritech Laboratories (HCV) of Fairfield, New Jersey, a State-certified laboratory (NY Certification #11408). Analytical results and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) data establishing proper holding times, analytical methodology, and laboratory reporting limits (RLs) for the soil, concrete, and groundwater samples are provided as Attachment C and summarized in Table 1 (Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - April 2011), Table 2 (Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - June 2011), Table 3 (Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - December 2011), Table 4

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 5

(Groundwater Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - December 2011), Table 5 (Concrete Sampling and Analyses Data Summary), and Table 6 (TCLP Soil Sampling and Analyses Data Summary - June 2011). Analytical results for the soil and concrete samples collected were compared to NYSDEC Remedial Program Part 375 Unrestricted Use Soil Cleanup Objectives (UUSCOs) with a focus on the NYSDEC Part 375 Restricted Residential and Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Analytical results for the groundwater sample collected were compared to NYSDEC Technical and Operational Guidance Series 1.1.1 (TOGS) Groundwater Quality Standards (GWQS). 3.2 3.2.1 SITE INVESTIGATION SAMPLING AND ANALYSES DATA SUMMARY Site Lithology

Whitestones March 2011 Geotechnical Investigation at the subject site consisted of the installation of 33 soil borings, identified as B-1 through B-27 including offset borings B-5A, B-7A, B-8A, B-11A, B-19A, and B-26A. Whitestones April 2011 Stormwater Management Area Evaluation consisted of excavating five soil profile pits, identified as SPP-1 through SPP-5. Whitestones April 2011 initial SI consisted of drilling 12 soil borings, identified as EB-1 through EB-12. Whitestones May/June 2011 supplemental Geotechnical Investigation consisted of excavating 17 test pits, identified as TP-1 through TP-17, as well as drilling 14 offset soil borings, identified as B-24A through B-24I and B-26B through B-26F. Whitestones December 2011 supplemental SI consisted of drilling 59 soil borings, identified as EB-13 through EB-69 including offset borings EB-15-2 and EB-50A. Boring and test pit locations are depicted on Figure 2, and records of subsurface exploration are presented in Attachment A. The subsurface soil conditions encountered in the borings, soil profile pits, and test pits performed during Whitestones investigations consisted of the following generalized strata in order of increasing depth: Surface Materials: The subsurface tests were performed within existing grass-covered, gravel-covered, concrete-slab-covered, and/or paved areas. Tests performed within existing paved areas encountered approximately 1.5 inches to 10.0 inches of asphaltic concrete pavement at the surface underlain by approximately two inches to eight inches of gravel subbase materials. Twenty-seven test locations performed within existing paved areas did not encounter subbase materials beneath asphalt cover. The borings, test pits, and soil profile pits performed within existing grass-covered areas encountered approximately two inches to six inches of topsoil at the surface. The soil profile pits performed within existing gravel-covered areas encountered approximately six inches to nine inches of gravel at the surface. The borings performed within the existing building encountered approximately six inches to eight inches of concrete floor slab underlain by approximately 6.0 inches to 6.5 inches of gravel subbase materials.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 6

Fill Materials (Stratum 1): Underlying the surface cover, the majority of the test locations encountered existing fill materials to depths ranging between approximately 1.3 feet below ground surface (fbgs) and 15.0 fbgs. Some test locations terminated within the existing fill material of Stratum 1 due to machine refusal within the fill materials. In at least 34 locations where existing fill materials were encountered, the actual depth of existing fill is presumed to extend beyond the termination depth of the test location based on the comparison of former site topography with current site topography. The existing fill materials generally consisted of either: silty sand with variable amounts of gravel/cobbles/boulders, debris, and roots; gravel with silty sand and variable amounts of debris and roots; gravel/cobbles/boulders and a variable amount of sand; and/or debris. The content of the gravel- to boulder-sized fragments within Stratum 1 varied widely across the site. Where encountered, the debris within Stratum 1 generally consisted of concrete, brick, wood, PVC pipe, metal, steel reinforcement bars, chain-link fence, aluminum cans, asphalt, terra cotta, carpet, timber and/or plastic, as well as cinders and ash. The estimated extent of the fill material at the site is depicted on Figures 2 through 5. Apparent Buried Topsoil (Stratum 1A): The top of a layer of apparent buried topsoil was encountered either beneath the surface cover or beneath existing fill materials within 22 test locations at depths ranging between approximately 0.75 fbgs and 10.5 fbgs. Where encountered, the apparent buried topsoil layer ranged in thickness from approximately three inches to 4.5 feet. Residual Materials (Stratum 2): Beneath the surface cover, apparent buried topsoil and/or existing fill materials, 71 of the test locations encountered natural residual materials. The residual materials generally consisted of: micaceous silty sand (USCS: SM) with a variable amount of gravel; poorly graded micaceous sand (USCS: SP-SM) with silt and gravel; lean clay (USCS: CL); and/or sandy silt (USCS: ML) with a variable amount of gravel. Twelve test locations were terminated within the residual materials stratum at depths ranging between approximately 6.5 fbgs and 31.0 fbgs. Otherwise, the residual materials stratum was encountered to a depth equivalent to the top of weathered rock, which varied between approximately 1.5 fbgs and 20.5 fbgs at Whitestones test locations. Weathered Rock (Stratum 3): Beneath either the surface cover, the existing fill materials of Stratum 1, the apparent buried topsoil of Stratum 1A or the residual materials of Stratum 2, the majority of the test locations encountered weathered micaceous schist, visually classified as either gravel-sized rock fragments with a variable amount of silt and sand or silty sand with gravel-sized rock fragments. The top of the weathered micaceous schist stratum was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 0.5 fbgs to 20.5 fbgs. Fifty-two of the test locations terminated within the weathered rock of Stratum 3 at depths ranging between approximately 2.1 fbgs and 15.0 fbgs. Otherwise, the weathered rock extended to apparent intact bedrock at depths ranging between approximately 0.9 fbgs and 21.5 fbgs. Bedrock (Stratum 4): Underlying the weathered rock, thirty-five test locations encountered micaceous schist bedrock, and 31 of these test locations were terminated at the apparent top of bedrock due to machine auger and/or excavation refusal at depths that ranged between approximately 0.9 fbgs and 21.5

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 7

fbgs. Four of the soil borings included approximately five feet to 11.0 feet of rock coring into bedrock and were terminated at depths ranging between approximately 7.5 fbgs and 20.0 fbgs. Rock core recovery ranged between 5.6 percent and 67.0 percent. Rock quality designation ranged between zero percent and 91.0 percent. Groundwater: Static groundwater was encountered within nine of the test locations at depths ranging between approximately 6.5 fbgs and 20.0 fbgs; corresponding elevations ranged from approximately 214.5 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 203.0 feet above msl. Additionally, trapped/perched groundwater was encountered within five test locations at depths ranging between approximately 3.5 fbgs and 10.0 fbgs; corresponding elevations ranged from approximately 216.5 feet above msl to 212.0 feet above msl. Groundwater conditions likely will fluctuate seasonally and following periods of precipitation. 3.2.2 Boring/Test Pit Investigation Summary - April to June 2011

Twelve borings (EB-1 through EB-12) were advanced throughout the site to document potential impacts to subsurface conditions at the subject property during the initial SI. Borings EB-1 through EB-3 and EB6 through EB-9 were advanced to obtain general site coverage and evaluate historic site operations and fill materials. Borings EB-4 and EB-5 were advanced in the vicinity of the former underground storage tanks (USTs) in the western portion of the site and borings EB-10 to EB-12 were advanced within the interior of the site building to evaluate potential impacts from historic site operations and fill materials. Supplemental geotechnical test pits and borings were also installed in the southern, eastern, and northern portions of the site to further evaluate documented fill materials. Whitestone also evaluated and collected soil samples from these borings and test pits as part of the initial SI. Field screening did not identify elevated PID readings in the initial SI borings. Fill materials were encountered in 11 of the 12 initial SI borings to depths of up to 7.5 fbgs. Fill material depths may be greater as refusal within the fill material horizon prevented the borings from reaching full investigation depths in select locations. 3.2.3 Supplemental Boring Investigation Summary - December 2011

Fifty-nine borings (EB-13 through EB-69 and off-set borings EB-15-2 and EB-50A) were advanced throughout the site to further to evaluate and delineate fill materials at the subject property during the supplemental SI. Borings EB-13 through EB-34 and EB-42 through EB-69 were advanced to obtain general site coverage and delineation. Borings EB-35 to EB-41 were advanced within the interior of the site building. Field screening identified slightly elevated PID readings in three of the supplemental SI borings (EB-29, EB-35, and EB-38) ranging between 2.4 ppm and 34.6 ppm. A slight petroleum odor was detected in boring location EB-15-2. Fill materials were encountered in 58 of the 59 supplemental SI borings to depths of up to 12.0 fbgs. Fill depths may be greater as refusal within the fill material horizon prevented the borings from reaching full investigation depths in select locations.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 8

3.2.4

Soil Analyses Data Summary

3.2.4.1 April 2011 Investigation The following is a summary of the soil laboratory analytical results from the initial SI activities conducted on April 28, 2011. The NYSDEC SCOs developed as part of NYCRR Part 375 are not directly incorporated into the NYCRR Part 360 regulations. However, it is understood that NYSDEC utilizes the SCOs on projects subject to the NYCRR Part 360 regulations to evaluate requirements for the management of site materials. Accordingly, the laboratory analytical data for the site were compared to NYSDEC SCOs as outlined below. SVOCs and PCBs were not detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs. The VOC acetone was detected in four of the 12 soil samples collected at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Groundwater SCO. However, acetone is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was also confirmed with HCV. Aluminum and/or iron were detected in each of the soil samples collected at concentrations exceeding their respective NYSDEC UUSCOs. The aluminum UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO only and the iron UUSCO is based on the Residential SCO only. However, these concentrations may be the result of naturally occurring concentrations of these metals within the soil and fill materials and not releases at the site. Select metals were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs in soil sample EB-10 collected beneath the existing site building (ash identified in the boring). Arsenic and lead were also detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Commercial, Residential, Restricted Residential, Industrial, and/or Protection of Groundwater SCOs in soil sample EB-10. Select metals were also detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs in soil sample EB-10. The Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs are applicable to portions of sites having or potentially having ecological resources. The on-site wetlands could be considered an ecological resource, however, the elevated metals were detected in a portion of the site where current and future development would preclude the existence of ecological resources. Accordingly, the Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs would not be applicable in the vicinity of sample location EB-10. Chromium and nickel were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs in soil sample EB11 collected beneath the existing site building. Nickel was detected at a concentration exceeding the NYSDEC Protection of Ecological Resources SCO. The elevated nickel level was detected in a portion of the site where current and future development would preclude the existence of ecological

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 9

resources. Accordingly, the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO would not be applicable in the vicinity of sample location EB-11. Lead was detected at a concentration exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO in soil sample EB-1 collected in the eastern landscaped portion of the site. The UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO. The elevated lead level was detected in a portion of the site where current and future development would preclude the existence of ecological resources. Accordingly, the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO would not be applicable in the vicinity of sample location EB-1. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings advanced at the site during the initial April 2011 SI. Analytical results for these soil samples collected at the site comprise Attachment C, and are summarized in Table 1 and on Figure 2. 3.2.4.2 May/June 2011 Investigation The following is a summary of the laboratory analytical results from the soil samples collected from the supplemental geotechnical borings and test pits conducted in May 2011 and June 2011. Select metals were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs as well as NYSDEC Residential, Restricted Residential, Commercial, Protection of Ecological Resources, Industrial, and/or Protection of Groundwater SCOs in soil samples TP-12/S-1 and TP-13/S-1 collected from test pits excavated in the southern portion of the site. Aluminum and/or iron were detected in each of the soil samples collected at concentrations exceeding their respective NYSDEC UUSCOs. The aluminum UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO only and the iron UUSCO is based on the Residential SCO only. However, these concentrations may be the result of naturally occurring concentrations of these metals within the soil and fill materials and not releases at the site. Select metals were also detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs in soil samples TP-10/S-1, TP-10/S-3, TP-11/S-1, B-24D/S-1, B-24F/S-1, and B-26C/S1. However, the elevated metals were detected in portions of the site where current and future development would preclude the existence of ecological resources, and accordingly, the Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs would not be applicable in these areas. Due to the presence of elevated metals concentrations (particularly lead) in soil samples TP-12/S-1 and TP-13/S-1, these samples were further analyzed for TCLP metals to further analyze the waste characteristics of these soils. TCLP metals analyses of soil samples TP-12/S-1 and TP-13/S-1 did not document leachate concentrations exceeding USEPA TCLP Maximum Concentration Levels.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 10

Select SVOCs were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs as well as NYSDEC Residential, Restricted Residential, Commercial, Protection of Ecological Resources, Industrial, and/or Protection of Groundwater SCOs in soil sample TP-10/S-1 collected from a test pit excavated in the northern portion of the site and soil samples TP-12/S-1 and TP-13/S-1 collected from test pits excavated in the southern portion of the site. VOCs were not detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs. Analytical results for these soil samples collected at the site comprise Attachment C, and are summarized in Tables 2 and 7 and on Figure 2. 3.2.4.3 December 2011 Investigation The following is a summary of laboratory analytical results from the soil sampling collected from the supplemental environmental borings conducted in December 2011. The VOC acetone was detected in six of the 71 soil samples collected at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Groundwater SCO. However, acetone is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was confirmed with HCV. The SVOC di-n-butyphthalate was detected at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO in 27 of the 71 soil samples collected throughout the subject property. However, di-n-butyphthalate is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was confirmed with HCV. Select SVOCs including benzo[a]anthracene, benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, chrysene, indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene, dibenzo[a,h]anthracene, and/or benzo[k]fluoranthene were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs as well as NYSDEC Residential, Restricted Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and/or Protection of Groundwater SCOs in soil samples EB-14A, EB-15B, EB41A, EB-43, and/or EB-63B. Aluminum and/or iron were detected in each of the 71 soil samples collected at concentrations exceeding their respective NYSDEC UUSCOs. The aluminum UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO only and the iron UUSCO is based on the Residential SCO only. However, these concentrations may be the result of naturally occurring concentrations of these metals within the soil and fill material and not releases at the site.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 11

Select metals were also detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs in each of the soil samples collected. However, these metals were detected in portions of the site where current and future development would preclude the existence of ecological resources. Accordingly, the Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs would not be applicable in these areas. Manganese was detected in soil sample EB-14C at a concentration exceeding the NYSDEC Residential, Restricted Residential, Protection of Ecological Resources, and Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Lead was detected in soil sample EB-64 at a concentration exceeding the NYSDEC Residential, Restricted Residential, Protection of Ecological Resources, and Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Analytical results for these soil samples collected at the site comprise Attachment C, and are summarized in Table 3 and on Figure 2. 3.2.5 Concrete Analyses Data Summary

The VOC acetone was detected in four of the five concrete samples analyzed for VOCs at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Groundwater SCO. However, acetone is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was confirmed with HCV. The SVOC di-n-butyphthalate was detected at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO in three of the 10 concrete samples collected within the site building. The UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO. However, di-n-butyphthalate is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was confirmed with HCV. Select metals were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs that are based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs in each of the 10 concrete samples collected within the site building. Cobalt (six of the 10 samples) and iron (all 10 samples) were detected at concentrations exceeding their NYSDEC Residential SCOs. Selenium (one of the 10 samples) and silver (one of the 10 samples) were detected at concentrations exceeding their NYSDEC Protection of Groundwater SCOs. PCBs were detected in concrete samples CS-03 and CS-04 at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO. The NYSDEC UUSCO is based on using the site for raising livestock or producing other animal products for human consumption. The PCB concentrations are below all other NYSDEC SCOs and the NYSDEC UUSCO is not applicable to the subject property.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 12

Analytical results for these concrete samples collected at the site comprise Attachment C, and are summarized in Table 5 and on Figure 2. 3.2.6 Groundwater Analyses Data Summary

The groundwater sample collected during the December 2011 supplemental SI did not document VOCs or SVOCs at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC GWQS. Analytical results for this groundwater sample collected at the site comprise Attachment C, and are summarized in Table 4.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 13

SECTION 4.0 Conclusions

4.1

CONCLUSIONS

Whitestone conducted SI field activities at the subject site between April 2011 and December 2011 to evaluate potential impacts to subsurface conditions and building materials at the property. Conclusions and recommendations pertaining to these activities are summarized as follows: 4.1.1 Soil The VOC acetone was detected in four of the 12 soil samples collected during the initial SI and six of the 71 samples collected during the supplemental SI at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Groundwater SCO. However, acetone is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion has been confirmed with HCV, and no further investigation or corrective actions are required. No other VOC concentrations were detected at the site exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs. The SVOC di-n-butyphthalate was detected at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO in 27 of the 71 soil samples collected throughout the subject property. However, di-n-butyphthalate is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion has been confirmed with HCV, and no further investigation or corrective actions are required. Aluminum and/or iron were detected in each of the soil samples collected throughout the site at concentrations exceeding their respective NYSDEC UUSCOs. The aluminum UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO only and the iron UUSCO is based on the Residential SCO only. However, these concentrations may be the result of naturally occurring concentrations of these metals within the soil and fill material and not releases at the site. Select metals were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs in each of the soil samples collected throughout the site. The Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs are applicable to portions of sites having or potentially having ecological resources. The on-site wetlands could be considered an ecological resource, however, the elevated metals were detected in portions of the site where current and future development would preclude the existence of ecological resources. Accordingly, the Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs are not applicable in these portions of the site. Due to the presence of elevated metals concentrations (particularly lead) in soil samples TP-12/S1 and TP-13/S-1, these samples were further analyzed for TCLP metals to further analyze the waste characteristics of these soils. TCLP metals analyses of soil samples TP-12/S-1 and TP13/S-1 did not document leachate concentrations exceeding USEPA TCLP Maximum Concentration Levels.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 14

SVOCs and/or metals were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Restricted Residential, Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and/or Protection of Groundwater SCOs in select borings and test pits sampled throughout the site. The elevated contaminant concentrations are indicative of the fill materials encountered at the site. The contaminants identified in the fill materials previously include SVOCs and metals. These compounds are generally immobile and, based on the data, do not appear to represent an impact to environmental conditions at the site. Fill materials were encountered throughout the subject site to depths greater than 15.0 fbgs. Figures 2 through 5 shows the assumed extent of fill materials at the site. Groundwater The groundwater sample collected during the December 2011 supplemental SI did not document VOCs or SVOCs at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC GWQS. Concrete The VOC acetone was detected in four of the five concrete samples analyzed for VOCs at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO which is based on the Protection of Groundwater SCO. However, acetone is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was confirmed with HCV, and no further investigation or corrective actions are required. No other VOCs were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs. The SVOC di-n-butyphthalate was detected at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO in three of the 10 concrete samples collected within the site building. The UUSCO is based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCO. However, di-n-butyphthalate is a common laboratory contaminant and does not appear to be the result of a release at the site. This conclusion was confirmed with HCV, and no further investigation or corrective actions are required. No other SVOCs were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs. Select metals were detected at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs that are based on the Protection of Ecological Resources SCOs in each of the 10 concrete samples collected within the site building. Cobalt (six of the 10 samples) and iron (all 10 samples) were detected at concentrations exceeding their NYSDEC Residential SCOs. Selenium (one of the 10 samples) and silver (one of the 10 samples) were detected at concentrations exceeding their NYSDEC Protection of Groundwater SCOs. PCBs were detected in concrete samples CS-03 and CS-04 at concentrations exceeding the NYSDEC UUSCO. The NYSDEC UUSCO is based on using the site for raising livestock or producing other animal products for human consumption. The PCB concentrations are below all other NYSDEC SCOs and the NYSDEC UUSCO is not applicable to the subject property, and no further investigation or corrective actions are required.

4.1.2 4.1.3

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 15

SECTION 5.0 Landfill Disturbance/Waste Handling, Relocation, and Disposal Plan

5.1 EXISTING LANDFILL CONDITIONS

Portions of the site building initially were constructed in 1972, and the facility has been used as a newspaper printing facility since that time. According to historical sources reviewed by Whitestone, prior to the early 1970's, the subject property consisted of undeveloped, primarily wooded land dating back to at least 1947. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during Whitestones SI and geotechnical activities at the subject property, fill materials (as described in Section 3.2.1) were placed throughout the majority of the subject property in the early 1970's prior to site redevelopment. The filling activities are suspected to have only occurred for less than two years. Fill materials appear to be a combination of imported fill in select areas and imported fill mixed with reworked/regraded site soils in other areas. The imported fill materials contained varying amounts of construction and demolition debris and household solid waste. Areas with significant amounts of debris and solid waste are located in the northwestern and southern portions of the site. The fill materials appear to have been utilized to achieve the current site grades. These activities included the filling of significant topographic features as evidence based on a evaluation of pre-development site topography. The site currently is owned and operated by Westchester Rockland Newspaper, Inc./The Journal News and fill materials at the site currently are capped with The Journal News facilitys landscaping, asphalt pavement, and concrete areas including the building floor slab. The current owner purchased the site on May 4, 1971 and the filling activities presumably occurred following the purchase date in conjunction with site redevelopment. Exposed fill material currently is not located on site. Off gasing or leachate concerns have not been observed in conjunction with the site. As depicted on Figures 2 through 7, fill materials are present throughout the majority of the subject property and contain select contaminants as outlined in Section 3.0. The geotechnical/structural evaluation of the fill materials located throughout the subject site have identified select areas of structurally unsuitable fill materials which will require proper management during site redevelopment. 5.2 PROPOSED SITE REDEVELOPMENT

Life Time Fitness proposes to purchase the site and construct a stand-alone, approximately 209,000 square feet fitness center on the property along with related parking, landscaping, and stormwater quality

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 16

improvements. In addition to traditional health club offerings, the proposed fitness center will include an extensive selection of premium amenities and services in a resort-like setting. Amenities include indoor and outdoor swimming pools, an outdoor Bistro and patio, basketball and squash courts, indoor tennis facilities, cycling and mind-body studios, personal training and group fitness programming, an indoor and outdoor children activities/care center, cafes, an outdoor member activity area, and indoor and outdoor spas. The proposed site redevelopment including utilities is shown on Figures 3 and 5. The proposed redevelopment of the site will require extensive earthwork operations to accommodate the proposed improvements. The project also requires upgrades in stormwater management including the construction of retention basins and belowground collection systems including pervious pavement areas. As discussed in more detail in Section 5.3.2, the construction of the stormwater components will require contaminated fill material excavation and management to prevent stormwater from infiltrating through impacted soils in these areas. The off-site disposal of contaminated fill materials is also required at the site. The off-site disposal may include the beneficial reuse of the fill materials at an already permitted site. Concrete generated during the demolition of the existing site building is proposed to be crushed and re-used on site. The proposed site redevelopment will include the use of public utilities. Accordingly, potable water wells and septic disposal systems will not be present on site. Due to the proposed children activities areas at the site, the NYSDEC Part 375 Restricted Residential SCOs were used to compare sampling results in these areas. The proposed children activities areas are shown on Figures 2, 4, and 5. 5.3 OFF-SITE DISPOSAL OF LANDFILL MATERIALS

All excess fill materials generated in conjunction with site redevelopment activities will be further classified, transported off site, and disposed of at a regulated facility permitted to accept the documented contaminant and waste types. The off-site disposal may include the beneficial reuse of the fill materials at an already permitted site. The necessary NYSDEC approvals/determinations will be obtained, as necessary, for the beneficial reuse facilities. Based on the SI data, it is assumed that all soil/fill material removed from the site will be subject to regulated off-site disposal or reuse, as each of the soil samples collected during the SI activities documented the presence of contaminants. Off-site disposal activities will comply with local, State (including NYSDEC Part 364), and Federal regulations. The areas of fill material currently proposed to be excavated and disposed off site are shown on Figure 4 and include the areas designated as A-1, B-2, D-2 through D-5, E-1, E-2, F-1, F-2, F-5, J-2, and J-3. Select areas proposed for excavation and off-site disposal also represent the areas of the site that contain the most significant quantities of debris and solid waste (Areas A-1, B-2, and D-2 through D-5). Accordingly, there will be no identified areas of the site containing significant amounts of debris and solid waste. In

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 17

certain locations, only portions of the fill materials in that area will be removed to accommodate redevelopment. If soil suspected to be impacted with contaminants other than those encountered in the fill material during the SI is encountered during site redevelopment activities, this material will be segregated, properly characterized, and, depending on the test results, left in-place, relocated, or managed off site as outlined above. 5.3.1 Children Activities Areas

As shown on Figure 2, fill materials containing contaminant concentrations exceeding Restricted Residential SCOs have not been identified in the children activities areas located in the northern portion of the proposed site building and to the north of the proposed site building. However, in the event fill materials are identified in these areas containing contaminants at concentrations exceeding Restricted Residential SCOs during site redevelopment, these materials will be excavated from beneath the footprint of the children activities areas and either disposed off site as discussed above or re-used on site in areas outside of the children activities areas or stormwater quality areas (basins and pervious pavement). Contaminated fill materials located in these areas, if encountered, will be excavated until native soils are encountered. Fill material documented to contain contaminant concentrations exceeding Restricted Residential SCOs are located to the south of the proposed children activities areas. A portion of these fill materials (Area F3 on Figure 4) is proposed to remain in place. These fill materials will not have an adverse impact on the children activities areas as they will be capped with approximately two feet of material containing contaminant concentrations below NYSDEC Restricted Residential SCOs as part of site grading as well as an additional six inch (minimum) concrete floor slab. As these fill materials will be capped and are located outside of the children activities areas, they do not represent an exposure risk if left in place. 5.3.2 Stormwater Quality Basin and Pervious Pavement Areas

As shown on Figure 2, fill materials documented to contain concentrations of contaminants exceeding NYSDEC Protection of Groundwater SCOs have been documented within proposed stormwater quality basin and pervious pavement areas. As stormwater will be infiltrating through the subsurface materials in these areas, fill materials documented to exceed the Protection of Groundwater SCOs in these locations will be excavated and disposed off site as outlined above. These areas are depicted by locations A-1, B-2, and D-4 on Figure 4. The impacted fill materials located in these areas will be excavated for off-site disposal until native soils are encountered.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 18

5.4

ON-SITE RE-USE OF LANDFILL MATERIALS

All other fill materials documented at the subject site will be re-used on site as necessary to accommodate proposed site grades and in accordance with geotechnical/structural recommendations. The re-use of fill materials will only occur in areas already documented to contain fill materials as depicted on Figures 2 through 5. Fill materials will not be re-used outside the boundaries of the existing fill materials. In addition, fill materials containing contaminants at concentrations exceeding Protection of Groundwater SCOs will not be re-used in stormwater quality areas (basins and pervious pavement) and fill materials containing contaminants at concentrations exceeding Restricted Residential SCOs will not be re-used within children activities areas. In certain locations, fill materials will be excavated and re-used on site to accommodate redevelopment and limit the overall volume of fill material requiring off-site disposal. These areas are shown on Figure 4 as locations A-2, C-1, C-2, E-3, F-7, and K-2. The overall lateral extent of the on site fill materials will be the same as the current conditions (see Figures 2 through 5) following site redevelopment. Proposed areas for the reuse of fill materials generated in location E-3 are shown on Figure 4 and are located beneath the southern parking area. Upon demolition of the existing site building, the concrete from the structure will be crushed and utilized on site to achieve proposed site grades. Due to the presence of contaminants at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Protection of Groundwater SCOs, the concrete will not be re-used in water quality areas (basins and pervious pavement). 5.4.1 Existing Landfill Areas Not to be Disturbed

Landscaped and asphalt-paved areas associated with the existing The Journal News facility are proposed to remain with limited to no disturbance during site redevelopment. These areas are located in the eastern and western portions of the site. Accordingly, contaminated fill materials and their existing surface covers, which consist of asphalt/subbase or topsoil/vegetation, will remain in place. Select areas also are currently wooded. These areas are depicted by locations E-4, H-1, J-1, and J-4 on Figure 4. In addition, areas of structurally unsuitable fill will be managed in place along with other fill materials throughout the site in accordance with geotechnical/structural requirements to reduce the overall volume of fill material requiring off-site disposal. These areas are depicted on Figure 4 as B-1, B-3, D-1, F-3, F-4, F-6, G-1, and I-1. The existing engineering controls in these areas are shown on Figure 5. 5.5 ENGINEERING CONTROLS

Fill materials remaining on site following redevelopment will be subject to adequate engineering (cap) and institutional (Deed Notice) controls to prevent human exposure and reduce contaminant leaching. Adequate engineering controls will include the proposed building slabs and pavement areas (concrete, pavers, and asphalt) and clean cover. The engineering controls to be utilized at the site are outlined below and shown on Figure 5.
WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 19

5.5.1

Asphalt

Fill materials remaining in-place or re-used in portions of the property proposed for parking/driveway areas will be capped with a minimum of four inches of asphalt pavement (including pervious pavement) along with its associated subbase material. Proposed asphalt paved areas are identified on Figures 3 and 5. 5.5.2 Concrete

Fill materials remaining in-place or re-used in portions of the property proposed for concrete walkways, building pads, pools, curbs, or equipment pads will be capped with a minimum of four inches of concrete along with its associated subbase material. Proposed concrete areas and buildings are identified on Figures 3 and 5. 5.5.3 Landscape/Clean Fill Cover

Fill materials remaining in-place or re-used within proposed landscaped areas and children and adult activities areas will be capped with a minimum of two feet of clean fill material with a surface cover. The surface covers will include, however, may not be limited to, mulch, grass, decorative stone, artificial turf, etc. Artificial turf will be located in the exterior activities areas. The clean fill layer will consist of soils imported from virgin off-site sources or existing native site soils or fill materials not containing contaminant concentrations exceeding NYSDEC Restricted Residential or Protection of Groundwater SCOs. The landscape/cleanfill cover areas are shown on Figures 3 and 5. 5.5.4 Pavers

Fill materials remaining in-place or re-used in select walkway and patio areas will be capped with twoinch (minimum) pavers along with their associated subbase material. Proposed paver areas are shown on Figures 3 and 5. 5.5.5 Leachate Control Measures

No evidence of leachate from the on site fill materials has been observed on site and, based on the groundwater data, the generally immobile compounds identified at the site have not impacted groundwater conditions. Accordingly, leachate control measures are not required on site. In addition, precautions have been taken to remove elevated contaminant concentrations in areas proposed for water quality management (basins and pervious pavement). These areas to be removed also contain the most significant debris and solid waste on site. These removal areas correlate to A-1, B-2, and D-2 through D5 on Figure 4.
WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 20

5.5.6

Landfill Gases Control Measures

No evidence (odors) of landfill off gasing has been observed on site during the installation of the SI and geotechnical borings and the majority of the fill materials on site, with the exception of areas in the northwestern and southern portions of the site, do not contain wastes that would decay and create off gasing concerns. In addition, the areas containing the significant quantities of solid waste are being removed as discussed above and would no longer represent a potential for decay and off gasing. These areas also are not located in close proximity to the proposed site building. Fill materials located beneath the site building do not contain wastes that would have the potential for decay or off-gasing. These fill materials generally contain debris such as concrete and brick. In addition, volatile compounds have not been detected in the fill material or groundwater at the site based on field screening with a PID. Accordingly, landfill gas controls are not required at the site. 5.5.7 Future Operation and Maintenance Considerations

As soils at the property contain contaminants at concentrations exceeding NYSDEC UUSCOs, appropriate future operations and maintenance considerations must be implemented to prevent exposures to site occupants and other personnel. Accordingly, no person shall make any alteration, improvement, or disturbance at the site which impacts the engineering controls or areas of fill material without first obtaining approval from the property owner. Any major disturbances or alterations of the engineering controls or of fill materials must also be approved by NYSDEC in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 360. Upon completion of any disturbance of engineering controls or fill materials, these disturbed areas must be restored to pre-disturbance conditions. Further, the owner shall ensure that all applicable worker health and safety laws and regulations are followed during the alteration, improvement, disturbance, and restoration to ensure exposure to contamination in excess of the applicable SCOs does not occur. The owner shall maintain records of the nature of the alteration, improvement, or disturbance; the dates and duration of the alteration, improvement, or disturbance; the name of key individuals and their affiliations conducting the alteration, improvement, or disturbance; the amounts of soil generated for disposal, if any; the locations of off-site soil disposal; and any precautions taken to prevent exposure. This information will be provided to NYSDEC, as necessary. The persons responsible for implementing the Landfill Plan, the site owner/operator, and/or subsequent owners, lessees or operators, shall monitor and maintain the engineering controls to ensure that the controls instituted continue to be protective of the public health and safety and of the environment. If at any time the proposed controls are determined to no longer be protective, additional corrective action or protective measures will be evaluated and instituted as necessary. These corrective actions or protective measures may require prior approval from NYSDEC.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 21

5.6

DEED NOTICE

A Deed Notice will be recorded for the property. The Deed Notice will indicate that solid waste is located on site and has been addressed in accordance with this Landfill Plan. The Deed Notice is intended to notify future site owners/operators/lessees that the solid waste is present and is required to be address in accordance with this Landfill Plan and applicable portions of 6 NYCRR Part 360. 5.7 CONSTRUCTION HEALTH AND SAFETY

Due to the documented soil and concrete contamination at the subject property, special considerations will be given with respect to worker health and safety during construction activities. A site-specific Health & Safety Plan (HASP) will be prepared for on-site construction activities involving soil, concrete, or groundwater (if encountered) management. The HASP will also outline proposed construction monitoring activities. The construction health and safety considerations are outlined below. 5.7.1 Site-Specific Construction HASP

Whitestone will develop a Site-Specific Construction Health and Safety Plan consistent with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 CFR 1910 and 1926). The HASP will cover construction activities that involve contact with contaminated on-site soil, groundwater, or concrete (as present). The HASP will identify potential chemical, physical, and biological hazards associated with the proposed construction activities and provide appropriate abatement procedures including required levels of personal protective equipment (PPE) to be used by field personnel. The HASP also will identify required personnel training and medical monitoring requirements, personnel and equipment decontamination procedures, heat/cold stress monitoring, safe work practices, traffic and work site access controls, and health and safety reporting requirements. The HASP will include an Emergency Response and Contingency Plan that identifies potential emergency situations, provides appropriate response actions, and lists emergency response and first aid equipment to be utilized at the site. The Emergency Response and Contingency Plan also will include a project-specific list of emergency contacts and a map to the nearest emergency care facility. These items will be posted on site during the work. 5.7.2 Air and Health & Safety Monitoring

In support of the redevelopment effort, Whitestone will provide the following air and health and safety monitoring services:
WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 22

Whitestone will provide a full-time, on-site, air monitoring technician during earthwork/construction activities involving the excavation and movement of impacted soils and concrete or management of on-site groundwater, if encountered. Air monitoring will include particulate (dust) monitoring, VO vapor monitoring, and methane and oxygen monitoring. Dust will be monitored visually and with a hand-held particulate meter; VO vapors will be monitored with a hand-held PID; and methane and oxygen will be monitored with a hand-held multi-gas meter. Whitestones on-site technician will also monitor soil management activities at the site as discussed above. Whitestone also will provide health and safety monitoring and oversight services that will include a site safety officer (SSO) to be present on site during all earthwork activities. The air monitoring technician will be the SSO. Whitestone also will be available to screen on-site soils with the PID for potential VO contamination if suspect material is encountered. Although select subcontractors will be responsible for ensuring and monitoring their own employees health and safety throughout the construction activities, Whitestone will coordinate and review health and safety procedures to ensure that the on-site contractors are complying with OSHA and other pertinent safety regulations and the requirements outlined in Whitestones Site-Specific Construction HASP. As necessary, Whitestone will collect soil/fill samples for laboratory analyses to further evaluate on-site soils and/or characterize soils for importing or exporting to/from the site. Other Construction Considerations

5.7.3

All earthwork activities will be conducted and monitored in accordance with the projects approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In addition, the site will be monitored for dust as outlined above. In the event elevated dust levels are recorded or visually observed, water will be applied to the site for dust control. Stockpiled soils will be managed in accordance with the SWPPP and covered with polyethylene sheeting during non-work hours.

WHITESTONE ASSOCIATES, INC.

Page 23