Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MITIGATION
SI.TE CHA-RACTER IZA-TION STUDY. I- .. 'PH-ASE- I-I v- . .... - SAINT V[N-CENT..DE' _PAUL'-_ . · - : THRIFT- STORE "UA K E.RSF I'ELD.'' CALIFORNIA ?.!" _ SEPTEMBER 1907 ' ' "'~--~ ·-_. "SMITH-GUTCHER ~ ' o-- ,~. - ~ -AND XSSOC/A rES, . . -:-,-; ...... -' Consulting Geologists .~- _ - ..... Post Office BoX'B0706~-- ...... -'- - .~]_.]._~ _.- -'-- - - Bakersfield,'California 93386:0706 " :(80_5)_871-3207 FAX'(805) 871-3698- - - - '- · · TABLE OF CONTENTS ~ Page IntrOduction ................................................... 1 Site Background ...................... ' .......................... 2 ·. Former Fuel Facilities ....................................... 2 : Preliminary Site Assessment Results ........................ ' ....... 3 Site Characterization Study ..................................... 3 Site Geology .................................................. 4 Soil Sampling .................................................. 5 · Results of Phase II Site Characterization ................................. 6 Conclusions ................................................... 7 · Exhibits: Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Site Map Figure 3 Cross Section Location Map Figure 4 Cross Section A-A' · Appendix A Analytical Results and Chain of Custody Record Appendix B Log of Test Hole · C:~14~PWIIV60~gFPDOCS~ILR~'TI~S97~VDP2. · SITE CItARACTERIZATION STUDY PHASE II SAINT VINCENT DE PAuL THRIFT STORE · INTRODUCTION A phase H site characterization study has been completed for a former underground storage tank site at the Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store (SVDP) property located at 300 Baker Street in Bakersfield, California. It is situated in the southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 29 South, · Range 28 East, Mount Diablo Baseline & Meridian (see Figure 1). A site characterization study, required by the Bakersfield Fire Department, was completed in March 1992. The study delineated the vertical and horizontal limits of the gasoline contaminated soil and the degree of contamination. Subsequent to the characterization study SVDB applied to and was · accepted by the Cai~EPA, Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Program. SVDP was in the process of acquiring bid proposals to remediate the gasoline contaminated soil when Mr. Martin Clark of the fund program, during the pre-approval process, questioned whether the 1992 data represents the current conditions at the site. Mr. Martin and Mr. Howard Wines of the Bakersfield Fire Department required further investigation to ascertain the current conditions of the subsurface soils at the site. SCALE 1:24,000 1 ½ 0 1 MILE 1OO0 O 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET CONTOUR INTERVAL 5 TO 20 FEET (INTERVAL DIFFERS DEPENDINCI ON QUADI"~AI,I(~LEI NATIOI,IAL GEODEIIC VElllICA[ DAIUM or 1929 LOCATION MAP :sAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE BAKERSFIELD, CALiFORNiA Source of Base Map: U.S.G.S. Oildale, Oil Center, Oosfor(l, and Lamonl 77: Minute Top-graphic Ouadrangles, 19.54, phnforevised 1968 and 1973. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the 1992 data represents the current conditions · at the site. This investigation included the drilling and logging of one test hole, chemical analyses of five soil samples, and the preparation of this report by Mr. Duane R. Smith, Registered Geologist No. 3584. This report was prepared following the guidelines of the Bakersfield Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division. The investigation reported herein has been conducted in accordance with generally recognized and current state-of-the-art geological procedures. The geological factors that were considered are outlined in this report. Other geological factors were not considered inasmuch as they were not deemed relevant to the intended land use and scope of this investigation. This investigation was conducted to the best of the investigative geologist's abilities in accordance with the foregoing limitations. SITE BACKGROUND · Former Fuel Facilities · One 550 gallon underground gasoline tank was removed from the property on June 17, 1991. It was situated on the property as shown on Figure 2. The dispenser was located about 4 feet north · of the west edge of the tank. · · · · · 0 · 0 · e, SITIE SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT' STORE " BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA' C/./icc3 "$It1Illt .¢UTCI~R AND AS$OCIATg.% INC.. july 1997 ~"= z~' · preliminary_ Site Assessment Results Four soil samples were collected from beneath the tank and dispenser. The samples were analyzed for B.T.X.& E. and T.P.H. gasoline by BC Laboratories in Bakersfield, California. The laboratory results indicated product loss and associated soil degradation beneath the tank. There was no indica- tion of product loss or soil degradation beneath the dispenser. Site Characterization Study · Subsequent to the preliminary site assessment, the degree and extent of the contamination was determined. Four test holes were drilled at the site in January 1992. Test Hole No. l was drilled through the center of the contamination to a depth of 70 feet. Test Hole Nos. 2 through 4 were situated east and west of Test Hole No. 1. They were perimeter borings drilled to provide date necessary to delineate the lateral extent of the contamination. The maximum vertical extent of the contaminant plume was found to be at a depth of approximately 53 feet and is located directly below the former tank location. The maximum areal extent of the contaminant plume is estimated to be a roughly circular zone approximately 47 feet in diameter between depths of approximately 27 to 36 feet. The data indicates that the plume is slightly · asymmetrical~ but roughly circular in the horizontal cross section. · SITE GEOLOGY According to the Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet Campbell, 1971), the site is situated over Quaternary fan deposits composed of sediments deposited from streams emerging from the highlands surrounding the valley. In general, these sediments consist of unconsolidated and imdissected gravel, sand, and silt. The sediments encountered in the test hole drilled during this investigation, to a depth of 24 to 25 feet, consist of a brown to tan, locally gravelly, locally silty, fine to very coarse grained sand. A · light brown sandy silt layer 2 to 3 feet thick occurs below this. The next lithologic unit, which occurs below depths of about 27 to 28 feet, consists of a tan, fine to coarse grained, locally gravelly, sand. This unit is 5 to 8 feet thick. Below depths of 32 to 35 feet, the sediments cOnsist ora light brown to brown, sandy silt. This unit is 20+ feet thick and is locally interbedded with sand and gravelly sand layers up to 7 feet thick. In general, the sediments are slightly moist and loose to slightly consolidated. The sediments exhibit a moderate degree of variability typical of Quaternary fan deposits.. · According to the General Soil Map of Kern County (U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1967), the site is underlain by soils of the Hesperia-Hanford association. In general, this is a well-drained soil developed on nearly level alluvial fans. This soil type is derived from granitic rocks and is moderately coarse textured. ACCOrding to the 1994 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency, the depth to groundwater beneath the site was slightly less than 200 feet in July of 1995. No shallow perched groundWater is known to exist beneath the site. No groundwater was encountered in the test hole drilled during this investigation. SOIL SAMPLING One test hole was drilled at the site on September 15, 1997. The test hole was drilled through the presumed center of the contamination to a depth of 45 feet. It was located approximately 3.5 · feet southeast of Test Hole No. 1, which was drilled during the original site characterization work completed in March 1992. Soil samples were collected from the test hole at depths of I0, 15, 20, 30, and 45 feet. Soil samples were collected using a split-spoon sampler driven into the soil utilizing a track- · mounted 8 inch diameter hollow stem auger rig (Mobile Drill B-53). The split-spoon sampler holds three one inch diameter by 6 inches long brass liners. · The sampler was driven through the proper sampling interval utilizing a 140 pound drop hammer at, er the hole was drilled with the hollow stem auger. The sampler was then removed from the · drilling equipment and the brass liners removed from the samPler. The ends of the middle liner from each sample depth were covered with Teflon seals and polyethylene caps. The liner was then labeled and placed in a polyethylene sample bag and the bag sealed and labeled. Each bagged liner was immediately placed in an ice chest on blue ice and retained for laboratory analyses. Another soil sample from each sample depth was retained for field screening and soil descriptions. · Field screening consisted of a headspace reading for hydrocarbon vapors with an Hnu PID meter. In addition to the headspace readings, hydrocarbon odors, if detected, were noted. · The sampling equipment was scrubbed, washed, and thoroughly rinsed between each sample collection. The augered soil was placed back into the hole since in-situ remediation is anticipated. This was approved by Mr. Wines. The top 4 inches of the boring was filled with asphalt patch material. · RESULTS OF PHASE II SITE CHARACTERIZATION Five soil samples were submitted for chemical analyses. The samples were analyzed for T,P.H, gasoline and B.T.X.& E. by BC Laboratories in Bakersfield. The analytical methods utilized by BC Laboratories are listed on the laboratory reports. The quality assurance' and quality control · of the laboratory are available from BC Laboratories on request. The analytical results of the five soil samples submitted for analyses along with the appropriate chain of custody records are included in Appendix A. 6 The 10, 15, 20, 30, and 45 foot soil samples from the test hole were analyzed. No T.P.H. or B.T.X.& E. were detected in the 10 foot sample above the practical quantitation limits. This sample was in the area of the preliminary site assessment samples. T.P.H. was detected in the 15 foot sample at a Concentration of 2,600 rog/kg. No B.T.X.& E. were detected in the sample above the practical quantitation limits. T.P.H. was detected in the 20 foot sample at a concentration of 470 rog/kg Total xylenes were detected at a concentration of 1.3 rog/kg T.P.H. was detected in the 30 foot sample at a concentration of 3.6 rog/kg. Toluene and total xylenes were detected at concentrations of 0.008 mg/kg and 0.26 mg/kg, respectively. T.P.H. was detected in the 45 foot sample at a concentration of 4,600 mgtkg. B.T.X.& E. were detected at concentrations of 33 mg/kg, 480 rog/kg, 140 rog/kg, and 800 rog/kg, respectively CONCLUSIONS Figure 3 shows the location of cross section A-A' through Test Hole Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the original site characterization work completed in March 1992. The location of the test hole drilled during the phase II site characterization work also is shown on Figure 3. Cross section A- A' is shown on Figure 4 and depicts a west-east vertical profile of the contaminant plume. The figure includes an interpretation of the lithology beneath the site. The interpretation is based on all five test hole logs. The test hole log for the phase II work is included as Appendix B. The lower · case letters on Figure 4 (e.g., sw, mi, etc.) are the USCS soil designations taken from the test hole logs. The solid lines indicating lithologic changes indicate greater certainty than the dashed lines. 7 CROSS SECTION LOC'ATION MAP 7~./¥. ~o. 1/ T~T Tes~ Hole Lo~tion - DUANE R - SMITH ~ ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 CROSS SECTION A-A' Gl~oolvt~ ' I su~AC~ . ~ r - - ~- -- ~ L - --~---~ 0 I0' ~0 0~0~ ~0 0DO~ ~ ~ lO~ oDot~ . r~. ooo~ r~. ooo~ ~L U~ ~ ND~ ~ [o. oz~J 6o' ~J ~ NO [~s~l~ - ~. ooo~ ~o' ~ ND ND [o.~s] NOTES: 1, ~alues listed outside of brackets ( 1 are ppm T,P,H. gasoline, 2. Values listed inside of brackets ( J are ppm benzene. 3. ND refers to None Detected. 4. Preliminary site assessment samples shown by solid circle. 5. Phase II test hole superimposed on cross section. D. R. SMITIt AND ASSOCIATES - MARCIt 1992 FJ.~u~:e 4 The contaminant concentrations in the 10 foot soil sample do not appear to correlate well with the · pre'luninary site assessment samples. The 9.'5 and 13.5 foot samples contained T.P.H concentrations of 1,800 rog/kg and 4,300 rog/kg, respectively. No T.P.H. was detected in the l0 foot sample from the phase II characterization. This could be due to partial aeration and a mixing with cleaner soil during the removal of the tank and backfilling of the excavation. The contaminant concentrations in the 15 and 20 foot soil samples correlate relatively well with the results of the original characterization work. The samples contain T.p.H. concentrations of 2,600 mg/kg and 470 rog/kg, respectively. The 20 foot sample from the original characterization work · contained a T.P.H. concentration of 2,800 mg{kg. The contaminant concentrations in the 30 foot soil sample do not appear to correlate well with the original characterization work. The sample contained a T.P.H. concentration of 3.6 rog/kg. The 30 foot sample bom the original characterization work contained a T.P.H. concentration of 1,500 mg/kg · and B.T.X.& E. concentrations also were much higher. The contaminant concentrations in the 45 foot soil sample correlates relatively well with the results of the original characterization work. The sample contains a T.P.H. concentration of 4,600 rog/kg The 45 foot sample from the original characterization work contained a T.P.H. concentration of · 6,000 mg/kg. B.T.X.& E. concentrations were slightly higher in the sample from the original characterization work. Based on the phase II characterization study, there has been a slight to moderate decrease in · contaminant concentrations at the selected depths between March 1992 to September 1997. Soil samples were' collected at depths of highest concentrations as found in the original characterization work. Present contaminant concentrations may show a decrease at these depths due to migration · of the cOntaminants to lower depths. Some natural degradation of the gasoline contaminants also may be taking place. ~ ~, Submitted by: I . . I"~ oua~~,,. ]T J DuaneR. Smith · \ 5.~, ,,,,. o.,o.. J~] Registered Geologist State of California No. 3584 C Aff/PffiIN 60~WPDOCSbr:ILESb~TLES9 7kW'VINC EN, CHA ~ 9 APPENDIX A ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 1 LABORATORIES' Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SMITH-GUTCHER and ASSOCIATES, INC. Date Reported: 09/30/97 ' P.O. BOX 60706 Date Received: 09/16/97 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93386-0706 Laboratory No.: 97-09919-1 Attn: DUANE R. SMITH 805-871-3207 Sample Descrlption: T H 1 ® 10', SAMPLED By DUANE SMITH Sample Matrix: Soil Date Collected: 09/16/97 @ 08:15AM Date Extracted-8020: 09/26/97 Date Analyzed-8020: 09/26/97 Date Extracted-8015M(g) : 09/26/97 Date Analyzed-8015M(g) : 09/26/97 Practical Analysis Reporting Quantitation Constituents Results Units Limit Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Toluene None Detected mg/kg 0.'005 · Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.065 Total Xylenes None Detected mg/kg 0.01 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. Surrogate % Recovery 105. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH b~ D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. /1186 Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor · All results listed In this repor~ are for the exclusive use of the submitting pady. BC laboratories, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration, separation, detachment or third party I.terpretatlon. 41 O0 Atlas Ct. · Bakersfield, CA 93308 · (BO5) 327-491.1 · FAX (805) 327-1 ~)1B Page 1 LABORATORIES Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SMITH-GUTCHER and ASSOCIATES, INC. Date Reported: 09/30/97 P.O. BOx 60706 Date Received: 09/16/97 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93386-0706 Laboratory No.: 97-09919-2 Attn: DUANE R. SMITH 805-871-3207 Sample Description: T H 1 @ 15', SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Sample Matrix: Soll Date Collected: 09/16/97 ® 08:15AM Date Extracted-8020: 09/27/97 Date Analyzed-8020: 09/27/97 Date Extracted-8015M(g) : 09/27/97 Date Analyzed-8015M(g) : 09/27/97 Practical Analysis Reporting Quantltatlon Constituents Results Units Limit Benzene None Detected mg/kg 3. Toluene None Detected mg/kg 3. Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 3. Total Xylenes None Detected mg/kg 5. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 2600. mg/kg 500. Surrogate % Recovery 88. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by DoO.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Note: PQL's were raised due to high concentration of target analytes requiring sample dilution. Sample chromatogram not typical of gasoline. California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor All results listed tn this report are for the exclusive uae of the submitting party. BC Leboratorles, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration, separation, detachment or third party Interpretation. 41 O0 Aclss Ct. · Bskersfield, CA 93308 · (805) 327-491 I · FAX (BO5) 327~1918 '~ Page 1 LABORATORIES '- Purgeable Aromatics and · · Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SMITH-GUTCHER and ASSOCIATES, INC. Date Reported: 09/30/97 P.O. BOX 60706 Date Received: 09/16/97 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93386-0706 Laboratory No.: 97-09919-3 Attn: DUAlgE R. SMITH' 805-871-3207 ~_ Sample Description: T H 1 @ 20', SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Sample Matrix: Soil Date Collected: 09/16/97 ® 08:15AM Date Extracted-8020: 09/27/97 Date Analyzed-8020: 09/27/97 Date Extracted-8015M(g) : 09/27/97 Date Analyzed-8015M(g) : 09/27/97 Practical Analysis Reporting Quantltation Constituents Results units Limit Benzene None Detected mg/kG 0.3 · Toluene None Detected mg/kG 0.3 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mG/kg 0.3 Total Xylenes 1.3 mG/kg 0.5 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 470. mg/kg 50. Surrogate % Recovery 76. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Note: PQL's were raised due to high concentration of target analytes requiring sample dilution. Sample chromatogram not typical of gasoline. Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor · All results listed in this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting party. BC Laboratories, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration, separation, detachment or third party Interpretation. 4100 Atlas Ct. · Bakersfield, CA 93308 · (805) 327-491 I · FAX (805) 327-1918 Page 1 LABORATORIES Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SMITH-GUTCHER and ASSOCIATES, INC. Date Reported: 09/30/97 P.O. BOX 60706 Date Received: 09/16/97 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93386-0706 Laboratory No.: 97-09919-4 Attn: DUANE R. SMITH 805-871-3207 Sample Description: T H 1 @ 30', SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Sample Matrix: Soil Date Collected: 09/16/97 ® 08:15AM Date Extracted-8020: 09/29/97 Date Analyzed~8020: 09/29/97 Date Extracted-8015M(g) : 09/29/97 Date Analyzed-8015M(g) : 09/29/97 Practical Analysis Reporting Quantitation Constituents Results Units Limit Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.008 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Xylenes 0.26 mg/kg 0.01 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 3.6 mg/kg 1. Surrogate % Recovery 96. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. · Note: Sample chromatogram not typical of gasoline. Stuart G. Buttram Department Supervisor All results listed in this report are lot the exclusive use of the submitting party. BC Laboratories, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration, separation, detachment or third party Interpretation. 4100 Atlas Ct. · Bakersfield, CA 93308 · (805) 327-491 I · FAX (805) 327-1918 Page 1 LABORATORIES' Purgeable Aromatics and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SMITH-GUTCHER and ASSOCIATES, INC. Date Reported: 09/30/97 P.O. BOX 60706 Date Received: 09/16/97 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93386-0706 Laboratory No.: 97-09919-5 Attn: DUD/gE R. SMITH 805-871-3207 Sample Description: T H 1 ® 45', SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Sample Matrix: Soil Date Collected: 09/16/97 ® 10:00AM Date Extracted-8020: 09/29/97 Date Analyzed-8020: 09/29/97 Date Extracted-8015M(g) : 09/29/97 Date- Analyzed-8015M(g) : 09/2'9/97 Practical Analysis Reporting Quantitation Constituents Results Units Limit Benzene 33. mg/kg 3. 'roluene 480. ms/kg 20. Ethyl Benzene 140. mg/kg 3. 'rotal Xylenes 800. ms/kg 30. Total Petroleum ~{ydrocarbons (gas) 4600. mg/kg 3000. Surrogate % Recovery 83. % 70-130 TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Note: PQL's were raised due to high concentration of target analytes requiring sample dilution. Call~orni~.O.H.S. Cert. l~~186 Stuart G. Buttram [)apartment Supervisor All results listed In this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting party. BC Laboratories, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration, separation, detachment or third party Interpretation. 41 O0 At~ss Ct. · Bskersfield, CA 93308 - [805) 327-491 I · FAX lB05) 327-191B CHA'IN OF CUS'TOD Y RECORD' · Loc~ion of'$amptin,q Sample Cotlec~or t ~e~ived Comaanv: Da~e an~' ~m Reiinauisn~, by: Comoanv: Date ana ~me: Received O~ ~omoanv: Date and' c~C~EO-~ G ~:TC~ZR .~D ~SO CLCTEZ, ~C: APPENDIX B · LOG OF TEST HOLE LOG OF TEST HOLE LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: Test Hole ELEVATION: -412' D~,TE DRILLED: 09/15/97 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Lewis White :DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves !HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 45' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: DRS Z SAMPLE E o -. = ~ '~ ~. < o AND ASSOCIATES :~ _ ~ o u z ; ~ ~ ~ _ ~ u BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA c ~ ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ' 0 ' Fill, sand, brown, very silty, fine to very coarse grained, well graded, , sm loose, slightly moist, slight hydrocarbon odor. '10'I 4 _ _ 1 08lB 4 1 ND 4 sw Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, medium dense, slightly - moist, gasoline odor. '15-~ 4 _ 2 0830 6 1OO 2,600 Same as above. 8 -20- I 3 _ 3 0850 6 100 470 Same as above, moderately graded, fine grained sand predominant, 6 gasoline odor. -25 ' - mi Silt, light brown, sandy, fine grained, slightly clayey, medium stiff, slightly moist, gasoline odor. sw Sand, tan, fine to well medium coarse grained, graded, dense, slightly moist, gasoline odor. -30' Sh~t I of 2 B-i LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: Test Hole ELEVATION: -412' DATE DRILLED: 09/15/97 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Lewis White DRILLING RIG:. Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 45' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: ORS SAMPLE [ ~ DUANE R. SMITH ~ 0 .--- Z ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ u BAKERSFIELO, CALIFORNIA ~ ~ ~ ~2 ~ < ~ o~ ~ o [805] 589-7861 _ ~ = ~0 ~ o = ~ ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION '30- ~ 4 _ _~ 4 0920 10 190 3.6 sm Same es above, gasoline odor. 20 '35 ' Silt, light.brown, sandy, fine grained, slightly clayey, stiff, slightly _ mi moist, gasoline odor. - Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, medium dense, slightly sw moist, gasoline odor. =40 = Sand, light gray,, fine to medium grained, predominantly fine, poorly . graded, dense, dW, gasoline odor. sp . 5 1000 3 150 4,600 3 Sheet 2 of 2 SITE. CH-ARACTERI)'.ATION.'-WORK PLAN ~A_INT' 91N'(~ENT --DE. F~'A'u.L T'HR-II~-'sTORE - _-_ BAK~.R~F-IE-:L-D-.' -CALIFOR_N'IA-~ .- ~ - _ ..... JULy 1997 _ ._ .-~-'--' ~ ......... Consulting Geolog[sts~ .. ~ :': _ . '- ' Post Office Box 60706. - -- .... - . .Bakersfield, California 93386-0706 ~'- ..- .... (805) 871-}207 -FAX (805} 871-3698--' - TABLE OF CONTENTS Pave sit~ Background ................................................ 1 Site Geology ~ ................................................. 2 · Site Characterization Study ..................... · ................... 2 Soil Sampling Plan. .............................. , ..............3 Site Safety Plan ................................................ 6 · Exhibits: Figure 1 Location Map · Figure 2 Site Map Figure 3' Test Hole Location Map Appendix A Site Safety Plan · C'.'1ff;PIFIAr601tFPDOCSWYLE~IL~S97~Fl)P. TOC SITE CHARACTERIZATION WORK PLAN · PHASE H SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE · SITE BACKGROUND The Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store ($VDP) is located at 300 Baker Street in Bakersfield, California. It is situated in the southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 29 South, Range 28 East, Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian (see Figure 1). The area around the site is residential and · commercial. One 550 gallon underground gasoline tank was removed in June 1991. It was situated on the property as shown on Figure 2. The dispenser was located about 4 feet north of the west edge of the tank. The soil around the tank was stained and gasoline odors were noted. A site characterization study, required by the Bakersfield Fire Department, was completed in March 1992. The study delineated the vertical and horizontal limits of the gasoline contaminated soil and · the degree of contamination. Subsequent to the characterization study SVDB applied to and was accepted by the Cal/EPA, Underground Storage Tank CleanUp Fund Program. SVDP was in the process of acquiring bid proposals to remediate the gasoline contaminated soil when Mr. Martin Clark of the fund program, during the pre-approval process, questioned whether the 1992 data represents the current conditions at the site. Mr. Martin and Mr. Howard Wines of the Bakersfield · Fire Department have required further investigation to ascertain the current conditions of the SCALE 1:24,000 1 ½ 0 1 MILE ! I I I I ! I I I I I I 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET ~.-~ 1-4 /-.~ I I I I I I I CONTOUR INTERVAL B TO 20 FEET IINIERVAt DIFFERS DEPENDING ON QUADRANGLEI NATIONAL GEODEIIC VERllCAL DATUM OF 1929 LOCATION MAP SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Source of Base Map: U.S.G.S. Oildale, Oil Center, Gosford, and Lamont 7'/z MiT!re Tol~gr~phic Q. adrangles, 1954, pholorevised 1968 and 1973. Figure 1 SITE MAi= BAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT' I~TORE BAKERE3FIELD, CALIFORNIA l 1 t I A~~ C~llco S~'~s£7- 5MI27I .GUTCHI~R AND ASSOCIATKS, INC.. JULY 1997 /' subsurface soils at the site. Approval of the this work plan is the first step in answering the · questions raised by Bakersfield Fire Department and Cai~EPA. SITE GEOLOGY · According to the Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet, the site is situated over Quaternary fan deposits composed of sediment deposited from streams emerging from the highlands surrounding the valley. The test holes drilled during the site characterization study encountered fine- to coarse-grained sand, sandy silt, and silt. According to the Kern County Water Agency, Water Supply Report, 1994, the depth to the groundwater beneath the site was approximately 200 feet in the spring of 1995. No shallow perched groundwater is known to exist beneath the site. · SITE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY Subsurface migration of contaminants appears to have been controlled by the influence of gravity and also by lithology. It is clear that the silt layer at a depth of approximately 25 feet has hade a great deal of influence on the contaminant migration. Gasoline migrated relatively unimpeded through the sands above the silt and then spread laterally on top of the silt layer before penetrating to the sands beloTM. It appears that the contamination tapers offbelow a depth of approximately 25 foot. The study ascertained the maximum vertical extent of the contaminant 2 plume to be at a depth of apProximately 53 feet and is located directly below the former tank · location. The maximum areal extent of the contaminant plume is estimated to be a roughly circular zOne approximately 47 feet in diameter between the depths of approximately 27 feet and 36 feet. The data indicates that the plume is slightly asymmetrical, but roughly circular in the horizontal cross section. It is estimated that the contaminant plume consists of roughly 1,500 cubic yards of soil. Based on the gasoline contaminants found in the soils below the former tank location, the Bakersfield Fire Department required remediation at the site. SOIL SAMPLING PLAN One soil boring is proposed to assess current contaminant concentrations within the plume. The proposed boring location is shown on Figure 3. The test hole will be drilled through the middle · of the contaminant plume to assess the current conditions within the plume. The boring will be drilled to a maximum depth of 55 feet. Soil samples will be collected at 5 foot intervals starting at a depth of 10 feet below the surface. The sample intervals may be modified slightly depending on soil conditions, however, they should not deviate significantly from the proposed depths. Approximately 10 soil samples will be collected and field screened. Selected samples will be submitted for analyses. The soil samples will be analyzed for TPH gasoline and BTXE. 3 TEST HOLE LOCATION MAP SAINT VINCENT CIE PAUL. THRIFT STORE BAKERSFIELCI, CALIFORNIA The soil samples will be analyzed by BC Laboratories in Bakersfield. The quality assurance and quality control are available from the laboratory upon request. A chain of custody record documenting sample handling will be included. Soil samples will be collected using a split-spoon core sampler driven into the soil Utilizing a truck- mounted hollow stem auger rig (Mobile Drill B-53). The split-spoon sampler holds three 2.5 inch diameter by 6 inch long brass liners. The core sampler will be driven through the proper sampling interval after the hole is drilled to the sample depth with the hollow stem auger. The sampler will then be removed from the drilling equipment and the brass liners removed from the sampler. The ends of the bottom liner from each sample depth will be covered with Teflon seals and p°lyethylene caps. The liner will then be labeled and placed in a polyethylene sample bag and the bag sealed and labeled. Each bagged liner will be placed on blue ice and retained in a chilled state for delivery to the laboratory. Another soil sample from each Sample depth will be retained for field screening and soil description. Fidd screening will consist of a headspace reading for hydrocarbon vapors with an Hnu PID meter. In addition to the headspace readings, hydrocarbon odors, if present, will be noted. 4 Th6 sampling equipment will be scrubbed, washed ,and thoroughly rinsed between each sample eoileetion. The test hole will be baekfilled with bentonite chips. Contaminated drill cuttings, as identified by field screening, will be placed in DOT drums and retained on-site for future treatment or disposal by the client. The results of the field investigation will be presented in a formal report which will include a boring Iog~ laboratory reports, and conclusions. SITE SAFETY PLAN · The Site Safety Plan is included as Appendix A. ~~(,~N~X ~ Submitted by: · \~& '~'~ /~/ DuaneR. Smith ~ ~agtiest°e; ecda~ ef°~l~agi Sl~°' 3 5 8 4 CAWPW1N60~WPDOCSW'ILRSg'ZlLRS97~SFDPZPLN § APPENDIX A · SITE SAFETY PLAN SITE SAFETY PLAN The responsible party for the work will be Smith-Gutcher and Associates personnel. The expected hazardous material at the site is gasoline which will be blended with soil. The purpoSe of this plan is to establish procedures to protect all on-site personnel from direct skin contact, inhalation~ or ingestion of potentially hazardous materials that may be encount- ered at the site. Smith-Gutcher and Associates plans on drilling one soil boring through the former underground tank location. The boring will be drilled by: Melton Drilling Company 1701 Downing Avenue Bakersfield, California 93306 C-57 license number 508270. Duane Smith or Tom Gutcher, California registered geologists, will serve as project manager, field technician, and Site safety officer. Mr. Smith or Mr. Gutcher will assure that all on-site personnel have a copy of the site safety plan. Compliance with the site safety plan will be monitored at all times. A training session will be conducted to assure that all personnel are aware of safe work practices. Mr. Smith or Mr. Outcher Will be responsible for keeping field notes, collecting soil samples, and following chain-of-custody protocol. ® SMITH- GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. A-1 On-site employees will take ~'easonable precautions to avoid unforeseen hazards. On-site employees are to adhere strictly to the provisions of this site safety plan. The drilling contractor has been employed to deliver and operate all drilling equipment. Only qualified personnel will have contact with this equipment. All on-site personnel are required to · wear hard hats When near the drilling fig. Proper respiratory equipment will be worn if vapor levels exceed action levels. An action level of 5 ppm in the breathing zone will require respi- ratory protection. During all operations that might release airborne vapors, an Hnu PID meter will be used to monitor Vapors in the breathing zone of workers. If there are significantly higher readings than 5 ppm for a sustained period, the drilling and/or soil sampling operations will be suspended and the work reevaluated. No smoking will be permitted at the work site. Contami- nated drill cuttings, as identified by field screening, will be continuously placed in DOT drums and covered. On-site personnel will be exposed only to gasoline contaminated soil. This can present a significant hazard. Volatile organic compounds can be significant in soil contaminated with gasoline. Recognition of hazards, whether it be from instrument readings, odor, irritation, visi- bility~ headache, dizziness, or fatigue, is important, but it is equally important to take appropriate action when a hazard is recognized. If the problem cannot be promptly corrected, we will back off from the exposure source and obtain assistance to solve the problem. Work SMITH- GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. practices and engineering controls will be devised to minimize potential exposures. For eXample, where possible, We Will Work upwind of any potential exposure source. Air-purifying respirators with combination organic vapor/acid, gas/dust, fume, and mist cartridges will be on location. Replacement cartridges will be aVailable as necessary. These · will be worn When PID readings persist above 5 ppm in the breathing zone. If there is eye -irritation, full-face respirators will be used. Tyvek coveralls will be worn as necessary to avoid skin contact with contaminated soils. Chemical resistant gloves and boots will also be worn as necessary to avoid hand and foot contact with contaminants. Ear protection, as appropriate, will also be worn. All personnel will be advised that any portions of their bodies which might have contacted possible contaminants should be washed with soap and water before taking a break or leaving the site. Respirators, if used, will also be decontaminated at the end of the work day. Supervisory personnel involved in drilling and sample retrieval have received training as specified in the OSHA Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard [29CFR 1910.120]. The physical hazards associated with operating a drilling fig and sampling equipment must be recognized. Individuals not directly involved in drilling shall stand back at least the distance of the vertical boom. A restricted access area will be established around the work area as needed. ® SMITH- GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ia,-3 The potential hazards involved in this job will be reviewed with all personnel, including subcontractors, working on-Site. Prior to commencement of work, emergency'evacuation routes will be established. A "safe zone" location will be established taking into account weather conditions, site activities, and other factors, as necessary. Access to the site will be restricted to authorized personnel. Mr. Smith or Mr. Gutcher will be responsible for site security. According to 29CFR1910.120, paragraph (f), employees who wear respirators 30 days or more during One year or who have been exposed to hazardous substances or health hazards above established permissible exposure limits are required lo be monitored medically. All site personnel subject to these conditions are required to have a complete chemical physical on an annual basis. Documentation Will be kept on personnel exposed to contaminant hazards on the job site according to osHA regulations. These will include documentation that employees have received training on the site safety plan, respiratory protection, and all emergency procedures. Exposure records will be kept in the job file. These will include name and social security number for employees, job entry logs, and first aid administered. Arrangement will be made for transportation to a hospital in the event of an accident or exposure to hazardous materials that produce organic symptoms in the exposed party. · SMITH- GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. t~-4 In the event of accident, injury, or other emergency, notification will be as follows: Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Mr. Howard Wines (805) 326-3979 2. Police, Fire, or Ambulance (Emergency 911) 3. Nearest Emergency Hospital: Memorial Hospital 420 34th Street Bakersfield, California (805) 327-1792 SMITH- GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. We, othe undersigned, have read the preceding Site Safety Plan, and agree, by signing below, 'that we understand the Site Safety Plan and will adhere to the safety standards established in the Site Safety Plan. 1. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. ~ 2. Name {Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. ~ 3. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No,. 4. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. 5. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. 6. Name {Signature) Date · Name (Printed) Social Security No. SMITH- GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. I--~~ HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOC~T~, INC. I ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS · SCIENTISTS · GEOLOGISTS AND ENGINEERS Contaminated Site Assessments * Real Estate Audits * Site Remediation * Hazardous Waste Management HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., 143 South Figueroa Street Ventura, California 93001 (805) 652-0219 FAX (805) 652-0793 II 853 West 17th Street · Costa Mesa, California 92627 (714) 642-2660 · FAX (714) 642-2544 3157 Pegasus Drive · Bakersfield, California 93308 (805) 391-0517 * FAX (805) 391-0826 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ' · ~. (APN 016-320-15-00-2) JUNE 17, 1996 Client: Saint Vincent De Paul 310 Baker Street Bakersfield, California 93305 Attention: Reverend Ralph Belluomlnl (805) 323-7340 Consultant: Smith-Gutcher and Associates, Inc. Post Office Box 607[]6 Bakersfield, California 93386 Project Manager: Mr. Duane R. Smith, RG · ' (805) 871-3207 Contractor: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. 3157 Pegasus Drive Bakersfield, California 93308 Project Manager: Mr. Mark R. Mogorgoe, CHG, RG · (8[]5) 391-0517 ~-~ ~_~ ~ ' e-maih Mark_Magargee@hfa.com ss's ant Geologist ' y ogeologisf Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS · SCIENTISTS * GEOLOGISTS AND ENGINEERS :: i I I--.-&-ASSOCIATES, iNC. · - · E NViRONMENTALTIT,,4AN~GE ME NT. CONSULTANTS - . ' : - TABLEOF CONTENTS - '~ Page List of:Acronyms 1. Introduction .................................... -1 2. Site History .......... ~ ..................... · 2 3. Regional and Site-Specific GeolOgy and Hydrogeology 3 4. Human Health and Environmental:Threat ASsessment .... 5 4,1 ' Characteristics of Gasoline ...................................... 5 4.2 Human Health Threat Assessment .......................... 5 5. Rise Evaluation ............................. ;,-..: ................................... 8 5.1 RBCA Tier 1 Risk Evaluation· . ..............................8 5.2 RBCA Tier 2 Risk Evaluation ....................................... · 9 5.3 Remediatlon Goals.,: ..... ' .......................................... 9 6. Estimation of the Mass of Hydrocarbons in the Soils ......... 10 7. S°il Remediation,. ................ 11 7.1 Feasibility Study - Gasoline-Containing Soils ............ 11 -. '7.1,1 In-Situ Processes ........................................... '.. 11 7.1.2 Ex-Situ Processes (Excavation) ...................... 13 Feasibility Study Summary ....................................... 13 7.2 81 4n-Situ Soil Vapor Extraction ............. ' .................................. 15 8.1 System Design .......................................................... 15 8.2 Vapor Extraction Test ........... : ............ ....................... 15 8.3 Estimated Time for Soil Remediation ......... ~ ............. 17 8.4 Vapor Extraction System Equipme.nt and - Permitting .................................................................. 18 8.5 Vapor Extraction System Monitoring,' ...................... 18 8.6 Progress Soil Sampling ......................... ~i .................. 19 9. Site Closure and Interim Reporting .................................... 10. Health and Safety Plan - 21 11. Summary ........................................................................... 22 12. References ....................................................................... 2:3 I - SECTION II - FIGURES 1 Site Location Map 2 Plot Plan Showing VES .. i 3 Cross Section A-A' 4 VES Schematic Diagram .- 5 Expected Vapor Concentration Degradation Over Time SECTION III - SUMMARY TABLES 1 Summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results I 2 Hazardous Chemical Substances of Occupational Health Concern - ~- ~ _' ~ ¢ EN~/iR(Z~NME~-4TAL M.ANAGEi~ENT CONSULTANTS ,,"~'~- .... SECTION IV - ATTACHMENTS. -- ,~ - ' 1 ' RBCA Tier 1 Worksheets and Dose/Response Calculations I '-~ 2 RBCA Tier 2 Fate and Transport Modeling Worksheets and '. ~ · "': Do_se/Response Calculations . _ . 3 -RBCA Tier 2 Benzene Cleanup Level Calculations I 4 Vapor Extraction Well InstallatiOn Procedures · 5 Vapor Extraction Well Construction Details 6 Vapor Extraction Test Procedures and Equipment 7 Soil Boring and Well Construction Procedures I i 8 Health and Safety Plan ! ! :~'%.~,"-:'~' ~ ~ . -. , . .-::~_ ;: . - ENVlPlONMEN'T'AL MANAGEMENT CONSUL_TAN Bo - . -. ' · . ~ ~ ~ ~: :_~ -: .~ - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY H0iguin, Fahan & AssoCiates,' inc'~, (HFA) was cor~fracted by Saint vincent De. Pauly-and its representative, and Inc.; (Smith-Gutcher) to prepare Associates, a CAP for soil for the Saint Vincent. De Paul Thrift Store in Bakersfield, California, based on the evaluation of information from previous site assessment activities and remedial Investigations conducted by Smith-Gutcher. The subject site is located at 300 Baker' Street in the city of Bakersfield, Kern.COunty, California. Based on a review of available data, analytical results, and conversations with Mr. Duane R. Smith, on June 17, 1991~ a 550-gallon gasoline UST~ dispenser, ar~'d associated product piping were removed from the property. Soil samples collected from beneath the location .of the UST indicated concentrations of.gasoline hydrocarbons. SubseqUent site characterization activities Indicate that gasoline-containing sail is present to a d~pth of approXimately 55 fbg within an approximately 25-foot radius around the former UST at the site. Groundwater.was not encountered In any of the previous assessments-and is not anticipated above.a depth in-eXcess of 200 fbg. The impacted soil consists of highly permeable fine-grained to coarse-grained sands and silty sands'interbedded with a significant int:ervaJ of sandy silts and silts. The known contaminant at the site has been identified as petroleum hydrocarbons in the gasoline The total volume of hydrocarbon-containing soils was estimated to be range. approximately 3,650' cubic yards, containing an estimated 2,420 pounds of hydrocarbons in the gasolin'e range. This equates to approximately 390 gallons of gasoline absorbed into the subsUrface. Approximately 485 pounds of the hydrocarbons is estimated to be present beneath the thrift store building. A !risk evaluation of the gasoline-containing soils at the site was conducted using ASTM Designation: E-1739 Risk Based Corrective Action App, l~d at Petroleum Release Sites (RBCA). The results of RBCA Tier 1 and 2 evaluations are that the ~ndoor air inhalation pathw_ay exceed_s the Pe"rmissible lifetime lx10-6 exposure levels given the concentration of benzene in the soils beneath the thrift store building, and that mitigation is required to reduce these concentrati~-n~ - to'a permissible residual level, whiCh is protective of health of the OCcupants of the building. the An RI/FS was con~lucted to assess the feasibility and co~ effectiveness of mitigation technologies. The results of the RI/FS analysis are that~the time fra.me for natural biodegradation.is not sufficiently protective of the health of the current occupants of the "building, ~emoval of the hydrocarbons through excavation is not feasible or cost effective given the significant depth of the hyd/~carbons and the existence of a significant volume of the .hydroCarbons beneoth' the bud n~rhe time .f~ome fQr !n-sttu bioven_ting is not sufficiently .' .... .~ -HOL©UINi : - '- ExecutiVe Summary "- J--~'%'1 FAHAN' - ' ' ' Page2 ~1 :I~1 & ASSOCIATES,_ 1NC. -: ,' ' - ' ' -~-- (ENVIRC~NMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS : ' , : - I';' ' Protestive of the health of tl~ current occupants of the building and biove_.nting is not the iCost-effective alternative, and ln-situ vapor extraction 'is the cost-effective~lfernative, which Is protective of the health of the current occupants of the building.' I _; ._ . Biased on the PI~Yslcal properties of hydrocarbons in the gasoline range (i.e., high vapor i pressdre, Iow solubility, and a high Henry's Law constant), in-situ vapor extraction Is a very effective technology for mitigating hydrocarbOns adsorbed onto soil particles. Treatment is accomplished by extracting VOCs from the subsurface using an extraction blower and treating I the e~xfracted vapors utilizing either carbon absorption, thermal oxidation, 'or catalytic oxidation. A San Joaquln Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District - Southern Region : ATC permit will be required prior to operation of the proposed VES. I H'F.A proposes the installation of a pilot-scale well field consisting of seven vapOr extraction i we. Il? fOr the removal of gasoline hydrocarbons from the unsaturated zone. Upon installation of the pilot-scale vapor eXtraction well field, a soil vapor extraction test will be conducted for the selection of an appropriately sized vacuum blower and emission control system prior to the I inStallation of the full-scale treatment system, vapors removed from the subsurface may be treated initially by thermal oxidation. Once vapor concentrations drop to a level where thermal oxidation is no longer economically efficient, th~ vapors may be treated using catalytic I ~, and possibly followed again by carbon absorption,:. AflTer hydrocarbon Vapor .. concentrations reach asymptotic levels, the system will be shut down pending verification soil ~. - sampling. Throughout the treatment process, the sYstem will be monitored on a weekly basis In I older to optimize its effectiveness and track the progress of hydrocarbon removal from the subsurfacel I I , INC. ~_~ -~- .- "----' ENVIRGNMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS - - , ' ., UST OF ,,CROHYMs ACGIH . . .~ '~ American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hyglenisfs APN '~As~essor's Parcel NUmber ASTM~ -American SocleW of Testing'9~d Materials ~'TC ?- _ auth0ri~ to construct BFDHMD Bakersfield Fire Depa~ment H~zardous-Matedals Division benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes BTEX CAP .corrective action plan : CAS Chemical Abstract Se~lce CCR California Code of Regulations CDMG California Division of Mines and GeolOgy cfm cubib feet per minute CRWQCB-CVR CalifOrnia Regional Water QualiW Control Board, Central Valley Region (5) EPA Environmental Protection Agency ES Emergency Standard fbg feetbelow grade feasibili~ study FS GAC granular activated car~on GEM Good EaCh Machine ' .. h~ horse power ins-w~ter inches of water column vacuum KCWA .Kern Coun~ Water Agency LENL ''Lawrence Uvermore National Laborato~ MDBM ' Mount Diablo Base and Meridian._-: NFA no fudher action NIOSH Notional Institute of Occupational safe~ and Health O'&M :operations and maintenance PID photoionization detector pPm parts per million . . ppmv pads per million by volume PTO :permit to operate PVC polyvinyl chloride RBCA Risk B~sed Corrective Action RBSL risk based screening level- ROI ' radius of influence RI remedial investigation scfm standard cubic feet per minute SJVUAPCD-SR Son Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution District- Southern Region SVE' soil vapor extraction SVET soil vapor extraction test SWRCB State water Resources Control Board T L V threshold limit value TPH . total petroleum hydrocarbons ~ weighted average W T A time U~EPA UnitediSfQtes Environmental Protection Agency US T'.. . _..underground storage tank: - _ ~ - - ~ ~ .. ;~.V.~S ..t:. : ,* ~ ~apor extraction system .... : '" : ~V~c .~ :--:::.:.. volatile.organ c compouBO .' ;~ : _: :~ '~- ~ '" - W:H:V : ~ .. ~-:~;~wellheadvacuum . - - - - : ' ~:~-E~ '_- .ENM[RONMENTAL MANAGE .MEN7 C~ONSULTANTS : I' ..... --': -- ~ _ 1. INTRODUCTION : -:' ' Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., (HFA) was contracted by'Saint Vincent De Paul and Its I representative, Smith-Gutcher and Associates, Inc., (Smith-Gutcher) to prepare a CAP for the 'saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store, located at 300 Baker Street, Bakersfleld~ Kern County, '1 California. The topography at the site is relatively flat, with a slighfslope to the southwest (see Figure 1 - Site Location Map). The subject site is bound on the east by Baker Street, on the south by Chico Street, and On the west and north by commercial properties. The property is I located in the southeastern quarter of the southwestern .quarter of Section 29, T29S, R28E, MDBM, and is identified as APN 016-320,15-00-2.. The property Is situated within a developed ' commercial and light industrial area, interspersed with residential properties. A 550-gallon I gasoline UST, dispenser, and associated product piping were previously removed from the site (See Figure 2 - Plot Plan Showing VES). I The property owner Is Saint Vincent De Paul. The Owner contact Is Reverend Ralph Belluomlni, 310 Baker Street, Bakersfield, California, 93305, (805) 323-7340. The project consultant contact Is I Mr. Duane R. Smith, Smith-Gutcher & Associates, Inc., Post Office Box 60706, Bakersfield, California, 93386, (805) 871-3207. The remediation contractor contact is Mr. Mark R. Magargee, H:Olguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., 3157 Pegasus Drive, Bakersfield, California, 93308, I (805) 391-0517. i Smith-Gutcher completed a soil assessment report dated March 1992, which identified the distribution of 'hydrocarbons in the soils at the Site. The purpose of this CAP for soil, which is b~sedI on the evaluation of information from previous site assessment activities, is to determine I whether the adsorbed-phase subsurface hydrocarbons in the vadose zone present a health : :. threat or a threat to the environment, and if such a threat exists, to recommend an appropriate mitigation alternative for the gasoline-containing soils. Ail action taken to remediate the soils at the site will be performed with the approval of the controlling regulatory agencies, which include the BFDHMD and the SJVUAPCD-SR. All permits I and approvals from these agencies relating to site mitigation will be obtained prior to undertaking the proposed corrective actions for this site, I J-. .:J -HOL©UIN,- ~ Reverend Ralph Belluomini -'gl l. & ~IATES,. INC. = ,. . ~ . : June~.. 1_7, 1.996-. _--;Page . EN~VIRONMEf~JTAL MANAGEMENT_ CONSULTANTS : ~ ~-- :Z.~ : : ' 2. SITE HISTORY Based' on a review/: of available data, analytical results, and conversations with Mr. Duane Smith, on June 17, 1991, a 550-gallon' gasoline UST, dispenser, and :associated product piping were removed from the property: 'The former UST and dispenser were located immediately adjacent'to the southwestern co~ner of the thrift store building - (see Figure 2). Soil samples collected from beneath the location, of the UST indicated.concentrations of gasoline hydrociarbons (See Table 1 - summary of Soil Sample Analytical Results). On January 28, 1992, Smith-Gutcher advanced four soil borings (TH-1 through TH-4) to a maximum depth of 70 fbg, in and around the area of the former UST (see Figure 2). Laboratory analysis of soil samples collected' from the soil borings indicates that gasoline-containing soil is present to a depth of approximately 55 fbg within an approximate 25-foot radius around the former UST at the site (see Figure 3 - Cross Section A-A' and Table 1). 'Gasoline-containing soils are believed to extend to at least 20 feet under the southwestern cprnei' of the thrift store building. Groundwater was not encountered and is not anticipated above a depth'in excess of 200 fbg. The impacted soil consists of highly permeable, fine-grained to coarse-grained sands and silty sands Interbedded with a significant Interval of sgndylisilts and silts (see Figure 3). ii HOLG( INi . Reverend Ralph Belluomini FAHAN - saint vincent De Paul & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS · -- - 3._ REGIONAL AND SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY The site is located in a relatively flat area at an eleVation of approximately 415 feet above MSL. The site is in the southern of the Great province. Iocated~ portion Valley geomorphic The Great Valley is a¢ north-south trending valley, approximately 400 miles long by 50 miles wide, the southern portion of which is known as the San Joaquin Valley. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and Recent (11,000 years ago to the present) alluvial sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments are older, predominantly lake bed deposits. These lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene marine sediments, which extend to a crystalline basement at a depth of appro,ximately 30,000 fbg. Geologic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments of the Kern River Formation, which form a homocline dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are, alluvium consisting of poorl¢ Indurated and dissected fan deposits (CDMG, 1965). The site is an area at the foot of rolling hills reaching a maximum elevation of 900 feet above MSL, located on the eastern flank of the San Joaquin Valley and west of the southern Sierra Nevada. The Kern River drains a large area of the sOuthern Sierra Nevada, including the highest Part of the .range at Mount Whitney. The modern river has cut a channel southeast of the site and provides recharge for groundwater along its course. Sedimentary geologic formations, observed at the surface and underlying the site were sourced by the Sierra Nevada and transported via the ancestral Kern River. Surface water and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley. are derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada to the east, and are transported by five major rivers, the southernmost being the Kern River. The subject site is located approximately 2 miles south of the Kern River. The depth td the regional unconfined aquifer mapped by the KCWA is approximately 200 fbg at the site, with the direction of groundwater flow to the southwest (KCWA, February 1, 1994). The nearest known occurrence of perched groundwater is 2 miles to the southwest at a depth of 20 fbg in the abandoned Kern River channel to the ancient Kern Lake bed (KCWA, May 1993). In:the region of the site, the Tertiary sedimentary sequence from top to bottom is nonmarine Kern River Formation, nonmarine Chanac Formation, marine Santa Margarita Formation (p?ssibly interfing~ing with Chanac Formation due to the tentative correlation of type Sdnta Margarita Formation west of the San Andreas fault), marine Round Mountain Silt, marine Olcese Sand, marine Freeman Silt, marine Jewett Sand and Pyramid Hill member, marine Vedder Sand, nonmarine Walker Formation. Of these, only the Kern River, Chanac, and Santa Margar ta~ _Formations are important-to the hydrogeology:~of th'e 'site._.. _ ~,~The~.. Tertiary, - ReVerend Ralph Belluomini ,: HOLGUIN .... .~. . -- ' Saint Vincent De Paul FAHAN ' : & ~I~TES, lNG-. : June. 17, 1996- Page 4 ;-- . .ENVIRC-~NMEi~TAL__ ._ MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS -~ nonmarine Kern ~River formation is unconformably.overlain by bouldery terrace dep~o, sits of . ~ O'uaternaw:Older Alluvluml -" ' ~ T~Vo naturally occurring geologic Units are present in the near surface at the site. The two - -natural units are the Tertiary (Miocene to Pliocene), nonmarine Kern River Formation, and i : ': ' Quaternary (Pleistocene) Older Alluvium. The Olde~. Alluvium forms a thin terrace deposit lying ~ unconformably on the Kern River Formation. I ~uaterna:rV Older Alluvium: The middle to lower Pleistocene (Barrow, 1984), Older Alluvium is a ' flat-lyihg t~race deposit approximately 5 to 10 feet thick that overlies the erosional surface of the Kern River Formation, The Older Alluvium is composed of very coarse material, with I as large as 50 cm in diameter, Clastic material composition includes granitic and boulders dioritic crystalline rocks characteristic of the Sierra Nevada batholiths, quartzite characteristic i of pre-batholithic rocks, and volcanic and related rocks such as andesite and dark siliceous agatetypical of the Neogene deposits of the M°Jave desert. In some locations, caliche rims have developed between-clasts. - I Kern River Formation: The age of the Kern River Formation includes upper Miocene and Pljocene and possibly Pleistocene. The Kern River Formation is composed of interstratified I deposits silty claystones, fanglomerates are conglomerate fanglomeratic and Within the beds With cobbles as large as 20 cm in diameter, and in some areas fanglomerate beds exhibit I cross bedding from 2.5 to 5 meters thick. The silty claystone beds, which would serve as · lo,w-permeability barriers to vertical migration, are laterally continuous to as much as several thousand feet, but are locally truncated by sandy fanglomerate units. Another important factor I in: considering the I~otential for migration Is the lack of secondary permeability within the Kern River Formation as no secondary cracks, small faults, or gypsum veins are observed. Chanac Formation: The Chanac Formation of upper Miocene age is not exposed on or near th'e site, but outcrops in the cliffs southeast of the site along the Kern River bluffs at Hart Park. It is a 'thinly bedded chalky siltstone exhibiting many secondary cracks and gypsum veins. On-site soil borings indicate that the alluvium is characterized by highly permeable fine-grained to coarse-grained sand interbedded with lower permeabiJity silt zones ranging in depth from 24 to 27 fbg, 35 to 37 fbg, 44 to 57 fbg, and 63 to 70 fbg. The base of gasoline-containing soils is within the siih/interval ranging in depth from 44 to 57 fbg. -5' :--~ ' -': ':': '::'' · - ''-- : : ~'~ ' '.' J HOLGUI'N; ' :' ~ Reverend RalPI~ Belluominl "- FAHAN -_ ' Saint Vincent De Paul !1 & IATF,% INC. -.- : -- June 17, 'leO.PageS ENVIRONMEr~ITAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS : m ~ 4. HUMAN HEALTH AND~_ENVlRONMENTAL THREAT ASSESSMENT -- 4~'i CHARACTERISTICS OF GASOLINE m Gasoli'ne is a c!ear, flammable, vOlatile liquid with a characteristic odor. It Is a complex mixture of paraffinic, olefinic, and aromatic hydrocarbons ranging from C4 to C12 compounds. AS many · a! 250 separate ihYdrocarbons can be found in various commercial gasolines. A typical modern gasoline composition would be 50 to 80 percent paraffins, 10 to 40 Percent aromatics, and 5 :to 10 percent olefins. CAS Number: 8006-61-9 Benzene CAS ~umber: 71-45-2 l°luene CAS ~umber: 108-88-$ Ethylbenzene CAS Number: 100-41-4 m Xylene CAS Number: 1330-20-7 Benzene Chemical Formula: C6H6 Toluene Chemical Formula: C7H8 m Ethylbenzene Chemical Formula: C8H10 Xylene Chemical Formula: C8H10 m CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF GASOLINE Molecular Weight 84 Boiling Point >39°C, 77-121°C (50% distilled), <240°C Melting Point -90.5 to -95.4°C Flash Point -45 to -50°C Autoignition Temperature 536 to 853°F Explosive Limits 1.4% to 7.6% . Vapor Density 3.0 to 4.0 Specific Gravity 0.72 to 0.76 at 60°F Solubility in Water Insoluble Solubility in Organics Soluble in most common organic solvents 4.2 HUMAN HEALTH THREAT ASSESSMENT · _ Gasoline is .a suspected human carcinogen. A TLV of 300 ppm or 900 mg/m3 has been assigned to gasoline. This value of 300 ppm was assigned based on an average of 3 percent benzene (10 ppm TLV) in gasoline. Low-level inhalation exposure to gasoline can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and respiratory system; headache; and nausea. Acute toxicity is similaF for all gasolines. Gasolines act as an anesthetic and are mucous membrane inhabitants.. The~ hazard is h!gh becaUse of the '~ase in which harmful concentrations may · .... . -: ~ Reverend RalPh BellOomini I::! ' ~: ' June 17,1996:Page6 -. _ ~= . [~NVI[Z~E~NMENTAI- M,~,NAC]~EEMENT GCi)N~UL.T.Z:~NTE~ ' ' ' - ' I ' ' devd6p, inhalOti9~ is the most important route of 0Ccupationol entrY. Acute symptoms of intoxication, headache, blurred vision, dizziness~-and' nausea are the moSt common sYmptoms:resUlting from excessive vapor exp°sure. ~ Reported responses to gasoline vapors .U are: 1. eYe and throat, rrtaton within several hours at a concentration of 160'to 270 ppm; ~_ 2. eye; nose, an~ throat Irritation and dizziness within 1 h°~Jr at a concentration of 500 to 900 ppm; Ii add 3. mild aneSthesia within 30 minutes at a concentration of 2,000 ppm. Higher concentrations ~ a~e intoxicating within 4 to 10 minutes. The threshold_ concentration for immediate mild toxic · effect-is 900 to 1,o00 ppm. Inhalation of high concentrations cdn cause fatal pulmonary edema. I - - There are reports of toxic.neuritis following exposure to gasoline. Repeated or prolonged skin exposure causes dermatitis and can cause blistering of the skin due to gasoline's defatting' " properties. Repeated or prolOnged exposure to eyes can cause hyperemia of the I ' Ingestion can cause vertigo, confusion, conjunctive. inebriation, droWsiness, blurred vision, vomiting, and cyanosis. Aspiration after ingestiOn causes bronchitis, pneumonia, or edema, - which can be fatal. The chemical comPonents of gasoline that are the most dangerous are the volatile aromatics I benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (see Table 2 - Hazardous Chemical Substances of Occupational Health Concern for a summary of the physical and chemical properties and associated health hazards). Benzene is the most significant potential' health hazard found in gasoline and is a suspected hgman carcinoge,n, A TLV of 10 ppm or 30 mg/m3 has been assigned to benzene. I B~nze~e has a Iow odor threshold limit of 1.4 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to benzene can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and respiratory system; headache; and nausea. A TLV Iot 100 ppm or 375 mg/m$ has been assigned to toluene. Toluene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 2.1 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to toluene can cause fatigUe, weakneSS, confusion, and euphoria. A TLV of 100 ppm or 435 mg/m3 has been assigned to ethylbenzene. Ethylbenzene has a.low odor threshold limit of 2 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to ethylbenzene can 'cause irritation to the eyes and mucous membranes. A TLV of 100 ppm or 435 mg/m3 has been assigned to xylene. No Iow odor threshold limit has been established for I xylene. Low-level inhalation exposure to xylene can cause' dizziness, excitement, and drowsiness (see Table 2). HOLGUIN, - .... " . Reverend Ralph Beiluomini FAHAN Saint Vincent De Paul '-: ~ June 17, 1996- Page 7 & ASSOCIATES, 1NC. ENVIR(~)NMEi~ITAL MANAGEMENT CONSL3LTANTS E~tlmates of the'carcinogenic risks associated with llfe eXposure to various concentrations of b~nzehe 'in' water are: LIFE EXPOSURE CARCINOGENIC :RISKS Risk USEPA Concentration CCR Title 22 Concentration CAG Unit Risk (US[PA): 0.029 (mg/k0/doy) -1 Unit Risk (CCR Title 22): 0.1 (mo/kg/day) -1 NIOSH Recommended Standard: 1.0 pg/m3 TWA ACGIH TLV: 0.1 mg/m3 TWA I I ,~,~..... .F./~iq~a~r~' -_~ _. i.'i" ..... ~everend Ralph'Be'luominisaint Vincent De Paul - ;; ''. . ': : :il ;'~ i: ?: ..;'( '~ ' .... June 17, :1-996-:Page 8 & LATES,' INC.- .'. -'; -"~' ;'~ 7.-_.£ : EI~I=X2JRONME~yALMAN.~,GE~Ix~ENT-C~iZ)NSLILTANTS :" . .~. S. RISK EVALUATION -= ..... : ! CCR, Title 23, Article 1,1, section 2725 requires that a CAp Contain an "assessment of' the impacts" I of the unauthorized, release and an FS to evaluate and select the most cost-effective corrective action. ~W~t'=hi-n'the CAP, the responsible party is required to recommend target i -' cleanup levels fOr long:term corrective action to the regulatory agency for concurrenCe. .. To assess the Impacts,.. a, risk evaluation has been conducted in conformance to the , ~ ' ASTM besignc~tion: E-1739 RBCA, LLNL's Recommendations to Improve the Cleanup ProCess for i· " Califo"rnia's Leakir~g,Clnd~rground Fuel Tanks report dated October 16, 1995, and the SWRCB's Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Technical Review Guidance Document-No; 4; dated I December 27, 1995,. 5:1 RBCA TIER 1 RISK EVALUATION - I HFA Utilized the ASTM E-1739 Tier 1 RBSL Worksheets and Look-Up Tables to assess the lifetime o'ne-in-a-million (ix10-6) health risk for the following exposure pathways: 1. indoor air Inhalation; I 21 outdoor air inhalatiOn; 3. soil volatilization to outdoor air; 4. soil vapor intrusion from soil to b':'uildings; and 5.. surface soil ingestion/dermal/l~halation. Re-evaluation of the risk to g'~oundwater resources was not conducted in assOciation with this risk evaluation, since there is I -more than 15[] feet of between the known soils and the separation deepest gasoline-containing fiist occurrence of groundwater, and intervening barriers to hydr6carbon migration are present. ~ Benzene con..centrotions ranging from 2 to 200 rog/kg (equivalent to 2 to 200 ppm) have been ~ detected in soil samples collected from beneath the USI end ore known to extend beneath the I ~outhwestern corner of the thrift' store building, lb0 Igor 1 risk evaluation indicates that these concentrations exceed tho RBSL to bo protective of tho occupants of tho buildin~ for tho inhalation exposure pathw, 9¥ (see ^ttochment 1 for the RBCA lief 1 worksheets end , dOse/response calculations for lifetime lxl0-6 exposure), In accordance with RBCA, either mitigation is undertaken to reduce the exposure to below l xl0-6 exposure levels, or additional li.~r 2 Site-specific modeling is conducted to assoss whether the concentration detected in the 'J soJJ exceeds the lx10-6 exposure levels at the receptor location for each exposure pathway. Tlqis is~done by either collecting long-term, site-specific analytical data at each receptor -~ location or by modeling the fate and mobility of the contamination from its current location to .-~ each.. ~eceptor location. It' is' important to note that the California unit cancer risk slope factor for benzene is .0.1 (mg/kg/day)-1 as compared to the USEPA slope factor of 0.029 (mg/kg/day)-!, and that the .. ~r : . _ --' - ?/~ ~-~. ~ ' ' ' ~. FAHAN Saint Vincent De Paul I I I.~~. I :~ A,,.S,.SOCLA.TE~. INC. .- June. 17. 1996'-'Oage 9 ENMi.RC). NME~T~ITAL MAN~,GEr~ENT CONSULTANTS. ' 5'~2 RBCA-TIER 2 RISK EVALUATION - -HFA-~tilized the RBCA-:60ntaminate fate and~tfansP0rtlmgdeling algorithms to assess the site-sPecific.exposure 'levels at each receptor t° de~ermihe whether these levels exceed permissible lxl0-~exposure levels. The contami~nant fate and transport modeli_ng indicates that because benzene is present at concentratiE)ns.ranging between 2 and 200 rog/kg beneath the southwestern corner of the thrift store building, the potential benzene expOsure level for the ir~doo~ air inhalation pathway exceeds the permissible lx10-6 exposure level for commercial use. The contamir~ant fate and transport model did not indicate a likelihood for the surface soil ingestion/dermal/inhalation exposure concentrations, or outdoor air inhalati°n exposure concentrations to exceed the permissible lx10-6 exposure levels (see Attachment 2 for the RBCA: Tier 2 fate and. transport modeling worksheets and dose/response calculations for lx10-6 lifetime exposure). 5~3 REMEDIATION GOALS The BFDHMD is'the lead regulatory agency for the site. In general, the BFDHMD requires the cleanup.of hydroCarbon-containing soils to comply with the source removal r. equirements recommended in the SWRCB's Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Technical Review Guidance Document No. 4, dated December 27, 1995. Source:remov. al includes the removal of the leaking UST, liquid' phase hydrocarbons in the vadose zone, and mobile' vapor phase hydrocarbons in the vadose zone. In accordance with the RBCA Tier 1 and 2 risk evaluations, source removal is required to assure that mobile hydrocarbon vapor exposure via the indoor. air inhalation pathway does not exceed the permissible lx10-6 exposure level for commercial use. HFA utilized the RBCA Tier 2 contaminate fate and transport modeling algorithms to determine the cleanup ievel for benzene to reduce the risk to below the permissible lx10-6 exPosure level (see Attachment 3 for the RBCA Tier 2 benzene cleanup level calculations for the back calculation of the benzene concentration which is less than the lifetime lx10'6 permissible exposure level). A cleanup level of 0.5 rog/kg for benzene concentrations, in the soil beneath the southwestern corner of the thrift store building will reduce the lifetime exposure level to below lx10~6. i .... : :~_. _ '_ ":~-!~-~: "r' Reverend Ralph Belluomini ':: ~I-F/~I-I~N.i:i' ~ i ' - :-~ . Saint vincent Do Paul . E::: :' ~ ':':' :: ~N':VIR~Z~NME~xITAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS " I - :' - 'i:- , , 6. EST'I'MAiION OF THE MASS.OF:HYDROCARBON: IN THE SOILS ~, ~ ' The'_known contaminant at-the site has been identified as petroleum hydrocarbons in the .... gasoline range. Based on smith,GutCher's, site assessment investigations, hydrocarbons in ' exCe§S of the benzene'cleanup level have been determined to be present in the subsurface I ' soils at depths_ raqging from 5 to 55 fbg beneath the site, with the lateral limits of hydrocarbons V~ithir~~ 25 feet:d1; the UST, including 20 feet- beneath th-e southwestern corner of the thrift store . b. ui[dihg. The total .volume of gasdine-contain_ing _soils .is estimated to be approximately I ' 3,650 cubic yards-. ' The' total volume of soils with benzene, concentrations in excess of 10 my/kg - - · and TpH as- gasoline concentrations in excess of 1,000 rog/kg is estimated to be approximately 11,050 cubic yards, the total volume of soils with 'benzene conCentrations between 1 and I 1:0 my/kg and TPH as gasoline concentrations between. 100 and 1,000 my/kg is estimated to be 0pproximately 1,050 cubic yards, and the total volume of soils with benzene concentrations i between 0.5 and 1 mo/kg and TPH as gasoline concentrations between'10 and 100 my/kg is estimated to be aPp~oximateiy 1,550 cubic ya[ds. These soils contained an estimated 2,420 pounds of hydrocarbons in the gasoline range. This converts into approximately I 390gallons. of gasoline absorbed into the subsurface (see the table below). Appr0x mately 485 pounds,of hydrocarbons is estimated to be present beneath the thrift store building. ._ ' .-. ' MASS OFiHyDROCARBONS IN SOIL ' DEPTH CUBIC AVERAGE TPH ABSORBED ABSORBED ~INTERVAL , _DIMENSIONS YARDS CONCENTRATION HYDROCARBONS GALLONS I' (fbg) (ft} (rog/kg) (lbs) ' 10 to 50 · 40 x 15 x-15 x 9.14 1,050 1,500 2,030 325 . 7.5 to 52.5 (45 x20 x 20 x 3.14) - 1,050 1,050' 250. 340 55 I 5 t~ 55 (50 x' 251 x 25 x 3.14)- 2,100 1,550 25 - 50 10 ~ Total N/A 3,650 N/A7 2,420 390 Total Beneath N/A 730 'N/A 485 80 I 'Building N/A = Notapplicable. '" I ,HOLOUIN; ..... ~ : : Reverend Ralph Belluomini :' ' FAFtAN , - Saint vincent De Paul *-' '~-" ::'~ :; "- ENvIRONMEnTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS i-.:x -: 7. SOIl REMEDIATION ~ "- (he sail remediation technologies for mitigation~ of hydrocarbon-containing soils can be ~ivided into:in-situ and aboveground, eX-situ Processes. Aboveground processes involve excavation and 'either off-site disposal o~ Surface.treatment. Excavation is generally most - - ~ppropriate for sites where a short remediation time ,is, required, the hydrocarbon-containing . soils are shallow (less than 25 feet deep) and of limitedvolume within the site, soil permeabiliN is :- Iow and prevents effective vacuum extraction, bioventing, or bioremediation, and/or the Contdminant chemistry prohibits in-situ treatment technologies (i.e., contaminants that have Iow solubility or vapor pressure such as heavy metals, heavy oil, diesel fuel, and some chlorinated organic compounds). In-situ processes are most for sites where the appropriate presence of surface'structures limits excavation options, contaminant chemistw is favorable for mobilization of the contaminant in the subsurface medium, soil permeabiliN is moderate or high, and the remediation time frame can be extended to 1 year or more. These various treatment technologies are briefly discussed belaw. 7~1.1,1 Vo~Or [xtrocfion I B°so~ on tho ~hgdcol proportios of hloh Iow soluDili~, on~ o vopor pressure, high ~enry's Low Constont), in-situ SVE is ~ very effective technology for mitigating g~soline odsorbed onto soil 'p~rticles. Treatment is ~ccomplished by extracting VOCs from the ~ subsu¢~ce using ~n extroction blower ~nd treating the extrocted repots utilizing either c~rbon -- ~bsorPtion, thermal, oxidotion, or c~tdlytio oxidation. SVE generally removes in excess of 90 percent of the g~soline compounds from the soils.' The cost to remove g~soline from soils da SVE is moderote. In oddition, the soils c~n remdn undisturbed during treCtment. This eliminates the cost of exc~votion ond repetition. Additionally, SVE con contribute to g?oundweter remedi~tion by allowing volotiliz~tion of dissolved-phdse hydrocorbons from the cCpill~w fringe. I. 7.1,1.2 Bioventing Bioventing is intended to replenish the oxygen in the i .:mpacted soils, thus promoting an I enhanced rate of the natural biodegradation of the hydrocarbons~ Bioventing can be conducted in several forms. For passive bioventing, venting wells are constructed in and around the area of. impacted soil, and oxygen diffuses from the well bore into the soils, while 'I VOCs degas from the'soils to the atmosphere by way of the Venting wells. For injection ._ bioventing, oxygen is injected into to the impacted soils through the construction of injection :- --.- - wells id and around the area. of impacted soils. For'extraction bioventing, circulation ofoxygen L . . - Reverend RalPh Belluomini ~ :. - FAHAN' ...... ' · -' Saint Vincent De Paul :. ~._ & A.SS(Z~-~ IATES, :INC. - . ........ June 17, 1996- Page 1 -~ '" ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTAN¥S ':- ]' I through the iml~acted soils Is created using a IoW-flow extractl'on blo~/er. This form of -- ' bio~/enting:differs from:SVE in that it Is intended to minimize'the extraction of hydrocarbons to - the surface, Which would require a sophisticated emission control System. Rather, the.intention -- is to regulate the fJow of oxygen through the soil so that adequate moistUre .conditions are maintained for effective biodegradation; and the'hydrOcarbons are degraded in-situ prior to I - being ::extracted tb~the, surface. Therefore, only GAC canisters are generally required for the ~ s0rface emission control system. The risk with this'~orm of bioventing is that-GAC will ultimately '~- be very expensive: if significant quantities of hydrocarbons are extracted, Therefore, the I extraction must be !'slowed" to a rate permitting complete biodegradation of the hydrocarbons to occur first, and consequently the Overall cleanup time is greatly increased as compared to true vapor extraction. I 7.1.1.$ ' Bioremediation .~ This process involves the-'lnjection of oxygen and nutrients Into the subsurface to stimulate the indigenous microorganisms to digest the organic, compounds. Specialized metabolic ._ microorganisms may be added to the treatment zone. Bioremediation is O&M-intensive and I Will imPact facility oPerations. In-situ bioremediation is most apPlicable at sites with nonvolatile contaminants and where the subsurface contaminants are .readily accessible for biostimulafion through surface infiltration networks. 7.1.1.4 ~ Chemical Treatment i TWo methods generally employed for sites with hydrocarbon-cOntaining soils are soil flushing ahd bxidation. Soil flushing involves flooding the hydrocarbon-containing interval with a water surfactant mixture and collecting the elutriated solution for treatment. This can be expensive I due to' the extensive' monitoring required and the difficultyin collecting the sUrfactant solution. '-- These limitations can_ be overcome by using an oxidizing agent (e.g., hydrogen peroxide) to detoxify the hydrocarbons in the soil matrix. However, because the extent of degradation is J"l uncertain, the oxidation process is often most aPplicable asa pre-treatment technique for I1~ biological degradation. In general, chemical treatment techniques are still in the development I stage and have limited applicability at this time. 7.1.1.5 :Natural Attenuation . I Natural attenuation is the process of biodegradation, diffusion, and dispersion, reducing the ' concentration of the cOntaminants of concern to acceptable levels. Natural attenuation is appropriate at those sites where exposure Of receptors to the compounds of concern via air, I ' ~ soil, and groundwater pathways is not Iike!y to ocCur during the time frame required for natural attenuation. The rate of natural attenuation varies greatly depending on numerous factors '~'::" '~; ~ i!: ~"'· FAHAN :. .. saint vincent De Paul ':1 :':- &~IATE.~, INC. ~- June.. 17,.1996- Page.. 13 ¢- :~ ~ ~ ENViRONME[~JTAL MANAGEMENZ CONSULTANTS . -I ' -:' :'i dcldding the properties of the compound of concern and site conditions including soil ·: ' chem!stry~-organic content, moisture content, and available oxygen. 7:.1.2 Ex-Situ Piocesses (Excavation) 'Excavation is generally most opproprlote for undeveloped sites or sites that will be renovated I so th0t buildings or other fadlities are not impacted by the excavation. Whether the hydrocarbon-containing soils are then treated on site or disposed of off site Is primadly based on space and cost considerations. I 7:1.2.1 Off-Site Disposd Excavation and off-site clisposol of soft is a less desffable alternative as the hydrocarbons or I other compounds of concern are not mitigated, but ore merely transported to another location with the associated liability intact. I' 7'.1.2.2 On-Site Thermal DesorDtion Excavated soils containing hydrocarbon concentrations above regulatory limits could be I treated with a mobile treatment unit. One such currently available unit is the Ryan-Murphy, GEM. This technology utilizes a rotary dryer to heat soils to a temperature of 600 to 700°F, VOCs are ducted through a high-temperature baghouse and destroyed, while dried soils are I discharged and stockpiled on site for later use as backfill. The GEM-is designed to treat soils with relatively high hydrocarbon concentrations and water I saturations below 25 percent. The GEM becomes:costrprohibitlve for treating soils with water saturations In the 30-percent range such as the hydrocarbon-containing soils located in the I capillary zone at the subject site. - - '- 7J.2.3: Bioremediation/Land Farming I Excavated soils with hydrocarbon concentrations above regulatory limits can be bioremediated on site by stimulating the indigenous bacteria within the soils by adding nutrients and oxygen. The hydrocarbons are then used as a food source for the bacteria and are I degraded to carbon dioxide, water, and-biomass. 'This alternative is generally the most Cost-effective of the three treatment processes for excavated material; however, extensive I open space for constructing treatment cells is required. 7.2 FEASIBILITY STUDY SUMMARY I The depth of hydrocarbon-containing soils and the proximity of structures at the subject site render soil excavation and treatment (or disposal) impractical. The potential in-situ ~ '-: ~:': -~--technologies include natural attenuation' bioventing, and SVE.: The Jn-situ technologies of I .~=-~:-~:~ .. - . . ~ - : :i i': ' . -_ .--.:., z '?;-:.i":~' :" ~ 7 '.:~_~r.. -" : ' :'*: :27 . - ;: L'_'I :-HOLGUIN, ~ ...... ReverefidRalph;Beliuomini '- FAHAN - . , .~ Saint Vincent De Paul I -'- '"; & L,'kTE.S, INC. June 17,,1996-Page 14 -~T.,_~..-~ _ ~ -- ~ . ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ' ;! ' bioremediation and chemical treatment are not' generally Considered'to be as cost effective as SVE for the mitigation ofgasoline hydrocarbons adsorbed onto unsaturated soils. i I The cleanup times for the in-situ technologies vary from greatest for natural attenuation, lower fo[: pas§ive bioventing, lower yet for injection bioventing, followed by extraction bloventing, and shortest for.SVE. Extraction bioventing has an order of magnitude greater Cleanup time ,. ~. than SVE. Conversely, the monthly operating, regUlatory liaison, and regulatory oversight costs - are lowest for natural attenuation, higher for:Passive bioventing, higher yet for injection I bi0venting, followed by extraction bioventing, and highest for SVE. However, the overall project cost is a combination of these factors. SVE can frequently cost less than extraction bi0venting when considering the significant cost of GAC, and the very extended time frame for I passive bioventing injection bioventing may very and result in significant, long-term regulatory liaison and oversight costs. Natural attenuation may have the lowest direct costs, and site closure' may be conditionally issued; however, the long-term social cost of the restricted use of I the property including reduced property values may render this option the most costly, when all costs are considered. I The RBCA Tier 2 evaluation indicates that the selected mitigation technology must have an approPriate time frame to reduce the exposure of benzene through indoor air inhalation to the I occupants of the thrift Store building. Natural attenuation, passive bioventing, and injection bi0venting will not reduce the concentration of benzene within a'time frame, which is protective ¢ I ofithe health of the employees withinthe thflff store building. Based 'on the above described site conditions, HFA recommends that the in-situ treatment I methods of SVE or extraction bioventing are the most feasible remediation technologies for removing hydrocarbons from the unsaturated zone within a time frame, which is protective of the health of the employees of the thrift stole. Due to the highly permeable soil and the volatile I nature of the gasoline contamination, the subject project is in essence a textbook example of a site that is well suited for a rapid and successful cleanup through SVE. SVF would greatly ~ shOrten the time to complete the treatment and significantly reduce the risk of enormous costs I for disposal of spent carbon associated with extraction bioventing. The additional time _- required to complete extraction bioventing'would reSult in a significant cost associated with I performing system O&M and the ongoing quarterlY regulatory liaison and reporting including air emissions monitoring and reporting. HFA believes that for this site, SVE has a higher probability h of; success, a shorter time interval for completion, .and ultimately presents lower overall cleanup I c6st than extraction bioVenting. HFA recommends SVE as the cost-effective remedial technologY/that presents the lowest risk of adverse health:effects to the employees of the thrift -;:-: .... ,'-st6re. -i :. - ~- : --:- :-' : ..... '_-1:1~': - :: ': ' ' ~ ': - ': ' - i.~.:_~__~ ~_:./. -FAMAN Saint vincent De Paul I ...... IATE , INC. ~ June 17, ! 996, Page 15 .... ' , - E~NVi~iO"NMENTAL.MAIX~IAGE[~v1ENT CONSULTANTS _, .. 8.-IN-SITU SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION - : 8.~ SYSTEM DESIGN ' I' on the results of the FS presented above, an in-sltu VES is recommended for the Based} mitigation of gasoline-containing sOils at the subject site. To expedite the installation of a i fu:ll-sc~le VES, HFA recommends that a pilot-scale well field be installed and a SVET be conducted to determine the ROI for the site, the optimum well spacing, appropriate extraction bl°we~ size, and the initial emission control system. Despite tho lack of site-specific vapor extraction test data of tho effective ~OI for the unsaturated zone, tho lithology at the site suppers an initial assumption of an effective ~OI of I aPproximately 25 feet. lhereforo, HFA recommends tho Initial of placement seven vapor extraction walls (VW-1 through VW-7) (see Figure 2 for proposed vapor extraction wall i locations), lhe walls will bo constructed of 2-inch-diameter, schedule 40 PVC piping with 0.03-inch sio~od casing packed in aquarium sand. Soil boring VW-1 will be advanced through the former tank 'location and screened from a depth of 10 to 50 fbg. Three of the soil borings (VW:2 through VW-4) will be drilled in a triangular pattern at locations approximately 20 feet radially from the former tank, and screened from a depth of 10 to 35 fbg. The other three soil borings (VW-5 through VW-7) will be drilled in a triangular pattern at locations approximately 20 feet radially from the former tank, and screened from a depth of 35 to 55 fbg (see Figure 2 for proposed vqpor extraction well locations). This pattern is d..esigned to provide separate vapor extraction wells for the near-surface, highly permeable zone and for the deeper, moderately permeable zone. The wells will be valved.so as to be usable as inlet wells during the extraction phase to enhance . air flow across the gasoline-impacted zone (see Figure 4 - VES Schematic Diagram and Attachlment 4 for the vapor extraction well installation procedures and Attachment 5 for the v_apor extraction well construction details). Soil sampling will not be performed during drilling because the vapor extraction wells are positioned within an area that has previously undergone extensive sampling and laboratory analysis. i 8.~ vAPoR EXTRACTION TEST Upon completion of the installation of the pilot-scale vapor extraction well field, a SVET will be conducted to determine the site-specific ROI for each Iithologic zone. The results of the vapor I eXtraction test will be used to determine whether additional vapor extraction wells are required pr:ior to installation and operation of the full-scale VES. The SVET is also required by the :-. .... '. _ . _ SJ.VUApCD-SR for the permit to operate the VES on a full-time basisjn order to cOllect data to . ._ l: ~ OLC~ :: Reverend Ralph Belluomini . ES, INC. June 17, 1996- Page 16 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT _~_oNsuLTANTS ' demonstrate that the air flow from the effluent sta6k-of the system does not present a health risk to emPloyees or the adjacent-residential neighborhood. AISVET will be conducted in order to determine the flow rate/vacuum characteristics of the subsurface soil, the. ROI surrounding the vapor extraction well, the average intrinsic soil permeability, and the hydrocarbon ~concentrations within the extracted vapors. The equipment used to conduct the test will include a 3 hp, Sutorbilt Model 4HVL, pOsitive displacement blower capable of generating flow rates of up to 115 cfm at a WHV of 110 ihs-water, and two Westates Carbon, Inc., Model VSC-200, activated carbon filters to control volatile organic emissions to the atmosphere. System Parameters will-be monitored using Various magnahelic vacuum gauges, pitot tube and turbometer flow gauges, and a PID (see Attachment 6 for the extraction test and vapor procedures equipment). The SVETs .will be conducted using vapor extraction well vW-1 as ,the extraction well' (see Figure 2). A step test will be performed by extracting :soil vapors at three different vacuums for a duration of approximately 20 minutes. Selected vacuum steps will be approximately one-third of the maximum vacuum· achieved by the blower. Flow rates and corresponding WHVs and subsurface vacuums will be monitored, and the data will be recorded on a vapor extraction test recording log. The results of the test will be summarized graphically and in tabular form, and the information will be Utilized to calculate an ROI for various flow rates and the intrinsic soil permeability of the .exffacted zone. At the beginning and end of the step tests, vapor .samples will be collected in TedlarTM bags from each of the extraction wells and analyzed by a California state-certified laboratory for TPH as gasoline and BTEX using EPA Methods 8015 (M) and 8020, respectively. Upon Completion of the additional limited SVET, an RI report will be prepared that provides the final design of the full-scale VES. This information will be submitted to the SJVUAPCD-SR for the ATC permit for' the VES. The application contains detailed engineering data on the proposed remedial system. 'Estimates used to establish design criteria will be presented. Design criteria will include ROI, lithologio parameters (e.g., air permeability), hydrocarbon concentration in the ai~ stream, estimated pore volume turnover, treatment equipmerit specifications per permit requirements (i.e., ATC permit and PTa), and an estimated time for cleanup. !i HOLGUIN - - ' -- Reverend.Ralph Belluomini ; FAtTIAN " Saint vincent De Paul ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ~ONSULTANTS . 8.~ ES~IMATEB TIME FOR SOIL REMEBIATIOH ' , .- . . ~he estimoted decreose in-effluent v0Pors from the VES design ore generolly colculoted utilizing o model developed by Johnson et o1., which hOs been reduced to o m°ster curve for "gasoline. Essentially, the Johnson master c8rve predicts the pafern at which soil vapor concentrations extracted from the subsurface decrease, Where: ' ~ = Flow rate in scfm; m = Mass concentration; t = Time of vapor extraction operation; and W = Mass of contaminants in the subsurface. Utilizing Johnson's master curve for gasoline, it Is possible to estimate the degradation of extracted vapor concentrations over time if the initial concentration, the flow rate from the e~tra0tion well, and the mass of contaminants in the subsurface are known. The initial concentration and flow rate are determined fairly accurately during the SVET, and the mass of contaminants is usually estimated from the contaminant information About 2,420 pounds of hydrocarbons has been estimated to be present in the unsaturated soil at the site, and a maximum initial concentration of 2,000 Is estimated the maximum ppmv given concentrations. To estimate a best-case time for cleanup, an effective subsurface flow rate of 200 scfm and an initial vapor concentration of 2,000 ppmv were utilized, and the. vapor concentration over time was calculated for every week into the remediation (see Figure 5-Expected Vapor Concentration Degradation Over Time). As illustrated by Figure ~, the VOCs fall off exponentially, and there is a 90-percent reduction within the first 52 weeks. The vapor concentrations fall to approximately 1,000 ppmv in approximately 6 Weeks and to approximately 50 ppmv in 52 weeks. Throughout the cleanup, the determination of the mass of hydrocarbons in the subsurface is the parameter most subject to error because it is usually dependent on the laboratow results of relatively few samples collected during the site assessment.. The data is then averaged and extrapolated over the volume of contaminated soils to determine the mass. However, a more accurate estimate of the mass can be obtained from Johnson's master cuNe for gasoline after a few months of system operational data has been collected. After a few months of operation, the change in the vapor concentration during that time period and the corresponding flow rate are known. It is then possible to recalculate the mass of hydrocarbons in the subsurface, and a better estimate of the time required for cleanup can be obtained. FA _HAN ':" ' ._ . ' ' Saint Vincent De Paul & AssOC~T~;~INC. ENVlF~_O~NMENTAL MANAGEI'~,IEENT CONSULTANTS - .... 8.:~ VAPOR E~R~CTIOH SYSTEM EQUIPMENT-AND PERMi~ING ~ ' The VES should ~se o positive displacement blo~er~,~or the equivalent, with a capacity determined by the SVET, bu~ estimated at this 60 ins-water, . Th~ test Wi'Il likely indicate that direct-fired ~hermal oxidotion~is the most appropriate-and cost-effective emission control system for the initioi treatment of the vapors extracted from the ~subsurface, When the inlet concentrations have_dropped fo a level where supplemental fuel usage rises, then ~he unit will be switched into a cotal~ic ~xidofion mode until soil cleanup is obtained. Installation of the VES will commence after obtaining the following approvals and permits: · FS/CAP approval from the BFDHMD; · an ATC permit/PTa from the ~VUAPCD-SR for the selected treatment equipment; and · a Ci~ of Bakersfield Building Permit. - - Immediately after qbtaining the appropriate permits and approvals, the following tasks will be performod: · ~' procurement of all treatment system eqdpment and materials; and piping, treatment system, and treatment compound. Installation O~ subsu~ace 8.5 VAPOR EXTRAcTIoN SYSTEM MONITORING I Monitoring of the system will consist of the following measurements: I · VOCs in extracted Vapors; · total flow rate of extracted vapors; system vacuum generated by the blower; I · VOCs of vapors after treatment; and ' · ,system operating temperature. I Periodic testing of the VOCs from individual extraction wells will be conducted, and adjustments will be made to the system to minimize the duration of the cleanup. The VES will be designed for I continuous operation, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, until the concentration of gasoline hydrocarbons in the soils is reduced to less than' the BFDHMD-recommended guidelines, The anticipated duration of the remediation phase of the project is approximately 1 year from I the beginning of the remediation. A more precise time estimate will be provided upon completion of the SVET and revised with monitoring information gathered during the system HOLGUIN, ". :. _ ~'~ ~. Reverend Ralph. Belluomini FAFIAN : , "' Saint Vincent De Paul ENVIRC~NMENTAL MANAGE~MENT ~ONSULTANTS " ' i ' ~. - operation phase, A detailed description of the 'selected VES will be contained in the AEC permit application, which will also contain the results of the SyET. 8.6 PROGRESS SOIL SAMPLING At 12-month Intervals following the initiation of remedlatlon, progress soil bodngs will be advanced in order to assess mitigation progress. One Sail boring will be drilled through the central area of the.gasoline-containing soils. One additional soil boring will be drilled at an intermediate positiOn laterally in the plume to assesS the effectiveness of remedlatlng the lateral portions of the gasoline-containing soils.-Based on field observations, soil samples collected from each of the progress soil borings will be analyzed for TPH as gasoline and BTEX by a California state-certified laboratory.. Analysis of these soil samples will provide the treatment data-necessary to assess the effectiveness of the system in reducing the concentrations of gasoline hydrocarbons. HFA'will provide quarterly progress reports that detail~the remedial field activities, sample Collection, analytical results, data analysis, conclusions, and HFA's recommendation of what further remedial activities are required or that tl~e site can be closed once cleanup levels have been achieved. Certified laboratory reports and chain-of-custody documents will be included (see Attachment 7 for HFA's soil boring and well c~)nstruction p_rocedures). I Reverend Ralph Belluomini : Saint Vincent De Paul I'i fi ..... - :FAHAN -: - ~: -' June 17, 1996 - Page 20 i IATES, INC. "-.:. 'z. ~' ENvIRI~"NMEI~ITAL MANAGEMENT'CONSULTANTS : ... . I :ii · ~ ,~ - .9. SITE CLOSURE AND INTERIM REPORTING i Upon :approval of thiS CAP, HFA will submit vapo_r extraction well permit applications to the BFDHMD. Upon completion of the installation of the odoitional vapor extraction wells, HFA will .: conduct the SVET. HFA will prepare a' summary report that details the results of the SVET and I provides the design specifications of the full-scale remediation system, including the selected · emission control system for the VES. At the same time, HFA will submit an ATC permit application to the SJVUAPCD-SR for-the installation of the VES. As per BFDHMD policy, quarterly I p[ogress reports of the soil remediation system will be prepared until site closure is obtained. The report will include the monitoring requirements specified in the PTa for the VES. I 0nce!:effluent vapor concentrations from the VES reach a concentration of approximately 50 to 100 ppmv, Verification soil borings will be drilled..A sampling work plan will be developed i and sUbmitted to the-BFDHMD for approval prior to performing this work. Upon approval, i vbrificaton soil borings will be advanced in the vicinity of previouslY detected hydrocarbon-containing soils in order to evaluate VES performance and/or verify that the I propo'Sed target cleanup goals have been achieved. Following the completion of the verification sampling, a report will be prepared containing tho. data collected during remediation, the eStimated amount of hydrocarbons removed by the VES, the laboratory I analytical results of all vapor samples collected during the operation of the VES, and the labordtory analytical results of the verification soil borings. This report will be submitted to the i BFDHMD upon its completion. Upon successful completion of the remediation and with the aPproval of the BFDHMD, HFA will remove all of the surface equipment from the site, remove the ; · -. p~p~ng connecting the'wells with the treatment unit; and abandon the wells in accordance with I BFDHMD protocol. 1 2'5- ....... - 'i; .... ~ "' .. -Saint Vincent De Paul · ,~~i.~Ti~?.,,-iNC. ': =-'. i- June 17, 1996:-~Page21 ENVIRONMENT, AL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS : ': ._- ~ ~ -- 10. HEALTH AND SAFET~ PLAN A'healtl~ and safety Plan has been developed by HFA's:industrlal hygienist for City of Bakersfield UST sites.~ Procedures f~r conducting all work at the site are.outlined in this plan, and slte-s~ecific information Is provided on its cover Page (see Attachment 8 for the health and safety: plan), . . · I-& IATES, INC. - _ .. '~'--,'"~ 5 ~ ' = ' ' ' ~ . -' -. i :- t : : '.:~7~ ' ... .~ , ~ . : .-_ i . . ~. 11. SUMMARY ~ '~: ~ -'~-' - · ' A risk evaluation 0f.:the gasoline-containing soils at the site-was conducted using ASTM : Dosignafion: 1:-1739 Risk Based Corrective Action. Applied at ~etroleum ~eleose Sit0s (RBCA), lhe results of RBC^ lief 1 and 2 evaluations ore that the indoor air inhalation pathway exceeds i - the permissible Iifeti~e~lxl0-6 exposure levels given the concentr°fion of benzene in fhe soils boneath the thrift' store building, and that miti0atiOn is required to reduce these concentrations t° a permissible residual level, which' is protective of the health of the occupants of the building. An RI/FS was conducted to assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of mitigation technologies. The-results of the RI/FS analysis are that the time frame for natural I biodegradatlon is not sufficiently protective of the health of the current occupants of the building, removal of the hydrocarbons through excavation is not feasible or cost effective i given the significant depth of the hydrocarbons and the'existence ora significant volume of the hydrocarbons beneath the building, the time frame for in-sltu bloventing is not sufficiently piotectiVe of the health of the current occupants of the building and bioventing is not the I cost-effective alternative, and in-situ vapor extraction is the cost'effective alternative, which is p~otective of the health of the current occupants of the building. ! · _ Based'on the available preliminary site assessment data, HFA recommends in-situ vapor extraction for the re'mediation of hydrocarbon-containing soils at the site. vapor effluent from ~ ' the VES will likely be i'nitially treated utilizing a 200 scfm, direct-fired thermal oxidation unit, with the ability to be converted to catalytic oxidation as concentrations fall, and may eventually be followed by carbon absorption. Upon completion of cleanup, operations at the site, soil I v erification sampling will be performed, and a report dOcumenting the results of the remediation process will be submitted to the BFDHMD. ! F/~J-J~N ' ' Saint vincent' De Paul June 17, 1 .996- Page23 & ASSC~L&TES, INC. ~ENVI~IONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS : . :: ~ - 12. REFERENCES Barto~, J.A. 1984. Geologic Map and Cross Sections of the Southeastern San Joaquin Valley,. ~ i California. United States Geological Survey. Map 1-1496~ __ california Division of Mines end Geology. 1965. Geologic Map of Colifc~rnia, Bakersfield Sheet. Johnson, P.C., M.W. Kemblowski, and J.D. Colthart.- 1990. Quantitative Analysis for the Cleanup of Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils by In-Si_t~J Soil Venting. GroUnd Water. 28(3). Kern County Water Agency. Februa~ 1, 1994. 1993 Report on Water Conditions. Kern County Water Agency. 'May 1993. 1992 Water Supply Report. Lawrence Llvermore National Laboratories. October 16, 1995. Recommendations to Improve :the CleanUp Process for California's Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks Report. State Water Resources Control board. December 27, 1995. Underground Storage Tank :, Cleanup Fund Technical Review Guidance Document No. 4. MRM:rri cc: Mr. Howard H. Wines, I~1, BFDHMD :- -Mr.. Duane R. Smith., Smith-Gutcher -'~ SECTION II, FIGURES '. ·, ,OLGUIN,-:. _ . .. . ENViRONMEnTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS .- ' ~ ,..." ~& z_:l~uu~'~2 , '.' ' ~,~ ~:.~ *,.'.~ ?.~ k ~": ..... :': ~ . .~ II . ,: .. ~;.~ ,~-;~ ,,.. ::,,. ~:~ ~: .. ~ ~ :r'~ ' '~'~.~ ,.X ~>', :~X~'. ~! " ~ - ~ ' LEGEND . SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL 0 0.5 : 1 MILE ~ _ SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE ........... o - ' ~.~ ~ --2.~' 3.~' ..... ~.~' ~ ~,~FEET ' "]~_:j[;~,.Jj~ ~:~" ' : 300 BAKER STREET" ~J:~ZJ:c-':---~--~=~ .' '--~7~:~ , .... i &~LATES, INC... ENVIRONME~TAg MANAGE[~,4ENT CONSULTANTS , ~[ · 310 BAKER STRE~ . - ASPHALT STORAGE YARD SAINT VINCE~ DE PAuL THRI~ STORE - 300 BAKER STRE~ ~-2 ~ VESUNIT ~ ~-5 DISPENSER '-- ~ENC~ GATE ,_. ~ ~TH-2~-6 AJ (, TH ~ TH-~~TH4 -3 . iA' ~ FORMER :: 55~GALLON GASOLINE UST SCALE IN. FEET ~ ~ cHICO STREET :: 0 15 3o ~ , LEGEND SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL · SOIL BORING SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRI~ STORE ~Hu~u~-~-D VAPOR E~RACTION WELL . .. 300 BAKER STBEET v[sp~ua ~. - ~omu~. ~ ~ ~socm~m. ~c. ~fiVISIO~ ~1[: ~O~E 17, 10~: ~1 - _~..~- ~ . i INC. :: , - ENVIRONMENTAL ~M~NAGEMENT coNSULTANTS · ~ - } ' ' 3. 'i , . THalET S~O~E . ..... . : - BUILDING (PROJECTED) FORMER .... ,'. WEST-NORTHWEST 550-GALLON . EAST-NORTHEAST ~ GASOLINE UST · : ' ' ' - TH-3 : ~ 'TH-1 ' TH:2 ' ': ~ ~H-4 . n ~ ~ ' ' 'lllllllllt . u --:~:((:&:(d~&:.2~4 :~d:~d:4-:~:(dLd:&~Y~:&:& ~:&:&:;~:::.:::¢::. ::~::~::~::~.~:......;:.~:.~......w.~...;:...:...:...:.~ 0 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~::::::::~::¢~> ::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::2;2::::;:2:2;:5:: . ' -::5}~(~:5~V3[q~:q..Y. Vi. V3V3:.~,~.?V ::f-~q~: x~5-5:- .:.:.:.:.:':~:: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 10 . ,: ,.¢~ _. . u. ~ [-.-.~..fi&g.: '~ ~0 ~.. 'r., ,~.,.. ~/o.0 ~.,r.. 70 70 : . . ._ TD=70' . HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET : :: : . VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 3/4 ' 0 10 20 REFERENCE: SMI~-GUTCHER AND ASSOCIATES, INC., MARCH 1992 LEGEND SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL TH-1 ~ SO~L BOmNG DESigNATiON ~'.: SJCW SAND (SM) SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE ,~ BOREHOLE (DASHED WHERE :~':~:~: ,f POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) ~ PROJECTED) : , : _. 300 BAKER STREET .:-:: -'" --, CONCENTRATIONS IN' SOIL (m~g) ~ SILT (ML) FIGURE: 3: CROSS SECYION A-A' I ~=~"~'~' ~E J"N- 1- : . - . : _:..' ..... ._ . . : .. -:..: _:-,: :-~ -? _. m EFFLUENT MONITORING POINT INFLUENT 'm MONITORING POINT : THERMAL/CATALYTIC (KNOCI<.-OUT DRUid) ,~ ~ BLOWER SILENCER F~--~ ~ ~ WiTH m - SUPPLEMENTAL FUEL ! NOT TO SCALE LEGEND I SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL X PRESSURE OR VACUUM GAUGE ' SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE 310 BAKER STREET VALVE ,, ::_ - : -~ - BAKERSFiELD/CALiFORNiA ...,~, ' sAMPLE TAP ~'lO[,Z~IJ][~, 1~,1"1.,~ & ~OC~kl"~S, [l~IC. REVISION DATE: JUNE 17~ 1996: RRI :- ;_ -- · 7 - ---'i ?- _ .· '-~ FIGURE 5 --EXPECTED VAPOR CoNcENTRATION DEGRADATION OVER TIME ' .............. ' '10 20 30 40 _. -50. 60 70 80 90 100 ~me (weeks) ' SECTION III SUMMARY TABLES ~ .:~: ENVlRONME[~-~L 'M~NAGEMENT &ONSOLT~,NTS i "=- ~ '~' TABLE 1. · SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS . . . . : _ .i . - SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ~ ~ . (fbg)--I (mg/kg) (mu/kg) j (mg/kg) . (mg/kg) (mg/kg)I I ANALYTICAL-METHOD 8015 (M) EPA 8020' I N/A ' METHOD REPORTING LIMIT VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORT I N/A ~- TH-1 . '6-17-91 '9.5 TH-1-9.5 1,800 ~0.8' <0.8 <0.8 54.3j A I ,~ 6-17-91 13.5 TH-1-13.5 4,300 <2; <2 <2 189J A i ~ 1-28-92 20 - ~H-1-20 2,800 <1 <1 3 230 B ;i 1-28-92 30 TH-1-30 1,500 3 i10~ 24 305 B i ~ ' 1-28-92 45 __TH- 1-45 6,000 110 730 170 960 B ' 1-28-92 -50 TH-l-50 500 ____ 7 - ~11! 15 88 _B__ 1-28-92 65 TH-1-65 I _ 0.19 0.1! 0.079 0.287 B i 1-28-92 70 TH-l-70 ND 0.15 0.044 0.046 0.122 B D-1 6-17-91 2 D-1-2 ND ND ND ND- ND A '. 6-17-91 6 D-1-6 ND ND NDi ND ND A TH-2 1-28-92 25 TH-2-25 2,000 : <5 6 <5 395 B I TH-3 1-28-92 20 TH-3-20 ND ND ND · ND ND B 1-28-92 25 TH-3-25 2,600 <2 28 38 413 B - 1-28-92 45 '~H-3-45 11,000 200 1,200 . 300 ' 1,730 B__ I ~ 1-28-92 60 TH-3-60 2 0.34 0.034 0.12 0.374 B . :1-28-92 65 ~ 'TH-3-65 ND 0.015, ND ND NDI B TH-4 1-28-92 25 TH-4-25 ND ND ND ND ND B I ~1-28-92 35 T__H-4-35 ND ND ND ND' ND B 1-28-92 40 TH-4-40 3 0.056 0.02 0.131 0.255 B i, 1-28-~)'2 5_0 TH-4-50 1 '-0.054 0.11 0.065 0.0861 B 1-28-92 5~5 TH-4-55 ND 0.0261 0.068 NDI 0.071~ B~ t 1-28-92 '~ 60 J TH-4-60 ND 0.013! 0.019 ND 0.015t B REF = Report'reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected. I A = Smith-GutCher and Associates, Inc.'s (Smith-Gutcher's) tank removal sampling dated June 17, 1991. B = Smith-Gutcher's report dated March, 1992. I ! " ' HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES OF ocCUpATIoi~IAI. ~IE~LTH Co*N~*E~RN , .Itemized below are chemical s{Jbsia~cas that may pose an occupational health tlireat upon exposure': For each chemical substance itemized, the following information is summarized for . . 'quick reference: - - ~ - Applicable allowable exposure limits REL = recommended exPOsure limit MP = melting point - .Ionization Potential (IP) TLV = threshold limit value BP = boiling point . . .~ i - Generic chemical group (for reference to Attachments 6, 7, and 9) STEL = short-term exposure limit CVS = cardiovascular system ' ' .. ~ UEL = upper explosive limit ,ii .'."~: . . LEL= lower explosive limit Gl = gastrointestinal '''' .... ~., : VP = vapor pressure RBC ,' ,, CHEMICAL OTHER CHEMICAL WARNING PHYSICAL · ; NAME PEUTLV LIMITs GROUP PROPERTIES PROPERTIES TARGET ORGANS ACUTE/CHRONIC HEALTH EFFECTS CANCER Benzene 1/0.1 ppm IDLH: Petroleum bas(~d Aromatic odor LEL: 1.3% Blood, CNS, skin, Irritated eyes, nose, and respiratory system; yes ..... 3,000 ppm UEL: 7.9% bone marrow, eyes, headache; nausea; staggered gait; fatigue; STEL: 5 ppm IP: 9.25 eV respiratory system lassitude; dermatitis; bone marrow depression; .,: VP: 75 mm abdominal pain; leukemia MP: 42° F FP: 12° F BP: 176° F Toluene 20'~'/100 ppm IIDLH: Petroleum based Aromatic odor LEL; 1.2% CNS, liver, kidney, Fatigue, weakness, confusion, eupl~oria, no 2,000 ppm U EL: 7.1% skin dizziness, headache, dilated pupils, lacrimation, IP: 8.82 eV nervousness, muscle fatigue, insomnia, '~ii' .: VP: 22mm )arathesia, dermatitis, photophobia , ,'. MP:-139 ., Ethy'lbenzene 100/100 ppm IDLH: Petroleum based Aromatic odor LEL: 1.0% Eyes, skin, CNS, Irritated eyes and respiratory system, . · 2,000 ppm UEL: 6.7% respiratory system bums skin, dermatitis .i ,..ii~ STEL: 125 ppm IP: 8.76 eV ' ::'. , . VP: 10mm ., ' MP: -139° F , FP: 55° F BP: 277~ F Xy!ene 10(~/10~ ppm IDLH: Petroleum based Aromatic odor LEL: t.1% ' CNS, eyes, Gl tract, iDizziness; excitement; drowsiness; no t ,000 ppm UEL: 7..0% blood, liver, incoordination; staggering gait; .. STEL: 150 ppm IP: 8.6 eV kidneys, skin irritating to eyes, nose, and throat; VP: 7~m corneal vacuolizafion; anorexia; nausea; : MP: -t3 , ~ FP: 63° F ....... ..L ' .~. ~ BP: 292 I I I I I I I I SECTION IV I ATTACHMENTS ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! HOLGUIN, FAHAN &ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 1. RBCA TIER 1 WORKSHEETS AND DOSE/RESPONSE CALCULATIONS Output Table 1 ' Site Name; St. Vincent De Paul Job Identification: S043 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/96 Version: v 1.0 Completed By: Mark Magargee DEFAULT PARAMETERS NOTE: values which differ from Tier I default values are shown in bold italics and underlined. Exposure Residential Commerclal/Industrfal Surface Commercial/Industrial Parameter Da~flnltlon (Units) Adult (1-6yrs) (1-16 ¥r$) Chronic Constrctn Parameters Definition (Units) Residential Chronic Construction ATc Averaging time for caminogens (yr) 70 t Exposure duration (yr) 30 25 1 ATn Averaging time for non-carcinogens (yr) 30 6 16 25 t A Contaminated soil area (cm~2) 1.gE+06 9.3E.~05 BW Body Weight (kg) 70 15 35 70 W Length of affected soil parallel to wind (cra) 1.$E+03 g. IE+02 ED Exposure Duration (yr) 30 6 16 25 I W.gw Length of affected soil parallel to groundwater (c~ 1.$E+03 EF Exposure Freduency (daysJyr) 350 250 180 Uair Ambient air velocity in mixing zone (cra/s) 2.3E+02 EF.Derm Exposure Frequency for dermal exlx~ure 350 250 delta Air mixing zone height (cra) 2.0E+02 IRgw Ingestion Rate of Water (Vday) 2 1 Lss Definition of surficlal soils (cra) 1.0E+02 IRs Ingestion Rate of Soil (mg/day) 100 200 50 100 Pe Particulate areal emission rate (g/ca~2/s) 2.2E-10 IRedj Adjusted soil lng. rate (mg-yr/kg.d) 1.1E+02 9.4E+01 IRa~in Inhalation rate indoor (m~3/day) 15 20 Groundwater Definition (Unffs) Value IRa.out Inhalation rate outdoor (m~3/day) 20 20 10 delta.gw Groundwater mixing zone depth (cm) 2.0E+02 SA Skin surface area (dermal) (cra^2) 5.8E+03 2.0E+03 5.8E+03 5.8E+03 I Groundwater infiltration rate (cm/yr) 3.0E+01 SAadj Adjusted dermal area (cff~2-yr/kg) 2.1E+03 1.7E+03 Ugw Groundwater Darcy velocity (cm/yr) 2.5E+03 M Soil to Skin adherence factor 1 Ugw.tr Groundwater Transport velocity (cm/yr) 6.6E+03 AAFs Age adjustment on soil ingestion FALSE FALSE Ks Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity(cra/s) AAFd Age adjustment on skin surface area FALSE FALSE grad Groundwater Gradient (cra/cra) fox Use EPA tox data for air (or PEL based) TRUE Sw W'~'h of groundwater source zone (cra) gwMCL? Use MCL as exposure limit in groundwater? FALSE Sd Depth of groundwater source zone (cra) BC Biedegradation Capacity (mg/L) BIO? Is Bioattenuation Consh:lered FALSE phi.eft Effective Porosity in Water-Bearing Unit 3.8E-01 ' foc.sat Fraction organic carbon in water-bearing unit 1.0E-03 Matrix of Expose(! Persona to Residential Commerclal/Industrisi Complete Exposure Pathways Chronic Constrctn Soil Definition (Units) Value Groundwater Pathways: hc Capillary zone thickness (cra) 3.0E+01 GW.i Groundwater Ingestion FALSE FALSE hv Vadose zone thickness (cm) 6.1E+03 GW.v Volatilization to Outdoor Air FALSE FALSE tho Soil density (g/crn~3) 1.7 GW.b Vapor Intrusion to Buildings FALSE FALSE foc Fraction of organic carbon in vadose zone 0.01 Soil Pathways phi Soil porosity in vadose zone 0.38 S.v Volatiles from Subsurface Soils FALSE TRUE Lgw Depth to groundwater (cra) 6. IE.,,.03 SS.v Volatiles and Particulate Inhalation FALSE TRUE TRUE I..s Depth to top of affected soil (cro) 3.0E+02 SS.d Direct Ingestion and Dermal Contact FALSE TRUE TRUE Lsubs '133ickness of affected subsurface soils (cra) 1.4E+03 S.I Leaching to Groundwater from all Soils FALSE FALSE pH 'SoiVgroundwater pH 6.5 S.b Intrusion to Buildings - Subsurface Soils FALSE TRUE capillary vedose foundation phi.w Volumetric water content 0.342 0.12 0.12 phi. a :Volumetric air content 0.038 0.26 0.26 Building Definition (Units) Residential Commercial Lb Building volume/area ratio (cm) 2.0E+02 3.0E+02 Matrix of Receptor Distance Residential CommerciaEInduatrfal ER Building air exchange rate (s~-l) 1.4E-04 2.3E-04 and Location on- or off-site Distance On-Site Distance On-Site Lcrk Foundation.creck thickness (cra) 1.5E+01 eta Foundation crack fraction 0.01 GW Groundwater receptor (om) TRUE TRUE S Inhalation receptor (cra) TRUE TRUE Dlepamlve Transport Matrix of Parameters Deflnlaon (Units) Residential Commercial Target Risks Individual Cumulative Groundwater ax Longitudinal dispersion coefficient (cra) TRat:) Target Risk (class A&B carcinogens) 1.0E-06 ay Transverse dispersion coefficient ~TRc Target Risk (class C carcinogens) 1.0E-05 az Vertical dispersion coefficient (om) "/'HQ Target Hazard Quotient 1.0E,,O0 Vapor O~ Calculation Option (1,2, or 3) 1 dcy Trensverea dispersion coeff'~iont (om) Tier RBCA Tier 1 dc3: Vertical di ~u~e_rsion coefficient (om) {}Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reeewed. Physical Pr~ Vapor Diffusion ' log (Koc) or Pressure Molecular Coefficients log(Kd) Henry's Law Constant (@ 20 - 25 C) Solubility Weight in air in water (@ 20 - 25 C) (@ 20 - 25 C) (mm Hg) (@ 20 - 25 C) CAS (g/mole) (cm2/s) (cm2/s) (I/kg) (arm-m3) (unitless) Pure (mg/I) Pure acid base Number Constituent type MW ref Dair rel Dwat rel Koc ref mol re' Component ref Component ref pKa pKb ref 71-43-2 Benzene A 78.1 5 9.30E-02 A 1.10E-05 A 1.58 A 5.29E-03 2.20E-01 A 9.52E+01 4 1.75E+03 A 100-41-4 Ethylbenzene A 106.2 5 7.60E-02 A 8.50E-06 A 1.98 A 7.69E-03 3.20E-01 A 1.00E+01 4 1.52E+02 5 108-88-3 Toluene A 92.4 5 8.50E-02 A 9.40E-06 A 2.13 A 6.25E-03 2.60E-01 A 3.00E+01 4 5.15E+02 29 1330-20-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) A 106.2 5 7.20E-02 A 8.50E-06 A 2.38 A 6.97E-03 2.90E-01 A 7.00E+00 4 1.98E+02 5 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 Software version: v 1.0 © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Toxicity Data Reference Slope Dose Factors (mg/kg/day) l/(mg/kg/day) EPA Weight Is CAS Oral Inhalation Oral Inhalation of Constituent Number Constituent RfD_oral ref RfD_inhal rel SF_oral ref SF_inhal ref Evidence Carcinocjenic ? 71-43-2 Benzene - R 1.70E-03 R 1.00E-01 A 1.00E-01 A A TRUE 100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 1.00E-01 A 1.00E+00 A - R R D FALSE 108-88-3 Toluene 2.00E-01 A,R 4.00E-01 ~,,F R R D FALSE 1330-20-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) 2.00E+00 A,R 3.00E-01 A R - R D FALSE Site Name: St. Vincent De Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 Software version: v 1.0 © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Permissible Relative Detection Limits Half Life Maximum Exposure Absorption Groundwater Soil (First-Order Decay) CAS Contaminant Level Limit PEIJTLV Factors (mg/L) (rog/kg) (days) Number Constituent MCL (m~.) reference (m~/m3) ref Oral Dermal ref tel Saturated Unsaturated ref 71-43-2 Benzene 1.00E-03 CCR Title 22 3.20E+00 OSHA 1 0.5 0.002 C 0.005 S 720 720 H 100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 6.80E-01 CCR Title 22 4.34E+02 ACGIH I 0.5 0.002 _C 0.005 S 228 228 H 106-88-3 Toluene 1.00E+00 56 CFR 3526 1.47E+02 ACGIH 1 0.5 0.002 C 0.005 S 28 28 H 1330.20-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) 1.75E+00 CCR Title 22 4.34E+02 ACGIH 1 0.5 0.005 C 0.005 S 360 360 H Site Name: St. Vincent De Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 Software version: v 1.0 © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Input Screen 7 REPRESENTATIVE COC CONCENTRATIONS IN SOURCE MEDIA (Complete the following table) Representative COC Concentration CONSTITUENT in Groundwater in Surface Soil in Subsurface Soil value (mg/L) note value (mg/kg) note value (mg/kg) note Benzene ~ ' 5.~E-~ "' '-"~0'E~-~''~' ' .... 1E~~ne 5.0E-3 5.0E+0 Toluene - 5.0E-3 1.0E+I Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 5.0E+1 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargee Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/1996 ~© Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. 1 Tier 1 Worksheet 8.1 J Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Macjarcjee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 1 OF 6 TIER 1 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION OUST ~NHALA~oN 1) Source Medium 2) NAF Value (n~3/kal 3) Exoosure Medium 4) Exposure Multiolier 5) Average Daily Intake Rate Receptor Air. POE Conc. (mg/m~3) (1}/(2) (IRxETxEFxEDy(BWxAT) (m~3/kg-day) (tug. g-day) (3)X (4) Benzene 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.7E-8 7.0E-2 2.6E-9 Ethyibenzene 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.7E-8 2.0E-1 7.2E-9 Toluene 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.7E-8 2.0E-1 7.2E-9 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.7E-8 2.0E-1 7.2E-9 NOTE: ABS = Dermal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure frequencey (days/yr) POE = Point ~ exposure AF = Adherance factor CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hra/day) SA = Skin surface area (cn~2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yin) IR = Intake rate (L/day or mg/day) Sedal: G-291-MVX-.452 Software: GSI RBCA Spraadsrteat O Grounclwater Sendces, Inc. (GSI), 1995. Ail Rights Resen'ed. Ve,-sioft: v 1.0 t Tier 1 Worksheet 8.1 J Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Ma[iargee , Date Completed: 5/10/1996 2 OF 6 TIER 1 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE cALcULATION SUBSURFACE SOILS: VAPOR Exposure Concentration TOTAL PATHWAY INTAKE (rog/kg-day) INHALATION 1) Source Medium 2) NAF Value (ma3/kot 3) Exposure Medium 4) ExPosure Multiplier 5) Average DaVy Intake Rate ~Sum Inta~ valt, e~ ~ Receptor Nc POE Conc. (mg/ma3) (I) / (2) (IRxETxl~Fx£Dyg~h~T) (rn,,3/kg-day) (mgaig-day) (3) X (4) ~ace & ~:~u,,~ce nou~.) Subsurface Soil Constituents of Concern Conc. (mq,'k,q) On-S~e C,~y~erclai O~-Site C,¢~nmerctaJ O~-Sit® Corr, rnercial O~-Site Comn'~mial On-Site Commercial Benzene 2.0E+0 1.0E+4 2.0E-4 7.0E-2 1.4E-5 1.4E-5 Ethylbenzene 5.0E+0 1.0E+4 5.0E-4 2.0E-1 9.$E-5 9.8E-5 Toluene 1.0E+ 1 1.0E+4 1.0E-3 2.0E-1 2.0E-4 2.0E-4 Xylene (mixed isomers) , 5.0E+1 1.4E+4 3.6E-3 2.0E-1 7.0E-4 7.0E-4 NOTE: ABS = Dermal absoqYJon factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure freqcencey (days/yr) POE = Point of exposure AF = Adherence facto~ CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hrs/day) SA = Skin surface area (crn~2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yrs) IR = Intake rate (L/day or rog/day) Segel: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet O Groundwater Semices, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Resented. Version: v 1.0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m Tier I Worksheet 8.2 ] ~Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: M. ark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 1 OF 3 TIER 1 PATHWAY RISK CALCULATION CARCINOGENIC RISK , v^,'~ crr['.~ I o (2) Total Carcinogenic (3) inhalation (4) Individual COC (5) Total Tox~.,ant (6) Inhalation (7) Individual COC (1) EPA Intake Rate (mg/kg/day) Slope Factor Risk (2) x (3) Intake Rata (rog/kg/day) Reference Dose Hazard Quotient (5) / (6) ca~c~o~nic On-Site On-Site On-Site On-Site _Constituents of Concern oas~.;c=t~ Commercial (rn~g-day)~-I.Commercial Commercial (mf~/kq..day) Co,~,,*,e,cial iToBenzene A 1.4E-5 1.0E- 1 1.4E-6 3.9E-5 1.7E-3 2.3E-2 Ethylbenzene D 9.8E-5 1.0E+0 9.8E-5 luene D 2.0E-4 ' 4.0E-1 4.9E-4 LXylene (.mixed isomers) D 7.0E-4 3.0E-1 2.3E-3 Total Pathway Carcinogenic Risk = ~ 1.4E-6 ~ 0.0E+0 Total Pathway Hazard Index = I 2.6E-2 ~ 0.0E+0 ~ Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSl RBCA Spreadsheet O Groundwater Sel'vices, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 Tier I Worksheet 8.1 ] Site _Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 3 OF 6 TIER 1 EX ,P,,OSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION *~ SURFACE SOILS OR SEDIMENTS: Expoau~ Ce~le~ttmflml DERUAL CONT,~CT 1) Source Medium 4) ~ 5) Average Daily Intake Rate (SAxARU~SxC~EFxEDy(BWxAT) (r.,~ay) (mg//(g-day) Constituents of Concern Surface Soil Conc. (m;3/1<~3) On-Site Residential On-Sita Commercial On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial Benzene 5.0E-3 1.0Eo5 5.1E-8 Eth¥1b~zene 5.0Eo3 2.8E-5 1.4E-7 Toluene 5.0E-3 2.8E-5 1.4E-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 2.8E-5 1.4E-7 NOTE: ABS = Darmal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure frequencey (days/yr) POE = Point of exposure AF = Adherance factor CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hrs/day) SA = Skin surface area (cm^2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yrs) IR = Intake rate (I/day or mg/day) Serial: G-291-MVX-452 GSl RBCA Spreadsheet © Groundwater Sen, ices, Inc. (GSl), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 m m m m m m m m mm m m m mm mm mm m m m m Tier I Worksheet 8.1 ] Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 4 OF 6 TiER 1 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION SURFACE SOILS OR SEDIMENTS: Exp~ Ce~.en~'atlon TOTAL PATHWAY INTAKE (mg/~9-day) INGESTX3H ~. 1 ) Soume Medium 4) ~ 5) Average Daily Inta}~ Rate (S~re/ntake ve/ues from (IRxCxEFxEOy(BWxAT) (i/day) (mi;I/Ag-day) d~'mal&~y~ ~mut~--) Constituents of Concern Surface Soil Conc. (m.q/kcl) On-Site Resldenlfal eX, l-Site C~T,,T~,C~; Or~Sae R~=,A~,%~.~; Orr-Site C~...'~i.~=; Or~Slle Residential O~Slte C. ommefctal !'Benzene 5.0E-3 1.7E-7 8.7E-10 5.2E-8 Ethylbenzene 5.0E-3 4.9E-7 2.4E-9 1.4Eo7 Toluene 5.0E-3 4.9E-7 2.4E-9 1.4E-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 4.9E-7 2.4E-9 1.4E-7 INOTE: ABS = Dermal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure frequencey (days/yr) POE = Point of exposure AF = Adherance factor CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hrs/day) SA = Skin surface area (cn~2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yrs) IR = Intake rate (L/day or rng/day) Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet O Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 Tier 1 Worksheet 8.2 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 2 OF; TIER 1 PATHWAY RISK CALCULATION CARCINOGENIC RISK TOXIC EFFECTS (2) Total Carcinogenic (3) Oral (4) Indiv~ual COC (5) Total Toxicant (6) Oral (7) individual COC 0) EPA , Intake Rate (rog/kg/day) Slope Factor Risk (2) x (3) Intake Rate (rog/kg/day) Reference Dose Hazard Quotient (5) / (6) Carcinogenic On-Site On-Site Constituents of Concern Classificati~ Residential Commercial (m,q~,q-clay~'-t On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial On-Site Residential Of>Site Commercial (m,o/k,q-day) On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial ~e A 5.2E-8 1.0E-1 5.2E-9 EthL.~.,~nzene D 1.4E-7 1.0E-1 1.4E-6 ~ D 1.4E-7 2.0E-1 7.2E-7 I X¥1ene_.(mixed isomers) D 1.4E-7 2.0E+0 7.2E-8 Total Pathway Carcinogenic Risk = ~ 0.0E+0 I 5.2E-9 I Total Pathway Hazard Index = Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet O Groundvmter Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserv~:L Version: v 1.0 Tier 1 Worksheet 8.3 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargee Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5710/1996 1 of I TIER I BASELINE RISK SUMMARY TABLE BASELINE CARCINOGENIC RISK BASELINE TOXIC EFFECTS Risk Toxicity Limit(s) Limit(s) Individual COC Risk Cumulative COC Risk Exceeded? Hazard Quotient Hazard Index Exceeded? EXPOSURE Maximum Target Total Target Maximum Applicable Total Applicable PATHWAY Value Risk Value Risk Value Limit Value. Limit I Complete: 1.4E-6 1.0E-6 1.4E-6 N/A n 2.3E-2t 1.0E+0 2.6E-2 N/A O Complete: 0.0E+0 1.0E-6 0.0E+0 N/A O 0.0E+0 1.0E+O 0.0E+0 N/A O Complete: 5.2E-9 1.0E-6 5.2 E-9 N/A O 1.4E-6 1.0E+0 2.2E-6 N/A O Serial: 0 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m Total Risk for Each Pathway 1.0E-08 ............................................................... 3.0E-02 :::::: [] ~Carcin~ogenic Risk 9.0E-09 BSedes~ [] Sedes4 2.5E-02 ~ .~ 8.0E-09 '~ 7.0E-09 ~: 2.0E-02 .~ 5.0E-09 1'.5E-02~ .~ 4.0E-09 :':' 1.0E-02 m~ ~ 3.0E-09 ~ ~ 2.0E-09 5.0E-03 1 ~0E-09 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 Air Groundwater Soil Exposure Pathway Tier 1 Worksheet 6.1 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargse Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/1996 I OF 1 Target Risk (Class A & B) 1.0E-6 O MCL exposure iimit? Calculation Option: 1 SURFACE SOIL RBSL VALUES ... Target RIsk (Class C) 1.0E-5 O PEL exposure limit? - (< 3 FT BGS) Target Hazard Quotient 1.0E+0 nr~=~, r~esulxs Per ~omple~e ['-x ~osure ~-,aznwaya t-x" IT c;omple~e) Concentration Ingestion, Inhalation Construction Applicable Exceeded CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN Soil Leaching to Groundwater X and Dermal Contact X Worker RBSL ? Required CRF Residential: Commercial: Regulatory(MCL): Residential: Commercial: Commercial: CAS No. Name (mg/kg) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (mg/kg) 'n' if yes Only if "yes" left 71-43-2 Benzene 5.0E-3 NA NA NA NA 9.2E-1 2.4E+1 9.2E-1 O <1 100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 5,0E-3 NA NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res O <1 108-88-3 Toluene 5,0E-3 NA NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res O <1 1330-20-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5,0E-3 NA NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res O <1 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Serial: 0 © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 ............. ii .... il:[q;Bli'i~:t.1-1~1-11T~l:l~i I I Tier I Worksheet 6.2 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargee 1 OF 1 Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/1996 Target Risk (C.lass A & B) 1.0E-6 O MCL exposure limit? Calculation Option: 1 SUBSURFACE SOIL RBSL VALUES Target Risk (Class C) l.0E-5 O PELexposurellmit? (> 3 FT BGS) Target Hazard Quotient 1.0E+0 RBSL F~e~,_,!~s For Compl~ ~ta Exposure Pathways-('x' il Complete) Representative I RBSL Concentration Soll Volatilization to Soil Volatilization to Applicable ExceedeI CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN Soil Leaching to Groundwater X Indoor Air XI Outdoor Air RBSL d ? i Required CRF Residential: Commercial: Regulatory(MC[ Residential: Commercial: Residential: Commercial: CAS No. Name (mg/kg) (on-site) (on-site) ): (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) (mg/kg) 'ri' If yes I Only if 'yes' left 71-43-2 Benzene 2.0E+0 NA NA NA NA 5.4E-3 NA 1.4E+0 5.4E-3 n , I 3.7E+02 100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 5.0E+0 NA NA NA NA >Res NA >Res >Res O - <1 108-88-3 Toluene 1.0E+I NA NA NA NA 2.2E+2 NA >Res 2.2E+2 ~ <1 ####### Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E+1 NA NK NA NA 2.9E+2 NA >Res 2.9E+2 <1 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Sedal: 0 Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 I I I '1 I I I I ATTACHMENT 2. I RBCA TIER 2 FATE AND TRANSPORT MODELING WORKSHEETS AND DOSE/RESPONSE CALCULATIONS ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 1 Tier 2 Worksheet 8.1 J Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 1 0F6 TiER 2 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION D~JST INHALAllON 1) Source Medium 2) NAF Value (rr~3/kot 3) Exposure Medium 4) ~ 5} Averacle Daily Intake Rate Receptor Air:. POE Conc. (mgh'n,X3) (1)/(2) (IRxL=TxEFxED¥(BWr, AT) (r~3~g.-day} (mo~kg-day) (3)X (4) Benzene 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.5E+6 3.7E-8 1.4E-9 7.0E-2 1.2E-1 2.6E-9 1.7E-10 Eth¥1benzene 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.5E+6 3.7E-8 1.4E-9 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 7.2E-9 3.9E-10 Toluene 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.5E+6 3.7E-8 1.4E-9 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 7.2E-9 3.9E-10 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 1.4E+5 3.5E+6 3.7E.-8 1.4E-9 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 7.2E-9 3.9E-10 NOTE: ABS = Den,hal absorption factor {dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Expeaure frequencey (days/yr) POE = Point of exposure AF = Adherence factor CF = Units conversion factorET = Exposure O~ (hfs/day) SA = Skin sudace area (cm~2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp, duraUon (yrs) IR = Intake rate (L/day or mg/day) Sertal: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet O Groundwatar Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. Ail Rights Reserved. Ve~ston: v 1.0 I rl:[e/.,J-'lll:l':'~-"~-~:l-$'t61:l~ll Tier 2 Worksheet 8.1 J Site Nature: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 2 OF 6 TIER 2 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION SUBSURFACE SO~LS: VAPOR Exposure Concentration TOTAL PATHWAY INTAKE (mg/kg--day) INHALATION 1) SOUrCe Medium 2) NAF Value ,'m,~3/kq) 3) Exposure Medium 4) ExPosure MultiPlier 5) Average DaVy Intake Rate (Sum intake va/ues from Receptor Air. POE Conc. (mg/m~3) (1) / (2) (IRxETxEFxED¥(BWxAT) (rr~,3~g..day) (rcg/kg-day) (3) X (4) eunaee & eu~'~u~'f~ce mute..) Subsurface Soil Benzene 2.0E+O 1,0E+4 2.6E+5 2,0E-4 7.$E-6 7.0E-2 1.2E- 1 1.4E-5 9.1E-7 1.4E-5 9. Ethylbenzene 5.0E+0 1.0E+4 2.6E+5 5.0E-4 1.9E-5 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 Toluene 1.0E+1 1.0E+4 2.6E+5 1.0E-3 3.9E-5 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 2.0E-4 1.1E-5 2.0E-4 1.1 E-5 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E+1 1.4E+4 3.0E+5 3.6E-3 1.7E-4 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 7.0E-4 4.6E-5 7.0E-4 4.6E-5 NOTE: ABS = Dermal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure frequencey (days/yr) POE = Point of exposure AF =Adherance factor CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hfs/day) SA = Skin surface area (cra,'2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duretfea (yin) IR = Intake rate (L/day or rng/day) Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet {~Groundwater Sewlcea, Inc. (GSI), 1995. Ail Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 :t:[,~:~--~ .=~_,¥1.1={.1.1t,11=1;i Tier 2 Worksheet 8.2 J __ Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 1 OF 3 TIER 2 PATHWAY RISK CALCULATION CARCINOGENIC RISK TOXIC EFFECTS (2) Total Carcinogenic (3) Inhalation (4) Individual COC (5) Total Toxicant (6) Inhalation (7) Individual COC (t) EPA Intake Rate (mg/kg/day) Slope Factor Risk (2) x (3) Intake Rate (mo/kg/day) Reference Dose Hazard Quotient (5) / (6) Carcinogenic On-Site Off-Site On-Site Off-Site OnrSite Off-Site On-Site .'onatltuents o! Concern c3ass~ic~,~ Commercial Residential [ .mg/~.~'f¥'-I Commercial ResidentialCommercial Rasictential Im.q/k.q-da¥} Commercial Off-Site Resic~ential I ~nzene A 1.4E-5 9.1E-7 1.0E-1 1.4E.-6 9.1E-8 3.9E-5 2.1E-6 1.7E-3 2:3E-2 1.2E-3 ~thylbenzene D 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 1.0E+0 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 r'oluene D 2.0E-4 1.1 E-5 4.0E-1 4.9E-4 2.7E-5 !¥1ene (mixed isomers) D 7.0E-4 4.6E-5 3.0E-1 2.3E-3 1.5E-4 Total Pathway Carcinogenic Risk = ~ 1.4E-6 ~ 9.1E-8 Total Pathway Hazard Index = 2.6E-2 ~ 1.4E-3 Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Groundwater Servlcas, Inc. (GSI), 1995. Ail Rights Resenmd. * Vemion: v 1.0 Tier 2 Worksheet 8.1 ~ Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 3 OF 6 TIER 2 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION SURFACE SOILS OR SEDIMENTS: F._%*~,_ _~_,?e Col~-elltmtlon DERMAl. COm',~CT 1 ) SOurce Medium 4) Exposure Multiplier 5) Average Daily Intake Rate (SAxAF xABSxC~: xEF~IEDy(BWxAT) (t/day) (mg/~g-~ay) Constituents of Concern Surface Soil Conc. (re.q/kg) On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial Benzene 5.0E-3 1.0E-5 5.1 E-8 Ethylben'zene 5.0E-3 2.8E-5 1.4E-7 Toluene 5.0E-3 2.8E-5 1.4E-7 X¥1ene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 2.8E-5 - 1.4E-7 NOTE: ABS = Dermal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure frequencey (daysJyr) POE'= Point of exposure AF = Adherence factor CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hrs/day) SA = Skin surface area (cra^2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yrs) IR = Intake rate (L/day or rog/day) Serial: G-291-MVX-452 GSI RBCA Spreadsheet © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSl), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 m m, m m m m mm m m m m m m m m m m m m Tier 2 Worksheet 8.1 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 4 OF 6 TIER 2 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION 'SURFACE SOILS OR SEDIMENTS: Exposure Conc~tbation TOTAL PATHWAY INTAKE (mg/kg-day) INGESTION 1 ) Source Medium 4) ExPosure Multiplier 5) Average Oeily Intake Rate (Sum Intake velue~ (IRxC~EFxEDy(BWxAT) (i/day) (rog/kg-day) Constituents of Concern Surface Soil Conc. (m~/~g) On-Site Res.MentlaJ Or~S~te Commercial On-Site Res~'~ent~l Or~S~e Commercial On-Site Restdendal On-Site Cow~merctal Benzene 5.0E-3 1.7E-7 8.7E-10 5.2E-8 Ethylbenzene 5.0E-3 4.9E-7 2.4E-9 1.4E-7 Toluene 5.0E-3 4.9E-7 2.4E-9 1.4E-7 Xytene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 4.9E-7 2.4E-9 1.4E-7 NOTE: ABS = Dermal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = Exposure frequencey (days/yr) POE = Point of exposure AF = Adherance factor CF = Units conversion factor · ET = Exposure time (hrs/day) SA = Skin surface area (CFTC2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yrs) IR = Intake rate (L/day or rog/day) Serial: G-291.MVX-4,52 Software: GSi RBCA S{3readshe~ O Groundwater Se~ces, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Rese~ed. Version: v 1.0 1 Tier 2 Worksheet 8.2 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 2 OF 3 TIER 2 PATHWAY RISK CALCULATION CARCINOGENIC RISK TOXIC EFFECTS (2) Total Carcinogenic (3) Oral (4) Individual COC (5) Total Toxicant (6) Oral (7) Individual COC (1 ) EPA Intake Rate (mg/l<g/day) Slope Factor Risk (2) x (3) Intake Rate (mg/l<g/day) Reference Dose Hazard Quotient (5) / (6) Carcinogenic On-Site OmSite Constituents of Concern Classificatior Residential Commercial (m,(:j/k,q-day~.l On-Site Re~idential On-Site Commercial On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial (m,q/k.q-day) On-Site Residential On-Site Commercial Benzene A 5.2E-8 1.0E-1 5.2E-9 Ethylbenzene D 1.4E-7 1.0E-1 1.4E-6 Toluene D 1.4E-7 2.0E-1 7.2E-7 i X¥1ene (mixed isomers) D 1.4E-7 2.0E+O 7.2E-8 Total Pathway Carcinogenic Risk = [ 0.0E+0 5.2E-9 Total Pathway Hazard Index = 0.0E+0 I 2.2E..6 Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet {3 Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 mm m m m m m m m m mm mm m m m m m m 1 Tier 2 Worksheet 8.3 J Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargee Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/1996 I of 1 TIER 2 BASELINE RISK SUMMARY TABLE .~ BASELINE CARCINOGENIC RISK BASELINE TOXIC EFFECTS I Risk Toxicity Limit(s) Limit(s) Individual COC Ris Cumulative COC Risk Exceeded? Hazard Quotient Hazard Index Exceeded? EXPOSURE Maximum i ~aar~-~/ Total Target Maximum lApplicable Total Applicable PATHWAY Value I Risk ! Value Risk Value Limit Value Limit Complete: 1.4E-6 1.0E-6 1.4E-6 N/A n 2.3E-2 1.0E+0 2.6E-2 N/A O Complete: 0.0E+0 1.0E-6 0.0E+0 N/A O 0.0E+0 1.0E+0 0.0E+0 N/A O Complete: 5.2E-9 1.0E-6 5.2E-9 N/A O 1.4E-6 1.0E+0 2.2E-6 N/A O Serial: G-291-MVX. Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 Total Risk for Each Pathway 1.0E-08 3.0E-02 9.0E-09 · Sedes4 2.5E-02 .~ $.0E-09 I:1::: 7.0E-09 2.0E-02 ~ .~ 6.0E-09 ~...............................................~..................................................... ~ .~ 4.0E-09 ~ 3o0E-09 1.0E-02 ~. r~ 2.0E-09 5.0E-03 1.0E-09 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 Air Groundwater Soil Exposure Pathway m mm m m m mm m m m m mm m mm m m mm mm mm m~ 1 Tier 2 Worksheet 9.1j Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Com~pleted By: Mark Magargee Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Data Completed: 5/10/1996 I oF 1 J Target Risk (Class A & B) 1.0E-6 O MCL exposure limit? Calculation Option: 2 SURFACE SOIL SSTL VALUES Target Risk (Class C) 1.0E-5 OPEL exposure limit? (< 3 FT BGS) Target Hazard Quotient 1.0E+0 ~TL I~esults Per ~omplete ~Xl,Osure yaTnways ['mx" I~ t.,omp~eTe~ Concentration Ingestion, Inhalation Construction Applicable Exceeded CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN Soil Leaching to Groundwater X and Dermal Contact X Worker SSTL ? Required CRF_~_ Residential: Commercial: Regulatory(MCL): Residential: Commercial: Commercial: CAS No. Name (rog/kg) (on-site) (on-site) (on-site) 500 feet (on-site) (on-site) (rng/kg) "ri' if yes Only if "yes" left 71-43-2 Benzene 5.0E-3 NA NA NA 3.0E+2 9.2E-1 2.4E+1 9.2E-1 O <1 100-41-4 Ethylbenzene 5.0E-3 NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res >Res O <1 108-88-3 Toluene 5.0E-3 NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res >Res O <1 1330-20-7 Xylene (mixed isomers) 5.0E-3 NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res >Res O <1 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Sedah G-291-MVX-452 © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 Tier 2 Worksheet 9.2 Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargee 1 OF 1 Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/1996 Target Risk (Class A & B)' 1.0E-6 O MCL exposure limit? Calculation Option: 2 SUBSURFACE SOIL SSTL VALUES Target Risk (Class C) l.0E-5 O PRE exposure limit? (> 3 FT BGS) Target HazardQuotient 1.0E+O SSTL Results For Complete Exposure Pathways ("x" :omplete) · Representative I' I .x_ . SSTL Concentration ! Soil Volatilization to Soil Volatilization to Applicable ExceedeI CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN I ~ Soil Leaching to Groundwater Indoor Air X Outdoor Air SSTL d ? I Required CRF ............... i ......................................... -R--~sident~i-:' ~al:! RedUCE Residential: Commercial: Residential: Commercial: I i CAS No. ~Name ' (mg/kg) (on-site) (on-site) ): (on-site) (on-site)__. (on-site) 500 feet (on-site) I (mg/kg) 'ri' if yes only if "yes" left i 71-43-2i Benzene ~ ' ~ ~ ~ NA 5.4E-3 2.2E+1 1.4E+0 5.4E-3 n 3.7E~-~-2- i 100-41-4[ Ethylbenzene 5.0E+0 NA NA NA NA >Res >Res >Res >Res O <1 i 108-88-31Toluene 1.0E+1 NA NA NA NA 2.2E+2 -->Res -->Res 2.2E+2 o <1 ####### i Xylene (mixed i~omers) 5,0E+1 NA NA NA NA 2.9E+2 >Res >Res 2,9E+20 <1 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Sedal: G-291-MVX-452 © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 ~ HOLGUIN, & A~SOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ATTACHMENT 3. RBCA TIER 2 BENZENE CLEANUP LEVEL CALCULATIONS Tier 2 Worksheet 8.1 Site Nam_e: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Coml.,,o,o~ ,.,y. ,,,,,=,,, ,v,,=~a, wo Date Con'~Jleted: 5/10/1996 2 OF6 TIER 2 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION AlE ExPOsIJREPATHWA~,$1 : ::: ~: i i~iiii i!:i I"t (~ECKEDI~A~A~:~;~E)~::~::::~:: ................. ~::~ .................................. ~:~ '; SUBSURFACE SOILS: VAPOR Exposure Conce~ratlo~ TOTAL PA'I~4WAY INTAKE (mg/kg-day) INHALATION 1) Source Medium 2) NAF Value ~rn~3/ka~ 3) Exposure Medium 4) ~ 5) Average Daily Intake Rate (Sum Intal~e value~ from Receptor Air. POE Conc. (mg/n~3) (1) / (2) (IRxETxEFxED¥(BWxAT) (r~'3~g-day) (rog/kg-day) (3) X (4) su~ & ~u~ Subsurface Soil Constituents of Concern Conc. (mqJ~q) o~-site Cof'rlmercia[ Off-Site Residential O~l-Site Cowt~11erciaJ Off-Site Residential O~l-S;te Commercial Off-Site Residential O~-Site Con~ne~cJal Off-Site Residential O~-Site Commercial Off-Site Resldentml ~ 5.0E-1 1.0E+4 2.6E+5 5.0E-5 1.9E-6 7.0E-2 1.2E-1 3.5E-6 2.3E-7 3.5E-6 2.3E-7 ~ene 5.0E+0 1.0E+4 2.6E+5 5.0E-4 1.9E-5 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 Toluene 1.0E+ 1 1.0E+4 2.6E+5 1.0E-3 3.9E-5 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 2.0E-4 1.1E-5 2.0E-4 1.1E-5 I X¥1ene (mixed isomers/ 5.0E+1 1.4E+4 3.0E+5 3.6E-3 1.7E-4 2.0E-1 2.7E-1 7.0E-4 4.6E-5 7.0E-4 4.6E-5 NOTE: ABS = Dermal absorption factor (dim) BW = Body Weight (kg) EF = F. xposum frequencey (days~) POE = Point of exposure AF = Adherance factor CF = Units conversion factor ET = Exposure time (hrs/day) SA = Skin surface area (off?'2) AT = Averaging time (days) ED = Exp. duration (yin) IR = Intake rate (IJday or mg/day) Serial: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Sl:~'eadshee{ ¢~ Groundwater Semices, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 · 't=~-'~"~"=~'-~"["~'i"ll'll=tll II Tier 2 Worksheet 8.2 I __ Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee Date Completed: 5/10/1996 I OF 3 TIER 2 PATHWAY RISK CALCULATION [~!s:~ ~xeosu ~ ~X~s?: ! ~::~. ~: ::~i:. :i:~i ~i? :~i:: ::: i :?/:i!:i i!~iiiii~i:.i ~::: i::!;~ i ?::?~:~? i~i:?: :.::ii?:~:i!::::~:i::i i~::i:~i~ i~TS~!~i~CTiv~ :~!:?~ i: i i i: ~::: :: ::i:/~ ~. ::ii:i i ::::: ~:::::ii i ! ~il il;:;:~: :'i:. CARCINOGENIC RISK TOXIC EFFECTS (2) Total Carcinogenic (3) Inhalation (4) Individual COC (5) Total Toxicant (6) Inhalation (7) IndividuaJ COC (1) EPA Intake Rate (mg/kg/day) Slope Factor Risk (2) x (3) Intake Rate (mg~g/day) Reference Dose Hazard Quotient (5) / (6) Carc~ogeni: On-Site Off-Site On-Site Off-Site · On-Site Off-Site On-Sita _Constituents of Concem C~assi~catl¢~ Commercial Residential (m~f~;ta¥~..1 Commercial Residential Commercial Residential ( ,mR~-day) Commercial Off-Site Residential Benzene A 3.5E-6 2.3E-7 1.0E-1 3.5E-7 2.3E-8 9.8E-6 5.3E-7 1.7E-3 5.8E-3 3.1E-4 .Ethylbenzene D 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 1.0E+0 9.8E-5 5.3E-6 Toluene D 2.0E-4 1.1 E-5 4.0E-1 4.9E-4 2.7E-5 '~ylene (mixed isomers) D 7.0E-4 4.6E-5 3.0E-1 2.3E-3 1.5E-4 Total Pathway Carcinogenic Risk = ~ 3.5E-7 2.3E-8 Total Pathway Hazard Index -- L 8.7E-3 5.0E-4 I Sedal: G-291-MVX-452 Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 Tier 2 Worksheet 8.3 ] Site Name: St. Vincent De Paul Completed By: Mark Magargee Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Completed: 5/10/1996 1 of 1 TIER 2 BASELINE RISK SUMMARY TABLE BASELINE CARCINOGENIC RISK BASELINE TOXIC EFFECTS I Risk Toxicity Limit(s) Limit(s) Individual COC Risk Cumulative COC Risk Exceeded? Hazard Quotient Hazard Index Exceeded? EXPOSURE I~ -~-rg-~- Total Target Maximum Applicable Total Applicable PATHWAY I Value I Risk Value Risk Value Limit Value Limit Complete: 3.5E-7 1.0E-6 3.5E-7 N/A O 5.8E-3 1.0E+0 8.7E-3 N/A O Complete: 0.0E+0 1.0E-6 0.0E+0 N/A O 0.0E+0 1.0E+0 0.0E+0 N/A O Complete: 5.2E-9 ~ 1.0E-6 5.2E-9 N/A O 1.4E-6 1.0E+0 2.2E-6 N/A O Serial: G-291-MVX. Software: GSI RBCA Spreadsheet © Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI), 1995. All Rights Reserved. Version: v 1.0 HOLGUIN, ; '·· ~-o~FAHAN, ~oo~,~, ~.~, INC. - I ATTACHMENT 4. I VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL INSTALLATION PROCEDURES I ', 3. VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL INSTALLATION PROCEDURES SITING I Vapor extraction wells will be positioned as noted in the CAP. I DRILLING PROCEDURES Soil borings for installation of vapor extraction wells will be drilled with an 8-inch-OD hollow-stem auger as specified in the CAP. Cuttings from the soil borings will be logged by an experienced I environmental geologist under the direct supervision of a state of California registered geologist. The soils will be classified according to the standard Unified Soil Classification System. Observations regarding the types and quantities of waste materials encountered and I any PID readings will be logged. All data collected during the drilling of the soil borings will be recorded on individual logs of exploratory boring. I CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS The vapor extraction wells will be constructed of 2-inch-ID PVC casing. The screen length of I slotted casing will be limited to less than 40 feet In the wells. The design of the proposed wells will be according to the Department of Health Services and I City of Bakersfield guidance manuals, The specifications are listed in the following table, I VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL SPECIFICATIONS I Casing Size: Two-inch ID. Casing Materials: Schedule 40 PVC. I Filter Pack: Washed aquarium sand extending to no more than 5 feet above the well screen. I Sealant: Five feet of sodium bentonite immediately over the filter pack. Cement and bentonite mixture used as annular sealant from the top of the bentonite seal to the ground surface (2 to 5 percent bentonite by I weight). Well Covers: 12-inch-diameter locking aluminum access covers, I Screen Length: Maximu, m of 40 feet of 0.03-inch slotted well screen. I I Vapor Extraction Well Installation Procedures Page 2 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS All well design and construction completed during the Investigation will be documented with the following information: · Date/time of construction; · Drilling method; · Well location (_+0.5 foot); · Well depth (_+0,1 foot); · Drilling and lithologic logs; · Casing material; · Screen material a.nd design; · Casing and screen joint size; · TyPe of protective cap; · Detailed drawing of well; · Well cap elevation (_+0.5 foot); · Top of casing elevation (_+0.01 foot); Screen slot size/length; · Filter pack material and size; · Filter pack placement method; · Sealant materials; · Sealant volume; · Sealant placement method; · Surface seal design/construction; · Soil boring diameter and well casing diameter; and Relative ground surface elevations (~-0.01 foot). ~.. ? 'ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS -~ :- -: I' ~ VAPOR 'EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS i ~ · I ,; . I ~ . I...~ ":'":~ :" "::':~ "- ' ' ' ' - "' " '' = ' VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Client Name Saint Vincent De Paul Project Name Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store Figure No. N/A Site Address 300 Baker Street, Bakersfield, California Well Nos, VW-1 Date Completed Proposed Supervised by Mark R. Macjari}ee, CHG, RG WELL COVER GROUND SURFACE TOP WELL CAP .... depth of surface seal 2 feet SURFACE SEAL type of surface seal Neat cement annular seal thickness 2 feet ANNULAR SEAL type of annular seal Neat cement Iow permeability seal thickness 3 feet LOW PERMEABILITY SEAL type of Iow permeability seal Bentonite chips diameter of well casing 2 inches -- WELL CASING type of well casing Schedule 40 PVC PACK depth of top of gravel pack 7 feet type of gravel pack Aquarium sand SCREEN depth of top of screen 10 feet screen slot size 0.03 inch I depth of well 50 feet I diameter of borehole 8 inches depth of borehole 50 feet I ~ BOTTOM WELL CAP HOI.,GUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3157 Pegasus Drive i (805) 391-0517 Bakersfield, California 93308 ! I VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS I Client Name Saint Vincent De Paul Project Name Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store Figure No.' N/A I Site Address 300 Baker Street, Bakersfield, California Well Nos, VW-2 throu,qh VW-4 Date Completed Proposed I Supervised by Mark R. Magargee, CHG, RG WELL COVER GROUND SURFACE TOP WELL CAP depth of surface seal 2 feet SURFACE SEAL type of surface seal Neat cement annular seal thickness 2 feet ~ ANNULAR SEAL type of annular seal Neat cement Iow permeability seal thickness 3 feet SEAL type of Iow permeability seal Bentonite chips diameter of well casing 2 inches ~ WELL CASING type of well casing Schedule 40 PVC ~ GRAVEL PACK ' depth of top of gravel pack 7 feet type of gravel pack Aquarium sand SCREEN depth of top of screen 10 feet screen slot size 0.03 inch depth of well 35 feet diameter of borehole 8 inches depth of borehole 35 feet ~ BOTTOM WELL CAP HO[,G[~Ti_N, ~'AI-LAN' & ASSOC[A.TE, S, INC. 3157 Pegasus Drive (805) 391-0517 Bakersfield, California 93308 VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Client Name Saint Vincent De Paul Project Name Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store Figure No. N/A Site Address 300 Baker Street, Bakersfield, California Well Nos, VW-5 through VW-7 Date Completed Proposed Supervised by Mark R. Magar~ee, CHG, RG WELL COVER - GROUND SURFACE depth of surface seal 2 feet SURFACE SEAL type of surface seal Neat cement annular seal thickness 27 feet ANNULAR SEAL type of annular seal Neat cement Iow permeability seal thickness 3 feet type of Iow permeability seal Bentonite chips diameter of well casing 2 inches ~ wELL CASING type of well casing Schedule 40 PVC GRAVEL PACK depth of top of gravel pack 32 feet type of gravel pack Aquarium sand SCrEeN depth o~ top o[ screen 35 feet screen slot size O.O3 inch I depth of well 55 feet I diameter of borehole 8 inches depth of borehole 55 feet I ~ BOTI'OM WELL CAP ~O[,Gb'~.,W', F~-~u~' & AS$OC]~']'I~S, [N'C. 3157 Pegasus Drive i (805) 391-0517 Bakersfield, California 93308 :~ i. - ENViRONMEi'<JTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS · ATTACHMENT 6. VAPOR EXIRACTION TEST PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT I . VAPOR EXTRACTION TEST PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT VAPOR MONITORING EQUIPMENT MONITORING EQUIPMENT CONSTITUENT(S) MEASURED EFFECTIVE RANGE 1 - 2,000 ppm OVM PID volatile organic content (as isobutylene) Dwyer Magnahelic 0 - 0.25 ins-water Series 2000 subsurface vacuum 0 - 1.0 ins-water differential pressure gauges 0 - 2.5 psi Davis Instruments turbometer emissions stack velocity 0 - 9,999 feet per minute Omega HHP-6150 differential pressure meter WHV 0 - 200 ins-water 150 cfm maximum flow Sutorbilt Model.3ML, 5 hp 140 inches water maximum vapor extraction blower N/A vacuum Westates Model VSC-200 0-100 cfm flow 200 lbs activated carbon filters N/A carbon capacity VARIABLE-RATE FLOW TEST Variable-rate flow tests will be conducted using vapor extraction wells VW-1, VW-2, and VW-5 as the extraction wells. Test procedures consist of connecting the positive displacement blower to a vapor extraction well and measuring the flow rates generated at various WHVs. The measured vacuums and flow rates will be recorded on a vapor extraction test recording log. An Omega Model HHP-6150 differential pressure meter will be used to monitor the WHVs from a port located on the vacuum side of the blower. A Davis Instruments electronic wind speed indicator (turbometer), a Dwyer Series 2000 differential pressure gauge, and a pitot tube will be used to monitor the stack velocity at the outlet of the 2-inch-ID emissions 'stack. The temperature of the emissions will also be monitored at the outlet of the 2-inch-ID stack. The stack velocity and temperature will then be used to calculate the standard volumetric flow rate achieved with the blower. ROI AND INTRINSIC SOIL PERMEABILITY The ROI test will be conducted by connecting the Sutorbilt vacuum blower to each extraction well.in VW-1, operating the blower at three different flow rates as determined in the variable-rate flow test, and monitoring the resultant subsurface vacuum at surrounding monitoring points using Omega HHP-6150 differential pressure gauges. The subsurface and WHVs will be monitored Until they stabilize at each flow rate and then recorded in the vapor. extraction test recording log. Vapor Extraction Test Procedures and Equipment Page 2 HFA utilizes a graphical method for estimating the ROI that Is based on a modification of the distance-drawdown method u~ed in groundwater studies, A formula-based model patterned after Johnson et al.1 is used to determine the intrinsic soil permeability and other characteristics of the vadose zone. The ROI at each WHV will be graphically determined by plotting the subsurface vacuums measured in ins-water by the log of the distance (r) away from the extraction well. A straight line will then drawn between the points and extended until it Intercepts the zero-vacuum axis. This is the distance at which the subsurface vacuums decrease to atmospheric pressure. The effective ROI for the well is defined as the distance where 1 percent of the WHV ts achieved. The intrinsic soil permeability (k) will be determined through use of the Johnson equation as sPecified below. k = (Ql~/H~Patm-P(w)) [Ln(Rw/ROI)/(1-(Patm/P(w))2)] Where: Patm = Atmospheric pressure (1.013 x 106 g/cm-sec2) P(w) = Pressure at the extraction well ROI = Radius of influence of extraction well Rw = Radius of extraction well k = Intrinsic soil permeability Q = Volumetric flow rate from extraction well I~ = Vapor viscosity (1.8 x 10.4 g/cm:sec) H = Length of slotted interval SOIL VAPOR CONCENTRATION During the vapor extraction tests, extracted soil vapors will be monitored for VOCs using a Thomas Model 2107 vapor sampling pump connected to the pressure side of the blower prior to treatment via carbon adsorption through two 200 lb, activated carbon cannisters placed in series. The VOCs of the extracted vapors will be monito, red using a PID. The PID will be calibrated to a 100 ppm isobutylene standard prior to commencing the test. Readings taken with the PID will be used to provide a relative indication of VOCs within the extracted vapor stream. All constituents will be monitored until stable flow conditions are achieved and then recorded on the vapor extraction test recording log. I Johnson, P.C., Kemblowski, M.W., and Colthart, J.D., "Quantitative Analysis for the Cleanup of Hydrocarbon- Contaminated Soils by In-Situ Soil Venting", Ground Water Vol. 28, No. 3, May - June 1990. Vapor Extraction Test Procedures and Equipment Page 3 In addition to monitoring the extracted vapors with field instruments, samples of the extracted vapor stream will be collected from wells VW-1, VW-2, and VW-5 at the beginning and end of each test. Laboratory samples will be collected by connecting a l-liter, TedlarTM, bag to the sampling pump via Tefl°nTM tubing. Prior to collecting the samples from each well, soil vapors will be monitored with the PID until VOCs In the vapor stream stabilize. The TedlarTM bags will be labeled, sealed, and delivered to a California state-certified laboratory and analyzed for TPH as gasoline and BTEX using EPA Methods 8015 (M) and 8020, respectively. "1 ,. ':; 1~1 :&-ASSOCIATES, INC. - : : . - 2: '' iEN~IRONMENT~L M_AIN~AGEMENT CONSULTANTS : : ' ' ~ I . . -- ~2. ; ~ ~ -. ' '- .':~ A~ACHMENT 7. SOIL BORING AND WELL CONSTRUCTION PROOEDURES SOIL BORING AND WELL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES HAND-AUGERING PROCEDURES Each soil is manually drilled utilizing a 2-inch-OD hand auger manufactured by boring Xitech Industries. Soil samples are collected with a drive sampler, which is outfitted with 1.5-inch by 3-inch stainless steel or brass sleeves. When the sample is withdrawn, the ends of the sleeve are covered with aluminum foil or TeflonTM tape followed by plastic caps. During the drilling prOcess, soil cuttings are field screened for VOCs using a PID calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene. Any. soil staining or discoloration is visually Identified. All data is ,recorded on soil boring logs under the supervision of a state of California registered geologist. Soils are classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Specific geologic and hydrogeologic information collected includes depth to groundwater, plasticity, density, stiffness, mineral composition, moisture content, soil type, structure, grain size, and other features that could affect contaminant transport. The samples are labeled, sealed, recorded on a chain-of-custody record, and chilled in accordance with the procedures outlined in the State Water Resources Control Board"s (SWRCB's) LUFT field manual. Sample preservation, handling, and transportation procedures are consistent with Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) QA/QC procedures. The samples are transported in a chilled container to a California state-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory. TRUCK-MOUNTED DRILLING AND SOIL SAMPLING PROCEDURES Underground Service Alert of Central California Is notified at least .48 hours before commencement of drilling activities. Each soil boring is manually drilled for the first 4 feet to establish that the area is clear of subsurface structures. The soil borings are drilled with either a hollow-stem auger or an air rotary bit, and soil samples are collected with a California split-spoon sampler. The sampler is outfitted with 2.5-inch by 6-inch stainless steel or brass sleeves. When the sample is withdrawn, the ends of the sleeve are covered with aluminum foil or TeflonTM tape followed by plastic caps. During the drilling process, soil cuttings are field screened for VOCs using a PID calibrated to 100 ppmv isobutylene. Any soil staining or discoloration is visually identified. All data is recorded on logs of exploratory boring under the supervision of a state of California registered geologist, are according Soils classified to the USCS. Specific geologic and hydrogeologic information collected includes depth to groundwater, plasticity, density, stiffness, mineral composition, moisture content, soil type, structure, grain size, and other features that could affect contaminant transport. The samples are labeled, sealed, recorded on a chain-of-custody record, and chilled in accordance with the procedures outlined in the SWRCB's LUFT field manual. Sample preservation, handling, and transportation procedures are consistent with HFA's QA/QC procedures. The samples are transported in a chilled container to a California state-certified, hazardous waste testing laboratory. Soil Boring and Well Construction Procedures Page 2 DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES Before each sampling episode, the sampling equipment is decontaminated using a non-phosphate, soap and water wash; a tap water rinse; and two distilled, deionized water rinses. The drill string is decontaminated a steam cleaner boring. with between each soil WASTE, MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL The cuttings from the soil borings are stored in 55-gallon, Department of Transportation (DOT)-approved drums. Each drum is labeled with the number of the soil boring from which the waste Is taken and the date the waste was generated. The drums are stored at the site of generation until sample analytical results are obtained, at which time the soil is disposed of appropriately. SOIL BORING COMPLETION PROCEDURES All soil borings are either properly abandoned or completed as a well. Abandonment Each soil boring that is not completed as a well is backfllled with bentonite grout, neat cement, concrete, or bentonite chips with a permeability less than that of the surrounding soils. The grout is placed by the tremie method. Well Construction Wells are designed according to Department of Health Services and State Water Resources Control Board guidance manuals. All well design and construction completed during the Investigation are documented with the following information: · Date/time of construction; · Detailed drawing of well; ' · Drilling method and drilling fluid used; · Well development procedures; · Well location (+5 feet); · Screen slot size/length; · Well depth (_+C). 1 foot); · Filter pack material and size; · Drilling and lithologic logs; · Filter pack placement method; · Casing material; · Soil boring diameter and well casing diameter; · Screen material and design; · Sea~ant volume; · Casing and screen joint size; · Sealant placement method; · Type of protective cap; · Sealant materials; and · Top of casing or well cover · Surface seal design/construction: elevation (+0.01 foot); Soil Boring and Well Construction Procedures Page 3 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Well Surveying The elevation of the monitoring well cover or top of well casing is surveyed to an accuracy of +0.01 foot. All measurements to validity. are reproduced assure Well Development Well development is conducted by simple pumping if bridging of the screen does not occur. If bridging occurs, well surging is conducted for adequate ~vell production. Well surging is created by the use of surge blocks, bailers, or pumps, whichever method is most convenient at the time. Only formation water is used for surging the well. Well development continues until non-turbid groundwater is produced. All purged groundwater Is held on site in covered 55-gallon DOT-approved drums until water sample analytical results are received. DATA REDUCTION The data compiled from the soil borings is summarized and analyzed. A narrative summary of the soil characteristics is also presented. The logs of exploratory boring are checked for the following information: · correlation of stratlgraphic units among soil borings; · identification of zones of potentially high hydraulic conductivity; · identification of the confining formation/layer; · indication of unusual/unpredicted geologic features (fault zones, fracture traces, facies changes, solution channels, buried stream deposits, cross-cutting structures, pinchout zones, etc.); and · continuity of petrographic features such as sorting, grain-size distribution, cementation, etc. Soil boring/well locations are plotted on a properly scaled map. If appropriate, soil stratigraphy of the site is presented in a scaled cross section. Specific features that may impact contaminant migration (e.g., fault zones or. impermeable layers) are discussed in narrative form and supplemented with graphical presentations as deemed appropriate. ! ! --: ATTACHMENT 8. HEALTH AND SAFETy PLAN I I' ' ' HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN FOR UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK REMEDIATIONS SITE-SPECIFIC INFORMATION Site Address: 300 Baker Street, Bakersfield, California Name of Business Occupying Site: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store Owner Contact: Reverend Ralph Belluomini Owner Tel. #: (805) 323-7340 BFDHMD Contact: Mr. Howard H. Wines, III Tel. #: (805) 326-3979 FIELD ACTIVITIES AND GOALS OF THIS INVESTIGATION: Install seven vapor extraction wells, and conduct vapor extraction treatment of gasoline-containing soils. KNOWN HAZARDS AT THE SITE INCLUDE: Gasoline hydrocarbons KEY PERSONNEL AND RESPONSIBILITIES: NAME RESPONSIBILITIES Kenneth J. Mitchell, REA SITE SAFETY OFFICER - Primarily responsible for site safety, response operations, and protection of the public. Responsible for work site inspections to Identify particular hazards and define (805) 391-0517 site security. MarkR. Magargee, CHG, RG PROJECT MANAGER Primarily responsible for site characterization. The project manager delineates authority, coordinates activities functions, activities and and directs (805) 391-0517 related to mitigative efforts of clean-up contractors. Kenneth J. Mitchell, REA SITE INVESTIGATIVE PERSONNEL - Responsible for actual field work including sampling, monitoring, equipment use, and other (805) 391-0517 related tasks as defined by the project manager. 'ANTICIPATED WEATHER CONDITIONS FOR THIS AREA DURING THE PROJECT'S DURATION WILL BE: Temp. range: 80-100~F Humidity: 30-60% Ambient temp.: 9~F Potential for heat stress: High: X Medium: Low: ANTICIPATED PROTECTION LEVEL DURING THIS PROJECT* Level "D" *Will be upgraded or downgraded to fit situations as they arise. EMERGENCY INFORMATION: All emergency calls: 911 Closest hospital with emergency room: Kern Medical Center 1830 Flower Street, Bakersfield, California, (805) 326-2000 Map Showing Route from Site to Hospital Attached? Yes: X No: HEALTH AND SAFETY. PLAN FOR UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK SITE REMEDIATIONS This document outlines Holguln, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA"s) health and safety plan for City of Bakersfield UST site remedlations. Site-specific Information is provided on the cover page of this document. This health and safety plan was developed by HFA"s industrial hygienist through consultation of the following documents: Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) 29 CFR 1910 - "Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response, Final Ruling,"" March 1989; · NIOSH/OSHA/USCG/EPA "Occupational Safety and Health for Guidance Manual Hazardous Waste Site Activities," October 1985; and '. HFA's Corporate Standard Safety Program~ This health and safety plan is divided into the following categories: 1. Job Hazard Assessment; 2. Exposure Monitoring Plan; 3. Personal Protective Equipment; 4. Work Zones and Security Measures; 5. Decontamination and Disposal; 6. Worker Training; and 7. Emergency Procedures. 1.1 JOB HAZARD ASSESSMENT Immediate tasks at UST site Include evaluation of present or threat any leaking an any potential to public safety. Questions need to be answered regarding the dangers of signifiCant vapor exposures and potential explosion hazards. POTENTIAL CHEMICAL HAZARDS The chemical components of gasoline that are the most dangerous to site workers are the volatile aromatics, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes, and potentially, organic lead. Additionally, solvents such as 1,2-Dichlorobenzene and.1,2-Dichloroethane may also be used as cleaning solutions at service stations. The primary health risks associated with each of these chemicals are described ,below. Gasoline - human A TLV of 300 or 900 mg/m3 has been assigned Suspected carcinogen. ppm to gasoline. This value of 300 ppm was assigned based on an average of 3 percent benzene (10 ppm TLV) in gasoline. Low-level inhalation exposure to gasoline can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and respiratory systemi headache; and nausea. I Health and Safety Plan Page 2 I I Benzene - Suspected human A TLV of 10 or 30 mg/m3 has been to carcinogen. ppm assigned benzene. Benzene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 1.4 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to benzene can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and respiratory system; headache; and I nausea. IToluene - A TLV of 100 ppm or 375 mg/m3 has been assigned to toluene. Toluene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 2.1 ppm. Low-level inhalation exposure to toluene can cause fatigue, weakness, confusion, and euphoria. ! Ethvlbenzene - A TLV of 100 ppm or 435 mg/m0 has been assigned to ethylbenzene. i Ethylbenzene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 2 ppm, Low-level Inhalation exposure to ethylbenzene can cause Irritation to the eyes and mucous membranes. I Xylene - A TLV or 100 ppm or 435 mg/m3 has been assigned to xylene. No Iow odor threshold limit has been established for xylene. Low-level inhalation exposure to xylene can cause dizziness, excitement, and drowsiness. I 1,2-Dichlorobenzene - A .TLV of 50 ppm or 306 mg/m8 has been assigned to 1,2-dichlorobenzene. 1,2-dichlorobenzene has a Iow odor threshold limit of 4.0 ppm. I Acute vapor exposure can cause coughing, dizziness, drowsiness, and skin irritation. I 1,2-Dichloroethane - A TLV of 200 ppm has been assigned to 1,2-Dlchloroethane. No data Is available concerning odor threshold. Acute vapor exposure can cause coughing, dizziness, drowsiness, and skin irritation. I Tetraethyl Lead - A TLV of 0.1 mg/m3 has been assigned to tetraethyl lead. Tetraethyl lead is a colorless or red-dyed liquid at atmospheric conditions. No data is available concerning odor I threshold. Acute vapor exposure can cause insomnia, delirium, coma, and skin irritation. POTENTIAL PHYSICAL HAZARDS I Soil VaDor Extraction - Dangerously high fuel vapor levels will be monitored using an LEL meter. The presence of underground utilities is also of concern and the Underground Service Alert of I Northern California will be notified in advance of any drilling work for identification of all underground utilities in the Immediate area. I Gasoline hydrocarbons in the contaminated soils in the areas Identified by HFA will be extracted through vapor extraction wells and treated on the surface using a thermal oxidation/catalytic conversion system. The gasoline hydrocarbons are destroyed at an I efficiency of greater than 99 percent. Potential exposure to gasoline hydrocarbons during the vapor extraction process is very Iow. I Health and Safety Plan Page 3 I Sampling - Use of personal protective equipment will minimize the' potential for exposure of personnel conducting site investigation activities. I Heat stress will be monitored by each individual and controlled through regular work breaks as outlined in the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' TLVs for heat stress I conditions. 2. EXPOSURE MONITORING PLAN I Potential exposure hazards found at UST sites primarily include toxic airborne vapors from leaking USTs. I The most dangerous airborne vapor likely to be encountered during a UST remediation is benzene. Gasoline vapor concentration levels will be monitored In the breathing zone with a PID calibrated to benzene. When the action level of 150 ppm (one-half the TLV of gasoline) is I detected in the breathing zone, respiratory protection will be required utilizing full-face or half- face respirators with organic vapor cartridges. I Monitoring for combustible gases will also be performed using an LEL meter when vapor concentrations above 2,000 ppm are detected with the PID. The action level is 35 percent of the I LEL for gasoline vapors or 4,500 ppm. If this level is attained or exceeded, the work party will be IMMEDIATELY withdrawn. I 3. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT The level of protection during the site Investigation will usually be level "D." Level "D" protective equipment includes coveralls, safety boots, safety glasses, gloves, and hard hats if drilling or I trenching operations are in progress. Upgrading the protection level would be based on airborne benzene concentration levels I to the action level. An to level "C" would be if equal or exceeding upgrade protection required the action level is equaled or exceeded. Additional equipment required for level "C" would be a full-face or half-face air purifying canister-equipped respirator and Tyvek suits with taped arm I and leg seals. i If the action level was met or exceeded (35 percent) for the LEL, work would cease until the vapor level was measured to be below 20 percent of the LEL. A fire extinguisher will be maintained on site. Decisions for workers' safety are based on a continual evaluation of existing or changing conditions. Health and Safety Plan Page 4 4. WORK ZONES AND SECURITY MEASURES To facilitate a minimum exposure to dangerous toxic vapors and/or physical hazards, only authorized persons will be allowed on the job site. Work zones will be defined by HFA staff who will also be responsible for maintaining security within these zones. Only the minimum number of personnel necessary for the UST remediatlon will be present in the work zone. 5. DECONTAMINATION AND DISPOSAL HFA's standard operating procedures establish practices that minimize contact with potentially contaminated materials. Decontamination procedures are utilized if there is suspected or known contamination of equipment, supplies, instruments, or any personnel surfaces. Soap and water will be utilized in removing contaminants from personnel surfaces as well as equipment and instruments, Contaminated wash water will be disposed accordance with of In procedures outlined in the BFDHMD guidance document. 6. WORKER TRAINING All HFA employees working on the site will have had, at a minimum, the required 40-hour OSHA Training for Hazardous Waste Site Activities (29 CFR 1910, 120), which includes training in the use of personal protective equipment. Individualized respirator fit testing is required of all HFA employees working at the site. 7. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES HFA employees are trained in emergency first aid, and emergency first aid provisions will be brought to the site. In the event of overt personnel exposure (i.e., skin contact, Inhalation, or Ingestion), the victim will be transported to and treated at the closest hospital (see Hospital Map). SAN FRANCISCO LOS ANGELES . KERN MEDICAL CENTER SAN DIEGO 1830 FLOWER STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA (805) 326-2000 601 EUREKA STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MAP HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. NO. /~67 MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET GE NIUM PUBLISHING CORPORA TION ~,,SO'[-IHc,c-, 1145 CATALYN STREET SCHENEClADY. NY ~2~3-~e~ U~ (5~} 37~ ~~'~ ~e October SECTION ]. ~TERIAL IDEN)IFICAI]ON ~FA~: Avat~ble fr~ s~eral ~plters. SECTION !I. INGR~IE~S AND ~ZARDS z 'l H~Z~.O A hydrocar~ blend t~t e~ ~ncl~e no~l and br~ch~ 9~ ~/n~* c~tn a~es, cyc~oal~en, aloes, arctics and other nd~ltlves.** (~ad ~ 0.013 B/L, phoapho~ ~ 0.0013 ~, sulfur ~ 0.I0 ~tZ. ~y co~:at~ ~ye: ~00 p~/IE helena, <SZ; see ~ D3606). ~ace *ACO~H 198~ ~V (Intended ~tn L~ac). See alno ~. Ind. ~. K 39 11~117 (1978) **~e c~posLt~on o~ ~uel ~ varied ~th altitude and T~o 900 seasonal requir~ents for a l~$ty. ~e blend ~sC ~et ~ti~ock requiring. (~tiknock Index ~n ECT]oN P YS CAL OATA O~c/llacion ac'i a~, Initial, deg'C >39 Specific gravity~ ~/60 F - 0,72-0.76 50~ distilled - 77-1~1 ~ltl~ point, del C ..... ~d point .... <2~0 Evaporation rate Vapor density (Air=l) 3..~.0 Solubility in rater InsoLuble Appearance ~d Odor: A clear~ ~bile liquid rich ~ c~r~ctetistic odor ~lch ~n recolnlzed at about 10 p~ ~ air. (fl~soline ~y be colored vith dye.) SECTION !~. FIRE AND EXPLOSION DATA LO~ER UPPER ~[ash Point and ~eth~. ] Aut~t~/tton Temp. [ Fla~btlt'ty Lt~tts In Att -65 F '[ 53~853 F [ ~ bY vol~e l.a 7.6 ~c~Ru/shln8 Nedta: O~ choice1, carb~ dioxide, alcohol fora. Uae of ~tet ~y be ineffective to exttn~tsh ftge~ but use water spray for c~11ng ftte~0aed dt~ ~d tanks to prevent preqsure ~pture. Zt tn a danger~n ftre and e~lost~ hatard ~en ~posed to heat ~ fires. Vapors can fl~ along uurfaces, reach d~nt~t tl~ sources ~d flash back. ~ react vtolently ~th oxtdttln8 alsace. Flreftshters a~Id ~ar sel~tatned breathing apparatus aaa full protective clothtni SECTION V. REACTIVI~oATA' Thta ts a arable ~te~tal tn cloned c~tatnetu at r~ t~perature u~er no~1 storage and handIJn8 c~dttt~n. [t doer not ~derRo hatardoue pol~rtzett~. ~tn tn an OS~ Class ~ [1robie Itqut~. A mixture of gasoline va~rs and att can be explosive. [t tn tnc~attb~e utth oxtdtztnR The~]-oxtdaclve deRradatton can yield carb~ m~oxtde ~d partially hydrocarbons. ~ ~' '~ ~ ~ ~ ~E~IUM PUBLISHING I No I SECTION VI. HEALTH HAZARD INFORRATION I TLr 300 pPm(See Sect' I1) Inhalation causes intense burning of the mucous membranes, throat and reaolrato~ tract;l overexposure to vapors can lead to bronchupneu~nla, lnhRlatlon of htRh cont., ca~ caus~ ~atal pul~nary edam. Re,aced or prolonKed skin e~osure causes I cause bllsterln8 of skin due to its defattlng properties. E~osure to eyes c~ cause hype~mla of the con~unctlva. Ingestion or exceslive vapors can cause inebriation, dr~iness, blurred v~i~, vertigo confusion, v~ittn8 and cy~osts (2000 ppm produces ~ld anastasia cont. are ~toxicat~g.tn less t~.) ~plration after ~esti~ ca~es br~chl~l, I pne~ni~ or ed~ ~ich can be fatal. FIRST Eye Contact: ~ush thoroughly ~$th ~mning ~atet ~or ~ ~n. Xncl~tng ~der eyel~s. ' Skin Contact: ~ve ~nt~ted clo~ng. M~h affected area ~th I ~nha~at~: ~ve to ~resh air. ~store breathing ~ ~~r o~geu ~f needed. 1nKestton: ~ not t~uce ~tt~. ~ptratton ~rd. ~ct phyI~. Seek pro~t ~d~l ~atet~ce for ~urther trea~nt, obIe~ation ~d a~port. I SECTION VII. SPILL, LEAK~ AND DISPOSAL PROCEDURES Not~y safety perso~e~ of leaks or spt~ls. Re~ve sources o~ heat or ~8n~tton. v~de adequate ventilation. Clean-up personal require protection egnt~t l~q~d I tact and tnh~atton. Zf a leak or spt1~ hai not i~tted, ~e rater ipray to x'apor d~sperse vapors and to protect ~n attesting to stol) the leak,s. ~nt~n hoc allow to enter sever or surface uater. Add absorbent Io~td :o sm~ spills or i residues and p~ck ~ [or disposal. D~SPOSAL: Bu~ scrap mterta~ tn an appr~ed incinerator. ~u~ c~t~nated ~qu~d by spray~8 into ~ incinerator. Fo~l~ Federal, State, ~d ~cal regulators. ' SECTION Vlll. SPECIAL PROTECTION INFOR~TION Use general ~d lo~1 e~aust ve~t~lattoa (e~loston-~oE) to ~eep va~ts be~ the requirements ~ the ~tkplace. ~spttat~s Ihould be available [ut ~routlne I ~ergency ~e above the ~V. AVoid eye contact by use o~ ~em~1 Ia~ety goggles and/or fu~1 faceshteld ~ete tag ~s possible. ~ear pzotecttve c~othtng appropriate ~or the ~rk Itt~t~on to · I m~n~tze s~n contact such as rubber &torsi a~ ~oti. C~oth~nR to be c~nged da~y I and ~aundered. Eyevash fountains, sheers and vashing facilities sh~ld be readily accessible Provide suitable training to those h~dling ~d wrMnl ~th this ~tertal. I SECTION IX. SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS AND CO~ENTS _ S[o~e tn cloI~ c~tatne~J ~ a coo[, dry, ~eJJ-venttJat~ area ~a~ Jroe IOUrC~e o'~ heat, tgniti~ ~d sCr~8 oxidizing ~entI.- Protect c~tainerI fr~ physical dmie. Avoid direct s~ltlht. Storage ~st ~et require~nts of ~ Class IA liqu~. I ~tdoor or detached storage preferred, t~ s~klng in are~ of ~e. Prevent static electric spir~ and ~e e~loiton-proof electrical semites. (~t ~et code.) Avoid skin ~ eye contact. Avoid inhalation of vapors. ~ear clean ~rk clothing dail) Indoor use of this ~terial requirgs exhaust ventilation to re~ve vapors. I ICC Fla~ble Red l~bel. I~REI.: Fl~ble Lloutd ~ I.D. No. ~ 1203. Liquid, ~T Classification: F~LE LIOUID MIS ~ATA SOU'CE(S) CODE: 2.~-9.3~- 32 -.p~v~s: CRo ~ .-- .~ ....... ..and Safety .',' ~DI~L R[VI[~: ~c Hovembet 1981 I GENIUM rUBLISltiNG wa~ m~h I~s ~n in ~e liquid. ~ich, on t~ average, conlain~ ~: 8~ 1-9 14% ~ h~s. Runic, ~, ~ 24% Io 27% Bulk Ha~linR ~al ~l~ iff vari~s ~r~ of ~ bra~ of ~lme ' ~e ~dlfl c~l~l ~ ~ vast, ~ ~ ~ ~. was a~ul Ihe dighlly ~V-S~C ~ ~ (= 15~ ~m~ ~ ~ ~ a~ sl~y,'" a TLV ~ ~ was r~o~ ~ ~ ~ vast. ~is ~s ma~, ~ con~w~ ~li~ is a clear, fl~m~le, ~la8~ I~id ~h a ~~ ~, f~ ~ o~ai~s invd~, ~ ~L ~ling o( ~ine. In ~~s rangi~ ~ C~ m C,, ~. ~ ~m~ ~ is v~nz~, a ~l I~ limit mi~l ~ in ~er. ~ ~ 250 ~e ~~s m va~ ~1 ~ S~iF~ ~vi~ 0.72 ~o 0.76 at ~eF ~ ~s ~ 2% ~ ~ ~."' O~ la~ mimer has a ~l~- ~ilJ~ ~inL'* 39°C; ~°C (10% di~l~; 1 I0°C (50%); im~ lim~ ~ 4%. ~ ~i~ ~ly ~y c~in up 170oC (~%); 2~oC !o 5% ~e~.'~ A~l~is ~ 86 ~ ~ ~i~ imm ~- FI~ ~nt: -SO°F (10°0 ~n filling s~li~s ~al~ ~l 5% ~i~ ~ ~an 2.5% ~ lim~: 1.3% ~ 6.0% by ~u~ in air z~, wi~ ~e high~ ~z~ ~l~l ~ing 4.8%.'" ~ ~ l~ ~di~i~ Io ~ ~li~, ~ch as ~yl~ ~u~e in wa~, ~ is ~y ~ in ~, ~~ ~z~, di~l~ and ~lly ~ di~, am quite toxic, a~ a~e alc~. am ~1 in ~ ~11 a~n~ ~t ~ make a n~ligible ~i~ is a ~ f~ ~4~i~, ~n& i~l ~ ~i~ lo ~ IoxiciW u~ ~ ~i~.~ T~r~hyI ~i~ ~gi~. ~yl ~ am ~ I~ in ~afiliw ~t ~ al~ o~ina~ly A ~ical m~m ~line ~ifion ~ld ~ 80% ~ns, ~ li~e ~al~ ~a~ in ~ ~ling ~ ~ ~line. 14% a~ati~, ~ 6% ol~ns. ~ mean ~ ~ w~ In ~h~ wi~ ~nic ~, ~li~ ~ a ~ w~e J~ to ~ a~mxi~ly I%. ~u~ il is ~ ~ si~ifl~nt lng ~. ~ 3~ ~ ~V is limi~ lo ~lk ~ling p~, ~ ~1~ ~ f~ in ~i~, ~ ~ ~1 i~ing flllin8 ~ti~ ~fi~, ~ ~ d~ ~ ~ ~i~ing in ~bli~ing a ~V? ~ ~~ ~ ~ 8~ ~xic~i~ ~ l~ hig~ ~iling ing~i~B ~i~ might ~ · '~icular agenli~, if ~k am ~. ~, ~ a~ in ~ ~afl~s in,lying ~li~. .. ~ti~, a~ c~in ~ns.'~-'' A ~t~ic v~ ~fifi~ ~ of ~ w~ va~ati~ in ~l~lar ~ ~ its ~ ~ has ~ ~1~ fm 142 i~i~l ~~ ~ ~, ~ c~ d ~ ~ ~m~ is ~imam. ~ i~ ~li~ in ~ air ~e ~ v~.'" ~f~ ~ g~i~ ~ ~~ ~e toxici~ is similap'-s-~ f~ all ~li~. ~ ~ ~lly ~11~ ~ a ~n mol~br ~t d ~. As~min8 ~ ~ a~tic ~ am m~s ~b~ i~ ~ ~ is uni~tifi~ 8% m c~si~ of ~ hydr~a~s, the average hi~ ~u~ ~ ~ ~ in ~ ~1 ~~ ~ ~ ~1~ ~i~t ~ ~ 72.5. ~fom, at 25°C a~ 76 Ion, ~. In~lati~ is ~ ~ i~nl ~ ~ ~1 ~. 3~ ~ ~ld ~ m ~ ~ m~mL ~ ~n d intoxic~, ~, ~u~ ~, d~ A li~l~ a~ TLr ~ 3~ ppm is ~d~, for ~,~aa~tc~s~~~~. ~lk ~lin8 ~ ~li~ ~ ~ Runi~'s'~ ~lculations on mi~ a~a in ~ mi~t~~ Hi~ ~ ~ ~n~ i~ ~10 mi~.-~ ~ ~d ~ i~i~ mi~ ~ ~ is ~1~ ~m 1. ~ CF. ~ ~ ~ ~- I~. H~. ~. I. 39:118 (1978). ~ ~e ~~ in ~ ~ w~ ~~ ~ ~S, ~ 30% ~. ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~. (1943L ~ly 1.5%, ~ile ~ of ~ and ~ ~ to ~s 7. ~ H~= I~,d 36 338 1197S) Iri~l~ ~ 5% a~ 6% ~ ~ I~al. while ~z~ t0.7%), t~. SITE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET · BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA t~- MA R C H 1 992 D UA NE R. SMI TH AND ASSOCIATES Consulting Geologists 7201 Fruitvale Extension Bakersfield, California 93308 (805) 589-7861 T~BLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ................ · ........ 1 Site Background ...................... 2 Former Fuel Facilities ................. 2 Preliminary Site Assessment Results .......... 3 Site Geology ........................ 4 Soil Sampling ....................... 6 Results of Site Characterization .............. 7 Conclusions ........................ 10 Recommendations ...................... 12 Selected References Exhibits: Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Site Map Figure 3 Preliminary Site Assessment Test Hole · Locations Figure 4 Test Hole Location Map Figure 5 Cross Section Location Map · Figure 6 Cross Section A-A' Figure 7 Areal Extent of Contaminant Plume at 10 Foot Depth Figure 8 Areal Extent of Contaminant Plume at 20 Foot · Depth Figure 9 Areal Extent of Contaminant Plume at 30 Foot Depth Figure 10 Areal Extent of Contaminant Plume at 40 Foot · Depth TABLE OF CONTENTS {Continued} Figure 11 Areal Extent of Contaminant Plume at 50 Foot Depth Table 1 Depth to Groundwater, 1973 Through 1990 Table 2 Summary of Analytical Results Table 3 Leaching Potential Analysis for Gasoline Table 4 General Risk Appraisal For Protection of Water Quality · Appendix A Analytical Results and Chain of Custody Record - Preliminary Site Assessment Appendix B Logs of Test Holes Appendix C Analytical Results and Chain of Custody · Records - Test Hole Nos. 1 Through 4 · SITECI{AR.TAB SITE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE INTRODUCTION A site characterization study has been performed for a former underground storage tank site at the Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store property located at 300 Baker Street in Bakersfield, California. It is situated in the southwest quarter of Section 29, T.29S., R.28E., M.D.B.& M. (see Figure 1). The area around the site is residential and commercial. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree and extent of soil contamination resulting from unauthorized releases of gasoline into the subsurface at the site. This investigation included an inspection of the site, drilling and logging of 4 test holes, chemical analyses of selected soil samples, research of available materials, review of existing data, and the prepa- ration of this report by Mr. Thomas F. Gutcher, Registered Geolo- gist No. 5010. This report was prepared following the guidelines of the Bakers- field City Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division. The investigation reported herein has been conducted in accordance with generally recognized and current state-of-the-art geological procedures. The geological factors that were considered are 1 11 SCALE 1:24,000 1 Y2 0 1 MILE I I I I I I I I I I I I 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET H H H I I I I I I I CONTOUR INTERVAL 5 TO 20 FEET (INTERVAL DIFFERS DEPENDING ON QUADRANGLE) NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 LOCATION MAP SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE KERN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Source of Base Map: U.S.G.S. Oildale, Oil Center, Gosford, and Lamont 71/~ Minute Topographic Quadrangles, 1954, photorevised 1968 and 1973. Figure 1 outlined in this report. Other geological factors were not considered inasmuch as they were not deemed relevant to the intended land use and scope of this investigation. This investi- gation was conducted to the best of the investigative geologist's abilities in accordance with the foregoing limitations. SITE BACKGROUND · Former Fuel Facilities One 550 gallon underground gasoline tank was removed from the property on June 17, 1991. It was situated on the property as shown on Figure 2. The dispenser was located about 4 feet north of the west edge of the tank. No products other than gasoline are known to have been stored in the tank. The tank was made of steel and had been in place for many years. The actual age of the tank is unknown. 'The_soil aFound the tank was ~S~[ned an~' ~i~asoi~n~-0d6rS were noted upon removal./ There are no known reports of discrepancies or reportable varia- tions in inventory monitoring, failed tightness tests, repairs to tanks or piping, or past leaks. SITE MAP SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE · ~ ,=X o · Preliminary Site &ssessment Results Four soil samples were collected from beneath the tank and dispenser at the locations shown on Figure 3. Test Hole No. 1 was located through the former tank location and Test Hole No. 2 was located through the former dispenser location. Test Hole No. 1 was sampled at depths of 2 feet and 6 feet beneath the bottom of the tank location (actual depths of 9.5 and 13.5 feet). Test Hole No. 2 was sampled at depths of 2 feet and 6 feet beneath the dispenser location. The samples were analyzed for B.'T.X.& E. and T.P.H. gasoline by BC Laboratories in Bakersfield, California. The results of the chemical analyses along with the chain of custody record are included as Appendix A. The 2 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 1,800 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderate levels of xylenes (page A-i). The 6 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 4,300 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderate levels of xylenes (page A-2). No benzene, toluene, or ethyl benzene was detected in either of these samples. No T.P.H. gasoline or B.T.X.& E. was detected in the two samples from T.H. No. 2 (pages A-3 and A-4). These results indicate product loss and associated soil degradation beneath the tank. There was no indication of product loss or soil degradation beneath the dispenser. 3 · · · · · · · · · · · PRELIMI NARY SITE ASSESSMENT TEST HOLE LOC;ATIONS · SITE GEOLOGY · According to the Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet Campbell, 1971), the site is situated over Quaternary fan depos- its composed of sediments deposited from streams emerging from the highlands surrounding the valley. In general, these sedi- ments consist of unconsolidated and undissected gravel, sand, and silt. The sediments encountered in the four test holes drilled during this investigation, to a depth of 24 to 25 feet, consist of a brown to tan, locally gravelly, locally silty, fine to very coarse grained sand. A light brown sandy silt layer 2 to 3 feet thick occurs below this. The next lithologic unit, which occurs below depths of about 27 to 28 feet, consists of a tan, fine to coarse grained, locally gravelly, sand. This unit is 5 to 8 feet thick. Below depths of 32 to 35 feet, the sediments consist of a light brown to brown, sandy silt. This unit is 20+ feet thick and is locally interbedded with sand and gravelly sand layers up to 7 feet thick. Below depths of about 55 to 57 feet, the sedi- ments consist Of a light gray to tan, fine to medium grained, silty sand. Below depths of about 58 to 63 feet, the sediments consist of a light brown to brown, sandy silt. In general, the sediments are slightly moist and loose to slightly consolidated. The sediments exhibit a moderate degree of variability typical of 4 Quaternary fan deposits. Detailed descriptions are shown on the test hole logs in Appendix B. According to the General Soil Map of Kern County (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1967), the site is underlain by soils of the Hesperia-Hanford association. In general, this is a well-drained soil developed on nearly level alluvial fans. This soil type is derived from granitic rocks and is moderately coarse textured. According to the 1990 Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4, published by the Kern County Water Agency, the depth to groundwater beneath the site was approximately 210 feet in 1990. According to the 1990 Water Supply Report (a less detailed report), published by the Kern County Water Agency, the depth to groundwater beneath the site was approximately 195 feet in 1990. No shallow perched groundwater is known to exist beneath the site. No groundwater was encountered in the four test holes drilled during this investigation, the deepest of which reached a depth of 70 feet. Based on historic water depth data, collected for the period from 1973 to 1990, the depth to groundwater beneath the site has fluctuated between about 195 and 255 feet below the surface (see Table 1). The average depth to groundwater beneath the site during this time period is about 220 feet. 5 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER 1973 THROUGH 1990 SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE DATE ON MAP DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER SOURCE · May 1973 210' 1973" July 1974 250' 1974" Fall 1977 240' 1977b August 1978 200+' 19788 · Spring 1979 - 200' 1978b Spring 1981 210' 1980b Spring 1982 250' 1981b · Spring 1983 210' 1982~ October 1983 240' 1983" Spring 1984 230' 1983~ Spring 1985 250' 1984~ '· Spring 1986' 210' 1985~ Spring 1987 · 200' 1986b September 1987 255' 1987a O Spring 1988 220' 1987~ September 1988 220' 1988" Spring 1989 210' 1988~ · Spring 1990 200' 1989~ September 1990 210' 1990a January 1991 195' 1990~ Sources: a Kern County Water Agency, Improvement District No. 4, Report on Water Conditions, year of report listed. b Kern County Water Agency, Water Supply Report, year of report listed. S'TVINCEN.WTR Table 1 · SOIL S~PLING Four test holes were drilled at the site on January 28, 1992 (T.H. Nos. i through 4 on Figure 4). Test Hole No. i was drilled through the presumed center of the contamination to a depth of 70 ·. feet. Test Hole Nos. 2 through 4 were situated east and west of T.H. No. 1. They were perimeter borings drilled to provide data necessary to delineate the lateral extent of the contaminant plume. Test Hole Nos. 2, 3, and 4 were drilled to depths of 30, 65, and 60 feet, respectively. Test Hole No. 2 was terminated at 30 feet because field screening clearly indicated that the boring location was too near the plume center. Soil samples were collected at five foot intervals Starting at a depth of 10 feet in each boring. There was no sample recovery at 10 feet from T.H. No. 1. Soil samples were collected using a split'spoon sampler driven into the soil utilizing a truck-mounted 8" diameter hollow stem auger rig (Mobile Drill B-53). The split-spoon sampler holds three 2.5 inches diameter by 6 inches long brass liners. The sampler was driven through the proper sampling interval utilizing a 140 pound drop hammer after the hole was drilled with the hollow stem auger. The sampler was then removed from the drilling equipment and the brass liners removed from the sampler. 6 · · · · · · · · · ®- · TEST HOLE LOCATION MAP SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE I I Test Hole DUANE R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992, The ends of the middle liner from each sample depth were covered with Teflon seals, polyethylene caps, and taped shut with duct tape. The liner was then labeled and placed in a polyethylene sample bag and the bag sealed and labeled. Each bagged liner was immediately placed in an ice chest on blue ice and retained for laboratory analyses. Another soil sample from each sample depth was retained for field screening and soil descriptions. Field screening consisted of a headspace reading for hydrocarbon vapors with an Hnu PID meter. In addition to the headspace readings, hydrocarbon odors, if detected, were noted. Each set of augers was steam-cleaned after drilling each borehole to avoid cross contamination. The sampling equipment was scrubbed, washed, and thoroughly rinsed between each sample collection. Contaminated drill cuttings, .as identified by field screening, were placed in DOT drums and retained on-site for future treatment or disposal, if necessary. The test holes were backfilled with a sand-cement slurry from total depth to the surface. RESULTS OF SITE CHARACTERIZATION Eighteen of the soil samples collected from T.H. Nos. 1 through 4 were submitted for chemical analyses. The samples were analyzed 7 for T,P.H. gasoline and B.T.X.& E. by BC Laboratories in Bakers- field. The analytical methods utilized by BC Laboratories are listed on the laboratory reports included in Appendix C. The quality assurance and quality control of the laboratory are available from BC Laboratories on request. The analytical results of the eighteen soil samples submitted for analyses along with the appropriate chain of custody records are included in Appendix C. Table 2 shows a summary of the analytical results in tabular form. The 20, 30, 45, 50, 65, and 70 foot samples from T.H. No. 1 were analyzed. The 25 foot sample from T.H. No. 2 was analyzed. The 20, 25, 45, 60, and 65 foot samples from T.H. No. 3 were ana- lyzed. The 25, 35, 40, 50, 55, and 60 foot samples from T.H. No. 4 were analyzed. Sampling difficulties prevented collection of a 10 foot sample from T.H. No. 1. T.H. No. 2 was drilled as a perimeter boring. Field screening clearly indicated that the boring was too near the plume center to serve as a perimeter boring, so it was terminated at a depth of 30 feet and only one sample analyZed. The 20 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 2,800 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderately high levels of ethyl benzene and xylenes. No benzene or toluene was detected in this sample. The 30 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 1,500 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderately high levels of B.T.X.& E. The 45 8 · · · · · · · · · · · SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE SAMPLE BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYL 0-XYLENE M-XYLENE P-XYLENE TPH SAMPLE DEPTH IN BENZENE GASOLINE LOCATION FEET (ppm) (ppm) (ppml (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) 9.5 None Detected None Detected None Detected 29 19 6.3 1800 13.5 None Detected None Detected None Detected 120 50 19 4300 16 ..................... 20 None Detected None Detected 3 110 89 31 2800 T.H. No. 1 25 ..................... 30 3 110 2¢ 96 1 60 49 1500 (includes 35 ..................... preliminary 40 .................... site assess- 45 110 730 170 300 500 160 6000 ment samples) 50 7 51 15 29 44 15 500 60 ..................... 65 O. 19 O. 10 0.079 0.032 0.20 0.055 1 70 O. 15 O.044 0.046 0.013 0 .O88 0.021 None Detected 10 ..................... 15 ..................... T.H. No. 2 20 ..................... 25 None Detected 6 None Detected 150 240 None Detected 2000 30 ..................... 10 ..................... 15 ..................... 20 None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected 25 None Detected 28 38 170 180 63 2600 30 ..................... 35 ..................... T.H. No. 3 40 ..................... 45 200 1200 300 580 850 300 11,000 50 ..................... 55 ..................... 60 0.34 0.034 0.12 None Detected 0.28 0,089 2 65 0.015 None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected 10 ..................... 15 ..................... ZO ..................... 25 None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected 30 ..................... T.H. No. 4 35 None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected None Detected 40 0.056 0.20 O. 13 O. 12 O. 13 None Detected 3 45 ..................... 50 0.054 0.11 0.065 0.040 0.032 0.014 1 55 0.026 0.068 None Detected 0.031 0.035 None Detected None Detected 60 O.013 O.019 None Detected None Detected 0.005 None Detected None Detected Table 2 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 6,000 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and high levels of B.T.X.& E. The 50 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 500 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderately high levels of B.T.X.& E. The 65 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 1 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and traces of B.T.X.& E. The 70 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained traces of B.T.X.& E. No T.P.H. gasoline was detected in this sample. The analytical results of the selected samples from T.H. No. 1 are included in Appendix C, pages C-1 through C- 6. The 25 foot sample from T.H. No. 2 reportedly contained 2,000 ppm T.P.H. gasoline, 6 ppm toluene, 150 ppm o-xylene, and 240 ppm m- xylene. No benzene, ethyl benzene, or p-xylene was detected in this sample. The analytical results of this sample are included in Appendix C, page C-7. No T.P.H. gasoline or B.T.X.& E. was detected in the 20 foot sample from T.H. No. 3. The 25 foot sample from T.H. No. 3 reportedly contained 2,600 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderately high levels of toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylenes. The 45 foot sample from T.H. No. 3 reportedly contained 11,000 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and very high levels of B.T.X.& E. The 60 foot sample from T.H. No. 3 reportedly contained 2 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and traces of B.T.X.& E. The 65 foot sample from T.H. No. 3 report- edly contained 0.015 ppm benzene. No T.P.H. gasoline, toluene, 9 · ethyl benzene, or xylenes were detected in this sample. The analytical results of the selected samples from T.H. No. 3 are · included in Appendix C, pages C-8 through C-12. No T.P.H. gasoline or B.T.X.& E. was detected in the 25 or 35 · foot samples from T.H. No. 4. The 40 foot sample from T.H. No. 4 reportedly contained 3 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and traces of B.T.X.& E. The 50 foot sample'from T.H. No. 4 reportedly contained 1 ppm · T.P.H. gasoline and traces of B.T.X.& E. The 55 foot sample from T.H. No. 4 reportedly contained traces of benzene, toluene, and xylenes. No T.P.H. gasoline, ethyl benzene, or p-xylene was · detected in this sample. The 60 foot sample from T.H. No. 4 reportedly contained traces of benzene, toluene, and m-xylene. No T.P.H.~gasoline, ethyl benZene, o-xylene, or p-xylene was · detected in this sample. The analytical results of the selected samples from T.H. No. 4 are included in Appendix C, pages C-13 through C-18. CONCLUSIONS · Figure 5 shows the location of cross section A-A' through T.H. Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4. Cross section A-A' is shown on Figure 6 and depicts a west-east vertical profile of the contaminant plume. · Figures 7 through 11 show the approximate areal extent of the contaminant plume at depths of 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 feet,. respectively. The two preliminary site assessment samples 10 CROSS SECTION LOCATION MAP r' ..... ', ~ kI Test Hole Location - DUANE R - SMITH & ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 CROSS SECTION A -- A" O' A GI;OUIVI) SURFACE' ~ o~A TI O~ ~ I , NO 0§~,; FAINT 0~)0~ bio O~OR ' 3 ~0' - oz~o/; CON 7"~ ~ ~ ,v ,9 /u 'r' N D _--~-------- ~ ~R. OOOR ~0 ~~ [0.0~] ~. - ~0' ND · [o.15] NOTES: 1. Values listed outside of brackets [ ] are ppm T.P.H. gasoline. 2. Values listed inside of brackets [ ] are ppm benzene. 3. ND refers to None Detected. ~. Preliminary site assessment samples shown by solid circle ~. D . R . SMITH & ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 · , Figure 6 AREAL EXTENT OF CONTAMI NANT PLUME AT 10 FOOT DEPTH A~ A' ~. ~d.~ A 5PHAL~ Test Hole Location -~ ~UANE ~ . SMITH ~ AS~O~IATE~ -- ~A~H 1~ AREAL EXTENT OF CONTAMI NANT PLUME AT 20 FOOT DEPTH A ~.~.~o. ~o~ Test Hole Location -~ DUANE R . SMITH & ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 AREAL EXTENT OF CONTAMINANT PLUME AT 30 FOOT DEPTH Co,vrA m ;,%*~'r Test H°le Location -~ I' = I0' DUANE R. SMITH ~ ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 · · · · · · · · · · · AREAL EXTENT OF CONTAMINANT PLUME AT ~O FOOT DEPTH ~.o~' Test Hole Location -~ l" = I0' DUANE R . SMITH & ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 AREAL EXTENT OF CONTAMINANT PLUME AT 50 FOOT DEPTH A ~.~. Test Hole Location -~ Z" = 10' DUANE R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES -- MARCH 1992 collected from beneath the tank are also shown on Figure 6 as part of the samples from T.H. No. 1. Figure 6 includes an interpretation of the lithology beneath the site. The interpre- tation is based on the test hole logs included in Appendix B. The lower case letters on Figure 6 (e.g., sw, ml, etc.) are the USCS soil designations taken from the test hole logs. The solid lines indicating lithologic changes indicate greater certainty than the dashed lines. Subsurface migration of contaminants appears to have been con- trolled by the influence of gravity and also by the lithology. It is clear that the silt layer (ml) at a depth of about 25 feet has had a great deal of influence on contaminant migration. Gasoline migrated relatively unimpeded through the sands above the silt and then spread laterally on top of the silt layer before penetrating to the sands below. It appears that the contamination tapers off with depth below the 25 foot silt layer. Figure 6 shows the area of significant gasoline contamination. Trace levels of gasoline constituents were detected in some areas outside of the contaminant plume shown on Figure 6. The maximum vertical extent of the contaminant plume appears to be at a depth of about 53 feet (see Figure 6) and is located directly below the former tank location. The maximum areal extent of the contaminant plume is estimated to be a roughly 'circular zone about 47 feet in diameter between depths of about 11 27 feet and 36 feet (see Figures 6 and 9). The data indicates that the plume is slightly asymmetrical, but roughly circular in a horizontal cross section. A "point source" of contamination in laterally uniform soil should lead to the development of a symmetrical plume. It is estimated that the contaminant plume consists of roughly 1,500 cubic yards of soil. This value was determined by calcu- lating the volumes of eight horizontally-oriented discs of various dimensions which approximate the shape of the plume and then summing the volumes of each disc. The vOlume estimate is based on the plume as shown on Figure 6. It does not include the trace levels outside of the main plume. RECOMMENDATIONS Three possible remedial alternatives for this site are excavation and disposal, vapor extraction, and a no action alternative. Excavation of the contaminated soil would be very costly. Based on a cost of $300.00 per cubic yard to excavate and dispose of the contaminated soil, it would cost $450,000 to complete remedi- ation. This figure is considered somewhat conservative due to the depth of the excavation and the need for shoring and/or ramping. Also, it is likely that the actual amount of soil to be excavated would exceed the estimated 1,500 cubic yards of '12 contaminated soil. Furthermore, excavation to this depth at the site would involve moving or demolishing several structures. The · facility would be unable to operate during the excavation pro- cess, further adding to the costs. · During the excavation process, B.T.X.& E. constituents would be released to the atmosphere and excavation personnel, as well as civilians in the vicinity, could be exposed to these constitu- · ents. This remediation alternative could take several months to complete, including the planning stages. Excavation and disposal is also undesirable because the waste generator must pay several · different State taxes and is still liable for the soil. Waste disposal sites do not assume responsibility for accepted wastes. Public safety in the area is also a concern at this site. The second remedial alternative, vapor extraction, would involve drilling many dry wells through the plume and using vacuum pumps · to remove the hydrocarbon vapors. This method can be quite effective at reducing contamination levels from gasoline. The cost to complete a vapor extraction project at this location is · roughly estimated at $150,000. A vapor extraction system could require a year or more of operation before reducing contamination to acceptable levels. Verification borings with soil sampling would be required to demonstrate adequate cleanup. The third plan is a no action alternative. This plan is not deemed acceptable at this site for the following reasons. Nine of the twenty-two soil samples from the site (includes prelimi- nary site assessment samples) fail the leaching potential analy- sis for gasoline (see Table 3). The site also fails the general risk appraisal for the protection of water quality (see Table 4). Some of the soil samples were highly contaminated. For example, the 45 foot sample from T.H. No. 3 showed a benzene concentration of 200 ppm (page C-10) which is 200 times the recommended allow- able limit (see Table 3). Also, the plume is large in diameter and extends well under the store building (see Figure 9, for example). This may present a threat to public safety. Based on the foregoing evaluations, vapor extraction seems the most appropriate remedial alternative for this site. The no action alternative would not be accepted by the regulatory agencies and excavation and disposal is not cost-effective. Other, less conventional methods may be available which could be more cost-effective. All possible options should be investigated before choosing a remedial method for a project of this scope. Submitted by: e ~tNo 5010 STVINCEN.PLN 14 Leaching Potential Analysis for Gasoline Using Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons(TPH) and Benzene, Toluene, Xylene 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 sites 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 R DITION E IS MET E IS MET E IS MET · Minimum Depth to >100 51-100 25-50~1 Ground Water from the 10 Soil Sample (feet) i'Fractures in subsurface None Unknown Present (applies to foothills 10 · or mountain areas) Average Annual <10 10-25 26-40~2 Precipitation (inches) 10 · Man-made conduits which None Unknown Present increase vertical 10 migration of leachate Unique site features: None At least More recharge area, coarse 9 one than one · soil, nearby wells, etc RANGE OF TOTAL POINTS 49pts or more 41 - 48 pts 40pts or less · MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 1/50/50/50 .3/. 3/1/1 NA~3 B/T/X/E LEVELS (PPM) MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE 1000 100 10 TPH LEVELS (PPM) · ~1 If depth is greater than 5 ft. and less than 25 ft., score 0 points. If depth is 5 ft. or less, this table should not be used. ~2 If precipitation is over 40 inches, score 0 points. ~3 Levels for BTX&E are not applicable at a TPH concentration of 10ppm (from State of California. 1988) Table 3 · GENERAL RISK APPRAISAL FOR PROTECTION OF WATER QUALITY: APPLICABILITY CHECKLIST YES NO 1. Is the site in a mountainous area? (shaded moist · areas &/or areas with rocky subsurface conditions) X 2. Is the site in an area that could collect surface runoff or intercept water from a source other than X the natural precipitation? · 3. Does the areal extent of soil contamination exceed 100 meters'? X 4. Do the concentrations of fuel constituents in any soil samples exceed the following amounts: X benzene - 100 ppm, toluene - 80 ppm, xylene - 40 · ppm, ethylbenzene - 40 ppm. 5. Are there any records or evidence of man-made or natural objects which could provide a conduit for ~X vertical migration of leachate? · 6. Do any boring or excavation logs show the presence of fractures, joints or faults that could act as a X conduit for vertical migration of leachate? 7. Do any boring logs show that contaminated soil could be within 5 ft. of highest ground water? X 8. Do any boring logs show the presenCe of a layer of material, 5 ft. thick or more, which is more than X 75% sand and/or gravel? Directions: · 1. Boring logs taken during the general risk appraisal can be used to answer questions 5-8. In addition, analytical results of the soil samples taken during the general risk appraisal can be used to answer questions 3 and 4. 2. Lateral migration of constituents to problem areas · should also be considered in questions 5-8. 3. The above checklist contains questions which are designed to identify sites with environmental conditions which could produce a greater risk to ground water than was modeled. The results of the general risk appraisal are most applicable if all · of the questions on the checklist can be answered "no" with reasonable certainty. If any of the questions on the checklist cannot be answered "no", then the results of the general risk appraisal may be less valid. · (from State of California, 1988) · 'Table 4 SELECTED REFERENCES Campbell, I., 1971, Geologic map of California, Olaf P. Jenkins Edition, Bakersfield sheet: Calif. Div. Mines and Geol., second printing. County of Kern, 1990, Site characterization and remediation: Dept. of Environ. Health Services, Resource Management Agency, Handbook UT-35, 11 p. Kern County Water Agency, 1991, 1990 report on water conditions, Improvement District No. 4, 38 p. Kern County Water Agency, 1991, Water supply report 1990, 70 p. State of California, 1988, Leaking underground fuel tank field manual: guidelines for site assessment, cleanup, and under- ground storage tank closure: Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Task Force, 121 p. (revised March 1989). U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1967, Report and general soil map, Kern County, California: U.S.D.A., Soil Conservation Ser- vice, 71 p.. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, Test methods for evaluating solid waste: SW-846, Volume II: Field Manual, Third Edition. · BAKECIIAR.REF / APPENDIX A ANALYTICAL RESULTS · AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENT · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PE~'ROLEUB J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 · BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab #: 7137-1 Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 1 @ 2', 6/17/91 @ 1130 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH · Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-20-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.8 Toluene Hg/g None Detected 0.8 Ethyl Benzene Hg/g None Detected 0.8 o-Xylene ug/g 29. 0.8 m-Xylene ug/g 19. 0.8 p-Xylene ug/g 6.3 0.8 · Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) ug/g 1800. 200. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comment s: California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186 · ~// &nalyst · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 · Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 · BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 7137-2 Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 1 @ 6', 6/17/91 @ 1145 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH · Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-20-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 2. Toluene Hg/g None Detected 2. Ethyl Benzene Hg/g None Detected 2. o-Xylene ug/g 120. 2. m-Xylene ug/g 50. 2. p-Xylene ug/g 19. 2. · Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) ug/g 4300. 400. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186 · /- ~nalyst ~ ENI/IRON~fENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, RE(}. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327.1918 · Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 7137-3 · Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 2 @ 2', 6/17/91 @ 1200 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH · Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-21-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.005 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.005 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.005 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.005 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.005 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.005 · Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) ug/g None Detected 1. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comments: California D.O.H.S,~Cert. #1186 J. J. Eglin ~ /~nalyst A-3 · ENVIRONMENTAL . ,,,.,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,,s,s LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report= 06/25/91 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 7137-4 Attn.: .DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 2 @ 6', 6/17/91 @ 1210 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-21-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.05 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.05 Ethyl Benzene Hg/g None Detected 0.05 o-Xylene Hg/g None Detected 0.05 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.05 p-Xylene Bg/g None Detected 0.05 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) ug/g None Detected 1. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comment s: California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186 · . · {/ /Analyst - CI-L~IN OF CUSTODY RECO~D ~ Location of S~plinq Collector , Client Company: ~.~/~A~'~ ~/ Company: D.R. Smith & Associates Company: Address: ~0 I~< JT, Address: 7201 Fruitvale Ext. Address: ~f)~,'~ ~ ~'. Bakersfield, CA 93308 Telephone: ( ) Telephone: (805) 589-7861 Telephone: ( ) / Bill to Property ~ner ( ) Bill to Collector ~) Bill to Client ( ) S~ple No. Date Time Description '. ~alysis Requested Laboratory No. , ' ~. /~ Date: / Received By: ~ ~. ~.,r,..,-. , . ,, . .~, , , ~ 7.~.~),. ,_~,,., Company: ~ C. ,/ ~,.. ~-~ c ,.--~ ~ ~. Relin~ished By: ~ Company: Date: Received By: Company: Date: Relin~ished By: Company: Date: Received By: Company: Date: APPENDIX B LOGS OF TEST HOLES LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: T.H. No. 1 ELEVATION: -412' DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 70' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE [ Z DUANE R. SMITH · z ~ =o z< u° AND ASSOCIATES ; ~ o- - ~ ~ ~ o u BAKERSFIELD~ CALIFORNIA ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (805] 589-7861 c ~ k LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ' 0 ' · , Fill. sand, brown, very silW, fine to very coarse grained, well graded, _ sm loose, slighfl~ moist, slight hydrocarbon odor, - -I I 0733 5 .... No recovery. 7 sw . · · · . Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, medium dense, slightly - - moist, gasoline odor. _ _ 2 0740 19 220 Same as above. 21 _ _ 3 0750 12 ~40 2800 ' ' Ssmo ~ abovo, modoratol~ ~radod, fino Orainod sand predominant, 14 ... ~asolino odor. ....... Silt, light brown, ssnd~, fino ~rsinod, sliflhtl~ elocon, modium stiff, 22 - ~:: ~ ' slightly moist, gasoline odor. sw · · ' ' Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, medium dense, slightly moist, gasoline odor. Sheet i of 3 LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: T.H. No. 1 ELEVATION: -412' DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO,: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-§3 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 70' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE [ Z DUANE /::1. SMITH = E < °u AND ASSOCIATES u~ [805] 589-7861 LU Z Z O UJ _ .~ a: _ II-I m O c ~ ~- LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION '30 = I 20 · ... -I 5 0809 23 49 1500 sw · Same as above, gasoline odor· 17 "'35= · 22 .... ' 'I 6 0825 42 160 mi ....... Silt, light brown, sandy, fine grained, slightly clayey, stiff, slightly 43 ·-_ ' ........ moist, gasoline odor· sw. Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, medium dense, slightly -~ . · · '. moist, gasoline odor. sp . · '40"I 25 . _ 7 0838 42 7.6 Sand, light gray, fine to medium grained, predominantly fine, poorly 45 graded, dense, dry, gasoline odor. Note: Meter reading suspect - - ' . vapors appear to be "swamping" the meter. '45 'B 6 mi -~ '-'~-'~' - -I 8 0845 5 0.4 6000 ..... Silt, light brown, slightly sandy, fine grained, slightly clayey, medium 10 _.'_.'_._ stiff, slightly moist, strong gasoline odor. Note: Meter reading - _ ...... suspect - vapors appear to be "swamping" the meter. -'~.' r'- -50- I 12 ~ '_~ ~'_-.' - ' -I 9 0858 17 8.4 500 Same as above, stiff, slight sweet gasoline odor. Note: Meter 28 -~.-.--~ reading suspect - vapors appear to be "swamping" the meter. 10 O919 23 126 _. ' ~ Same as above, s~ight increase in sand content, traces of sweet 27 _ .-_< L gasoline odor. .... 2-ZL2_. sm ' ' Sand, light gray, silty, fine to medium grained, dense, slightly moist, - "i-~._. traces of gasoline odor. Shcct 2 o1' 3 B-2 LOCATION: Saint ~incem ~e Paul T~rif~ Store TE~T ~L~ ~.: T.~. ~o. 1 ~Tt~: ~4~2' DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 70' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG SAMPLE --E Zo : DUANE SMITH , BAKE~SFIELDi ~ .~ z O ~ ~ O O c m ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION _ _ 11 0930 23 79 sm ..... ' Same as above, traces of gasoline odor. mi ..... '65 ' _~ 12 0938 12 120 1 Silt, brown, sandy, fine to medium grained, black mottling common, 17 -* :"~'- stiff, slightly moist, slight sweet gasoline odor. ~ -*,~.'T _ .~ 13 0958 20 94 ND ..... Same as above, no hydrocarbon odor. 23 sm :*' t*-*-". Sand, brown, silty, fine to medium grained, medium dense, stightty . moist, no hydrocarbon odor. '75 - '80- -85 ' Sh~t 3 of 3 B-3 LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: T.H. No. 2 ELEVATION: -412' DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 30' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE E O BAKERSFIELDI CALIFORNIA (SO5] 589-7861 uJ z z 0 [::3 03 ~ O "r c ~ ~'- LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ' 0 ' Sand, brown, fine to very coarse grained, loose, slightly moist, no _ sw · - hydrocarbon odor. '10= · 10 o . ° -I 14 1114 12 13.8 Same as above, fine gravel common, no hydrocarbon odor. 21 . 15 1122 17 30 , Same as above, faint sweet gasoline odor. 19 '20'I 16 · . _ 16 1129 18 172 Same as above, gravel absent, gasoline odor. 21 mi ........ ' -I 17 1137 19 180 2000 ....... Silt, light brown, sandy, fine to medium grained, slightly clayey, 25 ...... medium stiff, slightly moist, strong gasoline odor. SW · 18 1154 28 150 Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, dense, slightly moist, 30 strong gasoline odor, Shcct I of l B-4 LOCATION: Sain~ Vincent ~e Paul Thrif~ Store TEST HOLI: NO.: T.H. ~o. 3 ELFYATION: ~412' DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO,: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 65' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE -E OZ = _ <, o° AND ASSOCIA'rES 15,, 2'" u o- -- ~ ~5= ,,m,- u_ BAKERSFIEI. O~ CALIFORNIA ~J z z _ n- I_ ~E) (n O c u) ~- LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ' 0 'I Sand, brown, fine to very coarse grained, loose, slightly moist, no _ sw ' ' "I hydrocarbon odor. _ _ 19 1315 25 32 o Same as above, fine gravel common, coarse gravel rare, dense, no 23 ° ° ° hydrocarbon odor. 20 1321 17 24 · Same as above, gravel absent, no hydrocarbon odor. 19 '20 I 14 -, I 21 1327 14 15.2 ND Same as above, medium dense, no hydrocarbon odor. 13 .. '25-1 il ' - -I 22 1332 13 190 2600 mi ..... Silt, light brown, sandy, fine to medium grained, slightly clayey, 16 ...... medium stiff, slightly moist, strong gasoline odor. sw . Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, dense, slightly moist, gasoline odor. '30- '" ' ' Sheet I B-5 LOG OF TEST HOLE DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 65' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE ~ 0 - ~~ ~ -- ~ z z 0 c ~ ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION _ _~ 23 1343 24 185 sw Same as above, gasoline odor. 20 * ' ". Fine gravel common, strong gasoline odor. _ _~ 24 1351 29 132 mi ....... . Silt, light brown, sandy, fine grained, slightly clayey, stiff; slightly 24 ........ , moist, gasoline odor. sw Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, dense, slightly moist, - - . '- .' · . ". gasoline odor. mi ........ Silt, light brown, slightly sandy, fine grained, hard, slightly moist, ....... gasoline odor. -40 - i ~ 5 ........ 30 sp .... . Sand, light gray, silty, fine grained, poorly graded, dense, slightly ...... moist, strong gasoline odor. '45'~ 13 '' ' '*' _ _~ 26 1412 10 148 11,000 ....... Silt, brown, slightly sandy, fine grained, slightly clayey, medium stiff, 10 mi _. =.2 ~_ slightly moist, strong gasoline odor. '50=I ~9 ........ . _ 27 1423 23 142 -'-:~'- Same as above, rust streaks common, slight sweet gasoline odor. 21 .... "~'- '55'I 13 ...... _ _ 28 1438 23 100 ~7~' ~ Sand, tan, silty, fine to medium grained, dense, slightly moist, traces 25 sm " of gasoline odor. mi ...... Silt, light brown, slightly clayey, very stiff, slightly moist, traces of '~0- sweet gasoline odor. Sh~t 2 of LD[3 OF TEST HDLE LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: T.H. No. 3 ELEVATION: -412' DATI: DRILLED: 0112819::;) DRILLING CO,: Melton Drilling Company DRILLE~: Mike Brayson D~ILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-§3 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMET£R: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 65' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE ~ Z ~ DUANE I::1. SMITH o Z -r~ ~ ~ u° _ze _~ ~ ~ _~ _u BAKERSFIELD, CALIFOIqNIA I.U z z O La I:~ _j '- ~ ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION _ _ 29 1450 39 104 2 mi ....... Same as above, traces of sweet gasoline odor. 50 ....... _ _ 30 1502 11 75 ND _-~'_-.'_-.~. Same as above, possible faint gasoline odor, 19 '70' '75 ' '80' '85 - '90- Shcct 3 or' 3 · B-7 LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: T,H, No. 4 ELEVATION: -412' DATE DRILLED: 01/28/92 DRILLING CO,: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 60' FIRST WATER: None .LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE '~ Z ~ OUANE I::~. SMITH 0 ~ :' - E ., < o AND ASSOCIATES m ~ 0 c Z BAKERSFIELD~ CALIFORNIA ~ [805] 589-7861 ~ z z O m ~ c m ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ' 0 = Sand, brown, silty, fine to coarse grained, loose, slightly moist, no _ sm. . hydrocarbon odor. _~ 31 1557 9 28 sw ~ · Sand, brown, fine to very coarse grained, fine gravel common, 14 , , medium dense, slightly moist, no hydrocarbon odor. _ _ 32 1602 13 13.9 Same as above, gravel rare, no hydrocarbon odor. =20 = B 6 _~ 33 1609 6 19.2 o Same as above, medium dense, no hydrocarbon odor. . .~ 34 1620 13 32 ND -..-~ .... Silt, light brown, sandy, fine to medium grained, slightly clayey, 17 .~-. '_~ medium stiff, slightly moist, possible faint hydrocarbon odor. - sw Sand, tan, fine to coarse grained, well graded, medium dense, slightly moist, possible faint gasoline odor. '30 Shcct ]oE B-8 LOG OF TEST HOLE LOCATION: Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Store TEST HOLE NO.: T.H. No, 4 ELEVATION: -412' DATE DRILLED: 01128/92 DRILLING CO.: Melton Drilling Company DRILLER: Mike Brayson DRILLING RIG: Mobile Drill B-53 SAMPLING METHOD: split spoon with brass sleeves HOLE DIAMETER: 8+" TOTAL DEPTH: 60' FIRST WATER: None LOGGED BY: TFG Z SAMPLE [ Z ~ DUANE R. SMITH ~ = o E~ < o AND ASSOCIATES ~ o BAKERSFIELD~ CALIFORNIA ~ ~ o z ~ ~ z ~= ~ (eos] m z z ~ ~ ~ ~ m O c m ~ LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION '30-a 6 , · · . _J 3~ 1634 6 8.8 ~w ' Same ~ ~bove, possible f~im g~solin~ odor. mi ....... Silt, brown, sandy, fine ~o m~dium grained, h~rd, slightly moist, faint '35- J ~9 ,-'~: Z,'- _ _J 36 1640 50 25 ND ........ S~me as above, faint gasoline odor. BO ....... '40 ' ~ 25 -: ~'-:- _~ 37 1649 26 6.6 3 _. ~ .'~ Same as above, gasoline odor. 50 . 38 1658 17 120 -.:.~'- Same as above, gasoline odor. .50-I t5 . _ ~, ~o =" ~= ~ _Z':Z-~ S.m..~.~ov., ,.~o,.. o~or. 33 -55 'I 2s ...... .- - -I 40 1725 28 108 ND sm ,, ~ : Sand, ten, silty, fine to medium grained, dense, slightly moist, faint 24 ,_. _. gasoline odor. '60'I 13 ..... I 41 1733 16 52 ND Same as above, faint gasoline odor. 22 '.''-: Sh~t 2 of I · APPENDIX C ANALYTICAL RESULTS · AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDS TEST HOLE NOS. 1 THROUGH 4 ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-1 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 7:50AM T.H. NO. 1 ® 20' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modif£ed EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene None Detected mg/kg 1. Toluene None Detected mg/kg 1. Ethyl Benzene 3. mg/kg 1. o-Xylene 110. mg/kg 1. · m-Xylene 89. mg/kg 1. p-Xylene 31. mg/kg 1. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 2800. mg/kg 200. · Comments:. California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-1 ~) Printed on Environment 25 contatnln[~ 100% reclaimed fibers with 15°/. Post-Consumer Waste · ENWRONMENTAL LABO RATORIF , INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-2 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 8:09AM T.H. NO. 1 ® 30' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents'by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Sell Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ~ Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 3. mg/kg 2. Toluene 110. mg/kg 2. Ethyl Benzene 24. mg/k9 2. o-Xylene 96[ m~/k~ 2. · m-Xylene 160. mg/k~ 2. p-Xylene 49. mg/kg 2. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 1500. mg/kg 500. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-2 Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% ~*eclalmed fibers with 15°/. Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327~4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-3 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 8:45AM T.H. NO. 1 ® 45' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/07/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 110. mg/kg 20. Toluene 730. mg/kg 20. Ethyl Benzene 170. mg/kg 20. o-Xylene 300. mg/kg 20. · m-Xylene 500. mg/kg 20. p-X¥1ene 160. mg/kg 20. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 6000. mg/kg 3000. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-3 Printed on Environment 25 containing 100 '/o reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93~08 PHONE (805) 327.4911 FAX (805) 327.1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-4 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 8:58AM T.H. NO. 1 @ 50' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 7. mg/kg 2 Toluene 51. mg/kg 2 Ethyl Benzene 15. mg/kg 2 o-Xylene 29. m~/k~ 2 · m-Xylene 44. m~/kg 2 p-Xylene 15. m~/kg 2 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 500. mg/kg 500. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · ~) Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ~'~ ~'~ L~ [30 FI~TO I::::t I F.__Cl, IIX, lC. 4100 ATLAS cT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons · D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-5 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 9:38AM T.H. NO. 1 ® 65' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by ~PA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.19 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.10 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene 0.079 mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylen% 0.032 mg/kg 0.005 · m-Xylene 0.20 mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene 0.055 mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 1. mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · Printed on Environment 25 containing 100 Yo reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EG/IN, REG. CHEM. ENGFI. PETROLEUB 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-6 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 9:58AM T.H. NO. 1 ~ 70' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.HoS. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.15 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.044 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene 0.046 mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene 0.013 mg/kg 0.005 m-Xylene 0.088 mg/kg 0.005 · p-Xylene 0.021 mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-6 (~) Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONf~ENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEUM J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-7 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 ll:37AM T.H. NO. 2 ® 25' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix; Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene None Detected mg/kg 5. Toluene 6. mg/kg 5. Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 5. o-Xylene 150. mg/kg 5. · m-Xylene 240. mg/kg 5. p-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 5. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 2000. mg/kg 1000. Comment s: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-7 {~ Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post.Consumer Waste I~ ENI/IRON~ENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, FtEG. CHEM. ENGFI. PETROLEU~ 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 32~-1918 e Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-8 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 13:27 T.H. NO. 3 ® 20' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02~06/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Toluene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 O m-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor C-8 Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327'-4911 FAX (805) 327'-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE.EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab #: 864-9 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 13:32 T.H. NO. 3 ® 25' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/07/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene None Detected mg/kg 2. Toluene 28. mg/kg 2. Ethyl Benzene 38. mg/kg 2. o-Xylene 170. mg/kg 2. m-Xylene 180. mg/kg 2. · p-Xylene 63. mg/kg 2. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 2600. mg/kg 500. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-9 Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum HydrocarbOns D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-10 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 14:12 T.H. NO. 3 ® 45' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/07/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units , Level Benzene 200. mg/kg 20. Toluene 1200. mg/kg 20. Ethyl Benzene 300. mg/kg . 20. o-Xylene 580. mg/kg 20. m-Xylene 850. mg/kg 20. p-Xylene 300. mg/kg 20. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 11000. mg/kg 3000. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor C-10 Printed on Environment 25 conlaining 100°/. reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUlt/I 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 · Petroleum Hydrocarbons · D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-11 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 14:50 T.H. NO. 3 @ 60' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/07/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.34 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.034 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene 0.12 mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 · m-Xylene 0.28 mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene 0.089 mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 2. mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-ii ~) Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste ENVIRONMENTAl LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-12 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 15:02 T.H. NO. 3 ® 65' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. /.L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/07/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.015 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 '0 m-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-12 ~) Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 1,5% Post-Consumer Waste ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 321-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-13 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 16:20 T.H. NO. 4 ® 25' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Toluene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 i O m-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gab) None Detected mg/kg 1'. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor' · C-13 ~ Printed on Environment 25 containing 100°/. reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGMN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327.4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons · D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-14 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 16:40 T.H. NO. 4 ® 35' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Toluene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 · mlXylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 p~Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-14 (~ Pdnted on En'~ronment 25 containing 100% ~'~c~a[rned ~[be~'s with 15% Post-Consume~' Was',e ENVIRONMENTAL ¥,,s LABORATORIES, INC. J, J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327.1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab #: 864-15 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 16:49 T.H. NO. 4 ~ 40' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum · Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.056 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.20 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene 0.13 mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene 0.12 mg/kg 0.005 · m-Xylene 0.13 mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 3. mg/kg 1. Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor C-15 Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste ENviRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327.4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/10/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-16 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 -Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 17:10 T.H. NO. 4 ~ 50' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/06/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.054 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.11 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene 0.065 mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene 0.040 mg/kg 0.005 m-Xylene 0.032 mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene 0.014 mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) 1. mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor C-16 Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste ~ ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEU~ 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 'FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/06/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-17 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 17:25 T.H. NO. 4 @ 55' · TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil · Date. Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/05/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.026 'mg/kg 0..005 Toluene 0.068 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene 0.031 mg/kg 0.005 m-Xylene 0.035 mg/kg 0.005 p~Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 · Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. Comments: · California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 · Department Supervisor · C-17 (~ Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers with 15% Post-Consumer Waste · ENWRONMENT~L LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUB 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 02/06/92 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 864-18 Attn.: TOM GUTCHER 805-589-7861 Sample Description: SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL, THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET, BAKERSFIELD CA 93305, 01/28/92 17:33 T.H. NO. 4 ® 60' TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. Sample Matrix: Soil Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received ® Lab: Completed: 01/30/92 01/30/92 02/05/92 Minimum Analysis Reporting Reporting · Constituents Results Units Level Benzene 0.013 mg/kg 0.005 Toluene 0.019 mg/kg 0.005 Ethyl Benzene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 o-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 · m-Xylene 0.005 mg/kg 0.005 p-Xylene None Detected mg/kg 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) None Detected mg/kg 1. · Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 Department Supervisor · C-18 ~ Printed on Environment 25 containing 100% reclaimed fibers wilh 15% Post-Consumer Waste CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Location of Sampling Sample Collector Client C~ny: ~[ p~ ~O~E C~ny: D~:ne R. Smith am Associates C~ny: A~ress: ~00 ~~ ~~ A~ress: 7201 Fruitvale Extension A~ress: ~~1~: ~ ~3~ Bakersfieldf California 93308 ~e~e~o.e: ( ~ ~ ~ --~ ~ ~e~e~o~e: C~OS~ ~-~S~ ~e~e~o.e: ( ) ~ Lab Re~rts to pro~rty owner ~Lab Re~rts to sable co,lector ~ Lab Re~rts to client g Billing tO pro.try owner ~.illing, tO sa.,. collector ~ B,[ling to client -- T T SemDle No. g8te Time Semple Description An8ly~es Requested Laboreto~ .m ~ ,' o~o~ %~. N~. / ~ ~o' " ,' " ~a ¢ ,, o~+~ ~. ~o, i ~ +¢' " " " .~ 9 ,, o~ W~. Wo. / ~ ~o' ,, " " ~ /~ ' II 3~ ~. ~o. ~ ~ ~' " " '~o ~G ,, '1~1 ~ ~H ~o 3~ ~' ~' " ~~ Comoany: Duane R. Smith & Associates Date and Time: o, ~?o/~ Received by:~~~ ~~ Company: '~C_ ~ Date and Time: ~- ~-,, ~ Relinquished by: Company: Date and Time: Received by: Company: Date and Time: Sheet DUA~E ~. SMITH ~ ASSOCIATES CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Location of Sam~lin_cl Sample Collector Client Company: ~"~/~1~7" ~"/'0/~' Company: Duane R. Smith a~ Associates C~ny: A~ress: ~0 ~E~ ~E~ A~ress: ~01 Fruitvale Extension A~ress: ~~S FI~C~, C~ 73~0~ BakersfieLd. CaLifornia Tete~one: (~0~) ~- ~ 3 ~0 TeLe~one: (805) 589-7861 Tete~one: ( ) Lab Re~rts to pro~rty o.ner ~ Lab Re~rts to sa~te coLLector ~ Lab Re~rts to client BiLLing to pro~rty o.ner ~Bitting to sable coLLector ~ Bitting to client Relinquished ~: ~ Company: Duane R. Smith & Associates Date and Time: ot Received by: ~M~ ~~ Company: .~ ~ Date and Time: Relinquished ~Y: Company: Date and Time: Received by: Company: Date and Time: Sheet D~ANE R. SMIT~ ~ ASSOCIATES SITE CHARACTERIZATION WORK PLAN · SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE 300 BAKER STREET BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA NOVEMBER I 991 D UA NE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES Consulting Geologists 7201 Fruitvale Extension Bakersfield, California 93308 (805) 589-7861 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Site Background ....................... 1 Site Geology ........................ 2 Preliminary Site Assessment Results ............. 3 Soil Sampling Plan ..................... 4 Site Safety Plan ...................... 6 Selected References Exhibits: Figure 1 Property Location Map Figure 2 Site Map Figure 3 Preliminary Site Assessment Test Hole Locations Figure 4 Test Hole Location Map Appendix A Analytical Results and Chain of Custody Record - Preliminary Site Assessment Appendix B Site Safety Plan WORKPLAN.TAB SITE CHARACTERIZATION WORK PLAN SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT SHOP SITE BACKGROUND · The Saint Vincent De Paul Thrift Shop property is located at 300 Baker Street in Bakersfield, California. It is situated in the southwest quarter of Section 29, T.29S., R.28E., M.D.B.& M. (see Figure 1). The area around the site is residential and commer- cial. One 550 gallon underground gasoline tank was removed on June 17, 1991. It was situated on the property as shown on Figure 2. The dispenser was located about 4 feet north of the west edge of the tank. No products other than gasoline are known to have been stored in the tank. The tank was made of steel and had been in place for many years. The actual age of the tank is unknown. The soil around the tank was stained and gasoline odors were noted. · There are no'known reports of discrepancies or reportable varia- tions in inventory monitoring, failed tightness tests, repairs to tanks or piping, or past leaks. · ?.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ a~~ST ,,[ - :.l'; ..... ~:-"'; "i= '~ ~ ~ '~ , ,,,~ ~.. ~ J,-,, ,..~.. ~.. ,. ~_. ~ . ~ ~'. ~ ~ .... --. ~., ,I - ~ ~ ,~ * ~ ~** ..... ' ..... ~'~', .... BM >1' ~' 0 o ~ ~ ..... m ...... . '~'' ~1 BM ~ ' > ~,~ t~ I .... ~ '.~ , . '' ~ '- ' ' ~ //~' II ' ~l'healer' lJ ~~F N . I1~]~i ~kbJm~c ~h . ~~ /~' .' , ~ II ILl Av~ II __ . , s~ .. g ... SCALE ]:24000 ~ ~ 0 ] ~ILE lO00 O lO00 2~0 3~0 40Og 5~0 60~) 7000 FEET I ~ ~ I KILOMETER ~O~E~~ ~O~~O~ ~ Source o~ Base Hap: U.S.G.S. O~ Gentet 7~ H~nuLe Quad~anR~e S I TE MAP SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL THRIFT STORE SITE GEOLOGY According to the Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet, the site is situated over Quaternary fan deposits composed of sediments deposited from streams emerging from the highlands surrounding the valley. In general, these sediments consist of unconsolidated and undissected gravel, sand, and silt. According to the General Soil Map of Kern County, published by the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A., the site is underlain by soils of the Hesperia-Hanford association. In general, this is a well-drained soil developed on nearly level alluvial fans. This soil type is derived from granitic rocks and is moderately coarse textured. According to the 1988 Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4, published by the Kern County Water Agency, the depth to groundwater beneath the site was approximately 220 feet in September 1988. According to the 1989 Water Supply Report (a less detailed report), published by the Kern County Water Agency, the depth to groundwater beneath the site was approximately 200 feet in the Spring of 1990. No shallow perched groundwater is known to exist beneath the site. PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENT RESULTS Four soil samples were collected from beneath the tank and dispenser at the locations shown on Figure 3. Test Hole No. 1 was located through the former tank location and Test Hole No. 2 was located through the former dispenser location. Test Hole No. 1 was sampled at depths of 2 feet and 6 feet beneath the bottom of the tank location. Test Hole No. 2 was sampled at depths of 2 feet and 6 feet beneath the dispenser location. The samples were analyzed for B.T.X.& E. and T.P.H. gasoline by BC Laboratories in Bakersfield, California. The results of the chemical analyses along with the chain of custody record are included as Appendix A. The 2 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly cOntained 1,800 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderate levels of xylenes. The 6 foot sample from T.H. No. 1 reportedly contained 4,300 ppm T.P.H. gasoline and moderate levels of xylenes. No benzene, toluene, or ethyl benzene were detected in either of these samples. No T.P.H. gasoline or B.T.X.& E. were detected in the two samples from T.H. No. 2. These results indicate product loss beneath the underground tank and some degradation of the soil beneath the tank. There was no indica- tion of product loss or soil degradation beneath the dispenser. PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENT TEST HOLE LOCATIONS I I D. R. SMITH ~ ASSOCIATES -- NOVEMBER 1991 SOIL SAMPLING PLAN Three soil borings are proposed to assess the vertical and lateral extent and the degree of contamination at the former underground tank location. The proposed boring locations are shown on Figure 4. Test Hole No. i will be drilled through the center of the former tank location to assess the vertical extent of contamination. Test Hole Nos. 2 and 3 will be drilled east and west of T.H. No. 1 to assess the lateral extent of contamina- tion. Boring locations may deviate slightly from those shown on Figure 4 based on site conditions and the findings of T.H. Nos. 1 and 2. The borings will be drilled until the maximum vertical extent of contamination is exceeded or to a depth of 60 feet. If contami- nation is found to exceed a depth of 60 feet, further drilling will require the client's authorization. Soil samples will be collected at 5 foot intervals starting at a depth of 10 feet below the surface. The sample intervals may be modified slightly depending on soil conditions, however, they should not deviate significantly from the proposed depths. Approximately 33 soil samples will be collected and field- screened. Selected samples will be submitted for analyses. Soil samples will be analyzed for T.P.H. gasoline and B.T.X.& E. 4 TEST HOLE LOCATION .MAP SAINT VINCENT DE PAU'L THRIFT STORE I ~ ~o. 3 ~ , ~_~ ~K/ ~ C~/co Test Hole Location -· ~ . R . SMITH ~ ASSOCI~TE~-- NOVeMbeR 1991 /"=2o' The soil samples will be analyzed by BC Laboratories in Bakers- field. The quality assurance and quality control are available from BC Laboratories upon request. Chain of custody records documenting sample handling will be included. Soil samples will be collected using a split-spoon core sampler driven into the soil utilizing a truck-mounted hollow stem auger · rig (Mobile Drill B-53). The split-spoon sampler holds three 2.5 inch diameter by 6 inch long brass liners. The core sampler will be driven through the proper sampling interval after the hole is drilled to the sample depth with the hollow stem auger. The sampler will then be removed from the drilling equipment and the brass liners removed from the sampler. The ends of the middle liner from each sample depth will be covered with Teflon seals and polyethylene caps and taped shut with duct tape. The liner will then be labeled and placed in a polyethylene sample bag and the bag sealed and labeled. Each · bagged liner will be placed on blue ice and retained in a chilled state for delivery to the laboratory. · Another soil sample from each sample depth will be retained for field screening and soil descriptions. Field screening will consist of a headspace reading for hydrocarbon vapors with an Hnu 5 PID meter. In addition to the headspace readings, hydrocarbon odors, if present, will be noted. The augers will be steam-cleaned between test holes. The sam- pling equipment will be scrubbed, washed and thoroughly rinsed between each sample collection. The test holes will be back- filled with a cement-sand slurry. Contaminated drill cuttings, as identified by field screening, will be placed in DOT drums and retained on-site for future treatment or disposal by the client. The results of the field investigation will be presented in a formal report which include boring logs, laboratory reports, conclusions, and recommendations. · SITE SAFETY PLAN The Site Safety Plan is included as Appendix B. Submitted by: Registered Geologist State of California No. 5010 STVINCEN.PLN 6 APPENDIX A ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENT · £NVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGUN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUB 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 · BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 7137-1 Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 1 @ 2', 6/17/91 @ 1130 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH · Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-20-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting · Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.8 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.8 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.8 o-Xylene ug/g 29. 0.8 m-Xylene ug/g 19. 0.8 · p-Xylene ug/g 6.3 0.8 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) Hg/g 1800. 200. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 BY Jl // ~nalyst · ENVIRON~IENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEU~I 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 · BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab #: 7137-2 Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 1 @ 6', 6/17/91 @ 1145 SAMPLED BY DUAME SMITH · Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-20-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 2. Toluene ug/g None Detected 2. Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 2. o-Xylene ug/g 120. 2. m-Xylene pg/g 50. 2. · p-Xylene ug/g 19. 2. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) ug/g 4300. 400. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186 · f ~nalyst · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES. INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEUM 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~: 7137-3 Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA: T.H. 2 @ 2', 6/17/91 @ 1200 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-21-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting · Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.005 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.005 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.005 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.005 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.005 · p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.005 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gas) ug/g None Detected 1. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comments: Californ~ D.O.H.S,~Cert. #1186 J. J. Eglin ~/ /~nalyst · EN¥1RON~ENrAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROL£Util J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 32L4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 Petroleum Hydrocarbons D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Date of · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Report: 06/25/91 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Lab ~= 7137-4 Attn.: DUANE R. SMITH 805-589-7861 Sample Description: ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-300 BAKER ST., BAKERSFIELD, CA= T.M. 2 @ 6', 6/17/91 @ 1210 SAMPLED BY DUANE SMITH Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis Collected: Received @ Lab= Completed: 06/17/91 06/17/91 6-21-91 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting · Constituents Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.05 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.05 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.05 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.05 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.05 · p-Xylene ~g/g None Detected 0.05 Total Petroleum Mydrocarbons (gas) Hg/g None Detected 1. TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015 Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020. As Received Basis Comments: California D.O.H.S. Cert. ~1186 · . g {/ /Analyst · ENVIRON~fENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. PETROLEU~ J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327'-1918 BTXE/TPH GASOLINE Quality Control Data D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Spike ID: 7087-1 · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Analysis Date: 20-Jun-91 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Sample Matrix: Soil Attention= DUANE SMITH · Quality Control for Lab Nos= 7137-1, 7137-2 · Dup Spike Spike Spike Constituent % Rec % Rec RPD Benzene 98.42 96.64 1.83 Toluene 94.07 91.68 2.57 Ethyl Benzene 93.50 90.72 3.02 · QC comments: · ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES, INC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PET'ROLEU~ 4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918 BTXE/TPH GASOLINE Quality Control Data D.R. SMITH & ASSOCIATES Spike ID: 7096-6 · 7201 FRUITVALE EXT. Analysis Date= 20-Jun-91 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Sample Matrix: Soil Attention: DUANE SMITH · Quality Control for Lab Nos= 7137-3, 7137-4 · Dup Spike Spike Spike Constituent % Rec % Rec RPD Benzene 97.31 98.30 1.01 Toluene 93.94 93.44 0.53 Ethyl Benzene 90.41 91.90 1.63 · QC comments: · · · · · · · · · · · C~L~IN OF CUSTODY RECOD ~ ----- Location of S~plinq Collector · Client Company: ~.V/,,~,~'~ ,~/ Company: ~.~. Sm~ ~ ~oc~ ~om~n~: Address: ~0 ;~~. J% Address: 7201 Fruitvale Ext. Address: ~t)~"~j ~,~'. Bakersfield, CA 93308 Telephone: ( ) Telephone: (805), 589-7861 Telephone: ( ) Bill to Property ~er ( ) Bill to Collector ~ Bill to Client ( ) S~plin~ Method: Dried 3~?/~ S~ple T~e:-~]/ Prese~ation Methods: /~6~ S~ple No.Date Time Description ',~alysis Requested Laborator. No. T. ~ '1 &-n-el/,~ Z' r,f~.(~~3 i ~:.x. ,~. ~ 1~- / T, ~. ~ ~<7~t tzo~ Z'~ ~aw. ~) ;, ~.z x. ~ ~. - 3 'F 14. ~ ,, tz to &/ r~ ~ 6~9 ~ ~.r x. ~ e ~/ i', ,n!~' ~ Received By: ~ ~ %<,, ~ .. , Relin~ished B~: Company: Date: Received By: Company: Date: Relin~ished By: Company: Date: Received By: Company: Date :. APPENDIX B SITE SAFETY PLAN SITE SAFETY PLAN The responsible party for the work will be Duane R. Smith and Associates personnel. The expected hazardous material at the site is gasoline which will be blended with soil. The purpose of this plan is to establish procedures to protect all on-site personnel from direct skin contact, inhalation, or ingestion of potentially hazardous materials that may be encountered at the site. Duane R. Smith and Associates plans on drilling three soil borings arotmd a former underground tank location. The borings will be drilled by: Melton Drilling Company 1701 Downing Avenue Bakersfield, California 93306 C-57 license number 508270. Duane Smith or Tom Gutcher, California registered geologists, will serve as project manager, field technician, and site safety officer. Mr. Smith or Mr. Gutcher will assure that all on-site personnel have a copy of the site safety plan. Compliance with the site safety plan will be monitored at all times. A training session will be conducted to assure that all personnel ar~e aware of safe work practices. Mr. Smith or Mr. Gutcher will be responsible for keeping field notes, collecting soil samples, and following chain-of-custody protocol. · DUANE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES 13-1 · On-site einployees will take reasonable precautions to avoid unforseen hazards. On-site employees are to adhere strictly to the provisions of this site safety plan. The drilling contractor has been employed to deliver and operate all drilling equipment. Only qualified personnel will have contact with this equipment. All on-site personnel are required to wear hard hats when near the drilling rig. Proper respiratory equipment will be worn if vapor levels exceed action levels. An action level of 5 ppm in the breathing zone will require respi- ratory protection. During all operations that might release airborne vapors, an Hnu PID meter will be used to monitor vapors in the breathing zone of workers. If there are significantly higher 'readings than 5 ppm for a sustained period, the drilling and/or soil sampling operations will be suspended and the work reevaluated. No smoking will be permitted at the work site. Contami- nated drill cuttings, as identified by field screening, will be continuously placed in DOT drums and covered. On-site personnel will be exposed only to gasoline contaminated soil. This can present a significant hazard. Volatile organic compounds can be significant in soil contaminated with gasoline. Recognition of hazards, whether it be from instrument readings, odor, irritation, visi- bility, headache, dizziness, or fatigue, is important, but it is equally important to take appropriate action when a hazard is recognized. If the problem cannot be promptly corrected, · we will back off from the exposure source and obtain assistance to solve the problem. Work · DUANE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES B-2 practices and engineering controls will be devised to minimize potential exposures. For example, where possible, we will work upwind of any potential exposure source. Air-purifying respirators with combination organic vapor/acid, gas/dust, franc, and mist · · cartridges will be on location. Replacement cartridges will be available as necessary. These will be worn when PID readings persist above 5 ppm in the breathing zone. If there is eye irritation, full-face respirators will be used. Tyvek coveralls will be worn as necessary to avoid skin contact with contaminated soils. · Che~nical resistant gloves and boots will also be worn as necessary to avoid hand and foot contact with contaminants. Ear protection, as appropriate, will also be worn. All personnel will be advised that any portions of their bodies 'which might have contacted possible contaminants should be washed with soap and water before taking a break or leaving the site. Respirators, if used, will also be decontmninated at the end of the work day. Supervisory personnel involved . in drilling and sample retrieval have received training as specified in the OSHA Hazardous Waste Operations and E~nergency Response Standard [29CFR 1910.120]. · The physical hazards associated with operating a drilling rig and smnpling equipment must be recognized. Individuals not directly involved in drilling shall stand back at least the distance of the vertical boom. A restricted access area will be established around the work area as needed. · DUANE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES B-3 The potential hazards involved in this job will be reviewed with all personnel, including subcontractors, working on-site. Prior to commencement of work, emergency evacuation routes will be established. A "safe zone" location will be established taking into account weather conditions, site activities, and other fact°rs, as necessary. Access to the site will be restricted to authorized personnel. Mr. Smith or Mr. Gutcher will be responsible for site security. According to 29CFR1910.120, paragraph (f), employees who wear respirators 30 days or more during one year or who have been exposed to hazardous substances or health hazards above established permissible exposure limits are required to be monitored medically. All site · personnel subject to these conditions are required to have a complete chemical physical on an annual basis. · Documentation will be kept on personnel exposed to contaminant hazards on the job site according to OSHA regulations. These will include documentation that employees have received · training on the site safety plan, respiratory protection, and all emergency procedures. Exposure records will be kept in the job file. These will include name and social security number for employees, job entry logs, first aid administered, and air monitoring records. · Arrangement will be made for transportation to a hospital in the event of an accident or exposure to hazardous materials that produce organic symI3toms in the exposed party. · DUANE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES B-4 In the event of accident, injury, or other emergency, notification will be as follows: 1. Hazardous Material Division Bakersfield City Fire Department 2130 G Street · Bakersfield, California 93301 Mr. Joseph A. Dunwoody (805) 326-3979 2. Police, Fire, or Ambulance (Emergency 911) 3. Nearest Emergency Hospital: Memorial Hospital · 420 34th Street Bakersfield, California (805) 327-1792 · DUANE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES B-5 We, the undersigned, have read the preceding Site Safety Plan, and agree, by signing below, that we understand the Site Safety Plan and will adhere to the safety standards established in the Site Safety Plan. 1. Name (Signature) Date · Name (Printed) Social Security No. 2. Name (Signature) Date · Name (Printed) Social Security No. · 3. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. · 4. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. · 5. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. 6. Name (Signature) Date Name (Printed) Social Security No. GASOLINE.SSP · DUANE R. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES B-6