The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About215 21ST STREET (6)SWRCB, January 2002 Page 1 . Secondary Containment Testing Report Form Thisform is intendedfor use by contractors performing periodic testing of UST secondary containment systems. Use the appropriate pages ofthisform to report resultsfor all components tested. The completedform, written testprocedures, and printouts from tests (if applicable), should be provided to thefacility owner /operatorfor submittal to the local regulatory agency. 1. FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Name: PEPSI COLA #3040 Date of Testing: 08/08/2011 Facility Address: 215 EAST 21ST STREET BAKERSFIELD, CA, 93305 Facility Contact: CASEY BLAIR Phone: ( 661) 201 -6963 Date Local Agency Was Notified of Testing: Name of Local Agency Inspector (if present during testing): unknown 2. TESTING CONTRACTOR INFORMATION Company Name: TANKNOLOGY, INC. Pass Technician Conducting Test: JARROD COOKE Repairs Made Credentials: x CSLB Licensed Contractor Not Tested SWRCB Licensed Tank Tester Secondary Pipe 1 DIE DIE License Type: a License Number: 743160 Manufacturer Manufacturer Training Component(s) Date Training Expires tanknology all 05/16/2014 Piping Sump 1 DIE x 3. SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS Component Pass Fail Not Tested Repairs Made Component Pass Fail Not Tested Repair Made Secondary Pipe 1 DIE DIE FRI Piping Sump 1 DIE x Piping Sump 1 DIE x UDC 1/2 E UDC 1/2 El El- 0 El- El Eli If hydrostatic testing was performed, describe what was done with the water after completion oftests: pump out CERTIFICATION OF TECHNICIAN RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING THIS TESTING To the best of my knowledge, thefacts stated in this document are accurate and infull compliance with legal requirements Technician's Signature: _^L Date: 08/08/2011 SWRCB, January 2002 5. SECONDARY PIPE TESTING Page 2 Test Method Developed By: X D Tank Manufacturer Industry Standard F-1 Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: X Pressure Vacuum El Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: gauge Equipment Resolution: • 2 0p s i Piping Material: Piping Run # 1 DIE DIE dwf i be r Piping Run # Piping Run # Piping Run # Piping Manufacturer: smith Piping Diameter: 3" Length of Piping Run: 151 Product Stored: DIESEL Method and location of piping -run isolation: SUMP Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum/water and starting test: 5min Test Start Time: 10: 17 Initial Reading (P4 ): 5psi Test End Time: 11: 17 Final Reading (RF ): 5psi Test Duration: 1hr Change in Reading (RF - R ): 0 Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: 0 Test Result: a Pass El Fail E] Pass El Fail El Pass El Fail 1-1 Pass 0 Fail Comments - (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) SWRCB, January 2002 6. PIPING SUMP TESTING Page 3. Test Method Developed By: Sump Manufacturer F-1 Industry Standard Xl Professional Engineer Other (Specie) Test Method Used: FI Pressure El Vacuum El Hydrostatic Other (Spec) Test Equipment Used: vpl t Sump # 1 DIE Sump # 1 DIE 4811 4 8 " Sump Diameter: Equipment Resolution: +-.002" Sump # Sump # Sump Depth: 58" 58" Sump Material: frp frp Height from Tank Top to Top of Highest Piping Pentration: 2811 2 8 " Height from Tank Top to Lowest Electrical Pentration: 14 " 1411 Condition of sump prior to testing: good good Portion of Sump Tested: 1 30" 30" Does turbine shut down when sump sensor detects liquid (both product and water) ?* X yes No N aYes No N F]Yes No N Yes 1:1 Turbine shutdown response time: 2 -5sec 2 -5sec Is system programmed for fail -safe shutdown ?* Yes N N N NE]Yes N NYes Yes No Was fail -safe verified to be operational?* X Yes N N X Yes N N X Yes N N X Yes No Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum/water and starting test: 5min 5min Test Start Time: 10: 16 10: 32 Initial Reading (RI ): 0 0 Test End Time: 10: 31 10 : 4 7 Final Reading (RF ): 000811 000611 Test Duration: 15min 15min Change inReading(RF - RI ): 0008" 0006" Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: 00211 00211 Test Result: a Pass 0 Fail Pass Fail Pass Fait Pass 1:1 Fail Was sensor removed for testing? X Yes N NA Yes N NA Yes[:]N NA Lj Yes [:]No N Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? E]YeC] N NA E]Ye N NA Ye N NA Yes N Comments - (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -up forfailed tests) 1 Ifthe entire depth of the sump is not tested, specify how much was tested. If the answer to anyof the questions indicated with an asterisk ( *) is "NO" or "NA ", the entire sump must be tested. (See SWRCB LG -160) SWRCB, January 2002 7. UNDER - DISPENSER CONTAINMENT (UDC) TESTING Page 4 Test Method Developed By: UDC Manufacturer Industry Standard X Professional Engineer Other (Spec) Test Method Used: FI Pressure Vacuum Fx1 Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: vp l t ' Equipment Resolution: +-.002" UDC Manufacturer: UDC # 1/2 UDC # 1/2 UDC # UDC # bravo bravo UDC Material: metal metal UDC Depth: 12 " 1211 Height from UDC Top to Top of Highest Piping Pentration: 0 0 Height from UDCTop to Lowest Electrical Pentration: 0 0 Condition of UDC prior to testing: good good Portion of UDC Tested: I 211 2 It Does turbine shut down when sump sensor detects liquid (both product and water) ?* Yes F ] Yes N Turbine shutdown response time: 2 -5sec 2 -5sec Is system programmed for fail -safe shutdown ?* Yes N N Yes' N N N NYes Yes No Was fail -safe verified to be operational?* Yes X N N Yes X N N Yes No JNA Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum/water and starting test: 5min 5min Test Start Time: 10 : 2 7 10 : 4 5 Initial Reading (RI ): 0 0 Test End Time: 10 : 4 2 11: 00 Final Reading (RF ): 0013" 00091, Test Duration: 15min 15min Change in Reading (RF- RI ): 001311 00091, Pass/Fail Threshold or Criteria: 0021, 002" Test Result: E Pass El Fail X Pass El Fail El Pass 7 Fail 0 Pass El Fail Was sensor removed for testing? Yes X N NA esENN NA Yes N NA Yes No Was sensor properly replaced and verifed functional after testing? Ye N NA N NA Ye NA Yes NOUNXYeX Comments - (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -upfor failed tests) I Ifthe entire depth ofthe UDC is not tested, specify how much was tested. If the answer to any ofthe questions indicated with an asterisk ( *) is "NO" or "NA ", the entire UDC must be tested. (See SWRCB LG -160) J- At 0 TankrK* gy 8501 N MOPAC EXPRESSWAY, SUITE 400 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78759 512) 451 -6334 FAX (512) 459 -1459 TEST DATE:08 /013/11 WORK ORDER NUMBEFS185577 CLIENT:PEPSI COLA SITE:PEPSI COLA #3040 COMMENTS Conduct SB -989 Testing PARTS REPLACED QUANTITY DESCRIPTION HELIUM PINPOINT TEST RE5ULT5 (IF APPLICABLE) ITEMS TESTED HELIUM PINPOINT LEAK TEST RESULTS Printed 09/15/2011 07:50 MTUTTLE SITE DIAGRAM Tan 8501 N MOPAC EXPRESSWAY, SUITE 400 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78759 512) 451 -6334 FAX (512) 459 -1459 TEST DATE: 08/08/11 WORK ORDER NUMBER3185577 CLIENT:PEPSI COLA SITE: PEPSI COLA #3040 DSL TL,S F VENTC Ll O LO Q M Bravo Q A L2 Float a N w ESO L N m ENTRANCE Printed 09/15/2011 07:50 MTUTTLE Ir Tanlvno/ogy 11000 N. MoPac Expressway, Suite 500 Austin, Texas 78759 Phone: (512) 451 -6334 Fax: (512) 459 -1459 BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INSPECTOR CRAIG PERKINS 1501 TRUXTUN AVE. BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93301 Test Date: 08/08/2011 Order Number: 3185577 Dear Regulator, Date Printed and Mailed: 09/15/2011 Enclosed are the results of recent testing performed at the following facility: PEPSI COLA #3040 215 EAST 21 ST STREET BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93305 Testing performed: Line Interstitial Secondary Containment Line Interstitial Secondary Containment Turbine Sump Secondary Containment - Dispenser Pan \Sump Sincerely, Dawn Kohlmeyer Manager, Field Reporting