HomeMy WebLinkAboutC_Clean Up_Prologis-Monster Road_Summary of VI Evaluations Memo_2021-0203
Two Union Square
601 Union Street, Suite 600
Seattle, WA 98101
tel: 206.292.2078 fax: 206.682.7867
Page 1 of 11
Memorandum
To: Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
From: Pamela Osterhout and Brett Beaulieu, Floyd|Snider
Date: February 3, 2021
Re: 2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
601 Monster Road SW, Renton, Washington
This memorandum provides a comprehensive updated vapor intrusion (VI) evaluation for the
601 Monster Road property (Site), based on the most recent soil vapor evaluation completed in
December 2020 and January 2021 and the results of prior vapor intrusion investigations.
The memorandum is organized into the following sections:
• Relevant site background and overview information
• Summaries of the previous VI evaluations completed in 2016, 2017, and 2019
• A data report detailing the recent 2020 and 2021 soil vapor sampling and results
• A comprehensive evaluation of current VI risks based on available data
The results verify that volatile organic compound (VOC) and total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH)
concentrations do not pose a risk of VI in the newly constructed distribution center. In addition,
fine-grained subsurface geology is naturally protective from potential VI, and conservative
mitigation measures have been taken to further reduce any potential VI risk.
OVERVIEW AND SITE BACKGROUND
The Site is located at 601 Monster Road SW in an industrial area of Renton, Washington, as
shown on Figure 1. The Site was historically used as a folding carton manufacturing facility since
its development in 1956. The former manufacturing warehouse was demolished in 2018,
leaving the concrete floor slab generally intact. A cleanup action to remove contaminated soil
and groundwater from the northeast corner of the former building, where the slab was
removed, was completed following demolition. A new 162,000-square-foot warehouse was
constructed in its place in 2019, with an additional 7-inch-thick topping slab constructed above
the existing floor slab. Where the original building slab was expanded or demolished during
construction, a 20-mil Drago Wrap vapor barrier designed to block VOCs was placed beneath
the new slab as a precautionary measure. The extent of the vapor barrier is shown in Figure 2.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 2 of 11
Prior investigations were completed at the Site in 2016 and 2017 to assess potential VI risk
associated with current and former impacted soil and groundwater in three areas of concern
(AOCs). The AOCs include petroleum-impacted soil and groundwater in AOC1 and AOC2
(located on the west side of the property) and chlorinated solvent-impacted soil and
groundwater in AOC4 (located on the north side of the property). Soil excavations were
completed at AOC1 and AOC2 in 1993 and 2015, but petroleum-impacted soil that was
inaccessible because of proximity to the building foundation and subsurface utilities was left in
place. Refer to the Remedial Action Report: Abandoned Subgrade Feature and Impacted Soil
Removal (Ramboll Environ 2015) for further information on the investigation and cleanup
efforts in AOC1 and AOC2.
Remediation of soil and groundwater was completed at AOC4 following these investigations
and the 2018 demolition of the former warehouse. The cleanup action removed soil impacted
with trichloroethene (TCE) and groundwater impacted with TCE and breakdown products
including vinyl chloride. Refer to the 2019 Construction Completion Report for additional
information on the cleanup effort at AOC4 (Floyd|Snider 2019a). A sub-slab soil investigation
was completed throughout the exposed slab in 2019 prior to construction of the new building.
An additional VI investigation was completed in AOC4 in late 2020 and early 2021, after
construction of the new building, following detection of vinyl chloride in groundwater that
exceeded the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) VI Method B groundwater screening level for
residential exposure.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS VAPOR INTRUSION EVALUATIONS
The analytical results from previous evaluations are included in Tables 1, 2 and 3. Table 1
contains the results of VOCs in ambient air and indoor air. Table 2 contains results for VOCs in
soil vapor. Table 3 contains results of the 2019 analysis of air phase hydrocarbons and
petroleum-related VOCs (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes [BTEX], and naphthalene).
Sample locations are shown on Figure 2.
2016 Evaluation at AOC1 and AOC2
In November 2016, Ramboll Environ completed a VI evaluation of AOC1 and AOC2 by collecting
a sub-slab soil vapor sample and paired indoor air sample adjacent to each of the AOCs. The
investigation was conducted in the former warehouse structure prior to its demolition, addition
of a 7-inch-thick topping slab to this area, and complete replacement of the structure and
ventilation systems. The sampling included two sub -slab soil vapor samples (SS1 and SS2), two
indoor air samples (IA01 and IA02), and one ambient air sample (AA01) located east of the
building. The results of this investigation are included in the Results of Additional Subsurface
Investigation memorandum (Ramboll Environ 2016). All results were reported at concentrations
less than corresponding MTCA screening levels except for the following compounds:
• Acrolein exceeded the MTCA Method C screening level of 0.67 µg/m3 in the sub-slab
soil gas samples SS1 and SS2 at 1.95 µg/m3 and 2.22 µg/m3, respectively. Acrolein
was not detected in the indoor air of the former warehouse or ambient air.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 3 of 11
• Benzene was detected at concentrations greater than the MTCA Method B screening
level in the indoor air of the former warehouse and ambient air samples, but at
concentrations less than MTCA Method B screening levels for the sub-slab soil vapor
samples. None of these samples exceeded MTCA Method C screening levels for
benzene in indoor air or soil vapor.
• 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene was detected at concentrations greater than the MTCA
Method B screening level in the indoor air samples at the time of the investigation
that are no longer applicable. The MTCA screening levels for 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene
were updated in 2019. The concentrations detected in these samples do not exceed
the 2019 updated screening levels (included in Tables 1 and 2). The detected
concentrations were attributed to historical and ongoing use of petroleum
compounds in the former building because sub-slab soil gas concentrations did not
exceed screening levels.
• 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) was not detected; however, the laboratory reporting limit
exceeds the MTCA Method C screening level updated in 2019.
2017 Evaluation at AOC4
In January and March 2017, Ramboll Environ conducted a VI evaluation at AOC4 with four
sub-slab soil vapor samples (SS3, SS4, SS5, and SS6) and an ambient air sample (AA02) located
east of the building. The investigation was conducted in the former warehouse structure prior
to its demolition, removal of the building slab from the AOC4 area, excavation of impacted soil
and groundwater from this area, addition of a vapor barrier, and complete replacement of the
structure and ventilation systems. Two of the sampling locations (SS3 and SS4) also had paired
indoor air samples (IA3 and IA4) collected. The details of this investigation are included in
Ramboll Environ’s January 30, 2017, memorandum (Ramboll 2017a) and March 31, 2017,
memorandum (Ramboll 2017b). This investigation found all VOCs at concentrations less than
screening levels except the following:
• TCE was detected at 188 µg/m3 at sub-slab sample SS3, which exceeds the MTCA
Method C screening level of 67 µg/m3. This sub-slab point was located within the
AOC4 remediation area that was remediated in 2019 and is no longer relevant.
• Acrolein was detected at 1.97 µg/m3 and 2.3 µg/m3 in sub-slab soil gas samples
collected from SS5 and SS6 located south and west of AOC4, respectively. These
concentrations exceed the MTCA Method C screening level of 0.67 µg/m3. Acrolein
was not detected in samples collected from SS3 and SS4, but the laboratory
reporting limit of 1.15 µg/m3 exceeds the screening level. Consistent with the 2016
evaluation, acrolein was not detected in indoor air in the former warehouse.
• Benzene was detected in indoor air in the former warehouse and ambient air at
concentrations that exceed the MTCA Method B indoor air screening level,
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 4 of 11
consistent with the 2016 sampling event; however, none of the samples exceeded
the MTCA Method C indoor air screening level.
• 1,2,4-Trimethybenzene in the indoor air of the former warehouse was noted to
exceed the MTCA Method B indoor air screening level at that time, consistent with
the 2016 sampling event; however, the detected concentrations do not exceed the
updated 2019 screening levels.
• EDB was not detected; however, the laboratory reporting limit exceeds the current
MTCA Method C screening level.
2019 Evaluation at AOC1, AOC2, and AOC4
In September 2019, following demolition but prior to construction of the new warehouse and
concrete floor slab, Floyd|Snider completed an additional VI evaluation of AOC1, AOC2, and
AOC4 with six sub-slab vapor points (VP-01 through VP-06). The assessment was undertaken as
a precautionary step to rule out potential VI concerns for TPH and VOCs based on results from
indoor air and sub-slab soil vapor samples collected in 2016 and 2017 prior to building
demolition, updated Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) guidance for assessing
VI risk (Ecology 2018a and 2018b), and updated screening levels in Ecology’s Cleanup Levels and
Risk Calculation (CLARC) website (Ecology 2019). Additionally, low-level analysis was conducted
on select samples to further assess the non-detect exceedances of acrolein and EDB. The results
from this 2019 sub-slab sampling are presented in the Summary of Sub-Slab Soil Vapor
Assessment Results Memorandum (Floyd|Snider 2019b). The results indicated that total TPH
results are in compliance with screening levels listed in Ecology’s Implementation Memo
No. 18, as shown on Table 3, and there were no detected exceedances of MTCA Method C
sub-slab soil vapor screening levels. Additionally:
• Acrolein was not detected in any sub-slab soil vapor samples, although reporting
limits (ranging from 0.69 µg/m3 to 2.2 µg/m3) exceeded the MTCA Method C
screening level of 0.67 µg/m3 even where low-level analysis was utilized.
• EDB was not detected at reporting limits less than the MTCA Methods B and C
screening levels.
2020 AND 2021 VAPOR INTRUSION EVALUATION AT AOC4
The most recent VI evaluation was completed to further assess if VI is a potential risk in AOC4
at the northern side of the newly constructed warehouse. In September 2020, elevated
concentrations of vinyl chloride were detected in groundwater in monitoring well AOC4-MW5
located in the parking lot approximately 25 feet north of the new warehouse. The vinyl chloride
concentration in groundwater was detected at 2.4 µg/L. AOC4-MW5 is one of six monitoring
wells installed in AOC4 in 2020 to monitor post-remediation groundwater quality. Vinyl chloride
was not detected in groundwater from any other monitoring well during the September 2020
monitoring event.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 5 of 11
Although the groundwater concentration of 2.4 µg/L exceeds the MTCA Method C groundwater
cleanup level of 0.29 µg/L, it does not exceed the MTCA VI Method C groundwater screening
level of 3.5 µg/L, and therefore no risk of VI would be expected based on these groundwater
results. To be conservative, however, two vapor points were installed in November 2020 to
provide additional data to assess potential VI risk from vinyl chloride in groundwater at AOC4.
Soil Vapor Point Installation and Sampling
Soil vapor point installation and sampling were completed in accordance with the sampling and
analysis plan for the sub-slab vapor investigation (Floyd|Snider 2019c) and Floyd|Snider’s
standard operating procedures (SOPs), with relevant details summarized below. On
November 17, 2020, Holocene Drilling, Inc., installed two permanent soil vapor sampling points,
VP-07 and VP-08, in the asphalt parking lot north of the new warehouse (Figure 2). VP-07 is
located approximately 50 feet east of AOC4-MW5 and 20 feet north of the warehouse. VP-08 is
located approximately 6 feet south of AOC4-MW5. The locations were selected to be
representative of potential VI risk downgradient of the AOC4 soil remediation area (VP-07), and
between monitoring well AOC4-MW5 and the warehouse (VP-08). Subgrade utilities located
beneath the sidewalk prevented placement of these vapor points closer to the warehouse.
Prior to installation of the vapor points, a soil core was collected from 0 to 5 feet below ground
surface (bgs) to assess the subsurface geology and groundwater levels. At both VP -07 and
VP-08, groundwater was not encountered in the top 5 feet. Groundwater sampling at nearby
monitoring wells in September and December 2020 indicate depth to groundwater is
approximately 8 feet bgs. The soil collected at each location is dominated by fine grained
materials, including silts and clays with varying contents of fine sand. Photographs of the soil
cores are included in Attachment 1.
The vapor points were constructed with a 6-inch-long stainless steel vapor screen and Teflon
tubing using a direct-push drill rig to 5.5 feet bgs and completed with a flush mount, stainless-
steel secure cover (refer to photographs included in Attachment 1). The vapor screens were set
from 4.75 to 5.25 feet bgs. The annular space was filled with silica sand from 4.5 to 5.5 feet bgs
to span the vapor screen, dry bentonite chips from 3.5 to 4.5 feet bgs to minimize moisture
migrating downward in the screen, and sand pack from hydrated bentonite chips. Hydrated
bentonite grout was placed from 2 to 3.5 feet bgs to seal surface water from infiltrating into the
sample point. The vapor point installation logs are included in Attachment 2.
The soil vapor sampling events occurred on December 2, 2020, and January 8, 2021. The
weather was considered when scheduling to avoid sampling during a period of extreme
atmospheric pressure changes or within 24 hours of a rain event that produces 0.5 inches of
precipitation or more. No precipitation occurred during the December 2020 sampling event nor
during the previous day. Sporadic light rain showers occurred on January 8, and rain was not
recorded the day prior to sampling. Soil vapor samples were collected in accordance with
Floyd|Snider’s SOPs.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 6 of 11
Prior to collecting the samples, the sampling equipment was set up at each location and a
closed valve leak test was performed. The sampling manifold was checked for leaks by closing
the control valve at the vapor point, then opening the SUMMA canister for a period of
5 minutes to see if vacuum was maintained. All sampling manifolds maintained their initial
vacuum for at least 5 minutes during both sampling events. After conducting the leak test, the
sample points were purged by purging at least one tubing volume from each location using a
6-liter SUMMA canister with a flow rate of 150 milliliters per minute (mL/min).
After purging the sample point and tubing manifold, a shroud was placed around the sample
point, SUMMA canisters, and sample tubing/manifold and filled with approximately 10 to
20% helium. Once the shroud was filled with helium, the soil vapor samples were collected at a
flow rate of less than 150 mL/min and collected in 100% certified and pre-evacuated 1-liter
SUMMA canisters supplied by Friedman & Bruya, Inc. (FBI) laboratory of Seattle, Washington. A
field duplicate (VP-108) was also collected at VP-08. During collection of VP-08 and VP-108
samples (concurrent collection), the sample cannister vacuum readings stalled about halfway
through sample collection at 17 inches of mercury (in/Hg). A full volume sample is considered
complete at 4.5 in/Hg. The sampling was paused by closing all valves and disassembling the
manifold to assess the cause of the stall (e.g., water blockage in tubing, tight soil formation,
etc.). Inspection of the sample point and tubing did not indicate water blockage was occurring.
The sample manifold was then reassembled and re-purged before completing the sample
collection.
During the January 8 sampling event, VP-07 was resampled using the same field methods
described above; however, 99% isopropyl alcohol was used as a tracer gas in place of helium for
leak detection. A field duplicate (VP-107) was also collected following collection of the parent
sample at VP-07.
Once the sampling was completed and the final vacuum was recorded, the sampling manifold
was removed from the canister, and a Swagelok cap was tightly fitted to the inlet port of the
SUMMA canister. A photoionization detector (PID) was used to record vapor readings from the
manifold connection, and the readings were logged on the soil vapor sampling sheets. The
initial canister vacuums, vacuum testing times, purging times, purged volumes, sampling start
and stop times, final vacuum readings, and PID readings were recorded on soil vapor sampling
sheets, which are included in Attachment 3. A PID reading was not collected on January 8 due
to interference with the isopropyl alcohol.
Soil vapor samples were submitted under chain of custody to FBI laboratory and analyzed for
the following:
• VOCs by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Method TO-15
• Helium by ASTM D1946
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 7 of 11
Data Validation
A Compliance Screening (Stages 1 & 2A) data quality review was performed on VOC data
resulting from laboratory analysis. The analytical data were validated in accordance with the
USEPA’s National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Organic Methods Data Review (USEPA
2017).
Three soil vapor samples were submitted as sample delivery group 012050 to Friedman & Bruya,
Inc., for chemical analysis by TO-15 and ASTM D1946. Two soil vapor samples were submitted as
sample delivery group 101099 to Friedman & Bruya, Inc., for chemical analysis by TO-15. For all
samples, the analytical holding times were met, and the method blanks had no detections. The
surrogate, matrix spike (MS), matrix spike duplicate (MSD), laboratory control sample (LCS), and
laboratory control sample duplicate (LCSD) recoveries and MS/MSD, LCS/LCSD, and
sample/sample duplicate relative percent differences (RPD) all met USEPA requirements as noted
below.
Helium was used as a tracer gas for leak detection during collection of the three soil vapor
samples in delivery group 012050. Helium was recorded by the field sampler at up to 19% in the
sample shroud during collection of VP-07-120220. The laboratory report of 16% helium by
ASTM D1945 in sample VP-07-120220 indicates there was a leak of ambient air into the sample.
Therefore, the laboratory results for VP-07-120220 are not representative of the soil vapor
quality and should not be used for further evaluation.
For the TO-15 analysis of sample VP-08-120220, the laboratory noted that the sample/sample
duplicate RPD for 1,1-dichloroethane was outside the laboratory control limits. As the LCS
recoveries were inside control limits and the RPDs for all other analytes in this sample
demonstrate adequate precision and accuracy for the method, no further action was taken by
the laboratory. It is with professional judg ment that only the 1,1-dichloroethane result from
this sample be qualified “J” as estimated based on this RDP information.
For the TO-15 analysis of samples VP-07-100821 and VP-107-100821, the laboratory noted that
the LCS recoveries for ethanol and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene were outside laboratory control
limits low and flagged impacted results “ca.” It is with professional judgment that these
laboratory qualifiers be retained as the final qualifier “J” for detected results and “UJ” for non -
detect results for database storage.
Based on the data quality review, data from VP-08-120220, VP-108-120220, VP-07-010821, and
VP-107-010821 are determined to be of acceptable quality for use as reported by the
laboratory unless specifically qualified above.
2020 and 2021 Soil Vapor Survey Results
Soil vapor results from the December 2020 and January 2021 sampling events are presented in
Table 2. Laboratory analytical reports are included as Attachment 4.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 8 of 11
In accordance with the Ecology VI guidance (Ecology 2018a), soil vapor results for VOCs
presented in Table 2 were compared to the 2019 MTCA Method C sub-slab soil gas screening
level listed on Ecology’s CLARC website (Ecology 2019). The MTCA Method B sub-slab soil gas
screening levels are also listed in the table for reference. The results from VP-08 are consistent
with the previous VI evaluations. There were no detections of chlorinated compounds,
including TCE and vinyl chloride, and no MTCA Method C exceedances of TPH-related VOCs
(BTEX and naphthalene). Acrolein was not detected, but the reporting limit exceeds the
screening level.
As previously discussed, the percent of helium (16%) reported in the sample collected from
VP-07 on December 2, 2020, is comparable to the maximum helium concentration (19%)
recorded in the sample shroud during collection of VP -07-12020. This result indicates that there
was a significant leak of ambient air into the sample cannister and the results are not
representative of soil vapor from this location. Although the sample cannister and manifold
passed leak detection prior to sampling, it is possible that a leak to ambient air occurred during
setup of the helium shroud after the closed-valve leak test was completed. These results are
not further considered.
The results from resampling the soil vapor point VP-07 on January 8, 2021, confirm the findings
that there are no detections of vinyl chloride or exceedances of any other VOCs or TPH-related
VOCs in soil gas in AOC4. 99% isopropyl alcohol, used as a tracer gas during this sampling event,
was detected at less than 0.01%, indicating that the leak observed during the December 2,
2020, sampling was likely caused by equipment failure rather than the surface seal or sample
tubing.
COMPREHENSIVE SOIL VAPOR AND AIR RESULTS DISCUSSION
A combined review of these VI evaluations, consistent with Ecology guidance for evaluating VI
(Ecology 2018a), indicates that there is not a current risk for VI in the newly constructed
distribution center. The TPH and VOC data summarized in this memorandum and other relevant
site conditions were considered in the evaluation.
• Total TPH results are in compliance with screening levels listed in Ecology’s
Implementation Memo No. 18 shown on Table 3 (Ecology 2018b).
• There were minor exceedances of the MTCA Method B screening levels for a handful
of VOCs during the 2016 and 2017 evaluations; however, MTCA Method B screening
levels in CLARC are used for residential exposure scenarios and are overly
conservative when applied to commercial buildings or industrial sites. Because the
Site is zoned industrial, has historically been used as an industrial property, and will
continue to be used as an industrial property, the MTCA Method C sub -slab soil gas
screening levels and MTCA Method C indoor air cleanup levels are more appropriate
for use and sufficiently protective of human health.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 9 of 11
• The 2019 VI assessment focused on potential issues related to non-detect
exceedances of acrolein and other VOCs but concluded that the previous non-detect
apparent exceedances of MTCA Method C screening levels for indoor air and
sub-slab soil gas were not replicated with the low-level analysis. Therefore, there are
no concerns related to VI for acrolein or other VOCs.
• The only other detected exceedance of the MTCA Method C screening level was for
TCE at sub-slab location SS3 within AOC4 in 2017, where a remedial cleanup action
was completed in 2019. The impacted soil (source of TCE and breakdown products
including vinyl chloride) in AOC4 was excavated, confirmed clean with confirmation
sampling, and backfilled with clean fill material. Groundwater within the excavated
area was recovered as part of the cleanup. This cleanup action eliminates a potential
source of VI. Following backfilling, a 20-mil Drago Wrap vapor barrier designed to
block VOCs was installed beneath the footprint of the building overlapping with
AOC4 as an additional precautionary measure.
• Vinyl chloride was only detected in one sub-slab soil vapor sample, SS5 located
south of AOC4, during all VI evaluations; however, this detection of vinyl chloride did
not exceed MTCA Method B or C screening levels for sub-slab soil gas. Although vinyl
chloride was detected in groundwater at elevated concentrations following the
remediation of AOC4, the 2020 and 2021 soil vapor results indicate that vinyl
chloride in groundwater does not pose a VI risk to occupants in the new distribution
center. Post-remediation groundwater monitoring is currently being conducted
quarterly at the Site. Groundwater concentrations are expected to attenuate over
time as the aquifer equilibrates following the cleanup action.
• The geology of AOC4 from at least 0 to 12 feet bgs consists primarily of silts and
clays, which are not conducive to vapor transport due to low permeability (USEPA
2012). During sampling of VP-07 and VP-08 in AOC4, the SUMMA canisters were
unable to extract full sample volumes because of the tight formation and low
permeability of the surrounding soil. The low permeability of the subsurface
material in AOC4 acts as natural vapor mitigation in conjunction with the vapor
barrier beneath the warehouse slab.
Per the Ecology VI guidance (Ecology 2018a), if VOC concentrations are greater than the
sub-slab MTCA Method C screening levels during the Tier I vapor intrusion assessment, the
reviewer will proceed to the Tier II assessment, which includes either collecting indoor air
samples or using the Johnson and Ettinger Model to predict indoor air concentrations a nd risk.
However, all VOCs analyzed were either less than their respective reporting limits or less than
their respective MTCA Method C screening levels. Therefore, the results of these four VI
evaluations, in addition to the cleanup action, mitigation measures of the VI barrier, and fine-
grained material of the subsurface, are sufficient to conclude that vapor risk into indoor air is
not a concern and there is no need for a Tier II assessment or further VI mitigation.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 10 of 11
REFERENCES
Floyd|Snider. 2019a. 601 Monster Road SW 2019 Remedial Actions Construction Completion
Report. Prepared for Prologis, Inc. February.
_____. 2019b. Summary of Sub-Slab Soil Vapor Assessment Results. Memorandum from Gabe
Cisneros and Brett Beaulieu, Floyd|Snider, to Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis.
8 November.
_____. 2019c. Sampling Plan for Sub-Slab Vapor Intrusion Assessment. Memorandum from
Gabe Cisneros and Brett Beaulieu, Floyd|Snider, to Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis .
3 September.
Ramboll Environ US Corporation (Ramboll). 2015. Remedial Action Report Abandoned Subgrade
Feature and Impacted Soil Removal, Graphic Packaging International, Inc . November.
_____. 2016. Results of Additional Subsurface Investigation . Memorandum from Ramboll
Environ to Walter E. Bowles, Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 2 December.
_____. 2017a. Results of AOC 4 Additional Subsurface Investigation. Memorandum from
Ramboll Environ to Walter E. Bowles, Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 30 January.
_____. 2017b. Results of Additional Subsurface Investigation (AOC 4). Memorandum from
Ramboll Environ to Walter E. Bowles, Graphic Packaging International, Inc. 31 March.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2018a. Guidance for Evaluating Soil Vapor
Intrusion in Washington State: Investigation and Remedial Action . Publication No. 09-09-
047. April.
_____. 2018b. Petroleum Vapor Intrusion (PVI): Updated Screening Levels, Cleanup Levels, and
Assessing PVI Threats to Future Buildings, Implementation Memorandum No. 18.
Publication No. 17-09-043. 10 January.
_____. 2019. CLARC Master Table Spreadsheet. <https://www.ezview.wa.gov/Portals/_1987/
Documents/Documents/CLARCInterimUpdate.xlsx> May.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2012. EPA’s Vapor Intrusion Database:
Evaluation and Characterization of Attenuation Factors for Chlorinated Volatile Organic
Compounds and Residential Buildings. Office of Solid Waste Emergency Response.
16 March.
_____. 2017. National Functional Guidelines for Superfund Orga nic Methods Data Review.
Prepared by the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. EPA -540-
R-2016-002/OLEM 9355.0-134. September.
Justin Kirk and Brett Richer, Prologis
February 3, 2021
2020–2021 Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Page 11 of 11
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Table 1 Indoor and Ambient Air Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Table 2 Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Table 3 Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Vapor Intrusion Evaluation Sampling Locations
Attachment 1 Photographs
Attachment 2 VP-07 and VP-08 Soil Vapor Point Field Installation Log
Attachment 3 VP-07 and VP-08 Soil Vapor Sampling Sheets
Attachment 4 2020 and 2021 Laboratory Reports
Tables
Table 1
Indoor and Ambient Air Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 1 of 2
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 1
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
AA02-20170118
1/18/17
Units
2019 MTCA Method C
(µg/m 3 )
2019 MTCA Method B
(µg/m 3 )
µg/m³40 9.6 2.03 U 0.0719 U 2.03 U 2.03 U 0.661 JQ 0.0719 U
µg/m³2 0.37 1.07 U 1.07 U 1.07 U 1.07 U 0.034 U 0.034 U
µg/m³2.8 0.28 0.511 U 0.0373 U 0.511 U 0.511 U 0.0373 U 0.0373 U
Other Volatile Organic Compounds
µg/m³0.43 0.043 2.06 U 0.044 U 2.06 U 2.06 U 0.044 U 0.044 U
µg/m³0.2 0.16 2.73 U 0.0647 U 2.73 U 2.73 U 0.0647 U 0.0647 U
µg/m³16 1.6 0.81 U 0.0463 U 0.81 U 0.81 U 0.0463 U 0.0463 U
µg/m³200 91 0.793 U 0.0492 U 0.793 U 0.793 U 0.0492 U 0.0492 U
µg/m³2 0.91 2.23 U 0.0434 U 2.23 U 2.23 U 0.0434 U 0.0434 U
µg/m³5,000 2,300 1.09 U 0.0383 U 1.09 U 1.09 U 0.0383 U 0.0383 U
µg/m³60 27 1.47 U 0.0194 U 17.8 23.9 9.69 8.27
µg/m³200 91 3.01 U 1.29 U 3.01 U 3.01 U 1.29 U 1.29 U
µg/m³0.96 0.096 0.809 U 0.0266 U 0.809 U 0.809 U 0.0266 U 0.0266 U
µg/m³6.8 0.68 2.31 U 0.0412 U 2.31 U 2.31 U 0.0412 U 0.0412 U
µg/m³0.83 0.083 1.11 U 0.0554 U 1.11 U 1.11 U 0.0554 U 0.0554 U
µg/m³2.3 0.23 1.8 U 0.943 U 1.8 U 1.8 U 0.943 U 0.943 U
µg/m³5,000 2,300 1.86 0.0912 U 3.1 3.92 0.0912 U 0.0912 U
µg/m³0.02 0.0091 1.15 U 0.107 U 1.15 U 1.15 U 0.107 U 0.107 U
µg/m³3.2 0.32 0.926 0.516 JQ 1.12 1.12 1.49 1.47
µg/m³23 2.3 2.07 U 0.0398 U 2.07 U 2.07 U 0.0398 U 0.0398 U
µg/m³5 2.3 1.94 U 0.075 U 1.94 U 1.94 U 0.075 U 0.075 U
µg/m³700 320 4.67 U 0.801 JQ 4.67 U 4.67 U 0.0314 U 0.372 JQ
µg/m³4.2 0.42 1.26 U 0.0486 U 1.26 U 1.26 U 0.0486 U 0.0486 U
µg/m³700 320 1.69 U 1.05 JQ 1.69 U 1.69 U 1.16 JQ 1.16 JQ
µg/m³5,000 2,300 3.83 U 0.0615 U 3.83 U 3.83 U 0.0615 U 0.0615 U
µg/m³100 46 1.48 U 1.52 1.48 U 1.48 U 1.45 JQ 1.45 JQ
µg/m³50 23 0.921 U 0.0267 U 0.921 U 0.921 U 0.0267 U 0.0267 U
µg/m³10,000 4,600 1.32 U 0.219 U 1.32 U 1.32 U 0.219 U 0.219 U
µg/m³1.1 0.11 0.977 U 0.0346 U 0.977 U 0.977 U 0.0346 U 0.0346 U
µg/m³90 41 1.03 U 1.16 1.03 U 1.03 U 1.01 JQ 1.03 JQ
µg/m³6.3 0.63 2.27 U 0.0344 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 0.0344 U 0.0344 U
Chloroethane
Chloroform
Chloromethane
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Chlorobenzene
Bromoform
Bromomethane
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Methyl ethyl ketone
Acrolein
Benzene
1,3-Butadiene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Sample Name
Sample Date
IA04AA01AA02IA01IA02IA03Location
1/18/17
AA01-20161108 IA01-20161108 IA02-20161108 IA03-20170118 IA04-20170118
11/8/16 11/8/16 11/8/16 1/18/17
Analyte
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)
Trichloroethene (TCE)
Vinyl chloride
Chlorinated Solvent Volatile Organic Compounds
Indoor Air Screening Levels
IndoorAmbientAmbientIndoorIndoorIndoorSample Type
Table 1
Indoor and Ambient Air Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 2 of 2
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 1
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
AA02-20170118
1/18/17
Units
2019 MTCA Method C
(µg/m 3 )
2019 MTCA Method B
(µg/m 3 )
Sample Name
Sample Date
IA04AA01AA02IA01IA02IA03Location
1/18/17
AA01-20161108 IA01-20161108 IA02-20161108 IA03-20170118 IA04-20170118
11/8/16 11/8/16 11/8/16 1/18/17
Analyte
Indoor Air Screening Levels
IndoorAmbientAmbientIndoorIndoorIndoorSample Type
Other Volatile Organic Compounds (cont.)
µg/m³0.68 0.068 2.01 U 0.0446 U 2.01 U 2.01 U 0.0446 U 0.0446 U
µg/m³1,000 460 1.3 U 0.155 JQ 1.3 U 2.95 1.76 JQ 1.23 JQ
µg/m³0.042 0.0042 1.54 U 0.0684 U 1.54 U 1.54 U 0.0684 U 0.0684 U
µg/m³1.1 0.11 10.7 U 0.389 U 10.7 U 10.7 U 0.389 U 0.389 U
µg/m³700 320 1.62 0.0467 U 1.69 1.34 0.889 0.812
µg/m³100 46 1.95 0.481 JQ 10.1 13.7 7.87 6.22
µg/m³3,000 1,400 4.1 U 0.0388 U 4.1 U 4.1 U 0.0388 U 0.0388 U
µg/m³700 320 1.23 U 0.0756 U 1.23 U 1.23 U 0.0756 U 0.0756 U
µg/m³96 9.6 0.721 U 0.0336 U 0.721 U 0.721 U 0.0336 U 0.0336 U
µg/m³600 250 5.21 U 0.0347 U 5.21 U 5.21 UJ 0.0347 U 0.0347 U
µg/m³0.74 0.074 1.57 U 0.219 U 1.57 U 1.57 U 0.219 U 0.219 U
µg/m³100 46 0.868 U 0.21 JQ 6.82 8.55 5.07 3.75
µg/m³1,000 460 1.28 U 0.0208 U 1.28 U 1.28 U 0.0208 U 0.0208 U
µg/m³5,000 2,300 4.18 1.11 5.05 4.75 6.3 5.35
µg/m³0.51 0.051 2.59 U 0.0319 U 2.59 U 2.59 U 0.0319 U 0.0319 U
µg/m³6.3 0.63 2.27 U 0.0362 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 0.0362 U 0.0362 U
Notes:
Blank cells are intentional.
RED/BOLD Non-detect result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
RED/BOLD Result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
Abbreviations:
CUL Cleanup level
µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
MTCA Model Toxics Control Act
Qualifiers:
J Analyte was detected, concentration is considered to be an estimate.
JQ Concentration is an estimated value reported below the associated quantitation limit but above the MDL.
U Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit.
UJ Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit, which is considered to be an estimate.
Ethylbenzene
1,2-Dibromoethane
Hexachlorobutadiene
n-Hexane
Xylene (meta & para)
Methyl iso butyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl-Tert-Butyl Ether
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
Methylene chloride
Naphthalene
Xylene (ortho)
Styrene
Toluene
Benzyl Chloride
Bromodichloromethane
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 1 of 4
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Units
2019 MTCA Method C
(µg/m 3)
2019 MTCA Method B
(µg/m3)
Chlorinated Solvent Volatile Organic Compounds
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)µg/m³1,300 320 37.9 52.7 81.4 4.59 2.85 4.11
Trichloroethene (TCE)µg/m³67 12 1.07 U 1.07 U 188 1.07 U 1.07 U 5.31
Vinyl chloride µg/m³93 9.4 0.511 U 0.511 U 0.511 U 0.511 U 0.851 0.511 U
Other Volatile Organic Compounds
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/m³14 1.4 2.06 U 2.06 U 2.06 U 2.06 U 2.06 U 2.06 U
1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/m³6.7 5.25 2.73 U 2.73 U 2.73 U 2.73 U 2.73 U 2.73 U
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/m³520 52 0.81 U 0.81 U 0.81 U 0.81 U 0.81 U 0.81 U
1,1-Dichloroethene µg/m³6,700 3,000 0.793 U 0.793 U 0.793 U 0.793 U 0.793 U 0.793 U
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/m³67 30 2.23 U 2.23 U 2.23 U 2.23 U 2.23 U 2.23 U
1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/m³17,000 76,000 1.09 U 6.77 10.3 1.09 U 1.09 U 1.3
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene µg/m³2,000 910 4.28 6.59 3.75 1.47 U 2.88 2.85
1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/m³6,700 3,000 3.01 U 3.01 U 3.01 U 3.01 U 3.01 U 3.01 U
1,2-Dichloroethane µg/m³32 3.2 0.809 U 0.809 U 0.809 U 0.809 U 0.809 U 0.809 U
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/m³230 23 2.31 U 2.31 U 2.31 U 2.31 U 2.31 U 2.31 U
1,3-Butadiene µg/m³28 2.8 1.11 U 1.11 U 1.11 U 1.87 10.2 U 1.11 U
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/m³76 7.6 1.8 U 1.8 U 1.8 U 1.8 U 1.8 U 1.8 U
Methyl ethyl ketone µg/m³170,000 76,000 20.1 20.9 464 6.57 1.47 U 1.47 U
Acrolein µg/m³0.67 0.3 2.22 1.95 1.15 U 1.15 U 1.97 2.3
Benzene µg/m³110 11 2.3 1.88 7.21 3.89 5.19 11.3
Bromoform µg/m³760 76 2.07 U 2.07 U 2.07 U 2.07 U 2.07 U 2.07 U
Bromomethane µg/m³170 76 1.94 U 1.94 U 1.94 U 1.94 U 1.94 U 1.94 U
Carbon disulfide µg/m³23,000 11,000 4.67 U 4.67 U 5.21 4.67 U 4.67 U 4.67 U
Carbon tetrachloride µg/m³140 14 1.26 U 1.26 U 1.26 U 1.26 U 1.26 U 1.26 U
Trichlorofluoromethane µg/m³23,000 11,000 1.69 U 1.69 U 1.69 U 1.69 U 1.69 U 1.69 U
1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane µg/m³170,000 76,000 3.83 U 3.83 U 3.83 U 3.83 U 3.83 U 3.83 U
Dichlorodifluoromethane µg/m³3,300 1,500 1.48 U 1.48 U 1.48 U 1.48 U 1.48 U 1.48 U
Chlorobenzene µg/m³1,700 760 0.921 U 0.921 U 0.921 U 0.921 U 0.921 U 0.921 U
Chloroethane µg/m³330,000 150,000 1.32 U 1.32 U 1.32 U 1.32 U 1.32 U 1.32 U
Chloroform µg/m³36 3.6 0.977 U 0.977 U 1.67 0.977 U 0.977 U 1.99
Chloromethane µg/m³3,000 1,400 1.03 U 1.03 U 1.03 U 1.03 U 8.65 25
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/m³210 21 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U
Bromodichloromethane µg/m³23 2.3 2.01 U 2.01 U 2.01 U 2.01 U 2.01 U 2.01 U
Ethylbenzene µg/m³33,000 15,000 2.39 3.13 5.23 4.39 3.11 3.14
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)µg/m³1.4 0.14 1.54 U 1.54 U 1.54 U 1.54 U 1.54 U 1.54 U
Sample Date
Event
Location
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Ramboll 2016 Ramboll 2017
SS3-20170119 SS4-20170119Sample Name
SS2
11/9/16
SS1-20161109
SS3 SS4 SS5 SS6SS1
SS2-20161109 SS5-20170321 SS6-20170321
1/19/17 1/19/17 3/21/17 3/21/1711/9/16
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Analyte
Sample Type
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil Gas Screening Levels
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 2 of 4
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Units
2019 MTCA Method C
(µg/m 3)
2019 MTCA Method B
(µg/m3)
Sample Date
Event
Location
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Ramboll 2016 Ramboll 2017
SS3-20170119 SS4-20170119Sample Name
SS2
11/9/16
SS1-20161109
SS3 SS4 SS5 SS6SS1
SS2-20161109 SS5-20170321 SS6-20170321
1/19/17 1/19/17 3/21/17 3/21/1711/9/16
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Analyte
Sample Type
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil Gas Screening Levels
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Other Volatile Organic Compounds (cont.)
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m³38 3.8 10.7 U 10.7 U 10.7 U 10.7 U 10.7 U 10.7 U
n-Hexane µg/m³23,000 11,000 4.34 1.62 3.48 9.94 10.3 42.3
Xylene (meta & para)µg/m³3,300 1,500 8.68 12.8 14.7 13.4 7.26 7.65
Methyl iso butyl ketone µg/m³100,000 46,000 4.1 U 4.1 U 12.8 4.1 U 4.1 U 4.1 U
Methyl methacrylate µg/m³23,000 11,000 1.23 U 1.23 U 1.23 U 1.23 U 2.34 15.1
Methyl-Tert-Butyl Ether µg/m³3,200 320 0.721 U 0.721 U 0.721 U 0.721 U 9.74 5.83
Methylene chloride µg/m³20,000 8,300 5.21 U 5.21 U 5.21 U 5.21 U 5.21 U 5.21 U
Naphthalene µg/m³25 2.5 1.57 U 1.57 U 1.57 U 1.57 U 1.57 U 1.57 U
Xylene (ortho)µg/m³3,300 1,500 4.56 6.73 5.1 4.86 3.25 3.29
Styrene µg/m³33,000 15,000 1.28 U 1.28 U 1.28 U 1.28 U 3.14 3.11
Toluene µg/m³170,000 76,000 7.95 7.54 43.6 27.3 7.88 13.5
Benzyl Chloride µg/m³17 1.7 2.59 U 2.59 U 2.59 U 2.59 U 2.59 U 2.59 U
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/m³210 21 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U 2.27 U
Leak Detection Tracer Gas
Isopropyl alcohol %
Helium %
Notes:
Blank cells are intentional.
RED/BOLD Non-detect result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
RED/BOLD Result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
Data are not representative of soil vapor conditions. Results are presented for reference only.
Abbreviations:
CUL Cleanup level
µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
MTCA Model Toxics Control Act
Qualifiers:
J Analyte was detected, concentration is considered to be an estimate.
U Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit.
UJ Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit, which is considered to be an estimate.
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 3 of 4
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Units
2019 MTCA Method C
(µg/m3)
2019 MTCA Method B
(µg/m3)
Chlorinated Solvent Volatile Organic Compounds
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)µg/m³1,300 320 540 J 69 100 51 44 290 J 82 140 U 59 U 95 U 28 U 29 U
Trichloroethene (TCE)µg/m³67 12 0.83 U 0.27 U 0.83 U 4.7 2.8 7.2 0.86 U 2.1 U 0.94 U 1.5 U 0.45 U 0.46 U
Vinyl chloride µg/m³93 9.4 0.79 U 0.26 U 0.79 U 0.77 U 0.77 U 0.26 U 0.82 U 5.1 U 2.2 U 3.6 U 1.1 U 1.1 U
Other Volatile Organic Compounds
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/m³14 1.4 0.43 U 0.14 U 0.43 U 0.41 U 0.41 U 0.14 U 0.44 U 2.7 U 1.2 U 1.9 U 0.58 U 0.59 U
1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/m³6.7 5.25 0.34 U 0.11 U 0.34 U 0.33 U 0.33 U 0.11 U 0.35 U 1.1 U 0.47 U 0.76 U 0.23 U 0.23 U
1,1-Dichloroethane µg/m³520 52 1.3 U 0.4 U 1.3 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 0.4 U 1.3 U 8.1 U 3.5 U 5.7 U 18 J 13
1,1-Dichloroethene µg/m³6,700 3,000 1.2 U 0.4 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 1.2 U 0.4 U 1.3 U 7.9 U 3.4 U 5.6 U 1.7 U 1.7 U
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/m³67 30 2.3 U 0.74 U 2.3 U 2.2 U 2.2 U 0.74 U 2.4 U 15 U 6.5 UJ 10 UJ 3.1 U 3.2 U
1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/m³17,000 76,000 5.5 2.0 1.7 U 1.6 U 1.6 U 1.4 1.7 U 11 U 4.7 U 7.6 U 2.3 U 2.3 U
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene µg/m³2,000 910 7.6 U 2.8 7.6 U 7.4 U 7.4 U 2.5 U 7.9 U 310 58 58 10 U 11 U
1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/m³6,700 3,000 1.9 U 0.6 U 1.9 U 1.8 U 1.8 U 0.6 U 1.9 U 12 U 5.2 U 8.4 U 2.5 U 2.6 U
1,2-Dichloroethane µg/m³32 3.2 0.13 U 0.04 U 0.13 U 0.12 U 0.12 U 0.04 U 0.13 U 0.81 U 0.35 U 0.57 U 0.17 U 0.17 U
1,2-Dichloropropane µg/m³230 23 0.72 U 0.23 U 0.72 U 0.69 U 0.69 U 0.23 U 0.74 U 4.6 U 2 U 3.2 U 0.97 U 0.99 U
1,3-Butadiene µg/m³28 2.8 0.069 U 0.022 U 0.069 U 0.066 U 0.066 U 0.022 U 0.071 U 0.88 U 0.38 U 0.62 U 0.19 U 0.19 U
1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/m³76 7.6 0.75 U 0.24 U 0.75 U 0.72 U 0.72 U 0.24 U 0.77 U 4.6 U 2.1 U 3.3 U 0.97 U 0.99 U
Methyl ethyl ketone µg/m³170,000 76,000 9.1 U 6.5 9.1 U 16 17 6.8 9.7 59 U 27 48 12 U 13 U
Acrolein µg/m³0.67 0.3 2.2 UJ 0.69 UJ 2.2 UJ 2.1 UJ 2.1 UJ 0.69 UJ 2.2 UJ 41 U 18 U 29 U 8.7 U 8.9 U
Benzene µg/m³110 11 1.2 0.66 1.2 1.7 2 0.76 1.4 9.2 17 16 1.3 U 1.4 U
Bromoform µg/m³760 76 6.4 U 2.1 U 6.4 U 6.2 U 6.2 U 2.1 U 6.6 U 41 U 18 U 29 U 8.7 U 8.9 U
Bromomethane µg/m³170 76 4.8 U 1.6 U 4.8 U 4.7 U 4.7 U 1.6 U 5 U 47 U 20 U 33 U 9.8 U 10 U
Carbon disulfide µg/m³23,000 11,000 19 U 6.2 U 19 U 19 U 19 U 6.2 U 20 U 120 U 54 U 87 U 26 U 27 U
Carbon tetrachloride µg/m³140 14 2 U 0.63 U 2 U 1.9 U 1.9 U 0.63 U 2 U 6.3 U 2.7 U 4.4 U 1.3 U 1.4 U
Trichlorofluoromethane µg/m³23,000 11,000 7 U 2.2 U 7 U 6.7 U 6.7 U 2.2 U 7.2 U 45 U 20 U 31 U 9.4 U 9.7 U
1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane µg/m³170,000 76,000 2.4 U 0.77 U 2.4 U 2.3 U 2.3 U 0.77 U 2.5 U 15 U 6.7 U 11 U 3.2 U 3.3 U
Dichlorodifluoromethane µg/m³3,300 1,500 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.9 2.8 2.8 9.9 U 4.3 U 6.9 U 3.5 3.6
Chlorobenzene µg/m³1,700 760 1.4 U 0.46 U 5.8 1.4 U 1.4 U 0.51 1.5 U 9.2 U 4 U 6.4 U 1.9 U 2 U
Chloroethane µg/m³330,000 150,000 8.2 U 2.6 U 8.2 U 7.9 U 7.9 U 2.6 U 8.4 U 53 U 23 U 37 U 11 U 11 U
Chloroform µg/m³36 3.6 3 0.28 1.2 5.3 5.1 0.46 0.73 1.1 1.2 1.4 0.21 U 0.27
Chloromethane µg/m³3,000 1,400 6.4 U 2.1 U 6.4 U 6.2 U 6.2 U 2.1 U 6.6 U 74 U 32 U 52 U 16 U 16 U
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/m³210 21 1.4 U 0.45 U 1.4 U 1.4 U 1.4 U 0.45 U 1.5 U 9.1 U 3.9 U 6.4 U 1.9 U 2 U
Bromodichloromethane µg/m³23 2.3 1 0.067 U 0.21 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.067 U 0.21 U 1.3 U 0.58 U 0.94 U 0.28 U 0.29 U
Ethylbenzene µg/m³33,000 15,000 13 9.9 6.5 7.9 8.7 5.2 4.7 230 88 93 1.8 U 1.9 U
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)µg/m³1.4 0.14 0.13 UJ 0.039 UJ 0.24 U 0.12 UJ 0.12 UJ 0.039 UJ 0.13 UJ 1.5 U 0.67 U 1.1 U 0.32 U 0.33 U
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
VP-08VP-01 VP-02 VP-03
VP-02-090919 VP-03-090919 VP-04-090919
Location
Floyd|Snider 2019
VP-05VP-04 VP-06
Event
9/9/19 12/2/20
VP-01-090919
9/9/19
VP-104-090919Sample Name
Sample Date 9/9/19
VP-05-090919 VP-06-090919
9/9/19 9/9/19 9/9/19 9/9/19
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
VaporSample Type
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil Gas Screening Levels
Analyte
Floyd|Snider 2020/2021
1/8/21 1/8/21
Soil Vapor Soil Vapor
12/2/20
VP-08-120220 VP-108-120220VP-07-010821 VP-107-010821
VP-07
Soil Vapor Soil Vapor Soil Vapor
12/2/20
VP-07-120220
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 4 of 4
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 2
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Volatile Organic Compounds
Units
2019 MTCA Method C
(µg/m3)
2019 MTCA Method B
(µg/m3)
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
VP-08VP-01 VP-02 VP-03
VP-02-090919 VP-03-090919 VP-04-090919
Location
Floyd|Snider 2019
VP-05VP-04 VP-06
Event
9/9/19 12/2/20
VP-01-090919
9/9/19
VP-104-090919Sample Name
Sample Date 9/9/19
VP-05-090919 VP-06-090919
9/9/19 9/9/19 9/9/19 9/9/19
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
VaporSample Type
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil
Vapor
Sub-Slab Soil Gas Screening Levels
Analyte
Floyd|Snider 2020/2021
1/8/21 1/8/21
Soil Vapor Soil Vapor
12/2/20
VP-08-120220 VP-108-120220VP-07-010821 VP-107-010821
VP-07
Soil Vapor Soil Vapor Soil Vapor
12/2/20
VP-07-120220
Other Volatile Organic Compounds (cont.)
Hexachlorobutadiene µg/m³38 3.8 0.66 U 0.21 U 0.66 U 0.64 U 0.64 U 0.21 U 0.68 U 4.3 U 1.9 U 3 U 0.9 U 0.92 U
n-Hexane µg/m³23,000 11,000 11 U 3.5 U 11 U 11 U 11 U 3.5 U 11 U 120 170 94 15 U 15 U
Xylene (meta & para)µg/m³3,300 1,500 58 43 27 34 38 22 20 780 310 300 6.2 3.7 U
Methyl iso butyl ketone µg/m³100,000 46,000 13 U 4.1 U 13 U 12 U 12 U 4.1 U 13 U 82 U 36 U 57 U 17 U 18 U
Methyl methacrylate µg/m³23,000 11,000 13 U 4.1 U 13 U 12 U 12 U 4.1 U 13 U 82 U 36 U 57 U 17 U 18 U
Methyl-Tert-Butyl Ether µg/m³3,200 320 5.6 U 1.8 U 5.6 U 5.4 U 5.4 U 1.8 U 5.8 U 36 U 16 U 25 U 7.6 U 7.8 U
Methylene chloride µg/m³20,000 8,300 270 U 87 U 270 U 260 U 260 U 87 U 280 U 690 U 300 U 490 U 150 U 150 U
Naphthalene µg/m³25 2.5 1.3 0.56 0.88 0.79 U 0.79 U 1.1 0.84 U 5.2 U 2.3 U 3.7 U 1.1 U 1.1 U
Xylene (ortho)µg/m³3,300 1,500 29 17 9.8 11 13 7.8 6.9 360 110 130 2.1 1.9 U
Styrene µg/m³33,000 15,000 2.6 U 2.0 2.6 U 2.9 3 2 2.7 U 17 U 7.4 U 12 U 3.6 U 3.7 U
Toluene µg/m³170,000 76,000 46 41 48 110 110 39 66 580 320 320 79 U 81 U
Benzyl Chloride µg/m³17 1.7 0.16 U 0.052 U 0.16 U 0.16 U 0.16 U 0.052 U 0.17 U 1 U 0.45 U 0.72 U 0.22 U 0.22 U
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/m³210 21 1.4 U 0.45 U 1.4 U 1.4 U 1.4 U 0.45 U 1.5 U 9.1 U 3.9 U 6.4 U 1.9 U 2 U
Leak Detection Tracer Gas
Isopropyl alcohol %0.0004 J 0.003 J
Helium %16 0.6 U 0.6 U
Notes:
Blank cells are intentional.
RED/BOLD Non-detect result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
RED/BOLD Result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
Data are not representative of soil vapor conditions. Results are presented for reference only.
Abbreviations:
CUL Cleanup level
µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
MTCA Model Toxics Control Act
Qualifiers:
J Analyte was detected, concentration is considered to be an estimate.
U Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit.
UJ Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit, which is considered to be an estimate.
Table 3
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Prologis-Monster Road
February 2021 Page 1 of 1
Soil Vapor Results and Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
Table 3
Soil Vapor Analytical Results—Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
VP-01-090919 9/9/19 sub-slab 380 1,100 77 U 1.2 46 13 58 29 1.3 1,629
VP-02-090919 9/9/19 sub-slab 460 420 25 U 0.66 41 9.9 43 17 0.56 992
VP-03-090919 9/9/19 sub-slab 620 730 77 U 1.2 48 6.5 27 9.8 0.88 1,443
VP-04-090920 9/9/19 sub-slab 720 600 75 U 1.7 110 7.9 34 11 0.79 U 1,485
VP-104-090919 9/9/19 sub-slab 770 530 75 U 2.0 110 8.7 38 13 0.79 U 1,472
VP-05-090920 9/9/19 sub-slab 350 1,000 J 25 U 0.76 39 5.2 22 7.8 1.1 1,426
VP-06-090921 9/9/19 sub-slab 580 710 80 U 1.4 66 4.7 20 6.9 0.84 U 1,389
sub-slab
sub-slab
Notes:
1
RED/BOLD Non-detect result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
RED/BOLD Result exceeds MTCA Method C screening level.
Abbreviations:
APH Air phase hydrocarbon
Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology
μg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
MTCA Model Toxics Control Act
NA Not applicable
TPH Total petroleum hydrocarbons
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Qualifiers:
J Analyte was detected, concentration is considered to be an estimate.
JQ Concentration is an estimated value reported below the associated quantitation limit but above the MDL, acceptable for use with qualification.
U Analyte was not detected at the given reporting limit.
4,700
2019 MTCA Method B Sub-Slab Soil Gas
Screening Level (µg/m3 )NA NA NA 11 76,000 15,000 1,500 1,500 2.5 4,667
170,000 33,000 3,300 3,300 252019 MTCA Method C Sub-Slab Soil Gas
Screening Level (µg/m3 )NA NA NA 110
(μg/m 3 )Location
Total TPH (1)
USEPA Method TO-15
(μg/m 3 )
o-Xylene
(μg/m 3)(μg/m 3 )
Naphthalene
USEPA Method MA-APH
(μg/m 3 )
Analysis Method
m,p-Xylene
APH EC9-10
Aromatics
TPH concentrations are compared to indoor air cleanup levels listed on Table 1 of Ecology's Implementation Memorandum No. 18 (Ecology 2018b). An attenuation factor of 0.03 is applied to the indoor air cleanup levels to acquire a
sub-slab TPH screening level of 4,667 μg/m3, as per Section A.2 in Memo #18.
Benzene
(μg/m 3 )
APH EC5-8
Aliphatics
(μg/m 3 )Sample ID Date
Depth
(feet)
VP-05
Ethylbenzene
(μg/m 3 )
Toluene
(μg/m 3)
APH EC9-12
Aliphatics
(μg/m 3 )
VP-01
VP-02
VP-06
VP-03
September 2019 Sampling Event
VP-04
Figures
SITE
MONSTER RD SW
MONSTER RD SWOAKES
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
S
W
B l a c k R i v e r R i p a r i a nF o r e s t a n d W e t l a n d
B l a c k R i v e r
I:\GIS\Projects\Prologis-Monster_Road\MXD\Summary of Vapor Intrusion Evaluations Report\Figure 1 Vicinity Map.mxd1/11/2021
Figure 1Vicinity Map
Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation601 Monster Road Site Renton, Washington
AREAENLARGED
Seattle
Renton
¹0 500 1,000250
Scale in Feet
Notes: · Aerial imagery obtained from Nearmap, 2020. · Inset map tiles by Stamen Design, under CC BY 3.0. Data by OpenStreetMap, under ODbL.
Legend
Property Parcel
&<
&<&<&<&<
&<
&<
&<
&<
&<
&<
&<
&<
&<
()XW
XW
XW
()
XW
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
")")
K / P C o r p o r a t i o n
S e a t t l e A r e aP i p e Tr a d e sE d u c a t i o n C e n t e r HK i n g C o u n t yS o u t h Tr e a t m e n tP l a n t
K i n g C o u n t y B l a c k R i v e r P u m p S t a t i o n
W e s c o?Infe
r
r
e
d
G
r
o
u
n
d
w
a
t
e
r
F
l
o
w
D
i
r
e
c
t
i
o
n
Jan
u
a
r
y
2
3
,
2
0
1
7
AOC1
AOC2
AOC4
AOC4-MW2RAOC4-MW3R AOC4-MW4
AOC4-MW5 AOC4-MW6
AOC4-MW7
FMW-01
FMW-02
FMW-03
KMW-01
KMW-02
KMW-03
KMW-05
MW-7
AA01IA02
IA01
IA03
AA02
IA04
VP-05
VP-06
VP-01
VP-02
VP-03
VP-04
SS2
SS1
SS5
SS6 SS3
SS4
VP-07VP-08
I:\GIS\Projects\Prologis-Monster_Road\MXD\Summary of Vapor Intrusion Evaluations Report\Figure 2 Vapor Intrusion Evaluation Sampling Locations.mxd1/14/2021
Figure 2Vapor Intrusion EvaluationSampling Locations
Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation601 Monster Road Site Renton, Washington
Legend
!(Sub-Slab Vapor Point
")Vapor Point
()Ambient Air Location
XW Indoor Air Location
&<Monitoring Well
Extent of Excavation 2019
Extent of Excavation 2015
Extent of Excavation 1993
Site Parcel
Property Easement1
Existing Building Slab Upgradedwith Additional 7-inch ThicknessExtent of Vapor Intrusion Barrierand New Building Slab 2019 ¹0 100 20050
Scale in Feet
Notes:1. An easement of access and utilities recorded June 28, 1990 as recording no. 9006281428 (Terramark 2015). · Orthoimagery obtained from Nearmap, 2020.
Abbreviation: AOC = Area of concern
Attachment 1
Photographs
February 2021
Photograph 1. Example of a stainless-steel soil vapor screen.
Photograph 2. Location of VP-07 in north parking lot of property, looking west toward VP-08
during installation.
Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
601 Monster Road SW
Renton, Washington
Attachment 1 Photographs
Photographs 1 and 2
February 2021
Photograph 3. Soil sample from VP-07 at 4 to 5 feet bgs (approximate depth of screen).
Photograph 4. Soil sample from VP-08 at 4 to 5 feet bgs (approximate depth of screen).
Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
601 Monster Road SW
Renton, Washington
Attachment 1 Photographs
Photographs 3 and 4
February 2021
Photograph 5. Location of VP-08 (right of blue bucket) in relation to monitoring
well AOC4-MW5 (bottom of photo). Photograph facing southeast toward warehouse.
Photograph 6. Manifold setup at VP-08 prior to placement of shroud during sample
collection of VP-08 and VP-108.
Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
601 Monster Road SW
Renton, Washington
Attachment 1 Photographs
Photographs 5 and 6
February 2021
Photograph 7. Sampling setup at VP-07 with helium shroud around SUMMA canisters and
sample point in December 2020.
Soil Vapor Results and
Vapor Intrusion Evaluation
601 Monster Road SW
Renton, Washington
Attachment 1 Photographs
Photograph 7
Attachment 2
VP-07 and VP-08 Soil Vapor Point
Field Installation Log
Attachment 3
VP-07 and VP-08 Soil Vapor
Sampling Sheets
Attachment 4
2020 and 2021 Laboratory Reports
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
James E. Bruya, Ph.D. 3012 16th Avenue West
Yelena Aravkina, M.S. Seattle, WA 98119-2029
Michael Erdahl, B.S. (206) 285-8282
Arina Podnozova, B.S. fbi@isomedia.com
Eric Young, B.S. www.friedmanandbruya.com
December 10, 2020
Pamela Osterhout, Project Manager
Floyd-Snider
Two Union Square, Suite 600
601 Union St
Seattle, WA 98101
Dear Ms Osterhout:
Included are the results from the testing of material submitted on December 2, 2020
from the Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050 project. There are
12 pages included in this report.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and hope you will call if you
should have any questions.
Sincerely,
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
Michael Erdahl
Project Manager
Enclosures
FDS1210R.DOC
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
1
CASE NARRATIVE
This case narrative encompasses samples received on December 2, 2020 by Friedman &
Bruya, Inc. from the Floyd-Snider Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI
012050 project. Samples were logged in under the laboratory ID’s listed below.
Laboratory ID Floyd-Snider
012050 -01 VP-08-120220
012050 -02 VP-108-120220
012050 -03 VP-07-120220
The propene concentration in sample VP-07-120220 exceeded the calibration range of
the instrument. The data were flagged accordingly. In addition, sample and sample
duplicate failed the relative percent difference for 1,1-dichloroethane. The laboratory
control sample passed the acceptance criteria, therefore the results were acceptable
All other quality control requirements were acceptable.
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
2
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: VP-08-120220 Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: 12/02/20 Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520
Date Collected: 12/02/20 Lab ID: 012050-01 1/4.2
Date Analyzed: 12/08/20 Data File: 120725.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 84 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene <5.1 <2.9 1,2-Dichloropropane <0.97 <0.21
Dichlorodifluoromethane 3.5 0.71 1,4-Dioxane <1.5 <0.42
Chloromethane <16 <7.6 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <20 <4.2
F-114 <2.9 <0.42 Methyl methacrylate <17 <4.2
Vinyl chloride <1.1 <0.42 Heptane <17 <4.2
1,3-Butadiene <0.19 <0.084 Bromodichloromethane <0.28 <0.042
Butane 36 15 Trichloroethene <0.45 <0.084
Bromomethane <9.8 <2.5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <1.9 <0.42
Chloroethane <11 <4.2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <17 <4.2
Vinyl bromide <1.8 <0.42 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <1.9 <0.42
Ethanol 52 28 Toluene <79 <21
Acrolein <8.7 <3.8 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.23 <0.042
Pentane <12 <4.2 2-Hexanone <17 <4.2
Trichlorofluoromethane <9.4 <1.7 Tetrachloroethene <28 <4.2
Acetone <20 <8.4 Dibromochloromethane <0.36 <0.042
2-Propanol <36 <15 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <0.32 <0.042
1,1-Dichloroethene <1.7 <0.42 Chlorobenzene <1.9 <0.42
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.7 <0.42 Ethylbenzene <1.8 <0.42
Methylene chloride <150 <42 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.58 <0.084
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <51 <17 Nonane <22 <4.2
3-Chloropropene <6.6 <2.1 Isopropylbenzene <10 <2.1
CFC-113 <3.2 <0.42 2-Chlorotoluene <22 <4.2
Carbon disulfide <26 <8.4 Propylbenzene <10 <2.1
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <7.6 <2.1 4-Ethyltoluene <10 <2.1
Vinyl acetate <30 <8.4 m,p-Xylene 6.2 1.4
1,1-Dichloroethane 18 4.5 o-Xylene 2.1 0.47
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.7 <0.42 Styrene <3.6 <0.84
Hexane <15 <4.2 Bromoform <8.7 <0.84
Chloroform <0.21 <0.042 Benzyl chloride <0.22 <0.042
Ethyl acetate <30 <8.4 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <10 <2.1
Tetrahydrofuran <1.2 <0.42 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <10 <2.1
2-Butanone (MEK) <12 <4.2 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <2.5 <0.42
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.17 <0.042 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.97 <0.16
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <2.3 <0.42 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <2.5 <0.42
Carbon tetrachloride <1.3 <0.21 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <3.1 <0.42
Benzene <1.3 <0.42 Naphthalene <1.1 <0.21
Cyclohexane <29 <8.4 Hexachlorobutadiene <0.9 <0.084
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
3
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: VP-108-120220 Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: 12/02/20 Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520
Date Collected: 12/02/20 Lab ID: 012050-02 1/4.3
Date Analyzed: 12/08/20 Data File: 120727.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 92 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene <5.2 <3 1,2-Dichloropropane <0.99 <0.21
Dichlorodifluoromethane 3.6 0.72 1,4-Dioxane <1.5 <0.43
Chloromethane <16 <7.7 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <20 <4.3
F-114 <3 <0.43 Methyl methacrylate <18 <4.3
Vinyl chloride <1.1 <0.43 Heptane <18 <4.3
1,3-Butadiene <0.19 <0.086 Bromodichloromethane <0.29 <0.043
Butane 39 17 Trichloroethene <0.46 <0.086
Bromomethane <10 <2.6 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <2 <0.43
Chloroethane <11 <4.3 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <18 <4.3
Vinyl bromide <1.9 <0.43 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <2 <0.43
Ethanol 47 25 Toluene <81 <21
Acrolein <8.9 <3.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.23 <0.043
Pentane <13 <4.3 2-Hexanone <18 <4.3
Trichlorofluoromethane <9.7 <1.7 Tetrachloroethene <29 <4.3
Acetone <20 <8.6 Dibromochloromethane <0.37 <0.043
2-Propanol <37 <15 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <0.33 <0.043
1,1-Dichloroethene <1.7 <0.43 Chlorobenzene <2 <0.43
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.7 <0.43 Ethylbenzene <1.9 <0.43
Methylene chloride <150 <43 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.59 <0.086
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <52 <17 Nonane <23 <4.3
3-Chloropropene <6.7 <2.1 Isopropylbenzene <11 <2.1
CFC-113 <3.3 <0.43 2-Chlorotoluene <22 <4.3
Carbon disulfide <27 <8.6 Propylbenzene <11 <2.1
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <7.8 <2.1 4-Ethyltoluene <11 <2.1
Vinyl acetate <30 <8.6 m,p-Xylene <3.7 <0.86
1,1-Dichloroethane 13 3.3 o-Xylene <1.9 <0.43
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <1.7 <0.43 Styrene <3.7 <0.86
Hexane <15 <4.3 Bromoform <8.9 <0.86
Chloroform 0.27 0.056 Benzyl chloride <0.22 <0.043
Ethyl acetate <31 <8.6 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <11 <2.1
Tetrahydrofuran <1.3 <0.43 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <11 <2.1
2-Butanone (MEK) <13 <4.3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <2.6 <0.43
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.17 <0.043 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.99 <0.16
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <2.3 <0.43 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <2.6 <0.43
Carbon tetrachloride <1.4 <0.21 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <3.2 <0.43
Benzene <1.4 <0.43 Naphthalene <1.1 <0.21
Cyclohexane <30 <8.6 Hexachlorobutadiene <0.92 <0.086
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
4
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: VP-07-120220 Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: 12/02/20 Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520
Date Collected: 12/02/20 Lab ID: 012050-03 1/20
Date Analyzed: 12/08/20 Data File: 120728.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 120 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene 1,100 ve 620 ve 1,2-Dichloropropane <4.6 <1
Dichlorodifluoromethane <9.9 <2 1,4-Dioxane <7.2 <2
Chloromethane <74 <36 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <93 <20
F-114 <14 <2 Methyl methacrylate <82 <20
Vinyl chloride <5.1 <2 Heptane <82 <20
1,3-Butadiene <0.88 <0.4 Bromodichloromethane <1.3 <0.2
Butane 370 150 Trichloroethene <2.1 <0.4
Bromomethane <47 <12 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <9.1 <2
Chloroethane <53 <20 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <82 <20
Vinyl bromide <8.7 <2 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <9.1 <2
Ethanol <150 <80 Toluene 580 150
Acrolein <41 <18 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <1.1 <0.2
Pentane 160 55 2-Hexanone <82 <20
Trichlorofluoromethane <45 <8 Tetrachloroethene <140 <20
Acetone 250 100 Dibromochloromethane <1.7 <0.2
2-Propanol <170 <70 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <1.5 <0.2
1,1-Dichloroethene <7.9 <2 Chlorobenzene <9.2 <2
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <7.9 <2 Ethylbenzene 230 54
Methylene chloride <690 <200 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <2.7 <0.4
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <240 <80 Nonane <100 <20
3-Chloropropene <31 <10 Isopropylbenzene <49 <10
CFC-113 <15 <2 2-Chlorotoluene <100 <20
Carbon disulfide <120 <40 Propylbenzene 58 12
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <36 <10 4-Ethyltoluene 110 23
Vinyl acetate <140 <40 m,p-Xylene 780 180
1,1-Dichloroethane <8.1 <2 o-Xylene 360 83
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <7.9 <2 Styrene <17 <4
Hexane 120 35 Bromoform <41 <4
Chloroform 1.1 0.22 Benzyl chloride <1 <0.2
Ethyl acetate <140 <40 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 210 42
Tetrahydrofuran <5.9 <2 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 310 64
2-Butanone (MEK) <59 <20 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <12 <2
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.81 <0.2 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <4.6 <0.76
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <11 <2 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <12 <2
Carbon tetrachloride <6.3 <1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <15 <2
Benzene 9.2 2.9 Naphthalene <5.2 <1
Cyclohexane <140 <40 Hexachlorobutadiene <4.3 <0.4
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
5
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: Method Blank Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: Not Applicable Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520
Date Collected: Not Applicable Lab ID: 00-2759 MB
Date Analyzed: 12/07/20 Data File: 120710.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 102 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene <1.2 <0.7 1,2-Dichloropropane <0.23 <0.05
Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.49 <0.1 1,4-Dioxane <0.36 <0.1
Chloromethane <3.7 <1.8 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <4.7 <1
F-114 <0.7 <0.1 Methyl methacrylate <4.1 <1
Vinyl chloride <0.26 <0.1 Heptane <4.1 <1
1,3-Butadiene <0.044 <0.02 Bromodichloromethane <0.067 <0.01
Butane <2.4 <1 Trichloroethene <0.11 <0.02
Bromomethane <2.3 <0.6 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <0.45 <0.1
Chloroethane <2.6 <1 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <4.1 <1
Vinyl bromide <0.44 <0.1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <0.45 <0.1
Ethanol <7.5 <4 Toluene <19 <5
Acrolein <2.1 <0.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.055 <0.01
Pentane <3 <1 2-Hexanone <4.1 <1
Trichlorofluoromethane <2.2 <0.4 Tetrachloroethene <6.8 <1
Acetone <4.8 <2 Dibromochloromethane <0.085 <0.01
2-Propanol <8.6 <3.5 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <0.077 <0.01
1,1-Dichloroethene <0.4 <0.1 Chlorobenzene <0.46 <0.1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.4 <0.1 Ethylbenzene <0.43 <0.1
Methylene chloride <35 <10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.14 <0.02
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <12 <4 Nonane <5.2 <1
3-Chloropropene <1.6 <0.5 Isopropylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
CFC-113 <0.77 <0.1 2-Chlorotoluene <5.2 <1
Carbon disulfide <6.2 <2 Propylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <1.8 <0.5 4-Ethyltoluene <2.5 <0.5
Vinyl acetate <7 <2 m,p-Xylene <0.87 <0.2
1,1-Dichloroethane <0.4 <0.1 o-Xylene <0.43 <0.1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.4 <0.1 Styrene <0.85 <0.2
Hexane <3.5 <1 Bromoform <2.1 <0.2
Chloroform <0.049 <0.01 Benzyl chloride <0.052 <0.01
Ethyl acetate <7.2 <2 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
Tetrahydrofuran <0.29 <0.1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
2-Butanone (MEK) <2.9 <1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <0.6 <0.1
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.04 <0.01 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.23 <0.038
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <0.55 <0.1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <0.6 <0.1
Carbon tetrachloride <0.31 <0.05 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <0.74 <0.1
Benzene <0.32 <0.1 Naphthalene <0.26 <0.05
Cyclohexane <6.9 <2 Hexachlorobutadiene <0.21 <0.02
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
6
Date of Report: 12/10/20
Date Received: 12/02/20
Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050
Date Extracted: 12/08/20
Date Analyzed: 12/08/20
RESULTS FROM THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR HELIUM USING METHOD ASTM D1946
Results Reported as % Helium
Sample ID Helium
Laboratory ID
VP-08-120220 <0.6
012050-01
VP-108-120220 <0.6
012050-02
VP-07-120220 16
012050-03 1/10
Method Blank <0.6
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
7
Date of Report: 12/10/20
Date Received: 12/02/20
Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: 012050-01 1/4.2 (Duplicate)
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Sample
Result
Duplicate
Result
RPD
(Limit 30)
Propene ug/m3 <5.1 <5.1 nm
Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/m3 3.5 2.8 22
Chloromethane ug/m3 <16 <16 nm
F-114 ug/m3 <2.9 <2.9 nm
Vinyl chloride ug/m3 <1.1 <1.1 nm
1,3-Butadiene ug/m3 <0.19 <0.19 nm
Butane ug/m3 36 34 6
Bromomethane ug/m3 <9.8 <9.8 nm
Chloroethane ug/m3 <11 <11 nm
Vinyl bromide ug/m3 <1.8 <1.8 nm
Ethanol ug/m3 52 51 2
Acrolein ug/m3 <8.7 <8.7 nm
Pentane ug/m3 <12 <12 nm
Trichlorofluoromethane ug/m3 <9.4 <9.4 nm
Acetone ug/m3 <20 <20 nm
2-Propanol ug/m3 <36 <36 nm
1,1-Dichloroethene ug/m3 <1.7 <1.7 nm
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 <1.7 <1.7 nm
Methylene chloride ug/m3 <150 <150 nm
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ug/m3 <51 <51 nm
3-Chloropropene ug/m3 <6.6 <6.6 nm
CFC-113 ug/m3 <3.2 <3.2 nm
Carbon disulfide ug/m3 <26 <26 nm
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) ug/m3 <7.6 <7.6 nm
Vinyl acetate ug/m3 <30 <30 nm
1,1-Dichloroethane ug/m3 18 13 32 vo
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 <1.7 <1.7 nm
Hexane ug/m3 <15 <15 nm
Chloroform ug/m3 <0.21 <0.21 nm
Ethyl acetate ug/m3 <30 <30 nm
Tetrahydrofuran ug/m3 <1.2 <1.2 nm
2-Butanone (MEK) ug/m3 <12 <12 nm
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) ug/m3 <0.17 <0.17 nm
1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/m3 <2.3 <2.3 nm
Carbon tetrachloride ug/m3 <1.3 <1.3 nm
Benzene ug/m3 <1.3 <1.3 nm
Cyclohexane ug/m3 <29 <29 nm
1,2-Dichloropropane ug/m3 <0.97 <0.97 nm
1,4-Dioxane ug/m3 <1.5 <1.5 nm
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane ug/m3 <20 <20 nm
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
8
Date of Report: 12/10/20
Date Received: 12/02/20
Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: 012050-01 1/4.2 (Duplicate) (continued)
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Sample
Result
Duplicate
Result
RPD
(Limit 30)
Methyl methacrylate ug/m3 <17 <17 nm
Heptane ug/m3 <17 <17 nm
Bromodichloromethane ug/m3 <0.28 <0.28 nm
Trichloroethene ug/m3 <0.45 <0.45 nm
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 <1.9 <1.9 nm
4-Methyl-2-pentanone ug/m3 <17 <17 nm
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 <1.9 <1.9 nm
Toluene ug/m3 <79 <79 nm
1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/m3 <0.23 <0.23 nm
2-Hexanone ug/m3 <17 <17 nm
Tetrachloroethene ug/m3 <28 <28 nm
Dibromochloromethane ug/m3 <0.36 <0.36 nm
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ug/m3 <0.32 <0.32 nm
Chlorobenzene ug/m3 <1.9 <1.9 nm
Ethylbenzene ug/m3 <1.8 <1.8 nm
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/m3 <0.58 <0.58 nm
Nonane ug/m3 <22 <22 nm
Isopropylbenzene ug/m3 <10 <10 nm
2-Chlorotoluene ug/m3 <22 <22 nm
Propylbenzene ug/m3 <10 <10 nm
4-Ethyltoluene ug/m3 <10 <10 nm
m,p-Xylene ug/m3 6.2 6.9 11
o-Xylene ug/m3 2.1 2.3 9
Styrene ug/m3 <3.6 <3.6 nm
Bromoform ug/m3 <8.7 <8.7 nm
Benzyl chloride ug/m3 <0.22 <0.22 nm
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 <10 <10 nm
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 <10 <10 nm
1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 <2.5 <2.5 nm
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 <0.96 <0.96 nm
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 <2.5 <2.5 nm
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/m3 <3.1 <3.1 nm
Naphthalene ug/m3 <1.1 <1.1 nm
Hexachlorobutadiene ug/m3 <0.9 <0.9 nm
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
9
Date of Report: 12/10/20
Date Received: 12/02/20
Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: Laboratory Control Sample
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Spike
Level
Percent
Recovery
LCS
Acceptance
Criteria
Propene ug/m3 23 95 70-130
Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/m3 67 100 70-130
Chloromethane ug/m3 28 96 70-130
F-114 ug/m3 94 97 70-130
Vinyl chloride ug/m3 35 111 70-130
1,3-Butadiene ug/m3 30 107 70-130
Butane ug/m3 32 101 70-130
Bromomethane ug/m3 52 98 70-130
Chloroethane ug/m3 36 115 70-130
Vinyl bromide ug/m3 59 115 70-130
Ethanol ug/m3 25 112 70-130
Acrolein ug/m3 31 109 70-130
Pentane ug/m3 40 111 70-130
Trichlorofluoromethane ug/m3 76 111 70-130
Acetone ug/m3 32 106 70-130
2-Propanol ug/m3 33 121 70-130
1,1-Dichloroethene ug/m3 54 93 70-130
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 54 86 70-130
Methylene chloride ug/m3 94 78 70-130
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ug/m3 41 90 70-130
3-Chloropropene ug/m3 42 77 70-130
CFC-113 ug/m3 100 88 70-130
Carbon disulfide ug/m3 42 81 70-130
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) ug/m3 49 82 70-130
Vinyl acetate ug/m3 48 84 70-130
1,1-Dichloroethane ug/m3 55 86 70-130
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 54 90 70-130
Hexane ug/m3 48 73 70-130
Chloroform ug/m3 66 87 70-130
Ethyl acetate ug/m3 49 88 70-130
Tetrahydrofuran ug/m3 40 78 70-130
2-Butanone (MEK) ug/m3 40 91 70-130
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) ug/m3 55 86 70-130
1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/m3 74 88 70-130
Carbon tetrachloride ug/m3 85 89 70-130
Benzene ug/m3 43 83 70-130
Cyclohexane ug/m3 46 79 70-130
1,2-Dichloropropane ug/m3 62 90 70-130
1,4-Dioxane ug/m3 49 98 70-130
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane ug/m3 63 93 70-130
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
10
Date of Report: 12/10/20
Date Received: 12/02/20
Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: Laboratory Control Sample (continued)
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Spike
Level
Percent
Recovery
LCS
Acceptance
Criteria
Methyl methacrylate ug/m3 55 98 70-130
Heptane ug/m3 55 93 70-130
Bromodichloromethane ug/m3 90 100 70-130
Trichloroethene ug/m3 73 101 70-130
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 61 103 70-130
4-Methyl-2-pentanone ug/m3 55 99 70-130
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 61 89 70-130
Toluene ug/m3 51 100 70-130
1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/m3 74 101 70-130
2-Hexanone ug/m3 55 88 70-130
Tetrachloroethene ug/m3 92 102 70-130
Dibromochloromethane ug/m3 120 105 70-130
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ug/m3 100 104 70-130
Chlorobenzene ug/m3 62 95 70-130
Ethylbenzene ug/m3 59 106 70-130
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/m3 93 97 70-130
Nonane ug/m3 71 92 70-130
Isopropylbenzene ug/m3 66 98 70-130
2-Chlorotoluene ug/m3 70 111 70-130
Propylbenzene ug/m3 66 115 70-130
4-Ethyltoluene ug/m3 66 114 70-130
m,p-Xylene ug/m3 120 104 70-130
o-Xylene ug/m3 59 99 70-130
Styrene ug/m3 58 96 70-130
Bromoform ug/m3 140 105 70-130
Benzyl chloride ug/m3 70 125 70-130
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 66 112 70-130
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 66 125 70-130
1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 81 121 70-130
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 81 110 70-130
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 81 111 70-130
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/m3 100 77 70-130
Naphthalene ug/m3 71 81 70-130
Hexachlorobutadiene ug/m3 140 102 70-130
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
11
Date of Report: 12/10/20
Date Received: 12/02/20
Project: Monster Road 601 Monster Rd 520 PO 7.1, F&BI 012050
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR HELIUM
USING METHOD ASTM D1946
Laboratory Code: 011481-01 (Duplicate)
Analyte
Sample
Result
(%)
Duplicate
Result
(%)
Relative
Percent
Difference
Acceptance
Criteria
Helium <0.6 <0.6 nm 0-20
Laboratory Code: 012022-20 (Duplicate)
Analyte
Sample
Result
(%)
Duplicate
Result
(%)
Relative
Percent
Difference
Acceptance
Criteria
Helium <0.6 <0.6 nm 0-20
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
12
Data Qualifiers & Definitions a - The analyte was detected at a level less than five times the reporting limit. The RPD results may not provide reliable information on the variability of the analysis.
b - The analyte was spiked at a level that was less than five times that present in the sample. Matrix spike recoveries may not be meaningful.
ca - The calibration results for the analyte were outside of acceptance criteria. The value reported is an estimate.
c - The presence of the analyte may be due to carryover from previous sample injections.
cf - The sample was centrifuged prior to analysis.
d - The sample was diluted. Detection limits were raised and surrogate recoveries may not be meaningful.
dv - Insufficient sample volume was available to achieve normal reporting limits.
f - The sample was laboratory filtered prior to analysis.
fb - The analyte was detected in the method blank.
fc - The analyte is a common laboratory and field contaminant.
hr - The sample and duplicate were reextracted and reanalyzed. RPD results were still outside of control limits. Variability is attributed to sample inhomogeneity.
hs - Headspace was present in the container used for analysis.
ht – The analysis was performed outside the method or client-specified holding time requirement.
ip - Recovery fell outside of control limits due to sample matrix effects.
j - The analyte concentration is reported below the lowest calibration standard. The value reported is an estimate.
J - The internal standard associated with the analyte is out of control limits. The reported concentration is an estimate.
jl - The laboratory control sample(s) percent recovery and/or RPD were out of control limits. The reported concentration should be considered an estimate. js - The surrogate associated with the analyte is out of control limits. The reported concentration should be considered an estimate.
lc - The presence of the analyte is likely due to laboratory contamination.
L - The reported concentration was generated from a library search.
nm - The analyte was not detected in one or more of the duplicate analyses. Therefore, calculation of the RPD is not applicable.
pc - The sample was received with incorrect preservation or in a container not approved by the method. The value reported should be considered an estimate. ve - The analyte response exceeded the valid instrument calibration range. The value reported is an estimate.
vo - The value reported fell outside the control limits established for this analyte.
x - The sample chromatographic pattern does not resemble the fuel standard used for quantitation.
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
James E. Bruya, Ph.D. 3012 16th Avenue West
Yelena Aravkina, M.S. Seattle, WA 98119-2029
Michael Erdahl, B.S. (206) 285-8282
Arina Podnozova, B.S. fbi@isomedia.com
Eric Young, B.S. www.friedmanandbruya.com
January 18, 2021
Pamela Osterhout, Project Manager
Floyd-Snider
Two Union Square, Suite 600
601 Union St
Seattle, WA 98101
Dear Ms Osterhout:
Included are the results from the testing of material submitted on January 8, 2021
from the Monster Road, F&BI 101099 project. There are 9 pages included in this
report.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and hope you will call if you
should have any questions.
Sincerely,
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
Michael Erdahl
Project Manager
Enclosures
FDS0118R.DOC
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
1
CASE NARRATIVE
This case narrative encompasses samples received on January 8, 2021 by Friedman &
Bruya, Inc. from the Floyd-Snider Monster Road, F&BI 101099 project. Samples were
logged in under the laboratory ID’s listed below.
Laboratory ID Floyd-Snider
101099 -01 VP-07-100821
101099 -02 VP-107-100821
Several TO-15 compounds exceeded the calibration range. The data were qualified
accordingly.
All quality control requirements were acceptable.
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
2
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: VP-07-100821 Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: 01/08/21 Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
Date Collected: 01/08/21 Lab ID: 101099-01 1/8.7
Date Analyzed: 01/12/21 Data File: 011132.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 93 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene 1,600 ve 910 ve 1,2-Dichloropropane <2 <0.43
Dichlorodifluoromethane <4.3 <0.87 1,4-Dioxane <3.1 <0.87
Chloromethane <32 <16 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <41 <8.7
F-114 <6.1 <0.87 Methyl methacrylate <36 <8.7
Vinyl chloride <2.2 <0.87 Heptane 71 17
1,3-Butadiene <0.38 <0.17 Bromodichloromethane <0.58 <0.087
Butane 390 160 Trichloroethene <0.94 <0.17
Bromomethane <20 <5.2 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <3.9 <0.87
Chloroethane <23 <8.7 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <36 <8.7
Vinyl bromide <3.8 <0.87 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <3.9 <0.87
Ethanol 89 47 Toluene 320 85
Acrolein <18 <7.8 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.47 <0.087
Pentane 270 91 2-Hexanone <36 <8.7
Trichlorofluoromethane <20 <3.5 Tetrachloroethene <59 <8.7
Acetone 570 ve 240 ve Dibromochloromethane <0.74 <0.087
2-Propanol 11,000 ve 4,400 ve 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <0.67 <0.087
1,1-Dichloroethene <3.4 <0.87 Chlorobenzene <4 <0.87
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <3.4 <0.87 Ethylbenzene 88 20
Methylene chloride <300 <87 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <1.2 <0.17
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <110 <35 Nonane <46 <8.7
3-Chloropropene <14 <4.3 Isopropylbenzene <21 <4.3
CFC-113 <6.7 <0.87 2-Chlorotoluene <45 <8.7
Carbon disulfide <54 <17 Propylbenzene <21 <4.3
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <16 <4.3 4-Ethyltoluene <21 <4.3
Vinyl acetate <61 <17 m,p-Xylene 310 71
1,1-Dichloroethane <3.5 <0.87 o-Xylene 110 26
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <3.4 <0.87 Styrene <7.4 <1.7
Hexane 170 48 Bromoform <18 <1.7
Chloroform 1.2 0.24 Benzyl chloride <0.45 <0.087
Ethyl acetate <63 <17 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 37 7.6
Tetrahydrofuran <2.6 <0.87 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 58 12
2-Butanone (MEK) 27 9.3 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <5.2 <0.87
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.35 <0.087 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <2.1 <0.33
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <4.7 <0.87 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <5.2 <0.87
Carbon tetrachloride <2.7 <0.43 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <6.5 <0.87
Benzene 17 5.2 Naphthalene <2.3 <0.43
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
3
Cyclohexane <60 <17 Hexachlorobutadiene <1.9 <0.17
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
4
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: VP-107-100821 Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: 01/08/21 Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
Date Collected: 01/08/21 Lab ID: 101099-02 1/14
Date Analyzed: 01/12/21 Data File: 011133.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 88 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene 1,100 ve 620 ve 1,2-Dichloropropane <3.2 <0.7
Dichlorodifluoromethane <6.9 <1.4 1,4-Dioxane <5 <1.4
Chloromethane <52 <25 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <65 <14
F-114 <9.8 <1.4 Methyl methacrylate <57 <14
Vinyl chloride <3.6 <1.4 Heptane <57 <14
1,3-Butadiene <0.62 <0.28 Bromodichloromethane <0.94 <0.14
Butane 250 100 Trichloroethene <1.5 <0.28
Bromomethane <33 <8.4 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <6.4 <1.4
Chloroethane <37 <14 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <57 <14
Vinyl bromide <6.1 <1.4 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <6.4 <1.4
Ethanol <110 ca <56 ca Toluene 320 86
Acrolein <29 <13 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.76 <0.14
Pentane <41 <14 2-Hexanone <57 <14
Trichlorofluoromethane <31 <5.6 Tetrachloroethene <95 <14
Acetone 3,100 ve 1,300 ve Dibromochloromethane <1.2 <0.14
2-Propanol 67,000 ve27,000 ve 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <1.1 <0.14
1,1-Dichloroethene <5.6 <1.4 Chlorobenzene <6.4 <1.4
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <5.6 <1.4 Ethylbenzene 93 21
Methylene chloride <490 <140 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <1.9 <0.28
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <170 <56 Nonane <73 <14
3-Chloropropene <22 <7 Isopropylbenzene <34 <7
CFC-113 <11 <1.4 2-Chlorotoluene <72 <14
Carbon disulfide <87 <28 Propylbenzene <34 <7
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <25 <7 4-Ethyltoluene <34 <7
Vinyl acetate <99 <28 m,p-Xylene 300 69
1,1-Dichloroethane <5.7 <1.4 o-Xylene 130 29
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <5.6 <1.4 Styrene <12 <2.8
Hexane 94 27 Bromoform <29 <2.8
Chloroform 1.4 0.28 Benzyl chloride <0.72 <0.14
Ethyl acetate <100 <28 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 44 8.9
Tetrahydrofuran <4.1 <1.4 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 58 12
2-Butanone (MEK) 48 16 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <8.4 <1.4
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.57 <0.14 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <3.3 <0.53
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <7.6 <1.4 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <8.4 <1.4
Carbon tetrachloride <4.4 <0.7 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <10 ca <1.4 ca
Benzene 16 5.0 Naphthalene <3.7 <0.7
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
5
Cyclohexane <96 <28 Hexachlorobutadiene <3 <0.28
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
6
Analysis For Volatile Compounds By Method TO-15
Client Sample ID: Method Blank Client: Floyd-Snider
Date Received: Not Applicable Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
Date Collected: Not Applicable Lab ID: 01-29 MB
Date Analyzed: 01/11/21 Data File: 011119.D
Matrix: Air Instrument: GCMS7
Units: ug/m3 Operator: bat
% Lower Upper
Surrogates: Recovery: Limit: Limit:
4-Bromofluorobenzene 89 70 130
Concentration Concentration
Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv Compounds: ug/m3 ppbv
Propene <1.2 <0.7 1,2-Dichloropropane <0.23 <0.05
Dichlorodifluoromethane <0.49 <0.1 1,4-Dioxane <0.36 <0.1
Chloromethane <3.7 <1.8 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane <4.7 <1
F-114 <0.7 <0.1 Methyl methacrylate <4.1 <1
Vinyl chloride <0.26 <0.1 Heptane <4.1 <1
1,3-Butadiene <0.044 <0.02 Bromodichloromethane <0.067 <0.01
Butane <2.4 <1 Trichloroethene <0.11 <0.02
Bromomethane <2.3 <0.6 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene <0.45 <0.1
Chloroethane <2.6 <1 4-Methyl-2-pentanone <4.1 <1
Vinyl bromide <0.44 <0.1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene <0.45 <0.1
Ethanol <7.5 ca <4 ca Toluene <19 <5
Acrolein <2.1 <0.9 1,1,2-Trichloroethane <0.055 <0.01
Pentane <3 <1 2-Hexanone <4.1 <1
Trichlorofluoromethane <2.2 <0.4 Tetrachloroethene <6.8 <1
Acetone <4.8 <2 Dibromochloromethane <0.085 <0.01
2-Propanol <8.6 <3.5 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) <0.077 <0.01
1,1-Dichloroethene <0.4 <0.1 Chlorobenzene <0.46 <0.1
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.4 <0.1 Ethylbenzene <0.43 <0.1
Methylene chloride <35 <10 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane <0.14 <0.02
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) <12 <4 Nonane <5.2 <1
3-Chloropropene <1.6 <0.5 Isopropylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
CFC-113 <0.77 <0.1 2-Chlorotoluene <5.2 <1
Carbon disulfide <6.2 <2 Propylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) <1.8 <0.5 4-Ethyltoluene <2.5 <0.5
Vinyl acetate <7 <2 m,p-Xylene <0.87 <0.2
1,1-Dichloroethane <0.4 <0.1 o-Xylene <0.43 <0.1
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene <0.4 <0.1 Styrene <0.85 <0.2
Hexane <3.5 <1 Bromoform <2.1 <0.2
Chloroform <0.049 <0.01 Benzyl chloride <0.052 <0.01
Ethyl acetate <7.2 <2 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
Tetrahydrofuran <0.29 <0.1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene <2.5 <0.5
2-Butanone (MEK) <2.9 <1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene <0.6 <0.1
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) <0.04 <0.01 1,4-Dichlorobenzene <0.23 <0.038
1,1,1-Trichloroethane <0.55 <0.1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene <0.6 <0.1
Carbon tetrachloride <0.31 <0.05 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene <0.74 ca <0.1 ca
Benzene <0.32 <0.1 Naphthalene <0.26 <0.05
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
7
Cyclohexane <6.9 <2 Hexachlorobutadiene <0.21 <0.02
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
8
Date of Report: 01/18/21
Date Received: 01/08/21
Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: 101090-01 1/3.2 (Duplicate)
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Sample
Result
Duplicate
Result
RPD
(Limit 30)
Propene ug/m3 <3.9 <3.9 nm
Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/m3 2.6 2.5 4
Chloromethane ug/m3 <12 <12 nm
F-114 ug/m3 <2.2 <2.2 nm
Vinyl chloride ug/m3 <0.82 <0.82 nm
1,3-Butadiene ug/m3 <0.14 <0.14 nm
Butane ug/m3 <7.6 <7.6 nm
Bromomethane ug/m3 <7.5 <7.5 nm
Chloroethane ug/m3 <8.4 <8.4 nm
Vinyl bromide ug/m3 <1.4 <1.4 nm
Ethanol ug/m3 290 270 7
Acrolein ug/m3 <6.6 <6.6 nm
Pentane ug/m3 <9.4 <9.4 nm
Trichlorofluoromethane ug/m3 <7.2 <7.2 nm
Acetone ug/m3 <15 <15 nm
2-Propanol ug/m3 <28 <28 nm
1,1-Dichloroethene ug/m3 <1.3 <1.3 nm
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 <1.3 <1.3 nm
Methylene chloride ug/m3 <110 <110 nm
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ug/m3 <39 <39 nm
3-Chloropropene ug/m3 <5 <5 nm
CFC-113 ug/m3 <2.5 <2.5 nm
Carbon disulfide ug/m3 <20 <20 nm
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) ug/m3 <5.8 <5.8 nm
Vinyl acetate ug/m3 <23 <23 nm
1,1-Dichloroethane ug/m3 <1.3 <1.3 nm
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 <1.3 <1.3 nm
Hexane ug/m3 <11 <11 nm
Chloroform ug/m3 0.22 0.20 10
Ethyl acetate ug/m3 <23 <23 nm
Tetrahydrofuran ug/m3 2.1 2.0 5
2-Butanone (MEK) ug/m3 <9.4 <9.4 nm
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) ug/m3 <0.13 <0.13 nm
1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/m3 <1.7 <1.7 nm
Carbon tetrachloride ug/m3 <1 <1 nm
Benzene ug/m3 <1 <1 nm
Cyclohexane ug/m3 <22 <22 nm
1,2-Dichloropropane ug/m3 <0.74 <0.74 nm
1,4-Dioxane ug/m3 <1.2 <1.2 nm
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane ug/m3 <15 <15 nm
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
9
Date of Report: 01/18/21
Date Received: 01/08/21
Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: 101090-01 1/3.2 (Duplicate, continued)
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Sample
Result
Duplicate
Result
RPD
(Limit 30)
Methyl methacrylate ug/m3 <13 <13 nm
Heptane ug/m3 <13 <13 nm
Bromodichloromethane ug/m3 <0.21 <0.21 nm
Trichloroethene ug/m3 <0.34 <0.34 nm
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 <1.5 <1.5 nm
4-Methyl-2-pentanone ug/m3 <13 <13 nm
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 <1.5 <1.5 nm
Toluene ug/m3 <60 <60 nm
1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/m3 <0.17 <0.17 nm
2-Hexanone ug/m3 <13 <13 nm
Tetrachloroethene ug/m3 <22 <22 nm
Dibromochloromethane ug/m3 <0.27 <0.27 nm
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ug/m3 <0.25 <0.25 nm
Chlorobenzene ug/m3 <1.5 <1.5 nm
Ethylbenzene ug/m3 1.4 1.5 7
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/m3 <0.44 <0.44 nm
Nonane ug/m3 <17 <17 nm
Isopropylbenzene ug/m3 <7.9 <7.9 nm
2-Chlorotoluene ug/m3 <17 <17 nm
Propylbenzene ug/m3 <7.9 <7.9 nm
4-Ethyltoluene ug/m3 <7.9 <7.9 nm
m,p-Xylene ug/m3 5.1 5.6 9
o-Xylene ug/m3 1.4 1.6 13
Styrene ug/m3 <2.7 <2.7 nm
Bromoform ug/m3 <6.6 <6.6 nm
Benzyl chloride ug/m3 <0.17 <0.17 nm
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 <7.9 <7.9 nm
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 <7.9 <7.9 nm
1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 <1.9 <1.9 nm
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 <0.73 <0.73 nm
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 <1.9 <1.9 nm
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/m3 <2.4 <2.4 nm
Naphthalene ug/m3 <0.84 <0.84 nm
Hexachlorobutadiene ug/m3 <0.68 <0.68 nm
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
10
Date of Report: 01/18/21
Date Received: 01/08/21
Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: Laboratory Control Sample
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Spike
Level
Percent
Recovery
LCS
Acceptance
Criteria
Propene ug/m3 23 90 70-130
Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/m3 67 106 70-130
Chloromethane ug/m3 28 100 70-130
F-114 ug/m3 94 103 70-130
Vinyl chloride ug/m3 35 98 70-130
1,3-Butadiene ug/m3 30 94 70-130
Butane ug/m3 32 90 70-130
Bromomethane ug/m3 52 102 70-130
Chloroethane ug/m3 36 97 70-130
Vinyl bromide ug/m3 59 104 70-130
Ethanol ug/m3 25 69 vo 70-130
Acrolein ug/m3 31 83 70-130
Pentane ug/m3 40 103 70-130
Trichlorofluoromethane ug/m3 76 111 70-130
Acetone ug/m3 32 92 70-130
2-Propanol ug/m3 33 97 70-130
1,1-Dichloroethene ug/m3 54 110 70-130
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 54 107 70-130
Methylene chloride ug/m3 94 83 70-130
t-Butyl alcohol (TBA) ug/m3 41 105 70-130
3-Chloropropene ug/m3 42 94 70-130
CFC-113 ug/m3 100 106 70-130
Carbon disulfide ug/m3 42 95 70-130
Methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) ug/m3 49 100 70-130
Vinyl acetate ug/m3 48 92 70-130
1,1-Dichloroethane ug/m3 55 103 70-130
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ug/m3 54 105 70-130
Hexane ug/m3 48 95 70-130
Chloroform ug/m3 66 108 70-130
Ethyl acetate ug/m3 49 109 70-130
Tetrahydrofuran ug/m3 40 93 70-130
2-Butanone (MEK) ug/m3 40 102 70-130
1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC) ug/m3 55 110 70-130
1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/m3 74 109 70-130
Carbon tetrachloride ug/m3 85 113 70-130
Benzene ug/m3 43 99 70-130
Cyclohexane ug/m3 46 99 70-130
1,2-Dichloropropane ug/m3 62 95 70-130
1,4-Dioxane ug/m3 49 95 70-130
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane ug/m3 63 96 70-130
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
11
Date of Report: 01/18/21
Date Received: 01/08/21
Project: Monster Road, F&BI 101099
QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF AIR SAMPLES
FOR VOLATILES BY METHOD TO-15
Laboratory Code: Laboratory Control Sample (continued)
Analyte
Reporting
Units
Spike
Level
Percent
Recovery
LCS
Acceptance
Criteria
Methyl methacrylate ug/m3 55 104 70-130
Heptane ug/m3 55 99 70-130
Bromodichloromethane ug/m3 90 108 70-130
Trichloroethene ug/m3 73 105 70-130
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 61 106 70-130
4-Methyl-2-pentanone ug/m3 55 110 70-130
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ug/m3 61 94 70-130
Toluene ug/m3 51 104 70-130
1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/m3 74 105 70-130
2-Hexanone ug/m3 55 103 70-130
Tetrachloroethene ug/m3 92 107 70-130
Dibromochloromethane ug/m3 120 111 70-130
1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) ug/m3 100 111 70-130
Chlorobenzene ug/m3 62 102 70-130
Ethylbenzene ug/m3 59 96 70-130
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/m3 93 94 70-130
Nonane ug/m3 71 90 70-130
Isopropylbenzene ug/m3 66 98 70-130
2-Chlorotoluene ug/m3 70 101 70-130
Propylbenzene ug/m3 66 101 70-130
4-Ethyltoluene ug/m3 66 109 70-130
m,p-Xylene ug/m3 120 95 70-130
o-Xylene ug/m3 59 97 70-130
Styrene ug/m3 58 93 70-130
Bromoform ug/m3 140 103 70-130
Benzyl chloride ug/m3 70 110 70-130
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 66 93 70-130
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/m3 66 101 70-130
1,3-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 81 111 70-130
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 81 90 70-130
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ug/m3 81 99 70-130
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/m3 100 68 vo 70-130
Naphthalene ug/m3 71 78 70-130
Hexachlorobutadiene ug/m3 140 100 70-130
FRIEDMAN & BRUYA, INC.
_________________________________________________
ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMISTS
12
Data Qualifiers & Definitions a - The analyte was detected at a level less than five times the reporting limit. The RPD results may not provide reliable information on the variability of the analysis.
b - The analyte was spiked at a level that was less than five times that present in the sample. Matrix spike recoveries may not be meaningful.
ca - The calibration results for the analyte were outside of acceptance criteria. The value reported is an estimate.
c - The presence of the analyte may be due to carryover from previous sample injections.
cf - The sample was centrifuged prior to analysis.
d - The sample was diluted. Detection limits were raised and surrogate recoveries may not be meaningful.
dv - Insufficient sample volume was available to achieve normal reporting limits.
f - The sample was laboratory filtered prior to analysis.
fb - The analyte was detected in the method blank.
fc - The analyte is a common laboratory and field contaminant.
hr - The sample and duplicate were reextracted and reanalyzed. RPD results were still outside of control limits. Variability is attributed to sample inhomogeneity.
hs - Headspace was present in the container used for analysis.
ht – The analysis was performed outside the method or client-specified holding time requirement.
ip - Recovery fell outside of control limits due to sample matrix effects.
j - The analyte concentration is reported below the lowest calibration standard. The value reported is an estimate.
J - The internal standard associated with the analyte is out of control limits. The reported concentration is an estimate.
jl - The laboratory control sample(s) percent recovery and/or RPD were out of control limits. The reported concentration should be considered an estimate. js - The surrogate associated with the analyte is out of control limits. The reported concentration should be considered an estimate.
lc - The presence of the analyte is likely due to laboratory contamination.
L - The reported concentration was generated from a library search.
nm - The analyte was not detected in one or more of the duplicate analyses. Therefore, calculation of the RPD is not applicable.
pc - The sample was received with incorrect preservation or in a container not approved by the method. The value reported should be considered an estimate. ve - The analyte response exceeded the valid instrument calibration range. The value reported is an estimate.
vo - The value reported fell outside the control limits established for this analyte.
x - The sample chromatographic pattern does not resemble the fuel standard used for quantitation.