Barrow Logo Barrow EP Handbook

Former plating or metal finishing shop on the subject property

Historical sources show that a plating or metal finishing shop once operated at the subject property. The standard has no provision on plating. The federal waste rules name four electroplating wastes, which tells what such a shop may have generated and nothing about whether any was released. Whether the past use makes a recognized environmental condition (REC) depends on four things: what the shop did and what wastes it generated, how long it ran and when, where its liquids went, and what the records and the building show of a release.

What the answer turns on

With no known release, the question falls under the second part of the REC definition: hazardous substances or petroleum products likely present at the subject property owing to a release or a likely release (E1527-21, 3.2.73). The standard's appendixes are nonmandatory. Appendix X4 says the two judgments, likely release and likely presence, go together (E1527-21, X4.1).

  • What the shop did, and what wastes it generated. The standard's definition of a solvent gives surface degreasing in metal fabricating industries as one of its uses (E1527-21, 3.2.82); it does not say what a given finishing shop used. The federal list of hazardous wastes from non-specific sources names four from electroplating operations: wastewater treatment sludges, with six processes excepted (F006); spent cyanide plating bath solutions (F007); and, where cyanides are used in the process, residues from the bottom of plating baths (F008) and spent stripping and cleaning bath solutions (F009). The first is listed for cadmium, hexavalent chromium, nickel and complexed cyanide, and the other three for cyanide salts (40 CFR 261.31; 40 CFR part 261, appendix VII). Certain spent halogenated solvents used in degreasing are on the same list (F001); for solvent vapor in the subsurface see vapor in a Phase I. Where the records or interviews show the shop used a per- or polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS), see PFAS in a Phase I. Establish what the shop plated or finished, which materials it used, and where sludge and spent liquids were held.
  • How long it ran, and when. The environmental professional considers what releases the historical uses could have led to (E1527-21, 8.3.1). For a likely release, Appendix X4's factors to consider include operations involving hazardous substances or petroleum products, how long they ran and in what period. Its note gives petroleum storage and dispensing, dry cleaning, manufacturing and the like, run for a significant period before regulatory controls, as possible examples, if the professional believes a release has likely occurred (E1527-21, X4.1). Establish the first and last years the sources show the shop.
  • Where its liquids went. Wastewater, as the standard defines it, takes in water used in an industrial or manufacturing process (E1527-21, 3.2.97). Drains and sumps, pits, ponds or lagoons, wastewater discharged from the subject property, wells including dry wells, and septic systems are site visit features, and interview questions shall try to cover the past ones (E1527-21, 9.4.21, 9.4.22, 9.4.26, 9.4.27, 9.4.28, 10.2). The body of the standard does not say what any discharge point means for the answer. Any buried tank may be on no registry: the federal tank rule (40 CFR part 280) excludes from its requirements a system "holding hazardous wastes listed or identified under Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act" and a "wastewater treatment tank system that is part of a wastewater treatment facility regulated under Section 402 or 307(b) of the Clean Water Act" (40 CFR 280.10(b)(1), (2)), so neither had a notice duty under that rule. The standard's own definition of an underground storage tank turns on whether the tank held hazardous substances or petroleum products, and has neither exception (E1527-21, 3.2.93).
  • What the records and the building show of a release. Appendix X4 lists observations, data, documents and interviews as direct evidence of a release (E1527-21, X4.1). Odors, drums and containers, staining or corrosion of floors, walls and ceilings, and stained soil or pavement are site visit features (E1527-21, 9.4.13, 9.4.15, 9.4.20, 9.4.23). The site visit need not identify conditions under floors or behind walls, and limits on what could be seen are documented (E1527-21, 9.2.4.2, 9.2.6).

The records that bear on it

  • Historical sources. A use shown only as industrial or manufacturing calls for further standard historical resources when reasonably ascertainable and likely to identify the specific use, short of data failure (E1527-21, 8.3.6, 8.3.7).
  • Government records. The federal generator list is a standard source, searched for the subject property and adjoining properties (RCRA generators; E1527-21, 8.2.2, Table 2). Release and cleanup records are separate lists: RCRA corrective action, state hazardous waste sites and voluntary cleanup. A listed subject property's file should be reviewed, or the report explains why not (E1527-21, 8.2.3.1).
  • Documents and interviews. The owner, key site manager and user are asked whether they know of hazardous waste generator notices or reports, safety data sheets, and environmental permits, wastewater and hazardous waste disposal permits among them (E1527-21, 10.8, 10.8.1). Past owners, operators and occupants likely to have material information are interviewed where identified (E1527-21, 10.5.4).

What the federal rule says

Among what the inquiry must seek to identify, the inquiry rule (40 CFR part 312) lists

Waste management and disposal activities that could have caused releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances;

40 CFR 312.20(e)(1)(iii), edition revised as of July 1, 2025

How it is written up

The report describes the shop with the other identified uses and explains any gaps in the history (E1527-21, 8.3.8). The use becomes a finding when the professional judges it may indicate presence or likely presence at the subject property, and the opinion reasons for or against calling it a REC (E1527-21, 12.5, 12.6).

Where the professional concludes a release occurred or is likely, and presence at the subject property follows, the opinion gives the grounds: what the shop did and generated, for how long and when, where its liquids went, what the records and the building show. Unless judged a de minimis condition or a historical REC, the REC is listed in the Conclusions, and the professional should give an opinion on additional investigation, if any (E1527-21, 3.2.20, 3.2.39, 12.7, 12.8).

Where the professional concludes otherwise, the opinion gives its reasoning on the same four facts (E1527-21, 12.6).

Historical sources may fail to show when the shop began or ended. Required information that good faith efforts could not obtain is a data gap, significant if it affects the ability to identify a REC: named in the Findings with the sources consulted, discussed in the Opinions and listed in the Conclusions (E1527-21, 3.2.19, 3.2.78, 12.5.1, 12.6.2, 12.7).

Related

This page is general reference for environmental professionals. It does not classify any property. ASTM E1527-21 is the standard and is not reproduced here; the judgment of the environmental professional on the facts governs.

Maintained by Barrow. General reference only, not legal or professional advice. Barrow is not affiliated with or endorsed by any government agency. See how Barrow drafts the report