The URL can be used to link to this page

2. Contract Approval - Brownfields Grant201 '1st Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 406.758.7740 Fax: 406.758.7758 City of Kalispell ■ www.kalispell.com Office of Community & Economic Development MEMORANDUM To: The Honorable Mayor Fisher and Kalispell City Council Members C c : Jane Howington, City Manager From: Katharine Thompson, Community Development Manager Re: Contract for Services with AMEC Geomatrix for EPA Brownf ells Assessment. Grant Project Meeting Date: April 19, 2010 Attached to this memo please find a copy of the Contract for Services between the City of Kalispell and AMEC Geomatrix. The contract includes Exhibit "A" (the U.S. E.P.A. Cooperative Agreement) and Exhibit "B77 (the AMEC Geomatrix Proposal for Environmental Assessment and Community Engagement Assistance, Kalispell Brownfield Revitalization Project with City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate dated April 5, 2010). BACKGROUND: The City of Kalispell has selected AMEC Geomatrix to serve as the Qualified Environmental Professional under the EPA Brownfield Assessment Grant. The City of Kalispell solicited responses for a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) to review and certify Phase I Environmental Site Assessments and conduct Phase II Environmental Site Assessments for both petroleum and hazardous substances within the city limits of Kalispell per the community -wide assessment grant perimeters with additional duties to include reporting and community outreach. Of the eight proposals received, AMEC Geomatrix scored the highest by the selection committee. The goal of the Kalispell Brownfield Revitalization Project is to support re -development and investment in critical and mainly commercial and light industrial areas by conducting up to sixteen (16) Phase I Assessments and up to six (6) Phase II Assessments as appropriate and determined by the volunteer committee assembled for the purpose of site review. The City of Kalispell's Fire Department Hazardous Materials Team members with technician -level training will conduct the Phase I Environmental Reports under the direction of the contracted Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) selected through this RFP process. The Grant Project focus includes the BNSF Revitalization Plan and the South Kalispell/Airport Redevelopment Plan areas. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has selected the city of Kalispell for acommunity-wide Brownfields Project. Proposed work shall meet federal requirements for work funded by an EPA Brownfields Grant. Proposed work is scheduled to be completed by November 2012. FISCAL IMPACT: The Contract for Services delineates costs associated with the project to be paid to AMEC Geomatrix over the life of the grant in the amount of $320,850. The remaining $79,150 will be used to cover programmatic costs of the project incurred by the City in pursuit of the project deliverables. RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve the Contract for Services between the City of Kalispell and AMEC Geomatrix under the EPA Brownfield Assessment grant. Respectfully submitted, p atharine Thompson ane PIowington Community Development Manager City Manager Community & Economic Development Dept. THIS AGREEMENT for services, dated this day of April 2010, is made between the City of Kalispell (hereinafter referred to as the `City"), of 201 First Avenue East, Kalispell, Montana, and AMEC Ceomatrix, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant") of 1001 S. Higgins, Suite B-1, Missoula, MT 59501. WHEREAS, the City is the grantee of a grant agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1595 wynkoop Street, SEPR-Sam, Denver, CO 80202-129, in which the City is receiving grant funds to pay for professional services to carry out inventory, assessment and cleanup planning activities at brownfield sites within a defined area of the City of Kalispell. A copy of the agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated fully herein by this reference. WHEREAS, the Consultant has offered a proposal for professional services to the City to meet the requirements set out in the above -described grant contract. A copy of the proposal of the Consultant is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated fully herein by this reference. NOW THEREFORE the City and the Consultant agree as follows: 1. Acceptance_of Proposal: The City hereby accepts the terms of the scope of services as set forth in Exhibit "B". The Consultant agrees to be bound by the terms of this scope. The Consultant further agrees that the personnel committed to perform the services shall be those individuals identified in Consultant's Proposal as set forth in Exhibit "C". 2. Requirements of Grant Contract: The City and the Consultant each agree to comply with all of the terms and requirements of their respective obligations under the Grant Contract as set forth in Exhibit "A". 3. Limitation on Consultant's Dama es: In the event of a claim for damages by Consultant under this Contract'. Consultant's damages shall be limited to contract damages and Consultant hereby expressly waives any right to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature or kind. In the event Consultant wants to assert a claim for damages of any kind or nature, Consultant shall provide City with written notice of its claim, the facts and circumstances surrounding and giving rise to the claim, and the total amount of damages sought by the claim, within ten (10) days of the facts and circumstances giving rise to the claim. In the event Consultant fails to provide such notice, Consultant shall waive all rights to assert such claim. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES Page I of 3 4. Dis ute Resolution: Any claim., controversy, or dispute between the parties, their agents, employees, or representatives shall be resolved first by negotiation between senior --level personnel from each party duly authorized to execute settlement agreements. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, the parties may invite an independent, disinterested mediator to assist in the negotiated settlement discussions. If the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days from date the dispute was first raised, then such dispute shall be resolved in a court of competent Jurisdiction in compliance with the Applicable Law provisions of this Contract. 5. Headings: The headings used in this Contract are for convenience only and shall not be construed as a part of the Contract or as a limitation on the scope of the particular paragraphs to which they refer. 6. waiver: A waiver by the City of any default or breach by Consultant of any covenants, terms, or conditions of this Contract shall not limit the City's right to enforce such covenants, terms, or conditions or to pursue the City's rights in the event of any subsequent default or breach. 7. Severability: If any portion of this Contract shall be held to be void or unenforceable, the balance thereof shall continue to be effective. S. Applicable Law: The parties agree that this Contract shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Montana and the parties expressly agree that venue shall be in Flathead County, Montana, and no other venue. 9. Binding Effect: This Contract shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of the parties. 10. Amendments: This Contract shall not be modified, amended, or changed in any respect except by a written document signed by all parties. 11. No Third Party _Beneficiary: This Contract is for the exclusive benefit of the parties and shall not constitute a third party beneficiary agreement and shall not be relied upon or enforced by a third party. 12. Counterparts: This Contract may be executed in counterparts, which together shall constitute one instrument. 13. AssigLament: Consultant shall not assign this Contract in whole or in part without the prior written consent of the City. No assignment shall relieve Consultant of its responsibility for the performance of the Contract and the completion of the Contract. Consultant shall not assign to any third party other than Consultant's subcontractors on the Contract, the right to receive monies due from the City without the prior written consent of City. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES Page 2 of 3 14. Authority: Each party represents that it has full power and authority to enter into and perform this Contract and the person signing this Contract on behalf of each party has been properly authorized and empowered to sign this Contract. 15. Independent Contractor: The parties agree and acknowledge that in the performance of this Contract and the completion of the Contract, Consultant shall render services as an independent contractor and not as the agent, representative, subcontractor, or employee of the City. The parties further agree that all individuals and companies retained by Consultant shall at all tunes be considered the agents, employees, or independent contractors of the Consultant and shall at no time be the employees, agents, or representatives of the City. 15. Integration: This Contract and all Exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire agreement of the parties. There are no understandings between the parties other than as set forth in this Contract. All communications, either verbal or written, made prior to the date of this Contract are hereby abrogated and withdrawn unless specifically made a part of this Contract by reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have signed 3 copies of the Contract. CITY OF I ALISPELL Do Jane Howington, City Manager Address for giving notices: P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903-1997 AMEC GEOMATRIX, INC. By Chris Cerquone, Project Manager Address for giving notices: 1001 S. Biggins, Suite B-1 Missoula, MT 59801 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES Page 3 of 3 BF - 97863001 - 0 Pa e 1 ASSISTANCE ID NO. 0so sno% U.S. EN RONMENTAL DATE OF AWARD PRG DOC ID. ..... . AMEND# BF 97863001 - 0 t ro PROTECTION AGENCY 09/29/2009 TYPE F AC TION CTION MAILING DATE Cc New 10/06/2009 �. Cooperative Agreement PAYMENT METHOD: ACH# -ACH p end RECIPIENT TYPE: Send Payment Request to: Municipal Las Vegas Financial Center- LVFC RECIPIENT: PAYEE: City of Kalispell City of Kalispell 201 First Avenue East 201 First Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901-0013 Kalispell, MT 59901-0013 EIN: 81-6001281 PROJECT MANAGER EPA PROJECT OFFICER EPA GRANT SPECIALIST Katharine Thompson Ted Lanzano Moye Lin 201 First Avenue East 1595 Wynkoop Street, 8EPR-SA Grants, Audit and Procurement, 8TMS-G Kalispell, MT 59901-0013 Denver, CO 80202-1129 E-Mail: lin.moye@epa.gov E-Mail: khompson@kalispell.com E-Mail: lanzano.ted@epa.gov Phone:303-312-6667 Phone: (406) 758-7713 Phone: 303-312-6596 PROJECT TITLE AND DESCRIPTION w Brownfield Assessment and Cleanup Cooperative Agreement, Sec 101 and 104k This award provides funds to carry out inventory, assessment and cleanup planning activities at brownfields sites. BUDGET PERIOD PROJECT PERIOD TOTAL BUDGET PERIOD COST TOTAL PROJECT PERIOD COST 10/01/2009 - 09/30/2012 10/01/2009 - 09/30/2012 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 NOTICE OF AWARD Based on your application dated 09/10/2009, including all modifications and amendments, the United States acting by and through the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), hereby awards $400,000. EPA agrees to cost -share 100.00% of ail approved budget period costs incurred, up to and not exceeding total federal funding of $400,000. Such award may be terminated by EPA without further cause if the recipient fails to provide timely affirmation of the award by signing under the Affirmation of Award section and returning all pages of this agreement to the Grants Management Office listed below within 21 days after receipt, or any extension of time, as may be granted by EPA. This agreement is subject to applicable EPA statutory provisions. Theapplicable regulatory provisions are 40 CFR Chapter 1, Subchapter B, and all terms and conditions of this agreement and any attachments_ ISSUING OFFICE (GRANTS MANAGEMENT OFFICE) AWARD APPROVAL OFFICE ORGANIZATION I ADDRESS ORGANIZATION I ADDRESS Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 U.S. EPA, Region S 1595 Wynkoop Street Ecosystems Protection and Remediation Denver, CO 80202-1129 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SIGNATURE OF AWARD OFFICIAL TYPED NAME AND TITLE DATE Digital signature applied by EPA Award Official Mayne Anthofer, Director 09/29/2009 AFFIRMATION OF AWARD BY AND ON BEHALF OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENT ORGANIZATION SIGNATURE TYPED NAME AND TITLE DATE Jane Howington, City Manager EPA Funding Information BF-97863001 -0 Page FUNDS FORMER AWARD THIS ACTION AMENDED TOTAL EPA Amount This Action $ $ 400,000 $ 400,000 EPA In -Kind Amount $ $ $ 0 Unexpended Prior Year Balance $ $ $ O Other Federal Funds $ $ $ 0 Recipient Contribution $ $ $ 0 State Contribution $ $ $ 0 Local Contribution $ $ $ 0 Other Contribution $ $ $ 0 Allowable Project Cost $ 0 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 ............ Assistance Program (CFDA) Statutory Authority . . .. ..... . .......... Regulatory Authority 66.818 - Brown#ields Assessment and Cleanup Cooperative Agreements CERCLA: Sec. 101(39) ICERCLA: Sec. 104(k)(2) 40 CFR PART 31 Fiscal Site Name Req No FY Approp. Code Budget Organization PRC Object Site/Project Class Cost Organization Obligation I Deobligation - 0908LBF083 09 E 08LOAG7 4020379E 411 G80ONYOO - 200,000 - 0908LBF083 09 E 08LOAG 402D79EBP 4114 G8000ROO - 200,000 400,000 BF - 97863001 - 0 Page 3 Btidnet 5ummary Pane Table A - abject Class Category (Non -construction) Total Approved Allowable Budget Period Cost 1. Personnel $39,816 2. Fringe Benefits' $9,954 3. Travel $7,480 4. Equipment $0 5. Supplies $1,000 6. Contractual $341,750 7. Construction $0 8. Other $0 9. Total Direct Charges $4009000 10. Indirect Costs: % Base $0 11. Total (Share: Recipient 0.00 % Federal 100.00 %-) $400,000 12. Total Approved Assistance Amount $400,000 13. Program Income $0 14. Total EPA amount Awarded This Action $400,000 15. Total EPA Amount Awarded To Date $400,000 BF - 97863001 - 0 Page 4 Administrative Conditions 1. The recipient will comply with the following : (1 ) all applicable provisions of 40 CFR Parts 29, 311, 34, and 35 (if applicable), OMB Circulars A-102, A-133 and 2 CFR, Part 225 and (2) any terms and conditions set forth in this assistance agreement or assistance amendment. 2. The Project Work Plan is the work plan for this award. Performance will be evaluated consistent with the Policy on Performance Based Assistance dated May 31, 1985. 3. The recipient agrees to ensure that all requisitions for conference, meeting, convention, or training space funded in whole or in part with Federal funds comply with the Hotel and motel Fire Safety Act of 1990. 4. Pursuant to 40 CFR 31.41(b) and 31.50(b),. EPA recipients shall submit a final Federal Financial Report (SF-425) to EPA no later than no later than 90 calendar days after the end of the project period. The form is available on the internet at http:Z/www.epa.govLocfolfinservices/forms.htm . All FFRs must be submitted to the Las Vegas Finance Center: US EPA, LVFC, PO Box 98515, Las Vegas, NV 89119, or by Fax to: 702-798-2423. The LVFC will make adjustments, as necessary, to obligated funds after reviewing and accepting a final Federal Financial Report. Recipients will be notified and instructed by EPA if they must complete any additional forms for the closeout of the assistance agreement. EPA may take enforcement actions in accordance with 40 CFR 31.43 if the recipient does not comply with this term and condition. 5. The chief executive officer of this recipient agency shall ensure that no grant funds awarded under this assistance agreement are used to engage in lobbying of the Federal Government or in litigation against the United States unless authorized under existing law. The recipient shall abide by its respective OMB Circular (A-21, A-87, or A-122), which prohibits the use of federal grant funds for litigation against the United States or for lobbying or other political activities. 6. In accordance with the polices set forth in EPA Order 1000.25 and Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy and Transportation Management (January 24, 2007), the recipient agrees to use recycled paper and double sided printing for all reports which are prepared as a part of this agreement and delivered to EPA. This requirement does not apply to reports prepared on forms supplied by EPA, or to Standard Forms, which are printed on recycled paper and are available through the General Services Administration. 7 Recipient shall fully comply with Subpart C of 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR Part 1532, entitled "Responsibilities of Participants Regarding Transactions (Doing Business with other Persons)." Recipient is responsible for ensuring that any lower tier covered transaction as described in Subpart B of 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR Part 1532, entitled "Covered Transactions," includes a term or condition requiring compliance with Subpart C . Recipient is responsible for further requiring the inclusion of a similar term or condition in any subsequent lower tier covered transactions. Recipient acknowledges that failing to disclose the information as required at 2 CFR 180.335 may result in the delay or negation of this assistance agreement, or pursuance of legal remedies, including suspension and debarment. Recipient may access the Excluded Parties List System at www.epls.gov. This term and condition supersedes EPA Form 5700-49, "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters." 8. The recipient organization of this EPA assistance agreement must make an ongoing,. good faith effort to maintain a drug -free workplace pursuant to the specific requirements set forth in Title 40 CFR 36.200 - 36.230. Additionally, in accordance with these regulations, the recipient organization must identify all known workplaces under its federal awards,. and keep this information on file during the performance of the award . Those recipients who are individuals must comply with the drug -free provisions set forth in Title 40 CFR 36.300. The consequences for violating this condition are detailed under Title 40 CFR 36.510. Recipients can access the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40 Part 36 at htt www.access. g po. ov nara cfr waisidx 06 40cfr36 06.htmi. 9. a. The recipient agrees to: (1) Establish all subaward agreements in writing ; (2) Maintain primary responsibility for ensuring successful completion of the EPA -approved project (this responsibility cannot be delegated or transferred to a subrecipient); (3) Ensure that any subawards comply with the standards in Section 210(a)-(d) of OMB circular Ay-133 and are not used to acquire commercial goods or services for the recipient; (4) Ensure that any subawards are awarded to eligible subrecipients and that proposed subaward costs are necessary, reasonable, and allocable; (5) Ensure that any subawards to 501(c)(4) organizations do not involve lobbying activities; (6) Monitor the performance of their recipients and ensure that they comply with all applicable regulations, statutes, and terms and conditions which flow down in the subaward; (7) obtain EPA's consent before making a subaward to a foreign or international organization, or a subaward to be performed in a foreign country; and (8) obtain approval from EPA for any new subaward work that is not outlined in the approved work plan in accordance with 40 CFR Parts 30.25 and 31.30, as applicable. b. Any questions about subrecipient eligibility or other issues pertaining to subawards should be addressed to the recipient's EPA Project Officer. Additional information regarding subawards may be found at htt www.e a. ov o d aide subaward-- olio -- art- 2. df. Guidance for distinguishing between vendor and subrecipient relationships and ensuring compliance with Section 210(a)-(d) of OMB Circular A--133 can be found at htt www.e a. ov o d uide subawards-a gndix-b. df and htt www.whitehouse. ov omb circulars a l33 al33. html. The recipient is responsible for selecting its subrecipients and, if applicable, for conducting subaward competitions. 10. Management fees or similar charges in excess of the direct costs and approved indirect rates are not allowable. The term "management fees or similar charges" refers to expenses added to the direct costs in order to accumulate and reserve funds for ongoing business expenses, unforeseen liabilities, or for other similar costs which are not allowable under this assistance agreement. Management fees or similar charges may not be used to improve or expand the project funded under this agreement, except to the extent authorized as a direct cost of carrying out the scope of work. 11. EPA's financial obligations to the recipient are limited by the amount of federal funding awarded to date as shown on line 15 in its EPA approved budget. If the recipient incurs costs in anticipation of receiving additional funds from EPA, it does so at its own risk. 12. In accordance with Section 6002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6962) any State agency or agency of a political subdivision of a State which is using appropriated Federal funds shall comply with the requirements set forth . Regulations issued under RCRA Section 6002 apply to any acquisition of an item where the purchase price exceeds $10,000 or where the quantity of such items acquired in the course of the preceding fiscal year was $10,000 or more. RCRA Section 6002 requires that preference be given in procurement programs to the purchase of specific products containing recycled materials identified in guidelines developed by EPA. These guidelines are listed in 40 CFR 247. 13. In accordance with OMB Circular A-133, which implements the single Audit Act, the recipient hereby agrees to obtain a single audit from an independent auditor if it expends $500,000 or more in total Federal funds in any fiscal year. Within nine months after the end of a recipient's fiscal year or 30 days after receiving the report from the auditor, the recipient shall submit a copy of the SF --SAC and a Single Audit Report Package. For fiscal periods 2002 to 2007 recipients are to submit hardcopy to the following address: Federal Audit Clearinghouse 1201 East 10" Street Jeffersoville, IN 47132 For fiscal periods 2008 and beyond the recipient MUST submit a copy of the SF -SAC and a Single Audit Report Package, using the Federal Audit Clearinghouse's Internet Data Entry System. Complete information on how to accomplish the 2008 and beyond Single Audit Submissions you will need to visit the Federal u it Clearinghouse web site: http=Hharvester.census.gov/fac, 14. GENERAL COMI'LI ANCE, 40 CFR, fart 33 The recipient agrees to comply with the requirements of EPA's Program for Utilization of Small, Minority and Women's Business Enterprises in procurement under assistance agreements, contained in 40 CFR, Part 33. FAIR SHARE OBJECTIVES, 40 CFR, Part 33, Subpart D A recipient must negotiate with the appropriate EPA award official, or his/her designee, fair share objectives for MBE and wBE (MBE/wBE) participation in procurement under the financial assistance agreements. Accepting the Fair Share objectives/Goals of Another Recipient The dollar amount of this assistance agreement is $250,000, or more; or the total dollar amount of all of the recipient's non -TAG assistance agreements from EPA in the current fiscal year is $250,000, or more. The recipient accepts the applicable MBE/wBE fair share objectives/goals negotiated with EPA by the _IVIontana Department of Environmental Qualily as follows. - MBE: CONSTRUCTION 2.0%; SUPPLIES 2.0%; SERVICES 2.0%; EQUIPMENT 2.0% wBE: CONSTRUCTION 3.0%; SUPPLIES 3.0%; SERVICES 3.0% - EQUIPMENT 3.0% By signing this financial assistance agreement, the recipient is accepting the fair share objectives/goals stated above and attests to the fact that it is purchasing the same or similar construction, supplies, services and equipment, in the same or similar relevant geographic buying market asMontana D artment of Environmental OualiLy. Negotiating Fair Share objectives/Goals, 40 CFR, Section'33.404 The recipient has the option to negotiate its own MBEIWBE fair share objectives/goals. If the recipient wishes to negotiate its own MBEIwBE fair share objectives/goals, the recipient agrees to submit proposed MBEIwBE objectives/goals based on an availability analysis, or disparity study, of qualified MBEs and wBEs in their relevant geographic buying market for construction, services, supplies and equipment. The submission of proposed fair share goals with the supporting analysis or disparity study means that the recipient is not accepting the fair share objectives/goals of another recipient. The recipient agrees to submit proposed fair share objectives/goals, together with the supporting availability analysis or disparity study, to the Regional MBEfWBE Coordinator within 120 days of its acceptance of the financial assistance award. EPA will respond to the proposed fair share objective/goals within 30 days of receiving the submission. If proposed fair share objective/goals are not received within the 120 day time frame, the recipient may not expend its EPA funds for procurements until the proposed fair share objective/goals are submitted. SIX GOOD FAITH EFFORTS, 40 CFR, Part 33, Subpart C Pursuant to 40 CFR, Section 33.301, the recipient agrees to mare the following good faith efforts whenever procuring construction, equipment, services and supplies under an EPA financial assistance agreement, and to ensure that sub -recipients, loan recipients, and prime contractors also comply. Records documenting compliance with the six good faith efforts shall be retained: (a) Ensure DBEs are made aware of contracting opportunities to the fullest extent practicable through outreach and recruitment activities. For Indian Tribal, State and Local and Government recipients, this will include placing DBEs on solicitation lists and soliciting them whenever they are potential sources. (b) Make information on forthcoming opportunities available to DBEs and arrange time fratnes for contracts and establish delivery schedules, where the requirements permit, in a way that encourages and facilitates participation by DBEs in the competitive process. This includes, whenever possible, posting solicitations for bids or proposals for a minimum of 30 calendar days before the bid or proposal closing date. (c) Consider in the contracting process whether firms competing for large contracts could subcontract with DBEs. For Indian Tribal, State and local Government recipients, this will include dividing total requirements when economically feasible into smaller tasks or quantities to permit maximum participation by DBEs in the competitive process. (d) Encourage contracting with a consortium of DBEs when a contract is too large for one of these firms to handle individually. (e) Use the services and assistance of the SBA and the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce. (fl If the prime contractor awards subcontracts, require the prime contractor to take the steps in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section. MBE/WBE REPORTING, 40 CFR, Part 33, Sections 33.502 and 33.503 The recipient agrees to complete and submit EPA Form. 5700-52A, "MBE/WBE Utilization Under Federal Grants, Cooperative Agreements and Interagency Agreements" beginning with the Federal fiscal year reporting period the recipient receives the award, and continuing until the project is completed. only procurements with certified MBEIWBEs are counted toward a recipient's MBE/"E accomplishments. The reports must be submitted semiannually for the periods ending March 31" and September 30`h for: Recipients of financial assistance agreements that capitalize revolving loan programs (CWSRF, DwSRF, Brownfields); and All other recipients not identified as annual reporters (40 CFR Part 30 and 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart A and Subpart B recipients are annual reporters). The reports are due within 30 days of the end of the semiannual reporting periods (April 30" and October 301h). Reports should be seat to Grants Audit and Procurement Program office. Final MBE/WBE reports must be submitted within 90 days after the project period of the grant ends. Your grant cannot be officially closed without all MBE/WBE reports. EPA Form 5700-52A may be obtained from the EPA office of Small Business Program's Home Page on the Internet at www.epa.govlosbp . CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION PROVISIONS, 40 CFR, Section 33.302 The recipient agrees to comply with the contract administration provisions of 40 CFR, Section 33.302. BIDDERS LIST, 40 CFR, Section 33.50I (b) and (c) Recipients of a Continuing Environmental Programs Grant or other annual reporting grant, agree to create and maintain a bidders list. Recipients of an EPA financial assistance agreement to capitalize a revolving loan fund also agree to require entities receiving identified loans to create and maintain a bidders list if the recipient of the Moan is subject to, or chooses to follow, competitive bidding requirements. Please see 40 CFR, Section 33.501 (b) and (c) for specific requirements and exemptions. fLogrammatic Conditions f�eT�1�7e1� y ��:71�[7 xiliii [7 � •u I � �i �N NOTE: For the purposes of these 'Terms and Conditions the terra "assessment" includes, eligible activities under -the Comprehensive Environmental Respoinse, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 104(k) (2) (A)(l) such as activities involving the inventory, characterization, assessment, and planning relating to brownfield sites as described in the EPA approved work plan , A. Federal Policy and Guidance 1. a. Cooperative Agreement Reci Tents: By awarding this cooperative agreement,. EPA has approved the proposal the Cooperative Agreement Recipient submitted in the Fiscal Year 2009 competition for Brownfields assessment cooperative agreements. however, the CAR may not expend ("draw down") funds to carry out this agreement until EPA's award official approves the final work plan. b. In implementing this agreement, the CAR shall insure that work done with cooperative agreement funds complies with the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 104(k). The CAR shall also ensure that assessment activities supported with cooperative agreement funding comply with all applicable Federal and state laws and regulations. c. The recipient agrees to comply with Executive order 13202 (Feb. 22, 2001, 66 Fed. Reg. 11225 ) of February 17, 2001, entitled "Preservation of open Competition and Government Neutrality Towards Government Contractors' Labor Relations on Federal and Federally Funded Construction Projects," as amended by Executive Order 13208 (April 11, 2001, 66 Fed. Reg. 18717) of April 6, 2001" entitled "Amendment to Executive order 13202, Preservation of open Competition and Government Neutrality Towards Government Contractors' Labor Relations on Federal and Federally Funded Construction Projects. d. The recipient must comply with Federal cross -cutting requirements. These requirements include but are not limited to, MBE/WBE requirements found at 40 CFR Part 33; OSHA worker health & Safety Standard 29 CFR 1910.120; the Uniform Relocation Act; rational Historic Preservation Act; Endangered Species Act; and Permits required by section 404 of the Clean water Act; Executive order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, and implementing regulations at 41 CFR 60-4; Contract Work lours and Safety Standards Act, as amended (40 USC 327-333) the Anti Kickback Act (40 USC 276c) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as implemented by Executive orders 11914 and 11250. e. The CAR must comply with Davis -Bacon Act prevailing wage requirements and associated U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulations for all construction, alteration and repair contracts and subcontracts awarded with funds provided under this agreement. Activities conducted under assessment grants generally do not involve construction, alteration and repair within the meaning of the Davis -Bacon Act. The recipient must contact EPA's Project officer if there are unique circumstances (i.e. removal of an underground storage tank or another structure and restoration of the site) which indicate that the Davis -Bacon Act applies to an activity the CAR intends to carry out with funds provided under this agreement. The Agency will provide guidance on Davis -Bacon Act compliance if necessary. 1. a. The CAR must provide information to EPA about site -specific work prior to incurring any costs under this cooperative agreement for sites that have not already been pre -approved in the CAR's work plan by the EPA. The information that must be provided includes whether or not the site meets the definition of a brownfield site as defined in §101(39) of CERCLA, the identity of the owner, and the date of acquisition. b. If the site is excluded from the general definition of a brownfield, but is eligible for a property -specific funding determination, then the CAR must provide information sufficient for EPA to make a property --specific funding determination. The CAR must provide .sufficient information on how financial assistance will protect human health and the environment, and either promote economic development or enable the creation of, preservation of, or addition to parks, greenways, undeveloped property, other recreational property, or other property used for nonprofit purposes. The CAR must not incur costs for assessing sites requiring a property -specific funding determination by EPA until the EPA Project officer has advised the CAR that the Agency has determined that the property is eligible. 2. a. For any petroleum contaminated brownfield site that is not included in the CAR's EPA approved work plan, the CA.R. shall provide sufficient documentation to the EPA prior to incurring costs under this cooperative agreement which includes (see the latest version of EPA's Proposal Guidelines for Brownfields Assessment grants for discussion of this element) (1) that a State has determined that the petroleum site is of relatively love risk, as compared to other petroleum -only sites in the State, (2) that the State determines there is "no viable responsible party" for the site; (3) that the State determines that the person assessing or investigating the site is a person who is not potentially liable for cleaning up the site; and (4) that the site is not subject to any order issued under section 9003 (h) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. This documentation must be prepared by the CAR or the State following contact and discussion with the appropriate petroleum program official. b. Documentation must include the identity of the State program official contacted, the State official's telephone number, the date of the contact, and a summary of the discussion relating to the state's determination that the site is of relatively love risk, that there is no viable responsible party and that the person assessing or investigating the site is a person who is not potentially liable for cleaning up the site. Other documentation provided by a State to the recipient relevant to any of the determinations by the State must also be provided to the EPA Project Officer. C. If the State chooses not to make the determinations described in 2.a. above, the CAR must contact the EPA Project Officer and provide the information necessary for EPA to make the requisite determinations; d. EPA must also make all determinations on the eligibility of petroleum contaminated brownfield sites located on Indian tribal lands. Prior to incurring costs for these sites, the CAR must contact the EPA Project officer and provide the information necessary for EPA to make the determinations described in 2.a. above, i /�U7u'IIY�Yii:7�ii�I •. . ....... Term of the ► gr Bement 1. The term of this agreement is three years from the date of award, unless otherwise extended by EPA at the CAR's request. 2. If after 1 1I2 year from the date of award, EPA determines that the CAR. has not made sufficient progress in implementing its cooperative agreement, EPA may terminate this agreement. For purposes of assessment grants, the recipient demonstrates "sufficient progress" when 35% of funds have been drawn down and obligated to eligible activities; for assessment coalition grants "sufficient progress" is demonstrated when a solicitation for services has been released, sites are prioritized or an inventory has been initiated if necessary, community involvement activities have been initiated and a Memorandum of Agreement is in place within one and a half years. 3. Assessment funding for any eligible brownfield site'may not exceed $200,000 unless a waiver has been granted by EPA and then funding is not to exceed $350,000 at the site subject to the waiver. 1. The U.S. EPA may be substantially involved in overseeing and monitoring this cooperative agreement. a. Substantial involvement by the U.S. EPA generally includes administrative activities such as: monitoring; review of project phases; and approval of substantive terms included in professional services contracts. b. Substantial EPA involvement also includes brownfields property -specific funding determinations described in I.B. under Eligible Brown fields Site Determinations above, If the CAR awards a subgrant for site assessment, the CAR must obtain technical assistance from EPA on which sites qualify as a brownfield site and determining whether the statutory prohibition found in section 104(k)(4)(B)(i)(Iv) of CERCLA applies. This prohibition precludes the subgrantee from using EPA funds to assess a site for which the subgrantee is potentially liable under §107 of CERCLA. C. Substantial EPA involvement may include reviewing financial and environmental status reports; and monitoring all reporting, record --keeping, and other program requirements. d. EPA may waive any of the provisions in term and condition II. B. I ., with the exception of property -specific funding determinations. EPA will provide waivers in writing . 2. Effect of EPA's substantial involvement includes: a. EPA's review of any project phase, document, or cost incurred under this cooperative agreement, will not have any effect upon CERCLA §128 Eligible Response site determinations or for rights, authorities, and actions under CERCLA or any Federal statute. b. The CAR remains responsible for ensuring that all assessments are protective of human health and the environment and comply with all applicable Federal and State laws. C. The CAR and its subgrantees remain responsible for incurring costs that are allowable under the applicable OMB circulars. 1. The CAR must acquire the services of a qualified environmental professional(s) to coordinate, direct, and oversee the brownfields assessment activities at a particular site, if they do not have such a professional on staff. 2. The CAR is responsible for ensuring that contractors and subgrant recipients comply with the terms of their agreements with the CAR, and that agreements between the CAR and subgrant recipients and contractors are consistent with the terms and conditions of this agreement. 3. Subgrants are defined at 40 CFR 31.3. The CAR may not subgrant to for -profit organizations. The CAR must obtain commercial services and products necessary to carry out this agreement under competitive procurement procedures as described in 40 cFR 31.36. In addition, EPA policy encourages awarding subgrants competitively and the CAR must consider awarding subgrants through competition. 4. The CAR. is responsible for assuring that EPA's Brownfields Assessment Grant funding received under this grant, or in combination with any other previously awarded Brownfields Assessment grant does not exceed the $200,,000 assessment grant funding limitation for an individual brownfield site. Waiver of this funding limit for a brownfields site must be approved by EPA prior to the expenditure of funding exceeding $200,,000. In no case may EPA funding exceed $350,,000 on a site receiving a waiver. (Note: cooperative Agreement Recipients expending funding from a community -wide assessment grant on a particular site must include such funding amount in any total funding expended on the site.) M Quarterly Progress Report a. The CAR must report on interim progress and any final accomplishments by completing and submitting relevant portions of the Property Profile Form (e.g.,, the initiation of assessment activities, the completion of assessment activities, and contaminants), The CAR must submit the updated Property Profile Form reflecting such events as soon as the accomplishment has occurred, or within 30 days after the end of the Federal fiscal quarter in which the event occurred. The CAR will be provided access to an on line reporting system, the Assessment, cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange system, by the EPA Project officer to perform their reporting requirements. Alternately, the CAR may complete a hard copy version of the Property Profile Form available from their EPA Project officer or on line at: http,:,/Zwww..,.epa. ci ov brownfields utslnot orms.htm, b. The CAR must submit progress reports on a quarterly basis to the EPA Project officer. Quarterly progress reports must include: i . Documentation of progress at meeting performance outcomes/outputs, project narrative, project time line and an explanation for any slippage in meeting established output/outcomes (see v.1.d. below for specifics). ii. An update on project milestones. iii. A budget recap summary page with the following headings: (A) Current Approved Budget; (B) Costs Incurred this Quarter; (C) costs Incurred to Date; and (D) Total Remaining Funds. iv. If applicable, quarterly reports must specify costs incurred at petroleum contaminated brownfields sites. v. Recipient quarterly reports must clearly identify which activities performed during the reporting period were undertaken with EPA. funds, and must relate EPA -funded activities to the objectives and milestones agreed upon in the work plan including a list of sites where assessment activities were completed. To the extent consistent with the EPA approved work plan for this agreement, activities undertaken with EPA funds to be included in quarterly performance and financial reporting may include: 1. Assessment start Date (interim measure to show grant progress) 2. Acres per property 3. Assessments completed 4. No cleanup required 5. Types of contaminants found 6. Acres of g reenspace created 7. Engineering/institutional controls required, what type and whether they are in place 8. cleanup plans 9. Redevelopment underway 10. Funds leveraged 11. Jobs leveraged 12. Health monitoring studies, insurance, institutional controls funded 2, The CAR must maintain records that will enable it to report to EPA on the amount of funds expended on specific sites under this grant. 3. The CAR must maintain records that will enable it to report to EPA on the amount of funds expended by the CAR at petroleum sites identified in the EPA approved work plan. 4. In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 31.40 (d), the recipient agrees to inform EPA as soon as problems, delays or adverse conditions become known which will materially impair the ability to meet the outputs/outcomes specified in the assistance agreement work plan. A. Eligible Cases of the Funds for the Cooperative Agreement Recipient 1. To the extent allowable under the work plan, cooperative agreement funds may be used for eligible programmatic expenses to inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct planning and outreach. Eligible programmatic expenses include activities described in Section Iv of these Terms and conditions. In addition, such eligible programmatic expenses may include: a. Determining whether assessment activities at a particular site are authorized by CERC!_A 104(k); b. Ensuring that an assessment complies with applicable requirements under Federal and State laws, as required by CERCLA 104(k); C. Using a portion of the grant to purchase environmental insurance for the characterization or assessment of the site. Funds may not be used to purchase insurance intended to provide coverage for any of the Ineligible Uses under Section B. d. Any other eligible programmatic costs including direct costs incurred by the recipient in reporting to EPA; procuring and managing contracts; awarding and managing subgrants to the extent allowable under III. B. 2.; and carrying out community involvement pertaining to the assessment activities. a Local Governments only. No more than 10% of the funds awarded by this agreement may be used for brownfield program development and implementation (including monitoring of health and institutional controls) if described in the EPA approved work plan. The CAR must maintain records on funds that will be used to carry out any program development and implementation tasks if included in the EPA approved work plan to ensure that no more than 10% of its funds are used for brownfield program development and implementation (including monitoring of health and institutional controls). B, Ineligible Uses of the Funds for the cooperative Agreement Recipient 1. Cooperative agreement funds shall not be used by the CAR for any of the following activities: a. cleanup activities; b. Development activities that are not brownfields assessment activities (e.g.,, construction of a new facility); c. Job training unrelated to performing a specific assessment at a site covered by the grant; d. To pay for a penalty or fine; e. To pay a federal cost share requirement (for example, a cost -share required by another Federal grant) unless there is specific statutory authority; f. To pay for a response cost at a brownfields site for which the recipient of the grant or subgrant is potentially liable under CFRCLA §107; g. To pay a cost of compliance with any federal law, excluding the cost of compliance with laws applicable to the assessment; and h. Unallowable costs (e.g., lobbying and fund raising) under applicable OMB Circulars. 2. Under CFRCL.A 104(k)(4)(B), administrative costs are prohibited costs under this agreement. Prohibited administrative costs include all indirect costs under applicable OMB Circulars. a. Ineligible administrative costs include costs incurred in the form of salaries, benefits, contractual costs, supplies, and data processing charges, incurred to comply with most provisions of the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants contained in 40 CFR Part 31. Direct costs for grant administration, with the exception of costs specifically identified as eligible programmatic costs, are ineligible even if the grant recipient is required to carry out the activity under the grant agreement. b. Ineligible grant administration costs include direct costs for (1) Preparation of applications for Brownfields grants; (2) Record retention required under 40 CFR 31.42; (3) Record --keeping associated with supplies and equipment purchases required under 40 CFR 31.32 and 31.33; (4) Preparing revisions and changes in the budgets, scopes of work, program plans and other activities required under 40 CFR 31.30; (5) Maintaining and operating financial management systems required under 4❑ CFR 31; (6) Preparing payment requests and handling payments under 40 CFR 31.21; (7) Non-federal audits required under 40 CFR 31.26 and OMB CircularA-133; and (8) Close out under 40 CFR 31.50. 3. Cooperative agreement funds may not be used for any of the following properties a. Facilities listed, or proposed for listing, on the National Priorities List (NPL); b, Facilities subject to unilateral administrative orders, court orders, administrative orders on consent or judicial consent decree issued to or entered by parties under CERCLA; C. Facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody or control of the United States government except for land held in trust by the United states government for an Indian tribe; or d. A site excluded from the definition of a brownfields site for which EPA has not made a property -specific funding determination O 4. The CAR must not include management fees or similar charges in excess of the direct costs or at the rate provided for by the terms of the agreement negotiated with EPA. The term "management fees or similar charges" refers to expenses added to the direct costs in order to accumulate and reserve funds for ongoing business expenses, unforeseen liabilities, or for other similar costs that are not allowable under EPA assistance agreements. Management fens or similar charges may not be used to improve or expand the project funded under this agreement, except to the extent authorized as a direct cost of carrying out the scope of work. C, Interest -Bearing Accounts and Program Income 1. In accordance with 40 CFR 31.25(g)t2), the CAR is authorized to add program income to the funds awarded by the EPA and use the program income under the same terms and conditions of this agreement. Program income for the assessment CAR shall be defined as the gross income received by the recipient, directly generated by the cooperative agreement award or earned during the period of the award. Program income includes, but is not limited to, fees charged for conducting assessment, site characterizations, clean up planning or other activities when the costs for the activity is charged to this agreement. 2. The CAR must deposit advances of grant funds and program income (e.g.,, fees) in an interest bearing account. a. Interest earned on advances, CARs are subject to the provisions of 40 CFR §31.21(i) to remitting interest on advances to EPA on a quarterly basis. b. Interest earned on program income is considered additional program income. .......... A. Authorized Assessment Activities 1. Prior to conducting or engaging in any on -site activity with the potential to impact historic properties (such as invasive sampling), the CAR shall consult with EPA regarding potential applicability of the rational Historic Preservation Act and, if applicable, shall assist EPA in complying with any requirements of the Act and implementing regulations, 111111111� Pill! 1. when environmental samples are collected as part of the brownfields assessment, the CAR shall comply with 40 CFR Part 31.45 requirements to develop and implement quality assurance practices sufficient to produce data adequate to meet project objectives and to minimize data loss. State law may impose additional QA requirements. 2. Prior to the collection of environmental data, a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) will be developed and approved by EPA as outlined in the approved assessment grant work plan, C. Completion of Assessment Activities 1. The CAR shall properly document the completion of all activities described in the EPA approved work plan. This must be done through a final report or letter from a qualified environmental professional, or other documentation provided by a State or Tribe that shows assessments are complete. 1. As required by CERCLA §104(k)(2)(B)(ii) and CERCLA §101(35)(B),, the CAR shall ensure that a "Phase I" site characterization and assessment carried out under this agreement will be performed in accordance with EPA's standard for all appropriate inquiries. The CAR shall utilize the practices in ASTM standard E1527-05 "standard Practices for Environmental Site Assessment: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process," or EPA's All Appropriate Inquiries Final Rule. This does not preclude the use of grant funds for additional site characterization and assessment activities that may be necessary to characterize the environmental impacts at the site or to comply with applicable State standards, V. Conflict of interest: Appearance of lack of Impartialit�A 1. The CAR shall establish and enforce conflict of interest provisions that prevent the award of subgrants that create real or apparent personal conflicts of interest, or the CAR's appearance of lack of impartiality. such situations include, but are not limited to, situations in which an employee, official, consultant, contractor, or other individual associated with the CAR (affected party) approves or administers a grant or subgrant to a subgrant recipient in which the affected party has a financial or other interest. such a conflict of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality may arise when (i) The affected party, (ii) Any member of his immediate family, (iii) His or her partner, or [iv] An organization which employs, or is about to employ, any of the above, has a financial or other interest in the subgrant recipient. Affected employees will neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from subgrant recipients. Recipients may set minimum rules where the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal intrinsic value. To the extent permitted by state or local law or regulations, such standards of conduct will provide for penalties, sanctions, or other disciplinary actions for violations of such standards by affected parties. A. Payment Schedule 1. The CAR may request payment from EPA pursuant to 40 CFR §31.21(c). 1. Closeout will be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 31.50. EXHIBIT "B" Scope of Work/Proposal and Project Schedule City of Kalispell Brownfield Project AMEC Geomatrix, Inc. (AMEC) proposes to complete the following tasks for the City of Kalispell (City) Brownfield Project. SCOPE of WORD Site Inventory/Ranking AMEC proposes to inventory potential Brownfield sites within the City, and rank those that are within the BNSF and South Kalispell Airport Revitalization Areas. To complete the inventory, we will: ♦ Complete a regulatory site data review maintained by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. This database contains all underground storage tank and state superfund sites organized by city and county. ♦ Query public meeting attendants as to their knowledge of sites at public meetings ♦ Review Sanborn Insurance maps as available to identify potential historical sites or underground storage tanks The ranking of sites within the revitalization areas would be completed after completion of the inventory. The ranking would be completed using criteria developed with the City. Ranking criteria will likely include potential for redevelopment, site location, ease of access, importance to the revitalization plans, importance to the community, and likelihood of a favorable EPA site eligibility determination. Upon completion of the inventory and ranking, AMEC will prepare a Brownfield Site Inventory and Ranking Report. Community outreach GommunU Outreach Plan AMEC will develop a community outreach plan. The plan will include a background section, purpose and objectives section, and the elements to be completed to engage the community. Those items identified in the EPA work plan previously submitted to EPA will be included. Web Site Assistance AMEC will work with the City web manager to design an initial web page for the EPA Brownfield program, including web page content. The City will update the web page as the project progresses. The web page will likely include the community outreach plan, work plans and reports developed during the course of the project, information on upcoming meetings, program contact information, and links to other information on the DEQ and EPA's Brownfield web site. Program Brochure AMEC will assist with the City with development of a brochure that can use to educate people about the Brownfield project. We will provide examples of previous brochures we have developed for use by the City as a template, and the City will finalize the brochure language. AMEC will design the layout and print the brochures. The brochure would describe the Brownfield Program, the benefits of participating in the program, and invite participation in the Scope of Work/Proposal and Schedule, Kalispell Brownfield Project 2 program. Five hundred copies of the brochure would initially be printed. The brochure would be developed before the initial public meeting so it can be brought to the meeting. Program Slogan Development We will assist the City with developing a slogan for the Brownfield program to be used on outreach materials and advertising. The slogan would be a catch phrase that captures what the City is trying to accomplish, eventually becoming synonymous with your program. It's been our experience that having a slogan helps with identification of your program, site selection, and community involvement. Radio Ads and Newspaper Articles AMEC will assist the City with radio ads and newspaper stories concerning the project, as needed. Developing Mailing List The City will develop a project mailing list. Initially, the list will be populated with public and private community leaders and landowners within the revitalization areas. The list will be supplemented as the project progresses, including adding attendants at public meetings. Brownfield 101 Training AMEC will complete a "Brownfields 101 " training for City staff and steering committee members who wish to attend. At the training, attendees will be provided a foundational understanding of the EPA's Brownfield Assessment program, which will help them play a more active role in the management of the Kalispell Brownfield Program. Public and Other Stakeholder Meetings We propose to facilitate three public meetings in Kalispell. The first meeting will be held to explain how the program works and to get public input for consideration in selecting and prioritizing Brownfield sites for assessment. The second meeting would be facilitated after a core of Phase I Site Assessments are complete to inform participants on findings and to garner input into selection of the sites for Phase 11 assessments. The third meeting would be facilitated after completion of Phase 11 assessments on sites to inform the public of the results and site cleanup and redevelopment options. AMEC staff will prepare and present at each of the public meetings. AMEC will also develop posters for the meetings. AMEC will participate in several other meetings throughout the project, as needed. This includes meetings with the Brownfield Steering Committee, and City and other community leaders to describe the program and identify sites, potential developers, and regulatory agency personnel. Community outreach Report AMEC will prepare a Community outreach Report at the closing of the grants. This report would summarize the actions taken to educate and encourage participation in the Brownfield Assessment grant program. Where appropriate, the report will describe how stakeholder and public involvement shaped assessment and cleanup planning goals and objectives. The plan will also include public meeting notes and participant lists, copies of outreach materials, and the mailing list of program participants. Scope of Work/Proposal and Schedule, Kalispell Brownfield Project Phase I Site Assessment Training for Fire Department Staff Before embarking on the Phase Is, AMEC will train City staff on how to complete an AAI- compliant, Phase I ESA. The hands-on training will include completing site reconnaissance, where to find and how to interpret historical documents and aerial photographs, how to interview property owners, how to evaluate potential environmental liabilities, and methods of reporting. Phase I Site Assessments AMEC will complete Phase I Environmental Site Assessments in accordance with All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI) standards (ASTM 1527-05) on sites identified for assessment. As indicated above, Fire Department staff will complete elements of the Phase I ESAs. Prior to initiating the Phase 1, AMEC will obtain EPA approval for the assessment. Upon completion of the assessment for each site, a Phase I assessment report will be prepared and copies distributed to parties identified by the City. The report will identify any recognized environmental conditions on the site, and recommend Phase li site assessment, as appropriate. AMEC will complete the first three Phase I ESA's, accompanied by City staff during the site visit. As City staff learn how to do a Phase I, including the report, our oversight would diminish. For all the Phase Is, we will review the report and certify that the assessment satisfies the ASTM standard, and we will remain a resource to City staff throughout the project. We will also provide a report template to the City as well as interview and site reconnaissance forms. Preparation of Program -Specific Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Prior to initiation of Phase 11 Site assessment, AMEC will prepare a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). The QAPP will detail the quality control and quality assurance that will be followed during Phase 11 site assessments. It will be prepared in accordance with EPA guidance, and a draft of the QAPP will be submitted to Mr. Ted Lanzano at the EPA for review and approval. The QAPP will guide all Phase 11 site assessments to be completed on the City Brownfield project. Phase 11 Site Assessments/Reporting Prior to completion of a Phase 11 Site Assessment, AMEC shall coordinate with EPA to make sure the selected site is eligible for Phase 11 assessment. Upon site eligibility clearance, AMEC will prepare a site -specific Sampling and Analysis Plan for the City and EPA review and approval. The SAP will outline what will be done as part of the assessment including the location and number of samples to be collected, the analytical methods for samples, and the reporting requirements. Upon completion of the site assessment, AMEC shall prepare a Report of Findings that will include appropriate field forms and boring logs, site figures, analytical reports, and will also describe remedial alternatives for site cleanup and closure, provided the assessment has sufficiently defined the contamination. Should the assessment not fully define the contamination problem, or identify additional problems, recommendations for additional assessment will be made in the report. Project Management AMEC will complete several project management activities on this project, including guiding the City staff on management of their grant, overseeing all AMEC staff working on the project, and preparing quarterly progress reports and EPA deliverables, as requested by the City. Mr. Chris Cerquone will be the project manager and the point of contact for all work. Scope of Work/Proposal and Schedule, Kalispell Brownfield Project 4 PROJECT SCHEDULE The tentative schedule for completion of work is proposed as follows: First Public Meeting: Site inventory and Reporting: Ranking Sites Fire Department Phase I Training Initial Phase I Site Assessments QAPP Preparation Initial Phase II Site Assessments April 2010 May 2010 May/June 2010 May 2010 July -September 2010 September 2010 October 2010 The schedule above depicts the general flow of a Brownfield project from site selection to completion of Phase II assessment. Typically, the initial tasks through public meetings will follow this prescribed schedule, but beyond that assessments would be done as sites are identified and approved by EPA. It's likely over the course of the project the City will complete assessments on several sites over the full grant period 3 years, as they are identified. City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK A - SITE INVENTORY AND RANKING PROJECT TASK QN1T Task A I - Database and Sanborn Map Review Labor Project Scientist 16 $85.00 Project Assistant 8 $55.00 Subtotal Total Task A I Task A2 - Preparing Site Inventory Report Labor Project Scientist Project Assistant Direct Costs Copies Binders Task A3 - Site Ranking within Revitalization Areas Labor Senior 11 (ranking oversight) Project Scientist TASK B - PUBLIC OUTREACH PRCfECT TASK Task BI - Community Outreach Plan Labor Public outreach Specialist Direct Costs Copies Task B2 - Web Page Asssitance Labor Initial webpage content and set up assistance 12 20 2,000 10 10 32 UNIT 10 1,200 20 $85.00 $55.00 Subtotal $0.15 $12.00 Subtotal Total Task A2 $120.00 $85.00 Subtotal Total Task A3 TOTAL TASK A RATE $85.00 Subtotal $0.15 Subtotal Total Task B I $85.00 Subtotal Total Task B2 RATE AMEC TOTAL $1,360.00 4$ 40.00 $1,800.00 $ l 9800 $ l ,020.00 1$.100.00 $2,120.00 $300.00 fJ 20.00 $420.00 $2,540 $1,200.00 2$ ,720.00 $3,920.00 $39920 $8,260 TQTA� $850_.0Q $850.00 f� BQ.QQ $180.00 $1,030 l� ,700.O0 $1, 700.00 $1 J00 Bear Pow Assessment I o f 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 Taks B4 - Brochure Labor Project I (assist city with language) 8 $85.00 $680.00 Graphic Artist (design) 10 $80.00 $800.00 Subtotal $ 1.480.00 Direct Costs Color Printing 500 $1.50 7$ 50.00 Subtotal $750.00 Total Task B4 $2,230 Task B5 - Public Meetings (three meetings in Kalsspell) Labor Senior BP Specialist (prepare and present at meetings) 50 $120.00 $6,000.00 G1S (poster development) 10 $80.00 $800.00 Subtotal $6,800.00 Direct Costs Gas 3 $35.00 $105.00 Car Rental 3 $50.00 $150.00 Per Diem 6 $30.00 $180.00 Hotel 3 $90.00 $270.00 Color Posters 4 $90.00 3$60.00 Su btotal $1,065.00 Total Task B5 $7,865 Task B7 - Community Outreach Report Labor Project Scientist 20 $85.00 $1,700.00 Subtotal $1.700.00 Direct Costs Copies 500 $0.15 $7a. Subtotal $75.00 Total Task B7 $11775 TOTAL TASK B $ 14,600 Bear Pow Assessment 2 o f 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK C - PHASE I ESAs PRQ-JECT TASK UNIT RATE TOTAL "Task C I - Phase I Training for Fire Department Staff' Labor Project I (develop training, prepare packet, hold training) 28 $85.00 $2,380.00 Project Assistant 16 $55.00 8� 80.00 Subtotal $3.260.00 Direct Costs Car Rental 1 $50.00 $50.00 Gas 1 $35.00 $35.00 Per Diem 1 $30.00 $30.00 Subtotal $1 15.00 Total Task C I $3,375 Task C2 - Phase I Site Assessments (assumes 15 are completed) Labor Senior 11 (ESA review) 90 $120.00 $10,800.00 Staff 11 (completion of first three, assistance after) 100 $85.00 $8,500.00 Subtotal $19.300.00 Direct Costs EDR 3 $200.00 $600.00 Title Company Ownership 3 $150.00 $450.00 Car Rental 2 $90.00 $180.00 Gas 2 $35.00 $70.00 Hotel 2 $90.00 $180.00 Per Diem 4 $30.00 1$ 20.00 Subtotal $1.600.00 Total Task C2 $20,900 TOTAL TASK C $24,275 Bear Pow Assessment 3 of 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK D - QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN PRO.JECT TASK UNIT RATE TTTAL Labor Senior 11 (QAPP review) 6 $120.00 Project I (document preparation) 48 $85.00 G1S 8 $80.00 Project Assistant 10 $55.00 Subtotal Direct Costs Copies 1,000 $0.15 Color Copies 80 $1.50 Subtotal TASK E - SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLANS (assuming 6 Phase 11's) Labor Senior 11 (SAP Review) Project I (plan preparation) GIS Project Assistant Direct Costs Copies Color Copies Binders TASK F - REPORT OF FINDINGS (assuming 6 Phase 11 reports) Labor Senior 11 (report review and cleanup planning) Project I (report preparation) GIS (graphics, data validation, and data management) Project Assistant Direct Costs Copies Color Copies Binders 36 264 36 48 5,000 200 50 60 360 42 50 5,000 350 50 TOTAL TASK D $120.00 $85.00 $80.00 $55.00 Subtotal $0.15 $1.50 $12.00 Subtotal TOTAL TASK E $120.00 $85.00 $80.00 $55.00 Subtotal $0.15 $1.50 $12.00 Subtotal TOTAL TASK F $720.00 $4,080.00 $640.00 5$0.00 $5,990.00 $150.00 $120.00 $270.00 $6,260 $4,320.00 $22,440.00 $2,880.00 2$ ,640.00 $32,280.00 $750.00 $300.00 $ I ,650.00 $33,930 $7,200.00 $30,600.00 $3,360.00 2,750.00 $43,910.00 $750.00 $525.00 60 .o $1,875.00 $45,785 Bear Paw Assessment 4 of 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK G - PROJECT MANAGEMENT Labor Project Set Up and Kick Off 10 $120.00 $1,200.00 Project Oversight 90 $120.00 $10,800.00 Quarterly Reports 72 $55.00 $3,960.00 Site Eligibility Questionnaires and Property Profiles 50 $55.00 $2,750.00 MBE/DBE tracking 32 $55.00 $1,760.00 Invoicing 40 $55.00 U,200.0 Subtotal $22,670.00 Direct Costs Hotel 5 $90.00 $450.00 Vehicle 5 $50.00 $250.00 Gas 5 $35.00 $175.00 Per Diem 10 $30.00 $300.00 Subtotal $1,175.00 TOTAL TASK. G $239845 SUBTOTAL $156v955 PHASE 11 ASSESSMENT (6 Phase [Is @ $27315.83 each} 15$3x895 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS $320t85O 1. Cost estimate is based on average costs to complete Phase 1 and 11 assessments, including reporting. Cost could be higher or lower based on site being assessed. 2. Cost estimate assumes 15 Phase I and 6 Phase 11 assessments are completed. 3. Cost assumes AMEC will complete first 3 Phase I ESAs with City staff, and that the remaining 12 would be completed by City staff with our oversight and review of report. Bear Paw Assessment 5 of 5 Proposal For ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ASSISTANCE Kalispell Brownfield Revitalization Project AMEC Geomatrix, Inc. 100 1 South Higgins Avenue, Bldg B- Missoula, Montana USA 59801-4144 Tel (406) 542-0129 Fax (406) 542-0130 www.amecgeomatrixinc.com January 14, 2010 Ms. Katharine Thompson Community Development Manager City of Kalispell 201 First Avenue East Kalispell, Montana 59901 Subject: Site Assessment and Community Engagement Brownfield Proposal City of Kalispell Kalispell, Montana Dear Katharine, AMEC Geomatrix is pleased to submit our qualifications to complete site prioritization and ranking, Phase I and II site assessments, community outreach, and EPA grant management for the City of Kalispell (City). As demonstrated in the proposal, we have the knowledge and experience to meet the challenges of your project. Preparing the EPA grant application for the City and getting to know the stakeholders involved has provided us a sound understanding of the goals and objectives of your Brownfield program. We are excited about the opportunity to assist the City and we look forward to revitalization of properties within the BNSF and Airport/By-Pass Revitalization Areas though use of Brownfield assessment funds. For more than 10 years, we have assisted communities and Tribes across Montana with nearly every aspect of Brownfield work, and in doing so have gained expert knowledge of EPA Brownfield assessment and cleanup grant programs. We understand the regulatory framework by which Brownfield sites must be assessed and remediated in Montana. Equally important, we have the EPA grant management expertise necessary to ensure the City has a successful Brownfield program. We thank you for this opportunity to present our proposal and we look forward to building a lasting relationship with the City. Respectfully submitted, AMEC GEOMATRIX, INC. Chris Cerquone Brownfield Regional Manager Att Proposal (5 copies) PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SERVICES City of Kalispell Brownfield Project Prepared for: Ms. Katharine Thompson and Mr. Sean Conrad City of Kalispell 201 First Avenue East Kalispell, Montana 59901 Prepared by: AM EC G EOMATRix, INC. 1001 S. Higgins, Suite B- Missoula, Montana 59801 and 1824 North Last Chance Gulch P.O. Box 7118 Helena, Montana 59604 January 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS WHY HIRE AMEC GEOMATRIX?....................................................................................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................3 1.1 Proposal Organization..............................................................................................................................4 2.0 PROJECT APPROACH........................................................................................................................4 2.1 Kick Off Meeting and Project Management Plan................................................................................4 2.2 U.S. EPA Coordination.............................................................................................................................4 2.3 Brownfield Steering Committee.............................................................................................................4 2.4 Community Outreach and Education Plan..........................................................................................4 24.1 Project Mailing List............................................................................................................................. 5 2 4.2 Slogan Development.......................................................................................................................... 5 2 4..3 Web Site Assistance ........................................................................................................................... 5 2 4.4 Program Brochure .............................................................................................................................. 5 2 4.5 Billboards, Radio Ads, and Newspaper Articles .......................................................................... 5 2 4. 6 Public Meetings.................................................................................................................................... 5 . .7 Communitv Outreach Report......................................................................................................... 2.5 Site Selection...............................................................................................................................................6 2.5.1 Inventorying and Selecting Sites for Assessment........................................................................ 6 2.6 Site Assessment..........................................................................................................................................7 2 6.1 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment/Fire Department Staff Participation ...................... 7 26.2 QAPP and SAP Preparation............................................................................................................. 7 2 6..3 Quality Assurance............................................................................................................................... 7 2 6.4 Phase 11 Environmental Site AssessmentlCleanup Planning...................................................... 8 2 6. 5 Phase 11 Reporting of Findings .......................................................................................................... 8 2.6.6 Cost Saving FleldInvestigation Techniques .................................................................................. 2.7 Innovative Project Reporting..................................................................................................................8 2.8 Project Management Approach..............................................................................................................8 3.0 RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE................................................................................................9 4.0 PROJECT TEAM....................................................................................................................................9 5.0 MBEIDBE/WBE UTILIZATION..........................................................................................................9 6.0 PROJECT BUDGET ........................................................................................................................... 10 7.0 PROJECT REFERENCES.................................................................................................................... 10 8.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION..................................................................................................... 10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Brownfield Project Approach Flaw Chart Figure 2: AMEC Geomatrix Montana Brownfield Projects Figure 3: Project Organization Chart LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Figures Attachment B: Proposed Project Schedule Attachment C: Representative Brochure Attachment D: Selected Project Descriptions Attachment E: Comprehensive List of Brownfields Projects Attachment F: Firm Profiles and Resumes of Key Project Personnel Attachment G: Estimated Project Casts Attachment H: Supporting Information City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page I of 10 WHY HIRE AMEC GEOMATRIX? There are many reasons the City of Kalispell (City) should consider AM EC Geomatrix for this Brownfield project, including: Pro%ect Understanding -We understand the scope of services requested. Our understanding is founded on our experience with communities across Montana on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfield projects, and our familiarity with the goals of your project. It has been a privilege to help the City prepare a successful assessment grant application. In formulating the objectives for that grant, we gained a sound understating of the number and types of Brownfield sites in the BNSF and South Kalispell/Airport Revitalization Areas, the stakeholders involved, and the goals of the 2005 Kalispell Downtown Action Agenda and the 2007 BNSF Revitalization Plan. We know how to use grant funds to remove the environmental stigma on Brownfield properties in the revitalization areas because we have done it before. On the Great Falls Brownfield project, we assessed multiple properties within a defined area (similar to the City's goal), clearing more than half for redevelopment by showing that the stigma was more perceived than real. We also know how important assessments are to laying the groundwork for acquisition of additional EPA grants. On the Missoula Sawmill, Cowboy Hall of Fame, Missoula White Pine & Sash, and Elmo projects, assessment funds defined the problem and resulted in award of EPA cleanup grants. A successful Brownfield Program requires much more than the ability to complete environmental assessment. Like nearly every federal program, having the institutional knowledge of the program and how to maximize its benefits is vital to success. We have for more than a decade learned, sometimes through unexpected challenges, how to create a vibrant Brownfield program and we can bring this expertise to your program. EPA Brownfield Experience - Personnel proposed for this project have more than 25 combined years of EPA Brownfield experience. Mr. Chris Cerquone, proposed project manager, has managed Brownfield projects for 12 years, both as a grant manager for the Missoula County Health Department and as a consulting scientist. He brings unparalleled assessment, site cleanup, and grant management experience to this project. Whether it's first-hand knowledge of site eligibility and selection, the ASTM 1527-05 (AAI Phase 1) Standard, or grant writing expertise, he consistently delivers exemplary Brownfield service because he is immersed in Brownfield work every day. Under his direction, we are the only Montana firm that has successfully taken an EPA -funded Brownfield site from assessment through to redevelopment (Missoula White Pine Sash and Missouri River Federal Courthouse). Site Assessment and Cleanup Experience - In Montana, we have completed more than 35 Phase I and 20 Phase II site assessments on EPA grant projects contaminated with petroleum, poly -chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), solvents, metals, dioxins/furans, asbestos, lead - based paint, and methamphetamine. We have comprehensive experience with ASTM guidance, and Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and EPA regulations that guide completion of these assessments. We have prepared several EPA - approved Sampling &Analysis Plans (SAPS), Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs), and Health and Safety Plans (HASPS). We also have experience evaluating cleanup alternatives based on proposed redevelopment, often leading to unexpected benefits. Acquisition ofAdditional Public Assistance — Unlike many competitors, we propose to assist the City in acquiring additional public assistance for your Brownfield program. Acquiring additional funds will be vital to addressing the 47 underused properties in the BNSF Revitalization Area. We have successfully prepared EPA assessment, cleanup, and revolving loan fund grant applications resulting in more than $5.2 million to communities in Montana. We also have acquired Planning Grants from EDA, Technical Brownfield grants from DEQ and EPA, and Reclamation & Redevelopment Grants from DNRC to assess and cleanup contaminated sites, and we have a City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 2 of 10 working understanding of how to use Tax Increment Financing to pay for cleanup, a model that could be replicated in Kalispell. Brownfield Program and Phase 1 Assessment Training Experience —We have trained Steering Committee members, Brownfield Coordinators, and planning staff' on the EPA Brownfield Program, and staff and students on how to complete Phase I and II assessments. If selected, we will provide a "Brownfield 10 1 " training seminar to grant administrators, planners, and Steering Committee members at no cost. To supplement the EPA training Fire Department staff will receive we will also train Fire Department staff on how to complete an AAI-compliant, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). The overall objective of the Fire Department staff training will be to eventually give the City the means to complete a Phase I ESA with no oversight. Initially, the hands-on training would include completing a site reconnaissance, where to find and how to interpret historical documents and aerial photographs, how to interview property owners, how to evaluate potential environmental liabilities, and methods of reporting. Site investigation and interview form templates and Phase I reports will be provided to City staff. As the project progresses, we will continue to mentor staff' and train them on soil and groundwater sampling, as requested. DEQ and EPA Collaboration - A successful Brownfield program requires effective regulatory agency collaboration. Our team includes former DEQ Brownfield Coordinator Ms. Kelly Schmitt, who brings intimate knowledge of DEQ and EPA guidance and regulations. Ms. Schmitt and Mr. Cerquone have a working relationship with Mr. Ted Lanzano of EPA and DEQ Brownfield Coordinators (Mr. Jason Seyler and Ms. Amy Steinmetz). On this project, they will facilitate regulatory agency coordination to ensure assessments are completed in accordance with DEQ and EPA regulations. Public Outreach Experience — Our team has facilitated many Brownfield public meetings. In addition, we have directed and participated in many smaller meetings with landowners, community leaders, and potential developers to gain property access, negotiate developer agreements, and bring about community consensus. We have developed brochures, fact sheets, and web sites to educate stakeholders, and we are comfortable using the media to expand outreach efforts. O u r innovative "Needs Assessment" approach brought together diverse landowners on the Great Falls project resulting in redevelopment consensus from 14 landowners on more than 45 acres. EPA Grant Management Assistance — On every Brownfield project we prepare project profiles, EPA quarterly reports, and other grant management deliverables to assist our clients, as requested. We also advise them on issues involving use of funds, government accounting, site eligibility, and EPA guidance and policy, and we have developed a project reporting format that allows our clients to pass on our report to satisfy EPA reporting requirements. Local Teaming— On this project, we have teamed with the local firm of Thomas, Dean & Hoskins, Inc. (TD&H). We intend to subcontract surveying, geotechnical, and asbestos and lead -based paint related services to TD&H, and also rely on their additional institutional knowledge of potential Brownfield sites in Kalispell. We have worked with several individuals in this firm and can attest to their quality of work. No Conflict of Interest — AM EC Geomatrix and our subcontractors have no interest and shall not have any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict with the performance of the services contemplated. No person having such interest shall be employed by or associated with AM EC Geomatrix during the term of our contract agreement. Commitment to the Project— By submitting this proposal, we commit to the City that, if selected, we will staff this project to provide exemplary service, and that personnel assigned will remain until project completion. We look forward to building a lasting relationship with the City. City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 3 of 10 1.0 INTRODUCTION AMEC Geomatrix prepared this proposal in response to a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued by the City on December 9, 2009. The City has been awarded a $400,000 EPA community -wide, assessment grant (petroleum and hazardous substance) and wishes to select a firm capable of inventorying and prioritizing Brownfields sites for assessment, completing assessments (Phase I and II) on selected Brownfields sites, facilitating a community outreach program, and developing cleanup plans (cleanup planning) for contaminated sites. While not a requirement for use of the grant funds, the City hopes to complete assessment on sites located in the BNSF Revitalization Area as well as the South Kalispell/Airport Revitalization Project Area. If selected, AMEC Geomatrix will serve as the prime contractor and will be contractually responsible for the work as well as lead the Phase I and Phase II environmental assessments. Our firm will be supported by Thomas, Dean & Hoskins, Inc. (TD&H), a subcontracted local civil engineering firm to provide site surveying, asbestos and lead -based paint assessment, and geotechnical engineering, as needed. Since its founding in 1984, AMEC Geomatrix has established a reputation as one of the most respected environmental consulting and engineering firms in North America. We have earned this reputation by providing our clients leading -edge environmental solutions. Our company philosophy is grounded in creating long-term client relationships. Starting with a small group of dedicated and respected scientists, AMEC Geomatrix has grown to more than 500 staff in 16 offices across North America with annual revenues exceeding $85 million in 2006. In Montana, we operate offices in Helena and Missoula. AMEC Geomatrix provides superior Brownfield environmental services for clients throughout the U.S., as evidenced by our receipt of Phoenix Awards. These awards are given to individuals or groups ANN& that have implemented innovative, yet p racti cal programs that resulted in remediation of environmental contamination at Brownfield sites and simultaneously stimulated economic development. We have first-hand knowledge of haw to select sites for assessment, facilitate community involvement, and complete assessments in accordance with EPA and DEQ, and we can bring this knowledge and experience to your project. Currently, we are working with several communities and Tribes across Montana including the City of Missoula, City of Lewistown, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Central Montana Brownfield Coalition, Bear Paw Development Corporation, Great Northern Development Corporation, McCune County, Millsite Revitalization Project LLC, and Mitchell Development and Investments, Inc. As a leading Brownfield practitioner, we continually interface with EPA and DEQ coordinators to stay current with the latest in site assessment and remedial technology as well as EPA Brownfield policy and guidance. We believe we are consistently chosen to complete Brownfield projects because we have a proven track record of quality work and because we foster trust with regulators and our clients. About TD&H, Inc TD&H is a consulting engineering firm offering a full range of services throughout Montana, Washington, and Idaho. TD&H has been assisting clients since 1965, and has an office in City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 4 of 10 Kalispell. TD&H staff in Kalispell specialize geotechnical engineering, surveying, and asbestos and lead -based paint assessment and abatement. TD&H also provides our team with additional local knowledge of Brownfield sites in Kalispell. 1.1 Proposal Organization Our proposal is organized to address the information requested in the RFP. Section 2.0 presents our project approach and Section 3.0 includes relevant project experience. Section 4.0 presents profiles of our proposed team. Our commitment to MBE/WBE on the project is described in Section 5.0. In Section 6.0, we present project estimated casts for those items identified in the RFP. Professional references are provided in Section 7.0, and supporting information is in Section 8.0. Supporting documentation is appended to our proposal, as follows: ♦ Attachment A — Figures ♦ Attachment B —Project Schedule ♦ Attachment C — Representative Brochure ♦ Attachment D — Project Descriptions ♦ Attachment E — Comprehensive List of Geomatrix Brownfields Projects ♦ Attachment F — Company Profiles and Resumes of Key Personnel ♦ Attachment G — Cast Estimate ♦ Attachment H — Supporting Information 2.0 PROJECT APPROACH Brownfield assessment projects have a common progression to them, as shown in the flaw chart provided in Figure 1, Attachment A. A project -specific schedule showing the anticipated work elements and deliverables is provided in Attachment B. 2.1 Kick Off Meeting and Project Management Plan AM EC Geomatrix proposes to lead a "Kick Off" meeting and prepare a Project Management Plan (PMP), including a Community Outreach Plan. The "Kick Off" meeting will be held to provide for introductions and to go over the project strategy. The PMP will be developed as an outcome of the meeting and will include a scope of work, schedule, and a project cast estimate. The PMP will present a road map for the project. It has been our experience that the scope often changes a bit from the original proposal after a more formal discussion of project strategy. 2.2 U.S. EPA Coordination Because this project is funded through an EPA Brownfield grant, our team will coordinate all tasks with the EPA, including review of draft plans and reports and site eligibility approval. Deliverables that require review by the EPA will be provided to the City for review concurrently with the draft submittal to EPA. 2.3 Brownfield Steering Committee It is our understanding that the City has or will create a Brownfield Steering Committee to support the Brownfields Program. Over the years we have worked closely with several steering committees. On this project, we will ensure that the committee is kept informed of work elements and progress on the project, including contracting, project budgets, site selection, public outreach, and assessment and redevelopment progress. 2.4 Community Outreach and Education Plan Several staff on our team has facilitated public and stakeholder meetings, created Brownfield websites, developed brochures and fact sheets, and are comfortable with media interviews to broaden outreach on Brownfield projects. On this project, we will coordinate with the City to organize the public meetings, create outreach materials, present at the meetings, and complete other public outreach tasks, as necessary. Based on our experience, we anticipate the outreach plan will have the fallowing specific elements: ♦ Project Mailing List ♦ Program Slogan Development City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 5 of 10 ♦ Web Site Assistance ♦ Brochure and Fact Sheets ♦ Billboards, Radio Ads, and Newspaper Articles ♦ Public Meetings 24.1 Project Mailing List O u r team will assist the City with maintaining an up-to-date mailing list during the project that will be used to notify various stakeholders and interested persons and groups of upcoming events, project successes, project milestones, etc. The mailing list will include a broad range of stakeholders from interested persons to local, state, and federal political leaders. 24.2 Slogan Development We recommend the City consider developing a slogan for the Brownfield program to be used on outreach materials and advertising. The slogan would be a catch phrase that captures what the City is trying to accomplish, eventually becoming synonymous with your program. The slogan might be "Improving Kalispell through Brownfield Revitalization", or "Transforming Eyesores to Assets". It's been our experience that having a slogan helps with identification of your program, site selection, and community involvement. 2 4..3 Web Site Assistance Our team will coordinate with the City web manager to post information concerning the project on the City website, including deliverables (reports, maps, etc.), fact sheets, brochures, upcoming events, and status reports. Information will be posted monthly. 2 4.4 Program Brochure We propose to prepare a brochure that the City can use to educate people and market the Brownfield program. The brochure would describe the program and the benefits of participation, provide contact information, and invite participation. The City should place the brochure within the project areas at locations known to be frequented by the public and mail it to key stakeholders. Facts sheets will also be developed as needed to present technical information on the sites. The brochure and fact sheets should be brought to all meetings with landowners and the public. An example brochure and fact sheet we developed for Brownfield projects is provided in Attachment C. 24.5 Billboards, Radio Ads, and Newspaper Articles The City should consider use of billboards, radio, and newspapers to educate individuals about the Brownfield program. This is often mistakenly overlooked on Brownfield projects, yet in Montana, residents spend a great deal of time on the road, and are also generally more connected to their communities than residents of large urban centers. Radio and billboards can be an effective means to get a message across. Billboards could be used to display a simple message to encourage curiosity and participation in the program. Radio advertising can be used to promote public meetings. Local newspapers can run articles on the project to show progress and attract developers. Done consistently, advertising can spark interest in the program, lead to identification of sites for assessment, and Increase private Investment interest. 24.6 Public Meetings We propose to facilitate three public meetings in Kalispell. The first meeting will be held to explain how the program works and to garner public input for consideration in selecting and prioritizing Brownfield sites for assessment. The second meeting would be facilitated after a series of Phase I Site Assessments are completed to inform participants on findings and to garner input on selection of sites for Phase II assessments. The third meeting would be facilitated after the results of the Phase II assessment are known to inform the public of site cleanup and redevelopment options. At this last meeting, participants would be provided a description of the assessment results, what the results mean, and cleanup options. When possible, Brownfield public meetings should be coordinated with the public City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 6 of 10 meetings held on the BNSF and Airport Revitalization Areas. We will also participate in several other meetings throughout the project, as needed. This includes meetings with landowners to describe the benefits of the program and to gain site access, potential developers to showcase Brownfield sites, and regulatory agencies to address their concerns and ensure compliance with regulations, and Steering Committee meetings, as needed. 24.7 Community Outreach Report Upon completion of the project and during closing out the assessment grants, AM EC Geomatrix will prepare a Community Outreach Report. This report would summarize the actions taken to educate the community and encourage participation in the program. Where appropriate, the report would describe how stakeholder and public involvement shaped assessment and cleanup planning goals. The plan will also include public meeting notes and participant lists, copies of outreach materials, and a mailing list of program participants. 2.5 Site Selection 25.1 Inventorying and Selecting Sites for Assessment AMEC Geomatrix will inventory and develop a master list of Brownfield sites for potential assessment by initially reviewing the D EQ database of petroleum and hazardous substance sites within the City with a subset being identified in the BNSF and Airport Revitalization Areas. D EQ maintains a I i st of al underground storage tanks and state Superfund sites by county. This list would then be supplemented with sites identified through: ♦ Review of Sanborn Insurance maps, as available. Sanborn maps often show underground tanks and provide property ownership information that may indicate the potential for contamination; ♦ Meetings with local elected officials (county commissioners and mayors) and other local government staff. These individuals commonly know of impacted sites in their communities; ♦ Public meetings. Participants at public meetings can also have knowledge of impacted sites. The master list would then be refined by ranking the sites based on the criteria chosen by the City with our assistance. Possible ranking criteria might include redevelopment potential and/or developer interest, fulfillment of goals and objectives of previously adopted land -use plans, potential severity of contamination, proximity to infrastructure, leveraging potential, and community acceptance. The final outcome of the inventory and ranking exercise would be a published list of sites, generally ranked from most to least likely to be assessed based on the established screening criteria. The goal will be to initially prioritize up 20 sites for Phase environmental assessment. Fallowing the ranking, we recommend meetings be held with the landowners of the highest ranked sites to evaluate their interest in participating in the program. Since the Brownfield program is voluntary, landowner approval and access for site assessment is required, and often the best way to achieve this is through one-on-one meetings. At these meetings, we would describe the benefits of participation in the program and attempt to answer questions they may have. It's important to realize that while inventorying sites and ranking them can be an important tool for identifying sites, the City should not place too much emphasis on the list. The list should be used at the programmatic level to identify sites. Site assessments should be focused on sites that have the greatest redevelopment potential because EPA will likely not deem a site eligible for assessment if there is a lack of redevelopment potential. For this reason, we recommend the City focus assessments on properties within the BNSF City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 7 of 10 and Airport Revitalization Areas, and supplement them with assessment on sites that developers (public and private) are considering for development. 2.6 Site Assessment Upon attainment of access agreements from landowners, site assessments will be completed in accordance with guidelines, regulations, and requirements of ASTM, DEQ, and EPA. The proposed tasks that would be completed during the site assessment phase of the project are described below. 2.6. / Phase/ Environmental Site Assessment/Fire Department Staff Participation We propose to complete Phase I Environmental Site Assessments in accordance with All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI) standards (ASTM 1527-05). Upon completion of the assessment for each site, a Phase I assessment report will be prepared and copies distributed to parties identified by the City. The report will identify any recognized environmental conditions on the site, and recommend Phase II site assessment, as appropriate. Fire Department staff will complete several elements of the Phase I ESAs. Before embarking on the Phase Is, we will train them on how to complete an AAI-compliant, Phase ESA. The hands-on training will include completing site reconnaissance, where to find and how to interpret historical documents and aerial photographs, how to interview property owners, how to evaluate potential environmental liabilities, and methods of reporting. We will provide a report template and assign writing responsibility for some or all of the report to Fire Department staff. On the first few assessments, we will accompany City staff during the site visit and provide considerable oversight of their activities. As they learn how to do a Phase I, including the report, our oversight would diminish. For all the Phase Is, we will review the report and certify that the assessment satisfies the ASTM standard, and we will remain a resource to City staff throughout the project. 2 6.2 QAPP and SAP Preparation We will prepare a draft and final QAPP for review and approval by the City and EPA. The QAPP will be a grogram -specific document that can be used by the City on any site that is assessed using grant funds. The QAPP will identify the overall data quality objectives as well as quality assurance and quality control objectives for Phase II assessment. Prior to each Phase II assessment, we will prepare a draft and final SAP. The SAP will identify the specific media (soil, groundwater, building materials, etc.) to be tested on the site based on a review of the recognized environmental conditions reported in the Phase I assessment. It will also include a Health &Safety Plan approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist (see Attachment H). Revisions to draft SAPS and the QAPP will be made based on comments from the EPA, DEQ, and the City. The QAPP and SAP for each site will be prepared and distributed to the regulatory agencies and pertinent stakeholders. 26.3 Quality Assurance Several measures will be used to ensure that defensible, high quality data are collected and reported. Site assessment planning documents including the QAPP and SAP will be developed in accordance with EPA guidance (EPA 540-R- 98-038, Quality Assurance Guidance for Conducting Brownfie/d Site Assessments, September, /996) and DEQ guidance to ensure the methods employed to assess sites are consistent and comply with EPA guidance. All samples will be analyzed by an EPA -accredited analytical laboratory that will strictly follow quality assurance protocols. In addition, site assessments (Phase I and II) will be completed in accordance with AMEC Geomatrix Standard Operating Procedures (SOPS). We have developed numerous EPA -approved SOPS specific for Brownfield assessment (see list in Attachment H). Following the SOPS will ensure that quality data is obtained and that the sampling will allow for an evaluation of City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page S of 10 cleanup alternatives, or additional assessment, when necessary. 26.4 Phase 11 Environmental Site AssessmentlCleanup Planning Upon acceptance of the program -specific QAPP and the SAP for a particular site by EPA, a Phase II site assessment will be completed in accordance with EPA, D EQ, and/or ASTM standards. All field staff completing the assessment work will be 40-hour OSHA trained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.120. Boreholes or monitoring wells will be completed by personnel licensed by the State of Montana. A representative boring log and copy of monitoring well installation licenses for staff are included in supporting information in Attachment H for your reference. The Phase II assessment may involve the sampling of various media including soil, groundwater, soil vapor, indoor air, and building materials. The field team leader will communicate frequently with the project manager to ensure data quality. 2 6.5 Phase 11 Reporting of Findings A Report of Findings will be completed following the receipt of all Phase 11 analytical data. The report will be supported with figures, diagrams, tables, and copies of all field forms and analytical reports. Field and analytical data will be entered into a project database. We will use any pre-existing and new site data to develop a conceptual cleanup plan and conceptual remedial alternatives evaluation for each site assessed. To complete the conceptual plan and alternatives evaluation, site data will be compared to published generic screening levels based on proposed use of the site (i.e. industrial, recreational, and residential). Risk assessment may be necessary to establish site -specific cleanup levels or to demonstrate that cleanup is not necessary depending on the nature of the contaminants and proposed reuse. The most viable remedial alternative will be identified in the report. 26.6 Cost Sa ving Field In vestigation Techniques We have learned several innovative and cost saving field techniques during our extensive Brownfield project experience. These investigative techniques could reduce investigative costs while not sacrificing data quality, and include but are not limited to: ♦ Use of petroleum immunoassays ♦ Composite sampling, where appropriate ♦ Use of geophysical methods to locate buried structures in lieu of soil borings ♦ Use of Geoprobe drill rigs instead of auger or rotary drill rigs ♦ Analyzing indicator compounds to assess the extent of contamination instead of all the potential contaminants of concern We take pride in using innovative and cost- effective technologies to assess sites. We will explore the use of all innovative techniques to allow the City to spread their Brownfields funds as far as passible. 2.7 Innovative Project Reporting AM EC Geomatrix has devised a project reporting format on our Brownfield projects that allows our clients to quickly and easily complete their quarterly reports required by EPA. The City will be able to satisfy EPA quarterly reporting requirements by simply submitting our report and a cover letter that summarizes key accomplishments. In addition, we propose to assist the City with preparation of property profiles and other grant management deliverables, as requested. 2.8 Project Management Approach Mr. Chris Cerquone, our proposed project manager, will be the main point of contact. To promote communication, he will rely on the following tools: ♦ Monthly memos summarizing progress since the last reporting period and activities anticipated during the next reporting period, problems or issues encountered and recommended City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 9 of 10 solutions, budget status, schedule status, and percent of project completed. ♦ Quarterly reports for submittal to EPA. ♦ Telephone, email, and teleconference communication to provide more frequent updates on the status of the project at a frequency to be developed in conjunction with the City. ♦ Face-to-face meetings held as necessary to resolve any Issues that may arise during the project. ♦ Information that relates to subsequent assessment or cleanup decisions will be provided prior to final report preparation, including: a. Recognition of new potential environmental concerns. b. Detection of contaminant concentrations that exceed or may exceed levels requiring cleanup c. Deviations from the QAPPISAP 3.0 RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE As a demonstration of relevant project experience, descriptions of select Brownfield projects that AMEC Geomatrix has completed are found in Attachment D. Figure 2, Attachment A illustrates the assessment projects we have completed in Montana. In addition, a comprehensive list of national Brownfield projects we have worked on is provided in Attachment E. 4.0 PROJECT TEAM Our proposed project team is composed of members who have the necessary experience and credentials to complete this project. This includes personnel possessing a wealth of experience in Brownfield site assessment, public outreach, quality assurance, and remedial alternatives development. A project organizational chart is shown in Figure 3, Attachment A, and company profiles and resumes of key personnel are presented in Attachment F. The personnel proposed for this project have more than 25 combined years of direct experience on EPA -funded Brownfield projects. We propose to assign Mr. Chris Cerquone, AMEC Geomatrix's Regional Brownfield Manager, as the project manager. He will be responsible for completion of all aspects of the project. As shown in Figure 3, Attachment A, we will employ the talents of a supporting cast that includes professionals with several years of Brownfield assessment and cleanup experience. Directly supporting Mr. Cerquone in key lead positions will be Ms. Kelly Schmitt, farmer DEQ Brownfield Coordinator; Mr. Matt Wright, P.E., Mr. K. Bill Clark, Mr. Wilhelm Welzenbach, and Mr. Peter Klevberg of TD&H. As a farmer Brownfield Coordinator for DEQ, Ms. Schmitt brings expert knowledge of bath DEQ and EPA Brownfield regulations. She will lead regulatory agency coordination ensuring that the site assessment approach complies with EPA and DEQ rules and regulations. She will also assist with public outreach. Mr. Matt Wright, a licensed professional engineer in Montana will be responsible for the site cleanup planning elements of the project. He has more than 12 years of assessment, remedial engineering design, risk assessment, and site cleanup experience. Mr. K. Bill Clark relaying on more than 25 years of assessment and cleanup experience will spearhead quality control and quality assurance. Mr. Welzenbach and Mr. Johnson will lead the field assessment components of the project. They have completed numerous Phase I and II Brownfield assessments over the past 8 years. Mr. Klevberg, a DEQ-licensed asbestos contractor with TD&H will lead the assessment of asbestos -impacted sites, relying on more than 20 years of experience. 5.0 M BEIDBE/WBE UTILIZATION AMEC Geomatrix is committed to following the six affirmative steps found in 40 CFR 35.6580(a) to the fullest extent possible on all projects where state or federal funds are involved. To demonstrate our commitment to this directive, we will include organizations owned or controlled by socially and City of Kalispell Brownfield Proposal Page 10 of 10 economically disadvantaged individuals and women during solicitation of supplies, construction, equipment, or services. In particular, we will attempt to use a disadvantaged analytical laboratory because testing of samples collected during site assessments can be a significant component of the overall project budget. 6.0 PROJECT BUDGET A breakdown of casts for those items identified in the RFP is provided in Attachment G. As shown in Attachment G, we estimate a total cast of $356,6 1 6, assuming sixteen Phase and six Phase II assessments are completed. It is impassible to know haw many Phase I and II environmental site assessments the City will complete. This is particularly true of Phase II assessments, where the number of sources and the media impacted (soil,, groundwater, structures, etc.) will control the cast. Where passible, we have provided a hard cast estimate (i.e. site inventory/ranking,, public outreach, Phase I assessments, preparation of the QAPP and SAPS, Phase II reporting, and project management). Where this was not passible (Phase II sampling and analytical casts), we estimated an average Phase II cast of $25,000 per site based on our experience with completing Brownfield assessments. The City should expect to complete between 12 and 18 Phase I ESAs and 4 to 7 Phase 11 assessments with the $400,000 grant. Based on our experience, EPA will be more concerned with making sure assessments are comprehensive rather than meeting a milestone concerning the number of sites assessed. Therefore, we will strive to complete thorough assessments using funds appropriately. 7.0 PROJECT REFERENCES We invite you to contact our references. References for our subcontractor (TD&H) can be provided upon request. Mr. Ted Mitchell Mitchell Development &Investments P.O. Box 738 Great Falls, Montana 59403 (406) 76 I -4400 Email: ted@mdandi.com Ms. Marlene McDanal Brownfield Coordinator Natural Resource Department Director Confederated Salish &Kootenai Tribes 301 West Main Poison, MT 59860 (406) 883-2888 Email: mmdanal@cskt.org Ms. Linda Twitchell Executive Director Great Northern Development Corp. 233 Cascade, Wolf Point, MT 59201 (406) 653-2590 Email: Linda@gndc.org 8.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION Supporting information for this proposal can be found in Attachment H. This information includes: ♦ Typical Borehole Lag ♦ Monitoring Well Constructor License ♦ List of EPA -approved Standard Operating Procedures for Assessment ♦ Typical Health & Safety Plan FIGURES 4-0 C13 � 0 i 'o Sao o .. aU N N o o M (L) (n 0 � C.) LU Q rJJ � = � H •� a a� _ v pq ■- '- Q = _ o� � — m •- � H � y a v = = a EW � a (D v '(D (D CJ ,, o� cc o a . �, °' W � 4) m MINEa. 0 mCL. is CL.m (D � z c a■ E a v a a _ CcE (D / 0 • - _ a. c — c cn H C = Cc H = 0� H cc ■= to 0D m t1) � C] (D cc m .y (D C] '� •G C H cc H H 0D CV }' cc N a. _. � v H — 0 o C46• Oi cn = c FL i = iAMINE H cc V7 t%7 t%7 .y (D H Cc Cc O •p H _ a..r � v (D v cc (D _ }, cD ccccU) (A 4) � W cn Q = a a a. a) d ID(D ow N N aD a- E v (D &ME4) i d i ca 4) cc am.= cc Cc Cc o _ or a. o U LU cc ow N N v d rJJ � C46• H MINE t17 rA 0� C7 a■'r - i .� MINE a 4)'- (D cc = a W = }' � v H aN W ca _ Obi i 0D H i v= v LU •v - = W PROPOSED PROTECT SCHEDULE r _r Z r r C] 0 r r a) a U d t r � r t ❑ � V 0 r O r ydy - i d _ -0 N t � r � ❑ r � LL r � � r i � w Cfz C d d �d 'v i [d r 7 i r _ y L ❑ r _r L C� C 0- _r (D LL r r cz 0 ❑ � CL � d d r w 7 d d ❑ t ❑ CD - LL Z a5 ❑ C] it fb 0 a �du�; w r o e ® f �13 J CCCL C Y a) ❑ CL ❑ ❑ � C C f3 e w N 0CD w Q t V$ V y O 7 T — C C m q d d W W rn d i '° C F'' ❑ w N w L7 - O 'N C p L G d w tKoL. i v Eo d 1- Q CL.❑CD " v_ $ E ri in M aol u0 V c i C — V ra O a a er y �! � E r m ❑ p� p� p ICCC V c C cz C Cm m a5 dco r 0 L........y......................... d ................................................................................................................................................................................... E E T 7 u) E d 7 � 0 cn 0- LL 0 r- 0 7O_ M �h [7 0 -b 0 0 CO 0 [7 C] Q7 0 0 r6 n 0 0 0 0 M — — w — — N c, — r l -0 N -0 7 M n .� 1-6_ i� T T — — [�V i r-6 -b LL LL LL LL LL LL '� LL '� LL LE LL LL d 'r LL LL N � V C) r-CO O 7[7 �S7 [7 C] iY�j -b '�� C] C] LA ML;i C] [7 ML;i r C] C] co N r1lfV C] C] N 'O C] C] c, c,'O C] — M — — N w — N fV N M M C O C: (0 O r_6 n T c d O T T c c [V c O d 1 r ❑ N a Gl t 7 O 0 O O 7 O O O 7 O LL C ~ � m b0 C v ❑ c _ _ p E It C U- —CL c E c E CL 0 m c c ° O° ° L a)� ro t CL c [d ° �. ._ ❑ ran N ui L.L m �+ m U ran b.0 N a5 CL cn m c ❑ C Q .❑ 0 8- w "' n a)7. " _ a� N `n N C _ N — ❑ r❑n . ❑ [�G C ❑ C C2 CL m CL O o ro t N 0--C m o 0 Q E W m m ° m U t 5� L. L. ❑ w o 0 L. ❑ Q —_ ❑� m .2: c b0 C � t V a C° N ° 7❑ a� N Q C m a)-C C L ai u m v ro� 0❑ m om _ m C d cn m a o C � m• ° m � o `� J °�' m � a; L a- ❑ a; ro .- a--0 3 O v w -a v N zoftLo� w aC Ma�M-0M Qr Y V CL 7' �' m m Q ❑ ° E ❑ o C E" ❑ as L. r o a` H �C L � U L L LL LL f' m in cn w 0 u m m cn cn i OL u i ❑ O L i OL� i t H ❑— N M I v] 16 n CO T 2 _ N M FF n CO T C] 2 ❑ REPRESENTATIVE BROCHURE CL Z) Z LU J u Z Q Z 0 H Q U H w Z w H cn LL 0 0 H cn 2 Q s E 1� o- � L � o L � � •Q V � � _ L o •� s Q o a ° L o° ct Q rd 4_j ct s � raa [VC � � � L o � •C � � � � � •N V a C ct ct ct Aj s— E+j "(n . p o cn L p a o- Q ct E._ Q a o o 2 0 E r_ r_ ct w Q o �; .N Q L s�_0 o �, V a� °' ? V p 0 cn w o X o� �' a :3 +j Q+ a o a o 'a o sCL o oct 7. L ct aW E u +j 0 +j 0 ct a) °- U o �' cam' o J ct 0 a 0 .> �� ct ct 0 X 0 0� •- act o Ct � � L: � o � E. ° � � as •� ct� � co L � � � •ate L C CL a �; o r� • ^- N •� � C 0 0- � s ° � � L � �' o rd L N - L [C L o co [C o ( CL -0—%,,e E ° o L E N p V E.� [C L.L o -a s a, o o— Q a U a +-' V) _ +-' V �, bw L w (n a •� N -0 o o o •- E -0s N r� L `�' ❑ a)� a•� o o �. " N •� a o 4-1[C L V [C • - [C m [C V V] � [C ° ct W ct +� o cr c= p p o 0 w ct s V __ct 72 a o p L aL. a a r� 0 ct♦' '> a o ct E ° �; E ct s �: ° 0 E V 0 o ct > LL b. Q ct L �--� o � 4-J '- a o ( N a rd N L '� L o o L L a p cri 0 _ 0 Ln Lp a Z Q w J U oC LL t2, a a Z Q [C � 4- a) C >: 0 a) -0 � -0� Q N ' s w LU V — L L a Ct a s o N o ° •� 0 0 .� •(„ o i N a a _ °� c- o +j L s L 0 _ o V 0- C) a� a•� 0 O N W � ate ❑ ra,� N L 0 0 co oL L o � �; '� Z 0 > o0 CL w V Q) •�, a raa V rd C s 0 N [C E �' 0 —_ U V L bJ N N' C b� L +-' '� V �, o o �, s Ct `� 0 � + j ct � ��s•°�° L. _ V N _ o �'�— ao �'u E r_ ct � �} -0 N r� — ° — C 0 a a u E � °- 0 ° E s C7 o cn ♦, 0 - � �. o a� V '� t LL N � L.[ .0 a C ' C Ln E _s a Tj L u +--� [� L [C C v a- co C r ct - o '� ��s 0 °s �v a a�.N NUyo��o>L�,� � L Lo t!0�� o � oN°-0 U� N .� s a N� '� �D 0 '� a� � 0 •0 u Ct ov V � 4-; s 4' o '� � N — = o= ct 0 0 o � o E�° � L(Y � 2 E t m o� a� J oo a) 4— s o a� 2 s u-0� r rd Q 0 0 L� o rt '� w •,_, o 0 L o 2! •S- o Z) F�mr s _� = 'r w❑.�� 4cn o V M 0co o 4'��'U3 0 V � woo BROWNFIFLD NE WS GRFA T NOR THFRN DFVFL OPMFNT CORPORATION WINTER 2006 In .21DD5, the GNTDC was awarded $100,000 from the EPA to complete environmental assessments on EPA -eligible, petroleum - contaminated properties. Being awarded these funds allows the GNTD C to complete environmental assessments on properties that are being redeveloped. In many instances investors are reluctant to invest in marginalized property due to fear of a contamination problem, even when one may not exist. Haring these funds will give the GNTD C the tools to evaluate if a contamination problem exists on a property, ho-%v severe the contamination is if it exists, and the information needed for stakeholders to devise a cleanup strategy for any contamination discovered. GNTD C has established a Brownfield subcommittee made up of representatives from the six counties where environmental assess- ment may be completed. This committee will guide the GNDC Brownfield Program and be instrumental in selecting what sites are assessed, and the level of assessment that will be completed on each site. HOW THE B ROININFI ELD P RO G RAM WORKS ASSESSMENT CONTRACTOR HIRED Browi-ifield funds awarded to GNDC are potentially available to ai-iv public or private landowrier willing to allow voluritary access to their property for the purpose of environmental site assessment. The overall goals of the GNDC EPA Brownfield Program are to remove environmental uncertaint`:r on petroleum - contaminated Browi-afield properties withirZ Sheridan, Daniels, Garfield, Roosevelt, Valle., and McCone counties in northeastern Montana. IrZitially, GNDC hopes to complete a Phase I Environmental Assessment on at least one propernr in each of the six counties, and at least one comprehensive Phase II Environmental Site Assessment. To select properties for assessment, the GNDC will be inventorving potential candidate sites and ranking them based on site ranking criteria established by the GNDC. Persons wishirZg to have their site assessed are encouraged to contact Audrey Pipal of the GNDC at the address provided at the end of this bulletin. BENEFITS OF PARTCIPATING IN THE BROININ- FIELD PROGRAM Ai -iv property owi-ier located in the six county area of the G�TD C Browrifield Program has the potential opportui- it`:r to participate irZ the program. Possible eligible properties may include gas stations, petroleum bulk storage facilities, former refineries, properties impact by pipeline releases, or ai-iv other property where redevelopment is complicated by erZvirorZ- mental contamination. Nearly ai-iv property is eligible for a Phase I environmental assessment, provided the owi-ier allows G�TD C has hired GeomatrLx Consultants, Inc. (Geomatrix) to complete the environmental assessments. Geomatrix has an office in Helena and Missoula, and has been working in the Browrifield arena for more than seven :rears. GNDC is confident that they have the expertise and knowledge to efficiently and professionally complete the environmental assessments. HOW TO PARTICIPATE Public outreach and education on this project is being fostered through preparation of fact sheets, public meetings, and periodic GNDC website updates concerning the Browi-afield Program. We invite you to get involved and become an active participant in the project that will benefit residents of northeastern Montana for :rears to come. To get progress updates and information on the latest challenges and successes on the project, check the GNDC web site at wNNrN T.gndc.org, or contact Audrey Pipal or Chris Cerquone at the addresses shoNVTn below. Audrey Pipal G1 rTD C 233 Cascade Wolf Point, MT 59201 (406)653-2590 Chris C erquone GeomatrLx Consultants access to complete a site visit. However, when a Phase II 1001 S. Higgins, Suite B-1 assessment is to be completed (site sampling), GNDC must Missoula, MT 59801 show that the propernr is contaminated with petroleum only, (406)542-0129 and that the owner has insufficient funds to address the contamination in order to use grant funds to assess the property. The benefits to participating in the program are many. Assess- ments are completed at no cost to the property owi-ier, and the o data generated is given to the property owi—ier. Property ow,ners currently under order by a regulatory agency can use Browi-ifield funds to satisfy regulatory agencv concerns. Likewise, a property owi-ier that is concerned about a possible o petroleum contamination problem can access funds to evaluate if there is a problem. Being selected for assessment also makes the property eligible for additional Browi-afield funds for further assessment ar-id site cleanup. While GNDC' existing award limits how mai-ly o assessments can be completed this year, G�TD C is committed to applying for additional assessment and cleanup funds from o EPA ir-i 2006. c•N W ~ c C 0 M o •� h .. 0 W c • c r0 W ' C 0 % Bqwft M 0 `y ,S per.► ;.. •� c W W 0 M c C v 0 � w V ara� ' 4-4 c� u 1-4 1-4 u 1-41-4 bJO 4� a� 1-4 0 0 u bJp 1-4 o � o t-4 a 1�-)4 = 4:1,� � � o � o 4.3 4-4 . ,. tv 7:; o VI VI D • a � S.a V -I- �..► y rot;� V V d] • o � _bb d] V � V > W SELECTED PROTECT DESCRIPTIONS Berg Lumber Targeted Brownfield Assessment - City of Lewistown, Lewistown, Montana Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Site Assessment, Sampling and Analysis ■ Sampling and Analysis Plan Review ■ Site Cleanup Plan Development Year Started/Completed: 2004 - 2005 While at the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, AMEC Geomatrix staff, Kelly Schmitt, assisted with a Phase II Targeted Brownfield Assessment of approximately 31 acres of land at the Berg Lumber Mill Site in Lewistown, Montana. The assessment was conducted to identify contaminants of concern associated with this former Mill Site so the property could be redeveloped and include a public fishing access. The Brownfield assessment included sampling surface and subsurface soils, and sediments and surface water from Big Spring Creek and a nearby irrigation ditch. Samples were analyzed for pentachlorophenol, dioxinslfurans, volatile petroleum hydrocarbons, extractable petroleum hydrocarbons, semi-volatiles and metals. In addition, four monitoring wells were installed during the Phase II activities. Kelly Schmitt identified sources of funding for the assessment and managed the use of the Brownfields funds for assessment activities. She also reviewed the sampling and analysis plan and assessment report and submitted quarterly reports to EPA regarding progress of Brownfield assessment activities at the site. She also assisted with the Brownfields assessment cleanup grant application that was awarded by EPA to the City of Lewistown for $200,000. Brewery Flats Brownfield Assessment Project, US EPA, City of Lewistown, MT —Brownfield Assessment, Lewistown, Montana Client U.S. EPA, City of Lewistown Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Phase II Environmental Assessments ■ Surface water and sediment sampling ■ VCP Development Year Started/Completed: 1993 - 1996 AMEC Geomatrix staff completed a Brownfield assessment of approximately 47 acres of land on Brewery Flats south of Lewistown, Montana to identify contaminants at the site and to assess the suitability of adding the property to an adjacent park created through a Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks stream redevelopment project. The Brownfield assessment included the collection of sediment and surface water samples for PCB immunoassay field screening and the installation of Geoprobe boreholes. Subsurface soil samples and groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for pesticides/ PCBs, SVOCs, VOCs, diesel range organics (DRO), and metals. The data obtained were compared to the EPA Region 9 residential soil preliminary remediation goals (PRG) and soil screen- ing levels (SSL). Contaminants detected at concentrations above the PRG or SSL were included in the calculation of site -specific action levels. AMEC Geomatrix staff also helped prepare an initial screening of remedial technologies for the City of Lewistown, which included the identification of potential remedial alternatives, cost estimates for implementation of each alternative, and recommendation of a preferred alternative. Afield sampling plan for collecting additional data at the site was prepared and implemented. These data and previously collected data were used to prepare a Voluntary Cleanup Plan for consideration by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Confederated Salish &Kootenai Tribes Brownfield Project - Poison, Montana Client Confederated Salish Kootenai Tribes Marlene McDanal Phone: (406) 883-2888 Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Site Assessment ■ Successful Cleanup Grant Application ■ SAP and QAPP Preparation ■ Site Cleanup Plan Development Year Started/Completed: ongoing Contract Value: $346,309 Role: Prime Since 2005, AMEC Geomatrix has worked with the CSKT on their Brownfield program. AMEC Geomatrix has completed Phase I, 11, and III site assessments of eight Brownfield sites, and prepared a successful $200,000 cleanup grant application for the Elmo Cash Store site. Assigned tasks include development of a Quality Assurance Project Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plans for each site assessed, implementation of soil and groundwater characterization, site cleanup plan development, public outreach, regulatory agency collaboration, and EPA -grant management. AMEC Geomatrix has completed assessments of landfills, former fueling stations, methamphetamine labs, and home sites, as directed by the Tribe. Contaminants discovered on the sites include asbestos, lead -based paint, petroleum, PAHs, solvents, and metals. Great Falls Brownfield Redevelopment Project, Great Falls Development Authority (GFDA) -Great Falls, Montana Client Great Falls Development Authority (GFDA) Contacts: Lillian Sunwall (GFDA) Phone: (406) 454-1934 Ted Mitchell (Mitchell Development) Phone: (406) 761-4400 Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Successful Assessment and RLF Grant Application ■ Public outreach ■ Phase I and II Environmental Assessments ■ SAP and QAPP Preparation ■ Grant Management Year Started/Completed: 2002 - 2006 Contract Value: $4I 9,000 Role: Prime AMEC Geomatrix staff has been involved with the Great Falls Riverfront Brownfield Project for the past four years. Completed work includes the preparation and submission of a successful application for USEPA Brownfield grant ($400,000 assessment grant and $I,000,000 RLF grant) and creation of a redevelopment plan for the 45-acre riverfront redevelopment project. A "Needs Assessment" with landowners and key stakeholders was completed as well as an initial inventory and ranking of sites to be assessed. AMEC Geomatrix staff facilitated several public meetings concerning the assessment and redevelopment plan, prepared fact sheets and worked with GFDA staff to update their Brownfield web site. AMEC Geomatrix staff also completed 14 Phase I ESAs in the riverfront area and comprehensive Phase II assessments on 10 of the 14 properties. Prior to the Phase II assessments, AMEC Geomatrix staff developed a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) and project -wide Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) which was approved by the USEPA. Phase II environmental assessments encompassed soil, groundwater, and asbestos surveys of structures. AMEC Geomatrix assisted GFDA over the past few years with management and marketing of their RLF grant program. Currently, we are working with the developer (Mitchell Development) on remediation of the site of the Great Falls Federal Building. Great Northern Development Corporation Brownfield Project - Wolf Point, Montana Client Great Northern Development Corporation (GNDC) Contact: Linda Twitchell Phone: (406) 653-2590 Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Successful Assessment Grant Application ■ Public outreach ■ Phase I and II Environmental Assessments ■ SAP and QAPP Preparation ■ Grant Management Year Started/Completed: ongoing Contract Value: $244,338 Role: Prime AMEC Geomatrix has been involved with the GNDC for the past three years. Completed work includes the preparation and submission of a successful application for USEPA Brownfield assessment grant ($200,000 grant), facilitation of several public meetings, preparation of fact sheets and a brochure, and completion of Phase I and II ESAs in Plentywood, Jordan, Circle, and Hinsdale, Montana. AMEC Geomatrix also developed a project -wide Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) which was approved by the USEPA and several SAPS for Phase II assessment. Currently, we are assisting the GNDC with a RLF grant application. We will also begin Phase I ESAs on 4 additional sites during the fall of 2008, including the Montana Cowboy Hall of Fame site in Wolf Point, Montana. Missoula Sawmill Site Brownfield Redevelopment -Missoula, Montana Client Mill Site Revitalization Project, LLC Contact: Ed Wetherbee — MRP, LLC Phone: (303) 859-3835 Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Successful Targeted Brownfields Assessment Grant Application ■ Phase II Environmental Assessments ■ VCP Development ■ Site Cleanup ■ RLP Loan Assistance Year Started/Completed: ongoing Contract Value: $771,962 Role: Prime AMEC Geomatrix has worked with the City of Missoula on the Missoula Sawmill project over the past four years. In 2003, the City of Missoula worked with AMEC Geomatrix employees to assist in the successful preparation of an EPA Assessment grant application and prepare a SAP/QAPP for the site and complete a comprehensive Phase II site assessment on the Sawmill site. The assessment included gathering datd concerning on the presence and absence of wood preservatives, solvents, petroleum compounds, and metals. The data gathered during the Phase II assessment was used to prepare a draft Voluntary Cleanup Plan (VCP) in accordance with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality regulations. Currently, AMEC Geomatrix is working with the City and a local developer on redevelopment of the site. The VCP has been determined by the DEQ to be complete. AMEC Geomatrix has been retained by the developer (MRP, LLC) to implement cleanup of the site estimated at $2.0 million. Soil removal actions are complete. Methane abatement and long-term groundwater monitoring remain. White Pine Sash Site Brownfield Cleanup Grant Project -Missoula, Montana Client City of Missoula, Missoula, MT Contacts: Kisha Schlegel Phone: (406) 258-3688 Cindy Wulflcuele Phone: (406) 258-4657 Role of AMEC Geomatrix Personnel: ■ Successful Cleanup Grant Application ■ Interim Remedial Action Plan ■ Public Meeting Facilitation ■ Pentachlorophenol and Dioxin Site Cleanup Year Started/Completed: ongoing Contract Value: $91,610 Role: Prime Since 2002, AMEC Geomatrix has worked with the City of Missoula on the White Pine and Sash project In 2003, the City of Missoula purchased a portion of the former White Pine &Sash facility for future use as a road department and park. AMEC Geomatrix has assisted with redevelopment of the city property through site assessment and the successful submission of a Brownfield cleanup grant application. Both a Phase I and II environmental site assessment were completed in accordance with an EPA - approved SAP/QAPP. In April 20079 AMEC Geomatrix submitted on behalf of the City a draft Interim Remedial Action Plan to the DEQ that outlines the remedial actions that will be completed to cleanup the site and allow for redevelopment. As part of the IRAP, AMEC Geomatrix has facilitate several public meetings with the local neighborhood living adjacent to the site, and overseen the cleanup of the site. Cleanup is complete on the project and we are awaiting DEQ closure. COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF BROWNFIELD$ PROJECTS ABOUT AMEC GEOMATRIX AMEC Geomatrix is a diversified technical and engineering firm that specializes in helping our clients manage and solve tough, complex challenges the world over. We do this by bringing to each project some of the world's most technically accomplished, pragmatically oriented scientists and engineers, and a singular focus on creating the right solutions for our clients, time after time. We strive and continue to be our clients' partner of choice to solve a wide range of technical challenges, from interfacing with regulators to developing and managing programs. More than 80 percent of our revenues are from existing clients or referral business; this makes us both grateful and proud to know that our work continues to earn the trust of clients. Broad -based Expertise and Global Reach AMEC Geomatrix is headquartered in Oakland, California with offices located throughout North America and affiliates throughout the western hemisphere. Our team consists of more than 500 scientific, technical and support professionals who work on projects across the globe. When supported by our parent company, AMEC plc, our numbers grow to 23,000 in 30 countries. Our expertise includes geotechnical and seismic engineering, environmental engineering, chemical and process engineering, air quality and toxicology, risk assessment, biological sciences, applied environmental and earth sciences and visual resource analysis. We also provide an extensive range of specialized services including computer modeling, geographic information systems, and litigation support. Our clients include Fortune 500 firms, businesses from major industries, service - sector organizations, and government entities at federal, state/provincial, and local levels. Our clients include Fortune 500 firms; businesses from major industries; service - sector organizations; and government entities at federal, state/provincial, and local levels. Our Commitment to Clients, To Ourselves We have a three-part formula for success and enduring client relationships: ■ We hire the best people. ■ We work for great clients who inspire our teams by challenging them with intriguing, complex, and important problems. ■ We unleash our teams to focus on the true needs of our clients, resulting in the innovative, thoughtful, creative solutions that make sense for our clients. This formula enables us to provide what our clients need most smart solutions for a complex world. V) 4-a U a� p u L C CL [d V) 0 C L. p m U o x L V J E a� 0 a� w L d 0 U Fi a� U C!] U Fi a� C!] C!] C� 0.] 0 qr- LO It V) u a� u C - -v J rJ V) L. 0 m U o x L V J E a� 0 C a� w L d 0 U o ° o Con ci ci con ci 0 ci +� ❑ _ as � � a� � ;� • � ❑ m � M C)❑ ,__, ❑ a o C4 o o o �, `4 n o o a� Cn Cn i C4 'd N 'd cj � C4 ❑ °� > Cn ❑ > -d C4 ci 7� C4 U C!] S-i S-i f]A ❑ m CI] S-. ❑ C4 C1. S-i C) U S-i S- 4 0 ] M C) 0 ] N C4 �i C4 C4 C4 ; U N �' 7z v7 � r M C) ❑ ap o C4 0] V C4 C4 0 bz C4 C4 C4 +� a� ❑ C4 ❑ Cn ;:5 a) 0 Cn ❑ o o ❑ C4 C4 Ls. a C4 cn x ❑ a1 a1 ❑ aA � U � CI] 0.] ;:5 0.] m C/7 4m. Ly C4 0] N CC4 ci �. +� m 'd W L.] C4 C) ❑ _ 'd U C/7 _ ❑ U CA CA WE qr- LO It V) u a� u CL [d V) 0 C L. p m U o x +--) L J E a� 0 •� V C U w L d 0 U rA C.) C� U CD CD o .� a) m ° "'' � C!] � � •S'". Cam/] o 0 0 ° ❑ o m �o o ° o ^i C!] a� 4 o � w NA 0.] C/7 C-7 qr- LO It FIRM PROFILES AND RESUMES OF KEY PROJECT PERSONNEL Helena Office 1824 North Last Chance Gulch P.O. Box 7 I 18 Helena, MT 59604 (406) 442-0860 phone (406) 442-0864 fax Missoula Office 1001 South Higgins Building B, Suite Missoula, MT 59801-4144 (406) 542-0129 phone (406) 542-0130 fax amecP CH RIS CERQUON E, RS Environmental Consulting Brownfields Project Management Hydrogeologic Investigations Environmental Site Assessments EDUCATION M.S., Environmental Studies, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, 1988 B.S., Biology (Minor: Mathematics), Cortland State University, Cortland, NY, 1984 REGISTRATION Registered Sanitarian, MT No. 4227 1994 PROFESSIONAL HISTORY AM EC Geomatrix, Inc_, Senior Scientist, 2008 to date Geomatrix Consultants, Inc_, Senior Scientist, 2005 — 2008 Maxim Technologies, Missoula, MT, Project Manager, 2002 — 2005 Missoula County Health Department, Missoula, MT, Sr_ Water Quality Specialist, 1993 — 2002 TMC Environmental, Eugene, GR7 Northwest Regional Manager & Vice President, 1990 — '1993 Anania Geologic Engineering, Pinole7 CA, Project Manager, 1989 —1990 Purcell, Rhoades and Associates, Hayward, CA, Staff Environmental Scientist, 1988 — '1989 University of Montana, Missoula, MT, River Biolog ist, 1986 —1987 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Mr_ Cerquone has more than 20 years of diversified environmental consulting experience_ He has managed numerous environmental projects, including hydrogeologic investigations of landfills; metal plating chemical release investigations; Phase I, II and III environmental site assessments (ESAs); human health risk assessments; and contaminated soil and groundwater remedial actions_ Mr_ Cerquone has more than 10 years of U.S. Environmental Protection Association (EPA) Brownfields experience and is currently managing several Brownfields projects_ His experience in Brownfields encompasses EPA and Housing and Urban Development grant writing, project management, site assessment, community outreach, site cleanup, and redevelopment planning_ He has also led or participated in several public outreach efforts on very controversial projects, including several Brownfields redevelopments, the expansion of the Rocky Mountain Laboratories (RML) in Hamilton, Montana, and the proposed oil and gas exploration of the Rocky Mountain Front outside of Choteau, Montana_ B ROWN F I E L D PROJECTS Missoula Saw► ffl Site, Mlllslte Revitalization Project, LLC, Missoula, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 010817.000.0) Project manager_ Responsible for all tasks associated with investigation and remediation of the 50-acre Brownfield Redevelopment project_ Specific responsibilities include oversight of site investigation of soil, groundwater, and soil vapor, vapor intrusion modeling, preparation of a Voluntary Cleanup Plan (VCP) consistent with the Montana Voluntary Cleanup Act, implementation of soil excavation to depth greater than 40 feet, soil vapor extraction to CH RIS CERQUON E, RS amecP PACE 2 remediate TCE in soil vapor, regulatory negotiation and consensus, public outreach and public meeting facilitation, long-term groundwater monitoring, and client management_ White Pine & Sash, City of Missoula, Missoula, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 010880.002_0) Project manager_ Responsibilities include oversight and management of soil remediation at a former wood treatment site. contaminants of concern included pentachlorophenol and dioxinslfurans_ Specific duties include management of site investigation, preparation of Interim Remedial Action Plan, oversight of soil excavation to site -specific standards, public outreach on human health risks, regulatory collaboration, preparation of successful cleanup grant application, and site cleanup reporting. our involvement allowed the city to redevelop the former mill site into a neighborhood park_ Great Falls Federal Building Brownfield Project, Mitchell Development & Investments, Great Falls, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 012095.001.0) Project manager_ Responsibilities include oversight of petroleum investigation and cleanup to allow for development of the site into a U.S. Federal Building_ A Phase I and II ESAs in accordance with the General Services Administration and Montana DEQ guidelines was completed_ cleanup elements include soil vapor mitigation, groundwater monitoring, and regulatory collaboration and negotiation_ AMEc Geomatrix efforts on this project allowed the initial anchor project for the Great Falls Brownfield Riverfront Redevelopment project to move forward, spurning additional developer interest and resulting in construction of a hotel and restaurant adjacent to the federal building_ Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSK7) Brownfield Project, CSKT, Polson, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 012454.000.0) Project manager_ Responsibilities include management of multiple site investigation and cleanup projects within the Flathead Indian Reservation, Montana_ Assignments have involved sites contaminated with petroleum, metals, pesticides, asbestos, and methamphetamine_ Specific responsibilities included preparation of successful EPA cleanup grant, management of budgets, staff, and the client to facilitate redevelopment or remediation of tribal - owned properties_ Great Northern Development Brownfields Assessment Project, Great Northern Development Corporation, Wolf Point, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 012134.000.0) Project manager_ General responsibilities include oversight and management of environmental assessments completed using USEPA petroleum and hazardous substance grant funds_ Specific duties include public outreach, grant writing, completion of Phase I and II site assessments, preparation of cleanup plans, and collaboration with EPA and DEQ Brownfield coordinators_ USEPA Brownfield Grant Applications, Numerous Clients, United States_ Prepared or assisted in the preparation of U.S. EPA Brownfield Grant applications resulting in more than $5.0 million in grants to communities and tribes, including: • 1998 — $200,000 city of Missoula Assessment Grant ■ 2002 — $400,000 Great Falls Development Authority (GFDA) Assessment Grant • 2003 — $1,000,000 GFDA Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) Grant • 2004 — $200,000 Missoula cleanup Grant ■ 2004 — $1,000,000 city of Missoula RLF Grant ■ 2005 — $200,000 Great Northern Development corporation (GNDG) Assessment Grant • 2006 — $200,000 GSKT cleanup Grant • 2006 — $1 '15,000 Missoula Sawmill Site Technical Brownfield Assessment Grant ■ 2007 — $400,000 Big Sky Economic Development Association Assessment Grant ■ 2008 - $400,000 Bear Paw Development corporation Assessment Grant amecP CHRIS CERQUONE, RS PACE 3 ■ 2008 - $400,000 city of Kalispell, Montana Assessment Grant • 2008 - $400,000 city of corpus Christi, Texas Assessment Grant • 2008 - $1,600,000 Northern Rockies RC&D RLF Grant Great Falls Brownfield Riverfront Redevelopment Project, Great Falls Development authority, Great Falls, MT (Prior to GMX) Project manager_ Responsible for overseeing all aspects of the project, including project budgets, human resource allocation and client negotiation_ Project involves assessment and cleanup of 46 acres of land adjacent to the Missouri River_ Specific work tasks managed on this project include preparation of master redevelopment plan for the area, site assessment, public outreach, grant writing, cleanup planning, remedial alternatives evaluation, site cleanup, redevelopment planning and EPA collaboration_ ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT AND REMEDIATION PROJECTS Poison Shooting Range Site Remediation Project, Northwest Holdings., LLC, Poison, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 012725.000.0) Project manager_ Responsibilities included oversight of site investigation and cleanup of PAH and lead -impacted surface soil at proposed subdivision_ our actions resulted in the impacts to soil being fully delineated, the cleanup proceeding on the site, and the lots impacted with PAHs and lead being re -developed. Chromium Groundwater investigation and Cleanup, Confidential Client, Creswell, OR. (Prior to GMX) Project manager_ Responsible for a remedial investigation and remediation of a 67000- gallon chromium spill at a chrome plating facility_ The release impacted soil, groundwater and surface water_ Duties included management of site investigation, groundwater modeling, installation and operation of a cation -exchange treatment system, surface water discharge permitting, work plan and report review, scheduling, budgeting and regulatory agency negotiation_ Pentachloroethylene (PCE) and Vinyl Chloride Groundwater investigation and Cleanup, Confidential Client, Eugene, OR. (Prior to GMX) Project manager_ Responsible for developing and implementing a corrective action plan involving installation of groundwater pump -and -treatment system, underground solvent tank removal and excavation and disposal of about 77000 cubic yards of solvent -impacted soils_ PCB Site Characterization and Human Health Risk Assessment, carnation company, Oakland, CA_ (Prior to GMX) Project manager_ Responsible for completion of characterization of a PCB groundwater plume and human health risk assessment_ PCB migrated off -site and was impacting neighboring commercial wells_ Significant public outreach was conducted to educate landowners and the public concerning the site. The site characterization data and risk assessment were used to prepare a corrective action plan, ultimately approved by the local and state regulatory agencies_ WATER RESOURCE PROJECTS Aspen Trails Ranch Subdivision, Tuholske Law Office, P.C., Helena, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 013662_000.0) Expert Witness_ Expert witness for plaintiff who filed a complaint with the City of Helena for approval of a Preliminary Plat for a 326-lot subdivision_ Plaintiff has alleged that the City failed adequate characterize soil liquefaction, groundwater, and floodplain issues, and therefore, erroneously approved the plat_ His expert testimony was used to identify where the City may have failed to require the applicant to provide sufficient information, and what the risks to the environment and future home buyers might be. Project is ongoing_ CH RIS CERQUON E, RS amecP PACE 4 "The Ranch" Rock Creek Subdivision, Rock Creek Protective association, Rock Creek, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 012455_000_0) Expert Witness, Project Manager, and Technical Lead_ Responsibilities included applying a Stream Segment Temperature Model (SSTEMP) to predict the impact on in -stream water temperature from proposed water diversions from the river designed to create a large pond as part of a proposed housing development_ Developed a water mass balance that included inputs and losses to groundwater as well as evaporation_ Provided technical review of subdivision submittals with respect to nitrogen and phosphorus loading, groundwater depths and impacts, and floodplain determinations_ Testified before judge in public hearing where client was able to obtain a temporarily restraining order halting the proposed subdivision until such time that adequate studies were completed_ Proposed North Shore Subdivision, Citizens for a Better Flathead, Kalispell, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 013968_000_0) Project manager and Technical Lead_ Responsibilities included technical review of submittals associated with a 275-lot subdivision on Flathead Lake, Montana_ Provided technical opinions to the Kalispell Planning Board and County Commissioners concerning groundwater depths and quality, groundwater/surface water modeling, storm water treatment, floodplain issues, and soil liquefaction_ Technical work lead to the a denial of the subdivision as proposed, based on discovery of historical right to flood the property by PPL, Montana, who owns and operates the Kerr Dam. Fort Missoula Regional Park Project, City of Missoula, Missoula, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 014562_000_0) Project manager_ Responsibilities included oversight of Phase I and II environmental site assessment of operate gravel pit and concrete production facility, determination of available water rights held by the City and others in the vicinity of the proposed park, calculation of consumptive use of water rights deemed potentially available to the City, and coordination of our findings with park planners_ Project is ongoing_ N E PA PROJECTS Biomedical Research Facility Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), National Institute of Health, Hamilton. (Prior to GMX) Assistant project manager. Responsible for assisting in preparation of an EIS for an integrated biomedical research facility that included a Bio-Safety Level 4 laboratory_ Worked with the applicant to refine the purpose and need of the proposed project. Participated in community outreach and public meetings. Provided review of environmental data and prepared responses to public comments. Rocky Mountain Front oil and Gas Exploration EIS, Bureau of Land Managrement, Blackleaf Area of rocky Mountain Front, Choteau, MT (Prior to GMX) Outreach coordinator and project facilitator_ Responsible for coordinating public outreach on a controversial project to increase oil and gas development of the Rocky Mountain Front in Montana_ Also served as the project facilitator for all internal meetings between the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), cooperating agencies and contractor personnel_ Worked with the BLM to refine the proposed action, public meeting format and methodology used to respond to public comments_ Participated in community outreach and public meetings_ Provided review of environmental data and prepared responses to public comments_ BLM Resource Management Plan, Bureau of Land Managrement, Butte District, MT (Prior to GMX) Social resource manager_ Responsible for coordinating staff on the preparation of specialist reports specific to socioeconomics and cultural impacts_ Directed staff on project deliverables and reviewed specialist reports and responses to public comments made on the EIS_ CH RIS CERQUON E, RS amecP PACE 5 Missoula Airport Authority EA, Missoula airport authority, Missoula, MT (Prior to GMX) Project manager_ coordinated the preparation of a biological assessment, wetland delineation and cultural survey related to the runway expansion EA for the Missoula Airport_ Directed staff and reviewed project deliverables_ Bitterroot National Forest Weed Spraying EIS, USFS, Missoula, MT (Prior to GMX) Technical Specialist_ Prepared technical report that evaluated the human health risks associated with application of pesticides and herbicides on the Bitterroot National Forest_ Attended public meetings to provide results of the study and answer questions from the public_ PUBLIC OUTREACH PROJECTS Rocky Mountain Laboratories Proposed Expansion EIS, National Institute of Health, Public Outreach coordinator, Hamilton, Montana (Prior to GMX)_ See discussion of responsibilities above under EIS/EA experience_ Blackleaf oil and Gas Exploration EIS, Bureau of Land Management, Public outreach coordinator, Great Falls, Montana_ Public outreach coordinator (Prior to GMX)_ See discussion of responsibilities above under EIS/EA experience_ Great Falls Rive►front Brownfield Project, Great Falls Development authority, Great Falls, MT Public outreach coordinator (Prior to GMX)_ See discussion of responsibilities above under Brownfields experience_ Northeast Montana Brownfield Program, Great Northern Development corporation Falls Development authority, Great Falls, MT Public outreach coordinator_ See discussion of responsibilities above under Brownfields experience_ Missoula White Pine & Sash Brownfield Project, city of Missoula, Missoula, MT Public Outreach coordinator_ See discussion of responsibilities above under Brownfields experience_ AFFILIATIONS Montana Environmental Health Association Montana Economic Developers Association PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS "Missoula Mill Site Brownfield Project." C. Cerquone. Presented at National EPA Brownfield conference, Portland, OR_ October 2003_ "Public Outreach on Brownfield Projects." C. Cerquone. Presented at Regional EPA Brownfield conference, Salt Lake city, UT_ June 2002_ "Missoula's Aquifer Protection Program." C. Cerquone. Presented at Montana Environmental Law Compliance course, Missoula, MT_ November 1999_ "The Missoula Valley Aquifer Protection Ordinance." C. Cerquone. Presented at Rocky Mountain Groundwater conference, Jackson? WY_ October, 1995_ "The Maze of Regulatory Compliance: What do you do when you own a Contaminated Site?" C. Cerquone_ Business News_ Eugene, OR_ 1992_ CH RIS CERQUON E, RS amecP PACE f "Innovative Approaches to Hydrocarbon and Animal Fat Contamination Assessment and Cleanup." K.J. Anania, G_M_ Cerquone, and M.C. Scruggs_ Petroleum hydrocarbons and organic chemicals in groundwater Prevention, detection, and restoration_ Proceedings of the 1 WWA conference; Houston, TX_ p_ 413-26_ November 1989_ "Modeling Phosphorous Levels of Lake Pend O'reille, USA." V. Watson, C.M. Cerquone, and J _ Rokosch _ Proceedings of the Montana academy of Sciences_ Biological Sciences_ v_ 487 p_ 119- 26_ '1988_ "Phosphorous Removal Alternatives at the Missoula Wastewater Treatment Plant: A time for change." C. M . Cerquone. Clark Fork currents_ October 1987_ amecP KELLY J. SCHMITT Brownfields Grant Applications Brownfields Coordinator CDBW-ED Program Specialist Voluntary Cleanup Consultant EDUCATION B.S., Reclamation, minors in Environmental Science, Geology and German, University of Wisconsin -Platteville, Platteville, WI, 2000 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Ms. Schmitt has more than 9 years experience providing environmental, voluntary cleanup and remediation consulting services. She has significant experience preparing Brownfields grant applications and technical documents. Ms. Schmitt has served as coordinator and project officer for state lead and voluntary cleanup sites and program specialist for the Community Development Block Grant -Economic Development (CDBG-ED) Program, managing multiple projects in various grant stages. Ms. Schmitt has managed superfund site activities, from conducting public meetings to writing plan and record of decision documents. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS BROWNFIELDS Environmental Specialist/Brownfields Coordinator, 2001 2006, Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Helena, MT Brownfields coordinator and project officer for state lead and voluntary cleanup sites_ Produced legal decision documents for a maximum priority state superfu nd site, conducted oversight of investigation and remediation and construction activities at several maximum and high priority sites_ Reviewed technical documents, work plans, remedial investigations, risk assessments, and voluntary cleanup plans for thoroughness and content and provided detailed comments_ Reviewed staff work to ensure consistency within the Brownfields program, implemented institutional controls including applying for permits to limit groundwater use. Conducted outreach to communities, economic development entities, and other governmental agencies regarding Brownfields grants and issues_ Produced printed publications for outreach purposes_ Tracked expenditures including contractor costs, travel, training and meeting costs, and personnel, benefits, and overhead costs to ensure appropriate use of funds_ Phase one and Phase Two Assessments, Browwfields Grants, Old Holy Rosary Hospital, Mlles City, MT Used state Brownfields grant funding to hire consultant to conduct phase one and phase two assessments_ Oversaw all work conducted in areas having containers of unknown hazardous substances, asbestos, and lead -based paint present_ Successfully assisted Miles City Housing Authority in applying for and receiving a Brownfields cleanup grant from EPA_ VOLUNTARY CLEANUP Field oversight at Voluntary Cleanup Site, Corbin Flats, Jefferson City, MT Conducted field oversight of the cleanup at this voluntary cleanup site which was a former processing facility where mine tailings contaminated with lead, arsenic, and other metals, were spread throughout residential KELLY J. SCHMITT amecP PACE 2 yards and other properties_ Met with property owners, some of whom were hostile, to address residential property -specific cleanup issues such as tree removal, fencing, and landscaping_ Reviewed and approved construction cleanup and groundwater monitoring reports_ Sampling Plans and VCP Plan Review, Rocky Mountain Laboratories, Hamilton, MT Reviewed sampling plans and voluntary cleanup plans for cleanup of former radioactive waste burial pits at a federal research laboratory_ Provided guidance to consultant and National Institutes of Health that enabled them to obtain approval of the voluntary cleanup plan and regulatory delisting of the site. Voluntary Cleanup Plan Review, Missoula Sawmill, Missoula, MT Reviewed several drafts of voluntary cleanup plan for cleanup of soils contaminated with petroleum, solvents, and metals_ Provided advice and guidance to consultant and developer regarding regulatory requirements for voluntary cleanup plan approval_ Creatively worked through unique issues where the ultimate decision had the potential to set precedent_ SUPERFUND SITES Superfund Project oversight, Bitterroot Valley Sanitary Landfill, Victor, MT oversaw all activities at this maximum priority state superfund site where groundwater was contaminated with chloroform from disposal of liquid laboratory waste into the landfill_ Wrote proposed plan and record of decision and conducted several public meetings in contentious situations_ Met one-on- one with property owners affected by the contamination to ensure their concerns were addressed_ Produced semiannual newsletter to update residents living in the area. Worked closely with state agencies, local agencies, and consultants to develop a workable controlled groundwater area. Superfund Oversight, Burlington Northern Fueling Facility —Whitefish, Whitefish, MT Oversaw all activities at this high priority state superfund petroleum and solvent contaminated site. Reviewed and provided comments on the remedial investigation report. Conducted a public meeting with local officials and the community to update them on the progress at the site and address any concerns and worked with neighboring residential property owners and the city in dealing with property transactions associated with contaminated property. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT -ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (CDBG-ED) Community unity Developm en t Block Grant -Economic De velop►n en t (CDBG-E0) Program Specialist, Montana Department of Commerce, Helena, Montana_ Managed multiple CDBG-ED projects in different grant stages_ Provided recommendations on CDBG-ED funding applications and prepared contracts between department and local governments and non -profits. Tracked project expenditures and managed budgets to ensure appropriate use of funds, reviewed and documented compliance by local grant recipients with federal and state requirements_ Responded to program inquiries from government agencies, non -profits, and private consultants_ amecP ADAM N . JOH N SON Hydrogeology Geology EDUCATION M _S _, Hydrogeology, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, 2003 B_A_, Geology, Macalester College, St_ Paul, M N, 1998 PROFESSIONAL HISTORY AM EC Geomatrix, Inc_, Staff Hydrogeologist, 2008 to date Geomatrix Consultants, Inc_, Staff Hydrogeologist, 2006 — 2008 Salish Kootenai College, Pablo, MT, Science Instructor, 2003 — 2006 Geology Department, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, Research Assistant, 2002 — 2003 U.S. Geological Survey, Helena, MT, Hydrologist Trainee, 2001 — 2003 Geology Department, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, Teaching Assistant, 2000 — 2001 U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, Earth Science Intern, 1999 — 2000 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Mr_ Johnson has four years of professional geologic and water resources experience_ Current hydrogeology-related responsibilities include: • Data collection and reporting in support of water supply development_ Projects involve well design, drilling oversight, lithologic logging, discharge measurement, well development oversight, groundwater sampling, depth to groundwater monitoring, and aquifer testing/data analysis_ • Monitoring well installation oversight and aquifer testing in a variety of geologic environments_ Recent hydrogeologic field investigations were completed in Montana, Idaho, Alaska, and Ghana_ • Field investigations, data collection and reporting for mining projects, including active and abandoned mines_ • Phase I, II, & III ESAs (sampling plans, field investigations and reporting) and Brownfields site assessments and investigations_ • Surface water - groundwater interaction studies Mr_ Johnson is proficient in surface and ground water sampling for organics, metals, and radionuclides_ He has also acquired geophysical experience using ground -penetrating RADAR, magnetometer, and seismic refraction instruments_ Modeling experience includes a MODFLOW- based study of subsurface preferential flow zones, geochemical analysis of mine -impacted surface waters, and nutrient fate and transport models in support of wastewater treatment systems_ REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT AND HYDRGGEGLGGIc ASSESSMENT Red Dog Ranch, Territorial Landworks, Inc_, Missoula, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 013929_000_0) Staff Hydrogeologist_ Completed a Source Water Delineation and Assessment Report identifying ADAM N . JOH N SON amecP PAGE 2 the sources of groundwater that will provide drinking water to a proposed subdivision, as well as potential contaminant threats to those sources. Responsible for providing field oversight during public water supply (PWS) well screen installation and well development_ Completed aquifer testing of the PWS wells_ Submitted a Hydrogeologic Summary Report to the State of Montana describing the results of aquifer testing. The report described the physical and legal availability of the proposed groundwater source, and addressed potential adverse affects to senior surface water and groundwater right holders_ Teton Addition Subdivision, wGM Group, Missoula, MT (GMX Project # 12823) Staff hydrogeologist_ Completed Source -Water Delineation and Assessment Report for proposed public water supply (PINS) system_ Assisted with proposal writing for second phase of PINS development_ Recorded lithologies, well completions, and groundwater production rates during installation of test wells and production wells_ Performed 24-hour and 72-hour production well aquifer tests with up to five observations wells and at flow rates of up to 1700 gpm_ Analyzed time-drawdown data using several techniques to provide estimates of aquifer transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity_ Completed Hydrogeologic Assessment Report prior to PINS construction as required by the State of Montana_ Flynn Ranch Subdivision, DJU, P.C. 7 Missoula, MT (GMX Project # 13376) Staff hydrogeologist_ Provided oversight during the drilling and installation of three groundwater monitoring wells on a property exhibiting seasonally high groundwater levels_ Recorded litholog is descriptions of soils_ Monitored monthly water -level elevation measurements in thirteen wells for six months_ These data will allow for calibration of a groundwater flow model to help determine where basements and crawl spaces may be appropriate_ MINING Brong Ahafo Mine, Newmont Ghana Gold Ltd.., Accra, Ghana_ (GMX Project # 10860 and 10983) Staff hydrogeologist_ Completed geological cross sections based on Newmont's borehole logs_ Collected groundwater and surface water samples and performed short-term aquifer tests on approximately 20 wells to provide data for mine dewatering modeling efforts (February -March 2007)_ Assisted with aquifer -test data analysis for determination of aquifer properties_ Amoma Pit Investigation, Newmont Ghana Gold, Ltd_, Accra, Africa_ (AMEC GMX Project # 014525_001 _D)_ Field Hydrogeologist (October -November 2008)_ Proposed open -pit gold mine in western Ghana_ Provided oversight of field activities for collection of baseline hydrogeologic data, including monitoring well drilling, lithologic logging, screen installation, well development, and aquifer testing_ Assumed some management and oversight responsibilities due to the remote nature of the project_ Site conditions and contractor indifference caused significant delays in the completion of the monitoring wells_ Guided the contracting process that was required for the mine to hire a replacement contractor to complete the project_ Provided oversight for the Ghana well installation work for a period of almost six weeks (twice as long as the planned work)_ Deliverables included a monitoring well completion report and an aquifer testing report_ Open Pit Seepage Assessment, Teck Cornlnco Alaska Incorporated, Kotzebue, AK (AM EC GMX Project # 007753_005_0)_ Open -pit lead -zinc mine_ Provided oversight during the installation of exploration boreholes that were designed to intercept sub -permafrost groundwater_ I nstalled thermistor strings and vibrating wire transducers to monitor groundwater temperatures and potentiometric levels_ Acted as a liaison between Major Drilling contractors and mine staff_ ADAM N . JOH N SON amecP PACE 3 Monsanto, Husch & Eppenberger, Soda Springs, ID_ (AMEC GMX Project # 013871.000.0) Staff Hydrogeologist responsible for a variety of field and reporting tasks relating to an Idaho phosphate mine. Provided oversight and lithologic logging during the installation of six monitoring wells and fifteen Geoprobe piezometers_ Assisted with the installation of vadose zone moisture monitoring stations. Conducted groundwater and surface water sampling_ Measured stream discharge. Reporting included an analysis of preliminary soil moisture data. Geoche► ical Analysis of Surface Water draining Abandoned Mine Lands, U.S. Geological Survey, Helena, MT (Prior to AMEC Geomatrix) Hydrologist trainee responsible for hourly stream sample collection as part of a 24-hour study to document diurnal changes in metals and field parameters in a stream near Helena_ Processed samples and analyzed data using geochemical models_ Acid -Generating Capacity of Abandoned Mine Lands in Northern Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey, Freston, VA_ (Prior to AM EC Geomatrix) Field research assistant and lab analyst_ Collected water, soil, and sediment samples at and near abandoned Pb-Zn mine_ Analytical methods included X-ray diffraction and acid -base accounting_ Results provided a baseline for comparison after planned reclamation of the site. BROWNFIELDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS Missoula Saw► ilf Site, Millsite Revitalization Project, LLC, Missoula, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 010817.000.0). Staff hydrogeologist responsible for coordinating semi-annual onsite and offsite groundwater sampling for iron and manganese in accordance with an administrative order on consent_ Activities include ongoing collection of groundwater samples, coordination of sampling activites with other staff, data management, and reporting_ The work is being performed as part of a Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) with the goal of residential redevelopment and included regulatory interaction at a site with ongoing investigation and remedial activities_ Phase H Site Assessment, Sylvia Rapley, Great Falls, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 011034_002_0) Staff Hydrogeologist_ Field investigation of petroleum -impacted property that contained a leaking underground storage tank_ Responsibilities included soil sampling, monitoring well installation oversight, soil vapor -point installation oversight, groundwater sampling, data analysis, and reporting_ This ongoing project will soon transition from the assessment phase to the cleanup phase_ Brownfields Assessment, Great Northern Development Corporation (GNDQ Wolf Point, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 012134_000_0)_ Staff Hydrogeologist responsible for completion of five Phase I ESAs in support of GNDC petroleum and hazardous substances grants_ Completed Phase 11 ESA investigations at two of the sites_ Project duties include field data collection (soil, groundwater), data analysis, and reporting_ Soil at one of the sites contains free -phase diesel fuel, and assessment is ongoing_ 2007 Railroad Avenue Site, Weir Floway, Inc_, Fresno, CA_ (AMEC GMX Project # 009662_004_0) Industrial site impacted by volatile organic compounds and hexavalent chromium_ Assisted the Rancho Cordova, California Geomatrix office_ Staff hydrogeologist responsible for directing the installation of eleven monitoring wells_ Completed lithologic logging and collected groundwater samples_ Phase 1, 11, and 111 Environmental Site Assessments Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Flathead Indian Reservation, MT (GMX Project # 12454) Staff hydrogeologist_ Completed five Phase I ESA reports_ Phase 11 and III field activities at an abandoned informal dumpsite include ADAM N . JOH N SON amecP PACE 4 ground water sampling, water level monitoring, and surface water and stream sediment sampling_ Contributed to analyses of data and report writing_ Provided field oversight during the installation of numerous monitoring wells at a former gasoline service station_ Developed the wells, collected groundwater samples, and measured groundwater elevations_ Created potentiometric maps and assisted with conceptual hydrogeologic model development_ Collaborated on reporting of the Phase II, III, and IV assessment investigations_ Brownrield Investigation, Northwest Holdings., Polson, MT (GMX Project # 12725) Staff hydrogeologist_ Assisted with the setup of a soil -sampling grid at a former shotgun shooting range_ Intensive sampling was completed in two phases to characterize impacts to the shallow subsurface from lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons_ SURFACE - GROUNDWATER INTERACTION Characterization or Surface Water - Groundwater Interaction in a Montana RiverlFloodplain System, Flathead Lake Biological Station, Polson, MT (Prior to AM EC Geomatrix) Graduate research assistant_ An investigation into the hydrogeology and multiple -scale groundwater flow systems near Glacier National Park was part of a multidisciplinary effort funded by the FLBS_ Data included groundwater and surface water temperature profiles, hydraulic head, water chemistry, and ground -penetrating RADAR surveys_ Products consisted of water table maps, hydraulic conductivity estimates, a groundwater flow model, and groundwater flow directions and velocity estimates. AFFILIATIONS National Groundwater Association CONTINUING EDUCATION AND CERTIFICATIONS Analysis and Design of Aquifer Tests Including Slug Tests and Fracture Flow_ National Groundwater Association Short Course #192_ June 18-207 2007_ Dublin, Ohio_ Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) 40-hour training and current Eight -Hour Refresher. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) 24-Hour Open -Pit New Miner Training. State of Montana Monitoring Well Constructor License #440 (August, 2008) amecP ADAM N . JOH N SON PACE 5 PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS "Environmental Geochemistry of a Kuroko-type massive sulfide deposit at the abandoned Valzinco Mine, Virginia, USA_" R.R. Seal II, J.M. Hammarstrom, A_N_ Johnson, N.M. Piatak, G_A_ Wandless_ Applied Geochemistry_ v_ 237 p_ 320-342. 2008_ "Geochemical and Mineralogical characterization of the Abandoned Valzinco (Lead -Zinc) and Mitchell (Gold) Mine Sites Prior to Reclamation, Spotsylvania county, Virginia_" J.A. Hammarstrom, A_ N _ Johnson, R. R. Seal, A.L. Meier, P. L. Briggs, N.M. Piatak_ U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5085_ 2000_ "Evaluation of an Inexpensive Small -Diameter Temperature Logger for Documenting Groundwater —River Interactions." A.N. Johnson, B.R. Boer, W.W. Woessner, J.A. Stanford, G.C. Poole, S.A. Thomas, and S.J. O' Da n i e I . Groundwater Monitoring & Remedlatlon_ v_ 25 (4)7 p_ 08- 74_ 2005_ "Preliminary Hydrogeological and Ground Penetrating RADAR Investigation of Preferential Flow Zones in a Gravel -Dominated Floodplain, Northwest Montana." A.N. Johnson. Master's Thesis. University of Montana, Missoula, MT_ 130 pages_ 2003_ "Preferential Flow in the Hyporheic Zone of a Large Alluvial Floodplain, Western Montana." A.N. Johnson, W_W_ Woessner, and J.A. Stanford_ Proceedings of the 54th annual Groundwater Expo, National Groundwater association, Las Vegas., NV_ December 8-11 , 2002_ "Geochemical Characterization of Drainage Prior to Reclamation at the Abandoned Valzinco Mine, Spotsylvania county, Virginia." R.R. Seal, A. N_ Johnson, J.M. Hammarstrom, A.L. Meier_ U.S. Geological Survey open -File Report 02-360_ 2002_ "Mineralogy and Geochemistry of Sulfidic Mine Waste at an Abandoned Pb-Zn Mine: Implications for Acid -Generating and Acid -Neutralizing Potential." A. N. Johnson, J. M. Hammarstrom, R. R. Seal_ Geological Society of America Annual Meeting Abstracts with Programs. 2000. "Oxygen Isotopes and Geochemistry of Anorthosite Xenoliths, Keweenawan Beaver Bay complex, Northeastern Minnesota." A.N. Johnson, K.R. Wirth, W_ H. Peck, J.W. Valley_ GSA Annual Meeting Abstracts with Programs_ 1998_ "Three Millennia of Glacial Fluctuations from Beare Glacier, Eastern Gulf of Alaska_" A.N. Johnson, G.C. Wiles, D.C. Frank_ Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs_ 1998_ amecP K. BILL CLARK, PG Hydoogeology Remed iati onlReclamatio n EDUCATION M_S_, Geology/Hydrogeology, University of Montana, Missoula, 1986 B.S., Earth ScienceslGeology, Montana State University, Bozeman, 1981 REGISTRATION Professional Geologist? WY No. PG-11277 1992 Monitoring Well Constructor, MT No. 0407 1989 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Mr_ Clark is a hydrogeologist and senior project manager with more than 20 years of professional experience in environmental investigations, feasibility studies, remedial actions, and environmental impact statement analyses_ His assignments have included hydrogeologic and groundwater characterizations for water resource studies, abandoned mines and mills, landfills, and organic compound releases_ Mr_ Clark is involved with development, design, construction, and monitoring of remedial actions that include mine waste repositories, stream restoration, bioventing and soil vapor extraction, groundwater withdrawal and treatment, intrinsic bioremed iation, and air sparg i ng techniques_ He is involved with preparing environmental impact statements (ElSs) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act_ His experience includes managing a multidisciplinary team and coordinating hydrogeologic baseline studies for hardrock mines in West Africa_ Mr_ Clark has been a liaison with federal land managers, tribal authorities, state and federal regulatory agencies, and county and city governments_ He has served as project team leader for collaborative, multidisciplinary groups, managed staffs of engineers and scientists, provided technical review to natural resource studies, and is steward for projects with individuals, industry, and state and federal government agencies_ REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS CERCWRcRA Abandoned/inactive Mining and Milling Sites, USDA -Forest Service, Northern Idaho and Western MT Project manager responsible for site investigation and characterization of 17 sites in accordance with the National Contingency Plan_ Field efforts were aimed at identifying the chemical and physical characteristics and volumes of various waste rock and tailings materials in mountainous terrains and stream courses_ Conducted geotechnical feasibility study of an open pit mine to assess the potential of developing the site as a centralized waste repository_ Completed repository siting evaluations, reclamation plans, and engineering evaluation/cost analyses for mine waste removal actions_ Prepared removal designs and bid documents associated with tailings and waste rock removals, repository designs, and stream reclamations_ Provided construction inspection and documentation services_ Hydrologic Assessment for a Landfill, Damshen and Associates, Sidney, MT Project manager and hydrogeologist responsible for completing a hydrogeologic assessment with respect to federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle D regulations_ Work required evaluating K. BILL CLARK, PG amecP PAGE 2 existing geologic and hydrogeologic data, designing a groundwater and methane monitoring program, and measuring hydraulic properties of earth material beneath the landfill_ Results of the investigation were used to develop community waste disposal alternatives and support a landfill siting study_ LandfililState Superfund Site, National Institutes of Health, Western MT Project manager and coordinator responsible for a remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) regulated by the Montana Comprehensive Environmental Cleanup and Responsibility Act (CECRA7State Superfund Program)_ Responsible for identifying and mitigating chlorinated hydrocarbons released to groundwater from the former landfill, public presentations, scheduling, budgeting, and regulator liaison for this federal contract_ The project team completed characterization studies, developed numerical flow and transport models, performed a feasibility study, and implemented several interim remedial actions, including large-scale soil removal and treatment, groundwater interception and remediation, and replacement of private groundwater supplies using telescopic drilling techniques_ BASELINE STUDIES AND HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODELS Hydrogeologic Baseline Study and conceptual Model for Proposed Mines, Nemnont Ghana Gold Limited, West Africa_ Project hydrogeologist responsible for conducting baseline studies for proposed gold mines in subtropical Africa_ Project involved designing a study that would generate comprehensive groundwater and hydrologic data to support and environmental impact statement (EIS) from the development of up to 127 150-meter deep open mine pits_ More than 45 monitoring wells were installed and tested to determine aquifer properties and water quality_ Hydrogeologic and hydrologic data along with geologic, soil, wetland occurrence, and meteorologic information were complied and synthesized to develop a conceptual model that explains the groundwater flow system_ The model formed the basis for a numerical model being used to predict hydraulic and water quality conditions in response to various alternatives to mine development strategies_ Baseline Studies Proposed Gold Mine, Newmont Golden Ridge Resources Limited, West Africa_ Project manager for environmental studies documenting existing baseline conditions for a proposed gold mine in south central Ghana_ Coordinated the development of plans of study (PsOS) for physical and biologic studies including environmental geochemistry, air quality, flora, fauna, aquatics, soil, and hydrogeology_ Baseline study results are being used to refine mine plans, evaluate facility placement and closure alternatives, perform a cumulative effects analysis, and support an EIS_ HAZARDOUS AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AND WASTE MINIMIZATION Former Landfill, National Institutes of Health, Western MT Project manager responsible for characterizing hydrogeologic aspects of a landfill that accepted liquid hazardous wastes over a five-year period_ Results of this investigation are being used to identify potential risks to public health from historical waste disposal practices and to develop alternatives for remediation and additional investigations_ Project activities included characterizing the hydrogeology of a multi - layered aquifer system with data from more than 70 monitoring wells and 25 domestic wells; evaluating interactions of two surface water courses and the groundwater system; interpreting and defining inorganic and organic contaminant plumes; aquifer testing; developing a numerical groundwater flow and transport model; and initiating a comprehensive groundwater monitoring prog ram _ amecP K. BILL C LARK, PG PAGE 3 WATER SUPPLY INVESTIGATION/DEVELOPMENT Municipal Water Supply, confidential client, Western MT Project manager and hydrogeologist responsible for evaluating groundwater resources_ Project tasks included well field siting, municipal well design, aquifer testing, characterization of area bedrock and alluvial aquifers, and evaluation of inorganic water chemistry and interactions between groundwater and surface water_ Water Rights investigation, confidential client, Law Flan, Southwestern MT Project manager responsible for investigating groundwater/surface water interrelationships relative to contested water rights near a private community and an agricultural area. Information was used to develop hydrologic and dye tracer studies to support litigation and document potential water availability impacts to prior appropriators_ State Public HealthlEnvironm en tal Agency Groun dwa ter Quan titylQualify investigations, Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, Statewide, MT Staff hydrogeologist responsible for providing technical expertise to the agency's legal division, public drinking water section, and subdivision section with respect to groundwater quantity/quality problems_ Assisted in implementing and maintaining a statewide groundwater pollution control system and evaluated groundwater discharge permit applications and corrective action programs for technical accuracy and adequacy_ In term on tan a RiverlUnconfined Municipal Supply Aquifer, University of Mon tan a, Western MT Research associate responsible for examining interactions between an intermontane river and an unconfined municipal supply aquifer_ The investigation required installing monitoring wells, developing a surface water mass balance model, conducting geophysical and permeameter experiments, completing aquifer tests, assessing water chemistry data, establishing a 42-well monitoring network, and developing a groundwater flow computer model of the aquifer system_ Results of the study are being used to manage the Missoula, Montana, sole source aquifer_ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS Biomedical Research Facility EIS, Rocky Mountain Laboratories., National Institutes of Health, Western MT Project administrator and technical advisor responsible for coordinating the preparation of an EIS for an integrated biomedical research facility that includes a Bio-Safety Level 4 laboratory_ Worked with the applicant to refine the purpose and need of the proposed project_ Participated in community outreach and public meetings_ Provided review of environmental data and prepared responses to public comments_ AFFILIATIONS National Ground Water Association American Water Resources Association, Montana Section PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS "Interactions Between the Clark Fork River and Missoula Aquifer, Missoula County, Montana." K.B. Clark. Master's Thesis_ University of Montana, Missoula, MT_ p.157.1986. amecP MATTH EW D. WRIGHT, PE Environmental Engineering Site Investigation and Remediation Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Storm Water Management EDUCATION M.S., Environmental Engineering, University of Wyoming, Laramie, 11 71997 B_S_, civil Engineering, University of Wyoming, Laramie? M7 1995 REGISTRATION Professional Engineer, cA No. c080447 2005 Professional Engineer, UT No. 4873234-22027 2001 Professional Engineer, MT No. 174007 2006 Professional Engineer, ID No. 130037 2009 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Mr_ Matthew Wright has more than 11 years of diverse environmental engineering experience in site investigation and characterization, feasibility studies, remedial system design, brownfield redevelopment, and construction management_ He has experience designing, implementing, and operating a wide range of remedial technologies, including zero-valent iron, in -situ chemical oxidation, soil vapor extraction, air and ozone sparging, free product recovery, bioremediation, groundwater pump and treat, and excavation and disposal_ Mr. Wright's experience also includes engineering evaluations and cost analysis, risk assessments, underground storage tank removal, and preparation of Spill Prevention control and countermeasure (SPCC) Plans and Storm Water Pollution Prevention (SWPP) Plans_ He has completed projects within National Parks, at state and federal Superfund sites, remote mine sites, military facilities, rail yards, manufactured gas plants, airports, and other industrial, commercial and recreational facilities_ REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS MINING Blackfoot Bridge Phosphate Mine, Monsanto company, Southeast Idaho_ (AMEC GMX Project # 014008.000.0) Project engineer responsible for the preparation of a water management plan for a proposed phosphate mine_ Estimated storm water flows associated with the design storm event and average annual runoff volumes for each year of mine life_ Prepared the conceptual design of the mine's water management system, including holding ponds, sediment control dams, culverts, diversion ditches, use of evaporative sprayers, and storm water best management practices_ Hydrogeologic Investigation and Remedial design, Southeast Idaho_ (GMX Project # 13871) Project engineer_ currently conducting comprehensive hydrogeologic investigation of groundwater, surface water, and their interactions_ The objective of the project is to determine if a waste rock dump at a mine is a source of contamination to a stream_ Assisted with the identification and evaluation of potential short-term remediation strategies_ Prepared an investigation work plan and quality assurance project plan_ Designed and conducted field scale zero-valent iron and bioreactor amecP MATTHEW D. WRIGHT, PE PAGE 2 pilot tests to evaluute potential treatment options to address elevated metals concentrations in surface water and groundwater_ Denton -Rawhide Cyanide Systems. Kennecott Rawhide Mining company, NV_ (GMX Project # 10807) Project manager_ conducted an engineering evaluation of the cyanide management systems at a gold mine in Nevada to determine what system modifications would be necessary for the mine to comply with the International cyanide Management code_ Designed modifications to an existing concrete secondary containment area for an aboveground cyanide storage tank_ Wastewater Treatment, confidential client, CA_ (GMX Project # 13091) Project engineer_ Responsible for assisting with the procurement of a pre -fabricated steel building to house a wastewater treatment system and an emergency shelter at a remote mine site in the Sierra Nevada range_ Montana Barite Project, CVM Equity Funds, Garnet Mountains, MT (GMX Project # 13081) Project engineer_ Evaluated operations at a barite mine in Montana and identified regulatory requirements for obtaining a small miner's exclusion statement for the mine. REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN PSC Georgetown, Philip Services corporation, Seattle, WA_ (GMX Project # 08770) Project engineer_ Assisted with the preparation of a feasibility study for a former RcRA treatment, storage, and disposal facility_ Identified and evaluated remediation technologies and remedial alternatives_ Prepared engineering cost estimates_ Old Hammer Field, Fresno, CA_ (Prior to GMX) Prepared a feasibility study, remedial action plan, and a remedial design and implementation plan for a TCE groundwater plume with multiple responsible parties_ The plume is more than two -miles long, reaches depths of more than 370 feet, and emanates from the former old Hammer Army Air Field Base within the current boundaries of the FresnoNosemite International Airport_ oversaw the implementation of remedial actions, including soil vapor extraction (SVE)7 in situ chemical oxidation, and groundwater extraction and treatment_ conducted an SVE pilot study to obtain site -specific data for the design of a full-scale remediation system_ Prepared investigative plans for potential soil, soil vapor, and groundwater impacts associated with a release from an aircraft -fueling pipeline and the historic release of TOE_ Prepared a Public Participation Plan and assisted with a public meeting to discuss corrective actions at the site. Purity oil, UPRRY Sacramento, CA_ (Prior to GMX) Project manager for the investigation and remediation of a former used oil reprocessing facility for the redevelopment of the site. Prepared and oversaw the implementation of a remedial design and implementation plan for the removal of lead impacted soil and monitored natural attenuation of groundwater impacted by chlorinated solvents_ Sacramento Rail Yard, UPRRY Sacramento, CA_ (Prior to GMX) Project engineer_ Developed, planned, and managed a subsurface investigation to evaluate the occurrence and extent of VGcs, metals, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons in soil, groundwater, and sediment associated with a former manufactured gas plant within a 240-acre Superfund site. Assessment and Remediation of Free Phase Petroleum Hydrocarbons, confidential client, UT (Prior to GMX) Project manager for the completion a subsurface investigation at a petroleum refinery to delineate the extent of a free phase hydrocarbon plume and identify potential sources_ Designed a product recovery system and prepared design drawings and specifications_ MATTH EW D. WRIGHT, PE amecP PACE 3 Chlorinated Solvent Plume Investigation and Remediation, Mark Miller Toyota, Salt Lake city, UT (Prior to GMX) Oversaw a subsurface investigation at a commercial property to delineate chlorinated solvent impacts to groundwater and identify potential sources_ completed a human health risk assessment_ Developed and implemented a remedial action plan that included in -situ, chemical oxidation treatment of site groundwater_ Missoula Mill Site Redevelopment, Millsite Revitalization Project, LLC, Missoula, MT (GMX Project # 010817) Project engineer_ Responsible for the oversight of remedial actions of a former sawmill facility for the redevelopment of the site. Assisted with the preparation of a voluntary cleanup plan for the facility_ Designed and installed a soil vapor extraction system with horizontal vapor extraction lines to address petroleum impacted soil remaining below the final limits of a remedial excavation_ Designed a passive methane abatement system for a parking lot to be constructed over an area of subsurface wood waste (historic log pond location) with potentially explosive concentrations of methane in the subsurface_ Prepared bid specifications for contractor selection_ Prepared construction completion reports and closure requests for individual remediation areas_ Missoula White Pine Sash, city of Missoula, Missoula, MT (GMX Project # 010880) Project engineer_ Responsible for the preparation of engineering specifications and oversight of remedial actions at a former mill and wood treatment facility_ Assisted with the preparation of an interim remedial action plan and public outreach efforts to inform neighbors of upcoming cleanup efforts_ Prepared a remedial alternatives evaluation and engineering cost estimates_ CERTIFICATIONS OSHA 40-Hour HAZMAT/Health and Safety Training Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) Certification PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS "Case History: Ozone Injection Remediation of chlorinated Solvents_" M. D. Wright_ Proceedings of the Second International conference on oxidation and Reduction Technologies for In -Situ Treatment of Soil and Ground Water, Toronto, Canada_ 2002_ "An Integrated Approach to Remediation of Petroleum Contaminated Soils: Surfactant Enhanced Electroki netics_" M.D. Wright, T_V_ Edgar, D _ H _ Foster, S_ K. Battacharya, G_ F_ Vance, and M.R. Junna_ Proceedings of the American Institute of chemical Engineers 2000 National Meeting, Treatment of organics Contaminated Soils — Part III. 2000_ "Electrokinetic Removal of Residual Gasoline Contamination from Nearly Saturated organic Soils_ M.S. Thesis in Environmental Engineering," M.D. Wright. University of Wyoming, Laramie, M' 1997_ amecP SHAN E FOX GIS Analyst/Programmer Database Management EDUCATION B.S., Earth Science -Emphasis in Geography with Minors in GIS and Computer Science, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, 2000 PROFESSIONAL HISTORY AMEC, GIS Analyst, Missoula, MT, 2008 to date Geomatrix Consultants, Inc_, GIS Analyst, Missoula, MT, 2005 -2008 Maxim Technologies, GIS Analyst, Missoula, MT, 2001 — 2005 Mountain CAD, LLC, CADDIGIS Technician, Missoula, MT, 2000 — 2001 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Mr_ Fox has over ten years experience in geographic information systems (GIS) using ArcGIS, Ardnfo, Autodesk Map, ArcIMS, ArcGIS Server and Global Positioning Systems (GPS); programming and scripting using Visual Basic, HTML, Javascript, SQL, C, C++, LISP and Avenue; production of drawings and diagrams, graphs, charts and technical schematics, computer -aided design and drafting (CADD) using ArcGIS and Autodesk Map; and database management using Microsoft Access_ As the database manager for AM EC Geomatrix's Missoula office, he provides data retrieval, validation and quality control; editing; conversion; loading; presentation and database integrity for numerous multi -disciplinary environmental and spatial databases_ Mr_ Fox is a Trimble GeoXT GPS expert and provides Modeling, Hydrogeologic, Water Resource, Mining, and Litigation GIS support_ His skills also include creating, customizing and maintaining web services and web mapping applications using ArcIMS and ArcGIS Server_ Mr_ Fox is familiar with UNIX and adept at Windows operating systems_ He serves as network administrator and provides information technology support for the Missoula office_ REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Oversight of Data Management System hosted on the web using Arcl M S Uranium Mine Permit Baseline Studies, Southern, TX_ (AM EC GMX Project # 014006.000.0) GIS Analyst/Programmer and Database Manager_ Study focused on collection of defensible data to support mine design and permit acquisition_ Project involved collection of more than 17000 environmental samples, completion of over 50 surveys, and preparation of numerous technical documents_ Mr_ Fox developed and maintained multiple spatial and environmental databases_ Also created several web applications utilizing ArcGIS Server and was responsible for authoring and creating all maps and figures_ Pinedale Anticline Production Area (PAPA) Ground Water data Compilation & Analysis, Ultra Resources, Plnedale, WY_ (AMEC GMX Project # 013055_000.0) GIS Analyst and Database Manager_ Assisted in the compilation of a complex analytical database for groundwater analysis in a GIS_ Additionally, Mr_ Fox assisted in developing a comprehensive mapbook for an Emergency Spill Response Plan_ SHAN E FOX amecP PACE 2 Horseshoe overburden Area Hydrogeologic Investigation, Husch & Eppenbergrer, Soda Springs., ID_ (AM E C GMX Project # 013871 _DDD_D)GIS Analayst and Database Manager_ _ Responsible for data retrieval, validation, quality control, editing, conversion, loading and presentation and database development and integrity_ Also authored, created and maintained all spatial databases and maps_ Missoula Airport Expansion Wetlands EA, Missoula, MT GIS Analyst_ Responsible for providing cartography and GIS analysis necessary to support EAs and EISs_ Various S►na11 Land Management EAs, MT GIS Analyst_ Responsible for providing cartography and GIS analysis necessary to support EAs and EISs_ GIS Support for Utah Fire Management Plan (FMP) Environmental Assessments (EAs), U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), UT GIS Analyst_ Responsible for gathering and organizing environmental and base map GIS data. Produced cartographic products and GIS analysis necessary to author maps and figures for use in all EAs created for project. CIS Support for Environmental Planning, Idaho Transportation Department Environmental Planning, ID_ District 6_ GIS Analyst_ Responsible for gathering and organizing environmental and base map GIS data. Aided environmental professionals with cartography and GIS analysis necessary to create a variety of maps and posters for public presentations_ West African Mine Permit Baseline Studies, Newmont Ghana Gold, Ltd.,, Helena, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 010983_005_0) GIS Analyst/Programmer and Database Manager_ 18-month study focused on collection of defensible data to support mine design, permit acquisition, and compliance with International Finance Council and World Bank guidance_ Project involved collection of more than 17000 environmental samples, completion of over 100 surveys, and preparation of numerous technical documents_ Mr_ Fox was responsible for data retrieval, validation, quality control, editing, conversion, loading and presentation and database development and integrity for multiple spatial and environmental databases to be used for a detailed 3-dimensional finite -element groundwater flow and chemical transport model of the system. Mr. Fox also created and provided technical CIS Support for Abandoned Mine Land Engineering Evaluations/Cost Analysis: (EE.ICA), U.S. Forest Service (USFS)., MT, NM, and ID_ GIS Analyst_ Responsible for gathering and organizing environmental and base map GIS data. Developed mosaic topographic maps by applying DEM and other natural resource data with Arcl nfo to evaluate the suitability of potential sites as centralized mine waste repositories_ CIS Support for MineIMill Tailings Stream Characterization for - Idaho Panhandle National Forests, U.S. Forest Service (USFS)., ID_ GIS Analyst_ Responsible for utilizing Arcview and Microsoft Access to develop maps and charts based on chemical and physical properties database information_ Maps and charts were used to characterize the aerial extent and magnitude of tailings and tailings -impacted material present downstream from a former tailings impoundment_ CIS Support for Petroleum Pipeline Release Stream Sediment Investigation, Missoula County, MT GIS Analyst_ Responsible for utilizing Autodesk Map and Microsoft Access to produce maps describing the degree of sheen production, relative stream gradient, concentration of total extractable hydrocarbons detected in sediment and predominant bed sediment type for each reach of the stream. Geodatabase for Hydrogeologic Study, Power Generation Facility Hydrogeologic Study, Eastern MT (AMEC GMX Project # 010726.000.0) Database developer and GIS Analyst_ Responsible for assembling data provided in a variety of formats into a geodatabase_ The SHAN E FOX amecP PACE 3 database was used as the basis for a three-dimensional numerical groundwater model and to generate base maps and model output_ Engineering design Packages for Environmental Restoration and Water Supply Projects, WY, ID, and MT CADD technician_ Responsible for preparing engineering drawings used for soil and groundwater remediation projects, abandoned mine land reclamation projects, and public water supply projects_ Montanore Project, Mines Management, Inc_, Libby, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 010729_000_0) GIS Analyst and Database Manager responsible for migrating, automating, customizing and maintaining project database_ The database was eventually passed off to the client and Mr_ Fox trained the staff proper techniques for maintaining the database and uploading new datasets (edd's). Additionally, Mr Fox was the primary GIS Analyst responsible for preparing maps and analyzing GIS data for a public water supply permit_ Database Management for Mine Site, Landfill and Pipeline Projects, ID and MT Database manager_ Responsible for data retrieval, validation, quality control, editing, conversion, loading and presentation and database development and integrity_ Bear Gulch Mine Complex, U.S. Forest Service (USFS)., Database manager_ Responsible for database creation and management for a variety of projects_ Produced report documents, queries and map features from database files_ Blue Joe Creek, U.S. Forest Service (USFS)Y Idaho Panhandle National Forest, ID_ Database manager_ Responsible for creating and managing databases for a variety of projects_ Produced report documents, queries and map features from database files_ Bear Gulch Mine Co►nplex, U_ S. Forest Service (USFS)., Idaho Panhandle National Forest, ID_ Database manager_ Responsible for creating and managing databases for a variety of projects_ Produced report documents, queries and map features from database files_ AFFILIATIONS Association of American Geographers Montana Association of Geographic Information Professionals CERTIFICATIONS 40-hour Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Training, Maxim Technologies, Great Falls, MT, 2003 8-hour OSHA HAZIlVOPER Refresher, Maxim Technologies, Missoula, MT, 2008 HAZUS Data Preparation Training, Emmitsburg, MD 7 2002 Autodesk Map 5 Training, Billings, MT, 2002 AutoCA❑ 2000i Training, Missoula, MT, 2000 ESRI Geodatabases Training, Missoula, MT, 2006 ESRI ArcGIS Server Configuration Training, Denver, CO, 2007 amecP WILHELM WELZENBACH Soil Reclamation Site Assessment and Remediation EDUCATION M_S_, Soil Science, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2002 B.A., Biochemistry, Carleton College, Northfield, MN, 1998 PROFESSIONAL HISTORY AM EC Geomatrix, Inc_, Project Scientist, 2008 to date Geomatrix Consultants, Inc_, Project Scientist, 2007 — 2008 Hyd rometrics, Inc_, Missoula, MT, Scientist, 2006 — 2007 EMC27 Bozeman, MT, Scientist, 2006 P&D Environmental, Inc_, Oakland, CA, Project Manager and Project Scientist, 2002 — 2006 University of Washington, Seattle, WA, Research Assistant, 1999 — 2002 SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE Mr_ Welzenbach has more than six years of experience in assessment, remediation, and closure of sites impacted by hazardous materials_ Special areas of expertise include: • Construction management for remediation • Data validation and data management • Soil reclamation and agronomic surveying • Lithologic logging and drilling oversight • Remedial System design and installation REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS MINING Monsanto, Husch & Eppenbergrer, Soda Springs., ID_ (AMEC GMX # 013871) Project Scientist_ Responsible for a variety of field and reporting tasks relating to an Idaho Phosphate mine_ Performed data validation, groundwater sampling, groundwater well installation oversight, surface water gaging and sampling, unsaturated zone monitoring installation, pilot water treatment system installation, snow surveying, calculation of snow water equivalents, and data management of field records_ Leviathan Mine, EPA Superfund Site, alpine County CA_ (GMX Project # 13091) Data Manager_ Responsible for data validation and data management for mine site remediation activities_ Activities included coordination of data validation, database transfer, downloading of reports and tracking levels of completion, resolved missing reports issues, formatted information for upload, and creation of monthly summary tables_ Facilitated intra- and inter -company communication concerning data management_ Toxic Release Inventory, Kennecott Rawhide Mining Company, Fallon, NV. (AMEC GMX # 10807.003.0) Project Scientist_ Facilitated Toxic Release Inventory reporting in accordance with WILHELM WELZENBACH amecP PACE 2 EPA regulations, including data analysis, emission quantity calculations, threshold calculations, and compared operation quantities to threshold calculations_ Soil Resources - offshore, Golden Ridge Resources Limited, Accra, Ghana_ (AMEC GMX # 013026.701.0) Project Scientist_ conducted Validation of soil resource data, prepared soils data Validation report, including QC calculations and laboratory QA Verification_ Groundwater Resource - Offshore/Onshore, Golden Ridge Resources Limited, Accra, Ghana_ (AMECGMX#013026/27.801.0) Project Scientist_ Performed field oversight for well installation and development, generated lithologic logs, and reviewed well construction details_ Prepared well installation report and Validated QC results for microbial data. Water Resources Baseline Investigation - Uranium Mine, Confidential client, South Texas_ (GMX Project # 014006_005_0) Project Scientist_ Directed the installation of several exploratory wells of the ore zone, prepared field forms, and reviewed geologic information with driller, client's exploration geologist, and project management_ Prepared well construction details_ Butte Highlands, Timberline Resources, Butte, MT (AMEC GMX Project # 014716) Project Scientist_ Performed drilling oversight for well installed to depth of over 1100 feet, surface water gaging and sampling, coordination of spatial data transfer and correction between site owner and GIS staff_ BROWNFIELDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS Missoula Saw► ilf Site, Missoula Sawmill Redevelopment, LLC, Missoula, MT (AM EC GMX Project # 10817) Project Scientist_ oversaw Voluntary cleanup Plan remediation activities, including large contaminated soil excavations_ Specific responsibilities included directing exploratory remedial excavations up to 39-feet deep, installing and sampling water and soil Vapor wells, installing and operating Soil Vapor Extraction system, and collecting soil samples for excavation confirmation and waste characterization. Phase H Site Assessment, Sylvia Rapley, Great Falls, MT (AM EC GMX # 11034_002_0) Project Scientist_ Implemented field investigation of petroleum -impacted property_ Project duties included soil sampling, groundwater sampling, data analysis, and reporting_ Project is transitioning from the assessment phase to the cleanup phase_ Indoor Air Vapor Abatement, Sylvia Rapley, Great Falls, MT (AM EC GMX # 11034_003) Project Scientist_ Assisted in the design of mitigation system for gasoline Vapors_ Responsibilities included indoor air sampling, outdoor background air sampling prior to and during operation of the Vapor mitigation system, implementation of Vapor mitigation system, collection of soil Vapor samples from existing Vapor probes surrounding the building, and monitoring existing groundwater monitoring wells in the Vicinity of the source area. Water Line Excavationllnstallation, Mitchell Development & Investments, Great Falls, MT (AMEC GMX # 12095_003) Project Scientist_ Responsibilities included oversight of installation of special waterline materials, abandonment of monitoring wells, drilling of soil boreholes, and subsurface soil sampling in area of petroleum impacts_ Reviewed historical data, performed data analysis, and reporting_ Correction Action PlanlFree Product Recovery, Mccone county, circle, MT (AM EC GMX # 14361.000) Project Scientist_ completed field oversight for monitoring well installation and development, data analysis, and reporting for groundwater investigation at a diesel fuel release at the former Mccone county Hospital_ Assisted in the development of plan for free product removal_ amecP WILHELM WELZENBACH PACE 3 ADDITIONAL SITE A SSFSSME NT A1ND RFMFDIA TIO N Strea►nside Soil Management - Guadalupe River Project - 3AIPhase Z MlllerlWatts Constructors, San Jose, CA_ (Prior to GMX) Project Scientist_ Implemented Sampling and Analysis Plan for dewatering, including in -stream monitoring_ Pre -characterized soil and provided technical assistance for soil management prior to restoration at the NPDES-permitted Army Corps of Engineers flood control project, including management of hazardous levels of metals directly adjacent to sensitive aquatic habitat for threatened salmonid fishes_ Industrial Site Closure, Pacific Rolling Door, San Lorenzo, CA_ (Prior to GMX) Project Manager_ Managed final site closure including remediation7 confirmation sampling, risk analysis, and legal documentation for an industrial painting facility with lead-, zinc-, and mercury -impacted soil as well as lead- and solvent -impacted groundwater_ Underground Storage Tank Removal and Cleanup, Central CA. (Prior to GMX) Project Manager. Coordinated multiple start -to -finish Underground Storage Tank (UST) removal and cleanup projects throughout central California, 2002-2006_ Chlorinated Solvent Impact Assessment, PercServ, Berkeley, CA. (Prior to GMX) Project Manager and field oversight for assessment of a perchloroethene (PCE) dense non -aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) plume_ Oprations included the use of Membrane Interface Probe (MIP) to obtain real-time chemical and geophysical data from the subsurface. AFFILIATIONS Soil Science Society of America National Ground Water Association CERTIFICATIONS Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Certification (40 Hour) First Aid Certification (16 Hour) Mining Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) trained (8 Hour) 'liMEN4 &M i TD- -a--- THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC. Thomas Dean & Hoskins, Inc_ (TD&H) is a consulting engineering firm offering a full range of services throughout Montana, Washington, and Idaho_ We serve a diverse clientele ranging from individuals and rural water districts to large corporations in populous cities_ We assist our clients through all phases of their projects, starting with concept development through construction completion_ TD&H has been satisfying clients since its incorporation in 1965 and has built an impressive resume of successful projects_ TD&H is 75 employees strong with a staff comprising licensed professional engineers and land surveyors, certified engineering technicians, CAD operators, experienced construction management personnel and qualified administrative support staff, serving our clients from five regional offices_ Services Include: Water Resources, Hydraulics and Hydrology Water Supply and Distribution Wastewater Collection and Treatment Structural Transportation Geotechnical Surveying Site Development Construction Management and Inspection Industrial Hygiene Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Public Involvement, Environmental Permitting, and Grant Writing AASHTO-accredited Construction Materials Testing Laboratory TD&H strives to provide innovative engineering solutions to challenging technical problems by assigning professionals who understand the issues and deliver results_ TD&H has accumulated an impressive resume of successful projects_ The knowledge gained from this experience allows TD&H to provide you a high level of service_ We place a priority on service and measure our success in terms of each client's success and satisfaction. Thomas, Dean & Hoskins, Inc. Page - I now% Dim h mwhk4 ba T 1 Peter Klevberg, P.E. PROJECT EXPERIENCE Mr. Klevberg's career has spanned a broad range of environmental, industrial hygiene, geotechnical engineering and construction disciplines_ With extensive experience in all phases of engineering project execution, he has twenty years of experience in geology, mining, geotechnical engineering, hydrogeology, construction materials testing, structural analysis and design, petroleum hydrocarbon remediation, asbestos, lead based paint, hazardous waste, indoor air quality, mold, radon and industrial noise exposure_ Peter Klevberg will provide oversight and senior review for geotechnical and industrial hygiene support services for the Kalispell Brownfields Redevelopment Project_ Brownfields Experience Phase I and U Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs): Great Falls and Shelby. Mr_ Klevberg was involved in both supervisory and field positions for environmental and industrial hygiene work components on two Brownfields projects with AMEC personnel_ His responsibilities included scheduling personnel and equipment, overseeing HASP preparation and implementation, sampling per SAP and QAPP requirements, and interpretation and presentation of data. Field responsibilities included subsurface investigations to assess the magnitude and extent of petroleum fuel and solvent impacts to soil and ground water and building inspections for asbestos and lead -based paint_ Geotech n ical Mr_ Klevberg has performed geotechnical investigations in Montana, Idaho, and North Dakota, including commercial buildings, industrial and agricultural processing facilities, hospital additions, athletic club, office buildings, schools, warehouses, power plants, pipelines, communication towers, and hotels_ His responsibilities include devising scopes of work and budgets, performing or overseeing field investigations, performing or reviewing engineering calculations, writing and reviewing reports, and performing follow-up evaluations_ Typical structural elements include foundations, retaining walls, and roadways and parking areas_ Engineering recommendations include suitable structure types, allowable bearing capacities, lateral earth pressures, friction coefficients, anticipated settlements, roadway sections (paved and unpaved), and other soil -related matters_ Buildings and Industrial Structures: Various Locations, Montana and North Dakota. Projects have included many residential, commercial, and industrial developments, from single-family residences to municipal water tanks, pipelines and grain elevators to industrial sites in excess of 100 acres_ Projects have included a variety of excavation and drilling techniques, and with depths of investigation ranging from only a few feet to almost 200 feet_ Roadway Condition Assessments and Design: Montana and Idaho. Responsible for performance or oversight of roadway condition assessments and evaluation of capability and anticipated service life for paved and unpaved public and private roadways_ Regence Blue Shield: Lewiston, Idaho. Two concrete parking structures (a three- story and a five -story) and a retaining wall up to 40 feet high on a site with highly variable soils_ now% Dim h mwhk4 ba T 1 Communication Towers: Montana. Investigations for communications towers in or near Great Falls, Dutton, Havre, Glacier National Park, Zurich, Judith Gap and Fort Benton, Montana_ Military Facilities: Montana. Subsurface investigations on military facilities for various structures (armory, skills center, weapons storage, housing, etc_) Asbestos/Lead-Based Paint Inspection/Abatement Asbestos Inspections and Hazard Assessments: Montana & Idaho. Conduct or review asbestos building inspections and asbestos hazard assessments at many sites_ Perform cost -benefit analyses for asbestos control options and formulate recommendations for response actions_ Asbestos Project Monitoring, Clearance Sampling and Abatement: Montana and Idaho. Supervised asbestos abatement and performed air sampling at sites ranging in size from small residences to large industrial and emergency response projects_ Asbestos Abatement Project Designs: Montana. Prepared asbestos abatement project designs for projects with historic, public relations and technical constraints at sites in Missoula, Bonner, Phillipsburg and Butte_ Projects completed include a steam locomotive, extensive pipe tunnels containing live electrical equipment, and asbestos insulation buried in a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) hazardous waste site. Environmental Site Assessments Phase I and H ESAs: Montana. Principal Investigator conducting Phase I and H ESAs for linear utilities, rights -of -way and industrial and commercial properties for banks, realtors, agricultural companies, management companies, engineering firms, automobile dealers and investors_ Tasks include title search for county records, interviews regarding previous site and adjacent property usage, regulatory agency file research, site inspections and data acquisition and interpretation_ Conduct assessments at farms, ranches, grain elevators, feed plants, seed plants, fertilizer plants and warehouses for agricultural chemicals_ Peter has conducted assessments at an auto dealership, daycare center, recycling center, bank, grocery warehouse, furniture warehouse, restaurant/bar, convenience stores, service stations, petroleum bulk facilities, lumber mills, shopping malls and apartment buildings_ Phase H ESAs Environmental Testing Plans: Montana. Developed and implemented environmental testing plans_ Supervised building and subsurface investigations, including drilling and sampling of soil and ground water_ Testing parameters include petroleum hydrocarbons, herbicides, pesticides, formaldehyde, radon and asbestos_ Sites include a lumber mill, lumber supply yard, agricultural sites, and active and abandoned solid waste TSD facilities_ Hydrocarbon/LUST Investigation/Mitigation Petroleum Contamination Site Field Investigations: Montana. Principal Investigator responsible for investigation at numerous sites contaminated by subsurface petroleum hydrocarbons_ Activities included literature searches for regional geology, site history and potential receptors; soil vapor and confined space surveys; subsurface investigations and soil sampling; installation of vapor, ground water monitoring and product recovery wells; and ground water monitoring_ Subsurface Contamination Remediation: Montana. Supervised and assisted with implementing remediation procedures and installing soil vapor extraction and bioventing systems for sites with extensive subsurface contamination_ Supervised removal of contaminated soil from many petroleum hydrocarbon -impacted sites_ now% Dim h mwhk4 ba T 1 Formulated remedial alternatives, scope of work and preliminary cost estimates for residual hydrocarbons in proximity to buildings, buried utilities, and in stream sediments_ Public Water Supply Remediation Designs: Montana. Designed or assisted with design of relocation or replacement of water mains in three Montana communities where permeation of plastic piping by petroleum constituents had been observed_ Hazardouslindustrial Waste Management/Minimization Municipal and Military Project Work Plans and oversight: Missoula, Montana. Prepared work plans and provided project oversight during sampling of electrical transformers for polychlorinated biphenols (PCB's) at Fort Missoula, Great Falls International Airport, and the Montana State Fairgrounds_ Methamphetamine Laboratory Investigations: Montana. Performed field investigative, oversight and review for testing of several buildings where methamphetamine had been manufactured, including a motel, apartment building, houses, and National Forest cabin and campsite locations_ Malmstrom Air Force Base Mixed Waste Characterization: Great Falls, Montana. Conducted investigation of liquid drum wastes for characterization and disposal_ Engineering Design Hydrocarbon Projects Remediation System Conceptual Design: Montana. Responsible for remediation system conceptual design and project specifications, cost estimation and alternatives screening for hydrocarbon projects and ancillary structures, including roadway and culvert design and specifications_ Clients have included petroleum production and distribution companies and companies redeveloping contaminated sites_ Mine Repository Design: Butte, Montana. Performed volume calculations and grading plan preparation for mine waste repositories in the Butte - Clark Fork CERCLA (Superfund) site. Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans Review: Montana. Responsible for preparation or review of SPCC plans for bulk petroleum facilities in Big Sandy, Big Timber, Billings, Chinook, Crow Agency, Cut Bank, Denton, Galata, Glendive, Great Falls, Harlem, Havre, Hinsdale, Inverness, Malta, Poplar, Saco, Stanford, Turner, and other sites_ Landfill Investigations/Engineering Landfill Corrective Action and Closure Plans: Montana. Designed corrective action plans, nonmigration investigations, and prepared regrading and closure plans for an inactive Class II landfills in north -central Montana_ Landfill Cost Estimates and Equipment Sizing: Bozeman, Montana. Provided estimates and equipment sizing for a Class H landfill corrective measures assessment (landfill gas) in southwestern Montana, and performed landfill gas monitoring at a major Class II landfill in north -central Montana_ Landfill Construction Quality oversight: North-Central Montana. Perform construction quality control oversight for new cell construction at public and private landfills_ Performed field and record reviews of cell closure activities for owners and served as liaison with regulators_ Abandoned Mine Reclamation Abandoned Mines Field Investigations: Montana. Responsible for collection of soil, ground water and surface water data in conjunction with investigations of several now% Dim h mwhk4 ba T 1 abandoned coal mine and metal mine properties with acid mine drainage or metals impacts to soil and water_ Gauged streams with flow rates from a few milliliters per minute to tens of cubic meters per second_ Measured bed and j oint attitudes from rock outcrops_ Geologist and site health and safety officer for CERCLA (Superfimd) base metal mine tailing investigation_ Storm Water Runoff Permitting and Management NPDES Permit Applications and Storm water Investigations: Montana. Prepared NPDES permit applications or exemption requests for commercial properties_ Trained site personnel for NPDES sampling_ Performed storm water discharge investigations at lumber mills, petroleum bulk facilities, and a heavy equipment repair facility_ Identified outfall, supervised flume installation and assembly and programmed automatic sampler at a major Class II landfill_ Employed manual and rational methods to estimate storm water discharge rate_ Truck Stop Storm water System Design: San Antonio, Texas. Designed detention basins, sand filters and overflow spillways for a 20-acre truck stop facility_ Storm water management system included earthfill, riprap and reinforced concrete structures_ Animal Waste System Design: Shelby, Montana. Designed storm water detention basin and associated collection system for a livestock feedlot to prevent impacts to surface and ground water_ Designed liner and installed ground water monitoring well. Health and Safety Tank Closure and Subsurface Investigation Health and Safety Plan: Chief Joseph Dam, Washington. Environmental Engineer/Site Health and Safety Officer responsible for development of site health and safety plan for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers tank c to sure and subsurface investigation_ Worker Safety during Emergency Response: Bullhead Valley, Montana. Site Health and Safety Officer_ Responsible for safety of workers during emergency response involving failure of crude oil pipeline_ Hazardous Waste operations (HAZWOPER) Initial Training: Great Falls, Montana. Principal Instructor_ Taught 40-hour OSHA HAZWOPER initial course_ Worker Safety during CERCLA, Industrial Hygiene, and Hydrocarbon Field Investigations: Montana. Responsible for preparation of Site Health and Safety Plans and supervision of workers during many hydrocarbon, industrial hygiene, CERCLA, and abandoned mine site investigations_ Asbestos Initial and Refresher Training: Montana. Principal or adjunct instructor for many asbestos initial and refresher classes_ Clients include asbestos abatement companies, schools, waste management companies, government agencies, consultants and contractors_ Indoor Air Quality Assess mentslMitigation Industrial Hygiene C h aracterization : Montana. In conjunction with a certified industrial hygienist, conducted industrial hygiene characterization monitoring for methanol, styrene, hydrogen cyanide and dusts at a major Montana sporting goods manufacturing plant_ Office Building Indoor Air Quality Assessments: Montana. Projects ranged in size from 350 to 25,000 square feet and included delineation of potential contaminants and field-testing for air quality parameters_ Radon Investigation and Mitigation: Butte and Missoula, Montana. Investigated an elementary school and federal building to identify geologic and structural factors now% Dim h RWhh4 ba T 1 contributing to very high radon levels in the building_ Designed systems for radon mitigation and improved air quality with energy conservation. Performed cost -benefit analysis for alternatives_ Prepared contract documents and inspected work. Professional Employment History 2007 — Present Sr_ Geotechnical Engineer, Thomas, Dean & Hoskins, Inc_ 1991 — 2007 Branch Manager, Maxim Technologies/Tetra Tech, Inc_ 1989 — 1991 Project Engineer, MCS Environmental, Inc_ 1989 (summer) Engineering Technician, Knight Piesold, Ltd_ 1987 — 1989 Geological Technician, Montana Tunnels Mining, Inc_ TD& �+� �rrir■�r Daniel J.P. Lozar, P.E. PROJECT EXPERIENCE McDonalds Restaurant — Kalispell, MT Design engineer and project manager for a restaurant site adjacent to Highway 93. Performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on the subject tract_ The site necessitated a multi basin collection and conveyance storm drainage system_ A storm drainage trunk line was sized to collect and convey future runoff for a developmental group outside of the property boundaries_ TD&H performed a geotechnical site investigation which provided recommendations for flexible pavement design, building foundations, and footing designs_ Acted as the local liaison between the City of Kalispell the McDonalds Corporation and represented them thru all required regulatory approvals including Architecture Review, Site Plan Review, and Public Works before acquiring the building permit and helping facilitate bids_ Flathead County Solid Waste District — West Glacier Landfill Closure: Project manager and lead designer for the reclamation and closure of an abandoned landfill in West Glacier, MT_ Services performed included mass balance of imported and exported materials, geotechnical investigation of existing subsurface conditions, design and layout of BMP's for erosion protection, Montana Department of Environmental Quality permitting c o ordination of closure, competitive bid administration and construction management_ Flathead County Solid Waste District — West Corridor Container Site: Project manager and lead designer for a new regional solid waste collection facility in western Flathead County_ Services included site layout of 5.5 acre facility, grading and drainage design, permitting with DNRC and MDT, competitive bid administration and construction management_ Seeley Lake Water District — Water System Improvements Project: Project Manager for design and construction of the District's water improvements project which includes a 500,000 gallon reinforced concrete storage tank, water treatment plant expansion, incorporation of an ultraviolet light water disinfection system, remote chlorine feed stations, two water booster stations, a large capacity transmission main and various distribution main piping upgrades_ The project is being funded with state and federal grants and low interest loans obtained from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality — Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program_ TD&H is providing Construction Management and Inspection services throughout the 200 day construction period which is scheduled for completion July 2010_ Flathead Valley Community College — Campus Expansion. Design engineer and construction inspector for a three building $1 F million expansion to the college campus_ Civil design integrated a geotechnical site investigation and geotechnical engineering report; a 12" water main loop through campus; two sanitary sewer main extensions; two sanitary sewer lift stations; access roads, sidewalks, parking lots, ADA access from parking and sidewalks; storm drainage conveyance and regional detention pond_ TD& �� rrirrl� USFS Administrative office and Site Development — Project Manager and engineer for site and utility design, grading and storm water treatment and disposal design for the five acre USFS Administrative office and Tally Lake Ranger D i strict campus. The water and sewer design included boring and encasement of a large capacity water main under West Reserve Drive and approximately 1500 lineal feet of main extensions and services to the building_ The project included design of one block of street to provide access from Stillwater Road to the campus_ TD&H also provided topographic, property and ALTA surveys, as well as Construction Inspections and Materials Testing_ Glacier Bank 2nd Street Improvements — Kalispell, MT Project Manager and design engineer on a multi -tiered street improvement project_ Approval of a sky bridge which linked two City of Kalispell blocks over an extremely busy state road way_ TD&H provided a storm drainage collection system enhancement and rehabilitation design which incorporated the recently adopted Kalispell streetscape standards_ The storm drainage system collected and conveyed runoff from a new commercial parking lot and an expanded pedestrian sidewalk network in downtown Kalispell_ TD&H provided construction staking and construction administration services during all phases of the project_ Rock Creek Cattle Company — Phase I Project Engineer for large multi- faceted private development_ Project responsibilities included coordination with multi -discipline design team_ Analysis and design of a multi-user water distribution system utilizing a Variable Frequency Drive pumping network and large tank storage_ Sanitary sewer design for rurally located Level 2 treatment systems catering to large multi -dimensional usage requirements including residential cabins, fitness center, restaurant and a Fishing Lodge_ Road grading and drainage design incorporating Best Management Practices (BMP " s) to protect the natural integrity of the site. Rock Creek Cattle Company — Willow Creek Road Design Engineer on a 7.5 mile rural collector road through mountainous terrain_ Design considerations included high volumes of construction traffic integrated with residential traffic at 200 ADT, multiple stream crossings requiring governmental permits and approvals, and drainage design through delicate wetland areas_ River Crossing — Whitefish, MT Civil infrastructure designer for a multi -plea condominium development_ Water distribution system was designed to adequately convey a quality and quantity of water while adhering to both State and local requirements. Civil design parameters included storm drainage design in a city mandated low impact area along the Whitefish River, a water distribution system designed and analyzed to meet the State requirement of quality and quantity, and a sanitary sewer design integrating both private sewer lift stations and conventional gravity fed sewer systems_ 'limey d� i �ii� � TD& Richard J. Swan, P.L.S. PROJECT EXPERIENCE BNSF Railroad Remediation Projects: Provided topographic and boundary surveys, including the location of soils tests and monitor wells on environmental remediation projects for BNSF in Kalispell, Somers and Paradise, Montana, from 1992 to 2009_ Provided these services on nine projects thru that time period_ Kalispell Ninth Street Drainage and Paving, Kalispell, Montana. Regrading and resurfacing four blocks of Ninth Street_ Responsibilities included collecting topo data and supervising construction staking_ Kalispell Sidewalks. Managed design survey and generated base map, including all utilities and property lines for expansive sidewalk improvements to Kalispell, West/North neighborhood_ Main Street, Fifth Avenue to Center Street, Kalispell, Montana. A primary urban, highway reconstruction_ Field surveys included topography with elevations for all doors, curbs, side streets, utilities, water, sewer, and storm drainage_ Northern Santa Fe Railroad_ Survey staking three-mile segment of railroad right-of-way just south of Glacier National Park_ Responsibilities included project administration, research and calculations of right-of-way line, crew supervision_ Flathead County, Montana_ Montana Department of Transportation CTEP pedestrian, bike path projects: Edgerton bike path, Lone Pine Trail, Meridian Rails to Trail, Bigfork Grand Avenue. Responsibilities included coordinating collection of field data with buried utility locates, drafting final plans, establishing right-of-way locations_ Flathead County Solid Waste District - Landfill Expansion Improvements 1999 thru 2006= Phases L R III expansion projects_ Managed construction staking for earthwork, gas extraction, storm water improvements, roads and cell liners. Generated volume surveys for payment purposes. Surveyed monitor well locations and elevations_ Property boundary delineation_ Responsible for topographic survey and construction staking of new entrance road to the landfill. Flathead County Solid Waste District - Landfill Aerial Mapping 1999 to 2009: Responsible for having landfill property photographed and mapped on an annual basis, coordinating with Missoula Blueprint and 'limey d� i �ii� � TD& Map Inc. Flathead County Solid Waste District - West Glacier Closure Responsible for topographic and boundary survey of F _C _ S _ W _D _ landfill property in West Glacier, Montana for closure project in 2004. Flathead County Solid Waste District - Green Box Sites Responsible for topographic, boundary and construction staking surveys for new green box sites in the following locations: Columbia Falls, Coram, Creston, Marion, Kila, West Corridor and Somers. Also topo and boundary surveying for future site in Olney. Flathead County Solid Waste District - Storm Water Improvements_ Responsibilities included re -design and drafting of 22-million gallon retention basin, construction staking 2,300 feet of service road, 1,500 feet drainage pipe, plus retention basin, drafting of as -built plans_ JP Road Reconstruction, Whitefish, Montana. Topographic survey, boundary lines, and easement documents for 1,500 LF road and utility reconstruction project_ Generated CAD basemap for S.I.D. creation and road reconstruction plans. Whitefish 2006 Trails, Whitefish, Montana. Survey project manager for six bicycle/pedestrian path topographic surveys. Generated CAD basemap for public meetings and plan production of the trails. Railway Street Reconstruction & 13th Street Extension, Whitefish, Montana. Generate basemap for design, using survey topo data. Lupfer Avenue Reconstruction, Whitefish, Montana. Coordinate and process topo survey for design of seven blocks of street reconstruction_ City of Whitefish, Montana. Coordinate and manage road staking, including bluetops, curb and drainage structures for the following projects Greenwood Avenue — 1000 feet of curbed street_ Second Street East — o_ 6 miles of street reconstruction with curb, curb inlets, two parking areas & one retaining wall. First Street East — o_ 5 miles of street reconstruction with two blocks of curb. Dakota Avenue — 2,100 feet of street improvements, including new pavement, curb, water, sanitary and storm sewer, as well as four retaining walls. Edgewood Place — 1,400 feet of street reconstruction with new curb, water, sanitary & storm sewers_ First and Fourth Streets West — 21000 feet of street 'limey d� i �ii� � TD& reconstruction with water, sanitary & storm sewers involving data collection and base map generation for design, as well as all the construction staking_ Harbor Village at Eagle Bend, Bigfork, Montana. 1 o2-lot residential and golf course community on 187 acres between Flathead River and existing Eagle Bend Golf Course development_ Responsibilities included managing topo surveys, drafting preliminary and final plats, including layout of lots, curbed streets, water, sewer and storm drainage, area calculations, preparing color maps for marketing and finance purposes, writing tract descriptions for conditional use permits. Poison Airport Improvements, Poison, Montana - Al Paving_ Construction staking of 4,200 feet of runway, f ,100 feet of taxiway, apron improvements, drainage structures, taxiway lights and perimeter fence_ Responsibilities included calculations for construction stakes, with offsets and grades, supervise and schedule survey crew_ Coram Water & Sewer District, Coram, Montana Water System Improvements. Construct 16,000 feet of water main, storage tank, two new wells_ Responsibilities included survey management, collect topo data, generate base map with right-of-way lines, prepare boundary adjustment survey for tank site, drafting on final plans. Holt Drive Reconstruction, Bigfork, Montana. Field surveys for topography, utilities and alignment for complete reconstruction of Holt Drive from the new post office to Highway 35_ Construction staking for grade, cut and fill, curb and gutter, and signals at Highway 35. Elizabeth Warren Drive, Butte, Montana. An urban highway project in Butte, Montana_ Participated in field surveys for topography, utilities, and right-of-way_ SUBDIVISION PROJECTS Northern Pines Golf Club. 3 o-lot, 18 -hole golf development (Andy North design), north of Kalispell, Montana_ Stillwater Estates. 128-lot, 3-phase subdivision skirting Kali spell' s North end_ Juniper Bend_ 32-unit townhouse subdivision, Kalispell, Montana_ Teton Terrace/Woodland Court. 26-lot and 24-lot affordable housing subdivisions for the City of Kalispell_ 'limey d� i �ii� � TD& Kalispell Market Place - Commercial subdivision including grocery store and 2 bank facilities. McDonald's Corporation_ Commercial subdivision and site plan for new sites in Kalispell and Ronan, Montana_ SITE, BOUNDARY AND CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS Home Depot & Target Store_ Two 130,000 sq_ ft_ retail stores built on the Hutton gravel pit, North Kalispell, including mass grading, water, sewer, storm, curb, and highway widening_ Kalispell, Montana. Assisted Living Facility_ Construction staking of 31,000 sq. ft. Building (44 suites). Buffalo Commons P.U.D. Phase I and II 50-acre commercial and residential development_ Construction staking of water, sewer, drainage, streets and sidewalk_ Columbia Falls Aluminum Company_ Locate monitor wells using state plane and UTM coordinate systems, Columbia Falls, Montana_ Whitefish, Montana, Site survey and well locations for improvements to Burlington Northern Fuel Yard_ ALTAIACSM SURVEYS Responsibilities included project administration, boundary research, contact with buried utility companies, supervise survey crew, all drafting, boundary calculations and written legal description for the following projects. Anderson Lumber, Kalispell, Montana - ALTAIACSM Land Title Survey Eight -acre lumber yard north of Kalispell_ North Valley Hospital, Whitefish, Montana. Assisted living facility and new hospital site. Home Depot, U. S.A. Pre -construction and as -built surveys for new store on North side of Kalispell_ Centre Court Manor. Senior living facility in downtown Kalispell_ Walgreens. Pre -construction and as -built surveys for new store in Whitefish_ 'limey d� i �ii� � TD& ESTIMATED PROTECT COSTS City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK A - SITE INVENTORY AND RANKING PROJECT TASK UNIT Task Al - Database and Sanborn Map Review Labor Project Scientist 16 Project Assistant 8 Task A2 - Preparing Site Inventory Report Labor Project Scientist Project Assistant Direct Costs Copies Binders Task A3 - Site Ranking within Revitalization Areas Labor Senior II (ranking oversight) Project Scientist TASK B - PUBLIC OUTREACH PROJECT TASK Task B I - Community Outreach Plan Labor Public Outreach Specialist Direct Costs Copies Task B2 - Web Page Asssitance Labor Initial webpage content and set up assistance 12 20 2,000 10 10 32 UNIT 10 1,200 20 RATE AMEC TOTAL $85.00 $55.00 Subtotal Total Task A $85.00 $55.00 Subtotal $0.15 $12.00 Subtotal Total Task A2 $120.00 $85.00 Subtotal Total Task A3 1 tei f.3, a f:�.1:4J RATE $85.00 Subtotal $0.15 Subtotal Total Task B $85.00 Subtotal Total Task B2 $1,3 60.00 $440.00 $1,800.00 $1,800 $1,020.00 I$ ,100.00 $2,120.00 $300.00 I$ 20.00 $420.00 $2,540 $1,200.00 2$ ,720.00 $3,920.00 $3,920 $8,260 TOTAL 8$ 50.00 $850.00 I$ 80.00 $180.00 $1,030 I$ ,700.00 $1,700.00 $1,700 Bear Paw Assessment 1 of 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 Taks B4 - Brochure Labor Project I (assist city with language) Graphic Artist (design) Direct Costs Color Printing Task B5 - Public Meetings (three meetings in Kalsipell) Labor Senior BF Specialist (prepare and present at meetings) G IS (poster development) Direct Costs Gas Car Rental Per Diem Hotel Color Posters Task B7 - Community Outreach Report Labor Project Scientist Direct Costs Copies 8 $85.00 $680.00 10 $80.00 $800.00 Subtotal $1,480.00 500 $1.50 7$ 50.00 Subtotal $750.00 Total Task B4 $2,230 50 $120.00 $6,000.00 10 $80.00 $800.00 Subtotal $6,800.00 3 $35.00 $105.00 3 $50.00 $150.00 6 $30.00 $180.00 3 $90.00 $270.00 4 $90.00 3$ 60.00 Subtotal $1,065.00 Total Task B5 $7,865 20 $85.00 1$ ,700.00 Subtotal $1,700.00 500 $0.15 7$ 5.00 Subtotal $75.00 Total Task B7 $1,775 TOTAL TASK B $14,600 Bear Paw Assessment 2 of 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK C - PHASE I ESAs PROJECT TASK UNIT RATE TOTAL Task C I - Phase I Training for Fire Department Staff Labor Project I (develop training, prepare packet, hold training) 28 $85.00 $2,380.00 Project Assistant 16 $55.00 $880.00 Subtotal $3,260.00 Direct Costs Car Rental 1 $50.00 $50.00 Gas 1 $35.00 $35.00 Per Diem 1 $30.00 $30.00 Subtotal $115.00 Total Task C 1 $3,375 Task C2 - Phase I Site Assessments (assumes 15 are completed) Labor Senior 11 (ESA review) 90 $120.00 $10,800.00 Staff II (completion of first three, assistance after) 100 $85.00 8$ ,500.00 Subtotal $19,300.00 Direct Costs EDR 3 $200.00 $600.00 Title Company Ownership 3 $150.00 $450.00 Car Rental 2 $90.00 $180.00 Gas 2 $35.00 $70.00 Hotel 2 $90.00 $180.00 Per Diem 4 $30.00 1$ 20.00 Subtotal $1,600.00 Total Task C2 $20,900 TOTAL TASK C $24,275 Bear Paw Assessment 3 of 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK D - QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN PROJECT TASK UNIT Labor Senior II (QAPP review) 6 Project I (document preparation) 48 GIS 8 Project Assistant 10 Direct Costs Copies 1,000 Color Copies 80 TASK E - SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLANS (assuming 6 Phase 11's) Labor Senior II (SAP Review) 36 Project I (plan preparation) 264 GIS 36 Project Assistant 48 Direct Costs Copies 5,000 Color Copies 200 Binders 50 TASK F - REPORT OF FINDINGS (assuming 6 Phase II reports) Labor Senior II (report review and cleanup planning) 60 Project I (report preparation) 360 GIS (graphics, data validation, and data management) 42 Project Assistant 50 Direct Costs Copies 5,000 Color Copies 350 Binders 50 RATE TOTAL $120.00 $720.00 $85.00 $4,080.00 $80.00 $640.00 $55.00 5$ 50.00 Subtotal $5,990.00 $0.15 $150.00 $1.50 $120.00 Subtotal $270.00 TOTAL TASK D $6,260 $120.00 $4,320.00 $85.00 $22,440.00 $80.00 $2,880.00 $55.00 2$ ,640.00 Subtotal $32,280.00 $0.15 $750.00 $1.50 $300.00 $12.00 $600.00 Subtotal $1,650.00 TOTAL TASK E $33,930 $120.00 $7,200.00 $85.00 $30,600.00 $80.00 $3,3 60.00 $55.00 2$ •750.00 Subtotal $43,910.00 $0.15 $750.00 $1.50 $525.00 $12.00 $600.00 Subtotal $1,875.00 TOTAL TASK F $45,785 Bear Paw Assessment 4 of 5 City of Kalispell Brownfield Assessment Cost Estimate April 5, 2010 TASK G - PROJECT MANAGEMENT Labor Project Set Up and Kick Off 10 $120.00 $1,200.00 Project Oversight 90 $120.00 $10,800.00 Quarterly Reports 72 $55.00 $3,960.00 Site Eligibility Questionnaires and Property Profiles 50 $55.00 $2,750.00 MBEIDBE tracking 32 $55.00 $1,760.00 Invoicing 40 $55.00 $2,200.00 Subtotal $22,670.00 Direct Costs Hotel 5 $90.00 $450.00 Vehicle 5 $50.00 $250.00 Gas 5 $35.00 $175.00 Per Diem 10 $30.00 3$ 00.00 Subtotal $1,175.00 TOTAL TASK G $23,845 SUBTOTAL $156,955 PHASE II ASSESSMENT (6 Phase Its @ $27,315.83 each) 16$ 3,895 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS $320,850 Notes I. Cost estimate is based on average costs to complete Phase I and II assessments, including reporting. Cost could be higher or lower based on site being assessed. 2. Cost estimate assumes 15 Phase I and 6 Phase II assessments are completed. 3. Cost assumes AMEC will complete first 3 Phase I ESAs with City staff, and that the remaining 12 would be completed by City staff with our oversight and review of report Bear Paw Assessment 5 of 5 SUPPORTING INFORMATION SITE SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN PROJECT INFORMATION ATION Date(s) of Field Work: Au uust 2oog Project Name: Coho Hall of Fame, GNDC Brownfield Project Number: 1 2 1 34+001 Client: ND' Site Phone: 11fI. Site Address: WolfFolm MT ❑ Site Plan Attached cope of o rk: Soil round ter and soil va or assessrnent Approvals Initials Date Prepared By C NC 7/22/09 Approved By Type of Project: ®Environmental; OGeotechnical; F-11ndustrial Process; F10ther-: EHAZWOPER Project: Training & Medical Surveillance must conform to 29 CFR 1910.120 & Geomatrrx Guidelines. F-]Client Specific Requirements (Attached) KEY CONTACTS Project Manager. Chris I uoner Phone: e V - - I Ile 406-396-2368 Project H&S Manager. Batt ra t Phone. 40 54 -01 9 Cell: 40 S29-126 Site H S Manager: Wilhelm Welzenbac' Phone. 406-542-01 9 Cell. 406-529 577 Client Contact: AudreK ftgl, GNDC Phone. 40 653- 590 Cell. Client's Site Contact. NISI Phone: N/A Cell* N/A Corporate Health & Safety Manager: Don Kubik L11-1 Phone: SIO-663-411S Cell: 510-368 643.E Other: Emergency Medical Facility: Trirti LZ �tal Address: 31,E Kra Wolf Point 11T Phone Number (general): 40 -6S 2100 Phone Number (emergency): 911 EEmergency Medical Facility Confirmed ®Map to the hospital is attached Police.- 911 Fire: 911 Paramedic/Ambulance.- 911 Poison Control enter: 1-800-222-1222 EMERGENCY PROCEDURES Medical Emergencies I . Remove injured or exposed person(s) from immediate danger if possible. 2. Evacuate other on -site personnel to a safe place in are upwind direction until it is safe for work to resume. 3. If serious injury or life -threatening condition exists, call 911 - Paramedics, fire department, police Hospital emergency room Clearly describe location, injury and conditions to dispatcher/hospital, Designate a person to direct emergency equipment to the injured person(s). 4. Provide first aid if necessary. Remove contaminated clothing only if this can be dome without endangering the injured person. 5. Call the project manager and/or project health and safety officer, 6. Immediately implement steps to prevent recurrence of the accident. Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials or Wastes 1. Evacuate all on -site personnel to a safe place in an upwind direction until the PM or PHo determines that it is safe for work to resume. 2. Immediately instruct a designated person to contact the PIM or PH So. 3. Contain spill* if it is possible and it can be done safely. 4. Initiate cleanup. General Emergencies In the case of fire, flood, explosion, or other hazard, work shall be halted and the local police/ fire department shall be notified by calling 91 I . All on -site personnel wi I l be immediately evacuated to a safe place. Emergency Equipment onsite ®First Aid lit; EFIre Extinguisher; ZEye Wash; rjOther: 031803 REVISION CHEMICAL HAZARDS CHEMICAL EXPOSURE LIMITS LEL KNo1P NIE P HEALTH HAZARDS OSHA ACG I H M ECTED CONCENTR ATIoNS Lead (inorganic) 50uglm per 8 hrs IAA 0-1200 mg/kg Lassitude (weakness, exhaustion), (m&3) in soil insomnia; facial pallor; anorexia, weight loss, malnutrition; constipation, abdominal pain, colic; anemia; gingival lead line; tremor; paralysis grist, ankles; encephalopathy; kidney disease; irritation eyes; hypotension Arsenic 10 ugfm per 8 NA 20-50 mg/kg in sore throat} lung irritant, skin effects hrs soil Benzene I ppm 0.5 ppm 1.2 Unknown Irritant to resp, system; giddiness, STEL 5 ppm headache, nausea, staggered gait Toluene 200 ppm 5 oppm I , i Unknown Irritation eyes, nose; lassitude (weakness, exhaustion), confusion, euphoria, dizziness, headache; dilated pupils, iacrimati on (discharge of tears); anxiety, muscle fatigue, insomnia; paresthesia; dermatitis; liver, kidney damage Ethyl benzene 100 ppm 100 ppm 0.8 Unknown Irritation eyes, skin, mucous membrane; STEL 125 ppm headache; dermatitis; narcosis, coma ylenes 100 ppm 100 ppm 0.9 Unknown Irritation eyes, skin, nose, throat; C 200 ppm dizziness, excitement, drowsiness, incoordination, staggering gait; corneal vacuolization; anorexia, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain; dermatitis Naphthalene 10 ppm (50 glm) 10 ppm (50 mg1m) NA Unknown Irritation eyes; headache, confusion, excitement, malaise (vague feeling of discomfort); nausea., vomiting, abdominal pain; irritation bladder; profuse sweating, jaundice; hematuria (blood in the urine), renal shutdown; dermatitis, optical neuritis, corneal damage PAHs 0.2 mg#m NA < 100 mglkg in Probable carcinogen soil Dieldrin 0.25 rng/m NA 2.1-56 uglkg in robable carcinogen. Neurotoxin, soil uspected Endocrine Disruptor, immune uppressi on; depression; anxiety; rritability. If not specified, exposure limit is the PEL or the TLV-TUNA, Exposure limit preceded by a "STEL" is a Short Term Exposure Limit and by a `°C" is the Ceiling Limit PHYSICAL HAZARD MHeat Stress ®Cold Stress []Wet [:]Noise 09ip,Trip, & Fall E:]Heavy Equipment ❑ Electrical Hazards ❑ Underground Hazards.- One Call Ticket # _ Date Called: OPrivate Locator Utilized: FlOverhead Hazards OTraffic Excavation s/Tren chi ng nConfined Space E]Other BIOLOGICAL HAZARDS: nPathogens: FjMold: ®Plants: f [DInsects: 031803 REVISION ZOther Fauna: snakes 00ther: SITE CONTROLS: ZVone. PERSONAL DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES: Wash hands before eap�2g or PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT — R = RE U I REDS A = HAVE AVAILABLE R Eye Protection: R Safety Glasses; _ Splash Goggles; Face Shield: Other: Hard Hat R Steel -Toed Boots Chemical Resistant Boots Traffic Safety Vest R Hearing Protection: Protective Clothing: DTyyee; Coated Tyvel ; [DSarinex; F10ther: _ R loves: ZNitrile; DPVC; [:]Neoprene; Zcloth/leather; Other Respiratory: FlFull-Face APR;F-lHalf-Face APR Filter: [jOrganic Vapor; EjAcid Gas; []HEPA; 00ther.- Other: MONITORING EQUIPMENT ElPhoto Ionization Detector with 10.6 eV lamp F-lFlame Ionization Detector FICombustible Gas Indicator DOxygen Meter ODetector Tube (Brand: — Tribes: Passive Dosimeter~ [:]Air Sampling Pump — Filter Media: DOther: Frequency of monitoring: None 031803 REVISION SOIL BOREHOLE LOG Page 1 PROJECT- GNDC ( Project No_ 12134) - Plentywood, Sheridan County Log of Boring No_ SB-3 BORING LOCATION- Plentywood, Montana DATE- 2112108 DRILLING CONTRACTOR- SK Geotechnical (Clayton Larson) TOTAL DEPTH- 31 ft DRILLING METHOD- Holkwstem auger DEPTH TO WATER- 23.5 feet bgs DRILLING EQUIPMENT- CME-75HT LOGGED BY- ANJ SAMPLING METHOD- split -spoon; continuous BOREHOLE DIAMETER- 8-inch HAMMER WEIGHT-140 Ibs DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION- RR Ave right of way a -- DESCRIPTION CL w o = a a NAME (USCS Symbol): color, moist'► by weight; plant, consistency, structure, REMARKS ❑ m cementation, etc. 1-2.5 41736721 6.6 ML-silt with sand; 80% silt; 20% fine sand; dark yellowish brown (1 OYR 412); dry; 16' recovery homogenous; hard 2.5-4 9, 9, 9 0-0 SM-silty sand; 75% fine-med sand; 25% silt; dry; homogenous; 10YR 412 12" recovery 4-6 7, 8, 7 U_U ML as above; bottom 1` black organic -rich soil 12" recovery top 9'- SM silty sand with gravel; 70% sand; 15% silt; 15% gravel; gravel subrounded; 6-7.5 2, 5, 5 0-0 bottom 37_ SW -well graded sand with gravel; 80% med-coarse sand; 20% subrounded 10" recovery gravel 7.5-9 1, 2, 5 0-0 SW med-coarse sand (85%); 15% subrounded gravel; gravel clasts up to 1" diameter; dry 9' recovery 9-11 9, 6, 5, 6 0-0 SW as above; dry 8" recovery 11-12.5 4' 3 4 0_5 GW-GM well -graded gravel with silt and sand; 65% subrounded gravel; 10% sift; 25% 1" recovery sand; dry_ At 12.6, dark organic -rich soil on auger flights_ 12.5-14 3, 3, 4 U_2 silt with sand; silt dusky yellowish brown (10YR 212); mixture of SW as above and dark silt; 5, recovery coffins yellowish silt and subrounded gravel; dry; 75% dark silt; 25% sand 14-16 3, 4, 5, 5 6.6 top 2dark silt as above; bottom 1 U"_ SP-poorly graded sand; dominant color pale 9„ recovery yellowish brown (1OYR 612); 100% fine -medium sand 16-17.5 2, 4, 6 0_6 SP as above; damp 8" recovery 17.5-19 4, 3, 3 1.4 SM silty sand; 60% sand; 30% silt; 10% gravel; silt 10YR (212); contains subrounded and 6" recovery angular gravel; damp 19-21 4, 5, 2, 3 0_6 SM silty sand with gravel; 65% sand; 25% silt; 10% gravel (subrounded) 6" recovery 24-26 5, 5, 4, 5 0_3 GM silty gravel with sand; 70% gravel; subrounded; 15% silt; 15% sand; no odor_ Saturated at 23.5 feet weight of 26-28 hammer, 5, 5, 0-0 CL-ML silt and clay; plastic; yellowish tan; no odor 3 weight of 29-31 hammer, 2, 2, CL-ML as above; saturated 2 SOP TITLE I AMEC Geomatrix Field Forms 2 Equipment Decontamination 3 Monitoring Well Construction 4 Monitoring Well Development 5 Field Measurement of Ground Water Level 6 Field Measurement of Electric or Specific Conductance (EC/SC) 7 Field Measurement of pH 8 Field Measurement of Dissolved Oxygen 9 Field Measurement of Redox Potential 10 Field Sample Filtration I I Groundwater Sampling 12 Soil Sample Collection 13 Sample Documentation 14 Quality Control Samples 15 Sample Packaging and Shipping 16 Field Measurement of Volatile Organic Compounds Headspace 17 Management of Investigation -Derived Waste 18 Sample Chain -of -Custody Procedures 19 Direct Push Well Installation 20 Asbestos Sample Collection 21 Lead -Based Paint Sample Collection 22 Surface Water Sampling 23 Sediment Sampling 24 Soil Vapor Sampling 25 Asbestos and Lead Air Sampling 26 Ambient Air Sampling M,OiNITANA A10NITORING WELL CONSTRUCTOR'S LICENSE oils license Is Is-sj;cd by the Board of Water Well Contractors In cornplla-nco with Tide 37, Ch. 43, NICk ADAM N. JOHNSON TheIx nsee Is authorirvd to open to ima f4onliwitt:4 Well GonHituciar ASMOEC GEOM ATRIX INC. whdein the employ at the above stated r,-aintr=jor. 0ATE ISSUED 6/30/09 DATE EXPIRES 6/30/1 LICENSE NUMBER 440 BWWC ProVranl P& a -r VY MONTANA MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTOWS LICENSE This license Is Issued by the Board 01 Watei Well Contractors in compliart-ce with Title 37, Ch. 43, VIQA. K. BILL CLAR T.he licensee Is nw1horized, In opemle as a 1114ortitoling Well can -Arucicr AMEC GEOMATRIX, INC. while In the ernploY Of the 016iove slated conimclor. DATE ISSUED 6/30/09 DrTEEkirl REs 6/30/10 LICENSE NUMBER 040 9NVWC Program Ojjapa