Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E95-0003 - GABION WALL - DUWAMISHGABION WALL DUWAMISH 10625 - 29 EAST MARGINAL WAY S E95-0003 r City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director August 6, 1996 Paul Pierce 1916 Pike Place Seattle, WA 98101 RE: The Duwamish L95-0010 (Shoreline Permit) E95-0003 (Environmental Review) Dear Mr. Pierce, This is to follow up on the letter of July 22, 1996 informing you of the pending expiration date of the above referenced project. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the above applications associated with The Duwamish have now expired. If you wish to proceed with the project you will be required to submit new applications, fees, and comply with current regulations. If you wish to appeal this determination you must do so in writing no later than 5:00 P.M. August 20, 1996. If you have any questions on this action or on appeal procedures you can contact Nora Gierloff at 433-7141. Sincerely, Steve Lancaster DCD Director 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 City of Tukwila • • John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director July 22, 1996 Paul Pierce 1916 Pike Place Seattle, WA 98101 RE: The Duwamish L95-0010 (Shoreline Permit) Mitat3t'Environmental Review) Dear Mr. Pierce, As you know, for the above referenced project to proceed you must submit the additional information regarding the Shoreline Permit and SEPA review requested in September of 1995. In addition, you must submit applications for Design Review and a Shoreline Variance. We notified you of these requirements on February 19, 1996, March 12, 1996, and June 17, 1996. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that if we do not receive the information and applications requested by August;5;1996 the Shoreline and SEPA applications will become void and any vested rights fou may have had with them will be lost. If you are no longer pursuing the applications:1 would appreciate receiving a letter requesting their withdrawal. If you have any additional questions please call me at 431-3670. Sincerely, Nora Gierloff Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 (206) 431-3670 • Far (206) 431-3665 • City of Tukvvila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director June 17, 1996 Paul Pierce 1916 Pike Place Seattle, WA 98101 RE: The Duwamish L95-0010 IE05 00034 Dear Mr.. Pierce, I have been assigned to review your project and I understand that we have not heard from you since March 12, 1996 when John Jimerson contacted you to check on the status of the project. If you are no longer pursuing the applications I would appreciate receiving a letter requesting their withdrawal. This will enable me to close out the files. If you are still intending to pursue the applications be advised that we will be changing our permit procedures effective July 11 to comply with ESHB 1724. If you have any additional questions or comments, please call me at 433-7141. Sincer ly, Lc1 Nora Gierloff Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 -RZA AGRA, Inc. (formerly Rirrenhouse Zeman & Associates, Inc.) Engineering & Environmental Services 13 October 1992 Security Pacific Corporation Real Estate Management Services T16-1 Security Pacific Tower, P.O. Box 3966 Seattle, Washington 98109-5191 Attention: Subject: Ms. Shirley Aguilera r Sump Pump Out Documentation 10625-29 East Marginal Way Property Seattle, Washington Dear Ms. Aguilera: k1= bu,wA i' iiSH 11335 NE 122nd Way Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98034-6918 (206) 820-4669 FAX (206) 821-3914 W-8219-2 RECEIVED FEB 2 3 1995 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS RZA AGRA, Inc. conducted a Geotechnical and Environmental site assessment for the above referenced site. In our report dated 9 July 1992, we made several recommendations concerning the condition of an existing sump located in the northem part of the main building. We recommended that the fluid In the sump be removed and that the sump be inspected for structural Integrity. The report also suggested an investigation to determine the location of the discharge outlet of a drain adjacent to the sump. Analytical results (by EPA Method 6010) of fluid samples collected from the site indicated that cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury and zinc concentration were 1,700 ppb, 2,800 ppb, 1,800 ppb, 360 ppb, 4.4 ppb and 530 ppb, respectively. A copy of the laboratory certificate is attached. Following our recommendations, the sump fluid (approximately 200 gallons) was manifested as non- hazardous material and removed on October 2, 1992 by Northwest EnviroService, Inc. Confirmatory testing by Northwest EnviroService (NWES) by Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) indicated that the fluid is non -hazardous; and was manifested by NWES as such. A copy of NWES's confirmatory testing (waste product questionnaire) is attached. At the time of disposal, the sump was visually inspected and appeared to be structurally sound. No major cracks were observed in the sump walls, however the sump's wooden cover was in a state of disrepair and may pose an unsafe condition. The drain located next to the sump and was touockritiP its discharge directly into the sump. ? 995 v AGRA Earth & Environmental Gr( • • Security Pacific Corporation 13 October 1992 W-8219-2 Page 2 Based upon the metals concentrations of the sump fluid, we recommend additional subsurface soils be sampled for metal concentrations beneath the sump upon demolition of the existing building and the sump. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to Security Pacific Corporation and would be pleased to further discuss our results and recommendations with you. Respectfully submitted, RZA AGRA, Inc. „69t ,74,;,A-ee Stephen J. Nicholl Engineering Technician 71.a_74c Dale A. Kramer Project Scientist AC2 Daryl S. PVtrarca Associate Enclosures: Laboratory Certificate Waste Product Questionnaire SJN/DAK/LAD AGRA Earth & Environmental Group vVr t it'i =CREEK ANALYTICAL • • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell. WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 1ZA/AGRA 1335 NE 122nd Way, 41100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Attention: Dale Kramer Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank. W-8219 Sampled: May 27, 1992 Sample Descript Sump 1 Received: May 27, 1992 Analysis Method: EPA 6010/7000 Digested: Jun 9, 1992 Sample Number: 205-1375 Analyzed: Jun 9-10,1992 Matrtc Water Reported: Jun 12, 1992 Analyte TOTAL E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Detection Limit pg/L (ppb) Sample Results P9/L (ppb) ntimony 100 ....•••••.»•»•»••...••».••»••.•• N.D. 4rsenic. 200 ?eryllium. 20 •"• .» :a mium: e.<r-,Y„.- .x,».> .: 15:•;,....;....,„4.:::::.:z.--- x �:, :.....>,,:�,...�;:, .... > N.D. .Ihromiu .r)! ..„, .. <,).w.w:u •:.:.a ... ..,... ..:..w:.: •, ..:6 > �. .,:<w....w....:!a...6An.,::>xw..t'pesv�'/<Y`i.;....�::..>+ H. • ' � r> » T�>`irclC? :v,•:ii.<.r...::.. .:....�,.......,a.� Q:M:.•ti :i.A.,, wn...;:.�:.:::..:.:✓w.2, ers > :� - `.(K .ttw:Q::.ti[N.:dw`... Cr DO '2, 800 x��t� ::.�,,,,: ... .. . .�Mnwlvim•�-ierci•...»»:1::::»»»..«...»•.«• ••.M»»N.M•a .) •r. .'::0.50.,<r../.)�y^GO/,,,,e5^:*,*'iv"•sp .4 ( ��144w. teav.Nickel selenium liver . hallium. 50 N.D. 100 • N.D. T /► 10 N.D. Zn ir."/ y) fYG.iN 6.^e)R4`E7. O+S w/N{;•� iw <<i wbb. •i �. .j 200 N.D. �yy `<..."F.......,...>.<5JO:..f:.fn?`.�.....``..�m`n•:<.:r-f�.ac��.f;�+>ire+�vyi!`^i1er.":r'. 30A:)r.-sc:,'<a�.iirs •n.r Analytes reported as N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. .$STH CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Comnour Laboratory Director 2051375.RZA c t > Sea;re. :as-• - c LC ;2:7)6; F.[ rvurrGE� WP 8 . • • • mailed back atter NWES Q 4 4 1 3 '.S EPA ID S°"""e irpr 92_[0716-� FI hft At T1 t game and Fedity AOCrass .03 Skagen Boats 10625-29 E. Marginal Way Seattle, WA 98168 'Shirley Aguilara quad 'i i `miv•�'r"�st'•''�'..M• •••4•,4--4.4)'t-�L -4- 41 r• •'fit^: �^"`~ tit a Fir: :C •••.' Faf":s�' '+z� rt4.-`Ye�d�i�!Z�•A�a. � �' �:7i�y:i�i[�"s;:.,_�'�;:'." (206) 585-4918 r Y: Tar WASTE PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 8 CHARACTERISTICS 3N'ter with trace sediment .(non -hazardous) ' I irbf sump Physical State At 70'F. .lid 0 Sludge quid 0 Powder mpressed Gas pH ❑10.1-12.4 -4 ❑ > 12.5 -10 rj( act Fan Liquids at 7tr•F. Yesn No Volume 10 0 Solids 0 By Volume Total Dissolved Suspended METALS ❑ ToxicityCharacteristic Cracteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP ) • 4s) ... <0.2 3a) . < U . • (Cd) U ..3 n (Cr) 0.6 :u) .1. U.1 ' Mercury (Hg) . . Nickel (Ni) ... . Selenium (Se) . Silver (Ag) ... Zinc (Zn) Nondetectable Flan Point ❑ < 70'F. ❑ 140'-200'F. ❑ 70'-99'F. 0 > 200'F. ❑ 100'-139'F. No Flash Density or Specific Gravity 1.00 0 Liquid <(J.1 <0.1. <0.1 <0.1 Wit CTIVES AND OTHER WASTES (PPM)NT NT PCB's HexChrome NT HOC NT NT Solid ,ipDine7Name: Sump water and sediment -fatarcous). IbsJgal. Ibsjtt.3 ❑ Closed Cup ❑ Open Cup Exact Odor 0 None 0 Strong o Mild Describe Layers Multilayered Bi -Layered Homogenous Color tan-clr WASTE PRODUCT CHEMICAL COMPOSITION inc( viers! Tor 1000. of Totall H2O HCI H2SO4 HNO3 NaOH Phenols Chlorides aro °e y...c. Sump water lJL1cWil,1. 100 . Sediment TRACE 3rd Class: I D At • _RO 'es•No Inhalation Hazard 0 Yes [ No Dangerous When Wet 0 Yes Ding Container: Drum 0 Volume Bulk E Volume Type Volume Gats/tbs per 0 mo [I yr. abets Required: ff No U S EPA Hazardous Codes Wasington State Codes State Designation DW 0 EHW ❑ Is Waste Product: 0 Ignitable ❑Corrosive ❑Biological Charactenst:: 0 Reactive None of Above 0 Ofhe 0 Subject to Land Disposal Restrictions (If marked. fill out notification sheet) Spetsal Handling Requirements: -31160 GENERATOR CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ,ereby csniy that as an authorize() representative of the generator nameo above. all mm -matron suPrnrtteC in this ane all the snacneo documents rs true anC accurate. Analysis o: the waste was noucl.0 m accordance with Ina apaonio ter methods m AO CFR 261 on a representatr a &ample as oehnec m 40CFR261.20. 7o the best of my knowteo;e. all known (aoCFR261? and suspected zaroous components have been mciude0 in this oocumentatton. attire Ter Date NWES INC. USE CIA•_ r Chemical Nature 00 ❑t Doi Date Reviewed Status 0 eadroved Penned 0 Den.ed ❑ Nov") PHASE I ENVIRONIv1ENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Skagen Boats/Petrolane Seattle, WA 98168 ATEC Project Number 07181 v RECF !ED FEB 2 1 1995 RECEIVED Prepared For: Security Pacific Bank 1000 Second Avenue P.O. Box 3966, Mail Code T16-1 Seattle, Washington 98124-3966 Attn: Ms. Shirley Aguilera December 31, 1991 cclvi,. FEB 2 3 1995 DEVELOP-, NT TUKWILA PUBLIC WORK • ATEC Associates, Inc. V13333 Bellevue -Redmond Road. Suite 239 Bellevue. Washington 98005-2332 [206] 643-8078. FAX # (206] 643-8679 December 31, 1991 Security Pacific Bank P.O. Box 3966, Mail Code T16-1 Seattle, Washington 98124-3396 Attn: Ms. Shirley Aguilera 1 RE: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Skagen Boats/Petrolane 10625-29 East Marginal Way & 10655 Pacific Highway South Seattle, Washington 98168 ATEC Project Number 07181 Ladies & Gentlemen: ATEC Associates Inc. has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the above -referenced site. ATEC recommends the installation of a minimum of three groundwater monitoring wells in order to assess water quality beneath the site. We recommend the completion of a series of soil borings in the area of former storage and/or debris disposal, fuel pumps, and in the area of the reported metal plating activities at the Skagen parcel. We also recommend a detailed site history review prior to drilling in order to properly locate borings and monitoring wells. With regard to the buildings on the two parcels, we recommend a limited asbestos sampling survey of representative building materials such as suspended ceilings, roof felt, linoleum, and vinyl floor tile. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with these services. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the report or our recommendations, please feel free to call us at your convenience. It has been a pleasure working with you on this project. Sincerely, ATEC ASSOCIATES INC. Melanie Keenan Staff Hydrogeologist A Subsidiary of American Testing and Engineering Corporation Offices in Major U.S. Cities/Since 1958 Materials Engineers Malcol - ' ander R.G. District Manager Consulting Environmental. Geotechnical and • • TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 PHYSICAL SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 General Site Condition 2.2 Storage Tanks 2.2.1 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) 2.2.2 Above Ground Storage Tanks (ASTs) . 2.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 2.3.1 Transformers 2.4 Asbestos -Containing Materials (ACMs) 2.5 Utilities 2.6 Solid and Hazardous Waste 2.7 Flood Conditions 2.8 Seismic Conditions 3.0 ADJACENT LAND USE 4.0 SITE HISTORY AND RECORDS REVIEW 4.1 Prior Ownership and Usage 4.2 Aerial Photography 4.3 Regulatory Review i ll 1 3 3 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 9 10 10 11 13 4.3.1 Federal 4.3.2 State 4.3.3 Local/Agency 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.0 QUALIFICATIONS FIGURES Figure 1 - Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 - Site Plan APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Photographic Documentation Photos 1-9 APPENDIX B - Contacts and References 13 13 15 16 18 • • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ATEC Associates Inc. (ATEC) has conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of a two parcel property; the first parcel ("Parcel A") is referred to as Skagen Boats and contains three buildings, and the second parcel ("Parcel B") directly to the south of Skagen Boats is referred to as Petrolane and contains two buildings. The methods used in the site assessment consisted of interviews and regulatory research of federal, state and local agencies, review of historic aerial photographs of the region and a physical evaluation of the subject property and its vicinity. ATEC's regulatory research of the subject site indicates that hazardous materials releases have been recorded with the Tukwila Fire Department. concerning the Skagen Boats Facility. Numerous county violations are recorded for flammable liquid spills (quantity unknown) for many years dating back to 1972 and as recently as September of 1991. Evidence of open flammable liquid containers was observed during ATEC's physical evaluation of the site. Hazardous materials releases have occurred within approximately one-half mile of the subject parcels. Four sites are listed on the Washington Department of Ecology's (DOE) Leaking Underground Storage Tank List. These sites appear to be located hydraulically upgradient of the subject site (as reported by the Department of Ecology), and as such present a potential threat to the environmental integrity of the subject parcels. The sites are: a) McKonkey Property at 10710 East Marginal Way South; b) Chevron Station at 10805 East Marginal Way; c) Ford Truck Sales at 11000 Pacific Highway South; and d) Yellow Freight Terminal at 11231 East Marginal Way South. More specifically, a review of regulatory agency file information indicates that groundwater contamination exists at the McKonkey Property and the Chevron Station. These two properties are located within 500 feet of the subject parcels, and it is possible that groundwater contamination from these sites has migrated beneath the subject parcels. Two pole -mounted transformers were observed on the subject site. Information provided ll by Seattle City Light reveals that the two pole -mounted transformers on-site have not been tested for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Spills and leaks associated with these transformers were not observed during our physical evaluation of the site, and releases from these units are the responsibility of Seattle City Light, the owners of the transformers. ATEC's historic research indicates that the parcels have previously been occupied by: a) a fuel service station; b) a lumber and wrecking company; c) a cannery; d) a Safeway grocery store; e) a propeller company; f) a used car lot; and g) a tire store. The historic aerial photography research revealed suspect storage and/or debris disposal at the southern end of the Petrolane facility in photos dated 1946 and 1960 when the property was utilized by a lumber and wrecking company. Additionally, the current tenant (Gerald Skagen) reported possible past metal plating activities when the current Skagen Boats property was leased to a propeller company. In summary, the subject parcels have been occupied by a number of industries which routinely used hazardous materials (e.g., fuel station, propeller company, etc.). Suspect storage and/or debris disposal was noted in historic aerial photos. Flammable hazardous materials releases have been documented at this site. Two properties in the immediate vicinity (i.e., Chevron and McConkey Property) have documented groundwater problems which may have impacted the subject site. Therefore, we recommend the installation of three groundwater monitoring wells in order to assess water quality beneath the site. We also recommend the completion of soil borings in the area of former storage and/or debris disposal, fuel pumps, and in the area of the reported metal plating activities at the Skagen parcel. With regard to the buildings on the two parcels, we recommend a limited asbestos sampling survey of representative building materials such as suspended ceilings, roof felt, linoleum, and vinyl floor tile. Hazardous materials should also be more safely secured on these parcels, particularly at the Skagen Boats facility. iii PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT Skagen Boats/Petrolane 10625-29 East Marginal Way & 10655 Pacific Highway South Seattle, Washington 98134 ATEC Project Number 07181 1.0 INTRODUCTION ATEC Associates, Inc. (ATEC) was retained by Security Pacific Bank to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of a two parcel property; the first parcel ("Parcel A") is referred to as Skagen Boats located at 10625-29 East Marginal Way. The second Parcel ("Parcel B") is referred to as Petrolane located directly to the south of Skagen Boats at 10655 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, King County, Washington (Figure I, Site Location Map). ATEC Associates, as represented by Ms. Melanie Keenan, Staff Hydrogeologist, Mr. Mark Watts Project Manager, and Mr. Malcolm Gander, District Manager with the ATEC-Seattle office, was authorized to proceed with the contracted scope of services by Ms. Shirley Aguilera of Security Pacific Bank, on November 4, 1991. Subject Parcel A consists of three one-story industrial/commercial buildings, and Parcel B consists of two one-story industrial/conimercial buildings and a 18,000 gallon above ground storage propane tank, including storage of several empty propane tanks and cylinders. The property is located directly to the west of the intersection of East Marginal Way, Pacific Highway South and South Boeing Access at the southern edge of Seattle City limits. The western edge of the subject parcels is bordered by the meandering channel and bank of the Duwamish River. This site evaluation was undertaken to identify areas of potential environmental concern and related risk within the limits of the subject site and/or as visually observed immediately adjacent to the subject property on the days of our field investigation. 1 The scope of work included the following: 1) A visual site evaluation of the property was performed with the express purpose of recording the suspect presence of stored, spilled or otherwise managed suspect hazardous and/or non -hazardous industrial or commercial grade solid/liquid waste products or related visible residue such as hydrocarbon based materials, chemicals or PCBs. We were to likewise record the presence of typical surface expressions of underground storage tanks (USTs), or related holding units that we may have observed on the property at the time of our investigation. A cursory drive-by review of adjacent properties was performed as part of the site visit. General adjacent tenant activities were also noted. 2) A review was conducted of past and present aerial photographs inclusive of fifty years before present as pertaining to land usage. 3) A review was made of the EPA, NPL, CERCLIS and RCRA listings (computer database), as well as the State of Washington's Department of Ecology Affected Media and Contaminants list, Active Landfills, Registered Underground Storage Tanks, and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) lists. Additionally, a report by the King County Department of Public Health on the abandoned landfills in Seattle was evaluated. The purpose of this review was to identify: a) the presence of contaminated sites; b) the registrations of underground tanks which may be present at the site; and c) reported leak or spill incidents in the area which are related to underground tanks. Historical notes concerning the subject property were provided by Security Pacific Bank. A review of chain of title information was included in the scope of work. 5) This report details our findings. 2 2.0 PHYSICAL SITE DESCRIPTION This section will describe the site features as observed by ATEC personnel on November 20 and December 6, 1991. Other features were determined from a review of history sheets provided by Security Pacific Bank which catalogue trust committee meeting minutes, as well as topographic maps, aerial photographs and pertinent public documents. The referenced parcels are located in south Seattle, King County, Washington. The surrounding area is commercial and industrial. According to Moria Bradshw from the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development, the site is zoned as MQL. This zoning status is defined by heavy industrial and light landscaping. 2.1 General Site Conditions The subject property is approximately 46,125 square feet, according to history notes provided by Security Pacific Bank (Figure 2). The property is roughly rectangular/triangular with frontage to the east along the East Marginal Way and Pacific Highway South intersection. The bank of the Duwamish River borders the western edge of the subject site (Appendix A, Photo #1). The site is comprised of two parcels: Parcel A is occupied by Skagen Boats, which operates a boat and car repair and show room. This property is also utilized for storage of equipment, repair and waste (Appendix A, Photos 1-4). Parcel B is occupied by Petrolane which operates a propane distributorship and tank storage facility. A special permit is held by the Petrolane facility for the registration of a large aboveground storage tank on-site (Appendix A, Photos 8 & 9). ATEC's visual observations of the site revealed the use or storage of hazardous materials at both facilities. Evidence of open flammable liquid containers was observed during ATEC's physical evaluation of the site. Overall, poor housekeeping practices were noted at the time of the site evaluation at the Skagen Boats facility. For example, there are numerous tires and pallets as well as other debris present behind the buildings (Appendix A, Photo 2). Also noticeable were apparent propane -related odors emanating from the Petrolane 3 facility. ATEC personnel observed several small stained areas of unknown origin behind the buildings at the Petrolane facility. The age of the buildings occupying the subject parcels are estimated to be as old as 1946 with the small wood frame office furthest to the north present as early as 1980, according to our aerial photo review. All buildings show various stages of improvements over the years. Parcel A - Skagen Boats The Skagen Boats facility has three one-story buildings located on approximately 36,900 square feet parcel. The building furthest to the north is a smaller wood frame building with wall to wall carpeting and is utilized for a bathroom and storage. The second building, which was the main structure at the Skagen Boats parcel, is utilized for a repair shop and as a showroom. This structure is a tilt -up concrete building with many improvements through the years of cinder concrete block construction. The floor coverings are predominately concrete flooring and linoleum tile. The interior walls are painted concrete and the wall covering in the main show room is wood paneling. The ceilings throughout the building are covered with damaged ceiling tiles showing water damage. The building appeared to have a flat, built-up composition roof, and there is evidence of water damage and leakage. Numerous cracks in the concrete walls were observed throughout the building. The entire structure appears to be in Foor repair and is believed to be as old as 1946, where first observed during aerial photo research. The third building is a butler type corrugated steel building completed in 1960. This building is utilized for storage of boats and equipment as well as display panels and equipment from a previous stove company, according to Gerald Skagen. Access to this building was limited due to the storage of boats and trailers. The front of the parcel contains paved parking areas. The areas behind the buildings are overgrown with berry bushes and weeds, rendering it inaccessible. A billboard is present between the main building and the butler style metal building, and records indicate it was erected around December 1957. 4 Parcel B - Petrolane Parcel B is occupied by Petrolane and contains two one-story buildings that show various stages of improvements over the years. The buildings are estimated to be older than 1969, which is when they were first observed in available aerial photos. Petrolane uses this property as a pumping station and a maintenance facility. The first structure to the north is a combination of a hanger style corrugated steel building with the additions of both corrugated metal and wood frame construction. The floors consists of concrete and linoleum with some carpeting. The roof to this building is covered with tar paper. The second building consists of various stages of storage sheds constructed together out of corrugated sheet metal and wood frame, with composite roof and plywood and concrete flooring. The site topography is generally flat and a portion of the site is considered to lie in the 100 year flood plain of the Duwamish River, according to John Pherog, Associate Engineer for the Storrn and Surface Water Program with the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. The area behind site buildings along the Duwamish river is overgrown with blackberry bushes and weeds, and this growth has encroached all the way to the back of Parcel A. The remainder of the property is paved with asphalt. The present elevation of the site is approximately 15 feet above sea level. ATEC's experience in the area indicates that the soils in thearea are typically sands and silts and that the depth to groundwater is generally less than twenty feet below the ground surface. Based on topography, and information provided by the Department of Ecology personnel, the regional groundwater flow in this area appears to be towards the Duwamish River. The groundwater flow direction beneath the site cannot be verified without the installation of a minimum of three. groundwater wells on-site and subsequent measurement of groundwater depth in each well. Flow direction is calculated based on differences in groundwater elevation. 5 2.2 Storage Tanks 2.2.1 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) Underground storage tankswere not observed or are known to exist within the study area, according to property tenants interviewed. Fill pipes, vent pipes, or other evidence of USTs were not observed during ATEC's site visit. Four sites within a one-half mile of the subject parcels are documented on the Washington Department of Ecology's (DOE) Leaking Underground Storage Tank List, and are discussed in Section 4.3.2 of this report. Thus, hazardous materials releases have occurred within approximately one-half mile of the subject parcels. Historical notes suggest the presence of a service station on the property between 1948 and 1950. No documentation was available related to the presence or absence of USTs associated with this fuel station. 2.2.2 Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) There are no known or observed ASTs on the Skagen facility on Parcel A. The Petrolane facility on Parcel B contains a thirty year old, 18,000 gallon propane tank ( I.D. #1075). This AST is used to dispense propane to customers, and in a fenced enclosure. The rest of the property is utilized for the storage of several hundred smaller ASTs and cylinders that the operator claims to be empty and in need of repair before being distributed. 2.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 2.3.1 Transformers Two pole -mounted transformers were observed on the subject site. Information obtained from Seattle City Light revealed that the transformers located on Parcel A of the subject property have not been tested for the presence or absence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). According to Seattle City Light personnel, the transformers were installed on December 12, 1977. The cost to test the transformers during normal business hours is $431.00 dollars per transformer and requires a four person crew; additional charges are assessed during non -business hours. Evidence of leakage from these transformers was 6 • • not observed by ATEC personnel at the time of the site survey. It should be noted that any releases from these transformers are the responsibility of Seattle City Light. 2.4 Asbestos -Containing Materials (ACMs) An asbestos survey and sampling program was not included in the scope of work for this Phase I Investigation. However, we identified the following building materials as suspect ACM: suspended ceilings, roof felt, linoleum, and vinyl floor tile. 2.5 Utilities The subject property obtains its water from the City of Seattle. Electricity is provided by Seattle City Light. The sanitary sewage system for Parcel B is managed by the City of Seattle. According to site occupant Gerald Skagen at Parcel A, it is unclear whether the site is a) connected to the city sewer, or b) connected to an on-site septic system. 2.6 Solid and Hazardous Waste ATEC's regulatory research of the subject site indicates that hazardous materials releases have been recorded with the Tukwila Fire Department concerning the Skagen Boats facility. Numerous county violations are recorded for flammable liquid spills (quantity unknown) for many years dating back to 1972 and as recently as September of 1991. Evidence of open flammable liquid containers was observed during ATEC's physical evaluation of the site. Five 55 -gallon drums filled with waste oil were observed in what appeared to be a repair area in the main Skagen showroom building (Appendix A, Photo 5). Several open containers of paints and what appeared to be solvents were present in the repair area. This area also contained two flatbed trailers filled with various waste materials (Appendix A, Photo 4), Mr. Skagen stated that he personally disposes of waste periodically. Additionally, we noted one cabinet of paints and solvents (Appendix A, Photo 7). The north end of this building contained an unknown white powdery residue on the masonry block wall in the repair area of the main Skagen structure (Appendix A, Photo 6). The 7 • • floor in this room also exhibited a rectangular, concrete -filled area which Mr. Skagen believes was used for plating activities when a propeller company occupied the site. Herbicides are used for weed control behind the Skagen Buildings along the Duwamish River, according to tenant Mr. Skagen. We noted stressed and dead vegetation in this area. With regard to Petrolane, two cabinets of cleaners, solvent, and flammable materials (such as xylene) were observed. Located in the yard next to the storage sheds is a labeled 55 - gallon drum of methanol; no spills were observed around this container. Waste is regularly disposed of by a refuse company serving thtt area. In general, it appeared that sound housekeeping practices are observed on the Petrolane parcel. When located downwind from this facility (at the Skagen parking area) petroleum related odors were evident. 2.7 Flood Conditions According to Mr. Pherog, Associate Engineer with the Storm and Surface Water Division for Public City works for the city of Tukwila, approximately 30 to 40 percent of subject site bordering the Duwamish River is located within the special flood hazard_ area rated as a 100_ year flood plain. The remainder of the property which borders the highway is in Zone X, which is rated above the 500 -year flood plain. This information is based on the Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Insurance Administration Flood Hazard Community Map 3530089A Panel Number 310 of 650, compiled by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the national flood insurance program. 2.8 Seismic Conditions According to "Washington State Earthquake Hazards", Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Information Circular 85, the subject site is located in an area susceptible to ground shaking from earthquakes. For example, earthquakes measuring 7.1 and 6.5 on the Richter scale occurred in Olympia in 1949 and the Seattle -Tacoma area in 1965, respectively. Therefore, the study area should be considered to lie within a seismically active zone where earthquakes may occur periodically. • • 3.0 ADJACENT LAND USE The subject site is located at the southern edge of the Seattle City, limits with the City of Tukwila further to the south. Within a one to two block radius the site is bounded to the north, west and south by industrial and commercial buildings. The western edge of the site is bordered by the meandering channel embanlanent of the Duwamish River. The parcels are bordered to the east by the intersection of East Marginal Way, Pacific Highway South, and South Boeing Access. Located directly east of the site beyond Pacific Highway South (approximately 500 feet to the east), is the vacant property formerly occupied by a Chevron service station. This Chevron station is further discussed in Section 4.3.2. To the north runs a narrow seam of overgrown thickets between the river channel embankments and Pacific Highway South. Located to the south of Parcel B is Northwest Truck & Detail, a truck paint and body shop. Oil and Gas Wells Evidence of oil and gas wells was not observed during ATEC's physical evaluation of the site and immediate vicinity. According to Washington Division of Geology and Earth . Resources Information Circular 65, 1988, "Oil and Gas Exploration in Washington, 1900- 1982"; there are no apparent oil and gas wells within a one -mile radius of the subject property. 9 • . 4.0 SITE HISTORY AND RECORDS. REVIEW 4.1 Prior Ownership and Usage The earliest readily available aerial photographs indicate that the property contained buildings as early as 1936. According to the history sheets provided by Security Pacific Bank dating back to April 6, 1948, the subject site has been occupied by the following establishments; please note that historic data was incomplete and occupancy dates are sometimes estimated: a) General Petroleum Corporation (service station), 1948 - 1950; b) Safeway Stores, 1948 - 1950; c) Oceanic Lumber and Wrecking Company (also referred to as Aerial Lumber Company, Oceanic Factors Company and Aerial Builder Supply Company), 1948 - 1957; d) Church of Latter Day Saints (cannery), 1949 - 1957; e) Pacific Propeller Company, 1951 - 1970; f) Automobile dealership (name not provided), 1959 - 1961; g) Petrolane, 1962 to present; h) AAA Tire Wholesale Company, 1970 - 1973; i) Skagen Boats, 1975 to present. Information in the history sheets suggests that General Petroleum Corporation operated a service station on-site, which could pose a threat to the environmental integrity of the site. Similarly, the Pacific Propeller Company may have used hazardous materials in their operation according to information provided by Mr. Skagen. Additionally, the lumber and wrecking yard may have used hazardous materials, as well as been responsible for the suspect storage practices observed at the southern end of the site in historic aerial photographs. Mr. Skagen also related information that a stove company operated a business in the metal butler style building, dates unknown. Details on other occupants operations were not available. 10 • • 4.2 Aerial Photography Aerial photos of the subject property and site vicinity were reviewed at Walker and Associates, Inc. Photogrammetric Engineers Office in Seattle, Washington. The following years' photos were evaluated: 1936 (Scale 1" = 800') The surrounding area is agricultural; there are orchards to the east of the subject site beyond East Marginal Way. The adjacent area to the west, north and south shows light residential housing and farm activities. The subject property appears to be occupied by a farm and/or commercial buildings at this time. The path of the Duwamish River channel appears much as it does in the 1990 photo. Pacific Highway South and a road which is now I-5 to the east of the site are in there present configuration. 1946 (Scale 1" = 1000') The subject site shows improvements, and some of the previously existing structures have been removed and there are several new ones. Specifically, a new building (which is presently the Skagen Boats repair and showroom) is present, and the area surrounding this building is now paved. To the south is evidence of a large commercial building and docks extending from the subject property into the Duwamish River. The surrounding area in general shows increased development; the area to the east is now residential, to the north are new commercial and industrial buildings. There is. now a road where South Boeing Access runs today. At the southern end of the subject property there appears to be suspect storage and debris handling activities on what is now the Petrolane facility. 1960 (Scale 1" = 1500') The building which is presently utilized by Skagen Boats as a repair shop and showroom is still evident. The warehouse on what is the Skagen parcel today has been completed and appears much as it does today. The larger building to the south observed on the 1946 photo is no longer present. The storage and debris handling area noted in the 1946 photo appears to be better maintained. The roads adjacent to the subject parcels are in their present configuration, including the on and off ramps for South Boeing Access. The surrounding area shows increased development to the north, east and south. A large parking area has been 11 noted to the north beyond the Duwamish River. Further to the south is still some agricultural activity. 1969 (Scale 1" = 1500') Subject property buildings are similar to present day structures. The billboard to the south of what is now the Skagen showroom is present. The surrounding area shows increased development, and the Boeing facility is well established to the north. The facility to the southeast appears to be in its present configuration. The adjacent property immediately to the south has been developed with new buildings. The Petrolane facility appears much as it does today, with buildings, the large aboveground storage tank, and paved areas. The docks. mentioned previously are no longer present. 1980 (Scale 1" = 1500') There is a noticeable increase in development along the Duwarnish River. There are more buildings present on the property immediately to the south of the subject site, as well as a large storage area with what appears to be several drums and truck trailers. There is a new small building on the subject site, north of the Skagen show room. An increase of storage on the Petrolane parcel is observed. 1985 (Scale 1" = 1500') Except for an increase in storage on the southern parcel, the subject property appears much as it does in the 1990 photo. The large commercial building to the north of South Boeing Access is completed. The surrounding area shows an increase in development. 1990 (Scale 1" = 1000') The subject property appears much as it does today with an increase of AST storage since 1985. The property immediately to the south has less storage than what was observed. in the 1980 photo. The highrise to the south is completed and appears to be in its present day configuration. In general there is an increase in development in the surrounding area. Other historic aerial photos were not readily available. In summary, aerial photography research reveals suspect storage and debris handling activities as observed in the 1946 and 1980 photos at the southernmost porion of the subject site. The 1980 photo also showed a large storage area with what appeared to be several drums and truck trailers on the property immediately to the south of the subject site. It is possible that these activities could have 12 • 1 impacted the subject property. 4.3 Regulatory Review 4.3.1 Federal NPL The National Priorities List (i.e., Superfund List) EPA Region 10 dated August 8, 1991 (provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) was researched and properties within a one -mile radius of the subject site were not listed. CER CLIS The Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation List Information System (CERCLIS) "Site/Event Listing" dated August 8, 1991 (provided by the U.S. EPA Superfund Program) was researched, and properties within a one mile radius of the subject site are not listed. 4.3.2 State LUST The Washington Department of Ecology's (DOE) Leaking Underground Tank (LUST) List for King County (dated November 12, 1991) was researched and four sites are listed within a one-half mile radius of the subject parcels. Hazardous materials releases have occurred at these four sites and appear to be located hydraulically upgradient of the subject property (as reported by the Department of Ecology). The sites are listed and discussed below; 1) Chevron Station #9-3099 10805 East Marginal Way A leaking gasoline UST has been removed within 300 feet of the subject property to the east beyond Pacific Highway South. Soil and groundwater contamination is 13 • • documented. Clean up status is on going. 2) McKonkey Property 10710 East Marginal Way A leaking gasoline UST is documented approximately 500 feet to the east of the subject site. Groundwater contamination is documented, and clean up status is listed as limited and on-going. 3) Ford Truck Sales 11000 Pacific Highway South Remediation of contaminated soils is apparently on-going approximately one-quarter of a mile to the southwest of the subject site. Groundwater has reportedly not been impacted and a leaky UST was removed in December 1990. 4) Yellow Freight Terminal 11231 East Marginal Way A leaky UST was removed approximately one-quarter of a mile to the south southeast. Cleanup status is documented as being complete. A review of regulatory agency file information indicates that groundwater contamination exists at the McKonkey Property and the Chevron Station. These two properties are located within 500 feet of the subject parcels, and it is possible that contamination from these sites has migrated beneath the subject parcels. As such, they present a potential threat to the environmental integrity of the subject parcels. Regulatory agency file information indicates that soil contamination at The Ford Truck Sales and the Yellow Freight Terminal located approximately one-quarter of a mile to the south is being properly addressed, and groundwater has reportedly not been affected. These two sites apparently pose a minimal environmental concern to the.subject property. The Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Affected Media and Contaminants List (dated July 3, 1991) was researched, and one site is listed within one-half mile of the subject site. The site is Northwest Auto Wrecking, and it is located approximately one-half mile north of the subject property. 14 • • In 1984, the King County Department of Public Health published a study of the abandoned landfills in the City of Seattle. This document indicates that abandoned landfills are not present within one mile of the subject site. According to the January, 1991 listing of landfills in the state of Washington, published by the DOE, active landfills are not present within a one mile radius of the subject site. 4.3.3 Local/Agency The following interviews were conducted in person or by telephone: Martha Turvey with the Department of Ecology Elliot Bay action team provided information on regional groundwater flow direction for the subject parcels. David Ray of the Tukwila Fire Department Fire Prevention Office provided information regarding county violations at the Skagen Boats facility. Parcel A Tenant Gerald S. Skagen provided site access and toured the facility with ATEC personnel. Sandy Norton, Office Manager for Petrolane (Parcel B tenant), provided site access and toured the facility with ATEC personnel. Moria Bradshaw, Associate Planner for the city of Tukwila Department of Community Development, provided information regarding zoning information for the subject site. John Pherog, Associate Engineer for the city of Tukwila Public Works Storm and Surface Water Program, provided flood zoning information for the subject site. Mary Flynn with Seattle City Light researched information regarding transformers located on site. A McKonkey Property employee provided information about the contaminated soil and • groundwater investigation/cleanup at that facility. 15 • • 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions In summary, ATEC determined the following pertinent (environmentally related) information within the contracted scope of services of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment at the Skagen Boats and Petrolane facilities in Seattle, Washington. USTs were not visibly encountered or suspected to be present on-site. Site personnel interviewed reported no knowledge of existing or past UST use at either of the subject parcels. However, historic research reveals past service station activities which could have involved the use of an underground storage tank. A visual survey revealed the presence of suspect asbestos containing materials at both facilities. Suspect materials include ceiling material and roof felt/asphalt at the Skagen Boats facility, and vinyl floor, linoleum, and suspended ceiling tiles at the Petrolane facility. Aerial photograph review indicated suspect storage and debris handling at the south end of Parcel B Petrolane facility as noted in photographs dated 1946 and 1960. These waste handling practices could potentially pose an environmental concern to the subject site. ATEC's regulatory research of the subject site indicates that hazardous materials releases have been recorded with the Tukwila Fire Department concerning the Skagen Boats facility. Numerous county violations are recorded for flammable liquid spills (quantity unknown) for many years dating back to 1972 and as recently as September of 1991. Review of historical records reveals occupancy by a number of businesses whose activities may have affected the environmental integrity of the subject site. Of particular concern are a service station, a propeller company, and a 16 lumber and wrecking yard. The regulatory review yielded four LUST sites which exist within a one-half mile radius of the subject property. Documentation reveals that two of the four sites, Chevron and McKonkey, involve ground water and appear to be located in areas hydraulically upgradient of the subject site. Due to their distance within 500 feet of the subject site, it is possible that groundwater contamination from these sites has migrated beneath the subject site. Recommendations ATEC recommends the installation of a minimum of three groundwater monitoring wells in order to assess water quality beneath the site. We also recommend the completion of a series of soil borings in the area of former storage and/or debris disposal, fuel pumps, and in the area of the reported metal plating activities at the Skagen parcel to assess possible soil contamination. With regard to the buildings on the two parcels, we recommend a limited asbestos sampling survey of representative building materials such. as suspended ceilings, roof felt, linoleum, and vinyl floor tile. We also recommend a detailed site history review prior to drilling in order to properly locate borings and monitoring wells. If further research does not reveal tank existence and/or removal, recommendations would also include a geophysical survey prior to drilling in order to determine if an underground storage tank still exists where apparently the service station operated on-site. Research should also include the possibility of a septic system at the Skagen Boats facility. 17 • • 6.0 QUALIFICATIONS Our professional services have been performed, our findings obtained and our recommendations prepared in accordance with customary principles and practices in the fields of environmental science and engineering. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties either expressed or implied. This company is not responsible for the independent conclusions, opinions or recommendations made by others based on the field exploration.and laboratory test data presented in this report. It should be noted that all surficial environmental assessments are inherently limited in the sense that conclusions are drawn and recommendations developed from information obtained from limited research and site evaluation. Subsurface conditions were not field investigated as part of this study and may differ from the conditions implied by the surficial observations. Additionally, the passage of time may result in a change in the environmental characteristics at this site and surrounding properties. It must be noted that no investigation can absolutely rule out the existence of any hazardous materials at a given site. This assessment has been based upon prior site history and observable conditions and activities. Existing hazardous materials and contaminants can escape detection using these methods. The work performed in conjunction with this assessment and the data developed are intended as a description of available information at the dates and location given. This report does not warrant against future operations or conditions, nor does it warrant against operations or conditions present of a type or a location not investigated. 18 • • SOURCE: U.S.G.S 7.5 x 5' TcpographicBathymetric Maps. Bonen & Seattle South. Washington. 1983. M. K»non 07181-01 • • EPS' VACANT PROPERTY OVERGROWN BERRY BUSHES ASSOCIATED GROCERS WAREHOUSE PARCEL A SKAGEN BOATS 10625-29 East Marginal Way MCKONKEy ppOPERTY/ BIG B's AUTO SALES TOWING ANO REPAIR EAS FORMER CHEVRON SERVICE STATION P A C/F/ BILLBOARD PARCEL B SIGN - PETROLANE :,•: A 10655 Pacific Highway South C - INDUSTRIAUCOMMERCIAL PARK EXPLANATION • Pole -Mounted Transformers Approximate Property Boundary AST STORAGE AREA W AY THE NICE WONGER COMPANY 18,000 GALLON PROPANE AST AST STORAGE AREA APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMER STORAGE AND DEBRIS DISPOSAL 0 a SCALE PROPORTIONAL Figure 2: SITE PLAN FOR .. SKAGEN BOATS AND PETROLANE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ATEC v CLIENT - SECURITY PACIFIC BANK PROJECT NO. 07181 DATE/DRAFTER 01-02-92/M.Keenan 07158-02 PHOTO 1: VIEW FACING SOUTH SHOWING THE SKAGEN BOATS FACILITY ON PARCEL A AT THE SUBJECT SITE; NOTE THE POLE -MOUNTED TRANSFORMERS. PHOTO 2: VIEW FACING WEST TOWARDS THE DUWAMISH RIVER SHOWING THE SKAGEN BOATS FACILITY BUTLER STYLE BUILDING; NOTE DEBRIS IN OVERGROWN BERRY BUSHES. PROJECT NAME SKAGEN BOATS/PETROLANE PROJECT NO. 07181 DATE 12/30/91 ATEC V PHOTOLOG 1: Photos 1 & 2 PHOTO 3: INTERIOR VIEW OF THE MAIN SKAGEN STRUCTURE SHOWROOM; NOTE WATER DAMAGED CEILING TILES. PHOTO 4: INTERIOR VIEW OF THE REPAIR AREA LOCATED IN THE MAIN SKAGEN BOATS STRUCTURE; NOTE THE FLATBED TRAILER CONTAINING WASTE MATERIALS. PROJECT NAM_ SKAGEN BOATS/PETROLANE PF.OJECT NO. 07181 DATE 12/30/91 ATEC v PHOTOLOG 2: Photos 3 & 4 PHOTO 5: VIEW OF 55 -GALLON DRUMS OF WASTE OIL STORED INSIDE THE REPAIR AREA OF THE MAIN SKAGEN BOATS STRUCTURE. PHOTO 6: INTERIOR VIEW SHOWING THE NORTH END OF THE MAIN SKAGEN BOATS STRUCTURE; NOTE THE WHITE RESIDUE ON THE CINDER BLOCK WALL PROJECT NAME SKAGEN BOATS/PETROLANE PROJECT NO. 07181 M.;een=n DATE 12/30/91 ATEC v PHOTOLOG 3: Photos 5 & 6 PHOTO 7: VIEW OF STORAGE CLOSET LOCATED IN THE REPAIR AREA OF THE MAIN SKAGEN BUILDING. ROJECT NAME SKAGEN BOATS/PETROLANE PROJECT NO. 07181 DATE 12'30/91 . ATEC v PHOTOLOG 4: Photo 7 <ee PHOTO 8: WESTERLY VIEW OF THE PETROLANE STORAGE SHEDS LOCATED ON PARCEL B OF THE SUBJECT SITE. PHOTO 9: THE 18,000 GALLON ABOVEGROUND STROAGE TANK LOCATED ON PARCEL B OF THE SUBJECT SITE. PROJECT NAME SKAGEN BOATS/PETROLANE PROJECT NO. 07181 DATE 12/30/91 ATEC V PHOTOLOG 5: Photos 8 & 9 M Kee.^.Cr. APPENDIX B CONTACTS AND REFERENCES Documents National Priorities List, August 8, 1991; by the U.S. EPA Region 10. CERCLIS Site/Event Listing, August 8, 1991; by the U.S. EPA Superfund Program. Affected Media and Contaminants List, July, 1991; by the Washington Department of Ecology. Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites, November 12, 1991; by the Washington Department of Ecology Washington Active Landfills, January, 1991; by the Washington Department of Ecology Abandoned Landfills in Seattle, 1984; by the King County Department of Public Health. Security Pacific Bank History Sheets, dated from April 6, 1948 to August 1, 1990. Maps U.S.G.S. 7.5' Topographic-bathymetric map, Burien & Seattle South, 1983. Aerial Photography collection at Walker and Associates, Seattle, Washington. Telephone Communications Martha Turvey, staff employee, Department of Ecology Elliot Bay Action Team. David Ray, Fire Inspector, Tukwila Fire Department Fire Prevention Office. Moria Bradshaw, Associate Planner, City of Tukwila Department of Community Development. John Pherog, Associate Engineer, City of Tukwila Public Works Storm and Surface Water Program. Mary Flynn, staff employee, Seattle City Light. • • Interviews Owner Gerald S. Skagen, Skagen Boats (Parcel A Tenant). Sandy Norton, Office Manager, Petrolane (Parcel B tenant). McKonkey Property employee. Geotechnical and Environmental Site Assessment 10625-29 East Marginal Way Seattle, Washington Prepared for Security Pacific Corporation Real Estate Management Services T16-1 Security Pacific Tower P.O. Box 3966 Seattle. Washington 98109-5191 • Prepared by RZA AGRA, INC. 11335 NE 122nd Avenue NE Kirkland, Washington 98036 July 1992 W-8219 RECEIVED FEB 2 3 1995 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS RECEIVED FEB 2 1 1995 �iVlVlww;• EN i DEVELOPIV9 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS W-8219 1.0 GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY 1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY 3 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 4.0 SITE LOCATION AND GENERAL CONDITIONS 4 4.1 Surface Conditions 5 4.2 Existing Structures 5 4.3 Subsurface Conditions 5 4.4 Groundwater 6 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL TEST RESULTS 6 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 7.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Shore Stabilization Considerations 7.2 General Revetment Design Consideration 7.2.1 Revetment Configuration 7.2.1.1 Slope Preparation 7.2.1.2 Geotextae Fabric 7.2.1.3 Intermediate Fater 7.2.1.4 Riprap 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 10 8.0 CLOSURE 10 Enclosures: Figure 1, Location Map Figure 2, Site and Exploration Pian Plates 1 Through 10 Appendix A, Exploration Procedures, Logs, Monitoring Well Construction Diagrams Appendix B, Laboratory and Sampling Procedures, Results and Lab Certificates Site Survey By Licensed Surveyor (Back Rap) GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 10625-29 EAST MARGINAL WAY PROPERTY SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 1.0 GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY A brief summary of the project geotechnical considerations is presented below: • Subsurface explorations showed soil conditions to vary somewhat across the site. The soils within the uppermost 7 to 12 feet were found to be very loose to medium dense, fine to medium sands. An intermediate layer of silt, ranging from soft to hard in consistency was encountered beneath the upper sands. Each of the borings encountered dense to very dense fine to medium sand of depths ranging from 12 to 17 feet, extending to the termination depths of 25 to 30 feet • The slope along the waterfront was irregular, apparently exhibiting some surficial sloughing. Tension cracking with existing displacement on the order of 0.5 feet were observed on the site surface between the main Skagen Boat Budding and the Buller Building. Several cracks were also noted in the buildings, although cracks directly attributable to slope movement were not observed. • Surface and subsurface conditions suggest that further slumping of the bank will likely occur due to waterfront erosion, progressively leading to further damage to existing upland structures. We recommend construction of a rock revetment edge protection at an outside slope inclination of 2H:1V as the most expedient and economical method for protecting the waterfront bank at this location. • The existing buildings are old and in disrepair. We recommend a structural engineer review the structural integrity of these buildings. A rock revetment edge protection system would protect the waterfront side of the structures from further deterioration and provide some increase In safety factor against sliding under both static and seismic loading. However, upgrading the building foundation and shoreline slope to a higher safety factor.in the event of seismic occurrence would be costly, Involving a structural retaining wall bulkhead along the waterfront and possibly underpinning the building(s) with a deep foundation system. We quid provide a scope of work and _ budget for a more rigorous stability analysis and design of a more substantial bulkhead and building foundation system, B desired. Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 2 • Construction of a 2H:1V rock revetment would need to be accomplished from the water using barge -mounted equipment. Upland construction would only be feasible at this site lf the buildings were to be demolished. • Flattening of the waterfront slope to about 4H:1V and protecting exposed soils from erosion would also Increase the safety factor against sliding. Permitting of a 4H:1V fill slope extending out into the waterway would likely not be possible. Excavation of a 4H:1V slope could only be accommodated on the slope if the existing buildings were to be removed. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY A brief summary of project environmental considerations Is presented below • Laboratory results of soil samples submitted for analytical testing were below detection limits for petroleum hydrocarbon compounds (Methods 418.1, WTPH-D, WTPH-G), halogenated volatile organics (Method 8240), semi -volatile organics (Method 8270). • Ceiling material collected from the Main building and submitted for asbestos screening were below detection limits. • Groundwater collected from monitoring well MW -1 and analyzed for total EPA metals contained upon analysis 34 parts per billion (ppb), 59 ppb, and 120 ppb for chromium, copper, and zinc, respectively. • Groundwater collected from monitoring well MW -2 and submitted for analytical testing for Total EPA Priority metals contained upon analysis, 23 ppb copper and 110 ppb zinc; • Groundwater collected from monitoring wells MW -1 and MW -2 and submitted for analytical testing were below detection limits for dissolved EPA priority metals (Method 6010/7000). hexavalent chromium, and semi -volatile organics (Method 8240/8260). • Water collected from the existing sump located in the northern portion of the main building contained upon analysis total EPA Priority Metals In the following concentrations:1,700 ppb. 2800 ppb, 1800 ppb, 360 ppb, 4.4 ppb, and 530 ppb for cadmium. chromium, copper, lead, Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 3 mercury, and zinc, respectively. Of these metals tested, concentrations of cadmium, chromium, lead, and mercury exceed Washington State Model Toxic Control Act (MICA) Method A cleanup levels (see Section 5.0). Both the geotechnical and environmental summaries are presented for introductory purposes and should be used in conjunction with the full text of this report The project description, site conditions, and our recommendations are presented in the text of the report. The exploration procedures and logs are presented in Appendix A. Analytical certificates and procedures are presented in Appendbc B. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project she is an irregularly shaped parcel located immediately west and north of the Intersection of East Marginal Way S., S. Boeing Access, and Pacific Highway South in Seattle, Washington (see Figure 1). The west portion of the property is bounded by the Duwamish River. The southem-most building on the site is occupied by a custom boat repair shop. All other buildings at the time of report preparation do not appear to be occupied. The purpose of this study was two -fold. Geotechnical objectives were to establish general subsurface conditions at the site from which conclusions and recommendations for slope stability and erosion mitigation could be presented. Environmental characterization objectives were to assess the integrity of site soils, sump -water, groundwater and building materials (asbestos screening). The scope of work consisted of a field exploration program, geotechnical and 'environmental laboratory testing, geotechnical engineering analyses, monitoring well installation and preparation of this report. In the event that there are any changes in the nature, design, elevation or location of structures, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified as necessary, to reflect those changes. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Security Pacic Corporation and their agents, for specific application to the property In accordance with generally accepted geotechnical and environmental protocol and practices. 4.0 SITE LOCATION AND GENERAL CONDITIONS The site conditions were evaluated for this study in May and June, 1992. The surface and subsurface conditions are discussed below, while the exploration procedures and interpretive togs of the explorations are presented in Appendbc A. The laboratory procedures and results are presented in Appendix B, and on • • Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 4 the exploration Togs where noted. The site location is shown on Figure 1, and locations of the three exploration borings and monitoring wells MW -1 and MW -2 are presented on Figure 2, the Site and Exploration Plan, presented at the end of the text. A copy of the licensed survey is located in the rear flap of the report. The topography of the majority of the site is essentially flat Tying. However, the westem edge of the property is slopes s eeply from the upland area to the water line of the Duwamish River. Vegetation along the western upland and River bank consists of a variety of weeds and thickets of very thick berry bushes. Three existing buildings are shown on Figure 2, the Site and Exploration Plan (end of text). 4.1 Surface Conditions The project site encompasses an irregularly shaped area bounded on the west by the Duwamish River and on the east by East Marginal Way South. Various photographs of general conditions at the site are shown in Plates 1 through 10 at the end of the report. Visual manifestation of slope instability in this area Include surface soil tension cracking on the westem portion of the site between the Butler Budding and the main building (Plate 7), a leaning utility pole (Plate 6), and leaning piles (Plate 9). The site slopes steeply on the west to the Duwamish River, with the other areas of the of the site being relatively flat During our exploration program, the eastem portion of the site was occupied by an asphaltic concrete paved car parking lot. Evidence of slope instability at the site are shown in Plates 6, 7, and 9. These include leaning river bank piles, leaning telephone pole and surface soil tension cracking. 4.2 Existing Structures There are three existing structures on the subject site. The approximate locations of these structures is shown on Figure 2 and the licensed survey located in the folder located on the back flap of the report. Abundant cracking attributed to site settlement is visible on the southwestern corner of the main building. Plate 2 Is a photograph of these cracks. Various features of the main building are shown in Plates 1 through 5 at the end of the text. 4.3 Subsurface Conditions In general, our borings indicate the project site is underlain by very loose to medium dense sands with interbedded soft to stiff silts at depths. We Interpret these soils to be alluvium and possibly fill. The soils • • Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 5 within the uppermost 7 to 12 feet were found to be very loose to medium dense, fine to medium sands. An intermediate layer of silt, ranging from soft to hard in consistency was encountered beneath the upper sands. Each of the borings encountered dense to very dense, fine to medium sand at depths ranging from 12 to 17 feet, extending to the termination depths of 25 to 30 feet. The boring logs enclosed in Appendix A should be referred to for exploration specific subsurface conditions. 4.4 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered in all of the borings advanced for this study, at the time of dulling at approximately 10 feet. The inferred gradient of groundwater Is towards the DuwamIsh River. Groundwater in monitoring wells MW -1 and MW -2 was measured on 26 May 1992, 27 May 1992, and 1 June 1992. Depth to groundwater at these times in monitoring wells MW -1 and . MW -2 ranged from approximately 13.06 to 18.64 feet. It appears that the groundwater table beneath the site fluctuates due to fluctuating river levels which are in tum Influenced by tidal fluctuations: We would anticipate the fluctuations would lag the river stage temporarily, with groundwater fluctuations decreasing with increasing distance from the river's edge. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYTICAL TEST RESULTS Soil samples collected from borings B-1, B-2, and B-3 and submitted for analytical testing for detection of concentrations of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX), halogenated volatile organics (method 8240), and semivolatile organics (Method 8270) were, upon analysis, below detection limits for the respective constituents. Groundwater collected from monitoring weB MW -1 and analyzed for total EPA metals contained upon analysis, 34 ppb, 59 ppb, and 120 ppb chromium, copper, and zinc, respectively. Groundwater collected from monitoring well MW -2 and submitted for analytical testing for total EPA Priority metals contained upon analysis, 23 ppb, copper and 110 ppb zinc. Groundwater collected from monitoring wells MW -1 and MW -2 and submitted for analytical testing was below detection limits for dissolved EPA priority metals (Method 6010/7000), hexavalent chromium, semi -volatile organics (Method 8240/8260); Water collected from the existing sump located in the northern portion of the main building contained upon analysis total EPA Priority Metals In the following concentrations: 1,700 ppb, 2800 ppb, 1800 ppb, 360 ppb, • • Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 6 4.4 ppb, and 530 ppb of cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc respectively. Of these metals tested, the concentrations of cadmium, chromium, lead, and mercury exceed Washington State Model Toxic Control Act (MTCA) Method A cleanup levels. 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Site soils submitted for analysis from the borings B-1, B-2, B-3 were non detectable for the constituents analyzed. With respect to the analytical test results, the sump water (approximately 100 gallons) should be manifested as a hazardous waste and removed by a local vacuum company and hauled away for proper disposal. Concomitant with disposal we recommend that the existing sump be inspected for its structural integrity, and, If damaged, we would recommend that additional subsurface soils and groundwater evaluation for metal concentrations be conducted within the sump vicinity. Moreover, the drain located next to the sump should be Investigated in order to locate the discharge outlet to the drain. Site sols should be collected and screened in order to assess metal concentrations We also recommend at least one more groundwater sampling event in order to asses the concentrations of total metals in the groundwater at the subject site. Results of our environmental exploration of the subject site indicate that in general the site does not appear to be significantly impacted by past site use. It is possible that limited area surficial zones of Impacted soil may exist on the site that remain uncharacterized; however, given the apparent condition of the property these areas if they exist are probably limited in a real extent. 7.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Shore Stabilization Considerations The existing project shore or bank along the Duwamish Waterway is undergoing active erosion, sloughing and slumping due to the tidal and wave effects of the Waterway. A rock revetment is recommended to protect the shore from further degradation and to Improve the stability condition of the narrow upland area adjacent to the existing building. It has been our experience that this is the most cost-effective solution under these circumstances, where the alternatives include structural systems, bulkheads or walls. The construction of a rock revetment would be most economical if It can be accomplished from the upland portion of the site. However, given the limited space between the building and the top of the bank, land side Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 7 construction would likely only be feasible if the building were to be demolished. Construction from the waterside using barge -mounted equipment would otherwise need to be accomplished. In consideration of the adverse effects of the potential land slippage, an 'emergency repair consisting of dumped In place rip - rap may be permitted In a reasonable time frame. Consisting of dumped in place rip -rap. if the building were to be razed, another Tess expensive approach to bank stabilization would be to flatten the slope, followed by placement of Tess costly erosion protection systems to blanket exposed soils. We have assumed in this report that such a decrease In the upland area would not be desirable. 7.2 General Revetment Design Consideration The design of a riprap revetment is dependent upon the associated waterway design parameters as well as the existing bank and subsurface conditions, which have been described previously In this report for this project. The controlling waterway parameter appears to be the 2 to 3 foot navigational wave the Corps of Engineers uses for design along the Duwamish Waterway. The existing site materials for design considerations generally consisted of stratified layers of sand and silt with soft to hard consistency. A typical riprap revetment consists of an armor layer and filter layer(s). The purpose of the armor or riprap is to protect the underlying material(s) from high velocity of flowing water and wave action. A filter is designed so that it will not migrate out through the overlying layer (riprap or other filter), and will prevent migration of the underlying material (other filter or natural site soils). Sometimes it is economical and beneficial on a particular project to substitute a geotextile fabric for the smallest size filter underlayment. The fabric typically acts as and energy dissipator by shielding the existing site material from the erosive forces of moving water. As a fitter, the fabric allows adequate groundwater seepage to pass from the protected slopes while retaining underlying sol particles. The filtration qualities will be required when groundwater seeps cyclically with the tidal changes, to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures. 7.2.1 Revetment Configuration The existing Waterway bank consists of very loose to loose sand alluvium that grades to medium dense to dense with depth. We made extrapolations of the subsurface conditions towards the Waterway based on our borings and experience In the area. In a previous study for a nearby portion of waterfront, we determined that a revetment with a slope of 2H:1 V (horizontal to vertical) would provide a static factor of safety of approximately 1.2. As the slope is flattened, a higher factor of safety is realized. However, based on our analyses, it would take a revetment slope angle flatter than 4H:1V to obtain a factor of safety of 1.5, • • Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 8 a standard factor of safety used for permanent embankments. If a flatter slope were to be constructed waterward of the existing shoreline, this latter design would extend a considerable distance into the Waterway and require a substantial amount of construction material. Permitting of waterfront fills will be more expedient If the net El is kept to 1 cubic yard per foot of waterfront or Tess. Although low, a static factor of safety of 1.2 is not unusual for river and pert embankments and has been used on many port facilities in the Puget Sound region. As is the case with many of these facilities, the slopes at this site may not be stable during a major seismic event for the Puget Sound region. We have not performed a detailed study of the foundation of the existing buildings, but would assume they are supported on shallow foundations based on their age and condition. Construction of a rock revetment along the waterfront with a 2H:1V outside slope will increase the stability of the building under both static and dynamic loading. To increase the safety factor of the buildings and waterfront slopes during a seismic event would likely required transferring the building foundation Toads to dense sols at depth by underpinning the foundation with piles. A further increase in the waterfront stability would involve substitution of a structural retaining wall (bulkhead) for the rock revetment. Because of the additional cost required to make the slopes theoretically stable during a seismic event, owners often consider it to be a reasonable compromise to use the 2H:1V slope configuration. Assuming this to be the case. we have based our further analyses and recommendations on a revetment slope configuration of 2H:1V. The riprap necessary for the project is large enough to require two layers of filter: one to prevent migration of the fine grained, existing bank sols, and one to prevent migration of this smaller gradation filter through the voids in the riprap. Based on our experience in the area, we recommend a revetment consisting of riprap, an intermediate stone filter, and a geotextle fabric against the finer site soils be utilized for design. 7.2.1.1 Slope Preparation The existing Waterway slop( should be cleaned and dressed prior to placing the geotextle fabric. This Includes removing the existing vegetation, significant wood and organics, and any existing riprap not meeting the specifications described subsequently. The slope should be graded to a smooth, uniform surface, devoid of overhangs or depressions that would inhibit intimate contact with the fabric. Al excavated material should be wasted form the site that is not suitable for bacldiil. We recommend that slope be observed by a representative form our firm prior to placing the fabric. Security Pacific Corporation 9 July 1992 W-8219 Page 9 7.2.1.2 Geotextile Fabric A suitable geotexdile fabric should be placed on the cleaned and dressed slope. We recommend utilizing a Mirafi 700X or the equivalent for this application. The fabric Is a woven product that meets Corps of Engineers specifications for use in revetments. 7.2.1.3 Intermediate Filter An intermediate filter consisting of ballast or bedding material should be place don the geotextile fabric as necessary to achieve the 2H:1V sub -slope for placement of the riprap. This bedding material should be at least 12 inches In thickness perpendicular to the slope at all times. Due to the steep nature of most of the existing bank this could result In a rather large wedge of this material. The bedding material should consist of screened, crushed ballast or quarry spalls, 2 to 4 inches in diameter, with Tess than 10 percent passing a 2 inch square opening. We recommend this material be placed from the bottom of the slope upward to the top of the slope. The bedding material should not be end -dumped. It also should not be dropped from a height over 1 foot (e.g., by clamshell) above the fabric unto at least a 2 foot thickness of ballast exists over the fabric. The bedding material should meet the same testing requirements as those presented for the riprap. 7.2.1.4 Riprap The stone used for rock riprap (and the intermediate filter) should be hard, durable, angular in shape, resistant to weather and free from overburden, spoil, shale, organic and other deleterious material. Neither the breadth nor thickness of the riprap should be less than one-third its length In addition, these materials shall conform to the following requirements: Test Requirement 1. Specific Gravity (ASTM:D 127 or AASHTO:T85) 2.65 minimum 2. Percent Absorption (ASTM:DC 127 or AASHTO:T85) 3% maximum 3. Sulfate Soundness (AASHOTO:T104) Loss of Tess than 5% after five cycles 4. Ethylene Glycol Test (Corps of Engineers CRD -C 148) Not more than 15% breakdown The riprap should be placed with a clamshell or other means such that the gradation Is well -distributed and applied in a uniform manner, without disturbance to the underlying layer. It should be noted that. provided Security Pacific Corporation W-8219 9 July 1992 Page 10 a 12 inch thickness of quarry spall bedding material has been applied over the fabric, the 2H:1V slope configuration could be accomplished using riprap provided a 31/2 feet thickness exists along the entire slope, if this Is deemed economically advantageous. 8.0 CLOSURE The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the explorations accomplished for this study. The number, locations, and depths of our explorations were completed within the she and scope constraints so as to yield the information used to formulate our recommendations. If changes in the nature, elevation or orientation of the proposed development are made, we recommend that we be provided the opportunity to review the recommendations provided herein to determine whether any changes are appropriate. General design considerations for a rock revetment edge protection presented herein are very preliminary and should not be used for construction purposes without additional field work, survey and analysis in order to finalize design and recommendations prior to construction. We appreciate this opportunity to be •of service to you on this project. Should you have any questions regarding this report, or other aspects of the project, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully submitted, RZA AGRA, Inc. 1)2. n 7.ta Z �; ,ice` ,^ r. •r 3- �3 rr James S. Dransfield,;;�tS • . :_;•s�� .'`� ._t.lit - Associate Daryl S. Ptrarca, R.E.A. Senior Project Manager dak/kwg/tgs Dale A. Kramer Project Geologist i. • . !+ Ii�J. 1 O :.0 - 0i/ 01.11 ,1• ( t: pnN lUlll I0 WY • PIP • • la M ••M 5. • • • • M •1 Iv •.c t til •• • 1 _J3 M1 _4. — 0.00 • 1 SMAil SMAIC 1� .1 MS VS.4"9111Gia MCI AI. I• 41 LOCATION MAF tal cv 3 0 0) 0) z Oh Oh z Z ▪ Z co O N al C.11 t12 al 2$� p • to °gid tra (Y• .. .. tq =� cs • . •I • r J O. Z 0 0 J < m 0 O Z Z I- w 0 Z O. 0 O 0 < Z Z w0< N w a F- Z CO w Ei w0 _J CC I--Zm CC Z 002 al ASSOCIATED GROCERS WAREHOUSE EPS"( MPRG\NPL Wp,Y VACANT PROPERTY OVERGROWN BERRY BUSHES McKONKEY PROPERTY/ BIG B'S AUTO SALES TOWING AND REPAIR_ FORMER CHEVRON SERVICE STATION PARCEL A SKAGEN BOATS 10625-29 EAST MARGINAL WAY B-3/ MW -2 SUMP LOCATION ------------ LEGEND B-3/ MW- 2 • MONITORING WELL/BORING NUMBER AND LOCATION • LOCATION OF POLE -MOUNTED TRANSFORMER BILLBOARD SIGN 8-2 DUWAMISH RIVER, PARCEL 8 PETROLANE 10655 PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH AST STORAGE AREA B-1/ MW -1 • ASBESTOS SAMPLE LOCATION _ AREA OF POSSIBLE TENSION CLACKS WITH MAXIMUM 0.5 FOOT DISPLACEMENT THE NICE WONGER COMPANY (=18.0000�GALLON PROPAN_JE AST AST STORAGE AREA APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FORMER STORAGE / /.N0 DEBRIS DISPOSAL OVON SS300V RZA AGRA, INC. Engineering 6 Environments/ Services 11335 N.E. 122nd Way Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034-6918 W.O. W-8219 DEBION DAK DRAWN MJF DATE JUN 1992 BCALE NONE SECURITY PACIFIC BANK SEATVLE, WASHINGTON SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 2 oRAWVYi NO. NEA\W-8219\MTV) Wo PLATE 3 NORTH CENTRAL FACE OF MAIN BUILDING WINDOWS ARE BOWED AND BRACED BY BEAMS VERTICALLY SUPPORTING SASH PLATE 4 INSIDE FACE OF • DISPLACED DOOR NOTE CRACKING ALONG CENTRAL FLOOR AREA r PLATE 5 CEILING OF MAIN BUILDING SHOWING APPROXIMATE LOCATIOr OF MATERIAL SELECTED FOR ASBESTOS SAMPLING PLATE 6 WEST CENTRAL SIDE OF MAIN BUILDING °r: PLATE 7 • v WEST EDGE OF SUBJECT SITE MIDWAY BETWEEN BUTLER AND MAIN BUILDINC NOTE TENSION CRACKS WITH MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT OF 0.5 FEET PLATE 8 PARTIALLY "RIP -RAPPED" RIVER BANK NORTH OF PROJECT SITE • • PLATE 9. RIVER BANK ADJACENT TO SUBJECT SITE. NOTE LEANING PILES glP RAOPEO tpropy 1-6 gar* PLATE 10 Pr 1 • . • ' • 4 • RIP -RAPPED PROPERT) TO NORTH OF SUBJECI SITE APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration program conducted for this study consisted of advancing a number of test borings. The approximate exploration locations are illustrated on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. The exploration locations were obtained in the field by taping from fixed site features. Elevations of the explorations were obtained during a licensed survey by Goldsmith Surveyors. The locations of the explorations should be considered as accurate as the degree implied by the method used. Hollow Stem Auger Borings Three borings were drilled on 21 May, 1992 by local a exploration drilling company under subcontract to our firm. The borings were drilled by advancing a 4 -inch inside diameter hollow -stem auger with a truck- mounted drill rig. During the drilling process, samples were generally obtained at 21,4 or 5 foot depth intervals. The borings were continuously observed and logged by a geotechnical engineer from our firm. Disturbed samples were obtained by using the Standard Penetration Test procedure as described in ASTM:D 1586. The test and sampling method consists of driving a standard 2 -inch outside diameter, split barrel sampler a distance of 18 -inches into the soil with a 140 -pound hammer free falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows for each 6 -inch interval is recorded. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is considered the Standard Penetration Resistance ('N') or blow count. The blow count is presented graphically on the boring logs in this appendix If a total of 50 blows is recorded within one 6 -inch Interval, the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the number of inches of penetration. The resistance, or 'N' value, provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils. The soil samples obtained from the split barrel sampler were classified in the field and representative portions placed in water tight containers. The samples were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and laboratory testing. Samples are generally saved for a period of 30 days unless special arrangements are made. AppendLx A Page 2 Groundwater observation wells were Installed at 2 of the test boring locations. Each well consisted of a slotted length of PVC pipe placed In the bottom of the boring. A blank PVC riser extended from the lower slotted section to the ground surface. Granular material was utilized as backfll around the slotted section to allow entry of water Into the observation well. The groundwater level measured within each observation well, subsequent to•completion of the boring and well installation, Is indicated by a triangular symbol on the appropriate boring log along with the date of the measurement. The boring Togs presented In this appendbc are based on the drilling action, inspection of the samples secured, laboratory results and field logs. The various types of soils are Indicated as well as the depths where the soils or characteristics of the sods changed. If should be noted that these changes may have been gradual,'and if the changes occurred between sample intervals, they were interpreted. Security Pcfic Bank PROJECT: East Marginal Way Property w.o. W-8219 BORING Na B-1 • -10- - 15 - - 20- - 25 AIM 30 SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximate ground surface elevation: 00 feet Moat, brown to block, fine SAND Very loose, moist, brown to block fine SAND r• V a H Loose, saturated, brown, The to medium SAND, — some spit. Medium stiff, damp, brown, sandy, clayey SILT. some woody material Very dense, saturated, black, The to medium SAND with troce silt Very dense, saturated block, fine to medum SAND Very dense, saturated, black, Me to medh,rm SAN /Boring terminated at approximately 30 feet i= h z 5-7 5-2 r- STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Pace 8 < £ Blows pa foot of 1 V 3 0 10 20 30 40 SOTESTINC • • • • • • ....._... • • • • • --r -1 • • • • • • • • r • • • • LEGEND I2-iach OD :plat -spoon sample X. Groundwater level •0 at time of driilia= o 10 20 30 40 So MOISTURE CONTENT 1 • 1 Plastic limit Natural Liquid Lmit RZA AGRA, Inc Engineering & Environmenta.+Services 11335 NE 122nd Way, Suite 103 ',Wand. Washington 98034-6918 Drilling started: 21 May 1992 Drilling completed: 21 MOy 1992 Loeeed bv: rue • Security Pacific Bank PROJECT: East Marginal Way Property W.O. W-8219 BORING NO. B-2 E. 8 -0 SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximate ground surface elevation: 00 feet u N t/7Z ig 0 < sP* 0 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Page 1 A,Blows per toot of 1 10 20 ao 40 TESTING - 10- - 15 - - 20- - 25 - - 30 - Medium dense, damp, brown, fine SAND with some silt Medium stiff, saturated, gray, clayey SILT some sand. abundant woody material Stiff, saturated, groysandy clayey SILT abundant woody material Very dense, saturated, black, fine fo medium Dense, saturated block, fine to medium SAND trace silt Boring terminated at approximately • 25 feet LEGEND 1 2 -inch OD split -spoon sample XSample not recovered Mr Groundwater level AID at time of drilling S-2 5-3 S-5 AID to ao ao MOISTURE CONTENT • Natural RZA AGRA, Inc Engineering & Environmental Services 11335 NE 122nd Way, Sufte 100 10rldond, Washington 98034.6918 Drillino Stxnr•A• 91 AArni 700) n.:tt: ...t_.�t• 91 AArni 1OO) Security Panic Bank • PROJECT: East Marginal Way Property W.O. W-8219 BORING NO. B-3 3 Y 0 SOIL DESCRIPTION ' Approximate ground surface elevation: 00 feet to i� Z Pz STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE Page 1 . Blows per foot of l v 3 o 10 20 30 40 soTESTINC 10 - - 15- - 20 - - 25 Medium dense , damp, block. clayey silty SAND — Hord, saturated, gray, clayey SILT some sand. —'T abundant woody fragments 11 Dense, saturated, block. file to medium SAND Very dense, saturated, block, fine to medium SAND Very dense, saturated, block. file to medium —I SAND 111 Very dense, saturated, block, fine to medlum SAND Boring terminated at opproxamotely 30 feet • , s-1 • • • • • • • • • • S-2 ATD S -5— • • • — .r- • • • • • • • • . . Y ••- .1 1 • • • LEGEND I2 -inch OD split -spoon sample Grouedwat= level Ao at time of drilling • to I Plastic limit an 30 40 40 MOISTURE CONTENT • l Natural liquid limit RZA AGRA, Inc Engineering & Environmento! Services 11335 NE 122nd Way, Suite 100 IOridond, Washington 98034918 Drilling started: 21 May 1992 Drilling completed: 21 May 1992 Logged by: DAK • Security Pacific Bank PROJECT: East Marginal Way Property w. o. W-8219 WELL NO. MW - Elevation reference: Ground surface elevation: Well completed: Casing elevation AS -BUILT DESIGN Page 1 of 1 NO SOIL DESCRIPTION • r r�ec o� =8 _z Xo o • < 0 V -10- - 15 - 20 - - .25 - - 30-" Moist, brown. black, fine grain SAND Very loose, moist, brown. black fine — SAND I Loose, saturated, brown. fine SAND, — some silt Medium stiff, clomp, brown. sandy. — clayey. SILT, some woody material Very dense, saturated, block, fine to — medium SAND, trace at Very dense, saturated, block, fine to -- medium SAND Very dense. saturated, black, fine to medium SAND Bottom of boring at 30 feet. • • T 1 1 — 1— S-1 S-1 " -0 ' S-2 2 0 S-3 — 4 S-4 S-5 5-6 S-7 4 74 59 84 0 0 ATD 1 Flush -mounted /— steel monument IG Ground surface op of casing ement Bentonite Casing (Schedule -40 2 -inch 1.0. PVC) 8-I2 sand filter pock !IllllllllllllIID1111 I®IIIIIIII Screen (2 -inch 1.0. PVC with .010 -inch slots) Threaded end cap ZFSZINC LEGEND 2 -Inds O.C. observed groundwater te»t spin -spoon sornd. Aro • at Ilene or Mang RZA AGRA, Inc. Geotechnical & Environmental Group 11335 NE 122ad Way, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034-6918 Drillinx started: 91 AAnv 7009 fir T1ine rnnnlr'pri- T nnn►rr ►.... n A v • Security Pcific Bank PROJECT: East Marginal Way Property w.o. W-8219 WELL NO. MW-: Elevation reference: Ground surface elevation Well complete& Casing elevation: AS -BUILT DESIGN Page 1 of 1 r. -'0 SOIL DESCRIPTION J <� e fd o� r2 Z 05 2 0< v3 - 5' - 10 - 15 - - 20- -25- - 30-{ Medium dense, damp, black, clayey silty SAND Hard, saturated, gray, clayey SILT som sand abundant woody fragments Dense, saturated, block. fine to medium SAND e - Very dense. saturated. block, fine to medium SAND Very dense, saturated, black. fine to medium SAND Very dense, saturated, block, fine to medium SAND 'Bottom of boring of 30 feet. I T T • • S- S -2 S-3 S-4 S-5 5-6 28 44 35 54 50 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 AID Rush -mounted steel monument Ground surface op of casing ement Bentonite Casing (Schedule -40 2 -inch LD. PVC) 8-12 sand fitter pock Screen (2 -inch LD. PVC with 0.10 -inch slots) Threaded end cap 1Fsrf4G LEGEND T 24icn 0.0. spIt.spoan sample moObserved groundwater:level AID • at gm* ot or4np RZA AGRA, Inc. Geotechnical & Environmental Group 11335 NE 122nd Way, Suite 100 Kirkland, Wuhington 98034-6918 Drilling started 21 May 1992 Drilling completed: 71 AAr,v 1001 L.oaaed bv: nA1( APPENDIX B W-8219 LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES A series of laboratory tests were performed during the course of this study to evaluate the index and geotechnical engineering properties of the subsurface soils. Descriptions of the types of tests performed are given below. Visual Classification Samples recovered from the exploration locations were visually classified In the field during the exploration program. Representative portions of the samples were carefully packaged In watertight containers and transported to our laboratory where the field classifications were verified or modified as required. Visual classification was generally done in accordance with the Unified Sod Classification system. Visual soil classification includes evaluation of color, relative moisture content, soil type based on grain size. and accessory soil types included in the sample. Soil classifications are presented on the exploration logs in Appendb: A. Moisture Content Determinations Moisture content determinations were performed on representative samples obtained from the explorations in order to aid in identification and correlation of soil types. The determinations were made in general accordance with the test procedures described in ASTM:D-2216. The results of the tests are shown on the exploration logs in Appendix A. Atterberg Limits Atterberg limits are used primarily for classification and indexing of cohesive soils. The liquid and plastic limits are two of the five Atterberg limits and are defined as the moisture content of a cohesive soil at arbitrarily established limits for liquid and plastic behavior, respectively. Uquid and plastic limits were established for selected samples In general accordance with ASTM:D-423 and ASTM:0-424. respectively. The plastic limits and liquid limits are presented adjacent to the appropriate samples on the exploration Togs in Appendix A. Appendix B Page 2 Grain Size Analyses A grain size analysis indicates the range in diameter of sol particles included in a particular sample. Grain size analyses were performed on representative samples in general accordance with ASTM:D-422. The results of the grain size determinations for the samples were used in classification of the soils, and are presented in this appendix PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 00 SIZE ar sr OF OPENING r 1 r 1 IN INCHES t vr• 1 We 3/r 1 1 rim* U.S. STANDARD 4 u 1 s SIEVE 4. l SIZE M 1M 1 1 au 1 HYDROMETER IfNE GRAINED . ,1.._.�,: ----..,,,,,....\\. 70u. {1 60 ii ,` - SO � .i — 40 V — 30 , � 1� 20 'a v - .11 11\,........,..,:st .... 1 1000 100 10 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 BOULDERS COBBLES Guano nr.. . G.rs. Y.44.0 rim* Sal ai., cRAVEL SAND IfNE GRAINED E ploraUoa $ample Number Depth s—.IF--n..-1 1 1-2 ►-•-•-r♦ 11-2 .--t-• .--i 1-2 II -3 9-2 10' Moisture Mee 310 Hs s -s 1r aim T1s 11-a is 240 4z 3-1 r 370 400 6oU Description Project: Security Pacific Hank Work Order. W-8219 Date: 6/2/92 RZA - AGRA ENGINEERING k ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 11335 N.E. 122nd Way Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98034-6918' 80 PLASTICITY CHART 70 50 W 50 0 . Z 3- 40 N 30 20 10 0 / / / r / / 0 / a (Lys,. 15"' ILII [111 Hi I1I1 1TITTIIgIli 1 IIFT' I1TI IIII 1111 1111 1111 1I1i 1111 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 LIQUID OMIT 100 110 120 130 140 150 S►mtsol Sample Type Semple Number Depth (n.) Moisture Liquid LIMN Mosul Until Holds Wien O e-2 9-2 t0• 31Is 41 36 5 a 8-2 s-3 15• Sas 88 12 33 4 0 • 3 — Boring Tp — Te.tpit Ns — Hand auger 01 — Orel Bag Z — Ocher Project: Security Pacific Bonk Work Order. W-8219 Dote: 6/2/92 RZA — AGRA EIIGDIECRINC & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 11335 N.E. 122nd Way Suite 100 Kirkland. Washington 98034-6918 4 • ASBESTOS ANALYSIS AND INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. Asbestos Analysis and Information Service, Inc. Job # 5083 • Bulk Sample Analyses client: RZA-AGRA, Inc. Kirkland, WA Dale Kramer Job #: W-8219 May 26, 1992 P.O. Box 837 Four Oaks, NC 27524 • 205 Providence Road Chapel Hill. NC 27514 • COMMENTS ON BULK SAMPLE ASBESTOS ANALYSES Points of interest to the Management Planner The primary concern of Asbestos Analysis and Information Service, inc. is to provide accurate identification of asbestos -containing materials. The presence of asbestos does not constitute ACM; therefore, laboratory reports may indicate asbestos in amounts of less than one percent, identifying the sample as negative. Materials so identified are of special concern to AAIS due to the variation in asbestos content that can occur among various samples of the same material. The manufacturing techniques and resultant inhomogeneity of suspect materials, the proximity of sample material to another ACM source, sampling techniques which allow for sarnple mixing, and the presence of minor asbestos -containing layers in heterogeneous materials are all parameters which affect the asbestos content of a particular sarnple. Therefore, the management planner should consider the entire homogeneous sampling area, and the sampling scheme employed, when making decisions. Variations in percentages reported for sample constituents occur among analysts as a result of the subjectivity of visual estimation. Variance of 25% is to be expected with higher variations at the low end of the reporting range. Also, analysts may group constituents that commonly occur together under a single percentage amount. Minor accessory minerals are usually grouped with major constituents: for example, feldspars generally with quartz, or constituents of plaster such as gypsum needles, talc, clay, etc. are all grouped with plaster. Minerals which occur in trace amounts generally are not listed individually unless they are asbestos. Minor binder or glue which accompanies cellulose or fiberglass in ceiling tiles or paper is included with the cellulose or fiberglass percentage. Details of individual laboratory reports therefore may vary; however, the overall identification of the same sample by different analysts should agree. Notice the statement at the bottom of the laboratory reporting form regarding the analyses offloor tiles. Floor tiles are reported as positive if PLM techniques result in the identification of any asbestos fibers. Quantitation of asbestos in floor tiles is reported as a relative indicator: if asbestos fibers are readily visible under low power stereoscopic examination, a value greater than 5 percent may be assigned; if scattered asbestos fibers are visible under the same examination, a 5 percent value is assigned; if asbestos fibers are visible only under high magnification and are widely scattered, a value of less than 5 percent may be assigned; and, if no asbestos fibers are detected in the tile matrix but are found in attached mastic, the mastic will be reported as asbestos -containing and the tile as none detected. It would be prudent to treat reported negative floor tiles as ACM and obtain additional testing on such tiles prior to any destructive or abrasive activity upon the tiles. Other nonfriable materials that resist routine grinding procedures may fall into this reporting category. ASBESTOS ANALYSIS AND P.O. Box 837 Four Oaks, NC 27524 919-894-7718 FAX: 919-894-6187 INFORMATION SERVICE, INC. Glen Lennox Offices, Suite 202 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 919-967-3295 FAX: 919-967-9201 Client/Project: W-8219 Client Sample No.: Asb-1 Analyst: els Description: Orange woody fibrous AAIS Project No.: 5087 AAIS Sample No.: 1 Date: 5/26/92 ceiling tile with white paint. ASBESTOS: present Chrysotile: Amosite: other: x not detected total ASBESTOS: nd % OTHER FIBROUS MATERIAL: fbgls/min.wool: cellulose: synthetics: other: % 98 OA other: total other fibrous: NONFIBROUS MATERIAL: type: paint • 2 % type: : % type: eye comments: total nonfibrous: 98 % 2 % note: This analysis was performed as recommended by EPA in Test Method document "EPA 600/M4-82 -020' and suggestion sheets supplied to Tabs. These results are determined only from the above one sample. Extrapolation of results to cover large areas should incorporate a random sampling scheme and agreement of multiple samples' results. NVLAP accreditation does not imply govemment endorsement of individual sample analyses. • The EPA has no approved test method for the identification of asbestos in floor tiles. Since most of the vinyl floor tiles marketed in the late sixties to mid -seventies contained 8-30 % asbestos, and because much of the asbestos was milled so fine as to be below the detection limits of current PLM techniques. the presence of any detectable asbestos by PLM is an indication the tile is ACM. The nondetection of asbestos fibers by PLM is of itself inconclusive. ntv Analyst Signature =NORTH • • = CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 \\\ww`N.F wn mw w ♦ v.\MC..n.Mv.V•!'�w'�Qr-.w. \!..Y� •Y. H. .s.wnw.''n.'v '.^`.•:•"'''"'""""•••••"*".`"'","'" .YY.^ _ ^.. ^./�,Y�;; /.N+ii^Hi!N//+/ Y ^^Y`.?:•. w•wwww . ` ` ••:.• ♦mw�:.....n iw�wwwvww..�w.:•:vwww. "-'/- .n..w.a'w.wv.wv.wr-.i.Wiw.MRpv:wLiGI «VA�.^/.r�w�A�icw.vr RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 :;11335 NE 122nd Way. #100 Matrbc Soil illKrkland, WA 98034 Analysis for Total Solids Received: May 27, 1992 Attention: Dale Kramer First Sample #: 205-1379 Reported: Jun 15 1992 ... :.-•'^"^v :..i.^•w .:,-..�.`-`:.w.vyv w.%Cw ^wro!MV`v'Wwrwi �^�'%",..w....,••••••••••••••••,••••• iw\�w'1\.M1.L+Y.w::•i . -*0' ' 6.rr^fWA�..H.w'�Y+rn6':.v...w JMwr.YW.r�.::y...N>i:H�.....h.c''.: • .. LABORATORY ANALYSIS FOR: Total Solids Sample Sample Sample Number Description Result 205-1379 Bt. S-3 73 205.1380 B2, S-2 62 205-1381 B3, S.2 62 North Creek Analytical routinely provides analytical results for soils, sediments,or sludges on a WET WEIGHT 'as received' basis. To attain dry weight equivalents for regulatory compliance, divide the soil result by the decimal fraction of percent solids. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Cocanour oratory Director 2051379.FtZA <1> NORTHi =CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2559 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 -. .. ::. ♦- vA..v....w-..ra:.:v:?-..wNtwrO.G.i+.Ji...:wii.inJ.l.> .vw.-.vn.:...-nw....'wiw.w4:..N.4..-+:w.vi..n.i ./ ,^ /w.N..L.�'w...Y.• RZA/AGRA Client Project III: Security Pacific, W-8219 Sampled: May 21, 1992 <11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Matrix Descript: Soil Received: May 27, 1992: `:Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 418.1 Modified (1.R. w/clean-up) Extracted: May 29, 1992:: Attention: Dale Kramer First Sample #: 205-1379 Analyzed: May 29, 1992;` Reported: Jun 15, 1992 ter;, :;:�i:Y::,:�....:x::'�.n,......,�uo:...,.::.,,�.i;.f �c-:Ga:�.:,�:;c:::r..�:..,:,:Eca �...�. ;..:..,��:.w....... ...... ........ TOTAL RECOVERABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WTPH-418.1) Sample Sample Petroleum Oil Number Description mg/kg (PPm) 205-1379 B1, S-3 205-1380_ B2, 8-2 205-1381 B3, 8-2 BLK052992 Method Blank N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Detection Limits: 10 Malytes reported u N.D. we not present above the stated remit of detection. NO; CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc t Cocanour Laboratory Director CREEKNORTH • ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 yn��vave•.w.-.\"v!v.`!Q,H�^.h\N�M�wwvw.ww.'a.l�.^^!.<. N^O\^.C\.• �!•.^^""�^.w.^^]lvp)W . vM.r •w.Mv f`:^11•,..M. •••7• IfiC // w.w.i N /•NM' <RZA/AGRA t 1335 NE 122nd Way, #100 F'Kirkland, WA 98034 Attention: Dale Kramer x•�..`.....Y..v-...�+e�q...;.._. �.:_.__�..,..�:.�__..�>. ->' - --- ..�;�.....,:.,<_.,.... - -. / _ Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Matrix Descript: Sob Analysis Method: EPA 3550/8015 First Sample #: 205-1379 Sample Number 205-1379 205-1380 205-1381 BLK052892 -TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WTPH-D) Sample Description B1, S-3 132. S-2 B3, S-2 Extractable Hydrocarbons mg/kg (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. Method Blank N.D. Surrogate Recovery 96 86 91 96 91 Sampled: May 21, 1992 Received: May 27, .1992 Extracted: May 28, 1992 Analyzed: May 29, 1992 Reported: Jun 15, 1992 Detection Umits: 10 Extractable Hydrocarbons ars quantitated as diesel range organics (nc$ - nC24). Surrogate recovery reported is for 2-Auorobiphenyl. Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Cocanour Laboratory Director 2051379.RZA <3> NORTH =CREEK ANALYTICAL • • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 i< 11335 NE 122nd Way, .#100 Matrix Descript: Sod ':Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 5030/8015/8020 Attention Dale Kramer First Sample ,.-...,..... .....�.. t 05 1379 Reported Jun 5, 1992. Sampled: May 21, 1992 Received: May 27, 1992;; Analyzed: Jun 2, 1992:" TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS with BTEX DISTINCTION (WTPH-G/BTEX) Sample Number Sample Description 205-1379 81, S-3 205-1380 82, S-2 205-1381. B3, S-2 BLK060292. Method Blank Volatile Hydrocarbons mg/kg (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Ethyl Surrogate Benzene Toluene Benzene Xylenes Recovery mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg % (Ppm) (Ppm) (PPm) (Ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 83 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 88 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 87 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 85 Detection Limits: 1.0 0.050 0.10 0.10 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons are quantitated as gasoline range organics (na - nC12). Surrogate recovery reported is for Bromolluorobenzene. Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Cocanour Laboratory Director =NORTH • =CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 .. ..,w.. ................ .wr • ii. K.r.•or M.wr;•r�rvyv er,! "'�' ... /. .;.T... Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Sampled: May 21, 19921 Sample Descript: Soil, B1, S-3 Received: May 27, 1992; Analysis Method: EPA 8240 Analyzed: Jun 2. 1992 • Sample Number. 205-1379 Reported: Jun 15, 1992;: RZA/AGRA 1::11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 > K lrkland, WA 98034 'Attention: Dale Kramer �Nilw.JiC4wtaKinww'inCJO.w1%NNrv.ii:1:.(twvnM.2MT.✓. Analyte ,- - werw ..w• ay ha.«� ^Nw^ Mr. • «n•^ ..Tr+.x, . Pc 1,1f."rw•ryr . M0.MW.%VNiooX(.'wM'.IO:nY.bA(fAfN4iD.d.OfbY/+.Wiw[�.hMGln'4W/�w✓ /tQMOWIAfbMU.MAf AF•iI//� viI//.Y.iMMN4�tlAti.f/Ad///AGNY:�.GL/bl/w/rir//nLY�W HALOGENATED VOLATILE ORGANICS (EPA 8240) Bromodichloromethane....., Bromoform Bromomethane Carbon tetrachloride Chlorobenzene Chloroethane 2-Chloroethyvinyi ether Chloroform Chloromethane Dibromochloromethane 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethene Total 1,2-Dichl oroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane cis-1,3-Dichloropropene trans-1,3-Dichloropropene Methylene chloride 1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane Tetrachloroethene 1,1,1 Trichloroethane 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane Trichloroethene Trichlorofluoromethane Vinyl chloride ........ ................ ......... ..._............ ....... .........._ Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery: 1.2-Dichloroethane-d4 Toluene -da 4-8romofluorobenzene 85 99 84 Detection Umit mg/kg (ppm) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated Omit of detection. NO ' CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc canour Laboratory Director Sample Resutts mg/kg (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051379.RZA <5> • . NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 ,V`- :-"wr._--,-.-w ,.. i:..••...4.. .. :.w..•::.:..:..�..:... .;....:..... ......-.;...oi..:...:.....:.:wi..::..;.+.w.(.';:.:.�:.....:.:�.ow..:w..»:.is::c.::v.✓.w ..'t: �-- .w RZAAGRA,... / Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Sampled: May 21, 1992 <11335 NE 122nd Way. #100 Sample Descript Soil, B2, S-2 Received: May 27. 1992 - Krldand, WA 96034 Analysis Method: EPA 8240 Analyzed: Jun 2, 1992, "Attention: Dale Kramer Sam I Numb p e um er 205 1380 ed: Jun 15 1 w-....�. w• ...- Report 092, . , j .. •ww-M.,...w.�,•�,.•- ,,ww �.,•,.•....(,rM, . V aM:�.:.:✓ iri/,,lhw.�. ... .. Analyte HALOGENATED VOLATILE ORGANICS (EPA 8240) Detection Limit mg/kg (ppm) Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) Bromodichloromethane 0.10. N.D. Bromoform. 0.10 •••••••••••• 00.11100 N.D. Bromomethane 0.10 N.D. Carbon tetrachloride 0.10 N.D. Chlorobenzene 0.10 N.D. Chloroethane 0.10 N.D. 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether 0.10 N.D. Chloroform. 0.10 N.D. Chloromethane 0.10 N.D. Dibromochloromethane 0.10 N.D. 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 0.10 N.D. 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene...... 0.10 N.D. 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 0.10 N.D. 1,1-Dichloroethane. 0.10 N.D. 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.10 N.D. 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.10 N.D. Total l,2-Dichloroethene 0.10 N.D. 1,2•Dichloropropane 0.10 N.D. cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.10 N.D. trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.10 N.D. Methylene chloride 0.10 N.D. 1,1,2.2 -Tetrachloroethane 0.10 N.D. Tetrachloroethene 0.10 N.D. 1,1,1 Trichloroethane 0.10 N.D. 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane 0.10 N.D. Trichloroethene 0.10 N.D. Trichlorofluoromethane 0.10 N.D. Vinyl chloride 0.10 N.D. Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery: 1,2-Oitloroethane-d4 86 Toluene d8 97 4-Bromofluorobenzene 86 Malytes reported u N.O. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc T • Cocanour Laboratory Director -NORTH • =CREEK ANALYTICAL RZA/AGRA 11335 NE 122nd Way, *100 IGrldand, WA 98034 Attention: Dale Kramer Client Project ID: Sample Descript: Analysis Method: Sample Number. 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 Security Pacific, W-8219 Sampled: Soil, B3, S-2 Received: EPA 8240 Analyzed: 205-1381 Reported .r., . p.. w.. v.. ns•wivwvw.+w.-„, ^ww"^--...nw...v..�rwiv� wvw•�•• - •i..w. aa.::::.� �i?1:N�-.`.t+ttl".iJ.V[.AA1Nn:. .,. 4.»:J::��.wC ..X.:vw **' r wm».....w.•w...............w.......-...-...,.,..,.�.....,..� ........... ..-....-._..._ — �.. HALOGENATED VOLATILE ORGANICS (EPA 8240) Analyte Bromodichloromethane Bromoform Bromomethane Carbon tetrachloride Chlorobenzene Chloroethane 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether Chloroform Chloromethane Dibromochloromethane 1.2 -Dichlorobenzene 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,2•Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethene Total 1.2-Dichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane cis-1,3-Dichloropropene trans-1,3-Dichloropropene Methylene chloride 1,1,2.2 -Tetrachloroethane Tetrachloroethene 1,1,1 Trichloroethane 1,1,2 Trichloroethane Trichloroethene Trichlorofluoromethane Vinyl chloride Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery: 1,2•Dich loroethane-d4 Toluene d8 4-Bromotluorobenzene 87 98 8S May 21, 1992 May 27, 1992 Jun 2, 1992 Jun 15, 1992 Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) mg/kg (ppm) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated IirrUt of detection. NO CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Cocanour Laboratory Director N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051379.RZA <7> NORTH 1 CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 ........... ::-.........:.:.w..n...:.:.:.w........a.:..✓...::.G.w�:..-...�:•:.. �H w!'!^M'�"^'�!•�^7.'.....: r+.••yry...�,..�...»I- ...wn......, .:.w:.;.�..v..w..�...w.....:w......w.......w:.:r:...:w�w...w..::....:.w:..:v w.w,i:.____.. .. :.'�r�•�••- ^'7."...'.•.w. .RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 r• .11335 NE 122nd Way. #100 Sample Descript: Method Blank Kirkland. WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 8240 Analyzed: Jun 2, 1992<: Attention: Dale Kramer v Sam•ple Number. BLK060292 Reported: Jun 15, 1992 • • • -.r,�..r :...r...ui:..:v�..'.✓.:.w..�...ot..i.c.wsv Lw..:.....oi..:..r:::ib.uouv/w.t....i�iit:..::......ur. •...-.:,..waw,,. -. ...i.'......« . r •' . HALOGENATED VOLATILE ORGANICS (EPA 8240) Analyte Detection Limit mg/kg (ppm) Bromodichloromethane 0.10 Bromoform 0.10 Bromomethane 0.10 Carbon tetrachloride 0.10 Chlorobenzene 0.10 Chloroethane 0.10 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether 0.10 Chloroform 0.10 Chloromethane.... 0.10 Dibromochloromethane 0.10 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 0.10 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene 0.10 , 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 0.10 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.10 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.10 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.10 Total 1,2-Dichloroethene 0.10 1,2-Dichloropropane • 0.10 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.10 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.10 Methylene chloride 0.10 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane 0.10 Tetrachloroethene 0.10 1.1,1 -Trichloroethane 0.10 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane 0.10 Trichloroethene 0.10 Trichlorofluoromethane 0.10 Vinyl chloride 0.10 Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery. 12-Dichloroethane-d4 84 Toluene -d8 98 4-8romafluorobenzene 85 Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc t Cocanour Laboratory Director Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051379.RZA <87. • . =NORTH • CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481.9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 z; 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Sample Descript Soil, B3, S-2 illiGrkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Attention: Dale Kramer Sample Number. 205-1381 : ill.tawi.a... • • Analyte • Sampled: May 21, 1992i Received: May 27, 1992;: Extracted: May 29, 1992;; Analyzed: Jun 11, 1992 Reported: Jun 15, 1992:': /MSW/M!Y'^,^wM^M�•M.'/M. I'M)j'^"'!!!'^'rT^y/� N/. ./ /wY/r- H...- r./ .r.v. :y.: .cwfG:Gxaicr::Qw::rSriGiG:6auwD.v/.w.a'.»'.'rnNrlw.GiflcriJaf.aaSa.U..iG.�..rww' w.nc.✓/...�.-::''.w-w.GCV SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) mg/kg (ppm) Acenaphthene 0.40 Acenaphthylene 0.40 Aniline 0.60 Anthracene 0.40 Benzidine .» 4.0 Benzoic Acid 2.0 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.40 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.80 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.80 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.60 Benzo(a) pyrene....»...........» 0.80 Benzyl alcohol 0.80 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 0.40 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0.40 Bis (2-chl oroisopropyl) ether 0.40 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 1.0 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 0.60 Butyl benzyl phthalate 20 4-Chloroaniline 0.40 2-Chloronaphthalene 0.40 4-Chloro-3-methylphenot..............»: 0.40 2 -Chlorophenol 1.0 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 0.40 Chrysene 0.40 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene...»...»..» 1.0 Dibenzofuran. 0.40 Di -N -butyl phthalate 1.0 1.3 -Dichlorobenzene..... .......... _.._..__ ...... ________ 0.40 1.4 -Dichlorobenzene....»» :..........:...»................ » .......»» 0.40 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 0.40 3,3•Dichlorobenzidine..»...............».._.»..-.. ».. 2.0 2,4-Dichlorophenol...».»..» .»....-.._ 0.40 Diethyl phthalate...».......»......».._..................»-.---»,--,.._, 0.40 2.4 -Dimethylphenol --...» .............»...,,..»».»...»..»...,» 1.0 Dimethyl phthalate..... 0.40 4,6-Dinitro-2-methyl phenol 1.0 -- 2.4-Dinitrophenol 1.0 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Page of 2 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051379.RZA <9> NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481.9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 ..w.:w.�w.w�wi .Myw/ryY Mei. N'/Y, :.Oj/.r riq�Y ZA /AG RA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Sampled May 21, 1992'Y ;:.11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Sample Descript Soil, B3, S-2 Received: May 27, 1992i Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted:. May 29, 1992;. Attention: Dale Kramer Sample Number. 205-1381 Analyzed: Jun 11,1 Yz992:•° Reported Jun 15, 1999% "/. !!!;;ui4r i.�v4wiiri�✓tAi if�iiriwl'l.W • � ;vwrwlw�� it ifrifii ri'ry��w.n._ 21 SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) mg/kg (ppm) .... »».».......».»....... »..........» 0.40 ».».»».».»....... N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene N.D. 0.40 ••••••••••••••••••••••...........»» Di-N-octyl phthalate 2.0 Fluoranthene•»••»••»••••••••-»-•-•- N.D. 0.40 N.D. Fluorene 0.40 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene .»». N.D. 0.40 ......»...»..»...»......». Hexachlorobutadiene. 0.40 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene. 2.0 N.D. Hexachloroethane »....»............».......» N.D. Indeno 1,2,3 -cd 0.80 '»"' ( )Pyrene........ 0.80 N.D. Isophorone...»..»...»».»...»..».».......».». 0.40 N.D. 2 -Methylnaphthalene .». 0.40 2-Methylphenol »..».....»..»....»»»..».» N.D. 4-Methylphenol 0.60 »..».»..»...........»..»..».» N.D. Naphthalene 0.60 ».»...».............».....»».» N.D. 0.60 N.D. 2-Nitroanline 0.80 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 0.80 N.D. 4-Nitroaniine 2.0 N.D. Nitrobenzene 2.0 N.D. 2-Nitrophenol 0.40 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 2.0 N.D. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 0.80 N.D. N•Nitroso-di•N•propylamine 0.60 N.D. Pentachlorophenol 2.0 N.D. Phenanthrene ...». 0.40 N.D. Phenol.....».»....»............».......».».»...».»» 0.60 N.D. Pyrene 0.60 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.40 N.D. 2.4,5 Trichlorophenol.....»»»._..»...».».»....»».........»..»» 0.60 N.D. 2,4.6 -Trichlorophenol 0.60 .»...»».»». N.D. Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery: 2-Fluorophenol 70 Phenol -d6 78 2.4.6.Tnbromophenol 78 1 Nitrobenzene -d5 79 2-Fluorobiphenyl 85 Terphenyl d14 96 Analytes reported as N.O. were not present above the stated limit of detection. NgTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 9rnsrz7ome €rn, . -NORTH • -CREEK ANALYTICAL • RZA/AGRA ;11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 >` Kirkland, WA 98034 ;:.Attention: Dale Kramer Analyte } 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell. WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 . nM<w.w.v.�:.w.wrv.. v."...v. n:..::n:mw ♦i.iw..:.. n.ii:.wv:i ...i . ' '..w.i.:.w�l..wvrvw.wwww•�rw.i.w.�rroroir:(�wr.w.w.wrov�...w:ww:.....". Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Sample Descript: Method Blank Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Sample Number. BLK052992 Extracted: May 29, 1992;;: Analyzed: Jun 11. 1992::4 Reported Jun 15, 1992'': :.r.,is;a,..e..c:...w4.;•.:.:• <d....>.�.vr.,o.:..:,.;:.i.....(':% ... ». .... SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 2.6-Dinitrotoluene »» Di-N-octyl phthalate Fluoranthene ». Fluorene. Hexachlorobenzene Hexachiorobutadiene. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Hexachloroethane • I nd eno (1,2,3 -cd) pyrene lsophorone' 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2-Methylphenol 4-Methylphenol ..... Naphthalene 2-Nitroaniline 3-Nitroaniline 4-Nitroanline Nitrobenzene 2-Nitrophenol 4-Nitrophenol »..»..»..... N-Nitrosodiphenylamine N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine............ _.»......:..»...»..... »..... Pentachlorophenol .....» ............. ..»..»..»......... »...... ».._.»» Phenanthrene. .... ....... Phenol»..».......»............».............».......».»»..... Pyrene».».._._.......»..».».....»..»».»»».»».. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene...»..... »..».»........»......»»..» 2,4,5 Trichlorophenol »......»» 2,4,6 -Trichlorophenol ........_....»»»....»........»...»» Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery Detection Limit mg/kg (ppm) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 _ 2-Ruorophenol 74 Phenol -de 80 2.4.6-Tnbrornophenol 80 1 Nitrobenzene -d5 2-Fluorobiphenyt Terphenyld14 81 87 98 Analjaes reported as N.D. were not present above the stated knit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Cocanour ratory Director Page 2 of 2 Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051379.RZA <12> -NORTH• CREEK - ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 .• •., r.,> .., a ,,, Mr r+!�a+«�y.... „«.. o.. ......««.�yya.>� y .�.y-.rv!•,;a..:y.•+.::...,r, :...:a......:w:...+.:.w.,...�.M...•....�....:.ra:::;....:aaa:•..�,«w..•.v:�..w::.:..�..-..:...««.�.✓.:�.:..�...::.,�:«>..wa.., «..«:.:.::: r.....�:>:.<.:.«.•:.;.:,..ir,�..�::.r»w�..�w..:.:cw..:«w:i.:vw�ocw.:.«.:w.ti.:.;....w«..:.. .««....:a:.....,�:. RZ4/AGRA 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Kirkland, WA 98034 attention: Dale Kramer Client Project ID: Security Pacific. W-8219 Sample Descript Method Blank Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Sample Number. BLK052992 4nalyte Extracted: May 29, 1992 Analyzed: Jun 11, 1992 Reported: Jun 15, 1992 "� �"---«;,waw,r'i;4.uw:b:ia..cew;;ru• .....:•:.. ,• •.•....:;cuc-.�.:•.v's./.uw.u...cw....�i.�:,•u/.d.�sr,,wu.:%i..:,,x..vi:.n SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Acenaphthene........».»...........»»....»...».....»... Acenaphthylene Aniline Anthracene Benzidine Benzoic Acid Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene. Benzo(g,h,l) peryiene............»...........».._......»....»............ Benzo(a)pyrene. Bentyl alcohol Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane B is(2-chl oroethyi) ether B is(2-chloroisopropyl) ether Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 4-Bromophenyt phenyl ether Butyl benzyl phthalate 4-Chloroanline 2-Chloronaphthalene 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 2 -Chlorophenol 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether......»».»....... »....»....... »....». Chrysene ».................»..,... Dibenz(a,h)anthracene .»»».. Dibenzofuran...................... »......».......».»......»....» Di -N -butyl phthalate................»......»»... ..........». 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene.... ....», 1,4Dichlorobenzene...........».........»...».........».........».»». 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene.......»..».»» »,.,».. 3.3-Dichlorobenzidine. 2,4-Dichlorophend.......».»».......»..»......»»...............»».». Diethyl phthalate 2.4 -Dimethylphenol.. Dimethyl phthalate 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphend 2,4-Dinitrophend Detection Limit mg/kg (ppm) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.25 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.50 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Page 1 of 2 Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.O. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051379.FIZA <11> NORTH 0 =CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 '•'i^.'ln.%K•,t !KMICta++C�^'^w. i ••'•tl`K Y'!• w.Cr. M`-iYI/N.HrMY:/i./M. //4/. /I+:Nv / < y i•�•r! ....v.\ti.. - wwCQ:n.r11M,i+M.aa:.w��vwvwn.v�inJ.vwW.w.. W.:. . 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Kirkland, WA 98034 iAttention: Dale Kramer Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Analyst : G. Emory Method EPA 8270 r, Sample Matrix : Soil Extracted: May 29, 1992` Units : mg/kg Analyzed: Jun 11, 1992'4 QC Sample #: BLK052992 Reported: Jun 15, 1992'•; • i• �•::•.": - - '.Awril:Jh\i W'di.wwtiY�IM.1:�.'A..:.i.04✓ih" tl"w1• _ $ ..r.Y'// ...♦ C':..w:..-:i: r�iiO.WJ.vtw../.itiw:/�ViviiiwUA(/.4w/v"iwif...>iso.r�i!/.0�0�(.q(4i/Mw(.i%:ir...WNN.w wrD'/A%/.w✓/!//•.:✓w•:.+4i.(tl.Ni'.4...r...w.••K Analyte • QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT Matrix Conc. Matrix Spike Conc. Spike Matrix Duplicate Relative Sample Spike Conc. Matrix °,6 Spike Conc. Added Spike Recovery Duplicate Recovery Difference Phenol N.D. 2 -Chlorophenol N.D. 1.4•Dichloro- N.D. benzene N -Nitroso -Di -N- N.D. propylamine 1,2,4-Trichioro- N.D. benzene 4 -Chloro- N.D. 3-Methylphenol Acenaphthene N.D. 4-Nitrophenol N.D. Z4-Dinitro- N.D. toluene Pentachloro- N.D. phenol Pyrene N.D. RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL inc La ocanour ratory Director 0.10 0.074 74% 0.082 82% 10.3% 0.10 0.078 78% 0.080 - 80% 2.5% 0.050 0.042 84% 0.043 86% 2.4% 0.050 0.049 98% 0.049 98% 0.0% 0.050 0.043 86% 0.044 88% 2.3% 0.10 0.088 88% 0.092 92% 4.4% 0.050 0.050 100% 0.052 104% 3.9% 0.10 0.085 85% 0.088 88% 3.5% 0.050 0.038 76% 0.041 82% 7.6% 0.10 0.093 93% 0.080 80% 15.096 0.050 0.056 112% 0.049 98% 13.3% % Recovery: Relative % Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Cone. of Sample x 100 Spike Conc. Added Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. x 100 (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 2051379.RZA <13> NORTH • -CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Method : EPA 418.1 mod. Kirkland, WA 98034 Sample Matrix : Soil Attention: Dale Kramer Units : mg/kg QC Sample #:205-1379 ,.,,,....,.,..... .�.,..,�.. .. ter• ,.�-----** ... :, ...........:,.....4....14.*,..,....•..,::...�.....,..:... ,.»:«.:,...,:. ..::.:.e.�. ..“ r. «� .u...:.:,; w:. ''1.4...."w. a ,.. ;; , .,• QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT Analyst : S. Kimball Extracted: May 29, 1992: Analyzed: May 29, 199214 Reported: Jun 15. 19921 ANALYTE Petroleum Oil Sample Conc.: N.D. Spike Conc. Added: 500 Conc. Matrix Spike: 541 Matrix Spike % Recovery: 108 Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 485 Matrix Spike Duplicate % Recovery: 97 Relative % Difference: 10.9 CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc cot Cocanour Laboratory Director X Recovery Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample x 100 Spike Conc. Added Relative S. Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Cone. of M.S.O. x 100 (Cone. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 2051379.RZA <14> ' •=NORTH CREEK • ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell. WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485.2992 .ww`q�wvnr...vvw.nC"••.•vw«+ y n .rywn•.ww:.:iy;^-yMY ! ..wy. ��.. vv :�: �..... ..:. n..v....: - w. wlAwi(H:.w.Wv:w+wWw.www:w�v+.✓i.wvwv.'..:.v ..ww.:www.�.w.n.w.:.w�-..w.wvfi..-:.wv ... r:-:w..:wW.W.w/iw.i.w....:..w:w ..:.:wvi:CiJ/. vw.:v .<...Y.....r./hv.. - ...... RZA/AGRA `;:11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 ;Kirkland, WA 98034 ::Attention: Dale Kramer Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Method : EPA 5030/8020 Sample Matrix : Soil Units : mg/kg QC Sample #: 205-1352 Analyst : M. Essig K Wilke Analyzed: Jun 2, 1992;; >v.�.:y:...awb....w.n:w[MwVwMw�w....w0I.wwwv9w.V..w.Mwv+•�N\..+.l•WJ:.\•'e.�w:�.Mw..i...wv\"\^wCN"...q\%w.. .:w7�.i+0.•%V.O'•ww.^w.^w.M.4v:!�n:Q•<w.wvw.w.nQiiiR.AYt000ttOY.O6Y..w.N.t0.4' i..w Reported Jun 15,19 92 (iw.4...u.. iwwi✓�.:..•.wnnWirN�t�.G//AVI400t00.1N:1RK(M//Rl.!v/".�N4WFML�!.�.uYwwliiY N.WWIwrYi.w/.w✓G.:�wt QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Benzene Toluene Ethyl benzene Xylenes Sample Conc.: N.D. N.D. Spike Conc. Added: 0.50 0.50 Conc. Matrix Spike: 0.40 0.44 Matrix Spike °% Recovery: 80 88 Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 0.40 0.44 Matrix Spike Duplicate % Recovery: 80 88 Relative % Difference: 0 0 RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL inc t Cocanour Laboratory Director N.D. N.D. 0.50 1.50 0.52 1.49 104 99 0.51 1.45 102 97 1.9 2.7 % Recovery: Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample x 100 Spike Conc. Added Relative % Difference: Conc. of M.S. • Conc. of M.S.D. (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 x 100 2051379.RZA <15> NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 .nv..... ... ..:a. n.v4tw..wuN/...v::: i..:. At:u.L.w: - /....u... :7,17:7 57=-77:-::=7.!1 A..r.:.:Iy::,:t.i:.C: RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Analyst . D. Harmon 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Method : EPA 3510 or 3550/8015 .::Kirkland, WA 98034 Sample Mata:: Soil Extracted: May 28, 1992;;; :Attention: Dale Kramer Units : mg/kg Analyzed: May 29, 1992 i OC Sample BLK052892 :�.. -,�:::•` �-- rn's,! "" , Reported Jun 15,t99 :.:..--•-•-:w.,••,•,..,..--•••::.......�w:i::....... u:a::...M.....,.o..c:.....;;;;,-zsz....P.w...:.a::::�i:w.:ri o. ..._ "`t'"�"';a'. ',r'r!?.,...%,,k.,:i.krotin; r..rr.._ _ i/ 4 r �2 ....iw„�w..•.swn..w.:nwa.:a:.....w.tw.v::i.•,w�ii ircGicfrw.�'iii.,iii..i•.w i.::w.w um� �iL�.�w.: .wi.: QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Diesel Fuel Sample Conc.: N.D. Spike Conc. Added: Conc. Matrix Spike: Matrix Spike % Recovery: Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: Matrix Spike Duplicate % Recovery: Relative % Difference: 66 57 102 103 1.5 NC}iTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc cot Cocanour Laboratory Director % Recovery: Relative % Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample x 100 Spike Conn. Added Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. . x 100 (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 2051379.RZA <16> NORTH • CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 :RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: ;111335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Method : <Kirkland, WA 98034 Sample Matrix : :Attention: Dale Kramer Units : ;• Security Pacific, W-8219 EPA 3510 or 3550/8015 Sol? m OC Sample BLK052892 Reported Jun 15,199 •` . ,w.. ,�.- � -..-�» ••••—• .,•s . „,. .,v 2 :...,, --' ••• -� w....ww.:i.r.....,.-...Hca.�:w........::::A.....i,......:..:�.....-..-..:....:,:-.....• ,:.n..,.;:.... �.w.....w-.-,a,.a✓w:oro::n..ww...%L:.:..`:.:.i.Dw:v...�.iwvi..vrw...c4.v ."::�.:>:..vi :iu./ii..u..::iincs'.:w�u.:.4.....w...�.::,w.w:�.:...w.�..ci Analyst : D. Harmon Extracted: May 28, 1992.-4 Analyzed: May 29, 1992;-; QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Diesel Fuel Sample Conc.: N.D. Spike Conc. Added: Conc. Matrix Spike: 57 Matrix Spike % Recovery: 102 Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 68 Matrix Spike Duplicate % Recovery: 103 Relative % Difference: 1.5 Nt TH CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc cot Cocanour Laboatory Director % Recovery. Relative % Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample Spike Conc. Added Conc. of M.S. • Conc. of M.S.D. . (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 x 100 x 100 2051379.RZA <16> =NORTH • Tz =CREEK ANALYTICAL • .wv 19Cw.vnMCwinv RZA/AGRA 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Kirkland, WA 98034 Attention: Dale Kramer Analyte 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 '^^•T (K•ww.wwy Y•"!•!. vn' N'V!N'� w.. (i... n n! wMYwrw..r H•YM^YM. Nr.. r / ( 'l/ ,,,••••••••• Client Project ID: Security Pacific, W-8219 Analyst : J- Kimball Method : EPA 8240 Sample Matrix : Soil Units : mg/kg OC Sample #: 205-1238 Reported: Jun 15, 1992 <— •.. Analyzed: Jun 2, 1992 Sample Conc. QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT Spike Conc. Added Conc. Matrix Spike Matrix Conc. Matrix Spike Spike Matrix Duplicate S6 Spike % Recovery Duplicate Recovery Relative Difference 1,1-Dichioro- ethene N.D. Benzene N.D. Trichloroethene N.D. Toluene N.D. Chlorobenzene N.D. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1.0 0.70 70% 0.70 1.0 0.80 80% 0.90 1.0 0.70 70% 0.80 1.0 0.80 80% 0.90 1.0 0.80 80% 0.90 70% 90% 80% 90% 90% % Recovery: Conc. of M.S. - Cone. of Sample Spike Conc. Added Relative % Difference: Cone. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. (Conc. of M.S. + Cone. of M.S.D.) / 2 x 100 x 100 2051379.RZA <17> • NORTH • CREEK ANALYTICAL 1 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell. WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481.9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 M ,,,,,, w .vn•.!!MTh w•••••r .Y•t .1• 'K..yw w.-/wwuyN.w •wwvC•mwiv,v.:•w:m i .wwnvO:M`InYN: /.'.. w/"" _.: S'•S"'"rnw.. i•f'+vwv.•w.y,.:. viww }�.......w W:� • •v.vi,rwv,w.w - wwAPMr.*.,w >' RZA/AGRA {11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 i(irldand, WA 98034 s!Attention: Dale Kramer • Client Project ID: Sample Descript: Analysis Method: Sample Number. Matrbc Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Sump 1 EPA 6010/7000 205-1375 Water .Z•.wy::•w.:w•••••.*a».►e.^i1rci::ws.�,aW.nri:,:xv.,eiww"twvw.onY...:=aw:...;cs:w,escfeeS:aoSe'eud.Y•sL«LiiGbiweo!.w:;U.Y,6i::/nK: •%••-fa,imMfLW�G'L:6✓i3Oi, TOTAL E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Antimony. Arsenic... BeMlium Detection limit pg/L (ppb) 100 200 20 Sampled: May 27, 1992 Received: May 27, 1992;: Digested: Jun 9, 1992;, Analyzed: Jun 9-10.1992. Reported: Jun 12, 1992_:; QNR%M%Gk.✓fG✓Y//.C/////4, .,Hinny' $iN::Y Sample Results N9/L (ppb) N.D. N.D. N.D. Cadmium .:: :....•.•.....,.. <... :.. :: <:. .... 15 , :.... .,. , , . .�•1,700,. «.. < ". <> ChromiunL::.... . ;�:.; .. .... ,:,,:::. :: ,: , s; 25 ... ... ....... ::. 2,800 , .•. .. .:;.10 ........• .:.. �.�• ..., .,.: :;;1,800 Lead:.., :.,....•, :; ,. ,: ,,. ,..•• ..?:.50 .... .• ..: ::> .:::.: .. :..,:.• ,..:.360 .. -::.. Mercury....--.....;.. . .:..... :::. ...;.. .. .:... :::.,: ..,• 0.50 .... ...... .... .. . :; 4.4.. ...., Nickel. Selenium.. Saver Thallium 50 100 10 200 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. iZtnc , Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Cocanour Laboratory Director 2051375.RZA <1> =NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL • RZA/AGRA 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Kiridand, WA 98034 Attention: Dale Kramer 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Sample Descript: MW -1 Analysis Method: EPA 6010/7000 Sample Number. 205-1376 Matrix Water •• . • vlprom _ - . • •. ' �<:..r:iwl:wr: dee:..w.:r:<:aJemw:xeaC '• Analyte y--^'1!,. .,=7z- -7-727.r= /+vwnM :v/iw Sampled: May 27, .1992: Received: May 27, 1992 Digested: Jun 9, 1992;, Analyzed: Jun 9-10, 1992;:: y.. Reported: Jun 12, 9924 TOTAL E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Detection Limit pg/L (ppb) Antimony.». .......... »...».»..»..».».................».. 100 200 Beryllium.. 20 Cadmium. 15 Arsenic. Sample Results P9/L (Ppb) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Lead.-» Mercury -----» Nickel».»..».:..»-,,. Selenium.....»»..... Silver»».-...._ Thallium IZmc• Analytes reported as Ka were not present above the stated Emit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Scnour Laboratory Director 50 0.50 50 100 10 200 50 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051375.RZA <2> 3 1 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. NORTH -CREEK • ANALYTICAL 1 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 :)%• :.. �•v .n.w. = v.•H<K\ ...MG. M:�' \: __ �w. •:•nvwwrry�\. wCwvp w; w..w. :"'^.^. JH. :Yi '•.�:M�!w;HH/H...yww..w.Y. RZA/AGRA 011335 NE 122nd Way, #100 ' K,1dand, WA 98034 :Attention: Dale Kramer Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank. W-8219 Sample Descript: MW -2 Analysis Method: EPA 6010/7000 Sample Number. 205-1377 Matrix Water Sampled: May 27, 1992:; Received: May 27, 1992iii Digested: Jun 9, 1992;:-. Analyzed: Jun 9-10,1992'h Reported: Jun 12, 1992'• 2.a..«:�::.k.�'..>....w.`�;.:Rai...cu....:.±.w.::..e:::.r...w>....:.vara.Jcc�;::.;.rn.•. •., x..a.:x-''46i�muof.wc;wr:':c;iswrG.L:fr�4i0/«,i%.wi�w�oai../4U%isRli%/.i'LU<G:om.L�,bM6&L..'.�GwU::::i i .w::J+4'.:...:,.G�::.c:Z Analyte TOTAL E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Detection Umit pg/L (ppb) Antimony 100 Arsenic.. 200 Beryllium. Cadmium. Chromium 20 15 25 Sample Results P9/L (PPb) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 'Copper Lead Mercury Nickel...... ...........»....».......».....»...»»..».».» Silver Thallium 50 0.50 50 100 10 200 Analytes reported as N.D. were not present above the stated Emit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Cocanour Laboratory Director 2051375.PZA <3> _NORTH =CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 v \ s �\\ rM•...�.•�� C.. Haa o .r ^t-......w,wy..,,.. nw, tiro we a• y i . ��;w ....: .. n.�:: n.n.nnv.. ` -.qr ti+v�+w\nn.w�m ...:::: RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Sample Descnpt: Method Blank :Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 6010/7000 Digested: Jun 9, 1992:`. ;:Attention: Dale Kramer Sample Number. BLK060992 Analyzed: Jun 9-10, 1992 Matroc Water Reported: Jun 12, • 1992.:, •.�.'W.w(• Niw•AOGflrwriLW4ii.(/!A)4IG.O4Gi✓�%!wv//.. L" -: ... tiu Analyte TOTAL E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Detection Limit Sample Resutts pg/L (ppb) pg/L (ppb) Antimony 100 N.D. Arsenic. 200 N.D. Beryllium. 20 N.D. Cadmium 15 N.D. Chromium... 25 N.D. Copper. .» 10 ....»...»................ N.D. Lead50 ..........»» ..................». N.D. Mercury 0.50 N.D. Nickel. ...»»...».»...........».»..... 50 N.D. Selenium. » 100N.D. Suver 10 »».....»..»..»..»».»».» N.D. Thallium. 200 N.D. T.Znc........ 50 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. el- 4 a• • Cocanour La •oratory Director CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc 2051375.RZA <4> . =NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL • RZA/AGRA V11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 <!K rldand, WA 98034 ,Attention: Dale Kramer Jw:vrrvry. b.....n" Client Project ID: Sample Descript: Analysis Method: Sample Number. Matrix 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 ` Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 wJw.v.. .NrrN-ri«.: r Kv:irr. :r:«lN.4rr.«rw/w..rii.r/r..e., nririrri irrrrv. r ./.-.. Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Sampled: May 27, 1992 MW -1 Received: May 27, 1992;. EPA 6010/7000 Digested: Jun 9, 1992,: 205-1376 Analyzed: Jun 9-10, 1992 :. Water Reported: Jun 12, 1992 " DISSOLVED E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit pg/L (ppb) Antimony 100 Arsenic.. 200 Beryllium. 20 Cadmium........ 15 Chromium..... 25 Copper 10 50 Mercury 0.50 Nickel 50 100 10 200 ZZnc.... 50 Lead. • Selenium.. Silver.... Thallium. Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. NO - CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Cocanour Laboratory Director Sample Results pg/L (ppb) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051375.RZA <5> =NORTH • CREEK -ANALYTICAL RZA/AGRA ::;11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 >'Kirkfand. WA 98034 'Attention: Dale Kramer Matrnc Water Reported Jun 12, 1992.7 J.^.•C.`...... CC" ♦ ?^:r •♦. ,: '.. wyete.. ,� t..w....,., y�.:. ...:^""'^'�'^""'!;."• R' 9 ,.y r... yid fr .. %•.ry;; _ .�„p..... ,,; wainavn+ar:::a...ah w,;.:;ia.wor:••h::.:i,.a.•, •, ...:s:..::.:ri ••. r-�'.<at. w ...'••• war...o.....a••Y ...,:.au/ou»,eiw:.::ay.<daou<iaoww.iR.:.�:xdi.:i .. /i...ow-..cw'b..... _•'.unww;-,.-.rw,u. :.w..u:: 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell. WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Sample Descript: MW -2 Analysis Method: EPA 6010/7000 Sample Number. 205-1377 Sampled: May 27, 1992::• Received: May 27. 1992! Digested: Jun 9, 1992;: Analyzed: Jun 9-10, 1992:: DISSOLVED E.P.Q. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Antimony Arsenic. Beryllium. Cadmium Chromium. Copper Lead. Mercury Nickel Selenium. Silver.._ Thallium Zinc: Detection Limit Sample Results pg/L (ppb) pg/L (ppb) 100 200 20 15 25 10 50 0.50 50 100 10 200 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Anatytes reported u N.O. were not present above the stated limit of detection. NTH CREEK ANALYTICAL inc Cocanour ratory Director 2051375.RZA <6> - NORTH . CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific !:*•11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Sample Descript: Method Blank < Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 6010/7000 Attention: Dale Kramer Sample Number. BLK060992 Matrbc Water • S.i.�.Jw•w•iriw.Nwr%/n-4:K4..w...w.✓wwi/.... ... w..ww.v • ,` Bank, W-8219 Digested: Jun 9, 1992:; Analyzed: Jun 9-10, 199215 R/eported Jun 12, 1992 H^^^'!M'/j:M+f�YI� %M'•i/� . •'�LSw .u..w..r6fi•�� e6.w! wxG•.••/•�•. +.,�ii/.i.:.cwir . Ko•.i./:e!� DISSOLVED E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Umit Sample Results pg/L (ppb) pg/L (ppb) Antimony 100 .................................... N.D. Arsenic. 200 N.D. Beryllium Cadmium 15 N.D. Chromium. 25 N.D. Copper. 10 • N.D. Lead 50 N.D. Mercury 0.50 N.D. Nickel 50 N.D. Selenium. 100 N.D. Silver 10 N.D. Thallium. 200 N.D. Znc.. 50 N.D. Analytes reported u N.O. were not present above the stated Gmit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Cocanour Laboratory Director 2051375.RZA <7> NORTH • CREEK • =ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481.9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 •.w,r . ...n...,.v,w.. ten.: L.w r..Nr- ....c.;. ...ww..... ten. t Sampled: May 27, 1992::': Received: May 27. 1992::: Extracted: May 29, 19921 Analyzed: May 29, 1992:'.; Reported: Jun 12, 1992 TOTAL RECOVERABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WTPH-418.1) ..-... .n.....• nnw....w.wnw. .w�.�.wwv'-•:w<.V.4in-.w.r RZA AGRA n,� .. w. w. "n....... :i. i..... • ♦.w::.n / Client Pro e• Jct ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 :11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Matrix Descript: Water Kirldand, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 418.1 (I.R. with clean-up) Attention: Dale Kramer First Sample #: 205-1376 Sample Number 205-1376 205-1377 BLK052992 Sample Description MW -1 MW -2 Method Blank Petroleum Oil mg/L (ppm) N.D. N.D. N.D. Detection Umits: 1.0 Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL inc t Cocanour oratory Director 2051375.RZA <8> . = NORTH • CREEK ANALYTICAL 1 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 w.., .,,�,..... ,••.,,,w - :: • -. v.viN .••wr. vwv /wr I •w ^NH xw � ::v.:_ .-.:: RZA/AGRA ;11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Kirddand, WA 98034 "'Attention: Dale Kramer a Sample Number :::i : iwr.:iw-w...v.ri.v.i�v wr.inr.:::::: r.i - m ..:... ...:.::..r Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Analysis Method: EPA Analysis for. Hexavalent Chromium First Sample #: 205-1376 Sampled: May 27, 1992. Received: May 27, 1992;1 Analyzed: May 27, 1992 w..wo.....:o.,..,:....<M..:iatroc...,...:...:::... �...::.:...:..W.....:terReported: .e : /... rt:e.. d r J u/n, -.1 2.,. 1� 2 -?.. :.. METALS ANALYSIS FOR: Hexavalent Chromium Sample Description 205-1376 MW -1 205-1377 MW -2 BLK052792 Method Blank Detection Limit P9/1- (ppb) 9/L(ppb) 50 50 50 Sample Result N9/L (ppb) N.D. N.D. N.D. Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. TN CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc t Cocanour Laboratory Director 2051375.RZA <9> _NORTH • CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 ..............:......:.:.:....:.,w.a..w..ww•..w:.+.....w.. .ww.:..... ..f......::,N• w.. I..•.'�'.^.'.:/,_. r.... RZAAGRA ...::....-:.._w,:.M ;...,.x :....�.w.w..w:.:;..,;.;:.,;.....;:�,.:wv,�,,.4.w`:, �.., ....:.; >:.,HM;:M / Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Sampled May 27, 1892 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Sample Descript Water, MW -1 Received: May 27. 1992;. Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 8240/8260 'Attention: Dale Kramer Sample Number. 205-1376 Analyzed: JJun 1. 1992,; .M,, „< „ ,:� ... � ,. ........ ....,;, < ; ..;:„ Reported: Jun 12, 1992; fir!; -......„....„,„:„...,.....,,....-7,-; Analyte VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8240/8260) Detection Umit pg/L (ppb) Acetone 10 Benzene 2.0 Bromodichioromethane 2.0 Bromoform. 2.0 Bromomethane...».. 2.0 2-Butanone 10 Carbon disulfide 2.0 Carbon tetrachloride 2.0 Chlorobenzene.».»......».»...»..».».....» 2.0 Chloroethane. ............ ��..... »............»...».... 2.0 2-Chioroethyl vinyl ether Chloroform.»..»......»........»...»....» 2.0 Chloromethane 2.0 Dibromochloromethane 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane 2.0 1.2-Dichloroethane 2.0 1.1-Dichloroethene......»...._ 2.0 cis 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.0 trans 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.0 1.2-Dichloropropane....» 2.0 cis 1,3-Dichioropropene 2.0 trans 1.3-Dichloropropene....».......». 2.0 Ethyibenzene 2.0 2-Hexanone 10 Methylene chloride...........».. 10 4-Methy1-2-pentanone 10 Styrene......................».....»....»... 2.0 ». 1.1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane. ..»......._» ...»».» 2.0 Tetrachloroethene...».»...»..»» 2.0 Toluene.. »...._....» .................»... • »»».»...»..»...... 2.0 1,1,1 Trichloroethane »•»»•»••»»»»••»»» 2.0 1,1.2 Trichloroethane. 2.0 Trichloroethene.»...».»..».........».».........».....».»».»...»».» 2.0 Trichlorofluoromethane. ....»...»._......».,..» 2.0 Vinyl chloride..»......»..»». ...»...»» 2.0 Total Xylenes 2.0 Analytes reported u N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery. 1,2-Dichtoroethaned4 83 Toluene -dB 97 4-Bromofluorobenzene 85 Cocanour La • oratory Director Sample Results pg/L (ppb) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051375.RZA <10> . NORTH • CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 �•aaa...W.....ay.:w:::aa+w�•v+�.aauHao.w�.a+.wwaow.w�cai-.....:w. a...w.:o.a.:».cow...::o:iw.�o.:.::. -:. -: .. -.';, , --.a:%i:r..✓.G.:Laiww.:�:wiLi RZA/AGRA tt11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 z' 1Grldand, WA 98034 is Attention: Dale Kramer Analyte Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Sample Descript: Water, MW -2 Analysis Method: EPA 8240/8260 Sample Number. 205-1377 -4006'444' • ..r.W4 ! Sampled: May 27, 1992;, Received: May 27, 1994 Analyzed: Jun 1. 1992 Reported: Jun 12. 1992':: H 'KY.yr/plY/ 9.xf1R40:4l00i'.rl�is�r"i�.�C,i VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8240/8260) Acetone. Benzene....- Bromodichloromethane. Bromoform. Bromomethane 2-Butanone Carbon disulfide Carbon tetrachloride Chlorobenzene .................................................. Chloroethane 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether Chloroform.. Chloromethane Dibromochloromethane 1,1-Dichloroethane 1.2-Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethene cis 1,2-Dichloroethene trans 1,2-Dichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane..... cis 1,3•Dichloropropene. trans 1,3-Dichloropropene................................................ Ethylbenzene............._ 2-Hexanone Methylene chloride 4-Methyl-2-pentanone Styrene 1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane............................••••••..----••••••-» Tetrachloroethene Toluene.._ ................._................._........... 1,1,1 Trichloroethane.._ ............... 1.1,2 -Trichloroethane. Trichloroethene .....................__ --....__.M...._ Trichlorofluoromethane. Vinylchloride ....................................... TotalXylenes ........................_. »....--.......................» Detection Limit pg/L (ppb) Analytes reported as N.O. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc • Cocanour Laboratory Director 10 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 10 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 10 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 10 10 10 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery. 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 Toluene -de 4-Bromofiuorobenzene 86 98 87 Sample Results Ng/L (ppb) N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. 2051375.RZA <11> • NORTH -CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011.2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 w..nww. *.vw.s,... MC •..wXw:ww1'��!w>•,"'",... .w.+u.Mvw„wwvww:f. w^.rwM`.!Y!!r:.v!MtMwwwwm-.vwwww..:)..t..r,..*!.rMMG.. ieH,....' L+v w.:J.. �. •�:.s....,.wvQ w.vw\.:wwv.<www:wJ.www.t.w�:ww.w. w..wwww:vi s•Vowvww«w.. Awe...ww.v.w.wi.w.4virwvw«:.i•nw*ehw.V.Hw4wii....**..•:4rw.w.wiwrv..w. y .RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 :11335 NE 122nd Way. #100 Sample Descript Method Blank Kirkland, WA 98034 Analysis Method: EPA 8240/8260 - Analyzed: Jun 1, 1992 t Attention: Dale Kramer Sample Number. BLK060192 Reported: Jun 12, 1992:' .-•..vw �.v w.v.•w .w.•.v vwv�>.wi„-•,;y..w.r✓�r,�w--->.. wvM••w•..,-.. wv�tv• :C)l^�.^'Mu.:n.". :iww••ry •..v.ww.: .w!J%/IWl..i1^�::.'l.. r;r.v.w+N+v•........ww......r.w.ww.vn..., .. VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8240/8260) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/L (ppb) N9/L (PPb) Acetone 10 Benzene 2.0 Brorodichloromethane 2.0 Bromoform. 2.0 Bromomethane 2.0 2-Butanone 10 Carbon disulfide 2.0 Carbon tetrachloride 2.0 Chlorobenzene 2.0 Chloroethane 2.0 2-Chloroethyi vinyl ether ....................... .... 10 Chloroform. • 2.0 Chloromethane 2.0 Dibromochloromethane 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethane 2.0 1,2-Dichloroethane 2.0 1,1-Dichloroethene 2.0 cis 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.0 trans 1,2-Dichloroethene 2.0 1,2-Dichloropropane 2.0 cis 1,3-Dichloropropene 2.0 trans 1,3-Dichloropropene 2.0 Ethylbenzene 2.0 2-Hexanone 10 Methylene chloride 10 4-Methy1-2-pentanone 10 Styrene... 2.0 1.1.2.2 Tetrachloroethane..._... 2.0 Tetrachloroethene.......... 2.0 Toluene 2.0 I1;1;`1 1.1:Trichlor'oethane .;,: >« :.ZO 1 -Trichloroethane . . 1.1.2-Trichloroethane....- Trichloroethene. .1.2-Trichtoroethane....-Trichloroethene. Trichlorofluoromethane Vinyl chloride .... Total Xylenes Analytes reported as N.D. were not present above the stated limit of detection. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc Surrogate Standards Percent Recovery 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. of Cocanour laboratory Director 1,2-0ichloroethane-d4 87 Toluene -d8 98 4-Bromofluorobenzene 89 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. a a NORTH -CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 wo,ore......,nw. :nw.»r..+ ww.ta.+.ew••••. •em.. fy...••••n. ,u x- as ,1•,, w:!nir ...wtmr�. ri.. .:••r::•:.....•,! r :...::.n ..:,ra.i.:.:..vWi...:..N.v..'nw/.w..w.i::•:ww... Ni. ••• : RZA/AGRA CI►e;.t Project ID: Security Paci :::11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Method : EPA 6010/7000 Kirkland, WA 98034 Sample Matrix : Water WAttention: Dale Kramer Units : pg/L ki OC Sample BLK060992 ,.,-,....,--\ •.Q••\ a+-f+��••• .,.t, ..,:...» w�.� ,-- ry..•w ,,.,,r:,.. > •.............—...—i..........:—.........— ✓..,..:.::..u..a wows::.;c..,u.cr•::<o•..w..ce b.iw:.aaYve::ROM e>.:..a>:..::.arec.w W-8219 Analyst : D. Vandel F. Shino Digested: Jun 9, 1992::; Analyzed: Jun 9-10, 1992 i W Reported Jun 12, 1992:'.. • • ;Analyte Sample Conc. QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT Spike Conc. Added Conc. Matrix Spike Matrix Conc. Matrix Spike Spike Matrix Duplicate Relative Spike 76 •,6 Recovery Duplicate Recovery Difference Antimony Arsenic Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury Nickel Selenium SiIver Thallium N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Zinc N.D. CREEK ANALYTICAL inc of Cocanour Laboratory Director 500 470 94% 470 94% 0.0% 500 490 98% 450 90% 8.5% 500 450 90% 450 90% 0.0% 500 460 92% 460 92% 0.0% 500 470 94% 480 96% 2.1% 500 480 96% 490 98% 2.1% 500 490 98% 500 100% 2.0% 10 10 100% 11 110% 9.5% 460 92% 440 88% 4.4% 400 80% 520 104% 26.1% 1,000 100% 1,000 100% 0.0% 470 94% 520 104% 10.1% 500 500 100% 490 98% 2.0% 500 500 1,000 500 % Recovery: Cone. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample Spike Conc. Added Relative % Difference: Cone. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 x 100 x 100 2051375.RZA <13> _NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell. WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 N . \ ;.. vvw.,MN�.-..v�H�.n�.M•. ?`>. ..wvM� ��.,wy. +nww.w�w. w« �w:.•::.. JCw ...:...... :N.iwwr.:w' nw.: i.... i: i... •.::. '.v.ii:.[..ww..w.iiiiLlw%'I.'N'N.. i.::.WrL Avw....vA.w..... wrwvvw:.L RZA/AGRA Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Analyst : S. KtmbaU :11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Method : EPA 418.1 mod. ;, IGrldand, WA 98034 Sample Matrix : Water Extracted: May 29, 1992.1i :Attention: Dale Kramer Units : mg/L Analyzed: May 29, 1992 : OC Sample #:BU<052992 Reported Jun12. 199-..2',•ay arw. w,4 .: arjr:m. .....,... ,•,— _..4.w+.e•�:wau:.-:.wV»;.:...:Ja74e_ ✓k..we_.mn.:w.:4%.awww.:..,i:.. A0.%�W4OL: /fr�.AN7.AYO'dl/?4%/il//''K'•<�t4'Vi.IGr�:.—..K.4.4%,w�:4w.w4rwt4NH/.i.N.rrii • QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Petroleum O7 Sample Conc.: N.D. Spike Conc. Added: Conc. Matrix Spike: Matrix Spike % Recovery: Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: Matrix Spike Duplicate % Recovery: Relative % Difference: 15 16 108 16 108 0 TH CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc t Cocanour Laboratory Director $ Recovery. Relative S Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample x 100 Spike Conc. Added Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. • x 100 (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 • i• =NORTH -CREEK ANALYTICAL • 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 .N\\ `:t•: .K 10• S^\ v „ .wrvv •wrywr •'^•!"ry:. vnv.•<. :::r! . y<: ....-. .r -...v; _. ..� _:.�.. �.. . :"nvi.'rr. .r..w m....rwv i:.vwY ..,vrw.m•.i.v v.! v v •.r RZA/AGRA 11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 :'Kirkland, WA 98034 :Attention: Dale Kramer • Client Project ID: Method : Sample Matrix : Units : OC Sample #: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 Analyst : J. Kimball $s EPA 8240 >f Water pg/L Analyzed: Jun 1, 1992< BLK060192 Reported: Jun 12, 1992::1 ry+...vrry .vM^..v: w..vr....y,vrw.y .wH.W^.w•wwMYiwv.vw.r vrr vv wY• N\C!-M' ^•- CT'�M��"!�N• 1 •h� ^•!Mn > •nw..M\ , M ^Y ^'^•i _ • •�•'yHw• ••••• •t..�i..�wW9'••.Wwr•:••••••Ara7<<dfM-wwJ.Kl�•.\.YMIp�/•J.ZA<w:,.:••••...:•:.•••..:ci•X••!«✓.0 .✓•w'. •.;..., ::i....4.`,•: iG.wuiYv-.r....• ! 6i w:.u/�ir 4.7,4..w;.a:•.-.;..:.5.•i:•:[::••: ..rcw.0:•• .�..>•••:,: gra Sample Analyte Conc. QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT Spike Conc. Added Conc. Matrix Spike Matrix Conc. Matrix Spike Spike Matrix Duplicate Relative % Spike S6 % Recovery Duplicate Recovery Difference 1,1-Dichloro- ethene N.D. Benzene N.D. Trichloroethene N.D. Toluene N.D. Chlorobenzene N.D. CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc nour La oratory Director 10 10 10 10 10 8.0 8.8 8.8 7.3 8.9 80% 88% 88% 73% 89% 8.0 9.1 8.5 7.2 8.9 80% 91% 85% 72% 89% 0.0% 3.4% 3.5% 1.4% 0.0% % Recovery. Relative % Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample Spike Conc. Added Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. (Conc. of M.S. + Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 x 100 x 100 2051375.RZA <15> 1 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 1 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone ,... .�.,:......,..,:,. 1... . �� .:;, � .>,�.� �.�...•�,,,.,,,�.,,,..,.�, (206) 481-9200 • FAX (206) 485-2992 RZA/AGRA ...,.:,.,...;,.;i;:/,,;;,:....: i..:(:..c.-G:% .�uvS.L'..✓iil."vi�.:.. r.;')i°"711"..^"�^'^^..•r.w,M.uw Client Project ID: Security Pacific Bank, W-8219 ;11335 NE 122nd Way, #100 Method . D. Vandel ;Kirkland, WA 98034 Method :EPA 7196 Sample Matrix : Water t. Attention Dale Kramer Units --�•..,�r� .� OC Sample #: B 0Analyzed: eed: �iii.vMw.�:riR� _ •w'K'�'Mbww+�>FM'^M S. ;.w. �A 2y. eA.:6[oea+QoCiui.,.�.GLVl6G.w�:.l�i'Wiw •,l �.,:v' �'a • /.> �. 1!y�n'?' A;>7 /M.•^y..'.<.rmwr +vy... +�✓ L'. aplam'' �_{•1: QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Chromium Sample Conc.: Spike Conc. Added: Conc. Matrix Spike: Matrix Spike % Recovery: N.D. 500 580 116 Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 520 Matrix Spike Duplicate % Recovery: 104 Relative % Difference: . 11 RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Inc S t Cocanour oratory Director % Recovery. Relative % Difference: Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of Sample x 100 Spike Conc. Added Conc. of M.S. - Conc. of M.S.D. x 100 (Conc. of M.S. f Conc. of M.S.D.) / 2 2051375.RZA <16> Issues to Discuss with Paul Pierce re: The Duwamish PLANS New site plan showing topography, location of patio, location of OHWM and HHWM, location of fl000d zone, location of gabion wall. If work is proposed within the floodway, then a flood zone control permit is required. SEPA Traffic analysis including Trip Generation/Distribuition Peaks). And Pedestrian Trip Generation/Distribution. Riverbank stabilization study required to ensure bank is SHORELINE (ADT and' stable. To meet 25.16.030(C), comply with standard erosion control practices? To meet 25.16.030(E)(1), show distance of building from OHWM...all parking shall be at least the same distance from OHWM. To meet 25.16.030(E)(2), revise site plan showing perimeter of all parking being landscaped. To meet 25.16.030(E)(3), revise landscape plan showing one tree every thirty feet of planting area. Td meet 25.16.030(E)(4), revise landscape plan showing one shrub for each 60 feet of planting area. To meet 25.16.030(F), provide bioswale or coalescing plate separator. Option shown on plans will eliminate need for SEPA mitigation. To meet 25.16.070(D), applicant needs to submit a site plan showing relationship of development to the OHWM and floodway, including the location of the patio and gabion wall. OTHER Provide frontal improvements may be required per sidewalk ordinance or SEPA. BLA Issues can be addressed prior to building permit. Parking Issues.... meet pkg requirements on site, provide adequate circulation, meeting pkg requirements for adjacent property affected by Boundary Line Adjustment. CHECKLIST: EllIONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE•RMIT MAILINGS.' FEDERAL AGENCIES ( )U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( )FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( )DEPT. OF INTERIOR -FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE WASHINGTON ( )U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.U.D. (REGION X) STATE AGENCIES ( )OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( )TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( )DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES ( )OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( )DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ( )DEPT. OF FISHERIES ( )K.C. PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEV. ( )BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( )FIRE. DISTRICT #11• ( )FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( )SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )TUKWILA LIBRARIES ( )RENTON LIBRARY ( )KENT LIBRARY ( )CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( )US WEST ( }SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( )WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( )WATER DISTRICT #75 ( )SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( )GROUP W CABLE ( )OLYMPIA PIPELINE ( )KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( )PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( )POLICE ( )FINANCE ( )PLANNING ( )BUILDING ( )PARKS AND ORECREATION ( )TUKWILA MAYOR )DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES )DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS DIVISION, )DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* )DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE )OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL *SEND CHECKLIST WITH DETERMINATIONS AND *SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( )KING COUNTY DEPT. OF PARKS ( )HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( )PORT OF SEATTLE ' ( )BUILDING & LAND DEV. DIV.- SEPA INFORMATION CENTER SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( )HIGHLINE SCHOOL: DISTRICT ('')KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE SCHOOL•DISTRICTS ( )RENTON:..SCHOOL DISTRICT UTILITIES ( )PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ( )VAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( )WATER.DISTRICT #20 (-' )WATERDISTRICT #125 (. ),CITY'' OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS (; .)RAINIER VISTA ( )SKYWAY CITY AGENCIES ( )RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )CITY OF SEA -TAC ( )CITY OF SEATTLE ( )CITY OF BURIEN ( )TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( )TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( )PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( )P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( )SW K.COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( )MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( )DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE MEDIA ( )DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE. ( )VALLEY DAILY NEWS . ( )METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIV. OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL 5,000 GSF OR MORE RESIDENTIAL 50 UNITS OR MORE RETAIL • 30,000 GSF OR MORE ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ).SEATTLE TIMES PUBLIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PERM[TS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section Applicant Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) Include these documents: SEPA Determination (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of.Dlstribution (notice was mailed & sent to newspaper). SHORELINE MAILINGS Notice of Application: Notice of application for a substantial development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 300 feet of subject property, prepare an affidavit of publication, and publish two consecutive weeks with deadline for comments due 30 days after last newspaper publication date. Shoreline Permit: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 30 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General Applicant Indian Tribes Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). Include these documents: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, if applicable) Shoreline Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements Cross-sections of site w/structures & shoreline Grading plan Vicinity map SEPA Determination (3 -part form from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed & sent to newspaper) Affidavit of Publication (notice was published in newspaper). INTERIM (3/11/94) PLEASE SUBMIT 'I E FOLLOWING INFORMATION: 1. TWELVE SETS OF ni i. PLANS NEEDED TO CLEARLY DESCRIBE IRE PROPOSED ACTIONS. 2. ONE PMT SET OF PLANS REDUCED TO 8 1/2 X 11. 3. FOUR COPIES OF ANY STUDIES NEEDED IN SUPPORT OF THE CHECKLIST. 4. FIF1'LEN COPIES OF THF. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WHICH INCLUDES 8 1/2 X 11 COPIES OF 111l. REDUCED PLANS. ADDITIONAL COPIES OR .URTHER INFORMATION MAY BE REQUIRED. RECEIVED FEB 2 11995 cuiviivium I Y DEVELOPMENT Conte No. Epic File No. gq -v(Y3 Fee $ 325 Receipt No. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST '1 E-1JAF- A. BACKGROUND •� N 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 71moi(/5Y 2. Name of applicant: 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: c 4 . L • ! -8E37 4. Date checklist prepared: 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): l� !?20rw 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. AJO. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. -41‘ . • ,scZtordN11V 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals dir e tly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. JV -2- 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. z -4v 6) - 777 v ' /Pme tJr. IIVP__ _ 11. 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. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be sumo i zed here. a� • 640T �L7 4.753 .i S I V 21� 12. 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, and section, township, and range, if known. 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 applica- tions related to this checklist. Gi 6&7JE 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive•Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? • -3= • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICAIQT . Evaluation for Agency Use Only B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? /5 /WON7CJPD�lG L?IU' 1ls //2!vev... 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. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any fillip or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. N'4-- f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, .generally describe. /va g• About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example asphalt or buildings)? °f • Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: • / 7/G.�1L1i ,F.WZ.. W 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, •automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the. project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. b. Are there -any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. D c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or otheracts to air, if any: 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. -5- • Evaluation for 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. 'r QN s:rii �r� 11DI' rp . = 0s 0716 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. • Agency Use Only 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. 5) Does the proposal floodplain If so, note location on the site plan. lie within a 100 -year L 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. XJD -6- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground .water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, 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. 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 into other waters? If so describe.. s. • . Evaluation for 2). Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, round, and runoff w.ter impa ts, i any: .2.// 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, miifoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? A)O&/E c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near,thp site. -8- Agency Use Only . Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: N mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass,41mon) trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if an • -9- 411 Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (ele_ ctris„ natural qas, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used f heating, manufacturing, etc. Onewv7 b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. ive) c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures t• red - or control energy im. - ts, if an : in.�. .d -t il. A,: Iii -41i_ di i_v_ l� e� 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. IVa 1) Describe special -emergency services that might be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental Fjealth hazards, if any: -10- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? 2) What types and levels of noise would be created .by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long-term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: 11fOLk 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent prop- ties? _ /. /.1 toce-11( b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. SIJ 0-- c. Describeany structures on the site. 6702/468 ca)ti..,Di 6 -11- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demol' hed? If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?T 4tL g - If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? ,l%f,/4L /tz(i h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. i. Approximately how many peoplA would reside or work in the completed project? J Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? AloAJ k. Proposed measures to If1,4_9r reduce displacement impacts, if any:f 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: -12- • 9. Housing • Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whetpr high, middle, or low-income housing? A/ . ,4 - b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. • c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: ,v, 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exteriori building material(s) proposed? 21-p!, b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: /V , '- -13- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Noiu f b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? AE) • c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? ON d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare imp acts, i any: • 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? A)6(1[55— b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. IUD c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided bJhe,project or applicant, if any: -14- • 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation 0 Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. tio' b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NOME: c. Proposed meakures,to reduce or control impacts, if any: 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. G✓h t b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? -15- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricit natural gas, water. refuse service, to ephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that areproposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete my knowledge. I understand that the relying on them to its •- ' ion. Signature: to the best of lead agency is Date Submitted: PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. -17- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICA• D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) • Evaluation for Agency Use Only Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the 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 imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Ah20.7.r Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: /U. �. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: -18- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? ,Vav Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses 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 habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplain , or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce i acts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inclduing whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? • Evaluation for Agency Use Only . Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services 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. -20- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? ivy Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: -21- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICA• • Evaluation for Agency Use Only E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? _____ri ii , - - d 1 :LT .:.4.8i Ems..f�r.id' !IVii_ . _..P'-.•,!— :ATOM . -' J . -► 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: -22- Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? Proposed' measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: -23- April 20, 1995 95-04-10 Mr. John Parrish Washington Development Company 2001 E. Yesler - Suite 26 Seattle, Washington 98122 RE: Geotechnical & Geological Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South Seattle, Washington Dear Mr. Parrish: We are pleased to present herein three copies of the above referenced report. This report presents the results of our Geotechnical & Geological report for the referenced project. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of the project with you at your convenience. Please contact us if we can be of further service to you. Respectively, GEOTECHNICAL D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 12 Roland D. Maynard, P.E., President Geotechnical Engineer Geotu.(inical, Geological ey Environmental Engineering TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Project Description 3 3.0 Data Compilation and Review 3 3.1 Site Description 3 3.2 Geologic Setting 4 3.3 Site Stratigraphy 6 3.4 Duwamish River 6 4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 7 4.1 Seasonal Working Conditions 7 4.2 Site Preparation 8 4.3 Erosion Control 8 4.4 Structural Fill. 9 4.5 Cuts & Excavation 10 4.6 Gabion Wall Design and Construction Recommendations 10 4.7 Slope Protection 12 5.0 Closure 13 Appendix A Vicinity Map Appendix B Site Map and Slope X -Sections Appendix C Geologic Map Appendix D Duwamish River Data Appendix E Typical Gabion Wall Section Appendix F Typical Slope Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our limited site investigation and geotechnical engineering /analysis for the design and construction of a gabion wall to be located along the Duwamish River water front at the property located at 10625-29 East Marginal Way South. Our work has been completed in general accordance with our Proposal for Gabion Wall Design Services dated January 24, 1995 and on discussions held with Mr. John Parrish of Washington Development Company and the project architect, Paul Pierce. The purpose of GES, Inc.'s investigation was to provide design and construction recommendations for the design of the referenced gabion wall. The scope of our investigation included a limited geological and geotechnical reconnaissance of the project site and surrounding area; the review of previously performed geotechnical and environmental studies on the site; a review of geologic maps, geotechnical maps, geotechnical reports, soil information and consultant reports in our office files; and the preparation of the recommendations, details and specifications contained in this report. During the course of this investigation, we were provided and/or reviewed the following information: 1. Soil Survey of the King County Area, Washington by the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 2. Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and Vicinity, Washington by Howard H. Waldron, Bruce A. Liesch, Donald R. Mullineaux, and Dwight R. Crandel, dated 1962. 3. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Skagen Boats Petrolane, prepared by ATEC Associated, Inc., dated December 31, 1991. GES, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 4. Geotechnical and Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-29 East Marginal Way Property, report prepared by RZA-AGRA, Inc., dated July 9, 1992. 5. Sump Pump Out Documentation, 10625-29 East Marginal Way Property, letter prepared by RZA-AGRA, dated October 13, 1992. 6. Plan View and Section drawings provided by Paul Pierce, project Architect, dated April, 1995. 7. Quarried Stone For Erosion and Sediment Control, manual by National Stone Association, March 1987, Based on our review of the supplied and/or obtained information and data, we believe that the proposed gabion wall can be constructed as proposed provided that the design and construction recommendations contained in this report are carefully followed. This report will address the following design and construction considerations: ✓ Seasonal Working conditions ✓ Site Preparation ✓ Erosion Controls ✓ Structural Fill ✓ Cuts & Excavations ✓ Gabion Wall Design & Construction Recommendations ✓ Slope Protection 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 95-04-10 The project will consist of the construction of 175-200 lineal feet of gabion wall along the west portion of Parcel "A". It is our understanding the two existing buildings on the site will be remodeled to provide a Club facility and a Storage facility. The gabion wall will allow for additional area between the proposed Club facility and the Duwamish River for the addition of a patio. Based on the sections provided by Mr. Paul Pierce, the height of the wall will vary from 3 to 15 feet. 3.0 DATA COMPILATION AND REVIEW 3.1 Site Description The project site is a irregularly shaped parcel located immediately west and north of the intersection of East Marginal Way South, S. Boeing Access, and Pacific Highway South in Seattle, Washington. The west portion of the property is bounded by the Duwamish River. A copy of the Vicinity Map showing the location of the project site relative to existing municipal improvements is included in Appendix A of this report. 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 The site is fairly flat within the area of the two existing buildings, but the site slopes steeply on the west side of the site buildings to the Duwamish River. The west portion of the site consists of steep well vegetated slopes and deteriorating wood retaining walls. Areas surrounding the buildings are paved. Evidence of slope instability of the western slopes is evident. This evidence is indicated by the presence of leaning river bank piles, leaning telephone pole and surface soil tension cracking. Evaluation of the stability of this slope and the structural adequacy of the site buildings is beyond the scope of this project. Both have been previously discussed within the report prepared by RZA-AGRA. A Site Map and Slope X -Sections showing the general layout of the project site are contained in Appendix B of this report. 3.2 Geologic Setting The site lies in a geologic region known as the Puget Sound Lowland Physiographic Province. The Puget Sound Lowland Physiographic Province consists of a linear depression which trends in a north -south direction between the Olympic Mountains to the west and the Cascade Mountains to the east. The Lowland contains the majority of the Puget Sound Basin area. During the recent geologic past, within the last 1 million years or so, the topography of the Lowland was altered by a series of glacial events originating out of the Canadian Rockies (continental ice flows) and the northern Cascade Mountains. 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 Deposits of at least four (4) Pleistocene aged glaciations have been identified in the Puget Sound Lowland Physiographic Province. The last of these glaciations has been named the Fraser. The Fraser Glaciation includes two (2) recognized advances (stades) separated by an interstade - or retreat period. The younger stade of the Fraser Glaciation is locally known as the Sumas, while the older is called the Vashon Stade. Deposits of the Vashon Stade and the earlier interstade are found within the project area. This event, the Vashon stade, covered most of the Puget Sound Lowland and the project site with up to 3,000 feet of glacial ice from approximately 18,000 to 13,000 years ago. This glacial event altered the topography of the Puget Sound Lowland and the project area to resemble its present configuration. As a result of these glacial events, most of the surficial and/or near surficial soil types encountered within the Puget Sound Lowland are derived from or directly associated with glaciation. Surficial geologic deposits in the project area have been mapped by the USGS and published in the Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and Vicinity. Washington, by Howard H. Waldron, Bruce A. Liesch, Donald R. Mullineaux, and Dwight R. Crandel, dated 1962. Surficial soil mapped in the project area consists Alluvium (Qa) deposits. For reference purposes, a copy of a portion of this map containing the project site has been included on the Geologic Map contained in Appendix C of this report. 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 3.3 Site Stratigraphy 95-04-10 Subsurface explorations were not included as part of the scope of this project. Subsurface information was gathered from previous work performed by RZA- AGRA and through probing performed during our site reconnaissance. As part of their July 1992 report, RZA-AGRA drilled three borings at this site. They found the project site to be underlain by very loose to medium dense sands with interbedded soft to stiff silts at depts. They interpreted these soils to be alluvium and possibly fill. During our site recon, we performed several probes with a steel rod and made visual observations. Along the area where the proposed gabion wall will be constructed, we found the near surface soils to consist of a loose to very loose, fine-grained sand that contained traces of silt. This is in general agreement with the Geologic Map and RZA-AGRA's findings. 3.4 Duwamish River Information on the Duwamish River at this location was provided to us by the project Architect, Paul Pierce. Following is the pertinent design information on the Duwamish River at this location: • Mean Velocity 2.6 feet per second (fps) • Base Flood Water Surface Elevation 8.7 feet (NGVD) 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. • Wave Height 2 feet • Water Type Fresh Water 95-04-10 A copy of Duwamish River Data sheet is contained in Appendix D of this report. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information reviewed and generated during this investigation, we believe that the installation of a gabion wall along the east bank of the Duwamish River to provide for additional patio area behind the proposed Club is feasible provided that the recommendations contained below are carefully followed. 4.1 Seasonal Working Conditions The soil found in the project area is moisture sensitive and will readily become moisture disturbed if worked during extended periods of wet weather. We caution that working on these soils when wet will alter their engineering characteristics. Due to this and the nature of the work required for the project, we recommend that this project be undertaken only during the dry months of the year. Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 4.2 Site Preparation 95-04-10 Site preparations should include the removal of a deleterious materials, all existing structures, all loose and unstable materials slope materials, all garbage, and all top soil and organics from below the proposed gabion wall, below any areas to receive fill and within reconstructed areas of the slope. 4.3 Erosion Controls Adequate erosion controls should be installed during the initial site preparation stages to insure that there are no impacts to the Duwamish River and its drainage paths. Best Management Practices, as outlined in the Washington Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin should be applied. Erosion control measures should also comply with WSDOT Standard Specification section 8-01, Erosion Control. Run-off should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the project site slopes and denuded slopes. These should be covered and/or mulched as soon as possible so as to not allow for siltation into the Duwamish River. Permanent erosion control should be installed as soon as possible after completion of the project. 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 4.4 Structural Fill 95-04-10 Fill material will need to be imported to be placed behind the proposed gabion wall. Imported fill should consist of well graded, free draining, granular soil free of organic and debris. The materials for gravel borrow spelled out in WSDOT Standard Specification section 9-03.14, Gravel Borrow, will meet the requirements except that the gradation should be as follows: Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight 4 inch 100 1/4 inch 25 to 75 no. 40 5 to 25 no. 200 0 to 5 A Site slopes that will receive fill should be prepared in accordance with section 4.2, Site Preparation of this report. Fill should be placed in layers not to exceed 8 inches in depth and compacted to a uniform density of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). This uniform density should be verified by a qualified materials laboratory. Only light hand-held vibratory equipment should be used to compact soil within 3 feet of the back of the gabion wall. This will help cut down on potential outward movement of the gabion wall due to compaction/placement pressures. 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 4.5 Cuts and Excavations 95-04-10 Careful and prudent construction practices are advised when working around cuts and excavations. All cuts and excavations should conform to Washington Department of Labor and Industries Standards for Construction Work, chapter 296-155 WAC part N. For this project, all temporary excavations and/or slopes should be laid back to a maximum slope of 1 H:1 V unless physically retained. All permanently exposed slopes should not be steeper than 2H:1 V. Cuts exposed during placement of the gabion wall should be observed periodically for cracking or movement that could affect the foundations of the adjoining buildings. If cracking or movement is observed, GES, Inc. should be contacted immediately to view the area and develop recommendations to remediate the problem. Cuts and excavations exposed to the elements for extended periods of time or opened during wet weather should be protected from erosion with visqueen. 4.6 Gabion Wall Design and Construction Recommendations The typical Gabion Wall Section is given in Appendix E of this report. A table listing the required depth of the wall section in relation to wall height is contained within this drawing. Following are the design and construction recommendations for placement of proposed gabion wall: 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 1. Gabion Baskets - The gabion baskets shall consist of a rectangular container of zinc coated steel wire, woven in a uniform hexagonal double twist pattern, reinforced on corners and edges with heavier wire and backfilled with 3" to 6" strong, durable, unweathered crushed rock meeting the requirement of WSDOT Standard Specification section 9-13.6, Quarry Spalls, with a specific gravity of greater than 2.5. The baskets shall be filled with the rock to provide for a density of at least 150 pcf. Baskets shall meet the following minimum specifications: • Mesh Opening • Wire for Netting • Wire for Selvedges • Wire for Binding • Zinc Coating • Typical Basket 0. 0. Hex. nom. 3.25" by 4.25 " 1181" nom. diameter 0.1535" nom. diameter 0866" nom. diameter 0.80 oz. per sq. ft. Length = 6' Width = 3' Height = 3' Diaphragms = 1 Capacity = 2.0 cu. yd 2. Foundation Preparation - The area to receive the Gabion Wall should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations provided previously in this report under the section titled, Site Preparation. Foundation soils should be excavated down to native undisturbed soils. The native loose Alluvium soils cannot provide for adequate foundation support for the proposed wall. For this reason, a minimum of 3.0 feet of 3" to 6" Quarry Spalls meeting the requirement of WSDOT Standard Specification section 9-13.6, Quarry Spalls, should be placed under the wall to provide for foundation support. The 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 toe of the gabion wall should be placed a minimum of 3 feet back from the edge of the native slope. 3. Structural Fill - On-site materials are not suitable for use as structural fill. Imported structural fill shall be provided and placed behind the proposed gabion wall in accordance with the requirements given above in section 4.4, Structural Fill. 4. Filter Blanket - A non -woven geotextile should be placed between the gabion wall and the structural fill. The geotextile shall be Mirafi 180N or equivalent. The filter blanket is needed to stop piping of materials through the Gabion Wall as water moves through the area. In addition to the requirements given above, the Gabions should be placed and constructed as per all appropriate manufacturers recommendations and specifications. In addition, foundation placement should be observed and approved by a Geotechnical Engineer. 4.7 Slope Protection All slopes below the proposed Gabion Wall should be protected in accordance with the Typical Slope Section contained in Appendix F of this report. Light loose riprap shall meet the requirements of WSDOT Standard Specifications sections 9-13, Riprap and Slope Protection and section 9-13.1(2), Light Loose Riprap. The light loose riprap should extent a minimum of 3' above the base 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 flood elevation of 8.7'. Slope protection above elevation 11.7 should consist of 3" to 6" Quarry Spalls meeting the requirement of WSDOT Standard Specification section 9-13.6, Quarry Spalls. A non -woven geotextile should be placed between the slope rock and the native slope materials. The geotextile shall be Mirafi 180N or equivalent. 5.0 CLOSURE Based upon our field and office studies; it is our opinion that it is feasible from a geotechnical and geological standpoint, if the recommendations contained within this report are followed, to construct the proposed gabion wall. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on the observed conditions at the time of the site reconnaissance, our review of the available data on the project site and upon our understanding of the proposed project. Some variations in the subsurface soil types, soil stability, and in the embankment configuration may be observed or occur during construction. These variations may possibly impact certain aspects of the gabion wall construction. GES, Inc. is available on a limited basis to provide construction inspection services as recommended in this report and to make on-site assessments of changed conditions as necessary during construction. If a problem arises or comes 13 Geotechnical Engineering Report Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way S. Seattle, Wa. 95-04-10 to the attention of the property owner or the contractor during construction, we are available to answer any geotechnical questions that might come up. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully Submitted, Geotechnical and Environmental Services, Inc. Roland D. Maynard, PE Geotechnical Engineer 14 APPENDIX A VICINITY MAP Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South 0 nr 11TIj AV - I'.. e .. - s� r ._. , I 1 �.,: 'r-._ r;�AVi �- Av S O Ef , r. S Cla -,.LL\N�ppNT1 11.4 8 ^ 14TH 177N x V 4 = AV c 16T �.�` ✓• BM AY S "• 5 CH— 121H AV 17TH AY �--•- 'a el • /ETNA i $ o � S ~ , rl.i , N ES 0 �,� �� p r' - /J�N Ion�..1.... A�..��.....s.)" I Ir -I `/' �' 1y�p i 9 f / N II IIs, .r s ,,, 1j4TH G7i=! r'. _ Id>N r § 12TH ._ --' 8800 y 16TH AV MA AY AV I AV S y ...I `moi �v s„,... '`.. ^ .r uTx AV S/ S / ( • :...;;. _ Vii.,;• �fqR pj 2 : 19TH -e AY S goi t3 ii 4, is ' N _ V s - L_ /� 20TH AV S ^ � �C y ♦ I - # / - . _:' AV 5 AVS AV S x'4,0. .A \O I,4b'� MIV11liN ,... -, " v - —2111'1-161" 1V4�e ' c, '`r '\/__.. r • 0 - W W , / .. 1 . / ` '._..< .. -. • . vNs.ysrA - _fa; I AV '� I ralr°saol ,f i/ DGi: '`�� f y-�) 25TH AV 4 7 � ': , I 11�-^, : zz 14 1119L fly O ./ IN ��/// .,. fa an A t. PCI jC, - J `• 1!', 41 ,I} 011114 �, I —�l1d 1...MIA oatitd /." - 5 cos 70TH ,," �1'MI r `Cr AV__ I ►' ! SNI �:I� 91:n N' I = ��^ N S 1. \ `\% • av�; " _. u N IN�-I/Nl a .. an q. /7, "� � AV ` f Z.L�< • <: 'L19 � ^� 11 -.. 4- r 436TH • IN [e " $ 75t .AV S �• y� 40TH ., y 3 ` -'-'''''''''T.:',''''', - 1--1 �i�/4v _: ='/ P.•• - 1 .� " 8" Ii qTN i--� � J7n1 ..� y Av AV 5 u . 37111 IN00 S - _ six A s `^ �! AV � Ll..• 5 la y i s i ly INi ~ V. m A R. H Zi:,„‹ D 30TH AI s rn '?Lo• �may ›...../ J�► /! s' ura • \ 8 " a •CAR KfEk DR W a.TH '' _: .,t p V. r. 5 L A. ; Hn 6 TM _ Av_-s V N 42N0 -A! Y r 1 ° rl / I • , W Nan °I nv S 42ND AY S r s S1S`'6'iti"------7-- f`` AY SJ -- •g� �x'7irlo i �;" n/ NIM S Ay H 4211D AVS �.. .� !/ � S �M r- $ "-� AV• 5 -•. = 'S �� E � % / � ..../v / I •, / : �ii moi/ / Iy 41. � .4941.„, �: i 44TH .- C 48TH AV 5 ST PL•a 0A S $"A 5 a�� 1 5 �� ,� 44111 - - ._.., 471H A � , S �4). 7 % I d 9NIN—' AY ..... .n ', N " S� A l.. T!p u. Q 2f A 11311 coo, ° .s u s "-! in-- ----1 � � ., Hp7�• 3 p ... NlladW ainx nv 49111 AY 50TH ..... , Afrn •. S " ...... _ °II ... r, -.' c I ,: •,. Av �• Ars J .. / �"�• , AV� '>i� •. - .. -." ., o m 1°11 44111 Ni•ail"ev S 1 1" ..,...„:2., ®• AV . . 17 , ' I ��� 46111 48j11_.. _._ 50TH 49TH . _... I .. 1 rxl Ir ' -_.:I 1 • er , ......1.J y. nw _-_ _ _7-i AV .. .S _ R 1N _ -- •i ., 441.1 -Ib45TH 46111 I moo N y ` AY �__' __ z-. �_ N . . - o p _ - S AV AV �" �. AV V ... . x ? ,, ° .=llriiN-u, 5710 All 53111 Nil$ m 51ST_ _ /07110111 IWW "�' .... N b- il 4- �V... In S'.,p ~ a i 4 r 3 , e S i ,t441, "I s �•"� z -__�,y LIS:''- ___._ , .. AV •0.5.. ... r4_.___— III S_A__rnm-sY3-`:, -' .� __ _ ••�� � 4 tir_ _ .'1�v�"--= �--__ 5. ..•I— /, :. „a N�f+ -, r .c^N Rr f 5 s. 5311 •.. �— 52N0 Av ---B.A,.__�•>7 " -n i. .. - , IA f TN AY 9 a' $5TH " � AV .,, 541H AV s N ✓1 W .: J -1 w, d Alive i�" s 1 - A Al Imo, 56TH ©� a los0o S AV 5 LI,OSAr 9800 N 55TH AV S '"-"m � �y _ >I11Vd V1- i ��' c; `�F� py:J'® $ A y s' IP �F ,N ssTx - 55TH Av V -_I- 10600 v �" STH AV Sri: O'" . ,' , __._•- APPENDIX B SITE MAP AND SLOPE X -SECTIONS Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South 1 MEM,. 41.=.......••••• 1' i" • • Z.) 0 i I I • I • • ; • 1 1 ; , i • , • • I: tl I I i • , • I ; .1 .1 e• • .• •; • i ; • ; , 1 •• 1- • .1 ! 1. ! .1 : • 4. 71 • • EXISTING SLOPE X -SECTIONS GABION WALL @ EAST MARGiONAL WAY SOUTH 95-04-10 GES — J towns OD ......o,,,, A ;snot via loulilIZZOTIK. Qi -cfc. M s A 31 • SITE MAP GABION WALL @ EAST MARGIONAL WAY SOUTH 95-04-10 GES APPENDIX C GEOLOGIC MAP Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South GEOLOGICAL MAP GABION WALL @ 10625-29 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH 95-04-10 GES, INC. APPENDIX D DUWAMISH RIVER DATA Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South GABION WALL @ 10625-29 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH x d a FLOODING SOURCE FLOODWAY BASE FLOOD WATER SURFACE ELEVATION CROSS SECTION DISTANCE' won'MLA TIT( l) %ICIION (SENTARE TM) MEAN VTI OCIIY (I f EI PER SECOND) RfGUTAIORY WIEITOUI WITH IIOODWAY IIOODWAY (TEEE nGVO) INCREASE Green River (Without Levees) A 3.90 450 9,977 1.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 0.0 R 4.38 443 8,939 1.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 0.0 C 4.80 500 9,357 1.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 0.0 0 5.21 800 13,904 0.9 8.3 8.3 8.3 0.0 1: 5.42 400 4,953 2.4 8.3 8.3 8.3 0.0 1: 5.68 260 3,626 3.3 8.5 8.5 8.5 0.0 4111116 C 5.98 290 4,571 2.6 8.7 8.7. 8.7 0.0 • II 6.20 400 4,679 2.6 8.8 8.8 8.8 0.0 I 6.25 200 2,726 4.4 8.8 8.8 8.8. 0.0 J 7.62 213 2,432 5.3 9.9 9.9 9.9 0.0 K 8.12 250 2,668 4.8 11.4 11.4 11.4 0.0 1. 8.47 290 3,555 3.6 12.3 12.3 12.3 0.0 11 8.86 190 2,464 5.2 13.0 13.0 13.0 0.0 N 8.97 186 2,363 5.4 13.3 13.3 13.3 0.0 0 9.06 165 2,051 6.2 13.5 13.5 13.5 0.0 P 9.24 188 2,883 4.4 14.2 14.2 14.2 0.0 Q 9.48 134 2,645 4.8 14.4 14.4 14.5 0.1 R 10.63 ' 176 2,654 4.8 17.5 17.5 17.6 0.1 S 10.79 163 3,247 3.9 18.1 18.1 18.2 0.1 T 10.87 163 2,735. 4.7 18.3 18.3 18.4 0.1 U 10.92 216 3,576 3.6 18.6 18.6 18.8 0.2 v 11.18 150 2,571 4.7 19.4 19.4 19.5 0.1 W 11.48 140 2,576 4.7 20.0 20.0 20.2 0.2 X 11.68 180 2,884 4.2 20.3 20.3 20.6 0.3 Y 11.83 175 2,568 4.7 20.6 20.6 21.0 0.4 )Miles Above Mouth APPENDIX E TYPICAL GABION WALL SECTION Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South TYPICAL GABION WALL SECTION GABION WALL @ 10625-29 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH 95-04-10 GES, INC. APPENDIX F TYPICAL SLOPE SECTION Gabion Wall @ 10625-29 East Marginal Way South z rri n GABION WALL @ 10625-29 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH t iOI1DaS adO'IS 'IYDIdAI