Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
UNDERGROUND TANK (2)
;' ..IL W. W. IRWIN, INC. I CLOSURE REPORT at ABANDONED TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 16th Street Bakersfield, California for TEXACO REFINING AND M_~RKETING INC. 10 Universal city Plaza, 4th Floor' Universal City, California submitted by: W. W. IRWIN, INC. ' 2475 Lemon Avenue Long Beach, California 90806 Project Number 10084.00 I March 2, 1989 · CONSTRUCTION · MAINTENANCE ~', · ENVIRONMENTAL 2475 LEMON AVE., LONG BF_.ACH, CA 90806 CLOSURE REPORT at ABANDONED TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 16th Street Bakersfield, California for TEXACO REFINING AND MARKETING INC. 10 Universal City Plaza, 4th Floor Universal City, California ~ubmitted by: W. W. IRWIN, INC. 2475 Lemon Avenue Long Beach, California 90806 Project Number 10084.00 March 2, 1989 ABANDONED TEXACO BULK PLANT, 801 16TH STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a report requesting site closure at~he abandoned Texaco bulk plant at 801 16th Street, Bakersfield, California. The request is based on total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration data. recorded during soil vapor .venting operations and laboratory analysis on.soil samples collected from confirmatory borings. A TPH concentration in the soil of 1,570 mg/kg at a depth of 25 feet below grade has been quantified as indicative of diesel. According to the State of California LUFT Manual, Table 2-2, based on site conditions, a diesel concentration of 10,000 mg/kg' may be left in place. A TPH concentration of 14,200 mg/kg has been detected at a depth of five feet below grade. This soil. will be excavated and hauled to a Class I facility in Kern County. INTRODUCTION A subsurface investigation at this facility was conducted in September of 1986 that included nine soil borings (Subsurface Investigation Report, November 3, 19~; Harding Lawson Associates). Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the soil between a fuel unloading area and a 5,000 gallon, underground diesel tank (Figure 1). Based on the concentrations of hydrocarbons found during the removal of the diesel tank in March 1987 (Tank Removal Report, March 23, 1987;. W.~W. Irwin, Inc.), hydrocarbon impacted soil was determined to be confined to the unloading area and was not laterally extensive. In April 1987, a well was installed in the vadose zone. near the load rack to enable venting of the hydrocarbons. A permit to construct venting equipment (a Mobile Oxidation System - MOS) was reqUested from the Kern County Air pollution Control District in May 1987 and was received in January 1988. System testing began in May 1988 and venting operations began in June 1988. The MOS venting was shut down on December 14, 1988, based on confirmational soil sample analysis. This report describes these operations and the results of the remediation program. SITE ASSESSMENT The initial site assessment was conducted on September 8 and 9, 1986. Nine soil borings were advanced on the site in areas where hydrocarbon impacted soils are commonly found. Mos~ of these borings were only drilled to fifteen feet because no hydrocarbons were found in the borings with a field photoionization detector (PID). One boring,. B-3, located between the facility's fuel unloading area and the 5,000 gallon underground diesel tank, was advanced to a depth of of 46' feet. Hydrocarbon impacted soil was detected with a PID from '~ive below grade to the total drilled depth of the boring. Laboratory analyses were not performed on all of the samples from this boring. One sample collected from a depth of 26 feet yielded a total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration by EPA method.8015 of 3,000 mg/kg. The 5,.000 gallon diesel tank was removed on March 9, 1987. Soil samples were collected from beneath the tank and analyzed for TPH by a State certified laboratory using EPA method 418.1 in accordance with Kern County guidelines. Hydrocarbon concentrations in these samples ranged from not detected at 1 mg/kg (method detection limits) to 24.2 mg/k~. The tank therefore was eliminated as a point source of hydrocarbons and mitigation efforts were concentrated around the fuel unloading area. HYDROGEOLOGY The site is underiain by Pleistocene and Quarternary nonmarine alluvial terrace deposits of unknown thickness (California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield sheet, 1965). The uppermost regional aquifer is unconfined and occurs at a depth of approximately 185 to 195 feet (Kern County Water Agency, District No. 4, 1987 Report on Water Conditions, February 1, 1988). This aquifer is used for area municipal, domestic and agricultural supply purposes. REMEDIATION PROGRAM The petroleum hydrocarbons in the soils at the site apparently adhered to loose sand grains of very fine to medium size. After reviewing several site remediation alternatives including excavating and hauling, a program of active soil venting was selected (Recommendations on Remedial Action, W. W. I~in Inc., June 5, 1987). A venting well constructed of slotted PVC casing -3- was installed on April 14, 1987 to a depth of 60 feet near the fuel unloading area. Analytical data from soil samples collected during the venting well installation and data from samples collected from the previous investig'ations were used to establish estimates of the amount of recoverable hydrocarbons, the method of hydrocarbon destruction and the estimated duration of venting operations. The amount of hydrocarbons present in the soil was estimated from the average hydrocarbon concentrations in the soil and the volume of impacted soil. The volume of impacted soil was estimated at 31,400 cubic feet containing approximately 1,900 pounds of of hydrocarbons, or the equivalent of 311 gallons of gasoline. ~Based on this estimate, a Mobile Oxidation System' (MOS) was proposed for the 'destruction of the vented hydrocarbons. (A description of the MOS is included in Appendix A). Assuming that 75 % of the hydrocarbons were recoverable, based on field experience with this method, the time of operation was estimated at approximately 4 months (Appendix B). SOIL VENTING OPERATIONS The application for a permit to construct t~e venting equipment was submitted on May 20, 1987; the permit to construct was granted on January 13, 1988 (Appendix C). Initially, the MOS was tested in the Vapor Combustion Processor (VCP) mode where the hydrocarbons are extracted by vacuum pump and flared. However, the concentrations of hydrocarbons were not high enough to allow efficient operation of the VCP without the excessive use of supplemental fuel needed for flame stability. Tediar bag samples were collected of the influent on May 23, 1988 and analyzed by EPA methods 8015 and 8020. The results are presented in Table A: TABLE A EPA 8020 RESULTS ppm (vol/vol) Benzene Nb(0.21)* Toluene 29.0 Ethyl Benzene 3.4 Total Xylenes 32.0 EPA MODIFIED 8015 RESULTS DDm (vol/vol) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 130.0 * Not found at the indicated detection limit After reviewing the results, preparations were made to operate with the catalytic oxidizer (catox) mode of the MOS. The catox unit began operating on July 5, with an initial influent concentration of 4210 ppm TPH by volume as analyzed by a FID. Concentrations declined 29% in the first two weeks of operation to 2990 ppm and another 54% in the the next three weeks to 1600 ppm. By December 14, when the system was shut down, the influent concentration had declined 93% to 274 ppm. A soil vapor concentration deCline graph is found in Appendix D. SOIL BORINGS ~ A soil boring, CB-i, (Figure 2) was drilled approximately four feet north of the venting well on November 15, 1988 to determine the progress of the remediation and confirm the influent concentrations read from the analyzer. Soil samples were collected at five-foot intervals when possible between five feet and fifty-five feet below grade. Cobbles were encountered at 25, 30 and 35 feet preventing the collection of samples at these depths. On December 15, a second boring, CB-2, was drilled approximately three feet to the east of the venting well to confirm .the results at CB-lo Samples 'were collected at five-foot intervals to 25 feet below grade. Beyond this depth, samples were collected below the cobble zones at 33 and 38 feet. The logs for both of the borings are included in Appendix E. ANALYTICAL RESULTS The samples from boring CB-1 were collected under'EPA protocols (Appendix F) and analyzed by a State certified laboratory for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by modified EPA method 8015 to quantify for diesel or gasoline concentrations. Analysis for benzene, toluene, total xylenes and ethyl benzene (BTEX) by EPA method 8020 was also performed where TPH concentrations exceeded 100 mg/kg. All samples from CB-2 were analyzed for both TPH and BTEX. , Four samples collected from CB-1 between five feet to 35 feet below grade contained TPH concentrations ranging from 220 mg/kg to 6000 'mg/kg; however, no BTEX components were detected in any of these samples at their respective method detection limits. These samples were quantified as indicative of diesel not degraded gasoline by modified EPA method 8015 in the laboratory (Appendix G). TPH concentrations in the samples from the 40, 50 and 55 foot depths in CB-1 were not detected at the method detection limits. Above 40 feet, TPH concentrations ranged from 6,000 mg/kg at five feet to 220 mg/kg at 15 feet. Seven samples were collected from boring CB-2. Only the samples from the five foot and 25 foot horizons contained TPH above method detection limits. These concentrations were 14,200 mg/kg and 1,570 mg/kg, respectively. All of the samples from CB-2 were analyzed by EPA method 8020. BTEX components were not detected in any of the samples at method detection limits. These results are summarized in Table B. Copies of the laboratory reports are included in Appendix G. TABLE B. ANALYTICAL RESULTS OF CONFIRMATION ,~ORING SAMPLES Results in mg/kg ~%~ ETHYL TOTAL TPH BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES SAMPLE I.D. EPA 8015 EPA 8020 CB-1 @ 5' 6000. ND(1.0) ND(1.0) ND(1.0) ND(1.0) CB-1 @ 10' 390. ND(O.1) ND(O.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-1 @ 15' 220. ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-1 @ 20' 5600. ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.!) CB-1 @ 40' ND(1.0) NA NA NA NA CB-1 @ 50' ND(1.0) NA NA NA NA CB-1 @ 55' ND(1.0) NA NA NA NA CB-2 @ 5' 14,200. ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-2 @ 10' ND(10.) ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-2 @ 15' ND(10.) ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-2 @ 20' ND(10.) ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-2 @ 25' 1570. ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-2 @ 33' ND(10.) ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) CB-2 @ 38' ND(10.) ND(.05) ND(.05) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) LUFT MANUAL ASSESSMENT The State of California LUFT Manual, Table 2-2, provides a method of estimating the concentrations of diesel related TPH and BTEX components that can be left in place without leaching into the ground water. A leaching potential analysis using this table and existing site conditions is presented below: -7- Table 2-2 Leaching Potential Analysis for Diesel Using Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) and Benzene, Toluene, Xy!ene and Ethylbenzene (BTX&E) The following table was designed to permit estimating the concentrations of TPH and BTX&E that can be left in place without threatening ground water. Three levels of TPH and BTX&E concentrations were derived (from modeling) for si~es which fall into catagories of low, medium or high leaching potential. To use the table, find the appropriate description for each of the features. Score each feature using the weighting system shown at the top of each column. Sum the points for each column and total them. Match the total points to the allowable BTX&E and TPH levels. S SCORE S SCORE S SCORE SITE C 10 PTS C 9 PTS C 5 PTS O IF CON- O IF CON- O IF CON- FEATURE R DITION R DITION I R DITION E IS MET E IS MET ! E IS MET Minimum Depth to >100 51-100 25-~0' Ground Water from the Soil Sample (feet) 10 Fractures in subsurface None Unknownll Present (applies to foothills or mountain areas) Average Annual i <10 10-25 26-40** Precipitation (inches) I 9 Man-made conduits whichl None Unknown Present increase vertical migration of leachate ]0 Unique site features: None At least' More recharge area, coarse one than one soil, nearby wells, etc RANGE OF TCTAL POINTS 49p~s or morel 41 - 48:~-~ 40pts or iess MAXIML'~ ALLOWABLE 1/~0/50/50 .3/.3/1/1 .3/.3/. B/T/X/E LEVELS (PPM) M_~ X 2 :.UJ ?. ALLC~ABLE TPH LE';ELS (PPM) .' * If deo~h is under 25 feet sccre 0 po±n~s. ** if precipitation is over 40 inches score 0 pcints. -27- When the scores from each site feature category are added, the point total for this site is 49. According to the table, a diesel concentration of 10,000 mg/kg may be left in,~lace. CONCLUSIONS The influent concentrations recorded during the last month of catox operations ranged from 367 to 235 ppm by volume. From these data it appears that most of the gasoline that was readily retrievable from the soil has been recovered. Calculations from influent concentration data indicate that approximately 184 gallons of hydrocarbons equaling approximately 1138 lbs. were removed using the catox mode of the MOS. The original estimate of potentially recoverable hydrocarbons was 311 gallons. Based'on this information, 60% of the recoverable hydrocarbons have been removed. BTEX components typically are not associated with diesel fuel, but are commonly found in gasoline.' The lack of BTEX compounds in the samples from CB-1 and CB-2 suggest that the hydrocarbon concentrations that remain are diesel which is not amenable to soil venting. Laboratory quantitation has also indicated that the remaining fuel is diesel. Using this information, the leaching potential of the remaining hydrocarbons was analyzed per the State of California LUFT Manual, Table 2-2, to determine if the remaining diesel fuel concentration of 1570 mg/kg 'at 25 feet can be left in place without endangering the ground water at 190 feet. The results of the LUFT analysis, based on existing site conditions, show that 10,000 mg/kg of diesel hydrocarbons can be left in the ground. Since the 1570 mg/kg are about 165 feet above ground water, the threat to the ground water based on the LUFT manual is low. The TPH concentration of 14,200 mg/kg detec~d at five feet in CB-2 exceeds the maximum allowable level of 10,000 mg/kg established in Table 2-2. This near surface soil will be excavated to a depth where TPH concentrations are below 10,000 mg/kg and hauled to a Cl.ass I facility in Kern County. Soil samples will be collected from the bottom of the excavation to insure that all the soil exceeding the maximum allowable limit has been removed. Contingent upon the removal of this soil, site closure should be requested from Kern County. Respectfully submitted, W. W. IRWIN, INC. Michael F. Burke, Geologist 1CR3 16th STREET ~ ~ ~.~ 20,00'0-gallon Ga~'age ~-. above-ground tanks ~ _~_B-6 / Fuel truck / '" unloading area / 5,000-gallon Loading ' "' (/ underground rack '"¢ / ~ / B- fuel tank ',' '~ Pump,' '-', Office X'~Former ~ump locations EXPLANATION '% Railroad siding Boring location Underground piping -N- Scale 0 10 20 30 40. 50 feet Reference: Texaco, Inc., 1-926, Layout and topo'graphy, sales station 3ire Bakersfield, California. I DWN. BY I I CHK'O ar APPENDIX A. Description of MOS Unit. B. Original Time of Operation Estimate. C.. Permit to Construct from Kern County A.P.C.D. D. Soil Vapor Decline Graph. E. Soil Boring Logs. F. Soil Sampling Procedures. G. State Certified Laboratory Analytical Reports. H. Monthly MOS Monitoring Reports. APPENDIX A. Description of MOS Unit A. HYDROCARBON VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM: OVERVIEW The system is designed to recover and convert hydrocarbons in vapors extracted from gasoline contaminated soils. Conversionn is accomplished by oxidation with a heated catalytic bed or by thermal oxidation (Vapor Control Processor [VCP]). The method depends upon contaminant concentration. The system employs specially drilled venting wells that are connected to a vacuum pump capable of extracting 25 to 100 scfm. of vapor to the processing units. The amount of vacuum, of course, depends upon the permeability of the sediments.- The processor is also equipped with a hydrocarbon analyzer using a flame ionization detector for monitoring influent and effluent gases. The calibration gas is carried in mounted gas cylinders so that the detector can be calibrated at any time. The cylinders can be replaced, rather than refilled, when they are empty. The catalytic beds are equipped with thermocouples for adjusting the heat as well as high- and low-temperature shutdown switches. The thermal oxidizer has a combustion safeguard so that the unit will turn off if the flame goes out. When concentrations of hydrocarbon in the extracted vapors exceed about 3000 ppm (v), the thermal oxidizer will have to be used. Concentrations above 3000 ppm (v) raise the temperature of the catalytic beds high enough to require excessive dilution. In the thermal oxidizer mode, the discharge of hydrocarbons to the atmosphere will be typical of the Hasstech Model VCP-800 that is permitted by the California Air Resources Board for use at the Greybill Terminal in San Diego. When the concentrations are too high to use the catalysts· and too low to sustain combustion, the thermal oxidizer will have to be fed with supplemental fuel. The maximum amount of fuel that will be used is about 100,000 cu.ft./day or 4500 lbs/day natural gas or 170 gal/day or 6100 cu.ft./day propane. This fuel use will generate a maximum exhaust temperature of about 1300 degrees F. and hydrocarbon discharge of about 0.006 pounds per day. The catalytic 'mode of operation exhausts less contaminants .into the atmosphere than does the thermal oxidizer. N0x will be less due to the lower temperature of oxidation. CO will be less because of the greater efficiency of the catalyst to convert it to CO2. Lead, which should be low anyway, is captured at the leading edge of the catalyst bed. Theoretically it should be essentially zero. SOx depends upon the composition of the source gas and will be also essentially zero. Particulates theoretically would be less than 1 pound per day. · B. BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY Service station sites are actually engineered landfills that contain soils, gravels, and associated ballast in which various hydrocarbon product and waste storage tanks are installed. During normal operations, hydrocarbon liquids and/or vapors may escape from tanks ,gr pipes, or be spilled contaminating the soils/landfills. According to SCAQMD report "Best Availably Control Technology, May 1983", the preferred approach to removal of organic gases occurring in landfills is to gather them for disposal by flaring (p.25). W. W. Irwin, Inc. has designed a gasoline vapor extraCtion system to recover hydrocarbon vapors from contaminated. soils and landfills,, consistent with the BACT screening criteria. Vapors are gathered through specially installed wells drilled on the site, and destruction is accomplished either by incineration (high concentrations) or by oxidation with a heated catalytic bed (low concentrations). This system is both effective and efficient in removal of contamination at levels of risk acceptable according to the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) manual ("Air Toxics Source Assessment Manual for California Air Pollution Control Districts", October 1986). Under proposed Rule 1166, the District has reviewed technologies available for the control of Voliatile Organic Compound (VOC's) emissions from the decontamination of soil. Soil venting with multimode combustion has been identified as one of the preferred technologies. This technology affords underground collection of VOC's and an on-site disposal system. C. DETAILED SYSTEM INFORMATION The proposed system is designed to remove fugitive gasoline contamination from the soil in the form of vapors. Item #1 DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT Equipment consists of vertical venting· wells all constructed of perforated four inch diameter PVC. These will be manifolded just below the surface to either of two remediation systems. A five hp electric motor driven vacuum pump discharges an air Stream containing hydrocarbon vapors at 50 to 100 cfm to a proprietary vapor cleanup process called a Multimode Combustor. This unit is manufactured by King-Buck/Hasstech of San Diego, California. The King/Buck Hasstech Multimode Combustor has two separate modes of operation involving separate process streams. The different functions of these modes are as follows. In the first mode, volatile hydrocarbon vapors are consumed by direct combustion in an incinerator. The direct combustion mode is used when the hydrocarbon concentrations exceed 3,000 ppm by volume, 9,000 ppm by weight. In the second mode, the consumption of the vapors is achieved by catalytic oxidation. In both modes, the end products are primarily carbon dioxide and water, discharged with the air extracted from the soil. Together these modes make up W. W. I~in, Inc's. Mobile Oxidation System (MOS). Over the long term the preferred operating mode is to clean up the hydrocarbon contaminants in the fume air by the catalytic oxidation systam. However, if the hydrocarbon content of the air is too high, the heat of oxidation would raise the temperature of the catalyst bed so high that built in safeguards would shut down the system. Thus, when the hydrocarbon level in the air is "relative high", the mixture must be sent to the thermal incinerator. The composition that can be accepted by the catalytic oxidizer depends on several factors, but as a rough guideline the highest allowable vapor composition is about 3,000 ppm (by volume) of hydrocarben in air. In the direct combustion mode, the vapors are incinerated either' with ambient air only, or with air and supplemental fuel (propane or natural gas), which is used when the concentrations of gasoline vapors .are insufficient to sustain combustion alone. The amount of supplemental fuel required is dependent on the amount of hydrocarbon vapors recovered and increases as the concentration of recovered pollutant decreases. In the catalytic oxidation mode the hydrocarbon are consumed by oxidation within~ the catalytic beds of the unit, using ambient air as an oxidizer contains noble metal catalysts (e.g. platinum) on a substrate of a ceramic honeycomb core. The catalysts permit the oxidation of combustible hydrocarbon components at a ~emperature lower than the open flame temperature of therm~ incineration. In order to maintain catalyst activity, the 'temperature of the catalyst must be maintained at or above a minimum control temperature in the order of 600 deg. F, depending on the hydrocarbon composition. At relatively low levels of hydrocarbons in the air stream, under conditions in which the heat given off during oxidation is insufficient to maintain the catalyst bed at its minimum temperature, supplementary heat is added by an electrical preheater and by methanol injection. In the thermal incineration mode, the discharge of residual hydrocarbons and other contaminants to the atmosphere will be typical of Hasstech Model VCP-800 that is permitted for operation by the California Air Resources Board at the Greybill Terminal in San Diego. The relative potential, for air pollution by the catalytic oxidation system compares to that of thermal incineration as follows: !. N0x 'will be less, because of the lower temperature 'of oxidation. 2. CO will be less, because the catalyst effectively converts CO to CO2. 3. SOx will be the same. 4. Particulates, which should be low in both cases, will be about the same. The operation of MOS is Phase 1 When the levels of hydrocarbon vapors recovered from the soil have been reduced to approximately 500 ppm the catalytic oxidation unit would be replaced by the vacuum pump and carbon canister battery. The activated carbon system employs the same vacuum pump used with VCP/CAR system, as well as the same flexible tubing. No special additional equipment or apparatus is needed. Activated carbon canisters are employed to process the recovered, soil vapors.. The activated carbon pellets selectSvely adsorb the hydrocarbon molecules, allowing a purified air stream to vent into the atmosphere. Adsorption of hydrocarbons by the activated carbon is instantaneous, and contact' time is not a factor. The proposed system includes (a) a series of venting wells, (b) manifolded vapor collection piping joining these wells, (c) a vacuum pump to extract soil vapors, and (d) activated carbon canisters for removal of volatile organic compounds from the recovered so'il vapors, the proposed arrangement is as illustrated on the attached drawing (See Exhibit F [8]). A total of two canisters will be used, each 'containing 1,200 lb. of activated carbon. The canisters will be arranged in parallel series. .The initial canister will be joined to a second canister in series to protect against any potential. for emissions resulting from unexpected breakthrough in the initial canister. Eventually, the activated carbon will become saturated~ and will no longer be able to adsorb additional hydrocarbon vapors. At that point, it will be necessary to remov~ the- spent carbon and replace it with a fresh supply. Regular monitoring of the concentration of influent vapors to the second adsorber will be performed using a total hydrocarbon analyzer to determine when replacement will be required.· It is estimated that carbon replacement will be required not more than twice during its period of service. The carbon canister operation is Phase 2. The MOS will be monitored at both inlet and outlet, automatically using a flame ionization total hydrocarbon analyzer during Phase 1. During Phase 2, the activated carbon operations will be monitored manually, using a Century OVA 128 Portable Organic Vapor Analyzer. Please refer to the attached data sheets for additional equipment specifications and performance information. ITEM ~2 OPERATING SCHEDULE The soil venting program would be in operation 24 hours a day.. seven days a week except when being serviced or during the changing of components. Phase 1 would be used initially, to be replaced with Phase 2 when hydrocarbon concentrations are reduced to levels which will not efficiently support the operation of the catalytic beds. Phase 2 would continue to operate until the cleanup is completed. ITEM #3 PROCESS WEIGHT The total weight of fugitive gasoline to be consumed by the system is estimated to be approximately 1,560 pounds, equal to approximately 260 gallons. The concentrations of gasoline_ vapors by weight of air will vary over time. The concentrations initially processed may be greater than 3,000 ppm by volume. Above 3,000 ppm the combustor will be· used to incinerate the vapors. Below approximately 3,000 ppm the catalytic oxidizer will be used. These The proposed system includes (a) a series of venting wells, (b) manifolded vapor collection piping joining these wells, (c) a vacuum pump to extract soil vapors, and (d)-.activated carbon canisters for removal of volatile organic compounds from the recovered soil vapors, the proposed arrangement is as illustrated on the attached drawing (See Exhibit F [8]). A total of two canisters will' be used, each containing 1,200 lb. of activated carbon. The canisters will be arranged in parallel series. The initial canister will be joined to a second canister in series to protect against any potential for emissions resulting from unexpected breakthrough in the initial canister. Eventually, the activated carbon will become saturated, and will no longer be able to adsorb additional hydrocarbon vapors. At that point, it will be necessary to remove the spent carbon and replace it with a fresh supply. Regular monitoring of the concentration of influent vapors to the second adsorber will be performed using a total hydrocarbon analyzer to determine when replacement will be required. It is estimated that carbon replacement will be required not more than twice during its period of service. The carbon canister operation is Phase 2. The MOS will be monitored at both inlet and outlet, automatically using a flame ionization total, hydrocarbon analyzer during Phase 1. ~D~ring Phase~ 2, the activated carbon 6perations will be monitored manually, using a Century OVA 128 Portable Organic Vapor Analyzer. Please refer to the attached data sheets for additional equipment specifications and performance information. ITEM #2 OPERATING SCHEDULE The soil venting progra~ would be in .operation 24 hours a day. seven days a week except when being serviced or during the changing of components. Phase 1 would be used initially, to be replaced with Phase 2 when hydrocarbon concentrations are reduced to levels which will not efficiently support the operation of the catalytic beds. Phase 2 would continue to operate until the cleanup is completed. ITEM #3 PROCESS WEIGHT The total weight of fugitive gasoline to be consumed by the system is estimated to be approximately 1,850 pounds, equal to approximately 300 gallons. The concentrations of gasoline vapors by weight of air will vary over time. The concentrations initially processed may be greater than 3,000 Ppm by volume. Above 3,000 ppm the combustor will be used to incinerate the vapors. Below approximately 3,000 ppm the catalytic oxidizer will be used. These concentrations will decrease as the cleanup proceeds. At approximately 500 ppm the catalytic oxidizer (Phase 1) will be replaced by a carbon canister adsorption system (Phase 2). This system will capture.vapors until the remediation is completed. A summary of source test data prepared b~'Energy Systems Associates for the Irwin Company project at 28821 South Western Avenue in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, is included with the attachments. This project utilizes the same catalytic oxidation, system which is described above, operating under similar conditions. ITEM #4 FUELS AND BURNERS USED Natural gas or propane are used as a supplemental fuels as described above. No other fuels are used within the emission producing streams. I ' PRENEATER E AT A L"/T I ¢__' J PEq'ROLEIJ~ ...... . 5R DY,. I DITFIZ, J klV DROLAR ~AN{ DJ Ll3T JlglkJ VAPOR% J - ~ I ~ ~ I VE N'T1NI6 c~ ': WELL ~O~Lr- o~o~-r~~ s~s-r~ '/..~ I~,,,,,,jlj PROLES£ ,CLOUd Di EXH [ B IT 0 W. W. IRW]N, INC. SERVICE STA~ON MAINTENANCE & ~QuIPMENT C~NSTRUC~ON & ~VIRONMENTAL 2475 L~MCN AVENUE August 6, 1987 Mr. R. J. Wark Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc. 10 Universal City .Plaza, 4th F!ocr Universal City, California 91608 Re: Progress Report of Soil Vapor R~mediatlon Western/Caddingtcn San Pedro Project Nc.. 10049.00 Dear Mr. Wark: At:ached is a repcrt cf progress in scl! vapcr remedia:icn a: the a~andoned service station si~e at Western and Cadding~cn, San Pedro. Since the inception of the sci! vapor remedla%imn Dr:gram, nearly 95 percenu of the ~c~a! estimated petrcle,~ hydrocarbon ccncentranlcn present a~ tkls site~has been remcved. A series of ~est ~orings to confirm, remediticn progress is recommended. Please contact me should you have any ~_-uesticns regarding Ve:-z ~ruly yours, z c. Rickar~ A. Sc~i~: ~h.D. Ca!iforn£a Registered Gec!cgis~, Nc. 3996 .qA£:mu-S~PEDRC ~~w~ w, mW'N, ~NC. ' ~ ~e.co rt. on P.F.~D~_ AT~_ ON PRCGR.E$ S a~ T~fACO SER~CE STAT~CN 28821 Scutk Western Avenue' at Cadding~on Rancko Pa!cs Verdes, California for LO Universal Ci~y PLaza Universal City, Ca__,orn_a Project Number ~0049.00 Aug-cst 6, ~_987 .Rickar~ A. ScP_mldt, Ph.D. ~a~ .... n_a .Registered Ge.o!cgist No. 3996 S-A__CN - WES?E.R-~/C~dDD!NGTCN - SA~ PECKC, CALiFCR.~Z.K The concentration of hydrocar_~ons in the influent to Catalytic Oxidizer unit has -been monitored regularly since operations began. Initial measurements made on February! 9, !987, showed 32,600 p.mm of total hydrocarbcns by volume. As of July. 31, 1987, ~he concentration was 1830 D.~m (v) which represen-.s a re'duo,ion 'in hydrocarbon con~en~" to nearly one-~-wentietk of the~,._~-~.__~ amount (please refer to the a~acked figure). Usinq available da~a for the Western/Caddin~-.on si~e, es~L~&~ad ~anti .--les and time for decline in sci! vapor ccr. cen~ra~ions can he calcu!a~ed usinq ~he formula evaLuat£cns. ~..., ~ s fo--m..uLa is: ~he~e: ~ ~ ~c~i ~ime fr~m s~ar: of decline ~ ? = =inaL production ra~a a~ end cf lecLine ~Reference: A W. McCray, Pe~role,um Evaluations and Economic Decisions, Prentice-Ha!l, inc., Englewccd CLiffs, NJ, (~975), p. 328-330) ," I'EXACO - WLSlI:ItN/CADDINOTOc:",- DECLINE OF SOIL VAPOR " -' . 2/09/87 32,600 PPM (~V 0 30000.00 - 0 ~ 2oooo.oo - · Estimate' of Recovered Ouantities As of July 21, 1987, the Soil vapor recovery system has operated for about !75 days. During t_his time, hydrocarbon concentrations in the influent have declined from 32,600 ppm (v) on February 9, 1987 to 1830 pDm (v). This is a reduction of almost twenty-fold. The total quantity of petroleum hydrocarbons removed from the soil at this site may be estimated using the ~bove decline equation; but solving for total production during the observed decline. NPD I 32,600 32,600 1830 !75 x 32,600 4.22 ~ 35! 895 p~m (v) Tkis quantity can be expressed in more familiar units by employing appropriate conversion factors. '.35 x l0~ spm (v) x .21 × 10-f= 0.2825 lb ft3 ft3 In tke December !5, 1986 progress repo_~-~, the total volume 9f contaminated soil ak this siva was estimated at 1889.5 ~bic yar~s. Ccnver--ing to cubic fee~, \... 1889.5 yd3x 27 ft3 = 5!,017 ft3 yd3 Thus, the' total quantity of petroleum hydrccar~cns estimanad to be presen~ in the sci! vapors at this sine, exDressed as gasoline, is: Already removed Remaining Total 14,463 lb + 765 lb + '"!5,228 lb or 2,371 !b = 125 gal = 2,496 gal E. VAPOR RECOVERY WELL DETAILS Five (5) vapor recovery wells will be drilled to a depth of 11 ft. It is planned to position vapor recovery wells adjacent to the area of greatest concentrations of TPH. Each vapor recovery well will be constructed of four-inch diameter PVC-Type 1 Schedule 40 casing. Blank casing will be installed in the upper region; slotted casing will be installed from 5 ft.below ground surface to the bottom of the bore hole. The bottom will 'be capped. Details of the a vapor recovery well will be as shown on the attached sketchs. The annular space between the well casing and the bore hole will be 'packed with clean, relatively uniform sand or gravel. The purpose of this pack is to provide a highly permeable connection between the well screen and the formation while acting as a filter to retain the fine silt or sand in the formation. It also allows a larger screen slot size to be used to enhance overall vapor recovery. In addition at this site, a horizontal vapor extraction piping system will be installed on the adjacent property. This will address contamination in the upper zones at discrete distances in 20 foot segments. i in , ', E XHAU~T E N RIh~M £klTs.__l~~ I ~<t X4 RREST°R · WZ~-fER-7 I ~ ~ VttP UKIIT K E ~ METHANOL f~- FLOW I~E RELO[DER FSL- F~W SWIT~ ~W ~L-TEMPE~DRE IND, ~~R bXl D I~ER ~-TEMP~T~E R~6~R TSH-~MPE~T~RE $~IT~ HI6H PRQLES.~ I~LOI~/ DI KING, BUCK/HASSTECH MULTIMODE COMBUSTER ~ OPERATING RANGES AND DATA CONC QTY QTY QTY TEMP PRESS STREAM PPM(V) SCFM #/D GAL/D F PSIG OTHER CU Intake 100' 11,000 ~'' 80 -7 combust.h.c, at 50,000 5 1,890 290 combust.h.c, at 1,000 0.1 28 5.8 Dilution air, max 50 5,500 C0 discharge, max .100 11,000 200 14 Flow to VCP, max 100 11,000 200 1 fuel gas makeup (as propane) 1.0 169 40 Flow to CAR, max 80 8,800 200 0.5 Electric preheat, max 5 kW MeOH preheat suppl.max. 75 11 VCP Effluent Internal temp, max 2400 Exhaust temp 500 +/- Total h.c. as C3 2.3 .04 Benzene ND Note 1 NOX < 3 < .05 CO Note 2 0.4 SOX Note 3 - Particulates Smokeless - CAR Effluent Catalyst oper'g temp 1050 max Exhaust temp 500 Total h.c. <50 < 1.5 Benzene < 0.2 < .005 NOX < 1 < .01 CO < 1- < .01 SOX Note 3 Particulates VCP - NOTES: 1. If just below the detection limit of 3 p~m, qty = .07 lb/day 2. Ambient CO was 15-20 ppm when incinerator samples measured 30-40 ' ppm. .. Notwithstanding, daily quantity' is calculated for 35 ppm. 3. SOX depends on the gasoline composition. At 1,000 gal/d gasoline extracted, if S content is .01%w, SOX would be ca. 1.2 #/d. MULTIM2A: PKE: JL o SPRINGFIELD, MISSOUR; ' (.045 CF~ D!SPL.) VAC~ C~VE - MOD~-~z.U¢~ C-867S ........ , , ~,/~v,. --_, .... . :~ ,, . . , .... ~ F,~. "H~',.; 0'.'.' ...0,~:'.'. ~; . ~., . .~ L~i",::':. .. .; ,,,,,~, &- - 100; - 200 : · %2 ...... 100: 8 .... 0: 2 ~ -- - 2580. 2580 3500= ..... 150: ._~ ~ 5; A~W; I~T ¢/~---8 ....... -- !00t = ..... 25 5 Y 2 ~' -_ ....... - .~ ; 1000 Z500 2000 2500 3000 ~00 50 ~ SPEED (R~) ~'~ 56; I / ...... G~atl -- II~l T~caled Alloy Steel Iltlical, Mal~itd ~[li~G[~'l' ....... ~ g~ Seals - Mui:JlallJctlJ F~I;d, J.dJ)ylililll alld Lip Type t'.[. a~lL b.~ -i,I,l~-L ~ ~/ "' ' '"'"": ,,. ~,,.. I ,,.,I, I,.,~. l_uhiicaliofl --Oil SI)lasll Sysl~lll - I]olh ...... ,., ...... v,, ......... ,,.~ Operating Si)ecl I,lllvl il,Il.d. 14,il't)ll lil,li~lll~i IJ,,~[I I'111 I;J.~ll I.I11) I'1 ~li. M~lXJllllllll J)Jscllulgu 'l'uIJIpu~alul~ ~, ~ .....-...~..~-. ~ (~2OZ~, ,~'~.~ .. 2.02 .,(~ 0,~:~:.~ ~j.~.2250,.¢~ 3208.[~ 15. ~ ~.~.--.' ..t.~:' el~.': "' , 57/81 Series Special Application Illowers -~a?~' ,,.;;.~ ,,~, _,m~,.'~.o~,~'.;,~,~:~ou~.~:~,~ ~,.,,,o.,:;.... ~80.~i.).~, .;~j1750~d'.. ~..~,3~..fk. ,~.238j C60.~ This premi,Jm quality se, les is designed h,; Ihuse special i,i)plic,i- '~ ~ ]~ ~.~.Oqi~ ,~?~:6o'~;:?~T;f .,~bi~Tso~)'~. ":' ..... ' ~ ' . lions where NOMINAl_ lu~Jk iiulJL,jess is J equircd o,' whe, e conlimr [~ :~ ';16~"¢. ~2.02j1'~ ~'60~iX~¢. ;~:'1~ The mechanical lace seals are isolated Irojjj Ihe blower air cl)~Jm. 55t0~ t2~.a? ~ ~~ ~6oi~f~:l~ ~t[~ ~3~o~ bet with tile vertical uJJ(I i)lales and die htlw~iJilh tulloJi seal. '1 he 552o'~". lO?ir ~ ,ffi. GeJi~ ,'.~f([~'4~ ,HI:.'~..~ ['~'l. tlso~J'{ end plale venls lilly he i)hJgge(I -~ ve~llu(I I)ilck lu Ihe bluwer JJIlel 'for gas h~dling Hole: Fo, co,,,l)luleg,,s ti,jh, ,'e, lui,',,,,mnls,,',~fur ,() "S" ,efi,,s. pReDmalJcs Jflc. ~n.qnw ~FA~HFY tT SP~INGFIEI D. MI). 5. VAPOR CONTROL PROCESSOR a. Dimensions: 36 inches x 50 inches x 64 inches high b. Maximum thermal rating: 1.5 million BTU/hr c. Maximum fuel'. consumption: 1,890 lb/d at richest fume gas conceivable d. Burner location: base of unit e. Expected ambient air indrafted: estimated at about 400 standard cubic feet per minute f. Thermocouple location: 1.5 ft. (minimum) above burner elevation g. Manufacturer's Identification data: VCP-100 A component of K,B/H M~C-5 Serial No. 703 Manufactured at Hasstech, Inc. · 8821 Production Avenue San Diego, CA 92121 h-. Contaminant control efficiency: Please refer to table of operating data. i. For further information, please refer to the attached tables and drawings. In the VCP-100, combustion takes place mainly in a chamber that is a tube 51 inches long, and operates as a flare. This chamber has a square cross-section which is tapered linearly from its inlet dimensions of 21 x 21 inches up to 27 x 27 inches at its maximum, thence back to an exit opening that is 19 x 19 inches. Both ends of the combustion chamber are completely open and ~nobstructed, excepting the gas-pipe itself. The chamber is suspended centrally within, and surrounded by, a square frame 36 x 36 inches. Sheathing is attached on the outside of the frame starting at the 30 inch level and extending up to the 96 inch level to conceal the flare and to prevent accidental contact with the hot walls of the combustion chamber. 6. CATALYTi'C oXIDIZER UNIT a. Dimensions: the insulated, coffin-like box around the CAR has the dimensions: approx. 82" long, 24" wide, 24" high. (See photo). b. Mfrs ident data: Catalytic Reactor (CAR Unit of K,B/H M/~C-5 c. Contaminant control effic: see table of operating data. d. Location and amounts of emissions: See table. e. Size and shape of outlet: 2" exhaust'pipe, 9 ft. high. f. Flow rate and temp of effluent gases: See table. g. Est'd mass rate and conc of pollutants: See table. h. For further information, please refer to the attached tables and drawings. Catalyst Bed Details. a dimensioned sketch prepared by the manufacturer is enclosed. Please note that this information is regarded by the manufacturer as confidential and proprietary. The reciprocal gas hourly space velocity is: @' 50 scfm: 17,960 hr-1 ~ 80 scfm: 28,740 hr-1 The unit uses a catalyst identical to that typically employed in control of exhaust gases from passenger automobiles. At the request of SCAQMD, we arranged for emission tests to be conducted by Energy Systems Associates on February 11, 1987. A summary of these tests is attached. ~etraethyl lead, if present in the vapors extracted from the soil, could poison and deactivate the catalyst over time. We have researched, this question. We have contacted Professor Joseph Hightower, Chairman of the Department of Chemical Engineering at Rice University and Dr. George Hoag, an expert in soil venting operations at the University of Connecticut. Both authorities stated that tertraethyl lead .would not be volatilized from the soil, having been immobilized by interactions with' non-vol-atile compounds. The manufacturer informs us that the catalytic oxidizer is desicned to operate at an internal temperature of less than ll000F, at which point a shUt-down switch turns the system off for safety. The stainless steel tubing used for the reactor is stable to abcut 1500°F6 while the ceramic substrate is stable above about 2000 F, ,-an the melting point of platinum is greater than 3000°F. Thus, the manufacturer maintains that the issue of catalyst degradation through temperature alone is moot. To date, continuous operation of the system was found to yield hydrocarbon destruction efficiency between 94 percent and 96 percent, with no degradation in performance during more than six months'operation at several sites. The life expectancy of the catalyst is estimated to be of the order of 24 to 36 months, although sufficient operating time to verify this remains to be accomplished. L£VI~L Hi3EI'z"OklTAL &S& ..L 5E/'TI~31kl T~3 FLOW IO. R.I' ,,'7_1' 4.40 ~n~ /-I I~',, I'~' ~5~,1 in~- "' 30 I/'O~LIN~ ~klP, q...~ ~LI~ AII~ J I/,., . PI LOT 6A£~. TI-IRC)UC~ PUT: ? EXHAUST' ,--[LAME. ~UFFLER~ 4 m m I I ~ E ~ METhAnOL F~- FLO~ Ig~ R[~ORDER ~-TEMPE~DRE I~D, ~IIFR ~KI D I~ER %R-~MPE~TURE 5~IT6H HI6~ VAP6R I:L~W P, ATE ~_ F:.'I..~. - Io,, I~/-~~. r-/°'~l~l V~_P MORSE: 5~-I00 5LFM LA'TOX MODE: 40 ,- ~0 5~_FM Klt~.~.: I~TE5 BEPEKIDIk!6 ON 6AsOLIKIE LG~I/~EikrTRAI'IdNS ILI VAPOR. ENRI r_NMt:MT- ~ VOl::' I:LAME ---x ARRESTOR I:M. Ex"r R/~/..T I ON ' WELL ~ 4'~ G'~ ~ ~ P~EGSIJP..ES, 4 'TEMPEE.~'T81(L.% APPENDIX B. Original Time of Operation Estimate ESTIMATED OPERATING TIME T~e volume of soil containing contamination is estimated to be approximately 40 ft. in diameter and 25 ft. in depth, or a total of 31,400 ft.3 Average concentrations of TPH is this volume --.are estimated to be about 500 ppm (wi), or about 2,900 lb. This is equivalent to about 311 gallons of gasoline. Assuming that apDroximate'!y 75 percent of this amount can be recovered readily, this would be 1,425 lb. The time required for such operations can be estimated using the hyperbolic decline curve equation (McCray, A. W., Petro!e~m Evaluations and Economic Decisions', Prentice- Hal!, Inc., Eng!ewood Cliffs, N.j. (1975) p. 328-330). First, the recoverable quantity is converted to an effective total concentration: 1,425 lb. =0.05 lb. x ! =2.4 x 105 ppm (v) 31,400 ft~ ~ .21 x i0~ Approximate!? 7 percent cf the tote! concentration is extracted at the outset of recovery operations, based on our experience: 240,000 ppm (v) x .07 = i~,800 ppm (v) This '- ........... ~= the concentration ~o be fed ~~I to the equipmen~ Then, the ~mount of time re~cired for operations can be calculated readi!,!. As noted above, two'operating modes are planned; time estlma=es are given for each. (a) VCP/CAT-OX Mode. Sci~' vapors will be urccessed by the VCP unit, until concentrations are reduced to approximately 3,000 p~m (v). At that level, the CAT-OX mode will be emD!oyed, until average inf!uen= concentrations are reduced to about.!,500 ppm (v). The time required to acccmpilsh this is: ~ = 240,000 16,800 L5,800 i,500 · = L4.~ x 3.3 = 47 da.~s This is rouzded off to rough!~£ 2 mca%ks. (~) ....... ~-~,-=~=~- .... Carbon Canisters. The ~we_~ - !e,;ei sc~__ vapor concentrations will be passed over acnivated carbon canisters until leve~s are reduced u·o i00 Dom.. (v). ~%_..e time required is: t = 2!,429 ! 1,500 1.,500 ~ 100 = 14.3 x. 3.9 ,- = 56 days ~:. This equiDment will also be operated for about 2 months. Thus, the total time required for removal of hydrocarbon contamination is estimated to be about 4 months'~ APPENDIX C. Permit to Construct from Kern County A.P.C.D. KERN COUNTY AiR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT U'THORITY TO CO ¥STR UCT January i3, 1~ A~¢LICAT]ON NO. 2007235 January 13, 1990 DARE: June 2, 1987 AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT IS HEREBY GRANTED TO: TEXACO REFINING & MARKETING, INC. Irt-[he event an AL.IT}-~[TY TO CCH~CT ia reissued I:o a ne~ o~rtar, any ~iss~ans increase assi~ne= :o doc~n t. AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT IS HEREBY GRANTED FOR: Gasoline =_nd D~=se~ Ccncamina.:ed _Coil Air ~- ' ' ~=~ __ - D ~.-~.O Pl.~ ODe .... P~ge o~ 5 Pa~es ~007~35 Continued "EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: Gasoline and Diesel Contami'nated Soil' Air Striopin~ Ooeration, including the followinM equipment and desiMn specifications: A. Vapor extractio~ well and vapor piping (p~ase [ & II), B. Vacuum pump 5 hp (phase C. Kin~Buck/Hasstech Multimode Combustor (MCC) , propane assisted incinerator/catalytic oxidizer (phase I), D. Beckman 400A total hydrocarbon analyzer (phase E. Atlantic Fluidics model A-75 vacuum pump (phase II), F. Four Carbtrol G-1 carbon adsorption canisters (phase II). CONDITIONAL APPROVAL: . Pursuant to Rule 209. "conditional approval" is hereby Mranted. Please be aware that ail conditions of approval remain in e=fec5 for life of project unless modifications are approved by District. DESIGN CONDITIONS: I. Extracuion well sas sba!~ be directed only to propane assisted incinerator, catalytic oxidizer, or carbon adsorpuion canisters - ~her shall be no provisions for discharMe directly to atmosphere. (Rule ~09) 2.System shall be equipped with vapor flow meter at each operational pump outlet. (Rule 3. Incinerator combustion chamber shall be equipped with operations! temperature indicator showin$ combustion temperature. (Rule 209.!, 4. Catalytic oxidizer combustion chamber shall be equipped wi~h operational temperature indicator showinM combustion ~empera~ure. (Rule Beckman hydrocarbon anai';zer sha~ 1 be in-erlocked wlth vapor controls. (Rule 209) Minimum incinerator s~acK belch- shall be 3.5 me-ers. (Rule 209 7. Minimum ca~aiy~ic oxidizer s~ck hei~h~ shall be 3.0 meters. (Rule 2091 ~ Each carbon adsorot~on cannis%=r shaii con~n a% ~ east ~40 oouncs of ~ranuiar ac~it'ia~e~ c~r~on and a minim'um o= 4 unsa~'zra~ed car~on cannisters shall be connected in series at ali times when extraction well Mas is no5 directed 5o incinera~o~ or ca:aiy~ic oxidizer. (Rule 209) 9. Minimum ca~alytlc oxid'met s-ack he!Mbt shall be i.5 me,ers. OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS: a. Vapor flowrate to control device in use shall not exceed 100 scfm. (Rule 210.1) incinerator shall be used to combust extraction well ~as when hydrocarbon concentration exceeds 5000 ppmv. (Rule ~10.1) '~ Page 3 of ~ 5 Pages 2007935 Continued c. Incinerator combustion chamber shall be m'ainta~ned at a minimum of 1400 des. F. '(Rule 209) d. Catalytic oxidizer shall be used only to. treat inlet streams with gaso.line vapor concentrations greater than 500 ppmv. (Rules 2!0.1, 419) e. Supplemental electric heate~ shall maintain catalyst bed between 600 deg. F. and 800 deg. F. when catalytic mode is in operation. (Rule 209) f. Carbon adsorption system shall be used only to treat inlet streams with gasoline vapoP concentrations less than 500 ppmv. (Rules 419) Photoionization indicator or equivalent shall be used to determine hydrocarbon and benzene concentrations exhaust of control device. (Rule 4f9) h. Calibration gas for hydrocarbon and benzene detectors shall be on- site a: all times. (Rule 209) i. All lines, fiTtings~ adaptors, connections, and appurtenances shall be leak free. (Rule Exhaust gas hydrocarbon and benzene emissions detectors shall be designed, installed, calibrated and aperated such that emLssions are accurately and precisely de:ermined at levels which result in compliance with Emission Sampling Limits below. (Rule EMISSION SAMPLING LIMITS: Non-Me~hane Hydrocarbons: 0.05 lbm/day (incinerator) (Rules 210. 1 & ~19) 0.98 lbm/day (catalytic oxidizer] (Rules 210.1 & 9.01 !bm/day (carbon adsorbers {Ru~es 210. f & 419) Benzeze: D.O05 !bm/day (incinerator) 3.0036 ibm;'day (catalytic 0.0001 ibm/day (carbon adsorbers] {Rules 210.1 & 419) SPEC[AL CONDitiONS: aa. Texaco RefLnina and ~arke~ing. inc. shall maintain accurate of exhaus: ~o[ume fiowra~e ~empera~ure, and ou~LeE non-me:hane hydrocarbon and benzene concentrations and such records shall be readily avaiiab[e for Distric% inspection upon ~eques~. (Rule %b. Hydrocarbon and benzene emissions monitors shall be calibrated by independent testing laboratory in District's presence within 60 days. after s~artup. (Rule '108) Pa~e of ~ Pa~es. 2007235 Continued 'RU~E 210.1 (RSR) A~Ag¥SI$ ~AgIDATIOR: Maximum daily emission rate of each air contaminant from entire stationary source shall no~ exceed daily amount shown as "proposed" on attached emission profile. Maximum averaMe monthly emission rate of each air contaminant from ent'ire stationary source shall not exceed number of days in month times daily .amount shown as "proposed" on attacked emission profile. AveraMe monthly emission rate shall be determined at end of each month by avera~inM previous 12 months of operation (fewer than 12 if new or seasonal source). Compliance with these emission limits shall be verified by source operator (with fuel consumption data, operational data, etc.) on daily basis (maximum daily emission ra~e) and on monthly basis (maximum average monthly emission r_..) and written documentation made resd~ ly available to District for period of one year. RULE 210.1 ~NSR~ SPECIFIC L~M!TING CONDITIONS: (Se~_ as~ached emission. . pro~ ~=~.~._, !bm ~.~=~d !bm ~: ..... ~ ~-~ 0.05 d~.¥ O.O0 ..... 0 96 rr?ccsed =bm d-...-=' · ~=~-y 0.98 : 0 O-Tz 36f 0 &a.:'= 5.-'- ~'- APPENDIX D. Soil Vapor Decline Graph APPENDIX E. Soil Boring Logs ~ . DM ~... CME 55 Dm~ D~ 11-15-88 ~e~ B~: L~MON AVENU~ V ~ONGBEACH CA90806 ~ D~= 8" ~ N~*r CB-1 M.BURKE : ~~ coarse, loose, dry, FAIR ODOR i 5 SAND, very fine-coarse, light gray, loose, ~ ~0 · d:y, ;~ o~o~ 6 -- --'.O'. SAND, as above, trace large pebbles, -- --' ~'- FAINT ODOR 8~ ~29~:'~!' ~m ~:}:f'i ~ ~ [~dry, F~I~T ODOR · 14 l- --~ --~' ~[. ~SILTY S~D, ve~ fine-fine, medium gray, :' ' 5': :: SP m cac ou,, m -- ~ ''Z · ~D ~RGE PEBBLES NO ~3~m~l ~S~ND, very fine-fine, trace medium, light gray, ~s~- -;~::~.:.~;;~ GP ~ ~ ~ ~oose, ~r~, ~,~ o~o~ 5~ ~ % %SAND, very fine-very coarse, light reddish L i.~ ~.' ~,.,~ ~brown, loose, dry, FAINT ODOR - --. ~.' IVI ~SAND, very fine-coarse, light brown, trace large ~.~~~? ~ lpe~,, ~oo,~, ~r~, NO O~O~ -- --:' :' SW --xCOBBLES ~ ~~[' .' SAND, very fine-very coarse, some small to large ~ ~ ~. pebbles, light reddish brown, loose, dry, NO ODOR ~~ SAND, very fine-medium, tr~ee ~oarse, tan, loose dry, NO ODOR TOTAl. DEPTH 56-] /2' Complst~n No~s:. SITE: Hole backfilled with bentonite grout ABANDONED TEXACO BULK PLANT' 801'16TH STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA PROJ'XOT NO. 10084 ~ ,¢~~NV,."O,,~,N,*L BORING. LOG ~ ~ 2475 LEMON AVENGE ' ' ~ ~ONC 8EACH. CA 9080~ ~ D~: 8" ~ N~e~ CB-2 J.M. SHEFFER : ~:~ /S~D, medium-coarse, brown, loose, aamp, FAINT ODOR --. ~.--..O'. . ~ ~ '~" C~ /S~D, medium-very coarse, tan, loose, d~, ~~~ _['/S~D, medium-very coarse w/pebbles to 1", ~ --. ~ . /orange bro~, damp, FAINT ODOR ~~ -.' o'- ~'~--'-~'; ' /S~D, fine-coarse, tan, loose, damp, VERY, ~ ~' ~" /WAINT ODOR / ..~. ~~.. z.' ~A/ /S~D, fine-coarse, tan, loose, slightly damp, ~ ~ 5:. =.: ~,, / ~ o~o~ OBBLES, in ~atr~x o~ ~and a~ ~escr~b ~~~' //S~D, fine-coarse with pebbles to 1", tan, loose __ ~.~_~~~~ -,,.~.~ GP/~ery.. slightly damp, VERY FAINT ODOR ~~~[~. ~ /COBBLES, in matrix of sand as described %~"~" SW ~, =~.~-~o~=~, ~.-~, ~oo~, ~=~, ~o o~o. ~ ~ TOTAL DEPTH 39' CompUteR No~.: SITE: Hole backfilled with bentonite grout ABANDONED TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 16TH STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA P~,I~NO. 10084 APPENDIX F. Soil Sampling Procedures SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURES Soil samples ~ were collected under EPA protocols established in the EPA publicaton SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Volume II, November 1986. Soil samples were collected with a 2 1/2" diameter split-spoon sampler 'lined with three, 6 - inch long brass tubes. One tube from each sample was capped with Teflon, sealed with tape and iced for delivery to a State certified laboratory under chain-of-custody. The remaining tubes were used for soil classification. Any hydrocarbon odors were duly noted. Before collection of the next sample, the sampler was washed in a trisodium phosphate and water solution and rinsed in clean water. APPENDIX G. State Certified Laboratory Analytical Reports .. CI~ Environmental -South Coast 7~) Lincoln W.~y · Garcien Grove, CA 925~1 (213) 598-O,~58 · (714) 898-6370 · (800) LAB-I-CRL FAX: (71.t) ~91-5917 · ..November 29, 1988 ,., W. W. Irwin ANALYSIS NO.: 832014-£ 3925 Vernon Street ANALYSES: EPA Methods Long Beach, CA 90815' DATE SAMPLED: 11/15/8~ ATTN: Mr. M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 11/ PROJECT: Texaco/Bakers P/J#10084.00 Enclosed with this letter is the amended report on the chef physical analyses on the sample from ANALYSIS NO: 832014-0£ above. The samples were received by CRL in a chilled state, intact chain-of-custody record attached. Sample seals were intac~ Solid samples are reported on an "as received" basis. Please note that ND( ) means not detected at the detection within the parentheses. Verbals ~ere given on November 23, 1988 at 3:15-P.M.' to Mr REVIEWED J APPR, The Report Cover LeKar is an integral I~aH of tills rapod. Th~s reoort pertains only to me samDles [nvestlcJalecl and does not necessardy al3131y to otl~er aooarently identical or similar materials. Th~ use o~ the client to whom ~t ~s addressed. Any reoroduction of tins reoort or use ol ~rtis ~ooratory'$ name for a~vertismcJ or Dul~li¢~ Durpos CRL Environmental - South Coast ~ 7.t.~O Lincoln Way · Garden Grove. CA 926~1 (213) 598-Oa58 · 1714) 898-6370 · (800) LAB-I-CRL FAX: tTl.*) $91-5917 .-.November 29, 1988 W. W. Irwin ANALYSIS NO.: 832014-001/008 3925 Vernon Street ANALYSES: EPA Methods 8015 & 8020 Long Beach, CA 90815 DATE SAMPLED: 11/15/88 ATTN: Mr2 M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 11/15/88 PROJECT: Texaco/Bakersfield P/J#10084.00 Enclosed with this letter is the amended report on the chemical and physical analyses on the sample from ANALYSIS NO: 832014-001/008 shown above. The samples were received by CRL in a chilled state, intact, and with the chain-of-custody record attached. Sample seals were intact. Solid samples are reported on an "as received" basis. Please note that ND( ) means not detected at the detection limit expressed within the 'parentheses. Verbals were given on November 23, 1988 at 3:15 P.M. to Mr. M. F. Burke. REVIEWED ,J APPROVED iL : Tha Rapor~ Cover Lettar is an integral part of this report. '"Th~s reoor~ ;)ertams only to the samoles investigated and does not necessarily aoply to driver aoaarently identical ar similar materials. This report is suDm~tted for the exclusive use of the chent to wnam ,t ~s addressed. Any reoroauc~ion of :ms reDort ar use of [ms Laoorator,/'s name for a(~vertising or pualic,ty ourposes w~thout autl~onzation ,s prombaed. EF1SeC© -- CRL Environmental ~ South Coast 7-bio Lincoln Way · Garden Grove, CA 92641 ,C.o. 131 _~98-0458 · (71.11 898-6370 · (800) LAB-I-CRL FAX: {714) 891-5917 LABORATORY REPORT W. W. Irwin ANALYSIS NO.: 832014-001/005 3925 Vernon Street ANALYSES: EPA Methods 8015 & 8020 Long Beach, 'CA 90815 DATE SAMPLED: 11/15/88 ATTN: Mr. M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 11/15/88 DATE ANALYZED: 11/22-23/88 SAMPLE TypE: Solid PROJECT: .Texaco/Bakersfield ' P/J~10084.00 BTX, EPA Method 8020 (mg/kg) TOTAL EXTRACTABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ETHYL TOTAL EPA METHOD 8015 SAMPLE ID BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES (m~/k~ CB-1 @5' ND(1.) ND(1.) ND(1.) ND(1.) 6,000. CB-1 @10' ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) 390. CB-! 015' ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) 220. CB,1 @20' ND(0.1) ND(0. !) NDe0.1) ND(0.1) 5,600. CB-i 025' 32. * Chromatographic fingerprint most closely matched diesel fuel. .Quantitation based upon diesel standard. Chromatographic flngerprlnt is at~g. ical of diesel fuel. Quantita~icn based on diesel standard. The Report Cover Letter is an'integral part of this report. ,~. This report Oertmns only to the samples investigated and does not necessardy apply to omer apparently identical or similar materials. Th~s report ~s suommed for me exc:us~ve use of the client to whom ~t is addressed. Any reproduction at tins report or use of m,s Laooratory's name for advertising or OuOliclty ourooses without aumanzatlon ~s pron,oltea. CRL Environmental - South Coast 74a0 Lincoln Way · Garden Grove. CA 926a, I (213) 598-0~58 · (714.) 898-6370 · (800) LAB-I-CRL FAX: ~714) ~191-5917 LABORATORY REPORT W. W. Irwin ANALYSIS NO.: 832014-006/008 3925 Vernon Street ANALYSES: EPA Method 8015 Long Beach, CA 90815 DATE SAMPLED: 11/15/88 ATTN: Mr. M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 11/15/88 DATE ANALYZED: '11/16/88 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid PROJECT: Texaco/Bakersfield P/J~10084.00 · TOTAL VOLATILE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS EPA METHOD 8015 SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION (m~/k~) CB-1 @40' ND(1.) CB-1 @50' ND(1.) CB-1 @55' ND(1.) The Report Cover Let~er is an integral part of this report. This reoort pertains only To The sam[~les investigated and does not necessardy aOply to other al~parefltly iclefltJcal or similar materials. This rel~ort is sunmttted for the exclumve use o[ the chent to ,.nora it is addressed. Any reoroduction of this reoort or use of tins Lanoratory' s name for a(Jver~lsmg or i~uOlic[ty purposes wilhout authorization is promnaed. ~ISCC© -- CRL Environmental - South Coast Lincoln Way · Garden Grove, CA 92641 598-0~58 · (714) 898-6370 · t8001 LAB-I-CRL FAX: [7lb.) $91-5917 LABORATORY REPORT W. W. I~in ANALYSIS NO.: 832014-001/008 3925 Vernon Street ANALYSES: EPA Methods 8015 & 8020 Long Beach, CA 90815 DATE SAMPLED: 11/15/88 ATTN: Mr. M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 11/15/88 DATE ANALYZED: 11/22-23/88 SAMPLE TYPE: .Solid PROJECT: Texaco/Bakersfield P/J#10084.00 QA/QC SUMMARY Average Relative Spike Acceptable Percent .Acceptable Date Parameter(method~ Recovery% Range% Difference Range% 11/16/88 Total Volatile 123 70-130 5 40 Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPA Method 8015) 11/22/88 Total Extractable 92 60-130 9 40 Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPA Method 8015) 11/23/88 Total Extractable 112 60-130 2 40 Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPA Method 8015) 11/23/88 Toluene 70 60-120 10 40 (EPA Method 8020) I1~23/88 EthylBenzene 71 60-120 11 ~0 (EPA Method 8020) 1!/23/88 Xylenes 67 60-120 i0' ~.~' (EPA Method 8020) The Report Cover Letter is an integral part of this report. This reoort pertains only to the samples inve.sticjated and does not necessarily apply to other apparently identical or similar matermls. Thins reoort is suom~ttecl for the exc:us~ve use pt the cltent to whom ~t is addressed. Any reproducZion of this repoa or use Pt m~s Laoorato~/'s name for aavedis~ng or puDIJcJty purposes w~trlout au~l~or~zallon is Dromc:ted CHEMICAL RESEARCH LABORATORIES, INC. · OHAHGE Ci:}UN'IY CHAIN OF CU~TOD~? RECORD ........... · [..A. COUNI'Y SAMPLE t (](;A'II(H~ IJA]E 'lIME ..... ~'l ~ ...... Alii SOLID NO. OF TESTS CN'I NHS ~ C._~ ~1 ~.' I ~.~,~,,~.~;~.~,,,,,.,,,,,,:,. ~-,.,,~,,,,,,., .......... ,,,,,:~,v,,,, / ..................................... CHEMICAL HIE~IEAI~CH LAI]ORATORI£~i, INC. · O,',A~(~ COU~*~IY CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD · V~N I UHA .................................................... · l A. OOUNIY ? .......... T ....... I ....................................................................................................................................... _~_~ ~~z ...... ,,,,,,,,,,~,.,,,~,,,~,, ......................................................... ~..~ ___~.~ ~ ................................................. Relilltlui~hc,I {)y. (51llll,,lIJlC) I'lucbived by: (Siflllalulu) liun ul your ~alul~lc. 'I Date/Time I ASSOCIATED LABORAIOPJES 806 North Bat,;via : On=nge, C=li[oraia 92668 - 2'14/Z2'1-6900 l: . Wi W. Irwin, Inc. (1362) LAB ..NC. F57843-01 3925 Vernon St. Long Beach, CA 90815 REPORTED 12/19/88 Attn: Mike Sheffer $ A..~:? LE Soil R~_.~ .: ~_D 12/15/88 Texaco - 16th & Q, Bakersfield [DEN/~F:C.%U:CN Project ~10084.00 As Submitted CB2 @ 5' CB2 @ 10' CB2 @ 15' Total Hydrocarbons (TPH PHS) (mg/kg) 14,200 ND<10 ND<10 Benzene (mg/kg) ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 Toluene (mg/kg) ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 Ethyl Benzene (mg/kg) .ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 Total Xylenes (8020) (mg/kg) ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 AS SO~.T-E D LABO~IF~ Edward S. Be~re, Ph.D. ESB/ql NOTE: Unless notified in ~riting, all samples will be discarded by appropriate disposal protocol 30 days from date reported. TESTING & C.~ NSUL';:~ zG Chemlcc: · T-he reports of tr~e Associated L. aDo,atorles are conflctential property of our clients eno ~iC~IO~O~ZC~ · may not De reoroduce~ Or use~ for puOUcatlon in part or ,n full without our written permission. T~ls ~S for t~e ~utuai protection of the OuOlic. our clients, an~ ourselveS. ~e~:c/ . ASSOCIATED LABORAIORIES 806 Nort~ Batavia - Orange, CaJiforma 92668 - 714/771-6900 .... W.. W. Trw±n, Znc. (1362) 'L~,DNO E57843-02 3925 Vernon St. Long Beach, CA 90815 R~.r=~.~.RL~-'=D 12/19/88 Attn: Mike Sheffer Soil 12/15/88 SAM?L-- RECE".VED Texaco - 16th & Q, Bakersfield .~=.,: .... ~ ...... Project ~10084.00 As Submitted CB2 @ 20' CB2 @ 25' CB2 @ 33' CB2 @ 38' Total HydrOcarbons (TPH DHS) (mg/kg) ND<10 1,570 ND<10 ND<10 Benzene (mg/kg) ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 Toluene '(mg/kg) ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 ND< 0.05 Ethyl Benzene (mg/kg) ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 Total Xylenes (8020) (mg/kg) ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 ND< 0.1 ND< 0.! ESB/ql . NOTE: Unless notified in writing, all samples will be discarded by appropriate disposal protocol 30 days from date reported. ~.-CT?.iG ,~ ~, c ....... C.hem~cr: · Tl~e reports of trte Assoc~atecl L_aDoratorie$ are confidential orooerty of our clients an~ ~/C~ICIO~IC~ ' ~ ~ay not De reOroOuceO or use~ for DuDlicatlon in Dart or in full without our written OermlSSio~. This i% for t~e ~utual DrotectIon of t~e ouOlic, our clients, an~ OUrSelves. E~e~tcl · a:np ~ u.r~ /) ~c ti,od , / --{- -[q----L-~ 0.:~.,h' s.,~,,t Sa. cie Oe Ju~ Saml)l ~ Coil[am- talners Ilu,n~er BaLe Time {;fade (fi). T~pe in~[Ion .... .. 10 ~ /v, .... i~ " /~-.,- 2,,~", ' qa~ales. . . Pronerly. Cooled: Y~ /t0 - ~R~nqulshed by: Oatc I Tifne ~eccived by.' 15ambles Accepted: Yes ,,1~ not, i, 'llelln(lulshed by: O~t,~ / Time -Received for Lab ~a~ples Placed In Lab Ilefrlyerator ;"cs .... tl,~ ..... Rep. Inltlala APPENDIX H. Monthly MOS Monitoring Reports OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MAY 1988 TEXACO: 801 16th ST. , BAKERSFIELD SLrMMARY: c. On May 23, MOS # 2 operation was commenced using the VCP'. The unit operated without incident or shut down for the rest of the month. Natural gas is being supplied from PG&E for use as supplemental ~uel. The average natural gas consumption was ~04.6 ft /day. The average source flow rate was 29.3 ft~/min. . The average stack temperature was 546.9 degrees Fahrenheit. After start up, an extension was added to the VCP stack to raise the stack height to that which is required by the KCAPD. This installation only required five hours of venting down time. There is no analyzer on the MOS unit. A Teled!~ne FID is on order and is expected to be available in early July. Air samples were collected from the venting influent and analyzed at a state certified laboratory for total petroleum hydrocarbons, C1 - C!0, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. The analysis results 'were not accurate. They were obviously much lower than the actual hydrocarbon concentrations. CONCLUSION: It will be difficult to track progress until an analyzer is installed on the MOS unit. Air samples collected in Ted!ar bags or bombs just do not compare to the analyzer readings. One more air sample should be collected after the hydrocarbon analyzer has been installed. Perhaps by comparing these two analytical results an initial concentration can then be estimated. Additional costs for the month of May will include time to s~ar~. and adjust the VCP opera~ion, the installation of the unit, the exhaust stack extension, and the laboratory air samDle analysis. J j VAi:'OR [:tllqi:ql~T 1 lin |:'lt(I{:J':~-~BlJti I,l|il'l J 1 lill I NB · UI'II'I': lliiIlbl Jt ,~ r,. 1,1,.,.: i,.-'ll~,. 0,'; · INI:i.UENI' FI.Ot-i ~1t11;1( t'itll. L~ttB I,ii:l'Elt ~-:~--,,~,w--m~ , ~_..],:l ...... '~:~, s~.~ ............................... E~' i N~:l.ui':N r 27 --Play--- L~ B cj4 ~ 30 .'~74 6860 ]l--I,l.~y 'BII ~oO 30 5Ol '13B5 I'IIIX. I 30 N~TIIR~L I~B I I IVl'J. [-"l'.'~ / I)I~Y F'131lilt. I 4 I I OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT Jo'NE 1988 TEXACO: 801 16th ST. , BAKERSFIELD Operation continued with no incidents through June 17. The average stack temperature was 542 degrees Fahreheit. The average total flow rate was. 30 scfm. A total of 1,600,000 ft~ of natural gas was consumed which averages.to be 106,667 ft~/day. on June 16, a Teledyne FID analyzer was installed. The hydrocarbon concentration was found to be approximately 2000 ppm (FID) which is well in the catox range of operation. Because of the extreme consumption rate of natural gas by the VCP, it was terminated and a Catox trailer was prepared to be delivered and initiated within the first week of July. CONCLUSION: Operation ~sing the catox will commence in the first week of July. The natural gas consumption rate was very high and it was more economical to halt operation immediately and to wait for an available catox. OPERATIONS .DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT JULY 1988 TEXACO: 801 16th ST. , BAKERSFIELD S~Y: ~. On July 5, venting commenced using the catox. The unit was operational during July 5 - 20. The emissions were high during the first part of this period. On July 20, the emissions were improved by making adjustments of the source flow rate and the methanol addition rate. During July 16 - 19 the analytical system was not functional due to the sample handling system. On July 20 all systems were functioning properly and the emissions were within acceptable limits. When the system was monitored on July 21, it was discovered to have overtemperatured. Upon attempting to restart the unit, the temperatures-persisted and white smoke was coming out the catox box and the stack. The problem is suspected to have been caused by oil being passed from the compressor to the catox. The unit is currently down and will be investigated and repaired through the rest of July and the first two Weeks of August. DATA SL~5~_ARY: Total days of operation in July: 12 days Average source flow rake = 67.5 scfm Decrease in soil v~por: Venting well - initial (7/05/88) = 4120 ppm - current (7/20/88) = 2990 ppm Average thermocouple tempe'fetuSes: TC! = 666.6 TC2 = 684.8 TC3 = 822.8 Average ther/~oc!ine: 156.2 Average hydrocarbon destruction efficency: 65.2 % CONCLUS ION: The catox unit will continue to be investigated and repaired. It should be operational again in mid to late August. ii J ~ i~VI.i, f,I .I.. F. ..~EXACO' 801 161'1--I SI'.BAKERSFIELD - DECLINE OF' SOIL VAPOR ..~ FF./NTINO IfP..LL 4000:(019/88 4120 PPM ooo J - 295O PPM t'~ 2500- LL- 2000 - [3_. 1 000 - 500 - 0-' I [ I I--f-T-T-I'-ITF-F-T [ I I [ I I [ l--l--[--I I I I I-I-T-]-I I [ I [ [ [ I I [ I "I-I-I'TqTF]--F-FF'~T[-I I I I 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 ONTHS OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST 1988 TEXACO: 801 16th ST'. , BAKERSFIELD SUMMARY: The mobile oxidation system was restarted on August 16' On August 18 the system went down because of a black out~ The system was restarted on August 20 The 'average hydrocarbon destruction efficency was 57 % The average and was 1607 in fluent effluent concentration and 686 ppm (FID), respectively. Although the efficency is lower than 90 % , it should be noted that this was the unit that had the beds reversed in order to save them. The efficencies appear to be improving with time. Because the concentrations are low, it may be acceptable to allow the unit to "bake" for a period of time. If it does not improve, then the unit will need to be taken to Hasstech for repair. DATA SUMMARY: Total days of operation in August: 14 days Average source flow rate = 50.0 scfm Decrease in soil vapor: Venting well - initial (7/05/88) = 4120 ppm - current (8/31/88) = 1300 ppm Average thermocouple temperatures: TC1 = 553 TC2 = 593 TC3 = 635 Average thermocline: 82.0 Average hydrocarbon destrucnicn efficency: 57 CONCLUSION: The venting operation will ccn~inue and the emissions will be closely monitored. If after a period of time the emissions have not improved, then the unit will be shut sent to Hasstech for repairs. down and i [:lll~ll 'r'i ii i&', il)Jli IlIH I'I:iH I fH~ll.il~ iii,il I I,lill.II f~ ..... IJNil: Illl-lll,I II ,' J EITI::; ll:,.[.~',.,-' ti, il lt,Lll L.~L. ~ l]~tl,.lar-51'i¢:lll III1-1 Ili-I,II l:.i I:1 II1'1,II Fl_lll, I I('1 I(:,:' I1,?, ............. [J[~l'l' E I 1 I'1['[ l) I.~l,I I:'l :'1'1 I'.~ f I,I I: I' I:' IF..--[l~t!l. l~1-1 MI'I.I'I i1,1[~ IH'"l'll/l/ III1,1 llt'[iil-i'~lt'll{I). IIII I II1.111: lt:l.-lt~lJi tilt ~Y!JlI'Pl I)111-11'1 I)111: II) I:'lJbll.!lt IIIIlilIH- II~,/li. Il'HI/ :':'-ii,Hi I~t~ ~'. 4', I ', ,, I, ~ i.ln~ t,, " , ,,~[I {,, ~'.1 I,li I ~:. I,:'~ ,'ii II,llI I~t{ I'{.'.,l~ ,.'llil {.,)~ ',,~ ',,i.l. i.l,' I.',,','~ II"/I,. ,:"j il,iiI I~li 'l~,l :,(~ll '.,I h I '.,' '. ~ ,' I I,'J /I I'lllX. I.I ':~ I'1 I I'1. ~',' ~ / I'liIX. i:,l, I . I,~ ,:, - II...~: I'l I I-I. . ', I II .... I'IIJX. I, I, ~:.,f,,, -'"' ?~'t; .... TEXACO: 80116'[t't S'[. BAKERSFIELD -- DECLINE OF' SOIL VAPOR' VENTING Ir'ELL 4000 4120 PPM 3500 3000 ~ 2500 2000 n ~soo ~/at/~ - 1300 PPM 1000 -. 500 - 0-'-r-rT~-~-r--r'r-~--I-n--nTrTT~-FrTT~-~-rT-l--~--lT~ ~T~ ~ ~ ~ ~-Fr-rT~-~--r-rT~1 , ~,~ '' ' ~ ~1 ii ('i 2 ,i. 6 8 1 0 12 ; ~ C) ~,1 T H S · ' OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT · MONTHLY REPORT SEPTEMBER 1988 ~ TEXACO: 801 16th ST. , BAlfERSFIELD SUMMARY: The MOS/cat0x operated for 29 days during September. The unit was down on September 4 because of a power failure. For most of the month catalyst bed temperatures were above the theoretical conversion temperature Of 650 degrees Fahrenheit. The average influent and effluent concentration was ·1002 and 290 ppm (FID), respectively. The average hydrocarbon destruction efficency was 71 percent. Although the efficency is lower.than 90 % , it should be noted that this was the unit that had the beds reversed in order to save them. The temperatures will be raised in early October to enable better conversion. DATA S~Y: Total days of operation in September: 29 days Average source flow rate = 51.0 scfm Decrease in soil vapor: Venting well - initial (7/05/88) = 4120 ppm - curren~ (9/30/88) = 651 ppm Average thermocouple temperatures: TC1 = 609 TC2 = 696 TC3 = 711 Average thermocline: 102.0 deg F Average hydrocarbon destruction efficency: 71% CONCLUSION: The venting Operation will continue and the emissions will be closely monitored. Temperatures will be raised in order to lower the emission concentrations. , W { )imm m ii,{{ iii (.ll'lJJl Y'i Il: (J~. il)Iii llJl~l I'l{I-iJ]~.~2,(~ll'I(~ illii I I,ilJl~lJ'llJl(il,lli IIl'.ll I J ll(t-IlJ~.l II ,~ · (il li:i: i r~.,):,~4.',.,: IP. I l[:.tll c,~l . , i.(/Ihul':,l i¢~ifl l'. Il ,. ; ItJlJJtj/i. l ~ll:l. IILI'I I i:1:1 I.IIILN I I:1 I)i3 I IL'_' I' [ PiE I'll ' (,~ fJ i) ~lJ 'Ii(' J ,~('ll'l .-~('ll~l :><1 J:,l.I I [,{~l J~JJl] J f. ll:l .I II,ri J'; (]J:~-J~l~l) -Jll. t ~litllilJJ~ llE--INIIIL)J)LIIJ[:I) ('J~ L;~,i). Jill [~'J.5( I ~LJ(.I ,,/ ~,(.l~ I~lt ':l,'m*J (.,Ij..~i~lJ -IHJ I ~ji)l) Jl'l ~(?li I~lJ I{~'.'J:~ ..,,... i) Isc~ I.~i(~ ':l")z* ' I':d ~,~"1~ lld~ /.~t.j ,E':',' ~iF'l, lll~ '~,'.,' I:.ll. li:.t~ :~,,' f~l;, '7(:'~) 72.',:: II...~; .-~ ,-'{~, '~J~l) I{~ ':)J:l,.) ~,,'~ I 1,~ ["if ~ii}JJ' ~l{ {-,. ~4:1 ,'~:'J ~il.'I) l$1% J'J:':' I'.('I. /'.j, ~:)']l J./l(.', '~J~.'J /t",~ .~Jl ~.j(~l) llt~ /)"1 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT OCTOBER 1988 TEXACO: 801 16th ST. , BAKERSFIELD SUMMARY: The MOS/catox operated for 31 days during October. For.the entire month the catalyst bed temperatures were above the theoretical conversion temperature of 650 degrees Fahrenheit. The average influent and effluent concentration was 808 and 71 ppm (FID), respectively. The average hydrocarbon destruction efficiency was 91 3 percent. ' DATA SUT/4ARY: Total days of operation in October: 31 days Average source flow rate = 44.8 scfm Decrease in soil vapor: Venting well - initial (7/05/88) = 4120' ppm - current (11/01/88) = 650 ppm Average thermocouple temperatures: TCI = 675 TC2 = 859 TC3 = 792 Average hydrocarbon destruction efficiency: 91.3 % CONCLUSION: Venting will continue through November. il~r--*-~t ~i I&~ il~l, b~[k~l~tfl ............................... ~ · It,id ~tt~l~ ~t ........................ liJ~ll~. .... ~l I~ l~l ~lJ JCl .... · ~, I~ ~ f~ I~l 1o ~.1 1~5 ~ 1.0 0 I~ 16 ~1 ~ ~ ~ i I I "~--~-~ ~J ..... ~ ............ ~.5 ............ ~J----- ~ .... I.O G--.I~ ii .--- ~. : ~-M ~ fl l~t 1~ ~. ~ I~ ~ 1.0 0 i~ 2Q 615 ~:,,..~. ~; ~ II ' ~1. I ~1~ ~ 1~ ~i.a ~(~ ~,l' · Ili~ . I~ ~.0 k~ - i~ · k~ ~.5 l.O ....................................................... ~.'G~:f~ ~.." ~~"~ ... TEXACO: 801 16TH ST.BAKERSFIELD - DECLINE OFSOIL VAPOR VENTING IgELL 4000 -' 7//OG//SB 4120 PPM 5500 3000 r'~ 2500 200 D 1500 1000 500- 650 PPM 0 2 4 6 - 8 10 12 MONTHS OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT NOVEMBER 1988 TEXACO: 801 16th ST. , BAKERSFIELD S~Y: The MOS/catox was operational for the entire month of November. For the entire month the catalyst bed temperatures were above the theoretical conversion temperature of 650 degrees Fahrenheit. The average influent and effluent concentration was 617 and 50 ppm (FID) , respectively. The average hydrocarbon destruction efficiency was 92.1 percent. DATA SUM1KARY: ~. Total days of operation in November: 30 days Average source flow rate = 40.0 scfm Decrease in soil vapor: Venting well - initial (07/05/88) = 4120 ppm - current (12/01/88) = 283 ppm Average thermocouple temperatures:· TC1 = 675 TC2 = 895 TC3 = 782 Average hydrocarbon destruction efficiency: 92.1% CONCLUS ION: Venting will continue through December. ¢ 16~v-~ iit~i il ~3 YJ ~4.~ Y[5 4o 1.0 o I~ ~u 667 876 774 500 ~v-~ ~ FI YL~ Y5 ~.~ {ES 40 hO O I~ 30 676 6~ 784 ~v-~ ~ F~ ~6 {m 'ii. 5 ~ 40 1.0 0 i~O JO 67{ ~1 767 ~-~ 940 ~i 4~ ~5 S~. 1 YE5 40 hO 0 1~ ~0 697 875 TEXACO' 801 161'H ST. BAKERSFIELD - DECLINE OF SOIL VAPOR' V~NTIN~ ~rELL ~ 4120 PPJI 4000 - 3~00 - 5000 - ~ - ~ 2~00- 2000 - ~00T ~000Z 500Z - 283 PPM O-- I ~ [ I I I I ~ I [ I I I I I I I I I [ I I I I I I ~ I I [ I I I I I I I I I [ ~ I I I I I [ I I [ I I I I I I I I I [ '0 2 4 6 8 10 12 MONTHS 16th STREET ( '~ 20,O00-gallon Ga'rage ~,~ ~ above-ground tanks ' ' truck 5,000-gallon Loading ~' underground rack 1, B- fuel tank ,¢~{.( ........ u Th, ~_ Fu ling Pump :' Office .. ~ormer ~um~ locations EXPLANATION Railroad siding Underground piping -N- Scale 0 ~0 20 Reference: Texaco, Inc., 1.92,3, Layout and topo'graphy, sales station site, Bakersfield, California. TITLE '~ t ~ ~ ~) e ~Z~ ~ FIGUR£ /O0~q.~O I OWN. BY ~L~ I CHK'D BY TITLE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ FIGURE - DATE '"~' 6 ,,,~,.. '~ y , a / ,.' ~,.'~ · ~ "'~'~' "~' F JI '~*_ '7 ~ ~. .. : , ...,, IELD ' ~ ~ T : 32 SCALE Reference: USGS 7.5-minute Gosford & Oildale, California quadrangles [photorevised 1968) Harding Lawson Associates V J C I N I T Y bl ^ P · Engineers, Geologists - Texaco Bulk Plant 801 16th Street Bakersfield, California JOB NUMI~ER AP~IOVEO /~ oArE REVISED gATE 2251,016.11 ~ 10-31-86 ~ .... 16th STREET ~ 20,000-gallon Ga'rage above-ground tanks ' Fuel truck k j) / /unloading area / I-- v / / .5,000-gallon Loading ¢./ LU ~ / underground . .. .. ,.. ~ ,' ~. ,' ,!i~ ~-n- / ~ / ./. fuel tank ~h I ,, ~---"--- ........ I~I_ __f-l.__Fueling [~ __~--- /_ :~, , ........ ==----L_l---point · -7-"~'-- Pump/ ~% '" *--',.,. -*. -, \ -J. --I '-.', Office "¥."-.. Building t Stack. ed ~ -..~ _~= .._.. oil drums "~B-9 B-~_ i' S-4. ! ~ ./.Railroad spur Former pump locations EXPLANATION '~ Railroad siding Underground piping -N- Scale 0 10 20 30 40 50 feet Reference: Texaco, Inc., 1926, Layout and topography, sales station site, Bakersfield, California. Harding Lawson Associatss S IT E P L A N PLArE ~'i 9. ~ Engineers, Geologists Tex ace Bulk Plant '' &Geol3hys,osls · '801 16th Street · Bakersfield, California 2251,016.11 ~ 10~31-8'6 16t~ STREET - I"~-~ ' ' · II I I ~1K ~ a~ove-ground tanks I '' I 5,000-gallon ~ Loading I Buii0ing I · /.Railroad s~ur · %' Railroad ·siding Scale 0 10 20 30 40 50 feet Reference: Tex~co, Inc., 1928, L~yout ~nd toOograO~y, sales station site. Bakersfield. C~iifornia. SITE PLAN Tex~co Bul~ 8G1 16t~ Street Bakersfield. California ,- 16tin STREET . /' '~ 20,000-gall0n coaX'age aDore-ground tanks ' ' . v / / .5,000-gallon Loading /' / unaerground .~r~ ,~ ' . L Stacked oil drums ~B;9 ~=-- · ~Former pure0 locations EXPLANATION ~ Rsiiroa~ siding ~-l~°ring I°c~ti°n' Underground BiDing -N- Scale 0 10 20 30 40 50 feet Reference:Texaco, Inc., 1926, Layout and toDograDhy, sales station site. Bakersfield, California. Engin~rs. G~l~i~s Tax ace Bulk .Pl~t. · a~.~s,c~s~s ' 801 16th Street Bakersfield. California AF /XF /X AVERA5E DEPTH OF E~CAV'~TIO~'d = 5.=~ FEE7 GREATEST DEPTH OF EXCAVATION ::~ ~ = 70 FE. ET ~VENTINC~ WELL Q V/:~mOR RECOVERY W~__L NO ~CALF- 3'x3'x6" Concrete $iah L ....... ~lm' Fill Box '-" ~.-'- ~" PVC, Schedule 40, Blank Casing ~+'~ ~ Flush-Threaded ~.I .-._.- .-:~.__~ 3' Bentonite Seal .--_~ ::.:.' :'--: .., :.,.., , '.:"-: $7 ,:<. :':,: _'h"']'" &" PVC, Schedule 40, Slotted Cas±, ..:- .:. Flush-Threaded :-:.::.: __ ;.. ~.. ;.o, ..-;:: __ ....-.:.-: ::.' .:.-'.. __ ..-.:..' · . :' ;,.'.. _ .-... -.:': .-...; - ,, -..o:.~ ::-.!:_ · '..'~; .'.:. .:>:. ' .o.' :~.-:.':.'. . . .. ;'.':: .. :...-'. · ,.,.-: ;.'..'.'.. .; .:. :.. 7..:'.' ~ .:':. :~:..:.. ~ .:... RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY Environmental Health Se~,ices ~nt RANDALL L. ABBOTT STEVE mcca,, ~,. RE~S. omacror DIRECTOR Air Pollum~n Conu, ol ~ DAVID PRICE !II W~LUAM ,j. eOOOY, *PCO ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ~. Ptannins & Development Senme~ DeCrement 'lTD ,JAMES, AICP, DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT January ?, 1991 Texaco, Inc. P. O. Box 7812 Universal City, California 91608 CLOSURE OF ! UNDERGROUND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE STORAGE TANK LOCATED AT 801 16TH STREET IN BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA. PERMIT # A415-16/260053 This is to advise you that this Department has reviewed the pro3ect results for the preliminary assessment associated with the closure of the tank noted above. Based. upon the 'sample results submitted, this Department satisfied that the assessment is complete. Based on current requirements and policies, no further action is indicated at this time. It is important to note that this letter does not relieve you of further responsibilities mandated under the California Health and Safety Code and California Water Code if additional or previously unidentified contamination at the sub3ect site causes or threatens to cause pollution or nuisance or is found to pose a significant threat to public health. Changes in the present or proposed land use may require further assessment and mitigation of potential public health impacts. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. LAUREL FUNK, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPECIALIST 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861-3636 FILE CONTE.~]TS SUMMARY FACILITY: I ~D~ .~ ~'~ ~. 0 .~ ~ (~.~. Activity Date # Of Tanks Comments EX-TEXACO BULK PLANT - 801 16TH STREET, BAKERSFIELD: CA INTRODUCTION Initially, Harding Lawson Associates of Tustin, California was contracted by Texaco to investigate potential hydrocarbon contamination at the subject site. Nine exploratory holes were bored during this investigation witk only one showing hydrocarbon contamination (B-3 in the Harding Lawson report). This boring was located in the vicinity of both a 5000 gallon, underground fuel tank and the plant's .fuel unloading area. Subsequently, the underground tank was removed. An investigation conducted by the Irwin Company during the tank r~moval eliminated the tank as the source of contamination. Data from the ~arding Lawson and Irwin reports indicated that remedial action should be focused near the unloading area. On April 14, 1987, a soil boring, VW-1, was drilled near the unloading area to determine the vertical extent of contamination. Slotted PVC casing was installed in the hole to enable future hydrocarbon venting. CONTAMINATION The plume is not laterally extensive. No significant contamination was detected while removing the 5000 gallon tank. However, contamination has been detected by laboratory analysis as deep as 45 feet in both B-3 and VW-1. Very faint hydrocarbon odors were detected at 50 .feet in VW-1, but hydrocarbons were not detected by laboratory analysis in tk~ 50-foot sample. HydroCarbon odors were detected in VW-i at 25 to 40 feet. However, the analytical results of the samples from those depths showed no hydrocarbons detected. The soils were sands and though the samples where collected in brass sleeves and sealed, it is possible that the volatile hydrocarbons escaped during the handling of the samples. GROUND WATER The boring, VW-1, was' drilled to sixty feet. No ground water was encountered to this depth. Ground water can be expected near 175 feet with an eastern gradient according to the Kern County Water Agency 1986 report on water conditions. FUTURE SITE USE Until recently, the site was leased by Texaco to Star P~troleum Company. As of May 15, the site was taken over by the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency. Destruction of the bulk plant began on June 4. Construction of a. parking structure for an adjacent hotel should begin in mid-1988. REMEDIAT!ON ALTERNATIVES The hydrocarbon contamination at fifty feet does not appear to threaten the ground water expected near 175 feet, though vapors may cause problems with the future parking structure. Abatement of the contamination should be underway before construction begins. Therefore, a "no action" alternative cannot be considered in this case. One remediation alternative is excavating the hazardous material and hauling it to a Class I hazardous waste facility. Remediation may be completed in about a week by excavating to 40 feet at an estimated cost of about $200,000. However, hauling presents the problem of continuing liability.. Texaco will still be liable for the contaminated soil even though it is dumped at a hazardous waste facility. A second remediation alternative is soil venting where hydrocarbon vapors are recovered by inducing a vacuum through the vertical, venting well installed in VW-1. The ._. vapors are processed in a two phase operation through either of two systems. In the first phase vapors are consumed by direct combustion in an incinerator and ca~al!rtic oxidizer. The end products of this operation are primarily carbon dioxide and water. The second phase o. requires passing the hydrocarbon vapors through activated carbon canisters connected in series. These canisters adsorb the hydrocarbons and are changed when they become saturated. Spent canisters may be shipped to a hazardous waste facility or the activated carbon may be regenerated. The cost of this alternative is comparable to excavating a~d hauling, however long term liabilities are diminished because most of the contamination is eliminated on site. Also the sandy soil under the site readily gives up hydrocarbon vapors. Therefore, we recommend soil venting as the best remedial action. An application for a permit to construc~ venting equipment has already been filed with the Kern County Air Pollution Control District. Once started, remedia~ion of the site should take about six months. Respectfully submitted W. W. IRWIN, INC. Michael F. Burke, Geologist ...... --- .., ..~ :'.'. ..... / Approved: '""' '; ~;' ' '" W. W. Scott, Geologist Calif. Reg. ~1968 Table i. Labo=atory Soil Test Results , Samg. le Source Hydrocarbons EPA 8020 EPA 7421 Boring Depth EPA 8015 Ethyl- Organic No. (feet) Total Fuel Benzene Toluene Xylene benzene Lead B-l* 6,11,15.5 (5) (0.025) (0.825) 0.32 ' 0.24 (0.10) '1 B-2* '6,11,16 (5) (0.025) 0.15 0.27 0.26 (0.10) B-3 26 3080 (0.025) 1.40' 19.2 1.3 0.12 B-3 45.5 (5) 0.031 0.l! 0..40 0.20 (0.10) B-4* 6,1!,16 (5) (0.025) (0.025) 0.20 0.23 (0.10) B-5* 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) (0.025-) -- - 0.19 0.23 (0.10) B-6* 6,11,16. (5) (0.025) 0.05 0.22 0.24 (0.i0) B-7* 6,11,16 '(5) (0.025) 0.12 0.24 0.25 (0.i0) B-8' 6,1_1,16 (5) (0.025) (0.025) 0.19 0.24 (0.!0) B-9~- 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) 0.03 0.2! 0.24 (0.10) Notes: Measured concentrations are shown in milligrams .Der kilogram (rog/kg) *denotes composite sample ( ) denotes not detected above enclosed detect, ion limits April 28, 1987 W. W. Irwin ANALYSIS NO.: 710705-001/010 2475 Lemon Ave. ANALYSES: EPA Method 8015, 8020 Long Beach, CA 90806 DATE SAMPLED: 04/17/87 ATTN: Mr. M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE REC'D: 04/18/87 DATE ANALYZED: 04/20/87 SAMPLE TYPE: SOIL PROJECT: Texaco Bulk Plant Bakersfield, P/J~10084.00 Dear Mr. Burke: Enclosed with this letter is the report on the chemical and physical analyses on the samples from ANALYSIS NO.: 710705-001/010 shown above. The samples were received by CRL in a chilled state, intact, and with the chain-of-custody record attached. Please note that ND ( ) means not detected at the detection limit expressed within the parentheses. KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMEN~r ~ .~rvlce Request ~ Complaint CT No.. ..... ~_ ..... Assigned to= ............................................................................................. Re,ortln, Person ~~~ ~~ Address ' - Phone Property Owner Address Phone Complainant notified of results ............................ Investigated by .................................................................................................. Date ................................................. I<.CHD 580 2760 372-EH (R.~.~.-80) .................... Texaco USA 10 L,,'nw,~rs~l City Ph~a PC Sox 78"t2 Unlversai City 'CA 9,608-78,2 ~ ~ 0 ~ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ~ay 5~ ~989 Mr. Bill Scheide Environmental Health Specialist Environmental Health Department of Kern County 2700 "M".~Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, California 93301 Subject: Supplemental Data for Abandoned Texaco Bulk Plant Closure Report 801 16th Street Bakersfield, California March 2, 1989 Project Number 10084.00 Dear Mr. Scheide: Confirmational borings advanced at this site 'to determine the effectiveness of soil venting detected a hydrocarbon concentration of 14,200 mg/kg at a depth of five feet below grade in CB-2 (Figure 1). These near-surface hydrocarbon concentrations, quantified as diesel by the Enseco-CRL laboratory in Stanton, California, exceeded the allowable limit of 10,000 mg/kg for diesel established in the State of California LUFT Manual (Table 2-2 in the May 1988 version, Table 2-1 in the March 1989 version issued in April 1989). In the referenced report, site closure was requested contingent upon the removal of hydrocarbon impacted soil within five feet of grade near the venting well. The following letter provides the details of the soil removal operations. The soil was removed with a backhoe on April 11, 1989 in the vicinity of the venting well ~s_shown in Figure 2. As it was excavated, the soil was monitored with an organic vapor analyZe~' (OVA) to determine the areal limits of the ~near-surface hydrocarbons. An arbitrary OVA reading of 100 ppm was used to define the maximum limits of the excavation. In order to quantitatively confirm the removal of.the impacted soil, samples were collected at the greatest extent of the excavation and analyzed in an on-site mobile laboratory. Sample collection and' handling procedures followed EPA protocols 'established in SW-846. Supplemental Data Bakersfield, CA Page 2 A total of seven samples were collected from the excavation. Each was analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) by the Department of Health Services method. The results are presented below in Table A. TABLE A TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS SAMPLE LOCATION (TPH DHS~ (mq/kg) A @ 5.0' ND(10) B @ 5.0' ND(10) C @ 5.0' ND(10) D @ 7.0' 64 E @ 5.5' ND(10) F @ 6.0' ND(10) G @ 5.0' ND(10) Copies of the laboratory report and chain of custody record are attached. The excavated soil was loaded onto trucks and hauled to a Class I facility in Buttonwillow, California under hazardous waste manifest. Six loads of soil were removed totaling approximately 108 yards. Copies of the hazardous waste manifests are included with this letter. After the excavation was completed, the hole was backfilled with imported clean soil and compacted to grade. The analytical data indicate that the soil exceeding 10,000 mg/kg discovered within five to seven feet from grade has been removed from the site. There is no known soil remaining with TPH concentrations that exceed the LUFT Manual limit which fulfills the site closure contingency made in the March 2, 1989 report. With the submittal of this additional data Texaco requests that closure be granted. L.M. Sawy~9 Registered Geologist #4450 If you have any questions please call me at (818) 505-2469. Sincerely, Roger Johnson Environmental Protection Coordinator ASSOCIATED LABORATORIES 806 Noz't~ Batavia - On. ge. CaJ~Joz'zzia 92668 - 714/771-6900 CLIENT W. W. Irwin, Inc. LAB NO. A10lll 3925 Vernon. Street Long Beach, CA 90815 REPORTED 04/12/89 Attn: Michael Burke Soil RECEIVED 04/11/89 SAMPLE Texaco - '1801 16th St., Bakersfield IDENTIFICATION Project #10084.00 ~ As Submitted to Mobile Laboratory BASED ON SAMPLE Total Hydrocarbons (TPH DHS) (mg/kg) A @ 5.0 . ND<lO B @ 5.0 ND<lO C @ 5.0 ND<10 D @ 7.O 64 E @ 5.5 ND<lO F @ 6.0 ND<10 G @ 5.0 ND<10 d S..'Behare, Ph.D. ~ ESB/ql ' ,~, ~.-...~, ~. .., ~,';. -~°. NOTE: Unl'ess.~otified in writing, all samples will be discarded by appropriate disposal protocol 30 days from date. reported. ' TESTING & CONSULTING Chemical · The reports of the Associated Lal~oratories are confidential property'of our clients ancl MicroDiological · may not De reproduced or usecl for puDlicatiorl in' part Or in full without our written permission. Tllis is for the mutual protection of the puDlic, our clients, and ourselves. Environmental · C-I 1OM ASSOCIATED LABORATORI ES 806 N. Batavia · Orange, CA (32668 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD (714) 771-6900 e FAX: (714) 538o1209 Date ~'/" /,%c[ Page I of__ CLIENT ~,J. L~. I¢ L~ ~, ~ ADDRESS -~C~ 7- 5 ~/~ ~ ~o ~ ~ . PROJECT MANAGER ~, ~. ~t~~ Sampleslntact Yes..~ NO~ County Seals Intact Yes ~ ~o ' LO~ ~~ , ~A q~S~ PHONENUMBE~t~ /~q ,~5~.~ SampleAmblent__~oolea ~ Frozen__ PROJECT NAME ~Z~O Same Day ~0/ / ~ ?~ ~. ~ ~ ~/~ '~~~ ~ Regular 48 Hr. Date/Time I hereby authorize lhe performance of the above Relinquish~ed by: (~igDature)~o~-----,,.---~' Re~ature) .. Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by Mobile Laboratory for field analysis: Date/Time (Signature) Special Instructions: DISTRIBUTION: White with report. Yellow to AL. , · .~...: .:. ... ...' . .:. .,- ~..:,...:........ ,, ..': ,... · ... . . . .. · .:. :'. · . ". :,~..,..'..,....:: · . :;. :..., · ; . : : ... , . ,.. ,., . . Idmdfellq" · 2. PllGe I .WASTE MANIFEST ' I C I A I D 19181 1.14141 3191 31 ]' ~ "~ r.qu~.d by F.~.., ]-,,. 3. Genmltca"& Nim~ and Mailing Acldreal ....... A. 8till Mlldfelt Document NumDlf . : ..~ .. Texaco l~efining'& ~tarketing [nc. . 51re. 6ulI( Flan ..... ~ ........ '. '.": R ~")~R~I'I'7 ':':'.:::" p.. o.c 608 · ..". :,: '..:. . .: "'" 4 univ~t' a! , A, · .' 7. Tf~lp~ 2 ~m~ay N~ . [ . .: · ~ ~J ~ ~ -. E:~tIIt TWa¢I ~ .../.~:.' .... ?5' .,... · I'1' I' t I'1 f I '1 I I F.~,~.~..: .... -.'... . .... .: g. ~ F~mll~ ~ and ~t. ~ I~ ... ' ~ ~k ~ ~b~ .~ .~te Fa~ ~ .;........ '~ .... : ~.... :.:.. : · ~e~rol~um ~a~e, 'Inc. '.~:'.~ '~:*';"' .... ' ' :' ""~" ' ~ ..... :" '''~ 2SO0 ~.. ~okern ~. · · · -~ ~'~' ~ ." ¥'"-'.-'.'--:: .... '~-'::':" ~ '". :'::. · Ru**nnw~lln~, Ca. 93206 . t~. ~e I~ T~t~ 14. :'.-.., ... '.,. L · : ':.. · . . · Gu&nOW Un& ..'.' ~:...W~e ~'".":. 11. ~T~~op~p~~d~.~ON~) ~.' ~ ' '' WI/V~ :':'.: '.:':- ..... '.':';?' .. .. ......... - . ~ '" .':' ::":.. · · ....',':..,::.';~.':~. 6[[:' '."..' I. ..:. ,'~ . ~aste contaminated soi~=- :,.. ' · · ..-.....~ ~ [:.~ T I ~ ~ ~ 'Y ,:~empt.:":.~.~:'::'.." ~ · . .. '...... .~ .. ~e..:..?? · :..~ ;:.~..,;:.:.::.,.,. .. ...,:.: :.. · :.....::."..........? ....... .... .,.... .... '".'"'"":'.' :"~":'"'":' ":" '"" '"'"' :'i i ~ "' "'"' . ........ ,. . .... .' :.,'~':.', ' "". : : t I I I ....... ". ..... ~.~:~:~'~'.'~'" "'" ~ '" "'::: '~' "' ~ ', .? '-}::-.;.'-.:.~:"~';,:':'.'::'",:'"': .. ..........:.........:' '::....'::....:..:.' .... ......:'.':......-.-:.....' .... :.-..'..: :: ..~.'..~..:'..'.: :.~::: :......... :.... .. :'-':'~:'~":..':.? .... . "~'"'":'";~'~".-, :...~..?., ';".'.'": · . · '":. :'.":"..' '. . '..' . ~Ai~ ' .-.".' .... .... " "'" "'"' ...... :':" .... ""'f"' ' ' ! ~ '. '1" "I'!:1 ! :'":~';~."'.'?" :::';~.'"'~; ..... · .. .... ' :"~'. · :. ~ ~ · .'-'::~ '" ': ~"' 'i '" ':' ~'" 'i' ~':"' ~' i ~' "..':'" ~'-~.... .... ",?'"':~" '"'.. ....... :'''''' ~.~..~.. ..... .'z:,.:~ :.· _.' · ....... .'";.:7":' :.-,'...L... .... So~I ¢~.0~ ...... ~ ....... ....:.~.- ....... , ..... ~:.-~..~ ...... .~ ...... :..?~ ..-~F~...~:,.:~.... , .... ,:..~ .... .'.:..:..,..'.-..: .' ~1 ese] . ... ,1. Og :;:::...: · .....:~.-.:: ;...~.~ ...... .-:.. -....~:~ ::..~:.:...;~'...,: ........... '..-::? .... :.:~:.-. :...:?:.~ ? ~..~..:..:-..~:~.,.:.~>~..~.,:;..... d. ?.::.-.~.. ~ ~: ....:r :...:.' .. ~--': ;'~....'.' ..",'. . ~ :.......~..~..~:..`.:;.~.~.~.?~..~.~:.:~.:..~.F....::..~;~:....:z%.~i?:~.~.~ . . ..... -...... . ..... ....., ~.~..... :~:,~:............., .. , ...~ .~.. ~:,.,-.?..- :.,.::~:.~...........~.~..:..:(:..2.~..~.:.,:~.......~ ....~,,..~?.:.:~., ~-...~....~t.?~, .. ~...,. :,-.....,~.;.?. .: . ..-. .... " ' '-' ':" ~n~: ~ro,Clo~h~n~ required bT'.lSgF ""~""' ~. ~. ~ ~ ~-~a4 ..... '....:.~. . · .. : ~:.. . .' .. :~ ?".. .. :: . ..... '.,.....'. ~.:.'. ,:..~; "........ ...... .'.. ': .. :.:. · . ' ' i.'~'...' ':". "~':.'.."--~:;.' "' '.' ' ' · :' ' ' ~$ ..... .~ .. .' .. ....~ . '.'."..- · '..... ..',..'...'.~ .' .; ' .. :i..'. ... ~l~g~ec~~t~... .... . ...: .'. .'.' :..' '.:'.','- .'.'.~ .' ~: '~;..'...' ,.' ' .'.'..'· ' ' '.. ~e~ and furze tN~t to ~fl hli}~ a~ ~ ~il~nl~~itwlml~l~Kf~Nlb~Gto~tl~lff . · ..... ' ' ' .. ' · . . . · 17. Tt~w l~~en~ ~pl ~ ~ ' · .' : .: · I[ ~1~ ~ ~l~g= ~ R~I~I d ~11~1 .... .~. ' ' ,' ..: · · . . . , . "..'....:.' ....· '" ~" [(~u. ~ ~/~., ~*~ .... . :...' :' ~' ~' ."~,._ ::' "" ' ""' · .......... "-'. · I~. D~y m~ ~ ~ . ,' '. 4 .. . ~: · :.: ~.' . .. .. .- :...--'.- . .....~'- .. .....'..~i: . .:... · ~.~....~:::.: . . . :,' :.. '. . . .'...;: ..; '; : '..~.~[~....: .. . .. ..... '..:...:.;.'.'.-..-. ' . .....;... .. . .; ,-.,,.,. .':...... (I/~ · ... : ~Write ~l~w~is'~e'''''': ..... ' ":'"" .. '"' ...... · ". ' · "' ' ' " · 7~z2 · ."..: · .. . ..... '.'....-:.: :.'.: .~, ~DF ~N~ ' . .. ":.:'.:.'.... .. . .:.... :. T ' ': ' - '*' " ' .": · ~'.~ · · q~ 'T DF · R : L . '" ' ' ' ' '''';': ~'' '"' ~ ~ -- . . ... ~. ..~...... ., .. . . ,..I ..: ; · .. :'..:... ' . '.".' . '. : , . . . . ~exaco~eT~nln9 ~arKe.~ng inc. Site: Bulk Plant ...' 8 8285609 '. nlversa~ ~j,' CA. 9 608 uaKersrle(o; ~. ~"~'~ -' ~. Ty~ ~lV~ .'. . . .../~-.i .'.:...~ j .: - ~~~~[~ ... ' .' '..' .... ' ' · · .'"''.~ · ~-:.,...'2 -'. ~'~~~~ · ~ :. · .~.--., .. .. ~7.' '::." ~'".'.. ?::~'.',..'.'. '."~','~".~.'.'L"-." · ' ' ... ~.':~' ~ .... ' .' '.'~ '~.':'- P. W. [. ~ D-~84 An~ 'P~o-c]oth~ng raqu~ed b;~ TSDF ff I ~ 8 ~o q~ g~ertt~, I ~fll~ ~t I ~ 8 ~m iff pM~ to re. Ge ~ ~ ~ t~ ~ wm~e g~at~ to ~ ~ I hsve do~h~ present ~ futura t~eat to h~ ~ a~ t~ o~m~: ~. il I am i stain fl~tl~ geflarat~, I have made a go~ l~th gonaril~ ~d at.ct tho ~ waate ~gomont ~od t~t ~ av~o tO me a~ thil I ~fl I~ ~m~Ty~d ~ ~tur - ~ - ~ Day YW ~ ' ~ TSDF SENDS -" . ~ ·. ' .. '. - ' .: .' · . . .' ::" "" '.-. "'.j' .-~. ,.'~7 ;".",' ., .'.".' ".." ' h. ' ':: , . . . ¢ ~ , - · . ...'.: ..: ..'. · ~ '.':..~ .,,:..:;-. ~. ~.m...:.,:.~:~,~'.g~-. ~ - ...':.; ...'... . ~ .- ..... , · ...... .......:,;.....: .... ~.,.~., .; ...... ...... . ...~: ~t~ ~ont r~ . .. ,. : · · ...".':.: '... ' · ;.",:- ..... '. ~: '..~ '...,.....~: '.? .': 7. "..' .: . .' .' '.:':' ' .' ' . .. , ... .....,... ...... ... . r'..., ..' . .. ~ T 17 Tr~.~ l~g~R~l~8 . ~ .. '. .......... . .. ',.... ."...~ '..".. · . . ' ". ' ':-' .' ' ~ O t~ T;l~2~l~geme~~o(~tt~o .' .'...'... '.. .; .... ~ .... : . · . ;' .. .. : . · '.' ' : .... .... : A . .-' · ' ' . '. '...:'. '"' .. ..... -"-" '..' ~ :.-:.': ' ...;- _.h.'..:.;.''~'. ..... ~.;....'?'~ ':'.-;':.~¥ '"v '..',.':' :.:..',',..;~ ' .' .- :i..:: ;:..':'...'h:..'.:;~.:~.:"~;' ::' '.. ' C .. ' ' ' ' : :'. ' . ..: -"..'"'-,' . · .... ::' ','..'L:':'.:':.. .:'L? '-": ."'. ~:"' '-~':':..-.~'..'.':~:~:,..-':':".'.'.'""':" "~ ."~';'. '"' ."" ,'-':~.' "h_ ; ": :"'::."'.... I .' . .o ' . . · ...-.. '~... .:':.~ . .' '... '.' '.'.... ' .... . :;.:.'.:,~,-::' ' ? '.. .:.:" : :,. :..':,;:¢ :'..:'. .'.... '..: · · '. -.:.:,.... ' -.'. L' PO ~ox 7;3i;2 Universai Cky CA 91608-7912 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH March 17, 1989 Mr. Bill Scheide Environmental Health Specialist Environmental Health Department of Kern County 2700 "M" Street, suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: CLOSURE REQUEST 801 16THSTREET BAKERSFIELD, CA Dear Mr. Scheide: Enclosed is a report dated March 2, 1989 documenting the soil venting operation and the current soil analysis. Texaco proposes that 1) the high TPH concentrations near surface be excavated and hauled to a disposal facility 2) the site then be closed based on the LUFT Guideline Leaching Potential Analysis in the report. Upon your concurrence with this proposal the excavation phase will be initiated and confirmation samples of the excavation limits will be analyzed and reported. Very truly yours, ROGER JOHNSON Environmental Protection Coordinator RGJ:fr 1701/1-4N Enclosure ~ [JUN 1 g 1987 Reco~endations on REMEDIAL ACTION L at .._ EX-TEXACO BULK PL~T 801 16th Street ,. _ Bakersfield, California' for TEXACO REFINING AND MARKETING, INC. 10 Universal City Plaza Universal City, California 91608 Project Number 10084.00 June 5, 1987 Michael F. Burke, Geologist · CON~nU~ION ~ · MAINTENANCE ~ ~ · ENVIRONMENTAL 2475 LEMON AVE., LONG BEACH, CA 90806 .,~ · Texaco USA 13 Universal C[z').' PJ,]z~. PO Bcx,3755 Les Angeies CA 90051-1756 June 15, 1987 . Mr. Bill Scheide · County of Kern. Department of Public Health Division of Environmental Health 1700 Flower Street Bakersfield, California 93305 ~'.i .'.~ Dear Mr. Scheide: Reference is made to previous correspondence concerning soil contamination at the site of the old Texaco Bulk Plant located at 801 16th Street, Bakersfield, California. Attached for your review and approval is a remedial action plan outline for the site in question as provided to Texaco by our consultant, W.W. Irwin, Inc., Long Beach, California. We are in complete agreement with the W.W. Irwin, Inc. recommendation to utilize a soil venting procedure to remediate the hydrocarbon in the soils in the area of the fuel truck unloading area. We stand ready to proceed immediately and will begin remediation upon receiving Kern County approval and APCD permits. We would appreciate your assistance in receiving all the neces%ary approvals and permits to allow this work to go forwa~ as soon as possible. Call' m9[\ at (818)505-2468 if you have any questions. Yo'~ very truly, Protection Coordination RJW:sjt Attachment . lt06030 Recommendations on REMEDIAL ACTION at ? EX-TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 16th Street Bakersfield, California for TEXACO REFINING AND MARKETING, INC. 10 Universal City Plaza Universal City, California 91608 Project Number 10084.00. June 5, 1987 'Michael F. Burke, Geologist jpCItI:MICAL RESEARCH CA8QRATQII]£$. iNC. 1631 Seaooard Circle · $1amofl: C~ 90680 [714! 898-637O · (213! 598-0458 LABORATORY REPORT W. W. Irwin ANALYSIS NO.: 710705-001/010 2475 Lemon Ave. ANALYSES: EPA Method 8015, 8020 Long Beach, CA 90806 DATE SAMPLED: 04/17/87 ATTN: Mr. M.F. Burke DATE SAMPLE EEC'D: 04/18/87 DATE ANALYZED: 04/20/87 SAMPLE TYPE: SOIL ~ PROJECT: Texaco Bulk Plant Bakersfield, P/J~10084.00 BTX (EPA METHOD 8020, mg/kg) T P H ETHYL TOTAL (EPA METHOD SAMPLE NUMBER BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES 8015, m~/kg) VW-1 @ 5' 0..1 4.0 2.0 36. 110 VW-1 @ 10' 0.6 22. 12. 160.* 110 VW-1 ~ 20' ND(0.1) 4.0 6.0 25. 80 , VW-1 @ 25' ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.i) ND(i'.) VW-1 @ 30' ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(1.) VW-1 @ 35' ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(1.) VW-1 @ 40' ND(0.1) ND(0.'i) ND(O.1) ND(0.1) ND(1.) VW-1 @ 45' ND(0.1) 0.5 0.1 0.8 3. VW-1 @ 50' ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(1.) VW-1 @ 55' ND(0.1) ND(D.1) ND(0.1) ND(0.1) ND(1.) *POSSIBLE INTERFERENCE FROM SAMPLE MATRIX ON XYLENE CONCENTRATION CHEMICAL RESEARCH LABORATORIES, INC. · ORANGE COUNTY CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD 11631 SEABOARD CIRCLE, STANTON, CA 90680 · VENTURA TEL. NOS.: (714) 898-6370 (213) 598-0458 · SANTA MARIA Date · BAKERSFIELD · L.A. COUNTY ADDRESS .-'~-~"' ,,~~ .~ PROJECTM'ANAGER SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE TYPE NUMBER DESCRIPTION DATE TIME WATER AIR SOLID NO. OF TESTS Cemp. ~ CNTNRS REQUIRED Relin~ke~ Received by: (Signature) Date ~l'lme Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by Mobile Laboratory for field analysis: Dat~ "rime (Signature) ~)ispetched by: (Signature) Date/Time Received for Laboratory by: Data 3'ime Method of Shipment: Special Instructions: CHEMICAL RESEARCH LABORATORIES, INC. , ORANGE COUNTY CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD ,,63, s~.OA.D C,.OLE. STA.TO., 0A.0660 . W.~..~ ~,//~1~ TEL NOS.: (714) 898-6370 (213) 598-0458 · SANTA MARIA Date-~~ Page ~ of~, · BAKERSFIELD ~ L.A. COUN~ CLIENT ~. ~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ADDRESS ~~ ~~ ~ PROJECT M~NAGER ~/ ,~.. ~ ~/~ ~d ~ PHONE NUMBER PROJECfNAME ~~ ~ ~~ SAMPLERS: ~MPLE LOCATION SAMPLE WPE NUMBER DE~HIPTION DATE TIME .WATER AIR 80LID NO. OF TESTS C~mp. Grab. CNTNR8 REQUIRED ~_/ ~ - ~ x x Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by: (Sigr~ ~ure) Date/Time I Relinquished by: (Signature) Received by Mobile Laboratory for field analysis: Date(rime (Signature) / Dispatched by: (Signature) Date/Time Received for Laboratory by: Date/Time Met~/d o! Shipment: Special Instructions: TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 16th Street, Bakersfield, CA v~,-1 0' Asphaltic Concrete SAND, very fine - medium, medium gray, loose, fuel on grains, STRONG ODOR 5 .... Drive sample; recovered 12-1/2": SAND, very fine - very coarse, trace pebbles, loose, fuel on grains, STRONG ODOR 10'- ~ - Dr"ve sample; recovered 18": SAND, as above 15'- - - Drive sample; No sample recovered 20'- - - Drive sample; recovered 18": SAND, as above,' No fuel on grains 25 .... Drive sample; recovered 18": SAND, as above, slightly damp, STRONG ODOR 30 .... Drive sample; recovered 9": SAND, very fine - coarse, light brown, loose, dry, FAINT ODOR 35'- - - Drive sample; recovered 1'4": SAND, very fine - very coarse, light gray, loose, dry, FAINT ODOR 40 .... Drive sample; recovered 14": SAND, very fine - fine, micaceous, greenish gray, slightly compact, slightly damp, FAINT ODOR 45'- - - Drive sample; recovered 12": SAND, very fine - ~ine, gray, compact, damp, FAINT ODOR 50'- - - Drive sample; recovered 14": 10" CLAYEY SAND, very ~ine - medium, medium brown compact, slightly damp, VERY FAINT ODOR 4" SAND, very fine - very coarse, light brown, loose, gravely, dry, NO ODOR 55'- - - Drive sample; recovered 9": SAND WITH CLAY INCLUSIONS, very fine - very coarse, light brown, loose, dry, NO ODOR CLAY INCLUSIONS, medium gray, firm, crumbly, slightly damp, NO ODOR 60'- - - Total Depth Pulled augers; hole collapsed to 37'; set 40' of 4" PVC, schedule 40, flush threaded, .020" slot=ed well casing; backfilled to 3' with pea gravel; sealed ko grade wi~h 100 lbs. of bentonite pellets. 1700Flower Street KI-HN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HEALTH OFFICER Bakersfield, California 93305 Leon M Hebertson, M.D. Telephone (805) 861-3636 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vernon S. Reichard \ April 30, 1987 R. J. Wark Environmental Protection Coordinator Texaco U.S.A. P. 0. Bo~ 3756 Los Angeles, California 90051-1756 RE: Texaco U.S.A. Bulk Plant - Bakersfield, California. Dear Mr. Hark: This department has reviewed the laboratory analyses for the diesel underground storage tank at 801 - 16th Street. Permit #A415-16. The samples indicated no significant soil contamination at the site. Based upon this information, the department considers this preliminary site assessment complete and no further assessment is required. Sincerely, ? z/' - , Bill Scheide Environmental Health Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program BS:sw cc: Reliable Equipment Company DISTRICT OFFICES Delano . Lamont Lake Isabella Moiave Ridgecrest Shafter . Taft Texaco USA 10 Universal City Plaza Universal City CA 91608.1097 PO Box 3756 Los Angeles CA 90051-1756 Division of Environmenta~ Kern County Department 1700 Flower Street Bakersfield, CA 93305 Dear Mr. Sheide: Reference is made to our recent telephone conversation concerning environmental site investigations made at 'the site of the old Texaco USA Bulk Plant located at 801 16th Street, Bakersfield, California. As I recall, a representative of our contractor and consultant, W. W. Irwin, Inc., recently delivered to you a copy of the Harding Lawson Associates' site investigation of the Bakersfield Bulk Plant property. Attached for your review is a copy of a W. W. Irwin, Inc. report dealing with the removal of a 5,000-gallon underground tank at this site. Based on their findings, there was no evidence that the tank was a "leaker", and analysis of soil samples detected only extremely minor evidence of any soil contamination. Thus., the only soil contamination of any concern as per the Harding Lawson Associates' report is in the area of the fuel unloading pipe manifold, near boring B-3. We have authorized W. W. Irwin, Inc. to install a vertical venting well in the con- taminated area to a depth where contamination is minimal and to carry out mechanical soil venting to reduce the contamination to an acceptable level. We will keep you. advised as to our progress. Call me at (818) ~05-2468 if you have any questions. :~ very truly, ~.. WARK E~vironmental Protection Coordinator ~JW:nb R29/1131 Attachment CALIF. CONTRACTOR'S (213) 426-3338 LICENSE #252163 (213) 636-1368 ' (714) 821-5150 W. W. IRWIN, INC. SERVICE STATION MAINTENANCE & EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION & ENVIRONMENTAL 2475 LEMON AVENUE LONG BEACH. CALIFORNIA 90806 March 23, 1987 Mr. R. 'J. Wark Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc. 10 Universal City Plaza - 4th Floor Universal City, CA 91608 Sub: Texaco Bulk Plant 801 16th Street Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Wark: Enclosed are copies of a report on the removal of an underground storage tank from the subject site. A copy of this report should be sent to Bill Sheide, Division of Environmental Health, Kern County Department of Public Health, 1700 Flower Street, Bakersfield, CA 93305 Very truly yours, W. W. IRWIN, INC. Michael F. Burke, Geologist eric. /jam TANK REMOVAL TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 16TH Street Bakersfield, California for TEXACO REFINING AND MARKETING, INC. 10 Universal City Plaza Universal City, California · Project Number 10084.00 March 23, 1987 Michael F. Burke, Geologist TEXAdO BULK PLANT - 801 16TH STREET, BAKERSFIELD, CA INTRODUCTION A review by Texaco of Harding Lawson Associates subsurface investigation prompted the remoVal of an unused, 5000-gallon, underground, diesel tank at the subject site. Texaco'contracted the Irwin Company to remove the tank and take soil samples in accordance with Kern County requirements. The tank was removed and samples collected On March 9, 1987. TANK REMOVAL The tank was cleaned before removal by Crosby and Overton. After removal the tank was sh~pped to the Crosby and Overton yard for Conversion to scrap. No holes were observed in the tank. A copy of a completed Kern County tank disposition tracking record, required by the County, is included with this report. SOIL SAMPLES Soil samples were collected at depths of two feet and six feet, one-third of the length in from each end of the tank. The four samDles were collected undisturbed, sealed with a Teflon-lined cap, iced, and delivered to Geotest in Long Beach for analysis. No samples were collected beneath the tank related two inch piping which surfaced at the southeast corner of the tank and ran above ground through the office building.. The line was again buried from the office building to the load rack in a trench with four product transfer lines. The tw° inch . piping was not removed for fear of damaging the transfer lines. The situation was explained to Tom Mele of Kern County Environmental Health and he' agreed'that samples should be taken when all the lines are removed from the trench at a future date. CONTAMINATION No contamination was apparent in the backfill or the loose, sandy, native soil except for around the fill pipe. The analytical results of the samples yielded total petroleum hydrocarbons by EPA method 418.1 of 19.1 mg/Kg in sample W2, two feet below the west end of the tank, and 24.2 mg/Kg in W6, six feet below the east end. Total petroleum hydrocarbons were not detected in the other two samples at 1 .mg/Kg. No benzene was detected in any sample by- EPA method 8020 at a detection limit of 0.1 mg/Kg. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The lack of significant contamination in the soil samples -2- eliminates the 5000 gallon tank as the source of tke - contamination in nearby B-3 (Harding Lawson Associates' November 3, 1986 report). This confirms the previous conclusion that spillage from the fuel unloading area has migrated downward through 'the highly permeable native soil to at least· forty-six feet. Apparently, there has been little migration. latera1 The permeability of the soil makes the site amenable to active soil venting. Remediation can be accomplished with one vertical venting well installed as·closely as possible to the unloading area. The ·induced·radius of influence .- should significantly reduce the contamination in the vicinity of B-3 and any negligible tank pit contamination. The well should be installed below the lowest depth of field detectable contamination. Respectfully suJ~mitted, W. W. IRWIN, INC. Michael F. Burke, Geologist " 16t,q STREET' .'~"'~ i ' 20,O00-gallon Ga g ~ / ~e~ tr. ok · '~ ,' ¢'k )./ I'"'~'""'"" · .." underground r=¢~ ~, ~ / /, fuel tsnk "~ ~ Office I Stacked ~==~ ~Rsilroad s~ur ~'Former pump locations EXPLANATION ~ ~ilroad siding ~-,~ .. , Boring )oc~tJon. Un~ergroun, ,i~ing -N- , , J So~le 0 ~0 20 ~0 40 50 feet ~eferen6e:Tex~6o, Ino., 19~, Layou~ &nd to¢ogr~hy, sales s:ation site, ~akersfield. California. SJT~ PLAN Texaco Bulk '801 16th Street Bekersfield, California · ...:::~_;:~,..,.,..~.?.f.... 'woaFm,,~. s~,,~ KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT Bakersfield. California 93305 l-eon M Hebeet~m% M.~. TeleOt~one (805) 861-3636 . - ENVIRONMENTAl. HEALTH DIVISION "-..' · · ~ DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH T~ls lorn ts to be returned to the Kern County Health Department within 14 da~s of acceptance of tank(s) by dlsposal or recycling facility. The holder of the permit with number noted above is responsible for ti that this form is completed and returned. "'. 0"-'-,',.. ~tlo " ~ - ~g ~ filled 9ut ~ contractor "decontamtnatln~ tank(~: · '~'.-::':,"77:~_ Au~ho~i'zed representative of contractor certifies by si~n~ belo~ tha~ t~) have been decont~inated In accord~ce ~ith Kern Co~t~ Health Depar~t re~ire~eu~. ~ . [~;-';'_ ..................................... e lion_ To be filled out and si~ned ~ a~ authorized reuresentattve of the ~reatment, s~ora~e, o~.d/svosal facZll~F acceottnf ~a~{s): - ~ (~ r. orized Representatfive) ' ' .,_.... ......... C-' ........ .~ .............. ~ ...... · * * ~ILI~G INS~UCTIONS: Fold in half and staple. Postage ~d '~lin~ labei have already been alfixed to out~lde for ~our convenience. ~' ;~' ". '- (~o~ ~-l~o) ., , .. GEOTEST An'.Enwrcnmen,'a~ Monitoring and Testing Ser'~ice FIELD LABORATORY RESULTS REPORT PREPARED FOR W.W. IRWIN TEXACO BULK PLANT 801 - 16TH STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ANALYSIS OF BTXE BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY EPA METHOD 8020 SOII.~ g2q'ALYS I $ DATE RECEIVED : March 10, 1987 DATE OF ANALYSIS: March 10, 1987 PROJECT NUMBER : 86555-03 CLIENT ID : 10084.00 SAMPLE ID ~ BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYLBENZENE TOTAL XYLEMS (mg/kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg) 16Q-E6 ND, 0.1 ND, 0.1 ND, 0. ! ND, 0.1 16Q-E2 ND, 0.1 ND, 0.1 ND, 0..1 ND, 0.1 16Q-W6 ND, 0.1 ND, 0. ! ND, 0.1 ND, 0.1 16Q-W2 ND, 0.1 ND, 0.1 ND, 0.1 ND, 0.1 ND - Not detected below indicated limit of detection. NOTE: Samples were received in a chilled state, intact and with Chain-of-Custody attached. L GEOTEST is a division of GEOSERVICES, a California corporation Post Office Box 90911 Long Beach, California 90809-0911 (213) 498-9515 (800) 624-5744 . ,re .esy d GEOTEST .An Env,ronmen~a~ .'~onitortnq and Tesung Service FIELD LABORATORY RESULTS REPORT PREPARED FOR W.W. IRWIN TEXACO BULK PLANT .. 801 - 16TH STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA I ANALYSIS OF HYDROCARBON CONTENT BY INFRARED SPECTROMETRY EPA METHOD 418.! t SOILS ANALYSIS DATE RECEIVED : March 10, 1987 ]. DATE OF A/~ALYSIS : March 10, 1987 {: PROJECT NUMBER : 86555-03 -~ CLIENT ID : 10084.00 ~' SAMPLE ID ~ CONCENTRATION [ (mg/kg) L 16Q-E6 24.2 16Q-E2 ND,<I.0 16Q-W6 ND,<i.0 16Q-W2 19.1 [. *NOTE: Samples were received in a chilled state, intact and with Chain-of-Custody attached. GEOTEST is a division of GEOSERVICES, a California corporation Post Office Box 90911 Long Beach, California 90809-0911 (213) 498-9515 (800) 624-5744 GEOTEST Telephone: 1213}437-8836, {209}252-9252 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD _. DATE PAGE CLIENT ~ I"~ .~1~, ~"~ PARAMETERS OTHER ADDRESS -'T'~_.~/~',~',~ ~.~V~.~ PROJECT NO. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z LABORATORY: ~~T ~ ~ ' ~ <e ~MPLE NO. DATE TIME LOCATION ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ Z Sigflaturl Signature Signature Signature /~)~ ,~. ,<'. ~/~ T,ME T,ME T,ME T,M----~ ~1~.1 Printed Name ~ ~ Printed Name Printed Name Printed Name SPECIAL SHIPMENT/HANDLING ~-~ ~/ ~ OR STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Com~ny ~ Com~ny Company Company RELINQUISHED BY DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RELINQUISHED BY DATE RECEIVED BY(Le~r~toryl DATE ~ ~ Signature Signature Sign a lure ~~ ~/~ ~~ ~ Printed Name Printed Name Printed Name Printed Name 'J " Harding ~w$on As~cJatoa A .Report Prepared for TexaCo Refining and Marketing, Inc. 10 Universal City Plaza, Fourth Floor Universal City, California 91608 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION TEXACO BULK PLANT BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Brian A. Beck Registered GeolOgist - 4180 Gerald M. Diaz Civil Engineer - 13932 Harding Lawson Associates 15621 Redhill Avenue, Suite 100 Tustin, California 92680 714/259-7992 November 3, i986 ONLy: KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT PTO ; PTA DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPLICATION DATE 1700 FLOWER STREET, BAKERSFIRLD', CA 93305 # OF TANKS TO BE ABANDONED (805) 861-3636 LENGTH OF PIPING TO ABANDON APPLICATION FOR .PERMIT FOR PERMANENT CLOSURE/ABANDONMENT OF UNDERGROUND HAZ,~I~DOUS SUBST~TCES STORAGE FAC ILI' TY THIS APPLICATION IS FOR ~REMOVAL, OR ~ AB~DO~8~ IN P~Cg (FILL O~ ON~ APPLICATION PER PACILI~) N~EST CROSS STREET PACILI~ N~E ~DRE$S PROPOS~ PROJECT STATING D~ ~C~IFO~IA LICENS8 t WO~ER'S COMPENSATION · ~INSURER ,0RKER' S C0~PENSATION · INS~ER PHONB ~BO~TORY T~T WILL ~ALYZB S~PLES ~DRESS CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF ~TBR[ALS STORED T~K { VOL~B · CHBMIC~ STORED (NON-C~ERCIAL . To TO WATER TO FACILITY PROVIDED BY DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER ~ ~o NEAREST WATER WELL - GIVE DISTANCE AND DESCRIBE TYPE IF WITHIN 500 FEET {SOIL TYPE AT FACILITY ~ ~0 BASIS FOR SOIL TYPE AND GROUNDWATER DEPTH DETERMINATION · TOTAL N~ER OF S~PLES TO BE ~ALYZED S~LES WILL BE ~ALYZED ~OR: 'DESCRIB~ HOW R~SIDUE IN T~K(S) ~D PIPINO IS TO ~ R~MOV~ AND DISPOSED OF (INCLUDE T~PORTATION ~D_DISPOSAL COMPANy): DESCRIBE BOTH T,, DISPOSAL NETHOD AND DISPO,~ LOCATION ,OR.. PIPING = ~ PLEASE PROVIDE INFO~TION RSOUESTED O~ REVSRSE SIDE .] INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface investi- gation at the site of a bulk fuel distribution plant at 80.1 16th Street in Bakersfield, California (Plate 1). The site is pre- sently' Oeing leased to Star Petroleum Company by Texaco. The main features of the site are shown on Plate 2, and include four 20,000-gallon, above-ground tanks and one 5,000- gallon, underground, fuel-storage tank. The underground tank is not in use. Our work was performed to investigate the potential presence of hydrocarbons in the soil and ground water beneath the site. The scope of our work included the following tasks: 1. Review literature to determine local ground-water conditions. 2. Drill and sample nine exploratory borings and monitor the samples for volatile organic vapors with a photoioniza- tion detector (PID). The borings were to be drilled as close as possible to the locations selected by Texaco and as directed by Texaco in the field. 3. Test composited samples for fuel hydrocarbons, benzene, toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene (BTXE) and organic lead, as directed by Texaco. 4. Prepare this report. Our work was performed in accordance with Texaco Miscellaneous Bid and Work Cont'ract No. 27878, dated August 29, 1986. 1 Harding Lawson Associates FIELD INVESTIGATION On September 8 and 9, 1986, we drilled nine exploraeory borings at the locations shown on Plate 2. The borings were drilled using truck-mounted drilling equipment with 8-inch- ! outside-diameter hollow-stem augers. Boring ranged from 16.5 to 46.0 feet deep. A proposed boring location plan, showing 11 borings, was furnished by Texaco. ~owever the actual number and locations of the borings had to be modified because of obstructions at the site. Two borings were ~epositioned: Boring B-5 was moved from the south to the north side of the underground tank because of ! numerous buried pipelines, as shown on Plate 2; Boring B-9 was moved from the'southwest property corner because numerous oil · .~?~ drums restricted access to that area. Two planned borings were deleted: a proposed boring at the south end of the above-ground tanks next to the west property line was not drilled because stacked oil drums and above-ground piping precluded access for fthe drill rig;'a proposed boring at the west end of the off~ce building was not drilled because of overhead powerlines. In each boring, soil samples were taken at approximately· 5-foot depth intervals using a Sprague and Henwood (S&H) sampler with brass liner tubes (2.4-inch inside diameter by 6 inches Harding Lawson AIsoclat., long). Our field geologist classified the soils in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System, described on Plate 3. Plates 4 through 12 present the boring logs. The soil samples we. re checked for odors, and~were monitored with an photoioniza- on detector (PIP), equipped with a 10 2 electron-volt lamp cali- brated against a benzene standard. Odors noted and PIP readings are presented on the boring logs. The ends of the sample tubes were lined with aluminum foil, capped, sealed with electrical tape and shipped to the laboratory under chain-of-custody protocol. Samples were placed on ice in coolers during collec- tion and transit t° the analytical laboratory. The S&H sampler was washed with TSP and rinsed with clean water between samples. The augers were decontaminated between borings using a steam cleaner. The drill cuttings were placed in DOT H-17 drums and left on the site for subsequent disposal by Texaco. Except for one underground tank, all of the facilities are above ground. Accordingly, most of the borings were planned to be drilled to depths of 15 feet to check for contamination in the upper soils and to be drilled deeper if evidence of coatamination was.noted in the field. Boring 3 had indications of contamination throughout its depth. The boring was terminated ii ' Harding Lawson at 46 feat due to failure of the drilling equipment. Ail the borings were back-filled with a cement-bentonite grout on September 10, 1986. LABORATORY TESTING As directed by Texaco, samples from 6, 11, and 16 feet, in borings in which PID readings were zero (all except Boring B-3), were composited for laboratory testing. .Samples tested from Boring 3 were those at 26 feet (the highest PID reading) and 45.5 feet (the bottom of the boring). Samples were analyzed by Analytical Technologies, Inc., in San Diego, California for benzene, toluene, xylene and ethyl- benzene (EPA Method 8020), volatile fuel hydrocarbons (EPA Method 8015), and organic lead (EPA Method 7421). Test results are presented in Table 1 and the laboratory test reports are presented in the Appendix. SITE CO~DITIONS The site is approximately 402 feet above Mean Sea Level. Development in the vicinity includes the Bakersfield Civic -Auditorium (to the west), hotels and warehouses. Harding Lawson As~clates The ground surface is nearly level and mostly.paved with asphal- tic concrete. The drum storage area in the southwest corner of the property and the area around the fuel truck unloading pump and manifold are unpaved. The site is .in an area of Quaternary-age alluvial fan sedi- ments (California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield sheet, 1964). Ground water is reported to occur at a depth of about 175 feet*. The soils encountered in the borings were typically sands and silty sands. Stiff silts, with silty clay layers, were encoun- tered from 40 feet to the maximum depth explo'red (46 feet) in Boring B-3. No ground water was encountered in any borings, but the soils were generally observed to be moist. Volatile organic vapors, measured by the PID, and hydrocarbon odors were noted only in Boring 3. The highest PID values (150 to 200) were measured, from 26 to 42 feet deep. No hydrocarbon odors were noted and PID readings were zero in all other borings. *Kern County Water Agency, February 1986, 1985 report on water conditions, Plate 5. ':~':¥' HardlngLawsonAs~ociltes ~:~'. ': .. Total fuel hydrocarbons were above detection limits (5 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg]) in only one soil sample tested (Boring B-3 at 26 feet deep; 3,000 mg/kg). Benzene was detected (above 0.025 mg/kg) in only one sample (Boring B-3 at 45.5 feet; 0.031 mg/kg). Toluene was detected (above 0.025 mg/kg) in composite samples from Borings B-2, B-6, B-7 and B-9 and in Boring B-3 at 26 and 45.5 feet); concentrations ranged from 0.03 to 140 mg/kg. Xylene and ethylbenzene were detected in all samples tested. However, except for the sample from Boring B-3 · at 26 feet, the xylene and ethylbenzene concentrations were in a narrow range (0.19 to 0.40 mg/kg) that may be indicative of general conditions across the site. In the sample from Boring B-3 of 26 feet, elevated levels of xylene (19.2 mg/kg) and ethylbenzene (1.3 mg/kg) were detected. Harding Law. on Aeso4=iates Table 1. Laboratory Soil Test Results S~nple Source Hydrocarbons EPA 8020 EPA 7421 Boring Depth EPA 8015 Ethyl- Organic No. (feet) Total Fuel Benzene Toluene Xylene benzene Lead B-l* 6,11,15.5 (5) (0.025) (0.025) 0.32 0.24 (0.10) B-2* 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) 0.15 0.27 0.26 ' (0.10) B-3 26 3000 (0.025) 1.40 19.2 1.3 0.12 B-3 45.5 (5) 0.031 0.21 0.40 0.20 (0.10) B-4* 6,11,16 (5) .(0.025) (0.025) 0.20 0.23 (0.I0) B-5* 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) (0.025-) -- - 0.19 0.23 (0.10) B-6* 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) 0.05 0.22 0.24 (0.10) B-7* 6,i1,16 (5) (0.025) 0.12 0.24 0.25 (0.10) B-8* 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) (0.025) 0.19 0.24 (0.10) B-9* 6,11,16 (5) (0.025) 0.03 0.21 0.24 (O.10) Notes: Measured concentrations are shown in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) *denotes composite sample .( ) denotes not detected 'above enclosed detection limits *~ ~-:'" Harding Law~on A~'soclmte~ DISTRIBUTION 3 copies: Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc. 10 Universal City Plaza., Fourth Floor Universal City, California 91608 Attention: Mr. W. W. Wagner QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW: ~ivil Engineer- 22026 ::..~_::. MAJOR 'DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES :.~."i'-' GW ei':.!.'.~ WELL-GRADED GRAVELS. GRAVEL-SAND · > GRAVELS LITTLE OR NO FINES -'..-_ GP ... .... POORLY GRAOED GRAVELS. GRAVEL.SAND C~3~Oz COARSE FRACTION GM SILTY GRAVELS. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL- IS LARGER THAN SAND-SILT MIXTURES Z NO. 4 SIEVE SIZE GRAVELS WITH OVER ~ .~ 12% FINES LEI ,- GC ~//~/~ CLAYEY GRAVELS. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL - ..... ' Z ~ SAND-CLAY MIXTURES (.',',0 SW ~e °°° WELL-GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS I -- CLEAN SANDS WITH ° · "~;' LU ~ LITTLE OR NO FINES ':~ U3~ ~ SANDS SP e' POORLY GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANOS ,c~ ~ MORE THAN HALF Of,.) ~ COARSE FRACTION SM ~J~ SILTY SANDS. POORLY GRADED IS SMALLER THAN SANO-SILT MIXTURES ~ NO. 4 SIEVE SIZE SANDS WITH OVER '~ 12% FINES SC e/ CLAYEY SANDS. POORLY GRADED ./ SAND-CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS ANO VERY FINE SANDS. ML ROCK FLOUR. SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS. OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY C/3rr ; ~//. INORGAN,C CLAYS OF LOW TO MED,UM _J ~ SILTS AND CLAYS CL PLASTICITY. GRAVELLY'CLAYS. SANOY CLAYS. L, U,O L,M,T S0°.'. OR LESS ,/// S,LTY CLAYS. CLAYS c'~ m m ORGANIC CLAYS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS LLI ~. ~ OL OF LOW PLASTICITY Z~~ .=! ~ -r O INORGANIC SILTS. MICACEOUS OR ,.,, rt': <- z MH DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY LU ~ SILTS AND CLAYS CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY. FAT CLAYS ;~.i~~' LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50% OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HiGH PLASTICITY. ORGANIC SILTS /,~'..'.: HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt ~ PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS · .~ UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM i~-.,. ''Undisturbed'Sample HC odor Hydrocarbon Odor ~;.~ [] Bulk or Classification Sample No No Odor PIE) - Photoionization Detector Reading Lo - Slight Odor (10.2 electron-volt lamp, catibrated Md Moderate Odor against a benzene standard) Sg - S~rong Odor KEY TO BORING LOG Hardlag Lamon Associates SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART PLATE Eng,neers. Geologisls , & KEY TO BORING LOG & Geophysicists ' Texaco Bulk Plant ~'~ 801 16th Street Bakersfield, California JO8 NUMBER . APP~J~VEO'~ DATE REVI.~[O [;~J[ 2251,016.11 '~ 10-31-86 ...... - .- o ~ ~ Equipment Hol low-s~em Auoer o - ~ " 9-8-86 'r e. r~ ~ Elevation 402' Date ..::: 0 L.].~.[., 2!' ASPHALTIC CONCRETE :=' :~:~[: DARK BRO~IN SILTY SAND (SM) :':'""....:.:. LIGHT BROWN SAND (SP) '" ':':':': loose, dry -No0 Composite Sample, lO- Chemical Test -- No 0 : 'IJ~:"iiiiiiiii moist 15- ~ BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) DARK BROWN SAND (SP) No' 0 JJl?:':':" loose, moist Boring terminated at 16.5 fee~. Ground water not encountered while drilling. 20- Bori.ng backfilled with cement- bentonite grout on 9-10-86. 25- 35- NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL), interpreted from USGS 7.5-minute Gosford .~.: ouadrangle. Elevation shown is .-+2 feet. : Harding lawson Associates LOG OF BORING E~- 1 .L^r~ '~ -- ~- Engineers. Geologists Texaco Bulk Plant ' , & Geophysicists ~801 16th Street Bakersfield, California 2251,016.11 ~ /sb 10-31-86 ~ ~ 8" Hollow-stem Auger 0 = ~ Equipment -- ~ ~ " 402' ~ ~ ~ m. Elevation Date 9-8-86 ...,.,. 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE ;~':' ....."'"" BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) SAND (SP) LIGHT BROWN .... loose, moist 5- :.' '.:. ":"' BROWN AND RED SILT (ML) --No 0 ~ medium stiff, moist .... DARK BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) · .'.'i' loose, moist ~ BROWN SAND (SP) Composite Sample 10- ........ loose moist Chemical Test-- No 0 !:!:i:!: .:.:.:.: -i-S::: No' 0 ~.::i:i:: with gravel .:.:.:.: 20- No 0 Boring terminated at 21.5 feet. Ground water not encountered while drilling. .. 25- Boring backfilled with cement- bentonite grout on 9-10-86. 30- 35- NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL) ,: interpreted from USGS 7.5-minute Gosford quad rang! e.. Elevation shown :..~- is -+2 feet. 40- Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF BORING B-2 PLATE '~ J ~:'i Engineers, Geologists Texaco. Bulk Plant & Geophysicists 801 16th Street J~ Bakersfield, California JOB NUMBER A P~,~O,¥EO OATE REvISFC ~)~ E itl 2251,016.11 /r~tJ//sb ' 10-31-86 "~' ~ ~ Equipment 8" Hollow-stem Auoer 'o~ --~ :: 0 ~ E~ 0 -- · o ~__ ~' ~ Elevati0n~ 402' Date 9-~-86 o ~ ~ ~' -r- ~. ~ o~ -r ~. ~ o~ (Continuation of Log) 0 ~,.~, 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 40 III ]0" GRAVEL BASE Sg 150 Ill DARK GRAY SAND (SP) .LLL._~r-GRAY SAND (SP) 'loose, wet, medium-grained Lo 20 '~--~ medium dense, moist ,:.:.:.: ~ L BROWN AND GRAY SANDY SILT (HL) 5-1 £':':':' No 0 ~ stiff, moist Sg 80 Chemical Test Sg SO ~I stiff, moist - ~)(LDARK GRAY SILTY SAND '. IH medium dense, moist 'IILRED AND BROWN SILTY CLAY (GL) II stiff, moist IL'DARK GRAY SILTY SAND (SM) 50-- [ medium dense, moist 10' (':° Ground water not encountered .... Boring backfilled with cement- 15-~ (':'-. ben:oni~e grout'on ~-)O-86. :.:.-.:. 65 - Chemical Test Sg 200 30 -j [':'- :' 70 - Sg ]80 ;::-'::: dense, with gFavel ::.i:~:i 35 -j c-:-. :. 75 - 40-- ~ BROWN AND GRAY SILT (ML) very stiff, moist 80-- NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea .~ Hifdlflll'-wIon&IIO~lItiI LOG OF BORING Level (MSL), interpreted ~rom Enqineers. Geoioqmsls TexacoBulk Plant· USGS 7.5-minuce Gosford &GeoonvSlC=Sis on~ -~Fh i -' 0 ~- ~ Equipment -- e ~ 402' ' ' .. ; ~ ~ ~ Elevation Date, .9-9-86 medium stiff, moist --~ ~ BROWN SAND C::::::: loose, moist, fine- to ~ C.'C: med ium-gral ned Composite Sample, lO- Chemical Test-- No 0 :...:.;. -.:.:.- 15- ''" ~o . 0 ~::::::C coarse-gte ~ned Boring terminated at 16.5 feet. Ground water not encountered while drilling. Boring backfilled with cement- 20- bentonite grout on 9-I0-86. 25- 30- 35- NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL), ,interpreted from USGS 7.5-minute Gosford quadrangle. Elevation shown is +-2 feet. 40- '~" ~ HmrdingLaw$onAssocimtel LOG OF BORING B-4 PLATE · "~ Engineers. Geologists Texaco Bulk Plant !.:{i.:!~~ _ &Geopnys,c,sts 801 16th Street 7 '~ ~%--. Bakersfield, California ~ DRAWN JOB NUMBER j,~PROVE. O DAI'E REVISED DAIF, 'O ~- ~ 8" .. O ~- ~ Equipment Hol low-stem Auger ~;..t ~, O r~ ~. E . 'T- ~ ~ ~ Elevation 402' Date 9-9-86 '-.':'. 0 .:o.:~-~ 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE .~ ;'CAi. :::::::: .I0" GRAVEL BASE ..'-'!:. :iiii!:i BROWN SAN0 ~......: loose, moist coarse-grained · ,~..... ;.:.;.;. 5- ":': .:-:-:-: i:i:i:i: Chemical Test - No O ~1~::::::: gray _% ° ':::.:: 1 5- :::::i::.. . ~.~:::::: med i um den se No 0 Boring terminated at 16.5 feet. Ground water not encountered while drilling. 20- Boring backfilled with cement- bentonite grout on 9-10-86. 25- 35- NOT___~.E: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL), interpreted from USGS 7.5-minute Gosford quadrangie. Elevation shown is -+2 feet. 40- Ha~dlng Lawson AIIOclItll LOG OF BORING B-5 i JJJ~;~ Engineers. Geologists Texaco Bulk Plant & Geooi~ys[cists 801 16th Street 8 Bakersfield, California ~o~u~. ,,..~,~ov~o o,,,r~ 2251,016.11 /{~.//S' ' b 10-31-86' ".,",~'"". .... 0 ~: ~. Equipment Hollow-stem Auger ~.~::.:,. -.r E. m ~ Elevation 402 Date 9-9-86 0 · --.~:i::;T ,~:(-J.~ . 2" ASPHA'LTIC CONCRETE ':':';': 10" GRAVEL BASE :.:.:.:. ~::~..-_.: ~.¢,~;~,.. .;.~.~.: BROWN SAND (SP) ~'f- -- '"""' "loose, moist ~, ....., .'-:-:':- -.,: o 0 I::::::: '.:.:.:. Compos ite Samp 1 e, 10-.-.-.-.-:::::::: Chemical Test--No 0 IJJ:i:i'.i:i red-brown, with cobbles i".i:i:i:' 15- :':':':' .:.:.:.: NO' 0 j~:.:.,..~ med i um dense Boring terminated at 16.5 feet. Ground water not encountered while drilling. 20- Boring backfilled with cement- bentonite grout on 9-10-86. 25- 30- 35- NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL), i'nterpreted from USGS 7.5-minute Gosford quadrangle. Elevation shown i s -+2 feet. ~.~--!~ Hm,dlngLawsonA.,,ociate, LOG OF BORING B-6 ':~ " · · =:= = Engineers. Geologists Texaco Bulk Plant ~, ~ _ : &Geoonymcmm 801 16th Street ~iI Bakersfield, California 0~I~NN - JOB NUMI~ER ~ APPROvI~D DAlE RE.¥,SED ' '~' 2251,01'6.11 ~ /sb 10-31-86 ~~. 'o '~- --~ Hollow-stem Auger ~, , O ~ a. Equipment · ;! -- ~ ~ 402' ~ :.: -r cu a ~ Elevation Date 9-9-86 ~;~:,~.' ? ..' ... '~:~i:'.-.-- 0 ~?.qf 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE ~!i .... 10" GRAVEL BASE · . ...... ' BROWN SAND (SP) ' ':':'~': 'loose, moist, fine- to' ~:'~i! - :::::::~ reed i um-g ra i ned iii :::::::: 5- - '"""' No 0 .:.:.:.: : . 1 O- Composite Sample, .'.'.'.' Chemical Test- No 0 ~1::::~:~ red-brown, fine- to coarse- :':'?': grained with cobbles :.:.'.: _N~ 0 ~.::::::: med i um dense Boring terminated at ]6.5 feet. Ground water not encountered while drilling. 20- Boring backf[]led with cement- bentonite grout on 9-10-86. 25- 30- 35- : NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea :..~ Level (MSL), interpreted from '?:. USGS 7.5-minute Gosford quadrangle. Elevation shown ~.. is -+2 feet. Hmrdlng Lawson Associates LOG OF BORING B-7 Engineers, Geologists Texaco Bulk Plant" & Geophysicists Bakersfield, California '.. JOE) NiJMc3ER /} AP?ROVEO OAFiE R/vISE~ OAFE :~"~ O = ~. Equipment Hol low-stem Auqer :~. -r ~- ca ~o Elevation Date .,]..'. :~:~ 2" ASPHALTIC CONCRETE ':!:::i: -~o 0 J~:::::::: fine- to medium-grained Chemical Test-- No 0 ~:i:i:!:i cobbles ~5- -.'.-.'. ~o' 0 ~:~:~[ medium dense, coarse-~rained' Boring terminated at 16.5 feet. Ground water not encountered Boring backfilled with cement- 20- bentonite 25- 30- 35- NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL),' interpreted from .~:.' USGS 7.5-minute Gosford :..t:[~. quadrangle. Elevation shown ,~. is ±2 feet. Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF BORING B-8 Engineers. Geologists Texaco Bulk Plant &Geoohys~czsts 801 16th Street 1 1 Bakersfield, California JO~ NUMI~ER .,,.t.A/~PROvED DATE REvJSED ~': O ~- -~ Equipment Ho1 low-stem Auger -- ~ ~ 402' :: ~_ r~ ~ Elevation Date 9-9-86 0 :::::::: BROWN SAND (SP) -.-.-.-. loose, moist :.:.:.:. ""': .... 5- .:.:.:.: ":~ -No 0 ~l~.iiiiii! fine- to medium-grained :.:.:.:- .:.:.:.: Composite Sample 10-..':.:.? Chemical Test - No 0 l~::::::: fine- to coarse-grained .:.:.:.: .:.: '.: No 0 Il:::::::: rown Boring terminated at 16.5 feet. Ground water not encountered while drilling. 20- Boring backfilled with cement- bentonite grout on 9-10-86. 25- 30- -.'::~ 35- ;'~" NOTE: *Elevation above Mean Sea Level (MSL), interpreted from USGS 7.5-minute Gosford quadrangle. Elevation shown is +2 feet. 40- ~:Harding Law,on As,oclat,.. LOG OF BORING B-9 ~^rE Geolog,sm Texaco Bulk Plant '801 16th Street . 12 Bakers field, California 2251,016.11 /'~-¢~ /S b 10-31-86 17~FloworStroet , KE~.. COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT f H~LmOFF~CE, Bakemfield, California 93305 ~on M Hebeds~, M.D. EN~RONMEN~L H~L~ DI~SION ~lephone (805) 861-3636 o · .. DIRECTOR OF EN~RONME~AL HEAL~ ~rnon · Re~ha~ pERMIT FOR PERMANENT ABANDONMENT PERMIT N-UMBER A415-16 OF UNDERGROUND HAZARDOus SUBSTANCES STORAGE FACILITY . FACILITY NANE/ADDRESS: 0I~II~R (S) NANE/ADDRESS: CONTRACTOR: "~ ' ':~ :.':~:.'i ' :' Texaco, Inc. Texaco, Inc. Reliable Equipment ".' 801 16th Street 10 Universal City Plaza 8331 Commonwealth Ave. Bakersfield, CA Los Angeles, CA 91608 Buena Park, CA 90621 License No. 426638 " ... PERMIT TO ABANDON 'PERMIT EXPIRES June 5, 1987 LOCATION. APPROVED BY .. Bill Scheide .................... POST ON PREMISES ..................... CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Permlttee 'must obtain a Fire Department permit prior to initiating abandonment action. 2. All procedures used must be in accordance with requirements of Standards and Guidelines developed for implementation of Kern County Ordinance Code.. A copy of these requirements are enclosed with this permit. 3. A minimum of four samples must be retrieved at 2' and 6' depths, one- third from each end of the 5000 gallon tank. 4. For all product plplng, every 15 linear feet of pipe run must be sampled at 2' and 6' depths for benzene and total petroleum hydrocarbons. One' set of the samples must be taken underneath each dispenser at the prescribed depths. 5. All samples must be analyzed for benzene and total petroleum hydrocarbons. B. Advise this office of the time and date of proposed sampling .with 24 hours advance notice. 7. This department must receive lab analyses results no later than 5 days after their completion. 8. The holder of this permit is responsible for insuring that the tank disposition tracking record is completed and'returned to this department within 14 days of acceptance of tank by a disposal or recycling facility. DISTRICT OFFICES r~l~na I ~mnnf ! ak~ t~h~lla . Molave . Rldqecrest . Shafter . Taft [ 170~Flower Street KL. ,N COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT" HEALTH OFFICER Bakersfield, California 93305 Leon M Hebertson, M.D. Telephone (805) 861-3636 .. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Facility Name Kern County Permit This form ts to be returned to the Kern County 1 days of acceptance of tank(s) by disposal or 'he holder of the per. It with nuaber noted above 1: ng that this form i~ completed and returned Section ~ - yfl ~ filled out ~ tun. removal contractor: Dale Tanks Re.o veal ~~ No. o¢ Tanks Section ~ - ~ ~ ~llled ou~.~_con~ac~or~_ "decon~a~ina~ln~ ~ank(s}: Au~ho~Ized rep~esen~a~Ive o~ con~rac~o~ ce~i~les by sIEnln¢ belo~ ~ha~ ~ank~) have been decon~ina~ed In accordance ~i%h Kern County ~eal~h -- Signature -- Title Da~e Tanks Rec¢,~ , . No. of Tanks * * * ~ILINO INSTRUCTIONS: Fold tn half and staple. Postage and mailing label have already been affixed to outside for your convenience.ff~/ D{STR}~ OFFICES KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT '' PTO i ' PTA 1700 FLOWER STREET. B~ERS~IELD.' (805) 861-3B36 ~ENOTH OF PIPINO ~ ~ANDON APPL]' CATT ON FOR PERMIT FOR PERIVIANENT CLOSURE/ABANDONMENT OF UNDERGROUND HAZ,~DOUS SUBST.~CES STORAGE FACTLITY THIS APPLICATION IS FOR ~REMOVAL, OR ~ AB~OO~ENT IN P~CE (PILL O~ ON~ ~PLI~TION PER FACILITY) { NIGHTS- ~~' ~ [ FACILITY N~E ~DRESS PROPOSED PROJECT STATING D~E [CA~IFO~IA LICENSE · IWO~ER S CO~ENSATION · [INSU~ ' { · , . L _ . P~LIMIN~Y~.~.~' ~ ISITE ASSEtS~ENT C0N~CTOR~ ~DRESS~~ ~~C~O~ 0 ~~ ~ PHONE ( ~ ) ~ WORKER'S COMPENSATION, INS~EK PHONE ~BO~TORY T~T WILL ~ALYZE S~PLES ~DRESS ~~ ~ ~ ~ PHONE CHEmiCAL CO~POSITION OF ~TER[ALS STORED T~K ~ VOLUME CHEMIC~ STORED (NON-U~ERUIAL N~) DATES ~ED CH~ICAL PReVIOUSlY : TO TO WATER TO FACILITY PROVIDED BY {DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER I ~ NEAREST WATER WELL - GIVE DISTANCE AND DESCRIBE TYPE IF WITHIN §00 FEET SOIL TYPE AT FACILITY ~ _~ .//z ~/¥/J~ ~ 7./ ~ ~ BASES FOR SOIL TYPE ~D GROUNDWATER DEPTH DETE~ENATION TOTAL NUMBER OF S~PL~S TO BE ~ALYZED {S~PLES WILL BE ~ALYZED FOR: DESCRIBE BOTH THE DISPOSAL METHOD ~D DISPOS~ LOCATION FOR: ~ -- PIPING * * PLEASE PROVIDE INFO~TIO~ REQUESTE~ O~ RSVERS8 SIDE OF THIS SHEET BEFORE SUB~ITTINO APPLICATION FOR REVIE~ * THIS FO~E~~~~LTYOF PERJURY AND TO THE BEST OF ~ KNOWLEDGE IS TRUE ~D CORRECT. (Form ~H~P-140)