Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3699 WILSON ROAD (6)SWRCB, January 2002 Page of 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 results for all components tested. The completedform, written test procedures, and printoutsfrom tests (if applicable), should be provided to thefacility owner /operatorfor submittal to the local regulatory agency. 1. FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Name: HP Go Go Date of Testing: 7/1 1/201 1 Facility Address: 3699 Wilson Road, Bakersfield, CA 93309 Facility Contact: Alondra Hernandez I Phone: 661- 835 -8044 Date Local Agency Was Notified of Testing : 6/28/2011 Name of Local Agency Inspector (rfpresent during testing): Ester Estrada 2. TESTING CONTRACTOR INFORMATION Company Name: Confidence UST Services Pass Fail Technician Conducting Test: Bryan A Self Repairs Made Component Credentials: x CSLB Licensed Contractor x SWRCB Licensed Tank Tester Not Tested License Type: CSLB Reg. Annular License Number:804904 Manufacturer Manufacturer Training Component(s) Date Training Expires Franklin Fueling TS -STS 1 -06 -2013 UST Service technician ICC 7 -5 -2013 Star. Smith. Fibercast Fiber Glass Systems N.A. UDC 3 -4 X 3. SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS Component Pass Fail Not Tested Repairs Made Component Pass Fail Not Tested Repairs Made Reg. Annular X UDC 1 -2 X Reg. Middle Annular X UDC 3 -4 X Super Annular X UDC 5 -6 X Reg. Product Line X UDC 7 -8 X Reg. Middle Product Line X Waste Oil Fill Sump X Super Product Line X Waste Oil Annular X Reg. Fill Sump X Reg. Middle Fill Sump X Super Fill Super X Reg. STP Sump X Reg. Middle STP Sump X Super STP Sump X If hydrostatic testing was performed, describe what was done with the water after completion of tests: Water was nut back into test trailer and waste drum CERTIFICATION OF TECHNICIAN RESPONSIBLE To the hest ofmy knowledge,_liefaFts stated in this document re u Technician's Signature: 2 CONDUCTING THIS TESTING and infull compliance with legal requirements SWRCB, January 2002 4. TANK ANNULAR TESTING Page of Test Method Developed By: Tank Manufacturer x Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure x Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Calibrated Gages Equipment Resolution:0.0625" of Tank #Reg. Tank # Reg. Middle Tank # Super Tank #Waste Oil Is Tank Exempt From Testing ?' Yes x No Yes x No Yes x No Yes X No Tank Capacity: 12,000 12,000 12,000 1000 Tank Material: FRP FRP FRP FRP Tank Manufacturer: Xeries Xeries Xeries Unknown Product Stored: Regular Regular Super Waste Oil Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum /water and starting test: 5 min. 5 min. 5 min. 5 min Test Start Time: 11:08am 11:08am 1 1:08am 2:35 pm Initial Reading (R,): 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI Test End Time: 12:08pm 12:08pm 12:08pm 3:35 pm Final Reading (RF): 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI 5 00 PSI Test Duration: 1 hour 1 hour 1 hour 1 hour Change in Reading (RF -R,): 0.00" 0.00" 0.00" 0.00" Pass /Fail Threshold or Criteria: 0.00" 0.00" 0.00" 0.00" Test Result: x Pass Fail x Pass Fail x Pass Fail x Pass Fail Was sensor removed for testing? x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testin ? x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes 11 No NA Comments — (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) 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)) SWRCB, January 2002 Page of 5. SECONDARY PIPE TESTING Test Method Developed By: Piping Manufacturer x Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Spec) Test Method Used: x Pressure Vacuum Hydrostatic Other (Spec) Test Equipment Used: Calibrated Gages Equipment Resolution: 0.0625" Piping Run# Super Piping Run # Piping Run # Reg. Piping Run # Reg. Middle Piping Material: FRP FRP FRP Piping Manufacturer: Smith Smith Smith Piping Diameter: 3.00" 3.00" 3.00" Length of Piping Run: 100.00, 100.00, 100.00, Product Stored: Regular Regular Super Method and location of piping-run isolation: Clean & Dry Clean & Dry Clean & Dry Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum /water and starting test: 5 min. 5 min. 5 min. Test Start Time: 1 1:40am 1 1:40am 1 1:40am Initial Reading (R,): 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI 5.00" PSI Test End Time: 12:00pm 12:00pm 12:00pm Final Reading (RF): 2.50" PSI 3.00" PSI 4.00" PSI Test Duration: 20 min. 20 min. 20 min. Change in Reading (RF -R,): 2.50" PSI 2.00" PSI 1.00" PSI Pass /Fail Threshold or Criteria: 0.00" 0.00" 0.00" Test Result: Pass x Fail Pass x Fail Pass x Fail Pass Fail Comments — (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) SWRCB, January 2002 6. PIPING SUMP TESTING Page of Test Method Developed By: Sump Manufacturer x Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Spec) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum x Hydrostatic Other (Spec) Test Equipment Used: Ts -sts Equipment Resolution: Sump # Reg. Sump # Reg. Middle Sump # Super Sump # Sump Diameter: 42.00" 42.00" 44.00" Sump Depth: 55.50" 55.50" 56.00" Sump Material: FRP FRP FRP Height from Tank Top to Top of Highest Piping Penetration: 38.00" 33.00" 13.00" Height from Tank Top to Lowest Electrical Penetration: 34.50" 30.00" 30.00" Condition of sump prior to testing: Dirty Dirty Dirty Portion of Sump Tested' Pipe penetration Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Does turbine shut down when sump sensor detects liquid (both product and water) ?* Yes No x NA Yes No x NA Yes No x NA Yes No NA Turbine shutdown response time NA NA NA Is system programmed for fail -safe shutdown ?` Yes No x NA Yes No x NA Yes No x NA Yes No NA Was fail -safe verified to be o eraail - s ? Yes No x NA Yes No x NA Yes No x NA Yes No NA Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum /water and starting test: Visual Fail Visual Fail 5 Min Test Start Time: Initial Reading (Rj): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): Test Duration: Change in Reading (RF -Ri): Pass /Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass x Fail Pass x Fail x Pass Fail Pass Fail Was sensor removed for testing? x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? x Yes No El NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Yes No NA Comments — (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) Both Rey-ular unleaded STP sumps were leakiny- from the clam shell and were Visual Fails. If the entire depth of the sump is not tested, specify how much was tested. If the answer to a of the questions indicated with an asterisk ( *) is "NO" or "NA ", the entire sump must be tested. (See SWRCB LG -160) SWRCB, January 2002 Page of 7. UNDER- DISPENSER CONTAINMENT (UDC) TESTING Test Method Developed By: UDC Manufacturer x Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specie) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum x Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Ts -sts Equipment Resolution: UDC # 1-2 UDC # 3 -4 UDC # 5 -6 UDC # 7 -8 UDC Manufacturer: Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne UDC Material: FRP FRP FRP FRP UDC Depth: 23.00" 23.00" 23.00" 23.00" Height from UDC Bottom to Top of Highest Piping Penetration: 10.00" 9.50" 9.50" 11.001, Height from UDC Bottom to Lowest Electrical Penetration: 6.50" 6.50" 6.00" 7.00" Condition of UDC prior to testing: Dirty Dirty Dirty Dirty Portion of UDC Tested Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Does turbine shut down when UDC sensor detects liquid (both product and water) ?* x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Turbine shutdown response time 8 Seconds 8 Seconds 8 Seconds 8 Seconds Is system programmed for fail- safe shutdown? x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Was fail -safe verified to be o erational? x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum /water and starting test 5 Min 5 Min 5 Min 5 Min Test Start Time: Initial Reading (R,): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): Test Duration: Change in Reading (RF -R,): Pass /Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass X Fail Pass X Fail Pass X Fail Pass X Fail Was sensor removed for testing? X Yes No NA X Yes No NA X Yes No NA X Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? X Yes No NA X Yes No NA X Yes El No 11 NA X Yes 11 No El NA Comments — (include information on repairs made prior to testing, and recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) If the entire depth of the UDC is not tested, specify how much was tested. If the answer to a of the questions indicated with an asterisk ( *) is "NO" or "NA ", the entire UDC must be tested. (See SWRCB LG -160) SWRCB, January 2002 8. FILL RISER CONTAINMENT SUMP TESTING Page of 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 x Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum x Hydrostatic Other (Specify) Test Equipment Used: Equipment Resolution: Fill Sump # Reg. Fill Sump # Reg. Middle Fill Sump # Super Fill Sump # W.0 Sump Diameter: 36.00" 36.00" 36.00" 34.00" Sump Depth: 53.00" 60.00" 58.00" 42.00" Height from Tank Top to Top of Highest Piping Penetration: 30.50" 17.00" 17.00" N.A. Height from Tank Top to Lowest Electrical Penetration: 33.50" 19.00" 12.00" 15" Condition of sump prior to testing: Dirty Dirty Dirty Dirty Portion of Sump Tested Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Pipe Penetration Sump Material: FRP FRP FRP FRP Wait time between applying pressure/vacuuin /water and starting test: 5 min. 5 min. 5 min. 5 min. Test Start Time: Initial Reading (Rj): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): Test Duration: Change in Reading (RF -R): Pass /Fail Threshold or Criteria: Test Result: Pass x Fail x Pass Fail Pass x Fail x Pass Fail Is there a sensor in the sump? x Yes No x Yes No x Yes No x Yes No Does the sensor alarm when either product or water is detected? x Yes No NA x Yes No 0 NA x Yes No 0 NA x Yes No 0 NA Was sensor removed for testing? x Yes No NA x Yes No 0 NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Was sensor properly replaced and verified functional after testing? x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA x Yes No NA Comments — (include information on repairs made prior to Jesting, and recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) The rev -ular and the super tanks were visual fails. When I nut the water in the tank I went over the nininy, penetration by the time I nut my probes in the tank the water had dropped under the penetration. 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 x Test Method Developed By: Spill Bucket Manufacturer x Industry Standard Professional Engineer Other (Specify) Test Method Used: Pressure Vacuum x Hydrostatic Other (Spec) Test Equipment Used: Ts -sts Equipment Resolution: Spill Box # Spill Box # Spill Box # Spill Box # Bucket Diameter: Bucket Depth: Wait time between applying pressure /vacuum /water and starting test: Test Start Time: Initial Reading (R,): Test End Time: Final Reading (RF): Test Duration: Change in Reading (RF -R,): 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 recommendedfollow -upforfailed tests) Spill buckets were iust completed with the annual monitor certification HP GO GO 3699 WILSON RD BAKERSFIELD CA 93309 661- 835 -8045 INVOICE 27134 07/20/2011 1:38 PM SUMP LEVEL REPORT SUMP OIL -FIL 3,556 IN HP GO GO 3699 WILSON RD BAKERSFIELD CA 93309 661- 835 -8045 INVOICE 27134 07/20/2011 1:54 PM SUMP LEAK TEST REPORT OIL -FIL TEST STARTED 1:39 PM TEST STARTED 07/20/2011 BEGIN LEVEL 3.5561 1N END TIME 1:54 PM ENO DATE 07/20/2011 END LEVEL 3.5549 IN LEAK THRESHOLD 0.002 IN TEST RESULT PASSED HP GO GO HP GO GO 3699 WILSON RD 3699 WILSON RD BAKERSFIELD CA 93309 BAKERSFIELD CA 93309 681- 835 -8045 651- 835 -8045 INVOICE 27134 INVOICE 27134 07/11/2011 2:13 PM 07/11/2011 4:29 PM SUMP LEVEL REPORT SUMP LEAK TEST REPORT UDC 1 -2 SUMP 87 MFIL 5,705 IN SUMP 91 -STP 2,818 IN TEST STARTED 4:13 PM TEST STARTED 07/11/2011 BEGIN LEVEL 5.3140 IN END TIME 4:29 PM END DATE 07/11/2011 END LEVEL 5.3070 IN LEAK THRESHOLD 0.002 IN TEST RESULT FAILED UDC 3 -4 HP GD GO 3699 WILSON RD TEST STARTED 4:13 PM BAKERSFIELD CA 93309 TEST STARTED 07/11/2011 661- 835 -8045 BEGIN LEVEL 5.3071 IN INVOICEt2T134 + ENO TIME 4:29 PM ENO DATE 07/11/2011 07/11/2011 2:29 PM END LEVEL 5.3042 IN LEAK THRESHOLD 0.002 IN SUMP LEAK TEST REPORT TEST RESULT FAILED 87 MFIL UDC 5 -6 TEST STARTED 2:13 PM TEST STARTED 07/11/2011 TEST STARTED 4:13 PM BEGIN LEVEL 5.7056 IN TEST STARTED 07/11/2011 END TIME 2 :28 PM BEGIN LEVEL 6.5278 IN END DATE 07/11/2011 ENO TIME 429 PM ENO LEVEL 5.7084 IN END DATE 07/11/2011 LEAK THRESHOLD 0,002 IN END LEVEL 8,5238 IN TEST RESULT PASSED LEAK THRESHOLD 0,002 IN TEST RESULT FAILED 91 -STP UDC 7 -8 TEST STARTED 2:13 PM TEST STARTED 07/11/2011 TEST STARTED 4:13 PM BEGIN LEVEL 2.8187 IN TEST STARTED 07/11/2011 END TIME 2:28 PM 851N LEVEL 4.7675 IN END DATE 07111/2011 END TIME 4:29 PM ENO LEVEL 2,8187 IN END DATE 07/11/2011 LEAK THRESHOLD 0,002 IN ENO LEVEL 4,7612 IN TEST RESULT PASSED LEAK THRESHOLD 0.002 IN TEST RESULT FAILED