􀁲􀁭􀁾􀀧􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀮􀀬􀀠/'; 
/o(z{P/o/􀀣􀁾􀁊􀀵􀀭􀀱􀀠 Council Agenda Item:h..;;; SUMMARY: Council acceptance 􀁡􀁮􀁤􀁾􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁲􀁯􀁶􀁡􀁬􀀠of the fmal report of the Fuel Farm Committee related to the site relocation
and operating methodology ofthe Addison Airport Fuel Farm. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Budgeted Amount: Cost: BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, City Council officially created and charged a special
advisory committee with the work ofresearching, analyzing and recommending a preferred site for the new fuel farm and the methodology of its operation. Fuel Farm rates and charges were
not part of this process and will be determined and brought forward to Council at a later date. The committee facilitated by Addison Airport Director, Dave Pearce has concluded their
work and has provided their attached recommendation. There is a consensus between the committee, airport operator and staff as to the selection of the primary (Northeast end of the Airport
adjacent to the Service Center) site and secondary site (East tie-down area between the Airport Admin. Offices and the Police Facility) as well as the methodology for the operation ofthe
fuel farm (Town owns and leases tanks). The committee's recommendation also includes other criteria that they are recommending be included as well, in addition to their concurrence ofthe
two objectives. Committee member, Laura Herrick, will appear before Council to report on the Committee's process and deliver their recommendation. Attachments: Dave Pearce -Memorandum
of Recommendation Airport Site Map Phase II Environmental Assessment Memo -WGI Present Fuel Farm Site Map Fuel Farm Advisory COnu:il.ittee -Process Fuel Farm Advisory Committee Recommendation
Fuel Farm Advisory Committee -10/19/01 Meeting Minutes Fuel Farm Advisory Committee -Response to sections of the Phase I Environmental Assessment Update RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends
the approval of the recommendation as submitted by the operator and committee with the exception and exclusion of items A-2, 3,4,5,7,8 & D of the committee's recommendation. MA 
Fax: 972.788.9334 4651 Ailport Parl<v..,y Addison, Te"", 75001 Phone: 972.392.4855 􀁾􀀩􀁊􀁩􀁾􀁾􀀱􀀮 1 􀀧􀁾􀁁􀁩􀁲􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀀠 Memo To: Mark Acevedo, Administrator Facilities & Fleet Services
From: David C. Pearce, Airport Director CC: Darci Neuzil, Assistant Airport Directcr Bob Katzen, Real Estate Operations Manager Date: 10/26/2001 Re: Fuel Farm Site Recommendation Comments:
This memo is to provide a recommendation to design and construct a new fuel farm at the Addison Airport. The recommendation is based on a number offactors listed below. In order to provide
a true understanding of the many issues surrounding this proposal, a background summary, council appointed committee recorumendations, committee documer!ts, and a copy ofthe initial
committee briefing are provided for review. To remain focused on the task, the WashingtoniStaubech recommendation will be in response to the task only which was to identifY potential
fuel fann site locations. Fuel farm rates and charges are not part ofthis recommendation and therefore will not be addressed. Recommendation WashingtonlStaubach recommends approval of
the primary and secondary sites depicted on the attached map. Additionally, it is recommended that the fuel farm be designed and constructed by the Town and individual sites located
at the central fuel farm be leased to the current active fuel farm users; Addison EXpress, Mercury Air, Million Air and Cherry Air. The primary and secondary sites both allow separation
ofairfield and 18wheel vehicles, easy emergency response access, keeps 18 wheel refuelers off of main streets and are on currently owned airport land. The Fire Marshal has review both
site to ensure they conform to all applicable codes. Background Upon receiving the contract to manage the Addison Airport, an agreement was made to have an assessment ofthe environmental
conditions at the Addison Airport. It would 
Memo dated 10126101 Fuel Farm Site Recommendation Page 2 be logical to assume that this was generated because an environmental condition baseline is needed i<Lobtainihe Pollution LiabilityJnsurance
for the fuel farm; a requirement outlined in the contract. None-the-less, the Town ofAddison contracted with Camp Dresser and McKee (CDM) to accomplish a Phase I Environmental. CDM performed
a Phase I Environmental Update to their previous 1998 report. The Update indicated environmental deficiencies. The report indicated that records depicted petroleum spills subsequent
to the State acknowledging site closure and that there is a history of fuel spills and releases throughout the fuel farm area. CDM recommended that the Town enter the. _ voluntary cleanup
program. During this time, subsequent inspections of the fuel farm were iilso made. It appears that fuel farm tanks have been abandoned without entering the closure process. Based on
the CDM report and subsequent inspections, WashingtoniStaubach was unable to obtain Pollution Liability Insurance. Based on the above, we recognized that a Phase II environmental is
required. A Phase I Environmental is performed to assess and identify compliance with EPA regulatory gnidance. It provides an overview of existing conditions but it does not go beyond
that i.e. determining the extent of deficiencies. Therefore, the Phase I does not provide a baseline for transfer of property. Additionally, the only practical option would be to enter
the voluntary cleanup program when performing the Phase II Environmental. With that said, we assessed the options. Performing a Phase II environmental and entering the voluntary cleanup
program presents some unique challenges. Currently there are 29 underground storage tanks (USTs) of which 14 are in service. The 15 abandoned tanks will need to be removed as well as
the some ofthe ground surrounding them. It is likely that there will be open holes for a period of time during the mitigation process. This is the point where we based our options. Options
It is likely that access to the existing fuel farm will be impacted during a cleanup process. To eliminate any impact the option of staging fuel trucks near but not adjacent the fuel
farm during the construction period was assessed. The benefit of this is that fuel availability would not be impacted however, the potential for ground and storm water contamination
is high as well as fire and safety concerns. We eliminated this option. We contacted some other airports and engineering companies to obtain a general conscientious on what is the average
service life on USTs. We fuund that one could plan to find leaks around the 17-25 year point. Reviews ofthe Addison tanks depict that all ofthe in use tanks are over 15 years with many
of the abandoned tanks being well over the 25-year point. With that as a base line it appears that the decision was weather to clean up the existing fuel farm and continue it's use or
look at constructing a new fuel fan:ri, transitioning into the new fuel farm and then cleanup the existing fuel farm. We selected the later..---. After review of the above information,
it was decided that a committee would be formed to also research, analyze, and recommend a preferred site for the new fuel farm and a methodology for its operation to the City Council.
Their report is enclosed. 
Memo dated 10126101 Fuel Farm Site Recommendation Page 3 Site Selection The fuel farm sites listed in the Barnard Dunkelberg & Company 1997 Master 􀁾 􀁐􀁬􀁡􀁮􀁾􀁲􀁥􀁶􀁩􀁥􀁷􀁥􀁤􀀮􀀠The
site at the comer ofWestgrove and Addison road was not considered to be operationall), 􀁾􀁳􀁳􀁡􀁢􀁬􀁥􀀮􀀠The other site located on Addison Road was not on airport land and would have
required airport fuel trucks to transient public roads. These two sites were not considered to be adequate. . Before preceding further a review of the operational aspects surrounding
a fuel fium was made. First, it is desired to have a fuel farm located where airside vehicles v.ill remain "airside" and the large refueling vehicles will not have access to the airport
proper. Secondly and equally important is fire response time. Access for emergency vehicles must be considered. Additionally, street access pertaining to ingress and egress for the 18-wheel
refuelers must be considered. In final, the access to airport refuelers from both a safety and operational standpoint must be reviewed. The above information was used to research and
recommend a new fuel farm site. Any site on the west side ofthe airport would require airfield refuelers to cross the runway so sites west of the runway were not considered. 􀁔􀁷􀁾􀁥that
met the criteriJ!, above are recommended as first (primary) and second secondary) choice. A map depicting those is attached. The first choice is south of the Service Center adjacent
the storage yard. Preliminary discussions with TxDOT and FAA indicate that this site may be acceptable but due to the fact that it might penetrate the Part 77 approach surfaces a secondary
site was identified. The secondary site is located west ofthe police station on the aircraft tie-down area. 1ms site also meets all the operational aspects addressed earlier in this
memo. The secondary site does not encroach Part 77 surfaces or setback restrictions. 􀁾􀀠 7 
!li?15-3 Addison Airport Fuel Farm Advisory Committee Recommendation to City Council November 13, 2001 Background and Current Situation Jack Hopkins, GM of Million Air, Inc. Discussion
offuel farm • Number of tanks, in-use and abandoned • Average life of tanks • Current location • Lack of contamination •. Condition of eXisting fuel farm Reasons for relocating the fuel
farm • Long-range plans call for upgrading the airport facilities • By moving the fuel farm, the land could be redeveloped into a more aesthetically pleasing purpose Objectives and Recommendation
Laura Herrick, Addison Resident Objectives • Existing fuel farm operators do not wish to increase their operating costs (fuel flowage fees and ground leases). • Most of the existing
tanks have 10-20 years of useful life remaining, are in good operational condition, and the owners do not wish to lose their investment. • If a new fuel farm can be built at the Town's
expense and the operating costs are not increased, the fuel operators will agree to the relocation. Recommendation A. The committee recommends the following course of action for relocating
the fuel farm: . 1. The Town of Addison would build the new fuel farm at a recommended primary or secondary site (see B below). 2. Engineers hired to design the new fuel farm must have
sign-off by' current fuel tank owners/lessors before the design/plan is submitted to the Town for approval. 
3. Current fuel tank owners/lessors may continue to use their existing tanks until the new tanks are operational. 4. Current fuel tank owners/lessors would allow the Town of Addison
to remove and clean up the existing fuel farm at the Town's 􀁥􀁸􀁾􀁦􀁥􀁮􀁳􀁥􀀮􀀭 . 5. Town of Addison would bear the cost of removing/cleaning up abandoned tanks. 6. The Town of Addison
would own the new fuel farm and lease tanks to fuel operators. 7. After the new fuel farm is in operation, the fuel flowage fee will be no higher than the current rate as of October
19, 2001 8. Lease rates for fuel tanks would remain at the level currently paid by Addison Express (or their successors) until the expiration of its current lease; for 20 years thereafter,
lease rate increases will be tied to the current Addison Express rate plus CPI. B. The committee recommends the following sites for the new fuel farm: 1. Primary site: Adjacent and South
of the Service Center 2. Secondary site: Adjacent and West of the Police Station and existing tie-down area C. The final selection of a site is dependent on the following criteria: 1.
The site preserves existing approach minimums. 2. The site does not impede future development or improvements to approach minimums. 3. The final site selection is subject to FAA approval.
D. The committee will remain intact until the new fuel farm is operational. E. The committee appointed Jack Hopkins and Laura Herrick co-chairmen of the committee. Jack and Laura will
present these recommendations to the City Council on November 13, 2001. 
8\Yash111f1in Addison Airport .' LEGEND _PROPOSED TAXIWAY "8" (ALT 􀁟􀁅􀁘􀀱􀁓􀁲􀁮􀁾􀁇􀁁􀁉􀁒􀁦􀁉􀁅􀁌􀁄􀀠PAVEMENT 􀁾􀁆􀁕􀁗􀁒􀁾􀁐􀁒􀁏􀁒􀁾􀁔􀁙􀀠UNE 􀁢􀁾__:EXlSl1NG ,PROP£lm LINE .!III FU11JRE
BUILDINGS' . •􀁾􀀧􀀺􀁬􀀭􀀮􀁩􀀮􀁅􀀺􀁘􀁊􀁓􀁔􀁬􀁎􀁇􀀠elilUiINGS -EXlS'llNGB\1ILDINGS Or.! .."on!>" I Primary Site .. 􀁾􀀠i· AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT DRAWING . ADDrSO,tJ AIRPORT. '.'
. . ADDIS,,!N. TEXAS -;.'"<"",, 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 'f 􀁾􀀠 
)d PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UPDATE RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSES u:I According to page 6 of the Phase I Environmental 􀁁􀁳􀁳􀁥􀁳􀁳􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁗􀁰􀁤􀁡􀁴􀁥􀀭􀁰􀁲􀁥􀁰􀁡􀁲􀁥􀁤􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭by
Camp Dresser & McKee dated August 29, 2001, "Based on TNRCC records¥fJ 􂀢􀀠 which document a Compliance Evaluation Inspection (CEI) ofeach ofthe seven fuel farms on April 21; 199.8,
aI/USTs [Underground Storage Tanks] at the fuel farm are now in compliance.'􀁾􀀠The report also references four leaking petroleum storage tank (LPST) sites at the airport's fuel farm.
It is important to note that a LPST site is defined as "A.site at which a confirmed release of a petroleum substance from an UST or AST has occurred. Petroleum substance contamination
which results from multiple sources may be deemed as one LPST site by the agency:; Any significant, uncontrolled release offue! from a tank is considereq a LPST. The cases referenced
by the Phase 1 are not actl,lally leaking tanks, but rather the result of overfills or spills. spills. No evidence. of problems with the individual tanks has been presented or found.
Following is a list of the recommendations contained in Section 7.2.1. In bold . after each recommendation is the necessary action that has been or should be taken: . • Registration
Inconsistencies CDM recommends amended tank registration forms be submitted by Addison Airport (Multi-User Fuel Farm), Cherry Air, Million Air, Mercury Air, and Addison Express to accurately
reflect the status, contents, and/or capacity of their respective tanks. The Town should monitor this activity to ensure that it is completed correctly. Five tanks being used by Addison
Express are registered to both Addison Express and R StemFBO Fuel Farm, three tanks being leased from the town by Mercury Air Center are registered to both the lessee and the lessor,
and one tank is registered to Monarch although they do not have a tank. This recommendation can be easily followed by updating paperwork at the Airport Operator's I Town's conveniencef'
• Regulatory Issues o Based on the absence of TNRCC notification documentation for the releases at the Addison Express fuel farm,. further investigation should be performed to verify
the releases were reported as required. According to information and documentation. pending from by General Manager Ed Morales these releases have been reported as required.1II . o The
removable gates on the spill pads located adjacent to the MultiUser Fuel Farm and Million Air fuel farm should be replaced as 
soon as possible to prevent future spills on the pad from coming in contact with adjacent soil. The gates are outside the individual fuel farm fences and therefore the Airport Operator's
I Town's responsibility. They should be simple and inexpensive to replace. o Texas Prq Air Fuel Farm -if not already done, plug and abandon the associated monitoring well and submit
a Final Site Closure Report. In a letter from EA Engineering dated April 17, 2001 to David Pearc,JII, the Airport Operator was notified ofthe need to plug and abandon these wells. This
farm is the responsibility of the Airport OperatorI Town. According to the TNRCC database, this case is still open.v o Million Air Fuel Farm -obtain a letter from the TNRCC approving
Million Air not to plug and abandon the monitoring wells installed as part of their release investigation. Miliion Air has requested these remain open and has not yet received approval
•. This is a matter ofpaperwork and should be easily resolved. According to the TNRCC database this case has been closed. vi a Jet Way Fuel Farm (formerly R. Stern Fuel Farm) -determine
the reason TNRCC issued a letter approving closure of the LRST case and then subsequently issued another letter stating further corrective action may be necessary. If further corrective
action is necessary, the additional activities should be completed and reported. The last correspondence received by R Stem documents the closure of this case. vii 􀁾􀁣􀁣􀁯􀁲􀁤􀁩􀁮􀁧􀀠to
the TNRCC database, this case has been closed.'''" a AATI Fuel Farm (Multi-User Fuel Farm) -if not already performed, the activities requested in the TNRCC's CARF dated April 6, 1999
should be completed and reported, and a Release Report Form should be submitted to documentthe removal ofthe two 1,000gallon tanks. This is a paperwork issue and the responsibility of
the Airport OperatorI Town ofAddison. a Cherry Air Fuel Farm (Addison Aircraft Storage Fuel Farm) -if not already performed, a risk-based assessment should be completed and reported
to the TNRCC in in an Assessment Report Form. According to the TNRCC database, thIs LPST case has been . closed/x Thelsite assessment has been completed and forwarded to TNRCC. x • Release
Investigation Information obtained from Addison Express indicates that no sampling has or Will be performed in response to releases at their fuel farm.· COM recommends these releases,
as well as any others occurring in the future, should be characterized through a combination of surface, subsurface and/or groundwater sampling and testing to establish baseline soil
and groundwater conditions. AccordIng to Information and documentation 
supplied by General Manager Ed Morales sampling has been accomplished in accordance with TNRCC guidelines.xl Also at issue regarding the Fuel Farm is the question of insurability. All
of the current Iuel farm operators have liability insurance at this time.xii The fuel farm operators' insurance is jhe primary coverage in the event of a covered event. Any difficulty
obtaining insurance coverage is unique to the Airport Operator f Town of Addison. I (Texas Administrative Code. Title 30 Environmental Quality, Part I Texas NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION
COMMISSION, Chapter '334 UNDERGROUND AND ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANKS, Subchapter A GENERAL PROVISIONS; RULE §334.2 Definitions) " See Exhibit A: Notices of Storage Tank Registration III
See Exhibit B: Documentation from Gerner Environmental and Cactus Environmental Iv See Exhibit C: Letter from EA Engineering v See Exhibit 0: TNRCC Database Query Results for LPST 10
# 91471 vi See Exhibit E: TNRCC Database Query Results for LPST 10 # 98890 vii See Exhibit F: Letter Letter from TNRCC to Ray Stem 􀁾􀀢􀀠See Exhibit G: TNRCC Database Query Results for
LPST 10 # 110033 􀁾􀀠See Exhibit H: TNRCC Database Query Results for LPST 10 # 112934 x See Exhibit I: Site Assessment Executive Summary for LPST 10 # 112934 􀁾􀀠See Exhibit B: Documentation
from Gamer Environmental and Cactus Environmental 􀁾􀁉􀀠See Exhibit J: Insurance Documents from Fuel Farm Operators 
p, , " Washington IndpsltialJPfUCess ..' October 15,200] ./,,\.-Mr. David Pearce Washington Staubach Addison Airport 4651 Airport Parkway Addison, Texas 75001 Re: Phase n Environmental
Site Assessment Addison Airport Fuel Farm Dear Mr. Pearce: 'niis letter reaffirms our position for the 􀁩􀁭􀁰􀁯􀁾􀁣􀁥ofconducting the field investigation 'at the airport fuel farm. as
presented in OUf proposal, and accepted by the Town ofAddison on August 15, 2001. 1110 following items are indications that further investigation needs to be conducted in the vicinity
ofthe existing fuel farm: 1. Records indicate spil.ls ofpetroleum products have occutred without the necessa!)' and required 􀁤􀁯􀁣􀁵􀁭􀁥􀁮􀁾􀁯􀁮􀀠on site. These have been known to occur
IlUbsequent to the State ofT(OOIs acknowledging the site had met closure requitements. 2. Fuel tilnks have been abandpned without entering the closure process. 3. Identified tank locations
not previously documented in the Phase 1 report. '. 4. History of spills and releases throughout the tank farm area. S. Contractual obligation for baseline conditioos to be established
as part of Washington Staubach assuming airport operations, .,ft..., We believe that any and all ofthese items warrant establishing an understanding ofcurrent subsurface oonditiollS
for th.eJ)otential oolltaminliltioll from petroleum hydrocarbons, Ifyou 􀁨􀁡􀀮􀁶􀁾􀀠any questions regarding this project, please call me at 2815:2.9.8939. ., II Sincerely • WASIllNGTON
GROUP INTERNATIONAL,INC. " 􀀬􀁾􀁾􀀠􀀯􀁦􀁾􀀠Paul R. Wild Manager of Environmental ServiCes TNRCC' Registered CAPM #00385 " Washington Group Iotarnatlona.l, Inc." 1250 W. Sam Hovt\ton
Parkway South· Houston. TX USA ,.,042 • P.O. Box 1281 • Hov!"tOl'l. TX USA 7725'-1281 F'hol'Ie: 􀀨􀀲􀀸􀁬􀀩􀁢􀁾􀀳􀀰􀀰􀀰􀀢􀀠Fax:: (281) 􀁾􀀢􀀢􀁜􀂥􀁷􀁷􀀮􀁷􀁧􀁩􀁮􀁴􀀮􀀨􀀻􀁑􀁭􀀠• 
Addison Airport Fuel Farm Fuel Storage Area!ir. #1 Fairway Aviation (972) 312-9046 Million Air (972) 248-1600 Stem AIr (972) 9SO-21l33 #3 Mercury Air (972) 9W-0216 Addison Express (972)
713-7000 Stem Air 114 Cn.ny Air (214) 248-1707 See pages 2-91'or detailed Information DMSIONt DRAWINOBY: RAY YAGER N """" " ... -" 
9 3Dl s· 3 (I) 3;] Addison Airport FuelFann Fuel Storage area #1 Mercury Air .)etA 12,OOOGol. Containment Pit Emergency Fuel Sh .tnff I 􀁾.. FlRllDEPARTMENT OPERATIONS DIVISION 
Addison Airport Fuel Farm Fuel Storage area #2 -------.---------------------------------------------------1 i i o 􀀡􀁾o 'mi 􀀬􀁾􀀠·n::::l..... !!1. i::::l i i3 m 3"U ::+ , i i i L--_-_---------------
----.-r---------------------------._._t NFIRE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS DIVISION ORA'WING BY: RAYYAOER, """" Emergency Fuel Shutoff * , i i i ii.. ________________________________ 
,,< ... FlREDEPARTMENT OPERATIONS DIVISION t N Addison Express .letA 12,000 Gal. Addison Express Jet A 12,000 Gal. Addison Expr&ss .letA 12,000 Gal. Addison Airport Fuel Farm Fuel Storage
area #3 DRAWING BY: RAYYAOER. """" 
Addison Airport Fuel Fann Fuel Storage area #4 Area 3 Cherry Air Jet A 12,000081. Cherry Air Jet A 12,000 Gal. I Emergency * •• Fuel Shutoff Fence FIRE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS DlVlSION
t N 
: .\ ,; , 
Pax: 972.788.9334 -465] fJrport Parkway Addison, Texas 75001 Phone: 972.392.4855 Memo To: Mark Acevedo, Administrator Facilities & Fleet Services From: David C. Pearce, Airport Director
CC: Darci Neuzil, Assistant Airport Director Bob Katzen, Real Estate Operations Manager Date: 10/2612001 Re: Fuel Farm Site Recommendation Comments: Tbis memo is to provide a recommendation
to design and construct a new fuel farm at the Addison Airport. The recommendation is based on a number offactors listed below. In order to provide a true understanding of the many issues
surrounding this proposal, a background summary, council appointed corrunittee recommendations, corrunittee documents, and a copy ofthe initial committee briefing are provided for review.
To remain focused on the task, the WashingtoniStaubach recommendation will be in response to the task only which was to identifY potential fuel farm site locations. Fuel farm rates and
charges are not part ofthis recommendation and therefore will not be addressed. Recommendation WashingtoniStaubach recommends approval of the Primary and secondary sites depicted on
the attached map. Both sites allow separation ofairfield and 18wheel vehicles, easy emergency response access, keeps 18 wheel refuelers off of main streets and are on currently owned
airport land. The Fire Marshal has review both site to ensure they conform to all applicable codes. Background Upon receiving the contract to manage the Addison Airport, an agreement
was made to have an assessment of the environmental conditions at the Addison Airport. It would be logical to assume that this was generated because an environmental condition baseline
is needed to obtain the Pollution Liability Insurance for the fuel farm; a requirement outlined in 
Memo dated 10126/01 Fuel Farm Site Recommendation Page 2 the contract. None-the-Iess, the Town ofAddison contracted with Camp Dresser and McKee (COM) to accomplish a Phase I Environmental.
COM performed a Phase 1Environmental Update to their previous 1998 report. The Update indicated environmental deficiencies. The report indicated that records depicted petroleum spills
subsequent to the State acknowledging site closure and that there is a history of fuel spills and releases throughout the fuel fann area. COM recommended that the Town enter the voluntary
cleanup program. During this time, subsequent inspections of the fuel fann were also made. It appears that fuel fann tanks have been abandoned without entering the closure process. Based
on the COM report and subsequent inspections, WashingtoniStaubach was unable to obtain Pollution Liability Insurance. Based on the above, we recognized that a Phase II environmental
is required. A Phase I Environmental is performed to assess and identify compliance with EPA EPA regulatory gnidance. It provides an overview ofexisting conditions but it does not go
beyond that i.e. determining the extent of deficiencies. Therefore, the Phase I does not provide a baseline for transfer of property. Additionally, the only practical option wonld be
to enter the voluntary cleanup program when performing the Phase II Enviroumental. With that said, we assessed the options. Performing a Phase II environmental and entering the voluntary
cleanup program presents some unique challenges. Currently there are 29 underground storage tanks (USTs) of which 14 are in service. The 15 abandoned tanks will need to be removed as
well as the some ofthe ground surrounding them. It is likely that there will be open holes for a period oftime during the mitigation process. This is the point where we based our options.
Options It is likely that access to the existing fuel fann will be impacted during a cleanup process. To eliminate any impact the option of staging fuel trucks near but not adjacent
the fuel fann during the construction period was assessed. The benefit of this is that fuel availability wonld not be impacted however, the potential for ground and storm water contamination
is high as well as fire and safety concems. We eliminated this option. We contacted some other airports and engineering companies to obtain a general conscientious on what is the average
service life on USTs. We found that one conld plan to find leaks around the 17-25 y<Jilf point. Reviews ofthe Addison tanks depict that all ofthe in use tanks are over 15 years with
many of the abandoned tanks being well over the 25-year point. With that as a base line it appears that the decision was weather to clean up the existing fuel fimn and continue it's
use or look at constructing a new fuel fann, transitioning into the new fuel fann and then cleanup the existing fuel fann. We selected the later. After review of the above information,
it was decided that a committee would be formed to also research, analyze, and recommend a preferred site site for the new fuel fann and a methodology for its operation to the City Council.
Their report is enclosed. 
Memo dated IOa6/0I Fuel Fann Site Recommendation Page 3 Site Selection The fuel farm sites listed in the Barnard Dunkelberg & Company 1997 Master Plan was reviewed. The site at the comer
ofWestgrove and Addison road was not considered to be operationally assessable. The other site located on Addison Road was not on airport land and would have required.airport fuel tmcks
to transient public roads. These two sites were not considered to be adequate. Before preceding further a review of the operational aspects surrounding a fuel farm was made. First, it
is desired to have a fuel farm located where airside vehicles will remain "airside" and the large refueling vehicles will not have access to the airport proper. Secondly and equally
important is fire response time. Access for emergency vehicles must be considered. Additionally, street access pertaining to ingress and egress for the IS-wheel refuelers must be considered.
In final, the access to airport refuelers from both asafety and operational standpoint must be reviewed. The above information was used to research and recommend a new fuel farm site.
Any site on the west side ofthe airport would require airfield refuelers to cross the runway so sites west of the runway were not considered. Two were that met the criteria above are
recommended as first (primary) and second secondary) choice. A map depicting thoseis attached. The first choice is south of the Service Center adjacent the storage yard. Preliminary discussions with TxDOT and FAA indicate that this site may be acceptable but due to
the fact that it might penetrate the Part 77 approach surfaces a secondary site was identified. The secondary site is located west of the police station on the aircraft tie-down area
This site also meets all the operational aspects addressed earlier in this memo. The secondary site does not encroach Part 77 surfaces or setback restrictions. 
LEGEND􀁦􀁾􀁤􀁤􀁩􀀠on Air-Dort I PROPOSED TAXIWAY "B" (ALT R(W) EXISTING AIRFIElD PAVEMENT Primary Site ;" ,,'" FUTURE PRoPitRTY LINE ---EXISTING PROF'ERTY LINE ._ FUTURE BUILDINGS EXISTING
BUILDINGS EXISTING BUILDINGS ON AIRPORT 􀁾􀀠ADDlS.ON AIRPORT􀀮􀁾􀁷􀁡􀁓􀁨􀁩􀁮􀁧􀁴􀁯􀁮􀀠AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT DRAWING ADDISON, TEXAS 
• Rules o( engagement (ROE) • Background • Committee objectives • Approach • Existing conditions • New site considerations • Operating methodology • Site options 
Rules ofEngai,. • Stay aligned to working with committee members • All options assessed • There are no bad suggestions • It is OK to disagree • Recommendations submitted to Council in
October for November Council 
􀁂􀁡􀁣􀀧􀁔􀀭􀁾􀀢􀀠• Philosophy • Ownership • Tanks and condition • Environmental • Positive Action 
Committee Db· • • Recommend a potential fuel farm site • Recommend operational methodology 
'",., • Review & discuss 1997 Master Plan recommendations • Assess other potential sites • Obtain consensus ofbest site • Discuss operational methodology • Recommend methodology • Transition
to new fuel farm 
Existing 􀁃􀁏􀁊􀀮􀁾... • Fuel farm configuration • Location • Operational requirements • Phase I Environmental • Phase II Environmental 
New Site Consi • EPA & 􀁾􀀠TNRCC compliance • Safety • Separation of airside & roadside traffic • Location to users • Integration with existing conditions • Future conditions 
LEGENDso 􀁁􀁩􀁴􀁾􀁰􀁯􀁲􀁴􀀠'?,:,':PROPOSED TAXIWAY "8" (ALT R/W) EXISllNG AIRFIELD PAV1::MENT ,' .. :' FU 11JRE PROPERTY LINE '-'-'EXISTING PROPERTY LINE .!III FU11JRE BUILDINGS EXISTING
BUILDINGS EXISTING BUILDINGS ON AIRPORT Potential Site Potential Site 􀁾􀀠􀁍􀁬􀁕􀁾􀀢􀀢􀀠. :"'Site A ... -. -. . ADDiSON AIRPORT:"waShlngton AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT DRAWING ADDISON,
TEXAS 
Operating Methoi€4tfj' • Single source fuel to multiple provid#lj>I • Multiple tank owners with individual fuel providers • Town constructs fuel farm & leases to providers • Town leases
land to fuel providers, they construct fuel farm 
• • 􀁾􀀠 .e., 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠 􀁾􀀠\..J 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠c 􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠􀁾􀀠 􀀮􀁾􀀠C'J 0000 􀁾0 􀁾􀀠0 􀁾􀀠U 
• • 00 o 􀁾􀀠U 
• • 00 􀁾􀀮􀀠o U 
• • r.rJ o 􀁾􀀠U 
O¢tober 15, ZOOI Mt· DavldP...... Wsshingtoo Staubach AddiSon Airport 46$1 AlrportPro:kWay Addison, Texas 75001 Re: Phase II llmironmmfolSIk 􀁾􀁴Ad__ AI>portl".ell'um Dear Mr. Pean:e:
Thl, lott", reofIjnru; "'" position r« 􀁬􀁨􀁯􀂷􀁾ofoond<JCtiJis the fi.1d i,v..ligation·" lho ';rport r",,1 fium, as p«SOntod in "'"proposal, iIlld 􀁾bylho Town orAddison o. AuS'JS!
IS, ZOOI. ",. following _ ...... indJ_lhatfwtbet'invcstigolion needs to bo CQIlduellld i. the vIcinity ofthe existing rael farm: . I. _Indicate.pills ofpelri>lewnj>rodllC/S hove 0II0Il!Ied
moutthe n_iIlld requlrtd documentation on site. 1'hesCI have􀁾􀁢􀁥􀁥􀁮􀀠known to oc:eur t'Ubseqmntto the State ofTexas 􀁾􀁵􀀺􀁫􀁮􀁯􀁷􀁫􀁤􀁧􀀡􀁮􀁧􀀱􀁨􀁥􀀠site: had 􀁭􀁥􀁴􀁴􀁬􀁾requb'em.eots.
2. fuel tanks have bo>m 􀁯􀁢􀁡􀁮􀁾withom .-10811>0 .1--.process. 3. IdontIfied lank locstioos not pmlously d .....cnted in !he Ph"",l report. 4. History ofspills end,..1<o= IhrolJ8hout
lho taSlk rllml ...... S. Cootmoltl.d obligation fur basel.,. .,.".ufiOll' to bo _liolled as as plitt ofWasbinglOn Slaubacl. "'"",ing airport opomions. We believe that any and all ofthese
items WB.mUlt establishing an undct1lfMdjng ofOWTCnt .ubswfilee coedi..... for the.po<e.u.1 eontamiNtion from petroleum 􀁢􀁾􀀮If you b."" any question. regarding thi. proj"" pi...."aU
m. 412S 1.529.11939. 􀁓􀁪􀁾􀁙􀁴􀀠W ASIDNGTON GROW INTJ:RNATlONAI, INC. ·PJ jft. Paul R. Wild . M$nagerofBnvlronmentaJ Services TNRCC· Reglstetod CAPM #00385 
Addison Airport Fuel Farm Advisory Committee Recommendation to City Council November 13,2001 Background and Current Situation Jack Hopkins, GM of Million Air, Inc. Discussion offuel
farm • Number of tanks, in-use and abandoned • Average life of tanks • Current location • lack of contamination • Condition of existing fuel fann Reasons for relocating the fuel farm
• long-range plans call for upgrading the airport facilHies • By moving the fuel farm, the land could be redeveloped into a more aesthetically pleasing purpose Objectives and Recommendation
laura Herrick, Addison Resident Objectives • Existing fuel farm operators do not wish to increase their operating costs (fuel flowage fees and ground leases). • Most of the existing
tanks have 10-20 years of useful life remaining, are in good operational condition, and the owners do not wish to lose their investment • If a new fuel famn can be built at the Town's
expense and the operating costs are not increased, the fuel operators will agree to the relocation. Recommendation A. The committee recommends the following course of action for relocating
the fuel famn: . 1. The Town of Addison would build the new fuel farm at a recommended primary or secondary site (see B below). 2. Engineers hired to design the new fuel famn must have
sign-off by current fuel tank ownersllessors before the design/plan is submitted to the Town for approval. 
3. Current fuel tank owners/lessors may continue to use their existing tanks until the new tanks are operational. 4, Current fuel tank owners/lessors would anow the Town of Addison to
remove and clean up the existing fuel farm at the Town's expense . . -5. Town of Addison would bear the cost of removing/cleaning up abandoned tanks. 6. The Town of Addison would own
the new fuel farm and lease tanks to fuel operators, 7. After the new fuel farm is in operation, the fuel flowage fee will be no higherthan the current rate as of October 19, 2001 8.
Lease rates for fuel tanks would remain at the level currantly paid by Addison Express (or their successors) until the expiration of its current lease; for 20 years thereafter, lease
rate increases will be tied to the current Addison Express rate plus CPI. B. The committee recommends the following sites for the new fuel farm: 1. Primary site: Adjacent and South of
the Service Center 2, Secondary site: Adjacent and West of the Police Station and existing tie-down area C. The final selection of a site is dependent on the following criteria: 1. The
site preserves existing approach minimUms. 2. The site does not impede future development or improvements to approach minimums. 3. The final site selection is subject to FAA approval.
D. The committee will remain intact until the new fuel farm is operational. E, The committee appointed Jack Hopkins and Laura Herrick co-chairmen of the committee, Jack and Laura will
present these recommendations to the City Council on November 13, 2001, 
Addison Airport Fuel Farm Advisory Committee Minutes of the October 19, 2001 Meeting I. Discussion of decision to relocate the existing fuel farm A. Response to Phase I report made by
COM • . Documentation provided to update the status of the action items identified in the report • Based on the Phase I report, there is no evidence of contamination B. Reasons for relocating
the fuel farm • Based on the condition of the existing fuel farm, the Town of Addison is not able to obtain insurance • Based on their age, some of the tanks need to be replaced • When
the old tanks are removed, contamination of the soil beneath and around the tanks may be revealed • If contamination has occurred, remediation will be disruptive to the surrounding tanks
• Entering into a Voluntary Cleanup Program, as recommended by COM, will be disruptive to the surrounding tanks • The removal of older tanks will be disruptive to the surrounding tanks
• Long-range plans call for upgrading the fuel farm facilities. • The condition of the airport has not been maintained as well as it could have been and upgrading of facilities is necessary.
• By moving the fuel farm, the land could be redeveloped into a more aesthetically pleasing purpose. C. Objectives of fuel operators • Existing tank owners/lessors do not wish to increase
their operating costs (fuel flowage fees and ground leases). • Most of the existing tanks have 10-20 years of useful life remaining and the owners do not wish to lose their investment.
• If a new fuel farm can be built at the Town's expense and the operating costs are not increased, the fuel operators will agree to the relocation. D. Motions and amendments • Councilman
Barrett proposed a motion that was amended by Laura Herrick, AI Ranyak, Jack Hopkins, John Cummings and Ray Stern. II. Recommendation to Town of Addison City Council A. The committee
recommends the following course of action for relocating the fuel farm: . 1. The Town of Addison would build the new fuel farm at a recommended primary or secondary site (see B below).
2. Engineers hired to design the new fuel farm must have sign-off by current fuel tank owners/lessors before the design/plan is submitted to the Town for approval. 3. Current fuel tank
owners/lessors may· continue to use their existing tanks until the new tanks are operational. 
4. Current fuel tank owners/lessors would allow the Town of Addison to remove and clean up the existing fuel farm at the Town's expense. 5. Town of Addison would bear the cost of removing/cleaning
up abandoned tanks. 6. The Town of Addison would own the new fuel farm and lease tanks to fuel operators. 7. After the new fuel famn is in operation, the fuel flowage fee will be no
higher than the current rate as of October 19, 2001 8. Lease rates for fuel tanks would remain at the level currently paid by Addison Express (or their successors) until the expiration
of its current lease; for 20 years thereafter, lease rate increases will be tied to the current Addison Express rate plus CPI. B. The committee recommends the following sites for the
new fuel famn: 1. Primary site: Adjacent and South of the Service Center 2. Secondary site: Adjacent and West of the Police Station and existing tie-down area C. The final selection
of a site is dependent on the following criteria: 1. The site preserves existing approach minimums. 2. The site does not impede future development or improvements to approach minimums.
3. The final site selection is subject to FAA approval. D. The committee will remain intact until the new fuel farm is operational. E. The committee appointed Jack Hopkins and Laura
Herrick co-chairmen of the committee. Jack and Laura will present these recommendations to the City Council on November 13, 2001. 
, ,!W )( SO '51'A-1Jf>IN4 ,tMM 􀀢􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁲􀁁􀀼􀀮􀀠(UJoF ., , Os 􀂷􀀧􀁰􀁯􀁴􀀮􀀮􀁥􀀢􀀵􀀭􀁴􀁾􀁃􀀾􀀠􀁾􀀠It.. -/I' tj! x 􀁾S' U;"''''' FVet.. 7'Mlf?fo 􀁀􀀻􀀼􀁐􀀼􀁬􀀱􀁖􀁾􀁌􀁅􀀻􀀠?2> '24 􀁆􀁩􀁊􀁾􀀠7;;0I1$)
,,"'4:􀁾􀀭􀁕􀀾􀁍􀀾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀮􀀠􀁾􀁾􀂣􀀾􀀠􀁾􀀬􀀮􀁯􀁊􀀢􀀠{.e:iJt 1_--:" _____􀀭􀀭􀀺􀀮􀁾􀁴􀀧􀀧􀀧􀀮􀁊􀀴􀀠 4 {:1Irt:J.. 01 􀀬􀀬􀀬􀁾􀁩􀁴􀁊􀀺􀀻􀂷􀁲􀁎􀀴􀁦􀀠<S?'ANP? P'12:fEt-nA-/.Ntte'f COA)CorP-r
􀁾􀀠A<--r 'fJ'Pl-/L FU6e.-􀀷􀁾􀀠1i/17/1>1 
Project Schedu1e Design and Construct New Fuel Farm Addison Airport, Addison, Texas Select Design Consultant Topo SUlVey Preliminary Design FAA Preliminary Review Texas Approvals Final
Design FAA Approval Advertise, Bid, and Award Contract Construction Total October 29, 2001 Estimated Time to Complete 10 weeks 4 weeks 4 weeks 6 weeks 6 weeks 4 weeks 6 weeks 20 weeks
60 weeks 
􀀷􀁩􀀵􀁫􀁾􀀠; 􀁾􀁾􀀠/tiff) 􀁳􀁾r' VC;􀁾􀁾􀁦􀁲􀀧􀂭􀁾􀁾􀁲􀀧􀀭􀂭F;1/f-􀀱􀁬􀀭􀁾􀀷􀁾􀀠􀁳􀀺􀀨􀁾􀀬􀀠􀁾..􀁾􀀺􀀠w.rJ-/􀁲􀁥􀁾􀀠R.fQ K-k\;II-e<-..J $ 􀁏􀁑􀁾I 􀁾􀁊􀂭tJ.ud'""t4,.,"k Qr,Jr,,-c,-.:j....
3 􀁶􀁦􀁴􀁑􀀬􀁾.... :, 􀁾􀀮􀁨􀀮􀀻􀀻􀀻􀁉􀀠􀀳􀁗􀀧􀁾-" 
Jim Pierce From: samuel.lundgren@wgint.com Sent: Thursday. October 25.2001 5:07 PM To: jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us Cc: Oavid_Pearce@staubach. com; macevedo@cLaddison.tx.us Subject: FW:
FUEL FARM PROCESS Jim, As Requested. Sam From: Samuel Lundgren [mailto:samuel.lundgren@wgint.coml Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:49 AM To: David Pearce@staubach.com Cc: Neil Rood;
Paul R Wild Subject: RE: FUEL FARM PROCESS Dave Happy Thursday! How's this for your answer? Design and Construction Time Estimate For Addison Airport, Addison, TX Bulk Fuel Storage and
Dispensing Facility Design Estimate: Site Investigation & Survey 4 weeks Mechanical/Electrical Design 6 weeks Arch/Civil/Structural Design 4 weeks NEPA Documents and TX Approvals 4 weeks
Total Design Time 18 weeks Bid Documents & Misc Contracting Support 1 week Construction Estimate: Mob, Site work, pavement & utilities 25 days Containment Structure and Pad 10 days Storage
tanks & piping 20 days Controls and Equipment 15 days Cover and structure 20 days Contingency & weather 10 days Total Construction Time 100 days Assuming: For design, TX approvals will
be FAA (site), TRNCC (fuel system and NEPDES permit alteration) and EPA (for Dallas-Ft Worth air quality non-attainment review). For construction, fabricated tanks are ordered immediately
upon contracting and can be delivery on site by day 40 of the 1 
contract and that specific fue_ equipment/meters/filters are a_ J ordered immediately for delivery on site by day 55 of the contract. Please call if you have questions, Sam Lundgren,
P.E. Project Manager, Airport Services Washington Group Infrastructure Phone (303)948-4041, Fax (303)948-4789 -----Original Message----From: David Pearce@staubach.com [mailto:David Pearce@staubach.co
ml Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:05 AM To: Samuel.Lundgren@wgint.com Subject: FUEL FARM PROCESS Sam-can you help me with this? Dave -----Forwarded by David Pearce/Staubach on 10/25/2001
11:16 AM ----cterry@ci.addi 􀁳􀁯􀁮􀀮􀁴􀁸􀁾􀁵􀁳􀀠To: jpierce@ci.addison.tx.us ceo 􀁭􀁡􀁣􀁥􀁶􀁥􀁤􀁯􀁀􀁣􀁩􀀮􀁡􀁤􀁤􀁩􀁳􀁯􀁮􀀮􀁴􀁸􀁾􀁵􀀵􀀬􀀠10/25/2001 David Pearce@staubach.com 10:11 AM Subject:
FUEL FARM PROCESS 􀁊􀁾􀀬􀀠I need to know the following for next Thursday night's Council Worksession: what is the estimated time to complete the design and construction of a fuel farm
if we started in January, 2002? Segment out for me the design and the construction time estimates. What regulatory approvals are required to design, construct, commission and begin operation
of a new fuel farm. These approval processes of all appropriate regulatory agencies need to be factored into the timeline. I am sure Dave can help you with these projections. I need
this by Tuesday, 10/30 at 5:00 p.m. Don't worry we are not planning to start building one in January, I just want to understand the process and required time to do 50. Thanks. 2 
(As submitted to Dave Pearce, Airport Director on 10/25/01) Design and Construction Time Estimate For Addison Airport Bulk Fuel storage and Dispensing Facility Design Estimate: Site
Investigation & Survey 4 weeks Mechanical/Electrical Design 6 weeks Arch/Civil/Structural Design 4 weeks NEPA Documents and TX Approvals 4 weeks Total Design Time 18 weeks Bid Documents
& Mise Contracting Support 1 week Construction Estimate: Mobilization, Site work, pavement & utilities 25 days Containment Structure and Pad 10 days Storage tanks & piping 20 days Controls
and Equipment 15 days Cover and structure 20 days contingency & weather 10 days Total Construction Time 100 days Assuming: For design, TX approvals will be FAA (site), TRNCC (fuel system
and NEPDES permit alteration) and EPA (for Dallas-Ft Worth air quality non-attainment review). For construction, fabricated tanks are ordered immediately upon contracting and can be
delivery on site by day 40 of the contract and that specific fuels equipment/meters/filters are also ordered immediately for delivery on site by day 55 of the contract. Please call if
you have questions, Sam Lundgren, P.E. Project Manager, Airport Services Washington Group Infrastructure phone (303) 948-4041, Fax (303) 948-4789 
Jim Pierce From: Chris Ter!), Sent: Thursday, October 25,200110:12 AM To: Jim Pierce Cc: Mark Acevedo; 'David_Pearce@staubach.com' Subject: FUEL FARM PROCESS Jim, I need to know the
following for next Thursday night's Council Worksession: What is the estimated time to complete the design and construction of a fuel farm if we started in Janua!)', 2002? Segment out
for me the design and the construction time estimates. What regulato!)' approvals are required to design, construct, commission and begin operation of a new fuel farm. These approval
processes of all appropriate regulato!), agencies need to be factored into the timeline. I am sure Dave can help you with these projections. I need this by Tuesday, 10/30 at 5:00 p.m.
Don't wor!), -we are not planning to start building one in Janua!)', I just want to understand the process and required time to do so. Thanks. ,ta.-lf k.J 􀀨􀀯􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀷􀀿􀀬􀁟􀀧􀀠t-,(frl-t.''''-c
&J(f􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀠1S--c:l7. 􀁾􀁉ritA-􀁾􀁾􀀠 􀁦􀁾􀁾􀀠 AJrf-U 􀁨􀀭􀁾􀀠􀁴􀁴􀁇􀀭􀂥􀁾􀀠􀁾I 6l1v& 􀁾􀁾􀀮􀁬􀀭􀀭􀁴􀁬􀁪􀁜􀁾􀀠rkrn./bhv-rvr--i 1 
MEMORANDUM To: Ron Whitehead, City Manager May 30, 2001 From: Chris Terry, Assistant City Manager Subject: FUEL FARM ADVISORY COMMITTEE It is time to begin work on our planning efforts
to move and close the existing fuel farm on the Airport. This is a major infrastructure project for the Airport that will benefit from a planning effort involving various stakeholders
and community leaders familiar with the Airport and its operations. An item will appear on the June 12, 2001 Regular City Council Agenda which requests that the Council officially create
and charge this special advisory committee with the work of researching, analyzing and recommending a preferred site for the new fuel farm and methodology for its operation. In advance
of the Council meeting, staff wanted to allow the Councilmembers to begin considering individuals best suited to serve on this special advisory committee. Staff recommends a committee
size limited to no more than 8-10 individuals. If each Councilmember knows of someone they would like to serve on the Committee, please have them forward such names to Michele Covino
or me in advance of the June 12 Council meeting. Ideally, it would be helpful to receive such recommendations from the Councilmembers prior to next Tuesday. June 5. 2001 so staff can
identify the full roster of recommended individuals in the official Council packet to be distributed on Wednesday, June 6. Generally, we believe this will be a 2-3 month work period
for the committee which will be facilitated by Addison Airport Director, Dave Pearce. We anticipate that the committee will complete its work and return to the City Council with a final
recommendation in August, 2001. Dave Pearce has recommended that representatives from the three major FBOs serve on the committee. These individuals are: Jack Hopkins, MiliionAir; Edward
Morales, Addison Express and Jeff Smith, Mercury Air. Additional information on this request will be included in the next Council packet. Should you have any questions, please give me
a call. CC: Dave Pearce Mark Acevedo CT 
Jim Pierce From: Jim Pierce Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 10:47 AM To: Chris Terry; Mark Acevedo Cc: David Pearce (E-mail); Michael Murphy Subject: Airport Environmental I have been in
contact with Bob Owens of Environmental Innovations. Bob stated that he did not do any sampling at the airport. His main job for AATI was to prepare the Addison Airport Action Plan,
May, 1998, which I have a copy of. Bob referred me to Todd Frazee of EA Engineering Science & Technology. Todd stated EA worked on two leaking petroleum storage tank sites on the airport.
One was the Texas Pro Air site at which tanks were removed in the late 80's. EA received closure on this site last year. The other site was a 12 tank site that AATlleased and sub leased.
This site is closed except for plugging the remaining monitoring wells. Todd agreed to send me copies of the closure info for these sites. EA also prepared a storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan and a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan for the airport. Todd said he would send me a copy of each. Jim Pierce, P.E. Assistant Public Works Director PO Box 9010 Addison,
TX 75001-9010 972-450-2879 1 
Recommendations and Scope of Work For Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing Facility And Underground Fuel Storage Tank Removal Prepared for Addison Airport Addison, Texas 1. Tasking: The
Town of Addison requested Washington Infrastructure to perform a review, make recommendations and develop the scope ofwork for design ofa replacement Bulk Fuel Storage Facility. The
design and subsequent construction is to be accomplished in conjunction with the removal ofall existing Underground Fuel Storage Tanks, as specified in the to be developed and approved
Underground Fuel Storage Tank Removal Plan. 2. References: Addison Airport ALP (Barnard Dunkelberg & Co), dated May 1999, and Addison Airport 10 year ClP (Shimek, Jacobs & Finklea, LLP),
dated Feb 2000 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update (Camp Dresser & McKee), dated Feb 1,2001 Addison Airport Development Drawing (Washington Infrastructure), dated Oct 30, 2000.
3. Background: Although the Capital Improvement Program (ClP) for Addison Airport, does not specifically address an upgrade or replacement Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing facility,
the current status and regulatory requirements for the numerous underground fuel storage tanks on Airport property mandate action. The referenced Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
indicates a need to control bulk fuel storage and dispensing, including the installation ofenvironmental protection and spill prevention systems, along with the necessity ofbringing
the Airport into compliance with the current Underground Storage Tanks (UST) requirements. A do nothing alternative is not discussed because of the mandated upgrades required for the
systems and because closing the airport is not considered a reasonable or viable option. 4. Discussion: Centralized Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing versus Decentralized The existing
decentralized bulk fuel storage and dispensing systems are convenient for the tenant operators on the Airport. However, as indicated in the Phase I Environmental Assessment, and subsequent
actions by the Airport's insurance carrier, environmental and spill prevention controls, along with operational and spill response accountability are not up to current requirements or
standards. As the Airport property owner, the Town of Addison is responsible for oversight and management of environmental requirements and will face increased liability for poor management
practices. In comparing the convenience of decentralized bulk fuel storage and dispensing facilities versus a centralized system on the Airport, a centralized system allows for better
security and effective management and monitoring ofoperations as well as the installation ofstandardized storage systems with appropriate environmental and spill prevention controls.
In addition, a new centralized system ADS: 05/14/01 1 
could be constructed in a large berm/diked containment area that would prevent catastrophic tank leakage and fuel release. A centralized system also allows the installation ofspill collections
systems under the bulk fuel unload and dispensing stands, to safely collect inadvertent spills into an oil/water separator. Finally, the cost ofretrofitting appropriate environmental
and spill prevention controls, plus the cost to either install double wall underground fuel storage tanks with leak detection, or the area and cost to berm/dike new single wall above
ground fuel storage tanks at each decentralized location, makes a centralized storage and dispensing facility a more cost effective alternative. Recommendation Number 1: The Town of
Addison and the Airport mandate that all bulk fuel storage and dispensing systems on the Airport are to be constructed in a centralized location with the appropriate containment and
spill collection systems. 5. Proposed Location for a new Centralized Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing Facility: A proposed location for the "Future Fuel Farms" was identified on the
May 1999 Airport Layout Plan (ALP); however, the site is not currently owned by the Airport. In addition, questions ofland use and zoning compatibility could be raised, since the surrounding
area and facilities are comrnercial/business, not industrial, and aircraft refuel truck access to the aircraft parking areas could be a problem. Some concerns may also be raised about
large over the road tanker trucks accessing the site for bulk fuel delivery. Several alternative locations are possible; however, for existing property owned by the Airport, a new proposed
location was identified on the North side of the airport, from the intersection ofBent Tree Plaza, along Westgrove Road, adjacent to the Town Servicing Yard and Facilities. Construction
would be outside the existing east Runway Obstacle Free Area line, but inside the 20 foot Building Restriction Line, which will make height of facilities a mctor for design. The location
is compatible with the Town Servicing Yard activities and also provides an opportunity to install a Town use, gas/diesel vehicle dispensing pump, while providing for bulk storage within
the Airport site. The greatest disadvantage ofthe location is that construction heights will be limited and the site is in the proposed "Future Approach" Runway Protection Zone. Construction
of the Bulk Fuel Storage Facility on this site will preclude upgrading Runway 15, as listed on the May 1999 ALP, to a higher category precision instrument approach. Recommendation Number
2: A review ofthe proposed Bulk Fuel Storage Site, along with all identified alternatives, should be accomplished by an Airport Review committee to verifY siting criteria and other considerations,
with the selected site to be submitted to FAA for final approval. Specific consideration should be given to current and future runway protection zone requirements and runwayfILS development.
6. Airport Ownership versus Supplier Ownership of Storage Tanks and Dispensing Equipment: The key factors to consider in determining ownership of the storage tanks and dispensing equipment
include available funds, risk management, desire and ability to maintain the system ADS: 05/14/01 2 
and stability of the users. lfthe Town!Airport has sufficient funding available and desires to make the up-front investment in a new storage and dispensing system, they can recover the
investment by long term leasing of storage and dispensing to users. The advantages are construction ofstandardized storage tanks and dispensing equipment, common operation and maintenance
procedures, and if any user develops financial problems, the storage and equipment is owned by the Airport and will not be included in any bankruptcy proceedings. The disadvantages are
that the Town!Airport must maintain the tanks and equipment either by contract or with in house personnel, and the Airport keeps liability for the storage tanks and dispensing equipment,
along with the site. lfthe TenantIFBO/Supplier installs the bulk storage and dispensing equipment, installed items should be specified and approved by the Airport for standardization
oftank size, material and construction, along with commonality of dispensing equipment. If tank and dispensing equipment is provided and installed by the TenantlFBO, lease documents
should provide for immediate acquisition by the Airport at the amortized value ofthe equipment if the operator develops financial problems. Recommendation Number 3: To limit environmental
liability, insure unifurm equipment, construction standards and operations, the Town should construct the Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing Facility and lease the required equipment and
storage tanks to the Supplier/OperatorlFBO. 7. Single bulk fuel storage system versus multi-supplier system A single bulk fuel storage and dispensing system is the most efficient from
a cost and space utilization perspective; however, if a single system is used to supply all users ofthe Airport, then the system should be owned by the Airport. This will also require
the Airport to competitively bid the total airfield fuel requirement on an annual or biennial basis and all users must purc1Jase from tbis supply. The advantages are generally a lower
per gallon gallon price and a stable price to the user over the life of the supply contract; however, with market fluctuation, if the cost per gallon declines after the contract, the
user will still pay the same. In short, the Airport is buying all fuelsand the users buy fuels from the Airport and there is no competition after the Airport contracts for the best price available at time of contract. Since there is no market competition
after contract, if the price of fuel goes up, it's a good deal and ifit goes down, the contract becomes a poor deal. Current FBO arrangements with branded fuel suppliers could be impacted
by a single fuel storage operation. The decision to take the Airport into the aviation fuel market as a supplier should be carefully considered by Airport and Town management. Recommendation
Number 4: Because space limitation is not an issue and there is a desire for supplier competition, along with ease of operation, a multi-supplier operation is recommended. 8. Bulk fuel
storage system Options: • Combined Use Storage Facility with Shared Off-LoadIDispensing Facility ADS: 05114101 3 
This option may be the best option in terms ofspace use and total cost. With a combined use storage facility, one large fuel storage complex could be designed with secondary contaimnent
designed for the largest storage tank in the complex. This method allows maximum flexibility for future needs and provides for maximum storage capacity in the minimum area used. The
shared on-load/dispensing equipment also economizes on space use as well as cost, since only one storage and dispensing system is constructed. The storage tanks would use a card or key
system to track withdrawal from the system by each user. This system would work with one supplier, competitively bid by the Airport, for all airport users. Some disadvantages of this
system is that al1 users share the facility, which could be an operationaVmaintenance problem, which will be an Airport responsibility, and there is increased liability risk to the Airport.
If a spill occurs, it also may be more difficult to track responsibility. • Combined Use Off-Load and Storage Facility with Individual Dispensing Facilities This option varies from the
above option in that there is one selected fuel supplier and bulk fuel storage source which is dispensed to individual TenantJFBO for convenience ofaccounting and access to the stored
bulk aviation fuel. • Individual Storage Facilities using a Combined Use Off-LoadlDispensing Facility This option varies from the first in that one Off-LoadlDispensing Stand would use
electronically control1ed pumps to place off-loaded fuel into the correct bulk fuel storage tank and electronically controlled dispensing pump would select fuel from the correct bulk
fuel storage tank to fill aircraft fuel servicing trucks. Advantage is a little less space required for Combined Off-LoadlDispensing facility, but the design ofthe electronically controlled
pump/manifold system is critical and there will be some product remaining in the dispensing piping after delivery, which goes to the next user. • Consolidated Individual Facilities for
Each Aviation Fuel Operators This concept is that each TenantJFBO/Supplier has an individual bulk fuel storage and dispensing system, either leased from the Airport or owned, within
the Airport Bulk Fuel Storage site. Ifequipment and storage tanks are built by the users/suppliers, they fol1ow Airport mandated standards for construction on the Airport owned site
and the equipment and storage tanks are maintained by the user/supplier. Individual storage and dispensing equipment can be either Airport or TenantJFBO/Supplier installed and owned.
The advantage is that each storage and dispensing system is operated by the user, for clear delineation ofaccounting and responsibility, plus consolidated individual systems minimizes
liability to the Airport. The greatest disadvantage is the individual system requires more area for construction. Recommendation Number 5: Individual bulk fuel storage tanks, off-load
and dispensing systems, consolidated in one environmentally protected site, including covered tanks and operating equipment, with suitable architectural considerations to blend into
the site and constructed by the Airport, for long term lease to suppliers, operatora or FBOs. 9. Other Considerations: ADS: 05/14101 4 
Industry standard filtering systems with automatic shutdown and alarms should be installed on the Off-Load side of the Storage Tanks, to protect product in the fuel storage tanks. Overflow
protection devices should be installed on all Fuel storage tanks and connected to the pump control panel. Pump/Dispensing Control panel or panels, should be logically sequenced, gauged
to fuel storage tanks for fuel level indication, and clearly marked for ease ofoperations. An oillwater separator should be installed and connected to the bermed containment area, using
a valved connection and the Off-LoadlDispensing pad to allow for immediate wash-down of any spilled product. The Off-LoadIDispensing Pad should be large enough to provide a designated
parking spot for any aircraft refueler vehicle that develops a leak. Fuel storage area should have explosion proof electrical fixtures and control panel. An I W' water line will be required
for emergency eye wash unit and a I" hose and reel unit installed for wash down. The hose must reach all areas ofthe facility, including the oil/water separator. An emergency telephone/intercom/trans
mitter device should be installed with direct link to the Fire Station alarm room. Use ofa concrete low wall would allow a more compact containment berm area and would also allow lowering
the storage tank area by two to three feet, ifFAA Part 77 geometry is a problem, or for appearance, ifdesired. Installing a panel and frame roof system, that allows access to storage
tanks, would minimize rainfall into the containment area. This would also allow the contaiument area to be valve connected to a smaller oil/water separator so that any major spill in
the containment area can be washed down and pumped out through the oillwater separator. A panel and frame roof system would also enhance the facility appearance from outside the Airport
property. Access from the outside (airport land side) should be controlled with electrically operated gates and a code or key access pad. Paved access will be required from from the
street and from Taxiway "A." Street connection should include driveways, curb and gutter. If desired, the Town's diesel and mogas storage tanks could be included in this project, with
dispensing pad located within the Town Maintenance yard area. Finally, recommend fuel spill neutralizing agent be stored in the covered area ofthe facility. The estimated cost for construction
of the Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing Facility, as outlined above, is $2,800,000. 10. Scope of work: In accordance with recommendations one through five, plus paragraph 9, above, and
including all other appropriate guidance and recommendations from the Town Management, provide comprehensive design services and the production ofbid documents for the new Bulk Fuels
Storage and Dispensing Facility at Addison Airport. Service should include developing an Environmental Assessment (EA) or a Category Exclusion (CATEX) document, as required, a detailed
engineers construction estimate, construction acquisition process support, bid result review, and optional construction management and inspection, and project c1ose-outlas-built service,
if desired by the Airport and Town. The estimate for comprehensive design services as listed above, without optional Construction Support Services, is $248,500. ADS: 05/14/01 5 
CONCEPTUAL SCOPE OF WORK For Undefiround Fuel Storage Tank Removal 1. Discussion: The following narrative describes the typical activities and possible results ofthe Underground Storage
Tank (UST) removal and enviromnental remediation program at Addison Airport. The narrative is not in itself a detailed scope ofwork but is intended to provide guidance to Airport and
Town Management on Enviromnental Consultant requirements and to support efforts in obtaining qualified contractors consultants to successfully execute the Airport UST removal program.
Enviromnental Consultant and Management functions are required at the Airport to oversee construction, evaluation, remedial actions, and monitoring ofpossible problem sites, and to assist
with qualified contractor selection. In addition to a Comprehensive Site Assessment, the Enviromnental Engineer must be prepared to rapidly accomplish specific tasks, such as contamination
assessment for sites discovered during construction, in an effort to accomplish the UST removal as expeditiously and cost effectively as possible. 2. Background and Tasking: From best
information available and according to the referenced Phase I Enviromnental Site Assessment Update, 29 registered UndergrOlllld Storage Tanks (USTs) and one unregistered above ground
storage tank are located at the airport, ofwhich 15 USTs are currently inactive. The remaining 14 active USTs and one above ground storage tank must remain in service until a new bulk
fuel storage and dispensing facility has been constructed or suitable temporary alternatives are available. There is also concern that additional unregistered above ground and underground
fuel storage tanks may be on the Airport. It is assumed that the new construction site will be on the Airport and that the Airport and Town will provide general or specific management
and oversight ofthe new facility. In addition, the Airport and Town desire that the 15 inactive USTs be fully taken out ofservice and have final actions accomplished, which would be
defined as as either permanent abandomnent in place or removal. Subsequent to the activation ofthe new bulk fuel storage and dispensing facility at the Airport, the remaining 14 USTs
will be taken out ofservice and permanently abandoned or removed. For all USTs, removal is the preferred option, unless utility lines or structures would be at substantial risk from
removal operations, or the associated cost ofremoval is excessive. Based on the available information and conditions on site, the most efficient and effective process for comprehensive
removal of all USTs at Addison Airport will be to first investigate, categorize and develop a baseline, then develop a UST removaVcompliance/remediation plan, based on the investigation.
After plan approval, proceed with UST removal or permanent abandomnent by a licensed UST removal contractor and accomplish final remediation on each site, as required. 3. Environmental
Baseline Survey and Investigation: An investigation is required to determine site conditions at each UST and establish a Baseline for the Airport that clearly indicates the environmental
status ofthe Airport with new Airport Management and Operations. The Phase I Enviromnental Site Assessment Update indicates several incidences of hydrocarbon spills to the surface. Although
existing USTs should have been at least tank tightness tested, these documented spills, potential undocumented spills and associated underground piping leakage would not be detected
using only a tank tightuess test. A ADS: 05114/01 6 
soil gas analysis should be accomplished on all USTs as soon as possible to evaluate current subsurface conditions relative to the possible presence ofhydrocarbons from released fuels.
Soil gas analysis is a sensitive, relatively accurate, and relatively inexpensive method of identifying impacts to geologic media. For this reason, a soil gas analysis should be conducted
in the areas of the USTs andlor identified spill areas. The soil gas analysis will be key information in developing the Airport Environmental Baseline Survey and Investigation. The Environmental
Consultant should also perform an extensive docnment, construction plan, and inspection report review of all bulk fuel storage tanks and related piping on the Airport as part of the
Investigation. Ifthe Investigation determines that one or more ofthe current operational underground fuel storage tanks are leaking, TNRCC must be notified and the operator must immediately
take that tank out of service andlor take corrective action. The Environmental Consultant should work with the operator to develop reasonable temporary fuel storage options until the
new system can be constructed. In the event that soil gas analysis indicates the probability of impacted geologic media, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) regulations
would require that a Comprehensive Site Assessment be conducted to determine the extent and magnitude ofthe impacts. This would include soil borings, monitoring wells, analytical testing,
a receptor survey, and a hnman health risk assessment, at a minimum. The Environmental Consultant should conduct this work for the Airport and Town under the direction of a TNRCC-registered
Corrective Action Project Manager. 4. Development of detailed UST RemovaJJCompliance/Remediation Plans and Specifications: In some cases, it may be more cost effective to abandon tanks
in place because of safety issues. This is more likely to be the case when utility lines and structures will be placed at risk because of excavation and removal activities. Otherwise,
removal of all tanks to eliminate future liabilities is recommended. The Environmental Consultant will develop detailed plans and specifications to function as bid documents for tank
abandonment andlor removal by qualified tank removal contractors. The Environmental Consultant should also conduct an Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Regulations Analysis to identifY
regulations or reasonably accepted practices that must be, or reasonably should be, complied with for the tank abandonment/removal and remediation programs. This effort assists in identifYing
Federal, State, County, and Town laws, regulations, and ordinances that are mandatory, including identification ofany wastewater discharge permits/approvals, air emissions permits/approvals,
waste disposal permits/approvals, and construction permits. It will also help to identifY industry accepted practices, such as American Petroleum Institute and American National Standards
Institute standards, that are not necessarily mandatory by regulation but which constitute "best practices." 5. Tank abandonment or removal: In accordance with the Airport and Town's
desire to permanently remove the tanks from service, the Environmental Consultant should assist the Airport and Town with selection of a qualified contractor(s) to conduct tank abandonment
or removaL Activities include but are not limited to: site preparation (drain the lines and tanks, remove and dispose or re-use fuels, remove ancillary equipment), remove flammable vapors,
test tank atmosphere, fill tanks with inert material or remove them, backfill pit with clean fill soil, dispose waste soils, dispose tanks, etc. The Environmental Consultant should monitor
and document the removal and remediation activities of the selected contractor(s) and report progress and compliance with statutory requirements and ADS: 05/14/01 7 
contractual obligations fur tank abandonment and/or removal. A detailed, site-specific health and safety plan for the tank abandonmenl1removal process and for all remediation activities
should be developed by the contractor and reviewed by the Environmental Consultant on behalf ofthe Airport and Town. Soils must be excavated from the tank pits to allow access to the
tanks for backfilling or removal. Excavated soils that are not impacted by hydrocarbons can be used for backfill; otherwise, clean soils must be brought from a borrow source for backfilling.
Soils unsuitable as backfill, either because ofpoor geotechnical properties or contamination, must be disposed properly. Contaminated soils will be tested to deterruine contaminant levels,
which will then define the type ofdisposal facility that is suitable. In some situations, contaminated soils may be subjected to a treatment process, such as bio-remediation or thennal
desorption, if it appears cost effective or is necessary because of Federal Land Disposal Restrictions. Waste fuels, i.e. fuels unsuitable for use in aircraft, must be disposed properly.
Tank sediments and emulsions, consisting ofcorrosion byproducts, water, soil particles, and other detritus, must also be disposed properly. Construction equipment wash waters, contaminated
personal protective equipment, sampling devices, and all other waste produced as part of the abandonmenl1removal activities must be properly characterized and disposed. For either abandonment/removal
or remediation activities, soil, water, and wastes must be analyzed for hydrocarbons in order to properly characterize and categorize them. Analytical test methods will be those approved
by the U.S. EPA and TNRCC. The Environmental Consultant should defrne the analytical program and conduct the testing with a National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program approved
lab or other lab that can demonstrate participation in an auditing program administered by a regulatory agency or nationally-recognized standards orgauization. orgauization. Once the
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Regulations Analysis is completed, the Environmental Consultant should either assist the Airport and Town with obtaining the permits, approvals,
and required plans (such plans function as permits by rule) or will monitor the activities of contractors and consultants that are obtaining the permits, approvals, and plans on behalf
of the Airport and Town. Such permits/approvals/plans typically include but are not limited to wastewater discharge permits to municipal sewer systems, air pennits, waste disposal authorizations
from pennitted disposal facilities, one-time waste generator numbers and waste identification numbers, construction permits, construction stonnwater pollution prevention plans, and authorizations
to access privately-operated areas. 6. Final Site Remediation and Close-out: Ifgeologic media are contaminated above acceptable human-health-based levels, a Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
must be implemented according to TNRCC guidelines. The Environmental Consultant should design the CAP and assist the Town with selection of contractors to implement the CAP. Remediation
could involve over-excavation and disposal of waste soils, in situ or ex situ treatment of soils, groundwater treatment, soil vapor extraction, installation of barriers, etc. Excavated
soils that are not impacted by hydrocarbons can be used for backfill; otherwise, clean soils must be brought from a borrow source for backfilling. Soils unsuitable as backfill, either
because of poor geotechnical properties or contanrination, must be disposed properly. Contaminated soils will be tested to detennine contaminant levels, which will then defrne the type
of disposal facility that is suitable. In some situations, contaminated soils may be 􀁳􀁵􀁾ected to a treatment process, such as bio-remediation or thennal desorption, ifit appears cost
effective or is necessary because ofFederal Land Disposal Restrictions. Waste fuels, i.e. fuels unsuitable for use in aircraft, must be disposed properly. Tank sediments and emulsions,
consisting ofcorrosion byproducts, water, soil particles, and other detritus, must also be disposed properly. Construction ADS: 05114{01 8 
equipment wash water, contaminated personal protective equipment, sampling devices, and all other waste produced as part ofthe abandonment/removal activities must be properly characterized
and disposed. For either abandonment/removal or remediation activities, soil, water, and waste must be analyzed for hydrocarbons in order to properly characterize and categorize them.
Analytical test methods will be those approved by the U.s. EPA and TNRCC. The Environmental Consultant should define the analytical program and conduct the testing with a National Environmental
Laboratory Accreditation Program approved lab or other lab that can demonstrate participation in an auditing program administered by a regulatory agency or nationally-recognized standards
organization. With assistance from the contractor(s}, the Environmental Consultant will prepare the project closeout and as-built drawings, which will be coordinated with TNRCC, as required.
7. Scope ofWork: The Environmental Consultant will perform the underground fuel storage tank environmental baseline survey and investigation, as outlined in section 3, performing soiVgas
analysis on a forty foot (40') grid at all UST locations. Using information gained or developed in this survey and investigation, the Environmental Consultant will, as outlined in seetions
4 and 5, develop a detailed UST RemovaVCompliancelRemediation plan in two parts. Part A will be the UST Removal Plan, Proposed Schedule and Docnmentation for Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission approval and Part B will be the UST Removal Plan and Speeifications, for competitive bid or negotiation with qualified UST removal contractors. For the identified USTs at
Addison Airport, the estimated cost ofremoval and replacement with clean backfill, by a qualified contractor, is $170,000. Performing the UST Environmental Baseline Survey and fuvestigation
as outline above is estimated at $33,500 and producing the UST Removal Plan, with Part A and B, is estimated at $14,500. USI removal management, testing, site evaluation, engineering
and remediation requirements, and site close-out are not included in these estirnsted costs and are not reasonable to estimate until the USI baseline survey and investigation is complete.
Respeetfully submitted to the Airport and Town ofAddison, on May 10,2001. 􀀼􀀺􀀧􀁾􀀱􀁬􀁩􀁦􀁩􀁬􀁬􀁵􀁾􀁥􀁾􀀠en, .E. Project Manager, Airport Services Washington fufrastructure ADS: 05114/01
9 
Appendixl Cost Estimates For Addison Airport Addison, Texas Bulk Fuel Storage and Dispensing Facility Construction Estimate: Site work, pavement and utilities Containment Structure and
Pad Storage tanks and piping Controls and Equipment Cover and structure Contingency (5%) Total Design Estimate: Site Investigation & Survey Architectural Design Civil & Structural Design
MechanicallElectrical Design NEPA Documents Bid Documents & Support Total Underground Fuel Storage Tank Removal Construction Estimate: UST excavation & removal Clean backfill & haul
Miscellaneous (permits, barricades) Contingencies (10%) Total Removal Design: Investigation Studies Soil/Gas Plan & Specification Preparation Total $ 265,000 $ 250,000 $1,500,000 $ 550,000
$ 95,000 $ 140,000 $2,800,000 $ 12,500 $ 9,500 $ 25,500 $189,000 $ 3,500 $ 8,500 $248,500 $116,000 $ 30,000 $ 7,000 $ 17,000 $170,000 $ 9,500 $ 24,000 $ 14,500 $48,000 ADS: 05/14/01
10 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract JAJ No. &Project No.& AlP No. &AlP No.& CONTRACT Addison Airport, as owned by the Town of Addison, TX, hereinafter called the "Sponsor", agrees
to retain the Washington Infrastructure Services, Inc., hereinafter called the "Engineer", to perform the scope of engineering services as outlined belOW, hereinafter called the "Project"
at Addison Airport, (AlP Project No). The term of this Contract shall become effective upon execution by the Parties and will remain in effect until or as terminated in accordance with
Paragraph XII below. J. The scope of work contemplated under this agreement with regard to the Project is for engineering services for improvements to Addison Airport. Said improvements
will include, but are not limited to, the following items: List items and scope II. Engineer's services for the above described scope of work will be provided in accordance with mutually
agreed amendments issued pursuant to Paragraph III of this contract for the services described in the following schedule: PART A -BASIC SERVICES (PRE-APPLICATION AND DESIGN/ENGINEERING)
1. As requested, assist the Sponsor in the preparation of the 􀁐􀁲􀁥􀁾􀁡􀁰􀁰􀁬􀁩􀁣􀁡􀁴􀁩􀁯􀁮􀀠for Federal Assistance (Capital Improvement Program). Prepare the Program Sketch, Program
Narrative, and Engineer's Estimate and assist the Sponsor with the required Statements and Notifications, the Environmental Documentation, and the State and Regional reviews as required;
2. Consult/Coordinate with Airport Users, FAA, Airport Staff, Town, County, and other interested parties; 3. Review, and revise as necessary, the airport drawings which provide the basis
for the project design; 4. Prepare preliminary plans, specifications, contract documents, and cost estimates for the design. 5. Provide acceptable Airport Layout Plan, Exhibit I and
associated drawings, as required; 6. Prepare and submit fmal plans, specifications, and contract documents for approval by the Sponsor and the FAA prior to advertising for bids; L: PlarminglADS
Page 1 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract 7. Prepare a Design Engineer's Report, including estimates of final quantities and opinion of probable construction costs. The report will be submitted
with the final plans and specifications to the Sponsor and the FAA; 8. Prepare or assist in tbe preparation of the Application for Federal Funds and the Property Map (Exhibit "A"); 9.
Coordinate the establisinnent of bid proposals into schedules to allow flexibility of award to match the funds available; 10. Provide complete sets of approved plans, specifications,
and contract documents for the bidding of the project; 11. Arrange for and conduct Pre-bid Conference and job showing; 12. Assist with the bid opening and processing of bid documents,
and make recommendations to the Sponsor for award of contract schedules: 13. Perform miscellaneous engineering services, e.g. hydrology studies, as requested by airport management. PART
B -SPECIAL SERVICES (SOILS AND PAVEMENT INVESTIGATIONS/TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS/FIELD ENGINEERING) 1. SOILS AND PAVEMENT INVESTIGATIONS (FOR DESIGN) Perform soils andlor pavement testing
and investigation of proposed construction areas as required for design. 2. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS (FOR DESIGN) Perform topographic surveys of proposed construction areas as required for
design. 3. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION Administer proposed construction activity. 4. FIELD ENGINEERING Arrange for and conduct Pre-Construction Conference. Provide complete resident
engineering coordination of the construction work with sufficient qualified inspectors who shall be present during all construction operations, to observe that construction is accomplished
in accordance with the plans and specifications. It is expressly understood that the term "engineering coordination" does not mean that the Engineer will assume any responsibility that
usurps or replaces the duties and authority of a Construction Superintendent or other Contractor agent charged with responsibility for the construction operation including but not limited
to ways ways or means of construction or job site safety. The Engineer, in carrying out his responsibilities for L: Planning/ADS Page 2 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract engineering coordination shall endeavor to guard the Sponsor against defects and deficiencies in the permanent work constructed by the Contractor,
but does not guarantee the performance of the Contractor. The above disclaimers do not in any way abrogate the responsibility of the Engineer as agent for the Sponsor to exercise technical
competence, expertise, skill and engineering judgment so that the Contractor's construction products are provided in accordance with the construction contract documents. The Engineer
shall issue such instructions to the Contractor's Construction Superintendent as are necessary to protect the Sponsor's interests to the same extent as would the Sponsor himself, if
he were present and equipped with the reqUisite knowledge, skill, competence, expertise, and engineering judgment. The Engineer shall provide sufficient surveys and observe and check
surveys conducted by the Contractor in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Engineer shall conduct materials tests required by the FAA and/or observe and evaluate all such
tests made by the Contractor in the field and in the laboratory as necessary in accordance with the plans and speCifications. Copies of all test reports will be furnished to the Sponsor
and the FAA. Test results will be available on the day tests are taken. The Engineer shall act as the Sponsor's agent during construction to protect the Sponsor's interest and shall
have the authority to recommend to the Sponsor that the construction be stopped if not in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Engineer will furnish the Sponsor and the
FAA a weekly construction progress and inspection report. The Engineer shall prepare all addition and deletion change orders and supplemental agreements as required. After acceptance
of the Construction Contractby the Contractor, copies will be submitted to the Sponsor and the FAA for approval and signature before proceeding with the work. The Engineer shall prepare periodic estimates during
the construction of the project and shall prepare the final estimate when the work is completed. Periodic estimates shall be submitted regularly to the Sponsor for concurrence and submittal
to FAA for Federal participation payment requests. The Engineer shall review the submitted weekly contractor's payrolls, check shop drawings and construction submittals; and prepare
and maintain necessary records of construction progress. When the project has been completed and is ready for final acceptance, the Engineer shall arrange for inspection of the finished
work by the FAA, the Sponsor, the Contractor, and the Engineer, following which the fmal estimate for the work will be considered by the Sponsor. Upon acceptance of the project, the
Engineer shall prepare the "Record Drawings," including any field snrveying required to compute final quantities, and the Construction Engineering Report, and shall provide the Sponsor
and the FAA with one (I) set of reproducible "Record Drawings," one microfiche copy, and one (1) copy of the Construction Report. On completion of the project, the Engineer shall prepare
and supply the Sponsor with an Airport Maintenance Program for the improvements constructed under the Project. L: PlarmingiADS Page 3 of 10 4123/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract III. COMPENSATION Engineer services to be performed under this contract will be ordered as required by the Sponsor via execution of mutually agreed
amendments. Compensation for services shall be on a Lump Sum or Cost Reimbursable basis as mutually agreed by the parties. The amendments issued under this Contract shall specifically
identifY the services, the type of Compensation, the applicable rates and the reimbursable expenses. For performance of the Work described in each Lump Sum amendment, Sponsor shall pay
the Lump Sum set forth in such amendment in monthly increments over the period of performance of tbe Work, based on percentage completed unless other specific payment schedules are mutually
agreed to and set forth in the amenthnent. For performance of tbe Work described in each Cost Reimbursable amendment, Sponsor shall pay Engineer the rates for the applicable individual
performing the services times the number of hours employed on a specific project. The rates rates are identified on ATtachment A, Established Hourly Rate Schedule and hereby incorporated.
The rates set forth in ATtachment A are subject to annual revision by the Engineer. Expenses for Lump Sum and Cost Reimbursable projects shall be reimbursed by Sponsor as identified
in the amendment. Payments for all services shall be due within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoices. If Sponsor disputes any portion of an invoice, it shall not be relieved of
the responsibility of paying the undisputed portion thereof. IV. CHANGE OF SCOPE It is mutually agreed that any change in the scope of the Project as outlined in Article I, or the services
outlined in Article II, in Parts A and B, andlor delays (including completion of the work in more than one project) by the Sponsor, resulting in extra expense to the Engineer, shall
be considered beyond the normal scope of this contract. In addition to the foregoing services, the Sponsor may require additional services such as Property Surveys, Descriptions of Land,
Easements, Redesign or Major Changes of the concept after fmal plans or concepts have been approved by the FAA. Payment to the Engineer for such work because of the change in scope of
the project shall be negotiated at the time of the anticipated cbange and it shall be mutually agreed to by amending this contract. V. The Engineer further agrees that: 1. The Sponsor,
the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Comptroller General of the United States or any of their designated representatives shall have access to any books, documents, L: Planning!
ADS Page 4 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract papers and records of the Engineer which are directly pertinent to the grant program for the purpose of making audit examination, excerpts, and
transcriptions. 2. The Engineer has formulated, adopted, and actively maintains an affirmative action plan in compliance with Executive Order No. 11246 entitled, "Equal Employment Opportunity."
The Engineer does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, national origin, sex, or age. Goals and targets are specified in the affirmative action plan to assure
its implementation. 3. All services performed shall be in confurmance with any and all applicable rules and regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration. 4. Whereas, it is the
policy of the Department of Transportation (DOT) that Disadvantaged Business Enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 26 shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance
of contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds, consequently. the DBE requirements of 49 CPR Part 26 apply to this contract. The Engineer shall agree to ensure that Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 26 have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts financed in whole or in part with Federal
funds. In this regard, all Contractors shall take all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CPR Part 26 to ensure that Disadvantaged Business Enterprises have the maximum
opportunity to compete for and perform contracts. Contractors shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of DOT assisted
contracts. VI. The Engineer and the Sponsor mutually agree that: 1. The Sponsor and the Engineer each binds himself, his partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the
other party to this contract and the partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party in respect of all covenants of this contract. Neither the Sponsor nor
the Engineer shall assign, sublet, or transfer its interest in this contract without the written consent of the other; 2. The original plans and specifications shall remain the property
of the Engineer; however, the Sponsor will be provided one (1) set of specifications and reproducible plans whether or not the project is executed. With the Engineer's prior consent,
the Sponsor may use those plans in any manner he wishes, provided the Sponsor agrees to save and hold the Engineer hannless for any liability resulting from such reuse. vn. The Sponsor
agrees that: 1. The Sponsor shall make available to the Engineer all technical data that is in the Sponsor's possession including maps, surveys, property descriptions, borings and other
information required by the Engineer and reiating to his work. 2. The Sponsor agrees to cooperate with the Engineer in the approval of all plans and specifications, or should they disapprove
of any part of said plans and specifications, shall make L: Planning/ADS Page 5 of 10 4/23/01
 Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract a timely decision in order that no undue expense will be caused the Engineer because of lack of decisions. If the Engineer is caused to incur
other expenses such as extra drafting. due to changes ordered by the Sponsor after completion and approval of the plans and specifications, the Engineer shall be equitably paid for such
extra expenses and services involved. 3. The Sponsor sltall pay publishing costs for advertisements of notices, public hearings, requests for bids, and other similar items; shall pay
for all permits and licenses that may be required by local, state or federal authorities; and shall secure the necessary land, easements, and rights-of way required for the project.
vrn. INSURANCE The Engineer shall procure and maintain at its expense during the effective period of this Contract the following insurance from insurance companies authorized to do business
in Colorado covering all operations and services under this Contract performed by Engineer. Workers' Compensation Insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Colorado Workers'
Compensa tion Act. Commercial General Liability in amounts not less than $1 million combined single limit per occurrence and $1 million aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage with endorsements to include broad form contractual, and broad form property damage. Automobile Liability, Bodily Injury and Property Damage with a limit of $1 Million
for occurrence, combined single limit including owned, hired and non-owned autos. Professional Liability Insurance in amounts not less than $1 million per claim and annual aggregate.
The Engineer shall furnish to the Sponsor a certificate or certificates of insurance showing compliance with this paragraph. The certificates shall provide that the insurance shall not
be canceled until ten (10) days written notice shall have been given to Sponsor. IX. WARRANTY Engineer warrants that the services performed hereunder beginning on the date Engineer comple!es
Work and terminating one year from the completion thereof, will be in accordance with that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering proression existing
as of the date that such services are performed. Engineer's sole liability to Sponsor for any non-conforrning Work shall be to correct the item of defective Work, written notice of which
must be promptly given by Sponsor to Engineer. The only warranties made by Engineer are those expressly enumerated in this provision. Any other statements of fact or descriptions expressed
in the contract or any attachments thereto shall not be deemed to constitute a warranty of the Work or any part thereof. THE WARRANTIES L: Planning/ADS Page 6 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract SET FORTH IN THIS PROVISION ARE EXCLUSIVE AND IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER STATUTORY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED (INCLUDING ALL WARRANTIES
OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND ALL WARRANTIES ARISING FROM COURSE OF DEALING AND USAGE OF TRADE). The remedies provided above are the Sponsor's sole remedies
for any failure of Engineer to comply with its obligations. Correction of any nonconformity or reimbursement to Sponsor in the manner and for the period of time provided above shall
constirute complete folfillment of all the liabilities of Engineer fur defective or nonconforming services or materials whether the clalms of the Sponsor are based in contract, in tort
(including negligence and strict liability), or otherwise with respect to or arising out of the work performed hereunder. X. CONSTRUCTION COST OPINION An opinion of probable construction
cost prepared by the Engineer represents his judgment as a design professional and is supplied for Sponsor's guidance. Since the Engineer has no control over the cost of labor and material,
or over competitive bidding or market conditions, the Engineer does not guarantee the accuracy of its opinion as compared to contractor bids or actual cost to the Sponsor. XI. FORCE
MAJEURE Any delay or failure of Engineer in the perfonnance of its required obligations hereunder shall be excused if and to the extent caused by acts of God, war, riot, strike, fire,
storm, flood, windstorm, discovery or uncovering of hazardous or toxic materials or causes beyond the reasonable control of Engineer, provided that prompt written notice of such delay
or suspension be given by Engineer to the Sponsor. Upon receipt of said notice, if necessary, the time for performing shall be extended for a period of time reasonably necessary to overcome
the effect of such delays and Engineer shall be reimbursed for the cost of such delays. XII. TERMINATION A. Upon five-(5) business days written notice to Engineer, Sponsor may terminate
Engineer's right to proceed further with the Work under this Contract or any amendment issued hereunder. In the event of such termination, Sponsor may take possession of the Work in
such manner as Sponsor may deem expedient, but Engineer shall not be liable to Sponsor for any excess cost of completion, nor shall Engineer be liable to Sponsor for damages of any nature
for delays in the completion of the Work. In the event of such termination of Engineer's right to further proceed with the Work, Sponsor shall reimburse Engineer fur all costs associated
with the cessation of Engineer's services, pins that portion of the Contract Price earned to the date of such termination, and Sponsor shall thereafter assume all obligations, commitments,
or other liabilities that Engineer shall have theretofore incurred or made in connection with its performance of the Work and for which Engineer has not been paId and released. B. If,
notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph XI, the Work shall be delayed fur more than 30 calendar days on account of one or more of the occurrences set forth in Paragraph XI, or if
L: Planning/ADS Page 7 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract Sponsor shall fail to pay Engineer in accordance with the Payment Schedule, Engineer may, at its option, upon five (5) business days written notice
to Sponsor, terminate this Contract In the event of such termination, Sponsor shall reimburse Engineer for all costs of performance of the Work as Engineer may have incurred on account
of such delays. Sponsor shall thereafter assume all obligations, commitments, or other liabilities that Engineer shall have theretofore incurred or made in connection with its performance
of the Work and for which Engineer has not been paid and released. C. Either party hereto may terminate this Contract by giving the other party thirty (30) calendar days written notice
of its intent to terminate. Upon termination, Engineer shall be entitled to payment in accordance with subparagraph A of this Paragraph XII. XIII. LIABILITY Each party will defend and
indemnify and hold harmless the other party from and against liability, damage, loss, costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, on account of injury or damage to persons or property
occurring on or occasioned by facilities owned or controlled by such indemnifying party, unless such injury or damage resulted from the sole negligence of the other party. In the event
negligence is attributable to both parties, each party shall be responsible for the resulting damages attributable to the negligence of such party whether such proportionate share is
arrived at through agreement between the parties or as a result of litigation. Whether due to delay, breach of contract, warranty, tort (including negligence and strict liability) or
any other theories of liability, neither Engineer nor its contractors or suppliers of any tier shall be liable for any special, indirect, incidental or consequential damages of any nature,
including. without limitation, Sponsor's loss of actual or anticipated profits or revenues, loss by reason of shutdown, non-operation, or increased expense of manufacturing or operation,
loss of use, cost of capital, damage to or loss of property or equipment of Sponsor or claims of customers of the Sponsor. The remedies stated in the contract are exclusive and in no
event shall the liability of Engineer or its contractors or suppliers of any tier to Sponsor, for the order under which the liability arose, whether in contract, warranty, tort (including
negligence or strict liability) or otherwise for the performance or breach of the contract or anything done in connection therewith exceed an amount equal tu one hundred percent (100%)
of the value of the contract. XIV. DISPUTES Any dispute which shall arise as to the obligation of either party under the contract or the interpretation of any provision thereof, if not
settled by agreement of the parties, shall be settled by arbitration in a [mutually agreed city] in the Unlted States of America, in the English language, under the commercial rules
then established by the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon any arbitration award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. XV. SEVERABILITY L: Planning/ADS
Page 8 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft Basic Airport Services Contract The provisions of this Contract are severable, and, if any provision shall be determined to be illegal or unenforceable, such determination shall
in no manner affect any other provision hereof, and the remainder of this Contract shall remain in full force and effect, provided however, that the intention and essence of this contract
may still be accomplished and satisfied. In the event that any provision of the Contract is held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, Engineer and Sponsor
shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions ofthis Contract to preserve the purpose of this contract and maintain the allocation or risk, liabilities and obligations originally
agreed upon. XVI. GOVERNING LAW The terms of this Agreement sball be construed and interprered under, and all respective rights and duties of the parties shall be governed by, the laws
of the State of Colorado. XVII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Contract constitutes the entire entire agreement between the parties and the terms and conditions hereof were negotiated between
the parties on an arms-length basis and no obligation or covenant of good faith or fair dealing shall be implied or interpreted as conferring upon either party any right, duty, obligation
or benefit other than expressly set forth herein. No modifications or amendments to this Contract shall be valid unless agreed to by the parties in writing and signed by their authorized
representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have affixed their signatures this __ day of ,am. SPONSOR: Town of Addison ATTEST: Addison, TX By ____=-____________________ Town
Manager Town Attorney ENGINEER: Washington Infrastructure Services, Inc. By __________________________ L: Planning/ADS Page 9 of 10 4/23/01 
Draft -Basic Airport Services Contract Amendment #1 Project: Environmental Baseline Investigation and Underground Fuel Storage Tank Removal Plan Amendment #2 Project: New Bulk Fuel Storage
and Dispensing Facility L: Planning!ADS Page 10 of 10 4/23/01