Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 173 Huntmar Drive, Ottawa, Ontario

Transcription

1 Phase II Environmental ite Assessment 173 Huntmar Drive, Ottawa, Ontario Type of Document Final Client 1 Jeremiah Place Ottawa, Ontario K2H 8L7 Project Number: Prepared By: Taryn Glancy, M.A.c. Reviewed By: Mark McCalla, P. Geo Queensview Drive Ottawa, ON K2B 7H6 Canada Date ubmitted

2

3 Executive ummary Exp ervices Inc. (exp) was retained by to complete a Phase II Environmental ite Assessment (EA) of 173 Huntmar Drive in Ottawa, Ontario. The objective of the Phase II EA was to address areas of potential environmental concern (APEC) identified in a Phase I EA conducted at the site by exp and to support the City of Ottawa ite Plan Approval permitting requirements. The site is located on the west side of Huntmar Drive at 173 Huntmar Drive in Ottawa. The site is zoned Development Reserve Zone. At the time of the investigation, the site was developed with a residence that is vacant and located on the west part of the property. The shape of the site is rectangular and with an area of 5.92 hectares (14.6 acres). The residence and barn have existed at the site as early as the early 1900s. The barn is semidemolished. urrounding properties consist of mainly residential and/or agricultural/vacant lands. Regional groundwater flow direction is northeast towards the Carp River, a distance of 850 m. The findings of the Phase I EA were presented in a report entitled Phase I Environmental ite Assessment, dated May 21, The Phase I EA identified the following onsite APEC: Table EX.1: Areas of Potential Environmental Concern Areas of Potential Environmental Concern (APEC) 1. An unused fuel dispensing tank Location of APEC Potentially Contaminating Activity (PCA) Potential Contaminants of Concern (PCOC) North of the residence #28 Gasoline and Associated Products torage in Fixed Tanks Petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) This Phase II EA was conducted in accordance with the Phase II EA standard as defined by Ontario Regulation 153/04, as amended by Ontario Regulation 511/09 (O.Reg. 153/04), and in accordance with generally accepted professional practices. The Phase II EA consisted advancing a total of three (3) boreholes in May For assessment purposes, exp selected the ite Condition tandards (C), provided in Table 3 of oil, Groundwater and ediment tandards for use Under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, Ministry of the Environment (MOE), 2011 for residential and commercial use at a site with coarse textured soil in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04, as amended in Regulation 511/09. In addition, exp compared the soil results to Table 1 C to determine if excess soil maybe be relocated to a different site during site redevelopment. The results and findings of the Phase II EA conducted at the site are summarized as follows: The general stratigraphy at the site, as observed in the geotechnical boreholes also completed by exp, started with topsoil over sandy clay/clay over till. Bedrock was encountered in the boreholes between 0.05 and 15.0 m below ground surface (bgs). No fill materials were encountered. To assess the APEC of the exterior above ground storage tank (AT), shallow auger holes were advanced through the silty sand topsoil. Boulders or limestone bedrock were encountered at less than 1 m which prevented further advancement of the auger holes. EXI

4 No groundwater was encountered in the geotechnical or environmental boreholes in this area of the site. oil samples from the surface soil near the exterior AT were collected and submitted to Paracel Laboratories for PHC and BTEX. The samples did not have any associated sheens, odours, or elevated combustible vapour readings. The measured concentrations of PHC and BTEX from the soil samples were well below both MOE Table 1 and Table 3 C for a residential land use. No additional environmental work is recommended at this time. EXII

5 Table of Contents Executive ummary... EXI 1. Introduction ite Description Property Ownership Current and Proposed Future Uses Applicable ite Condition tandards Background Information Physical etting Past Investigations cope of the Investigation Overview of ite Investigation Media Investigated Phase I EA Conceptual ite Model Deviations from ampling and Analysis Plan Impediments Investigation Method General Drilling oil ampling Field creening Measurements Groundwater: ampling ediment: ampling Analytical Testing oil ampling Elevation urvey Review and Evaluation Geology oil Texture oil: Field creening and Observations oil Quality Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs), F1 to F4 including BTEX Ground Water Quality ediment Quality Quality Assurance and Quality Control Results i

6 5.11 Phase Two Conceptual ite Model (CM) ite Description ite Conditions Geological and Hydrogeological etting Underground Utilities Areas of Potential Environmental Concern/Potential Contaminants of Concern Investigation and Remediation Contaminants of Concern (COC) Contaminant Fate and Transport Exposure Pathways ummary and Conclusions References General Limitations Appendices Appendix A: Figures Appendix B: ampling and Analysis Plan (AAP) Appendix C: Borehole Logs Appendix D: Analytical ummary Tables Appendix E: Laboratory Certificates of Analysis ii

7 1. Introduction Exp ervices Inc. (exp) was retained by to complete a Phase II Environmental ite Assessment (EA) for the property located at 173 Huntmar Drive, in Ottawa (site), Ontario. The objective of the Phase II EA was to address areas of potential environmental concern (APEC) identified in a Phase I EA conducted at the site by exp and to support the City of Ottawa ite Plan Approval permitting requirements. This report has been prepared in accordance with the Phase II EA standard as defined by Ontario Regulation 153/04, as amended by Ontario Regulation 511/09 (O.Reg. 153/04), and in accordance with generally accepted professional practices. ubject to this standard of care, exp makes no express or implied warranties regarding its services and no third party beneficiaries are intended. Limitation of liability, scope of report and third party reliance are outlined in ection 9 of this report. 1.1 ite Description The site is located on the west side of Huntmar Drive, approximately 300 m north of Maple Grove Road, at 173 Huntmar Drive in Ottawa. A site location plan is provided in Appendix A. At the time of the investigation, the site was developed with a residence that is vacant and located on the west part of the property. The shape of the site is rectangular and with an area of 5.92 hectares (14.6 acres). The residence and barn have existed at the site as early as the early 1900s. The barn is semidemolished. urrounding properties consist of mainly residential and/or agricultural/vacant lands. Regional groundwater flow direction is northeast towards the Carp River, a distance of 850 m. 1.2 Property Ownership At the time of the investigation, the site was owned by. Owner Contact: Robert Karam 1 Jeremiah Place Ottawa, Ontario Phone: Current and Proposed Future Uses At the time of the Phase II EA, the subject site was developed with a residence that is vacant and located on the west part of the property. Exp understands that a Record of ite Condition is not required for this change in land use. 1.4 Applicable ite Condition tandards The assessment criteria, ite Condition tandards (C), applicable to a given site in Ontario are established under subsection 168.4(1) of the Environmental Protection Act. Tabulated generic criteria are provided in oil, Ground Water and ediment tandards for Use Under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act ( the GW tandards ), MOE, April These criteria, which came into force on July 1, 2011, are based on site sensitivity (sensitive or nonsensitive), groundwater use (potable or nonpotable), property use (residential, parkland, institutional, commercial, industrial, community and agricultural/other), soil type (coarse or medium to fine textured) and restoration depth (full or stratified restoration). In addition, site specific criteria may be established on the basis of the findings of a Risk Assessment carried out in accordance with Part IX and chedule C of O. Reg. 153/04, as amended. 1

8 The GW tandards specify C for soil, groundwater and sediment that are tabulated as follows: Table 1 Full Depth Background ite Condition tandards; Table 2 Full Depth Generic ite Condition tandards in a Potable Ground Water Condition; Table 3 Full Depth Generic ite Condition tandards in a NonPotable Ground Water Condition; Table 4 tratified ite Condition tandards in a Potable Ground Water Condition; Table 5 tratified ite Condition tandards in a NonPotable Ground Water Condition; Table 6 Generic ite Condition tandards for hallow oils in a Potable Ground Water Condition; Table 7 Generic ite Condition tandards for hallow oils in a NonPotable Ground Water Condition; Table 8 Generic ite Condition tandards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Potable Groundwater Condition; and, Table 9 Generic ite Condition tandards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a NonPotable Groundwater Condition. For assessment purposes, exp selected the 2011 Table 3 C for residential property use in a nonpotable groundwater situation with coarse textured soil. The selection of this category was based on the following factors: The site was not considered a sensitive site; Based on exp s previous knowledge of the study area and field observations, groundwater is no longer used as a potable water source either on or within 100 m of the site; The site is not located in an area designated in a municipal official plan as a wellhead protection area or other designation identified by the municipality for the protection of groundwater; The site will be used for residential purposes; Exp submitted four soil samples for grain size analysis and determined that the site was predominantly fine and medium grained; and, There is no intention to carry out a stratified restoration at the site. 2

9 2. Background Information 2.1 Physical etting At the time of the investigation, the site was developed with a residence in the western part of the site that is vacant. The eastern part of the site is used for agricultural purposes. Based on construction, the residence may be as old as the early 1900s. The shape of the site is rectangular and has an area of 5.92 hectares. The residence is twostorey stone structure with a basement. A large barn located north of the residence is semidemolished. Access to this barn was limited as it was unsafe to enter. Two other barns are demolished with the debris remaining at the site. urrounding properties consist of mainly residential and/or agricultural/vacant lands. Based on a review of historical aerial photographs, historical maps, and other records review, the site was first developed in the 1900s as a residence and farm. Regional groundwater flow direction is northeast towards the Carp River, a distance of 850 m. The Phase II EA study area is shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A. The properties located south of the site were considered upgradient with respect to the anticipated groundwater flow direction. As such, there is the potential for the historic use of the subject site (former above ground fuel dispensing oil storage tank) and properties located upgradient of the site to pose an environmental impact to the site. The location of the area of potential environmental concern (APEC) is shown on Figure 3 in Appendix A. The land is relatively flat with a difference in elevation of approximately 2.0 m over the 400 m length of the property. No areas of natural significance were present within 250 m of the subject site. 2.2 Past Investigations The following environmental reports were reviewed by exp: Phase I Environmental ite Assessment, prepared by Pinchin Environmental (January 2011). At the time of that investigation, the site was vacant agricultural land with a twostorey residential building and three agricultural buildings. The report identified two above ground storage tanks (ATs). One was located in the basement and the other outside near the barns. There were no observations of odours of staining associated with these tanks. The reported identified that based on the age of the building there is the potential for asbestoscontaining materials (ACM) and therefore prior to any demolitions, a designated substance survey should be completed. Nothing was identified as a potential concern for impacts to the subsurface and no further work was recommended. Based on exp s review of this report, no APECs were identified. Phase I Environmental ite Assessment, prepared by exp ervices Inc. (May 21, 2014). At the time of that investigation, the site was vacant agricultural land with a twostorey residential building and a semidemolished barn. The report identified two above ground storage tanks (ATs). One was located in the basement and the other outside near the barn. No staining or odours were observed in the vicinity of the AT, however, the presence of the AT and associated dispensing equipment near the barn represents an APEC. The report also identified that based on the age of the building there is the potential for ACM and therefore prior to any demolitions, a designated substance survey should be completed prior to any renovations or demolition. 3

10 3. cope of the Investigation 3.1 Overview of ite Investigation The purpose of the Phase II EA was to investigate the soil quality in the vicinity of the AT to characterize the soil conditions so that can redevelop the property as residential townhomes and to support the City of Ottawa ite Plan Approval permitting requirements. 3.2 Media Investigated The Phase II EA included the investigation of onsite soil. As any impact from the AT would have occurred from the ground surface, shallow soil samples were collected. No groundwater samples were collected as no impact was identified in the shallow soil samples. As there was no surface water body on the site, no surface water or sediment sampling was required. 3.3 Phase I EA Conceptual ite Model The site is located at 173 Huntmar Drive, approximately 300 m north of Maple Grove Road in Ottawa, Ontario. At the time of the investigation, the site was vacant. A residence and barn has existed at the site as early as the early 1900s. At the time of the site reconnaissance, the barn is semidemolished. urrounding properties consist of mainly residential and/or agricultural/vacant lands in all directions. Based on topography, the groundwater flow in the overburden at the site is anticipated to be the northeast and the site was considered down gradient from the lands to the south. The site is at a similar elevation to the lands in each direction. The topography of the site is relatively flat, with a difference in elevation of approximately 2 m across the 400 m length of the site. Regional groundwater flow direction is northeast towards the Carp River, a distance of 850 m. Based on this large intervening distance, there is little risk of the site impacting the Jock River. In addition, there are no known local potable groundwater uses in the area. A review of the borehole logs from the geotechnical investigation that was recently completed by exp shows that the eastern part of the site is underlain by topsoil and silty clay to a depth of at least 6 m. The western part of the sit, where the residence and AT are located has shallow bedrock (0.1 m to 2.3 m) with sand and glacial till. The till is underlain by limestone bedrock, with shaley partings, of the Bobcaygeon Formation. The groundwater at the site is generally in the glacial till material and silty clay. No areas of natural significance were present in the vicinity of the subject site. Based on the 2014 Phase I EA, the identified APEC and potential contaminants of concern (PCOC) are shown on Figure 3 in Appendix A and summarized in table below. Table 3.1: ummary of Potential Areas of Environmental Concern Areas of Potential Environmental Concern (APEC) An unused fuel dispensing tank Location of APEC Potentially Contaminating Activity (PCA) Potential Contaminants of Concern (PCOC) North of the residence #28 Gasoline and Associated Products torage in Fixed Tanks Petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) 4

11 3.4 Deviations from ampling and Analysis Plan The field investigative and sampling program was carried out following the requirements of the ite ampling and Analysis Plan (Appendix B). No significant deviations from the ampling and Analysis Plan were reported, which affected the sampling and data quality objectives. 3.5 Impediments No physical impediments were encountered during the field investigation. The entire property was accessible at the time of the investigation. 5

12 4. Investigation Method 4.1 General The site investigative activities consisted of the drilling of boreholes to facilitate the collection of soil samples for chemical analysis. The scope of work for the Phase II EA was as follows: Advance a total of three (3) shallow hand auger boreholes; Collect representative soil samples for chemical analysis of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) Fractions F1 to F4 including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (BTEX); and, Prepare a report of the findings. Exp personnel who completed this project included Taryn Glancy, M.A. c. and Mark McCalla, P. Geo. 4.2 Drilling On May 13, 2014, three hand auger boreholes (BHE, BHN, BH) were advanced by exp staff to a maximum depth of 0.6 m below ground surface. It was difficult to auger any deeper due to numerous boulders and shallow bedrock in the area. The boreholes were drilled approximately 1.0 to 1.2 m from the north, south and east sides of the concrete tank base. The approximate boreholes locations are shown on the ite Plan on Figure 3 in Appendix A. In addition, a geotechnical investigation was also completed by exp for the whole property. Additional details regarding the site, such as geology, were taken from the geotechnical report. No petroleumbased greases or solvents were used during drilling activities. Exp staff continuously monitored the drilling activities and recorded the depth of soil sample collection and total depth of boring. Field observations are summarized on the auger logs provided in Appendix C. 4.3 oil ampling The soil sampling during the completion of this Phase II EA was undertaken in accordance with the ampling and Analysis Plan presented in Appendix B. oil samples for geologic characterization and chemical analysis were collected on a continuous basis in the overburden materials using 50 mm diameter hand auger. The soil cores were removed from the samplers upon retrieval by drilling personnel. Geologic details of the recovered cores were logged by exp field staff and samples were collected from selected cores for chemical analysis. Measures were taken in the field and during transport to preserve sample integrity prior to chemical analysis. Recommended volumes of soil samples selected for chemical analysis were collected from the recovered cores into precleaned, laboratorysupplied glass sample jars/vials identified for the specified analytical test group. All soil samples were placed in clean coolers containing ice prior to and during transportation to the subcontract laboratory, Paracel Laboratories Ltd. (Paracel) of Ottawa, Ontario. Decontamination and other protocols were followed during sample collection and handling to minimize the potential for sample crosscontamination. New, dedicated disposable nitrile gloves were used for the handling and sampling of each retrieved soil core. The hand auger sampler was decontaminated between sampling intervals using a potable water/phosphatefree detergent solution followed by rinses with potable water. 6

13 4.4 Field creening Measurements A portion of each soil core was placed in a sealed ziplock plastic bag and allowed to reach ambient temperature prior to field screening using a Gastechtor combustible vapour meter, calibrated with hexane. The measurements were made by inserting the instrument s probe into the plastic bag while manipulating the sample to ensure volatilization of the soil gases. These readings provide a realtime indication of the relative concentration of combustible vapours (indicative of petroleum impact) encountered in the subsurface during drilling and are used to aid in the assessment of the vertical and horizontal extent of contamination and the selection of soil samples for analysis. The field screening measurements, in parts per million (ppm) hexane equivalent, are presented with the borehole logs provided in Appendix C. 4.7 Groundwater: ampling No monitoring wells were installed at the site and therefore, no groundwater samples were collected 4.8 ediment: ampling As no water body was present at the site, sediment sampling was not part of the Phase II EA. 4.9 Analytical Testing The contracted laboratory selected to perform chemical analysis on all soil samples was Paracel. Paracel is an accredited laboratory under the tandards Council of Canada/Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation in accordance with IO/IEC 17025:1999 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories oil ampling Representative soil samples from each borehole were selected for laboratory analysis based on field screening results, sample location and depth interval. The requested laboratory analysis was based on the identified contaminants of concern. The representative soil samples selected for laboratory analysis, the rationale for each sample and the requested analyses are summarized in Table 4.2. Table 4.2: ummary of oil amples ubmitted for Chemical Analyses Borehole & oil ample ID Depth (m) Rational for ubmission Analysis BHE urface soil was identified as the APEC PHC and BTEX BHN urface soil was identified as the APEC PHC and BTEX BH urface soil was identified as the APEC PHC and BTEX Notes: PHCs petroleum hydrocarbons BTEX benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes 4.10 Elevation urvey An elevation survey was not required. 7

14 4.11 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Measures A QA/QC program was also implemented to ensure that the analytical results received are accurate and dependable. A QA/QC program is a system of documented checks that validate the reliability of the data collected regarding any given site. Quality Assurance is a system that ensures that quality control procedures are correctly performed and documented. Quality Control refers to the established procedures observed both in the field and in the laboratory, designed to ensure that the resulting end data meet intended quality objectives. The QA/QC program implemented by exp incorporated the following components: Collection and analysis of blind duplicate soil sample to ensure analytical precision; Using dedicated and/or disposal sampling equipment; Following proper decontamination protocols to minimize crosscontamination; Maintaining field notes and completing field forms to document onsite activities; and, Using only laboratory supplied sample containers and following prescribed sample protocols, including proper preservation, meeting sample hold times, proper chain of custody documentation, to ensure integrity of the samples. Paracel s QA/QC program involved the systematic analysis of control standards for the purpose of optimizing the measuring system as well as establishing system precision and accuracy and included calibration standards, method blanks, reference standards, spiked samples, surrogates and duplicates. 8

15 5. Review and Evaluation 5.1 Geology As previously mentioned a geotechnical investigation was also completed at the site by exp. The detailed soil profiles encountered in each borehole are provided on the borehole logs in Appendix C. Boundaries of soil indicated on the log sheets are intended to reflect transition zones for the purpose of environmental assessment and should not be interpreted as exact planes of geological change. The general stratigraphy at the site, as observed in the geotechnical boreholes, started with topsoil over sandy clay/clay over till. Bedrock was encountered in the boreholes between 0.05 and 15.0 m below ground surface (bgs). No fill materials were encountered. The interpreted site geology is shown on the enclosed cross sections (Figures 3A). No environmental sampling was conducted on these boreholes. To assess the APEC of the exterior AT shallow auger holes were advanced through the silty sand topsoil. Boulders or boulders were encountered at less than 1 m which prevented further advancement of the auger holes. The details of the auger holes are presented in Table 5.1 Table 5.1: Auger Holes Borehole ID Depth (m) Geology Vapour Reading (ppm) ample BHE BHN BH Topsoil: Dark brown silty sand with roots and boulders Topsoil: Dark brown silty sand with roots and boulders Topsoil: Dark brown silty sand with roots and boulders 0 BHE 1 (Duplicate BHE 10) 0 BHN 1 0 BH oil Texture Grain size analyses were completed on four soil samples collected during the geotechnical investigation from depths of 1.5 to 6. 7 m below ground surface. The results showed that all samples were comprised of 90 to 95% silt and clay and therefore considered to be fine and medium textured. 5.6 oil: Field creening and Observations Field screening involved using the combustible vapour meter to measure vapour concentrations, in parts per million (ppm) hexane equivalent, in the collected soil samples in order to assess the presence of soil gases which would imply potential petroleum hydrocarbon impact. The vapour readings from the surface soil samples near the exterior AT were all 0 parts per million by volume. These results indicate do not indicate any petroleum impact to soil. Inspection of the soil cores retrieved from the boreholes did not indicate the presence of sheen, the presence of a separate organic phase, or other evidence of a NAPL either in the surficial fill or overburden soil materials. No petroleum staining was noted in any of the soil samples. 9

16 5.7 oil Quality In accordance with the scope of work and the sampling and analysis plan, chemical analyses were performed on selected soil samples recovered from the boreholes. The selection of representative worst case soil samples from each borehole was based on field visual or olfactory evidence of impacts and/or presence of potential water bearing zones. ummaries of the soil analytical results are found in Appendix D. Copies of the laboratory Certificates of Analysis for the tested soil samples are provided in Appendix E. The Table 3 C are applicable if soil ph is in the range of 5 to 9 for surface soil (less than 1.5 m below soil surface) and 5 to 11 for subsurface soil (greater than 1.5 m below soil surface). The Certificates of Analysis includes ph measurements from one sample. The ph result was 7.09 which indicated that the soils fall within the appropriate range and MOE Table 3 C is appropriate Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs), F1 to F4 including BTEX Three (3) soil samples and a blind duplicate were submitted for the chemical analysis of PHC and BTEX. As shown in Table 1 in Appendix D, the concentrations of the tested parameters in the soil samples submitted from boreholes BHN, BH, and BHE were all less than the MOE Table 3 C. The laboratory reporting detection limits (RDLs) were also below the 2011 MOE Table 3 C. The measured BTEX and PHC concentrations were also less than the Table 1 (Background) C. Very low level PHC F3 concentrations were measured in two of the auger samples, however the results were well below applicable C and this does not pose a concern. 5.8 Ground Water Quality As no groundwater monitoring wells were installed atsite, the Phase II EA did not include groundwater sampling. Groundwater was not observed in any of the geotechnical boreholes. 5.9 ediment Quality As no surface water body was onsite, the Phase II EA did not include sediment sampling Quality Assurance and Quality Control Results Quality assurance and quality control measures were taken during the field activities to meet the objectives of the sampling and quality assurance plan to collect unbiased and representative samples to characterize existing conditions in the fill/upper overburden materials and groundwater at the site. QA/QC measures, as described in ection 4.12, included: Using dedicated and/or disposal sampling equipment; Following proper decontamination protocols to minimize crosscontamination; Maintaining field notes and completing field forms to document onite activities; and, Using only laboratory supplied sample containers and following prescribed sample protocols, including proper preservation, meeting sample hold times, proper chain of custody documentation, to ensure integrity of the samples. Review of field activity documentation indicated that recommended sample volumes were collected from soil and groundwater for each analytical test group into appropriate containers and preserved with proper chemical reagents in accordance with the protocols set out in the Protocol for Analytical Methods used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (MOE, 2004). 10

17 amples were preserved at the required temperatures in insulated coolers and met applicable holding time requirements, when relinquished to the receiving laboratory. Duplicate soil samples BHE 1 and BHE 10 were submitted for chemical analysis of PHC and BTEX. For QA/QC purposes, the analytical sample results are quantitatively evaluated by calculating the relative percent difference (RPD) between the samples and their duplicates. The concentrations of BTEX and PHC (F1, F2 and F4) in the duplicate soil samples were less than the laboratory reported detection limits for both the primary and duplicate samples and therefore RPD could not be calculated. The RPD for PHC F3 was 18%. Therefore, the data is acceptable from a RPD perspective. The subcontract laboratory used during this investigation, Parcel Laboratories Ltd., is accredited by the tandards Council of Canada/Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation. The analysis of all parameters for all samples in the scope of work for which C have been established under Ontario Regulation 153/04. Certificates of Analysis were received from Paracel reporting the results of all the chemical analyses performed on the submitted soil and groundwater samples. Copies of the Paracel Certificates of Analysis are provided in Appendix E. A review of the Certificates of Analysis prepared by Paracel indicates that they were in compliance with the requirements set out under subsection 47(3) of O.Reg. 511/09. The analytical program conducted by Paracel included analytical test group specific QA/QC measures to evaluate the accuracy and precision of the analytical results and the efficiency of analyte recovery during solute extraction procedures. The Paracel laboratory QA/QC program consisted of the preparation and analysis of laboratory duplicate samples to assess precision and sample homogeneity, method blanks to assess analytical bias, spiked blanks and QC standards to evaluate analyte recovery, matrix spikes to evaluate matrix interferences and surrogate compound recoveries (VOCs only) to evaluate extraction efficiency. The laboratory QA/QC results are presented in the Quality Assurance Report provided in the Certificate of Analysis prepared by Paracel. The QA/QC results are reported as percent recoveries for matrix spikes, spike blanks and QC standards, relative percent difference for laboratory duplicates and analyte concentrations for method blanks. The Paracel QA/QC results were assessed against test group control limits in the case of spiked blanks, matrix spikes and surrogate recoveries and alert criteria in the case of method blanks and laboratory duplicates. Review of the laboratory QA/QC results reported by Paracel indicated that they were within acceptable control limits or below applicable alert criteria for the sampled media and analytical test groups. Based on the assessment of the QA/QC, the analytical results reported by Paracel are of acceptable quality and data qualifications are not required Phase Two Conceptual ite Model (CM) This section presents a Conceptual ite Model (CM) providing a narrative, graphical and tabulated description integrating information related to the ite s geologic and hydrogeological conditions, areas of potential environmental concern/potential contaminating activities, the presence and distribution of contaminants of concern, contaminant fate and transport, and potential exposure pathways. These components are described in the following sections. The presentation of the Phase II EA CM makes reference to the following attached drawings: Figure 1 Location Plan; Figure 2 ite Plan; Figure 3 Borehole Location Plan; and, Figure 4 Geological Crosssection. 11

18 ite Description The site is located on the west side of Huntmar Drive at 173 Huntmar Drive in Ottawa. At the time of the investigation, the site was developed with a residence that is vacant and located on the west part of the property. The shape of the site is rectangular and with an area of 5.92 hectares. The residence and barn have existed at the site as early as the early 1900s. The barn is semidemolished. urrounding properties consist of mainly residential and/or agricultural/vacant lands Based on the groundwater elevations, the groundwater flow in the overburden at the site is to the north and the site was considered down gradient from the lands to the south. The site is at a similar elevation to the lands in each direction. The topography of the site is relatively flat, with a difference in elevation approximately 2 m across the 400 m length of the site. Regional groundwater flow direction is northeast towards the Carp River, a distance of 850 m ite Conditions The site is located in a developed mixed agricultural, commercial and residential area where potable water is supplied by the City of Ottawa and therefore the MOE Table 3 ite Condition tandard (C) is applied to the site. In accordance with ection 41 of the Ontario Regulation 153/04 as amended (Regulation), the site is not an environmentally sensitive area. The site is not located within an area of natural significance and it does not include land that is within 30 metres of an area of natural significance. Based on the Phase II EA investigation, soil ph samples collected from the site were within the acceptable range of surficial and subsurface soil for the application of MOE Table 3 C. Furthermore, the site is not a shallow soil property as defined in ection 43.1 of the regulation, nor does it include all or part of a water body or is adjacent to a water body or includes land that is within 30 metres of a water body Geological and Hydrogeological etting A review of the borehole logs shows that the eastern part of the site is underlain by topsoil and silty clay to a depth of at least 6 m. The western part of the site has shallow bedrock (0.1 m to 2.3 m) with sand and glacial till. The nearest surface water body to the site is the Jock River, located approximately 0.85 km northeast of the site. The location of the geologic crosssections prepared from site boreholes are presented on Figures 4A and 4B.. Regional groundwater flow direction is northeast towards the Carp River, a distance of 850 m Underground Utilities There were no underground utilities found in the area of interest on the subject site. Therefore, there are no preferential pathways for the migration of the contaminants of concern Areas of Potential Environmental Concern/Potential Contaminants of Concern As per Ontario Regulation 153/04, as amended, a Potential Contaminating Activity (PCA) is defined as one of the 59 industrial operations set out in Table 2 of chedule D that occurs or has occurred on the site or within the Phase One EA study area During the site inspection, two storage tanks were observed which is identified as a PCA (#28 Gasoline and Associated Products in Fixed torage Tanks). The interior tank does not represent an APEC as there is no staining around it. The exterior AT represents an APEC because there is a dispensing pump on the top of the tank that has the potential to have spilled small amounts of fuel to the ground surface over time during fueling of farm vehicles. 12

19 Based on Phase I EA, the identified areas of potential environmental concern (APEC) and potential contaminants of concern (PCOC) are summarized in table below and are shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A. 13

20 Table 5.2: ummary of Potential Areas of Environmental Concern Areas of Potential Environmental Concern (APEC) Location of APEC Potentially Contaminating Activity (PCA) Potential Contaminants of Concern (PCOC) An unused fuel dispensing tank North of the residence #28 Gasoline and Associated Products torage in Fixed Tanks Petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) Investigation and Remediation The Phase II EA was conducted to assess the soil quality in the vicinity of the above ground fuel tank and fuel dispenser at the site. As indicated in the APEC and PCOC Table (above), the analytical program of the Phase II EA included testing of soil for PHCs, including BTEX from the boreholes on the site. The borehole locations are shown on Figure 3A in Appendix A. All soil samples submitted were less than MOE Table 3 and Table 1 C. ince the surface soil samples were of acceptable quality, and the APEC was related to the surface soils, exp did investigate soil quality at deeper locations. No remedial efforts are required Contaminants of Concern (COC) Based on the results of the Phase II EA, PHC and BTEX were not identified to be elevated in the surface soils in the vicinity of the exterior AT Contaminant Fate and Transport oil COCs The soil PHC impacts (very low level PHC F3) may be affected by natural attenuation mechanisms in the soil environment, which effectively reduces the concentrations, including advection mixing, mechanical dispersion/molecular diffusion, phase partitions (e.g. sorption and volatilization), and possibly abiotic or biotic chemical reactions. Concentrations of PHC in soil will be reduced by the effects of molecular diffusion and the creation of concentration gradients. The less volatile PHC F3 may undergo abiotic or biotic chemical reactions associated with the soil mineral particles and the microorganisms present in the overburden material. As a result of the various natural attenuation mechanisms in the soil environment and the fact that there is no longer a source of petroleum on the subject site, the concentrations of COCs in soil at the site will be reduced over time Exposure Pathways Human Health Receptors and Exposure Pathways Based on the results from the soil samples, exp has determined there to be negligible risk associated with the trace level of PHC F3 found in two of the auger holes. Ecological Receptors and Exposure Pathways Based on the results from the soil samples, exp has determined there to be negligible risk associated with the trace level of PHC F3 found in two of the auger holes. 14

21 6. ummary and Conclusions The results and findings of the Phase II EA conducted at the site are summarized as follows: The general stratigraphy at the site, as observed in the geotechnical boreholes also completed by exp, started with topsoil over sandy clay/clay over till. Bedrock was encountered in the boreholes between 0.05 and 15.0 m below ground surface (bgs). No fill materials were encountered. To assess the APEC of the exterior above ground storage tank (AT), shallow auger holes were advanced through the silty sand topsoil. Boulders or limestone bedrock were encountered at less than 1 m which prevented further advancement of the auger holes. No groundwater was encountered in the geotechnical or environmental boreholes in this area of the site. oil samples from the surface soil near the exterior AT were collected and submitted to Paracel Laboratories for PHC and BTEX. The samples did not have any associated sheens, odours, or elevated combustible vapour readings. The measured concentrations of PHC and BTEX from the soil samples were well below both MOE Table 1 and Table 3 C for a residential land use. No additional environmental work is recommended at this time. 15

22 7. References This study was conducted in accordance with the applicable Regulations, Guidelines, Policies, tandards, Protocols and Objectives administered by the Ministry of the Environment. pecific reference is made to the following: Environmental Protection Act, R..O. 1990, Chapter E.19, as amended, eptember 2004; Exp ervices Inc. November 2013, Phase I Environmental ite Assessment, 383 Albert treet, Ottawa, Ontario. Guidance on ampling and Analytical Methods for Use at Contaminated ites in Ontario, Ministry of the Environment of Ontario, December 1996; Ontario Regulation 153/04 (made under the Environmental Protection Act), May 2004 (MOE); Ontario Regulation 511/09 (made under the Environmental Protection Act), July 2011 (MOE). Phase I Environmental ite Assessment,. Pinchin Environmental, January Phase I Environmental ite Assessment,., May 21, Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, March 2004; oil, Ground Water and ediment tandards for Use Under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, March 2004; and, The Ontario Water Resources Act R.R.O. 1990, Regulation 903 Amended to O. Reg. 128/03, August 2003; 16

23 8. General Limitations The information presented in this report is based on a limited investigation designed to provide information to support an assessment of the current environmental conditions within the subject property. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report reflect site conditions existing at the time of the investigation. More specific information with respect to the conditions between samples, or the lateral and vertical extent of materials may become apparent during excavation operations. The interpretation of the borehole information must, therefore, be validated during any such excavation operations. Consequently, during the future development of the property, conditions not observed during this investigation may become apparent. hould this occur, should be contacted to assess the situation, and the need for additional testing and reporting. Exp has qualified personnel to provide assistance in regards to any future geotechnical and environmental issues related to this property. The environmental investigation was carried out to address the intent of applicable provincial Regulations, Guidelines, Policies, tandards, Protocols and Objectives administered by the Ministry of Environment. It should also be noted that current environmental Regulations, Guidelines, Policies, tandards, Protocols and Objectives are subject to change, and such changes, when put into effect, could alter the conclusions and recommendations noted throughout this report. Achieving the study objectives stated in this report has required us to arrive at conclusions based upon the best information presently known to us. No investigative method can completely eliminate the possibility of obtaining partially imprecise or incomplete information; it can only reduce the possibility to an acceptable level. Professional judgment was exercised in gathering and analyzing the information obtained and in the formulation of the conclusions. Like all professional persons rendering advice we do not act as absolute insurers of the conclusions we reach, but we commit ourselves to care and competence in reaching those conclusions. Our undertaking at exp, therefore, is to perform our work within limits prescribed by our clients, with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession. It is intended that the outcome of this investigation assist in reducing the client's risk associated with environmental impairment. Our work should not be considered 'risk mitigation'. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended in this report. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the and may not be reproduced in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of exp, or used or relied upon in whole or in part by other parties for any purposes whatsoever. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any part thereof, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. Exp ervices Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report. We trust this report is satisfactory for your purposes. hould you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. 17

24 Appendix A: Figures

25 ITE LOCATION r:\210000\218000\218662a0 amazon land development corp\218662ao fig 14, aer 15.dwg 4/15/2014 4:12:45 PM 4/15/2014 4:14:22 PM Plotted by: revellj Pen Table:: trow standard, july 01, 2004.ctb Filename: Last aved: Last Plotted: scale date drawn by 1:20,000 15/04/14 J.REVELL CLIENT: TITLE: t: f: Queensview Drive, uite 100 Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Canada BUILDING EARTH & ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INDUTRIAL INFRATRUCTURE UTAINABILITY KEY PLAN 173 HUNTMAR DRIVE, OTTAWA, ONTARIO project no. OTT A0 FIG 1

26 r:\210000\218000\218662a0 amazon land development corp\218662ao fig 14, aer 15.dwg 5/21/ :01:00 AM 5/21/ :02:29 AM Plotted by: revellj Pen Table:: trow standard, july 01, 2004.ctb Filename: Last aved: Last Plotted: scale date drawn by 1:10,000 15/04/14 J.REVELL CLIENT: TITLE: t: f: Queensview Drive, uite 100 Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Canada BUILDING EARTH & ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INDUTRIAL INFRATRUCTURE UTAINABILITY TUDY AREA 173 HUNTMAR DRIVE, OTTAWA, ONTARIO project no. OTT A0 FIG 2

27 r:\210000\218000\218662a0 amazon land development corp\218662ao fig 14, aer 15.dwg 5/15/ :41:40 AM 5/15/ :43:28 AM Plotted by: revellj Pen Table:: trow standard, july 01, 2004.ctb Filename: Last aved: Last Plotted: scale date drawn by 1:10,000 14/05/14 J.REVELL CLIENT: TITLE: t: f: Queensview Drive, uite 100 Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Canada BUILDING EARTH & ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INDUTRIAL INFRATRUCTURE UTAINABILITY ITE PLAN (DETAIL) project no. OTT A0 173 HUNTMAR DRIVE, OTTAWA, ONTARIO FIG 3A 3

28 r:\210000\218000\218662a0 amazon land development corp\218662ao fig 14, aer 15.dwg 5/21/ :58:45 AM 5/21/ :59:04 AM Plotted by: revellj Pen Table:: trow standard, july 01, 2004.ctb Filename: Last aved: Last Plotted: scale date drawn by 15/04/14 J.REVELL CLIENT: TITLE: t: f: Queensview Drive, uite 100 Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Canada BUILDING EARTH & ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INDUTRIAL INFRATRUCTURE UTAINABILITY CRO ECTION 173 HUNTMAR DRIVE, OTTAWA, ONTARIO project no. OTT A0 FIG 4

29 Appendix B: ampling and Analysis Plan (AAP)

30 1 Introduction This appendix presents the ampling and Analysis Plan (AAP) that was developed in support of the (EA) for the property located at 173 Huntmar Drive in Ottawa, Ontario (hereinafter referred to as the site ). The AAP presents the procedures and measures that will be undertaken during field investigative activities to characterize the site conditions and meet the data quality objectives of the Phase II EA. The AAP presents the sampling program proposed for the site, the recommended procedures and protocols for sampling and related field activities, the data quality objectives, and the quality assurance/ quality control measures that will be undertaken to provide for the collection of accurate, reproducible and representative data. These components are described in further detail below. 2 Field ampling Program A 1000 L single walled steel AT, situated on a concrete pad, was observed to the north of the residence. There is a dispensing pump on the top of the tank that has the potential to have spilled small amounts of fuel to the ground surface over time during fueling of farm vehicles. No staining or odours were observed in the vicinity of the AT, however the presence of the AT and associated dispensing equipment represents an area of potential environmental concern. As such a Phase II EA was recommended. The field sampling program was developed to provide for the collection of samples of the surficial and subsurface soil materials for chemical analysis of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHC) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (collectively known as BTEX ). The soil sampling media is to consist of the surface soils and overburden materials (depths up to 1.5 m of overburden beneath site). The soil sampling will be locationspecific to assess for the potential presence of PHC and BTEX based on the identification of the area of potential environmental concern. Vapour readings will also be taken in the field to determine samples to be submitted for BTEX and PHC F1F2 analysis. The soil sample intervals will extend from the surface up to a maximum depth of approximately 1.5 m below grade. If no impact is identified or the nonimpacted soil is identified above the water table, groundwater monitoring will not be required. If impact is noted, then groundwater monitoring wells will be installed and groundwater samples will be submitted for analysis of PHC and BTEX in each monitoring well. Vertical control of the boreholes and monitoring wells will be obtained through the completion of an elevation survey with reference to a local assumed benchmark. Groundwater flow and direction in the water table aquifer will also be determined through groundwater level measurements and the elevations established in the site elevation survey. 3 Field Methods To meet the requirements of the field sampling program, the following field investigative methods will be undertaken: Auger Digging oil ampling The field investigative methods will be performed following the procedures and protocols set out in exp s standard operating procedures and are outlined below:

31 3.1 Hand Auger ampling Boreholes will be advanced at the site to facilitate the collection of soil samples for chemical analysis and geologic characterization. A total of three (3) boreholes are proposed to be advanced at the site, up to a maximum overburden depth of approximately 1.5 m below grade, to provide for the collection of samples of the surficial and overburden materials beneath the site. The borehole locations will be selected to delineate the extent and magnitude of PCOC related impacts to the soils. Boreholes will be advanced with the use of a hand auger by exp staff. 3.2 oil ampling oil samples will be collected for chemical analysis and geologic property characterization. Geologic and sampling details of the recovered cores will be logged and the samples will be assessed for the potential presence of nonaqueous phase liquids. amples for chemical analysis will be selected on the basis of visual and olfactory evidence of impacts and at specific intervals to define the lateral and vertical extent of known impacts. Recommended volumes of soil samples selected for chemical analysis will be collected into precleaned, laboratory supplied, analytical test group specific containers. The samples will be placed into clean insulated coolers chilled with ice for storage and transport. amples intended for analysis of BTEX and PHC F1F2 will be collected into 40 ml vials. The samples will be assigned unique identification numbers, and the date, time, location, and requested analyses for each sample will be documented in a bound field note book. The samples will be submitted to the contractual laboratory within analytical test group holding times under Chain of Custody (COC) protocols. New disposable chemical resistant gloves will be used for each soil core to prevent sample crosscontamination. 4 Field Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program The objective of the field quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program is to obtain soil and groundwater samples and other field measurements that provide data of acceptable quality that meets the objectives of the Phase II EA. The objectives of the QA/QC program will be achieved through the implementation of procedures for the collection of unbiased (i.e. noncontaminated) samples, sample documentation and the collection of appropriate QC samples to provide a measure of sample reproducibility and accuracy. The field QA/QC measures will comprise: Decontamination Protocols; Equipment Calibration; ample Preservation; ample Documentation; and, Field Quality Control amples. Details on the field QA/QC measures are provided below. 4.1 Decontamination Protocols Decontamination protocols will be followed during field sampling where nondedicated sampling equipment is used to prevent sample cross contamination. The hand auger soil sampling device will be

32 cleaned/decontaminated between sampling intervals and auger flights between borehole locations in according with OP requirements. 4.2 Equipment Calibration All equipment requiring calibration will be calibrated in the field according to manufacturer s requirements using analytical grade reagents, or by the supplier prior to conducting field activities, and subsequently checked in the field. The calibration of all precalibrated instruments will be checked in the field using analytical grade reagents and recalibrated as required. For multiple day sampling events, equipment calibration will be checked prior to the beginning of sampling activities. All calibration data will be documented in a bound hard cover notebook. 4.3 ample Preservation All samples will be preserved using appropriate analytical test group specific reagents, as required, and upon collection placed in prechilled insulated coolers packed with ice for storage and transport. 4.4 ample Documentation All samples will be assigned a unique identification number, which is to be recorded along with the date, time, project number, company name, location and requested analysis in a bound field notebook. All samples will be handled and transported following COC protocols. 4.5 Field Quality Control Field quality controls samples will be collected to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of the field sampling procedures. For soil sampling, one (1) field duplicate is to be collected for every ten (10) samples submitted for chemical analysis. The field duplicate samples will be assessed by calculating the relative percent difference and comparing to the analytical test group specific acceptance criteria.

33 Appendix C: Borehole Logs

34 YMBOL AND TERM UED ON THE BOREHOLE AND TET PIT RECORD OIL DECRIPTION Behavioural properties (i.e. plasticity, permeability) take precedence over particle gradation in describing soils. Terminology describing soil structure: Desiccated having visible signs of weathering by oxidization of clay minerals, shrinkage cracks, etc. Fissured having cracks, and hence a blocky structure Varved composed of regular alternating layers of silt and clay tratified composed of alternating layers of different soil types, e.g. silt and sand or slit and clay Well Graded having wide range in grain sizes and substantial amounts of all intermediate particle sizes Uniformly Graded predominantly of one grain size Terminology used for describing soil strata based upon the proportion of individual particle sizes present: Trace, or occasional less than 10% ome 1020% Adjective (e.g. silty or sandy) 2035% And (e.g. silt and sand) 3550% The standard terminology to describe cohesionless soils includes the relative density, as determined by laboratory test or by the tandard Penetration Test N value: the number of blows of 140 pound (64 kg) hammer falling 30 inches (760 mm), required to drive a 2 inch (50.8 mm) O.D. split spoon sample one foot (305 mm) into the soil. Relative Density N Value Relative Density % Very Loose <4 <15 Loose Compact Dense Very Dense >5 >85 The standard terminology to describe cohesive soils includes the consistency, which is based on undrained shear strength as measured by insitu vane tests, penetrometer tests, unconfined compression tests, or occasionally by standard penetration tests. Consistency Undrained hear tength N Value kips/sq.ft. kpa Very oft <0.25 <12.5 <2 oft Firm tiff Very tiff Hard >4.0 >200 >30

35 YMBOL AND TERM CONTINUED TATA PLOT Gravel & and ilt Clay Fill Ignsous edimentary Metamorphic Boulders Bedrock Bedrock Bedrock WATER LEVEL MEAUREMENT Borehole or tandpipe Piezometer AMPLE plit spoon sample (obtained by performing the standard penetration test) B W RC Bulk sample Wash sample Rock core T helby tube or thin wall tube AXT, BXL. etc P Piston sample Rock core samples obtained with the use of standard diamond drilling bits. OTHER TET G pecific gravity CU Consolidated undrained triaxial H Hydrometer analysis with pore pressure measurements ieve analysis UU Unconsolidated undrained triaxial γ Unit weight D Direct shear C. Consolidation P. Field permeability CD Consolidated drained triaxial ROCK DECRIPTION The description of bedrock is based on the rock quality designation (RQD). The classification is based on a modified core recovery percentage in which all pieces of sound core over 100mm long are counted as recovery. The smaller pieces are considered to be due to close shearing, jointing, faulting, ore weathering in the rock mass and are not counted. In most cases RQD is run on NXL core; however, it can be used on different core sizes if the bulk of the fractures caused by drilling stresses are easily distinguishable from normal insitu fractures. RQD ROCK QUALITY Excellent, intact, very sound 7590 Good, massive, moderately jointed or sound 5075 Fair, blocky and seamy, fractured 2550 Poor, shattered and very seamy or blocky, severely fractured 025 Very poor, crushed, very severely fractured

36 Hand Auger Borehole logs OTT A0 Borehole Depth (m) oil Description oil Vapour Name Reading BH E Dark brown, sandy silt 0 ppm oil sample collected at 0.0 to 0.2 m and submitted for analysis of PHC(F 1 F 4 ) and BTEX. BH N Dark brown, sandy silt 0 ppm oil sample collected at 0.0 to 0.15 m and submitted for analysis of PHC(F 1 F 4 ) and BTEX. BH Dark brown, sandy silt 0 ppm oil sample collected at 0.0 to 0.15 m and submitted for analysis of PHC(F 1 F 4 ) and BTEX.

37 Project No: Project: :Location: Date Drilled: 4/25/14 Drill Type: Datum: Logged by: CME55 (Track Mount) Assumed Elevation AN Checked by: J Log of Borehole 1 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. plit poon ample Auger ample PT (N) Value Dynamic Cone Test helby Tube hear trength by Vane Test Combustible Vapour Reading Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits 1 Undrained Triaxial at % train at Failure hear trength by Penetrometer Test 3 of 2 G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION TOPOIL Dark brown, moist, silty sand with trace gravel rootlets throughout CLAY with sand Greyish brown, moist (firm to very stiff) Assumed Elevation m D epth 0 1 tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength s=5 kpa Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m s=7 CLAY Grey, moist to wet (very stiff to firm) s= INFERRED CLAY Drove Dynamic Cone from 7.0 m to refusal at 15.0 m LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 Continued Next Page NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.Borehole was backfilled with drill cuttings upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

38 Project No: Project: G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION INFERRED CLAY Drove Dynamic Cone from 7.0 m to refusal at 15.0 m (continued) Log of Borehole 1 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. Assumed Elevation m 90 D epth 10 tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength kpa 2 3 of 2 Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m INFERRED TILL >Cone Refusal at 15.0 m Depth LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.Borehole was backfilled with drill cuttings upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

39 Project No: Project: :Location: Date Drilled: 4/25/14 Drill Type: Datum: Logged by: CME55 (Track Mount) Assumed Elevation AN Checked by: J Log of Borehole 2 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. plit poon ample Auger ample PT (N) Value Dynamic Cone Test helby Tube hear trength by Vane Test Combustible Vapour Reading Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits 1 Undrained Triaxial at % train at Failure hear trength by Penetrometer Test 4 of 2 G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION TOPOIL Dark brown, moist, silty sand with trace gravel rootlets throughout CLAY with sand Greyish brown, moist (firm to very stiff) Assumed Elevation m D epth 0 1 tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength s=9 kpa Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m s= CLAY Grey, moist to wet (very stiff to firm) s=5 82 s= LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 Continued Next Page NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.A 19 mm slotted standpipe was installed upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

40 Project No: Project: G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION CLAY Grey, moist to wet (very stiff to firm) (continued) Log of Borehole 2 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. Assumed Elevation m 90 D epth 10 tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength kpa 2 4 of 2 Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m ilty and TILL Grey, wet (compact) some cobbles and boulders >Practical Auger Refusal at 15.9 m Depth LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.A 19 mm slotted standpipe was installed upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

41 Project No: Project: :Location: Date Drilled: 4/25/14 Drill Type: Datum: Logged by: CME55 (Track Mount) Assumed Elevation AN Checked by: J Log of Borehole 3 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. plit poon ample Auger ample PT (N) Value Dynamic Cone Test helby Tube hear trength by Vane Test Combustible Vapour Reading Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits 1 Undrained Triaxial at % train at Failure hear trength by Penetrometer Test 5 of 1 G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION TOPOIL Dark brown, moist, silty sand with trace gravel rootlets throughout CLAY with sand Greyish brown, moist (firm to very stiff) Assumed Elevation m D epth 0 1 tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength s=2 kpa Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m s= s=8 CLAY Grey, moist to wet (very stiff to firm) s=8 82 s=7 67 s= >End of Borehole at 7.0 m Depth s=12 LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.A 19 mm slotted standpipe was installed upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

42 Project No: Project: :Location: Date Drilled: 4/25/14 Drill Type: Datum: Logged by: CME55 (Track Mount) Assumed Elevation AN Checked by: J Log of Borehole 4 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. plit poon ample Auger ample PT (N) Value Dynamic Cone Test helby Tube hear trength by Vane Test Combustible Vapour Reading Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits 1 Undrained Triaxial at % train at Failure hear trength by Penetrometer Test 6 of 1 G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION TOPOIL Dark brown, moist, silty sand with trace gravel rootlets throughout CLAY with sand Greyish brown, moist (firm to very stiff) Assumed Elevation m D epth 0 1 tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength kpa Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m CLAY Grey, moist to wet (very stiff to firm) ilty and TILL Grey, moist to wet (compact) some cobbles and boulders >Practical Auger Refusal at 6.6 m Depth 93.4 LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.Borehole was backfilled with drill cuttings upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

43 Project No: Project: :Location: Date Drilled: 4/29/14 Drill Type: Datum: Logged by: CME55 (Track Mount) Assumed Elevation AN Checked by: J Log of Borehole 7 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. plit poon ample Auger ample PT (N) Value Dynamic Cone Test helby Tube hear trength by Vane Test Combustible Vapour Reading Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits 1 Undrained Triaxial at % train at Failure hear trength by Penetrometer Test 7 of 1 G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION TOPOIL Dark brown, moist, silty sand with trace gravel rootlets throughout CLAY with sand Greyish brown, moist (firm) ilty and TILL Grey, moist to wet (compact) some cobbles and boulders >Practical Auger Refusal at 2.2 m Depth Assumed Elevation m D epth tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength kpa Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m 3 LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.Borehole was backfilled with drill cuttings upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

44 Project No: Project: :Location: Date Drilled: 4/29/14 Drill Type: Datum: Logged by: CME55 (Track Mount) Assumed Elevation AN Checked by: J Log of Borehole 8 OTT A0 Figure No. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Development Amazon Land Development Corp. Page. plit poon ample Auger ample PT (N) Value Dynamic Cone Test helby Tube hear trength by Vane Test Combustible Vapour Reading Natural Moisture Content Atterberg Limits 1 Undrained Triaxial at % train at Failure hear trength by Penetrometer Test 8 of 1 G W L Y M B O L OIL DECRIPTION TOPOIL Dark brown, moist, silty sand with trace gravel rootlets throughout CLAY with sand Greyish brown, moist (firm to very stiff) ilty and TILL Grey, moist to wet (compact to dense) some cobbles and boulders Assumed Elevation m D epth tandard Penetration Test N Value hear trength kpa Combustible Vapour Reading (ppm) Natural Moisture Content % Atterberg Limits (% Dry Weight) A M PL E Natural Unit Wt. kn/m >Practical Auger Refusal at 6.6 m Depth LOG OF BOREHOLE BHLOG.GPJ TROW OTTAWA.GDT 5/20/14 NOTE: 1.Borehole data requires interpretation by exp. before use by others 2.A 19 mm slotted standpipe was installed upon completion. 3.Field work supervised by an exprepresentative. 4.ee Notes on ample Descriptions 5.This Figure is to read with exp. ervices Inc. report OTT A0 Elapsed Time WATER LEVEL RECORD Water Level (m) Hole Open To (m) Run No. CORE DRILLING RECORD Depth (m) % Rec. RQD %

45 Grainize Distribution Curve Queensview Drive Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Method of Test for Particle ize Analysis of oil MTO Test Method L 702, Rev. No. 19 Unified oil Classification ystem C L A Y A N D I L T A N D Fine Medium Coarse Fine G R A V E L Coarse GRAIN IZE IN MICROMETER #200 #100 #50 IEVE DEIGNATION (Imperial) #16 #4 ½" ¾" 1" 3" Percent Passing Grain ize (mm) Exp Project No.: OTT A0 Project Name : Client : Date ampled : Amazon Land Development Corp. Project Location : Geotechnical Investigation of Proposed Development 173 Huntmar Drive April 25, 2014 Bore Hole/Test Pit No.: 1 ample No.: 3 Depth (m) : ample Description : Clay with sand Figure : 9

46 Grainize Distribution Curve Queensview Drive Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Method of Test for Particle ize Analysis of oil MTO Test Method L 702, Rev. No. 19 Unified oil Classification ystem C L A Y A N D I L T A N D Fine Medium Coarse Fine G R A V E L Coarse GRAIN IZE IN MICROMETER #200 #100 #50 IEVE DEIGNATION (Imperial) #16 #4 ½" ¾" 1" 3" Percent Passing Grain ize (mm) Exp Project No.: OTT A0 Project Name : Client : Date ampled : Amazon Land Development Corp. Project Location : Geotechnical Investigation of Proposed Development 173 Huntmar Drive April 25, 2014 Bore Hole/Test Pit No.: 2 ample No.: 5 Depth (m) : ample Description : Clay Figure : 10

47 Grainize Distribution Curve Queensview Drive Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Method of Test for Particle ize Analysis of oil MTO Test Method L 702, Rev. No. 19 Unified oil Classification ystem C L A Y A N D I L T A N D Fine Medium Coarse Fine G R A V E L Coarse GRAIN IZE IN MICROMETER #200 #100 #50 IEVE DEIGNATION (Imperial) #16 #4 ½" ¾" 1" 3" Percent Passing Grain ize (mm) Exp Project No.: OTT A0 Project Name : Client : Date ampled : Amazon Land Development Corp. Project Location : Geotechnical Investigation of Proposed Development 173 Huntmar Drive April 25, 2014 Bore Hole/Test Pit No.: 2 ample No.: 8 Depth (m) : ample Description : Clay Figure : 11

48 Grainize Distribution Curve Queensview Drive Ottawa, ON K2B 8H6 Method of Test for Particle ize Analysis of oil MTO Test Method L 702, Rev. No. 19 Unified oil Classification ystem C L A Y A N D I L T A N D Fine Medium Coarse Fine G R A V E L Coarse GRAIN IZE IN MICROMETER #200 #100 #50 IEVE DEIGNATION (Imperial) #16 #4 ½" ¾" 1" 3" Percent Passing Grain ize (mm) Exp Project No.: OTT A0 Project Name : Client : Date ampled : Amazon Land Development Corp. Project Location : Geotechnical Investigation of Proposed Development 173 Huntmar Drive April 25, 2014 Bore Hole/Test Pit No.: 4 ample No.: 3 Depth (m) : ample Description : Clay with sand Figure : 12

49 Appendix D: Analytical ummary Tables

50 Table 1 oil Analytical Results Petroleum Hydrocarbons ample ID 2011 Table 1 BHE 1 BHE 10 BHN 1 BH 1 Trip Blank 2011 Table 3 Non ample Date Background 13May14 Dup of 13May14 13May14 13May14 Potable GW ample Depth (m) Concentrations BHE Parameter (ug/g) Benzene Residential <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Ethylbenzene <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Toluene <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Xylenes <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 PHC F1 (C 6 C 10 ) <7 <7 <7 <7 <7 PHC F2 (C 10 C 16 ) <4 <4 <4 <4 NA PHC F3(C 16 C 34 ) <8 20 NA PHC F4 (C 34 C 50 ) <6 <6 <6 <6 NA Notes: 1. MOE Table 3: Full Depth Generic ite tandards in a NonPotable Ground Water Condition Residential Property Use July 2011 (fine grained soil) 2. This table represents a summary of the data presented in the Laboratory Certificate of Analysis for convenience purposes only 3. This summary is to be use in conjuction with, not as a replacement of the Laboratory Ceriticate of Analysis which contains all QA/QC information Bold concentration exceeds MOE Table 3 residential standard hade concentration exceeds MOE Table 1 background concentrations NA not analyzed

51 Appendix E: Laboratory Certificates of Analysis

52 Certificate of Analysis (Ottawa) Queensview Dr. Ottawa, ON K2B 8K2 Attn: Mark McCalla Phone: (613) Fax: (613) Client PO: Project: OTT B Custody: Report Date: 16May2014 Order Date: 13May2014 This Certificate of Analysis contains analytical data applicable to the following samples as submitted: Paracel ID Client ID BHN BHE BHE BH Trip Blank Order #: Approved By: Mark Foto, M.c. For Dale Robertson, Bc Laboratory Director Any use of these results implies your agreement that our total liabilty in connection with this work, however arising shall be limited to the amount paid by you for this work, and that our employees or agents shall not under circumstances be liable to you in connection with this work Page 1 of 7

53 Certificate of Analysis Client: (Ottawa) Client PO: Analysis ummary Table Project Description: OTT B Order #: Report Date: 16May2014 Order Date:13May2014 Analysis Method Reference/Description Extraction Date Analysis Date BTEX by P&T GCM EPA 8260 P&T GCM 14May14 15May14 ph EPA ph 25 C, CaCl buffered ext. 15May14 15May14 PHC F1 CW Tier 1 P&T GCFID 14May14 15May14 PHC F2 F4 CW Tier 1 GCFID, extraction 14May14 16May14 olids, % Gravimetric, calculation 14May14 14May14 Page 2 of 7

54 Certificate of Analysis Order #: Report Date: 16May2014 Client: (Ottawa) Order Date:13May2014 Client PO: Project Description: OTT B Client ID: BHN 1 BHE 1 BHE 10 BH 1 ample Date: 13May14 13May14 13May14 13May14 ample ID: MDL/Units oil oil oil oil Physical Characteristics % olids 0.1 % by Wt General Inorganics ph 0.05 ph Units 7.09 Volatiles Benzene 0.02 ug/g dry <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Ethylbenzene 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Toluene 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 m,pxylenes 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 oxylene 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Xylenes, total 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Toluened8 urrogate 105% 104% 104% 105% Hydrocarbons F1 PHCs (C6C10) 7 ug/g dry <7 <7 <7 <7 F2 PHCs (C10C16) 4 ug/g dry <4 <4 <4 <4 F3 PHCs (C16C34) 8 ug/g dry < F4 PHCs (C34C50) 6 ug/g dry <6 <6 <6 <6 Client ID: Trip Blank ample Date: 13May14 ample ID: MDL/Units oil Volatiles Benzene 0.02 ug/g dry <0.02 Ethylbenzene 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 Toluene 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 m,pxylenes 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 oxylene 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 Xylenes, total 0.05 ug/g dry <0.05 Toluened8 urrogate 104% Hydrocarbons F1 PHCs (C6C10) 7 ug/g dry <7 Page 3 of 7

55 Certificate of Analysis Client: (Ottawa) Client PO: Method Quality Control: Blank Analyte Result Project Description: OTT B Reporting Limit Units Hydrocarbons F1 PHCs (C6C10) ND 7 ug/g F2 PHCs (C10C16) ND 4 ug/g F3 PHCs (C16C34) ND 8 ug/g F4 PHCs (C34C50) ND 6 ug/g Volatiles Benzene ND 0.02 ug/g Ethylbenzene ND 0.05 ug/g Toluene ND 0.05 ug/g m,pxylenes ND 0.05 ug/g oxylene ND 0.05 ug/g ource Result %REC %REC Limit Xylenes, total ND 0.05 ug/g urrogate: Toluened ug/g Order #: Report Date: 16May2014 Order Date:13May2014 RPD RPD Limit Notes Page 4 of 7

56 Certificate of Analysis Client: (Ottawa) Client PO: Method Quality Control: Duplicate Analyte Result Project Description: OTT B Reporting Limit Units ource Result General Inorganics ph ph Units Hydrocarbons %REC %REC Limit Order #: Report Date: 16May2014 Order Date:13May2014 F1 PHCs (C6C10) ND 7 ug/g dry ND 40 F2 PHCs (C10C16) 5 4 ug/g dry QR01 F3 PHCs (C16C34) 19 8 ug/g dry QR01 F4 PHCs (C34C50) ND 6 ug/g dry Physical Characteristics % olids % by Wt Volatiles Benzene ND 0.02 ug/g dry ND 50 Ethylbenzene ND 0.05 ug/g dry ND 50 Toluene ND 0.05 ug/g dry ND 50 m,pxylenes ND 0.05 ug/g dry ND 50 oxylene ND 0.05 ug/g dry ND 50 urrogate: Toluened ug/g dry ND RPD RPD Limit Notes Page 5 of 7

57 Certificate of Analysis Client: (Ottawa) Client PO: Method Quality Control: pike Analyte Hydrocarbons Result Project Description: OTT B Reporting Limit Units ource Result %REC %REC Limit F1 PHCs (C6C10) ug/g ND F2 PHCs (C10C16) ug/g F3 PHCs (C16C34) ug/g F4 PHCs (C34C50) ug/g Volatiles Benzene ug/g ND Ethylbenzene ug/g ND Toluene ug/g ND m,pxylenes ug/g ND oxylene ug/g ND urrogate: Toluened ug/g Order #: Report Date: 16May2014 Order Date:13May2014 RPD RPD Limit Notes Page 6 of 7

58 Certificate of Analysis Client: (Ottawa) Client PO: Qualifier Notes : QC Qualifiers : Project Description: OTT B Order #: Report Date: 16May2014 Order Date:13May2014 QR01 : ample Data Revisions None Duplicate RPD is high, however, the sample result is less than 10x the MDL. Work Order Revisions / Comments : None Other Report Notes : n/a: not applicable ND: Not Detected MDL: Method Detection Limit ource Result: Data used as source for matrix and duplicate samples %REC: Percent recovery. RPD: Relative percent difference. oil results are reported on a dry weight basis when the units are denoted with 'dry'. Where %olids is reported, moisture loss includes the loss of volatile hydrocarbons. CCME PHC additional information: The method for the analysis of PHCs complies with the Reference Method for the CW PHC and is validated for use in the laboratory. All prescribed quality criteria identified in the method has been met. F1 range corrected for BTEX. F2 to F3 ranges corrected for appropriate PAHs where available. The gravimetric heavy hydrocarbons (F4G) are not to be added to C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. In the case where F4 and F4G are both reported, the greater of the two results is to be used for comparison to CW PHC criteria. Page 7 of 7

59