DESCRIPTION OF INTERIM CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION TRIDENT … · 2018. 3. 30. · Trident to use up to 90 additional parking spaces in the adjoining parking lot. ... long

DESCRIPTION OF INTERIM CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION April 5, 2018

TRIDENT TECHNICAL COLLEGE PROJECT NAME: Workforce Development Center

(Acquisition of Former American LaFrance Property) REQUESTED ACTION: Land and Building Acquisition (Preliminary and Final) REQUESTED ACTION AMOUNT: $6,050,0000 INITIAL CHE RECOMMENDATION DATE: N/A BOARD APPROVAL: Purchase of property for readySC initially approved by SBTCE in October 2017, Reaffirmation with Trident Tech as the owner March 27, 2018 The Trident Area Commission approved to transfer $1,000,000 of available fund balance to the Capital Projects Fund for the purchase at its January 23, 2018 meeting.

Project Budget Previous Change Revised Building Purchase $0 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 Professional Service Fees $0 $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $6,050,000 $6,050,000

Source of Funds Previous Change Revised College Local Funds * $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Governor’s Closing Fund (Department of Commerce)

$0 $2,550,000 $2,500,000

readySC (State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education)

$0 $2,500,000 $2,500,000

Total $0 $6,050,000 $6,050,000 *Accumulated dollars at fiscal year-end from operating within budget, various sources including tuition and fees

DESCRIPTION: Trident Technical College requests to purchase part of the former American LaFrance property, consisting of approximately 5 acres of land and a 61,316 SF building for the continuation of readySC workforce development initiatives. This proposal is the result of an ongoing collaboration between the College, readySC, and the Department of Commerce as indicated in the combination of funds provided. Currently the space is being leased by the Department of Commerce for $50,000/month and the lease expires in April 2018. The building is two stories and is comprised of office and classroom/training space. Approximately $400,000 has been invested in upfitting the space for readySC projects. The purchase price of $6M is below the appraised value of $7.5M. This request also includes an additional $50,000 to cover the costs of the environmental assessment, appraisal, and building condition reports, and estimated closing costs. The costs associated with this facility will not impact student tuition and fees or the county appropriations to the College.

The overall benefit to the State is $18.6M in the first year and $237.9M over a 15 year period. This cost/benefit analysis includes all public costs including expenses associated with incentives, tax credits, and the building acquisition for only the most recent announcements in the past 18 months.

In addition to a permanent training site for readySC initiatives, the space will be available for future Trident Technical College programs. Although residents may enter the workforce via readySC training programs, they often return to Trident Tech to complete a certificate, diploma,

Agenda Item 8.04.A.2.A.

1

or associate’s degree. The reasoning for Trident Tech to own the property rather than the State Tech Board or Department of Commerce is that the counties in the service area relate well to the College and associated training provided, and provides the most flexibility for all parties in the future. Recently, Dorchester County has approached the College requesting a facility to provide training for the increased population and economic growth.

The property includes 33 parking spaces on-site, and there will be an easement that allows Trident to use up to 90 additional parking spaces in the adjoining parking lot.

A Phase I Environmental Assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the property. Both the roof and the building structure were evaluated as part of initial due diligence, but a complete building condition report has not yet been completed. The roof inspection noted no indication of major debris and no active leaks, but did identify visible cracks or open joints, and a lack of TPO clad galvanized sheet metal that could cause future water intrusion. Two structural items, mis-located deck fastening screws and an interior crack along the southwest corner of the building, were noted in the reported observations of the building with no immediate need for remediation. Further, the support letter acknowledging the removal of the property from the County’s tax rolls has not yet been received from the Berkeley County School District. The county issued their letter of support for the acquisition March 26, 2018.

E&G MAINTENANCE NEEDS: The building will be added to the College’s inventory.

ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS/SAVINGS: The purchase will save South Carolina $600,000 in annual lease expense, and an estimate of $170,000 annually for maintenance for a net savings of $430,000. Maintenance of the facility will be paid for by readySC/SBTCE until such a time that TTC desires to use all or part of the Center for its programs. At that time, Trident will become responsible for all upfit, operating, and maintenance costs.

2

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED AS SUPPORT

The South Carolina Department of Commerce and the South Carolina State Technical College System are partnering with Trident Tech in funding the acquisition to create what we hope will be a model for future regional training centers. The agreed upon purchase price is $6 million (for a building appraised at $7.5 million) with funding from the South Carolina Coordinating Council for Economic Development ($2.5 million), readySC™ ($2.5 million) and Trident Tech ($1 million).

As background, when no training space is available at a local technical college to facilitate training by readySC™, a county typically acquires suitable space and makes it available to readySC™ for the period needed. readySC™ upfits the space for the required training and removes its equipment after the training is complete. Under this model, state dollars that readySC™ expends to upfit the training space are largely lost after the training ends. Another challenge is the availability of affordable space for the time period needed. The market in and around Charleston has become extremely expensive for training space, even if suitable space is located. For example, Charleston County recently identified a building for training Mercedes Benz Vans workers, but the minimum lease term was 5 years (when it was only needed for 2.5 years) at a cost to lease and upfit of at least $2.5 million. The purchase of a building to be dedicated as a regional training center would establish certainty of availability and ensure that the state’s investment in upfit is preserved and can be used and adapted for different types of training.

readySC™ is already using the American La France building to fulfill current training commitments. To date, the state has spent $560,000 to lease the building with funding from the Coordinating Council in order to fulfill the state’s training commitment to Volvo in connection with the 2015 announcement of Volvo’s first American manufacturing facility. That commitment includes the construction of a Volvo dedicated training center, but readySC™ required additional space to train workers prior to the training center’s completion and for the long term to house recruitment and pre-hire training activities for Volvo. To that end, readySC™ has incurred costs to upfit the building, which is now needed to fulfill the state’s commitment to Mercedes Benz Vans. If Trident Tech acquires the building, the state’s investment in the building can be preserved and used to fulfill existing training commitments (Volvo, Mercedes Benz Vans) and train thousands of future workers. Since January 2016, and not including Mercedes and Volvo’s first 2,000 workers, 6,000 new jobs have been announced in Trident Tech’s training area.

We believe the Trident regional training center will be a cost-effective model that can be replicated throughout the state thereby providing a valuable recruiting and training tool to Commerce and readySC™ for the future.

3

4

5

6

PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INFORMATION FORMAT FOR PRELIMINARY LAND ACQUISITION / INVESTIGATIVE STUDIES PROJECTS

1. What is the internal projected cost of the project, including acquisition cost?

$6,050,000

2. What is/are the source(s) of funds to be used for investigative studies for the acquisition? Department of Commerce

3. What is your agency/institution’s definition of the source(s) of funds to be used for the investigative land studies? (Please be specific for each source and if there is a statutory authority authorizing the use of the funds for capital projects/acquisitions, please cite the code section. If a source includes any type of fee, what is the fee called, what is the fee amount and when was it put in place?)

Governor's Closing Fund

4. What is the current fund balance of uncommitted funds in the source of funds for investigative land studies?

$260,000 (this is after the $2.55 million for the purchase has been accounted for)

5. What is the source(s) of funds to be used for the acquisition?

Governor's Closing Fund – (Department of Commerce) - $2,550,000 Capital Reserve Non-Recurring (readySC) - $2,500,000 Trident Technical College - $1,000,000 For a total of $6,000,000

6. What is your agency/institution’s definition of the source(s) of funds to be used for acquisition? (Please be specific for each if different from those in 3 above. If there is statutory authority authorizing the use of the funds for acquisition, please cite the code section and if a source includes a fee, what is the fee called, what is the fee amount and when was it put in place?)

Governors Closing Fund – funds are appropriated annually by the legislature for the purpose of supporting companies that bring jobs and new investments to the state readySC Training Projects (SCEIS Coding: Fund 3634000, Funded Program 9801 400000X000) Trident Technical College – funds available by operating within budget

7. What is the current fund balance of uncommitted funds in each source to be used for the acquisition? $260,000 (this is after the $2.55 million for the purchase has been accounted for) readySC Training Projects - uncommitted fund balance = $11,031,648.55 (as of March 12, 2018) Trident Technical College – all funds are committed

8. Will the use of any funds for the acquisition require an increase in any student fee or tuition? If so, please explain.

No

9. If the use of any funds for acquisition will require any student fee or tuition increase, please explain and include the amount of the fees annually or by semester, what the fee is called and when it was put in place.

No 7

10. What is the total acreage and/or square footage of the land and/or building to be acquired?

5 acres, including a 61,316 S.F. building

11. If a building is involved in the acquisition, will it have to be renovated and what is the projected cost?

Please explain. No renovations will be required.

12. What program(s) will use the land/building to be acquired?

readySC will use the building for workforce training, initially for the automotive industry. 13. What is the current age of the building to be acquired, if applicable?

The building is 11 years old, having been built in 2007

14. Please provide demand/usage data to support the need for the acquisition.

Volvo and Mercedes Benz Vans have collectively announced nearly 6,000 new jobs to the area. In total over 10,000 new jobs have been announced in the Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester area since 2016. Many of these jobs will require training and recruitment activities through readySC, all of which will be facilitated in the new building.

15. What are the estimated numbers of students, faculty, staff and/or clients that are expected to use the property to be acquired? (Answer for as many as are applicable.)

Between Volvo and Mercedes Benz Vans projects, a total of 22,000 individuals must be recruited, assessed, and trained in the building over the next 10 years. The services required to support the remaining 4,000 committed jobs cannot be fully defined at this early date. The building will also support 100 full time staff and instructors onsite. Additionally, approximately 100 project company personnel will use the building at any given period for various training and recruitment activities.

16. Has the acquisition project been included in a previous year’s CPIP? If so, what was the last year the project was included and for which year, 1-5?

No

17. What are the economic impacts of the project, including job creation and retention? If there are none, please explain.

This project directly contributes to job creation.

Please see the attached economic cost/benefits analysis prepared by the Department of Commerce.

8

SOUTH CAROLINACOORDINATING COUNCIL FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT IMPACT ANALYSIS

Trident Area CommitmentsJanuaary 1, 2016 to Present County

3/21/2018

PROJECT DATA

ANNOUNCED CAPITAL INVESTMENTLand -$ Existing Building -$ New Building 292,220,000$ Machinery & Equipment 1,168,880,000$ Total Investment 1,461,100,000$

NEW EMPLOYMENT/TOTAL PAYROLLEmployment 6,121 Annual Payroll $220,356,000Average Salary $36,000Average Hourly Wage $18.00

PROJECT MULTIPLIERS

SIC Code - Income 2.00 Investment -- Construction 1.60 Investment -- Machinery 0.20 Employment 2.35 SC Average Annual Salary $26,596

EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS

Employment -- Direct 6,121 Employment -- Indirect 8,285 Total Employment Impact 14,406

SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PAGE 19

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS

PRESENT VALUEFIRST YEAR 15-YEAR TOTAL

PUBLIC COSTSCorporate Jobs Tax Credit $0 $70,140,707Multi-County Industrial Park - 25,505,711 AFDC Jobs Tax Credit - - Job Development Credit (JDC) - 63,661,663 Special Schools 18,363,000 18,363,000 Economic Development grants 50,000,000 50,000,000 Training Center Cost 6,000,000 6,000,000 Increased State Education Costs 1,581,790 19,088,684 Infrastructure Improvements - - Increased Local Education Costs 1,244,480 15,018,107 Other Costs - - Total Public Costs $77,189,270 $267,777,871

INCOME BENEFITSTotal New Building (Direct & Indirect) $338,975,200 $338,975,200Total Machinery & Equipment (Direct & Indirec 467,552,000 467,552,000 Total Payroll (Direct & Indirect) 440,712,000 5,318,413,565 State Revenues 93,542,940 459,370,557 Rural Infrastructure Fund $0 19,098,499 Reduction of AFDC Costs 1,013,638 12,232,351 Property Taxes from Project 3,050,776,800 18,802,061,256 Property Taxes from New Housing 852,043 10,282,266 Property Taxes from New Automobiles 223,661 2,252,052 Total Income Benefits $4,393,648,282 $25,430,237,745

PRESENT VALUESPrivateTotal Value of Private Benefits $1,153,696,260 $5,665,570,207

StatePresent Value of State Benefits $94,556,578 $490,701,407Present Value of State Costs 75,944,790 252,759,765 Total State Value $18,611,788 $237,941,643

LocalPresent Value of Local Benefits $3,051,852,505 $18,814,595,574Present Value of Local Costs 2,523,769 30,456,279 Total Local Value $3,049,328,735 $18,784,139,294

OVERALL NET BENEFIT $4,221,636,783 $24,687,651,144

COST/BENEFIT RATIO 88:1

SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PAGE 210

DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION EXECUTIVE BUDGET OFFICE

APPROVAL OF PROJECT INVOLVING LAND ACQUISITION FOR LIMITED PURPOSES ONLY

AGENCY: _T r_id en t_T ec h_n i_c_a l_C o_l_l_e g_e

PROJECT NAME: _Tr_ident_- Wor_k_f_or_ce Deve_l_opment_Ce_nt_er

PROJECT NUMBER: DATE SUBMITTED: _Mar_ch 15,_2018

The approval of this project, which involves the acquisition of land, is for establishment only for the

limited purposes of securing: (1) any appraisals which may be required; (2) any land surveying services which

may be required; (3) a Phase One Building Condition Assessment on any structures included in the acquisition

which may be required; (4) an asbestos survey on any structures included in the acquisition; (5) a Level One

Environmental Study for detection of hazardous materials; and (6) any other information desired by the Joint Bond

Review Committee or the State Fiscal Accountability Authority which describes further the land proposed to be

acquired and the purposes it would serve if acquired.

The agency should forward originals of the appraisal, environmental study and building condition

assessment reports to the Executive Budget Office, Capital Budgeting Unit, 1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 529,

Columbia, South Carolina 29201. We will ensure that the building condition assessment is forwarded and

reviewed by the Office of State Engineer.

No authority is given by this approval to acquire any land or to enter into any agreement to acquire land

until the required studies have been reviewed by staff and an A-1 form which fully details the project has been

reviewed by the Joint Bond Review Committee and approved by the State Fiscal Accountability Authority.

Submission of the A-1 form to finalize the land acquisition, information supplied on the attached format

and a letter requesting approval of the acquisition, stating the date by which this approval is required, should be

submitted to the Capital Budgeting Unit as noted above.

Revised 3/30/16

11

PROPERTY ACQUISITION INFORMATION FORMAT

PART I

1. Project Number:

2. County: Berkeley

3. Description of Property: Class A office and flexible industrial space formerly occupied by American LaFrance.

4. Grantor(s) Name and Address: 5. Grantee(s) Name and Address:

RT Jedburg Commerce Park, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Trident Technical College Charleston, South Carolina

6. County Location:

Berkeley

7. Acreage: 5 Acres, including a 61,316 S.F. building

12

8. Purpose for Acquisition:

This facility will be used to conduct workforce development training, initially for the automotive industry.

9. Demonstrate the need to acquire the property:

readySC is required by agreements made by the State of South Carolina to train the initial workforce for two automotive industries establishing or expanding in the Berkeley, Charleston, and Dorchester county areas. Suitable training space is not available at Trident Technical College

10. Purchase Price: $ $6,000,000.00

11. Current Year Property Tax Amount: $ 90,000.00 Approximately

PART II

1. How many sites were evaluated? The American LaFrance site was the only site evaluated for purchase. However, five other properties were evaluated for rental and extensive up-fit.

2. Please list the selection criteria used to evaluate sites. Location in relation to two large projects (one in Charleston and one in Berkeley County) Available parking Condition of building infrastructure Availability of the building for immediate usage Having requisite space that could accommodate large manufacturing equipment A building set up that could accommodate and separate multiple projects Sufficient power and industrial supply to support the needs of multiple projects Affordability of the property

3. How was the final selection of the site made? readySC, in coordination with SC Department of Commerce, has been renting the building for 18 months to meet the training needs of Volvo. However, space constraints in Charleston County required the building to be used for the Mercedes Benz Vans post hiring training as well. Additionally, Volvo doubled its original commitment to 4,000 employees as opposed to the original 2,000. Because of the rental arrangement, readySC had to make substantial improvements in the building to accommodate the training. Failure to purchase the building would require readySC to remove the infrastructure and redevelop that infrastructure in an alternate building. This would severely impact the training timeline of the two projects and potentially impact the hiring of South Carolinians. 13

4. Why was this specific site selected?

The building is located in a site convenient to both major projects and is in close proximity to areas of expected future growth. The building is large enough to accommodate two large projects without interrupting one another and can accommodate future projects as well. The building has substantial parking to accommodate the influx of hundreds of trainees at a time. The condition of the building infrastructure is such that it can support the needs of the large manufacturing equipment needed for the purposes of training. The building is available immediately. In fact, readySC is already using the building and has made significant improvements to the building.

5. What are the estimated costs of any construction or renovations to be done on the

property and the anticipated source of funds for such work?

No construction or renovations are required. 6. What are the estimated additional annual operating costs which will result from

acquisition of the property and the anticipated source of funds? Explain the factors that determine the cost. If no costs, explain why not. There will be a savings of $430,000 per year from the current lease after maintenance costs.

7. What are the estimated additional annual operating costs which will result from construction/renovation on the property and the anticipated source of funds? Explain the factors that determine the costs. If no costs, explain why not.

No construction or renovations will be required.

Revised 3/30/16 14

REQUEST TO ACQUIRE REAL PROPERTY

South Carolina Code Section 1-11-58 requires the Department of Administration to review its central

listing of surplus real property to determine if an agency’s need for real property can be met from

existing state-owned property. In order to comply with this statutory requirement, you are requested to

complete the following form and send it to the Capital Budgeting Unit, 1205 Pendleton Street, Edgar A.

Brown Building, Suite 529, Columbia, South Carolina 29201, prior to submitting an A-1 form to

establish a project for a new land acquisition.

Agency Code: Agency Name:

Contact Person: Phone: Date:

Statement of Need: (Explain why the property is needed, not the purpose it will be used for):

Amount of Land Needed: County in which land is needed:

Preferred Location:

Suitable Alternate Locations:

Briefly describe the type of property needed in sufficient detail to enable our review of the records of

available surplus property to ascertain whether such property may be suitable for your needs:

FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY:

Identification of property located on surplus property lists which may meet the above need:

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

Notified agency of property(ies): Name: ________________________________ Date: ____________

ADMIN Representative Initials: ______ Date: ______________

15

Note: This is an excerpt of the January 23, 2018 Area Commission Meeting Minutes, scheduled to be approved March 27, 2018

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Appraisal ReportFormer American LaFrance Office Building

1090 Newton WaySummerville, Berkeley County, South Carolina 29483

Report Date: March 12, 2018

FOR:

SC Coordinating Council for Economic DevelopmentMr. Daniel Young

Executive Director1201 Main Street, Suite 1600

Columbia, SC 29201

Valbridge Property Advisors 1250 Fairmont AvenueMount Pleasant, South Carolina, 29464843.884.1266 phone Valbridge File Number:843-881-7532 fax SC01-18-0083valbridge.com

Note: Information provided in the meeting materials are an excerpt from the original document. The complete appraisal report is retained in the project file for reference.

26

1250 Fairmont Avenue

Mount Pleasant, South Carolina,

29464

843.884.1266 phone

843-881-7532 fax

valbridge.com

March 12, 2018

Christopher D. DonatoMAI,

CCIM

843-884-1266 x111

[email protected]

Mr. Daniel Young

Executive Director

SC Coordinating Council for Economic Development

1201 Main Street, Suite 1600

Columbia, SC 29201

RE: Appraisal Report

Former American LaFrance Office Building

1090 Newton Way

Summerville, Berkeley County, South Carolina 29483

Dear Mr. Young:

In accordance with your request, we have performed an appraisal of the above referenced property.

This appraisal report sets forth the pertinent data gathered, the techniques employed, and the

reasoning leading to our value opinions. This letter of transmittal is not valid if separated from the

appraisal report.

The subject property, as referenced above, is located at 1090 Newton Way, Summerville, SC 29483.

The subject building was originally built by American LaFrance, a fire engine manufacturer, in 2007.

The plant consisted of two buildings, a 61,315 SF office/showroom building and a 500,000 SF

manufacturing facility. This appraisal is an analysis of the office building, only. It is located on 5 acres

and is identified by the Berkeley County Assessor as tax map 220-00-02 parcel number 118. Although

the subject is currently leased, lease expiration is April 2018. Due to imminent lease termination this

is a fee simple analysis.

We developed our analyses, opinions, and conclusions and prepared this report in conformity with the

Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) of the Appraisal Foundation; the Code

of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute; the

Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA); and the requirements of our

client as we understand them.

27

The client in this assignment is SC Coordinating Council for Economic Development and the intended

users of this report are SC Coordinating Council for Economic Development and their appointed

representatives. The intended use is for potential acquisition. The value opinions reported herein are

subject to the definitions, assumptions and limiting conditions, and certification contained in this

report.

Valbridge Property Advisors | Charleston is independently owned and operated by Valbridge Property

Advisors | Atlantic Appraisals, LLC, which is solely responsible for performance of the appraisal and

content of the appraisal report. Neither Valbridge Property Advisors, Inc. nor any of its other affiliates

has been engaged to provide the appraisal or is responsible for its content.

The acceptance of this appraisal assignment and the completion of the appraisal report submitted

herewith are subject to the General Assumptions and Limiting Conditions contained in the report. The

findings and conclusions are further contingent upon the following extraordinary assumptions and/or

hypothetical conditions which might have affected the assignment results:

Extraordinary Assumptions: None

Hypothetical Conditions: None

28

Based on the analysis contained in the following report, our value conclusions are summarized as

follows:

Value Conclusions

Component As Is

Value Type Market Value

Property Rights Appraised Fee Simple

Effective Date of Value March 5, 2018

Value Conclusions

Intangible Property Value (BEV)

Personal Property Value (FF&E)

Real Property Only $7,500,000

Value Conclusion $7,500,000

$122.32 psf

Respectfully submitted,

Valbridge Property Advisors | Charleston

Christopher D. Donato, MAI, CCIM

Senior Managing Director

South Carolina Certified General CG 292

License Expires 6/30/2018

Pledger M. "Jody" Bishop, III, MAI, SRA

Senior Managing Director

South Carolina Certified General CG 795

Expires 6/30/2018

29

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment American LaFrance Office

1090 Newton Way Summerville, South Carolina

Project No. 4261-17-127

Prepared for: State Technical College System

111 Executive Center Drive Columbia, South Carolina 29210

Prepared by: S&ME, Inc.

620 Wando Park Boulevard Mount Pleasant, South Carolina 29464

August 17, 2017

Note: Information provided in the meeting materials are an excerpt from the original document. The complete Environmental Assessment report is retained in the project file for reference.

30

August 17, 2017

SC Technical College System 111 Executive Center Drive Columbia, South Carolina 29210

Attention: Dr. Tim Hardee

Reference: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment American LaFrance Office 1090 Newton Way Summerville, South Carolina S&ME Project No. 4261-17-127

Dear Dr. Hardee:

S&ME, Inc. has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the referenced property located in Summerville, South Carolina. The work was performed pursuant to S&ME Proposal No. 42-1700914 dated July 26, 2017. The submitted report includes the results of our review of the public record for the subject property, our observations of site conditions, and a summary of environmental conditions based on this information and these observations.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for this project. Please contact us at your convenience if there are questions regarding the information contained in this report.

Sincerely,

S&ME, Inc.

Norvin C. Duncan Tom Behnke, P.G., CHMM Environmental Professional Senior Hydrogeologist

31

Table of Contents

Summary ........................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 2

1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Detailed Scope of Services ............................................................................................... 3

1.2.1 ASTM E-1527-13 ................................................................................................................ 3

1.2.2 Exclusions from and Additions to Scope of Services ........................................................... 3

1.3 Significant Assumptions .................................................................................................. 4

1.4 Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment ................................................................... 4

1.5 Special Terms and Conditions ........................................................................................ 4

2.0 Site Description ..................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Site Location ...................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Site and Vicinity Characteristics ..................................................................................... 5

2.3 Site Improvements (Descriptions of Roads, Other Improvements on the Site) ....... 5

2.4 Current Use of Adjoining Properties ............................................................................. 5

3.0 User Provided Information .................................................................................. 6

3.1 Title Records ...................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations ................................................ 6

3.3 Specialized Knowledge .................................................................................................... 6

3.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information .................................. 6

3.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues ........................................................... 6

3.6 Owner, Property Manager and Occupant Information .............................................. 6

3.7 Reason for Performing the Phase I ESA ........................................................................ 6

3.8 Other ................................................................................................................................... 6

4.0 Records Review ...................................................................................................... 7

4.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources ..................................................................... 7

4.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources .................................................................. 8

4.2.1 EDR Supplementary Sources .............................................................................................. 9

4.2.2 Tribal Record Sources .......................................................................................................... 9

4.3 Physical Setting Sources ................................................................................................ 10

32

4.4 Historical Use Information on the Subject Property .................................................. 10

4.4.1 Aerial Photographs ............................................................................................................ 11

4.4.2 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps ........................................................................................... 12

4.4.3 Topographic Maps ............................................................................................................. 12

4.4.4 Property Record Information / Plats ................................................................................. 12

4.5 Historical Use Information on Adjoining Properties................................................. 13

4.6 Previous Assessments .................................................................................................... 13

4.7 Vapor Encroachment Screening ................................................................................... 13

5.0 Site Reconnaissance ............................................................................................ 14

5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions ....................................................................... 14

5.2 General Site Setting ........................................................................................................ 14

5.2.1 Current Use(s) of the Subject Property ............................................................................. 14

5.2.2 Past Use(s) of the Subject Property ................................................................................... 14

5.2.3 Current Use(s) of Adjoining and Surrounding Properties ............................................... 14

5.2.4 Past Use(s) of Adjoining and Surrounding Properties ..................................................... 14

5.2.5 Geologic, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic, and Topographic Conditions ................................ 15

5.2.6 Description of Structures and Roads ................................................................................ 15

5.2.7 Potable Water Supply and Sewage Disposal System ........................................................ 15

5.3 Exterior Observations .................................................................................................... 15

5.4 Interior Observations ..................................................................................................... 15

6.0 Interviews ............................................................................................................. 17

6.1 Interview with Past and Present Owners .................................................................... 17

6.2 Interview with Key Site Manager ................................................................................. 17

6.3 Interview with Occupants ............................................................................................. 17

6.4 Interview with Local Government Officials ............................................................... 17

6.5 Interviews with Others .................................................................................................. 17

7.0 Findings ................................................................................................................. 18

7.1 On-Site Findings ............................................................................................................. 18

7.2 Off-Site Findings ............................................................................................................. 18

8.0 Opinion.................................................................................................................. 19

8.1 On-Site Opinions ............................................................................................................ 19

33

8.2 Off-Site Opinions ............................................................................................................ 19

8.3 Data Gaps and Data Failure .......................................................................................... 19

9.0 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 20

10.0 Deviations ............................................................................................................. 20

11.0 Additional Services ............................................................................................. 20

12.0 References ............................................................................................................. 21

13.0 Signature(S) Of Environmental Professional(S) ........................................... 22

14.0 Qualification(S) Of Environmental Professional(S) .................................... 22

List of Tables Table 1-1 – Dates of Initiation for Phase I ESA Components ................................................................ 4

Table 4-1 - Federal Environmental Record Sources................................................................................ 7

Table 4-2 - State Environmental Records Sources .................................................................................. 8

Table 4-3 - Tribal Records .......................................................................................................................... 9

Appendices Appendix I - Figures, Property Information, User Questionnaire

Appendix II - EDR Environmental Records Report

Appendix III – Vapor Encroachment Screening

Appendix IV - Historical Research Documentation

Appendix V - Site Photographs

Appendix VI - Contract between User and S&ME, Inc.

Appendix VII - Qualifications of Environmetal Professionals

34

Summary S&ME, Inc. has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), in general accordance with ASTM E 1527-13 for a property (subject property) located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, South Carolina. The work was performed pursuant to S&ME Proposal No. 42-1700914 dated July 26, 2017. This summary is intended as an overview of the Phase I ESA, for the convenience of the reader. The complete report must be reviewed in its entirety prior to making decisions regarding this site.

The subject property is that parcel of land identified by the Berkeley County Assessor’s Office as Parcel No. 220-00-02-118.

The subject property is located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, South Carolina. The subject property is developed with an approximately 61,000 square foot two-story office building that was constructed in 2007 for American LaFrance, a former heavy duty truck manufacturer. The former truck manufacturing facility is located on a parcel adjacent to the subject property. The office building on the subject property is currently occupied by employees of readysc (a division of the SC Technical College System) and Volvo. No recognized environmental conditions were identified on the subject property.

S&ME contracted Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to conduct an environmental database search of the subject property and the surrounding area. The subject property was not identified on the environmental databases reviewed. Three off-site listings were identified on the environmental databases reviewed within the specified search distances. Based on their current regulatory status, the potential for vapor migration, and their proximity (distance and topographic position) to the subject property, these database listed sites do not appear to represent a threat to the environmental regime of the subject property and are not considered a recognized environmental condition.

This Phase I ESA has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property.

35

1.0 Introduction S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) has conducted a Phase I ESA of a property (subject property) located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, Berkeley County, South Carolina. This ESA was conducted using the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-13, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, and in accordance with S&ME Proposal No. 42-1700914 dated July 26, 2017.

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of the ESA was to evaluate the current and historical conditions of the subject property in an effort to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs), controlled recognized environmental conditions (CREC’s), and historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs) in connection with the subject property. This Phase I ESA is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for RECs, CRECs, and HRECs in connection with the subject property.

ASTM E 1527-13 defines the term recognized environmental condition (REC) as the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws.

ASTM E 1527-13 defines the term controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC) as “a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls)”.

ASTM E 1527-13 defines the term historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) as a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls (for example, property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls).

The terms do not include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions nor controlled recognized environmental conditions.

36

1.2 Detailed Scope of Services

1.2.1 ASTM E-1527-13

S&ME's approach to performing this Environmental Site Assessment consisted of four major tasks in accordance with ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-13.

1. Task 1 - A review of reasonably ascertainable public records for the subject property and the immediate vicinity was conducted. This review was performed to characterize environmental features of the site and to identify past and present land use activities, on or in the vicinity of the site, which may indicate a potential for recognized environmental conditions. The review of the reasonable ascertainable public records included:

A. Examination of federal, state, tribal and reasonably ascertainable local public records for the subject property and immediate vicinity.

B. Examination of one or more of the following standard sources: aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, tax files, building department records, zoning/land use records, street directories and topographic maps of the site and vicinity for evidence suggesting past uses that might have involved hazardous substances or petroleum products.

2. Task 2 - A site reconnaissance was performed to identify visual signs of past or existing contamination on or adjacent to the subject property. This reconnaissance was also performed to evaluate evidence found in our public record review that might indicate activities resulting in hazardous substances or petroleum products being used or deposited on the subject property. The site reconnaissance included the following activities:

A. A reconnaissance of the subject property and adjacent properties was performed to look for evidence of current and past property uses, signs of spills, stressed vegetation, buried waste, underground or above ground storage tanks, subsidence, transformers, or unusual soil discoloration which may indicate the possible presence of contaminants on the properties. Photographs are provided to document these conditions.

B. The exterior reconnaissance involved a viewing of the periphery of the subject property and a walk-through of accessible areas was performed of the site interior.

3. Task 3 - Interviews with past and present property owners, operators and occupants and adjacent property owners, operators and occupants, as well as with appropriate local officials were attempted to consider any local knowledge of hazardous substances or petroleum products on the property or on adjacent properties.

4. Task 4 - Report preparation and review.

1.2.2 Exclusions from and Additions to Scope of Services

Unless specifically authorized as an addition to the Phase I ESA work scope, the scope did not include any assessment of environmental conditions not specifically included in the ASTM E 1527-13 standard including, but not limited to sampling of materials (i.e., soil, surface water, groundwater or air), or the assessment of business risk issues such as wetlands, lead in drinking water, asbestos containing materials,

37

mold, fungi or bacteria in on-site buildings, regulatory compliance, cultural/historic risks, industrial hygiene, health/safety, ecological resources, endangered species, indoor air quality (including an evaluation of vapor intrusion), radon or high voltage power lines.

1.3 Significant Assumptions

The groundwater within the local geologic province is typically contained in an unconfined (water table) aquifer. The slope of the water table under static conditions (no pumping interference) often approximates the land surface topography. Thus, the interpreted groundwater flow direction is assumed to be approximately the same as the slope of the ground surface. Perennial surface waters (creeks, rivers, marshes, lagoons etc.) are assumed to act as a discharge point for groundwater flow.

1.4 Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment

This Phase I ESA was conducted using ASTM E 1527-13. The findings of this report are applicable and representative of conditions encountered at the subject property on the date of this assessment, and may not represent conditions at a later date. The review of public records was limited to that information which was available to S&ME at the time this report was prepared. Interviews with local and state government authorities were limited to those people whom S&ME was able to contact during the preparation of this report. Information was derived from “reasonably ascertainable” and “practically reviewable” sources in compliance with our understanding of the standards set forth by ASTM E 1527-13. Specific limitations to this assessment were that portions of the subject property are covered with pavement and structures preventing the observation of the underlying soils in those areas. The review of aerial photographs was limited by the scale and clarity of the individual photographs, and some historical documents were not available in five year intervals back to its first developed use, or back to 1940, whichever is earlier. Information provided by the user is assumed to be correct.

1.5 Special Terms and Conditions

This Phase I ESA was authorized and conducted in accordance with S&ME Proposal No. 42-1700914 dated July 26, 2017. A copy of the executed contract is included in Appendix VI. The resulting report is provided for the sole use of State Technical College System. Use of this report by any other third party will be at such party’s sole risk except when granted under written permission by S&ME.

According to standards set forth by ASTM E 1527-13, certain components of the Phase I ESA will expire 180 days from the date of initiation of that component and will therefore require updating if the date of use exceeds this time period. The following table lists the dates of initiation for pertinent components:

Table 1-1 – Dates of Initiation for Phase I ESA Components

Component Date of Initiation

Environmental Database Search August 8, 2017

Site Reconnaissance August 8, 2017

Interviews August 8, 2017

Environmental Lien Search Responsibility of the user

Environmental Professional Declaration Date of Report

38

2.0 Site Description

2.1 Site Location

The subject property is located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, South Carolina and is that parcel of land identified by the Berkeley County Assessor’s Office as TMS No. 220-00-02-118. A Site Location Map (Figure 1) and a copy of the Tax Map (Figure 2) are located in Appendix I.

2.2 Site and Vicinity Characteristics

The subject property is located in a business park near Interstate 26 and Jedburg Road. The subject property comprises approximately 5 acres of land.

2.3 Site Improvements (Descriptions of Roads, Other Improvements on the Site)

The subject property is developed with an approximately 61,000 square foot two-story office building, a stormwater detention pond, and paved parking. A small guard shack is located at the entrance drive. The subject property has municipal water and sewer service. Utilities including phone, electric, and natural gas are present at the site.

2.4 Current Use of Adjoining Properties

The following is a brief description of the current uses of the properties adjoining the subject property.

North Wooded land.

West Additional parking areas of the adjacent former American LaFrance facility.

East Newton Way / AGRO (warehousing facility) beyond.

South Former American LaFrance truck manufacturing facility.

39

3.0 User Provided Information This section is provided to summarize information provided by the user (SC Technical College System) that may help in identifying recognized environmental conditions. As indicated in the ASTM standard, the environmental professional does not typically generate this information.

3.1 Title Records Chain-of-Title information was not provided by the user. According to information obtained from the Berkeley County website, the owner of the subject property is listed as RT Jedburg Commerce Park, LLC. General property ownership information obtained from the Berkeley County website is included in Appendix I.

3.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations The user indicated that they were not aware of any environmental cleanup liens or activity and use limitations (AUL) for the subject property.

3.3 Specialized Knowledge No specialized knowledge that was material to any current recognized environmental conditions at the subject property was provided by the user.

3.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information The user provided no commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information that is material to any current recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property.

3.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues The user was not aware of a valuation reduction of the subject property for any environmental issues.

3.6 Owner, Property Manager and Occupant Information Refer to Section 6.0 of this report.

3.7 Reason for Performing the Phase I ESA The purpose of the ESA is to identify, pursuant to ASTM E 1527-13, recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. S&ME assumes that this Phase I ESA is being performed to assist the user in qualifying for the innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on CERCLA liability, and to assist in a property transaction.

3.8 Other The user completed a User Questionnaire which is included in Appendix I.

40

4.0 Records Review

4.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources

S&ME contracted Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to prepare a report compiling federal and state environmental database information from the regulatory records of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the State of South Carolina. The purpose of the EDR Radius Map™ Report was to identify environmental sites and activities within a radius of potential concern from the subject property, as outlined by ASTM E 1527-13. The following table lists databases included in the search.

Table 4-1 - Federal Environmental Record Sources

Database Approximate

Search Distance Search Results (No. of Sites)

National Priority List (NPL) 1 mile 0

Proposed NPL 1 mile 0

DELISTED NPL 1 mile 0

NPL LIENS Target Property 0

CERCLIS (SEMS) 0.5 mile 0

SEMS ARCHIVE 0.5 mile 0

CORRACTS 1 mile 0

RCRA-TSDF 0.5 mile 0

RCRA-LQG/SQG/CESQG 0.25 mile 1

RCRA-NonGen 0.25 mile 1

US ENG CONTROLS 0.5 mile 0

US INST CONTROLS 0.5 mile 0

ERNS Target Property 0

HMIRS Target Property 0

CONSENT 1 mile 0

US BROWNFIELD 0.5 mile 0

DOD 1 mile 0

FUDS 1 mile 0

ROD 1 mile 0

TRIS Target Property 0

TSCA Target Property 0

FTTS Target Property 0

PADS Target Property 0

MLTS Target Property 0

MINES 0.25 mile 0

FINDS 0,25 mile 0

41

Table 4-2 - State Environmental Records Sources

Database

Approximate Search Distance

Search Results (No. of Sites)

State Hazardous Waste Site (SHWS) 1 mile 1

Solid Waste Facilities/Landfills (SWF/LF) 0.5 mile 0

Groundwater Contamination Inventory (GWCI) 0.5 mile 0

Drycleaners 0.5 mile 0

ALLSITES 0.5 mile 0

Record of Controlled Remedy (RCR) 0.5 mile 0

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) 0.5 mile 0

Underground Storage Tanks (UST) 0.25 mile 0

Aboveground Storage Tanks (AST) 0.25 mile 0

Activity and Use Limitations (AUL) 0.5 mile 0

Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) 0.5 mile 0

SC BROWNFIELDS 0.5 mile 0

Manifest 0.25 mile 0

Spills Target Property

0

The subject property was not listed on the databases. Three off-site facilities were identified on the environmental databases in the EDR report within the ASTM designated search radii of the subject property. The EDR report with complete descriptions of all databases reviewed is located in Appendix II. Details of the database listed facilities are provided in the following table.

4-3 EDR Database Listed Sites

Facility Name Location Database Listing Comments

American LaFrance, LLC

1116 Newton Way Adjoining to the south

RCRA NonGen / NLR

Former truck manufacturing facility. Several minor violations noted

(transportation container use and management)

Southeastern Freight Lines

1140 Business Park Ln 0.16 mile north

RCRA-SQG

Small quantity generator. No violations noted.

Trident North Landfill Hwy 16 near I-26

0.9 miles west SHWS

Former landfill site.

4.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources

A search of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Envirofacts database was conducted. A review of the Envirofacts database resulted in the identification of no other facilities of potential concern in the immediate vicinity of the subject property.

42

During previous environmental assessments performed by S&ME in the past on nearby properties, regulatory files pertaining to the former Trident North Landfill were reviewed. The files indicated that a Preliminary Assessment-Hydrogeologic Review was performed at the landfill site by the SCDHEC in 1988. Groundwater flow was noted to be toward Kelly Branch creek and Stanley Branch creek near the landfill site. A 200-foot buffer zone was reportedly maintained between the two creeks. Elevated levels of chromium had been detected at the landfill site since 1981, but the levels did not exceed Federal Drinking Water Standards. Elevated levels of Total Organic Carbon were also detected in wells at the landfill. A Site Inspection Prioritization was performed by the SCDHEC in 1995. The SCDHEC recommended continued monitoring, but gave the site a low priority status. The SCDHEC noted the nearest domestic well developed within the aquifer of concern to be 0.24 miles to the east and the nearest community well to be 0.85 miles to the north (Wilson’s Truck Stop). The information in the available files indicated that the landfill was removed from inclusion as a possible Superfund site.

Based on information in the EDR report, previous assessments, interviews, and available historical information, it is the opinion of the environmental professional that an attempt to perform a regulatory file review at this time was not warranted.

S&ME reviewed the US Drug Enforcement Agency National Clandestine Laboratory Register. A review of the register, updated July 5, 2017, did not indicate any clandestine drug laboratories located in the direct vicinity of the subject property.

4.2.1 EDR Supplementary Sources

An EDR Zip Code Scan Search was also conducted in the preparation of this report. This report was reviewed and no other sites of concern were discovered. The EDR Zip Code Scan Report is included with the EDR Radius Map Report in Appendix II.

4.2.2 Tribal Record Sources

A search of available tribal record databases by EDR, Inc. revealed no sites within the specified search distances. The following tribal databases were searched.

Table 4-4 - Tribal Records

Database Active Date Approximate

Search Distance Search Results

(number of sites)

Indian Reservations 1/10/17 1.0 mile 0

Indian LUST 5/5/17 1.0 mile 0

Indian UST 5/5/17 1.0-mile 0 Indian lands are areas with boundaries established by treaty, statute, or executive or court order. These lands are recognized by the United States Federal Government as territories in which American Indian tribes have primary governmental authority. S&ME reviewed data compiled by the United States Geologic Survey (www.nationalatlas.gov) in order to identify properties owned by Indian tribes or the United States Federal Government. No federal lands or lands under the authority of federally recognized tribes are located in the area.

43

4.3 Physical Setting Sources

S&ME reviewed the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute series topographic map (Summerville, SC Quadrangle dated 1979) to examine the topography and drainage of the subject property and vicinity. The topographic map depicts the subject property in an area comprising woodlands, farmland, and residential development. The surface elevation of the subject property is approximately 70 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The subject property is located at an area depicted as a mining pit (soil borrow pit). No structures are depicted at the subject property. The subject property is located northwest of the Town of Summerville. Interstate 26 is located nearby to the north.

Berkeley County is located in the Outer Coastal Plain Subprovince of the South Carolina Coastal Plain. Sedimentary sequences, totaling approximately 2000 feet, exist between ground surface and the underlying hard crystalline and metasedimentary rocks of the Piedmont. These sediments, ranging from recent to upper Cretaceous age, have been termed the Coastal Plain Stratigraphic Wedge (Colquhoun, et al 1983). The wedge of sediments includes a series of depositional units that have been transported by river, deltaic and marine systems and reworked in nearshore environments due to fluctuations in sea level. Each depositional unit has a definable lithology, definable sedimentary structures, an overall shape and a relationship to other depositional units. In the Berkeley County area, the primary depositional units are (in descending order) Pleistocene delta plain, barrier island, back-barrier marsh and tidal channel deposits; the late Eocene Cooper Group; the middle Eocene Santee Limestone (Orangeburg Group); the lower Eocene and Paleocene Black Mingo Group and the upper Cretaceous Peedee Formation, Black Creek Group and the Middendorf Formation.

Groundwater is present in the surficial Pleistocene sediments under water table conditions. Water table depths are shallow and close to surficial contaminant sources (on the order of 5 – 10 feet below ground surface), recharge rates vary and water quality is generally poor. For these reasons, the approximate 50 foot thick sequence of waterbearing sediments are typically not utilized as a potable water source throughout the Berkeley County area. The Cooper Group which varies in depth from 30 - 40 feet includes the late Eocene Harleyville and Parkers Ferry Formations. These sediments were deposited in a carbonate shelf environment, have a relatively poor porosity, and serve as a confining unit between the overlying shallow aquifer system and the underlying semi-confined to leaky aquifers of lower Eocene to upper Cretaceous age. In general, the groundwater flow of a surficial aquifer will mimic the topography of a given site and will flow with the slope of the land. Groundwater flow direction can fluctuate depending on rainfall, construction activity in the area, and other climatic and subsurface conditions.

4.4 Historical Use Information on the Subject Property

Based on interviews and a review of available historical information, the subject property was a portion of a larger tract(s) of land (190+/- acres) on which development of a business park began in the late 1990s. The existing office building was built for American LaFrance who moved into the office building and adjacent truck manufacturing facility after it was constructed in 2007. American LaFrance filed for bankruptcy in 2008 and soon ceased operations at the facility. The facility continued manufacturing truck components for a time, and the facility was vacated about 2014. The office building on the subject property has been leased by readysc and Volvo since about November 2016. The following is a summary of historical sources reviewed:

44

4.4.1 Aerial Photographs

S&ME reviewed available aerial photographs dated 1938, 1953, 1961, 1968, 1973, 1979, 1984, 1989, 1994, 1999, 2005, 2007, 2014, and 2017 to observe previous conditions and development of the subject property as well as the immediately adjacent properties.

In the 1938 aerial photograph, the subject property appears to be wooded land. An unimproved road appears to route west to east across a portion of the site. A field is visible nearby to the west and farmland is visible in the surrounding area. Old Dairy Road is visible to the southwest.

In the 1953 aerial photograph, no significant changes are noted.

In the 1961 aerial photograph, the subject property appears to be within an area in use as a soils borrow pit. Another borrow pit is nearby to the east. Construction of Interstate 26 is visible nearby to the north.

In the 1968 aerial photograph, construction of Interstate 26 appears complete. A few additional unimproved roads are visible nearby, but no other significant changes are noted.

In the 1973 and 1979 aerial photographs, no significant changes at the subject property are noted.

In the 1984 aerial photograph, some timber harvesting may have occurred in the vicinity of the subject property, otherwise, no significant changes are noted.

In the 1989 aerial photograph, no significant changes are noted.

In the 1994 aerial photograph, no significant changes are noted. The outlines of future roads including Newton Way are depicted on this photograph.

In the 1999 aerial photograph, the business park in which the subject property is located is under development. A large building in the business park is visible to the southeast of the subject property. No buildings are visible on the subject property. Business Park Road is under construction routing to the business park from Jedburg Road. More development in surrounding areas is visible.

In the 2005 aerial photograph, one large business (former Piggly Wiggly Distribution Center) appears to have been completed within the business park. The subject property is still undeveloped. New development is evident in the surrounding area including the future Southeastern Freight Lines nearby to the northwest.

In the 2007 aerial photograph, the American LaFrance facility, including the office building on the subject property, is under construction. Another business nearby to the south is also under development in the business park. The location of the former Trident North Landfill is visible to the west.

In the 2014 aerial photograph, the full American LaFrance facility including the office building on the subject property is visible.

In the 2017 aerial photograph, the subject property and the surrounding area appear similar to current conditions.

45

The scales and clarity of the reviewed aerial photographs limited our ability to identify specific conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on or in the vicinity of the subject property. Copies of the aerial photographs are located in Appendix IV.

4.4.2 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

A search of available Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps by EDR revealed no coverage of the subject property.

4.4.3 Topographic Maps

S&ME reviewed available historical topographic maps (Summerville, SC Quadrangle) dated 1920, 1944, 1958, 1971, 1979, and 1990 to observe previous conditions and development at the subject property and immediately adjacent properties.

The 1920 topographic map depicts the area of the subject property to be wooded. The area appears rural in nature with farmland and scattered residential sites in the surrounding area.

The 1944 topographic map depicts more clearings and unimproved roads in the vicinity of the subject property, as well as more residential sites.

On the 1958 topographic map, the area of the subject property appears more heavily wooded. An unimproved road routes west to east across a portion of the subject property. The area still appears rural in nature.

On the 1971 topographic map, the subject property appears to be located within a portion of a mining pit (soil borrow pit). Another borrow pit is depicted nearby to the east and another is depicted to the north, on the opposite side of Interstate 26. These borrow pits were likely used during the construction of Interstate 26.

On the 1979 and 1990 topographic maps, no significant changes are noted other than more residential development in outlying areas. Copies of the historic topographic maps are included in Appendix IV.

4.4.4 Property Record Information / Plats

S&ME searched for property information and available plats of the subject property on the Berkeley County website. A plat dated June 2, 2003 depicts the subject property to be within a 190 acre tract of land owned by Summerville Land Corporation. The land is within an area being developed as a business park. Newton Way is depicted as well as a portion of a business (Piggly Wiggly Distribution Center) nearby to the east. A plat dated November 2, 2006 depicts the subject property as Tract A (5.0 acres), adjacent to Tract B which will soon be developed with the American LaFrance facility. No development is shown on the subject property. The property record card for the subject property indicates that it is owned in the name of RT Jedburg Commerce Park, LLC having been purchased about August 2007. The existing office building is noted to have been built in 2007.

An attempt to review historical sources such as building department records, and zoning/land use records was not made because it has been our experience that within Berkeley County historical copies of these records are rarely available or productive to our purpose.

46

4.5 Historical Use Information on Adjoining Properties

Based on the review of available historical sources, adjoining properties have generally comprised woodlands, farmland, and residential sites through the years. Some of the land in the direct vicinity of the subject property was used as soil borrow pits during construction of Interstate 26 in the 1960s. Development of the business park where the subject property is located began in the late 1990s.

4.6 Previous Assessments

No previous environmental assessment of the subject property was provided or discovered. S&ME has performed several environmental assessments on nearby properties in years past. During the previous assessments, no significant environmental conditions were identified in the area near the subject property.

4.7 Vapor Encroachment Screening

A Vapor Encroachment Screening (VES) of potential contaminant sources from the environmental database listed sites located within an area of concern indicates that a vapor encroachment condition with respect to the subject property does not exist. A copy of the VES Screening is located in Appendix III.

47

5.0 Site Reconnaissance A site reconnaissance was conducted on August 8, 2017 by Norvin Duncan of S&ME, to observe the current uses of the subject property, immediately adjoining properties, and properties in the surrounding area.

5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions

The subject property was observed by walking accessible areas of the property and visually observing adjoining properties. Portions of the subject property are covered with pavement and structures preventing the observation of the underlying soils. Photographs were taken of the subject property to document existing conditions. Copies of these photographs are included in Appendix V.

5.2 General Site Setting

The subject property’s address is 1090 Newton Way Summerville, South Carolina. Interstate 26 is located nearby to the north. The subject property is located approximately 3 ½-miles from the municipal center of the Town of Summerville.

5.2.1 Current Use(s) of the Subject Property

The subject property is currently used as offices by readysc and Volvo.

5.2.2 Past Use(s) of the Subject Property

The building on the subject property was originally the offices and showroom for American LaFrance, a manufacturer of fire trucks and other heavy duty vehicles. No evidence of other past uses of the subject property was observed.

5.2.3 Current Use(s) of Adjoining and Surrounding Properties

North Wooded land.

West Additional parking areas of adjacent former American LaFrance facility.

East Newton Way / AGRO (warehousing facility) beyond.

South Former American LaFrance truck manufacturing facility.

The surrounding area generally comprises commercial and residential development.

5.2.4 Past Use(s) of Adjoining and Surrounding Properties

Site observations did not reveal previous operations of adjoining and surrounding properties that are different from their current uses (See Section 4.4).

48

5.2.5 Geologic, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic, and Topographic Conditions

The surface of the subject property appeared relatively level and comprising loamy soils. Area hydrogeologic conditions were not confirmed during the site reconnaissance. No confirmation of groundwater conditions was made during the site visit. According to the review of the topographic map of the area, the elevation at the subject property is approximately 70 feet MSL.

5.2.6 Description of Structures and Roads

Entrance to the subject property is from Newton Way via Business Park Road (aka Red Bay Road). A small guard shack is located at the entrance drive. The subject property is currently developed with an approximately 61,000 square foot two-story office building, a small guard shack, and paved parking.

5.2.7 Potable Water Supply and Sewage Disposal System

The subject property has municipal water and sewer service.

5.3 Exterior Observations

Access to the subject property is from Newton Way. A small guard shack is located at the entrance drive. Paved parking areas are located at the front (east side) and rear (west side) of the office building. S&ME does not know how much, if any, of the parking lot west of the office building may be included within the boundary of the subject property. A stormwater detention pond is located on the eastern portion of the subject property adjacent to Newton Way. No unusual conditions were observed in the water in the pond.

The office building has an emergency generator unit situated outside at the south end of the building. The generator appears to be connected to a natural gas supply, and also has an internal diesel fuel tank (693-gallon capacity) on the bottom of the unit. No evidence of leaks or spills were observed around the generator.

The office building has modern HVAC equipment for heating and cooling.

Phone, electric, and natural gas utilities were observed at the subject property. Two pad-mounted electrical transformers were observed at the subject property. The transformers appeared to be in good condition and are labeled Non-PCB.

No other potential environmental concerns such as aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), underground storage tanks (USTs), unusual staining, or stressed or dying vegetation was observed on the subject property.

5.4 Interior Observations

The interior of the two-story office building on the subject property is almost entirely comprised of office space. There are two large rooms on the north side of the building that were showrooms of the former American LaFrance truck manufacturer. A below-floor pit (currently covered by plywood) is present in one of the showrooms. This was reportedly used to allow clients to make observations underneath the trucks (no repair work was performed).

49

The office building has one hydraulically operated elevator. No evidence of spills or leaks were observed in the elevator equipment room. The office building also contains several restrooms, kitchen areas, and open meeting hall rooms / training areas. The building is currently occupied by readysc and Volvo as offices and training facilities for job applicants.

50

6.0 Interviews

6.1 Interview with Past and Present Owners

S&ME interviewed Mr. Charles Carmody (843-577-1155) of CBRE, Inc. Mr. Carmody stated that he is the broker for the current property owner. According to Mr. Carmody, he was not aware of any current, or previous environmental concerns at the subject property, or the adjacent (former) American LaFrance manufacturing facility. Mr. Carmody stated that he would check with the property owner and report if they were aware of any previous environmental reports or environmental concerns at the subject property. At the time this report was issued, Mr. Carmody had not replied with any additional information.

S&ME was not provided with contact information for any previous property owners.

6.2 Interview with Key Site Manager

Same as owner interview.

6.3 Interview with Occupants

During the site reconnaissance, S&ME interviewed Mr. Terrance Rivers (843-509-8519), Area Director for readysc (a division of the SC Technical College System). According to Mr. Rivers, the building on the subject property has been leased by readysc and Volvo since about November 2016 for use as office space and training for prospective employees of Volvo who is constructing a car manufacturing facility in the nearby area. Mr. Rivers and Mr. Bernard Gill (facilities manager) provided a tour of the building and grounds. Mr. Rivers and Mr. Gill were not aware of any problems with the elevator unit or the emergency generator at the subject property, nor any other potential environmental concern at the subject property.

6.4 Interview with Local Government Officials

S&ME contacted the City of Summerville Fire Department (843-285-2870) to inquire if the fire department had any records of any major fires, spills, or hazmat incidents at the subject property. The Fire Department responded that they have no records of any incidents at the subject property.

6.5 Interviews with Others

No other interviews were conducted at this time.

51

7.0 Findings

7.1 On-Site Findings

♦ The subject property has an emergency generator that operates on natural gas and has an internal back-up fuel supply (diesel). The generator appeared to be in good condition and no obvious leaks or spills were observed around the generator.

♦ The office building at the subject property has one hydraulically operated elevator. No

evidence of leaks or spills were observed around the elevator equipment.

7.2 Off-Site Findings

No obvious environmental concerns were observed on adjoining properties. Three off-site listings, American LaFrance, Southeastern Freight Lines, and Trident North Landfill were identified on the environmental databases reviewed within the ASTM-specified search radius.

♦ The former American LaFrance truck manufacturing facility is located adjacent to the south of the subject property. It is listed on the RCRA-NonGen/NLR database as a non-generator. There were no spills or releases reported for the facility.

♦ Southeastern Freight Lines located approximately 855 feet to the north is listed as a small

quantity generator with no reported spills or releases. ♦ The Trident North Landfill is a former landfill site located approximately 4,836 feet west that

has been previously assessed by the SCDHEC. Contaminated groundwater was documented at the landfill site in the past, but based on identified contamination levels, it was given low priority for further assessment.

52

8.0 Opinion

8.1 On-Site Opinions

♦ Based on its good condition and no evidence of leaks or spills, the emergency generator with a supplemental internal diesel fuel supply is considered a finding, but not a recognized environmental condition.

♦ Based on its good condition and no evidence of leaks or spills, the hydraulically operated

elevator at the subject property is considered a finding, but not a recognized environmental condition.

8.2 Off-Site Opinions

♦ The off-site environmental database listed sites do not appear to represent a threat to the environmental regime of the subject property based on distance, topographic position, and/or regulatory status and are not considered recognized environmental conditions.

8.3 Data Gaps and Data Failure

The user did not provide chain of title information. Some historical documents reviewed were not available in five-year intervals back to the subject property’s first developed use, or 1940, whichever was earlier. Based on available information, it is our opinion that these data gaps did not significantly affect our ability to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property.

53

9.0 Conclusions We have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-13 of the property located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, South Carolina. Any exceptions to, or deletions from this practice are described in Section 1 of this report.

This Phase I ESA has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property.

10.0 Deviations S&ME has endeavored to perform this Phase I ESA in substantial conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-13 without significant deviation.

11.0 Additional Services No other services were provided during this assessment.

54

12.0 References ASTM, 2013. ASTM Standards on Environmental Site Assessments for Commercial Real Estate. E 1527-13, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

Phase I ESA of the Hodge Tract by S&ME. Project No. 1134-08-185 April 4, 2008

U.S.G.S. Topographical Maps - Summerville, South Carolina Quadrangle – https://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=262:1:12622249500977

Web Soil Survey - http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

Berkeley County website – www.berkeleycountysc.gov

University of South Carolina, 1983. Surface and Subsurface Stratigraphy, Structure and Aquifers of the South Carolina Coastal Plain; Colquhoun, Woollen, Van Nieuwenhuise, Padgett, Oldham, Boylan, Bishop and Howell

EPA Envirofacts Website - https://www3.epa.gov/enviro/index.html

EDR Radius Map Report with Geocheck, American LaFrance Office, 1090 Newton Way, Summerville, SC 29483, Inquiry No: 5016036.1s, August 8, 2017

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, EDR

Aerial Photographs – EDR, Berkeley County GIS, Google Earth

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control – www. dhec.sc.gov

DEA National Clandestine Laboratory Register website - www.justice.gov/dea/clan-lab/clan-lab.shtml

55

13.0 Signature(S) Of Environmental Professional(S) We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, that we meet the definition of Environmental professional as defined in § 312.10 of 40 CFR 312.

We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

_____________________________ _____________________________

Norvin C. Duncan Tom Behnke, P.G., CHMM Environmental Professional Senior Hydrogeologist

14.0 Qualification(S) Of Environmental Professional(S) The environmental professionals for this project are Mr. Norvin C. Duncan and Mr. Tom Behnke. Mr. Duncan conducted the assessment and prepared the report. Mr. Duncan has over 35 years’ experience in construction and environmental consulting and has performed numerous Phase I Environmental Site Assessments over the past 25 years. Mr. Duncan has also completed ASTM training for performing Phase I Environmental Site Assessments. Mr. Behnke has over 25 years of environmental consulting experience and has also completed ASTM training for performing Phase I ESAs. Resumes of the environmental professionals are included in Appendix VII

56

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update

Former American LaFrance Office

1090 Newton Way

Summerville, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4261-18-049

PREPARED FOR:

State Technical College System

c/o South Carolina Coordinating Council for Economic Development

1201 Main Street, Suite 1600

Columbia, South Carolina 29201

PREPARED BY:

S&ME, Inc.

134 Suber Road

Columbia, SC 29210

March 26, 2018

57

March 26, 2018

SC Technical College System

c/o South Carolina Coordinating Council for Economic Development

1201 Main Street, Suite 1600

Columbia, South Carolina 29201

Attention: Mr. Daniel Young

[email protected]

Reference: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update

Former American LaFrance Office

1090 Newton Way

Summerville, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 4261-18-049

Dear Mr. Young:

This report is presented as an Update to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the former American

LaFrance office site located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, Berkeley County, South Carolina (i.e. “the Subject

Property”) performed by S&ME, dated August 17, 2017 (S&ME Project No. 4261-17-127). This ESA update is

intended to be used in conjunction with the previous report and should not be solely relied upon apart from the

other documents. This Phase I ESA Update has been prepared in general accordance with the ASTM E1527-13

standard practice for use of prior assessments and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the AS-071

Agreement for Services between S&ME and SC Technical College System dated March 21, 2018.

ASTM E 1527-13 states that an Environmental Site Assessment “meeting or exceeding” this practice and

completed less than 180 days prior to the date of acquisition or intended transaction is presumed to be valid if

the report is being relied on by the User for whom the assessment was originally prepared and the following

components were completed: interviews, the regulatory review, site visit, and the declaration by the Environmental

Professional responsible for the assessment. Based on this requirement, this report is presumed to be valid for 180

days after March 20, 2018.

The Subject Property is an approximate 5-acre tract of land located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, Berkeley

County, South Carolina. (Refer to the figures in Appendix I). The Subject Property is identified as Berkeley County

Tax Map Parcel 220-00-02-118 and is currently owned by RT Jedburg Commerce Park, LLC.

58

Scope of Services

S&ME’s approach to performing this Phase I ESA Update addressed the five components listed below in

accordance with ASTM E1527-13, Section 4.6:

1. Interviews with the current property owner, operators, and occupants;

2. Searches for recorded environmental liens (Note: As described in the ASTM standard, the search for

recorded environmental liens is the responsibility of the user);

3. Reviews of federal, tribal, state, and local records;

4. Visual inspections of the Subject Property and adjoining properties; and,

5. The declaration by the Environmental Professional that the report was prepared in accordance with 40

CFR Part 312.

The Phase I ESA Update does not include assessment of environmental conditions not specifically included in the

ASTM E1527-13 standard such as asbestos-containing materials; lead-based paint; mold, fungi or bacteria in on-

site structures; drinking water; regulatory compliance; cultural/historic risks; radon; indoor air quality including

vapor intrusion; electromagnetic fields around high voltage power lines nor did it include any sampling of soil,

surface water, groundwater, or other materials.

Significant Assumptions

A significant assumption used in evaluating potential impacts to the Subject Property from nearby, off-site

incidents was that the slope of the water table under static conditions (no pumping interference) often

approximates the land surface topography. Thus, the movement of groundwater is assumed to be in

approximately the same direction as the dip of the topographic slope.

Limitations of the Assessments

The findings of this report are applicable and representative of conditions encountered at the Subject Property at

the time of this evaluation, and may not represent conditions at a later date. The review of public records was

limited to that information which was available to S&ME at the time this report was prepared. Interviews with local

and state government authorities were limited to those people whom S&ME was able to contact during the

preparation of this report. All information was derived from practically reviewable, readily available sources in

compliance with the standards set forth by ASTM E1527-13.

Although this report satisfies the ASTM E1527-13, these results are not a guarantee or warranty that no

environmental conditions exist or that the Subject Property is free from all contamination. Environmental

conditions may exist on the Subject Property that could not be identified through the scope of this Phase I ESA

Update.

The opinions presented in this report are based on findings derived from a site reconnaissance, a review of

specified regulatory records and historical sources, and comments made by interviewees. Generally, information

obtained from public records and from interviews is reliable. However, S&ME cannot warrant or guarantee that

information provided is complete or accurate. In the event responses requested by S&ME from public agencies

59

are provided to S&ME following the submittal of our report, they will be forwarded to the client in the form

received for evaluation by the client.

There were no conditions which limited the performance of this Phase I ESA Update in accordance with the ASTM

E1527-13.

User Reliance

The resulting report is provided for the sole use of the State Technical College System (client). Use of this report

by any third parties will be at such party’s sole risk except when granted under written permission by S&ME. Any

such authorized use or reliance by third parties will be subject to the same Agreement under which the work was

conducted for the client. The additional party's use and reliance on the report will be subject to the same rights,

obligations, and limitations imposed on the client by our Agreement, unless otherwise agreed. However, the total

liability of S&ME to all parties of the Phase I ESA shall be limited to the remedies and amounts as provided in the

Agreement as a single contract. The additional party's use and reliance on the report shall signify the additional

party's agreement to be bound by the proposal and contract that make up the Agreement between S&ME and

the client. S&ME hereby acknowledges that this report may be relied upon by the client subject to limitations of

the current contract between the terms and conditions of our AS-071 Agreement for Services that was executed

between the client and S&ME dated March 21, 2018.

User Provided Information

Title Records and Environmental Liens

Certain information identified in ASTM E1527-13 is typically provided by the User of this report (Client) on a User

Questionnaire. The Client, Mr. Daniel Young with South Carolina Coordinating Council for Economic Development

completed the User Questionnaire provided in Appendix III.

Review of Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) and environmental liens by the Environmental Professional can help

in determining if a recognized environmental condition or controlled recognized environmental condition is

associated with the Subject Property. AULs can include both institutional and engineering controls, and are often

recorded in land title records in the restrictions of record rather than a typical chain-of-title or title abstract. The

user has the responsibility of checking land title and judicial (federal, state, tribal, and local) records. According to

the Berkeley County GIS website, the Subject Property is a reported 5-acre parcel identified as Berkeley County

Tax Map Parcel 220-00-02-118 currently owned by RT Jedburg Commerce Park, LLC.

The user did not provide title records or information regarding an AUL or environmental lien search.

The User provided A Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessment for the former American LaFrance facility dated

September 11, 2013. No recognized environmental conditions (RECs) were identified in connection with the

American LaFrance office building. RECs were identified in connection with the former manufacturing facility.

Subsequent soil sampling did not identify environmental impact to the site.

60

2017 Phase I ESA

S&ME did not identify recognized environmental conditions, historical recognized environmental conditions, or

controlled recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Subject Property in the August 17, 2017

Phase I ESA.

A new Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Radius Map Report was ordered for the Subject Property.

Environmental databases are updated several times a year, and as such, regulated facilities are often added or

removed from the databases.

The subject property was not listed in the databases reviewed. Database listings of regulated facilities within the

required search radii of the Subject Property in the new EDR report are summarized below.

Table 1 – Off-Site Database Search Results Summary Table

Facility

Location

Distance/Direction

Topographic

Relationship

Record Comment

American

LaFrance, LLC

1116 Newton Way

Adjacent to the south

Cross-Gradient

RCRA NonGen / NLR

Former truck manufacturing facility. Several

minor violations noted (transportation

container use and management).

Southeastern

Freight Lines

1140 Business Park Ln

977 feet northwest

Up-Gradient

RCRA-SQG Small quantity generator.

No violations noted.

Trident North

Landfill

Hwy 16 near I-26

4,826 feet west

Up-Gradient

SHWS Former landfill.

Based on current regulatory status, relative topographic location, and information from previous environmental

assessments, the off-site facilities identified in the above table appear unlikely to have an environmental impact

on the Subject Property. The EDR Radius Map Report is provided in Appendix II.

Additional Environmental Record Sources

Tribal Records

The EDR Radius Map Report did not reveal any nearby listings of tribal environmental records.

Other Record Sources

No other record sources were reviewed for this update.

61

Site Reconnaissance Update

S&ME Environmental Professional, Norvin Duncan, conducted a vehicular and foot reconnaissance of the Subject

Property on March 21, 2018. The purpose of the reconnaissance was to observe the current uses of the Subject

Property and adjoining properties. Photographs were taken of various portions of the Subject Property to

document existing conditions. Copies of pertinent photographs are included in Appendix I of this report. A

vehicular survey of the surrounding area was also performed to confirm the locations of facilities listed in the EDR

report and to verify nearby land use. The reconnaissance involved viewing nearby properties from publicly

accessible areas, but not entering private property. Observations of nearby properties was limited to areas visible

in the line of sight from public roadways. S&ME did not enter adjacent properties to view areas not visible from

the Subject Property or public property.

The Subject Property is developed with an approximately 61,000 square foot two-story office building, a small

guard house, paved parking, and a stormwater pond. The building is currently occupied by readysc, part of the SC

Technical College System that provides workforce training programs for employers. Overall, environmental site

conditions remain unchanged from those documented in the previous Phase I ESA report dated August 17, 2017.

Current Use of Adjoining and Surrounding Properties

Surrounding property use is unchanged since the original previous Phase I ESA report was prepared and adjoining

property use is summarized below:

North: Wooded land

South: Former American LaFrance truck manufacturing facility

East: Newton Way / AGRO warehousing - distribution facility

West: Additional parking areas of the former American LaFrance facility

No obvious environmental concerns were observed on adjoining properties.

Interviews

The Subject Property is currently owned by RT Jedburg Commerce Park, LLC. S&ME contacted Mr. Charles

Carmody (843-577-1155) of CBRE, Inc., Broker for the current owner. Mr. Carmody stated that he was not aware of

any changes or environmental concerns at the subject property since the August 2017 ESA report.

During the site reconnaissance, S&ME interviewed Ms. Kristen Bonaforte of readysc (843-879-5405) and Mr.

Darrell DeChaine (tooling/maintenance personnel). Ms. Bonaforte stated that she was not aware of any

environmental concerns at the Subject Property. Mr. DeChaine provided access and a tour of the building areas.

Mr. DeChaine stated that he was also not aware of any environmental concerns at the Subject Property. The only

changes he was aware of was that natural gas lines were being separated and re-routed independently to the

building on the subject property and the former American LaFrance facility next door.

62

S&ME contacted the City of Summerville Fire Department Station #4 (843-285-2870) to inquire if the fire

department had any records of any chemical spills or hazmat incidents at the subject property. The Fire

Department responded that they have no records of any incidents at the subject property.

Data Gaps

No significant data gaps were identified during this Phase I ESA Update or in the original Phase I ESA report.

Conclusions

S&ME has performed an update of the original Phase I ESA report for the approximate 5-acre Subject Property

located at 1090 Newton Way in Summerville, Berkeley County, South Carolina in general accordance with ASTM

Standard Practice E1527-13.

This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Subject

Property.

Pursuant to ASTM E1527-13 Section 4.6, the conclusions of S&ME’s August 17, 2017 Phase I ESA remain valid

based on the updated information contained herein.

Declaration

The Environmental Professionals for this environmental assessment are Mr. Norvin C. Duncan, Environmental

Professional and Mr. Tom Behnke, P.G., C.H.M.M.

“We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental

Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312” and we have the specific qualifications based on education,

training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the property. We have

developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth

in 40 CFR Part 312.

63

Closing

S&ME appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we

may be of further assistance, please contact us at your convenience.

Sincerely,

S&ME, Inc.

Norvin C. Duncan Thomas Behnke, P.G., CHMM

Environmental Professional Environmental Services Manager

[email protected] [email protected]

Appendices

Appendix I – Figures and Site Photographs

Appendix II – EDR Radius Map Report

Appendix III – User Questionnaire

64

Memorandum of Agreement

Workforce Development Center

This Facilities Use Agreement is entered into as of ___________(the Effective Date) between Trident Technical College (TTC) and readySC (readySC), a division of the State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education (SBTCE).

1. Ownership. The Workforce Development Center (WDC) located at 1090 Newton Way, Summerville, South Carolina 29483, is titled to Trident Technical College.

2. Operations & Maintenance.

a. readySC/SBTCE will pay for all operating and maintenance costs of the WDC to include:

i. Utilities. ii. Maintenance.

iii. Major Repairs. iv. Additions, Improvements, Alterations. v. Catastrophic Damage (e.g. hurricane or earthquake).

vi. Locks and Access. vii. Security.

viii. Fire Alarm and Fire Reporting. ix. Cleaning and Custodial Services. x. Data Connection.

xi. IT Services and Support. xii. Furniture.

xiii. Refuse and Hazardous Waste Disposal. xiv. Recycling. xv. Grounds Maintenance.

xvi. Parking Lot Maintenance.

b. When TTC desires to use all or a portion of the WDC for its programs, TTC will be responsible for all costs associated with preparing the space for its use and for a proportional share of the operating costs. Prior to commencement of TTC’s use of space in the WDC, this agreement will be modified by mutual consent to address the space and cost allocation.

3. Insurance and Damage.

a. TTC will provide insurance on building and grounds. TTC’s tort liability insurance coverage is provided by the South Carolina Insurance Reserve Fund. TTC shall notify readySC in writing should such coverage be cancelled or if cancellation is imminent. Said

65

notification will be given in writing within 10 days of receipt of any actual or constructive notice of cancellation. readySC will reimburse TTC for the cost of property insurance.

b. readySC will provide insurance on contents of buildings, including computers, furniture, and equipment as well as tort liability insurance coverage provided by South Carolina Insurance Reserve Fund. readySC shall notify TTC in writing should coverage be cancelled or if cancellation is imminent. Said notification will be given in writing within 10 days of receipt of any actual constructive notice of cancellation.

4. Relationship. Neither readySC nor any personnel of readySC will for any purpose be considered employees or agents of the TTC. readySC assumes full responsibility for the actions of readySC’s personnel, and is solely responsible for their supervision, daily direction and control, payment of salary (including withholding income taxes and social security), worker’s compensation and disability benefits.

5. Notice. Any notice to either party hereunder must be in writing signed by the party giving it, and shall be served either personally, by registered, or certified mail addressed as follows:

If to TTC: Mr. Scott Poelker Vice President for Finance & Administration Trident Technical College P.O. Box 118067 Charleston, SC 29423 If to readySC: Mr. Randall Johnson Vice President for Finance State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education 111 Executive Center Drive, Suite 100 Columbia, SC 29210 6. Authority. The individuals signing below on behalf of State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education’s readySC program and TTC hereby represent and warrant that they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of readySC and TTC and that this Agreement is binding upon each party in accordance with its terms.

7. Entire Agreement. This Agreement (and its attachments, if any) constitutes the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any and all prior understanding and agreements, oral and written, relation hereto. Any amendments hereof must be in writing and signed by both parties.

8. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of South Carolina and the courts of which state shall have jurisdiction over its subject matter.

66

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have, through duly authorized officials, executed this Service Agreement effective as of the day and year indicated below.

Trident Technical College State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education

Name: Mary Thornley Name: Tim Hardee

Signature:___________________ Signature:____________________

Title: President Title: President

Date:______________________ Date:________________________

Name: Scott Poelker Name: Randall Johnson

Signature:____________________ Signature: ____________________

Title: Vice President for Finance & Title: Vice President for Finance

Administration

Date:_______________ Date:_______________

67

THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY AND AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Benjamin L. Kryder, Esq. Kirkland & Ellis LLP 300 N. LaSalle, Suite 2800 Chicago, Illinois 60654

DECLARATION OF EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT

THIS DECLARATION OF EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (the “Declaration”) is made this __ day of , 2017, by RT JEDBURG COMMERCE PARK, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Declarant”).

RECITALS

1. WHEREAS, as of the effective date hereof, Declarant is the owner of certain real property having an address of 1090 Newton Way, Summerville, South Carolina, as more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”);

2. WHEREAS, the Property consists of two parcels (“Parcel A” and “Parcel B”; collectively, the “Parcels”), as shown on that certain Plat recorded in the Berkley County Public Registry, Plat Cabinet R, Page 263-C;

3. WHEREAS, the Declarant desires to establish certain easements, restrictions and maintenance agreements with respect to the Parcels.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits derived and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Declarant does hereby declare that the following easements, restrictions, and agreements shall be covenants running with the land, which shall be binding upon Declarant and its successors and assigns.

68

Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals are hereby restated as if fully set forth herein.

Section 2. Grant of Access Easement.

(a) For the benefit of the owner of Parcel B (together with its successors and/or assigns, collectively, “Parcel B Owner”), and its lessees, permitees, invitees, guests, and employees (collectively, “Affiliates”), a perpetual, non-exclusive, commercial, appurtenant easement for vehicular and pedestrian ingress, egress, passage and delivery on, over and across the access road more particularly depicted on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated by reference (the “Access Easement Area”) is hereby established for the purpose of providing access to and from Parcel B and Newton Way, together with the full right and authority to repair, replace and maintain the improvements within the Access Easement Area as set forth in Section 4(a) herein (the “Access Easement”).

(b) The owner of Parcel A (together with its successors and/or assigns, collectively, “Parcel A Owner”; together with Parcel B Owner, each an “Owner” and collectively, the “Owners”) shall keep the Access Easement Area open for use by Parcel B Owner and its Affiliates and, subject to Parcel B Owner’s obligations set forth in Section 4(a) herein, shall take all necessary action to prevent any obstructions to the free flow of traffic over the Access Easement Area, including with respect to obstructions relating to any construction activities on Parcel A. The grants contained herein are not intended and shall not be construed as a dedication of the Access Easement Area or any portion thereof for public use, and Parcel A Owner may take whatever steps are necessary to avoid such dedication other than closing the access road therein.

(c) There is currently a security guard station located within the Access Easement (the “Guard Station”). The Owners may mutually agree to a staffing schedule with respect to the Guard Station and an allocation of the costs therefor. If the Owners are unable to come to such mutual agreement within a reasonable time after the date hereof, then, (i) at the election of the Parcel B Owner, the Guard Station may be staffed, with the cost thereof included in the Easement Area Maintenance Costs or (ii) if the Parcel A Owner desires to staff the Guard Station and the Parcel B Owner does not agree, the Parcel A Owner may do so at its sole cost and expense.

Section 3. Grant of Parking Easement.

(a) For the benefit of Parcel A Owner and its Affiliates, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for the purpose of using as parking spaces up to, but not in excess of, ninety (90) parking spaces on an unreserved basis and located within the parking area more particularly depicted on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated by reference, together with the right of vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress on, over and across the Parking Easement

69

Area for the purpose of providing access to and from the Parking Easement Area and Parcel A (the “Parking Easement”).

(b) Parcel B Owner shall keep the Parking Easement Area open for use by Parcel A Owner and its Affiliates and shall take all necessary action to prevent any obstructions to the free flow of traffic over the Parking Easement Area, including with respect to obstructions relating to any construction activities on Parcel B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parcel B Owner shall be entitled to mark the spaces located within the Parking Easement area with a unique paint color, signage, or other means. The grants contained herein are not intended and shall not be construed as a dedication of the Parking Easement Area or any portion thereof for public use, and Parcel B Owner may take whatever steps are necessary to avoid such dedication other than closing the access road therein.

Section 4. For the benefit of the owner of Parcel A Owner and its Affiliates, a perpetual, non-exclusive, commercial, appurtenant sanitary sewer and storm drain easement over, under and across those portions of Parcel B, as depicted on Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated by reference (the “Utility Easement”) is hereby established for the limited purpose of operating and using certain underground sanitary sewer and storm drain transmission facilities. For the benefit of the owner of Parcel B Owner and its Affiliates, a perpetual, non-exclusive, commercial, appurtenant easement for landscaping, maintenance and repair on, over and across those portions of the “STORM WATER DETENTION POND” which are located on Parcel A, as depicted on Exhibit E attached hereto and incorporated by reference (the “Detention Pond Easement Area”) is hereby established for the purpose of providing access for landscaping, maintenance and repair of those portions of the detention pond located within the Detention Pond Easement Area. (the Detention Pond Easement Area, together with the Access Easement Area, Parking Easement Area and the Utility Easement, is collectively referred to as the “Easement Areas”).Easement Maintenance and Cost Sharing Covenants. Easement Area Maintenance. Parcel B Owner shall be responsible for reasonably maintaining and repairing the Easement Areas, including, without limitation, snow and ice removal, paving, curbing, striping, signage, landscaping, and traffic lights. At all times, Parcel B Owner shall keep the Easement Areas in good condition, and any maintenance or repairs conducted in the Easement Areas shall be performed in a good, professional and workmanlike manner by contractors licensed and insured in the State of South Carolina.

(b) Easement Area Maintenance Costs. Parcel A Owner shall be responsible for twenty percent (20%) of all documented, out-of-pocket costs relating to the maintenance of the Easement Areas incurred by Parcel B Owner pursuant to Section 4(a) herein (the “Cost Share”). Parcel B Owner shall deliver to Parcel A Owner copies of all paid invoices for any such costs, and Parcel A Owner shall, within thirty (30) days of receipt of said invoices, remit to Parcel B Owner its Cost Share.

(c) Gross Negligence; Willful Misconduct. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the event that any of the costs incurred by Parcel B Owner pursuant to Section 4(a) herein result from the gross

70

negligence or willful misconduct of either Owner or its respective Affiliates, then such Owner shall be solely responsible for the maintenance and/or repair costs necessitated thereby.

Section 7. Right to Self-Help. In the event Parcel B Owner defaults in its obligations under this Declaration, Parcel A Owner shall have the right, but not the obligation, upon the expiration of thirty (30) days’ written notice to Parcel B Owner to cure such default for the account of and at the expense of Parcel B Owner, provided that Parcel B Owner has not, prior to the expiration of such 30 day notice period, cured the default or commenced to cure the default and is diligently continuing efforts to cure the same. Notwithstanding the above, in the event of emergency conditions constituting a default hereunder, Parcel A Owner acting in good faith shall have the right to cure such default upon such advance notice as is reasonably possible under the circumstances, or, if necessary, without advance notice, so long as notice is given as soon as possible thereafter. Any notice to Parcel B Owner shall specify the nature of the default.

Section 8. Liens. The Parties shall take the necessary actions to assure no mechanics’ or other liens are filed against the other Owner’s property.

Section 9. Estoppel Certificates. Each Owner, within thirty (30) days of its receipt of a written request from the other Owner, shall from time to time provide the requesting Owner, an estoppel certificate binding upon such Owner stating: (a) to the best of such Owner’s knowledge, whether any party to this Declaration is in default or violation of this Declaration, and if so identifying such default or violation; (b) the amount of any unpaid Cost Share; and (c) that this Declaration is in full force and effect and identifying any amendments to the Declaration as of the date of such certificate.

Section 10. Obligations Run with the Land. The terms, conditions and covenants of this Declaration shall bind, and inure to the benefit of the Owners and their respective successors and assigns. The rights and obligations set forth in this Declaration herein shall extend to and include each Owner and such Owner’s Affiliates.

Section 11. Insurance. Each Owner shall at all times during the term of this Declaration, maintain or cause cause to be maintained in full force and effect a commercial general public liability insurance policy (on an occurrence basis) insuring against all claims for personal injury, death or property damage occurring upon, in or about such Owner’s Parcel or as a result of the performance of Parcel B Owner’s maintenance obligations hereunder, with combined single limits of at least Two Million and no/100 Dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence for the respective Parcel, which insurance shall include contractual liability coverage covering the insured’s indemnity obligations hereunder. All such insurance policies shall be issued by a financially responsible insurance company or companies authorized to issue insurance policies in the State of South Carolina. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, any Owner with a tangible net worth in excess of One Hundred Thousand U.S. Dollars ($100,000.00) may elect to self-insure with respect to the risks described in Sections 9 and 10 herein upon written notice of self-insurance and proof of financial strength to the other Owner. Upon the reasonable request of any Owner, the other Owner shall provide evidence that such Owner maintains insurance in accordance with the terms of this Declaration. In no event shall the limits of any coverage maintained by any Owner pursuant to this Declaration be construed as limiting such Owner’s

71

liability under this Declaration. Any insurance required under this Declaration may be carried under a policy or policies covering other liabilities and locations of an Owner; provided, however, that such policy or policies shall apply to the Parcels required to be insured hereunder in an amount not less than the amount of insurance required to be carried by such Owner with respect thereto.

Section 12. Mutual Indemnification. Each Owner hereby indemnifies and saves the other Owner and their tenants (as applicable) harmless from and against any and all third party liabilities, damages, reasonable expenses, causes of action, suits, claims or judgments (including, without limitation, reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs actually incurred) arising from personal injury, death or property damage and arising through such indemnifying party’s use and enjoyment of the easement rights referenced herein or in the satisfaction of the obligations set forth herein; provided, however, if such personal injury, death or property damage was caused by the intentional or grossly negligent acts or omissions of the indemnified owner or its employees, agents or contractors, then the indemnified party shall not be protected or held harmless by this indemnity.

Section 14. No Unilateral Changes. No change in any of the terms or provisions of these covenants shall be effective unless, in addition to all other requirements of law, it is in writing, duly executed by both parties hereto and recorded with the Berkeley County Recorder of Deeds.

Section 15. Term. The easements, covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in this Declaration shall be effective commencing on the date of recordation of this Declaration with the Berkeley County Recorder of Deeds and shall remain in full force and effect thereafter in perpetuity, unless this Declaration is modified, amended, canceled or terminated by the written consent of all then record Owners in accordance with this Section __.

Section 16. Notices. Notices given to any Owner pursuant to this Declaration shall be delivered to the address of such Owner’s Parcel and the address where tax notices are sent. Any party to this Declaration may designate a different address for itself by notice given in the manner set forth above.

Section 17. Severability. This Declaration is intended to be performed in accordance with, and only to the extent permitted by, all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. If any provision of this Agreement is for any reason and to any extent determined to be invalid or unenforceable, then the remainder of this Declaration and the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances will not be affected but rather will be enforced to the greatest extent permitted by law.

Section 18. Applicable Law. It is the intent of the parties hereto that all questions with respect to the construction of this Agreement and the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto shall be construed and interpreted under, and governed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of South Carolina.

Section 19. Legal Fees. In the event legal action is instituted by any of the parties to enforce the terms of this Declaration or arising out of the execution of this Declaration, the prevailing party will be entitled to receive from the other party or parties’ reasonable attorneys’ fees actually incurred in an amount to be determined by the court in which the action is brought.

72

[SIGNATURE PAGE TO DECLARATION OF CROSS EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND MAINTENANCE

AGREEMENT]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this instrument this ___ day of , 2017.

DECLARANT:

RT JEDBURG COMMERCE PARK, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company

By:______________________________

Name:______________________________

Title:______________________________

STATE OF_____________________ :

:to wit:

COUNTY OF __________________:

On this _______ day of _______________________, before me, the undersigned officer, personally appeared , who has satisfactorily proven to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and as __________________, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained on behalf of said corporation.

____________________________________ Notary Public

My Commission Expires:

73