Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMITIGATION ? ~ :'/ \,,~./ ~ovember 15, 2001 Mr. Lloyd Childers 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, Ca 93306 Subject: Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, Ca 93306 Dear Mr. Childers: E2C Remediation, LLC is pleased to present this report documenting the Third Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring event at the Freeway Liquor Store at 2140 East Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. This report has been prepared to document the groundwater conditions beneath the Site as required by the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services. Significant fuel hydrocarbon contaminants were identified in soils and groundwater beneath the Site during the Site Characterization work. Therefore, an Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) was prepared to perform interim remediation of impacted soils and groundwater. This work was approved by the BFD and costs were pre-approved by the State Fund. The work is tentatively scheduled to start November 22, 2001. Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, do not hesitate to call the undersigned at. 661-831-6906.  ,~ectfullySubmitte~, f .~ , .n ~(t~ ~t~L/William A. Lawson, RG. #7171 RG. #4779  Project Geologist .~s 11/30/02  ydrogeologist CC: Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Department 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, CA 93304 E2C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONPIENTAL I ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e 1 9 7 0 5300 Woodmere Drive,, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 Tel: 661.831.6906 Fax: 661.831.6234 Toll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate Office: 382 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408.327.5700 Fax: 408.327.5707 Email: E2C.Remediation. LLC@sbcglobal.net I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II ~ ~~ I I E2C REI'IEDIATION, LLC EN¥1RONI'tENTAL / ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e 1 9 7 0 ! THIRD QUARTER 2001 I GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT . FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE iiI 2140 EAST BRUNDA GE LANE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA November 15, 2001 I Project Number 1802JS01 Prepared For: I Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store I 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, California 93306 Prepared By: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive,. Suite 105 I Bakersfield, California 93313 e2c.remediatiomllc @ sbcglobal.net Prqiect Number 1802JS01 , Nc)¥~rnl~er 15. 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS '~" ' ................................................... ;. · · · ...... ..................................................... I LIST OF FIGURES ...... ' ............................................................ ~' ......................................... ~ ......... i LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... i LIST OF APPENDICES ' i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............. ..................................................................................... i .......... 1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 1 Recommendations .......... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology 2 1,1.1 Regional Geology & Hydrogeology ....................................................................... 2 1,1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology ........................................................................... 3 1.2 Site History ................................................................................................................ .. 3 · 1,2.1 Site Characterization .......................................................................................... ~.4 1,2.3 Interim Remedial Action Plan 6 2.0 THIRD QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING ................................................ 7 2.1 Groundwater Elevations .................................................................................. i ............ 7 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling ................................. ~ ....................................... 7 2.3 Groundwater Analytical Results ................................................................................... 8 2.4 Discussion of Analytical Results 8 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 8 3.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 8 3.2 Recommendations ......................... · .............................................................................. 9 4.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION .......................................................... i ...... 9 5.0 REFERENCES 10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 MTBE Isoconcentration Plot LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report E~C Remediation, LLC i I /~l'qiect Number 1802JS01 November 15. 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I This report presents the results of the ThirdQuarter 2001 groundwater monitoring performed in August 2001 at the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1 for Site location). E2C personnel monitored groundwater I and collected a groundwater sample from the one (1) monitoring well located at the Site. The results of chemical analyses on the groundwater sample are summarized following: · BTEXwas reported as non-detect; I · TPHg was reported as non-detect; and · MTBE was reported at a concentration of 33 ~.g/L (58 ~g/L in duplicate sample). I In April 2001, significant concentrations of BTEX, TPHg, and MTBE were reported in the water sample from well MW-1. These concentrations declined significantly in August 2001. The I groundwater table lowered 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001, which suggests that groundwater fell slightly below the extent (depth) of impacted soils. When the water table rises, groundwater will come into contact with the impacted soils, thus concentrations in groundwater ! will increase. I Conclusions , · Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: ~ · The groundwater gradient at the Site is not know, however, three additional monitoring wells are scheduled to be installed in late November 2001, at which i time a gradient can be determined; · The water table lowered approximately 1.5 feet from April 2001 to August 2001; · Significant concentrations of TPHg and BTEX compounds were reported in the I water sample from well MW-1 in April 2001; · Concentrations of TPHG, BTEX, and MTBE decreased significantly from April 2001 to August 2001; and I · When the water table rises, groundwater will again come into contact with impacted soils, thus increasing concentrations in groundwater. I Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: I · Install VES and AS wells on site as proposed and approved BFD; · Perform the VES Pilot Test as proposed and approved by the BFD; I · Install additional monitoring wells (one on site and two offsite in the inferred downgradient groundwater direction as proposed and approved by the BFD to assess groundwater 'gradient direction; I · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and and for the sampling reporting duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shut-down; and I · Analyze .groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, BTEX using EPA Method 8260b, and the five fuel oxygenates of MTBE, Di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ERTBE), Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), and I tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME)) using EPA Method 8260b. I E~C Remediation, LLC I Prelect Number 1802J$01 /V{2¥ember 15, 2001 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the Third Quarter 2001 groundwater'~or)~oring performed in August 2001 at the Freeway Liquor 'Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage l~ane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1 for Site location). This report reviews the environmental history of the Site, discusses geological and hydrogeological conditions, describes the methods used in the assessment work, provides the analytical results, interprets the extent of the fuel hydrocarbon groundwater plume and presents conclusions and recommendations. 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology 1.1.1 Regional Geology & Hydrogeology Regional Geology The Site is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five tO seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. Unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake gravel, sand, silt, and clay sediments, in turn, overlie the Tertiary rocks. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in hills which and Iow-lying through perennial intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit consisting of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths~ 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. I E2C Remediation, LLC 2 Prqiect Number 1802JS01 November 15, 2001 I Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sedin~ents range in size from clays to boulders I and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the-west side of the Valley arederived largely-from the' Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra I Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the boring procedures at th~".~ and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial comprised of fine-to-coarse gray--sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in I these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according I to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. During the .Site Assessment work in April 2001, groundwater was encountered at 130 feet below ground surface (bgs). I 1.2 Site Geology Hydrogeology 1. and Site Geoloav I During the drilling portion of the additional characterization work in April 2001 (see Section 4.0 below), subsurface materials beneath the Site were generally observed to consist of silt and sands with some minor clay fractions in areas. Figures 4 and 5 depict subsurface conditions in I ' cross-section. Of specific note is the change from coarser materials (sands) to finer materials ~ (silts and clays) between approximately 45 and 55 feet bgs, dependent upon location. The finer materials occur to a depth of approximately 80 feet bgs. Below 80 feet bgs, materials generally I consist of sands and silty sands. Site Hydrogeology I Groundwater was encountered between 125 and 130 feet bgs in boring B-8. Fifteen minutes after encountering water, the groundwater level stabilized at 126 feet bgs. i As it appeared that groundwater had been impacted by fuel hydrocarbons, boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-1. On April 27, 2001 a groundwater sample was collected at well MW-1. At that time, the groundwater was 121.94 feet below top of casing i (BTOC). In August 2001, groundwater was measured at 123.10 feet BTOC, a drop of approximately 1.2 feet. As there is only one well at the Site, the groundwater flow direction and magnitude cannot be determined. I 1.2 Site History The Freeway Liquor Store contracted with Industrial Contamination Extraction Services, Inc. i (ICES) to remove three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs)'; two 6,000-gallon, single-walled, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) located on two dispenser islands and associated product piping. The fueling facilities i were subsequently upgraded with double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled product pipelines, and MPDs with dispenser pans. ~ ICES contracted with Holguin, Fahan and Associates, Inc. (HFA) to conduct soil sampling at the Itime of UST removal. On December 4. 1998, the five USTs', six MPDs' and product piping were removed from the Site. Soil samples were collected per BFD requirements and analyzed for i TPHg, BTEX and MTBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020; respectively. A total of thirty I EeC Remediation, LLC 3 prqie~t Number 1802J$01 November 15. 2001 eight (38) samples were analyzed and the results are tabulated in Table 1. Significant concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were detected beneath the two former 6,000;~a!lon gasoline USTs' and beneath five of the former dispenser locations. -- - .... On February 4, 1999, HFA submitted a Tank Closure Report to the City for review. On March 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed Mr. Lloyd Childers (Owner), by letter, to submit a workplan for further assessment. The Owner subsequently applied to the State Fund and was accepted into the Fund on February 5, 2001. The Owner contracted with E2C, Inc (E2C) to conduct the work presented in the Workplan. Based on those conclusions and recommendations, an Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) has also been developed to lay the groundwork for remediation of fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soil and groundwater. As part of the IRAP, additional Site Assessment work is also proposed to define the limits of fuel-impacted groundwater beneath the Site. The Site Assessment work was performed by E2C, Inc. (E2C) (now E2C Remediation, LLC) at the request of Mr. Lloyd G. Childers of the Freeway Liquor Store in response to a requirement of the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services (BFD), the Lead regulatory agency for this Site (CBFD, 1999). E~C prepared a Site Characterization Workplan that detailed a Scope of Work and procedures to perform, characterization of the Site (E~C, 2001). The BFD reviewed and approved the Workplan by letter dated February 26, 2001 (BFD, 2001). 1.2.1 Site Characterization The Site Characterization Workplan was implemented during the period of April 9 through April 17, 2001. Soil Borings and Soil Sampling A soil boring was advanced at the proposed locations (see Figure 2). Note: Based on actual field conditions and field screening of soil samples, some borings were relocated. In addition, extra borings were also advanced to provide definition of impacted soils and groundwater. Chemical Analyses of Soil Samples All analytes tested for were detected at varying concentrations dependent upon location. The source area appeared to be centered at the area of boring B-8. In general, the fuel hydrocarbons spread downward from the source area until encountering the finer-grained materials at the 45- to 55-foot depths. From there, the fuel hydrocarbons spread laterally principally toward the southeast. Fuel hydrocarbons did migrate downward in the source area to groundwater as evidenced by the analytical results from boring B-8 at depth. In addition, groundwater in the B-8 area had been impacted. A limited zone of highly impacted soils occurred at the near surface in the boring B-8'area. The principal portion of impacted soils occurred between 35 and 55 feet bgs and covers an area of approximately 1,000 square feet. Regulatory_ Compliance During the drilling operations it became apparent that the extent of impact to soils was more extensive than previously believed. The preliminary field and analytical data was correlated with I E=C Remediation, LLC 4 Prqiect Number 1802J$01 November 15, 2001 preliminary cross-sections and a meeting with the BFD was held. At that meeting, the BFD representative authorized expanding the characterization program to ga'~'n..better definition of the impact at the Site. Based on that meeting, the following work was approved: '--- .... · Extending soil boring B-8 to greater depth than originally anticipated and converting this boring into groundwater monitoring well MW-1; · Extending several borings to greater depth (e.g., B-5 and B-6) to aid in definition of the soil plume; · Relocating some borings (e.g., B-3 and B-11) and adding borings (e.g., B-12 through B- 16); · In anticipation that soil remediation at depth would be required at the Site, advancing six (6) additional borings with conversion of all six into vapor wells; · Collection and chemical analyses thereof of additional soil samples generated as a result of the deeper borings, the additional borings, and the additional borings for conversion into vapor wells; · Development of well MW-1 and collection of a groundwater sample from that well; and · Compilation of all data and preparation of an Interim Remedial Action Plan. Installation of Well MW-1 Upon approval of the BFD, boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-I. MW-1 was constructed to 140 feet bgs with the screened interval from 115 to 140 feet bgs. Filter pack sand (Lonestar #3) was placed by gravity feed from 140 to 113 feet bgs. Three feet of bentonite was placed on top of the filter pack and hydrated with water. Neat-cement grout completed the seal to the surface. Two days after installation of the. well, the well was developed using the overpumping method. Groundwater Sampling at Well MW-1 On April 27, 2001 groundwater was sampled at well MW-I. The well was overpurged until approximately 20 gallons were extracted (casing volume of 3.2 gallons). Concentrations of fuel hydrocarbon compounds were reported in the groundwater sample collected from MW-1. Table 3 contains a summary of the analytical results. Of significance were the following detections: · Benzene at a concentration of 95 ~g/L (duplicate at 96 ~.g/L); · TPHg at a concentration of 2,049 ~g/L (duplicate at 2,108 ~g/L); and · MTBE at a concentration of 295 pg/L (duplicate at 331 pg/L). Site Characterization Conclusions Based on the data obtained from the preliminary assessment and the Site Characterization, E2C made the following conclusions: · Approximately 50,000 cy of soils contained fuel hydrocarbons at Concentrations of concern; · .Impacted soils occurred from the near surface to approximately 55 feet bgs as shown on the cross sections; · Groundwater had been significantly impacted by fuel hydrocarbons at the Site as evidenced by the concentrations of benzene (95 ~g/L), TPHg (2,049 ~g/L), and MTBE (295 Izg/L) in .the water'sample from MW-1; and I E~C Remediat/on, LLC 5 I Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 November 15. 2001 I · The State of California Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for benzene, a known carcinogen, in drinking water is 1 ~.g/L; the water sample from MW-1 contained benzene "~-...i I at a concentration of 95 p.g/L; and · The areal extent of the groundwater plume was not knOwn, I Site Characterization Recommendations Based on the conclusions presented above, E2C made the following recommendations: · Further define limits of groundwater plume for all fuel components of concern; I · To achieve the groundwater definition, perform additional groundwater characterization by installing monitoring wells; I · Prepare Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) to include a provision for vapor extraction and groundwater air sparging pilot testing; · Implement the IRAP; I · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling using the monitoring well network; and · If the proposed groundwater monitoring wells delineate the extent groundwater plume, I Remedial Action Plan that inCludes Pilot data prepare a (RAP) Testing to remediate impacted vadose zone soils and the groundwater plume. I 1.2.3 Interim Remedial Action Plan As requested by the BFD, E2C proposed to implement interim remedial action to remediate the fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soils and groundwater 'beneath the Site while groundwater plume I definition is being performed. Purpose I The Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) contained two principal tasks: · Define lateral limits of groundwater hydrocarbon plume; and · Remediate fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site in the source area. I Scope of Work The following Scope of Work will be needed to perform the two principal Tasks of the IRAP. IGroundwater Plume Assessment · Locate underground utilities; I · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; · Install a total of three (3) groundwater monitoring wells, one in inferred upgradient and two in the inferred downgradient directions; I · Develop wells; · Sample water at wells and have samples chemically analyzed; · i · Compile data and generate plots showing groundwater gradient (flow direction and magnitude); and · Compile data and generate plots showing contaminant plumes as appropriate. I Interim Remedial Action Plan · Locate underground utilities; I · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; I E2C Remediation, LLC 6 Project Number 1802J$01 November 15. 2001 · Install soil vapor extraction {Vi=) wells and Air-$parging {AS) wells; '" · Perform soil sampling and analysis; '~--. · Install VE/As piping and Manifolding; · Perform VE/AS pilot test for designing the final treatment system; · Generate a Report of Findings included with the final RAP that includes final treatment system design; · Operations and Maintenance of Remedial System; Quarterly Monitoring/Sampling; Groundwater · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remedial Progress Reporting; · Quality Assurance plan; and · Site Safety Plan This Interim Remedial Action Plan was prepared for the remediation of fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site. The IRAP initially consists of installing wells as follows: · Four (4) shallow soil vapor extraction (VE)wells (VE-1 through VE-4, which are already installed); · One (1) deep VE well (VED-5, which is already installed); · One (1) medium depth VE well (VEM-6, which is already installed); · Two (2) air sparge (AS) wells (AS-1 and AS-2). VE and AS wells will be used in performance of a VE/AS pilot test. The pilot test will provide data on the effectiveness of this remedial method as well as design criteria for a site-wide treatment system. The results of these activities will be presented in a report of findings and the IRAP will be revised and be presented as a final Remedial Plan (RAP) to detail the proposed on-site treatment system. I 2.0 THIRD QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING · On August 6, 2001, E2C personnel conducted Third Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring depths to groundwater, checking the well for free-product, I purging collecting a groundwater sample.' the we~l, and 2.1 Groundwater Elevations I to purging sampling, depth to groundwater was measured at all MW-1 using a Prior and the Solinst water level meter. Depth to groundwater in MW-1 was measured from the top of casing (TOC) at the North side of the casing to the nearest 0.01-foot (see Table 1 for summary of I Table 2 contains of historical In MW-1 depths; a summary measurements). addition, was checked for free-product using a Yellowjacket oil-water interface probe. The interface probe and Solinst water level indicator were washed in an Alconox solution and rinsed with clean water I prior to use. Groundwater elevations for this sampling round'are summarized in Table 1 and with previously Icollected elevation data for the Site in Table 2. 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling I The well in order to obtain representative groundwater sample. A monitoring was purged a I E=C Remediation, LLC 7 Proiect Number 1802J$01 November 15, 2001 minimum of three well casing volumes of groundwater were removed from the well prior to sampling utilizing a battery-powered submersible pump. A casing volume is calculated by multiplying the height of the freestanding water column in the well by the cross-sectional-area.of the well casing. During purging, groundwater parameters of temperature, pH and conductivity were measured as water was pumped from the wells to verify sufficient purging and stable physical parameter measurements on field instruments (see Appendix A for data sheets). purge The pump was decontaminated in a solution of Alconox and water and rinsed with clean water before each use. After purging, groundwater in the well was sampled using a new disposable bailer. The groundwater sample was decanted into four 40-mi volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials. Care was taken to prevent headspace or bubbles in the vials, which were sealed with Teflon-lined lids. Samples were labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4° degrees Centigrade, accompanied with a Chain-of-Custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. 2.3 Groundwater Analytical Results Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M and BTEX and fuel oxygenates using EPA Method 8260b. Appendix B presents the analytical laboratory report. Laboratory analytical results for the Third Quarter 2001 are summarized in Table 1 and along with historical data in Table 3. The results of these chemical analyses are summarized following: · BTEX was reported as non-detect; · TPHg was reported as non-detect; and · MTBE was reported at a concentration of 33 pg/L (58 p.g/L in'duplicate sample) (see Figure 3). 2.4 Discussion of Results Analytical In April 2001, significant concentrations of BTEX, TPHg, and MTBE were reported in the water sample from well MW-1 (see Table 2). These concentrations declined significantly in August 2001. The groundwater table lowered 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001. This suggests that groundwater fell slightly below the extent (depth) of impacted soils. When the water table rises, groundwater could come into contact with the impacted soils, thus concentrations in groundwater could increase. 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Conclusions Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site is not know, however, three additional monitoring wells are scheduled to be installed in late November 2001, at which time a gradient can be determined; · The water table lowered approximately 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001; · Significant concentrations of TPHg and BTEX compounds were reported in the water sample from well MW-1 in April 2001; · Concentrations of TPHG, BTEX, and MTBE decreased significantly from Apri~ 2001 to August 200i; and I E2C Remediation, LLC 8 I Pro/ect Number 1802JS01 November 15, 2001 I the water table rises, groundwater will again come · When ... into contact with impacted soils, thus increasing concentrations in groundwater-.. -.. $.2 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following I recommendations: · Install VES and AS wells on site as proposed and approved BFD; i · Perform the VES Pilot Test as proposed and approved by the BFD; · Install additional monitoring wells (one on site' and two offsite in the inferred downgradient groundwater direction as proposed and approved by the BFD to I assess groundwater gradient direction; · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system I shut-down; and · Amend the analytical program to test for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, BTEX using EPA Method 8260b, and. the five fuel oxygenates of MTBE, Di-isopropyl I ether (DIPE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ERTBE), Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), and tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME)) using EPA Method 8260b. I 4.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Report in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing I in California at this time. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No I warranty expressed or implied is made. : This report has been prepared under the professional supervision of the registered professional I whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so i that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(S). I Prepared By: .., ' Reviewed By: lw i liam A. Lawson, RG. #717 ~ I No 4T/g FJhi~) G/3~ ' , . #4779 " Project Geologist ~i,~.~. ,/,.~. e.g.E, xpires 11/30/02  rincipal Hydrogeologist I I E=C Remediation, LLC 9 Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 Nover~ber 15. 2001 I '~"'5.0..._ REFERENCES (BFD, 1999) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, March 30, 1999,. Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Freeway I Liquor Store, 2030 East Brundage Lane, Permit #BR-0231 (BFD, 2001) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, February 26, 2001, Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East I Brundage Lane (a.k.a. 2030 EastBrundage Lane) (E2C, 2001a) E2C, Inc., February 9, 2001, Site Characterization Workplan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California I (E2C, 2001b E2C, Inc., May 31, 2001, Site Characterization Report of Findings and Interim Remedial Action Plan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, i Bakersfield, California I E2C Remediation, LLC 10 Project Number 1802JS01 November 15, 2001 FIGURES Figure 1Site Location Map Figure 2Site Plan Figure 3MTBE Isoconcentration Plot £2G Remedia#on, L£G Figures I ; ~ "-,, .... -...L---'-" \ Round ]' Sh3rk Tooth HHI ' '~ .! Sll£ LOC^lION ./~.,.~rr~-.. ... :' - ...~,~ ':~ , .~"'~..."-~. L~'-- '~x r- .. ~,'~,~*r,~ GREENFIELO /, OLD RIVER~ J ~ OiGror¢o ,5"' WEEOPATCH BEAR VALLE' SPRINGS ~ ',, ./.....,¢.:~.r '",,_..~-" . v,~,~,~o ....... M .... ORT ; .:%.( . %'~'-:"'"'":' ~ .... . ~,- STALLION _ ~ \& ~ /,.,,,_./ E2C Remediation, LLc FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, CA. 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Phone: (661) 831-6306 1 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 VICINTY MAP R.$ N~ VE-1 Vapor Extraction ~ WellLocation , B-16 I m AREA ~ B-e B-e I PENSER B-2~ . NEW U T { ~ NDS ~ 15 I v'e v~.. · .~ III I B-12 ' B-4 ~ // / ? ~ ~AST ~UNDA~ ~N~ E2 C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE ~URE Dr., 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE ~ rs f~l~d,m~l~o rn i~ ~i~ ~5 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 3 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 THIRD QUARTER 2001 MTBE ISOCONCENTRATION PLOT I LEGEND '. I ~116 .,~k31l Er,3, iqg L.,oc..,~.k~q . .~:~.~.... · I .l"l;'r' I~aqb3, iqg Well Loc. a. bq ~'- YE-1 Vapor Extraction I I ~ {~ WellLocation · B 16 I ' I STORAGE STORE I AREA ! I~~°~ v~ ,,, ® '~ I VE-2 ~ I. ° I,~ ~, I' ~ (B-8) I DISPENSER I I w.,,' I VE-3 & <~ m ® // I '" I " : ------~' - SHOULDER ~ I ~~_ I SCALE: 1"= :30 foot E2C Remediation, LLC fREEWAY UaUOR STO~E FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 2 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 I Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 SITE PLAN Prqiect Number 1802JS01 No¥~r/1/2~r 15. 2001 TABLES Table 1 Preliminary Assessment Analytical Results Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report E¢C Remediation, LLC Tables Project Number 1802JS01 November 15, 2001 TABLE 1 THIRD QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California 6-Aug-01 DEPTH TO GW TOTAL TOC ELEVATION GW ELEVATION FREE PRODUCT ETHYL- TOTAL WELL DATE (feet BTOC) DEPTH (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES TPHg MTBE .___~_6/_0_1~ .... ~12_3._10- .... 151.60__- nd<0.5 nd<0.5 nd<l nd<l nd<50 33 MW-1 ~d_uplica_te ................. nd<0.5 nd<0.5 nd<l nd<l nd<50 58 Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (pg/L) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8260b; TPHg - EPA 8015M Minimum Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene - 0.5 pg/L; Ethylbenzene/Xylenes - 0.5 pg/L; MTBE - 0.5 pg/L; and TPHg - 50 A,g/L BTOC = Below Top of Casing GW = Groundwater /' nd - Not Detected ./~' NS - Not Sampled TOC = Top of Casing ./ E2C Remediation, LLC Table 1-I ~ m m m ~ ~ m m m m~ ~ m ~ ~ m ~ m m Project Number 1802JS01 November15, 2001 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Total DEPTH TO GW TOC ELEVATION GW ELEVATION FREE PRODUCT WELL ID DATE Depth (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) (feet BTOC) 4/27/01 141.60 121.94 MW-1 8/6/01 141.60 123.1 ,. ! NOTES: : BTOC = Below Top of Casing GW = Groundwater ND = Not detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by number TOC = Top of Casing E2C Remediation, LLC Table 2-1 Project Number 1802JS01 November 15, 2001 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER AN.~-LYTICAL DATA Freeway Liquor Store .... 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Ethylbenzene Xylenes . Well ID Sample Date Benzene I ............... Toluene I ...................... IT°tal I._ 3'1~g_ .... I ........ ._M~BE~ #g/L GRAB 4/18/01 531 451 346 651 4,980 1,570 4/2 7/01 95 107 60 122 2,049 295 MW-1 duplicate 96 129 71 139 2,108 331 8/6/01 nd<0.5 nd<0.5 nd<l nd<l nd<50 33 duplicate nd<0.5 nd<0.5 nd<l nd<l nd<50 58 Notes: Results in micrograms per liter ~g/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene and Toluene - 0.5 #g/L, Ethylbenzene and Xylenes - 1.0 #g/L, TPHg and TPHd - 50 ua/L. MTBE - 5 u(3/L nd - Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by number MTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ehter TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline GRAB - Unpurgted Water Sample collected prior to well development Note: For 4/27/01 and 8/6/01, Sample labeled MW-1 is labeled MW-8 on chain of custodys and MW-9 is a duplicate sample on the chain of custodys. I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 3.1 Project Number 1802JS01 November 15. 2001 APPENDICES Appendix AThird Quarter 2001 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix BThird Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report E2C Remediation, LLC Appendices Project Number 1802JS01 November 15. 2001 APPENDIX A I Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets I E~¢ Remediation, LLC Appendix A E2C, inc WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD - Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5640 District Blvd Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~ SAMPLE 19 OR WELL NO.: - .., DEPTH TO WATER: ) 2 PROJECT NO.: //,O~42Z .~,~:~/ TOTAL PERTH OF WELL: t ~. ~GO PROJECT NAME:,~'$~ ~¢ ,/~ WELL DIAMETER: DATE: ~/~/01 CASING VOLUME: ~, ~O gallons SAMPLED BY: ~,¢ METHOD OF PURGING: A)~ Z,F+ PURGE CHARACTERISTICS TEMP pH SEC SAMPLE REMARKS TiME iNTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F°) (UNITS) (pmhosl CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED cm) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) pH CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZED  BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4,01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 Well Capscity: 2" - 0,1632 gallo~inear TEMP P 4" - 0.6528 gallo~linear foot INSTRUMENT READING 6" - 1.4688 galloWlinear foot SPECIFIC ELEOTRILCAL CONDUCTANCE - CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZATION KCL SOLUTION pMHOS / CM G 25 C~ 74 718 1413 6868 58640 TEMP P INSTRUMENT READING ~RAMPIFDAT: ~ ~ ~ ~. FINAL DEPTH TO WATFR: ~ ~r~ ~. 3 CASING VOLUMES= ~.l~2_ GALS. I Pro_iect Number 1~()2JS01 May 23. 2001 I I I I I I I I APPENDIX B Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I I I I I I '1 I .I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix B Halcyon Laboratories Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested . Sample Matdx ~ ~ ~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102. Bakersfield, CA 93313  ample Date SampleT~me Sample DescdpUon and Con~aberType ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ommen~s Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour 5-Day Standard ~ ' Relinquished By: Date~.~& o7 Relinquished By: Date: Received By: ~ ~ Date:eeC/el Received By: Date: I Halcyon Laboratories, :]:nc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 ~- CLIENT E2C, Remediation LLC Project Name: FreeWay Liquors #1802BK03 5300 Woodmere Dr, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Ruben Dorame TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5030/8021B BTEX Analysis: 8/10/2001 BTEX by EPA 5030/8021B Date of Report: 8/14/2001 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: ug/L Sample#: 2K1-1400 2K1-1401 2K1-1402 'Date Sampled: 8/6/2001 8/6/2001 8/6/2001 DL ug/L iSample Description: T-Blank MW-8 MW-9 Benzene 0.5 Toluene 1.0 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPH Gasoline ND ND ND 50 TPH Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % 99 94 94 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: Benzene 0.5 Toluene 1.0 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPH Gasoline 50 TPH Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: Benzene 0.5 Toluene 1.0 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPH Gasoline 50 TPIt Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detecti°n Limit /~~ ~'2,~ -' ND - Non-Detect at given DL , NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Mike l~ivera I Halcyon' I.a~boratories, ]:nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L ~*~. ; Certification # 1920 ~- CLIENT: E,_C Inc. 5640 District Blvd Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors 8[6/0'1 Report Date · 8/14/2001 Sample ID · Travel Blank m Analyte Result Method RL Units m 5 Oxygenates m Methyl TeA-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L m BTEX Components m Benzene ND 0.5 m Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/g o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L 'l Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50 100% m 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50 100% Surrogate Standards m Methane, dibromofluoro- 61 122% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 63 126% Toluene-d8 52 104% m p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 60 120% I Halcyon' I.aboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # lg20 CLIENT: E2C Inc. 5640 District Blvd Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors 816101 Report Date · 8/14/2001 Sample ID · MW-8 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 33 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L ; Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I rn & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I i Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluom 50 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50 100% I 1,4-Dichlombenzene-d4 50 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 63 127% ' 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 61 122% Toluene-d8 53 106% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57 114% I Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Inc. 5640 District Blvd Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors 8/6/01 Report Date · 8/14/2001 Sample ID · MW-9 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 58 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 57 114% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 59 118% Toluene-d8 53 106% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 56 112% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E2C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS i S i n c e ! 9 7 0 FOURTH QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT AND REPORT OF FINDINGS FOR ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION AND SVE/AS PILOT TESTING & REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FOR SOURCE AREA CONTAMINANT REMOVAL FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA February 6, 2002 Project Number 1802JS01 Prepared For: Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store 6107 Roundup Way California 93306 Bakersfield, Prepared By: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, California 93313 e2c.remediation.llc @ sbcglobal.net ! ! I Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 I TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... i I LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ iii I LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 , Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 1 , I Additional Groundwater Characterization and Groundwater Monitoring ................................... 1 Soil Vapor Extraction/Air Sparging Test .............................................................................. 1 I Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology .......................................................................................... 3 I 1.1.1 Regional Geology & Hydrogeology ....................................................................... 3 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology ........................................................................... 4 I 1.2 Site History .................................................................................................................. 4 1.2.1 Site Characterization ............................................................................................ 5 1.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan ............................................................................... 7 I 2.0 THIRD QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING ................................................ 8 2.1 Groundwater Analytical Results ................................................................................... 8 I 2.2 Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 8 2.3 Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 9 3.0 BFD Approval of May 31,2001 IRAP ................................................................................. 9 I 4.0 REPORT OF FINDINGS- ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION ........... 9 4.1 Soil Borings and Soil Sampling .................................................................................... 9 I 4.1.1 Soil Analytical Results ........................................................................................ 10 4.2 Well Installations ........................................................................................................ 11 4.2.1 Air Sparge Wells AS-1 and AS-2 ........................................................................ 11 I 4.2.2 Groundwater Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4 .................................... 11 4.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 11 I 4.4 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 12 5.0 FOURTH QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING ........................................... 12 5.1 Groundwater Elevations ............................................................................................. 12 I 5.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling ....................................................................... 12 5.3 Groundwater Analytical Results ................................................................................. 12 I 5.4 Discussion of Analytical Results ................................................................................. 13 5.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................... 13 5.5.1 Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 13 I 5.5.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 13 I E~C Remediation, LLC i Project Number 1802JS0~ Februa~ 6. 2002 6.0 REMEDIATION SYSTEM INSTALLATION ....................................................................... 13 6.1 Installation of SVE & AS Wells ................................................................................... 14 6.1.1 Installation of Groundwater Air Sparging Wells 14 6.1.2 Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells ........................................................... 14 6.2 Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System ............................................... 14 7.0 SVE/AS PILOT TEST REPORT OF FINDINGS ................................................................ 15 7.1 SVE Observations ..................................................................................................... 15 7.1.1 Radius of Influence ............................................................................................ 15 7.1.2 Removal Rates .................................................................................................. 16 7.2 Air Sparge Observations ............................................................................................ 17 7.2.1 Dissolved Oxygen Observations ......................................................................... 17 7.2.2 Groundwater Level Observations ....................................................................... 18 7.2.3 Air Sparge Test Conclusions 18 8.0 REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FOR SOURCE AREA CONTAMINANT REMOVAL ............... 19 8.1 Task 1 - Permitting .................................................................................................... 19 8.2 Task 2 - Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Well ................................................. 19 8.3 Task 3 - Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System ................................. 20 8.3.1 Electrical Supply 20 8.3.2 Equipment Pad .................................................................................................. 20 8.3.3 Equipment Enclosure ......................................................................................... 20 8.3.4 Remediation Equipment ..................................................................................... 21 8.4 Task 4 - Report of Findings for Remedial Action System Installation and Additional Groundwater Characterization .............................................................................................. 21 8.5 Task 5 - Operation and Maintenance of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System ....... 21 8.6 Task 6 - Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring ............................................................... 22 8.7 Task 7 - Status Reporting .......................................................................................... 22 8.7.1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Reports .................................... 22 8.7.2 Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation Status Reports ................... 22 9.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN ......................................................................................... 23 9.1 Sample Collection and Handling Protocol ................................................................... 23 9.2 Protocol for Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody Documentation .................... 23 9.3 Analytical Quality Assurance ...................................................................................... 23 10.0 SITE SAFETY PLAN ..................................................................................................... 23 11.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION.: ........................................................... 23 12.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 25 I · I E2C Remediation, LLC ii Project Number 1802JS01 F¢/~r~a~_ 6. 2002 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 Fourth Quarter 2001 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Fourth Quarter 2001 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 Fourth Quarter 2001 MTBE Isoconcentration Plot Figure 7 Cross- Section B-B', Distribution of Benzene in Soils Figure 8 Cross - Section B-B', Distribution of MTBE in Soils Figure 9 Cross- Section B-B', Distribution of TPHg in Soils Figure 10 SVE Wells Radii of Influence Figure 11 AS Wells Radii of Influence Figure 12 Typical Air Sparge Well Diagram Figure 13 Site Plan with Trenching Schematic Figure 14 Trench Details Figure 15 Vapor Extraction and Air Sparge Manifold Diagram LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data Table 4 Soil Analytical Data Table 5 Well Distance Matrix Table 6 Pilot Test Hydrocarbon Removal Rate I LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I C with Well Completion Details Appendix Boring Logs Appendix D Soil Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix E Summary of Air Sparge Observations I Appendix F Pilot Test Tedlar Bag Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix G Pilot Test Field Data Sheets Appendix H SVE Radius of Influence Calculations I ! ! : I E~C Remediation, LLC iii I Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i This report presents the results of Additional Groundwater Characterization, Fourth Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring, Air Sparge/Soil Vapor Extraction (AS/SVE) pilot testing, and provides a remedial action workplan for the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East i Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1 for Site location). E2C personnel installed three groundwater monitoring wells (one well onsite and two wells offsite) and two onsite air sparge wells in November 2001. Groundwater was monitored and groundwater i samples were collected from the three new wells and the existing onsite well in December 2001. The AS/SVE pilot test was conducted in January 2002. Conclusions I Additional Groundwater Characterization and Groundwater Monitoring Three groundwater monitoring wells were installed in November 2001 to further evaluate Igroundwater conditions. One well was installed onsite and two wells were installed offsite on the south side of East Brundage Lane. Soil samples were collected at selected depth intervals and submitted for laboratory analysis. I Based on the findings of the additional groundwater characterization and ongoing groundwater monitoring, E2C makes the following conclusions: I · The water table rose approximately 0.7 foot from August 2001 to December 2001; · The groundwater gradient was determined to be 0.016 foot/foot with flow to the west- i southwest; · BTEX was reported as non-detect in all groundwater samples and Iow concentrations of TPHg (130 p,g/L), MTBE (16.4 p,g/L), and TBA (18.8 ~zg/L) were I reported in the water sample from well MW-1 located in the source area; · The concentration of TPHg increased slightly from August 2001 to December 2001 while MTBE decreased slightly; however, the TPHg and MTBE concentrations are an I order of magnitude lower than in April 2001 indicating that the rate of contaminant migration from the soil to the groundwater is less than in April 2001; · Trace concentrations of TPHg and toluene were reportedly detected in soil samples I at the locations of new wells MW-2 located onsite and MW-3 and MW-4 located south of the Site across Brundage Lane, however, given these Iow concentrations (one to two orders of magnitude lower than source area concentrations) the limits of I the soil plume have now been defined in all directions except downgradient of MW-1 (west-southwest); and · The lateral distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater has been defined I to the north and south as contaminants were reportedly not detected in water samples from the three newly installed wells, however, the downgradient extent west-southwest of well MW-1 has yet to be defined. I Soil Vapor Extraction/Air Sparging Test Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Testing IBased on the results of SVE pilot testing, a radius of influence up to 100 feet may be possible at the Site; however, a conservative radius of 70 feet has been used for remedial system design. ! I E2C Remediation, LLC I Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 Contaminant removal rates were high during the entire test as evidenced by the greater than 1,000 ppm measurements at the influent sampling port using an FID. This is also supported by analysis of the Tedlar bag samples collected from the influent. Significant dilution air was required during the test to maintain the machine in a safe operating mode (<100% LEL) meaning that higher contaminant removal rates can be achieved during full-scale remediation. Based on the test flow rate and Tedlar bag influent sample analyses, an average sustainable removal rate of 300 pounds per day was calculated, however, removal rates as high as 750 pounds per day were calculated. As remediation progresses, the removal rate would be expected to decrease in response to lower source area concentrations remaining and potential channeling of vapor flow. Eventually, asymptotic Iow influent concentrations will be obtained at which time the effectiveness of the vapor extraction/air sparge system should be re-evaluated. Recommendations Based on the data presented above, ongoing monitoring, and the conclusions made from this data, E2C makes the following recommendations: · Installation of one (1) groundwater monitoring well west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; · Installation and operation of remediation equipment described in the enclosed remedial action plan to cleanup and control the migration of hydrocarbons in soil and groundwater (Section 8.0 of this report); and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters following system shut-down. I E2C Remediation, LLC 2 I Pro'_/ect Number 1802JS01 Febr~fa~_ 6. 200? I 1.0 INTFIODUCTION This report presents the results of Additional Groundwater Characterization and Fourth Quarter I 2001 groundwater monitoring performed in November 2001, AS/SVE pilot in testing performed January 2002, and provides a remedial action workplan for the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure I for Site location). I This report reviews the environmental history of the Site, discusses geological and hydrogeological conditions, describes the methods used in the assessment and pilot test, provides the analytical results, interprets the extent of the fuel hydrocarbon groundwater plume I and presents conclusions and recommendations. 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology I 1.1.1 Regional Geology & Hydrogeology Regional Geology I The Site is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of I Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks I of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. I Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are I comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. Unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake gravel, sand, silt, and clay sediments, I in turn, overlie the Tertiary rocks. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial ~ · fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the i ~ nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and I intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and I the disseCted The overflow lands lake bottoms lie the of uplands. and in central part the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. I Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit consisting of i soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 ~ miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation' of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, Ihighest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,500 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. ! I E~C Remediation, LLC 3 Project Number 1802JS01 Fc, l)r¢ary ~, ,8002, Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the boring procedures at the Mr. Fast and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. During the Site Assessment work in April 2001, groundwater was encountered at 130 feet below ground surface (bgs). 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology Site Geolo(~v The subsurface at the Site is generally characterized by fine to medium grained poorly graded sand and silty sand with some minor clay fractions in areas to a depth of approximately 55 feet bgs. Of specific note is the change from coarser materials (sands) to finer materials (silts and clays) between approximately 45 and 55 feet bgs, dependent upon location. The finer materials occur to a depth of approximately 80 feet bgs at MW-1. Silt to fine grained silty sand is present to a depth of approximately 85 feet at MW-2, to 75 feet at MW-3 and from approximately 70 feet to 90 feet bgs at MW-4. These finer sediments are underlain by poorly graded sand and silty sand to the maximum depth explored of 141.5 feet bgs, however, at MW-4 an additional layer of silt was found between 125 feet and 135 feet bgs. Figure 7 depicts onsite subsurface conditions in cross-section. Site Hydrogeology Groundwater has been encountered between approximately 120 feet and 125 feet bgs during drilling activities. In April 2001, the groundwater level was 121.94 feet below top of casing (BTOC) at well MW-1. In August 2001, groundwater was measured at 123.10 feet BTOC, a drop of approximately 1.2 feet since the initial measurement. In December 2001, groundwater was measured at 122.44 feet BTOC, a rise of 0.66 foot since August 2001. Groundwater flow was determined to be to the west-southwest at a gradient of 0.016 foot per foot (ft/ft) in December 2001 (Figure 3). 1.2 Site History The Freeway Liquor Store contracted with Industrial Contamination Extraction Services, Inc. (ICES) to remove three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs)'; two 6,000-gallon, single-walled, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) located on two dispenser islands and associated product piping. The fueling facilities were subsequently upgraded with double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled product pipelines, and MPDs with dispenser pans. ICES contracted with Holguin, Fahan and Associates, Inc. (HFA) to conduct soil sampling at the time of UST removal. On December 4. 1998, the five USTs', six MPDs' and product piping were removed from the Site. Soil samples were collected per BFD requirements and analyzed for TPHg, BTEX and MTBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020, respectively. A total of thirty eight (38) samples were analyzed. Significant concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were E~C Remediation, LLC 4 Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 F¢/~rua~_ 6. ~Or)2 detected beneath the two former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' and beneath five of the former dispenser locations. On 1 HFA submitted Tank Closure to the for review. On March February 4, 999, a Report City 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed Mr. Lloyd Childers (Owner), by letter, to submit a workplan for site characterization. The Owner subsequently to the State Fund and into the Fund 2001. applied was accepted on February 5, E2C prepared a Site Characterization Workplan that detailed a Scope of Work and procedures to perform characterization of the Site (E2C, 2001). The BFD reviewed and approved the Workplan by letter dated February 26, 2001 (BFD, 2001). 1.2.1 Site Characterization The Site Characterization Workplan was implemented during the period of April 9 through April 17, 2001. Soil Borings and Soil Sampling A soil boring was advanced at the proposed locations (see Figure 2). Note: Based on actual field conditions and field screening of soil samples, some borings were relocated. In addition, extra also advanced to definition of soils and borings were provide impacted groundwater. Chemical Analyses of Soil Samples All analytes tested for were detected at varying concentrations dependent upon location. The source area appeared to be centered at the area of boring B-8. In general, the fuel hydrocarbons spread downward from the source area until encountering the finer-grained materials at the 45- to 55-foot depths. From there, the fuel hydrocarbons spread laterally principally toward the southeast. Fuel hydrocarbons did migrate downward in the source area to groundwater as evidenced by the analytical results from boring B-8 at depth. In addition, groundwater in the B-8 area had been impacted. A limited zone of highly impacted soils occurred at the near surface in the boring B-8 area. The principal portion of impacted soils occurred between 35 and 55 feet bgs and covers an area of approximately 1,000 square feet. Regulatory. Compliance During the drilling operations it became apparent that the extent of impact to soils was more extensive than previously believed. The preliminary field and analytical data was correlated with preliminary cross-sections and a meeting with the BFD was held. At that meeting, the BFD representative authorized expanding the characterization program to gain better definition of the impact at the Site. Based on that meeting, the following work was approved: · Extending soil boring B-8 to greater depth than originally anticipated and converting this boring into groundwater monitoring well MW-1; · Extending several borings to greater depth (e.g., B-5 and B-6) to aid in definition of the soil plume; · Relocating some borings (e.g., B-3 and B-11) and adding borings (e.g., B-12 through B- 16); · In anticipation that soil remediation at depth would be required at the Site, advancing six (6) additional borings with conversion of all six into vapor wells; I E2C Remediation, LLC 5 Project Number 1802J$01 February 6. 2002 Collection and chemical analyses thereof of additional soil samples generated as a result of the deeper borings, the additional borings, and the additional borings for conversion into vapor wells; · Development of well MW-1 and collection of a groundwater sample from that well; and · Compilation of all data and preparation of an Interim Remedial Action Plan. Installation of Well MW-1 Upon approval of the BFD, boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-I. MW-1 was constructed to 140 feet bgs with the screened interval from 115 to 140 feet bgs. Filter pack sand (Lonestar #3) was placed by gravity feed from 140 to 113 feet bgs. Three feet of bentonite was placed on top of the filter pack and hydrated with water. Neat-cement grout completed the seal to the surface. Two days after installation of the well, the well was developed using the overpumping method. Groundwater Sampling at Well MW-1 On April 27, 2001 groundwater was sampled at well MW-1. The well was overpurged until approximately 20 gallons were extracted (casing volume of 3.2 gallons). Concentrations of fuel hydrocarbon compounds were reported in the groundwater sample collected from MW-1. Table 3 contains a summary of the analytical results. Of significance were the following detections: · Benzene at a concentration of 95 ~g/L (duplicate at 96 Izg/L); · TPHg at a concentration of 2,049 ~g/L (duplicate at 2,108 l~g/L); and · MTBE at a concentration of 295 p.g/L (duplicate at 331 lLtg/L). Site Characterization Conclusions Based on the data obtained from the preliminary assessment and the Site Characterization, E2C made the following conclusions: · Approximately 50,000 of soils contained fuel hydrocarbons at concentrations of cy concern; · Impacted soils occurred from the near surface to approximately 55 feet bgs as shown on the cross sections; · Groundwater had been significantly impacted 15y fuel hydrocarbons at the Site as evidenced by the concentrations of benzene (95 lzg/L), TPHg (2,049 Izg/L), and MTBE (295 l~g/L) in the water sample from MW-l; and · The State of California Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for benzene, a known carcinogen, in drinking water is 1 p.g/L; the water sample from MW-1 contained benzene at a concentration of 95 pg/L; and · The areal extent of the groundwater plume was not known. Site Characterization Recommendations Based on the conclusions presented above, E2C made the following recommendations: · Further define limits of groundwater plume for all fuel components of concern; · To achieve the groundwater definition, perform additional groundwater characterization by installing monitoring wells; · Prepare Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) to include a provision for vapor extraction and groundwater air sparging pilot testing; · Implement the IRAP; I E~C Remediation, LLC 6 I Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~. 6. 2002 I · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling using the monitoring well network; and I · If the proposed groundwater monitoring wells delineate the extent groundwater plume, prepare a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) that includes Pilot Testing data to remediate impacted vadose zone soils and the groundwater plume. I1.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan As requested by the BFD, E2C proposed to implement interim remedial action to remediate the I fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soils and groundwater beneath the Site while groundwater plume definition is being performed. Purpose I The Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) contained two principal tasks: · Define lateral limits of groundwater hydrocarbon plume; and I · Remediate fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site in the source area. Scope of Work i The following Scope of Work will be needed to perform the two principal Tasks of the IRAP. Groundwater Plume Assessment · Locate underground utilities; I · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; · Install a total of three (3) groundwater monitoring wells, one in inferred upgradient and I two in the inferred downgradient directions; · Develop wells; · Sample water at wells and have samples chemically analyzed; I · Compile data and plots showing groundwater gradient (flow direction and generate magnitude); and · Compile data and generate plots showing contaminant plumes as appropriate. Interim Remedial Action Plan · Locate underground utilities; I · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; · Install soil vapor extraction (ME) wells and Air-Sparging (AS) wells; I · Perform soil sampling and analysis; · Install ME/AS piping and Manifolding; · Perform ME/AS pilot test for designing the final treatment system; I · Generate a Report of Findings included With the final RAP that includes final treatment system design; i · Operations and Maintenance of Remedial System; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring/Sampling; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remedial Progress Reporting; I · Quality Assurance plan; and · Site Safety Plan I I EeC Remediation, LLC 7 I Project Numt)er 1802J$01 Febr~l~_ 6. 2002 I This Interim Remedial Action plan was prepared for the remediation of fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site. The IRAP initially consists of installing wells as follows: I · Four (4) shallow soil vapor extraction (VE) wells (VE-1 through VE-4, which are already installed); · One (1) deep VE well (VED-5, which is already installed); I · One (1) medium depth VE well (VEM-6, which is already installed); · Two (2) air sparge (AS) wells (AS-1 and AS-2). I VE and AS wells will be used in performance of a VE/AS pilot test. The pilot test will provide data on the effectiveness of this remedial method as well as design criteria for a site-wide itreatment system. The results of these activities will be presented in a report of findings and the IRAP will be revised and be presented as a final Remedial Action Plan (RAP) to detail the proposed on-site treatment system. I 2.0 THIRD QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING On August 6, 2001, E2C personnel conducted Third Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring I activities, which included measuring the depth to groundwater, checking well MW-1 for free- product, purging the well, and collecting a groundwater sample. Historical groundwater elevation data is summarized in Table 2. I 2.1 Groundwater Analytical Results Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the I groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M and BTEX and fuel oxygenates using EPA Method 8260b. Historical laboratory analytical results are summarized in Table 3. The results of these chemical analyses are summarized following: I · BTEX was reported as non-detect; · TPHg was reported as non-detect; and I · MTBE was reported at a concentration of 33 Izg/L (58 p.g/L in duplicate sample). In April 2001, significant concentrations of BTEX, TPHg, and MTBE were reported in the water sample from well MW-1 (see Table 3). These concentrations declined significantly in August I 2001. The groundwater table lowered 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001. This suggests that groundwater fell slightly below the extent (depth) of impacted soils. When the water table rises, groundwater could come into contact with the impacted soils, thus concentrations in I groundwater could increase. 2.2 Conclusions i Based on the data presented in this report, E2C made the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site is not known, however, three additional monitoring wells are scheduled to be installed in late November 2001, at which time the gradient I can be determined; · The water table fell approximately 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001; · Significant concentrations of TPHg and BTEX compounds were reported in the water I sample from well MW-1 in April 2001; · Concentrations of TPHG, BTEX, and MTBE decreased significantly from April 2001 to i August 2001; and I E2C Remediation, LLC 8 I Prqiect Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 ' I · When the water table rises, groundwater will again come into contact with impacted soils, thus increasing concentrations in groundwater. I 2.3 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C made the following I recommendations: · Install VES and AS wells on site as proposed and approved BFD; · Perform the VES Pilot Test as proposed and approved by the BFD; I · Install additional monitoring wells (one on site and two offsite in the inferred downgradient groundwater direction) as proposed and approved by the BFD to assess i groundwater gradient direction; · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shut-down; and I · Amend the analytical program to test for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, BTEX using EPA Method 8260b, and the five fuel oxygenates of MTBE, Di-isopropyl ether (DIPE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ERTBE), Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), and tertiary amyl methyl I ether (TAME) using EPA Method 8260b. 3.0 BFD Approval of May 31, 2001 IRAP I On August 31,2001, the BFD granted written approval of the May 31,2001 IRAP. The IRAP was approved with the following conditions: I · The AS/SVE pilot test shall be conducted for a period of five (5) days; and · All collected groundwater samples shall be analyzed for TPHg by EPA Method 8015M, and BTEX, EDB, MTBE, TAME, DIPE, ETBE, TBA, and 1,2-DCA by EPA I Method 8260. 4.0 REPORT OF FINDINGS- ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION I E2C obtained drilling permits from the Kern County Environmental Health Department (KCEHD) for the installation of three wells, one well onsite (MW-2) and two wells offsite along the south i side of East Brundage Lane (MW-3 and MW-4). In addition, two air sparge wells were installed onsite as part of the interim remedial action plan (IRAP) dated May 31, 2001. The wells were installed in November 2001. I 4.1 Soil Borings and Soil Sampling A soil boring was advanced to 140 feet bgs at each well location. Figure 2 depicts the boring i locations for wells AS-l, AS-2, MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4. Each soil boring was advanced using a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill rig, conventional equipment for environmental site assessments. Soil samples were collected at selected depth intervals during drilling, particularly from zones that had yet to be sampled. Samples were collected using a split-spoon sampler I containing three brass sleeves. i Drilling operations, soil sampling and field monitoring for the presence of hydrocarbons were performed by a State of California Registered Geologist. A hydrogen flame ionization detector (FID) was used during the drilling process to detect the presence of .hydrocarbons (note: these i are only qualitative tests not to be construed to represent a certified laboratory analysis). I E2C Remediation, LLC 9 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6, 2002 Sample lithology and pertinent drilling information was described and recorded on field boring logs, which are contained in Appendix C. All soil samples were labeled, capped and placed in a cooler with ice at a temperature of 4 degrees Centigrade for possible analysis. Five (5) samples from each of the three monitoring well borings and five samples from air sparge well boring AS-2 (total of 20 samples) were submitted for chemical analyses. Samples for analyses were selected based on the field screening measurements. These samples were transferred to a California State Certified laboratory under chain of custody control procedures. Soil samples were chemically analyzed for the following fuel hydrocarbon compounds: 1) TPHg using EPA Method 8015; 2) BTEX using EPA Method 8260b; 3) Five fuel oxygenates, including MTBE, using EPA Method 8260b; and 4) The detection limits were 0.05 milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg) (equivalent to parts per million) for TPHg, and 0.005 mg/Kg for BTEX compounds, 0.025 mg/Kg for TBA, and 0.005 mg/Kg for the remaining fuel oxygenates, including MTBE. Note: Where significant detections of analytes occurred in a sample, the detection limits were increased due to sample dilution. 4.1.1 Soil Analytical Results Low concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were reported in soil samples from each boring. TPHg was reportedly detected in all twenty samples analyzed. Reported TPHg concentrations in samples from onsite boring AS-2 ranged from 2.2 mg/Kg to 213.3 mg/Kg. Benzene was reportedly detected at concentrations ranging from 0.0234 mg/Kg to 33.9 mg/Kg and MTBE at concentrations ranging from 0.066 mg/Kg to 24.235 mg/Kg. No other fuel oxygenates were reportedly detected in soil samples from boring AS-2. The distribution of benzene, MTBE, and TPHg in onsite soils supplemented with data from AS-2 is depicted in cross-section in Figures 7, 8, and 9, respectively. TPHg was reportedly detected in all soil samples from the groundwater monitoring well borings. At these boring locations, soil sample TPHg concentrations reportedly ranged from 0.160 mg/Kg to 1.16 mg/Kg. Toluene concentrations reportedly ranged from <0.005 mg/Kg (non-detect) to 0.5 mg/Kg. Benzene and fuel oxygenates, including MTBE, were reportedly not detected in any of the soil samples that were analyzed from the monitoring well borings. Soil analytical results are summarized in Table 4. Soil analytical laboratory reports are included as Appendix D. ! ! I E¢C Remediation, LLC 10 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 4.2 Well Installations 4.2.1 Air Sparge WelIs AS-1 and AS-2 The borings for air sparge wells AS-1 and AS-2 were advanced to 140 feet bgs for installation of the wells. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 125 feet bgs at each boring. The boring for well AS-1 was straight drilled to 140 feet bgs without soil sampling because it was drilled near existing well MW-1 which was soil sampled to a depth of 136 feet during drilling. The wells were constructed using 2-inch ID Schedule 40 PVC blank casing with a 2-foot long microporous sparge point at the bottom of the casing string (see Appendix C, Boring Logs, for well construction details). Graded sand (No. 3) was emplaced to a point approximately five feet above the top of the sparge point, followed by a seven- to fifteen-foot thick bentonite pellet seal and neat bentonite-cement grout to approximately 1 foot bgs. A steel traffic box was set in concrete slightly above grade over the wellhead for protection. 4.2.2 Groundwater Monitoring Wells MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4 The borings for groundwater monitoring wells MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4 were advanced to 140 feet bgs. (see Figure 2 for locations). The boring for well MW-2 was straight drilled to 80 feet bgs where soil sampling commenced at 10-foot depth intervals. The boring for well MW-3 was also sampled at 10-foot depth intervals with sampling beginning at 10 feet bgs. At well MW-4 the boring was sampled at 20-foot depth intervals from 20 feet bgs with an intermittent sample collected at 130 feet bgs. The wells were constructed using 2-inch-diameter Schedule 40 PVC casing screened from approximately 115 to 140 feet bgs with 0.010-inch wide slotted casing at the bottom followed by blank casing at the top. Graded sand (#2/12) was emplaced to a point approximately three feet above the slotted interval. Neat bentonite-cement grout was placed to the near surface (approximately one foot bgs) to complete the well seals. The wells were equipped with a locking cap and a steel traffic box was set in concrete slightly above grade over the wellheads for protection. Boring logs with well completion details are provided in Appendix C. Groundwater sample analytical data and the distribution of groundwater contaminants are discussed in Sections 5.3 and 5.4, respectively. A State of California licensed surveyor surveyed the new wells for horizontal and vertical location and tied them into the existing survey. The top of casing elevations were surveyed to the nearest 0.01 foot. 4.3 Conclusions Based on the findings of the additional groundwater characterization, E2C makes the following conclusions: · Trace concentrations of TPHg and toluene are present in soil at the locations of new wells MW-2 located onsite and MW-3 and MW-4 located south of the Site across Brundage Lane, however, given these Iow concentrations (one to two orders of magnitude lower than source area concentrations) the limits of the soil plume have now been defined all except (downgradient) ; in directions west-southwest of MW-1 and · The distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater has been defined to the north and south as contaminants were reportedly not detected in water samples from the three new wells, but has not been defined west-southwest (downgradient) of the source area (see Section 5.3). I E~C Remediation, LLC 11 Proiect Number 1802JS01 · Februa~_ 6, 2002 4.4 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E=C makes the following recommendations: Installation of an additional groundwater monitoring well approximately 100 feet west- southwest of source area well MW-1 to define downgradient groundwater conditions; and · Installation and operation of remediation equipment described in the May 31, 2001 IRAP to cleanup and control the migration of hydrocarbons in soil and groundwater. 5.0 FOURTH QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING On December 7, 2001, E2C personnel conducted Fourth Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring depths to groundwater, checking the wells for free-product, purging the wells, and collecting groundwater samples. 5.1 Groundwater Elevations Prior to purging and sampling, the depth to groundwater was measured at wells MW-1 through MW-4 using a Solinst water level meter. Depth to groundwater was measured from the top of casing (TOC) at the north side of the casing to the nearest 0.01 foot. In addition, the wells were checked for free-product using a Yellowjacket oil-water interface probe. The interface probe and Solinst water level indicator were washed in an Alconox solution and rinsed with clean water prior to use. Evaluation of the groundwater elevation data shows that the gradient is 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west-southwest. 3 of the Fourth Quarter 2001 Figure depicts a plot groundwater gradient and flow direction. Groundwater elevations for this sampling round are summarized in Table 1 and previously collected elevation data for the Site are summarized in Table 2. 5.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling The monitoring wells were purged in order to obtain representative groundwater samples. At least three casing volumes groundwater were prior sampling well of removed from the wells to utilizing a battery-powered submersible pump. A casing volume is calculated by multiplying the height of the freestanding water column in the well by the cross-sectional area of the well groundwater of pH, and conductivity were casing. During purging, parameters temperature, measured as water was pumped from the wells to verify sufficient purging and stable physical parameter measurements on field instruments (see Appendix A for purge data sheets). The pump was decontaminated in a solution of Alconox and water and rinsed with clean water before each use. After purging, groundwater in the wells was sampled using new disposable bailers. The groundwater samples were decanted into four 40-mi volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials. Care was taken to prevent headspace or bubbles in the vials, which were sealed with Teflon-lined lids. Samples were labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4 degrees Centigrade, accompanied with a Chain-of-Custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. 5.3 Groundwater Analytical Results Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M and BTEX and fuel oxygenates using EPA Method 8260b. Appendix B presents the analytical laboratory report. Laboratory analytical I E2C Remediation, LLC 12 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 results for the Fourth Quarter 2001 are summarized in Table 1 and historical data are summarized in Table 3. The results of these chemical analyses are summarized following: · BTEX was reported as non-detect in all samples; · TPHg was reported at a concentration of 130 tzg/L (110 Izg/L in duplicate sample) in the sample from well MW-1; · MTBE was reported at a concentration of 16.4 tzg/L (18.6, Izg/L in duplicate sample) in the sample from well MW-l; · TBA was reported at a concentration of 18.8 ~zg/L (<2.5 Izg/L in duplicate sample) in the sample from well MW-l; and · No other fuel oxygenates were reportedly detected in the groundwater samples. 5.4 Discussion of Analytical Results ~The concentration of TPHg increased slightly from August 2001 to December 2001 and the concentration of MTBE decreased slightly. During this period, the water table rose approximately 0.7 foot. Soil analytical data indicates significant contaminant concentrations in the vadose and saturated zones in the vicinity of MW-I. These data suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons are still migrating from the soil to the groundwater, though at a rate resulting in relatively Iow groundwater concentrations. Analytical data from the three newly installed wells indicate that groundwater from these wells has not been impacted. Isoconcentration plots of TPHg, benzene, and MTBE in groundwater are shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6, respectively. 5.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.5.1 Conclusions Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site is 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west-southwest; · The water table rose approximately 0.7 foot from August 2001 to December 2001; and · The concentration of TPHg increased slightly from August 2001 to December 2001 while MTBE decreased slightly; however, the TPHg and MTBE concentrations are an order of magnitude lower than the April 2001 concentrations indicating that the rate of contaminant migration from the soil to the groundwater is less than in April 2001. 5.5.2 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · Installation of one (1) groundwater monitoring well west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shut-down. 6.0 REMEDIA TION SYSTEM INSTALLATION The May 31, 2001 IRAP contained two principal tasks: to define the lateral extent of the groundwater plume and to remediate onsite fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soil and groundwater. Several of the items planned in the IRAP to fulfill these tasks were installed during the Fourth Quarter 2001. These include two air sparge (AS) wells, four shallow and two deep vapor extraction (VE) wells, and two groundwater monitoring wells, as well as VE and AS underground I E2C Remediation, LLC 13 Prqiect Number 1802J$01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 piping and manifolds. Details regarding the AS and VE well installations are provided below. The installation of groundwater monitoring wells MW-2 through MW-4 is described in Section 4.2.2. 6.1 Installation of SVE & AS Wells These well installations proposed in the IRAP were completed in November 2001 with the installation of two onsite air sparge wells, AS-1 and AS-2. The six SVE wells, VE-1 through VE- 4, VED-5, and VEM-6, were installed in April 2001, No additional remediation wells are proposed at this time, however, depending on the findings of the installation of a downgradient groundwater monitoring well, additional remediation wells may be necessary. 6.1.1 Installation of Groundwater Air Sparging Wells Two AS wells were installed at the Site as part of the IRAP. Each sparge well consists of two- inch-diameter PVC casing. A 2-foot long microporous screen was set approximately 20 feet into the water column to enhance the radius of influence. The screened interval in each sparge well is encased by a sand filter pack that extends approximately 5 feet above the top of the screen. ^ 3-foot thick seal of bentonite was placed in the annular space above the sand pack and cement-bentonite slurry was placed to the near surface (see Figure 12 for typical AS well). 6.1.2 Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells Six VE wells have been installed at the Site as part of the IRAP. Each SVE well is constructed in the same general manner as a groundwater monitoring well using 2-inch-diameter Schedule 40 PVC casing with 0.020-inch wide slots. Wells VE-1 through VE-4 are screened from 25 feet to 55 feet bgs. Well VEM-6 is screened from 55 feet to 70 feet bgs and well VED-5 is screened from 75 feet to 105 feet bgs. Filter pack sand was emplaced by gravity feed in the annular space to a point 2 feet above the top of the screen and the wells were sealed with 3 feet of hydrated bentonite chips. Neat cement-bentonite slurry was used to fill the remainder of the annular space to the near surface. Each wellhead is constructed such it can manifolded that be into the SVE remediation system. Wells VE-1 through VE-4 will be used to affect the upper zone materials in the source area. Wells VEM-6 and VED-5 will be used to affect the middle deep zone respectively, source area. zone and materials, in the 6.2 Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Trenches excavated and installations from the VE and AS wells to the were piping equipment pad were also made. A protective shed will subsequently be constructed to protect the manifold and gauge area. The trenching and piping work was completed in December 2001. Underground piping for SVE and AS wells were installed concurrently in a single trench to the location of equipment pad (see Figure 14). Trenches were constructed in the following manner: · A backhoe was used to excavate a 3-foot wide by 2-foot deep trench from each AS and VE well to a main line (see Figure 13 approximate trench routes). · Six (6) inches of sand was placed as base and was compacted to approximately 90% relative density (see Figure 14 for trench details); · Piping was laid on the base and additional sand (6 inches compacted to 90 percent) was added to encase the piping; and · Native soils were then placed and compacted to approximately 90 percent relative compaction to ground surface. I E2C Remediation, LLC 14 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6, 2002 SVE piping was installed separately from AS piping. SVE piping consists of color-coded 2-inch ID Schedule 40 PVC while AS piping consists of pressure rated 1/2-inch diameter galvanized pipe. Each AS and SVE well was piped to the equipment area individually and concurrently in the main trench. Each piping run was manifolded above ground at the equipment pad. A control valve was installed on the manifold for each well so each well can be adjusted for flow rates on an individual basis. A diagram of the vapor extraction and air sparge manifold is shown on Figure 15. All manifolding and plumbing installations were performed in accordance with local building ordinances and codes. 7.0 SVE/AS PILOT TEST REPORT OF FINDINGS During the period of January 8 through January 11, 2002, E2C conducted a vapor extraction and air sparge pilot study to assess the site condition for use of vapor extraction and air sparge techniques in the remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil and groundwater. Existing wells MW-1 through MW-4, VE-1 through VE-4, VED-5, VEM-6, and new wells AS-1 and AS-2 were used in this study. The study was conducted to determine whether acceptable aquifer conditions existed for the utilization of air sparging, that vadose zone conditions were acceptable for the use of vapor extraction (in conjunction with groundwater air sparging and as a stand alone remediation technique) and an estimate of the effective radius of influence for both the air sparge and vapor extraction for design of the remedial system. 7.1 SVE Observations The vapor extraction study included the use of a Solleco Industries 250 SCFM Thermal Oxidizer equipped with a 20-hp positive displacement (PD) blower. The system was used to extract vapor from the wells and was equipped to run on liquid propane. Testing and measurement devices included flow and pressure gauges, a water level indicator, portable flame ionization detector (FID) for onsite concentration monitoring, pump and Tedlar bags for collecting influent samples to analytically determine hydrocarbon concentrations. The Thermal Oxidizer was connected to different configurations of vapor extraction wells. A test was run for different lengths of time using different combinations of the wells as extraction (suction) and observation wells. Four (4) monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-4) were also used as observation wells as they were nearby and their screened intervals in the wells included a length of screen above the water table in the unsaturated zone. Based on field FID measurements, vapor influent and effluent samples were collected in Tedlar bags and submitted for chemical analyses. The SVE field data sheets are included as Appendix G. 7.1.1 Radius of Influence Based on the Pilot Test results, a radius of influence can be calculated for the vapor extraction. Appendix H contains radius of influence calculations and plots. Based on the data from Test 14 (see Graph H-9 in Appendix H) a radius of influence of approximately 85 feet can be extrapolated; based on data from Test 15 (see Graph H-10), a radius of influence of feet be and based data from Test 16 radius of approximately 65 can extrapolated; on a influence of approximately 100 feet can be extrapolated. As such, a conservative SVE radius of influence of 70 feet is feasible for the Site. Vadose zone soils on the east side of the Site in the vicinity of VE-2 and to a lesser extent near VE-4 appear to be more permeable than soils near wells VE-1 and VE-3. The influence at VE-2 when VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4 were independently used for extraction (Tests 14, 16, and 17) was E2C Remediation, LLC 15 Project Number 1802JS01 Febrl~ary O, 2,0{22 greater than the influence on those three wells when VE-2 was open and they served as observation points (Test 15). In other words, the influence at VE-2 observed while using VE-3 for extraction (Test 14) was equal to or greater than the influence at the other shallow wells although VE-2 was the most distant from the extraction well. This indicates that if all wells are simultaneously used for extraction, the vacuum at VE-2 may need to be decreased to provide a greater vacuum near the other three shallow VE wells. All tests utilizing the shallow VE wells (screened from 35 feet to 55 feet bgs) for extraction, produced some influence' at wells VEM-6 (screened from 55 feet to 75 feet) bgs and VED-5 from 75 feet to 105 feet the effect is less than that (screened bgs) (Appendix H). Although observed at the wells completed at shallower depths, the data indicate that eVE has significant influence in deeper areas of the soil plume. During eVE pilot Tests 7 through 12 using shallow wells for extraction, induced flow through well VED-5 was observed. This to be the appears result of the well serving as a conduit for air flow equalizing the higher pressure naturally occurring in the deeper zone with shallower zone soils that are under vacuum and therefore at a lower pressure. In summary, the locations of the four existing shallow VE wells will provide air flow sufficient for coverage of the soil plume as the radii of influence cover most of the Site (Figure 10). 7.1.2 Removal Rates During the entire length of the test, removal rates were high as evidenced by the greater than the 1,000 ppm measurements at the influent sampling port using the FID during each test. This is also supported by Tedlar bag vapor test results on influent samples (Appendix F). Tedlar bag influent vapor sample concentrations can be evaluated in terms of the configuration of wells used for extraction, the screened interval the wells, and the radius of influence data of discussed in the previous section. The highest influent vapor sample concentration measured (8,838 ppmv) was during Test 8 when wells VE-1, VE-3 and VE-4 were used for extraction and and VEM-6 used for observation. Of induced air flow VE-2, VED-5, were note, significant was observed in VED-5 and would therefore contribute to the effluent. A concentration of 3,618 ppmv was measured during Test 21 utilizing deeper wells VED-5 and VEM-6 for extraction and AS-1 for air sparging, an indication that extraction is and effective in the source vapor necessary area at depths greater than 55 feet. Concentrations for the majority of the tests measured approximately 3,500 ppmv. Based on the influent vapor concentration data and the associated well configurations, the optimum configuration for extraction appears to be wells VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4. The addition of air sparging to this configuration should increase the influent vapor concentration above the value measured for Test 8 which did not employ air sparging. Use of well VE-2 for extraction should be limited such that the vacuum is concentrated in wells VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4 as well VE-2 has a smaller radius of influence and therefore is less effective at the locations of VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4. The flow rate during the pilot test was typically 260 scfm in the extraction wells. Using this flow rate and the Tedlar bag results (see Appendix F) for the testing (total of hydrocarbons plus aromatics from Influent Test 8, result, = 8,838 ppmv) and using the equation, Removal (lbs/day) = (8,838 x 10'6) x 260 cfm x 1 lb-mole x 86 lbs x 1,440 min 379.5 cf lb-mole day a removal rate of approximately 750 pounds per day (lbs/day) was calculated. A significant amount of dilution air was required to maintain the machine at an appropriate operating temperature during the pilot test. This indicates that the measured influent vapor concentration I E2C Remediation, LLC 16 Prqiect Numt)er 1802~1S01 Febr{7~_ 6. 2002 and hence removal rate represent minimum values that would likely be exceeded upon full- scale operation of the system as less dilution air is required to maintain an appropriate operating temperature. As remediation progresses, the removal rates would be expected to decrease in response to lower source concentrations remaining and potential channeling of vapor flow. Eventually, asymptotic Iow influent concentrations will be attained at which time the effectiveness of the vapor extraction/air sparge system will need to be re-evaluated. The pilot test removal rate data with well configuration and flow rate are tabulated in Table 6. The destruction efficiency of the catalytic oxidizer can be calculated based on the ratio of effluent to influent concentration. For Test 1 and effluent vapor sample (influent 3,147.6 ppmv 90.21 ppmv) the destruction efficiency was found to be 97.1% and for Test 20 (influent 3,168.41 ppmv and effluent 188.61 ppmv) the efficiency was 94.1% (Table 6). In conclusion, the radius of influence for a full-scale remediation will be greater than 70 feet and may approach 100 feet. The site stratigraphy and lack of resistance to flow (2" Hg) suggests this site is an ideal candidate for vapor extraction. The high removal rate suggests this site has a significant soil and groundwater on-site source, i.e .... area requiring remediation. 7.2 Air Sparge Observations The air sparge study included the use of compressed air to activate the sparge wells, flow and pressure gauges, and a dissolved oxygen meter. Compressed air was introduced into the sparge point while measurements of pressure and dissolved oxygen were collected at various wells. The pilot study observations are included in Appendices E, F, G, and H. The dissolved oxygen observations revealed significant data. In general, the air sparging was initially conducted on a relatively continuous basis at a pressure of 22 pounds per square inch (psi) at each sparge point with flow at approximately I to 3 cubic feet per minute (cfm). These are similar to those found in full-scale remediation. 7.2.1 Dissolved Oxygen Observations Generally, dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations increased in observed monitoring wells after startup of the air sparge unit. Significant increases were observed at several of the wells (see Appendix E). MW-1 - Significant increase in DO was observed in MW-1 (9.8 mg/L at pre-test conditions with an increase greater than 15 mg/L at the end of the test, see Appendix E), located 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2 (see Table 5, Well Distance Matrix). MW-2 - A decrease in DO was observed in MW-2 (10.6 and 10.7 mg/L at pre-test conditions with a decrease to 9.5 mg/L at the end of the test), located 123 feet from AS-1 and 118 feet from AS-2 (see Table 5). MW-3 - An increase in DO was observed at MW-3 (7.0 mg/L at pre-test conditions with an increase up to 9.0 mg/L at the end of the test), located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2. MW-4 - A significant increase in DO was observed at MW-4 (7.6 mg/L at pre-test conditions with an increase to 10.0 mg/L at the end of the test), located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2. ' I E~C Remediation, LLC 17 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~. 6, 200P 7.2.2 Groundwater Level Observations The radius of influence from air sparging can also be evaluated in terms of groundwater level changes in the observation wells (Appendix E). At onsite well MW-l, located 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2, groundwater levels rose by 3.8 feet from the start of Test 18 through the end of Test 22. At upgradient well, MW-2 located 123 feet from AS-1 and 118 feet from AS-2, the water level rose by 1.14 feet during this same test period. At well MW-3, located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2, the water level rose approximately 0.4 foot and at well MW- 4, located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2, the level rose 0.6 foot. These data indicate influence onsite at well MW-1 with radius of influence than 100 a significant a greater feet in the upgradient direction (MW-2). It should be noted that there was a decrease in DO concentration at well MW-2 although the water level rose as a result of air sparging. Some influence was observed at wells MW-3 and MW-4 indicating a radius of influence greater than approximately 130 feet south of the Site. 7.2.3 Air Sparge Test Conclusions The results indicated the acceptability of the aquifer for air sparging and a conservative estimate of the air sparge radius of influence is in excess of 100 feet and possibly up to 120 feet plus. This is based on two factors: 1) Air sparging introduced backpressure at observation wells (VE-1 through VE-4, VED- 5, and VEM-6). This backpressure is indicative of a large radius of influence for the air sparging in the water-bearing zone. Furthermore, backpressure was observed in well MW-3, located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2, and MW-4, located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2, as indicated by the rise in water level. increases in DO the observation at well MW-1 2) Significant at wells, specifically (9.80 mg/L at test start and greater than 15 mg/L at test end), which is located in the source area 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2. Of important note, Well MW-3 showed a significant increase in DO from the start of the test (7.0 mg/L) to the end of the test (9.0 mg/L). MW-3 is located cross-gradient from the AS wells approximately 135 feet south of AS-1 and 138 feet south-southwest of AS-2. DO concentrations at well MW-4 increased also from 7.6 mg/L at start of test to 9.0 mg/L at the end of the test. MW-4 is located cross-gradient from the AS wells approximately 150 feet southeast of AS-1 and 125 feet south-southeast of AS-2. Based on this data, a conservative radius of influence for air sparging of 100 feet is estimated for the Site and the use of groundwater air sparging at this site will yield high removal rates and rapid source removal. Tedlar Bag Vapor Sample Results The Tedlar for Test 8 indicated that hydrocarbons in the Cl bag vapor sample analysis through Ce range were detected at a concentration of 8,838 parts per million volume (ppmv). Test 8 was run with extraction from wells VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4. Tedlar bag vapor sample results are included as Appendix F. Tests 1 and 18 were run with all wells and Tests 2 through 17 open and 19 through 21 were run with various combinations of wells open and closed (see Appendix G for Pilot Test Field Data Sheets). Tests 18 through 23 were conducted with the addition of air sparging using wells AS-1 and AS-2 Groundwater air sparging provides dissolved oxygen at a concentration of approximately 10 to 12 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Calculations of the mass of contaminants present indicates that I E~C Remediation, LLC 18 Project Number 1802J~01 F~ary ~i, 2,002 DO at levels in this range will be sufficient to accomplish complete mass removal. It appears that air sparging will sufficiently increase the DO concentration in source area groundwater, as indicated by the large increase to greater than 15 mg/L at well MW-1. Assessment of the downgradient (west-southwest) extent of he dissolved groundwater plume is necessary to evaluate whether the air sparge radii of influence are sufficient to cover the limits of the groundwater plume (see Section 8.2 for recommendation of well installation). 8.0 REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FOR SOURCE AREA CONTAMINANT REMOVAL Following evaluation of the pilot test data, a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) was developed to implement remediation of the source area contaminants. The RAP includes the remaining tasks initially described in the May 31, 2001 IRAP to commence full-scale remediation. Timely implementation of this RAP is necessary to control further migration of petroleum hydrocarbons from the source area. The Scope of Services to implement the RAP consists of the following tasks: Task 1 Permitting Task 2 Install Groundwater Monitoring Well Task 3 Install Source Area Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Equipment Task 4 Report of Findings for Installation of Remedial Action System Task 5 Operation and Maintenance of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Task 6 Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Task 7 Status Reporting 8.1 Task 1 - Permitting After approval of the RAP by the City of Bakersfield Fire Department, necessary permits as required for the installation and operation of SVE/AS equipment will be secured by E2C. These permits include, but may not be limited to the following: · Construction and Electrical permits from the City of Bakersfield and/or Kern County; and · Authority-to-Construct and Permit-to-Operate permits from the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD). 8.2 Task 2 - Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Well One (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) is proposed approximately 100 feet west- southwest of well MW-1 This well will be used to monitor conditions in (Figure 2). groundwater the downgradient direction which was determined to be west-southwest during the Fourth Quarter 2001. A soil boring will be advanced to 140 feet bgs at the well location. The soil boring will be advanced using a truck mounted hollow-stem auger drilling rig, conventional equipment for environmental site assessments. Soil samples will be collected at 5- to 10-foot intervals from the surface to total depth and in the capillary fringe. Samples will be collected using a split- spoon sampler containing three brass or stainless steel sleeves. Drilling operations, soil sampling and field monitoring for the presence of hydrocarbons will be performed by an experienced environmental geologist under the supervision of a California Registered Geologist. A hydrogen flame ionization detector (FID) will be used during the drilling process to detect the presence of hydrocarbons (note: these are only qualitative tests not to be I E~C Remediation, LLC 19 Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 Februa~. 6. 2002 construed to represent a certified laboratory analysis). Sample lithology and pertinent drilling information will be described and recorded on field boring logs. All soil samples will be labeled, capped and placed in a cooler with ice at a temperature of 4° C for possible analysis. A maximum of five (5) cores from the boring will be submitted for chemical analysis. Samples for analyses will be selected based on the field screening measurements. These will be transferred California State Certified samples to a laboratory under chain of custody control procedures. Soil samples will be chemically analyzed for the following fuel hydrocarbon compounds: · BTEX using EPA Method 8260b; · TPHg using EPA Method 8015; and · Five oxygenates, including MTBE, using EPA Method 8260b. The detection limits will be 0.005 milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg) (equivalent to parts per million) for BTEX compounds, 50 mg/Kg for TPHg, and 0.005 mg/Kg for MTBE. The well will be developed using a combination of swabbing, bailing, and Iow-flow pumping. The well will be incorporated into the quarterly sampling program following installation and development. 8.3 Task 3 - Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Trenching and piping installations for the remedial system were completed in December 2001 (Section 6.2). The remaining tasks are to acquire an electrical power supply, and to construct a concrete equipment pad and protective shed to protect the remediation equipment, manifold, and gauge area. 8.3.1 Electrical Supply The electrical service requirements for the SVE system and groundwater sparge system will be supplied by the installation of a utility power pole. A service panel will be mounted on the pole and wired with separate circuit breakers for individual circuits as needed. The supply service at the pole will require three-phase, 240 volts at 200 amps. 8.3.2 Equipment Pad The proposed equipment enclosure will consist of a concrete slab measuring approximately 10- feet wide by 20-feet long by 6-inches thick. The slab will be reinforced with a No. 4 rebar mat extending to within 2-inches of the inside perimeter of the concrete slab. The rebar spacing of the mat will not exceed 12-inch centers. The mat will be above within the slab supported grade by dobbie supports. The Equipment Pad will house the following equipment: · Electrical Pole and Supply Panel for all electrical equipment; · SVE equipment composed of a water knock-out pot, blower, and catalytic oxidizer. The vent manifold will include individual well valving; and · Air sparging equipment composed of an oil-free compressor and receiver tank. The air sparge manifold will include needle-valve flow controllers for each well. 8.3.3 Equipment Enclosure A small sheet metal shed will be constructed to protect the gauges, valves, compressor and electrical equipment from the elements at each location. Each manifold will be connected to the remedial treatment equipment using appropriate hoses and connectors. I E2C Remediation, LLC 20 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~. 6. 2002 8.3.4 Remedia~ion Equipment The remedial equipment consists of a catalytic oxidizer unit, Solleco Industries Model 300 ECAT Catalytic Oxidizer, to extract vapor at 300 and 100 inches H20 vacuum. The from the wells cfm unit's minimum operating temperature is 600 degrees Fahrenheit in catalytic mode. This temperature is set to ensure vapor oxidation at reasonable electrical cost. Furthermore, the unit has module to the oxidation The unit is with a catalytic complete process. equipped a regenerative type vapor extraction blower. For improved reliability and safety, [he valve controls, actuators, and components are controlled by relay logic. The Solleco 300 is equipped with a water knock-out pot, automatic air dilution capability, and a noise-reducing muffler. This proposed piece of equipment is designed to shut down and lock out in the event of a system malfunction. The various safety features include high and Iow oxidizer bed temperatures, high and Iow blower pressure, high intake lower explosive limit (LEL), high and Iow air pressure, high and Iow exhaust temperature, and water knockout malfunction sensor. Groundwater air sparge equipment will consist of an "oil-free" rotary-screw 10-horsepower Ingersol Rand Compressor, pressure regulator, needle-valve flow controllers and microporous sparge points. All electrical and plumbing work will be performed in accordance with any and all City of Bakersfield and/or County of Kern building ordinances and codes. The application for the permit to construct/operate, including construction details will be prepared and submitted after this plan has been approved. 8.4 Task 4 - Report of Findings for Remedial Action System Installation and Additional Groundwater Characterization A report will be prepared that includes details and procedures regarding the Remedial Action System installation, including as-built plans, and findings for the additional groundwater characterization. In addition, this report will include a finalized Remedial Action Plan for additions to the remedial system including additional groundwater monitoring, SVE, and/or AS wells, as needed. 8.5 Task 5 - Operation and Maintenance of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System E2C professional staff, experienced in SVE/GASS technology, will conduct operation and maintenance (O & M) of the VES Units to ensure efficient remediation of the Site. Equipment operating parameters will be monitored by E2C on-site inspections. It is E2C's experience, from previous SVE/GASS operations, that maintenance schedules will be daily inspections for the first 10 days; 2 to 3 days per week for the next 20 days; and weekly thereafter. Maintenance and inspection schedules will ultimately comply with the permit conditions set by the APCD. The operations and maintenance of the systems is to include all materials and supplies necessary to conduct normal operational activities such as field screening, systems checks and adjustments, and regular lubrication and maintenance. The VE/AS system proposed will be equipped with LEL, Flow, Stack Temperature, Chamber Temperature, and Pre-Heat Temperature measurement devices and are recorded every one (1) minute on a chart recorder. I E~C Remediation, LLC 21 Project Number 1802JS01 F~,/3rua~_ 6, 200,° 8.6 Task 6 - Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater monitoring with groundwater sampling will be performed on a quarterly basis and will incorporate proposed well MW-5. After one year, the sampling schedule will be evaluated and revised as necessary. pump be to purge a minimum of three well volumes at each well. A submersible used Periodically during purging the parameters pH, temperature, and conductivity will be measured as another means to ensure that a representative sample of the aquifer is obtained for chemical The will be considered stabilized if three consecutive measurements within analysis. aquifer are 10 percent of previous measurements. After purging, a disposable bailer will be lowered into a well to collect a sample. Each sample will be decanted into three 40-milliliter VOA vials. Care will be to verify that headspace or bubbles do not exist and each VOA will be sealed using a Teflon®-Iined lid. The samples will be labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4 degrees Centigrade, accompanied by a chain- of;-custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. A State of California-certified analytical laboratory will analyze the samples for the following compounds by the appropriate EPA Method: ·TPHg using EPA Method 5030/8015M; BTEX using EPA Method 5030/8260b; and · Fuel oxygenates (includes MTBE) using EPA Method 5030/8260b. 8. 7 Task 7- Status Reporting Status reporting will be performed as discussed below. 8.7.1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Reports · APCD Startup Inspection Test Report; · APCD Annual Inspection and Test Report; and · Quarterly Remediation Status Reports (see below). 8. 7.2 Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation Status Reports On a quarterly basis, a report will be prepared by the last day of the next month following each quarter and will contain, at a minimum, the following: · Tabulated results of all previous and to date investigations; · Groundwater elevation and contamination contour maps; · Site map clearly indicating the areal extent of contamination plumes; · A map showing all sensitive receptors and a brief description of the receptor, including its distance and direction from the Site; · Compliance with other agency's requirements; · A summary of analytical data to date, equipment records, daily/weekly inspection records, and a discussion of remedial progress; and · In addition, the report will contain a conclusions and recommendations section clearly indicating what further actions, if any, are required. The report will be prepared under the supervision of, reviewed by, and certified by a State of California Registered Geologist. I E~C Remediation, LLC 22 Pro_iect Number 1802J$01 February 6. 2002 9.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN This section describes field and analytical quality-assurance procedures to be followed during the investigation and remediation. 9.1 Sample Collection and Handling Protocol Proper sample collection and handling are essential to assure quality of data obtained from a sample. Each sample, therefore, will be collected in a plastic tube, preserved correctly for the intended analysis and stored for no longer than permissible holding time prior to analysis. Protocol to be applied in this project was described earlier. 9.2 Protocol for Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody Documentation Sample identification and Chain-of-Custody 'procedures are designed to assure sample quality and to document sample possession from the time it is collected to the time of its ultimate disposal. The container for each sample submitted for analysis will have a label affixed with the identifying number or the number will be inscribed directly on the container. The analytical laboratory will assign a separate sample number unique to that sample for internal sample coordination and identification. A description of the sample including the sample number and other pertinent information regarding its collection and/or geologic significance will be written in field notes and/or a geologic boring log being prepared by the site geologist. These field documents will be kept in a permanent project file. All samples will be analyzed by a state certified laboratory for the analyses requested. A properly completed Chain-of-Custody Form will be submitted to the analytical laboratory along with sample. The laboratory's assigned number will be properly entered on the form. A quality control officer at the lab will verify integrity of sample submitted, proper sample volume, correctness of containers used, and properly executed Chain-of-Custody Form. Pertinent entered a log book kept by the laboratory. information will be into 9.3 Analytical Quality Assurance In addition to routine calibration of analytical instruments with standards and blanks, the analyst is required to run duplicates and spikes on 10 percent of analyses to assure an added measure of reliability and precision. Accuracy is verified through the following: 1. U.S. EPA and State certification of results; 2. Participation in inter-laboratory round robin program; 3. The quality control officer on a weekly basis submits "Blind" samples for analysis. These are prepared from National Bureau of Standards specifications of EPA reference standards; and 4. Verification of results with an alternative method. 10.0 SITE SAFETY PLAN The Site Safety Plan presented in the E2C February 9, 2001 Workplan (E2C, 2001a) will remain in force during performance of the above discussed Scope of Work. 11.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Report in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing in California at this time. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic I E2C Remediation, LLC 23 I Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 I conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No I warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared under the professional supervision of the registered profeSsional I whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so I that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(s). I Prepared By: ~ Reviewed By: , ·) .... Iwln, · Mark W. Clardy, RG. #705~,,~ ~'_,~,~-~' RG. #4779 I Senior Geologist ',,,~e"o~ ~v~,~O~;," . Expires 11/30/02 )al Hydrogeologist I ! I I I I I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC 24 I Prqiect Nurnt~r 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 I 12.0 REFERENCES I (BFD, 1999) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, March 30, 1999, Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Freeway i Liquor Store, 2030 East Brundage Lane, Permit #BR-0231 (BFD, 2001) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, February 26, 2001, Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East I Brundage Lane (a.k.a. 2030 East Brundage Lane) (E2C, 2001a) E2C, Inc., February 9, 2001, Site Characterization Workplan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California I (E2C, 2001b) E2C, Inc., May 31, 2001, Site Characterization Report of Findings and Interim Remedial Action Plan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California I (E2C, 2001c) E2C Remediation, LLC, November 15, 2001, Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, i Bakersfield, California I I I I I I I I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC 25 Prelect Nvmber 1802J$01 Fcbrua~_ 6, 2002 ! FIGURES Figure 1Vicinity Map Figure 2Site Plan Figure 3Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4Fourth Quarter 2001 TPHg Isoconcentrati0n Plot Figure 5Fourth Quarter 2001 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6Fourth Quarter 2001 MTBE Isoconcentration Plot Figure 7Cross- Section B-B', Distribution of Benzene in Soils Figure 8Cross- Section B-B', Distribution of MTBE in Soils Figure 9Cross- Section B-B', Distribution of TPHg in Soils Figure 10 SVE Wells Radii of Influence Figure 11 AS Wells Radii of Influence Figure 12 Typical AS Well Diagram Figure 13 Site Plan with Trenching Schematic Figure 14 Trench Details Figure 15 Vapor Extraction and Air Sparge Manifold Diagram ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Figures I Knob H ~' ~' ~ ~ -" j ~oUNla M?N. Pyr'~id Hi~'{ ~ ] Shark Tooth Hill '~ .t SITE LOCATION t' '--':c,.~,.... c~',,;~, o.,. WEEDPATCN .~ GEAR VALLE'~ SPRINGS ~ ,,. ~.~..,"o"-:'Lr ' "~..t'-" __ :. v,,~.~o ...~'~ "' · . ~ o. ~/ ~.... ;ii ~...'.'n,'n ,nm m m "~ // f 9)n£EI~R RIDGE ~/e . ~ i I ~ WHEELER RIOGE .. 'x ¢..aov' / " !:l ' "¢ " E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, CA. 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Phone: (661) 831-6306 1 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 VICINTY MAP I LEGEND I ;6 Soil Boring Location I H;I MW-2 B-16 VE-1 Monitoring Well Location ,~ · ~ {~ Vapor Extraction Well Location STAORREAAGE STORE AS-1 ~ FENCE ~ ~ [] Air Sparge Well Location ~1~'~' ~ VE-2 "' a .-g'~- ~--=r----~ ~ I ; * Cross-Section Transect ~ ~ VE'4 IB'15 J (PROP[SED) B-13 SHOULDER ~ I ~ EASI BRUNDAGE ~NE power line . MW-3 < BI o z SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 2 Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 SITE PLAN LEGEN~D ~6 Soil Boring Location MW-2 .~1 Monitoring Well Location V~I Vapor Extraction Well LocatlonSTAO~AGE STO:~i I VE2+ · Bo16 AI~'I Air Sparge Well Location . ~264.66 GW Elevation, ft. MSL FEN~.~ I N~W US~ ~W ' / -I DISPENSER I B-2 B-II - VENTLINES~ (B-a) IS~NDS [ ' NEW UST I+1 IS~NDS ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE MW.3~power line MW-4 z o ~ m 0 20 40 SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C ~~o~, [[C FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 3 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 FOURTH QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER GRADIENT PLOT r LEGEND ' · Soil Boring Location I U~V-1 MW-2 B-16 .~- Monitoring Well Location VE-1 STORAGE ~) Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 [] Air Sparge Well Location FENCE ~__-nm · ~) VE-2 zo ~ TPHg Concentration in ug/L B-9 B-6 ... ~ TPHg Isooncentration z · k. ~:$ '% Contour In ug/L· '? rn B-11 ~ (B-S) DISPENSER a-2 · =~ ~,~LANDS VED-5 · I]1-5 CANOI'~"Iy ·B'15 ^s-~ [] ,~ VE-4 \ · ^s-2 _ /// ~ VE-3 ~. B-12 VEM-6 · // ' / MW-5 · ~ ~- B-3 / I (PROPOSED) B.1t3 SHOULDER ; "'"'~°'e'"~e/- ' B'14 -- EAST BRUNDAGE LANE power line MW-3 ~ MW-4 SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 4 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Fourth Quarter 2001 TPHg Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Isoconcentration Plot B ~ LEGEND · Soil Boring Location M~-I ~ B-16 ~ 'Monitoring Well Location ,~ · VE-1 STORAGE ~3 Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 -- FENCE VT-1 [] Air Sparge Well Location ' B-9 B-6 ~ Benzene Concentration In u~L ~ B-11 VE~ LINES NEW UST ~W 1 ' (B'8) DISPENSER a-2 ' NEW US~ m~~~NDs ' B-15 v,o.,. SHOULDER ~ EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE power line MW-3 MW-4 o m SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation/LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 5 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Fou~h Qua~er 2001 Benzene Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Isoconcentration Plot m I LEGEND O Soil Boring Location I I IdW-I MW-2 B-16 .~ Monitoring Well Location VE-1 STORAGE i (~ Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 [] Air Sparge Well Location FENCE ~',n111 · ~ VE-2 zo I ~ MTBE Concentration in ug/L B-9 ~ 8-6Z m MTBE Isoconcentratlon ~ · ~10 ,% Contour in ug/L ~ I B-11 · VENT LINES - (a'8) DISPENSER B-2 · NEW UST I,~~NDS B-15 I !~ VEO-5 · 1~-5I-~B-I · · CANOPY IAS-I[] e VE-4 VE-3 {~ B-12 VEM-6 · // / I + x, III SHOULDER I o*e~ ~oe/ · B-14 I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE i power line MW-3 ~ MW-4 I'~ o z t-- SCALE: 1" = 40' I E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 6 Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Fourth Quarter 2001 MTBE I Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Isoconcentration Pict B-8; set ahead B ~~ feet ~., =.~ .(setAasl~2ead oo D-~ B-6 ~ ~-. 16 feet) ~-o -NW~ ............................................... - ~ 'FILL ~: ....................... _~ ___ _9 : SE ~ 6.02 I -- o .~ ~ ~ I ~ .... ~ .4.50 ~60 / ........... _ _ 7 / --~o ~ 3~.o,-~__~__ ,. __~ - -, ~ -~ -~- -~- -/- ~- _-:' 's~- + -/- - -I- - -, ~ '~-'~1~_~_ ~~__? 's, --120 ~ 0.007 ~ I' ~ _ _ 10.086~ I  SM/ML ~ I ML - Silt, some fine sand MUO~SC - Silt, Clay, Olayey Sand SC/SM -Olayey Sand, Sil~ Sand SM/ML - Sil~, Sandy, Sandy Silt SP/SW - Sands SCALE 1" = 20 feet BENZENE SOIL ANALYSIS in rog/kg ~2C ~e~eEi¢tio., L[C FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 7 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 CROSS-SECTION B-B' DISTRIBUTION OF BENZENE IN 8OILS B-8; set ahead AS-2B' B ~.~~.~ 15feetX,~ B-4 16faeheet~d B-3 NW ? FILL 20 4.3 $.$ 1. ' _ _ ~ ' 9 3.? S SP/SW 1.7 - M~CbSC ML .9 N_~_~ ~ - · SP/SW ? 9 ........~ '_ sw/s~ ' . o o~o sw ~oo '" -~M- ,--I ~ -- --I'' -- - ' .gs~sP '~ - - -t - - - ? -- 1 °'~"~ I SM / ~ I O.010 20 ML ~x,~....,o, s. I °.'--5- [sP Initial Water B-0 - Borin~ Cocation Mk - Silt, somo flno sand M~G~SG - Silt, Glay, Glayoy Sand SC/SM - Glayoy Sand, Silty Sand SM/ML - Sil~, Sandy, Sandy Silt SP/SW - Sands MTBE SOIL ANALYSIS in my/Kg SCALE 1" = 20 feet ~2C ~~t~O~, ~C FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE ~URE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 " CROSS-SECTION B-B' - DISTRIBUTION O Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 OF MTBE IN SOILS B-8; set ahead AS-2  B~w- _ r~ a _ _ 15 feet ~ B 4 ~t ahe B .~'_~ _u-~_~~_ _'_ 16 feet~ ~ ~ SE I I I ~ ~ ~ S,~ Mk ~.os ~ _ _ ~ _j ~s_ _ '_ ~ / ?~"~'-[~ - - ~- - ? ~ SM ; ~ ' ~ Initial Wate- ML - Silt, some fine sand ~" ~" M~C~SC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SM/ML - Silty, Sandy, Sandy Silt SP/SW - Sands SCALE 1" = 20 feet TPHg SOIL ANALYSIS in mg/kg E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 CROSS-SECTION B-B' - DISTRIBUTION Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 OF TPH~ IN SOILS MW-2 B-16 %";'2E STO~ / -- FENCE ~  ~ ~B-15 SHOULDER ~ EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE LEGEND ~ ~ Vapor ~xtra~tion W,II ~o~atlon 1 Air Sparge Well Location ~C ~E~E~O~ ~C FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield,Telephone: (661)California831-690693313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 10 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 SVE WELLS RADII OF INFLUENCE I STORAGE I AREA STORE FENCE ~ ~ 33111 I · ffi VE-2 zo I B-9 B-6 m I ! NEW UST MW-1 i B-11 · '/E~T UNES --{ (S-S) DISPENSER B-2 ; VED-5 ~ ~-5 CANOPY ' E-- · "-= j / SHOULDER ~ EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE LEGEND  B~ power line ~ Soil Boring Location  ~ Monitoring Well Location MW-3 < m MW-4 VE-1 ~ Vapor Extraction Well Location ~ Air Sparge Well Location m E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313Telephone: (661) 831-6906 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 11 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 AS WELLS RADII OF INFLUENCE I ! i Removable Cap ~ Well Box grouted -- I ~ Air Flow From Manifold ~~ Neat-Cement u. Grout ti. I WATER ~-7 TABLE Approximalely 125 ft. bgs x~ 3 Feet of Bentonite ·~'~ Chips Lonestar #3 Sand · ~, ~,,,/or Equivalent ~ Flush Threaded 2 Inch m ~ ~ Dia. PVC Blank ~ Micro-Porous - 2.0 feet _-.~ ~ Air Sparge Point NOT TO SCALE E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 12 Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 TYPICAL AIR SPARGE WELL DIAGRAM I LEGEND ~ · Soil Boring Location I I ~W-I MW-2 B-16 .~. Monitoring Well Location .~. · VE-1 STORAGE I t~ Yapor Extraction Wall Location ARE~ AS-1 ~ Air Sparge Well Location FENCE ~ qv~man~ '/ I NEW UST B-11 · VE~ LINES -- (a'8) DISPENSER B-2 e NEW UST AS-I~ e ~ , v=~ j  ~ B-12 v~,v,'~ ~ B-3 SHOULDER - ~ ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE i power line i MW-3 < m MW-4 O I E2C J'~E//~¢diatiO/~, .[,[,C FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 13 Bakersfield, California 93313 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 SITE PLAN WITH TRENCHING SCHEMATIC I VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL OR AIR SPARGE WELL WELLHEAD PIPING Removable Manhole DETAIL Well Head ~,'" with SCHEMATIC / Cap~ Cover / '" ~ ~ ~ PVC Schedule 40 AS line -~~ Vapor Flow Direction ~~L Air Sparge Flow Direction ~ CASING Vapor Extraction And Sparge Lines PIPE TRENCH SECTION DETAIL . Compacted ~~~~~fill .... ~j~ ~~ ~~ Native ~.~~{~~-~---~ Sand or Pea ~~/ -~~~i~ ~~~' "::)~ 4"Above3. Sandsand LayerLayer ~ '::~ Switch Board whereAdditi°nal p ~ .vc sc ..o ,,o, ~ ~ ~ Pipe below~ li~,,. ,1_ Proposed VES 1/2" Sch. 40 ~ - Compound Pipe I Manifold 10' X 20' NOTE Air Sparge System piping Working : pressure: 20-30 PsiG~~ ' ~ Air SpargeVap°rLinesEXtracti°nin 24 x land8 in. Trench ~ Vapor Extraction System piping Working pressure:~ Negative (vacuum) 10-100" Water ~ ' ~ ~ E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FI GU RE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, Califomia 93313Telephone: (661) 831-6906 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 14 ROOFED SECURITY ENCLOSURE X X X X ! SAMPLING PORT 1/4' NALGENE Tubing 3~ (one per AS) /~R PRESSURE REGULATORS AS- 1 WITH INDIVIDUAL ~ A5-2 -~ 1/2" STEEL PIPE (Note: 1/2 PVC Schedule 40 below ground CONTROL LEVERS ROTARY AIR COMPRESSOR LOCATION SAMPLING PORT: 1/4" NALGENE Tubing (one per vent) 4" SCH 40 PVC i --- ~ 1 MANIFOLD VE-1 VED-5 2" Sch 40 PVC X VEM-6 VE-3 , FLANGE VE-2 ' ' 2" BALL VALVES "~1~-4 WITH INDIVIDUAL CONTROL LEVERS SOLLECO Model 250 unit; trailer-mounted 30~ ABC FIRE EXTINGUISHER ©'~'~' NOT TO SCALE X X X X £2C I emeaiation, £LC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93311Telephone: (661) 831-6906 BAKESFIELD, CALIFORNIA 15 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 Vapor Extraction and Air Sparge Manifold Diagram Pro. iect Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6, 2002 TABLES Table 1 Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 4 Soil Analytical Data Table 5 Well Distance Matrix Table 6 Pilot Test Hydrocarbon Removal Rate E2C Remediation, LLC Tables m m mm m m mm mm m m m m m mm m m m m m Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 TABLE 1 FOURTH QUARTER 2001 GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California DEPTH TO TOTAL TOC GW FREE ETHYL- TOTAL WELL DATE GW DEPTH ELEVATION ELEVATION PRODUCT BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES TPHg TBA MTBE DIPE ETBE TAME (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC)! (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) pg/L pg/L .u~/L /~g/L /~g/L /A~/L pg/L /~g/L #~/L pg/L 12/7/01 122.44 138.26 386.40 263.96 nd nd nd nd 130 18.8 16.4 nd nd nd MW-1 duplicate ....................... nd ........ _nd MW-2 1_~2f7./0! _1..21~;94_. 139.50 . . 386.60, ...... _2.64~6_6 ............. nd .... n_d- ........... n_cl .......... nd ...... nd __ ~_d___. nd .... _n_d ........ __n_d._ n_d~ MW-3 12/7/01 ....121.42 138.92 384.15 .... 262.73 .... n.d__ . _nd ............. n__d ...... _n.d ..... nd_ nd... nd __n_cl ....... _n_d _ _~n_d~- MW-4 , _1~2/?_/.g_1 .... _1_1.9.64- 139.58 . .384_.1_1 ........... _~_6_~,_._47_ ...................... _nd_- nd ........... _n_d_ ............ r~__d~ _~n__d~ __ nd ..... _n_d_ ...... _nde_, _~n_d__ .... _nd___ Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (pg/L) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8260b; TPHg - EPA 8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5 #g/L; Xylenes - 1.0 ,ug/L; TBA - 2.5 pg/L; MTBE - 0.5/~g/L; and TPHg - 50 pgA.. Sample MW-5.on chain of custody form is duplicate from well MW-1 BTOC = Below Top of Casing GW ~ Groundwater nd = Not Detected TOC = Top of Casing E2C Remediation, LLC Table I-1 Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Total DEPTH TO GW TOC ELEVATION GW ELEVATION FREE PRODUCT WELL ID DATE Depth (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) (feet BTOC1 . 4/27/01 ........... 141.6__0_ .................... MW-1 _ 8/6/01 ........ 171-..67 ............ !23.t 10 12/7/01 138.26 122.44 386.40 263.96 ! _2/7'/01 .... 139.50 ....... 12~1. t94 ...... 386.60 264.66 MW_2 ........ .1_ 2/7/01 ............. 138._9_2 __ 121.42 384.15 262.73 MW-3 ...................................................... ~ ...... ....... 1__2~'_/01 .............. _1_39:5._8_ .............. __1_19.__6_~ .................... 384.1_1_ MW-4 NOTES: BTOC = Below Top of Casing GW = Groundwater TOC = Top of Casing MSL = Mean Sea Level E2C Remediation, LLC Table 2-1 Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 ' TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California ..................................... TBA MTBE DIPE · ETBE TAME Well ~o Sample Date' Benzene .l_ Toluene EthylbenzeneITotal XylenesI TPHg __l ............ I ........... I ............ I ............. I ........... GRAB 4/18/01 531 451 346 651 4,980 1,570 4 / 2 7 / 01 95 107 60 122 2,049 ................ 295 duplicate 96 129 71 139 2,108 331 8/6/01 nd nd nd<l nd nd 3 3 MW.1 duplicate nd nd nd<l nd nd 5 8 1 2/7/01 nd nd nd nd 130 18.8 16.4 nd nd nd duplicate nd nd nd nd 1 10 nd 18.6 nd nd nd 1 2/7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-2 ........................................ I ............................................... 1 2/7/0 1 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-3 ~1 2/7/01 nd nd nd. _n~.. ~_~_d n_d n_cl_ od .._nd nd MW-4 Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (ug/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021 B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M Method Detection Limits: B. enzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5 pg/L, Xylenes - 1.0 ,ug/L, TPHg - 50 #g/L, TBA - 2.5 #g/L, MTBE - 0.5 #g/L nd - Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by value MTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ether TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline GRAB - Unpurged Water Sample collected prior to well development Note: For 4/27/01, 8/6/01, and 12/7/01 samples labeled as MW-8, MW-9, and MW-5, respectively, on chain of custody are duplicates from MW-1 ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 3-I Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 TABLE 4 SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA NOVEMBER 27- 30, 2001 FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California BoringID Sample ID Benzene I Toluene ! Ethylbenzene Total Xylenes ! TPHg TPHd TBA MTBE DIPE ETBE TAME (mg/Kg) MW2-80 nd 0.104 nd nd 1.060 na nd nd nd nd nd MW2-100 nd nd nd nd 0.340 na nd nd nd nd nd MW-2 MW2-120 nd 0.0214 nd nd 0.300 na nd nd nd nd nd MW2-130 nd 0.215 nd nd 0.300 na nd nd nd nd nd MW2-140 nd 0.15 nd nd 0.185 na nd nd nd nd nd MW3-60 nd 0.0332 nd nd 0.340 na nd nd nd nd nd '"~§:~'¥6' ............ '~i .......... ...... 6~'6~'~ ................... ~;~' ........................... ;~'~j ....... : .............. 6~'~ ................. fi;;' ................... 'fi~i .................... ~'~i .................... ;~i ..................... fi;~' ......... ' .......... '~i ......... '"~i~§:~'~6' ............ '~i ................. 6'.'6~'~ .................... ~;;~' .......................... ;~'~i ...................... 6~;~§ ................ 'fi;;' ................... '~ .................... ~'~i .................... ~;~i .................... '~;;~' ......... .......... ';{~i ......... MW-3 '"t~':'~'§~' ........... '~ ................. ~'.'(~:)"~ .................... ~1' ........................... ~'~ ...................... ~)' ................. ~' ................... '~1 .................... ~'~J .................... ~j ................... '~1' .............. 7"'~ ......... MW3-140 nd 0.0304 nd nd 0.270 na nd nd nd nd nd MW4-80 nd 0.12 nd nd 1.160 na nd nd nd nd nd ""~;~::'i'~i~' ........... '~i ................ (5~:i~'~ ................... ~;~' ........................... 'F~'~i ...................... ~"i'~ ................ 'fi;;' ................... '~j .................... ~'~i .................... ~i .................... ',:;;~' ................... ~i ......... MW-4 ""I~V~,'-'~'~' ........... ~'~J ................... ~i~ ....................... fi~l' ............. ' .............. ~'~j .................... '~i'~'~)' ................ '~ .................... ~J .................... ~'~j ..................... ~ ................... 'fi~l .................... ~'~J ......... MW4-130 nd 0.135 nd nd 0.160 na nd nd nd nd nd MW4-140 nd 0.26 nd nd 0.640 na nd nd nd nd nd AS2~60 33.900 49.300 27.470 67.350 213.300 na nd<.25 24.235 nd nd nd ..... ~S2-80 ......................................... 1.62O ' ................................................ 5.56O O.56O. ' ........................................................................................................................................... 2.070 5.150 na nd<.25 1.375 nd nd nd AS2-100 0.120 0.590 0.060 0.265 2.200 na nd<.25 0.066 nd nd nd AS-2 .... '~'~"~'~' ......... ~'.'~'§~, ............. ~'~:~'(~ ................ '~J:6~;~' .......... ' ........... ~';¥~'~J .................. ¥~'~'(~ ................ ~' ............... ~'~j~'~;~' ........... ~j~'~;{ ..... nd nd nd .... ',~,'~'~_' Lj',~ ~)' ......... ~)';~"i'6 .............. ~)~'~'(~ ...... 1 .......... '(~:~:~' ..................... ~';~"~ ................ '~'~'(~ ................ ~' ............... ~'~"~ ~' ............ ~'~'~ ...... nd nd , nd Notes: nd = Not Detected at or above the method detection limit na = Not Analyzed Method Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.005 mg/Kg; Xylenes - 0.01 mg/Kg;TPHg - 0.05 mg/Kg; TBA - 0,025 rog/Kg; MTBE - 0.005 mg/Kg mg/Kg = milligrams per kilogram (equivalent to parts per million) E2C Remediation, LLC T4-1 Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 ' TABLE 5 WELL DISTANCE MATRIX FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 VE-1 VE-2 VE-3 VE-4 VED-5 VEM-6 AS-1 AS-2 MW-1 X MW-2 104 X MW-3 126 230 X MW-4 140 204 98 X VE-1 47 85 165 226 X VE-2 57 51 179 177 60 X VE-3 14 130 105 155 71 90 X VE-4 65 97 145 118 102 63 85 X VED-5 13 119 140 150 60 70 17 64 X VEM-6 20 123 135 137 70 72 14 58 '8 X AS-1 16 123 135 150 58 75 7 71 7 12 X AS-2 35 118 138 125 81 61 36 30 28 24 35 X Note: All distances in feet E2C Remediation, LLC Table 5-1 Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 TABLE 6 PILOT TEST HYDROCARBON REMOVAL RATE FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA Hydrocarbon Influent Effluent Destruction Flow Rate - Test No. Date Removal Rate Concentration Concentration Wells Open Efficiency (%) scfm (lbs/day) ppmv ppmv 1 i 01/08/02 154 3147.6 i 90.21 i 97.13 ' 150 i All sixVEwells open 8 i 01/09/02 i 750 8838.25 NA [ NA .~ 260 ! VE-1 VE-3, VE-4 11 i 01/09/02 ~ 280 3301.28 i NA ' NA i 260 i VE-3 & VE-4 13 i 01/10/02 300 -.. -353-6'79 ........ 1 NA ~ NA i 260 I VE-2 & VE-3 14 i 01/10/02 307 3616.39 ~ NA ~ NA 260 ............ ~ I ~ VE-3 16 ! 0i/10/02 ......... 300 .......... ~ .................... ! ' 3539.9 ' NA I__ NA ............. 2_6.__0_ ..... ..... ':1'~'- i ..... ~1-/10/02 -: .............. ~4- ............ 40~5 ...... NA i NA i 190 i All six VE wells w/both AS 19 i ~ 01/11/02 78 915.04 i NA , NA i 260 i VED-5 & VEM-6 w/both AS 20 ~ 01/11/02 233 3168.41 '! 188.61 94.05 225 _!_ VE-1 thru VE-4 w/both AS ............................. i , 260 ~ VED-5 & VEM-6 w/AS-1 21 I 01/11/02 307 __ ! 3618.1 _~ NA NA 22 i 01/11/02 286, ......... 33~2-.~,- 1 ........... -NA .............. I' ................. NA i~, ............... 260 ! VE-3 & VE-4 w/AS-2 iHydrocarbons Removed (lbs/day) = Concentration (ppmv) X 10~ X Influent flow Rate (scfm) X 1 lb-mole/379.5 ~ X 86 (lb/lb-mole) X 1440 (min/day) Notes: lbs/day - pounds per day ppmv - parts per million volume scfm - standard cubic feet per minute E2C REMEDIATION, LLC TABLE 6-1 Pro_iect Number 1802J$01 Februa~. 6. 200P APPENDICES APpendix A Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix C Boring Logs with Well Completion Details Appendix D Soil Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix E Summary of Air Sparge Observations Appendix F Pilot Test Tedlar Bag Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix G Pilot Test Field Data Sheets Appendix H SVE Radius of Influence Calculations E2C Remediation, LLC Appendices I Prqiect Number 1802JS01 Febru~. 6. 2002 I I I I I ~ APPENDIX A I Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets I I I I I I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC AppendixA E~C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 ~Voodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: J'~ J,~' '"" J DEPTH TO ~/ATER: I~Z- ~/---/ ft PROJECT NO.: F~ ~..~.b-//~ ' LAQ TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: J3 ' PROJECT NAME: _~(/..l~.J~ I,~ ~ ~ ~ WELL DIAMETER: ' DATE: ~Z~/~J . CASING VOLUME:- ~,~ gallons SAMPLED BY: &~ ~ METHOD OF PURGING: PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS TEMP pH SEC REMARKS TIME INTAKE ~TE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (~ (UNITS) (mmh~/cm) ' DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PU~PED (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) ~: ~ z ~, ,, ~ 70-~ 7.~0 I. ~ I Ill l l l IWell Capacity: Z.O. 16~ ] 8~llon/linea~ foot I i i E~C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO,: ~ ~ "' ~ DEPTH TO WATER: j 7...j. ~ i.( ft PROJECT NO,: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: 13.~j. ~'-0 ft PROJECT NAME: ___~i'~.~ ,~ k//~q' k-t q WELL DIAMETER: DATE: J, ~/'0 3/'0 1 CASING VOLUME: '~.q '~ gallons SAMPLED BY: (~// ~ METHOD OF PURGING: . PURGE CHARACTERISTICS TEMP pH SEC REMARKS TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F°) (UNITS) (mmh~s/cm DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) ' l- Well Capacity: 2". O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4". 0.6528 gallon/linear foot .... 6". 1.45~8 gallon/linear foot ., S^~4~'LED^T: ~q-3 .5'-~ rt. ~N^LDaPm'rOW^TE~: I 7_'Z.-4.¢ rt. SC^S~NSVOLU~aES=i~,G5 ¢^LS. IqOTES: J i REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: j'~"~ DEPTH TO WATER: j'7-1, N ~- rt PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: . j~,'J~ ' h __ ~-~ L~ ~ WELL DIAMETER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: i~ j ~ J~j CASING VOLUME: ~ ~ ~allons SAMPLED BY: ~ ~ METHOD OF PURGING: ~,~ ~ I ~ PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS TEMP pH SEC REMARKS TIME INTAKE ~TE CUM, VOL ~ELL VOL (~ (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) r DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) I: I I I I Capacity: O. 103~ gallon/linear Well ~oot 4". 0.~528 gallon/linear foot 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear foot SAMPLED AT: I ~ ~' O FT. F~AL DEPTH TO WATEr: i~- 3 ~ FT. 3 CASing VOLU~S= ~' ~ ~ALS. IOTES: C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND ~/ELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR ~/ELL NO.: Jl~l,~J- i'J DEPTH TO ~/ATER: · PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: PROJECT NAME: ~ ~~ Ct~o,~ ~ELLDIAMETER: DATE: [~ J O ( CASING VOLUME: ~ '~ ~ ~allons SAMPLED BY: ~ -- ~ METHOD OF PURGING: PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS TEMP ~H SEC REMARKS TIME INTAKE ~TE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (~ (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) J D~PTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED (COLOR. TURBIDITY. ETC.), I I I I  Well Capacity: ]". O. 16~ ~allon/linear ~oot , 4". 0.65~8 ~allon/linear foot 6". 1.4688 ~allon/linear ~oot SAMPLED AT: ~ .~0 FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: I~ O- O ~ FT. ~ CASING VOLUMES= ~ ~ GALS. ~OTES: L I Project Number i802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 I ! ! i ! ! ! ! ~ APPENDIX B Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I I I I I I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC Appendix B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ HalCyon Laboratories Chain o'1: Cusl For Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 66'1.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 AnalysiS' Requested Sample Matdx Project Name: --~e ~'.'-,-'t L,- ? ~.,...-.¢ ~ ~ ~' ¢. ~ ~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ 0, ~ Soil < ~ ~ ~ ,. ~ -- ~ ~ ~ .,. Sampler Name: ~~-¢~ (~c~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x ,,, o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'Acidified Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type m ~ ~- ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ m Comments I Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour ~ .5-Day Standard Relinquished By: ._,~'~. ~_/~/'. :~. Date: ~'Z/'7/D) Relinquished By: Date: Received By: ~,,,~~, Date:/z/-7/o? Received By: Date: I I Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors I .5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Ramon Velez I TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPHg Analysis: 12/13/01 I Date of Report: 12/20/01 Units: ug/L I Sample#: 2K1-1923 2K1-1924 2K1-1925 2K1-1926 2K1-1927 Date Sampled: 12/7/01 .12/7/01 12/7/01 12/7/01 12/7/01 DL ug/L Sample Description: MW-1 MW-5 MW-2 MW-3 MW4 I TPH Gasoline 130 110 ND ND ND 50 I Surrogate Recovery % 95.3 104 98.4 97.9 93.2 I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L I Sample Description: '1 TPH Gasoline 50 I Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: I Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: I TPlt Gasoline 50 I Surrogate Recovery % IDL = Detecti°n Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Mike Rivera I 'l Halcyon Laboratories, ]:nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ID- Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/20/01 I Sample ID · #1923 MW-1 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol 18.8 2.5 ug/L I Ether 16.4 0.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl (MTBE) Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L 'BTEX Components '1m Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L I Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/I_, m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug,rL o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Behzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 64,4 129% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 65.2 130% i Toluene-d8 46.4 93% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.8 116% I · · Halcyon Laboratories, :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L ICertification # 1920 I CLIlgNT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I Project ID · · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/20/01 I Sample ID #1924 MW-5 I ' Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 18.6 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components :' Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L i Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I I Iflternal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 62.5 125% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 66.6 133% Toluene-d8 47.7 95% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 56.7 113% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in Ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIIgNT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date' 12/20/01 Sample ID · #1925 MW-2 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 0.5 Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 up=/[, BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene [ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluOro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 63.6 127% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 64.4 129% Toluene-d8 48.5 97% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.5 115% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I ProjeCt ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date: 12/20/01. I Sample ID ' #1926 MW-3 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates i t-Butanol CrBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether ('TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L ' BTEX Components lib Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L I Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Bbnzene, fluoro 50.0 100% i Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 51,0 102% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.3 107% I Toluene-d8 40.4 81% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 56.7 113%, Halcyon Laboratories~' ]2nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 . ' .' ' . CLIENT. E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors Report Date: 12/20/01 Sample ID: #1927 MW-4 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) NJ) 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1 50.0 21.00% ,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 51.4 ' 103% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 55.1 110% Toluene-d8 39.8 80% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 55.8 112% I Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 FebrUa~. 6. 2002 '! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ~ APPENDIX C I Boring Logs with Well Completion Details I I I I I I I , I E~C Remediation, LLC Appendix C . i~iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: PROJECT.iqo. [~O"~'5~'01 ' DATE ll/2'O/0! IE~ORJ,~'G ~o. . LOGGED BY ,~,C~y DRILLER ~.' · Drilling method ~5~ ~m(~)t~-I~i'~c~P~ Hote dia. ~ i~',' ':~ . ~ ~ ~ Water level o ~ ~ = = = ~ -- ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I I ~p i I I I I I I I I REMARKS: I~iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJECT ~ _l~o?..~l DATE 1[/2~,[o/' BORING No LOCATION LOGGE~. BY C;sing installation data Hole dia. · EE ~ OE · o = ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I i I ,,, ~ ! ~ ! I I I I I ~ i ~ ,,. I I i i I ~ I -- I I I I i I ~ ~ I .,, I REMARKS: · . . I E'iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJEC.'r..~o..1~02-~'01 DATE _l [~/0/ BORING No. .. LOCATION ~[~' LOGGED BY ~- Casing i~stallation data Drilling method ~, ~L~i~, Hole dia. ~ ~ ~ Water level ~ ~ ~ o ~ g ~ - Time ~ = ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I i~'iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJECT No. , {~0~-.'-5~'01 DATE ~[f;Z~(O( BORING No. LOGGED BY -- Casing installation data Drilling method ~S~ ~ -~1~. Hole dia.. ~ ~ Date ~ ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I ~ , I ' · REMARKS: E'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJECT No.. It~O~01 DATE I[/Z~[OI BORIHG No. CLIENT '"'~EU~,l LOCATION Cas~g ~nst~at~on Drilling method ~5~ ~ ~'l-~t~. Hole dia. ,. , ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I I. [ .. I I I REMARKS: I~'iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · BORING No. .~ LOGGE~ BY "'-- Casing installation data Drilling method Hole dia. ., ~ = E E ~ E o E ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I ,,, ~ ,,, ~ " I I , , REMARKS: ~'iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: ' PROJECT No.. ] ~)OZ.$,..~0i DATE BORI,~G No. LOCATION ~}~ ~' ~OA~ ~'1 Casing installation data Drilling method ~ ~ ~/' ~1~ ...... Hole dia. ~. ~ ~ Water level j j j j '~"¥ -- ~ Date ~ ~ / DESCRIPTION I I I ~ ! I .... I i ' .. REMARKS: I~'iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring': · PROJEC.T No. I ~)07-''E'3''01' DATE !~/2.~/~)! BORING No. LOGCE~V p,.C,-,~/ DR~LLER LL.C'' of-7--- ~ = ~ W~e,~e~ i I I I ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ Time I ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I Ii - I , I I i t I I I REMARKS: i~'iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG . Field location of boring: PROJECT No. , / OOZ.5..TO( DATE ] J/27/0! BORIN'G No. LOCATION 21~ ~. ~.~ L~.r~.~ ~ Sh~ ~ LOGGED~Y ~,~F~ DRILLER ~-~ ' of ~ ~r'_ Drilling method HS~ ~ ~/A, Hole dia. '~. Water level I I J J ~ = ~ Date '~ ~ DESCRIPTION I t I ~ ~ I ,,, t , REMARKS: [~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJEC.I'No.. I~O2'-'-c~61 DATE Il/d/o/ BORING No. LOCATION LOGGEO~Y ~, '~. · Casing installation ~ata, . .... Drilling method H~' ~ ~'C~l~. ,, Hole dia. ' .... ~,~ - ~ _~ . , ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I , ,,. I ~1;~" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I i ~ ~1~ .... REMARKS: i~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of boring: PROJECT No. I~02'',5~01 DATE _ ~1/~,/01 BORING No. LOCATION . ~ [~0 E, ~~E ~.l~.~ Sheet " LOGGED~Y M- ~ON DRILLER_ ' ' Casing installation ~ata Drilling method ~,, Hole dia. ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I I i I .... I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I 51~ 5~U~ '~M ~F): ~O~,V~y ~~c1~- ~1 I I I I I ,. REMARKS: I~'i~LD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG' Field location of boring: PROJECT No.. t ~02.,~"-'01 DATE _ ~(/~/O~ BORING No. CLIENT ' ~.~WcR-'~ [-,-I~o~, { ' /V~W~2--- LOCATION ~-It'~O ~-' LOGGED-BY ~V~ .C--z~,O,~ DRILLER_ · Casing.installation ~lata Drilling method ~'i P!~. ~N~ ~ S~ Hole dia. ~N(~ 4t~ I - IOG. ~ ~- '~. ~ ~ ~ = ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I ~oi5'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i ' REMARKS: '-'~;' ' I~iELD EXPLORATORY BOR'iNG LOG - Field Iocatlon of boring: PROJECT No. ~ ~:~ ~-.--S..T0 i BORING No. LOGGED BY /V~, C~-O)/ DRILLER_ 'L-C-'' ' .. o[ _'7 5 $1 p'~ 4~. ~, ~e~uN~.E. L~r~;(ot~l~. Sv,) ptZb,~ (:r-.{~.) Casing installation data Drilling method ~ ~ ~-Oih' Hole dia. ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I I ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~o ~o~ I ~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG' Field location of boring: PROJ.=C.T &o. I ~O2.-.S~-t~l DATE U/Z-?/Ol 8OR,,,;G No. LOGGE~ · Casing installat~on ~ata Drilling method. I I .~ ~ DESCRIPTION I I .... I , I ? I I I I I ! I I I I f REMARKS: - i~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Fleldlocatlonofboring: PROJEOTN0. [~0~'"5~'Ot DATE [[[~'~/01 . LOGGED~Y ~, Casing installa[ion ~ata Drilling method ~ i Hole dia. ~ ~ DESCRIPTION ~,0 I I ~ ~ REMARKS: i~iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: PROJECT No.' I~)O2-5~'0[ DATE _q/z'fl°l , . Casing installation Hole dia. = ~ ~ E E ~ E ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I II .. I I I ! '~ ~ I REMARKS: . . I i~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of boring: PROJEC."i' No. I ~o2..-,5,~Tol DATE ~,(/'~-~//OI BORING No. LOGGE~ · Casing installation ~ata Drilling method , ~1 Hole dia. ~ ~ DESCRIPTION I 5" I c~m~od / No opo~ I II I i~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJECT No. I ~)0 ?...,~..1'0~ DATE I d'z'~/ol BORING No. 'LOCATION ~21qO E,, P/r~o~a~ L~.~ I~r-~.~ cA :Sheet ~ LOG~aY ~,~ DR~LL~R U~ ' o~ ~ . ' Casing installalion ~ata Hole dia. - :~ - ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I I .. I I I I i ' I I I " - I' I I . I I I ~ I Ii, - I I I I i I ~ I ~ " I ~ REMARKS: - ~ I i~i~LD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: PROJECT No..,1,~02.-'~:~t)I , DATE \~'/'ZS[OI BORING No. Casing installation ~ata ~ ~c,~(~,O ~'~) ~ ~ DESC'RIPTION I I I I I i .... I I f .., I I i I I I I I I .... I' I REMARKS: i~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of boring: PROJECT No. I ~O~---~01 DATE _ {I/~ /OI BORING No. CLIENT' ~.EE~r"-/ LOCATION' LOGGED~Y Drilling method ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ = ~ ~ Time ~' ~ ~ ~ o = ~ Date RE,lARKS: I~iELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Fleldlocatlonofboring: PROJECTNo. ii~)02-~:;L'~DI DATE ({/Z~ {0/ BORhNGNo. LOCATION 21~.0 E,~P~ L~) ~I~F~.~ CA S .. ~ LOGGED~Y ~ ~ D~I~ER ~-~ ' o~ ~ ' ' Casing installa[ion ~ala Drilling method H~m t ~ -~1~. ..~ Hole dia. ,. ~ ~ ~ [ [~ E E ~ E~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I' I I REMARKS: I i~',I~LD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG' FieJd Ioca'ti'~)'n of boring: PROJECT No. l~)oz-5-~OJ DATE [[J~l~ ( O!. BORING No CLIENT ]'~-wAv J~t~.~l>(C ' ~-~ LOGGED~Y-M., C~/ DRILLER L-O ' o~ --7 ' · 02sing insJalla~ion Drilling method ,, ['~'" i ~iA' -.. :>, d~a. -' .,~.1,., Hole E E ~ E ~ E ~ Date I ~ ~ DESCfllPTJON I I I t _ I I I I I I I I I I so .' I I I i i ,,. ' .. J I I I J ~ ,, REMARKS: : . "-~ I~'IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: " .... PROJECT No. , /~025~'0f DATE _1 t/'~O/0( BORhNG NO. LOCATION ~0 ' Casing installation ~ ~ ~ o o g ~ a ~ ~ Time ~ ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I ! .,i REMARKS: I~'IELD EXPLORATORY bORiNG LOG · Field location of boring: PROJECT No. 'il ~)~--'5-~-°1 DATE [~/"~0/01 BORING No. ' · Casing ins[alia[ion Drilling method ~&~A ~ Hole dia. ~ ~ ~= ~E EE OE~ j ~ o - ~= ~ = ~ ~ -- ~ .~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I~'o "1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i REMARKS: i~IELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG . ' Field location of boring: PROJEC.T No. I~OZ'$~OI DATE ~ ~,/~'O/O{ BORh~G No. LOGGE~.BY ~, CL~¢~ DRILLER C-~ o~ ~ Casing installation data _ -- ~ Date ~ ~ DESCRIPTION I I I t I I I I I I I REMARKS: FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Fieldl°catl°n°fb°ring: CLIENT ?~_¢~_t,~,tPROJEOTN°' 1~00~5~0j~o~. DATE LOGGED BY ~. C~ DRILLER ~-~ ' o~ . . Casing installation data ~ ~ (0,O~ Drilling method {~5~ ~h..Ol~. ~~ ~'~ 5~ ~c~ /o~ ~. ~ll,~c~. ~~- Hole dia. F~~GP~m ~ i C~. ~S. - ~ ~ ~ = o Date ~ DESCRIPTION I¢~ ~ " I I 1 REMARKS: Prqiect Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 APPENDIX D i Soil Analytical Laboratory Report I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix D Halcyon LaboratorieS ain Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 lax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requesled ... Sample Matdx '" ~ ,9 .~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105,' Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Manager: ~u L~w~ ~ ~ ~ Soil Sampler Name: M~ C > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Comments Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type _  Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour .5-Day Standard Receiv;d ~~~ ~ Date:/,/z~/o, Received By: Date: I Halcyon Laboratories, nc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT F-aC Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Mark Clardy ' TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPH g Analysis: 11/29/01 I Date of Report: 12/4/01 Units ug/Kg I Sample#: 2K1-1757 2K1-1758 2K1-1759 2K1-1760 2K1-1761 Date Sampled: 11/26/01 11/26/01 11/26/01 11/26/01 11/26/01 DL ug/Kg Sample Description: AS-2 60' AS-2 80' AS-2 100' AS-2 120' AS-2 140' TPl~ Gasoline 213,300 5,150 2,200 18,700 87,300 50 I Surrogate Recovery % 98.5 96.7 99.9 93 104 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg I Sample Description: '1 TPIt Gasoline 50 Surrogate Recovery % I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg Sample Description: TPFI Gasoline 50 1 I !Surrogate Recovery % IDL = Detecti°n Limit ~~'~~ ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Mike Rivera Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report . Soil Sample Results in ug/L '" Certification# 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Freeway Liquors' #1802BK03 ID Report Date · 11/28/01 Sample ID · AS2-60 Analyte Result I~lethod RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 250.0 ug/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 24.235 50.0 u~w'Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50.0 u~g Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 50.0 ug/Kg Tert-Amyl Methyl (TAME) 50.0 u~Kg Ether BTEX Components Benzene 33,900 50.0 u~..WKg Toluene 49.300 50.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenze0e 27,470 50.0 u~Kg m & p Xylenes 33,920 50.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes 33.430 50.0 ugfKg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% I Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% i Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 48.7 97% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 64.4 129% I Toluene-d8 60.8 122% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 46.5 93% ! Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B LabOratory Report so. Sample Results in ug/L Certification Ct 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors #1802BK03 Report Date · 11/28/01 Sample ID · #1758 AS-2 80 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 250.0 ug/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 1.375 50.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 50.0 uo~Kg Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 50.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene 1,620 50,0 ug/Kg Toluene 5.560 50.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene 560 50.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes 1,180 50.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes 890 50.0 ug/Kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50,0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 71.2 142% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 69.7 139% Toluene-d8 58.9 118% p-Bromofluorobenzene iBFB) 51.2 102% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. I EPA 8260B Laboratory Report soi~ sample R.esults in ug/L' Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I Project ID . Freeway Liquors #1802BK03 Report Date · 11/28/01 I Sample ID · #1759 AS-2 100 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 250.0 ug/Kg Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 66 50.0 u~drKg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50.0 u~'Kg I Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 50.0 ug/~g Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 50.0 ug/Kg '1 BTEX Components Benzene 120 50.0 ug/Kg Toluene 590 50.0 I Ethylbenzene 60 50.0 m & p Xylenes 155 50.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes 110 50.0 u~g I I ' Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% I Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene.d4 50.0 100% i Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 76.5 153% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 75.0 150% I Toluene-d8 59.2 118% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 51.6 103% Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA.8260B Laboratory Report son Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 " CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors #180~BK03 . Report Date · 11/28/01 Sample ID · #1760 AS-2 120 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol l',rD 250.0 ug/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 10.4 50.0 Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50.0 uo~o Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) tx,rD 50.0 ug/Kg Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 50.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene 23.4 50.0 ug/Kg Toluene 340 50.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene 25.6 50.0 u~g m & p Xylenes 75 50.0 ttg/Kg o Xylenes 55 50.0 ug/Kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50,0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 73.9 148% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 74.9 150% Toluene-d8 56.2 112% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 54.2 108% Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis'Requested Sample Matdx Project Name: 'Fgec-w/~'¢ L,-id~,o(4 ~' ~ ~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~ ~ ~ < < e ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ Soil Project Manager: u~ L~W~ud ~ ~ ~ < ~ " ~ ~ ~ ..... < < '~ - - ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Acidified ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type ~ = ~ ~ > ~ ~ = ¢ ~ Comments .I .// .. i/ i Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour ~ 48 Hour .5-Day Standard ". Relinquished By: /]'~"1~,~¢. t~'~/;~/ Date: i1{2.-7[01 I Relinquished By: Date: Received By: ~_(,~~ '¢ Date:[/lZ¢'//o/ Received By: Date: ! Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. ~ EPA 8260B Laboratory Report. soi~ S.ample Results in ug/L ·CertificatiOn # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I Project ID · Freeway Liquors #1802BK03 Report Date · 11/28/01 I Sample ID' #1761 AS-2 140 Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates i t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 250.0 ug/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 845 50.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 50.0 u~d'Kg I Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 50.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components -! Benzene 610 50.0 ug/Kg Toluene 5,720 50.0 ug/Kg I Ethylbenzene 330 50.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes 3,670 50.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes 3,005 50.0 I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 71.1 142% 1,2-Dichloroetha ne-d4 71.2 142% Toluene-d8 59.7 119% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 51.2 102% I Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Mark Clardy I TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPH g Analysis: 12/3/01 I Date of Report: 12/4/01 Units ug/Kg i Sample #: 2KI-1776 Date Sampled: 11/27/01 DL ug/Kg Sample Description: MW-2 80' I TPH Gasoline 1,060 50 I I Surrogate Recovery % 102.5 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg I Sample Description: I TPIt Gasoline 50 I Surrogate Recovery % I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg Sample Description: I TPlt Gasoline 50 I I $ ,grr,ogate Recovery % ,.,, I DL = Detecti°n Limit ND - Non-Det~t at given DL ~- - NA - Result not available Laborato~Manager: Mike Rivera I ! · Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. ~ EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so,~SampleResults inug/Kg. Certification # 1920 ' I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ]]3' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/4/01 I Sample ID · #1776 MW-2 80' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 us/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether ND 5.0 (MTBE) u~.g Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 u~/~g Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 u~/~g Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 5.0 Toluene 104 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ugfKg m & p Xylenes ND 5.O ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% ,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% 1 Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 62.6 125% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.4 115% Toluene-d8 48.2 96% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 62.1 124% I Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matrix ~ ~ ~ [~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 2` Project Manager: (% L Sampler Name: I~ ~.ctq,h~1 x~ ~,. =°~ ~=* =~ *~ *~ ~ ~ x~ [--] Acidified Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type m ~ ~ ~ > m ~ ~ ~ Comments z 102 0 ~. ~dz- i~ ~ / ~. ~r~3~ '%,tx Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour ~ .5-Day ~ Standard I Relinquish e d ' By:. ////~.~/L~ tO~, .Z.,.~ Date: / / J Relinquished By: Date: Received By: .YYi~Y~ ~''' Date:/,/:~L-~/,~, Received By: Date: Halcyon Laboratories [nc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC Remediati0n, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Mark Clardy TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPH g Analysis: 12/3/01 Date of Report: 12/6/01 Units ug/Kg Sample#: 2K1-1794 2K1-1796 2K1-1797 2K1-1798 Date Sampled: 11/28/01 11/28/01 11/28/01 11/28/01 DLug/Kg Sample Description: MW-2 100' MW-2 120' MW-2 130' MW-2 140' TPH Gasoline 340 300 300 185 50 Surrogate Recovery % 93.6 92.9 96.1 100.4 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg Sample Description: TPH Gasoline 50 Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: Date Sampled: I)L ug/Kg Sample Description: TPH Gasoline 50 Surrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Mike Rivera Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report sou Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E~C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID- Freeway Liquors Report Date' 12/6/01 Sample ID · #1794 MW-2 100' I Analyte ReSult Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND · 25.0 ug/Kg I Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether CI'AME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene ND 5.0 ug/Kg i Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50,0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 59.0 118% 1,2-Dichloroetha ne-d4 58.9 ! 18% Toluene-d8 45,5 91% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 55.8 112% 1 · Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. ~ EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so.Sample ResultS in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ID' Freeway LiquOrs Report Date · 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1796 ~-2 120' I Analyte Result Method RL UnitS I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg I Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 5.0 ug,/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 21.4 5.0 ug/Kg I Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I I .Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzer~e-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards m Methane, dibromofluoro- 54.6 109% 1,2-Dich Ioroetha n e-d4 55.7 ! 11% m Toluene-d8 42.8 86% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 55.4 111% I I · Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. '1 EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 . I CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1797 MW-2 130' I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol ('FBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 u~g I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 215 5.0 ug/Kg i Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 57.0 114% 1,2-Dich/ometh a ne-d4 56.2 112% Toluene-d8 43.9 88% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 56.2 112% I · Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. I EPA 8260B Laboratory Report. so. Sample Results in ug/Kg 'CertifiCation # 1920 'l CLIlgNT: E2C Remediation, LLC i 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date: 12/6/01 I Sample ID ' #1798 MW-2 140' I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates i t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND '5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 150 5.0 ug/Kg I Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% i Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofiuoro- 56.1 112% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.1 114% I Toluene-d8 46.4 93% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 58.1 116% Halcyon Laboratories Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matdx Aqueous Client Address: 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102. Bakersfield, CA 93313 Sampler Name:~l~C~P~ x 8ample Date 8ample Time 8ample Description and container Type , Comments ) , ) · ]Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour ~ 48 Hour 5-Day ~ Standard ]. Relinquished By: ~ [~~ Date: ¢~7 Relinquished By: Date: ". Received B~ Date:/2/~I Received By: Date: Halcyon LabOratOries .. Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matrix Project Name: ~'~~~ /.---IC~x~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102. Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Manager: ~ ~o,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Acidified Sampler Name: L x Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type. ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ = ~ ~ Comments  Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour '5-Day Standard ,',~ Relinquished By: ,.~ ~~' Date:i¢~,/o/RelinquishedBy: Date: Received By:~ ~ Date:,~, Received By: Date: I Halcyon Laboratories~ [nc. Laboratory Report ~ I Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors i 5300 Woochnere Drive, Suite 105 , Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled !~-: Mark Clardy I TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPH g Analysis: 12/6/01 Date of Report: 12/10/01 : I Units ug/Kg Sample#: 2K1-1822 2K1-1827 2K1-1828 2K1-1829 2K1-1830 I Date Sampled: 11/29/01 11/29/01 11/29/01 11/29/01 11/29/01 DL ug/Kg Sample Description: MW-3 60' MW-3 1 I0' MW-3 120' MW-3 130' MW-3 140' I TPIt Gasoline 340 670 495 200 270 50 1 I Surrogate Recovery % 96.2 92.5 96.4 94.4 100.9 iSample #: Date Sampled:. :DL ug/Kg I Sample Description: I TPIt Gasoline 50 I Surrogate Recovery % i Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline 50 I I Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detection Limit I ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Mike Rivera I Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory- -RepOrt soi~ Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 CLIENT: ~E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 Sample ID · #1822 MW-3 60' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates .' t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 33.2 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg m Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50,0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 · 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 69.2 138% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 52.3 105% Toluene-d8 59,8 120% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 68.1 136% Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report So~l Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 CLI]gNT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 Sample ID · #1827 MW-3 110' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ]'4]3 25.0 ug/~g Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/rKg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/~g Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ~'D 5.0 ug/~g Toluene 39.8 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 66.0 132% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53,! 106% i Toluene-d8 59.2 118% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 65.5 131% I Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so, Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 CLrENT: E~C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date' 12/6/01 Sample ID · #1828 MW-3 120' I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 1,413 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/~g Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 5.0 ug/~g Toluene 59 5.0 ug/~g i Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 76.2 152% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.9 108% Toluene-d8 62,3 125% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 64.0 128% ! · Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. ·1 EPA 8260B LaboratOry Report so~ Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification Ct 1920 " ' I CLIlgNT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1829 MW-3 130' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 76 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 68,6 137% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 54.4 109% Toluene-d8 63,9 128% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 67.0 134% .I ! · Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in ug/Kg ICertification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 I Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1830 MW-3 140' I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg I Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) lq'E) 5.0 ug/Kg I Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 30.4 5.0 ug/Kg ] · Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 u~.~Kg I m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg ! I " Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50,0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50,0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 54.3 109% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.8 108% Toluene-d8 57.6 115% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 64.8 130% Halcyon LaboratOries .. Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matrix Project Name: ~7~:~ (..i~.uefL 8 8 .... ~ '" ~ 8 [---'--] Aqueous Client Address: 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102. Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Manageri ~:~t~_ Ltq'~c;,z Sampler Name: F. × ,,, ~ ~ ~. ~. ~- ~ v Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type co :~ ~ ~- :g u~ ~- :~ ~ m Comments I Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour __ 48 Hour B-Day __ Standard __ Relinquished By: ~F~.~'~. ~~. Date://~,/o/" Relinquished By: Rec_.__eived By: ~'//~~_ -- / Date: ¢o/o, Received By: m m m. m m m m m m m m m m m m m I Halcyon LaboratorieSt [nc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors ' i 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Mark Clardy I TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPH g Analysis: 12/6/01 Date of Report: 12/10/01 I Units ug/Kg Sample#: 2K1-1860 2K1-1861 2K1-1862 2K1-1863 2K1-1864 I Date Sampled: 11/30/01 11/30/01 11/30/01 11/30/01 11/30/01 DL ug/Kg Sample Description: Mw4 80, MW-4 100' MW4 120' MW-4 130' MW4 140' I TPIt Gasoline 1,160 160 160 160 640 50 I I Surrogate Recovery % 97.8 92.3 101.2 98.4 89.5 Sample #: !Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg I [Sample Description: I IPH Gasoline 50 I Surrogate Recovery % I I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/Kg Sample Description: l I TPH Gasoline 50 I I Surrogate Recovery % { I DL = Detection Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Mike Rivera I Halcyon Laboratories~ [nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report soJ~ Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification'# 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project rD' Freeway Liquors Report Date ' 12/6/01 Sample rD · #1860 MW-4 80' I Anaiyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND ' 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components l Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 120 5.0 ug/Kg i Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 70.4 141% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 54.2 108% Toluene-d8 61.7 123% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 67.6 135% I Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so~ Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 CLI]gNT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project 1I)' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 Sample ID' #1861 MW-4 110' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 u~dg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 u~g BTEX Components " Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 19.2 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m 8, p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% i Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 78.2 156% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.0 114% i Toluene-d8 63.8 128% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 67.8 136% · Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. ~ EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so.Sample Results in ag/Kg Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Wo°dmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 I Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date· 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1862 MW-4 120' I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ag/Kg I Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ugFz~g Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ~ 5.0 ag/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ag/Kg I Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 us,~g BTEX Components I Benzene HD 5.0 u~Kg Toluene 500 5.0 ug/fCg i Ethylbenzene HD 5.0 u~/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 u~/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 u~JKg I I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% i· Surrogate Standards ~ Methane, dibromofluoro- 68.0 :136% 1,2-Dichloroetha n e-d4 56.9 114% m Toluene-d8 63.2 126% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 63.1 126% ! Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in ug/Kg Certification # 1920 CLltiNT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1863 MW-4 130' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/~g Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ug/Kg 5.0 Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 5.0 ug/~g Toluene 135 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg m & p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes i',TD 5.0 ug/Kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% i Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- Co~.9 130% 1,2-Dichloroet h ane-d4 51.4 103% i Toluene-d8 59,1 118% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 72,0 1~4% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report soi~ Sample Results in ug/Kg Ce~ification # 1920 - CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 I P roject ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 12/6/01 I Sample ID · #1864 MW-4 140' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol ('I'BA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 25.0 ug/Kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 5.0 ' ug/Kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 5.0 ug/Kg Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 5.0 ug/Kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 5.0 ug/Kg Toluene 260 5.0 ug/Kg Ethylbenzene ND 5.0 ugfKg m 8, p Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg o Xylenes ND 5.0 ug/Kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 66.6 133% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 54.6 109% Toluene-d8 64.9 130% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 68.5 137% I I Proiect Number 1802J$01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! I APPENDIX E Summary of Air Sparge Observations I I I I I I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix E Project Number 1802JS01 February 6, 2002 SUMMARY OF AIR SPARGE OBSERVATIONS FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA Dissolved Depth To Date Time Oxygen Groundwater Test Comments (mg/L) (ft. BTOC) MW-1 Pre-Test Measurement 1/10/02 I .12:54 I 9.80 I 122.11 I InitTest-18 I No odor Test Measurements 6:10 9.80 119.80 Init Test-19 No odor 14.00 117.51 Init Test-20 No odor 1/11/02 1:00 15+ 118.76 Init Test-21 No odor 15+ 117.82 Init Test-22 No odor 2:45 4:36 15+ 118.30 No odor MW-2 Pre-Test Measurement 1/10/02 I 1:10 I 10.6 I 121.74 I lnitTest-181 Noodor Test Measurements 6:20 10.7 120.99 Init Test-19 No odor 9.2 120.3 init Test-20 No odor 1/11/02 1:18 9.2 120.69 Init Test-21 No odor 2:50 9.40 120.32 Init Test-22 No odor 4:35 9.50 120.60 No odor MW-3 Pre-Test Measurement 1/10/02 I 1:33 I 7.00 I 121. 4 I nitTest-18 I No odor Test Measurements 6:25 7.00 121.15 Init Test-19 No odor 8.20 120.75 Init Test-20 No odor 1/11/02 1:30 8.60 120.68 Init Test-21 No odor 3:05 9.00 120.45 Init Test-22 No odor 4:55 9,00 120.75 No odor MW-4 Pre-Test Measurement 1/10/02 I 1:20 I 7.60 I 119.40 I Init Test-la I No odor Test Measurements 6:30 7.60 119.38 Init Test-19 No odor 11:20 10.40 118.68 Init Test-20 No odor 1/11/02 1:25 9.00 118.75 Init Test-21 No odor 2:59 10.00 118.60 Init Test-22 No odor 4:47 9.00 118.80 No odor ! I E2C Remed/ation, LLC APPENDIX E-1 Project Number 1802JS01 Februa~_ 6. 2002 APPENDIX F i Pilot Test Tedlar Bag Analytical Laboratory Report I E~C Remediation, LLC Appendix F Feb 04 02 05:04p TRC EHVIROHMEHTAL CORP. 6613991398 p.2 I Ill I CERTIFIED MASTER CLASS I ~ Scott Specialty Gases Single-Certified Calil~ration Standard 26GG CAJGN BL'v'b.,SAN ~EF, NAF, biNO,CA ~24i i ~none: svs-~u/-z~t ~ Pax: uuu-uu/-v~qu I · CERTIFICATE OF ACCURACY: Certified Master· Class Calibration Standard I Product Information Customer Project No.: 02-13009-002 Item No.: O202B700 ! 01PAL TRC ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION P,O. No.: B37938 FORMERLY:ENGINEERiNG SCIE I Folio #: 2520 PEGASUS Cylinder Number: ALMO03311 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 Cylinder Size: AL Certification Date: ' 10/26/2001 Expiration Date: 10/26/2004 I CERTIFIED CONCENTRATION Concentration Accuracy Component Name (Moles} { + I-%) m N-BUTANE 100. PPM 2 EIHANE 100. PPM 2 N-HEXANE 99.? PPM 2 METHANE 100. PPM 2 i N-PENTANE 99.5 PPM 2 PROPANE i00. PPM 2 NITROGEN BALANCE TRACEABILITY I Traceable To NIST ! ! I I I ! APPROVED BY: _ '-' BLM .............. Feb 04 02 OS:04p TRC EHVIROHMEHTAL CORP. G$13891388 p.3 Gas Chromatograph Company: ~C R~lato~ Agency: S~UA~ L~flon: Fre~ Liquor I Sample ID No. Run Date Lab no. Test 8 Influent-Freeway Liquo~ 1 January S. 2O02 Method EPA MI§ 'Rm9:3:15 i Test 20 I~uent-Freeway Lkluor 2 January t 1, 2002 Project No. Time: 12:10 Test 22 Influent-Fre~way Liquor 3 January 11. 2002 Time: 3:37 I .Calibration Standard Comoonent: ppm area count mvs Methane 100.00 670.335 Ethane 100.00 1277.079 I Propane 100.00 1909.981 Butane 100.00 2540.387 Pentane 99.50 3112.666 Hexane 99.70 3808.289 I Sample Runs i Componen~t J~un 1, mV s Run 2, mV s ..Run 3, mV s C1 Methane 143.85 68.18 73.98 NMHCl 0.00 0.00 0.00 I C2 Ethane 0.00 0.00 0.00 NMHC2 0.00 0.00 0.00 C3 Propane 125.10 80.00 63.39 NMHC3 0.00 0.00 0.00 I C4 Butanes 118113.12 11748.83 10868.72 NMHC4 0.00 0.00 0.00 C5 Pentanes 78487.76 52890.14 57266.8S NMHC5 0.00 0.00 0.00 I C6 Hexanes 48365.37 32974.78 36417,80 NMHC6 0.00 0.00 0.00 I Results k~ actual opm: Run Methane _Ethane Propane Butanes .Peri,aries ..Hexanes I 21.46 ND<I 6.79 4863.36 2603.47 1343.17 I 2 10.17 ND<I 4.34 483.76 1754.39 915.75 3 11.04 ND<I 3.44 447.52 1899.57 1011.37 I Results in Pm as methane.' 1 21.46 ND < 1 18.66 17620.01 11708.74 7215.10 2 10.17 ND < 1 11.93 1752.68 7890.11 491g. 15 i 3 11.04 ND < 1 9.46 1621.39 8543.02 5432.78 Area Reject: 44.69 mVs i ND<f: non.<fetectable less than I ppm as methane Feb 04 02 05:05p TRC EHVIROHMEHTAL CORP. 6613991398 Ga~ Chromatograph Suml~j of^nal~i$ I Company: ETC m Regutator~ Agency: SJV~APCD Location: Freeway Liquo~ Sample ID No. Run Date Lab no. Test 13 Inlluent-Free~ay Liquor 4 Januar/t0, 2002 Method EPA M18 T~ne: lO:lO Test 21 Influent-Freev~y Uqu~' 5 J~ua~ 11, 2002 PrGject NO. Time: 2:35 Test I Effluent-Freeway UquoF 6 Janua~ 8, 2002 73me: 2:42 Calib ,mUon ~n.da,rd ,Comoonent .', ppm. a[ea count, mY s Methane 100.00 670.335 Ethane 100.00 1277.079 Propane 100.00 1909.98t Butane 100.00 2540.387 Pentane 99.50 3117.866 Hexane 99,70 3808.289 Sample Runs Com~nent Run 1, mV s Run 2. mVS Run 3. mVs Cl Methane 123.55 75.83 5,00 NMHC1 O.O0 0.O0 O.00 C2 Ethane 0.00 0.00 0.00 NMHC2 0.00 0.00 0.00 C3 Propane 88.93 68.04 0.00 NMHC3 0,00 0,00 0.00 ~ Butanes 13340.33 11669.41 55,94 NMHC4 0.00 O.(IO 0.00 Pent~nes 59685.29 61215.72 288.19 C5 NMHC5 0.00 0.00 0.00 C6 Hexanes 35448.40 39323.87 2821,13 NMHC6 0.00 0,00 0.00 Run Methane Ethane Propane Banes Pentanes Hexanes 4 18.43 N[3<1 4.83 549.29 1979.79 984,45 5 11.3t ND<I 3.69 z180.4g 2030.55 1092.00 6 ND<I ND<I ND<I 2.30 9.56 78.35 m Results in ~om as rneth~ne: 4 18~43 ND < 1 13.27 1990,10 8903.80 5288.16 5 ll.3i ND < 1 10.15 1740.83 g132.11 5866.30 $ N c 1 ND ¢ 1 ND < 1 6.34 42.99 420.85 Area Reject: 44.69 mV s ND< 1. nn- ~ ' : .._n..o~te~able less than I ppm as methane ,I Feb 04 02 OS:OSp TRC EHUIROMMEHTRL CORP. 6613991398 p.S . Ga~ Chromolosraph Summary orAng.is C~ny: ~C Regu~to~ ~n~: SJ~D L~n: F~ay ~u~ Sample ID No. Run Date Lab no. Test 16 Inftuent-Freeway Liquor 7 January 10. 2002 Method EPA M18 Time: 12:17 Test 11 Influent-Freeway I_~uor § January 9. 2002 Project No. Time: ,3:30 Test 18 Influent-Freew-ay Liquo~ 9 January 10. 2002 Time: 5:53 Calil~ration Standard Componen~: ppm area count, mVs Methane 100.00 670.335 Ethane 100.00 12TT.0T9 Propane 100.00 1909.98t Butane 100.00 2540.387 Pentane 99.50 3112.866 Hexane 99,70 3808.289 Sample Runs ~ Component Run 1, mVg_ Run 2. mY s Run 3. mV s Cl Methane 44.34 0,00 79.25 NMHC1 0.00 0.00 0.00 C2 Ethane 0.00 0.00 0.00 NMHC2 0.00 0.00 0.00 C3 ' Propane 127.77 0.00 96.50 NMHC3 0.00 0.00 0.00 CA Butanes 16245.59 8156.46 14039.25 NMHC4 0.00 0.00 0.00 C5 Pentanes 61512.44 52457.42 684S$.t6 NMHC5 0.00 0.00 0,00 C6 Hexanes 29658,48 44124.39 44296.71 NMHC6 0.00 0.00 0.00 Results in actual ~qn Methane Ethane Propane Butanes Pentanes Hexqnes 7 ND<I ND<I 6.93 6{~8,92 2040.39 823.66 8 ND<I ND<I ND<I 335.85 1740.04 1225.39 9 11.82 ND<I 5.24 5?8.07 227{:).69 1230.18 I Results in I~m as methane_' 7 ND < 1 ND < 1 19.06 2423.50 9176.37 4424.43 6 ND < 1 ND < 1 ND < 1 1216.77 7825.55 6582.44 i 9 11.82 ND < 1 14.40 2094.36 10212.08 6608.15 Area Reject: 44.69 mV s i ND<I: non-detectable/ess than I ppm a9 methane Feb 04 02 05:05p TRC EHVIROHMEHTRL CORP. 6613991398 p.6 i Gas Chromatograph Sununary of Analysis Company: ETC i Regulatory Agency: SJVUAPCO Location: Freeway Liquor Sample ID No. Run Date Lab no. Test 1 In~uem-Free~y L~uor 10 Jan~ 8, ~ Me~d EPA MI~ ~ 2:35 T~ 14 Infl~t-Fr~y LIar 11 Jan~ 10, ~2 Pr~t No. Ti~: 11:22 T~ 20 Effiu~t-F~y ~r 12 Je~ 11, 20~ Ti~: 12:12 ~a~m~on S~nda~ Comet: ppm area ~unt, mV s Me~a~ 100.00 670,3~ Ethane 100,00 1277.079 Propane 100.00 1 ~9.981 Butane 100.00 2~0.387 Pentane 99,50 3112.866 Hexane 99.70 ~08.289 8am~ Component Run ~,mV~ R~2 mV~ Run3, mV~ .' Cl Me.ne 77.52 156.~ 19.12 NMHCl 0.~ 0.00 0.00 C2 Ethane 0.00 0.00 0.00 NMHC2 0.00 0.00 6.74 C3 Propane 67.13 54.74 0.00 NMHC3 0.00 0.00 0.00 ~ Buta~s 10697.82 10779.26 180.43 NM~ 0.00 0.00 0.00 P~s 528~.85 6~58.69 t208.66 C5 NMHC5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hex~ 3~17.49 41078.37 508~.47 NMHC6 ~.00 0.00 0.00 ~1~ In ac~al opm: ~un Me~nne E~ane Pm~ Bu~8 Pen~nes ,Hexa~ 10 11.~ ND<I 3.~ ~0.49 1752.75 9~.16 11 23.~4 ND<I 2.ST 443.~ 20~ 1140.80 12 ND<I ND<I ND<I 7.43 40.~ 141.09 I Resutls in ~=m as rft. ~=t~qne: 10 11.56 ND < 1 10.01 1595.89 78~Z.75 5044.86 11 23.34 ND < 1 8.17 1608.04 9019.18 6128.04 I 12 N < 1 ND < 1 ND < 1 26.92 180.31 757.90 Area Reject: 44.69 mV s i ND<l: non-detectable less than I ppm as methane 05:05p TRC ENVIRONMEMTAL CORP. 6613991398 Gas Chromatograph Summary of Analysls Company-. ETC Regulatory P~ency: ~VUAPCD Location: Freeway Liquor I Sample ID No, Run Date Lab no. Test I Influent-Fmeway lique~' 15 January 11, 2002 Method EPA M18 Time: 10:30 I Project No. I Calibration Standard Comoonent: ppm ama count, mV ~ Methane 100.00 670.335 Ethane 100.00 1277.079 I Prol~ane 100.00 1909.981 Butane 100.00 2540.387 Pentane 99.50 3112.866 i Hexane 99.70 3808.289 Sample Runs I Component Rur~ 1, mVS _Run 2. mV s Run 3, mV s Methane 25.95 C1 NMHC1 0.00 I C2 Ethane 0.00 NMHC2 0.00 C3 Propane 0.00 NMHC3 0.00 I Butanes 1400.00 NMHC4 0.00 C5 Pentanes 12991.87 i NMHC5 0,00 C6 Hexanes 15355.26 NMHC6 0.00 I Results in actual Run Methane Ethane Propane Butanes Pentanes Hex, arms 10 ND<I ND<I ND<I 57.65 430.95 426.44 Results in Dom as methan~ 10 ND < 1 ND < 1 ND < I 208.85 1938.12 2290.68 Area Reject: 44.69 mV s ND<l: non-detectable les= than I ppm as methane I Project Number 1802J$01 Februa~. 6. 200P I I I I I I I I ~ APPENDIX G Pilot Test Field Data Sheets I I I I I I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix G TEST # / SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START T ME 30 DATE WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PS!. FLOW VE-1 = ~,~ 'VE-4 = ~ P~' AS-1 ~' ~ VED-5 = d~ % DILUTION = TURNS OFREClRC = MACHINE VACUUM = !.~"/' Hg MACHINETEMP = J WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~ 1'2_ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = ¢1o ,¢ VE- 4 = 3 ' .VED-5 = VEM-6 = c,~. ~' VE-3 = VE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VE-1 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = ~' VE-3 = VE-2 = VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = FID READING = /OOO'*' ppmv , ~ ~",,~'".,~-'~ff- BAG SAMPLE ~ / NO _ TEST # o~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME 3.' ~ O DATE I.- oC-. oz._ 'WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) A._~S PSI FLOW vE-1 = = ,,- VE-2= % DILUTION = TURNSOF RECIRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ~.~ Hg MACHINETEMP = /G7~ '. WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~ ~ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) = VE-1 = VED-5 = ~,~  VEM-6 = VE-3 = ~.~ ........ YE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VE-~ = '-- VE- 4 = / 7~ VED-5 = / 7~ VEM-6 = VE-3 = / VE-2 = VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 = ~ ~ VE- 4 = -- VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = FID READING = /~ ~ ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES TEST # ~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I START TIME _~:~o DATE I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI FLOW VE-1 = ' 'O~Z'.,,~ VE- 4 = I VED-5 = VEM- : As- VE-3 = O I VE-2 = O I % DILUTION = TURNS OF RECIRC = MACHINE VACUUM = /. :3"// Hg I MACHINETEMP = WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~C) SCFM I WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) I VE-1 = ~;' VE- 4 = .~'~ VED-5 = --' IVEM-6 = ~' VE-3 = VE-2 = ._~. I WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM I VE-1 : ~oC~ VE-4 : ,~ ~:~'~_.. VED-5 = VEM-6 = I VE-3 = ~'72 VE-2 = I VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) I VE-1 = VED-5 = o '70 IVEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = I I FID READING = BAG SAMPLE YES / I TEST # /'~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I START TIME Z~; ~.:~ DATE WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI FLOW vE4' = AS-1 = - = ¢.:to~,~' ^s-~ _ VE-3 = 1% DILUTION = m TURNS OFREClRC = ¢ _ MACHINE VACUUM = /o~' Hg IMACHINETEMP = /~5-~ WELL FLOW (Machine) = zTzj/ SCFM I WELLVAOUUM (inches of H20) I (from manifold guage) .. I VE-1 = z..¢/. 2- VE-4 = VED-5 = ~,~_ VEM-6 = · /O g VE-3 = q. ~ B VE-2 = H, ~ WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM I VE-1 = /~ VE-4 = ~ VED-5 = ,.~ VEM-6 = '~,/~ ~ ! w-~ = )~7 VE-2 = '~~ ii!i M I UENCE (inches of H20) ~ VE-'4 = ------ I FID READING = JO00 +' ppmv · BAG SAMPLE YES L 6~cul~+io~ ~,~,~ ~-/o~ - TEST # ~" SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I START TIME ~: ~ DATE WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/'CLOSED) AS PSI FLOW IVED-5 = - VE-2 = I % DILUTION = ~, TURNS OFRECIRC = ¢ MACHINE VACUUM = ~,.~ /~ Hg I MACHINETEMP = /~,qi~ WELL FLOW (Machine) = /-¢~ SCFM I WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) i(from manifold guage) .. . VE-~ : ~.~ VE- 4 : '--/, yED-5 = '~. ~' J. VEM-6 = ~.~ VE-3 = vE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SOFM IVE-1 = ,~ '70 VE- 4 = '/7 2-. VED-5 = ! 70 VE-3 = ~. ~,, VE-2 = /72., I iVACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 ,. = - VE-'4 = VED-5 = -" IVEM-6 = VE-3 = . . iVE-2 = ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES /~ TEST # /~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN !CLOSED) .. AS. PSI FLOW VE-1 = I VED-5 = .. VEM-6 = l YE-3 = VE-2 = I % DILUTION = ~'~" TURNS OFREClRC = i MACHINE VACUUM = ~.,O /~ Hg MACHINE TEMP = j WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~1 0'7 SCFM I WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) i (from manifold guage) VE-1 = ----- VE- 4 = /~. .VED-5 = I VEM-6 = · VE-3 = i VE-2 = /~. 5'" WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM IVE-1 = ---- VE- 4 = ...~(c,o VED-5 = ~2- i . VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = I I VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 - = VED-5 = +' I VEM-6 = - ¢5- VE-3 = l YE-2 = -" I FID READING = /(:~ ''/'' ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES /~_...~ TEST # 7 SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME ~:,,O; ~t~ DATE t -9- o?... VE-1 = ~.~ VE:4 = wo- VE-2 = % DILUTION = TURNS OFREClRC =  MACHINE VACUUM = ~ ~' Hg MACHINE TEMP = i¢~3 ' WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~o~ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inchesof H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCF~ VED-5 = VEM-6 = ~ ~ · VE-3 = VE-2 = VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 . = ~ VE-4 = -- VEM-~ = VE-3 = ~.~ VE-2 = IFID READING = JOCx3~ ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES / I TEST # ~' SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I START TIME I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/'CLOSED). ,AS PSI FLOW VED-5 VE-2 = I% DILUTION = ~?',~. TURNS OFREClRC = I MACHINE VACUUM = o~ /J Hg MACHINE TEMP = ,/~?oc' WELL FLOW (Machine) = z~7 SCFM ! WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) i(from manifold guage) VE-~= /6, VE-4= ! 7 .VED-5 = IVEM-6 = VE-3 = IVE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM IvE-~ = VED-5 = i VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = ---- I VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) I VE-1 = --'-' VE- 4 = '""- "~'-V E D-5 = .-f- t.3 I VEM-6 = VE-3 = ---' i VE-2 = I FID READING = I~X3(~"{"' ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~/NO ! TEST # ~? SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS TART TIME ,~; 5'-(~) DATE ,/""~ ~/_..)~ LELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) A._~S PSI FLOW w-~ = L~,~... w-4= ~.l~Z ^s-~ ¢, E-2 = tu D~LuT~oN = ,¢'Z.. RNSOFRECIRC=  ACHINE VACUUM = ~ // Hg ACHINE TEMP = WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~ SCFM ~ELL VACUUM (inches of H20)  from manifold guage) =  EM-6 = ~E-3 =- ~ iVE-2 : /¢ WELL FLOW ( at well) in SOF~ ~E-1 = ~0 + VE- 4 = ~ED-5 = ~ ~EM-6 VE-2 = I  AOUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) ~E-1 = ~__ VE-4 = / ~ ~VED-5 = ~ J. ~  %M-6 = /. ~ i VE-2 =  'ID READING = /~O~ ppmv ,A~ S*~.LE YES ¢ TEST # j,~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME .jO .'~5'~ DATE / w~co.~,~u..~o. (o.~./c~os~) *s .s~~ow w-~ = C~t~VE-~ = : VE-3 = ' VE-2 = ~ ~LUT~ON= ~ff TURNS OF REClRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ~/' Hg MACHINETEMP = J~Z WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~// SCFM ~ WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = vE-~= YE-2= /7 WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = 7~ ~ VE-2 = ~O + VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VED-5 = /. X ViM-6 =_ VE-3 = VE-2 =  FID READING = JO~ ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~ NO . ! TEST Cf .~) SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS ! START TIME Z"/; O ,~" - DATE I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI I VED-5 = VE-2 = I % DILUTION = '7~ TURNS OFRECiRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ¢.;;ZS' '~ Hg I MACHINETEMP = i'?~'~ ' WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~O~ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) i (from manifold guage) VE-1 = -- VE- 4 = .VED-5 = I VEM-6 =. VE-3 = i VE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM I VE-1 = --'- VE- 4 = · 'VED-5 = i VEM-6 = .-----';~ % . VE-3 = VE-2 = _~¢ ! VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) IVE-1 ,' = ,/,~---~ VE-4 = I VEM-6 = ~fo o~ VE-3 = ~ ~,.~, VE-2 = r iD READING = /OOo'f- ppmv AG SAMPLE YES ~) TEST # I I SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME q: 2. ,3 DATE WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI iFLOW VE-2 = I% DILUTION = '77 TURNS OFREOIRC = i MACHINE VAOUUM= ~.~.~ // Hg MACHINE TEMP = I ~'7 ~ ". WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~'¢O..R SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) . .VED-5 = ---- I VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = ---" WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VED-5 = I .VEM-6 = --- ~ ,,,., , VE-3 = c~{¢4:~ 'f VE-2 = -'-- i VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 ,. = J, 35' VE-4 = I VEM-6 : t, ~ VE-3 = ---' l YE-2 = IFID READING = ,,/rCX2)O'l- ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~)/NO TEST # ./Z... SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME Z/; 5'~ DATE WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS FLOW VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = VED-5 = VEM-~ = ~,~ ~s-2 v~-3: 1% DILUTION = TURNS OF RECIRC MACHINE VACUUM = ~ /~ Hg I MACHINE TEMP : WELL FLOW (Machine) = q i~::~ SCFM I WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) Iv -i = .VED-5 = "'"' I VEM-6 = '"-' VE-3 = ----- VE-2 = '------ I WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM : ,..,~ ~/" VE-4 : "~..~ d/'''' I VE-1 -- VEM-6 = '-- I VE-3 = VE-2 = ! VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) I VE-1 = VE- 4 = ~-vED-5 : · VEM-6 = · VE-3 = /, VE-2 = ! I FID READING = ~ ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES TEST # /z/' SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME //,' ~ DATE /'-'/g2 "' O Z~ WE''CONF,GURAT,ON (O.E./CLOSED) PS, LOW VE-1 = E~-'/.'~ ~.~ VE-4 = ~.,.{~,,~ AS-1 ~ ~ VED-5 : ~, 1¢,~ ~,! VE-2 = ¢Jl~2 1%DILUTION = ~,_~ TURNS OFRECIRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ~' Hg I MACHINE TEMP = //7~ Z- '. WELL FLOW (Machine) = ,~>..~ SCFM ! WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) i(from manifold guage) VE-1 = .--~ VE- 4 = .---"- VED-5 = '"' IVEM-6 = VE-3 = ,~_.'~ iVE-2 = ----- WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM I VE-1 = .___ VE- 4 = "-'"'- VED-5 = '----' VEM-6 = I VE-3 = VE-2 = ! VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) I VE-1 = VED-5 = IVEM-6 = /,/.~" VE-3 = ------ VE-2 = /, I I FID READING = /000~ ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~ NO TEST # ~"~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI .FLOW VE-3 = VE-2 = TURNS OF RECIRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ~.O /¢ Hg MACHINE TEMP = WELL FLOW (M~chine) = ~¢~ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = - VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VED-5 = VE-3 = . VE-2 =  FID READING = /~O~ ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES I TEST # .,/~_.~, SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I START TIME //~.-,'/,-%~' DATE I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI FLOW I VED-5 = ~. VEM-6 = C ,,,~o~,~- ,,? AS-2 VE-3 : I % DILUTION = TURNS OFRECIRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ~..5"/~ Hg I MACHINE TEMP = /7~':5'" ' WELL FLOW (Machine) = Z./'~-" SCFM I WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) I VE-1 : ~" VE-4 : VED-5 = I VEM-6 = VE-3 = - VE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM I VE-1 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = I VE-3 = VE-2 = I VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) IVE-1 = -" VE-4 = VED-5 = /,O I VEM-6 = /. 2..~"" VE-3 = VE-2 = /. ~,o I FID READING = /O~O '''f' ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~ / NO TEST # / 7 SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME ) ~.: ~O DATE J "' I~ - Oz.. m WELLOONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS pSI FLOW mVED-5 = mVE-3 =, m% DILUTION = TURNS OF REClRC = m MACHINE VACUUM = ~ y~ Hg MACHINE TEMP = ~ 7~ ~ -'. WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~ 5 SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) m ( from manifold guage) VE-1 = VED-5 = mVEM-6 = VE-3 = mVE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM mVE-1 = VED-5 = VE-3 = VE-2 = mVACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VED-5 = m VEM-6 = I FID READING = J~;70'~" ppmv BAG SAMPLE YES I TEST # //(;;~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS PSI FLOW VED-5 = VEM-6 VE-2 = % DILUTION = TURNS OF REOIRO = MACHINE VACUUM = /. ~ Hg MACHINE TEMP = WELL FLOW (~chi,e) = ~/~ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = ~.' VED-5 = VEM-~ = ~, VE-3 = VE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VEM-~ = / VE-3 = VE-2 = VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 = VED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = FID READING = /~O¢ ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~ NO I TEST Cf ~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/'CLOSED) AS PSI FLOW I VED-5 = ' ~,..~ VEM-6 = DILUTION TURNS OF RECIRC = I MACHINE VACUUM = ~' /~ Hg MACHINE TEMP = ~ 7,ZZ. '. WELL FLOW (Machine) = 4~Ooo SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) I (from manifold guage) VE-1 = -- VE- 4 = --- ,VED-5 = I VEM-6 = VE-3 = -- I VE-2 = --- WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM I VE-1 = VE- 4 = ---- VED-5 = ~fco i- VE-3 = -- VE-2 = I VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 ,' = .bO VE-4 = .,oC'O VED-5 = I VEM-6 = -- VE-3 = .'75' i VE-2 = , '75"' IF ID READING = /~;N p pmv BAG SAMPLE O TEST # ~,~O SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME Ic~:Oo DATE WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) A.__~S PSI FLOW VE-1 = ~ VE: 4 = VEM-6 = 6(~5~-~ AS-2 VE- =. VE-2 =. % DILUTION = TURNS OF REClRC =  MACHINE VACUUM = ~ ~/ Hg MACHINE TEMP = J'7~O WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~ SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = 7.~ VE-4 = ~ED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = '7. ~ VE-2 = 7'~ WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = VED-5 =  .VEM-6 = ~ ~ %.. VE-3 = VE-2 = VAOUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 .' = ~ VE- 4 = VED-5 = ~. N%  VEM-6 = . ~ VE-3 =  VE-2 = I FID READING = /~,oo''/- ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~)/NO I TEST # 5\ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS START TIME I WELL CONFIGURATION (OPEN/CLOSED) AS. PSI FLOW = . VE-2 = % DILUTION = TURNS OF REClRC = MACHINE VACUUM = ~ ~/ Hg MACHINE TEMP = /'7¢O ". WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~O 7 SCFM WELL VACUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = ~ED-5 = VEM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 = WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM VE-1 = VE- 4 = VED-5 = ~  VEM-6 = ~O+)':-~:, VE-3 = VE-2 = VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 .' = VED-5 =  EM-6 = VE-3 = VE-2 =  ID READING = /~o~ ppmv A~ SAU.~ ~.O TEST # ~q~ SITE FREEWAY LIQUORS WELL CONFIGURATION . (OPEN /CLOSED) AS psi" FLOW VE-1 = ~~ VE~ 4 = ~ AS-1 ~ ~ VED-5 =. ~O5~ % DILUTION = ~ ~ TURNS OF REClRO = ~  MACHINE VACUUM = ~ ~/ Hg MAOHINETEMP = J~ WELL FLOW (Machine) = ~j~-- SCFM WELL VAOUUM (inches of H20) (from manifold guage) VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = J~ VED-5 = ~  VEM-6 = ~ =  VE-2 = '~ WELL FLOW ( at well) in SCFM  VE-1 = ~ VE- 4 = ~+ VED-5 = ~  VEM-6 = ') VE-3 = ~ ~ VE-2 = ~  VACUUM INFLUENCE (inches of H20) VE-1 ,. = .AO VE-4 = ~ VED-5 = , ~O  VEM-6 = , ~ VE-3 = ~  VE-2 = , ~ I FID READING = /'~)C:l~'f- ppmv BAG SAMPLE ~/NO I . I Project Number 1802JS01 F(#~ruarv 6, 2002 ! APPENDIX H i SVE Radius of Influence Calculations ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS Test 6 Extraction Wells: 'VE-2, VE-3 & VE-4 VEo2, VE-3 & VE-4 VEM-6 VE-1 12.7 0.85 1 Average VP (in H20) 12.7 0.85 1.00 Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 48 78 Test 6 - Radius of Influence 15.0 0 c 10.0 5.0 0o0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC . Appendix H-I I Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 I SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS .I Test 7 Extraction Wells: VE-1, VE-2 & VE-4 I VE-1, VE~2 & VE-4 VEM-6 VE-3 16 0.98 1.25 i Average VP (in H20) 16.0 0.98 1.25 3istance to E-Well (feet) 0 67 82 I Test 7 - Radius of Influence i 20.0  10.0 -- ' * Vacuum Pressure E ::3 ~ 5.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 I Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-2 I Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 I SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS I Test 8 Extraction Wells: VE-1, VE-3 & VE-4 i VE-1, VE-3 & VE-4 VEM-6 VE-2 16.3 1.2 2.2 Average VP (in H20) 16.3 1.20 2.20 I Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 47 71 Test 8 - Radius of Influence 20.0 5.0 0.0 .... ', .... ', ' ' ' ' I ' ' I ' [ .... ', '' ''1' ''' I''' ~1 'l '11~ I 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-3 I Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002. I SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS ITest 9 Extraction Wells: VE-1, VE-2 & VE-3 I VE-1, VE-2 & VE-3 VEM-6 VE-4 14 1.2 1.8 Average VP (in H20) 14.0 1.20 1.80 I Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 74 83 iTest 9 - Radius of Influence 15.0 I c 10.0 .............. e . e Vacuum Pressurei: = 5.0 ...... 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-4 Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS Test 10 Extraction Wells: VE-2 & VE-4 VE-2 & VE-4 VEM-6 VE-1 VE~3 21.25 1.05 1,5 1.3 Average VP (in H20) 21.25 1.05 1.50 1.30 Distance to E-Well 0 65 81 8 8 (feet) I Test 10 - Radius of Influence 25.00 A 20.00 ._~  15.00 I ~ ' · Vacuum Pressure a. 10.00 E '1 > 5.00 I 0.00 ................... I ......... i ' ' ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ ~ 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-5 Project Number 1805BK04 Febn~ary 6, 2002 SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS Test 11 Extraction Wells: VE-3 & VE-4 VE-3 & VE-4 VEM-6 VE-2 VE-1 24 1.2 1.9 1.35 Average VP (in H20) 24.00 1.20 1.90 1.35 Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 36 77 87 Test 11 - Radius of Influence 30.00 25.00 15.00 ..... i , Vacuum Pressure = 10.00 > 5.00 0.00 ................... ', .... ', .... ', .... ', .... ', ...... , 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I. E2C Remediation. LLC Appendix H-6 I Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 I SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS ITest 12 Extraction Wells: VE-1 & VE-4 I VE-1 & VE-4 VE-2 VEM-6 VE-3 18.5 2.2 1.2 1.45 Average VP (in H20) 18.50 2.20 1.20 1.45 I Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 62 64 78 iTest 12 - Radius of Influence 20.00 I O 15.00 .g  1,0.00 , Vacuum Pressure ~ 5.00 I 0.00 .... ; .... ; ' ' ' ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ', .... ; .... i .... ; .... I .... ', ' ' 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-7 Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS Test 13 Extraction Wells: VE-2 & VE-3 VE-2 & VE-3 VEM-6 VED-5 VE-1 VE-4 16.5 1.2 1.45 1.3 1.625 Average VP (in H20) 16.50 1.20 1.45 1.30 1.63 Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 43 44 66 74 Test 13 - Radius of Influence 20.00 ~ 15.00 .................  10.00 '....e __ Va~uum Pres__s_u_.r_ff E ~ 5.00 ...... 0.00 .... : .... ; ' ~ ~ ' I ' ' ~ ' I ~ ' ' ~ I ~ ' ' ' ] ' ' ' ' : .... ; .... ; ' 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-8 - I Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 I SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS I Test 14 Extraction Well: VE-3 I VE-3 VEM-6 VED-5 VE-1 VE-4 VE-2 29 1.15 1.2 0.8 1.0 1.0 i Average VP (in H20) 29.0 1.2 1.2 0.80 1.00 1.00 Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 1 4 1 7 71 85 90 I Test 14 - Radius of Influence i 35.0 30.0 ...... '. I ° ~ 25.0 ............................................... : ~ 20.0 ~ · Vacuum Pressure k' 15.o E I o= 10.0 5.0 I 0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 IDistance from Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H.9 Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS Test 15 Extraction Well: VE-2 VE-2 VE-1 VE-4 VED-5 VEM-6 VE-3 31 0.95 1.35 1.2 1.0 0.85 Average VP (in H20) 31.00 0.95 1.35 1.20 1.00 0.85 Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 60 63 70 72 90 Test 15 - Radius of Influence 35.00 30.00 n ~ · Vacuum Pressure 15.00 · 10.00 5.00 0.00 ........ 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Distance from 'Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix H-lO Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS Test 16, Extraction Well: VE-1 VE-1. ' VE-2 VED-5 VEM-6 VE-3 VE-4 28 1,60 1,0 1,25 1,10 1,15 Average VP (in H20) 28.0 1.60 1.00 1.25 1.10 1.15 Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 60 60 70 71 102 Test 16 - Radius of Influence 50.0 40,0 ~ 30.0 ~' · Vacuum Pressure E  20,0 ....... 10.0 · · 0.0 ~ ~'~, ~ ...... · ......... 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Distance from Extraction Well (feet) I E2C Remediation, LLC Appenclix H-11 I Project Number 1805BK04 February 6, 2002 I SVE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CALCULATIONS I Test 17 Extraction Well: VE-4 I VE-4 VEM-6 VE-2 VED-5 VE-3 VE-1 45 0.95 1.55 0.85 0.925 0.95 Average VP (in H20) ~----~-~-~-~~ ~ 0.95 I Distance to E-Well (feet) 0 58 63 64 85 102 I Test 17 - Radius of Influence 50.0 ~ --~ -- I ~5.o ~; ..... ~ .......................................................... I ..... 0 ~0 40 ~0 80 ~00 ~0 ~0 I I I E2C Remediation, LLC ,4ppend~x H-12 I I I I I I I I i I I' I I I I I I I I /' '" // V' '\~, : ,,/' :, T/ E~C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL I ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e 1 9 7 0 FIRST QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA April 1, 2002 Project Number 1802JS01 Prepared For: Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, California 93306 Prepared By: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, California 93313 e2c.remediation.llc @sbcglobal.net Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 A~ril 1. 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES · iii LIST OF TABLES .................................... i .......... ....................... ' ..... i...' ......................................... iii LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 1 Recommendations 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology .......................................................................................... 2 1.1.1 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology ...... ' ............................................................. 2 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology ........................................................................... 3 1.2 Site History 3 1.2.1 Site Characterization ............................................................................................ 4 1.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan ............................................................................... 6 1.3 Summary of Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring ............................................. 7 1.3.1 Summary of Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Data .............................. 7 1.4 BFD Approval of May 31,2001 iRAP :...8 1.5 Report of Findings - Additional Groundwater Characterization ...................................... 8 1.5.1 Soil Analytical Data ....................................................................... ; ...................... 8 1.5.2 Well Installations .................................................................................................. 8 1.5.3 Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 9 1.5.4 Recommendations 9 1.6 Summary of Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring ........................................... 9 1.6.1 Groundwater Gradient ........................................................................................ 10 1.6.2 Groundwater Analytical Data .............................................................................. 10 1.6.2 Discussion of A'nalytical Data ............................................................................. 10 ...................................... ................................................................. 10 1 ,6,3 Conclusions 1.6.4 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 10, 1.7 Remediation System Installation ................................................................................ 10 1.7.1 Installation of SVE & AS Wells 11 1.7.2 Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells ........................................................... 11 1.7.3 Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System 1 1 1.8 SVE/AS Pilot Test Report of Findings ......................................................................... 11 1.8.1 SVE Observations .............................................................................................. 12 1.8.2 Air Sparge Observations .................................................................................... 14 1.9 Remedial Action Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal .................................... 15 1 - Permitting ............. ~ .............................................................................. 16 1.9.1 Task 1.9.2 Task 2 - Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Well ..........................................16 E~C Remediation, LLC i Project Number 1802J$03 April I. 2002 1.9.3 Task 3 - Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System ......................... 16 1.9.4 Task 4 - Report of Findings for Remedial Action System Installation and Additional Groundwater Characterization i 17 1,9.5 Task 5 - Operations/Maintenance of Soil & Groundwater Remedial System ....... 17 1.9.6 Task 6 - Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring ....................................................... 17 1;9.7. Task 7 - Status Reporting ................................................................................... 18 2.0 FIRST QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING ............................................... 19 2.1 Groundwater Elevations 19 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling ....................................................................... 19 2.3 Groundwater Analyses ............................................................................................... 19 2.4 Discussion of Analytical Results ................................................................................. 20 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 20 3.1 Conclusions 20 3.2 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 20 4.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION ............................................................... 21 5.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... ; ............ 22 I E~C Rernediation, LLC ii Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 A~)rfl 1.2002 I LIST OF FIGURES i Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan ~ Figure 3 First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot i Figure 4 First Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 First Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 First Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot I LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data I Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data I LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets · I Appendix B First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I E2C Remediation, LLC iii Pro/e¢t Number ~8~£J$~$ A~ril ~. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of the First Quarter 2002 monitoring event .for the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California. Groundwater was monitored and groundwater samples were collected from the four (4)wells at the Site On February 19, 2002. Conclusions Based on the data obtained to date, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site remains constant at 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west- southwest; · The water table dropped slightly in three (3) wells with a larger drop in well MW-4 of 1.16 feet and well MW-3 showed a rise of 0.14 foot; · The concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons continued to show a decrease in groundwater at well MW-1 as all compounds analyzed for were reported as non-detect; and · Fuel hydrocarbon compounds remained non-detect in groundwater at wells MW-2, MW- 3, and MW-4. Recommendations Based on the data obtained to date and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · As recommended in the Fourth Quarter 2001 report, install one (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; · As recommended in the Fourth Quarter 2001 report, implement Source Area Remedial Action on a full-scale basis; and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. ! ! I E~C Remediation, LLC I Project Number 1802JS05 A~ril I. 2002 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of First Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring performed in February 19, 2002 for the Freeway Liquor (Site) located at Brundage Store 2140 East Lane in Bakersfield,. California (see Figure 1 for Site location). This report reviews the environmental history of the Site, discusses geological and hydrogeological conditions, provides the analytical results, interprets the extent hydrocarbon groundwater plume presents of the fuel and conclusions and recommendations. 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology 1.1.1 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology Regional Geology The Site is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin'Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. Unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake gravel, sand, silt, and clay sediments, in turn, overlie the Tertiary rocks. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit, which consists of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,500 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. E~C Remediation, LLC 2 Prqiect Number 1802JS03 Aodl 1. 2002 I Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders I and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely, from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with . limited permeability. 'The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra INevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the boring procedures at the Freeway Liquors Site and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. '1 Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according I to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. During the Site Assessment work in April 2001, groundwater was encountered at 130 feet below ground surface (bgs). I 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology Site Geology I The subsurface at the Site is generally characterized by fine to medium grained poorly graded sand and silty sand with some minor clay fractions in areas to a depth of approximately 55 feet bgs. Of specific note is the change from coarser materials (sands) to finer materials (silts and I clays) between approximately 45 and 55 feet bgs, dependent upon location. The finer materials occur to a depth of approximately 80 feet bgs at MW~I. Silt to fine grained silty sand is present to a depth of approximately 85 feet at MW-2, to 75 feet at MW-3 and from approximately 70 feet I to 90 feet bgs at MW-4. These finer sediments are underlain by poorly graded sand and silty sand to the maximum depth explored of 141.5 feet bgs, however, at MW-4 an additional layer of silt was found between 125 feet and 135 feet bgs. I Site Hydrogeology Groundwater has been encountered between approximately 120 feet and 125 feet bgs during i drilling activities. In April 2001, the groundwater level was 121.94 feet below top of casing (BTOC) at well MW-1. In August 2001, groundwater was measured at 123.10 feet BTOC, a drop of approximately 1.2 feet since the initial measurement. In December 2001, groundwater I was measured at 122.44 feet BTOC, a rise of 0.66 foot since August 2001. Groundwater flow was determined to be to the west-southwest at a gradient of 0.016 foot per foot (ft/ft) in December 2001 and in February 2002. 1.2 Site History The Freeway Liquor Store contracted with Industrial Contamination Extraction Services, Inc. I (ICES) to remove three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs)'; two 6,000-gallon, single-walled, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) located on two dispenser islands and associated product piping. The fueling facilities i were subsequently upgraded with double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled product pipelines, and MPDs with dispenser pans. i ICES contracted with Holguin, Fahan and Associates, Inc~ (HFA) to conduct soil sampling at the time of UST removal. On December 4. 1998, the five USTs', six MPDs' and product piping were removed from the Site. Soil samples were collected per BFD requirements and analyzed for i TPHg, BTEX and MtBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020, respectively. A total of 38 soil i E2C Remediation, LLC 3 Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 A!2dl 1. 2002. samples were analyzed. Significar{t concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were detected beneath the two former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' and beneath five of the former dispenser locations. On February 4, 1999, HFA submitted a Tank Closure Report to the City for review. On March 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed Mr. Lloyd Childers (Owner), by letter, to submit a workplan for site characterization. The Owner subsequently applied to the State Fund and was accepted into the Fund on February 5, 2001. E2C prepared a Site Characterization Workplan that detailed a Scope of Work and procedures to perform characterization of the Site (E2C, 2001). The BFD reviewed and approved the Workplan by letter dated February 26, 2001 (BFD, 2001). 1.2.1 Site Characterization The Site Characterization Workplan was implemented during the period of April 9 through April 17, 2001. Soil Borings and Soil Sampling A soil boring was advanced at the proposed locations (see Figure 2). Note: Based on actual field conditions and field screening of soil samples, some borings were relocated. In addition, extra borings were also advanced to provide definition of impacted soils and groundwater. Chemical Analyses of Soil Samples analytes tested were at varying dependent upon for detected concentrations location. The source area appeared to be centered at the area of boring B-8. In general, the fuel hydrocarbons spread downward from the source area until encountering the finer-grained materials at the 45- to 55-foot From there, the fuel depths. hydrocarbons spread laterally principally toward the southeast. Fuel hydrocarbons did migrate downward in the source area to groundwater as evidenced by the analytical results from boring B-8 at depth. In addition, in the B-8 area had been groundwater impacted. A limited zone of highly impacted soils occurred at the near surface in the boring B-8 area. The principal portion of impacted soils occurred between 35 and 55 feet bgs and covers an area of approximately 1,000 square feet. Regulatory. Compliance During the drilling operations it became apparent that the extent of impact to soils was more extensive than previously believed. The preliminary field and analytical data was correlated with preliminary cross-sections and a meeting with the BFD was held. At that meeting, the BFD representative authorized expanding the characterization program to gain better definition of the impact at the Site. Based on that meeting, the following work was approved: · Extending soil boring B-8 to greater depth than originally anticipated and converting this boring into groundwater monitoring well MW-l; · Extending several borings to greater depth (e.g., B-5 and B-6) to aid in definition of the soil plume; · Relocating some borings (e.g., B-3 and B-11) and adding borings (e.g., B-12 through B- 16); · In anticipation that soil remediation at depth would be required at the Site, advancing six (6) additional borings (with approval of the BFD) with conversion of all six into vapor wells; E~C Remediation, LLC 4 ~'i~.~?..'' Project Number 1802JS03 A~ril 1. 2002 I · Collection and chemical analyses thereof of additional soil samples generated as a result of the deeper borings, the additional borings, and the additional borings for I conversion into vapor wells; · Development of well MW-1 and collection of a groundwater sample from that well; and · Compilation of all data and preparation of an Interim Remedial Action Plan. Installation of Well MW-1 After approval of the BFD, boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-I. I MW-1 was constructed to 140 feet bgs with the screened interval from 115 to 140 feet bgs. Filter pack sand (Lonestar #3) was placed by gravity feed from 140 to 113 feet bgs. Three feet of bentonite was placed on top of the filter pack and hydrated with water. Neat-cement grout I completed the seal to the surface. Two days after installation of the well, the well was developed using the overpumping method. I Groundwater Sampling at Well MW-1 On April 27, 2001 groundwater was sampled at well MW-1. The well was overpurged until approximately 20 gallons were extracted (casing volume of 3.2 gallons). Concentrations of fuel , lB hydrocarbon compounds were reported in the groundwater sample collected from MW-1. Table ,W 3 contains a summary of the analytical results. Of significance were the following detections: · Benzene at a concentration of 95 tzg/L (duplicate at 96 pg/L); I · TPHg at a concentration of 2,049 pg/L (duplicate at 2,108 l~g/L); and · MtBE at a concentration of 295 pg/L (duplicate at 331 pg/L). I Site Characterization Conclusions Based on the data obtained from the preliminary assessment and the Site Characterization, EaC made the following conclusions: i ' · Approximately 50,000 cy of soils contained fuel hydrocarbons at concentrations of concern; i · Impacted soils occurred from the near surface to approximately 55 feet bgs as shown on the cross sections; Groundwater had been significantly impacted by fuel hydrocarbons at the Site as I evidenced by the concentrations of benzene (95 I~g/L), TPHg (2,049 ~g/L), and MtBE (295 pg/L) in the water sample from MW-1; and · The State of California Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for benzene, a known I carcinogen, in drinking water is I tzg/L; the water sample from MW-1 contained benzene at a concentration of 95 ~zg/L; and · The areal extent of the groundwater plume was not known. I Site Characterization Recommendations Based on the conclusions presented above, E2C made the following recommendations: I · Further define limits of groundwater plume for all fuel of components concern; · To achieve the groundwater definition, perform additional groundwater characterization by installing monitoring wells; I · Prepare Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) to include a provision for vapor extraction and groundwater air sparging pilot testing; I · Implement the IRAP; I E¢C Remediation, LLC 5 Proiect Number 1802J$05 Aod! 1. 2002 · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling using the monitoring well network; and If the proposed groundwater monitoring wells delineate the extent groundwater plume, prepare a'Remedial Action Plan (RAP.) that includes Pilot Testing data to remediate impacted vadose zone soils and the groundwater plume. 1.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan As requested by the BFD, E2C proposed to implement interim remedial action to remediate the fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soils and groundwater beneath the Site while groundwater plume definition is being performed. Purpose The Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) contained two principal tasks: · Define lateral limits of groundwater hydrocarbon plume; and o Remediate fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site in the source area. Scope of Work The following Scope of Work will be needed to perform the two principal Tasks of the IRAP. Groundwater Plume Assessment · Install a total of three (3) groundwater monitoring wells, one in inferred upgradient and two in the inferred downgradient directions; · Sample water at wells and have samples chemically analyzed; · Compile data and generate plots showing groundwater gradient (flow direction and magnitude); and · Compile data and generate plots showing contaminant plumes as appropriate. Interim Remedial Action Plan · Install soil vapor extraction (VE) wells and Air-Sparging (AS) wells; · Perform soil sampling and analysis.; · Install VE/AS piping an,cl Manifolding; · Perform VE/AS pilot test for designing the final treatment system; · Generate a Report of Findings included with the final RAP that includes final treatment system design; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring/Sampling; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remedial Progress Reporting; The Interim Remedial Action Plan was prepared for the remediation of fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site. The IRAP initially consists of installing wells as follows: · Four (4) shallow soil vapor extraction (VE) wells (VE-1 through VE-4, which are already installed); · One (1) deep VE well (VED-5, which is already installed); o One (1) medium depth VE well (VEM-6, which is already installed); · Two (2) air sparge (AS) wells (AS-1 and AS-2). I E~C Remediation, LLC 6 Prelect Number 1802JS0~ April 1, 2002 VE and AS wells would be used in performance of a VE/AS pilot test. The pilot test would provide data on the effectiveness of this remedial method as well as design criteria for a site- wide treatment system. The results of these activities would be presented in a report of findings and the IRAP would be revised and be presented as a final Remedial Action Plan (RAP) to detail the proposed on-site treatment system. 1.3 Summary of Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring On August 6, 2001, E2C personnel conducted Third Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring the depth to groundwater, checking well MW-1 for free- product, purging the well, and collecting a groundwater sample. 1.3.1 Summary of Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Analytical Data The results of the chemical analyses for the Third Quarter 2001 are summarized following: · BTEX compounds were reported as non-detect; · TPHg was reported as non-detect; and · MtBE was reported at a concentration of 33 ~g/L (58 tzg/L in duplicate sample). In April 2001, significant concentrations of BTEX, TPHg, and MtBE were reported in the water sample from well MW-1 (see Table 3). These concentrations declined significantly in August 2001. The groundwater table lowered 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001. This suggested that groundwater fell slightly below the extent (depth) of impacted soils. When the water table rises, groundwater could come into contact with the impacted soils, thus concentrations in groundwater could increase. Conclusions Based on the data presented in the Third Quarter report, E2C made the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site was not known, however, three additi~)nal monitoring wells were scheduled to be installed in late November 2001, at which .time the gradient could be determined; · The water table fell approximately 1.2 feet from April 2001 to August 2001; · Significant concentrations of TPHg and BTEX compounds were reported in the water sample from well MW-1 in April 2001; · Concentrations of TPHG, BTEX, and MtBE decreased significantly from April 2001 to August 2001; and · When the water table rises, would into with groundwater again come contact impacted soils, thus increasing concentrations in groundwater. Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C made the following recommendations: · Install VES and AS wells on site as proposed and approved BFD; · Perform the VES Pilot Test as proposed and approved by the BFD; · Install additional monitoring wells (one on site and two offsite in the inferred downgradient groundwater direction) as proposed and approved by the BFD to aSsess groundwater gradient direction; I E~C Remediation, LLC 7 Project N~lrPber 1802JS03 A_Ddl 1. 200~ · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shut-down; and · Amend the analytical program to test for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, BTEX using EPA.Method 8260b, and the five fuel oxygenates of MtBE, Di-isopropyl ether.(DIPE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), Tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA), and tertiary amyl methyl ether (TAME) using EPA Method 8260b. 1.4 BFD Approval of May 31, 2001 IRAP On August 31, 2001, the BFD granted written approval of the May 31, 2001 IRAP. The IRAP was approved with the following conditions: · The AS/SVE pilot test shall be conducted for a period of five (5) days; and · All collected groundwater samples shall be analyzed for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, and for BTEX, EDB, MtBE, TAME, DIPE, ETBE, TBA, and 1,2-DCA using EPA Method 8260b. 1.5 Report of Findings - Additional Groundwater Characterization Three groundwater monitoring wells were installed, one well onsite (MW-2) and two wells offsite along the south side of East Brundage Lane (MW-3 and MW-4). In addition, two air sparge wells were installed onsite. The wells were installed in November 2001. 1.5.1 Soil Analytical Data Low concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were reported in soil samples from each boring. TPHg was reportedly detected in all twenty samples analyzed. Reported TPHg concentrations in samples from onsite boring AS-2 ranged from 2.2 mg/Kg to 213.3 mg/Kg. Benzene was reportedly detected at concentrations ranging from 0.0234 mg/Kg to 33.9 mg/Kg and MtBE at concentrations ranging from 0.066 mg/Kg to 24.235 mg/Kg. No other fuel oxygenates were reportedly detected in soil samples from boring AS-2. TPHg was reportedly detected in all soil samples from the groundwater monitoring well borings. At these boring locations, soil sample TPHg concentrations reportedly ranged from 0.160 mg/Kg to 1.16 mg/Kg. Toluene concentrations reportedly ranged from <0.005 mg/Kg (non-detect) to ' 0.5 mg/Kg. Benzene and fuel oxygenates, including MtBE, were reportedly not detected in any of the soil samples that were analyzed from the monitoring well borings. 1.5.2 'Well Installations Air Sparge Wells AS-1 and AS-2 The borings for air sparge wells AS-1 and AS-2 were advanced to 140 feet bgs for installation of the wells. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 125 feet bgs at each boring. The boring for well AS-1 was straight drilled to 140 feet bgs without soil sampling because it was drilled near existing well MW-1 which was soil sampled to a depth of 136 feet during drilling. The wells were constructed using 2-inch ID Schedule 40 PVC blank casing with a 2-foot long microporous sparge point at the bottom of the casing string (see Appendix C, Boring Logs, for well construction details). Graded sand (No. 3) was emplaced to a point approximately five feet above the top of the sparge point, followed bY a seven- to fifteen-foot thick bentonite pellet seal and neat bentonite-cement grout to approximately I foot bgs. A steel traffic box was set in concrete slightly above grade over each wellhead for protection. I E~C Rernediation, LLC 8 Prqiect Number 1802JS05 A~fi! 1. 200? Groundwater Monitoring Wells MW-2. MW-3. and MW-4 The borings for groundwater monitoring wells MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4 were advanced to 140 feet The for well MW-2 drilled to 80 feet where soil bgs. (Figure 2). boring was straight bgs sampling commenced at 10-foot depth intervals. The boring for well MW-3 was also sampled at. 10-foot depth intervals with sampling beginning at 10 feet bgs. At well MW-4 the boring was at 20-foot intervals from 20 feet with an intermittent collected at 130 sampled depth bgs sample feet bgs. These sampling intervals were selected as abundant vadose zone soil lithologic data had been accumulated in the previous site characterization work and field screening indicated that soils at those locations had not been impacted by the fuel hydrocarbons. The wells were constructed using 2-inch-diameter Schedule 40 PVC casing screened from approximately 115 to 140 feet bgs with 0.010-inch wide slotted casing at the bottom followed by blank casing at the top. Graded sand (#2/12) was emplaced to a point approximately three (3) feet above the slotted interval followed by three(3) feet of hydrated bentonite and neat bentonite-cement grout to the near surface (approximately one foot bgs) to complete the well seals. Each well was equipped with a locking cap and a steel traffic box set in concrete slightly above grade over the wellheads for protection. A State of California licensed surveyor surveyed the new wells for horizontal and vertical location and tied them into the existing survey. Top of casing elevations were surveyed to the nearest 0.01 foot for vertical control. 1.5.3 Conclusions Based on the findings of the additional groundwater characterization, E2C made the following conclusions: · Trace concentrationS of TPHg and toluene were present in soil at the locations of new wells MW-2 located onsite and MW-3 and MW-4 located south of the Site across Brundage Lane, however, given these Iow concentrations (one to two orders of magnitude lower than source area concentrations) the limits of the soil plume have now been defined in all directions, except west-southwest (downgradient) of MW-1; and · The distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater has been defined to the north and south as contaminants were reportedly not detected in water samples from the three new wells, but has not been defined west-southwest (downgradient) of the source area (see Section 5.3). 1.5.4 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C made the following recommendations: · InStallation of an additional groundwater monitoring well approximately 100 feet west- southwest of source area well MW-1 to define downgradient groundwater conditions; and · Installation and operation of remediation equipment described in the May 31, 2001 IRAP to cleanup and control the migration of hydrocarbons in soil and groundwater. 1.6 Summary of Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring On December 7, 2001, E2C personnel conducted Fourth Quarter 2001 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring depths to groundwater, checking the wells for free-product, purging the wells, and collecting groundwater samples. EeC Remediation, LLC 9 Project Number 180EJ$03 ' April I. 2002 I 1.6.1 Groundwater Gradient Evaluation of the groundwater elevation data showed that the gradient was 0.016 ft/ft with flow I to the west-southwest. 1.6.2 GroundWater Analytical Data I The results of the Fourth Quarter 2001 chemical analyses are summarized following: · BTEX was reported as non-detect in all samples; i · TPHg was reported at a concentration of 130 p.g/L (110 ~g/L in duplicate sample) in the sample from well MW-1; · MtBE was reported at a concentration of 16.4 pg/L (18.6 ~g/L in duplicate sample) in the ! ~ sample from well MW-l; · TBA was reported at a concentration of 18.8 pg/L (<2.5 pg/L in duplicate sample) in the sample from well MW-l; and I · No other fuel oxygenates were reportedly groundwater samples. detected in the 1.6.2 Discussion of Analytical Data I The concentration of TPHg increased slightly from August 2001 to December 2001 and the concentration of MtBE decreased slightly. During this period, the water table rose approximately 0.7-foot. Soil analytical data indicated significant contaminant concentrations in I the vadose and saturated zones in the vicinity of MW-1. These data suggested that petroleum hydrocarbons were still migrating from the soil to the groundwater, though at a rate resulting in relatively Iow groundwater concentrations. Analytical data from the three newly installed wells I indicated that groundwater from these Wells had not been impacted. 1.6.3 Conclusions I Based on the data obtained to date, E2C made the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site was 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west-southwest; · The water table rose approximately 0.7 foot from August 2001 to December 2001; and I · The concentration of TPHg increased slightly from August 2001 to December 2001 while MtBE decreased slightly; however, the TPHg and MtBE concentrations were an order of i magnitude lower than the April 2001 concentrations indicating that the rate of contaminant migration from the soil to the groundwater was less than in April 2001. 1.6.4 Recommendations I Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C made the following recommendations: i · Installation of one (1) groundwater monitoring well west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of I " remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. 1.7 Remediation System Installation IThe May 31, 2001 IRAP contained two principal tasks: to define the lateral extent of the groundwater plume and to remediate onsite fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soil and groundwater. Several of the items planned in the IRAP to fulfill these tasks were installed during the Fourth I Quarter 2001. These included two air sparge (AS) wellsl four shallow and two deep vapor I E2C Remediation, LLC 10 prqiect Number 1802JS05 A~ril 1. 2002 extraction (VE) wells, and three (3) groundwater monitoring wells, as well as VE and AS underground piping and manifolds. Details regarding the AS and VE well installations are provided below. The installation of groundwater monitoring wells MW-2 through MW-4 was described above. . 1.7.1 Installation of SVE & AS Wells Each sparge well consists of two-inch-diameter PVC casing. A 2-foot long microporous screen was set approximately 20 feet into the water column to enhance the radius of influence. The screened interval in each sparge well is encased by a sand filter pack that extends approximately 5 feet above the top of the screen. A 3-foot thick seal of bentonite was placed in the annular space above the sand pack and cement-bentonite slurry was placed to the near surface. 1.7.2 Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells Six VE wells have been installed at the Site as part of the IRAP. Each SVE well is constructed in the same general manner as a groundwater monitoring well using 2-inch-diameter Schedule 40 PVC casing with 0.020-inch wide slots. Wells VE-1 through VE-4 are screened from 25 feet to 55 feet bgs. Well VEM-6 is screened from 55 feet to 70 feet bgs and well VED-5 is screened from 75 feet to 105 feet bgs. Filter pack sand was emplaced by gravity feed in the annular space to a point 2 feet above the top of the screen and the wells were sealed with 3 feet of hydrated bentonite chips. Neat cement-bentonite slurry was used to fill the remainder of the annular space to the near surface. Each wellhead is constructed such that it can be manifolded into the SVE remediation system. Wells VE-1 through VE-4 will be used to affect the upper zone materials in the source area. Wells VEM-6 and VED-5 will be used to affect the middle zone and deep zone materials, respectively, in the source area. 1.7.3 Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Trenches were excavated and piping installations from the VE and AS wells to the equipment pad were also made. A protective shed will subsequently be constructed to protect the manifold and gauge area. The trenching and piping work was completed in December 2001. Underground piping for SVE and AS wells were installed concurrently in a single trench to the location of equipment pad. SVE piping was installed separately from AS piping. SVE piping consists of color-coded 2-inch ID Schedule 40 PVC while AS piping consists of pressure rated 1/2-inch diameter galvanized pipe. Each AS and SVE well was piped to the equipment area individually and concurrently in the main trench. Each piping run was manifolded above ground at the equipment pad. A control valve was installed ' on the manifold for each well so each well can be adjusted for flow rates on an individual basis. All manifolding and plumbing installations were performed in accordance with local building ordinances and codes. 1.8 SVE/AS Pilot Test Report of Findings During the period of January 8 through January 11, 2002, E2C conducted a vapor extraction and air pilot study to assess the site condition for use of extraction and air sparge vapor sparge techniques in the remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil and groundwater. I E~C Remediation, LLC 11 Proiect Number 1802JS03 A~ril 1. 2002 Existing wells MW-1 through MW-4, VE-1 through VE-4, VED-5, VEM-6, and new wells AS-1 and AS-2 were used in this study. The study was conducted to determine whether acceptable aquifer conditions existed for the utilization of air sparging, that vadose zone conditions were acceptable for the use of vapor extraction (in conjunction with groundwater air sparging and as a stand alone remediation technique) and an estimate of the effective radius of influence for both the air sparge and vapor extraction for design of the remedial system. 1.8.1 SVE Observations The vapor extraction study included the use of a Solleco Industries 250 SCFM Thermal Oxidizer equipped with a 10-hp positive displacement (PD) blower. The system was used to extract vapor from the wells and was equipped to run on liquid propane. Testing and measurement devices included flow and pressure gauges, a water level indicator, portable flame ionization detector (FID) for onsite concentration monitoring, pump and Tedlar bags for collecting influent samples to' analytically determine hydrocarbon concentrations. The Thermal Oxidizer was connected to different configurations of vapor extraction wells. A test was run for different lengths of time using different combinations of the wells as extraction (suction) and obServation wells. Four (4) monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-4) were also used as observation wells as they were nearby and their screened intervals in the wells included a length of screen above the water table in the unsaturated zone. Based on field FID measurements, vapor influent and effluent samples were collected in Tedlar bags and submitted for chemical analyses. Radius of Influence Based on the Pilot Test results, a radius of influence was calculated for the vapor extraction. Based on the data, a radius of influence of approximately 85 to 100 feet was extrapolated. As such, a conservative SVE radius of influence of 70 feet was considered feasible for the Site. Vadose zone soils on the east side of the Site in the vicinity of VE-2 and to a lesser extent near VE-4 appear to be more permeable than soils near wells VE-1 and VE-3. The influence at VE-2 when VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4 were independently used for extraction was greater than the influence on those three wells when VE-2 was open and they served as observation points. In other words, the influence at VE-2 observed while using VE-3 for extraction was equal to or greater than the influence at the other shallow wells although VE-2 was the most distant from the extraction well. This indi'cates that if all wells are simultaneously used for extraction, the vacuum at VE-2 may need to be decreased to provide a greater vacUum near the other three shallow VE wells. All tests utilizing the shallow VE wells (screened from 35 feet to 55 feet bgs) for extraction produced some influence at wells VEM-6 (screened from 55 feet to 75 feet) bgs and VED-5 (screened from 75 feet to 105 feet bgs). Although the effect is less than that observed at the wells completed at shallower depths, the data indicate that SVE had significant influence in deeper areas of the soil plume. Using shallow wells for. extraction, induced flow through well VED-5 was obServed. This appeared to be the result of the well serving as a conduit for air flow equalizing the higher pressure naturally occurring in the deeper zone with shallower zone soils that are under vacuum and therefore at a lower pressure. In summary, the locations of the four existing shallow VE wells will provide airflow at a rate sufficient for coverage of the soil plume as the radii of influence cover most of the Site. I E~C Remediation, LLC 12 Project Number 1802JS03 Aoril 1.2002 Removal .Rates During the entire length of the test, removal rates were high as evidenced by the greater than the 1,000 measurements at the influent sampling port using the FID during each test. This ppm is also supported by Tedlar bag vapor test results on influent samples. Tedlar bag influent sample concentrations can be evaluated in terms of the configuration vapor of wells used for extraction, the screened interval of the wells, and the radius of influence data discussed in the previous section. The highest influent vapor sample concentration measured (8,838 ppmv) was during Test 8 when wells VE-1, VE-3 and VE-4 were used for extraction and VE-2, VED-5, and VEM-6 were used for observation. Of note, significant induced airflow was observed in VED-5 and would therefore contribute to the effluent. A concentration of 3,618 ppmv was measured during Test 21 utilizing deeper wells VED-5 and VEM-6 for extraction and AS-1 for air sparging, which is an indication that vapor extraction is necessary and effective in the source area at depths greater than 55 feet. Concentrations for the majority of the tests measured approximately 3,500 ppmv. Based on the influent vapor concentration data and the associated well configurations, the optimum configuration for extraction appeared to be wells VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4. The addition of air sparging to this configuration should increase the influent vapor concentration above the value measured for Test 8, which did not employ air sparging. Use of well VE-2 for extraction should be limited such that the vacuum is concentrated in wells VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4 as well VE-2 has a smaller radius of influence and therefore is less effective at the locations of VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4. The flow rate during the pilot test was typically 260 scfm in the extraction wells. Using this flow rate and the Tedlar bag results for the testing (total of hydrocarbons plus aromatics from Influent Test 8, result, = 8,838 ppmv) and using the equation, Removal (lbs/day) = (8,838 x 10'6) X 260 cfm x 1 lb-mole x 86 lbs x 1,440 min 379.5 cf lb-mole day a removal rate of approximately 750 pounds per day (lbs/day) was calculated. A significant amount of dilution air was required to maintain the machine at an appropriate operating temperature during the pilot test. This indicated that the measured influent vapor concentration and hence removal rate represent minimum values that would likely be exceeded upon full- scale operation of the system as less dilution air is required to maintain an appropriate operating temperature. As remediation progresses, the removal rates would be expected to decrease in response to lower source concentrations remaining and potential channeling of vapor flow. Eventually, asymptotic Iow influent concentrations will be attained at which time the vapor extraction/air sparge system will need to be re-evaluated. effectiveness of the The destruction efficiency of the catalytic oxidizer can be calculated based on the ratio of effluent to influent concentration. For Test 1 and effluent vapor sample (influent 3,147.6 ppmv 90.21 ppmv) the destruction efficiency was found to be 97.1% and for Test 20 (influent 3,168.41 ppmv and effluent 188.61 ppmv) the efficiency was 94.1%. In conclusion, the radius of influence for.a full-scale remediation will be greater than 70 feet and may approach 100 feet. The site stratigraphy and lack of resistance to flow (2" Hg) suggested this site is an ideal candidate for extraction. The high removal rate suggested this site vapor has a significant soil and groundwater on-site source, i.e .... area requiring remediation. I E2C Remediation, LLC 13 Project Number 1802JS03 A!~N 1. 2002 1.8.2 Air Sparge Observations The air sparge study included the use of compressed air to activate the sparge wells, flow and pressure gauges, and a dissolved oxygen meter. Compressed air was introduced into the sparge point while measurements of pressure and dissolved oxygen were collected at various wells. The dissolved oxygen observations revealed significant data. In general, the air sparging was initially conducted on a relatively continuous basis at a pressure of 22 pounds per square inch (psi) at each sparge point with flow at approximately 1 to 3 cubic feet minute These similar to those found in full-scale remediation. per (cfm). are Dissolved Oxygen Observations Generally, dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations increased in observed monitoring wells after startup of the air sparge unit. Significant increases were observed at several of the wells. MW-1 - Significant increase in DO was observed in MW-1 (9.8 mg/L at pre-test conditions with an increase to greater than 15 mg/L at the end of the test), located 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2. MW-2 A in DO observed in MW-2 and conditions decrease was (10.6 10.7 mg/L at pre-test with a decrease to 9.5 mg/L at the end of the test), located 123 feet from AS-1 and ~118 feet from AS-2. MW-3 - An increase in DO was observed at MW-3 (7.0 mg/L at pre-test conditions with an increase up to 9.0 mg/L at the end of the test), located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2. MW-4 - A significant increase in DO was observed at MW-4 (7.6 mg/L at pre-test conditions with an increase to. 10.0 mg/L at the end of the test), located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2. Groundwater Level Observations The radius of influence from air sparging was also evaluated in terms of groundwater level changes in the observation wells. At onsite well MW-l, located 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2, groundwater levels rose by 3.8 feet from the start of Test 18 through the end of Test 22. At upgradient well, MW-2 located 123 feet from AS-1 and 118 feet from AS-2, the water level rose by 1.14 feet during this same test period. At well MW-3, located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2, the water level.rose approximately 0.4 foot and at well MW-4, located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2, the level rose 0.6 foot. These data indicated a significant influence onsite at well MW-1 with a radius of influence greater than 100 feet in the upgradient direction (MW-2). It should be noted that there was a decrease in DO concentration at well MW-2 although the water level rose as a result of air sparging. Some influence was observed at wells MW-3 and MW-4 indicating a radius of influence greater than approximately 130 feet south of the Site. Air Sparge Test Conclusions The results indicated the acceptability of the aquifer for air sparging and a conservative estimate of the air sparge radius of influence is in excess of 100 feet and possibly up to 120 feet plus. I E~C Remediation, LLC 14 Prc_iect Number 1802JS03 Apdl 1. 2002 This was based on two factors: · .Air sparging introduced backpressure at observation wells (VE-1 through VE-4, VED-5, and VEM-6). This backpressure was indicative of a large radius of influence for the air sparging in the water-bearing zone. Furthermore, backpressure was observed in well MW-3, located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2, and MW-4, located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2, as indicated by the rise in water level; and · Significant increases in DO at the observation wells, specifically at well MW-1 (9.80 mg/L at test start and greater than 15 mg/L at test end), which is located in the source area 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2. Of important note, Well MW-3 showed a significant increase in DO from the start of the test (7.0 to the end of the test (9.0 MW-3 is located from the AS wells mg/L) mg/L). cross-gradient approximately 135 feet south of AS-1 and 138 feet south-southwest of AS-2. DO concentrations at well MW-4 increased also from 7.6 mg/L at start of test to 9.0 mg/L at the end of the test. MW-4 is located cross-gradient from the AS wells approximately 150 feet southeast of AS-1 and 125 feet south-southeast of AS-2. Based on this data, a conservative radius of influence for air sparging of 100 feet was estimated for the Site and the use of groundwater air sparging at this site would yield high removal rates and rapid source removal. Tedlar Bag Vapor Sample Results The Tedlar bag vapor sample analysis for Test 8 indicated that hydrocarbons in the C~ through O6 range were reported at a concentration of 8,838 parts per million by volume (ppmv). Test 8 was run with extraction from wells VE-1, VE-3, and VE-4. Tests 1 and 18 were run with all wells open and Tests 2 through 17 and 19 through 21 were run with various combinations 'of wells open and closed. Tests 18 through 23 were conducted with the addition of air sparging using wells AS-1 and AS-2. Groundwatei air sparging provides dissolved oxygen at a concentration of approximately 10 to 12 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Calculations of the mass of contaminants present indicated that DO at levels in this range will be sufficient to accomplish complete mass removal. It appears that air sparging will sufficiently increase the DO concentration in source area groundwater, as indicated by the large increase to greater than 15 mg/L at well MW-I. Assessment of the downgradient (west-southwest). extent of he dissolved groundwater plume is necessary to evaluate whether the air sparge radii of influence are sufficient to cover the limits of the groundwater plume. 1.9 Remedial Action Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal Following evaluation of the pilot test data, a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) was developed to implement remediation of the source area contaminants. The RAP included the remaining tasks initially described in the May 31, 2001 IRAP to commence full-scale remediation. Timely implementation of this RAP was deemed necessary to control further migration of petroleum hydrocarbons from the source area. The Scope of Services to implement the RAP consisted of the following tasks: Task 1 Permitting Task 2 Install Groundwater Monitoring Well Project Number 1~02JS05 Apdl 1. 2002 Task 3 Install Source ^rea Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Equipment Task 4 Report of Findings for Installation of Remedial ^ction System I Task 5 Operation and Maintenance of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Task6 "Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring I Task 7 Status Reporting 1.9.1 Task 1 - Permitting i · After approval of the RAP by the City of Bakersfield Fire Department, necessary permits as required for the installation and operation of SVE/AS equipment will be secured by E~C. I 1.9.2 Task 2 - Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Well One (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) was proposed approximately 100 feet west- I southwest of well MW-1 (Figure 2). This well will be used to monitor groundwater conditions in the downgradient direction, which was determined to be west-southwest during the Fourth Quarter 2001. I 1.9.3 Task 3 - Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Trenching and piping installations for the remedial system were completed in December 2001. The remaining tasks would be to acquire an electrical power supply, and to construct a concrete I equipment pad and Protective shed to protect the remediation equipment, manifold, and gauge area. i Electrical Supply The electrical service requirements for the SVE system and groundwater sparge system would be supplied by the installation of a utility power pole. A service panel would be mounted on the Ipole and wired with separate circuit breakers for individual circuits as needed. The supply service at the pole would require three-phase, 240 volts at 200 amps. I Equipment Pad The proposed equipment enclosure will consist of a concrete slab measuring approximately 10- feet wide by 20-feet long by 6-inches thick. The slab will be reinforced with a No. 4 rebar mat i extending to within 2-inches of the inside perimeter of the concrete slab. The rebar spacing of the mat will not exceed 12-inch centers. The mat will be supported above grade within the slab by dobbie supports. The Equipment Pad would house the following equipment: I · Electrical Pole and Supply Panel for all electrical equipment; · SVE equipment composed of a water knockout pot, blower, and catalytic oxidizer. The vent manifold will include individual well valving; and I · Air sparging equipment composed of an oil-free compressor and receiver tank. The air sparge manifold will include needle-valve flow controllers for each well. i Equipment Enclosure A small sheet metal shed would be constructed to protect the gauges, valves, compressor and , electrical equipment from the elements at each location. Each manifold will be connected to the I remedial treatment equipment using appropriate hoses and connectors. Prqiect Number 1802JS03 ADd/1, 2002 Remediation Equipment The remedial equipment consists of a catalytic oxidizer unit, Solleco Industries Model 300 ECAT Catalytic Oxidizer, to extract from the wells at 300 cfm and 100 inches H20 vacuum. The vapor unit's minimum operating temperature is 600 degrees Fahrenheit in catalytic mode. 'This temperature is set to ensure vapor oxidation at reasonable electrical cost. Furthermore, the unit has a catalytic module to complete the oxidation The unit is equipped with a process. regenerative type vapor extraction blower. For improved reliability and safety, the valve controls, actuators, and components are controlled by relay logic. The Solleco 300 is equipped with a water knockout pot, automatic air dilution capability, and a noise-reducing muffler. This proposed piece of equipment is designed to shut down and lock out in the event of a system malfunction. The various safety features include high and iow oxidizer bed temperatures, high and Iow blower pressure, high intake lower explosive limit (LEL), high and Iow air pressure, high and Iow exhaust temperature, and water knockout malfunction sensor. Groundwater air sparge equipment will consist of an "oil-free'' rotary-screw lO-horsepower Ingersol Rand Compressor, pressure regulator, needle-valve flow controllers and microporous sparge points. All electrical and plumbing work would be performed in accordance with any and all City of Bakersfield and/or County of Kern building ordinances and codes. The application for the permit to construct/operate, including construction details would be prepared and submitted after the RAP has been approved. 1.9.4 Task 4 - Report of Findings for Remedial Action System Installation and Additional Groundwater Characterization A report would be prepared that includes details and procedures regarding the Remedial Action System installation, including as-built plans, and findings for the additional groundwater characterization. In addition, this report will include a finalized Remedial Action Plan for additions to the remedial system including additional groundwater monitoring, SVE, and/or AS wells, as needed. 1.9.5 Task 5- Operations/Maintenance of Soil & Groundwater Remedial System E2C professional staff, experienced in SVE/GASS technology, would conduct operations and maintenance (O & M) of the VES Units to ensure efficient remediation of the Site. Equipment operating parameters would be monitored by E2C on-site inspections. Maintenance and inspection schedules will ultimately comply with the permit conditions set by the APCD. The operations and maintenance of the systems would include all materials and supplies necessary to conduct normal operational activities such as field screening, systems checks and adjustments, regular lubrication and maintenance.. The VE/AS system proposed would be and equipped with LEL, Flow, Stack Temperature, Chamber Temperature, and Pre-Heat Temperature measurement devices and are recorded every one (1) minute on a chart recorder. 1.9.6 Task 6 - Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater monitoring with groundwater sampling would be performed on a quarterly basis and would incorporate proposed well MW-5. After one year, the sampling schedule.would be evaluated and revised as necessary. I E~C Remediation, LLC 17 .. Prqiect Number 1802JS05 A~dl I. 2002 A State of California-certified analytical laboratory would analyze groundwater samples for the following compounds by the appropriate EPA Method: · · TPHg using EPA Method 5030/8015M; · BTEX using EPA Method 5030/8260b; and ' · Fuel oxygenates (includes MtBE) using EPA Method 5030/8260b. 1.9.7 Task 7- Status Reporting Status reporting will be performed as discussed below. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Reports · APCD Startup Inspection Test Report; · APCD Annual and Test and Inspection Report; · Quarterly Remediation Status Reports (see below). Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation Status Reports On a quarterly basis, a report would be prepared by the last day of the next month following each quarter and would contain, at a minimum, the following: · Tabulated results of all previous and to date investigations; · Groundwater elevation and contamination contour maps; · Site map clearly indicating the areal extent of contamination plumes; · A map showing all sensitive receptors and a brief description of the receptor, including its distance and direction from the Site; · 'Compliance with other agency's requirements; · A summary of analytical data to date, equipment records, daily/weekly inspection records, and a discussion of remedial progress; and · In addition, the report will contain a conclusions and recommendations section clearly indicating what further actions, if any, are required. The report will be prepared under the supervision of, reviewed by, and certified by a State of California Registered Geologist. I E~C Remediation, LLC 18 .~. Project Number 1802JS03 Apdl I. 2002 2.0 FIRST QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING On February 19, 2002, E2C personnel conducted First Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring activities, included measuring depths to groundwater, checking the wells for free-product, which purging the wells, and collecting groundwater samples. 2.1 Groundwater Elevations Prior to purging and sampling, the depth to groundwater was measured at wells MW-1 through MW-4 using a Solinst water level meter. Depth to groundwater was measured from the top of casing (TOC) at the north side of the casing to the nearest 0.01 foot. In addition, the wells were checked for free-product using a Yellowjacket oil-water interface probe. The interface probe and Solinst water level indicator were washed in an Alconox solution and rinsed with clean water prior to use. Evaluation of the groundwater elevation data indicates that the gradient is 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west-southwest. Figure 3 depicts a plot of the First Quarter 2002 groundwater gradient and flow direction. Groundwater elevations for the First Quarter 2002 generally dropped since the Fourth Quarter 2001, except at well MW-3 in which the groundwater elevation rose 0.14 foot. Groundwater elevation decreases were small, in two wells, MW-1 (0.18 foot) and MW-2 (0.02 foot), whereas the decrease at well MW-4 was much more significant (1.16 feet). Groundwater elevations for this monitoring event are summarized in Table 1 and with historical groundwater elevation data in Table 2. 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling Groundwater at each well was purged in order to obtain a representative groundwater sample. At least three well casing volumes of groundwater were removed from the each well prior to sampling, utilizing a battery-powered submersible pump. A casing volume is calculated by multiplying the height of the freestanding water column in the well by the cross-sectional area of the well casing. During purging, groundwater parameters of temperature, pH, and conductivity were measured as water was pumped from a well to verify sufficient purging and stable physical parameter measurements on field instruments (see Appendix A for purge data sheets). The pump was decontaminated in a solution of Alconox and water and rinsed with clean water before each use. After purging, groundwater at each well was sampled using a new disposable bailer or a pre- cleaned stainless steel bailer. The groundwater samples were decanted into two (2) 40-mi volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials. Care was taken to prevent headspace or bubbles in the vials, which were sealed with Teflon-lined lids. Samples were labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4 degrees Centigrade, accompanied with a Chain-of-Custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. 2,3 Groundwater Analyses Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, fuel oxygenates, and the lead scavengers (1,2-DCA and EDB) using EPA Method 8260b. Appendix B presents the analytical laboratory report. Laboratory analytical results for the First Quarter 2002 are I E~C Rernediation, LLC 19 Project Number 1802JS03 Apdl 1. 2002 summarized in Table I and historical data are summarized in Table 3. The results of the First Quarter 2002 chemical analyses are summarized following: -All analytes including the lead scavengers were reported as non-detect in all four (4) groundwater samples collected this quarter. 2.4 Discussion .of Analytical Results The concentration of TPHg increased slightly from August 2001 to December 2001 and the concentration of-MtBE decreased slightly. During this period, the water table rose approximately 0.7-foot. From the Fourth Quarter 2001 to the First Quarter 2002, the groundwater table dropped slightly in wells MW-1 and MW-2 with a slight rise in MW-3 and a significant drop in MW-4 of greater than one (1) foot. Soil analytical data indicates significant contaminant concentrations in the vadose and saturated zones in the vicinity of MW-1. These data suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons may still migrate from the soil to the groundwater when the groundwater rises significantly, though at a rate that could result in only relatively Iow concentrations, data from the three installed wells groundwater Analytical newly (MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4) indicate that groundwater at these wells has not been impacted. 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Conclusions Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: ·The groundwater gradient at the Site remains constant at 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west- southwest; · The water table dropped slightly in three (3) wells with a larger drop in well MW-4 of 1.16 feet and well MW-3 showed a rise of 0.14 foot; ·The concentrations of'fuel hydrocarbons continued to show a decrease in groundwater at well MW-1 as all compounds analyzed for were reported as non-detect; and · Fuel hydrocarbon compounds remained non-,detect in groundwater at wells MW-2, MW- 3, and MW-4. 3.2 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · As recommended in the Fourth Quarter 2001 report (E2C, 2002), install one (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; ·As recommended in the Fourth Quarter 2001 report (E~C, 2002), implement Source Area Remedial Action on a full-scale basis; and ·Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of. remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. E~C Remediation, LLC 20 Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 Aoril 1. 200? 4.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Report in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing in California at this time. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared under the professional supervision of the registered professional whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(s). Prepared By: Revi ~,~'"~,~ William A. Lawson,U:{.G. #7171 "l~lip Go~,ir~ Senior Geologist Principa~ Hy~, I E2C Remediation, LLC 21 Client Name E2C Remedialion, LLC 661.831.6906 tax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requosled Sample Matdx Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite ~ 05, Bakersfield, CA 933~ 3 Project Manager: I Sample Date ~ Sample Time ~ Sample Description and Container Type Comments iTurnaround'Time Requested: 24 Hour ~ 48 Hour ,5-Day Standard z.--'''''~` Relinquishe, d By: ~ ~ Date: 02.//ic//D2 Relinquished By: Date: i ReceivedBy:. v~/~/~--," Date: ~-//.,~/~ Received By: Date: , I Halcyon Laboratories~ ~nc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C' Remediation, LLC' Project Name: Freeway Liquors I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous i Sampled by: Ramon Velez&Ruben Dorame TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPHg Analysis: 2/26/2002 I Date of Report: 3/5/2002 Units: ug/L I Sample #: 2K2-2289 2K2-2290 2K2-2291 2K2-2292 2K2-2293 2K2-2294 Date Sampled: 2/19/2002 2/19/2002 2/19/2002 2/19/2002 2/19/2002 2/19/2002 DL uodL Sample Description: Tblank MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-1 MW-5 I TPH Gasoline ND ND ND ND ND ND 50 I Surrogate Recovery % 88 93 90 85 85 80 I , Sample #: Date Sampled: DL uodL I Sample Description: I I Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: I Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: I I Surrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available P'rlnclpal Analyst Phil Acosta I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E~C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 3/4/2002 Sample ID: 2289/Tblank I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ag/[. Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ' ND 0.5 ug/L . rn & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Result Method RL Units Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 65.4 131% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 60.3 121% Toluene-d8 46.8 94% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 50.2 100% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L 'Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date: 3/4~2002 Sample ID: 2290/MW-2 I AnaJyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND · 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug,/L Toluene ND 6,5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ' ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengem Result Method RL Units Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 67.4 135% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 63.0 126% Totuene-d8 51.3 103% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 53.7 107% EPA L b mt ry Report W ter I Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors I Report Date · 3/4/2002 ISample ID: 2291/MW-3 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 .. ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 u~L, i Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ' ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Result Method RL Units I Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- (EDB) ND 0.5 · ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I dibromofluoro- 66.4 133% Methane, 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 61.8 124% Toluene-d8 48.8 98% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 52.8 106% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors Report Date' 3/4/2002 Sample ID · 2292/MW-4 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L i Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ' ND 0.5 u~.~ I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 u~JL J o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengem Result Method RL Units I Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 67.8 136% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 63.5 127% Toluene-d8 48.6 97% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 47.5 95% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID. Freeway Liquors Report Date · 3/4/2002 Sample ID · 2293/MW-1 Analyte Result Method RL Onits 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl A~cohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ' ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengem Result Method RI. Units Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 u~ Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards dibromofluoro- 68.2 136% Methane, 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 63.6 127% Toluene-d8 49.4 99% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 48.9 98% · . ;.. }:.;! .... ,:....,: , ..... x:::..:--.:? . '.'{:' ?4 I Halcyon Laboratories, Tnc. EPA 8260B Laborator~ Report Water Sample Results in ug/L I Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors .I Report Date · 3/4/2002 ISample ID: 2294/MW-5 I Result Method RL Units Analyte I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 u~, i Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L ' Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene , ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ' ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengem Result Method RL Units I Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L I :Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 64.5 129% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 59.5 119% Toluene-d8 52.4 105% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 49.1 98% Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 ADril 1. 2002 TABLES Table 1 First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data E~C Remediation, LLC Tables Project Number 1802JS03 Ap/fl 1, 2002 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF FIRST QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California DEPTH TO TOTAL TOC GW FP S T E X TPHg MtBE TBA DIPE ETBE TAME 1,2-DCA EDB WELL DATE GW DEPTH ELEVATION ELEV. (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) pg/L pg/L pg/L pg/L pcj/L ~ pg/L 2/19/02 122.62 138.22 386.40 263.78 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-1 duplicate nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 2/19/02 121.96 139.48 386.60 264.64 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-2 2/19/02 121.28 139.02 384.15 262.87 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd . nd nd MW-3 2/19/02 119.68 139.56 384,11 264.43 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW.4 ............................................................................................ Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (pg/L) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8260b; TPHg - EPA 8015M Method Detection Umits: Benzene/'roluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5 pg/L; Xylenes - 1.0 pg/L; TBA - 2.5/~g/L; MTBE - 0,5 pg/L; and TPHg - 50 #g/L. Sample MW-5 on chain of custody fom~ is duplicate from well MW-1 ~ - 1,2-DCA = 1,2-Dlchloroethane B = Benzene BTOC = Below Top of Casing DIPE = Di-isopropyl ether E = Ethylbenzene EDB = 1,2-Dihromoethane E'rBE = Ethyl tertiary Butyl Ether GW = Groundwater nd = Not Detected TAME = Tertiary Amyl Methyl Ether ' ' TBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol TOC = Top of Casing X = Total xylenes E2C Remediation, LLC Table 1.1 Project Number 1802JS03 , April 1, 2002 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Total DEPTH TOC GW ELEVATION FREE WELLID DATE Depth TO GW ELEVATION, ELEVATION I CHANGE PRODUCT (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) (feet) 4/27/01 141,60 121,94 386,40 264,46 MW-1 12/7/0! . 138,2_6 122,44 26_:~_,.9_6 .....0,66 2/19/02 138,22 122.62 263,78 -0,18 MW-2 2/19/02 139,48 121,96 264,64 -0,02 MW-3 2/19/02 139.02 121,28 262.87 0.14 NOTES: BTOC = Below Top of Casing GW = Groundwater TOC = Top of Casing MSL = Mean Sea Level I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 2-1 Project Number 1802JS03 , April 1, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane. Bakersfield, California TBA I MtBE DIPE ETBE I TAME 1,2-DCA EDB Well ID Sample DateB I T .J E I X ..I TP._Hg__J ............................ I #g/L grab 4/18/01 531 451 346 651 4,980 na 1,570 na na na na na 4/27/01 95 107 60 122 2,049 na 295 na na na na na duplicate 96 129 71 139 2,108 na 331 na na na na na 8/6/01 nd nd nd nd nd na 33 na na na na na dup!icate nd nd nd nd nd na 58 na na na na na MW-1 12/7/01 nd .... nd nd nd 130 18.8 16'.4 nd nd nd nd nd duplicate nd nd nd nd 110 nd 18.6 nd nd nd nd nd 2~i9~2' ..... n~l n~i ~d ..... nd ..... nd .......... nd ' ' ~-d' .......... n~l- ........ nd' -~1~-' nd nd duplicate nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 12/7/01 .... nd .... nd_ .n_d.. ...... .n_d_ .......... n_d ........ n.d ....... _nd___.~_d ...... _nd~ .....n__d____ n~d ......_nd_. 2/i9/02 MW-2 ._ nd... nd __ nd ._. nd.._ .nd ...... nd._ _j ..... n_d ........ r~_d 12./7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd ?d nd . . .n_d _ri.d__ ~d___, MW-3 2/19/02 nd nd nd ~_ nd nd nd nd ........ nd ..... nd _n_d ......... _n_d ...... ri.d___ 12/7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-4 2/19!02 nd nd nd ... nd -' nd nd ........ nd ....... nd ....... nd ..... ~d ...... ~ ...... ~d Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (pg/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5 #g/L, Xylenes - 1.0 #g/L, TPHg - 50 pg/L, TBA - 2.5 #g/L, MTBE - 0.5 ua/L B = Benzene E = Ethylbenzene DIPE = Di-isopropyl Ether ETBE = Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether - Unpurged Sample prior development GRAB Water collected to well MTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ether na = Not analyzed nd - Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by value F = Toluene TAME = Tertiary Amyl methyl Ether TBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline X = Total xylenes Note: For 4/27/01, 8/6/01, and 12/7/01 samples labeled as MW-8, MW-9, and MW-5, respectively, on chain of custody are duplicates from MW-1 I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 3-1 Project Number 1802J$03 Aodl 1. 2002 APPENDICES Appendix A First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report E~C Remediation, LLC Appendices Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 · A~dl 1. 2002 I I I I I I I ~ APPENDIX A I First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets I I I I I I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix A E2C Remediation, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD I Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105, Bakersfield CA 93313 WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA (661) 831-6906 / fax: (661) 831-6234 ~ ~PLEDBY: ~ Vggg~ ,~ ~0~t M~OD OF PURGING: ~)~,C~ ....  PURGE C~R~ ~ME INTAKE ~ ~TE ]CUM. VOLJ WELLVOL. TEMP pH SEC ~ ~Z'.lk I _  Well Capacity: 2' - 0.1632 gallonainear foot 4' - 0.6528 gallon/linear foot 6' - 1.4688 gallon/linear foot ,m -I E2C Remediation, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPUNG RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 10§, Bakersfield, CA 93313 WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA (661) 831-6906 / fax: (661) 831-6234 DATE: n~ ~/O ~ CASING VOLUME: 2. ~ ~ gallons ~PLEDBY: ~ ~L~ /~ ~0~E M~OD oF PuRGING: PURGE C~RI~ ~S ~ME "INTAKE I RATE I cum'voLI WELLVOL. TEMP pH SEC ~ ~~~ (F) (UNffS) (mmhos/cm (COLOR,~RBID~, ~C.) ~0 Well Capacity: 2" - 0.1632 galton~inear foot 4" - 0.6528 gallon~inear foot 6" - 1,4688 gallon/linear foot E2C Remediation, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPUNG RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND 5300 Woodmere Dr,, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA (661) 831-6906 / fax: (661) 831-6234 DATE: 0 g~g/O~ CASING VOLUME: ~'a¢ gallons PURGE C~RIS~ ~ME INTAKE ~ ~TE ~ CUM. VOLJ WELLVOL TEMP pH SEC ~ ~ (GMP) ~ (GAL) ~. ~ (F) (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) (COLOR,~RBID~,~C.) Well Capacity: 2' - 0.1632 gallonainear foot 4' - 0.6528 gallonAinear fool 6" - 1.4688 gallon/linear foot I I I E2C Remediation, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA (661) 831-6906 / fax: (661) 831-6234 PROJECT NAME: Z F~'~ ~.t~,/~ ~ L \ Q WELL DIAMETER: PURGE C~RI~ ~ME INTAKE ~ ~TE J CUM. VOL) WELLVOL. TEMP pH SEC Well Capacity: 2' - 0A632 gallon/linear foot' 4' - 0.6528 gallon/linear foot 6" - 1.4688 gallon~inear foot S~IPLED AT: I 1 I Prqiect Number 180~JS01 Februa~. ~, 2002 APPENDIX B First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I E~C Remediation, LLC Appendix B Pro_iect Number 1802J$03 A~d/ I, 2002 I 5.0 REFERENCES I (BFD, 1999) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, March 30, 1999, Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Freeway £iquOr StOre, 2030 East Brundage Lane, Permit #BR-0231 I (BFD, 2001) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, February 26, 2001, Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane (a.k.a. 2030 East Brundage Lane) I (E2C, 2001a) E2C, Inc., February 9, 2001, Site Characterization Workplan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001b) E2C, Inc., May 31, 2001, Site Characterization Report of Findings and Interim I Remedial Action Plan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001c) E2C Remediation, LLC, November 15, 2001, Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater I Monitoring Report, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001d) E2C Remediation, LLC, February 6, 2002, Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater I and of for Additional Groundwater Monitoring Report Report Findings Characterization and SVE/AS Pilot Testing & Remedial Action Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, I Bakersfield, Cafifomia ! ! , · I E~C Remediation, LLC 22 Project Number 1802J$03 April 1. 2002 ! I I I I FIGURES I Figure 1 Vicinity Map I Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 First Quarter 2002 T'PHg Isoconcentration Plot I Figure 5 First Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 First Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot I '1 I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC Figures /' BLO RWER1 ' I .- Rd. BEAR . ~ x/~,.,~.u[r...~.... SPRINGS ";,~%~--,... '~ 1[~ .~ WHEELER RIpGE E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, CA. 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Phone: (661) 831-6306 1 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 VICINTY MAP LEGEND B-6 N · Sell'Boring Location I UW.d MW-2 B-16 ~ Monitoring Well Location ,~ · VE-1 STORAGE ~) Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 FENCE ~ ovemanq [] Air Sparge Well Location · ~ VE-2 zo B B' w B-9 B-6 I ~k '~ Cross-Section Transect o I m -/ NEW US'; ~W-1 B-1 I B-2 · VENT LINES -~ (a-8) DISPENSER · ~ I [] AS-2 _ ~ // I · ~ VE-3 {~ B-12 VEM-6 B-4 I ~/ / MW-5 · B-3 / / (PROPOSED) & B-13 . ~ SHOULDER ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE power line MW-3 < Ill MW-4 z o z Ill c m SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C ~T~¢//~¢di~ztio/~/~,J~C FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ~ Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 SITE PLAN ILEGEND 1 N~ ~O Soft Boring Location '. / STAORR~2E IW-2 i I .~1 Monitoring Well Location / '~ Vapor Extraction Well LocationI ~' B-16 IA~'I V~J AIr sparge Well L°cat[°n / ' ·VE~ S-11 INES ~ (B-8) · B-15 · VE-~ VE-3(~) VEM-6 '~ B-13· MW-5 (PROPOSED) SHO EAST UNDAGE LANI 'LTl lower ~ p r.w-3, g ~ ~ 0 20 40 ~ SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE ' I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ~ Telephone: (661) 831-6906 I Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 FIRST QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER GRADIENT PLOT · Soil Boring Location I~;'f Monitoring Well Location MW 2 B-16 / (~) Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA o/~rlc: H lAS-1 ' ~ FENCE ~ 9veman,<t /i~'] Air Sparge Well Location vr.-i IE[I T"Hg °°ncentra"°n I"''~' w 8.g B.6 I .---~ TPHg Isooncentratlon ~ · I VED'5 "~'ScANOPY ~ I VE-3 ~ B-12 VEM-6 MW-5 } ~ ~ / (PROPOSED) B-13 SHOULDER ~ , EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE power line , E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 4 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 First Qua~er 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Plot ,,, r LEGEND ~ B-6 . I~ Soil Boring Location ' ' ~ Monitoring Well Location .~ B-16 YE-1 STORAGE {~) Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 FENCE ~ ovemanq il [] Air Sparge Well Location - · ®I~ VE-2 B-9 B-6 r~'~ Benzene concentration In ,,, ug/L ~ · NEW UST B-11 ' VENT LINES -- ~ -- (B-8: R B-2 · NEW UST · 1 VED-5 · }-S CANOPY · .~ · ~ · [] AS-2 YE-3 {~ B-12 VEM-6 B-4 MW-5 · B-3 (PROPOSED) a-13 SHOU'LDER i ,,~e~ · B-14 I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE i power line MW-3 < o SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 First Quarter 2002 Benzene i Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Isoconcentration Plot m LEGEND B-6 · Soil Boring Location ImllmU-'l B-16 m ~ Monitoring Well Location ~.~· VE-1 m ~ Vapor Extraction Welt Location ST~)F~kAGE STORE AS-1 FENCE ~ .... ~n~ 1| ~l Air Sparge Well Location · ® VE-2 m~ MTBE c°ncentrau°n In ug/L B-g ,,, B.6 MTBE Isoconcentration ,.z, : : C10 -,,% Contour in ug/L . u. I ~ 82  B'I - ,/ENT LINES N ST W-1 m 1. · ! (B-8) DISPENSER ' m .-- m ISLANDS · m VED'5 · ~'ScANOPY VE4 VE-3 ~) B-12 VEM-6 B 4 · (PROPOSED) I -':~ B:13__ . I SHOULDER e~ \\¢~ · B-14 m · ~..9°~ m ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE m , ~ power I--~'ne z SCALE: 1" - 40' I , E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 6 Telephone: (661)831-6906 First Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration m Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 PIct ! I I I I I I E2C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e 1 9 7 0 ! I SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT AND I REMEDIAL STATUS REPORT i MR. FAST SERVICE STATION 600 Brundage Lane i Bakersfield, California' June 25, 2002 Prepared For: I Mr. & Mrs. Ki Chu Yi 600 Brundage Lane I Bakersfield, California I Prepared By: i E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, California 93313 I Project Number 1801 BK03 I II I June 25, 2002 Mr. & Mrs. Ki Chu Yi i Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA 93304 I Subject: Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring RepOrt and Remedial Status Report · I Mr. Fast Service Station · 600 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California I Dear Mr. & Mrs. Yi: I E2C Remediation, LLC (E2C) has completed Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring at the property identified as the Mr. Fast Service Station at 600 Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. This report documents the work performed and the results. On-site soil and i groundwater remediation using soil vapor extraction and air sparging methods commenced in April 2002 and the status of these activities is included in this report. · It is a pleasure to be of service to you, should you have any questions regarding this submittal, do not hesitate to call either of the ~ at 661-831-6906..~._.._~ Respectfully Submitted'd'~' ~' ~~~./~f~/~_l~';'-~ '7/¢/¢',.~ ~'~/~ ,,./:,~,',,%~'-"' "~O,"~.~7 -'O' 70 (~'~,~~~t ~.~ I Mark W. Clardy, R.G. #70¢~ ,~. -'¢/-o ~,' / / ~ *,~.~'~.7.~hi~lip ~..¢j in, R.G. ¢4779 Senior Geologist ?'~'*~,..._.,~// ~x-"~"~~'p~l Hydrogeologist I I CC: Mr. John Whiting. R.G. Mr. Howard Wines, R.G Associate Engineering Geologist Hazardous Materials Division California Regional Water Quality Control Board City of Bakersfield Fire Department Central Valley Region 1715 Chester Avenue I 3614 Ashlan Avenue Bakersfield. CA 93304 Fresno, CA 93726 I E2C REHEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONI'4ENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS I .5 i n c e l 9 .7 0 5300 \'~oodmere Drive,, Suite 105, Bakersllcld, C/~. 93313 To.l: 661.,g31.6906 Fax: 661.831.6234 Toll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate Office: 382 ,Martin Avenue, S;mta Clar:h CA 95050 'I;:1:405.327.5700 Fax: 'i08.327.5707 Emai{: E2C. Remcdiatlon. LLC@sbcglob:d.net I Project Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 I TABLE OF CONTENTS i TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ I LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 I Second 2002 Groundwater Monitoring ........................................................................ 1 Quarter Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 1 I ~ .. Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4 i 1.1 Site Description ............... ' .................................................................... 4 1.2 Regional and Site Geology and Hydrogeology ............................................................... 4 1.2.1 Regional Geology ................................................................................................... 4 I 1.2.2 Regional Hydrogeology .......................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Site Specific Subsurface Stratigraphy and Hydrogeology ........................................ 5 I 2.0 SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING ' . ........ 6 2.1 Groundwater Elevations ................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling .......................................................................... 7 ' I 2.3 Groundwater Analytical Results ..................................................................................... 7 3.0 REMEDIATION STATUS REPORT ................................................................................... 8 I 3.1 Remediation System Startup ......................................................................................... 8 3.1.1 Remediation System Equipment ..................................... , ....................................... 8 3.1.2 Regulatory Compliance .......................................................................................... 9 I 3.2 Ongoing System Operations .......................................................................................... 9 4.0 DISCUSSION OF REMEDIAL EFFICIENCY ..................................................................... 9 I 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 1'0. 5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 10 I 5.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 11 6.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION .............................................................. 13 i · 7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 14 ! I E2C Remediation, LLC i I Prqiect Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 I LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Map I Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot I Figure 4 Second Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Second Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot I LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Second Quarter 2002 GrOundwater Monitoring Data i Table 2 Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Historical Groundwater Analytical Results Table 4 Summary of VES Monitoring Data I Table 5 Mass of Hydrocarbons Removed by VES (based on influent concentrations) Table 6 Mass of Hydrocarbons Removed by VES (based on %LEL) ILIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets I Appendix B Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix C SJVUAPCD Remediation System Startup Report, May 28, 2002 I. I I I I I I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC ii Pro)ect Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report contains the results of the Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring event and soil and groundwater remediation progress for the Mr. Fast Service Station at 600 Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. This report is presented to comply with the directive of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region (RWQCB) dated September 21, 2001. This report presents the results of the work activities and includes analytical data, groundwater elevation data, and interpretations of current groundwater quality and flow direction beneath the Site and the immediate vicinity. Operation of the on-site soil vapor extraction and air sparging remediation equipment began on April 4, 2002 and the status of these activities is included with this report. On January 24, 2002, the RWQCB issued a letter in review of the additional groundwater characterization performed in November and December 2001. The letter requested installation of an additional downgradient monitoring well to identify and monitor deeper water-bearing zones below perched groundwater. E2C received cost pre-approval from the State UST Fund by letter dated April 9, 2002 that includes costs to prepare a Workplan to install the additional monitoring well. The Workplan will be submitted in .early July 2002 and the installation is scheduled for late July 2002. Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring . Conclusions Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater elevation onsite and along Brundage Lane increased approximately 3 feet relative to the First Quarter 2002 and increased 6 to 7 feet south-southeast of the Site adjacent to Berneta Avenue where the groundwater . gradient increases. Along Fig Street approximately 300 feet south of the Site, the groundwater elevation decreased by approximately 12 feet at the east end of the street and rose by more than 3 feet at the west end of the street; · The average groundwater gradient from the Site to Fig Street was calculated at 0.068 ft/ft with flow in a southeasterly to south-southeasterly direction in the Second Quarter 2002; in the First Quarter 2002 the groundwater gradient was 0.036 ft/ft, with flow to the southeast; · Wells MWo15D, MW-16, and MW-17D were found to be dry, suggesting that groundwater flow along Fig Street is laterally discontinuous. As well MW-15S went from dry in the First Quarter 2002 to containing more than 3 feet of water in the Second Quarter 2002, the direction of groundwater flow and/or recharge (note MW-15S is closest to the canal along Fig Street) in this area may have changed since the previc~us quarter. Note: In April and May 2002, it was observed that the unlined canal west of the Site was dredged. This could have resulted in removal of settled fines thus propagating increased percolation of water from the canal into the subsurface. This action may have contributed to the increase in water table elevation that was evident in May 2002 during the monitoring event; · The free product thickness at well MW-13 increased from 0.84 foot in the First Quarter 2002 to 3.00 feet in the Second Quarter 2002, an increase of 2.16 feet. I E~C Remediation, LLC 1 Project Number 1801f~KO$ June 25. 2002 Free product found in wells MW-l, MW-7, and MW-12 in the First Quarter 2002, was not found in these wells in the Second Quarter 2002; · Significant concentrations of TPHg and benzene were reported in the water samples from wells MW-l, MW,2, MW-4 through MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15S, with the exception of benzene at wells MW-l, MW-5, MW-8, and MW-12 which was reported as non-detect; · Benzene concentrations at onsite wells MW-2 through MW-5 have decreased significantly, an indication that the combined vapor extraction/air sparging remediation is effectively reducing benzene levels; · The total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration in groundwater at wells MW-l, MW-7, MW-8, MW-11R, MW-12, and MW-14 suggests that free-product may be present in those areas. Free product was found in three of these wells, MW-l, MW-7, and MW-12 in the First Quarter 2002; . · Total hydrocarbons as gasoline were reportedly nomdetect in the groundwater sample from downgradient monitoring well MW-17S for the second consecutive quarter; · The groundwater contaminant plume at the Site is long and narrow, which indicates that it is primarily controlled by the steep groundwater gradient, however, the slightly increasing toluene and TPHg concentrations in the sample from upgradient well MW-2, and increasing TPHg at MW-4, MW-5, and MW-9, some dispersion may occurring; indicate lateral also be · Total petroleum hydrocarbOns as gasoline and benzene concentrations significantly increased at well MW-15S since the initial sample in the Fourth Quarter 2001, possibly indicating a new preferential pathway for groundwater transport. This well was dry in the First Quarter 2002; · Remediation (SVE and groundwater air sparge) at the Site began in April 2002. The remediation affects only the on-site portions of the groundwater contaminant plume. Significant decreases in concentrations for groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells located on-site were observed (MW-l, MW-3, MW-4, and MW-5); · The remediation system has removed approximately 2,000 pounds of hydrocarbons from the groundwater and/or soil plumes from start up in April through June 2002; and · Influent concentrations to the remediation system declined rapidly after start up indicating a "groundwater-only" contaminant plume. Cycling of the system resulted in a greater than 5-fold increase in hydrocarbon removal rate. Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · Install VES and AS wells off-site to mitigate and control free-product in the groundwater; · Obtain VE/AS remedial equipment and operate off-site remedial system; · Continue operation and maintenance of the on-site remedial system on a cyclic basis to enhance removal rates; I E2C Remediation, LLC 2 ! Pro]est Number 1801E~K03 ~l~fl~ 25. 2002 I · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system I shut-down of both the on-site and off-site remedial operations; and · As the free-product thickness significantly increased from 0.84 foot to 3.0 feet in off-site well MW-13, institute remedial action of free-product in the off-site area. I Note: The RWQCB approved installation and operation of both the onsite and offsite remediation systems by letter dated January 24, 2002. The onsite remedial system has been in I operation since April 4, 2002. Cost pre-approval for installation of the off-site system was granted by the State UST Fund by letter dated April 9, 2002. An Authority to Construct permit application will be submitted to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Valley Air Pollution Control I District in July 2002 for the off-site remedial equipment. The January 24, 2002 RWQCB letter also approved sUspending analysis of groundwater I samples for MtBE until verification monitoring is performed prior to site closure. The RWQCB issued, a subsequent letter dated May 13, 2002 in review of the First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Report. Due to the detection of TBA in one sample in the First Quarter 2002, the I RWQCB requested that analysis for the five oxygenates, including MtBE, be continued for at least two additional quarters (through the Third Quarter 2002). IAir sparge and vapor extraction wells in the off-site area are scheduled to be installed in mid- July 2002 with subsequent installation of the off-site remedial system. ! I E2C Remediation, LLC 3 Project Number 1801BK03 Juice 25. 2002 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of the Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring event for the Mr. Fast Service Station at 600 Lane California. This is Brundage (Site), Bakersfield, report presented to comply with the directive of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region (RWQCB) dated September 21, 2001. This report presents the results of the work activities for and includes quarterly groundwater monitoring analytical data, groundwater elevation data, and interpretations of current groundwater quality and flow direction beneath the Site and immediate vicinity. The report also includes the initial soil vapor extraction (SVE) and groundwater air remediation status report. sparge 1.1 - Site Description The Site is located at 600 Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure I for Site location map). The Site is located in the SW 1/4 of SE 1/4, Sec. 31, T29S, R28E, Diablo Base and'Meridian. The present property consists of a rectangular-shaped lot containing one building located in the Northeast corner (see Figure 2 for Site Plan). The building is currently occupied by a small retail business, Mr. Fast Gas & Liquors. Attached to the west side of the building is a fenced in storage area. Old dispenser islands and new dispenser islands are located along the south edge of the building. The property is bordered along its northern side by 1st Street, along its eastern side by T Street (on the South side of Brundage T Street becomes Berneta Avenue), along its southern side by Brundage Lane, and along its western side by the Kern Island Canal - Central Branch. Residential areas, interspersed with light commercial/industrial areas, are located adjacent to the Site. Vista High School is located just North of the Site. Highway 58, an East-West trending four-lane divided freeway is located approximately 450 feet south of the Site. 1.2 Regional and Site Geology and Hydrogeology 1.2.1 Regional Geology The property is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley Where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks overlain continental marine and non-marine rocks of which are by sedimentary Tertiary age, are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. The Tertiary rocks,:in turn, are overlain unconsolidated continental which consist of Pliocene to Holocene river and by deposits, lake sediments comprised of gravels, sands, silts, and clays. I E2C Remediation, LLC 4 ?r~iect Number 1801BK03 · ~l(~t?e 25. 2{)02 Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, Overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sand and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. 1.2.2 Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit, which consists of soil and rock of varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximatelY 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aqui~[ers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The ValleY aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,5000 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the at the Mr. Fast and consisted of alluvial boring procedures adjoining parcels deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 150 and 200 feet below grade, according to the 1995 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in January 1998. Unconfined groundwater beneath the subject property is significantly shallower than the regional depth, presumably because of the position adjacent to the unlined Kern Island Canal - Central Branch. In general the hydraulic gradient in the area is towards the northwest. Measurements made within shallow onsite and offsite wells over the course of this project have shown that the gradient in the unconfined aquifer beneath the Site has been consistently towards the southeast, away from the unlined canal. In January 2001, groundwater flow was also southeasterly at a gradient of 0.0172 ft/ft (see Section 4.5 below). 1.2.3. Site Specific Subsurface Stratigraphy and Hydrogeology In general, the subsurface at the Site is characterized by approximately 5 feet of silty sand at the surface followed by sand to approximately 50 to 55 feet bgs. Silty clays, clayey silts, sandy silts, and finer-grained silty sands occur from that depth to approximately 80 feet bgs. In previous borings for wells (e.g., MW-10), first groundwater was encountered at approximately 47 feet bgs. At the boring for well MW-11R, first groundwater was encountered between 46.5 and 50 feet bgs. At well MW-12, first groundwater was not encountered until 56.5 to 60 feet bgs I E2C Remediation, LLC 5 Project Number 1801BK03 J(~ne 25. 200? On-site, specifically (wells MW-1 through MW-8), groundwater elevations increased an average of approximately 2 feet from June to August 2001. In the off-site area of wellS MW-7, MW-9, and MW-10 groundwater elevations also increased, an average of approximately 1.7 feet. At wells MW-11R and MW-13, groundwater eleVations increased significantly, approximately 7 feet each at wells MW-11 R and MW-13. MW-11R is located approximately 90.feet south of MW-10 and MW-13 is located approximately 100 feet southeast of MW-11R in the general downgradient direction. This data indicates that a very steep groundwater gradient exists between MW-10 and MW-11R with the gradient flattening out somewhat in the area of MW-11R to MW-13. This is evident as depicted on Figure 3, the groundwater gradient plot for August ' 2001. A review of the boring logs for the Site revealed the cause for this change in gradient. In the area from wells MW-1 and MW-2 to the area of well MW-10, the top of the groundwater table occurs above the silty layer, which is generally encountered at approximately 50 feet bgs. This suggests that principal groundwater movement occurs on top of the silty layer within the coarser-grained materials as flow from the recharge point along the canal until it reaches the area of well MW-lO. Upon reaching the area of well MW-lO, groundwater then matriculates down into the silty layer, which has a lower hydraulic conductivity than the coarser materials lying above (i.e., takes longer for the groundwater to move through the finer grained flow medium). This transfer from flow in coarser materials to flow in finer-grained materials creates a steeper gradient. As expected, groundwater elevations downgradient of the change in flow medium materials are much lower than those upgradient of this change and the downgradient area can experience a wide fluctuation in groundwater levels due to even minor recharge or discharge effects. 2.0 SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING From May 16 to 23, 2002, E2C personnel conducted Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring depths to groundwater, checking wells for free- product, purging wells, and collecting groundwater samples. 2.1 Groundwater Elevations Prior to purging and sampling, the depth to groundwater was measured at all wells using a Solinst water level meter. Each monitoring well was measured below the top of casing (BTOC) at the north side of the casing to the nearest 0.01-foot (see Table 1 for summary of depths; Table 2 contains a summary of historical measurements). Based on the previous data regarding the Site, measurements were taken at the wells in order of least impacted location' to most impacted location. In addition, each well was checked for free-product using a Yellowjacket oil-water interface probe. The interface probe and Solinst water level indicator were washed in an Alconox solution and rinsed with clean water prior to each use and between each well. Groundwater elevations were then calculated by subtracting the measured depths from the surveyed elevation. GrOundwater elevations for this sampling round are summarized in Table 1 and with previously collected elevation data for the Site in Table 2. Based on the depth to groundwater measurements, groundwater flow at the Site is southeast at a steep average gradient of 0.068 ft/ft from the Site to Fig Street (onsite gradient of 0.021 ft/ft and offsite gradient of 0.091 ft/ft). In the vicinity of Fig Street groundwater flow becomes south-southeast (Fkjure I E~C Remediation, LLC 6 Project Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 Onsite elevations 3 to 4 feet since the First Quarter 2002. This groundwater rose approximately is likely in response to dredging of an unlined canal bordering the western edge of the Site. Dredging the canal of fines allows for better percolation of water into the subsurface. Dredging of the canal may also haVe an effect on the water level at wells MW-12 and MW-11R where it rose 7.33 feet and 6.05 feet, respectively, since the previous quarter. The water table in this area could also be influenced by the transition in soil lithology in the water-bearing zone between these wells. Between wells MW-12 and MW-13, separated by approximately 130 feet, there presently is a 12.65-foot difference in water table elevation. The lithology of the water- bearing soils between these two wells changes from poorly graded sand at MW-12 to interbedded silts, clays, and sands at well MW,13. As groundwater migrates from more permeable sand at MW-12 to less permeable sediments at MW-13, the gradient becomes more steep and groundwater apparently mounds near MW-11R' and MW-12 as it encounters more resistance to .flow in the finer grained soils. 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling All monitoring wells were purged in order to obtain representative groundwater samples. A minimum of three well casing volumes of groundwater were removed from each well prior to sampling utilizing a battery-powered pump. casing by submersible A volume is calculated multiplying the height of the freestanding water column in the well by the cross-sectional area of the well casing. During purging, groundwater parameters of temperature, pH and conductivity measured water from the wells to sufficient and stable were as was pumped verify purging physical parameter measurements on field instruments (see Appendix A for groundwater purge data sheets). The pump was decontaminated in a solution of Alconox and water and rinsed with clean water before each use. After purging, the wells were sampled using new disposable bailers. A groundwater sample from each well was decanted into four 40-mi volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials. Care was taken to prevent headspace or bubbles in the vials, which were sealed with Teflon-lined lids. Samples were labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4 degrees Centigrade, accompanied with a Chain-of-Custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. 2.3 Groundwater Analytical Results Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, BTEX using EPA Method 8260b, and fuel oxygenate compounds of Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE), Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (ETBE), Methyl tertiary Butyl (MtBE), Tertiary Amyl Methyl (TAME), and Tertiary BUtyl Ether Ether Alcohol (TBA) using EPA Method 8260b. Appendix B presents the analytical laboratory report. Well MW-13 not due to the of 3.00 feet of was sampled presence approximately free-product, an increase from 0.84 foot in the First Quarter 2002.' Laboratory analytical results for the Second Quarter 2002 are summarized in Table 1 and along with historical data in Table 3. The results of these chemical analyses are summarized following: · Significant concentrations of TPHg and BTEX were reported in the water samples from wells MW-l, MW-2, MW-4 through MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15S, with the exception of benzene at wells MW-l, MW-5, MW-8, and MW-12 which was reported as non-detect; . E2C Remediation, LLC 7 Pro]ec! Number 180 I ~KO~ · June 25. 2002 · was reported ranging from 0.7 #g/L (MW-6) to 45 Benzene at concentrations #g/L (MW-11R), and was reported at 330 pg/L at MW-14 (MW-14 monitors a lower portion of the aquifer) (see Figure 4 for benzene isoconcentration plot for distribution); and · At least two of the three compounds of toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were reported in all water samples, except from MW-5 where only xylenes were detected (20 pg/L) and MW-3 and MW-17S which were non-detect, with Toluene at a maximum of 15,080 pg/L at well MWol 1 R, ethylbenzene at a maximum of 1,800 #g/L at well MW-8, and total xylenes at a maximum of 12,320 #g/L at well MW-14; · TPHg was reported in all samples, except from MW-3 and MW-17S, at concentrations ranging from 180 pg/L (MW-6) to 78,000 pg/L (MW-12) (see Figure 5 for TPHg isoconcentration plot for distribution); · TBA was reported in one sample, MW-l, at a concentration of 500 #g/L; and · MtBE, nIPE, ETBE, and TAME were not reported in any'of the samples. 3. 0 REMEDIA TION S TA TUS REPORT 3.1 Remediation System Startup The on-site remedial system consists of soil vapor extraction and groundwater air sparging equipment. Operation of the on-site system commenced on April 4, 2002. Startup testing was performed on April 10, 2002 under the inspection of Mr. Bruce Muir-SJVUAPCD. This is the initial remediation progress report for the project. Future reports will be provided on a quarterly basis. The following sections provide information on the status of the project through the current quarter. A copy of the remediation startup report that was submitted to the SJVUAPCD on May 28, 2002 is included in Appendix C. 3.1.1 Remediation System Equipment The vapor extraction remediation system consists of a regenerative type vapor extraction blower to extract vapors from a network of six wells. An electrically heated Solleco Model 250 ECAT thermal/catalytic oxidizer is connected to the system to reduce vapor emissions entering the atmosphere. The unit's minimum operating temperature is 600 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in catalytic mode. This temperature is set to ensure vapor oxidation at reasonable electrical cost. Furthermore, the unit has a catalytic module to complete the oxidation process. For improved reliability and safety, the valve controls, actuators, and components are controlled by relay logic. The Solleco 250 is equipped with automatic air dilution capability and a noise reduction muffler. The system has been modified with a 200-gallon capacity water 'knockout' pot to temporarily store water entrained in the vapor stream. This remediation equipment is designed to shut down and lock out in the event of a system malfunction. The various safety features include high and Iow oxidizer bed temperatures, high and Iow blower pressure, high intake lower explosive limit (LEL), high and Iow air pressure, high and Iow exhaust temperature, and water knockout malfunction sensor. The system is equipped. with a strip chart recorder and instrumentation to continuously record the heat exchanger temperature, the combustion temperature, the catalytic outlet temperature, the system flow rate in standard cubic feet per minute, and the %LEL. I E~C Remediation, LLC 8 Project Number 1801BK05 June 25. 2002 3.1.2 Compliance Regulatory E2C on behalf and under the supervision of the APCD Inspector collected samples of the influent and effluent vapor emissions on April 10, 2002. The samples were collected in Tedlar bags and transported to a certified laboratory under chain of custody protocol. The samples were submitted to Performance Analytical, Inc? of Simi Valley, California, a state certified laboratory (DHS Certification No. 2380), and analyzed for Total Organic Gases using EPA Method TO-3. Analytical results for influent concentration were reported as 1,700 ppmv and effluent concentrations were reported as 66 ppmv. Based on the analytical results, the destruction efficiency is 96.1%. The daily VOC emissions rate is 7.12 pounds per day (lbs/day) based on the observed system flow rate and a conversion of effluent sample laboratory data to mass flow and 6.74 lbs/day based on the observed flow rate and FID measurement of the effluent vapor stream. Based on these data, the destruction efficiency was calculated to be 96.1%, a value that is in compliance with the minimum 95% destruction efficiency stated in the APCD permit conditions. 3.2 Ongoing System Operations E2C personnel periodically measure influent oxidizer concentrations using a hydrogen flame ionization detector (FID). A summary of operational data for the on-site system collected during E2C's periodic visits is provided in Table 4. The initial concentration as measured with the FID on April 4, 2002 was 950 parts per million volume (ppmv). After approximately one month of operation, the influent concentration decreased to 200 ppmv as measured with the FID. During this period, the influent concentration was monit°red at different well field configurations to optimize vapor extraction. In May 2002, the influent concentration continued to drop falling to 30 ppmv. The vapor extraction system was shut down on May 14, 2002 to allow conditions to stabilize prior to groundwater monitoring and to begin cycling the system off and on to allow for the accumulation of hydrocarbon vapors. Cycling of the system on a weekly basis appears to have significantly increased influent concentrations upon restart after an off-cycle week (Table 4). As you will note on Table 5 and accompanying graphs (daily hydrocarbon removal rate), a steep decline in daily hydrocarbon removal was observed from April - May 2002. This downward trend was reversed in May - June 2002 due to the advent of system cycling. The system was shut down the weeks of May 14, May 28, June 11, and June 24, 2002, and was operated during the intervening weeks. Groundwater air sparging also began on April 4, 2002 utilizing wells AS-l, AS-2, and AS-3 to deliver air to the groundwater. Initial airflow at these wells varied from 0.25 to 4 scfm at operating pressures of 1.5 to 5.5 pounds per square inch (psi). Due to these' Iow flow rates, the air compressor was upgraded on April 15, 2002 with an Ingersoll Rand Model SSR EP10 Rotary Screw Air Compressor to increase the flow rate. Since the upgrade, flow rates have increased varying from 2 to 12 scfm at operating pressures of 2 to 9.5 psi. ' 4.0 DISCUSSION OF REMEDIAL EFFICIENCY influent concentrations and high flow rates were observed at the onset of the Moderately high remediation project. Rapid declines in the influent concentrations were observed after approximately 30 days of. continuous operation. Significant and rapid declines in influent concentration are indicative of "groundwater-only" contaminant plumes or can be caused by channeling in the vadose zone. Generally, when channeling is occurring an increase in flow rate and decrease in well field vacuum are observed. E2C field personnel carefully observed ~1 E~C Remediation, LLC 9 Proiect Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 machine and did not record flow increases field operational parameters significant or well vacuum decreases; therefore, the significant decline in influent concentrations are likely a result a "groundwater-only".contaminant plume. In an effort to increase the hydrocarbon removal rate, E2C began cycling (one week on and one week off) the system to determine whether cycling would increase influent concentrations. The results clearly demonstrate that cycling increased influent concentrations. Prior to cycling on May 14, 2002, influent concentrations had dropped to 95 ppmv. After a one-week off cycle, influent concentrations were measured at 300 ppmv at restart. As cycling continued, the results became even more dramatic. On June 11, 2002 influent concentrations were measured at 620 ppmv, an over 10-fOld increase. Hydrocarbon removal rates are a function of influent concentration, flow rate, and run time. Flow rate remained nearly constant, run time was halved (due to cycling) and influent concentration increased by eleven (11) times; therefore, the net result is a 5.5 times increased removal rate over the same elapsed calendar time. As these results clearly demonstrate, cycling of the remediation system at this site produces significantly higher hydrocarbon removal rates. Therefore, it is E2C's recommendation to continue cycling the system until cycling no longer produces desirable results. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater elevation onsite and along Brundage Lane increased approximately 3 feet relative to the First Quarter 2002 and increased 6 to 7 feet south-southeast of the Site adjacent to Berneta Avenue where the groundwater gradient increases. Along Fig Street approximately 300 feet south of the Site, the groundwater elevation decreased by approximately 12 feet at the east end of the street and rose by more than 3 feet at the west end of the street; · The average groundwater gradient from the Site to Fig Street was calculated at 0.068 ft/ft with flow in a southeasterly to south-southeasterly direction in the Second Quarter 2002; in the First Quarter 2002 the groundwater gradient was 0.036 ft/ft, with flow to the southeast; · Wells MW-15D, MW-16, and MW-17D were found to be dry, suggesting that groundwater flow along Fig Street is laterally discontinuous. As well MW-15S went from dry in the First Quarter 2002 to containing more than 3 feet of water in the Second Quarter 2002, the direction of groundwater flow and/or recharge (note MW-15S is closest to the canal along Fig Street) in this area may have changed since the previous quarter. Note: In April and May 2002, it was observed that the unlined canal west of the Site was dredged. This could have resulted in removal of settled fines thus propagating increased percolation of water from the canal into the subsurface. This action may have contributed to the increase in water table elevation that was evident in May 2002 during the monitoring event; · The free product thickness at well MW-13 increased from 0.84 foot in the First Quarter 2002 to 3.00 feet in the Second Quarter 2002, an increase of 2.16 feet. Free product found in wells MW-1 MW-7, and MW-12 in the First Quarter 2002, was not found in these wells in the Second Quarter 2002; I EzC Remediation, LLC 10 Prqiect Number 1801BK0~ June 25. 2002 · Significant Concentrations of TPHg and benzene were reported in the water samples from wells MW-l, MW-2, MW-4 through MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15S, with the exception of benzene at wells MW-l, MW-5, MW-8, and MW-12 which was reported as non-detect; · Benzene concentrations at onsite wells MW-2 through MW-5 have decreased significantly, an indication that the combined vapor extraction/air sparging remediation is effectively reducing benzene levels; · The total hydrocarbon concentration in groundwater at wells MW-l, MW-7, 8, MW-11R, MW-12, and MW-14 suggests that free-product may be present in those areas. Free product was found in three of these wells, MW-l, MW-7, and MW-12, in the First Quarter 2002; · Total hydrocarbons as gasoline were reportedly' non-detect in the groundwater sample from downgradient monitoring well MW-17S for the second consecutive quarter; · The groundwater contaminant plume at the Site is and which long narrow, indicates that it is primarily controlled by the steep groundwater gradient, however, the slightly increasing toluene and TPHg concentrations in the sample from upgradient well MW-2, and increasing TPHg at MW-4, MW-5, and MW-9, indicate some lateral dispersion may also be occurring; · Total petroleum hydrocarbons-as gasoline and benzene concentrations significantly increased at well MW-15S since the initial sample in the Fourth Quarter 2001, possibly indicating a new preferential pathway for groundwater transport. This well was dry in the First Quarter 2002; · Remediation (SVE and groundwater air sparge) at the Site began in April 2002. The remediation affects only the on-site portions of the groundwater contaminant plume. Significant decreases in concentrations for groundwater samples collected from monitoring' wells located on-site were observed (MW-l, MW-3, MW-4, and MW-5); · The remediation system has removed approximately 2,000 pounds of hydrocarbons from the groundwater and/or soil plumes from start up in April through June 2002; and · Influent concentrations to the remediation system declined rapidly after start up indicating a "groundwater-only" contaminant plume. Cycling of the system resulted in a greater than 5-fold increase in hydrocarbon removal rate. 5.2 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · Install VES and AS wells off-site to mitigate and control free-product in the groundwater; · Obtain VE/AS remedial equipment and operate off-site remedial system; · Continue operation and maintenance of the on-site remedial system on a cyclic basis to enhance .removal rates; · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shut-down of both the on-site and off-site remedial operations; and I E~C Remediation, LLC 11 Project Number 180 IBK03 June 25. 2002 · As the increased from 0.84 foot 3.0 feet in free-product thickness significantly to off-site well MW-13, institute remedial action of free-product in the off-site area. Note: The RWQCB approved installation and operation of both the onsite and offsite remediation systems by letter dated Janua~ 28, 2002. The onsite remedial system has been in operation since April 4, 2002. Cost pre-approval for installation of the off-site system was granted by the State UST Fund by letter dated April 9, 2002. An Authority to Construct permit application will be submitted to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Valley Air Pollution Control District in July 2002 for the off-site remedial equipment. lhe ,JanUary 28, 2002 RWQGB letter also approved suspending analysis of groundwater samples for MtBE until verification monitoring is performed prior to site closure. The RWOGB issued letter dated 1 2002 in review of the First Ouarter 2002 Groundwater subsequent May 3, Monitoring Report. Due to the detection of TBA in one sample in the First Quarter 2002, the RWQCB requested, that analysis for the five oxygenates, including MtBE, be 'continued for at least two additional quarters (through the Third Quarter 2002). Air sparge and vapor extraction wells in the off-site area are scheduled to be installed in mid- July 2002 with subsequent installation of the off-site remedial system. ! =! ! I E~C Remediation, LLC 12 ! Prqiect Number 180 IBK03 June 25. 2002 '1 6.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Report in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing Iin California at this time. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No I warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared under the professional supervision of the registered professional I whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so Ithat our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. & Mrs. Ki Chu Yi and/or agent(s). I Prepared By: ~ , ~evie~w,~d By: ~._~, .... ~'t...J.. u._.z. 1 ~-,d/'-~ '~---~''<----- Mark W. Clardy, R.G. #7055¢ ~. ~?-' '~' _o 7, ] ~, ~,._~,~ ~'.~hiJ~'alWin, R.G. #4779 I Reg. Expires 05/31/04 '~~~ / ~",~"¢~_' ~c~'~pal Hydrogeologist Senior Geologist ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC 13 I Project Number 1801BK03 · June 25. 2002 7. 0 REFERENCES (AEC, 2000a) Advanced Environmental Concepts, Inc., February 2000, Continuing Soil and Groundwater Assessment Report at 'Mr. Fast Gas & Liquors, 600 Brundage Lane, County of Kern, Bakersfield, Califomia (AEC, 2000b) Advanced Environmental Concepts, Inc., July 2000, Continuing Soil and Groundwater Assessment Report at Mr. Fast Gas & Liquors, 600 Brundage Lane, County of Kern, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001) E2C, Inc., July 26, 2001, Request for Approval of Off-Site Remediation & Request for Approval to Install Additional Groundwater Monitoring Wells, Underground Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, Cafifomia (E2C, 2001 a) E2C Remediation, LLC, August 15, 2001, Report of Findings for Additional Site Characterization & SVE/AS Pilot Testing, Second Quarter Groundwater Monitoring Report, Revised Remedial Action Plan (includes Workp/an for Additional Groundwater Characterization), Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001b) E2C Remediation, LLC, October 15, 2001, Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600. Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, Cafifomia (E2C, 2002) E2C Remediation, LLC, January 11, 2002, Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report and Additional Groundwater Characterization Report of Findings, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (Grisanti, 1992) Grisanti & Associates, Inc.', February 1992, Transaction Environmental Site Assessment, Mr. Fast #6 Liquor and Deli Facifity, 600 Brundage Lane, County of Kern, Bakersfield, Cafifomia (RWQCB, 2000a) California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region, 17 November 2000, Underground Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (RWQCB Case No. 5T15000619) (RWQCB, 2000b) California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region, 29 November Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast 2000, Underground. Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (RWQCB Case No. 5T15000619) (RWQCB, 2001) California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region, 16 ,January 2001, Underground Storage Tank Re/ease, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (RWQCB Case No. 5T1500061.9) E~C Remediation, LLC 14 I Proi_ect Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 I (RWQCB, 2001c) California Water Control Board Central Regional Quality Valley Region, 26 February 2001, Underground Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast Service . Station, 600 Brundage 'Lane, Bakersfield, Ca#fomia (RWQCB Case No. 5T15000619) (RWQCB, 2001d) California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region, I 20 April 2001, Underground Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (RWQCB Case No. ,. 5T15000619) I (RWQCB, 2001e) California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region, 21 September 2001, Underground Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast I Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (RWQCB Case No. 5T15000619), Review of "Request for Approval of Off-Site Remediation and Request for Approval to Install Additional Groundwater I Monitoring Wells" (RWQCB, 2002) California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region, I 24 January 2002, Underground Storage Tank Release, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (RWQCB Case No. 5T15000619) I (WEECO, 1993) Western Environmental Engineers Company, July 1993, Site Assessment Report, Mr. Fast Service Station, 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, I California ! ! I E~C Remediation, LLC 15 Project Number 1801BK03 June 25, 2002 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 Second Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Second Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot E2C Remediation, LLC Figures E2C Rentediation, LLC MR. FAST SERVICE STATION FIGURE 600 BRUNDAGE LANE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Bakersfield, California 93313 1 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 SITE LOCATION MAP Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 LEGEND  Monitoring Well Location ~ Shallow Monitoring Well Location ~ Deep Monitoring Well Location I Abandoned Well Location APN: 011-031-05 Y vapor Extraction Well Location 'T' Street : [] Air Sparge Well Location I I-. BM Benchmark Ltl : I Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Bmndage Lane VE-2 Y cu.,.t G., II --/3[~'--1 Pumps // · ~'~_~ I I VE-4 ¥--~ MW:4 ~-~ ~ I I T MW-1 .. ~ ~/ APN: 011-032-16 MW-6 MW-3 '~ ~ MW-5 Brundage Lane -~ ~ MW-8 VE-~ ~ I I 92fi West; 22fl South-3 BRUNDAGE LANE ,, .uw-9- Mw.7 MW-lO+' ~ 011-048-14 011-048-08 U.I MW-12 [ m + uw-11R MW-11 ~ MW-14 UW-l + 011-048-15 011-041-01 011-041-02 011-041-11  011-048-10 011-048-0¢ 011-048-08 i 011-041-12 0 I 80 SCALE: 1 inch = 80 feet E2C Remediation, LLC MR. FAST SERVICE STATION 600 BRUNDAGE LANE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 BAKERSFIELD, CA. Bakersfield, California 93313 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 SITE PLAN 0 J 80 APN: 011-031-05 I _~ SCALE: 1 inch = 80 "T" Street , ,,.~,.~ .g~j feet ~~E-~ ~~f ~' ,O APN: 011-032-16 · ~f ~ ,~ Brundage Lane 9211Wesl 2ZI SOLilh 353.10 ~ ' ~ J ~ ' I , Monitoring Well Location Shallow Monitoring Well Location ' ~ ~ ~ ........... ,~~~ ~- 8~~ ~ ueep Mommnng well Locauon MW 15s MW 15d ~ ~~ MW-17s MW-17d ~ Abandoned Well Location FIG STREETET ~ ~~ ~,~ Va,o,.x.rac,ion We..,o--. ~ Groundwator Bovation ~ E2C Remediation, LLC MR. FAST SERVICE STATION FIGURE 600 Brundage Lane 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, California Bakersfield, California 93313 3 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 SECOND QUARTER 2002 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 GROUNDWATER GRADIENT PLOT 0 J 80 APN: 011-031-05 SCALE: 1 inch = 80 feet "T" Street / MW-2 · .1~ · ! I F- l I T 600 Brunda Lane / ' v.-~ I "~'~% I ~ A~N: o~-o3~-~ ~ ~ - c%~%?~ ~ Brundage Lane ~ VE-4_ ~-1 * ~ ~-- ~ J ' MW 6 MW 3 ' ' ~ -~ .... ..- ,.. BRUNDAGE LANE MW-9 ~ ¢ ~ Approximate Limits of ~ ~, :-~.~-o~ LEGEND  Monitoring Well Location I  Shallow Monitoring Well Location . ~.o,t8-~o 01 i-o48-o9 011-048-08 ~ 011-041-12 -- Vapor Extraction Woll Location 8~ Bonchmark ~ ~onzono Concontration in u~C E2C Remediation, LLC MR. FAST SERVICE STATION FIGURE 600 Brundage Lane 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, California Bakersfield, California 93313 Telephone: (661)831-6906 SECOND QUARTER 2002 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 BENZENE ISOCONCENTRATION PLOT 0 J 80 APN: 011-031-05 SCALE: 1 inch = 80 feet "T" Street ~ APN: 011-032-16 / ~ ~"'=1 Brundage Lane ~ vE-4. , MW-1 ' BRUNDAGE LANE ~ ~ ~ Approximate Limits of o,,-o,,,-o: o.-o,,~.~, o,,.o~.o~ ~ Free-Product  MOBItO atlon  Shallow MonRodn~ Well kocation Abandoned Well Location FIG STREE~ vapor Extraction Well Location BM Benchmark FREE -WAY ~ TPHg Concentration in uCL E2C~emegJ¢tJo~, [[C MR. FAST SERVICE STATION FIGURE 600 Brundage Lane 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, California Bakersfield, California 93313 5 Telephone: (661)831-6906 SECOND QUARTER 2002 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 TPHg ISOCONCENTRATION PLOT Proiect Number 1801BK03 ~1~170 25. 2002 TABLES Table 1 Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Results Table 4 Summary of VES Monitoring Data Table 5 Mass of Hydrocarbons Removed by VES (based on influent concentrations) Table 6 Mass of Hydrocarbons Removed by VES (based on %LEL) EeC Remediation, LLC Tables Project Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING RESULTS Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California May 16 - 23, 2002 WELL ID DATE WATER F-P ELEV. ELEV. B T E X TPHg TPHd TBA MTBE DIPE ETBE TAME (feet BTOC) (feet) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) MW-1 5/16/02_ ~ 4_1:50 _394,_03 .... _3~2.5_:3 ...... ND .... 3.5 _0.6_. _ 1_83_ _ _ _28~6`00. _NA_ .... _.500 ..... ND. ._ND ..... ND ...... MW-2 5/16/02' 41.02 395.01 353.99 1.6 58 1.0 37.9 470 NA ND ND ND ND ND MW-3 5/16/02 41.54 394.64 353.10 ND ND ND ND ND NA ND ND ND ND ND MW-4 5/i6/02 -' 42.54 --394.14 351.60 ......... 1.2 .... ~6 2~2 - - 5-0 ........ 6~0--" ~NA- ..... -ND .... ~D ...... ND .... ND .... -~D' MW-5 5/22/02. _ 4~2.9~_ . 393.43 350.51 ....... ND_ _ ND ........ ND ........ 20 ..... _220 ...... N_A .... _ND_._ _N_D .... ND_ .... ND ..... ND__. MW-6 5/22/02 41.23 393.76 352.53 0.7 ND ND 25 180 NA ND ND ND ND ND MW-7 5/22/02 43.31 393.63. _ 350.32 _ _1._8 _.300 .... _ND .... 3120 31 500 ..... NA ..... __ND .... _ND ..... ND_ _ ND. __-ND_ duplicate ........... N_D .... 4_4.0_ . _~D~ ..... 3 37? .... 35 `0_0.0- ...... FA _ __N.D_ _ _ND. ND ND ND aw-8 5/1-6/(~2 '--~ ~421..62 .... 3_93..9_5 351.33_ _. _ ND .... 6,010 ..... ~1_,800 _ _.4_:690 ~7_4,0_00 _Nh ..... ND~ .... ND .... ND . ND ..... MW-9 5/1_6/02_ . 4!.92 ..... 394~05. . 352.13~ ..... 2._1 ........ _86 ..... 6~6. _ 63 ...... 9__9._0 ..... NA ....... ND .... _N_D __ _N_D .... ND ..._ND__ MW-10 5/16/02 44.94 392.91 347.97 1.6 99 8.8 67 470 NA ND ND ND ND ND MW-11 . . Well. taken o_u! of Service - Repiac~d b~, MW-11R ..... We~{ taken ~3u~-o~ se ~vic;': R~l-aced ~)~-M-W-- 11R MW-12 5/23/02 _4.'3.71 . _ '..39_k~0.6. _ _34_8135 ._ -.~.D-'-I . 9i'0. i..' I" -9~° -.- }?,91~- '~8;0_-_00~ I~'_-~,~.~1 ND'-'-. ND'-I "ND ' ND MW-13 5/23/02 58.70 3.00 392.00 335.70 NSFP MW-15S 5/22/02 70~00.. 390.75 320:75 25. I .4,670- I ND .iii _~.3;~00 ~...1i-~'0~)0 I-_ _N~_A..i"I- -~'D I ...ND' ND '-ND ."~ND_~__- MW-15D 5/22/02 . .. DRY _3_90~72 . . _----;--- ................................ NS MW-16 5/22/02 DRY 390.97 ........ NS MW-17S 5/22-J02_ .73:98 390.74.' 316.7~6 ..... ND I ._ND-_._J _No._J_ ND _l. _-__N'D ii "A_'.' I_ _. ND' I ND J 'ND J-'ND I -ND MW-17D 5/22/02 DRY 390.91 ........ NS Notes: Duplicate of MW-7 labeled as MW-18 on Chain-of-Custody ND = Below Practical Quantitation Limits: IResults in micrograms per liter ~ug/L) = parts per billion (ppb) Benzene/Toluene-O.5//g/L, Ethyl Benzene/Xylenes-0.5//g/L, TPHg-50//g/L, and MTBE-O.5 B = Benzene NS = Not Sampled; well dry 3TOC = Below Top of Casing NSFP = Not Sampled, free-product present DIPE = Diisopropyl Ether T = Toluene -- = Ethylbenzene TAME = Tertiary Amyl Methyl Ether ETBE = Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether TBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol =-P = Free-Product Thickness TBD = To Be Determined 3W = Groundwater TOC = Top of Casing MTBE = Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether TPHd = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as diesel NA = Not analyzed TPHg = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline X = Total Xylenes GW Elevation corrected for Free Product usin~l formula: GW Elev = Reference Elev -[Depth to Water - (Product Thickness)(0.8)l E2C Remediation, LLC T1-1 Project Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California TOC ELEVATION TOTAL DEPTH DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER WELL ID DATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (feet MSL) (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) .._ _7/_2p_/9_5 ......... _N/A ........ N_/A- ..... .N_./A- ..... N/A_ ..... 4/5/96 N/A N/A N/A ... N/_A _ _.3/.2_7/97 ......... N__/.A- ........... ._N~A ........ N/A N_/A- ..... __ .1_0/20J9_8 .... NlA. ...... N/A __ H/A ...... N_/A .... . _1/! !_/99 N/A NJA. N/A ~q!_A-_ . 5/12/99 N/A N/A 45.13 N/A _ . _8./_2_ 0_/9~9 .... _N/.A ........ N~A .... 40.96_ _. N/A- ....... .. 12~_/_ .99 ..... N_/A_ ........ 'N~A- .... 40_.96 ..... N/A .... MW-1 __. _3J~_0_/0_0 .......... .~_/A ..... N/A ............ 4_6._.3_5 ........ _N_/A ...... _ __7_/_3/_0_0_ ........ N/~A ........ N/_A ..... _N_/A_ ....... N_/A .......... .__1_/_33/_0_1 ....... .. 3~9_4_.0~3 ....... _51._7.3_ _ _ 43.28 ..... 35q.7_5_ ..... .6_/_4./_0_ ! ........ ~9__4._03~ ......... 5_! ._8.0- ........ _42_,_1_5 ........ 3_5.!,_88 ..... 51.80 40.32 353.71 8/6/01 394.03 _ ____~_~_6__/0.1- ..... _~4_:0~ ........... _51 .~80 ............ 42~.3._2 .......... _35_1 ._7j ........ ................................... 2/18/02 394.03 5__~_: ~..~ ................ ~5'~ .................................... _52._1p ............... 4_1.50 ........... 3_5~._ _5.~__ 5/16/02 394.03 _ _ _ ............... N/A .... 4/5/96 ..................................... 4.4:99 ..... 10~20~98 ..... .. J!1.1_/99 .................................. .44_:_2_8 ................... _. _ 5/1__~__9_9_ ...................... _42:_76 ........................ _. 8/_2~/_9_9_ ............................. 38.61 ................ __~1_0_/6/9~9_ ...................................... _N/A ............................. ___~ _2/?99 ....................................... _4__1._47 ...................... MW-2 ...................................... 3/30/00 _4_5.j-9_ ........... ..... .. 7_/.3__/p.q ............................ 4._2_~_0_1 ..................... 1/3/01 395.01 54.29 ...................... 3_51.63 ..................................... 43.38 ...... .~/_4_/_0J_ _ _ 3-95_,p_1_ .... 54.,-2.9_ ..... 4.1~.8~2_ ....... _3.5_3:!9 8/6/01 395.01 54,29 40.12 354.89 ' 12~i01 ' 39~,~1 ..... 5~4,29 4:~.42 .... 3'5~'~'~ .... - - ~i-8/-0~ - ~9-~':~i 5~,:24 ..... ~5-.~ .... ~:~ i_~.:~.16~_0_~ ' -_ '_ _'_3~_5:~0.1 ~ :.~4.'J~. ~ i .i.i ..-'-i~'-1_~-'--- 4/5/96 _N/A_ .................. I _ 3(27/~9_7_ ............................... ~/_A- ........... 1072_0_/_9_8 ........................................ _4_5_.4__6 ........................... _ _ !/_ 1~1/_99_ .................................. 45:4_3 ................. __5/!.2/_ 9-9_ ............................ _4.4_.2__1_ ................ _ _8J2_0_/_g _g. .............. 39._92 .................... .... ~_01_61_99 ................... H/A__ ............. _1._ .2~../99 ........ 42_.~5. .............. MW-3 .. _3/_30/00 ......... 46..._4.4 ..... ...... 43.05 .... .. i _4.80 6/4/01 394.64 54.84 42.82 351.82 8(_6_/0_1 ...... 3__94~_64._ . . 54.8_4 4_1:16_ 3_5__3:.48_ ..... .___1.. _~_6_/_0 _1 _. _.3_9_4.64 ..... 54.~? 43._.3_0 ...... ~_1 ._34 . ._ __ ~1.8_/P.2_. _3_9_4:.6_4 54.8_2 ...... 4§.._3_2 ........ 34~8.37 ..... _.. 5(1_6./0_2 ..... 3_94.64_ .... 5_.4.._80 .... ~ .,54~ ...... 353:10__ ._ I I E2C Remediation, LLC T2-1 I Project Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 I TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane I Bakersfield, California DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER TOC ELEVATION TOTAL DEPTH WELL ID DATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION I (feet MSL) (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) 4`-/5/~6 ..... _N./A 3/27/97 N/A 10/20/98 46.17 ! ~1./_11!99 .............. .4`5--99 .__ . .5(1__2/99 ..... 4_5:13 _ _8(~0/_99 ........ 40.74 . ~10J6/_-99 ......... N/_A_ I 12/7/99 - 42._6_ _5 MW-4 . .3/~p_/..0_0 ................ 45~82 .............. _ Z_/3`/_0_0 .................... 4_3`_..lp . I 6_/_4/0!. 3`94..1_4`. 54.12 _4_3_. ~08 . _3_.5_1..0__6__ .. 8/.6/0_1_ ...... -39_4.1_4 ......... 54.12 _ 4'~.2-.2- __ 3__5_2.:.9-2_ ___ _. 12/6~/0_1 ......... _3`_94_~.1_4_ ....... 54t 1_4 ........ _42.~80~ ....... 35~1 ._3`Il.__ ..... _2(18/_02._ _ _39_4._14 ........ _5_4_..t4 .... 4_5.9_8_ ...... 3_48_, 1~6 _._ I _ __ 5_/!.1~/_02_ 3`94`._1`4_ 54.1_5 .4__2:54 3_5_1.._6_0_ _3/2_7/9_~ ..I ................. N/A ................ . 1.p/_20/-98 ............... 5_1.45 I ._1_/! 1/9_-9 51:3! _ .5/1_ _2/9_ -9................... 4` 9._7_5 ................... . 8_/2 _0-/_99 .................... 4~2_.~7 ? ................... .__ 12.~.__/-9.9 ....................... 4_3_. 9_9_ 5!_.2_ 0_ MW-5 ..... 7_/_;}_/_00. ........................................ _43__.8_~ . __6_/4_/_01 ....... 3`93.?.3 .... 5?.40 4~..-98. ..... 3_4_9_. 4~5 .... I8(6__/_0_1 3_9--3:4_3_ ~5_7._40_ __42_,1_0. _3.5_1._ _33__ _ 1`.._2/6_/01 ..... 3--93-.~4-3_ ........ 57.40 43.16 350.27 _ _2-/1_8/0~2_ ..... 393`:4.3 .... 5?:40 _. :i -46.4-8 ' -3~,-6~9~' .... ___5_/2~-0-2 .... 39_3_..4_3_ _ . 57.4_4 . 4~:~)~_. "' ': -' _3~'_0~._6T1_- I .... 3/2-'/~/_9_ .7_ ......................... N_/A ................ _ .10120.1_9_~ ............. 45.70 i 1/1:1/9_9. .......... ' ....... 4~:1~3- .......... . . ._.5/1__~_9~ ............................................ _..8_(2_0/_9p_ ....................... 3`-9_.9_4 __12(7_/9_9_ ................................. ~(A_ .................... ..... 3`/30/_0_o. ................... 4~6.,6._1 I MW-6 __7_/3/~00 41 .. 1/3/_0_1 3_93;7_6 53_..2_0 . _43~07 ...... ~34_0:56 6/4/01 393.76 53.06 41.30 352.46 . .`6/6_/0'~ ..... 3_93:7_6 53.16 . _ 39:75 3`54:0-1 .... I 12(6/01 393.76 53.18 .42.14 35_1..6~2 2~18/02 ' 39.3.76 53.10 . 45.1`_8 . . . 34_8_...58 ..... .5/22/02 , . 3_-93:76_. 53.10 41.23 ...... 352_t_53_ I I E2C Remediation, LLC T2-2 I Project Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 I TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane I Bakersfield, California TOC ELEVATION TOTAL DEPTH DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER WELL ID DATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION I (feet MSL) (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) . _3!27./_97 .... 49-._5_0 10/20/98 49.34 _. 1/11/99 ......... -53-~!.§ .5/1_2/99- _4-2.51 _8_/2_ Q/_9-9 4_5.1:~ ... 12/7/99 45.13 . . 3/39_/0_0. ............. 51_.2_7._ t MW-7 7/3/_00 ................... N/A' .~1-310~ .... 3_9--3,_63_ 5_2,80 45-08 ...... '348,~ ___6_/_4_/~_1 .... 3_9-3.6~ .... 5_3,72 _ _ .._4_4,52 . .34_9-.!! . _~_6.(01, _ _ _393_.6.3 .... 5_3.~7._2 ....... 42:_7_8` ..... 35_o._8-5. _ I 1_.2.H/_0~I .... _3-9-~t_63. _ _5~_3,7_2 _ 44_,_3._2 ...... 3_4_9.3-_1 2/19/02 393.63 53.70 47.23 346.50 I ._ 7_/3/~00~ ............................................. _4_3,4_2_ _ . 1_/_3J0__1 ...... _39_3.95 ........ 5_2:8_0_ ......... 4.3._99 ............. -35~p,_0_5 ........ __ _.6/.4L0~ ...... ~39~3._~ ........... _5@:9-p ........... ~;_3~ .......... 3-5_0_.~9_ MW-8 __ 81_6!_01_ ........ _39__3..p-5 .... 50~9-_0 ...... 4.1.._5_8 .... _35_2:3_7. I 12/6/01 ................ 5. _0_. 9_0 ........ _4_3.1_8_ ........ 35_0.77 __. ....... 393.95 .... _24.J._8/g _2 ..... .3_9__3 9_.5_ ........ 6_o;9_2. ....... _46_._22_ ..... 3.47_.7__3_ .. _ 5~/~1.67p2_ .... 39-_3~.9~5_ . ._ 59.~90 ..... 4_2.~62_ . __35_1 ,_3,3~. ia _ .................. .............................. .......................... 1/3/01 394.05 51.6p .......... 4_5_.1_4. ........ _3_4_`8; 9- _1 _._ .... 6/~4.(~1 ..... -39-4_.05- ........ 50~_`80~ ................ _43-, .5._2 .......... _3__5_ _0;.5_3. .... MW-9 .__`8_/6/~_1_ ..... 3_9_4.0_5 ......... 5_0._8~ ...... 42._2~1 ....... 3~5_1_,~. _ , · _ 1_2/6/~0_1 .... _3_9_4 .~0__5 59_._.72 ....... _4.-4;_2_4__ ........ _-3_4_9_.~_1_ i!· _. ~_1_8_/0_~ _394,_0._5_ . 50._68. _ 4(~.94 ...... _3.4.7:1_1_ _ 5/16/02 394.05 352.13 ............... 50.66 .... 47._92_ ............. I .... .... .... 4-5.-5_! 6/4/01 392.91 _ 5_2. _3.4 ....... _45:3_~ .... ~-4_7.. t5_7_ ...... I .1_2(. _6/_ 0_~1_ 39-_2~9-1_ 62.34_ 4_4 ,_1_4 . _3z~_ 8._7-7_ _ . 2/18/02 392.91 52.32 47.12 345.79 I .............................. ................... _7/3/O_O 45._7_5 MW-11 _. 1_!_3/.0_1 ..... _~91_ ._35_ ........ .48._30 ...... 44.9_2 .... ~ _34_6.4~__ L.JT OF SERVICE, REPLACED BY MW-11R . .6/_4/~1 . _39_1._2_2 .._ 6.3_:52_ 5.4.7_6 3_36.4_.6 . . I ._8/6/_0_1_ . 3_91_ .2_.2- 63-:52 47.65_. 343.57 MW-11 R 1__2~_./0_~1. _ _391..~22_ .63-.5_2 _ 4_5.0_8 3--4_6:.14 _.2/18(.O2__ _ _39_1.3__3 _ .63:_.40 ..... 5_4_.63 .... 3-:~6..7_0 ..... i . _-5/22/0_2 .... _3 9_ _1~. _3_ _3 . .63_.4_0 . _. 48.68. ..... 342._6_5. _ 6/4/01 392.01 - NMFP NMFP NMFP .8/6_/_01 . ._3_9~2.0~1 ..... NMFP . _ . N_MFP_ . NM_F_~ . . I MW-12 12f7__/_01. 392~0_~1 4~.7_8 _347:_2-_3-... · 2/1_9_/0~ . .39-2._06 5!.65. 341!;.0.7. 5/23/02 392.06 43.71 348.35 I I E2C Remediation, LLC T2-3 Project Number 180 I BK04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California TOC ELEVATION TOTAL DEPTH DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER WELL ID DATE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (feet MSL) (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) . _6/_4[p! . _ ~9~.6_5 6.5_~40. 59;10 334:55 8/6/01 392.65 65.40 50.97 341.68 MW-13 - !2/7(0-1 .... -3--9-1--~65 - ~ 65'-39- - - 49'-52 342'13 _ _2/! 9_/..0.2_ _.. 3_92.00. 65._.3_8 5_7_.43 3~5.24_. _ __5(2_3~0_2 3-92.00 ..... 66._10 58.70 335.70 6/4/01 391.87 77.00 69.88 321.99 . ~_/639~1 ........ ~39~1 .~7_ ......... 76~.9_O_ ...... _68.~! ........ 3~2~_..46~ _ MW.14 _ __1__2/7._ ./_.01_ ...... 39~11..8_7 ..... ?_6_..._9_ 2 ...... 9.8.5D . 3_23=37 2/18/02 391.65 76.98 69.30 322.35 .... _5/~ _3_/.02 .... 3_9].6~5 ......... 77_.48_ .... 69.50_ 322.15. 1__2/7__/9_1. ....... ~-99~.7_5 ......... 7_3:24 . _ . 7__0.72 . .. 32_0'._03 MW-15S _ _~1_8_/_0~2 ...... 3_90.7_5 ......... 7_3._3_0_ ....... D_R_¥ .... - ...... _5_/_2W02_ ....... _3_9_.0~7~ ......... 73.,~2- .......... 7_0_,00_ I. 320.75 _1. _2Z7/0_1- ...... 3_9_.0.7_2_ .......... 87._2.4' ........ D_R~ . _ ' ....... I MW-lSD .... 2/18_/__0_2 ......... .3_9_0_:_7.2 ............. 87_.2_4- ...... _D.~Y ...... - ....... .._ _~ _2/.0_2. ..... 3_g0..7_2 ................. DRY_ ...... -:--'.".- _ _ ...._1_ _2.(7_/_0! ....... 3_9~0_ ..9_7 ...... _7-9._1_0 ...... _D~R_Y . __ - ....... .. MW-16 _ 2/~1_8/_0_2_ ........ 3_9P_.9_7 ....... 7__g._1_2 ......... D__R¥ ..... :-:-:--7 _ 5/22/02 390.97 78,55 .l~_/::{~ ..... ':-:--:L .... 1__2/7_/.0.1 ........ _39~.0~_7,~ .......... _8_1.p_2_ ......... 57_.1_4_ 33~3,_6._0 . . MW~17S _ __2/_~1_8/0~ ........... _3_90_..7.4' .......... 7~_7_8 .... 6_1.50. ..... 329:24 5/22/02 390.74 79.65 73.98 316.76 )_2/7/q! ..... 3_9.q,-9~ ....... 9_t.~ _O_R_Y ._ - ....... MW-17D ._._2/_1.8/_.02 .... 3_9p.-9:1_ ........ .-9_1~.2_0_ ........ g~_Y. ...... - ....... 5/22/02 390.91 91.00 DRY ........ Notes: NMFP = Not measured, greater than 30" of free-product Top of Casing Elevations are measured at the nodh side of casing and referenced to mean sea level Groundwater Elevations- are not corrected for product thickness before 01/03/01 Groundwater elevations after 01/03/01 are based on Benchmark on canal abutment '1 I E2C Remediation, LLC T2-4 Proj~t Number 18076K04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA MR. FAST SERVICE STATION 60~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA I ETHYL- TOTAL T ME BENZENE l TOLUENE BENZENE I XYLENES I TPHg )TPHd TBA MTBE DIPE I ETBE A WELl. ID DATE, (~) 7/20/95 4,200 113~000 ND 40,000 ._ .329,000 _NA ~ _-NA _ . NA ~ _NA _ _NA . NA . 4/5/96 NA NA NA _ NA ...... N_A -NA . NA~ . NA _ _NA NA NA 3/27/97 170 _27,000 . _ 5, _0~0 _ _30,000__ 21_0000 .... NA.... NA~_ _ 22,__(~0 .... NA _ .NA. _~A 10/20/98 NSFP ... NSFP .... N_SFP N_SF_P NSFP . _N_A----I ..... NA . NA.... NA~_ ..... NA_ NA 1/11/99 NSFP NSFP NSFP ..... NSFP .... _NS~=p NA .... N 5/12/99. NSFP NSFP. . NSFP .... NSFP ...... .N_SFP NA .... NA~ . _ N~ _ ~A .... NA _NA 6/20/99 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NA NA .... NA _.N_A . NA .NA 12/7/99 <5600 35,400_ 62,~00 _: 454,000 _N/A _ .~N.A ._ - ~A <38.000 NA NA NA 3/30/00 NSF~ . NSFP NSFP NSFP . .NSFP. . . NA . - NA _ NA ._NA __ . _NA NA MW-1 7/3/00 8.2 8.8 .. 1,600 . 24,000 130,000 NA NA NA NA NA NA 1/3/01 <20 460 680 19,700 18,890 NA <200 <20 <20 <20 <20 1/3/01 (Dup) <20 710 1400.... 18. _ . 17,930. . N? _~ . <200 <20 <20 <20 <20 3/2/01 NSFP . NSFP NSFP __NSFP NSF? NSFP ...... I~SFP_. NSFP ._N_SFP ..... N_SFp__ _ NSFP. 6/4/01 <50.0 340 1,610 8,0~0 65,7~0 NA _ __<~5~.0 550.0.. _~0.0 <50.0_ _ <50.0. 8/6/01 <50,0 585 .830 . .7,7_60. . 33,500 NA . <250~0 ~ <50.0 ?50.0 .. <50,0 <50.0 12/6/01 ND. ND 230 . _ 5,280 ... 73,890 . N_A _ _ __ND. . ND .... N_D ....... ND .... ND 2/18/02 . NSFP .... .NSFP NSFP _NS_F_P _ NSFP NSFP . .N__SFp __ N_SFP. .N_~SFP .. __N_SFP_ . _NSFP. 5/16/02 ND . 3.5 0.6 .. 183 . ~8,600.. NA....... 500 ...... ND ND .... ND .... ND 4/5/96 <0.3 <.3 <0:3 <.03 _?50.0 _NA .... NA ..... NA .NA ....... NA _ . _ NA_ . 3/27/97 1.0 6.2 . 0.83 , _ 4.5. . 4~. . NA .. ~ ~_ __ N_.A. . .NA ._ N~ . NA_. 10/20/98 <0.5 _ <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 _ <50 . FA FA <q_._5 .... HA_ _ .. NA . NA 1/11/99 <0.5 . <0.5 <0.5 .... <0.5 <50 NA., NA. <0.5 NA _ _. NA NA 5/12/99 ~0:3 5.5 <0.3 _ 1.52 ..... <500_ ~N~_ ......N_A~ ..... _<~.0 ___NA ...... _NA .... ~NA 8/20/99 . . <0.3 _ .. <0.3.... <0.3 .......<0.6 ..... ~.5(~0_ ....N_A_ ......_N_A. .....~<2._.(~ ...... _NA ..... _NA .... NA 12/7/99 _<'0.3 <0.3 ,<0.3 . . .<0.6 <500 _NA _ NA_ _ <2._0 .NA . NA. NA 3/30/00 .<0.3 . <0.3 <0:3_ i .... _<0.6 .... <5_0~.. . NA ..... N_A_ .. _<0_._5_ aA ...... NA .... N_A _ MW-2 7/~/_00 <0.5 ..... <0.5 <0._.5. ....... _<0.._5 .... <50 _.N.A _ . _N__A .....!:`0.--5 ...... NA_ .... NA ........ N~A_ _. 1/3/01 <0.50 <0.50 <.0.50 _<0.~ 3/2,/01 <0.50 <O.50 . . ~0.50 <0.50 ..... <50 .... NA ...... <_5__ _ ~0.50.... __<~.:50 ...... -<'q-'50 _ <0.50. 6/4/01 .<_0.5 <0.5_ . ?0.5 . _ <0.5 ._ <50_ _ NA_ _. <2.5 ..... '5°.5 .... <0.5._ _~0_.5_ ,- <0_.5_ _ 6/6/01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ~:0.5 <50 NA . <2.5 <0.5. .<0.5 <0.5 I <0.5 12/6/01 ND 2.56 . ND . _ ND 90 NA ND ND ND NDI ND 2/18/02 4,7 3.90 ~ID 3_1.3 170 .NA ..... ND .... N_D ~D ..... ND __. N~ 6/16/02 1.5 58 _ 1.0 . , 37.9 . ~ . 470 . . -NA ..... ND ..... ND . . ND .... ND_ _ ND. E2C Remediation, LLC T3-1 Project Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA MR. FAST SERVICE STATION 600 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA I ETHYL- TOTAL WELL ID DATE (/~/L) 4/5/96 41 42 35 3,000.00 _ 8 600 NA NA NA _NA _. _ NA I- NA 3/27/97 37 8.4 170 1,100 12,000 NA .... NA NA . .NA NA NA 10/20/98 .4.6 .~ ._<0.5 1.90 _. .53.0 .... !,300 ..... NA ...... _N_A ........ -3,8_ ..... I~h .... NA_ ...... _NA 1/11/99 .4Q 16,00 0.60 180 8,200 NA _NA . . 65.0 .. NA NA -NA_ 5/12/99 8.36 <0.3 <0.3 421 ~4,300 NA .... N_A 69.4 .- . ~A. NA ._ NA 8/20/99 <0,3 _<0.3 <0.3 _.<0-6 __ _<.500 NA_ Nh . I - i<2~._0 .... _N.A_ .... .N_A _ .A. 10/6/99 <0,3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.6 ... <500 NA _ _ NA_ ....1.1_ _ . NA ._NA... NA 12/7/99 <0.3 <0,3 <0.3 1..38... <500 NA ..... NA ._<.1.0 .... NA ..... NA _ NA _ 3/30/00 1.04 2.06 <0.3 89.60. _ 1,020 . ._NA _NA_ <(~.5. ~ . .NA .._NA . NA. _ MW-3 7/3/00 <50.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA . .NA <0.5 . _ NA .__ NA NA 1/3/01 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 NA _ _<5 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 . <0.50 3/2/01 <50 <0.50 0.85 ..... 10 . .2,704 NA .....?5 .... <0.50 _<0.50 _<0:50_ <0.Sq ._ 6/4/01 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 383 NA <25.0 <5,0 <5.0 <5,0 <5.0 dup. <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <~.0 .... 388 NA <25:0 .... <3:0 _ . <5,0 <5,0. <5.0_ 0/6/01 <5.0 <5,0 <5.0 ~6.0 ._%50 NA .<2_5,0 ....... <5~0 . __<5.0 <5~0. .~5,0 12/6/01 . _ND 1.06 . ~JD _ND .. 515 NA ND ND _ ._ND. _ ND- ND dup . ND , 0.92 ND ND. _~80. NA .... ND _ _ ND . ND _. ND ND 2/18/02 19 . ._ 55 ND 25 1,140 NA __ND ..... ND ND ND ND 5/16/02' ND ND.. ND ND . ND NA _N_D.- _N[~ _. ND ND _. _ND 4/5/96 <0.3 <0.3 0.75 260 _ _ ?,600 NA NA NA NA NA NA 3/27/97 2.00 20.0 1,10 9.8 340 NA NA. NA NA NA NA 10/20/98 15 2.50 87 930 _3,000 NA .. . N~A . 300 NA NA NA.. 1/11/99 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NAr NA 7.~_. ~N_A .... NA NA 58.7 9.87. 388 1,O40 _ ~ .1_-3,600' _~ IDA_'.--'-~NA_. .524.0. __N_A _.NA_ __ NA ' 8/20/99 <0.3 <0,3 <0,3 <0.6 <500 . _NA NA. .__3.~? .NA . .NA NA 10/6/99 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 . <0.6 _~ <5_00._. NA NA _ .~2,p _ NA NA . . NA 12/7/99 <0.3 .... <0.3 <0.3 .. ~..11_ <500 NA '- ~A 5.15 Nh . NA .-. NA_ MW-~ 3/30/00 <0.3 <0.3_ <0.3 _ ~0-6 .... <500 .NA NA ..... <0,5 ~N.A . NA ..... NA 7/3/00 <0:5 . .<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 _ . <50 NA ..... N? ...... <0..5_ NA _ -Nm .... NA 1/3/01, . <50.0 <0,5 <0.5 .<0:5 . <5p NA <5.. <0.~50_ .. ?0.50 <0,50 <0.50 3/2/01 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 . . <0._50 _. <50. NA <3 .... <0.50 <0.50 50.50_ .<0.50 6/4/01 <0.5 <0,5 <0,5 <0.5 <50 'NA . <2:5_ <0,~5 <0,5 <0.5 . . <0,5 8/6/01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA <2,5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 12/6/01 6,44 295 80 295_ .. 2,210 . NA ND ND ND ND _ "ND 2/16/02 54 _ 230 4.7 _. ~2~_5. 200 NA * N~ ..... ND' ' ND ND ~ _ND 5/16/02 1.2 46 2.2 50 640 N-A ' -~qD- .... N[~' ' ND ND ND E2C Remediation, LLC T3-2 Proj6ct Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA MR. FAST SERVICE STATION 600 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA t ETHYL- TOTAL 3/27/97 8.8 32 3.6 29 320 NA NA NA NA NA NA 10/20/98 <0.5 . <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA NA <0.5 NA NA NA 1/11/99 <0,5 3.9 <0.5 . 1..50 . . <~0 ..... NA . . -NA_ <0~5. _ NA . .NA NA 5/12/99 <0.3 <0.3 .. <0.3 1=2_7 .._ <500 ~NA NA 21.40 NA ~ ~-N.A_ . .NA 8/20~9 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.6 <500 NA _ -NA ..... _1.65 ., _ N? NA . NA 12/7/99 <0.3 <0.3 .. <0.3 . . <0.6 __ _<500 NA NA.. _ <!:(~ ...... NA HA . NA 3/30/00 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 ~.3 _ , <500 .... NA NA <0.5 .NA NA NA MW-5 7/3/00 . <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA NA <0.5 NA NA NA 1/0/01 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 2.46 <50 NA <5 ~ _<0:50 .<0.50 <0.50 <0.50 3/2/01 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <50 NA <5 . ~<0.50 <0:50 <0.50 <0.50 6/4/01 <0,5 <0.5 . <0.5 .<0.5 __<50 , _N~.. . <2.5 _ _ <0.5 . <0:5 .... ~0.5 . <0.5 .6/6/01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 . . <0.5 . . _<50 _ _NA . <2~5 ....... <0.5.. . ~:0.5 . _ <0.5 . <0.5 12/5/01 12.4~ ....... 480 105 .... 375 2_,~10 ~18/02 ND 720 190 NA ND ND ND ND ND 3/27/97 0.98 5.90 0,92 6.80 60.00 NA . NA NA _ _NA_ NA NA 10/20/98 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA NA NA NA NA NA 5/12/99 <0.3 . 1.05 ' 0.62 4.67 .<500 NA NA' . .<2._.0__ NA NA N_A 8/20/99 <0.3 <0.3 <0,3 <0.6 <500 NA . . NA _ _ "<1.0. ._NA NA NA 12_E'.'.~/99NA NA NA _ NA NA . , NA . _N.A . _NA _ NA NA NA 3/30/00 .<0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.6 <500 NA NA <0.5 NA NA NA MW..6 7/3/00 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA .... 1/3/01 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <50 NA <5 <0.50 _<0.50 <0.50 .<0.50 3/2/01 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <50 NA <5 <0,50 <0.50 <0.50 <0._50 6/4/01 <0.5 i <0:5 . _ ~0.5 <0.5 . <50 NA *~._.5.. _,~0.5 .... <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 6/6/01 <0.5I <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 !,850 NA . .<2.5 _ <0:5 <(~ .5 <0.5 <0.5 12/5/01 6.41 270 77... 255 . . 2,150 . ,.. NA..... -ND _ND _-ND ._ . ND. .... ND . 2/1 6/02 ND 5.8 ND 25 150 NA ND ND ND ND ND 5/22/02 0.7 ND ND 25 180 NA ND.. ND ND ND ND 3/27/97 2,400 24,000 2,300 14,000 140,000 NA NA NA NA NA 10/20/98 110 25,000 3,500 27,000 150,000 NA NA 150 NA NA NA 1/11/99 220 31,000 .4,200 31,000 . 1_20,_0~0. _ , . NA NA ~80 NA ~ . NA NA 5/12/99 NSFP ,. NSF.P_ . NSFP N.~FP N._S~? NA . NA ........ NSFP NA_. _ NA 8/20/99 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NA NSFP 12/7/99 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NA NSFP 3/30100 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NA NSFP 7/3/00 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NA NSFP MW-7 1/3/01 NSFP NSFP Ns~P NSFP , - NSFP I NA ~'/SI~P' NSFP 'NS~P NSFP NSFP 3/2/01 <20 9,400 4,100 26,000 24,940 NA <200 <20 _<20 <20 <20 6/4/01 <50.0 5,730 3,590 13 230. ._ 87,960 NA <250.0<50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 5/6/01 <50.0 1,780 2,330 10,600 . 35,500 NA _ <250.0 .<50,0 <50.0 . <50,0 <50.0 12/7/01 ND 2,315 ._ 1,120 8 290. .42,835 NA ND ND ND ND ND 2/19/02 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP 5/22/02 1.8 300 ND 3, ~ 20 31,500 NA ND ND ND ND ND dup ND 440 ND 3,370 35,000 NA ND ND ND ND ND E2C Remediation, LLC T3-3 Project Number 1801BK04 June 25, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA MR. FAST SERVICE STATION 600 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA I filHYL- TOTAL I BEN~'£NE _ TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES TPHg TPHd TBA MTBE DIPE ETSE TAME WELL ID DATE I - 7/3/00 820 64,000 _ 6,300 .. 73,000 260,000 NA NA........ 550 . ~ NA . NA _ . NA 1/3/01 34 45,000 .. 5,000 30,800 40 910 .... NA . . <CI.~0 _ . 3/2/01 34 53,000 4,000 26,000 34,280 NA <2,000 <200 <200 <200 <2(i0 dup <200 48,000 . . 4,100. 26000 33,610 f~A <2,000.. <200. _ . <200 .... <200_ . .<200 MW-8 6/4/01 <50.0 43,560 3,770 . 14,760 _64,32_0 ._ NA ~ _ <~50.0 ...... 5~50.0 .. <5_0.0. . _~50._~). <-50,0 6/6/01 <50.0 40,070 . 7,280 16,800 .70 350 _ _. NA <250.0 ~50.0 ._ _<50.0 <50.0 <50.0 12/6/01 ND 31,075. 5,160 . 18,650 107.~335 NA ND ND ND ND ND 2~16/02 0.6 1,100 1,410 [ 3,270 27,50~ . .. NA __ND ND ND . _ND. ND 6/16/02 ND 6,010 1,800I · 4,690 74,000 ._NA ND _ ND L_ND_ ND ND 7/3/00 ?0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <50 NA _N_A _ -<'~ .5 _ NA . NA+ NA 1,~01 . <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 ~0.50 <50 NA <5 .<0.~0 ..... <0.50 ,<0.50 <0.50 3/2/01 <0,_50 <0.50 __<0.50 I'_ <0.50 _~<50 Nb ....... <p.50 6/4/01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <_50 . NA <2~5 <q.5 .... ~<0.5 . ~<0.5 <0.5 Mw-9 6/6/01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA <2.5 <0.5 . <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 12/6~1 32.9 555 105 . _ 425 __ _2,6_50 ~N,~. ND _ND .....I~D. __ ND ND_ 2/1~02 7.3 10 ND 79 . ~0. NA ND ND ND ND ND 6/16/02 2.1 86 6.6 63_ . 990 NA ' _ ND . ._ -ND' '. '. :':ND ND ..ND 7/3/00 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA NA <~).5 . NA NA. NA 1/3/01 <0.50 <0~50 <0.50 <0.50 <50 NA <5 . ..<0~50 <0.50 <0.50. <0.50 3/2/01 <0,50 <0.50 , . <0.50 <0.50 <50 NA <5 <0.~0 ,~0.50 <0.50 6/4/01 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA <2.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 MW-10 6/6/01 '~0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <50 NA~ .<2..5 ._'~.5 .. <0.5_ . <0.5 <0.5 12~6/01 4.69 210 . 65 230 1,735 _N~ ......... N_D ..... ND ..... ~D . . ND ~ _.ND 2/18/02 ND 14 0.7 25.7 215 NA...... ND ND ND ._. ND ND 6/16/02 1,6 99 8.8 67 470 NA ND ND ND ND ND ~ 7J'"~l~0 _. <0~:5 <0.5 <0:5 .... <0.5 . . <50.0 NA..... _NA~ .... _<9.5 NA .... _N? _ NA MW-11 . .1/3/01 <20 3,600 . 2_,600 __ 1_6,300.. _12,050 _~NA ........ _<2.00 .......... ,~5__. __<20 ...... <-20. 3/2/01 _ i NSWS NSWS .NSWS ...... NSWS NSWS _NSWS_ ...... NSWS . _ NSWS Nsws .. NSWS . NSWS 3/2/01 Well taken out of service, silted uo to 12 feet from bottom, reolaced bv MW-11R 6/4/01 540 11,980 1,390 7,230 ~ 54,410 <50 <250.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 6/6/01 866 29,850 2,425 13,686 57,475 . .NA . . <250.0 <50.0 <50.0 _.<50.0 <50.0 12/7/01 ND 440 ND _.4,415.. 6,775 NA ND ND ND _ N~D__ . ND MW-11R 2/16/02. 140 1,560 1,090_ . .2,440 .22,000 NA . . NO. , i'.. _~D NO ND ND ~ Duplicate 140 1,320 1,063 2.490 28,000 NA ND ND ND ND ND 5/22/02 45 15,080 36 3,050 19,000 NA ND N D NO ND ND 6/4/01 NSFP NSFP NSFP .~ISFP NS~=p NSFP NSF? . NS~P _ N. SFP .... NSFP NSFP 6/6/01 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP .NSFP . .NSFP .NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP MW-12 12F//01 NSFP NSFP NSFP . NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP 2/19/02 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP 5/23/02 ND 910 970 10,910 78,000 NA ND ND ND ND ND 6/4/01 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0. <50.0 5,580 <50 <250.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 <50.0 8/6/01 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP MW-13 12/7/01 115 6,550 4,690 .14,815 178,900 NA ND . _ ND NB N D N D 2/19/02 NSFP NsFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP 5/23/02 NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP NSFP E2C Remediation, LLC T3-4 Project Number 1801BK01 June 25, 2002 TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF VES MONITORING DATA Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Cumulative Cumulative Inlet Well Well Well Well Dilution Field Field Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Date Calendar Operating Operating Flow Chamber Stack YE-2 VE-3 MW-1/VE-4 MW-8/VE-5 Air TPH in i TPH out LbsJHr. Lbs. Lbs. Gallons Monitored Da~/s Hours Hours (scfm) % LEL Temp. (°F) Temp. (°F) valve vah/e valve valve vatve (ppmv) (ppmvI Extracted Extracted Destroy/ed Extracted 4/4/02 0 3485.0 3 261 4 650 757 O O O O C 950 5.2 3.4 10.1 10 1.5 4/5/02 1 3507.0 25 264 4 650 686 O O O O C 450 5.4 1.6 45.7 44 6.8 4/8/02 4 3579.0 97 240 4 628 692 C C O O C 940 9 3.1 266.5 256 40.0 4/10/02 6 3624.5 142.5 313 3 716 722 C C O O C 700 10 3.0 402.1 398 62.2 . 4/15/02 11 3747.1 265.1 276 3 668 679 C C O O C 400 2 1.5 586.1 580 90.7 4/16/02 12 3767.3 285.3 180 3 ~6~.2 671 C C _._0 0 - C-'- -3~0 I - 0.9- .... 604.9 599 93.6 4/24/02 20 3956.1 474.1 257 3 _ . _685 . 679 C . ._C .... 0 _ _ 0 C ....... 895 _ , _8_ _ 3~! ..... 1_1_96.8 1185 = i85.1- - 4/29/02 25 ...... 4_076.1 594.1 256 ~ . . _6.56 _ 625 _C ~ .... O_ . ._ O- ~; .... _39_0- i.._.__3 _ 1._4_ __1359.7 1346 ..... 210.3. 5/2/02 28.. 4148:1 666.1 160 3 6_55 .... 632 PO po ~ _ .0 _.._0 c ..... _240 ...... _1_ ...... 0..5 _ _ _1:}97_.3 _ _ _1383 ..... 2-16._1__ _ . 5/6/02 32 4232.0 750.0 253 3 6,33 611 P_O PO 0 _ 0 .c .... _2.00 ..... 0 ....... 0.7 ~`14.55.0. .1440 . _~225.1 5/14/02 40 4426.9 944.9 252 3 . 631 618 PO P~.. 0 0 c ..... 9_5.~ .0_.6_ 0.3. _. ~15_18.5 1503 234~9-'-- 5/21/02 47 4428.6 946.6 283 3 658 615 0 0 0 0 c 300 0.4 1.2 1520.4 1505 235.2 6/4/02 61 4587.9 1105,9 223 2 624 598 0 0 0 0 c 300 0.2 0.9 1665.3 1649 257,6 6/7/02 64 4657.9 1175,9 208 2 668 612 O C O O .~ _49 ~. 0.2 0.1 . 1675.0 1658 .259.1 6/11/02 68 4752.8 1270.8 234 2 653 619 O C .... (3__ 0_ C . .56 ~1..~ .... 0.2 . _ 1692.0~ 1675 261.7 6/17/02 I 74 4753.5 1271.5 228 3 659 599 O C O _ 0 C . 620_. 0.2 1.9 _ 1693.3 .. . 1676 261.9 5/24/02I 81 4920.0 1438,0 187 3 661 619 0 C 0 0 _C. 46 . . 0.2 _ . _0.1 1712.8 1696 .264_.9_ 7/1/02 88 4920.8 1438.08 194 5 625 667 0 C 0 0 C 500 I 1.3 1713.8 1697 265.1 Notes: scfm = standard cubic feet per minute LEL = Lower Explosive Limit ppmv = parts per million volume Lbs./Hr. = pounds per hour 0 = Valve Open C = Valve Closed PO = Valve Partially Open E2C Remediation, LLC Table 4-1 I Project Number 1801BK01 June 25, 2002 TABLE 5 - MASS OF HYDROCARBONS REMOVED BY VES I (based on infiuent concentrations) Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane I Bakersfield, California Date I HCRemoved ICumulativeHCRemovedl InfluentConcentrations I FlowRatej RunTime I (lbs/month) (lbs) (ppmv) (scfm) (days) 04/01/02 0 0 0 0 0 05/01-)02 1'5i7 ...... 15-17 ...... 678 ~)5-4 ' - - ~7-' 06/01/02 339 1857 ' ' ' 209 .... ~)37 - 2i I 07/0i/02 259 "1' _ 2i'i5. i'. 262 _21-1~ i'4- Where: Hydrocarbons Removed 'lbs/month) = Influent Concentration (ppmv) X 10.6 X Influent Flow Rate (ecrm) I X 1 lb-mole/379.5 ft3 X 86 lb/lb-mole) X 1440 (min/day) X Run Time (days/month) I Cumulative Hydrocarbons Removed (lbs.) Based on Influent Concentrations (Since April 2002) 5000 I 4500 ......................... : ..................................................................... ..,4000 ................................................................. ~.3500 ....................................................... >e 3000 .................................................. 0 I ~- 2500 ..................................................... ~ ._cj 2000 .............. ~ ................. I i.- 1000 -"'. I 500 ................... 0 04~01/02 05~01/02 05/31/02 06/30~02 07~30~02 I TIME I I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 5-1 I Project Number 1801BK01 June 25, 2002 I Average Daily Hydrocarbon Removal Rate (lbs/day) Based on Influent Concentrations (Since April 2002) I 100 60 .......... O ~: 40 ! ° ~ 30 I m 20 I 04/01/02 05/0 ~ /02 05/31/02 0~/~0/02 07/30/02 I ...... Time (month~) ! i E2C Remediation, LLC Table 5-2 Project Number 1801BK01 June 25. 2002 TABLE 6 - MASS OF HYDROCARBONS REMOVED BY VES (based on %LEL) Mr. Fast Service Station 600 Brundage Lane ' Bakersfield, California DateI HCRemoved Cumu,ativeHCRemoved I LEL IFIowRatel RunTime I (lbs/month) (lbs) (%) (scfm) days/month) 04/01/02 3.4% 27 06,01,00! 672 1722 3.0:/;0 237 21 -~/-01/ ' ' Where: Influent Concentration assume 100% LEL =13,800 ppmv calculated as hexane LEL estimated from difference between oxidizer and stack temperature. 1% LEL = approximately 25° F difference Hydrocarbons (lbs/month) = Influent concentration (ppmv) x 10.6 X influent flow rate (scfm) x 1 lb-mole/379.5 cf x 86 lb/lb-mole x 1440 min/day X run time (days/month) ' Cumulative Hydrocarbons Removed (lbs.) Based on %LEL 5000 (Since April 2002) ~'"4000 ........................... !3ooo. i 2000 1000 --.- -- .,,~ ................................. 0 04/01/02 05/01/02 05/31/02 06~30~02 07~30~02 Time ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 6- I I Project Number 1801BK01 June 25, 2002 Monthly Hydrocarbons Removed (lbs./month) Based on %LEL 'l 1200 (Since April 2002) 1100 o 1000 ~' 900 I '"' 800 > 700 · ~ 600 I 0 500 ......... _>, 400 (~ 300 ....... ~ 200 .............. 100 ................................................. 0 04~01/02 05/01/02 05/31/02 06~30~02 07130102 Time I Monthly %LEL (Since April 2002) 4.0% 3.5% ..... m 2.5% _~, 2.0% I o 1.5% - - - i 1.0% 0.5% I 0.0% 04/01/02 05/01/02 05/31/02 06/30/02 07/30/02 i Time I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 6-2 Proiect Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 APPENDICES Appendix A Second Quarter 2002 Well Purging Data Sheets Appendix B Second Quarter 2002 Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix C SJVUAPCD Remediation System Startup Report, May 28, 2002 E2C Remediation, LLC Appendices ! Project Number 180 I BKO$ June 25. 200p ,! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! APPENDIX A ! Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ' I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix A E2C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD - Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AN D WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID CFI WELL NO.: ~"~I,~2-/ DEPTH TO WATER: ~'~1. '~ ft PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL:' ~'"o,.,'), /~:~ ft PROJECT NAME:_ ./'~1~, .~' WELL DIAMETER: ~. '" DATE: -~-'- J(~ - 02... CASING VOLUME: ~, ?~, 9allons SAMPLED B~': 3.S / A..~ METHOD Or PURSING: TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F°) (UNITS) (pmho~ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) . (GAL) PUMPED cra) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDLY, ETC.) . , ......,.. ....... :. . . ... ...... ' ,.....~ ..~ ..... ..~,:~.~:.,,. .... , ........ .:~ ...... .? ~ .... ., . .,, . . ..? ,.., , ........ . ....... .......~ .... ,... pH CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZED BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4.01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 Well Capacity: 2" - 0.1632 galloWlinear foot TEMP F" 4" - 0.6528 gallon~inear foot INSTRUMENT READING 6' - 1.4688 galloWlinear foot s..c,.~c ............... ~.~c~.~.CA. co.ouc~A.C~- C:~;"~+~O' ~"~'s+~'""~'""~zA~'~°. ..... '" '. ...................... ..... · Ac. so.u~o~.~,os~ CM ~ ~ C' ~ ~' ~.~ ~ ~0 TEMP F~ iNSTRUMENT READING ... SAMPLED AT: ~. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~ ~. 3 CASING VOLUMES= ~/~ GALS. NOTES: I ! E2C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Enviror~mental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: /~.t.,/_ ~ DEPTH TO WATER: PROJECT NO.: ,/~/,./, ~'~/~Z- TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ;~-~. / 2_- ft DIAMETER PROJECT NAME: WELL : DATE: .~"--///~ -¢.)~ CASING VOLUME: ~, /-.3 gallons SAMPLED BY: j~/~2~ METHOD OF PURGING: PURGE CHARACTER TI TEMP pH SEC SAMPLE EMAR KS TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F°) (UNITS) (F. mhos/ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED CT) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) e:o,. [,,.¢? ! [BUFFEfl 8OLUTION pH 4.0~ pH ?.0 pH ~ 0.0 Well O~p~city: 2" - 0.~ B32 g~llo~line~r foot TEMP P ~' - 0.~28 g~l~on/line~r foot INSTRUMENT ~EADING ~' - ~ .4B88 gdlon/line~r ~oo~ ............. sPE ELECTRILCAL CONDUCTANCE - CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZATION KCL SOLUTION pMHOS / CM ~ 25 C~ 74 718 1413 6868 58640 TEMP P INSTRUMENT READING SAMPLEDAT: ~ ~. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~/'~ ~. 3 CASING VOLUMES= ~. '/ GALS. NOTES: E2C REMEDIATION, LLC - WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consuttants ' AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: /~//~/&//-..~ DEPTH TO WATER: /~///o ~Z?/ ft PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ~. PROJECT NAME:~ ~ ~ WELL DIAMETER: DATE: ~-/~ - O ~ CASING VOLUME: ~. ~ ~ galJons SAMPLED BY: J ~ / ¢i. D METHOD Of PURGING: PURGE CHARACTERISTICS' TEMP pH SEC SAMPLE REMARKS TIME INTAKE RATE CUM' VOL WELL VOL ' (F°) (UNITS) (pmhos/ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED cm) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDLY, ETC.) /0:/7 9?; /.~ o 7~ ~.¢z ~// r~o,,d~ .~ ~,.~,~ -1 I '/0.' ¢o ¢ ~ 7i.S C. 7g ~./z ~H CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZED BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4.01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 Well Capacity: 2" - 0.1632 galloWlinear foot TEMP F' 4" - 0.6528 galloMinear foot INSTRUMENT READING 6" - 1.4688 galloWlinear foot sPEC[~I~ 'ELEcT~I~CAL c~NDu'cTANcE- ~XL'I'~iO~'/'S~N'~'RDizATION TEMP F' INSTRUMENT READING SAMPLED AT: ~. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~. 3 CASING VOLUMES= ~,~ GALS. NOTES: ,I I I E2C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants' AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: /~/4//'''' V DEPTH TO WATER: Z'/.2-. ~"-'/-/ ft PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ~""f. / ~ ft PROJECT NAME:_ /2///z'' ,~,,4"i/-' WELL DIAMETER: ,.~" DATE: ~'7'~/~ "~ Z- CASING VOLUME: .,, -'/. ~:;=~ 9aliGns SAMPLED BY: ..~_~ / ~ METHOD OF PURGING: '~__.. .................... PORGE C,,,-,'"^ R,--,,..,. '~ ':'';'E Ri~ ....... TI~ : ' ............. ......... TEMP~ ..... .., - . i .... pH' ."" .......... SEC ' ....... SAMPLE' ............. ' ....... REMARKS' ...... ' TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F°) (UNITS) (pmhos/ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED cm) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) ~]:2_V 3.0 72.9 '7.13 ,~./,./ ff..Ac /'/. ff 7o..1 g,. ~ 5" q:;zb ~.P 70.1 6.~'3 /- ,,,:~' .......................~AdlBR,~TiOI~ / ST-AND,~I~IZED ' .......... ":' ........ ~*" ........ ' .................. ' ........................................ ........... BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4.01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 Well Capacity: 2" - 0.1632 gallorVlinear foot 'TEMP F° 4" - 0.6528 gallon/linear foot INSTRUMENT READING 6" - 1.4688 gallon/linear foot SPECIFIC ELECTRILCAL CONDUCTANCE - CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZATION KCL SOLUTION pMHOS / CM @'250° 74 718 1413 6868 58640 TEMP F° INSTRUMENT READING SAMPLED AT: /-/~,. ~ FT. ~INAL DEPTH TO WATER: Z/La. ~ O FT. 3 CASING VOLUMES: ~,~' ~ALS. NOTES: I ! . E~cRemediation, Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants Water. ©uality Sampling Record s3oo WoodmereC)r~ve, S.~t~ ~0~; ~k~,~, ~o~. ~ ~ and Well 'Development Data Telephone: (66 l) 831-6906 / Facsimile: (66 I) ~31.6234 . SAMPLE ID / WELl, ~: ~ ~-~- DEPTH TO WATER: ~. ~ ~ E~C REM. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELt: ~' 7. ~ ~ PROJECTN~IE: ~' ~ WELLDI~ETER; ~ it DATE SAMPLED: ~-- ~ ~- ~ '~ CASING VOLUME: ~ · ~ ~ ' '.",~d ~-. ".' .' .:: 't ' ' ' ' . , ;" ~" .' . ' ' -"' .' · - .:. : . · ', :' PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS , .-'.?': TEMP pH SEC REMARKS //z~ ,, ~il~/~ J Well Capacity: T', O. 1632 ~allon/linear [~t ~", 0.652~ gallon/linear foot 6". 1.468~ gallon/linear foot .. ..[ . . 'L' -.. :: ... .. . t ,~.;..;'j S~MPLED AT: ~ ~ ~ FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~ ' ~ ~ FT. 3 CASING VOLUMES = ~, / O GALS. NOTE~: 6roundwater$cientist$: £nvironmentalConsultant$ Water. Quality Sampling Record 5300~Voodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (66 I) 831.6906 / Facsimile: (66 I) 831.6234 S~PLE ID / ~ELL ~: ~ ~ - ~ DEPTH TO WATER: ~/~ ~ E~C REM. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF ~ELL: ~, I PROJECT NAME: ~, ~5~ ~ELL DI~ETER; ~ ii DATE S~PLED: O~ _ ~--~ ~ CASING VOLUME:,,. /, ~ '. :"PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS ,' .-' ~']:..~ TEMP pH SEC REMARKS ~el} Capachy: }" - O. 16~} ~allon/lin~ar S~MPL~D AT: ~ FT. FINAt D~PTH TO ~ATER: ~ ] ~T. ~ CASING VOLUMES = ~ ~ GARS. NOTES: I ! £2cRemedia/ion, Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants Water. Quality SamPling Record 5300 V/oodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661) $31-6906 / Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 S~PLE ID / WELL ~: ~(~ ~ '~ ~ DEPTH TO ~ATER: ~3' ~ / E~C REM. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF W~LL: ~ ~ ~ DATE SAMPLED: ~~~ CASING VOLUME: "'. :'PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS · ,' ,-".('-: TEMP pH SEC REMARKS Well Capacity: 2"- O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4". 0.65]S gallon/linear foot 6". 1.46~S gallon/linear foot E2C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD - Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite· 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ' PROJECT NAME~__ ~ ~ ~' WELL DIAMETER: DATE: ~-/~ ~ ~ ~ CASING VOLUME: /, ~ gallons TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL · (F°) (UNITS) (gmhos/ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED cra) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDLY, ETC.) ~H CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZED BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4.01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 [ Well Capacity: 2" - 0.1632 ga~loWlinear foot TEMP F'j 4" - 0.6528 gallo~inear ~oot INSTRUMENT READING ,. ~ 6" - 1.4688 gallo~inear foot SPECIFIC ELECTRILCAL CONDUCTANCE- C~kl~Tio~ I ~T~'~R~lz~lioN'' 'KCS'SOLUTION gMHOS / CM ~ 25 CO 74 718 1413 6868 58640 'TEMP F" INSTRUMENT READING SAMPLED AT: FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~. 3 CASING VOLUMES= ~ ~ GALS. NOTES: E2C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater scientists: Environmental Consultants' AN D WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: /~/zJ- ~ DEPTH TO WATER: PROJECT. NO.: TOTAL DEPTH. O'F WELL: "~"~.,~. ~p~, ft PROJECT NAMEi /~t., ~'~/~ WELL DIAMETER: DATE: ~'-~/~, - 0 2- CASING VOLUME: .. SAMPLED BY: _.J ~ / f p METHOD OF PURGING: PURGE CHARACTERISTICS TEMP pH SEC SAMPLE REMARKS TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL · (F°) (UNITS) (l~mhos/ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED cm) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) ¢...¢p /.5' 7q. 7 b. 7~- ,'/:~-~ 3. o 72.7 4~.~ 3 pH CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZED BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4,01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 Well Capacity: 2" - 0.1632 gallon/linear foot TEMP Fo 4" - 0,6528 gallon/linear foot INSTRUMENT READING 6" - 1.4688 gallon/linear foot SPECIFIC ELECTRILCAL CONDUCTANCE - CALIBRATION / STANDARDIZATION KCL SOLU;I'ION I~MHO'S / CM @' 25 C° 74 718 1413 6868 58640 TEMP F° INSTRUMENT READING ISAMPLED AT: --~'O ! FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: FT. 3 CASING VOLUMES= ~. ~. 7 GALS. NOTES:. ! I E2C REMEDIATION, LLC WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater Scientists:Environmental Consultants AND WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 SAMPLE ID OR WELL NO.: ~ ~ ,.--! ~ DEPTH TO WATER: Z.///-~, ~z~ ft !PROJECT NO.: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: '~--..,2. c.~C) ft · PROJECT NAME: ~rt~ WELL DIAMETER: DATE: .~/& ~O~ CASING VOLUME: ~. ~ ~allons SAMPLED BY: ~ ~ ~ ~ METHOD OF PURGING: PURGE CHARACTERISTICS TEMP pH nEM~n~o TIME INTAKE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F°) (UNITS) (pmhos/ CONTROL DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED CT) NO. (COLOR, TURBIDLY, ETC.) q.~. 3.0 7~.q &.~ BUFFER SOLUTION pH 4.01 pH 7.0 pH 10.0 Well Capaci~: 2' - 0,1632 galloMinea'r foot TEMP P 4" - 0.6528 gallo~inear foot INSTRUMENT READING 6' - 1.4688 gallo~inear foot C~N~UCT'~'"~;-~ ~,.~ ~ ~.~.,~.. ~.~,.~ ~., ,.~L'~;;;;;~;"/'~;;;"~;'a~Z~;;O';'' .......... "" .... ....... ~ ........... '"" SPECIFIC ELECTRILCAL Kc~ SOLUT,ON.MHOS/CM ~ 2S C" ~4 ~ ~4~3 ~S ~0 TEMP F~ INSTRUMENT READING  SAMPLED AT: ~. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~. 3 CASING VOLUMES~GALS. NOTES: E2C Rem eclia[ion, LL C i Groundwater Scientist,, Environmental Con,ultant$ Water Quality Sampling Record s3oo Wooa~ere Dr~ve, Suite ~OS; Bake~e~a, O~fo*~a ~ and Well Development Data I Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)831-6234  E~C R~M. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ~ ~ ' ~ O I DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PU,~PED  Well C~paeity: ~"- O. 16~ gallon/linear foot 4"- O.65~ gallon/linear foot ~ NOTff5: l EaC Rem ediazion, LL C 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite. IQ5; Bakersfield, California 9:]313 and Well Development Data -Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)83!.6234 SAMPLI: iD / WELL g: ,/Y/(.t.3 ~/..2. DEPTH TO WATER: Z/t'.~, 7 / E2C REM. PROJECT #: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ~a ~", ~" ~" PROJECT NAME: .. /'Z/~'2. /:'n ~,Z' WELt DIAMETER; ~2." '"' '. :':PURGE CHARACTERISTICS, ' TEMP pH SEC RD, lARKS TIME . INTAKE J RATE J CUag. VOL J WELLVOLDEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED (F°) (UNITS) (mmhos/¢m) (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) i?vy q 7¥. Well Capacity: 2", O. 1637 gallon/linear foot 4". 0.65')8 gallon/linear 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear foot SAMPLED AT: 'd//~r.,. ~) FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~'/'~;',' 7/ FT. S CASING VOLUMES = Z'~- 3(~., GALS. NOTES: E2C Remcdiation, LL C aroundwater$cientist~: EnvironmentalConsultants Water. Quality Sampling Record 5300 Wood'ere Drive, Suite 105; Baker~eld, California 9~1~ and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831.6906 / Facsimile: (661)8~1-6234 S~PLE ID / WELL ~: :'~ ~- / ~c ~E~. P~OJECT ~: TOTAL ~PTH O~ W~LL: ~, PROJECT NAME: ~ ~ ·/=~ ~ ~ WELL DI~ETER; DATE S~PLED: ~ %~ ~' ~ ~ '~ ~ '~ CASING VOLUME: : · ~ ..,' :;."..~; '~, , ~ ['," ~ .'..~:~ "; ' ." ·. ' .,. :: .'".:' :,' -. -. · '. , .':,:r' .:'-;.' ~-,' ':-. t;PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS ·:-':':.'~:'~';' TE~P pH SEC RE~RKS TIME INTAKEI ~TE I CUM. VOL I ~ELLVOL (~ (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED · . - ~ell Capacity: ~"- O, 4"- 0,~5]~ ~llon/linear 6"- 1.46~ Ballon/linear .'. ........ S~MPLED AT: FT. FINAL DEPTH TO ~ATER: FT. 3 CASING VOLUMES = GALS. NOTES: ~'~: 7 r~' '~; E~CRcm¢cliation~ Grounclwater$cientbts: Environmental Consultants Water Quality Sampling Record 5300WoodmereOrive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)831-6234 SAMPLE ID / WELL #: ~ z.~ --! ~ DEPTH TO WATER: ~ ~. ,~'"0 E.~¢ REM. PROJECT #: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: '7'7. PROJECT NAME: /~ ~ ~ ~ WELL DIAMETER; DATE SAMPLED: ~ .~ ~ 0 '~ CASING VOLU~E: , :' -. :"PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS.. "' TEMP pH SEC REMARKS ~J~E J~TAK~ J ~T~ j CUM. VOL J ~EL~VOL gEP~H (G~M) (~L) PU~D (~ (U~J'~) (mm~o~/¢m) (COLO~, tUrBiDitY, ETC,) Well Capacity: ]"- O. 1632 gallon/linear 4"- 0.652~ gallon/linear toot 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear toot S~MPLED AT: 7/' O FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: ~ ~' ~ FT. 3 CASING VOLUME5 = ~, ~ GALS. £2 C Rcmecliatio n, ~£ C 6ro,,d.,at,rSc;e.t;,t,: E,v;ro.me, ta;Co,s~;~a~,Water Quality Sampling Record 5~ Wood'ere Drive, Suite 105; Bake~neld, California 9a~ 13 and Well Development Data Telephone: (66 I) ~ 1-6906 / Facsimile: (66 I) 8~ 1-61t4 S~IPLE ID / WELL ~: ~ ~.- Z ~"-- ~ DEPTH TO WATER: E~C RE~. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF ~ELL: PROJECTN~E: ~ ~,~ ~ELL DIAMETER;. DATE SAMPLED: ~-~~ CASING VOLUME: ~,~ ":' "'-.':' PURGE CHARACTERISTICS ' ' .'"-'~,'~:' :; TEMP pH SEC R~MARKS TIME INTAKE ~TE VOL (~ (UNITS) (mm~o$/cm) (COLOR. TURBIDITY. ETC.) (GAL) J WELL VOL  P ~ PUMPED , Well Capaciw: 2"- O. I 6J 2 Ballon/linear 4". 0.65]S Ballon/linear foot 6"- 1.46SS gallon/linear S~tPLED AT: '~, O FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: '~ ~ ~' ~ FT. ~ CASING VOLU,~IES = / ~ ~ GALS. NOTES: E2C Remectiatio n, LL C Groundwater$cientists: £nvironmentalConsultants Water. Quality Sampling Record 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)8~1-6234 SA~PLEID/WELL~: ~-/~-- ~ O DEPTH TOWATER: E~C R~M. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF ~LL: PROJECT N~E: ~ I~, ~ S/~ WELL DIAMETER; DATE SAMPLED: ~-~ ~- ~ '~ CASING VOLUME: 5~IPLED BY: ~ ~,~,~ ~ ~ ~c~ (~ PURGE METHOD: .~". '. ~PURGE CHARACTERISTICS ~, ..":"~ :~: T~MP pH SEC R~ARKS 4"- 0.65]S gallon/linear S~MPLED AT: FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: FT. ~ CASING VOLUMES = GALS. NOTES: ~ E2CRcm¢c/iation, LLC Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Con,ultants WaterQuality Sampling Record 5300 Vgoodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data '1 Telephone: (661)$31-6906 / Facsimile: (661)831-6234 SAMPLE ID / WELL #: /~ U~) -/~(~ DEPTH TO WATER: L~ l~ ~ E~C RE~. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: ~ ~, ~ PROJECT N~E: ~, ~ ~ WELL DIAMETER; ~ DATE SAMPLED: O~ ~ ~'~ CASING VOLU~E: S~PLEDBY:' ~~ PURGE METHOD: -~ "-. ~"PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS. "-'~:.'~'~:~J T~MP pH S~C REMARKS S~MPLED AT: FT. ~INAL DEPTH TO ~AT~R: FT. ~ CASING VOLUMES ~ GALS. NOTES: E2C Remev[iatio n, LL C ~roundw~te; Sde,,ti~t.: Em,'o,,memi Co,,~,,~t.n~, Wa ter O u alit y Sa m p lin g Reco rd 5300 Vgoodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data. Telephone: (661) 831.6906 / Facsimile: (661) 831.6234 SAMPLE ID / WELL #: ~'~') ~ / ~7 ~ ~ DEPTH TO WATER: '~',.~' E~C REM. PROJECT #: TOTAL DEPTH OF '. :' pURGE CHA~CTERISTICSj '--'~ . TEMP ~H SEC REMARKS TIME ' INTAKEI ~TE I CU~.VOL I WmVOL (~ (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) DEPTH (~p~).. (GAL) PUMPED Well Capacity: 2"- O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4"- 0.6528 gallon/linear foot 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear foot S~PLEOAT: ~ 5~ O , NOTES: I I I 1 I Groundwater Scientist$ : £nvironmentalConsuttants Water ©uality Sampling Record 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)831-~234 PROJECT NAME: ~ ~ DATE SAmPLeD: ~'~~ CASING VOLUME: ': :"PURGE CHA~CTERISTIC~ , · -*' '.'.t 1EMP pH 'SEC RE~RKS Well Capacity: 2"- O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4"- 0.652S gallon/linear foot 6". 1.46~ gallon/linear foot S~MPLED AT: FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: FT. 1 CASING VOLUMES = GALS. NOTES: ! ! I Pro_iect Number 1801BK03 June 25. 2002 I I I I I I I ~ APPENDIX B I Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report ! ! ! ! ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix B ,m~Fla n ,boratories Chain of Custody Form" Client Name:. E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis. Requested .... Sample .Maidx ' Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105. Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~- ~- ~ ~" 2 e c., Sample Date Sample'rime Sample Description and Container Type m ~ ~- > m ~' ~ ~ ~' Comments ! ~r rr · . Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 4~ Hour 5-Day Standard ' '"1 Relinquislned B¥:~,,~t~. - Date:5'-/~,-o~ Relinquished By: Date: Received By: '"-- Date: z.. Received By: Date:. HalcyOn Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT EzC Remediation, LLC Project Name: Mr Fast 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Jack Scott TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPHg Analysis: 5/20/2002 Date of Report: 5/22/2002 .... Units: ug/L I Sample #: 2K2-2720 2K2-2721 2K2-2722 2K2-2723 2K2-2724 2K2-2725 Date Sampled: 5/16/2002 5/16/2002 5/16/2002 5/16/2002 5/16/2002 5/16/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: Tblank MW-2 MW-4 MW-10 MW-9 MW-3 I TPH .Gasoline ND 470 640 470 990 ND 50 I Surrogate Recovery % 95.8 98.4 101.9 95.9 89 119 I Sample #: 2K2-2726 2K2-2727 Date Sampled: 5/16/2002 5/16/2002 DL ug/L I Sample Description: MW-8 MW-1 I TPH Gasoline 74,000 28,600 5,000 i Surrogate Recovery % 84.9 84.9 Sample #: ' Date Sampled: DL ug/L I Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline 50 I ~urrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Principal Analyst Phil Acosta I Halcyon Laboratories :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 . CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast Report Date · 5/23/2002 "~ Sample ID · 2720/Tblank I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl'Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L ' I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 50.9 102% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 48.6 97% Toluene-d8 50.1 100% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 58.0 116% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 i Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I Report Date · 5/23/2002 I Sample ID · 2721/MW-2 I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene 1.6 0.5 ug/L Toluene 58 0.5 ug,d.., Ethylbenzene 1 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes 6.6 0.5 u~/L o Xylenes 31.3 0.5 ugfL Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards i Methane, dibromofluoro- 67.3 135% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 56.7 113% Toluene-d8 59.8 120% I p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 54.5 109% Halcyon LabOratoriesf :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification #.1920 CLIENT: E:C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Mr Fast Report Date · 5/23/2002 Sample ID · 2722/MW-4 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) HD 0.5 ug/b Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene 1.2 0.5 Toluene 46 0.5 Ethylbenzene 2.2 0.5 m & p Xylenes 17 0.5 u~ o Xylenes 33 0.5 u~/L Znternal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 :1.00% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 58.9 118% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.4 107% Toluene-d8 55.6 111% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 54.1 108% Halcyon Laboratories, Znc. EPA 8260B LabOratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 i Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I Report Date · 5/23/2002 "~ i Sample ID · 2723/MW-10 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene 1.6 0.5 ug/L Toluene 99 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene 8.8 0.5 ug/L i m & p.Xylenes 31 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 36 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 67.8 136% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.~, 107% Toluene-d8 69.5 139% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.9 116% I Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I Report Date · 5/23/2002 '" I Sample ID · 2724/MW-9 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ether Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene 2.1 0.5 ug/L Toluene 86 0.5 ug/L EthylbenZene 6.6 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes 24 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 39 0.5 ug/L I [nternal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50,0 100% I SurrOgate Standards I- Methane, dibromofluoro- 54.7 109% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 49.5 99% Toluene-d8 57.2 114% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.7 115% ! Halcyon Laboratories, ]:nc, EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast Report Date · 5/23/2002 Sample ID · 2725/MW-3 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 61.5 123% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 56.3 113% Toluene-d8 60.9 122% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 60.8 122% Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 i Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Mr Fast I Report Date" 5/24/2002 i Sample ID: 2726/MW-8 I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene 6,010 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene 1,800 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes 1,340 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 3,350 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 55.9 112% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 58.0 116% ToIuene-d8 60.0 120% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 51.2 102%. Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 i Bakersfield, CA 73313 Project ID · Mr Fast Report Date: 5/24/2002 i Sample ID · 2727/MW-1 I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol 500 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene 3.5 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene 0.6 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes 3 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 180 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fiuoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 65.5 131% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.4 115% Totuene-d8 60.8 122% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 52.2 104% · Halcyon Laboratories Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested .. Sample Matdx Project Name: ~ s' ~ ,~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105. Bakersfield, CA 93313 ...... ~ ~ Acidified Sample Date Samp[eTime Sample Description. and Container Type m ~ ~ ~ > m ~ ~ ~ = Comments ~ - i Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour 5-DAY Standard Received By: .. - Date: Receive~ By: Date: Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 · cLIENT E2C Remediation, LLC Project Name: Mr Fast 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Ruben Dorame TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPHg Analysis: 5/28/2002 Da~e of Report: 5/30/2002 Units: ug/L Sample #: 2K2-2802 2K2-2803 2K2-2804 2K2-2805 Date Sampled: 5/22/2002 5/22/2002 5/22/2002 5/22/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: Tblank MW-17S MW4 MW-5 TPH Gasoline ND ND 180 220 50 Surrogate Recovery % 82.5 84.6 96.6 93.3 Sample #: 2K2-2806 2K2-280'~ Date Sampled: 5/22/2002 5/22/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: MW-I IR MW-15S TPH Gasoline 19,000 I0,000 5,000 Su.r. rogate Recovery % 85.1 80.6 , Sample ~: 2K2-2808 2K2-2809 Date Sampled: 5/22/2002 5/22/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: MW-7 MW-I8 TPH Gasoline 31,500 35,000 10,000 Surrogate Recovery % 97.9 94.6 , DL = Detecti°n Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available / Prm'~ipal' ' Analyst: Phil' Acosta I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I Report Date: 6/10/2002 I Sample ID ' 2802/Tblank i Analyte Result Method RL Units i 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether ND 0.5 (DIPE) Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% i 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 67.8 136% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.7 115% Toluene-d8 63.2 126% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.2 114% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I Report Date · 6/10/2002 i Sample ID: 2803/MW-17S I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 us/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 67.3 135% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 59.3 119%' Toluene-d8 63.4 127% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 56.4 113% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast Report Date · 6/10/2002 Sample ID · 2804/MW-6 I Analyte Result Method RL Units i 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L ,aa Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L : · Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug,/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene 0.7 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 25 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% i 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 65.8 132% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 60.3 121% Toluene-d8 64.7 129% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 54.3 109% I Halcyon Laboratories, ]:nc.. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Nr Fast I Report Date · 6/10/2002 I Sample ID: 2805/MW'5 I Analyte Result Method RL Units i 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Ether ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl (DIPE) Ethyl TeK-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug, rL I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 20 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 :[00% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 63.9 128% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 54.1 108% Toluene-d8 58.0 :[ :[6% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 58.6 117% I Halcyon Laboratories, :Inc. EPA 826OB Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: Remediation, LLC E2C 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Mr Fast I Report Date · 6/10/2002 I Sample ID: 2806/MW-11R Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl (DIPE) 0.5 ug/L Ether Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene 45 0.5 ug/L Toluene 15,080 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene 36 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes 380 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 2,670 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% i 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 70.8 142% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 72.6 145% Toluene-d8 73.2 146% m p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 50.6 101% I I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Mr Fast Report Date: 6/10/2002 Sample ID · 2807/MW-15S I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates ! t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene 25 0.5 ug/L Toluene 4,670 0.5 uo~L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes !,590 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 2, l 10 0.5 ug/L [nternal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro .50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 :1.00% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 6214 125% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 63.7 127% Toluene-d8 66.5 133% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 50.7 101% 1 I Halcyon Laboratories~ Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E:C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I Report Date · 6/10/2002 I Sample ID · 2808/MW-7 I Analyte Result Method RL Units i 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether ND 0.5 (DIPE) ug,fL Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene 1.8 0.5 ug/L Toluene 300 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes 1,590 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 1,630 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dib~:omofluoro- 56.1 112% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 58.3 117% Toluene-d8 60.6 121% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 49.6 99% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L I Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Mr Fast I' Report Date · 6/10/2002 i Sample ID · 2809/MW-18 I Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates I t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I, Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene 440 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L i m & p Xylenes I,?10 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes 1,660 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluor0- 63,8 128% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 62.9 126% Toluene-d8 55.4 111% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 49.2 98% Halcyon Laboratories Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 ~. Analysis Requested Sample Matrix Project Name: l~/Z, F~ST" 8 ~ ~" ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite105. Bakersfield, CA93313 2- ~' ~ ~ ~ < < ~" ~ ~ ~ ~ .; ~ Soil ProjectManagen ~L~ ~o~~',~u' < < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ - ¢~ ~ g ~ ~ Acidified Sampler Name: ~O~ ~~~ x ~ o ~ = ~ ~ ~ " x ,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ = ~ ~ Comments  Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour 5-Day Standard -. Relinquished By: ~ ~~2~ Date~~ Relinquished By: Date: Received By: ~~~~ Date:~~ Received By: Date: Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIEN;F E2C Remediation, LLC Project Name: Mr Fast 5300 WOodmere Drive, Suite 105 ' Bakersfield, CA 933 ! 3 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Ruben Dorame&Ken Sutcliffe TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPHg Analysis: 6/3/2002 Date of Report:. 6/4/2002 Units: ug/L I Sample #: 2K2-2836 2K2-2837 Date Sampled: 5/23/2002 5/23/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: MW-14 MW42 TPH Gasoline 34,000 78,000 10,000 Surrogate Recovery % 93.8 95.7 I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L i Sample Description: i TPH Gasoline i Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: · Date Sampled: DE u~L Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline I iS,urr°gate RecoVery % , DL = Detection Limit · ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Prirnc~pal Analyst Phd Acosta I I Halcyon Laboratories, [nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L "I Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Mr Fast Report Date · 6/10/2002 Sample ID · 2836/Mw-14 I Analyte Result Method RL Units '5 Oxygenates ! t-Butanol ('I'BA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 250 u~L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 50 ug/L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 50 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 50 ug/L BTEX Components I Benzene 330 50 ug/L Toluene 13,400 50 ug/L Ethylbenzene 1,240 50 ug/L I m & p Xylenes 6,930 50 ug/L o Xylenes 5,390 50 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery i Benzene, .fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 64.9 :1.30% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.6 115% Toluene-d8 60.3 121% i p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.0 114% I I Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · .Mr Fast i Report Date · 6/10/2002 ISample ID · 2837/MW-12 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 250 ug/L i Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 50 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 50 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 50 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 50 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 50 ug/L Toluene 910 50 ug/L Ethyl benzene 970 50 ug/L I m & p Xylenes 6,360 50 ug/L o Xylenes 4,550 50 ug/L ,'l Internal Standards ' Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 .100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 59.4 119% 1,2-Dich Ioroethane-d4 56.8 114% Toluene-d8 59.5 119% I p-BromOfluorobenzene (BFB) 49.9 100% I I Prqiect Number 1 ~01BKO$ June 25. 2002 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! APPENDIX C ! SJVUAPCD Remediation System Startup Report, May 28, 2002 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix C I May 28, 2002 I San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District i Southern Regional Office 2700 M Street, Suite 275 B~.kersfield, CA 93301 IAttention: Mr. Bruce Muir RE: Startup Analytical Data, Permit S-3931-1-0 I Dear Mr. Muir: Pursuant to the conditions set forth in the Authority to Construct (ATC) for the Mr. Fast i Service Station site located at 600 Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California, please find enclosed copies of the laboratory analytical data collected during the startup inspection on April 10, 2002. I On April 10, 2002, Tedlar bag samples were collected from both the influent and effluent sample ports installed after the blower and in the effluent stack, respectively. The samples were submitted to Performance Analytical, Inc. of Simi Valley, California for analysis (DHS Certification No. 2380). The influent and effluent samples were analyzed I for Total Organic Gases (TOG) using EPA Method TO-3. TOG in the influent were measured at 1,700 parts per million volume (ppmv). TOG in the i effluent were measured at 66 ppmv. The ratio of effluent to influent VOC is as follows: 66ppmv I 1700ppmv- 0.039 Therefore, destruction efficiency is: I (t- 0.039) x 100% = 96. t% The total VOC emission rate is calculated as follows: I Formula 1: Convert ppmv (laboratory) to concentration in pg/L concentration(pg /L) = ppmv( laboratory) x 86gratns/tnole(molecularwt' I 22.414 liters ~mole (idea lg aslaw) I 253.2gg/L = 66ppmv x 86grams~mole 22.414 liters ~mole I IEzC P. Fj4EDLO,T~O,'q, LLC -I:Iq¥IROblt. IEF.~,L [ E£;!GII~EERIIq'.G COtqSULTAI'q-Fs 5 ; ~ ¢ ¢ t $' 7 0 5300 \T~o,dmcrc Dd,m., .qokn 105. 'llai,:~r~:td, C~k 93313 TM. 661.1131.6906 Fax: 661.g~1.623.i T.,11 Fizz: g00.339.4952 Prelect No. 1577BK04 May 28. 2002 Formula 2: Calculate emissions (lbs/day) using concentration and flowrate: Emissions(lbs~day) = effluentconcentration(gg / L ) x flowrate( scfm) x unitconversionfactors =253.2gg/Lx313cfmx 1~ x~ llb x28'33Lx60minx~24Hrs · - ' '10 ,u.g 454g lris 1Hr lday Using an alternative VOC emissions rate calculation yields similar results: lb · mole 86lbs 1440 min = × VOC(lbs/day) Concentration(ppmv)x flowrate(scfm)x 379'5fi~ x lb, mole day 86lbs 1440min lb·mole 6.741bs/day = 66ppmvx 313scfmx lb· mole x day x 379'5fi3 Flow rate is. measured by a Dwyer Series 603A Differential Pressure Transducer. Differential pressure sensors are located up and down flow stream of a V-cone which is located downstream of the blower and upstream of the oxidizer chamber. Differential pressure is converted to a 4 - 20 mA signal, which is then converted to flow at the chart recorder device. Flow at the time of sample collection was measured at 313 SCFM. Visual observations of the stack during startup operations were that the discharge was transparent, without a noticeable opacity. No identifiable odor or other nuisance was observed. VOC control efficiency calculations were made based on the laboratory samples collected during the initial inspection, under the supervision of the APCD Inspector. Samples were collected from both the influent and effluent gas stream sampling ports. Sampling ports installed are adequate to collect grab samples, for use of flame ionization detector (FID) or photoionization detector (PID) or other approved device, for the monitoring of influent and effluent gas streams. Ongoing compliance will be demonstrated by monitoring of the influent and effluent streams with a FID or PID during regular system operations and monitoring visits. Records including sampling results, cumulative run time, flow rate and catalytic oxidizer temperature will be maintained and retained for a minimum of two (2) years. System operation temperature will be maintained at a minimum of 600 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in the combustion chamber of the catalytic oxidizer. Please contact E2C at (661) 831-6906 with any questions or comments regarding this letter. Respectfully submitted, E2C Remediation, LLC Mark W. Clardy, R.G. #7055 Reg. Expires 05/31/02 Senior Geologist Enclosure: Laboratory Report dated. April 26, 2002, Performance Analytical, Inc. I I E:C Remediation, LLC 2 I -.: Performance AnalytiCal Inc. I - .~- Air Quality Laboratory ,4 Division of Cohttnhia Atu/lytical Service& htc. An Employee Owned Coml;a~ly L~o~ToKY ~POKT Client: E2C REMEDIATION, LLC Date of Report: 04/26/02 Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Date Received: 04/11/02 Bakersfield, CA 93313 PAl Project No: P2200668 Contact: Mr. Bill Lawson Purchase Order: Verbal Client Project ID: Mr. Fast Two (2) Tedlar Bag Samples labeled: "Mr. Fast Influent" and "Mr. Fast Effluent" The samples were received at the laboratory under chain of custody on April 11, 2002. The samples were received intact. Please refer to the sample acceptance check form for additional information. The results reported herein are applicable only to the condition of the samples at the time that they were received at the laboratory. __C! through C_6 Hydrocarbons and Total Gaseous Non-Methane Organics Analysis The samples were analyzed for C~ through C6 hydrocarbons and total gaseous non-methane organics per modified EPA Method TO-3 using a gas chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization detector (FID). The results of analyses are given on the attached data sheets. I Reviewed and Approved: R~_,Tw'ed and,Approved: I Regan Lau Kd-Jih O,tten Analytical Che~st Principal Che~st I Performance Inc. ..: : ,~na,?ca, I --- Air Quality Laboratory ,4 D/vision t~'Uo/tttH/~/,t Alltt(%'t/~'lt/.ffcrricc.s. Ira'. ~SULTS OF ANALYSIS  '~ Page 1 of 1 I Client: E2C Remediation, LLC Client Sample ID: Mr. Fast Influent PAI Project ID: P2200668 Client Project ID: Mr. Fast PAI Sample ID: P2200668-001 I Test Code: Modified EPA TO-3 Date Collected: 4/10/02 Instrument ID: HP5890A/FID #8 Date Received: 4/11/02 Analyst: Regan Lau Date Analyzed: 4/11/02 Sampling Media: Tedlar 1.0 ml Bag Volume(s) Analyzed: Test Notes: D.F. = 1.00 Result MRL Data Compound Qualifier ppmV ppmV C1 as Methane 12 0.50 C2 as Ethane ND 0.50 C3 as Propane ND 0.50 C4 as n-Butane 0.89 0.50 C5 as n-Pentane 2.8 0.50 C6 as 14 0.50 n-Hexane C6+ as n-Hexane 270 1.0 . Total Gaseous Non-Methane Organics (as Methane) 1,700 1.0 ND = Compound was analyzed for, but not detected above the laboratory reporting limit. MRL = Method Reporting Limit - The minimum quantity of a target analyte that can be confidently determined by the referenced method. I I Verified By: Date: 2 Performance Analytical Inc. I ' '-- Air Quality Labo?atory A Divixion qfCohmthia Atttdytica[ StuTice.s'. I~tc. ~ An Employee Ou'~ted CotH?tttly ~SULTS OF ANALYSIS  ~ Page 1 of 1 IClient: E2C Remediation, LLC Client Sample ID: Mr. Fast Influent PAl Project ID: P2200668 Client Project ID: Mr. Fast PAI Sample ID: P2200668-001DUP I I ITest Code: Modified EPA TO-3 Date Collected: 4/10/02 Instrument ID: HP5890A/FID #8 ' Date Received: 4/11/02 ia nalyst: Regan Lau Date Analyzed: 4/l 1/02 mpling Media: Tedlar Bag Volume(s) Analyzed: 1.0 ml est Notes: D.F. = 1.00 Result MRL Data Compound Qualifier ppmV ppmV C1 as Methane 12 0.50 C2 as Ethane ND 0.50 C3 as Propane ND 0.50 C4 as n-Butane 0.89 0.50 'C5 as n-Pentane 2.8 0.50 C6 as n-Hexane 14 0.50 C6+ as n-Hexane 270 1.0 Total Gaseous Non-Methane Organics (as Methane) 1,700 1.0 ND = Compound was analyzed for, but not detected above the laboratory reporting limit. MRL = Method Reporting Limit - The minimum quantity of a target analyte that can be confidently determined by the refere'nced method. I I I ! Verified By' '~-(5' Date: I OUooSSVG RDI DL'P _', .... !',~k ~ .':',:_' ... ',~,t.' I~ ".:" X.,..i.....I .d'~.,,m~'~;t~,5't'l!,,:c,'~!';,.'~2~' 71!,:'t.tx.'i'5.52r'-727~l ,. : Performance Analytical Inc. " ,~ Air Quality Laborat,.~ry , A Divisi.n of £'Mumhi,,~ Aa,dyti, al .$'cr~ ices./,w. '. '-- a,, ~,,~,~,,?,, o,,,,,.~ c,,,,,~,,,,,>. ~SULTS OF AN~YSIS .. Page 1 of 1 iClient: E2C Remediation, LLC Client Sample ID: Mr. Fast Effluent PAI Project ID: P2200668 Ciieut Project ID: Mr. Fast PAI Sample ID: P2200668-002 I Test Code: Modified EPA TO-3 Date Collected: 4/10/02 Instrument ID: HPSg90A/FID #8 Date Received: 4/11/02 Analyst: Regan Lau Date Analyzed: 4/11/02 ISampling Media: Tedlar Bag Volume(s) Analyzed: 1.0 ml Test Notes: I D.F. = 1.00 I Result MRL Data Compound Qualifier ppmV ppmV I C1 as Methane 19 0.50 C2 as Ethane ND 0.50 C3 as Propane ND 0.50 I C4 as n-Butane ND 0.50 C5 as n-Pentane ND 0.50 I C6 as n-Hexane i 0.83 0.50 I C6+ as n-Hexane 10 1.0 Total Gaseous Non-Methane Organic; (as Methane) 66 1.0 i ND = Compound was analyzed for, but not detected above the laboratory reporting limit. MRL = Method Reporting Limit - The minimum quantity of a target analyte that can be confidently determined by the referenced method. 'l I I Verified By: ~ (._., Date: I 00ooSSVG RDI - Sounple (2) 4 ~ ,.. : .... '. , .... , . ~ ..~ .. , ;, ;:... - ,, .; ~,, · ~ ! Performance Analytical Inc. I .~- Air Quality Laboratory ,4 D/vision t?f Ct,h~tnhiu ,Dtu(vticu[ Scrvicc.¥. Itt('. "., -- Att Etn[~loyee Owned Ctlll¥~ltlly RESULTS OF ANALYSIS ! - Page 1 of I llient: E2C Remediation, LLC ient Sample ID: Method Blank PAI Project ID · P2200668 Client Project ID: Mr. Fast PAI Sample ID: P020411-MB I IneSt Code: Modified EPA TO-3 Date Collected: NA strument ID: HP5890A/FID #8 Date Received: NA i ~analyst: Regan Lau Date Analyzed: 4/11/02 mpling Media: Tedlar Bag Volume(s) Analyzed: 1.0 ml Test Notes: D.F. = 1.00 Result MRL Data Compound Qualifier ~ ppmV ppmV I C1 as Methane ND 0.50 C2 as Ethane ND 0.50 C3 as Propane ND 0.50 C4 as n-Butane ND 0.50 C5 as n-Pentane ND 0.50 C6 as n-Hexane ND .0.50 C6+ as n-Hexane ND 1.0 ~ Total Gaseous Non-Methane Organics (as Methane) ND 1.0 ND = Compound was analyzed for, but not detected above the laboratory reporting limit. MRL = Method Reporting Limit - The minimum quantity ora target analyte that can be confidently determined by the referenced method. I ,! I Verified By: ~ (_~ Date: I 00o6:~SVG RDI - MBI~k Halcyon Laboratories Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 .. fax 661.831.6234 Analys!s Requested 'Sample Matrix Project Name: ...... ~£ F,4,'r ~ ~'~ ~ ~ 7'0-5 ~ Aqu.eous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105. Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~" ~' ~' ~ [ ~ ~' ~' /~.,. /%f/.,~ e. ''' §~;~~v ~ ~ I--1 so, Project Manager: ~o ~_ ~ ~ ~,, ~ Sampler Name: ,,x, ,,, ~ ~5 ~ Sample Date SampleTime Sample Description and Container Type ,~ ~- ~ > m ~" :~ "' Comments /1~-~ t /~¢ E££1~,.t ........ TurnarOund Time Requested: 24 Hour ~ 48 Hour 5-Day Standard ~ Rece;v;d BY:' '~~' /~ Date: ~I,//~ ~ Received By: Date: April 1,2002 Mr. Lloyd Childers 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, CA 93306 Subject: First Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Report Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA 93306 Dear Mr. Childers: E2C Remediation, LLC is pleased to present this report documenting the activities performed for the First Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring event at the Freeway Liquor Store at 2140 East Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. This report has been prepared to document the groundwater conditions beneath the Site as required by the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services (BFD). Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, please do not hesitate to call either of the undersigned at 661-831-6906. Respectfully Submitted, E2C Remediation, LLC ///-" Senior Geologist Principal Hydrog~ CC: Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Department 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, CA 93304 John Noonan RWQCB-CVR 3614 Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 E2C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL/ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i ~ c e 1 ~ 7 0 5300 Woodmere Drive,, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 Tel: 661.831.6906 Fmc: 661.831.6234 Toll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate Office'. 382 Martin Avenue, santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408,327.5700 Fax', 408:327,5707 Emaik E2C,Remediation,LLC@sbcgMb~l,net August 26, 2002 Mr. Lloyd Childers 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, CA 93306 Subject: Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Report Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA 93306 Dear Mr. Childers: E2C Remediation, LLC is pleased to present this report documenting the activities performed for the Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring event at the Freeway Liquor Store at 2140 East Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. This report has been prepared to document the groundwater conditions beneath the Site as required by the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services (BFD). Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, please do not hesitate to call either of the undersigned at 661-831-6906. Respectfully Submitted, E2C Remediation, LLC #7 Mark Ge o log ist ~~~/ a W. Clardy, R.G. '~5~9/~1]0~ ~/- / ~ Cdncipal Hydrogeologist Senior CC: Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Department 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, CA 93304 John Noonan RWQCBoCVR 3614 Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 E2C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i ~ r e I 9 7 0 5300 Woodmere Drive,, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 'l hi: 661.831.6906 Fax: 661.831.6234. 'lbll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate O~ce: 382 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408.327.5700 Fax: 408.327.5707 Email: E2C.Remedlation. LLC@sbcglobal.net I · I I I I I I I I I I I ,;,<, x,/ '",;~ / i .. / ,,,, /x. f \, f ',, / \ E~C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONHENTAL / ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS I I I I I I SECOND QUARTER 2002 I_ GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE · I 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA August 26, 2002 I Project Number 1802JS01 I Prepared For: I Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store I 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, California 93306 I I Prepared By: E2C Remediation, LLC I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, California 93313 e2c.remediation.llc@sbcglobal.net I I I I I Prqiect Number 1802JS03 August 26. 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS · i LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... i LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... i LIST OF APPENDICES i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 1 Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology 2 1.1.1 Regional Geology and Hydroge01ogy ................................................................... 2 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology ........................................................................... 3 2.0 SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING ............................................ 3 2.1 Groundwater Elevations ............................................................................................... 3 Monitoring Purging Sampling ......................................................................... 2.2 Well and 4 2.3 Groundwater Analyses ................................................................................................. 4 2.4 Discussion of Analytical Results ............... - .................................................................... 4 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 5 3.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 5 3.2 Recommendations 5 4.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION ................................................................. 6 5.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 Second Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Second Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 Second Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary .of Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Second Quarter 2002 GroundWater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I E2C Remediation, LLC i Prqiect Number 1802JS05 Au~_ ust 26. 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of the Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring event for the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California. Groundwater was monitored and groundwater samples were collected from the four (4) wells at the Site on May 23, 2002. Conclusions Based on the data obtained to date, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site remains constant at 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west- southwest; · The water table dropped less than 0.1 foot in all four (4) wells from the First Quarter 2002 to the Second Quarter 2002; and · The concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons remain at non-detect levels at all four wells similar to the previous quarter, with the exception of MtBE at MW-l, which was reported at a Iow concentration of 1.3 ~g/L. Note: This detection of MtBE in MW-1 at a relatively Iow groundwater elevation indicates that the soil plume may be encroaching upon the groundwater interface. Recommendations Based on the data obtained to date and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · As recommended in the First Quarter 2002 report, install one (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; · As recommended in the First Quarter 2002 report, implement Source Area Remedial Action full-scale basis; and on a · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. Note: Pre-approval of costs was obtained from the State Fund on May 22, 2002. Installation of the recommended additional groundwater monitoring well and implementation of the source area remediation will begin in the Third Quarter 2002. I E2C Remediation, LLC I Prqiect Number 1802JS03 Au_oust 26. 2002 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring performed on May 23, 2002 for the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1 for Site location). This report reviews the environmental history of the Site, discusses geological and hydrogeological conditions, provides the analytical results, interprets the extent of the fuel hydrocarbon groundwater plume and presents conclusions and recommendations. 1.1 and Geology Hydrogeology 1.1.1 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology Regional Geology The Site is located in the south central area of'the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is of massive block of and composed a igneous metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the consists of deformed and fractured marine and non-marine rocks west tectonically sedimentary of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous These rocks age. are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. Unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake gravel, sand, silt, and clay sediments, in turn, overlie the Tertiary rocks. Surface features of the floor 'of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit, which consists of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,500 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. I E~C Remediation, LLC 2 Project Number 1802JS05 August 26. 200P Lithologic and hydraulic properties of th'ese sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during. the boring procedures at the Freeway Liquors Site and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. During the Site Assessment work in April 2001, groundwater was encountered at 130 feet below ground surface (bgs). 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology Site Geology The subsurface at the Site is generally characterized by fine to medium grained poorly graded sand and silty sand with some minor clay fractions in areas to a depth of approximately 55 feet bgs. Of specific note is the change from coarser materials (sands) to finer materials (silts and clays) between approximately 45 and 55 feet bgs, dependent upon location. The finer materials occur to a depth of approximately 80 feet bgs at MW-1. Silt to fine grained silty sand is present to a depth of approximately 85 feet at MW-2, to 75 feet at MW-3 and from approximately 70 feet to 90 feet bgs at MW-4. These finer sediments are underlain by poorly graded sand and silty sand to the maximum depth explored of 141.5 feet bgs, however, at MW-4 an additional layer of silt was found between 125 feet and 135 feet bgs. Site Hydrogeology Groundwater has been encountered between approximately 120 feet and 125 feet bgs during drilling activities. In April 2001, the groundwater level was 121.94 feet below top of casing at well MW-1. In 2001, measured at 123.10 feet BTOC, (BTOC) August groundwater was a drop of approximately 1.2 feet since the initial measurement. In December 2001, groundwater was measured at 122.44 feet BTOC, a rise of 0.66 foot since August 2001. Groundwater flow was determined to be to the west-southwest at a gradient of 0.016 foot foot (ft/ft) in per December 2001 and in February 2002. 2.0 SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING On May 23, 2002, E2C personnel conducted Second Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring depths to groundwater, checking the wells for free-product, purging the wells, and collecting groundwater samples. 2.1 Groundwater Elevations Prior to purging and sampling, the depth to groundwater was measured at wells MW-1 through MW-4 using a Solinst water level meter. Depth to groundwater was measured from the top of casing (TOC) at the north side of the casing to the nearest 0.01 foot. In addition, the wells were checked for free-product using a Yellowjacket oil-water interface probe. The interface probe and Solinst water level indicator were washed in an Alconox solution and rinsed with clean water prior to use. E2C Remediation, LLC 3 I Project Number 1802JS03 August 26. 2002 I, I Evaluation of the groundwater elevation data indicates that the gradient is 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west-southwest. Figure 3 depicts a plot of the Second Quarter 2002 groundwater gradient I and flow direction. Groundwater elevations for the Second Quarter 2002 fell slightly since the First Quarter 2002. Groundwater elevation decreases were small, 0.09 foot in two wells, MW-1 and MW-3, 0~04 foot in MW-2, and 0.01 foot in MW-4. Groundwater elevations for this I monitoring event are summarized in Table 1 and with historical groundwater elevation data in Table 2. I 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling Groundwater at each well was purged in order to obtain a representative groundwater sample. At least three well casing volumes of groundwater were removed from the each well prior to I sampling utilizing a battery-powered submersible pump. A casing volume is calculated by multiplying the height of the freestanding water column in the well by the cross-sectional area of the well casing. During purging, groUndwater parameters of temperature, pH, and conductivity I were measured as water was pumped from a well to verify sufficient purging and stable physical parameter measurements on field instruments (see Appendix A for purge data sheets). The pump was decontaminated in a solution of Alconox and water and rinsed with clean water I before each use. After purging, groundwater at each well was sampled using a new disposable bailer or a pre- I cleaned stainless steel bailer. The groundwater samples were decanted into two (2) 40-mi volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials. Care was taken to prevent headspace or bubbles in the vials, which were sealed with Teflon-lined lids. Samples were labeled and placed in an iced I cooler maintained at 4 degrees Centigrade (°C), accompanied with a Chain-of-Custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. I 2.3 Groundwater Analyses Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, fuel oxygenates, and the I scavengers (1,2-DCA EDB) using 8260b. Appendix presents lead and EPA Method B the analytical laboratory report. Laboratory analytical results for the First Quarter 2002 are summarized in Table 1 and historical data are summarized in Table 3. The results of the I Second Quarter 2002 chemical summarized analyses are following: · MtBE was reported in the groundwater sample from MW-1 at a concentration of 1.3 i ~tg/L, however, all other fuel hydrocarbon compounds were reported as non-detect; · All fuel hydrocarbon compounds including the lead scavengers were reported as non- detect in samples from wells MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4 this quarter. I 2.4 Discussion of Analytical Results From the First Quarter 2002 to the Second Quarter 2002, the groundwater table dropped less I than 0.1 foot at all four wells. The concentration of MtBE at well MW-1 increased slightly from non,detect (<0.5 ~g/L) to 1.3 g.g/L during this period. Although groundwater concentrations remain Iow, soil analytical data indicates significant contaminant concentrations in the vadoSe Iand saturated zones in the vicinity of MW-1. These data suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons may still migrate from the soil to the groundwater when the groundwater rises significantly., i though at a rate that could result in only relatively Iow groundwater concentrations. Analytical I E~C Remediation, LLC 4 Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 Al~gust 26. 2002 data from the three wells installed in November 2001 (Mw-2, MW-3, and MW-4) indicate that groundwater at these wells has not been impacted. $.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Conclusions Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: ·The groundwater gradient at the Site remains constant at 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west- southwest; ·The water table dropped less than 0.1 foot in all four (4) wells from the First Quarter 2002 to the Second Quarter 2002; and - The concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons remain at non-detect levels at all four wells similar to the previous quarter, with the exception of MtBE at MW-l, which'was reported at a Iow concentration of 1.3 ~g/L. Note: This detection of MtBE in MW-1 at a relatively Iow groundwater elevation indicates that the soil plume may be encroaching upon the groundwater interface. 3.2 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · As recommended in the First Quarter 2002 report, install one (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) west-southwest of MW-1 to assess downgradient groundwater conditions; ·As recommended in the First Quarter 2002 report, implement Source Area Remedial Action on a full-scale basis; and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. Note: Pre-approval of costs was obtained from the State Fund on May 22, 2002. Installation of the recommended additional groundwater monitoring well and implementation of the source area remediation will begin in the Third Quarter 2002. ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC 5 Prelect Number 1802JS05 August 26. 200P 4.0 ~ LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Report in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing in California at this time. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared under the professional supervision of the registered professional whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(s). Prepared By: Senior Geologist ~r'mcilSal Hydrogeologist ! I E2C Remediation, LLC 6 I Prqiect Number 1802JS05 Auo_ust 26. 2002 I 5.0 REFERENCES i (BFD, 1999) Bakersfield Fire _Department Office of Environmental Services, March 30, 1999, Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Freeway Liquor Store, 2030 East Brundage Lane, Permit #BR-0231 I (BFD, 2001) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, February 26, 2001, Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane (a.k.a. 2030 East Brundage Lane) I (E2C, 2001a) E2C, Inc., February 9, 2001, Site Characterization Workplan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001b) E2C, Inc., May 31, 2001, Site Characterization Report of Findings and Interim Remedial Action Plan,. Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001c) E2C Remediation, LLC, November 15, 2001, Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2002) E2C Remediation, LLC, February 6, 2002, Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater I and of for Additional Groundwater Monitoring Report Report Findings Characterization and SVE/AS Pilot Testing & Remedial Action Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, I Bakersfield, California I E2C Remediation, LLC 7 Project Number 1802JS03 August 26. 2002 FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 Second Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Second Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 Second Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot E2C Remediation, LLC Figures I ) ~ ,~.:.~' .. / Shark Tooth Hill I , , ~" ..' i : aS O,-e ' O'crPe~k I . WEEOPATCH ., ...... ~ ~. .... .. ~... ~ ..... sP,~No~ / "'~_.,,~ E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, CA. 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Phone: (661) 831-6306 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 VlCINTY MAP I m B-~ LEGEND O Soil Boring Location · m ~.1 MW-2 B-16 Monitoring Well Location .~ · VE-1 STORAGE I ~ Yapor Extraction ~oll [ooatlon ~ ~TO~[ . . AS-1 FENCE ~ ovemanq %~ Air Sparge Well Location m ~ e ~ VE-2 B~9 B-6 mB-11 (PROPOSED) SHOULDER ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE power line MW-3 < m MWo4 .- o z m z c: Ill SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STONE FIG U R E 5300 Woodmere D~., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield,Telephone: (661)Calif°rnia831-690693313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 2 Facsimile: (661)831-6234 SITE PLAN I /V ~o,,~o~,~o~,,o~ IMW-1 I+ Monitoring Well Location IVI Vapor Extraction Well Location STORAGE IA~'I AIrspargewellL°catl°n I AREA "'42°wE'evat'°n'"'MsL I I ~m~GW Elevatl°n C°nt°ur' fi' MS~~ ~s~ V~~~~~~ ~ , B~ E~2 1 . VE e ~ ,power line~~ SC~L~: 1 =40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield,Telephone: California(661 ) 831-690693313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA' 3 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER GRADIENT PLOT I LEGEND ~ N~ $oll Boring Location R-16 Monitoring Well Location -- FENCE ~ Alt Sparge Well Location ' I ~ VE-2 I TPHg Concentration In uCL B-9 B-6 ' *, Contourln u~ ~ B-~ ~ ~~MW'I~ - VENTUN~S-- ~ (B-8) DISPENSER I B-2 8-~5 ~ VE-3 ~ B-12 VEM-6 B-4 ~ B-3 ,w., . ./ / (PROPOSED) & B-13 ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I power Fine m MW-3 < MW-4 -. o z SCALE: 1" = 40' ! E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2i40 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 4 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Second Quarter 2002 I Facsimile: (661)831-6234 TPH~I Isoconcentration Plot m LEGEND I ;6 Soil Borlng Location m B.16 VE-1 STORAGE I O Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 ove,.~,q FENCE ~ [] Air Sparge Well Location I z m · ® VE-2 zo I B-9 B-6 Benzene Concentration In ug/L NEW UST ~lW-1 B-2 B-11 · VENT LINES (S-8) DISPENSER I B-15 -5 CANOPY AS-1 [] ~ I SLAB VE'4 ~-~ MW-5 · B-3 ~ / (PROPOSED)-~ SHOULDER T m ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE power line, MW-3 < MW-4 m t- SCALE: '1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIG U RE m 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ' ~ TelephOne: (661) 831-6906 Second Quarter 2002 m Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot m I LEGEND · Soil Boring Location I I MW-1 MW-2 8-1 ~ Monitoring Well Location VE-1 STORAGE m {~) vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 FENCE ~ -- [] Air sParge Well Location 23 Z · VE-2 zo m ~ MTBE Concentration In ug/L a-9 ~ B-6 zrn MTBE Isoconcentraflon z · '1.0 · Contour in ug/L B-11 MW-1 (B-8) 8-2 I B-15 ED-5 · · SL~B VE-4 J'~ · ® ~-[] ~ ® I/ I m M'~W-5 /E'3 {~ B'12 VEM'6 84 ' SHOULDER m ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE m ,power line MW-3 < MW-4 23 7 SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE m 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ~ Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Second Quarter 2002 m Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot Prqiect Number 1802JS03 Aua_ust 26. 2002. TABLES Table 1 Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data E2C Remediation, LLC Tables Project Number 1802JS03 August 26, 2002 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF SECOND QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California WELL DATE GW DEPTH ELEVATION ELEV. (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) #g/L 5/23/02 122.71 138.20 386.40 263.69 _1 nd nd nd nd nd 1.3 nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-1 5/23/02 122.00 139.32 386.60 264.60 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-2 duplicate " nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-3 5/23/02 121.37 139.30 384.15 262.78 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 5/23/02 119.69 140.71 384.11 264.42 nd nd nd nd nd nd ' nd nd nd nd nd I nd MW-4 ..............................................................................I Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (pg/L) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8260b; TPHg - EPA 8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5 pg/L; Xylenes - 1.0 #g/L; TBA - 2.5/~g/L; DIPE/ETBE/MTBE/'DAME/1,2-DCNEDB - 0.5 ,ug/L; and TPHg - 50 pg/L. Sample MW-5 on chain of custody form is duplicate from well MW-2 1,2-DCA = 1,2-Dichloroethane B = Benzene BTOC = Below Top Of Casing DIPE = Di-isopropyl ether E = Ethylbenzene EDB = 1,2-Dibromoethane ETBE = Ethyl tertiary Butyl Ether GW = Groundwater nd = Not Detected TAME = Tertiary Amyl Methyl Ether TBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol TOC = Top of Casing X = Total xylenes E2C Remediation, LLC Table 1-1 Project Number 1802JS03 . August 26, 2002 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Total DEPTH TOC GW ELEVATION FREE WELL ID DATE Depth TO GW ELEVATION ELEVATION CHANGE PRODUCT (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) (feet) 4/27/01 141.60 121.94 386.40 264.46 8/6/01 141.60 123.10 263.30 -1.16 MW-1 .__1_2/7_/_0_1_ .... ~1~3_8_t_2_6- !_2_2.~__4 2/19/02 138.22 122.62 263.78 -0.18 _.. 5/23/02 ......!.38.2_0 .......... 12/7/01 139.50 121.94 386.60 264.66 MW-2 __2/_1.9/0~_2- .......... 1_3~9.4_8- ....... 1_2_:~_._9_6_ _5/_2_ 3/0~2- 1_39_._3_2- _1_ 2_2_ ._0_.0_ 26~ .~60_ _-_0_:_0. 4_. 12/7/01 138.92 121.42 384.15 262.73 MW-3 _2_/1_9.~0_2_ ..... _1~3_9_.02_ ........ !2__1_..__2.8_. ............................ _2-~2._ 8~ ......... 0_:1~4 5/23/02 139.30 121.37 262.78 -0.09 _1.1_9_. _6_4 384~.!1 2~_4._4~7_ 2/19/02 139.56 119.68 264.43 -0.04 MW-4 5/23/02 140.71 119.69 264.42 -0.01 NOTES: BTOC = Below Top of Casing GW = Groundwater TOC = Top of Casing MSL = Mean Sea Level I I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 2; 1 Project Number 1802JS03 August 26, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Well ID Sample Date _. ~._.1 _~ _1. _E I__X I ~p_H.g_ I_ T_B.A__I __M_t__BE__I. P!PE_J_ET.B_E I ~AME_I !~'_.D. CAI EDB_ #g/L grab 4/18/01 531 451 346 651 4,980 na 1,570 na na na na na 4/27/01 95 107 60 122 2,049 na 295 na na na na na duplicate 96 129 71 139 2,108 na 331 na na na na na 8/6/01 nd nd nd nd nd na 33 na na na na na duplicate nd nd nd nd nd na 58 na na na na na MW-1 12/7/01 nd nd nd nd 130 18.8 16.4 nd nd nd nd nd duplicate nd nd nd nd 110 nd 18.6 nd nd nd nd nd 2/19/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd duplicate nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 5/23/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd 1.3 nd nd nd nd nd __.1~2/7/_0_1 ...... -nd_ .... _nd_ .... _nd- ...... n_d_ ........ _n_d_ ..... --nd_ ....... _nd_ .... _nd_ ..... _n._d_ .... _n._d_ ....n_d~_ 2/19/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-2 5/23/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd duplicate nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 12_/7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-3 ...... ._2/_!_9_/__0_2- ..... _n_~_ _ n_~ ...._nd-_.. __-n.d_ ....... _n_d _ _n_~d_ ....~_d_ .... _n_~ .... _n.~ .... n_d__ __~.n_d_ ..... -nd~_ __5_/_2_3/__02 _ __n.d_ ...... -n_d__ __n_d__ nd_ ....... _nd_ ........ n_d_ .__nd_ ...... n__d ..... _n_d__ .....n~d ..... _nd-_ ......n_d___. 12/7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-4 _ N_I _9(0_2 nd_ .... n_d_ ..... _n_d__ nd ...... _n.d ........ nd ........ _._n_d_ ...... n_d ....... n_d ...... pd_ .... nde_., nd _ ~/_2~3/0_2.. n~d _ qd .... n_d_. _.n_d .... nd ..... gd ..... n__d ....... _n_d- ........ n_cl_ ...... _nd_ ....... _nd-_ ....... n~d_ Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (.ug/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5 pg/L, Xylenes - 1.0 #g/L, TPHg - 50 #g/L, TBA - 2.5 pg/L, MTBE - 0.5 u~L B = Benzene E = Ethylbenzene DIPE = Di-isopropyl Ether ETBE = Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether GRAB - Unpurged Water Sample collected piior to well development MTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ether na = Not analyzed nd o Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by value T = Toluene TAME = Tertiary Amyl methyl Ether TBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline X = Total xylenes Note: For 4/27/01,8/6/01, and 12/7/01 samples labeled as MW-8, MW-9, and MW-5, respectively, on chain of custody are duplicates from MW-1 I I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 3-1 Project Number 180£JS05 Au_oust 26. 200P APPENDICES Appendix A Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report E2C Remediation, LLC Appendices ?roiect Number 1802JS03 August 26. 2002 APPENDIX A Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets EeC Remediation, LLC Appendix A £aCRemediation, a,.o,,,&ate,.s, ie,,ti.,: E. vVo..,~.ta~Co.s~ta,,~ Water Quality Sampling Record Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)831.6134 :' ', . E~C REM. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: /~, ~ o "..t:PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS ' T~MP pH S~C ~RKS TIME INTAKE (~ (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) (GOLOR. TURBIDITY. DEPTH ] ~TE (¢~L) ~ ~tt rot PUMPED '.... ' '.'/ ' ' . T .'" ' ' - '.' ,.' - ~.~. , S~MPL~D AT: /~ ~T. ~INAL DEPTH TO ~ATER: /~. 7 / ~T. t CASING VOLUMES = ~ ~ GALS. NOTES: m Groundwater Scientists: £nvironmental Consultants Water. Quality Sampling Record Telephone: (661)831.6906 / Facsimile: (661)831.6234 SAMPLE ID / ~ELL ': ~- ~ DEPTH TO WATER: - .. '. :"PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS .... .':' ".t JEMP pH SEC REMARKS TIME INTAK~ (~ (UNITS) (mmhos/cm) (COLOR, TURBIDITY, ETC.) DEPTH j ~TE (~PM) J CUM' VOL . (GAL) J WELL VOL Well Capacity: 2". O. I ~32 gallon/linear foot 4"- O.8S2S gallon/linear/oot 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear S~IPLEDAT: / ~ ~ ' FT. FINAL DEPTH TO WATER: /~ Z. ~ FT. tCASlNGVOLUMES= ~ ~/ GALS. F,2CReme&'ation, LLC Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants Water. Quality Sampling Record s3oo Wooam.r. my., s.~,~ ~os; ~k~d, ~,ro~a ~ ~ and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831.6906 / FacSimile: (661)831.6234 ~,C R"M. PROJECT ~: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: PROJECT NAME: ~~ WELL OI~ETER; ~'..',~, . .... ' ' "'. :"PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS · ' .'" .'~'{, TEMP pH SEC RE~RK~ Well Capacky: 2" · O. I ,, .... , . ...? . . .~. ." ... . . :. . .. ..... NOTE~: I £2CRcm¢ liation, 5300 V/oodmere Drive, Suite 105: Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)83 I-6.7.34 SAMPLE ID / WELL #: /,"~/Z', C~L)- (-/'- DEPTH TO WATER: // E2C REM. PROJECT #: TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: / ~). PROJECT NAME: /~:'C- WELL DIAMETER; "'..:'PLIRGE CHARACTERISTICS, , -'.=.,~ ':".' TEMP pU SEC REMARKS TIME INTAKE DEPTH j RATE (GPM) J CUM. VOL (GAL) J ~VELL VOL' (F°) (UNITS) (mmho$/¢mI (COLOR, TURGIDITY. ETC.) PUMPI:D /' .... ...,..... ;~ :.', · . ..- :- Well Capacity: 2"- O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4"- 0.65~S gallon/linear ~" · 1.4688 ~alton/linear S~MPLEDAT: / ~ ~ FT. FINAL DEPTH TOWATER: /,~& ~ FT. 3 CASlNGVOLUMES= /~.~ GALS. NOTES: Project Number 1802JS01 August 26, 2002 APPENDIX B Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix B m ~ oFm Client Name ' E.2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matrix ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o ~ ~ ~ Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Conta~nerType '~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ 3 m Comments [ Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour 5-Day Standard ~ Relinquished By: ~~¢~ Date:o~_z,.¢~ I Relinquished By: Date: Received By: ,~/~ Date: ~,/~ [Received By: Date: I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT' EiC Remediation, LLC Project Nat~e: Freeway Liquors 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Ruben Dorame&Ken Sutcliffe TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPHg Analysis: 6/3/2002 Date of Report: 6/4/2002 Units: ug/L I Sample #: 2K2-2830 2K2-2831 2K2-2832 2K2-2833 2K2-2834 2K2-2835 Date Sampled: 5/23/2002 5/23/2002 5/23/2002 5/23/2002 5/23/2002 5/23/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: Tblank MW-1 MW-2 MW-5 MW-3 MW4 I TPH Gasoline ND ND ND ND ND ND 50 I Surrogate Recovery % 84.4 93.7 86.5 96.7 106.9 95.1 I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L I Sample Description: i TPH Gasoline i Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L I Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline I Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detecti°n Limit ~~ I ND - Non-Detect at given DL , NA - Result not available ~ Principal Analyst: Phil Acosta I I I Halcyon Laboratoriesf :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date: 6/10/2002 Sample ID · 2830/Tblank Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-AmyJ Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/g Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 u~JL, o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L ~Znternal Standards Results. % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 71.9 14~% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 61.1 122% Toluene-d8 64.8 i30% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 52.1 104% ! I Halcyon LaboratOries, [nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date: 6/10/2002 Sample ID · 2831/MW-1 Analyte Result Method RL Units. 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 1.3 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 U~-~ Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 , ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 1.00% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 65.4 131% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.7 115% Toluenc=~d8 60.6 121% p-Bromofluor°benzene (BFB) 58.5 117% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors I Report Date: 6/10/2002 ISample ID · 2832/MW-2 ,f I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates .:. t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol · ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Ether ND 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl (DIPE) Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 u~J~L, Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 u~L, I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ugfL Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L' I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers I Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% I Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-DichloFobenzene-d4 50.0 100% mSurrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 66.1 132% m 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 60.1 120% Toluene-d8 57.9 116% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 61.7 123% ! I : ~ Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B LabOratory Report Water Sample Results in uglL I Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 i Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors I Report Date · 6/10/2002 i Sample ID · 2833/MW-5 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates -- t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 u~L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 u~L I Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 us/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers I Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results Recovery O/o Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% I Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 66.4 133% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 57.2 114% I 65.6 131% Toluene-d8 p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 56.8 114% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway LiquOrs I Report Date · 6/10/2002 I Sample ID · 2834/MW-3 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates : t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 2.5 ug/L Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I Ether (DIPE) ND ' 0.5 ug/L Diisopropyl Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.5 ug/L Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 ug/L I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers I Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene. fluoro 50.0 100% I chloro- 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, 1,4-DichlorobenZene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 66.0 132% 1.2-Dichloroethane-d4 59.7 119% Toluene-d8 59.5 119% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 54.3 109% I Halcyon' Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Resultsin ug/l. .Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 6/10/2002 Sample ID · 2835/MW-4 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates .~. t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND :2.5 u~L Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 u~/L Ether (DIPE) ND 0.5 Diisopropyl Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0,5 u~L Ted-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.5 u~/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 u~ Toluene ND 0.5 Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 60.5 121% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.8 108% Toluene-d8 58.4 117% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 52.2 104% I I I i I I '1 I '1 I I ,i I I E2C REHEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS I September 17, 2002 Mr. Lloyd Childers 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, CA 93306 Subject: Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Report & Additional Groundwater Characterization Report of Findings Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA 93306 Dear Mr. Childers: E2C Remediation, LLC is pleased to present this report documenting the activities performed for Additional Groundwater Characterization at the Freeway Liquor Store at 2140 East Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. In addition the Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring event performed in August 2002 is detailed· This report has been prepared to document the groundwater conditions beneath the Site as required by the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services (BFD). Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, please do not hesitate to call either of the undersigned at 661-831-6906. Respectfully Submitted, E2C'~W~~I r~~' Mark a · C dy, R.G. #7055 ~.~.~ ~..~../ '~alw, Senior Geologist ~ ~~~~rin ,pal ylr~g~ologist CC: Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Department 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, CA 93304 John Noonan RWQCB-CVR 3614 Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 E2C REMEDIATION, LLC ENVIRONI"tENTAL I ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e l 9 7 0 5300 Woodrnere Drive,, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 Tel: 661.831.6906 Fax: 661.831.6234 Toll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate Office: 382 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408.327.5700 Fax: 408.327.5707 Email: E2C.Remediation. LLC@sbcglobal.net THIRD QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION REPORT OF FINDINGS FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA September 17, 2002 Project Number 1802JS04 Prepared For: Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store 6107 Roundup Way California 93306 Bakersfield, Prepared By: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, California 93313 e2c. remediation.llc @ sbcglobal.net m Prqiect Number 1802JS05 S~otember 17. 20rip m TABLE OF CONTENTS m TABLE Of CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ ii m LiST OF APPENDICES ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 m Installation of Downgradient Groundwater Monitoring Well ...................................................... 1 Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring ........................................................................... 1 Additional Groundwater Characterization ................................................................................ 1 m Conclusions 2 Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 2 m · 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology .......................................................................................... 3 1.1.1 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology ................................................................... 3 m 1.1.2 site Geology and Hydrogeology ........................................................................... 4 1.2 Site History .................................................................................................................. 4 m 1.2.1 site Characterization ....................... ; .................................................................... 5 1.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan ............................................................................... 7 1.2.3 Report of Findings - Additional. Groundwater Characterization .................... i ......... 8 m 1.2.4 Remediation System Installation ........................................................................... 9 1.2.5 SVE/AS Pilot Test ................................................................................................ 9 m 1.2.6 Remedial Action Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal ............................ 11 1.2.7 Summary of Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................. 13 2.0 THIRD QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING .............................................. 13 m 2.1 Groundwater Elevations ............................................................................................. 13 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling ....................................................................... 13 m 2.3 Groundwater Analyses ............................................................................................... 14 3.0 ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION REPORT OF FINDINGS ........... 14 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 15 m 4.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 15 4.2 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 15 m 5.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION ............................................................... 16 6.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................. ~ ................................. 17 ! m m E2c Remediation, LLC i Pro_iect Number 1802JS0~ July 26. 200? LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 Third Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Third Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 Third Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data Table 4 Summary of Boring MW-5 Soil Analytical Data LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Second Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix C MW-5 Boring Log Appendix D MW-5 Soil Analytical Laboratory Report Remediation, LLC ii I Prqiect Number 1802JS03 S~otember 17. 2002 I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I This report presents the results of the Additional Groundwater Characterization performed at the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California on July 25, 2002. In addition, the Third Quarter 2002' groundwater monitoring event is I documented. Installation of Downgradient Groundwater Monitoring Well I In July 2002, groundwater monitoring well MW-5 was installed in the downgradient direction. The well was installed to approximately 140 feet in depth with the screen interval set from approximately 115 to 140 feet below ground surface' (bgs). Groundwater was initially sampled I at the well in conjunction with the Third Quarter groundwater monitoring event performed in August 2002. I Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater samples were collected from five (5) monitoring wells at the Site in August 2002. Groundwater samples were analyzed at Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of I Bakersfield, California. The Third Quarter 2002 data summarized groundwater analytical are following: i · Ethylbenzene was reported in the groundwater samples from MW-2 and MW-3 at Iow concentrations of 0.5 ~.g/L and 0.6 ~g/L, respectively; · Total xylenes were reported at a Iow concentration of 0.5 ~g/L in the groundwater I sample from MW-3. Note: No other fuel hydrocarbon compounds were detected in groundwater samples from MW-2 and MW-3; and · All fuel hydrocarbon compounds including the lead scavengers were reported as non- I detect in samples from wells MW-l, MW-4, and new well MW-5 this quarter. Additional Groundwater Characterization I From the Second Quarter 2002 to the Third Quarter 2002, the table from groundwater dropped 0.12 foot to 0.30 foot at all four wells that were monitored the previous quarter. The concentration of MtBE at well MW-1 decreased from 1.3 tzg/L in the Second Quarter 2002 to I non-detect in the Third Quarter 2002. concentrations remain soil Although groundwater Iow, analytical data indicates significant contaminant concentrations in the vadose and saturated zones in the vicinity of MW-I. These data suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons may still I migrate from the soil to the groundwater when the groundwater rises significantly, though at a rate that could result in only relatively Iow groundwater concentrations. IEthy~benzene concentrations were reported in the water samples from MW-2 and MW-3 in the Third Quarter water samples collected from those wells. Groundwater samples from these two (2) wells have been reported as non-detect for all fuel hydrocarbon constituents in previous I quarters. Further monitoring is required to verify these reported detections. Groundwater samples collected from the upgradient well (MW-4) and the downgradient well (MW-5) indicate that the groundwater plume is defined in those directions. · I E~C Remediation, LLC I I f:'roiect Number 1602JS03 September 17. 200P I Conclusions I Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site remains constant at 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west- I southwest; · The water table dropped from 0.12 foot to 0.30 foot in all four (4) previously installed wells from the Second Quarter 2002 to the Third Quarter 2002; and I · The data indicate that the plume is defined in all directions from analytical groundwater the Site; however, very minor detections of ethylbenzene and xylenes were reported in wells MW-2 and MW-3 in the Third Quarter 2002 monitoring event. Further monitoring at I those wells will be required to verify these detections. Recommendations I Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: I · No additional groundwater monitoring well installations are recommended as the current well network is sufficient to characterize groundwater chemical conditions; · As recommended in the Second Quarter 2002 report, implement Source Area Remedial I Action on a full-scale basis; · Continue to monitor groundwater at wells MW-2 and MW-3 to verify the reported detections of very Iow concentrations of ethylbenzene and xylenes at those wells in the I Third Quarter 2002; and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. I Note: Pre-approval of costs to implement Site remediation was obtained from the State Fund on May 22, 2002. The SJVAPCD permit was applied for and received. After receipt of the air I permit, E2C authorized construction of the remedial equipment, which is scheduled for completion in late September 2002. In addition, after receipt of the air permit, the equipment pad was constructed in early September 2002 and the electrical supply will be installed the Iweek of September 16, 2002. The anticipated stirrup date for the remediation system is early October 2002. I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC 2 Project Number 1802JS05 September 17. 2002 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents ,the results of Additional Groundwater Characterization performed in July and August 2002 for the Freeway Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1 for Site location). In addition, this report details Third Quarter groundwater monitoring for the Site. This report reviews the environmental history of the Site, discusses geological and hydrogeological conditions, provides the analytical results, interprets the extent of the fuel hydrocarbon groundwater plume and presents conclusions and recommendations. 1.1 Geology and Hydrogeology 1.1.1 Regional Geology and HydrogeOlogy Regional Geology The Site is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. Unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake gravel, sand, silt, and clay sediments, in turn, overlie the Tertiary rocks. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are of active stream deposition sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the sites of the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit, which consists of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,500 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. I E2C Remediation, LLC 3 Prqiect Number 1802JS05 September 17. 200~, Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixturbs between the extremes. Those of the west side of the derived Valley are largely from the Coastal Ranges,. which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more Sediments encountered permeable. during the boring procedures at the Freeway Liquors Site and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. During the Site Assessment work in April 2001, groundwater was encountered at 130 feet below ground surface (bgs). 1.1.2 Site Geology and Hydrogeology Site Geology The subsurface at the Site is generally characterized by fine to medium grained poorly graded sand and silty sand with some minor clay fractions in areas to a depth of approximately 55 feet bgs. Of specific note is the change from coarser materials (sands) to finer materials (silts and clays) between approximately 45 and 55 feet bgs,"dependent location. The finer materials upon occur to a depth of approximately 80 feet bgs at MW-1. Silt to fine grained silty sand is present to a depth of approximately 85 feet at MW-2, to 75 feet at MW-3 and from approximately 70 feet to 90 feet bgs at MW-4o These finer sediments are underlain by poorly graded sand and silty sand to the maximum depth explored of 141.5 feet bgs, however, at MW-4 an additional layer of silt was found between 125 feet and 135 feet bgs. Site Hydrogeology Groundwater has been encountered between approximately 120 feet and 125 feet bgs during drilling activities. In April 2001, the groundwater level was 121.94 feet below top of casing (BTOC) at well MW-1. In August 2001, groundwater was measured at 123.10 feet BTOC, a drop of approximately 1.2 feet since the initial measurement. In December 2001, groundwater was measured at 122.44 feet BTOC, a rise of 0.66 foot since August 2001. Groundwater flow has remained constant.with a flow direction to the west-southwest at a gradient of 0.016 foot per foot (ft/ft) from December 2001 through the Third Quarter 2002. 1.2 Site History In December 1998, three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs)'; two 6,000-gallon, single-walled, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) located on two dispenser islands and associated product piping were removed from the Site. The fueling facilities were subsequently upgraded with double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled product pipelines, and MPDs with dispenser pans. At the time of removal, soil samples were collected per BFD requirements and analyzed for TPH'g, BTEX and MtBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020, respectively. A total of 38 soil samples were analYzed. Significant concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were detected beneath the two former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' and beneath five (5) of the former dispenser locations. I E2C Remediation, LLC 4 Proiect Number 1502JS05 $~o[ember 17', 2002 On FebruarY 4, 1999, a Tank Closure Report was submitted to the City for review. On March 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed the Site 'to submit for site characterization. The Owner owner by letter, a workplan subsequently applied to the State Fund and was accepted into the Fund on FebruarY 5, 2001. E2C Site Characterization that detailed of Work and prepared a Workplan a Scope procedures to perform characterization of the Site (E2C, 2001). The BFD reviewed and approved the Workplan by letter dated FebruarY 26, 2001 (BFD, 2001). 1.2.1 Site Characterization Work elements of the Site Characterization Workplan were implemented during the period of April 9 through April 17, 2001. Soil borings were advanced at the locations depicted on Figure 2. Note: Based on actual field conditions and field screening of soil samples, some borings were relocated. In addition, extra borings were also advanced to provide definition of impacted soils and groundwater. Chemical Analyses of Soil samples All analytes tested for were detected at varYing concentrations dependent upon location. The source area appeared to be centered at the area of boring B-8. In general, the fuel hydrocarbons spread downward from the source area until encountering the finer-grained materials at the 45- to 55-foot depths. From there, the fuel hydrocarbons spread laterally principally toward the southeast. Fuel hydrocarbons did migrate downward in the source area to groundwater as evidenced by the analytical results from boring B-8 at depth. In addition, groundwater in the B-8 area had been impacted. A limited zone of highly impacted soils occurred at the near surface in the boring B-8 area. The principal portion of impacted soils occurred between 35 and 55 feet bgs and covers an area of approximately 1,000 square feet. Regulatory_ Com.oliance During the drilling operations it became apparent that the extent of impact to soils was more extensive than previously believed. The preliminarY field and analytical data was correlated with preliminarY cross-sections and a meeting with the BFD was held. At that meeting, the BFD representative authorized expanding the characterization program to gain better definition of the impact at the Site. Based on that meeting, the following work was approved: · Extending soil boring B-8 to greater depth than originally anticipated and converting this boring into groundwater monitoring well MW-1; · Extending several borings to greater depth (e.g., B-5 and B-6) to aid in definition of the soil plume; · Relocating borings (e.g., B-3 and B-11) and adding borings (e.g., B-12 through B-16); · In anticipation that soil remediation at depth would be required, advancing six (6) additional borings (with approval of the BFD) with conversion of all six into vapor wells; · Collection and chemical analyses thereof of additional soil samples generated as a result of the deeper borings, the additional borings, and the additional borings for conversion into wells; vapor · Development of well MW-1 and collection of a groundwater sample from that well; and · Compilation of all data and preparation of an Interim Remedial Action Plan. - I E2C Remediation, LLC 5 Prqiect Number 1802JS03 Seotember 17. 200P Installation of Well MW-1 After approval by the~ BFD, boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-l. MW-1 was constructed to 140 feet bgs with the screened interval from 115 to 140 feet bgs. Filter pack sand (Lonestar #3) was placed by gravity feed from 140 to 113 feet bgs. Three feet of bentonite was placed on top of the filter pack and hydrated with water. Neat-cement grout completed the seal to. the surface. Two days after installation of the well, the well was developed using the overpumping method. Groundwater Sampling at Well MW-1 On April 27, 2001 groundwater was sampled at well MW-I. The well was overpurged until approximately 20 gallons were extracted (casing volume of 3.2 gallons). Concentrations of fuel hydrocarbon compounds were reported groundwater sample in the collected from MW-I. Table 3 contains a summary of the analytical results. Of significance were the following reported concentrations: · Benzene at a concentration of 95 ~g/L (duplicate at 96 ~g/L); · TPHg at a concentration of 2,049 pg/L (duplicate at 2,108 pg/L); and · MtBE at a concentration of 295 Izg/L (duplicate at 331 I~g/L). Site Characterization Conclusions Based on the data obtained from the preliminary assessment and the Site Cha"racterization, E2C made the following conclusions: · Approximately 50,000 cy of soils contained fuel hydrocarbons at concentrations of concern; · Impacted soils occurred from the near surface to approximately 55 feet bgs as shown on the cross sections; · significantly impacted by hydrocarbons at as Groundwater had been fuel the Site evidenced by the concentrations of benzene (95 pg/L), TPHg (2,049 pg/L), and MtBE (295 pg/L) in the water sample from MW-1; and · The State of California Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for benzene, a known carcinogen, in drinking water is 1 pg/L; the water sample from MW-1 contained benzene at a concentration of 95 ~g/L; and · The areal extent of the groundwater plume was not known. Site Characterization Recommendations Based on the conclusions presented above, E2C made the following recommendations: · Further define limits of groundwater plume for all fuel components of concern; · To achieve the groundwater definition, perform additional groundwater characterization by installing monitoring wells; · Prepare Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) to include a provision for vapor extraCtion and groundwater air sparging pilot testing; · Implement the IRAP; · Perform quarterly groundwater .monitoring and sampling using the monitoring well network; and I E~C Remediation, LLC 6 Prqiect Number 1 ~o2Js03 Seotember 17. 2002 · If the proposed groundwater monitoring wells delineate the extent groundwater plume, prepare a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) that includes Pilot Testing data to remediate impacted vaddse zone soils and the groundwater plume. 1.2.2 Interim Remedial ACtion Plan As requested by the BFD, E2C proposed to implement interim remedial action to remediate the fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soils and groundwater beneath the Site while groundwater plume definition was being performed. Purpose and Scope of Work The Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) contained two principal tasks: · Define lateral limits of groundwater hydrocarbon plume; and · Remediate fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site in the source area. The following Scope of Work was proposed to perform the two principal Tasks of the IRAP. Groundwater Plume Assessment · Install a total of three (3) groundwater monitoring wells, one in inferred upgradient and two in the inferred downgradient directions; · Sample water at wells and have samples chemically analyzed; · Compile data and generate plots showing groundwater gradient (flow direction and magnitude); and · Compile data and generate plots showing contaminant plumes as appropriate. Interim Remedial Action Plan Install soil vapor extraction (VE) wells and Air-Sparging (AS) wells; · Perform soil sampling and analysis; · Install VE/AS piping and Manifolding; · Perform VE/AS pilot test for designing the final treatment system; · Generate a Report of Findings included with the final RAP that included final treatment system design; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring/Sampling; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remedial Progress Reporting; The Interim Remedial Action Plan was prepared for the remediation of fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site. The IRAP initially consisted of installing wells as follows: · Four (4) shallow soil vapor extraction (VE) wells (VE-1 through VE-4, which were already installed); · One (1) deep VE well (VED-5, which was already installed); · One (1) medium depth VE well (VEM-6, which was already installed); · Two (2) air sparge (AS) wells (AS-1 and AS-2). . VE and AS wells would be used in performance of a VE/AS pilot test. The pilot test would provide data on the effectiveness of this remedial method as well as design criteria for a site- wide treatment system. The results of these activities would be presented in a report of findings I E~C Remediation, L£C 7 Project Nvmber 1~02JS03 Seotember 17. 2002 and the IRAP would be revised and be presented as a final Remedial Action Plan (RAP) to detail the proposed on,-site treatment system. BFD Approval of May 31. 2001 IRAP On August :31, 2001, the BFD granted written approval of the May 31, 2001 IRAP. The IRAP was approved with the following conditions: · 'l'he AS/SVE pilot test shall be conducted for a period of five (5) days; and · All collected groundwater samples shall be analyzed for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M, and for BTEX, EDB, MtBE, TAME, DIPE, ETBE, TBA, and 1,2-DCA using E-'PA Method 8260b. 1.2.3 Report of Findings - Additional Groundwater Characterization In November 2001 three (3) groundwater monitoring wells were installed, one well onsite (MW- 2) and two wells offsite along the south side of East Brundage Lane (MW-3 and MW-4). In addition, two air sparge wells were installed onsite. Soil Analytical Data Low concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were reported in soil samples from each boring. TPHg was reportedly detected in all twenty samples analyzed. Reported TPHg concentrations in samples from onsite boring AS-2 ranged from 2.2 mg/Kg to 213.3 mg/Kg. Benzene was reportedly detected at concentrations ranging from 0.0234 mg/Kg to 33.9 mg/Kg and MtBE at concentrations ranging from 0.066 mg/Kg to 24.235 mg/Kg. No other fuel oxygenates were reportedly detected in soil samples from boring AS-2. TPHg concentrations were reported in all soil samples from the groundwater monitoring well borings. At these boring locations, soil sample reported TPHg concentrations ranged from 0.160 mg/K9 to 1.16 mg/Kg. Reported toluene concentrations ranged from <0.005 mg/Kg (non- detect) to 0.5 mg/Kg. Benzene and fuel oxygenates, including MtBE, were reported as non- detect in ail of the soil samples that were analyzed from the monitoring well borings. Conclusions Based on the findings of the additional groundwater characterization, E2C made the following conclusions: · Trace concentrations of TPHg and toluene were present in soil at the locations of new wells MW-2 located °nsite and MW-3 and MW-4 located south of the Site across Brundage Lane, however, given these Iow concentrations (one to two orders of magnitude lower than source area concentrations) the limits of the soil plume were defined in all directions except west-southwest (downgradient) of MW-l; and · The distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater had been defined to the north and south as contaminants were reported as non-detect in water samples from the three new wells, but had not been defined west-southwest (downgradient) of the source area. Recommendations Based on the' data presented above and the conclusions, E2C made the following recommendations: · ' Installation 'of an additional groundwater monitoring well approximately 100 feet west- southwest of source area well MW-1 to define downgradient groundwater conditions; and I E~C Remediation, ,LLC 8 Prqiect Number 1802JS05 September 17. 2002 = Installation and operation of remediation equipment described in the May 31, 2001 IRAP to cleanup an~ control the migration of hydrocarbons in soil and groundwater. 1,2,4 Remediation System Installation To date, two (2) air sparge wells (AS-1 and AS-2) and six (6) vapor extraction (VE) wells have been installed at the Site. In addition, plumbing for the VE/GASS has been installed. Installation of SVE & AS Wells Each well consists of two-inch-diameter PVC casing with a 2-foot long microporous sparge screen set approximately 20 feet into the water column to enhance the radius of influence. Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells Each SVE well is constructed in the same general manner as a groundwater monitoring well using 2-inch-diameter Schedule 40 PVC casing with 0.020-inch wide slots. Wells VE-1 through VE-4 are screened from 25 feet to 55 feet bgs. Well VEM-6 is screened from 55 feet to 70 feet bgs and well VED-5 is screened from 75 feet to 105 feet bgs. Wells YE-1 through VE-4 will be used to affect the upper zone materials in the source area. Wells VEM-6 and VED-5 will.be used to affect the middle zone and deep zone materials, respectively, in the source area. Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Trenches were excavated and piping installations from the VE and AS wells to the equipment pad were also made. A protective fence has been constructed around the pad to protect the manifold and equipment area. Underground piping for SVE and AS wells were installed concurrently in a single trench to the location of equipment pad. The trenching and piping work was completed in December 2001. The pad was constructed in September 2002. Each AS and SVE well was piped to the equipment area individually and concurrently in the main trench. Each piping run was manifolded above ground at the equipment pad. A control valve was installed on the manifold for each well so each well can be adjusted for flow rates on an individual basis. 1.2.5 SVE/AS Pilot Test During the period of January 8 through January 11, 2002, E2C conducted a vapor extraction and air sparge pilot study to assess the site condition for use of extraction and air vapor sparge techniques in the remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil and groundwater. Radius of Influence Based on the Pilot Test results, a radius of influence was calculated for the vapor extraction. Based on the data, a radius of influence of approximately 85 to 100 feet was extrapolated. As such, a conservative SVE radius of influence of 70 feet was considered feasible for the Site. Removal Rates During the entire length of the test, removal rates were high as evidenced by the greater than the 1,000 ppm measurements at the influent sampling port using the FID during each test. This is also supported by Tedlar bag vapor test results on influent samples. Tedlar bag influent vapor sample were evaluated in terms of the configuratiOn of concentrations wells used for extraction, the screened interval of the wells, and the radius of influence data discussed in the previous section. A removal rate of approximately 750 pounds per day (lbs/day) was calculated. I E~C Rernediation, LLC 9 Pro_iect Number 1802JS08 Seoternber 17. 2002 lbo destruction efficiency of the catalytic oxidizer was also calculated based on the ratio of effluent to influent vapor sample concentration. For lost 1 (influent 3,147.6 ppmv and effluent 90.21 ppmv) the destruction efficiency was found to be 97.1% and for Test 20 (influent 3,168.41 ppmv and effluent 188.61 ppmv) the efficiency was 94.1%. In the radius of influence for full-scale remediation would be than 70 feet conclusion, a greater and may approach 100 feet. The site stratigraphy and lack of resistance to flow suggested this site is an ideal candidate for vapor extraction. The high removal rate suggested this site has a significant soil and groundwater on-site i.e area remediation. source, requiring Air Sparge Observations The air sparge study included the use of compressed air to activate the sparge wells, flow and pressure gauges, and a dissolved oxygen meter. Compressed air was introduced into the sparge point while measurements o4 pressure and dissolved oxygen were collected at various wells. The dissolved oxygen observations revealed significant data. Dissolved Oxygen Observations Generally, dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations increased in observed monitoring wells after startup of the air sparge unit. Significant increases were observed at several of the wells, specifically at wells greater than 100 feet from the air sparge compressor. Groundwater Level Observations The radius of influence from air sparging was also evaluated in terms of groundwater level changes in the observation wells. At onsite well MW-l, located 16 feet from AS-1 and 35 feet from AS-2, levels 3.8 feet from the start of Test 18 the end of Test groundwater rose by through 22. At upgradient well, MW-2 located 123 feet from AS-1 and 118 feet from AS-2, the water level rose by 1.14 feet during this same test period. At well MW-3, located 135 feet from AS-1 and 138 feet from AS-2, the water level rose approximately 0.4 foot and at well MW-4, located 150 feet from AS-1 and 125 feet from AS-2, the level rose 0.6 foot. These data indicated a significant influence onsite at well MW-1 with a radius of influence greater than 100 feet in the upgradient direction (MW-2). It should be noted that there was a decrease in DO concentration at well MW-2 although the water level rose as a result of air sparging. Some influence was observed at wells MW-3 and MW-4 indicating a radius of influence greater than approximately 130 feet south of the Site. Air Sparge Test Conclusions The results indicated the acceptability of the aquifer for air sparging and a conservative estimate of the air sparge radius of influence to be in excess of 100 feet and possibly up to 120 feet plus. Of important note, Well MW-3 showed a significant increase in DO from the start of the test (7.0 mg/L) to the end of the test (9.0 mg/L). MW-3 is located cross-gradient from the AS wells approximately 135 feet south of AS-1 and 138 feet south-southwest of AS-2. DO concentrations at well MW-4 increased also from 7.6 mg/L at start of test to 9.0 mg/L at the end of the test. MW-4 is located cross-gradient from the AS wells approximately 150 feet southeast of AS-1 and 125 feet south-southeast of AS-2. Based on this data, a conservative radius of influence for air Sparging of 100 feet was estimated for the Site and the use of groundwater air sparging at this site would yield high removal rates and rapid source removal. I E~C Rernediation, LLC 10 Prqiect Number 1802JS05 Seotember 17. 20n~ Todlar Bag Vapor Sample Results' The Tedlar bag vapor sample analysis for Test 8 indicated that hydrocarbons in the G1 through C6 range were reported at a concentration of 8,838 parts per million by volume (ppmv). Groundwater air sparging provides dissolved oxygen at a concentration of approximately 10 to 12 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Calculations of the mass of contaminants present indicated that DO at levels in this range will be sufficient to accomplish complete mass removal. It appeared that air sparging will sufficiently increase the DO concentration in source area groundwater, as indicated by the large increase to greater than 15 mg/L at well MW-1. 1.2.6 Remedial ACtion Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal Following evaluation of the pilot test data, a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) was developed to implement remediation of the source area contaminants. The RAP included the remaining tasks initially described in the May 31, 2001 IRAP to commence full-scale remediation. Timely implementation of this RAP was deemed necessary to control further migration of petroleum hydrocarbons from the source area. The Scope of Services to implement the RAP consisted of the following tasks: Task 1 Permitting Task 2 Install Groundwater Monitoring Well Task 3 Install Source Area Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Equipment Task 4 Report of Findings for Installation of Remedial Action System Task 5 Operation and Maintenance of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Task 6 Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Task 7 Status Reporting Task 1 - Permitting A KCEHSD permit for installing MW-5 was applied for and approved. An application for Authority to Construct was prepared and submitted to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) on June 5, 2002. On June 26, 2002, the SJVAPCD requested additional information. The requested information was submitted to the SJVAPCD on June 27, 2002. On August 7, 2002, the SJVAPCD issued the Authority to Construct. Task 2 - Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Well One (1) groundwater monitoring well (MW-5) was installed on July 25, 2002 (see Figure 2 for location). Task 3 - Installation of Soil and Groundwater Remedial System Trenching and piping installations for the remedial system were completed in December'2001. The equipment pad and enclosure were constructed in early September 2002. The electrical supply will be installed the week of September 13, 2002. Remediation Equipment The remedial equipment will consist of a catalytic oxidizer unit, Solleco Industries Model 300 ECAT Catalytic Oxidizer, to extract vapor from the wells at 300 cfm and 100 inches H20 vacuum. The unit's minimum operating temperature is 600 degrees Fahrenheit in catalytic mode. This temperature is set to ensure vapor oxidation at reasonable electrical cost. I E~C Remediation, LLC ' 11 I Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 September 17. 2002 I Furthermore, the unit has a catalytic module to complete the oxidation process. The unit is equipped with a regenerative type vapor extraction blower. For improved reliability and safety, I controls, actuators, components are controlled by relay logic. The 300 is the valve and Solleco equipped with a water knockout pot, automatic air dilution capability, and a noise-reducing muffler. This proposed piece of equipment is designed to shut down and lock out in the event of I malfunction. The various features include and Iow oxidizer bed a system safety high temperatures, high and Iow blower pressure, high intake lower explosive limit (LEL), high and Iow air pressure, high and Iow exhaust temperature, and water knockout malfunction sensor. I Groundwater air sparge equipment will consist of .an "oil-free" rotary-screw lO-horsepower Ingersol Rand Compressor, pressure regulator, needle-valve flow controllers and microporous I sparge points. Task 4 - Report of Findings for Installation of Remedial Action System I When the remedial equipment construction is completed and the equipment is mobilized to the Site, a Startup Test will be performed with an SJVAPCD Startup Inspection. Upon completion of that inspection the Startup Report will be issued. That report will detail the final installation I and startup of the system. The report will contain initial influent and effluent analytical data. Task 5 - Operations/Maintenance of Soil & Groundwater Remedial System , · The3 SJVAPCD permit was applied for and received. Upon receipt of the air permit, E2C authorized construction of the remedial equipment. The SVE/GASS remedial equipment will be mobilized to the Site in early October 2002. E2C professional staff, experienced in SVE/GASS ~ t technology, would conduct operations and maintenance (O & M) of the VES Units to ensure efficient remediation of the Site. Equipment operating parameters would be monitored by E2C on-site inspections. Maintenance and inspection schedules will ultimately comply with the i permit conditions set by the SJVAPCD. Task 6 - Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater monitoring will continue on a quarterly'basis. Groundwater elevations and I groundwater samples will be collected from all five (5) monitoring wells at the Site. Groundwater samples will be analyzed at a State of California Certified analytical laboratory for the following fuel hydrocarbons by the appropriate EPA Method: I · EPA Method 5030/8015M; TPHg using · BTEX using EPA Method 5030/8260b; i · Five (5) fuel oxygenates (includes MtBE) using EPA Method 5030/8260b; and · The lead scavengers (1,2-DCA and EDB) using EPA Method 5030/82360b. Task 7 - Status Reporting I Status reporting will consist of the following: · SJVAPCD Startup Inspection Report; I · SJVAPCD Annual Inspection Report; inspection performed after one (1) year of operations and maintenance with subsequent reporting; and · Quarterly groundwater monitoring and remedial status reports, which will be submitted I by the last day of the month following the end of a quarter. I E~C Remediation, LLC 12 ~. roject Number 1802JS03 Se!)tember 17. 2002 1.2.7 Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Routine quarterly groundwater monitoring commenced at the Site in August 2001 and has continued to date. In general Iow to non-detect concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons have been reported in 'groundwater samPles from MW-1 while groundwater samples from MW-2 through MW-4 have been reported as non-detect. Based on this data and the groundwater flow direction calculated after installation of monitoring wells MW-2 through MW-4, a downgradient monitoring well (MW-5) was proposed for installation. This well (MW-5) was installed in July 2002 and groundwater was initially sampled at the well in conjunction with the Third Quarter groundwater monitoring event in August 2002. 2.0 THIRD QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING On August 15, 2002, E2C personnel conducted Third Quarter 2002 groundwater monitoring activities, which included measuring depths to groundwater, checking the wells for free-product, purging the wells, and collecting groundwater samples. 2.1 Groundwater Elevations Prior to purging and sampling, the depth to groundwater was measured at wells MW-1 through MW-4 using a Solinst water level meter. Depth to groundwater was measured from the top of casing (TOC) at the north side of the casing to the. nearest 0.01 foot. In addition, the wells were checked for free-product using a Yellowjacket oil-water interface probe. The interface probe and Solinst water level indicator were washed in an Alconox solution and rinsed with clean water prior to use. Evaluation of the groundwater elevation data indicates that the gradient is 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west-southwest. Figure 3 depicts a plot of the Third Quarter 2002 groundwater gradient and flow direction. Groundwater elevations for the Third Quarter 2002 fell slightly since the Second Quarter 2002. Groundwater elevation decreases were small, 0.12 foot in MW-l, 0.30 foot in MW-2, 0.26 foot in MW-3, and 0.24 foot in MW-4. Groundwater elevations for this monitoring event are summarized in Table I and with historical groundwater elevation data in Table 2. Note: Surveying of the MW-5 wellhead to comply with State of California Assembly Bill 2886 is currently being scheduled and should be performed in the Fourth Quarter 2002. 2.2 Monitoring Well Purging and Sampling Groundwater at each well was purged in order to obtain a representative groundwater sample. At least three well casing volumes of groundwater were removed from the each well prior to sampling utilizing a battery-powered submersible pump. A casing volume is calculated by multiplying the height of the freestanding water column in the well by the cross-sectional area of the well casing. During purging, groundwater parameters of temperature, pH, and conductivity were measured as water was pumped from a well to verify sufficient purging and stable physical parameter measurements on field instruments (see Appendix A for purge data sheets). The pump was decontaminated in a solution of Alconox and water and rinsed with clean water before each use. After purging, groundwater at each well was sampled using a new disposable bailer or a pre- cleaned stainless steel bailer. The groundwater-samples were decanted into two (2) 40-mi. volatile organic analysis (VOA) vials. Care was taken to prevent headspace or bubbles in the I E~C Remediation, LLC 13 I Project Number 1802JS03 September 17. 2002 I vials, which were sealed with Teflonlined lids. Samples were labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4 degrees Centigrade (°C), accompanied with a Chain-of-Custody · I document for transport to the analytical laboratory. 2.3 Groundwater Analyses I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. (Certification #1920) of Bakersfield, California analyzed the groundwater samples for TPHg using EPA Method 8015M and BTEX, fuel oxygenates, and the I lead scavengers (1,2-DCA and EDB) using EPA Method 8260b. Appendix B presents the analytical laboratory report. Laboratory analytical results for the First Quarter 2002 are summarized in Table 1 and historical data are summarized in Table 3. The results of the i Second Quarter 2002 chemical analyses are summarized following: · Ethylbenzene was reported in the groundwater samples from MW-2 and MW-3 at Iow concentrations of 0.5 tzg/L and 0.6 pg/L, respectively; I · Total xylenes were reported at a Iow concentration of 0.5 I~g/L 'in the groundwater sample from MW-3. Note: No other fuel hydrocarbon compounds were detected in groundwater samples from MW-2 and MW-3; and I · All fuel hydrocarbon compounds including the lead were reported as non- scavengers detect in samples from wells MW-l, MW-4, and new well MW-5 this quarter. I 3.0 ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION REPORT OF FINDINGS One (1) additional groundwater monitoring well was installed in the downgradient direction at I the Site in July 2002. Soil samples collected during the drilling operations indicate that the soil plume has been defined in the downgradient direction (see Table 4). I From the Second Quarter 2002 to the Third Quarter 2002, the groundwater table dropped from 0.12 foot to 0.30 foot at all four wells that were monitored the previous quarter. The concentration of MtBE at well MW-1 decreased from 1.3 p,g/L in the Second Quarter 2002 to I non-detect in the Third Quarter 2002. Although groundwater concentrations remain Iow, soil analytical data indicates significant contaminant concentrations in the vadose and saturated zones in the vicinity of MW-I. These data suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons may still I migrate from the soil to the groundwater when the groundwater rises significantly, though at a rate that could result in only relatively Iow groundwater concentrations. I Ethylbenzene concentrations were reported in the water samples from MW-2 and MW-3 in the Third Quarter water samples collected from those wells. Groundwater samples from these two (2) wells have been reported as non-detect for all fuel hydrocarbon constituents in previous Iquarters. Further monitoring is required to verify these reported detections. Groundwater samples collected from the upgradient well (MW-4) and the downgradient well I(MW-5) indicate that the groundwater plume is defined in those directions. ! I E~C Remediation, LLC 14 Prqiect Number 1802JS03 September 17, 2002 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Conclusions, Based on the data presented in this report, E2C makes the following conclusions: · The groundwater gradient at the Site remains constant at 0.016 ft/ft with flow to the west- southwest; · The water table dropped from 0.12 foot to 0.30 foot in all four (4) previously installed wells from the Second Quarter 2002 to the Third Quarter 2002; and · The analytical data indicate that the groundwater plume is defined in all directions from the-Site; however, very minor detections of ethylbenzene and xylenes were reported in wells MW-2 and MW-3 in the Third Quarter 2002 monitoring event. Further monitoring at those wells will be required to verify these detections. 4.2 Recommendations Based on the data presented above and the conclusions, E2C makes the following recommendations: · No additional groundwater monitoring well installations are recommended as the current well network is sufficient to characterize groundwater chemical conditions; · As recommended in the Second Quarter 2002 report, implement Source Area Remedial Action full-scale basis; on a · Continue to monitor groundwater at wells MW-2 and MW-3 to verify the reported detections of very Iow concentrations of ethylbenzene and xylenes at those wells in the Third Quarter 2002; and · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling and reporting for the duration of remedial operations plus a minimum of four quarters beyond system shutdown. Note: Pre-approval of costs to implement Site remediation was obtained from the State Fund on May 22, 2002. The SJVAPCD permit was applied for and received. After receipt of the air permit, E2C authorized construction of the remedial equipment, which is scheduled for completion in late September 2002. In addition, after receipt of the air permit, the equipment pad was constructed in early September 2002 and the electrical supply will be installed the week of September 16, 2002. The anticipated startup date for the remediation system is early October 2002. ! I E~C Remediation, LLC 15 Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 September 17. 2002 5.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Report in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing in California at this time. It shOuld be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared under the professional supervision of the registered professional whose seal and signature herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the appear Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so if that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, necessary. This report was prepared for · the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(s). . Reviewed By: Prepared By: akW. Ca y, R.G. #705..~.~ ' - '~.,~.//' /'~.~/__~¥ ~_'~vin, R.G. #4779 I E2C Remediation, LLC 16 Project Number 1802J$05 September 17. 2002 6.0 REFERENCES (BFD, 1999) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, March 30, 1999, Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Freeway Liquor Store, 2030 East Brundage Lane, Permit #BR-0231 (BFD, 2001) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, February 26, · 2001, Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane (a.k.a. 2030 East Brundage Lane) (E2C, 2001a) E2C, Inc., February 9, 2001, Site Characterization Workplan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, Ca#fomia (E2C, 2001b) E2C, Inc., May 31, 2001, Site Characterization Report of Findings and Interim Remedial Action Plan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2001c) E2C Remediation, LLC, November 15, 2001, Third Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California (E2C, 2002) E2C Remediation, LLC, February 6, 2002, Fourth Quarter 2001 Groundwater Monitoring Report and Report of Findings for Additional Groundwater Characterization and SVE/AS Pilot Testing & Remedial Action Plan for Source Area Contaminant Removal, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California ,! ! ! I E2C Remediation, LLC 17 Pro_iect Number 1802JS03 Se~)tember 17. 2002 FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot Figure 4 Third Quarter 2002 TPHg Isoconcentration Plot Figure 5 Third Quarter 2002 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot Figure 6 Third Quarter 2002 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot Remediation, LLC Figures '" ~ ~ .; ~.. ... ~,, , ~no~ fl~ll /. ~' ~ SITE LOCATION j~y"/ .... ~.?, ~ '. f z OLO RIVE~ E WEEDPATCH . __ c~o ~ ~ ~ ~,. BEAR VALLEY~ ' . SPRINGS ~ ooL~ c[uq ~ ~ · . ~~ ~ "~ "~ . ~ ~.L.,.~I.-STALLIDN ~c '~ ~,.. ~A~ ~:..O.r > ~ ~.. ~ ~ ..... SPRINGS ~; 1[I ~ WHEE~R RIDGE '~ !:1 ~ " ~2~ Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE ~GURE 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, CA. 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Phone: (661) 831-6306 1 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 VlClNTY MAP m m LEGEND B-6 · Soil Boring Location I m ~(~1 MW-2 B-16 Monitoring Well Location ,,~ VE-1 STORAGEFENCE -- 9v~man(~ m ~ Vapor Extraction Well Location AREA STORE AS-1 < m [] Air SpargeWell Location E~'I = B-9 B-6 (~) z · m · VENT LINES -- DISPENSER · NEWUST I,,,/ ,S~NDS · B-15 VED-5 · ~-5 CANOPY VE-4 As-i[] ~ I~B m ,,~ VE'3~) B'12 VEM'6 B'4 ' ~/' MW-5 · a-3 SHOULDER I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I ,, power line m MW-3 < m MW-4 ~z 0 z ! E2C Remediation, LLC' FREEWAY UaUOR STORE FIGUFIF: m 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield,Telephone: (661)California831-690693313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 2 m Facsim(le: (661)831-6234 SITE PLAN LEGEND 46 Soil Boring Location MW-1 MW-2 · .~- Monltorlng Well Location V~I Vapor Extraction Well Location ' AS-, S TAORRE~AG E STORE Air Sparge Well Location -- FENCE ~:~0' GW Elevation, ff. MSL B-~ V~ ~Ew~ mw 1 · ,VEN~ .,~,=~ ~ ' DISPENSER B-il ....... ~ [ (B-8) ~S~.DS · ~ ~ M~5 ~u SSOUC~fi~ E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Third Qua~er 2002 Groundwater Gradient Plot I.-6 LEGEND Soil Boring Location Monitoring Well Location . B-16 VE-1 "~ · · ~> Vapor Extraction Well Location S T~)RR¢2 E STORE AS-1 ~. FENCE ~ ov~manq ~borato~ Detection Limit B-9 B-6 V~N*UN~S~ (B-S) D,S.S.S~. I ~'~ m B-15 · ' ~ ~ ~as-~ _~ // SHOULDER m kkoe/ ~ B-14 I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE ,power line ~ MW-3 < MW-4 := Z SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY UQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 4 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Third Quarter 2002 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 TPH~ Isoconcentration Plot m m LEGEND ~1 Soil Boring Location m MW'~I M°nit°rlng Well L°cati°n ~ _ B-16 m ~Vapor £xtraotion Well Location STAORREAAGE STORE ~ . . AS-1 ~[] Air Sparge Well Location m Benzene Not Detected at or · ® ' VE-2 ~ Above Laboratory Detection B-9 B-6 · v~.'r L,N~S d (B-8) DISPENSER ! B-2 · m · . I AS-1 v e- ~ ~ ~ AS-2 ~ // .w-~ . ~-~~j/ SHOULDER --m m kkoe~ ~ B-14 m / EAST BRUNDAGE LANE power line MW-3 < MW-4 o t-.- rn SCALE: 1" = 40' E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 5 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Third Quarter 2002 Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 Benzene Isoconcentration Plot I I e-6 LEGEND ~1 Soil Boring Location Monitoring Well Location ,~ · VE-, s~#¢~ STO~ I ~ Vapor Extraction Well Location / AS-1 FENCE ~ ' ~ Air Sparge Well Location B-9 ' B 6 i ~ t ~ VE-2 MTBE Not Detected at or Above Laborato~ Detection u~,, , ~ I B-11 NEW UST ~W-I' B-2 ' VENT UNES -- (B-8) DISPENSER , - ~.~ ~/ / I ' .... SHOU'LDER I ~ ,~e~ ~ B-14 I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I power Fine I MW-3 < MW-4 Z SCALE: 1" = 40' ! E2C Remediation, LLC FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5300 Woodmere Dr., Suite 105 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 6 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Third Quarter 2002 i Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 MtBE Isoconcentration Plot Prqie~t Number 1802JS03 Seotember 17. 200? TABLES Table I Summary of Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 2 Summary of Historical Groundwater Analytical Data Table 3 Summary of Historical Groundwater Elevation Data Table 4 Summary of Boring MW-5 Soil Analytical Data E2C Remediation, LLC Tables Project Number 1802JS04 September 17. 2002 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF THIRD QUARTER 2002 GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California WELL DATE GW DEPTH ELEVATION ELEVATION FP B T E X TPHg MtBE TBA DIPE ETBE TAME EDB (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) pg/l~ MW-1 8/15/02 122.83 136.95 386.40 263.57 nd nd nd nd nd nd na na na na nd nd 8/15/02 122.30 140.42 386.60 264.30 nd nd 0.5 nd nd nd na na na na nd nd MW-2 ............................................................................... MW-3 8/1.5/02 121.62 139.30 384.15 262.53 nd nd 0.6 0.5 nd nd na na na na nd nd MW-4 8/15/02 119.93 140.71 384.11 264.18 nd nd nd nd nd nd na na na na nd nd 8/15/02 123.72 136.80 nd nd nd nd nd nd na na na na nd nd MW-5 duplicate nd nd nd nd nd nd na na na na nd nd Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (j/g/L) = pads per billion (ppb) &nalytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8260b; TPHg - EPA 8015M iMethod Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5/./g/L; Xylenes - 1.0 #g/L; TBA - 2.5/Jg/L; DIPE/ETBE./MTEIE/TAME/1,2-DCA/EDB - 0.5 pg/L; and TPHg- 50//g/L. Sample MW-6 on chain of custody form is duplicate from well MW-5 1,2-DCA = 1,2-Dichloroethane B -- Benzene BTOC = Below Top of Casing DIPE = Di-isopropyl ether E = Ethylbenzene EDB = 1,2-Dibromoethane ETBE = Ethyl tertiary Butyl Ether GW = Groundwater nd = Not Detected :TAME = Tertian/Amyl Methyl Ether ]'BA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol TOC = Top of Casing IX = Total xylenes E2C Remediation, LL C Table 1-I ! Project Number 1802JS04 September 17, 2002 I TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA I FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane i Bakersfield, California Total DEPTH TOC GW ELEVATION FREE I WELL ID DATE Depth TO GW ELEVATION ELEVATION CHANGE PRODUCT (feet BTOC) (feet BTOC) (feet MSL) (feet MSL) (feet) (feet) · 4/27/01 141.60 121.94 386.40 264.46 · 8/_-6/_0_! .... !4.!.6q ...... _1.2__3.: _1~0 ......... ~_63.30 -1._1_6 ........... I __'12/~_._/_0_1 ...... 1-_3_.8_.26_ ....... 1_2,2._.44 ........... 26_3.9_6 _ . _0:64 MW-1 __~1~(_0__2 ........ _1__3_8.22 ............. ! 2__2_._6__2 .................. _2. _6_ ~-T_8_ ......... :0.2§ i _. 5_/_2_3_/.02 ........ 1.3_8_.2_0- ........... _1_22.7_! ................. 2_63_:_-6.9_ ........... -0._0_9_ ___8/_15/02_2 ....... 13~6_.9~5 ....... 122:83 .................. 2§3_~5_7 ..... -_0._12 I _1-___2/7/01 ........ 1__3~:5_0' ........ 1_2._1-:_94: ...... _3_86_._6 O_ ....... 2~64_.6_-6 ' ._2/_!9/0~2 .... 13~.9_.~_8 ......... !21_.9_6_ ..................... ~2_64._ ._-6_4_ ........ :_0.._0_2 MW-2 _ 5_/2_3/_0_2 ....... 1__37.3_2 ..... 1- ~_2_._0_0_ ................... 26_4:_60_ .......... ~0.0~4 ................. 8/15/02 140.42 122.30 264.30 -0.30 . 1__~2~-/._/01 ...... 1.~8.92 ........... 1_2...1-.:_4_2 ..... 8_8_4_:15 .... .2__63:73 _ ~ !_9._/0_2 ..... 1- .3_9.. O_2 ......... 1-2_!.28 ................. ~62.8Z ......... 0._1_4_ I 5/2__3_/.~2 ..... 1_ 3__9.30~ ........... 1-21.37,. .................. ~2._7,8 ....... :0:_0._9_ MW-3 8/15/02 139.30 121.63 262.52 -0.26 I .__12/7~/_0~ ......... 3_9__.5_8- ...... _!_1_9.._6__4 ..... _ 1 ._~/_1_9/p~2 ......... 13~9 .. _5_ 6_ ....... _1_1. ?:.6_8 ............... ~2.6_4 ..4_3 .......:_0_._0~ MW-4 __ 5_/_2__3/0._2 ..... ]_4_0:7.1 ....... 11__9:.69- .................._2_6,4_.4_2 ........:O._0_l_ 8/1_5_/0_2 _. 1-4_0.7] !..1,9:93 _2_64_:!8 8/15/02 136.80 123.72 i MW-5 ..................................................................... I NOTES: BTOC = Below Top of Casing I GW = Groundwater TOC = Top of Casing MSL = Mean Sea Level ! I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 2-1 Project Number 1802JS04 September 17, 2002 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL DATA ~ FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE. 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California Well ID Sample Date _.~B.._1 T_. _[ E I._~__ I T_PH_g_.[. _.T_B_A_ ..I _Ut~B~ I. DIP_E I _ETBE I TA_ME_ I ~1~,2_:DC~1 _E~B_ grab 4/18/01 531 451 346 651 4,980 na 1,570 na na na na na 4/27/01 95 107 60 122 2,049 na 295 na na na na na ._dqp!_i_cat~ .... 9_6 !_2_9__ __7_1_& 1_39_- _2,1_0_8_ .... @~a_ .... _33_1 _. 8/6/01 nd nd nd nd nd na 33 na na na na na ..d_up_li~ca~t__e._nd_.` nd__ _~nd _. nd .n-d na _5_8_ na ne.. ne.. .n..a r]_a_ MW-1 12/7/01 nd nd nd nd 130 18.8 16.4 nd nd nd nd nd __d__u_p_lic_a_t_e__' r~d ._ nd ..... _n_d nd 1_10 nd 1B:6 .nd _ . nd nd ._nd 2/19/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd _ dup_li_c_ate__ __nde. _ .n_._d_ _ _n_d.___n_d . _ nd_ .... nd _ n__d, . _-n~_ _ r~d_ _ _ -nd_ _ __n.d, ...... _n_d.__ :__5_/2_3_/_0_2_ .... _n_d_ ~_d._ g_d.._J,._n_d .... nd __ ~nd __1.._3._ _n__d ..... qd ...... ~d ..... _nd ..... ~n_d__._ _ . 8_/_1._5Z02 ...... .n_d _ _._n__d- __od .... nd_ nd ne. _ n~ _ @_d..:_ ._ .Od. .nd __..n-d .... q_d__ 12/7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 2/19/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 5/23/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-2 duplicate nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd ...... .8_/.1_5(~_2.__. _n_d nde__ _P:5_ _n_d .... _nd ........ 9a_ ..... n~d O..a ......... _na~ ........ n_a_ .......... n_d ..... n_d___ 12/7101 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-3 5~23102 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd _ _8_/1_5.5_/_0_2__ __nd_ . _n_d__ _0.6~_ __0:_5_ _ n_d_ ..... o_a. ....._nd ...... -n_a_ .....r~_a ..... n.__a_ ...... -n_~_ _n_d_ 12/7/01 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd 2/19/02 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd MW-4 . _~5/2_3_/_0_2~ ....n_d__ n~_ .. .n_d _n._d.- nd .... .nd ... n_d ........n.d_ ....._nd_ .... n_d. .... ~_d ...... n__d _ ..._8_._/_1.5/0_2_ ..... _nd__ n_d, ._. nd-__ _ nd ..... _nd ...... _na ..... _n_d ......_n_a_ _ _ ._n.a__ ....ne_ n~d, .... ~n_d_. 8/15/02 nd nd nd nd nd na nd na na na nd nd MW-5 duplicate nd nd nd nd nd na nd na na na nd nd Notes: F{esults in micrograms per liter ~g/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021 B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene - 0.5/Jg/L, Xylenes - 1.0 #g/L, TPHg - 50 ,ug/L, TBA - 2.5 ,ug/L, MTBE - 0.5 ,uo/L B = Benzene iE = Ethylbenzene DIPE = Di-isopropyl Ether ETBE = Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether GRAB - Unpurged Water Sample collected prior to well development MTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ether na = Not analyzed nd - Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by value T = Toluene TAME = Tertiary Amyl methyl Ether TBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gaso!ine X = Total xylenes Note: For 4/27/01, 8/6/01, and 12/7/01 samples labeled as MW-8, MW-9, and MW-5, respectively, on chain of custody are duplicates from MW-1 I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 3-I I Project Number 1802JS04 September 17, 2002 TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF BORING MW-5 SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA I FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 East Brundage Lane i Bakersfield, California 25-Jul-02 Boring ID' Depth B ._J T _ .l__ _E .{...X._ .... I TPHg J TBA .L_?t~E__I_D!_PE..I ETBE I TAME I ....... EDB_ I pg/L : 20 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 0.3 nd<0.5 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 40 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0ol nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.5 'nd<0,1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 MW_5 I 115 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.5 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 '"1-2-,~-- nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 -~d-~)-]-'i-nd<0.1 nd<0.5 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 140 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.5 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 nd<0.1 Notes: i Results in micrograms per liter (pg/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M ~wetrlUU UeLeUUu[~ url~t~: oerlzene/I u~uer~e/,-tr~y~uenzene - u.o pUlL, ^y~ene~ - t.u #g/L, t r~g - ou pg/,, , D~ -/.o pg~L, ,Vi, I B = Benzene E = Ethylbenzene DIPE = Di-isopropyl Ether I = Ethyl Tertiary Butyl ETBE Ether GRAB - Unpurged Water Sample collected prior to well development rvlTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ether I ~a = Not analyzed nd - Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit, which is indicated by value T = Toluene I TAME = Tertiary Amyl methyl Ether YBA = Tertiary Butyl Alcohol 'TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline I X = Total xylenes I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC Table 4-1 Project Number 1802JS03 SeDtember 17. 2002 APPENDICES Appendix A Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets Appendix B Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix C MW-5 Boring Log Appendix D Boring MW-5 Soil Analytical Laboratory Report E2C Remediation, LL C Appendices ! Pro_iect Number 1802J$05 September 17. 2002 '1 I I I I I I I APPENDIX A I  Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Purge Data Sheets I I I I I I I I E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix A £aCRemediation, Z£C - Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants Water Quality Sampling. Record 53oo Woodmere ~v.. Su~,~ t05; ..~..ne~, c~ro~.~. ~ and Well Development Data Telephone: (68 I) 831-8908 / Facsimile: (68 I) 831.8] 34 S~PLE ID / WELL ~: ~ ~ / DEPTH TO WATER: E~C R~. PROJE~ ~: /~ ~ ~ TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: PROJECT N~E: ~ ~ ~ELL DI~ETER; DATE S~PLED: ~/~ ~ CASING VOLUME: S~PLED BY: ~ ~m~2~ ~ PURGE METHOD: L'." '.3h ~ ". ',~.. ',:': '.'~ 2..."~-? :~'~ '~'.~,-~ ~'.~5,.'~-~ ~;~' :.. ~'q 3'/.' ~-' :'F?.?~-f.~'(:'~.~: '7'L'.;' '5'~?~::;4.::'' U7;2 .:'.':. '." '~.:. 'T; z~,~',-:.. ;.:'-? ,'. ;'.~'~,.:s'~,,: :.~..~.~:L~.~,:-~ ... ~, ~,,,~ ~ ..... r ....... . L,:~ .., .~,...~ .,~ ~',5.:.c~,~,~:PURGE CHARA~ERISTICS ,.,'~.:t~,.'~ .:~,~,: TEMP pH SEC R~RKS TIME INTAKEDEPTH J (GPM)~T[ J CUM. VOL l WELL VOL(GAL) PUMPED (~ ~NITS) (mmhos/cm) (COLOR. TURBIDlY. ETC.) ./. ~.~..~= ::~:.L:::::.:4~ ~:,::C~::,~_~,.,~,~%.:,T,~9.~.::.,U~::~:=~::~?:~=:' '~:::.:~ '..~--.-, ~. ,,./.,..;~-~,~,, ,.,,.~.:~-:~, =:.-~c,-~..~:-: .~ ,::.,~,.-~.;...~:-:,.,~,-(~:: :2~,F:;-:L,:%~.7~:~- ~ell Capacity: ~'. O. 163] ~811on/linear fooJ 6". 1.4688 gallon/linear foot -:."'~'7:-:.:~:";::':'.Y'..t'~'".."7':" :.VL-:.":v' ~.':' ;-"' ':'..'~.,' .~.:'~'::t::.-~;;:'~.":.. ' .' ~-"' :. · : .' -'. .. :~ ' '- ' '. · . S~IPLED AT: /~ ~ O FT. FINAL DEPTH TO ~ATER: / 2 Z:'ff ~ ~ FT. ~ ~SING VOLUMES: ~, ~ g GALS. NOTES: "- EaCRemediation, arOU.dwaterSc;e.t;,~S: E~v;ro~m~a~Co~su~,a.~s Water Quality Sampling Record 53~ Woodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bake~field, ~Iifornia 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661)831-6906 / Facsimile: (661)831-6234 S~PLE ID / WELL ~: ~-~ DEPTH TO WATER: E~CR~.PROJECT~: /~ ~ ~ ~ TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: PROJECT N~E: ~ ~ WELL DI~ETER; DATE S~PLED: o ~-t~-D ~ CASING VOLUME: DEPTHI I I(GeM) (~AL) PUMPED Well Capacity: 2"- O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4"- 0.652~ gallon/linear 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear foot NOTES: E2C Rem edia~io n, £L C Groundwater Scientists: Environmental Consultants Water Quality Sampling Record s3oo Woodmere O,~ve. S,~,e ~OS; Bake,s,e~d. Ca~rorm ~3~ and Well Development Data Telephone: (661) 831-6906 / Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 DATE S~PLED: (~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ CASINO VOLUME: ~, ~ ~ ' ' .'. :'PURGE CHA~CTERISTIC5 · '" TEMR pH SEC REMARKS Well Capacity: 2". O. 1632 gallon/linear foot 4"- 0.6528 gallon/linear foot 6". 1.4688 gallon/linear foot NOTES: I 1 I I £~ C Rem ediatio n~ LL C Groundwater Scientists: £nvironmental Consultants Wa ter Q u a lity $ a m p li n g Reed rd 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661) 831-6906 / Facsimile: (66 I) 831-6234 S~PLE ID/~ELL ~: ~_y DEPTH TO ~ATER: E~C REM. PROJECT n: /.~ ~ ~3 TOTAL DEPTH OF ~ELL: PROJECT NAME: _. ~~ ~ELL DIAMETER; ~ ~ L DATES~PLED: ~(~-~ CASING VOLUME: ~, I ~ '- :"PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS · ·" TEMP pH SEC REMARKS Well Capacky: 2". O. 163] gallon/linear ~oot 4" - 0.6525 gallon/linear foot 6"- 1.4688 gallon/linear foot S~PLED Ar: / ~ FI. [INAL DEPTH TO ~AIER: /~, ~ ~ FL 3 CASING VOLUME5 = ~, ~ 3 GALS. NOTES: ! I Remediatio n, LL C 5300 ~oodmere Drive, Suite 105; Bakersfield, California 93313 and Well Development Data Telephone: (661) $31-6906 / Facsimile: (661) 831-6234 SAMPLE ID / WELL ~: ~ ~. ~, DEPTH TO WATER: /~ ~- 7 ~ E~C REM. PROJECT ~: /~ ~ ~ ~ TOTAL DEPTH OF ~ELL:. , /~, ~O PROJECT NAME: /~ c~ ~ ~ ~ WELL DI~ETER; ~ ' ~ DATE SAMPLED: ~ ~_ ~ ~-~ ~ CASING VOLUME: ~,/~ SAMPLED BY: .~,'~~ PURGE METHOD: ~,~.. ~.~ : PURGE CHA~CTERISTICS -' TEMP pH SEC RE~ARKS I I I I ! Project Number 1502JS01 Se!~tember 17. 2002 ! ! ! ! ! ! ~ APPENDIX B Third Quarter 2002 Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report I I I I I I I I I EzC Remediation, LLC Appendix B :ones Chain of Custody Form Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matrix Project Name: t~"1~ 034 !/ , ? ~/~ ~' Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~ b ~ ~ ~ ~ Acidified Sampler Name: Sample Dine Samplel~me Sample OescdpUon and Conta~nerType m ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ommems Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour ~ 48 Hour 5-Day Standard I Laboratoriest Inc. Halcyon LabOratory Report I Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT E2C Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Ruben Dorame I TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 80 ! 5M TPHg Analysis: 8/26/2002 I Date of Report: 8/28/2002 Units: ug/L I Sample #: 2K2-3524 2K2-3525 2K2-3526 2K2-3527 2K2-3528 2K2-3529 2K2-3530 Date Sampled: 8/15/2002 8/15/2002 8/15/2002 8/15/2002 8/15/2002 8/15/2002 8/15/2002 DL ug/L Sample Description: Tblank MW-3 MW-4 MW-2 MW-5 MW-6 MW-I TPH Gasoline ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 50 Surrogate Recovery % 100.2 90.1 98.7 95.7 94.7 94.3 99.9 I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L I Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline I Surrogate Recovery % , Sample #: I Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline I SUrrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~Principal Anh!yst: Phil Acosta I I ~ Halcyon' Laboratories~ Znc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L I Certification # 1920 ~ '1 I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors I i Report Date · 8/26/2002 I Sample ID · 3524/Tblank I Analyte Result Method RL Units MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L : BIEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L m & Xylenes ND 0.5 P ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 58.4 117% 1,2-Dichloroethane-cl4 54.2 108% Toluene-d8 55.7 111% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 47.7 95% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 ' CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors Report Date: 8/26/2002 Sample ID: 3525/MW-3 i Analyte Result Method RL Units MTBE ~ Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene 0.6 0.5 ug/L m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ugfL o Xylenes 0.5 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 58.4 117% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 54.7 109% Toluene-d8 54.8 110% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 47.0 94% I I I Halo/on Laboratories~ :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory' Report water~ampleResults inug/L I Certification # 1920 ~ I CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors I Report Date ' 8/26/2002 ISample ID: 3526/MW-4 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L I BIEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug/L I m & Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L P o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L I Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/t I Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L I Internal Standards Results %' Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% · Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% S u rrogate Sta nda rds I Methane, dibromofluoro- 57.9 116% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 55.6 111% I Toluene-d8 51.9 104% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 46.3 93% I i Halcyon Laboratories, ]:nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample eesults in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors Report Date ' 8/26/2002 Sample ID: 3527/MW-2 Analyte Result Method RL Units MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L BIEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene 0.5 0.5 ug/L m & Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L P o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/t Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50~0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 62.3 125% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 55.8 112% Toluene-d8 53.8 108% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 51.7 103% Halcyon Laboratories Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 ~ I CLIENT: FaC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors I Report Date ' 8/26/2002 I Sample ID · 3528/MW-5 I Analyte Result Method RL Units i MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug;T. I BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug,"L I m & p Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L o Xylenes ND 0.5 ug;'L I Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L I Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L i 'Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% I 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards I Methane, dibromofluoro- 52.3 105% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 55.6 111% i Toluene-d8 49.6 99% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 48.3 97% Halcyon ' -~'"'-'--:"" Inc. I,.CIi,,/Ui I~ LUi iC~! o=~,u,, ~,~.,,,,,.Mi y Report Water Sample Results in ug/L Certification # 1920 = CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project iD · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/26/2002 Sample ID · 3529/MW-6 I Analyte Result Method RL Units MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.5 ug/L BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 ug/L Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 u~I. m & Xylenes ND 0.5 ug/L P o Xylenes ND 0.5 Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, flu0ro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 56.5 113% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 53.2 106% Toluene-d8 51.7 103% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 47.5 95% Halcfon '" "'"--"'--:"- Er~ 82uuEl Lauui aLui y i~t=~JUi ~. Water Sample Resuits in ug/L Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID: Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/26/2002 Sample ID: 3530/MW-1 I Analyte Result Method RL Units MTBE Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) NT) 0.5 u~I~ BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.5 ug/L Toluene ND 0.5 u~cjL Ethylbenzene ND 0.5 ug, q~ m & Xylenes ND ' 0.5 P u~,,/C o Xylenes ND 0.5 Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.5 ug/L ELhane, 1,2-Oibromo (EOB) ND 0.5 ug/L Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fiuoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromof!uoro- 62.6 125% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 56.9 114% Toluene-d8 .50.6 101% p-Bromof!uorobenzene (BFB) 50.3 10!% Project Number 1802JS01 September 17. 2002 APPENDIX C MW-5 Boring Log E2C Remediation, LLC Appendix C E' '- XPLORATORY BORING LOG · " Field location of boring: ', PRCiJECT No.. I~o''L ..... DATE '"' CLIENT _ t2&6-6 w"~-'t L-~,'! ,A,,,/~' ' ! ~'~'- ' LOCATION %('-to E= O~..-,.--~-t.~r-.-.-- L._,.~' Shee[~_._____. , LOGGED BY 0-- (J,.4.~.... DRILLER ("1 .. Casing Installation data .__ : . Drlfiing method ~F~¢ Ct' IE Z..~o9 '~ _ Hole dia. ~' ,',~, W~te, ~e,,el i i I i C~C~21v, 3 aE co ~ DESCRIPTION I I I I I I I f,¢~L,.I . I I I I I ,. ' ' I '" I i ,,, I I ~ · I I I I I lk I i .. i I I I I ~ .[ REMARKS: FIE'LD-EXPLOR~,TORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: ' PROJECT No. I,sFc~'L DATE. '7 Izs-Io~ BORING ' LOGGEDBY ~,~(c DRILLER. O~ c~ ~ ., Casing Installation da a Drilling method ~ ( ~ ~c~ ) -- Waterievel i I I = ~ ~ Time ~~ ~ ~ ~ m z m ~ DESCRIPTION REMARXS: ..* FIELD-EXPLORATORY BORING LOG m Field location of boring: ' PROJECT No. I?O"L . DATE "-J (?~'[~'~- ,8ORh'~G No. '" CLIENT LOCATION '~¼o G, ~g~'~ ~ Shee~ ., Casing l~stallat~on da~a I "DrillJngmethod _~' C,-- ~oo ~ - Ho~ dia. ~ ,'~ h W~,~,e~e, i I I I ; ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ Time = ~ Date m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ DESCRIPTION I 0 II S il t~~-I ¢0 ~o ~e ~aUV ~OeO ~X~o~ (~/ '~¢o ~ey, ~ I I I I I I I ! I  I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I I REMARKS: :..: FIELD-EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · " I Field location of boring: .. PROJECT No. '" CLIENT LOCATION T~O ~,.~¢~~ L~ . Sheet I ' LOGGE~ BY Casing Installa~ion data Hole dia. ~ ~ ~ ~ Time I i  ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ Z ~ ~ DESCRIPTION o I ~ I I I~ I I I I I I I I 19~~ ~ /' I I I I I I I I I ~ I ' R~MARKS: :.'-. FiELD-ExPLORATORy_ BORING LOG · I Field location of boring: PR0'JEOTNo. l~o'z_- - DATE ,-'21~--¢(t2~--- BORING No. LOGGE,D. BY Casing Installation data I Driltingmelhod /4.S¢''- (Ifb¢?~'°°') c~ ~ DESCRI?TION I I I - I FIELD-EXPLO ORY BORING LOG · Fleld.locatlonofbor|ng: -.. ,. PROJECTNo. I~r(3''L-- DATE-~/~'[~' BORINGNo. LOCATION ~(~0 G- ~o~'C~ She~t~ , LOGGED BY ~, Water level I o E E ~ ~ E ~ DESORIPTIOS I I I I I i I REMARKS: ! Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 Seotember 17. 2002 I I I I I I I I ~ APPENDIX D Boring MW-5 Soil Analytical Laboratory Report I I I I I I I I I E~C Remediation, LLC Appendix D ~ ii ~ ~ ~ i I i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ alcyon Chain of Custody Form Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matdx ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 Projec{ ManageF: ~ ILL ~&W ~'c'~ Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Comments :yon nes Client Name E2C Remediation, LLC 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matdx Project Name: z~.b/~,..~ t~uo,z.-s ~' ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105, Bakersfield, CA 93313 ~' ~. ~. < < ~ ~ Project Manager: g ~ ~ Acidified Samplo Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type ~ ~ ~ - > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "'Comments [ Turnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour 5-Day Standard I Halcyon Laboratories, [nc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT EzC Remediation, LLC Project Name: Freeway Liquors I 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Gabriel Halcon I TESTS: TPH Gas by EPA 8015M TPH g Analysis: 8/7/2002 Date of Report: 8/8/2002 I Units: rog/Kg Sample#: 2K2-3360 2K2-3362 2K2-3364 2K2-3~66 2K2-3368 2K2-3370 2K2-3371 I Date Sampled: 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 DL mg/Kg Sample Description: MWS-20 MW5-40 MW5-60 MW5-80 MWS-100 MW5-115 MW5-120 I TPH Gasoline 0.3 ND 0.7 0.2 ND ND 0.3 0.1 I I Surrogate Recovery % 92.6 97.2 95.5 94.5 88.1 88.7 94.7 Sample#: 2K2-3372 2K2-3373 2K2-3375 Date Sampled: 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 7/25/2002 DL mg/KgI I Sample Description: MW5-125 NIW5-130 MW5-140 I IPH Gasoline ND ND ND 0.1 I Surrogate Recovery % 97 90.5 89.3 I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL rog/Kg Sample Description: I TPH Gasoline 1 I Surrogate Recovery % I D L:DetectionLimit ?~7-'""~??Y~'~ ~-' ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available //Princirp~ Analyst: Phil Acosta 1 Halcyon Laboratories, :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report sea Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/9/2002 Sample ID · 3360/MW5-20 Analyte Result Method Rt. Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 rog/kg · I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg i Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.1 m~g Toluene ND 0. I mg/kg Ethyl benzene ND 0.1 rog/kg I m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg I Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.! mg/kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 49.6 99% I 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 49.7 99% Toluene-d8 48.9 98% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 48.6 97% 'Halcyon Laboratories, :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report soi~ Sample Results in rog/kg Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/9/2002 Sample ID · 3362/MW5-40 Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates · t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 rog/kg I Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MIBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg i Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg BIEX Components I Benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg Toluene ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0. i mg/kg I rn & p Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg I Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.1 mg/kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I SUrrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 54.3 109% I 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 50.8 102% Toluene-d8 54.2 108% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 59.7 119% I HalCYon Laboratories, :[nc.' EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/9/2002 Sample ID · 3364/MW5-60 Analyte Result Method RE Units 5 Oxygenates .- t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 mg/kg Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.1 rog/kg Toluene ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0.1 mg/kg m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.! rog/kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene. fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS. chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 57.5 115% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 51.7 103% Toluene-d8 54.1 108% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 60.0 120% Halcyon 'Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT: E~C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/9/2002 Sample ID · 3366/MW5-80 ' Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 mg/kg · I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.! rog/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg I BTEX Components I ND 0.1 mg/kg Benzene Toluene ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0. i mg/kg I m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg i Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.! mg/kg i Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.1 mg/kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I' Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 57.4 115% I 1.2-Dichloroethane-d4 51.5 103% Toluene-d8 49.6 99% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.3 115% ! Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Soil Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/12/2002 Sample ID · 3368/MW5-100 Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates .' t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 mg/kg Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0. I mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0. l mg/kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 rog/kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg Toluene ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0. I rog/kg m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg O Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.1 mg/kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene. fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5. chloro- 50.0 100% 1.4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 50.0 100% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 49.5 99% Toluene-d8 52.6 105% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 51.5 103% HalCYon Laboratories, [nc, EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/12/2002 Sample ID · 3370/MW5-115 Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 mg/kg ' I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0. I mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) 'ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0. I mg/kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg Toluene ND 0. I mg/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0.1 mg/kg I m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg i Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.1 mg/kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 50.3 101% I 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 46.7 93% Toluene-d8 50.0 100% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 48.2 96% I Halcyon Laboratories, :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report Soil Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Wo°dmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/12/2002 Sample ID · 3371/MW5-120 Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates .-. t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 mg/kg I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 rog/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0. I mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0. l mg/kg i Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAM E) ND 0. I mg/kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg Toluene ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0.1 rog/kg I m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg i Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.1 rog/kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery i · Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% I Benzene-d5, chlor°' 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane. dibromofluoro- 54.7 109% I 1,2-Oichloroethane-d4 56.4 113% Toluene-d8 48.7 97% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 51.5 103% I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report soi Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT: E2C Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/12/2002 Sample ID: 3372/MW5-125 ' Analyte Result Method RL Units 5 Oxygenates ..-. t-Butanol (TBA) Ted-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 mg/kg Methyl Ted-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl Ted-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg BTEX Components Benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg Toluene ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg m & p Xylenes ND 0. ! rog/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg Lead Scavengers Ethane, Z,2-Dichloro (I.,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.! mg/kg Internal Standards Results % Recovery Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1.4-Dichlorobenzene-d4' 50.0 100% Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 54.9 110% 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 52.1 104% Toluene-d8 52.4 105% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.5 115% I Halcyon Laboratories, [nc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report so. Sample Results in mg/kg Certification # 1920 ~ CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project ID' Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/12/2002 Sample ID · 3373/MW5-130 Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates .. t-Butanol (TBA) Tert-Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 rog/kg I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 rog/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.I mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg i Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.1 mg/kg Tel uene ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0.1 rog/kg I m & p Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg o Xylenes ND 0.1 mg/kg I Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0.1 mg/kg I Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-d5, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 54.5 109% I 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 56.0 112% Toluene-d8 54.4 109% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 57.5 115% ! I Halcyon Laboratories, :Inc. EPA 8260B Laboratory Report sou Sample Results in mg/kg I Certification # 1920 I CLIENT: EzC Remediation, LLC 5300 Woodmere Drive, Suite 105 I Bakersfield, CA 93313 i Project ID · Freeway Liquors Report Date · 8/12/2002 I Sample ID · 3375/MW5-140 I Analyte Result Method RL Units I 5 Oxygenates t-Butanol (TBA) Tert~Butyl Alcohol ND 0.5 rog/kg I Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Diisopropyl Ether (DIPE) ND 0.1 mg/kg Ethyl Tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) ND 0.1 mg/kg I Tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) ND 0.1 mg/kg BTEX Components I Benzene ND 0.1 rog/kg Toluene ND 0.1 rog/kg Ethylbenzene ND 0.1 mg/kg I m & Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg P O Xylenes ND 0.1 rog/kg I Lead Scavengers Ethane, 1,2-Dichloro (1,2-DCA) ND 0.1 mg/kg I Ethane, 1,2-Dibromo (EDB) ND 0:1 mg/kg · Internal Standards Results % Recovery I Benzene, fluoro 50.0 100% Benzene-dS, chloro- 50.0 100% 1,4-Dichlorobenzene-d4 50.0 100% I Surrogate Standards Methane, dibromofluoro- 57.3 :t :t5% I 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 55.7 111% Toluene-d8 45.6 91% p-Bromofluorobenzene (BFB) 59.9 1_20% ! Mr. Lloyd Childers ~ , 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, Ca 93306 Subject: Site Characterization Report of Findings and Interim Remedial Action Plan Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, Ca 93306 Dear Mr. Childers: E2C, Inc. is pleased to present this report detailing the Site Characterization work at the Freeway Liquor Store at 2140 East Brundage Lane (Site), Bakersfield, California. This report has been prepared to document the Site Characterization work as required by the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services. Significant fuel hydrocarbon contaminants were identified in soils and groundwater beneath the Site. Therefore, an Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) is included to perform interim remediation of impacted soils and groundwater. As part of the IRAP, a scope of services is presented to perform additional characterization to define the lateral limits of the groundwater plume beneath the Site. hould you have any questions regarding this submittal, do to call the undersigned ~. *~.X'~,o. 7171/~~ . 'nB #477  Expires 11/30/02 ~cipal Hydrogeologist ~tr CC: Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Department 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, CA 93304 EzC INC ENVIRONI'IENTAL / ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e I 9 7 0 5640 District Boulevard, Suite 102, Bakersfield, C~ 93313 Tel: 661.831.6906 Fax: 661.831.6234 Toll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate Ofl~ce: 382 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408.327.5700 Fax: 408.327.5707 www. e2cinc, com I I I I I I I I I E.~C [NC ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS i S i n c e 1 9 7 0 SITE CHARACTERIZATION REPORT OF FINDINGS AND INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA May 31, 2001 Prepared For: Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, California 93306 Prepared By: E2C, Inc. 5640 District Boulevard, Suite 102 Bakersfield, California 93313 Project Number 1802JS01 ! ! Prqiect Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 · TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ ii LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................. ,~ ........................................................... ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Site Characterization Workplan .................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Work ......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT HISTORY ......................................................................................................... 2 3.0 GEOLOGY & HYDROGEOLOGY ...................................................................................... 2 3.1 Regional Geology & Hydrogeology ............................................................................... 2 3.1.1 Regional Geology ................................................................................................ 2 3.1.2 Regional Hydrogeology ........................................................................................ 3 3.2 Site Geology & Hydrogeology ...................................................................................... 4 3.2.1 Site Geology ........................................................................................................ 4 3.2.2 Site Hydrogeology ................................................................................................ 4 4.0 SITE CHARACTERIZATION ........................................ : ..................................................... 4 4.1 Soil Borings and Soil Sampling .................................................................................... 4 4.2. Field Screening of Soil Samples ................................................................................... 4 4.3 Preservation of Soil Samples ....................................................................................... 5 4.4 Chemical Analyses of Soil Samples ............................................................................. 5 4.5 Discussion of Soil Analytical Results ............................................................................ 5 4.6 Regulatory Compliance ................................................................................................ 5 4.7 Installation of Well MW-1 ............................................................................................. 6 4.7.1 Groundwater Sampling at Well MW-1 ................................................................... 6 4.7.2 Groundwater Analytical Results ............................................................................ 6 4.8 Site Characterization Conclusions ..................................... ' ........................................... 6 4.9 Site Characterization Recommendations ...................................................................... 7 5.0 INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN ................................................................................. 8 5.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 8 5.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................. 8 5.2.1 Groundwater Plume Assessment ......................................................................... 8 5.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan ............................................................................... 8 5.3 Permitting .................................................................................................................... 9 5.4 Install Wells .................. : .............................................................................................. 9 5.4.1 Soil Borings and Soil Sampling ............................................................................. 9 5.4.2 Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Wells ...................................................... 10 5.4.3 Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells ........................................................... 10 5.4.4 Installation of Groundwater Air Sparging Wells ................................................... 11 E2C, Inc i I Project Number 1,~02J$01 M¢y 31. 2001 5.5 Perform VE/AS Pilot Test ............................................ ............................................... 12 5.6 Remedial Action Plan ................................................................................................. 12 5.7 Quarterly Monitoring and Sampling ' 13 6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN ......................................................................................... 13 6.1 Sample Collection and Handling Protocol ................................................................... 13 6.2 Protocol for Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody Documentation .................... 13 6.3 Analytical Quality Assurance ....................................................................................... 14 7.0 .REPORTING ................................................................................................................... 14 7.1 Report of Findings and Remedial Action Plan ............................................................. 14 7.2 Quarterly Groundwater and RemediatiOn Status Monitoring Reports .......................... 14 8.0 SITE SAFETY PLAN ........................................................................................................ 14 9.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION ............................................................... 15 10.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 16 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity map Figure 2 Site Plan Showing Preliminary Assessment Sample Locations Figure 3 Site Plan Showing Cross-Section Transects Figure 4 Cross-Section A-A' Figure 5 Cross-Section B-B' Figure 6 Cross-Section A-A'- Distribution of Benzene in Soils Figure 7 Cross-Section A-A'- Distribution of MTBE in Soils Figure 8- Cross-Section A-A' - Distribution of TPHg in Soils Figure 9 Cross-Section B-B'- Distribution of Benzene in Soils Figure 10 Cross-Section B-B'- Distribution of MTBE in Soils Figure 11 Cross-Section B-B' - Distribution of TPHg in Soils Figure 12 Proposed Monitoring and As Well Locations Figure 13 VE-1 through VE-4 Radii of Influence Figure 14 VED-5 Radius of Influence Figure 15 VEM-6 Radius of Influence Figure 16 AS Wells Radii of Influence Figure 17 Typical AS Well Diagram LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Preliminary Assessment Analytical Results Table 2 Site Characterization Soil Sample Analytical Results Table 3 Well MW-1 Groundwater Analytical Data LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A BFD March 30, 1999 Letter Appendix B BFD February 26, 2001 Letter Appendix C Workplan Site Plan with Proposed Boring Locations Appendix D Boring Logs for Soil Borings & Well MW-1 Appendix E Purge - April 27, MW-1 Data Sheet 2001 Appendix F Analytical Laboratory Data Sheets & Chains-of-Custody Appendix G VE Well As-Built Diagrams H Site Plan Appendix Safety E2C, Inc ii I Project Number 1802JS01 May 31.2001 I 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the Site Assessment performed in April 2001 at the Freeway I Liquor Store (Site) located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1 for Site location). This report reviews the environmental history of the Site, discusses geological and hydrogeological conditions, describes the methods used in the assessment work, provides I the analytical results, interprets the extent of the fuel hydrocarbon groundwater plume and presents conclusions and recommendations. Based on those conclusions and recommendations, an Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) has also been developed to lay the Igroundwork for remediation of fuel hydrocarbon-impacted soil and groundwater. As part of the IRAP, additional Site Assessment work is also proposed to define the limits of fuel-impacted groundwater beneath the Site. I The Site Assessment work was performed by E2C, Inc. (E2C) at the request of Mr. Lloyd G. Childers of the Freeway Liquor Store in response to a requirement of the Bakersfield Fire I Department Office of Environmental Services (BFD), the Lead regulatory for this Site agency (CBFD, 1999) (Appendix A). IE2C prepared a Site Characterization Workplan that detailed a Scope of Work and procedures to perform characterization of the Site (E2C, 2001). The BFD reviewed and approved the Workplan by letter dated February 26, 2001 (BFD, 2001) (Appendix B). I 1.1 Site Characterization Workplan The Scope of Services in the Site Characterization Workplan was formulated to attain the I following objectives: · Further assess the lateral and vertical extent of fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils in the vicinity of the former USTs' and dispenser islands; I · Evaluate risks to groundwater and · Recommend appropriate remedial action, if required. I 1.2 Scope of Work The scope of services described in the Workplan included: I ,, Locate underground utilities using Client's as-built drawings (if available) as well as · Underground Service Alert (U.S.A.); · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; I · Advance approximately eleven (11) soil borings including six (6) borings around the existing canopy covered dispenser islands and four (4) borings in the vicinity of the I former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' locations and one adjacent to the former westernmost 12,000-gallon gasoline UST using continuous flight hollow-stem augers, each to a depth 10 feet below the base of significantly impacted soils, auger refusal, or I upon encountering groundwater (average boring depth assumed to be approximately 40 feet below ground surface) (Appendix C contains Site Plan showing proposed boring locations); I · Collect soil samples at 5-foot intervals beginning at five feet below ground surface (bgs) and continuing until total depth; the samples will be collected using brass or stainless steel sleeves; 1 I E2C, Inc 1 I Prqiect Number 1802J$01 May 31. 2001 · Field screen samples for volatile hydrocarbons using a hydrogen flame-ionizing detector (FID); · Secure soil samples in sleeves sealed with Teflon, end caps and tape. The sealed tubes to be placed in a cooler at 4° centigrade and transported to a DHS certified laboratory under chain-of-custody procedures; · Analyze approximately forty four (44) selected soil samples for the aromatic hydrocarbons of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and total xylenes (BTEX), and methyl- tertiary-butyl-ether (MTBE) using EPA Method 5030/8021b, as well as Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) using Method 3550/8015M, the detection limits to be .005 mg/kg - MTBE and .5 mg/kg -TPH; · Abandon all boreholes with a cement or bentonite grout; cuttings to be placed in drums pending proper disposal; and · Prepare a written report summarizing the results of the investigation with conclusions and recommendations, including borings logs, applicable tables and figures, the report to be certified by a California Registered Geologist. 2.0 PROJECT HISTORY The Freeway Liquor Store contracted with Industrial Contamination Extraction Services, Inc. (ICES) to remove three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs)'; two 6,000-gallon, single-walled, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) located on two dispenser islands and associated product piping. The fueling facilities were subsequently upgraded with double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled produc~ pipelines, and MPDs with dispenser pans. ICES contracted with Holguin, Fahan and Associates, Inc. (HFA) to conduct soil sampling at the time of UST removal. On December 4. 1998, the five USTs', six MPDs' and product piping were removed from the Site. Soil samples were collected per BFD requirements and analyzed for TPHg, BTEX and MTBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020, respectively. A total of thirty eight (38) samples were analyzed and the results are tabulated in Table 1. Significant concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were detected beneath the two former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' and beneath five of the former dispenser locations. On February 4, 1999, HFA submitted a Tank Closure Report to the City for review. On March 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed Mr. Lloyd Childers letter,'to submit for further assessment. The Owner (Owner), by a workplan subsequently applied to the State Fund and was accepted into the Fund on February 5, 2001. The Owner contracted with E2C, Inc (E2C) to conduct the work presented in the Workplan. 3.0 GEOLOGY & HYDROGEOLOGY 3.1 Regional & Geology Hydrogeology 3.1.1 Regional Geology The Site is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes I E2C, Inc 2 Pro_iect Number 1802~1~01 May 31.2001 five to seven degrees beneath the~San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sand Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. Unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake gravel, sand, silt, and clay sediments, in turn, overlie the Tertiary rocks. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. 3.1.2 Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit consisting of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,5000 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the boring procedures at the Mr. Fast and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. During the Site Assessment work in April 2001, groundwater was encountered at 130 feet below ground surface (bgs). E~C, Inc 3 I Prqiect Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 3.2 Site Geology & Hydrogeology 3.2.1 Site Geology During the drilling portion of the additional characterization work in April 2001 (see Section 4.0 below), subsurface materials beneath the Site were generally observed to consist of silt and sands with some minor clay fractions in areas. Figures 4 and 5 depict subsurface conditions in cross-section. Of specific note is the change from coarser materials (sands) to finer materials (silts and clays) between approximately 45 and 55 feet bgs, dependent upon location. The finer materials occur to a depth of approximately 80 feet bgs (see Figure 4, Section B-B', boring B-9 and Figure 5, Section A-A', boring B-6). Below 80 feet bgs, materials generally consist of sands and silty sands. 3.2.2 Site Hydrogeology Groundwater was encountered between 125 and 130 feet bgs in boring B-8 (see Figure 5). Fifteen minutes after encountering water, the groundwater level stabilized at 126 feet bgs. As it appeared that groundwater had been impacted by fuel hydrocarbons (see Section 4.0 below), boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-1. On April 27, 2001 a groundwater sample was collected at well MW-1. At that time, the groundwater was 121.94 feet below top of casing (BTOC). As there is only one well at the Site, the groundwater flow direction and magnitude cannot be determined. 4.0 SITE CHARACTERIZATION The Site Characterization Workplan was implemented during the period of April 9 through April 17, 2001. The following Sections describe the methods and procedures for the site characterization work. 4.1 Soil Borings and Soil Sampling A soil boring was advanced at the proposed locations (see Figure in Appendix C). Note: Based on actual field conditions and field screening of soil samples, some borings were relocated. In addition, extra borings were also advanced to provide definition of impacted soils and groundwater. Figure 2 depicts locations for the soil borings (B-1 through B-6, B-8, B-9, and B- 11 through B-17) that were advanced at the Site. Soil borings B-l, B-7, and B-10 were not advanced. Each soil boring was advanced using a truck mounted hollow-stem auger drilling rig, conventional equipment for environmental site assessments. Soil samples were collected at 5- foot intervals from the surface to total depth. Samples were collected using a split-spoon sampler containing three brass sleeves. Drilling operations, soil sampling and field monitoring for the presence of hydrocarbons were performed by an experienced environmental geologist under the direct supervision of a California Registered Geologist. Soil boring logs are included as Appendix D. 4.2 Field Screening of Soil Samples A hydrogen flame ionization detector (FID) was used during the drilling process to detect the presence of hydrocarbons (note: these are only qualitative tests not to be construed to represent a certified laboratory analysis). Sample lithology and pertinent drilling information was I E~C, Inc 4 Project Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 described and recorded on field boring logs (see Appendix D). Note: Field FID readings generally exceed 1000+ ppmv through the imported intervals. 4.3 Preservation of Soil Samples All soil samples were labeled, capped and placed in a cooler with ice at a temperature of 4° C for possible analysis. Samples for analyses were selected based on the field screening measurements. Samples will be transferred to a California State Certified laboratory under' chain of custody control procedures. 4.4 chemical Analyses of Soil Samples Soil samples were chemically analyzed at Halcyon Laboratories, a California State-Certified Laboratory (#1920) for the following fuel hydrocarbon compounds (the appropriate EPA Method is also listed) (analytical data sheets are included in Appendix F): · BTEX using EPA Method 8260b; · TPHg using EPA Method 8015; · MTBE using EPA Method 8260b; and · The detection limits were 0.005 milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg) (equivalent to parts per million) for benzene, 0.010 rog/Kg for toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes, 0.05 mg/Kg for TPHg, and 0.05 mg/kg for MTBE. 4.5 Discussion of Soil Analytical Results All analytes tested for were detected at varying concentrations dependent upon location. Soil analytical results are summarized in Table 2. Figures 6 through 8 depict subsurface analytical results for benzene, MTBE, and TPHg, respectively, in Cross-Section A-A'. Figures 9 through 11 depict subsurface analytical results for benzene, MTBE, and TPHg, respectively, in Cross- Section B-B'. The limits of fuel hydrocarbon impact to soils are defined on these six cross- sections for each of the three analytes. As seen in the cross-sections, the source area appears to be centered at the area of boring B-8. In general, the fuel hydrocarbons spread downward from the source area until encountering the finer-grained materials at the 45- to 55-foot depths. From there, the fuel hydrocarbons spread laterally principally toward the southeast. Fuel hydrocarbons did migrate downward in the source, area to groundwater as evidenced by the analytical results from boring B-8 at depth. In addition, groundwater in the B-8 area has been impacted (see Section 5.0 below). A limited zone of highly impacted soils occurs at the near surface in the boring B-8 area. The principal portion of impacted soils occurs between 35 and 55 feet bgs and covers an area of approximately 1,000 square feet. Figure 12 depicts the areal extent of impacted soils at depth. 4.6 Regulatory Compliance During the drilling operations it became apparent that the extent of impact to soils was more extensive than previously believed. The preliminary field and analytical data was correlated with preliminary cross-sections and a meeting with the BFD was held. At that meeting, the BFD representative authorized expanding the characterization program to gain better definition of the impact at the Site. Based on that meeting, the following work was approved: · Extending soil boring B-8 to greater depth than originally anticipated and converting this ' boring groundwater monitoring ; into well MW-1 I E~C,/nc 5 Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 May $1, 2001 · Extending several borings to greater depth (e.g., B-5 and B-6) to aid in definition of the soil plume; · Relocating some borings (e.g., B-3 and B-11) and adding borings (e.g., B-12 through B- 16); · In anticipation that soil remediation at depth would be required at the Site, advancing six (6) additional borings with conversion of all six into wells; vapor · Collection and chemical analyses thereof of additional soil samples generated as a result of the deeper borings, the additional borings, and the additional borings for conversion into vapor wells; · Development of well MW-1 and collection of a groundwater sample from that well; and · Compilation of all data and preparation of an Interim Remedial Action Plan. 4.7 Installation of Well MW-1 Upon approval of the BFD, boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-1 (see boring B-8 Icg in Appendix D). MW-1 was constructed to 140 feet bgs with the screened interval from 115 to 140 feet bgs. Filter pack sand (Lonestar #3) was placed by gravity feed from 140 to 113 feet bgs. Three feet of bentonite was placed on top of the filter pack and hydrated with water. Neat-cement grout completed the seal to the surface. Two days after installation of the well, the well was developed using the overpumping method. 4.7.1 Groundwater Sampling at WelI MW-1 On April 27, 2001 groundwater was sampled at well MW-1. The well was overpurged until approximately 20 gallons were extracted (casing volume of 3.2 gallons) (see purge data sheet in Appendix E). Groundwater parameters of temperature, pH, and conductivity were measured as water was pumped from the well to verify sufficient purging had been accomplished and stable measurements were obtained from field instruments. A purge data sheet for the well is included in Appendix E. The sample was decanted into two 40-milliliter VOA vials and one one-liter Amber. Care was taken to ensure no headspace or bubbles existed and the vials were sealed with Teflon-lined lids. The samples were labeled and placed in an iced cooler maintained at 4° Centigrade, accompanied with a chain- of-custody document for transport to the analytical laboratory. 4. 7.2 Groundwater Analytical Results Concentrations of fuel hydrocarbon compounds were detected in the groundwater sample collected from MW-1. Table 3 contains a summary of the analytical results and Appendix F contains the analytical laboratory data sheets and the associated chain-of-custody. Of significance Were the following detections: · Benzene at a concentration of 95 tzg/L (duplicate at 96 Izg/L); · TPHg at a concentration of 2,049 pg/L (duplicate at 2,108 I~g/L); and · MTBE at a concentration of 295 I~g/L (duplicate at 331 p.g/L). 4.8 Site Characterization Conclusions Based on the data obtained from the preliminary assessment and the Site Characterization, E2C makes the following conclusions: · Approximately 50,000 cy of soils contain fuel hydrocarbons at concentrations of concern; I E2C, Inc 6 Prqiect Number 180£J$01 May $1.2001 · Impacted soils occur from the near surface to approximately 55 feet bgs as shown on the cross sections; · Groundwater has been significantly impacted by fuel hydrocarbons at the Site as evidenced by the concentrations of benzene (95 ~g/L), TPHg (2,049 ~g/L), and MTBE (295 ~g/L) in the water sample from MW-1; and · The State of California Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for benzene, a known carcinogen, in drinking water is 1 ~g/L; the water sample from MW-1 contained benzene at a concentration of 95 Fg/L; and · The areal extent of the groundwater plume is not known. 4.9 Site Characterization Recommendations Based on the conclusions presented above in Section 4.8, E2C makes the following recommendations: · Further define limits of groundwater plume for all fuel components of concern; · To achieve the groundwater definition, perform additional groundwater characterization by installing monitoring wells (see Section 5.0 below for Interim Remedial Action Plan which includes for installation of additional provisions groundwater monitoring wells); · Prepare Interim Remedial Action Plan (IR^P) which includes a provision for vapor extraction and groundwater air sparging pilot testing; · Implement the IRAP; · Perform quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling using the monitoring well network; and · If the proposed groundwater monitoring wells delineate the extent groundwater plume, prepare a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) that includes Pilot Testing data to remediate impacted vadose zone soils and the groundwater plume. ! ! I E2C,/nc 7 Project Number 1802dSO 1 May ~1, 2001 5.0 INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN As requested by the BFD, E2C, Inc. proposes to implement interim remedial action to remediate the fuel soils and beneath the Site while hydrocarbon-impacted groundwater groundwater plume definition is being performed. The methods and procedures to perform the groundwater plume definition and the interim remedial action are discussed in the following sections. 5.1 Purpose The Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP) contains two principal tasks: · Define lateral limits of groundwater hydrocarbon plume; and · Remediate fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils and groundwater on-site in the source area. 5.2 of Work Scope The following Scope of Work will be needed to perform the two principal Tasks of the IRAP. 5.2.1 Groundwater Plume Assessment · Locate underground utilities; · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; · Install a total of three (3) groundwater monitoring wells, one in inferred upgradient and two in the inferred downgradient directions; Develop wells; · Sample water at wells and have samples chemically analyzed; · Compile data and generate plots showing groundwater gradient (flow direction and magnitude); and · Compile data and generate plots showing contaminant plumes as appropriate. 5.2.2 Interim Remedial Action Plan · Locate underground utilities; · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; · Install soil vapor extraction (VE) wells and Air-Sparging (AS) wells; · Perform soil sampling and analysis; · Install VE/As piping and Manifolding; · Perform VE/AS pilot test for designing the final treatment system; · Generate a Report of Findings included with the final RAP that includes final treatment system design; - Operations and Maintenance of Remedial System; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring/Sampling; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remedial Progress Reporting; · Quality Assurance plan; and · Site Safety Plan This Interim Remedial Action Plan was prepared for the remediation of fuel hydrocarb°n impacted soils and groundwater on-site. The IRAP initially consists of installing wells as follows: · Four (4) shallow soil vapor extraction (VE) wells (VE-1 through VE-4, which are already installed); I E2C, Inc 8 I Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 · One (1) deep VE well (VED-5, which is already installed); · One (1) medium depth VE well (VEM-6, which is already installed); · Two (2) air sparge (AS) wells (AS-1 and AS-2). VE and AS wells will be used in performance of a VE/AS pilot test. The pilot test will provide data on the effectiveness of this remedial method as well as design criteria for a site-wide treatment system. The results of these activities will be presented in a report of findings and the IRAP will be revised and be presented as a final Remedial Plan (RAP) to detail the proposed on-site treatment system. The tasks associated With this IRAP are presented below. 5.3 Permitting After approval of the IRAP by the BFD, and concurrence from the RWQCB - Central Valley Region, necessary permits as required for installing groundwater monitoring wells, VE wells, and AS wells and for VE/AS pilot test will be secured by E2C. These permits include, but may not be limited to the following: · Drilling Permits from Kern County Environmental Health Services; · Construction and Electrical permits from Kern County Building and Safety Department where applicable; · Construction and Electrical permits from City of Bakersfield Building Department, where applicable; and · Authority-to-Construct and Permit-to-Operate permits from the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (APCD). 5.4 Install Wells During the Site Characterization drilling program the following wells were installed: · Six (6) SVE Wells consisting of four shallow VE wells (VE-1 through VE-4, one (1) medium depth VE well (VEM-5), and one deep VE well (VED-6) (see Figure 6 for locations). For the next phase of work, three (3) groundwater monitoring wells and two (2) air wells sparge (AS-1 and AS-2) are proposed. The groundwater monitoring wells will be designated MW-2 through MW-4 (see Figure 12 for locations). The air sparge wells will be designated AS-1 and AS-2 (See Figure 12 for locations). E2C anticipates installing the wells in July 2001. Well locations have been selected based on geology and hydrogeology of the Site. In addition, the chemical concentrations in the soil samples and groundwater sample from well MW-1 were considered in the location selection process. 5.4.1 Soil Borings and Soil Sampling A soil boring will be advanced to the desired depth at each groundwater monitoring well and AS well location. Figure 12 depicts proposed locations. Each soil boring will be advanced using a truck mounted hollow-stem auger drilling rig, conventional equipment for environmental site assessments. Soil samples will be collected at 5-foot intervals from the surface to total depth and in the capillary fringe. Samples will be collected using a split-spoon sampler containing three brass or stainless steel sleeves. Drilling operations, soil sampling and field monitoring for the presence of hydrocarbons wi~ be performed by an experienced environmental geologist under the supervision of a California I E2C, Inc 9 I Project Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 I Registered Geologist. A hydrogen flame ionization detector (FID) will be used during the drilling process to detect the presence of hydrocarbons (note: these are only qualitative tests not to be i construed to represent a certified laboratory analysis). Sample lithology and pertinent drilling information will be described and recorded on field boring logs. i All soil samples will be labeled, capped and placed in a cooler with ice at a temperature of 4° C for possible analysis. A maximum of five (5) cores from the boring will be submitted for chemical analysis. Samples for analyses will be selected based on the field screening measurements. These samples will be transferred to a California State Certified laboratory I under chain of custody control procedures. i Soil samples will be chemically analyzed for the following fuel hydrocarbon compounds: , BTEX using EPA Method 8260b; · . TPHg using EPA Method 8015; I · MTBE using EPA Method 8260b; and · The detection limits will be 0.005 milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg) (equivalent to parts per million) for BTEX compounds, 50 mg/Kg for TPHg, and 0.05 mg/kg for MTBE. I 5.4.2 Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Wells Well MW-1 - Boring B-8 was converted into groundwater monitoring well MW-1 after approval I the BFD. The and well construction is contained in D. This well is by boring log Appendix screened from 115 to 140 feet bgs with filter pack sand from 113 to 140 feet bgs followed by i three feet of hydrated bentonite chips and neat-cement grout to the surface. Proposed Wells MW-2 through MW-4 - These wells will be placed at the locations as shown on Figure 12. These wells will be set approximately the same as well MW-1 with the screened I interval from 115 to 140 feet well MW-2 will be. installed in the inferred bgs. Monitoring groundwater upgradient direction and monitoring wells MW-3 and MW-4 will be installed in the inferred groundwater downgradient direction. I 5.4.3 Installation of Soil Vapor Extraction Wells Vapor extraction in soils (VE) is a recognized technology for the removal of volatile I hydrocarbons such as gasoline from the vadose zone. This method has also been shown to be effective in the removal of free-product. I Wells screened through the contaminated interval into the capillary fringe are installed and connected at the surface to a blower. A vacuum is created and soil gases are drawn to the wells carrying hydrocarbon volatiles, which are stripped from the soil. At the surface, the I hydrocarbons are thermally destroyed or adsorbed in canisters of granulated activated carbon to prevent emissions to the atmosphere. I After approval by the BFD, six (6) VE wells were installed for the pilot testing. This is basedon E2C's extensive knowledge of past testing at sites with similar geological materials. Figures 13 through 15 depict locations of the VE wells (VE-1-4, VED-5, and VEM-6, respectively) and their Ianticipated areas of influence with an estimated radius of influence of 40 feet for each VE well. Based on the results of the pilot testing, additional VE wells may be required if the area of influence is determined to be less than a radius of 40 feet. ! I E2C,/nc 10 I Project Number 1802JS01 May 31.2001 The soil boring for each VE well was advanced as described above in Section 5.4.1. Each VE well was constructed in the same manner as a groundwater monitoring well. The four (VE-1 through VE--4) were screened from 25 to 55 feet bgs, the medium-depth well (VEM-6) was screened from 55 to 75 feet bgs, and the deep well (VED-5) was screened from 75 to 105 feet bgs. As-built figures of VE wells are included as Appendix G. Each well was constructed with 2-inch Schedule 40 PVC casing with 0.020" slot for the screened section. Filter pack sand was emplaced by gravity feed in the annular space from the bottom to a point two feet above the screened interval to be followed by three feet of hydrated bentonite chips to seal the filter pack. Neat cement-bentonite slurry filled the annular space to the surface. Each wellhead is equipped with a locking cap and a traffic-rated steel box. Upon completion of the pilot test, the wells can be manifolded into an SVE remediation system. 5.4.4 Installation of Groundwater Air Sparging Wells Air sparging (AS) is a developed remedial technique designed for cleanup of groundwater impacted with volatile hydrocarbons. It can be used in conjunction with vapor extraction and therefore, if conditions at the site are favorable, a properly engineered system can effectively cleanup both impacted soils and groundwater. To be effective, sparging should only be used where the water level occurs below 5 feet, the aquifer is unconfined, the contaminant is volatile and not too soluble (such as gasoline) and the soils are relatively porous and permeable. With air sparging, air is introduced into the saturated zone via wells, which are usually screened with a short one- to three-foot interval. Air bubbles travel upwards vertically, but also spread horizontally, partly in response to the naturally greater horizontal permeability of sedimentary deposits. It is advisable to set the injection .point some distance, typically 5 to 20 feet below the water table to increase the radius of influence of the sparging point. Radii of influence from 5 to 20 feet in coarse sediments have been observed. The radius of influence is evaluated by monitoring VE wells for increased VOC concentrations, monitoring dissolved oxygen content at groundwater monitoring wells, checking for localized water table mounding above sparge points, and modifications of the potentiometric surface across the site. At this time, two (2) AS wells are proposed (see Figure 16 for locations). Due to the nature of the materials in the groundwater-bearing zone at the Site, a radius of influence of 20 feet in the Site's Water-bearing zone is anticipated (See figure 16). Additional AS wells may be added based on the Pilot Testing data and in conjunction with chemical analyses of groundwater samples from monitoring wells MW-2 through MW-4. The typical air sparge system consists of an oil-free air compressor rated for continuous operation, manifolded to one or more sparging wells. Air is supplied to the wells through metal pipe or rubber hose. A pressure gauge, flow control valve and regulator are provided at each sparging well to measure and control the flow of air. Each sparge point consists of one to two- inch PVC casing. A microporous sparge point is set approximately 20 feet into the water column, or near the bottom of the water-bearing materials to enhance radius of influence. The sparge point of each sparge well is encased by a sand filter pack. A seal of bentonite or grout is emplaced in the annular space to the surface. Figure 17 depicts a typical AS well diagram. I Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 M~ty ~1, 2001 5.5 Perform VE/AS Pilot Test Prior to preparation of the final RAP, VE/AS system pilot testing will be performed. Initial groundwater data including dissolved oxygen content and water levels will be collected. During the pilot test, a vacuum pressure gauge will be placed on each of the AS wells and VE wells in turn to measure the vacuum backpressure/drawdown at each location. The vacuum pressure gauge to be employed will be capable of detecting pressure changes of 0.1 inch of water. Vacuum backpressure/drawdown will be recorded from each inlet well and will be plotted against distance. The distance-backpressure/drawdown curves thus generated will yield the empirical data necessary to estimate whether the well configuration will provide sufficient lateral coverage to effectively remediate the impacted soil and groundwater. Measurements collected during the pilot test will include radius of influence, backpressure, extracted VOC concentrations, dissolved oxygen, and water table elevations. These measurements will be compared to pre-sparging/vapor extraction measurements and used to evaluate the effectiveness of the system and the optimum rate at which air is to be injected into the subsurface and extracted by the vapor extraction system. The effect of air sparging at various rates and distances from the vapor extraction wells can be evaluated. The object will be to determine if the air sparging results in increased mass removal rates and the optimum vapor extraction/air sparging well spacing. The radius of influence testing will also yield information regarding anisotropic flow in the vadose zone. After completion of the pilot study, the data generated will be compiled and analyzed. E2C will then revise the IRAP, using data derived from the pilot study that contains the final remedial design, which will be reported in the RAP. 5.6 Remedial Action Plan The RAP will describe the methods for implementation of finalized remedial action. The RAP will be certified by a California Registered Geologist and will include at a minimum the following: · Description of Additional Well Installation Procedures and Findings; · Pilot Testing Data and Evaluation; · Design of Treatment system; · Drilling/Well Installation Procedures for Additional Groundwater Monitoring, VE and AS wells, if required; · VE/AS treatment system Installation and Operation Procedures; · Soil and Water Field Screening Methods and Procedures; · Sample Collection Procedures; · Analytical Methods; · Remedial System Operations and Maintenance Procedures; · Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Sampling Methods and Procedures; · Sampling and Analysis Quality Assurance Plan; · Quarterly Monitoring and Remedial Progress Reporting; · Surrounding AreaWell Survey; · Procedures to Collect Confirmation Data and Decommission Wells and Equipment upon completion of Remedial Activities; and · Scheduling I E=C, Inc 12 Prqiect Numt~or 1802JS01 May 81.2001 5.7 Quarterly Monitoring and Sampling Groundwatei sampling will be performed on a quarterly basis. After one year, the sampling schedule will be evaluated and revised schedules will be as necessary. Sampling tabulated in the revised IRAP. All water will be and sealed in containers and recorded samples collected, stored, appropriate on chain-of-custody document pending transport to a state-certified laboratory. Sampling, sealing and transporting procedures will be documented in the CAP. A State of California-certified analytical laboratory will analyze the samples for the following compounds by the appropriate EPA Method: · TPHg using EPA Method 8015; · BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8260B. All samples will be collected, stored, and sealed in appropriate containers and recorded on chain-of-custody documents pending transport to a state-certified laboratory. 6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN This section describes field and analytical quality-assurance procedures to be followed during the investigation and remediation 6.1 Sample Collection and Handling Protocol Proper sample collection and handling are essential to assure quality of data obtained from a sample. Each sample, therefore, will be collected in a plastic tube, preserved correctly for the intended analysis and stored for no longer than permissible holding time pdor to analysis. Protocol to be applied in this project was described earlier. 6.2 Protocol for Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody Documentation Sample identification and Chain-of-Custody procedures are designed to assure sample quality and to document sample possession from the time it is collected to the time of its ultimate disposal. The container for each sample submitted for analysis will have a label affixed with the identifying number or the number will be inscribed directly on the container. The analytical laboratory will assign a separate sample number unique to that sample for internal sample coordination and identification. A description of the sample including the sample number and other pertinent information regarding its collection and/or geologic significance will be written in field notes and/or a geologic boring Icg being prepared by the site geologist. These field documents will be kept in a permanent project file. All samples will be analyzed by a state certified laboratory for the analyses'requested. A properly completed Chain-of-Custody Form will be submitted to the analytical laboratory along with sample. The laboratory's assigned number will be properly entered on the form. A quality control officer at the lab will verify integrity of sample submitted, proper sample volume, correctness of containers used, and properly executed Chain-of-Custody Form. Pertinent information will be entered into a logbook kept by the laboratory. E2C, Inc 13 Project Number 1802JS01 May $1. 2001 6.3 Analytical Quality Assurance In addition to routine calibration of analytical instruments with standards and blanks, the analyst required run duplicates spikes on percent analyses assure an measure is to and 1 0 of to added of reliability and precision. Accuracy is verified through the following: 1. U.S. EPA and State certification of results; 2. Participation in inter-laboratory round robin program; 3. The quality control officer on a weekly basis submits "Blind" samples for analysis. These are prepared from National Bureau of Standards specifications of EPA reference standards; and 4. Verification of results with an alternative method. 7. 0 REPOR TING Reports will consist of the following: 1) Report of Findings in Combination with finalized Remedial Action Plan; and 2) Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation Status Reports. 7.1 Report of Findings and Remedial Action Plan A report will be prepared that describes the activities performed for the hydrogeologic assessment (Section 5.2.1) and the IRAP (Section 5.2.2), including results, conclusions, and recommendations. This report will also include a finalized remedial action plan for implementation of an on-site treatment system for remediation of on-site soils and groundwater impacted by fuel hydrocarbons. 7.2 Quarterly Groundwater and Remediation Status Monitoring Reports On a quarterly basis, a report will be prepared by the last day of the next month following each quarter and will contain, at a minimum, the following: · Tabulated results of all previous and to date investigations; · Groundwater elevation and contamination contour maps; · ' Site map clearly indicating the areal extent of contamination plumes; · A map showing all sensitive receptors and a brief description of the receptor, including its distance and direction from the Site; · Compliance with other agency's requirements; · A of analytical data to date, equipment records, daily/weekly inspection summary records, and a discussion of remedial Progress; and · In addition, the report will contain a conclusions and recommendations section clearly indicating what further actions, if any, are required. The report will be prepared under, reviewed by, and certified by a California Registered Geologist. 8.0 SITE SAFETY PLAN Appendix H contains a Site Safety Plan that complies with Worker Right to Know Regulations and California Code of Regulations Title 2. I E2C, Inc 14 I Pro. iect Number 1802JS01 May 3 I. 2001 I 9.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION _ E2C has prepared this Workplan in accordance with generally accepted standards of care I in this time. It should be that definition and evaluation of existing California at recognized -- geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and _ recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared by E2C, Inc. under the professional supervision of the registered professional whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based "' solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this ,, report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This -- report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(s). d By: -- -. ~ ~" --1~'~~'~(~;9oL~oV~n, R~. #7171 in, RG. #4779 ' ~ect Expires 11/30/02 I Hydrogeologist :ipal I I E2C, Inc 15 I Prqiect Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 ! 10.0 REFERENCES I (BFD, 1999) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, March 30, 1999, Laboratory results from preliminary site assessment conducted at the Freeway i Liquor Store, 2030 East Brundage Lane, Permit #BR-0231 (BFD, 2001) Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, February 26, 2001, Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East I Brundage Lane (aka 2030 East Brundage Lane) (E2C, 2001) E2C, Inc., February 9, 2001, Site Characterization Workplan, Freeway Liquor Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E2C, Inc 16 I Pr(_iect Number 1802JS01 May 31.2001 FIGURES I Figure 1Vicinity map i Figure 2Site Plan Showing Preliminary Assessment Sample Locations Figure 3Site Plan Showing Cross-Section Transects Figure 4Cross-Section A-A' I Figure 5Cross-Section B-B' Figure 6Cross-Section A-A'- Distribution of Benzene in Soils I Figure 7Cross-Section A-A'- Distribution of MTBE in Soils Figure 8Cross-Section A-A' - Distribution of TPHg in Soils Figure 9Cross-Section B-B'- Distribution of Benzene in Soils I Figure 10 Cross-Section B-B'- Distribution of MTBE in Soils Figure 11 Cross-Section B-B' - Distribution of TPHg in Soils I Figure 12 Proposed Monitoring and As Well Locations Figure 13. VE-1 through VE-4 Radii of Influence I Figure 14 VED-5 Radius of Influence Figure 15 VEM-6 Radius of Influence Figure 16 AS Wells Radii of Influence I Figure 17 Typical AS Well Diagram I E2C, Inc Figures MTE LOCATION Ill.rill. Id ,~.., ~*,~* ~.~. ,..,..,,.,. ,..,,,.,, Be, r Moun~in SPRINGS ,% ~ ~,.,¢:~.'.~."% __ , S~MO~E ~YOH OAK TREE COUHTR ~.-. ~...% ~o~ Vel~o ~o. ...~ ' ~ ~' '"~'~ .... "- ~2' "~"~  . ~c~t..mat o,~ r,r~g . ' ..... /: [ ~EE~R RI~E :ira St. : . ~EE~fl RIDGE,. ~, ,' ~ · '...o. E2C, IgC. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2030 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 5640 DJstdct Blvd., Suite 102 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ~akorsfiold, Galifornia OBBI~ Iolophono: (~) 831-~0~ SIT~ LO~TIO~ Fax: (~$1) 8~1-~234 Id; VE-1 Vapor Extraction {~ WeilLocation B 16 I ' STORAGE STORE I AREA II I-'-'~ FENCE V~..~ I °vernan'q i I ' ,. ® '~ I I yE-2 IC3 nl ~ / NEWUST IMW11 I B2 B-11 I. VEHTUNES / ' I I ' I '-3 (B-8) I DISPENSER I I B-5 I la al I I v' ~ v.% ?.4 , /// ' SCALE: 1" = 30 feet ~ ~--- FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 2 Fax: (661) 831-6234 SITE PLAN ~ WellLocation B-16 i I AREA ~ FENOE VE-1 ~ I~1 . NEW UST IM~ . ~ EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE SCALE: 1" = 30 feet ~C/J~c, FREEWAY UQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd,, Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 3 Fax: (661) 831-6234 CROSS-SECTION TRANSECTS A set back B-13 B-12 B.~i 8 feet ?~,e~ ~-6 Set bac~ ~'~ VE-2 B-16 -" ~' ' ' FILL I ~. ~ -+-----~- · .... ....... ~ - --ffu/~/~ - - -"~ .... s~,~., .... ~~- / 5-~"'s~ ~ ....... / ~ >- d - - -'- ~ E ML · .... ~-~-I .... SP/SW -l-_ ~ - I SP/SW/SM ? SM SP ? ? ' SM/Mk ' ? ? EXPLANATION ~ SM B-12 - Boring Location ML - Silt, some fine sand 40 M~CL - Silt, Clay M~C~SC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand M~MH/SW - Silt, Clay, Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Sil~ Sand SM - Silty Sand SM/ML - Sil~ Sandy, Sandy Sil~ SP/C~ML - Sand, Clay Silt SCALE 1" = 20 feet SP/SM/SW - Sands, Sil~ Sands ~C~ ~c. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Fax: (661) 831-6234 CROSS-SECTION A-A' B-8; set ahead Intersect B-B' ~ ) B B-, B-6 15 feet X'~.~ B-4 B-3 -.NW I SE ? '- -? ML ~ - ~l - ~ SM/ML SP/SW S ? ML/CL/SC [ --? - .~,_ _ {- -?. -- / SM/ML ? - -~.~~wl' ? ML _ _ ,~ ? SP/SW I ?-- ? ' SC/SM ? ? s~sF - - ? £×PLANATION Water at 126' ~ SM B-9 - Boring Location ML - Silt, some fine sand ML/CI_/SC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SM - Silty Sand SM/ML - Silty Sandy, Sandy Silt SP/SW - Sands SCALE 1" = 20 feet ~'~.C/ZT/'/¢. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 ~j Fax.' (661) 831-6234 CROSS-SECTION B-B' ~A B-8; set back sect ~''~'' .... B-18 B- 12 B-5 8 feet \?te~ B-6 Set baCK za VE-2 B-16A B-13 ML ,-'L J __ _ S__~/ML/SP~! i -I ........ o.o. 1-~ --' -- SM/SP ' °.~ '-__- ~.~ o.o~ ,/c '~L --~U/~/~ ' --"C ~ --/ ? M~CL ~ ~ ? ? SM/M ? ND _ ~8~ .? I 0.09 SP/SW ~ ? ? SM SC/SM 0.12 S~/SW/SM 100 9 2.a: 9 9 I°'~~ ~ 0.007 ? 0.034 9 ~;~ B-12 - Boring Location ~ ML - Silt, some fine sand M~CL - Silt, Clay MUCUSC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand MUMH/SW - Silt, Clay, Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SM - Silty Sand SM/ML - Silty Sandy, Sandy Silt SCALE 1" = 20 feet SP/C~ML - Sand, Clay, Silt BENZENE SOIL ANALYSIS in rog/kg SP/SM/SW - Sands, Silty Sands FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE ~UR~ I~c, ~z~' 2~o EAST B~UN~A~ L~U~ 5640 District Bird., Suite 102 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Bakersfield, California 93313 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 CROSS-SECTION A-A' - DISTRIBUTION OF Fax: (~) sa~-~2a4 BENZENE IN SOILS I A B-8; set back \¢.e~sec~. ~,-K B-13 B-12 B-5 8 feet B-6 Set back 25' VE-2 B-16 I ~' ~~10~-- ----~ .- 40 ~'~ ,,4~1~- ~ _ 0.29 ~ ~ / SC/SM 137 -- -- ~ 3.6 '~ ~ SC ML A~ -- ~0.241 ? ~D Water at 126' ~ 9 ? _? EXPLANATION ~0. Mk - Silt, somo fino sand ~ 40 M~Ck- 8lit, Clay I M~C~SO - Silt, Glay, Glayoy Sand M~MH/SW - Silt, Glay, Sand SG/SM - Glayoy Sand, Silty Sand i SM - Silty Sand SM/Mk - Silty Sandy, Sandy Silt S~/C~ML - Sand, Glay, Silt S~/SM/SW - Sands, Silty Sands i SCAk~ 1'= 20 ~eot E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE i 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 CROSS-SECTION A-A' - DISTRIBUTION OF i Fax: (661) 831-6234 MTBE IN SOILS I A B-8; set back sec" ~,-K .... A~ B-13 B-12 B-5 8 feet _ L ~1-- 2,~/~ '} [ 689 ~ 1196 / ~ II  122  ~ ........ %% _ _ _ ~_ _ _ ~.~ ~ M/;~ ;W ~0.~ -  '10 3~ ~ _ _ ? ? ? ND I 3.95 SP/SW'-- ? I ? SM SC/SM 6.63 P/SW/SM I ? 79 _ ? ? ? I ? -- --FM'-/SP ? I SM <0.5 I Waterat126"~~' ? I1'6- ? ? 0ffsM/ML_ ? EXPLANATION I ~-5SM B-12 - Boring Location -- ML - Silt, some fine sand ML/CL - Silt, Clay I ML/CL/SC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand ML/MH/SW - Silt, Clay, Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SM - Silty Sand I SM/ML - Silty Sandy, Sandy Silt SCALE 1" = 20 feet SP/CL/ML - Sand, Clay, Silt TPHg SOIL ANALYSIS in rog/kg SP/SM/SW - Sands, Silty Sands I E2C, ~-I~IC. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Q Telephone: (661)831-6906 CROSS-SECTION A-A'- DISTRIBUTION OF I Facimile: (661)831-6234 TPHg IN SOILS B-8;ls~et ahead Intersect B-B' ? __ 6.02 ~ x' 3- · 0.06 ~ 8.67 · ~ 4.50 '~:~' SM--5.95__ J ~"~' ~ ~~ , ; .... ~ o.oo ~yD ML~ -- b.09- SP 3W I-- -- ?--I -? -- oo 's~- ' -~ ~ SM -120 I o.oo7 ?,nl_..086 _ ? Water at 126' SM ~.0~ EXPLANATION I -140 B-9 - Boring Location ML - Silt, some fine sand MUCUSC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SM/ML - Silty, Sandy, Samdy Silt SCALE 1" = 20 feet SP/SW - Sands BENZENE SOIL ANALYSIS in mg/kg E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Facimile: (661)831-6234 CROSS-SECTION B-B'- DISTRIBUTION OF BENZENE IN SOILS m B-8; set ahead ~ Intersect B-B' B' B B-9 B-6 15feet 'q~ i B-4 B-3 --.~--~r '~ / -- -- ...... 5.7 ML/CL/SC 1.0 13.6 . _ _~_ ~ m ? _ ND ..... m -' - -80 · -~l-I-- '~ ? -- _ ~_ --/? _ sw/s~' /~ SM/SP I · ? ? o.~s ? m Water at 126' ~ ? SM/ML m o.188 SM ,_~ EXPLANAIION - -140 I B-O - Bodn~ kocation Mk - Silt, oomo fino sand M~G~SG - Silt, Glay, Glayoy Sand  SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SM/ML - Silty, Sandy, Samdy Silt SCALE 1" = 20 feet SP/SW - Sands MTBE SOIL ANALYSIS in kg/my m ~2cx ~c. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE m 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 / Facimile: (661)831-6234 CROSS-SECTION B-B'- DISTRIBUTION m OF MTBE IN SOILS B-8; set ahead Intersect B-B' B ~.~ ~.~ 15feet x,~'~'~'~ B' NW I a-4 B-3 I ~,,s;, 'I'l- -/?, ? - .[-' -~7e- - /? ' s~sE'",T10;"- ; SM SM/ME ? Water at 126' ~' ? -~M--~5 140 EXPLANATION B-9 - Boring Location ML - Silt, some fine sand ME/CE/SC - Silt, Clay, Clayey Sand SC/SM - Clayey Sand, Silty Sand SCALE 1" = 20 feet SM/ME - Silty, Sandy, Samdy Silt SP/SW - Sands TPHg SOIL ANALYSIS in mg/kg " E2. C~, ~'//c. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 11 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 CROSS-SECTION B-B'-DISTRIBUTION Fax: (661) 831-6234 OF TPHg IN SOILS ' · EXPLANATION a-6 · Soil Boring Location MWol MW-2 ~ Monitoring Well Location VE-1 N ~ Vapor Extraction Well Location I ASol [] Proposed Air Sparge Well Location B-16 MW-2 ~.~ Proposed Monitoring Well Location, STORAGE STORE / AREA FENCE overnanc~ VE'I tU O VE-2 z B-9 B-6 IO ._] NEW UST IMW.1 B-2 B-11 · vEm,NES (B-8) DISPENSER O/ NEW UST I-~ ISLANDS B-15 B- 1~3 vEo-5 · '"-'oP" · __ ,,? -'/21 SHOULDER~ ~ ~B-14~ ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE sc^~; ~"= ~0 ~ee, ~ ~w-~ ~w-~ E2C, Inc, FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 're~e~o,e: (~)~31-6~06 1 2 Fax: (661) 831-6234 SITE PLAN WITH PROPOSED WELLS LEGEND B-6 · s~ I~,~ Lo~-~l~, MW-2 VE-1 Vapor Extraction ~ WollLocation B-16 m ~ VE-2 ~ B-0 B-6 NEW UST B-11 B-2 ' NEWUST ~,B- ' B-15 VE~-6 B-12 -4 ~ ~-3 B-13 SHOULDER ; B-14 ~ EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE SC~kfi: 1"= ~0 foot ~ ~W-a E2C, Inc. 5~40 District Blvd., 8uito 102 2~40 Bakemfield. California 93313 BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661)831-6906 13 Fax: (661) 831-6234 VE-1 - VE-4 RADII OF INFLUENCE I I B-6 LEGEND A ,~.~ S~,, B=,,~j L~.k3. MW-2 N~ I ~. ~ WellLocation .~ B-16 I I I STORAGE STORE I AREA ~ FENCE VE-1 I I I I B-5 I I'-' al I \ 'e v~,~ · .~ /?1 I & 8-12 ' 8-4 B aw ~' / ! sHoULDER 1 I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I SCALE: 1"= 30 feet '(i)' MW-3 MW-4 '~' .1.~2C/ ~_lZCo FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE I 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Te~epho.e: (661)831-69o6 1 4 I Fax: (661) 831-6234 VED-5 RADIUS OF INFLUENCE I LEGEND Bo$ ..~ YE-1 Yapor Extract[on I I ~ WellLocation B-16 FENCE overilan,q I VE-1 ua O VE-2 :~ B-9 B-6 I "' U. NEW ~ B-11 . VEm'UNES B'2 B-13 SHOULDER I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE I 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661)831-6906 1 5 I Fax: (661) 831-6234 VEM-6 RADIUS OF INFLUENCE I LEGEND · ,~1 ~,~ ~=~ MW-2 ~ ~ ~ I w-~ =,1 I I NEWUST IMW11 I B-11 I. VE~ L,.ES ~ ' I I B'2 I -i ~ ~B'8)I DISPENSER I ~ EAST BRUNDAGE ~NE ,, + aw3 aw~ + ~C/~C. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Fax: (661) 831-6234 AS WELLS RADII OF INFLUENCE Removable Cap I ~'~ -"" Well Box grouted -- in place 1 foot~"' Air Flow From Manifold J I ~ ~ Neat-Cement Grout I ! I WATE" ~7 TABLE o[ Bentonite Chips Approximately 126 feet bgs Lonestar #3 Sand or Equivalent I ~ - Flush Threaded 2 Inch I 3 feet Dia. PVC Blank I ~ Micro-Porous 2 feet Air Sparge Point I NOT TO SCALE E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE RGURE 5640 District Blvd,, Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Telephone: (661) 831-6906 1 7 Fax: (661) 831-6234 TYPICAL AS WELL DIAGRAM Project Number 1802JS01 May $1. 2001 TABLES Table 1 Preliminary Assessment Analytical Results Table 2 Site Characterization Soil Sample Analytical Results Table 3 Well MW-1 Groundwater Analytical Data E2C, /nc Tables Project Number 1802JS01 May 31, 2001 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FREEWAY MQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DATE · ETHYL TOTAL SAMPLE SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH SAMPLE ID TPHg BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES M3~E (fbg) (mc;l/k~l) (m~/kg (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (rog/kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8015(M) 8020 N/A REPORTING LIMIT 1 0 0.005 0.005 0.015 0.015 0.02 N/A 1 2/4/98 2 WEST TK-1 @2FT ND 0.016 0.033 ND 0.01 4.5 A Western End of Northern 6K UST 1 2/4/98 6 WEST TK-1 @6FT ND ND 0.013 ND 0.021 1.4 A 1 2/4/98 2 EAST TK-1 @2FT 230 0.035 1.3 0.94 7.1 4.7 A Eastern End of Northern 6K UST 1 2/4/98 6 EAST TK-1 @6FT 30,000 240 1,500 440 2,400 330 A 12/4/98 2 WEST'rK-2@2FT 1,100 0.29 13 7.5 48 13 A Western End of Southern 6K UST 1 2/4/98 6 WEST TK-2@6FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.24 A 1 2/4/98 2 EASTTK-2@2FT 41,000 2_,20- ........... ~_,4_0_~0 ............. .6__9~0 ................. _4_,00~0- ...... _4_1-0 ~. _ A Eastern End of Southern 6K UST 12/4/98 6 EAST TK-2@6FT 34,000 310 1,900 570 1,100 730 A 1 2 / 4 / 98 2 EAST TK-3 @2FT ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 A Eastern End of Soutnern 12K UST 1 2 / 4/98 6 EAST TK-3@ 6FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.11 A 12/4/98 2 MIDDLE TK-3@2FT ND ND 0.019 ND 0.024 5.2 A Center of Southern 12K UST 12/4/98 6 MIDDLE 'rK-3@6FT ND ND 0.013 ND 0.064 0.19 A 1 2/4/98 2 WEST TK-3@2FT ND 0.0059 0.015 ND ND 3.7 A Western End of Southern 12K UST 1 214198 6 WEST TK-3@6FT ND 0.012 0.091 0.043 0.33 6.2 A 1 2/4/98 2 NORTH TK-4@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.57 A Northern End of Eastern 12K UST 1 2/4/98 6 NORTH TK-4@6FT ND ND 0.007 ND ND 0.11 A 12/4/98 2 MIDDLE TK-4@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.44 A Center of Eastern 12K UST 12/4/98 6 MIDDLE TK-4@6FT ND 0.006 0.039 0.017 0.12 3.7 A 1 2/4/98 2 SOUTH TK-4@2FT __ N~D ............. N~D ............ ~ND~ ........... _N~D ...... .0__0_2ff. ........ ]___3 ..... A Southern End of Eastern 12K UST 12/4/98 6 SOUTH TK-4@6FT ND ND 0,01 ND 17 1.9 A 12/4/98 2 NORTH TK-5@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 0,74 A Northern End of Western 12K UST 1 2/5/98 6 NORTH TK-5@6FT ND ND 0.015 ND 0.033 0.5 A 1 2/6/98 2 MIDDLE TK-5@2FT ND 0.0053 0.011 ND ND 4.7 A Center of Western 12K UST 1 2/4/98 6 MIDDLE TK-5@6FT ND 0.0057 0.013 ND ND 1,300 A 1 2/4/98 2 SOUTH TK-5@2FT ........ N~D ................. N~D ....... 0_._0__!.5- ............ _N.D- ............... _N_D_ ....... ~. '~ .... Southern End of Western 12K UST 1 2/4/98 6 SOUTH TK-5@6FT ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 A 12/4/98 2 D-1 @ 2FT ND .... ~0:_02__ .......... _N_p ........... _ND_ ............. 0~._0-2_~ ......... _0..4_! i...._A Northeastern Dispenser 12/4/98 6 D-1 @ 6FT 100 0.033 1.1 0.95 5.1 2.1 A 12/4/98 2 D-2 @ 2FT 420 10 21 S 69 110 A North Central Dispenser - -i~'4~'~8 ...... ~- ..... D-2 @ 6FT 6,600 ..... 'i~ ......... ~-~)- ......... 1-'30 ................. 5-~-0 ......... ~:i"~ ...... A '- Northwestern Dispenser __.1_2~/!/~98- .......2~ ..... D-3 @ 2FT __ 1~4,_000 ........ _6._~ ..... 70~0_ .......... _23~0 ................ 1.,_3_0_0 ....... _72-__0. 1 2/4/98 6 D-3 @ 6FT 20,000 98 870 320 1,500 660 A 12/4/98 2 D-4 @ 2FT 15,000 .... _3._2_ ............ _6_60 ......... ~_30_ ......... _1_,2__0_~ ........ ~._2._ ......... A Southeastern Dispenser 12/4/98 6 D-4 @ 6FT 19,000 42 700 250 1;900 88 A 1 2/4/98 2 D-5 @ 2FT 29,000 _1_1_0 ......... ~_,2-0_0_ ...... _37__0 ................ _2_,.6__0_.0_ ...... !.5_0 .... _A South Central Dispenser 12/4/98 6 D-5 @ 6FT 49,000 370 3,100 830 4,800 420 A 1 2/4/98 2 D-6 @ 2FT 60,000 ...... ~24_0_ ...... 2,~8_0._0_ ........... .9_1~0 ........... _5__70~ .......... _2_ 5_0 ........ _A_ ..... Southwestern Dispenser ............................ 1 2/4/98 6 D-6 @ 6FT 20,000 43 710 260 2,000 87 A REF = Report Reference. N/A = Not applicable. NE) = Not detected A = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc's, current report. E2C, Inc. Table 1-I Project Number JSO 1 May 3 I, 2001 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF SITE ASSESSMENT SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA TPHg BENZENE TOLUENE .............................................................. BORING ID SAMPLED DEPTH SAMPLE ID .................................................................................................... .B...E..~..N...E. ........... ~..E.N...E...S.. ................................... (fb~l) (rog/Kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8015(U) 8020 REPORTING LIMIT 0.5 0.005 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.05 1 5 B2-15 106 2.90 5.42 1.96 5.01 6.9 25 B2-25 7.0 0.40 0.51 0.26 0.55 1.96 B-2 4/12/01 35 B2-35 6.9 0.32 0.31 0.15 0.29 1.53 40 B2-40 3,094 6.42 11.63 5.96 13.77 4.8 20 B3-20 1.03 0.06 0.08 ND 0.04 0.77 30 B3-30 23.8 1.58 4.86 2.19 4.94 11.3 B-3 4/11/01 ......................................................................................................................................... ........ 3_.5_- ............... B~3-35 ...... 3;_32~5 ............. 8.67_ ...... 5.89 9.32 ._9._.5._8- .......... 9_._.8 50 B3-50 3,312 10.82 8.92 9.18 15.09 2.6 1 5 B4-15 9.6 1.00 3.23 0.65 2.62 5.58 B-4 4/1 0/01 3 5 B4-35 692 4.47 5.17 5.33 7.75 14.1 45 B4-45 3,186 5.95 3.92 9.09 17.6 6.4.9 ......... 2~0 ..................... B_5-20 ...... 6_,,1_ 1_8_ .......... 9.~1 ............. 6.3 ................. 7__.1-- ...... _2_4- .......... 1 _8 ..... _3_0_ ..... B5-30_ .................. 3 ,_9_.-7. 8_ ................. __6_ ._~_ ................ 3.~8_ ........... 6.~2_ .............. ! ! ........ 9_-..0 ........... 4_0~ .... B5-40 ...... 4_,_! 2_2 ............. !_o_ ................. 1_o_ ............. !_! .................... !. .................. .3_. _8. ...... ........... 5~5 ........ B5-5_5_ .............. _2_ . ,_ 3_ _3~5 ............... ~1_4 ................. 1__2 ...... _7_;5_ ....... 11 .............. 1._~ ........ B-5 4/9/01 65 B5-65 <0.5 0.039 0.136 0.018 0.074 0.07 7 5 B5-75 <0.5 0.079 0.167 0.05 0.155 0.093 90 B5-90 <0.5 0.010 0.027 ND ND ND 1 00 B5-100 1.36 0.021 0.143 0.092 0.221 0.084 1 05 B5-105 <0.5 0.008 0.132 0.098 0.225 ND ...... !__0_ ...........B 6-10 ..... ._2,_2__.7_ 6_ .. 6.02 _ 3.2_3_ ........... 5_. _2__5 ............ 9.8_9. ............!_~._9 .... 30 B6-30 1 96 4.50 7.35 4.15 7.51 4.3 45 B6-45 247 4.59 7.85 4.72 8.52 3.7 50 B6-50 10.7 2.60 4.52 1.01 2.97 1.7 B-6 4/11/01 60 B6-60 10.7 1.49 2.19 0.27 0.98 1 ..... 65-- .............. B 6:_6_5- .................... _3..__3_ ............. _0_._1_ 9 ......... ~0-._2__8 ................. 0_0_5- ............... _0_:_2? ............... O. 2_4. ! ...... _75-- ......... _B6-~7_5 ............... _6~_8.?_ ...................... 0.~8__3 .... 3.06 ..... 9.._7~ ..........._2.5-_6 ..........._o._..6~ ...... 80 B6-80 3.95 0.09 0.32 0.05 0.19 0.08 9 0 B6-90 6.63 0.12 0.38 0.07 0.27 ND E2C, Inc. Table 2-2 Project Number JS01 May 31, 2001 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF SITE ASSESSMENT SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DATE DEPTH TPHg BENZENE TOLUENE ...................... MTBE BOR,N ,D SAMPLED SAM 'LE,D ........................................................................................................ ............ .................................... (fbi) (mg/Kg) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8015(M) 8020 REPORTING LIMIT 0.5 0.005 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.05 30.5 B8-30.5 689 6.00 8.79 6.45 13.7 5.6 60.5 B8-60.5 31 2 5.39 8.74 4.99 9.1 3.6 !_0.~.._ 5_ ........... B_ 8_ _-_1_ .C)_ 0 .~5 ............... 7~99 ....................... 2_._3~ ......... _4.._2_9_ ............. ~ . 1~9~ ....... 3_:._49_ .............. _1:.~3 110.5 B8-110.5 3.6 0.192 0.231 0.119 0.235 0.669 B-8 4/1 7/01 ............................................................................................................................................. 120.5 B8-120.5 <0.5 0.007 0.022 ND ND ND 125.5 B8-125.5 1.6 0.086 0.166 0.035 0.139 0.245 130.5 B8-130.5 0.65 0.034 0.086 0.011 0.049 0.188 135.5 B8-135.5 <0.5 0.01 0.04 ND 0.03 0.058 25 B9-25 10.6 1.09 3.33 0.53 1.81 2.3 4111/01 40 B9-40 6.4 0.35 2.11 0.35 1.16 0.91 55 B9-55 1 4 1.94 3.45 0.47 1.81 2.6 60 B9-60 1 4 1.54 3.45 0.48 1.71 5.7 4/1 2/01 70 B9-70 <0.5 0.008 0.023 ND 0.011 ND 75 B9-75 ND ND ND ND . ND ND 4/1 6/01 35.5 B11-35.5 <0.5 ND 0.10 ND ND 0.053 .... 4_._0.:.5_ .............. B_.!..._1...-__4__0.__5- ............. _0.~7_5_ ..................... 0.~0~07 _ ._ 0.94_7_ ......... ~0_.0.1~5 ............... 0..Q5_7__ 50.5 Bll-50.5 0.56 0.026 0.04 ND 0.032 0.214 B.11 ................................................................................................................................................. 4/17/01 60.5 B11-60.5 <0.5 ND 0.012 ND ND ND 65.5 B11-65.5 1.52 0.01 0.058 0.033 0 0.051 70.5 B11-70.5 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 0 B12-10 96 2.76 6.54 3.39 6.42 3.48 B-12 4/10/01 ....... [_5. ...... , ...... B!2;2_5_ .............. 7__7_ ............... 2__._95 ......... 6:!.._9 .......... ~_._~6 ......... .6_.__2_2- ....... 40 B12-40 2,557.00 6.08 5.48 5.42 8.04 4.16 E2C, Inc. Table 2-3 Project Number JS01 May 31, 2001 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF SITE ASSESSMENT SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DATE DEP~t TPHg BENZENE TOLUENE ...... ~~ ........... ~'1~' ..... MTB BORING ID SAMPLED SAMPLE ID ................................................................................................................................................................................................. (fbi) (mg/Kg) EPA ANAL~ICAL METHOD 8015(M) 8020 REPOR~NG LIU~ 0.5 0.005 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.05 30 B13-30 95 3.40 6.97 3.49 6.22 ND 35 B13-35 211 4.08 7.89 4.69 7.79 1.35 40 B13-40 5.3 0.37 1.64 0.33 1.19 0.79 B-13 4/1 0/01 45 B13-45 36 2.19 5.22 1.27 3.78 0.29 50 B13-50 5.6 0.26 1.53 0.34 1.28 0.73 55 B13-55 14.6 2.23 4.19 1.28 3.89 1.71 60 B13-60 3.8 0.35 1.15 0,19 0.70 0.56 30 B14-30 0.51 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.10 4 0 B14-40 16.7 0.78 4.35 1.67 4.16 0.91 B-14 4/11/01 45 B14-45 5.9 0.28 1.82 0.51 1.87 0.91 55 B14-55 60 B15-60 ND ND ND ND ND ND 20 B15-20 107 1.47 5.38 2.63 5.09 2.8 30 B15-30 32 0.35 2.85 0.76 2.53 4.1 B-15 4/1 2/01 40 B15-40 138 1.66 5.37 3.33 6.64 3.1 50 B15-55 342 4.45 8.32 5.22 -~ 9.48 1.95 25.5 B16-25.5 4.8 0.028 0.195 0.096 0.356 ND 40.5 B16-40.5 7.1 0.037 0.32 0.147 0.583 ND B-16 4/1 6/01 45.5 B16-45.5 11.7 0.079 0.716 0.252 0.736 ND 60.5 B16-60.5 1.5 0.032 0.099 0.033 0.117 ND 70.5 B16-70.5 ND ND ND ND ND ND 35 B18-35 14.8 1.15 .... l~p ..... 0.18 ...... 0-~ ...... 8.2 55 B-18-55 17.7 1.76 2.91 0.27 0.96 0.66 Notes: Only those samples that were analyzed are listed in this table REF = Repo~ Reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected at or above method detection limits A = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc's, current repo~. E2C, Inc. Table 2-4 I Project Number 1802JS01 May 31, 2001 I TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS I Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California IEthylbenzene Total Xylenes I MTBE WelIID Sample Date ~ Benzene J. TolueneI ...... I ..... I TPHg #g/L 95 107 60 122 2,049 295 4/27/01 96 129 71 i39 2,108 331 I MW-1 GRAB 4/18/0~ 531 451 346 651 4,980 1,570 I Notes: Results in micrograms per liter (pg/I) = parts per billion (ppb) Analytical Methods: BTEX and MTBE - EPA 5030/8021B; TPHg by EPA Method 5035/8015M Method Detection Limits: Benzene and Toluene - 0.5 pg/I, Ethylbenzene and Xylenes -'1.0 #g/I, TPHg and I - pg/I, - pga TPHd 50 MTBE 5 ND - Not Detected at or above Method Detection Limit I MTBE = Methyl tertiary butyl ehter TPHg - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline GRAB - Water Sample I Note: For 4/27/01, Sample labeled MW-8 is the sample and MW-9 is a duplicate sample on Chain-of-Custody I I I E2C,/nc Table 3-5 Pro_iect Number 1802J$01 May Sf , 2001 APPENDICES Appendix A BFD March 30, 1999 Letter Appendix B BFD February26, 2001 Letter Appendix C Workplan Site Plan with Proposed Boring Locations Appendix D Boring Logs for Soil Borings & Well MW-1 Appendix E MW-1 Purge Data Sheet-April 27, 2001 Appendix F Analytical Laboratory Data Sheets & Chains-of-Custody Appendix G VE Well As-Built Diagrams Appendix H Site Safety Plan E2C, Inc Appendices ! Project Number 1802J$07 May $1. 2001 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ~ APPENDIX A I Appendix A BFD March 30, 1999 Letter I E~C, Inc Appendix A March 30, I999 Lloyd Childers 2030 East Brun,-lag~ Lane Bakersfield, CA 93307 F~R-g CHIEF ~o,~F~.~ RE: Laborat.:)~' resui~.~ from Ixelmainay site assessmem conducted a: th= Freeway Liquor Store, 2030 East Bmndage Lane. ,~'nu,'nv~ smv~c~s Permit ~'"BR-0231 210~ 'N' $1¢0~ · VOICE (805) 32~-3941 Fax (~os) 39~-la4e Dear lvlr. Chi!ders: SUPPRES.$1DN SERVICES :~o~ 'H' S~c Upon review of the recently submitted laboratory results from your vc~ce (8os)a2¢<,4~ facility, this office has delermLr!ed that the extent of the contamination ~x~.:oos)a~-~ plume, associated wi~ the Freeway Liquor Store underground storage ..~-v~mo. s~c~ tanks previously lo,ted ca your prop~', h~ not been adequately defined. 1715 Ch~r A~. 8ak~fleld, ~ 9~1 vo,c~os)3:~3os~ This o~ce req,ai~es (in accord~ce wi~ Chapter 6.7 of F~t~5)~o Califomm Healti~ a~d Safe~ Code ~d Chapter 16, Title 23 of ~e euvi~o,~ s~cEs California Code of Repletion) ~a[ ~er assessment be done m define 1715 Cb~rA-,. tl~e vertical and hofizon~ extent of ~e coem~afion vlume. VOICE (8e$) F~ (835) Please sub.fit a work p1~n ~or ~er ~essment, to ti]is office, ~u~u~ ~as~ou wi~ 30 ~ys from receipt of ~[s letter. The workpl~ should follow ~2~e~. guidelines fom~d ~: A~v~ndi~ A -~.eoo'as.~ri - Regional Board Staff vo~c~(~os)a~s~7 Reco~endaious for Pr~.[jminar~ ev~tmtion and F~ (~s)3,,-~e: ~nderground l~ ot:~; July 6. 1990. Addifiomlly. be ~v~sed ~at oversight cost.for ~is prQect will be billed to you at a rate of S75.00 per I~our. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) J26-3979. SMcerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Em'iron:entel Sec'ices ~H/dlm Project Number 1802,1,?,01 May 3 I. 2001 APPENDIX B Appendix B BFD February 26, 2001 Letter E2C, Inc Appendix B RECEIVED 2 8 001 February 26, 2001 Mr. Phillip Goalwin, R.G. F,RE C.,EF Environmental/Engineering Consultants RON FRAZE 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Bakersfield, Ca 9331 3 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE(661)326-3941 RE: Site Characterization Work Plan for Freeway Liquor FAX (661) 395-1349 Store, 2140 East Brundage Lane (aka 2030 East SUPPRESSION SERVICES Brundage Lane). 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 Dear Mr. Goalwin: FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES This is to notify you that the work plan for the above 1716Choster^ve. stated address is satisfactory. Please give this office 5 Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661)326-3951 working days notice prior to the commencement of work. FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTALSERVlCES Please be advised that any work done that is not 1715ChesterAve. under direct this office will not be performed oversight by Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 accepted, unless previously approved. FAX (661)326-0576 TRAINING D,V,S,O. If yOU have any questions, please call me at (661) 326- 5642 Victor Ave. 3979. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 Sincerely, --' Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services HHW/dlm cc: L. Childers S:\USTFORMS\UST.L3 Project Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2001 APPENDIX C Appendix C Workplan Site Plan with Proposed Boring Locations /nc Appendix C FENCE _ STORE FORMER 12,00-GALLON ~:. Z ~ z NORTH'rK-S O ~ FORMER ~ O NORTH TK-4 i 6,000-GALLON _. Z GASOLINE USTs ri' B-1 CANOPY U.I MIDDLE TK-5. MIDDLE TK-4 .~ o el / Z WE~T TK-1 EAST TK-1 B-11 I° ° I~' B'6 ~ [= o, e ::) a-2 I O souT. T.-. · ' o De I SOUT.~.~ 0 I 0 I ~-~ 0 1 B-7 e~DISPENSER B-8 ISLANDS WEST TK-3 MIDDLE TK-3 EAST TK-3 135 FORMER - 12,00 ^LLON GASOLINE UST B-4 LOCATIONS S C A L E ONE INCH = 20 FEET ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I ~2C~1_11c. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2030 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA I Bakersfield, California 93313 3 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 PROPOSED BORING LOCATIONS Fax: (661) 831-6234 I I Prqiect Number 1802JS01 May 31. 2QQI ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ~ APPENDIX D i Appendix D Boring Logs for Soil Borings & Well MW-1 ! ! ! ! ! ! I EeC, Inc Appendix D FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · '" ~'DATE Field, loCation of boring: PROJECT No. ~ :BORING No. ~Hole dia. ~ ~ ~ ~ Water level ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Time EE ~ ~ DESCRIPTION , / ~ ~ / ,- . ~ ~ . , ~ i,-I.~ REMARKS: FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: , BORING No. g~,~-t~,._~+ :,4 .5,,,,I-L~,--.. 9,.,~.~ .~'ROJECT,O.cL,~N.r. '~'"'-"~'"~ ':- .I_.' ",~DATE ~/,,),',, -- 3 LOCATION Sheet Drilling method ~~ - '/ Hole dia. .~ ~ ~' Water level '~ _e ~ ~ = e ~ ~ Time _ . ~ ~ e -- ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I ~o~ FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: PROJECT No, DATE '-~/~_/'/b//! BORING No. Casing installation data Hole dia. Water level ~ = [~ E E ~ ~ ' ~d Time OE~ , ~ DESCRIPTION REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of boring: ~ 5//io ~ o i BORING NO. LOOATION J ~ Sheet ~ ~ LO~GEOBYB,JJ ~'~ DRILLERi~~'~ - Of ~ ~ ' Hole dia. Water I~vel ~ ~ E E ~ ~ Date & DESCRIPTION REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of boring: ' PROJECT No. DATE y//6/ol BORING No. LOCATION I Sheet.. ~' LOGGED BY' ,,~'il ~"f"-~ DRILLER ~)"~"~'"' of ~" Casing installation data ' ff Drilling method ~., ~ ~, ~ ~ ~'~'- ~ ~ ..... ~ Hole dia. Water level ' ~ ~ Time · ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION ~ ~ REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: ' PROJECT No. DATE q/~/o! BORING No. D-~-- ~,~L oq .~.,.~,.,..., CUE,T F-~.,.,.,.~ /.,., .o,~,'~ -- .~-5'- 0,,,~¢,,/>.....,'~1.,~ LOCATION Z!clO [::.~,w,,~,~.._ ( . Sheet..{. LOGGED BYL~?'~ r~r~,"~.DRILLER~ u~e~ . of 3 ~~ ~,~ ~Or,~ ~ Casinglnstallationdata ~~. ~ ~ Hole dia. Water level ~ ~ ~ · · ~ = · ~ 'Time o ~ ~ = = ~ ~ = ~ Date ~ ~ ~ ~ ~//; ~ DESCRIPTION ~ ... ' ~ l " -i -/ · ~l,~//c ~ ~g~ ~ ~', ,,,~ ,'z,,'~u ~,~ .,~ 41,o REMARKS: l FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: - PROJECT No. DATE ~/~'/o/ BORING No. LOCATION ~ Sheet ~ ~ Water level ~ Time ~ ~ DESCRIPTION I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG .' ..... Field location of boring: PROJECT No. ~_ DATE y/~h( BORING No. ~-~ ~,,,-/o.~ ~.~--~.~.~ c~,~ ~.? ~,;.~., '5~' LOGGEDBY~:(I~~ DRILLER~ of ~ Casing installation data Hole dla, Water level ~ e~ ~ ~ E~ ...... Date FIELD EXPLORATORY 3ORING LOG Field location of boring: ~PROJECT No. DATE ~t/lll °l BORING No. LOCATION I Sheet LOGGED BY ~ DRILLER C~ ~,~ of Drilling method ~-~o[\°w .~r,.~ A,,-5,---- ~ ~ '~ _ 5~ ~ ~. ~ Hole dia. Water level ~ ~ ~e. ~° ~ =_ ~e ~d ~ ~ Time ~ Date ~ DESORIPTION i REMARKS: · FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: .~PROJECT No, ,. DATE ~/J!//01 _ I BORING No, LOCATION .- Sheet LOGGED BY~; II Casing installation data ~ Hole dia. ~ Water level ~ DESCRIPTION f FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: " ,, PROJECT No. - DATE _~ / II ~ o ~_ BORING No. LOGGED By Casing installation data Drilling method ~Hote dla, ~ ~  ~ ~ ~ ~d Time ~/~. ~ ~ ~ ~z ~ ~ ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: '~PROJECT No. DATE '~//~/O I BORING No. Casing installation data Drilling method Hole dia. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ Time ~ EE ~ E ~E~ ~ ~ ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION REMARKS: FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING lOG. Field location of boring: -:PROJECT _j~ DATE y/'~,/OI BORING. No. Casing ins[alla~ion data ; ~ ~ ~ Water level ~ = ~ Date ~ D~SCRIPTION I ,_/ ~ . - i REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of boring: 'PROJECT No. DATE ~//7,{~- ( 'BORING No. LOCATION e LOGGEDBY~:tt(--°oF~"" DRILLER ~uib~'~ Of ~ Casing installation data Drilling method Hole dia. ~ · Water level ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Time ~ - ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION I I I REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY 3ORING LOG Field location of boring: 'PROJECT No,., DATE L{ [1"//~( BORING No, LOCATION Sheet Casing installation data " Hole dia. Water level ~ _ ~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG - Field location of borin_.Lg:. ~] BORING .~o. Casinalnstallationdata C~'3 ~ ~or ~ ~ ~ Hole die, ; ~ ~ Water level ~ DESCRIPTION ~o 0 8o ~ FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: .PROJECT No.. DATE ~1 I-/..Io ( BORING No. LOCATION ,,,)~ Sheet 'Z. LOGGED BY DRILLER ~"~ of Casing installation data Drilling method [)' ~./ ~T ~ ~ ~ Water level 3 ~ Time e Date ~ ~ ~ ~ DESCRIPTION t t /"~ I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: PROJECTNo. DATE ~{/[ 7/0/~ BORING Ho. ; ~ ~ ~ Water level j ~ DESCRIPTION REMARKS: FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: ' PROJECT.No. DATE q I1-1 ! o I aORING LOCATION ~' Sheet LOGGEDBY ~:{~ ~ DRILLER ~~ of Casing installation data Hole dla. ~ Water level , E m ~ e e ~ = e ~]~ Time m DESCRIPTION I REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: "PROJECT No. DATE L.//0//Gl BORING No. LOCATION ' 'J - t ' Sheet _ Casing installation data G ~ ~ ~5 ~ ~ Drllllngmethod I~,[~ ~c~ ~Hole;dla. ~ 5~,,,~ ~;CQ ~ Water level ; ~ ~ ~ ~ · ~ Time ~ DESCRIPTION " : I ~ _ ~,' / i I ~mc~ REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG ' Field location of boring: 'PROJECT No. DATE V/~'O /o / BORING No. LOCATION S ~5~~ 5~'~' LOGGED By ~'{~ ~ DRILLER ~ of, ~,~,'~ ~~,~..~-- ~-,~ ~,~. Drilling method Holl -Hole dia. B Water level E ~ %~ ~ ~ d Time ~ DESCRIPTION ....... ~C S" i,~ , Lo.o · REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: ', PROJECT No. DATE q ilo{ Or 'BORING No LOCATION,, Sheet Casing installation data ~ Hole die, m = ~ Waterlevel, - ~m mZ ~ ~ =~ Date ~ DESCRIPTION / REMARKS: FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: ~1~' ~PROJECT N . , DATE /~///(/O/ BORING No. LOGGED BY~;i I l~ DRILLER Casing installation data · .J Hole dia. p ~ ~ ~ Water level · Date ~ DESCRIPTION FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: ,PROJECT No. DATE ~ / II/~[_ BORING No. Casing installation data Drilling method Hole dia. Water level , ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ ~ Time ~ Date I ~ DESCRIPTION _ . ~ '- ~ /~// / ,/ ~ , ,, REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG · Field location of boring: , PROJECT No, . DATE 1'/i//"Z/O/_ BORING No. ..... LOGGED By%J\t (-ob,..--.... DRILLER ~,~o.~.~ of ~ ~ Water level ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ = ~ ~ Time · - ~ Date = DESCRIPTION ..... Y~ ~C C~ ,~' ¢:l~&~_~Z~ ~z ~-~ ..o - ' ~:o  /(/f~ ,, ~ 0 ~0 5~ , _ / . I I. , ~' q~ ~' ''"":': 5 I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: =PROJECTN..~. ~ DATE ~]/"L [ O[ BORING No.// LocATION ~-~ ! -r Sheet. _ '~' ~o;~.,~1,~ Casing installation data method A. ~ Hole dla. ~ Water level E ~ ~ e ~ ~ e ~3~ Time . ~ Dato ~ DESCRIPTION ~/~r:¢ ~.r~.~-. 4~>-,- ~,,z~_ ~ FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG II Field location of boring: PROJECTNo. ~/i{] OI @OR,NG No. ~k LOCATION ~ .¼~. Sheet__L_ ~ g ~ = ~ Date ~ ~ DESCRIPTION ,~ I REMARKS: .~,;'.~LD EXPLORATORY BOILING LOG Fie~d location of boring: PROJECT No. DATE k//I t~ / 0 I BORING No. I ~'~ ;~ ~'~ "' LOCATIO~ ~ . I' Sheet.,, ~ I Casing bstallation data Drilling method ~olo dia. ~ ~ ~ Water level I ~E - = Time EE ~ E CE · ~ DESCRIPTION . ~ J m 1 i REMARKS: I FIELD EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Field location of boring: PROJECT .~. DATE ~i~'~/e I BOR,NG ' LOCATION [ Sheet Casing installation d~ta ~ Da~e ~ DESCRIPTION ;~'~-- i . REMARKS: I Project Number 1~02JS01 May 31. 2001 ! I I I '1 ,! ! ~ APPENDIX E I Appendix E MW-1 Purge Data Sheet- April 27, 2001 I I I I I I I I E~C, Inc Appendix E m I I WATED.R QUAL.~ SAMPLING RECORD Groundwater ScientJsts: EnvironmentalConsultan[$' AN WELL DEVELOPMENT DATA 5840 Di$=,dct B~vd Suh'e 102 Etakers,qeld, CA 93313 I ,SAMCLE ~O OR WELt. NO.: ~ -- t~ DEPTH TO W^TER: PROJECT NO.: I ~C) 7... ~f/..O ( TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL:, I PROJECT NA,ME; ~~ ~_~,~ ~ WELL DIAMETER: DATE: ~. I%~f .~ ~ CASING VOLUME: I SAMPLEO BY: ~¢~ METHOD OS PURGING: PURGE CHARACTERISTICS TEMP pH SEC SAMPLE REMARKS I TIME INTA,KE RATE CUM. VOL WELL VOL (F=) (UNITS) (.~mhos/ CONTROL. DEPTH (GPM) (GAL) PUMPED cra) NO. (COLOR, TURBIOITY~ >H CALIBFIATION / STANDARDIZED BUFFER SOLUTION j pH 4.01 j pH 7.0 J pH I0.0 j ~,'/.~:l Capaci',y: 2' - 0.1832 gaUon/linear hN'STRU,MENT READING J J I J 6' - 1.4538 ~;allon,qinear fo SPeCIfIC EL~CT~ILCAL CONDUC~AHCE · CALIBRATIO~I / STANOAROIZATIOH KCLSOLUTIObI~MHOS/C&I~2SC' J 74 J 718 j 1413 J 6~53 I 5~3~0 I TEM~ F' I j J J J INSTRgME~;T READING j J j SA).t~LEOAT: j[y,~ ~. FINAL DEPTH TO WATE~: J~, [~ ~. ~CASI,~OVOLUb, IES=~.g~ GALS. I Pro_iect Number 1802J$01 Ma.v 31, 2001 APPENDIX F Soil Analytical Data Sheets & Chain-of-Custody I MW-1 Analytical Laboratory Data Sheet & Chain-of-Custody I E~C, Inc Appendix F I Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/10/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/10/01 ~TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sample #: 2K1-535 2K1-536 2K1-528 2K1-533 2K1-530 2K1-526 2K1-519 I)L rog/Kg Date Sampled: 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 Sample Description: BS-100 B5-105 B5-65 B5-90 B5-75 B5-55 B5-20 Benzene 0.021 0.008 0.039 0.010~ 0.079 14 9.1 0.005 Toluene 0.143 0.132 0.136 0.027 0.167 12 6.3 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.092 0.098 0.018 ND . 0.050 7.5 7.1 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.221 0.225 0.074 ND 0.155 11 24 0.010 TPR Gasoline 1.36 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 2,335 6,118 0.5 TPlt Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 0.084 ND 0.070 ND 0.093 13 18 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 86 103 106 94 107 105 107 Sample #: 2K1-521 2K1-523 Date Sampled: 4/9/01 4/9/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B5-30 B540 Benzene 6.7 10 0.005 Toluene 3.8 10 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 6.2 11 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 11 14 0.010 TPH Gasoline 3,978 4,122 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA 0.5 MTBE 9.0 3.8 0.05 Su,,rrogate Recovery % 98 104 , Sample #: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPIt Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % ~ DL = Detection Limit ~d ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available · ' I I Halcyon Laboratories, ]:nc. Laboratory Report i Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors i 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/11/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/12/01 I .TPH Gas by EPA 8015M mg/Kg Units: Sample #: 2K1-538 2K1-542 2K1-544 2K1-546 2K1-549 2K1-552 2K1-558 I Date Sampled: 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 ' 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 DL mg/Kg Sample Description: B4-15 B4-35 B4-45 B12-10 B12-25 B12-40 B13-30 Benzene 1.00 4.47 5.95 2.76 2.94 6.08 3.40 0.005 I Toluene 3.23 5.17 3.92 6.54 6.19 5.48 6.97 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.65 5.33 9.09 3.39 3.36 5.42 3.49 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 2.62 7.75 17.6 6.42 6.22 8.04 6.22 0.010 I TPH Gasoline 9.6 692 3,186 96 77 2,557 95 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 5.58 14.1 6.49 3.48 2.88 4.16 ND 0.05 I Surrogate Recovery % 108 109 110 108 109 110 102 Sample #: 2K1-559 2K1-560 2K1-561 2K1-562 2K1-563 2K1-564 Date Sampled: 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 DL mgfKg I Sample Description: B13-35 B13-40 B13-45 B13-50 B13-55 B13-60 Benzene 4.08 0.37 2.19 0.26 2.23 0.35 0.005 Toluene 7.89 1.64 5.22 1.53 4.19 1.15 0.010 I Ethyl Benzene 4.69 0.33 1.27 0.34 1.28 0.19 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 7.79 1.19 3.78 1.28 3.89 0.70 0.010 TPH Gasoline 211 5.3 36 5.6 14.6 3.8 0.5 I TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 1.35 0.79 0.29 0.73 1.71 0.56 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 88 101 106 107 109 107 I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg Sample Description: · Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.0 I0 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 I m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 I MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % ~ IDL = Detccti°n Limit ~~ ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~ Laboratory Manager: rew J. ~c---'Ear~... I Halcyon Laboratories Znc. Laboratory Report i Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors i 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper I TESTS: MTBE by. EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/13/01 i BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/16/01 .TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sample #: 2K1-568 2K1-570 2K1-571 2K1-574 2K1-580 2K1-582 2K1-583 I Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 rog/Kg Date IDL Sample Description: B3-20 B3-30 B3-35 B3-50 B14-30 B1440 B1445 Benzene 0.06 1.58. 8.67 10.82 0.04 0.78 0.28 0.005 I 4.86 5.89 8.92 0.03 4.35 1.82 0.010 Toluene 0.08 Ethyl Benzene ND 2.19 9.32 9.18 0.01 1.67 0.51 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.04 4.94 9.58 15.09 0.01 4.16 1.87 0.010 I TPIt Gasoline 1.03 23.8 3,325 3,312 0.51 16.7 5.9 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 0.77 11.3 9.8 2.6 0.10 0.91 0.91 0.05 I Surrogate Recovery % 109 93 104 96 115 97 105 Sample#: 2K1-585 2K1-586 2K1-588 2K1-592 2K1-595 2K1-596 2K1-598 Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 DL rog/Kg I B14-55 B14-60 B6-10 B6-30 B6-45 B6-50 B6-60 Sample Description: Benzene 0.15 ND 6.02 4.50 4.59 2.60 1.49 0.005 Toluene 0.13 ND 3.23 7.35 7.85 4.52 2.19 0.010 I Benzene 0.02 ND 5.25 4.15 4.72 1.01 0.27 0.010 Ethyl m,p,o Xylenes 0.07 ND 9.89 7.51 8.52 2.97 0.98 0.010 TPH Gasoline 1.09 ND 2,276 196 247 10.7 10.7 0.5 I TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE ND ND 17.9 4.3 3.7 1.7 1.0 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 109 102 102 99 101 111 89 I Sample #: 2K1-599 2K1-601 2K1-6~2 2K1-604 Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B6-65 B6-75 B6-80 B6-90 I Benzene 0.10 0.83 0.09 0.12 0.005 Toluene 0.28 3.06 0.32 0.38 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.05 0.73 0.05 0.07 0.010 I m,p,o Xylenes 0.20 2.56 0.19 0.27 0.010 TPIt Gasoline 3.30 6.84 3.95 6.63 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA 0.5 I MTBE 0.241 0.64 0.08 ND 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 112 106 97 93 ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~ Laboratory Manager: Drew J. Picard Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT FaC, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/14/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/16/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sample #: 2K1-609 2K1-612 2K1-615 2KI-616 2K1-618 2K1-619 2K1-622 Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B9-25 B9-40 B9-55 B9-60 B9-70 B9-75 B2-15 Benzene 1.09 0.35 1.94 1.54 0.008 ND 2.90 0.005 Toluene 3.33 2.11 3.45 3.45 0.023 ND 5.42 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.53 0.35 0.47 0.48 ND ND 1.96 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 1.81 1.16 1.81 1.71 0.011 ND 5.01 0.010 Gasoline 10.6 6.4 14 14 <0.5 ND 106 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 !MTBE 2.3 0.91 2.6 5.7 ND ND 6.9 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 84 84 105 109 98 103 106 Sample #: 2K1-624 2K1-626 2K1-627 2K1-631 2K1-633 2K1-635 2K1-638 Date Smnpled: 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 IlL rog/Kg Sample Description: B2-25 B2-35 B240 B15-20 B15-30 B1540 B15-55 Benzene 0.40 0.32 6.42 1.47 0.35 1.66 4.45 0.005 Toluene 0.51 0.31 11.63 5.38 2.85 5.37 8.32 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.26 0.15 5.96 2.63 0.76 3.33 5.22 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.55 0.29 13.77 5.09 2.53 6.64 9.48 0.010 l'Pit Gasoline 7.0 6.9 3,094 107 32 138.0 342.0 0.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 TPlt Diesel iMTBE 1.96 1.53 4.8 2.8 4.1 3.1 1.95 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 102 96 106 98 111 95 99 iSample #: ~Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg .Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 iToluene 0.0 I0 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 Xylenes 0.010 m,p,o TPlt Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detection Limit ~~~.~ ~.~ ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA Result not available - Laboratory Manager: Drew J. Picar~}~....~. Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT EzC, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/17/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/17/01 .TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sample ti: 2K1-680 2K1-661 2K1-664 2K1-665 2K1-668 2K1-670 Date 4/16/01 4/16/01 4/16/01 4/16/01 4/16/01 4/16/01 DL Sampled: rog/Kg Sample Description: Bll-35.5 B16-25.5 B16-40.5 B1645.5 B16-60.5 B16-70.5 Benzene ND 0.028 0.037 0.079 0.032 ND 0.005 Toluene 0.010 0.195 0.32 0.716 0.099 ND 0.010 Ethyl Benzene ND 0.096 0.147 0.252 0.033 ND 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes ND 0.356 0.583 0.736 0.117 ND 0.010 TPH Gasoline <0.5 4.8 7.1 11.7 1.5 ND 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 0.053 ND ND ND ND ND 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 118 111 108 107 100 91, Sample #: Date Sampled: DL rog/Kg Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Benzene 0.010 Ethyl m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % Sample ti: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at' given DL NA - Result not available ~ Laboratory Manage : Dew J. I Halo/on Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Bird, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/18/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/19/01 TPH Gas EPA 8015M Units: mg/rg Sample #: 2K1-681 2K1-683 2K1-685 2K1-686 2K1-687 2K1-692 2K1-698 Date Sampled: 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: Bl140.5 Bll-50.5 Bll-60.5 Bll-65.5 Bll-70.5 B8-30.5 B8-60.5 Benzene 0.007 0.026 ND 0.010 ND 6.00 5.39 0.005 Toluene 0.047 0.040 0.012 0.058 ND 8.79 8.74 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.015 ND ND 0.033 ND 6.45 4.99 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.057 0.032 ND 0.108 ND 13.7 9.1 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.75 0.56 <0.5 1.52 ND 689 312 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 0.105 0.214 ND 0.051 ND 5.6 3.6 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 87 106 103 88 104 104 88 Sample#: 2K1-706 2K1-708 2K1-710 2K1-711 2K1-712 2K1-713 Date Sampled: 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 4/17/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B8-100.5 B8-110.5 B8-120.5 B8-125.5 B8-130.5 B8-135.5 Benzene 2.33 0.192 0.007 0.086 0.034 0.01 0.005 Toluene 4.29 0.231 0.022 0.166 0.086 0.04 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 1.19 0.119 ND 0.035 0.011 ND 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 3.49 0.235 ND 0.139 0.049 0.03 0.010 TPH Gasoline 79 3.6 <0.5 1.6 0.65 <0.5 0.5 TPH Diesel HA NA NA NA HA NA 0.5 MTBE 1.03 0.669 ND 0.245 0.188 0.058 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 91 106 95 105 98 101 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MI'BE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~ Laboratory Manager: Drew J. Picard Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled bx.,: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5030/8021B BTEX Pmalysis: 4/19/0 l BTEX by EPA 5030/8020 Date of Report: 4/19/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015 Units: ug/L Sample #: 2K1-715 Date Sampled: 4/18/01 DL ug/L Sample Description: MW- 1 Benzene 531 0.5 Toluene 451 0.5 Ethyl Benzene 346 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 651 1.0 TPH Gasoline 4,980 50 TPIt Diesel NA 50 MTBE 1,570 5 Surrogate Recovery % 107 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: Benzene 0.5 Toluene 0.5 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPIt Gasoline 50 TPH Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: Benzene 0.5 Toluene 0.5 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPlt Gasoline 50 TPIt Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % ND - Non-Detect at given DL , NA - Result not available atory Manager: Drew J. Pi~ar-'ftl--- I I Halcyon Laboratories, Znc. Laboratory Report I Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors i 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper I TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/23/01 i BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/23/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sample #: 2K1-716 2K1-717 2K1-718 I Date Sampled: 4/19/01 4/19/01 4/19/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B 18-35 B 18-45 B 18-55 Benzene 1.15 1.13 1.76 0.005 I Toluene 1.67 1.42 2.91 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.18 0.18 0.27 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.69 0.68 0.96 0.010 I TPIt Gasoline 14.8 13.1 17.7 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 8.2 2.4 0.66 0.05 I Surrogate Recovery % 96 95 90 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL rog/Kg I Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 I Ethyl 0.010 Benzene m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPIt Gasoline 0.5 I TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % I Sample #: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg Sample Description: I Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 I m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPlt Diesel 0.5 I MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % I DL = Detection Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~ Laboratory Manager: Drew J. Picar~--~"d'~.__ Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 . CLIENT EzC, Inc Project Name: Freeway Liquors #1802BK03 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield,. CA 93313 Matrix: Aqueous Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5030/802 lB BTEX Analysis: 5/1/01 BTEX by EPA 5030/8021B Date of Report: 5/2/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: ug/L Sample #: 2K1-926 2K1-927 2K1-928 Date Sampled: 4/27/01 4/27/01 4/27/01 ug/L DL Sample Description: T-Blank MW-8 MW-9 Benzene ND 95 96 0.5 Toluene ND 107 129 1.0 Ethyl Benzene ND 60 71 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes ND 122 139 1.0 TPIt Gasoline ND 108 50 2,049 2, TPIt Diesel NA NA NA 50 MTBE ND 295 331 5 Surrogate % 96 87 85 Recovery Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: Benzene 0.5 Toluene 1.0 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPIt Gasoline 50 TPIt Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % Sample #: Date Sampled: DL ug/L Sample Description: Benzene 0.5 Toluene 1.0 Ethyl Benzene 1.0 m,p,o Xylenes 1.0 TPH Gasoline 50 TPH Diesel 50 MTBE 5 Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detection Linfit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~ LaboratoD, Manager: Drew J. Picard~d'"--"-----~_ Halcyon Laboratories Chain of Custody Form Client Name: E2C, Inc 661.831.6906 fax 661.831.6234 Analysis Requested Sample Matdx Project Name: ~-¢.~ ~ ~, ~..,,,. L.c.t.t,o.~ <-, ~ 8 ~ Aqueous Client Address: 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102. Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Manager: ~, ~,~, (.,.,.,.,,¢o--- <~° ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Acidified Sampler Name: ~c,~ ~ x Sample Date Sample Time Sample Description and Container Type Comments ITurnaround Time Requested: 24 Hour 48 Hour __ 5-Day __ Standard 7,~.. t Date: z'///~ '~/,.// I Relinquished By: Date:' Relinquish;d BY: ~c~ /~).~-- ~ Receiv.e. d y: -~ _~~~~f%~~~ Date: ~FO/ I Received BY: Date: I Proiect ~ Number 1802JS01 May 31.2001 ~ APPENDIX G i Appendix G VE Well As-Built Diagrams I E~C,/nc Appendix G Removable Cap Concrete Well Monument O To Manifold Shut-Off ~,~ Vapor Flow J Neat-cement grout -'" 3 feet hydrated Bentonite I Lonestar #3 Sand ° .c Schedule 40 PVC, 2-inch c 0.020 Slot Size e- ~ Flush Thread Cap WATER Approximately 122 feet bgs NOT TO SCALE E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CA, Telephone: (661) 831-6906 V E Fax: (661) 831-6234 Shallow SVE Well Diagram Removable Cap Concrete Well Monument ~ ~ ~ ~ To Manifold Shut-Off  ~' Vapor Flow ~, o~ ~''~ l ~:~i~-~'~ ~ Neat-cement grout ~ ~ ~ feet hydratod Bentonito ;~:;'~;~~ Lonestar ~3 Sand ~ ~ ;::'~:~: Schedule 40 PVC, 2-inch c ~diameter, 0.020 Stet Size O ~ ~ ~.. Flush Thread Cap WATER ~pproximatoly 122 loot b~ I E2C~ l_lzc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CA. Telephone: (661) 831-6906 V E M Fax: (661)831-6234 Medium Depth SVE Well Diagram ! Removable Cap Concrete Well Monument ;i To Manifold Shut-Off ~-~ ~ Vapor Flow ~ ~ ~i '~' '~ ~' Neat-cement grout ~ ~-~' 3 feet hydrated Bentonite ° ~:~:'~ Schedule 40 PVC, 2-inch ~ ~!~!i~:; ~. ~diameter, 0.020 Slot Size :,~~ Flush Thread Cap WATER Approximately ~ 22 feet b~s NOT TO $C~L£ E2C, Irtc. FREEWAY LIOUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District BIvd.,.Suite 102 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CA. Telephone: (661)831-6906 VED Fax: (661) 831-6234 DEEP SVE Well Diagram I Pro/ect Number 1802JS01 May $1, 2001 I I I I I I I ~ APPENDIX H I Appendix H Site Safety Plan I I I I I '1 I I I E2C, Inc Appendix H Prelect Number 1~02JS01 M~y 23, 2001 APPENDIX H SITE SAFETY PLAN Introduction: A Site Safety Plan (SSP) has been designed to address safety provisions needed during the site characterization. Its purpose is to provide established 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. The SSP establishes personnel responsibilities, personal protective equipment standards decontamination procedures, and emergency action plans. E2C, Inc. seeks to enter property described above for the purpose of conducting a site characterization consisting of up to eleven (11) soil borings to evaluate the extent of soil impaction. Soil samples will be collected at 5-foot intervals during exploratory drilling using the hollow stem auger equipment. All possible efforts will be made to collect undisturbed samples. Each sample to be chemically analyzed will be collected in a brass sleeve, capped with lined plastic lids, sealed with tape, and placed on ice in a cooler immediately. All Chain-of-Custody protocol will be followed. Drilling equipment will be brought to the site and operated by a subcontractor: Layne Christensen Company 11001 Etiwanda Ave Fontana, California 92337 C-57 License Number 510011 The SSP describes means for protecting all on-site personnel from deleterious contamination or personal injury while conducting on-site activities. As described below we will meet all requirements promulgated by the California Department of Health Services. Responsibilities of Key Personnel: All personnel on site will have assigned responsibilities. Mr. Bill Lawson, Project Geologist of E2C, Inc. will serve as Project Manager and On-Site Geologist. He will also serve as Site Safety Officer (SSO). As SSO, Mr. Lawson will assure that on-site personnel have received a copy of SSP. Personnel will be required to document their full understanding of the SSP before admission to the site. Compliance with the SSP will be monitored at all times by the SSO. Appropriate personnel will conduct a training session to assure that all are aware of safe work practices. In the training session, personnel will be made aware of hazards at the site and will utilize Material Safety Data Sheets for information on compounds to be encountered. Mr. Lawson will also be responsible for keeping field notes, collecting and securing samples, and assuring sample integrity by adherence to Chain-of-Custody protocol. On-site employees will take reasonable precautions to avoid unforeseen hazarOs. After documenting understanding of the SSP, each on-site employee will be responsible for strict adherence to all points contained herein. Any deviation observed will be reported to the SSO E~C, Inc Appendix H- 1 Project Number 1802JS01 May 23. 2001 and corrected. On-site employees.are held responsible to perform only those tasks for which they believe they are qualified. Provisions of this SSP are mandatory and personnel associated with on-site activities will adhere strictly hereto. Job Hazard Analysis: Hazards likely to be encountered on site include those commonly encountered when operating mechanical equipment, such as the danger of or moving machinery. Simple any falling objects precautions will reduce or eliminate risks associated with operating such equipment. Qualified personnel only will have contact with this equipment. All on-site personnel, any including the drilling contractor and his employees, are required to wear hard hats and steel- toed shoes when in close proximity to drilling equipment. Latex gloves will be worn by persons collecting or handling samples to to contaminants. Gloves will be changed prevent exposure between samples, and used ones discarded, to avoid cross-contamination. Proper respiratory equipment will be worn if vapor contamination levels on site exceed action levels as determined using a FID. Action levels requiring will be 5 in the respiratory apparatus ppm, breathing space. Furthermore, no on-site smoking, open flame, or sparks will be permitted in order to prevent accidental ignition. Risk Assessment Summary: Chemical exposure on site includes diesel, and benzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX). These chemicals represent a hazard because they are moderately to extremely toxic and most are highly flammable. Threshold Limit Values (TLV's), Short Term Exposure Limits (STEL's), and Toxicity levels (LD50, oral-rat), all in mg/kg (ppm), are listed below: Compound TLV STEL Toxicity Gasoline 200 300 .... Benzene 10 25 4894 Toluene 100 150 5000 Ethylbenzene 100 50 3500 ' Xylenes 100 200 4300 Benzene is considered a cancer hazard. Exposure Monitoring Plan: A Hydrogen flame-Ionization Detector (FID) will be used to monitor vapor concentrations around the site. Personal Protective Equipment: Personnel on site will have access to respirators with organic vapor and particulate cartridges. Replacement cartridges will be available on site as needed. When handling samples, the on- site geologist and technicians will wear latex gloves. All personnel on site when in proximity of drilling rigs and heavy equipment will wear hard hats and steel-toed shoes. I E~C, Inc Appendix H-2 Pro_iect Number 1802JS01 May 23. 2,001 Work Zones and Security Measures: Access to the site will be restricted to authorized personnel. A set of cones, placards, or wide yellow tape, surrounding site will the perimeter. The Project Manager will be the define responsible for site security. Decontamination Measures: Avoidance of contamination whenever possible is the best method for protection. Common sense dictates that on-site personnel avoid sitting, leaning, or placing equipment on possibly contaminated soil. All personnel will be advised to wash their hands, neck, and face with soap and water before taking a break or leaving the site. Respirators will be washed with soap and water following each day's use. Drilling and sampling equipment used will be decontaminated by steam- cleaning. Sampling equipment will be decontaminated before each sample is taken and drilling equipment will be decontaminated before each boring is commenced. General Safe Work Practices: Drillers, heavy equipment operators and other on-site personnel will be briefed each day in "tailgate" meetings as to the day's goals and equipment to be used. Anticipated contaminants and emergency procedures will be reviewed. Appropriate personal protective equipment will be put on and verified correct by SSO, including respirator fit. Drilling and sampling equipment will be steam-cleaned before being brought on site. Split- spoon sampling equipment will be steam-cleaned before each use. Augers will be steam- cleaned between borings. The On-Site Geologist will oversee operations and log borings in consultation with drillers. The Sample Coordinator will assure that proper protocol is used at all times in collecting and handling samples. Training Requirements: The SSO will conduct a pre-site training session which will include all points of MSDS forms, contaminant properties, warning signs, health hazard data, risk from exposure, and emergency first aid. The SSO will assure that everyone fully understands site hazards. Medical Surveillance Program: According to CFR 29, 1910.120, 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 will be required to have had a complete chemical physical within the past year. Record Keeping: Documentation will be kept on personnel exposed to contaminant hazards on the job site according to OSHA regulations. These will include documentation that employees received training on the SSP, respiratory protection, MSDS forms, and all emergency procedures. These will be reviewed during the pre-site training meeting. I E2C, Inc Appendix H-3 Project Number 1802JS01 May 23. 2001 Exposure records on each job will be kept for 30. years to meet requirements. Included will be names and social security number of employees, medical evaluation, on-the-job logs from entry to exit, first aid administered, visits on site by outside persons, and personal air monitoring records. Contingency Plans: In the event of accident, injury, or other emergency, the Project Director, Senior Project Manager, or other person will notify appropriate government agencies or individuals as follows: 1. City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, California, 93301 (661) 326-3979 Contact: Mr. Howard Wines 2. Police, Fire, or Ambulance Emergency 911 3. Nearest Emergency Hospital (Figure H-l): Memorial Hospital 420 34th Street Bakersfield, California (661) 324-4647 Emergency Numbers for E2C, Inc. personnel: Mr. Bill Lawson, of E2C will serve as Project Manager and On-Site Geologist. He may be contacted at the work site by calling the following number: Cell Phone: (661) 599-1473 In case of an emergency, you may contact Mr. Phil Goalwin, R.G. of E2C at the following numbers: Office: (661) 831-6906 Cell Phone: (661) 599-1470 I E~C, Inc Appendix H-4 I I Round Mtn. H 0 $ P I T FI L .,.., .o.o,~.,, HART '/ SITE [OCAIION '~'~'~'.,.~,....- r . I ~...~; ~'-..' :. \../ I?':'~ ..... "x ~'" OLO RJVE, Ki ~'Rd. I,a I ,, BEAR VA SPRINGS I I,.. ~_.... \ I I -- ~.,,.o. ~._.....:. .... .~-~"' s~'mNos ¢lnyon __ C~6~t '"~'~... ..,.,... ...-'~'~-..._.*--.* ~**.* .... I ~=,-.. ~. ~ Hw~st c~t~.~EELERRmac ol~ I ' c' '~.,,. '" ' ' ~\ -,- i~ (, . "'~'..-- -,- , ,, , i~, ..... ~, · A" '% ':'~".., I E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2030 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE i 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Bakersfield, California 93313 H- 1 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 Fax: (661) 831-6234 HOSPITAL LOCATION MAP ! NILES ~'~c. ' ~D~Y D~. . HOLLy VIRGINIA ~' ~ V/RD/~ DEACON ,-,, : ~ 155 TEXAS '~" 54O MADISON LN. : ,J '~,~.'o". ,', '~ 8",4.c. s'a.c ~ COT~NW~D RD .':J ;, ; · ,, ~,.~ ~-..~,[~_., ~ ' :'.. '~',~.' (L': ': ',~';' , ' L-- MT VERNON ~o ~¥,','. ': ,' ,S' ' ,' D August 31,2001 Mr. Lloyd Childers Freeway Liquors 6107 Roundup Way F~RE C.~E~ Bakersfield, CA 93306 RON FRAZE RE: Site Characterization Report & Interim Remedial Action Plan ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Freeway Liquors, 2140 East Brundage Lane in Bakersfield Bakersfield. CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 ~Ax (661) 395-1349 Dear Mr. Childers, SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street I have reviewed the above referenced report, dated May 31, 2001, prepared Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 by E2C, Inc. This is to notify you that the interim remedial action plan for FAX (661) 395-1349 the above stated address is satisfactory, with the following comments which were not otherwise specifically addressed in the report: PREVENTION SERVICF..~ 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 This Office will require that the pilot vapor extraction test be FAX (661) 326-0576 performed for a five-day period. Also, groundwater samples ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES shall be analyzed for TPH-g by EPA method 8015M, and 1715 Chester Ave. BTEX, 1,2-DCA, EDB, MTBE, TAME, DIPE, ETBE and Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 TBA by EPA Method 8260. FAX (661) 320-0576 TRAINING DIVISION Please be advised that any work done that is not performed under direct 5642 Victor Ave. oversight by the Office will not be accepted, unless previously approved. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 Please give this Office fiv.e working days notice prior to commencement of FAX (661) 399-5763 work. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Registered Geologist No. 7239 Office of Environmental Services cc: W. Lawson, E2C , J. Whiting, RWQCB Halcyon Laboratories, ]:nc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B/ BTEX Analysis: 4/13/01 BTEXby EPA 5035/8021B [//t Date of Report: 4/16/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sample #: Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/I 1/01 4/11/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B3-20 B3-30 B3-35 B3-50 B14-30 B1440 B14-45 Benzene 0.06 1.58 8.67 10.82 0.04 0.78 0.28 0.005 iToluene 0.08 4.86 5.89 8.92 0.03 4.35 1.82 0.010 Ethyl Benzene ND 2.19 9.32 9.18 0.01 1,67 0.51 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.04 4.94 9.58 15.09 0.01 4.16 1.87 0.010 !TPH Gasoline 1.03 23.8 3,325 3,312 0.51 16.7 5.9 0.5 !TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 0.77 11.3 9.8 2.6 0.10 0.91 0,91 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 109 93 104 96 115 97 105 Sample #: Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B14-55 B14-60 B6-10 B6-30 B6-45 B6-50 B6-60 Benzene 0.15 ND 6.02 4.50 4.59 2.60 1.49 0.005 Toluene 0.13 ND 3.23 7.35 7.85 4.52 2.19 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.02 ND 5.25 4.15 4.72 1.01 0.27 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.07 ND 9.89 7.51 8.52 2.97 0.98 0.010 TPH Gasoline 1.09 ND 2,276 196 247 10.7 10.7 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 !MTBE ND ND 17.9 4.3 3.7 1.7 1.0 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 109 I02 102 99 I01 111 89 Sample #: Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/I 1/01 4/11/01 4/11/01 ~DL mg/Kg Sample Description: B6-65 B6-75 B6-80 B6-90 'Benzene 0.10 0.83 0.09 0.12 0.005 Toluene 0.28 3.06 0.32 0.38 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.05 0.73 0.05 0.07 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.20 2.56 0.19 0.27 0.010 TPH Gasoline 3.30 6.84 3.95 6.63 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA I 0.5 MTBE 0.241 0.64 0.08 NDI 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 112 106 97 93 ' ! ' DL = Detection Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Drew J. Picard Halcyon Laboratories, Inc. Laboratoq/Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc. t Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 / Bakersfield, CA93313 6'~i,~ / /Matrix: Soil I ( )~ / / Sampledby: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B [/ ~ BTEX Analysis: 4/14/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B ~ ,..~ Date of Report: 4/16/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M / Units: mg/Kg Sample #: Date Sampled: 4/11/01 4/11/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B9-25 B940 B9-55 B9-60 B9-70 B9-75 B2-15 Benzene 1.09 0.35 1.94 1.54 0.008 ND 2.90 0.005 Toluene 3.33 2.11 3.45 3.45 0.023 ND 5.42 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.53 0.35 0.47 0.48 ND ND 1.96 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 1.81 1.16 1.81 1.71 0.011 ND 5.01 0.010 TPIt Gasoline 10.6 6.4 14 14 <0.5 ND 106 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 2.3 0.91 2.6 5.7 ND ND 6.9 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 84 84 105 109 98 103 106 Sample #: Date Sampled: 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 4/12/01 DL mg/Kg Sample Description: B2-25 B2-35 B240 B15-20 B15-30 B1540 B15-55 Benzene 0.40 0.32 6.42 1.47 0.35 1.66 4.45 0.005 Toluene 0.51 0.31 11.63 5.38 2.85 5.37 8.32 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.26 0.15 5.96 2.63 0.76 3.33 5.22 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.55 0.29 13.77 5.09 2.53 6.64 9.48 0.010 TPH Gasoline 7.0 6.9 3,094 107 32 138.0 342.0 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 1.96 1.53 4.8 2.8 4.1 3.1 1.95 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 102 96 106 98 111 95 99 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg Sample Description: Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detection Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Laboratory Manager: Drew J. Picard Halcyon Laboratories ]:nc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT E2C, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBE by EPA 5035/8021B BTEX Analysis: 4/10/01 BTEX by EPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/10/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: rog/Kg Sample#: 2K1-535 2K1-536 2K1-528 2K1-533 2K1-530 2K1-526 2K1-519 Date Sampled: 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 4/9/01 DL rog/Kg Sample Description: B5-100 B5-105 B5-65 B5~90 B5275 B5-55 B5-20 Benzene 0.021 0.008 0.039 0.010 0.079 14 9.1 0.005 Toluene ' 0.143 0.132 0.136 0.027 0.167 12 6.3 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.092 0.098 0.018 ND 0.050 7.5 7.1 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.221 0.225 0.074 ND 0.155 11 24 0.010 TPIt Gasoline 1.36 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 2,335 6,118 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 0.084 ND 0.070 ND 0.093 13 18 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 86 103 106 94 107 105 107 1 Sample #: 2K1-521 2K1-523 ~ Date Sampled: 4/9/01 4/9/01 DL mg/Kg .Sample Description: B5-30 B5-40 Benzene 6.7 10 0.005 Toluene 3.8 10 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 6.2 11 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 11 14 0.010 TPH Gasoline 3,978 4,122 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA 0.5 MTBE 9.0 3.8 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 98 104 ~Sample #: Date Sampled: DL rog/Kg! Sample Description: --. Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % ~ DL = Detection Limit~ ~d ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available Halcyon Laboratories, :[nc. Laboratory Report Certification # 1920 CLIENT EzC, Inc. Project Name: Freeway Liquors 5640 District Blvd, Suite 102 Bakersfield, CA 93313 Matrix: Soil Sampled by: Bill Cooper TESTS: MTBEbyEPA5035/8021B BTEXAnalysis: 4/11/01 BTEXbyEPA 5035/8021B Date of Report: 4/12/01 TPH Gas by EPA 8015M Units: mg/Kg Sa~nple #: 2K1-'538 2K1-542 2I~1-544 2K1-546 2K1-549 2K1-552 2K1-558 Date Sampled: 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 DLmg/Kg! Sample Description: B4-15 B4-35 B445 B12-10 B12-25 B1240 B13-30 Benzene 1.00 4.47 5.95 2.76 2.94 6.08 3.40 0.005' Toluene 3.23 5.17 3.92 6.54 6.19 5.48 6.97 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.65 5.33 9.09 3.39 3.36 5.42 3.49 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 2.62 7.75 17.6 6.42 6.22 8.04 6.22 0.010 TPH Gasoline 9.6 692 3,186 96 77 2,557 95 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE 5.58 14.1 6.49 3.48 2.88 4.16 ND 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 108 109 110 108 109 110 102 Sample #: 2K1~559 2K1-560 2KI-561 2K1-562 2K1-563 2KI-564 Date Sampled: 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 4/10/01 DL mg/Kg Sample Description: B13-35 B13-40 B13-45 B13-50 B13-55 B13~60 Benzene 4.08 0.37 2.19 0.26 2.23 0.35 0.005 Toluene 7.89 1.64 5.22 1.53 4.19 1.15 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 4.69 0.33 1.27 0.34 1.28 0.19 0.010 m,p,o,Xylenes 7.79 1.19 3.78 1.28 3.89 0.70 0.010 TPH Gasoline 211 5.3 36 5.6 14.6 3.8 0.5 TPH Diesel NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.5 MTBE ,1.35 0.79 0.29 0.73 1.71 0.56 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % 88 101 106 107 109 107 Sample #: Date Sampled: DL mg/Kg ! Sample Description: ..-. Benzene 0.005 Toluene 0.010 Ethyl Benzene 0.010 m,p,o Xylenes 0.010 TPH Gasoline 0.5 TPH Diesel 0.5 MTBE 0.05 Surrogate Recovery % DL = Detection Limit ND - Non-Detect at given DL NA - Result not available ~ Laboratory Manager: Drew J. ~c~rd--~, February 9, 2001 Mr. Lloyd Childers 6107 Roundup WaYBakersfield, Ca 93306 for Site Characterization Subject: Workplan Freeway Liquor Store 2140 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, Ca. Dear Mr. Childers: This Workplan was developed after reviewing information regarding preliminary asSessment at the Site. This workplan is presented to comply with the directives of the Bakersfield Fire Department letter dated 8/24/00. This Workplan presents the scope of services associated with performing the Site Characterization work. We look forward to working with you on this project. Should you have any questions regarding this submittal, do not hesitate to call the undersigned at 661-831-6906. ~, ~ Submitted, in, RG. #4779 -m"~--~j~:xplres 1/30/02 Principal Hydrogeologist CC: Mr. Howard Wines, III Bakersfield Fire Department 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93304 EzC INC ENVIRONHENTAL / ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S i n c e I 9 7 0 5640 District Boulevard, Suite 102, Bakersfield, CA 93313 Tel: 661.831.6906 Fax: 661.831.6234 Toll Free: 800.339.4952 Corporate Office: 382 Martin Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408.327.5700 Fax: 408.327.5707 www. e2cinc.com I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E~C INC ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS I $ i n c e 1 9 7 0 I I I I I SITE CHARACTERIZATION WORKPLAN ! FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ! ! Presented To: I Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store I 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield, California 93306 I I I Prepared By: I E2C, Inc. 5640 District Boulevard, Suite 102 I Bakersfield, California 93313 I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Scope of Work 1 1.3 Schedule 2 2.0 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology 2 2.1 Regional Geology 2 2.2 Regional Hydrogeology 3 3.0 Project History 3 4.0 Workplan 4 4.1 Soil Boring Depths and Locations 4 4.2 Boring Methods 5 4.3 Soil Sampling 5 4.4 Field Screening of Soil Samples 5 4.5 Soil Analyses 6 5.0 Report of Findings 6 6.0 Quality Assurance Plan 6 6.1 Sample Collection and Handling 6 Protocol 6.2 · Sample Identification and Chain 6 of Custody Protocol 6.3 Analytical Quality Assurance 7 7.0 Site Safety Plan 7 8.0 Limitations And Report Certification 7 ! Tables I Table 1 Preliminary Assessment Analytical Results iI Figures Figure 1 Vicinity map I Figure 2 Site Plot Plan Showing Preliminary Assessment Sample Locations ' Figure 3 Site Plot Plan Showing Proposed Boring Locations i Appendices Appendix A - Site Safety Plan i Appendix B -Preliminary Assessment Analytical Report I I I I I I '1 I I I, I .. iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION Mr. Lloyd Childers has authorized E2C, Inc. (E2C) to prepare this Workplan for Site Characterization at the Freeway Liquor Store facility located at 2030 Brundage Lane Bakersfield, California (Site). The City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services (City) is the lead regulatory agency. 1.1 Purpose The site characterization described in this workplan has the following objectives: · Further assess the lateral and vertical extent of fuel hydrocarbon impacted soils in the vicinity of the former USTs' and dispenser islands. · Evaluate risks to groundwater. · Recommend appropriate remedial action, if required. -. 1.2 Scope of Work The scope of services described in the Workplan include: · Locate underground utilities using Client's as-built drawings (if available) as well as Underground Service Alert (U.S.A.); · Obtain necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals; · Advance approximately eleven (11) soil borings including six (6) borings around the existing canopy covered dispenser islands and four (4) borings in the vicinity of the former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' locations and one adjacent to the former westernmost 12,000-gallon gasoline UST using flight augers, continuous hollow-stem each to a depth 10 feet below the base of significantly impacted soils, auger refusal, or upon encountering groundwater (average boring depth assumed to be approximately 40 feet below ground surface); · Collect soil samples at 5 foot intervals beginning at five feet below ground surface (bgs) and continuing until total depth. The samples will be collected using brass or stainless steel sleeves; · Field screen samples for volatile hydrocarbons using a hydrogen flame-ionizing detector (FID); · Secure soil samples in sleeves sealed with teflon, end caps and tape. The sealed tubes will be placed in a cooler at 4° centigrade and transported to a DHS certified laboratory under chain-of-custody procedures. Selected samples will be chosen for chemical analysis; · Analyze approximately forty four (44) selected soil samples for the aromatic hydrocarbons -benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and total xylenes (BTEX), and methyl- tertiary-butyl-ether (MTBE) by EPA Method 5030/8021b, as well as Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) by Method 3550/8015M. The detection limits will be .005 mg/kg - MTBE and .5 mg/kg -TPH; ° Abandon all boreholes with a cement or bentonite grout . Cuttings will be placed in drums pending proper disposal; and · Prepare a written report summarizing the results of the investigation with conclusions and recommendations, including borings logs, applicable tables and figuress. The reports will be certified by a California Registered Geologist. 1.3 Schedule E2C, Inc. anticipates beginning work described herein within one week upon approval from City and authorization to proceed from Client. The field services can be accomplished in three to four working days. The analytical data will be reported within two weeks after sample submittal. The Report of Findings will be completed within thirty days after receipt of the analytical results. 2,0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY & HYDROGEOLOGY 2.1 Regional Geolo§y The property is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Tertiary age, which dip eastward beneath the Sar'~Joaquin Valley. The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. The Tertiary rocks, in turn, are overlain by unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Pliocene to Holocene river and lake sediments of gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. ! ! 2 These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active Stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra. Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. 2.2 Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit consisting of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are ap_pr.,oxi~m~tely 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much a~~:,~ deep. ~<'" ~"~'/'"'-' Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural c,onsists of the use alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,50¢to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the boring procedures at the Mr. Fast and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine-to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas, Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. 3.0 PROJECT HISTORY The Store contracted with Industrial Contamination Extraction Inc. Freeway Liquor Services, (ICES) to remove three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline USTs'; two 6,000-gallon, single-walled, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) on two dispenser islands and associated product piping. The fueling facilities were with subsequently upgraded double-Walled, fiberglas-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled product pipelines; and MPDs' with dispenser pans. ICES contracted with Holguin, Fahan and Associates, Inc.(HFA)to conduct soil sampling at the time of tank removal.On December 4. 1998, the five USTs', six MPDs' and product piping were removed from the site. Soil samples were collected per City requirements and analyzed for TPH as gasoline, BTEX and MTBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020, respectively. A total of thirty eight (38) samples were analyzed and the results are tabulated on Table 1. Significant concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were detected beneath the two former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' and beneath five of the former dispenser locations. On February 4, 1999, HFA submitted a Tank Closure Report to the City for review. On March 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed Mr. Lloyd Childers (Owner), by letter, to submit a workplan for further assessment. The Owner subsequently applied to the State Fund and was accepted into the Fund on February 5, 2001. The Owner contracted with E2C, Inc. to prepare this workplan. 4.0 WORKPLAN E~_C, Inc. proposes to assess the lateral and vertical extent of hydrocarbon impacted soil as discussed in the following sections. 4.1 Soil Boring Depths and Locations A total of eleven (11) soil borings are proposed to assess the lateral and vertical extent of impacted soil at the Site. For the purposes of this plan, it is assumed that the borings will be advanced to an average depth of forty (40) feet below ground surface (bgs); however, the soil borings will be advanced to a depth 10 feet below the base of significantly impacted soils, auger refusal, or upon encountering groundwater. Six (6) borings are proposed to assess the lateral and vertical extent of impacted soil adjacent to the dispenser island. The borings will be designated B-1 through B-6 (dispenser area) .. Four (4) borings are proposed in the vicinity of the former southernmost 6,000-gallon gasoline UST and adjacent piping. The borings will be designated B-7 through B-10. One (1) boring is proposed in the vicinity of the former westernmost 12,000-gallon gasoline UST. This boring will be designated B-11. Dispenser Area Borings B-l, B-2, B-3 and B-4 will be advanced along the northern, northeastern, southeastern and southern edge of the canopy covered fuel islands, respectively for the purpose of assessing the lateral extent of impacted soil. Boring B-5 will be slant drilled at an approximate 10 degree angle toward the east along the southwest margin of the canopy covered fuel island to assess the lateral and vertical extent of impacted soil beneath the dispenser island. In addition, B-5 will be used to assess the southern lateral extent of the 6,000-gallon gasoline UST plume. Boring B- 6 will be advanced along the northwestern edge of the canopy covered fuel island to assess the lateral extent of the dispenser plume as well as the lateral extent of the 6,000-gallon gasoline UST plume to the northeast. Former Southernmost 6.000-Gallon Gasoline UST Boring B-7 will be advanced at the eastern end of the former southernmost 6,000-gallon gasoline UST to assess the vertical extent of hydrocarbon impacted soil. Boring B-8 will be slant drilled at an approximate 10 degree angle toward the east along the western edge of the canopy. B-8 will be located approximately 15 feet southeast of B-7 to assess the vertical and lateral extent of impacted soil between the UST and the Borings B-9 and B-10 will be canopy. advanced north and west of the UST, respectively. Former Westernmost 12,000-Gallon UST Boring B-11 will be advanced through the center of the former UST to assess the vertical extent of impacted soils associated with the former UST. Radial distribution and migration of contaminants is assumed in selecting the proposed boring locations. If, during the course of drilling operations, information is developed which indicates a change in location of the borings is desirable or that an additional boring is necessary to achieve 4 an adequate assessment, E2C will recommend such action to all interested parties. The depth ..... of impacted soils is of course unknown, but the average depth of assessment borings is typically 40 feet below ground surface (bgs). Borings will be advanced until at least 10 feet of section is penetrated below the base of the last significantly impacted soils, as determined by field .monitoring methods. The borings may also be halted by auger refusal due to difficult drilling conditions, or upon encountering groundwater. The proposed boring locations are shown on Figure 3. 4.2 Boring Methods The borings will be advanced using a truck mounted hollow stem auger drilling rig with a six- inch or larger diameter hollow stem continuous flight auger in accordance with ASTM Method D 1452-80 soil investigations sampling by auger borings, augers steam for and The will be cleaned prior to drilling each boring. The lithology and other pertinent data will be recorded on a field boring Icg in accordance with Method D 2488-84 for visual description and identification of soils. Soil cuttings generated during drilling operations will segregated on-site. Soil from borings in unimpacted areas will be used to refill the boreholes. Soil from borings in impacted areas will be placed in drums pending proper disposal and the boreholes will be abandoned with a cement or bentonite grout. 4.3 Soil Sampling Soil samples will be collected using a California modified split spoon sampler containing three 2 x 6 inch brass or stainless steel sleeves which is driven by a 30 inch fall of a 140 pound hammer at each sampling point. Soil samples will be driven at 5 foot intervals to total depth in each boring. Sample lithology, pertinent drilling and hydrocarbon monitoring information will be described and recorded on field boring logs by an experienced environmental geologist working under the supervision of a California Registered Geologist. One sleeve with soil from each interval will be capped, sealed, labeled in accordance with EPA protocols, recorded on a chain- of-custody form, placed in a cooler at 4° centigrade and transported to a California Certified Laboratory with the chain-of-custody for the specified analyses. All sampling equipment will be cleaned in an Alconox solution and double rinsed prior to each use. 4.4 Field Screening of Soil Sampies Soil samples will be collected using three six-inch brass or stainless steel sleeves installed inside a split-spoon sampler. Generally, the middle sample tube will be immediately sealed, labeled and stored in an iced cooler after collection and retained for possible chemical analysis. The bottom tube will be used for lithologic description, and hydrocarbon field screening. Field screening for the presence of volatile hydrocarbons will be conducted by placing a standard portion of soil into a mason jar to approximately for a standard period of time after which a headspace reading will be measured and noted on the boring Icg. Field screening will be accomplished using a Foxboro hydrogen flame-ionizing detector (FID). 4.5 Soil Analyses All samples will be labeled, capped and placed in a cooler with ice at a temperature of 4° C for possible analysis. Typically, one soil sample per 10-15 vertical feet in each boring is submitted for chemical analysis. It is estimated that a total of forty four (44) representative samples will be submitted for BTEX, MTBE and TPHg analysis. These samples will be analyzed by Halcyon Laboratories, a California State Certified Laboratory (Certification #1920) in accordance with State guidelines and EPA protocol using EPA Method 5035/8021b and Method 8015M, respectively The minimum detection limits will be BTEX - 0.005 rog/kg, MTBE - 0.05 mg/kg, TPHg - 0.5 mg/kg. 5.0 REPORT OF FINDINGS A report of findings will be prepared which details field activities, sampling procedures, analytical results, discussion of results, conclusions and recommendations. Based the analytical upon conclusions of the report of findings, E2C, Inc. will make recommendations for further action, if necessary. The Report of Findings will be certified by a California Registered Geologist. 6,0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN This section describes field and analytical quality-assurance procedures to be followed during the investigation and remediation. 6.1 Sample Collection and Handling Protocol Proper sample collection and handling are essential to assure quality of data obtained from a sample. Each sample, therefore, will be collected in a brass or stainless steel tube, preserved correctly for the intended analysis and stored for no longer than permissible holding time prior to analysis. 6.2 Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody Protocol Sample identification and Chain-of-Custody procedures are designed to assure sample quality and to document sample possession from the time it is collected to the time of its ultimate disposal. The container for each sample submitted for analysis will have a label affixed with the identifying number or the number will be inscribed directly on the container. The analytical laboratory will assign a separate sample number unique to that sample for internal sample coordination and identification. A description of the sample including the sample number and other pertinent information regarding its collection and/or geologic significance will be written in field notes and/or a geologic boring log being prepared by the site geologist. These field documents will be kept in a permanent project file. All samples will be analyzed by a state certified laboratory for the analyses requested. A properly completed Chain-of-Custody Form will be submitted to the analytical laboratory along with sample. The laboratory's assigned number will be properly entered on the form. A quality control officer at the lab will verify integrity of sample submitted, proper sample volume, correctness of containers used, and properly executed Chain-of-Custody Form. Pertinent information will be entered into a log book kept by the laboratory. 6 6.3 Analytical Quality Assurance In addition to routine calibration of analytical instruments with standards and blanks, the analyst is required to run duplicates and spikes on 10 percent of analyses to assure an added measure of reliability and precision. Accuracy is verified through the following: 1. U.S. EPA and State certification of results; 2. Participation in inter-laboratory round robin program; 3. "Blind" samples are submitted for analysis by the quality control officer on a weekly basis. These are prepared from National Bureau of Standards speci.fications of EPA reference standards; 4. Verification of results with alternative method. an 7.0 SITE SAFETY PLAN Appendix A contains a Site Safety Plan which complies with Worker Right to Know Regulations and CCR Title 2 8.0 LIMITATIONS AND REPORT CERTIFICATION E2C has prepared this Workplan in accordance with generally accepted standards of care existing in California at this time. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic conditions is a difficult and inexact science. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with limited knowledge of surface conditions present. No warranty expressed or implied is made. This report has been prepared by E2C, Inc. under the professional supervision of the registered professional whose seal and signature appear herein. The conclusions of this report are based solely on the Scope of Services outlined and the sources of information referenced in this report. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the Site should be submitted to E2C so that our conclusions may be reviewed and modified, if necessary. This report was prepared for the sole use of Mr. Lloyd Childers and/or his agent(s). By: HydrogeologiSt I I I I I I I' FIGURES I I I I I I I I I ,, ~ -\ '~ OEMGCRAT '.~ HOT SPITINGS FOF ~408'~ Hoo~rERFLAT ( ~-~':~ 5it~ Loc~tio, ~ . ...~...4~ ~.'. ~..~l ~ ...~' I... ~X ~' " OLD RIVER E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2030 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Bakersfield, California 93313 3 Telephone: (661) 831-6906 VICINITY MAP Fax: (661) 831-6234 FENCE STORE TK-4 6G'AO OsO(~ LGIANLELuO~ITs - CA~.OPY ~ SO,T. TK.,.i O i I SOo~"ITK"WES[T¢'2 EAST~K'I ~ ~Bi:] [] Fa~ ,, DISPENSER ISLANDS o o WE T -3 MIDDLE TK-3 EAST TKo3 D6 D4 FORMER 12,00 GALLON GASOLINE UST -" ~ 'B' ~I'"E-~''', ~ % ~ ~ 12 ® SOIL r SAMPLE LOCATIONS S C A L E ONE INCH = 20 FEET EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 2030 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Bakersfield, California 93313 Telephone: (661)831-6906 SITE PLOT PLAN SHOWING PRELIMINARY Fax: (661) 831-6234 ASSESSMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS FENCE _ STORE ., FORMER 12,00-GALLON 7 __ ILl v ~ FORMER __ O I · NORTH TK-4 I 6,000-GALLON__ i Z GASOLINE USTs r'r' B- 1 CANOPY. LU B-9 'i~ MIDDLE TK-4 I MIDDLE TK-i~O O '~ ! WEST TK-1 EAST TK-1 I '~ Z B-11 IO OI ~' B-6 m m D~ B-2 O I ~ ~ WEST TK-2 EAST TK-2~ O SOUTHTK-4 ~ I O ~1~ Z ,~ SOUTHTK-5 0 J 0 J B-~OI B-7 e~DISPENSER B-8 ISLANDS m m J o o o J m WEST TK-3 MIDDLE TK-3 EAST TK-3 I FORMER 12,00-GALLON i GASOLINE UST m LEGENO m PROPOSED ~ BORING m S C A L E LOCATIONS ONE INCH = 20 FEET m ~ ~ EAST BRUNDAGE LANE I I I E2C, Inc. FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE FIGURE 5640 District Blvd., Suite 102 2030 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE Bakersfield, California 93313 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 3 m Telephone: (661)831-6906 PROPOSED BORING LOCATIONS Fax: (661) 831-6234 I TABLES .... ! ...... TABLE 1 ......... i ................... SUMMARY_QF_S_OIL SAMP_LE__A__N/~-L_.Y~I__.CAL R_ESULT_S I FREEWAY LIQUOR_STORE,BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ............... ! ........... DATE TPH AS ETHYL TOTAL SAMPLE SOURCE SAMPLED DEPTH sAMPLE ID GAs0-1.~INE B~EN2~E- TOL~J'E[~I-E BE~EN~E-- -X~.J~-ES-'~BI~ REF (fbg) ' '- (mg/k~) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 8015 (M) 8020 N / A REPORTING LIMIT 1 0 0.005 0.005 0.015 0.015 0.02 N/A Western End of Northern 6K UST 12/4/98 2 WESTTK-I@2FT ND 0.016 0.033 ND 0.01 4.5 A 12/4/98 6 WEST TK-1 @6FT ND ND 0.013 ND 0.021 1.4 A Eastern End of Northern 6K UST 12/4/98 2 EASTTK-I@2FT 230 0.035 1.3 0.94 7.1 4.7 A 12/4/98 6 EAST TK-I@6FT 30,000 240 1,500 440 2,400 330 A Western End of Southern 6K UST 12/4/98 2 WESTTK-2@2FT 1,100 0.29 13 7.5 48 13 A 12/4/98 6 WEST TK-2@6FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.24 A Eastern End of Southern 6K UST 12/4/98 2 EASTTK-2@2FT 41,000 220 2,400 690 4,000 410 A 12/4/.98 6 EAST TK-2@6FT 34,000 310 1,900 570 1,100 730 A Eastern End o! Southern 12K UST 12/4/98 2 EAST TK-3@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 2.3 A 12/4/98 6 EAST TK-3@6FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.11 A Center of Southern 12K UST 12/4/98 2 MIDDLETK-3@2FT ~ ND ND 0.019 ND 0.024 5.2 A 12/4/98 6 MIDDLE TK-3@6FT ND ND 0.013 ND 0.064 0.19 A Western End of Southern 12K UST 12/4/98 2 WESTTK-3@2FT ND 0.0059 0.015 ND ND 3.7 A 12/4/98 6 WEST TK-3 @ 6FT ND 0.012 0.091 0.043 0.33 6.2 A Northern End of Eastern 12K UST 1 2/4/98 2 NORTH TK-4@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.57 A 12/4/98 6 NORTH TK-4@6FT ND ND 0.007 ND ND 0.11 A Center of Eastern 12K UST 12/4/98 2 MIDDLETK-4@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.44 A 12/4/98 6 MIDDLE TK-4@6FT ND 0.006 0.039 0.017 0.12 3.7 A Southern End of Eastern 12K UST 12/4/98 2 SOUTH TK-4@2FT ND ND ND ND 0.027 1.3 A 12/4/98 6 SOUTH TK-4@6FT ND ND 0.01 ND 1 7 1.9 A Northern End of Western 12K UST 12/4/98 2 NORTH TK-5@2FT ND ND ND ND ND 0.74 A 12/5/98 6 NORTH TK-5@6FT ND ND 0.015 ND 0.033 0.5 A Center of Western 12K UST 12/6/98 2 MIDDLETK-5@2FT ND 0.0053 0.011 ND ND 4.7 A 1 2/4/98 6 MIDDLE TK-5@6FT ND 0.0057 0.013 ND ND 1,300 A Southern End of Western 12K UST 12/4/98 2 SOUTH TK-5@2FT ND ND 0.015 ND ND 0.55 A 12/4/98 6 SOUTH TK-5@6FT ND ND ND ND ND 2.7 A Northeastern Dispenser 12/4/98 2 D-1 @ 2FT ND 0.02 ND ND 0.026 0.41 A 12/4/98 6 D-1 @ 6FT 100 0.033 1.1 0.95 5.1 2.1 A North Central Dispenser 12/4/98 2 D-2 @ 2F-r 420 1 0 21 8 69~ 110 A 12/4/98 6 D-2 @ 6FT 6,600 10 280 130 570! 310 A Northwestern Dispenser 12/4/98 2 D-3 @ 2FT 14,000 61 700 230 1,300! 720 A 12/4/98 6 D-3 @ 6FT 20,000 98 870 320 1,5001 660 A Southeastern Dispenser 12/4/98 2 D-4 @ 2FT 15,000 32 660 230 1,2001 32 A 12/4/98 6 D-4 @ 6FT 19,000 42 700 250 1,900 88 A South Central Dispenser 1 2/4/98 2 D-5 @ 2FT 29,000 110 1,200 370 2,600 150i A 12/4/98 6 D-5 @ 6FT 49,000 370 3,100 830 4,800 420 A Southwestern Dispenser 12/4/98 2 D-6 @ 2FT 60,000 240 2,800 910 570 250 A 12/4/98 6 D-6 @ 6FT 20,000 43 710 260 2,000 87 A REF = R_eP?rt Reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected .... IA = H~l~uin,-~ahan & Associates, Inc's, current report.' ..... I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX A ! APPENDIX A SITE SAFETY PLAN Introduction: A Site Safety Plan (SSP) has been designed to address safety provisions needed during the site characterization. Its purpose is to provide established procedures to protect all on-site personnel from direct skin contact, inhalation, or ingestion of potentially hazardous materials that be encountered the site. The SSP establishes may at personnel responsibilities, personal protective equipment standards decontamination procedures, and emergency action plans. E2C, Inc. seeks to enter described above for the of a site property purpose conducting characterization consisting of up to eleven (11) soil borings to evaluate the extent of soil impaction. Soil samples will De collected at 5 foot intervals during exploratory drilling using the hollow stem auger equipment. All possible efforts will De made to collect undisturbed samples. Each sample to be chemically analyzed will be collected in a brass sleeve, capped with lined plastic sealed with tape, and placed on ice in a cooler immediately. All Chain-of-Custody protocol will be followed. Drilling equipment will be brought to the site and operated by a subcontractor: Layne Christensen Company 11001 Etiwanda Ave Fontana, California 92337 C-57 License Number 510011 The SSP describes means for protecting all on-site personnel from deleterious contamination or personal injury while conducting on-site activities. As described below we will meet all requirements promulgated by the California Department of Health Services. Responsibilities of Key Personnel: All personnel on site will have assigned responsibilities. Mr. Bill Lawson, Project Geologist of E2C, Inc. will serve as Project Manager and On-Site Geologist. He will also serve as Site Safety Officer (SSO). As SSO, Mr. Lawson will assure that on-site personnel have received a copy of SSP. Personnel will be required to document their full understanding of the SSP before admission to the site. Compliance with the SSP will be monitored at all times by the SSO. Appropriate personnel will conduct a training session to assure that all are aware of safe work practices. In the training session, personnel will be made aware of hazards at the site and will utilize Material Safety Data Sheets for information on compounds to be encountered. Mr. Lawson will also be responsible for keeping field notes, collecting and securing samples, and assuring sample integrity by adherence to Chain-of-Custody protocol. On-site employees will take reasonable precautions to avoid unforeseen hazards. After documenting understanding of the SSP, each on-site employee will be responsible for strict adherence to all points contained herein. Any deviation observed will be reported to the SSO and corrected. On-site employees are held responsible to perform only those tasks for which they believe they are qualified. Provisions of this SSP are mandatory and personnel associated with on-site activities will adhere strictly hereto. Job Hazard Analysis: Hazards to be encountered site include those encountered when likely on commonly operating any mechanical equipment, such as the danger of falling objects or moving machinery. Simple precautions will reduce or eliminate risks associated with operating such equipment. Qualified personnel only will have any contact with this equipment. All on-site personnel, including the drilling contractor and his employees, are required to wear hard hats and steel- toed shoes when in close proximity to drilling equipment. Latex gloves will be worn by persons collecting or handling samples to prevent exposure to contaminants. Gloves will be changed between samples, and used ones discarded, to avoid cross-contamination. Proper respiratory equipment will be worn if vapor contamination levels on site exceed action levels as determined using a FID. Action levels requiring respiratory apparatus will be 5 ppm, in the breathing space. Furthermore, no on-site smoking, open flame, or sparks will be permitted in order to prevent accidental ignition. Risk Assessment Summary: ' Exposure to chemicals anticipated on site include diesel, and benzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX). These chemicals represent a hazard because they are moderately to extremely toxic and most are highly flammable. Threshold Limit Values (TLV's), Short Term Exposure Limits (STEL's), and Toxicity levels (LD50, oral-rat), all in mg/kg (ppm), are listed below: Compound TLV STEL Toxicity Gasoline 200 300 .... Benzene 10 25 4894 Toluene 100 150 5000 Ethylbenzene 100 50 3500 Xylenes 100 200 4300 Benzene is considered a cancer hazard. Exposure to chemicals anticipated on site also include waste oil containing lead. Because of the Iow volatility of the higher molecular weight compounds in petroleum oils and the physical properties of lead, as well as the auger drilling methods to be used, no significant exposure to · dust or vapors is anticipated, however, all personnel will be advised to avoid generating dust or breathing dust. The Exposure limit for inorganic fumes and dust containing lead is 0.05 mg/m3. Aisc, all personnel will be advised to wear gloves and avoid inadvertently ingesting soil from their hands. Washing and washing of clothing after the project is advised. Exposure Monitoring Plan: A Hydrogen flame-Ionization Detector (FID) will be used to monitor vapor concentrations around the site. Personal Protective Equipment: Personnel on site will have access to respirators with organic vapor and particulate cartridges. Replacement cartridges will be available on site as needed. When handling samples, the on- site technicians will latex Hard hats and steel-toed shoes will be geologist and wear gloves. worn by all personnel on site when in proximity of drilling and heavy equipment. Work Zones and Security Measures: Access to the site will be restricted to authorized personnel. A set of cones, placards, or wide yellow tape, surrounding the site will define the perimeter. The Project Manager will be responsible for site security. Decontamination Measures: Avoidance of contamination whenever possible is the best method for protection. Common sense dictates that on-site personnel avoid sitting, leaning, or placing equipment on possibly contaminated soil. All personnel will be advised to wash their hands, neck, and face with soap and water before taking a break or leaving the site. Respirators will be washed with soap and water following each day's use. Drilling and sampling equipment used will be decontaminated by steam- cleaning. Sampling equipment will be decontaminated before each sample is taken and drilling equipment will be decontaminated before each boring is commenced. General Safe Work Practices: Drillers, heavy equipment operators and other on-site personnel will be briefed each day in "tailgate" meetings as to the day's goals and equipment to be used. Anticipated contaminants and emergency procedures will be reviewed. Appropriate personal protective equipment will be put on and verified correct by SSO, including respirator fit. Drilling and sampling equipment will be steam-cleaned before being brought on site. Split- spoon sampling equipment will be steam-cleaned before each use. Augers will be steam- cleaned between borings. The On-Site Geologist will oversee operations and Icg borings in consultation with drillers. The Sample Coordinator will assure that proper protocol is used at all times in collecting and handling samples. ! I Training Requirements: The SSO will conduct a pre-site training session which will include all points of MSDS forms, I contaminant properties, warning signs, health hazard data, risk from exposure, and emergency first aid. The SSO will assure that everyone fully understands site hazards. I Medical Surveillance Program: According to CFR 29, 1910.120, Paragraph (f), employees who wear respirators 30 days or I more or who have been to hazardous substances health hazards during one year exposed or above established permissible exposure limits are required to be monitored medically. All site personnel will be required to have had a complete chemical physical within the past year. I Record Keeping: I Documentation will be kept on personnel exposed to contaminant hazards on the job site according to OSHA regulations. These will include documentation that employees I received training on the SSP, respiratory protection, MSDS forms, and all emergency procedures. These will be reviewed during the pre-site training meeting. I Exposure records on each job will be kept for 30 years to meet requirements. Included will be names and social security number of employees, medical evaluation, on-the-job logs from entry to exit, first aid administered, visits on site by outside persons, and personal air monitoring ,' I records. Contingency Plans: I In the event of accident, injury, or other emergency, the Project Director, Senior Project Manager, or other person will notify appropriate government agencies or individuals as follows: I 1. City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services .~ I 1715 Chester Ave Bakersfield, California, 93301 (661) 326-3979 I Contact: Mr. Howard Wines 2. Police, Fire, or Ambulance Emergency 911 I 3. Nearest Emergency Hospital: i Memorial Hospital 420 34th Street Bakersfield, California i (661) 324-4647 ! I 4 Emergency Numbers for E2C, Inc. personnel: Mr. Bill Lawson, of E2C will serve as Project Manager and On-Site Geologist. He may be contacted at the work site by calling the following number: Cell Phone: (661) 5991473 In case of an emergency, you may contact Mr. Phil Goalwin, R.G. of E2C at the following number Office: (661) 831-6906 Cell Phone: 599-1470 APPENDIX B March 30, 1999 Lloyd Childer$ 2030 East Brundage Lane Bakersfield, CA 93307 FtRE CHIEF ~o~F~z~ RE: Laboratory rcsuks from preliminary site assessment conducted at ~e F~eeway Liquor Store, 2030 East Bmndage L~e. ~.~ s~c~s Pe~it ~R-0231. V0~CE (805) t~s~ ~ Dear Mr. Ch[Iders: $UPPRE~N ~o~ 'H' ~ Upon review of ~e recently subdued laborato~ results from your vo, c~ (so~),~ facility, this office has determined ~at ~e extent of ~e contamination [~s) a~ plume, associated wi~ ~e Freeway Liquor Store underground storage ~~ ~c~ t~ previoufly lo.ted cn your prope~', h~ not been adequately defined. ~715 C~r A~. 8ag~eld, ~ g~l V01CE(SOS) S2~3OSI Thi~ office requkes (in accord~ce wi~ Chapter 6.7 of ~e F~t~13~mO Califom Heal~ and Safe~ Code ~d Chapmr 16, Title 23 of en'~nou~ s~c~ California C~e of Re~lado~) Eat ~er assessment be done m define ~7~ c~. a.., ~e vertical and hofizon~ extem of ~e coa~ation plume. Bcge~f~lO, ~ ~01 ~tCE (8~fi) (805) Please sub~t a work plan for ~er msessment, to · ~.,.o ores,oN wi~ 30 ~ys from receipt of ~s letter. The workpl~ should follow ~2~a~, guidelines fom~d ~: A~di~ A-ReDo'ns. ~ri - Regional Board Staff vo~c~l~s)a~, Re~o~endations for P~liminar~ eviction and Underground T~ Sjtm; luly 6. 1990. A~ifio~lly. be ~v~sed ~at oversight c~t.for ~is project will be billed to you at a rate of $75.00 per hour. If you have e~y questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. S~cerely, Ralph E, Huey, Director Office of Em'iro~ental SeD'ices ~H/dlm UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE (LEAl() t CONTAMINATION SITE REPORT REPORT ~ AOo~sS 1715 C~ST~ AV~ B~FI~ ~ 93301 ~ . ,~?, . , 2030 ~AST B~E ~ ~FI~.~ ~ 93307 ~ ~lY LIQUOR S~ ~ LLO~ ~s ( ) ~ CI~ O~ B~SFI~ F~ D~~ ~ ~ ~ (661)326-3979 ~ ~° ~ ~l~OL~ ,, , ..... ~ ~ ~ ~UR~ OF Ol~ j C~ O~ ~ R~T~NP~N ~ ~E~D~UP~MPL~;~oO~UN~ECE~As~ ~ ~E~UNDER'WAY C~CK~PR~R~TE~NlS) ~ E~VA~$OIS~O) ~ ~EU~EFREEP~OU~(~) ~ - HOLGL'TIN, F', AN & AS. .,OCLATES, INC. I MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS ENVIRONI'vqENTA L February 4. 1999 Bakersfield Fire Depa.men, ~~~ Environmental Se~ices Division 1715 Chester Avenue. Suite Bake~eld, Calif~la 9330 ~ Subject: T~NK CLOSURE REPORT ~OR THE FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2~30 ~SI BRUNDAGE ~NE, BAKERSFIE~, CALIFORNIA, Dear Mr. Wines: ~is repoff presents ~e [esuJ~ at soil sampling performed by HoJggj~, Fahan & ~ssog~,gtes, Inc. (NFA) in association ~ me removcl of t~r~ 12,~gal!on gasoline USTs, gasoline U~s. six mul~ple product d~spense~ (MPDs) on f,vo d~spenser Islands, and associated Droducf pipe~nes from lhe abcve-~eferenced slte (see Rgure 1 - Site Location Map). The tank Temoval actM~s wer~ performed u~det pe(mlt ~ Depa~menf Environmental Se~Jc~s Divisior~ (BFDESD) in ~soclafion ~ upgrades ~ the tu~ling sy~ems at the site. ~ACKGROUND The Freeway Liquor Store contracted v/~ ~ndu~rlai Contamln~on E~ac~on Se~ices, Inc. (~ES) to remove ~hree 12,~gal~.~, s~ng~e-wa!~ed, steel gaso',lne USTs; ~ 6,00Ggalion, single-walled, ~teel, gasoline U~Ts: SiX MPDs c.n ~a dispenser I~iands: and associated product p~peilnes (see Figure 2- ~lct Plan). Sub~e,~e~tly, ~,e ?jeling f~cilifies were upgraded ~ the InstallaMon of double-waliea, fiberglas-Clad UST~ ~ ove~il and overspl{I prote~tlor~; doubl~wa)led product p~pellne~.; and MPD~ wl~ sec,~n~fi~ containment, ~ December 4, 1~. ~e five gasoline USTc, six MPDs, and product p~pe~ines were removed ~rom ~e site. HFA was Contracted fo provide an envirgnmental geologist under ~e dlr~ct supe~lslon ~f the under~ign~ Cate o~ Ca,fern~a reglCerea geo!~Ist to the direction o¢ Mr. Heward W. Wines, iii with the I ENVIImtC::NMENTAL: SCiENTiST'S ~ GEOLOGISTS · ENGIr,~EERS TANK CLOSUR[ SOIL 5AN~PLING ~ December 4. 1~8. sc~ ~,~',~e:~ WEST TK..I~2F.T and WEST TK-I~FT. and EAST TK-] '~2FT and EAST TK-I~6FT; gpd WES[ TK-2~2~T aqd WES] TK-2F~bFT. and EAST TK-2~2FT and EAST TK-2~6FT were cc~eot~d from 2 mhd 6 feet b~J~a~h the in'ue~5 c1 !he western arid eastern eRds o¢ th9 noffhem arid ~oufhe[n ~,g0O-gailcn gasoline USTs (deslgrJafed as Tank ~l and lank~), respectively. Sci)scrap?es V.,:E~T TK.-3~2FT a~d NN'EST TK-3~6FT, MIgDLE TK-3~2FT and M,!DDL[ TK-3~6FT, and ~AST TK,3,$2F[ and lAS7 TK-355~ ,were collected tram 2 amd 6 felt be~eath ~e. inveds ~ ~e western en~ 3eFffer, and eastern a~d of ~e southern 12.00~gallon gasoline UST (designa'red os Tank ~3). resp~ctiv~ly, Soil samples NORTH TK-J~2FT and NORTH TK-4~'6FT, MiDD~ TK-a~2~ c;nd Mi~DLE 'TK-~'6FT. and ~OUTH TK-4~2FT and . k.-5~2Fr and SOUTH TK-J~6FT: and NO~TH TK-5~2FT and NORTH TK-5~6FT, MIDD~ MIDDLE TK-5~bFT, and SCU~ TK-5~2~ and SOUTH TK-b~6FT were coJiected from 2 and b feet beneo~ lhe lnveds of the no,gm s,3uthgm, ends of ~g easfgrn amd western ~nds. 12,~0-gallon gcsollne USTs (des~gna~'ad o~ Tartk ~'~ on~ rank ~5), r~specfively. Soil samples F7 D-3;¢2~ and D-3~a~; and D~2FT Qnd D-~,~2Fr and D-I~6~. D-2~2~' arid D-2~5 ~, and D-4~6~, D-5~2~ and D-5~6~, o;'-~c D~2Fi and D-~6~' were collected from 2 and 6 fee...' beneath the ea~e;n, centeh and western Mags on t~a no~hern and southern dispenser islands, respectively (se~ Figure 2 for ~'he tank remo,val ~oi~ sample locations). All s~mpling equipment was washed w~th c nc, n,-Ohosphate cleanser, pre-rinsed w~ fop water. a~d fina{ly rinsed w;th deion~zed wafer prior fo sgmpl~r~g. The soil samples were collected from ~e backhoe bucket immediatei'y ~o~!owing excava~on, ~e soil samples were stored 2-1nch-d~amefer bra~ hJbes, sealed ~ Teflon~ Hpers gnd end caps, labeled, placed In an ice chest ~ a tempera~re of I~ss ~an 4~. and transpoffed to ~ Callf~ia state-certified J~bo~a~op/for analysis. Sample Jdenti~oat{on 3~d chain-of-custody procedures 'were followed tar the samples to ensure sample integrity ant fo docume~t sample possession from ~e time ct collection tO the ulfim~e des~na~on, The ~ampte labels identified ~e Job number, sampler, date and time of collection, a~,d a Sample numbe~ unique to each I ANALYTICAL M~HODS AND RESULTS I The soll samples were a.~atyzed for TPH ,ms goscii,me using EPA Method 8015 (M) and BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020. Gasoline hydrocarbo,.,~ concentrations were detected !n the soil samples collected from beneath ail five USTs amd a~l six MPDs [see Figure 2 for the soil sample I locations, Table 1 - Summary of Sall Sampie AnaJytloal Results, arid Attachment 1 for 1he laboratory report).' I I I HOI. GUIN, Mr, Howord W. wines. III FAHAN BFDESD ~ February 4, 1999 - ,"'~ge 3 .a,a, aa~ &.~T -F__.S, INC. ~..NVllg~ONMENT ~- L M Z.N,~GE:MENT RINSATlii ^.ND STORAGE TANK: DISPOSAL Prior to tank removal, ~ USTs were triple rinsed. The rinsate was t[ansportecl by Cummings Vacuum Service, Inc., to Demenno/Kerdoon's disposal faclllly In Compton, Coliforn!a, under Non-It,CRA HOzardous Waste Monlfest. An LEL meter woe utlIIzed to verify that the hydrocarbon vapor concenfrofions were less than 5 percent of the LEL. Subsequently, 2D pounds of dry ice per I,L1XI gallons of tcuqk capoclty was Introduced Info the USIs, and oxygen metering wc~s conaucted to veri,~/that the level ct oxygen within/he U$?s was less than 12 percent. With the approval o1 the KCDEH.S, the storage tanks vcere removed, ptoced or,. flatbed trucks, ond tronsported by Brodfocd ex Sons Inc. to Golden Store Metol's Bakersfield facitily 1or destruction. CONCLUSIONS ~ased on the soil sampting and laboratory analyficai results, h¥clrocarbcn concentrations were detected in hhe soil beneath ail five of the gasoline USTs and slx MPDs removed from the site. Therefore, the BFDESD v/Ill likely require oddlMonal investigation ct the verlica[ and [otero! limits of gasoline, containing soils and an assessment of the parental of the petroleum release to impact groundwater resources. HFA recommends that the client submtf an application to the State Water Resources COntTOI Board (SWRCB)/Underground Storage 'rank Clear,up Funci (USTCF) fcr reimbursement of o!1 tulure costs [less applicable deductible) associated with 1he a~sessment and potenllol remedlat[on of the gasoline release ct fne site. HFA is available to assist the property owner In preparing the SWRCB/USTCF cie:ira application. Upon receiving a leffer of commitment from the SWRGB/USTCI=, H~A recommends that,' the client submit a work plan to the BFDEc..D for additiona! evat.Jcr~.on of the vertical and lateral limit of gasoline-containing soil and the potential/or the release To Impact groundwater resources. This report has been prepared 1:or the exclusive use of the Freeway Liquor Store and Its representative, tndustrk-~l Contamlnc~flon Extraction Se,vices, lnc., as If pertains to the referenced property In Bai~ersfielct. California. The services performed by Holguln, Fahan & Associates, Inc., were conducted in ~ manner consistent wt~ the level of care and skllt ordinarily exercised bv members of Its pro/e~lon currently practicing under similar conditions In the state of Ca!l;o~nia. No other warranty I$ expressed or implied. I ~ HOLGUIN, '- '--_-." Mr. Howard W. Wines. BFDESD F'AdJu~ Feb~aw 4.1~. Page 4 & ~~T~, INC. Th0ak you for !hl~ opDo~un~ to ho~'~ ~ o~ s~!¢e. If you h~'~8 ~n~' qu~s~[o~ rego~ln9 rep'~ or ~e informotlo~ con~alned here~n, please aop, tact me ~ (~5) 391~17 or ~ e-mail address Mark_Magargeegbk.h~a.corn, Respectfully submi~ed, m. Environmental Technician ,r r.-.~/--- . Senior H~,drogeo)oglst Holguin, Fahon ~ Associates, ~nc. Ho:guin, Fohon ~ ~soctates, Inc. ~ MR~:rri  Enclosures: Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 - PIct Plan Table 1 Summar~ of Soil Scruple Anal~tcai Results AHachment I - Labor~o~ Repoff cc: Mr. Cameron Reagor, ICES I ~.~-_ HOLOUIN, '-' ._-' M:-. H~warO W. W~n~s. ill - BFDESD .,,,~,..,,~,,,,.,~ FA~-'L~.[%' Februow 4.19~9 - Poge 5 ~ &,'MS._~~T~. INC. ,.~, - . . ~ '.~'"':.~'- ~:,.~. .. -,:-,:. ~ :. ~ .~¢.~ 7--1 ~.." ~.~'~, .t~,..~ .,~,,~ -. -..~ · .. ,,___,: . .~.., . ....;:,~., ...,,,, ~....~:t:¢.,,~..~.~.,-?.. ~,~!:-.,.q ~.-'----..--..' - ~.~-2¢.~~ ~-.':..'t:'.7' ,,~:-'; .',~, " .' ,., ~ ,~/.'"~.." · .. ,~,~m'.;:""-'~------i~i~ . ~ .... ,. ~ ~. , ..... ' . , ;.., "-:::' ,: .;: '"'"' ' ' ~" ','. '"'~' '. L,'?~'.,, '~ '~" 'F '"~ ~. : " ~~[m.~t ,:*r~;? . .~.~,**~- '.~, ....... :~,., ~ :.~;,~_~ : . '~ .... ;-n~.~ ,¢;~-.~"~'-.~.,.~,~, ~~ ~~ii}il!.' Sen , i~o.:.- ~'.- !~.-, ~- _ ~ . .'~ . ...~. ~~ ~ .:,,--'. r--~' ..... ~'"' '''''~' i ,~~~~"~...*-'-,~~'2:'~ __ "L,~'::- ' ~ ...." !ILLZ{==~.,~_ ~,_~,g.,~ ~l,!W..,~. ".' [ ::~s ~.~'; _j'" _j,.~ I '.'.,~,.~,__ . "'2~"' :~ ....... - --. I ' '~ '" :'-' ~')' ',~r ~.~_:¢ ~.~:m~ ~ · ~ ,..~ ,,,;,~4 , · · -, ~ ..... - ...... ~.,., ,i.-. ......... x --II-' , ; .' ..... ,', .~ - .: ': .... , .. ,,, , I~ .. ~ . I,,. ~ , t'..;' ,,..,,¢,. ., ,;, ,. ... _ =- . ...... , · , ' ~ '"'. '.~ .... ~, ¢' ~ L .... :' I ~- ..... ~, ",, 'x [ .':' c , % ~ , m.~ , , Ii ~ '. '. ~~ ~ ~ .:~ ~i~i ........... I I~ -~ ..... ~ .~. 'x i'i ' ...~"~ '~ I . .~ . '[ " -. ~ ~.~ , ~,~i4' ,- ..'SITE LOCATION ,~%. ~ ,, ~~~ . .. . , ~ ,, ~ ... ; . ~ -.. ~ .. i~ ~3 -, · ,, , .. . ,., ., . ~~~' " -.. "--. ~i / ~ % '.. ": ".., ~~~-.. "' ¢ ........ iP / ~, ~ '.. ~----' "'-~.' ....... : '~" __ L _. · ' ~ ,,.~ ' II ' '~ .~~ ................... ~ ...... ,.~, .. ..... ; : ~ ........ ~ , ,,. ,,,,, ~,?,.., , .~. ,. m¢~ t~¢~ ~ ~ ./ % ..... · "" ~,-",' '~' '.%e t ', %;  :': -'! '" i.-' ...... ' .'%" :: .' i ~,,:; i ;I Xj ", i · - I~ "- , I' i I ,': ~ I n°~ k '  ~.~_J!,: "c. ~' . , .' I I~,' / t, ~: , , ~.~W~'e '$ '. ~ ..... ',~.f ' . _ . .... ;, :~ / .... '~ , /. LEGEND ICE~ o ~.~ ~,~ ~ ~ ,.~ ~,~ ~r ~ 2030 ~ST BRUNDAGE ~NE ~ ~ ~. ~'. ' ~;' ~ BAKERSFIELD, CAUFORNIA o o,e ~ ~,~o~e~. ~ FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP I TABLE !. SLfMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS z . FREEWAY LIQUOR 5q'ORE, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFO!RNIA ~ ' SAMPLE SOURCE ISAMP~DIOE~{ SAMPLE ID GASOUNE BENZENE~TOLUENEIBENZE~EIXYLENES~ MTBE I Eastern End ~ S~them eK UST 12~ge ~ 2 ~ EAS'r 1~-2 ~2~ 41,~0 2,~0 '~ 40Gt ~90 4,~00~ 4 ! 0~ A Cer~tef of Eastern -I 2 K UST 12~98 ~ 12~98 I ~MIDDLE TK-4~6~ Southern End of ~stem 12K UST 12.98 .1.____~- SOUTH TK~2~ ND Nol Center ~ Western 12K UST 12~96 ~IDDLE TK-5~2~ NDI 0.0053I 0.m 1 ~ NDI ND/ 4.7~ A -- TABLE 1, SUMMARY OF SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESb"LTS FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE, BAKERSFIELD, CAUFORNIA i OATE I I TPHAS ETHYL TOTAL SAMPLE SOURC~ SAMPLEOIOEPTH EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD .. REPORTING UMIT ~ 12-4-98 REF = Re~ mle,e~e, fFA = Net applicable. ND = Not deleted. A = Ho~gufn, Fahan & A~iates, Inc.'s, cu~nt mpo~. / ~ E~C ~c ENVIRONMENTAL/ ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS S / n c e l 9 7 0 PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION FREEWAY LIQUOR STORE 2140 EAST BRUNDAGE LANE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Presented To: Mr. Lloyd G. Childers Freeway Liquor Store 6107 Roundup Way Bakersfield; California 93306 Prepared By: E2C, Inc. 5640 District Boulevard, Suite 102 Bakersfield, California 93313 1.0 INTRODUCTION This proposal presents the scope of services and costs associated with further Site Characterization for Freeway Liquor Store located at 2140 East Brundage Lane, Bakersfield, California. The work will conform to the Site Assessment Workplan prepared by E2C, Inc. and approved by the Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services (a copy of the letter is included in Appendix A). The proposed Scope of Work contained herein was derived from a review of data collected during previous site assessment. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The Site is located at 2140 East Brundage Lane in a commercial-residential section of Bakersfield. The property is located on the North-west comer at the intersection of East Brundage Lane and Mt. Vernon Avenue. The adjacent lots to the West of the Site and North of the Site are vacant. The property is currently a self-service/retail gasoline station with a C-Store. The self-service gasoline facility consists of a covered canopy area located in the southeastern corner of the lot. The canopy area is overlain by a concrete slab and contains two fueling islands with three (3) MPDs per island. The current tanks on Site consist of three (3) 12,000-gallon, double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs. The USTs are located in the area of the former USTs, east of the canopy area, as described below in section 3.0. The C-store building is located to the north of the Canopy area and the current USTs. 3.0 PROJECT HISTORY The Freeway Liquor Store contracted with Industrial Contamination Extraction Services, Inc. (ICES) to remove three 12,000-gallon, single-walled steel, gasoline USTs'; two 6,000-gallon, single-wailed, steel gasoline USTs'; six multiple product dispensers (MPDs) on two dispenser islands and associated product piping. The fueling facilities were subsequently upgraded with double-walled, fiberglass-clad USTs' with overfill and overspill protection; double-walled product pipelines; and MPDs' with dispenser pans. ICES contracted with Fahan and Inc. to conduct soil at the Holguin, Associates, (HFA) sampling time of tank removal. On December 4. 1998, the five USTs', six MPDs' and product piping were removed from the site. Soil samples were collected per City requirements and analyzed for TPH as gasoline, BTEX and MTBE using EPA Methods 8015M and 8020, respectively. A total of thirty eight (38) samples were analyzed and the results are tabulated on Table 1. Significant concentrations of fuel hydrocarbons were detected beneath the two former 6,000-gallon gasoline USTs' and beneath five of the former dispenser locations. On February 4, 1999, HFA submitted a Tank Closure Report to the City for review. On March 30, 1999 the City filed an underground storage tank unauthorized release form and directed Mr. Lloyd Childers (Owner), by letter, to submit a workplan for further assessment. The Owner subsequently applied to the State Fund and was accepted into the Fund on February 5, 2001. The Owner contracted with E2C, Inc. to prepare a workplan that was submitted for review to the Bakersfield Fire Department on February 9, 2001. The workplan was approved by the Bakersfield Fire Department, letter dated February 26, 2001. 4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY & HYDROGEOLOGY 4.1 Regional Geology The property is located in the south central area of the San Joaquin Valley where the Sierra Nevada, Great Valley, and Coastal Range physiographic provinces meet. The southern end of the Sierra Nevada Province is composed of a massive block of igneous and metamorphic rock of Mesozoic age and older. This Sierran block, 40 to 100 miles wide and 400 miles long, slopes five to seven degrees beneath the San Joaquin Valley. The Coastal Range province on the west consists of tectonically deformed and fractured marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of .3 Jurassic, Cretaceous, Tertiary age, dip Joaquin Valley. and which eastward beneath the Sand The Great Valley province is a broad asymmetrical synclinal trough, which is known as the Sacramento Valley in the north and the San Joaquin Valley in the south. Beneath the southern San Joaquin Valley floor, the Sierran plutonic and metamorphic rock block is overlain by consolidated marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. These rocks are overlain by continental marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age, which are comprised of continental deposits of consolidated to semi-consolidated, fossiliferous sandstone, siltstone, and shale which thicken toward the south and west. The Tertiary rocks, in turn, are overlain by unconsolidated continental deposits consisting of Piiocene to Holocene river and lake sediments of gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Surface features of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley consist of dissected uplands, alluvial fans, overflow areas, and lake bottoms. Dissected uplands lie between the mountains and the nearly flat Valley floor and are manifest in Iow-lying hills through which perennial and intermittent streams flow. These features consist of reworked older alluvium. The alluvial fans are the sites of active stream deposition of sands and silts derived from the Sierra Nevada and the dissected uplands. The overflow lands and lake bottoms lie in the central part of the Valley where silt and clay accumulate in quiet lake and marsh environments. 4.2 Regional Hydrogeology The Central Valley of California is underlain by a broad, thick hydrogeologic unit consisting of soil and rock with varying porosity and permeability. Physical dimensions are approximately 50 miles wide at the widest point in the Valley, 400 miles long, and as much as 2,000 feet deep. Recharge to regional aquifers consists of infiltration of seasonal precipitation and percolation of surface waters. The Valley aquifer of greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest storage, highest quality, and greatest accessibility for domestic and agricultural use consists of the alluvial and lacustrine continental deposits extending to the depths of 1,5000 to 2,000 feet beneath the San Joaquin Valley floor. Lithologic and hydraulic properties of these sediments are largely the product of the sediment source and the depositional environment. These sediments range in size from clays to boulders and include all mixtures between the extremes. Those of the west side of the Valley are derived largely from the Coastal Ranges, which tend to consist of shales and fine sandstones with limited permeability. The east sediments are derived mainly from granitic materials of the Sierra Nevada which are generally coarser and much more permeable. Sediments encountered during the boring procedures at the Mr. Fast and adjoining parcels consisted of alluvial deposits comprised of fine- to-coarse grained sands containing quartzite and micas. Permeability in these sediments is high. Regionally, the depth to groundwater ranges between 200 and 220 feet below grade, according to the 1996 Water Supply Report published by the Kern County Water Agency in July 2000. 5.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES E~C the following of work: proposes scope · Task I- Regulatory Liaison, Permitting, and Project Management · Task II- Field Operations · Task III - Analytical Services · Task IV- Reporting · Task V- Scheduling ! I 4 TASK I - Regulatory Liaison Task I-Sub-Task I - Regulatory Meetings E2C, Inc (E2C) will represent Client, as an independent consultant, at meetings involving the Bakersfield Fire Department, the lead regulatory agency. The purpose of these meetings will be to develop a clear understanding between Client and the lead agency regarding necessary investigative procedures and to eStablish the criteria for implementation of this site investigation. Task I-Sub-Task II - Permit Preparation E2C will obtain and prepare any necessary permits and/or regulatory approvals as required for soil borings. Task I - Sub Task III - Project Management E2C's Project Geologist will coordinate and oversee all activities relating to the Scope of Work discussed under Tasks I through V. All activities discussed below under the Scope of Services for. this project will be under the supervision of E~C's Principal Hydrogeologist, a State of California-Registered Geologist. TASK II - Field Operations Task II - Sub-Task I- Soil Boring Locations and Depths Following authorization from the client and pre-approval from the State FUND, E2C will proceed with the assessment. Based on the previous work conducted at the site, three specific areas are to be further assessed during this project. Eleven (11) assessment borings are proposed to complete the characterization of the site. Six (6) borings are proposed to be located around the existing covered dispenser islands and four (4) borings in the vicinity of the former 6,000- canopy gallon gasoline USTs' locations and one adjacent to the former westernmost 12,000-gallon gasoline UST using continuous flight hollow-stem augers, each to a depth 10 feet below the base of significantly impacted soils, auger refusal, or upon encountering groundwater (average boring depth assumed to be approximately 40 feet below ground surface); Boring Methods The borings will be advanced using a truck mounted hollow stem auger drilling rig with a six-inch or larger diameter hollow stem continuous flight auger in accordance with ASTM Method D 1452- 80 for soil investigations and sampling by auger borings. The augers will be steam cleaned prior to drilling each boring. The lithology and other pertinent data will be recorded on a field boring Icg in accordance with Method D 2488-84 for visual description and identification of soils. Soil cuttings generated during drilling operations will be segregated on-site. Soil from borings in 'unimpacted areas will be used to refill the b0reholes. Soil from borings in impacted areas will be placed in drums pending proper disposal and the boreholes will be abandoned with a cement or bentonite grout. Soil samples will be collected using a California modified split spoon sampler containing three 2 x 6 inch brass or stainless steel sleeves which is driven by a 30 inch fall of a 140 pound hammer at each sampling point. Soil samples will be driven at 5 foot intervals to total depth in each boring. Sample lithology, pertinent drilling and hydrocarbon monitoring information will be described and recorded on field boring logs by an experienced environmental geologist working under the supervision of a California Registered Geologist. One sleeve with soil from each interval will be capped, sealed, labeled in accordance with EPA protocols, recorded on a chain-of-custody form, placed in a cooler at 4" centigrade and transported to a California Certified Laboratory with the chain-of-custody for the specified analyses. All sampling equipment will be cleaned in an Alconox solution and double rinsed prior to each use. Field Screening of Soil Samples Soil samples will be collected using three six-inch brass or stainless steel sleeves installed inside a split-spoon sampler. Generally, the middle sample tube will be immediately sealed, labeled and stored in an iced cooler after collection and retained for possible chemical analysis. The bottom tube will be used for lithologic description, and hydrocarbon field screening. Field screening for the presence of volatile hydrocarbons will be conducted by placing a portion of soil into a mason jar to approximately for a standard period of time after which a headspace reading will be measured and noted on the boring Icg. Field screening will be accomplished using a Foxboro hydrogen flame-ionizing detector (FID). Task III - Soil Analyses All samples will be labeled, capped and placed in a cooler with ice at a temperature of 4° C for possible analysis. Typically, one soil sample per 10-15 vertical feet in each boring will be submitted for chemical analysis. It is estimated that a total of forty four (44) representative samples will be submitted for BTEX, MTBE and TPHg analysis. These samples will be analyzed by Halcyon Laboratories, a California State Certified Laboratory (Certification #1920) in accordance with State guidelines and EPA protocol using EPA Method 5035/8021b and Method 8015M, respectively The minimum detection limits will be BTEX - 0.005 mg/kg, MTBE - 0.05 mg/kg, TPHg - 0.5 mg/kg. TASK IV- Reporting Task IV - Sub Task I - Site Assessment Report A Site Assessment Report will be prepared which will detail field activities, analytical results, discussion of analytical results, conclusions, and recommendations. The Site Assessment Report will recommend what further action, if necessary, may be required. If additional work is warranted, the scope of the additional work will be specified in the report. The Additional Site Assessment Report will be certified by a California Registered Geologist. Task IV - Sub Task II - Preparation of State Fund and Regulatory Agencies Documentation E2C will and/or assist in preparation of documentation required for the State FUND. prepare any This will also include preparation of any documentation other than reports to regulatory agencies. TASK V - Scheduling E2C can begin the scope of work described above within two (2) weeks after receiving approval to proceed from the CLIENT and pre-approval from the State FUND. Individual Phases of work may be subject to Regulatory review and permitting. Field operation will take approximately 2 days to perform eleven (11) soil borings and sampling. The Additional Site Assessment Report will be submitted for the eleven (11) soil borings approximately 30 days after receipt of the analytical results for the samples collected. A detailed cost estimate for each Task of the proposed Scope of Work is included in Appendix B of the proposal. 6.0 CLIENT RESPONSIBILITIES With respect to any work performed at the site, Mr. Childers will be the CLIENT, and no other person or entity or insurer will be considered to be a CLIENT. The CLIENT will be responsible for providing adequate access to the Site and work areas within the Site. Locating of all underground utilities and conduits that may be impacted by the above-referenced scope of work is the responsibility of the CLIENT. E2C will attempt to assist in this matter b y contacting USA DIG prior to commencing any drilling, trenching or excavation on site. If necessary, a private Iocator will be used. City of Bakersfield records will also be reviewed to determine the locations of any utilities that may interfere with placement of the wells. Payment terms are to be negotiated. Invoices will be submitted upon the completion of a Task of Work. Late charges may be added if warranted. 7.0 LIMITATIONS The referenced fee estimates are based upon E2C mobilizing and working on the entire project during one (1) continual time period. Delays in the field due to CLIENT schedule changes will be billed on a time-and-material basis. These are fee estimates given for budgetary purposes, and E2C will not exceed totaled amount unless authorization in writing by CLIENT due to changes in scope. CLIENT will be kept abreast of developments as they occur. If significant changes to the scope of work, as described in this proposal, do occur, the CLIENT will be notified in writing prior to implementation of work. These changes will not be implemented until written agreement from the CLIENT or their agent is received. 8.0 AGREEMENT I have read, understand and agree to the terms and conditions of the contract. SIGNED DATE . SUBMITTED ~j,.~::Cc,.p.~r~ DATE ~ ~/'~- O/ The fee estimate is good until 4/30/01. If CLIENT wishes to extend the price, CLIENT must acquire written approval from E2C. E2C, Inc. 5640 District Blvd., Ste. 102 Bakersfield, California 93313 Phone: (661) 836831-6906 Facsimile: .(661 ) 831-6234 I I I 7 Appendix A Ma.,'ch 30, 1999 I Lloyd Childers i 2030 East Brun,iage Lane Bakersfield, CA 93307 ~,~_-- P.E: Laborat.tW results from preliminzts' site assessment conducted a-'. t.h..- Freev,'a:.' Liquor Store. 2030 East Brundage Lane. ,¢~nlrrax~ smv~ces Permit ~'q3R-0231. 2101 'H' ~,~ (~s~ a~,~ Dear Mr. Chi[tiers: ~,.~: 'H' S~ Upon r~view of ~e recency subdued laborato~ results from your vc,csrso$) 3z~ facility, this office has determbed fha[ ~e extent of ~e contamination ~.gm :~s)~*~ ~ ~* plume, associated wi~: ~e Freeway Liquor Store underground storage ,,~o~ ~c~, previously on yo,z:' propa~', h~ not adequately lo~tad been deffmed. 1715 C~t A~. vo,c~ tsJs) ,~s~s~ This F~(~S),2~0 California Hca!tx and Safcp? Code ~d 16, Title 23 of ~e Chapter eu'~aOUU~ Stn'~CES Califo~ia Code of ReTala[[o~) ~nr ~er assessment be done [o define ~z,~ cb~=~ a~=. the vertical and ~ofizont~ extent of ge coe~ation plume. VOCE (865) ~7~ F~ (935) Please sub.Jr a work pl~n [or hr~her ~sessment, to tiffs office, r~t~ ~as~o, ~,~ 30 ~ys from receipt of ~is letter. The workpl~, should tbltow se~2,~==,~, rotund Lq: Ab, 2~ndix_.4 -Reoo~ ~ri- Regional Board Staff ~c,c~(~c,,>~ Recom~endatiov.s for Pretiminarx ev~mrion and Inv~~ Underground T~}: Si.r~: July 6, 1990. Addifio~lly. be ~ ,_ed rhar oversight cost.for hhis project will be bitled to you at a rate of S75.00 per hour. If you have any q~sstions, p~,ase cml me ar (651) J26-3979. S ~ce rely, Ratph E. Huey, Director Office of ' ' ' Envtron~:enmt Sec'ices ~H/dlm Appendix B ' March 19, 2001 SUMMARY OF COSTS Freeway Liquor Store Hours/Units Cost per Unit Total TASK I - Regulatory Liaison, Permitting and Project Management Task I -SubTask I - Regulatory Liaison Principal/Registered Geologist 1.0 105.00 105.00 Project Geologist 2.0 80.00 160.00 Subtotal 265.00 Task I - SubTask II - Permit Preparation Permits 0.0 0.00 0.00 Task I - SubTask III - Project Management Professional Services Principal/Registered Geologist 3.0 105.00 315.00 Project Geologist 8.0 80.00 640.00 Subtotal 955.00 Total Task I $1~220.00 TASK II - Field Operations Professional Services Principal/Registered Geologist 1.0 105.00 105.00 Project Geologist 20.0 80.00 1,600.00 Technician 20.0 55.00 1,100.00 Miscellaneous equipment 2.0 75.00 150.00 Travel Time 1 hour per round trip (2 trips) 2.0 55.00 110.00 Milage 40 miles round trip (2 trips) 80.0 0.35 28.00 Subtotal 3,093.00 Field Equipment and Materials FI D 3.0 50.00 1 Subtotal 150.00 Task II- Sub-Task I- Drilling Services Mob/Demob to Site (2 Man Crew and Equipment) 1.0 750.00 750.00 Drill 9 borings to a depth 40 ft bgs (straight borings) Drill 2 borings to a depth 45 ft bgs (angle borings) Sample every five (5) feet Backfill borings with cement bentonite grout place drill cuttings in drums Vertical borings 360 ft. @ $16/ft 360.0 16.00 5,760.00 Angle borings 90 ft. @ $18/ft 90.0 18.00 1,620.00 Concrete Corin~ 1.0 400.00 400.00 Subtotal 8,530.00 Materials Brass Sample Tubes w/Caps 90.0 3.00 270.00 DOT 55-~al Drums 30.0 38.00 1,140.00 E2C Mark-Up of 15% on the Sub-contractor Drilling Services/Material= 1.0 1,491.00 1.491.00 Subtotal 2,901.00 lotal Task II $14,674.00 Task-Ill - Analytical Services Soil Samples for TPHg, BTEX and MTBE by 8015 and 8021b, respectively 44.0 65.00 2,860.00 E2C Mark-Up of 15% on the Sub-contractor Analytical Services 1.0 429.00 429.00 Subtotal 3,289.00 Total Task III $3,289.00 /nc. Appendix B-1 March 19, 2001 SUMMARY OF COSTS Freeway Liquor Store Hours/Units Cost per Unit Total TASK IV- Reporting Task IV - Sub Task I- Site Assessment Report Professional Services Principal/Registered Geologist 1.0 105.00 105.00 Project Geologist 4.0 80.00 320.00 Staff 12.0 70.00 840.00 AdmJn. Personnel 2.0 30.00 60.00 Subtotal 1,325.00 Task IV - SubTask II - FUND Documentation Preparation Principal/Registered Geologist 1.0 105.00 105.00 Project Geologist 4.0 80.00 320.00 Admin. Personnel 16.0 30.00 480.00 Subtotal 905.00 Total Task IV $2,230.00 Total $21,413.00 I ! I E2C, Inc. Appendix B-2