Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E04-017 - MALTE DEAN / PACCAR - SOIL REMEDIATIONPACCAR - W. EXCAVATION AREA SOIL REMIDIATION WORK 8801 E MARGINAL WAY S E04 -017 THIS FILE ALSO INCLUDES A CD LOCATED WITH DCD, IN LAND USE CD FILE T FRONT DESK FILE# • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 12, 2006 Ross Dunning 32001 32nd Ave South Ste 100 Federal Way WA 98001 Re: SEPA and Shoreline revision applications for the former Paccar site located at 8801 East Marginal Way South. File numbers E04 -017 and L03 -067. Dear Mr. Dunning: This letter is to notify you that the above referenced application has been currently closed as no re- submittal was received from you in response to the City's request for additional information dated January 11, 2005. You had applied for SEPA and Shoreline revision to do some soil remediation work at the above referenced address. Since there was no response received from you the city has presently closed the application files. If you wish to pursue this project, new applications must be filed. If you have any further questions, you can contact me at 206 -431 -3685. Minnie Dhaliwal Senior Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor June 9, 2005 Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Maura S. O'Brien Washington State Department of Ecology Toxics Cleanup Program 3190 -160th Avenue SE Bellevue WA 98008 -5452 Re: Former Paccar Site at 8801 East Marginal Way South. Dear Maura: As per my phone message, I am attaching a copy of the SEPA application that Paccar had filed. Also, attached is the conceptual water quality plan that was approved for Insurance Auto Auction. Further I have also attached a copy of the letter that was sent to the applicant requesting further information. If you have any questions, you can reach me at 206 - 431 -3685. Minnie Dhaliwal Senior Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Gity of Tukwila • Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director January 11, 200' Dean K. Malte 32001 32nd Avenue South Suite 100 Federal Way WA 98001 Re: Request for additional information for SEPA and Shoreline applications. File numbers E04 -017 and L03 -067. Dear Mr. Malte: As per my phone conversation with Alex Buccilli, the following information is required to further process your application: The City had met with representatives from Insurance Auto Auction in November and they had submitted a conceptual water quality plan, which also included work in the general area of your proposed work. I have attached a copy of their conceptual plan. Please coordinate with Insurance Auto Auction and inform us of the entire extent of the work that is proposed in the shoreline area. Also, please note a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) may be required if the scope of your proposed work includes removal of the existing outfall. Please provide more details on how you propose to remove the outfall and coordinate with Washington State Department of Fisheries if HPA is required for the proposed work. Any work that affects the dedicated Fire water mains shall be reviewed by the Fire Department. Also, any proposed soil excavation that may impact the fire loop will have to be approved by the Fire Department. If you have any questions, you can reach me at 206 - 431 -3685. Minnie Dhaliwal Senior Planner. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Gity of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works James F. Morrow, P.E., Director December 3, 2004 Mr. Elliott Zimmerman Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program Washington State Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office 3190 160th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 -5452 Subject: Insurance Auto Auction (IAA) 8801 East Marginal Way South Demolition and Tenant Improvements to 24 acre industrial facility - site to be reused for parking and storage of salvaged vehicles. Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Per your attached September 9, 2004, letter, please find a conceptual storm drainage /water quality plan for IAA for your review and comments enclosed. Mr. Jay Grubb, P.E., of Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. at (425)251 -6222, is the project engineer for this site. Please contact him directly with your comments. Sincerely, Development Engineer JS:lw enclosures cc: Minnie Dhaliwal, DCD Jay Grubb, P.E. Files: E04,014; D04 -236, D04 -237 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 433 -0179 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • Joanna Spencer, Engineer City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Conceptual Water Quality Plan Insurance Auto Auctions (IAA) 8801 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, Washington City File No. E04 -014 / Our Job No. 11419 Dear Joanna: CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES November 24, 2004 As a follow -up to our recent meeting, I am forwarding four copies of the conceptual water quality plan for the above- referenced project. In addition, I have enclosed a cost estimate of the proposed stormwater improvements for the purpose of establishing a bond amount. Please review our estimate and acknowledge that the estimated costs are satisfactory for the purpose of pursuing a performance bond for this project. If so, I will notify Insurance Auto Auctions/Washington Real Estate Holdings, LLC, to secure the required bond. Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questions, please contact me at this office. Respectfully, Jay S. Grubb, P.E. Vice President JSG /vj 11419c.010.doc enc: As Noted cc: MJinnie?DITaliw-alpCity of Tukwila Brent Lower, Washington Real Estate Holdings, LLC Michael Madden, Insurance Auto Auctions Steve Tibble, Insurance Auto Auctions 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251 -6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com • • PRELIMINARY FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT COST ESTIMATE PROJECT NAME: Insurance Auto Auction PROJECT NO.: 11419 LOCATION: 8801 East Marginal Way CLIENT: Insurance Auto Auction DATE OF ESTIMATE: December 1, 2004 HARD COSTS . :.. A. Mobilization/Trench Demo (Non- Taxable) $14,000 B. Sanitary Sewer System (Taxable) not applicable $0 C. Water Supply System (Taxable) not applicable $0 D. Public Storm Drainage System (Non- Taxable) not applicable $0 E. Private Storm Drainage System (Taxable) $103,730 F. Public Roadway Improvements (Non - Taxable) not applicable $0 G. On -Site Specific Construction Costs; ie sawcut and bedding (Taxable) $1,088 TOTAL SECTIONS $118,818 9/10/03 Rounded $119,000 150% OF COST = $178,500 Summary 11419 STM -WATER QUALITY PERMIT Estimate.xls HARD" COSTS .. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL Mobilization 1 LS $0.00 $5,000 AC RemovaUDemolition (excludes dump fees) 500 SY $3.00 $1,500 Allowance for Other Erosion Control (not specified) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 Erosion Control Maintenance Budget (12 months) 0 LS $2,500 TOTAL SECTION A $14,000 15 -Inch CMP /ADS/PVC Pipe 60 LF $24.00 $1,440 12 -Inch CMP /ADS/PVC Pipe 300 LF $20.00 $6,000 8 -Inch CMP /ADS/PVC Pipe 1,150 LF $16.00 $18,400 Inlets/Type4 -K 3 EA $600.00 $1,800 Type 1 Catch Basins 6 EA $800.00 $4,800 Type 2/48 -Inch Catch Basins (maximum 8 feet deep) 3 EA $1,500.00 $4,500 Type 2/54 -Inch Catch Basins (maximum 8 feet deep) 4 EA $3,000.00 $12,000 Vortech Model 1000 - incl. vault, risers, bedding 1 EA $15,000.00 $15,000 Vortech Model 3000 - incl. vault, risers, bedding 1 EA $20,500.00 $20,500 OiUWater- flow control structure (not including catch basin) 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000 Pavement Restoration 510 SY $12.00 $6,120 Export of Unsuitable Material, Truck Measure (excludes dump fees) 65 CY $12.00 $780 SUBTOTAL SECTION E $95,340 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $8,390 TOTAL SECTION E $103,730 Sawcutting - budget 1 500 1 LF 1 $2.00 $1,000 SUBTOTAL SECTION G $1,000 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $88 TOTAL SECTION G $1,088 9/10/03 Page 1 of 1 11419 STM -WATER QUALITY PERMIT Estimate.xls STATE OF WASHINGTON • RECEIVED SEP 10 2004 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Northwest Regional Office • 3190 160th Avenue SE • Bellevue, Washington 98008 -5452 • (425) 649 -7000 September 9, 2004 Ms. Minnie Dahlilwal Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Ms. Dahlilwal: CERTIFIED MAIL 7003 0500 0005 0582 8513 Your address is in the Duwamish- Green watershed RE: Permit application for selective demolition and tenant improvements to a 24 acre industrial facility in anticipation of reuse for parking and storage of salvaged vehicles. This permit application has come to our attention and we would like to offer potential assistance in the design of the proposed salvaged vehicle storage facility to best meet environmental protection standards. Ecology's Hazardous Waste Program has had extensive experience working with the auto salvage industry in Washington, and has helped develop environmental best management practices for this industry. Certainly the best and least expensive way to help achieve these standards is to design new facilities to best achieve these environmental goals. Regulated hazardous waste - generators in Washington must comply with appropriate regulations in Chapter 173 -303 WAC, which, includes, for example, requirements for secondary containment, drainage, base imperviousness, etc. in any hazardous waste accumulation areas. We strongly recommend that you contact one of our staff forrassistance in determining the . best and most cost effective design and operating procedures for this anticipated facility. While we have a number of staff who can assist you, we suggest you begin by contacting Mr. Scott Lamb in our Northwest Regional field office. Scott has had considerable experience working with the auto salvage industry regarding environmental protection; you can contact Scott at (425) 649 -7268. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on this permit application. Sincerely, Elliott Zimme Hazardous W sfe & Toxics Reduction Program J EZ:sd .10o- 0 • • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 9 September 2004 Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Subject: SEPA Environmental Review Application Materials and Request for Revision to Shoreline Permit L03 -067 PACCAR Facility, 8801 East Marginal Way South K/J 046001.04 Dear Ms. Dhaliwal: Engineers & Scientists 32001 32nd Avenue South Suite 100 Federal Way, Washington 98001 253 - 874 -0555 (Seattle) 253 - 927 -8688 (Tacoma) FAX 253 - 952 -3435 RECEIVED NOV 2 4 2004 urkvvILA PUBLIC WORKS Kennedy /Jenks Consultants is pleased to submit this SEPA Environmental Review application (SEPA) and revised Shoreline Permit on behalf of PACCAR Inc (PACCAR). The scope of work for the SEPA application and shoreline revision may include excavation of contaminated soil at five locations on the western and central portions of the site, repair, replacement or removal of stormwater conveyance structures (catch basin, piping, and vault structures), potential in -place lining of a section of storm drain pipe, and potential installation of groundwater treatment systems in two new areas. The scope of work is described below in greater detail. No work included in this SEPA will be performed on or within the Duwamish Waterway. The Shoreline Permit (Permit L03 -067) was originally issued by the City of Tukwila (City) on 12 January 2004 in support of the AS /SVE system installation at the PACCAR site. Based on our telephone conversations on 12 July 2004, the updated Discussion of Project Consistency with Decision Criteria for projects subject to King County Shoreline Regulations included with this SEPA application (Attachment A) completes the City's requirements for revising the Shoreline Permit. We further understand that the City will revise Shoreline Permit L03 -067 upon completion of the SEPA review process. This revision to the Shoreline Permit is consistent with WAC 173 -27 -100. The completed SEPA materials, including the application checklist, application, Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist, and State Environmental Checklist are included in Attachment B. A site location map is provided on Figure 1. Figure 2 provides an overview of the project work areas, including the anticipated storm water system repair, replacement, and removal area, the five anticipated soil excavation areas, and the two potential groundwater treatment areas. One set of the required public comment materials, including tax parcel maps and mailing labels, is also provided with this letter as a separate attachment. The applicable Public Works permits related to this SEPA will be submitted at a later date by the contractor(s) selected to perform the work. We understand that the City will begin the review process for this SEPA immediately, and do not require the Public Works permit applications at E04- p/7 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 9 September 2004 Page 2 this time. Additional drawings and other materials may be submitted by the Contractor with the Public Works permit applications materials. Scope of Work The scope of work for the activities associated with this SEPA is presented below. As previously indicated, the scope of work includes contaminated soil excavation, the repair, replacement, or removal of storm drain catch basins, pipes, and /or vaults, and the potential installation of groundwater treatment systems in two areas. Storm drain work may be performed based on existing operability, excavation conditions, and if any storm drain structures are damaged during excavation activities. None of the work will be performed on or within the Duwamish Waterway. All work will be performed from the uplands side of the bulkhead or riprap of the Duwamish shoreline. A geotechnical evaluation (Attachment C) was performed for work areas in the vicinity of the Waterway. Excavation Areas and Associated Storm Drain Systems Work The scope of work includes excavation at five locations on the PACCAR site as follows (refer to Figure 2 for locations): 1) Northwest Excavation Area. The scope of work in this area includes removal of the existing oil water separator as it is inoperable and allows intrusion of contaminated groundwater into storm water runoff, excavation of up to 2,100 cubic yards of soil material to a depth of up to12 feet to remove impacted soils, and installation of monitoring wells. The storm drain line with then be re- connected to the north outfall. A new oil -water separator vault may be installed at the new owner's discretion. A groundwater treatment system may also be installed in this area. 2) Middle Outfall Area. This outfall and associated piping will be removed, as it has not been operable for some time. The scope of work in this area includes excavation of approximately 800 cubic yards of soil material to a depth of up to 6 feet. The repair, replacement, or removal of storm drain pipes, catch basins, and /or vaults will be performed, including a portion of the pipe connected to the existing middle outfall. 3) Southwest Storage Area. The scope of work in this area includes excavation of up to 16,200 cubic yards of impacted soil to a depth of up to 12 feet. The repair, replacement, or removal of storm drain pipes, catch basins, and /or vaults may be performed, including a portion of the pipe connected to the existing south outfall. A new oil /water separator may also be installed in this area at the new owner's discretion. 4) Frame Drill Area. The scope of work in this area potentially includes excavation of up to 5,750 cubic yards of soil material to a depth of up to 10 feet. Storm drain structures, if encountered, may be repaired or replaced. Excavation in this area will be performed following demolition of the existing Off - Highway building (demolition is being performed under a separate City of Tukwila permit, and is unrelated to this project). Groundwater monitoring wells may also be installed in this area. w:120041046001.0419dkm-tcs1 Ldoc • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 9 September 2004 Page 3 5) Groundwater Treatment Area. The scope of work in this area may include excavation of approximately 2,200 cubic yards of soil material to a depth of up to 8 feet, and installation of a groundwater treatment system. Some of the work may be below the water table depending upon the groundwater treatment system design. Storm drain structures, if encountered, may be repaired or replaced. Additional details regarding design of the groundwater treatment system will be included in the forthcoming Public Works permit application materials. In addition, excavation of impacted soils may be performed in this area once the maintenance shed is demolished. The total estimated excavation volume is approximately 27,050 cubic yards, and the estimated affected surface area is approximately 1.55 acres (based on this area, we anticipate that a Construction Stormwater Permit will be required). At all of the excavation areas, the excavations will be backfilled with imported materials, most likely including pit -run material, pea gravel, and crushed rock base material (additional materials such as bentonite slurry or concrete may be used at the groundwater treatment system area). Paved surfaces will be restored following the completion of excavation and backfilling activities. In -Place Pipe Lining In addition to the storm line repair work activities discussed above, it may also be necessary to apply a cured in -place pipe (CIPP) lining of a portion of the existing storm line system to prevent chemicals of concern (COC) originating in groundwater from entering the stormwater system. The scope of work for proposed CIPP work may include: • Inversion equipment to install the CIPP inside the portion of the pipeline to be lined. • A boiler truck to inflate and heat the liner as it is cured in- place. The estimated maximum length of the CIPP work is shown on Figure 2. There are no firm plans to line the storm water line unless removal of the oil water separator does not stop the flow of groundwater intrusion. If lining of the storm line is required, then it will be performed in phases starting in the Northwest corner of the facility. General Work Area Description The work areas for this project are located in the portions of the PACCAR Seattle site as displayed on Figure 2. The entire site is guarded by security personnel that are present at all times. The site is not accessible to the general public. The ground surface in the work area is paved with asphalt or concrete, depending upon the location, and is generally flat. The surface is gently contoured in some locations to facilitate stormwater runoff to catch basins. No modification of the existing surface topography is planned for this project. Most of the storm drainage system work and three of the excavation areas (Northwest Excavation Area, Middle Outfall Area, and Southwest Storage Area) are located within 200 feet of the Duwamish Waterway. The boundary between the site and the Duwamish Waterway w:120041046001.0419c0m -tcst l.doc • • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 9 September 2004 Page 4 consists of a vertical sheet - piling bulkhead on the northern two- thirds of the site and a steep rock embankment on the southern one -third of the site. A chain -link fence is present along the entire length of the waterway. All work will be performed on the eastern (upland) side of the fence located along the sheet -pile bulkhead and rock embankment. No adverse impacts to the waterway, sheet -pile bulkhead, or rock embankment area are anticipated as a result of the work described herein. Potential sediment runoff during construction activities will be mitigated through implementation of erosion and sedimentation control best management practices as defined in the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan developed for the project (see below). Geotechnical Evaluation To evaluate the excavation areas adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway, Kennedy /Jenks Consultants contracted the services of Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) to perform a geotechnical evaluation of the bulkhead and rip /rap bank protection. The results of this work are summarized in their letter report to Kennedy /Jenks Consultants dated 1 June 2004 and provided in Attachment C. In summary, ZZA's assessment indicated that the potential for impacts to the bulkhead and rip /rap bank were possible under certain slope conditions. The recommended slope conditions for work preformed in the shoreline areas is identified in their report. A licensed geotechnical engineer will provide oversight for excavation work near site structures (buildings, sheet piling bulkhead, and rip -rap bank) in the vicinity of the Duwamish Waterway. Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has been prepared for this project and is included as Attachment D. The general content of the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is summarized below. The primary potential sediment runoff pathway from the site is through catch basins located in the work areas, which discharge to the Duwamish Waterway. Direct runoff (not through catch basins) of sediment to offsite locations is not anticipated, as all runoff within the work area is directed toward catch basins. Catch basins in proximity to the work areas will be fitted with catch basin inserts and surrounded by hay bales to trap sediment that may be entrained in surface water runoff. The catch basin inserts and hay bales will be inspected daily and cleaned or replaced as necessary. Loose sediment will be removed from the asphalt/concrete surface in the work area (and onsite haul routes) by sweeping, as necessary. In addition, excavated soil or imported materials that are stockpiled onsite will be contained within bermed enclosures underlain and covered with impermeable plastic sheeting to minimize the potential for erosion and runoff of sediment laden water to the catch basins. Liquid from saw cutting activities will be collected and contained onsite pending offsite disposal. w:120041046001.0419dkm -tcsl l.doc • • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 9 September 2004 Page 5 Regulatory Framework This project is being performed under the Ecology's Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) (VCP Site ID# NW0960). The case officer assigned to the site is Ms. Maura O'Brien with Ecology's Northwest Regional Office (please route any correspondence to Ms. O'Brien through Kennedy /Jenks Consultants). Please contact us at (253) 874 -0555 with any questions or comments regarding the information presented in this letter or in the SEPA Environmental Review application package. Very truly yours, KENNEDY /JENKS CONSULTANTS Dean K. Malte, R.G. Senior Staff Geologist C Ty C. SchYeiner, L. Hg. Vice President Enclosures: Figure 1 — Site Figure 2 — Site Attachment A — Attachment B — Attachment C — Attachment D — Location Map Plan and Approximate Excavation Areas Revised Discussion of Project Consistency with Decision Criteria SEPA Application Materials Geotechnical Evaluation by Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan cc: Ms. Carole Robbins, PACCAR Inc w:120041046001.0419dkm -ICS l I.doc •. Park i •' 1lijank Kennedy /Jenks Consultants SOURCE: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic - Bathymetric Quadrangle, Seattle South, Washington. Dated 1983. PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SITE LOCATION MAP 046001.04 /LOCATION.VSD Approximate Scale in Miles FIGURE 1 OIL/WATER SEPARATOR NORTHWEST EXCAVATION AREA VAULT / APPROX. 1100 CY \\ \\ NORTH OUTFALL� \ • GROUNDWATER TREATMENT AREA APPROX. 2,200 CY IN -PLACE PIPE UNING AREA 7 Z MIDDLE OUTFALL MIDDLE OUTFALL AREA APPROX. 800 CY POWER HOUSE AS /SVE TRENCH (INCLUDED UNDER CURRENT SHORELINE - MI \ , PERMIT)'00 \ FRAME DRLL 1TIC \ \\ l \ OP . \ \\ �19I► ©lll♦ \ •��A • il, ./ %i..- Avg..\ III \\ \\ U \ r -" TOUCH -UP PAINT MAINTENANCE PAINT MIX AREA WATER TOWER EMPLOYEE PARKING PARTS WAREHOUSE MANUFACTURING BUILDING SHEET PILING BULKHEAD APPROXIMATE 100 YEAR FL000PLAIN BOUNDARY - BASE FLOOD ELEVATION = 8.40' (NGVD 1929 DATUM) PLANT BUILDING ADMINISTRATION SHIPPING RAMP VENDOR REJECT TIRE SHOP CAFETERIA RECEIVING MAIN ACCESS GATE CONTRACTOR ENTRANCE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK = 4.64' (NGVD 1929 DATUM) SOUTH OUTFACE RIP RAP BANK SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA APPROX. 16,200 CY EMPLOYEE PARKING SECONDARY ACCESS GATE SHOREUNE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 40' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY LEGEND: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 100' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY APPROXIMATE SOIL REMOVAL AREA AND ESTIMATED REMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) APPROXIMATE AREA OF STORM LINE REPAIR WORK. (ACTUAL AREA MAY BE LESS) SOURCE: BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INC. SHORELINE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 200' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY NOTES: 1. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2. APPROXIMATE REMOVAL AREAS AND VOLUMES MAY VARY BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. 3. WORK IN EXCAVATION AREAS MAY INCLUDE REPAIR, REPLACEMENT, OR REMOVAL OF STORM DRAIN CATCH BASINS, VAULTS, AND /OR PIPES. 4. NO WORK IS ANTICIPATED WITHIN THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY. ALL WORK AREAS ARE LOCATED EAST OF THE EXISTING SHEET PILING BULKHEAD AND RIP -RAP BANK. 5. A LICENSED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER WILL PROVIDE OVERSIGHT FOR ALL EXCAVATION WORK NEAR SITE STRUCTURES (BUILDINGS, BULKHEAD, AND RIP -RAP BANK). 0 60 120 APPROX SCALE IN FEET 1 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPROXIMATE EXCAVATION AREAS 046001.04 -FIG_2 FIGURE 2 Attachment A Revised Discussion of Project Consistency With Decision Criteria • • Revision to Shoreline Permit L03 -067 issued on 12 January 2004 Discussion of Project Consistency with Decision Criteria PACCAR Excavation Project 8801 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, Washington The following is a revised response to Item #10 on the City of Tukwila's Shoreline Permit Application Checklist based on the new scope of work for the PACCAR site. Based on our conversations with Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal, it is our understanding that this revision is required for revision of the current Shoreline Permit. We understand that the City of Tukwila will review the Shoreline Permit revision against the King County Shoreline Regulations (K.C.C.25.16), particularly the general requirements of K.C.C.25.16.030, which are specifically listed in the Shoreline Permit Application. Each item from K.C.C.25.16.030 listed in the Shoreline Permit Application is identified (italic text) and a response is provided (bold text) below. A. Nonwater related development and residential development shall not be permitted waterward of the ordinary high water mark. No work is planned waterward of the ordinary high water mark. B. Except in those cases when the height requirements of the underlying zones are more restrictive, no structure shall exceed a height of thirty -five feet above average grade level. [additional text omitted] Construction of structures is not part of this project. C. All Development shall be required to provide adequate surface water retention and sedimentation facilities during the construction period. The work area is paved and a stormwater conveyance system is present. A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan will be implemented prior to the start of construction activities. D. Development shall maintain the first fifty feet of property abutting a natural environment as required open space. The existing site development area is not a natural environment. E. Parking facilities except parking facilities associated with detached single- family and agricultural development shall conform to the following minimum conditions: [list omitted]. No work related to parking facilities is planned for this project. F. Collection facilities to control and separate contaminants shall be required where stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces would degrade or add to the pollution of recipient waters or adjacent properties. A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan will be implemented prior to the start of construction activities. The existing stormwater conveyance system includes an oil -water separator. G. The regulations for this chapter have been categorized in a number of sections; regardless of the categorization of the various regulations, all development must comply with all applicable regulations. This project is being performed under Ecology's Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP ID #NW0960). Applications for applicable permits will be submitted to the City of Tukwila. H. Development proposed on shore lines of the State shall maintain setbacks, provide easements or otherwise develop the site to permit a trail to be constructed or public access to continue where: 1. There is a proposed trail in the King County Trail System; or 2. Part of the site is presently being used and has historically been used for public access. There is not a proposed King County Trail System trail, and the site is not presently and has not historically been used for public access. w: 120031036025 .001shorelleepemitresp.#10.doc Attachment B SEPA Application Materials CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan a,ci.tukwila.wa.us SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW INFORMATION The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires all agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a development before making decisions (43.21C RCW). The purpose of environmental review is to identify a proposal's significant adverse impacts, measures to minimize or avoid such impacts, and allow wide public review for a wide range of projects. REQUIREMENTS: SEPA review is required for any action associated with the following types of decisions: 1. Developing more than 4 dwelling units. 2. Agricultural structures over 10,000 s.f. 3. Office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings over 4,000 s.f. and 20 parking spaces (certain utility lines, personal wireless communication facilities, and normal maintenance/replacement activities are fully exempt). 4. Parking lots with over 40 spaces. 5. Landfills and excavations over 500 cubic yards. 6. Land use decisions involving a subdivision of land into 5 or more lots, public hearing design review, a Conditional Use Permit, or an Unclassified Use Permit. The accompanying application must be completed. If a question does not apply, "Does not apply" or `NA" may be entered. Complete answers to the checklist may avoid unnecessary delays later. City staff may also be able to help about govemmental designations (e.g., zoning, shoreline, and landmark status). PROCEDURES: Within 28 days of receiving your application, City staffdetermines if it is complete, based on the following "Complete Application Checklist". If not, you will be mailed a letter outlining what additional information is needed. Once the application is "complete," substantive review will begin and a `Notice of Application" must be posted/mailed to begin a public comment period After completing the environmental analysis and considering public comments, the Director will approve the project as proposed, approve it with impact mitigation requirements, or require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared due to probable, significant, negative, environmental impacts. COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted at a later date for use at the public hearing (e.g. colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 - 431 -3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206- 433 -0179 (Department of Public Works). Check items submitted with application Information Required May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: X 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. X 2. Completed ESA Screening Checklist, State Environmental Checklist and drawings (5 copies). X 3. One set of any plans submitted reduced to 8 1/2" by 11 ". One complete set of PMTs of the final drawing set will be required prior to final approval. X 4. Application Fee $500. *• 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA Review. PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: X 6. Mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Number of sets depends on the notice requirements of the underlying permit, check with Planning Staff. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings - -e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks - -must be included (see Public Notice Materials section). X 7. King County Assessor's map(s) that shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot (if mailing labels are required). X 8. A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that the application is complete (see Public Notice Materials section). PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: X 9. Vicinity Map with site location. N/A 10. Provide four (4) copies of any sensitive area studies as needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). • ** 11. Any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". ** To be submitted at a later date by the selected contractor. * ** Drawings included with this application illustrate the proposed work areas and general information required for this application. Additional drawings may be provided by the selected contractor with the Public Works permit. CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan tt,ci.tukwila.wa.us • SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: PACCAR - West Excavation Areas LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. 8801 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA King County Tax Account #5422600060 Quarter: SW Section: 33 Township: 24N Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tat statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Dean K. Malte Address: 32001 32nd Avenue South, Suite 100, Federal Way, WA 98001 Phone: (253) 874 -0555 FAX: (253) 952 -3435 Signature: ` /�,� Date: FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P -SEPA Planner: File Number: Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: PACCAR - West Excavation Areas LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. 8801 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA King County Tax Account #5422600060 Quarter: SW Section: 33 Township: 24N Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tat statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Dean K. Malte Address: 32001 32nd Avenue South, Suite 100, Federal Way, WA 98001 Phone: (253) 874 -0555 FAX: (253) 952 -3435 Signature: ` /�,� Date: CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. 1 am the current ownerof the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are titre and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. (Tuner grants the City, its employees, agents,engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days. SS 7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on (Print Name) (Address) (Phone Number) (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SIJBSCRJBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON miS DAY OF NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at My Commission expires on PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS ADDRESS LABEL REQUIREMENTS: The City of Tukwila requires that neighboring residents, businesses and property owners be notified of certain types of development applications. Applicants are therefore required to submit the following materials: • Mailing labels listing the property owners of record, residents and businesses within 500 feet of the project property lines (not the property center). The number of sets of labels required depends on the notice requirements of the underlying permit. Check that application form or consult with Planning Staff for the number required. • One copy of an Assessor's map(s) showing the boundaries of the subject property and the 500 foot public notice area. .U... .■. f/I lrp 122 St 123 St • Property owner names and addresses can be obtained fom the King County Department of Assessment located on the 7th floor of the King County Administration Building, Room 700, 500 Fourth Avenue, Seattle. To compile the information required: • Obtain the Assessor's map(s) that contain(s) your property and all neighboring properties within 500 feet (See example diagram). You may use the maps on file in the Assessor's Office or purchase a set from the King County Department of Public Works Map Counter on the 9th floor of the Administration Building. Purchased maps must be ordered several hours in advance of the time you would like to pick them up. • After securing the Assessor's maps, obtain a "Real Estate Inquiry Batch Request Sheet" from the Department of Assessment. On this form, provide the tax account number for each affected property as shown on the Assessor's map(s) and submit the completed form to the Department of Assessment with the appropriate fee. Applicants can request the information be printed in mailing label form or on standard paper. • Altemately many title companies can provide property owner mailing labels. To obtain occupants/resident/business names and addresses, consult the Kroll maps located in the Tukwila Department of Community Development and do a field survey as directed. The information on the mailing labels may refer to "Resident" or "Tenant", with the proper mailing address, if the specific names are unknown. PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGNS: Public Information Signs are intended to make the public aware of land use and development actions that are being considered by the City, to facilitate timely and effective public participation in the review process. "On -Site Posting Periods" for public information signs vary based on the type of permits being requested. These periods are shown in Type 1. SIGN INSTALLATION AND SPECIFICATIONS Sign Size and Placement The sign(s) shall be 4'x4' in size, placed no closer than five (5) feet from the right -of -way at the mid -point of the more heavily traveled public street fronting the property (see Figure 2). A minimum of one sign is required on each project site. Additional signs may be required for larger sites or for properties with several street frontages. The sign(s) cannot be located within the required clear vision area depicted in Figure 3. The sign shall be prepared using the official templates provided in this packet or attachable Letters (see Figure 4 and 5). Hand lettered signs are not acceptable. Signs meeting the established criteria may be obtained from any professional sign company. Signs Now in Tukwila (206) 271 -5465 and Fast Signs in Seattle (206) 368 -7331 are two sign companies providing this service. You may consult the yellow pages to obtain quotes from other sign companies. Sign Content • The title "Notice of Land Use Action" • Type of land use or development action, which is proposed. • Name of the proposed project. • Address of project site. • Name of the Applicant. • City of Tukwila logo (copy attached). • A graphic or written description of the site boundaries, and space for the Notice of Application and Notice of Public Hearing. • Additional information as the Director of Community Development may determine to be necessary to adequately notify the public of the pending land use application. Decision Type Type 1 decision On -Site Posting Periods Duration of Posting Period Type 2 derision 14 Type 3, 4, or 5 derision For any project requiring a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit For projects triggering SEPA review , posting stall take pace withn 14 days after notice of the public concurrent period. Sngle Family dwellings are exempted. For projects triggering SEPA review , pasting shall take pace within 4 days albs notice of completeness until the later of (1) 14 days after the issuance of a decision or (2) the date of any appeal fig. For all type 3, 4, and 5 decisions posting shall take pace withi114 days at notice of completeness lentil the date cf the pctfc hearing The Public Notice Board shall be posted for a ninimm of 30 days • Notice of Hearing At least 14 days prior to any public hearing an Type 3, 4, and 5 decisions open record appeal hearings on Type 2 decisions and dosed record appeal hearings on type 4 dedsicrrs the Project Planner shall past the Notice of Hearing on any posted notice board(s) erected Removal of Posting Board Applicant is responsible for removing the pasting board in a emery mama h a000rdane with the time Omit described in the "ouration of Posting Period" sedfon. • FIGURE 1 6/99 Top of Mabee Sign shall be7b9' above grade NOTICE OF LAND USE ACi1ON TypT,�e of Ac an Addroot Applkant Site Map 14x21" Laminated Netted Appiicatid'I 8,5"x14" L Tinuted P'wttlC Notice 8.5"x14' Laninaled To Substn conceits or dAaii elfrlioras rltrn ation Rcaictruct ma Doormen d C4rraunry br rdorrneu a cslq ui 4679 GsaDSatirci Ya 8id £Ia nterta WAlibte To See Figure 4 for a copy of the City Seal 2' 7to9tees Sign Materials Use 4x4x12' Post Use 4x4' Ptywa d Use 1/2 "x 3 "Gaty. Lag Bdts %Wasters Sign Lettering Use Helvetia Letrrirg Black Lettering on Write Bad ground for al btt the Boavd1Ble Red Lettairg on Mite Badcgroud for ere Board TBIe "Notice of Lard Use Action" Logo 8 hch darreter See Hone 3 for leterirg sizes and placement i 1.1 10 1 -1L I i!I •11 P 1 e- It I FIE "II Ia'71'1 I ! • r� . n 111 ^, 11 IIC. I 1 :• . 141 111 tit' • -stn -1 = I1: =i1 7: Ft:. Project Site *raSe, WcNu 4e1 bade:* p wary tho MEM tbiepY. lel="4041 aK 3nander 9rj nilan,td m* air ....fang" flr.;y s "m'ate timer ^,oleo to Y•V /- Dear ptak. v Public Notice Beard Sign Location Example FIGURE 2 • • RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT The applicant shall be solely responsible for the construction, installation, maintenance and removal of the notification sign(s) and the associated cost. The sign(s) shall be erected no later than fourteen (14) days after the Department of Community Development issues the Notice of Completeness and will remain erected until the date specified by the Department. The applicant shall sign an affidavit, stating that the sign(s) were installed and posted in accordance with all City codes and ordinances. The affidavit of posting shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development by the applicant within fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. If the sign is made illegible, removed or otherwise destroyed prior to the date of the final Public Hearing or final action by the City of Tukwila, the applicant is responsible for the immediate replacement of the sign. Failure to maintain the Notice Board in good condition is cause for the discontinuance of the review of the application until the Notice Board is replaced and remains in place for a specified time period. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Department shall provide the applicant with all information necessary for the installation of the Public Notification Board. These materials include a copy of the City logo, size and materials requirements, and illustrated examples of a Posting Board. The Department will also determine the type of decision being rendered for this application and specify to the applicant the duration of the posted period The Department shall post the Notice of Hearing on any posted Notice Board(s) erected pursuant to TMC 18.104.110 at least 14 days prior to any Public Hearings on Type 3, 4 and 5 decisions, Open Record Appeal Hearings on type 2 decision and Closed Appeal Hearings on Type 4 decisions. REQUIRED CLEAR VISION AREA NO SIGNAGE ALLOWED FIGURE 3 • • 4' • TYPE OF ACTION: PROJECT NAME: SITE ADDRESS: APPLICANT: 8" Dia 2.75" (Lettering, Red) NOTICE OF LAND USE ACTION 1.5" (Lettering) 1.5" (Lettering) TO SUBMIT COMMENTS OR OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE PROJECT PLANNER AT (206) 431 -3670 Tukwila Planning Division 6300 Southcenter Blvd. #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 1.0" (LETTERING) FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that m the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and the other applicable guidelines were posted on the property Located at so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a timely manner or within fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter. Applicant or Project Manager's Signature On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signed the same as his /her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at My commission expires • • City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: 7/12/04 Applicant Name: Dean K. Malte Street Address: 32001 32nd Ave. South, Suite 100 City, State, Zip: Federal Way, WA 98001 Telephone: (253) 874 -0555 Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 ® ontinue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of cbaring? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -8). se circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 3-0 YES - Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3 -0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in sect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 4-0 YES - Continue to Question 3-1 (Page 5) 4 -0 Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 5-0 Continue to Question 5-0 5 -0 ` ill the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle a s s ropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 6-0 - :ntinue to Question 6-0 QoM*1∎4 u�4►ilan So(tS 6Rwn bwA i1.. Mnoc�u+virt- • Part A (continued) 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -13). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle a ' ' ropriate response. Checklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1 -3 ontinue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -12). Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development. Please circle appropriate response. NOTE: Impervious surfaces that are removed will be NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) replaced, but will not result in the creation of any new ontinue to Question 1 -4 impervious surface area. 1 -4 Will your project _generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. �a� ontinue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) err Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast- height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -3 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -4 YES - Continue to Question 2 -4 2-4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 1) got" ► s 3ZwuM —ott- NOW W lu. gib no., ""A-TL-m- ss 144.vpwv • • YES - Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black. Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO. - Continue to Question 3 -2 YES - Continue to Question 3-2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modific ations. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap, gate, diversion, or any entirely man -made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-3 YES - Continue to Question 3-3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or . hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-4 YES - Continue to Question 3-4 3-4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-5 YES - Continue to Question 3-5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-6 YES - Continue to Question 3-6 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-7 YES - Continue to Question 3-7 3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3-8 YES - Continue to Question 3-8 3-8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. An electronic version of this form is available from the Department of Community Development. Applicant Responses: A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: PACCAR - West Excavation Areas 2. Name of Applicant: Dean K. Malte 3. Date checklist prepared: 9/8/04 4. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Fall 2004 through 2005 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Project activities, including analytical sample results, will be documented in a final project report. Previous environmental reports are available upon request. 8. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. We understand that a separate permit application for demolition activities has been submitted. This project is separate from the demolition activities. No other pending applications are known, but additional permits for other projects onsite are currently in effect (shoreline, grading, hauling). Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. City of Tukwila Public Works permits for grading and hauling - to be coordinated by selected contractor. 10. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Lining of a section of storm drain pipe. Excavation and offiste disposal of 27,050 cubic yards of impacted soil material at five excavation areas. Backfilling of excavations to the existing site grade, and replacement of asphalt and concrete surfaces. Repair, replacement, or removal of storm drain catch basins, pipes, and vaults if necessary. Potential installation of groundwater treatment systems. Refer to the attached cover letter for additional information. 11. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, the tax lot number, and section, township, and range. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Address: 8801 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, WA Location: SW 1/4, Sec. 33, T24N, R4E King County Tax Account: 5422600060 Work areas are at the westem end of the site (refer to project drawings). 12. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? No. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth Agency Comments a. General description of the site (circle one olling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: >95% of surface covered with buildings or pavement. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 5 to 10% on vehicle ramps, otherwise flat. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Gravel, silty gravel,poorly graded sand, silty sand, sand silt, silt. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Excavation volume estimated to be approximately 27,050 cubic yards. Specific source of fill is not yet determined, but it will be locally imported; most likely pit -run or pea gravel type material. Crushed rock base material may also be used beneath pavement. B� vsa. vr, o.., St l..r1 5AnM 1 5,,-s ATte. uvi sra .t. - SrrE (5 bN 4 of) p r 'fu-1e36 ATEMA{ g - Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Surface water runoff into excavations is possible; surface water runoff into nearby catch basins is possible. Temporary erosion control will be implemented at the affected catch basins (refer to Attachment D of the cover letter). g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? >95 %; no change from current condition. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has been p epared and is provided in the attached materials (Attachment D of the cover letter). 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Automobile and construction machinery exhaust during construction. Dust is possible during construction, but has not typically been an issue in past projects onsite. No emissions to air once project is complete. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None planned. 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes, the Duwamish Waterway adjoins the site to the west. The Duwamish discharges to Elliot Bay. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Some work areas are within 200 feet of the Duwamish Waterway. No work is planned over or in the Duwamish Waterway 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. WOOL wtTli,4 Ctt� Ala 'se on.G, -444kE Amts. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. Agency Comments 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. However, a small portion of the site ( +1- 5,000 square feet at the southwestem corner) may be included in FEMA zone "AE" (special flood hazard areas inundated by 100 -year flood - base flood elevations determined). The FEMA base flood elevation is 8.4 feet1but surface elevations in upland areas of the site adjacent to the Duwamish appear to be above 8.4 feet. The area included in FEMA zone "AE" may include a portion of the rip -rap bank located outside the chainlink fence. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: yamg , � v, No, excavation dewatering is not anticieated. If dewatering becomes necessary, 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Give excavation water would be pumped into holding tanks and disposed after characterization. Catchment basins and storm drain line cleaning and repair may require dewaterinq dependinq pongroun matgsjnt_r Qp,___ fen:2AT CAMTl4W, 44 -T'A..D 204n✓0 w.4W?_ 1 '3 asc.LI An.6er, ib Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 2. Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve: None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stomiwater runoff will be collected by existing catch basins. Hay bales and filter fabric will be installed at catch basins in the work area. (Refer to the Temporary_ Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in the attached materials.) 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Refer to the attached Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan provided in the attached documents. uct- 144e- NTbaT OC CanalAv J,4. -.p (D 11.0.41 IQ W A-TOL i C1 itAb l;rkn • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. Agency Comments c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. ,rhigkiiiiar alder, maple, aspen, other ver een treetir, cedar, pine, other ru Grass Pasture Crop or grain Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. Agency Comments c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 5. Animals Agency Comments a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on ornea the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Mammals Fish Other 1Llawk, ea le ongbirds, .ther: Deer, bea Ik, b aver, o r: O1I16p Bass, Zolltherring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or ne the site. None known. CA1,4001f. SAt4Mtivl USA "t tJVWI 4isd 944r1— (?ki0.4.4,40 (MIGn-4 -1D 7 PvtiosEs. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Unknown. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Diesel /gasoline /electric - construction machinery and equipment. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Potential exposure to chemicals of concern in soil and groundwater will be addressed in the Site Health and Safety Plan, as will general health and safety considerations. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any Site Health and Safety Plan; Daily Safety Meetings. SPILL rtecpo,nSi Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Noise Agency Comments 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? General industrial noise; aircraft. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term noise from construction machinery and trucks, typically between 6:00 am and 5:00 pm. No long -term effects. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Industrial b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. won,tc_ u•rnU#( Mb(st: /riot R.,yrruti Pn, d I9 30 7. 1 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: c. Describe any structures on the site. Factory, warehouse, administrative, and site maintenance buildings are present. Agency Comments d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy (MIC /H) f What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? MIC /H g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? King County Shoreline Master Program. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments i Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Unknown - The site is currently vacant and would be sold or leased to a new tenant. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? None. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? No structures proposed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None; work performed during daylight hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, National, State, or Local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments • 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. East Marginal Way South serves the site through four access gates. (Refer to the project drawings.) b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No; —1/4 mile. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? No changes to existing parking facilities. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Rail transport may be used for transport of impacted soil to disposal facilities, but would be trucked from the site to an offisite rail transfer facility. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: septic system other: • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general constriction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Power to job trailer, if used, otherwise no utilities will be installed. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: 1 Date Submitted: gH 1 (NON- PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitats, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Agency Comments 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Attachment C Geotechnical Evaluation by Zipper Zeman Associates., Inc. ZZA " = Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting • J -1894 June 1, 2004 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 32001 32nd Avenue South, Suite 100 Federal Way, Washington 98001 Attention: Mr. Ty Schreiner Subject: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Paccar Excavation Recommendations 8801 East Marginal Way Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Schreiner: In accordance with your request and authorization, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) has completed the review of existing soil data and developed recommendations for temporary excavation slopes for the above referenced projcct. The conclusions and recommendations developed from the evaluation are discussed in the subsequent sections of this report. SCOPE OF SERVICES The authorized scope of services completed by ZZA for this project included a visual site reconnaissance, review of existing boring logs and cross sections provided to us, engineering analyses, and preparation of this letter report. This report was prepared in general accordance with our Proposed Scope of Services and Cost Estimate (P -2418) dated May 21, 2004. Authorization to proceed with our evaluation was provided by Kennedy Jenks on May 26, 2004. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The site is located at the former Paccar Truck Facility at 8801 East Marginal Way in Tukwila, Washington. Currently, the site appears to be completely abandoned, with several empty industrial buildings across the site. The projcct site is bordered by a Boeing facility to the north, East Marginal Way to the east, the Duwamish Waterway to the west and industrial properties to the south. The west side of the site is elevated several feet above the high water levels of the Duwamish. The west margin of the site is supported by a steel sheet pile bulkhead and a rip -rap buttressed slope. The sheet pile wall extends approximately 500 feet south from the northwest corner of the site and then turns east for approximately 70 feet. Subsequent to the construction of the sheet pile bulkhead, a portion of the site south of the bulkhead was filled and rip -rap (boulder) armoring was used to protect the fill from erosion. The areas adjacent to the bulkhead and armored embankment are covered with asphalt pavement. Immediately above the northern portion of the sheet pile bulkhead is an approximate 18905 33id Avenue West #I17, Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771 -3304 Fax: (425) 771 -3549 • • • Paccar Soil Excavation J -1894 June 1, 2004 Page 2 165- by 60 -foot metal frame building. It is known as the "Plastic Shop ". We have not observed any records regarding the foundation type used for this structure. We understand that at least two excavations will be completed in close proximity to thc sheet pile bulkhead and rip -rap armored embankment. The generalized locations of the proposed excavations, as we understand, are presented on Figure 1, the Sitc Plan. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Generalized subsurface soil conditions in thc vicinity of thc bulkhead and rip -rap armored embankment were determined by reviewing existing boring logs provided to us by Kennedy /Jenks. Borings MW -25A, MW -26C, MW -29A and MW -30A were completed in April and June of 1997. A Generalized Geologic Cross Section A -A ", Figure 7, produced by Kennedy /Jenks is included with this report. Copies of these logs are included with this report. It is our understanding that the planned depth of these excavations is about 10 feet below the existing ground surface. Soil Conditions In general, soil conditions appear to be variable across the site, particularly in the upper 15 to 20 feet. Although not specifically noted on the logs, we anticipate that much of the material in this zone consists of man - placed fills. The near - surface conditions generally consist of interbedded very loose to medium dense poorly graded sand, silty sand and sandy silt. These materials generally extended to a depth of about 15 to 20 feet below existing grades and were interpreted to be fill. Native soils at depth generally consist of interbedded loose to medium dense, poorly graded sand and silty sand, and soft to medium dense organic silt. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater seepage was observed in the borings at the time of drilling at depths of about 8 to 12 feet below existing grades. We understand that the groundwater levels behind the bulkhead fluctuate due to the tidal influence of the Duwamish Waterway. It appears that the high water levels behind the bulkhead lag the high waterway levels by several feet while the low water levels behind the bulkhead also lag the low waterway levels by several feet. Temporary Excavation Slopes We understand that two excavations are planned at the site for the purpose of removing contaminated soils. One of the proposed excavations will be situated immediately north of the former Plastic Shop Building. This is a relatively confined area due to the property line to the north, the sheet pile bulkhead to the west, and the Plastic Shop Building to the south. We have not been provided any information regarding the foundations that support the Plastic Shop Building. Therefore, we have assumed that it is supported on shallow foundations. The other proposed excavation is situated in the southwest portion of the site and will extend from near the J- 1894.Paccar Soil Excavation ZZA rof �.F_. • • Paccar Soli Excavation ] -1894 lune 1, 2004 Page 3 south property line up to approximately 220 north of the southwest corner of the site. The original sheet pile bulkhead stopped about 230 feet north of the southwest corner of the site and headed east approximately 70 feet. Sometime after the construction of the sheet pile wall, the area between the southwest corner of the site and the bulkhead was filled and large rip -rap boulders were used to armor the embankment. Therefore, this excavation will be bounded by a sheet pile bulkhead to the north, a rip -rap covered embankment to the west, and embankment supported fill material to the south. Temporary slope stability is a function of many factors, including the following: • The presence and abundance of groundwater; • The type and density of the various soil strata; • The depth of cut; • Surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation; • The length of time the excavation remains open. It is exceedingly difficult under the variable circumstances to pre - establish a safe and "maintenance -free" temporary cut slope angle. Therefore, we recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineering firm be present throughout the excavation process in order to observe the soil and groundwater conditions, as well as observe the nature, condition and stability of thc cut slopes. We recommend that temporary slope configurations be on the order of 3H:1 V to 4H:1 V in order for the wet to saturated soils to maintain stability, particularly under low waterway conditions when soils are draining and seepage forces are greatest. Unsupported vertical slopes should not extend beyond a depth of 4 feet, and only then if the soil and groundwater conditions are suitable to construct such excavations. The cuts should be adequately sloped, shored, or supported to prevent local slumping, sloughing, spalling, or running conditions. The excavation should conform to applicable federal, state, and local regulations. We understand that dcwatering is not planned. Therefore, we anticipate that thc resulting excavation would be allowed to fill and drain with the fluctuating level of the waterway. In this case, the resulting hydrostatic forces on each side of the sheet pile wall would essentially be balanced. In this casc, it is our opinion that the excavation could extend up to the sheet pile wall without leaving any soil buttress on the land side of the wall. We recommend that temporary slopes to thc north, south, and cast constructed at an angle between vertical and 2H:1 V (27 degrees) above the high groundwater level and at an angle of 3H:1 V (19 degrees) to 4H:1 V (14 degrees) below the high groundwater level. The purpose for the relatively flat slopes below the high groundwater level is due to the tidal influence in the soils and the fact that the soils are anticipated to drain more slowly than the change in water levels in the waterway. The resulting seepage forces will tend to decrease the stability of the temporary slopes comprised of the very loose to medium dense sandy soils and therefore require flatter slopes. In the area of the rip -rap covered embankment, we recommend that the western temporary slope be set back a minimum of J- 1894.Paccar Soil Excavation ZZA • • Paccar Soil Excavation 1.1 894 June I, 2004 Page 4 8 feet horizontally from the top of the rip -rap embankment. At this point, we recommend that the slope angles recommended above be used. We recommend that an envelope of existing soil extend horizontally away from outer edge of foundations supporting the Plastic Shop Building at least 6 feet and then extend downward at a maximum slope of 2H:IV above the high water level in the soil and at a 3H:IV to 4H:IV slope below the high water level in the soil, depending on the stability of the soil. CLOSURE The temporary slope angles recommended in this letter are based on the soil conditions described on the enclosed boring logs. if any variation form these slope angles is planned, we recommend that an experienced geotechnical engineer from ZZA review the conditions exposed in the excavation and determine whether variation from these recommendations will provide adequate stability. During all excavation activity adjacent to the bulkhead, plastic shop building, and rip -rap slope, we recommend that a representative from our firm be present to observe the soil and groundwater conditions to confirm or modify the recommended slope angles in this report. The integrity of earthwork and placement of structural fill depend greatly on proper site preparation and construction procedures. We recommend that ZZA be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services during the earthwork - related phases of the project. If variations in the subsurface conditions are observed at that time, a qualified engineer would be able to provide additional geotechnical engineering recommendations to the contractor and design team in a timely manner as the project construction progresses. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service on this project and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of this project with you at your convenience. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully submitted, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Thomas A. Jones, P.E. Associate EXPIRES 4 / 27 / c S- Enclosures: Figure I — Revised Approximate Excavation Areas Plan by KennedylJenks Figure 2 — Site Layout and Locations of Geologic Cross - Sections by Kennedy /Jenks Figure 7 — Generalized Geologic Cross Section A -A' by Kennedy /Jenks Boring Logs by Kennedy /Jenks J- 1894.Paccar Soil Excavation MICR UST ET RENOV4 AKA 11 07: 1.100 CV N -RACE PPE WOK AREA PANT NIX AREA EMPLOYEE PAR/0N0 \\\\ '°NG \\ BA -'G- _ i� /� % % / /H� %///////////////// /it / / % / A REMOVAL AREA APPROX. 1.100 CY 9EET PA NO BIAXNEAO TOIOI -AP PANT APPROXIMATE 100 YEAR RO®UN BOUNDARY- BASE 11000 010001101 . 0.00 (NO10 Ins OA1W) TRACTOR ENTRANCE MEAN 1001 RATER MAO(. 1.11' (0000 1011 DAWN) TOU111<ST STORAGE AKA APPRO. 11.500 C! EMPLOYEE PARI6C SNOREUE NANAL I 60U0001TY APRM 10. FROM TK WAN IOW NARA MAN CE M 0)114191 WATERWAY LEGEND: MANAGEMENT 110DIOARY ATROX. 103' ARM THE KA11001 WATER MARX Cr INC 11111011191 WATERWAY 910$RE MANACp1711 BOUNDARY APAR= 2011 AROI RE WAN /R01 11010T MARK OE 1K 01RAII91 WAERWAY APPROXIMATE SOIL REMOVAL AREA AND ESTIMATED REMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) APPROXIMATE AREA OF IN –PLACE PIPE LINING WORK (ACTUAL AREA MAY BE LESS) NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. APPROXIMATE REMOVAL AREAS AND VOLUMES MAY VARY BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. SOURCE: BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INC. 0 60 120 APPROX SCALE IN FEET N I Kennedy /Jenks Coltant PACCAR It, SEATTLE, V REVISED APPROXIMATE EXCAVATION AREA 046001.02 /PO4SKOI FIGURE STORMY/ATER OIL/WATER SEPARATOR E7 CLOSED 04 PUCE) A ; W-358 - ;PLASTIC \ sHop %1W-26C'.. 1.1AW MW-36B 1 GA.93UNE 14 WAIER/04. 12 DIESEL EH ACETONE \ MW -29C • ,•1•••■•••••:).', MW-298 BULKHEAD OFF-Hwy BUD • VI 4 \ STORM-SOUTH HI-BAY - - - FORMER TORREL STORAGE PARTS WAREHOUSE AT E AUGN. OUCH-UP PAINT CUM WASTE OIL 7 MANUFACTURING BUILDING SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA SHIPPING FORMER BONETARD RECEIYING 1M. FORMER DRUM STORAGE AREA FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE UST DIESEL UST CLOSED IN-PLACE) IRE SHOP FORMER OIL US1S (CLOSED IN-PLACE) CAFETERIA FORMER 15W 40011. UST FORMER DIESEL UST EMPLOYEE PARKING EMPLOYEE PARKING WT. OIL 3 NM-FREEZE 4 30 WT. OIL 2 DIESEL LEGEND iv- SHALLOW ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION MW-288 -4)- INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION 2.3C + DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION RW-2 0 EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION MEM FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) LOCATION AND DESIGNATION SEEP 1 NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS (REFER TO FIGURES 7 AND 8) ) RGSA WORK AREAS 1 PLANT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING DO 120 2V1i APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET Kennody/Jonke Cons PACCA C SEATTLE, WA SITE LAYOUT INCLUDING RGSA WORK AREAS AND LOCATIONS OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS 016110.00/P02SK002 FIGURE 2 =a 1S ELEVATION (FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL) A 10— 0— — 10— — 20— —30 — —40 —50 — —60 — kr Pr Ar / Argil A A z 174 9 777 /7 r Ire J LEGEND PREDOMINANTLY SAND UNIT (SP, SP /SM, SW. GP /GM) PREDOMINANTLY FINE — GRAINED UNIT (ML, SM, SM /ML) APPROX. HIGH TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROX. LOW TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 s 10 APPROXIMATE VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET A' -10 — 0 - -10 - -20 - -40 - -50 - -60 Kennedy /Janke C•tant PACCAR IN SEATTLE, W GENERALIZED GEOLOGII CROSS SECTION A-1 ISOUTH-TO -NORTH 016110.00/P02SK00 FIGURE - - -- B hOh r‘, rym ti� $3- � Q0 9I 10- 1 14, ,t10 LEGEND PREDOMINANTLY SAND UNIT (SP, SP /SM, SW, GP /GM) PREDOMINANTLY FINE - GRAINED UNIT (MI, SM, SM /ML) APPROX. HIGH TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROX. LOW TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET o s ,I o I � � aaaaar• APPROXIMATE VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET Kennedy /Jenkaaulta PACCAR SEATTLE, GENERALIZED GEOLO CROSS SECTION E (WEST -TO-EA 016110.00/P02SK FIGURI • Boring & WellSnstruction Log Kenn./Jenks Consultants KRM ICATOr WEST END - NORTH ARE ISLE !tl.ILLING mole► CASCADE DRIWNG. INC. mug" BRENT MALOW DRILLING Dump HOLLOW STEM AUGER OW. 01TS) 9>Z 9 -INCH 0.0 =LANNI asses NONE m rI. Borb18/Wer Nam Mw -25A Project Name KENwORTH - SEATTLE Project Number 956085.03 1 tNe1 CA9NO 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC 0.5T° 13.0 rl• CXvADOI MO 041W 5.75 10111 OWN 29.0 110111:041121 GAMIC 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010' SLOT) 13.0 23.0 rt W; STAR= 04/09/1997 s2[ �No "C Or n P L NESVIAR LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 SAND Ra1 10.010 29.0 e411/1. oA1q O17TN 01) 9.3 Doll = Li11a 04/09/1997 BENTONITE CHIPS FRO11 1.0 - 10.0 10cuo 90 0011 nmSON 0rt NONE 1e rT. SwNl a 10000S 2.5' sPUr WooNs PPE VOCon RitMAT R 5T (run asae al OcPM Wag 10 1.5 5 5 5 1.5 55 6 5 1.2 4 4 1.0 4 5 6 1.2 10— 25 Mater Level 9.3 feet 4/10/97 LZ SP o • 9 SP MIL =mum &Ate NOU91O O STA.D Rlll SAUP14 e[gpiPwW ANe eRatala MUMS Conceal% • Ioba%. 1w.•0erad sgtlr SAND 01oyi,1, town. roes* fine aond, moist. no odors Say SAND /sandy SILT 9raMals brown. oltrnot: g layers of me la med. Send (4 -5 thick) end sandy sit (2 -r vIlal), moist. very loess, no odors Pert' woad SAND Reddish brown. floe to me0aun send. trop of s91. mast very loose. no odors Peery graded SAND Rockfish brown, for to maim Bond. trace al moat very boas. no odors Poorly graded SAND _Ath eM Wry 00tH gray One goad Intrbeded write wood dips end sawdust layers (2-3- wad. wet very loom no odors Poorly graded SAND very dark gray. mostly One to medium good. interb.d.d with alter sand Iger9 and Does topers of wood debris, moial, wig loose. no odor. At 17 /t becomes set no edam From 26 1L 10 29 IL wood frognnrd. 0.Oreare. no adore Note: 1) TM augers were raised to 24 feet to install the monitoring well and the borehole coved in from 24 10 29 rut. 9Q1 _L, Or j� Boring & Well 'Instruction Log Kennety/Jenke Consultants Magi LCCAllii INSIDE PUS= SHOP mums wear CASCADE ORILUNG. INC. lammEIRENT MALOW =WM HOLLOW STEM AUGER cou. ono ow 9-INCH COLollOy COINS NONE 10 rt. Itorleg/Well Nose MW-26A Project Nese KENWORTH - SEATTLE Project number 956085.03 gunk ease 2-INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC CNN 0.5 to 10•0rL tortomet caw 2-INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010" SLOT 10.0 20.0 Ft lallaY106 so0 SARA La5 109• WIN ns oat $umo oan CORI= 001/09/1917 1 04/09/1997 " FitgIttlAR LAPIS LUSTRE 12/12 SAND FRC. ILO 22.5 Pt sell& la= WM WI) !La BENTONITE CHIPS 1.01° 8.0 LOD= WI DON 1016011 01110 NONE FL rot 1111011611 11111) 11••••1 orPei Para VOW MI 13 13 • 7 OM' Wear Loyal SA hot 4/9/07 . • • •=1 moult WHIN =REM On &Ma MEND LS SRN SPOOFS St••• 1 Boring & Well "Instruction Log Kenn /Jenks Consultants alI1 LXCAT1°' PLASTIC SHOP DRILL" cDAAHr HOLT DRIWNG. INC. mum MICE BRANKUNE MILLING GEMS HOLLOW STEM AUGER emu. ate alt: 9 —INCH 0.0. EGIADOI CASING 10-INCH I.D. HOLLOW STEM AUGER rwa+ 0.0 To 42.0 rt Boring/Well Name MW -26C ProJ•ct Nam KENwORTH — SEA ProJ.ct Numbirr 956085.03 RAMC CASING 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC tsar 0.0T0 49.0 QLVAGOI AHD DAMN TOT. WSW 8.94 FEET MSl. 60.0 'mounts mart 2 —INCH SCH 40 PVC (0.010" SLOT) r>rar 49.0 59.0 Vr. ow .AO trot v 11811 ADo SLICA SAND (110-20) FRCS 46.0�0 60.0 R OM STAMTM DAN e0SW= 06/05/1997 06/05/1097 WIN. "AM CCM trt) 50.0 B'EN1ON1TE CHIPS oral 3.0T0 450rt' LOGTO) sr 0014 HANSON d10YT OUIK —GROUT BENTONITE SLURRY rear 0.010 43.0 ]naI►n7IrG 1t7motA 1.e. SPUT SPOONS SNOWS �54Aaq� TINS ROOIOIT 94? KEY) SOMA OWN MET] 11573 100 ML xu ISAPalntar • SAVAGE HOLISNG O STAID PIM SNARE ODIGISeim NO aeLRe1G ROMAI Concrete. 6 -make% Pro -00/441 10— 15— 25 I0 LO. snu Kum A1GOt AURRY HOLLOW STEN� AUGER t WWI Sandy SILT SM Yellowish brown with o trace of roots. mei.t, no odors ML • SP SP - 8oly SAND YMw.iah brown. mostly fine sand. moist, no odors Sandy SILT /Sandy SAND Yolgee dark grey sandy at intsrheded with 4 -6' thick layers of darn ps(Ie sh known silty ran sand. moist. very loose. no odors Poorly graded SAND Dark 'wish brown 6 —mad Bond interpoded ,ath 1' thick layers of grayish brown sandy all 000rosimotey every r. wet. median dense. no odors Poorly graded SANG very dab groyiM brown /ire to medium send. wet. loem no adam From 30 to 40 lost Rhology was inferred from callings and drgtng conciliate GMT 1_ ar 2_ • • Boring & Well Rnstruction Log KennetJenks Consultants project Norma KDAVORN - SEATTLE Project Number 956085.03 BorlaWWel Name MW-26C Sent IS IMRE 1111111.11FIKIII NO COWS 11101/11112111 VIM AMA se la Ham SIDI NADI SP 35 NO 40 11131TDI1E SLIMY SUL RACED 1114 1 PIPS Sit, SIDDISamil SILT • grayish Woe% Intotedded 1017 Go lend Old earn di. wt. no odors 3 0.11 BM/ 3 0.0 g 45 sonalert $ 0.1 4 4 4 7-1/4 ail. SIDI wan heft paled SAND do* way. lbw wok vet. no Wag% mood debris in soncle (frm, pigs) se supine Non 50-02 kW silly file wandbonnip Elk 40-303 mit 8P 3 0.0 dart voginh bons. nory be sand alb — sal. .11. no adorn. MS teems el need • foo.a Ong in nomplar 3 0.0 4 4 Boring & Well istruction Log Kenne.Jenks Consultants o""'NG "WIC" FORMER H000 STORAGE AREA m"" cc."'" CASCADE DRILLING. INC. O"'11D18RIAN GOSE maim Knot HOLLOW STEM AUGER MILL Yn12 um 9 —INCH 0.0 1 OLATIO1 CASING NONE nom TO 1 Borinp/W.B Name MW -29A Project Name KENWORTH — SEATTLE Project Number 956085.03 °""` CASING 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC 0.5m 15.0 13LYA1104 4r10 OAUIY 8.76 10114 OIPTH 49.5 eNITCSIAICO CaSIM n. 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010' SLOT) 15.0 • 25.0 DATE surnro 01W mottos 04/08/1997 04 08 1997 911 AM1 THE LaES�fAR LAPIS LUSTRE 12/12 SAND 12.0m 49.5 SEN. BENTONITE CHIPS r5ar 1.010 12.0 rt. TUN. RAM oV14 (I1) 6.5 LOC= ST 0011 HANSON 01041 Ter[ SIONOn AC9sT 12 10 12 6 14 14 17 19 27 It) 15 20 25 Nester Level 8.5 bet 4/8/97 WW -29A -20.0 — MW -29A -22.5 I1E- 291 -25.O 1113. CONSTRUCTION MTN TD SPI SPA r1. 8P OL SP SAN/1S REDICDS 2.S SPU1 SPOONS Stu ORMITIM MO 9AIIAQ MUSING 0 SIMI. LYE ►T. Pelt L. SAMRt DE30[►ODN 110 (MUMS NNW= Ialmhes pevorsd oelswwls Poorly eroded SAND WO Mt Bolin. mostly fine sand. moist. no odors Peery eroded BAND Brown. mostly ens pond. ban of sit. moist. no odors. Deady 811.T Yellowish brown, sand b mostly rnk mkt. Wit no odors Poorly /redid IANO with M1 D ore yellowish Wolin rile sand. mob . NO o rlon Poorly vetted LAND Mottled dor% yellowish brown end yelbrish red. fine -red. wend interbedded about every 2.5 to 5 feet IAN .5 to 13' thick layers of black organte MI and wood debris. moist, Nahum dense, no odors IV -sr. Weed/Ierb layer 24.5 -253: Wood debris layer W M-ered d BAND MI6 /sad Derk grayish brow, w6 nad6en dense. no odors Poorly graded LAND DdA groyish brown. ,nosey rile to medium pond with Noses of course wend and rue grovel. west. nO odors Boring do Well ietruction Log KennetJenks Consultants Project Moss (MORN — SEATTLE Project Numbs, 9 56085.03 Berbto/W.I Naas MW-29A s VmAit Pali ■ s 1.0 3 1.0 5 lA 1. 1.0 5 1.2 $ 1.2 S 13 sum .at, be"( treoareet me COWS 40141401 1111- 7Me -3DA TAe ((1 1L) organic. sit beet at 21.75 IL • Tale (1/2 cm) 1M —. blresasd is seed • from 31 to 33 lL $ro DAND $*ND 1!111 SSt Der entity n brown .leer lies send • hnterreeee WMA levers et sae* eit ninety' It Midas= been 1 -2 Inches le 2• Mel, outlasted !saes le etsarstn de. . ro sum. pestle ended SAND 1d0i AN ▪ Oar ena bh anise Sno to enlbae send. end. er6nan dame. ne MOM Notes: 1) The rerhe wa Matlieae rrlltn bMaette dills hoe e0 le 45.5 bet. Nubs sob mese In iron 311 to e0 hod. cease!!e chips err weed to biddd the sorry' am 30 to 35 Is.. 11x1 L a i Boring & Well istruction Log 10116 lAcAT1D1 FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE HANDLING AREA Kennelipenks Consultants MUM Cp° CASCADE DRILUNG. INC. tea' BRIAN GOSE 100.4 WOW HOLLOW STEM AUGER Dieu ants) we 9 —INCH 0.0. esouDa CA1ire NONE 10 n. Wort CASete 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC 0.310 1 4.3 Boring/WW1 Nome MW -30A ProJeet Name Project Number =W SW A.a CARO • 9.73 KENWORTH — SEATTLE 956085.03 • mat Kris 42.5 PUSCOINIID CAWS; 10 FL 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC L0.010- SLOT) 14.3 24.3 Sit A1O "1 ter nNEEAR LAPIS LUSTRE 12/12 SAND raw 12.0T0 28.0 n. DA* STARIID 04/06/1997 NOAL Irstel DD0I (VT) 12.3 0A15 CddR11E0 04/06/1997 " BENTONITE CHIPS aim NATIVE SOIL ►ear 1.570 12.0 i1' LODttm Be DON HANSON raw 28.010 38.0 "• SNOU C e[11= 2.5 'SPLIT SPOONS sill COeFttlol III SWOT 1ttelea silro Pre LAKES TWE egte et7 p All Wart tkaat 1.5 23 ii 10 10 10 1.5 20 30 .32 1.0 25 27 1.2 7 t0 1.0 6 10 15 1.2 6 12 15 0.1 6 6 A 0.4 11 16 16 12 16 20 00.11 071517 10— 15— 20— scent In Water Lewd 12.3 Iasi 4/6/97 use swat DEX7aPt01 saC OSU.rre NOtAgrS 4 fates asphalt inty SAND 7.7 SP 1. 1.5 • 1.5 Brown fine to medium sand. moist no odor, Pearly graded SAND .elks l Doti yelio.ish brown. Pins to madiwn send. Croce el coarse Bond. mast. Very dines, ro odes Peaty graded IANO Dedi yeio.ish brown far to medurn send w ith 0 traced rrnas, most. "sedum dense. n o odors • Peaty wades SAND rift W Dort brown faro sand, o for SOWS. trees of mod debris and trick frogmants, moot to ma. loose. tight organic odor illy SAND Dark gray. roe 10 ms6um sand with a 1sw fins to coons grand and cobbles. trans d ■ ood dsbrle. .et. rnocfn m dens., no odor, Ova* /PL I NJtt wag Mock, wed. still. apome odor. hers 165 to 19.5 sand coolant increases Poaq eroded SAND Very doh gray fins to median sand. wet. loose. no odors 23': Traces smog silty sad nodules. not. no odors. odors. Sand losing into °ages 25: groans to mwtly mad, sand. fewer sat nodu4� 27•:water coming to the surfot1 .dh sea cuttings WET y Of .2_ • • I & Well structIon Log Kennea/Jenks Consultants Proiset S KEMVORN •- SEATTLE Probst Nwnber 956085.03 Boss/W.1 Nome lAW-30A ogpal LIM IN INCLOCf uss Lee SNINI KY Bleb* NO MUNI INIVANI TIM lane! (Jul) NINA al 0.7 111 24 - •• • _ ., . - 45— - ...ta A.r•.--:,- ,77.12f,. Awl. -•tj't A...trit. ;',0%1/4 - 1.5 .: . • . ' - . . • . • BP: 30% dudes to 0—wied sand. trace teems mond 33: as course oceol. oo odors 31r: boom of blade organic ett inchrsiene (1.': all 40111411) . os S 1.0 N:. (S..- li:4 6 .; ,. . . • 1 1 1.0 a ML a-0-J rim 1 01. Groeielo brow. mini it mostly '.... 10 . : . 8P/ 8M waist to wt. vory MIK so Were 13 Oriel* OLT Nab mod IWO. send Lt mostly line. wet. eery ats.. ertorde oder ... - • Pee* undid SAND oda di Oast vat Ore b rnedurn med. wok arredeor dorm ne adore - 41-42t some eille Ow sod loyera m. Notes: 1) A oestorels oed on imailed trees 31 to 42.5 is& 2) Neer. set cared ie kern 22 1. 32 feet dodos boddlivi. sat i. cc Attachment D Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Engineers & Scientists 32001 32nd Avenue South Suite 100 Federal Way, Washington 98001 253 - 874 -0555 (Seattle) 253 - 927 -8688 (Tacoma) FAX 253 - 952 -3435 ECEIVED 1 June 2004 c yOFTUKWILA Jura U ° 2Nli Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal PERMIT CENTER City of Tukwila Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Subject: Permit Application Addendum Request Additional Geotechnical Information K/J 046001.04 Dear Ms: Dhaliwal: Kennedy /Jenks Consultant is pleased to submit this letter on behalf of PACCAR Inc (PACCAR) that contains supplemental information in support of an addendum to the SEPA Planned Action and Shoreline Permit Application for the PACCAR Seattle facility located at 8801 East Marginal Way South in Tukwila, Washington. Background and Purpose In a letter dated 12 May 2004, Kennedy /Jenks Consultants submitted a request for an addendum to the SEPA Planned Action and Shoreline Permit Application to the City of Tukwila. The proposed activities included excavation of impacted soil at three locations of the site and performing repairs to the storm line system using cast in -place pipe lining techniques. (Note: In response to recent changes, we have modified the proposed areas for soil excavation as provided in our 12 May 2004 letter. The attached Figure 1 identifies the revised soil excavation locations and estimated removal volumes.) Based on your preliminary review, the City of Tukwila has requested that a geotechnical evaluation be performed to assess the potential for impact to the sheet pile bulkhead and rip /rap bank protect located along the western property boundary. This letter provides the information you have requested. Geotechnical Evaluation Results Kennedy /Jenks Consultants contracted the services of Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) to perform a geotechnical evaluation of the bulkhead and rip /rap bank protection. The results of this work are summarized in their letter report to Kennedy /Jenks Consultants dated 1 June 2004 and provided in Attachment A. In summary, ZZA's assessment indicated that the potential for impacts to the bulkhead and rip /rap bank protection were possible under certain slope conditions. The recommended slope conditions for work preformed in the shoreline areas is identified in their report. • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 1 June 2004 Page 2 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has been prepared for this project and is included as Attachment B. This same Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan was included in our 12 May 2004 letter and our original permit application. The general content of the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is summarized below. The primary potential sediment runoff pathway from the site is through catch basins located in the work area, which discharge to the Duwamish Waterway. Direct runoff (not through catch basins) of sediment to offsite locations is not anticipated, as all runoff within the work area is directed toward catch basins. Catch basins in proximity to the work area will be fitted with catch basin inserts and surrounded by hay bales to trap sediment that may be entrained in surface water runoff. The catch basin inserts and hay bales will be inspected daily and cleaned or replaced as necessary. Loose sediment will be removed from the asphalt/concrete surface in the work area (and onsite haul routes) by sweeping, as necessary. In addition, excavated soil or imported materials that are stockpiled onsite will be contained .within a bermed enclosure underlain and covered with impermeable plastic sheeting to minimize the potential for erosion and runoff of sediment laden water to the catch basins. Liquid from all saw cutting activities will be collected and contained onsite pending offsite disposal. With implementation of these activities, we do anticipate sedimentation or turbid surface water conditions that will impact the Duwamish Waterway or disturb the fisheries habitat. Please contact us at 253 - 874 -0555 with any questions or comments regarding the information presented in this letter or in the permit application package. Very truly yours, JENKS CONSULTANTS os ' . Du ' ng, P.E. roject)4 - ager A C•,/� Ty C. Schreiner, L. Hg. Vice President Enclosures: Figure 1 — Approximate Excavation Areas Attachment A — Letter Report by Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Attachment B - Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan cc: Mr. Alex Buccilli, PACCAR Inc. w:120041046001.0416tcs 1 I. doc Figure 1 Revised Approximate Excavation Areas FORMER UST E7 REMOVAL AREA APPROX. 1,400 CY IN -PLACE PIPE UNING AREA MAINTENANCE AS /SVE TRENCH (INCLUDED UNDER ORIGINAL SHOREUNE PERMIT) /PAINT MIX AREA WATER TOWER EMPLOYEE PARKING OFF -HWY BUILDING PARTS WAREHOUSE MANUFACTURING BUILDING A REMOVAL AREA APPROX. 1,900 CY TOUCH -UP PAINT � SHEET PILING BULKHEAD PLANT BUILDING ADMINISTRATION SHIPPING RAMP VENDOR REJECT TIRE SHOP CAFETERIA APPROXIMATE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN BOUNDARY - BASE FLOOD ELEVATION = 8.40' (NGVD 1929 DATUM) RECEIVING ONTRACTOR ENTRANCE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK = 4.64' (NGVD 1929 DATUM) SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA APPROX 6.600 CY x EMPLOYEE PARKING SHOREUNE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 40' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY LEGEND: • • OREUNE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 100' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY APPROXIMATE SOIL REMOVAL AREA AND REMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) APPROXIMATE AREA OF IN —PLACE PIPE (ACTUAL AREA MAY BE LESS) SHORELINE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 200' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY ESTIMATED LINING WORK NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. APPROXIMATE REMOVAL AREAS AND VOLUMES MAY VARY BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. SOURCE: BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INC. 0 60 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 120 APPROX SCALE IN FEET PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA REVISED APPROXIMATE EXCAVATION AREAS 046001.02/PO4SK001 FIGURE 1 Attachment A Zipper Zeman Associates Geotechnical Report ZZA rdrdsb, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting J -1894 June 1, 2004 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 32001 32nd Avenue South, Suite 100 Federal Way, Washington 98001 Attention: Mr. Ty Schreiner Subject: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Paccar Excavation Recommendations 8801 East Marginal Way Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Schreiner: In accordance with your request and authorization, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) has completed the review of existing soil data and developed recommendations for temporary excavation slopes for the above referenced project. The conclusions and recommendations developed from the evaluation are discussed in the subsequent sections of this report. SCOPE OF SERVICES The authorized scope of services completed by. ZZA for this project included a visual site reconnaissance, review of existing boring logs and cross sections provided to us, engineering analyses, and preparation of this letter report. This report was prepared in general accordance with our Proposed Scope of Services and Cost Estimate (P -2418) dated May 21, 2004. Authorization to proceed with our evaluation was provided by Kennedy Jenks on May 26, 2004. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The site is located at the former Paccar Truck Facility at 8801 East Marginal Way in Tukwila, Washington. Currently, the site appears to be completely abandoned, with several empty industrial buildings across the site. The project site is bordered by a Boeing facility to the north, East Marginal Way to the east, the Duwamish Waterway to the west and industrial properties to the south_ The west side of the site is elevated several feet above the high water levels of the Duwamish. The west margin of the site is supported by a steel sheet pile bulkhcad and a rip -rap buttressed slope. The sheet pile wall extends approximately 500 feet south from the northwest corner of the site and then turns east for approximately 70 feet. Subsequent to the construction of the sheet pile bulkhead, a portion of the site south of the bulkhead was filled and rip -rap (boulder) armoring was used to protect the fill from erosion. The areas adjacent to the bulkhead and armored embankment are covered with asphalt pavement. Immediately above the northern portion of the sheet pile bulkhead is an approximate 18905 331.° Avenue West #117, Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 771 -3304 Fax: (425) 771 -3549 ZZA ria Paccar Soil Excavation 1 -1894 June 1, 2004 Page 2 165- by 60 -foot metal frame building. It is known as the "Plastic Shop ". We have not observed any records regarding the foundation type used for this structure. We understand that at least two excavations will be completed in close proximity to the sheet pile bulkhead and rip -rap armored embankment. The generalized locations of the proposed excavations, as we understand, are presented on Figure 1, the Site Plan. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Generalized subsurface soil conditions in the vicinity of the bulkhead and rip -rap armored embankment were determined by reviewing existing boring logs provided to us by Kennedy /Jenks. Borings MW -25A, MW -26C, MW -29A and MW -30A were completed in April and June of 1997. A Generalized Geologic Cross Section A -A ", Figure 7, produced by Kennedy /Jenks is included with this report. Copies of these logs are included with this report. It is our understanding that the planned depth of these excavations is about 10 feet below the existing ground surface. Soil Conditions In general, soil conditions appear to be variable across the site, particularly in the upper 15 to 20 feet. Although not specifically noted on the logs, we anticipate that much of the material in this zone consists of man - placed fills. The near - surface conditions generally consist of interbedded very loose to medium dense poorly graded sand, silty sand and sandy silt. These materials generally extended to a depth of about 15 to 20 feet below existing grades and were interpreted to be fill. Native soils at depth generally consist of interbedded loose to medium dense, poorly graded sand and silty sand, and soft to medium dense organic silt. Groundwater Conditions Groundwater seepage was observed in the borings at the time of drilling at depths of about 8 to 12 feet below existing grades. We understand that the groundwater levels behind the bulkhead fluctuate due to the tidal influence of the Duwamish Waterway. It appears that the high water levels behind the bulkhead lag the high waterway levels by several feet while the low water levels behind the bulkhead also lag the low waterway levels by several feet_ Temporary Excavation Slopes We understand that two excavations are planned at the site for the purpose of removing contaminated soils. One of the proposed excavations will be situated immediately north of the former Plastic Shop Building. This is a relatively confined area due to the property line to the north, the sheet pile bulkhead to the west, and the Plastic Shop Building to the south. We have not been provided any information regarding the foundations that support the Plastic Shop Building. Therefore, we have assumed that it is supported on shallow foundations. The other proposed excavation is situated in the southwest portion of the site and will extend from near the J- 1894.Paccar Soil Excavation ZZA rfis% Paccar Soli Excavation 3-1894 June 1, 2004 Page 3 south property line up to approximately 220 north of the southwest corner of the site. The original sheet pile bulkhead stopped about 230 feet north of the southwest comer of the site and headed east approximately 70 feet. Sometime after the construction of the sheet pile wall, the area between the southwest comer of the site and the bulkhead was filled and large rip -rap boulders were used to armor the embankment. Therefore, this excavation will be bounded by a sheet pile bulkhead to the north, a rip -rap covered embankment to the west, and embankment supported fill material to the south. Temporary slope stability is a function of many factors, including the following: • The presence and abundance of groundwater; • The type and density of the various soil strata; • The depth of cut; • Surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation; • The length of time the excavation remains open. It is exceedingly .difficult under the variable circumstances to pre - establish a safe and "maintenance -free" temporary cut slope angle. Therefore, we recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineering firm be present throughout the excavation process in order to observe the soil and groundwater conditions, as well as observe thc nature, condition and stability of the cut slopes. We recommend that temporary slope configurations be on the order of 3H:1 V to 4H:1V in order for the wet to saturated soils to maintain stability, particularly under low waterway conditions when soils are draining and seepage forces are greatest. Unsupported vertical slopes should not extend beyond a depth of 4 feet, and only then if the soil and groundwater conditions are suitable to construct such excavations. The cuts should be adequately sloped, shored, or supported to prevent local slumping, sloughing, spalling, or running conditions. The excavation should conform to applicable federal, state, and local regulations. We understand that dewatering is not planned. Therefore, we anticipate that the resulting excavation would be allowed to fill and drain with the fluctuating level of the waterway. In this case, the resulting hydrostatic forces on each side of the sheet pile wall would essentially be balanced. In this case, it is our opinion that thc excavation could extend up to the sheet pile wall without leaving any soil buttress on the land side of the wall. We recommend that temporary slopes to thc north, south, and east constructed at an angle between vertical and 2H:1V (27 degrees) above the high groundwater level and at an angle of3H:1V (19 degrees) to 4H:1V (14 degrees) below the high groundwater level. The purpose for the relatively flat slopes below the high groundwater level is due to the tidal influence in the soils and the fact that the soils are anticipated to drain more slowly than the change in water levels in the waterway. The resulting seepage forces will tend to decrease the stability of the temporary slopes comprised of the very loose to medium dense sandy soils and therefore require flatter slopes. In the area of the rip -rap covered embankment, we recommend that the western temporary slope be set back a minimum of J- 1894.Paccar Soil Excavation Paccar Soil Excavation J -1894 June 1, 2004 Page 4 8 feet horizontally from the top of the rip -rap embankment. At this point, we recommend that the slope angles recommended above be used. We recommend that an envelope of existing soil extend horizontally away from outer edge of foundations supporting the Plastic Shop Building at least 6 feet and then extend downward at a maximum slope of 2H:1V above the high water level in the soil and at a 3H:1 V to 4H:IV slope below the high water level in the soil, depending on the stability of the soil. CLOSURE The temporary slope angles recommended in this letter are based on the soil conditions described on the enclosed boring logs. If any variation form these slope angles is planned, we recommend that an experienced geotechnical engineer from ZZA review the conditions exposed in the excavation and determine whether variation from these recommendations will provide adequate stability. During all excavation activity adjacent to the bulkhead, plastic shop building, and rip -rap slope, we recommend that a representative from our firm be present to observe the soil and groundwater conditions to confirm or modify the recommended slope angles in this report. The integrity of earthwork and placement of structural fill depend greatly on proper site preparation and construction procedures. We recommend that ZZA be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services during the earthwork - related phases of the project. If variations in the subsurface conditions are observed at that time, a qualified engineer would be able to provide additional geotechnical engineering recommendations to the contractor and design team in a timely manner as the project construction progresses. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service on this project and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of this project with you at your convenience. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully submitted, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Thomas A. Jones, P.E. Associate (EXPIRES 4/27/cS- Enclosures: Figure I — Revised Approximate Excavation Areas Plan by Kennedy /Jenks Figure 2 — Site Layout and Locations of Geologic Cross - Sections by Kennedy /Jenks Figure 7 — Generalized Geologic Cross Section A -A' by Kennedy /Jenks Boring Logs by Kennedy /Jenks ]- 1894.Paccar Soil Excavation Boring & Well Construction Log KennedyInks Consultants Kum° 10617°" WEST END - NORTH FIRE ISLE °RD.UNG CASCADE DRIUJNG. INC. O'R1LA BRENT MALOW mum "CTiOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER emu. OTIS) 9a 9 -INCH 0.0. 1SO1A110• cASNt NONE mar TO FT. Boring/W.0 Nome MW -25A ProJoct Nam* KENWORTH - SEATTLE Project Number 956085.03 i BLANK CASINO 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC FROr 0.5�° 13.0 U1VA0p1 AND 0Anm. 8.75 TOTAL OWN 29.0 PD6OMA= CAAIf 10 FT m0A 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010" SLOT) 13.0 23.0 DATE STAR= 04/09/1997 DATE CODM;ETE9 04/09/1997 see A"0 1wE LONESVfAR LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 SANG F1roLf 10.0 • 29.0 WIN, PATER OEM (TT) 9.3 BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 - 10.0 LOCOED sr DON HANSON Gmur NONE FROM 1D R. SAMPIP4C MEDICOS 2.5 'SPIT SPOONS Tau. cODMit1on Stand ttOuSIN0 t7 STAND PM( SAMPLES TYPE D(ODCAY RESIST (FEET) OLOMS DEPTH (ran SIRE Ma Pal cernatUCnott SAMPLE DESCAP1I I AND TsM4La1O ST]UARMS 1.5 5 5 5 1.5 6 5 6 1.2 5 4 4 z.. 1.0 7 8 7 4 5 6 1.2 10- 15- 20 - 25- Water Leval 9.3 feet 4/10/97 SL. 0 0 0 Coaorete. 8 toolro. pre -oared 8TH ' 8111 BAND - Grayish Drown. mostly fine Bond. `moist. no odors SM L s 8P - SP/ _ SM P Silty 1AND/wdy SILT groyish brawn, attrnoting toyer, 01 fun to med. Bond (4 -5' thick) and sandy sill (2 -3- thick). moist. very loom no odors Poorly graded BAND Reddish brown. fine to me0um send. true of silt. moist. wry loose, no odors Polly graded BAND Reddish brown, fine to medium cord. trace of tug. moist very loose, no odors Poorly graded BAND with Pk Vary dor% gray fine sand intsrbeded with wood chips and sawdust layers (2 -3- thick), rot vary loose. no odors Poorly graded /AND Very dock gray. mostly Ens to medurn sand, interbeded with sillier sand layers and trace layers of wood debris. moist, very lase. no odors At 17 1t becomes eat. no odors From 26 It. 10 29 11. wood fragments decrease, no odors Note: 1) Tha augers were raised to 24 feet to install ths monitoring well and the borehole coved in from 24 10 29 loot. 9tET .L Or • Boring Well Construction Log • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants EMIG LCC,1T01 INSIDE PLASTIC SHOP °0"14 wow. CASCADE ORILLJNG, INC. nab.se come HOLLOW STEM AUGER o...nb BRENT MLOW ON LL OM IND 9-010H 0.0. MOM CAM NONE TO rt Barbs/W.M Nana MW -26A Proj.at Naar. Project NYIDbsr 956085.03 KENWORTH — SEATTLE sum ease 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC P1101 0.510 10.0 4811 OWN 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010" SIOT) 10.0 20.0 arum! .+o S.1W Ontt PM= 04/09/1997 1994 owls 222 04N =MAO 04/09/1997 sal "nn w at AR LAPIS LUSTRE 12/12 SANG 110°0 8.010 22.5 n. wtr. 44101 90.111 941 8.e Tlv • BENTONITE CHIPS 111011 1.0`0 all n. MOD ft DON RONSON Mout NONE RIM to !AMMO 1[11004 2S SRJf SPOONS. 1[b► alfalfa IN Dina MIND o MOrocrt ISOM ptM r1..A •J 1•► COM7AIm011 IIn11 $ 1.5 5 s 12 i5 19 S 1.2 4 7 5—� 10— 15— 20— 25-+ Wetly Imre T-7 LS foot • 7 Nol 0 0 "IL low twwt 0E10unes 554 osu.10 GOWNS Commis. Ste• ta.+wod Sandy SILT Yi.eeibe brows wih 0 trots d nuts. moist. no 00.x1 Sea SAID Yu.odrl brown. mostly Ike .se rn.y& no ears Seery SILT/Sriy SAND _ Mo01.d dart poy .awry IS Int.10sded with 4 -f Midi layers at dab ysSsw 1 Moen - say Soo caw. mid. wry blow. no odor. 1 Pools psgd SANS Dods WO* broom 0 -nrd mad 1nW9eded wills 1' Wd1 layers of groOsh brawl money oet o proem oWMy wary C. wt. msdsmm derv. no 0401 Pont — SAND Wry dab grayish brown roe to medium bond. wet. 10055. ale Odor. paT J_ L • Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedyyenks Consultants El's 1-ccATic" PLASTIC SHOP p°1LLpi6 CEPPANY HOLT DRILLING, INC. =LUR MIKE BRANKUNE liRLDG METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER 01°" aT S) 9ZC. 9 -INCH 0.0. Im.Anak CASING 10 -INCH I.D. HOLLOW STEM AUGER fROw 0.0T0 42.0 R' Boring/WW1 Name Mw -26C Project Name KENWORTH - SEA Project Number 956085.03 &AII( GSM 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (WM 0.0 i0 49.0 rr' IIlVA1KTN AND DATUM 8.94 FEET MSL TOTAL DEPTH 60.0 P Rfl ATE° ra N0 2 -INCH SCH 40 PVC (0.010" SLOT) FROM 10 T. 49.0 59.0 DAIL STAR1p) 08/05/1997 9a AHO TYP[ OF (L0l .DO SILICA SAND ( #10 -20) FROM 46.010 60.0 R w11AL SA10t OIP1H (►T) 50.0 OAII COMPLETED 06/05/1997 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 4 TO FT. Lo00ED BY DON K&NSON Weilr ate x1NtOS 3.0 45.0 0.010 410 ^t I 1.5. SPUT SPOONS a701'T OUIK -GROUT BENTONITE SLURRY (ROY VEu. CES PL1.Tl0, 11 SWAM HOUSING O STAND PsPE SAMIPLZS TYPE RIOOIOIY RESET (FEET) b.aa/4 wl 0EP1N (FEET) Vera ea wok CONSTRUCTION 10- 15- 20— 25-- 30— HOLLOW STEM AUGER SLURRY 7 -1/4" 0.0. HOLIDM STEM AUGER L AIaLCGY LOO SNMPtt OCEC aPhON NO ONLIM0 REMARK! Concrete, d-lnoh... prroared ML Bendy 88.7 SM - Yellowish brown with o trace of roots, moist. no odors ML 8P SP Silty SAND Yellowish brown. mostly tine sand. moist, no odors Sandy SILT /l0ty SAND Mottled dark gray sandy all interceded with 4 -ft thick Ioyars of dark yellowish brown silty fine Bond, moist. very loose. no odors Poorly greeted SAND Dark grayish brown 1 -mad sond interb.Wd with 1' thick Byers oI grayish brown sandy all opproximately every K. wet. medium dense. no orlon Poorly graded !AND Vary dark grayish brawn fine to medium frond, wet, boss, no odors From 30 to 40 feet tithOlOgy was inferred from cuttings and drilling condl ens • orina & Well Construction Lo Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project RN= KENWORTH - SEATTLE Protest Number 956085.03 Boring/WM Name MW -26C O>zA :.;Y. ' IMAM 00►M Pin ME AL usroh067 hAOS SAME m�mn NO ARUM lIOhoAhS - - 35-' - 443-, y1 _ - 43-' . - SO*" - - 09- - HOLLOW Y MILER SCURRY SEAL OME pR gamma OIPS Si/S -1 7 P 0.0. SflFll MicaM ;� -_ _ - _ i - .f •r .f. SP - - . . - ' _ - - -, - - . '- - - oI Ir SM! PAL *My SANWSssdp OLT Or* Won% hfwboddrd onto Ono mond - and sandy MR wt. no odors . - .-• - s as 4 3 ■ -� _ { ' - ' - r; _ _ SK _ _ _ S a0 4 S , r f •f - . ' •; - SP Marto grub° SAND dart Drop. ftrs oond. wet. no odors. -• wood dotes in sands Wont plug) - - on pons from 60 -02 lest any firm w, send/sordy Ia. 40 -500 it - dart w sro n. ply tins sore wok - al. oat. no odors. . ps ba of wood - Sam. plug in oomph.. - S 0.1 4 4 s o.s g 9 s a 4 • Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy'enks Consultants "114 maim I FORMER HOOD STORAGE AREA MILL" Co11P MY CASCADE DRILLING. INC. mum BRIAN GOSE ETULLING mETTIOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER Da . arts) sm 9 -INCH O.D. 1ouno" AND NONE CROP TO n. Boring/VW Norte MW -29A Project Nam KENWORTH - SEATTLE Project Number 956085.03 KA"" CAST"a 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC Raw 0.51° 15.0 `t' EIEVA11Dr1 AND (MOW 8.78 TOTAL DEPTH 49.5 PERKSIA1E0 CASNG 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010' SLOT) 15.0 25.0 DATE STARTM 04 /08/1997 DATE MOWED 04/08/1997 siE Ala "PE or LINES AR LAPIS LUSTRE /2/12 SAND �a 12.0 49.5 wore IMMO OEP11I (n) 8.5 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS GROUT rood 1.0m 12.0' LOG= OT DON WWSON FRGw 10 R. BAWLING NE3/t10S 2.5" SPLIT SPOONS SELL ODUPLE110r1 MI SURFACE NOVSPTS O STAMO PIPE FT. SAMPLES etmWDh (nil) bid. (R-- V WTI (ten SARI NO Paw Ua+aoey Iu6 LOO SAMPLE OESOEPTI01 Ala Eault10 REIWbtS S 1.4 12 12 5 1.3 15 30 S 1.0 12 20 25 5 1.0 8 14 14 S 1.5 14 17 20 5 1.0 17 23 5 1.0 15 17 s 1.0 25 25 5 12 1.2 21 27 5- 10- 15 20- 25- 30- Wot.r Lave 8.s feat 4/8/97 MW -29A -20.0 MW -29A -22.5 1414-29A -25.0 2 2 2 0 2 0 SP/ SM SP SiwMs pr.-oohed obrlw. Poorly vsd.d SAND with wilt `Brown. mostly fins sand. moist. no odors ML SP/ SM • . SP OL SW SP Party 9r.d.d BAND Brown. mostly fun sand. trace of sit moist, no odors. Seedy GILT Yellowish brown. surd is mostly line, moist stilt. no odors • Poorly graded !IMO with sit Dork yellowish brown fun sand. moist. no odors Poorly graded BAWD Mottled dark yellowish brown and yellowish red. fins -m.0. sand interbedded about ovary 2.5 to s feet with .5 to 1.5' Mich layers of block organic silt and wood `debris. mast, medium dense, no odors 21' -24`. w.odrerk layer 24.5 -25.5: Wood debris layer W.N- graded SAND with Drivel Oork grayish brawn. wet. - odors m. um dense. no Poorly graded BAND Dark greyish brown. mostly line to medium Bond with traces of COWS, sand and rm. grovel. wet. no odors 1 SHEET t fY Z.., Boring & Well Construction Log Projoot Name Kennedyyenks Consultants KENWORTH SEATTLE Projaot Numbly 9 56085.03 Borbt0/WM Name MW -29A Oa*f Me1fr410 1• • 1.0 1e2 S 1.0 21 L Otels * adt d10M110M N Oisusre sOmele t1/- 250 -30.0 1Wn (41 ft.) organic. sit foyer at 25.75 It. Thin (1/2 cm) alit Myers Interbadsd in sad from 31 to 33 1t. s 1.0 17 S 1.0 3 5 - S. 1.0 if 14 S 1.2 10 14 S 1.2 2' 4 0 - SIM 4 5 — Sap sA110/&AMD odrt 5N Dora grayish brown silty fir. send Inwewed with flyers of seedy At ranging in thidunn from 1 -2 Inches to 2 took satnoted. Voss to medium done. no odors 219 5 13 21 • Peels Sided SAND ANS ON • Dora grayish Worn fins to medium send. wow median dares. ne odes Notes: 1) The boring was becehoed wpm bentonie drips from 40 to 40.5 toot. Nothe soil eared in from 35 to 40 feat. Benwrite drips ewe used to boddi l t s boring from 30 be 35 foot. scat L a L • Boring & Well Construction Log Kennel Jenks Consultants 9 s r wtrlc L9C"TlD" FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE HANDLING AREA DRUM Clieeurrr CASCADE GRILLING. INC. MILLING IETMOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER emu" BRIAN GOSE omta. Guts) 9a': 9 —INCH 0.0. 'soon°" `aspic NONE 10 T. Boring/Wog Nome MW -30A Project Nome KENWORTH — SEATTLE Project Number 956085.03 au lX CASING 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC FROM 0.310 14.3 &M INN AND o41w 9.73 10TANL OEP1M PE"FORAlD CA9NC !PLOP to 2 —INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC (0.010" SLOT) 14.3 24.3 FT. DATE STAR1m 04/08/1997 DATE MOUND 04/08/1997 stt AND TM a<HLONESTAR LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 SAND 12.0 id 28.0 worm. %LEER OEP1N (FT) 12.3 it BENTONITE CHIPS • r99 1.510 12.0 LOGGED BY OON HANSON °"`" NATIVE SOIL MG" 28.0m 38.0 FT. SAMPLING I INODS 2.5' SPOT SPOONS WELL COMPLETION al SLIP= NWSNG C SUMO PPE SAMPLES ref( 0(074F1 9E9ST PUT/ WO Ri ov1N PT=T) 23 1.5 29 17 10 0.5 10 10 20 1.5 30 32 15 1.0 25 7 1.2 15 8 1.0 10 15 8 1.2 12 15 6 0.1 8 8 11 S 0.4 18 16 S 12 18 20 10— 15— 20— 25— 30— Slater Lewd 12.3 Taal 4/8/97 LOCUM' • I SAMPLE DESUIPi:4 A10 ORLON MAINS SM SP/ SM SP SP/ SM 4 Inches esphaM Bete SAND \brown line 10 medium send. moist. no odors SM 7.7 1.5 1. 1.5 • • OL SP Pearly graded BAND went a!1 Dory yellowish brown. fine to medium send. trace of coarse send. moist. very dense. no odors Poorly graded SAND Dark yellowish brown Fine to media m send with o trace al lines. moist. medurn derv. no odors Poorly eroded SAND well sit D ark brown fine aond. o few cobbles. Croce of wood debris and brick (moments. moist to wet. loose. stgM organic odor My SAND 0or11 grog. lino 10 medium sand with o law fine to coarse growl and cobbles. trace of wood debris, wet, medium dense, no odors L + Oman& 11117 with adsl IBlock. wet. 'WI, organic odor. from 18.5 to 19.5 sand content increases Poorly graded 8A1113 Very dark gray fine to medium Bond. wet Wu, no odors 23': Tepees smog ally send nodules, wt. odors. Sand flow ' nt o ors 42.5 no wng up i o ug 25': grudge to mostly med. send. fewer silt nodule 27': water coming to the surface with soil cuttings SN¢T or i • • Construction Lo Kennedytenks Consultants Project Mamo KENWGRTN - SEATTLE Project Member 956085.03 Sorbs/Wel Memo Mw -30A ' OWN 0E7 SUM It , Mt , U)OACr satioLt eteor.ar NO MUM NW= MT) ,..t......,.. 664.es1 5 0.7 'a 20 24 35— �- - . 45- - _ _ - 50: ' %r4;.1 ,Ar r f.»r yN,,:.., }i .v4 -, t`j C , .< ;;;::< : - _ - - - - - - 1.5 - - 0 0 1 1 ......... j �• . 30% Oven to fi -coons d sand. boat coos send ` 33'; no Coats sond. no odors 35% bows d Work organic sit inelusiau (1-2 an daneW) ~ - S 0.. 19 S 1.0 19 20 1.0 10 a , p ML MOM OLT. fioyM tnB1.n, send moony nee, oL - .mist to ..t very MK us odor. 1A 13 25 • !f !1 gM - arms OLT I fort, sod . .bet. sad b mosey nee. net very MO.. - a1eds odor - s 1.5 . Pea* prsdmd WOO 1.011 era Dort gm/ fins to motion Bond. wet - msdswn dense. no odor - 41 -42`. some sky tine Bond byes - Notes: 1) A bsston s sod nor inetossd from 30 to 42.5 feel. 2) Native soi coved is from 20 Is 30 feet dwing toddling. ........ . - 1 • — r. mom ,`..iii�.i.i951.1. /Z ii.9519..: viiiiiiiir.iiii i.iiiiiii MOM LEGEND: APPROXIMATE SOIL REMOVAL AREA AND ESTIMATED REMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) APPROXIMATE AREA OF IN -PLACE PIPE LINING WORK (ACTUAL AREA MAY BE LESS) NOTES; 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. APPROXIMATE REMOVAL AREAS AND VOLUMES MAY VARY BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. SOURCE: BASE DRIVING PROVIDED Amor wax W fur BY PACCAR INC. K«wMV /MMks CsMdU . PACCAR INC SEATTLE. WA HEWED APPROXMME EXCAVATION AREA8 046001.02/PO4SK001 RARE t ' • • Attachment B Erosion Control Plan and Details MW -26C BMW -26A BMW -268 MW- 27A OFF -HWY BUILDING C8 CB MW -31A +MW -38A \ MW-39A \ SVE SYSTEM TRENCH RR CB +MW -378 USE OF DOCUMENTS THIS DOCUMENT. INCLUDING THE INCORPORATED OESIOi5, IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERNCE FOR MIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT %MMOUT ME MITTEN AUTHORIZATION CF KENNEDY /JENK5 CCNSULTANTS. N0. REN40N DATE BY SCALES O 1• O 25mm IF THIS BM I5 NOT DIMENSION SHOWN, ADJUST SCALES ACCORDINGLY. EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (ESC) NOTES 1. THE IMPLEMENTATION CF THESE ESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION. MAINTENANCE. REPLACEMENT. MID UPGRADING OF THESE ESC FACTURES IS THE RESPONSBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR 2. THE ESC FACTURES SHOW ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES, AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT LADEN WATER (ICES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM OR NOTATE APPUCABIE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. 3, THE ESC FAOUTIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED STE CONDITIONS (WRING THE CONSTRUCDON PER100, THESE ESC FAOUTIES SHALL BE UPGRADED (E.G., INCREASED INLET PROTECTCN, ETC.) AS NEEDED FOR STORM EVENTS. 4. THE ESC FAOURES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THEIR CONTINUED FUNCTIONING. 5. THE ESC FAOUTIES IN INACTIVE AREAS SHALL BE INSPECTED MD MAINTAINED WITHIN THE 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. 6. PROVIDE APPROPRIATE MEASURES AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT LEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. AREA DRAIN STRAW BALES FOR ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTION SCALE: NONE CONSTRUCTION NOTES CONSTRUCTION 1. APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENDON BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MUST BE EMPLOYED AT ALL TIMES IN ACCORDANCE 8)1)1 GUIOEUNES DEVELOPED IN THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON AUGUST 2001. 2. EXCAVATED SOIL IS TO BE PLACED WEST OR SOUTH CF THE SAWa1 TRENCH AND SECURELY COVERED WITH PLASTIC SHEETING UNTIL BA(XFILL OR OFFSTE DISPOSAL 15 COMPLETE POST CONSTRUCTION 1. REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSON/SEDINENTARCN FACILITIES FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. 2. CLEAN MID PROPERLY DISPOSE OF ALL ACCUMULATED SLT ANTI DEBRIS FROM ALL AREAS INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, PIPES. MANHOLES MID VAULTS. CATCH BASN CRATE CATCH BASN GRATE FRONT V1EW STORM PIPE SIDF VIEW CATCH BASIN INSERT DETAIL SCALE NONE 1' REBAR FCR INSERT REMOVAL 2 K 2• x 3/4' RUBBER BLOCK EXPANSION RESTRAINT CATCH BASH INSERT EXISTING CATCH BASIN 0 10 20 40 60 SCALE: 1'= 20' -0• DESIGNED R110 DRAWN PMB/DRM PACCAR. INC. SEATTLE, WASHINGTON AIR SPARGING AND SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM CHECKED ECC Kennedy /Jenks Consultants FEDERAL WAY. WASHINGTON EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND DETAILS FILE NAME 036025.00 -C4 JOB N0. 036025.00 DATE 11/2003 SHEET OF C4 PRINT DATE: Jun 01, 2004 — 2:34pm P:\ CAD \03 \036045.00 — PACCAR \036025.00— C4.dwg • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 12 May 2004 Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Subject: Permit Application Addendum Request PACCAR AS /SVE System Installation K/J 036025.00 Dear Ms. Dhaliwal: sscelvso or( ©F TUKwIL` MAN A 2004 PERMIT CENTER Engineers & Scientists 32001 32nd Avenue South Suite 100 Federal Way, Washington 98001 253 - 874 -0555 (Seattle) 253- 927 -8688 (Tacoma) FAX 253 - 952 -3435 Kennedy /Jenks Consultant is pleased to submit this letter on behalf of PACCAR Inc to provide information in support of an addendum to the SEPA Planned Action and Shoreline Permit Application for the air sparging and soil vapor extraction (AS /SVE) system installation project at the PACCAR Seattle facility located at 8801 East Marginal Way South in Tukwila, Washington. This letter provides a brief description of proposed modifications to the project scope of work and work area, a discussion of the regulatory framework of the project and description of the erosion and sedimentation control plan to be implemented during construction. Please refer to our original Permit Application dated 31 October 2003 (File No. L03 -067 and E03 -027) for additional information regarding our original submittal. Background and Purpose The original scope of work included in the SEPA Planned Action and Shoreline Permit. Application included the installation of an AS /SVE system for groundwater remediation purposes. The purpose of the AS /SVE system is to reduce the potential for environmental impact to the Duwamish Waterway resulting from existing site conditions. Additional activities at the site are proposed to provide further environmental protection resulting from existing site conditions. These activities will include cured in -place pipe (CIPP) lining of a portion of the • existing storm line system to prevent chemicals of concern (COC) originating in groundwater from entering the stormwater system and additional soil excavation to remove soils containing COCs. The scope of work for proposed CIPP work will include: • Cleaning the portion of the storm line located in the vicinity of the oil /water separator vault prior to lining using CIPP techniques (refer to Figure 1). This will entail using a flush truck equipped with a high - pressure washer and vacuum equipment to clean the Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 12 May 2004 Page 2 pipeline and recover material within the pipeline. The vacuum equipment will be placed at a downstream catch basin to remove the wash water and associated sediments from the pipeline generated during cleaning. • Following cleaning, inversion equipment will be used to install the CIPP inside the portion of the pipeline to be Tined. • A boiler truck will then used to inflate and heat the liner as it is cured in- place. The estimated maximum length of the CIPP work is shown on Figure 1. Initially, PACCAR plans to line the first 100 feet adjacent to the oil /water separator on the west side of the property. Up to four additional soil removal areas have been identified at the site and are displayed in Figure 1. The scope of work for removal of impacted soil will include saw - cutting and removal of approximately 10,800 square feet of asphalt and concrete pavement, excavation of approximately 5,000 cubic yards of soil, stockpiling of impacted soils prior to offsite disposal, backfilling of the excavation with clean fill material and restoration of the asphalt and concrete surface. Work Area Description The work areas for this project are located in the portions of the PACCAR Seattle site as displayed on Figure 1. The entire site is guarded by security personnel that are present at all times. The site is not accessible to the general public. The ground surface in the work area is paved with asphalt or concrete, depending upon the location, and is generally flat. The surface is gently contoured in some locations to facilitate stormwater runoff to catch basins. No modification of the existing surface topography is planned for this project. Most of the CIPP work and two of the excavations (Former UST E7 Removal Area and Former Southwest Storage Area) are located within 200 feet of the Duwamish Waterway. No work will be performed on or within the shoreline areas adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway. The boundary between the site and the Duwamish Waterway consists of a vertical sheet - piling bulkhead on the northern two- thirds of the site and a steep rock embankment on the southern one -third of the site. A chain -link fence is present along the entire length of the waterway. The shoreline will not be modified in any way as part of this project. All work will be performed on the eastern (upland) side of the fence located along the sheet -pile bulkhead and rock embankment. No adverse impacts to the waterway, sheet -pile bulkhead, or rock embankment area are anticipated as a result of the work described herein. Potential sediment runoff during construction activities will be mitigated through implementation of erosion and sedimentation control best management practices as defined in the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan developed for the project (see below). w:120031036025.001200415rwd -tcs 11.perrnitaddend.doc • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 12 May 2004 Page 3 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has been prepared for this project and is included as Attachment A. The general content of the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is summarized below. The primary potential sediment runoff pathway from the site is through catch basins located in the work area, which discharge to the Duwamish Waterway. Direct runoff (not through catch basins) of sediment to offsite locations is not anticipated, as all runoff within the work area is directed toward catch basins. Catch basins in proximity to the work area will be fitted with catch basin inserts and surrounded by hay bales to trap sediment that may be entrained in surface water runoff. The catch basin inserts and hay bales will be inspected daily and cleaned or replaced as necessary. Loose sediment will be removed from the asphalt/concrete surface in the work area (and onsite haul routes) by sweeping, as necessary. In addition, excavated soil or imported materials that are stockpiled onsite will be contained within a bermed enclosure underlain and covered with impermeable plastic sheeting to minimize the potential for erosion and runoff of sediment laden water to the catch basins. Liquid from all saw cutting activities will be collected and contained onsite pending offsite disposal. No additional procedures are needed for erosion or sedimentation control associated with the CIPP work. Regulatory Framework This project is being performed under the Ecology's Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) (VCP Site ID# NW0960). The case officer assigned to the site is Ms. Maura O'Brien with Ecology's Northwest Regional Office (please route any correspondence to Ms. O'Brien through Kennedy /Jenks Consultants). Evaluation of WAC 173 -27 -100 In accordance with our discussions, we have evaluated the proposed work outlined herein relative to the six criteria identified under WAC 173 -27 -100. Based on our evaluation, we have made the following assessment: a) No additional over the water construction is involved with the additional work on this project. b) No new ground area coverage will be added under this proposal. c) No development exceeding the project height, lot coverage, or setbacks are proposed under this proposal. d) No additional landscaping is proposed. w:120031036025.001200415rwd -tcs t I. p emdtadden d. doc Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Ms. Minnie Dhaliwal City of Tukwila 12 May 2004 Page 4 e) The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed. f) No adverse environmental impact is expected from implementation of the project. Please contact us at 253 - 874 -0555 with any questions or comments regarding the information presented in this letter or in the permit application package. NKS CONSULTANTS Project Manager Ty C. Schreiner, L. Hg. Vice President Enclosures: Attachment A — Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Figure 1 — Approximate Excavation Areas cc: Mr. Alex Buccilli, PACCAR Inc. A L'114 C, ) y' IA A(2.3' et/ X..�/.- hE % {i�"1 Li w: 120031036025 .001200415rwd- tcs1I. permitaddend.doc Attachment A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan • FORMER UST E7 REMOVAL AREA APPROX. 1,400 CN • • • IN -PLACE PIPE LINING AREA \..........- MAINTENANCE REMOVAL AREA • APPROX. 1,000 CYO MAINTENANCE AS /SVE TRENCH (INCLUDED UNDER ORIGINAL SHORELINE PERMIT) WATER TOWER EMPLOYEE PARKING OFF -HWY BUILDING PARTS WAREHOUSE MANUFACTURING BUILDING A REMOVAL AREA APPROX. 1,900 CYO TOUCH -UP PAINT SHEET PILING BULKHEAD PLANT BUILDING ADMINISTRATION SHIPPING RAMP VENDOR REJECT TIRE SHOP CAFETERIA APPROXIMATE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN BOUNDARY - BASE FLOOD ELEVATION = 8.40' (NGVD 1929 DATUM) RECEIVING ONTRACTOR ENTRANCE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK = 4.64' (NGVD 1929 DATUM) SHOREUNE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 40' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY LEGEND: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 100' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE OUWAMISH WATERWAY SHORELINE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARY APPROX. 200' FROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY APPROXIMATE SOIL REMOVAL AREA AND ESTIMATED REMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) APPROXIMATE AREA OF IN —PLACE PIPE LINING WORK (ACTUAL AREA MAY BE LESS) NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. APPROXIMATE REMOVAL AREAS AND VOLUMES MAY VARY BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. 0 60 120 SOURCE: BASE DRAWING PROVIDED APPROX SCALE IN FEET' BY PACCAR INC. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA APPROXIMATE EXCAVATION AREAS 046001.02/PO4SK001 FIGURE 1 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 530 South 336t Street Federal Way, Washington 98003 253 - 874 -0555 253 - 952 -3435 (Fax) Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report December 2002 Prepared for PACCAR Inc Business Center Building 777 106th Avenue Northeast Bellevue, Washington 98004 K/J Project No. 016110.00 Table of Contents List of Tables iii List of Figures 111 List of Appendices iv List of Acronyms v Section 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Background and Objective 1 1.2 Report Organization 3 Section 2: Phase I Data Gaps Investigations 5 2.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater and Soil Assessments (RGSAs) 5 2.1.1 Field Activities 5 2.1.2 North Fire Aisle Area 7 2.1.2.1 Objectives 7 2.1.2.2 Work Performed and Conditions Encountered 8 2.1.3 Wash Pit Area 9 2.1.3.1 Objectives 9 2.1.3.2 Work Performed and Conditions Encountered 9 2.1.4 Southwest Storage Area 10 2.1.4.1 Objectives 10 2.1.4.2 Work Performed and Conditions Encountered 10 2.2 Groundwater Monitoring Well Installation and Development 11 2.2.1 Objective 11 2.2.2 Work Performed 12 2.2.2.1 Well Construction 12 2.2.2.2 Well Development 12 2.2.2.3 Field Observations During Well Installation 13 2.2.2.4 Well Survey 14 2.3 Groundwater, Stormwater, and Seep Monitoring 14 2.3.1 Water Elevation Monitoring 15 2.3.2 Monitoring Well Sampling 15 2.3.3 Stormwater Sampling 16 2.3.4 Seep Sampling 17 2.4 Investigation- Derived Waste 17 Section 3: Geologic and Hydrogeologic Conditions 19 3.1 Regional Setting 19 3.2 Site Geology 19 3.3 Site Hydrogeologic Conditions 20 3.3.1 Groundwater Level Monitoring 21 Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepatliz.doc Table of Contents (cont'd) Section 4: Site Conceptual Model 23 4.1 Current and Anticipated Future Land Use 23 4.2 Site Conditions and Surrounding Area 23 4.3 Geology /Hydrogeology 24 4.4 Regulatory Framework and Assumptions 25 4.5 Points of Compliance 26 4.6 Potential Sources 27 4.6.1 Underground Sources 27 4.6.2 Aboveground Sources 27 4.7 Potential Exposure Pathways and Receptors 27 Section 5: Reconnaissance Groundwater and Soil Assessment Analytical Results 29 5.1 North Fire Aisle Area 31 5.1.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results 31 5.1.2 Soil Analytical Results 31 5.2 Wash Pit Area 33 5.2.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results 33 5.2.2 Soil Analytical Results 33 5.3 Southwest Storage Area 34 5.3.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results 34 5.3.2 Soil Analytical Results 35 Section 6: Site -Wide Groundwater, Stormwater, and Seep Analytical Results 37 6.1 Groundwater Analytical Results 37 6.2 Stormwater and Seep Analytical Results 40 Section 7: Conclusions 42 7.1 North Fire Aisle 42 7.2 Wash Pit Area 43 7.3 Southwest Storage Area 43 7.4 Groundwater 44 7.5 Storm Drains and Seeps 44 7.6 Potential Migration to the Duwamish Waterway, Conditional Points of Compliance, and Potential Impacts from Offsite 45 Section 8: References 47 Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptiepartUzdoc �ii • Table of Contents (cont'd) List of Tables 1 Summary of Phase I Data Gaps Investigations 2 North Fire Aisle Area — Soil Analytical Results 3 Wash Pit Area — Soil Analytical Results 4 Southwest Storage Area — Soil Analytical Results 5 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results 6 Summary of Well Construction Details 7 Groundwater Elevation Data — Low and High Tides 8 Groundwater Analytical Results 9 Stormwater and Seep Analytical Results 10 Investigation- Derived Waste Characterization Analytical Results 11 Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPHs) — Soil Analytical Results 12 Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) Analytical Results — SVOCs and Lead List of Figures 1 Site Location Map 2 Site Layout including RGSA Work Areas and Locations of Geologic Cross Sections 3 North Fire Aisle Area - Boring Locations 4 Wash Pit Area - Boring Locations 5 Southwest Storage Area - Boring Locations 6 Groundwater, Stormwater, and Seep Monitoring Locations 7 Generalized Geologic Cross Section A -A' (South -to -North) 8 Generalized Geologic Cross Section B -B' (West -to -East) 9 Potentiometric Surface Contours for Shallow Zone — 16 April 2002 (Low Tide) 10 Potentiometric Surface Contours for Shallow Zone — 16 April 2002 (High Tide) 11 Site Conceptual Model Schematic 12 VOC Concentrations Exceeding Surface Water Standards — Shallow Zone Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreportlizdoc iii Table of Contents (cont'd) • List of Appendices A Technical Memorandum from Mr. Paul Fuglevand B Boring and Well Construction Logs C Well Development Forms D Well Elevation Survey Data E Well Purge and Sample Forms F Investigation- Derived Waste Characterization and Disposal Documentation G MTCA Petroleum Hydrocarbon Mixture Worksheets H Laboratory Analytical Reports and Chain -of- Custody Documentation Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.120011016110.0012002 phase i rprsepordiLdoc iv • List of Acronyms µg /kg micrograms per kilogram µg /I micrograms per liter 1,1,1 -TCA 1,1,1- trichloroethane 1,1 -DCA 1,1- dichloroethane AOC Area of Concern ARARs Applicable, Relevant, and Appropriate Requirements ARI Analytical Resources Inc. AS /SVE Air Sparge and Soil Vapor Extraction AST Aboveground Storage Tank ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials bgs below ground surface BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylene CAP Cleanup Action Plan CFR Code of Federal Regulations cis- 1,2 -DCE cis- 1,2- dichloroethene CLARC Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations cm /sec centimeters per second COC Chemical of Concern cPAHs Carcinogenic Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons DNAPL Dense Non - Aqueous Phase Liquid Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPHs Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons ft/ft feet per foot ft/min feet per minute ft/yr feet per year GC /MS Gas Chromatograph /Mass Spectrometer HI Hazard Index HQ Hazard Quotient IDW Investigation- Derived Waste LNAPL Light Non - Aqueous Phase Liquid MDL Method Detection Limit MEK Methyl ethyl ketone (2- butanone) mg /kg milligrams per kilogram mg /I milligrams per liter MI Manufacturing - Industrial MIBK 4- methyl -2- pentanone MSL Mean Sea Level MTCA Model Toxics Control Act NAWQC National Ambient Water Quality Criteria NFA North Fire Aisle NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NTR National Toxics Rule OVA Organic Vapor Analyzer Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rp&eportlitdoc v Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 1: Introduction 1.1 Background and Objective This document has been prepared to summarize the results of the Phase I data gaps investigations conducted at the PACCAR Seattle facility (site) located at 8801 East Marginal Way South in Seattle, Washington (refer to Figure 1). Previous site investigations have focused on volatile organic compound (VOC) and petroleum hydrocarbon releases originating from former underground storage tanks (USTs) located in the North Fire Aisle (NFA) and South Fire Aisle (SFA), respectively. Activities associated with these releases included UST closures (by either removal or closure in- place), groundwater extraction, installation of a groundwater monitoring well network, semi - annual groundwater, stormwater, and seep monitoring, and preparation of site investigation reports, a risk assessment, and a Cleanup Action Plan (CAP). In October 2000, PACCAR entered into the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) to obtain assistance in closure of the site. The following documents were submitted to Ecology with the VCP application for review: • Diesel UST Closure Report, Seattle, Washington, prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated September 2000. Interim VOC Investigation Report, 8801 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, Washington, prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated June 1998. • Risk Assessment, PACCAR Facility, Seattle, Washington, prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated October 2000. • Cleanup Action Plan, PACCAR Facility, Seattle, Washington, prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated October 2000. In a draft opinion letter dated 14 March 2001 (Ecology 2001c), Ecology presented their document review comments and concerns regarding the proposed remedial action alternative (enhanced bioremediation) as outlined in the Cleanup Action Plan. These comments were addressed during a meeting among Ecology, PACCAR, and Kennedy /Jenks Consultants on 9 April 2001. During this meeting, Ecology indicated that additional information would be required to continue under the VCP and to justify use of the proposed remedial action alternative. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants developed a data gaps investigation program to collect supplemental site characterization data to address Ecology's concerns regarding site conditions, specifically: • Identification of potential upgradient offsite source(s) Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc— Seattle Facility December 2002 w:12 0 01101 6 1 1 0.0012002 phase i rptreparUiz.doc Page 1 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • Potential migration of VOCs in shallow groundwater beneath the sheet - piling bulkhead located along the western property boundary adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway • Potential migration of VOC vapors into enclosed buildings • Consideration of a more aggressive remediation approach. The scope of work for additional investigations was presented to Ecology in the Draft Data Gaps Investigation Work Plan, PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility, prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated 16 September 2001 (Work Plan). The Work Plan also included additional investigation of the NFA and SFA releases and other potential areas of concern (ADCs) at the site including: • Wash Pit Area (located south of the Maintenance Building) • Former Boneyard, Drum Storage, and the Former Hazardous Waste Storage Area (located in the southwestern corner of the site, adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway, and hereinafter collectively referred to as the Southwest Storage Area) • Former frame turnover fixture (located in the Main Manufacturing Building) • Former frame drill (Bergmaster) (located at the southern end of the Off - Highway Building). In a draft opinion letter dated 14 November 2001 (Ecology 2001d), Ecology presented their review comments regarding the proposed work plan. These comments were addressed at a meeting among Ecology, PACCAR, and Kennedy /Jenks Consultants on 19 November 2001. Specific changes requested by Ecology are identified below. The scope of the proposed ambient indoor air investigation was expanded in direct response to Ecology's comments on the Work Plan. Specifically, Ecology requested that the "ambient/indoor air investigation be conducted in all enclosed buildings at the site in order to better understand the potential vapor threat that VOCs pose to human health and the environment." The scope of the proposed groundwater, stormwater, and seep monitoring program was also expanded in response to several issues. Metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) have been detected in Duwamish Waterway sediments in the vicinity of the site (Weston 1999; HartCrowser 1999). Previous site investigations focused predominantly on VOC and petroleum hydrocarbon releases to site soil and groundwater, and Ecology identified the absence of tests for the other potential chemicals of concern (COCs) in site groundwater and stormwater as a data gap. Stormwater at the site is managed by a series of catch basins connected to two storm drains (refer to Appendix C of the Work Plan). Based on manhole invert elevations, a portion of the northern storm drain is known to intercept shallow groundwater. Low levels of VOCs are consistently detected in stormwater samples collected from the northern storm drain outfall (Storm- North), suggesting that groundwater is infiltrating the northern storm drain. Consequently, discharge from the northern storm drain is a combination of stormwater and groundwater. An oil /water separator (OWS) is located prior to the northern storm drain outfall (refer to Figure 2). The OWS and northern storm drain are being evaluated with respect to Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.120011016110.0012002 phase i rprreportlizdoc Page 2 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants upgrading the site's stormwater management system. In order to assist in future permitting issues associated with any proposed upgrades to the northern storm drain /OWS, Ecology requested additional analysis for other potential COCs to further evaluate the quality of site groundwater and stormwater being discharged to the Duwamish Waterway. Table 1 summarizes the scope of work presented in the Work Plan and the current status of these activities. As can be seen in Table 1, some of the activities have been completed while others are still ongoing. This report presents the results of the reconnaissance groundwater and soil assessments (RGSAs) conducted in the NFA Area, the Wash Pit Area, and the Southwest Storage Area, supplemental groundwater monitoring well installations, and the results of the site -wide groundwater, stormwater, and seep sampling. Collectively, these activities are hereinafter referred to as the Phase I data gaps investigations. The ambient air monitoring results have already been presented to Ecology in a stand -alone document titled Ambient Air Monitoring Report, PACCAR Inc, Seattle Facility prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated 25 March 2002. At the request of Ecology, a more aggressive remedial action approach is also being evaluated for the site than was identified in the Cleanup Action Plan (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, 2000c. An air sparge and soil vapor extraction (AS /SVE) pilot study was recently completed in accordance with Kennedy /Jenks Consultants' letter to Ecology dated 1 May 2002 (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2002b). The AS /SVE pilot study findings and recommendations regarding an expanded AS /SVE system will be presented to Ecology under separate cover. 1.2 Report Organization The remainder of this report is organized as follows: • Section 2 summarizes the field activities performed as part of the Phase I data gaps investigations. • Section 3 summarizes the hydrogeologic conditions encountered at the site, including a summary of stratigraphic conditions, hydraulic gradients, and the estimated direction of groundwater flow. • Section 4 presents the site conceptual model that was used to identify potential sources, potential exposure pathways, and potential receptors and to evaluate appropriate target cleanup standards for the site based on current and future anticipated land use. • Section 5 summarizes the analytical results from the RGSAs conducted at other potential AOCs. • Section 6 summarizes the site -wide groundwater, stormwater, and seep monitoring analytical results. Supplemental analytical data evaluations have been provided by Mr. Paul Fuglevand of Dalton, Olmsted and Fuglevand, Inc, of Kirkland, Washington (refer to Appendix A). Phase I Data Gaps. Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.12 0 01101 61 1 0.0012002 phase I rptVepatlizdoc Page 3 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • Section 7 summarizes the findings and provides conclusions based on the Phase I data gaps investigations, including recommendations for additional work to be included in the Phase II data gaps investigations. • Section 8 lists the references cited in this report. Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w120011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepatliz.doc Page 4 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • Section 2: Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations The Phase I data gaps investigations, which were performed between February and May 2002, consisted of the following main tasks: • RGSAs in NFA Area, Wash Pit Area, and Southwest Storage Area • Groundwater monitoring well installations in the NFA, along the northern property boundary, and along the sheet - piling bulkhead adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway • Site -wide groundwater, stormwater, and seep monitoring. This section summarizes the field activities associated with these tasks. Unless otherwise stated, field activities were conducted in general accordance with the protocols and procedures presented in Kennedy /Jenks Consultants' Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs) presented in Appendix D of the Work Plan. 2.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater and Soil Assessments (RGSAs) Between 20 and 26 February 2002, RGSA field activities were performed at three separate work areas on the site: • NFA Area (in proximity to the northern property boundary) • Wash Pit Area (located south of the Maintenance Building) • Southwest Storage Area (located in the southwestern corner of the site adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway). Twenty -eight soil borings were advanced at the site in the three work areas. A total of 74 soil samples and 12 reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from the soil borings. Specific activities performed at each work area, including boring locations, sampling activities, field observations, and general Iithologic descriptions, are discussed below. Figure 2 shows the locations of each work area. 2.1.1 Field Activities RGSA field activities included the collection of reconnaissance groundwater and soil samples, field observation of soil samples (headspace screening, sheen testing, and observation of physical characteristics), and lithologic logging. RGSA boring advancement and sample collection were performed using either a GeoProbe drill rig operated by Cascade Drilling, Inc. (Cascade) of Woodinville, Washington, or by hand auger • (required at three locations in the Wash Pit Area) where site structures and /or underground Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011015110.002002 phase i rptseportlizdoc Page 5 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants utilities restricted GeoProbe access. GeoProbe sampling was performed by hydraulically pushing a 2 -inch diameter split -spoon sampling probe into undisturbed soil beneath the tip of the probe. The probe was typically advanced by pushing against the weight of the sampling vehicle, but was assisted by roto- hammering the top of the probe rod where the probe could not be advanced by pushing. At locations where the probe could not be advanced with moderate hammering ( "refusal "), boring activities were discontinued. For each sampling interval, a new Teflon liner was inserted into the sampling probe. After sample collection, the split -spoon was opened and the Teflon liner was cut to allow visual observation and field screening of the sample and sample collection. Field screening included: • Water sheen testing to qualitatively assess the presence of hydrocarbon compounds • Physical observation of soil samples for staining and odor • Organic vapor headspace screening using a portable organic vapor analyzer (OVA). Visual observations and field screening were used to help select which soil samples were submitted for chemical analysis. Soil samples were logged and classified in general accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual- Manual Procedure) (ASTM D 2488 -93) (refer to boring Togs in Appendix B). Unused soil samples and equipment decontamination water were temporarily stored onsite in 55- gallon drums pending characterization and appropriate disposal (refer to Section 2.4). After sample collection, RGSA borings were backfilled with bentonite chips, and the surface was patched to match existing conditions. Soil sampling for field screening and lithologic logging was performed continuously in 3 -foot depth intervals. Soil material was retained for possible laboratory analysis in 2- to 3 -foot depth intervals at shallow [(typically 6 to 12 feet below ground surface (bgs)] depths. Where soil borings were advanced below approximately 12 feet bgs, soil samples were retained for laboratory analysis at variable depths based on the scope of work and field observations. Soil samples were collected in laboratory- supplied glass sample containers appropriate for the analyses being performed. Based on the scope of work, visual observations and field screening, select soil samples from each sampling location were submitted to Analytical Resources Inc. (ARI) of Tukwila, Washington, for laboratory analysis. For example, in areas where surface spills were considered to be a potential source of concern, the near surface samples were initially submitted for chemical analysis. In addition, samples showing either elevated organic vapor headspace concentrations, visual staining, or distinctive odors were also submitted for analysis. Based on the initial analytical results, additional samples were then submitted for analysis. Specific analyses requested for each sample varied, but included one or more of the following: • VOCs by EPA Method 8260B • SVOCs by EPA Method 8270C Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i Iptlreportlizdoc Page 6 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • PAHs by EPA Method 8270C using gas chromatograph /mass spectrometer (GC /MS) with SIM (in order to obtain lowest possible laboratory reporting limits) • PCBs by EPA Method 8082 • Total priority pollutant metals by EPA Methods 200.8 and 7000 series (Note: Select samples were also analyzed for hexavalent chromium by EPA Method 5300 because the MTCA cleanup level for hexavalent chromium is more restrictive than for trivalent chromium.) • Diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons by Ecology's NWTPH -Dx (extended). Lists of analyses performed for specific soil samples collected in each work area are provided in Tables 2, 3, and 4. (Note: The tables show those compounds detected by a particular analytical test method; however, the tables do not list all VOCs and SVOCs included in the analytical test method. Complete lists of VOCs and SVOCs included in the respective analytical test methods can be found in the analytical laboratory reports in Appendix H.) Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected at eight RGSA locations, based on the scope of work, by attaching a temporary well screen to the lowermost probe rod, which was then advanced to the desired sampling depth. The probe rod was pulled up several feet, and the screen was exposed beneath the rods at the desired sampling interval (i.e., the screen dropped out of the bottom of the sampling rods as they were lifted). Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected through the annulus of the probe rods using a peristaltic pump. Where soil sampling was performed by hand auger, the groundwater sampling rods were advanced with a hand -held roto- hammer and extracted with a hydraulic jack. Reconnaissance groundwater samples were submitted to ARI for analysis of diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, SVOCs, PAHs, PCBs, and total and dissolved priority pollutant metals by the methods listed above (refer to Table 5). 2.1.2 North Fire Aisle Area 2.1.2.1 Objectives The NFA work area is located at the western end of the NFA immediately north of the Boiler /Power House and diesel aboveground storage tank (AST) containment area, and is centered on the former location of two solvent USTs. Additional soil sampling was proposed in this area to evaluate the extent and level of residual VOC- containing soil and to assess whether this area continues to be a source of VOCs to site groundwater. Reconnaissance groundwater sampling was proposed to assess concentration gradients within the upper saturated zone, because solvents [i.e., trichloroethene (TCE) and tetrachloroethene (PCE)] are denser than water and could preferentially migrate downward toward the base of the upper saturated zone. This general area also has a history of petroleum hydrocarbon use; therefore, the scope of work in this area was expanded to include analysis of select soil samples for petroleum hydrocarbons, SVOCs (including PAHs), PCBs, and metals. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:12 0 0 110 1 611 0.0012002 phase i rplVeptatliz.doc Page 7 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2.1.2.2 Work Performed and Conditions Encountered Eight soil borings (NA -1 through NA -8) were advanced in the NFA at the former location of the two solvent USTs (refer to Figure 3). Two borings, NA -6 and NA -7, were located within the former UST excavation area and advanced to depths of 54 and 36 feet bgs, respectively. The remaining six borings were located around the perimeter of the former UST excavation area and advanced to depths of 6 to 9 feet bgs. Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from boring NA -6 at depths of 8, 20, and 49 feet bgs, and from boring NA -7 at depths of 8, 28, and 35 feet bgs. The samples were analyzed for VOCs in order to assist in placement of intermediate zone monitoring wells. The samples collected from boring NA -7 at 28 and 35 feet bgs were collected from immediately above and below the silt confining layer (described below). Field observations of soil samples and Iithologic logging results are summarized on the boring logs in Appendix B. Table 2 provides a summary of soil samples submitted for laboratory analysis and a list of specific analyses performed. Soil types encountered in the NFA typically included sand and gravel, but with some silt (well - graded sand with silt and gravel, poorly - graded sand, poorly - graded gravel, silty sand with gravel) from the surface (immediately below the concrete and asphalt) to depths of 6.5 to 7.5 bgs. Shallow soils at sampling locations within the former UST excavation area appeared to be pit -run type fill material. Shallow soils at locations around the perimeter of the former UST excavation area might also have been fill material, but were typically finer - grained and texturally distinct from the material encountered within the excavation area. Fine - grained materials including gray, dense silt were present beneath the shallow sand and gravel and extended to depths of 14 to 14.5 feet bgs. Beginning with this uppermost silt layer and extending to the bottom of the soil borings, soil materials appeared to be native. (Note: Only borings NA -6 and NA -7 were advanced to sufficient depth to penetrate this silt layer.) The upper silt layer was underlain by gray, poorly - graded sand, locally with some silt, to a depth of 27 to 28 feet bgs. This sand unit has been interpreted as the primary unit comprising the upper saturated zone. The sand in the NFA borings was 13 to 13.5 feet thick. Gray, dense silt (hereinafter referred to as the silt confining layer) was present beneath the poorly - graded sand and extended to a depth of 33.5 to 34.5 feet bgs, with an approximate thickness of 5.5 to 6.5 feet. The contact between the silt confining layer and the overlying sand was sharp and distinct. The top of this silt confining layer is interpreted as the base of the upper saturated zone at the site. Borings NA -6 and NA -7 were advanced through the silt confining layer, but boring NA -7 was terminated at approximately 36 feet bgs. To provide a better evaluation of site lithology at depth, boring NA -6 was advanced to 54 feet bgs. Materials beneath the silt confining layer to the bottom of the boring were predominantly fine- to medium - grained poorly - graded sand, although minor silty sand was encountered at approximate depths of 33 and 50 feet bgs. The saturated zone beneath the silt confining layer is interpreted as the uppermost portion of the lower saturated zone at the site. Visual observations and field screening indicated soil impacts in the NFA Area. Samples from borings located close to the Boiler House (NA -1, NA -2, and NA -5) typically contained gray- stained soil with a moderate to strong hydrocarbon or chemical odor. The odor typically increased with depth up to approximately 7 feet bgs, which was the approximate top of the Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rpt% epatliz.doc Page 8 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants fine- grained uppermost silt layer previously described. Boring NA -7, located within the former UST excavation area, contained stained and odorous soil from 5.5 to 6.5 feet bgs that may be indicative of impacts by hydrocarbon compounds. Boring NA -6, also located within the former excavation area, did not contain obviously affected soil. Soil samples from borings farther from the Boiler House had very slight to no hydrocarbon or chemical odor and were not stained. In borings where stained and odorous soils were encountered, the OVA headspace readings were typically highest at 6 to 7 feet bgs, ranging from 92.7 to 204 parts per million (ppm) at this depth interval. Analytical findings for soil and reconnaissance groundwater samples collected in the NFA Area are summarized in Tables 2 and 5 and discussed in Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 of this report. 2.1.3 Wash Pit Area 2.1.3.1 Objectives The Wash Pit Area is located in the north- central part of the site, south of the Maintenance Building. The wash pit includes a concrete - bermed enclosure where steam cleaning was historically performed, and this enclosure was identified as a potential AOC. Additional soil sampling was proposed in this area to evaluate the potential for the Wash Pit Area to serve as another source of VOCs to site groundwater. The wash pit was used for any equipment that required cleaning; therefore, the scope of work in this area was expanded to include analysis of select soil and reconnaissance groundwater samples for petroleum hydrocarbons, SVOCs (including PAHs), PCBs, and metals. 2.1.3.2 Work Performed and Conditions Encountered Six soil borings (WP -1 through WP -6) were advanced in the Wash Pit Area to depths of 7 to 9 feet bgs (refer to Figure 4). Five borings were located within or immediately around the perimeter (within 15 feet) of the wash pit, and one boring (WP -3) was located approximately 30 feet northwest of the wash pit. Boring WP -6 was advanced through the wash pit floor. Select soil samples collected from each boring were submitted for laboratory analysis (refer to Table 5 for specific samples and analyses performed). Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from borings WP -2, WP -3, and WP -5 at the approximate top of the upper saturated zone (refer to Table 5 for specific analyses performed). Soil types differed between boring WP -3 and those located in and around the wash pit. At the borings near the wash pit, brown, poorly - graded sand was encountered immediately below the concrete slab and extended to 4.5 to 5 feet bgs. Beneath the sand, gray to orange dense silt was present to the bottom of the borings. The sand and silt materials appeared to be native, although the sand could be dredge -fill. At boring WP -3, poorly - graded sand with silt, silty sand, and sandy silt were present from immediately beneath the concrete slab to the base of the boring at 9 feet bgs. Field observations in the Wash Pit Area did not indicate the presence of obviously affected soil conditions. Odorous soil, discolored soil, and elevated VOC headspace readings were not encountered in Wash Pit Area soil samples. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rpfteportlizdoc Page 9 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Analytical findings for soil and reconnaissance groundwater samples collected in the Wash Pit Area are summarized in Tables 3 and 5 and discussed in Sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of this report. 2.1.4 Southwest Storage Area 2.1.4.1 Objectives The Southwest Storage Area which includes the Former Boneyard, Drum Storage, and Former Hazardous Waste Storage Area are separate but contiguous areas (based on former usage) located in the southwestern corner of the site. These areas were identified as potential AOCs, based on historical usage and previous investigations conducted in Former Boneyard. The northwestern corner of the boneyard was previously excavated in an area where an oil spill had occurred. The excavated soil contained elevated concentrations of metals. Reportedly, some metals- containing soil might have been left in- place. The other areas have not been previously investigated. Additional sampling of these areas was proposed to evaluate whether metals- containing soil remains in place and whether historical activities in the other areas have affected soil and /or groundwater in this portion of the site. Select soil and reconnaissance groundwater samples from these areas were analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons, SVOCs (including PAHs), PCBs, and metals. 2.1.4.2 Work Performed and Conditions Encountered Six soil borings (BY -1 through BY -6) were advanced in the Former Boneyard, two borings (DS -1 and DS -2) were advanced in the Drum Storage area, and six soil borings were advanced in the Former Hazardous Waste Storage Area (HM -1 through HM -6) (refer to Figure 5). The entire area is asphalt - paved, although two concrete pads are present in the Former Hazardous Waste Storage Area. Trench drains located around the perimeter of these concrete pads have been filled with concrete, although open trench drains are located west of the concrete pads. A visible patch line in the asphalt surface in the northwestern corner of the Former Boneyard indicates the location of the previous excavation area. Soil borings were advanced to depths of 4 to 20 feet bgs. Boring depths were typically advanced to a minimum depth of 8 to 12 feet bgs unless refusal conditions were encountered (borings BY -1, BY -2, DS -1, and HM -3). (Note: This portion of the site is located in an area that was backfilled when the Duwamish Waterway bank was straightened, and rip -rap and /or debris type material was encountered in the refusal borings.) Select soil samples from the 14 borings were submitted for laboratory analysis (refer to Table 4 for specific samples and analyses performed). Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from the top of the upper saturated zone at borings BY -5, DS -2, and HM -6 (refer to Table 5 for specific analyses performed). Soil types encountered in the Southwest Storage Area included fill material underlain by potentially native soil material. The fill material included sand, gravel, and silt material mixed with varying percentages of anthropogenic debris including brick, concrete, rock, wood, charcoal, and white /orange /buff colored granular material. The color of the fill material was primarily dark gray to brown, but locally was orange, red, green, or white, commonly with a Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.12 0 0110 1 61 1 0.0012002 phase i rpVreporUiz.doc Page 10 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants variegated pattern. Fill material was encountered immediately below the asphalt or concrete surface. Potentially native materials (i.e., soil that did not contain obvious anthropogenic debris) were encountered at depths between 8 and 14 feet bgs, although some borings were terminated in non - native fill material at 8 to 12 feet bgs. These soil types included silt, silty sand, and sandy silt. Potentially native materials were typically encountered at shallower depths in borings located farthest east of the Duwamish Waterway. Although debris was not present, this material could also have been fill material. Field observations indicated the presence of potentially affected soil conditions in this portion of the site, primarily those soils interpreted as fill material. Staining of soil material was not readily apparent due to the mixed texture and color of the fill. Soils exhibiting slight to moderate chemical (possibly hydrocarbon) odors were encountered in 9 of the 14 borings. Odorous soil was encountered at various depths, but mainly below 6 feet bgs. Headspace OVA readings for soil samples collected from the Southwest Storage Area ranged from 4.7 to 68.4 ppm, but most were between 5 and 15 ppm. Based on field observation and the depths of the potentially affected soil material, it is possible that previously affected soil might have been used as fill material in this area. Analytical findings for soil and reconnaissance groundwater samples collected in the Southwest Storage Area are summarized in Tables 4 and 5 and discussed in Sections 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 of this report. 2.2 Groundwater Monitoring Well Installation and Development Thirteen new groundwater monitoring wells were installed at the site during the Phase I data gaps investigations. Ten wells were installed between 11 and 14 March 2002 and well MW -29C was installed on 30 March 2002. Monitoring well locations are shown on Figure 6. 2.2.1 Objective Monitoring wells were installed in three general areas on the site. Three wells were installed in the NFA in the general vicinity of the RGSA soil borings. One well (MW -8B) was installed in the intermediate zone (i.e., immediately above the silt confining layer) close to existing shallow zone well MW -8A. This well is designed to evaluate whether downward migration of solvents has occurred in the VOC source area. Two additional shallow zone wells (MW -33A and MW -34A) were installed along the northern property boundary to assess the northern extent of VOCs in site groundwater in the NFA and the possibility of an offsite upgradient source contributing to the VOCs observed in site groundwater in this portion of the site. Eight additional wells (MW- 29B /C, MW- 35A/B, MW- 36A/B, MW- 37A/B) were installed along the Duwamish Waterway behind the sheet - piling bulkhead, to monitor the shallow, intermediate, and deep water - bearing zones (refer to Section 3.3). These wells were designed to (1) evaluate the lateral variation of VOC concentrations in the shallow zone groundwater along the sheet - piling bulkhead, (2) monitor the lower portion of the upper saturated zone (beneath the bottom of the sheet - piling Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptrepatliz.doc Page 11 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants bulkhead and the silt confining layer), and (3) provide conditional point of compliance monitoring locations for future remediation activities. 2.2.2 Work Performed 2.2.2.1 Well Construction Cascade Drilling, Inc., installed the monitoring wells using both full -size and limited- access (for indoor wells and wells beneath power lines) hollow -stem auger drill rigs. The wells were constructed of Schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe with 0.010 -inch machine - slotted well screen, in accordance with Ecology's Well Regulations [Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173 -160]. Shallow zone wells typically were constructed to depths of 20 to 23 feet bgs with 10 feet of well screen. Intermediate zone wells were constructed to depths of 28.5 to 44 feet bgs, typically with 5 feet of well screen, although well MW -29B was constructed with a 10 -foot screen interval. The screened intervals for the intermediate zone wells were placed at the base of the upper saturated zone directly above the silt confining layer identified in previous soil borings. Deep well MW -29C was constructed to a depth of 56 feet bgs, with 7 feet of well screen placed immediately below the silt confining layer. Large (15 -inch diameter) augers were used as a temporary conductor casing for installing well MW -29C to minimize the potential for downward migration of potentially affected water from the upper saturated zone. The 15 -inch augers were initially advanced to a depth of 40 feet bgs, approximately 2 feet below the top of the silt confining layer. A 4 -foot thick seal of hydrated bentonite chips was placed at the bottom of the 15 -inch augers (36 to 40 feet bgs). Drilling through the bentonite seal and below 40 feet bgs was performed with 9 -inch augers, which were placed in the annular space of the 15 -inch augers and advanced through the bentonite seal. Specific screen intervals for each well were based on the well installation objectives and field observations. In general, a sand filter pack ( #2/12 Monterey Sand) was installed in the annular space between the boring and well screen from the bottom of the boring to approximately 2 feet above the well screen. Bentonite chips were installed above the sand filter pack to an approximate depth of 1 foot bgs. Wells were completed to the existing grade with traffic -grade surface monuments set in concrete. Well construction details for new and previously existing site wells are summarized in Table 6. Boring and well construction logs for the new wells are provided in Appendix B. Soil cuttings and equipment decontamination water were temporarily stored onsite in 55- gallon drums pending characterization and appropriate disposal (refer to Section 2.4). 2.2.2.2 Well Development Following installation, the wells were developed to remove fine - grained material deposited in the filter pack during well installation. The wells were alternately surged and pumped across the height of the screened interval using a submersible purge pump until the turbidity of the discharge water was minimized, and general water quality parameters including pH, temperature, and specific conductivity were relatively stable. This required pumping an average of 15 well volumes of water from the well. Well development forms are provided in Appendix C. Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepatlizdoc Page 12 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Well development water was temporarily stored onsite in 55- gallon drums pending characterization and appropriate disposal (refer to Section 2.4). 2.2.2.3 Field Observations During Well Installation Soil samples were collected during the well installation activities for Iithologic logging and field screening purposes using a 1.5 -foot 3 -inch diameter split -spoon sampler, which was advanced ahead of the auger with a 140 -pound drop hammer. Sampling intervals typically varied from 5 -foot depth intervals to continuous sampling, based on the scope of work and the level of Iithologic detail required. Continuous sampling was conducted at well MW -36B, located adjacent to the sheet - piling bulkhead. Continuous samples provide for a more complete Iithologic profile. Larger sampling intervals were typically employed only at locations where a shorter sampling interval had been previously used for an adjacent well (i.e., well pairs along the Duwamish Waterway bulkhead). Soil types encountered during well installation activities were generally consistent with previous site observations. Soil types encountered in the NFA wells typically included sand (poorly - graded to well - graded) from immediately below the concrete surface to a depth of 3.5 to 5.5 feet bgs that was underlain by silt, sandy silt, and silty sand to a depth of 14 to 17 feet bgs. Gray, poorly - graded sand typical of the upper saturated zone was present beneath the silt, sandy silt, and silty sand material. One boring in the NFA (MW -8B) was advanced through the sand unit to the underlying silt confining layer at the base of the upper saturated zone. The silt confining layer was encountered in boring MW -8B at a depth of 28 feet bgs. Soil types encountered in the well borings advanced along the Duwamish Waterway bulkhead were generally consistent with past site observations. A silt, silty sand, and sandy silt unit was encountered in all sheet - piling bulkhead borings beginning at depths of 0 (immediately beneath the concrete surface) to 6 feet bgs and extending to depths of 8 to 12 feet bgs. In borings where the silt, silty sand, and sandy silt was not encountered at the surface, poorly - graded sand or gravel with sand and silt were encountered. This material extended from the surface to depths of 3.5 to 6 feet bgs and was underlain by the silt and sand unit described above. Poorly- graded sand typical of the upper saturated zone was encountered beneath the silt and sand layer and extended to depths of 38.5 to 43 feet bgs with an approximate thickness of 26.5 to 33.5 feet. The silt confining layer at the base of the upper saturated zone was present beneath the poorly - graded sand in all borings advanced to sufficient depth. The top surface of the silt confining layer was encountered at depths of 38.5 to 43 feet bgs. The contact between the overlying sand and the silt confining layer was generally distinct, although in borings MW -29B and MW -36B, thin layers of silt and silty sand were encountered several feet above the main silt layer. One boring (MW -29C) was advanced through the silt confining layer. The silt confining layer was underlain by poorly- graded sand at a depth of 50 feet bgs. Silt was again encountered beneath the sand at a depth of 56 feet bgs, and continued to the base of the boring at 59 feet bgs. Based on the observations from boring MW -29C and the previous soil boring for well MW -26C, the thickness of the silt confining layer at the base of the upper saturated zone in this portion of the site is approximately 9 to 11.5 feet. Field screening results for monitoring well borings did not indicate affected soil conditions at any well locations. Stained soil, odorous soil, and elevated VOC headspace screening results were not encountered in any soil samples retained for field screening or Iithologic logging purposes. Field screening was not conducted at well boring MW -8B since affected soil was previously Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility • December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptieporUiz.doc Page 13 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants encountered in RGSA boring NA -7, located immediately adjacent to boring MW -8B. Soil samples from NA -7 were submitted for chemical analysis (refer to Section 2.1.2). 2.2.2.4 Well Survey After monitoring well installation, well elevations were surveyed by Earth Tech of Federal Way, Washington, on 17 April 2002. Elevations were surveyed for the top of the surface monuments (north rim) and the top of the inner PVC well casing (typically at the northernmost point of the casing) for all newly installed wells. In addition, two existing site wells in the SFA area were surveyed. Well MW -4A was recently located in the SFA area, and the upper casing of well MW -6A was replaced during UST removal activities in March 2000. Vertical survey elevations are based on the datum [13.29 feet above mean sea level (MSL)] given on a brass plate located on top of a concrete post near the northwestern corner of the Maintenance Building. This datum has also been used for previous well elevation surveys on the site. Well elevation data for all site wells is provided in Table 6. Well survey elevation data for the newly installed wells is provided in Appendix D. 2.3 Groundwater, Stormwater, and Seep Monitoring A site -wide groundwater, stormwater, and seep monitoring event was conducted as part of the Phase I data gaps investigations. This monitoring event included water level measurements and sample collection. (Note: Well MW -3A was not included in the Phase I data gaps monitoring event because the well was not considered suitable for groundwater monitoring purposes due to the presence of an unknown thick, black material on the inside of the well casing. It is planned to appropriately abandon this well during future field activities. Only water level measurements were collected from wells MW -P1A and MW -P1 B. The total depths of these wells are known, but no information is available regarding well construction, particularly the screened interval; therefore, these wells were not sampled as part of the Phase I data gaps monitoring event.) As discussed in Section 1 of this report, the scope of Phase I data gaps monitoring event was greatly expanded to include a comprehensive suite of compounds. Thirty -eight groundwater wells (refer to Table 7), two stormwater discharge locations (Storm -North and Storm- South), and six seep locations were sampled during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event (refer to Figure 6). The following field quality control (QC) samples were also collected as part of the sampling activities. Three sets of duplicate samples were collected at select well locations representing each water - bearing zone, and one set of duplicate samples was collected from Storm -North. Duplicate samples were analyzed for the same full suite of compounds as the primary samples. Two sets of field equipment blanks were collected, one for each sampling crew. Field blanks were also analyzed for the full suite of compounds. In addition, trip blanks accompanied water samples collected for VOC analysis. Five trip blanks were analyzed for VOCs. During the Phase I data gaps monitoring event, groundwater, stormwater, and seep samples were collected in accordance with the protocols and procedures presented in the Work Plan and analyzed for the following comprehensive suite of compounds: • VOCs by EPA Method 8260B Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepartlizdoc Page 14 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • SVOCs by EPA Method 8270C • PAHs by EPA Method 8270C using GS /MS with SIM • PCBs by EPA Method 8082 modified using the Manchester method • Total and dissolved priority pollutant metals by EPA Methods 200.8 and 7000 series • Diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons by Ecology's NWTPH -Dx (extended) • Gasoline -range petroleum hydrocarbons by Ecology's NWTPH -G • Glycols by EPA Method 8015 modified (only select wells located in the vicinity of former antifreeze USTs). A select number of groundwater samples from each water - bearing zone (shallow, intermediate, and deep) were also analyzed for calcium and magnesium. ARI used the calcium and magnesium data to calculate water hardness by Standard Method 2340B. Hardness values for specific samples were used to calculate an average value for groundwater hardness for the site of 189 milligrams per liter (mg /I). This value was used to evaluate the cleanup levels for certain metals. A list of analyses performed for specific samples is provided in Tables 8 and 9. (Note: The tables show those compounds detected by a particular analytical test method; however, the tables do not list all VOCs and SVOCs included in the analytical test method. Complete lists of VOCs and SVOCs included in the respective analytical test methods can be found in the analytical laboratory reports included in Appendix H.) 2.3.1 Water Elevation Monitoring Groundwater elevation monitoring of all accessible site wells was performed at both high and low tide conditions on 16 April 2002. Water levels were measured using electronic water level depth probes and converted to elevations using the surveyed top of casing elevations. Water level measurements were completed within approximately one -half hour of the published times for Seattle, Washington high and low tides. Groundwater elevation data is summarized in Table 7 and discussed in Section 3.3.1 of this report. [Note: Petroleum hydrocarbon product, also referred to light non - aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) was encountered on the water table at well MW -6A. Product thickness varied between 0.19 and 0.24 foot between low and high tides.] 2.3.2 Monitoring Well Sampling Twenty -eight shallow zone wells, eight intermediate zone wells, and two deep zone wells were sampled between 26 March 2002 and 2 April 2002 (refer to Figure 6). Groundwater sampling included groundwater purging, water quality parameter monitoring, and groundwater sample collection at all new and existing monitoring wells at the site, except wells MW -P1A, MW -P1B, and MW -3A, as previously discussed. Prior to sampling, groundwater monitoring wells that had not been historically included in semi - annual monitoring events (MW -4A, MW -11A, MW -16A, MW -19B, MW -22A, and MW -23A) were redeveloped to remove fine - grained materials that Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.12 0 0 1101 61 1 0.0012002 phase i rphrepathz.doc Page 15 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants might have accumulated over time in the sand filter packs or in the wells themselves. (Note: Table 9 indicates those wells that have been sampled regularly as part of an ongoing semi - annual monitoring program under the VCP.) The development procedures were the same as previously described for the newly installed wells (refer to Section 2.2.2.2). Well development logs are provided in Appendix C. Groundwater sampling was performed using low -flow sampling techniques (EPA 1996). Water quality parameter measurements including pH, temperature, and specific conductivity were recorded during the purging process. Qualitative observations of water color, odor, and turbidity were also noted. Groundwater purge and sample forms that document the sampling activities are included in Appendix E. Groundwater samples were submitted to ARI for analysis of the comprehensive suite of compounds. Groundwater samples were placed directly into appropriate laboratory- supplied sample containers for each required analysis. Preservatives (hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, or nitric acid) were included in the laboratory- supplied sample containers as appropriate. Each sample was labeled and placed in a chilled cooler for transport to the analytical laboratory. Samples were handled and transported using standard chain -of- custody procedures. Duplicate samples were collected at wells MW -14A, MW -28B, and MW -26A and analyzed for the same comprehensive suite of compounds as the primary samples. Five trip blanks were analyzed for VOCs for each day of sampling, and two field blanks were collected by filling sampling containers with laboratory- prepared water and analyzed for the comprehensive suite of compounds. Chain -of- custody documents are included in Appendix H with the laboratory analytical reports. Analytical findings for groundwater samples collected during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event are summarized in Table 8 and discussed in Section 6.1 of this report. Well sampling purge water was temporarily stored onsite in 55- gallon drums pending characterization and appropriate disposal (refer to Section 2.4). 2.3.3 Stormwater Sampling Grab stormwater samples were collected on 16 April 2002 during a rainfall event. Grab stormwater samples were collected from the northern storm drain outfall (Storm - North) at both high and low tide conditions. A grab stormwater sample was also collected from the southern storm drain outfall (Storm- South) at low tide. (Note: Sample collection was not possible at high tide during the rainfall event because the outfall was partially submerged. By the time the tide had dropped sufficiently to allow access to the outfall, insufficient stormwater was flowing to collect the volume of sample required to test for the comprehensive suite of compounds.) Stormwater monitoring locations (Storm -North and Storm - South) are shown on Figure 6. Grab stormwater samples were collected by filling appropriate laboratory- supplied sample containers, preserved with acid where appropriate, at the point of discharge from the site. Stormwater samples were submitted to ARI for analysis of the comprehensive suite of compounds. One duplicate sample was collected at Storm -North during high tide conditions. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rp&eportlizdoc Page 16 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Stormwater samples were handled and transported as previously described. Chain -of- custody documents are included in Appendix H with the laboratory analytical reports. Analytical findings for stormwater samples collected during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event are summarized in Table 9 and discussed in Section 6.2 of this report. 2.3.4 Seep Sampling Grab seep samples were collected on 17 April 2002 during a low tide condition. The six seeps are located along the Duwamish Waterway bank, adjacent to the southern portion of the site that lies beyond the southern extension of the sheet - piling bulkhead, in an area that is protected only by rip -rap. (Note: During the Phase I data gaps monitoring event, insufficient flow from Seep #3 prevented sample collection, and there was only sufficient flow from Seep #6 to collect a sample for VOC analysis.) Seep monitoring locations are shown on Figure 6. Grab seep samples were collected by pumping seep discharge water into appropriate laboratory- supplied sample containers, preserved with acid where appropriate, using a peristaltic pump or a pipette where the discharge rate was insufficient to allow pumping. Seep samples were submitted to ARI for analysis of the comprehensive suite of compounds. Seep samples were handled and transported as previously described. Chain -of- custody documents are included in Appendix H with the laboratory analytical reports. Analytical findings for seep samples collected during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event are summarized in Table 9 and discussed in Section 6.2 of this report. 2.4 Investigation- Derived Waste Investigation- derived waste (IDW) for this project included soil cuttings generated during soil boring and well installation activities, equipment decontamination water, and purge water generated during well development and sampling activities. All waste materials were temporarily stored onsite in 55- gallon steel drums that were labeled to indicate the contents. Three composite soil samples were collected on 20 March 2002 from eight randomly selected drums in order to characterize the soil cuttings for disposal. The composite samples were submitted to ARI for analysis of diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons by Ecology Method NWTPH -Dx (extended), VOCs by EPA Method 8260B, and for RCRA eight metals by EPA Methods 6010/7000 using the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). Soil waste characterization analytical results are summarized in Table 10. Laboratory analytical reports and chain -of- custody documents for these analyses are provided in Appendix F. A total of 14.3 tons (36 drums) of soil was disposed of as non - hazardous waste by the Regional Disposal Company (Rabanco) of Seattle, Washington. Soil cuttings were transported in the original drums by Rabanco to its Seattle transfer station for landfill disposal on 10 May 2002. The Rabanco waste profile and disposal documents are provided in Appendix F. Analytical results from groundwater sampling were used for wastewater characterization. A total of 1,650 gallons of wastewater was disposed of as non - hazardous waste by Philip Services Corporation (Philip) under an existing PACCAR profile (159416 -63). Philip removed water from Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:12 00 1101 6 1 1 0.0012002 phase i iphrepoctIiz.doc Page 17 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants the drums located onsite with a vacuum truck and transported it to the Kent, Washington, facility for disposal. Wastewater disposal documents are provided in Appendix F. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:12001101 61 1 0.0012002 phase i rptrepatliz.doc Page 18 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 3: Geologic and Hydrogeologic Conditions 3.1 Regional Setting The geomorphology and soil types of the Puget Sound Lowland were formed as deposits of glacial drift and interglacial sediments. Postglacial changes to this glacial drift plain included erosion and down - cutting from the White, Cedar, Green, and Duwamish Rivers. Alluvial and sedimentary deposits from this erosion subsequently filled the broad Duwamish River Valley embayment area. These sediments consist primarily of silt and sand. Soils in the Duwamish River Valley were formed in these alluvial deposits and are part of the Ordia - Seattle- Woodinville soil association. These soils are composed of stratified silt loams, silty clay loams, and sandy loams, with layers of peat and muck that are characteristically level and somewhat to very- poorly drained. Soil permeability is moderate to moderately low for the Oridia series soils, moderate for the Seattle series soils, and moderately low for the Woodinville series soils. Areas along the Duwamish Waterway have been built up and industrialized from the original tide -flats land surfaces. Such industrialized areas contain original soils modified by the addition of 3 to 12 feet of dredge fill materials. Over time, the original Duwamish River sediments have been dredged, meanders in the river straightened to shorten the river by approximately 9 miles, and former slips to the river backfilled, eventually creating the Duwamish Waterway of today. The southwestern corner of the site was modified sometime between 1961 and 1970, resulting in a straightening of the Duwamish Waterway bank. The area between the original bank and rip -rap was backfilled with soil and debris material of unknown origin. 3.2 Site Geology Findings regarding site lithology and stratigraphy are generally consistent with the findings of previous site investigations. However, information obtained during the Phase I data gaps investigations has enhanced the understanding of subsurface conditions, particularly with respect to the silt confining layer previously identified as the lower boundary of the upper saturated zone (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 1998). This section also incorporates findings from other previous site investigations. Interpretive geologic cross sections based on current and past site findings are presented on Figures 7 and 8. Figure 7 provides a south -to -north cross section along the Duwamish Waterway, while Figure 8 provides a west -to -east cross section between the Duwamish Waterway and the NFA Area. The top of the silt confining layer, which is interpreted as the base of the upper saturated zone, was encountered at depths of 27 to 28 feet bgs in the NFA Area soil borings. In a previous well boring (MW -28B) located in the Hi -Bay Building, the silt confining layer was encountered at a depth of 39 feet bgs. In current and previous soil borings advanced along the Duwamish Waterway, the silt confining layer was encountered at 38 to 43 feet bgs. These findings indicate that the top surface of the silt confining layer slopes downward generally toward the west between the north- central and western portions of the site. Where the silt confining layer is fully penetrated by soil borings, the thickness ranges from approximately 6 feet in the NFA Area to Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc— Seattle Facility December 2002 v120011016110.00\2002 phase i rphrepo tlizdoc Page 19 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants approximately 10 feet along the Duwamish Waterway. The silt confining layer has been encountered throughout the site in borings that were advanced to sufficient depth. The poorly - graded sand layer encountered above the silt confining layer accounts for most of the saturated thickness of the upper saturated zone. This layer is typically encountered in soil borings advanced to sufficient depth and appears to be present across the entire site. Observations from soil borings that completely penetrated the sand layer indicate that the layer increases in thickness between the central portion of the site and the western end of the site. In boring NA -6, located in the NFA Area, the sand layer was 13 feet thick. In well MW -28B, located in the Hi -Bay Building, the sand layer was 27 feet thick. In the well MW -30A, along the Duwamish Waterway south of the sheet - piling bulkhead, the sand layer was approximately 19 to 33.5 feet thick. In the other wells located adjacent to the sheet - piling bulkhead, the sand layer was approximately 26.5 to 33.5 feet thick. The general increase in thickness of the sand layer toward the Duwamish Waterway appears to be related in part to the increasing depth of the silt confining layer, although the depth to the top surface of the sand layer varies across the site. Fine - grained materials, typically silty sand or sandy silt, are generally present above the poorly - graded sand layer at thicknesses of several to approximately 15 feet. These fine - grained materials are present immediately below the pavement in some borings, or are overlain by sandy or gravelly materials that locally are mixed with silt. Textural features (e.g., layering, root traces, etc.) observed in some deposits indicate that they may be native materials, particularly at depths below 5 to 10 feet bgs; however, fill materials have been identified in many soil borings throughout the site. Fill materials at the site includes structural fill beneath buildings and paved areas, sand and silt dredge -fill deposits, and backfill materials for excavations. In addition, fill material was placed in the southwestern corner of the site in the vicinity of the Southwest Storage Area when the Duwamish Waterway bank was straightened. Based on the findings of the Phase I data gaps investigations, this material includes a mixture of sand, silt, gravel, and general anthropogenic debris. 3.3 Site Hydrogeologic Conditions The following three water - bearing zones have been identified at the site: • Upper portion of the upper saturated zone (also referred to as the shallow or "A" zone) • Lower portion of the upper saturated zone (also referred to as the intermediate or "B" zone) • Upper portion of the lower saturated zone (also referred to as the deep or "C" zone). A total of 38 monitoring wells have been completed in these three zones at the site (excluding MW -P1A, MW -P1 B, and MW -3A). Twenty -eight wells (designated "A ") monitor the shallow zone. Wells installed in the shallow zone are typically screened between 10 and 20 feet bgs, although specific screen intervals vary (refer to Table 6). Eight wells (designated "B ") monitor the intermediate zone. The screen intervals in these wells are typically 5 to 10 feet and are located immediately above the silt confining layer that is interpreted as the base of the upper Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptVepat.liz.doc Page 20 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • saturated zone. Two wells (designated "C ") monitor the deep zone immediately below the silt confining layer described above in Section 3.2, and have screen intervals of 7 to 10 feet. Both deep zone wells (MW -26C and MW -29C) are associated with well clusters that also include shallow and intermediate zone wells. The intermediate zone wells, with the exception of well MW -19B, are also paired with shallow zone wells. (Note: Only the total depth of wells MW -P1A and MW -P1 B is known; the screen intervals and integrity of these wells are unknown.) 3.3.1 Groundwater Level Monitoring Groundwater elevations were monitored during high and low tide conditions in 38 wells at the site to evaluate the shallow zone potentiometric surface and horizontal hydraulic gradient and to evaluate the vertical hydraulic gradient between well pairs and triplets installed in the various water - bearing zones. Groundwater is encountered at the site at depths ranging from approximately 5 to 12 feet bgs (refer to Table 7). The shallow zone horizontal groundwater gradient is generally to the west across the site but is strongly influenced by tidally induced water level fluctuations, particularly on the western portion of the site. The amount of water level fluctuation observed in each monitoring well is summarized in Table 7 and ranges from approximately 3 to 4 feet near the Duwamish Waterway to 0.04 foot in the eastern portion of the site (well MW -1A). The hydraulic gradient in the shallow zone at low tide conditions is approximately 0.004 feet/foot • (ft/ft), which is consistent with previous monitoring events. The westward gradient is most evident during low tide conditions. At high tide, the westward gradient is evident on the eastern portion of the site, but the gradient is reversed on the western portion of the site. The greatest water level differences between low and high tides are observed in the southwestern corner of the site in the vicinity of wells MW -37A and MW -30A. Well MW -37A is located at the southern end of the sheet - piling bulkhead, and well MW -30A is located south of the sheet - piling bulkhead, in an area where the western property boundary is protected from the Duwamish Waterway by rip -rap. The gradient reversal produces a shallow groundwater trough, or stagnation zone, on the western portion of the site adjacent to and east of the sheet - piling bulkhead, generally parallel to the Duwamish Waterway. The groundwater gradient along the axis of this trough is approximately to the northwest, toward the northern property boundary. The presence and nature of the trough is consistent with previous water level monitoring events at the site. Potentiometric surface contour maps of shallow zone groundwater elevations at low and high tide are presented on Figures 9 and 10, respectively. Based on the limited number of wells monitoring installed in the intermediate zone, groundwater in the intermediate zone appears to mimics the fluctuations observed in the shallow zone. At low tide, groundwater flow in the intermediate zone is toward the west. At high tide, the gradient is reversed on the western portion of the site. Well clusters located along the Duwamish Waterway (behind the sheet - piling bulkhead) typically exhibited an upward hydraulic gradient between the deep zone wells and intermediate zone wells during both low and high tide conditions. The upward hydraulic gradient between the deep zone and intermediate zone is consistent with historic observations in wells MW -26B and • MW -26C. The hydraulic gradient between the shallow zone wells and intermediate zone wells Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase 1 rptreportliz.dac Page 21 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants located along the Duwamish Waterway was typically downward during low tide conditions and upward during high tide conditions. However, the vertical hydraulic gradients between wells MW -37A and MW -37B were opposite to this trend (downward at low tide and upward at high tide). This difference in vertical hydraulic gradients may be related to the location of this well pair at the southwestern corner of the sheet - piling bulkhead. At this location, the sheet - piling bulkhead extends east (inland) for a short distance. Consequently, this well pair has sheet - piling located on two sides of the well pair, which appears to be influencing water level fluctuations in this portion of the site differently from water level fluctuations observed at other well pairs located along the sheet - piling bulkhead to the north. The vertical hydraulic gradient at well pair MW -28A and MW -28B was downward at high tide and upward at low tide. The well pair is located in the Hi -Bay, approximately 400 feet east of the sheet - piling bulkhead, and appears to be located in the stagnation zone. The observed vertical gradient is generally consistent with previous monitoring events with respect to the water elevation difference between the two wells, which has historically been between 0.01 and 0.06 foot. However, vertical gradients between these wells have typically been downward during both high and low tides, with an upward gradient observed at low tide for only one previous monitoring event (November 1999). The small difference between water elevations between the two wells may be related to the position of the wells in the stagnation zone. The vertical gradient between well pair MW -8A and MW -8B was downward during both high and low tide conditions. This well pair is located in the NFA Area and situated farthest from the tidal influences of the Duwamish Waterway. (Note: The vertical gradient between well pair MW -P1A and MW -P1 B was not evaluated because the screen intervals and specific Iithologic units included in the screen intervals are unknown.) Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 wA20011016110.0012002 phase i rptVepatliz.doc Page 22 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 4: Site Conceptual Model A site conceptual model has been developed for the site. The site conceptual model was used to identify potential sources and evaluate potential exposure pathways and receptors based on current and anticipated future land use. The site conceptual model has also been used to identify appropriate cleanup standards for the site. The site conceptual model will be reviewed and updated as necessary as additional information becomes available from future site investigations. A schematic representation of the site conceptual model is presented on Figure 11. 4.1 Current and Anticipated Future Land Use The site is located in a heavy industrial area near -to Boeing Field. The site is zoned for Manufacturing - Industrial Center Heavy (MI) use and meets the following criteria for an "industrial property" under WAC 173 - 340 -745: • People do not live at the site. • The primary potential exposure is to adult employees and contracted industrial workers. • Access to the property by the general public is not allowed, and if allowed it is highly limited and controlled due to safety or security considerations. Access to the site is controlled by security guards and perimeter fence that extends around the entire facility. • No food is grown or raised at the site. • Operations at the site are characterized by the use and storage of chemicals, noise, odors, and truck traffic. • The ground surface is entirely covered by buildings and paved parking Tots, minimizing potential exposure to vapors. • The site may have support facilities consisting of offices, cafeterias, and other facilities that are commercial in nature but are devoted to administrative functions necessary for industrial use and /or are primarily intended to serve industrial facility employees and not the general public. The use of industrial -based cleanup standards (when available) to evaluate data obtained from site investigations is considered most appropriate to site conditions, based on past and future anticipated land use. 4.2 Site Conditions and Surrounding Area The PACCAR site covers approximately 25 acres and is either paved (with asphalt or concrete) or covered with buildings. Precipitation onto the site is currently controlled through roof drains and catch basins that route runoff to the Duwamish Waterway. Consequently, the potential for infiltration of precipitation is negligible. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptseportliz.doc Page 23 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants As with the site, the areas surrounding the PACCAR site are also highly industrialized. Boeing Field and several other industries are located east of the site, across the railroad tracks and East Marginal Way. A Boeing facility is located to the north, and the former Rhone Poulenc site is located to the south. Each of these properties is also zoned for heavy industrial use. 4.3 Geology /Hydrogeology Groundwater is initially encountered at the site at relatively shallow depths ranging from 5 to 12 feet bgs. Two main saturated zones, referred to as the upper saturated zone and the lower saturated zone, have been identified at the site. The upper saturated zone has been nominally divided into the shallow zone representing the upper portion of the upper saturated zone and the intermediate zone representing the lower portion of the upper saturated zone. A silt confining layer separates the two main saturated zones. The silt confining layer is believed to be present across the entire site and acts as an aquitard between the two saturated zones. The silt confining layer dips gently toward the west and the Duwamish Waterway. A sheet - piling bulkhead located along the western property boundary protects the site from the Duwamish Waterway. The remainder of the western property boundary is protected by rip -rap. Construction drawings show the sheet - piling bulkhead was installed to a depth of 30 feet bgs. Therefore, the sheet - piling bulkhead does not appear to penetrate the silt confining layer located at approximately 40 feet below grade. While the sheet - piling bulkhead is unlikely to be completely watertight, it does form a barrier to the flow of shallow zone groundwater. No seeps are currently observed along the portion of the western property boundary that is protected by the sheet - piling bulkhead. Several seeps are observed at low tide south of the sheet - piling bulkhead where the western property boundary is protected only by rip -rap. The main pathway for groundwater from the upper saturated zone to exit the site along the majority of the western property boundary is under the sheet - piling bulkhead. Where only rip -rap is present significant tidal influences on the upper saturated zone are observed and the shallow zone water may exit the site at low tide and be influenced by the Duwamish Waterway at high tide. Water level fluctuations of 3 to 4 feet occur along the western boundary of the site as a result of the tidal changes in the Duwamish Waterway. Analytical data from wells monitoring the shallow and intermediate zones indicate that the VOCs and petroleum hydrocarbons identified in site groundwater are present mainly in the shallow zone, suggesting that limited vertical migration has occurred. Because the net groundwater flow direction at the site is to the west, horizontal migration of dissolved phase compounds has occurred primarily west of the source areas. However, the amount of shallow groundwater potentially exiting the site is limited by the presence of the sheet - piling bulkhead and the tidal fluctuations in the Duwamish Waterway, which create a groundwater gradient reversal in the western portion of the site during high tide conditions (twice a day). These tidal fluctuations also affect the vertical groundwater gradients, especially along the western portion of the site where groundwater potentially exits the site. During low tide conditions, the groundwater gradient is typically downward and is reversed during high tide conditions. VOCs released to site groundwater have migrated across the western portion of the site to the sheet - piling bulkhead. However, the combination of the sheet - piling bulkhead, tidally influenced mixing and stagnation as well as natural biodegradation has likely limited the potential for significant offsite migration. In fact, many chemicals experience enhanced natural attenuation, due to active biogeochemical processes taking place, in tidally fluctuating groundwater zones (Boatman and Hotchkiss 1997). Those chemical compounds that are sufficiently mobile to be transported through the Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110 0012002 phase i rpttrepotliz.doc Page 24 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants groundwater system typically remain in solution upon discharge to surface water, with little affinity for sorption onto sediments. Because shallow groundwater at the site has been affected, groundwater cleanup levels must be established for the site. According to WAC 173 - 340- 720(1)(a), groundwater cleanup levels shall be based on estimates of the highest beneficial use and the reasonable maximum exposure expected to occur under both current and potential future use conditions. The highest beneficial use for the site groundwater is to protect the adjacent surface water body (Duwamish Waterway). Given the proximity of the site to the Duwamish Waterway, there is an extremely low probability that site groundwater will be used for drinking water purposes. The shallow groundwater at the site is considered to be "non- potable" based on the following conditions specified in WAC 173 - 340- 720(2)(d): • There are known or projected points of entry of groundwater into surface water. Water level monitoring data supports groundwater flow beneath the sheet - piling bulkhead and possibly via the seeps along the western property boundary. Groundwater is also being discharged (along with the site's stormwater) from the northern storm drain. • The Duwamish Waterway is not classified as a suitable domestic water supply source under WAC 173 -201A. • There are no known water supply wells within' /z mile of the site based on a review of Ecology well logs. • The groundwater is sufficiently hydraulically connected to the surface water that it is not practicable for use as a source of drinking water. The significant groundwater fluctuations observed in the western portion of the site suggest that the site is "sufficiently" hydraulically connected to the Duwamish Waterway. Therefore, groundwater cleanup levels based on the protection of surface water are most appropriate to site conditions. Groundwater and stormwater data obtained from the site investigations will be evaluated with respect to the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method B surface water cleanup levels and /or other applicable, relevant, and appropriate requirements (ARARs), in accordance with WAC 173 - 340- 730(3)(b)(i), as discussed in Sections 5 and 6. 4.4 Regulatory Framework and Assumptions The conceptual site model and the associated cleanup levels identified in this report have been developed in accordance with the current version of MTCA (WAC 173 -340, dated 12 February 2001). As indicated above, the PACCAR site is zoned for industrial use. In preparing this report, we have assumed that the future land use will remain industrial and that appropriate controls and restrictions will be instituted and maintained to assure the continued industrial use of the property. This includes the assumption that the site is paved or covered with buildings to prevent human contact with site soils and that stormwater controls will be maintained in the future to prevent infiltration of stormwater runoff. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w: ' 20011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepoatlizdoc Page 25 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 4.5 Points of Compliance In accordance with MTCA, the point of compliance (the point where cleanup levels must be attained) varies for the various media (groundwater, surface water, soil, and air). These are: • Groundwater — throughout the site from the uppermost zone of saturation to the lowest depth that could potentially be affected. (Note: This is for groundwater that may be used as a potable water source. However, no known drinking water wells have been identified within 1h mile of the site.) • Soil — The point of compliance for soil cleanup levels developed for protection of direct contact or ingestion is throughout the site from the surface to 15 feet below grade. • Surface water — The point where contaminants may enter surface waters of the state unless Ecology has authorized a dilution zone in accordance with WAC 173 -201 -035. • Air — Throughout the site. MTCA allows a conditional point of compliance for groundwater that discharges to surface water, such as at the PACCAR site. At these sites, MTCA allows use of groundwater cleanup levels based on the protection of surface water that are measured at the point where groundwater (seeps or monitoring wells adjacent to the western property boundary) discharge to an adjacent surface water body [WAC 173 - 340- 720(8)(d)]. For a conditional point of compliance to be allowed, MTCA requires the following: • Groundwater entering surface water will continue to enter surface water after the cleanup is done • It is not practicable to meet cleanup levels within a reasonable restoration timeframe • Mixing zones are not an allowable means to achieve cleanup levels • Groundwater discharges shall be provided with all known and reasonable methods of treatment (AKART) prior to release into surface water • Groundwater discharges shall not result in violations of sediment quality values published in WAC 173 -204 • Groundwater monitoring must be performed to estimate the contaminant flux rates and to address potential bioaccumulation problems resulting from surface water concentrations below method detection limits. For purposes of this report, a conditional point of compliance for groundwater discharging to surface water was assumed (i.e., wells located along the western portion of the site adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway). However, formal acceptance of a conditional point of compliance will require Ecology approval. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 v(120011016110.0012002 phase i rptiepatliz.doc Page 26 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 4.6 Potential Sources For the purposes of the site conceptual model, sources with the potential to affect soil and /or groundwater have been divided into two main categories: those located below ground surface (e.g., USTs) and those located above ground surface (e.g., storage areas). 4.6.1 Underground Sources Former USTs located in the NFA and SFA have leaked and affected site soil and groundwater with VOCs in the NFA and with petroleum hydrocarbons in the SFA. In both cases, the USTs have been removed or closed in- place. Residual soil containing low concentrations of VOCs and petroleum hydrocarbons remains in place. Dissolved -phase transport of VOCs and petroleum hydrocarbons in shallow zone groundwater has occurred in both areas. LNAPL associated with the petroleum hydrocarbon release is present on the water table in the SFA. DNAPL associated with the VOC release is not expected, as discussed in Sections 5 and 6 of this report. In addition to USTs, other "sources" that could potentially impact site soil and groundwater include potentially contaminated fill material and other offsite entities such as adjacent properties and/or the Duwamish Waterway, as discussed in Sections 5 and 6 of this report. 4.6.2 Aboveground Sources Areas where potential surface spills and leaks could impact subsurface soil and groundwater include surface storage areas such as Southwest Storage Area. In these areas, concrete pads or asphalt cover the ground surface, or secondary containment systems associated with the storage areas are designed to limit the potential for spills /leaks to enter soil and /or groundwater. Consequently, the potential for impacts to subsurface soil and groundwater appear to be remote, as discussed in Sections 5 and 6 of this report. 4.7 Potential Exposure Pathways and Receptors If soil impact has occurred, then potential exposure pathways include direct contact (dermal and /or ingestion), inhalation (vapors), and leaching (from soil to groundwater). Three groups of potential receptors have also been identified: humans, terrestrial plants and wildlife, and aquatic organisms. The potential receptors were used to evaluate whether the potential exposure pathways can be considered "complete" pathways (refer to Figure 11). Aquatic organisms are identified as the primary receptors due to the hydraulic connection between the site groundwater and the Duwamish Waterway. Approximately 50 percent of the site is covered by buildings with concrete foundations, and the remainder of the site is covered by concrete pads and /or asphalt. The buildings, concrete, and asphalt pavement prevent stormwater (from precipitation) from infiltrating to groundwater. Stormwater runoff at the site is managed by a series of stormwater catch basins connected to two storm drains. For practical purposes, the site is capped with respect to stormwater infiltration. Therefore, the leaching pathway from unsaturated zone soils in incomplete. Minor cracks in the asphalt may result in a limited amount of stormwater infiltration; however, this can be mitigated by regular inspections and maintenance. Because PACCAR is pursuing a conditional point of compliance for Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 v.120011016110.0012002 phase i rptrepatliz.doc Page 27 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants discharge of groundwater to the Duwamish Waterway, evaluation of the leaching pathway is not considered for subsurface soils. The buildings, concrete, and asphalt also act as a barrier to other potential exposure pathways. The presence of VOCs in site soil and groundwater creates the potential for VOCs to volatilize from the soil and groundwater and migrate through the vadose zone soil, to the ground surface, and into ambient air (either outdoor or indoor). Consequently, the vapor inhalation pathway is considered a potential complete exposure pathway and is evaluated in the Ambient Air Monitoring Report, PACCAR Inc, Seattle Facility prepared by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, dated 25 March 2002. The buildings, concrete, and asphalt also act as a barrier to direct contact by humans and terrestrial plants and wildlife. Direct contact with affected soil by the dermal and /or ingestion pathways may occur if the "barrier" is disturbed for any reason through invasive activities (for example an industrial worker). Therefore, direct human contact with site soil is considered a complete exposure pathway for an industrial worker scenario and is evaluated in this report. Therefore, concentrations of chemicals detected in site soil during site investigations were initially evaluated with respect to the MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels based on the ingestion -only exposure pathway. MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup levels were substituted if MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels have not been established. Because the site is located in an industrial area (refer to Section 4.1), future land use is anticipated to be consistent with past land use (i.e., the site will remain covered with either buildings, concrete pads, asphalt, or other physical barriers that include a surface water management system). Therefore, it has been assumed that the site will qualify for an exclusion from a terrestrial ecological evaluation because it meets the following criterion for exclusion as defined in WAC 173 - 340- 4791(1)(b): • All soil contaminated with hazardous substances is, or will be, covered by buildings, paved roads, or other physical barriers that will prevent plants and wildlife from being exposed to the soil contamination. Consequently, the site investigations did not include an ecological evaluation. (Note: It is understood that in order to qualify for this exclusion, an institutional control shall be required by Ecology under WAC 173 - 340 -440.) Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreporLliz.doc Page 28 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 5: Reconnaissance Groundwater and Soil Assessment Analytical Results RGSAs were conducted in the following three work areas as part of the Phase I data gaps investigations: the NFA Area, the Wash Pit Area, and the Southwest Storage Area between 20 and 26 February 2002. Soil samples and reconnaissance groundwater samples collected from each work area were analyzed for VOCs, petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, SVOCs (including PAHs), and total priority pollutant metals (including hexavalent chromium) as indicated in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5. Reconnaissance groundwater analytical data were evaluated with respect to ARARs including: • Ecology's Chronic Freshwater Surface Water Quality Standard (SWQS) (WAC 173 -201A) (Ecology 1997) • National Toxics Rule (NTR) for Consumption of Organisms Only [Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 131.36] (EPA 1992) • National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (NAWQC) for Consumption of Organisms Only [Section 304(a), Clean Water Act] (EPA 1999) • Ecology's Model National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Standards for petroleum hydrocarbons (WAC 173 -226). Unless otherwise stated, ARARs are considered to be appropriate surface water cleanup standards. However, in accordance with WAC 173 - 340 -730, ARARs were evaluated to assess whether they are sufficiently protective under MTCA. This was achieved by comparing the ARARs to the Method B surface water cleanup levels published in Ecology's Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations (CLARC version 3.1) (Ecology 2001e), adjusted to a risk level of 1 x 10 "5. (Note: The values listed in CLARC version 3.1, as well as those listed on the summary tables presented in this report, are based on a risk level of 1 x 10 -6.) If the ARAR was not considered to be sufficiently protective (e.g., vinyl chloride), the ARAR was "adjusted downward" to the MTCA Method B surface water cleanup level. In other words, if the ARAR exceeds the MTCA Method B surface water cleanup level at the 1x10 "5 risk level, then the ARAR is not considered to be "sufficiently protected under MTCA." Where there are no established ARARs, MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels (based on a risk of 1 x 10 -6) must be used. Where ARARs or MTCA cleanup levels are lower than the Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs) (e.g., PCBs, mercury) or natural background levels (e.g., arsenic), the ARAR or MTCA cleanup level was "adjusted upward" to the PQL or natural background level in accordance with WAC 173 - 340- 730(5)(c) (Natural Background and PQL Considerations). Reconnaissance groundwater samples collected in the former NFA Area were collected at various depth intervals within the saturated zones to assist supplemental monitoring well installations in this portion of the site. Reconnaissance groundwater samples collected from the other work areas were designed to assist in evaluating groundwater quality with respect to the Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepallizdoc Page 29 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants other potential COCs. It should be noted that reconnaissance groundwater analyses tend to overestimate chemical concentrations due to suspended entrained soil /sediment particles in the sample that can impart a high bias on the analyses. This occurs with both organic and inorganic analytes in groundwater. Groundwater samples collected from developed wells are considered more representative of overall groundwater quality than the reconnaissance groundwater analytical results summarized in this section (refer to Section 6). Soil analytical results were compared to MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels based on direct contact (ingestion only) published in Ecology's Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations (CLARC version 3.1) (Ecology 2001e). Where MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels are not available (e.g., lead), MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup levels were used. [Note: Cleanup levels based on the dermal contact exposure pathway were not evaluated, since no modifications to the MTCA Method C cleanup level equations for the ingestion only pathway were made (WAC 173 - 340- 745(5)(c)(iii).] The following protocols were followed to allow an assessment of petroleum hydrocarbon soil concentrations in accordance with the current MTCA guidance for petroleum mixtures [WAC 173 - 340- 745(5)(b)(iii)(B)(III)]. If diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in a soil sample at concentrations greater than the MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level of 2,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg /kg), the sample was also analyzed for BTEX, total naphthalenes, and carcinogenic PAHs (cPAHs). Similarly, if oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in a sample at concentrations greater than 2,000 mg /kg, the sample was also analyzed for PCBs. In addition, soil samples exceeding 2,000 mg /kg were also analyzed for extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPHs) in order to obtain concentrations based on equivalent aromatic and aliphatic carbon fractions. Individual petroleum components (e.g., carbon fractions, BTEX, total naphthalenes, and cPAHs) were then used to evaluate the petroleum mixture with respect to MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels based on the direct contact pathway using Ecology's Worksheet for Soil Cleanup Levels for TPHs Sites. The worksheet calculates the hazard index (HI) and carcinogenic risk associated with the individual petroleum components and the hazard quotient (HQ) and total carcinogenic risk associated with the total petroleum mixture. MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels are exceeded if either of the following conditions applies: • For a single petroleum component, the HQ for non - carcinogens exceeds 1 or the carcinogenic risk exceeds 1 x 10 "5. • For total petroleum mixtures, the HI for non - carcinogens exceeds 1 or the sum of the carcinogenic risks 1 x 10 "5. If individual petroleum components or the total petroleum mixture being tested fails to meet either of the conditions above, the worksheet can be used to back - calculate target soil cleanup levels based on one of the following: • HI =1 • Total carcinogenic risk = 1 x 10 "5 • MTCA Method A groundwater cleanup level for benzene of 5 .ig /I. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreportliz.doc Page 30 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Where cleanup criteria are based on "total" concentrations (i.e., PCBs or cPAHs) the following procedures were used to evaluate total concentrations. In accordance with WAC 173 - 204 - 320(2), if one or more PCB Aroclors are detected in the sample, the sum of the detected Aroclors was used to represent the possible total PCB concentration. If no PCB Aroclors are detected in the sample, the highest laboratory reporting limit was used to represent the possible total PCB concentration. For cPAHs, the possible total cPAH concentration was based on benzo(a)pyrene equivalent values. Individual cPAH concentrations were adjusted, prior to summation using benzo(a)pyrene toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs) in accordance with WAC 173 - 340- 708(8)(e)(ii). Where an individual cPAH was not detected at the laboratory reporting limit, a value of one half the laboratory limit was multiplied by the TEF. Only those compounds exceeding applicable surface water cleanup standards, PQLs, and natural background concentrations are discussed in this section. Complete lists of compounds detected and their respective concentrations are provided in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5. 5.1 North Fire Aisle Area Eight borings were advanced in the NFA, in and around a former UST excavation area (refer to Figure 3). Two solvent USTs were formerly located in this area of the NFA. Soil samples collected from various depth intervals from this area were to be analyzed for VOCs to evaluate whether soil left in -place after the UST removals is a continuing source of VOCs to site groundwater. However, due to a history of petroleum hydrocarbon use in this area, select soil samples were also analyzed for diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, SVOCs (including PAHs), and priority pollutant metals (including hexavalent chromium). Soil sample analytical results for the NFA Area are provided in Table 2. Reconnaissance groundwater analytical results for the NFA Area are provided in Table 5. 5.1.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results Six reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from two borings (NA -6 and NA -7) advanced within the former UST excavation area at the NFA at various depth intervals to assess potential vertical migration of VOCs in the source area (refer to Figure 3). Three reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from boring NA -6 at depths of 8, 20, and 49 feet bgs, and three reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from boring NA -7 at depths of 8, 28, and 35 feet bgs. Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected at the top of silt layers within the upper saturated zone, and from directly above and below the silt confining layer. Only one sample, collected from boring NA -7 at 8 feet bgs (top of the upper most silt layer), contained concentrations of VOCs that exceeded applicable surface water cleanup standards. In this sample, PCE was detected at a concentration of 11 micrograms per liter (µg /I) which slightly exceeds the NTR and NAWQC values of 8.85 µg /I. 5.1.2 Soil Analytical Results Volatile Organic Compounds. A total of 13 soil samples were analyzed for VOCs. No VOCs were detected in any of these samples at concentrations above MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rpttreportliz.doc Page 31 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Petroleum Hydrocarbons. A total of ten soil samples were analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. Diesel- and /or oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in all of these soil samples. However, only one sample collected from boring NA -5 at 5 to 7 feet bgs exceeded the MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level of 2,000 mg /kg with concentrations of diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons at 4,600 and 4,200 mg /kg, respectively. This soil sample was also analyzed for EPHs, BTEX, total naphthalenes, cPAHs, and PCBs. EPH results for sample NA- 5(5 -7) are provided in Table 11. Individual petroleum components (carbon fractions, BTEX, total naphthalenes, and cPAHs) were used to evaluate cleanup levels based on the direct contact exposure pathway for petroleum hydrocarbons detected in soil in the NFA Area. The total petroleum mixture soil concentration for sample NA- 5(5 -7) (including the individual petroleum components) is 9,591.36 mg /kg (refer to worksheet in Appendix G). The total petroleum mixture concentration (9,591.36 mg /kg) detected in the soil sample collected from boring NA -5 does not exceed the MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup level (based on the direct contact exposure pathway). The total petroleum mixture soil concentration (9,591.36 mg /kg) was also evaluated with respect to residual saturation in accordance with WAC 173 - 340 - 747(10), i.e., the soil concentration must not result in the accumulation of hydrocarbon product (i.e., LNAPL) on or in the groundwater. The total petroleum mixture concentration (9,591.36 mg /kg) exceeds the residual saturation screening level of 2,000 mg /kg. However, there was no physical evidence of LNAPL in the soil or groundwater in the eight borings advanced in and around the. UST excavation area during the Phase I data gaps investigations. LNAPL was not detected on the water table in well MW -8A (or any other wells in proximity to the former UST excavation area) during the Phase 1 data gaps monitoring event, or during any previous monitoring events conducted under the VCP. Petroleum hydrocarbons have been used in this portion of the site for over 50 years. Therefore, it is believed that sufficient time has elapsed for migration of petroleum hydrocarbons from soil into groundwater to have occurred and that the characteristics of the site observed during the Phase I data gaps investigations are representative of future conditions. Polychlorinated Biphenyls. A total of nine soil samples were analyzed for PCBs. No PCBs (total or individual) were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method A or C industrial soil cleanup levels. PCBs are further discussed in a technical memorandum from Mr. Paul Fuglevand to PACCAR, dated 30 September 2002. A copy of the technical memorandum is included in Appendix A. Semivolatile Organic Compounds and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. A total of six soil samples were analyzed for SVOCs (including PAHs). No SVOCs /PAHs were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. Priority Pollutant Metals. A total of nine soil samples were analyzed for priority pollutant metals [antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium (III and VI), copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc]. No total priority pollutant metals were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method A or C industrial soil cleanup levels. Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rpr repodJizdoc Page 32 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 5.2 Wash Pit Area Six borings were advanced in and around the Wash Pit Area (refer to Figure 4). Soil samples in this area were initially to be analyzed only for VOCs to evaluate whether this potential AOC was an additional source of the VOCs identified in site groundwater. Based on the history of the Wash Pit Area, select soil samples representing various depth intervals were also analyzed for diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, SVOCs (including PAHs), and priority pollutant metals (including hexavalent chromium). Soil sample analytical results for the Wash Pit Area are summarized in Table 3. Reconnaissance groundwater analytical results for the Wash Pit Area are summarized in Table 5. 5.2.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results Three reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from three borings (WP -2, WP -3, and WP -5) advanced around the Wash Pit Area. The reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from the shallow zone at depths of approximately 8 to 10 feet bgs. Three reconnaissance samples were analyzed for VOCs, and one sample was also analyzed for diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, SVOCs (including PAHs), and total and dissolved priority pollutant metals. No compounds were detected in the reconnaissance groundwater samples collected from the Wash Pit Area at concentrations above applicable surface water standards, PQLs, or natural background concentrations. It should be noted that the laboratory reporting limits for the PCBs and SVOCs (including PAHs) exceeded applicable surface water standards. As discussed in Section 6, lower laboratory reporting limits were obtained during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event when all onsite wells were sampled. 5.2.2 Soil Analytical Results Volatile Organic Compounds. A total of 10 soil samples were analyzed for VOCs. No VOCs were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. Petroleum Hydrocarbons. A total of eight soil samples were analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. No petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above the MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level of 2,000 mg /kg; therefore, no additional evaluation of petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations was conducted. Polychlorinated Biphenyls. A total of three soil samples were analyzed for PCBs. No PCBs (total or individual) were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method A or C industrial soil cleanup levels. PCBs are further discussed in a technical memorandum from Mr. Paul Fuglevand to PACCAR, dated 30 September 2002 (refer to Appendix A). Semivolatile Organic Compounds and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. A total of four soil samples were analyzed for SVOCs (including PAHs). No SVOCs /PAHs were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.12 0 01101 6 1 1 0.0012002 phase i rphrepatUz.doc Page 33 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Priority Pollutants Metals. A total of five soil samples were analyzed for priority pollutant metals. No total priority pollutant metals were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method A or C industrial soil cleanup levels. 5.3 Southwest Storage Area A total of fourteen borings were advanced in the Southwest Storage Area (refer to Figure 5). Select soil samples representing various depth intervals were analyzed for VOCs, diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, SVOCs (including PAHs) and priority pollutant metals (including hexavalent chromium). Soil sample analytical results for the Southwest Storage Area are summarized in Table 4. Reconnaissance groundwater analytical results for the Southwest Storage Area are summarized in Table 5. 5.3.1 Reconnaissance Groundwater Analytical Results Reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from three borings (BY -5, DS -2, and HM -6) advanced in the Southwest Storage Area. The reconnaissance groundwater samples were collected from the shallow zone at depths of approximately 16 to 20 feet bgs. The reconnaissance samples were analyzed for VOCs, diesel- and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, SVOCs (including PAHs), and total and dissolved priority pollutant metals. Vinyl chloride was detected in two of the three the reconnaissance groundwater samples (BY -5 and DS -2) collected from the Southwest Storage Area above applicable surface water standards. The concentrations (17 and 494g/1) exceed the MTCA Method B surface water cleanup level for vinyl chloride of 3.69 µg /I. No petroleum hydrocarbons or PCBs were detected in the reconnaissance groundwater samples above applicable surface water standards. It should be noted that the laboratory reporting limits for the PCBs exceeded surface water standards. However, as discussed in Section 6, lower laboratory reporting limits were obtained for these compounds during the Phase I data gaps groundwater monitoring event. As shown in Table 5, three cPAHs were detected above the NTR criterion of 0.031 p.g /l. Chrysene and benzo(a)anthracene were detected at concentrations of 0.12 and 0.11 µg /I, and benzo(b)fluoranthene was detected at an estimated trace concentration of 0.07J µg /I. These concentrations are likely biased high due to suspended entrained soil /sediment particles in the reconnaissance sample. Elevated cPAH concentrations would not be expected in groundwater samples collected from properly installed and sampled monitoring wells. A comparison of the total and dissolved metals concentrations detected in reconnaissance groundwater samples collected from the Southwest Storage Area shows the impact that suspended entrained soil /sediment particles can have on analytical results. Samples analyzed for dissolved metals are filtered thus removing suspended entrained soil /sediment particles from the sample. Five metals (arsenic, copper, lead, mercury, and selenium) were detected in the unfiltered samples at total metals concentrations exceeding applicable surface water standards, PQLs, or natural background concentrations. Only two of these metals, arsenic (up to 8µg /I) and selenium (up to 6µg /I), were detected in the filtered samples at concentrations slightly above the natural background concentration for arsenic of 5µg /l and Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS for selenium of 5µg /I. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 . w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptseportliz.doc Page 34 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 5.3.2 Soil Analytical Results Volatile Organic Compounds. A total of 30 soil samples were analyzed for VOCs. No VOCs were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. Petroleum Hydrocarbons. A total of 29 soil samples were analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. The highest concentrations were detected in the near - surface samples (0 to 2 feet bgs). The concentrations of oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons (up to 5,000 mg /kg) detected in near - surface soil samples from borings BY -1, BY -4, BY -6, and DS -1 exceed the MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level of 2,000 mg /kg. The diesel -range petroleum hydrocarbon concentration (2,300 mg /kg) detected in the near - surface soil sample collected from boring BY -1 also exceeds the MTCA Method A criterion. These samples were also analyzed for BTEX, total naphthalenes, cPAHs, PCBs, and EPHs. BTEX, total naphthalenes, cPAHs, and PCBs results are shown in Table 4. EPH analytical results are summarized in Table 11. Individual petroleum components (carbon fractions, BTEX, total naphthalenes, and cPAHs) were used to evaluate cleanup levels based on the direct contact exposure pathway for petroleum hydrocarbons detected in soil in the Southwest Storage Area, as described in Section 5.1.2. The following total petroleum mixture soil concentrations (including the individual petroleum components) were evaluated (refer to worksheets in Appendix G): • Sample BY- 1 -0 -1: 8,355.28 mg /kg • Sample BY- 4 -0 -2: 1,399.40 mg /kg • Sample BY- 6 -0 -1: 2,362.05 mg /kg • Sample DS- 1 -0 -1: 3,054.00 mg /kg. The total petroleum mixture concentrations detected in the soil samples collected from borings BY -1, BY -4, BY -6, and DS -1 do not exceed the MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup level (based on the direct contact exposure pathway). The total petroleum mixture soil concentrations (1,399.40 to 8,355.28 mg /kg) were evaluated with respect to residual saturation in accordance with WAC 173 - 340 - 747(10). The total petroleum mixture concentration for the near - surface sample collected from borings BY -1 (8,355.28 mg /kg), BY -6 (2,362.05 mg /kg), and DS -1 (3,054.00 mg /kg) exceed the residual saturation screening level of 2,000 mg /kg. However, there was no physical evidence of LNAPL in the soil or groundwater in the 14 borings advanced in the Southwest Storage Area. The Southwest Storage Area has been used for handling surplus equipment and general storage since this portion of the site was created sometime between 1961 and 1970 (as a result of modifying the Duwamish Waterway bank). Therefore, it is believed that sufficient time (over 30 years) has elapsed for petroleum hydrocarbons in soil to migrate to groundwater. Therefore, it is believed that the characteristics observed during the Phase I data gaps investigations are representative of future conditions. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase I rptlreportlizdoc Page 35 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Polychlorinated Biphenyls. A total of 13 soil samples were analyzed for PCBs. No PCBs (total or individual) were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method A or C industrial soil cleanup levels. PCBs are further discussed in a technical memorandum from Mr. Paul Fuglevand to PACCAR, dated 30 September 2002 (refer to Appendix A). Semivolatile Organic Compounds and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. A total of 26 soil samples were analyzed for SVOCs (including PAHs). No SVOCs /PAHs were detected in any of these soil samples at concentrations above MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. Three samples with the highest SVOC concentrations were analyzed using the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) (EPA Method 1312), to evaluate the potential for the SVOCs identified in the Southwest Storage Area to leach from the soil. The SPLP analytical results are summarized in Table 12. The results indicate that the SVOC concentrations detected are not expected to leach from the soil to groundwater at concentrations above applicable surface water standards. No cPAHs were detected above the laboratory reporting limit of 1 µg /I; however, it should be noted that this concentration exceeds the NTR criterion for cPAHs of 0.031 .tg /I. Priority Pollutants Metals. A total of 14 soil samples were analyzed for total priority pollutant metals. As shown in Table 4, none of the concentrations exceed their respective MTCA Method C industrial soil cleanup levels. The concentrations of lead (up to 9,220 mg /kg) exceed the MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level of 1,000 mg /kg. (Note: Lead has no established MTCA Method C industrial cleanup level.) Two samples containing high lead concentrations were analyzed using the SPLP to evaluate the potential for the lead to each from the soil. The SPLP analytical results are summarized in Table 12. The results indicate that the concentrations of lead detected in site soil have the potential to leach from the soil at concentrations that exceed Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS of 51.1g /I. However, it should be noted that the SPLP extraction process includes an aggressive process where soils are tumbled end over end in an acidic solution for 18 hours. These conditions are not expected to be encountered at the site. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptrepartliz.doc Page 36 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 6: Site -Wide Groundwater, Stormwater, and Seep Analytical Results As discussed in Section 4.2, site groundwater cleanup levels based on the protection of surface water are most appropriate for site conditions. Analytical data obtained from the reconnaissance groundwater sampling was noted to exceed some of the applicable surface water standards in a few instances. Therefore, where possible, specialized analytical techniques were used during the Phase I data gaps groundwater monitoring event to achieve the lowest laboratory reporting limits for each test method. Groundwater, stormwater, and seep analytical data were evaluated with respect to ARARs including: • Ecology's Chronic Freshwater Surface Water Quality Standard (SWQS) (WAC 173 -201A) (Ecology 1997) • National Toxics Rule (NTR) for Consumption of Organisms Only [Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 131.36] (EPA 1992) • National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (NAWQC) for Consumption of Organisms Only [Section 304(a), Clean Water Act] (EPA 1999) • Ecology's Model National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Standards for petroleum hydrocarbons (WAC 173 -226). Unless otherwise stated, ARARs were considered to be the applicable surface water cleanup standards. However, as previously discussed in Section 5, ARARs must also be sufficiently protective under MTCA. If the ARAR was not considered to be sufficiently protective (e.g., vinyl chloride), the ARAR was "adjusted downward" to the MTCA Method B surface water cleanup level. Where there are no established ARARs, MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels were used. Where ARARs or MTCA cleanup levels are lower than the PQL (e.g., PCBs, mercury) or natural background levels (e.g., arsenic), the ARAR or MTCA cleanup level was "adjusted upward" to the PQL or natural background level in accordance with WAC 173 - 340- 730(5)(c) (Natural Background and PQL Considerations). Groundwater, stormwater, and seep sampling locations included in the Phase I data gaps monitoring event are shown on Figure 6. Phase I data gaps groundwater, stormwater, and seep analytical results are summarized in Tables 8 and 9. Only those compounds exceeding applicable surface water cleanup standards, PQLs, and natural background concentrations are discussed in this section. 6.1 Groundwater Analytical Results Thirty -eight groundwater monitoring wells were sampled during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event (refer to Figure 6). Groundwater analytical results are summarized in Table 8. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:12001W16110.0012002 phase i rphrepottlizdoc Page 37 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Most of the groundwater wells installed at the site monitor the upper portion of the upper saturated zone (shallow zone). Eight wells (MW -8B, MW -19B, MW -26B, MW -28B, MW -29B, MW -35B, MW -36B, and MW -37B) monitor the lower portion (base) of the upper saturated zone immediately above the silt confining layer (intermediate zone). Two wells (MW -26C and MW -29C) monitor the upper portion of the lower saturated zone immediately below the silt confining layer (deep zone) (refer to Section 3). Volatile Organic Compounds. Historically, groundwater samples collected from a select number of wells have been regularly analyzed for VOCs as part of the semi - annual monitoring program being conducted under the VCP. The Phase 1 data gaps monitoring event included all site wells, including previously existing wells not sampled as part of the semi - annual sampling program and new wells installed as part of the Phase I data gaps investigations. VOC analytical results obtained during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event are generally consistent with previous groundwater monitoring events and are shown in Table 8. Three VOCs [vinyl chloride, 1,1- dichloroethene (1,1 -DCE), and TCE] were detected in shallow zone wells only at concentrations above applicable surface water standards. Vinyl chloride was detected at concentrations up to 69 4/1 which exceed the MTCA Method B surface water cleanup level of 3.69 µg /I. 1,1 -DCE was detected at concentrations up to 12 pg /I which exceeds the NTR and NAWQC values of 3.214/I. TCE was detected at concentrations up to 88 4/I which exceeds the NTR and NAWQC values of 8114/1. The concentrations of VOCs detected in groundwater samples collected from the intermediate zone are all below applicable surface water standards. No VOCs were detected in the groundwater samples collected from the deep zone wells located along the Duwamish Waterway bulkhead, except for low concentrations of methylene chloride (0.3 and 0.4 µg /I) in wells MW -26C and MW -29C. Methylene chloride, a common laboratory contaminant, was also detected at similar concentrations in the trip blanks and field blanks. Figure 12 shows the approximate lateral extent of VOCs in site groundwater exceeding applicable surface water standards based on the groundwater sample analytical results obtained during the Phase !data gaps investigations. These concentration contours are consistent with previous site results. Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Glycols. Historically, only groundwater samples collected from wells MW -6A and MW -9A (located in the SFA) have been analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. During the Phase I data gaps monitoring event, groundwater samples from all 38 wells were analyzed for gasoline -, diesel -, and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons. A select number of wells (MW -1A, MW -4A, MW -6A, and MW -9A) located in proximity to former antifreeze USTs were also analyzed for glycols (ethylene glycol and propylene glycol). Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the groundwater sample collected from one well (MW -6A) above Ecology's Model NPDES Permit Standard. A small amount of floating hydrocarbon product (LNAPL) is present on the water table at the same well which is located in the SFA, downgradient of former diesel UST E2. The thickness of hydrocarbon product measured at well MW -6A during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event ranged from 0.24 to 0.19 foot between high and low tides. Gasoline -range petroleum hydrocarbons (2.6 mg /I) detected in the groundwater sample collected from well MW -6A exceed Ecology's Model NPDES Permit Standard of 1 mg /I. Phase 1 Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rptrepatlizdoc Page 38 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Historically, groundwater samples have not been analyzed for PCBs. Groundwater samples collected during the Phase I data gaps monitoring events were analyzed for PCBs by EPA Method 8082 modified using the Manchester method in order to obtain the lowest possible laboratory reporting limits. The laboratory reporting limit for PCBs (i.e., the level at which an analytical laboratory feels confident in reporting a result) using the standard EPA Method 8082 is typically 114/I. By collecting additional sample volume and using the modified Manchester method, reporting limits up to two orders of magnitude lower were obtained during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event. (Note: These represent the lowest possible detection limit using the available technology.) Even using this modified method, the reporting limits for PCBs still exceeded applicable surface water standards. In accordance with WAC 173 - 340- 720(7)(c) (Natural Background and PQL Considerations), the groundwater analytical results for PCBs were evaluated with respect to the PQL. The PQL is defined as a concentration that can be "reliably measured within specified limits during routine laboratory operating conditions" using Ecology- approved methods. According to CLARC version 3.1, Table 2: Summary Table for Method A Groundwater Values in Table 720 -1 (Ecology 2001e), the PQL for PCB mixtures is 0.1 µg /I based on the EPA's Manchester Laboratory. No PCBs (individual or total) were reported in the groundwater samples at concentrations exceeding the PQL. PCBs are further discussed in a technical memorandum from Mr. Paul Fugelvand, dated 30 September 2002 (refer to Appendix A). Semivolatile Organic Compounds and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Historically, groundwater samples have not been analyzed for SVOCs (including PAHs). PAH compounds are included in the SVOC list of analytes; however, the laboratory reporting limits obtained for PAHs using the standard EPA Method 8270C exceed applicable surface water standards for cPAHs. Therefore, the groundwater samples were also analyzed for PAHs by EPA Method 8270C using SIM in order to obtain the lowest possible laboratory reporting limits. The lower reporting limits were below applicable surface water standards. Of the 38 samples analyzed for SVOCs /PAHs only the groundwater samples collected from wells MW -4A and MW -6A (located in the SFA) exceeded applicable surface water standards. The concentrations (0.034 and 0.064 µg /I) of chrysene detected in the groundwater samples collected from wells MW -4A and MW -6A, respectively, exceeded the NTR criterion for cPAHs of 0.031 pg /I. Priority Pollutant Metals. Historically, groundwater samples have not been analyzed for metals. Groundwater samples were analyzed for both total and dissolved priority pollutant metals during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event. Priority pollutant metals include antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc. Samples for analysis of dissolved metals were field filtered using a 0.45 micron filter. It should be noted that in some instances, the total concentrations are slightly lower than the dissolved concentrations. Based on discussions with the analytical laboratory, this is likely due to the amount of carbon in the sample interfering with the dissolved metals on the instrument during analysis. However, given the very low concentrations of total and dissolved metals being detected, the difference in the analytical results between the total and dissolved metals concentrations is considered to be negligible. As shown in Table 8, metals were detected in the groundwater samples at very low concentrations, well below applicable surface water standards. The only notable exceptions are arsenic and selenium trace elements that occur naturally in the environment. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase i rptreportliz.doc Page 39 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Total and dissolved arsenic were detected in groundwater samples collected from 37 of 38 wells included in the Phase I data gaps monitoring event at concentrations ranging from 0.4 to 26.8 p.g /I. The arsenic concentrations are relatively consistent across the majority of the site, at concentrations of 6.3 lag /I or less. According to CLARC version 3.1, Table 2: Summary Table for Method A Groundwater Values in Table 720 -1 (Ecology 2001 e), Ecology's natural background concentration criterion for arsenic is 5 µg /I. This indicates that the arsenic concentrations observed in groundwater samples across the majority of the site are representative of natural background concentrations, except as follows. Arsenic was detected in the groundwater sample collected from shallow zone well MW -25A at a concentration of 26.81189/1. This well is located along the northern property boundary in the northwestern corner of the site (refer to Figure 6). The other slightly higher- than - background arsenic concentrations (12.6 and 14.5 .ig/I) were detected in groundwater samples collected from two wells (MW -11A and MW -12A) located in the southern portion of the site. Total or dissolved selenium were detected in groundwater samples collected from three intermediate zone wells (MW -26B, 35B, and 36B) at concentrations of 6, 20, and 5 pg /I, respectively, and from two deep zone wells (MW -26C and MW -29C) at concentrations of 5 and 6 p.g /I, respectively. These concentrations slightly exceed Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS of 5 mg/I. Although Ecology has not identified a background concentration for selenium, this trace element can occur naturally in groundwater at concentrations ranging from <1 to 10 14/1 (Dragun 1988). 6.2 Stormwater and Seep Analytical Results Five seeps ( #1, #2, #4, #5, and #6) and two storm drain outfalls (Storm -North and Storm - South) were grab sampled during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event (refer to Figure 6). Stormwater and seep analytical results are provided in Table 9. The southern storm drain outfall (Storm- South) and seeps were sampled at low tide only. The northern storm drain outfall (Storm -North) was sampled at both high and low tides. Grab and unfiltered samples contain suspended entrained soil /sediment particles that can impart a high bias on the sample analysis, unlike groundwater samples that are collected from developed and purged wells to reduce the presence of suspended entrained soil /sediment particles in a sample. Volatile Organic Compounds. Historically, water samples collected from Storm -North, Storm - South, and from the seeps have been analyzed for VOCs as part of the semi - annual monitoring program conducted under the VCP. VOC analytical results obtained during the Phase 1 data gaps monitoring event are generally consistent with previous stormwater and seep monitoring events. Except for the vinyl chloride detected in the stormwater sample collected from Storm -North, the VOC concentrations detected in the stormwater and seep samples are below applicable surface water standards. Vinyl chloride was detected in the stormwater samples collected from Storm -North at both high and low tides at concentrations of 20 and 5.1 p.g /I, respectively. These concentrations are consistent with the concentrations detected in site groundwater, historically, and exceed the MTCA Method B surface water cleanup level for vinyl chloride of 3.69 pg /I. Petroleum Hydrocarbons. Historically, stormwater and seep samples have not been analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. During the Phase I data gaps monitoring event, stormwater and Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc— Seattle Facility December 2002 02001l016110.0012002 phase i rpt repo tlizdoc Page 40 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants seep samples were analyzed for gasoline -, diesel -, and oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons. No petroleum hydrocarbons were detected at concentrations exceeding applicable surface water standards. Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Historically, stormwater and seep samples have not been analyzed for PCBs. No PCBs (individual or total) were detected in the stormwater and seep samples at concentrations exceeding the PQL of 0.1 µg /I. PCBs are further discussed in a technical memorandum from Mr. Paul Fugelvand to PACCAR, dated 30 September 2002 (refer to Appendix A). Semivolatile Organic Compounds and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Historically, stormwater and seep samples have not been analyzed for SVOCs (including PAHs). Benzo(b)fluoranthene and chrysene (both of which are cPAHs) were the only SVOCs /PAHs detected at concentrations exceeding applicable surface water standards. Benzo(b)fluoranthene was detected at concentrations of 0.032 and 0.034 µg /I in stormwater samples collected at low tide from Storm -North and Storm - South, respectively. These concentrations slightly exceed the NTR criterion for benzo(b)fluoranthene of 0.03114/I. Chrysene was also detected at a concentration of 0.064 p.g /I in the stormwater sample collected at low tide from Storm - South. This concentration exceeds the NTR criterion for chrysene of 0.031 µg /I. Priority Pollutant Metals. Historically, stormwater and seep samples have not been analyzed for metals. As shown in Table 9, total and dissolved arsenic were detected in stormwater samples collected from Storm -North at both high and low tides. The arsenic concentrations (up to 68.4 µg /I) exceed the natural background criterion for arsenic of 5 Total copper, lead, and zinc were also detected in the stormwater sample collected from Storm -North at low tide at concentrations of 23.4, 8, and 223 µg /I, respectively. These concentrations exceed Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS of 19.56 µg /I (copper), 5µg /I (lead), and 179.22 µg/1(zinc) (based on an average groundwater hardness of 189 mg /I). Total arsenic, copper, and lead were also detected in the seep sample collected from Seep #2 at concentrations of 7.5, 33.8, and 16 µg /I. These concentrations exceed natural background concentrations (arsenic) and Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS (copper and lead). Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w: 12 0 0 1101 61 1 0.0012002 phase i rptieportliz.doc Page 41 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 7: Conclusions A Phase I data gaps investigation was performed at the site to evaluate selected AOCs identified in the Draft Data Gaps Investigation Work Plan, PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2001) including: • NFA Area (located north of the Boiler /Power House and Maintenance Building) to evaluate if the area continues to be a source of VOCs to site groundwater and to determine if DNAPL exists and has migrated vertically • Wash Pit Area (located south of the Maintenance Building) to evaluate if the area is an AOC for VOCs or any other potential COCs • Southwest Storage Area (located in the southwestern corner of the site, adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway) to evaluate if the area is an AOC for metals or any other potential COCs. In addition, groundwater wells were installed along northern property boundary and along the Duwamish Waterway to evaluate the potential for impacts from offsite sources and the potential migration of COCs under the sheet - piling bulkhead along the Duwamish Waterway. The wells located along the Duwamish Waterway also represent conditional point of compliance monitoring locations. Site -wide groundwater, stormwater and seep sampling and analysis were performed for an expanded list of potential COCs. Grab sampling techniques were used to collect reconnaissance groundwater samples, storm drain outfall samples, and seep samples. These types of samples typically contain suspended entrained soil /sediment particles that can impart a high bias on the analytical data. Consequently, samples collected using grab sampling techniques may not be considered representative of site conditions in several instances. The results of the Phase I data gaps investigations are summarized below. 7.1 North Fire Aisle Six reconnaissance groundwater samples and 18 soil samples were collected from the NFA Area and submitted for a range of chemical analyses. In addition, groundwater monitoring wells MW -8A and MW -8B are located in the NFA and were analyzed for a range of potential COCs. The results of these investigations indicate the following: • DNAPL is not expected based on the low concentrations of solvent compounds detected and the limited vertical concentration gradients observed • Residual concentrations of parent solvent compounds (PCE and TCE) in the NFA Area are low. Only one sample collected from well MW -14A contained TCE at concentrations above the NTR criterion of 81 p.g /I. However, these low concentrations of parent solvent compound may result in concentrations of daughter compounds (1,1 DCE and vinyl chloride) that exceed appropriate standards and /or cleanup levels. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i iptreportlizdoc Page 42 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants No further soil investigation is recommended for the NFA Area at this time. Periodic groundwater monitoring of this area is recommended under the VCP, as discussed in Section 7.4. 7.2 Wash Pit Area Three reconnaissance groundwater samples and 13 soil samples were collected from the Wash Pit Area and submitted for a range of chemical analyses. In addition, groundwater monitoring wells MW -15A and MW -19B are located in the Wash Pit Area and were also analyzed for a range of potential COCs. The results of these investigations indicate the following: • No COCs were detected at concentrations exceeding applicable soil or surface water standards. Based on the results of the Phase I data gaps investigations, the Wash Pit Area is no longer considered to be an AOC, and no additional investigation is warranted. 7.3 Southwest Storage Area Three reconnaissance groundwater samples and 43 soil samples were collected from the Southwest Storage Area and submitted for a range of chemical analyses. In addition, groundwater samples from nearby groundwater monitoring wells were analyzed fora range of potential COCs. The results of these investigations indicate the following: • Only petroleum hydrocarbons and lead concentrations in soil exceed the MTCA industrial cleanup levels. Evaluation of the samples with elevated petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations using Ecology's fractionation analysis did not indicate an adverse risk to potential human receptors. SPLP extraction and analysis of three samples with elevated PAH concentrations did not indicate the potential for leaching of these compounds at concentrations exceeding applicable surface water standards. SPLP extraction and analysis of two samples with elevated lead concentrations did indicate the potential for leaching of lead at concentrations exceeding applicable surface water standards. However, it is acknowledged that the SPLP extraction is far more aggressive than would be expected during normal site conditions. It should be noted that total or dissolved lead were not detected in the nearby well groundwater samples. In addition, dissolved lead was not detected in the reconnaissance groundwater samples collected from this area. Consequently, it appears that the SPLP data over estimates actual leaching conditions. While the distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons in this area appears to be indicative of surface spills, the distribution of lead was not and may be an artifact of the backfill material. Additional investigation in the Southwest Storage Area for lead impacts is recommended. • Vinyl chloride was detected in both reconnaissance and monitoring well groundwater samples above applicable surface water standards. Because of the presence of this compound in the western portion of the site, the Southwest Storage Area,is not considered to be a source area for vinyl chloride. Reconnaissance groundwater samples also indicated chrysene, benzo(a) anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, arsenic, selenium, copper, lead, and mercury at levels exceeding applicable surface water standards. As previously discussed, grab reconnaissance samples may be biased high because of suspended entrained Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w. 20011016110.0012002 phase i rptliepartliz.doc Page 43 • Kennedy /Jenks Consultants soil /sediment particles. These compounds were not detected in monitoring well groundwater samples above applicable surface water standards. Periodic groundwater monitoring of this area is recommended under the VCP, as discussed in Section 7.4. 7.4 Groundwater Thirty -eight groundwater monitoring wells were sampled during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event. Groundwater samples were analyzed for a wide spectrum of potential COCs. The following provides a summary of findings based on the groundwater sampling: • Vinyl chloride, 1,1 DCE, and TCE are considered COCs in the shallow zone groundwater only throughout the western portion of the site. • Petroleum hydrocarbon compounds and chrysene are considered COCs in the shallow zone groundwater in the SFA. • Arsenic and selenium were the only metals detected at concentrations above applicable surface water standards. These trace elements occur naturally in the environment. When evaluated with respect to natural background levels, the arsenic exceedances are limited to two areas of the site: the northwestern corner near the Boeing facility and in the southern portion of the site (formerly owned by the Monsanto Industrial Chemical Company). The relative concentrations and distribution of selenium within the water - bearing zones are not indicative of, or consistent with, a selenium source on the PACCAR site. The selenium concentrations are considered to be more indicative of natural background concentrations (Dragun 1988). Continued periodic groundwater monitoring of select site wells is recommended under the VCP for VOCs, petroleum hydrocarbons, SVOCs /PAHs, and arsenic. The appropriate monitoring wells should be selected based on relative concentrations and evaluation of expected remedial activities and points of compliance. 7.5 Storm Drains and Seeps Five seeps ( #1, #2, #4, #5, and #6) and two storm drains (Storm -North and Storm - South) were sampled during the Phase I data gaps monitoring event. The southern storm drain (Storm- South) and the seeps were sampled at low tide only. The northern storm drain (Storm -North) was sampled at both high and low tides. The following provides a summary of findings based on the stormwater and seep sampling: • Vinyl chloride was detected in stormwater samples collected from Storm -North at both high and low tides at concentrations exceeding the MTCA Method B surface water clean level. • At low tide, benzo(b)fluoranthene was detected in stormwater samples collected from Storm -North and Storm -South and chrysene was detected in the stormwater sample collected from Storm -South at concentrations slightly exceeding the NTR criterion. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphrepatliz.doc Page 44 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • Total and dissolved arsenic were detected in the stormwater samples collected from Storm -North at both high and low tides at concentrations exceeding the natural background concentrations. Total copper, lead, and zinc were also detected above Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS in the stormwater sample collected from Storm -North at low tide; however, dissolved metals were not detected above applicable surface water standards. • Total arsenic, copper, and lead were detected on one seep sample at concentrations above natural background concentrations (arsenic) and Ecology's Chronic Freshwater SWQS (copper and lead); however, dissolved metals were not detected above applicable surface water standards. The concentrations of vinyl chloride and arsenic detected in stormwater discharging from the northern storm drain are a result of the site groundwater infiltrating a portion of the northern storm drain. The stormwater discharges will be managed in compliance with Washington's new stormwater permit requirements. Because seep samples are not indicative of site conditions (due to a high bias imparted on the analytical data due to suspended entrained soil /sediment particles in the sample) and adequate monitoring well coverage exists along the western property boundary (refer to Section 7.6), future seep sampling is not recommended as part of the VCP. 7.6 Potential Migration to the Duwamish Waterway, Conditional Points of Compliance, and Potential Impacts from Offsite Eight additional monitoring wells were installed along the sheet - piling bulkhead (MW- 29B/C, MW- 35A/B, MW- 36A/B, and MW- 37A/B) near the Duwamish Waterway. These wells allow a comparison of groundwater samples collected from the various water - bearing zones (shallow, intermediate, and deep) to evaluate the potential migration of COCs under the sheet - piling bulkhead to the Duwamish Waterway or vice versa. These wells also provide for conditional point of compliance monitoring locations. Two additional shallow zone wells (MW -33A and MW -34A) were installed along the northern property boundary to evaluate potential offsite sources of COCs. The following provides a summary of findings based on an evaluation of the potential migration to and from the Duwamish Waterway, conditional points of compliance, and potential impacts from offsite: • No VOCs were detected above applicable surface water standards in groundwater samples collected from intermediate and deep zone wells located along the Duwamish Waterway. • Monitoring wells located along the Duwamish Waterway provide for conditional points of compliance. The only compound that exceeds applicable surface water standards at this conditional point of compliance is vinyl chloride in the shallow zone. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreporUizdoc Page 45 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants • New well MW -33A, located along the northern property boundary, contained concentrations of vinyl chloride above applicable surface water standards. However, the concentrations are consistent with previous VOC groundwater monitoring results. No additional investigation, other than periodic groundwater monitoring is recommended at this time. • Groundwater beneath the adjacent Boeing facility has been impacted with arsenic and is a likely source of the elevated arsenic concentrations found in site groundwater in the northwestern portion of the site. Based on the results of the Phase I data gaps investigation, PACCAR request's formal approval from Ecology to use the groundwater monitoring wells located along the western property boundary, adjacent to the Duwamish Waterway, as conditional point of compliance monitoring locations for the site. As discussed in Section 7.4, periodic groundwater monitoring is recommended under the VCP. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreportbz.doc Page 46 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Section 8: References Boatman CD, Hotchkiss DA. 1997. Tidally influenced containment berm functioning as leachate treatment cell — Puget Sound experience in confined disposal of contaminated sediments. Presented at International Conference on Contaminated Sediments, Rotterdam, Netherlands. Bouwer, H., and Rice, R.C. 1976. A Slug Test Method for Determining Hydraulic Conductivity of Unconfined Aquifers with Completely or Partially Penetrating Wells. Water Resource Research 12 (3):423 -428. Dragun J. 1988. The Soil Chemistry of Hazardous Materials. Published by The Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute, Silver Spring, Maryland. EPA. 1992. National Toxics Rule, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 131.36. EPA. 1996. Groundwater Issue: Low -Flow (Minimal Drawdown) Groundwater Sampling Procedures. Puls, R. W. and Barcelona, M.J., United States Environmental Protection Agency, dated 1996. EPA. 1999. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria — Correction. Office of Water. EPA 822 -Z -99 -001, April 1999. Fetter, C.W. 1980. Applied Hydrogeology. Published by Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, Ohio. Freeze, R. A., and Cherry, J. A. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice -Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. HartCrowser. 1999. Summary Report — Kenworth Seattle and Former Seaboard Lumber Sediment Quality Assessment, Seattle, Washington, dated August 1999. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by HartCrowser, Seattle, Washington. HydroSOLVE, Inc. 1996. AQTESOLV for Windows. Distributed by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 1998. Interim VOC Investigation Report, 8801 East Marginal Way South, Tukwila, Washington, dated June 1998. Prepared for the Kenworth Truck Company by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 1999. Flux Chamber Air Monitoring Results and Risk Calculations, Kenworth Truck Company Facility, dated October 1999. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2000a. Diesel UST Closure Report, Seattle, Washington, dated September 2000. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w.120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreportliz.doc Page 47 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2000b. Risk Assessment, PACCAR Facility, Seattle, Washington, dated October 2000. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2000c. Cleanup Action Plan, PACCAR Facility, Seattle, Washington, dated October 2000. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2001 a. Data Gaps Investigation Work Plan, PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility, dated September 2001. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2001 b. Supplemental Groundwater Monitoring, PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility, dated December 2001. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2002a. Ambient Air Monitoring Report, PACCAR Inc, Seattle Facility, dated March 2002. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2002b. AS /SVE Pilot Study, PACCAR Seattle Facility, 8801 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington. Letter from Kennedy /Jenks Consultants to Washington State Department of Ecology, dated 1 May 2002. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants. 2002c. Air Sparging and Soil Vapor Extraction Pilot Study, dated November 2002. Prepared for PACCAR Inc by Kennedy /Jenks Consultants, Federal Way, Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Natural Background Soil Metals Concentrations in Washington State. Ecology Publication No. 94 -115, dated October 1994. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Water Quality Standards for Surface Water of the State of Washington, Chapter 173 -201A Washington Administrative Code (WAC), dated 18 November 1997. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2001a. Review and Opinion Letter, Boeing Isaacson Property, 8625 east marginal Way, Seattle, WA 98108. VCP ID# NW0453. Letter from Washington State Department of Ecology to Mr. Paul Frankel of The Boeing Company, dated 12 January 2001. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2001 b. Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation Chapter 173 -340 WAC. Ecology Publication No. 94 -06, dated February 2001. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2001 c. Draft — Request for Review and Opinion Letter, VCP, Independent Remedial Action, PACCAR Inc., 8801 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108. TCP 1.D. #NW059. Dated 14 March 2001. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rphreportUz.doc Page 48 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Washington State Department of Ecology. 2001d. Draft — Request for Review and Opinion Letter, VCP, Draft Work Plan, PACCAR Inc., 8801 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, WA 98108. TCP I.D. #NW059. Dated 14 November 2001. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2001e. Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations under the Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation, CLARC Version 3.1. Ecology Publication No. 94 -145, dated November 2001. Weston. 1999. Site Inspection Report, Lower Duwamish River (RK 2.5 to 11.5), Seattle, Washington prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, by Roy F. Weston, dated April 1999. Phase I Data Gaps Investigations Summary Report PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility December 2002 w. 20 0 110 1 61 1 0.0012002 phase i rphreportlizdoc Page 49 • _ • TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS WORK PLAN PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility Page 1 of 5 Area of Concern Proposed Activities Rationale Status Upgradient Offsite Source(s) • Collect groundwater samples from wells MW -25A, MW -32A, MW -24A, MW -23A, MW -16A for metals and TPH analysis. • Review of Boeing facility groundwater data. Assess whether COCs associated with the adjacent upgradient Boeing facility (Thompson- Isaacson site) have impacted the PACCAR site. COMPLETED. Results provided in Supplemental Groundwater Monitoring Report, PACCAR Inc. Seattle Facility, dated 27 December 2001 (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2001 b) Former Solvent Tank Area (NFA) • Advance up to seven direct push borings to collect soil samples in the vicinity of the former UST removal area for VOC analysis. • Collect reconnaissance groundwater samples from two boring locations at various depths within the upper saturated zone in the vicinity of the former solvent tank area for VOC analysis. • Install one intermediate zone monitoring well (TBD) in the former solvent tank area and include in data gaps groundwater monitoring event. Assess extent of residual VOC- impacted soil in the vicinity of the former UST excavation that may be acting as a continual source area (DNAPL). Assess VOC concentration gradient in upper saturated zone (shallow and intermediate zone, respectively) to evaluate whether solvents have migrated to the base of the upper saturated zone. COMPLETED. Results provided in this report. Boeing Property Boundary • Install two shallow zone monitoring wells along northern property boundary either side of existing well MW -23A. • Include wells MW -16A and MW -23A in data gaps groundwater monitoring event. • Install two intermediate zone wells (TBD) and include in data gaps groundwater monitoring event. Assess impact of VOC plume on adjacent property. Assess potential upgradient offsite source(s). COMPLETED. Results provided in this report. (Note: Two intermediate zone wells were not installed based on data evaluation. At this time, we recommend that PACCAR not install the wells.) Duwamish /Bulkhead Property Boundary • Install one intermediate zone monitoring well adjacent to MW -29A. • Install up to three additional well pairs (shallow and intermediate zone) along the bulkhead and immediately south of the bulkhead. • Install one deep zone well (TBD) adjacent to MW -29A. • Include newly installed wells in data gaps groundwater . monitoring event. • Perform continuous hydraulic monitoring of water levels in new well •airs. Assess the potential migration of VOCs across; beneath, and around the bulkhead that will act as the conditional point of compliance for future site remediation activities. COMPLETED. Except for continuous hydraulic monitoring of new well pairs (to be included in Phase II). Results provided in this report. December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rpfttable 1.doc 016110.00 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS WORK PLAN PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility Page2of5 1 Area of Concern Proposed Activities Rationale Status Underground Storage Tanks (SFA) • Collect two grab soil samples from excavation pit during removal of UST E4. • Advance up to 16 direct push /hand auger borings to collect soil samples in the vicinity of SFA USTs. • Collect up to 16 reconnaissance groundwater samples in the vicinity/downgradient of the SFA USTs. • Include existing wells MW -6A and MW -9A in data gaps groundwater monitoring event. • Redevelop and sample recently discovered well MW -4A as part of the data gaps groundwater monitoring event • Install up to three shallow zone monitoring wells (TBD) downgradient of SFA USTs and include in data gaps groundwater monitoring event. • Abandon recently discovered well MW -3A. Assess impact of TPH releases from USTs in the SFA area, especially in the downgradient direction. Assess the extent of free product on the water table. Collect data to allow a TPH evaluation with respect to the current MTCA regulations for petroleum mixtures and facilitate regulatory closure of the SFA USTs. All work to be included in Phase II (except redevelopment and sampling of well MW -4A, which was conducted during the Phase I groundwater monitoring event). Ambient Indoor Air • Collect 8 -hour integrated air samples for VOC analysis from worker breathing zone in those areas of site within the limit of VOC plume where workers typically spend an 8 -hour work shift. • Collect a control sample for VOC analysis from an area of the site outside the limit of the VOC plume. Assess potential worker exposure to VOCs, which may migrate through the concrete floor into enclosed buildings in accordance with OSHA PELs. COMPLETED. Scope of investigation was expanded to include a total of 26 sample locations (including two duplicates and one outside background) and analysis of 27 VOCs. Results provided in Ambient Air Monitoring Report, PACCAR Seattle Facility, dated 25 March 2002 (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2002a). Duwamish Sediment Evaluation • Obtain and review any additional sediment data that may exist in the vicinity of the site. • Review historical site (upland) data for evidence of any previous sampling for PCBs. • Evaluate the need for additional sampling for PCBs at the site. Assess potential PCB impact, if any, of the site on Duwamish Waterway sediments. Identify other possible sources of PCBs in Duwamish Waterway sediments. COMPLETED. Results presented in the Technical Memorandum from Mr. Paul Fuglevand provided in Appendix A of this report. King County Storm Drain • Obtain and review data regarding location, depth, and structural integrity of King County storm drain line that passes beneath a portion of the site. • Obtain and review any analytical data collected from the storm drain line. • Based on the availability of existing data, collect a storm drain line discharge sample for analysis of site COCs. Assess the potential impact, if any, of the offsite storm drain line on the site and vice - versa. ONGOING. December 2002 w:120011016110.00 phase i rpt table 1.doc • 016110.00 • TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS WORK PLAN PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility • Page 3 of 5 Area of Concern Proposed Activities Rationale Status Site Storm Drains • Assess existing oil /water separator for north storm drain line and recommend system upgrades. • Evaluate and recommend potential VOC treatment options for north storm drain line discharge. Reduce potential for discharge of VOC- impacted water to the Duwamish Waterway. ONGOING. Site storm drains to be managed under new stormwater permit. OTHER POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN Steam Cleaning/Wash Pit Area • Advance up to three direct push borings to collect soil samples and reconnaissance groundwater samples downgradient of this potential AOC. • Include well MW -15A in data gaps groundwater monitoring event. Assess if this area is acting as another source of the VOCs identified in the site groundwater over the western portion of the site. COMPLETED. Scope of work expanded to include additional borings and analysis of additional compounds [SVOCs (including PAHs), metals, PCB, TPHs]. Results provided in this report. Former Hazardous Waste Storage Area, Boneyard, and Drum Storage Area (collectively referred to as Southwest Storage Area) • Advance up to 14 direct push borings to collect shallow soil samples in and around a former soil excavation area in the bone yard and beneath and around two closed trenches in the former hazardous material waste handling area. • Analyze soil samples for a suite of chemicals (TPHs, metals, VOCs, PAHs /cPAHs, PCBs) likely to have been handled /stored in these areas. • Analyze groundwater samples from well MW -30A and new shallow well to be installed south of the bulkhead (refer to Duwamish /Bulkhead Property Boundary) for COCs identified in the soil in this area. Assess if this area is acting as another source area. COMPLETED. Results provided in this report. Frame Turnover Fixture • Advance up to four direct push /hand auger borings to collect soil samples in the vicinity of the Frame Turnover Fixture for TPH analysis. Past indication of TPH -soil impact in this area. Collect data to allow a TPH evaluation with respect current MTCA regulations for petroleum mixtures. All work to be included in Phase II. Former Bergmaster (Frame Drill) • Advance up to two direct push /hand auger borings to collect soil samples in the vicinity of former test pit (TP -2) for VOC analysis. Past indication of VOC -soil impact in this area. All work to be included in Phase II. December 2002 w:120011016110.0012002 phase i rpt table 1.dac 016110.00 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS WORK PLAN PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility Page 4 of 5 Area of Concern Proposed Activities Rationale Status Groundwater • Collect groundwater level measurements from all accessible site wells during high and low tides, respectively. • Sample existing 17 wells in the semi - annual program. • Sample existing wells MW -16A (upgradient background location), MW -23A (northern property boundary), MW -15A (steam clean /wash pit area), and wells MW -6A and MW -9A (SFA area), which have not been included in recent semi - annual monitoring events. • Redevelop and sample well MW-4A, recently located in the SFA area. • Sample all proposed new wells (if installed). Assess concentrations of COCs in site groundwater as follows: - Analyzing all samples for VOCs. - Analyzing samples collected from the wells located along the northern property boundary for petroleum hydrocarbons and metals. - Analyzing groundwater samples collected from the wells located in the vicinity of the SFA for petroleum hydrocarbons and ethylene glycol. - Analyzing groundwater samples collected from the wells located in closest proximity to the former hazardous material storage area for any additional COCs identified in the soil. - Analyzing groundwater samples from eight wells (MW -1A, MW -14A, MW -25A, MW -26A, MW -27A, MW -28A, MW -29A, and MW -30A) for general water quality parameters. COMPLETED. Scope of work expanded to include analysis of additional compounds [SVOCs (including PAHs,) metals, PCB, TPHs]. Analysis of groundwater samples from eight wells (MW -1A, MW -14A, MW -25A, MW -26A, MW -27A, MW -28A, MW -29A, and MW -30A) for general water quality parameters to be completed in next groundwater semi - annual monitoring event under the VCP. Results provided in this report. Stormwater • Sample Storm -North and Storm -South discharge at high and low high, respectively. Assess concentrations whether COCs are discharging from the site to the Duwamish Waterway via surface water (stormwater). COMPLETED. Scope of work expanded to include analysis of additional compounds [SVOCs (including PAHs), metals, PCB, TPHs]. Results provided in this report. Seeps • Sample up to six seeps at low tide. Assess whether COCs in site groundwater are discharging from the site to the Duwamish Waterway COMPLETED. Scope of work expanded to include analysis of additional compounds [SVOCs (including PAHs), metals, PCB, TPHs]. Results provided in this report. December 2002 w:120011016110.0M2002 phase i rpCtable 1.doc • 016110.00 • • • TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF DATA GAPS WORK PLAN PACCAR Inc — Seattle Facility Page 5 of 5 Area of Concern Proposed Activities Rationale Status SUPPLEMENTAL FIELD ACTIVITIES AS /SVE Assessment • Collect continuous soil samples from vadose and upper Preliminary assessment of air sparging as ONGOING — As part of AS /SVE Pilot saturated zone for detailed lithological logging. a potential remediation alternative for the Study. • Collect soil samples for geotechnical analysis (grain size distribution, bulk density, bulk porosity, and moisture content). • Sample eight wells (MW -1A, MW -14A, MW -25A, MW -26A, MW -27A, MW -28A, MW -29A, and MW -30A) for additional general water quality parameters (ferric iron and manganese). site. Analysis of groundwater samples from eight wells (MW -1A, MW -14A, MW -25A, MW -26A, MW -27A, MW -28A, MW -29A, and MW -30A) for general water quality parameters to be completed in next groundwater semi - annual monitoring event conducted under the VCP. Results provided in Air Sparge and Soil Vapor Extraction Pilot Study, dated November 2002 (Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2002c). Notes: AS /SVE COCs MTCA NFA OSHA PAHs /cPAHs PCBs PELs SFA SVOCs TBD TPHs USTs VCP VOCs Air sparging /soil vapor extraction. Chemicals of concern. Model Toxics Control Act. North fire aisle. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons /carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Polychlorinated biphenyls. Permissible exposure limits. South fire aisle. Semivolatile organic compounds. To be determined. Based on the results obtained from other proposed data gaps investigation activities. Total petroleum hydrocarbons. Underground storage tanks. Voluntary Cleanup Program Volatile organic compounds. December 2002 w:120011016110.000002 phase i rptltable 1.doc 016110.00 TABLE 2 NORTH FIRE AISLE AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Page 1 of 3 Analyte (Walpht - Sample Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method A Industrial) °) MTCA Method C Industrial(b) NA -1 (3 -5) NA -1 (6 -7) NA -2 (1 -3) NA -2 (3 -5) NA -2 (5 -7) NA -3 (1 -2) NA -3 (4 -5) NA -3 (5 -7) NA-4 (1 -3) NA-4 (3.5 -5) NA-4 (5 -6) NA -5 (1 -3) NA -5 (3 -5) NA -5 (5 -7) NA-6 (6.5 -7.5) NA -7 (5.5 -6.5) NA -8 (1 -3) NA-8 (5 -7) TPH (mg /kg - NWTPH -Dx by GC /FID) Diesel _to 70 31 - -- 860 - -- - -- 9.4 - -- - -- 9.1 <5.0(d) 21 4,600 31 110 - -- - -- 2,000 NA(*) Oil - -- 180 79 - -- 1,900 -- - -- 16 - -- - -- 13 15 22 4,200: 68 99 -- -- 2.000 NA PCBs (pg/kg - 8082 GC /ECD ) Aroclor 1016 - <41 <38 - -- <41 <38 - - -- <38 -- - <38 -- <41 <41 <39 -- - NA 245,000 Aroclor 1242 -- <41 <38 -- <41 <38 -- -- <38 -- - -- <38 -- <41 <41 <39 - - -- NA NA Aroclor 1248 - -- <41 <38 -- <41 <38 - -- -- <38 -- - -- <38 -- <41 <41 <39 -- - NA NA Aroclor 1254 -- <41 <38 - -- 130 <38 -- - <38 -- - -- 130 -- <41 <41 <39 -- - NA 70,000 Aroclor 1260 - -- <41 <38 -- <56Y <38 -- - -- <38 - -- - -- <48Y -- <41 <41 <39 - -- - NA NA Aroclor 1221 . - -- <82 <76 -- <82 _ <75 - -- -- <76 - -- - -- <77 - -- <81 <82 <79 - -- -- NA NA Aroclor 1232 - -- <41 <38 - -- <41 <38 -- - -- <38 - -- -- <38 - -- <41 <41 <39 - -- - -- NA NA Total PCBs(t) - -- 82 76 - -- 130 75 - -- -- 76 - -- - -- 130 - -- 81 82 79 -- -- 10,000 NA VOCs (pg/kg - 8260B GC /MS)1a) Chloromethane <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 190B - -- <1.2 <1.3 -- <1.2 <1.2 - -- <2.2 290B <1.2 <1,400 -- <1.3 NA 1.01E +07 Chloroethane <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 - -- <1.2 <1.3 -- <1.2 <1.2 -- 3.5 <160 <1.2 <1,400 -- <1.3 NA NA Acetone 61 8,100 - -- <6.0 <760 - 7.2 <6.4 -- <6.0 <5.8 -- 55 <790 26 <7,200 -- <6.5 NA 3.50E +08 Carbon Disulfide <12 <1,600 - <1.2 <150 -- <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.2 - <2.2 <160 <1.2 <1,400 - <1.3 NA 3.50E +08 1,1 -DCE <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 -- 1.1J <1.3 - <1.2 <1.2 -- <2.2 <160 <1.2 <1,400 - -- <1.3 NA 2.19 +05 1,1 -DCA <12 <1,600 -- <1.2 <150 - -- 31 5.6 - <1.2 <1.2 -- <2.2 <160 3.8 <1,400 -- <1.3 NA 3.50E +08 cis -1,2 -DCE <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 - -- 15 2.8 -- <1.2 <1.2 - -- <2.2 <160 1.1J <1,400 - -- <1.3 NA 3.50E +07 1,2 -DCA 12 <12 < 1,600 - -- < 1.2 150 <150 - -- 4.0 <1.3 -- <1.2 <1.2 -- <2.2 <160 <1.2 <1,400 - -- <1.3 NA 1,44E +06 2- Butanone <61 <7,900 - -- <6.0 <760 -- <5.8 <6.4 - -- <6.0 <5.8 - -- <11 <790 7.2 <7,200 - -- <6.5 NA • 2.10E +09 1,1,1 -TCA <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 - -- 92 27 -- <1.2 1.0J - -- <2.2 <160 43 <1,400 - -- 3.3 2,000 3.15E +09 Trichloroethene <12 <1,600 - <1.2 <150 -- 45 11 - -- 5.9 7.6 - -- 3.8 <160 3.5 <1,400 - -- 13 NA 1.19E +07 Benzene <12 <1,600 -- <1.2 <150 -- <1.2 <1.3 -- <1.2 <12 - 1.8J <160 <12 <1,400 -- <1.3 NA 2 39E +06 Tetrachtoroethene 53 <1,600 -- 9.1 <150 - -- 770 120 -- 1.6 2.0 - 15 <160 27 <1,400 -- 6.5 NA 2 57E +06 Toluene <12 <1,600 -- 2.1 <150 - 39 6.5 -- 17 16 - -- 4.1 79J 52 <1,400 - 11 NA 7.00E +08 Ethylbenzene <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 -- <1.2 <1.3 -- <1.2 <12 - -- 75 9,500 <1.2 18,000 - <1.3 NA 3.50E +08 m,p-xylene ene <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 200J -- <1.2 <1.3 - -- <1.2 <12 - -- 160 33,000 <1.2 93,000 - -- <1.3 NA 7 00E +09 o- xylene <12 <1,600 -- <1.2 <150 - <1.2 <1.3 - -- <1.2 <12 - -- 30 3,700 <1.2 43,000 - -- <1.3 NA 7 00E +09 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 - -- <1.2 <1.3 - -- <1.2 <1 2 - -- 9.0 1,100 <1.2 18,000 - -- <1.3 NA NA 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 480M - -- <1.2 <1.3 - -- <1.2 <1.2 - -- 26 4,300 <1.2 33,000 -- <1.3 NA NA Isopropylbenzene 39 <1,600 - -- <1.2 <150 - -- <12 <13 -- <1.2 <1.2 - -- 2.1J 1,200 <1.2 5,500 - -- <1.3 NA NA n- Propylbenzene 28M <1,600 -- <1.2 200M - -- <1.2 <1.3 - -- <1.2 <1 2 - -- 2.6M 2,400 <1.2 11,000 -- <1.3 NA NA sec- butylbenzene 42M <1,600 -- <1.2 270M -- <1.2 <1.3 -- <1.2 <12 -- <2.2 250 <1.2 <1,400 - -- <1.3 NA NA 4- Isopropyltoluene <12 <1,600 - -- <1.2 180M - -- <1.2 < <1.3 -- <1.2 <1.2 -- 7.7 260 <1.2 <1,400 - <1.3 NA NA n-Butylbenzene <24 <3,200 - -- <2.4 <300 -- <2.3 <2.6 - -- <2.4 <2.3 -- 6.8M <320 <2.5 <2,900 -- <2.6 NA NA Naphthalene <61 <7,900 - -- <6.0 <760 - -- <5.8 <6.4 -- <6.0 <5,8 - -- 160 3,900 <6.1 <7,200 -- <6.5 NA 7.00E +07 December 2002 w:\2001 \0161}Q 00\2002 phase I rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 2 North Fire Isle • 1010.00 • • TABLE 2 NORTH FIRE AISLE AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Page 2 of 3 Analyte (Weight • Sample Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method A Industrial(a) MTCA Method C Industrial(e) NA -1 (3 -5) NA -1 (6 -7) NA -2 (1 -3) NA -2 (3 -5) NA -2 (5 -7) NA -3 (1 -2) NA -3 (4 -5) NA -3 (5 -7) NA-4 (1 -3) NA-4 (3.5-5) NA-4 (5 -6) NA -5 (1 -3) NA -5 (3 -5) NA -5 (5 -7) NA -6 (6.5 -7.5) NA -7 (5.5 -6.5) NA -8 (1 -3) NA -8 (5 -7) SVOCs (pg /kg - 8270 GC /MS- SIM)(a) Nphthalene - -- <82 -- - -- <81 -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 330 2,700 <82 580 - -- - -- NA 7.00E +07 2- Methylnaphthalene - -- <82 -- - -- <81 -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 400 4,300 <82 <79 -- - -- NA NA Acenaphthene - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 210 2,400 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 2.10E +08 Dibenzofuran - -- <82 -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 120 1,100 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA NA Fluorene - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 220 2,300 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1.40E +08 Phenathrene - -- <82 - -- -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 550 5,400 • <82 <79 - -- - -- NA NA Carbazole - -- 120 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 6,56E +06 Anthracene - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -• - -- - -- 110 990 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1 05E+09 Di- n- Butylphthalate - -- <82 - -- - -• 85 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 -- - -- NA 3.50E +08 Fluoranthene - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 250 2,800 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1.40E +08 Pyrene - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 320 3,100 <82 100 - -- - -- NA 1.05E +08 Butylbenzylphthalate - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 7.00E +08 Benzo(a)anthracene( ") - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 83 820 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalate - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 130 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 9 38E +06 Chrysene( ") - -- <82 -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 160 1,400 <82 95 - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Benzo(b)fluoranthene( ") - -- <82 - -- -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Benzo(k)fluoranthene(") - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Benzo(a)pyrene( ") - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene( ") - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- -- NA 1 80E+04 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene( ") - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - -- <82 - -- - -- <81 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <77 <730 <82 <79 - -- - -- NA NA Total cPAHs(') - -- 74.21 - -- - -- 73.31 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 67.05 716.5 74.21 72.05 - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 PAHs (pg/kg - 8270C GC /MS SIM)(°) Naphthalene - -- <8.2 - -- - -- 86 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 2,600 12 630 - -- - -- NA 7.00E +07 2- Methylnaphthalene - -- 12 - -- - -- 32 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -• 4,600 <8.2 85 - -- - -- NA NA Acenaphthylene - -- <8.2 - -- - -- <8.1 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- <180Y <8.2 <7.9 - -- - -- NA NA Acenaphthene - -- 39B - -- - -- 28 - - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 2,200B 25B 588 - -- - -- NA 2.10E +08 Fluorene -- 56 -- - -- 36 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- 2,200 7.4J 41 - -- - -- NA 1.40E +08 Phenanthrene - -- 26 - -- - -- 56 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 4,400 22 82 - -- - -- NA NA Anthracene - -- 11 - - -- 21 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- 1,200 8.2 • 26 - -- -- NA 1.05E +09 Fluoranthene - -- 15 - -- - -- 49 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 2,400 30 99 - -- -- NA 1.40E +08 yrene - -- 24B -- - -- 100 - -- -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- 3,000B 33B 130B - -- -- NA 1 05E+08 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - -- <8.2 -- - -- <8.1 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <130Y 27 51M - -- - -- NA NA Dibenzofuran - -- 19 - -- - -- 12 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 980M 5.7J 21M - -- - -- NA NA Chrysene(') -- 9.8 - -- - -- 31 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 1,600 26 120 - -- - -- NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(b)fluoranthene( ") -- <8.2 -- - -- <24Y -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- 410 20 73 -- NA 180E +04 Benzo(k)fluoranthene(") - -- 4.1MJ -- - -- <24Y - -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <310Y 20 60M - -- -- NA 1 80E+04 Benzo(a)anthracene( ") - -- <82 - -- - -- <24Y - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- 680M 21M 36M - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Benzo(a)pyrene(") - -- <8 2 - -- - -- <8.1 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 360M 24 16M - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene( ") - -- <82 - -- - -- <8.1 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <110Y 18 28 - -- - -- NA 1 80E+04 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene( ") - -- <8 2 - -- - -- <8.1 --- - -- - -- - -- <150Y 5.7J 18 - -- - -- NA 1 80E +04 Total cPAHs(D -- 7.48 - -- - -- 9.985 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 536 34.4 44.1 - -- - -- NA 1 80E +04 December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase I rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 2 North Fire Isle 016110.00 TABLE 2 NORTH FIRE AISLE AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Page 3of3 Analyte (Weight - Sample Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method A Industrial(*) MTCA Method C Industrial(b) NA -1 (3 -5) NA -1 (6 -7) NA -2 (1 -3) NA -2 (3 -5) NA -2 (5 -7) NA -3 (1 -2) NA -3 (4-5) NA -3 (5 -7) NA-4 (1 -3) NA-4 (3.5 -5) NA-4 (5-6) NA -5 (1 -3) NA -5 (3 -5) NA -5 (5 -7) NA-6 (6.5 -7.5) NA -7 (5.5 -6.5) NA -8 (1 -3) NA -8 (5 -7) Total Metals (mg/kg - 200.8/7000 Ser es) Antimony - -- <0.2 <0.2 - -- <0.2 - -- -- -- - -- -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.3 NA 1,400 Arsenic - -- 2.1 0.9 -- 1.7 - -- - - -- -- -- -- 1.3 - -- 2.7 3.2 1.9 1.7 3.6 NA 87.5 Beryllium - -- <0.2 0.3 - -- <0.2 - -- -- -- - -- - -- 0.3 - -- <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 NA 7,000 Cadmium - -- <0 2 0.3 -- <0.2 -- -- - - - -- <0.2 -- <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.3 NA 3.500 Chromium - -- 11.1 10.3 - -- 13.3 -- -- -- -- - -- - -- 13.5 - -- 17.9 16 14 16.2 13 9 NA 5,250,000() Copper - -- 16.5 155 - -- 15.4 - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 144 - -- 19.4 46.8 69.8 40.1 18 0 NA 130,000 Lead - -- 4 6 -- 6 - -- -- -- - -- - -- - -- 14 -- 8 6 6 3 5 1,000 NA Mercury - -- <0.06 <0.05 -- <0.05 - -- -- - -- - -- - -- -- <0.05 - -- <0.04 <0.05 <0.06 <0.06 <0.05 NA 1,050 Nickel - -- 11 3 17.2 - -- 11.5 - -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- 17.7 - -- 15.9 15.9 15.1 24.2 13.0 NA 70,000 Selenium - -- <0 6 <0.5 - -- <0.6 -- -- -- -- -- - -- <0.6 - -- <0.6 0.7 <0.6 <0.6 <0 6 NA 17,500 Silver -- <0.6 <0.5 -- <0.6 - -- -- - - -- -- <0.6 - -- <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0.6 <0 6 NA 17,500 Thallium - -- <0 2 <0.2 - -- <0.2 - -- -- -- - -- -- - -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.3 NA 245 Zinc - -- 30 56 - -- 36 -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 71 - -- 35 47 47 43 38 NA 1,050,000 Conventional Parameters (mg/kg - 5300 -Cr -D) Hexavalent Chromium f1 - -- -- -- -- <0.55 - -- - -- -- - - -- - -- -- - -- 0.66 - -- -- <0.10 <0.12 NA 10,500 Notes: (a) MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (b) MTCA Method C industrial soil direct contact (ingestion only) soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (c) = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. (d) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (e) NA = MTCA cleanup level not available /not applicable. (f) Total polychlorinated biphenyts (PCBs) were calculated as follows. If no individual PCB Aroclors were detected, the single highest detection limit was used to represent the total PCB concentration. If one or more PCBs Aroclors were detected, the PCB Aroclor concentrations were summed to represent the total PCB concentration. (g) Only detected analytes have been listed. (h) Carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (cPAH). (i) Total probable cPAHs are based on benzo(a)pyrene equivalent values. These values were calculated by multiplying individual cPAH concentrations by benzo(a)pyrene toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs). If a probable cPAH was not detected in the sample, a value equal to one -half the laboratory reporting limit was used and multiplied by the appropriate TEFs. (j) MTCA Method A and C industrial land use soil cleanup levels are for Chromium III (CAS# 16065- 83 -1). Analytes detected in samples at concentrations exceeding one or more of the cleanup levels or comparison values are shown In bold and shaded. mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram pg/kg - micrograms per kilogram Qualifiers B - Compound also detected in method blank. J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the calculated laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match. Y - Raised laboratory reporting limit due to matrix interference. December 2002 w:\2001 \0161\2002 phase I rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 2 North Fire Isle • TOXICITY EQUIVALENCY FACTORS cPAH TEF Benzo(a)pyrene 1 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.1 Benzo(a)anthrancene 0.1 Chrysene 0.01 Indeno(1,2,3c,d)pyrene 0.1 dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.4 Source: Cal EPA. 1994. Benzo(a)pyrene as a Toxic Alr Contaminant 1[010.00 i TABLE 3 WASH PIT AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte (Weigh- Sample Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method A Industrial(e) MTCA Method C Industrial(b) WP -1 (1 -3) WP -1 (3 -5) WP -1 (5 -7) WP -2 (3 -5) WP -2 (5 -7) WP -3 (3 -5) WP -3 (5 -7) WP-4 (1 -2) WP-4 (5 -6) WP -5 (1 -2) WP -5 (6 -7) WP-6 (1 -2) WP-6 (5 -6) TPH (mg /kg - NWTPH -Dx by GC /FID) Diesel 26 - -(`( <5.0(< - -- - -- - -- -- <5.0 <5.0 38 8.7 11 12 2,000 NA(`( Oil 140 - -- <10 - -- - -- - -- - -- <10 15 72 20 21 63 2,000 NA PCBs (pg /kg - 8082 GC /ECD ) Aroclor 1016 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- <35 - -- <36 - -- <38 - -- NA 245,000 Aroclor 1242 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <35 - -- <36 - -- <38 - -- NA NA Aroclor 1248 - -- -- - -- - -- - -- <35 - -- <36 - -- <38 - -- NA NA Aroclor 1254 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <35 - -- 170 - -- <38 - -- NA 70,000 Aroclor 1260 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <35 - -- <64Y -- <38 - -- NA NA Aroclor 1221 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <71 - -- <71 - -- <75 - -- NA NA Aroclor 1232 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <35 - -- <36 - -- <38 - -- NA NA Total PCBs(r) - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 70 - -- 170 - -- 75 - -- 10,000 NA VOCs (pg /kg - 8260B GC MS)1e( Chloromethane - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1 3 - -- <1.4 -- <1.4 <1.2 <1.5 NA 1,01E +07 Chloroethane - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1 3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <1 2 <1.5 NA NA Acetone - -- <5.8 39 <5.7 46 <6.3 <6.6 - -- 28 - -- 66 <6 0 <7.3 NA 3.50E +08 Carbon Disulfide - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 -- <1,4 <1 2 <1.5 NA 3.50E +08 1,1 -DCE - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1 3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1,4 <1.2 <1.5 NA 2.19 +05 1,1 -DCA - <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1 3 - -- <1 4 - -- <1.4 <1.2 8.4 NA 3 50E+08 cis -1,2 -DCE - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1,3 <1 3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <1.2 1.6 NA 3 50E+07 1,2 -DCA - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 -- <1.4 <12 <1,5 NA 1 44E+06 2- Butanone - -- <5.8 8.0 <5 7 8.7 <6 3 <6.6 - -- <7.0 - -- 13 <6 0 <7.3 - NA 2.10E +09 1,1,1 -TCA - -- 4.0 <1,4 1.5 1.8 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1 4 -- <14 2.1 17 NA 3.15E +09 Trichloroethene -- 3.2 <1.4 2.2 2.1 <1 3 <1 3 - -- <1 4 - <1.4 <1 2 24 NA 1 19E+07 Benzene -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1.3 - -- _ <1 4 - -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA 2 39E +06 Tetrachloroethene -- 5.5 <1.4 <11 <1 4 <1 3 <1 3 - -- <1.4 - <1.4 1.4 30 NA 2.57E +06 Toluene - -- <1.2 <1.4 <11 <14 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 -- <1.4 1.4 <1.5 NA 7.00E +08 Ethylbenzene - -- <1.2 <14 <11 <1.4 <13 <1.3 - -- <1.4 -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA 3.50E +08 m,p- xylene - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <1 3 <1 3 - -- <1 4 - -- <1.4 <1.2 <1.5 NA 7 00E +09 ylene - -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1.4 <13 <1 3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA 7.00E +09 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene - -- <1.2 <1 4 <1.1 <1.4 <1 3 <1 3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <1.2 <1.5 NA NA 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene -- <1.2 <1.4 <1.1 <1 4 <1 3 <1 3 - -- <1 4 -- <1.4 <1.2 <1.5 NA NA Isopropylbenzene -- <1.2 <14 <1.1 <1.4 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA NA n- Propylbenzene - -- <1.2 <1.4 <11 <1.4 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA NA sec - butylbenzene - -- <1.2 <1.4 <11 <14 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA NA 4 -Isop pyltoluene - -- <1.2 <14 <11 <1 4 <1.3 <1.3 - -- <1.4 - -- <1.4 <12 <1.5 NA NA n- Butylbenzene - -- <2.3 <2 8 <2.3 <2.7 <2.5 <2.6 - -- <2.8 - -- <2.8 <2.4 <2.9 NA NA Naphthalene - -- <5.8 <6.9 <5.7 <6.8 <63 <6,6 - -- <7,0 - -- <6.9 <6.0 <7.3 NA 7,00E +07 December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase I rpt \Table 2-3-4-5.xlsTable 3 Wash Pit Area Page 1 of 3 016110.00 TABLE 3 WASH PIT AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte (Weight - Sample Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method A Industrial(') MTCA Method C Industrial(') WP -1 (1 -3) WP -1 (3 -5) WP -1 (5 -7) WP -2 (3 -5) WP -2 (5 -7) WP -3 (3 -5) WP -3 (5 -7) WP-4 (1 -2) WP-4 (5 -6) WP -5 (1 -2) WP -5 (6 -7) WP -6 (1 -2) WP -6 (5 -6) SVOCs (Ng /kg - 8270 GC/MS-SNP') Naphthalene <74 - -- -- -- - -- — - -- -- -- <71 — 5,800 <97 NA 7.00E +07 2- Methylnaphthalene <74 - -- — -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- <71 — 3,000 <97 NA NA Acenaphthylene <74 — -- — — - -- -- -- -- <71 — 91 <97 NA NA Acenaphthene <74 -- -- -- -- -- - -- - -- -- <71 -- 5,100 <97 NA 2.10E +08 Dibenzofuran <74 - -- -- - -- -- — - -- - -- -- <71 — 5,600 <97 NA NA Fluorene <74 -- -- - -- — — - -- - -- — <71 — 8,000 <97 NA 1.40E +08 Phenathrene <74 -- - -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- <71 — 24,000 <97 NA NA Carbazole <74 -- - -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- — <71 — 4,400 <97 NA 6.56E +06 Anthracene <74 -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- — <71 -- 4,900 <97 NA 1.05E +09 Di- n- Butylphthalate <74 - -- -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <71 -- 100 <97 NA 3.50E +08 Fluoranthene <74 -- - -- - -- - -- -- -- -- -- <71 - -- 12,000 <97 NA 1.40E +08 Pyrene <74 -- -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- <71 — 6,500 <97 NA 1.05E +08 Butylbenzytphthalate <74 -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- <71 - -- 110M <97 NA 7.00E +08 Benzo(a)anthracene(") <74 -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- <71 - -- 2,500 <97 NA 1.80E +04 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalate <74 - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- 86 — 200M 1,200 NA 9.38E +06 Chrysene(") <74 -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <71 — 2,500 <97 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(b)fluoranthene("t <74 -- -- -- -- - -- -- — <71 — 930 <97 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(k)fluoranthene("t <74 -- — - -- — — -- — -- <71 — 1,100 <97 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(a)pyrene("t <74 — -- -- — — — — -- <71 — 1,100 <97 NA 1.80E +04 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene(") <74 — -- -- — -- -- - -- — <71 -- 440 <97 NA 1.80E +04 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene("t <74 — - -- — - -- — -- — — <71 -- 110 <97 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <74 -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- -- <71 -- 380 <97 NA NA Total cPAHs(1) 66.97 — -- -- - -- — - -- -- 64.25 — 1,666 87.79 NA 1.80E +04 PAHs (Ng/kg - 8270C GC /MS SIM)Ie) Naphthalene — -- — - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- -- -- -- - -- NA 7.00E +07 2- Methylnaphlhalene -- -- - -- - -- - -- -- -- -- - -- -- - -- -- — NA NA Acenaphthylene - -- — - -- - -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- - -- - -- NA NA Acenaphthene - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- NA 2.10E +08 Fluorene - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- -- NA 1.40E +08 Phenanthrene — - -- - -- — - -- - -- - -- - -- -- -- - -- -- - -- NA NA Anthracene - -- -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- — NA 1.05E +09 Fluoranthene - -- -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- . -- -- - -- -- -- — NA 1.40E +08 Pyrene - -- - -- - -- _ -- -- - -- - -- -- -- -- -- - -- — NA 1.05E +08 Benzo(q,h,i)perylene - -- - -- - -- -- -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- -- — -- NA NA Chrysene( "t -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- — -- — — — -- NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(b)fluoranthene(") - -- -- - -- -- — - -- — -- -- — - -- -- -- NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(k)fluoranthene("t - -- -- -- — -- — — -- -- — -- -- — NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(a)anthracene(") - -- -- — -- - -- -- — - -- — - -- — -- - -- NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(a)pyrene("t - -- -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- — -- - -- -- — NA 1.80E +04 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene("t - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- -- - -- — -- - -- - -- NA 1.80E +04 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene( ") - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- — -- -- - -- -- - -- - -- NA 1.80E +04 Total cPAHs(1) - -- — - -- - -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- NA 1.80E +04 December 2002 w:\2001 \000\2002 phase I rpt \Table 2- 3 -4- 5.xlsTable 3 Wash Pit Area • Page 2 of 3 4110.00 • • TABLE 3 WASH PIT AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte (Weight - Sample Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method A Industrial(a) MTCA Method C Industrial(b) WP -1 (1 -3) WP -1 (3 -5) WP -1 (5 -7) WP -2 (3 -5) WP -2 (5 -7) WP -3 (3-5) WP -3 (5 -7) WP-4 (1 -2) WP-4 (5 -6) WP -5 (1 -2) WP -5 (6 -7) WP -6 (1 -2) WP -6 (5 -6) Total Metals (mg /kg - 200 8/7000 Series) Antimony <0.2 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 <0.3 NA 1,400 Arsenic 1.8 - -- - -- -- -- - -- - -- 2.9 - -- 2.4 - -- 2.3 3.6 NA 87.5 Beryllium <0.2 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 0.4 NA 7,000 Cadmium <0.2 - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- 0.8 - -- 0.3 - -- 0.4 <0.3 NA 3,500 Chromium 9.1 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 12.5 - -- 9.2 - -- 11.3 18.1 NA 5,250,000(') Copper 10.5 - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- 13.9 - -- 11.1 - -- 35.4 22.4 NA 130,000 Lead 3 - -- - -- - - -- - -- -- 10 - -- 11 - -- 34 9 1,000 NA Mercury <0.04 - -- - -- - -- -- - -- -- <0.04 -- <0.05 - -- 0.06 <0.06 NA 1,050 Nickel 8.8 - -- -- - - - -- - -- 9.9 -- 9.1 - -- 10.9 16.2 NA 70,000 Selenium <0.5 - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- <0.5 - -- <0.5 - -- <0.5 <0.7 NA 17,500 Silver <0.5 - -- -- -- - -- - -- - -- <0.5 - -- <0.5 - -- <0.5 <0.7 NA 17,500 Thallium <0.2 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -- <0.2 -- <0.2 - -- <0.2 <0.3 NA 245 Zinc 25 - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 48 - -- 32 -- 83 57 NA 1,050,000 Conventional Parameters (mg/kg - 5300 -Cr -D) Nexavalent Chromium <0.10 - -- <0.12 - -- - -- - -- - -- <0.10 1.1 <0.10 0.19 <0.10 1.8 NA 10,500 Notes: (a) MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (b) MTCA Method C industrial soil direct contact (ingestion only) soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (c) " - -" = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. (d) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (e) NA = MTCA cleanup level not available /not applicable. (f) Total polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were calculated as follows. If no individual PCB Aroclors were detected, the single highest detection limit was used to represent the total PCB concentration. If one or more PCBs Aroclors were detected, the PCB Aroclor concentrations were summed to represent the total PCB concentration. (g) Only detected analytes have been listed. (h) Carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (cPAH). (i) Total probable cPAHs are based on benzo(a)pyrene equivalent values. These values were calculated by multiplying individual cPAH concentrations by benzo(a)pyrene toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs). If a probable cPAH was not detected in the sample, a value equal to one -half the laboratory reporting limit was used and multiplied by the appropriate TEFs. (j) MTCA Method A and C industrial and use soil cleanup levels are for Chromium III (CAS# 16065- 83 -1). mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram pg/kg - micrograms per kilogram Qualifiers B - Compound also detected in method blank. J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the calculated laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match. Y - Raised laboratory reporting limit due to matrix interference. December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.0012002 phase I rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 3 Wash Pit Area TOXICITY EQUIVALENCY FACTORS cPAH TEF Benzo(a)pyrene 1 Benzo(b)lluoranthene 01 Benzo(k)ttuoranthene 01 Benzo(a)anthrancene 01 Chrysene 0.01 Indeno(1,2,3- c,d)pyrene 01 dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.4 Source: Cal EPA. 1994. Benzo(a)pyrene as a Toxic Air Contaminant. Page 3 of 3 016110.00 TABLE 4 SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Page 1 of 2 December 2002 w: \2001 \016110.00\2002 phase 1 rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 4 SW Storage Area 016110.00 Analyte (W.r °m• 544444 M.4844) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA MethodA Industrial(') MTCA MethodC Industrial)b) BY -1 (0 -1) BY -1 (1 -3) BY -3 (0 -0.5) BY -3 (3 -5) BY -3 (6-8) BY-3 (8 -9) BY-4 (0 -2) BY-4 (4-6) BY -4. (6 -7.5) BY -5 (0 -1.5) BY -5 (5 -7) BY -5 (7 -9) BY-6 (0 -1) BY-6 (3 -5) BY-6 (7 4.5) DS -1 (0 -1) DS -1 (3 -5) DS -1 (74.5) DS -2 (0 -1) DS -2 (3 -5) DS -2 (6-8) DS -2 (8=10) HM -1 (1 -2) HM -1 (3 -5) HM -1 (74.5) HM -1 (10 -11) HM -2 (1 -2) HM -2 (3 -5) HM -2 (9 -11) HM -3 (1 -2) HM -3 (3 -5) HM -3 (8 -9) HM-4 (1 -2) HM-4 (3 -5) HM-4 I HM -5 (8.10) I (1 -2) HM -5 (6.5 -8) HM -5 (8.5 -9.5) HM-6 (0 -1.5) HM-6 (3 -5) HM-6 (6.54) HM-6 (10 -12) HM-6 (13.5 -14) TPH (mg /kg • NWTPH -Ox by GC /FID) 2,300 660 270 440 220 - 580 44 -(`) 19 - 130 360 440 260 560 46 - 380 74 430 -- 10 - 220 - 26 - 190 24 - - 8.4 19 190 1 20 - 180 29 - - 340 - 2,000 NA10I Diesel Oil 5,000` 980 1,600 1,100 530 - _ - 3,100 130 - 39 - 240 2,000- 1,200 470 3,000. 180 - 1,400 230 980 - 14 -- 200 - 46 - 140 41 - - 22 19 450 . 43 - 180 56 - - 580 - 2,000 NA PCBs (pg /kg • 8082 GC/ECO ) Arodor 1016 <39(•) - - - <48 - <38 - - <39 - - <37 - - <35 - - <37 - - -• <39 - <39 - <38 - - - - - <37 - - <38 - <42 - - - - - NA 245.000 Arodor1242 <39 - - - <46 - <38 - - <39 - - <37 - - <35 - - <37 - - -- <39 - <39 - <38 - - - - - <37 - - <38 - <42 - - - - - NA NA Arodor1248 <39 - - - <46 - <38 - - <39 - - <37 - - <35 - - <37 - - - <39 - <39 - <38 - - - - - <37 - - <38 - <42 - - - - - NA NA Amdor 1254 <39 - - - 160 - 46 - - 250 - - 70 - - 140 - - 71 - -- - 140 - 100 - 940 -- - - - - <37 - - 140 - 120 - - - - -- NA 70.000 Amdor1260 86 -- - - 110 - <38 - - <03Y - - <37 - - <51Y - - <37 - -- - 60 - 50 - <310Y - - - - - <37 - - <58Y - <44Y - - - - - NA NA Aroclor1221 <78 - - - <92 - <76 - - <77 - - <74 - - <70 - - <74 - - - <79 - <78 - <76 - -- - - - <75 - - <76 - <84 - - - - - NA NA Arodor1232 <39 - - - <46 - <38 - - <39 - -- <37 - -- <35 - - <37 -- -- -- <39 - <39 - <38 - - - - - <37 - - I, <38 - <42 - - -- - - - NA NA Total PCBs° 86 - - - 270 - 46 - - 250 - - 70 - - 140 - - _ 71 - - - 200 - 150 - 940 - - - - - 75 -- - I 140 - 120 - - - - -- 10,000 NA VOCS (pg /kg • 8260B GC MS)1o1 Chloromethane - <1.2 <1.4 -- <l.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.3 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <11 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <l.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <l.2 - <1.1 <1.3 - <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA 1.01E +07 Vinyl Chloride <1.2 <1.4 - 2.3 64 - <1.2 15 <1.4 <1.2 4.2 <1.3 <1 1 <1..1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 2.8 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 -- <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 • - <1.2 <l60 - <1.1 - <l.2 - NA 8.75E +03 Chloroethane <1.2 <l.4 - <1.2 <1.3 - <l.2 <l.3 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <1..1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 -- - <1.2 <l.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 -- <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <l.2 - NA NA Methylene Chloride <3.7 <4.1 -- <3.7 <4.0 - 4.3 <3.9 <4.1 <3.5 <3.5 <3.9 <3 3 <3.3 <8.6 <3.2 <3.4 - - <3.4 <3.4 -- -- <3.7 <3.5 <3.8 -- <3.5 <4.1 - <3.4 <3.6 - <3.4 <3.9 - <3.6 <470 - <3.4 - <3.8 - 20 17,500 Acetone 11 67 -- 87 250 - <5.8 58 51 <5.8 27 27 <5 5 <5.4 56 5.7 <5.7 - -- <5.7 29 - - <6.2 85 35 -- <5.8 95 - <5.7 32 -- <5.6 72 - 120 <790 -- <5.7 - -• 170 - NA 3.50E +08 Carbon Disulfide 1.3 5.2 -- 4.2 4.7 - <1.2 3.8 3.2 <1.2 <l.2 3.6 <1 1 <1.1 3.1 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 1.3 -- - <l.2 6.4 <1.3 - <1.2 <l.4 - <1.1 1.7 - <1.1 <1.3 - 3.3 <160 -- <1.1 - 1.5 - NA 3.50E +08 1,1 -DCE <l.2 <1.4 - <1.2 4.1 - <l.2 <1.3 <1.4 <1.2 2.6 <1.3 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <l.1 <1.1 -- -- <1.1 <1.1 - - <l.2 <1.2 <l.3 - <l.2 <l.4 - -- <1.1 <l.2 - <1.1 <l.3 -- <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - -- NA • 2.19 +05 1,1 -DCA <1.2 <1.4 - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.3 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <1 1 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 -- - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <1-2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 ' - <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA 3 50E+08 trans -1,2 -DCE <1.2 <1.4 - 37 120 - <12 8.6 <1.4 <1.2 3.2 4.8 <1 1 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 1.2 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <12 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 1 - <12 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA 7.00E +07 cis -12 -DCE 3.5 5.7 - 34 89 - < 1 2 1 1 1.6 <1.2 22 3.4 <11 <1.1 <2..9 <l.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 1.3 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 - <12 <160 - <1.1 - <12 - NA 3.50E +07 1,2 -DCA <12 <1.4 - <1.2 <1.3 - <12 <1.3 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <12 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 - <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA 1.44E +06 2- Butanone <6.1 9.9 - 6.2 32 - <5.8 8.4 7.2 <5.8 <5.9 <6.5 <5 5 <5.4 <l4 <5.4 <5.7 - - <5.7 5.7 - - <6.2 17 7.3 - <5.8 23 - <5.7 6.9 - <5.6 19 -- 22 <790 - <5.7 - 20 -- NA 2.10E +09 1,1,1 -TCA 1.2 <1.4 - <1.2 <1.3 - <12 <1.3 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 0.8J <1.1 <2.9 4.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 -- <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 1.4 - <1.1 <1.3 • -- <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA 3.15E +09 1,2- Dichloropropane <1.2 <1.4 - <1.2 2.6 - <12 <2.OY <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 3.2 - - <1.2 <12 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 ' - <12 <160 - <1.1 - <12 - NA 1.93E +06 Trichloroethene 110 130 - 480 120 - 12 11 20 2.0 53 50 2.2 3.4 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - 5.1 24 - - 8.2 2.0 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 7.9 - <1.1 <1.3 - <12 <160 - <1.1 - 2.8 - NA 1.19E +07 Benzene <1.2 <1.4 - <12 2.3 - <12 1.6 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <1.1 <2,9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <12 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 <1.3 ' - <12 <160 -- <1.1 - 2.3 - NA 2.39E +06 Tetrachtomethene 0.9J 2.9 - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.3 1.6 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <12 - 4.7 <1.3 - <1.2 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA 2.57E +06 Toluene 2.6 <1.4 = 1.5 +1.2 1.7 3.6 +1.3 2.2 - 2.1 +1.2 2.6 13 7 . 0 34 <1.4 1.9 < . 4 2.4 1.8 < 1 . 2 <1.2 <1.2 < 1 . 2 <1.2 1.4 < 1 . 3 1.6J 4.3 < 1 1 <1.1 1.6 < 1 . 1 <1.1 <2.9 < 2 <2.9 3.2 <1.1 <1.1 2.0 3.1 14 - - 1.2 +1.1 <1.1 <1.1 +1.1 <1.1 - - _ <1.2 +12 <1.2 L6 5.0 6.5 <1.3 +1.3 <1.3 - <1.2 <7.2 <1.2 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 - <1.1 +1.1 <1.1 1.5 +1.2 <12 _ <1.1 +1.1 <1.1 +1.3 23 22 - +12 10 15 <160 +160 <160 - 1.5 +1.1 <1.1 - 4.0 230 560 - NA NA NA 7,00E +08 3.50E +08 7.00E +09 Ethylbenzene +1.2 +1.4 m,p- xylene <1.2 5.2 o- xylene <1.2 1.8 - <12 <1.3 - <1.2 20 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 4.9 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 6.5 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 12 - 5.2 <160 - <1.1 - 110 - NA 7.00E +09 1.3,5 -T4r ethylbenzene <1.2 6.5 - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 13 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 18 <1.1 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 4.4 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 15 - 5.2 <160 - <1.1 - 110 - NA NA 1.2.4- Trimethylbenzene <1.2 10 - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 24 2.2 <1.2 <1.2 37 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 1.7 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 12 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 74 - 11 <160 - <1.1 - 350 - NA NA Isopropylbenzene <1.2 <1.4 - - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 1.8 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 2.4 <1 1 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 1.8 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 13 - 1.3 <160 - - - +1'.l - 100 - NA NA n-Pmpylbenzene <1.2 1.6M - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 3.8 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 4.4 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 2.3 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 24 - <12 <160 - <1.1 - 240 - NA NA sec - butylbenzene <1.2 <1.4 - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 1.8M <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 9.9 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <12 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 3.4 - <12 <160 - <1.1 - <1.2 - NA NA 4- Isopmpyltoluene <1.2 <1.4 - <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 2.8 <1.4 <1.2 <1.2 10 <11 <1.1 <2.9 <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.1 <1.1 - - <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 - <1.2 <1.4 - <1.1 <1.2 - <1.1 6.3 - 1.3 <160 - <1.1 - 48 - NA NA n- Butytbenzene <2.4 <2.8 - <2.5 <2.7 - <2.3 <2.6 <28 <2.3 <2.4 8.8M <2 2 <2.2 <5.7 <2..2 <2.3 - - <2.3 <2.3 -- - <2.5 <2.3 <2.5 - <2.3 <2.7 - <2.3 <2.4 - <2.3 4.1 - <2.4 <320 - <2.3 - 7.1 - NA NA Naphthalene <6.1 <6.9 - <6.2 <6.7 - <5.6 <8.5 <6.9 <5.6 <5.9 <6.5 <5.5 <5.4 <14 <5.4 <5.7 - - <5.7 56 - - <6.2 200 <6.3 - <5.8 20 - <5.7 <5.9 - <5.6 120 - 370 5,100 - <5.7 - 1,900 - NA 7.00E +07 SVOCs (pg /kg • 8270 GC /MS- SIM)1v1 Naphthalene <440 - - - <92 - <150 -- - <77 - +82 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 <250 <87 <79 - 1,200 - <76 - <91 - - 120 <75 <75 610 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 1,700 1200 NA 7,00E +07 2- Methylnaphthalene 3,600 - - - <92 - <l50 - - <77 - <82 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 <250 <67 <79 . - 550 - <76 - <91 - - 82 <75 <75 980 <76 - +84 <76 - <82 700 620 NA NA Acenaphthene 650 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - <82 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 1200 <87 <79 - 1,600 - <76 - 390 - - 290 <75 <75 4,800 <76 - <84 <76 - +82 1 100 1200 NA 2.10E +08 Dibenzofuran <440 - - - <92 <150 - -- <77 - <82 <140 -- <83 <210 - <82 - <73 650 <87 <79 <79 - - 1,300 1.800 - - <76 <76 - - <91 140 - - - - 180 270 <75 <75 <75 <75 4,200 7,200 <76 <76 - - <84 <84 <76 <76 - - <82 <82 730 1,200 900 920 NA NA NA 1.40E +08 Fluorene 810 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - <82 <140 -- <83 <210 - <82 - <73 1,100 <87 Phenathrene 4,100 - - - 110 - <150 - - <77 - 230 <140 - 150 <210 - <82 - <73 7,800 280 <79 - 7,900 -- <76 - 430 - - 2,100 <75 <75 25,000 <76 - <84 <76 - 280 3 300 4,000 NA NA Carbazole <440 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - <82 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 690 <87 <79 - 750 - <76 - <91 - - 260 <75 <75 2 100 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 520 <460 NA 6.56E +06 Anthracene <440 - -- - <92 - <150 - - <77 -- <82 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 1 600 <87 <79 - 1,600 - <76 - <91 - - 610 <75 <75 4,000 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 530 540 NA 1.05E +09 Di- n- Butyfphthalate 1,700 610 -- - -- - -- -- <92 130 - - <150 <150 - - - - <77 <77 -- - 120 290 <140 <140 - - 83 210 <210 <210 - - <82 100 - - <73 <73 <250 7,000 <87 220 <79 <79 - - 120 4,900 - -- +76 <76 - - <91 190 - •- -- - 120 1 700 <75 <75 <75 <75 <170 14.000 <76 , <76 -- - <84 84 130 <76 - - <82 180 190 2 000 <460 1 800 NA NA 3.50E +08 1.40E +08 Fluoranthene Pyrene 630 - - - 150 - <150 - - <77 -- 260 <140 - 240 <210 - 110 - <73 5,400 200 <79 - 4,100 120 -- - <76 280 - - 110 <91 - - - - 1,800 170 <75 <75 <75 <75 8,600 <170 <76 <76 - - <84 <84 <76 540 - - 110 <82 1,500 320 1,700 <460 NA NA 1.05E +08 7.00E +08 Butylbenzylphthalate <440 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - <82 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 <250 <87 <79 - Benzo(a)anthracenePO <440 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - 130 <140 - 92 <210 - <82 - <73 2.600 31 <79 - 1,800 - <76 -- <91 -- - 850 <75 <75 2,900 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 570 590 NA 1.80E +04 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalate <440 •- - - 440 - <150 - - 320 - 120 <140 - 780 <210 - <82 - 130 260 95 620 - 370 -- 420 - <91 - - 1,300 950 98 250M 520 - 200 <79 - <82 180 <460 NA 9.38E +06 hrysenel "1 1,200 - - - 98 - 160 -- - <77 - 190 210 - 160 230 - 89 - <73 3,000 110 <79 - 2,000 - <76 - <91 - - 920 <75 <75 3,100 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 670 940 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(b)Ouoranthene(") <440 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - 110 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 1,800 <67 <79 - 1,100 - <76 - <91 - - 760 <75 <75 1,500 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 410 <460 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(k)0uoranthene°) <440 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - 180 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 2.400 •.87 <79 - 1.300 - <76 - <91 - - 820 <75 <75 1.800 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 400 530 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(a)pyrene01 <440 - - -- <92 - <150 - - <77 - 160 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 2400 =87 <79 - 1,600 - <76 - <91 - - 800 <75 <75 2,000 . <76 -- <84 <76 - <82 460 <460 NA 1.80E +04 Indeno(1,2,3- cdlpyrene0 <440 - - - <92 - <150 - - <77 - 180 <140 - <83 <210 - <82 - <73 730 •87 <79 - 870 - <76 - <91 - - 190 <75 <75 1,300 <76 - <84 <76 - <82 220 <460 NA 1.80E +04 ") <440 - _ _ <92 <92 83.78 - <150 <150 136.6 - - <77 <77 55.83 - <82 <82 236.3 <140 <140 128.1 - <83 <83 81.35 <210 <210 191.3 - <82 <82 59.93 - <73 q3 68.06 59 0 590 3. 233 <87 <87 84.15 <79 <79 71.5 - 190 770 2,203 - <76 <76 68.78 - - <91 <91 82.35 - - 150 150 1,068.60 <75 <75 67.87 <75 <75 67.87 120M 1,400 2,869 <76 <76 68.78 - <84 <84 7602 <76 <76 68.78 - <82 <82 74.21 190 190 644 <460 <460 489 NA NA NA 1.80E+04 NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(q,h.i)pryeneene( Benzo(g,h.i)perylene c440 408 oral cPAHS° December 2002 w: \2001 \016110.00\2002 phase 1 rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 4 SW Storage Area 016110.00 TABLE 4 SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Page 2 of 2 Notes: (a) MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (b) MTCA Method C industrial soil direct contact (ingestion only) soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (c) " -' = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. (d) NA = MTCA cleanup level not available/not applicable. (e) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (f) Total polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were calculated as follows. If no individual PCB Aroclors were detected, the single highest detection limit was used to represent the total PCB concentration. If one or more PCBs Aroclors were detected, the PCB Aroclor concentrations were summed to represent the total PCB mncentration. (g) Only detected analytes have been listed. (h) Carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (cPAH). (i) Total probable cPAHs are based on benzo(a)pyrene equivalent values. These values were calculated by multiplying individual cPAH concentrations by benzo(a)pyrene toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs). It a probable cPAH was not detected in the sample, a value equal to one -half the laboratory reporting limit was used and multiplied by the appropnate TEF5. 0) MTCA Method A and C industrial land use soil cleanup levels are for Chromium III (CAS# 16065 - 83-1). Analytes detected in samples at concentrations exceeding one or more of the cleanup levels or comparison values are shown in bold and shaded. mq/kq - milligrams per kilogram 00/59 - micrograms per kilogram Qualifiers B - Compound also detected in method blank. J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the calculated laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match Y - Raised laboratory reporting limit due to matrix interference. December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00 \2002 phase 1 rpt\Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 4 SW Storage Area TOXICITY EQUIVALENCY FACTORS Analyte (wdgl•t- samploMrrtlwd) Samp e Designation /Sample Depth MTCA MethodA Industrial(') MTCA Method Industrlal(b) BY-1 (0 -1) BY -1 (1 -3) BY -3 (0 -0.5) BY -1 (3-5) BY-3 (6-8) BY -3 (8 -9) BY-4 (0 -2) BY-4 (4-6) BY-4. (6 -7.5) BY -5 (0 -1.5) BY-5 (5 -7) BY -5 (7 -9) BY-6 (0 -1) BY-6 (3 -5) BY-6 (7 -8.5) DS -1 (0-1) DS -1 (3 -5) DS -1 (74.5) DS-2 (0 -1) DS -2 (3 -5) DS -2 (6-8) DS -2 (8-10) HM -1 (1-2) HM -1 (3-5) HM -1 (7.8.5) HM -1 (10 -11) HM -2 (1 -2) HM -2 (3 -5) HM -2 (9-11) HM -3 (1-2) HM -3 (3 -5) HM -3 (8 -9) HM-4 (1 -2) HM-4 (3 -5) HM-4 (8-10) HM -5 (1 -2) HM -5 (6.5 -8) HM -5 (8.5 -9.5) HM-6 (0 -1.5) HM-6 (3 -5) HM-6 (6.5 -8) HM-6 (10 -12) HM-6 (13.5 -14) PAHs (pg /kg - 8270C GC /MS SIM 1p1 280 18 <7.5 a a�� <14 - <7.1 - - - - - - - a a -- - �aaa �a <7.6 <7.6 °� 22 16 a �� - - - 1111911111•111112:1 as <7.6 1,200 Na•hthalene 7.00E +07 2 -Meth Ina•hthalene Acenaphthylene 3,500 220 17 75 15 - 27 - 740 NA NA <9.2 ®a <7.7 - <8.3 <7.1 - - - - - - a�� a <7.6 7.6 a <9.1 320 120 320 42 110 a �� - _ - - a� a a a �� - _ <7.6 <7.5 <7.6 <7.5 <7.6 <78 <76 970 NA NA NA <75 <7.7 <14 - 24 <7.1 2.10E+08 'cena•hthene Fluorene 510 960 c9.2 <9.2 93 <75 34 <7.7 12 <l4 54 - - 1 120 <7.l 56 - - - - - - - - a - - - '- -- .- - - • -- �� EM �� a ®a ® <7.8 13 - - 770 3,300 490 NA NA NA 1.40E +08 NA Phenanthrene 4,100 2 1 <7 5 <7.7 <l4 - 38 e7.1 - - - - - - - - - - 1.05E +09 Anthracene 290 520 95 110 <9.2 35 M a 14 � ®a <7 5 14 a a a 24 46 <14 - - -- 140 220 12M 39 - - - - - 1,800 NA 1.40E *08 P rene 580 17 <7.7 <7.7 B8 <7.l <7.6 100 53 aaa - �a a - - _ - - - - - as a� <7.6 <7.6 <7.6 1.300 800 190 NA NA NA t.O5Er08 NA Dibenzofuran 310 Benzo hip <44 _ <14 - 26M <7.l - - a - - - <7.9 - <7.6 <9.1 NA ere 73 � 120 �� 12 150 - 120 200 - - -- - - - <7.9 a�a�a�� - a�a a� 9.8 ` 6 41 18M <9.1 a a� - - aae - - a a - - - - -_ aa�a 7.6 - 840 400 NA NA NA 1.80Ea04 ChrvseneGl 960 .a 41 46 19 a�aM®aa <45Y <75 a a a - - 12M ® �aa ®aa = ma <,4 <14 - a - - 73 100M 78 82nd 19M ® 47.1 - - a a aaaaaaMME aaee - - - as a - - _ _- 6Y �a 1.80E+04 Benzo(b)OUOranthene01_ Benzo(k)BUOremhenel "( 540 <520Y 340 - - - a 1.80E +04 - - - - - - - as - - - 7 6 7 <7.6 - - - - - 490 120 140 NA NA NA 1.80E +04 Benzo(a)anthracene01 - 1.80E +04 Benzola)pVreneml Indero(123- "I <610Y <44 - ,.80E+04 cd)lnrenel Dibenzo(a h)anthracene7» <44 - - - - - <9.2 - <7 5 - - <7.7 - - <14 - <80 <7.1 - - - - - -- <7.9 - - - <7.6 - <9.1 - - - - - - <7.6 - - - <78 NA 1.80E+04 Total cPAHS"1 439.6 - - - 273.6 - 63.57 - . - 13.83 - - 40.3 - 111.86 88.675 - - - - - .- 7.55 - - - 7.82 - 32.38 - - - - - - ' - - - 6.878 - - - 586.6 NA 1.80E +04 Total Metals /kg - 200.8/7000 Series) (mg Antimony - <02 11 - - <02 - - <0.2 - - 0.2 - - <0.2 - - <0.2 - - - <0.2 - - - <0.2 - - <0.2 - - <0.2 - - <0.2 - - <0.2 - - - - NA 1,400 Arsenic .0.8 7.1 - 2.8 <0.2 <0.2 14.7 <0.2 22.2 - - 21 - - 2.4 ' 4.3 <0 2 0.6 - - 14.2 - - 11.1 2.9 <0.2 0.5 - - 4.9 - - 5.4 3.8 <02 <0.2 - - <0.2 - - - 2.9 <0.2 <02 - - - - - - 3.7 <0.2 0.7 - - - - - - - - - 4.1 <0.2 0.6 - - - - - - - - - 3.7 <0.2 0.6 - - - - - - 4 <0.2 0.5 - - - - - - 2.7 <0.2 0.4 - - - -- - - 4.5 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - - 3.2 <02 0.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - NA NA NA 87.5 7 000 3 500 Beryllium <0.2 3.8 -- 22.8 Cadmium Chromium 1 390 109 - 14.7 55.0 700 1380 - - - - 13 7 892 - - - - 15.6 44.8 - - - - 21 82 - - - - 18.3 224 - - - - - 18 196 - - - - - ' -- 17 3.290 - - - - - - 25.8 422 - - - - 21.3 335 - - - - 11.3 74.5 - - - - ' 11.6 ' 107 - - - - 25.9 91.6 - - - - - - - - NA NA 5,250,000U1 130000 Copper Lead 631 0.16 '- 9,220+. - 27 0.04 ''5j200 0.93 :- 6;080: - 541 - 46 0.11 ''3,330 - - ':_3;780`? - 66 006 150 - � l,130`'r - 17 0.07 21 - - - 16.3 0.30 .- - - - 85 0.12 - - - - - - 67 022 - - - - - - 40 0.60 - - - - 41 0.61 - - - - 13 0.10 - - -. - 21 0.13 - - - - 72 0.12 - - - - - - - - 1,000 NA NA 1050 Mercury Nickel 29.9 - 15.8 1.9 - - 12 6 - - 10.3 - - 15.8 - - 18.2 - - 17.2 - - - 12.2 - - - 13 - - 14.5 - - 9.7 - - 11.1 - - 10.3 - - - - NA 70 000 Selenium <0.6 <0.6 - - <0.8 <0.6 <2 5.3 - - - - <0.0 <0.5 - - - - <0.6 <0.6 - - - - <0.5 <0.5 - - - - <0.5 <0.5 - - - - +0.5 <0.5 - - - - - - <0.6 <0.6 - - - - - - <0.5 <0.5 - - - - <0.5 +0.5 - - - - <2 +0.6 - - - - <0.6 <0.6 - - - - +0.5 <0.5 - - - - - - - - NA 17 500 NA 17,500 Silver Thallium <0.2 3.450 - - <0.2 42 <0.2 3 640 - -- - - <02 59 - - - - <0.2 55 - - - - +0.2 47 - - - - <0.2 47 - - - - <0.2 111 - - - - - - <0.2 60 - - - - - - <0.2 66 - - - -• <0.2 55 - - <0.2 35 -- - - - <0.2 41 - - - - <0.2 59 - - - -- - -- - - NA 245 NA 1,050.000 Zinc Conventional Parameters m• /k• •5300 -Cr •D 2.3 - <0.10 <0.11 �0�00 r n 0 '®�0� <0.09 00 0'99 0�0 '®0 r r 0�0 '®�00 '®' 0 0.16 -!- <0.10 0��00� - Hexavalent Chromium NA 10,500 Notes: (a) MTCA Method A industrial soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (b) MTCA Method C industrial soil direct contact (ingestion only) soil cleanup level based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (c) " -' = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. (d) NA = MTCA cleanup level not available/not applicable. (e) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (f) Total polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were calculated as follows. If no individual PCB Aroclors were detected, the single highest detection limit was used to represent the total PCB concentration. If one or more PCBs Aroclors were detected, the PCB Aroclor concentrations were summed to represent the total PCB mncentration. (g) Only detected analytes have been listed. (h) Carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (cPAH). (i) Total probable cPAHs are based on benzo(a)pyrene equivalent values. These values were calculated by multiplying individual cPAH concentrations by benzo(a)pyrene toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs). It a probable cPAH was not detected in the sample, a value equal to one -half the laboratory reporting limit was used and multiplied by the appropnate TEF5. 0) MTCA Method A and C industrial land use soil cleanup levels are for Chromium III (CAS# 16065 - 83-1). Analytes detected in samples at concentrations exceeding one or more of the cleanup levels or comparison values are shown in bold and shaded. mq/kq - milligrams per kilogram 00/59 - micrograms per kilogram Qualifiers B - Compound also detected in method blank. J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the calculated laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match Y - Raised laboratory reporting limit due to matrix interference. December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00 \2002 phase 1 rpt\Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 4 SW Storage Area TOXICITY EQUIVALENCY FACTORS cPAH TEF Benzo(a)pyrene 1 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranlhene 0.1 Benzo(a)anthrancene 0.1 Chrysene 0.01 Indeno(1,2.31.d)pyrene 0.1 dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.4 Source: Cal EPA. 1994. Benzo(a)pyrene as a Toxic Air Contaminant. 016110.00 TABLE 5 RECONNAISSANCE GROUNDVVATER ANALYTICAL-RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte IWeiaht Sarnole Method) Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method B Surface Water(a) corogy !ironic Freshwater 1. SWQSI61 National Toxics Rule) National AWQC(d) BY- 5 -GW -16 DS- 2 -GW -16 HM- 6 -GW -20 WP- 5 -GW -10 WP- 3 -GW -8 WP- 2 -GW -8 NA- 6 -GW -8 NA- 6 -GW -20 NA- 6 -GW-49 NA- 7 -GW -8 NA- 7 -GW -28 NA- 7 -GW -35 - TPH (mg /I - NWTPH -Dx by GC /FID) Diesel 0.49 <O.251`1 1.0 <0.25 -- 1 -- -- -- - - -- -- 10191 NA9'1 NA NA Oil <0.50 <0.50 ' 1.3 <0.50 -- --- --- --- - -- -- -- - -- 1019 NA NA NA (pg /I - 8082 GC /ECD ) Aroclor 1016 <1 1 <1.1 <1.2 <1 1 - -- -- -- -- - -- - -- 0.00582 / 0.119 0.014°1 0.119 0.000171'1 / 0.111 0 000171'1 / 0.119 Aroclor 1242 <1.1 <1.1 <12 <1 1 -- -- - -- -- -- - - -- NA 0.0141'1/0.119 0.000171'1/0./(9 000017P)/0.1f1 Aroclor 1248 <1 1 <1.1 <1.2 <1 1 - - --- -- - -- -- -- NA 0.0141'1/0.1(9 0.000171') /0.1(7 000017P1/0.1(1) Aroclor 1254 <1 1 <1.1 <1.2 <1 1 - -- - -- -- - -- - -- 0.00166 /OAP 0.0141'1 / 0.1 ° 0.00017P)/ 0.119 0.000171'1 / 0.1 r7 Aroclor 1260 <1 1 <1.1 <1.2 <1 1 -- -- -- - -- -- - -- NA 0.014111/0.1f9 0.000171'1/0.1 0.0001 711 1 0.11/ Aroclor 1221 <2.3 <2.2 <2.4 <2 <2.2 - - - - -- -- -- -- NA 0.014(;1/0.117 0.00017P)/ 0.1(9 0 0001711 /0.111 Aroclor 1232 <1 1 <1.1 <1.2 <1 1 - -- -- -- - - - -- -- NA 1r � 0.014'' / 0.1 t�1 ra 0.00017 / 0.1 (-0 n 0 00017 / 0.1 ' VOCs (pg /I - 8260B GC /M4 Chloromethane <0.6 <1.0 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3M <0 2 <1 0 <0.2 <0.2 133 NA NA NA Vinyl Chloride '. 17 :49 + - 1.3 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 0.9 0.4M <0 2 <1 0 <0.2 <0 2 169 NA 525 525 Chloroethane <0 6 <1.0 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 10 <0.2 <02 <1 0 <0.2 <0 2 NA NA NA NA Acetone <3 0 <5.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 6.1 <2.8Y 12 <5 0 <1.0 <1.0 NA NA NA NA Carbon Disulfide <0 6 <1.0 - 0.4 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 0.6 <1 0 <0.2 <02 NA FLA NA NA 1,1 -DCE <0 6 <1.0 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <1 0 <0 2 <02 1.93 NA 3.2 3.2 1,1 -DCA 3.3 4.4 1.1 0.6 0.2 5.4 10 1.1 <0 2 4.6 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA cis -1,2 -DCE 30 48 0.3 0.2 <0.2 1.1 1.8 1.1 <02 <1 0 <0.2 <02 NA NA NA NA 1,2 -DCA <0 6 <1.0 <02 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <02 <1 0 <0 2 <0 2 59.4 20,000 99 99 2- Butanone <3 0 <5.0 ` <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 1.7 <1 0 <1 0 <5.0 <1 0 <1 0 NA NA NA NA 1,1,1 -TCA <0 6 <1.0 - <0 2 1.3 0.9 1.9 6.9 <0.2 0.2 24 <0 2 <0.2 417,000 NA NA NA Trichloroethene <0 6 <1 0 <0 2 <02 0.2 3.2 1.3 0.2 <0 2 2.4 <0.2 <0 2 55.6 21,900 81 81 Benzene <0 6 <1 0 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <1 0 <0 2 <0 2 22.7 NA 71 71 Tetrachloroethene <0 6 <1 0 <0 2 <0 2 0.5 <0 2 1.1 <0 2 <0 2 11 <0 2 <0 2 4.15 840 8.85 8.85 Toluene <0 6 <1 0 • <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <02 0.3 <0 2 0.2 2.1 <0 2 0.3 48,500 NA 200,000 200,000 Ethylbenzene 2.5 <1 0 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <02 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 89 <0.2 0.2 6,910 NA 29,000 29,000 m,p- xylene <1 2 <1 0 <0 4 <0 4 <0.4 <0 4 <0 4 <0 4 <0 4 470 <0 4 . <0 4 NA NA NA NA o- xylene <0 6 <1 0 - <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <02 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 210 <0.2 <0 2 NA NA NA NA 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 0.8 <1 0 <02 <02 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0 2 31 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,2,4- Trimethylbenzene 0.8 <1 0 0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 0.2 <0.2 <02 79 <0.2 <0 2 NA ['IA NA NA Isopropylbenzene <0.6 <1 0 : <0 2 <02 <0.2 <0.2 <02 <0 2 <02 14 <0.2 0.4 NA NA NA NA n- Propylbenzene <0 6 <1 0 i <0 2 <02 <0.2 <02 <0 2 <0 2 <02 19 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA sec- butylbenzene <06 <1.0 <02 <02 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <02 <02 <1.0 <0.2 <02 NA NA NA NA 4- isopropyltoluene <0 6 <1.0 . <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <02 <0 2 <0.2 <1.0 <0.2 <02 NA NA NA NA n- Butylbenzene <0 6 <1.0 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <02 <02 <02 <0.2 1.0 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA Naphthalene <1 5 <5.0 0.6 <0 5 <0.5 <0 5 <0 5 <0 5 <0.5 <5.0 <0.5 <0 5 4,940 620 NA NA December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase 1 rpt \Table 2-3-4-5.xlsTable 5 WATER Page 1 of 3 016110.00 TABLE 5 RECONNAISSANCE GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte fWeiaht - Samole Methodl Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method B Surface Watert'I Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQSIbI National Toxics Rule) National AWQCIdi BY-5-GW -16 DS- 2 -GW -16 HM- 6 -GW -20 WP- 5 -GW -10 WP- 3 -GW-8 WP- 2 -GW-8 NA- 6 -GW -8 NA- 6 -GW -20 NA- 6 -GW-49 NA- 7 -GW-8 NA- 7 -GW -28 NA- 7 -GW -35 SVOCs (pg /I - 8270 GC /MS) Naphthalene <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1 1 - - -- -- -- -- - - -- 4,940 620 NA NA 2- Methylnaphthalene <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <11 -- - -- - -- -- - - - -- NA NA NA NA Acenaphthene 1.6 <1 2 <1.0 <11 -- - -- -- 643 520 NA 2,700 Dibenzofuran <1.2 <1 2 <1.0 <11 -- -- - - NA NA NA NA Fluorene <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <11 __ ___ _ - - - 3,460 NA 14,000 14,000 Phenathrene <1.2 <1.2 <1 <11 - -- - ___ __ _ - NA NA NA NA Carbazole <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.1 - -- -- - --- - -- NA NA NA Anthracene <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <11 - -- - - -- - -- -- -- - -- 25,900 NA 110,000 110,000 Di- n- Butylphthalate <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <11 -- -- - --- -- - - --- NA NA 12,000 12,000 Fluoranthene <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <11 _ - 90.2 NA 370 370 Pyrene <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <11 - --- -- --- - -- - -- -- --- 2,590 NA 11,000 11,000 Butylbenzylphthalate <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <1.1 --- -- - -- -- -- - -- - -- 1,250 NA NA 5,200 Benzo(a)anthracenelkl <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1 1 - -- -- -- - -- - -- - 0 0296 NA 0.031 0 049 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalate <4.9 <4.8 <4 1 <4 4 - -- -- -- - -- -- -- - - -- 3.56 3 5.9 5.9 Chrysenetkl <1.2 <1.2 • <1 0 <1 1 -- -- - -- -- -- - -- -- 0.0296 NA 0.031 0 049 Benzo(b)fluoranthenetkl <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.1 - -- - -- -- - -- - -- -- -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0 049 Benzo(k)fluoranthener`1 <1.2 <1.2 • <1 0 <1.1 -- - - - - - -- -- 0.0296 NA 0.031 0 049 Benzo(a)pyrenelkl <1.2 <1.2 • <1 0 <1.1 -- -- - - - -- - -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0 049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrener`1 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.1 - - - --- - - - -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene0`1 <1.2 , <1.2 -. <10 <1.1 - -- - -- - - - -- 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(g h i)perylene <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.1 -- - -- --- - - -- -- NA NA NA NA PAHs (pg /I - SW8270C GC /MS SIM) Naphthalene 0.17 <0.12 0.37 -- - - - -- - -- -- -- 4,940 620 NA NA 2- Methylnaphthalene <0.12 <0.12 . 0.18 - -- -- - -- - - - - NA NA NA NA Acenaphthene 1.6 <0 12 ' 0.26 - -- - - -- - -- - - 643 520 NA 2,700 Fluorene 0.16 <0 12 • 0.35 - -- - - - - - - - 3,460 NA 14,000 14,000 Phenanthrene 0.20 <0.12 0.84 -- -- - - - - - - -- NA NA NA NA Anthracene <0.12 <0 12 0 31 - - - -- - -- - - - -- 25,900 NA 110,000 110,000 Fluoranthene <0.12 <0 12 0 45 -- - - - - 90.2 NA 370 370 Pyrene <0.12 <0 12 0 37 -- -- - -- -- - -- -- --- 2,590 NA 11,000 11,000 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <0.12 <0.12 • <0.10 -- -- - - - - -- - -- NA NA NA NA Dibenzofuran <0.12 <0 12 • 0 22 -- -- - -- -- -- - -- -- NA NA NA NA Chrysenelkl <0.12 <0 12 0 12 .� -- - - -- -- -- - -- - -- 0.0296 NIA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(b)fluoranthene (k) <0.12 <0 12 ' 0 07J',- ,;:: ; -; -- - -- -- --- - -- - -- - -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)fluoranthenelkl <0.12 <0 12 <0.10 -- - - -- -- - -- -- - - -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)anthracenelkl <0.12 <0.12 •: `- '- '0.11•;' _ =4. - -- -- --- - -- -- -- - -- -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)pyrenelkl <0.12 <0 12 <0.10 - -- - - -- - -- -- -- 0.0296 NiA 0.031 0.049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene1 <0.12 <0.12 <0.10 -- -- -- - --- -- -- -- -- 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracenec`1 <0.12 <0.12 <0.10 -- -- - -- - - -- -- -- - -- 0 0296 NA 0.031 0.049 December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase 1 rpt \Table 2-3-4-5.xlsTable 5 WATER Page 2of3 016110.00 TABLE 5 RECONNAISSANCE GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle IWeiaht - Samole Methodl ASamolee Sample Designation /Sample Depth MTCA Method B Surface Waterlat cology hronlc Freshwater SWQS(b) National Toxics Rufet`1 National AWQC(d» BY- 5-GW -16 DS- 2 -GW -16 HM- 6 -GW -20 WP- 5 -GW -10 WP- 3 -GW -8 WP- 2 -GW -8 NA- 6 -GW-8 NA- 6 -GW -20 NA- 6 -GW-49 NA- 7 -GW-8 NA- 7 -GW -28 NA- 7 -GW -35 Total Metals (pg /I - EPA 6010/7000) Antimony <0.2 <0.2 0.5 <0.2 - -- - - -- -- - -- -- 1,040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic 4.1 ..• 7:8 15.9 -- • 4.6 -- -- -- - -- - -- 0.0982 / 5r4 190 0.14 / 5(4 0.14 / 514 Beryllium <0.2 <0.2 0.3 <0 2 --- '- - - -- - -- -- -- 273 5.3 NA NA Cadmium° <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 - -- - -- --- -- -- 20.3 1.65 NA NA Chromium° 8.8 4.6 • 39 <1 - -- -- - -- -- - - -- -- -- 243,000("» 29/82 NA NA Copper» 14.1 7.3 - = -162. -', 2 -- - - -- - -- - - -- -- 2,660 19.56 NA NA Lead (�» 1 '�1A - 4 . � 77- , 2 "- - - -- -- - -- - -- -- NA 5.00 NA NA Mercury <0 1 <0.1 ..0.1 :-'.7:. <0 1 --- - -- -- --- -- NA 0.0127 0.1 n 0.15 0.051 / 0.1('» Nickel(» 4.3 5.5 18.7 15.2 -- -- - - -- -- - -- -- 1,100 26335 4,600 4,600 Selenium 3 5. r - - -- 2,700 5 NA 11,000 Silver <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- - - - -- --- _- 25,900 NA NA NA Thallium <0.2 <0.2 • <0.2 <0 2 -- - -- --- ___ _- -- 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc° 19 18 • 73 18 - -- -- -- - -- - - -- - -- - 16,500 17J 22 NA 69,000 Dissolved Metals (pg /I - Ei'A 6010/7000) Antimony <02 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 - -- - - --- '- -- -- - -- 1,040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic 2.8 8 ?:i:',:: <0.2 .5,, .... <0.2 3.2 <0 2 -- -- - -- - -- -- -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 0.0982 / 5(4 273 150 5 3 0.14 / 5(4 NA 0.14 / 5f4 NA Beryllium <0.2 Cadmium° <0.2 _ <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 -- - -- - -- -- - -- - - - 20.3 1.65 NA NA Chromium° 7.5 5.7 .• 7 <2 -- -- - -- - -- _ - - --- - 243,000(") 29:,.82 NA NA Copper° 0.7 0.8 1.2 3.3 - - - -- - - -- - -- -- 2,660 15.56 NA NA Lead ° <1 <1 <1 <1 -- - -- - - -- -- -- -- NA 500 NA NA Mercury <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0 1 - -- - -- - - -- -- -- -- NA 0.012 / 0.18 0.15 0.051 / 0.1(n Nickel° 1.6 3 2.9 9.6 -- -- - -- - - -- -- --- - -- 1,100 26935 4,600 4,600 Selenium 4 4 ' 6,'� :;; ` 0.7 -- -- -- -- -- - 2,700 5 NA 11,000 Silver <2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - -- -- --- -- -- ___ -- 25, 900 f IA NA NA Thallium <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - -- - - - - - - 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc° <4 <4 <4 6 -- - -- - -- -- -- 16,500 179:22 NA 69,000 Notes: (a) MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (b) Ecology Chronic Freshwater Surface Water Quality Standard (SWQS) (WAC 173- 201A). (c) National Toxics Rule (NTR) for consumption of organisms based on 40 CFR 131.36 for a risk level of 1x10. (d) National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for consumption of organisms based on Section 304 of Clean Water Act for a risk level of 1x10$. (e) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (f) " -" = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. (g) Ecology's Model National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Standard for discharges to surface water from leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanups where gasoline and diesel are the pollutants of concern. (h) NA = No cleanup level available /not applicable. (i) Surface water standard adjusted upward to Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL). (j) Value represents total (sum of all Aroclor's) polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). (k) Carcinogenic PAH (cPAH). (1) Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQS based on an average groundwater hardness of 189 mg /I. (m) Surface water standard adjusted upward to Natural Background Criterion. (n) MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels are for chromium III (CAS# 16065- 83 -1). Applicable surface water standards are shown in italics. Analytes detected in samples at concentrations exceeding applicable standards are shown in bold and shaded. mg /I - milligrams per liter pg/I - micrograms per liter Qualifiers B - Compound also detected in method blank. J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the calculated laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match. Y - Raised reporting limit due to matrix interference. December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase 1 rpt \Table 2- 3- 4- 5.xlsTable 5 WATER Page 3 of 3 016110.00 TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS PACCAR - Seattle Well Designation Date of Installation Status Casing Diameter/ Construction Borehole Diameter TOC Elevation (ft)Ia Total Well Depth (ft) Blank Interval (ft) Screened Interval (ft) Slot Size (in) MW -1A 16- Feb -86 Functional 4" / PVC excavation 9.51 10 5 5 0.020 MW -2A 17- Jun -86 Destroyed 3" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.69 (3.01)i`l 19.8 4.2 15.6 0.020 MW -3A 17- Jun -86 present 3" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.21 (2.53)1`1 19.2 3.7 15.5 0.020 MW-4A 18- Jun -86 Functional 3" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.81 19.2 3.8 15.4 0.020 MW -5A 18- Jun -86 Destroyed 3" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.78 (3.10)1`1 18.9 3.5 15.4 0.020 MW -6A 18- Jun -86 Functional 3" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.10 19.3 3.8 15.5 0.020 MW -7A 19- Jun -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.59 19.2 4.7 14.5 0.020 MW -8A 23- Jun -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.85 18 3 15 0.020 MW -8B 14- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 9.03 28.5 23.5 5 0.010 MW -9A 20- Jun -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 12.80 20.4 5.4 15 0.020 MW -10A 20- Jun -86 Destroyed 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) unknown 20.3 5.3 15 0.020 MW -11A 20- Jun -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 14.05 20.8 5.3 15.5 0.020 MW -12A 23- Jun -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.25 20.5 5 15.5 0.020 MW -13A 25- Sep -86 no well installed in borehole terminated at 6 feet) MW -14A 23- Sep -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.11 15.4 1.5 13.9 0.020 MW -15A 26- Sep -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.06 15.9 1.6 14.3 0.020 MW -16A 26- Sep -86 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.07 16.9 1.9 15 0.020 MW -17A 25- Sep -86 no well installed in borehole terminated at 8 feet) MW -18A 14- Jul -87 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 8.88 18.6 8.6 10 0.020 MW -19B 16- Jul -87 . Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.37 37 32 5 0.020 MW -20A 16- Jul -87 Destroyed 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.29 (3.61)(c) 18.2 3.2 15 0.020 MW -21A 17- Jul -87 Destroyed 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.14 (3.46)1`) 21 6 15 0.020 MW -22A 16- Jul -87 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.24 20.3 5.3 15 0.020 MW -23A 17- Jul -87 Functional 2" / PVC 9 incheslb) 9.17 20 5 15 0.020 MW -24A 15- Apr -97 Functional 2" / 316 SS 9 inches 9.09 25.3 20.3 5 0.010 MW -25A 9- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.75 23 13 10 0.010 MW -26A 9- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.84 20 10 10 0.010 MW -26B 16- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.91 40 35 5 0.010 MW -26C 5- Jun -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.94 59 49 10 0.010 MW -27A 14- Apr -97 Functional 2" / 316 SS 9 inches 8.56 25.5 20.5 5 0.010 MW -28A 14- Apr -97 Functional Z'/ 316 SS 9 inches 8.68 20.3 15.3 5 0.010 MW -28B 14- Apr -97 Functional 2" / 316 SS 9 inches 8.39 40.3 35.3 5 0.010 MW -29A 8- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.76 25 15 10 0.010 MW -29B 12- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.88 44 34 10 0.010 MW -29C 26- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.87 56 49 7 0.010 MW -30A 8- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 9.73 24.3 14.3 10 0.010 MW -31A 9- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.54 23 13 10 0.010 MW -32A 9- Apr -97 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.88 23 13 10 0.010 MW -33A 14- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 9.11 20 10 10 0.010 MW -34A 14- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.97 20 10 10 0.010 MW -35A 13- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.81 20 10 10 0.010 MW -35B 13- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.60 40 35 5 0.010 MW -36A 11- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.87 20 10 10 0.010 MW -36B 11- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.84 42 37 5 0.010 MW -37A 11- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.82 20 10 10 0.010 MW -37B 12- Mar -02 Functional 2" / PVC 9 inches 8.84 40 35 5 0.010 MW -PIA unknown Presumed functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.03 -20 unknown unknown unknown MW -P1 B unknown Presumed functional 2" / PVC 9 inches(b) 9.05 -40 unknown unknown unknown Notes: (a) TOC elevations are based on the vertical datum given on a brass plate on top of a concrete post at the northwest corner of the Boiler House (13.29 feet above mean sea level). (b) Estimated from well logs, actual value is unknown. (c) Estimated relative to the 13.29 foot datum from GeoEngineers 1986 survey (GeoEngineers elevation is given in parentheses). Acronyms: PVC Schedule 40 PVC pipe SS Stainless steel TOC Top of well casing December 2002 w: \2001 \016110.00 \2002 phase I rpt \Table 6.xls 016110.00 • TABLE 7 GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA - LOW AND HIGH TIDES PACCAR - Seattle Well Designation Well Status Standard Seml - Annual Monitoring Event Phase I Data Gaps Monitoring Event RIM Elevation TOC Elevation (ft)"' Survey Date 4/25/97 Depth to G oundwater from TOC (ft) Elevations Tidal Elevation Difference (ft) 0.04 High Tide Low Tide High Tide Low Tide 4116/02 5.36 5.32 4116102 4.15 4.19 MW -1A Functional X X 9.89 9.51 MW-2A Destroyed - -- 8.69 (3.01)(b) --- --- --- --- --- -- MW-3A Present(`) - 8.21 (2.53)(1') - -- - -- - -- -- -- -•- MW-4A Functional X 9.09 8.81 4/17/02 6.81 6.63 2.00 2.18 0.18 MW-5A Destroyed Functional X X - -- 9.34 8.78 (3.10)(e) 9.10 - -- 4/17/02 - -- 7.20 - -- 7.12 - -- 1.90 - -- 1.98 - -- 0.08 MW-6A MW -7A Functional X X 8.80 8.59 4/25/97 8.37 7.11 0.22 1.48 1.26 MW -8A Functional X X 9.42 8.85 4/25/97 6.39 6 -04 2.46 2.81 0.35 MW-8B Functional X 9.44 9.03 4/17/02 6.80 6.69 2.23 2.34 0.11 MW-9A Functional X X 12.94 12.80 4/25/97 10.91 10.69 1.89 2.11 0.22 MW -10A Destroyed Functional X - -- 14.58 unknown 14.05 -- 4/25/97 - -- 12.31 - -- 12.04 -- 1.74 -- 2.01 0.27 MW-11A MW-12A Functional X X 8.69 8.25 4/25/97 8.34 6.07 -0.09 2.18 2.27 MW -13A No well installed Functional in borehole (terminated X at 6 feet) X 9.37 9.11 4/25/97 7.08 6.99 2.03 2.12 0.09 MW -14A MW -15A Functional X 9.43 9.06° 4/25/97 6.96 6.87 2.10 2.19 0.09 MW -16A Functional X 9.27 9.07 4/25/97 NM 4.82 NM 4.25 -- MW-17A No well installed Functional in borehole (terminated X at 8 feet) X 9.54 8.88 4/25/97 6.93 6.79 1.95 2.09 0.14 MW -18A MW-19B Functional X 9.63 9.37w 4/25/97 7.21 7.14 2.16 2.23 0.07 MW -20A Destroyed -- 9.29 (3.61)(1') -- - -- -- MW21A Destroyed Functional X - -- 9.59 9.14 (3.46) 9.24 - -- 4/25/97 --- 5.52 --- 5.48 --- 3.72 --- 3.76 -- 0.04 MW-22A MW -23A Functional X 9.49 9.17 4/25/97 6.96 6.86 2.21 2.31 0.10 MW -24A Functional X X 9.27 9.09 4/25/97 713 692 1.96 2 -17 0.21 MW -25A Functional X X 9.08 8.75 4/25/97 8.31 7.10 0.44 1.65 1.21 MW-26A Functional X X 9.16 8.84 4/17/02 9.42 6.70 -0.58 2.14 2.72 MW -26B Functional X X 9.13 8.91 4/17/02 10.29 6.44 -1.38 2.47 3.85 MW -26C Functional X X 9.15 8.94 4/17/02 9.08 6.27 -0.14 2.67 2.81 MW-27A Functional X X 8.89 8.56 4/25/97 7.23 6.82 1.33 1.74 0.41 MW -28A Functional X X 8.87 8.68 4/25/97 7.32 6.86 1.36 1.82 0.46 MW-28B Functional X X 8.90 8.39 4/25/97 6.97 6.58 1.42 1.81 0.39 MW-29A Functional X X 9.16 8.76 4/25/97 9.16 6 47 -0 40 229 2.69 MW -29B Functional X 9.12 8.88 4/17/02 10.19 6.21 -1.31 2.67 3.98 MW-29C Functional X 9.17 8.87 4/17/02 9.67 5.98 -0.80 2.89 3.69 MW -30A Functional X X 10.06 9.73 4/25/97 10.29 7.02 -0.56 2.71 3.27 MW-31A Functional X X 8.89 8.54 4/25/97 8.07 6.51 0.47 2.03 1.56 MW -32A Functional X X 9.13 8.88 4/25/97 7.21 7.11 1.67 1.77 0.10 MW-33A Functional X 9.54 9.11 4/17/02 7.04 6.91 2.07 2.20 0.13 MW -34A Functional X 9.49 8.97 4/17/02 6.60 6 -52 2.37 2.45 0.08 MW-35A Functional X 9.18 8.81 4/17/02 9.19 6.86 -0.38 1.95 2.33 MW-35B Functional X 9.17 8.60 4/17/02 9.29 6.29 -0.69 2.31 3.00 MW -36A Functional X 9.12 8.87 4/17/02 9.25 6.75 -0.38 2.12 2.50 MW -36B Functional X 9.15 8.84 4/17/02 10.09 6.49 -1.25 2.35 3.60 MW-37A Functional X 9.04 8.82 4/17/02 10.33 6.18 -1.51 2.64 4.15 MW -37B Functional X 9.06 8.84 4/17/02 9.51 6.50 -0.67 2.34 3.01 MW -P1A Presumed functional (f) 9.26 9.03 4/25/97 7.24 6.97 1.79 2.06 0.27 MW.p1B Presumed functional (f) 9.26 9.05 4/25/97 7.25 6.98 1.80 2.07 0.27 Notes: (a) TOC elevations are based on the vertical datum given on a brass plate on top of a concrete post at the northwest corner of the Boiler House (13.29 feet above mean sea level). (b) Estimated relative to the 13.29 foot datum from GeoEngineers 1986 survey (GeoEngineers elevation is given in paranthesis). (c) Well to be destroyed in accordance with WAC 173 -160 as part of either the Phase II data gaps investigations or future UST removal activities. (d) High side of casing 9.06; low side 8.93. (e) High side of casing 9.37; low side 9.28. (1) Well not sampled during Phase I data gaps monitoring event, used for water level measurement only. Acronyms: TOC Top of well casing NM Not measured December 2002 w:\.2001\016110.00■2002 phase I'rpt \Table 7.xIs 016110.00 TABLE 8 GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR Seattle Page 1 of 4 Analyte (uox- Sample Method) Sample Designation Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQSI`I National Toxics Rule 141 NationalAWQC 1,1 MW -1A MW-4A MW-6A MW -7A MW-8A MW -8B MW -9A MW -11A MW -12A MW -14A/ MW- 101A1'1 MW -15A MW -16A MW -18A MW -19B MW -22A MW -23A MW -24A MW -25A MW -26A MW -26B MW- 26C /MW- 103C1'1 MW -27A MW -28A- MW -28B/ 10261'1 MW -29A MW -29B MTCA Method B e1 Surface Water(b) TPH (mg8 - NWTPH -Dx by GC/FID) Gas <O.25i4 <0.25 . -2.6 • _ <0 25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <O.25 <O.25 <0.251<0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0 25 <0.25 <0 25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <O.25 <0 25 .0.25/.0.25 <O.25 <0.25 <0.251<0.25 <0.25 <O.25 _ 14'( NA(''' NA NA Diesel <0.25 2 7 9.2 <0 25 0.51 <0 25 <O.25 <O.25 <O.25 <0.251<0.25 <0 25 <O.25 <0 25 <O.25 <0 25 <0 25 <0.25 <025 <0 25 <0 25 <0.25/ <0.25 <0 25 <0.25 <0.25/<0.25 <0.25 <O.25 /Ow NA NA NA on <0.50 <0 50 <2.5 <0 50 <0.50 <0 50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50/<0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0 50 <0 50 <0,50 <0,50 <0 50 <0 50 <0.50/<0.50 <0 50 <0.50 <0.50 /<0.50 <0.50 <0.50 • 10 e1 NA NA NA Glycols (mg/1 - GC /FID) Ethylene Glycol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 -01 - - 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 NA NA NA NA Propylene Glycol <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 - - - 5.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I NA NA NA NA PCBs (pg8 - 8082 GC/ECD ) Aroclor 1016 <0.017 <0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.017 <0.017 <0.0181<0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.018 <0.018 <0020 <0.017 <0.018 <0.018 /<0 019 <0.018 <0.018 <0.017/<0.018 <0.017 <0.018 0.00582 / 0.1( "/ 0.014U1 / O.1 ( "/ 0.00017W / 0.101 0.00017W/ 0.1(4 Aroclor 1242 <0.017 <0 018 <0.019 .0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0 017 <0.017 .0.018/ <0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.018 <0.018 <0.020 <0.017 <0.018 <0.018/<0 019 <0018 <0.018 <0.017/<0 018 <0.017 <0.018 I NA 0.01441 / O.1 w 0.0001741 / 0.1( ") 0.0001741/ 0.1( "/ Aroclor 1248 <0.017 <0 018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0 017 <0.017 <0.018/ .0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.018 <0.018 <0.020 <0.017 <0.018 .0.018/ <0. 019 <0.018 <0018 <0.017/<0 018 <0.017 <0.018 NA 0.01441 / 0.1(4 0.0001741 / 0.1("1 0.00017w/ 0.1( "1 Aroclor 1254 <0.017 <0 018 .0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0. 017 <0.017 <0.0181 <0 "018 <0. 019 0.064 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.018 <0.018 <0.020 <0.017 <0 "018 <0.018/<0 019 <0.018 <0.018 <0.017/<0 018 <0.017 <0.016 ' 0.00166 10.1( "( 0.01401 / 0.1 r "1 0.0001741 / 0.1 r "( 0.00017W/ 0.1(y Aroclor 1260 <0 017 <0 018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0020 <0 017 <0.017 <0.0181<0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.018 <0.018 <0.020 <0.017 <0.018 <0.018/ <0 019 <0.016 <0.018 <0.017/<0.018 <0.017 <0.018 NA 0.01441 / O.1 ru 0. 0001741 / 0.1 r "/ 0.00017G1/ 0.11"' Aroclor 1221 <0 035 <0.036 <0.037 <0.037 <0.038 <0.036 <0,040 <0.033 <0.035 <0.0351<0.036 <0.038 <0.037 <0.037 <0.036 <0.040 .0.036 <0.036 <0.039 <0.035 <0.037 <0.035/<0 038 <0.036 <0.036 <0.034/<0.035 <0.033 <0.037 NA 0.014G1 / O.1 r "1 0,0001701 / 0.1( "( 0.00017U1/ 0.1( "/ Aroclor 1232 <0 017 <0 018 <0.019 <0.019 <0 "019 <0.018 <0,020 <0.017 <0.017 <0.018/<0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.018 <0.020 <0.018 <0.018 <0.020 <0.017 <0.018 <0.018/.0.019 <0.018 <0.018 <0.017/<0.018 <0.017 <0.018 NA 0.014G1 / O.1 r "l • 0.0001741 / 0,1( "1 0.00017G1/ 0.1( ") VOCs (pg/1 - 82608 GC /MS) See laboratory analytical reports for complete list of analytes included in the test method. Chloromethane <0.2 <02 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0,2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0.2 <02 <0.2 <02 <02 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2/ <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 •0.21 <0.2 <O.2 <O.2 133 NA NA NA Vin Chloride <0. 2 <0.2 <02 0.5 0.4 2,4 <0.2 <02 1.4 0.4/0.4 <O.2 <0.2 0.6 0.8 <O.2 <0.2 1.0 2.6 re'4B__r <02 <0.2/ <02 10 ``_69.,_. • 0.3/0.3 :,38 "., 1.0 3.69 NA 525 525 Chlomethane <0.2 0.7 <0.2 <02 <0.2 2.0 <0.2 0 8 <0.2 0.3/0.2 <0.2 <0.2 1 2 <0..2 <02 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2/ <0.2 0.9 <02 48/47 <02 5.2 NA NA NA NA Methylene Chloride <0.3 <0 3 <0 3 <0,3 <0,.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3/ <0.3 <0 3 .0.3 <0,3 <0..3 <0.3 <0.3 <0 3 <0.3 4.1 <0 3 0.3/0.3 <0.3 13 2.7/3.1 <0.3 <O.3 960 NA NA NA Acetone <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 2.3 <1..0 1.2 <1.0 3.9 1.4 4,900/6,900 14 <1.0 <1.0 <1..0 <1.0 <1.0 <l0 19 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0/ <10 <1.0 1.2 <1.0/1.6 <1.0 <1.0 NA NA NA NA Carbon Disulfide <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <02 <02 <0 2 0.2 <0.21 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 <02 <0.2 <02 <02 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2/<0.2 <O,2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,1 -DCE <0.2 <O 2 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <O 2 2 0 " - - 12/8.9.:;`'1 <0 2 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <02 0.4 <0 2 <0.2 0.4 <0 2 <0 21.0.2 <O.2 3.1 <0.2/ <0.2 0.6 <0,2 1.93 NA 3.2 3.2 1,1 -DCA <0,2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 4.4 t1.0 0 9 <0 2 3 1 13/11 0 8 3.6 2 4 <0.2 <0.2 4.4 <0 2 <0.2 11 <0 2 <0 2/ <0.2 0.7 7.5 <0.2/ <0.2 8.0 1.2 NA NA NA NA trans -1,2 -DCE <0,2 <0 2 <0.2 <O 2 <0.2 0.2 .0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.21 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <02 <0 2 0 2 2.9 <0 2 <0 2 /<0 2 <0,2 7.8 <0.21 <0.2 2,0 <0,2 32,800 NA NA 140,000 cis -1,2 -DCE <0.2 <0 2 .0.2 <0 2 1.5 2,8 0 4 <0 2 2.5 4.3/4.9 0 2 <0.2 0 3 <0.2 0.6 1.7 0.2 1 3 41 <0 2 <0 21<0. 2 0.8 480 <0.21<0.2 57 <02 NA NA NA NA Chloroform <O.2 <O 2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.9/0.8 <0 2 0.2M <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 0.4 <0 2 <O.2 <02 <0 2 <0 21 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <0.2/ <0.2 <O.2 <02 283 1,240 470 470 1,2 -DCA <0..2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.21<0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <02 <0 2 <0 21 <0 2 <0,2 <0.2 <0.2/.0.2 <0 2 <02 59.4 20,000 99 99 2- Butanone <1,0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 7 3 <1.0 10,000 /16,000 <1 0 <1.0 4 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 /<1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.01<1.0 <1 0 <1 0 NA NA NA NA 1,1,1 -TCA .0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 6.6 <O 2 2 0 <0.2 <0.2 86/81 2 2 30 1 8 <0.2 1.2 29 <0 2 <O.2 <02 <0 2 <0 2/.0.2 <02 <0.2 <0.2/<02 <0 2 <0 2 417,000 NA NA NA 1,2- Dichloropropane <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 0.2 .O,2 <02 <0.2 <0.2/ <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 21 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0 2 <O 2 <O 2 23.2 5,700 NA 39 Trichtoroethene .0.2 <0 2 <O.2 <0 2 2.3 0.8 0 7 <O.2 <O.2 - ..-- _88/87:: , . 1 6 1.6 0.5 <0.2 1.2 8.8 0.6 0.8 5.3 <0 2 <0 21<0 2 0.2 0.4 <0.2/<0 2 8.9 <0 2 55.6 21.900 81 81 1,1,2- Trichloroethane <,2 <O 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0..2 <0.2 <02 0.6/0.5 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <02 <0 2 .0 2 <02 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2/ <0 2 <O 2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 25.3 9,400 42 42 Benzene <0,2 <O 2 0.5 .0 2 <0.2 <O 2 <0,2 <0.2 <02 04/0.4 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <02 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 0.4 <0 2 <0 2/ <0 2 0.2 <0.2 <0.21<0 2 0.3 <0 2 22.7 NA 71 71 4- Methyl -2- Pentanone(MIBK) <1,0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 760/1,100 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <10 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.01<10 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 /<1.0 <1.0 <1 0 NA NA NA NA Tetrachloroethene .0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 8.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <02 2.42.5 0.4 1.0 <0 2 .0.2 0.3 4.2 <0.2 <0.2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2/<0.2 <O 2 <0.2 <02/<0 2 <0.2 <0 2 4.15 840 8.85 8.85 Toluene <02 .0 2 0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <0.2 32J/54J <0 2 .0.2 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <O 2 <0 2 <0.2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2/<0.2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.21<0 2 <0 2 <O 2 48,500 NA 200,000 200,000 Ethylbenzene <0.2 <0 2 2.5 <0.2 <O.2 <O 2 <0,2 <02 <0.2 <0.2/<0.2 <0 2 0.2 <0 2 <0,2 .0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O 21<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.21<0 2 .0 2 <0.2 6,910 NA 29,000 29,000 m,p- xylene <O 4 <0.4 26 <O 4 <0.4 0.8 <0,4 <0.4 <0 4 <0.4/ <O.4 <0 4 5.6 <0 4 <0.4 <0 4 <0 4 <0. 4 <0.4 <O 4 <0 4 <0 4/ <0 4 <0 4 <0.4 <0.4/ <0 4 <0 4 <0 4 NA NA NA NA o-xylene <0.2 <O.2 4.1 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2/ <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 0.3 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.21<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,3,5- Trimethylbenzene <O 2 <0,2 18 <0. 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0,2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2/ <0.2 <0 2 0.3 .0 2 <02 <0 2 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2/ <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2/<0 2 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,2,4- Trimethylbenzene <0 2 <O.2 32 <0.2 <0.2 <O 2 <02 .0 2 .0 2 <0.21<0.2 .0.2 0.5 <0 2 <0 2 .0 2 <0 2 0.4 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2/ <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.21 <0.2 <O 2 .0 2 NA NA NA NA Isopropylbenzene <0.2 <0,2 3 4 <0,2 <0.2 <O 2 <02 <0.2 <0 2 <0..2/ <O.2 <0 2 0.5 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0,2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 /<O 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.21<0.2 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA n- Propylbenzene <0 2 .O,2 6 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 cO 2 <O 2 .0.21 <0.2 <0 2 1.1 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 <,2 <0.2 <O 2 - <0.2 <0 2 /<0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.21<0 2 <0.2- <0 2 NA NA NA NA sec- butylbenzene <0.2 <0,2 3 3 <0.2 <0.,2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2/ <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0,2 <02 <0 2 <0 2 <0 21<0 2 <O 2 <O2 <0.2/<02 <0 2 <0 2 NA NA NA NA 4- Isopropyltoluene <0 2 <02 3.7 <0.2 <0.2 <0. 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2/<0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 <O 2 <O 2 <,2 <0 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0.2/ <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA n- Butylbenzene <0 2 <0.2 7.1M <0.2 <0.2 <0. 2 <O 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0. 2/ <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 .0.2/.0.2 <O 2 <0.2 <0.2J <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 NA NA NA NA Naphthalene <0 5 <0.5 13 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0 5 <0 5 <0. 5/<0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <O 5 <0 5 <O 5 <0 5 <0 5 .0 5 <0 5 .0 5 <0 51<0 5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5/ <0 5 <0 5 <O 5 4,940 620 NA NA SVOCs (pg/1 - 8270 GC /MS) See labora ory analytical reports for complete list of analytes included In the test method. 4 -Meth henol <1.2 <l.2 1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1,2 <12 <1 0 <1 2 2.02.4 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <1.0 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1 0 <111.1.0 <11 <1.0 <1.21<1 0 <1 0 <10 NA NA NA NA _ Naphthalene <1 2 <1.2 6.9 <1.0 <1.2 <1,2 <1 2 <10 <1 2 <1.2f<1.1 <1 2 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 .1.0 <1 2 <1 0 <1 0 <11/<1. 0 <11 <1.0 <1.21<1 0 <1 0 <1.0 4,940 620 NA NA 2- Methylnaphthalene <12 <12 23M <1.0 <1.2 <12 <1 2 <1.0 <1 2 <1.2/<1.l <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <12 <1 2 <1. 0 <10 <12 <10 <1.0 <1.1/'1. 0 <11 <1,0 <1.2/<1.0 <10 <1 0 NA NA NA NA Acenaphthene <1 2 <1.2 <3.5Y <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <12 .1.2/.1.1 <1 2 <12 <1.2 <12 <12 <10 8.4 3.1 <1 0 <1 0 <1. 1/.10 <1 1 <1.0 <1.2/<1.0 <1.0 <1 0 643 520 NA 2,700 Dibenzofuran <12 <1.2 3.7 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1 2 <1.2/ <1.1 <1 2 <1,2 <1 2 <12 <1 2 <1 0 <1 0 <12 <10 <1 0 <11/<10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2/ <1.0 <1.0 <l0 NA NA NA NA Fluorene <1.2 _ <1 2 8.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <12 <10 <12 <1.2/ <1.1 <1 2 <12 <1 2 <1 2 <12 <1 0 <1.0 <1.2 <1 0 <1.0 <11/ <1.0 <11 <1.0 <1.2/'1.0 <1.0 <10 3,460 NA 14,000 14,000 Phenanthrene <1 2 <1.2 3.4 <1.0 <1.2 <1..2 <1 2 <1.0 <1 2 <1.21<1.1 <1.2 <1 2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <1.0 <1.0 <1 2 <1 0 <1 0 <1 11 <1.0 <1 1 <1.0 <1.21 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 NA NA NA NA Carbazole <1.2 <1 2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1,2 <1 2 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2/<1.1 <1.2 <1 2 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 2.0 <1 2 <10 <1.0 <1.1/<10 <1 1 <1.0 <1.2/<1 0 <10 <1 0 NA NA NA NA Anthracene <1.2 <12 <1.1 <1.0 <12 <1.2 <1 2 <10 <12 <1.21 <1.1 <1 2 <12 <1 2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1,0 <1.2 <1.0 <10 <1 1 / <10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21<1 0 <10 <1 "0 25.900 NA 110,000 110,000 Di-n- Butylphthalate <1 2 <1.2 <1.1 <1.0 <12 <1.2 <1 2 <1.0 <12 <1.21 <1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <1 2 <12 <1 0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 <10 <1.1/ <10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21<1 0 <10 <1 0 NA NA 12,000 12,000 Fluoranthene <1.2 <1 2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <l.0 <12 <1.21 <1.1 <1 2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2 <1 2 <1.0 <1,0 . <l2 <1.0 <10 <1.1 /.10 <1 1 <1.0 <1.21<1 0 <1.0 <10 90.2 NA 370 370 yrene <1.2 <1 2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.2 <1.21<1.1 <12 <12 <1 2 <1 2 <1 2 <1.0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 <10 <1.11<1.0 <1 1 <1.0 <1.21<1 0 <1.0 <1 0 2,590 NA 11,000 11,000 Butylbenzylphthalate <1 2 <1 2 <1.1 <1.0 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.2 <1.21 <1.1 <1 2 <1 2 <1 2 <1 2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 <1 0 <1. 11<1 0 <1 1 <1.0 <1.21 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 1,250 NA NA 5,200 Benzo(a)anthracene4l <1 2 <1 2 <1.1 .1 ,0 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1. 2 <1.21<1.1 <1 2 <1 2 <12 <1 2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.1 /<10 <1 1 <1.0 <1.2/<1 0 <1 0 <10 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalate <5 0 <5 0 4.6 <4.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <4 0 <5. 0 <5.0/<4.4 <5 0 <5 0 .5 0 <5 0 <5 0 <4.0 <4..0 <5 0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.41<4 0 <4 4 <4.0 <5.01<4.0 <4 0 <4 0 3.56 NA 5.9 5.9 Chrysene01 <1 2 <1 2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <10 <1. 2 <1.2/ <1.1 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <12 <1.2 <1,0 <1..0 <1.2 <1.0 <1 0 <1.11<10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21 <1.0 <1 0 <10 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(b)fluoranlheneal <1 2 <1 2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.2 <1.21<1.1 <1 2 <1.2 <1 2 <1.2 <1.2 <1,0 <1.0 <l 2 <1.0 <1 0 <1.11 <10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21.1.0 <1 0 <1 0 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)fluoranthene9l <1 2 <1.2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1.2 <1.2/ <1.1 <1.2 <12 <1.2 <1.2 <1,2 <1.0 <1..0 <1 2 <l.0 <1 0 <1.1 /<10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21<1.0 <1 0 <1.0 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)pyrene0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2/<1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1..0 <1 2 <1.0 <1 0 <1.11<1 0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene9 <1 2 <1.2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <l.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2/ <1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.11<1.0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.21 <1.0 <1.0 <l.0 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene< <1 2 <1.2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <12/<1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.1/ <1.0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2/<1.0 <1.0 <1.0 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(9.h,i)perylene <1.2 <1.2 <1.1 <1.0 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <l.21<1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.1/ <1.0 <1,1 <1.0 <1.2/<1.0 <1.0 <1.0 NA NA NA NA December 2002 w2 2 002101 6 1 1 0.00/2002 phase I rot \Table 8.xls 016110.00 TABLE 8 GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Page 2 of 4 Analyte (Unit . Semple M.twd1 Sample Designation MTCA Method B 5urfaceWatertbl Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQS 1�1 National Toxics Rulej4l National AWpC1'1 MW -1A MW-4A MW-6A MW -7A MW-8A MW-8B MW -9A MW -11A MW-12A MW -14A! MW -101 AM MW -15A MW -16A MW-18A MW-19B MW-22A MW -23A MW-24A MW -25A MW-26A MW -26B MW- 26C / MW- 103Ct'1 MW -27A MW -28A MW-28B/ MW102Bt'1 MW-29A MW -29B PAHs (pg/I • SW8270C GC /MS SIM) _ Naphthalene <0.012 0.049M 6.97'' 0.021 0.013 0.062 0.017 <0.010 0.128 0.018/0.016 0.013M 0.019 0.017 0.02 <0.012 0.0093J 0.011M 0.036 0.012M 0.036 0.018 <0.010 <0.010 .0.010 <0.010 .0.011/.0010 <0.011/<0010 0.062B 0.014 .0.010 0.015 0.015/0.009BJ 0.038/0.023 0.138 0.021 0.218 0.048 4,940 NA 620 NA NA NA NA NA 2- Methylnaphthalene 0.026 0.083M 230) 0.0094) 0.014 0.20 O.OlOJ •0.010 0.026 0.013M/0.011 0 012M 0.026 0.013M 0.010) <0.012 Acenaphthylene <0.012 <0.055Y <0.060Y 0.022 0.015 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.012 <0.0121<0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 0.26 0.13 <0.010 <0.010 <0.011 /<0010 <0.011 <0010 <0.012/.0.010 <0.010 •0.010 _ NA NA NA NA_ Acenapbthene <0.012 0.96 <3.5Y° 0.39 <0.012 0.14 0.018 <0 010 <0.012 0.037/ <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0. 012 <0.012 0.0085MJ 8.4 3.1 <0.010 <0.010 <0.011/ <0 010 <0.011 <0.010 .0.012/ <0.010 <0.010 0.0089J 643 520 NA 2,700 Fluorene <0.012 0.83 8.01' <0.010 <0.012 0.12 <0.012 <0 010 <0,012 <0.012/ .0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0. 012 <0.012 <0.010 0.078 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 .0.011/ <0 010 <0.011 <0.010 .0.012/ <0 010 <0.010 <0.010 3,460 NA 14,000 14,000 Phenanthrene 0.012J 0.016M 3.47'1 0.0070) 0.014 0.059 0.0067J <0.010 <0.012 .0.012/.0.011 00076J 0.014 0.0078J 0.0066) <0.012 0.0056.1 0.16 0.015M <0.010 <0.010 <0.0111<0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.0121 <0 010 <0.010 <0010 NA NA NA NA Anthracene 0.014 0.12M <0.13Y 0.0076MJ 0.026M 0.011J 0.018 <0 010 <0.012 .0.012/ <0.011 0.010J 0.012J 0.0012J 0.0085MJ <0.012 0.0077J 0.044M 0.021M <0.010 <0.010 <0.011/ <0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.0121 <0 010 <0.010 <0.010 • _ 25.900 NA 110,000 110,000 Fluoranthene <0.012 0.082 0.12 <0.010 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.0121 <0,011 <0.012 <0012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 .0.010 0.0099J <0.012 <0.010 .0.010 <O.01 1 /<O 010 <11011 <0.010 <0.012/ <0 010 <0.010 <0.010 90.2 NA 370 370 Pyrene <0.012 0.13 <1.1 <0.010 0.016 0.033 0.015 <0 010 <0. 012 0.0084) /0.0066) <0.012 0.12 0.0079J 0.0085J 0.013 <0.010 0.0066J . <0.010 0.018 <0.012 <0.010 <0010 <0.010 <0.010 .0.011/ <0 010 <0.0111<0 010 <0.011 <0.011 <0.010 <0.010 <0.0121 <0 010 <0.012/<0 010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 2.590 NA NA NA 11,000 NA 11,000 NA Benzo(g,h,i)per lene <0.012 <0.012 0.0099MJ <0.010 0.013 <0.012 <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.012/<0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <O.012 <0. 012 <0.012 <0.010 Dibenzofuran <0.012 <0.063Y 3.71') <0.010 <0.012 0.044 <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.012/ <0 011 0.012J <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0,010 0.0093J <0.012 <0.010 .0.010 .0.011/.0 010 <0.011 <0.010 .0.012/ <0 010 <0.010 <0.010 _ NA NA NA NA Chrysenel9 <0.012 '0.034 - 0.064 • <0.010 0.013 <0.012 <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.012/<0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 .0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.011/ <0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.012/<0 010 <0.010 <0.010 • 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(b)0uoranthene01 <0.012 <0.012 0.0088MJ <0.010 0.0066J <0.012 <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.0121 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 .0.011/.0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <O.012 /<0 010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)9uoranthene01 <0.012 <0.012 0.0082MJ <0.010 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.012/.0. 011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0. 010 <0.010 <0.012 •0.010 <0.010 ,0.011/ <0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.0121 <0 010 <0.010 <0.010 - _ 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)anthraceneP1 <0.012 0.013 0.030 <0.010 0.0081J <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 .0 012 <0.012/.0 011 .0 012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 •0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.0111<0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.012/ <0 010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)pyrene0' <0.012 <0.012 0.011 <0.010 0.011J <0.012 <0.012 <0,010 <0.012 <0.012/<0011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.011/.0010 .0.011 <0.010 0.021/<0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pvrene <0.012 <0.012 0.0057J <0.010 0.0088J <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.012 <0.012/<0. 011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.011 /<0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.012 /<0 010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)2nthracene °1 <0.012 <0.012 <0.011 <0.010 <0.012 <0.012 .0.012 <0.010 <0.012 .0.012/ <0. 011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.0111<0 010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.012 /.0 010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Total Metals (pg /I • EPA 200.8/7470) Antimony 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 0.3 <0.2 <0.2/.0.2 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 • . 1,040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic 1.0 0.4 1.5 0.6 2.3 -4.0 0.9 ,;.9.0;'•.: .1(4. 2.7/2.8 2.3 0.7 0.8 2.2 0.8 0.6 1.0 .;:`1126:2.,,_ 1.7 <1 1.3/1.3 0.6 2.0 1.2/1.2 3.1 2.2 0.0982/5 "1 190 0.14/51 " / 0.14/51 " / Beryllium <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 .0.2 .0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0 2 <0.2 ' <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <1 <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.21<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 273 5.3 NA NA Cadmium") <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2/<0,2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 .0 .2 <0.2 <0.2 <0,2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0. 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 /<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 20.3 1.65 NA NA Chromiumi'"i <1 <2 <2 <1 4 <2 6.7 0.6 5 1.1/ <l <0.5 <1 0.6 15 <2 <0.5 1.1 1.5 <1 3 2.5/2.6 0.8 <2 3/3 <1 4 243,0001°i 299.82 NA NA Copper"' 5.5 1.0 2.6 <0.5 16.6 2.3 4.0 1.6 0.6 5.8/6,0 3.8 3.3 3.7 11.5 2.4 2.1 <0.5 0.7 1.0 2.0 1.8/1.9 0.7 0.6 1.1/1.2 0.7 1.9 2,660 19.56 NA NA Lead 1"1 <1 <1 <1 <1 3 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1R1 c1 <1 <1 2 3 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1/0 <1 <1 <1/<1 <1 <1 NA 5.00 NA NA Mercury <0.1 <0.1 <0 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <O.1 <0 1 <0.1/ <0,1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0 1 <O.1 .0.1/.0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.11 <0 1 <0.1 <0.1 NA 0.012 / 0.1 /p 0.15 0.051 / 0.1 n' Nickel°") 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.2 8.1 1.9 4.0 3.2 2.5 4.6/5.1 t4 1.8 2.9 2.3 2.2 2.5 1.1 1.2 1.9 3.3 0.9/0.9 0.8 1.1 1.2/1.3 2.4 1.5 1,100 269.35 4,600 4,600 Selenium 0.9 <0.5 <0 5 1.6 <0.5 0.8 <0.5 0.6 0.8 0.7/<2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <2 0.7 0.6 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 . • "6 - .., 4/5 ` .. 0.6 <0.5 <2/<2 <0.5 <2 2,700 5 NA 11,000 Silver <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0. 5 <0.51<0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0. 5 <0.5 <0.5/<0. 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5/.O 5 <2 <0.5 25,900 NA NA NA Thallium <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2/.0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0. 2 <0.2 <0.21<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 /<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc"' <4 5 <4 <4 12 4 <4 <4 5 6/.4 4 6 5 30 <4 <4 <4 19 <4 <4 <4/4 <4 <4 <4/.4 <4 <4 16,500 179.22 NA 69,000 Dissolved Metals (pg/I - EPA 200.8/7470) Antimony 02 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 0.3 0.3 <0 2 <0.2/.0. 2 0.8 0.4 0.4 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.2/<0.2 <0.2 <02 <0.2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 • 1.040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic 1.0 0.4 1.2 0.7 0.4 3.4 0.7 ...12.6;,.. ...14.5 -. 3.2/3.4 2.3 0.7 0.8 2.9 0.8 0.6 1.2 ,. -- 26:8. '� -, 1.7 <1 1.2/1.1 0.6 2.3 1.7/1.7 2.5 1.B 0.0982 / 51 "1 190 0.14 / 5" 0.14 1 51") B lIium <0.2 <02 <0. 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0. 2 <0.2/<0,2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.21<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 273 5.3 NA NA Cadmium°"' <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 .0.2 <0. 2 <0.2/ <0. 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0,2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.21 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2/<02 <0.2 <0.2 20.3 1.65 NA NA Chromium°") <2 <2 <1 <1 <1 <2 8 <1 4 <1 / <1 <1 <1 <1 13 <2 <0.5 <1 <1 <0.5 4 2.9/2.8 <1 <1 <2/<2 <2 3 243,000" 299.82 NA NA Copper°". 5.2 0.8 0.7 <0.5 1.4 1.0 4.2 1.3 0.6 3.2/3.4 3.8 1.9 3.1 10.3 2.8 2.3 0.7 1.0 0.8 2 1.4/1.6 0.8 0.7 1.2/1.2 0.8 1.3 2,660 19.56 NA NA Lead 1"< <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 .1 / <7 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 .1 <1 <1 <1 <2 <11<1 <1 <1 <1/ <1 <1 2 NA 5.00 NA NA Mercury <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1/ <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1/ <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 /<0 1 <0.1 <0.1 NA 0.01210.11 " 0.15 0.051 / 0.11"' Nickel°") 1.0 0.6 <0.5 0.9 1.7 1.8 4.3 -3.4 2.5 4.3/5.4 1.3 1.7 3.0 2.0 1.2 2.1 0.9 1.1 1.7 3 0.7/0.7 0.7 1.2 1.3/1.2 3 1.3 1,100 269.35 4,600 4,600 Selenium .2 <0.5 <0.5 1.9 <0.5 0.7 0.7 <0.5 0.8 1.4/1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 4.2 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.8 <0.5 <5 ... '. 515 -"- - 0.6 0.6 • 3.0/3.0 <0.5 <2 2.700 5 NA 11,000 Silver <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5/.0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1 <0.5/<0.5 • <0.5 <0.5 <0.5/ <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 25,900 NA NA NA Thallium <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.21<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.21,0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <02/ <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc "' <4 <4 <4 <4 5 4 5 5 _ <4 5/5 4 4 7 7 <4 <4 <4 20 <4 <10 <4 / <4 <4 <4 <4/5 <4 <4 16,500 179.22 NA 69,000 Conventional Parameters Temperature (Celcius) 11.3 14.5 13.4 15.0 13.0 16.1 15.1 14.4 14.5 13.8 20.1 10.1 16.7 15.5 11.7 13.8 15.8 14.2 15.9 14.8 13.7 15.5 16.0 15.5 13.4 13.7 - - - - pH 6.30 6.30 6.15 5.76 6.45 6.93 6.51 6.60 6.22 5.72 6.68 6.83 6.61 7.40 6.83 6.10 5.71 6.02 6.51 7.41 7.51 6.09 6.28 6.53 6.13 6.51 - - - - Conductivity (micromhos/cm) 479 624 297 579 240 338 267 285 688 386 113 207 350 630 202 245 293 _ 484 360 1.093 951 412 414 1,164 292 1.351 - - - - December 2002 w:',2002/016110.00/2002 phase 1 rpt \Table 8.zls 016110.00 TABLE 8 GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte (una- sample Method) Sample Designation MTCA Method B Surface Waters el Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQSI`I National Toxics . Rule IeI National AWQCI'1 MW -29C MW-30A MW -31A MW -32A MW -33A MW -34A MW -35A MW-35B MW-36A MW-36B MW -37A MW -37B Trip Blank I Trip Blank 3/26/02 3/27/02 Trip Blank 3/28/02 Trip Blank 3/29/02 Trip Blank 4102/02 FB•1 3/27/02 FB -2 3/28/02 TPH (mg/I • NWTPH Ox by GC /FID) I - Gas <0.25 <O.25 <0,25 <0.25 <0,25 <0.25 <O.25 <O.25 <O.25 <O.25 <0.25 <0.25 - _ - - - - <0.25 <O.25 111 NA1hi NA NA Diesel <0.25 <0.25 <0. 25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <025 <0.25 <O.25 <0.25 <0 25 - - - - - <0.25 <025 1011 NA _ NA NA Oil <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0 50 - - - - - <0.50 <0.50 1011 NA NA NA Glycols (mg/I - GC -FID) Ethylene Glycol - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NA NA NA NA Propylene Glycol - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NA NA NA NA PCBs (ug/I -8082 GC /ECD ) Aroclor 1016 <0.017 <0.017 <0.020 <0.018 <0.017 <0.017 <0.032 <0.017 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.021 - - - - - <0.018 <0.018 0.00582 / 0.11"1 0.0141 / 0.11 "1 0.0001741 / 0.l 1"1 0.000170/ 0.1 / "1 Aroclor 1242 <0.017 <0.017 <0.020 <0.018 <0.017 <0.017 <0.032 <0.017 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.021 - - - - - <0.018 <0.016 NA 0.01441 / 0.11 "1 o:00017 °I / 0.11"1 0.000171/ 0.11 "1 Aroclor 1248 <0.017 <0.017 <0.020 <0.018 <0.017 <0.017 <0.032 <0.017 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.021 - - - - - <0.018 <0.018 NA 0.014°1 / 0.11 "1 0.00017U' / 0.11"1 0.00017U1/ 0.11"1 Aroclor 1254 <0.017 0.012) <0.020 <0.018 <0.017 0.023 <0.032 <0.017 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.021 - - - - - <0.018 <0.018 0.00166 / 0.11 "1 0.014G1 / O./ 14 0.0001741 1 0.11"1 0.00017w/ 0.114 Aroclor 1260 <0.017 <0.017 <0.020 <0.018 <0.017 <0.017 <0.032 <0.017 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.021 - - - - - <0.018 <0.018 NA 0.014 °I / 0.11 4 0.0001741 / O.11 "1 0.0001741/ O.11 "1 Aroclor 1221 <0.033 <0.035 <0.040 <0.036 <0.034 <0.033 <0.064 <0.033 <0.039 <0.038 <0.037 <0.043 - - - - - <0.037 <0.036 NA 0.014a)/ 0.11 "1 0.0001741 / 0.11 "1 0.0001741/ 0.11 "1 Aroclor 1232 <0.017 <0.017 <0.020 <0.018 <0.017 <0.017 <0.032 <0.017 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.021 - - - - - <0.018 <0.018 NA 0.014U1 / 0.11 4 0:0001701 / 0.11"1 0.00017 °ll 0.11 "1 VOCs (ug/I -82608 GC /MS) See laboratory analytical reports for complete list of analytes Included in the test method. Chloromethane <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 133 NA - NA NA Vinyl Chloride <0.2 3.9- +:.' „• : 34 : s 75.., .,.S Br`. <02 - :°.r.'S1'_" 0.3 c ",:4.9i"' 0.6 0.6 10 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 3.69 NA 525 525 Chloroethane <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA Methylene Chloride 0.4 <0.3 <0 3 <0 3 <0 3 <0.3 3.6 0.3 <0 3 <O.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 960 NA NA NA Acetone <1.0 <10 <10 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <10 2.7 <1.0 1.8 <1.0 12 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 15 14 NA NA NA NA Carbon Disulfide <0.2 <0 2 0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,1 -DCE <0.2 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 1.93 NA 3.2 3.2 1,1 -DCA <O.2 2.4 16 <0.2 2.1 2.5 9.4 <0 2 2.4 0.3 0.4 1 0 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 NA NA NA NA trans -1,2 -DCE <0.2 <0 2 0.7 <0 2 1.4 <0.2 3.6 <0.2 0.6 <0.2 <O.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 32,800 NA NA 140,000 cis -1,2 -DCE <0.2 2.2 54 11 32 0.2 21 0.3 36 0.7 0.3 0 5 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA Chloroform <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 0.3 <0 2 <O 2 0.3 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 283 1,240 470 470 1,2 -DCA <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <D.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 59.4 20,000 99 99 2- Butanone <1.0 <1 0 - <10 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 7.7 8.2 NA NA NA NA 1,1,1 -TCA <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 13 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <O 2 <0.2 417,000 NA NA - NA 1,2- Dichloropropane <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 23.2 5,700 - NA 39 Trichloroethene <0.2 <0 2 0.4 2.8 64 2.4 0.4 <O 2 47 0.5 1.4 0 2 <O.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 55.6 21,900 81 81 1,1,2- Trichloroethane <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 - <0.2 <O 2 <0.2 25.3 9.400 42 42 Benzene <0.2 <0 2 0.4 <0 2 <O 2 <0.2 0.3 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 22.7 NA 71 71 4- Methy1-2- Pentanone (MIBK) <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 NA NA NA NA Tetrachloroethene <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 0.6 0.4 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 4.15 840 8.85 8.85 Toluene <0.2 cO 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 0.2 <O 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 48,500 NA 200,000 200,000 dbenzene <02 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <O 2 <0.2 6,910 NA : 29,000 29,000 m,p-xylene <0.4 <0 4 <0 4 <O 4 <0 4 <0 4 <0 4 <0 4 <0 4 <0.4 <D 4 <0.4 <0.4 <0 4 <0 4 <0.4 <0.4 <0 4 <0.4 NA NA NA NA o-xylene <02 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <O 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <O 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,3,5- Trimethylbenzene <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 NA NA NA NA 1,2,4- Trimethylbenzene <O2 <0 2 <O 2 0.2 <O 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 <O.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA Isopropytbenzene <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O,2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <O 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA n- Propylbenzene <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0 2 <0 2 <O.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA sec - butylbenzene <0.2 <O 2 <0 2 <O 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <02 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <O 2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 4- Isopropyltoluene <0 2 <0 2 <O 2 <0 2 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O 2 <O.2 <O.2 <0 2 <O.2 NA NA NA NA n- Butylbenzene <02 <O 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <0 2 <O.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 - <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <O.2 NA NA NA NA Naphthalene <0.5 cO 5 <0 5 <0 5 <0. 5 <0 5 <O 5 <0 5 <O 5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <O.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <O.5 4,940 620 NA NA SVOCs (pg/I - 8270 GC /MS) See laboratory analytical reports for complete list of analytes included In the test method. 4- Methylphenol <1. 1 <1 2 <1 2 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1 2 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 2 _ <1.0 - - - -- - - <1 0 <1.1 NA NA NA NA Naphthalene <1. 1 <1 2 <1 2 <1 0 <l2 <10 <1 2 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 - - - - - <1 0 <1.1 4,940 620 NA NA 2 -Meth na hthalene <1 1 <1 2 <1 2 <1 0 <1.2 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 - - - -- - <1 0 <1.1 NA ' NA NA NA Acenaphthene . <1. 1 <1 2 <1 2 3.8 1.7 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 - - - - - <1 0 <1.1 643 520 NA 2,700 Dibenzofuran <1.1 • _ <12 <1 2 <10 <1.2 <1 0 <12 <1 0 <10 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 NA NA NA NA Fluorene <1.1 <1.2 <12 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <12 <10 <1 0 <1.0 <12 <1.0 - - - - - <1 0 <1.1 3,460 NA 14,000 14,000 Phenathrene <1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <12 <10 <1.2 <1.0 <10 <1.0 <12 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 NA NA NA NA Carbazole <1.1 <1 2 <12 <1 0 <12 <1 0 <12 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 NA NA NA NA Anthracene <11 <1 2 <12 <1 0 <1.2 <1 0 <1.2 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <12 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 25,900 NA 110,000 110,000 Di- n- Butylphthatate <11 <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1.2 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <12 <1.0 - - - -- - - <10 <1.1 NA NA 12,000 12,000 Fluoranlhene <11 <1.2 <1 2 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1.2 <10 <1.0 <1.0- <12 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 90,2 NA 370 370 Pyrene <11 <1.2 <12 . <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 2,590 NA 11,000 11,000 Bt_rtylbenzylphthalate <1.1 <1.2 <12 <10 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 1,250 NA NA 5,200 Benzo(a)anthracene1< <1.1 <1.2 <12 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <12 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <10 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalale <4 4 <5. 0 <5.0 <4 0 <5.0 <4 0 <5 0 <4 0 <4.0 <4.0 <5 0 <4.1 - - - - - <4 0 <4.4 3.56 NA 5.9 5.9 Chrysene0 <1 1 <1. 2 <1.2 <10 <1 2 <1 0 <1.2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(b)fluoranthene1l <11 <1. 2 <1.2 <10 <1 2 <1 0 <12 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <12 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)fluoranthene0 <11 <1.2 <1.2 <10 <1 2 <1 0 <1.2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)oyrene0 <11 <1.2 <1.2 <1 0 <1 2 <1 0 <1 2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene9 <11 <1,2 <1.2 <1.0 <1.2 <1 0 <1 2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene< <1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <1.0 <1 2 <1.0 <1 2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <12 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(q.h,i)peMene <1.1 <1.2 <1.2 <l.0 <1 2 <l.0 <1.2 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2 <1.0 - - - - - <1.0 <1.1 NA NA NA NA December 2002 w:\2002\016110.001.2002 phase I rpt \Table 8.xls Page 3 of 4 01611 0.00 TABLE 8 Page 4 of 4 GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Anal a Yt (llnb•S. vmhimod) Sample Designation MTCA Method B Surface Water' n) Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWasI`I National Toxics Rule a1 National AWQCI'I MW -29C MW -30A MW -31A MW -32A MW -33A MW -34A MW -35A MW -35B MW -36A MW -36B MW -37A MW-37B Tri Blank p 3/26/02 Tri Blank / 3/27/02 Tri Blank p 3/28102 Tri Blank p 3/29/02 Tri Blank p 4/02/02 FB -1 3/27/02 FB -2 3/28/02 PAHs - SW8270C GC /MS SIM) (pg8 Naphthalene <0.011 0.138 0.12B 0.022 0.032 0.010 <0.012 0.017 0.168 0.208 0.128 0.118 - - - - - 0.017 0.022 4,940 620 NA NA 2- Methylnaphthalene <0.011 0.027 0.023 0.0080) 0.018 0.010 <0.012 <0.010 0.025 0031 0.052 0.021 - - - - - 0.0071MJ 0.014 NA NA - NA NA Acenaphthylene <0.011 <0.012 0.58 <0.012 <0.012 0.16 3.84' 0 10 1.7"' <0 010 <0010 <0. 012 <0,012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 - - - - - - - - - - <0.010 <0.010 <0.011 <0.011 NA 643 NA 520 NA NA NA 2,700 Acenaphthene <0.011 Fluorene <0.011 0.13 <0.012 <0.010 <0012 <0010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 3,460 NA • 14,000 14,000 Phenanthrene <0.011 0.012J <0.012 0.19 0.083 <0 010 <0. 012 <0.010 <0.010 0.0084) <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - 0.0054MJ <0.011 NA NA NA NA Anthracene <0.011 0.056 <0.012 0.017M 0.021 <0010 <0. 012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 25,900 90.2 NA NA 110,000 370 110,000 370 Fluoranthene <0.011 0.10 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0 010 <0 012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 Pyrene <0.011 0.067 <0.012 0.0079J <0.012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 2,590 NA ' r 11,000 11,000 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0 010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 NA NA _ NA NA Dibenzofuran <0.011 1017M <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0 010 <1012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - -- - - - <0.010 <0.011 NA NA NA NA Chrysenelll <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(b)fluoranthenep' <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0.010 0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)fluoranthene'1 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 0.010 <0 012 0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)anthracenep' <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0.010 <0 012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)pyreneP1 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 <0.010 <0 012 0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0 012 0.010 <0 012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - - - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 ndeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrenetl' Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene11 <0.011 <0.012 0.012 <0.010 <0 012 0.010 <0 012 <0.010 0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 - -- - - - <0.010 <0.011 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Total Metals (pgl1 - EPA 200.8/7470) Antimony 0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - - - - - <0.2 <0.2 1,040 NA _ 4,300 " 4,300 " Arsenic 455J. -, 0.7 17 2.3 26 1.2 2.2 ..=..-8 _ -. 0.9 3.0 3.2 3.4 - - - - - <0.2 <0.2 0.0982 /51 " 190 _•' 0.14 /51 0.14 /5r Beryllium <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <1 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0,2 <0.2 273 5.3 NA NA 1 ' Cadmium"' <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0.2 <0.2 20.3 1.65 NA NA 2.6 6 1 0.7 4 <0.5 <0.5 <2 <1 5 0.8 4 - - - - - <0. 5 <0.5 243,0001°1 299.82 t NA NA Copper"' 2.8 2.8 0.9 0.5 1.6 0.8 2.2 1.7 2.8 2.8 1.7 2.6 - - - - - <0 5 <0.5 2,660 19.56 _ NA NA Lead""' <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 - - - - - <1 <1 NA 5.00 NA NA a" Mercury <0.1 <0.1 <0 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - - - - - <0 1 <0.1 NA 0.012 / 0.1 y" 0.15 0.051 / 0.1 Nickel°"' 1.4 1.5 1.9 1.0 2.5 1.1 2.9 6.0 2.9 1.6 2.2 1.7 - - - - - <05 <0.5 1,100 269.35 4,600 4,600 Selenium <2 <2 <0.5 <0.5 0.9 <0.5 0.6 :20',.',,,• 0.9 i5' .., 0.9 3 - - - - - <0 5 <0.5 2.700 5 NA 11,000 Silver <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - - - - - <0 5 <0.5 25,900 NA NA NA Thallium <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0 2 <0.2 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc4°I 8 <4 <4 <4 8 <4 <4 <20 <4 5 6 <4 - - - - - <4 <4 16,500 179.22 NA 69,000 Dissolved Metals (pgll - EPA 200.8/7470 Antimony <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0 2 <0.2 1,040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic 13': - 0.7 16 2.3 2.5 1.6 2.0 .. . 5 ` -` - 0.9 2.6 3.5 2.6 - - - - - <0 5 <0.2 0.0982 / 5" 190 0.14 / 5" 0.14 / 5r " Beryllium _. <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0 2 <0.2 273 5.3 NA NA Cadmium "' <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0 2 <0.2 20.3 1.65 NA NA Chromium "' 2.7 6.0 <1 <1 1.6 <0.5 <0.5 3 <1 4 <0.5 3 - - - - - <0 5 <0.5 243,0001 °' 299.82 NA NA Copper"' 1.6 1.2 0.7 0.7 0.9 1.0 2.2 1 3.1 1.8 0.8 1.8 - - - - - <0.5 <0.5 2,660 19.56 NA NA Lead ' -) <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <2 <1 <1 <1 <1 - - - - - 1 <1 NA 5.00 NA NA "' Mercury, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NA 0.012 / 0.11 " , 0.15 0.051 / 0.11 Nickell'"' 1.1 1.3 1.8 0.9 2.4 1.2 2.7 4.0 2.6 1.2 1.7 1.3 - - - - - <0.5 <0.5 1,100 269.35 4,600 4,600 Selenium - -:6. -_ <2 <0 5 0.6 1.0 <0.5 <0.5 '- '.16'-.. 0.7 <2 1.5 <2 - - _ - - - <2 <0.5 2,700 5 NA 11,000 Silver ,' <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 . <1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - - - - - <0.5 <0.5 25,900 NA NA NA Thallium <0.2 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - - - - - <0.2 <0.2 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc1'"' 5 <4 <4 <4 5 <4 4 <10 <4 <4 <4 <4 - - - - - <4 <4 16,500 179.22 NA 69,000 Conventional Parameters Temperature 13.9 13.7 14 7 14.1 15.2 13.6 119 13.9 13.3 14.0 11.0 13.4 - I - - - - - - - (Celcius) 7.67 6.67 6.42 6.81 6 15 7.15 6.62 7.08 6.42 7.28 ' 6.52 6.90 - - - - - - - pH Conductivity(micromhos /cm) 1,342 3.30 293 241 384 296 246 1,130 325 8.69 378 597 - - - - - - - - - - Notes, (a) Duplicate Sample. (b) MICA Method 8 surface water cleanup levels based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (c) Ecology Chronic Freshwater Surface Water Quality Standard (SWQS) based on WAC 173 -201A. (d) National Toxics Rule (NTR) for consumption of organisms based on 40 CFR 131.36 for a risk level of 1x10. (e) National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for consumption of organisms based on Section 304 of Clean Water Act for a risk level of 1x104 (1) (9) (h) NA = No cleanup level available/not applicable. (i) -° = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. 0) Value represents total (sum of all Aroclor's) polychlorinated biphenyfs (PCBs). (k) Surface water standard adjusted upward to Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL). (I) Carcinogenic PAH (cPAH). (m) Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQS based on an average groundwater hardness of 189 mgll. (n) Surface water standard adjusted upward to Natural Background Criterion. (o) MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels are for chromium III (CAS# 16065 - 83-1). Qualdiers B - Compound also detected in method blank. J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the 00644190 laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match. < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. Ecology's Model National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Standard for discharges to surface water from leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanups where gasoline and diesel are the pollutants of concem. Applicable surface water standards are shown in italics. Analytes detected In samples at concentrations exceeding applicable standards are shown in bold and shaded. mg/I - mlargrams per flier pg4 - micrograms per titer December 2002 w:\2002 \016110.00/2002 phase I rpt\Table 8.xls 016110.00 TABLE 9 STORMWATER AND SEEP ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte (Unit - Sample Method) Hiah Tide Low Tide Low Tide MTCA Method B Surface Water(b) Ecology Chronic Freshwater (I SWQS ` National Toxics Rule(d) National AWQC1a) Storm South Storm North/ Storm -IP) Storm South Storm North Seep #1 Seep #2 Seep #4 Seep #5 Seep #6 TPH (mg /I - NWTPH -Dx by GC /FID) Gas -(o <0.25/<0.25181 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 - 1 (h) NA(') NA NA Diesel - <0.25/ <O 25 0.31 0.33 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 - /Ow NA NA NA Oil - (0.50/(0 50 50.50 50.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 - 10( ^) NA NA NA PCBs (pg /1 - 8082 GC /ECD ) Aroclor 1016 - <0.019/ <0 020 <0.017 <0.018 <0.017 <0.019 <0.017 <0.018 - 0.00582 / 0.1(4 0.014G) 1 0.1(4 0.000170 / 0.1(4 0.00017G) / 0.1(k?__ Aroclor 1242 - 50.019/(0 020 (0.017 <0.018 <0.017 (0.019 <O.C17 <0.018 - NA 0.014 U) 1 0.1 °° 0.000170 / 0.1(4 0.00017U) / 0.1( "' Aroclor 1248 - <0.019/<0 020 <0.017 <0.018 <0.017 <0.019 <0.017 <0.018 -- NA 0.014G) / 0.1 (k) 0.00017(i) / 0.1(°) 0.000170/ 0.1( "' Aroclor 1254 - <0.019/ <0 020 <0.017 0.018 0.022 0.087 0.011) 0.014J - 0.00166 1 0.1(4 0.0146)1 0.1(k) 0.0001701 0.1(k) 0.000170)/ 0.1( ")__ Aroclor 1260 - <0.019/ <0 020 <0.017 <0.018 0.019 0.075 0.0090J 0.014J -- NA 0.014°)/ 0.1(4 0.00017( / 0.1(4 0.0001701 0.1°: Aroclor 1221 - <0.038/<0 040 <0.033 <0.036 <0.033 <0.037 <0.035 <0.036 -- NA 0.014) / 0.1(k) 0.00017) / 0.1(4 0.000170 / 0.1("' Aroclor 1232 - <0.021Y/<0.020 (0.017 (0.018 <0.017 <0.028Y <0.017 (0.018 - NA 0.014 °) / 0.1(4 1( 00.1(4 00017 )1 0 . 0 / 0.1("' 0 00017 VOCs (pg /I - 8260B GC /MS) See laboratory analytical reports for complete list of analytes included in the test method. Chloromethane - <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 133 NA NA NA - Vinyl Chloride - `.19/20' =;.;i <0.2 ..;5:1.,: <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 3.69 NA 525 525 Chloroethane - <0.2/<0 2 0.5 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA__ Methylene Chloride - 2.5/1.9 <0.2 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 960 NA NA . NA Acetone - <6.4Y/<11Y 5.4 10 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.2Y NA NA NA NA Carbon Disulfide - <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA --- 1,1 -DCE - <0.2/<02 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 1.93 NA 3.2 3.2 1,1 -DCA - 0.6/0.5 <0.2 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 1., <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA _ - <0.2 <0.2 5.72 5.7 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.3 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 32,800 NA NA NA NA NA 140,000 ' __ NA -- cis- 1.2 -DCE cis- L2 -DCE - 21/21 21/21 Chloroform - <02/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 283 1,240 470 470 1,2 -DCA - 507')(0 2 50.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <0.2 59.4 20,000 99 99 -- 2- Butanone - <1.0/<1 0 1.8 3.6 <1.0 <1.0 <1 •) <1.0 <1.0 NA NA NA NA 1,1,1 -TCA - <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 OM <0.2 <0.2 417,000 NA NA NA 1,2- Dichloropropane - 50.2/ <0 2 <0.2 <O.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 23.2 5,700 NA 39 Trichloroethene - 50.2/ <02 <0.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.f+ <0.2 0.4 55.6 21,900 81 81 • __ 1,1,2 - Trichloroethane - <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 253 9,400 42 42 Benzene -- 0.4/0.4 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 22.7 NA - 71 71 4- Methy1-2- Pentanone (MIBK) - <1.0/ <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 NA NA NA NA Tetrachloroethene - <0.2/<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <03 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 4.15 840 8.85 885 Toluene - 22/22 <0,2 5.5 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 48,500 NA 200,000 200,000 Ethylbenzene - 4 6/4.6 <0.2 1.0 50.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 6,910 NA 29,000 29,000 ' m,p- xylene - 14/14 <0,4 2.9 <0.4 <0.4 <0 4 <0.4 <0.4 NA NA NA NA __ o-xylene - 2 9/2.8 <0. 2 0.6 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,3,5- Trimethylbenzene - 0 2/0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA 1,2,4- Trimethylbenzene - 0 8/0.8 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <02 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA Isopropylbenzene - <0 2/ <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA n- Propylbenzene - <0 2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA' NA NA sec- butylbenzene - <0 2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA - NA NA NA 4- lsopropyltoluene - <0 2/<0 2 <0,2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA n- Butylbenzene - <0 2/ <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 NA NA NA NA Naphthalene - <0 5/ <0 5 <0. 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.3 <0.5 <0.5 4,940 620 NA NA SVOCs (pg /I - 8270 GC /MS) See laboratory analytical reports for complete list of analyl 1s included in the test method. 4- Methylphenol - <1 2/<1 0 <1.0 <1.1 <1,0 <1.1 <1 I <1.1 - NA NA NA NA Na N hthalene - <1 2/<1 0 <1,0 <1.1 <1. 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 4,940 620 NA NA 2- Methylnaphthalene - <1 2/<1 0 <1.0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - NA NA NA NA Acenaphthene - <1 2/<1 0 <1.0 <1.1 <1. 0 <1.1 <1 I <1.1 - 643 520 NA 2,700 Dibenzofuran - <1 21<1 0 <1.0 <1.1 <1..0 <1.1 <1 I <1.1 - NA NA NA NA Fluorene - <121<10 <1.0 <1.1 <1..0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 3,460 NA NA - NA 14,000 NA 14,000 NA Phenanthrene - <1.2/<10 <1.0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - Carbazole - <1 21<1 0 <1 0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - NA NA NA NA Anthracene - <1 2/ <1.0 <1,0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 25,900 NA 110,000 110,000 Di- n- Butylphthalate - <1 2/<1.0 <1,0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - NA NA 12,000 12,000 , _ Fluoranthene - <1 2/<1.0 <1. 0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 90.2 NA 370 370 Pyrene - <1 2/<1.0 <1. 0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1. 1 <1.1 - 2,590 NA 11,000 11,000 Butylbenzylphthalate - <1 2/<1.0 <1. 0 <1.1 <1 0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 1,250 NA NA 5,200 Benzo(a)anthracene°) - <12/<1.0 <1.0 <1.1 <1..0 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 bis(2- Ethylhexyl)phthalate - <4 71 <4.0 <4.0 <4.3 <4..2 <4.3 <4 4 <4.3 - 3.56 3 5.9 5.9 Chrysene10 - <1 2/<1.0 <1 0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(b)ftuoranthene(I) - <1 21<1.0 <1.0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <11 <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)fluoranthenem - <121 <1.0 <1.0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <1 1 <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(a)pyrenem - 51.2/ <1.0 <1. 0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <1 I <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene °1 - <1.2/<1.0 <10 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene °) - <1.2/ <1.0 <1.0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(q,h,i)perylene - <1.2/<1.0 <1.0 <1.1 <1.0 <1.1 <1.1 <1.1 - NA NA NA NA December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.0012002 phase I rpt \Table 9.xls Page 1 of 2 016110.00 TABLE 9 STORMWATER AND SEEP ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR Seattle Analyte (Unit - Sample Method) Hiah Tide Low Tide Low Tide MTCA Method B Surface Water(') Ecology Chronic Freshwater SWQSM National Toxics Rulej6) National AW�C( °7 Storm South Storm North/ Storm -D( °I Storm South Storm North Seep #1 Seep #2 Seep #4 Seep #5 Seep #6 PAHs (pg /1 - SW8270C GC /MS SIM) Na hthalene - 0.034/0.028 0.015 0.017 0.015 0 014 <0.011 <0.011 - 4,940 620 NA NA • t. _ 2- Methytnaphthalene - <0.014Y/0.011M 0.024 <0.022Y <0.010 0014 <0.011 <0.011 - NA NA NA NA _ Acenaphthylene - 0.039/0.0099J <0.010 0.020 <0.010 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 - NA NA NA NA Acenaphthene - 0.65/0.50 <0.010 0.094 0.014 0 011 <0 011 <0.011 - 643 520 NA 2,700 Fluorene - 0.0076J/ <0.010 <0.010 0.0066MJ 0.010J 0.0076J <0011 <0.011 - 3,460 NA 14,000 14,000 _ Phenanthrene - 0.O10J /0.0067J 0.029 0.034 0.021 . 0 046 <0 011 <0.011 - NA NA NA NA _ Anthracene - 0.0066J /0.0053J 0.013 0.0065MJ 0.011 0 015 <0011 <0.011 - 25,900 NA 110,000 110,000 Fluoranthene - 0.010J /0.0064J 0.080 0.049 0.028 0 060 <0 011 <0.011 -- 90.2 NA 370 370 Pyrene - <0.012/0.0079J 0.062 0.046 0.025 0 055 0.017 0.013 - 2,590 NA 11,000 11,000 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - <0.012/<0.010 0.022 0.020 0.0060J 0.019 <0 011 <a011 - NA NA NA NA Dibenzofuran - <0.012/ <0.010 0.064 <0.011 0.0070) 0.0062J <0 011 <0.011 - NA NA NA NA Chrysene°) - <0.012/<0.010 °0;064: '. 0.028 0.010 0 024 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 _ Benzo(b)fluoranthene°) - <0.012/ <0.010 •- :0:034,'. =' .:0.032'. -, 0.0070J 0021 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Benzo(k)fluoranthenep) - <0.012/ <0.010 0.023 0.013 0.0077) 0.020 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 • Benzo(a)anthracenep) - <0.012/<0.010 0.014 0.0091J 0.0086J 0.020 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 _ Benzo(a)pyrenem - <0.0121 <0.010 0.0094J <0.011 <0.010 0.014 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene't - <0.0121<0.010 0.020 0.018 0.0055J 0.019 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene0 - <0.0121<0 010 <0.010 <0.011 <0.010 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 - 0.0296 NA 0.031 0.049 Total Metals (pg /I - EPA 200.8/7470) Antimony - <0.2/ <0.2 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.3 - 1.040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic - :7.....,-6.6/66:4, -, ,. 0.8 , : :.'.30.8 `- 2.6 ' T 1.4 2.6 - 0.0982 / 5(4 190 • 0.14 / 5) 0.14 / 5(4 : Beryllium - <0 2/<0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - 273 5.3 NA NA Cadmium(m) - <0 2/ <0 2 0.6 1.0 <0.2 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - 20.3 1.65 NA NA . r Chromiumtm) - 1/1 1.9 2.4 2.4 7.6 3.0 1.0 - 243,000(0) 299.82 NA NA Copper") - 4 3/4.5 10.8 23.4. -:' 13 0 ' ,31:8"..1'.7 6.4 16.2 - 2,660 19.56 NA NA Lead("') - 2/3 4 • 3 2 <1 - NA 5.00 NA NA Mercury - <0 1 /<0 1 <0.1 <0 1 <0 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 - NA 0.012 1 0.1(4 0.15 0.051 / 0.1(4 __ Nickel("') - 1 1/1.1 1.8 1.4 1.4 7.0 0.8 0.8 - 1,100 269.35 4,600 4,600 Selenium - <2/ <2 <0.5 0.6 <2 <2 <2 <2 - 2,700 5 NA 11,000 I:. Silver T - <0 5/<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 - 25,900 NA NA NA _ Thallium - <02 /<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc('") - 47/77 133 ... '223" ` +( 12 53 7 6 - 16,500 179.22 NA 69,000 Dissolved Metals (pg /I - EPA 200. 8/7470) Antimony - <02/ <02 0.4 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.6 0.2 - 1,040 NA 4,300 4,300 Arsenic - 48:8/48. 0.7 2 "., ',0.2:•.x,;' 1.7 2.2 1.0 2.0 - 0.0982/5r "/ 190 0.14/5(0 0.14/5( ") Be ryllium - <0 2.<0 2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 - 273 5.3 NA NA Cadmium("') - <0 2/ <0.2 0.4 0.5 <0 2 <0 2 <0.2 <0.2 - 20.3 1.65 NA NA • Chromium('") - 3/3 1.4 1.0 2.4 3.3 3.4' 1.8 - 243,000(0) 299.82 NA NA Copper('") - 10/0.9 8.3 9.3 5.0 5.2 4.4 7.4 - 2,660 19.56 NA NA Lead ("a - <1/ <1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 - NA 5.00 NA NA '1 Mercury - c0 1/ <0 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0 1 <0.1 <0.1 - NA 0.012 / 0.1(k4 0.15 0.051 / 0.1(''4 Nickel("') - 09/0.8 1.3 0.8 <0.5 <05 <0.5 <0.5 - 1,100 269.35 4,600 4,600 t Selenium - <2/ <2 <0.5 1.0 <2 <2 <2 <2 - 2,700 5 NA 11,000 i Silver - c0 5/ <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0 5 <0.5 <0.5 - 25,900 NA NA NA Thallium - <02/ <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - 1.56 40 6.3 6.3 Zinc('") - 26/24 125 167 <4 5 4 <4 - 16,500 179.22 NA 69,000 Notes: (a) Duplicate Sample. (b) MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels based on CLARC version 3.1, dated November 2001. (c) Ecology Chronic Freshwater Surface Water Quality Standard (SWQS) based on WAC 173 -201A. (d) National Toxics Rule (NTR) for consumption of organisms based on 40 CFR 131.36 for a risk level of 1x10'6. (e) National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for consumption of organisms based on Section 304 of Clean Water Act for a risk level of 1x10. (0 ° -° = Sample not analyzed for indicated analyte. (g) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (h) Ecology's Model National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Standard for discharges to surface water from leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanups where gasoline and diesel are the pollutants of concern. (i) NA = No cleanup level available/not applicable. (j) Value represents total (sum of all Aroclor's) polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). (k) Surface water standard adjusted upward to Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL). (I) Carcinogenic PAH (cPAH). (m) Ecology Chronic Freswater SWQS based on an average groundwater hardness of 189 mg/I. (n) Surface water standard adjusted upward to Natural Background Criterion. (o) MTCA Method B surface water cleanup levels are for chromium III (CAS# 16065-83-1). Applicable surface water standards are shown in italics. Anatytes detected in samples at concentrations exceeding applicable standards are shown in bold and shaded . mg/I - milligrams per liter pg/1 - micrograms per liter Quailtiers: J - Estimated concentration when the value is less than the calculated laboratory reporting limit. M - Estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectal match. Y - Raised laboratory reporting limit due to matrix interference. December 2002 w:\2001 \016110.00\2002 phase I rpt \Table 9.xls Page 2 of 2 016110.00 TABLE 10 INVESTIGATION - DERIVED .WASTE CHARACTERIZATION ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analyte (Unit • Sample Method) Sample Designation Dangerous Waste Criteria(a) DR -29/37 DR -35/36 DR- 8/33/34 TPH (mg /kg - NWTPH -Dx by GC /FID) Diesel 28 6.1 6.0 NA(b) Oil 43 12 <10(`) • NA VOCs (pg /kg - 8260B GC /MS) Chloromethane <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA Chloroethane <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA Acetone 56B(d) 20B <6.2 NA Carbon Disulfide 4.5 <1.2 <1.2 NA 1,1 -DCE <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA 1,1 -DCA <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA cis -1,2 -DCE <1.3 2.5 <1.2 NA 1,2 -DCA <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA 2- Butanone <6.6 <6.2 <6.2 NA 1,1,1 -TCA <1.3 <1.2 2.9 NA Trichloroethene <1.3 <1.2 4.4 NA Benzene <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA Tetrachloroethene <1.3 <1.2 1.8 NA Toluene 3.4 <1.2 2.9 NA Ethylbenzene 2.7 <1.2 <1.2 NA m,p- xylene 11 <1.2 13 NA o- xylene 3.0 <1.2 1.7 NA 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 4.1 <1.2 6.3 NA 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 11 <1.2 2.3 NA Isopropylbenzene <1.3 <1.2 2.8 NA n- Propylbenzene 1.6 <1.2 4.0 NA sec- butylbenzene <1.3 <1.2 <1.2 NA 4- lsopropyltoluene 7.4 <1.2 <1.2 NA n- Butylbenzene <2.6 <2.5 <2.5 NA Naphthalene 7.5B <6.2 <6.2 NA TCLP RCRA Metals (mg /I 6010/7000 Series) Arsenic <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 5.0 Barium 0.19 0.06 0.1 100.0 Cadmium <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1.0 Chromium <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 5.0 Lead <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 5.0 Mercury <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.2 Selenium <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 1.0 Silver <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 5.0 Notes: (a) Dangerous Waste Criteria based on WAC 173 - 303 -100. (b) NA = Not available /not applicable. (c) < = denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (d) B = Compound also detected in method blank. mg /kg - milligrams per kilogram pg /kg - micrograms per kilogram mg/1- milligrams per liter December 2002 w: \2001 \016110.00\2002 phase I rpt \Table 10.xls 016110.00 TABLE 11 EXTRACTABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (EPHs) - SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PACCAR - Seattle Analytes Sample Designation /Sample Depth NA -5 -5 -7 BY -1 -0 -1 BY -4 -0 -2 BY -6 -0 -1 DS -1 -0 -1 EXTRACTABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONSIai (mg /kg) Aliphatics C8 -C10 45 6.5 <3.8(b) <3.5 <3.6 C10 -C12 88 13 <3.8 <3.5 <3.6 C12 -C16 490 160 <3.8 5.3 4.0 C16 -C21 720 410 25 50 27 C21 -C34 2,100 2,200 580 660 880 Aromatics C8 -C10 <24 <3.8 <3.8 <3.5 <3.6 C10 -C12 <24 <3.8 <3.8 <3.5 <3.6 C12 -C16 160 110 <3.8 <3.5 <3.6 C16 -C21 830 250 13 38 34 C21 -C34 5,100 5,200 770 1,600 2,100 Notes: (a) Results for analysis of extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPHs) by GC /FID. (b) " <" denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. mg /kg - milligrams per kilogram December 2002 w: \2001 \016110.00 \2002 phase! rpt \Table 11 . As 016110.00 TABLE 12 SYNTHETIC PRECIPITATION LEACHING PROCEDURE (SPLP) ANALYTICAL RESULTS - SVOCS(a) AND LEAD(b) PACCAR - Seattle Sample Designation Totals SVOCs(at cPAHs Naphth- alene 2- Methyl naphthalene Acenaph- thlyene Acenaph- thene Fluorene Phenan- threne Anth- racene Fluoran- thene Pyrene Dibenzo- furan Benzo (g,h,i) perylene Chrysene Benzo (b)- fluoranthene Benzo (k)- fluoranthene Benzo (a)- pyrene Indeno (1,2,3- cd) pyrene Dibenz (a,h)- anthracene Benzo (a)- anthracene BY -1 -0 -1 Total (pg /kg) <440t`) 3,600 <440 650 810 4,100 <440 610 630 <440 <440 1,200 <440 <440 '1 <440 <440 <440 <440 SPLP (pg /I) <1.0 2.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 i <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 DS -2 -6 -8 Total (pg /kg) <250 <250 <250 1,200 1,100 7,800 1,600 7,000 5,400 650 590 3,000 1,800 2,400 , 2,400 730 <250 2,600 SPLP (pg /I) <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ■ <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 HM- 4 -8 -10 Total (pg /kg) 610 980 <170 4,800 7,200 25,000 4,000 14,000 8,600 4,200 1,400 3,100 1,500 1,800 2,000 1,300 220M 2,900 SPLP (pg /I) 1.3 2.1 <1.0 9.6 11 14 1.4 <1.0 <1.0 7.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Surface Water Standard (14/1) 620 NA(d) NA 520 14,000 NA 110,000 370 11,000 NA NA 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 Sample Designation Totals Lead BY -1 -1 -3 Total (mg /kg) 9,220 SPLP (mg /I) ,` ''0;020';, BY -4 -4 -6 Total (mg /kg) 3,330 SPLP (mg /I) ,. 0:0605,-'1; Surface Water Standard (moil) 0.005 . Notes: (a) Samples were analyzed using Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) by EPA Method 1312 with semivolatile organic compound analysis (SVOCs) by 8270C GC /MS. (b) Samples were analyzed using SPLP by EPA Method 1312 with lead analysis by EPA Method 200.8. (c) " <" denotes analyte was not detected at the indicated laboratory reporting limit. (d) NA = No cleanup level available /not applicable. Qualifiers: M - Indicates an estimated value of analyte found and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match. Applicable surface water standards are shown in italics. Analytes detected in samples at concentrations exceeding applicable standards are shown in bold and shaded . pg /kg - micrograms per kilogram mg /kg - milligrams per kilogram pg /I - micrograms per liter mg /1 - milligrams per liter December 2002 w:\20011016110.00\2002 phase I rpt\Table 12.xls 016110.00 s !�!�S'a`• - -®► "!ilk A!1 vi d r 7 BEIMINIFIMEMIN zwartall 01I ®mm \ ISSN Mu= Jr- \, • Foot REFERENCE USGS 7.5' TOPOGRAPHIC BATHYMETRIC QUADRANGLE, SEATTLE SOUTH, WASHINGTON (1985) 0 1000 2000 • '■ APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET N Kenned /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SITE LOCATION MAP 016110.00/P02SK001 FIGURE 1 STORM -NORTH STORMWATER OIL /WATER SEPARATOR MW -8B MW -33A MW -23A MW -34A RW -3 E7 ACETONE (CLOSED IN PLACE) MW -35A MW -26 MW -35B PLASTIC SHOP M -25A 1 GASOLINE 14 TER /OIL ®�MVJ -7A 12 DIESEL MW -32A MW -24A MW -8A MW -26B MW -26A EB ACETONE OFF -HWY MW -27A HI-BAY MW -28A MW-288 MW -29C MW -31 MW -29A MW -39A MW -29B SHEET- PILING BULKHEAD MW -38Aa w FORMER BARREL STORAGE MW -37 SEEP 4 SEEP 3 1 SEEP 2 SEEP 1 SEEP 6 STORM -SOUTH SEEP 5 LEGEND MW -11A MW -28B -0- MW -26C- - RW -2 SEEP 1 M7 SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA FORMER BONEYARD MW- 12A' PARTS WAREHOUSE RW -1 MW -14G. MAINTENANCE THINNER /OIL 6 `-8 THINNER r..•' —rte o E 0 1 MW- 5A WATER I �IC) oWo MW -18AA ® W -2 MW 19B MW -PIA MW -P1 B AXLE ALIGN. TOUCH -UP PAINT cam WASTE OIL 7 NFA AREA 10 THINNER 11 THINNER MW -16A MW -22A WASH PIT AREA MANUFACTURING BUILDING MW 6A 7 PAINT MIX AREA EMPLOYEE PARKING MW -1A 5 20 W1. OIL 4 30 WT. OIL 3 ANTI- FREEZE 2 DIESEL SHIPPING MW -9A TIRE SHOP CAFETERIA RECEIVING -MW -4A FORMER DRUM STORAGE AREA FORMER ANITFREEZE UST FORMER DIESEL UST ,(CLOSED IN- PLACE) FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA MW -11A SHALLOW ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION ® FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) LOCATION AND DESIGNATION A B L� 4 ®eoo��d F FORMER OIL USTS (CLOSED IN- PLACE) FORMER 15W 40 OIL UST FORMER DIESEL UST NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS (REFER TO FIGURES 7 AND 8) RGSA WORK AREAS 0 EMPLOYEE PARKING PLANT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 60 120 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SITE LAYOUT INCLUDING RGSA WORK AREAS AND LOCATIONS OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS 016110.00/P02SK002 FIGURE 2 Fence / Approximate Property Boundary PACCAR Seattle Pole Boeing • • MW -23A9 •e North Fire Aisle —> Awning Shed/Awning NA -3 • MW-8A9 RW -1 N•2 NA- NA-8 • NA-4 • MW-8B 9 NA -7 O NA-6 Storage Shed Maintenance Building Diesel AST / Former UST Excavation Area 11*Catch Basin •NA-5 111111111 111 MW -34A 9 Boiler /Power House LEGEND:. NA-6 0 Reconnaissance sampling location —soil and groundwater NA-8 ® Reconnaissance sampling location —soil only MW-8A 9 Monitoring /Extraction well location NOTES: 1. All locations are approximate 2. See Figure 2 for locations onsite 0 10 20 MIN Approximate Scale in Feet (1 " =101 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA NORTH FIRE AISLE AREA BORING LOCATIONS 016110.00 /FIGURE3.VSD FIGURE 3 MW -14A4 '- niiilyT:cnrn MW-18A 4 Maintenance Shed • Maintenance Building WP-3 Furnace MW -15A- WP -1 • WP -2 Wash Pit WP-6 • WP -5 O 0. WP-4 Covered Storage MW -19B Water Tower Manufacturing Buiding LEGEND: WP -2 oQ Reconnaissance sampling location —soil and groundwater WP-4 Reconnaissance sampling location —soil only MW -14A 4 Monitoring well location NOTES: 1. All locations are approximate 2. See Figure 2 for locations onsite N E 20 40 Approximate Scale in Feet (1 " =20') Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA WASH PIT AREA BORING LOCATIONS 016110.00 /FIGURE4.VSD FIGURE 4 MW37B MW-37A Sheet - Piling Bulkhead --*`'. _Previous Excavation. Patch_ Area_ Fence / Approximate Property Boundary \ • G. 1 N -0 CO • • BY-5 catch basin ® • BY -1 (refusal) BY -2 (refusalk • • BY•4 BONEYARD •BY-6 • DS -1 (refusal) DRUM STORAGE •BY-3 *DS-2 HM -1 • Concrete Pad HM -2 • Trench Drains Storm -South Discharge }--c • • O • LEGEND: DS -2 • Reconnaissance sampling location —soil and groundwater HM4 • Reconnaissance sampling location —soil only MW-30A 4 Monitoring well location • HM-3 (refusal) HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE Former T ench Drains Filled with Concrete ID pole • HM-6 4 MW -30A 0 20 40 Approximate Scale in Feet (1 " =201 NOTES: 1. All locations are approximate 2. See Figure 2 for locations onsite Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA BORING LOCATIONS 016110.00 /FIGURE5.VSD FIGURE 5 STORM -NORTH STORMWATER OIL /WATER SEPARATOR MW -8B MW -33A MW -73A THINNER /OIL 6 8 THINNER 10 THINNER 11 THINNER E7 ACETONE (CLOSED IN PLACE) MW -35B M ' -25A 1 GASOLINE 14 TER /OIL MW -7A \1.2_ DIESEL MW- 32A MW -24A. MW -34A MW -16A -MW -22A MW-35P1 PLASTIC A SHOP MW -26C � o • MW -36B1 TT MW-36A‘ MW -26B MW -26A E8 ACETONE E. C MW -14A RW -1 MAINTENANCE OFF -HWY BUILDING MW -27AA HI -BAY MW -BA MW -28B PARTS WAREHOUSE MW -29C M 38Aa MW -31 MW -29A MW -39A MW -29B SHEET- PILING BULKHEAD MW- 0 y IUYYL MW -1800' MW - --19B RW -2 AXLE ALIGN. TOUCH -UP PAINT FORMER BARREL STORAGE MW -37 SEEP 3 JEEP 2 SEEP i SEEP 6 W -37B FORMER BONEYARD MW -12A4 FORMER DRUM STORAGE AREA SHIPPING RECEIVING MW -P 1 A MW-I-'1 B WASTE OIL 7 WASH PIT RW -3 MANUFACTURING BUILDING I I MW -6A coo RA P MW -9A urn /MW -4A )1( x y X FORMER ANITFRX EEZE UST FORMER DIESEL UST (CLOSED IN- PLACE) STORM -SOUTH SEEP 5 LEGEND MW -11A - MW-28B - MW -26C - - RW-2 SEEP 1 W -30A FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA x TIRE SHOP FORMER OIL USTS (CLOSED IN- PLACE) x x xI FORMER 15W 40 OIL UST FORMER DIESEL UST MW -11A SHALLOW ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION ® FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) .4 SEEP LOCATION AND DESIGNATION NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. CAFETERIA PAINT MIX AREA EMPLOYEE PARKING MW-1A 5 20 WT. OIL 4 30 WT. OIL 3 ANTI- FREEZE 2 DIESEL PLANT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING EMPLOYEE PARKING 0 I X 60 120 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA GROUNDWATER, STORMWATER, AND SEEP MONITORING LOCATIONS 016110.00/P02SK006 FIGURE 6 (FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL) A 10- co co co AD 43<b 0- /, / /j,/' :ir/JfE�l // -'65 WLY �% ,�i�f1 ��1 i'/ '//%%/,'• %/ -1 0 - -20 - L // ///// ///' -40 - i/ // / i• / / /j -50 - -60 - LEGEND PREDOMINANTLY SAND UNIT (SP, SP /SM, SW, GP /GM) PREDOMINANTLY FINE - GRAINED UNIT (ML, SM, SM /ML) APPROX. HIGH TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROX. LOW TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (EF. MSL) D 0 30 60 APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL SCALE N FEET 0 5' 10 • • • • • .- APPROXIMATE VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET A' -10 J - 0 - -10 - -20 - -40 - -50 - -60 J W U-1 J W Ln w w w w Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A -A' (SOUTH -TO- NORTH) 016110.00/P02SK007 FIGURE 7 B • 10 J w -10- w 0 -20- 0 m F- w w LL z 0 a -30 - w J w - 40 - - 50 - -60 - REM EMI OM / � ���FAr�z,,,mm //, Ivrar I/I IGRIMOr�r/�i irAw4r.r.w ./m/�iii WANKA ID OICAII/ / //irg�/I���IyeArIIr a ; / . 4417r. AzAr Az.. AN /,j /, / % j/ / // /ter , MEM LEGEND PREDOMINANTLY SAND UNIT (SP, SP /SM, SW, GP /GM) PREDOMINANTLY FINE - GRAINED UNIT (ML, SM, SM /ML) APPROX. HIGH TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROX. LOW TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) 0 i j /� / / % / /. / /;••/ 30 60 • • • • ■ Ifc APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET s 10 APPROXIMATE VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET MEM MmM oQ' 10 0 J w > - -10 w N -20 > F- LU w 0 - -30 w J w - -40 - -50 - -60 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B -B' (WEST - TO-EAST) 016110.00/P02SK008 FIGURE 8 STORM -NORTH STORMWATER OIL /WATER SEPARATOR MW -25A (0.44) ° E7 ACETONE (CLOSED IN PLACE) MW -35A (-0.38)? MW -35 PLASTIC SHOP S MW -26C vy G MW -36B , MW -36A ( -0.38) • W -26B MW -26A ( -0.58) Fs. S' • 9 MW -29B 9 1 GASO 14 WA (0 12 E8 AC MW -32A NE (1.67) /OIL 7A 2) 0 •0 MW -29C MW -29A —0.40) SHEET -PILI BULKHEAD A '�1j 7B IESEL ONE W -27 (1.33) OFF -HWY BUILDING MW x?4A (1.96) I- BAY 1W -28A ( 36) MW -28B MW—.)1A M .. (0.47)-40-'r ; MW —,39A Y' -BA.V / —1.5. MW-37A SEEP 4 SEEP 3 SEEP 2 SEEP 1 SEEP 6 STORM -SOUTH SEEP 5 LEGEND MW-11A -4- (1/4) MW -28B MW -26C RW -2 0 / c .s PARTS AREHOUSE. MW MW -88 MW -33A MW -23A (2.07) . A6) X (2 1, ; .o - -�- - -- - ■-- MW -8A -�� • :. MW —a P, ._• =_ i MW -16A MW -22A — (2.46) 11 POWER (2.37) RW -3 ' (NM) (3.72) —1 RW -1 I.l HOUJ 2.03 MAINTENANCE 0 o THINNER /OIL 6 a8 THINNER 10 THINNER 11 THINNER M ❑WATER `t' TOWER .10). E 10 2 MW -19B 0 MW -18A (1.957 ®R - MW —PIA —MW —P1 B AXLE ALIGN. TOUCH -UP PAINT FORMER BARREL S AGES% SHIPPING FORMER DRUM STORAGE AREA MW— OA ( -0.:) mm WASTE OIL 7 0 WASH PET AREA MANU CTURING BUILDING FORMER AN '.EZE UST — RECEIVI G MW -11A (1.74) I I MW -6A --MW -9A (1.90 *) (1.89) FORMER DIESEL UST (CLOSED IN— PLACE) MW -4A (2.00) v' s — ORMER 15W 40 OIL • RAMP f TIR SHOP FORMER OIL U (CLOSED IN— PLACE) FORM DIESEL UST SHALLOW ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION AND GROUNDWATER ELEVATION IN FEET MSL INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION • ® FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. APPROXIMATE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE ELEVATION COUNTOUR BASED ON MEASUREMENT TAKEN AT LOW TIDE ON 16 APRIL 2002 SEEP 1 SEEP LOCATION AND DESIGNATION (NM) NOT MEASURED * MEASUREMENT IS THE WATER ELEVATION IN WELL MW -6A. HYDROCARBON PRODUCT MEASURED 0.19 FEET ABOVE WATER ELEVATION. PAINT MIX AREA EMPLOYEE PARKING • ,, • • • \` ,, • • • • • ,, • • • • • • • MW -1A 5 20 WT. OIL (4.15) 4 30 WT. OIL AN11— FREEZE 2 DIESEL CAFETE EMPLOYEE∎PARKING N I 1 0 60 120 • i E7 ACETONE (CLOSED IN PLACE) MW -35A•' (1.95) MW -26C MW -36B MW -36A (2.12) STORM -NORTH STORMWATER OIL /WATER SEPARATOR MW -25A a (1.65) �� 1 GASOUNE 'o 14 TER /OIL j • ._ MW -7A X1.48) -12 DIESEL E8 ACETONE MW -35B PLASTIC SHOP V r. 1k MW 26B MW -26A (2.14) S�. MW -29B MW -37A (2.64 SEEP 4 MW -32A (1.77) sI OFF -HWY B[lL DING` MW -27A (1.74) � ' xx 4.MW -?4A (2.17) HI -BAY MW -28A _4(1.82) MW -286 MW -29C MW -31 MW -29A (2.03) (2.29) . MW -39A /MEET- PILING BULKHEAD -38A� W W -37B SEEP 3 SEEP 2 SEEP 1 �/11' SEEP 6' MW -1 1A (2.01) MW -28B MW -26C RW -2 STORM -SOUTH SEEP 5 LEGEND L_ FORMER BARREL STORAGE PARTS WAREHOUSE MW -8B THINNER /OIL 6 MW -23A MW- 33A a (2 31) � 8 THIJNER a a a a (2.20), - - - - -- - MW_gp, ;� MW -34P, 1 � MW -16A, MW -22A (2.81) ill POWER , i"-• 2.45) , RW -3 (4.25)(3.76) RW -1 ■ Hous___J M�(2.19r- ' MAINTENANCE 10 THINNER 11 THINNER 0 0 WATER TOWER MW- 15ArI, MW -18A A, (2. 9Y r1 )O 0 (2.097-RW -2 MW 19B, AXLE ALIGN_ NMI pi TOUCH -UP PAINT MW -P 1 A (2.06) MW-P1B WASTE OIL 7 a WASH P1T\AREA MANUFACTURING BUILDING o �s �� O S FORMER ANITFREEZE UST — FORMER BONEYARD MW -12A (2.18) i 4 t • ORAG M FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA (2.71) 2 13: MW -30A SHIPPING \RECEIVING X X MW-11A (2.01) MW -9A (2.11) X x X X X I I MW -4A (2.18) MW-6A t_i r(1.98 *) FORMER DIESEL UST (CLOSED IN- PLACE) lik N. FORMER 15W 40 OIL UST RAMP CAFETERIA FORMER OIL USTS (CLOSED IN- PLACE) x x "k1 FORMER DIESEL UST SHALLOW ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION AND GROUNDWATER ELEVATION IN FEET MSL INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION ® FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. �.�5�Th APPROXIMATE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE ELEVATION COUNTOUR BASED ON MEASUREMENT TAKEN AT HIGH TIDE ON 16 APRIL 2002. SEL -P 1 SEEP LOCATION AND DESIGNATION (NM) NOT MEASURED * MEASUREMENT IS THE WATER ELEVATION IN WELL MW -6A. HYDROCARBON PRODUCT MEASURED 0.24 FEET ABOVE WATER ELEVATION. PAINT MIX AREA EMPLOYEE PARKING MW -1 A 5 20 WI. OIL (4.19) 4 30 WT. OIL 3 ANTI- FREEZE 2 DIESEL Aik EMPLOYEE PARKING PLANT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 0 60 120 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS FOR SHALLOW ZONE 16 APRIL 2002 (HIGH TIDE). 016110.00/P02SK010 FIGURE 10 Conditional Point of Compliance for Groundwater- precipitation Sheet - Piling Bulkhead --\ Surface Storage (secondary containment) surface runoff to storm sewer Surface Storage (no secondary containment) High Tide Waterway Level vapors vapors Stagnation Zone Duwamish Waterway Rip -Rap - Aquatic Organisms ("-- Dissolved Phase Transport leak Low Tide Waterwa Level Orga ear k Upper Saturated Zone ----------------- - i= 0.004ft/ft Pay = 0.04 Kav = 6.6x10-3 ft/ min V10 = 34 ft/year Shallow "A" zone Intermediate "B" zone • n Lower Saturated Zone POTENTIAL PATHWAY POTENTIAL RECEPTORS PATHWAY COMPLETE/ INCOMPLETE? RATIONALE Direct Contact (ingestion, dermal) Soil Industrial Worker COMPLETE Direct contact possible by industrial worker doing invasive work O Direct Contact (ingestion, dermal) Groundwater Industrial Worker INCOMPLETE No potable water wells or surface water within 1/2 mile of the site •Potential Inhalation Vapors Industrial Worker COMPLETE for VOC migration through concrete foundations ® Leachin g Soil to Groundwater Aquatic Organisms in Duwamish Waterway INCOMPLETE Site is paved and stormwater is routed to storm drains 0 Hydraulic Connection Groundwater to Surface Water Aquatic Organisms in Duwamish Waterway COMPLETE Groundwater discharges to Duwamish Waterway at low tide LEGEND: Groundwater flow direction - low tide Groundwater flow direction - high tide Potentiometric surface - low tide Potentiometric surface - high tide ® Concrete slab foundation Asphalt pavement Impacted soil Deep "C" zone NOT TO SCALE Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SITE CONCEPTUAL MODEL SCHEMATIC 016110.00 /FIGURE11.VSD FIGURE 11 STORM -NORTH STORMWATER OIL /WATER SEPARATOR MW -25A TCE 0.8 VC 2.5 MW -32A TCE 2.8 1,1 -DCE 0.7 VC 7.5 MW -14A TCE 1,1 -DCE VC 88 12 0.4 MW -24A TCE 0.6 VC 1.0 MW -33A TCE 1,1 -DCE VC 64 0.2 5.6 MW -8A TCE 2.3 VC 0.4 MW -23A TCE 8.8 1.1 -DCE 0.4 8 THINNER THINNER /OIL 6 MW -8B MW -34A TCE 2.4 MW- 16A 1.6 MW -22A TCE 1.2 E7 ACETONE o (CLOSED IN PLACE) ,MW -35B MW -26A 1,1 -DCE 0.4 VC 48 MW -36A TCE 47 1,1 -DCE 0.3 VC 4.9 MW -29A TCE 8.9 1,1 -DCE 0.6 VC 38 MW -37A TCE 1.4 VC 0.6 1 GASOLINE \ 1WATER/OIL 4332 \ 12 DIESEL 6, E8 ACETONE \ MW -7A VC 10.5 C HI -BAY -3.69. -- RW -1 MAINTENANCE PLASTIC SHOP MW -26C, MW -26B MW -35A TCE 0.4 VC 51 OFF -HWY BUILDING MW -27A TCE 0.2 VC 1,0 MW -28B MW -28A TCE 0.4 1,1 -DCE 3.1 VC 69 / PARTS WAREHOUSE / / II POWER HOUSE O U RW- 3 o ATEP, o O TOWEP� MW4-42 o B WASH PIT AREA RW -2 -MW -P 1A - MW -P1B AXLE ALIGN. Cal WASTE OIL 7 MW -15A MW -18A 11 THINNER 10 THINNER PAINT MIX AREA MANUFACTURING BUILDING MW -36B FRAME RACKS MW -29C MW -39A MW -29B SHEET - PILING BULKHEAD VC 28 / FORMER BARREL STORAGE TOUCH -UP PAINT SEEP 4 MW -30.A 1,1 -DC 0.5 SEEP 3 SEEP 2 SEEP 1 SEEP 6- STORM -SOUTH MW -39A / TCE 0.4 / ,1 -DCE 0.5 , VC 25 FORMER BONEYARD FORMER DRUM /STORAGE AREA cHn SHIPPING FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE A EA MW - 12A 2.0 1.4 1,1 -DCE VC RECEIVING MW -9A TCE 0.7 �C x �C I X FORME ANN-FREEZE UST FORMER DIESEL UST (CLOSED IN- PLACE) MW -6A. RA P -MW-4A x TIRE SHOP FORMER OIL USTS (CLOSED IN- PLACE) X X XI FORMER 15W 40 OIL UST FORMER DIESEL UST CAFETERIA EMPLOYEE PARKING MW-1A 5 20 WT. OIL `4 30 WT. OIL -3 ANTI- FRFE7E 2 DIESEL PLANT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING X EMPLOYEE PARKING SEEP 5 LEGEND MW -1 1A - SHALLOW ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION MW- 28B-�- INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION MW -26C - DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION RW -2 ® EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION ® FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) SEEP LOCATION AND DESIGNATION Si- Li= ANALYTE MW -14A 1, TCE 88 1 -DCE 12 0.4 VC a CONCENTRATION (}ig /I) ONLY CONCENTRATIONS DETECTED ABOVE THE LABORATORY REPORTING LIMIT ARE SHOWN ON THIS FIGURE NATIONAL TOXIC RULE /NATIONAL AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA CONCENTRATION CONTOUR FOR TRICHLOROETHENE (WI) NATIONAL TOXIC RULE /NATIONAL AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA CONCENTRATION CONTOUR FOR 1,1- DICHLOROETHENE (pg /I) MICA METHOD B SURFACE WATER CLEANUP LEVEL CONCENTRATION CONTOUR FOR VINYL CHLORIDE (Ng /I) x x x X X X X X X X NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. 3) ANALYTICAL RESULTS ARE FOR GROUNDWATER SAMPLES COLLECTED 26 MARCH TO 2 APRIL 2002. 0 60 120 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 1 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA VOC CONCENTRATIONS EXCEEDING SURFACE WATER STANDARDS - SHALLOW ZONE 016110.00/P02SK012 FIGURE 12 Appendix A Technical Memorandum from Mr. Paul Fuglevand Dalton, Olmsted & Fuglevand, Inc. Environmental Consultants 10827 NE 68th Street, Suite B • Kirkland, Washington 98033 -4000 Telephone (425) 827 -4588 (FAX 425 739 -9885) MEMORANDUM TO: Alex Buccilli, PACCAR, Inc. FROM: Paul Fuglevand RE: Task 1, PCB Data Review, PACCAR Seattle DATE: September 30, 2002 This memorandum presents the results of our review of PCB data provided by PACCAR for their Seattle facility and of the EPA site characterization data for the Lower Duwamish River (1999). Dalton, Olmsted & Fuglevand (DOF) was retained by PACCAR, Inc. to review available PCB data to provide an opinion as to the potential severity of the problem and to recommend a path - forward. As discussed in this report, we found little evidence of a significant source of PCBs to Duwamish River from the PACCAR Seattle site. PACCAR SITE DATA. On May 13, 2002 Carole Robbins of PACCAR emailed us preliminary groundwater, surface water, and soil quality data from the PACCAR Seattle site. The data was collected as part of the Washington State Department of Ecology Voluntary Cleanup Program or "VCP ". We received the following data: • Groundwater analytical results for 38 monitoring well samples (transmitted in an Excel spreadsheet). • Surface water analytical results for three storm -water samples and four seep samples (transmitted in a separate Excel spreadsheet). • Soil analytical results for PCBs were transmitted as a table within an email. • Dalton, Olmsted & Fuplevand, Inc. PACCAR Seattle Data Review 09/30/02 Page 2 PCB Concentrations in Soil PACCAR provided preliminary PCB soil results for various areas within the plant site. We received a tabulation of detected concentrations. The results are presented on the May 13, 2002 email from Carol Robbins. PCB Aroclors 1254 and 1260 are the only two PCBs reported in the data set. Detected concentrations are summarized by site location as follows. Table 1. Detected PCBs in Preliminary Soil Data PACCAR — Seattle VCP. Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 (ug/kg) (ug/kg) 130, 130 170 46, 70, 86, 160, 250 86, 110 71, 140 100, 120, 140, 140, 940 50, 60 Location North Fire Aisle Wash Pit Boneyard Drum Storage Haz. Materials Storage Note: tg/kg — micrograms per kilogram. Total PCBs (ug/kg) 130, 130 170 46, 70, 86, 250, 270 71,140 120, 140, 150, 200, 940 PCB Concentrations in Groundwater Thirty-eight (38) groundwater samples were analyzed for seven (7) PCB Aroclors (Aroclors 1016, 1242, 1248, 1254, 1260, 1221, and 1232). The reported detection limits ranged from 0.017 to 0.064 ug/1. (Note: Special analytical techniques were used to achieve the low detection limits, two orders of magnitude below standard detection limits of 1.0 ug/1.) PCB Aroclor 1254 was detected in three (3) of the thirty-eight (38) sample analyses. No other Aroclors were reportedly detected. In each case the results were close to the detection limits for the test. The detected concentrations are tabulated below. Table 2. Detected PCBs in Preliminary Groundwater Data PACCAR — Seattle VCP. Sample Aroclor 1254 Well Location (ug/1) MW -16A 0.064 North property line, adjacent Manufacturing Bldg. MW -30A 0.012J South west corner, adjacent Duwamish River MW -34A 0.023 North property line, adjacent Manufacturing Bldg. Notes: µg/1 — micrograms per liter. "J" qualified result is an estimated trace concentration reported below the detection limit. Dalton, Olmsted & Fuelevand, Inc. PACCAR Seattle Data Review 09/30/02 Page 3 PCB Concentrations in Surface Water Surface water samples were collected at the stormwater discharge points into the Duwamish River at locations Storm North and Storm South during a low tide. Another sample (and a duplicate sample) were also collected from Storm North at high tide. (Note: No sample was able to be collected from Storm South at a high tide.) Seep samples were collected at four locations (Seep 1, Seep 2, Seep 4, and Seep 5) along the southern portion of the Duwamish River shoreline of the PACCAR Seattle property. These seven surface water samples were each analyzed for seven PCB Aroclors (Aroclors 1016, 1242, 1248, 1254, 1260, 1221, and 1232). The reported detection limits ranged from 0.017 to 0.040 ug/1. PCB 1254 was detected in five of the seven samples in the preliminary data set. PCB 1260 was also detected in the four seep samples in the preliminary data set. PCBs were not detected in samples from Storm South at low tide, or from Storm North at high tide. In each sample where PCBs were detected, the results were close to the detection limits for the test. As indicated previously, these are the lowest possible detection limits. The detected PCB 1254 and 1260 concentrations are tabulated below. Table 3. Detected PCBs in Preliminary Surface Water Data PACCAR — Seattle VCP. Sample Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 (ug/l) (1-Lg/1) Storm North 0.018 Seep #1 - - 0.022 0.019 Seep #2 0.087 0.075 Seep #4 0.011J 0.0090J Seep #5 0.014J 0.014J Notes: µg/1— micrograms per liter. "J" qualified result is an estimated trace concentration below the reported detection limit. Discussion of VCP Data Soil. Preliminary soil data indicate that PCBs are not a compound of concern at the PACCAR Seattle site. Washington's Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) - Chapter 173- 340 WAC - Method A cleanup level for PCBs at industrial property is 10,000 ug/kg PCBs. The Method A cleanup level for residential property (for PCBs described as "high occupancy areas with no cap ") is 1,000 ug/kg PCBs. Not only are there no soil concentrations of PCBs at the site that exceed the industrial criteria (10,000 pg/kg), there are no soil concentrations that exceed the lower residential level of 1,000 ug/kg. Groundwater PCB's were detected in only three (3) of the thirty-eight (38) wells sampled and were found to have concentrations below the MTCA Method A drinking water cleanup level of 0.1 ug/1 and only marginally exceed the EPA ambient chronic • Dalton, Olmsted & Fu2levand, Inc. PACCAR Seattle Data Review 09/30/02 Page 4 freshwater criterion of 0.014 ug /1 (EPA 822 -2 -99 -001, April 1999). The limited detection of PCBs in groundwater is not surprising because PCBs are hydrophobic (i.e. partition readily to soil) and have low solubility in water. The three samples with detected PCBs may be an artifact of sampling, and may not be representative of PCBs dissolved in groundwater. If PCBs are present in soil around a well screen, well sampling can agitate the soil around the screen and draw soil particles into the well. PCBs sorbed to the soil particles are then extracted from the water sample during laboratory preparation and result in a "false positive" or "biased high" detection of PCBs. We recommend that the three wells with detected PCBs be re- sampled using low -flow methods. The low -flow sampling procedure minimizes agitation of soil surrounding the well and generally consists of purging the well at a rate of about 0.5 liters /minute using a peristaltic or small submersible pump. During purging, turbidity is measured using a field meter until the turbidity is less than approximately 5 NTUs or stabilizes at some level above 5 NTUs. Once purging is complete, the water sample is collected with the same equipment as was used to purge the well. Surface Water. Preliminary surface water data indicates that PCBs are present in the storm water and shoreline seeps at very low concentrations (0.0090J to 0.087 ug/1). Two of the sample concentrations (Seep #4 and #5) are below the EPA ambient chronic criterion of 0.014 ug/1. The remaining samples marginally exceed the criterion. However, as was discussed for groundwater, PCBs detected in the four seep samples may be an artifact of sampling, and not be indicative of PCBs migrating in seep /groundwater. Collection of seep samples using grab sampling techniques can easily disturb the surface sediments (that contain low levels of PCBs), resulting in the introduction of PCBs sorbed to soil particles into the water sample that will be extracted during the laboratory analysis. For example, a seep sample with 100 parts per million solids, with the solids originating from adjacent surface sediment with 100 parts per billion PCBs, would falsely indicate 0.010 ug /1 PCBs in the seep water. We recommend that future seep sampling, if completed, use a method that minimizes the inclusion of surface soil particles in the seep sample. Turbidity measurements should be made during sampling. One method involves the installation of a short double - packed well screen into the seep, with purging and sampling completed using the same low -flow procedure as for groundwater monitoring wells. This low -flow sampling minimizes the disturbance of the soil at the seep and facilitates the collection of a water sample that is representative of actual site seep /groundwater conditions. ' . One possible source of PCBs at the well screen can be the drilling process. For example, some surface soils containing PCBs can be transported down to the level of the well screen by the advance of the augers. • Dalton, Olmsted & Fuelevand, Inc. PACCAR Seattle Data Review 09/30/02 Page 5 EPA LOWER DUWAMISH RIVER DATA As part of the work for Task 1, we reviewed data from EPA's Site Inspection Report, Lower Duwamish River, Volume 2 — Map Folio, April 1999 by R.F. Weston. The PACCAR Seattle site is identified as the Kenworth Motor Corp site on Reach D of the maps. Reach D is located furthest upstream of the four segments of the site maps (Reach A, Reach B, Reach C, Reach D). Map 4 -1d presents total PCB concentrations for Reach D of the study area. Three surface sediment samples are located offshore of the Kenworth Motor Corp site, as summarized below. Table 4. PCBs in Surface Samples Adjacent Kenworth Motor Corp Reach D of Lower Duwamish, EPA Site Inspection Report, 1999. Sample TOC PCBs PCBs Sample Location with respect to (1) dry-wt:- TOC- normalized Adjacent Kenworth Motor Corp property (ug/kg) (ug/kg) (2) DR236 0.9% 129 15,200 North end about 60 ft. offshore, near Storm -North DR277 1.9% 91 4,890 Mid property, about 160 ft. offshore DR237 1.6% 98 6,170 South end about 60 ft. offshore, near Storm -South and Seeps 1 through 6. 1. TOC. Total Organic Carbon 2. TOC normalized concentrations are calculated by dividing the dry- weight concentration of PCBs by the total organic carbon (TOC) concentration of the sample. EPA also collected three samples adjacent to the property located across the Duwamish River from the Kenworth Motor Corp property, designated as DL on the maps, and one sample in the navigation channel between the two properties. The results of those samples are summarized below. Table 5. PCBs in Surface Samples Across Duwamish from Kenworth Motor Corp Reach D of Lower Duwamish, EPA Site Inspection Report, 1999. Sample TOC PCBs PCBs Sample Location with respect to dry-wt. TOC- Normalized Adjacent Kenworth Motor Corp property (ug/kg) (ug/kg) DR282 2.6% 87 3,370 Across from north end of Kenworth, about 120 ft. offshore of DL property. DR258 1.6% 62 4,000 Across from middle of Kenworth, about 40 ft. offshore of DL property DR288 3.0% 83 2,790 Across from south end of Kenworth, mid channel DR259 2.9% 123 4,180 Across from south end f Kenworth, about 80 ft. offshore of DL property. Dalton, Olmsted & Fuelevand, Inc. PACCAR Seattle Data Review 09/30/02 Page 6 Discussion of EPA's PCB Sediment Data TOC. Total organic carbon (TOC) is a measure of the portion of the sediment that is comprised of organic carbon. The TOC in the Duwamish River sediments adjacent to and across from the Kenworth Motor Corp site range from 0.9% to 3.0 %, averaging about 2.1 %. Sample DR236 has a relatively low TOC of 0.9 %, while all other results are 1.6% or greater. The range of TOC adjacent to Kenworth Motor Corp site, 0.9% – 1.9 %, is lower than the TOC range across from the Kenworth Motor Corp site, 1.6% - 3.0 %. PCB Dry Weight. The PCB dry- weight concentrations are presented as a proportion of the weight of PCBs to the dry weight of the tested sediment. The range of PCBs in Duwamish sediment adjacent to the Kenworth Motor Corp site, 91 – 129 ug/kg, is very similar to the range of PCBs in Duwamish sediment located across from the Kenworth Motor Corp site, 62 – 123 ug/kg. All of the above reported PCB dry- weight concentrations in Duwamish sediment, located adjacent to and across from the Kenworth -Motor Corp site, are-less than half of the PCB dry- weight cleanup criterion of 300 ug/kg set for the Commencement Bay Nearshore / Tideflats Superfund (CB/NT) site ( CB/NT Explanation of Significant Differences, EPA, 1997) for marine sediments. PCB dry- weight cleanup criteria have not been established in Washington for fresh -water sediment. PCB TOC Normalized. The PCB TOC normalized concentration is calculated by dividing the PCB dry- weight concentration by the TOC concentration. TOC normalized — concentrations_ can.provide..abetter-indication _of- -the bioavailability of organic compounds. The range of PCB TOC normalized in Duwamish sediment adjacent to the Kenworth Motor Corp site, 4,890 – 15,200 ug/kg, is higher than the range of PCBs TOC normalized in Duwamish sediment located across from the Kenworth Motor Corp site, 2,790 – 4,180 ug/kg, even though the dry- weight reported range of PCBs is about the same adjacent and across from the Kenworth site. The PCB TOC normalized values are higher adjacent to the Kenworth site because the TOC values are lower, by as much as a half. With the exception of sample DR236 (15,200 ug/kg TOC normalized), all of the reported PCB TOC normalized concentrations in Duwamish sediment located adjacent to and across from the Kenworth Motor Corp site are less than about half of the PCB criterion of 12,000 ug/kg TOC normalized criteria set by the Washington State Sediment Management Standards (SMS) for marine sediment (no adverse effects, Sediment Quality Standard "SQS" for marine sediments). Sample DR236 is only slightly over the SQS criterion, and is less than one -fourth of the Cleanup Screening Level (CSL) of 65,000 ug/kg PCBs TOC normalized for marine sediments. The CSL is often used as the action level for active remediation of contaminated sediments at Washington sites. PCB (TOC normalized) cleanup criteria have not been established in Washington for fresh -water sediment. • • Dalton, Olmsted & Fu2levand, Inc. PACCAR Seattle Data Review 09/30/02 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS Our review of the VCP data for site soil and water data did not disclose evidence of a significant source of PCBs on the PACCAR Seattle property, or of a source of PCBs to the Duwamish River sediment. The upland soil concentrations of PCBs, when detected, were typically in the range of 45 to 270 ug/kg, with one sample from the Hazardous Materials Storage Area at 940 ug/kg. Four other samples from the Hazardous Material Storage area were between 120 and 200 ug/kg, indicating that the condition represented by the 940 ug/kg PCBs is not widespread. As discussed above, the upland industrial soil cleanup level for PCBs is 10,000 ug/kg, and the residential soil cleanup level is 1,000 ug/kg. These low concentrations of PCBs at the site indicate that there are no significant PCB source materials at the site. PCB levels in groundwater and surface water, when detected, were all below the MTCA Method A drinking water standard. Some of the results were slightly above the EPA ambient chronic freshwater criterion. However, PCBs detected in the groundwater and surface water samples may be an artifact of sampling and not indicative of PCBs migrating in seeps and groundwater. Additional groundwater and seep sampling, utilizing methods that minimize inclusion of soil particles, would determine the concentration of PCBs, if any, migrating in site seeps and groundwater. EPA sediment samples collected adjacent to the site were all below the currently available marine sediment criteria (CB/NT dry- weight, and SMS -SQS TOC normalized), with the exception of sample DR236, which is only slightly over the SQS criteria, and is less than one -fourth of the Cleanup Screening Level (CSL) of 65,000 ug/kg PCBs TOC normalized. The EPA sediment data set for the Lower Duwamish River confirms the conclusion from the upland data that there is little evidence of a significant source of PCBs to the river from the PACCAR Seattle site. Appendix B Boring and Well Construction Logs • Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name NA -1 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 8.0 DATE STARTED 02/21/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 8.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TD 0.5 FT. SAMPUNG METHODS SPLIT SPOON W/UNER WELL COMPLETION E7 SURFACE HOUSING CO STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENEIRABON RESIST (B.OMS/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHDLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3.5 4 NA -1 -1 -3 NA -1 -3 -5 5- NA-1-6-7 17.1 64.3 92.7 SM Concrete Slob Silty SAND with gravel Dark brown sand with 10 -15% silt and some fine gravel. 1 -3 feet, slight chemical odor. 3 -5 feet, stoined gray, mod /strong chemical odor. 5 -6 feet, brown, slight odor. 6 -7 feet, gray stained, very strong chemical odor. ML SILT Gray dense silt. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATON CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT Boring /Well Name NA -2 Project Name PACCAR DATA ,GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/20/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.5 DATE COMPLETED 02/20/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TD 9.0 F1. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT' SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION ED SURFACE HOUSING E7 STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENETRADON TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (13101S/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOCY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 2 4 5— 10— NA -2 -1 -3 NA -2 -3 -5 NA -2 -5 -7 NA -2 -7 -9 6.9 5.8 98.1 7.9 SM ML Concrete Slab Silty SAND with gravel Brown, dry to moist, sand with 10 -15% silt and 5% fine grovel, no odor. Silty SAND with gravel Gray stained sand with silt and grovel, moderate chemical odor, some wood fragments, moist. SILT Gray dense silt. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FROM TO FROM TO FROM TO ' FT. Boring /Well Name NA -3 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 8.0 DATE STARTED 02/20/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/20/2002 FT. INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.5 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 8.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION C=I SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (8.885/6 BL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3 4 5— 10— NA-3-1 —2 NA -3 -4 -5 NA -3 -5 -7 9.6 5.7 8.6 SW Concrete Slab Well- graded SAND with gravel Red /brown, sand with 10 -15% fine gravel and 5% silt, no odor. SP 11_ ML Poorly graded SAND Gray /brown sand with silt (<5 %) and fine gravel (<5 %), very slight HC /chem odor. SILT Gray dense silt. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 J Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name NA-4 Project Name PACCAR DATA , GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 6.0 DATE STARTED 02/20/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/20/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM TO FT. 0.5 6.0 LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0 5 FT' SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION O SURFACE HOUSING C7 STAND PIPE FE. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRABON RESIST (BLOWS/6 BL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS' 3 2 5— NA -4 -1 -3 NA- 4 -3.5 -5 NA -4 -5 -6 REFUSAL 5.7 8.1 9.4 SW SP _N Concrete Slab Well- graded SAND with gravel Red /brown, sand with 10 -15% fine gravel and \5% silt, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray /brown medium sand with some silt (<5 %) and fine grovel (<5 %),possible very slight hydrocarbon /chemical odor 5 -6 feet. Notes: Refusal at approximately 6 feet, concrete. • SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE • DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name NA -5 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/20/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.5 DATE COMPLETED 02/20/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.5 TO 9.0 FT. 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. LOGGED BY DKM SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION O SURFACE HOUSING STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRA110N RESIST (B.011S/6 IN) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 2 2 2 2 5— 10— 15— NA -5 -1 -3 NA -5 -3 -5 NA -5 -5 -7 NA -5 -7 -9 - 9.7 16.1 - 146 - 11.7 GP Concrete Slab • P• oorly graded GRAVEL Pea gravel, no odor. Well- graded SAND with gravel Dark brown sand with 10 -15% fine gravel and some silt, no odor. Silty SAND with gravel ML Gray /dark gray sand with 107. silt and 10 -15% grovel, moderate chemical odor. Silty SAND with gravel Dark gray, slightly moist, silty (10 -15 %) sand with fine gravel, granulor shiny appearance in places, strong hydrocarbon /chemical odor. SILT — Gray dense silt. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name NA -6 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 54.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/20/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 DATE COMPLETED 02/20/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 54.0 FT LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.010 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION 0 SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENEIRABON TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLOWS/6 W. DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE Na WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 - NA-6-2-4 NA- 6- 6.5 -7.5 10— 15— 20 — 25 — 30— NA- 6 -19 -20 8.7 9.8 8.6 UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRIWNG REMARKS SW Concrete Slab Well- graded SAND with gravel Gray sand with 25 -35% gravel, appears to be pit run fill material, no odor. S W / Well- graded SAND with alit and gravel ML Red /brown sand with silt and grovel, no odor. SILT Gray dense silt, no odor. Sandy SILT Gray, wet, silt and fine sand, grades from sandy silt at approximatley 8.5 feet to silty sand at approximately 13 feet, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray fine sand, wet, soft wood material mixed of 15 -15.5 feet, texturally uniform, no odor. Silty SAND Gray, silty fine to very fine sand, dense, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Durk gray fine sand, minor silt, 5% course sand 23.5 -24 feet, no odor. SILT Graff dense silt, possibly some clay, some small wood fragments, no odor. Some fine - to medium- sand layering with fibrous wood material 30 -31 feet. SHEET 1 OF Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name . PACCAR DATA GAPS Protect Number 0161 10.00 Boring /Well Name NA -6 SAMPLES TYPE PENE1RA110N RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLONSA Bi.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 35— 40— 45— 50— NA- 6 -48 -49 6.7 ML SM SP SP Silty SAND Gray fine sand /medium sand /silt mixture, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Dark gray fine to medium sand, locally includes minor silt and wood fibers or fragments, overall texturally uniform, no odor. Silty SAND Fine sand and silt mixture, denser that overlying and underlying sand, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Dark groy fine to medium sand, no odor. Notes: Groundwater sample NA- 6 —GW -8 collected at 8 feet. screened 6 -8 feet. Groundwater sample NA- 6 —GW -20 collected at 20 feet, screened 16 -20 feet. Groundwater sample NA- 6 —GW -49 collected at 49 feet, screened 45 -49 feet. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name NA -7 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FROM TO ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 36.0 FT SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/2112002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.570 36.0 F' LOGGED BY OKM GROUT CONCRETE SAMPLES FROM 0.010 0.5 FT. SAMPUNG METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION O SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE PENETRATION TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (11.0WS /6IN.) 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 DEPTH (FEET 5— SAMPLE NO. - NA- 7- 5.5 -6.5 NA -7 -7 -8 10— NA- 7 -11 -12 15— 20 — 25— 30 — NA -7 -14.5 -15.5 NA- 7 -22 -23 NA- 7 -27 -28 WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILUNG REMARKS 204 25.4 45.7 9.1 15.0 11.2 SW SM L N Concrete Slob Well- graded SAND with gravel Gray sand with 25 -35% grovel, appears to be pit run fill material, no odor. ML SP Well - graded SAND with alit and gravel Dark gray sand with fine gravel (5 -10%) and silt (5 -10%), strong chemical odor. SILT Gray dense silt. no odor. Sandy SILT Gray, wet, silt and fine sand mixture, possible slight chemical odor 8 -12 feet, no odor 12 -14.5 feet. Poorly graded SAND Gray, poorly graded fine to medium sand, overall texturally uniform, no odor. ML SILT Gray dense silt, possibly some cloy, some small wood fragments, no odor. Some fine sand mixed at 31 -32 feet. • SHEET 1 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name .PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name NA -7 SAMPLES TYPE PENETRATION RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (Bums/61P1) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 35 — NA- 7 -35 -36 12.1 ML SP Poorly graded SAND Dark gray fine to medium sand, no odor. Notes: 1. Groundwater sample NA- 7 —GW -8 collected at 8 feet. screened 6 -8 feet. 2 Groundwater sample NA- 7 —GW -28 collected at 28 feet, screened 26 -28 feet, immediately above silt layer. 3. Groundwater sample NA- 7 —GW -35 collected at 35 feet, screened 35 -36 feet, immediately below silt layer. SHEET 2 OF 2 . J Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy/Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring/Well Name NA-8 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA ,GAPS 016110.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/20/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/20/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.5 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 9.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 00T0 0.5 Fr' SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W/LINER WELL COMPLETION I=1 SURFACE HOUSING ED STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRADON RESIST (BO IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 5— NA-8-1-3 NA-8-3-5 NA-8-5-7 7.3 3.8 8.2 s Concrete Slab Well-graded SAND with gravel Red/brown sand with 10-15% fine grovel and some silt, no odor. ML SILT Gray to orange/brown dense silt. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION WASH PIT AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name WP-1 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Protect Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO DATE STARTED 02/21/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO , 9.0 FT.' LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TD 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION CI SURFACE HOUSING D STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE PENEIRA ➢ON RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (B.O /& IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 5 10— 15— 20 — 25 — 30 — WP -1 -1 -3 WP -1 -3 -5 WP -1 -5 -7 11.0 10.8 11.6 SP Concrete Slab Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, no odor. ML SILT Gray moist dense silt, no odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION WASH PIT AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name WP -2 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FROM TO FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH ' 9.0 FT DATE STARTED 02/21/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.5 TO 0.0 TO 9.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM 0.5 FT' SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION O SURFACE HOUSING E7 STAND PIPE FT SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BLOBS/BIN) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE N0. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 5— WP -2 -1 -3 WP -2 -3 -5 WP -2 -5 -7 8.9 9.2 12.4 SP N Concrete Slab Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, no odor. ML SILT Gray moist dense silt, some fine sand 8 -9 feet, no odor. Notes: 1. Groundwater sample WP- 2 —GW -8 collected at 8 feet, screened 6 -8 feet. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION WASH PIT AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name WP -3 Protect Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 DATE STARTED 02/21/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 9.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TD 0 5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION I= SURFACE HOUSING I=1 STAND PIPE FT SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BLONS /6 UL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG . SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 5— 10— WP -3 -1 -3 WP -3 -3 -5 WP -3 -5 -7 14.9 14.1 21.2 SP/ SM Concrete Slab N Poorly graded SAND with alit Brown poorly graded medium sand with 5 -10% silt in small clumps, some small brick fragments at 4 -5 feet, no odor. Sandy SILT Brown /orange silt and fine sand mixture, no odor. Poorly graded SAND with alit Brown medium sand with 5 -10% silt, no odor. Silty SAND Brown silty fine sand, no odor. Notes: 1. Groundwoter somple WP- 3 —GW -8 collected at 8 feet, screened 6 -8 feet. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION WASH PIT AREA Boring /Well Name WP-4 I DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER PACCAR DATA ,GAPS DRILLING METHOD HAND AUGER DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Project Name Project Number 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 7.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO DATE STARTED 02/26/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A DATE COMPLETED 02/26/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 7.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS HAND AUGER WELL COMPLETION I= SURFACE HOUSING I=1 STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BLOBS/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED HA 6 WP -4 -1 -2 WP- 4 -3 -4.5 5— WP -4 -5 -6 10— 15— 20 — 25 — 30— OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILUNG REMARKS 5.4 6.9 12.5 SP Concrete Slob Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly groded medium sand, no odor. ML SILT Gray to blotchy orange . silt, dense, no odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION WASH PIT AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD HAND AUGER /GEOPROBE RODS DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name WP -5 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 8.0 DATE STARTED 02/26/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/26/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM TO F1. 0.5 8.0 LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.070 05FT' SAMPLING METHODS HAND AUGER WELL COMPLETION CI SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (_065/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS HA 6 5— WP -5 -1 -2 WP- 5 -3 -4.5 WP -5 -6 -7 2.2 SP 4.4 Concrete Slob Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, some fine grovel in upper 0.5 foot, no odor. 8.1 ML SILT Gray silt, dense, no odor. Notes: 1. Groundwater sample WP- 5 —GW -8 collected at 8 feet, screened 6 -8 feet. Geoprobe rod with screen advanced to 8 feet with jockhommer. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION WASH PIT AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD HAND AUGER DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT, Boring /Well Name WP -6 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS • 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 7.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT DATE STARTED 02/26/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/26/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 7.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.070 0 5 FT SAMPLING METHODS HAND AUGER WELL COMPLETION I=1 SURFACE HOUSING I=1 STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY SISTN (FEET) (BLOBS/6 PL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS HA 6 WP -6 -1 -2 WP- 6 -3 -4.5 WP -6 -5 -6 10— 15— 20 — 25 — 30 — 8.4 SP 8.5 Concrete Slob Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, some fine — to medium— grovel in upper foot, no odor. 9.8 ML SILT Groy to blotchy orange silt, dense, no odor. • • SHEET 1 OF 1 • Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION BONE YARD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO ' FT. Boring /Well Name BY -1 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 6.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 6.0 FT. GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0T0 0.5 FT DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A LOGGED BY DKM SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 WELL COMPLETION I7 SURFACE HOUSING CI STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE PENETRATION RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BANS/S IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA 4 2 10— BY -1 -0 -1 BY -1 -1 -3 Refusal 8.9 11.0 8.8 UTHOLOGY USCS LOG GM SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS Asphalt Well- graded SAND with silt and gravel Dark gray /brown silt /sand /grovel mixture. Slight chemical odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Red /brown mixture of angulor rock /brick debris (40 -50 %) with silt and sand, no odor. Poorly graded fine gravel /coarse sand texture. White /buff /orange granular fill material, some in clumps, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with sand Coarse angular rock /brick debris (80 -90 %) mixed with silt and sand, no odor. Notes: 1. Refusol at approximatley 6• feet, rip –rap? SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION BONE YARD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FROM TO FROM TO FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name BY -2 Project Name PACCAR DATA ,GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DAN TOTAL DEPTH 4.0 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 FT. INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 4.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 Fr. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION O SURFACE HOUSING II STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRABON RESIST (BLONS/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 5— BY -2 -0 -1 Refusal 8.1 SP Aspholt Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, some coarse sand and fine gravel in upper 0.5 foot, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Angular rock fragments (907,) with silt and sand, no odor. Notes: 1. Refusal at approximately 4 feet, rip —rap? SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATIDN BONE YARD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name BY -3 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 DATE STARTED 02/21/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5T0 12.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.070 05FT• SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION 0 SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE FT SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENEIRADCN RESIST (BLOMS/B IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTMOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 4 BY- 3 -0 -0.5 BY -3 -3 -5 5— - BY -3 -6 -8 BY -3 -8 -9 10— 15— 20— 25— 30— 8.6 10.3 9.8 7.6 SP GP/ GM SM SP ML SP \Asphalt Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, mixed with block granular material in upper 0.5 foot, no odor. Poorly graded GRAVEL with allt and sand Angular rock /concrete material (90 -95%) with silt and sand, no odor. Silty SAND with gravel Brown /red mixture of sand, silt, and some gravel, some rock /concrete debris, no odor. Poorly graded SAND with gravel Orange /brown granular material (sand and fine gravel) mixed with 30% black charcoal /wood debris, no odor. SILT Dark gray silt, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, no odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION BONE YARD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT Boring /Well Name BY-4.4 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 8.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/21/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.5 DATE COMPLETED 02/21/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 To 8.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION I= SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BOAS/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA 4 4 5— 10— 15— 20 — 25 — BY -4 -0 -2 BY -4 -4 -6 BY- 4 -6 -7.5 30 — 15.2 16.0 15.9 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRIWNG REMARKS \Asphalt Poorly graded SAND Gray /brown poorly graded sand, medium sand 1 -2 feet, medium and coarse sand 0 -1 feet, <5% fine gravel, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with sand Red /brown angular rock /concrete debris (80 -90 %) mixed with silt and sand, no odor. White /gray concrete debris, mixed with <5% dark brown silt, no odor. Poorly graded gravel texture. Well - graded SAND with slit and gravel Brown sand, fine gravel and silt mixed with angular rock and brick debris (15 -20 %), no odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Red /brown /orange mixture of angular rock /concrete debris (60 %), sond (25 %) and silt, no odor, wet below 7.5 feet. • SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION BONE YARD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO ' FT. Boring /Well Name BY -5 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 20 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. SEAL FT. BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0 5TD 20 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 9.5 LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION C=I SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE FT SAMPLES TYPE PENETRATION RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (B.OMS/6 Bi.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE Na WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILUNG REMARKS 4 4 4 BY- 5 -0 -1.5 5— BY-5--5-7 BY -5 -7 -9 10— - BY- 5 -10 -12 15— 20 — 9.1 4.7 13.1 - 68.4 SP GM ML \Asphalt Poorly graded SAND N Gray poorly graded sand, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with sand Angular rock fragments mixed with silt and sand, >90% rock 3.5 -5 feet, 50 -60% rock 5 -7 feet, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with sand Orange /green /white /gray mixture of angular rock /brick /charcoal( ?) debris (60%) with sand. and silt, no odor, sandier with less rock debris 8 -9.5 feet. Sandy SILT Black /dark gray silt with fine sand, some angular rock debris, moderate HC or chemical odor. Notes: 1. Collected groundwater sample BY- 5 —GW -16 at 20 feet, screen advanced to 16 -20 feet. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION BONE YARD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM 0.510 12.0 FT. Boring /Well Name BY -6 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 • ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 DATE COMPLETED. 02/22/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.0 LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FL SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION C7 SURFACE HOUSING STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENETRATION TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLONS/61/L) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA [SINOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 4 BY -6 -0 -1 - BY-6-3-5 5— BY- 6 -7 -8.5 10— 15— 20— 25— 30 — 6.7 10.2 10.3 SP GM GM ML Asphalt Poorly graded SAND with gravel Brown poorly graded medium sand with 5 -107, fine gravel, some silt, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Brown /orange mixture or angular rock /concrete debris (60 -70) mixed with silt and sand, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with nand Dark gray fine- to medium- sand and silt mixed with angular rock /brick and wood debris (50 -55%), possible slight HC /chemical odor. Sandy SILT Dark gray sandy silt with moderate biological — odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION DRUM STORAGE AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FROM TO FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name DS -1 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM GROUT CONCRETE FROM TO FT. 0.5 TO 9.0 FT. 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.5 DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 LOGGED BY DKM SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION I=1 SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENEIRADON RESIST (BLOWS /6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE N0. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 1 10— DS-1-0--1 DS -1 -3 -5 DS- 1 -7 -8.5 Refusal 6.8 11.2 10.8 SP \Asphalt Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, no odor. Mixed with fine gravel in upper 0.25 foot. Contains 40 -50% rounded fine— to medium — gravel from 4.5 to 5.0 feet. G Silty GRAVEL with Band Angular rock /brick /concrete debris (90%) mixed with gray silt and sand, some buff granular material, no odor. Notes: Refusal at approximately 9 feet, large rock stuck in sampler tip. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION DRUM STOAGE AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL 81T(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name DS-2 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 16.0 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 9.0 DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TD 16.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. SAMPLING MET-100S SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION C7 SURFACE HOUSING E7 STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES PENETRATION TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLOWS /6 RC) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOCY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRIWNG REMARKS 4 4' 4 10— 15— DS -2 -0 -1 DS -2 -3 -5 DS -2 -6 -8 DS- 2 -8 -10 10.4 8.9 7.9 6.8 SP SP GM Asphalt Poorly graded SAND with gravel Brown medium sand with 40% fine grovel, no odor. Poorly graded SAND \Brown poorly graded medium sand, no odor. ML r ML Silty GRAVEL with sand Brown /gray mixture of angular rock /brick debris (65 -70 %) with sand and fine grovel (20 %) and silt (5 -10 %), no odor. Sandy SILT with gravel Dark gray silt and fine sand with angular rock /brick debris (20 -30 %), possible slight HC odor. Sandy SILT Gray sandy silt, no odor. Notes: 1. Groundwater sample DS- 2 —GW -16 collected at approximately 16 feet. Screen advanced to 12 -16 feet. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS GROUT CONCRETE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM 0.5 TO . 12.0 FT FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. Boring /Well Name HM -1 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Protect Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 11.0 DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 LOGGED BY DKM SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION CI SURFACE HOUSING C= STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (B.ONS /B IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA LITHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3.5 4 4 10— 15— 20 — 25 — 30 — HM- 1 -7 -8.5 HM- 1 -10 -11 10.5 - 13.5 11.3 11.2 SP Concrete Slob Poorly graded SAND Brown to gray /brown (below 6 ft) medium sand, minor silt, minor fine brick fragments, no odor, no sheen. GM GM ML Silty GRAVEL with sand Angular rock and .brick debris (50 %) mixed with gray silt and fine- to medium- sand, some wood chip debris, moderate chemical odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Angular rock and brick debris (60 -70 %) mixed with. silt and sand. Brown 8.5 -10 ft, gray 10 -11 ft. Slight chemical odor. Sandy SILT Dark gray sandy silt, moderate biological odor. Wet below approx. 11 ft. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT Boring /Well Name HM-2 Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FROM TO ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 11.0 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 12.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0T0 0.5 FT' SAMPUNG METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION I=1 SURFACE HOUSING C7 STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENETRATION TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (o.o%S/6 OL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILUNG REMARKS 3.5 4 4 10— 15— 20— 25— HM -2 -1 -2 HM -2 -3 -5 HM- 2- 6.5 -7.5 HM- 2 -9 -11 30 — 8.0 10.1 14.6 12.9 Concrete Slab - Poorly graded SAND - Brown medium sand, no odor. SP 1 SP Poorly graded SAND Dark gray poorly graded medium sand, no odor. Broken angular brick material. Dense groy /brown silt, some fine rootlets, no odor. Sandy SILT Dark gray to black fine sandy silt with angular rock /brick debris (10 -157), slight chemical (biol ?) odor. Sandy SILT Gray /brown sandy silt, no odor. Wet below — approx. 11 ft. • SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name HM -3 Project Name Protect Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 9.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TD 9.0 FT. GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0 5 FT. DATE STARTED 02/22/20002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) N/A LOGGED BY DKM SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER DATE COMPLETED 02/22/2002 WELL COMPLETION I=1 SURFACE HOUSING L=I STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE PENEIRARDN RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLOWS /6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 1 10— HM -3 -1 -2 HM -3 -3 -5 HM- 3- 6.5 -7.5 HM -3 -8 -9 Refusal 10.7 7.7 12.7 GW/ GM SP Asphalt Well- graded GRAVEL with alit and Band Crushed rock fill with silt and sand. Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, no odor. SP GM Poorly graded SAND Dark gray poorly graded medium sand with minor (57) small rock /brick fragments, slight possible chemical odor. Silty GRAVEL with sand Red /brown mixture of angular rock /concrete /brick debris (60 -70%) with silt and sand. Possible slight chemical odor. Notes: 1. Refusal of approximately 9.0 feet. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name HM-,4 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 DATE STARTED 02/26/2002 DATE COMPLETED. 02/26/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 11.5 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM as' 12.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 To 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION C7 SURFACE HOUSING CI STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES PENETRADON TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLOWS/6 BO DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3.5 4 5— 10— 15— 20— 25 — HM -4 -1 -2 HM -4 -3 -5 HM -4 -6 -7 HM- 4 —B -10 30— 8.3 6.5 8.6 10.0 SP Concrete Slab Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded sand, up to 5% fine gravel, isolated angular rock /concrete fragments, no odor. SP ML GM Poorly graded SAND Dark gray poorly graded medium sand with fine rootlets, no odor. Sandy SILT Dark Gray sandy (fine sand) silt with 5% fine— to medium— gravel, brick debris present 7 -8 feet, no odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Dark gray mixture of angular rock /concrete /brick debris (70 -80 %) with silt and fine— to medium— sand, moderate biological odor. • SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE ' DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. BLANK CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name HM -5 Project Name Protect Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 12.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. DATE STARTED 02/26/2002 DATE COMPLETED 02/26/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 11.5 SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 0.5 TO 12.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION O SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE PERETRA110N RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLOBS /6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA U1HOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3.5 4 4 5— 10— 15— 20— 25 — 30 — HM -5 -1 -2 HM- 5 -6.5 -8 HM- 5- 8.5 -9.5 HM- 5 -10 -12 11.5 SP Concrete Slab Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded sand, no sample recovery 3 -4.5 feet (3 inches broken concrete in sampler tip), 5% silt and 5% fine— to medium— gravel 5 -6.5 feet, no odor. 4.9 5.8 10.2 SM SM SM Silty SAND with gravel Gray silty fine sand with 5 -10% gravel (angular rock /concrete fragments), slight chemical odor. Silty 'SAND with gravel Gray silty fine sand with 15 -2055 angular gravel (rock /brick /concrete debris), moderate chemical odor. Silty SAND Dark gray silty sand, moderate biological odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AREA DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER BILL MOYER DRILLING METHOD GEOPROBE ISOLATION CASING BLANK CASING PERFORATED CASING SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK SEAL BENTONITE CHIPS DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 2 INCH FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT. FROM TO FT FROM TO FT. FROM 0.5 TO 20.0 FT. Boring /Well Name HM -6 Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 01110.00 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH ' 16.0 DATE STARTED 02/22/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 10.5 DATE COMPLETED• 02/22/2002 LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TO 0.5 FT• SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON W /LINER WELL COMPLETION 0 SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENETRATION TYPE RECOIERY RESIST (FEET) (aaOWS/6 u&) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL NOT CONSTRUCTED OVA UTHOLOCY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4 4 4 4 - HM- 6 -0 -1.5 10— 15— 20 — HM -6 -3 -5 HM- 6 -6.5 -8 HM- 6 -10 -12 HM -6- 13.5 -14 9.5 12.4 13.8 31.8 20.2 P Asphalt Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand, some grovel in upper 0.5 foot, minor silt locally, no odor. SP GW/ GM Poorly graded SAND Gray /brown poorly graded medium sand, some fine rootlets and minor small brick fragments, slight biol odor. —\ GM ML Well- graded GRAVEL with silt and sand Angular rock /brick /concrete debris (50 -55%) mixed with gray silt and fine sand, minor granular orange material, possible slight chemical odor. Silty GRAVEL with Band Dark gray /black angular rock debris with up to 20% fined sand and silt, possible slight chemical odor. Sandy SILT Dark gray silt with 10% fine sand, moderate — biological odor. Notes: 1. Groundwater sample HM- 6 -GW -20 collected at approximately 20 feet; screen advanced to 16 -20 feet. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE Boring /Well Name MW -8B Protect Name PACCAR DATA GAPS DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLERJAMES Protect Number 016110.00 DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 -INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 28.5 BLANK CASING FROM TO FT ' 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE 0.0 23.5 DATE STARTED 03/14/2002 DATE COMPLETED 03/14/2002 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 23.5 28.5 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 7.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND 21.5 28.5 LOGGED BY DKM SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 21.5 FT. SAMPLING METHODS WELL COMPLETION IN SURFACE HOUSING o STAND PIPE FT. GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.070 1.0 FT. SAMPLES DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS , TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRADON RESIST (BLOWS/6 IN.) - - 5- " - - 10— _ 15- - - - 20- - 25- 30 - MEM = __ = z _ s = s_ = = _ _ = = s _ = _ = ,=--. = = _ = = = • _ - - - - z _ _ .-- - = _ - s_ - C S = = - = — _ s = = _ = _ _ = = - - = - = = - = C S = - S _ - - • Concrete • • • • • sw -N - Well- graded SAND with gravel _ Gray sand with 25 -35% gravel, appears to be fill material. _ - •I • 1 S_�l �N[ - Well- graded SAND with alit and gravel Dark gray sand with fine grovel (5 -10 %) and \— silt (5 -10 %), strong chemical odor. - ML ML - SILT — Gray dense silt, no odor. Sandy SILT Gray, wet, silt and fine sond mixture. SP — Poorly graded SAND _ Gray poorly graded fine— to medium— sand, no odor. - - - - I I I I. ML SILT Gray dense silt, no odor. — - Notes: 1. Lithology is based om geoprode boring NA -7. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION SOUTH OF PLASTICS SHOP NEAR BULKHEAD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILLER JAMES DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9—INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -29B Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 • BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 34.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH • 44.0 PERFORATED CASING TO FT 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 34.0 44.0 DATE STARTED 03/12/2002 DATE COMPLETED. 03/12/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND FROM 32.0 TO 44.0 FT. INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.0 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 32.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GRouT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 TO 1.0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION t• SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENEIRAIION RESIST (BM/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS S 1.5 10 8 9 S 1.5 5 4 6 S 1.5 6 6 7 s 1.5 10 12 13 S 1.5 12 13 18 S 1.5 10 14 21 5 1.5 3 7 10 s 1.5 50 1.5 60 S 20 1.5 20 24 5— 10— 15— 20— 25— 30 — ES 6.3 1.6 5.7 4.1 GM SP Concrete _ Silty GRAVEL with sand \Angular gravel with silt and fine sand SM SP/ SM SP SP Poorly graded SAND Brown medium— to fine— sand with fine rootlets, no odor. Silty SAND Brown /orange fine sond and silt mixture, 5% medium sand, no odor. Poorly graded SAND with silt Brown medium— to fine— sand with some silt, no odor. `Poorly graded SAND Brown medium sand with 20 -307. fine sand, — minor silt, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand. Isolated small silt pockets and banding 12 -20 feet, silt <5% total volume. Very minor to no apparent silt 20 -39 feet. Driller suspects wood 25 -27 feet. SHEET 1 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name .PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name MW -29B SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRA11ON RESIST (BLOWS /6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 1.5 9 18 23 1.5 9 21 24 3 1.5 4 12 9 1.5 17 15 6 1.5 12 19 6 1.5 6 9 9 1.5 15 27 11 1.5 11 13 35 — 40— 45— 50— 55— 60— 65— 70 — 5.8 SP S SP ML Silty SAND Gray fine sand with silt, moderately dense, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray medium sand, grades to mostly fine sand by 42 feet. Sandy SILT Gray silt with fine sand, moderotely dense, no odor. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION SOUTH OF PLASTICS SHOP NEAR BULKHEAD DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER SCOTT DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 15 /9" OD ISOLATION CASING 15" OD HSA FLIGHTS (TEMPORARY) FROM 0.0 TO 40.0 FT. Boring /Well Name MW -29C Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.070 49.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 59.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 49.0 56.0 DATE STARTED 03/30/2002 DATE COMPLETED 03/30/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND 47.0 59.0 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.0 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.070 47.0 FL LOGGED BY DKM GRDUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.070 1 0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION 1M SURFACE HOUSING C7 STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BL0110/5 UL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE 110. WELL CONSTRUCTION UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRIWNG REMARKS 5— 10— 15— 20— 25 — 30 — GM SP SM SP/ SM SP _ \Concrete _ Silty GRAVEL with Band Angular grovel with silt and fine sand Poorly graded SAND Brown medium— to fine— sand with fine rootlets, no odor. Silty SAND Brown /orange fine sand and silt mixture, 5% - \ medium sand, no odor. SP Poorly graded SAND with alit Brown medium— to fine— sand with some silt, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Brown medium sand with 20 -30% fine sand, - minor silt, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand. Isolated small silt pockets and banding 12 -20 feet, silt <5% total volume. Very minor to no apparent silt 20 -39 feet. Driller suspects wood 25 -27 feet. • SHEET 1 OF 2 . Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name . PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name MW -29C SAMPLES DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION LITHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENE1RAIION RESIST (BLOWS/6 IN.) - 35— - 40— - 45 _ 50— 55— _ 60— = = �_ — = _ ? = = — = - = = = = _ = z �— _ — — �— = r = s - _ _ - - _ - - — _ - SP - - - S 1.5 6 4 6 M L _ Sandy SILT — Gray /brown texurally layered fine sand with silt and sandy silt, 30% fine sand overall. S 1.5 3 2 3 ML Sandy SILT Dork gray silt with 15% fine sand. - S 1.5 4 5 5 ML Sandy SILT Dark gray silt with 25 -30% fine sand - overall, texturally layered with fine sandy silt and silty fine sand. S 1.5 3 5 8 S 1.5 3 5 6 • SP Poorly graded SAND Dark gray fine sand with 5% silt in small pods and lenses. - - S 1.5 5 6 6 S 1.5 6 8 8 S 1.5 6 8 8 ML SILT ML \Gray silt, moderately dense. - _ Sandy SILT — Gray silt with fine sand, texturally layered with silt and silty fine sand, overall 30% fine sand. _ — Notes: 1. Lithology above 37.5 feet based on boring MW -29B. 2. 15" OD augers used as temporary isolation casing. A 4 -foot thick seal of hydrated bentonite chips was set from 36 -40 feet. Drilling below 40 feet was done with 9" OD augers through the center of the 15" OD augers. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER JAMES DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9-INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -33A Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA ,GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 10.0 ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH ' 20.0 PERFORATED CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 10.0 TD 20.0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK TO LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND FROM 8.0 20.0 DATE STARTED 03/14/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 9.0 DATE COMPLETED 03/14/2002 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1 .010 8.0 FT' LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 TD 1.0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION MI SURFACE HOUSING CT STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENETRATION DEPTH TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (FEET) (BLONS/6IN.) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 1.5 3 4 5 1.5 5 7 9 1.5 5 4 3 1.5 10 10 7 1.5 1 4 5 1.5 50 10— 15— 20— 25— 30— 6.7 8.6 9.0 10.8 8.1 SP ML Concrete Concrete slab and 2 inches pea gravel. Poorly graded SAND \Brown poorly graded fine sand, no odor. SILT with nand Orange /brown silt with 5 -10% fine sand in bonds and pods, no odor. SM Slaty SAND Gray to brown silty fine sand, 40% silt, no odor, wet, 50/50 fine and and silt below 13 feet. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, up to 5% silt, no odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION NORTH FIRE AISLE DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER JAMES DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 -INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -34A Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TD 10.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 21.5 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 10.0 20.0 FT SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND 8.0 20.0 DATE STARTED 03/14/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 9.0 DATE COMPLETED 03/14/2002 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 8.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENEIRADON RESIST (ELOIIS/6 IN.) FROM 0.0 TO 1.0 FT. SAMPUNC METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION IN SURFACE HOUSING I=1 STAND PIPE FT. DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE N0. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 5— 10— 15— 20— 25— 30 — Ml11111111 1IIMIU 8.2 8.3 9.3 8.0 SP ML SM Concrete Concrete slob and 2 inches pea grovel. Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded fine sand with some silt, no odor. SILT with sand Tan /gray mottled orange silt with 5 -10% fine sand, moderately dense, no odor. Silty SAND Gray to brown silty fine sand, 35 -40% silt, no odor, 20 -25% silt below 11 feet. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, up to 5% silt, no odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log BORING LOCATION INSIDE PLASTICS SHOP Kennedy /Jenks Consultants DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER JAMES DRILLING METHOD HSA LIMITED ACCESS RIG DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9—INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -35A Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 10.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 20.0 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 10.0 20.0 FT. SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND FROM 8.0 T0 20.0 DATE STARTED 03/13/2002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.5 DATE COMPLETED 03/13/2002 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 8.0 FT LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 TO 1.0 rT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION MB SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE SAMPLES PENETRADON DEPTH TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (FEET) (GLOMS /6 IN.) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 1.5 4 4 7 1.5 11 16 14 1.5 16 30 25 5— 10— 15— 20— 25— 30— = s 8.0 7.7 Concrete Silty SAND Brown fine sand with 30 -50% silt, local "layered" texture voriation, no odor. SM SM Silty SAND Gray /brown fine sand with 30% silt, "layered" texture, coorsens downward slightly, no odor. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sond, up to 5% silt in thin bands in upper 5 feet, no odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION INSIDE PLASTICS SHOP DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER JAMES DRILLING METHOD HSA LIMITED 'ACCESS RIG DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 -INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -35B Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 70 35.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 40.5 PERFORATED CASING TO FT 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 35.0 40.0 DATE STARTED 03/13/2002 DATE COMPLETED 03/13/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND 33.0 40.0 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 10.0 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 33.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 TO 1.0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION IN SURFACE HOUSING CI STAND PIPE FT. SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) RESTS ON (O.O1,S/6 IN) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO WELL CONSTRUCTION 1.5 16 12 12 1.5 4 6 7 1.5 4 8 9 1.5 8 11 11 1.5 8 12 14 1.5 10 12 14 0 3 27 50 0 14 15 26 1.5 9 27 30 0 6 7 14 1.5 27 50 5— 10 15 20 — 25 — 30 — OVA UTHOLOCY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3.8 1.9 1.5 2.4 3.9 Concrete Silty SAND Brown fine sand with 30 -50% silt, local "layered" texture variation, no odor. SM SM Silty SAND Gray /brown fine sand with 30% silt, "layered" texture, coarsens downward slightly, no odor. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly groded medium sand, up to 57. silt in thin bands in upper 5 feet, no odor. Driller reports heaving sands 15 -35 feet. SHEET 1 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name MW -35B SAMPLES TYPE PENETRATION RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (B.ONS/6IN.) 0 24 50 DEPTH (FEET SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 0.3 5 5 5 1.5 1.0 27 50 7 15 50 35— 40 — 45— 50— 55— 60— 65— 70— 7.2 • SP ML Sandy SILT Gray sandy silt to silty sand, textural layering, no odor. Upper contact grades over 2 inches, but distinct. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ,BORING LOCATION SOUTH OF PLASTICS SHOP DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER YANCCY DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 -INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO ' FT. Boring /Well Name MW -36A Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 10.0 FT' ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 21.5 PERFORATED CASING TO FT 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 10.0 20.0 DATE STARTED 03/11/2002 DATE COMPLETED 03/11/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM TO FT. LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND 8.0 20.0 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.5 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 8.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 TO 1, 0 FT: SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION MI SURFACE HOUSING O STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BLOWS/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA LITHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 1.5 4 3 3 1.5 7 11 7 1.5 12 23 20 1.5 6 8 11 5— 10— 15— 20 — 25 — 30— 10.7 12.7 SM SM P Concrete Concrete with crushed rock base Silty SAND Light brown silty fine sand, no odor. Silty SAND Brown /gray moderotely dense sandy silt grading to silty sand, no odor. Silt with some fine sand 2 -4 feet; 50/50 mixture of \fine sand and silt 4 -7 feet; 60% fine sand, 30% silt, 10% medium sand 7 -8 feet. — Poorly graded SAND Brown to gray medium sand, 5 -10% silt in small clumps in upper 1 foot, up to 5% silt to 13 feet, minor to no silt below 14 feet. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION SOUTH OF PLASTICS SHOP DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER YANCCY DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9_1 NCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT Boring /Well Name MW -36B Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 37.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATU TOTAL DEPTH 43.5 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO FT. 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 37.0 42.0 DATE STARTED 03/11/2002 DATE COMPLETED, 03/11/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND FROM TO 35.0 42.0 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 8.5 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0T0 35.0 F. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 To 1.0 F-r. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION IN SURFACE HOUSING I= STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE PENC1RADON RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (0.0115 /6IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION 34 7 8 1.5 3 3 5 1.5 5 5 5 1.5 3 3 3 1.5 8 9 11 0.5 9 11 8 1.5 6 8 10 1.5 7 8 10 1.5 7 8 15 1.5 9 17 23 1.5 9 17 22 1.5 9 7 13 1.5 7 22 33 1.5 7 9 10 1.5 3 7 14 1.5 3 7 14 1.5 6 6 11 1.5 50 1.5 3 7 19 5- 10- 15- 20 - 25- 30 - W OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 6.8 6.3 8.1 7.5 10.6 SM SM Concrete \Concrete with crushed rock bose. SP Silty SAND Light brown silty fine sand, no odor. Silty SAND Brown /gray moderately dense sandy silt grading to silty sand, no odor. Silt with some fine sand 2 -4 feet; 50/50 mixture of fine sand and silt 4 -7 feet; 60% fine sand, 30% silt, 10% medium sand 7 -8 feet. Poorly graded SAND Brown to gray medium sand, 5 -10% silt in small clumps in upper 1 foot, up to 5% silt to 13 feet, minor to no silt below 13 feet, some coarse sand 30 -35 feet. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name . PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name MW -36B SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (fiEONS/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS S 1.5 3 7 12 S 1.5 15 23 25 5 1.5 10 20 50 S 1.0 50 S 1.5 50 S 1.5 10 13 10 S 1.5 10 11 13 5 1.5 12 23 50 S 1.5 9 11 16 35 - 40— 45— 50— 55— 60— 65— 70— 9.6 SP SILT Gray dense silt, no odor. Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, some silt - \ 40 -41 feet. Sandy SILT Silt and fine sand mixture, approximately - 50/50, moderately dense, no odor. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION SOUTHWEST BULKHEAD CORNER DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER YANCCY DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 —INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -37A Project Name Project Number PACCAR DATA GAPS 016110.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 10.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 21.5 PERFORATED CASING FT 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 10.0 TO 20.0 DATE STARTED 03/11/2002 DATE COMPLETED 03/11/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND TO FT. 8.0 20.0 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 9.0 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 8.0 FT. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) SAMPLES PENEIRADON TYPE RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (BLOWS /6 p.) FROM 0.070 1.0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION NM SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE DEPTH (FEET) 5— 10— 15— 20— 25— 30 — SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION x OVA 6.9 2.7 8.3 UTHDLOGY USCS LOG SP SM SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS Concrete Concrete with crushed rock base. Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand with some fine sand and silt, no odor. Silty SAND Brown /gray medium sand with 10 -20% silt and some fine sand and fine gravel, up to 40% silt 4 -6 feet, layered silt /fine sand /medium sand 10 -11 feet, angular rock /brick debris 3.5 -4 feet, no odor. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, some silt in small clumps above 20 feet. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 1 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION SOUTHWEST BULKHEAD CORNER DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER YANCCY DRILLING METHOD HSA DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 —INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -37B Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 BLANK CASING 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 35.0 f' ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 40.5 PERFORATED CASING FROM TO 2" SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE (0.010 SLOT) 35.0 40.0 FT. DATE STARTED 03/12/2002 DATE COMPLETED 03/12/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK FROM LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND TO FT. 33.0 40.0 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 9.0 SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM 1.0 TO 33.0 FT.. LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE (FOR SETTING MONUMENT) FROM 0.0 TO 1 0 FT. SAMPUNG METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION IM SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRATION RESIST (BL0N5 /6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION 1.5 6 6 7 1.5 3 4 4 1.5 7 13 15 1.5 9 11 14 1.5 6 12 19 1.5 10 24 28 5— 10 15— 20— 25— 30 — EE iff gi ME gi if iE if ME gE EE fE NE If gg Eg gg EE iE If ME EE gE gg ME EN EE gg OVA UTHDLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 4.4 _ 5.8 9.3 SP SM Concrete Concrete with crushed rock base. Poorly graded SAND Brown poorly graded medium sand with some fine sond and silt, no odor. Silty SAND Brown /gray medium sand with 10 -20% silt and some fine sand and fine grovel, up to 40% silt 4 -6 feet, loyered silt /fine sand /medium sand 10 -11 feet, angular rock /brick debris 3.5 -4 feet, no odor. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, some silt in small clumps above 20 feet. No odor. SHEET 1 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name PACCAR DATA GAPS Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name MW -37B SAMPLES TYPE PENETRATION RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (11L011S/6 IN.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UIHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILUNG REMARKS • 1.5 3 24 35 0.5 15 6 7 1.5 3 8 15 1.0 18 60 1.5 8 6 7 1.5 5 5 11 35 — 40— 45— 50— 55— 60 — 65 — 70 — T • SP ML SILT with Band Dark gray silt with fine sand, moderately dense, no odor. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION 10 FEET EAST OF PILOT WELLS DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER DRILLING METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -38A Project Name Project Number PACCAR VES PILOT 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.0 TO 13.0 f' ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 38.0 PERFORATED CASING 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC , PIPE 0•010 SLOT FROM D 13.0 23• FT 0 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM FROM TO FT. 1 1 .0 25.0 25.0 To 1.0 11.0 DATE STARTED 05/0212002 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) DATE COMPLETED 05/02/2002 8.0 38.0 Fr LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.01° 1.0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION In SURFACE HOUSING CI STAND PIPE FT SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENETRAOON RESIST (B.oNS/6 W.) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 3 1.5 4 5 5 1.5 5 7 3 1.5 2 2 4 1.5 6 7 3 1.5 3 2 3 1.5 5 4 5 1.5 5 5 6 1.5 5 4 8 1.5 6 9 1.5 5 7 10 1.5 5 6 9 1.5 7 8 12 1.5 14 12 16 1.5 9 5 8 10- 15- 20 25 - 30 MW- 38A -5 -5.5 MW- 38A -6.5 -7 MW -38A -7 MW- 38A -20 MW -38A- 20.5 -21 V = 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.3 SW SM • ML SP P Concrete Well- graded SAND with gravel Brown sand with 25 -30% gravel and some silt, likely fill material. \ Silty SAND with gravel Gray silty sand with 5 -15% fine to medium gravel. Sandy SILT Light brown /orange to gray mottled fine sandy silt. Silty SAND Light brown silty fine sand SILT with sand Brown to gray, vaguely layered, silt and fine sand. Poorly graded SAND Gray to brown poorly graded fine to medium sand with 5 -10% silt, silt content decreases with depth. Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, 10 -20% coarse sand 25 -30 feet bgs, 15 -20% fine sand below 30 feet bgs. SHEET 1 OF 2 . Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Project Name PACCAR VES PILOT Project Number 016110.00 Boring /Well Name MW -38A SAMPLES TYPE PENETRATION RECOVERY RESIST (FEET) (EIONS /6 UL) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NO. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 1.5 8 11 10 5 1.5 6 5 4 1.5 4 8 4 1.5 4 6 35— SP ML Sandy SILT Gray to brown silt and fine sand, locally interbedded between sandy silt and fine sand with silt. SHEET 2 OF 2 Boring & Well Construction Log Kennedy /Jenks Consultants BORING LOCATION 15 FEET WEST OF PILOT WELLS DRILLING COMPANY CASCADE DRILLER DRILLING METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILL BIT(S) SIZE: 9 INCH OD ISOLATION CASING FROM TO FT. Boring /Well Name MW -39A Project Name Project Number PACCAR VES PILOT 0161 10.00 BLANK CASING 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE FROM 0.010 13.0 FT. ELEVATION AND DATUM TOTAL DEPTH 23.5 PERFORATED CASING FROM 2 -INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC . PIPE 0.010 SLOT TO FT 13.0 23.0 DATE STARTED 05/02/2002 DATE COMPLETED 05/02/2002 SIZE AND TYPE OF FILTER PACK LAPIS LUSTRE #2/12 MONTEREY SAND SEAL PURE GOLD BENTONITE CHIPS FROM TO FT. 1 1.0 23.5 INITIAL WATER DEPTH (FT) 5.0 FROM 1.0 TO 11.0 FT LOGGED BY DKM GROUT CONCRETE FROM 0.0 TD 1.0 FT. SAMPLING METHODS SPLIT SPOON WELL COMPLETION In SURFACE HOUSING 0 STAND PIPE SAMPLES TYPE RECOVERY (FEET) PENE1RA110N RESIST (BLONS/6 IN) DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE ND. WELL CONSTRUCTION OVA UTHOLOGY USCS LOG SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND DRILLING REMARKS 1.5 3 3 4 1.5 2 2 3 1.5 3 4 7 1.5 5 7 7 5— 10— 15 20— EM z 1 z 0.9 0.2 0.2 \Concrete SW/ SM - Well- graded SAND with alit and gravel '''''''''''\ Brown to gray mixture of gravel, sand, and silt with minor metal debris, likely fill material. SM Silty SAND Light brown to gray silty fine sand, some vogue layering, 10 -30% silt, silt content increases with depth. SP Poorly graded SAND Gray poorly graded medium sand, wet, minor silt. SHEET 1 OF 1 Appendix C Well Development Forms • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3/I 5/27 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants NAME: WELL NUMBER: Al J / A PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER: 01 & Ll o • FZD PERSONNEL: Dk.4 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASURING POINT DESCRIIP'TIIO_N: `�Z WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: t� A"-- -N"- PURGE METHOD: :5L ii0I/ 'i TIME START PURGE: (ICE) PURGE DEPTH (FT) (0- Z 0 TIME END PURGE: - TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: P I P IARAA . WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) a WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 Z C/ I �� 0.1 / 0.64 1.44 0 1/ TIME :5 i ): 2 -b l 2-- °°- VOLUME PURGED (GAL) i v 2 0 ( j PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) ( (' _ (•.• i C r,_ I - , `- pH 6-1\ 6., '10 0 b-qt SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm - °- DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR /vle..6_ Iv) VI\0 6, C '1 R)bi If- b,' h (DO U. It 1pe, I U D VA-- bPrn \ , vj ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) 10 -2d DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of ; Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE N0. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (m1 or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: 1 COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): . NO WELL SECURITY c INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: T // 51/4T Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: WELL NUMBER: (n) -35-in PROJECT NUMBER: b Le 0 0 • by PERSONNEL: tV UL-'1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): p,.0 MEASURING POINT DESCRRIPTTI 171L-) -�ON: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 4,-/L-t4/1;),--' PURGE METHOD: —� :J ,,,y PURGE DEPTH (FT) (, --S TIME START PURGE: 111\t) 1 CF C) TIME END PURGE: 1-D- ; TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: NI` g IS 1.0 rA ki ?_0 Od 4f�A +i�l ill W —� 6 4- ic,\, 11 1- II, e 3 05d) 4.0 „0 - %./(/ O % ° a ,�J WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) ° CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 S IZ_ 0.16 0.64 1.44 3 ' L v TIME r 15 )l'1?-- (1: �j (: S (2:2� ( ? - -O) VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / V ' ( k b _ t ,r .S `f 50 PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 2-0 (-3.5K ( 11--1 c .6. (?.9 / f PH al-(-3 n, Zo -1, 7 -L (0,-/:: 1, ( q I SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR I�`'"f'I � �� '1 /� I1 �i�M u`j +' �"' /cc./u/ �/ D �1 i d`r, u v ODOR tv6 10I - - - - -- . - -� DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) ��✓ (I jl (// DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: • WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING ,(FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): _ NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 'Pa-e-c...-1/ PROJECT NUMBER: b LL, lto, 15•\ D WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: LVV- STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: ` 1D U/ WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 1&`e4'"`' PURGE METHOD: p(,(.../0„0 TIME START PURGE: ( - 1/ PURGE DEPTH (FT) /!),..13.S: TIME END PURGE: `• 4 - TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: f \ O\ \ D e G me/tA WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE ,PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) r30 6.r\ 13s WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 2 4 6 o 6 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) Itn TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) �o• 14 %r■ ro w DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of : Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: . SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F-43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 / 0 Z Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: pa...„., WELL NUMBER: &I l w -- 3 kik PROJECT NUMBER: r)[ La l(0 ,1-1 PERSONNEL: TIv 1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): C.,..C21, MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: ---0;Se WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 0-C/w1 — PURGE METHOD: . IZ: 1 //��- --CU TIME START PURGE: � _ PURGE DEPTH (FT) ILJ TIME END PURGE: ( S TIME SAMPLED: 1 COMMENTS: % l/-■ ∎ �- 1 t,r e. I a yv\civ\--\---- V _� plt Lii /k25 - -4,�i- dpiPol n�� �owil ,)le%(w /e .1- -PII G?,o -,ti( WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) - CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 2_0 6. is_ Z 0.16 0.64 1.44 2. 3 TIME c2'.S•6 1 -Q: (;O GI i - FL -,lz; VOLUME PURGED (GAL) S ( S lJ jf C) �(i`�J D `3 � Et \ 0 PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) CIA - ( 1 vl '1.? IL-t.i) 9,q( ,\-tz q,) ,:- `I,30. PH I SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm - DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) „•, A. eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. a . TURBIDITY /COLOR kin 1 1 � ,•11, -i /� J ��" , j+ 4.r', 5(1- I+ % ,^k, .�, t v- (�-- l ,n - 311 - ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) ,�,1 !P IC) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) ` NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: :. WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3/[5 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants - PROJECT NAME: V()' e---L----"'c-- WELL NUMBER: P4/4k) J� PROJECT NUMBER: (>1L,' 110. (5\-) PERSONNEL: PYAlt/k STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 75- 2 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: C_--- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: Li PURGE METHOD: 4-LA)9 ( V.46,,ye TIME START PURGE: 1 (: PURGE DEPTH (FT) f0---42>.__6) TIME END PURGE: \D- r 15\0 TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: Oa/A v VM- 1 WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER :IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 7 �-, � , /i � 16 0.64 1.44 r �� 1 T I M E { \ 1•. I l ctt 6r' S z(FIR /Z -J6 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) 5 /. D � O -J--- -fv I PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) r 3`1 ( I .9 j 3 -( - l I z_ (7\ ■ 3- 0 pH /- 3 7- � .3r 9.`1 / n.-z.k{ c) ,1_/ SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR Wye_ IN') IA-, 6 5l� b■o .-\erg a() jJ_ (0.,/ pF(eCrr c_ (0-i p� / `1e o5r Li_ 10 y ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) (0--Z 6 DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: / SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 • • roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants P� WELL NUMBER: �' `.l!� 364 NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: D \ L,1 Of (5-\ PERSONNEL: 171 PROJECT 1L LEVEL (FT): (1 s V MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: -7b STATIC WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: �`'"--- PURGE METHOD: l/lr WATER START PURGE: ) 0 S PURGE DEPTH (FT,) ( 0 --F.--CD TIME END PURGE: \-C) °' vl 1 TIME TIME SAMPLED: (i�/L, COMMENTS: " `�,u- i-v-D---- WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) / DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 1 , (6 _ Z 0.16 0.64 1.44 2 , S7-\ TIME fO:W tolz , ZO io i :30 (U. -5 3 O'''H- (61(q) (D'4( L.( 'S VOLUME PURGED (GAL) `� J PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 1 .-1 ''',1Z-C71 17---(--- (-z_ ra.n rz_ ‘. PH -Th 1c6 n_(-13 9.' \ 9 ,o17 1, DS t.oti- SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR V 1-1 17rA v. + La. lo(A) DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (m1 or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 % I S/ OT Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 2 !'r C_r--/ WELL NUMBER:. tI 0 �3 V PROJECT NUMBER: £U Lc( '15_D PERSONNEL: Opt- . STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 9 •'1 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: 1- .6-1..----- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 0. `J PURGE METHOD: J(.) p bun-if TIME START PURGE: dl - 1/2-- PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME END PURGE: IC)*' l c TIME SAMPLED: 11 _ COMMENTS: 1N- Qi�h(��� ti�I WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) ING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) a WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) = CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 5:,c-6--7 3 4, 3 1, l 't ?, TIME 01 : LO g150 1 = (0.`63-D 1010 (c) lb l (Y -1 S VOLUME PURGED (GAL) Z U _l 0 I L "t PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) (1 ) [3-0 V 1"3.3 (3,G 1.3 • Is. 13 ti- 91 7 PH (166c 7-1,) t17 1c6 1.°1`r 1_I 9.11 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) 1 (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR 4-K �r� hisk Mca h fv\ oec�. ✓� M0CIIQv) p� Irv) �o..v l } Snit jc) i.J 1l (1— hvv) (U"I / (a 4•-v1 Okl // ODOR \ k <0\ — DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) en- kA ,, / DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED - DEWATERED? F-431 (! -R (ISGO.I) Paae 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: - PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH .SAMPLED I SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF. NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 • • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 1 510Z Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 'ea_ L WELL NUMBER: (%V IN — , I 4 PROJECT NUMBER: D'; Li (f(,0.i PERSONNEL: 114" STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 4' ( MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: L' WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: ti rl,-- PURGE METHOD: \ LA-42 -e TIME START PURGE: all 0 PURGE DEPTH (FT) / 0 ---ZO V Cf∎ a `e TIME END PURGE: 0( , TIME SAMPLED: �tn, U COMMENTS: l 1)-/S al9//VP'�� J WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 f - of. \ i o• 1 1 0.64 1.44 r r L 1 C � TIME 1 .'Dct ...-)-.) OV.Z/0 -1,._- 01 '. —5 5-', 3 9-4.0 l-t VOLUME PURGED (GAL) r / 7/0 -- 3 0 r --S s - - O PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) (0. 6 to ^ � D� D r'_- D COs q PH (\ ,Sb f\.-?,(0 r6 q_o2 6 -11 .q6 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (m1cromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 4. eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR brA IA- 'rh 0-‘ bN-v V - \A- cv-v' U-1A_ r 1 ODOR 51 A�6\ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) 7 DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5.89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT):. EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2. Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 7 I) 'S. (X Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: OP C C-14/(e_. WELL NUMBER: AV/ //V — J I �' PROJECT NUMBER: Di 4G (ti I PERSONNEL: P14 (it/1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): '-)- 3 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: Tv C WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: k-\"' PURGE METHOD: _ ."('' -)' ' 3 t ? �Pf, t l j TIME START PURGE: 2 J '- J PURGE DEPTH (FT) v V 0k y Ie TIME END PURGE: f 'T -5 TIME SAMPLED: /� COMMENTS: t/1 i rn \ ! O ��\ Q l IrAn\- WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) = WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) ° CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 < J 2a 32` -9 r ,� U TIME VOLUME PURGED (GAL) 2 O ' 3 c ) Lt V ^,1- 5- ,- s D PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 11.- �j I 'W ( -1- laa I-3 • ■ (3.b pH . b q.-R- 9.5fl n_51) n_5Z-. n 0 SPECIFIC` CONDUCTIVITY (mIcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. W1e6 1y-v\ Am6 /m6 ('MQ 1Lbf!", S0-'rood r 4 - ),--" 5■.)1,-1 \‘_..r.,\ V_ )11i [k-- n v. .31 k TURBIDITY /COLOR S rb` -''' \l, ODOR 5 Pr h,‘\ ___,--, DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) SC-LW DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED .WEATHER ,,..,A., 'TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: � S ? Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: P Y )-liv WELL NUMBER: 44/1 --E-9 g PROJECT NUMBER: 6 t Lo ( ( 0 , PERSONNEL: 1)11'(V1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): Ass-1'0 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: e Yrn PURGE METHOD: S'1.) P'i TIME START PURGE: 9 ' v I PURGE DEPTH (FT) S4— 4 4 TIME END PURGE: S 1 I( TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: ..--4-0 ) )-\� I I)? \relo y/' 0.44 WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) ° CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 "( 6. `-(1) K rl, b 0.16 0.64 1.44 6,0a_ TIME f) 2r1 1.3Z- 1..14\-\ TS $-01 .11 • =( VOLUME PURGED (GAL) S I Leo 6r) c;0, ci..0 /d-r) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) r7. 6 1Z1 (3 , 14-0 \ q. 5 t ( . - n (LSO O k's -Q 9 PH 6_1'1 f. 1 c- 1g\ fl.,-7, CONDICIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) j (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR 611"1 / f 1, ∎ (1-^�Cti'`V\ m-o. 1,,k, h \-\1);"^ 4tn■Cl.\ Ii -)' h vtA0 l` (4- bra^ \ S1 'I0o G1 14 �r� is\, v)- 11 6- . 0. S1,(L'( ODOR .s4--t 4" J _. �- - -- DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) c4"44fl 1 In � V IA 19 ----) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED r, / DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: - PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 • • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form � l Date: 7 ° Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 1----1----4-----°Th--- WELL NUMBER: V-1\,(f0 c� PROJECT NUMBER: C) 1 L-e' 11 0 ` 51) PERSONNEL: 'DV— V\ --2-4 ) MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): (�W WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: �!` �- (,' Cm'-� PURGE METHOD: -��� `r iA--in- o TIME START PURGE: -1 0 PURGE DEPTH (FT) --�� TIME END PURGE: a' S TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - 1 ,t/ DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) '. 2 4 6 6(Pj ,12):,_--- 0.16 0.64 1.44 -7 , — ) TIME - aL ; a C ? D '•'i - ,A ,=i, c)---.4"? 6 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) D-C) .C- (o a C7 b , CS-b PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) rJ • ` f , I `A - .l ) 4 , r lit , 3 (4 -3 I _4 PH -7 , gs -7. ").2) —2 .CoS 1 1 O '1 ,(, `7,C,C- —7 .c,I SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) Co 'j 1 612).efS i ,,,_‘-) D 1-,5 Gj �11 C7(.4;1_..... (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR • ) - Lr /v-. t L isP -1-kA L-t \J • lzko 4 DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED ■ DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: SAMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F-43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge. and Sample Form Date:�� -° /ate-- .Kennedy/Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 1W-I ti C PROJECT NUMBER: c t to 1 '1-C ,b 0 WELL NUMBER: MIA D-- L PERSONNEL: 14.41, f JR'4 - STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 4.1(.0 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 4..4024 TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN . BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) VOLUME PURGED (GAL) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 4 o:( °v 10 WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 2U 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) l3/ eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR LA-40(0,3, 1 . Ck {g-f cl - - — ODOR L -L SL` Lam. 1,L i�LC� -,• (4& - DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) S� - NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED �b DEWATERED? i ' F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:' Kennedy /Jenks Consultants IOJECT NAME: P 1P ROJECT NUMBER: b L Le (.l D r a O WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT) EQUIPMENT: :. SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME. FILLED (ml or L) . TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS M. ",' :'''' .1 • -` ._ I - 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): oYti 0/-3'',- /VOLUME PER (GAL): 4ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO JELL SECURITY INSIDE OF 4ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YE. NO 3ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? . cc :, Project Job Other: Manager: File: -43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 70r710 Kennedy /Jenks Consultari PROJECT NAME: T WELL NUMBER: NO") ' I, PROJECT NUMBER: b 1(0 PERSONNEL: . ,(V I` STATIC WATEr LEVEL(FT): t t, MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: v WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: I- t1 N \ PURGE METHOD: h:-a+6 4n PURGE DEPTH (FT) e.. TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: Ra M WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) 6 DEPTH TO WATER (FT) TIME. VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) "e) L1: 3( (0 • WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) al 4- 211 • • eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (I SGO. I) Page, 1 of .; iroundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 7 fo �— • Kennedy /Jenks Consuitan y tee.... yu_ - ROJECT NAME: et t-- °AMC PROJECT NUMBER: 171(0 1(0 . 0 1, WELL NUMBER: M W k1 PERSONNEL: SP ` Die.4 I ;AMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE N0. N0. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: • COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): D14.A4°..-_tJ c, t /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY?: NO OK ?: ' NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS:'` (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE i ''', PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING V . r P- OR SAMPLING? . cc: Project 'Job Other: Manager: File: '. •. =•43.2 (5-89) Page 2' Of 2. • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: -6 0 �— Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: ? i 007- PROJECT NUMBER: 61 (e' l l 0. Do - WELL NUMBER: WA) a-3 PERSONNEL: 1k41/ STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): (P - v`)-- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: k4'E-12'00I" TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: f172,% e-- PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) u0CLA.- 6--IZJC1,7)(441201-- WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) TIME DEPTH TO WATER (FT) �:.;q WATER COLUMN (FT) o$ MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETE (IN) (: 4 0.16 6 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) oq VOLUME PURGED (GAL) U;5'3 (0 7:o( PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C). pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromh'os) (uncorrected) ,cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF.,PURGE' INTAKE (FT.)? DEPTH TO.WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED 3C° 3 DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: "°fD `Y Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 20JECT NAME: 20JECT NUMBER: a (v t a , aD WELL NUMBER: I- '= -. -> PERSONNEL: 91Z " AMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: , : a'. ° =:_ SAMPLE N0. N0. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: '"' COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): erC, Z 1 /VOLUME PER (GAL): IELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO /ELL SECURITY INSIDE OF /ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YE WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES N OK ?: NO ;ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING "6 ' c OR SAMPLING? . :c: Project _: J :ob.File: Other: Manager: 0 -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample -Form Date: ( Kennedy /Jenks"Consultants` PROJECT NAME: P-f�GL 4— SEAT1LC WELL NUMBER: \_ lA3 -' 7S7A PROJECT NUMBER: oI Co I L Of 01> PERSONNEL: lPicim STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): (9 ‘A-41- MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: -*MD C- 1 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: (45)-1110/3 PURGE METHOD: ‘-1-1421intid2., TIME START PURGE: q TIME END PURGE: 1 '21 TIME SAMPLED: ^7 y� COMMENTS: `�,'C� ,a vi) M PURGE DEPTH (FT) ' .. /.l WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN ; BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO -WATER .(FT).. VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH (0 WATER COLUMN (FT) 6 MULTIP6 -IER FOR CAS DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN .(mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) - NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) CASING VOLUME (GAL) (ISGO.1) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: slY a ) r- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 10J ECT NAME: 20JECT NUMBER: blLp L(o , b v WELL NUMBER :_,' PERSONNEL: ic 14414 312-e- AMPLE DATA: COMMENTS: . TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE N0. N0. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS(% `TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): VNSI /VOLUME PER (GAL): ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: fYF NO OK ?: NO • ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED GJ �rk-61...` r ". WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 41C''' F OR SAMPLING? c: Project Job•F11e: Other: Manager: 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 • • . Groundwater Purge and Saniple7fOrm fa-tp Date: t o Kennedy/Jenks Consultant's PROJECT NAME: Tifk4e--P - 040c WELL NUMBER: i•-itt/•D PROJECT NUMBER: nit" a), Di PERSONNEL: .31-Nft..--//t)le. M STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 45-,c3 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 1421-150 TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: (0 TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: • T?-0451.,blo • MEASURING POINT DESCRIVION: PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) '/N---1 o 41ELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) 1 4- "/•'7 X I o MULTIPLIER FOR CASJNG DIAMETER (IN) 4 . 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) . PURGE RATE (GPM), TEMPERATURE (°C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg/L) eH(MV)Pt-AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY/COLOR L0 4 TT CASING VOLUME (GAL) • ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED b 61'0 tt ..„ o DEWATERED? F-43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:.' L a�-- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 20JECT NAME: ,1 20JECT NUMBER: 01 (. 01 to I. WELL NUMBER: M Li " 74k 4, . .II PERSONNEL: 44.1 S 1241L-- 4MPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: � "'`,.., .2,, SAMPLE; N0. N0. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON - TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) - COMMENTS URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): G� CJ'' ` i -c'G4 014\ --ti /VOLUME PER (GAL): ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): s NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: 4ii, WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED SirkA t. .-1,- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING ' ' OR SAMPLING? . :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2' of 2 • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 7° �-- Kennedy /Jenks .Consultants PROJECT NAME: 'a4--10112--- S= i WELL NUMBER: 1vvA3 A `r PROJECT NUMBER: 471,(-01, L O PERSONNEL: <3\14-01 D1L- STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 1 ( WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: ttEp'v'3 TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: erne_ PURGE METHOD: ITLA)'ti Lat ?k-ViNe PURGE DEPTH (FT) h 3 WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) �•ZI WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR , CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) • 4- TIME VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH 14- C LS-0 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 1 1 1. -7e5 eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR _.■••••■__, DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED 1 DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5.89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of roundwater- Purcge,and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consutta 2OJECT 20JECT NUMBER: D1 Li tri. -,-CAD WELL NUMBER: e‹ I PERSONNEL: 4MPLE DATA: COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER - VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: • COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): 6 .t S'L /VOLUME PER (GAL): TELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO TELL SECURITY NSIDE OF TELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES OK ?: ES NO LID NO AND LOCK)?: 401 ;ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED Irk/ WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING J 45-' OR SAMPLING? . ;c: Project I' Job I Other: Manager: File: -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form; Date: /,,° /t' PROJECT NAME: S ID PROJECT NUMBER: ORe(, (0 i ZYU • STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): lo . L ` WELL NUMBER: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants { PERSONNEL: _pay D Kfrl WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 4402-1,1\3 TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: tl MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: PURGE METHOD: -av PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN., . BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH '(FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) cs VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY %COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5.89) to WATER COLUMN (FT)- it MULTIPLIER FOR CASIN 1AMETE ('IN) 2 4; 6 • 0.16 . (0 43 l°I CASING VOLUME (GAL) • " 3s 40 14 4 14.2 3 3 C( 3D 6L- (ISGO.I) Page-1 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 'of ° �' Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2OJ ECT NAME: mil_ AU- ROJECT NUMBER: b I. le Cl Or 01.7 WELL NUMBER: Ivt L " 4 A PERSONNEL: l -AM AMPLE DATA: - COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- -REQUEST' TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS (METHOD) COMMENTS 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: /l� COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): CA-1117) Q k /VOLUME PER (GAL): 1ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO 1ELL SECURITY INSIDE OF TELL CASING ;OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: TES NO OK ?: ES NO ?: a IEWEAT CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED � �1/ w"C.A4i- WEATH ER TEMPERATURE L PROBLEMS °C OR °F):– DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? 0 :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: '' -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Appendix D Well Elevation Survey Data PACCAR, INC. 8801 E. MARGINAL WAY SOUTH TUKW ILA, WA MONORITING WELL 33A 34A 8B 37A 37B 29B 29C 36A 36B 6A 4A 26A 26B 26C 35A 35B N. RIM ELEV. N. TOP CASE ELEV. 9.54' 9.49' 9.44' 9.04' 9.06' 9.12' 9.17' 9.12' 9.15' 9.34' 9.09' 9.16' 9.13' 9.15' 9.18' 9.17' 9.11' 8.97' 9.03' 8.82' 8.84' 8.88' 8.87' 8.87' 8.84' 9.10' 8.81' 8.84' 8.91' 8.94' 8.81' 8.60' DATE OF SURVEY = APRIL 17, 2002 BY EARTH TECH, INC. VERTICAL DATUM BASED ON BRASS PLATE ON TOP OF CONCRETE POST AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BOILER HOUSE, ELEVATION = 13.29 FEET. NOTE: BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INC. SHOWED MW-26A AND 26B. THESE 2 MONORITING WELLS LABELED IN THE FIELD ARE SWITCHED. THE INFORMATION SHOWN ARE AS LABELED IN THE FIELD. E AR T H ®T E C H : Appendix E Well Purge and Sample Forms • water Purge and Sample Form Date: �ic)- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED n DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 PA--e-L4‹-14--- WELL NUMBER: 1N10 --�\f�'� PROJECT NAME: . O l (4/1;1 D ' CD PERSONNEL: v PROJECT NUMBER: LEVEL (FT): 7 0 3 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: STATIC WATER r METHOD: 1-� PURGE METHOD: ( t..' WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT \ 'J D PURGE DEPTH (FT) �' J TIME START PURGE: (T). TIME END PURGE: ; TIME SAMPLED: 1 I, A'f, COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) ,• 'a- . 1 DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 4 6 "�„ v �S' . 17 0.16 0.64 1.44 �.S' TIME '.� 1, = I_�,�/ I,- VOLUME PURGED (GAL) '-- ' y� . PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) I \4$, `'� �, 4-.420 (4. / (A-.1 PH L , 44' (4,•4$ . (*)- SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm 2 7 �C 0 -�i� DA 2) DISSOLVED. OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR Lk .C.A,- .................--,01 ODOR n _ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED n DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater.Purge v . and Sample Form Date: ; b Y Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: P WELL NUMBER: 0/3 -toOk ROJECT NUMBER: 5J VW W 5t PERSONNEL: .:Y2/47")..__ AMPLE DATA: , TIME SAMPLED: \ • " ` COMMENTS: DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): 1 SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: ?`!/v1 -S SAMPLE N0. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY, COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS )— 3 3 V D.A. v op� t4a, �tc�t° A lac (- C� a.4-41 -1? v oL G) D-.. P° N) P (,:L POD--! 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES:. TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): = -`:= COMMENTS: DISPOSAL METHOD: - 6 "-zrt DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): 4ELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: ® NO INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: ® NO 4ELL CASING OK ?: NO : OMMENTS: 3ENERAL: - WEATHER CONDITIONS: t] _., � J. TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): - C PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? . :c: Project Manager: Job File: Other: -43.2 (5.89) Page 2' of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: —� Kennedy /Jenks Consultants Al ROJECT NAME: Y —I CC /'.! ,per _ WELL NUMBER: v (4) — Z 7 )' PROJECT NUMBER: PERSONNEL: J' 1 �' STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): ---7_ (,)'1 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: . WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: SOI‘A'15,-i-- PURGE METHOD: G' /I S- 4- (A L C___,4A , C !U TIME START PURGE: J:57,7 .. PURGE DEPTH (FT) ? J TIME. END PURGE: ? ' 4 v TIME SAMPLED: 2 :7!>0 COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 1 Si 0.16 0.64 1.44 'Z--,S--1 q 0 `( 5-c S TIME 7 Z =(D Z -70 Z=' 7 • -s VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / / - 3 ff If PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) r c c 1 $ ( ( 'S 15 ` ' -or-1 ( y, 6,01 pH —..clz .9`-f 0.06 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY(micromhos) 401 _I�/ -o 6 l/ 0 (1 if I� C.f-\ . (uncorrected ) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR (t r - �- —� ODOR c tADI __ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) 7 3 ____ ..._- __ -• - -" • - - - -- -- DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? ^ ) _ l -- -- -- — ___ F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 G /DZ Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: �/� P%1" CG / "► 4e- WELL NUMBER: Al n O� w'- -' fl A b t c C( 0/61) PERSONNEL: Oft k I SAMPLE DATA: Z • 3 U COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: Z1 P!..1-;-`. ) /rill L SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS Z 3 3 )c4 vo t4 f{c( Kc-� /v N/ Izow Zo 1 � VoL 1, -G,c r 3 z A A !✓ . f' /v 3 c I L PGA svoc, _ z 1 rA A) N N ii. Vic p4-c- -rp -(K $ 1 1 p P I-/0 03 HN0) /V Y 1 C I G 4-6.1 1 3 0 -' ✓pie Ow /vie-1I5 PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: ,-. COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): / /'onme '� 3• 6 /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YE NO OK ?: YE NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED A \c ad or-co-5 _ WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING t C OR SAMPLING? �e) cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: - y ' F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: alt /D E Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: Pk, C irl I') WELL NUMBER: �/V -- /T I PROJECT NUMBER: DI(' ( ( D'15-\ PERSONNEL: 1171-- 1/4/1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): (-7.69 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: (Cs) C WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 1 ∎ .) _ PURGE METHOD: P n -J6)11-‘■C.CM ' Cra / _S° TIME START PURGE: /-2, : C 7, PURGE DEPTH (FT) / 2) TIME END PURGE: 1:0 TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) = WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) c CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 I >,�! , S- 6, 6(4 Z, Z i TIME jz=Sz -- I:DZ 1 =0s l-.o% VOLUME PURGED (GAL) ! ' z '1,k Z ' /. PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) I ( l (- `, [ `' I k.1` 14' i pH b. Zz 6.Z Z- 0 6,zz SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) n 1 ' I I � 7 6,I, 1 L 6 Z1 .' 01(1k-i L (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. /COLOR ClTURBIDITY ei - ODOR Al /"� / __ __ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? J F-43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3lec o Z Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PCC AR_ WELL NUMBER: M I/0 - I / , b (Co I, to ' v" PERSONNEL: fC:A ) SAMPLE DATA: 1:11, COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: -a7/5-- e a`l:> ' J:) G SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS r T 3 V0)- Gb4 Hc( I-( c r N Iccr( 1 Pnl �E-� V VOG TPK -G �f 3 z ( A N N Al 3 L 1 C 1 /c SO fi Z A A. 1 L 1PK Dig -1 ( ( P P (-(Q'‘ froo ti 1 L _/ ( _ Y -(6 -Rekr PsrAAIS s PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: I COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): f,„4,1„, e_ CI /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): YES NO +�_Sm 6 ( GEA S \I" c / �/ ✓�) (RUC' ` J «4c- t> WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND UTER CASING DRY?: YES NO £4— OK ?: YES NO !� �� e C5'1P-Gf GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED (. 4/ ) C T (-( =C7■,7 1-- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING I OR SAMPLING? /( )t2 cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:(° Kennedy/Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: WELL NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: (51944 C) Cy0 PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER WATER LEVEL (FT): J54- MEASURING G POINT DESCRIPTION: w1C110 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 4A1AIY PURGE METHOD: TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: 341) b TIME SAMPLED: ltS COMMENTS: PURGE DEPTH (FT) . • • WELL VOLUME • CALCULATION (FILL 1N 6Ef0kE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH Co WATER(FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) .gto _ X MULTIPLIER FOR, CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) 71 I M E VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE (°C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY. (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm • DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg/L) eH(MV)Pt-AgCI ref. TURBIDITY/COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING - VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED?,7. 411 4-3 • 31a> ; • (ISGO.I):Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: V . -Colo Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 20JECT NAME: WELL NUMBER: -b (4) A- 20J ECT NUMBER: .Q t-'(o44:0 013 PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: ' C: ' _ (,qc- COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: , -1---k,---) nc C..-'L SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS 1 'S 3 v° *A (( t 0-0 00 ^► O . :. , 3 3 Q 1%3 14 pci5 di�i i.. ._. C a/_ y ti . tL " sC. .44 . URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES:. COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE''(GAL): DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATIONS) ,--1 CII-IS /VOLUME PER (GAL): TELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO.- IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): YE3ti NO ^` n. L TELL SECURITY NSIDE OF TELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY? OK ?: AgOr NO LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) NO ?: ' YEJ GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED n I V�`<-L -./" WEATHER TEMPERATURE.. PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 2P ° OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: ; 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 water Purge and Sample Form Date: l�` Kennedy/Jenks-Consultants ' - WELL NUMBER: ")� PROJECT NAME: llP (lc o PERSONNEL: ...3(2,13._ PROJECT NUMBER: . O 7, � Z MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: 4� STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): METHOD: �(6/lit�_. _ PURGE METHOD: Pe/A 54-7 C� WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT " GO PURGE DEPTH (FT) 4) TIME START PURGE: 'mil "� TIME END PURGE: • TIME SAMPLED: 61',‘"7 COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE 'PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 1 . '€)..__ WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 4 6 3 4- (5 0.16 0.64 1.44 S. ).— TIME e,..7. 5-, "c„, of a;to q l.4-• • •. VOLUME PURGED (GAL) /( �I IS to PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 4.(0 v' 4- : "O \ iJ i,' Is • 1 Woo pH 1.11 '►•fib 7.31 1, .).q i.�$. SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) 11 V lJ /� `15 Y1 Q A 1 1 S6-2,=. 2 v ,� ° (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt-AgC1 ref. - TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) edo DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) ISGO.I) Pagel of 2 groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: %-(Pi 0}— Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: Q ' ROJECT NUMBER: 0( (AA 0, trip WELL NUMBER: ITV '' �G V \l PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: t (,Sr COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: lA TP1v1 -nb{ T' i SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS '1 3 3�w; VO(‘ V 44c4 W it 0 0 lyo •V w i r•ii -•-- DL 72 4— 3 ..... 2 2 A X 13 0 • 0 0 12 t % L ! t— PC?? SvC. 1 ___(5 : . i � o � i t. t L 'poi: ,M Rss .ti ({ra PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: 71 .COMMENTS:.- . TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL).. , y.:.' /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): ® NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: 40; NO OK ?: 1110 NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 4-c- T OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: . -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 dwater Purge and Sample Form Kennedy /Jenks Consultants .. WELL NUMBER: . - '-7A- PROJECT NAME: Cot(' ( ( 0, Ott PERSONNEL: )— PROJECT NUMBER: 1 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: _ STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): .� 1 1 / MEASUREMENT METHOD: L,.P/VS>" -- PURGE METHOD: -S"�� '.T� iJ WATER LEVEL PURGE: 1� : ( 7 PURGE DEPTH (FT) \,S TIME START t a' TIME END PURGE: . TIME SAMPLED: 1:7-\- `�►� COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) i, („. a WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR C ING DIAMETER (IN) = CASING VOLUME (GAL) `2 4 6 (� ,I. \ 0.16 0.64 1.44 1:. � : 'alb TIME ID-:--0 ID-'_/ ID,'," ?-0 1?- .7 lam- VOLUME PURGED (GAL) /: 1— \ 1/Y .)-`-/-: PURGE RATE (GPM) - TEMPERATURE ( °C) `b • Q t,� , 61 11 L. b It - 0 t(, O PH to.. L 4 `U . (o �J C9, (pi ( -' 1 IC • )— CONDICIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm a 2 Q d -b 5 g ' fl DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR �A-C -fir „ -� I ODOR •¢�� DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT). N LU DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form J Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: PfW-.1ycL:1--- ROJECT NUMBER: OR, W 'b ! ZjU WELL NUMBER: k-lt/") ' 2 ,& PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: () ) COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: -^ l 'L/V' kiJ , SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) . COMMENTS ( ; 3 \lbA JD k((t 13 (a-o M-( ( )-‘)r✓I v DL - Pt4 -1,At ."'5A 3 Ki P (L Pus S c y pr r3 13 O.. i L Sit i- -calk-Dv -an— _ M-t'f ' 1, 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: r :.,:. -` • rt.= COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): ' e. O ..: ._.. /VOLUME PER (GAL): JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (EIRCLr YES OR NO'-' IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): '•_. ES' NO JELL SECURITY INSIDE OF JELL CASING :OMMENTS: ;� DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: .ACS NO\- - ..: _ OK ?: ea NO ;ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 1- OR SAMPLING? . :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: •43.2 (5.89) Page 2'.of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: .-/a-c (ma-- Kennedy/Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: l-1-4.--&1-- WELL NUMBER: 1"}t VO ' 5.--71:2) PROJECT NUMBER: 0140 (4 0 . C5,=, PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): -7- 6.;t5 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION:--; WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: V,,e,A,--Zry—' PURGE METHOD: 12CAUS -ta-&eY1---t/ TIME START PURGE: \C): 4c, PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME END PURGE: ( TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) _ DEPTH TO WATER (FT) _ _ WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) . CASING VOLUME (GAL) !),_ 4 6 '44) I OS ,:._, ok- 0.16 0.64 1.44 TIME 11%03 ti',?-0 it .. VOLUME PURGED (GAL) '6- 'co • PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE (°C) \a.s i 2;.-1 v)).1-, v» • >, k-2, .4 pH ‘to - 46.13. SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mIcromhos) (uncorrected) cm 1 tcp '4' S S-16 -7 SW27 5-4r7 7 DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg/L) eH(MV)Pt-AgCI ref. TURBIDITY/COLOR CA 4-Le- ao---4.--- IL ,- ODOR ‘V-7, tive eVIA, Pala i DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? 6 F-43.1 (5.89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 1 c( l o Y Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: NUMBER: lell o, vv WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: // C( I. 4 � COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: r;:-d1 D D�il/1 , sCt J SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS a-- 3 3 v0 Vb uK, t 1q 0 IJ lv+w( ta-o f1 V A._ 3 3 A. r3 0 0 IL LL- P‘-B, P4044 S 3 ( to tau 'SVo4 -7 t 1 p P V-0 up03 I l% i L 4 ' 'b nott4 Th. ss s tv.c.-taS 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES COMMENTS:, - TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): ..QI /VOLUME PER (GAL): IELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO IELL SECURITY NSIDE OF TELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: NO OK ?: 40 NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS:.- (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED r WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? , :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PYT GC-4) q- WELL NUMBER: /4/1 I/`) —3 D-)2) PROJECT NAME: CDL (P l (D, A) PERSONNEL: 6) /T PROJECT NUMBER: --J O L LEVEL MEASURING POINT STATIC WATER (FT): . DESCRIPTION: MEASUREMENT METHOD: G 1' V PURGE METHOD: l er- sTp\f -LG(04 ' Crc) WATER LEVEL ..- j I: 1 Z PURGE DEPTH (FT) Z- C) TIME START PURGE: 11 ' c D TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: 1[ :35-r< t 1' cf (A\ L c S saci l(- 3 S COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) a WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) a CASING VOLUME' (GAL) 2 4 6 ---<,Z0 0.16 , 0.64 1.44 S %, 6 2�, TIME it :ZZ 1<-3Z 1113 1113f [hlO //'Z VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / I 2 z vt Z � z_ Z 3/.f 3 PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) I 5 ) q v.1 ( - .1 i.r? /3.r7 PH 6,15 /� J ! V 1 C�$ 6-6Z 3 6�f z 1 6,66 3.3c U ‘-‘61-7 3• D SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR C (e a (. ODOR - t.)- S(-- DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) -� - -- ----- -_.-- - - - - -- -- DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? /j ) --- ,%t' F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: r/6 C- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT PROJECT NAME: Y [i7 C---CP WELL NUMBER: /44 (/J 30 //4 NUMBER: ()l i/iD, p) PERSONNEL: j l 1 SAMPLE DATA: 1.(- 3 c. COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: C� PC' r\ S 1 '4C_ SAMPLE NO. N0. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS i z, 004 vo(- (IC .S (-(c ( N , (C) r'"\! t zo 4 r C( e--g C2 c VnC: 71)14-Gy 3 `( - /'1 /A- 'V AI (1 N 3 L 1 L r pc& Svoc 5" 6 Z L A ti N Ai J i L !L /9/4-ff TMji 1 ( I P /2 frfAx) f uo� N r / L L / `fi"o -� -Ale A ss ii4e I -k, PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: . COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE -- - DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): £f'-fJwij,vi �'' -- e 0 . . /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): YES NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK)?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: 0 4110° OK ?: ES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED 2‘Jer -C2Q S -f- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:7 a67,7 7;� Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PJ -) C.[ Pe. WELL NUMBER: ///// k) - Z 01 14 - PROJECT NUMBER: 0 I / / V ' by PERSONNEL: 0 ! \ i/v1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): q 143) MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: C) e-- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: I • S `� PURGE METHOD: A'�-f-. �'1�nI �+ c_ ro'L'C,° n TIME START PURGE: Ci ;(f.-: PURGE DEPTH (FT) Z (27) TIME END PURGE: (0 '/ TIME SAMPLED: (0 lir COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) = WATER COLUMN (FT) X. MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER ,IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 Z.1-) 5L 0.16 .0.64 1.44 n ,(' I : 7).7 7'5 T I M E q: 5 IV '03 DID e) (DD I 2 -e) 'o'Z /D-( ZS VOLUME PURGED (GAL) 2 z,. 5 PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) f (� )3- I V' \-3,(4 /7.(-(- V. if (3 cf 6' PH 6; I z— 6. H I 6, H I l0-, ■,D SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm -3 7 7 ( I i S (� I -( 6 29-L DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR I —air` ODOR A) -- DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) 7/(,) 7-______ -- - DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? ) �-- —_ F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 Z6 07 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants W PROJECT NAME: P/ (�GC GZ WELL NUMBER: //PI I q PROJECT NUMBER: (7) i L) v , 15b PERSONNEL: /6' / SAMPLE DATA: M3/i3 / TIME SAMPLED: (D. � / > COMMENTS: D C�(. cij2 1 Q. / DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): 7i� 9 ( �_22e , l SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: Pe I,.5 \Il:( SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS I Z 3 3 Uoj- (%obi K c( I-i c ( /V /� f zo *4 ( (ZP elf r C I C' ,r t- (> U °C {�` A A � 6 1, z t r �G� SVoC 6 ,9 N ti /I/ z.- - L L -- - Ply 47-pff-De 7`6the/5 V D,s-s h ,.3715 T I -1 ( f _ P P goo, /0v? N l L / L PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): '5.7..11- COMMENTS: DISPOSAL METHOD: .O/^' 1 dtn e 11 DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): WELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES NO INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: ® NO WELL CASING OK ?: 41111" NO COMMENTS: GENERAL: ll WEATHER CONDITIONS: Over-CT-CZ S -t- TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): q--5- PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? i') cc: Project Manager:, Job File: Other: F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: GG� e__ WELL NUMBER: A, '' JP PROJECT NUMBER: bI-L t/ D 2 PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 1, ,7 /, MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: f 0 C_ WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: .50\v•>,.." PURGE METHOD: Y- e AI 51/1r _//0/Arc."-0 TIME START PURGE: 0C1 PURGE DEPTH (FT) 3q TIME END PURGE: I7( D TIME SAMPLED: C1,-•f(c) COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) = WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN). s CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 Zr? li 0.16 0.64 1.44 J U / 1( %,6 g''/- TIME 5,.1,L 1 9- Q q f /o VOLUME PURGED (GAL) D C 1 l S, 9 `" 0-0 v . Z s PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) (z -11 i . - 13. 6 I 7 . I 3. 13 - T R (-).3- 7 pH 61'61 6.n) 6,_9° 3� 6- ' LIT— D� 6' SD ti"..\„( 6.51 13 3 C 3 5 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) G 1 �1 I j (uncorrected) cm .T /, DISSOLVED OXYGEN.:{ g/L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR Gr-Hol /Vo YJ h b ODOR JLL4,oI DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) "3 C DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: ffz6 /d Kenpedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: () ) l CC4"� WELL NUMBER: A/ k) ,f...q. g PROJECT NUMBER: bl,11 11-0,5AD PERSONNEL: AK-I/1 SAMPLE DATA: p� TIME SAMPLED: (-L D COMMENTS: DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): S SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: P r\ S SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS VGi; (1C1 'V ov■I �Ie '°Yelfw ��Nj( � 3 4 A} ti 3�- Pct - s 6 z 7, 4 / - 'v Al Ai AV /L R-- Sqo f- I ' co p /Fwoj r)it)cj /U ( L / G \\ 1 V `no-t: Me i ) f% P SS- P/_1Cj 1 s PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): %.7-- 6 . Z--) COMMENTS: DISPOSAL METHOD: (\ 0/10/q e,(4 DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): WELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES NO INSIDE OP-WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: NO WELL CASING OKT:, YES NO COMMENTS: GENERAL: WEATHER CONDITIONS: 6) J q=Cit 5 + TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): -\ PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? 7j) d cc: Project Manager: Job File: Other: F•43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater. Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 9/0z. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 1 c-c,n ! U `_ WELL NUMBER: y " ( k./ 2...--(71-14.), ,' PROJECT NUMBER: a I(., HD , "D D PERSONNEL: (/ /Pc\ STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 7 • 0 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: r d WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: SC) L,-,S 1 PURGE METHOD: ` e-/\-\ 111 C-_- Cfr\ - C- 1- -d�. TIME START PURGE: C7I, S 7- PURGE DEPTH (FT) R:3 TIME END PURGE: LD TIME SAMPLED: 10• 3 S COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) ° CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 z_,%7 /S 1 (% . ' ,3 TIME r0 "o5- (o-. ►S (r)-.zz 271 (c): zs 10-z7, ? VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / 7 PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) I S, Cf / % ` - I y I 15,°1 f ,5 \ PH S. SD 3 5- 5 . 6 - 5-.G & .5 . c1 1 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm (_6. J \ ID 3 Z 30`A (a 2 3 DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt-AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR A) _ — — _ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) -3 °-- -- _ -- DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? n % A. r J F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 01 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consul PROJECT PROJECT NAME: "� . / C /C/�-�, WELL NUMBER: UV '' �"f 4)" NUMBER: (� �(i /1 0 ,.D ° PERSONNEL: u! )1"' SAMPLE DATA: r / 1 . 3 S COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: Z-3 126=p, ;-7;)---0.)1-5--(L SAMPLE N0. N0. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS ( z 3 VOA- Vo A (-lc\ 4-► N (ZOv.) r�,v w, [ G - v ` V0G -r -I -G - 6 E.- 4 A) AL l L 1 O N �3 ( t- l - —r of vki e P151,1 4„,) s thAl ) PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: •Z COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATIONS) (GAL): Of\VVIiifina ? J A /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: ® INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO WELL CASING OK ?: YES NO COMMENTS: GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED S JV\ WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING l OR SAMPLING? 1 cc: Project Job File: Other: Manager: F•43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Kennedy /Jenks Consultants NAME: PA GC- f'7R_ WELL NUMBER: M IA — 2 S /419L- PROJECT NUMBER: 0)(O Lip, b-- ° PERSONNEL: 01-01 PROJECT "7- ). ?- MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: `7~0 'C- STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: E:0)\1/1 5 3- PURGE METHOD: P, P ` 14,1 \ C. 6,t1\ c p-c WATER TIME START PURGE: "h- q'Th-- PURGE DEPTH (FT) ) 3 END PURGE: , TIME TIME SAMPLED: "/ C- 0 COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) = WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) a CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 7-Li 0.16 0:64 1.44 /5.17, 7. s-7 Z 3 TIME 1;55 q ---cis 77 9:t0 2 , - - - q.,( 2 i i T • - (5 -3 - VOLUME PURGED (GAL) )- PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) I ("(- I I `t• I 14 \ I I - ' C 2 PH V -OCb. .01c1' 6 J 6.03 - � .oz I lll/// SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm (2b, I `f1 (4'1 � DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt- AgCl,ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR e — ..._....._ --- .-- ._....._ ODOR S 14- -_ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) __` - -- -- - DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? ------;;\ F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 07, Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT PROJECT NAME: A C. C J'9 WELL NUMBER: A S A NUMBER: v 1 6°((p. l PERSONNEL: CA-:-_i/'1 SAMPLE DATA: 6T• Z C COMMENTS: (2 TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: / q Pert. rr,11\ CI SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED. UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS I Z 3 3 L) ��(4 Hu r� ci N 1Lofrti‘ �Zv�( C le_ TAI -G PF 7 i 3 -L A A /-» .� !V Al 3 L 16 r p Gf3 svac- 6 Z z A I. i A) N l G I t J �'ii'N *1-0 4-Vy 1 I n P H/003 (1463 iv Y //, I L �� � -� +r - 1 J O IS N1 l J PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: 3 COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): V✓ '•1 h Vivipo t /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF N0, ADD COMMENTS): NO S p OK / WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO !_ \ `e t. Iv\ c:05\ OK ?: YES NO GelS (T . C� U GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED () e r c-.0 s 4- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? //t,/) 0 cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 1-/ "9- PROJECT NAME: A4 cc/1,R_ WELL NUMBER: //)// CI.) — PROJECT NUMBER: D) (o 11 D. 5 ° PERSONNEL: Off-t41 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 7%(16,9 MEASURING POINT T D C DESCRIPTION: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: C7OI &1 S 7 PURGE METHOD: 7P / \= 54014e 614 r C,- crl - TIME START PURGE: q ` .' 3 6 PURGE DEPTH (FT) if 1/45- TIME END PURGE: /(7 TIME SAMPLED: 5 : COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) _ DEPTH TO WATER (FT) _ WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 6 CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 ( ` 3 0.16 0.64 1.44 ( /. 3Oy 1 ` q 0 ( qr T I M E `7.0 1' n 53 . VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / n 2 7 Z PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 19 , / C� ( [.[ ( PI", , 9 /7-0 PH 5,10 �,r)(_ 5,r) i ,". -1,6 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos ) _. L' t O (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR C I e Gsfl r ODOR 514- - - -- — ---- --- ____ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) S _ ___ -- - - DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? � I - -- -� -- F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT PROJECT NAME: 2114-CC/A" 0- WELL r NUMBER: " Q.- fl 4 NUMBER: (9 l ("1 1 D , FO PERSONNEL: 0'017) SAMPLE DATA: - 0 5- COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: / S Pe O'- SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS Z -3 yop 04 E-f C( N ( , Ito o,c iZD p^) C r (- �( Inc -mi- . 3 `C 3 Z A A Ai // / » 3 i 1_. o9C� Supc 6 2 f\ j' - -1-- i u P/4- N -LPN -4)-1 62 P u,)o3 00, � 1 L 1 (, T� ri►E ®)ss r1 46,I} e�-' l PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: ,Z S COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): (/ •% Z r U o vi e 0 /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED ,..c-01/.\ WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING Ch OR SAMPLING? ki cc: Project Job Other:. Manager: File: F -43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: i ? `7f 0 Z Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: l { ' -4C(1 /"/0._. WELL NUMBER: /1/1 t/V f-z--=!> A PROJECT NUMBER: 0 1 (c /1 D' D v PERSONNEL: I `w l STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 7.0 (40. MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 5 °) ∎ S )- PURGE METHOD: (;) .. 7 1 C ( `r fe.) TIME START PURGE: C2-2-6- PURGE DEPTH (FT) I TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: -4:7:!' COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING)tO_ TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) - WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) = CASING. VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 Z ,Q� j/Z Z 0 7/0 TIME ('36 / ( '.`f6 r `f1 Z /11 P -5I Z\7 c� VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) [-% I ` %/ f /-1 (3' PH 6,77-- 6,(r1 GM 6, SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) `5-61 Z L9 D, r �L ((- 1 �\ (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR (=:/In(Ar- ODOR A) --- - - - - -- _ — - - - -- - -) DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) I- _- ___...__ DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? ( `% Ail / F -43.1 (5.89) (ISGO.II Paae 1 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 (2 i(O z Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: A4 GC: / - WELL NUMBER: M W -- Z 3 D 1 (' lip 1 AS PERSONNEL: �T Ci"1 J r SAMPLE DATA: t: ' C COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: / Pf`7-1-"-)14-") Ci SAMPLE NO.. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS z 3 0614 1-(c-( ,U) Alf `rp'N -Gx 3 Y 3 - /4 /�- /" iJ /V �/ f L J pc-e sub c, z z . A A) qtr /r/ /C �� � K -T145( 1 1 P te K�3 KO? /() y / (, � �'le i) PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: 5-- COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): (/-tJc "--E--- ' 1 e e) /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?:4101" NO OK ?: NO ?: YES GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED Obei('GS WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING ch OR SAMPLING? O cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: .3/ Z ?Pe- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: P V I C-G' /P� WELL NUMBER: �' (VV -- ? 3 PROJECT NUMBER: b 1(.4 ), I,TD , bU PERSONNEL: i:)(-1:. )4/1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): —7, / 1 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: `T G� C-- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: !' �, i .PURGE METHOD: I- {'f`'' '� \ 6'•' 1,.0 C TIME START PURGE: (z = 3 PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME END PURGE: It 1 > TIME SAMPLED: r-t D COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) = CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 . 4 6 0.16- 0.64 1.44 7- X J Z , s3_ 7' ( -- 0 TIME (2_ 4 12 : Sq, 1:0 l (:0`14 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / j 2. Z )�, f 1 Z 17T PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) / 5 I I5 -_ ( /5, \ ( -_ Z PH Gr .' 6.1y 6,16 V ,(c SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm � wiz_ Z ( Z 3 DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR G� e�f l -_ ODOR S I - - DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? A) F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISG0-11 Pans 1 of 9 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER: NAME: P.4 (- - ' `/ WELL NUMBER: /44/10-303A h1 le rip , PERSONNEL: ° I SAMPLE DATA: )-) V COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: r Pe--i'5.: l h:1.- SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN - ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS c z J 0/4 04 WC KCC fit) r✓ f o w, f reo *ii Cre_Cir (i0C TAN 3 T z 4 4 N N i (L 1 , 1 pc SvoC z ry N , l C It ! l o kft ■ c I P Kam, KiUo3 ti r 0, / c 1-/ /l s Asr/ Je �S PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: - . - COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATIONS) (GAL): OrtielIPT, = Z (4 /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK)?. WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: 0 NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED (2,-)C t tC7 WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: �P c:Dc:,, WELL NUMBER:, fri UV --I PROJECT NUMBER: OIL, C/ a, 5- D PERSONNEL: [)f( 14//\ 1 -:---14Z- STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASURING, POINT DESCRIPTION: ■ 0 C.1_ WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: <3;>()k if\ 5� PURGE METHOD: ei' 5, 4z;\(-h v c1. (Lr'r) TIME START PURGE: 1I' )9; PURGE DEPTH (FT) '-(____ TIME END PURGE: 1.1, TIME SAMPLED: I l - J COMMENTS: n v / 62- A . t - z / WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) = CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 ( C\ 2 �- Z � f , A TIME i [ ZD 1/1t /1.? 1.n 5- //. CD z VOLUME PURGED (GAL) i lc PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) J)) ( r/. I - - 13- 0 PH D S 5,10 S, n1 s-,9?- SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) Ir)3 V 3 760 s � 3 6 (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR G((vc P ODOR A) ) __ DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) fV / Z --` - - -- - -- — _�' . / DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) risrn-r) Dana 1 elf 7 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 OZ Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: QA cici i WELL WELL NUMBER: /1/1 w — 1 PROJECT NUMBER: 4 LP 1 vo, I PERSONNEL: 1 I" 1 SAMPLE DATA: . - ' . TIME SAMPLED: ( I " ‘ 1 5 2 . 7 6 . 0 (t? )COMMENTS: V ,li M I.t — /O.) 4- DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): t C1 k 6_ 7f--c--- SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: P-C,Sc5. \ )\.C.. , i ( lA0) I tr SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L_) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS f 6 6 V pA .v /1c-S (4 C r ti /� ?`w ) Z(O vh f `d )) o a TiH -Cy- 3 ` 6 IT A /61 /0 A) 6 1- L Pc6 SUGc Z f f -(n1O3 F n) Z (, U �✓ D-3- e 5 j )-oi PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: �J TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): Z p`. COMMENTS: c1 ��C_ l DISPOSATH�\ DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): WELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YE NO INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: Y NO WELL CASING OK ?: YES NO COMMENTS: GENERAL: WEATHER CONDITIONS: V e rC -5 -\- TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): `"f 7 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? 4)0 cc: Project Manager: Job File: Other: F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:? -!-7/ 0 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME:._ .:...':..,` PROJECT NUMBER: 0 -0 WELL NUMBER: --AG X PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: 2 COMMENTS: MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: Ci PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) n WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) TIME DEPTH TO WATER (FT) -1,a% VOLUME PURGED (GAL) WATER COLUMN (FT) e. v3 X • MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH X19 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 144 L. V13 eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? (ISGO.1) Page 1 of 2 F -43.1 (5 -89) Iroundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: ROJECT NUMBER: D1 LP 1/1/0 ' WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: TIME SAMPLED: L ... COMMENTS: DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): (\( SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: ' SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (m1 or L) TURBIDITY COLOR .SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS a-- 5 -5 U - v %1� ( ( Pj t3 (?t, .i4 l ' (�4Q,s --- U 5 -mit 4, _ ; 4 3 4 0 0 /0 t' 11._ G 1 . et-45 PA-4. too oZ �' 6 h) N 6L t'L Qb L 1314 --Ole 1 2) I Q' E' P�tj, tit00 / 1 . ti 14 r.14,-4!4' 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): COMMENTS: DISPOSAL- METHOD: 01. ---F 1• DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): JELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: iiiiib NO INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: Ilk) NO JELL CASING OK ?: YE NO :OMMENTS: 3ENERAL: L WEATHER CONDITIONS:P�u -� 'i TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): 41-5 ' PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Manager: Job File: Other: •43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: % /a'j f o._Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: k pA .(,e. ( PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: t..—_, WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 1./f— PURGE METHOD: TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: \ TIME SAMPLED: F 4. ( 0 C0M TENTS : PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) ,AS WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4. 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) CASING VOLUME (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) -- TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) (o (A 35 I eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF'PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 iroundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: C d /-( O ) Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: P WELL NUMBER: ROJECT NUMBER: 0 L/: it n , PERSONNEL: .a 1 AMPLE DATA: % ( 0 COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: 1 k pFi1A.S.•4--'t 'v SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER - VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS ( 2? v aa, P 1 ° voL 4 3 A. NJ IL /L 96 fitvc 5 k -›- "2- ' 0 r' NI (L l c- Svc -C Vvt -1$o 1 p p k,3,3 (-t=1 0 /.L_ /L. - o>s) 5' 5. 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): `- 0Ji,. /VOLUME PER (GAL): TELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING ,OMMENTS : DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: f721 NO OK?: NO ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED N4.1t14.8 WEATHH ER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING ItS ,F.:- OR SAMPLING? .c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: r. Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: ._.._ _ti; _o 5b WELL NUMBER: Nth) —°‘ A-- PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 10 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: . "C-- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: PURGE METHOD: PP/174 41-4.41.„. \1 TIME START PURGE: 4;7,—;-B TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) • DPTH TO WATER (FT) 'Co °1,S, WATER COLUMN (FT) 42 MULTIPLIER FOR CA NG DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) TIME VOLUME PURGED (GAL) i PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) .1 t4 A ‘F -43.1 (5.89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 pH ce. 'V b;41 Co.‘ (0 •S i SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) p �� A_ `T D-olo D- lo "7 (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) - eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR (elro DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) f l DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED / DEWATERED? Vim' ‘F -43.1 (5.89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: .r%-% /o }— Kennedy /Jenks Consultants tOJECT NAME: 20JECT NUMBER: 6 Rot.' P, M, WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: �j l - COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: " kl 42i.A/. .- SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER - VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION . VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS .- . V* l,tr-f C-'''' hit W(4 . -;a ) 3 4- `3 3 v d, ,..) t,a-,; t: 14 641 Lo.M- P 03 t,'2 ` 457- b z .2._ A ; r� N' r c L GL Pte,( CNI 25z. URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES:' COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): , .,~ /VOLUME PER (GAL): ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): YF NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: (YES OK ?: OS NO ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED s4 WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 444c'' F OR SAMPLING? . c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5-89) Page 2' of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: --7(•=/---'7/0a-- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: eT,►"` "`— WELL NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: 01(o.(.Lb,61) PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): • MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: • WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: .R- PURGE METHOD: 14/t/ l`^"! n n,�� TIME START PURGE: 01- SS PURGE DEPTH (FT) 't TIME END PURGE: l O • 4 D • TIME SAMPLED: Ili • b COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) C WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETE (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 BB CASING VOLUME (GAL) VOLUME PURGED (GAL) t :is toltq 1o:>S PURGE RATE'(GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 14,1 to- c33 D-4-0 -I 241 eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) •1-1,t) 1 DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: I i Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: ROJECT NUMBER: r `' A 'l WELL NUMBER: I () �c - 01,CA,, li '1; DrU D PERSONNEL: i AMPLE DATA: I \ D' / COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: • 1›.`' l,41 ._ __ SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN -OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALY.SI•S REQUES1 (METHOD) COMMENTS ( )- 3 3 442b. vit.. u( Wf a J° (ao w( t:a) IA-4 vas -1'1'4 --67 x 3 4- 3 )-. . a 6-- P t. 0 14 cc U— Yee VM-I S (o D-- )- a. A,- rJ 1) d l(- I t . S■) oZ. - t1)144 G .7 ,+ l I P p K 1-t _ ^� GL � � t, ` =, - 111-1_11,4.-ft-ay — rs, -t s )URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: /V_ . � ' COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): _ -- ... _ vat - /VOLUME PER (GAL): JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO .. JELL SECURITY INSIDE OF JELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY?: . YES OK ?: YES NO IENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED O- %- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F):1.;:- DURING PURGING ' OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: •43.2 (5.89) Page 2' of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: OW/ 1:1 b f-6U WELL NUMBER: M w : Ct PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT):. 3( MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: IP fArl WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD:�� TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: '17 PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) 9 WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) TIME DEPTH TO WATER (FT) -7.31 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) t • 42. 2, C WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) 4 PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH IS • A- 1.31 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 4Lv,a (olo o eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR '''si6P2-‘4.4 ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page l of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 4'Y7 (o a— Kennedy /Jenks Consultants tOJECT NAME: ?' tvc404z t le ' tOJECT NUMBER: 0 ( (Q r Ov WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: 4MPLE DATA: -'L -' o COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: �'L-P - PC4,1- 54A-4-- EC..;--/ SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) -r`b*"' TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) V° C, 1-?W . P ,COMMENTS jilll t 5' 3 5 VA vat- (.114 Vu ro + (.2'0 44 l'nk p.4 4- 6 �.- o / ct, 2- L to c (- sV t (l - .. URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: (� � • " ' COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): 4044)' X .4.4: Dik51 /VOLUME PER (GAL): SELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF TELL CASING :()RENTS: DEVICES WELL HEAD OK ?: OK AND OUTER 0 (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: 0 CASING DRY ?: YES NO NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED .. WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 • • • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 31an7 % Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: ?Art?..--Al2— WELL NUMBER: A vv --(IA PROJECT NUMBER: () I (t ((. 0 . (SU PERSONNEL: ,3(21✓ STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: -` TIME START PURGE: 3 TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: v 0 COMMENTS: \C vV{w r M* PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) T I M E VOLUME PURGED (GAL) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) '2 414 WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) c . 3� PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 4 - pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) kuncorrectieuj �1n DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR C..(_. ODOR. `O `"' A DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) l p l jj DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 6-40{b )— Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 20JECT NAME: I/ 20JECT NUMBER: 01 (0 Lam( -h 6-t) WELL NUMBER: r1/41//W PERSONNEL: i AMPLE DATA: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): el' (tit SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: `' lS. COMMENTS: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER ANALYSIS CHAIN- OF -CUS- REQUEST TODY AT 4 °C? (METHOD) COMMENTS voA Jofk A P wi r). 1 dL LL 1 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES::.. TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): COMMENTS: .t+Y" !`': I tiffs -p" 602.1 Pen-I % JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): !ELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: :NSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING .DRY? NO TELL CASING OK ?: :OMMENTS: NO NO ;ENERAL: WEATHER CONDITIONS: TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Manager: Job File: Other: 43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: ___,)__karfe_.(a).__ PROJECT NAME: • PROJECT NUMBER: � STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): c L • U 6 WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: isle t4h PURGE METHOD: '1 TIME START PURGE: Y1.� � PURGE DEPTH (FT) ~) • Q 6 �c ri (1 t.'(o ;15‘) Kennedy /Jenks Consultants WELL NUMBER: N.4 to ) r PERSONNEL: MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: to is • 0(o WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH:, (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) T I M E VOLUME PURGED (GAL) 11: X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING. DIAMETE (IN) 4 6 0.16 0.64 .1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mIcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT). NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED --g DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (IpG0 ,,page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: / )' Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: ROJECT NUMBER: V a....A.. .'' 'WELL NUMBER: tilitA) D 1 O t ( i'D40 PERSONNEL: j- • - AMPLE DATA: ( P :t c COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT EQUIPMENT: --= 7411111.641 1:1 SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD. FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) , COMMENTS I �- 1) / V 4A VoA W. kc 0 �,,n n�( v� 4 cam, ;r . V b e_ O: , Uy 3 A 3 )- A A- P NI /3 0 V- 1 t, . Cie;&. ppi4 -)- -> A- A , /1/4) N . 0 g IL L t, sv x -t Q 14.- -D K 1' P tAt 4.40,, 4 t L 4L `` , • D1,66 ryt 44- - t3,4 DURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES:: ;r i ', COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE - DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIONATION(S) (GAL): T6)144/r7141 __(}y -s /VOLUME PER (GAL): 4ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO'- IF NO, AO) COMMENTS): •- NO 4ELL SECURITY INSIDE OF 4ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES WELL HEAD OK ?: OK AND OUTER ES (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LI'D'AND LOCK) ?: CASING DRY ?: .'a) NO NO 3ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 4-2 ' V OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: ' - -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date `�6 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: (t/°- 3-c WELL NUMBER: -v "V PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: Vt.— WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: An PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME- SAMPLED: COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) T I M'E TOTAL DEPTH (FT) B VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 6, glo 1p\ WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR dNG DIAMETER (IN) 0.16 al 6 0.64 1.44 s CASING VOLUME (GAL) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY "(micromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 24-4. f eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -69) (I SGO.-I ). Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Dater T? 1 7 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 20JECT NAME: ROJECT NUMBER: P- WELL NUMBER: NA) ) / t) I Le l t O r DID PERSONNEL: / AMPLE DATA: 1 �-- ` ? ,145 • COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: a 11 — i-A1454.-4i4; SAMPLE ' NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS t3 11 v` `441 CI s Lao NA (�°.r►/(: .c�r U o ., 114, —cry 3 . 3 v. 4 N t� pCA3 a- a -- A �► . 1 L t �Ub6 le 1 p moo, _ a ' tL L DI 56 - 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL):` /VOLUME PER (GAL): CELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO c IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): Na CELL SECURITY INSIDE OF CELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK)?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: NO •._. OK ?: NO ;ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED "I ' ` " ' WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING "t1 OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: y(9-3 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PC�.l�et WELL NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: 01. t (4.0 l 51) PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 4(.;-1 ( O WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: ` )7t TIME SAMPLED: O ' COMMENTS: MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL' DEPTH (FT) ' • VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) DEPTH.. TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) �• U MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME . (GAL) es TEMPERATURE ( °C) kfl - 0 V0,6 �o. D- d. pH Co. elJ co, S5 (.4 (9 •$. . SPECIFIC /� CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) D. t -1 (uncorrected) cm a,ly- a0lj., v �� DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE. (( rr INTAKE (FT) (\- ` 0 DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED 1\' DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of •2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: . rd- V_zyy Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: �GI�C� -✓ ROJECT NUMBER: ate 1i,o101) WELL NUMBER: H c)3 t (e A PERSONNEL: Q I /. AMPLE DATA: Q ` >").---- COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: ' (4,O . SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE. FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS l ).- 3 .. PA v1,4 4ilt ko N t ( (2)-0....A m \lae__ , -L r, y 3 4 3 › A . to . pa , N t . .I' L _ - 6 P.Mit t . tJ .1.,- ft, =5we.._ t. ,3D. (i 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES ,, COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL). , b /VOLUME PER (GAL): JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO JELL SECURITY INSIDE OF JELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: ICJ WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: .°8 NO OK ?: 4190 NO iEEAT CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED `�l%�_ - W WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING AeK j� OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: •43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: °/ 2 g /off Kennedy /Jenks Consultants:::: • PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: b l `e' (i o -DO WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: 4. STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): . Co WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: : 44.4/ 1--- PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) .1 . 0 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: 1-1b(., P-e44-51-.i -F`� TIME START PURGE: 7 • 4 Z TIME END PURGE: e5 • TIME SAMPLED:_ COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) TIME DEPTH TO WATER (FT) C WATER COLUMN (FT) '( VOLUME PURGED (GAL) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 • 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) i PURGE RATE (GPM)- TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 1—(S a4'5 eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR c,( -ut,/ tD1 DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER Q. CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of.2 groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 9--SL e)� Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: oti 110 I n, WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: ho 34A •43.2 (5-89) Panes 9' of 9 ;AMPLE DATA: e a .' I COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: N-11 SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- - TAINER TYPE.. •. PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS ? -3 4 3 v \NA .(t t 1DD.A /•1 r. �``�.'r .. U va "3 A rJ ) t� d d P / ? L pr A . (J N In. L ri 5 140, ow i t 1 g to-v3 rt it.. I; L to Tb-Diet, 0 lSS rt-4-r"4 r:\LAz12-S- PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES ,. COMMENTS: tea: i TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL). sit'— ._ 5 . +A:w-.- ,� -�=- <: 0 _Ik---r'�i{'t:..: _< ..:. ...: ....:. ..:. /VOLUME PER (GAL): 4ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): ilD NO 4ELL SECURITY INSIDE OF ,TELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES WELL HEAD OK ?: OK AND OUTER (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK)?: CASING DRY ?: ES NO NO ES IENEATH CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED C� -.2 WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING etc' OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: •43.2 (5-89) Panes 9' of 9 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 7 *DT Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: Y ft (7C12) 12 WELL NUMBER: 01 (") - K-sL PROJECT NUMBER: Ol Le (1,D ' 6A= PERSONNEL: V;/! ` Vn STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 1. ;} U MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: T-0(: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: c--C> I\ ln\� PURGE METHOD: e f S l',,,,\ , C- I"^ ' c..� - rTIME START PURGE: / Z • 3 PURGE DEPTH (FT) f TIME END PURGE: , f TIME SAMPLED: 1 - Z v COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) = CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 ZC) S- 0.16 0.64 1.44 I Z- 'W cl, S v • 0 3 T I M E /:13 1 - 0 lb / ( t . !3 1 1 1 6 1' ( C� --. VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) lb' P f6, 0 gs 0 1. 3 /6- v PH b - V I 6.7.°) 6, zb Cam, n SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY ( micromhos ) L/ [ b 1 I I (� 1` '1 (41 Y (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt-AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR C -( � r f- -- -- - a- ODOR ,1 DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) � -- - — - - , i - / DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Paae 1 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3lE-4/0_ Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: poc_c /7"/-e_ WELL NUMBER: 1')- F--S)/4/-- PROJECT NUMBER: ti, IL (D r PERSONNEL: /2k SAMPLE DATA: TIME SAMPLED: ( - W COMMENTS: DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): 'I SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: 12E4\ ` .34-111))--(2. SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS. 1 Z— ii14- VO Iit'S If G ti I?.0t411 [u) C e U°C 0- 3 Z foe) fl ti N N [ L Sv oL 3— 6 Z- z 4 N N ti ) �— I L �°�4 �f ��N�p,< `� 1 ( i7 F1NO3 �03 Al ✓ 1 c, ) L Tt )D -�I IXyii//Q,) PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: I TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): /Z COMMENTS: DISPOSAL METHOD: -- 12^0uil -& - € -(V -- DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): WELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: YES NO INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YE NO WELL CASING OK ?: YES NO COMMENTS: GENERAL: WEATHER CONDITIONS: S TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): 69 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? 4969 cc: Project Manager: Job File: Other: _ F -43.2 (5.89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: _/EW O Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 4 c.--c- �V� WELL NUMBER: G1/ -" Z Y) -0 PROJECT NUMBER: NW((') (1-1_ PERSONNEL: Pk v v STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): s MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: TO C-- WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: \ 70 ) \ 34— PURGE METHOD: ef f S �G) 4- k 1-61/1 r C To) TIME START PURGE: 11.3 PURGE DEPTH (FT) I TIME END PURGE: 7 ,,-.11 r L TIME SAMPLED: I � �- Z� V /z ` `f OC c1`'I> COMMENTS: ID of r C.-v-4e 44 IA ) — (.0 /— ir�C1 _pf.-- r r e a WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 L _r13 / , 5cf- ( -, 3 TIME 2 c liL s-3 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) << = S (f J :0Y> c 1 2 :r7 1 (. I Z , zz f I ll / 2 : E PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) ( 5i) /5—'7 6, Js z ' 5 6.5z /5—‘5— 6 5Z ' ,r` '6.5-3 pH ,),s` CONDICIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) Z3 V\ (7D� I ) zG 7 ( 16 (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR -(C4f ODOR S(t- DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) 3 1-7 DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? ( ) ,/ - F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.II Paoe 1 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 3 z � GZ Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: P -GGO) 6 WELL NUMBER: Al (N -Z% g PROJECT NUMBER: r? `(./'H O M., PERSONNEL: 0 l SAMPLE DATA: l ') TIME SAMPLED: ( ?' 30/ 12 : 4- 0 ( COMMENTS: Pdp . S� -e____ D DEPTH SAMPLED (FT): Z 1 V" W� i 0Z C! !2.0 4-e 0 SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: eC' it:, 1„ f )-) C SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS 1 2, 6 6 v11)- vor�- xc K c \ r,, Z`iD -0 zA 0 w, I cl t) pc_ -'P {{-G 3 6 6 `� z r iW y _ 15i /14101) PURGE PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: TOTAL DISCHARGE (GAL): G COMMENTS: _ DISPOSAL METHOD: %' U V✓1 //t/`(›, DRUM DESIGNATION(S) /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): WELL SECURITY DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK)?: YES NO INSIDE OF WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: ' NO WELL CASING OK ?: iir NO COMMENTS: GENERAL: WEATHER CONDITIONS: -e__ TEMPERATURE (SPECIFY °C OR °F): PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Manager: Job F11e: Other: F -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: � %47 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: } %/ cc/9-6e_ WELL NUMBER: (4.4 LA,)--6 PROJECT NUMBER: 6 L( LC D J ' PERSONNEL: ,fiF.07//1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): r-1,9;0 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: PURGE METHOD: TIME START PURGE: 9 \ S 6 PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: ' r9'-" COMMENTS: J acl.L+ 1(1 (,) / J ^- --,,,,--t0,// N d crlej T .0 F an/G -le 6i% ), rj-- WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH. (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 '"',.4"- 6 %� S 0.16 0.64 1.44 t),5-0 7,P n I.. 3 TIME . f 11 l0 -26 1(7' -, l02?•7 ��� /0 -9 VOLUME PURGED _(GAL). �- j� PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) ), 7 -</) A•(-`'"1 13. 633 I (3- 4 6, I - 1?-9 U. l 1 13 _ k 6,/s- pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos ) 7 6. `' 2 (I b O DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR G f - —.- ODOR S }" - � -- �� - - — - DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) ( -- _ - DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER, OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED , F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.II Paae 1 of i Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: ,3 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT PROJECT NAME: P4-C-C WELL WELL NUMBER: / 1-) — 6 v NUMBER: 61 Li 1"1 b (Z PERSONNEL: 0 k SAMPLE DATA: / Cl) - Li'S-- COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: [ P 1 ' J H (1 l (, SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME . FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS ■ -L 3 3 Uc'v", Jo Vo Hc‘ (4c ' A) .' / !OD fr'\ r Lc) u'� I, / iC '41' I C.(e C" 4 ?` r(Tats z 4 N �V L J C l pigs svoG 6 1 z - /� A- / N N N ) C. /1.- f i li TOE . 1 F(NO3 N10°3 N I ( IL, \ V �'0'r'' "/5 P�� �E Is PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL -- METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): - % (1J e'.:1- //✓J 12 `, /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: NO OK ?: NO 4111:P ?: GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED DVe T COBS )-- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 4.-e'5- OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F -43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 1 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: 7 I up-b?, WELL NUMBER: ilr, vV ' (+/T PROJECT NUMBER: Z) I (6 / i D i l51> PERSONNEL: f✓ l ` ' ( STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 6:7, Ri-r MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: f 0 C_ s 1 J -4)-A� �A. ) WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: a �y� S � PURGE METHOD: C' E TIME START PURGE: U ' -(4 )- PURGE DEPTH (FT) / TIME END PURGE: 61.3 TIME SAMPLED: I: - COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) WATER COLUMN (FT) X° MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) a CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 ,/3 . 6 �✓ 6 -v 0.16 0 1.44 l Z.Z71 l 6 -°1 FO, TIME c1 :0-0 q7 5 -30 O '3 � /�j "( ^3� VOLUME PURGED (GAL) (.../' _...� ��cfr 6 ,/4 , __________ PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) ) 4' D )4J "? / (4\ 3 )("1- / (f` PH 6,gE 6 S- 6. -6 /,_ 6 /' 6) lJ VVV o--3?- 6v?-- 6 - i. /� z 6 (/ 6.30 6? C.1 1 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR G(2Rr v, Pc(e. qi, / ODOR 14 L DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) / l _ DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? �- -� F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.II Pace 1 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT PROJECT NAME: 0'i1- 11 -6T-- WELL NUMBER: M VV --("h4--- .. NUMBER: (9 Hi / / a 1 UZS PERSONNEL: Of c1 SAMPLE DATA: -- 3 .i COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLING SAMPLED (FT): EQUIPMENT: Pt/U-5;4,1 fic SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS `— s 3 3 V)19 U�� if c,( N �` �v 1LOm( «w1) l rl f ( -e OCe To70l -P Gbc-71 3 A- ) 3 C, P �S 6 Z �- �' N /) l w �x *Or cb 't P AAA 11 IL/ V 01,5 701t PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: - - COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): j)r/fr1fr1, >19 l: /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: YE NO GENERAL: ,, CONDITIONS: a- /___ (SPECIFY °C OR °F): ENCOUNTERED DURING PURGING Cap 4-- WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS l "- OR SAMPLING? i (;) ,/ cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F-43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:3 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: pri) c76-)4i(), WELL NUMBER: `/'4 —/ )4 PROJECT NUMBER: i> Ile. II D, 6-'6 PERSONNEL: O STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): 6> , MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: / a C WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: �d /Ih-5 PURGE METHOD: -El' \'47,gi C -(-m rC -,1v. ; TIME START PURGE: 94 PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME END PURGE: j 'f G TIME SAMPLED: D ' Z 0 COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) - DEPTH TO WATER (FT) _ WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) ° CASING VOLUME (GAL) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 2-%%.-- - % ' S / l , J /P TIME --);SZ %oZ yj =D91 :./ : 1:5- VOLUME PURGED (GAL) / z ? 3 .. II/Cr l PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 1 ( t S \. 3 /I, 3 I\ ? I(` P" L 63(i- L _ (/ 63) (/ 7 -( ��l/ 61 31 4111 6- :30 �� SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) '16?-- (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR -- - - — _.---- -- -- -- --- - --- Gar ^ J n ___ _—. ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) - - -- - -- - --- DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? __ -_ _ ___..._ --' _- F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO -il PMOP. 1 of 9 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 7. MA f o Z Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: 62 ::C-A(J` WELL NUMBER: ///1/4)-- i 4- 01 L' (I, 0.i D V PERSONNEL: Q/ l ` vv I SAMPLE DATA: �J ij • t- 0 COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: Pew r T- 1 J•. C SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS 3 3 S) - A) ,✓ , Z O vn ( _420,,,,,, p) 4' Z j .tJ /J N 3 ) L Pc C5 svaG 1 t A ,✓ / L, VW-Pi I P /ti Y / C -34 -44} 9)53/11e-)P PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /('‘v % 3"/( Vv101 (7),(i /VOLUME PER (GAL): WELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO WELL SECURITY INSIDE OF WELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: OK ?: YES NO CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: ES YES NO GENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED 0 0 r f• WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING V OR SAMPLING? I//(/) 0 cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: F-43.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: l ?c? Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): S. S WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: 'I' \'i/V6N"--- TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: MEASURING POINT PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) DESCRIPTION: AA s- (— c- A-41c: n 3� WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH, (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) o_S1 WATER COLUMN (FT) 31: MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 2 4 6 0.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) SS 03 TIME VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) s Y� (8 TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) K. 0 l 4.01 10'1 eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) c?c/461-) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? 'F -43.1: (5.89) 1\ (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:- v (mil 0 ' Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2OJECT NAME: ROJECT NUMBER: R WELL NUMBER: MO --;:)(4417 O (. U 0 i CO PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: • ;'fc- COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: l>7 4[3' CA S •tr. t."4- -1/"L` SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) : COMMENTS r voD uu r3 012194 thaG 3 4 3 y 4. Q -a P tL %L- PAI4 S ;›- a ") N [ L Sv Di- tob t . URGE. WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS:.' TOTAL DISPOSAL DRUM DESIGNATION(S) DISCHARGE (GAL): METHOD: 131.4-44-1.-(4.- oiLSi y— /VOLUME PER (GAL): ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO • ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: 410 WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: YES NO OK ?: III NO ENERAL:. CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 4 OR SAMPLING? c• Project 1 Job / Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5 -89) Page.2 of 2 Groundwater Purge and Sample Form PROJECT NAME: Date: arS Kennedy/Jenks Consultants LS 0.03 s - a WELL NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ( (, 0 ' PERSONNEL: KO—PA STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: .1_ WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: i6V1IT4.-=--11c../ PURGE METHOD: Qr, D 6$ PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TIME TOTAL DEPTH (FT) • VOLUME PURGED (GAL) • DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 6 WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 4 6 to . 0.16 0.64 1.44 . !„ • CASING VOLUME (GAL) -- PURGE-RATE (GPM) - • , TEMPERATURE (°C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mIcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg/L) eH(MV)Pt-AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY/COLOR ODOR 131,6 DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) C----N, DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) \ NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED , \ . DEWATERED? I (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 iroundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: WELL NUMBER: I3 ?:>11/- ' ROJECT NUMBER: U i to ((0 5 PERSONNEL: Y AMPLE DATA: (O. ' D-1 COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: A 1 D peiVASJ'T- C.'-1. c: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS 3 6A_ t" �l.G( c)'O M ( V DL 3 3 /k- 0l ,, LL P( s--- (.• a.... 1- A P e (` (.L . SO) 1--- -er --DY 6 ( 1 V i 171,55 Pm..21"1-• PURGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): , :'. /VOLUME PER (GAL): 4ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO 4ELL SECURITY INSIDE OF TELL CASING COMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?:CY) WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ? -: ES NO OK ?: 111P NO 3ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED ar-tlitAinr WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING I OR SAMPLING? cc: Project Job Other: Manager: File: • -43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 " ter Purge and Sample Form Date: C,")... Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 1h G.C�C- -cc.,i WELL NUMBER: • M� ?-- (0A PROJECT NAME: D llD ((d ' DO PERSONNEL: V V PROJECT NUMBER: `�j S y MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): . METHOD: 'C ` � PURGE METHOD: f01,-Yi—Okd WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT ' (`7 PURGE DEPTH (FT) ^�G� TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: r k COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 8 -W-- WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) s CASING VOLUME (GAL) 4 6 It . ; 0.16 0.64 1.44 C. S3 TIME '4',� C1�.>- _l'• -c. ' '35 VOLUME PURGED (GAL) �/� I v Ll )._ PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) LC • / i / is ,� 1 ! ici PH :� L"42 (o• (o, 1 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm a.) b D....7-7 55-s f._ 3 W V DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR (-k /14 , „ t L '� ,,,,.,.---°-'I ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) Vito DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5.89)>.: (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date:. r ( (a")/ Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME:�''�- ���'`f� ' � t ROJECT NUMBER: WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: i COMMENTS: T IME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: j .?'; ,. ,. em:54 41-414: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) -'. .;. COMMENTS '--- 3 von- 1-(c4 la0 4l Cil. P “- &k /) 4 3 .)— A A 0 0 P N (I L (1.- (2c,( (7 S a - 1 . 4 � ” A I• ft , I L 1 L s z 'C'Plil -4j0 - r„tj 1 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: ,t-:' 7., . -... COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): ' a .. b /,514<_4 /VOLUME PER (GAL): JELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): ES NO !ELL SECURITY INSIDE OF /ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES. OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: NO , OK ?: NO • GEEATL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED O��� � -� A n 4 iV W WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 4 S - E OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: .. " 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 • Groundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: 7 zrAiv1- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: Dlt7((a ov WELL NUMBER: PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): (0:1 l WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: TIME START PURGE: G173 TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: Y4\11\-- 61�/"►�-� MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: PURGE METHOD: PURGE DEPTH (FT) P6vt5Prot-tt WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) -TOTAL. DEPTH (FT) TIME VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) pH SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 7,o4 q11 (-r WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) 2•: 4 6 0.16 0.64 .1.44 s CASING VOLUME (GAL) 14 -o 1, o . 1603 l3. -ci cS 113a eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR et DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED. DEWATERED? F•43.145 =B9) ( w (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date 'c 7 ( Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 2OJECT NAME: ROJECT NUMBER: "C14,4L.A-- WELL NUMBER: I stw 1>S-15— n i� , ' 1 fFp PERSONNEL: i 41T)/ AMPLE DATA: J COMMENTS: . • . TIME SAMPLED:':; DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING (FT): EQUIPMENT: .1 , . . ?. (),,elion'141.C--, SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME 'FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD.) ., COMMENTS t " 3 3 ki-6 VDx E---( W( It3 No ( )15 A,( p-o -eov opt, 't 11 -6 3 4( 'L A :. i t . 13' c\ L L L C co- PMt 2 / t,L- ,i aZ 9 i P u ' t (16„:1=.14 URGE. WATER DISPOSAL NOTES ::: 1 COMMENTS._ Y L _'. r ..:' •. TOTAL DISCHARGE _DISPOSAL . METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): e } /VOLUME PER (GAL): ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): 41/%1 NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: NO OK ?: NO ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED 4-. • WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING AS r S OR SAMPLING? c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5.89) Page 2' of 2 water Purge and Sample Form Date: r( ° Kennedy /Jenks Consultants P WELL NUMBER: ( '� " PROJECT NAME. C7 tJ' (A 0 ' en, PERSONNEL: PROJECT NUMBER: 21 .' 1 41 MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): MEASUREMENT METHOD: lMS- PURGE METHOD: WATER LEVEL l PURGE: (dam PURGE DEPTH (FT) TIME START 1.-4S-457- TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: P• 4-15.; COMMENTS: WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH, ' (FT) : ' DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 1 _ \9 a WATER COLUMN (FT) X MULTIPLIER FOR C DIAMETER (IN) s CASING VOLUME (GAL) CS.5NG 2 4 6 • j k 0.16 - 0.64 1.44 a , P i — TIME !: T. 7.0 -.7'.' 1, G VOLUME PURGED (GAL) I :A - o c;i/ 3 , PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) ` '5, S l'; , Ov k:), , G ( ; , PH \O. (a ( . (15- G•( )- Cg . Cv) CONDICIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm d � � 1 ,1 /. DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) eH(MV)Pt -AgCI ref. ' TURBIDITY /COLOR Lt ( _ w 'i k�p � 4, Sit C ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date' " v -4/ 03-- Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: ?A_ ._ -4.f WELL NUMBER: 141/3" CPC- ROJECT NUMBER: Q t (Ott 0 / PERSONNEL: T AMPLE DATA: 1 45- COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING , (FT): EQUIPMENT: t'- le) Pmt SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS — — to i ace._ ot. c, 1P64 --6.ce .? ,) Gt, P rye, <- = 63 tx E61- 2 I Q ( - , - t., 1.ti ,- Tit, ;ti,4, CSI S -fr-Cs 'URGE. WATER, DISPOSAL NOTES:_._ .22. • COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): i - -- IAA..4 °C 1.5 'I. /VOLUME PER (GAL): IELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO 1ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF 1ELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY?: NO OK ?: ES NO ?: dipio ;ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED T WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING 4 S ' i OR SAMPLING? :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 4a2 (5 -89) Page 2 of • 2 • Groundwater�Purge • and Sample Form J Date: __ 0 Kennedy Jenks � ::.: ---- Y/ Consultants PROJECT NAME: NUMBER: b ` iz ti o ' n' WELL NUMBER: D-° 4C PERSONNEL: STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): Git • �L WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: ' \" TIME START PURGE: TIME END PURGE: TIME SAMPLED: COMMENTS: kr,30 t1%■S MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: D(j PURGE METHOD: 1"45-14-1-4/C-; PURGE DEPTH (FT) WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) TIME VOLUME PURGED (GAL) PURGE RATE (GPM) 1D = r1 k WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASING DIAMETER (IN) f2. 4 6 10.16 0.64 1.44 CASING VOLUME (GAL) 3 F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 TEMPERATURE ( °C) 1 . (, 1 + 5 t . is vs .1 .V51 1 0i »1 . / PH l- D- Ie'1 1 A 1., 45). 1'45 1. 5) 1..51 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (micromhos) 2) �^ f 1 cm. I 61 •01 16 � cl r5 3 J (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L)' ; to eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR (_) +"� 1� _ / (-.. (/J _ ��,L � tea.°.. .� r' _-- -. it � ODOR r" _7 ''— DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? 1 - F -43.1 (5-89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: °'it(ti Kennedy /Jenks Consultants ROJECT NAME: 90_,c_t_Ad.„- ROJECT NUMBER: 01,1.011:b ,C WELL NUMBER: M PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: 1.ri- l S COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING {FT) EQUIPMENT: : ,Q7'-_ -- ,. % I . . 4..r"..4-141-C-,' i - SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- NATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHO ?) i ` , COMMENTS ( '3 '3 ViZeA VIA kc{ tAa r4 (° iq (ate K. Ll I Li ■ 'v `- .r (' y 3 d- 3 3..- 4- P-- 0 ►' pi 0 0- IL I'e- PAH y nr a N.N cc, S y ti -2_ 'URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES: : ' , .fi '' 'j . -r .- •.- COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD: DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): Co�► I 00( irt- /VOLUME PER (GAL): TELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO ` IELL SECURITY NSIDE OF TELL CASING :OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: ES WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?:. ES NO. OK ?: ! NO ;ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED eh4.--A-4e...3 "4°" , -. WEATHER TEMPERATURE PROBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING dl-t: F.-- OR SAMPLING? . :c: Project Job Other: Manager: File: 43.2 (5 -89) Page 2 of 2 • oundwate� Purge and Sample Form Date:41' -/ 0 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 1 3- 154 eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 7ct_c-c'°�- WELL NUMBER: A✓I W ' %1 PROJECT NAME: bt 44,1-b (6' PERSONNEL: brly- PROJECT NUMBER: '7. A MEASURING POINT DESCRIPTION: bC1 STATIC WATER LEVEL (FT): , s METHOD: PURGE METHOD: �L 5[ "q./ WATER LEVEL ,MEASUREMENT '0• k S PURGE DEPTH (FT) e` : TIME START PURGE: 1.1 TIME END PURGE: ., TIME SAMPLED: It , COMMENTS: '-N D,1,tii\A_. F4 5/ M D WELL VOLUME CALCULATION (FILL IN BEFORE PURGING) TOTAL :. DEPTH (FT) DEPTH TO WATER (FT) 1, 4- I WATER COLUMN (FT) MULTIPLIER FOR CASNING DIAMETER (IN) -CASING VOLUME (GAL) (2) 4 ,�D 1 8 , 0.16 0.64 1.44 / , 1 TIME 0: %01 11',15 V: 4 ' 11! VOLUME PURGED (GAL) .y �- 4 `r ' PURGE RATE (GPM) TEMPERATURE ( °C) 14,o 1$.41 `'1. °O� 0),Q 11.01 I :M PH '1.11 1. -1¢ 1'i 1 ,.& i• ld, /•(1 SPECIFIC CONDUCTIVITY (mlcromhos) (uncorrected) cm DISSOLVED OXYGEN (mg /L) 1 3- 154 eH(MV)Pt -AgC1 ref. TURBIDITY /COLOR ODOR DEPTH OF PURGE INTAKE (FT) DEPTH TO WATER DURING PURGE (FT) NUMBER OF CASING VOLUMES REMOVED DEWATERED? F -43.1 (5 -89) (ISGO.I) Page 1 of 2 roundwater Purge and Sample Form Date: -, I )'/t \ -- _ Kennedy /Jenks Consultants 20JECT NAME; ? ROJECT NUMBER: 1' c it() / LD Z WELL NUMBER: is PERSONNEL: AMPLE DATA: , 1, . COMMENTS: TIME SAMPLED: DEPTH SAMPLED SAMPLING EQUIPMENT: (FT): ( 5- ,___'")C -S:: SAMPLE NO. NO. OF CONTAIN- ERS CON- TAINER TYPE PRESER- VATIVE FIELD FILTRA- TION VOLUME FILLED (ml or L) TURBIDITY COLOR SHIPPED UNDER CHAIN- OF -CUS- TODY AT 4 °C? ANALYSIS REQUEST (METHOD) COMMENTS 1 o-- 3 3 r -►Act Vii6r 1 ,3 b7* ifr4 u D-L. ri6jer °.;>-- A •' L .47f-E.QS I ■ 14 ii ' 1 - URGE WATER DISPOSAL NOTES:. :::L- COMMENTS: TOTAL DISCHARGE DISPOSAL METHOD:fth+y:,�d DRUM DESIGNATION(S) (GAL): /VOLUME PER (GAL): ELL HEAD CONDITIONS CHECKLIST (CIRCLE YES OR NO - IF NO, ADD COMMENTS): NO ELL SECURITY NSIDE OF ELL CASING OMMENTS: DEVICES OK (BOLLARDS, CHRISTY LID, CASING LID AND LOCK) ?: WELL HEAD AND OUTER CASING DRY ?: �YE NO OK ?: ES NO 41, ENERAL: CONDITIONS: (SPECIFY ENCOUNTERED I:� e/�`-.— may' WEATHER TEMPERATURE P2OBLEMS °C OR °F): DURING PURGING J V r OR SAMPLING? , c: Project Job Other: File: Manager: 33.2 (5-89) Page 2 of 2 • Appendix F Investigation- Derived Waste Characterization and Disposal Documentation SUMMARY OF LOADS HAULED AGE: INVOICE - #2125448 -E,,, DATE TICKET # GROSS TARE NET NET TONS (34) Petroleum Contaminated Soil Disposal - Seatt 05/10/02 1582126 63,400 34,800 28,600 14.300 102 TRUCK It CONTAINER # Total: 14.300 DATE TICKET # QUANTITY Drums 05/14/02 1583287 36.00 Total Quantity 36.00 C C ft \ r. 955 Powell Ave SW Renton, WA 98055 Phone 425/227 -0311 SHIPPING Lading Manifest: (N. PAPER 73107 -02 • DELIVERY DATE JOB # • 590752 !SHIPPER / CUSTOMER PACCAR - SEATTLE POINT OF CONTACT • LISA MONTOYA .ADDRESS 8801 EAST MARGINAL WAY S PHONE # (206)767 -8647 CITY, STATE, ZIP SEATTLE WA 98108 CARRIER /TRANSPORTER Burlington Environmental, Inc. PHONE # (253)383 -3044 , CONSIGNEE / FACILITY 1' . BURLINGTON ENV7RONMENTAL, INC. POINT OF CONTACT ADDRESS 20245 77TH AVENUE SOUTH PHONE# (253)872 -8030 CITY, STATE, ZIP KENT , WA 98032 HM m US DOT Description (Including Proper Shipping Name' Hazard Class and ID Number) Containers - No _ Type ;: Total "Quantity • UOM A VON - REGULATED WASTE WATER AND SLUDGE . 1 TT 'c 2 G • C _ 'D Special Handling Instruction and Additional Information: a) 159416 -03 - NON - REGULATED WASTE WATER, OIL, 6. SLUDGE FROK CATCH BASINS - ¥ATO5 WATB05 WATBO6 WATB07 STABB01 STABO1 1 KENNEDY /JENKS POI 016110.00=PSC #1 PER DEAN MUTE Placards Provided YES NO Emergency Phone # (253) 872 -785E SHIPPER'S CERTIFICATION: I hereby declare that the contents of this consignment are fully and accurately described above by proper shipping name and are classified, packed, marked, and labeled, and are in all respects in proper condition for transport by highway, vessel, and rail according to applicable international and national government regulations. (SHIPP PRINT OR TYPE AM SIGNATURE MONTH DAY lc YEAR iii- ' i / X , (CAR IRE RANSPORTE ) PRAT RTYP NAME SIGNATURE. v MofvT++_ �` DAY ,_ (CONSIGNEE /FACILI Y) PRINT OR TYPE NAME / SIG RE V/ Ji,..e; .=":7-4,e7.-(2.:A ( vr.' MONTH DAY YEAR 3 ro a -14Vir ALLIED WASTE • GENERATOR WASTE PROFILE SHEET Waste Profile # Requested Disposal Facility: an Allied Waste Company 1. Generator Information [Date: 4- /7_ s-*/ 0 "Z_ Generator Name: P A cc, A /) Generator Site Ac3dress:. 5S '3, 01 44 a i- ' ty , A c■ lit) .? -0 utt4 City: —(0 it ,A) 7, t 0, I County: 1-< C in. 5 State: 1,j1,11-- ' I Zip: [Generator State ID Number: 14) pt h 0 oci zq ti s- ork SIC Code Number: 3 1 1 1 Generator Mailing Address (if different): '-'11-1 1 a 6Th 14 City: ge1 i tv i,t e.,_ I County: )-( 4. State: LA) ki Generator Contact Name: / ) s a, eqe, ift 4 G y a.. — Phone Number:. 0 0 6 -1 6-1- '% 6 4- 1 Fax Number: 7...06 ---7 6 —I— g 60 g IL Transporter Information Transporter Name: 0, b 6 IA c- o I Transporter Address: City: County: tate: Transporter Contact Name: Phone Number: ate Transportation Number: Waste Stream Information Name of Waste: t1/4; 11 C- 4- 1 j4.4 S Process Generating Waste: 5c, Igo S Type.of Waste: INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WASTE or [POLLUTION CONTROL WASTE Physical State: KSOLID fl SEMI-SOLID Lj POWDER El LIQUID fl OIliER: Method of Shipment: Li BULK g.DRUM BAGGED n OTHER: • Estimated Annual Volume: E CUBIC YARDS: 0 TONS: g OTHER: 10 Ibp.oms ONE TIME DAILY 0 WEEKLY I I MONTHLY I OTHER: _ • • • Zip : IFax Number: Special Handling Instructions: IV. Representative Sample Certification Is the representative sample collected to prepare this profile and laboratory analysts, collected in accordance with U.S. EPA 40 CFR 261.20(c) guidelines or equivalent rules? Sample Date: 3 /Z. cl •L.. Type of Sample: X COMPOSITE SAMPLE Sampler's Employer: fre.Api /7-etiA lc: CoAE 14±":5 Sampler's Name (printed): OE..ai,k. j4iij.- Signature: fl NO SAMPLE TAKEN 1)1 YES or 0 NO. GRAB SAMPLE • I I 0 All icd Want Industries, July 2U0 04/25/02 THU 08:17 [TX/RX NO 6998] 0.1/ 20/02 :ow 09:41 FAN. 25;1 952 3435 _ 19:IV11LPY /JENttZ:i LAM btll; I'i N1 111U1110 Uniifitgie 40 owe Kite 2of2 GENERATOR WASTE PROFILE SHEET (continued) I . Wagto Ptnfilc.N J _ _ V, Pktybic ;63 C;it.>try>6,Ctt'ritaict. ui Waimea: Chpl•HCIetialit^ Componetrt5 % by Weight (retie) te.,_5.0.i..1...ay...1:1-LvLI_s___EtrzikLilL).111'n, I Cr-C2-1 r d�rt (drsc�ibej: Feet LiyatW6 9./ Solids; pH: Fg .� hgnlnt IPhonel [FSigrL) vt A)ptnc t'� YES nrNta o7v 6 ` c� , C f C.r, . 5I i ski" Pe.lro'r!>,>"1, Content °,6 a 0 .4 trnshr Lairotalory .4gotytird ivory Ondi r Marrrial &le y Para Sheet) l _■ hicirrd dg u ARratYb� d at'arareeler, Prtidlb4 t e N m„, - Dhan 04 wal►to r,r gniscralnb prwces LLN>waln veranda! conrurtratlrm otthe Iidii» r Posolden uldrow *lcid1* f.:i' stiotn•, ICndrin, I kpinl;hl,rr (gull it alrnairlcs), I. iridium, Mathu}yohlor, Toraphorlo, 2 A -D, or 2.4.5 -7•P Silwcs an f J YE1 or GINO ds:flpYrl br„ 40 (;I(Tt 261.3 ?:1_ ,. • ---"- noun rhl$ ,nal to to gtmtryutng pru1:G+l't csouic it to eai.+et! 031IA cspnt;um limits from high Ic "etc of Ilytl.ngeq Sulfide or ©Y>:5 or NO I•i p,�etu I .y.a,:ld,:�n dctio,ui Its 40 f:l'1'l 261.237 • f ,h llsil wtelu tynlaar wy�ltluWcl t:t,.,ut;nti•ations of i'ulychloriswrnl flyd,enyl9 (PCn;t2 so dot-onto-1 in dtr CPR part 7617 E] yr. or T4C1 1.).0 0th W1)l4 c:,nteIts rr.gillatt,l s;crnccutratio nt of listed lsgtmrrious writ= tkfined In 4u C1 i.261,31. 761.32, 261,33, ❑ YES a NO I11'1414 Kl:i{A 1'•Ll.tcd $nlvcot,'r_ _ _ iJ,ta this wntte t uatain rcgulntct) wm,.lvrrtralkuus of 2, 3, 7 ,11•7'ctrw'hlstrtwhihcnzt►diaxin (2,I,7,11- TCCD), or tiny u11wT o yEA E NO ai,rl[n niitulihitki Iii ill (.!,1. Pt 2t1.117 In thin n t/s(;ulau,d l oxlo Mtin-rial as u1:Hlnrd t,iP, det'al undto: Stow rogulailun>;? • 1t) Ihi� d t uis,tw4 kudinocties: Wive as tletlnal 'alernl andinr Slum repholnns ?. Is iiila a w ulatrd Mailed err IniGotiotu Waatt :yto dcfincd ImintIcrul and/or S■ole tcgululinns? Is lhix wnhuc gcn+:inlra$ al u rGdural Superliusd Chtast Up Silo? VI. ipenlrr1lth.r terteffr1 tint I hardily c.elrltY rho to the besot r/f trrY kduwlcAilr: Imd hclist, the infurmutilm cnnluinod herein Is a trot and Ace01111C tlewxipii,m r the *AMA; rnuutrial brut.: olt'arcd for dirpos41. 1 Nether ce�iiIy that by utilizing 'his prt,lik, neither ntyaulf nor arty othor employee r'f Iho en gouty wIII dclivbr for dluposa11 of attempt to dellyor for dlslsnrnl pry ww.Uc which is t Ii ufRcd to tonic ..aa*e heY.udoux waslc or infcolioua wiio, or any hUter vonytr_ ri,nIMiA1 iltit futility i,a prrshlltilIr /l I`rlrm 1Kfefrl,ng by Imo. Out company hereby agrees W lolly I,.rh mnhfy thlii dllpninl facility against ony donnas* 'walling limn thin row Iiii it cn Mktg isifcrunat or untrue, I further amity that the company hall nbt roared the Form orkeonitin of 1111 +foie rilsc,el n5 fury irle4 by .A Wed Warne In'luilrictt, Inc. } kS A. (771,.10 a n..0 Lik-o FCC- Fc(j_r CCi . �'� I A, tthilI ,CNrA1ivh NAs+r: mat) '1.1 I LE ti,risti K1) I;xpiratia `,yiflltntI /•It{%ri AiiitfnTIV1TI∎t11TURF, 1»IM Nr NAME VIE ,A thci 4 What Iii pptoyol Re,jex:9r:d 'Warne, 1'Ile Signalurtr Date i L. Allied Wuslc bKlurtd ', mom 2000 1 04/25/02 THU 09:17 [rX /RX NO BRIM 04/25/02 THU 10:21 [T% /R% NO 7004] ' BSG — TRANSPORTATION GROUP ❑ RESOURCE RECOVERY 1629 East Alexander Ave., Tacoma WA 98421 (253) 383 -3044 ❑ BEI PUGET SOUND 1629 East Alexander Ave., Tacoma WA 98421 (253) 383 -3044 BILL OF LADING o /Z;-) BEGINNING MILEAGE ,4/6 li -- ON DUTY �,r ; . PM DRIVER NAME / !' fr \/ ifr /',/ ✓j4, ENDING MILEAGE OFF DUTY AM PM /EHICLE NO. /ii' dam" t.% TRAILER NO. BOX NO. COST CENTER . SHIPPERS NO _ .:.. , :ORDER NO::: ' % ' 9c - SHIPPER-I ORIGIN WEIGH INFORMATION VAME "2' - ;'..Z GROSS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY +.. �?fi % ill/ V.1 'r f /� TARE ADDRESS. ! C. �,F �?' -L , - �� MILEAGE CONTAINER RATE FREIGHT i / / CITY- �lic,) 'STATE/ ' ZIP NET ,: QUANTITY DOT, PROPER SHIPPING NAME' r' PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT "� rhis is to certify that the above named materials are properly classified, described, packaged, marked and labeled, and are in proper condition for transportation, according to the applicable regulations of the Department of Transportation. • NAME ADDRESS CITY ' /EHICLE NO. 7 LOADED DESTINATION RECEIPT # STATE /d' ZIP j TRAILER NO. DATE f : 7er.- % D UNLOADED ❑ RINSED ARRIVAL TIME:; - _OAD TIME: START: '0 GEORGETOWN 734 S. Lucile St., Seattle, WA 98108 (206) 762 -3362 ❑ TACOMA 1701 E. Alexander Ave., Tacoma, WA 98421 (253) 627 -7568 ❑ WASHOUGAL 625 South 32nd St (PO Box 229) Washougal, WA 98671 (360) 835.8594 , KENT 20245 77th Ave S., Kent, WA 98032 (253) 872 -7859 AM PM FINISH: AM PM HRS. FREE TIME HRS. CHARGEABLE UNLOAD TIME: START: AM PM FINISH: AM PM HRS. FREE TIME HRS. CHARGEABLE REASON FOR LOAD DELAY: SIGNATURE FOR DELAY: DRIVER SIGNATURE L',OMMENTS. REASON FOR UNLOAD DELAY: SIGNATURE FOR DELAY: • f I IRT(IAAPP f .0 PV PHOLP P. Industrial Services Group W srern Region Date:5�' L � �� Manifest# 3°7412- Waste Receipt # %73a0 Generator: 4-cLptic.- Se' k, Transporter: 44/C, ,'Waste Category/AA/6g Waste Codes: /00/1-1— 12 Operator: �iS Shift:. Sampled B Tested By: C' c Labblearance Prior to Of Loading: NO Material Description: 7- '1 AY 1 0 Z 2 Bulk Load Check -In Sheet Process Form # Profile # /��?/ / G`3 *Designated Tank /0/ * Tank Start Volilme: ,/ - Tank Ending Volume: Manifested Volume: Rec'd Volume: Start Time {�✓ rid✓/ Rinsate: v Is the Volume Received a 10% discrepancy from the Manifested Volume: YES /C Finish Time; Check Appropriate Disposition: -Treatment: Carbon Filter: Prior to Pumping Technician wearing Proper PPE? Insure that only necessary valves are open Driver present and wearing Proper PPE l✓ T Bungie cords on all connections? / NO Checked hose(s) for: wear, gaskets in good condition, and connectors are tight? Stabilization: Fuels: Incin: Are only necessary valves are. open? ()/ NO Is Pump hooked up correctly jF / NO Tanker/Buckets/Equip. grounded? / NO Drip trays beneath all connections? 1,J / NO /. NO Communicate all "NO" Answers After Pumping Hose(s) depressurized? / NO In -line basket filters clean of sludge and debris? Sumps / Buckets pumped and clean of liquids /.debris? Drums Created? YES / O if yes, Drum Numbers Hose(s) drained and put away? NO All valves closed? / NO NO / NO Communicate all "NO" Answers /0/ *****REPORT DISCREPANCIES TO A SUPERVISOR * * * ** Combining the Strengths of Philip Services Corp., Allwaste and Sery -Tech wra oRn;o .0511 R72 -8030 • Fax (253) 395 =0377 Bulk Load Check-In Sheet Process Form # ENT Physical Description: 7/ -/ 1 7 JI 7,/� ignitability Screen: pH: /7/ 9 Total Chlorides: 11-/1:72-7 Specific Gravity / 7 / z ' Radiation Screen: /�� Cyanide. Screen: /1� Sulfide Screen: /vL7---- PCB's: %(/ Compatibility: z-5 Water / Mix Screen: V % Suspended Solids: % Stabiiized Solids: "j/ % Oil: % Gas: T<kCOIY ^. Physical Description: Pass Color D-Tect: YES / NO Color: Ingitabiiity Screen: pH: Specific Gravity: Radiation Screen: Cyanide Screen: ulfde Screen: PCB's: Compatability: Water / Mix Screen: Halogen Screen: . Hex .Chrome Spot: Phenol: % Stabiiized Solids: % Suspended Solids: % Oil: % Gas: GEORGETOWN Physical Description: ,: Oil / Fuels: Aqueous: % Water % Oil % Solvent ignitability Screen: pH: Total Chlorides: Radiation Screen: Cyanide Spot: Cyanide Amenable: Sulfide Screen: PCB's: Compatabilitv:. Treatability: Water / Mix Screen: IHex Chrome Screen: Phenolics Screen: BTU's: Oxidizer: As the driver of the v9-ic I--e-e rfy-t.o-tire- -ec-u of the above regarding volume, rinsate and content. Signature: /:: �/ Date: / 16 ' C)7 • *****REPORT DISCREPANCIES TO A SUPERVISOR * * * ** 4 fib, cd AnaAnalytical lyti al Chemists Resources, and Consultants Incorporate April 18, 2002 • . Amanda Aldersley Kennedy Jenks Consultants 530 South 336th Street Federal Way, WA 98003 Project Name: PACCAR -Wash Pit Soil Project Number: 016110.0.0 ' ARI Job: . EF58 Dear Ms. Aldersley: Please find enclosed the original chain . of custody .(COC) records and, analytical results for the above referenced project. Three soil samples were received on March 27, 2002. The samples were. received in good condition with no discrepancies between the sample • . containers and the custody papers. The samples were received at 0.5 -9.0 ° Celcius. The samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds by EPA method 82608, total RCRA metals by 6010/7000 and TPH -Dx by NWTPH -Dx methodologies. Quality control analysis results are included for your review. Copies of the reports and all associated raw data will be kept on file at ARI. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC. Project Manager susan @arilabs.com SS /ss Enclosures 4611 South 134th Place, Suite 100 • Tukwila WA 98168 • 206 - 695 -6200 • 206 - 695 -6201 fax — Erse Chain of Custody Record & Laboratory Analysis Request Turn Around Requested: Sid *age _L of Report to:D /V l q l_ Company: tr� Address: SS o S 33•01*` SAr t r& ( &u 511,43 Phone: z ,c3�94(2 -3 63 Fax: 2c r-12 SZ -393'5 Proj Name: 67A Proj Number. 6 16 I0, 01) Sampler. /2iC Analytical Resources, Incorporated Analytical Chemists and Consultants 400 Ninth Avenue North Seattle, WA 98109 -4708 206 -621 -6490 206 -621 -7523 (fax) Shipping Method: AirBill: Sample ID D2- a1�s7 D2 -4/ 37/34f- r./ s 34f Sample Sample Sample No Con - Date Time Matrix tainers 0-- oll cb. V Anal yses Requested S Notes /Comments Relin (Signatur Print e-41V1 Company: f(4P r D�1� Received by: Printed name ELL c i VfSa>J iiiiCompany: A (L Date: f Time: IS 3Z }31/1101, ( rc J Relinquished: (Signature) Relinquished: (Signature) Printed name: Printed name: Company: Company: Time: ,- Date: Time: Date: Time: Received by: Received by: Printed name: Printed name: Special Instructions /Notes Company: Company: Number of Coolers: Cooler Temp(s): Date: Time: Date: Time: COC Seals Intact? Bottles Intact? ANALYTICAL O RESOURCES INCORPORATED Case Narrative Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project Name: PACCAR Project Number: 016110.00 ARI Job: EF58 • Volatile Organic Compounds: The samples were analyzed on 4/1/02 within the recommended holding time for this analysis. Samples were received one week into their holding time. The method blank had detectable amounts of methylene chloride, acetone, 4- methyl -2- pentanone, 2- hexanone and naphthalene. Acetone and naphthalene are `B" flagged in the associated samples to indicate the presence of these analytes in the method blank. The other ketones were not found in the samples. Contamination is suspected from the sample analyzed prior to the method blank. The associated LCS and LCSD were within specified control limits. NWTPH - Diesel Analyses: Samples were extracted on 3/29/02 and analyzed o n 4 /10/02 within the recommended holding time. The LCS was within specified control limits. TCLP Metals Analyses: All samples were analyzed within the recommended holding time. A matrix duplicate and matrix spike was performed on sample HM- 4 -1 -2. The matrix duplicate and matrix spike were within control limits for all metals. • • • Matrix: Soil Lab ID SOIL VOLATILE SYSTEM MONITORING COMPOUND SUMMARY Client ID DCE TOL BFB ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED QC Report No: EFSB DCB TOT OUT EF58A DR -29/37 040102MB Method Blank 'EF58LCS Lab Cntrl Sample EF58LCD LCSDuplicate EF58B DR -35/36 EFSBC DR- 8/33/34 89% 96% 100% 98% 88% 88% (DCE) _ •1,2- Dichloroethane -d4 (TOL) = Toluene -d8 (BFB) = Bromofluorobenzene (DCB) = 1,2- Dichlorobenzene -d4 # Column to be used * Values outside of D System Monitoring 91% 93% 99% 100% 90% 92% 91% 96% 100% 98% 93% 95% LCS /MB LIMITS (70 -130) (70 -130) (70 -130) (70 -130) to flag recovery values required QC limits Compound diluted out FORM -II VOA -1 94% 98% 99% 99% 97% 97% QC LIMITS (70 -130) (70 -130) (70 -130) (70 -130) 0 0 0 0 0 ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 1 of 2 Lab Sample ID: 040102MB LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/04/02 Sample No: Method Blank QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: NA Date Received: NA Instrument: FINNS Sample Amount: 5.00 g dry Wt Equiv Date Analyzed: 04/01/02 22:44 Percent Moisture: NA CAS Number Analyte ug /kg 74 -87 -3 Chloromethane 1.0 U 74 -83 -9 Bromomethane 1.0 U 75 -01 -4 Vinyl Chloride 1.0 U 75 -00 -3 Chloroethane 1.0 U 75 -09 -2 Methylene Chloride 3.1 67 -64 -1 Acetone 5.4 75 -15 -0 Carbon Disulfide 1.0 U 75 -35 -4 1,1- Dichloroethene 1.0 U 75 -34 -3 1,1- Dichloroethane 1.0 U 156 -60 -5 trans -1,2- Dichloroethene 1.0 U 156 -59 -2 cis -1,2- Dichloroethene 1.0 U 67 -66 -3 Chloroform 1.0 U 107 -06 -2 1,2- Dichloroethane 1.0 U 78 -93 -3 2- Butanone 5.0 U 71 -55 -6 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane 1.0 U 56 -23 -5 Carbon Tetrachloride 1.0 U 108 -05 -4 Vinyl Acetate 5.0 U 75 -27 -4 Bromodichloromethane 1.0 U 78 -87 -5 1,2- Dichloropropane 1.0 U 10061 -01 -5 cis -1,3- Dichloropropene 1.0 U 79 -01 -6 Trichloroethene 1.0 U 124 -48 -1 Dibromochloromethane 1.0 U 79 -00 -5 1,1,2 - Trichloroethane 1.0 U 71 -43 -2 Benzene 1.0 U 10061 -02 -6 trans -1,3- Dichloropropene 1.0 U 110 -75 -8 2- Chloroethylvinylether 5.0 U 75 -25 -2 Bromoform 1.0 U 108 -10 -1 4- Methyl -2- Pentanone (MIBK) 9.8 591 -78 -6 2- Hexanone 19 127 -18 -4 Tetrachloroethene 1.0 U 79 -34 -5 1,1,2,2- Tetrachloroethane 1.0 U 108 -88 -3 Toluene 1.0 U 108 -90 -7 Chlorobenzene 1.0 U 100 -41 -4 Ethylbenzene 1.0 U 100 -42 -5 Styrene 1.0 U 75 -69 -4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.0 U 76 -13 -1 1,1,2 - Trichloro- 1,2,2 - trifluoroethane 1.0 U 1330 -20 -7 m,p- Xylene 1.0 U FORM -1 ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED • • • I ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 82608 Page 2 of 2 Lab Sample ID: 040102MB LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized 4r Reported: 04/04/02 Sample No: Method Blank QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: NA Date Received: NA Instrument: FINNS Sample Amount: 5.00 g dry Wt Equiv Date Analyzed: 04/01/02 22:44 Percent Moisture: NA CAS Number Analyte ug /kg 95 -47 -6 o- Xylene 1.0 U 95 -50 -1 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 1.0 U 541 -73 -1 1,3- Dichlorobenzene 1.0 U 106 -46 -7 1,4- Dichlorobenzene 1.0 U 107 -02 -8 Acrolein 50 U 74 -88 -4 Methyl Iodide 1.0 U 74 -96 -4 Bromoethane 2.0 U 107 -13 -1 Acrylonitrile 5.0 U 563 -58 -6 1,1- Dichloropropene 1.0 U 74 -95 -3 Dibromomethane 1.0 U 630 -20 -6 1,1,1,2 - Tetrachloroethane 1.0 U 96 -12 -8 1,2- Dibromo -3- chloropropane 5.0 U 96 -18 -4 1,2,3 - Trichloropropane 2.0 U 110 -57 -6 trans- 1,4- Dichloro -2- butene 5.0 U 108 -67 -8 1,3,5- Trimethylbenzene 1.0 U 95 -63 -6 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 1.0 U 87 -68 -3 Hexachlorobutadiene 5.0 U 106 -93 -4 Ethylene Dibromide 1.0 U 74 -97 -5 Bromochloromethane 1.0 U 594 -20 -7 2,2- Dichloropropane 1.0 U 142 -28 -9 1,3- Dichloropropane 1.0 U 98 -82 -8 Isopropylbenzene 1.0 U 103 -65 -1 n- Propylbenzene 1.0 U 108 -86 -1 Bromobenzene 1.0 U 95 -49 -8 2- Chlorotoluene 1.0 U 106 -43 -4 4- Chlorotoluene 1.0 U 98 -06 -6 tert - Butylbenzene 1.0 U 135 -98 -8 sec - Butylbenzene 1.0 U 99 -87 -6 4- Isopropyltoluene 1.0 U 104 -51 -8 n- Butylbenzene 2.0 U 120 -82 -1 1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene 5.0 U 91 -20 -3 Naphthalene 8.6 87 -61 -6 1,2,3 - Trichlorobenzene 5.0 U Volatile Surrogate Recovery d4- 1,2- Dichloroethane 96.0% d8- Toluene 93.4% Bromofluorobenzene 95.9% d4- 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 98.5% FORM -1 ANALYTICAL J© RESOURCES INCORPORATED ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 1 of 2 Lab Sample ID: EF58A LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized:0 Reported: 04/04/02 QC Report No: Project: Date Sampled: Date Received: Sample No: DR -29/37 EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants PACCAR 016110.00 03/20/02 03/27/02 Instrument: FINNS Sample Amount: 3.79 g dry Wt Date Analyzed: 04/02/02 03:57 Percent Moisture: 25.2% CAS Number 74 -87 -3 74 -83 -9 75 -01 -4 75 -00 -3 75 -09 -2 67 -64 -1 75 -15 -0 75 -35 -4 75 -34 -3 156 -60 -5 156 -59 -2 67 -66 -3 107 -06 -2 78 -93 -3 71 -55 -6 56 -23 -5 108 -05 -4 75 -27 -4 78 -87 -5 10061 -01 -5 79 -01 -6 124 -48 -1 79 -00 -5 71 -43 -2 10061 -02 -6 110 -75 -8 75 -25 -2 108 -10 -1 591 -78 -6 127 -18 -4 79 -34 -5 108 -88 -3 108 -90 -7 100 -41 -4 100 -42 -5 75 -69 -4 76 -13 -1 1330 -20 -7 Analyte Chloromethane Bromomethane Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Methylene Chloride Acetone Carbon Disulfide 1,1- Dichloroethene 1,1- Dichloroethane trans -1,2- Dichloroethene cis -1,2- Dichloroethene Chloroform 1,2- Dichloroethane 2- Butanone 1,1,1- Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate Bromodichloromethane 1,2- Dichloropropane cis -1,3- Dichloropropene Trichioroethene Dibromochloromethane 1,1,2- Trichloroethane Benzene trans -1,3- Dichloropropene 2- Chloroethylvinylether Bromoform 4- Methyl -2- Pentanone (MIBK) 2- Hexanone Tetrachloroethene 1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane Toluene Chlorobenzene Ethylbenzene Styrene Trichlorofluoromethane 1,1,2 - Trichloro- 1,2,2 - trifluoroethane m,p- Xylene FORM -1 ug /kg 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 4.0 U 56 S 4.5 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 6.6 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 6.6 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 10 Y 1.3 U 1.3 U 6.6 U 1 .3 U 6.6 U 6.6 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 3.4 1.3 U 2.7 1.3 U 1.3 U 1.3 U 11 ANALYTICAL RESOURCES C) INCORPORATED • • • • ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 2 of 2 Lab Sample ID: EF58A LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized:: f' Reported: 04/04/02 Sample No DR -29/37 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy 'Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: 03/20/02 Date Received: 03/27/02 Instrument: FINNS Sample Amount: 3.79 g dry Wt Date Analyzed: 04/02/02 03:57 Percent Moisture: 25.2% CAS Number Analyte ug /kg 95 -47 -6 o- Xylene 3.0 95 -50 -1 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 1.3 U 541 -73 -1 1,3- Dichlorobenzene 1.3 U 106 -46 -7 1,4- Dichlorobenzene 1.3 U 107 -02 -8 Acrolein 66 U 74 -88 -4 Methyl Iodide 1.3 U 74 -96 -4 Bromoethane 2.6 U 107 -13 -1 Acrylonitrile 6.6 U 563 -58 -6 1,1- Dichloropropene 1.3 U 74 -95 -3 Dibromomethane 1.3 U 630 -20 -6 1,1,1,2 - Tetrachloroethane 1.3 U 96 -12 -8 1,2- Dibromo- 3- chloropropane 6.6 U 96 -18 -4 1,2,3- Trichloropropane 2.6 U 110 -57 -6 trans -1,4- Dichloro -2- butene 6.6 U 108 -67 -8 - 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 4.1 95 -63 -6 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 11 87 -68 -3 Hexachlorobutadiene 6.6 U 106 -93 -4 Ethylene Dibromide 1.3 U 74 -97 -5 Bromochloromethane 1.3 U 594 -20 -7 2,2- Dichloropropane 1.3 U 142 -28 -9 1,3- Dichloropropane 1.3 U 98 -82 -8 Isopropylbenzene 1.3 U 103 -65 -1 n- Propylbenzene 1.6 108 -86 -1 Bromobenzene 1.3 U 95 -49 -8 2- Chlorotoluene 1.3 U 106 -43 -4 4- Chlorotoluene 1.3 U 98 -06 -6 tert - Butylbenzene 1.3 U 135 -98 -8 sec - Butylbenzene 1.3 U 99 -87 -6 4- Isopropyltoluene 7.4 104 -51 -8 n- Butylbenzene 2.6 U 120 -82 -1 1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene 6.6 U 91 -20 -3 Naphthalene 7.5 B 87 -61 -6 1,2,3 - Trichlorobenzene 6.6 U Volatile Surrogate Recovery d4- 1,2- Dichloroethane 88.7% d8- Toluene 91.0% Bromofluorobenzene 91.0% d4- 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 94.0% FORM -1 ANALYTICAL RESOURCES v INCORPORATED ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 1 of 2 Lab Sample ID: EF58B LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized: Reported: 04/04/02 Sample No: DR -35/36 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: 03/20/02 Date Received: 03/27/02 Instrument: FINN5 Sample Amount: 4.00 g dry Wt Date Analyzed: 04/02/02 04:23 Percent Moisture: 20.4% CAS Number Analyte ug /kg 74 -87 -3 Chloromethane 1.2 U 74 -83 -9 Bromomethane 1.2 U 75 -01 -4 Vinyl Chloride 1.2 U 75 -00 -3 Chloroethane 1.2 U 75 -09 -2 Methylene Chloride 3.8 U 67 -64 -1 Acetone 20 B 75 -15 -0 Carbon Disulfide 1.2 U 75 -35 -4 1,1- Dichloroethene 1.2 U 75 -34 -3 1,1- Dichloroethane 1.2 U 156 -60 -5 trans -1,2- Dichloroethene 1.2 U 156 -59 -2 cis- 1,2- Dichloroethene 2.5 67 -66 -3 Chloroform •1.2 U 107 -06 -2 1,2- Dichloroethane 1.2 U 78 -93 -3 2- Butanone 6.2 U 71 -55 -6 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane 1.2 U 56 -23 -5 Carbon Tetrachloride 1.2 U 108 -05 -4 Vinyl Acetate 6.2 U 75 -27 -4 Bromodichloromethane 1.2 U 78 -87 -5 1,2- Dichloropropane 1.2 U 10061 -01 -5 cis -1,3- Dichloropropene 1.2 U 79 -01 -6 Trichloroethene 1.2 U 124 -48 -1 Dibromochloromethane 1.2 U 79 -00 -5 1,1,2 - Trichloroethane 1.2 U 71 -43 -2 Benzene • 1.2 U • 10061 -02 -6 trans -1,3- Dichloropropene• 1.2 U 110 -75 -8 2- Chloroethylvinylether 6.2 U 75 -25 -2 Bromoform 1.2 U 108 -10 -1 4- Methyl- 2- Pentanone (MIRK) 6.2 U 591 -78 -6 2- Hexanone 6.2 U 127 -18 -4 Tetrachloroethene 1.2 U 79 -34 -5 1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane 1.2 U 108 -88 -3 Toluene 1.2 U 108 -90 -7 Chlorobenzene 1.2 U 100 -41 -4 Ethylbenzene 1.2 U 100 -42 -5 Styrene 1.2 U 75 -69 -4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.2 U 76 -13 -1 1, 1, 2- Trichloro - 1,2,2 - trifluoroethane 1.2 U 1330 -20 -7 m,p- Xylene 1.2 U FORM -1 ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED • ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 2 of 2 Sample Not DR -35/36 Lab Sample ID: EF58B QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Project: PACCAR Matrix: Soil 016110.00 Data Release Authorized :AP Date Sampled: 03/20/02 Reported: 04/04/02 Date Received: 03/27/02 Instrument: FINNS Sample Amount: 4.00 g dry Wt Date Analyzed: 04/02/02 04:23 Percent Moisture: 20.4% CAS Number Analyte ug /kg 95 -47 -6 o- Xylene 1.2 U 95 -50 -1 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 1.2 U 541 -73 -1 1,3- Dichlorobenzene 1.2 U 106 -46 -7 1,4- Dichlorobenzene 1.2 U 107 -02 -8 Acrolein 62 U 74 -88 -4 Methyl Iodide 1.2 U 74 -96 -4 Bromoethane 2.5 U 107 -13 -1 Acrylonitrile 6.2 U 563 -58 -6 1,1- Dichloropropene 1.2 U 74 -95 -3 Dibromomethane 1.2 U 630 -20 -6 1,1,1,2 - Tetrachloroethane 1.2 U 96 -12 -8 1,2- Dibromo -3- chloropropane 6.2 U 96 -18 -4 1,2,3 - Trichloropropane 2.5 U 110 -57 -6 trans -1,4- Dichloro -2- butene 6.2 U 108 -67 -8 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 1.2 U - 95 -63 -6 1;2;4- Trimethylbenzene 1.2 U 87 -68 -3 Hexachlorobutadiene 6.2 U 106 -93 -4 Ethylene Dibromide 1.2 U 74 -97 -5 Bromochloromethane 1.2 U 594 -20 -7 2,2- Dichloropropane 1.2 U 142 -28 -9 1,3- Dichloropropane 1.2 U 98 -82 -8 Isopropylbenzene 1.2 U 103 -65 -1 n- Propylbenzene 1.2 U 108 -86 -1 Bromobenzene 1.2 U 95 -49 -8 2- Chlorotoluene 1.2 U 106 -43 -4 4- Chlorotoluene 1.2 U 9B -06 -6 tert - Butylbenzene 1.2 U 135 -98 -8 sec - Butylbenzene 1.2 U 99 -87 -6 4- Isopropyltoluene 1.2 U 104 -51 -8 n- Butylbenzene 2.5 U 120 -82 -1 1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene 6.2 U 91 -20 -3 Naphthalene 6.2 U 87 -61 -6 1,2,3 - Trichlorobenzene 6.2 U Volatile Surrogate Recovery d4- 1,2- Dichloroethane 87.9% d8- Toluene 90.4% Bromofluorobenzene 93.1% d4- 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 97.0 %' FORM -1 ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 1 of 2 Lab Sample ID: EF58C LIMS ID: 02 -3772 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/04/02 Sample No: DR- 8/33/34 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR • 016110.00 Date Sampled: 03/20/02 Date Received: 03/27/02 Instrument: FINNS Sample Amount: 4.01 g dry Wt Date Analyzed: 04/02/02 04:49 Percent Moisture: 19.21 CAS Number Analyte ug /kg 74 -87 -3 Chloromethane 1.2 U 74 -83 -9 Bromomethane 1.2 U 75 -01 -4 Vinyl Chloride 1.2 U 75 -00 -3 Chloroethane 1.2 U 75 -09 -2 Methylene Chloride 3.7 U 67 -64 -1 Acetone 6.2 U 75 -15 -0 Carbon Disulfide 1.2 U 75 -35 -4 1,1- Dichloroethene 1.2 U 75 -34 -3 1,1- Dichloroethane 1.2 U 156 -60 -5 trans -1,2- Dichloroethene 1.2 U 156 -59 -2 cis -1,2- Dichloroethene 1.2 U 67 -66 -3 Chloroform 1.2 U 107 -06 -2 1,2- Dichloroethane 1.2 U 78 -93 -3 2- Butanone 6.2 U 71 -55 -6 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane 2.9 56 -23 -5 Carbon Tetrachloride 1.2 U 108 -05 -4 Vinyl Acetate 6.2 U 75 -27 -4 Bromodichloromethane 1.2 U 78 -87 -5 1,2- Dichloropropane 1.2 U 10061 -01 -5 cis -1,3- Dichloropropene 1.2 U 79 -01 -6 Trichloroethene 4.4 124 -48 -1 Dibromochloromethane 1.2 U 79 -00 -5 1,1,2 - Trichloroethane 1.2 U 71 -43 -2 Benzene 1.2 U 10061 -02 -6 trans -1,3- Dichloropropene 1.2 U 110 -75 -8 2- Chloroethylvinylether 6.2 U 75 -25 -2 Bromoform 1.2 U 108 -10 -1 4- Methyl -2- Pentanone (MIBK) 6.2 U 591 -78 -6 2- Hexanone 6.2 U 127 -18 -4 Tetrachloroethene 1.8 79 -34 -5 1,1,2,2 - Tetrachloroethane 1.2 U 108 -88 -3 Toluene 2.9 108 -90 -7 Chlorobenzene 1.2 U 100 -41 -4 Ethylbenzene 1.2 U 100 -42 -5 Styrene 1.2 U 75 -69 -4 Trichlorofluoromethane 1.2 U 76 -13 -1 1,1,2 - Trichloro- 1,2,2 - trifluoroethane 1.2 U 1330 -20 -7 m,p- Xylene 13 FORM -1 ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED • • ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 2 of 2 Lab Sample ID: EF58C LIMS ID: 02 -3772 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/04/02 Instrument: FINN5 Date Analyzed: 04/02/02 04:49 CAS Number 95 -47 -6 95 -50 -1 541 -73 -1 106 -46 -7 107 -02 -8 74 -88 -4 74 -96 -4 107 -13 -1 563 -58 -6 74 -95 -3 630 -20 -6 96 -12 -8 96 -18 -4 110 -57 -6 108 -67 -8 95 -63 -6 87 -68 -3 106 -93 -4 74 -97 -5 594 -20 -7 142 -28 -9 98 -82 -8 103 -65 -1 108 -86 -1 95 -49 -8 106 -43 -4 98 -06 -6 135 -98 -8 99 -87 -6 104 -51 -8 120 -82 -1 91 -20 -3 87 -61 -6 Sample No: DR- 8/33/34 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: 03/20/02 Date Received: 03/27/02 Sample Amount: 4.01 g dry Wt Percent Moisture: 19.2% Analyte o- Xylene 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 1,3- Dichlorobenzene 1,4- Dichlorobenzene Acrolein Methyl Iodide Bromoethane Acrylonitrile 1,1- Dichloropropene Dibromomethane 1,1,1,2 - Tetrachloroethane 1,2- Dibromo- 3- chloropropane 1,2,3 - Trichloropropane trans -1,4- Dichloro -2- butene 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Ethylene Dibromide Bromochloromethane 2,2- Dichloropropane 1,3- Dichloropropane Isopropylbenzene n- Propylbenzene Bromobenzene 2- Chlorotoluene 4- Chlorotoluene tert - Butylbenzene sec - Butylbenzene 4- Isopropyltoluene n- Butylbenzene 1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene Naphthalene 1,2,3 - Trichlorobenzene Volatile Surrogate Recovery d4- 1,2- Dichloroethane 88.2% d8- Toluene 91.7% Bromofluorobenzene 94.6% d4- 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 97.4% FORM -1 ug /kg 1.7 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 62 U 1.2 U 2.5 U 6.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 6.2 U 2.5 U 6.2 U 6.3 2.3 6.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 2.8 4.0 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 2.5 U 6.2 U 6.2 U 6.2 U ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 1 of 4 Lab Sample ID: EF58LCS LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized° Reported: 04/04/02 Date Analyzed: 04/01/02 Instrument: FINNS LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE CONSTITUENT Chloromethane Bromomethane Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Methylene Chloride Acetone Carbon Disulfide 1,1- Dichloroethene 1,1- Dichloroethane trans -1,2- Dichloroethene cis -1,2- Dichloroethene Chloroform 1,2- Dichloroethane 2- Butanone 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate Bromodichloromethane 1,2- Dichloropropane cis -1,3- Dichloropropene Trichloroethene Dibromochloromethane 1,1,2 - Trichloroethane Benzene trans -1,3- Dichloropropene 2- Chloroethylvinylether Bromoform 4- Methyl -2- Pentanone (MIBK) 2- Hexanone Tetrachloroethene 1,1,2,2- Tetrachloroethane Toluene Chlorobenzene Ethylbenzene Styrene Trichlorofluoromethane 1,1,2- Trichlorotrifluoroethane m,p- Xylene O- Xylene Reported in ug /kg- dry -Wt QC Report No: Project: Date Received: SPIKEE VALUE 46.7 40.5 69.9 50.1 39.4 266 27.8 50.9 50.4 52.0 51.8 49.2 52.7 283 50.2 49.7 32.2 50.0 52.3 50.1 48.0 49.8 51.0 47.8 53.9 57.6 49.7' 306 314 45.6 52.0 48.4 47.1 50.9 49.7 48.5 31.2 98.8 48.0 FORM -III ANALYTICAL RESOURCES C) INCORPORATED EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants PACCAR 016110.00 NA SPIKE AMT 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 250 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 250 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 250 250 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 100 50.0 RECOVERY 93.4% 81.0% 140% 100% 78.8% 106% 55.6% 102% 101% 104% 104% 98.4% 105% 113% 100% 99.4% 64.4% 100% 105% 100% 96.0% 99.6% 102% 95.6% 108% 115% 99.4% 122% 126% 91.2% 104% 96.8% 94.2% 102% 99.4% 97.0% 62.4% 98.8% 96.0% S • • • ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 2 of 4 Lab Sample ID: EF58LCS LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/04/02 Date Analyzed: 04/01/02 Instrument: FINNS ANALYTICAL O RESOURCES INCORPORATED QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Received: NA LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE SPIKE SPIKE % CONSTITUENT VALUE AMT RECOVERY 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 46.7 50.0 93.4% 1,3- Dichlorobenzene 46.9 50.0 93.8% 1,4- Dichlorobenzene 45.8 50.0 91.6% Acrolein 181 250 72.4% Methyl Iodide 40.7 50.0 81.4% Bromoethane 31.9 50.0 63.8% Acrylonitrile 47.7 50.0 95.4% 1,1- Dichloropropene 53.2 50.0 106% Dibromomethane 48.7 50.0 97.4% 1,1,1,2- Tetrachloroethane 51.3 50.0 103% 1,2- Dibromo -3- chloropropane 52.0 50.0 104% 1,2,3- Trichloropropane 51.2 50.0 102% trans -1,4- Dichloro -2- butene 41.9 50.0 83.8% 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 50.3 50.0 101% 1,2,4 - Trimethylbenzene 51.4 50.0 103% Hexachlorobutadiene 47.8 50.0 95.6% Ethylene Dibromide 50.7 50.0 101% Bromochloromethane 48.5 50.0 97.0% 2,2- Dichloropropane 50.6 50.0 101% 1,3- Dichloropropane 50.5 50.0 101% Isopropylbenzene 49.5 50.0 99.0% n- Propylbenzene 51.0 50.0 102% Bromobenzene 47.6 50.0 95.2% 2- Chlorotoluene 54.3 50.0 109% 4- Chlorotoluene 46.6 50.0 93.2% tert - Butylbenzene 48.1 50.0 96.2% sec - Butylbenzene 49.8 50.0 99.6% 4- Isopropyltoluene 49.8 50.0 99.6% n- Butylbenzene 49.7 50.0 99.4% 1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene 45.8 50.0 91.6% Naphthalene 52.2 50.0 104% 1,2,3 - Trichlorobenzene 46.7 50.0 93.4% Spike Blank Surrogate Recovery d4- 1,2- Dichloroethane 100% d8- Toluene 99.4% Bromofluorobenzene 100% d4- 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 99.4% Reported in ug /kg- dry -Wt FORM -III ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260E Page 3 of 4 Lab Sample ID: EF58LCSD LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/04/02 Date Analyzed: 04/01/02 Instrument: FINNS. LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE CONSTITUENT Chloromethane Bromomethane Vinyl Chloride Chloroethane Methylene Chloride Acetone Carbon Disulfide 1,1- Dichloroethene 1,1- Dichloroethane trans -1,2- Dichloroethene cis -1,2- Dichloroethene Chloroform 1,2- Dichloroethane 2- Butanone 1,1,1- Trichloroethane Carbon Tetrachloride Vinyl Acetate Bromodichloromethane 1,2- Dichloropropane cis -1,3- Dichloropropene Trichloroethene Dibromochloromethane 1,1,2- Trichloroethane Benzene trans -1,3- Dichloropropene 2- Chloroethylvinylether Bromoform 4- Methyl -2- Pentanone (MIBK) 2- Hexanone Tetrachloroethene 1,1,2,2- Tetrachloroethane Toluene Chlorobenzene Ethylbenzene Styrene Trichlorofluoromethane 1,1,2- Trichlorotrifluoroethane m,p- Xylene O- Xylene Reported in ug /kg- dry -Wt ANALYTICAL O RESOURCES INCORPORATED • QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Received: NA SPIKE VALUE 43.4 39.4 67.1 48.2 39.5 249. 27.1 52.8 50.4 52.7 52.2 50.2 52.9 281. 53.3 52.6 33.2 51.4 53.0 52.2 49.6 51.3 53.4 49.1 55.0 60.2 53.3 313. 326. 48.1 55.3 49.8 48.1 51.9 50.6 48.8 31.7 100. 48.7 • SPIKE % $ AMT REC RPD 50.0 86.8% 7.3% 50.0 78.8% 2.8% 50.0 134% 4.4% 50.0 96.4% 3.7% 50.0 79.0% 0.3% 250 99.6% 6.2% 50.0 54.2% 2.6% 50.0 106% 3.8% 50.0 101% 0.0% 50.0 105% 1.0% 50.0 104% 0.0% 50.0 100% 1.6% 50.0 106% 0.9% 250 112% 0.9% 50.0 107% 6.8% 50.0 105% 5.5% 50.0 66.4% 3.1% 50.0 103% 3.0% 50.0 106% 0.9% 50.0 104% 3.9% 50.0 99.2% 3.3% 50.0 103% 3.4% 50.0 107% 4.8% 50.0 98.2% 2.7% 50.0 110% 1.8% 50.0 120% 4.3% 50.0 107% 7.4% 250 125% 2.4% 250 130% .3.1% 50.0 96.2% 5.3% 50.0 .11% 6.5% 50.0 99.6% 2.9% 50.0 96.2% 2.1% 50.0 104% 1.9% 50.0 101% 1.6% 50.0 97.6% 0.6% 50.0 63.4% 1.6% 100 100% 1.2% 50.0 97.4% 1.4% FORM -III S S S • ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Volatiles by Purge & Trap GC /MS- Method 8260B Page 4 of 4 Lab Sample ID: EF58LCSD LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized : Reported: 04/04/02 Date Analyzed: 04/01/02 Instrument: FINNS ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED QC Report No: EFS8- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Received: NA LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE SPIKE SPIKE % % CONSTITUENT VALUE AMT REC RPD 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 47.6 50.0 95.2% 1.9% 1,3- Dichlorobenzene 48.2 50.0 96.4% 2.7% 1,4- Dichlorobenzene 47.0 50.0 94.0% 2.6% Acrolein 186. 250 74.4% 2.7% Methyl Iodide 40.1 50.0 80.2% 1.5% Bromoethane 31.6 50.0 63.2% 0.9% Acrylonitrile 50.0 50.0 100% 4.7% l,l- Dichloropropene 55.6 50.0 111% 4.6% Dibromomethane 50.1 50.0 100% 2.6% 1,1,1,2 - Tetrachloroethane 52.0 50.0 104% 1.0% 1,2- Dibromo- 3- chloropropane 56.2 50.0 112% 7.4% 1,2,3- Trichloropropane 54.0 50.0 108% 5.7% trans -1,4- Dichloro- 2- butene 46.1 50.0 92.2% 9.5% 1,3,5 - Trimethylbenzene 52.0 50.0 104% 2.9% 1,2,4- Trimethylbenzene 53.4 50.0 107% 3.8% Hexachlorobutadiene 51.5 50.0 103% 7.5% Ethylene Dibromide 53.1 50.0 106% 4.8% Bromochloromethane 48.2 50.0 96.4% 0.6% 2,2- Dichloropropane 53.0 50.0 106% 4.8% 1,3- Dichloropropane 51.7 50.0 103% 2.0% Isopropylbenzene 51.8 50.0 104% 4.9% n- Propylbenzene 52.8 50.0 106% 3.8% Bromobenzene 50.0 50.0 100% 4.9% 2- Chlorotoluene 54.8 50.0 110% 0.9% 4- Chlorotoluene 47.6 50.0 95.2% 2.1% tert - Butylbenzene 50.6 50.0 101% 4.9% sec - Butylbenzene 52.5 50.0 105% 5.3% 4- Isopropyltoluene 51.8 50.0 104% 4.3% n- Butylbenzene 51.3 50.0 103% 3.6% 1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene 47.5 50.0 95.0% 3.6% Naphthalene 57.8 50.0 116% 11% 1,2,3 - Trichlorobenzene 49.3 50.0 98.6% 5.4% LCSDuplicate Surrogate Recovery d4- 1,2- Dichloroethane 98.2% d8- Toluene 100% Bromofluorobenzene 97.9% d4- 1,2- Dichlorobenzene 98.8% • Reported in ug /kg- dry -Wt FORM -III ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED TOTAL DIESEL HYDROCARBONS COMPOUND SUMMARY Matrix: Soil QC Report No: EF58 LIMS ID Lab ID Extracted Client ID o -Ter TOT OUT 02 -3770 041002MB 03/29/02 Method Blank 86% 0 02 -3770 041002LC 03/29/02 Lab Control 79% 0 02 -3770 EF58A 03/29/02 DR -29/37 69% 0 02 -3771 EF58B 03/29/02 DR -35/36 73% 0 02 -3772 EF58C 03/29/02 DR- 8/33/34 73% 0 Control Sample QC LIMITS QC LIMITS (o -Ter) = o- Terphenyl (41 -131) (30 -106) # Column to be used to flag recovery values t Values outside of required QC limits D System Monitoring Compound diluted out Page 1 for EF58 FORM -II TPBD • • TOTAL DIESEL RANGE HYDROCARBONS NWTPHD Range C12 to C24 by GC /FID and Motor Oil LIMB ID: '02-3770 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized: Reported: 04/16/02 Lab YD Sample ID QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Received: 03/27/02 Date Data Dilution Dieeel *HC Extracted Analyzed Factor Range ID ANALYTICAL RESOURCES INCORPORATED Motor oil Surrogate Range Recovery EF58MB Method Blank 03/29/02 04/10/02 1:1 5.0 U - -- 10 U 86.0% EF58A DR -29/37 03/29/02 04/10/02 1:1 28 NO 43 69.0% EF58B D2-35/36 03/29/02 04/10/02 1:1 6.1 NO 12 73.0% EF58C DR- 8/33/34 03/29/02 04/10/02 1:1 6.0 NO 10 U 73.0% Values reported in ppm (mg /kg) on a dry weight basis. Surrogate is o- Terphenyl. • ID indicates, in the opinion of the analyst, the petroleum product with the beet pattern match. 'NO' indicates that there was not a good match for any of the requested products. Diesel quantitation on total peaks in the range from C12 to C24. • Motor Oil quantitation on total peaks in the range from C24 to C38. Data Qualifiers II Compound not detected at the given detection limit. J Indicates an estimated value below the calculated detection limit. S No value reported due to saturation of the detector. Dilution required. D Indicates the surrogate was not detected because of dilution of the extract. E Indicates a value above the linear range of the detector. Dilution required. NR Indicates no recovery due to matrix interference. B Indicates compound also detected in the method blank. FORM -1 TPED TOTAL DIESEL RANGE HYDROCARBONS NWTPHD Range C12 to C24 by GC /FID Lab Sample ID: EF58LCS LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized: 4!" Reported: 04/16/02 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE RECOVERY REPORT Date extracted: 03/29/02 Date analyzed: 04/10/02 CONSTITUENT Diesel Range Hydrocarbons TPHd Surrogate Recovery o- Terphenyl 79.Ok SPIKE SPIKE FOUND ADDED RECOVERY 112 150 Values reported in ppm (mg /kg) on a dry weight basis. FORM -III 74.7k • , TOTAL DIESEL RANGE HYDROCARBONS- EXTRACTION REPORT Matrix: Soil Date Received: 03/27/02 ARI ID Client ID ARI Job: Project: EF58 PACCAR . 016110.00 Sample Final Prep Amt Vol Basis Date 02- 3770- 032902MB 02- 3770- 032902LCS 02- 3770 -EF58A 02- 3771 -EF58B 02- 3772 -EF58C Method Blank Lab Control DR -29/37 DR -35/36 DR- 8/33/34 10.0 g 1.00 mL - 03/29/02 10.0 g 1.00 mL - 03/29/02 7.48 g 1.00 mL D 03/29/02 8.33 g 1.00 mL D 03/29/02 8.31 g 1.00 mL D 03/29/02 Basis: D =Dry Weight W =As Received Diesel Extraction Report ANALYTICAL RESOURCES V INCORPORATED INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Sample No: Method Blank TCLP METALS Lab Sample ID: EF5BMB LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/09/02 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: NA Date Received: NA Prep Prep Analysis Analysis Meth Date Method Date CAS Number Analyte RL ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED mg /L 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -38 -2 Arsenic 0.2 0.2 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -39 -3 Barium 0.02 0.02 U 1311 04/01/02 6010E 04/04/02 7440 -43 -9 Cadmium 0.01 0.01 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -47 -3 Chromium 0.02 0.02 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7439 -92 -1 Lead 0.1 0.1 U 1311 04/02/02 7470A 04/05/02 7439 -97 -6 Mercury 0.0001 0.0001 U 1311 04/01/02 6010E 04/04/02 7782 -49 -2 Selenium 0.2 0.2 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -22 -4 Silver 0.02 0.02 U U Analyte undetected at given RL RL Reporting Limits FORM -I • • • • • • • INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SKEET Sample No: DR -29/37 TCLP METALS Lab Sample ID: EF58A LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil QC Report No: Project: Date Sampled: Date Received: Data Release Authorized 011......'--.---. Reported: 04/09/02 EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants PACCAR 016110.00 03/20/02 03/27/02 Prep Prep Analysis Analysis Meth Date Method Date CAS Number Analyte RL 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -38 -2 Arsenic 0.2 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -39 -3 Barium 0.02 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -43 -9 Cadmium 0.01 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -47 -3 Chromium 0.02 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7439 -92 -1 Lead 0.1 1311 04/02/02 7470A 04/05/02 7439 -97 -6 Mercury 0.0001 1311 04/01/02 6010E 04/04/02 7782 -49 -2 Selenium 0.2 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -22 -4 Silver 0.02 U Analyte undetected at given RL RL Reporting Limits FORM -I ANALYTICAL O RESOURCES INCORPORATED mg /L 0.2 U 0.19 0.01 U 0.02 U 0.1 U 0.0001 U 0:2 U 0.02 U INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET TCLP METALS Lab Sample ID: EF58A LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorize Reported: 04/09/02 Analyte Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Mercury Selenium Silver ANALYTICAL O RESOURCES INCORPORATED Sample No: QC Report No: Project: Received: DR -29/37 EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants PACCAR 016110.00 03/27/02 MATRIX DUPLICATE QUALITY CONTROL REPORT Sample Duplicate mg /L mg /L . RPD Control Limit Q 0.2 U. 0.2 U 0.19 0.19 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.1 U 0.1 U 0.0001 U 0.0001 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.02 U 0.02 U 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% +/- 0.2 L +/- 20 % +/- 0.01 L +/- 0.02 L +/- 0.1 L +/- 0.0001 L +/- 0.2 L +/- 0.02 L 'Q' codes: * = control limit not met L = RPD not valid, alternate limit = detection limit FORM -VI • • INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET TCLP METALS • Lab Sample ID: EF58A LIMS ID: 02 -3770 Matrix: Soil _ Data Release Authorized. Reported: 04/09/02 Analyte Arsenic Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Mercury Selenium Silver Sample No: QC Report No: Project: Date Received: DR -29/37 EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants PACCAR 016110.00 03/27/02 MATRIX SPIKE QUALITY CONTROL REPORT Sample mg /L Spike mg /L Spike Added C Recovery Q 'Q' codes: Control Limits: • N H t NA 0.2 U 10.4 10.0 0.19 10.2 10.0 0.01 U 2.45 2.50 0.02 U 2.55 2.50 0.1 U 9.6 10.0 0.0001 U 0.0012 0.0010 0.2 U 10.6 10.0 0.02 U 2.47 2.50 104% 100% 98.0% 102% 96.0% 120% 106% 98.8% = control limit not met = %R not applicable, sample concentration too high = RPD control limit not met = Not applicable - analyte not spiked Percent Recovery: 75 -125% RPD: +/ -20% FORM -V ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Sample No: DR -35/36 TCLP METALS Lab Sample ID: EF58B LIMS ID: 02 -3771 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/09/02 QC Report No: Project: Date Sampled: Date Received: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants PACCAR 016110.00 03/20/02 03/27/02 Prep Prep Analysis Analysis Meth Date Method Date CAS Number Analyte RL 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -38 -2 Arsenic 0.2 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -39 -3 Barium 0.02 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -43 -9 Cadmium 0.01 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -47 -3 Chromium 0.02 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7439 -92 -1 Lead 0.1 1311 04/02/02 7470A 04/05/02 7439 -97 -6 Mercury 0.0001 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7782 -49 -2 Selenium '0.2 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -22 -4 Silver 0.02 U Analyte undetected at given RL RL Reporting Limits FORM -I ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED mg /L 0.2 U 0.06 0.01 U 0.02 U. 0.1 U 0.0001 U 0.2 U 0.02 U • • • • INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET Sample No: DR- 8/33/34 TCLP METALS Lab Sample ID: EF58C LIMS ID: 02 -3772 Matrix: Soil Data Release Authorized Reported: 04/09/02 QC Report No: EF58- Kennedy Jenks Consultants Project: PACCAR 016110.00 Date Sampled: 03/20/02 Date Received: 03/27/02 Prep Prep Analysis Analysis Meth Date Method Date CAS Number Analyte RL ANALYTICAL 0 RESOURCES INCORPORATED mg /L 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -38 -2 Arsenic 0.2 0.2 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -39 -3 Barium 0.02 0.10 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -43 -9 Cadmium 0.01 0.01 U 1311 04/01/02 6010E 04/04/02 7440 -47 -3 Chromium 0.02 0.02 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7439 -92 -1 Lead 0.1 0.1 U 1311 04/02/02 7470A 04/05/02 7439 -97 -6 Mercury 0.0001 0.0001 U 1111 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7782 -49 -2 Selenium 0.2 0.2 U 1311 04/01/02 6010B 04/04/02 7440 -22 -4 Silver 0.02 0.02 U U Analyte undetected at given RL RL Reporting Limits FORM -I Analytical Resources Inc. TPH Quantitation Report Data file: / cheml /fid4b.i /09apr02.b /0409b028.d Method: / cheml /fid4b.i /09apr02.b /tphfid4b.m Instrument: fid4b.i Operator: GSA Report Date: 04/11/2002 Macro: FID:4B040902 Calibration Dates: Gas:04 /09/02 Diese1:04 /09/02 Compound RT Toluene C8 C10 C12 C14 C16 C18 o -terph C20 C22 C24 C25 C26 C28 Triacon Surr C32 - C34 C36 Filter Peak C38 C40 FID:4A RESULTS Shift Height Area 1.374 0.069 15159 567864 1.486 -0.064 8664 572546 2.766 0.048 2985 101553 3.259 0.025 2941 104037 4.002 -0.046 1634 114169 4.- 493 0.005 1109849 42682575 4.806 0.001 2848 181792 5.156 -0.021 2941 359502 5.525 -0.006 1130 213717 5.691 -0.011 1723 163275 5.914 0.044 1355 175844 6.178 -0.022 2870 226131 6.518 -0.005 533289 36451320 6.848 -0.010 1652 155081 7.- 357 -0.007 1915 248454 FID:4A- 2C /RTX -1 EF58 MBS 0.9- 0.3- 0.1- "In IiTDO 0.0_, ' . 2.4 2.8 ARI ID: EF58 MBS 3/29 Client ID: Injection: 10- APR -2002 00:09 Dilution Factor: 1 M.Oi1:04 /09/02 Range GAS DIESEL M.OIL ==a Total Area Conc (Tol -C12) (C12 -C24) (C24 -C38) 4028407 12 8872161 3572963 o -Terph Surrogate Rec = Triacon Surrogate Rec = (42682575) (36451320) * Indicates Filter Peak subtracted HP689tIol2 :i a SD4o tka.d 6 g, irMstul I t 1wD In M r. �OO r, �? G11 1 fl N LO tD N N I� 3.2 3.6 4.0 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 6.4 6.8 7.2 7.6 8.0 8.4 Time (Mini „V • 1 1 9.2 9.6 10.0 • • Analytical Resources Inc. TPH Quantitation Report Data file: / cheml /fid4b.i /09apr02.b/0409b029.d Method: / cheml /fid4b.i /09apr02.b /tphfid4b.m Instrument: fid4b.i Operator: GSA Report Date: 04/11/2002 Macro: FID:4B040902 Calibration Dates: Gas:04 /09/02 Diesel:04 /09/02 Compound RT =a..= FID:4A RESULTS Shift Height • Area Toluene C8 C10 C12 C14 C16 C18 o -terph C20 C22 C24 C25 C26 C28 Triacon Surr C32 C34 C366 alter Peak - 38 C40 1.311 1.553 2.719 3.237 3.662 4.051 4.428 4.496 4.806 5.175 5.526 5.696 5.859 6.213 6.519 6.848 7.516 7.357 7.807 ARI ID: EF58 SBS 3/29 Client ID: Injection: 10 -APR -2002 00:30 Dilution Factor: 1 M.Oi1:04 /09/02 Range Total Area Conc acca= ca== cccoeca = = aac=c= 0.006 21290 0.003 ,24156 0.001 408978 0.002 687677 0.004 661686 0.003 661465 0.005 452604 0.008 1058660 0.001 273100 - 0.002 118982 - 0.005 40053 - 0.006 23309 - 0.011 11939 0.013 2594 -0.004 548635 -0.010 2467 -0.016 1028 -0.006 3229 - 0.050 2719 844705 1406710 11280756 21050704 31284832 25943961 22761815 39268006 19549391 8616449 3818458 2189738 1161603 132990 36326570 235050 205667 511036 505944 ac =a = =aa aca= aaacc =o =_ 0 0.3- 0.1 FID:4A- :2C /RT. On M O ray �Jry, V I;' tI "II)Iiu: u a N b N Dl u m Y GAS (Tol -C12) DIESEL (C12 -C24) M.OIL (C24 -C38) __ 252262849 896558073 18323540 o -Terph Surrogate Rec Triacon Surrogate Rec * Indicates Filter Peak (39268006) (36326570) subtracted aaaaaca= a== oa= accaav= aoacaaLC MP689g7UJ2 :I a Sg+79t3Q29.d Triacon Surr 0 N U. 0) P N f"1 MICIT ,111.111 rOCZn d a MOM • MN N N N ti O M ID p-- r -.q 0fllD m O N P (D m O M 1� 1G11VI I Ia kd 1I1I :I Iml ICI Ia;1 I o I 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4 0 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 6.4 6.8 7.2 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.8 9.2 9.6 10.0 Time (Min) Analytical Resources Inc. TPH Quantitation Report Data file: / cheml /fid4b.i /09apr02.b/0409b030.d Method: / chemi /fid4b.i /09apr02.b /tphfid4b.m Instrument: fid4b.i Operator: GSA Report Date: 04/11/2002 Macro: FID:45040902 Calibration Dates: Gas:04 /09/02 Diese1:04 /09/02 M.0i1:04/09/02 ARI ID: EF58 A Client ID: Injection: 10 -APR -2002 00:51 Dilution Factor: Compound RT ==a= a == == == .= a= === =__ Toluene C8 C10 C12 . C14 •C16 C18 o -terph C20 C22 C24 C25 C26 C28 FID:4A RESULTS Shift Height Area 1.335 0.030 1.550 0.000 2.716 -0.002 3.233 -0.001 3.656 -0.002 4.047 -0.001 4.423 0.000 4.492 0.004 4.804 -0.001 5.176 -0.001 5.531 0.000 5.695 -0.007 5.873 0.002 6.204 0.004 Triacon Surr 6.519 C32 6.833 C34 7.198 C36 7.532 Filter Peak 7.358 C38 7.848 C40 8.162 -0.004 - 0.025 0.001 0.000 -0.006 - 0.008 -0.006 2540 2275 11800 81697 41618 26535 33580 908321 30302 35916 42604 182100 48315 58007 456496 36815 23760 17340 27229 10754 7364 103343 132699 451512 2093402 1748726 2059902 3765698 34303345 2963705 4412193 6646632 12819274 2576535 6573526 31117192 3614245 1707988 1298049 4960481 1281271 392427 1 Range .Total Area Conc = = =c o== === =a== =a= GAS (Tol -C12) DIESEL (C12 -C24) M.OIL (C24 -C38) 30176335 170954177 242220772 o -Terph Surrogate Rec Triacon Surrogate Rec = (34303345) (31117192) * Indicates Filter Peak subtracted HP6898 aSWV1;30.d • 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 6 Time (Min) 4 6.8 7.2 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.8 9.2 9.6 10.0 • Appendix G MTCA Petroleum Hydrocarbon Mixture Worksheets Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Main Data Entry Form and Status of Current Soil Risk Soil Cleanup Levels: Worksheet for Data Entry Refer to WAC 173- 340 -720, 740,745, 747, 750 • Date: 09/04/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 • 1. Enter Soil Concentration Measured Composition Ratio Chemical of Concern or Equivalent Carbon Group Measured Soil Conc dry basis , mg/kg % Petroleum EC Fraction Fail AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00% AL_EC >6-8 0 0.00% AL_EC >8 -10 45 0.47% AL_EC >10 -12 88 0.92% AL_EC >12 -16 490 5.11% AL_EC >16 -21 720 7.51% AL_EC >21 -34 2100 21.89% AR_EC >8 -10 0 0.00% AR_EC >10 -12 4.7 0.05% AR_EC >12-16 160 1.67% AR_EC >16-21 826.795 8.62% AR_EC >21 -34 5099.87 53.17% Benzene 0.08 0.00% Toluene 0.079 0.00% Ethylbenzene 9.5 0.10% Total Xylenes 36.7 0.38% Total Naphthalenes 7.3 0.08% n- Hexane 0 0.00% MTBE 0 0.00% Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.00% 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 0.00% Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 0.01% Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 0.00% Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 0.00% Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 0.00% Chrysene 1.6 0.02% Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 0.00% lndeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 0.00% Sum 9591.359 100.00% 2. Enter Site - Specific Hydrogeolo2ical Data Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 0.43 Unitless Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 0.3 Unitless Volumetric air content: default is 0.13 0.13 Unitless Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 1.5 kg/I Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Unitless 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 20 Unitless Exposure Pathway Pass or Fail? Hl RISK Soil Direct Contact Unrestricted Land use Fail 4.00E+00 5.17E-06 Industrial Land use Pass 3.31E -01 1.28E-06 Method B Potable Ground Water Protection Pass 1.47E -01 2.52E -06 Warning!!! *Check to determine if a simplified or site - specific Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation may be required based on site - specific conditions and type of fuel (see WAC 173- 340 - 7490 - 7494). *Check Soil Residual Saturation Evaluation specified in WAC 173- 340 - 747(10). Note: 1. All data must be numeric values. Use of alphabetical characters (i.e., "ND ", "NA ", " < ", " > ", or "=") will cause an error. 2. Try to avoid double counting: The Petroleum Equivalent Carbon (EC) fractions include many individual substances that must be analyzed separately. When entering the concentration of petroleum EC fraction into the data entry cell, make sure you subtract the concentration of individual substances from the appropriate EC fraction. (See User's Guide) 3. For the values of soil measurement below the method detection limit, substitute one -half the method detection limit as required by WAC173 -340- 740-(7). For the values for soil measurement above the method detection limit but below the practical quantitation limit, substitute the method detection limit. However, for a hazardous substance or petroleum fraction which has never been detected in any sample at a site and these substances are not suspected of being present at the site based on site history and other knowledge, enter "0" for that hazardous substances or petroleum fraction for further calculation. Refer to WAC173- 340 - 740(7) for detail. 4. For detail analytical testing requirements for petroleum contaminated sites, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -820, 830 and 840, and Table 830 -1. 5. For detail information on site - specific hydrogeological conditions, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747. REMARK: Petroleum EC fractions have been adjusted to account for ethylbenzene, xylene, total naphthalene and cPAH results. Unsaturated soil sample conditions assumed: Dilution Factor = 20. 9/4/02: TPH NA -5 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Soil Direct Contact: Method C - Industrial Land Use Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for Soil Direct Contact Pathway: Method C- Industrial Land Use (Refer to MTCA WAC 173 - 340 -745) Date: 04- Sep-02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Measured Soil Chemical of Concern Cone or EC Group dry basis Exposure Parameters Toxicity Parameters Current Condition Adjusted Condition ABI AF ABSd GI RID, CPF, HQ RISK Pass or Fail? Soil Conc being tested HQ RISK Pass or Fail? mg/kg unitless mg/cm2day unitless unitless mg/kg -day kg- day /mg unitless unitless mg/kg unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5 -6 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8-10 45 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 1.03E -03 1.36E +02 3.11E-03 AL_EC >I0 -12 88 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 2.02E -03 2.66E +02 6.09E -03 AL_EC >12 -16 490 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 2.45E -02 1.48E +03 7.39E -02 AL_EC >16-21 720 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 5.40E -04 2.17E +03 1.63E -03 AL_EC >21 -34 2100 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 1.58E -03 6.34E +03 4.75E -03 AR_EC >8 -10 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 0.00E +00 AR_EC >10-12 4.7 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 6.46E -05 1.42E +01 1.95E -04 AR_EC >12 -16 160 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.05 4.80E -03 4.83E +02 1.45E -02 AR_EC >16 -21 826.795 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 4.13E -02 2.49E +03 1.25E -01 AR_EC >21 -34 5099.87 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 2.55E -01 1.54E +04 7.69E -01 Benzene 0.08 1 0.2 0.0005 0.95 - 0.003 0.055 1.34E -05 5.90E -10 2.41E -01 4.04E -05 1.78E -09 Toluene 0.079 1 0.2 0.03 1 0.2 2.57E -07 2.38E -01 7.75E -07 Ethylbenzene 9.5 1 0.2 0.03 0.92 0.1 6.30E -05 2.87E +01 1.90E -04 Total Xylenes 36.7 I 0.2 0.03 0.9 2 1.22E -05 1.11E +02 3.69E -05 Total Naphthalenes 7.3 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.02 4.49E -04 2.20E +01 1.36E -03 n- Hexane 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.06 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.000057 85 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 0.091 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.63E -07 2.05E +00 4.91E -07 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 9.82E -08 1.24E +00 2.96E-07 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 3.71E -08 4.68E -01 1.12E -07 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 7.3 8.62E -07 1.09E +00 2.60E -06 Chrysene 1.6 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.073 3.83E -08 4.83E +00 1.16E -07 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 2.92 7.19E -08 2.26E -01 2.17E -07 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.32E -08 1.66E -01 3.97E -08 Sum 9591.359 3.31E -01 1.28E -06 2.89E +04 1.00E +00 3.88E -06 • a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Current Condition TPH, mg/kg= 9591.359 HI= 3.314E -01 Cancer RISK= 1.284E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Adjusted Condition TPH, mg/kg= 28942.050 HI= 1.000E +00 Cancer RISK= 3.876E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Exposure Parameters for Non - carcinogens Units Average Body Weight, ABW Averaging Time, AT Exposure Frequency, EF Exposure Duration, ED Soil Ingestion Rate, SIR Dermal Surface Area, SA 70 20 0.7 20 50 2500 kg yr unitless year mg/day cm2 for Carcinogens Parameters for Carcinogens unit Averaging time, AT _C 75 yr 9/4/02: TPH DF20.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Prog•oil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Cone being tested Predicted Conc @Well HQ @ Well RISK ® Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/1 mg/kg ug/I unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5-6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8 -10 45 4.50E +01 1.93E -01 8.04E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC >10 -12 88 8.80E +01 2.43E -02 1.01E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC >12-16 490 4.90E +02 2.42E -03 5.04E -06 0.00E +00 AL_EC >16 -21 720 7.20E +02 4.50E -06 1.41E -10 0.00E +00 AL_EC>21-34 2100 2.10E +03 1.02E -10 3.20E -15 0.00E+00 AR- EC 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AR_EC>10-12 4.7 4.70E +00 1.16E +00 2.90E -03 0.00E+00 AR_EC >12-16 160 1.60E+02 8.00E+00 1.00E -02 0.00E+00 AR_EC >16-21 826.795 8.27E +02 2.88E +00 6.01E -03 0.00E+00 AR_EC>21-34 5099.87 5.10E +03 1.82E -01 3.80E -04 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.08 5 8.00E -02 2.01E +00 8.36E -02 2.52E -06 Toluene 0.079 1000 7.90E -02 5.57E -01 3.48E -04 0.00E+00 Ethylbenzene 9.5 700 9.50E +00 1.94E +01 2.42E -02 0.00E+00 Total Xylenes 36.7 1000 3.67E +01 7.56E +0I 4.72E -03 0.00E +00 Total Naphthalenes 7.3 160 7.30E +00 2.28E +00 1.42E -02 0.00E +00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 6.80E -01 3.64E -05 0.00E +00 3.04E -10 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 4.10E -01 3.17E -06 0.00E +00 2.64E -11 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 1.55E -01 6.39E -07 0.00E +00 5.33E -12 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 3.60E -01 3.01E -06 0.00E +00 2.51E -10 Chrysene 1.6 1.60E +00 I.46E -05 0.00E +00 1.22E -11 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 7.50E -02 8.73E -07 0.00E+00 2.91E -11 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 5.50E -02 5.70E -09 0.00E +00 4.75E -14 Sum 9591.359 9.59E +03 1.12E+02 1 1.47E -01 2.52E -06 Testing Total Soil Conc (mg/kg) is: 9591.36 a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics • Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n On, Oa P6 foe DF 0.43 unitless 0.3 unitless 0.13 1.5 0.001 20 unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back- Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on HI =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK =1.0E -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 9591.359 Pass or Fail? Pass Predicted TPH (ug/I) @Well: 1.12E +02 Cancer Risk @ Well: 2.52E -06 Hazard Index @Well: 1.47E -01 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL ( g/mol): 249.3 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): • 249.3 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.036 Volumetric NAPL Content, B,;t,, : 0.014 NAPL Saturation (%), &NAPI /n: 3.23% Type of model used for computation: 4 -Phase Model Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.00% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.00% in Solid: 0.04% in NAPL: 99.95% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPII Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPH NA -5 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Main Data Entry Form and Status of Current Soil Risk Soil Cleanup Levels: Worksheet for Data Entry Refer to WAC 173- 340 -720, 740,745, 747, 750 Date: 09/04/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 1. Enter Soil Concentration Measured Composition Ratio Chemical of Concern or Equivalent Carbon Group Measured Soil Conc dry basis mg/kg Petroleum EC Fraction Fail AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00% AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00% AL_EC >8 -10 45 0.47% AL_EC >10 -12 88 0.92% AL_EC >12 -16 490 5.11% AL_EC >16 -21 720 7.51% AL_EC >21 -34 2100 21.89% AR_EC >8 -10 0 0.00% AR_EC >10 -12 4.7 0.05% AR_EC >12-16 160 1.67% AR_EC >16-21 826.795 8.62% AR_EC >21 -34 5099.87 53.17% Benzene 0.08 0.00% Toluene 0.079 0.00% Ethylbenzene 9.5 0.10% Total Xylenes 36.7 0.38% Total Naphthalenes 7.3 0.08% n- Hexane 0 0.00% MTBE 0 0.00% Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.00% 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 0.00% Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 0.01% Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 0.00% Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 0.00% Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 0.00% Chrysene 1.6 0.02% Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 0.00% lndeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 0.00% Sum 9591.359 100.00% 2. Enter Site - Specific Hydrogeological Data Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 0.43 Unitless Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 0.3 Unitless Volumetric air content: default is 0.13 0.13 Unitless Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 1.5 kg/1 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Unitless 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 1 Unitless Exposure Pathway Pass or Fail? to RISK Soil Direct Contact Unrestricted Land use Fail 4.00E+00 5.17E -06 Industrial Land use Pass 3.31E -01 1.29E -06 Method B Potable Ground Water Protection Fail 2.95E+00 5.05E -05 Warning!!! *Check to determine if a simplified or site- specific Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation may be required based on site - specific conditions and type of fuel (see WAC 173-340-7490-.7494). 'Check Soil Residual Saturation Evaluation specified in WAC 173- 340 - 747(10). Note: - 1. All data must be numeric values. Use of alphabetical characters (i.e., "ND ", "NA ", " < ", " > ", or " = ") will cause an error. 2. Try to avoid double counting: The Petroleum Equivalent Carbon (EC) fractions include many individual substances that must be analyzed separately. When entering the concentration of petroleum EC fraction into the data entry cell, make sure you subtract the concentration of individual substances from the appropriate EC fraction. (See User's Guide) 3. For the values of soil measurement below the method detection lin� substitute one -half the method detection limit as required by WAC173 -340- 740-(7). For the values for soil measurement above the method detection limit but below the practical quantitation limit, substitute the method detection limit. However, for a hazardous substance or petroleum fraction which has never been detected in any sample at a site and these substances are not suspected of being present at the site based on site history and other knowledge, enter "0" for that hazardous substances or petroleum fraction for further calculation. Refer to WAC173- 340 - 740(7) for detail. 4. For detail analytical testing requirements for petroleum contaminated sites, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -820, 830 and 840, and Table 830 -1. 5. For detail information on site - specific hydrogeological conditions, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747. REMARK: Petroleum EC fractions have been adjusted to account for ethylbenzene, xylene, total naphthalene and cPAH results. Saturated soil sample conditions assumed: Dilution Factor = 1. 9/4/02: TPH NA -5 DFI.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil •up Level for TPH Sites - Soil Direct Contact: Method C - Industrial Land Use Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for Soil Direct Contact Pathway: Method C- Industrial Land Use (Refer to MTCA WAC 173 - 340 -745) Date: 04 -Sep-02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Measured Soil Chemical of Concern Cone or EC Group dry basis Exposure Parameters Toxicity Parameters Current Condition Adjusted Condition ABI AF ABSd GI RID, CPFe HQ RISK Pass or Fail? I Soil Cone being jested HQ RISK Pass or Fail? mg/kg unitless ing/ant -day unitless unitless mg/kg -day kg- day /mg unitless unitless mg/kg unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5 -6 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8 -10 45 I 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 1.03E -03 1.36E +02 3.11E -03 AL_EC >10 -12 88 I 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 2.02E -03 2.66E+02 6.09E -03 AL_EC >12-16 490 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 2.45E -02 1.48E +03 7.39E -02 AL_EC >16 -21 720 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 5.40E -04 2.17E +03 1.63E -03 AL_EC >21 -34 2100 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 1.58E -03 6.34E +03 4.75E -03 AR_EC >8 -10 0 I 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 0.00E +00 AR_EC >10 -12 4.7 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 6.46E -05 1.42E +01 1.95E -04 AR_EC >12 -16 160 I 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.05 4.80E -03 4.83E +02 1.45E -02 AR_EC >16 -21 826.795 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 4.13E -02 2.49E +03 1.25E -01 AR_EC >21 -34 5099.87 1 0.2 0.I 0.5 0.03 2.55E -01 1.54E +04 7.69E -01 Benzene 0.08 1 0.2 0.0005 0.95 0.003 0.055 1.34E -05 5.90E -10 2.41E -01 4.04E -05 1.78E -09 Toluene 0.079 1 0.2 0.03 I 0.2 2.57E -07 2.38E -01 7.75E -07 Ethylbenzene 9.5 1 0.2 0.03 0.92 0.1 6.30E -05 2.87E +01 1.90E -04 Total Xylenes 36.7 1 0.2 0.03 0.9 2 1.22E -05 1.11E +02 3.69E -05 Total Naphthalenes 7.3 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.02 4.49E -04 2.20E +01 1.36E -03 n- Hexane 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.06 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.000057 85 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 0.091 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.63E -07 2.05E +00 4.91E -07 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 9.82E -08 1.24E +00 2.96E -07 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 3.71E -08 4.68E -01 1.12E -07 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 7.3 8.62E -07 1.09E +00 2.60E -06 Chrysene 1.6 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.073 3.83E -08 4.83E +00 1.16E -07 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 2.92 7.19E -08 2.26E -01 2.17E -07 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 _ 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.32E -08 1.66E -01 3.97E -08 Sum 9591.359 3.31E -01 1.28E -06 2.89E +04 1.00E +00 3.88E -06 • a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Current Condition TPH, mg/kg= 9591.359 HI= 3.314E -01 Cancer RISK= 1.284E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(/0)) Adjusted Condition TPH, mg/kg= 28942.050 1-11= 1.000E +00 Cancer RISK= 3.876E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Exposure Parameters for Non - carcinogens Units Average Body Weight, AB W Averaging Time, AT Exposure Frequency, EF Exposure Duration, ED Soil Ingestion Rate, SIR Dermal Surface Area, SA 70 20 0.7 20 50 2500 kg yr unitless year mg/day cmr for Carcinogens Parameters for Carcinogens unit Averaging time, AT_C 75 yr 9/4/02: TPH NA -5 DF1.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology. Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Ground water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Conc being tested Predicted Cone @Well HQ @ Well RISK @ Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/I mg/kg ugh unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fradion AL_EC >5-6 0 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AL_EC >8 -10 45 4.50E+01 3.86E+00 1.61E -02 0.00E +00 AL_EC >10 -12 88 8.80E +01 4.86E -01 2.02E -03 0.00E +00 AL_EC >12 -16 490 4.90E+02 4.84E -02 1.01E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC>16-2l 720 7.20E+02 9.01E -05 2.81E -09 0.00E+00 AL_EC >21 -34 2100 2.10E+03 2.05E -09 6.40E -14 0.00E +00 AR EC >8 -10 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AR_EC>10-12 4.7 4.70E+00 2.32E+01 5.80E -02 0.00E+00 AR_EC >12-16 160 1.60E+02 1.60E+02 2.00E -01 0.00E+00 AR_EC >16 -21 826.795 8.27E+02 5.77E+01 1.20E -01 0.00E+00 AR_EC>21-34 5099.87 5.10E+03 3.65E +00 7.60E -03 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.08 5 8.00E -02 4.OIE+0I 1.67E +00 5.05E -05 Fail Toluene 0.079 1000 7.90E -02 1.I1E +01 6.97E -03 0.00E +00 Ethylbenzene 9.5 700 9.50E +00 3.87E+02 4.84E -01 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 36.7 1000 3.67E+01 1.51E+03 9.44E -02 0.00E+00 Fail Total Naphthalenes 7.3 160 7.30E+00 4.56E+0l 2.85E -01 0.00E+00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 6.80E -01 7.28E -04 0.00E+00 6.07E -09 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 4.10E -01 6.34E -05 0.00E+00 5.29E -10 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 1.55E -01 1.28E -05 0.00E+00 1.07E -10 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 3.60E -01 6.01E -05 0.00E+00 5.02E -09 Chrysene 1.6 1.60E+00 2.92E -04 0.00E +00 2.43E -10 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 7.50E -02 1.75E -05 0.00E+00 5.83E -10 lndeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 5.50E -02 1.14E-07 0.00E+00 9.50E -13 Sum 9591.359 9.59E +03 2.24E+03 2.95E+00 5.05E -05 Fail Testing Total Soil Conc (mg/kg) is: 959136 • • a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n en Pb foe DF 0.43 0.3 0.13 1.5 0.001 1 unitless unitless unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on HI =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK =1.OE -5 @Ground Water. Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration ( mg/kg) tested: 9591.359 Pass or Fail? Fail Predicted TPH (ug/l) @Well: 2.24E +03 Cancer Risk @ Well: 5.05E -05 Hazard Index @Well: 2.95E +00 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 249.3 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 2493 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.036 Volumetric NAPL Content, eN.1Pl.: 0.014 NAPL Saturation ( %), eNtpt,kr: 3.23% Type of model used for computation: I -Phase Model Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.00% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.00% in Solid: 0.04% in NAPL: 99.95% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TP A -5 DFI.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Prooil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173- 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Conc being tested Predicted Conc @Well HQ @ Well RISK @ Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/I mg/kg ug/l unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fradian AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E4-00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AL_EC >8-10 45 7.67E -01 3.35E+00 1.40E -02 0.00E +00 AL_EC >10 -12 88 1.50E +00 4.65E -01 1.94E -03 0.00E+00 AL_EC >12 -16 490 8.35E +00 4.85E -02 1.01E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC >16 -21 720 1.23E+01 8.69E -05 2.72E -09 0.00E +00 AL_EC >21-34 2100 3.58E +01 2.12E -09 6.62E -14 0.00E +00 AR_EC >8-10 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AR_EC >10 -12 4.7 8.01E -02 1.33E +01 3.33E -02 0.00E +00 AR_EC >12-16 160 2.73E +00 1.26E +02 1.58E -01 0.00E+00 AR_EC >16-21 826.795 1.41E +01 5.59E +01 1.16E -01 0.00E +00 AR_EC >21-34 5099.87 8.69E +01 3.75E +00 7.81E -03 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.08 5 1.36E -03 4.40E +00 1.83E -01 5.53E -06 Toluene 0.079 1000 1.35E -03 2.84E +00 1.77E -03 0.00E+00 Ethylbenzene 9.5 700 1.62E -01 1.95E +02 2.44E -01 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 36.7 1000 6.25E -01 7.36E +02 4.60E -02 0.00E4-00 Total Naphthalenes 7.3 160 1.24E -01 3.10E +01 1.94E -01 0.00E +00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 1.16E -02 7.36E -04 0.00E+00 6.14E -09 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 6.99E -03 6.48E -05 0.00E +00 5.40E -10 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 2.64E -03 1.31E -05 0.00E +00 1.10E -10 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 6.13E -03 6.15E -05 0.00E +00 5.13E -09 Chrysene 1.6 2.73E -02 3.00E -04 0.00E+00 2.50E -10 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 1.28E -03 1.76E -05 0.00E +00 5.88E -10 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 9.37E -04 1.18E -07 0.00E +00 9.82E -13 Sum 9591.359 1.63E +02 1.17E +03 1.00E +00 5.54E -06 Testing Total Soil Conc (mg /kg) is: 163.44 a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n '9w Da Pb foe DF 0.43 0.3 0.13 1.5 0.001 1 unitless unitless unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on H1 =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK - 1.0E -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 163.442 Pass or Fail? Pass Predicted TPH (ug/1) @Well: 1.17E +03 Cancer Risk @ Well: 5.54E -06 Hazard Index @Well: 1.00E +00 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 249.3 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 251.7 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/1): 1.036 Volumetric NAPL Content, ®r,;cpy : 0.000 NAPL Saturation ( %), B,yapy/n: 0.05% Type of model used for computation: 4 -Phase Model Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.14% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.03% in Solid: 2.18% in NAPL: 97.64% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPH NA -5 DF1.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Cone Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Conc being tested Predicted Conc @Well HQ @ Well RISK ® Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/1 mg/kg ug/I unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction I AL_EC >5-6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AL_EC >8 -10 45 1.51E +00 3.59E+00 1.50E -02 0.00E+00 AL_EC >10 -12 88 2.96E+00 4.76E -01 1.98E -03 0.00E+00 AL_EC >12 -16 490 1.65E+01 4.85E -02 1.01E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC >16 -21 720 2.42E+0l 8.86E -05 2.77E -09 0.00E+00 AL_EC>21-34 2100 7.05E +01 2.09E -09 6.52E -14 0.00E +00 AR- >8 -10 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AR EC >10 -12 4.7 1.58E -0I 1.69E +01 4.24E -02 0.00E+00 AR EC >12 -16 160 5.37E+00 1.41E +02 1.77E -01 0.00E+00 AR_EC >16-21 826.795 2.78E +01 5.68E +0I 1.18E -01 0.00E +00 AR EC 5099.87 1.71E +02 3.70E +00 7.72E -03 0.00E+00 Benzene 0.08 5 2.69E -03 7.94E +00 3.31E -01 9.99E -06 Fail Toluene 0.079 1000 2.65E -03 4.53E+00 2.83E -03 0.00E +00 Ethylbenzene 9.5 700 3.19E -01 2.60E+02 3.25E -01 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 36.7 1000 1.23E +00 9.91E +02 6.20E -02 0.00E +00 Total Naphthalenes 7.3 160 2.45E -01 3.70E+01 2.31E -0I 0.00E+00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 2.28E -02 7.33E -04 0.00E+00 6.11E -09 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 1.38E -02 6.42E -05 0.00E +00 5.35E -10 all Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.155 5.21E -03 1.30E -05 0.00E+00 1.08E -10 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 1.21E -02 6.09E -05 0.00E +00 5.05E -09 Chrysene 1.6 5.37E -02 2.96E -04 0.00E +00 2.47E -10 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 2.52E -03 1.76E -05 0.00E+00 5.86E -10 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 1.85E -03 1.16E -07 0.00E+00 9.67E -13 Sum 9591.359 3.22E +02 1.52E+03 1.31E+00 1.,00E -05 Fail Testing Total Soil Conc (mg /kg) is: 322.15 • • a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass/Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n 0.43 unitless QN 0.3 unitless O. 0.13 unitless Pb 1.5 kg/I foe 0.001 unitless DF 1 unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on HI =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK = 1.0E -5 @a Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 322.147 Pass or Fail? Fail Predicted TPH (ug/I) @Well: 1.52E +03 Cancer Risk @ Well: 1.00E-05 Hazard Index @Well: 1.31E +00 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL ( g/mol): 249.3 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 250.7 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.036 Volumetric NAPL Content, &NAPL : 0.000 NAPL Saturation (%), BNAPL In: 0.11% Type of model used for computation: 4 -Phase Model Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.09% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.02% in Solid: 1.17% in NAPL: 98.71% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPA -5 DF1.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Prooil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173- 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - NFA Former UST Area Sample Name: NA -5 -5 -7 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Cone Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Cone being tested Predicted Cone @Well HQ @ Well RISK @ Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/1 mg/kg ug/l unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 ■ 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8 -10 45 8.84E -01 3.41E+00 1.42E -02 0.00E +00 AL_EC>10-12 88 1.73E +00 4.68E -01 1.95E -03 0.00E +00 AL_EC >12 -16 490 9.63E +00 4.85E -02 1.01E -04 0.00E +00 AL_EC >16 -21 720 1.41E +01 8.74E -05 2.73E -09 0.00E +00 AL_EC>21-34 2100 4.13E +01 2.11E -09 6.59E -14 0.00E +00 AR- EC 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AR_EC >10 -12 4.7 9.24E -02 1.41E+01 3.53E -02 0.00E +00 AR_EC >12 -16 160 3.14E +00 1.30E+02 1.62E -01 0.00E +00 AR_EC >16 -21 826.795 1.62E +01 5.61E +01 1.17E -01 0.00E +00 AR_EC>21-34 5099.87 1.00E +02 3.74E4-00 7.79E -03 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.08 5 1.57E -03 5.00E +00 2.08E -01 6.29E -06 Toluene 0.079 1000 1.55E -03 3.16E +00 1.97E -03 0.00E4-00 Ethylbenzene 9.5 700 1.87E -01 2.09E +02 2.62E -01 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 36.7 1000. 7.21E -01 7.91E+02 4.94E -02 0.00E +00 Total Naphthalenes 7.3 160 1.43E -01 3.24E+01 2.03E -01 0.00E +00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.68 1.34E -02 7.35E -04 0.00E +00 6.13E -09 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.41 8.06E -03 6.46E -05 0.00E +00 5.39E -10 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.155 3.05E -03 1.31E -05 0.00E +00 1.09E -10 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.36 7.07E -03 6.14E -05 0.00E +00 5.12E -09 Chrysene 1.6 3.14E -02 2.99E -04 0.00E+00 2.50E -10 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.075 1.47E -03 1.76E -05 0.00E+00 5.87E -10 Indeno(I,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.055 1.08E -03 1.17E -07 0.00E +00 9.78E -13 Sum 9591.359 1.88E +02 1.25E+03 1.06E +00 6.30E -06 Fail Testing Total Soil Conc (mg /kg) is: 188.49 a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics S Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n e.. Oa Pa foe DF 0.43 0.3 0.13 1.5 0.001 1 unitless unitless unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back- Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on H1 =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK =1.OE -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 188.487 Pass or Fail? Fail Predicted TPH (ug/1) @Well: 1.25E +03 Cancer Risk @ Well: 6.30E -06 Hazard Index @Well: 1.06E +00 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL ( g/mol): . 249.3 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 251.5 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.036 Volumetric NAPL Content, eVJ'L : 0.000 NAPL Saturation ( %), eN,u.L /n: 0.06% Type of model used for computation: 4 - Phase Model Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.13% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.03% in Solid: 1.92% in NAPL: 97.92% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPH NA -5 DF1.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Main Data Entry Form and Status of Current Soil Risk Soil Cleanup Levels: Worksheet for Data Entry Refer to WAC 173- 340 -720, 740,745, 747, 750 Date: 09/04/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Bonevard Sample Name: BY -1 -0 -1 1. Enter Soil Concentration Measured Composition Ratio Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc or Equivalent Carbon Group dry basis mg/kg % Petroleum EC Fraction Unrestricted Land use AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00% AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00% AL_EC >8 -10 6.5 0.08% AL_EC>10-12 13 0.16% AL_EC >12 -16 160 1.91% AL_EC>16-21 410 4.91% AL_EC >21 -34 2200 26.33% AR_EC >8 -10 1.8982 0.02% AR_EC >10 -12 0 0.00% AR_EC >12-16 110 1.32% AR EC >16-21 247.595 2.96% AR_EC >21 -34 5199.956 62.24% Benzene 0.0006 0.00% Toluene 0.0026 0.00% Ethylbenzene 0.0006 0.00% Total Xylenes 0.0012 0.00% Total Naphthalenes 3.88 0.05% n- Hexane 0 0.00% MTBE 0 0.00% Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.00% 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 0.00% Benzo(a)anthracene 0.34 0.00% Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.54 0.01% Benzo(k)fluoranthene.. _ .0.26 . .. _0.00% Benzo(a)pyrene 0.305 0.00% Chrysene 0.96 0.01% Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.022 0.00% Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.022 0.00% Sum 8355.2832 100.00% 2. Enter Site - Specific Hydrogeological Data Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 0.43 Unitless Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 0.3 Unitless Volumetric air content: default is 0.13 0.13 Unitless Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 1.5 kg/1 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Unitless 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 20 Unitless Exposure Pathway Pass or Fail? HI RISK Soil Direct Contact Unrestricted Land use Fail 3.44E+0o 4.24E -06 Industrial Land use Pass 2.86E -01 1.05E-06 Method B Potable Ground Water Protection Pass 2.50E -02 2.28E -08 Warning!!! •Check to determine if a simplified or site - specific Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation may be required based on site - specific conditions and type of fuel (see WAC 173 - 340 - 7490 - 7494). •Check Soil Residual Saturation Evaluation specified in WAC 173- 340 - 747(10). Note: 1. All data must be numeric values. Use of alphabetical characters (i.e., "ND ", "NA ", " < ", " > ", or " = ") will cause an error. 2. Try to avoid double counting: The Petroleum Equivalent Carbon (EC) fractions include many individual substances that must be analyzed separately. When entering the concentration of petroleum EC fraction into the data entry cell, make sure you subtract the concentration of individual substances from the appropriate EC fraction. (See User's Guide) 3. For the values of soil measurement below the method detection Ii substitute one -half the method detection limit as required by WAC173 -34 740 -(7). For the values for soil measurement above the method detection limit but below the practical quantitation limit, substitute the method detection limit. However, for a hazardous substance or petroleum fraction which has never been detected in any sample at a site and these substances are not suspected of being present at the site based on site history and other knowledge, enter "0" for that hazardous substances or petroleum fraction for further calculation. Refer to WAC173- 340 - 740(7) for detail. 4. For detail analytical testing requirements for petroleum contaminated sites, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -820, 830 and 840, and Table 830 -1. 5. For detail information on site - specific hydrogeological conditions, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747. REMARK: Petroleum EC fractions have been adjusted to account for ethylbenzene, xylene, total naphthalene and cPAH results. Unsaturated soil sample conditions assumed: Dilution Factor = 20. 9/4/02: TPH BY -1 DF20.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soi•nup Level for TPH Sites - Soil Direct Contact: Method C - Industrial Land Use Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for Soil Direct Contact Pathway: Method C- Industrial Land Use (Refer to MTCA WAC 173 - 340 -745) Date: 04- Sep-02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -1 -0 -1 Measured Soil Chemical of Concern Conc or EC Group dry basis Exposure Parameters Toxicity Parameters Current Condition Adjusted Condition AB1 AF ABSd Cl RID. CPF, - i HQ RISK Pass or Fail? Soil Conc being tested HQ RISK Pass or Fail? mg/kg unitless mg/an'-day saltless unitless mg/kg-day kg- day /mg unitless unitless mg/kg unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5-6 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 i 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 ! 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8 -10 6.5 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 1.49E -04 2.27E +01 5.20E -04 AL_EC >10-12 13 1 0.2 0.03 08 0.03 2.98E -04 4.54E +01 1.04E -03 AL_EC >12-16 160 I 0.2 0.1 0 5 0.03 8.00E -03 5.59E +02 2.79E -02 AL_EC >16 -21 410 1 0.2 0.1 0 5 2 3.08E -04 1.43E +03 1.07E -03 AL_EC >21 -34 2200 1 0.2 0.1 05 2 1.65E -03 7.68E +03 5.76E -03 AR_EC >8-10 1.8982 1 0.2 0.03 08 0.05 2.61E -05 6.63E +00 9.11E -05 AR_EC >10 -12 0 1 0.2 0.03 0 8 0.05 i i 0.00E +00 AR_EC >12-16 110 1 0.2 0.1 05 0.05 3.30E -03 3.84E +02 1,.15E -02 AR_EC >16-21 247.595 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 1.24E -02 8.65E +02 4.32E -02 AR_EC >21 -34 5199.956 1 0.2 0.1 0 5 0.03 2.60E -01 1.82E +04 9.08E -01 Benzene 0.0006 1 0.2 0.0005 0.95 0.003 0.055 1.01E -07 4.42E -12 2.10E -03 3.51E -07 1.54E -I1 Toluene 0.0026 1 0.2 0.03 I 0.2 8.45E -09 9.08E -03 2.95E -08 Ethylbenzene 0.0006 1 0.2 0.03 0.92 0.1 3.98E -09 2.10E -03 1.39E -08 Total Xylenes 0.0012 1 0.2 0.03 0.9 2 4.00E -10 4.19E -03 1.40E -09 Total Naphthalenes 3.88 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.02 2.39E -04 1.36E +01 8.34E -04 n- Hexane 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.06 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.000057 85 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 0.091 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.34 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 8.14E -08 1.19E +00 2.84E -07 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.54 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.29E -07 1.89E +00 4.52E -07 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.26 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 6.23E -08 9.08E -0I 2.17E -07 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.305 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 7.3 7.30E -07 1.07E +00 2.55E -06 Chrysene 0.96 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.073 2.30E -08 3.35E +00 8.03E -08 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.022 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 2.92 2.11E -08 7.68E -02 7.36E -08 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.022 _ 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 5.27E -09 7.68E -02 1.84E -08 Sum 8355.2832 2.86E -0I 1.05E -06 2.92E +04 1.00E +00 3.68E -06 a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Current Condition TPH, mg/kg= 8355.283 HI= 2.863E -01 Cancer RISK= 1.053E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Adjusted Condition TPH, mg/kg= 29178.893 HI= 1.000E +00 Cancer RISK= 3.677E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Exposure Parameters for Non - carcinogens Units Average Body Weight, ABW Averaging Time, AT Exposure Frequency, EF Exposure Duration, ED Soil Ingestion Rate, SIR Dermal Surface Area, SA 70 20 0.7 20 50 2500 kg yr unitless year mg/day cm2 for Carcinogens Parameters for Carcinogens unit Averaging time, AT_C 75 yr 9/4/02: TPH BY -1 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -1 -0-1 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Cone Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Conc being tested Predicted Conc @Well HQ @ Well RISK @ Well , Pass or Fail! mg/kg ug/I mg/kg ug/1 unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 AL EC>6 -8 0 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 AL_EC >8 -10 6.5 6.50E+00 3.38E -02 1.41E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC >10 -12 13 1.30E+0I 4.35E -03 1.81E -05 0.00E+00 AL EC >12 -16 160 1.60E +02 9.58E -04 2.00E -06 0.00E +00 I AL_EC >16 -21 410 4.10E +02 3.11E -06 9.72E -11 0.00E +00 AL_EC >21 -34 2200 2.20E +03 1.30E -10 4.07E -15 0.00E +00 AR EC >8 -10 1.8982 1.90E +00 1.57E +00 3.93E -03 0.00E +00 AR _EC >10-12 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 AR_EC >12 -16 110 1.10E +02 6.67E +00 8.33E -03 0.00E +00 AR_EC >16 -21 247.595 2.48E +02 1.05E +00 2.18E -03 0.00E+00 AR_EC >21-34 5199.956 5.20E +03 2.26E -01 4.70E -04 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.0006 5 6.00E -04 1.77E -02 7.38E -04 2.23E -08 Toluene 0.0026 1000 2.60E -03 2.20E -02 1.38E -05 0.00E +00 Ethylbenzene 0.0006 700 6.00E -04 1.48E -03 1.85E -06 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 0.0012 1000 1.20E -03 2.98E -03 1.87E -07 0.00E +00 Total Naphthalenes 3.88 160 3.88E +00 1.47E +00 9.17E -03 0.00E +00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 M BE 0 20 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.34 3.40E -01 2.21E -05 0.00E +00 1.84E -10 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.54 5.40E -01 5.06E -06 0.00E +00 4.22E -11 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.26 2.60E -01 1.30E -06 0.00E +00 1.08E -11 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.305 3.05E -01 3.09E -06 0.00E +00 2.58E -10 Chrysene • 0.96 9.60E -01 1.06E -05 0.00E+00 8.85E -12 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.022 2.20E -02 3.11E-07 0.00E +00 1.04E -11 Indeno(I,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.022 2.20E -02 2.76E -09 0.00E +00 2.31E -14. Sum 8355.283 8.36E +03 1.11E+01 2.50E -02 2.28E -08 Testing Total Soil Conc (mg /kg) is: 8355.28 • a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n Pa roe DF 0.43 unitless 0.3 unitless 0.13 1.5 0.001 20 unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on H1 =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK = 1.0E -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT • Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 8355.283 Pass or Fail? Pass Predicted TPH (ug/I) @Well: 1.11E +01 Cancer Risk @ Well: 2.28E -08 Hazard Index @Well: 2.50E -02 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 263.5 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 263.5 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.061 Volumetric NAPL Content, ®narc : 0.012 NAPL Saturation (%), BAAPL /n: 2.75% Type of model used for computation: 4 - Phase Mudd Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.00% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.00% in Solid: 0.03% in NAPL: 99.97% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPJi@Y -1 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Main Data Entry Form and Status of Current Soil Risk Soil Cleanup Levels: Worksheet for Data Entry Refer to WAC 173- 340 -720, 740,745, 747, 750 • Date: 09/04/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -4 -0 -2 1. Enter Soil Concentration Measured Composition Ratio Chemical of Concern or Equivalent Carbon Group Measured Soil Conc dry basis mg/kg Petroleum EC Fraction Pass AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00% AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00% AL_EC >8 -10 1.9 0.14% AL_EC >10 -12 1.9 0.14% AL_EC >12-16 1.9 0.14% AL_EC >16-21 25 1.79% AL_EC >21-34 580 41.45% AR_EC >8 -10 1.8962 0.14% AR_EC >10 -12 1.8925 0.14% AR_EC >12 -16 1.9 0.14% AR_EC >16-21 12.7525 0.91% AR_EC >21 -34 769.9925 55.02% Benzene 0.0006 0.00% Toluene 0.0021 0.00% Ethylbenzene 0.0006 0.00% Total Xylenes 0.0032 0.00% Total Naphthalenes 0.0075 0.00% n- Hexane 0 0.00% MTBE 0 0.00% Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.00% 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 0.00% Benzo(a)anthracene 0.022 0.00% Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.049 0.00% Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.034 0.00% Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0225 0.00% Chrysene 0.12 0.01% Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00375 0.00% Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.00375 0.00% Sum 1399.4027 100.00% 2. Enter Site - Specific Hydrogeological Data Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 0.43 Unitless Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 0.3 Unitless Volumetric air content: default is 0.13 0.13 Unitless Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 1.5 kg /I Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Unitless 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 20 Unitless • Exposure Pathway Pass or Fail? HI RISK Soil Direct Contact Unrestricted Land use Pass 4.80E -01 3,48E -07 Industrial Land use Pass 3.99E -02 8.64E -0s Method B Potable Ground Water Protection Pass 3.53E -02 7.58E -08 Warning!!! *Check to determine if a simplified or site - specific Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation may be required based on site - specific conditions and type of fuel (see WAC 173- 340 - 7490 - 7494). *Check Soil Residual Saturation Evaluation specified in WAC 173- 340 - 747(10). Note: 1. All data must be numeric values. Use of alphabetical characters (i.e., "ND ", "NA ", " < ", " > ", or " = ") will cause an error. 2. Try to avoid double counting: The Petroleum Equivalent Carbon (EC) fractions include many individual substances that must be analyzed separately. When entering the concentration of petroleum EC fraction into the data entry cell, make sure you subtract the concentration of individual substances from the appropriate EC fraction. (See User's Guide) 3. For the values of soil measurement below the method detection limit, substitute one -half the method detection limit as required by WAC173 -340- 740-(7). For the values for soil measurement above the method detection limit but below the practical quantitation limit, substitute the method detection limit. However, for a hazardous substance or petroleum fraction which has never been detected in any sample at a site and these substances are not suspected of being present at the site based on site history and other knowledge, enter "0" for that hazardous substances or petroleum fraction for further calculation. Refer to WAC173- 340 - 740(7) for detail. 4. For detail analytical testing requirements for petroleum contaminated sites, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -820, 830 and 840, and Table 830 -1. 5. For detail information on site - specific hydrogeological conditions, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747. REMARK: Petroleum EC fractions have been adjusted to account for ethylbenzene, xylene, total naphthalene and cPAH results. Unsaturated soil sample conditions assumed: Dilution Factor = 20. 9/4/02: TPH BY-4 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Soil Direct Contact: Method C - Industrial Land Use Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for Soil Direct Contact Pathway: Method C- Industrial Land Use (Refer to MTCA WAC 173 - 340 -745) Date: 04- Sep-02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -4 -0 -2 Measured Soil Chemical of Concern Cone or EC Group dry basis Exposure Parameters Toxicity Parameters Current Condition Adjusted Condition AB! AF ABSd GI RID, CPF, ' HQ RISK Pass or Fail? Soil Cone being tested HQ RISK Pass or Fail? mg/kg unitless mg/cm2-day unitless unitless mg/kg -day kg- day /mg ' unitless unitless mg/kg unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction O 0 0 0 0 0 LA LA lA 00 00 00 '00 I AL_EC >5 -6 0 1 . 0.2 0.03 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 I 0.2 0.03 5.7 I 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8-10 1.9 1 0.2 0.03 0.03 4.35E -05 4.76E +01 1.09E -03 AL_EC >10 -12 1.9 1 0.2 0.03 0.03 4.35E -05 4.76E +01 1.09E -03 AL_EC >12 -16 1.9 1 0.2 0.1 0.03 9.50E -05 4.76E +01 2.38E -03 AL_EC>16-21 25 1 0.2 0.1 2 1.88E -05 6.27E +02 4.70E -04 AL_EC >21 -34 580 1 0.2 0.1 2 4.35E -04 1.45E +04 1.09E -02 AR_EC >8 -10 1.8962 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 2.61E -05 4.75E +01 6.54E -04 AR EC >10 -12 1.8925 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 2.60E -05 4.75E +01 6.52E -04 AR_EC >12-16 1.9 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.05 5.70E -05 4.76E +01 1.43E -03 AR EC >16 -21 12.7525 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 6.38E -04 3.20E +02 1.60E -02 AR_EC >21-34 769.9925 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 3.85E -02 1.93E +04 9.65E -0I Benzene 0.0006 1 0.2 0.0005 0.95 0.003 0.055 1.01E -07 4.42E -12 1.50E -02 2.52E -06 1.11E -10 Toluene 0.0021 1 0.2 0.03 1 0.2 6.83E -09 5.27E -02 1.71E -07 Ethylbenzene 0.0006 1 0.2 0.03 0.92 0.1 3.98E -09 1.50E -02 9.97E -08 Total Xylenes 0.0032 I 0.2 0.03 0.9 2 1.07E -09 8.02E -02 2.67E -08 Total Naphthalenes 0.0075 I 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.02 4.61E -07 1.88E -01 1.16E -05 n- Hexane 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.06 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 . - 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.000057 85 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 0.091 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.022 I 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 5.27E -09 5.52E -01 1.32E -07 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.049 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.17E -08 1.23E +00 2.94E -07 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.034 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 8.14E -09 8.52E -01 2.04E -07 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0225 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 7.3 5.39E -08 5.64E -01 1.35E -06 Chrysene 0.12 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.073 2.87E -09 3.01E +00 7.21E -08 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00375 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 2.92 3.59E -09 9.40E -02 9.01E -08 Indeno( I ,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.00375 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 8.98E -10 9.40E -02 2.25E -08 _ Sum 1399.4027 3.99E -02 8.64E -08 3.51E +04 1.00E +00 2.17E -06 • a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Current Condition TPH, mg/kg= 1399.403 HI= 3.988E -02 Cancer RISK= 8.641 E -08 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Adjusted Condition TPH, mgfkg= 35087.917 HI= 1.000E +00 Cancer RISK= 2.167E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residual Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) Exposure Parameters for Non - carcinogens Units Average Body Weight, ABW Averaging Time, AT Exposure Frequency, EF Exposure Duration, ED Soil Ingestion Rate, SIR Dermal Surface Area, SA 70 20 0.7 20 50 2500 kg yr unitless year mg/day cm2 for Carcinogens Parameters for Carcinogens unit Averaging time, AT _C 75 yr 9/4/02: TP Y-4 DF20.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Pro oil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -4 -0-2 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Conc being tested Predicted Conc @Well HQ @ Well RISK @ Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/1 mg/kg ug/I unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5-6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8 -10 1.9 1.90E +00 6.27E -02 2.61 E -04 0.00E+00 AL_EC >10-12 1.9 1.90E +00 4.09E -03 1.70E -05 0.00E +00 AL_EC >12 -16 1.9 1.90E +00 7.35E -05 1.53E -07 0.00E +00 AL_EC >16 -21 25 2.50E +01 1.22E -06 3.81E -11 0.00E+00 AL_EC>21 -34 580 5.80E +02 2 22E-10 6.95E -15 0.00E +00 AR EC >8-10 1.8962 1.90E +00 8.74E +00 2.19E -02 0.00E +00 AR EC >10 -12 1.8925 1.89E +00 3.36E +00 8.40E -03 0.00E +00 AR_EC >12-16 1.9 1.90E +00 7 22E-01 9 02E-04 0.00E +00 AR_EC >16-21 12.7525 1.28E +01 3 47E-01 7 23E-04 0.00E +00 AR_EC >21 -34 769.9925 7.70E +02 2.I6G0I 4 51E-04 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.0006 5 6.00E -04 6 01E-02 2 50E-03 7.55E -08 Toluene 0.0021 1000 2.10E -03 8 62E-02 5 39E -05 0.00E +00 Ethylbenzene 0.0006 700 6.00E -04 8 58E -03 1 07E-05 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 0.0032 1000 3.20E -03 4 59E -02 2.87E -06 0.00E +00 Total Naphthalenes 0.0075 160 7.50E -03 1.74E -02 1.09E -04 0.00E +00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.022 2.20E -02 9.24E -06 0.00E +00 7.70E -11 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.049 4.90E -02 2.97E -06 0.00E +00 2.48E -11 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.034 3.40E -02 1.10E -06 0.00E +00 9.19E -12 cPAKs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0225 2.25E -02 1 48E-06 0.00E +00 1.23E -10 Chrysene 0.12 1.20E -0I 8.60E -06 0.00E +00 7.17E -12 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00375 3.75E -03 3.42E -07 0.00E +00 1.14E -I1 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.00375 3.75E -03 3.05E -09 0.00E +00 2.55E -14 Sum 1399.403 1.40E +03 1.37E +0I 3.53E -02 7.58E -08 Testing Total Soil Conc (mg /kg) is: 1399.40 a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Ilydrogeological Characteristics • Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n ew Oa Pb J oc DF 0.43 0.3 0.13 1.5 0.001 20 unitless unitless unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil'I'PI4 Cleanup Levels Based on H1 =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK = 1.0E -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPII OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 1399.403 Pass or Fail? Pass Predicted TPH (ug/l) @Well: 1.37E +01 Cancer Risk @ Well: 7.58E -08 Hazard Index @Well: 3.53E -02 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 285.7 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g /mol): 285.9 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.011 Volumetric NAPL Content, B,v i, : 0.002 NAPL Saturation ( %), ©.cmt /n: 0.48% Type of model used for computation: J -Phase M11 odd Computation completed? Fes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.00% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.00% in Solid: 0.11% in NAPL: 99.89% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPH BY-4 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Main Data Entry Form and Status of Current Soil Risk - Soil Cleanup Levels: Worksheet for Data Entry Refer to WAC 173- 340 -720, 740,745, 747, 750 Date: 09/04/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -6 -0 -1 1. Enter Soil Concentration Measured Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Cone Composition or Equivalent Carbon Group dry basis Ratio mg/kg Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5-6 AL_EC >6 -8 AL_EC >8 -10 AL_EC >10 -12 AL_EC >12-16 AL_EC >16-21 AL_EC >21 -34 AR_EC >8 -10 AR_EC >10 -12 AR_EC >12-16 AR_EC >16-21 AR_EC >21 -34 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.07% 0.07% 0.22% 2.12% 27.94% 0.07% 0.07% 0.07% 1.59% 67.74% 0 1.75 1.75 5.3 50 660 1.74835 1.728 1.75 37.56 1599.986 Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Total Xylenes 0.00055 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0043 0.00055 0.0011 Total Naphthalenes n- Hexane MTBE Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0.022 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Benzo(a)pyrene - Chrysene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.038 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% - 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.18 0.065 0.007 0.15 0.007 0.007 Sum 2362.05485 100.00% 2. Enter Site - Specific Hydro2eological Data Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 0.43 Unitless Unitless 0.3 Volumetric air content: default is 0.13 0.13 Unitless Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 1.5 kg/1 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 0.001 Unitless Dilution Factor: default is 20 20 Unitless Exposure Pathway Pass or Fail? HI RISK Soil Direct Contact Unrestricted Land use Pass 9.95E -01 3.89E -07 Industrial Land use Pass 8.29E -02 9.65E -08 Method B Potable Ground Water Protection Pass 2.09E -02 5.16E -08 Warning!!! *Check to determine if a simplified or site - specific Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation may be required based on site- specific conditions and type of fuel (see WAC 173- 340 - 7490 - 7494). 'Check Soil Residual Saturation Evaluation specified in WAC 173- 340 - 747(10). Note: 1. All data must be numeric values. Use of alphabetical characters (i.e., "ND ", "NA ", " < ", " > ", or "=") will cause an error. 2. Try to avoid double counting: The Petroleum Equivalent Carbon (EC) fractions include many individual substances that must be analyzed separately. When entering the concentration of petroleum EC fraction into the data entry cell, make sure you subtract the concentration of individual substances from the appropriate EC fraction. (See User's Guide) 3. For the values of soil measurement below the method detection limit, substitute one -half the method detection limit as required by WAC173 -340 740 -(7)- -For the values for soil measurement above the method detection limit but below the practical quantitation limit, substitute the method detection limit. However, for a hazardous substance or petroleum fraction which has never been detected in any sample at a site and these substances are not suspected of being present at the site based on site history and other knowledge, enter "0" for that hazardous substances or petroleum fraction for further calculation. Refer to WAC173- 340 - 740(7) for detail. 4. For detail analytical testing requirements for petroleum contaminated sites, refer to WAC 173 -340 -820, 830 and 840, and Table 830 -1. 5. For detail information on site - specific hydrogeological conditions, refer to WAC 173 -340 -747. REMARK: Petroleum EC fractions have been adjusted to account for ethylbenzene, xylene, total naphthalene and cPAH results. Unsaturated soil sample conditions assumed: Dilution Factor = 20. 9/4/02: TPH BY -6 DF20.XLS • • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: SoSnup Level for TPH Sites - Soil Direct Contact: Method C - Industrial Land Use Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for Soil Direct Contact Pathway: Method C- Industrial Land Use (Refer to MTCA WAC 173- 340 -745) Date: 04- Sep-02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -6 -0 -1 Measured Soil Chemical of Concern Conc or EC Group dry basis Exposure Parameters Toxicity Parameters Current Condition Adjusted Condition AB1 AF ABS, CI RfD0 CPF0 HQ RISK Pass or Fail? Soil Conc being tested - HQ RISK Pass or Fail? mg/kg unitless mg/cmz -day unitless unitless mg/kg -day kg- day /mg unitless unitless mg/kg unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5 -6 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8-10 1.75 I 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 .4.01E-05 2.11E +01 4.84E -04 AL_EC >10-12 1.75 I 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 4.01E-05 2.11E +01 4.84E -04 ALEC>12-16 5.3 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 2.65E -04 6.40E +01 3.20E -03 AL__EC >16 -21 50 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 3.75E -05 6.03E +02 4.53E -04 AL_EC >21-34 660 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 4.95E -04 7.97E +03 5.97E -03 AR_EC >8 -10 1.74835 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 2.40E -05 2.11E +01 2.90E -04 AR EC >10 -12 1.728 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 2.38E -05 2.09E +01 2.87E -04 AR_EC >12 -16 1.75 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.05 5.25E -05 2.11E +01 6.34E -04 AR_EC >16 -21 37.56 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 1.88E -03 4.53E +02 2.27E -02 AR_EC >21 -34 1599.986 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 8.00E -02 1.93E +04 9.66E -01 Benzene 0.00055 I 0.2 0.0005 0.95 0.003 0.055 9.21E -08 4.05E -12 6.64E -03 1.11E -06 4.89E -11 Toluene 0.0043 1 0.2 0.03 1 0.2 1.40E -08 5.19E -02 1.69E -07 Ethylbenzene 0.00055 1 0.2 0.03 0.92 0.1 3.65E -09 6.64E -03 4.40E -08 Total Xylenes 0.0011 1 0.2 0.03 0.9 2 3.67E -10 1.33E -02 4.43E -09 Total Naphthalenes 0.022 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.02 1.35E -06 2.66E -01 1.63E -05 n- Hexane 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.06 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.000057 85 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 0.091 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.038 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 9.10E -09 4.59E -01 1.10E -07 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.18 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 4.31E -08 2.17E +00 5.20E -07 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.065 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.56E -08 7.84E -01 1.88E -07 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.007 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 7.3 1.68E -08 8.45E -02 2.02E -07 Chrysene 0.15 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.073 3.59E -09 1.81E +00 4.34E -08 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.007 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 2.92 6.71E -09 8.45E -02 8.09E -08 lndeno( I ,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.007 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.68E -09 8.45E -02 2.02E -08 Sum 2362.05485 8.29E -02 9.65E -08 2.85E +04 1.00E +00 1.16E -06 • a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. urrent on r Itlon TPH, mg/kg= HI= 8.286E -02 Cancer RISK= 9.652E -08 Pass or Fail? Pass C neck Resi ua Saturation (IVAC340- 747(10), juste r on t Itlon TPH, mg/kg= 28507.686 HI= 1.000E +00 Cancer RISK= 1.165E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass es: ua aturatton ec Exposure Parameters for Non - carcinogens Units Average Body Weight, ABW Averaging Time, AT Exposure Frequency, EF Exposure Duration, ED Soil Ingestion Rate, SIR Dermal Surface Area, SA 70 20 0.7 20 50 2500 kg N unitless year mg/day cm' for Carcinogens Parameters for Carcinogens unit Averaging time, AT_C 75 N 9/4/02: TPH BY -6 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173- 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Boneyard Sample Name: BY -6 -0-1 Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Cone Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition Soil Conc being tested Predicted Conc ®Well HQ ® Well RISK ® Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/1 mg/kg ug/I unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5-6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.60E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL EC >8-10 1.75 1.75E +00 3.25E -02 1.35E -04 0.00E +00 AL_EC>10-12 1.75 1.75E +00 2.10E -03 8.77E -06 0.00E +00 AL_EC>12-16 5.3 5.30E +00 1.14E -04 2.38E -07 0.00E +00 AL_EC >16 -21 50 5.00E +01 1.36E -06 4.26E -11 0.00E +00 AL_EC >21-34 660 6.60E +02 1.41E -10 4.40E -15 0.00E +00 AR_EC>8-10 1.74835 1.75E +00 4.85E4-00 1.21E -02 0.00E+00 AR_EC>10-12 1.728 1.73E +00 1.79E +00 4.46E -03 0.00E +00 AR_EC>12-16 1.75 1.75E +00 3.77E -01 4.71E -04 0.00E+00 AR_EC>16-21 37.56 3.76E +01 5.71E -01 1.19E -03 0.00E+00 AR_EC >21-34 1599.986 1.60E +03 2.50E -01 5.22E -04 0.60E +00 Benzene 0.00055 5 5.50E -04 4.09E -02 1.70E -03 5.14E -08 Toluene 0.0043 1000 4.30E -03 1.13E -01 7.07E -05 0.00E +00 Ethylbenzene 0.00055 700 5.50E -04 4.63E -03 5.79E -06 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 0.0011 1000 1.10E -03 9.32E -03 5.82E -07 0.00E +00 Total Naphthalenes 0.022 160 2.20E -02 2.92E -02 1.83E -04 0.00E +00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 MTBE 0 • 20 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.60E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.038 3.80E -02 8.89E -06 0.00E +00 7.42E -11 for Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.18 1.80E -01 6.09E -06 0.00E+00 5.08E -11 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.065 6.50E -02 1.17E -06 0.00E +00 9.78E -12 cPA/Ns Benzo(a)pyrene 0.007 7.00E -03 2.56E -07 0.00E+00 2.13E -11 Chrysene 0.15 1.50E -01 5.98E -06 0.00E +00 4.99E -12 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.007 7.00E -03 3.56E -07 0.00E +00 1.19E -11 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.007 7.00E -03 3.17E -09 0.00E +00 2.65E -14 Sum 2362.055 2.36E +03 8.06E+00 - 2.09E -02 5.16E -08 Testing Total Soil Conc (mg/kg) is: 2362.05 • a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeolagical Characteristics Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor. default is 20 n Q»• Da P b { !oc DF 0.43 0.3 0.13 1.5 0.001 20 unitless unitless unitless kg/1 unitless unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on HI =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK = 1.0E -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration ( mg/kg) tested: 2362.055 Pass or Fail? Pass Predicted TPH (ug/I) @Well: 8.06E +00 Cancer Risk @ Well: 5.16E -08 Hazard Index @Well: 2.09E -02 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 268.7 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 268.7 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.083 Volumetric NAPL Content, ®Nary : 0.003 NAPL Saturation ( %), eNAPG /n: 0.76% Type of model used for computation: 4 -Phase Model Computation completed? Yes! Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.00% Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.00% in Solid: 0.06% in NAPL: 99.94% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPII Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPH BY-6 DF20.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Main Data Entry Form and Status of Current Soil Risk - Soil Cleanup Levels: Worksheet for Data Entry Refer to WAC 173- 340 -720, 740,745,'747, 750 • Date: 09/04/02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Drum Storage Area Sample Name: DS -1 -0 -1 1. Enter Soil Concentration Measured Composition Ratio Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc or Equivalent Carbon Group dry basis mg/kg % Petroleum EC Fraction Unrestricted Land use AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00% AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00% AL_EC >8 -10 1.8 0.06% AL_EC >10-12 1.8 0.06% AL_EC >12 -16 4 0.13% AL EC >16 -21 • 27 0.88% AL__EC>21-34 880 28.81% AR_EC >8 -10 1.79835 0.06% AR_EC >10 -12 1.76945 0.06% AR_EC >12 -16 1.8 0.06% AR_EC >16 -21 33.536 1.10% AR_EC >21 -34 2099.9929 68.76% Benzene 0.00055 0.00% Toluene 0.0032 0.00% Ethylbenzene 0.00055 0.00% Total Xylenes 0.0011 0.00% Total Naphthalenes 0.03055 0.00% n- Hexane 0 0.00% MTBE 0 0.00% Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.00% 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 0.00% Benzo(a)anthracene 0.064 0.00% Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.07 0.00% Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.065 0.00% Benzo(a)pyrene • 0.065 - - 0.00% Chrysene 0.2 0.01% Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00355 0.00% Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.00355 0.00% Sum 3054.00375 100.00% 2. Enter Site - Specific HydrogeoloEical Data Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 0.43 Unitless Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 0.3 Unitless Volumetric air content: default is 0.13 0.13 Unitless Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 1.5 kg/1 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Unitless 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 20 Unitless Exposure Pathway Pass or Fail? HI RISK Soil Direct Contact Unrestricted Land use Fail 1.29E+00 8.55E -07 Industrial Land use Pass 1.08E -01 2.12E -07 Method B Potable Ground Water Protection Pass 1.71E -02 4.43E -08 Warning!!! 'Check to determine if a simplified or site - specific Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation may be required based on site - specific conditions and type of fuel (see WAC 173 - 340 - 7490 - 7494). 'Check Soil Residual Saturation Evaluation specified in WAC 173- 340 - 747(10). Note: 1. All data must be numeric values. Use of alphabetical characters (i.e., "ND ", "NA ", " < ", " > ", or "=") will cause an error. 2. Try to avoid double counting: The Petroleum Equivalent Carbon (EC) fractions include many individual substances that must be analyzed separately. When entering the concentration of petroleum EC fraction into the data entry cell, make sure you subtract the concentration of individual substances from the appropriate EC fraction. (See Users Guide) 3. For the values of soil measurement below the method detection limit, substitute one -half the method detection limit as required by WAC173 -340- 740-(7). For the values for soil measurement above the method detection limit but below the practical quantitation limit, substitute the method detection limit. However, for a hazardous substance or petroleum fraction which has never been detected in any sample at a site and these substances are not suspected of being present at the site based on site history and other knowledge, enter "0" for that hazardous substances or petroleum fraction for further calculation. Refer to WAC173- 340 - 740(7) for detail. 4. For detail analytical testing requirements for petroleum contaminated sites, refer to WAC 173 -340 -820, 830 and 840, and Table 830-1. 5. For detail information on site - specific hydrogeological conditions, refer to WAC 173 - 340 -747. REMARK: Petroleum EC fractions have been adjusted to account for ethylbenzene, xylene, total naphthalene and cPAH results. Unsaturated soil sample conditions assumed: Dilution Factor = 20. 9/4/02: TPH DS -1 DF20.XLS Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Program: Soil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Soil Direct Contact: Method C - Industrial Land Use Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for Soil Direct Contact Pathway: Method C- Industrial Land Use (Refer to MTCA WAC 173 - 340 -745) Date: 04- Sep-02 Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Drum Storage Area Sample Name: DS -1 -0 -1 Measured Soil Chemical of Concern Cone or EC Group dry basis Exposure Parameters Toxicity Parameters Current Condition Adjusted Condition AB1 AF ABSd GI RID. CPF, HQ RISK Pass or Fail? Soil Cone being tested HQ RISK Pass or Fail? mg/kg unities, mg/cmt -day unitless unitless mg/kg -day kg- day /mg unities, unities, mg/kg unities, unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL EC >5-6 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 ■ 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 5.7 i 0.00E +00 AL_EC>8-10 1.8 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 14.13E -05 1.67E +01 3.83E -04 AL_EC >10 -12 1.8 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 14.13E -05 1.67E +01 3.83E -04 AL_EC >12 -16 4 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 ■ 12.00E -04 3.71E +0I 1.86E -03 AL_EC >16 -21 27 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 2.03E -05 2.51E +02 1.88E -04 AL_EC >21 -34 880 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 2 16.60E -04 8.17E +03 6.13E -03 AR_EC >8 -10 1.79835 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 12.47E -05 1.67E +01 2.30E -04 AR EC >10 -12 1.76945 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.05 2.43E -05 1.64E +01 - 2.26E -04 AR_EC >12 -16 1.8 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.05 15.40E -05 1.67E+01 5.01E -04 AR_EC >16 -21 33.536 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 11.68E -03 3.11E +02 1.56E -02 AR_EC>21 -34 2099.9929 1 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.03 1.05E -01 1.95E +04 9.75E -01 Benzene 0.00055 I 0.2 0.0005 0.95 0.003 0.055 9.21E -08 4.05E -12 5.10E -03 8.55E -07 3.76E -11 Toluene 0.0032 1 0.2 0.03 1 0.2 1.04E -08 2.97E -02 9.65E -08 Ethylbenzene 0.00055 1 0.2 0.03 0.92 0.1 3.65E -09 5.10E -03 3.38E -08 Total Xylenes 0.0011 1 0.2 0.03 0.9 2 3.67E -10 1.02E -02 3.40E -09 Total Naphthalenes 0.03055 1 0.2 0.13 0. -89 0.02 1.88E -06 2.84E -01 1.74E -05 n- Hexane 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.06 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 MTBE 0 0.00E +00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.000057 85 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 1 0.2 0.03 0.8 0.03 0.091 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.064 I 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.53E -08 5.94E -01 1.42E -07 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.07 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.68E -08 6.50E -01 1.56E -07 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.065 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 1.56E -08 6.03E -01 1.44E -07 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.065 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 7.3 1.56E -07 6.03E -0I 1.44E -06 Chrysene 0.2 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.073 4.79E -09 1.86E +00 4.45E -08 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00355 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 2.92 3.40E -09 3.29E -02 3.16E -08 Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.00355 1 0.2 0.13 0.89 0.73 8.50E -10 3.29E -02 7.89E -09 Sum 3054.00375 1.08E -01 2.12E -07 2.83E +04 1.00E +00 1.97E -06 • a. "TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. urrent on l It:on TPH, mg/kg= HI= 1.077E -01 Cancer RISK= 2.124E -07 Pass or Fail? Pass Check Residua Saturation (WAC340- 747(10)) juste on s It:on TPH, mg/kg= 28344.938 HI= 1.000E +00 Cancer RISK= 1.971E -06 Pass or Fail? Pass c ' est . ua aturatton Exposure Parameters for Non - carcinogens Units Average Body Weight, ABW Averaging Time, AT Exposure Frequency, EF Exposure Duration, ED Soil Ingestion Rate, SIR Dermal Surface Area, SA 70 20 0.7 20 50 2500 kg YT unitless year mg/day cm for Carcinogens Parameters for Carcinogens unit Averaging time, AT_C 75 ST 9/4/02: TPH DS -1 DF20.XLS • Washington State Department of Ecology, Toxics Cleanup Pro oil Cleanup Level for TPH Sites - Protection of Potable Ground Water Worksheet for Calculating Soil Cleanup Level for the Protection of Potable Ground Water (Refer to WAC 173- 340 -747) Date: 9/4/02 � Site Name: PACCAR Seattle - Former Drum Storage Area Sample Name: DS -1 -0 -I Ground Water Chemical of Concern Measured Soil Conc Cleanup Level or EC Group dry basis Method A Adjusted Condition ■ Soil Conc being tested Predicted Conc @Well HQ @ Well RISK ® Well Pass or Fail? mg/kg ug/1 mg/kg ug/I unitless unitless Petroleum EC Fraction AL_EC >5 -6 0 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >6 -8 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 AL_EC >8-10 1.8 1.80E +00 2.60E -02 1.09E -04 0.00E +00 AL_EC >10 -12 1.8 1.80E +00 1.68E -03 7.01E -06 0.00E +00 AL_EC >12-16 4 4.00E +00 6.71E -05 1.40E -07 0.00E +00 AL_EC >16 -21 27 2.70E +01 5.72E -07 1.79E -11 0.00E +00 AL_EC >21 -34 880 8.80E +02 1.46E -10 4.56E -15 0.00E +00 AR_EC >8 -10 1.79835 1.80E +00 3.96E +00 9.90E -03 0.00E +00 AR_EC >10 -12 1.76945 1.77E +00 1.44E +00 3.59E -03 0.00E +00 AR_EC>12-16 1.8 1.80E +00 3.02E -01 3.78E -04 0.00E +00 AR_EC >16-21 33.536 3.35E +01 3.97E -01 8.26E -04 0.00E +00 AR_EC >21 -34 2099.9929 2.10E +03 2.55E -01 5.32E -04 0.00E +00 Benzene 0.00055 5 5.50E -04 3.50E -02 1.46E -03 4.40E -08 Toluene 0.0032 1000 3.20E -03 6.84E -02 4.27E -05 0.00E +00 Ethylbenzene 0.00055 700 5.50E -04 3.65E -03 4.57E -06 0.00E +00 Total Xylenes 0.0011 1000 1.10E -03 7.37E -03 4.60E -07 0.00E+00 Total Naphthalenes 0.03055 160 3.06E -02 3.18E -02 1.99E -04 0.00E+00 n- Hexane 0 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 MTBE 0 20 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 0.00E +00 0.00E+00 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0 0.01 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 1,2 Dichloroethane (EDC) 0 5 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 0.00E +00 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.064 6.40E -02 1.16E -05 0.00E +00 9.71E -11 for Benzo(b)lluoranthene 0.07 7.00E -02 1.84E -06 0.00E +00 1.53E -11 all Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.065 6.50E -02 9.11E -07 0.00E +00 7.60E -12 cPAHs Benzo(a)pyrene 0.065 6.50E -02 1.84E -06 0.00E +00 1.54E -10 Chrysene 0.2 2.00E -01 6.20E -06 0.00E +00 5.17E -12 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00355 3.55E -03 1.40E -07 0.00E +00 4.68E -12 Indeno(I,2,3- cd)pyrene 0.00355 3.55E -03 1.25E -09 0.00E +00 1.04E -14 Sum 3054.004 3.05E +03 6.53E +00 1.71E -02 4.43E -08 Testing Total Soil Conc (mg /kg) is: 3054.00 a. 'TPH Test" button below is for testing adjusted condition at a specified TPH concentration. b. Check columns at left for Pass /Fail detail. Site - Specific Hydrogeological Characteristics Item Symbol Value Units Total soil porosity: default is 0.43 Volumetric water content: default is 0.3 Initial volumetric air content: default is 0.13 Soil bulk density measured: default is 1.5 Fraction Organic Carbon: default is 0.001 Dilution Factor: default is 20 n 6W t7o Pb foc DF 0.43 0.3 0.13 1.5 0.001 20 unitless unitless unitless kg/I unitless unitless Back - Calculate Target Soil TPH Cleanup Levels Based on H1 =1.0 @Ground Water: Based on total Cancer RISK =1.0E -5 @Ground Water: Based on Benzene Ground Water Cleanup Level: TPH OUTPUT Total Soil Concentration (mg/kg) tested: 3054.004 Pass or Fail? Pass Predicted TPH fug/I) @Well: 6.53E +00 Cancer Risk @ Well: 4.43E -OS Hazard Index @Well: 1.71E -02 Initial Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 269.9 Equilibrated Weighted Average MW of NAPL (g/mol): 270.0 Initial Weighted Average Density of NAPL (kg/I): 1.087 Volumetric NAPL Content, 19 NAPL : 0.004 NAPL Saturation (%), 9N,trcIn: 0.98 Type of model used for computation: 4 -Phase Model Computation completed? Yes/ Mass Distribution Pattern @ 4 -phase in soil pore system: Total Mass distributed in Water Phase: 0.0W. Total Mass distributed in Air Phase: 0.00% in Solid: 0.04% in NAPL: 99.96% Please Check Soil Residual Saturation TPH Levels: Refer to Table 747 -5! 9/4/02: TPH DS -1 DF20.XLS OY`RLL NO • CONCEPTUAL WATER OUAUTY FAC1UTY PLAN INSUIE AUTO AUCTION. PC rmm 1Va.71 NAM 0/0 •0•074 _Et a t 0 aOA• r• 1-60• EXISTING BUILDING Nom mow . 201.7• (art NAM Icvtl. 7ar MX MOH 11001 Ta n MOWN m9Trm UM= . ,1A an 0.477) stmcl‘ IRS • A • ctrm �XQ4At/. a/Aco// . /G r - Ream .N• YAM WO UNE..S A I1( • °" .1.40 S _ mutt DRAINAGE w(T) m ss.77) 0▪ 4 1(•a ▪ m • • 04 • MI 1(••r .7 m•am 074.7 PM •am m. ISM CTwan� ® -' <*Mnrm ram: •ar r oar � • -ae r COO a: .•r) • e fYea .1.1( • CO ••a L r m •: roe r •04 mean r COO : 047471( -z1( fMMC: Y me 1 - 0amm••m , ram • _ r real•.Qn 0. 'm.aa • rem •am ram: •ar lr tea. r • w . (mime mi. .•I n w. m.•m m.[.. m. um 0c ▪ m . . r c am 04( me 1( m • •a ro: 0.4 Ms .711 DRAINAGE STRUCTIELES (GM.) 0.1(74.13 . m. aC e 11.me 0.133 "net 71. 0 ODD C ama . i t r1( • -T.1( STORY NA/MOLES - m male m (r tYL s Cam 1 aM pum eLa Nr.c sr� • . K OP MM< m • 1ms re • •m . ram • 111. W 0 o. mam(r••em1w� L 0.a.0 - i00ea: • mem 1(.00 re ••o u a SC MO 3•1•14 m - Lit - If am • _1a ePORI r Pt It 0 •1011G •/OPCITT LINE soma TAI LOT N• 54II 100041 OD(TARES PROP1RTES 227 L .744471 Way S. 7,0101, WA Etm • • r 00,4[ IS 0. PC // 'SiR AM Ma NM 7120. 4.a P070 E '-fie .0/V A.:44, ICJ(. /: "SRAPM /I./ 2 r..P.*.sa l«v!ro/ 4./0.010 1(:1(1(.111( r mc 1( IMO Ma t Oa. 0AR0m•MC IC� MIRn m. 714 1Lr- 7 . mm• r R.7m • u 7 r 0.00 a .0 419 MOM m_um 2.041: 0441.7 m.•- 00M0••Y r4R a • r s 1(. .a r •e m••.7 -MI al. ram 0.74.7 MI. l2. 2.(0 m.am COM • e aM • m•lm r Ci -1.7 1(;1 m • m PM ••n ; „ °m r I1( .a..l.. 1(..m r as • COMM S. m. •. 2 MD : PM MC .n•:.m1 aIS 0�1 .7� :.m :1 1 r m m • lm Ma• MO C SCa - Y roe • •zu m .r) IL m Ir7 C♦..r(mm- am 04.0.1( -am 41,(1.0 • • m • m -Y.1( 1.r 201 • :iim W m Y °m • m r r ais W 1(1 1 1.1( • • ISM 04111 It= .1aY 0471( m • tar m•um MUM Me MP 0- lam O® 1(.141( ▪ • 1 a14.r.Tonm • 1(.0 r' P.c • .107 0141 Lem - mem moo TY (.7 MS. m_um .IC COO la •LO 1(.L m.m11 x r - YP• 1(.M. km e a 1. • MOD x74. 711. MO 10 a LSO . TRENCH DRAIN w� r a a :1..i 01171 as, PAL II DEERS • 7414141.0 -MO. . ®7r(m SANITARY SERER / 510 YANNOLES Mme..4m.(•7 tr. MO ::Is *0•••1(.•11 . IC m I, : • UT MP •• • LA r Y 080er.•m.70 va »w40.14m.•Mt w� O. DI •.1.1131. • rte.:: 1.d 0.I10w4 1(••m kd 1.1.44 zx9'd..era/' As•: K!A l/. 6 cav- gam. 'aAI IQ94R•C 3%t A/, ) sue/- ///.V./,7I.•1, 46 .1.1,/ IA" /4av eavf■o! .Ggprserr EX1J7 ZY.f ROAI 494��# 6''x // e '.y/A1bo1. /3000 (S!y lqr :;4d4 3 ,S/o• ) Ca 0 m ~ 7 co C -O F o s- v P z 0 O ' 7 Q.. 0 Q • . w' z Q W z 0 LL 1A/cierla f : 2.o' to ca 0'7.14/'.4^ I till !lzI 11 I 1 4 i 1 m cc B 10 J w w J -10- z w 0 -20- m LU w w a -30 - w - 40 - - 50 - -60 - /Fr Air APIA. / /' = iii iii�����/ Jr�% ��������► ���. ����iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiyiiiii1riii���/ATM% //////////4 70-ar = ■ = ■ NMI r / 7 MIK 7 7 LEGEND PREDOMINANTLY SAND UNIT (SP, SP /SM, SW, GP /GM) PREDOMINANTLY FINE - GRAINED UNIT (ML, SM, SM /ML) APPROX. HIGH TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROX. LOW TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) 0 30 60 APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 5 i 10 • • • APPROXIMATE VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET F. ZIM oP 0 - -30 0 J w - -40 - -50 - -60 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B-B' (WEST -TO -EAST) 016110.00/P02SK008 FIGURE 8 A 0 2 3 4 B STORM - NORTH OUTFALL C D G H NORTHWEST EXCAVATION AREA APPROX. 2,100 CY GROUNDWATER TREATMENT AREA APPROX. 2,200 CY [ace STORM - MIDDLE OUTFALL 'ter! MIDDLE OUTFALL AREA APPROX. 800 CY,- • ;t ' CB • CB' - • STORM -SOUTH OUTFALL .:'-!.;,,;< 'Ai.. JtI . tD.%9 POdN OATICI4 • • 'SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA -.;APPROX. 16,200 CY .� J.. USE OF DOCUMENTS MI5 COMMENT. INCLUDING THE INCORPORATED OESICNS. 15 AN INSTRUMENT OF SEWAGE FOR THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE MOTION AUTHORIZATION OF KENNEDY /JENKS CONSULTANTS. NO. REASON DATE BY SCALES 25mm IF MI5 BAR IS NOT DIMENSON SHOW, ADJUST SCALES ACCORDINGLY EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (ESC) NOTES CONSTRUCTION NOTES I. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE ESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION. MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE ESC FACUTIES IS THE RESPONSBIUTY CF THE CONTRACTOR. 2. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION (8TH EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES, AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DOES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM OR VIOLATE APPUCABLE WATER OUAUTY STANDARDS. 3. THE ESC FADUTIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTIOPATED SITE CONDITIONS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED (E.G.. INCREASED INLET PROTECTION. ETC.) AS NEEDED FOR STORM EVENTS. 4. THE ESC FACIUTIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THOR CONTINUED FUNCTIONING. 5. THE ESC FACUTIES IN INACTIVE AREAS SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED WITHIN THE 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. 6. PRONOE APPROPRIATE MEASURES AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. CATCH BASIN INSERT NOTES. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. REMOVE CATCH BASIN GRATING. CLEAN DIRT AND DEBRIS FROM GRATING LEDGE. LAY THE CATCH BASIN INSERT INSIDE THE BASIN REPLACE THE CRATING. PINCHING THE INSERT FABRIC BETWEEN THE GRATING AND THE CATCH BASIN FRAME. IF INSERT IS TO BE USED MORE THAN ONCE, TRIM FABRIC TO CLEAN EDGE LEAVING A 3 TO 5 INCH WIDE STRIP AROUND THE OUTSOE OF THE GRATING. ,y. . ❖. . ❖. .y. PLAN CONSTRUCTION 1. APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MUST BE EMPLOYED AT ALL TIMES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUIDEUNES DEVELOPED IN THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON AUGUST 2001. 2. EXCAVATED SOL IS TO BE PLACED IN THE VICINITY OF EACH EXCAVATION AREA AND SECURELY COVERED WITH PLASTIC SHEETING UNTIL BACKOLL OR OFFSTE DISPOSAL IS COMPLETE. POST CONSTRUCTION 1. REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION FACILITIES FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. 2. CLEAN AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OF ALL ACOUMULATED SILT AND DEBRIS FROM ALL AREAS INCLUDING CATCH BASINS. PIPES, MANHOLES AND VAULTS. FILTER FABRIC RETRIEVAL STRAP `FILTER FABRIC FILTERED WATER PROFILE, CATCH BASIN INSERT DETAIL SCALE. NONE AREA ORM( OVERFLOW TO BYPASS PEAK STORM VOLUMES STRAW BALES FOR ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTION SCALE: NONE SYMBOL LEGEND ®C B I EXISTING CATCH BASIN APPROXIMATE SOL REMOVAL AREA AND ESTIMATED REMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) 0 20 40 80 120 ti': 0ESG7IED RIND DRAWR7 ORM CHECI.ED PACCAR, INC. SEATTLE, WASHINGTON SOIL EXCAVATION AREAS Kennedy /Jenks Consultants FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND DETAILS FILE NAME 046001.04 -FIG-1 JOB NO. 036025.00 DATE 11/2003 'SHEET OF FIG -1 PRINT DATE: Sap 07, 2004 — 5 B 8 i STORM -NORTH STORMWATER OIL /WATER SEPARATOR THINNER /OIL 6 8 THINNER 8' MW -33A E7 ACETONE (CLOSED IN PLACE) II MW -35B -25A 1 GASOUNE 14 TER /OIL 12 DIESEL E8 ACETONE W -32A MW -24A MW -8B MW- 3A MW -8A RW -1 MAINTENANCE OFF -HWY MW -35A MW -26C i A MW -36B MW -36A PLASTIC SHOP MW -26B MW -26A MW -29C MW -29A MW -29B SHEET - PILING BULKHEAD MW -27A HI -BAY MW' 28A MW -28B PARTS WAREHOUSE MW -14A 10 THINNER 11 THINNER I I o 0 MW -15A +... ❑ ATER C Ioo MW-18). ® MW 19B RW -2 MW-38A Q MW -31 MW -39A-F MW -37 SEEP 4 SEEP 3 SEEP 2 SEEP 1 SEEP 6 W -37B FORMER BARREL STORAGE STORM -SOUTH SEEP 5 MW_ -30A LEGEND MW -11 A - - SHALLOW MW -283 + MW -26C - RW-2 SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA FORMER BONEYARD MW -12A' FORMER DRUM STORAGE AREA SHIPPING FORMER HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA AXLE ALIGN. TOUCH -UP PAINT RECEIVING MW -P 1 A MW-Pi B WASTE OIL 7 X X X X X ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION INTERMEDIATE ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION DEEP ZONE MONITORING WELL LOCATION EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION ® FORMER UST LOCATION (REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) -- LOCATION AND DESIGNATION SEEP 1 MW-11A X X X X A L_ L� X NFA AREA j a PAINT MIX AREA WASH PIT AREA MANUFACTURING BUILDING II + MW -9A X FORMER ANITFREEZE UST FORMER DIESEL UST ,(CLOSED IN- PLACE) MW -6A MW -4A TIRE SHOP FORMER OIL USTS (CLOSED IN- PLACE) xl CAFETERIA FORMER 15W 40 OIL UST FORMER DIESEL UST X X X X X X X X X NOTES: 1) ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2) BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BY PACCAR INCORPORATED. LOCATION OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS (REFER TO FIGURES 7 AND 8) RGSA WORK AREAS EMPLOYEE PARKING -1A 20 WT. OIL \_\_5 430WT.OIL L3 ANTI- FREEZE 2 DIESEL EMPLOYEE PARKING 0 X PLANT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING N 1 I 60 120 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET X X Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SITE LAYOUT INCLUDING RGSA WORK AREAS AND LOCATIONS OF GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS 016110.00/P02SK002 FIGURE 2 (FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL) A 10 -10 -20 0 F-7 -30 w J W - 40 -50 - 60 , AD 0 NI- 417 4 4 4v ca. cili) 444 NV41IIIIIAh1IN ArrIMIZIADIrelaWATAr -.17 AC" r ZAr 1 Adi %/Iii ,. =' � — sea LEGEND PREDOMINANTLY SAND UNIT (SP, SP /SM, SW, GP /GM) PREDOMINANTLY FINE - GRAINED UNIT (ML, SM, SM /ML) APPROX. HIGH TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) APPROX. LOW TIDE SHALLOW ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION RECORED 4/16/2002 (FT. MSL) Ell 0 J 30 A4 60 ,4? APPROXIMATE HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 APPROXIMATE VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET A' 10 -10 - 20 (FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL) - 30 g W - 40 -50 -60 Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A -A' (SOUTH -TO- NORTH) 016110.00/P02SK007 FIGURE 7 0A B C 0 E F C H 2 3 4 • MW- 26C •M W- 26A ,MW -268 •MW -29C •MW -29A $MW -298 OFF -HWY BUILDING CB MW -31A \ MW- 39A SVE SYSTEM TRENCH 4MW -38A CB USE OF DOCUMENTS THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING THE INCORPORATED DESIGNS, IS AN INSTRUMENT OF SEANCE FOR THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF KENNEDY /ARKS CONSULTANTS. N0. REVISION DATE BY 0 0 SCALES 25mn, IF THIS BAR IS NOT DIMENSION SHOWN. AOAIST SCALES ACCORDINGLY. EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (ESC) NOTES 1. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE ESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPLACEMENT, AND UPGRADING OF THESE ESC FACUTIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 2. THE ESC FACTURES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES, AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT LADEN WATER DOES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM OR MCATE APPUCABLE WATER OUAUTY STANDARDS. 3. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED SITE CONDITIONS. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, THESE ESC FACUTIES SHALL BE UPGRADED (E.G., INCREASED INLET PROTECTION, ETC.) AS NEEDED FOR STORM EVENTS. 4. THE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY BY THE CONTRACTOR AND MAINTAINED AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE DOOR CONTINUED FUNCTIONING. 5. THE ESC FACILITIES IN INACTIVE AREAS SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED WITHIN THE 48 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM EVENT. 6. PROVIDE APPROPRIATE MEASURES AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. AREA DRAIN STRAW BALES FOR ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTION SCALE: NONE SUSPENSON CORDS/RODS OVERFLOW CATCH BASIN INSERT EXISTING CATCH BASH CONSTRUCTION NOTES CONSTRUCTION 1. APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MUST BE EMPLOYED AT ALL TIMES IN ACCORDANCE WITH GUIDEUNES DEVELOPED IN THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON AUGUST 2001. 2. EXCAVATED SOIL IS TO BE PLACED WEST OR SOUTH OF THE SAWCUT TRENCH AND SECURELY COVERED WITH PLASTIC SHEETING UNTIL BACKER!. OR OFFSITE DISPOSAL IS COMPLETE. POST CONSTRUCTION 1. REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION FACUTIES FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. 2. CLEAN AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OF ALL ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEBRIS FROM ALL AREAS INCLUDING CATCH BASINS, PIPES, MANHOLES AND VAULTS. CATCH BASIN GRATE FRONT VIEW STORM PIPE CATCH BASIN GRATE SIDE VIEW I CATCH BASIN INSERT DETAIL SCALE: NONE 1" REBAR FOR INSERT REMOVAL 2" z 2" z 3/4" RUBBER BLOC( EXPANSION RESTRAINT CATCH BASH INSERT EXISTING CATCH BASIN 0 10 20 40 60 SCALE: 1 " =20' -0 DESIGNED RHO DRAWN PMB/ORM PACCAR INC. SEATTLE. WASHINGTON AIR SPARGING AND SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM L CHECKED ECK Kennedy /Jenks Consultants FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND DETAILS FILE NAME 036025.00 -C4 JOB NO. 036025.00 DATE 11/2003 SHEET OF C4 PRINT DATE: May 12, 2004 — 11:28am OT -01 -04 02:41 From- NASHINGT.OLDINGS JUN -30.04 11;26 From:PACCAR CORPORATE 8TATF OP WWI COUNTY OPK1HG 206 - 6135301 T -6T4 P.02/02 F -241 426- 4094213• T -S31 P.0Z /03 Job -4T0 On al? TUKWil.4 Depart nrsr ofCwnawnIO Developntenl 6301) Swimmer Boulevard, Tukwila, W4 56186 TolapA'wte; (200)4$1-3670 (2O4) 431.360 f;- arulfr.jtt c sl�n(rTcLmku�ila vyp,p AFFWOAVrr Olt OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY ss The hmdenipard OWN; duly sworn and ulna anh paean follows: 1, Ian the carrot minor orate property w8hialiithltosubjectorthimapplication XXXXMI 100M0aKAUl 9IOZhhirgitaX*0161E01CD11Cd01Ylti ON VWS )1116D11110121IRO01010PX1020210 013081DertitF 3, The applioadtes Ls lrfiosub :WoodwatntybgrrAedeandoeataeat. 4, Owe/ swtt;duCtty is loysea•taeft3,crg COTMCirb ortstgc rawasalli property rho To ustIvor'Owersmaipropet loostad st : ' • far the Ramose or wins, m " Inc trrcasoryro601110aIbst114post i, Owner otos to hold due City harfnleaa far say loss or dotage to prawn or phariany mourn Ohl1I1e prim p[ayny dating the City'a pays 1d!awpm winsteelossorrlamsneisthDrC atdT oft; sataaegiigtataoof Mho My, ti. TitoCiy Ma s alon, cohost theapplicationWtrhoust>: 11tndaClbcLIhheappltowHaastrotrespondmgvoi6crequoslsfor itotlktallha -Comoro Appliewianche k)isi "withiahiltp*(QO)dOYL 1. pwKespone vvnosa too Ci ly infotouian legadi ®r ninety (tra) or ntahC days, shill ba reuse to canwi iba applicmiaa(s) withal; raAald of fps ExECUSma j,11 ayne ,.,._tcro),_1�� > oa Juge 3D 20 4 Richard E. Banaar� )0.6th Ave. NE, Bellevue, WA ._ 044060 L. (Signs an nth day prrtamally opttrerad Wiwi ma Law 4 rd E ISIPPLI/S•74 to mo known to bathe injvideul who Mood the rinablos It4NAmu im salalawIadgad that gag »B'ad tha acne o higla voisintary act mid dad for the tmz, ardi purpoasa mendaud thatsln. stlggr:R188D AND swami TOUT ICON •nus mail .RAY CS 01 L .2nd ARV )22 LTit iarlhaSlew fW lY n molding al /la,�e � IIUI SEP. 7. 2004 10:25AM REA*TATEW • mar nz • d4 c�.. -KRM TU,... Ms. Joanna Spencer, Engineer City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Insurance Auto Actions (IAA) 8801 East Marginal Way South Tukwila, Washington City File No E04 -014 / Our Job No. 11419 Dear Ms. Spencer. This letter is to formalize an understanding between Insurance Auto Auctions (IAA) and the City of Tukwila concerning stormwater improvements for the above - referenced project. • N0. 052 pP. 2 CML ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES September 2, 2004 SEP 07Z094 PURL W RKS RECEIVED SEP 0 3 2004 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS IAA is currently pursuing Demolition and Tentative Improvement Permits at the above-referenced 5� either In accordance with the Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance ((MDNS E04-014), t I satisfaction of 1) provide pretreatment of stormwater prior to discharge to the river, 2) the City Public Works Department that the existing stormwater e system as adequate pretreatment provisions, or 3) revise/expand/modify the existing storm drainage provide 9 pretreatment. is proceeding with the evaluation of the - .existing stormwater system as necessary to satisfy the �rovements, if any, be deferred ntitil the folloewing year during the dry construction season. stormwater P IAA anticipates the issuance of required permits within' the next couple of weeks and intends to start demolition /construction activities immediately thereafter. However, if the storrnwater improvements are required, they will likely occur within the 200 -foot shoreline setback, thereby requiring a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Shoreline Permit) and a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) to perform the necessary work A typical requirement of an } PA will only allow work within the river to occur during a summer fish window. Equally important, the stormwater improvements should occur during dry weather to minimize erosion potential and to avoid potential adverse impacts to the downstream drainage course. Paccar (former occupant) is in the process of preparing materials in order to file a Shoreline Permit for necessary environmental romediation activities within the shoreline setback area. The Shoreline Permit application, in addition to the remediation work, would include some stormwater system improvements. We anticipate this application to be filed with the City within a couple of weeks, IAA may elect to coordinate its storrnwater pretreatment plans with Paccar's work. Once the Demolition and Tentative Improvements Permits are issued, IAA would proceed with demolition and construction activity immediately, and continue through the fall construction season. IAA's objective is to occupy the site and begin business operations during the fourth quarter of 2004. The improvements to the stormwater system would occur following the issuance of the Shoreline Permit and most likely in conjunction with Paccar's work during the dry months of 2005 (Summer 2005). For the City to allow IAA to defer the stormwater improvement, IAA agrees to the following: 1. Prior to requesting an Occupancy Permit, IAA would submit plans, and receive the City's review and aFproval, for the stormwater improvements as necessary to satisfy the condition of the MDNS. These plans shall either 1) provide pretreatment of stormwater prior to discharge to the river, 2) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Department 18218 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251.6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECUL A. CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.baighaueen.com ' SEP. 7. 2004 10:26AM REA•TATEw ors ere 04 �,� »�1PM TU�...� Ms. Joanna Spencer, Engineer City of Tukwila NO. 052 PP. 3 _2. September 2, 2004 that the existing stormwater system has adequate pretreatment provisions, or 3) revise/expand /modify the existing storm drainage to provide adequate pretreatment. provide the City of Tukwila with a 2. Prior to requesting an Occupancy Permit, IAA would p , financial guarantee, in a the form f a performance ei emennd, in the amount of 150 percent the estimated cost to comp 3. Prior to requesting an Occupancy Permit and prior to the completion of the required stormwater improvements, IAA would install absorbent materials specifically designed for oil removal l a in catch basin separation and cede on-site catch basins /manholes as an intenm measure enhance 4. IAA will maintain a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which will include ue operational best management practices, outlining appropriate housekeeping measures to protect the downstream watercourse. ents occurring 5. IA.A, shall file a Shoreline Permit application in conjunction �mction with Paccar's Shoreline Permit within the 200 -foot shoreline setback (possible application). 6. The stormwater improvements shall be completed no later than September 30, 2005. Please acknowledge your acceptance of this arrangement by signing the enclosed copy of the letter in the space provided and return it to my attention: Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions or comments, or need additional clarification, please let me know. Respectfully, JSG /vj /ath 11419c.007.doc CITY. OF TUKW ILA By Its Jay S. Grubb, P.B. Vice President 3 04 ate oy SEP. 7. 2004 10:26AM REA =STATE IP STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF COOK 11 ll I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sco=ur 4.1 i T" is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that said person signed this instrument, on oath stated that said person was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the $. U. p A C r• D of insurance Auto Auctions, Inc., an Illinois corporation, to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated this 1213/ day of •„CppA • , 2004, ) ) ss. • NO. 052 P. 4 .1 OFFICIAL SEAL LINDA JURCZYK NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EIIPIRES:01109106 O1AAAnA /1 AAA I (Signature ototary) i, Ai oft- 77) 2c Yy (Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary) Notary public ind for the State of Illinois, residing at My appointment expires 1- g - 0.5 COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted at a later date for use at the public hearing (e.g. colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 - 431 -3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206- 433 -0179 (Department of Public Works). Check items submitted with application Information Required May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: X 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. X 2. Completed ESA Screening Checklist, State Environmental Checklist and drawings (5 copies). X 3. One set of any plans submitted reduced to 8 1/2" by 11 ". One complete set of PMTS of the final drawing set will be required prior to final approval. X 4. Application Fee $500. ** 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA Review. PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: X 6. Mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Number of sets depends on the notice requirements of the underlying permit, check with Planning Staff. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings - -e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks- -must be included (see Public Notice Materials section). X 7. King County Assessor's map(s) that shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot (if mailing labels are required). X 8. A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that the application is complete (see Public Notice Materials section). PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: X 9. Vicinity Map with site location. N/A 10. Provide four (4) copies of any sensitive area studies as needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). * ** 11. Any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". ** To be submitted at a later date by the selected contractor. * ** Drawings included with this application illustrate the proposed work areas and general information required for this application. Additional drawings may be provided by the selected contractor with the Public Works permit. CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 . Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan a,ci.Wkwila,wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: I. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. locate 4. Owner at asd g y pryel arn`s i nab Wd e�JOUthrre,re I UKW1 ttofpArupon Owner's real property, for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days. 7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. I ict EXECUTEDat.eevue� (city), ANA- T (stak),on I ( R.E. Bangert, II, Vice President (Print Name) ; (' L 777 106th Ave NE, Bellevue, WA 98004 (Address) 425- 468 -7250 (P.' Nutt) (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instnunent and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as bis /her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSC�RIBEDAklidiffiRNflKiliFORE ME ON 7-1h DAY OF 6e1974em' r► . aoo� ...••••• " 90 , � , 44?.r OM 4.4% )27 PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington X. r nd 4- m . D e t /c. 45 S 5 Q„ `► NOTAA 0 f ding at Ze / /eye/ e, &/9 r 01- /7 -o '.0411� Cot'(t rission expires on pu8`,` 0OF �WAB�,'�4 . 14T AVE S E'IHANGE Kennedy /Jenks Consultants SOURCE: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic - Bathymetric Quadrangle, Seattle South, Washington. Dated 1983. PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SITE LOCATION MAP 046001.04 /LOCATION.VSD Approximate Scale in Miles FIGURE 1 OIL/WATER SEPARIAATOR uT \\ .\ �////- NDRITTWST EXCAVARON AREA APPRO• 1.+00 CY .. GROUNDWATER TREATMENT AREA APPROX. 2.200 CV Y IR -PUCE PIPE UNWG AREA MAINTENANCE POWER HOUSE AS /SYC TRENCH (INCLUDED UNDER CURRENT 9E0REUNE PERMIT) \ \\ \\/ \ \ \\ \\ \\ 5j \ _ \ \ 0 FRAME TALL AREA ,APPROX. 5.750 CY pff.HA'. /2) D4LDP:G �:• L PARTS WAREHOUSE O O EMPLOYEE PARKING / / / / / / / / /// • , / / /, / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /,( MIDGE OuIEAU�— MEW 0RA11 AREA ARPPO, 800 C+ "n SHEET PRUNC A URA AT WD PPPOTTMATE ■00 ¢AR J ROODPUEN BOUADWP,- BASE RWO W.I. • BAG INLVD 1929 DARMH MEAN KCI WATER MAR • 464 (NM +929 DANA) V 5OUTH 00,41 PIP PAP BM. — SMPELmE •IANAGENRNT BOUNDAR, APPRO. AO ,POW IWE MEAN xA,x WARP MAPL IS R,E DNAAAeSx wATER..• i TOUCH -UP PAINT \ APING RAMP SOUTHWEST STO AREA APPROX. 16,200 CY VENDOR REJECT PE COIRAC CCNCARY ACCESS GA MANUFACTURING BUILDING RAMP ME SHOP EMPLOYEE PARKING `SNORELPNE MANAGEMENT BOUVDAP, APPROX. 100 (RCM ME MEAN HIGH ram, Ma P• OE THE DUWAYSn WATERWAY SHOREUNC MANAGEENT BOUNDARY APPRDX. 200 PROM THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK a ME OUWA05H WATERWAY LEGEND APPROAIMATE SOIL REMOVAL AREA AND ESTIMATED FEMOVAL VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) APPPO•:IMATE AREA OF STORM LINE PEPAIP WORK: (ACPJAL AREA MAY BE LESS) SOURCE. BASE DRAWING PROVIDED BR PACCAR INC. NOTES: 1. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. 2. APPROXIMATE REMOVAL AREAS AND VOLUMES MAY VARY BASED ON SITE CONDITIONS. 3. WORK IN E'ACAVATTON AREAS MAY INCLUDE REPAIR, REPLACEMENT. OR REMOVAL OF STORM DRAIN CATCH BASINS, VAULTS, AND /OR PIPES. 4. NO WORK IS ANTICIPATED WITHIN THE DUWAMISH WATERWAY. ALL WORK AREAS ARE LOCATED EAST OF THE EXISTING SHEET PILING BULKHEAD AND RIP -RAP BANK. 5. A LICENSED GEOTECHN;CAL ENGINEER WILL PROVIDE OVERSIGHT FOR ALL E<CAVATION WORK NEAR SITE STRUCTURES (BUILDINGS, BULKHEAD, AND RIP -RAP BANK). 60 120 APPROX SCALE IN FEET Kennedy /Jenks Consultants PACCAR INC SEATTLE, WA SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPROXIMATE EXCAVATION AREAS 046001.04 -FIG_2 FIGURE 2 B APPROX NORTHWEST 2100 rya ZION AREA �•. / 'AL C •: GROUNDWATER, TREATMENT AREA L' APPROX. 2,200 CY SOME - P.MJ a EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL IESCI NOTES CONSTRUCTION NOTES B .n 5'yfrAn.La,�pµR,x� \ CB I ICB 11118 .�CB,L 1s 1 EK r... REP. 0 , A ESC PIN6.w D MESC F MA CONSTRUCTION I .YJ IDE ... AM. Cr AM DPOAOBIG o f CC ESC DIOR S 6 of .P.11115 1 PE OORTRACTOI I. MNOPRIAR 0.1.7. SM.. 11051111 P..1104 1161..11.1 1 RACl1¢3 M6t BE C.O..T ALL lR6N ..,..7!..'t' L ME ESC FAa5113 9.1 CH DIS P. IR. ER f151ROCTED M CCODU4 WM oWNES 05115ED M DC RAD.L. SEAR COWNCII RiN EXCAVA. AC511E5 AW N 91CH • MADDER OISARNEMT Cr MOH. S7051.7. 650.1FM7 .5. FOR AS TO DO. .7 SMOOT LAW1 RAM DOES MOT OMR RE .11111.61.0.1 51116T 2101. OR.. STS255 OR N1AR MP...1ER 11A117 S.... �CS CCB ' FRAME DRILL AREA APPROX. 5.750 CY PJICTH6 6..11V•0 MIDDLE (i]TEALL AREA — APPROE 800 CL 1GgICB SI1115 - XI/5 01 yPt L. O.aa T i �CB" '1:. 17 !LAD EAWESTA.1 SOUTHWEST STORAGE AREA x APPROX. 16,200 CY n.d* 7. • USE OF DOCUMENTS DART M. Ino 1. ERUVARD SOL 6 N RE PU¢D 1N VC V.ITT OF EACH E1UW nOx ,S Rra.ESC EXURB .0•01 w 116 0..w ARE 11f I.. S(CMELY COVERED W M RASA 9EEnNl W R O. . 20 9R 1101Ai101E MOND DC OR 1F92 DISPOSAL 6 OWIIR 51PIK11 11MC. 1125E ESC FA.al15 SNNL BE 0P 10E0 IEC..... man R62CDOl EEC) AS x6OED FOR STORM (VEND M 6C F... S..5 RE WPM. OA. BY DE CCHnACTO POST CONSTRUCTION 4D .17ARIED Y rECESS.RY TO MORE MR .7.10 encnotwa 1. MAORI A111EWOMY 01090 .11011. 1. UO1II3 FOLC 0 CWS1RUCe011 COw1EDON S. lD ACR1D6S N MCOW ARM SHAM BE m. u1AE 111151 1K ..RS FOLpeNC • S1O01 51E1L. 2 FROM CLEAN ALN0AKu 4106'O4CAi601 6 1S HPEC . RISE .� YALL15. 6. PRO.fE AREAS 511 R 0 SIRES AS 4CESSMY 10 OGRE MA1 ALL PA CO .AREAS ARE PID1 05AN FIR n2 RAN. OF M PRa U CATCH BASIN INSERT NOTES. A no... BASH x CLEAN CRT MO OEMS FR. GRAM AMC ] UY M WEN BASH NSOI 0190E iH BASH A ROUGE M W ba.. RNDOIG 14 NSOT FAIRC ¢NON nE Ou1C NM nE CA. BASW FRAME R RCM 5 10 06 USED 5510 Tux oat 1511 FA. 10 CLEW EOM tuvNC A S TO H. MC STIR ANBM n( MSOE Cr W.I. r FILTER FABRIC RETRIEVAL STRAP PLAN FILTER FABRIC FILTERED WATER PRINT F CATCH BASIN INSERT DETAL SCAL OVERFLOW TO BYPASS PEAK STORM VCLUMES STRAW BALES FOR ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY INLET PROTECTION sLA1e N1E ®CB SYMBOL LEGEND E16. CATCH BASH A REMOVROLM 51105 OROS) N.O ESTIMATED o XO 40 B0 ORA. 5555 PACCAR INC. SEATTLE, WASIRIOTON SOIL EXCAVATION AREAS Kennedy/Jenks µ Conoits rte EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND DETAILS RM E .11.0-110-1 0e xa 16D051 11/:01 FIG -1 11 U • r P E N • • SEPA Environmental Review Public Comment Materials Mailing Labels and Tax Assessor Maps Revision to Shoreline Permit L03 -067 PACCAR Facility, 8801 East Marginal Way South King County Home News Services Comments Search Parcel Map and Data Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600060 8801 EAST MARGINAL WY S KENWORTH MOTOR CORP "The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, Indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County." Parcel Number 0001600014 Address Zipcode Taxpayer BOEING COMPANY THE 8625 EAST MARGINAL WAY S Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer KING COUNTY 0007400032 8800 EAST MARGINAL WAY S Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 0001600060 1619 S 92ND PL MCELROY GEORGE & ASSOC INC Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 0007400033 8811 EAST MARGINAL WY S BOEING COMPANY THE P Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 2824049007 6505 PERIMETER RD S KING COUNTY Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600010 9229 EAST MARGINAL WY S CONTAINER PROPERTIES LLC Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600015 9229 EAST MARGINAL WAY S BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600124 9200 EAST MARGINAL WAY S KING COUNTY Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600150 9100 EAST MARGINAL WY S 98108 WOOD MEADOWS L L C Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600160 9010 EAST MARGINAL WAY S KING COUNTY Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5624201032 9725 EAST MARGINAL WY S BOEING COMPANY THE Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5624201034 KING CO MUSEUM OF FLIGHT Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5624201038 BOEING COMPANY THE Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 7883608601 1420 S TRENTON ST BOEING COMPANY THE King County I GIS Center I News I Services I Comments I Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. King County • Home News Services Parcel Map and Data Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer KENWORTH MOTOR CORP 5422600060 8801 EAST MARGINAL WY S "The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County." • Comments King County I GIS Center I News I Services I Comments I Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. Search King County Home News Services Parcel Map and Data Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer 5422600060 8801 EAST MARGINAL WY S KENWORTH MOTOR CORP "The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or Information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County." Comments King County I GIS Center I News I Services I Comments I Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. Search King County Home News Services Parcel Map and Data fi 0007400033 { l(5} Green River • 5422600060 9 i 5422600414 County_ • . '{ 148fl r' �_.` 0001600460 z ;& ..., x • (C) 2CO214ng .., _ , _.__.._.... > _ ... .. _ . . . _ W - Parcel Number 5422600060 Address 8801 EAST MARGINAL WY S Zipcode Taxpayer KENWORTH MOTOR CORP "The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, Incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County." • Comments King County I GIS Center I News I Services I Comments I Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. Search King County • Home News Services Parcel Map and Data Parcel Number Address Zipcode Taxpayer KENWORTH MOTOR CORP 5422600060 8801 EAST MARGINAL WY S 'The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the Information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County." • Comments King County I GIS Center I News I Services I Comments I Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. Search Parcel Name Site Address Geo Area Block Parcel 542260 -0060 KENWORTH MOTOR CORP 542260 -0060 KENWORTH MOTOR CORP 8801 EAST MARGINAL WY S 35-65 Spec Area 540-10 Parcel Data Present Use Zoning Jurisdiction Property Type Code Lot Code 223 MIC/H TUKWILA C 2 &3 Legal Description MEADOWS THE MCNATTS DC 38 UNREC TR 3 TGW POR TR 2 DAF BEG NE COR SD TR 2 TH W 1574.72 FT TO NW COR TH SELY ALG WLY LN 237.76 FT TH E 1053.10 FT TH S 23 -02 -00 E 46.03 FT TH E 561.38 FT TO ELY LN TH NWLY 297.03 FT TO BEG LESS RR R/W Land SqFt Acres Water Sewer /Septic Rainier Olympics Cascades Territorial Seattle Location Bank Tide/Shore Restricted 1,058,508 24.30 WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC No No No No No DUWAMISH No No No Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Topography Traffic Sound Lk Wash Lk Samm Lk/Riv /Crk Other Waterfront Footage Access Rights Prox. Invluence Poor Quality No No No No No No No No 0 No No No Gross Sq Ft 369,700 Building Nbr Year Built Effective Yr 1) ASSEMBLY 1930 1959 Building / Imovement Nei Sq Ft 370,120 Gross Sq Ft Net Sq Ft Construction Page 1 of 3 165,600 165,600 MASONRY Parcel Name Site Address Geo Area Block Parcel 000160-0014 BOEING COMPANY THE 000160 -0014 BOEING COMPANY THE 8625 EAST MARGINAL WY S 35 -65 Spec Area 625 -10 Parcel Data Present Use Zoning Jurisdiction Property Type Code Lot Code 316 MIC/H TUKWILA C POR Legal Description BUCKLEY JOHN -D C #42 & 45 LOT "A" TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO L 2000 -080 REC NO 20011108900013 WCH IS POR OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 STR 33 -24-04 Land SqFt Acres Water Sewer /Septic Rainier Olympics Cascades Territorial Seattle Location Bank Tide/Shore Restricted 428,482 9.84 WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC No No No No No No No No No Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Topography Traffic Sound Lk Wash Lk Samm Lk/Riv /Crk Other Waterfront Footage Access Rights Prox. Invluence Poor Quality No No No No No No No No 0 No No No Tax Omit Yr Yr 2003 0 2002 0 2001 0 2000 0 1999 0 1998 0 1997 0 1996 0 TaxValue Reason Tax Roll History Appraised Land Val Imp Val 4,284,800 4,819,800 5,540,000 3,878,000 3,878,000 Taxable Total Land Val Imp Val 0 4,284,800 4,284,800 0 4,819,800 4,819,800 0 5,540,000 5,540,000 O 3,878,000 3,878,000 O 3,878,000 3,878,000 3,878,000 3,878,000 3,878,000 Total 0 4,284,800 0 4,819,800 0 5,540,000 O 3,878,000 0 3,878,000 O 3,878,000 O 3,878,000 0 3,878,000 Page 1 of 2 • • Parcel 000160 -0060 MCELROY GEORGE & ASSOC INC Parcel Data Parcel 000160 -0060 Present Use Code 195 Name MCELROY GEORGE & ASSOC INC Zoning I Site Address 1620 S 92ND PL Jurisdiction KING COUNTY Geo Area 36-40 Property Type Code C Block Lot POR Legal Description BUCKLEY JOHN - DC #42 & 45 LOT 4 KC SHORT PLAT NO 682074 REC NO 8301250794 SD PLAT DAF - BEG NXN OF S MGN OF DIRECTOR ST & ELY LN OF 14TH S TH S 89 -46 -57 E ALG SD S MGN & SD MGN PROD E 1486.627 FT TO NXN OF EXT OF W LN R/W OF COMMERCIAL WATERWAY #1 SD W LN BEING 500 FT W & PLW E LN SD R/W TH S 15 -00 W ALG SD W LN 683.966 FT TH N 89 -46 -57 W 1670.781 TOE MGN 14TH S TH N ALG SD E MGN 660 FT TO BEG LESS ST HWY AF 4857821 LESS ST Land Data Land SqFt 288,127 Use Exemption Acres 6.61 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location DUWAMISH Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Prox. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Gross Sq Ft Building / Improvement 71,650 Ne Sq Ft 71,650 Building Nbr 1) WHSE BLDG J Gross Sq Ft 26,600 Year Built 1992 Net Sq Ft 26,600 Effective Yr 1992 Construction MASONRY Page 1 of 3 Parcel 000740 -0032 KING COUNTY Parcel Data Parcel 000740 -0032 Present Use Code 106 Name KING COUNTY Zoning MIC/H Site Address Jurisdiction TUKWILA Geo Area 35 -70 Property Type Code C Block Lot Legal Description VAN ASSELT H -D C # 50 POR OF D C LY ELY OF E MARGINAL WAY & WLY OF LN BEG AT PT ON N LN OF MCNATTS D C 1749 FT W OF E LN OF SEC 33 -24 -04 TH W 610.26 FT TOE LN MARGINAL WY TH N 23 -42-45 W 542.00 FT TH N 86 -33 -36 E 81.95 FT TH N 76 -12 -02 E 176.08 FT TH N 55 -40-44 E 66.05 FT TH S 40 -29 -29 E 101.88 FT TH N 43 -22 -31 E 260.15 FT TH N 09 -22 -05 E 64.00 FT TH S 35 -53 -15 E 104.88 FT TH S 19 -03 -01 E 693.06 FT TO BEG TGW TRIANGLE STRIP IN TR 4 DAVIS MEADOWS TRS BEG AT SW COR TH N 19 -03 -01 W 4 FT TH SELY TAP ON N BNDRY OF MCNATT D C 50 FT E OF BEG TH W 50 FT TO BEG Land Data Land SqFt 354,108 Use Exemption Acres 8.13 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location No Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Prox. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Page 1 of 3 Parcel Name Site Address Geo Area Block Parcel 000740 -0033 BOEING COMPANY THE 000740 -0033 BOEING COMPANY THE 8811 EAST MARGINAL WY S 35-65 Spec Area 625 -10 Parcel Data Present Use Zoning Jurisdiction Property Type Code Lot Code 246 MIC/H TUKWILA C POR Legal Description VAN ASSELT H -D C #50 LOT "B" TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO L 2000 -080 REC NO 20011108900013 WCH IS POR OF SW 1/4 AND SE 1/4 33 -24 -04 Land SqFt Acres Water Sewer /Septic Rainier Olympics Cascades Territorial Seattle Location Bank Tide/Shore Restricted 842,675 19.35 WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC No No No No No DUWAMISH No No No Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Topography Traffic Sound Lk Wash Lk Samm Lk/Riv /Crk Other Waterfront Footage Access Rights Prox. Invluence Poor Quality No No No No No No No No 0 No No No Gross Sq Ft 324,258 Building Nbr Year Built Effective Yr Building / Imovement Net Sq Ft 324,258 1) ASSEMBLY BUILDING (BLDG 14 -01) 1967 1980 Gross Sq Ft Net Sq Ft Construction Page 1 of 3 316,100 316,100 PREFAB STEEL • • Parcel 282404 -9007 KING COUNTY Parcel Data Parcel 282404 -9007 Present Use Code 247 Name KING COUNTY Zoning IG2 U/85 Site Address 6505 PERIMETER RD S Jurisdiction SEATTLE Geo Area 35 -70 Property Type Code C Block Lot Legal Description POR OF SECS 20 -24 -04 & 28 -24 -04 & 29 -24 -04 & 33 -24 -04 & 34 -24 -04 & 03 -23 -04 & 04 -23 -04 TGW PORS OF DAVIS MEADOW TRACTS & ELIZABETH ADD & VAC FAIRGROUNDS ADD & HORTONS 1ST SUBD OF GEORGETOWN & THE MEADOWS TRACTS & QUEEN ADD & QUEEN ADD SUPL - TGW PORS OF FOLG DONATION LAND CLAIMS - JOHN BUCKELY #42 & LUTHER M COLLINS #46 & TIMOTHY GROW #44 & #48 & SAMUEL A MAPLE #49 & FRANCIS MCNATT #38 & HENRY VAN ASSELT #50 TGW POR OF FILLED BED OF DUWAMISH RIVER OF -- BAAP OF NXN BTWN WLY MGN OF AIRPORT WAY SOUTH & SELY LN OF SD QUEEN ADD SUPL TH IN A GENERALLY SWLY DIRECTION ALG SD SELY LN TO SW COR TRACT A SD QUEEN ADD SUPL & SLY EXTN OF E LN OF W 1/2 SD LUTHER M COLLINS D L C TH S ALG SD SLY EXTN TO SLY LN OF NLY 1/2 OF SD FILLED BED OF DUWAMISH RIVER TH SWLY ALG SD SLY LN TO ELY MGN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH TH CONT SELY ALG SD ELY MGN TO NXN WITH A LN PLT AND 825.00 FT S OF N LN OF JOHN BUCKLEY D L C #42 TH S 54 -14 -57 E TO ELY MGN OF FILLED BED OF DUWAMISH RIVER TH S 35- 49-39 E 104.93 FT TO NLY EXTN OF WLY LN OF DAVIS MEADOW TRATS TH SLY ALG SD WLY LN TO N LN OF TRACT 8 OF THE MEADOWS TRACTS TH WLY ALG SD N LN N 89 -16 -16 W 197.97 FT TH S 29 -52 -38 E 520.79 FT TH N 89 -58 -17 W 230.59 FT TH N 29 -52 -38 W 524.20 FT TH N 89 -16 -16 W 179.98 FT TO ELY MGN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH TH SLY ALG SD ELY MGN TO SLY LN OF TRACT 7 OF SD MEADOWS TRACTS TH ELY ALG SD S LN A DIST OF 474.62 FT TH S 29 -52 -38 E A DIST OF 2695.00 FT MORE OR LESS TH S 21 -20 -38 E TO N LN OF NORFOLK ST (CITY OF SEATTLE R/W) TH ELY ALG N MGN OF SD R/W TO EAST LN OF SECTION 04 -23 -04 TH CONT ELY & NELY ALG SD N MGN TO WLY MGN OF AIRPORT WAY SOUTH EXTN TH NWLY ALG SD WLY MGN TO P 0 B -- LESS POR OF SECTIONS 28 -24 -04 & 29 -24 -04 DAF - BEG AT 1/4 COR COMMON TO SD SECTIONS TH S ALG SEC LN 575.27 FT TO TPOB TH S 28 -42 -05 E 199.26 FT TH S 61 -17 -55 W 464.00 FT TH S 40 -59-48 W TO NELY MGN OF EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH TH NWLY ALG SD MGN 492.927 FT TH N 40 -59-48 E 569.836 FT TH N 28 -42 -05 W 483.276 FT TH N 61 -17 -55 E 187.06 FT TO NXN WITH E & W C/L OF SD SEC 29 TH CONT N 61 -17 -55 E 276.94 FT TH S 28 -42 -05 E 151.09 FT TO NXN WITH SD C/L TH CONT S 28 -42 -05 E 654.90 FT TO TPOB LESS TRIANGLE STRIP IN TRACT 4 OF DAVIS MEADOWS TRS -BEG AT SW COR TH N 19 -03-01 W 4.00 FT TH SELY TAP ON N BDRY OF MCNATT D L C 50.00 FT E OF BEG TH W 50.00 FT TO BEG -- SUBJ TO FORMER TRANS LN R/W - TGW POR BLKS 1 & 2 & 5 & 6 & 9 & 12 OF QUEEN ADD LY SELY OF SOUTH ALBRO PLACE & VAC STS & ALLEYS ADJ LESS STS - TGW POR LOT 5 BLK 6 SD QUEEN ADD LY NWLY OF S ALBRO PL - TGW ENTIRE REPLAT OF QUEEN ADD SUPL & VAC STS ADJ LESS C/M RGTS OVER POR LOT 1 BLK 5 SD QUEEN ADD LY NELY OF A LN FR PT 16.47 FT WEST OF NE COR TO PT 24.32 FT S OF NE COR LESS C/M RGTS OVER LOTS 5 -13 BLK 6 OF SD QUEEN ADD - LESS C/M RGTS OVER POR LOT 36 BLK 9 OF SD QUEEN ADD LY SWLY OF LN RNG FR PT 10.12 FT N OF SW COR SD LOT 36 TAP 6.85 FT E OF SD SW COR - LESS C/M RGTS OVER LOTS 1 -13 & OVER LOTS 26 -29 & OVER POR OF LOT 25 BLK 10 OF SD QUEEN ADD SUPL LY N OF LN - BEG ON EAST LN OF SD LOT 25 A DIST OF 1.56 FT N OF SE COR TH NWLY TAP ON N LN OF S 10.00 FT OF SD LOT 108.28 FT E OF W LN TH W PLW S LN 108.28 FT TO W LN OF SD LOT 25 - LESS POR TRACTS AB C &D SD QUEEN ADD SUPL & VAC ST ADJ & NLY 1/2 SD FILLED BED OF DUWAMISH RIVER DAF - BAAP ON NWLY LN SD TR B 100.00 FT SWLY FR MOST NLY COR TH S 33 -36 -10 E TO SLY LN SD NLY 1/2 TH SWLY ALG SD SLY LN TO E LN W 1/2 SD COLLINS D L C TH N ALG SD E LN TO NXN WITH C/L OF VAC SOUTH GREELY STREET TH NELY ALG SD C/L TAP N 33 -36 -10 W OF BEG TH S 33 -36 -10 E 30.00 FT TO BEG TGW POR W 1/2 SD COLLINS D L C LY ELY OF ELLIS AVENUE SOUTH (MABLE STREET) SLY OF ELIZABETH ADD & LY NLY OF TRACT DEEDED TO CITY OF SEATTLE BY ORD NO 38426 TGW POR SEC 29 -24 -04 LY ELY OF SD D L C & LY WLY OF WLY & NLY SHORELINE OF SD FILLED RIVER BED TGW POR SD HORTONS 1ST SOUTH ALBRO PLACE & VAC ST ADJ TGW BLK 1 & LOTS 1 -6 & LOTS 11 -15 BLK 2 OF SD ELIZABETH ADD & VAC POR SOUTH ELIZABETH ST ADJ Land Data Land SqFt 25,934,914 Use Exemption Acres 595.38 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier . No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Page 1 of 11 • • Parcel 542260 -0010 CONTAINER PROPERTIES LLC Parcel Data Parcel 542260 -0010 Present Use Code 245 Name CONTAINER PROPERTIES LLC Zoning MIC/H Site Address 9229 EAST MARGINAL WY S Jurisdiction TUKWILA Geo Area 35 -65 Property Type Code C Block Lot 1 -2 & POR Legal Description MEADOWS THE MC NATTS DC 38 UNREC & POR OF MC NATTS DC #38 & OF S 1/2 OF SEC 33 -24-04 LY WLY OF E MARGINAL WAY S & NLY OF A LN BEG 1374.17 FT SLY OF N LN SD DC AS MEAS ALG W MGN OF E MARGINAL WAY S & TPOB - (THE FOLG COURSES & DISTANCES PER SURVEY REC NO 20010803900001 - TH N 89 -22-40 W 14.85 FT TH N 85 -46 -07 W 486.97 FT TH N 83 -08 -12 W 117.00 FT TH S 85 -06-48 W 119.00 FT TH S 71 -58 -21 W 110.07 FT) TH S 61- 33 -40,W TO ELY MGN CWW #1 TH NWLY ALG SD MGN TAP 237.76 FT SELY OF NW COR TR 2 SD SUBD TH E 1053.10 FT TH S 23 -02 -00 E 46.03 FT TH E 561.38 FT TH SELY TO POB LESS RR R/W Land SqFt 868,101 Acres 19.93 Water WATER DISTRICT Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Y Topography No Traffic No Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location DUWAMISH Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore UPLANDS WITH TIDELANDS /SHORELANDS Pro:. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Gross Sq Ft Building / Improvement 35,148 Ne Sq Ft 35,148 Building Nbr 1) INDUSTRIAL BLDG Gross Sq Ft 22,400 Year Built 1947 Net Sq Ft 22,400 Effective Yr 1947 Construction MASONRY Page 1 of 3 • • Parcel 542260 -0015 BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE Parcel Data Parcel 542260 -0015 Present Use Right of Way/Utility, Road Name BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE Zoning MIC/H Site Address 9229 EAST MARGINAL WY S Jurisdiction TUKWILA Geo Area 35 -65 Property Type Code C Block Lot 1 -2 -3 Legal Description MEADOWS THE MC NATTS D C 38 UNREC STRIP OF LAND SIT IN TRS 1 -2 -3 THE MEADOWS & F MCNATTS DC BEG AT PT ON WLY LN OF ST HWY # 1 E MARGINAL WAY 373.77 FT SELY OF N LN OF SD DC TH SELY ON LN WH FORMS ANGLE OF 07 DEG 17 MIN FR SE TO S WITH WLY LN OF HWY DIST OF 134 FT M/L TO PT 17 FT SWLY MEAS AT R/A FR WLY LN SD HWY TH SELY 738 FT TH SELY TO PT ON WLY LN OF HWY 715.4 FT SELY OF N LN OF 2 THE MEADOWS TH NWLY ALG HWY TO BEG Land Data Land SqFt 14,671 Use Exemption Acres 0.34 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location No Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Pro:. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Page 1 of 3 Parcel 542260 -0124 KING COUNTY Parcel Data Parcel 542260 -0124 Present Use Code 247 Name KING COUNTY Zoning MIC/H Site Address Jurisdiction TUKWILA Geo Area 35-65 Property Type Code C Block Lot 5 & Legal Description THAT PORTION OF THE SE QTR OF SEC 33 TWP 24 N R 4 E WM IN KING COUNTY WA DESC AS FOLLOWS BEG AT THE NXN OF THEE MGN OF E MARGINAL WY S AND THE S LN OF SD SEC 33 TH N 22 -31 -55 W ALG SD ELY MGN A DIST OF 997.62 FT TO THE TPOB TH DEPARTING SD MGN S 87 -49 -39 E A DIST OF 77.07 FT TH N 22 -49 -02 W A DIST OF 23.50 FT TH S 87 -49 -39 E A DIST OF 89.83 FT TH S 02 -11 -39 W A DIST OF 42.19 FT TH S 88 -43-46 E A DIST OF 290.49 FT TH S 28 -43-46 E A DIST OF 89.25 FT TH S 88 -18-47 E A DIST OF 164.78 FT TO A LN THAT IS 500 FT FM AN PLW THE C/L OF RUNWAY 13R -31L TH ALG SD LN N 28 43 34 W A DIST OF 779.60 FT TH N 88 52 39 E A DIST OF 519.05 FT TO THE ELY MGN OF E MARGINAL WY S TH ALG SD MGN S 22 31 55 E 625.17 FT TO THE TPOB PER CITY OF TUK BLA ADJ NO L02 -058 REC NO 20030115900002 SD BLA BEING A POR OF THE S 1/2 OF SE QTR IN SEC 33 24 04 Land Data Land SqFt 383,443 Use Exemption Acres 8.80 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location No Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Prox. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Page 1 of 3 • • Parcel 542260 -0150 WOOD MEADOWS L L C Parcel Data Parcel 542260 -0150 Present Use Code 195 Name WOOD MEADOWS L L C Zoning MIC/H Site Address 9100 EAST MARGINAL WY S Jurisdiction TUKWILA Geo Area 35 -70 Property Type Code C Block Lot 6 Legal Description MEADOWS THE MC NATTS D C 38 UNREC POR W OF BOEING FIELD EXT Land Data Land SqFt 160,300 Use Exemption Acres 3.68 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location No Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Prox. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Building / Improvement Gross Sq Ft 52,180 Ne Sq Ft 52,180 Building Nbr 1) WAREHOUSE Gross Sq Ft 18,340 Year Built 1973 Net Sq Ft 18,340 Effective Yr 1973 Construction MASONRY Page 1 of 3 Parcel 542260 -0160 KING COUNTY Parcel Data Parcel 542260 -0160 Present Use Code 106 Name KING COUNTY Zoning MIC/H Site Address Jurisdiction TUKWILA Geo Area 35 -70 Property Type Code C Block Lot 7 -8 Legal Description MEADOWS THE MC NATTS D C 38 UNREC POR BEG ON N LN 179.98 FT E OF NW COR OF 8 TH S 89 DEG 17 MIN 51 SEC E ALG N LN 232.31 FT TH S 29 DEG 52 MIN 38 SEC E 520.79 FT TH N 89 DEG 58 MIN 17 SEC W 230.59 FT TH N 29 DEG 52 MIN 38 SEC W 524.20 FT TO BEG Land Data Land SgFt 105,900 Use Exemption Acres 2.43 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics. No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location No Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Prox. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Tax Roll History Appraised Taxable Tax Omit TaxValue Land Val Imp Val Total Land Val Imp Val Total Yr Yr Reason 2004 0 Exmpt Tax 1,059,000 0 1,059,000 0 0 0 2003 0 Exmpt Tax 1,059,000 0 1,059,000 0 0 0 2002 0 Exmpt Tax 1,059,000 0 1,059,000 0 0 0 2001 0 Exmpt Tax 1,059,000 0 1,059,000 0 0 0 2000 0 Exmpt Tax 953,100 0 953,100 0 0 0 1999 0 Exmpt Tax 953,100 3,541,600 4,494,700 0 0 0 1998 0 741,300 3,753,400 4,494,700 1997 0 741,300 2,818,700 3,560,000 1996 0 741,300 7,658,700 8,400,000 1995 0 741,300 7,658,700 8,400,000 1994 0 741,300 6,758,700 7,500,000 1993 0 741,300 6,758,700 7,500,000 1992 0 529,500 0 529,500 1991 0 529,500 0 529,500 Page 1 of 2 Parcel Name Site Address Geo Area Block Parcel 562420 -1032 BOEING COMPANY THE 562420 -1032 BOEING COMPANY THE 9725 EAST MARGINAL WY S 35 -65 Spec Area 625 -10 POR Parcel Data Present Use Zoning Jurisdiction Property Type Code Lot Code 245 MIC/H TUKWILA C POR Legal Description MOORES FIVE ACRE TRS TGW POR OF FRANCIS MCNATT DC NO 38 & POR OF ABANDONED BED OF DUWAMISH RIVER LYING BTWN E MARGINAL WAY S & ELY BDRY OF R/W OF CWW #1 & BTWN SD DC & MOORE'S FIVE AC TR & POR OF TRS 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 65, 66, 67, 68 & POR OF VAC FRANCIS AVE IN SD PLAT IN SEC 33 -24-4 & N 1/2 OF SEC 4 -23-4 DAF - BEG ON WLY MGN OF E MARGINAL WAY S AT A PT WCH BEARS N 89 -15 -54 W 2470.01 FT ALG DC LN TH S 23 -40 -59 E 1374.17 FT ALG WLY MGN OF E MARGINAL WAY S FR NXN OF LN BTWN DC OF FRANCIS MC NATT & HENRY VAN ASSELT WITH E LN OF SD SEC TO TPOB TH S 23 -39 -54 E ALG WLY MGN OF E MARGINAL WAY S 681.27 FT TAP OF NXN WITH S LN OF TR 65 OF SD PLAT TH S 62 -01-41 W 696.29 FT TO C/L OF VAC FRANCIS AVE IN SD PLAT TH N 27 -58 -19 W ALG SD C/L OF 14.67 FT M/L TO NWLY LN OF POR OF LAND CONDEMNED BY CITY OF SEATTLE ORD #82962 LYING WLY OF VAC FRANCIS AVE TH S 62 -01-41 W ALG SD NWLY LN 1079.55 FT TO ELY LN OF R W OF SD CWW #1 TH N 15 -00 -00 W ALG SD ELY LN 1069.38 FT TO N LN OF SUR PER REC NO 8108049007 TH N 61 -33 -40 E ALG SD N LN 840.02 FT TH N 70 -49 -29 E 110.173 FT TH N 83 -57 -56 E 119 FT TH S 84 -17 -04 E 117 FT TH S 86 -54 -59 E 486.97 FT TH S 89 -27 -50 E 14.94 FT TO TPOB LESS LOTS 'A'-'B' & 'C' OF TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO BLA -01 -002 REC NO 20010803900001 Land SqFt Acres Water Sewer /Septic Rainier Olympics Cascades Territorial Seattle Location Bank Tide/Shore Restricted 1,122,953 25.78 WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC No No No No No Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Topography Traffic Sound Lk Wash Lk Samm Lk/Riv /Crk Other Waterfront DUWAMISH No UPLANDS WITH TIDELANDS /SHORELANDS No Footage Access Rights Prox. Invluence Poor Quality No No No No No No No No 0 No No No Gross Sq Ft 400,851 Building / Improvement Ne Sq Ft 400,851 Page 1 of 3 Parcel Name Site Address Geo Area Block Parcel 562420-1034 KING CO MUSEUM OF FLIGHT 562420 -1034 KING CO MUSEUM OF FLIGHT 9725 EAST MARGINAL WY S 35-65 Spec Area 625 -10 POR Parcel Data Present Use Zoning Jurisdiction Property Type Code Lot Code 245 MIC/H TUKWILA C POR Legal Description MOORES FIVE ACRE TRS "REVISED LOT A" TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO BLA- 01- 002REC N020010803900001 & AFFIDAVIT OF CORRECTION REC NO. 20020215001703 WCH IS POR OF SE 1/4 OF SW 1/4 AND POR OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 STR 33 -24-04 Land SqFt Acres Water Sewer /Septic Rainier Olympics Cascades Territorial Seattle Location Bank Tide/Shore Restricted 238,860 5.48 WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC No No No No No No No No No Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Topography Traffic Sound Lk Wash Lk Samm Lk/Riv /Crk Other Waterfront Footage Access Rights Prox. Invluence Poor Quality No No No No No No No No 0 No No No Gross Sq Ft 32,340 Building Nbr Year Built Effective Yr Tax Omit Yr Yr 2003 0 2002 0 2001 0 Building / Imovement Net Sq Ft 32,340 I) CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT (BLDG 9 -04) 1991 1992 TaxValue Reason Gross Sq Ft Net Sq Ft Construction Tax Roll History Appraised Land Val Imp Val 2,388,600 2,019,000 2,388,600 1,956,700 2,505,900 1,500,000 32,340 32,340 MASONRY Taxable Total Land Val Imp Val Total 2,388,600 2,019,000 4,407,600 2,388,600 1,956,700 4,345,300 2,505,900 1,500,000 4,005,900 4,407,600 4,345,300 4,005,900 Page 1 of 2 Parcel Name Site Address Geo Area Block Parcel 562420-1038 BOEING COMPANY THE 562420 -1038 BOEING COMPANY THE 9725 EAST MARGINAL WY S 35 -65 Spec Area 625 -10 POR Parcel Data Present Use Zoning Jurisdiction Property Type Code Lot Code 245 MIC/H TUKWILA C POR Legal Description MOORES FIVE ACRE TRS "REVISED LOT C" TUKWILA BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO BLA- 01- 002REC NO20010803900001 & AFFIDAVIT OF CORRECTION REC NO. 20020215001703 WCH IS POR OF SE 1/4 OF SW 1/4 AND POR OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 STR 33 -24 -04 Land SqFt Acres Water Sewer /Septic Rainier Olympics Cascades Territorial Seattle Location Bank Tide/Shore Restricted 164,820 3.78 WATER DISTRICT PUBLIC No No No No No No No No No Land Data Views Use Exemption Environmental Topography Traffic Sound Lk Wash Lk Samm Lk/Riv /Crk Other Waterfront Footage Access Rights Prox. Invluence Poor Quality No No No No No No No No 0 No No No Tax Omit Yr Yr 2003 0 2002 2001 0 TaxValue Reason Tax Roll History Appraised Land Val Imp Val 1,648,200 1,648,200 1,708,600 412,000 412,000 0 Taxable Total Land Val Imp Val 2,060,200 2,060,200 1,708,600 1,648,200 1,648,200 1,708,600 Total 412,000 2,060,200 412,000 _.2,060,200... 0 1,708,600 Page 1 of 2 • • Parcel 788360 -8601 BOEING COMPANY THE Parcel Data Parcel 788360 -8601 Present Use Code 246 Name BOEING COMPANY THE Zoning IG2 U/65 Site Address 1420 S TRENTON ST Jurisdiction SEATTLE Geo Area 36-40 Spec Area 625 -10 Property Type Code C Block POR Lot POR Legal Description SOUTH PARK & 7 THRU 16 & 33 THRU 38 LESS W 12 FT OF 38 BLK 45 & ALL VAC HENDERSON ST ADJ LOTS 11 THRU 17 & 32 THRU 40 BLK 46 & LOTS 32 THRU 42 BLK 47 ALL IN SO PARK ADD LOTS 1 THRU 21 BLK 1 LOTS 1 THRU 28 BLK 3 LOTS I THRU 12 & 17 THRU 28 BLK 4 LESS N 16 FT OF LOT 17 & LOTS 4 -5-6 BLK 8 & LOTS 1 THRU 5 BLK 9 ALL IN SO PARK HEIGHTS LOTS I THRU 7 BLK 10 MC NATTS ST ADD TO SO PARK HEIGHTS & VAC HENDERSON ST ADJ & LOTS 1 THRU 4 LESS S 9.94 FT BLK 11 MC NATTS 1ST ADD TO SO PARK & POR J BUCKLEY DC S OF DIRECTOR ST PROD E W OF DUWAMISH WATERWAY & E OF MCNATTS 1ST ADD TO SO PARK & VAC ST S & ALLEYS ADJ & VAC 16TH AVE SE OF BLK 11 MCNATTS 1ST A DD TO SO PARK HEIGHTS & N OF S LN OF ALLEY PROD E LESS POR BEG NXN ELY MGN DALLAS AVE S & ELY EXT OF SLY MGN S DONOVAN ST TH W ALG SD ELY EXT 16.92 FT TH S 27 -29 -27 E 13.54 FT TH S 89 -46 -57 E 163.38 FT TO WLY LN DUWAMISH WATERWAY TH NLY ALG SD WLY LN 12.98 FT TH N 89 -46 -57 W 147.75 FT TO POB Land Data Land SqFt 1,198,771 Use Exemption Acres 27.52 Environmental No Water WATER DISTRICT Topography No Sewer /Septic PUBLIC Traffic No Views Rainier No Sound No Olympics No Lk Wash No Cascades No Lk Samm No Territorial No Lk/Riv /Crk No Seattle No Other No Waterfront Location No Footage 0 Bank No Access Rights No Tide/Shore No Prox. Invluence No Restricted No Poor Quality No Gross Sq Ft 352,159 B uildin__ g./ Improvement S Ft 352,159 Page 1 of 4