The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7725 SB989 RESULTS 8-22-16SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ Secondary Containment Testing Report Form This form is intended for use by contractors performing periodic testing of UST secondary containment systems. Use the appropriate pages of this form to report results for all components tested. The completed form, written test procedures, and printouts from tests (if applicable), should be provided to the facility owner/operator for submittal to the local regulatory agency. 1.FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Name: Date of Testing: Facility Address: Facility Contact: Phone: Date Local Agency Was Notified of Testing : Name of Local Agency Inspector (if present during testing): 2.TESTING CONTRACTOR INFORMATION Company Name: Technician Conducting Test: Credentials: CSLB Licensed Contractor SWRCB Licensed Tank Tester License Type: License Number: Manufacturer Training ManufacturerComponent(s)Date TrainingExpires 3.SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS ComponentPassFail Not Tested Repairs Made ComponentPassFail Not Tested Repairs Made If hydrostatic testing was performed, describe what was done with the water after completion of tests: CERTIFICATION OF TECHNICIAN RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING THIS TESTING To the best of my knowledge, the facts stated in this document are accurate and in full compliance with legal requirements Technician’s Signature:________________________________________________ Date:_________________________ $POGJEFODF6454FSWJDFT *OD ")B[ $% 1 7 #7725/Fastrip#19 08/22/2016 4901SouthUnionAvenue Bakersfield,CA93307 OmeroGarcia(661)393-7000 07/13/2016 Kris Karns CameronMason ✔ ICC CAUSTServiceTechnician 10/13/2016 INCON TS-STS 10/16/2016 87 Annular ✔UDC 15-16 91 Annular ✔ Diesel Annular ✔ 87 Annular ✔ 91 Annular ✔ Diesel Annular ✔ 87 STP ✔ Diesel STP ✔ UDC 9-10 ✔ UDC 11-12 ✔ UDC 13-14 ✔ 91 STP ✔ ✔ 87 Vapor Spill Bucket ✔ 91 Vapor Spill Bucket ✔ 08/22/2016 Water was returned too test tank. SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ 4.TANK ANNULAR TESTING Test Method Developed By: Tank Manufacturer Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: Tank # Tank # Tank # Tank # Is Tank Exempt From Testing?1 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Tank Capacity: Tank Material: Tank Manufacturer: ProductStored: Wait time between applying pressure/vacuum/water and starting test: Test Start Time: Initial Reading (RI): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): TestDuration: Change in Reading (RF-RI): Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Was sensor removed for testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Comments – (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommended follow-up for failed tests) 1 Secondary containment systems where the continuous monitoring automatically monitors both the primary and secondary containment, such as systems that are hydrostatically monitored or under constant vacuum, are exempt from periodic containment testing. {California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Section 2637(a)(6)} 2 7 ✔ ✔ CalibratedGauges 0.00" 87 ✔ Unknown Steel Unknown Gasoline 5 Min 0.00 hg 1 Hour -10.00 hg 11:00 am -10.00 hg 10:00 am 0.00 hg ✔ ✔ ✔ 91 ✔ Unknown Steel Unknown Gasoline 5 Min 10:00 am -10.00 hg 11:00 am -10.00 hg 1 Hour 0.00 hg 0.00 hg ✔ ✔ ✔ Diesel ✔ Unknown Steel Unknown Diesel 5 Min 10:00 am -10.00 hg 11:00 am -10.00 hg 1 Hour 0.00hg 0.00 hg ✔ ✔ ✔ SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ 5.SECONDARY PIPE TESTING Test Method Developed By: Piping Manufacturer Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: Piping Run # Piping Run # Piping Run # Piping Run # PipingMaterial: Piping Manufacturer: PipingDiameter: Length of Piping Run: ProductStored: Method and location of piping-run isolation: Wait time between applying pressure/vacuum/water and starting test: Test Start Time: Initial Reading (RI): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): TestDuration: Change in Reading (RF-RI): Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Comments – (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommended follow-up for failed tests) 3 7 ✔ ✔ CalibratedGauges 0.00" 87 Fiberglass Smith 3.00" 100.00' Gasoline Boot In Sump 5 Min 10:00 am 5.00 PSI 11:00 am 5.00 PSI 1 Hour 0.00 PSI 0.00" ✔ 91 Fiberglass Smith 3.00" 100.00' Gasoline Boot In Sump 5 Min 10:00 am 5.00 PSI 11:00 am 5.00 PSI 1 Hour 0.00 PSI 0.00" ✔ Deisel Fiberglass Smith 3.00" 100.00' Diesel Boot In Sump 5 Min 10:00 am 5.00 PSI 11:00 sm 5.00 PSI 1 Hour 0.00 PSI 0.00" ✔ SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ 6.PIPING SUMP TESTING Test Method Developed By: Sump Manufacturer Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: Sump # Sump # Sump #Sump # Sump Diameter: Sump Depth: Sump Material: Height from Tank Top to Top of Highest Piping Penetration: Height from Tank Top to Lowest Electrical Penetration: Condition of sump prior to testing: Portion of Sump Tested1 Does turbine shut down when sump sensor detects liquid (both product and water)?* Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Turbine shutdown response time Is system programmed for fail-safe shutdown?* Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was fail-safe verified to be operational?* Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Wait time between applying pressure/vacuum/water and starting test: Test Start Time: Initial Reading (RI): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): Test Duration: Change in Reading (RF-RI): Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Was sensor removed for testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Comments – (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommended follow-up for failed tests) 1 If the entire depth of the sump is not tested, specify how much was tested. If the answer to any of the questions indicated with an asterisk (*) is “NO” or “NA”, the entire sump must be tested. (See SWRCB LG-160) See Incon Results 4 7 ✔ ✔ TS-STS 0.002" 87 36.00" 40.00" Fiberglass 22.00" 28.00" Clean A.P.P. ✔ N/A ✔ ✔ 5 Min ✔ ✔ ✔ 91 36.00" 40.00" Fiberglass 22.00" 28.00" Clean A.P.P. ✔ N/A ✔ ✔ 5 Min ✔ ✔ ✔ Diesel 36.00" A.P.P. ✔ N/A ✔ 5 Min ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Clean 28.00" 22.00" Fiberglass 40.00" SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ 7.UNDER-DISPENSER CONTAINMENT (UDC) TESTING Test Method Developed By: UDC Manufacturer Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: UDC # UDC # UDC # UDC # UDC Manufacturer: UDC Material: UDC Depth: Height from UDC Bottom to Top of Highest Piping Penetration: Height from UDC Bottom to Lowest Electrical Penetration: Condition of UDC prior to testing: Portion of UDC Tested1 Does turbine shut down when UDC sensor detects liquid (both product and water)?* Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Turbine shutdown response time Is system programmed for fail- safe shutdown?* Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was fail-safe verified to be operational?* Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Wait time between applying pressure/vacuum/water and starting test Test Start Time: Initial Reading (RI): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): Test Duration: Change in Reading (RF-RI): Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Was sensor removed for testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Comments – (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommended follow-up for failed tests) 1 If the entire depth of the UDC is not tested, specify how much was tested. If the answer to any of the questions indicated with an asterisk (*) is “NO” or “NA”, the entire UDC must be tested. (See SWRCB LG-160) See Incon Results 5 7 ✔ ✔ TS-STS 0.002" 9-10 A.P.P. Clean 11.00" 10.00" 28.00" Fiberglass Unknown ✔ N/A ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 11-12 N/A ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ A.P.P. Clean 11.00" 10.00" 28.00" Fiberglass Unknown ✔ ✔ 13-1415-16 Unknown Unknown Fiberglass Fiberglass 28.00"28.00" 10.00"10.00" 11.00"11.00" Clean Clean A.P.P.A.P.P. ✔✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ N/AN/A ✔✔ ✔✔ ✔✔ SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ 8.FILL RISER CONTAINMENT SUMP TESTING Facility is Not Equipped With Fill Riser Containment Sumps Fill Riser Containment Sumps are Present, but were Not Tested Test Method Developed By: Sump Manufacturer Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: Fill Sump # Fill Sump # Fill Sump # Fill Sump # Sump Diameter: Sump Depth: Height from Tank Top to Top of Highest Piping Penetration: Height from Tank Top to Lowest Electrical Penetration: Condition of sump prior to testing: Portion of Sump Tested Sump Material: Wait time between applying pressure/vacuum/water and starting test: Test Start Time: Initial Reading (RI): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): TestDuration: Change in Reading (RF-RI): Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Is there a sensor in the sump? Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Does the sensor alarm when either product or water is detected? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was sensor removed for testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Yes No NA Comments – (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommended follow-up for failed tests) 6 7 ✔ ✔ TS-STS 0.00" Unmonitored ﬁll sumps. SWRCB, January 2002 Page ____ of ____ 9.SPILL/OVERFILL CONTAINMENT BOXES Facility is Not Equipped With Spill/Overfill Containment Boxes Spill/Overfill Containment Boxes are Present, but were Not Tested Test Method Developed By: Spill Bucket Manufacturer Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: Spill Box # Spill Box # Spill Box # Spill Box # BucketDiameter: BucketDepth: Wait time between applying pressure/vacuum/water and starting test: Test Start Time: Initial Reading (RI): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): TestDuration: Change in Reading (RF-RI): Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Pass Fail Comments – (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommended follow-up for failed tests) 77 ✔ ✔ TS-STS 0.00" 87 V 91 V 12.00"12.00" 13.00"13.00" 5 Min 5 Min 10:00 am 10:00 am 12.00"12.00" 0.00" 11:00 am 11:00 am 12.00"12.00" 1 Hour 1 Hour 10:00 am 0.00" 0.0625"0.0625 ✔✔