cleanup action report - wa

Cleanup Action Report Urban Union Property 501 Fairview Avenue North Seattle, Washington

for

SWB-II Seattle, LLC

May 8, 2015

Cleanup Action Report

Urban Union Property 501 Fairview Avenue North Seattle, Washington

for SWB-II Seattle, LLC

May 8, 2015

Plaza 600 Building 600 Stewart Street, Suite 1700 Seattle, Washington 98101 206.728.2674

Cleanup Action Report

Urban Union Property 501 Fairview Avenue North

Seattle, Washington File No. 1460-053-03

May 8, 2015

Prepared for:

SWB-II Seattle, LLC c/o Schnitzer West, LLC 818 Stewart Street, Suite 700 Seattle, Washington 98101

Attention: Zeb Keck and Jeff Harmer

Prepared by:

GeoEngineers, Inc. Plaza 600 Building 600 Stewart Street, Suite 1700 Seattle, Washington 98101 206.728.2674

Ian Young, LG Project Manager

David A. Cook, LG, CPG Principal

IDY:DAC:leh

Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................... 1

2.1. Historical Operations and Property Uses ..................................................................................... 1 2.2. Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................. 2 2.3. Geologic Setting ............................................................................................................................ 3

2.3.1. Soil Conditions ................................................................................................................... 3 2.3.2. Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................................... 3

3.0 PROJECT OBJECTIVE ........................................................................................................................... 4

4.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .......................................................................................................................... 4

5.0 CLEANUP LEVELS ................................................................................................................................ 4

6.0 EXCAVATION PLANNING AND PREPARATION .................................................................................. 5

6.1. Demolition ..................................................................................................................................... 5

7.0 CLEANUP ACTION ................................................................................................................................ 5

7.1. Test Pit Characterization Soil Sampling Results ......................................................................... 5 7.2. Remedial Excavation and Confirmation Soil Sample Results .................................................... 6

8.0 WASTE DISPOSAL ............................................................................................................................... 6

9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 7

9.1. Soil Cleanup .................................................................................................................................. 7 9.2. Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................................................... 7

10.0 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 7

11.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Soil Chemical Analytical Data (PAHs) Table 2. Groundwater Chemical Analytical Data (PAHs)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan and Soil Management Zones Figure 3. Remedial Excavation and Confirmation Sample cPAH Analytical Results Figure 4. Remedial Excavation Cross Section A-A’ Figure 5. Remedial Excavation Cross Section B-B’ Figure 6. Remedial Excavation Cross Section C-C’ Figure 7. Remedial Excavation Cross Section D-D’

May 8, 2015| Page i File No. 1460-053-03

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Contaminated Soil Disposal Weight Tickets Appendix B. Field Screening Procedures Appendix C. Chemical Analytical Data Appendix D. Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use

May 8, 2015| Page ii File No. 1460-053-03

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report documents a 2015 cleanup action consisting of the excavation and disposal of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (cPAH)-contaminated soil at the Urban Union redevelopment project (herein referred to as the “Property”) located in Seattle, Washington. Carcinogenic PAH-contaminated soil was removed for permitted disposal during the construction project. The Property is located in the southeastern portion of the half block bounded by Fairview Avenue North, Republican Street, a public alley, and Mercer Street. The Property consists of two parcels: the north parcel (King County Parcel 1983200545) and the south parcel (King County Parcel 1983200560). The physical address of the site is 501 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington. The cPAH-contaminated soil was likely associated with undocumented fill used in the construction of four former residential houses located on the south parcel. The Property is shown relative to surrounding physical features on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The project layout is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.

SWB-II Seattle, LLC , the current owner, is redeveloping this property into a 12-story commercial office building with five below-grade parking levels. The cleanup activities were completed as part of this redevelopment. Based on the findings of previous environmental investigations, the Property includes a contaminated “site” (as defined by the Model Toxics Control Act [MTCA]) where limited hazardous substances have been identified in fill soil. The “site” is contained within the bounds of the Property and consists of the orange-shaded area shown in Figures 2 and 3 where cPAHs were detected in soil samples at concentrations exceeding MTCA cleanup levels.

GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) conducted subsurface investigations at the Property in 2013 and 2014. The investigation results indicated that cPAHs exceeded MTCA Method A cleanup levels in fill soil in the southern portion of the Property. Additionally, trichloroethene (TCE) concentrations were detected in groundwater at the Property, including concentrations in one monitoring well at the north boundary of the Property that exceeded the MTCA Method A cleanup level. Concentrations of cPAHs were detected in groundwater in this same monitoring well only slightly above laboratory detection limits and below regulatory cleanup levels. The subject property history, surrounding property uses and site investigation data indicate that TCE in groundwater is from an off-property source. Groundwater was encountered at least 25 feet below ground surface (bgs), an elevation of 15 feet above mean sea level, in borings completed during an investigation performed in 2013 at the Property. Ground surface elevations range between about 41 feet at the west alley and 68 feet at Fairview Avenue North to the east.

Two thousand four hundred thirty-three (2,433) tons of cPAH-contaminated soil were removed from the Property during cleanup activities in January 2015 and transported to the CEMEX facility in Everett, Washington for permitted disposal; an additional 3,601 tons of impacted soil excavated during construction was disposed of at the CEMEX facility. Based on our observations and chemical analytical results for confirmation soil samples, it is our opinion that remedial action at this Property was successfully completed in accordance with the MTCA and its implementing cleanup regulation, Chapter 173-340 WAC (Washington Administrative Code). As anticipated, groundwater was not encountered during remedial excavation. The remedial excavation extended to an approximate elevation of 35 feet at the Property (groundwater is at elevation 15 feet bgs at the west alley).

GeoEngineers completed an evaluation of, and recommendations for, potential chemical vapor intrusion and mitigation at the Property in response to the discovery of TCE in groundwater beneath the Property.

May 8, 2015| Page ES-1 File No. 1460-053-03

GeoEngineers prepared a “Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Evaluation” report dated April 23, 2015 which summarizes TCE vapor intrusion mitigation measures that were designed and will be built into the subgrade building walls and foundation elements. Also, components of the building’s ventilation system will be used to provide additional management of any chemical vapors that, in the unlikely event, could intrude into the building. Based on review of available design drawings and construction drawings, and through discussions with the project’s engineering and design consultants, GeoEngineers was satisfied that the function of the subsurface features of the building (low permeability, water-tight concrete) and ventilation systems are sufficient to mitigate the potential for indoor air vapor intrusion for all identified chemicals of concern. The mitigation measures also satisfy applicable Washington State Department of Ecology Guidance.

Based on the removal of the cPAH-contaminated soil, deep depth to groundwater, the presence of at least 20 feet of vertical separation between the former soil contamination and the groundwater table, vapor mitigation steps taken for the completed building and the 2013 groundwater sampling and testing results showing that no cPAHs exceeded MTCA cleanup levels, it is our opinion that no further remedial action or monitoring is warranted at the Property.

This Executive Summary should be used only in context of the full report for which it is intended.

May 8, 2015| Page ES-2 File No. 1460-053-03

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report documents a 2015 cleanup action consisting of the excavation and disposal of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (cPAH)-contaminated soil at the Urban Union redevelopment project (herein referred to as the “Property”) located in Seattle, Washington. Carcinogenic PAH-contaminated soil was removed for permitted disposal to facilitate the construction project. The Property is located in the southeastern portion of the half block bounded by Fairview Avenue North, Republican Street, a public alley, and Mercer Street. The Property consists of two parcels: the north parcel (King County Parcel 1983200545) and the south parcel (King County Parcel 1983200560). The physical address of the site is 501 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington. Ground surface elevations range between about 41 feet at the west alley and 68 feet at Fairview Avenue North to the east. The cPAH-contaminated soil was likely associated with undocumented fill used in the construction of four former residential houses located on the south parcel fronting on Republican Street. The Property is shown relative to surrounding physical features on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The project layout is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.

SWB-II Seattle, LLC, the current owner, is redeveloping this property into a 12-story commercial office building with five below-grade parking levels. The soil cleanup activities were completed from January 7 to January 14, 2015 during construction for redevelopment of the Property. This remedial action was conducted as an independent cleanup under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). This report should be submitted to Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to comply with MTCA reporting requirements.

2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1. Historical Operations and Property Uses

Several environmental studies have been completed on the individual parcels composing the Property to evaluate potential sources of contamination and to characterize soil and groundwater conditions at the Property. Historic use of the Property’s north tax parcel included residential buildings from the 1880s to 1940s, and a warehouse building from 1947 to 2014. The south tax parcel included residential buildings built between 1905 and the 1930s. The 2014 GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) identified several recognized environmental conditions (RECs) on and adjacent to the Property (GeoEngineers, 2014a), including:

■ former underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Property,

■ past hazardous materials use and storage at the Property,

■ potential presence of contaminated fill material at the Property,

■ Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)- and metals-impacted soils at the west-adjacent property.

May 8, 2015| Page 1 File No. 1460-053-03

2.2. Environmental Setting

Several investigations were completed by other consultants at the Property and adjacent properties. Following is a brief summary of GeoEngineers’ review of the historical environmental reports:

■ According to two reports by PBS Environmental ([PBS] PBS Environmental 1999a, 1999b) which included PBS’ review of previous documents not provided for our review (1988 UST removal documents and a February 1999 Phase I ESA), two USTs were previously associated with the Property. The two USTs, a 5,000-gallon diesel UST and a 1,000-gallon gasoline UST, were located in the southwest corner of the north parcel. The USTs were originally believed to have been removed in 1988. In 1999, PBS determined that the 5,000-gallon UST was still in-place at the site, and that UST was subsequently removed. Soil samples from the limits of the UST excavation did not contain detectable concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons. No groundwater was observed in the excavation, which was completed to a maximum depth of 16 feet below ground surface (bgs), approximately at elevation 25 feet.

■ According to a March 15, 2011 No Further Action (NFA) letter obtained from Ecology for the west-adjacent Block 26 property, cleanup of soils contaminated by PAHs and metals associated with a removed waste oil UST, impacted fill material, and a railroad spur was completed at the west-adjacent property in 2009. Based on our review of the Ecology NFA letter, it does not appear that impacted fill material and the former railroad spur associated with the west-adjacent property extended beneath the subject Property.

GeoEngineers conducted two investigations to characterize soil and groundwater conditions at the Property, and an evaluation of vapor intrusion risk and mitigation based on those findings.

■ In September 2013, GeoEngineers conducted a Limited Phase II ESA (GeoEngineers 2014b) in general accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) Practice E1903-11. The investigation included eight borings, three of which were completed as groundwater monitoring wells. Soil samples from the borings were tested for petroleum hydrocarbons, metals, PAHs, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). None of these analytes were detected at concentrations exceeding MTCA cleanup levels. In groundwater samples from the three wells, contaminants of concern were limited to: trichloroethylene (TCE) was detected in all three wells, and PAH detections were limited to two cPAH analytes in one well. A groundwater sample from one of the wells, MW-02 located in the northeast quadrant of the Property, had TCE concentrations that exceeded the MTCA Method A cleanup level. Concentrations of cPAHs in the groundwater sample from MW-02 were only slightly above laboratory detection limits. The subject property history, surrounding property uses and site investigation data indicate that TCE in groundwater is from an off-property source. Locations of borings and monitoring wells are shown in Figure 2. Soil analytical results for PAHs are included in Table 1; groundwater analytical results for PAHs are included in Table 2.

■ In November 2014, following demolition of all buildings at the Property, GeoEngineers completed 10 test pit explorations in areas of the Property that were previously inaccessible. One test pit was completed within the foundation footprint of each of the four former site buildings fronting Republican Street (historic residences), and six test pits in the vicinity of the building footprint of the former building fronting Fairview Avenue North. Each test pit was excavated to a minimum depth of 10 feet bgs and soil screened for evidence of contamination. The geologic contact between imported fill material and native soil was identified by observation of soil conditions in the test pit sidewalls. Based on field observations and field screening results, one or more soil samples were selected from each test pit for

May 8, 2015| Page 2 File No. 1460-053-03

laboratory analysis of petroleum hydrocarbons, cPAHs, VOCs, and metals. Fill soil was identified in test pits completed in the east and south peripheries of the subject property from ground surface to depths ranging from 2 to 4 feet bgs. The fill contained a significant amount of building debris (crushed brick, masonry, plaster, and charred construction timber). Laboratory analytical results showed that cPAHs exceeding MTCA Method A cleanup levels were detected in fill in the southern portion of the Property in test pits TP-2, TP-3, and TP-4. This contaminated fill was located beneath three of the former residential buildings. Test pit exploration locations are shown in Figure 2. Soil analytical results for test pit samples are included in Table 1. Field screening procedures are presented in Appendix B.

■ In 2015, GeoEngineers completed an evaluation of, and recommendations for, potential chemical vapor intrusion and mitigation at the Property in response to the September 2013 discovery of TCE in groundwater beneath the Property. GeoEngineers prepared a “Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Evaluation” report dated April 23, 2015 which summarizes TCE vapor intrusion mitigation measures that were designed and will be built into the subgrade building walls and foundation elements. Also, components of the building’s ventilation system will be used to provide additional management of any chemical vapors that, in the unlikely event, could intrude into the building. Based on review of available design drawings and construction drawings, and through discussions with the project’s engineering and design consultants, GeoEngineers was satisfied that the function of the subsurface features of the building (low permeability, water-tight concrete) and ventilation systems are sufficient to mitigate the potential for indoor air vapor intrusion for all identified chemicals of concern. The mitigation measures also satisfy applicable Ecology Guidance.

Based on the findings of these previous studies, GeoEngineers identified one “site” (as defined by MTCA) where hazardous substances have come to be located on the Property. The term “site” at this Property refers to the location of media (soil) that is contaminated by a hazardous substance (cPAHs) at concentrations above MTCA cleanup levels. The contaminated site at the south end of the Property is the orange-shaded area shown on Figures 2 and 3. The area-wide, off-property-sourced, low level TCE groundwater plume is not part of this site.

2.3. Geologic Setting

Eight soil borings and 10 test pit explorations conducted by GeoEngineers were completed during environmental investigations at the Property. Following is a brief summary of soil and groundwater conditions based on investigations conducted in 2013 and 2014.

2.3.1. Soil Conditions

Native soil encountered at the Property was brown silty sand; the silty sand had interbeds of sand with gravel typical of a glacial depositional environment in the northern portion of the Property. Explorations at the south portion of the Property (in the vicinity of the cPAH-contaminated site) encountered brown silty sand, overlain by approximately 2 to 4 feet of dark brown fill material with organic matter and building debris.

2.3.2. Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was encountered in three deeper borings completed at the Property as monitoring wells during the 2013 environmental investigation. Groundwater has typically varied between Elevation 8 and 15 feet above mean sea level (approximately 25 to 33 feet bgs at the west alley). Groundwater flow direction is generally to the north toward Lake Union, however, studies in the South Lake Union

May 8, 2015| Page 3 File No. 1460-053-03

neighborhood by GeoEngineers indicate that groundwater flow direction can be influenced by construction dewatering which can temporarily change the groundwater flow direction.

3.0 PROJECT OBJECTIVE

The objective of this cleanup action is to protect human health and the environment in accordance with MTCA, while allowing construction to proceed as planned. Remedial excavation was the selected cleanup action alternative that was implemented to:

1. Remove known contaminated soil from the Property, and;

2. Allow for redevelopment of the Property.

4.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

The primary purpose of our environmental construction support services was to monitor the remedial excavation of cPAH-contaminated soil. Our services included assisting the contractor with identifying contaminated soil, segregating contaminated soil (as defined in Section 5.0) from clean soil, obtaining confirmatory soil samples from the limits of the remedial excavations, and evaluating the chemical analytical results. Our scope of services included the following activities:

1. Prepared a health and safety plan for use by GeoEngineers personnel during construction.

2. Provided permitted disposal facility support for soil removed during construction activities and during remedial excavation of contaminated or impacted soil on the subject property.

3. Prepared an Environmental Construction Contingency Plan (ECCP) and soil management addendum for soil handling during mass excavation for construction of the proposed building (GeoEngineers 2014c, 2014d). The ECCP is intended to be used by the General Contractor to guide soil handling and disposal activities.

4. Documented excavation of cPAH-contaminated soil at the site. This task included the following:

a. Observed and documented the excavation of contaminated soil defined by chemical analytical results from the test pit explorations.

b. Obtained 16 soil samples at the limits of the remedial excavation to confirm successful removal of contaminated soil. The soil samples were submitted for chemical analysis of cPAHs using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method 8270D/SIM.

5. Evaluated the chemical analytical results relative to the MTCA Method A cleanup level.

6. Prepared a Cleanup Action Report for submittal to Ecology that discusses remediation of cPAH-contaminated soil and other environmental conditions.

5.0 CLEANUP LEVELS

For the purposes of solid waste handling for the remedial excavation, soil was managed as contaminated if it contained concentrations of cPAHs exceeding relevant cleanup levels. MTCA Method A and B soil

May 8, 2015| Page 4 File No. 1460-053-03

cleanup levels for unrestricted land use were selected for data evaluation purposes during the cleanup. Cleanup levels for the PAH contaminants are shown in Table 1.

6.0 EXCAVATION PLANNING AND PREPARATION

6.1. Demolition

All surface features including landscaping planters, buildings, and subsurface utilities associated with the buildings within the planned construction area were demolished prior to mass excavation. J.R. Hayes Construction (J.R. Hayes) was the earthwork contractor subcontracted by Sellen Construction (Sellen), the General Contractor.

7.0 CLEANUP ACTION

7.1. Test Pit Characterization Soil Sampling Results

As described in Section 2.2, for the purpose of further characterizing soil conditions at the property, GeoEngineers obtained soil samples from within the footprints of the five buildings that were demolished in 2014. The buildings front Fairview Avenue North and Republican Street. On November 11, 2014, GeoEngineers observed the excavation of 10 test pit explorations in areas that were previously inaccessible because of the presence of the buildings (Figure 2). Carcinogenic PAHs exceeding MTCA cleanup levels were detected in fill soil encountered in test pit excavations TP-2, TP-3 and TP-4 beneath three of the former residential buildings. Benzo(a)pyrene was detected in all three test pit explorations at concentrations exceeding the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 0.1 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) at depths of 2 to 4 feet bgs. Total cPAHs in four samples from these test pits ranged between 0.260 mg/kg and 2.025 mg/kg, all greater than the 0.1 mg/kg MTCA cleanup level. Chemical analytical results for test pit soil samples are summarized in Table 1.

Based on soil chemical analytical results from GeoEngineers’ September 2013 Phase II ESA and November 2014 Test Pit Characterization, soil at the property was designated as “clean,” “impacted,” or “contaminated” as defined in GeoEngineers’ 2014 ECCP and reiterated below.

■ Clean soil – Contaminants of potential concern are not detected in soil samples or are detected at concentrations that represent background conditions. There are no special handling or end-use requirements for this soil. This soil is represented by the green shaded portion of the Property shown on Figure 2.

■ Impacted soil – Impacted soil is defined as soil with contaminants of potential concern at concentrations less than the MTCA Method A or B cleanup levels in soil, or at concentrations that are greater than background conditions in native soil. Impacted soil is represented by the yellow shaded portion of the Property shown on Figure 2.

■ Contaminated soil – Contaminants of potential concern (cPAHs) are detected in soil samples at concentrations that exceed MTCA Method A or B cleanup levels. This soil is represented by the orange shaded portion of the Site shown on Figure 2.

Soil categorized as “impacted” was coordinated to be transported to the CEMEX permitted treatment and disposal facility in Everett, Washington as a Class 2 soil (as defined by their permit). Soil categorized as

May 8, 2015| Page 5 File No. 1460-053-03

“contaminated” was scheduled to be transported to the CEMEX permitted treatment and disposal facility in Everett, Washington as a Class 3 soil. CEMEX defines their Class 3 disposal category for cPAH-contaminated soil as any soil that contains concentrations for total cPAHs equal to or greater than the MTCA Method A cleanup level 0.1 mg/kg, but less than 15 mg/kg.

7.2. Remedial Excavation and Confirmation Soil Sample Results

GeoEngineers monitored excavation of the cPAH-contaminated soil at the Property between January 7 and January 14, 2015. J.R. Hayes, the earthwork contractor, completed remedial excavation activities. Remedial excavation continued until contaminated fill soil was removed and approximately 1 foot of underlying, native silty sand was removed. Confirmation soil samples were obtained from the limits of the remedial excavation for chemical testing of cPAHs (a compound that is not easily identifiable using field screening techniques). The remedial excavation measured approximately 90 feet long (north-south) by 175 feet wide (east-west) with depths ranging from approximately 3 to 7 feet bgs. Carcinogenic PAH-contaminated soil represented by samples TP-2-2.0, TP-3-2.0, TP-3.4.0 and TP-4-2.0 was excavated during this remediation. Carcinogenic PAH-contaminated soil excavated from the site was transported to CEMEX in Everett, Washington for permitted disposal as discussed in Section 8.0.

Sixteen confirmation soil samples were obtained from the final limits of the remedial excavation at depths ranging from 3 to 7 feet bgs and submitted for chemical analysis of cPAHs. Carcinogenic PAHs were not detected in the confirmation samples except for one sample, EX10-37 (sample EX10 obtained from Elevation 37 feet). Benzo(a)pyrene and total cPAHs were detected in EX10-37 at concentrations of 0.367 mg/kg and 0.468 mg/kg, respectively; these concentrations are greater than the MTCA Method A cleanup level (0.1 mg/kg). Soil represented by this sample was excavated to obtain clean vertical limits. Samples EX14-35 and EX15-35 were obtained from the same vicinity as EX10-37, but 2 feet deeper (Elevation 35) to document final soil conditions. Carcinogenic PAHs were not detected in EX14-35 and EX15-35.

Chemical analytical results of confirmation samples representing soil conditions at the final limits of the remedial excavation are summarized in Table 1. A copy of the laboratory data reports for the confirmation samples is provided in Appendix C. The approximate locations of characterization and confirmation soil samples are shown relative to the Property on Figures 2 and 3, and in cross-sections shown in Figures 4 through 7.

8.0 WASTE DISPOSAL

All contaminated soil excavated from the Property by J.R. Hayes was transported off-site for disposal. Contaminated soil excavated from the Property was temporarily stockpiled on-site and then loaded into solo trucks and transported to CEMEX in Everett, Washington for permitted disposal. According to the disposal weight tickets provided from CEMEX, 3,601 tons of impacted soil was disposed of as Class 2 soil, and 2,433 tons of contaminated soil was disposed of as Class 3 soil. Copies of the weight ticket summaries from CEMEX are included in Appendix A.

May 8, 2015| Page 6 File No. 1460-053-03

9.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

9.1. Soil Cleanup

Based on our observations, field screening and chemical analytical results, the remedial action at the Urban Union Property that removed 2,433 tons of cPAH-contaminated soil was successfully completed in accordance with the MTCA cleanup regulation. All known contaminated soil was removed from the Property in January 2015 and disposed at a permitted facility. It is our opinion that no further action relative to soil is warranted at the Property.

9.2. Groundwater Conditions

It is our opinion that no further action is warranted for groundwater monitoring relative to cPAHs or TCE at this Property because of the following:

1. Former contamination at the Property resulted from cPAH-containing fill material (building debris) which is minimally mobile though soil media.

2. According to the chemical analytical results, cPAHs were not-detected in any of the confirmation soil samples obtained from the limits of the remedial excavation area.

3. Excavation during soil remediation to an approximate elevation of 35 feet above mean sea level did not encounter groundwater. As a result there is at least 20 feet of vertical separation between the former soil contamination and the groundwater table.

4. Although TCE was detected in groundwater at the Property, evidence from the surrounding properties indicate that the TCE is from an off-property source. GeoEngineers prepared a “Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Evaluation” report dated April 23, 2015 which summarizes TCE vapor intrusion mitigation measures that were designed and will be built into the subgrade building walls and foundation elements. Also, components of the building’s ventilation system will be used to provide additional management of any chemical vapors that, in the unlikely event, could intrude into the building. Based on review of available design drawings and construction drawings, and through discussions with the project’s engineering and design consultants, GeoEngineers was satisfied that the function of the subsurface features of the building (low permeability, water-tight concrete) and ventilation systems are sufficient to mitigate the potential for indoor air vapor intrusion for all identified chemicals of concern. The mitigation measures also satisfy applicable Ecology Guidance.

Based on the removal of the cPAH-contaminated soil, deep depth to groundwater, the presence of at least 20 feet of clean vertical separation between the former soil contamination and the groundwater table, vapor mitigation steps taken for the completed building, and the 2013 groundwater sampling and testing results (showing that no cPAHs exceeded MTCA cleanup levels), it is our opinion that no further remedial action or monitoring is warranted at the Property.

10.0 LIMITATIONS

We have prepared this report pertaining to the Urban Union Property located in Seattle, Washington for the exclusive use of SWB-II Seattle, LLC and their authorized agents and regulatory agencies.

May 8, 2015| Page 7 File No. 1460-053-03

Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with our Proposal dated August 28, 2014 and generally accepted environmental science practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood.

Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record.

Please refer to Appendix D, titled “Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use,” for additional information pertaining to use of this report.

11.0 REFERENCES

ASTM International (ASTM) Standard E 1903-11 for Phase II ESAs, published July 2011.

GeoEngineers, 2014a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Walsh Building Property, 501 Fairview Avenue Site, Seattle, Washington, dated March 20, 2014.

GeoEngineers, 2014b. Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Proposed South Lake Union Development, 501 Fairview Avenue Site, Seattle, Washington, dated March 20, 2014.

GeoEngineers, 2014c. Urban Union Environmental Construction Contingency Plan for Soil and Groundwater Management, Urban Union Property, 501 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, dated September 9, 2014.

GeoEngineers, 2014d. Addendum to GeoEngineers’ September 9, 2014 Environmental Construction Contingency Plan, Soil Management Plan, Urban Union Property, 501 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, dated March 20, 2014.

GeoEngineers, 2015. Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Evaluation, Urban Union Property, 501 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, dated April 23, 2015.

PBS Environmental, 1999a. Phase II Subsurface Soil and Groundwater Investigation, 509 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle Washington, dated July 22, 1999.

PBS Environmental, 1999b. Underground Storage Tank Investigation, 509 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, dated July 1999.

Washington State Department of Ecology, 2011. Letter to Hart Crowser Inc. re: No Further Action at Block 26 W City Place II LLC, 526 Boren Avenue North/1100 Republican Street, dated March 15, 2011.

May 8, 2015| Page 8 File No. 1460-053-03

TAB

LES

Total

cPAHs4

(mg/kg)

Naphthalene2-

Methylnaphthalene

1-Methylnaph

thaleneAcenaphthylene Acenaphthene Fluorene Phenanthrene Anthracene Fluoranthene Pyrene

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

Benzo(a)anthracene

ChryseneBenzo(b)

fluorantheneBenzo(j,k)

fluorantheneBenzo(a)pyrene

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)

pyrene

Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene

TEQ

GEI-01-5.0 5.0 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 0.005

GEI-01-12.5 12.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

GEI-02-7.5 7.5 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 0.0091 0.0092 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 < 0.0079 0.006

GEI-02-15.0 15.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

GEI-03-5.0 5.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

GEI-03-10.0 10.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

GEI-04-7.5 7.5 < 0.0068 < 0.0068 < 0.0068 < 0.0068 < 0.0068 < 0.0068 0.012 < 0.0068 0.026 0.029 0.010 0.011 0.020 0.018 0.0068 0.013 0.0076 < 0.0068 0.018

GEI-04-12.5 12.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

GEI-05-7.5 7.5 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 0.006

GEI-05-12.5 12.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

MW-01-7.5 7.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

MW-01-12.5 12.5 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 0.005

MW-01-27.5 27.5 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 < 0.0070 0.006

MW-02-7.5 7.5 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 < 0.0074 0.006

MW-02-10.0 10.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

MW-02-25.0 25.0 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 < 0.0072 0.005

MW-03-5.0 5.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

MW-03-15.0 15.0 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 < 0.0082 0.006

MW-03.25.0 25.0 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 < 0.0069 0.005

TP-1-2.0 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 0.040

TP-1-8.0 8.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0602 < 0.0602 < 0.0602 < 0.0602 < 0.0602 < 0.0602 < 0.0602 0.045

TP-2-2.0 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.248 0.247 0.296 0.068 0.177 0.161 < 0.0551 0.260

TP-2-6.0 6.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0523 < 0.0523 < 0.0523 < 0.0523 < 0.0523 < 0.0523 < 0.0523 0.039

TP-3-2.0 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.880 0.648 1.280 0.627 1.630 0.496 0.598 2.025

TP-3-4.0 4.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.785 0.869 0.920 0.497 0.659 0.354 0.0975 0.933

TP-3-8.0 8.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 0.041

ne 486 3.26 ne 246 3.26 2.4 ne 1.46 1406 1.46 146 0.1 1.46 0.146 0.1

TP-2

TP-3

MTCA Method A or B Cleanup Level for Unrestricted Land Use

5 5

TP-1

Direct Push Borings Completed September 22, 20131

GEI-01

GEI-02

GEI-03

GEI-04

GEI-05

Hollow Stem Auger Borings Completed September 21, 20131

MW-01

MW-02

MW-03

Test Pit Explorations Completed November 11, 20142

Table 1Soil Chemical Analytical Data (PAHs)

Urban Union Property

Seattle, Washington

Exploration Location Sample ID

Sample Depth

(feet bgs)

Non-Carcinogenic PAHs3

(mg/kg)Carcinogenic PAHs3

(mg/kg)

501 Fairview Avenue North

File No. 1460-053-03Table 2 | May 8, 2015 Page 1 of 2

Total

cPAHs4

(mg/kg)

Naphthalene2-

Methylnaphthalene

1-Methylnaph

thaleneAcenaphthylene Acenaphthene Fluorene Phenanthrene Anthracene Fluoranthene Pyrene


Benzo(a)anthracene

ChryseneBenzo(b)



Indeno(1,2,3-cd)

pyrene


TEQ Exploration Location Sample ID

Sample Depth

(feet bgs)


(mg/kg)Carcinogenic PAHs3

(mg/kg)

TP-4-2.0 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.948 1.130 0.501 0.190 0.138 < 0.0566 < 0.0566 0.319

TP-4-4.0 4.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0589 < 0.0589 < 0.0589 < 0.0589 < 0.0589 < 0.0589 < 0.0589 0.044

TP-4-8.0 8.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 0.040

TP-5 TP-5-4.0 4.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0507 < 0.00507 < 0.00507 < 0.00507 < 0.00507 < 0.00507 < 0.0507 0.038

TP-6 TP-6-4.0 4.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0554 < 0.0554 < 0.0554 < 0.0554 < 0.0554 < 0.0554 < 0.0554 0.042

TP-7 TP-7-6.0 6.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0491 < 0.0491 < 0.0491 < 0.0491 < 0.0491 < 0.0491 < 0.0491 0.037

TP-8 TP-8-4.0 4.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0535 < 0.0535 < 0.0535 < 0.0535 < 0.0535 < 0.0535 < 0.0535 0.040

TP-9-2.0 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 < 0.0539 0.041

TP-9-8.0 8.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0526 < 0.0526 < 0.0526 < 0.0526 < 0.0526 < 0.0526 < 0.0526 0.040

TP-10 TP-10-2.0 2.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0479 < 0.0479 < 0.0479 < 0.0479 < 0.0479 < 0.0479 < 0.0479 0.036

EX1 EX1-48 48* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0531 < 0.0531 < 0.0531 < 0.0531 < 0.0531 < 0.0531 < 0.0531 0.040

EX2 EX2-49 49* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0553 < 0.0553 < 0.0553 < 0.0553 < 0.0553 < 0.0553 < 0.0553 0.042

EX3 EX3-45 45* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0541 < 0.0541 < 0.0541 < 0.0541 < 0.0541 < 0.0541 < 0.0541 0.041

EX4 EX4-50 50* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 0.040

EX5 EX5-49 49* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0579 < 0.0579 < 0.0579 < 0.0579 < 0.0579 < 0.0579 < 0.0579 0.044

EX6 EX6-45 45* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0564 < 0.0564 < 0.0564 < 0.0564 < 0.0564 < 0.0564 < 0.0546 0.043

EX7 EX7-43 43* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 0.041

EX8 EX8-43 43* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 < 0.0534 0.040

EX9 EX9-39 39* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0532 < 0.0532 < 0.0532 < 0.0532 < 0.0532 < 0.0532 < 0.0532 0.040

EX10 EX10-37 37* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.193 0.224 0.455 0.088 0.367 0.224 < 0.0557 0.468

EX11 EX11-37 37* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.054 < 0.054 < 0.054 < 0.054 < 0.054 < 0.054 < 0.054 0.041

EX12 EX12-39 39* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 < 0.0527 0.040

EX13 EX13-39 39* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0546 < 0.0546 < 0.0546 < 0.0546 < 0.0546 < 0.0546 < 0.0546 0.041

EX14 EX14-35 35* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0552 < 0.0552 < 0.0552 < 0.0552 < 0.0552 < 0.0552 < 0.0552 0.042

EX15 EX15-35 35* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 < 0.0538 0.041

EX16 EX16-38 38* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- < 0.0519 < 0.0519 < 0.0519 < 0.0519 < 0.0519 < 0.0519 < 0.0519 0.039

ne 486 3.26 ne 246 3.26 2.4 ne 1.46 1406 1.46 146 0.1 1.46 0.146 0.1

Notes:1Chemical analytical testing by OnSite Environmental, Inc. in Redmond, Washington. Samples were obtained between September 21 and 22, 2013.2Chemical analytical testing by Fremont Analytical in Seattle, Washington.3Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and carcinogenic PAHs (cPAHs) analyzed by EPA Method 8270D/SIM.

5Sum of naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, and 1-methylnaphthalene is compared against the Method A cleanup level for naphthalenes.

-- = not tested < = analyte not detected above listed detection limit * = value represents approximate elevation above mean sea level, not depth from surfacebgs = below ground surface mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram

ne = not establishedBolding indicates analyte was detected.

Grey shading indicates that the analyte exceeded the MTCA Method A cleanup level.

Orange shading indicates that contaminated soil at the sample location was removed during remedial excavation.

6MTCA Method B Cleanup level

TP-9

Remediation Confirmation Samples Collected January 7, 8, and 14 20152

MTCA Method A or B Cleanup Level for Unrestricted Land Use

5 5

4Total cPAHs calculated using the toxicity equivalency (TEQ) methodology specified in WAC 173-340-780(8). cPAHs that were not detected were assigned half the value of the detection limit for these calculations.

TP-4


Total

cPAHs3

(µg/L)

Naphthalene2-Methyl

naphthalene1-Methyl

naphthaleneAcenaphthylene Acenaphthene Fluorene Phenanthrene Anthracene Fluoranthene Pyrene


Benzo(a)anthracene

ChryseneBenzo(b)



Indeno(1,2,3-cd)

pyrene


TEQ

9/27/2013 27.3 14.4 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.010 0.008

9/2/2014 33.1 8.6 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 0.008

9/27/2013 27.0 14.5 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.011 0.013 < 0.011 0.014 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 0.010

9/2/2014 32.8 8.7 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 0.010

9/27/2013 27.6 13.1 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.11 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 < 0.011 0.008

9/2/2014 32.1 8.6 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 <0.100 0.008

ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne ne 0.1 ne ne 0.1

Notes:1Chemical analytical testing of samples collected in September and October 2013 by OnSite Environmental, Inc. in Redmond, Washington and samples collected in September 2014 by Fremont Analytical in Seattle, Washington.2Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and carginogenic PAHs (cPAHs) analyzed by EPA Method 8270D/SIM.

4Sum of naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, and 1-methylnaphthalene is compared against the Method A cleanup level for naphthalenes.

-- = not tested

< = analyte not detected above listed detection limit

ne = not established

TOC = top of casing

g/L = micrograms per liter

Bolding indicates analyte was detected.

3Total cPAHs calculated using the toxicity equivalency (TEQ) methodology specified in WAC 173-340-780(8). cPAHs that were not detected were assigned half the value of the detection limit for these calculations.

501 Fairview Site

MW-01

MW-02

MW-03

MTCA Method A Cleanup Level for Unrestricted Land Use 1604

Table 2Groundwater Chemical Analytical Data (PAHs)

Urban Union Property

Seattle, Washington

Sample ID1Date

Sampled

Depth to Groundwater

(from TOC)Groundwater

Elevation


(µg/L)Carcinogenic PAHs2

(µg/L)


FIGU

RE

S

!

ElliotBay

LakeUnion

NP

Railr oad

KingKing2nd

Ave N

Bay St

TaylorAve Ea

stlak

eAv

e

Warr e

nPl

E JohnCt

TerraceSt

5th A

ve W

E Glen St

Fran

klin

P l E

FairviewPl N

YalePl E

E EatonPl

E CrockettSt

E Ward St

E Valley St

CoryellC t E

PostAve

E Blaine St

AuroraA ve N

Lee St

11th

Ave

PostAly

Nagl

ePl

NewsLn

Ce

m e t ery

Rd

WesternAve W

Lynn St

Pike Pl Hubb

ell Pl

E Calhoun St

Lenora S t

W OlympicPl

3rd

Ave N

McGrawSt

E HoweSt

Warre

nAv

e N

W HoweSt

W Kinnear Pl

WaverlyPl N

Union St

6th Ave N

5th

A veN

9th

Cherry St

E Galer St

2nd

Ave W

Belm

ont

Pl E

Dexte rWay N E Boston St

W HarrisonSt

Hayes St

Crockett St E Newton St

Howe St

W Smith St

Bell St

John St

Columbia St

Galer St

University St

Spring St

Batt

erySt

Boyls

ton

Ave E

E Highland D r

Melro

seAv

e

Howell St

Pont

ius

Ave N

E Lynn StW McGraw St

W Blaine St

8th A

ve N

W Garfield StW Galer St

W Mercer St

James St

DelmarD r E

B laine St

W Prospect StW Highland Dr

W Lee StW Comstock St

ValleySt

Clay St

Cedar

St

Broa

dway

E

E John St

Boyls

ton A

ve

QueenAnne Dr

Harv

ard

Ave E

Garfield St

E Alder St

E Union St

Bore

nAv

e N

Marion St

E Roy St

E Spring St

E Olive Way

Republican St

E Olive StMi

nor

Ave E

Newton St

Prospect St

Melro

seAv

eE

Boston St

Mercer St

East

lake A

ve E

Wall StVine S

t

E Columbia StE Marion St

Highland Dr

Harrison St

Interl a

k enDrE

14th

Ave

E

E Howell St

13th

Ave

9th Ave

11th

AveE

Fairvi

ew Ave

N

Summ

it Av

e ESu

mmit

Ave

E P rospect St

Seneca St

Western Ave

E Cherry St

9th A

ve N

Roy St

19th

Ave

Aloha St

Minor Ave

8th Ave

20th

Ave

E

OliveWay

Quee

n Ann

e Ave

N

E Harrison StE Republican St

E I nte r lakenB

l v d

Boyer Ave E

E Denn y Way

E Pike St

Pike St

14th

Ave

Thomas St

16th

AveE

E Jefferson St

E Aloha St

Pine St

WardSt

E Mercer St

E Thomas St

Elliott Ave

15th

Ave

1st A

ve N

16th

Ave

17th

Ave E

Taylor

AveN

4th

AveN

1st A

ve W

4th

Ave W

7th Ave

E Pine St

Broa

dway

Lak eview Blvd

E

18th

AveE

E Madison St

Madison St

Stewart

St

6th Ave

Bigelo

wAve

N

19th

Ave

E

BorenAve

20th

Ave

18th

Ave

12th

Ave

Broad

St

Alaskan Way

5th Ave1st Ave

10th

Ave

E

1 5th

AveE

2nd Ave

4th Ave3rd Ave

Denny Way

Fede

ralA

veE

Dext

er A

ve N

Westlake

Ave N

Se a ttle-

Vic t oria

µ

SITE

Vicinity Map

Figure 1

Urban Union Property510 Fairview Avenue North

Seattle, Washington

Shorel ineShorel ine

RentonRenton

SeattleSeattle BellevueBellevueKingKing

SnohomishSnohomish

KitsapKitsap §̈¦405

2,000 2,0000

Feet

Data Sources: ESRI Data & Maps

Notes:1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication.Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 10N

Offic

e: Pa

th: \\

sea\

projec

ts\1\

1460

053\

GIS\M

XD\1

4600

5300

_Vici

nityM

ap.m

xdMa

p Rev

ised:

19 Fe

bruary

2015

m

augu

st

SEE FIGURE 3

MW-01MW-02

MW-03

ParcelNo.1983200545

ParcelNo.1983200560GEI-05

GEI-04

GEI-03

GEI-02

GEI-01

TP-2 TP-1TP-3TP-4

TP-8

TP-9TP-5

TP-7

TP-6TP-10

Site Plan and Soil Management ZonesUrban Union Property

501 Fairview Avenue NorthSeattle, Washington

Figure 2

50 0 50

Feet

Approximate Location of September 2013

Approximate Location of November 2014 Test Pit withcPAH results either not detected or detected atconcentrations below MTCA Method A cleanup levels

Approximate location of November 2014 Test Pit withcPAH results exceeding MTCA Method A cleanup levels

Location of Boring Completed as GroundwaterMonitoring Well

Approximate Subject Property

Soil Management Zone

Impacted Soil: Contaminants of concern detected atconcentrations greater than laboratory reporting limits,but below MTCA Method A cleanup levels.Contaminated Soil: Contaminants of concern detectedat concentrations greater than MTCA Method A cleanuplevels.Clean Soil: Contaminants of concern either not detectedor detected similar to natural backgroundconcentrations in fill soil.

Notes:1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features discussed in an attacheddocument. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master fileis stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication.

Projection: WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere

Office: SEA Path: \\sea\projects\1\1460053\GIS\MXD\146005300_Sample_Locations_Zones.mxd Map Revised: 08 May 2015 maugust

Data Source: King County GIS, Base Drawing: Ground Support PLLC 2014 (Base features refer to future building elements.)

GEI-02

MW-03

TP-2

Legend

TP-9

30 0 30

Feet

Notes:1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showingfeatures discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannotguarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is storedby GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication.

Data Source: King County GIS, Base Drawing: Ground Support PLLC 2014

LegendcPAH analytical resultsexceeding MTCA MethodA cleanup levels. Samplearea overexcavated inJanuary 2015cPAH results either notdetected or detected atconcentrations less thanMTCA Method A cleanuplevelsApproximate limits ofremedial excavationCross Section(See following figures)

\\sea\projects\1\1460053\GIS\MXD\146005300_Sample_Locations_Zones_zoomS.mxd Date Exported: 05/08/15

D

B' C'

A

D'

B C

A'

EX12-39 EX6-45 EX5-49

EX2-49

EX4-50

EX1-48

EX3-45

EX8-43EX14-35EX10-37

EX15-35

EX16-38

EX7-43EX11-37

EX13-39EX9-39

GEI-05

TP-2 TP-1TP-3TP-4

Projection: WGS 1984 Web Mercator Auxiliary Sphere

Remedial Excavation and Confirmation Sample cPAH Analytical Results


Seattle, WashingtonFigure 3

A A'

INSET - SEE FIGURE 2 FOR COMPLETE SITE

10

40

20

30

50

40

60

10

30

20

50

60

WEST

(ALLEY)

A

EAST

(FAIRVIEW AVENUE NORTH)

A'

SIDEWALK AT EL 67

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

APPRO

XIMATE ELEVATIO

NABO

VE MEAN

SEA LEVEL70 70

T

P

-

4

T

P

-

3

T

P

-

2

T

P

-

1

:

\\Se

a\pr

ojec

ts\1

\146

0053

\CAD

\146

0053

03_F

ig 4

-7_C

ross

Sec

tions

.dw

g\TA

B:XS

A-A

' mod

ified

on

Feb

20, 2

015

- 11:

04am

MG

FID

Y

Notes:

1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.2. This drawing is for information purposes. It isintended to assist in showing features discussed in anattached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannotguarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files.The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and willserve as the official record of this communication.

Figure 4


Seattle, Washington

Remedial ExcavationCross Section A-A'

APPROXIMATE LIMIT OFREMEDIAL EXCAVATION

SILTY SAND

FILL SOIL

FEET

020 20

TP-4-2.0

TEST PIT NUMBER ANDAPPROXIMATE LOCATION

T

P

-

4

APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF TEXT PIT EXCAVATION

APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF REMEDIAL EXCAVATION

EX12-45

cPAHs DETECTED AT CONCENTRATIONSGREATER THAN MTCA METHOD ACLEANUP LEVELS

cPAHs NOT DETECTED WITHINLABORATORY REPORTING LIMITS

TP-4-2.0 TP-4-4.0

TP-4-8.0

EX15-35 EX14-35

TP-3-2.0

TP-3-4.0

TP-3-8.0

TP-2-2.0

TP-2-6.0

TP-1-2.0

TP-1-8.0EX4-50

EX3-45

EX9-39

EX13-39

APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF GROUNDWATER

30

50

60

40

20

NORTH

(CONSTRUCTION)

B

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

70

30

50

60

40

20

SOUTH

(REPUBLICAN STREET)

B'

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

70

SIDEWALK AT EL 55

T

P

-

4

10 10


FEET

010 10

:

\\Se

a\pr

ojec

ts\1

\146

0053

\CAD

\146

0053

03_F

ig 4

-7_C

ross

Sec

tions

.dw

g\TA

B:XS

B-B

' mod

ified

on

Feb

20, 2

015

- 11:

03am

MG

FID

Y

Notes:


Figure 5


Seattle, Washington

Remedial ExcavationCross Section B-B'

TP-4-2.0

EX10-37EX14-35EX15-35

TP-4-4.0TP-4-8.0 EX11-37

EX12-39

SILTY SAND

FILL SOIL

TP-4-2.0


T

P

-

4



EX12-45


cPAHs NOT DETECTED WITHINLABORATORY REPORTING LIMITS

EX16-38

APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF GROUNDWATER

30

50

60

40

20

NORTH

(CONSTRUCTION)

C

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

70

30

50

60

40

20

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

70

SIDEWALK AT EL 59

T

P

-

3

SOUTH

(REPUBLICAN STREET)

C'

10 10


FEET

010 10

:

\\Se

a\pr

ojec

ts\1

\146

0053

\CAD

\146

0053

03_F

ig 4

-7_C

ross

Sec

tions

.dw

g\TA

B:XS

C-C

' mod

ified

on

Feb

20, 2

015

- 11:

35am

MG

FID

Y

Notes:


Figure 6


Seattle, Washington

Remedial ExcavationCross Section C-C'

TP-3-8.0EX7-43

EX6-45TP-3-2.0

EX8-43 TP-3-4.0

SILTY SAND

FILL SOIL

TP-4-2.0


T

P

-

4



EX12-45


cPAHs NOT DETECTED WITHINLABORATORY REPORTING LIMITS APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF GROUNDWATER

30

50

60

40

20

NORTH

(CONSTRUCTION)

D

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

70

30

50

60

40

20

APPR

OXI

MAT

E EL

EVAT

ION

ABO

VE M

EAN

SEA

LEV

EL

70

SIDEWALK AT EL 62

T

P

-

2

SOUTH

(REPUBLICAN STREET)

D'

10 10


FEET

010 10

:

\\Se

a\pr

ojec

ts\1

\146

0053

\CAD

\146

0053

03_F

ig 4

-7_C

ross

Sec

tions

.dw

g\TA

B:XS

D-D

' mod

ified

on

Feb

20, 2

015

- 11:

01am

MG

FID

Y

Notes:


Figure 7


Seattle, Washington

Remedial ExcavationCross Section D-D'

EX1-48TP-2-6.0

EX5-49TP-2-2.0EX2-49

SILTY SAND

FILL SOIL

TP-4-2.0


T

P

-

4



EX12-45


cPAHs NOT DETECTED WITHINLABORATORY REPORTING LIMITS APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF GROUNDWATER

AP

PE

ND

ICE

S

APPENDIX A Contaminated Soil Disposal Weight Tickets

Ticket Date Description Product Name Qty Unit

1876076397 1/8/2015 P:76:URBAN UNION CLASS 3 SOIL DUMPED BY TON 29.43 TON





























































total tickets 61 total tons 1746.74








total tickets 6 total tonnage 166.49






total tickets 4 total tonnage 104.73

Alex Whitney

Typewritten Text

Type 2

Alex Whitney

PolyLine

Ticket Date Time Customer Customer Name Order Description Product Product Name Vehicle Vehicle Name Qty Unit Notes

1876076609 1/16/2015 2:24:00 PM 3172416 SCHNITZER WEST LLC 40997453 P:76:URBAN UNION 1192508 CLASS 3 SOIL DUMPED BY TON 2030229 KBK2T,KBK TRUCKING 27.57 TON

APPENDIX B Field Screening Procedures

APPENDIX B FIELD SCREENING PROCEDURES

General

A representative from our staff assisted J.R. Hayes, the earthwork contractor regarding the segregation and management of soil generated during the remedial excavation. Field procedures are described below.

Soil Sample Collection and Handling

Soil samples were obtained using excavator bucket and/or a pre-washed stainless steel trowel. Soil samples were obtained from the center portion of the bucket and samples were handled using disposable nitrile gloves. Soil samples obtained for chemical analysis were transferred to laboratory-prepared sample jars. Sample containers were filled to minimize headspace. The samples were placed in a cooler with ice pending transport to the analytical laboratory. Chain-of-custody procedures were followed in transporting the samples to the laboratory.

Field Screening of Soil Samples

Soil samples obtained from the Property were evaluated for the potential presence of petroleum contamination using field screening techniques. Field screening results can be used as a general guideline to delineate areas of potential petroleum-related contamination in soils. In addition, screening results are often used as a basis for selecting soil samples for chemical analysis. The screening methods employed included: (1) visual screening; (2) odor identification; and 3) water sheen screening.

Visual and odor screening consists of inspecting the soil for stains indicative of petroleum-related contamination. Visual and odor screening is generally more effective when contamination is related to heavy petroleum hydrocarbons such as diesel-range, or when hydrocarbon concentrations are high. Sheen screening is a more sensitive screening method that can be effective in detecting petroleum-based products in concentrations lower than regulatory cleanup guidelines.

Field screening results are site-specific. The effectiveness of field screening results varies with temperature, moisture content, organic content, soil type and type and age of contaminant. The presence or absence of sheen does not necessarily indicate the presence or absence of petroleum hydrocarbons or other contaminants.

Water sheen testing involves placing soil in water and observing the water surface for signs of sheen. Sheens are classified as follows:

No Sheen (NS) No visible sheen on water surface.

Slight Sheen (SS) Light, colorless, dull sheen; spread is irregular, not rapid; sheen dissipates rapidly.

Moderate Sheen (MS) Light to heavy sheen, may have some color/iridescence; spread is irregular to flowing; few remaining areas of no sheen on water surface.

Heavy Sheen (HS) Heavy sheen with color/iridescence; spread is rapid; entire water surface may be covered with sheen.

May 8, 2015| Page B-1 File No. 1460-053-03

Headspace vapor screening involves placing a soil sample in a plastic sample bag. Air is captured in the bag and the bag is shaken to expose the soil to the air trapped in the bag. The probe of a photoionization detector (PID) is inserted in the bag and the instrument measures the concentration of combustible vapor in the air removed from the sample headspace. The PID measures concentrations in parts per million (ppm) and is calibrated to isobutylene. The PID is designed to quantify combustible gas and organic vapor concentrations up to 2,500 ppm. The PID has a lower threshold of significance of 1 ppm in this application. Field screening results are site-specific and vary with soil type, soil moisture content, temperature and type of contaminant.

May 8, 2015| Page B-2 File No. 1460-053-03

APPENDIX C Chemical Analytical Data

APPENDIX C CHEMICAL ANAYLTICAL DATA

Analytical Methods

Our summary of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) issues pertains only to those soil sampling and analysis activities completed by GeoEngineers. Chain-of-custody procedures were followed during transport of field samples to the accredited analytical laboratories. The samples were held in cold storage pending extraction and/or analysis. The analytical results and quality control records are included herein.

Analytical Data Review

The laboratories maintain internal quality assurance programs as documented in their laboratory quality assurance manuals. The laboratories use a combination of blanks, surrogate recoveries, duplicates, matrix spike recoveries, matrix spike duplicate recoveries, blank spike recoveries and blank spike duplicate recoveries to evaluate the analytical results. The laboratories also use data quality performance goals (quality control limits) for individual chemicals or groups of chemicals based on the long-term performance of the test methods. Control limits were included in the laboratory reports. The laboratories compared each group of samples with the control limits and noted any exceptions in the laboratory report. Any data quality exceptions documented by the accredited laboratory were reviewed by GeoEngineers and are addressed below. Detailed summary review sheets for each data package are stored with the project files and are available upon request.

Analytical Data Review Summary

No significant data quality exceptions were noted in the laboratory reports during our review. Based on our data quality review, it is our opinion that the analytical data are of acceptable quality for their intended use in this report.

May 8, 2015| Page C-1 File No. 1460-053-03

January 08, 2015

GeoEngineersIan Young

Attention Ian Young:

RE: Urban UnionLab ID: 1501042

600 Stewart Street, Suite 1700Seattle, WA 98101

3600 Fremont Ave. N.Seattle, WA 98103

T: (206) 352-3790F: (206) 352-7178

[email protected]

Fremont Analytical, Inc. received 8 sample(s) on 1/7/2015 for the analyses presented in the following report.

Mike Ridgeway

This report consists of the following:

- Case Narrative - Analytical Results - Applicable Quality Control Summary Reports - Chain of Custody

All analyses were performed consistent with the Quality Assurance program of Fremont Analytical, Inc. Please contact the laboratory if you should have any questions about the results.

Thank you for using Fremont Analytical.

Sincerely,

President

Diesel and Heavy Oil by NWTPH-Dx/Dx Ext.Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons by EPA Method 8270 (SIM)Sample Moisture (Percent Moisture)

www.fremontanalytical.com

1 of 16

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.fremontanalytical.com

01/08/2015Date:

Project: Urban UnionCLIENT: GeoEngineers

Lab Order: 1501042

Work Order Sample Summary

Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Date/Time ReceivedDate/Time Collected

1501042-001 EX1-48 01/07/2015 1:00 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-002 EX2-49 01/07/2015 1:05 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-003 EX3-45 01/07/2015 1:10 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-004 EX4-50 01/07/2015 1:12 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-005 EX5-49 01/07/2015 1:15 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-006 EX6-45 01/07/2015 1:30 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-007 EX7-43 01/07/2015 1:40 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM1501042-008 EX8-43 01/07/2015 1:45 PM 01/07/2015 2:41 PM

Note: If no "Time Collected" is supplied, a default of 12:00AM is assigned

2 of 16


1/8/2015

Case Narrative1501042

Date:

WO#:

I. SAMPLE RECEIPT:Samples receipt information is recorded on the attached Sample Receipt Checklist.

II. GENERAL REPORTING COMMENTS:Results are reported on a wet weight basis unless dry-weight correction is denoted in the units field on the analytical report ("mg/kg-dry" or "ug/kg-dry").

Matrix Spike (MS) and MS Duplicate (MSD) samples are tested from an analytical batch of "like" matrix to check for possible matrix effect. The MS and MSD will provide site specific matrix data only for those samples which are spiked by the laboratory. The sample chosen for spike purposes may or may not have been a sample submitted in this sample delivery group. The validity of the analytical procedures for which data is reported in this analytical report is determined by the Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) and the Method Blank (MB). The LCS and the MB are processed with the samples and the MS/MSD to ensure method criteria are achieved throughout the entire analytical process.

III. ANALYSES AND EXCEPTIONS:Exceptions associated with this report will be footnoted in the analytical results page(s) or the quality control summary page(s) and/or noted below.

3 of 16

Project: Urban Union

Client Sample ID: EX1-48

Collection Date: 1/7/2015 1:00:00 PM

Matrix: Soil

Client: GeoEngineers

Lab ID: 1501042-001

Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedDFRL

Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:

Diesel and Heavy Oil by NWTPH-Dx/Dx Ext. Analyst: ECBatch ID: 9750

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 1/8/2015 1:36:00 AM19.9 mg/Kg-dry 1NDHeavy Oil 1/8/2015 1:36:00 AM49.8 mg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 1:36:00 AM50-150 %REC 1104 Surr: o-Terphenyl 1/8/2015 1:36:00 AM50-150 %REC 199.9

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons by EPA Method 8270 (SIM) Analyst: NGBatch ID: 9751

Benz(a)anthracene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1NDChrysene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(b)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(k)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(a)pyrene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1NDIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1NDDibenz(a,h)anthracene 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM53.1 µg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM42.7-132 %REC 191.8 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 1/8/2015 7:00:00 AM48.8-157 %REC 1100

Sample Moisture (Percent Moisture) Analyst: SBBatch ID: R19004

Percent Moisture 1/8/2015 9:39:47 AMwt% 18.69

Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank D Dilution was requiredE Value above quantitation range H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceededJ Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not detected at the Reporting Limit

RL Reporting Limit S Spike recovery outside accepted recovery limits

4 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-002


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:




Benz(a)anthracene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1NDChrysene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(b)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(k)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(a)pyrene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1NDIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1NDDibenz(a,h)anthracene 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM55.3 µg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM42.7-132 %REC 190.5 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 1/8/2015 7:23:00 AM48.8-157 %REC 198.1





5 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-003


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:









6 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-004


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:


Diesel (Fuel Oil) 1/8/2015 3:10:00 AM20.6 mg/Kg-dry 1NDHeavy Oil 1/8/2015 3:10:00 AM51.6 mg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 3:10:00 AM50-150 %REC 1118 Surr: o-Terphenyl 1/8/2015 3:10:00 AM50-150 %REC 1114







7 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-005


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:









8 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-006


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:









9 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-007


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:









10 of 16




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501042-008


Analytical Report

1/8/20151501042

Date Reported:

WO#:









11 of 16

Project: Urban UnionCLIENT: GeoEngineersWork Order: 1501042 QC SUMMARY REPORT

Diesel and Heavy Oil by NWTPH-Dx/Dx Ext.

1/8/2015Date:

Sample ID 1501042-008ADUP

Batch ID: 9750 Analysis Date: 1/8/2015

Prep Date: 1/7/2015

Analyte Result SPK value SPK Ref Val %REC RPD Ref Val %RPDLowLimit HighLimit RPDLimit Qual

Units: mg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: EX8-43

RunNo: 19003

SeqNo: 378003

DUPSampType:

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 3020.6 0NDHeavy Oil 3051.6 0ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 20.65 112 50 150 023.1 Surr: o-Terphenyl 20.65 109 50 150 022.5

Sample ID LCS-9750


Prep Date: 1/7/2015


Units: mg/Kg

RL

Client ID: LCSS

RunNo: 19003

SeqNo: 378010

LCSSampType:

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 500.0 96.4 65 13520.0 0482 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 20.00 114 50 15022.8 Surr: o-Terphenyl 20.00 103 50 15020.6

Sample ID MB-9750


Prep Date: 1/7/2015


Units: mg/Kg

RL

Client ID: MBLKS

RunNo: 19003

SeqNo: 378011

MBLKSampType:

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 20.0NDHeavy Oil 50.0ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 20.00 109 50 15021.9 Surr: o-Terphenyl 20.00 108 50 15021.6

Qualifiers: B Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank D Dilution was required E Value above quantitation range

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded J Analyte detected below quantitation limits ND Not detected at the Reporting Limit

R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting Limit S Spike recovery outside accepted recovery limits

12 of 16


Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons by EPA Method 8270 (SIM)

1/8/2015Date:

Sample ID MB-9751


Prep Date: 1/7/2015


Units: µg/Kg

RL

Client ID: MBLKS

RunNo: 19008

SeqNo: 379098

MBLKSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 50.0NDChrysene 50.0NDBenzo(b)fluoranthene 50.0NDBenzo(k)fluoranthene 50.0NDBenzo(a)pyrene 50.0NDIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 50.0NDDibenz(a,h)anthracene 50.0ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 500.0 88.1 42.7 132441 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 500.0 79.1 48.8 157396

Sample ID LCS-9751


Prep Date: 1/7/2015


Units: µg/Kg

RL

Client ID: LCSS

RunNo: 19008

SeqNo: 379099

LCSSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 1,000 91.8 41.9 13650.0 0918Chrysene 1,000 83.7 51.4 13550.0 0837Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1,000 92.9 39.7 13750.0 0929Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1,000 93.8 45.7 13850.0 0938Benzo(a)pyrene 1,000 84.6 40.9 14150.0 0846Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1,000 92.9 45.4 13750.0 0929Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1,000 93.9 37.6 14050.0 0939 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 500.0 92.8 42.7 132464 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 500.0 92.3 48.8 157462




13 of 16



1/8/2015Date:



Prep Date: 1/7/2015


Units: µg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: BATCH

RunNo: 19008

SeqNo: 379101

DUPSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 3052.9 0NDChrysene 3052.9 0NDBenzo(b)fluoranthene 3052.9 0NDBenzo(k)fluoranthene 3052.9 0NDBenzo(a)pyrene 3052.9 0NDIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 3052.9 0NDDibenz(a,h)anthracene 3052.9 0ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 528.8 83.8 42.7 132 0443 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 528.8 95.7 48.8 157 0506

Sample ID 1501036-002AMS


Prep Date: 1/7/2015


Units: µg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: BATCH

RunNo: 19008

SeqNo: 379103

MSSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 1,057 108 57.5 16952.8 01,140Chrysene 1,057 95.0 45.2 14652.8 01,000Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1,057 110 42.2 16852.8 01,160Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1,057 101 48 16152.8 01,070Benzo(a)pyrene 1,057 76.7 34.4 17952.8 231.21,040Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1,057 114 41.1 16552.8 01,200Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1,057 111 38.1 16652.8 01,180 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 528.3 97.3 42.7 132514 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 528.3 103 48.8 157547




14 of 16

Date Received: 1/7/2015 2:41:00 PM

Client Name: GEI Work Order Number: 1501042

Sample Log-In Check List

Kerra ZieglerLogged by:

Item Information

How was the sample delivered? Client

Is Chain of Custody complete? Yes No Not Present

Was an attempt made to cool the samples? Yes No NA

Are samples properly preserved? Yes No

Was preservative added to bottles? Yes No NA

Did all samples containers arrive in good condition(unbroken)? Yes No

Does paperwork match bottle labels? Yes No

Are matrices correctly identified on Chain of Custody? Yes No

Is it clear what analyses were requested? Yes No

Is the headspace in the VOA vials? Yes No NA

1.2.

6.

10.11.

12.13.14.

15.16.17. Were all holding times able to be met? Yes No

Chain of Custody

Log In

7. Were all coolers received at a temperature of >0°C to 10.0°C Yes No NA

8. Sample(s) in proper container(s)? Yes No

9. Sufficient sample volume for indicated test(s)? Yes No

Special Handling (if applicable)

18.

19.

Was client notified of all discrepancies with this order? Yes No NA

Person Notified: Date

Regarding:

Via: eMail Phone Fax In Person

Additional remarks:

Client Instructions:

By Whom:

Coolers are present? Yes No NA3.

Shipping container/cooler in good condition? Yes No4.Custody seals intact on shipping container/cooler? Yes No Not Required5.

Item # Temp ºC ConditionCooler 7.7 GoodSample 9.4 Good

Temp Blank 1 9.9 Good

Page 1 of 115 of 16

16 of 16

January 09, 2015






T: (206) 352-3790F: (206) 352-7178

[email protected]


Mike Ridgeway





Sincerely,

President

Diesel and Heavy Oil by NWTPH-Dx/Dx Ext.Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons by EPA Method 8270 (SIM)Sample Moisture (Percent Moisture)


1 of 13



01/09/2015Date:


Lab Order: 1501050



1501050-001 EX9-39 01/08/2015 12:45 PM 01/08/2015 1:31 PM1501050-002 EX10-37 01/08/2015 12:49 PM 01/08/2015 1:31 PM1501050-003 EX11-37 01/08/2015 12:51 PM 01/08/2015 1:31 PM1501050-004 EX12-39 01/08/2015 12:52 PM 01/08/2015 1:31 PM1501050-005 EX13-39 01/08/2015 12:54 PM 01/08/2015 1:31 PM


2 of 13


1/9/2015


Date:

WO#:





3 of 13




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501050-001


Analytical Report

1/9/20151501050

Date Reported:

WO#:


Diesel (Fuel Oil) 1/8/2015 3:57:00 PM21.0 mg/Kg-dry 1NDHeavy Oil 1/8/2015 3:57:00 PM52.5 mg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 3:57:00 PM50-150 %REC 1110 Surr: o-Terphenyl 1/8/2015 3:57:00 PM50-150 %REC 1110


Benz(a)anthracene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1NDChrysene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(b)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(k)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1NDBenzo(a)pyrene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1NDIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1NDDibenz(a,h)anthracene 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM53.2 µg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM42.7-132 %REC 188.0 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 1/8/2015 6:42:00 PM48.8-157 %REC 188.8

Sample Moisture (Percent Moisture) Analyst: KZBatch ID: R19021




4 of 13




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501050-002


Analytical Report

1/9/20151501050

Date Reported:

WO#:




Benz(a)anthracene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 1193Chrysene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 1224Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 1455Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 188.0Benzo(a)pyrene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 1367Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 1224Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM55.7 µg/Kg-dry 1ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM42.7-132 %REC 198.1 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 1/8/2015 7:27:00 PM48.8-157 %REC 1113





5 of 13




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501050-003


Analytical Report

1/9/20151501050

Date Reported:

WO#:









6 of 13




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501050-004


Analytical Report

1/9/20151501050

Date Reported:

WO#:









7 of 13




Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501050-005


Analytical Report

1/9/20151501050

Date Reported:

WO#:









8 of 13


Diesel and Heavy Oil by NWTPH-Dx/Dx Ext.

1/9/2015Date:



Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: mg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: EX9-39

RunNo: 19022

SeqNo: 379282

DUPSampType:

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 3021.2 0NDHeavy Oil 3053.0 0ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 21.19 107 50 150 022.6 Surr: o-Terphenyl 21.19 104 50 150 022.0

Sample ID LCS-9757


Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: mg/Kg

RL

Client ID: LCSS

RunNo: 19022

SeqNo: 379302

LCSSampType:

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 500.0 91.6 65 13520.0 0458 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 20.00 106 50 15021.3 Surr: o-Terphenyl 20.00 126 50 15025.3

Sample ID MB-9757


Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: mg/Kg

RL

Client ID: MBLKS

RunNo: 19022

SeqNo: 379303

MBLKSampType:

Diesel (Fuel Oil) 20.0NDHeavy Oil 50.0ND Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 20.00 104 50 15020.8 Surr: o-Terphenyl 20.00 103 50 15020.6




9 of 13



1/9/2015Date:

Sample ID MB-9758


Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: µg/Kg

RL

Client ID: MBLKS

RunNo: 19020

SeqNo: 379266

MBLKSampType:


Sample ID LCS-9758


Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: µg/Kg

RL

Client ID: LCSS

RunNo: 19020

SeqNo: 379267

LCSSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 1,000 85.6 41.9 13650.0 0856Chrysene 1,000 84.2 51.4 13550.0 0842Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1,000 96.9 39.7 13750.0 0969Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1,000 79.8 45.7 13850.0 0798Benzo(a)pyrene 1,000 95.2 40.9 14150.0 0952Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1,000 79.7 45.4 13750.0 0797Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1,000 84.3 37.6 14050.0 0843 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 500.0 87.0 42.7 132435 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 500.0 83.4 48.8 157417




10 of 13



1/9/2015Date:



Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: µg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: EX9-39

RunNo: 19020

SeqNo: 379269

DUPSampType:




Prep Date: 1/8/2015


Units: µg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: EX10-37

RunNo: 19020

SeqNo: 379271

MSSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 1,101 163 57.5 16955.1 193.01,990Chrysene 1,101 117 45.2 14655.1 223.71,510Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1,101 115 42.2 16855.1 455.11,720Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1,101 124 48 16155.1 87.961,450Benzo(a)pyrene 1,101 125 34.4 17955.1 367.31,750Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1,101 120 41.1 16555.1 223.71,540Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1,101 114 38.1 16655.1 01,250 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 550.7 91.0 42.7 132501 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 550.7 103 48.8 157569




11 of 13

Date Received: 1/8/2015 1:31:00 PM



Kerra ZieglerLogged by:

Item Information











1.2.

6.

10.11.

12.13.14.


Chain of Custody

Log In





18.

19.



Regarding:


Additional remarks:


By Whom:




Page 1 of 112 of 13

13 of 13

January 15, 2015






T: (206) 352-3790F: (206) 352-7178

[email protected]


Mike Ridgeway





Sincerely,

President

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons by EPA Method 8270 (SIM)Sample Moisture (Percent Moisture)




01/15/2015Date:


Lab Order: 1501099



1501099-001 EX14-35 01/14/2015 8:15 AM 01/14/2015 9:40 AM1501099-002 EX15-35 01/14/2015 8:17 AM 01/14/2015 9:40 AM1501099-003 EX16-38 01/14/2015 8:20 AM 01/14/2015 9:40 AM



1/15/2015


Date:

WO#:







Collection Date: 1/14/2015 8:15:00 AM

Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501099-001


Analytical Report

1/15/20151501099

Date Reported:

WO#:




Percent Moisture 1/14/2015 2:09:11 PMwt% 112.0






Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501099-002


Analytical Report

1/15/20151501099

Date Reported:

WO#:










Matrix: Soil


Lab ID: 1501099-003


Analytical Report

1/15/20151501099

Date Reported:

WO#:









1/15/2015Date:

Sample ID MB-9796


Prep Date: 1/14/2015


Units: µg/Kg

RL

Client ID: MBLKS

RunNo: 19116

SeqNo: 381101

MBLKSampType:


Sample ID LCS-9796




Units: µg/Kg

RL

Client ID: LCSS

RunNo: 19116

SeqNo: 381102

LCSSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 1,000 107 41.9 13650.0 01,070Chrysene 1,000 95.2 51.4 13550.0 0952Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1,000 86.0 39.7 13750.0 0860Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1,000 110 45.7 13850.0 01,100Benzo(a)pyrene 1,000 97.1 40.9 14150.0 0971Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1,000 81.3 45.4 13750.0 0813Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1,000 81.2 37.6 14050.0 0812 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 500.0 88.3 42.7 132442 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 500.0 103 48.8 157516






1/15/2015Date:





Units: µg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: EX14-35

RunNo: 19116

SeqNo: 381104

DUPSampType:






Units: µg/Kg-dry

RL

Client ID: EX15-35

RunNo: 19116

SeqNo: 381106

MSSampType:

Benz(a)anthracene 1,065 110 57.5 16953.3 01,170Chrysene 1,065 95.3 45.2 14653.3 01,020Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1,065 87.2 42.2 16853.3 0929Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1,065 107 48 16153.3 01,140Benzo(a)pyrene 1,065 97.1 34.4 17953.3 01,030Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1,065 80.8 41.1 16553.3 0861Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1,065 80.1 38.1 16653.3 0853 Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 532.5 80.1 42.7 132426 Surr: Terphenyl-d14 (surr) 532.5 98.1 48.8 157522




Date Received: 1/14/2015 9:40:00 AM



Clare GriggsLogged by:

Item Information











1.2.

6.

10.11.

12.13.14.


Chain of Custody

Log In





18.

19.



Regarding:


Additional remarks:


By Whom:




Page 1 of 1

APPENDIX D Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use

APPENDIX D REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR USE

This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks with respect to the use of this report.

Read These Provisions Closely

It is important to recognize that the geoscience practices (geotechnical engineering, geology and environmental science) are less exact than other engineering and natural science disciplines. Without this understanding, there may be expectations that could lead to disappointments, claims and disputes. GeoEngineers includes these explanatory “limitations” provisions in our reports to help reduce such risks. Please confer with GeoEngineers if you need to know more about how these “Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use” apply to your project or property.

Environmental Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons and Projects

GeoEngineers has completed this Cleanup Action Report for the Urban Union Property located in Seattle, Washington in general accordance with our Proposal dated August 18, 2014. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of SWB II Seattle, LLC and, its authorized agents and regulatory agencies. This report is not intended for use by others, and the information contained herein is not applicable to other properties.

GeoEngineers structures our services to meet the specific needs of our clients. For example, an environmental study conducted for a property owner may not fulfill the needs of a prospective purchaser of the same property. Because each environmental study is unique, each environmental report is unique, prepared solely for the specific client and property. No one except SWB II Seattle, LLC and its authorized agents and regulatory agencies should rely on this environmental report without first conferring with GeoEngineers. Use of this report is not recommended for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated.

This Environmental Report is Based on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors

This report has been prepared for the Urban Union property (Property) located in Seattle, Washington. GeoEngineers considered a number of unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of services for this project and report. Unless GeoEngineers specifically indicates otherwise, it is important not to rely on this report if it was:

■ not prepared for you,

■ not prepared for your project,

■ not prepared for the specific site explored, or

■ completed before important project changes were made.

If important changes are made to the project or property after the date of this report, we recommend that GeoEngineers be given the opportunity to review our interpretations and recommendations. Based on that review, we can provide written modifications or confirmation, as appropriate.

May 8, 2015| Page D-1 File No. 1460-053-03

Reliance Conditions for Third Parties

This report was prepared for the exclusive use of our Client. No other party may rely on the product of our services unless we agree to such reliance in advance and in writing. This is to provide our firm with reasonable protection against open-ended liability claims by third parties with whom there would otherwise be no contractual limits to their actions. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with our Agreement with the Client and generally accepted environmental practices in this area at the time this report was prepared.

Historical Information Provided By Others

GeoEngineers makes no warranties or guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of information provided by others. The information presented in this report is based on the above-described research. GeoEngineers has relied upon information provided by others in our descriptions of historical conditions and in our review of regulatory databases and files. The available data do not provide definitive information with regard to all past uses, operations or incidents at the property or adjacent properties.

Uncertainty May Remain Even After This Study is Completed

No study can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for environmental conditions or contamination in connection with a property. There is always a potential that areas with contamination that were not identified during this study exist at the site or in the project area. Our interpretation of subsurface conditions in this study is based on field observations and chemical analytical data from widely-spaced sampling locations. It is always possible that contamination exists in areas that were not explored, sampled or analyzed.

Environmental Regulations Are Always Evolving

Some substances may be present in the vicinity of the Property in quantities or under conditions that may have led, or may lead, to contamination of the Property, but are not included in current local, state or federal regulatory definitions of hazardous substances or do not otherwise present current potential liability. GeoEngineers cannot be responsible if the standards for appropriate inquiry, or regulatory definitions of hazardous substances, change or if more stringent environmental standards are developed in the future.

Subsurface Conditions Can Change

This environmental report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. The findings and conclusions of this report may be affected by the passage of time, by man-made events such as construction on or adjacent to the Property, by new releases of hazardous substances, or by natural events such as floods, earthquakes, slope instability or groundwater fluctuations. Please contact GeoEngineers before applying this report for its intended purpose so that GeoEngineers may evaluate whether changed conditions affect the continued applicability of the report.

Soil and Groundwater End Use

The cleanup levels referenced in this report are site- and situation-specific. The cleanup levels may not be applicable for other properties or for other on-site uses of the affected soil and/or groundwater. Note that hazardous substances may be present in some of the on-site soil and/or groundwater at detectable concentrations that are less than the referenced cleanup levels. GeoEngineers should be contacted prior to the export of soil or groundwater from the subject property or reuse of the affected soil or groundwater

May 8, 2015| Page D-2 File No. 1460-053-03

on-site to evaluate the potential for associated environmental liabilities. We are unable to assume responsibility for potential environmental liability arising out of the transfer of soil and/or groundwater from the Property to another location or its reuse on-site in instances that we did not know or could not control.

Most Environmental Findings Are Professional Opinions

Our interpretations of subsurface conditions are based on field observations and chemical analytical data from widely spaced sampling locations at the Property. Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoEngineers reviewed field and laboratory data and then applied our professional judgment to render an informed opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the Property. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from those indicated in this report. Our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions.

Biological Pollutants

GeoEngineers’ Scope of Work specifically excludes the investigation, detection, prevention or assessment of the presence of Biological Pollutants. Accordingly, this report does not include any interpretations, recommendations, findings or conclusions regarding the detecting, assessing, preventing or abating of Biological Pollutants, and no conclusions or inferences should be drawn regarding Biological Pollutants as they may relate to this project. The term “Biological Pollutants” includes, but is not limited to, molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and viruses, and/or any of their byproducts.

A Client that desires these specialized services is advised to obtain them from a consultant who offers services in this specialized field.

May 8, 2015| Page D-3 File No. 1460-053-03

Have we delivered World Class Client Service?

Please let us know by visiting www.geoengineers.com/feedback.

cleanup action report - wa

Documents