HomeMy WebLinkAboutRS_ER_Cleanup_Action_Report_190916_v1Cleanup Action Report
Bryant Motors Property
1300 Bronson Way North
Renton, Washington
for
Bryant Motors, Inc.
August 10, 2015
GEOENGINEERS
8410 154th Avenue NE
Redmond, Washington 98052
425.861.6000
Cleanup Action Report
Bryant Motors Property
1300 Bronson Way North
Renton, Washington
File No. 21945-001-00
August 10, 2015
Prepared for:
Bryant Motors, Inc.
1300 Bronson Way North
Renton, Washington 98057
Attention: Darrell Bryant
Prepared by:
GeoEngineers, Inc.
8410 1541h Avenue NE
Redmond, Washington 98052
425.861.6000
Paul Craig, LG
Senior Project Manager
Tony Orme, PE
Associate
PRC:TNO:lw
Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, tett, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy
of the original document, The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record.
L�g
`Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................1
2.0 BACKGROU'ND.....................................................................................................................................1
2.1. Subject Property Description........................................................................................................1
2.2. Contaminants of Concern.............................................................................................................1
2.3. Establishment of Cleanup Levels and Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation... ................................ 1
2.4. Review of Feasible Cleanup Alternatives and Selection of Preferred Remedy .........................1
3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE........................................................................................................................2
3.1. Task 1 - Soil Characterization.....................................................................................................2
3.2. Task 2 -Soil Removal and Chemical Analysis............................................................................2
4.0 SOIL CHARACTERIZATION ACTIVITIES..............................................................................................3
4.1. May 15, 2015...............................................................................................................................3
4.2. June 19 and July 6, 2015............................................................................................................4
5.0 REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES........................................................................................................................4
5.1. Remedial Excavation....................................................................................................................4
5.2. Contaminated Soil Disposal......................................................................................................... 5
5.3. Groundwater............................................................................ . 5
....................................................
6.0 CONFIRMATION SOIL SAMPLING AND CHEM MAL ANALYSIS........................................................ S
7.0 SITE RESTORATION.............................................................................................................................5
8.0 CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................................................5
9.0 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of Field Screening and Chemical Analytical Data
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. General Site Plan
Figure 3. Site Plan
APPENDICES
Appendix A -
Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation
Appendix B
- Field Methods
Appendix C - Chemical Analytical Program
Appendix D
- Disposal Tickets
Appendix E -
Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use
GEOENGINEERS August 10, 2015 Page i
File No. 21948-001-00
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the Model Toxics Control Act (MICA) Cleanup Action of hydraulic oil -contaminated soil
at Bryant Motors located at 1300 Bronson Way North in Renton, Washington. The property is herein referred
to as the "site." We understand that three hydraulic hoists (installed in approximately 1968) were removed
in May 2015 during building renovations at the site. GeoEngineers was contacted by the property owner to
characterize soil conditions beneath hoists following their removal. This report summarizes GeoEngineers'
observations and soil sampling results associated with soil in the vicinity of the hoists during soil
characterization and subsequent remedial excavation activities at the site. The approximate location of the
site relative to surrounding physical features is shown in Figure 1(Vicinity Map). Figure 2 is a general site
plan showing the location of hydraulic oil contamination in soil relative to the building location. The
approximate locations of the remedial excavation and soil samples are shown in Figure 3.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1. Subject Property Description
The subject property is relatively flat and consists of an approximately 16,480 square foot building on two
parcels with parking on the south side of the building. The property has been used as a commercial location
for medium -duty truck sales and service. According to King County records, the building was built in 1968.
Soil conditions observed on the subject property during site characterization and remedial excavation
activities in 2015 generally consisted of brown silty sand with gravel and occasional construction debris.
Groundwater was not encountered during soil characterization activities at the site, which attained a depth
of approximately 19 feet below the ground surface (bgs).
2.2. Contaminants of Concern
The potential contaminants of concern for soil impacted by a release from a hydraulic hoist are diesel- and
lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons, carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs),
naphthalenes, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), based on Table 830-1 in MTCA (Washington
Administrative Code (WAC) 173-340).
2.3. Establishment of Cleanup Levels and Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation
GeoEngineers completed a Simplified Terrestrial Ecological Evaluation (TEE) for the site in accordance with
MTCA. Based on the Simplified TEE (WAC 173-340, Table 749-1), land use at the site and surrounding area
make substantial wildlife exposure unlikely (see worksheet in Appendix A). Therefore, the recommended
cleanup levels for the site are MTCA Method A; 2,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) for each of
diesel- and lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons.
2.4. Review of Feasible Cleanup Alternatives and Selection of Preferred Remedy
The objectives of the cleanup action to be completed at the Subject Property are to: (1) prevent direct
human contact with soil containing contaminant concentrations greater than the MTCA Method A cleanup
levels for unrestricted land use, and (2) prevent leaching of contaminants from soil to groundwater. Other
pathways such as groundwater to surface water, and soil vapor intrusion to indoor air are not considered
GEOENGINEER August 10, 2015 Page 1
File No. 21948.001-00
complete exposure pathways for the Subject Property based on site conditions, absence of contaminant
impacts to groundwater, contaminant type and current and future land use. The cleanup alternatives
considered for the subject property were: (1) no action, (2) institutional controls, (3) in-situ remediation,
and (4) soil excavation and off-site disposal. Excavation and off-site disposal were selected over other
alternatives for the following reasons:
■ The selected alternative meets the "minimum requirements for cleanup actions"
(WAC 173-340-360(2)). Specifically, the alternative: (1) could be completed within a relatively short
period of time, (2) meets threshold requirements described by the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA)
(e.g. protects human health and the environment, complies with the cleanup standards, complies with
state and federal laws and provides for compliance monitoring), (3) is expected to be more effective
than other available methods in achieving concentrations that are protective of human health and the
environment, (4) is permanent, and (5) considers public concerns.
• Excavation and transport off site of impacted soil was considered to be the most permanent and cost
effective cleanup option for this Site.
The soil cleanup action was conducted by Bryant Motors in June/July 2015. The remaining sections of this
report below describe GeoEngineers' scope, remedial excavation activities, cleanup confirmation soil
sampling and permitted off-site disposal of excavated soil.
3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of our services was to document soil characterization and remedial excavation of hydraulic
oil -contaminated soil associated with three hydraulic hoists at the site in general accordance with MTCA.
The hoists were removed prior to soil characterization activities described below. Our scope of services
included the following activities.
3.1. Task 1- Soil Characterization
® Prepared a site-specific health and safety pian for use by GeoEngineers' employees working on site.
■ Obtained one discrete soil sample from the base of each of three vehicle hoist excavation locations
and three samples from the existing soil stockpile(s) for field screening and chemical analysis of diesel -
and lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons by Northwest Method NWTPH-Dx.
■ Evaluated the soil sampling field and chemical analytical data relative to MTCA cleanup levels.
3.2. Task 2 -Soil Removal and Chemical Analysis
■ Submitted hoist pit sample, HP3-1-7.5 (obtained on May 15, 2015) for the following chemical analysis
for disposal characterization purposes:
i Semi -volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) using EPA Method 8270D/SIM;
® Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) using EPA Method 8082; and,
■ Total Metals using EPA Method 6000/7000 Serie0s.
x Completed a waste profile application for transfer and permitted disposal of excavated soil to
Waste Management's transfer station located in Seattle, Washington.
GEoENGINEERs� August 10, 2015 Page 2
File No. 21948-001-00
■ Coordinated the marking of subsurface utilities in the vicinity of the former vehicles hoists by notifying
the one -call locate service for utilities located in the right-of-way and a private utility locate service for
on-site utilities.
■ Observed and documented the remedial excavation of soil with physical evidence of petroleum
contamination using visual and water sheen screening methods.
■ Obtained eleven discrete confirmation soil samples from the excavation for chemical analysis of
diesel- and lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons by NWTPH-Dx.
a Evaluated field and laboratory data relative to MTCA Method A cleanup levels.
4.0 SOIL CHARACTERIZATION ACTIVITIES
4.1. lylay 15, 2015
GeoEngineers conducted soil characterization activities on May 15, 2015 to characterize soil conditions at
the base of three hydraulic hoist excavations; the hoists had been removed prior to May 15. Soil observed
within the excavations was a silty fine to coarse sand with occasional gravel. The soil was very loose with
significant sluffing of the excavation sidewalls. Concrete and brick debris were observed in subsurface soils.
A backhoe was used to collect the samples at the base of the 6 to 7.5 feet deep excavations beneath the
former locations of the hoists. Field screening (water sheen testing) of three soil samples (HP1-1-6.0,
HP2-1-6.0 and HP3-1-7.5) obtained from the excavations indicated no sheen in soil sample HPI -1-6.0 and
heavy sheens from both HP2-1-6.0 and HP3-1-7.5. Field methods are described in Appendix B. The sample
locations are shown in Figure 3. Three additional soil samples (HPSP-1, HPSP-2 and HPSP-3) were obtained
for chemical analysis to characterize soil stockpiled on the exterior of the excavations for disposal purposes.
Each of the soil samples was submitted to OnSite Environmental, Inc. (OnSite) in Redmond, Washington for
chemical analyses of diesel- and lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons using Northwest Method
NWPTH-Dx with a sulfuric acid wash and silica gel cleanup. The samples were kept cool prior to and during
transport to the testing laboratory. Standard chain -of -custody procedures were followed in transporting the
samples to the testing laboratory. The following is a summary of the analyses:
■ Lube oil -range hydrocarbons were detected in two out of three of the characterization samples;
HP2-1-6.0 and HP3-1-7.5 at 5,900 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and 27,000 mg/kg, respectively,
which is greater than the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 2,000 mg/kgfor unrestricted land use. Lube
oil -range hydrocarbons were detected in HPI -1-6.0 (440 mg/kg), but at a concentration that was less
than the MTCA Method A cleanup level.
w Diesel -range hydrocarbons were detected in characterization sample HP3-1-7.5 at 3,500 mg/kg, which
is greater than the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 2,000 mg/kg for unrestricted land use. Diesel -range
hydrocarbons either were not detected or were detected at concentrations that were less than the
MTCA Method A cleanup level in 1-1131-1-6.0 and HP2-1-6.0.
■ Diesel- and lube oil -range hydrocarbons in the three stockpile samples ranged between "not detected"
and 3,900 mg/kg.
Follow up chemical analysis was completed for sample HP3-1-7.5; the sample identified as having the
highest concentration of petroleum contaminants, as indicated in the laboratory report. In accordance with
MTCA Table 830-1, Required Testing for Petroleum Releases, HP3-1-7.5 was submitted for chemical
GWENGINEERS� August 10, 2015 Page3
Re No- 21946-001-00
analysis of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by EPA Method 8082A, and carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (cPAHs) and naphthalenes by EPA Method 8270D/SIM. HP3-1-7.5 also was submitted for
chemical analysis of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals by EPA 6000/7000 series
methods for disposal characterization purposes. PCBs, cPAHs, naphthalenes and RCRA metals either were
not detected or were detected at concentrations that were less than the corresponding MTCA cleanup
levels.
Only those analytes that were detected at concentrations exceeding MTCA cleanup levels in soil
characterization sample HP3-1-7.5 were tested for in subsequent soil characterization and confirmation
samples; diesel- and lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons.
4.2. 3une 19 and July 6, 20tS
Geo Engineers conducted supplemental soil characterization activities on June 19 and July 6, 2015 to
characterize the vertical extent of soil contamination confirmed in the May 15, 2015 sampling event. Four
soil samples (EX -1-10.0, EX -1-10.5, EX -1-15.5 and EX -1-19.0) were obtained from depths ranging between
10 feet and 19 feet bgs and submitted for chemical analysis of diesel- and lube oil -range hydrocarbons by
Northwest Method NWPTH-Dx with a sulfuric acid wash and silica gel cleanup. The samples were kept cool
prior to and during transport to the testing laboratory. Standard chain -of -custody procedures were followed
in transporting the samples to the testing laboratory.
Diesel- and lube oil -range hydrocarbons were detected in EX -1-10.0 (obtained at approximately 10 feet bgs)
at 2,100 mg/kg and 6,300 mg/kg and in EX -1-10.5 at 600 mg/kg and 1,700 mg/kg, which were greater
than the MTCA Method A cleanup levels. Soil represented by EX -1-10.0 and EX -1-10.5 were excavated and
removed from the site for permitted disposal.
Diesel- and lube oil -range hydrocarbons EX -1-15.5 and EX -1-19.0 (obtained at depths ranging between
approximately 15.5 and 19 feet bgs) were not detected.
Chemical analytical data are presented in the laboratory report in Appendix C and summarized in Table 1
of this report.
5.0 REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES
5.1. Remedial Excavation
Remedial excavation activities were conducted by a Bryant Motors representative and/or
Wheeler Construction Company (Wheeler) of Enumclaw, Washington at the subject property in
June/July 2015 to remove contaminated soil identified in soil characterization sampling.
Approximately 150 cubic yards (236.71 tons) of petroleum -contaminated soil were removed from the site
using a combination of backhoe and excavator. GeoEngineers performed field screening (visual and water
sheen testing) to evaluate the potential lateral and vertical extent of petroleum -impacted soil for excavation
and removal from the site. The final limits excavation measured approximately 40 feet long and ranged in
width from 5 to 25 feet wide; the depth of excavation ranged from 12 to 15.5 feet deep. The approximate
limits of the remedial excavation are shown on Figure 3.
GEOENGINEERS� August 10, 2015 Page 4
File No. 21948-001-00
5.2. Contaminated Soil Disposal
Soil excavated as a part of this remedial action was temporarily stockpiled on site on a concrete surface
with the Bryant Motors building pending transport to a permitted disposal facility. The building was secured
at the end of each day. The excavated soil was subsequently transferred by truck to Waste Management's
transfer station in Seattle, Washington for permitted disposal. Weight tickets are presented in Appendix D.
5.3. Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered or observed at depths up to 19 feet bgs during this remedial action.
Therefore, groundwater sampling was not a part of this study.
6.0 CONFIRMATION SOIL SAMPLING AND CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Seven confirmation soil samples were obtained on July 7, 2015 to characterize soil conditions at the final
limits of the excavation. The samples were submitted to OnSite for chemical analysis of diesel- and lube
oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons using Northwest Method NWPTH-Dx. The samples were kept cool prior
to and during transport to the testing laboratory. Standard chain -of -custody procedures were followed in
transporting the samples to the testing laboratory. The approximate locations of the cleanup confirmation
soil samples are shown in Figure 3.
Diesel- and lube oil -range petroleum hydrocarbons in the July 7, 2015 confirmation soil samples submitted
for chemical analysis were not detected. Chemical analytical results are summarized in Table 1 and the
laboratory data sheets and our review of the laboratory quality control data are presented in Appendix C.
Soil characterization samples HP1-1-6.0 and EX -1-15.5 were also used as confirmation samples to
characterize soil conditions at the final limits of excavation.
7.0 SITE RESTORATION
Following the completion of soil excavation activities and the completion of chemical analysis of soil
samples obtained from the final limits of excavation, we understand that the excavation was backfilled with
imported structural fill and compacted in place by Wheeler. GeoEngineers was not present during backfill
or compaction activities.
8.9 CONCLUSIONS
Chemical analysis of soil characterization samples obtained on May 15, 2015 directly below a former
hydraulic hoist system at the site confirmed the release of petroleum hydrocarbons (hydraulic oil) to
subsurface soil at the site. According to MTCA, the discovery of a release of a hazardous substance to soil
is reportable to the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) by an owner or operator within
90 days. This report serves as the release report to Ecology.
GEoENGINEERS August 10, 2015 Page 5
He No. 21948-00100
Based on our observations, field screening and chemical analytical results, it is our opinion that soil cleanup
activities associated with the petroleum release from the former hydraulic hoist system were successfully
completed in accordance with MTCA. Approximately 150 cubic yards (236.71 tons) of soil impacted by the
release was successfully removed from the site for permitted disposal and chemical analysis of soil
samples obtained at the final limits of the excavation were less than MTCA Method A cleanup levels.
Therefore, it is our opinion that the remedial action completed to remove hydraulic oil -related petroleum
hydrocarbon -contaminated soil from the site resulted in site conditions that are protective of human health
and the environment. Additionally, it also is our opinion that no further remedial action relative to this
release is necessary at the site.
9.0 LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of Bryant Motors, Inc., their authorized agents and
regulatory agencies. This report is not intended for use by others and the information contained herein is
not applicable to other sites. No other party may rely on the product of our services unless we agree in
advance, and in writing, to such reliance. This is to provide our firm with reasonable protection against
open-ended liability claims by third parties with whom there would otherwise be no contractual limits to
their actions.
Our conclusions are based on our site observations, field screening results and chemical analysis of a
limited number of soil samples at the site. It is always possible that contaminants remain in areas that were
not observed, sampled or tested.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with
generally accepted environmental science practices in this area at the time this report was prepared.
No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood.
Any electronic form of this document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments
are only a copy of a master document. The master hard copy is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve
as the official document of record.
Please refer to Appendix E, titled "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use," for additional information
pertaining to use of this report.
GWENGJNEER� August 10, 2015 Page 6
File No. 21948-001-00
Table I
Summary of Field Screening and Chemical Analytical Data'
Bryant Motors, Inc.
1300 Bronson Way North
Renton, Washington
File Number 21948.001-00
Sample
IdoMiflcation�
Date
Sampled
Sample
Depth
(feetb )
Water
Sheen
Screening
Dlesel•Range
Hytlrocarbonsa
(mg/ka0
Wbe011-flange
Hytlrocaroons'
(m
PCBs°
(mg/kg)
Naphthalenes°
(mg/kg)
CPANs •a
(mg/kg)
RCRA (8) Metals'
(mL/kg)
Barium Chromium Lead
Soll Characterization Samples
HPI -1-6.0 05/15/15
6.0
NS*�28
440
HP2-1-6.0 05/15/15
6.0
HS
'
HP3-1-7.5 05/15/15
7.5
HS
., -
<0.239. 0.046
0.056
380 33 93
EX -1-10.0 06/19/15
10.0
HS
- -
EX -1-10.5 06/19/15
10.5
NST
1,700
-
EX -1.15.5 07/06/15
15.5
MS
<52
IX -1-19.0 07/06/15
19.0
SS
-
Soil Stockplle Samples
HPSP-1 05/15/15
NA
NS
<750
+_-1,700
HPSP-2 05/15/15
NA
I HS 1
<340
-
HPSP-3' 105/15/151
NA I
MS 1
140
".=.•,1@06r
--
SoilConfirmationSamples
-
-
D(-2-7.0 07/07/15
7.0
MS
<26'=*52::"=_%'�
EX -36.0 07/07/15
6.0
MS
<2fi'7;
IX -4-6.0 07/07/15
6.0
SS
E)(-nr10.5 07/07/15
10.5
SS
-='<27-
FX-610.0 07/07/15
10.0
NS
26 as.;1.'_=;542
IX -7-9.0 07/07/15
9.0
SS
<53
-
-
EX -86.0 07/07/15
6.0
SS's:-;.
--; <2&.'
<56
MTCA Method A Cleanup Level'"
-3,000'<=a.
2,000
1
5
0.1
16,000 2,000 250
,-
Notes:
'Chemical analysesby0mite Envimnmental, Inc.-inFedmond, Washlajgon.
s Approximate sample locations are shown in Figure 3_ `^,
't Petroleum hydrocarbons analyzed by Northwest Methodll _ .'-wlth sulfuric acid/silica gel cleanup.
"Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by EPA Method 80824.
s Naphthalenes and cPAHs by EPA Method 8270D/SIM.
Calculated using the toxicity equivalency (TED) methodology specified in WAC 173-340780(8).
' Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 Metals by EPA Method 601OC/7471B. Only detected analytes are shown.
a Soil represented by this sample was excavated and removed from the site for permitted disposal.
a go' Percentile for natural background soil concentration for chromium in soil in the Puget Sound region is 48 mg/kg
NWTPH Dx - Northwest Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Diesel Extended
bills below ground surface mg/kg= milligrams per kilogram MTCA - Model Toxics Control Act
NS = no sheen: SS - slight sheen; MS - moderate sheen; HS - heavy sheen
A bolded value indicates that an analyte wasdetected at . rethe ported concentration.
...
File 2 lOD G7EDENGINEER
Tablee IAugust I August 10, 2015 Page 1 of 1
1 Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are apprommate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc.
cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
a file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of
o this communication,
E 3. Itis unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
T
1v personal use or resale, without permission.
Y Data Sources: ESRI Data & Maps, Street Maps 2005
d
2 Transverse Mercator, Zone 10 N North, North American Datum 1983
C North arrow oriented to grid north
^1
3
_
- —
.'{,
4cl4ilalt MtOt7a 2 �D
�
•'
Sdteel e
NE 121h 51 NE12th5te° NE1bh5t
h
5 113th St
Si S 115th 51'{S
i',
NE 06'µ04
17th St
vE 1¢tlt P!
S 115th PI
a v NE
h St `
µpt
NF'Oth St ZF ryF
$ 117th St�'
'4 �.�' b
N 10'_h P1m
'S
2t
z O Nr 10th 5t
NE Nth vl q a
5 1171h Pt
5
£ NE 9
Q' StIsch 5,
n Z
Ni n c
Sr
t5 114th St
N tandtng
u Way
Y `
c
44
E r n
S 120th St
N 0th St N Sfi St N Sth St
'vf Rh St 4i > NC SM, St
NE Sit+
5121cct
Y c
2
5121s sr
S 122nd St
a b
x
.�� _'_
NEbNIGNlA1dDS PARK%x
rq Pl — rw
�
723rtl 5t 'NW 7th St
v }
NE 7th5 t
5123rd P1
1241h St a�
a N 6m 5; N 6th St
J
u
W
5 525th St
m
NF Sth vis
q F <
SN 5r
<
i
Z
��
Z
a'
- &
2.
N
e,,J�
n y r g
F.rM1a�
M
00
4W 4th St
ab D
m m m
N 4th S[
NE Ch St NE 4r ,
'D
Z Z Z
z 2 e
u
N�rtl'S
N
S
a
3
r? p" :V 3rd St
rn
>
e
A
GreelaoadC
Sr`u " = x
z 2 z
Alrprrt Way S. Poe z
�'f
NE3,6-t
Hy Nw 2nd 5i
5 T,Ilicum t ti N2nd St
5
3rd St
NE Intl St
z
3 rt
ST°bin Sts Tc6;n st ^yy r
'Site
<' SW Yitioria St a
_?
Y
C
3 rsr
z 5 )33rd P$
�S�krll N
N
r, ,&
St
LanRsro
itnlan Y!r�l S[heW m F < 3,f
.$2nd 52nd St =
D 2 �
n a
nR
57. b y
3
T`
d
y
SE 2nd Ct Se 3,d St
Syv$Ile
dP!
53rd St 53rd st m� !�••
;
Sr
Cyd a
PI O a° o167 5 9th St F 3
C
t„rt
S s
Satn 41 N�ye1 �
Nifi
_
Wi
SE Srr;�
� Q, £
� SSCh St
�a�eVauNi'Hhy
'rfa
\+
S*h pt s
` ) b
L
C�tr Rrver Y rpy
a
E
76I S 5th S �L'. . Q
3
TraN
5w ra'1 Sr ¢' SW�7th 5[
S7 St s'
S1 5�7rh 6rasr
Sr
`e
V =
ayt;r
s9thR
k.W fti
>
J
eN�Ctl'
A4
CftA
<L
5i4 7�tt1 St
�'.'r y
t2 St
r
a
f
�Si
O
W-1 5t 5NN _" �i •.?:�.,'
e
�J.
Q
Sy,,12t„
.•
,.. S
r_ Sf Royal
..,,..;� , r
a �
3
hm, 0t
kyFs
i
Sw 16th Sl
5 15th SC th St
S
tDr
16th Pt W
O
"...NMbf�ryK[
N
Ch
s..
2,000
0 2,000
Feet
1 Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are apprommate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc.
cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
a file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of
o this communication,
E 3. Itis unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
T
1v personal use or resale, without permission.
Y Data Sources: ESRI Data & Maps, Street Maps 2005
d
2 Transverse Mercator, Zone 10 N North, North American Datum 1983
C North arrow oriented to grid north
^1
Project Name Bryant Motors — Hydraulic Oil Release
GeoEn,oneers File Number 21948-001-00
Field Representative Eliya Hogan
[safe of O1aanup Activftim June 18 — July 7, 2015
Latitude/Longlitude of Release Area I N47.4B467 ° / W122.20OO5 °
I�ate:�
= Area of excavation
.70
jz
r 8 tR
The locations of all features shown are approximate
UWENGMEERS
I
0' 100, 200'
I"= loot
GENERAL SITE PLAN
FIGURE 2
,C„
.70
jz
r 8 tR
The locations of all features shown are approximate
UWENGMEERS
I
0' 100, 200'
I"= loot
GENERAL SITE PLAN
FIGURE 2
Project blame
Ge®Engineem File Number
Field Representative
Date of Cleanup Act"ies
Latyftude/Longitude of Release Area
141pZ- /- 6, 4
zX - -.5-- ia..s
Bryant Motors— Hydraulic Oil Release I
21948-401-00
Eliya Hogan
June 1.8 —July 7, 2015
N47.48467 ° / W122.20005 °
7- �0
�X ���lU�a �RTN �.se9LL
c
)3
4: /to. O,
ZX-/ - /�3,�✓
Notes
= Area of excavation
EX -1.-10.0 = Soil sample location
The locations of all features shown are approximate.
EoENGINEER
ex -Z-7-0
N
i
0. 10' 20'
t s i
SITE PLAN
FIGURE 3
Terrestrial Ecoiogicai Evaluation
APPENDIX B
Field Methods
APPENDIX B
FIELD METHODS
Sample Collection and Handling
Soil samples were obtained from the excavation area using a clean nitrile -gloved hand from the excavator
bucket. Each sample was placed in a 4 -ounce laboratory -prepared jar filled to minimize headspace. Gloves
were changed between samples to prevent cross -contamination. The samples were placed in an iced cooler
pending transport to the analytical laboratory.
Each sample submitted for chemical analysis was identified by a unique sample designation that
corresponded to its mapped sample location and depth below ground surface. Chain -of -custody procedures
were followed in transporting the samples to the laboratory.
Meld Screening of Soil Samples
A representative from our staff performed field screening of soil samples obtained from the excavation.
Field screening results are used as a general guideline to delineate areas with possible petroleum
hydrocarbons. In addition, screening results are used to aid in the selection of soil samples for chemical
analysis. The screening methods used include: (1) visual screening, and (2) water sheen screening.
Visual screening consists of inspecting the soil for stains indicative of petroleum hydrocarbons. Visual
screening is generally more effective when hydrocarbons are heavier, such as motor oil, or when
hydrocarbon concentrations are high. Water sheen screening is a more sensitive methods that can be
effective in detecting contamination at concentrations less than regulatory cleanup levels. However, field
screening results are site-specific. The effectiveness of field screening varies with temperature, moisture
content, organic content, soil type and age of contaminant. The presence or absence of a sheen does not
necessarily indicate the presence or absence of petroleum hydrocarbons.
Water sheen screening involves placing soil in water and observing the water surface for signs of sheen.
Sheen screening may detect both volatile and nonvolatile petroleum hydrocarbons. Sheen classifications
are as follows:
No Sheen (NS) No visible sheen on water surface.
Slight Sheen (SS) Light, colorless, dull sheen; spread is irregular, not rapid; sheen dissipates
rapidly. Natural organic matter in the soil may produce a slight sheen.
Moderate Sheen (MS) Light to heavy sheen; may have some color/iridescence; spread is irregular to
flowing, may be rapid; few remaining areas of no sheen on water surface.
Heavy Sheen (HS) Heavy sheen with color/iridescence; spread is rapid; entire water surface may
be covered with sheen.
GEOENGINEERS� August 10, 2015 Page B-1
File No. 2144"0300
APPENDIX C
Chemical Analytical Program
APPENDIX C
CHEMICAL ANALWICAL PROGRAM
Analytical Methods
Chain -0f -custody procedures were followed during the transport of the field samples to the analytical
laboratory. The samples were held in cold storage pending extraction and/or analysis. The analytical results,
analytical methods reference and laboratory quality control records are included in this appendix. The
analytical results are also summarized in the text and tables of this report.
Analytical Data Review
The laboratory maintains an internal quality assurance program as documented in its laboratory quality
assurance manual. The laboratory uses a combination of blanks, surrogate recoveries, duplicates, matrix
spike recoveries, matrix spike duplicate recoveries, blank spike recoveries and blank spike duplicate
recoveries to evaluate the validity of the analytical results. The laboratory also uses data quality goals for
individual chemicals or groups of chemicals based on the long-term performance of the test methods. The
data quality goals were included in the laboratory reports. The laboratory compared each group of samples
with the existing data quality goals and noted any exceptions in the laboratory report.
Analytical Data Review Summary
The following quality control exceptions were noted by the testing laboratory:
■ "Due to negative [matrix] effects [of sample HP3-1-7.51 on the instrument, Aroclor 1260 in the closing
continuing calibration verification standards (CCVs) were low. The sample was rerun with similar
results." Due to the high concentration of lube oil -range hydrocarbons in the sample, there was a matrix
interference with Aroclor 1260. However, because the analyte was not detected, the CCVs were
completed with similar results indicating that the instrument was functioning properly, and soil
represented by this sample was excavated and removed from the site, it is our opinion that the
analytical data are of acceptable quality for their intended use in this report.
■ `Hydrocarbons in the lube oil -range [forsamples HP3-1-7.5 and HPSP-3] are impacting the diesel range
result.' The diesel -range hydrocarbon may be considered to be biased high. However, because soil
represented by HP3-1-7.5 and HPSP-3 was excavated and/or removed from the site, it our opinion that
the analytical data are of acceptable quality for their intended use in this report.
■ `The surrogate recovery[NWTPH-Dx analysis forsamples HPSP-1, HPSP-2 and HP3-1-7.5] is outside of
the control limits.' However, because soil represented by HPSP-1, HPSP-2 and HP3-1-7.5 was
excavated and/or removed from the site, it our opinion that the analytical data are of acceptable quality
for their intended use in this report.
GEOENGINEER S August 10, 2015 Page C-1
File No. 21948-001-00
APPENDix D
Disposal Tickets
APPEN®ix E
Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use
APPENDIX E
REPORT LIVilTATIONS, AND GUIDELINES FOR USEx
This Appendix provides information to help you manage your risks with respect to the use of this report.
Read These Provisions Closely
Some clients, design professionals and contractors may not recognize that the geoscience practices
(geotechnical engineering, geology and environmental science) are far less exact than other engineering
and natural science disciplines. This lack of understanding can create unrealistic expectations that could
lead to disappointments, claims and disputes. GeoEngineers includes these explanatory "limitations"
provisions in our reports to help reduce such risks. Please confer with GeoEngineers if you are unclear how
these "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use" apply to your project or site.
Environmental Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons and Projects
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Bryant Motors, Inc. This report may be provided to
regulatory agencies for review. This report is not intended for use by others, and the information contained
herein is not applicable to other sites.
GeoEngineers structures our services to meet the specific needs of our clients. For example, an
environmental site assessment study conducted for a property owner may not fulfill the needs of a
prospective purchaser of the same property. Because each environmental study is unique, each
environmental report is unique, prepared solely forthe specific client and project site. No one except Bryant
Motors should rely on this environmental report without first conferring with GeoEngineers. This report
should not be applied for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated.
This Environmental Report Is Based on a Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors
This report has been prepared for excavation activities at the Bryant Motors Property. GeoEngineers
considered a number of unique, project -specific factors when establishing the scope of services for this
project and report. Unless GeoEngineers specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on this report if it was:
y not prepared for you,
e not prepared for your project,
ml not prepared for the specific site explored, or
■ completed before important project changes were made.
If important changes are made after the date of this report, GeoEngineers should be given the opportunity
to review our interpretations and recommendations and provide written modifications or confirmation, as
appropriate.
1 Developed based on material provided by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences; www.asfe.org.
GWENGINEERS� August 10, 2015 PageE-1
File No.; 21948-001-00
Reliance Conditions for Third Parties
Our report was prepared for the exclusive use of Bryant Motors. No other party may rely on the product of
our services unless we agree in advance to such reliance in writing. This is to provide our firm with
reasonable protection against open-ended liability claims by third parties with whom there would otherwise
be no contractual limits to their actions. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services
have been executed in accordance with our Agreement with Bryant Motors and generally accepted
environmental practices in this area at the time this report was prepared.
Environmental Regulations Are Always Evolving
Some substances may be present in the site vicinity in quantities or under conditions that may have led, or
may lead, to contamination of the subject site, but are not included in current local, state or federal
regulatory definitions of hazardous substances or do not otherwise present current potential liability.
GeoEngineers cannot be responsible if the standards for appropriate inquiry, or regulatory definitions of
hazardous substance, change or if more stringent environmental standards are developed in the future.
Uncertainty May Remain after Completion of Remedial Activities
Remediation activity completed in a portion of a site cannot wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the
potential for contamination in connection with a property. Our interpretation of subsurface conditions in
this study is based on field observations and chemical analytical data from widely -spaced sampling
locations. It is always possible that contamination exists in areas that were not explored, sampled or
a n a lyzed.
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
This environmental report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. The
findings and conclusions of this report may be affected by the passage of time, by manmade events such
as construction on or adjacent to the site, by new releases of hazardous substances, or by natural events
such as floods, earthquakes, slope instability or groundwater fluctuations. Always contact GeoEngineers
before applying this report to determine if it is still applicable.
Soil and Groundwater End Use
The cleanup levels referenced in this report are site- and situation -specific. The cleanup levels may not be
applicable for other sites or for other on-site uses of the affected media (soil and/or groundwater). Note
that hazardous substances may be present in some of the site soil and/or groundwater at detectable
concentrations that are less than the referenced cleanup levels. GeoEngineers should be contacted prior
to the export of soil or groundwater from the subject site or reuse of the affected media on site to evaluate
the potential for associated environmental liabilities. We cannot be responsible for potential environmental
liability arising out of the transfer of soil and/or groundwater from the subject site to another location or its
reuse on site in instances that we were not aware of or could not control.
GEOENGINEER� August 10, 2015 Page E-2
File No.; 21948-001-00
Most Environmental bindings Are Professional Opinions
Our interpretations of subsurface conditions are based on field observations and chemical analytical data
from widely spaced sampling locations at the site. Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at
those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoEngineers reviewed field and
laboratory data and then applied our professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface
conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ - sometimes significantly - from
those indicated in this report. Our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a
warranty of the subsurface conditions.
Geotechnical, Geologic and Geoenvironmental Reports Should Not Be Interchanged
The equipment, techniques and personnel used to perform an environmental study differ significantly from
those used to perform a geotechnical or geologic study and vice versa. For that reason, a geotechnical
engineering or geologic report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions or
recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated
contaminants. Similarly, environmental reports are not used to address geotechnical or geologic concerns
regarding a specific project.
Biological Pollutants
GeoEngineers' Scope of Services specifically excludes the investigation, detection, prevention or
assessment of the presence of Biological Pollutants. Accordingly, this report does not include any
interpretations, recommendations, findings, or conclusions regarding the detecting, assessing, preventing
or abating of Biological Pollutants and no conclusions or inferences should be drawn regarding Biological
Pollutants, as they may relate to this project. The term "Biological Pollutants" includes, but is not limited to,
molds, fungi, spores, bacteria, and viruses, and/or any of their byproducts.
If Bryant Motors desires these specialized services, they should be obtained from a consultant who offers
services in this specialized field.
GWENGINEERSL/rP August 10, 2015 Page E-3
File No.; 21948-001-00