M190044, GEH Response to NRC Request for Additional Information

GEH Response to NRC Request for Additional Information

ML19057A466
Person / Time
Site:	Vallecitos, Vallecitos Nuclear Center
Issue date:	02/26/2019
From:	Murray S GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
To:	Jack Parrott Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
M190044
Download: ML19057A466 (159)

Text

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy

• HITACHI Scott P. Murray Manager, Facility Licensing 3901 Castle Hayne Road P.O. Box780 M190044 Wilmington, NC 28402 USA February 26, 2019 T (910) 819-5950 scott.murray@ ge.com Jack D. Parrott, Senior Project Manager Reactor Decommissioning Branch Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 ATTN: Document Control Desk

Subject:

GEH Response to NRC Request for Additional Information

References:

1} NRC License DPR-1, Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor (VBWR}, Docket 50-18 2} NRC License DR-10, ESADA Vallecitos Experimental Superheat Reactor (EVESR}, Docket 50-183 3} Letter, D.J. Heckman (GEH} to NRC Document Control Desk, "Unconditional Release of Route 84 Frontage Section of Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC}

Site, 12/14/18 4} E-mail, J.D. Parrott (NRC} to S.P. Murray (GEH} "VBWR & EVESR Acceptance of Partial Site Release and Request for Additional Information",

2/26/19

Dear Mr. Parrott:

Per your request (Reference 4}, attached to this letter is a copy of the Baseline Environmental Consulting soil investigation report.

Please contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further.

w.

Sincerely, Scott P. Murray, Manager Facility Licensing

Attachment:

Baseline Environmental Consulting, Hazardous Materials Soil Investigation, November 2018. SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvements Project: GE-Hitachi Parcels 096-0350-001-07 and 096-0350-001-02.

Cc: SPM 19-006

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SOIL INVESTIGATION NOVEMBER 2018 SR 84 EXPRESSWAY WIDENING AND SR 84/1-680 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT:

GE-HITACHI PARCELS 096-0350-001-07 AND 096-0350-001-02 FOR:

Alameda County Transportation Commission 18301-00.02592 5900 Hollis Street. Suite D. Emeryville, CA 94608 I P: (510) 420-8686 I www.baseline-env.com

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SOIL INVESTIGATION NOVEMBER 2018 SR 84 EXPRESSWAY WIDENING AND SR 84/1-680 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT:

GE-HITACHI PARCELS 096-0350-001-07 AND 096-0350-00 1-02 FOR:

Alameda County

. Transportation Commission 18301-00.02592 Baseline ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 5900 Hollis Street, Suite D. Emeryville, CA 94608 1 P: (510) 420-8686 I www.baseline-env.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1

2. Background ......................................................................................................................,. ........ 1

3. Contaminants of Concern ......................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Radiological Materials ...................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Title 22 Metals .................................................................................................................. 2

4. Field Activities ........................................................................................................................... 3

5. Laboratory Analyses .................................................................................................................. 3

6. Evaluation of Results ................................................................................................................. 4 6.1 Radiological Materials ...................................................................................................... 4 6.2 Title 22 Metals .................................................................................................................. 6

7. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 6

8. Limitations................................................................................................................................. 7

9. References ................................................................................................................................ 7 APPENDICES A: 2015 GE-Hitachi Radiological Survey Report B: 2016 Initial Site Assessment C: Laboratory Analytical Reports D: ProUCL Statistical Analysis Output Files FIGURES 1: Project Overview 2: Soil Sample Locations TABLES 1: Soil Analytical Results for Radiological Materials (pCi/g) 2: Soil Analytical Results for Title 22 Metals (mg/kg) ill 18301-00.02592.GE Soillnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SOILS INVESTIGATION SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvements Project:

GE-Hitachi Parcels 096-0350-001-07 and 096-0350-001-02

1. INTRODUCTION The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), in cooperation with the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC), is proposing the "SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvements Project" (project) to widen and conform State Route (SR) 84 to expressway standards between south of Ruby Hill Drive and the Interstate 680 (1-680) interchange, among other improvements. The project is proposing to acquire a portion of the Vallecitos Nuclear Center property (APNs 096-0350-001-07 and 096-0350-001-02), located at 6705 Vallecitos Road in Sunol, California (Figure 1), which is currently owned by GE-Hitachi.

Baseline Environmental Consulting (Baseline), under subcontract to AECOM, has prepared this report documenting the activities and findings of a Hazardous Materials Soils Investigation in support of the proposed partial acquisition of the GE-Hitachi parcels. Most of the property acquisition is located on APN 096-0350-001-07; therefore, this investigation focused on that parcel. Soil testing for radiological materials and Title 22 metals was performed to support the release of the property from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's license, in accordance with 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 50.83. Based on a previous investigation to support the release of property on the north side of the GE-Hitachi facility (Appendix A) and coordination with GE-Hitachi staff, a total of 16 surface soil samples were collected within the parcel (APN 096-0350-001-07) at depths between 0 and 6 inches.

2. BACKGROUND The GE-Hitachi facility has used radioactive materials for nuclear fuel research and the production of radio-isotopes for medical and other uses since about the 1950s (Appendix A).

While much of the reactor-related activities have ceased, one reactor remains operational. Of the 1,600 acres owned by GE-Hitachi, the proposed project would acquire about 7 acres of the property located on undeveloped grasslands adjacent to SR 84. The nearest facility improvements to the proposed project include four wastewater retention basins in the southwest corner of the parcel, which are connected to a sprinkler irrigation system in a field to the east (Figure 1). *

• In 2015, a radiological survey was conducted on the GE-Hitachi property to the north of the facility to release 610 acres of the property from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's license restrictions. Surface soil samples were collected from lllocations and analyzed for 1

18301-00.02592.GE Solllnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

gross alpha and gross beta activity. The gross alpha and gross beta results were compared to screening levels for background concentrations recommended by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (2008). These screening levels were based on samples collected and analyzed at the LLNL facility located approximately 8 miles northwest of the GE-Hitachi facility.

While one of the gross beta results from the GE-Hitachi radiological 2015 survey was above the recommended background screening level, the level was well below results accepted and used to statistically calculate the background levels at the LLNL facility. Therefore, the results were considered consistent with natural background levels characteristic of the area. A gamma spectroscopy was also performed on the three soil samples with the highest alpha and beta activity. The analysis confirmed that no non-naturally occurring isotopes were present in surface soils above background levels (Appendix A).

In 2016, an Initial Site Assessment (ISA) was prepared for the project to identify and evaluate the level of risk associated with hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and/or contamination within the project area that could potentially be disturbed during the proposed construction activities. According to the ISA, there have been no documented releases of hazardous materials on the portions of the GE-Hitachi property that would be acquired for the proposed project (Appendix B).

3. CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN 3.1 Radiological Materials The primary radionuclides of concern are fission products, such as cesium-137, which are produced after a large atomic nucleus undergoes nuclear fission. These fission products then release additional energy in the form of beta particles and gamma radiation. While less likely to be released, heavier radionuclides used in nuclear reactors, such as uranium, release energy in the form of alpha particles and gamma radiation.

Because the area proposed for acquisition is located hydraulically downgradient of the facility where radiological materials are handled, undocumented releases of radiological materials (if any) to the ground surface could potentially migrate to the proposed project area via surface water runoff. Surface water runoff could be generated by rainfall events and/or operation of the facility's wastewater sprinkler irrigation system, which is located in the southwest portion of the facility and immediately upgradient to the north of the proposed project area (Figure 1).

Alternatively, undocumented releases of radiological materials (if any) to the atmosphere could have resulted in aerial deposition to surface soils around the facility.

3.2 Title 22 Metals Sanitary sewer water, stormwater, and industrial wastewater from the GE-Hitachi facility are collected in four retention basins located on the southwest portion of the facility, which then discharge to the ground surface through a sprinkler irrigation system to the east of the retention basins (Figure 1). Because the proposed project is located hydraulically downgradient of the sprinkler irrigation system, elevated concentrations of metals from the wastewater 2

18301-00.02592.GE Solllnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

discharge (if any) could potentially have migrated to the proposed project area from surface water runoff.

4. FIELD ACTIVITIES All soil investigation activities were performed in accordance with a scope of work submitted to GE-Hitachi in June 2018 (Baseline, 2018) and a project-specific health and safety plan prepared by Baseline. In July 2018, Baseline collected 16 surface soil samples at depths of between 0 and 6 inches and analyzed them for the contaminants of potential concern: radiological materials and Title 22 metals. Prior to sample collection, Baseline cleared all proposed sampling locations in accordance with Underground Service Alert requirements. As shown in Figure 2, soil samples were collected at the following locations:

• Five systematic random locations (SOl through SOS) spaced about 1,300 feet apart;

• Four locations (S06 through S09) in apparent low-lying areas where potentially contaminated sediments are more likely to accumulate due to surface water runoff;

• One location (SlO) near the entrance to the facility; and

• Six additional locations (Sll through S16) selected by Baseline in the field based on field conditions (i.e., additional low-lying areas and drainage channels observed).

All soil sample locations were surveyed in the field using a portable GPS unit (Trimble GeoExplorer 7X). The soil samples were manually collected in new stainless steel tubes using a slide hammer or a hand auger. Soil samples were labeled and stored in a chilled container immediately following collection. Each sample was labeled with the project name, date and time of sample collection, sampler initial, and unique sample identification. All sampling equipment was decontaminated between sample collections by brushing away any soil adhering to the surface of the equipment.

To help g1:.1ide the sampling effort and to provide real time health and safety exposure data, surface scans for ambient gamma radiation levels and measurements of gamma radiation levels at the soil sample locations were performed by Baseline using portable instruments provided by GE-Hitachi (Eberline E-120 and PRM-7). The field radiation levels were all within levels considered by GE-Hitachi staff as background for their property (between 5 and 10 microrem per hour for the PRM-7 and 0.01 and 0.08 counts per minute for the E-120). In addition to field gamma measurements, GE-Hitachi provided digital dosimeters (DMC 2000) to measure potential radiation exposure of Baseline staff during sampling. The digital dosimeters did not detect measureable radiation throughout sampling.

5. LABORATORY ANALYSES The soil samples were submitted to Enthalpy Analytical in Berkeley, California, a certified analytical laboratory for metals analysis. All analyses for radiological materials were 3

18301-00.02592.GE Soillnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

subcontracted by Enthalpy Analytical to GEL Laboratories LLC, in Charleston, South Carolina, a certified analytical laboratory.

The 16 soil samples collected from locations SOl through Sl6 were analyzed for gross alpha and beta activity by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency {USEPA) Methods 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 7110B Modified. A gamma spectroscopy analysis was then performed by U.S.

Department of Energy Methods HASL 300, 4.5.2.3/Ga-01-R on two of the samples with the highest gross beta activity (locations S09 and SlO) and one of the samples with the highest alpha activity (location 502). Three of the soil samples collected from locations SOl, S06, and S11 that were downgradient and south of the facility's sprinkler irrigation system were also analyzed for Title 22 metals {USEPA Methods 6010B/7471A). Baseline reviewed the laboratory analytical reports to ensure the reliability of the results. Copies of the laboratory analytical reports are included in Appendix C.

6. EVALUATION OF RESULTS 6.1 Radiological Materials The analytical results from the 16 soil samples (locations SOl through Sl6) analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity are summarized in Table 1. These results were combined with the 11 soil samples results from the 2015 radiological survey conducted on the north side of the GE-Hitachi facility (Appendix A), which were previously determined to be representative of background radiation levels. The purpose of combining the 27 soils samples was to compare the distribution of results and statistically evaluate if radiation levels in the project area are also representative of background levels.

The distributions of gross alpha and gross beta results from all 27 soil samples were first analyzed on quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plots to visually identify potential data outliers that could represent localized areas of elevated radiation in the project area, also referred to as "hot spots." Any identified hot spot samples were then analyzed by gamma spectroscopy to determine if non-naturally occurring isotopes are present. The one-tailed 95th percentile upper confidence limits {95% UCLs) for the mean gross alpha and gross beta levels were then calculated using the USEPA's ProUCL version 5.1 software and the results were compared to the LLNL's recommend background screening levels. The statistical outputs are included in Appendix D.

As shown below, the gross alpha data appears to have a normal distribution and there do not appear to be any data outliers, which indicates that samples collected from the project area are generally consistent with the background gross alpha levels reported during the 2015 radiological survey. Based on a normal distribution, the 95% UCL for the gross alpha levels from the 27 soil samples on the GE-Hitachi property is about 10.8 picocuries per gram {pCi/g), which is below the LLNL's recommended background screening level of 11 pCi/g {LLNL, 2008). To be conservative, a gamma spectroscopy was performed on the soil sample with highest gross alpha level, which was collected from location S02 (Figure 2). Based on the gamma results, 4

18301-00.02592.GE Soillnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

there were no elevated levels of non-naturally occurring isotopes such as cesium-137, which was not detected above the laboratory reporting limit of 0.100 pCi/g (Table 1).

- -~-Q* - Plot

--- for GrQss Alpha Samples

• 1.8 *1.2 ~.& 00

---

~------~-----__j 0.6 12 1.8 Theoretical Quantiles (standard Normal)

As shown below, the gross beta data also appears to have a normal distribution, except for two samples with elevated gross beta levels collected from locations 509 and 510 (Figure 2) in the project area that appear to be data outliers. The potential data outliers were confirmec;l using the Rosner outlier test procedure in ProUCL (Appendix D). The gross beta levels reported at locations 509 and 510 were 33.2 and 37.9 pCi/g, respectively. Because these two data outliers are statistically unique relative to the other 25 soil samples collected on the GE-Hitachi property, they are evaluated separately, below. The gross beta levels of the remaining 25 soil samples were evaluated based on their normal distribution of gross beta levels. The 95% UCL for the gross beta levels on the GE-Hitachi property is about 13.4 pCi/g, which is below the LLNL's recommended background screening level of 21 pCi/g (LLNL, 2008).

A gamma spectroscopy was performed on the two soil samples with elevated gross beta levels collected from locations 509 and 510 (Figure 2). Based on the gamma results, there were no elevated levels of non-naturally occurring isotopes at sample locations 509 and 510. At sample loca~ion 509, cesium-137 was not detected above the laborat<?ry reporting limit of 0.100 pCi/g.

At sample location 510, cesium-137 was reported slightly above the laboratory reporting limit at a level of 0.105 pCi/g. This level is well below the National Council of Radiation Protection and Measurements (1999) recommended residential and construction worker screening limits of 5.4 pCi/g and 12.6 pCi/g, respectively (Table 1). Because sample locations 509 and 510 were 5

18301*00.02592.GE Solllnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

in drainage swales, the elevated gross beta levels in these areas may be due to the accumulation of sediments affected by background radiation sources {naturally-occurring isotopes and atmospheric fallout).

Q-Q Plot for Gross Beta Samples Data Outliers ao g ' 25 0

a.

I'll 11 ID 20 e

(!)

16 10 ..

5

• 1.2 -o,& 0.0 0,8 1.2 1.8 Theoretical QuantOes (standard Normal) 6.2 Title 22 Metals The three soil samples analyzed for Title 22 metals from locations SOl, S06, and Sll had concentrations of metals reported above the laboratory reporting limits {Table 2). All concentrations of metals were reported below the applicable California and federal hazardous waste criteria, as well as the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (2016)

Construction Worker Environmental Screening Levels. Therefore, soils in the project area downgradient from the GE-Hitachi sprinkler irrigation system for wastewater discharges would not be considered a hazardous waste, once excavated, and would not pose a health risk to construction workers.

7. CONCLUSIONS Based on the analytical results and statistical analyses, gross alpha and gross beta levels reported in soil samples collected from the project area appear to be representative of background levels and no elevated levels of non-naturally occurring isotopes (e.g., cesium-137) were reported. In addition, soil concentrations of Title 22 metals were below the applicable hazardous waste thresholds and construction worker ESLs. Therefore, soils in the project area 6

18301-00.02592.GE Soillnvestlgatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

do not appear to be affected by radiological materials or metals associated with operation of the GE-Hitachi facility and would not be expected to pose a health risk to construction workers or the environment.

8. LIMITATIONS This Hazardous Materials Soil Investigation has been conducted for AECOM for the use of AECOM, Alameda CTC, and Caltrans in development of the proposed project. Baseline's objective is to perform our work with care, exercising the customary thoroughness and competence of earth science, environmental, and engineering consulting professionals, in accordance with the standard for professional services for a consulting firm at the time these services were provided. It is important to recognize that even the most comprehensive scope of services may fail to detect environmental conditions and potential liability at a particular site.

Therefore, Baseline cannot act as insurers and cannot "certify or underwrite" that a site is free of environmental contamination, and no expressed or implied representation or warranty is included or intended in this report except that the work was performed within the limits prescribed with the customary thoroughness and competence of our profession.

The passage of time, manifestation of latent conditions, or occurrence of future events may require further exploration at the project site, analysis of the data, and re-evaluation of the findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this report. The findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations expressed by Baseline in this report are limited by the scope of services and should not be considered an opinion concerning the compliance of any past or current owner or operator of the project site with any federal, state, or local law or regulation. No warranty or guarantee, whether expressed or implied is made with respect to the data reported or findings, observations, and conclusions expressed in this report.

9. REFERENCES Baseline Environmental Consulting (Baseline), 2016. Initial Site Assessment, SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvement Project, Alameda County. August 1.

Baseline, 2018. Hazardous Materials Survey Plan, SR-84 Widening and SR-84/1-680 Interchange Improvements Project, GE-Hitachi Parcels: Assessor's Parcel Numbers 096-0350-001-07 and 096-0350-001-02. June 29.

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, 2015. Release of North Section of Vallecitos, California Site. April.

Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), 2008. Background Values of Gross Alpha and Gross Beta in Soil for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Lawrence. March.

National Council of Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), 1999. Recommended Screening Limits for Contaminated Surface soil and Review of Factors Relevant to Site-Specific Studies. NCRP Report No. 129. January 29.

7 18301-00.02592.GE Soillnvestigation.Final.doc-11/8/18

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board), 2016.

Environmental Screening Levels (a Microsoft 2010 Excel file). Table S-1: Soil Direct Exposure Human Health Risk Screening Levels. February.

8 18301-00.02592.GE Soillnvestigatlon.Final.doc-11/8/18

FIGURES PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1 Legend

- Proposed Right-of-Way

-- ---- Proposed Construction Easement

- Existing Parcel Boundary 700 0

~700ft SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvement Project Alameda County

[e) ~

Figure 2 Legend

- Proposed Right-of-Way

• • • • Proposed Construction Easement

- Existing Parcel Boundary e Soil Sample Location 100 0

~

100ft SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvement Project Alameda County If] ~

Pagelof4

SOIL SAMPLE*LOCATIONS Figure 2 Legend

- Proposed Right-of-Way

--** Proposed Construction Easement

- Existing Parcel Boundary e Soli Sample Location 100 0

~

100ft SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvement Project Alameda County

[:e:J~

Page2of4

Figure 2 Legend

- Proposed Right-of-Way

--*- Proposed Construr::tton Easement

- Existing Parcel Boundary e Soli Sample location 100 0

~

100ft SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 lnterch~nge Improvement Project Alameda County

[li~

C.'\lhln\IASWN~\I'Nfldi\IIJD1<<JWMKSl~GlSdi~ - OI *liHCHI Page3of4

SOIL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Figure 2 Legend

- Proposed Right-of-Way

-*** Proposed Construction Easement

- Existing Parcel Boundary e Soli Sample Location 100 0

~

100ft SR 84 Expressway Widening and SR 84/1-680 Interchange Improvement Project Alameda County G!l ~

C;\UMINoASfUff~..,..._.\SGD1<<1WUHSI141J.41D\Ga\DG1SGls.tf~

• GS *I0->>11 Page4of4

TABLES Table 1: Soil Analytical Results for Radiological Materials (pCi/g)

- 1 Sample 10 Date Gross Alflha Gross Beta Cesiur:n-137 S01;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 10.5 16.2 -

S02;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 14.8 12.5 <0.100 S03;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 10.3 8.60 -

504;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 8.00 8.13 -

S05;0.0-0.5 7/19/i018 8.95 13.3 -

S06;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 7.34 10.8 --

S07;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 14.3 13.7 -

S08;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 14.4 16.7 --

S09;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 8.06 33.2 <0.100

' Sl0;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 11.9 37.9 0.105 Sll;0.0-0.5 7/19/2_018 7.12 6.19 --

S12;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 6.38 9.33 -

S13;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 9.5 19.7 -

S14;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 14 12.3 -

S15;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 12.2 12.9 -

S16;0.0-0.5 7/19/2018 13.3 15.3 -

2 3 95% UCL 10.8 13.4 -

LLNL B~ckground Screening Limit 11 21 NV NCRP Residential Screening Limit NV NV 5.4 NCRP Construction Worker Screening Limit NV NV 12.6 Notes:

Samples were analyzed for gross alpha and beta activity by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Methods 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 7110B Modified and gamma spectroscopy by U.S. Department of Energy Methods HASL 300, 4.5.2.3/Ga-01-R.

1 Results for other isotopes included the laboratory analytical report (Appendix B).

2 Includes samples from 2015 .GE-Hitachi Radiological Survey Report (Appendix A).

3 Excludes two data outliers (samples S09:0.0-0.5 and S10;0.0-0.S).

Abbreviations:

<X?< = indicates constituent was not identified at or above the laboratory reporting limit of xx

- = not analyzed pCi/g = picocuries per gram 95% UCL =95th percentile upper confidence limit LLNL =Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory NCRP = National Council of Radiation Protection and Measurements

References:

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2008. Background Values of Gross Alpha and Gross Beta in Soil for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Lawrence. March.

National Council of Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), 1999. Recommended Screening Limits for Contaminated Surface soil and Review of Factors Relevant to Site-Specific Studies. NCRP Report No. 129. January 29.

18301-00.02592 Summary Tables.xlsx Page 1 of1

Table 2: Soil Analytical Results for Title 22 Metals (mg/kg)

-- - I I

I I

I I

I I ..

I :I II

' E

I I

I I

I

-~

> I E I E E

I I  :

~-

F. E l iE

• 1' E I

~

'C '* "' I e

.i , -c  ::s* _ :e.::t l a*e 1* -

I e . ~

~-...

1 & -a  : ~

"IQ

' 'ii * -c

s

u

!ca -

~

' ~ i ~ "a' I ~D.

I 1 f ca cu o it ..!!! > .c aI :1""5.

1 A

l *!;"

I . ,E;. 5 ' a Jl

.z ~

1

.! -I i Il ,Jt . li 1. iE Sar11ple If) Salt!ple Date . l ' II' I I L 8 I i t I 501;0.0-0.5 7/19/18 <2.0 2.7 220 0.36 <0.26 35 6.6 16 12 0.024 <0.26 34 <2.0 <0.26 <0.52 23 32 506;0.0-0.5 7/19/18 <1.9 3.0 160 0.26 <0.23 30 12 11 9.3 0.026 <0.23 34 <1.9 <0.23 <0.47 21 41 511;0.0-0.5 7/19/18 <2.0 4.2 130 0.31 <0.26 48 11 9.5 8.8 <0.018 <0.26 40 <2.0 <0.26 <0.52 27 41 TTLC (mg/kg) 500 500 10,000 75 100 2,500 8,000 2,500 1,000 20 3,500 2,000 100 500 700 2,400 5,000 STLC (mg/L) 15 5.0 100 0.75 1.0 560 80 25 5.0 0.2 350 20 1.0 5.0 7.0 24 250 TCLP Threshold (mg/L) NV 5.0 100 NV 1.0 5.0 NV NV 5.0 0.2 NV NV 1.0 5.0 NV NV NV Construction Worker E5Ls (mg/kg) 140 11 2 3,000 42 43 530,000 28 14,000 160 44 1,800 86 1,700 1,800 3.5 470 110,000 Notes:

Samples were analyzed for Title 22 metals in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Methods 6010B and 7471A.

Results do not meet the following criteria:

- Concentration <!: TTLC

-Theoretical soluble concentration (total concentration x 10) <!:the STLC

-Theoretical soluble concentration (total concentration x 20) <!:the TCLP

-Concentration <!: Construction Worker ESLs 1

Total chromium values are presumed to be representative of chromium-Ill and not chromium-VI.

2 In accordance with guidance from Regional Water Board, the upper 99th percentile estimate of the naturally-occurring background arsenic concentrations reported by Duverge (2011) in the San Francisco Bay Area was substituted for the risk-based ESL.

Abbreviations:

<xx = indicates constituent was not identified at or above the laboratory reporting limit of xx Title 22 =the 17 inorganic compounds listed under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram mg/L = milligrams per liter NV= no value ESL = Environmental Screening Level (Regional Water Board, 2016)

TTLC =Total Threshold Limit Concentration STLC = Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration TCLP =Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

Reference:

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board), 2016. Environmental Screening Levels (a Microsoft 2010 Excel file). Table S-1: Soil Direct Exposure Human Health Risk Screening Levels. February.

18301-00.02592 Summary Tables.xlsx Page 1 ofl

APPENDICES (In PDF Format)

A: 2015 GE-Hitachi Radiological Survey Report B: 2016 Initial Site Assessment

(;: Laboratory Analytical Reports D: ProUCL Statistical Analysis Output Files

APPENDIX A 2015 GE-Hitachi Radiological Survey Report

• HITACHI .GEH 3901 Castle Hayne R9ad Wilmington, NC 28402.

APn12015 Release of North Section of Vallecitos, Calif()rnia Site Written By: Earl Saito Ph.D.; EHS Manag$r ReVIewed By; Scott Murray CHP; FacilitY Liceh$ln9

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 Apri12015 Page 2 of 18 Executive Summary:

Vallecitos Nuclear Center {VNC}, located at 6705 Vallecitos Road Sunol, California is an approximately 1600 acre site, of which only approximately 135 acres have ever been used for principal activities. GEH operates VNC as a research and development facility licensed under 10 CFR 50 and 70 as well as a State of California radioactive material license. VNC has never used the northern approximately 61 0 acres for principal activities and plans to remove reference to this section of the site in order to allow sale to a non-GE controlled entity. The areas identified as Areas C1 and C2 have undergone an environmental assessment including limited sampling to support the sale. GEH has also reviewed site history and operations to determine that Areas C1 and C2 are non-impacted areas and will be released without any limitations or conditions as defined in applicable regulations.

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 3 of 18 Overview:

The primary purpose of the GE- Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC (GEH) Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC) was to provide research and development and engineering studies of Boiling Water Reactors and their fuel. Over time, much of the reactor related activities have ceased leaving only R-33 Nuclear Test Reactor (NTR) still in operation while DPR-1 Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor (VBWR), TR-1 GE Test Reactor (GETR), DR-1 0 Empire State Atomic Development Agency Vallecitos Experimental Superheat Reactor (EVESR) are all in SAFSTOR. The principal activity currently performed on site is the by-product material activities covered under the State of California license CA-0017-01 including sealed source manufacture and research and development.

VNC is located near the center of the Pleasanton quadrangle of Alameda County, California. The site is east of San Francisco Bay, approximately 35 air miles east-southeast of San Francisco and 20 air miles north of San Jose. The site is indicated on the area map, Figure 1. The properties surrounding the site are primarily used for agriculture and cattle raising, with some residences, which are mostly to the west of the property. The nearest sizeable towns are Pleasanton located 4.1 miles to the north-northwest and Livermore located 6.2 miles to the northeast.

The site is on the north side of Vallecitos Road (State Route 84), which is a two and four-lane paved highway. A Union Pacific railroad line lies about two miles west of the site. There is light industrial activity within a 10-mile radius of the plant. San Jose (20 miles south), Oakland (30 miles northwest) and San Francisco (35 miles northwest) are major industrial centers.

The property boundary, which has not changed since the original property purchase in 1956, is fenced and posted "No Trespassing". A security gate at the entrance provides access control to the active area of the site.

The site is located in the Livermore Upland physiographic area. The majority of the site is undeveloped with hills ranging in elevation from approximately 400 to 1,200 feet above mean sea level. Approximately 135 acres located in the southwest comer of the property and situated between the 400 and 600-foot topographic contours are developed. The property on which the buildings are located slopes to the southwest and is drained by ditches leading to Vallecitos Creek. This creek discharges to Arroyo de Ia Laguna near the north end of Sunol Valley, two or three miles southwest of the property.

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page4of18

. FIGURE1 Area Map (Not to Exact Scale)

~

f L:.-.*ermun*.

~.tnl-r.uldS&:"t.* <;tocl..h*~

.l'urpotr~

Pleasa[lt\ln

'I 1

• t.Uvtl4ol : ~

1. LJUN.* j

\'nllecito~ 1\'uclear Ct!nter Va'~ecitos Road {l-lighway$1 GEH Class I Public lnfonnation

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 5 of 18 Methodology:

Because VBWR was licensed as a power reactor and EVESR has similar possession only license conditions , a 10CFR50.83 release request will be followed. Other licenses have different requirements, but the 50.83 requirements are bounding and should sufficiently demonstrate the adequacy of the release. For the purpose of this report, the requirements from 10CFR50.83 are presented in italics at the beginning of each section. Then a description, encompassing both VBWR and EVESR possession only reactor facilities at VNC, is provided on how that requirement is met.

Section 1: (a)(1) Evaluate the effect of releasing the property to ensure that-(i) The dose to Individual members of the public does not exceed the limits and standards of 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart D; The reactors in question have permanently ceased operations and are being maintained in a possession only SAFSTOR status. Direct dose measurements in and around Area C have all been consistent with background (Ref. 4, 5 and 6).

(il) There is no reduction in the effectiveness of emergency planning or physical security; The areas being released are not part of emergency planning and are not referenced in the plan.

Administrative update will be made to the security plan where the current total site area of 1,600 acres is listed. Removing the reference to the number of acres will not reduce the effectiveness of the plan.

(Ill) Effluent releases remain within license conditions; The reactors in question are being maintained in a possession only SAFSTOR status with limited air emissions and Areas C1 and C2 are uphill from principal site activities so no liquid surface effluents would impact them (Figure 2).

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 Apri12015 Page 6 of18 Figure 2: Topographical map of VNC. Note the higher elevation north of the active area of the site.

(iv) The environmental monitoring program and offsite dose calculation manual are revised to account for the changes; The reactors in question are being maintained in a possession only SAFSTOR status. The site monitoring plan has been updated to move samples in Area C to areas of the site that will be retained. In addition, the air monitoring from NTR was confirmed to be sufficient as documented in an associated License Amendment Request for NTR in letterTAC 15-002, from Tom Caine to US NRC dated February 16, 2015 (Ref 3).

(v) The siting criteria of 10 CFR Part 100 continue to be met; The reactors in question are being maintained in a possession only SAFSTOR status. The criteria are being met.

(vi) All other applicable statutory and regulatory requirements continue to be met Yes.

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 Aprll2015 P~ge7 of18 Sect/em 2: (a)(2) Perform a his.torica_/ s;te E~.ssessment of the part of the ~cility or site to be relea$ed; VNC is loqated neat the _center of the Pleasanton quadrangle of Alamedtl County, California. The site is east of Sa11 Francisco Bay, approximately 35 ~ir miles ~st-southea~ of San Francisco and 20 air mileS north of San Jose. The pJ;Opertles surtaundlng th,!! site a~ prtm~ly used for agricultu~ ahd cattle raising, With some residences, whic;h are mostly to the west of the propertY.

GEH has decided to divest aJ)proximately 610 acres in an unused portion of ttie site shown as Area C in Figure 3. Area b is further btoken down into two areas C1 and C2. Area C consists generally of undeveloped lani:l and is currently used for cattle grazing. The land has not been-ustKt (or prOcessing or stora~e of radioactive material.

Rgure 3: Overhead. View ofVNP S~ 'ayout GEH ClasS I Public lnfoi'rn8tion

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 8 of 18 An Environmental Assessment was conducted by Brown and Caldwell (BC) for Area C (Ref. 1). The results of the assessment were:

Recognized Environmental Conditions

• No adverse or recognized environmental conditions were identified on the Site.

• One recognized environmental condition (GE Vallecitos Nuclear Center) has been identified within one-half mile of the Site.

Environmental Concerns No environmental concerns were found on the Site.

Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions No Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions were found on the Site based on the review of aerial photographs and the EDR [Environmental Data Resources] Report.

Consistent with the MARSSIM approach (NUREG-1575 Section 2.2.5) the site has been determined to be non-impacted. The categorization decision is based on four sources of information: visual inspection, historical records review, process knowledge, and the results of sentinel measurements.

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Paget of18

1) Visuallnspection:

Figure 4: Current Site Boundary to Area C. Fence of golf driving range located north west of property seen on rfghl Figure~: Near C2 towaJd the Vallecltoi operations.

GE;H Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 10 of 18 Field observations in the Brown and Caldwell Environmental Site Assessment did not note any indications of industrial materials.

2) Historical Record:

The site history, as documented in Brown and Caldwell's (BC) Environmental Site Assessment of the VNC Site Ref. 1, did not indicate the presence of any radioactive material.

Brown and Caldwell's (BC) Environmental Site Assessment, Section 4.1 Historical Use Information As no historical records were found specific to the Target Property, BC has reviewed the information provided in the EDR Report for the site. Based on information obtained during interviews with site personnel at the Vallecitos Nuclear Center, the Site has been maintained as an open range with cattle grazing since it was purchased by GE-H in the 1950s.

In addition a review of historical site aerial photographs concluded:

No environmental concerns, REGs [Recognized Environmental Conditions], or HRECs [Historic Recognized Environmental Conditions] were observed in BC's review of historical aerial photographs.

Further GEH review of site records indicates that activities with licensed material were limited to the approximately 135 acres on the south-west end of the site which is well away from Area C. No documentation was identified that indicate an impact on Area C.

3) Process Knowledge A survey was taken of current and past site personnel, and there are no known events that occurred in the process area that would have contaminated Area C. The survey included the current and past site managers and the GEH current and past General Managers (who were located in *Wilmington, NC).

Name Title Approximate Service Years at VNC Thomas Caine Site Manager 2004-Present Timothy Christman General Manager 2013-Present Anthony McFadden Site Manager 2011-2013 Christopher Monetta GEH EHS Manager and 1996-2007 General Manager Scott Murray Licensing 1998-present Louis Quintana Site Manager 2001-2004 Michael Schrag Facilities Manager 2004-Present David Turner Site Manager and Site EHS 2003-2011 Manager Mark Varno General Manager 2011-2013 GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 11 of 18

4) Sentinel Measurements The only potential impact on Areas C1 and C2 from the site would have been due to airborne releases from the reactors or other site facilities. Any impact from the site airborne releases would have been fairly uniformly dispersed across the areas of interest. As part of an environmental assessment, Brown and Caldwell collected soil samples from 11 locations that were analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity (See Figure 6). These locations were selected because they were local low points where any contamination would expect to be concentrated. The alpha results had a mean value of 8.6 pCilg (not including reanalysis) with a maximum result of 17.7 pCilg (including reanalysis). The beta results had a mean value of 11.1 pCilg with a maximum result of 23.5 pCi/g. As sentinel results these confirmed the historical record that the area was non-impacted by operations on the site. The results of the soil samples are provided in Table 1.

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-01.7 Apri12Q15 Page 12of18 Table1: G~ss Alpha seta R~ults sample 1\tpha pCl/g +I- Beta pCI/g +/-

C1*1 6129 3.~7 9.04 3.38 C1-2 13.70 4,82 22.96 4.49 C1-3 7.35 3.66 12.67 3.90 Cl-4 5.58 2.42 9.68 3.48 C1-S 8.06 3.89 13.17 4.06 Cl-6 7.33 3.11 7.87 3.22 Cl-7 8.88 3.60 16.67 3,09 Cl-8 10.80 3.4o 5.89 2.49 C1*9 7.67 2.99 9.29 2.75 Cl-9 Replicate 1L16 4.19 10.85 2.86 C2-1 4.83 2.21 4.18 2.75 C2-2 10.82 3.24 8.60 2.18 Cl-1 Reanalysis 3.99 4.95 15.74 2.87 Cl-2 Reanalysis 11.65 5.11 23.52 4.39 C2-2 Reanalysis 17.65 8.24 12.02 2.67 GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 13 of 18 Figure 7: Rank order of gross alpha results of initial analysis. The highest reading was from sample C1-2.

alpha 16 14 12 ~

C'l10

~

0 ~

8 ~ ....... + alpha

a. 6 4 ....

.JYY --Linear (alpha!

2 0 .

0 5 10 15 20 Sample Rank Figure 8: Rank order of gross beta results. Sample C1-2 had the highest result.

beta 25 20

- C'l15 uC.1Q

• beta

--Linear (betel 5

0 0 5 10 15 20 Sample Rank For both the alpha and beta cases sample C1-2 appeared to be above the linear result expected for background samples (Figures 7 and 8). In addition, the samples were slightly above the screening levels, of 11 pCi/g for alpha and 21 pCi/g beta, recommended in the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) background value document (Ref. 2). The LLNL report is a publicly available document that describes the background samples that were collected and analyzed at LLNL. Since LLNL is located near VNC, these results should provide a good data set for general comparisons. While one result was outside of the screening level it was well below results accepted and used to calculate background in the LLNL report indicating consistency with natural background characteristic of the area.

GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 14 of 18 Because the C1-2 results were above screening levels and appeared to be above the rank order line, a gamma spectroscopy analysis was also performed. The gamma results did not indicate increased levels of non-naturally occurring isotopes. In particular, Cs-137 and Co-60, which are the dominant isotopes present at Vallecitos, were not detectable. In addition, gamma scan results for locations C1-1 and C2-2 were also conducted with all results provided in Attachment 1. Results for C1-1 and C2-2 were co1_1sistent with C1-2 results in that only naturally occurring isotopes were identified, and in expected concentrations.

Therefore, the result of the analysis is that no non-naturally occurring isotopes above background levels have been identified.

Conclusion of MARSSIM type review None of the 4 reviews indicate that radioactive material was ever used on Areas C1 and C2 and the areas are characterized as non-impacted.

Section 3: (a)(3) Perform surveys adequate to demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for unrestricted use specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 for impacted areas. Not applicable. The area being released is a non-impacted area.

Section 4: (b) For release of non-impacted areas, the licensee may submit a written request for NRC approval of the release if a license amendment is not otherwise required. The request submittal must include--

(1) The results of the evaluations performed in accordance with paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section; See Sections 1 and 2.

(2) A description of the part of the facility or site to be released; See Section 2 (3) The schedule for release of the property; The property will be released as soon as approval is received from the NRC. The property is currently being marketed and will transfer as soon as regulatory release is approved and commercial considerations are found to be acceptable.

(4) The results of the evaluations performed in accordance with§ 50.59; and: Both VBWR and EVESR have permanently ceased operations and are being maintained in a possession only SAFSTOR status. The site acreage is not explicitly used in any of the analyses supporting the licensing basis of either VBWR or EVESR. Results of 10CFR50.59 analysis provided below.

Would the installation, change, test, or experiment:

1. Result in more than a minimal increase in the frequency of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated; No, the change in site size has no impact on either probability or consequences of any previously evaluated accident.

2. Result in more than a minimal increase in the likelihood of occurrence of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component (SSC) important to safety previously evaluated; No

3. Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated; No

4. Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences of a malfunction of an SSC important to safety previously evaluated; No GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 15 of 18

5. Create a possibility for an accident of a different type than any previously evaluated; No, the change in site size does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.

6. Create a possibility for a malfunction of an sse important to safety with a different result than any previously evaluated; No

7. Result in a limit for a fission product/contamination barrier being exceeded or altered; or: No

8. Result in a departure from a method of evaluation used in establishing the design bases or in safety analyses. No, the change in site size does not result in a departure from a method of evaluation.

(5) A discussion that provides the reasons for concluding that the environmental impacts associated with the licensee's proposed release of the property will be bounded by appropriate previously issued environmental impact statements. The proposed property to be released is an ar.ea that has never been used for licensed activity, the current use of the land is cattle grazing. Area Cis separated from the active area of the site by hills that preclude surface transport of liquid effluents.

Samples taken in the area do not indicate impact from license activities. Because the power reactors are shut down and there is no evidence of historic impact on the area, any previous environmental impact statements should not be impacted by the proposed release of Area C.

Section 5: (c to f) are either not applicable or work to be performed by the NRC.

Section 6: Items of interest from other parts of the regulation 10CFR70.38(g)(4)(v) An updated detailed cost estimate for decommissioning, comparison of that estimate with present funds set aside for decommissioning, and a plan for assuring the availability of adequate funds for completion of decommissioning.

The changes will not impact the decommissioning cost estimate. Because no radioactive material was on land being divested, there is not a significant amount of funding in the current plan for this area.

References:

1) Environmental Site Assessment Assessor's Parcel No. 950-8-2-1 Alameda County, California.

March 2, 2015. Brown and Caldwell report 146768

2) Background Values of Gross Alpha and Gross Beta in Soil for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, March 2008. LLNL-TR-402360. Gretchen Gallegos.

3) TAC 15-002; Technical Specification Change to Support Potential VNC Site Land Sale; Tom Caine to Document Control Desk, February 16, 2015. Docket No. 50-73 License No. R-33.

4) License Renewal Application for Vallecitos Nuclear Center

Reference:

NRC License SNM-960, Docket 70-754; September 30, 2009 ML092950541

5) Annual Report, 2013 Effluent Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance Programs, February 28, 2014; ML14073A739 61 Annual Report, 2014 Effluent Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance Programs, February 25, 2015 ML15069A472 GEH Class I Public Information

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 Aprii2Q15 Page16of1B Attachment 1 Galnmd Spectroscopy Results:

sample to Sam_ple Matrix EPA Apaly5es ttesults -=t.. 2 sigma MDA Date Method *2C"gram Error C1*1*1114 12-21*14 son

{12:45)

Analyses completed on:

02/02/15 02/0lllS 93iO 9310 Gross AIPhlil

'GJ'OSs Beta 3.99 15.74

=

f:

4:95 2,87 8.30 4.02 01/23/i!i 01/23/15 DOE 4.5,2.3 DOE 4.5.2,3 -

K-40 Co-60 9.95 NO

= 0.23 0.()1 O.lZ3 0,05 otf23ns DOE 4.5.2.3 Cs*137 NO 0.01 0.06 Dl/2~/1~ 'DOE 4.5.2.3 ~-1'34 ND Q.Ol 0,03 01/23/15 DOE4.5,2.3 TI-l DB 0.24 = 0.03 0.23 01/23/15 b,~E 4.~.2.3 P~210 0.1? = 0 ,01 0.03 01/23/15 01/23/t:S ope 4.s_.~.~

I;I,OE 4.5,~~

Bl-210 Po~210 0.13 0.12

=

0.01 o.ol o.Q1 o.*o2 Ql/23/15 00E4,S*.~.3 9b-212 .o.h = 0.01 0.01 01/2~),.5 J)OE 4,$.2.3 ~*-,i4 0.19 = 0.03 *O.Q8 01/?-3/15 DOE 4,5.2.3 DQ~ 4.S.~.~

(l~~t4

'R8~26 0.17 0.18

= O.lh 0.01 0.04 0.04 01/23/15 01/23/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-"214 Th..22S 0.17

• o.~7

• =

-0~01 0.02 o.os

.o.to 01)23/15 DOE !il.5.2.3 ol/iJ/15 DOE 4.'5,2.3 Th-232 0.36 :1; o:o3 0.06 01/23/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Th-234 0.88 :1; 0,02 0.04 01/23/1~ DQE4.S.1.3 Pa-234m 0*$6  :!: 0.09 0.19 01/U/15 DOE4.S.~.3 Pa-234 0.76 :1; 0,07 0.12 01/2~/1$

01/23/15 DQ!; 4,5.,2.3 DOE 4.5.2.3 P~Z.~6 Po-218

0.25

.0.22.

=

O.Q3 Q.02

.0.18 o.os GEH cr. I Public lnfonnation

\J.S. NRC SPM 15-017 APnf201s Pag~17of18 sampfem sample Matrb( EPA Anal'f$es- Results +/- lSigma MDA Date ~eth.ocl pQJiin.tni er:ror C1~2~1114 11~21*1"4 SQI!

(i~~OQ)

Ana~ completeci on:

02/'l.3/l$ 9:310 Gf'9$S Alpba 11.65 :1: s.il 6.99 02/1.3/iS *9310 ~Seta 23.52 :1: 4.39 S.Q1 0~23/15 DOE4.S.2.3 K.,.fO 12.'7i :1:. o:44 0.82 b2/2311S* J)OE4.5.2,3 c;o~60 NO 0.01 ,0..10 02/~lS D0~4.S.2t3 CSrUl NO 6.01 o.io 02/23/15 DOE4.5.2.3 CS'-1~ ~0 0.91 Q.O~

oi/23lts OOE4,5.2.3 11~208 0.93 :1: o.oa 0.38 02/13/1~ DQ1;4.S.2.3 Pb*210 0~ :1: o.oa 0.11 fi'J./23/15 PQE4,5'.2.3 81~210 0.01 -:1; '0.01 1).01 02/23/15 DoE 4.5.2.3- Po-2~0 0.10  : 0.1)-1 0.01 02/23}1S DoE~.5.2.3 Pb--212 Q...Oi :1: 0.01 0.01 02/Zl/15 bOE4.S.2.3 ar-714 0.19  : 0.02 0.06 02/'2~/!S DoE4.5.2,3 Pb-i14 6.17 0.01 0.10 02/Pf_15 DOE4.S,2.3 Ra-226 P49 *

1; o.b~ o.ot 0"#23/l!i OOE4.5.2.i Po-214 0.15 :1; 0,01 0.08 02123/15 ~1:4.5,2.3 Th-UB 6.34 *0.02 0.06 02/2!J/iS DOE4.S.2..3 11:1"'232 (J.21 ** q.02 Q.i~

fW?3ilS DO.E 4,5.~-~ th-~ J.'74 :1:. 0.12 0.20 0~15 .DoE4~.2.3 PBl:2..34m 1.67 :f; 0.15* Q.35

~2,123/15 . DOE 4.5!2.3 PB*i34 o:16 :1:. q.b-7 o.i2 02/23/15 00E4;S.2.3 Po-216 0.70 *: 0.04 o.).o TY1/'1)/*t 5 DOE ...~.~~ p0.2l$ 0.11. 0.01 0.10 GEH Cla$S 1P!.iblic.lntonnation

U.S. NRC SPM 15-017 April2015 Page 18 of 18 Sample ID Sample Matrix EPA Analyses Results +/- 2 Sigmoo MDA Dote Method (;1Ci/grom Error C2-2-1114 11-21-14 Soil (09:001 Analyses compelted on:

01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 K-40 7.67 +/- 0.19 0.32 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Co-60 ND 0.01 0.07 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Cs-137 ND 0.01 0.09 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Cs-134 ND 0.01 0.04 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Tl-208 0.23 +/- 0.03 0.31 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Pb-210 0.11 +/- 0.01 0.04 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Bi-210 0.21 +/- 0.01 0.01 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-210 0.23 +/- 0.01 0.07 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Pb-212 0.22 +/- 0.01 0.06 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Bi-214 0.27 +/- 0.03 0.12 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Pb-214 0.31 +/- 0.01 0.06 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Ro-226 0.25 +/- 0.01 0.02 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-214 0.14 +/- 0.01 0.06 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Th-228 0.17 +/- 0.01 0.14 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Th-232 0.29 +/- 0.01 0.04 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Th-234 0.56 +/- 0.02 0.08 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-234m 0.50 + 0.06 0.26 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-234 0.48 + 0.02 0.06 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-216 0.26 +/- 0.03 0.24 01/26/15 DOE 4.5.2.3 Po-218 0.23 +/- 0.01 0.07 GEH Class I Public Information

APPENDIX B 2016 Initial Site Assessment (Excerpt for Vallecitos Nuclear Center Records Review)

INITIAL SITE ASSESSMENT DECEMBER 27, 2016 SR 84 EXPRESSWAY WIDENING AND SR 84/1-680 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Alameda County Prepared for:

Alameda County Transportation Commission 16205-00.02444 BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 5900 Hollis Street, SuiteD, Emeryvill~. CA 94608 I P: (510) 420-8686 I www.baseline-env.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1

2. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 2

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................. 2 3.1 SR 84 ................................................................................................................................. 2 3.2 SR 84/1-680 Interchange and Auxiliary Lanes .................................................................. 3 3.3 1-680.................................................................................................................................. 3 3.4 Project Construction ........................................................................................................ 4

4. REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY ................................................................................... 7

5. ISA METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 7 5.1 Hazardous Material Site Identifications ........................................................................... 7

6. REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF DATA SOURCES ........................................................................ 8 6.1 Historical Land Uses ......................................................................................................... 8 6.2 Current Land Uses ............................................................................................................ 9 6.3 Regulatory Environmental Records ................*.................................................................. 9 6.4 Evaluation of Potential Hazardous Materials Sources from Data Source Review ......... 13

7. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS .................................................................................... 14 7.1 Lead-Based Paint and Asbestos on Overpass Structures ............................................... 14 7.2 Lead and Chromium in Yellow Striping Paints and Pavement Marking ......................... 14 7.3 Naturally-Occurring Asbestos ........................................................................................ 15 7.4 Pipelines ......................................................................................................................... 15 7.5 Asphalt-Concrete and Portland Cement Concrete ........................................................ 15

8. DATA GAPS .............................................................................................................................. 16

9. ASTM 1527-13 DEVIATIONS .................................................................................................... 16

10. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................... 17 10.1 Recognized Environmental Conditions .......................................................................... 17 10.2 Other Environmental Conditions ................................................................................... 17 10.3 Risk Analysis ................................................................................................................... 17

11. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................., ................................................................................... 18 11.1 Preliminary Site Investigation ........................................................................................ 18 11.2 Hazardous Materials Management and Disposal .......................................................... 19 11.3 Property Acquisition Due Diligence ............................................................................... 20 ALA-84_297630_1SA2_maln text_clean.docx-12/27/16

12. LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 20

13. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 20 APPENDICES A: Caltrans ISA Checklist B: Historical Land Use Records C: Environmental Database Search FIGURES 1: Project Location 2A-2G: Project Layout and Hazardous Materials Sites from Regulatory Record Search TABLE 1: Sites on Regulatory Records Within One Mile of the Project Area ii ALA-84_29763D_ISA2_maln text_clean.docx-12/27/16

Releases from the USTs were identified during the UST removal activities in 1996. In 2014, as a condition for case closure, a land use restriction was recorded for a portion of the site, limiting excavation and prohibiting sensitive land uses.

Although residual contamination is present at the Mission Valley Rock Sunol Plant, this contamination is limited to the vicinity of the former UST location and does not extend off the site (Arcadis 2013}. Groundwater flow direction has been measured to the south, southeast, and east (Arcadis 2013}, indicating that this site is hydraulically downgradient from the project area. Based on this information, this release would not have the potential to affect the project area.

A Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Spills Leaks Investigations and Cleanups (SUC}

database case was opened at an equipment rental business at this site in 2007 when an inspection identified potential contamination near a sump. A subsequent soil investigation did not identify significant contamination, and the sue case was closed in 2014.

Site 4- Chevron Sunol Pipeline - 2793 Calaveras Road (Figure 28)

A pipeline accident occurred at this site in 2005, approximately one mile south of the project area, which resulted in the release of 25,830 gallons of gasolin~. After remediation using a soil vapor extraction system, this site was closed in July 2015. Remediation of this site has been

-completed, and it is located hydraulically downgradient from the project site, so it would not have the potential to affect the project area.

Site 6- Walgreens Sunol, 9494 Koopman Road (Figure 28)

A tractor-trailer truck accident near the Koopman Road undercrossing of 1-680 resulted in the release of 150 gallons of diesel. Cleanup occurred soon after the spill and contaminated soil was excavated and disposed of off-site. Although this site remains active in the sue database, the relatively small volume of the release and its prompt remediation make it unlikely that contaminants from this site would migrate and affect project area soils or groundwater.

Site 8- Vallecitos Nuclear Center, 6705 Vallecitos Road (Figures 2C and 20)

The primary function of this site is nuclear fuel research and the production of radio-isotopes for medical and other uses (DTSC 1997}. It is registered as a federal Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) large-quantity hazardous waste generator, indicating that it is authorized to generate and dispose of more than 100 kilograms per month of non-acutely hazardous waste, or more than 1 kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. The site is also a RCRA-registered waste handler and is listed as generator on numerous hazardous waste manifests.

In 1991, a Preliminary Assessment of the site,was performed under the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA} program, designed to investigate and remediate suspected hazardous waste sites. No further action was proposed under CERCLA.

11 ALA-84_297630_1SA2_maln text_clean.docx-12/27/16

In 1997, a RCRA Facility Assessment was performed to identify and evaluate hazardous waste management and other areas of concern at the site (DTSC 1997). Record review for the assessment identified two hazardous materials releases from the site:

• Polychlorinated biphenyls {PCBs) were released at the site in 1993, and affected soils were excavated and disposed of off-site. The oversight agency Alameda County, Division of Environmental Protection, Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) approved closure of the PCB release case, indicating completion of necessary remediation, on June 24, 1993.

• Diesel was released from a 10,000-gallon above-ground storage tank in 1994. Diesel-contaminated soils were remediated on-site. ACDEH determined that no further action was warranted.

The 1997 assessment concluded that the site discharged wastewater and managed hazardous waste in accordance with permits and other hazardous waste generator requirements. No further action was proposed (DTSC 1997).

Several hazardous waste violation enforcement actions have been recorded at the site, the most recent of which involved late submissions of monitoring reports and exceedances of copper discharge limits during 2000 through 2002. The RCRA enforcement database (CORRACTS) categorized the violations as "minor and indicated that they had been corrected.

The Vallecitos Nuclear Center appears on the Materials Licensing Tracking System due to the use of radioactive substances at the site. Radioactive substances are regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the California Department of Public Health, Radiologic Health Branch separately from other hazardous wastes.

The facility is required to monitor discharges to the environment for both standard and radioactive contaminants. Under RWQCB Waste Discharge Requirements (Order R2-2008-0079), the facility is required to monitor temperature, pH, total suspended solids, total dissolved solids, chloride, oil and grease, dissolved oxygen, total chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc, and acute toxicity. Under the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 20, the radioactivity of air, groundwater, vegetation, and stream bed sediments are regularly monitored. There are 20 monitoring stations along the perimeter of the facility buildings that measure gamma radiation and compare it to "background" stations located near the site perimeters.

The most recent effluent monitoring environmental surveillance report indicated that discharges from the Vallecitos Nuclear Center were within permit requirements for both radioactive and non-radioactive materials and met the goals of the monitoring program, which are to ensure that discharges from the site do not adversely affect areas outside the facility (GE Hitachi 2015).

Three hazardous waste incidents were reported at the Vallecitos Nuclear Center during 2011 and 2012 {Table 1). The incidents involved the release of 1,000 gallons of sewage, 20 gallons of 12 ALA-84_297630_1SA2_maln text_clean.docx-12/27/16

R22 refrigerant, and 70 gallons of hydraulic oil. The incident reports indicate that cleanup was conducted shortly after reporting, and none of the incidents resulted the opening of a case file by a regulatory oversight agency. These incidents would be unlikely to affect soils and/or groundwater in the project area.

Site 9 - 7900 Vallecitos Road (Figure 2C)

A hazardous materials incident was reported at this site in 2014 regarding a release of water from an irrigation ditch onto an adjoining property. No hazardous materials involvement was noted in the incident record.

Site 10- Pigeon Pass SR 84 Realignment Project (Figure 2E)

This site was listed in a hazardous materials enforcement action database due to a violation of RWQCB Order R2-2006-0033. The database indicated that the violation was related to the failure to implement required erosion controls, and did not involve hazardous material releases.

6.4 Evaluation of Potential Hazardous Materials Sources from Data Source Review 6.4.1 Aerially-Deposited Lead Lead alkyl compounds were first added to gasoline in the 1920s. Beginning in 1973, the EPA ordered a gradual phase out of lead from gasoline that significantly reduced the prevalence of leaded gasoline by the mid-1980s. Prior to the 1970s, the EPA estimated that vehicles emitted approximately 75 percent of the lead consumed in leaded gasoline as particulate matter in the exhaust (DTSC 2004). As a result, shallow soils within approximately 30 feet of the edge of pavement in highway corridors have the potential to be contaminated with ADL from historical car emissions prior to the elimination of lead in gasoline (DTSC 2009a).

Based on a review of historical aerial photographs, SR 84 has been present at the project area since at least 1940, and 1-680 was constructed in the late 1960s to early 1970s, which was before the full phase-out of lead in gasoline. Therefore, exposed shallow soils at the project area within approximately 30 feet of the edge of pavement along these highways could be contaminated with ADL.

On 1 July 2009, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) issued a variance to Caltrans (Caltrans/DTSC ADL Variance) allowing the reuse of some lead-affected soils for construction projects within the Caltrans rights-of-way (DTSC 2009b). The Caltrans/DTSC ADL Variance allows Caltrans to reuse soils containing total lead at concentrations up to 3,397 milligrams per kilogram, or soluble lead at concentrations up to 150 milligrams per liter within the project construction area and the Caltrans right-of-way, subject to certain restrictions and reporting requirements.

13 ALA-84_297630_1SA2_main text_clean.docx-12/27/16

APPENDIX C Laboratory Analytical Reports

E ANALYTICAL

Enthalpy Analytical 2323 Fifth Street. Berkeley. CA 94710. Phone (510) 486-0900 Laboratory Job Number 301639 ANALYTICAL REPORT Baseline Environmental Project 18301-00 5900 Hollis Street Location SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Emeryville, CA 94608 Level II Sample ID Lab ID S01;0.0-0.5 301639-001 S06;0.0-0.5 301639-002 S11;0.0-0.5 301639-003 This data package has been reviewed for technical correctness and completeness.

Release of this data has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verified by the following signature which applies to this PDF file as well as any associated electronic data deliverable files. The results contained in this report meet all requirements of NELAP and pertain only to those samples which were submitted for analysis. This report may be reproduced only in its entirety.

Signature: Date: 07/27/2018 Patrick McCarthy Project Manager patrick.mccarthy@enthalpy.com (510) 204-2236 ext 13115 CA ELAP# 2896, NELAP# 4044-001 1 of 15

,...~ENTHALPY

~_] ANALYTICAL CASE NARRATIVE Laboratory number: 301639 Client: Baseline Environmental Project: 18301-00 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Request Date: 07/20/18 Samples Received: 07/20/18 This data package contains sample and QC results for three soil samples, requested for the above referenced project on 07/20/18. The samples were received cold and intact.

Meta1s (EPA 6010B and EPA 7471A) :

Low recoveries were observed for antimony in the MS/MSD for batch 261623; the parent sample was not a project sample, the BS/BSD were within limits, and the associated RPD was within limits. No other analytical problems were encountered.

Page 1 of 1 11 . 0 2 of 15

BASELINE Environmental Consulting CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD 5900 Hollll Strut, SU~o D Emeryville, CA 94li08 LAB LOGIN '70( 6)t Tum-Around-Time Standard TAT l.aboratory-:E:"'n:';th-"'aT"lp"'y..;..;..;'---------

Tel: (510) 420-8686 BASEUNE Contact Person PiitriciC'Sutton Project Number: 18301-00 Project Name:

Samplers: (Signatu1

.U/../L )' ~

/P*.,;r,.,~~

, :~:;,.. -~.

SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Container I Preservative Analyses

.... r'

..... ... .!!!8 c: .!ll

iii ~ iii ti~

-alii Total Ia ~ .,  ;,::!! ~:!I a~

toO ss sMi E iii 5 II

- d 0 z e;i :J::i! OlD

~ID

1~ j!~

ii:a: Remarks/ Composite No.

...0 CD N 0 "' "' 1-<(

1!1.

~~ ><... .,51

..,< ~~

..D

~~

lab "'

lD  !!!.  !!!.

Fe No. Sample ID Date Time Media "1-lf-11 'iS ).II S..l SOl;O.IJ.O.S 506;0.0.()5 1*1t-*t 7:"t 4p s.,, 1 1

1 1

X X

X X

511;0.1).().5 1-lf-18 'is:*; Soil 1 1 X X

'------ /

v-

- ~

r--

-r--. -.

-- ~

..-- -- f-.-- - --. -

r--

I

---

----- ------ ~

R7lt2;:z:;;

---

?hi .f1tc eceived by: (Szure)

(ftl7l./L/1_ ~/L /

7~..,rr-Date/Time

~!"'

Remarks:

Relinquished by: (Signature) Received~: (Signatu1 Date/Time

! Email contact:

Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Signature) Date/Time J!Atti£l>@lliw!line-env com Received at laboratory with intact Sample condition upon Comments:

~~8 custody seal:

Yes No@ ni ci~

Ul 0

~ Soil Sample_MASTER Label GE Samples.xlsx-7/2012018 01

15A:MPILI! RECEIPI' QIECICUST .. ~

._;"1._]

ISI!c:tllon 1: Lo1ln# }0\ b:>'1 alent: _ _ 13:L,.c;(..,!__.~__;l::...\V\R..~..-----

Date ProJect: r [)0( - DO . ..,..,, .,

ENTHALI'Y Yes, how many? No (skip s.ctlan I b..ow) no cooler Sample Temp (*c): usln1IR Gun I# [] A, or C 8

[] samples received on ice directly from the field. Cooling process had begun In cooler: Date Openecf':kW-<fay (print) ~ (slgn),_-z....;:;;.:;.~;__-1------

Shlpplrw Info (If applicable) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Are custody seals present?'Ia No, or[] Yes. If yes, wh~re? []on cooler, []on samples,[] on package C Date: How many [J IJ Initials, IJ None ISactlonl: lm~t: Notify~ If t""penture eXCHds &*c or arrive frozen.

1Paclclr1aln cooler: (If other, describe),_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

IJ Bubble Wrap~ [] Foam blocks, C Bags, )~:None, [] Cloth material, C Cardboard, [] Styrofoam, [] Paper towels Samples received on Ice dlrectfv from the field. Coohng process had besun

• of Ice used : -p-wet, * [] Blue/Gel, [] None Temperature blank(s) Included? D Yes,~o ITempterat:ure measured IJ Thennometer ID: or IR Gun# C A~

1. 1: #2: #3: #4:

---

I pH strip l o t # - - - - - - -

..;.;.;.;._ _ _ _ _ addedtosamples _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ on/at

-~-----added to samples on/at - - - - -- ---l

_":"::"'"_ _ _ _ _ added to samples added to am,niA~:

on/at ---------l Enthalpy An*lytlall- Berblev Rev.15, 02/02/2018 4 of 15

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Detections Summary for 301639 Results for any subcontracted analyses are not included in this summary.

Client Baseline Environmental Project 18301-00 Location SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client Sample ID S01;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301639-001 Analyte -I Result Flags RL Units Basis IDF - Method P_J:"ep Method Arsenic 2.7 1.5 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Barium 220 0. 26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Beryllium 0.36 0.10 mg/Kg As Reed 1.000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Chromium I 35 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Cobalt Copper

6.6 16

0. 26

0. 26 mg/Kg mg/Kg As Reed As Reed

1. 000

1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 6010B EPA 3050B EPA 3050B Lead 12 1.0 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Mercury 0.024 0.016 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 7471A METHOD Nickel 34 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B

- - - - - - - -23 _ ___

-Vanadium r----0. 2 6-- mg/Kg EPA --6-010B As Reed 1. 000 EPA 3050B Zinc 32 1.0 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Client Sample ID S06;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301639-002

_Analyte _ I Res_ul_t Fl_a g s ___ _R_L *- Units _ J3<;isis IDF . M~tho_d Pr_eR Method Arsenic 3.0 1.4 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Barium 160 0.23 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Beryllium 0.26 0.093 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Chromium 30 0.23 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Cobalt 12 0.23 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Copper 11 0.23 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Lead 9.3 0.93 mg_LKg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Mercury 0.026 0.017 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 7471A METHOD Nickel 34 0.23 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Vanadium 21 --- -------

0.23 mg/Kg As Reed 1.000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Zinc 41 0.93 mg/Kg ~s Reed 1.000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Page 1 of 2 14. 0 5 of 15

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Client Sample ID S11;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301639-003 Analyte { Result Flags RL Units Basis IDF Method Prep Method Arsenic 4.2 1.5 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Barium 130 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Beryllium 0.31 0.10 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Chromium 48 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Cobalt 11 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Copper 9.5 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Lead 8.8 1.0 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Nickel 40 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Vanadium 27 0.26 mg/Kg As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Zinc 41 1.0 mg/K_g_ As Reed 1. 000 EPA 6010B EPA 3050B Page 2 of 2 14 . 0 6 of 15

,...~ENTHALPY

~~ ANALYTICAL Cal.li.~ornia Titie 22 Meta.ls Lab #: 301639 Project#: 18301-00 Client: Baseline Environmental Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Field ID: S01;0.0-0.5 Basis: as received Lab ID: 301639-001 Diln Fac: 1. 000 Matrix: Soil Sampled: 07/19/18 Units: mg/Kg Received: 07/20/18

~~ Re(~~:rt RL B&tdh* Pb_~eg Anl3.lyzed PreR Ana~ is Antimony ND 2.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Arsenic 2.7 1.5 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Barium 220 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Beryllium 0.36 0.10 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Cadmium ND 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Chromium 35 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Cobalt 6.6 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Copper 16 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Lead 12 1.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Mercury 0.024 0.016 261783 07/26/18 07/26/18 METHOD EPA 7471A Molybdenum ND 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Nickel 34 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Selenium ND 2.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Silver ND 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Thallium ND 0.52 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Vanadium 23 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Zinc 32 1.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B ND= Not Detected RL= Reporting Limit Page 1 of 1 2.1 7 of 15

"'"~ENTHALPY

~~ ANALYTICAL e&ai:forni.a Ti.Ue 22 Meba,J.s Lab #: 301639 Project#: 18301-00 Client: Baseline Environmental Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Field ID: S06;0.0-0.5 Basis: as received Lab ID: 301639-002 Diln Fac: 1.000 Matrix: Soil Sampled: 07/19/18 Units: mg/Kg Received: 07/20/18 Ana!yte Resuil.~ RL Batcmi Pr~~ed An~ly~etf Prep Analysis Antimony ND 1.9 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Arsenic 3.0 1.4 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Barium 160 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Beryllium 0.26 0.093 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Cadmium ND 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Chromium 30 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Cobalt 12 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Copper 11 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Lead 9.3 0.93 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Mercury 0.026 0.017 261783 07/26/18 07/26/18 METHOD EPA 7471A Molybdenum ND 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Nickel 34 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Selenium ND 1.9 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Silver ND 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Thallium ND 0.47 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Vana<;iium 21 0.23 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Zinc 41 0.93 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B ND= Not Detected RL= Reporting Limit Page 1 of 1 3.1 8 of 15

"""~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Ca1i.forni.a '1'4-t.ie 22 Mei;a1s Lab #: 301639 Project#: 18301-00 Client: Baseline Environmental Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Field ID: Sll;0.0-0.5 Basis: as received Lab ID: 301639-003 Diln Fac: 1.000 Matrix: Soil Sampled: 07/19/18 Units: mg/Kg Received: 07/20/18 Prep Analysis Antimony NO 2.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Arsenic 4.2 1.5 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Barium 130 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Beryllium 0.31 0.10 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Cadmium NO 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Chromium 48 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Cobalt 11 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Copper 9.5 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Lead 8.8 1.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Mercury NO 0.018 261783 07/26/18 07/26/18 METHOD EPA 7471A Molybdenum NO 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Nickel 40 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Selenium NO 2.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Silver NO 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Thallium NO 0.52 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Vanadium 27 0.26 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B Zinc 41 1.0 261623 07/20/18 07/23/18 EPA 3050B EPA 6010B NO= Not Detected RL= Reporting Limit Page 1 of 1 4.1 9 of 15

,..~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Batch QC Report C::~itorM* Title 22 Metal.a Lab #: 301639 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client: Baseline Environmental Prep: EPA 3050B Project#: 18301-00 Analysis: EPA GOlOB Type: BLANK Diln Fac: 1.000 Lab ID: QC940312 Batch#: 261623 Matrix: Soil Prepared: 07/20/18 Units: mg/Kg Analyzed: 07/23/18 Ahalvt:. Result R!a Antimony ND 1.9 Arsenic ND 1.5 Barium ND 0.24 Beryllium ND 0.097 Cadmium ND 0.24 Chromium ND 0.24 Cobalt ND 0.24 Copper ND 0.24 Lead ND 0.97 Molybdenum ND 0.24 Nickel ND 0.24 Selenium ND 1.9 Silver ND 0.24 Thallium ND 0.49 Vanadium ND 0.24 Zinc ND 0.97 ND= Not Detected RL= Reporting Limit Page 1 of 1 5. 0 10 of 15

,..~ENTHALPY

~_] ANALYTICAL Batch ocat~on:

Client: Baseline Environmental Prep:

Pro'ect#: 18301-00 Anal sis:

Matr~x: So~ Bate :

Units: mg/Kg Prepared: 07/20/18 Diln Fac: 1. 000 Anal zed: 07/23 18 Type: BS Lab ID: QC940313 Ant~mony Arsenic 47.62 48.45 102 80-120 Barium 47.62 49.30 104 80-120 Beryllium 23.81 24.29 102 80-120 Cadmium 47.62 47.67 100 80-120 Chromium 47.62 49.22 103 80-120 Cobalt 47.62 48.16 101 80-120 Copper 47.62 47.33 99 80-120 Lead 47.62 48.40 102 80-120 Molybdenum 47.62 48.86 103 80-120 Nickel 47.62 48.33 101 80-120 Selenium 47.62 47.93 101 80-120 Silver 4.762 4.649 98 80-120 Thallium 47.62 49.34 104 80-120 Vanadium 47.62 47.82 . 100 80-120 Zinc 47.62 48.36 102 80-120 Type: BSD Lab ID: QC940314 Ana Ant~mony . .

Arsenic 51.55 52.63 102 80-120 0 20 Barium 51.55 53.50 104 80-120 0 20 Beryllium 25.77 26.19 102 80-120 0 20 Cadmium 51.55 51.79 100 80-120 0 20 Chromium 51.55 53.41 104 80-120 0 20 Cobalt 51.55 52.19 101 80-120 0 20 Copper 51.55 51.31 100 80-120 0 20 Lead 51.55 52.52 102 80-120 0 20 Molybdenum 51.55 53.03 103 80-120 0 20 Nickel 51.55 52.41 102 80-120 0 20 Selenium 51.55 51.73 100 80-120 0 20 Silver 5.155 5.061 98 80-120 1 20 Thallium 51.55 53.57 104 80-120 0 20 Vanadium 51.55 51.84 101 80-120 0 20 Zinc 51.55 52.68 102 80-120 1 20 RPD= Relative Percent Difference Page 1 of 1 6.0 11 of 15

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Batch Ca1i.:fo~a La Locat1on:

Client: Baseline Environmental Prep:

Pro'ect#: 18301-00 Anal sis:

F1e a ID: zzzzzzzzz Bate :

MSS Lab ID: 301631-001 Sampled: 07/19/18 Matrix: Soil Received: 07/20/18 Units: mg/Kg Prepared: 07/20/18 Basis: as received Analyzed: 07/23/18 Diln Fac: 1. 000 Type: MS Lab ID: QC940315 Ana esu Ant1mony .4 Arsenic 4.548 51.02 52.09 93 80-124 Barium 97.76 51.02 145.5 94 75-125 Beryllium 0.4978 25.51 26.93 104 80-120 Cadmium 0.04715 51.02 51.24 100 80-120 Chromium 37.52 51.02 87.18 97 75-125 Cobalt 9.518 51.02 55.89 91 75-120 Copper 19.08 51.02 73.18 106 77-125 Lead 7.327 51.02 54.06 92 75-125 Molybdenum 0.2562 51.02 43.29 84 75-120 Nickel 42.99 51.02 89.08 90 75-125 Selenium <0.1760 51.02 44.98 88 75-121 Silver <0.02804 5.102 4.967 97 75-120 Thallium <0.08404 51.02 45.09 88 75-120 Vanadium 41.21 51.02 91.19 98 75-125 Zinc 42.23 51.02 94.77 103 75-125 Type: MSD Lab ID: QC940316 m

Ant1mony 0 Arsenic 55.56 56.96 94 80-124 1 20 Barium 55.56 156.0 105 75-125 4 20 Beryllium 27.78 29.62 105 80-120 1 20 Cadmium 55.56 55.73 100 80-120 0 20 Chromium 55.56 91.89 98 75-125 0 20 Cobalt 55.56 60.32 91 75-120 0 20 Copper 55.56 78.83 108 77-125 1 20 Lead 55.56 58.64 92 75-125 1 20 Molybdenum 55.56 47.28 85 75-120 0 20 Nickel 55.56 93.82 91 75-125 0 20 Selenium 55.56 49.72 89 75-121 1 20 Silver 5.556 5.442 98 75-120 1 20 Thallium 55.56 49.67 89 75-120 1 20 Vanadium 55.56 97.43 101 75-125 2 20 Zinc 55.56 100.5 105 75-125 1 20

• = Value outside of QC limits; see narrative RPD= Relative Percent Difference Page 1 of 1 7.0 12 of 15

,..~ENTHALPY

~_) ANALYTICAL Batch QC Report Ga1li.:fomua Tli.ble 22 Metal.$

Lab #: 301639 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client: Baseline Environmental Prep: ME!!' HOD Project#: 18301-00 Analysis: EPA 747lA Analyte: Mercury Diln Fac: 1. 000 Type: BLANK Batch#: 261783 Lab ID: QC940944 Prepared: 07/26/18 Matrix: Soil Analyzed: -07/26/18 Units: mg/Kg Resu1t NO 0.016 NO= Not Detected RL= Reporting Limit Page 1 of 1 9.0 13 of 15

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Batch QC Report C.-13,.:8Qrni* !irli.'Ue 22 Metail.s Lab #: 301639 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client: Baseline Environmental Prep: METHOD Project#: 18301-00 Analysis: EPA 7471A Analyte: Mercury Batch#: 261783 Matrix: Soil Prepared: 07/26/18 Units: mg/Kg Analyzed: 07/26/18 Diln Fac: 1. 000 Rasul:t BS QC940945 0.1695 0.1812 107 80-120 BSD QC940946 0.1639 0.1688 103 80-120 4 20 RPD= Relative Percent Difference Page 1 of 1 9. 0 14 of 15

~~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Batch QC Report e-.J.i.fomJ,i.a mlltie 22 Metals Lab #: 301639 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client: Baseline Environmental Prep: METHOD Project#: 18301-00 Analysis: EPA 7471A Analyte: Mercury Di1n Fac: 1. 000 Field ID: zzzzzzzzzz Batch#: 261783 MSS Lab ID: 301537-001 Sampled: 07/11/18 Matrix: Soil Received: 07/17/18 Units: rng/Kg Prepared: 07/26/18 Basis: as received Analyzed: 07/26/18

• !'ISS ResuiLt Result Lim MS QC940947 0.01628 0.1724 0.1956 104 80-120 MSD QC940948 0.1639 0.1932 108 80-120 3 20 RPD= Relative Percent Difference Page 1 of 1 10 . 0 15 of 15

E y ANALYTICAL

Enthalpy Analytical 2323 Fifth Street. Berkeley. CA 94710. Phone (510) 486-0900 Laboratory Job Number 301640 ANALYTICAL REPORT Baseline Environmental Project 18301-00 5900 Hollis Street Location SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Emeryville, CA 94608 Level II Sample ID Lab ID S01;0.0-0.5 301640-001 S02;0.0-0.5 301640-002 S03;0.0-0.5 301640-003 S04;0.0-0 ."5 301640-004 S05;0.0-0.5 301640-005 S06;0.0-0.5 301640-006 S07;0.0-0.5 301640-007 S08;0.0-0.5 301640-008 S09;0.0-0.5 301640-009 S10;0.0-0.5 301640-010 S11;0.0-0.5 301640-011 S12;0.0-0.5 301640-012 S13;0.0-0.5 301640-013 S14;0.0-0.5 301640-014 S15;0.0-0.5 301640-015 S16;0.0-0.5 301640-016 This data package has been reviewed for technical correctness and completeness.

Release of this data has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verified by the following signature which applies to this PDF file as well as any associated electronic data deliverable files. The results contained in this report meet all requirements of NELAP and pertain only to those samples which were submitted for analysis. This report may be reproduced only in its entirety.

Signature: Date: 08/10/2018 Patrick McCarthy Project Manager patrick.mccarthy@enthalpy.com (510) 204-2236 ext 13115 CA ELAP# 2896, NELAP# 4044-001 1 of44

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL CASE N.AlmATIVE Laboratory number: 301640 Client: Baseline Environmental Project: 18301-00 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Request Date: 07/20/18 Samples Received: 07/20/18 This data package contains sample and QC results for sixteen soil samples, requested for the above referenced project on 07/20/18. The samples were received cold and intact.

This RGROUP ho1ds misc. rad prods:

No analytical problems were encountered.

Page 1 of 1

3. 0 2 of44

BASEUNE Environmental Consulting CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD

, \ 6~\J 5900 Holik Sltftt, Sufte D Tum-Around-Tlme-:5:'-'ta":'nd~a;-;rd.;;..;.TA;..;.J;..___ _ _ _ _ __

Emeryvfle, CA 946011 lAB LOGIN *\_0 Laboratory Enthalpy Tel: (510) 42!1-8616 BASEUNE Contact Person Patrk:k Sutton Project Number: 18301-00 Project Name:

Samplers: (Signature)

~h~*h.*. ~~- '...u.

A .

SR84 Widening & SR84/i 680

.Ji'_ .._

-* I

""'*'~ I Container Preservative Analyses v If

.~

8..,

.!!. < 0 "' .

..... ~~

!:  ::: 0 Total ~ __, "'0z No.

~

N 0

0

~

u

J:

J:

.!t ~

!ri Remarks/ Composite Lab

..."' ~  :;:) wiiJ 8 ..

No. SampleiD Date Time Media SOl;O.D-0.5 l*l1-l1J 8:A\t Soa I

' X rSOZ;O.D-0.5 n:l'S I I X S03;o.o-o.s ID: S't1 I I X 10:o1 I S04;o.o-o.s 505;0.0-0.5 'f:'il \ X X

I 1:"141 506;0.D-O.S

' X 507;0.0-0.5 SOS;O.D-0.5 ll: ~S' 10:27 I

\

X X

S09;0.o-o.s

'!!)7 4f:oe~

' X SlO;O.D-0.5 t:2.1 I ' X Sll;O.D-0.5

' X

• lr tf:f; t:.

SU;O.G-0.5

' ' X 1))/Jl,v;t:; /)l. J_ J:f;;;;catur~)

Zjif . ~/ 7- 2b-'lf Date/Time ld-~41 Remarks:

i I

I Relinquished by: (Signature) Recel't§tf by: (Sls1ture) Date/Time I Email contact:

Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Signature) Date/Time * -enYJ:om Received at laboratory with Intact Sample condition upon Comments:

custody seal: ~~I at lab:

Yes No~ On Ice Cold w

0

~

~

Soil Sample_MASTER Label GE Samples.xlsx- 7/2012018

BASELINE Environmental Consulting CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD 5900 HolliJ Stntet, Sulta 0 Emoryvllle, CA 94608 LAB LOGIN ")CJl b~D Tum-Around-Time..:;S;:;ta":-nd~ar.::d....;T,;,;AT.;___ _ _ _ _ __

Laboratory Enthalpy To!: 1510) 42H686 BASEUNE Contact Person Patrick Sutton Project Number: 18301-()()

Project Name: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Samplers: (SignaL;.,

/bu. r *~--

I

.~1 I......... .,r~

. Container Preservative Analyses v .v

~ 8a; g... ... ... .......

~

~ .!!!, 0 "' 0 Total ra "'0z "'

"' ~~

No. ~

Oil 0

0

~

....0 u

J:

J: -fl ...~ .~~

Remarks/ Composite I

ILab ID "'

g::J fNo. SampleiD Date Time Media 513;0.0.0.5 l-Jct-1& fD:IC. Sot I \ I X is14;0.0.{).5 1o:s, 1 I X 515;0.0.0.5 ll:oo 1 I X 516;0.0.0.5 u~so I X L_.,

-- r--. -:-- r--....... ___... .--

....._..._ /

...... v ...............

~

_........- v - ~

i'- ............

I'-

-r-... r- ....__

R~/~~Gre)

~-

tfld .tt.eceJved by: ~:ure)

Date/Tlme

- --- Remarks:

'/J'Jt/L..a ,t, / ~-Ia- ~-11 Relinquished by: (Signature) Receive~: (Signa~) Date/Time i Email contact:

Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Signature) Date/Time

~m~~!iili!IIKii~K~l! s:!!fll Received at laboratory with Intact Sample condition upon Comments:

custody seah ~rival at lab:

Yes No{Nv On Ice Cold

~

0

~ Soil Sample MASTER Label GESamples.xlsx-712012018

~ -

. ~

Client: _ _ ...,:.{2'.-r;("!!i-}e:~l\,...;~~,..----- ~..J ENTHAI.I'Y Project: t 8'")0( - 00 Z: Samples received In a cooler? how many? No (skip Section 3 below) no cooler Sample Temp (*c): uslngiR Gun # C A, or Cl 8 C Samples received on Ice directly from the field. Cooling process had begun In cooler: Date Openeq..W-lYBv (print)  ::\lL:1. (slgn),_-z~~;.;;_-J.-----

Shlpplrwlnfo (If applicable) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Are custody seals present? 'a No, or Cl Yes. If yes, where? Cl on cooler, Cl on samples, [Jon package C Date: How many D 0 Initials, C None ISec::tlon 3: Important : Notify PM If t....,.peratura exceeds &*c or arrive frozen.

Pacldnsln cooler: (If other, descrlbe),_ _ _: - - - - - - - - - -

0 Bubble Wrap, C Foam blocks, C Bags, )~::None, [] Cloth material, [] Cardboard, [] Styrofoam, C Paper towels C Samples received on Ice directly from the field. Coohng process had begun of Ice used : -ptcwet,

• C Blue/Gel, C None Temperature blank(s) Included? D Yes,~o ITelmP*~rature measured C Thermometer ID: or IR Gun# IJ A~

1. 1: #5: #6:

- - - - - - -

• pH strip lot#-------

---~~~-----(~p) ________~------

---

fli~F (sltn) _ _ _~o/;,__-

Enthalpy An1lytlcal- Berkeley Rev.15, 02/02/2018 5 of44

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Detections Summary for 301640 Results for any subcontracted analyses are not included in this summary.

Client Baseline Environmental Project 18301-00 Location SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client Sample ID S01;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-001 No Detections Client Sample ID S02;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-002 No Detections Client Sample ID S03;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-003 No Detections Client Sample ID S04;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-004 No Detections Client Sample ID S05;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-005 No Detections Client Sample ID S06;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-006 No Detections Client Sample ID S07;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-007 No Detections Client Sample ID S08;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-008 No Detections Client Sample ID S09;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-009 No Detections Page 1 of 2 6.0 6 of44

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Client Sample ID S10;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-010 No Detections Client Sample ID S11;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-011 No Detections Client Sample ID S12;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-012 No Detections Client Sample ID S13;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-013 No Detections Client Sample ID : S14;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-014 No Detections Client Sample ID S15;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-015 No Detections Client Sample ID S16;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 301640-016 No Detections Page 2 of 2 6. 0 7 of44

Laboratory Job Number 301640 Subcontracted Products Genera1 Engineering Labs

t§l¥111 Laboratories LLC PO Box30712 CNrteston, SC29417 a member of The GEL Group INC 2040 savage Road Charteston, SC 29407 p 843:556 8171 F 843.766.1178 gel. com August 10, 2018 Mr. Patrick McCarthy Enthalpy Analytical, LLC 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 9471 0 Re: Project Number:

Work Order: 455294

Dear Mr. McCarthy:

GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) appreciates the opportunity to provide the enclosed analytical results for the sample(s) we received on July 24,2018. This original data report has been prepared and reviewed in accordance with GEL's standard operating procedures.

Our policy is to provide high quality, personalized analytical services to enable you to meet your analytical needs on time every time. We trust that you will find everything in order and to your satisfaction. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (843) 556-8171, ext. 4485.

Sincerely,

.h . ~ frltUI...J Bnelle Luthman for Valerie Davis Project Manager Enclosures problem solved 9 of44

Table of Contents Case Narrative ...................................................................................... 1 Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation.............................. .4 Laboratory Certifications ...................................................................... 7 Radiological Analysis ........................................................................... 9 Case Narrative ............................................................................ 10 Sam.pie Data Summary-............................................................... 15 Quality Control Summary-.......................................................... 32 10 of 44

Case Narrative Page 1 of34 11 of 44

Receipt Narrative for Enthalpy Analytical, LLC SDG: 455294 August 10, 2018 Laboratory Identification:

GEL Laboratories LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, South Carolina 29407 (843) 556-8171 Summary:

Sample receipt: The samples arrived at GEL Laboratories LLC, Charleston, South Carolina on July 24, 2018 for analysis. The samples were delivered with proper chain of custody documentation and signatures. All sample containers arrived without any visible signs of tampering or breakage. There are no additional comments concerning sample receipt.

Sample Identification: The laboratory received the following samples:

Laboratory ID ClientiD 455294001 SOl; 0.0-0.5 455294002 S02; 0.0-0.5 455294003 S03; 0.0-0.5 455294004 S04; 0.0-0.5 455294005 S05; 0.0-0.5 455294006 S06; 0.0-0.5 455294007 S07; 0.0-0.5 455294008 SOB; 0.0-0.5 455294009 S09; 0.0-0.5 455294010 SIO; 0.0-0.5 455294011 Sll; 0.0-0.5 455294012 Sl2; 0.0-0.5 455294013 Sl3; 0.0-0.5 455294014 Sl4; 0.0-0.5 455294015 SIS; 0.0-0.5 455294016 Sl6; 0.0-0.5 Case Narrative:

Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL's Standard Operating Procedures. Any technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical case narratives in the enclosed data package.

GEL Laboratories u.c PO Box aon 2 Charleston, sc 29417 2040 Savage Road Charleston, sc 29407 P843Ji5U1n F843.711.1178 www.gel.com Page 2 of34 12 of 44

The enclosed data package contains the following sections: Case Narrative, Chain of Custody, Cooler Receipt Checklist, Data Package Qualifier Definitions and data from the following fractions: Radiochemistry.

}j . ~ Yr'rtUV Bnelle Luthman for V a! erie Davis Project Manager GEL Laboratories u.c PO Box 30712 Charleston, SC 29417 2040 Savage Read Charles!Dn, SC 29407 P 843.55&.8171 F 843.718.1178 www.gel.com Page 3 of34 13 of 44

Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation Page 4 of34 14 of 44

Enthalpy Berkeley 2323 Fifth S_treet Berkeley, CA 94710 (510) 486-0900 (510) 486-0532 Project Number: 301640 Site: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Subcontract Laboratory:

General Engineering Labs 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407 (843) 556-8171 ATTN: Valerie Davis Results due: Report Level: II Please send report to: Patrick McCarthy (patrick.mccarthyenthalpy.com)

• • • Please report using Sample ID rather than Enthalpy (Berkeley) Lab #.

Sampl~. ID. SampJ esf * - ~a_t .:d.]!: 1\I!~~y~iB.. ,. I.;~tl . #. ¢9mm~n_t:s S01;0.0-0.5 07/19 08:41 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-001 S02;0.0-0.5 07/19 11:15 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640.- 002 S03;0.0-0.S 07/19 10:50 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-003 S04;0.0-0.5 07/19 1~:07 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-004 S05;0.0-0.5 07/19 09:41 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-005 S06;0.0-0.S 07/19 07:49 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-006 S07;0.0-0.5 07/19 11:35 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-007 S08;0.0-0.5 07/19 10:27 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-008 S09;0.0-0.5 07/19 09:27 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-009 S10;0.0-0.5 07/19 09:00 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-010 S11;0.0-0.5 07/19 08:23 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-011 S12;o.o-o.5 07/19 _ 09:55 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640

• 012 S13;0.0-0.5 07/19 10:16 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-013 S14;0.o-o.5 07/19 10:38 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-014 S15;o.o-o.5 07/19 ~1: 00 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 30164P-015 S16;0.0-0.5 07/19 11:50 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-016 I

1----~------------------------------------------------

IDate/Time:

I Signature on this form constitutes a firm Purchase Order for the services requested above.

Page 1 of 1 Page 5 of34 15 of 44

mDILaboratories _Lc vo Courier Other Carrier and Trac:klng Number

~ ~ *If Net COUIIts > IOOcpm on samples not marked "r..dioactive", contact the Radiation Safety Group for further Suspected Bamrd lnfonnation

~ investigation.

Shipped as a DOT Hazardous? Hazard CIIISS Shipped: UNII:

COC/Samples lllalked or classified as Mllllimum Net Counts Observed* (Observed Counts- An:a Background Coonts): _.,Jt::..___;CPM I mR/Hr radioactive? Casslfled as: Rad 1 Rad Z Rad 3 If yes, select Hazards below, and contact the GEL Safety Group.

PCB's Aammable Fmeigo Soil RCRA Asbestos Beryllium Other:

TEMP: 3" received within holding time?

PM lor PMA) noview: Initials _ _"j"M{.-..+JL.:..::::::..._ _ Date ---l.-\-11!"'--1-=-~- Page _l_ of_]__

GL-CHL-SR-001 Rev 5 Page 6 of34 16 of 44

Laboratory Certifications Page 7 of34 17 of 44

List of current GEL Certifications as of 10 August 2018 State Certification Alaska 17-018 Arkansas 88-0651 CLlA 4200904046 California 2940 Colorado SC00012 Connecticut PH-0169 Delaware SC00012 DoD ELAP/ IS017025 A2LA 2567.01 Florida NELAP E87156 Foreign Soils Permit P330-15-00283,P330-15-00253 Georgia SC00012 Georgia SDWA 967 Hawaii SC00012 Idaho Chemistry SC00012 Idaho Radiochemistry SC00012 Illinois NELAP 200029 Indiana C-SC-01 Kansas NELAP E-10332 Kentucky SOWA 90129 Kentucky Wastewater 90129 Louisiana NELAP 03046 (AI33904)

Louisiana SDWA LA180011 Maryland 270 Massachusetts M-SC012 Michigan 9976 Mississippi SC00012 Nebraska NE-OS-26-13 Nevada SC000122018-1 New Hampshire NELAP 205415 New Jersey NELAP SC002 New Mexico SC00012 New York NELAP 11501 North Carolina 233 North Carolina SDWA 45709 North Dakota R-158 Oklahoma 9904 Pennsylvania NELAP 68-00485 Puerto Rico SC00012 S. Carolina Radiochem 10120002 South Carolina Chemistry 10120001 Tennessee TN 02934 TexasNELAP Tl04704235-18-13 UtahNELAP SC000122018-26 Vermont VT87156 Virginia NELAP 460202 Washington C780 West Virginia 997404 Page 8 of34 18 of 44

Radiological Analysis Page 9 of34 19 of 44

Case Narrative Page 10 of34 20 of44

Radiochemistry Technical Case Narrative Enthalpy Analytical, LLC (CRTL)

SDG #: 455294 Product: Dry Weight Preparation Method: Dry Soil Prep Preparation Procedure: GL-RAD-A-021 REV# 23 Preparation Batch: 1785613 The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).

GEL Sample ID# Client Sample Identification 455294001 SOl; 0.0-0.5 455294002 S02; 0.0-0.5 455294003 S03; 0.0-0.5 455294004 S04; 0.0-0.5 455294005 S05; 0.0-0.5 455294006 S06; 0.0-0.5 455294007 S07; 0.0-0.5 455294008 S08; 0.0-0.5 455294009 S09; 0.0-0.5 455294010 SIO; 0.0-0.5 455294011 Sll; 0.0-0.5 455294012 Sl2; 0.0-0.5 455294013 S13; 0.0-0.5 455294014 S14; 0.0-0.5 455294015 SIS; 0.0-0.5 455294016 S16; 0.0-0.5 The samples in this SDG were analyzed on an "as received" basis.

Data Summary:

There are no exceptions, anomalies or deviations from the specified methods. All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where applicable.

Product: GFPC Gross AlB, Solid Analytical Method: EPA 900.0/SW846 931 0/SM 711 OB Modified Analytical Procedure: GL-RAD-A-OOlB REV# 19 Analytical Batch: 1790768 Preparation Method: Dry Soil Prep Preparation Procedure: GL-RAD-A-021 REV# 23 Preparation Batch: 1785613 Page 11 of34 21 of 44

The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).

GEL Sample ID# Client Sample Identification 455294001 SOl; 0.0-0.5 455294002 S02; 0.0-0.5 455294003 S03; 0.0-0.5 455294004 S04; 0.0-0.5 455294005 S05; 0.0-0.5 455294006 S06; 0.0-0.5 455294007 S07; 0.0-0.5 455294008 S08; 0.0-0.5 455294009 S09; 0.0-0.5 455294010 SIO; 0.0-0.5 455294011 Sll; 0.0-0.5 455294012 S12; 0.0-0.5 455294013 S13; 0.0-0.5 455294014 S14; 0.0-0.5 455294015 SIS; 0.0-0.5 455294016 S16; 0.0-0.5 1204088024 Method Blank (MB) 1204088025 455294001(SOI; 0.0-0.5) Sample Duplicate (DUP) 1204088026 455294001(SOI; 0.0-0.5) Matrix Spike (MS) 1204088027 455294001(SOI; 0.0-0.5) Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) 1204088028 Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)

The samples in this SDG were analyzed on a "dry weight" basis.

Data Summary:

All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where applicable, with the following exceptions.

Quality Control (OC) Information Duplication Criteria between QC Sample and Duplicate Sample The Sample and the Duplicate, (See Below), did not meet the relative percent difference requirement; however, they do meet the relative error ratio requirement with the value listed below.

Sample Analyte Value 1204088025 (SOl; 0.0-0.SDUP) BETA RPD 47.2* (0.00%-20.00%) RER 2.45 (0-3)

Technical Information Sample Re-prep/Re-analysis Samples were reprepped due to high relative percent difference/relative error ratio. The re-analysis is being reported.

Gross Alpha/Beta Preparation Information High hygroscopic salt content in evaporated samples can cause the sample mass to fluctuate due to moisture absorption. To minimize this interference, the salts are converted to oxides by heating the sample under a flame until a dull red color is obtained. The conversion to oxides stabilizes the sample weight and ensures that proper alpha/beta efficiencies are assigned for each sample. Volatile radioisotopes of carbon, hydrogen, technetium, polonium and cesium may be lost during sample heating.

Page 12 of34 22 of44

Recounts Sample 455294012 (S 12; 0.0-0.5) was recounted to verify sample results. Recount is reported. Samples 1204088025 (SOl; 0.0-0.SDUP) and 455294001 (SOl; 0.0-0.5) were recounted due to high relative percent difference/relative error ratio. The recounts are reported.

Certification Statement Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the requirements of the NELAC standard unless otherwise noted in the analytical case narrative.

Page 13 of34 23 of 44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Qualifier Definition Report for CRTLOOl Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Client SDG: 455294 GEL Work Order: 455294 The Qualifiers in this report are defined as follows:

• A quality control analyte recovery is outside of specified acceptance criteria

• • Analyte is a Tracer compound M Result above MDC and less than RDL U Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the MDL, MDA, MDC or LOD.

ReviewN alidation GEL requires all analytical data to be verified by a qualified data reviewer. In addition, all CLP-like deliverables receive a third level review of the fractional data package.

The following data validator verified the information presented in this data report:

Signature:~~~ Name: Theresa Austin Date: 10 AUG 2018

Title:

Group Leader Page 14 of34 24 of44

Sample Data Summary Page 15 of34 25 of 44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: SOl; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294001 Client ID: CRTLOOI Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 08:41 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 10.5 +/-4.14 3.77 4_00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/ 18 1612 1790768 Beta 16.2 +/-2.93 2.89 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dl)' Soil Prep Dl)' Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 931 0/SM 711 OB Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 16 of34 26 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S02; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 455294002 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 11:15 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 14.8 +/-5.02 3.95 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta 12.5 +/-2.94 2.86 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 17 of34 27 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 9471 0

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S03; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 455294003 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 10:50 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 10.3 +/-3.81 3.95 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 1313 1790768 Beta M 8.60 +/-2.12 2.16 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07127/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 931 0/SM 711 OB Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 18 of34 28 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S04; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294004 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 10:07 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 8.00 +/-3_30 3.86 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta M 8.13 +/-1.96 2.10 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level ( 1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit P.F: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 19 of34 29 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S05; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294005 ClientiD: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 09:41 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 8.95 +/-3.69 3.88 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 1313 1790768 Beta 13.3 +/-2.75 3.03 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 7110B Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 20 of34 30 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S06; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294006 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 07:49 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 7.34 +/-3.57 3.98 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/18 1313 1790768 Beta 10.8 +/-2.94 3.68 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

• Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 7110B Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level ( 1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 21 of34 31 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S07; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294007 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 11:35 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 14.3 +/-4.39 3.84 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 1313 1790768 Beta 13.7 +/-2.98 3.42 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method

• Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07127/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 22 of34 32 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S08; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294008 ClientiD: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 10:27 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 14.4 +/-4.62 3.89 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 J313 1790768 Beta 16.7 +/-3.30 3.54 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 23 of34 33 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S09; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 455294009 ClientiD: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 09:27 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 8.06 +/-3.41 3.85 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta 33.2 +/-3.51 2.37 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07127/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 24 of34 34 of 44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S10; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294010 ClientlD: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 09:00 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 11.9 +/-4.04 3.77 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/ 18 1314 1790768 Beta 37.9 +/-3. 74 2.22 10.0 pCilg The followin Methods were erformed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

OF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 25 of34 35 of44

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: Sl1; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294011 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 08:23 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 7.12 +/-3.13 3.83 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta M 6.19 +/-1.94 2.51 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 26 of34 36 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Cli~nt Sample ID: S12; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294012 ClientiD: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 09:55 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 6.38 +/-3.28 3.79 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/10/1 8 0634 1790768 Beta M 9.33 +/-2.63 3.32 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27118 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 931 0/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 27 of34 37 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S13; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 455294013 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 10:16 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 9.50 +/-3.57 3.97 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta 19.7 +/-3.14 3.22 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07127/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 28 of34 38 of 44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10,2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S14; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 455294014 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 10:38 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 14.0 +/-4.80 3.74 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta 12.3 +/-2.78 2.62 10.0 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 931 0/SM 711 OB Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 29 of34 39 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S15; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 455294015 ClientiD: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 11 :00 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 12.2 +/-4.54 3.93 4.00 pCi/g JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta 12.9 +/-2.99 3.08 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07127/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 30 of34 40 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 10, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S16; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 455294016 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 11:50 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting GFPC Gross AlB, Solid "Dry Weight Corrected" Alpha 13.3 +/-4.62 3.89 4.00 pCilg JXK3 08/09/18 1314 1790768 Beta 15.3 +/-2.83 2.47 10.0 pCilg The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method

• Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 07/27/18 0829 1785613 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments EPA 900.0/SW846 9310/SM 71108 Modified Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 31 of34 41 of44

Quality Control Summary Page 32 of34 42 of44

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com QC Summan: Report Date: August 10, 2018 Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Page 1 of 2 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Workorder: 455294 Parmname NOM c Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time Rad Gas Flow Batch 1790768 QC1204088025 455294001 DUP Alpha 10.5 8.28 pCi/g 23.8 (0%-100%) JXK3 08/09/ 18 16: 12 Uncertainty +/-4.14 +/-3.41 Beta 16.2 10.0 pCi/g 47.2* (0%-20%)

Uncertainty +/-2.93 +/-2.97 QC1204088028 LCS Alpha 104 109 pCi/g 105 (75o/o-125%) 08/09/18 13:13 Uncertainty +/-9.98 Beta 401 427 pCi/g 106 (75o/o-125%)

Uncertainty +/-14.6 QC 1204088024 MB Alpha u 0.554 pCi/g 08/09/18 13:14 Uncertainty +/-1.59 Beta u -0.165 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-2.30 QC1204088026 455294001 MS Alpha 119 10.5 153 pCi/g 119 (75o/o-125%) 08/09/18 13:13 Uncertainty +/-4.14 +/-17.5 Beta 461 16.2 483 pCi/g 101 (75o/o-125%)

Uncertainty +/-2.93 +/-17.8 QC1204088027 45529400 I MSD Alpha 116 10.5 132 pCi/g 14.6 105 (Oo/o-20%) 08/09/18 13:13 Uncertainty +/-4.14 +/-15.5 Beta 448 16.2 434 pCi/g 10.6 93.3 (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-2.93 +/-15.9 Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

The Qualifiers in this report are dc:fmed as follows:

• • Analyte is a Tracer compound

< Result is less than value reported

> Result is greater than value reported Page 33 of34 43 of44

GEL LA BORA TORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com QCSummary Workorder: 455294 Page 2 of 2 Parmname NOM Sam Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time BD Results are either below the MDC or tracer recovery is low FA Failed analysis.

H Analytical holding time was exceeded J Value is estimated K Analyte present. Reported value may be biased high. Actual value is expected to be lower.

L Analyte present. Reported value may be biased low. Actual value is expected to be higher.

M Result above MDC and less than RDL N/A RPD or %Recovery limits do not apply.

Nl See case narrative ND Analyte concentration is not detected above the detection limit NJ Consult Case Narrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier Q One or more quality control criteria have not been met. Refer to the applicable narrative or DER.

R Sample results are rejected u Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the MDL, MD A, MDC or LOD.

UI Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification UJ Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification UL Not considered detected. The associated number is the reported concentration, which may be inaccurate due to a low bias.

X Consult Case Narrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier y Other specific qualifiers were required to properly defme the results. Consult case narrative.

1\

RPD of sample and duplicate evaluated using +/-RL. Concentrations are <5X the RL. Qualifier Not Applicable for Radiochemistry.

h Preparation or preservation holding time was exceeded N/A indicates that spike recovery limits do not apply when sample concentration exceeds spike cone. by a factor of 4 or more or %RPD not applicable.

" The Relative Percent Difference (RPD) obtained from the sample duplicate (DUP) is evaluated against the acceptance criteria when the sample is greater than five times (5X) the contract required detection limit (RL). In cases where either the sample or duplicate value is less than 5X the RL, a control limit of+/- the RL is used to evaluate the DUP result.

• Indicates that a Quality Control parameter was not within specifications.

For PS, PSD, and SOILT results, the values listed are the measured amounts, not fmal concentrations.

Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the requirements of the NELAC standard unless qualified on the QC Summary.

I~

Page 34 of34 44 of44

E y A N A 1 Y T I .C A 1

Enthalpy Analytical 2323 Fifth Street. Berkeley. CA 94710. Phone (510) 486-0900 Laboratory Job Number 302601 ANALYTICAL REPORT Baseline Environmental Project 18301-00 5900 Hollis Street Location SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Emeryville, CA 94608 Level II Sample ID Lab ID 802;0.0-0.5 302601-001 809;0.0-0.5 302601-002 810;0.0-0.5 302601-003 This data package has been reviewed for technical correctness and completeness.

Release of this data has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or the Manager's designee, as verified by the following signature which applies to this PDF file as well as any associated electronic data deliverable files. The results contained in this report meet all requirements of NELAP and pertain only to those samples which were submitted for analysis. This report may be reproduced only in its entirety.

Signature: Date: 08/23i2018 Patrick McCarthy Project Manager patrick.mccarthy@enthalpy.com (510) 204-2236 ext 13115 CA ELAP# 2896, NELAP# 4044-001 1 of33

,...~ENTHALPY

~~ ANALYTICAL CASE NARRATIVE Laboratory number: 302601 Client: Baseline Environmental Project: 18301-00 Location: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Request Date: 08/16/18 Samples Received: 07/20/18 This data package contains sample and QC results for three soil samples, requested for the above referenced project on 08/16/18. The samples were received cold and intact.

Gamma Scan (EMLHASL 300):

General Engineering Labs in Charleston, SC performed the analysis (NELAP certified). Please see the General Engineering Labs case narrative.

Page 1 of 1 3.0 2 of33

<a&ti\

~M9NTROSE liatlick McCarthy <pmccarthy@montrose-env.com>

-Re: 18301-00 *Enthalpy (Berkeley) Data (301640)

Patrick Sutton <patrick@basellne-env.com> Thu, Aug 16,2018 at 1:45PM To: Patrick McCarthy <patrick.mccarthy@enthalpy.com>

Cc: Redgy Ramirez <radgy@baselina-env.com>, William Scott <blll@baselina-env.com>

Sura -we actually have an updated request, so Jet me start over. 0 Please perform a gamma scan (DOE EML HASL 300 4.5.2.3/GA-01-R) of samples S02;0.0-0.5, S09;0.0-0.5, and S10;0.D-0.5. To be consistent with previous lnvastlgatlons performed In this area, please Include the Jist of Isotopes shown below. In particular, we want to look at Co-60 and Cs-137. We would also like to request an expedited 5-day turnaround service.

Thanks, Patrick Sutton k-40

° Co-60 Cs-137 Cs-134 Tl-208 Pb-210 Bi-210 Po-210 Pb-212 Bl-214 Pb-214 Ra-226 Po-214 Th-228 Th-232 Th-234 Pa-234m Pa-234 Po-216 Po-218 Patrick Sutton Environmental Engineer Baseline Environmental Consulting 5900 Hollis Street, Suite D Emeryville, CA 94608 Main: (510) 42().8686 Direct: (510) 922-0080 3 of33

,...~ENTHALPY

~..J ANALYTICAL Detections Summary for 302601 Results for any subcontracted analyses are not included in this summary.

Client Baseline Environmental Project 18301-00 Location SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Client Sample ID S02;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 302601-001 No Detections Client Sample ID S09;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 302601-002 No Detections Client Sample ID S10;0.0-0.5 Laboratory Sample ID 302601-003 No Detections Page 1 of 1 5. 0 4 of33

Laboratory Job Number 302601 Subcontracted Products Genera1 Engineering Labs 5 of33

ld41l Laboratories LLc PO Box30712 Charleston.SC29417 a member of The GEL Group INC 2040 Bavage Road Charleston. SC 29407 p 843.556.8171 F 843 766.1178 gel. com August 21, 2018 Mr. Patrick McCarthy Enthalpy Analytical, LLC 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710 Re: Project Number:

Work Order: 457517

Dear Mr. McCarthy:

GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL} appreciates the opportunity to provide the enclosed analytical results for the sample(s) we received on July 24, 2018. This original data report has been prepared and reviewed in accordance with GEL's standard operating procedures.

Our policy is to provide high quality, personalized analytical services to enable you to meet your analytical needs on time every time. We trust that you will find everything in order and to your satisfaction. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (843) 556-8171, ext. 4485.

Sincerely, h . ~YWU'v Bnelle Luthman for Valerie Davis Project Manager Enclosures problem solved 6 of33

Table of Contents Case Narrative ...................................................................................... 1 Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation.............................. .3 Laboratory Certifications ...................................................................... 9 Radiological Analysis ......................................................................... 11 Case Narrative ............................................................................ 12 Sample Data Summary ............................................................... 17 Quality Control Summary .......................................................... 21 7 of33

Case Narrative Page 1 of26 8 of33

Receipt Narrative for Enthalpy Analytical, LLC SDG: 457517 August 21, 2018 Laboratory Identification:

GEL Laboratories LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, South Carolina 29407 (843) 556-8171 Summary:

Sample receipt: The samples arrived at GEL Laboratories LLC, Charleston, South Carolina on July 24,2018 for analysis. The samples were delivered with proper chain of custody documentation and signatures. All sample containers arrived without any visible signs of tampering or breakage. There are no additional comments concerning sample receipt.

Sample Identification: The laboratory received the following samples:

Laboratory ID ClientiD 457517001 S09; 0.0-0.5 457517002 S10; 0.0-0.5 457517003 S02; 0.0-0.5 Case Narrative:

Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL's Standard Operating Procedures. Any technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical case narratives in the enclosed data package.

The enclosed data package contains the following sections: Case Narrative, Chain of Custody, Cooler Receipt Checklist, Data Package Qualifier Definitions and data from the following fractions: Radiochemistry.

fne~th'::hor Valerie Davis Project Manager GEL Laboratories u.c POBax30712 Charleston,SC29417 2040SavageRcad Charlaston,SC29407 PII43.55U171 F B43.718.1178 www.gel.com Page 2 of26 9 of33

Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation Page 3 of26 10 of 33

Enthalpy Berkeley 2323 Fifth S~reet Berkeley, CA 94710 (510) 486-0900 (510) 486-0532 Project Number: 301640 Site: SR84 Widening & SR84/I 680 Subcontract Laboratory:

General Engineering Labs 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407 (843) 556-8171 ATTN: Valerie Davis Results due: Report Level: II Please send report to: Patrick McCarthy (patrick.mccarthyenthalpy.com)

• • • Please report using Sample ID rather than Enthalpy (Berkeley) Lab #.

S01;0 . 0*0.5 07/19 08:41 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*001 S02;0 . 0*0.5 07/19 11:15 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*002 S03;0.0*0.5 0?/19 10:50 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*003 S04;0.0-0.5 07/19 1~:07 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*004 S05;0.0*0.S 07/19 09:41 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BBTA 301640*005 S06;0.0*0.5 07/19 07:49 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*006 507;0.0-0.5 07/19 11:35 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*007 SOB;0.0-0.5 07/19 10:27 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*008 S09;0.0-0.S 0?/19 09:27 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BBTA 301640*009 Sl0;0;0-0.5 07/19 09:00 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*010 Sll;0.0-0.5 07/19 08:23 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-011 S12;0.0-0.5 07/19 . 09:55 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BBTA 301640*012 Sll;0.0*0.5 07/19 10:16 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*013 Sl4;0.0*0.5 07/19 10:38 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640-014 S15;0.0-0.S 07/19 ~1:00 Soil GROSS 1\LPHA/BETA 301640*015 S16;0.0*0.S 07/19 11:50 Soil GROSS ALPHA/BETA 301640*016 Signature on this form constitutes a firm Purchase Order for the services requested above.

Page 1 of 1 Page 4 of26 11 of 33

a ILaboratories _LC VD SAMPLE RECEIPT & REVIEW FORM Courier Otbcr Carrier and TrDcklng Number

~ ~ *JCNct Counts> IOOcpn* oa samples DOl amkcd "nndioactlvc*. coolaCIIhe Radiation Safely Group for funher Suspected Hazard lnfonnallon

~ lnvesiiJllldon.

Shl us D DOT Hnzanlous? Hllwd CJw Shipped: UN/I:

COC/Samples marked or classified as Maxhmm Nl:l Counts Observed* (Observed Couals* ARa Bucksmuncl Counls): -~-'CPM I mBIRr nnllonctlve? OnssUicd us: Rad 1 Rad 2 Rad 3 IC ye.~, select H:wucls below, and CODIICIIhe GEL Safety Group.

PCB's Fln11111111ble l'orelgo Soli RCRA Asbestos TEMP: 3" (If unknown, select No)

-~"""'~~- Pagc,.l_of_L GL-CHL*SR-001 Rev 5 Page 5 of26 12 of 33

Re: Additional Analysis for 301640/455294

Subject:

Re: Additional Analysis for 301640/ 455294 From: Patrick McCarthy <patrick.mccarthy@enthalpy.com>

Date: BjlG/2018 4:51 PM To: Valerie Davis <vsd@gel.com>

Hi Valerie, Here is the updated client request:

Please perform a gamma scan (DOE EML HA8L 300 4.5.2.3/GA-01-R) of samples 802;0.0-0.5, 809;0.0-0.5, and 810;0.0-0.5 (samples 301640-009, 301640-010 and 301640-002).

Please include the list of the following isotopes, of particular importance are Co-60 and Cs- 137.

They've also requested an expedited 5-day TAT. Is that something you can accommodate?

Thanks!

K-40 co-60 Cs-137 cs-134 Tl-208 Pb-210 Bi-210 Po-210 Pb-212 Bf-214 P.b-214 R.a-2:2~

Po-214 Th-228 Th-.232 Th-234 Pa-234m Pa-234 Po-216 Po*218 ENT HALPY.

ANALYTICAL Project Manager Enthalpy Analytical LLC (formerly Curtis & Tompkins, Ltd.)

2323 Fifth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 Office: (510) 486.0900 Direct: (510) 204.2236 1 of3 8/16/2018 5:46PM Page 6 of26 13 of 33

Re: Additional Analysis for 301640I 455294 www.curtisandtompkins.com Please note my office hours have changed! I am now available in the lab from 9:30-6 PM.

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Valerie Davis <vsd@gel.com> wrote:

Hi Patrick, Please confirm which gamma isotopes need to be reported.

I

' Thanks, Valerie

. On 8/16/2018 3:48 PM, Patrick McCarthy wrote:

Hi Valerie, The client has requested additional analysis for spectroscopy analysis (DOE EML HA8L 300 4.5.2.3/GA-01-R) for samples 809;0.0-0.5 (301640-009) and 810;0.0-0.5 (301640-01 0).

Can you proceed with the analysis?

ENTHALPY.

ANALYTlC.AL.

Project Manager Enthalpy Analytical LLC (formerly Curtis & Tompkins, Ltd.)

2323 Fifth St .. Berkeley, CA 94710 Office: (510) 486.0900 Direct: (510) 204.2236 www.curtisandtompkins.com Please note my office hours have changed! I am now available in the lab from 9:30-6 PM.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments and the reply from your system. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited.

2 of3 8/16/2018 5:46PM Page 7 of26 14 of 33

Re: Additional Analysis for 301640/455294

,I Valerie Davis Project Manager

! ~---------------------------------J

2040 Savage Road, Charleston, SC 29407 I PO Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 Office Direct: 843.769.7391 I Office Main: 843.556.8171 I Fax: 843.766.1178 E-Mail: vsd@gel.com I Website: www.gel.com

Analytical Testing I I I I

~ ~ ~

i - ------ --- ----- --**---

I I

_j

! CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property of

• The GEL Group, Inc. and its affiliates. All rights, including without limitation copyright, are reserved. The proprietary information contained in this e-mail message, and any files transmitted with it, is intended for the use of the recipient{s) named above. If the reader of

• this e-mail is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this e-mail in error and that any review, distribution or copying of this e-mail or any files transmitted with it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original message and any files transmitted. The unauthorized use of this e-mail or any files transmitted with it is prohibited and disclaimed by The GEL Group, Inc. and its affiliates.

http://www.gellaboratories.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the Intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments and the reply from your system. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments Is strictly prohibited.

3 of3 8/16/2018 5:46 PM Page 8 of26 15 of 33

Laboratory Certifications Page 9 of26 16 of 33

List of current GEL Certifications as of 21 August 2018 State Certification Alaska 17-018 Arkansas 88-0651 CLlA 42D0904046 California 2940 Colorado SC00012 Connecticut PH-0169 Delaware SC00012 DoD ELAP/ IS017025 A2LA 2567.01 Florida NELAP E87156 Foreign Soils Permit P330-15-00283,P330-15-00253 Georgia SC00012 Georgia SDWA 967 Hawaii SC00012 Idaho Chemistry SC00012 Idaho Radiochemistry SC00012 Illinois NELAP 200029 Indiana C-SC-01 Kansas NELAP E-10332 Kentucky SDWA 90129 Kentucky Wastewater 90129 Louisiana NELAP 03046 (AI33904)

Louisiana SDWA LA180011 Maryland 270 Massachusetts M-SC012 Michigan 9976 Mississippi SC00012 Nebraska NE-OS-26-13 Nevada scooo 122018-1 New Hampshire NELAP 205415 New Jersey NELAP SC002 New Mexico SC00012 New York NELAP 11501 North Carolina 233 North Carolina SDWA 45709 North Dakota R-158 Oklahoma 9904 Pennsylvania NELAP 68-00485 Puerto Rico SC00012 S. Carolina Radiochem 10120002 South Carolina Chemistry 10120001 Tennessee TN 02934 TexasNELAP T104704235-18-13 UtahNELAP SC000122018-26 Vermont VT87156 Virginia NELAP 460202 Washington C780 Page 10 of26 17 of 33

Radiological Analysis Page 11 of26 18 of 33

Case Narrative Page 12 of26 19 of 33

Radiochemistry Technical Case Narrative Enthalpy Analytical, LLC (CRTL)

SDG #: 457517 Product: Dry Weight Preparation Method: Dry Soil Prep Preparation Procedure: GL-RAD-A-021 REV# 23 Preparation Batch: 1793951 The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).

GEL Sample ID# Client Sample Identification 457517001 S09; 0.0-0.5 457517002 S10; 0.0-0.5 The samples in this SDG were analyzed on an "as received" basis.

Data Summary:

There are no exceptions, anomalies or deviations from the specified methods. All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where applicable.

Product: Dry Weight Preparation Method: Dry Soil Prep Preparation Procedure: GL-RAD-A-021 REV# 23 Preparation Batch: 1794192 The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).

GEL Sample ID# Client Sample Identification 457517003 S02; 0.0-0.5 The samples in this SDG were analyzed on an "as received" basis.

Data Summary:

There are no exceptions, anomalies or deviations from the specified methods. All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where applicable.

Product: Gamma Scan Analytical Method: DOE HASL 300, 4.5.2.3/Ga-01-R Analytical Procedure: GL-RAD-A-013 REV# 27 Page 13 of26 20 of 33

Analytical Batch: 1793965 Preparation Method: Dry Soil Prep Preparation Procedure: GL-RAD-A-021 REV# 23 Preparation Batches: 1793951 and 1794192 The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).

GEL Sample ID# Client Sample Identification 457517001 S09; 0.0-0.5 457517002 S10; 0.0-0.5 457517003 S02; 0.0-0.5 1204094972 Method Blank (MB) 1204094973 457517002(S10; 0.0-0.5) Sample Duplicate (DUP) 1204094974 Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)

The samples in this SDG were analyzed on a "dry weight" basis.

Data Summary:

All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where applicable, with the following exceptions.

Quality Control (QC) Information Duplication Criteria between QC Sample and Duplicate Sample The Sample and the Duplicate, (See Below), did not meet the relative percent difference requirement; however, they do meet the relative error ratio requirement with the value listed below.

Sample Analyte Value 1204094973 (S10; 0.0-0.SDUP) Bismuth-214 RPD 42.4* (0.00%-20.00%) RER 1.9 (0-3)

Lead-214 RPD 32.9* (0.00%-20.00%) RER 1.82 (0-3)

Potassium-40 RPD 21.1 * (0.00%-20.00%) RER 1.86 (0-3)

Radium-226 RPD 42.4* (0.00%-20.00%) RER 1.9 (0-3)

Qualifier Information Qualifier Reason Analyte Sample Client Sample Results are considered a false S10; UI positive due to high counting Lead-210 1204094973 0.0-0.5(457517002DUP) uncertainty.

Thorium-234 457517002 s10; 0.0-0.5 1204094972 MB for batch 1793965 Page 14 of26 21 of 33

S10; 1204094973 0.0-0.5(457517002DUP)

Results are considered a false UI Bismuth-214 457517001 S09; 0.0-0.5 positive due to low abundance.

Radium-226 457517001 S09; 0.0-0.5 Results are considered a false UI Thorium-234 457517001 S09; 0.0-0.5 positive due to no valid peale.

Certification Statement Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the requirements of the NELAC standard unless otherwise noted in the analytical case narrative.

Page 15 of26 22 of 33

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Qualifier Definition Report for CRTLOO 1 Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Client SDG: 457517 GEL Work Order: 457517 The Qualifiers in this report are defined as follows:

• A quality control analyte recovery is outside of specified acceptance criteria

• • Analyte is a Tracer compound M Result above MDC and less than RDL U Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the MDL, MDA, MDC or LOD.

UI Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification ReviewNalidation GEL requires all analytical data to be verified by a qualified data reviewer. In addition, all CLP-Iike deliverables receive a third level review of the fractional data package.

The following data validator verified the information presented in this data report:

Signature:~~~ Name: Theresa Austin Date: 22 AUG 2018

Title:

Group Leader Page 16 of26 23 of 33

Sample Data Summary Page 17 of26 24 of 33

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 22, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S09; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 SampleiD: 457517001 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 09:27 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gamma Spec Analysis Gamma Scan "Dry Weight Corrected" Bismuth-214 UI 0.00 +/-0.172 0.239 pCi/g MXRI 08/20/18 1351 1793965 Cesium-134 u 0.0118 +1-0.0355 0.0661 pCi/g Cesium-137 u 0.0185 +/-0.0289 0.0613 0.100 pCi/g Cobalt-60 u 0.0178 +/-0.0393 0.0864 pCi/g Lead-210 u 1.56 +/-3.34 6.61 pCi/g Lead-212 0.274 +/-0.0865 0.0809 pCi/g Lead-214 0.295 +/-0.123 0.109 pCi/g Potassium-40 5.54 +/-1.16 0.557 pCi/g Protactinium-234 u 0.105 +/-0.281 0.595 pCi/g Protactinium-234m u -2.33 +/-4.31 7.83 pCi/g Radium-226 UI 0.00 +/-0.172 0.239 pCi/g Thallium-208 0.0846 +/-0.0682 0.0578 pCi/g Thorium-228 0.274 +/-0.0865 0.0809 pCi/g Thorium-232 0.613 +/-0.239 0.225 pCi/g Thoriwri-234 UI 0.00 +/-1.77 1.58 pCi/g The following Prep Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXCI 08/17/18 0930 1793951 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Description Analyst Comments DOE HASL 300, 4.5.2.3/Ga-01-R Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 18 of26 25 of 33

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 22, 20 18 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S10; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 457517002 Client ID: CRTL001 Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 09:00 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gamma Spec Analysis Gamma Scan "Dry Weight Corrected" Bismuth-214 0.453 +/-0.109 0.0709 pCilg MXR1 08/20/18 1312 1793965 Cesium-134 u 0.0325 +/-0.0322 0.0475 pCilg Cesium-137 0.105 +/-0.039 0.0364 0.100 pCilg Coba1t-60 u 0.00333 +/-0.0195 0.0396 pCi!g Lead-210 u -2.93 +/-4.31 7.74 pCilg Lead-212 0.578 +/-0.0759 0.0536 pCilg Lead-214 0.368 +/-0.0989 0.068 pCi/g Potassium-40 6.45 +/-0.726 0.294 pCilg Protactinium-234 u -0.0452 +/-0.165 0.307 pCi/g Protactinium-234m u 2.97 +/-4.00 6.19 pCilg Radium-226 0.453 +/-0.109 0.0709 pCilg Thallium-208 0.194 +/-0.0451 0.0297 pCilg Thorium-228 0.578 +/-0.0759 0.0536 pCilg Thorium-232 0.609 +/-0.150 0.118 pCilg Thorium-234 UI 0.00 +/-2.13 1.75 pCilg The following Pre~ Methods were ~erformed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXC1 08/17/18 0930 1793951 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method Descri(!tion Anal~st Comments DOE HASL 300, 4.5.2.3/Ga-01-R Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detec~ble Concentration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 19 of26 26 of 33

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com Certificate of Analysis Report Date: August 22, 2018 Company: Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Address: 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California 94710

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Project: Project Number:

Client Sample ID: S02; 0.0-0.5 Project: CRTL00117 Sample ID: 457517003 Client ID: CRTLOOI Matrix: Soil Collect Date: 19-JUL-18 11:15 Receive Date: 24-JUL-18 Collector: Client Parameter Qualifier Result Uncertainty MDC RL Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method Rad Gamma Spec Analysis Gamma Scan "Dry Weight Corrected" Bismuth-214 0.429 +/-0.159 0.110 pCilg MXRI 08/20/18 1424 1793965 Cesium-134 u 0.0446 +/-0.043 0.089 pCi/g Cesium-137 u 0.0656 +/-0.0351 0.0791 0.100 pCi/g Coba!t-60 u 0.00332 :t/-0.0323 0.066 pCilg Lead-210 u 0.443 +/-1.14 0.836 pCilg Lead-212 0.656 +/-0.0969 0.0779 pCi/g Lead-214 0.470 +/-0.149 0.119 pCilg Potassium-40 8.81 +/-1.23 0.554 pCilg Protactinium-234 u 0.181 +/-0.244 0.518 pCilg Protactinium-234m u 3.08 +/-5.01 9.06 pCilg Radium-226 0.429 +/-0.159 0.110 pCi/g Thallium-208 0.171 +/-0.0883 0.0601 pCilg Thorium-228 0.656 +/-0.0969 0.0779 pCilg Thorium-232 0.739 +/-0.217 0.245 pCilg Thorium-234 u 0.346 +/-1.23 0.856 pCilg The following Pree Methods were eerformed:

Method Description Analyst Date Time Prep Batch Dry Soil Prep Dry Soil Prep GL-RAD-A-021 CXB7 08/17/18 1543 1794192 The following Analytical Methods were performed:

Method DescriQtion Analy~t Comments DOE HASL 300, 4.5.2.3/Ga-01-R Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

Column headers are defined as follows:

DF: Dilution Factor Lc/LC: Critical Level DL: Detection Limit PF: Prep Factor MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity RL: Reporting Limit MDC: Minimum Detectable Conce~tration SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit Page 20 of26 27 of 33

Quality Control Summary Page 21 of26 28 of 33

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com QC Summan: Report Date: August 22, 2018 Enthalpy Analytical, LLC Page 1 of 5 2323 5th Street Berkeley, California

Contact:

Mr. Patrick McCarthy Workorder: 457517 Parmname NOM c Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time Rad Gamma Spec Batch 1793965 QC1204094973 457517002 DUP Bismuth-214 0.453 0.294 pCi/g 42.4* (Oo/o-20%) MXRI 08/20/18 15:49 Uncertainty +/-0.109 +/-0.112 Cesium-134 u 0.0325 u 0.037 pCi/g N/A N/A Uncertainty +/-0.0322 +/-0.0295 Cesium-137 0.105 M 0.0586 pCi/g 57 (0%-100%)

Uncertainty +/-0.039 +/-0.041 Cobalt-60 u 0.00333 u -0.00244 pCi/g N/A N/A Uncertainty +/-0.0195 +/-0.0282 Lead-210 u -2.93 UI 0.00 pCi/g N/A N/A Uncertainty +/-4.31 +/-0.711 Lead-212 0.578 0.515 pCi/g 11.5 (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.0759 +/-0.0942 Lead-214 0.368 0.513 pCi/g 32.9* (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.0989 +/-0.107 Potassium-40 6.45 7.97 pCi/g 21.1* (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.726 +/-1.04 Protactinium-234 u -0.0452 u -0.0477 pCi/g N/A N/A Uncertainty +/-0.165 +/-0.163 Protactinium-234m u 2.97 u 1.45 pCi/g N/A N/A Uncertainty +/-4.00 +/-3.06 Radium-226 0.453 0.294 pCi/g 42.4* (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.109 +/-0.112 Thallium-208 0.194 0.160 pCi/g 19 (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.0451 +/-0.0566 Thorium-228 0.578 0.515 pCi/g 11.5 (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.0759 +/-0.0942 Thorium-232 0.609 0.603 pCi/g 0.957 (Oo/o-20%)

Uncertainty +/-0.150 +/-0.212 Page 22 of26 29 of 33

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com QC Summan:

Workorder: 457517 Page 2 of 5 Parmname NOM Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time Rad Gamma Spec Batch 1793965 Thorium-234 UI 0.00 UI 0.00 pCi/g N/A N/AMXRI 08/20/18 15:49 Uncertainty +/-2.13 +/-0.910 QC1204094974 LCS Americium-241 488 579 pCi/g 11 9 (75%-125%) 08/20/18 17:19 Uncertainty +/-14.8 Bismuth-214 u -0.559 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-1.16 Cesium-134 u 0.249 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.612 Cesium-137 172 165 pCi/g 96.2 (75%-125%)

Uncertainty +/-3.19 Cobalt-60 125 123 pCi/g 98 (75o/o-125%)

Uncertainty +/-3.28 Lead-210 5160 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-383 Lead-212 u 0.442 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.734 Lead-214 u -0.581 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-1.Q7 Potassium-40 u 0.780 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-2.49 Protactinium-234 u -0.75 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-6.52 Protactinium-234m u -25.8 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-96.6 Radium-226 u -0.559 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-1.16 Thallium-208 u 0.0885 pC!fg Uncertainty +/-0.520 Thorium-228 u 0.442 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.734 Page 23 of26 30 of 33

GEL LA BORA TORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171 - www.gel.com QC Summan:

Workorder: 457517 Page 3 of 5 Pannname NOM c Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time Rad Gamma Spec Batch 1793965 Thorium-232 u -0.317 pCi/g MXR1 08/20/18 17:19 Uncertainty +/-2.73 Thorium-234 u -6.83 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-22.1 QCI204094972 MB Bismuth-214 u 0.00421 pCi/g 08/20/1 8 15:45 Uncertainty +/-0.0563 Cesium-134 u 0.000157 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0206 Cesium-137 u 0.00288 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0214 Cobalt-60 u -0.00948 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0184 Lead-210 u -1.01 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-6.78 Lead-212 u 0.0214 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0525 Lead-214 u 0.109 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.117 Potassium-40 u 0.163 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.337 Protactinium-234 u 0.0593 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.148 Protactinium-234m u 3.54 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-3.32 Radium-226 u 0.00421 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0563 Thallium-208 u -0.0124 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0205 Thorium-228 u 0.0214 pCi/g Uncertainty +/-0.0525 Page 24 of26 31 of 33

GEL LABORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com QCSummary Workorder: 457517 Page 4 of 5 Parmname NOM Sam c Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time Rad Gamma Spec Batch 1793965 Thorium-232 u -0.000799 pCilg MXR1 08/20/18 15:45 Uncertainty +/-0.0797 Thorium-234 UI 0.00 pCilg Uncertainty +/-2.99 Notes:

Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 95% confidence level (1.96-sigma).

The Qualifiers in this report are defmed as follows:

• • Analyte is a Tracer compound

< Result is Jess than value reported

> Result is greater than value reported BD Results are either below the MDC or tracer recovery is low FA Failed analysis.

H Analytical holding time was exceeded J Value is estimated K Analyte present. Reported value may be biased high. Actual value is expected to be lower.

L Analyte present. Reported value may be biased low. Actual value is expected to be higher.

M Result above MDC and Jess than RDL N/A RPD or %Recovery limits do not apply.

N1 See case narrative ND Analyte concentration is not detected above the detection limit NJ Consult Case Narrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier Q One or more quality control criteria have not been met. Refer to the applicable narrative or DER.

R Sample results are rejected u Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the MDL, MDA, MDC or LOD.

UI Gamma Spectroscopy-Uncertain identification UJ Gamma Spectroscopy-Uncertain identification UL Not considered detected. The associated number is the reported concentration, which may be inaccurate due to a low bias.

X Consult Case Narrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier y Other specific qualifiers were required to properly defme the results. Consult case narrative.

A RPD of sample and duplicate evaluated using +/-RL. Concentrations are <5X the RL. Qualifier Not Applicable for Radiochemistry.

h Preparation or pres_!:rvation holding time was exceeded Page 25 of26 32 of 33

GEL LA BORATORIES LLC 2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407- (843) 556-8171- www.gel.com QCSummary Workorder: 457517 Page 5 of 5 Parmname NOM Sam ual C Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst Date Time N/A indicates that spike recovery limits do not apply when sample concentration exceeds spike cone. by a factor of 4 or more or %RPD not applicable.

" The Relative Percent Difference (RPD) obtained from the sample duplicate (DUP) is evaluated against the acceptance criteria when the sample is greater than five times (SX) the contract required detection limit (RL). In cases where either the sample or duplicate value is less than SX the RL, a control limit of+/- the RL is used to evaluate the DUP result

• Indicates that a Quality Control parameter was not within specifications.

For PS, PSD, and SOILT results, the values listed are the measured amounts, not fmal concentrations.

Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the requirements of the NELAC standard unless qualified on the QC Summary.

Page 26 of26 33 of 33

QUALITY CONTROL CHECKLIST FOR REVIEW OF LABORATORY REPORT Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 Wideni Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 301639 Report Date: 7/27/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz NA (Describe "no" responses below in "comments" section. Contact the laboratory, as for further document discussion in comments (A case narrative MUST be prepared by the Jab for all X

lb. Are the number of pages for the lab report as indicated on the case narrative/lab transmittal consistent with the number of that are included in re X lc. Does the case narrative indicate which samples were analyzed by a subcontractor and the subcontractor's name? X ld. Does the case narrative summarize subsequent requests not shown on the chain-of-custody (e.g.,

additional release of "hold"  ? X le. Does the case narrative explain why requested analyses could not be performed by laboratory insufficient  ? X lf. Does the case narrative explain all problems with the QA/QC data as identified in the checklist (as licab ? X X

X X

X

4. Was the lab report signed and dated as being reviewed by the laboratory director, QA manager, or other appropriate personnel? (Some lab reports have signature spaces for each page). (This irement also to a subcontracted out the X Sa. Are preparation methods, cleanup methods (if applicable), and laboratory methods indicated for all ana X Sb. If additional analytes were requested as part of the reporting of the data for an analytical method, were these included in the lab

6. Are the units in the lab X X

Are detection limits appropriate based on the analysis performed (i.e., not elevated due to dilution

? X 9a. Were the samples analyzed within the appropriate holding time (generally 2 weeks for volatiles, and to 6 months for total m X X

X X

X llc. Do the chromatograms confirm laboratory notes, if present (e.g., sample exhibits lighter rocarbon than standa X 1 of3

Quality Control Checklist- continued Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 w1aenmg and SR84/1680 Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 301639 Report Date: 7/27/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz Yes No NA

12. Are the results consistent with previous analytical results from the site? {If no, contact the lab and request'"'"'"'""' :ic of data, as app1 upr , ..."'.) X 13a. REVISED LAB REPORTS ONLY. Is the revised Jab report or revised pages to a Jab report signed and dated as being reviewed by the IDUUI DLUI director QA manager, Or Other DIJIJI UIJIIDL<:; IJ<:;I ;;oUIIIICI?

13b. REVISED LAB REPORTS ONLY. Does the case narrative indicate the date of revision and provide an

"'"l'*a**a*lon for the revision?

13c. REVISED LAB REPORTS ONLY. Does the revised lab report adequately address the problem(s) that

... 1515" .:;u the need for a revision?

13d. REVISED LAB REPORTS ONLY. Are the data included in the revised report the same as the data reported in the original report, except where the report was revised to correct incorrectly reported data?

OA/QC QUESTIONS Fleld/L.. ........... ,* Quality Control - Groundwater A..... , ......

14. Are field blanks reported as*"ND" (groundwater samples)? Afield blank is a sample of Dl water that is prepared in the field using the same collection and handling procedures as the other samples

. II.

and used to demonstrate that the .... ,,,..,,!:1 ,.., .,.. "' ....' .. has not contaminated the sample. X 14a. Are rinsate blanks reported as "ND" (soil samples)? A rinsate blank is a sample of Dl water that is prepared in the field by collecting Dl rinse water after it has been poured over decontaminated sampling equipment. The rinsate blank is collected to demonstrate that the decontamination procedure has removed all the contaminants from the sampling equipment and that the sampling equipment has not contaminated the sample. X

15. Are trip blanks reported as "ND" (groundwater samples/volatile analyses)? A trip blank is a sample of contaminant free matrix placed in an appropriate container by the lab and transported with the field samples collected. Provides Information regarding positive interference introduced during sample transport, storage, ,.., ...... , .,.. .,.,,, and .. , .. ,Y"" The sample is NOT opened in the field. X

16. Are duplicate sample results consistent with the original sample (groundwater samples)? Field duplicates consist of two independent samples collected at the same sampling location during a single sampling event. Used to evaluate precision of the analytical data and sampling technique. (Differences between the r/un/irntP and Sample results may alSO be attributed tO environmental VUI IUUIIILy.) X BATCH QUALITY CONTROL Samples are batched together by matrix [soli, water] and analyses requested. A batch generally consists of 20 or fewer samples of the same matrix type, and is prepared using the same reagents, standards, procedures, and time frame as the

............... QC *~-R*ft* are run with each batch to assess ......... , .......... of the entire measurement ..............

17. Do the sample batch numbers and ..u,, "'"1-'u'lding lal. .. , a*u_r y QA/QC batch numbers match? X 18a. Are method blanks (MB) for the analytical method(s) below the laboratory reporting limits? Used to assess lab contamination and prevent false aositive results. X 18b. If no, is an "'""'a"a.lon provided In the case narrative to validate the data? X 18c. Are analytes that may be considered laboratory contaminants reported below the laboratory reporting limit? Common lab contaminants include acetone, methylene chloride, diethy/hexyl phthalate, and ....1:,. -u ...y.

X 18d. If no, was the laboratory contacted to determine whether the reported analyte could be a

....."'""a' lal.ur a*v* y contaminant and was an "v"'l""'1tior included in the case narrative? X 2 of3

Quality Control Checklist- continued Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 Wideni Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 301639 Report Date: 7/27/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz Yes No

19. Are laboratory control samples (LCS) and LCS duplicate (LCSD) [a.k.a., Blank Spike (BS) and BS duplicates {BSD}] within laboratory reporting limits? Limits should be provided on the report. LCS is a reagent blank spike with a representative selection of target analyte(s) and prepared in the same manner as the samples analyzed. The LCS should be spiked with the same analytes as the matrix spike (below). The LCS is free from interferences from the sample matrix and demonstrates the ability of the lab instruments to recover the target analytes. Accuracy (recovery information) is generally reported as

%spike recovery; precision (reproducibility of results) between the LCS and LCSD is generally reported as the relative can be run in addition to or in lieu data. X 20a. Are the Matrix QC data (i.e., MS/MSD) within laboratory limits? Limits should be provided on the lab report. The lab selects a sample from the batch and analyzes a spike and a spike duplicate of that sample. Matrix QC data is used to obtain precision and accuracy information and is reported in the same manner as LCS/LCSD. If the MS/MSD fails, the results may still be considered valid if the MB and either the is within the lab's limits due to matrix int,rort**rE>.ncE*J. X X

21a. Are the surrogate spikes reported within the lab's acceptable recovery limits? A surrogate is a non-target analyte, which is similar in chemical structure to the analyte(s) being analyzed for, and which is not commonly found in environmental samples. A known concentration of the surrogate is spiked into the sample or QA "sample" prior to extraction or sample preparation. Results are usually reported as % recovery of the spike. Failure to meet lab's limits for primary and secondary surrogates results in rebatching and reanalysis of the sample; failure of only the primary or the secondary surrogate may be acceptable under certain circumstances. Failure generally is due to coelution with the matrix. X n in the case narrative to validate the data? X Comments:

Metals (EPA 60108 and EPA 7471A): Low recoveries were observed for antimony in the MS/MSD for batch 261623; the parent sample was not a project sample, the BS/BSD were within limits, and the associated RPD was within limits. No other analytical problems were encountered.

3 of3

QUALITY CONTROL CHECKLIST FOR REVIEW OF LABORATORY REPORT Job No.: 18301-00 Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 301640 Report Date: 7/27/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz NA for X

lb. Are the number of pages for the lab report as indicated on the case narrative/lab transmittal consistent with the number of that are included in X lc. Does the case narrative indicate which samples were analyzed by a subcontractor and the subcontractor's name? X ld. Does the case narrative summarize subsequent requests not shown on the chain-of-custody (e.g.,

additional ana release of "hold" sam X le. Does the case narrative explain why requested analyses could not be performed by laboratory insufficient X X

X X

X form? X

4. Was the lab report signed and dated as being reviewed by the laboratory director, QA manager, or other appropriate personnel? (Some lab reports have signature spaces for each page). (This uirement also lies to subcontracted out the l:>hnr::~tnr\1\ X Sa. Are preparation methods, cleanup methods (if applicable), and laboratory methods indicated for all ana X Sb. If additional analytes were requested as part of the reporting of the data for an analytical method, were these included in the lab X

7. the detection limits (DL) appropriate based on the intended use of the data (e.g., DL below icable MCLs for water  ? X detection limits appropriate based on the analysis performed (i.e., not elevated due to dilution

? X X

9a. Were the samples analyzed within the appropriate holding time (generally 2 weeks for volatiles, and to 6 months for total X X

X X

X X

1 of3

Quality Control Checklist - continued Job No.: 18301-00 Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 301640 Report Date: 7/27/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz Yes No NA results from the site? (If no, contact the lab and X

and

14. Are field blanks reported as "ND" (groundwater samples)? Afield blank is a sample of Dl water that is prepared in the field using the same collection and handling procedures as the ather samples rnii... r*~...rl and used to demonstrate that the has nat contaminated the "urr~w.-_ X 14a. Are rinsate blanks reported as "ND" (soil samples)? A rinsate blank is a sample of D/ water that is prepared in the field by collecting Dl rinse water after it has been poured aver decontaminated sampling equipment. The rinsate blank is collected to demonstrate that the decontamination procedure has removed all the contaminants from the sampling equipment and that the sampling equipment has nat contaminated the X X

X 18a. Are method blanks (MB) for the analytical method(s) below the laboratory reporting limits? Used to assess lab contamination and results. X X

18c. Are analytes that may be considered laboratory contaminants reported below the laboratory reporting !imit? Common lab contaminants include acetone, methylene chlaridt:;, diethylhexyl phthalate, and n1-11-n,rrv1 nhl~hn*Int,,:._ X 18d. If no, was the laboratory contacted to determine whether the reported analyte could be a nn1r~>nti~ll~hn~ltnrv contaminant and was an nation included in the case narrative? X 2 of3

Quality Control Checklist- continued Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 301640 Report Date: 7/27/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz Yes No

19. Are laboratory control samples (LCS) and LCS duplicate (LCSD) [a.k.a., Blank Spike (BS) and BS duplicates (BSD)] within laboratory reporting limits? Limits should be provided on the report. LCS is a reagent blank spike with a representative selection of target analyte(s) and prepared in the same manner as the samples analyzed. The LCS should be spiked with the same analytes as the matrix spike (below). The LCS is free from interferences from the sample matrix and demonstrates the ability of the lab instruments to recover the target analytes. Accuracy (recovery information) is generally reported as

%spike recovery; precision (reproducibility of results) between the LCS and LCSD is generally reported as the relative can be run in addition to or in lieu matrix data. X 20a. Are the Matrix QC data (i.e., MS/MSD) within laboratory limits? Limits should be provided on the lab report. The lab selects a sample from the batch and analyzes a spike and a spike duplicate of that sample. Matrix QC data is used to obtain precision and accuracy information and is reported in the same manner as LCS/LCSD. if the MS/MSD fails, the results may still be considered valid if the MB and either the is within the lab's limits due to matrix rnn*rrE*rP*~c:P'I_ X*

X 21a. Are the surrogate spikes reported within the lab's acceptable recovery limits? A surrogate is a non-target analyte, which is similar in chemical structure to the analyte(s) being analyzed for, and which is not commonly found in environmental samples. A known concentration of the surrogate is spiked into the sample or QA sample" prior to extraction or sample preparation. Results are usually reported as % recovery of the spike. Failure to meet lab's limits for primary and secondary surrogates results in rebatching and reanalysis of the sample; failure of only the primary or the secondary surrogate may be acceptable under certain circumstances. Failure generally is due to coelution with the matrix. X in the case narrative to validate the data? X Comments:

• The Sample and the Duplicate, (See Below), did not meet the relative percent difference requirement; however, they do meet the relative error ratio requirement with the value listed below.

Sample AnaJyte Value 12~802S (SOl; 0.0-0.sDUP) BETA RPD 4-7.2* {0.00%-20.00%) llEil2.4S {0-l) 3 of3

QUALITY CONTROL CHECKLIST FOR REVIEW OF LABORATORY REPORT Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 Widen Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 302601 Report Date: 8/23/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz NA (Describe "no" responses below in "comments" section. Contact the laboratory, as required, for further or action on "no" document discussion in comments , ..L.uu'"*

la. Does the report in (A case narrative MUST be prepared by the lab for all amJivttc:ai work X lb. Are the number of pages for the lab report as indicated on the case narrative/lab transmittal consistent with the number of that are included in rt? X lc. Does the case narrative indicate which samples were analyzed by a subcontractor and the subcontractor's name? X ld. Does the narrative summarize subsequent not shown on the chain-of-custody (e.g.,

release of "hold" sam X explain why requested analy~es could not be performed by laboratory X

X X

X X

form? X

4. Was the lab report signed and dated as being reviewed )Jy the laboratory director, QA manager, or other appropriate per~onnel? (Some lab reports have signature spaces for each page). (This uirement also lies to subcontracted out the l:ohnr:otnrvl X Sa. methods, cleanup methods (if applicable), and laboratory methods indicated for all ana X Sb. If additional analytes were as part of the reporting of the data for an analytical method, were these included in the lab re X X

X Sa. Are detection limits appropriate based on the analysis performed (i.e., not elevated due to dilution

? X X

)(

X X

X X

X 1 of 3

Quality Control Checklist- continued Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 Widen Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 302601 Report Date: 8/23/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz Yes No NA

12. Are the results consistent with previous analytical results from the site? {If no, contact the lab and X

14. Are field blanks reported as "N D" (groundwater samples)? A field blank is a sample of Dl water that is prepared in the field using the same collection and handling procedures as the other samples rnt.t .. ,~..rt and used to demonstrate that the has not contaminated the X X

X X

Samples are batched together by matrix [soil, water] and analyses requested. A batch generally consists of 20 or fewer samples of the same matrix type, and is prepared using the same reagents, standards, procedures, and time frame as the sam are run with each batch to assess of the entire measurement nrn,~l!'!i:,!i:.

X X

X 18c. Are analytes that may be considered laboratory contaminants reported below the laboratory reporting limit? Common lq_b contaminants include acetone, methylene chloride, diethylhexy/ ph~halate, and cJ1-11-n1~t X 18d. If the laboratory contacted to determine whether the reported analyte could be a l::>h,n~:*t-n'"' contaminant and was an on included in the case narrative? X 2 of3

Quality Control Checklist- continued Job No.: 18301-00 Site: SR84 Widening and SR84/1680 Laboratory: Enthalpy Analytical Laboratory Report No.: 302601 Report Date: 8/23/2018 BASELINE Reviewer: K. Mertz Yes No NA

19. Are laboratory control samples (LCS) and LCS duplicate (LCSD) [a.k.a., Blank Spike (BS) and BS duplicates (BSD)] within laboratory reporting limits? Limits should be provided on the report. LCS is a reagent blank spike with a representative selection of target analyte(s) and prepared in the same manner as the samples analyzed. The LCS should be spiked with the same analytes as the matrix spike (below). The LCS is free from interferences from the sample matrix and demonstrates the ability of the lab instruments to recover the target analytes. Accuracy (recovery information) is generally reported as 96 spike recovery; precision (reproducibility of results) between the LCS and LCSD is generally reported as the relative percent difference (RPD). LCS/LCSD can be run in addition to or in lieu of matrix QC data. X 20a. Are the Matrix QC data (i.e., MS/MSD) within laboratory limits? Limits ~hould be provided on the lab report. The lab selects a sample from the batch and analyzes a spike and a spike duplicate of that sample. Matrix QC data is used to obtain precision and accuracy information and is reported in the same manner as LCS/LCSD. If the MS/MSD fails, the results may still be considered valid if the MB and either the LCS/LCSD or BS/BSD is within the lab's limits (failure is probably due to matrix interference). X*

20b. If no, is the MB and either LCS/LCSD or BS/BSD within lab limits to validate the data? X SAMPLE QUALITY CONTROL 21a. Are the surrogate spikes reported within the lab's acceptable recovery limits? A surrogate is a non-target analyte, which is similar in chemical structure to the analyte(s) being analyzed for, and which is not commonly found in environmental samp'tes. A known concentration of the surrogate is spiked into the sample or QA "sample" prior to extraction ar sample preparation. Results are usually reported as 96 recovery of the spike. Failure to meet lab's limits for primary and secondary surrogates results in rebatching and reanalysis of the sample; failure of only the primary or the secondary surrogate may be acceptable under certain circumstances. Failure generally is due to coelution with the sample matrix. X 21b. If no, is an explanation given in the case narrative to validate the data? X Comments:.

• Duplication Criteria between QC Sample and Duplicate Sample The Sample and the Duplicate, (see below), did not meet the relative percent difference requirement; however, they do meet the relative error ratio requirement with the value listed below.

SaaapR Aitalrte Value 1204094973 (SlO; 0.0-0.SDUP) Bismuth-214 lU'D 42..4* (O.OQI)\..20.00%) 1tER.l.9 (0-3)

Iad-214 lU'D 32.9- (0.00%-20.00%) RER 1.82 (0-3)

Potusium-40 1U'D lU* (0.00%-20.00%) llE1l U6 (0-3)

R.adium-226 lU'D 42.4* (0.00%-20.00%) ltER.l.9 {0-3) 3 of3

APPENDIX D ProUCL Statistical Analysis Output Files

A I B I c I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K I L UCL Statistics for Uncensored Full Data Sets 1

2 3 User Selected Options Datemme of Computation ProUCL 5.19/21/2018 1:14:35 PM 4

From File Alpha and Beta Results lnput.xls 5

6 Full Precision OFF Confidence Coefficient 95%

7 mber of Bootstrap Operations 2000 8

9 10 11 Gross Alpha 12 13 General Statistics Total Number of Observations 27 Number of Distinct Observations 26 14 Number of Missing Observations 0 15 Minimum 4.83 Mean 9.846 16 Maximum 14.8 Median 9.5 17 SD 2.968 Std. Error of Mean 0.571 18 Coefficient of Variation 0.301 Skewness 0.196 .

19 20 21 Normal GOF Test Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wllk GOF Test 22 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 23 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.134 Ulllefors GOF Test 24 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 25 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 26 27 Assuming Normal Distribution 28 95% Normal UCL 95% UCL.s (Adjusted for Skewness) 29 95% Student's-t UCL 10.82 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 10.81 30 95% Modlfied-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 10.82 31 32 Gamma GOF Test 33 A-D Test Statistic 0.365 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test 34 5% A-D Critical Value 0.744 etected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Le 35 K-S Test Statistic 0.113 Kolmogorov-Smlmov Gamma GOF Test 36 5% K-S Critical Value 0.168 letected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance L~

37 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 38 39 Gamma Statistics 40 k hat(MLE) 11.04 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.837 41 Theta hat (MLE) 0.892 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.001 42 nu hat(MLE) 596.1 nu star (bias corrected) 531.2 43 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 9.846 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.139 44 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 478.8 45 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0401 Adjusted Chi Square Value 475.6 46 47 Assuming Gamma Distribution 48 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 10.93 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11 49 50

A I B I c I D I E I F I G I H 1 I I J I K I L 51 Lognormal GOF Test Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.956 Shapiro Wllk Lognormal GOF Test 52 53 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.923 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 54 Ulliefors Test Statistic 0.0957 Ulllefars Lognormal GOF Test 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.167 Data appear Lognonnal at 5% Significance Level 55 56 Data appear Lognonnal at 5% Significance Laval 57 58 Lognonnal Statistics Minimum of Logged Data 1.575 Mean of logged Data 2.241 59 60 Maximum of Logged Data 2.695 so of logged Data 0.314 61 62 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 63 95% H-UCL 11.06 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.68 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.65 64 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.89 65 66 67 Nonparametrlc Distribution Free UCL Statistics 68 Data appear to follow a Dlscemlbla Distribution at 5% Significance Level 69 70 Nonparamalrfc Distribution Free UCLs 95% CLT UCL 10.79 95% Jackknife UCL 10.82 71 72 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10.76 95% Bootstrap-! UCL 10.79 73 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.78 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10.78 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.82 74 75 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.56 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.34 76 97.5% Chebyshev(Maan, Sd) UCL 13.41 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.53 n

78 Suggested UCL to Usa 95% Student's-t UCL 10.82 79 80 81 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.

82 83 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized In Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006).

84 owever, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statisticl 85

A I B _l c I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K --. L 1 UCL Statistics for Uncensored Full Data Se1s 2

3 User Selected Options Datemme of Computation ProUCL 5.1912112018 3:14:48 PM 4

From File Beta Results Input - No Outiiers.xls 5

6 Full Precision OFF 7 Confidence Coefficient 95%

8 mber of Bootstrap Operations 2000 9

10 11 Gross Beta 12 General Statistics 13 Total Number of Observations 25 Number of Distinct Observations 24 14 Number of Missing Observations 0 15 Minimum 4.18 Mean 11.89 16 Maxi111um 22.96 Median 12.3 17 SD 4.428 Std. Error of Mean 0.886 18 Coefficient of Variation 0.372 Skewness 0.566 19 20 Normal GOF Test 21 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.972 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 22 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.918 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 23 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.101 Ulllafors GOF Test 24 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.173 DaiS appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 25 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 26 27 Assuming Normal Distribution 28 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 29 95% Student's-t UCL 13.4 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 13.45 30 95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 13.42 31 32 Gamma GOF Test 33 A-D Test Statistic 0.173 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test 34 5% A-D Critical Value 0.746 etected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Le1 35 K-S Test Statistic 0.105 Kolmogorov-5mlmov Gamma GOF Test 36 5% K-S Critical Value 0.175 jetected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Le1 37 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 38 39 Gamma Statistics 40 khat(MLE) 7.256 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.412 41 Theta hat (MLE) 1.639 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.854 42 nu hat(MLE) 362.8 nu star (bias corrected) 320.6 43 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 11.89 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.695 44 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 280.1

• 45 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0395 Adjusted Chi Square Value 277.5 46 47 Assuming Gamma Distribution 48 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 13.61 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 13.73 49 50

A 1 B J c L D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K I L 51 Lognormal GOF Test 52 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic o.en Shapiro Wllk Lognormal GOF Test 53 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.918 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 54 Lllliefors Test Statistic 0.124 Ulllefors Lognormal GOF Test 55 5% Lllliefors Critical Value 0.173 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 56 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 57 58 Lognormal Statistics 59 Minimum of Logged Data 1.43 Mean of logged Data 2.405 60 Maximum of Logged Data 3.134 SO of logged Data 0.395 61 62 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 63 95% H-UCL 13.93 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.84 64 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.15 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.98 65 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.56 66 67 Nonparametrlc Distribution Free UCL Statistics 68 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 69 70 Nonparametrlc Distribution Free UCLs 71 95%CLTUCL 13.35 95% Jackknife UCL 13.4 72 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 13.37 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 13.51 73 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13.62 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 13.38 74 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 13.49 75 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.55 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.75 76 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.42 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 20.7 77 78 Suggestsd UCL to Use 79 95% Student's-t UCL 13.4 80 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95o/a UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL 81 82 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness.

83 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized In Singh, Malchle, and Lee (2006).

owever, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional Insight the user may want to consult a statisticl 84 85

A J B I c J D E I F I G I H I I I J I K I l 1 Outlier Tests for Selected Uncensored Variables 2 User Selected Options 3 Datemme of Computation ProUCL5.19/25/2018 11:58:42 AM 4 From File Alpha and Beta Results lnpulxls 5 Full Precision OFF 6

7 8 Rosner's Outlier Test for Gross Beta 9

10 11 Mean 13.64 12 Standard Deviation 7.642 13 Number of data 27 14 Number of suspected outliers 3 15 16 Potential Obs. Test Critical Critical 17

1. Mean sd outlier Number value alue (5%) alue (1%)

18 1 13.64 7.499 37.9 10 3.235 2.86 3.18 19 2 12.71 6.024 33.2 9 3.402 2.84 3.16 20 3 11.89 4.428 22.96 18 2.5 2.82 3.14 21 For 5% significance level, there are 2 Potential Outliers 22 23 Potential outliers are:

24 37.9, 33.2 25 26 For 1'Yo Significance level, there are 2 Potential Outliers Potential outliers are:

27 37.9, 33.2 28 29