140R1023Q0005__0002_formatted_0002.pdf

(x)

140R1023Q0005 x x

1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR

OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

Boise ID 83706-1234 1150 N. Curtis Road, Ste. 100

R10

Acquisition Management Division Regional Office Pacific Northwest Region Bureau of Reclamation

07/17/20230002

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

05/11/2023

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

Project Title: Potholes Supplemental Feed Route (PSFR) Acquisition Remediation - Dieringer

Dairy Property located in Moses Lake, WA.

Solicitation Amendment 002 -

Purpose of this amendment is re-soliciting the requirement as a Total Small Business Set

Aside, attach reports to PWS, and scheduling an on-site visit.

A. Quotes are due August 11, 2023 at 12:00 PM MD.

B. A site visit is strongly encouraged. An On-Site Walk-through is scheduled for August 1, Continued ...

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

Misty Gates

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

ITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

NAME OF OFFEROR OR CONTRACTOR

2 2

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140R1023Q0005/0002

2023 at 10:00 AM PT. Location site 9327 Road 10

NE, Moses Lake, WA 98837 (47.23351'N, 119.23360'W). Water levels at the farm are variable, and it may be necessary to traverse wet and muddy terrain to reach the manure lagoons.

It is strongly recommended that participants wear tall waterproof boots and PPE appropriate for walking around a dairy farm. Contact Thomas

Appler, cell: (541)571-2238 to schedule the site-visit 48 hours prior.

Period of Performance: 08/15/2023 to 08/14/2024

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

Sponsored by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.110

Initial Phase II Site Assessment Report Dieringer Dairy Property

9327 Road 10 NE Moses Lake, WA 98837

Grant County Parcel #170934000

Prepared for:

United States Bureau of Reclamation Ms. Elizabeth Heether

1917 Marsh Road Yakima, WA 98901-2058

July 28, 2020

GSA Contract No. GS-10F-0357U

Order No. 140R1018F0032

Prepared By:

White Shield, Inc.

320 North 20th Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 Phone: 509.547.0100 Fax: 509.547.8292 Email: sfricke@whiteshield.com http: www.whisteshield.com mailto:sfricke@whiteshield.com http://www.whisteshield.com/

Initial Phase II ESA Grant County, Washington

Dieringer Dairy Property

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.2 Project Strategy

1.2.1 Soil Samples

1.2.2 Water Samples

2.0 SITE LOCATION, BACKGROUND, AND CONDITIONS

2.1 Site Location

2.2 Site Conditions

2.2.1 Topography

2.2.2 Soil Classification

2.2.3 Geology and Hydrogeology

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Groundwater Sampling

3.1.1 Water Level Measurement

3.1.2 Purging

3.1.3 Sample Collection

3.2 Utility Location

3.3 Soil Sampling

3.3.1 Soil Sampling Methods

3.3.2 Decontamination Methods

3.4 Quality Control

3.5 Investigation Derived Waste

4.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

4.1 Soil and Sludge Sample Results

4.2 Soil Sample Conclusions

4.3 Groundwater Level Results

4.4 Groundwater Sample Results

4.5 Groundwater and Surface Water Conclusions

5.0 SLUDGE AND BERM VOLUME ESTIMATES

5.1 Sludge

5.2 Berm

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

7.0 LIMITATIONS

8.0 QUALIFICATIONS AND SIGNATURES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS . 24

9.0 REFERENCES

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Vicinity/Topographic Map Figure 2: Site Plan and Sample Locations Figure 3: Water Sample Locations Photographs Figure 4: Geology and Groundwater

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Well Data Table 2: Sample Data Table 3: Soil Analytical Results Table 4: Water Analytical Results

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Laboratory Reports

Dieringer Dairy Property

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is developing the Potholes Supplemental Feed Route to assist with the delivery of irrigation water to the South Columbia Basin Irrigation District.

Water must be moved from Banks Lake to Potholes Reservoir, and two routes are being developed for this purpose. The subject property lies astride one of the two routes, and Reclamation must acquire the subject Dieringer parcel (Grant County Parcel #170934000). The location of the subject Dieringer Dairy property is shown in Figure 1. The original Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), and the follow-up Initial Phase II ESA work documented herein were conducted as due diligence prior to acquisition of the Dieringer parcel.

1.1 Background

White Shield, Inc. (WSI) completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report regarding the subject property on April 5, 2016. Figure 2 shows the subject property. One recognized environmental condition (REC), the lack of secondary containment for three diesel fuel tanks on the property was identified as defined by ASTM E 1527-13, Section 1.1.1 in connection with the property. Although not considered RECs under the ASTM 15-27-13 standard, other points of concern included the use of the property as a dairy since the late 1970s, the use of heavy equipment on site, the handling and storage of barnyard effluent, and the possible (but undocumented) use of herbicides and/or pesticides on the property at one time. To assess potential impacts from uses of the property identified in the Phase I ESA, Reclamation requested that WSI conduct a subsequent Phase II ESA to assess the potential for adverse impacts to soil and groundwater on the subject property identified in the Phase I

ESA.

Two key Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) concerns are (1) the risk to future water transported through Crab Creek, and (2) mitigating the risk of future property ownership. Issues/areas to be investigated and/or assessed by this Phase II Environmental Assessment included the following:

• The presence of two connected surface lagoons which are reportedly used to temporarily store four-million gallons (visual assessment suggests lagoon capacities differ significantly) of effluent and manure sludge from cattle pens and cattle washdown areas;

• Lands irrigated with water and sludge from the two lagoons;

• A seasonal side channel of Crab Creek (a swale), and the seasonal lake that periodically floods that channel, located along the western side of the property;

• The biological and chemical condition of groundwater on the site;

• Potential chemical contamination of site soils in areas identified as high risk due to the presence of hazardous materials such as fuels, and other chemicals used or stored on the property.

N

0 0.5 1.0

Scale (Miles)

Inferred Direction of Groundwater Movement

Dieringer Dairy 9327 NE Road 10 Moses Lake, WA

Date: July 6, 2020 Drawn by: WHR Chk by: SF Project #: 115-061-04 File ID: Figure 1

FIGURE 1

VICINITY/TOPOGRAPHIC

MAP

SITE SITE

Dieringer Dairy Property

1.2 Project Strategy

The Phase II sampling program described herein was intended as an initial “first look” assessment of the potential for contamination identified in the Phase I ESA. If one or more contaminants-of-concern (COCs) were identified by this initial Phase II ESA, additional sampling could be required to further characterize or delineate any contamination identified.

The potential sources of most contaminants on the Dieringer property are on the northern end of the site (Figure 2) where various chemical materials such a fuels, lubricants, and other chemicals used in the operation of the dairy are stored, used, and potentially spilled. Given that (1) virtually all surface runoff from the northern industrial dairy portion of the property flows to a collection sump south of the loafing sheds, and (2) washdown water from the milking parlor is also collected, and both are pumped to the effluent lagoons, the system functions as a powerful compositing and contaminant blending agent for the property. Both sludge and effluent are, therefore, believed to comprise a representative composite sample of the northern portion of the property. It is also recognized that the use of the effluent to irrigate and fertilize the large southern pasture serves to dilute and volatilize certain organic contaminants (if any), in effect reducing potential contaminant concentrations on the land to which the effluent is applied.

1.2.1 Soil Samples

Soil samples were collected from the fuel storage area, the downgradient side of the chemical storage shed, the barnyard runoff collection sump, and the irrigated fields. A sample of sludge in the lagoons was also collected for laboratory analysis. Samples were collected on January 8, 2020. A second sample of lagoon sludge was collected from a boat on July 1, 2020. Sample locations are shown in Figure 2. The project soil and sludge sample sources documented in this report were:

• Sample 061-04-LS, which consisted of sludge collected from along the shallow west side of the north end of the northern lagoon. As the sample was not considered representative of the sludge due to the shallow depth from which it was collected, a second sample (Sludge) was collected from a boat using a sludge sampler on July 1, 2020.

• Sample 061-04-D, which consisted of a composite grab sample of soil collected from beneath the above-ground diesel fuel tanks. Light staining in an area measuring roughly 10’ by 20’ was noted.

• Sample 061-04-WCS, which consisted of soil collected from the exterior of the west side of the calving shed/chemical storage building.

• Sample 061-04-SL, which consisted of manure above the intake of the manure/effluent separation and handling system. The sample is believed to be representative composite sample of solid wastes (primarily manure) in the cow handling/loafing areas.

• Sample 06-04-SF, consisted of a surface soil sample collected from the area formerly irrigated by the pivot system sourced from the irrigation sump.

• Sample 06-04-NF, consisted of a surface soil sample collected from the northern edge of the area irrigated with water from the effluent lagoons.

• Sample “Lagoon Sludge” was collected from a boat near the middle of the southern lagoon while the sludge thickness and depth was being measured.

Photographs of the sites from which soil samples were collected in January were lost due to a hard drive failure.

FIGURE 2

SITE PLAN &

SAMPLE LOCATIONS

Scale (feet)

1400700

Dieringer Dairy 9327 NE Road 10

Moses Lake, WA 98837

Date: July 6, 2020 Drawn by: WHR Chk by: SF Project #: 115-061-04 File ID: Figure 2

NNN

Crab Creek

Residence

Loafing Shed

Pivot Irrigation System

Effluent Lagoons

N E R oad 10 Feed Storage

Irrigated Field

10NE-19-1

DD-20-1

DD-RES

DD-IRR-SUMP

DD-20-2

Lagoon Sludge

061-04-LS

061-04-SF

061-04-NF

061-04-SL

061-04-WCS

061-04-D

Water Sample

Soil Sample

Inferred Direction of Shallow Groundwater Flow

LAGOON

Dieringer Dairy Property

1.2.2 Water Samples

Groundwater and surface water samples were collected from four wells and a fifth groundwater source originally called an “irrigation well”, which is actually an open pit or sump excavated to shallow groundwater on the southern end of the property. A sixth water sample was collected from the lagoons on the southwest corner of the property. Surface and groundwater sample locations are shown in Figure

2. Photographs of the water sample locations are shown in Figure 3.

The project water sample sources sampled were:

• Well 10NE-19-1 (also known as the up-gradient USBR well: This well is, screened in basalt of the Rosa flow). This sample was intended as an upgradient background sample, which is assumed to be unaffected by Dieringer Dairy site operations located approximately 550 feet downgradient to the southwest.

• Well DD-20-1 (a USBR well screened in Missoula flood gravel and sand deposits): This sample was intended to assess potential impacts to groundwater immediately downgradient from the industrial portion of the dairy operation.

• Well DD-20-2 (a down-gradient USBR well screened in Missoula flood gravel and sand deposits). This sample was collected to assess potential groundwater contamination created by infiltration of effluent and sludge stored in the nearby upgradient lagoons and any impact from the seasonal lake in the swale to the east of the well.

• Well DD-RES (Dieringer’s domestic water supply well screened in basalt). This sample serves as a sample of an onsite water supply well, located upgradient of the dairy area. Unlike the other shallow monitoring wells sampled, this well was completed at a depth of 260 feet below ground surface (bgs), and is screened from 130 feet bgs to 160 feet bgs. Water collected from the deeper well was believed unlikely to be contaminated with contaminants derived from the Dieringer property given the depth from which the water is drawn.

• Sump DD-IRR-SUMP (Dieringer's irrigation sump or pit on the south end of the site). This sample was collected from an open sump excavated into groundwater and is somewhat representative of groundwater on the southern portion of the property. However, due its open nature, it may not be truly reflective of groundwater conditions because it is exposed to the atmosphere and thus subject to direct contamination from the air and surface runoff.

• LAGOON (the two connected effluent lagoons on the southwest corner of the property): This water sample was collected from the surface of the lagoons. Given its source, it does not reflect the condition of site ground or natural surface water. This source was considered to be the most highly contaminated, given its sources on the industrial northern end of the site.

Groundwater and surface water sampling was conducted by Ronald Schalla, a Licensed Hydrogeologist with WSI, assisted by staff member Trevor Johnson. The samples were collected over several days in late June and early July, 2020

Well 10NE-19-1, looking northeast. Irrigation sump, DD-IRR.

Well DD-20-2, looking easterly. DD-RES wellhead location, looking south.

Well DD-20-1, looking northerly. Lagoon, looking southeasterly.

9317 NE Road 10

Moses Lake, WA 98837

Date: July 7, 2020 Drawn by: WHR Chk by: SF Project #: 115-061-04 File ID: Figure 3

FIGURE 3

Water Sample Location Photographs

Dieringer Dairy Property

2.0 SITE LOCATION, BACKGROUND, AND CONDITIONS

2.1 Site Location

The subject site, known as Dieringer Dairy Property, is located at 9327 NE Road 10 NE, approximately six miles north of Moses Lake, Washington. Access to the property is from Road 10 NE. The location of the property is shown in Figure 1. The subject property consists of a single, irregular-shaped parcel, comprising 125 acres; Grant County Tax Parcel #170934000.

Although no Warranty Deeds for the parcels comprising the subject property were provided by the client, a copy of the Recorded Document Guarantee (Grant County Title Company) provided by the client documents chain-of-title, and is presented in Appendix 16.4.

The legal description of Dieringer Property is as follows: Beginning at a point on the North line of said Section 15, 900 feet North 89/37'00" East of the Northwest corner of said Section 15, the Washington State Grid South zone co-ordinates of said Section corner are Y=695, 422.51X=2, 298,

729.11 and are referred to U.S.C. and G.S. Station "spad" whose Washington State Grid South zone co-ordinates are Y=676, 911.66, X=2, 288, 625.74, said point being on the centerline of a 60.00 foot County road; thence along said County Road North 89/37'00" East along said North line of said Section 15, a distance of 716.52 feet to the P.C. of a curve in the road to the right having a radius of

324.30 feet; thence Southeasterly along said curve a distance of 297.27 feet; thence South 37/51'46" East along centerline of said road, a distance of 2,440.54 feet to the P.C. of a curve in the road, to the left having a radius of 635.74 feet; thence Southeasterly along said curve to the most Northerly corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to Kenneth P. Bone and Bobbie N. Bone, husband and wife, as disclosed by Deed recorded May 20, 1975, under Auditor’s File No. 618293, said point being designated as point "A". Beginning again at the Point of Beginning; thence South 00/44'15" East, a distance of 2,696.71 feet; thence North 89/34'39" East, a distance of 1,408.62 feet; thence North 13/33'09" East a distance of 524.43 feet; thence South 76/23'34" East, a distance of 777.63 feet; thence North 37/16'10" East, a distance of 321.2 feet, more or less, to the point "A" above referred to.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM the North and East 30 feet for an existing County Road.

2.2 Site Conditions

2.2.1 Topography

The subject property is situated in the Quincy Basin, a structural sub-basin of the Central Columbia Plateau. The general area is typified by meandering drainage patterns cut by the multiple massive Pleistocene Lake Missoula outburst flood events. Abandoned erosional channels are common and appear as shallow swales in the landscape where overlying unconsolidated deposits were stripped to bedrock by the floods.

2.2.2 Soil Classification

The site is mantled by Malaga soil, which is described as a deep profile of well-drained to excessively well-drained soil developed on the surface of gravelly flood deposits laid down during the episodic Lake Missoula outburst floods that inundated the Columbia Plateau. The soil ranges in thickness from a few inches to many feet in thickness, depending on location.

Dieringer Dairy Property

2.2.3 Geology and Hydrogeology

Crab Creek flows in a generally southerly direction, immediately east of the subject property, through well-developed wetlands along its main channel. Moses Lake is located approximately

3.7 miles southwest of the subject property. Overland runoff flows in multiple directions on the property.

The surficial Lake Missoula Flood deposits are highly permeable, and infiltration rates and groundwater flow rates are relatively high. Present along the western and central portion of the subject property (as mapped by Pitz in Figure 4), the flood deposits consist of primarily gravel. Field observations by the author in the vicinity of the excavated effluent lagoon on the southwest corner of the property indicate that in that location a significant volume of the deposits also include boulders (to 30” or greater), sand, and silt. Pitz (2003) notes that the high permeability and infiltration rates of both the flood deposits provides limited attenuation of pollutants.

In some nearby localities, especially to the west of the subject property, the flood gravels are underlain by the late Miocene Ringold Formation. The Ringold Formation consists of unconsolidated lacustrine clay, silt, and fine sand, and is reported to pinch out approximately one mile west of Crab Creek. The presence of the Ringold Formation in the area is important as it is reported to serve as an aquitard between overlying flood deposits and deeper basalt bedrock. Based on mapping (Pitz, 2003), the Ringold formation appears to the east of Crab Creek, and not exposed to the west of Crab Creek. Based on morphology, it appears that the Ringold Formation was eroded and removed from the axis of the Crab /Creek drainage during one or more of the Lake Missoula outburst floods.

Bedrock in the region consists of the Columbia River Basalt Group, which hydro-geologically is recognized as a multi-aquifer system. The Roza Member of the Mid-Miocene Wanapum Basalt underlies the Ringold Formation locally. Regionally, the top of the Wanapum Basalt slopes to the southwest. The basalt flows comprising the Roza are highly fractured and/or jointed, and are often characterized by brecciated surfaces and bases, the combination of which are known as the inter-basalt zone. This zone is typically more porous and permeable than the interiors of the flows, thus facilitating the storage and movement of groundwater. The Roza crops out on the property to the northeast of the Dieringer parcel across Road 10 NE and is thinly mantled by a thin (6” or less) layer of topsoil.

Depth to groundwater varies from 20 to over 100 feet in the area and is largely controlled by topography. According to a regional study of groundwater and groundwater chemistry by Pitz (2003), groundwater movement in the region as well as in the vicinity of the subject property is to the south-southwest, as shown in Figure 4. Pitz based his groundwater flow map on data derived from an array of wells and piezometers in the study area. Accurately characterizing the direction(s) of groundwater flow in studies is important, since regulated chemical contaminants released up-gradient can pose a threat to the subject property, and on-site releases of regulated chemicals can pose a liability threat to current and future owners if contaminated groundwater migrates off-site onto properties owned by others.

A search of the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) website revealed 13 water resource wells within a one-mile radius of the subject property. The static water level in the wells located on the subject property was reported at a depth of 23 feet below ground surface.

Dieringer Dairy

9327 NE Road 10

Moses Lake, WA 98837

Date: July 6, 2020 Drawn by: WHR Chk by: SF Project #: 115-061-04 File ID: Figure 4

FIGURE 4

GEOLOGY AND

GROUNDWATER

Dieringer Dairy Property

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Groundwater Sampling

Sampling of four wells and two surface water locations was conducted by Ronald Schalla, a Licensed Hydrogeologist with WSI and assisted by Trevor Johnson of WSI. Information regarding the four wells that were sampled is summarized Table 1. Wells were sampled on June 23, 24, and the surface water sites on June 25, 2020. The depths to water are shown in Table 1 for the three monitoring wells. The following methodology was used to sample monitoring wells at the site. The domestic well was sampled by collecting water from a tap.

3.1.1 Water Level Measurement

Prior to purging the sentinel wells, the depth to water and total well depths were measured. A clean electronic water level probe was inserted into each sentinel well until it reached water.

Access to measure static water levels was only possible in the three monitoring wells. The depth to water from the designated measuring point at the top of the casing was measured to the nearest 0.01 ft bgs. The top of the PVC casing was approximately equal to ground surface.

The measuring point was located on the north side of the well casing indicated with black marker. Water levels are presented in Table 1.

Prior to purging the wells, the depth to water and total well depths were measured using the following method:

• A clean electronic water level probe was inserted into each well until it reached water. The ability to measure static water levels was only possible in the monitoring wells. The depth to water from the designated measuring point at the top of the casing was measured to the nearest 0.01 ft bgs. The measuring point is located on the north side of the well casing indicated with black marker.

• The total depth of the wells was measured using the water level indicator during the sampling to reaffirm depth of casing in the wells. The same was used for both water level and well depth.

3.1.2 Purging

After initial measurements were recorded, the volume of water (liters) in the well screen interval that had been calculated previously was purged. Purging used the “low flow” method, pumping water at discharge rates ranging from 450 ml per minute for Well 10NE-19-1; then reduced to 200 ml per minute after filling the 1-liter bottles. The water was clear except for a pale-yellow tint. In Well DD-20-1 purging with the peristaltic pump used the “low flow” method, pumping water at discharge rates ranging from 500 ml per minute initially with only

0.06 ft of drawdown; then reduced to 200 ml per minute after filling the 1-liter bottles. The water was clear. Discharge rate using a 1-liter bailer in Well DD-20-2 to 500 ml per minute and slight turbidity. The residential well DD-RES was sampled from the kitchen sink after purging for about 10 minutes. The water was clear. The surface water sites, that is, the LAGOON and the irrigation sump DD-IRR-SUMP were sampled from the shorelines with bail pail on a 12-foot-long extendible pole.

Dieringer Dairy Property

3.1.3 Sample Collection

Table 1. Well Data

Well Name

Well Diameter in inches and material type

Depths of the Screened Interval in feet below top of casing (bgs)

Depth in feet of intake is equal to sample collection depth in feet bgs

Depth in feet to

Groundwater feet below top of casing (bgs) 6-

23&24-2020

Type of pump used to collect sample

10NE-19-1 2 & SCH40 PVC 16.1-21.1 19.0 5.64 Peristaltic

DD-20-1 2 & SCH40 PVC 15.0-25.0 22.0 10.83 Peristaltic

DD-20-2 2 & SCH40 PVC 25.0-35.0 32.0 26.50 Bailer

DD-RES 6-inch steel? Unknown 212.0 Unknown Submersible

DD-IRR “Irrigation” Sump

NA NA NA Bail Pail

LAGOON NA NA NA NA Bail Pail

Table 2. Summary of Analytes, Methods, Preservative, Bottle Count and Type, Volumes per Well.

Testing for EPA Method Bottle Type Bottle

Volume

Milliliters

Preservative Number of bottles

VOAs 8260D GC/MS Clear glass 40 HCL 3

Phosphate Pesticides 8270 E/SIM amber glass

1000 None 2

Chlorinated Pesticides

8081A amber glass

1000 None 2

Acid Herbicides 8151A amber glass

1000 None 2

RCRA 8 Metals 6020 ICPMS plastic 500 HNO3 1

Nitrate 353.2 plastic 500 None 1

Total Phosphorus 365.1 plastic 250 H2SO4 1

Dieringer Dairy Property

Hydrocarbons NWTPH HCID amber glass

500 HCL 2

Gasoline NWTPH-Gx Clear glass 40 HCL 3

Diesel & oil NWTPH-Dx amber glass

500 HCL 2

Bacteria and e coli 9223B Clear plastic

100 None 2

Note: RCRA 8 Metals (Arsenic Barium, Cadmium, Total Chromium, Lead, Mercury, Selenium and Silver) by EPA Method 6020 (ICPMS) except for Mercury, which is done by EPA Method 7470A

After groundwater purging was completed, samples were collected from the wells and the surface waters using the following protocols:

• Groundwater samples were collected from the discharge tube of the pump for wells or discharge port or access to discharge outfall for the water supply wells, or were collected using disposable hand bailers (e.g., the irrigation sump) buckets and placed into laboratory provided sample bottles.

• Surface water samples from the lagoon were collected using a small stainless-steel bucket for most samples. The Coliform sample containers were collected with a small stainless-steel cup attached to a long extendible pole. Direct dipping of the sample container into the water was desirable. Precautions were taken to ensure that the sample collected was representative of the water body. Sample bottles were not dipped directly into the water to avoid displacement of the preservative acids but filled from the container used to capture the sample, transferred to a beaker from that container.

• New nitrile gloves were used before collecting each sample and changed as needed if contaminated.

• Each bottle remained capped until the sample was ready for transfer to avoid contamination while collecting the sample. Each bottle was held near the bottom with one hand, while holding the top of the cap with the other, and then unscrewing the cap. Bottles were not laid on ground or other places where they could become contaminated.

• Each bottle was held under the transfer container being careful not to let the bottle touch the sample container. Each bottle was filled to the neck or indicated fill line. Bottles were not allowed to overflow. Once filled, each bottle was removed from the water flow and the cap was carefully screwed back on.

• Documentation for the laboratory was prepared, and containers were examined to ensure each was properly identified and labeled. Samples were prepared for transport with adequate cushion wrap (e.g., bubble wrap or foam wrap) and blue ice. Each well’s chain-of-custody form was signed with date and time and placed in each ice chest. Each cooler was then sealed with custody tape.

• Each sample container was labeled with the sample number, type of laboratory analysis required, the date, time collected, name of site, and the name of the sampler.

• After collection and labelling, the samples (see Table 2, above) were placed in a cooler at approximately 4 degrees Celsius for delivery to the project laboratory (OnSite Environmental Inc., a chemical analytical laboratory at 14648 NE 95th Street, Redmond, WA 98052).

Dieringer Dairy Property

• New nitrile gloves were donned before collecting each Coliform bacteria sample.

Screens from each faucet were removed and the faucet was cleaned with a 10% Chlorox solution. Bottle lids were not placed on ground or other places where they could become contaminated. The water was allowed to run for few minutes before sampling to assure the water sample was representative, and to flush away any Chlorox residue, which could kill bacteria. Samples were delivered to Cascade Analytical at 019 G. S. Center Road in Wenatchee, Washington, 98801.

• Analytical results for groundwater samples submitted for analysis will be compared to

EPA National Primary Drinking Water Standards (EPA, 2009b) at the client’s request.

3.2 Utility Location

In contrast to normal procedure before any site activity takes place, during a Phase II ESA, White Shield did not notify the call before you dig” public utility notification service of the planned activities to obtain a Smart-Line ticket number. This was because no excavation was required for any of the sampling activities.

3.3 Soil Sampling

3.3.1 Soil Sampling Methods

A geologist licensed in the State of Washington was present for the purposes of collecting and logging soil samples and recording soil data. The geologist maintained a field log during field activities. All data generated during the investigation and any comments or other notes were entered directly into the daily field report.

At each of the soil sample locations from which a sample was collected, a stainless-steel spoon was used to scrape surface soils away to a depth of approximately two inches. Samples were placed in two 4 oz. laboratory-grade jars. U.S. EPA Method 5035 was used for samples to be tested for volatile components. For this method a disposable “Easy-Draw Syringe®” was used to collect approximately 5 grams of soil for transfer into pre-weighed 40-milliliter (ml) sample vials. Each sample was labeled with the soil sampling number and the depth below ground surface where the sample was taken, and the date and time the sample was collected. The samples were then placed in a cooler with frozen Blue Ice; and shipped to On-site Environmental, Inc. in that cooler under chain-of-custody protocol.

Soil samples were analyzed for VOCs, gasoline, diesel fuel, metals, and pesticides.

3.3.2 Decontamination Methods

All non-disposable sampling tools were cleaned and rinsed with de-ionized water after each sample was taken. Before the subsequent collection of each sample, all re-useable sampling equipment was cleaned with a hot water Alconox solution and rinsed with deionized water and wiped dry with paper towels.

3.4 Quality Control

The surface, groundwater and soil samples were collected according to industry protocols for the collection, documentation, and handling of samples. In the field:

• Dedicated sample pump tubing was used to collect samples the three monitoring wells.

Samples were placed into pre-cleaned laboratory provided sample containers.

Dieringer Dairy Property

• Samples were placed immediately into receptacles containing frozen Blue Ice in order to maintain sample integrity.

All sample labels were checked for accuracy and compared with the chain of custody documentation to provide sample documentation quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC). Samples were transported and submitted under standard chain of custody protocols and were kept refrigerated until delivery to the project laboratory. OnSite Environmental Laboratory provided standard QA/QC, which included: surrogate recoveries for each sample, method blank results, and duplicate analyses.

3.5 Investigation Derived Waste

Investigation derived waste for this project consisted of trace amounts of soil on wipes due to excess soil from sampling spoons, disposable gloves, and rinsate from decontamination. These wastes were placed in a plastic trash bag and upon receiving the non-detect results from the laboratory were disposed of in a trash bin. Because the groundwater purging and sampling method does not produce a significant amount of liquid waste, the purged groundwater was stored in 5-gallon plastic buckets pending receipt of laboratory results. The shallow soil sampling holes were backfilled with the soil that was dug out.

4.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The following section of this report outlines results of soil and groundwater sampling by WSI at the Dieringer Dairy.

Because the list of individual analytes tested for is quite long, and for the sake of simplicity and brevity, only those analytes detected during laboratory analyses are listed in Tables 3 and 4, below, with the exception of Coliform bacteria. Complete laboratory reports, listing concentrations of all analytes for which each sample was tested are presented in Appendix A.

Concentrations of detected soil contaminants are compared with Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A Cleanup Levels (CULs) for Unrestricted Land Uses (Table 740-1, WAC 173-340-900).

4.1 Soil and Sludge Sample Results

Table 3, below, summarizes the results of laboratory analysis of soil samples and two lagoon sludge samples collected on the Dieringer property.

Table 3 - Analytical Results; Soil Samples

Analyte Method A Cleanup Levels 061-04-LS 061-04-D 061-04-WCS 061-04-SL 061-04-SF 061-04-NF Lagoon Sludge mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg Gasoline Range Organics (HCID) NA ND NT ND Detected ND ND NT Diesel Oil-Range Organics (HCID) NA Detected NT ND Detected ND ND NT Lube Oil-Range Organics (HCID) NA Detected NT Detected Detected ND ND NT Gasoline-Range Organics (NWTPH-Gx) 100 NT NT NT NT NT NT ND Diesel Oil-Range Organics (NWTPH-Dx) 2,000 200 59000 ND 3800 NT NT 890 Lube Oil-Range Organics (NWTPH-Dx) 2,000 1600 33000 1400 3500 NT NT 17,000 Acetone ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.85 Benzene 0.03 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.0081 Carbon disulfide ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.67 m,p Xylene 9 0.57 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2-Butanone ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.12 Toluene 7 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.26 Organochlorine Pesticides NA ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Organophosphorous Pesticides NA ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Chlorinated Herbicides NA NT NT NT NT NT NT NA Arsenic 20 ND NT ND ND ND ND ND Barium ND ND ND ND ND ND 100 Cadmium 2 ND NT ND ND ND ND ND Chromium 2,000 9.2 NT 23 ND 7.7 8.1 18 Lead 250 ND NT 16 ND 10 ND ND Mercury 2 ND NT ND ND ND ND ND

Bold indicates that sample concentration exceeds MTCA Method A Cleanup Level ND = Not detected in sample NT = Sample not tested for this analyte NA = Not applicable or not available

Dieringer Dairy Property

Diesel-range and lube oil-range organic compounds were detected in concentrations greater than their respective MTCA Method A CULs of 2,000 mg/kg (parts per million (ppm)) in two samples. The sample collected from the diesel tank area (061-04-D) contained 59,000 mg/kg diesel oil-range organics and 33,000 mg/kg lube oil-range organics. The sample collected from the sludge over the manure-handling intake (061-04-SL) contained 3,800 mg/kg diesel oil-range organics and 3,500 mg/kg lube oil-range organics. 1,400 mg/kg lube oil-range organics were detected in the soil sample (061-04- WCS) collected from the west side of the calving/chemical storage shed area, that concentration being less than the 2,000 mg/kg CUL.

The same compounds were detected in the two lagoon sludge samples collected in January 2020 (061- 04-LS) and July (Lagoon Sludge). Concentrations of diesel-range organics and lube-oil range in the sample collected in January 2020 were 200 mg/kg and 1,600 mg/kg; and 890 mg/kg and 17,000 mg/kg for the sample collected in July 2020. Only the 17,000 mg/kg concentration in the July 2020 sample exceeded the 2,000 mg/kg MTCA Method A CUL. The January 2020 sample also contained traces of xylene and chromium in concentrations well below their respective CULS. The July 2020 sample contained acetone, benzene, and carbon disulfide in concentrations less than their respective CULs, for which CULs have been published. Low concentrations of barium (100 mg/L) and chromium (18 mg/L), both less than their respective CULs, were also detected in the July 2020 sludge sample. It is important to understand that these data are from but two sludge samples and may not be reflective of the entire volume of sludge as chemistry of the sludge may vary widely. Significant additional sampling would be required to more adequately characterize the 3,790 cubic yards estimated to be stored in the lagoons (See Section 5.0). No pesticides were detected in any of the samples tested for them.

4.2 Soil Sample Conclusions

With the exception of a relatively small, as yet non-delineated, area of soil on the west side of the calving /chemical storage shed, site soils do not appear to be contaminated with elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbon-based fuels, volatile organic compounds, metals, or pesticides. Surface soil in the area around the fuel tanks/pumps contains concentrations of diesel-range organics and lube oil-range organics that exceed the MTCA Method A CULs for those substances. Additional sampling would be required in the area to accurately delineate the areal extent and depth of the contaminated soils identified as a result of this initial sampling effort.

The sample (061-04-SL) collected from above the manure-handling system was collected in an effort to chemically characterize solids entrained in on-site effluent that was at one time being routed to the effluent lagoons. The information was used to help design analytical parameters for the surface and groundwater sampling component of the sampling program. At present, all manure on the site is collected and hauled off-site for use as fertilizer elsewhere. That notwithstanding, the presence of elevated petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in the material sampled does not indicate the presence of contaminated soil on the site.

In summary for site soils, contamination of site soils by chemical substances used on the Dieringer Dairy property appears to be minimal. Additional sampling would be required to estimate the volume of contaminated soil in the diesel pump/storage tank area.

4.3 Groundwater Level Results

Table 1, Well Data in Section 3.1.3 summarizes water levels and other data for the wells sampled.

Given that the well collar elevations are not surveyed, the data cannot be used to determine groundwater flow directions on the site. The groundwater flow direction on the site was estimated based on information provided by Pitz (Pitz, 2003).

Dieringer Dairy Property

4.4 Groundwater Sample Results

Table 4, below, summarizes analytical results for groundwater and surface water samples collected during this Phase II ESA. Complete laboratory reports are presented in Appendix A.

For both the sake of brevity and simplicity, only those analytes detected in the samples are presented in the table. Groundwater concentrations are compared against (1) EPA Primary Drinking Water Regulations, (2) MTCA Method A Cleanup Levels for Unrestricted Use, and (3) CULS published in WAC 173-200-040. For analytes for which EPA standards are not published, assessment of quality defaulted to MTCA standards. It is important to note that the EPA Primary Drinking Water Standards are NOT appropriate for assessing water quality in the sump or the lagoons, as they will never be intended for human consumption.

Table 4 - Analytical Results; Surface and Groundwater

EPA PRIMARY DRINKING SAMPLE NAME

Analyte MTCA LEVEL A CUL WAC 173-200-040 CUL WATER REGULATIONS Units 10-NE19-1 DD-20-1 DD-20-2 DD-RES DD-IRR-SUMP LAGOON Fecal coliform bacteria 1/100 0 MPN 0 0 0 0 790 9200 Total coliform bacteria 1/100 0, < 5%/month MPN Negative Negative Negative Negative 790 9200 Nitrate 10 mg/L 10 mg/L mg/L-N 12 1.6 1.4 1.5 ND 0.21 Total Phosphate mg/L 0.15 0.0087 0.28 0.059 2.7 94 HCID NA mg/L Detect ND ND ND Detect Detect NWTPH-Gx 1000 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND ND Diesel-Range Organics 500 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND 0.670 2.8 Lube-oil Range Organics 500 ug/L ug/L 0.42 ND ND ND 1.4 7.8 Acetone ug/L 5 ND ND ND 6 37 Carbon disulfide ug/L ND ND ND ND 0.52 ND Toluene 1000 ug/L 1,000 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND 2.3 ND Metals

Arsenic 5 ug/L 10 ug/L ug/L ND ND 3.6 ND ND 5 Barium 1000 ug/L 2,000 ug/L ug/L 230 ND 29 ND 110 280 Cadmium 5 ug/L 5 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND ND Chromium 50 ug/L 100 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 14 Lead 15 ug/L 0 ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 2.9 Selenium 10 ug/L 50 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 13 Silver 100 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND ND

Pesticides alpha-BHC ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.008 delta-BHC ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.021 Heptachlor 0.02 ug/L 0.4 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND 0.006 0.011 gamma-Chlordane 0.06 ug/L 2 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.100 4, 4'-DDE ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.009 Endosulfan ug/L ND ND ND ND 0.008 0.020 Endosulfan II ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.006 4,4'-DDT 0.3 ug/L 0.3 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.011 Endrin aldehyde 0.02 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.010

Herbicides

Dinoseb 7 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND ND 0.52 Pentachlorophenol 1 ug/L ug/L ND ND ND ND 0.049 ND

Bold = Exceeds one or more CUL or Standard

Dieringer Dairy Property

Coliform Bacteria: Coliform bacteria were not detected in any of the four well samples. The irrigation sump (DD-IRR-SUMP), and Lagoon (LAGOON) sample contained 790 and 9,200 MPN respectively, exceeding the recommended limit of 1/100 (colonies per 100 ml) for drinking water. However, the two sample sources are not used for drinking, and the level of coliform bacteria in the water is not surprising or unusual given the ubiquity of cow manure formerly collected and used as fertilizer on the site.

Nitrate: Nitrate was detected in all of the water samples, except in the irrigation sump sample. The only well in which the water sample nitrate concentration exceeded the recommend limit of 10 mg/L was the upgradient well (10-NE19-1), which contained 12 mg/L-N. The reason for the elevated nitrate concentration is unknown. Nitrate concentrations in samples collected from downgradient wells on the Dieringer Dairy property were less than the recommended 10 mg/L-N limit. The absence of nitrate in the sump sample is likely due to the heavy growth of algae and Duckweed (Lemnoidae) in the sump, which actively consume nitrate. Nitrate in groundwater is not considered to be an environmental issue for the subject property.

Total Phosphate: Phosphate was detected at relatively low concentrations in all of the well samples and the irrigation sump sample. The lagoon sample contained 94 mg/L total phosphate. This likely reflects the decomposition of organic material comprising the sludge in the lagoon bottom. The low concentrations of phosphorous in the four wells sampled suggests that phosphorous in groundwater is likely not a serious environmental concern, especially when considering the 0.15 mg/kg concentration of phosphorous in the upgradient well (10-NE19-1). Standards for phosphorous in groundwater have not been published.

Diesel-Range and Lube Oil-Range Organics: Diesel-range organics were detected in water samples collected from the irrigation sump (DD-IRR-SUMP) and lagoons (LAGOON) in concentrations of

0.67 ug/L (parts per billion (ppb)) and 2.8 ug/L, respectively; well below their respective MTCA Method A CUL of 500 ug/L. Lube oil-range organics were detected in the water samples collected from upgradient well (10-NE19-1), the irrigation sump, and the lagoon in concentrations of 0.42, 1.4, and 7.8 ug/L, respectively, which are also well below their MTCA Method A CUL of 500 ug/L.

Petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater are not considered to be an environmental issue for the subject property.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): Acetone, a common solvent, was detected in the groundwater samples collected from upgradient well 10-NE19-1, the irrigation sump, and the lagoon in concentrations of 5 ug/L, 6 ug/L, and 37 ug/L, respectively. There are currently no standard CULs for acetone, although these concentrations are relatively low. Given the absence of acetone in the four well samples on the Dieringer property, environmental risks appear to be relatively low.

Carbon disulfide was detected at a concentration of 0.52 ug/L in the water sample collected from the irrigation. Its presence is likely due to a biogenic process such as anerobic decomposition of plant materials in the sump. Given its very low concentration, it is not considered to be of environmental significance on the Dieringer site.

Toluene was detected at a concentration of 2.3 ug/L in the irrigation sump, well below the identical EPA and MTCA CUL of 1,000, ug/L. Its presence is unexplained, although as a component of gasoline, it is ubiquitous anywhere gasoline-powered equipment is used. Given its very low concentration, the presence of toluene is not considered to be of environmental significance on the property.

Metals: Arsenic was detected in the two water samples collected from well DD-20-2 and the lagoon at concentrations of 3.6 and 5.0 ug/L. The MTCA Level A CUL is 5.0 ug/L, half the less stringent

Dieringer Dairy Property

EPA CUL of 10 ug/L. The presence of arsenic in the well is likely due to the breakage of basalt boulders when the well was drilled recently, as arsenic is a common constituent of basaltic rocks. Its presence in the waters of the lagoon is inexplicable but may similarly reflect the breakage of basaltic boulders when the lagoon was dozed from the hillside. While somewhat anomalous, the presence of arsenic does not appear to present a significant threat to the environmental integrity of the property.

Pesticides: Two pesticides (Heptachlor and Endosulfan) were detected in the water samples collected from the irrigation sump and the lagoon at concentration less than their recommended MTCA and EPA Drinking Water CULs. Seven additional pesticides (see Table 4) were detected in the water sample collected from the lagoon. Of these seven, one (gamma-Chlordane) was present in a concentration (0.100 ug/L) greater than its MTCA CUL of 0.06 ug/L but less than its EPA standard of 2 ug/L. The concentrations of the remaining six pesticides detected in the lagoon water were either less than their respective MTCA CULs, or standard MTCA CULs have not be promulgated and must be specifically calculated for a site.

The presence of pesticides in the two surface water bodies sampled is somewhat anomalous. Given the absence of pesticides detected in the four groundwater wells, and the low concentrations detected in the sump and lagoons, it may reflect drift from the aerial application of pesticides on nearby farms.

WSI contacted the Grant County Department of Health, and learned that the agency applies pesticides to nearby Crab Creek weekly to control mosquitoes during mosquito season. However, none of the pesticides detected in the site water samples are used in Grant County’s Crab Creek mosquito control program. Their presence may reflect the likely wide use of pesticides in the predominantly agricultural area north of Moses Lake.

Herbicides: The once commonly used herbicide Dinoseb was detected at 0.52 ug/L in the water sample from the lagoon, and pentachlorophenol (also a once widely used wood preservative) was detected at a concentration of 0.049 ug/L in the water sample collected from the sump. Concentrations are both significantly less than the 7 ug/L (Dinoseb) and 1 ug/L pentachlorophenol EPA Drinking Water standards.

Their presence in the two sample sources is somewhat inexplicable.