HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNDERGROUND TANK FILE #2 ENVIRONME AL HEALTH SERVIC,L DEPARTMENT
STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. /~ 2700 'M" Street. Suite 300
DIRECTOR ~V Bakersfield, CA 93301
(805) 861-3636
(805) 861-3429 FAX
Mr. Joe Lopez March 4, 1993
Linde Gases of the West, Inc.
2678 Bishop Drive, Suite 200
San Ramon, CA 94583
SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Remediation, Baker's Welding, 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA
Permit No. 050033
Dear Mr. Lopez:
The purpose of this letter is to determine the status of the proposed vapor extraction to
remediate gasoline contamination at the subject site. A review of our records indicates that
the workplan for its implementation was approved in July 1992. In-addition, we requested
that information on actual equipment that will be installed on site be provided to this office.
To date, we have not received this information.
Please submit the additional information within fifteen (15) days from the date of this letter.
The status of the workplan implementation must also be addressed at the same time. If you
have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636, Extension 545.
Sincerely,
Steve McCalley, Director
By: Dolores Gough
Hazardous Materials Specialist
Hazardous Materials Management Program
DG:cas
cc: Uriah, Inc.
Uriah Environmental Services Inc.
? 2401 East Orangeburg Avenue #675-218, Mc)desto, CA 9S355
~'~ (510) 455-4991 (209) 551-3591 (209) 551-1200
~~~ ~n Franc~co~y Ar~ C~tral Valley FAX
~~ ~a~ 10, 1
MS. Dolores Gough
Hazardous Materials Specialist '~ ~ ~'~?/ "
Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services
Hazardous Materials Management Program ....
2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 ....
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Remediation of Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soil at 3505
Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA. Permit No. 050033
Dear Ms. Gough:
I am in receipt of your letter of March 4, 1993. I am pleased
to advise that the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District (SJVUAPCD) has approved our application for
Authority to Construct and issued Permit No. S-1371-0001-00
on February 19, 1993.
Per your request, I enclose our original application, supporting
documentation, and supplemental correspondence. I had thought
it inappropriate to provide you with information about the
remediation equipment to be installed until the SJVUAPCD
application process was complete and they had concurred with
our proposal (i.e. we knew for certain what we would be
installing).
The vapor destruction unit has been constructed and awaits the
installation of the well casing packers, extraction piping,
and electrical connections. I will have a technician in
Bakersfield during the week of March 14th to finalize arrange-
ments for this work. We expect these tasks to be completed
within two weeks and will have the system ready for inspection
by April 5, 1993. We will activate the system immediately upon
receipt of your approval and the SJVUAPCD Permit to Operate.
Sincerely ~
John E. Raper
Project Manager
JER:ms
cc: Mr. Joe Lopez, Linde Division, Praxair Inc.
San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District
AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT
PERMIT NO.: S-1371-0001-00 ISSUANCE DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1993
LEGAL OWNER OR OPERATOR: URIAH, INC.
MAILING ADDRESS: 2621 MAJESTIC OAK DRIVE
MODESTO, CA 95355
EQUIPMENT LOCATION: SEC. 23, T29S, R27E
3505 PIERCE ROAD
BAKERSFIELD, CA
EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: PETROLEUM CONTAMINATED SOIL REMEDIATION
OPERATION, INCLUDING 3 HP MASPORT M SERIES
MODEL M20F VACUUM PUMP, NOBLE METAL/CERAMIC
MATRIX CATALYTIC OXIDIZER, HYDROCARBON VAPOR-
WATER SEPARATOR, AND THREE VAPOR EXTRACTION
WELLS.
CONDITIONS:
1. No emission shall cause injury, detriment, nuisance or
annoyance or endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of
any persons or have a natural tendency to cause injury or
damage to business or property. (Rule 4102)
2. There shall be no odors detectable at or beyond property
boundary. (Rule 4102)
-- CONDITIONS CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE --
his ~ NOT a PERMIT TO OPERATE. Approv~ or den~l of a PERMIT TO OPERATE will be made aRer an i~p~tion to
veri~ that the equipment h~ been contacted ~ accordance ~ ~e approved plans, sp~i~atiom and conditiom of this
Authority to Construct, and to determ~e ff ~e equipment can be operated ~ compfi~ce wi~ all Rules and Regulatiom of the
San Joaquin Valley Unified A~ Pollution Control D~trict. PLEASE NOTWY THE DISTRICT COMPLIANCE DIVISION AT
(805) 861-3682 WtIEN CONSTRUC~ON OF THE EQUIPMENT IS COMPLETED. Unless comt~ction h~ commenced
pursuant to Rule 2050, th~ Au~ority to Co~truct shah exp~e and ~e app~cation sh~ be canceled two years ~om the date
of issuance. The applicant ~ r~pomible ~r comply~g ~ffi ~ laws, ordinanc~ ~d re~latiom of any offier governmental
agencies which may pertain to ~e above equipment.
DAV~ L. CROW, APCO
SEYED SADREDIN
D~ECTOR OF PERMIT SERVICES
Southern R~ion~ Office * 2700 M Str~, S~te 275 * B~e~fi~d, California ~301 * ~ 861~6~ * FAX ~ 861~060
CONTINUED CONDITIONS F~RIAH, INC. S-1371-0001- Page 2 of 2
3. Ail lines, fittings, pump seals, and appurtenances shall be
leak free, i.e. no detectable emissions. (Rule 2201)
4. Vapor extraction wells shall not vent to atmosphere. (Rule
2201)
5. Catalytic oxidizer shall be in.use whenever vacuum pump is
operating. (Rule 2201)
6. Vacuum pump shall discharge only to catalytic oxidizer. (Rule
2201)
7. Influent flow rate to the catalytic oxidation Unit shall not
exceed 53 scfm. (Rule 2201)
8. Volatile organic compound (VOC) emission rate shall not-exceed
0.01 ibm/hr or 0.22 ibm/day. (Rule 2201)
9. Benzene emission rate shall not exceed 0.0001 lbm/d~y. (Rule
22011
10. Ail monitoring, sampling, analytical, and operational data
shall be maintained for a period of two years and made
available to the District upon request. (Rule 1070)
11. Collected liquids shall be transferred to closed containers
and disposed of in a manner which prevents emissions to the
atmosphere, i.e. no detectable emissions. (Rule 2201)
12. Catalytic oxidation burner temperature shall be maintained
between 1350°F and 1450°F. (Rule 2201)
13. Exhaust stack shall be at least 10 ft. in height and shall not
exceed 14 in. in diameter at discharge. (Rule 2201)
14. Sampling ports shall be provided at the combined vapor inlet
directed to the catalytic oxidation unit. (Rule 1081)
15. Total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations shall be tested
using an organic vapor analyzer consistent with EPA Method 21
and recorded once a week. (Rule 1081)
Application for Authority to Construct
_, ] t '~e..-n ~ Sin loaquin Valley
'" . --- ' Uni!ied Air Pollution Conb:ol District
.,~. PLICA ,T, !ON ..FOR:
[ ] AU/~OR/TY TO CONSTRUCT (ATC)
{ ] ATC ]V~ODIFZCATION
[ ] PER~OT TO OPE~ ~0)
LOCA~ON ~ ~ EQL~}~S~ ~ILL ~E OPi~il~D~
, - ...... [
5. EQE~,~N% FOR ~CH ' ' *LICA~ON IS ~E ¢~:l~de P~t Nos, ~
PR0~ECT NO.:
Sou[beta ~liio;al Offl~ * 2700 Iv[ St., Suit: 275 * ~¢rsfl~Id, ~lifo~l 93301 * (80~ ~61-36~2 * F~ (80~ ~61-2~0
Uriah £nvironme tal Services Inc.
~'~~ 2401 East Orangeburg Avenue 675-218, Modesto~ CA 95355
~?'~:~'. ~,'~.~ (510) 455-4991 (209) 551-3591 (209) 551-1200
i~:~ ~,~:~ ~n Francisco~y Ar~ C~al Valley FAX
~ Nouember 12,
Manager of Permit Services
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Southern Regional Office
2700 "M" Street, Suite 275
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Soil Vapor Extraction of Gasoline Contamination
within Subsurface Soils at 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA
Dear Sir/Madam:
Please find enclosed an Application For Authority to
Construct. a pilot soil vapor extraction system (SVE) at the
above referenced site. The installation of this system is
being proposed for the purpose of conducting a study to
determine the suitability of employing SVE as the
technology of choice to remove Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC's as gasoline) from vadose soils. The source of the
subject contamination appears to have been a 10,000 gallon
underground fuel storage tank which was excavated and
removed from the site following a December, 1987 fuel leak
event. Area and site maps showing the locations of the
site and the proposed SVE system are included within the
previously prepared workplan revision enclosed in Appendix
A.
As you know, SVE systems operate on the principle that many
components of gasoline will volatilize at ambient soil
temperatures, with the volatilized contaminants then
entering the void spaces between soil particles until
equilibrium is achieved. When an appropriate vacuum is
applied to the soil the vapors are removed from the soil
pore spaces. This partitioning is described by Henry's Law
Constant and Raoult's Law.
It is our intent-ion to use an electrically powered, three
horsepower Masport M Series Model M20F Vacuum Pump with a
maximum draw of 53 scfm. Gasoline vapors located between
Page 1
15 and 35 feet below ground surface (bgs) will be drawn-
through 0.020" slotted PVC casing and into a catalytic
oxidation unit. As the contaminated VOC vapor-air stream
is discharged from the vacuum, extraction blower it enters
the catalytic oxidizer and passes through a burner that
pre-heats the vapor-air mixture to 1,400 degrees F. The
,pre-heated air stream then passes over a Noble Metal/
Ceramic Matrix catalyst where an exothermic reaction occurs
and the VOC's are converted to carbon dioxide and water
vapor. "Clean" hot air is then discharged into the
atmosphere. Typical treatment efficiencies for a catalytic
oxidation unit are >95%.
The top of the 14" diameter discharge stack servicing the
trailer-mounted oxidizer unit will be 10 feet above the
ground surface. The temperature of the stack exhaust air
is estimated at 1500 degrees F (compared to 300-500 degrees
F for catalytic oxidizers that utilize a heat exchanger).
The maximum exit velocity is 49.6 fpm. Vapor flow rates
and pressure readings will be taken at each extraction we]]
and, the vapor concentration as Total Petroleum Hydro-
carbons as Gasoline (TPH-G), benzene, toluene, ethyl-
benzene, and xylenes (BTEX) will be monitored by sampling
the air stream periodically with a Tedlar sample bag. A
sample will be taken to establish an initial base line and
periodically thereafter to determine the progress of
remediation. The oxidizer unit and power supply will be
contained within a locked fence. The fence will be posted
with appropriate notifications indicating the presence of
hydrocarbon vapors as well as service provider contact
information.
The concentration of contaminants in the soil is documented
in the summary of laboratory analyses presented in Uriah's
January and June 1990 Site Characterization Reports,
portions of which are included in Appendix A. The highest
level of TPH-G found on site was in boring BK-5 at 20 feet
bgs, which contained 190 parts per million (ppm) TPH-G in
soil. The theoretical maximum vapor concentration to be
treated by the catalytic oxidation system can be calculated
from knowledge of the mixture's molecular weight, vapor
pressure at the soil temperature, soil contaminant
composition (weathered gasoline), and the ideal gas law:
Cest = estimate of contaminant vapor concentration
[mg.n]
Pv = pure component vapor pressure at temperature T
[atm] = 0.049 atm
Mw = molecular weight of component [mg/mole] =
Page 2
111,000 mg/mole
R = gas constant = 0.0821 [L arm/mole K]
T = absolute temperature of residual [K] = 273 + 16 = 289 K
As the extracted vapors are initially in equilibrium, their
concentrations will decrease over time due to compositional
changes and mass transfer resistances.
It is proposed that the SVE system operate 24 hours per.~
day, 7 days per week with an anticipated project life of no
more than 1 month. By extrapolating available data, it
appears that the area of contamination is no larger than 60
feet x 80 feet x 5+ feet, or 24,500 cubic feet. Assuming
24,500 cubic feet of contaminated soil at 90 pounds/cubic
foot, the weight of the soil may be calculated as follows:
Wsoil = (Vsoil) (Dsoil) = (24,500 cubic feet) (90 lbs/
cubic'feet) Wsoil = 2.21e6 lbs
Wsoil = weight of contaminated soil [lbs]
V$oil = estimated volume of contaminated soil [cubic
feet] = 24,500 cuft
Dsoii = estimated density of contaminated soil [lbs/cu
ltl = 90 lbs/cu ft
Assuming an average concentration in the soil of 1/3 the
maximum level of TPH-G, the weight of gasoline in the soil
can be calculated:
Wgas = (Wsoil) (TPH-G concentration) = (2.21e6 lbs)
(190/3 ppm Wgas = 140 lbs
Wgas = weight of gasoline in contaminated soil [lbs]
Wsoil = weight of contaminated soil [lbs]
TPH-G concentration = average TPH-G level in
contaminated soil [ppm]
The estimated extraction rate may be calculated as follows:
Rest = (Wgas) / (project life) = (140 lbs) / (30
days) Rest = 4.66 lbs/day
Rest = estimated removal rate jibs/day]
Wgas = weight of gasoline in contaminated soil [lbs]
Project Life = assumed 1 month or 30 days
As contaminants are removed during SVE, the level of
Page 3
residual soil contamination decreases and less volatile
compounds comprise a greater portion of the residual
contamination. Both of these conditions may result in
reduced removal rates over time. As SVE continues and
contaminant levels decrease, it becomes more difficult to
remove the residual contamination through vapor extraction,
however, a significant body of data exists which
demonstrates that in-situ biodegradation of hydrocarbon
components occurs as the SVE process moves air through the
subsurface. This component of the process is particularly
effective in dealing with heavier-end hydrocarbon compounds
not readily volatilized. Although practical limitations
may exist which limit the ability to remove all of the
contamination, it is proposed that the vapor extraction and
biodegradation processes will reduce the level of
contamination by at least 90%.
Should you have any questions regarding the information
contained herein, or if I may otherwise be of assistance,
please contact me at {510) 455-499].
Jeff Schafer
Staff Engineer
SS/3r
enc.
Page 4
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services C°mpan32
June 30, 1992
Ms. Delores Gough
Kern County Department of ~
Environmental Health Services
2700 "M" Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Revised Workplan for the Remediation of Gasoline
Contamination of Soil Occurring at 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA. Kern County Site Permit #050033.
Dear Ms. Gough:
As a result in the co~'tinued declination of the groundwater
table at the above referenced site, Uriah has been authorized
by Linde Gases of the West, Inc. to submit this workplan addendum
for the remediation of gasoline contaminated vadose soils.
Tasks described herein are intended to comply with requirements
set forth by the Kern County Department of Environmental Health
Services (KCoDEH) and guidelines promulgated by the Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES
As a result of a December, 1987 fuel leak event at the Pierce
Road facility, a 10,000 gallon on-site underground unleaded
gasoline storage tank was removed and a limited environmental
assessment performed by Krazan and Associates· Uriah, Inc.
was subsequently engaged to install, develop, and sample eight
(8) two-inch diameter groundwater monitoring wells· Six of
the wells were installed on October 17 and 18, 1989, November
28, 1989, and May 1, 1990· Two additional wells were later
installed on June 27 and June 28, 1991· Compliance monitoring
of the wells has been ongoing in accordance with requirements
set forth by KCoDEH.
During November of 1991, Uriah submitted a Remedial Action Plan
(RAP) in which bioremediation appeared as the treatment
technology of choice for the decontamination of vadose and
saturated soils, as well as groundwater containing significant
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
concentrations of gasoline and/or its aromatic cons~tuents
(i.e. benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes [BTEX]).
The biotreatment system featured a fluidized-bed bioreactor
vessel into which extracted groundwater would be introduced
and thorougly degraded by a consortium of common, non-pathogenic,
hydrocarbon-utilizing bacteria. Once free of detectable
concentrations of the target contaminants, a portion of the
treated water, now oxygen and nutrient rich, and containing
large populations of the hydrocarbon-utilizing bacteria, would
be reinjected to promote in-situ biodegradation of vadose soil.
However, due to continuing drought conditions, the resultant
lowering of the water .table, and reduction in levels of dissolved
contaminants in groundwater, it has been suggested that soil
vapor extraction would be a more appropriate remediation
technology.
SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION AND BIOVENTING- TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
Soil Vapor Extraction
Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) of organic contaminants in vadose
soils is a process that embraces the principle that many anthro-
pogenic organic hydrocarbons, including those contained within
gasoline, will volatilize at ambient soil temperatures. Upon
partitioning from the liquid to the gaseous phase, these
contaminants will enter the pore spaces between soil particles
until an equilibrium is achieved. This partitioning is described
by Raoult's Law. Partitioning into the vapor phase is determined
by the volatility of a contaminant, its solubility in water,
and the degree to which it will adsorb to soil and other
particulate matter. Henry's Law and vapor pressure are used
to determine appropriate volatility for SVE. Henry's Law
constants above 0.01 (dimensionless) tend to move from aqueous
to gaseous phase. Contaminants with vapor pressures greater
than 25 mm/Hg are generally considered as' good condidates for
SVE, with vapor pressures as low as lmm/Hg acceptable. The
vapor pressure of gasoline is between 37 and 260 mm/Hg depending
upon the degree of weathering (degradation).
The solubility of gasoline is appropriate to SVE parameters
and, while gasoline may adsorb onto soil and other (organic)
particles within the soil matrix, sorption is generally not
so strong as to preclude efficient SVE remediation. In fact,
2%-5% water vapor is considered necessary to avoid drying of
the soil which would lead to a reduction in contaminant vapor
extraction efficiency.
The basic SVE system is composed of a blower or vacuum pump
which draws contaminant vapors to one or more extraction wells
and then through surface manifold piping, valves, and a
vapor-water separator for subsequent delivery to a vapor
treatment unit. Vapors may be captured or destroyed using
thermal incineration, catalytic oxidation, internal combustion,.
and/or biofiltration.
Bioventing
Bioventing employs the SVE system concept to promote the in-
situ aerobic biodegradation of hydrocarbon contaminants within
vadose soils. This is accomplished by using the SVE mediated
movement of air through the area of soil contamination to deliver
the large volume of oxygen required to develop and maintain
the biomass necessary to accomplish the mineralization (thorough
aerobic biodegradation) of fuel hydrocarbons. It has been
suggested that using air as a mechanism to deliver oxygen to
unsaturated soil could be 1,000 times more efficient than
transferring it to water (Wilson and Ward, 1986). A number
of sources have reported that analysis of SVE systems indicate
that 20-38% of hydrocarbon removal is by biodegradation, with
the remainder occurring by volatilization. Nutrients (primarily
nitrogen and phosphorus) and moisture may also be added to
increase biodegradation rates. The biological destruction
component .is particularly appropriate to the remediation process
when the hydrocarbon contaminant is formed, in part, of compounds
that are essentially not volatile.
SOIL VAPOR EX~RACTION AND BIOVENTING AS APPLIED TO THE PIERCE
ROAD SITE
It is proposed that the existing monitoring wells MW-3, MW-4,
and MW-5 be converted to vapor extraction wells. This will
be accomplished by inserting a packer into each well in order
to isolate that portion of the slotted interval appropriate
to the extraction of known hydrocarbon contaminants. Each well
will be fitted with the piping, instrumentation, and vacuum
pump or blower to induce an air flow of approximately 100 cubic
feet/minute (CFM) throughout the radius of influence for each.
of the three wells proposed for initial SVE conversion.
Additional existing on-site wells may be added to the system,
or additional wells installed as needed (although we do not
now believe this will be necessary). The minimum radius of
influence, as estimated for the relatively homgeneous sandy
soils at the site, is illustrated in Figure 2. The radial
influences illustrated are consistent with the natural air
recharge configuration proposed...where air will infiltrate
"naturally" from the surface into the area of treatment.
System piping will be 4" to 6" diameter Schedule 40 PVC. Flow
control valves and instrumentation to measure flow, pressure,
temperature, and levels of target contaminants will be installed.
Pulse venting is expected to enhance vapor removal efficiencies
and will be employed by operating wells only periodically in
order to allow vapor to diffuse into larger areas.'
Moisture within the extracted air-vapor stream will be removed
with a centrifugal water separator. Moisture thus acquired
is expected to contain detectable concentrations of fuel
hydrocarbons and will either be discharged to the sanitary sewer
or decontaminated on-site within a small biological treatment
unit.
It-is proposed that the destruction of extraction vapors be
either by adsorption onto granular activated carbon (GAC) or
by aerobic biodegradation within a packed-column biofiltration
unit. If used, the GAC units would consist of commercially
available drums connected in series. While GAC has a very high
surface area for adsorption of hydrocarbQn contaminants, GAC
may be quickly spent. Biological destruction of extracted vapors
may be considered as a cost-effective alternative. The bio-
treatment unit proposed for the Pierce Road site would consist
of a columnar biofiltration unit packed with spent mushroom
compost- a material known to function as a superior nutrient
reservoir (primarily for nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium),
moisture retention agent, and source of common, non-pathogenic
microorganisms (i.e. bacteria and fungi) known to be capable
of the thorough aerobic degradation of a wide range of fuel
hydrocarbons. Post-treatment air-stream sampling will be with
a hydrocarbon vapor survey instrument such as the GasTech Model
1314 Hydrocarbon Survey Instrument, a portable gas chromatograph,
or in accordance with other protocol established by Kern County.
Interim sampling of the extracted vapor stream will be conducted
and measurements taken of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH),
carbon dioxide, and oxygen. These measurements will be used
to document biodegradation, determine the need to add moisture
and/or nutrients (via injection into the wells), and project
the end point for bioventing. Biodegradation may be expected
to continue after the light-end compounds of gasoline have
volatilized, therefore, documentation of the aforementioned
is necessary to calculate mass balance of the contaminant so
as to estimate the extent of remediation.
At such time as the SVE-bioventing protocol is accepted by Kern
County, and the system is constructed and installed, a Sampling
and Analysis Plan (SAP) will be developed upon which project
effectiveness and completion will be based.
Ail work will be performed by qualified personnel under the
direction of a California Registered Civil Engineer in accordance
with protocol referenced within the Health and Safety Plan
enclosed as Appendix A.
Should you have any questions regarding this addendum, or if
we may otherwise be of assistance, please contact either of
the undersigned at (510) 455-4991.
Sincerely, ~
Project Microbiologist
Robert Oldham, P.E.
Registered Civil Engineer
JER/RO:dr
enc. Figures 1-3
cc: Central Valley RWQCB
Messrs. Barron and Callahan, Linde Gases, Inc.
B~ANCHE ST
ORANGE St ' ~
Colored Circle Denotes Site Location
Figure 1- Area Map for Bakers Welding Supply, 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
North
MILES I I I
KILOMETERS I J J
0 .25 .5 I
Oxygen Tank
Nitrogen Tank
~~ Main Building
........ ; Former Underground
Storage Tank Pit
North
Asphalt Payment
itoring Well MW-5
0 2O
Scale (ft)
l" = 20 ft
LPG Storage
Tank ~ Presumed Minimum Radius
of Influence for SVE System
Vapor Extraction Wells
Figure 2- Site Map Showing Vapor Extraction Wells
Proposed for 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA. KCoDEH Site #050033.
jSamplinq Port
Regenerative Blower
Vacuum Gauge__~_~(-~ Flow Meter Vapor Treatment Unit
t Sampling Port
Vapor Extraction Woll~ ~ ~
Piping
Ball Valve
Slotted Hydrocarbon Vapor-Water Separator
Annular Pack ~ /
Figure 3- Schematic of Soil Vapor Extraction/
Bioventing System Proposed for
3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Appendix A
Health and Safety Plan
HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES FOR SOIL REMEDIATION AND/OR SOIL
BORINGS-MONITORING WELL INSTALLATIONS
The following Health and Safety Procedures have been developed
for personnel involved in the investigation and/or remediation
of fuel hydrocarbon contaminated soils and/or the installation
of soil borings, monitoring, and extraction wells. While this
protocol is considered generally appropriate, modifications
may be made by qualified service providers and/or regulatory
agency representatives in response to site specific conditions.
PRIMARY HEALTH AND. SAFETY STAFF
Mr. John Rapp, Registered Environmental Health Specialist
Mr. Jeff Schafer, Engineer
PUBLIC HEALTH/ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT
Hazards attendant to the performance of tasks associated with
the above referenced investigative/remedial activities are:
.1) Exposure to the hydrocarbon contaminated soils, 2) The
potential for ignition of flammable/explosive vapors, and 3)
The physical hazards associated with working with/near heavy
equipment.
HAZARDS OF CHEMICAL EXPOSURE
Some of the soil at the site is known to be contaminated with
gasoline. The most toxic constituents present are believed
to be the aromatic constituents of gasoline- benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX); with benzene the most toxic
of these having been identified as a carcinogen that forms
as much as 3.5% of gasoline by weight~ Due to the volatile
nature of the aromatics, the most significant route of potential
exposure appears to be via inhalation. Secondary routes of
exposure include dermal (by direct contact with contaminated
soil) and the incidental ingestion of hydrocarbon contaminated
dusts. The measures prescribed for the minimization of risks
associated with the aforementioned routes of exposure are
described below.
HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH FLAMMABLE VAPORS
Although the levels of fuel hydrocarbons within soils encountered
A.
are typically low to moderate, it is recognized that there is
a potential for vapors to collect within the flammable range.
The measures for early detection of these vapors are described
below.
PHYSICAL HAZARDS
The physical hazards attendant to the performance of site
investigations are those associated with working on/near
mechanized equipment. Appropriate procedures attendant to the
operation of equipment to be used on this project are already
in force and are well known to our staff. Further, work-rest
cycles will be established and adhered to so as to provide
adequate rest periods; liquids will also be available to preclude
problems associated with heat stress.
RISK FACTORS AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION PROCEDURES
Type of Risk Route of Exposure Mitigating Factor(s)
Chemfcal .............. Inhalation ........... -Air purifying
respirators with
organic vapor and
dust filters.
-A hydrocarbon vapor
survey meter will
be used to determine
exposure.
Chemical .......... Dermal/Ingestion ......... -Optimum use of
equipment to minimize
direct exposure
to the soil.
-Use of protective
clothing.
-The nature of the
project does not
involve the
uncontrolled release
of toxic materials.
'Flammable Vapors ....... --. ................. -A hydrocarbon vapor
meter will be used
to determine the
percent of the lower
explosive limit
(LEL) present at
the excavation.
B.
Physical ............... --. ................. -Physical hazards
attendant to this
project are no diff
erent from those
at drilling or
excavation projects
involving non-regu-
lated materials.
-The use of trained
and experienced
staff; properly
attired and using
appropriate and
well-maintained
equipment.
WORK AREA
Only authorized personnel will be permitted within the work
area. This area will be clearly marked and monitored.
DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES
General procedures for handwashing and disposal of soiled
clothing will be adhered to.
MEDICAL ASSISTANCE
On-site staff will be provided with a cellular telephone.
An ambulance will be requested to respond to any situation
involving apparent illness or inury that cannot be appropriately
responded to with basic first aid.
Uriah lnc.
An Environmental Services Company.
January 26, 1990
Mr. Sam Rohn
Union Carbide- Linde Division
2420 Camino Ramon
San Ramon, CA 94583
Re= Site Characterization At 3505 PierCe Road, Bakersfield,
CA
Dear Mr. Rohnl
Uriah, Inc. staff have completed the installation of three (3)
two-inch groundwater monitoring wells at the above referenced
location according to the guidelines and requirements set forth
by the Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services
and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
in the area formerly occupied by a 10,000 gallon underground
unleaded gasoline storage tank...the focus of a known fuel leak
event in December~ 1987, in order to determine the lateral and
vertical extent of fuel hydrocarbon contamination of soil and
groundwater.
METHODOLOGY
A literature review conducted by the previous consultant Krazan
and Associates~ revealed a report by the Kern County Water
Agency, 1987, which stated that "...The groundwater gradient
is from the southeast to northwest, perpendicular to the Kern
River." The report went on to say that the direction of
groundwater flow may reverse seasonally depending upon whether
the Kern River is acting as a sou=ce of recharge or discharge.
With this in mind, it was decided to place a well to the
southeast (#MW-l) in what was believed to be the downgradient
position on October ~7, 1989. A second well (#MW-2) was advanced
adjacent to the building Northeast of the rank pit.on October
18, ~989. (See Figure ~ for specific well locations). The
location of all wel%s was pre-approved by Delores Gough,
Hazardous Materials Specialist for the Kern County Department
of Environmental Health Services.
464 Lindbergh Avenue * Liverrnore, California 94550 · (41,%) 455-4991
An attempt was made to utilize an existing groundwater monitoring
well installed by Krazan and Associates in order to determine
groundwater gradient; however, we were unable to utilized the
well due to the fact that the screened interval had completely
filled with silt. It was also noted upon visual inspection
of the well, that no surface cover was in place over the well.
This well was subsequently abandoned with the prior approval
of Dan Starkey, Hazardous Materials Specialist for the Kern
County Department of Environmental Health Services, on November
28, 1989 by filling it with grout and advancing a new well in
its place (see Figure l) on that same day.
Uriah's groundwater monitoring wells were advanced using a
truck-mounted, outside diameter, continuous-flight,
hollow-stem auger(s) by employees of BSK & Associates Drilling
Company for #MW-1 and #MW-2 and employees of Melton Drilling
for ~MW-3 under the direction of Uriah Staff Geologist, Walter
Floyd. Soil samples were obtained at 5 foot intervals for
lithologic evaluation (using the Unified Soil Classification
System) and/or laboratory analysis. The samples were collected
within clean brass sampling tubes (1.92 inches in diameter and
6 inches in length) placed within a California Modified Split
Spoon Sampler driven through the hollow stem of the drilling
auger, immediately upon the opening of the sampler, the ends
of the sampling tubes were wrapped in aluminum foil, fitted
with plastic caps, sealed with black electrical tape, labeled,
placed on dry ice, and transported to a certified hazardous
waste analytical laboratory under chain of custody for analysis.
soil samples obtained below groundwater were collected using
a standard split spoon sampler for logging purposes only. Ail
work performed was under the supervision of a Registered
Professional Civil Engineer.
Ail soil samples collected during the course of drilling
~MW-1 and #MW-2 appeared clean with no discoloration or odor
noted to be present. Groundwater was encountered at a depth
of 27' in both ~MW-1 and ~MW-2. Soil samples obtained at depths
of 5, 15, and 25 feet in both #MW-1 and #MW-2 were subsequently
analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G),
benzene, toluene, total xylenes, and ethylbenzene (BTX&E) using
D.O.H.S.L.U.F.T. method for TPH-G and EPA Method 8020 for
individual constituents.
The third monitoring well (#MW-3) was advanced in the same manner
as previously referenced. During the course of drilling this
well, a strong hydrocarbon odor of the soil was noted beginning
at 20 feet below grade. Groundwater was encountered at a depth
of 28.5 feet.' Soil samples were collected at depths of 5, 10,
15, 20, 25, and 28 feet in the sams manner as noted above and
then analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-
G), benzene, toluene, total xylenes, and ethylbenzene (BTX&E)
using'D.O.H.S.L.U.F.T, method for TPH-G and EPA Method 8020
for lnOlvidual constituents.
..... Ail three wells were constructed of 2-inch inside diameter,
.. threaded, Schedule 40 PVC risers attached to 0.020 inch slotted
PVC well screen. In each case, the slotted casing extends above
the groundwater surface to account for fluctuating groundwater
levels. A 3 foot bentonite seal was placed above the'screened
- interval in each well to protect groundwater from surface water
£nfiltration. Each well was completed with a cement grout
mixture pumped into the boring with a tremie line. Copies of
the Boring Logs and Monitoring Well Construction Details are
enclosed as Attachment B.
All tailings from the drilling were placed on visqueen, covered
and stored on site pending th~.results of certified laboratory
analysis for the determination of proper disposal.
The hollow stem augers were steam cleaned prior to arrival on
the site. All sampling equipment was steam cleaned prior to
being brought on site and between all samplings.
Groundwater monitoring wells #MW-1 and #MW-2 were developed
and sampled by Mr. Floyd on October 19, 1989. Monitoring Well
.._ #MW-3 was developed and sampled on November 29, 1989. (See
The Groundwater Monitoring Well Development and Sampling Report
enclosed as Attachment B.
- The wells were surveyed by Uriah, Inc. staff using a transit
and rod on November 28, 1989. An on site datum was used to
obtain an ~l~vation of the wells relative to each other.
Groundwater gradient was determined to be South 30 degrees West,
or roughly parallel to the Kern River (see Figure 2 attached).
This most recent data differs from gradient information supplied
by the Kern County Water Agency report on water conditions in
-' Improved District #4, 1987 Report. According to the report,
groundwater flow was Northwest, perpendicular to the Kern River,
which would be the expected direction of groundwater flow when
--- free of other influences. The lagoon near the water treatment
plant approximately a quarter of a mile away and the Calloway
Canal appear to have a significant influence on the hydraulic
gradient at this site.
LABORATORY RESULTS
Copies of all laboratory results as received from the certified
hazardous waste analytical laboratory are enclosed as Attachment
C.
CONCLUSIONS ANp.~R~CO~MMENDATIONS
The results of certified laboratory analysis are summarized
_B the following chart:
CHART I
Sample ~ Ma~rix TPH-G ( B T X E. )
** Concentrations ir, parts per billion- ppb
BK~-5' soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D, N,D.
BKI-15' soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
BK1-25' soil N,D. N,D. N,D. N.D. N.D.
BKR-5' soil N.D. N,D. N,D, N.D. N.D.
BK2-15' soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D, N,D,
BK2-25' soil N.D. N,D, N,D, N,D, N,D,
LB3-5' soil N.D, N,D, N.D. N,D, N,D.
LB3-10' soil N,D, N,D. N.D. N,D, N,D,
LB3-15' SOil N.D, N.D. N.D, N,D, N,D,
LB3-20' soil 1074.09 9.97 134,82 199,55 22.18
LB3-25' soil 53,70 0.50 6.74 9,98 1,11
LB3-28' ~oll <5 <0.02 0.21 0,1C ~0.02
MW-1 (BK1) water ':cD. N.D. N.D. N.D, N,D.
MW-2 (BK2) water 125 22,2 2,4 N,D, ~,~7
MW-3 (BK3) w~ter 3~7¢,4~ 90 140 550 990
Concentrations of benzene in groundwater fro~ ~MW-2 and ~MW-
3 were found to be above the Action Level of 0,7 parts per
billion (ppb) set by the CaLifornia State D~partmen~ of Health
Services (DOHS) for benzene in drinking water. Due to the
seasonal fluctuations in the direction of groundwater flow~
--- data obtained to date may not be sufficient to thoroughly
.' =~nm the potential extent of soil and groundwater contamination
-~t the referenced site,
Copies of this report have been included for your convenience,
It is recommended that one be forwarded to e&ch of the following
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services Company
June 15, 1990
Mr. Sam Rohn
Region Environmental Coordinator
Union Carbide- Linde Division
2420 Camino Ramon
San Ramon, CA 94583
Re: Completion of Site Characterization at 3505 Pierce Road~
Bakersfield, CA.
Dear Mr. Rohn:
Uriah, Inc. has completed the Site Characterization at the above
referenced facility as set forth in our proposal dated March
28, 1990 and according to the guidelines and requirements set
forth by the Kern County Department of Environmental Health
Services and Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.
METHODOLOGY
In addition to The three 2" groundwater monitoring wells
installed on October 17 and 18, 1989 and November 28, 1989
(see Uriah's Site Characterization Report dated January 26,
1990), three additional 2" groundwater monitoring wells (MW-
4, MW-5, and MW-6) were installed at the locations shown in
Figure t attached on May 1, 1990.
Ail groundwater monitoring wells were advanced using a truck-
mounted, 8" outside diameter, continuous-flight, hollow-stem
auger(s) by employees of Melton Drilling under the direction
of Uriah Staff Geologist, Walter Floyd. Soil samples were
obtained at 5 foot intervals for lithologic evaluation (using
the Unified Soil Classification System) and/or laboratory
analysis. The samples were collected within clean, brass sample
tubes (1.92 inches in diameter and 6.0 inches in length) placed
within a California Modified Split Spoon Sampler driven through
the hollow stem of the drilling auger. Immediately upon the
opening of the sampler and the removal of the sampling tubes,
the ends of each tube were wrapped in foil, fitted with plastic
caps, sealed with black electrical tape, labeled, placed on
dry ice, and transported to a certified hazardous waste
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Llvermore. California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
analytical laboratory under chain of custody for analysis for
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G), benzene,
toluene, total xylenes, and ethylbenzene (BTX&E) using D.O.H.S.
L.U.F.T. method and EPA Method 5030/8020. Soil samples obtained
below groundwater were collected using a standard split spoon
sampler for logging purposes only. Ail work was reviewed by
a California Registered Professional Civil Engineer. ..
Ail soil samples collected during the course of drilling MW-
4 and MW-6 appeared free of significant contamination with no
discoloration or odor present. However, a strong hydrocarbon
odor was noted during the course of drilling MW-5 beginning
at 20' below grade. Groundwater was encountered at a depth
of 33 feet in MW-4, MW5, and MW-6.
All three wells were constructed of 2-inch inside diameter,
threaded, Schedule 40 PVC risers attached to 0.020 inch slotted
PVC well screen. In each case, the perforated section of the
well casing extends 15 feet below and § feet above the first
encountered groundwater. The sand pack consisting of #3 Monterey
Sand extends from the bottom of the boring to 2 feet above the
perforations. A 3 foot thick bentonite seal was placed above
the sand pack. The remaining annulus was tremie filled with
a grout bentonite mixture. The sidewalls of MW-6 caved in after
the sand pack was placed creating a natural sand pack above.
the Monterey Sand pack; therefore, the bentonite plug was not
emplaced until a depth of 10 feet. Copies of the Boring Logs
and Monitoring Well Construction Details are enclosed as APPENDIX
Iisi! ~
Ail tailings from the drilling were placed on visqueen, covered
and stored on site pending the receipt of certified laboratory
analysis for the determination of proper disposal.
The hollow stem augers were steam cleaned prior to arrival on
the site. All sampling equipment was steam cleaned prior to
being brought on site and between all samplings.
Groundwater monitoring well MW-4 was developed and sampled by
Mr. Floyd on May 2, 1990. Monitoring wells MW-5 and MW-6 were
developed and sampled by Mr. Floyd on May 3, ~990. The three
previously installed groundwater monitoring wells (MW-l, MW-
2, and MW-3 were also sampled by Mr. Floyd. Uriah's well, MW-
1 installed on October 17, 1989 had silted up as had a well
previously placed at the site by Krazan Associates. Tn each
case, depth to groundwater was measured using an electric tape
and each well was then purged of three well volumes using a
WaTerra brand hand pump. Measurements of pH, conductlvity~
and temperature were acquired and recorded as referenced within
APPENDIX "C", attached. Subsequent to the development of each
well, a groundwater sample was acquired within a clean,
disposable, polyethylene bailer lowered into the well just below
the water ~urface. Upon being brought to grade, the water sample
was immediately transferred into two 40 ml Volatile Organic
Analysis (VOA) vials. Each vial was promptly sealed with a
teflon-lined screw cap, marked, and placed on blue ice for
transportation to a State certified hazardous waste'analytical
laboratory under chain of custody for analysis for Total
Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G) using TPH by D.O.H.S.'
L.U.F.T. method with individual constituents (BTX&E) using EPA
Method 5030/8020. Extracted groundwater, in addition to that
acquired for laboratory analysis, was placed into a covered
DOT drum for on site storage pending receipt of laboratory data.
The wells were surveyed by Mr. Floyd using a transit and rod
on May 3, 1990. The elevation of the groundwater was measured
with respect to an on site datum which was given an arbitrary
elevation of 100 feet. The datum selected was the east end
of the loading dock located closest to the liquid Argon storage
tank.
Data acquired by Uriah to date does not support a Kern County
Water Agency Report that the direction of groundwater flow
fluctuates seasonally. Additional data should be acquired
anddeveloped prior to the formation of a conclusion in this
matter. Uriah measured the flow direction in November of 1989,
and found it to be to the Southwest. At this time, recharge
from the Kern River would be expected to be at/near its minimum.
The flow direction was again measured during May 1990, a time
when Spring runoff from the mountains should maximize recharge,
however, flow direction was found again to be Southwest (see
Figure 2); although slightly different than when previously
measured in that contours were somewhat altered. This is
probably due to the water table lowering, exposing a gravel
lens with differential flow. This gravel lens is depicted in
the Geologic Cross Sections attached as Figures 5, 6, and 7.
Also, the water table was found to be five feet lower than when
measured the previous Fall indicating that no significant
recharge had been supplied to this aquifer. Because of below
average precipitation, it is possible that the amount of water
flowing in the Kern River was insufficient to supply hydraulic
recharge.
LABORATORY RESULTS
Copies of all laboratory results as received from the certified
hazardous waste analytical laboratory are enclosed as APPENDIX
"a!~ .
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of certified laboratory analysis are summarized
in the following chart:
CHART I
Sample # Matrix TPH-G (B T' X E1
**Concentrations in parts per billion- ppb
BK4-5' Soil N.D. 0.60 N.D. 2.5 1.5
BK4-t0' Soil 50 1.3 12 2.4 1.5
BK4-20' Soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
BK4-25' Soil N.D~ 3.0 t0 1.31 N.D.
BK4-30' Soil N.D. 0.90 1.7 N.D. N.D.
BKS-5' Soil N.D. 3.1 2.7 N.D. N.D.
BKS-10' Soil N.D. 5.9 N.D. N.D. N.D.
BK5-15' Soil N.D. N.D. 0.70 N.D. N.D.
BK5-20' Soil 190,000 180 590 5,510 410
BK5-25' Soil N.D. N.D. 0.80 N.D. N.D.
BK5-30' Soil 180 t.6 8.7 5.98 N.D.
(Please note that the laboratory interpreted the 6 on the chain
of custody for the following soil samples as a G. Therefore,
soil samples labeled BK6 by Uriah are noted as BKG on the
certified laboratory data),
BK6-5' Soil N.D. N.D. 17 N.D. N.D.
BK6-10 Soil N.D. N.D. 7.7 N.D. N.D.
BK6-15 Soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
" BK6-20 Soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
BK6-25 Soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
BK6-30 Soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
BK6-35 Soil N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
MW-1 Water N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
MW-2 Water 370 43 33 26.3 31
MW-3 Water 11,000 360 3,!00 1,590 30
MW-4 (BK4) Water 1,900 110 110 406 N.D.
MW-5 (BKS) Water 6,000 68 130 968 290
MW-6 (~K6) Water 83 N.D. N.D. 2.06 N.D.
N.D .... Non-Detected
TPH-G...Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
B...Benzene
T...Toluene
X...Total Xylenes
E...Ethylbenzene
Low levels of volatile gasoline compounds were detected
throughout the soils encountered during the advancement of MW-
4 (BK-4). This is believed to be vapor phase migration
throughout the sands present in the unsaturated zone.
Significant levels of soil contamination are present in MW-5
at a depth 20 feet below grade and again at a depth of 30 feet.
Low levels of volatile gasoline constituents were detected in
soil above 20 feet in MW-5 and are also believed to be vapor
phase migration. Only very tow levels of toluene were detected
in soil at a depth of 5 and 10 feet below grade in MW-6 (BK6).
Significant TPH-G and BTX&E contamination of groundwater was
found to be present in the three groundwater monitoring wells
just newly installed (MW-4, MW-5, and MW-6), as well as the
previously installed wells (MW-2 and MW-3), with the exception
of MW-1 which resulted in no detectable levels of contamination.
The northern end of the former tank pit (location of MW-3),
appears to be the area of maximum contamination. Iso-
concentration contour maps are enclosed as Figures 3 and 4.
The contour lines between wells were determined mathematically.
The lines outside of the wells were approximated. It is believed
that the gravel lens in the area of MW-4 and MW-5 i~ providing
a conduit for contaminant migration.
It is recommended that a computer model be developed and used
to design an in-situ bioremediation treatment system utilizing
an in~ection-extraction system to detoxify soil and groundwater
simultaneously should remediation become necessary. Until the
model is developed, it is proposed that we proceed with quarterly
groundwater monitoring of all wells in order to determine
contaminant plume patterning over time and to assist with the
model calibration..
copies of this report have been included for }'our convenience
and should be forwarded to each of the following agencies for
their review and comment:
Supplemental Information Submitted in
Support of Original Application
U iah Env ronmen aI Services nc.
2401 Mst Orangeburg Avenue #675-218, Mode~ CA 95355
(510) 455-4991 (209) 551-3591 (209) 551-1200
~n Franci~co,'~v Ars Cen~al Valley FAX
January 25, 1993
Ms. Betty Coppersmith
San Joaquin Valley Unified
Air Pollution Control District
2700 M Street, Suite 275
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Supplemental Information Concerning Application #0505001-
Installation of a Pilot Soil Vapor Extraction System at
3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Dear Ms. Coopersmith:
With regard to the request for additional information made by
Mr. Thomas E. Goff of your office, please be advised of the
following:
1. The vapor destruction unit has recently been tested
as it will be configured for the Pierce Road s'i. te.
It is designed to use propane as supplemental fuel
at a maximum rate of 0.5 gallons per hour.
2. Two forms of bioremediation were mentioned in our
permit application. The first was the bioventing
that is an inherent (but only recently acknowledged)
component of the soil vapor extraction (SVE) process.
The bioventing (or in-situ biological detoxification)
develops as the SVE system draws air through vadose
soils. As the soil column becomes better oxygenated and,
perhaps, as moisture is more evenly distributed, the number
of indigenous soil bacteria increase. Many of these
organisms are capable of the thorough aerobic degradation
(mineralization) of fuel hydrocarbons to form the end
products of carbon dioxide, minerals, and water...and
so as their numbers increase, bacteria inetabolize as much
as 20% of the hydrocarbon contaminants remediated at an
SVE site. Intermediate metabolic products and the carbon
dioxide formed as a result of complete degradation would
be drawn into the vapor destruction unit along with
hydrocarbon vapors not biologically degraded. All organic
compounds would be destroyed in the unit.
The second biological treatment component addressed
in our application was the remediation of water,
potentially contaminated with fuel hydrocarbons, that
we expect to collect within the in-line vapor-water
separator designed to remove unwanted water from the
extracted soil gas prior to it entering the vapor
destruction unit. While concentrations of. hydrocarbons
within this water are expected to be low enough to permit.
the water to be discharged to the sanitary sewer,
Uriah is prepared to install a bioreactor to treat
the water, if necessary. The enclosed figure provides
both flow and equipment information. Air samples taken
from the top of the reactor column have, in the past,
been free of detectable concentrations of hydrocarbons.
Therefore, we anticipate no loss of fugitive hydrocarbons
from the bioreactor (water treatment) unit.
Thank you for your assistance to date. If you have further
questions, please contact me at (209) 551-3591.
Sincerely,
John E. Rapp
Uriah, Inc.
JER:ms
enc.
Nutrient Supply Tank
Treated Flow Meter
Discharge G.P.M.
Nutrient Throttle Pomp
Tank Pressure Valve /
Chemical Gauge ~ 0 [ " '
. .
Air.Supply
~ Water inlet imm
~ Tl~r~fl: Valve-- -- Compressor ~ Solenoid operated
/T valve (Timer Operated) '
!
Contaminat~i Water Inlet
Fluidized- Bed ~ Uriah Environm~nta~l Service. s I__nc.
2401 E~t
Bioreactor System ,3,~,0,~_~ ,~,~,.~,,
Uriah ...... Env onrne ntal Services. nc.______
2401 East Orangeburg Avenue 675-218, Modesto. CA 95355"
~ , /. / 'y ~ Cen.walVaiiev [:AX
December 21 , 1992
Ms. Betty Coppersmith
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District
Southern Regional Office
2700 "M" Street, Suite 275
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Permit Application Concerning Soil Vapor Extraction Proposed
for Bakers Welding, 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Dear Ms. Coppersmith:
With regard to our telephone conversation of last week, please
be advised that I have spoken with Jeff Schafer of my office
(the project engineer) concerning the rating of the thermal
destruction unit proposed for the above referenced site.
Jeff confirmed that is our intention to withdraw hydrocarbon
vapors from subsurface soils with a 3 hp electric pump with
a maximum draw of 53 scfm. As shown on page three of the
November 12, 1992 letter accompanying our permit application,
the calculated removal rate of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
as Gasoline (TPH-G) is 4.66 lbs/day. As this figure is based
upon our estimate that 1/3 the maximum concentration of TPH-G
known to exist in vadose soil at the site represents the average
concentration-of fuel hydrocarbon contaminants available for
extraction, it is theoretically possible for the amount of
the contaminants introduced into the treatment system to be
greater than 4.66 lbs/day...with a not to exceed limit of 13.98
lbs/day (3 x 4.66). We do not, however, expect to reach these
levels and believe that actual site conditions favor the 4.66
lbs/day rate.
Regardless of the actual rate encountered, the SVE treatment
unit is equipped with sensors that will terminate extraction
should the treatment temperature fall below that which will
ensure thorough destruction of all hydrocarbon vapors introduced
into the system (which is rated for the full 53 scfm flow
possible).
If you desire additional information, or if we may otherwise
be of assistance, please contact Jeff or me at .(209) 551-3591
or (510) 455-4991.
Sincerely,
John E. Rapp
Uriah, Inc.
JER:ms
Uriah Inc.
An Enoironmental Services Company
June 30, 1992
Ms. Delores Gough
Kern County Department of
Environmental Health Services
2700 "M" Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Revised Workplan for the Remediation of Gasoline
Contamination of Soil Occurring at 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA. Kern County Sits Permit #050033.
Dear Ms. Gough:
As a result in the continued declinatioh of the groundwater
table at the above referenced site, Uriah has been authorized
by Linde Gases of the West, Inc. to submit this workplan addendum
for the remediation of gasoline contaminated vadose soils.
Tasks described herein are intended to comply with requirements
set forth by the Kern County Department of Environmental Health
Services (KCoDEH) and guidelines promulgated by the Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES
As a result of a December, 1987 fuel leak event at the Pierce
Road facility, a 10,000 gallon on-site underground unleaded
gasoline storage tank was removed and a limited environmental
assessment performed by Krazan and Associates· Uriah, Inc.
was subsequently engaged to install, develop, and sample eight
(8) two-inch diameter groundwater monitoring wells. Six of
the wells were installed on October 17 and 18, 1989, November
28, 1989, and May 1, 1990. Two additional wells were later
installed on June 27 and June 28, 1991. Compliance monitoring
of the wells has been ongoing in accordance with requirements
set forth by KCoDEH.
During November of 1991, Uriah submitted a Remedial Action Plan
(RAP) in which bioremediation appeared as the treatment
technology of choice for the decontamination of'vadose and
saturated soils, as well as groundwater containing significant
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
concentrations of gasoline and/or its aromatic constituents
(i.e. benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes [BTEX]).
The biotreatment system featured a fluidized-bed bioreactor
vessel into which extracted groundwater would be introduced
and thorougly degraded by a consortium of common, non-pathogenic,
hydrocarbon-utilizing bacteria. Once free of detectable
concentrations of the target contaminants, a portion of the
treated water, now oxygen and nutrient rich, and containing
large populations of the hydrocarbon-utilizing bacteria, would
be reinjected to promote in-situ biodegradation of vadose soil.
However, due to continuing drought conditions, the resultant
lowering of the water table, and reduction in levels of dissolved
contaminants in groundwater, it has been suggested that soil
vapor extraction would be a more appropriate remediation
technology.
SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION AND BIOVENTING- TECItNOLOGY OVERVIEW
Soil Vapor Extraction
Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) of organic contaminants in vadose
soils is a process that embraces the principle that many anthro-
pogenic organic hydrocarbons, including those contained within
gasoline, will volatilize at ambient soil temperatures. Upon
partitioning from the liquid to the gaseous phase, these
contaminants will enter the pore spaces between soil particles
until an equilibrium is achieved. This partitioning is described
by Raoult's Law. Partitioning into the vapor phase is determined
by the volatility of a contaminant, its solubility in water,
and the degree to which it will adsorb to soil and other
particulate matter. Henry's Law and vapor pressure are used
to determine appropriate volatility for SVE. Henry's Law
constants above 0.01 (dimensionless) tend to move from aqueous
to gaseous phase. Contaminants with vapor pressures greater
than 25 mm/Hg are generally considered as good condidates for
SVE, with vapor pressures as low as lmm/Hg acceptable. The
vapor pressure of gasoline is between 37 and 260 mm/Hg depending
upon the degree of weathering (degradation).
The solubility of gasoline is appropriate to SVE parameters
and, while gasoline may adsorb onto soil and other (organic)
particles within the soil matrix, sorption is generally not
so strong as to preclude efficient SVE remediation. In fact,
2%-5% water vapor is considered necessary to avoid drying of
the soil which would lead to a reduction in contaminant vapor
extraction efficiency.
The basic SVE system is composed of a blower or vacuum pump
which draws contaminant vapors to one or more extraction wells
and then through surface manifold piping, valves, and a
vapor-water separator for subsequent delivery to a vapor
treatment unit. Vapors may be captured or destroyed using
thermal incineration, catalytic oxidation, internal combustion,
and/or biofiltration.
Bioventing
Bioventing employs the SVE system concept to promote the in-
situ aerobic biodegradation of hydrocarbon contaminants within
vadose soils. This is accomplished by using the SVE mediated
movement of air through the area of soil contamination to deliver
the large volume of oxygen required to develop and maintain
the biomass necessary to accomplish the mineralization (thorough
aerobic biodegradation) of fuel hydrocarbons. It has been
suggested that using air as a mechanism to deliver oxygen to
unsaturated soil could be 1,000 times more efficient than
transferring it to water (Wilson and Ward, 1986). A number
of sources have reported that analysis of SVE systems indicate
that 20-38% of hydrocarbon removal is by biodegradation, with
the remainder occurring by volatilization. Nutrients (primarily
nitrogen and phosphorus) and moisture may also be added to
increase biodegradation rates. The biological destruction
component is particularly appropriate to the remediation process
when the hydrocarbon contaminant is formed, in part, of compounds
that are essentially not volatile.
SOIL VAPOR EX~q~ACTION AND BIOVENTING AS APPLIED TO THE PIERCE
ROAD SITE
It is proposed that the existing monitoring wells MW-3, MW-4,
and MW-5 be converted to vapor extraction wells. This will
be accomplished by inserting a packer into each well in order
to isolate that portion of the slotted interval appropriate
to the extraction of known hydrocarbon contaminants. Each well
will be fitted with the piping, instrumentation, and vacuum
um~q~_~_%9.w~ to induce an air flow of approximately 100 cubic
feet/minute (CFM) throughout the radius of influence for each
of the three wells proposed for initial SVE conversion.
Additional existing on-site wells may be added to the system,
or additional wells installed as needed (although we do not
now believe this will be necessary). The minimum radius of
influence, as estimated for the relatively homgeneous sandy
soils at the site, is illustrated in Figure 2. The radial
influences illustrated are consistent with the natural air
recharge configuration proposed...where air will infiltrate
"naturally" from the surface into the area of treatment.
System piping will be 4" to 6" diameter Schedule 40 PVC. Flow
control valves and instrumentation to measure flow, pressure,
temperature, and levels of target contaminants will be installed.
Pulse venting is expected to enhance vapor removal efficiencies
and will be employed by operating wells only periodically in
order to allow vapor to diffuse into larger areas.
Moisture within the extracted air-vapor stream will be removed
with a centrifugal water separator. Moisture thus acquired
is expected to contain detectable concentrations of fuel
hydrocarbons and will either be discharged to the sanitary sewer
or decontaminated on-site within a small biological treatment
unit.
It is proposed that the destruction of extraction vapors be
either by adsorption onto granular activated carbon (GAC) or
by'aerobic biodegradation within a packed-column biofiltration
unit. If used, the GAC units would consist of commercially
available drums connected in series. While GAC has a very high
surface area for adsorption of hydroc, arbon contaminants, GAC
may be quickly spent. Biological destruction of extracted vapors
may be considered as a cost-effective alternative. The bio-
treatment unit proposed for the Pierce Road site would consist
of a columnar biofiltration unit packed with spent mushroom
compost- a material known to function as a superior nutrient
reservoir (primarily for nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium),
moisture retention agent, and source of common, non-pathogenic
microorganisms (i.e. bacteria and fungi) known to be capable
of the thorough aerobic degradation of a wide range of fuel
hydrocarbons. Post-treatment air-stream sampling will be with
a hydrocarbon vapor survey instrument such as the GasTech Model
1314 Hydrocarbon Survey Instrument, a portable gas chromatograph,
or in accordance with other protocol established by Kern County.
Interim sampling of the extracted vapor stream will be conducted
and measurements taken of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH),
carbon dioxide, and oxygen. These measurements will be used
to document biodegradation, determine the need to add moisture
and/or nutrients (via injection into the wells), and project
the end point for bioventing. Biodegradation may be expected
to continue after the light-end compounds of gasoline have
volatilized, therefore, documentation of the aforementioned
is necessary to calculate mass balance of the contaminant so
as to estimate the extent of remediation.
At such time as the SVE-bioventing protocol is accepted by Kern
County, and the system is constructed and installed, a Sampling
and Analysis Plan (SAP) will be developed upon which project
effectiveness and completion will be based.
Ail work will be performed by qualified personnel under the
direction of a California Registered Civil Engineer in accordance
with protocol referenced within the Health and Safety Plan
enclosed as Appendix A.
Should you have any questions regarding this addendum, or if
we may otherwise be· of assistance, please contact either of
the undersigned at (510) 455-4991.
Sincerely,
John E. Rapp
Project Microbiologist
Robert Oldham, P.E.
Registered Civil Engineer
JER/RO: dr
enc. Figures 1-3
cc: Central Valley RWQCB
Messrs. Barron and Callahan, Linde Gases, Inc.
inn
L ST
OR
Colored Circle Denotes Site Location
Figure 1- Area Map for Bakers Welding Supply, 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
North
I
0 Y~ 'h 1
0 25 .5 I
Oxygen Tank
Nitrogen Tank
Argon Tank Loading Dock
'::'".'.: !'.\
Storage Tank Pit
Asphalt Pave~ent North ~
onitoring Well MW-5 ~
0 20
Scale (ft)
1" = 20 ft
LPG Storage
Tank ~ Presumed Minimum Radius
of Influence for SVE System
Vapor Extraction #ells
Figure 2- Site Map Showing Vapor Extraction Wells
Proposed for 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA. KCoDEH Site #050033.
Sampling Port
Temperature Gauge Vacuum Pump or
~~ ~ Regenerative Blower
Vacuum Gauge-~__~( Flow Meter Vapor Treatment Unit
Sampling Port
Vapor Extraction Well ~
~ PVC Piping
Ba~l
Valve
To Water Collection/Disposal/Treatment
Slotted Hydrocarbon Vapor-Water Separator
A~nular Pack~
Figure 3- Schematic of Soil Vapor Extraction/
Bioventing System Proposed for
3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Appendix A
Health and Safety Plan
HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES FOR SOIL REMEDIATION AND/OR SOIL
BORINGS-MONITORING WELL INSTALLATIONS
The following Health and Safety Procedures have been developed
for personnel involved in the investigation and/or remediation
of fuel hydrocarbon contaminated soils and/or the installation
of soil borings, monitoring, and extraction wells. While this
protocol is considered generally appropriate, modifications
may be made by qualified service providers and/or regulatory
agency representatives in response to site specific conditions.
PRIMARY HEALTH AND SAFETY STAFF
Mr. John Rapp, Registered Environmental Health Specialist
Mr. Jeff Schafer, Engineer
PUBLIC HEALTH/ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT
Hazards attendant to the performance of tasks associated with
the above referenced investigative/remedial activities are:
1) Exposure to the hydrocarbon contaminated soils, 2) The
potential for ignition of flammable/explosive vapors, and 3)
The physical hazards associated with working with/near heavy
equipment.
HAZARDS OF CHEMICAL EXPOSURE
Some of the soil at the site is known to be contaminated with
gasoline. The most toxic constituents present are believed
to be the aromatic constituents of gasoline- benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX); with benzene the most toxic
of these having been identified as a carcinogen that forms
as much as 3.5% of gasoline by weight.. Due to the volatile
nature of the aromatics, the most significant route of potential
exposure appears to be via inhalation. Secondary routes of
exposure include dermal (by direct contact with contaminated
soil) and the incidental ingestion of hydrocarbon contaminated
dusts. The measures prescribed for the minimization of risks
associated with the aforementioned routes of exposure are
described below.
HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH FLAMMABLE VAPORS
Although the levels of fuel hydrocarbons within soils encountered
A.
are typically low to moderate, it is recognized that there is
a potential for vapors to collect within the flammable range.
The measures for early detection of these vapors are described
below.
PHYSICAL HAZARDS
The physical hazards attendant to the performance of site
investigations are those associated with working on/near
mechanized equipment. Appropriate procedures attendant to the
operation of equipment to be used on this project are already
in force and are well known to our staff. Further, work-rest
cycles will be established and adhered to so as to provide
adequate rest periods; liquids will also be available to preclude
problems associated with heat stress.
RISK FACTORS AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION PROCEDURES
Type of Risk Route of Exposure Mitigating Factor(s)
Chemical .............. Inhalation ........... -Air purifying
respirators with
organic vapor and
dust filters.
-A hydrocarbon vapor
survey meter will
be used to determine
exposure.
Chemical .......... Dermal/Ingestion ......... -Optimum use of
equipment to minimize
direct exposure
to the soil.
-Use of protective
clothing.
-The nature of the
project does not
involve the
uncontrolled release
of toxic materials.
Flammable Vapors ....... --. ................. -A hydrocarbon vapor
meter will be used
to determine the
percent of the lower
explosive limit
(LEL) present at
the excavation.
B.
Physical ............... --. ................. -Physical hazards
attendant to this
project are no diff
erent from those
at drilling or
excavation projects
involving non-regu-
lated materials.
-The use of trained
and experienced
staff; properly
attired and using
apDropriate and
well-maintained
equipment.
WORK AREA
Only authorized personnel will be permitted within the work
area. This area will be clearly marked and monitored.
DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES
General procedures for handwashing and disposal of soiled
clothing will be adhered to.
MEDICAL ASSISTANCE
On-site staff will be provided with a cellular telephone.
An ambulance will be requested to respond to any situation
involving apparent illness or inury that cannot be appropriately
responded to with basic first aid.
Ce
Uriah 1
An Enoironmental Seroices
////I/
Mr. W. J. Callahan ~~'~/~
Linde Gases of the West, Inc.
2678 Bishop Drive, Suite 200
San Ramon, CA 94583
Re: Quarterly Summary Report for Baker's Welding,
3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit #050033)
Dear Mr. Callahan:
Please find enclosed the Quarterly Summary Report prepared
by Uriah, Inc. on your behalf fer the above referenced
facility.
For your convenience, copies of this report have been
enclosed. It is recommended that a copy be forwarded to
each of the following regulatory agencies:
Kern County Health Department
Department of Environmental Health Services
2700 M Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Attention: Dolores Gough
Central Valley_ Region Water Quality Control Board
3443~outier ~oad
Sacrament o, flA 95827-3098 ~-~ ~-~ k] 0
At~ntion:/Fuel Leak Section
If you have any questions, or if we may otherwise be of
assistance, please contact the undersigned at (510)
455-4991.
Sincerely,
Denise A. Rapp
Vice-President, Uriah, Inc.
DAR:ms
eric.
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · ~455-499~
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services Company
QUARTERLY SUMMARY REPORT
FOR:
BAKER'S WELDING
3505 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD,'CA
OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES
In October and November, 1989, Uriah, Inc. staff supervised
the drilling and installation of three (3) 2-inch inside-
diameter groundwater monitoring wells (MW-l, MW-2, and MW-
3) at the site in response to. requirements set forth by the
Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services and
the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board in
the area formerly occupied by a 10,000 gallon .underground
unleaded gasoline storage tank (Figure 2)...the focus of a
known fuel leak event in December, 1987, in order to
determine the lateral and vertical extent of fuel
hydrocarbon contamination of soil and groundwater. The
newly installed wells were developed and sampled by Uriah
staff on October 19 and November 29, 1989. The wells were
surveyed on November 29, 1989 using an on-site datum to
obtain an elevation of the wells relative to each other.
Groundwater gradient was determined to be S 30o W, or
roughly parallel to the Kern River. Certified analyses of
soil samples obtained attendant to the installation of the
wells resulted in low levels of Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G), benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and total xylenes (BTEX) in LB-3 only (also
known as MW-3) at depths of 20', 25', and 28' below ground
surface (bgs). Certified analyses of groundwater samples
obtained from the developed wells revealed concentrations
of benzene above the Action Level of 0.7 parts per billion
(ppb) for benzene in drinking water in wells MW-2 and MW-3.
Due to the possible seasonal fluctuations in the direction
of groundwater flow, the data obtained to date was not
believed to be sufficient to thoroughly define the
potential extent of soil and groundwater contamination at
Page 1
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
the site. Please refer to Uriah's report of work entitled
"Site Characterization at:...", dated January 26, 1990 for
further details.
On May 1, 1990, Uriah supervised the drilling and
installation of three additional 2-inch inside-diameter
groundwater monitoring wells (MW-4, MW-5, and MW-6) at the
locations shown in Figure 2, attached to further define the
plume of soil and groundwater contamination. Low levels .of
volatile gasoline compounds were detected throughout the
soils encountered during the advancement of MW-4 (BK-4).
Significant levels of soil contamination were present in
MW-5 (BK-5) at a depth of 20' bgs and again at a depth of
30 feet bgs. Low levels of volatile gasoline constituents
were detected in soil abDve 20 feet in MW-5. Only very low
levels of toluene were detected in soil at a depth of 5 and'
10 feet bgs in MW-6 (BK-6). Certified analyses of
groundwater samples obtained from the developed wells on
May 2, 1990 revealed significant TPH-G and BTEX
contamination. Certified analyses of the three wells
previously installed in 1989 (MW-l, MW-2, and MW-3) also
revealed significant TPH-G and BTEX contamination in MW-2
and MW-3 with the exception of MW-l, which resulted in no
detectable levels of contamination. Data obtained to date
indicated that the northern end of the former tank pit
(location of MW-3), appears to be the area of'maximum
contamination. Groundwater gradient on May 3, 1990 was
determined to be flowing once again to the southwest.
Please refer to Uriah's report of work entitled "Completion
of Site Characterization at:...", dated June 15, 1990 for
further details.
Quarterly sampling~ and analyses of the on-site wells was
performed on August 7, 1990 and on November 29, 1990. The
results of these analyses are shown in Table I of this
report.
A Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Was prepared for the site as
requested by Kern County dated February 28, 1991. This RAP
was approved by Kern County with the additional requirement
of the installation of two additional groundwater
monitoring wells. The two additional 2-inch inside-
diameter wells (MW-7 and MW-8) were installed on June 27
and 28, 1991. Certified analyses of soil samples obtained
at 36.5' and 46' bgs in MW-7, and 36' and 41' bgs in MW-8
revealed low levels of some of the target contaminants.
The relative elevations of all on-site wells were surveyed
and the depths to water measured by Uriah staff on Jul~ 17,
1991. However, the water table was so low on this date,
Page 2
that only wells MW-7 and MW-8 contained water and no
gradient could be determined. The hydraulic conductivity
"K" of the water-bearing formation was determined for both
MW-7 and MW-8 using the Hvorslev Method. Groundwater
samples were obtained from the developed wells on July 18,
1991. At this time, the levels of hydrocarbon contaminants
in groundwater appeared to increase towards wells MW-7 and
MW-3 (i.e. to the NW), despite the fact that the hydraulic
gradients determined in earlier studies are to the SW.
Levels also increase to the SSW (as indicated by relative
concentrations at MW-5). In order to finalize the design
of the pumping system for the remediation system, the
hydraulic conductivities as calculated, porosities, aquifer
thickness, the contamination levels as described in well'
logs and the December, 1990 reports of laboratory analyses,
and the calculated gradient were introduced into the SUTRA
software program. Please refer to Uriah's report of work
entitled "Report of Groundwater Monitoring Well
Installations at:...", dated August 30, 1991 for further
information.
Quarterly sampling and certified analyses of the on-site
wells was performed on November 7, 1991. All wells were
dry with the exception of wells MW-7 and MW-8. Initial
visual inspection of the site revealed that the half of the
yard area in which all eight of Uriah's monitoring wells
are located, had been recently regraded and repaved. All
monitoring well traffic covers had been replaced with water
meter boxes fitted with loose (unbolted) metal covers with
a hole in the center for meter reader use (these covers
indicate "water" or "sewer" on the cover top). These
covers will easily admit surface water drainage into the
well casing (see Figure 3). Monitoring well MW-6 has been
paved over and could not be located. The condition of each
well is described as follows:
MW-l: Condition appears normal. The well lock will be
replaced with a new P812 Master lock as the present lock is
rusty and difficult to open. This well was found to be
dry.
MW-2: Well appears to be in normal condition. The lock is
in good condition. This well was found to be dry.
MW-3: The side of the casing is severely caved in about 3"
from the top, reducing the opening by about half. It was
possible to insert a depth gauge for depth to water
measurement, however, the casing will have to be
Page 3
straightened to allow a bailer to be inserted for water
samples in the future. While attempts may be made to
replace only the upper portion of the casing, this will
most likely be infeasible. This well will probably need to
be abandoned and replaced with a new well. This well was
found to be dry.
MW-4: On the surface, this well appears almost normal.
The aluminum cap on top of the casing is slightly to one
side...indicating some impact on the side of the casing.
The well integrity may be compromised in this well also.
This well was found to be dry.
MW-5: This well has an aluminum cap permanently attached
to the casing (similar to MW-4). The top 4" of the casing
was designed to screw into the top of the casing below so
as to provide an adequate casing height. The top 4" of
this casing (with aluminum cap) was initially found to be
about 3" from vertical position...again caused by a side
impact. The casing is broken slightly at the threaded
portion. The casing top was rethreaded successfully, but
the well may not be secure from the introduction of surface
water due to the crack in the threaded area of the casing.
The traffic cover contained 3"-4" of debris inside,
including asphalt. Most of the debris was removed by
Uriah. The well was found to be dry. The lock is intact.
MW-6: This well could not be located. It appears to have
been paved over.
MW-7: The traffic cover was filled with 5"-6" of debris,
including asphalt. The top of the casing showed evidence
of a hard side impact, resulting in the casing being 2"-3"
off center. The l'ocking cap was completely compressed into
the top of the casing as if run over. The cap was
extricated by Uriah staff and the casing straightened
enough so that a depth to water gauge and a bailer could be
inserted into the well for sampling purposes. The top of
the casing still remains somewhat off center with it being
necessary to force a bailer into the casing before the
bailer can be lowered into the well to collect groundwater.
The casing is cracked about 8 to 10 inches from the top.
The bailer hangs up in the cracked area while being removed
from the well casing.
This well was sampled. The well caps fits loosely. The
cap was replaced, covered with plastic sheeting and secured
with duct tape to provide a moisture barrier. This well
needs a new lock.
Page 4
MW-8: A significant amount of asphalt was found in the
traffic cover. The cement traffic cover on this well was
apparently dropped and broken into several pieces, then
loosely assembled back together for installation around the
well casing. The well cap, with the lock in place, had
been obviously forced open. Material around the side of
the locking cap was torn and covered with a tar
substance...probably fresh asphalt. The top of. the casing
was also covered with tar material. It is very likely that
considering the condition of this well, asphalt was
introduced into the well casing while the area was being'
paved. The well cap was washed thoroughly with Alconox
solution and rinsed before resealing the well. This well
also needs the lock replaced. A water sample was obtained
from this well for certified analysis.
In summary, some of the wells may have been compromised by
the introduction of foreign material, in particular,
asphalt. Wells that suffered damaged casings are at risk
for surface water infiltration. Severely damaged wells
will most likely need to be abandoned and replaced with new
wells. All inappropriate traffic covers will have to be
replaced with secured environmental traffic covers. The
new traffic covers will need to be grouted inside and
around the casings. New covers should be installed
slightly higher than the paved surface and cement placed
around the outside to secure them from movement.
Groundwater from both MW-7 and MW-8 was very turbid. Mw-8
well depth was measured at 67.30' on July 18, 1991, and was
63.68' on November 7, .1991. After MW-8 was purged, the
well depth was remeasured and found to be
62.45'...indicating a high sediment content flowing through
the well screen.
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL SAMPLING
With the prior approval of Ms. Dolores Gough, Hazardous
Materials Specialist with the Kern County Health
Department, Uriah, Inc. staff collected one groundwater
sample from two of the eight existing groundwater
monitoring wells (MW-7 and MW-8) at the referenced site on
November 7, 1991.
Page 5
METHODOLOGY
Depth to water and total well depth for each well were
measured using an electric tape, and the volume of water
within each 2-inch inside-diameter casing computed. Each
well was then purged of three or more volumes, using a
clean, disposable polyethylene bailer until groundwater was
free of sand, silt, and/or other grit material~ and the pH,
conductivity, and temperature were stabilized. Measurements
of pH, conductivity, and temperature were acquired and
recorded as referenced within Appendix "A", attached.
In each case, subsequent to the purging of each well, a
groundwater sample was collected using a clean, disposable
polyethylene bailer lowered into the well just below the
water surface. Each sample was immediately transferred
into three (3) Volatile Organic Analysis (VOA) vials
containing sufficient Hydrochloric Acid preservative to
reduce the pH of the sample to <2.0. Each sample container'
was promptly sealed with teflon-lined screw caps, labeled,
placed on blue ice, and then transported under chain of
custody to a State-certified hazardous waste analytical
laboratory for analyses for Total Petroleum .Hydrocarbons as
Gasoline (TPH-G), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total
xylenes (BTEX) using EPA Methods 5030/8015 and 8020.
Extracted groundwater, in addition to that acquired for
laboratory analysis, was placed into a covered DOT drum and
stored on site pending receipt of laboratory data for the
determination-of proper disposal.
LABORATORY RESULTS
Copies of all laboratory results as received from the
certified hazardous waste analytical laboratory are
enclosed within Appendix "A", attached. Contaminant levels
found in this most recent groundwater sample for each well
are compared with those found previously in the table
below:
Page 6
Table I
(Groundwater Sample from MW-1 through MW-8)
Ethyl- Total
Date/ Depth TPH-G Benzene Toluene benzene Xylenes
Well To (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
No. Water
MW-1
10/19/89 27.33 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. NoD.
05/03/90 35.60 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
08/07/90 ..... WELL DRY .............. ' ....
11/29/90 WELL DRY-
07/18/91 -WELL DRY--
11/07/91 -WELL DRY-
MW- 2
10/19/89 27~32 125 22.2 2.4 1.17 N.D.
05/03/90 32.96 370 43 33 31 26.3
08/07/90 36.19 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
11/29/90 --WELL DRY-
07/18/91 .... WELL DRY--
11/07/91 .... WELL DRY-
MW-3
11/29/89 29.1 3076.43 90 140 550 990
05/03/90 33.57 11,000 360 3,100 30 1,590
08/07/90 36.78 6,000 220 2,700 84 720
11/29/90 39.~2 !~,000 200 3,800 260 3,110
07/18/91 WELL DRY--
11/07/91 WELL DRY
MW-4
05/02/90 33.16 1,900 110 110 N.D. 406
08/07/90 36.38 120 5.6 35 8.9 N.D.
11/29/90 39.52 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
07/18/91 WELL DRY
11/07/91 -WELL DRY
MW-5
05/03/90 33.50 6,000 68 130 290 969
08/07/90 36.79 7,100 48 470 380 1,490
11/29/90 40.25 640 26 19 3.5 154
07/18/91 -WELL DRY
11/07/91 -WELL' DRY .....
Page 7
Table I- Continued
(Groundwater Sample from MW-1 through MW-8)
Ethyl- Total
Date/ Depth TPH-G Benzene Toluene benzene Xylenes
Well To (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
No. Water
(ft)
MW-6
05/03/90 33.28 83 N.D. N.D. N.D. 2
08/07/90 36.51 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
11/29/90 40.00 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. .N.D.
07/18/91 -WELL DRY
11/07/91 -WELL DRY ..... ~ ............
MW - 7
07/18/91 48.63~ ~% 490 6.7 19 N.D. 56
11/07/91 51 !! ~' N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
MW-8
07/18/91 48.85 ,;i..,~A71 N.D. 1.0 N.D. 1.3
11/07/91 51.79 N.D. N.D. N.D.. N.D. N.D.
N.D .... Non-detected (<50 ppb for TPH-G, and <0.5 ppb for benzene,
toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes)
ppb... Parts per billion
TPH-G...Totai Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
~t...Feet
SUMMARY OF OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITIES PERFORMED DURING
THE PAST QUARTER
Due to the complexities attendant to the interaction
between Linde Gases of the West, Inc. (San Ramon, CA) and
the parent company, Union Carbide Industrial Gases
(Danbury, Connecticut), Uriah has not received
authorization either to provide additional information or
undertake work other than compliance monitoring of the
existing groundwater monitoring wells. However, during a
recent meeting with regional and corporate staff, Uriah was
advised that a decision would soon be made.
The next quarterly sampling of the on-site groundwater
monitoring wells is scheduled for mid-February, 1992.
Page 8
This report summarizes all environmental activities
undertaken at the referenced site during the past quarter.
No activities were performed during the past quarter which
would permit calculations of free product and/or dissolved
constituent recovery.
Robert Oldham, P.E.
Registered Civil Engineer_
~'~ ~,'~-' I" ' ~-~' v ~ ~'~
Page 9
~L ST
§? /
~.~'
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. II
464 LINDBERGH AVENUE, LIVERMORE, CA
AT: Scale:
1"= 2,200 ft.
3505 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA
Figure I
I Main Building
I , I
Looding Dock
I ~ '
UW-4
o~1 ~ -
~ I ,~l ~oundwat~r
~ I
I .~-~ ~-~ I
I i
I ~ I
~O~E ~ ~o~ltor~ ~e~
I ' l"=~O' I
Bakers ~eldin~ Su~91y ]' '[~~ a
3~05 Pierce Boaa ~ - -- '
Bakersfield, 0~ In Environmental Services Company
L
]]i~9r~m o? wcter meter type
box currently instaL[ed over
ct 3505 Pierce Rood,
(Observed on Nov, 7, 1991 ?ie[ol trip)
Unsecured (unbolted) me¢at cover
with a hole on top ?or meter reader
use, Me~l cover inolica~e~
'Sewer' on ~op,
Cement
casln9 (:some
ape c~ackeot
badly)
In~erlor o? tr~?~Ic box
ts ungrouted ~roun~
p~pe opemnQ ~nd lower portion oF
tr~??tC box.
Openlng ~o allow For plpe
Figure 3
AppenSix "A"
2458 Arrest, tons
Livermore, CA 94550
Uriah, Inc. {0,0)
A~ ~O~t~ ~e~es Co~u~ (510) 465-4995 F~
CLIENT: , ~J~'P~' DATE:
SITE COUNTY
B~gFRSFJff£D. CA CONTACTED PRIOI~ TO SAMPLING? ._ .YFR .
Note 1: TOTAL WELL DEPTH · DEPTH T0 WATEE measuremen~ are read to an
acc~acy of .01' from a s~aight edge placed in a north-sou~
orlen~on on top of the chrlsty box.
Note g: The 0,17 fllure used below to convert WA~R COLU~N HEIG~ to .l~lons
has unl~ of sallons/l~ear foot, and is for a ~ diameter, Schedule 40
PVC pipe ~ an inside ~ameter of ~,06~'. Similarly, use a conversion
f~ctor of 0.66 for a pipe, which has a 4.0~6" I.D.
TOTAL ?[ELL DEPTH $$.P, 8' MONITOEING WELL # MF-?
- DEPTH TO WATEE ~ l' I l '
= WATEE COL~N HEIGHT .~5. f8' X 0.17 = 2.~8 Gallons (1 ~ell volume}
Multiply I well wolfe by ~ to ob~in the minimum number of gallons of
w~ter to be pur~ed from monltor~n~ well prior to ta~ samples.
3 X 2.58 = 7.74 (3 well volumes)
. · os/em
~39 8 ?O.E 7.4 44~
1153 8 70,6 7.4 45~
CONTAMINANT ODOR?~ TIME OF SAMPLE COLLECTION:
TURBIDITY LEVEL: VERY HIgH WITNESSED BY~ - NO ~JYWff,Y$.
SHEEN ON WATER? NONff SAMPLER'S SIGNATURE
CLIENT; L/NDoe DATE: NOV~MB£1~ ?.
SITE COUNTY
ADDEESS: ~$05 /~I~/~C_F /~0AD REPRESENTATIVE:
BAK~RSF. f~I,D. CA CONTACTED PEIOI~ TO SAMPLING?
Note l: TOTAL WELL DEPTH & DEPTH TO WATER measurements are read to an
acouraey of .01' from a straight edge plaoed in a north--south
orientation on top of the christy box.
Note 2: Th; 0,17 fi/lure used below to convert WATER COLUMN HEIGHT to lallons
ha~ ~uits of gallons/linear foot, and is for a fi* diameter, Schedule 40
PVC pipe with an inside diameter of IL067'.. Similarly, use a conversion
factor of 0.66 for a 4" pipe, which has a 4.01~6' I.D.
TOTAL WELL DEPTH 85.$8' MONITORING WELL
- DEPTH TO WATER
= WATER COLUMN HEIGHT if. SS' X 0.17 = 2.02 Ga]Ions (1 ~ell volume)
Multiply 1 well volume by 3 to obtain the minimum number of gallons .of
water to be purl, ed from monitoring ~ell prior to takln~ samples.
3 X 2.02. =_ 8,68 (3 well volumes)
TIM~ GALLONS TSMPEEATUI~E p~ CON'~UCT~rY
..... 'F ~nmosfcm
845 0 68.£ ?.0
$00 ~ $7.8 7,~ 477
910 ~ 87.7 ?.$ d?2
922 $ 8/L0 ?.~
CONTAMINANT 0D01~? NO/V~ TIME OF SAMPLE C0v.r.vCTION: 980
TURBIDITY LEVEL: ~RY HICI-I WITNESSED BY: - ~VO FIT~V~$S -
SHEEN ON WATEE?, 2fONff SAMNLER'S SICNATUEE:~
LABORATORIES, INC.
41~ AT~S CT~ BAKERSFIELD, CAUFORNIA e~ PHONE (~ 3~491t F~ ~ ~7-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
URZA~SNVIR0~AL SERVICES, INC. 111' D&:e of
464 LZNDBEP~3H .. Re~ort: 11/12/91
LIV~RMORE, CA 94SS0 ~ ~ab %: 12070-~
Attn.: WALTER FLOYD 415-%55-4991
Sample De~cripCion: ~'W-7; SAMPLED 11-7-91 ~ 11:58AMBY TF
TEST ~THOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Mod/f/ed EPA 8015
Individual const£tuents by EPA Method
Sample Matrix: Water
Date Sample Dace Sample · Date Analysis
Collected: Received ® La~: Co~pleted:
11/07/~ ~/07/~1 ~/l~/s~
N£n~mum
Analysis Reporting Reporting
Constituents ~eqult6 .
~enzene None Detected ~/kg
Toluene N~e Detected Fg/kg
E~y1 Benzene None De~ected ~g/kg
o-Xylene ~one De~ecCed .p~/k~
m-Xylene None DeCec=ed ~g/kg 0.~
p-Xylene " None Detected ~g/kg 0.S
To:&l Petrole~
H~rocarbons (gas) None De:ected ~g/kg ~0.
California D.O.N.S. Cert. %1186
Depa~tmen~ Supervie~r'
!2-31-91 09:41AM PO2
LABORATORIES, INO.
,7. J. EGUN. REG. C~M. ~NGR.
41~ AT~S ~., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 9~ PHONE (~ 327.491t F~ (~5) 327.1918
~etroleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ~NVIRONM~NTAL SERVIC;S, iNC. 111 Da~e of
464 LI~BERGH ,.~ Re, or=:. 11/13/91
LI~~, ~ 94SS0 ~ ~ 12070-2
Attn.: W~TER F~ 41S-~5S-4991
S~ple Descr~ption: ~-S& S~D 11-7-91 ~ 9:30~ BY TF
T~ST ~THOD: TPH by D.O.~.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual ~ethod - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by E~A Me=hod 5030/8020.
Sample Matrix:'" water
Date Sample Date Sampie Date Analysls'
Collected: Received ~ Lab: Completed:
Zl/0?/~l 11/07/~1 =~/1~/~1
Minimum
Analysis Reportfn~ Report£n~
Constituents Re.s~I~s , Un~s , Level
Benzene None Detected #g/kg 0.5
Toluene None Detected ~g/kg 0.5 '-
Ethyl Benzene None Detected ~g/kg 0.S
o-Xylene None Detected ~/kg 0.~
m-Xylene None Detected ~g/~g 0.$
p-XyIene None Detected #~/k~ 0.5
Tot&l Petroleum ''
Hydrocarbons (~as) None Detected ~g/k~ 50.
Camment s:
Cal~fornia D.O.H.S. Cert.
Departmen~ Supervisor
Uriah, Inc.. CHAIN OF CUSTODY
(~10) 45~-4991 OFFICE (~10) 455--499~ F~ DATE~ PAGE~ ~ OF //
~oJ. ~o~ff ~0~-~O ANALYSIS REQUEST
coMP~ U~ ~.
~DRESS 2~8 A~~ S~et
PHONE NO., (5~455-499t
//
PROJECT INFORMATION: BY': ' I%EL/~QUI:~HED DY: REUNQV. F/SHED BY:
Sifu~t~u~o
LABORATORY IN~U~ON~/COMMEN~: ~______~__~me m~ Nme
T~ ~ouna Time (Cirole One)
'%~ -~
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services Company
Report of
Groundwater Monitoring Well Installations
at
Baker's Welding
3505 Pierce Road
Bakersfield, CA
August 30, 1991
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services Company
August 30, 1991
Mr. W.J. Callahan
Linde Gases of the West, Inc.
2678 Bishop Drive, Suite 200
San Ramon, CA 94583
RE: Well Installations at Baker's Welding, 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA. Kern County Site Permit #050033.
Dear Mr. Callahan:
Upon receipt of your authorization to proceed and subsequent
to approval of Uriah's workplan by Ms. Dolores Gough, Hazardous
Materials Specialist with the Kern County Department of Environ-
mental Health Services, Uriah installed, developed, and sampled
two (2) groundwater monitoring wells at the above referenced
site on June 27 and June 28, 1991.
The tasks described were undertaken in response to requirements
set forth by Ms. Gough and were intended to comply with standards
for such work established by Kern County and the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
METHODOLOGY
A total of six (6) two-inch diameter groundwater monitoring
wells (MW-1 through MW-6) were previously installed at the
subject site on October 17 and 18, 1989, November 28, 1989,
and May 1, 1990. The locations of these wells and the two new
wells are illustrated in Figure #2, attached.
The newly-installed wells were emplaced in soil borings advanced
on June 27 and 28, 1991 using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped
with 8-inch outside diameter, continuous-flight, hollow-stem
augers by employees of Melton Drilling Company under the
direction of a Uriah staff hydrogeologist. Soil samples were
obtained at 35, 40, and 45 feet below ground surface (bgs) for
logging using the Unified Soil Classification System, and for
certified laboratory analyses. The samples were acquired within
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
a California Modified Split-Spoon Sampler driven 18 inches into
undisturbed soil using a standard 30-inch drop of a 140-pound
hammer. The sampler was fitted with clean brass sleeves 1.9
inches in diameter by 6.0 inches in length. Immediately upon
retrieval of the sampling unit, the brass sleeves were removed
and the ends of each sleeve covered with teflon sheeting, fitted
with plastic caps, and sealed with black electrical tape. Each
sleeve was then marked and placed on blue ice for transportation
to a State certified hazardous waste analytical laboratory under
chain of custody. Certified analyses were subsequently conducted
for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G), benzene,
toluene, total xylenes, and ethylbenzene (BTX&E) using EPA
Methods 5030/8015-8020.
Soil Boring MW-7 was advanced to a depth of 65.6 feet bgs
encountering a yellow, brown silty sand between 0.5 feet and
8.0 feet bgs; well-graded yellow sand between 8.0 feet and
approximately 20.0 feet bgs, and poorly-graded yellow sand in
the intervals between 20.0 and 33.0 feet and 41.0 to 50.0 feet
bgs. A gravel and sand mixture was present 33.0-41.0 feet bgs
and 50.0-65.6 feet bgs. Slight to strong odors, consistent
with fuel hydrocarbons, were noted in the interval between
approximately 25.0 and 38.0 feet bgs. Groundwater was
encountered at approximately 50 feet bgs.
Soil Boring MW-8 was advanced to a depth of 67.3 feet bgs.
Soils encountered consisted of a well-graded yellow, brown sand
between 0.5 feet and approximately 20.0 feet bgs, and poorly
graded yellow sand in the intervals between 20.0 and 44.0 feet
bgs and 48.0-52.0 feet bgs. Gravel and sand mixtures were
present in the intervals 44.0-48.0 feet and 52.0-67.3 feet bgs.
Slight to strong odors consistent with fuel hydrocarbons were
present between 25.0 and 37.0 feet bgs. Groundwater was
encountered at approximately 50 feet bgs.
Soil Borings MW-7 and MW-8 were converted into groundwater wells.
Each of the wells was constructed of two-inch inside-diameter
threaded blank Schedule 40 PVC risers attached to 0.020-inch
slotted PVC well screen. The slotted screen extends
approximately five feet above the groundwater surface in each
well to account for fluctuations in groundwater elevation.
Grade #3 Monterey silica sand was used to pack the screened
interval and approximately two feet of bentonite seal composed
of ¼" pellets hydrated with distilled water was placed above
the screened interval to preclude surface water infiltration.
Each well was finished with neat cement grout to grade and fitted
with a locking well cap and "christy box" traffic cover. A
graphic depiction of each well construction is presented within
Appendix "A", attached.
The newly-installed wells were allowed to equilibrate and, on
e
July 18, 1991, both wells were developed and sampled. Depth
to static groundwater within the wells was measured with an
electrical tape prior to development. Following calculations
to determine well casing volumes, a vented surge block was 6sed
to surge the wells. Each well was then purged of more than
three well volumes using a dedicated polyethylene bailer until
temperature, pH, and electrical conductivity measurements
stabilized and the water was observed to be relatively non-
turbid. Water samples were then acquired within a clean,
disposable polyethylene bailer lowered to a point just below
the surface of the water table. Upon bringing the bailer to
grade, the sample was promptly transferred to two 40-ml Volatile
Organic Analysis (VOA) vials containing sufficient HC1
preservative to reduce the sample pH to <2.0, and to a one-liter,
amber glass sample bottle. Each container was sealed with a
teflon-lined screw cap, labeled, and placed on blue ice for
transport to a State Certified hazardous waste analytical
laboratory under chain of custody. The samples thus acquired
were free of sheen or other evidence of free product.
Drill cuttings, and water/soil generated during cleaning of
equipment and development of the wells were placed into labeled
DOT drums. These drums will be stored on-site pending develop-
ment of an appropriate disposal protocol.
HYDROGEOLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS
The relative elevations of all on-site wells were surveyed and
the depths to water measured by Uriah staff on July 17, 1991.
However, the water table was so low on this date, that only
wells MW-7 and MW-8 contained water and no gradient could be
determined. Previous studies (Uriah, 1990a, b, c, d) suggest
that the general direction of groundwater flow is to the south-
west.
The hydraulic conductivity "K" of the water-bearing formation
was determined for both MW-7 and MW-8 using the Hvorslev Method
(after Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 340-342; Fetter, 1988, p.
196-199, calculations detailed in Appendix "C"). The values
of "K" obtained were:
3.19 x 10-5 ft/sec (9.74 x 10-4 cm/sec) for MW-7
and
3.77 x 10-5 ft/sec (1.15 x 10-4 cm/sec) for MW-8.
Such values are smaller than expected for a well-sorted gravel
and reflect the conductivities of the large proportion of sand
in the unit being sampled.
MODELING
In order to finalize the design of the pumping system for the
remediation system, the hydraulic conductivities as calculated,
porosities, aquifer thickness, the contamination levels as
described in well logs and the December, 1990 reports of
laboratory analyses, and the calculated gradient were introduced
into the SUTRA software program.
SUTRA (Saturated-Unsaturated Transport) is a computer program
created by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the
U.S. Air Force. SUTRA provides solute concentrations, as they
vary with time, everywhere in the simulated subsurface system.
The model employs a two-dimensional hybrid finite element and
integrated finite-difference method.
The subject site was mo~led using hydraulic conductivities
that varie~ from 3 x 10 - ft/sec in the NNE part of the mesh
to 4 x 10-- ft/sec in the SSW part of the mesh. (Figure 2).
Two pumping rates (0.04 cubic ft/sec and 0.2 cubic ft/sec) were
also used in the model. These pumping rates were selected as
they are specific for the biological treatment unit which Uriah
has proposed for the site. Additional information regarding
the parameters used in modeling are presented in the SUTRA
program listing attached.
The SUTRA model predicted that concentrations of Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G) would be 138-166 parts per
billion (ppb) after one yea~__o.f___p~, i~ at a rate of 0.04 cubic
ft/sec (Figure C~5~-~-"~'~138 ppb at a pumping rate of 0.2 cubic
ft/sec (Figure C-6). The' h~draulic conductivites determined
using the Hvorslev Method indicated that a pumping rate equal
to or greater than 0.2 cubic ft/sec can be used.
RESULTS OF LABORATORY ANALYSES
Copies of the reports of certified laboratory analyses are
attached hereto as Appendix "B". Results of soil sample analyses
are presented in Table I, and the results of water sample
analyses are in Table II.
Table I
Contaminant
Sample #-Depth Matrix Analyte Concentrations
MW7-36.5' bgs Soil TPH-G 1.3 ppm
Benzene 0.0056 ppm
Toluene 0.24 ppm
Total Xylenes 0.38 ppm
Table Ir continued
Contaminant
Sample #-Depth Matrix Analyte Concentrations
Ethylbenzene 0.012 ppm
MW7-46' bgs Soil TPH-G N.D.
Benzene 0.0051 ppm
Toluene 0.039 ppm
Total Xylenes 0.055 ppm
Ethylbenzene N.D.
MW8-36' bgs Soil' TPH-G N.D.
Benzene N.D.
Toluene 0.0072 ppm
Total Xylenes 0.0162 ppm
Ethylbenzene N.D.
MW8-41' bgs Soil TPH-G N.D.
Benzene N.D.
Toluene N.D.
Total Xylenes 0.036 ppm
Ethylbenzene N.D.
MW8-46' bgs Soil TPH-G N.D.
Benzene N.D.
Toluene N.D
Total Xylenes N.D.
Ethylbenzene N.D.
Table II
Contaminant
Well # Matrix Analyte Concentrations
MW-7 Water TPH-G 490 ppb
Benzene 6.7 ppb
Toluene 19 ppb
Total Xylenes 56 ppb
Ethylbenzene N.D.
MW-8 Water TPH-G 71 ppb
Benzene N.D.
Toluene 1.0 ppb
Total Xylenes 1.3 ppb
Ethylbenzene N.D.
bgs...Below ground surface
TPH-G...Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
N.D .... Below the limits of laboratory detection (aka minimum
reporting level) i.e. 1 ppm for TPH-G in soil
50 ppb for TPH-G in water
0.005 ppm each for BTX&E in soil
0.5 ppb each for BTX&E in water
ppm...Parts per million
ppb...Parts per billion
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The levels of hydrocarbon contaminants in groundwater appear
to increase towards Wells MW-7 and MW-3 (i.e. to the NW), despite
the fact that the hydraulic gradients determined in earlier
studies are to the SW. Levels also increase to the SSW (as
indicated by relative concentrations at MW-5).
The high-permeability sand and gravel layers observed in all
of the well borings, and the pumping simulation developed with
.SUTRA, support the selection of aerobic biodegradation as the
remediation technology of choice for the detoxification of soil
and groundwater at the site.
Copies of this report have been enclosed. It is recommended
that one be forwarded to each of the following agencies for
their review and comment:
Kern County Environmental Health Services Department
2700 "M" Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Attention: Ms. Dolores Gough
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
3614 East Ashland
Fresno, CA 93726
Attention: Mr. Michael Mangold
Should you have any questions regarding the contents of this
report, or if we may otherwise be of assistance, please contact
either of the undersigned at (415) 455-4991.
Valentin Constantinescu, M.Sc.
Hydrogeologist
and
Mi .
Registered Geologist
VC/MAW:dr
enc. Appendix "A"...Boring Logs, Well Construction Details,
and Development and Sampling Data
Appendix "B"...Reports of Certified Laboratory Analyses
Appendix "C"...Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity
Appendix "D"...SUTRA Program Listing
REFERENCES CITED
Fetter, C.W., 1988, Applied Hydrogeology, 2nd Edition: Merrill
Publishing Company, Columbus, OH, 592 p.
Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Groundwater: Prentice-
Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 604 p.
Sevee, John, 1991, Methods and Procedures for defining aquifer
parameters in Nielsen, D.M., editor, Practical Handbook of
Ground-Water Monitoring: Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea,
MI, p. 397-447.
Uriah, Inc., 1990a, Completion of Site Characterization at
Baker's Welding Supply, 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
(June 15, 1990).
Uriah, Inc., 1990b, Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Well
Sampling Report for Baker's Welding, 3505 Pierce Road,
Bakersfield, CA (September 28, 1990).
Uriah, Inc., 1990c, Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Well
Sampling Report Regarding Baker's Welding, 3505 Pierce
Road, Bakersfield, CA (December 31, 1990).
Uriah, Inc., 1990d, Site Characterization at Baker's Welding,
3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (January 26, 1990).
tRIAN
L ST Bakersfield
H~lton
Figure # 1
N
SCALE OF DETAJL MAPS
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. ]mCHT022~FE~'
464 LINDBERGH AVENUE, LIVERMORE, CA o ~, '/,
M,LESJ I I I "'1 I
AT: KILOMETERS
0 .25 .5
BAKER'S WELDING
3505 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA
Main Building
! ~ ~~"~ ' Looding Dock
..... __ ,,
C~ *~.~.1 roundwater FIO~r_~ '~ (see Figures 13 and 14)
Scale: ~
I ~ ~i" =20' I
Bakers Welding Supply ]' '[ ' ~ ~"
3505 Pierce Road ~ F1 a ~ ~..
Bakersfield, CA An Environmental Services Company
ApPendix "A"
I~lC L~T~
MAJOR DIVISIONS I SYM.BOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DF..~CRIIrFION,I
I,,
·
' 'GW :- 8~NOMIXTUREe, LITTLEOR NO ·
F,NES, ,~;:~;, ORAVEL~.G.,XTU...
COAI~E · OR NO FINES ~ i '.'
GRAINEDMORE THAN ~ GRAVEL~ WITH FIN" i~
~o,u ~ s,Lw 0RAVEU. OR*vEL~".- .",.
GM SILT MIXTURF~t . ' · , ·
OF COARSE FRAC- (APPRECIABLE .
T1ON RETAINED AMOUNT OF FINESI
ON NO"~'~E' CLAYEY GRAVEL~, GRAVEL--6AND-
GC CLAY MIXTURES
t ~:_~ WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY
SAND CLEAN SAND SW SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
AND (LITTLE OR NO
~;~:~¢._'~ SP LY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
MORE THAN 50~ ~:.'.'.'.:.:~:.'.+.'.~.~
OF MATERIAL IS ~":~~
LARGER THAN NO.
~00 SIEVE SIZE SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT
MORE THAN 50~ SANDS WITH FINES SM MIXTURES
OF COARSE FRAC- (APPRECIABLE
TION PASSING AMOUNT OF FINES)
NO. 4 SIEVE CLAYEY SANDS, SANO4=LAY
SC MIXTURES
I INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
ML SANDS, ROCK FLOUR,SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY
SI LTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
FINE SILTS ~//~ INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
GRAINED AND LIQUl D LIMIT~ CL MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
SOILS CLAYS LESS THAN 50 CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY
CLAYS. LEAN CLAYS
I I I I I I I I; ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
I I I I I I I I: OL SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
IIIiiiiI
MH DIATOMACEOUS PINE SAND OR
SILTY SOILS
MORE THAN 50% SILI'~
OF MATERIAL IS AND LIQUID LIMIT~ INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
SMALLER THAN NO. CLAYS GREATER THAN 50 CH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS
200 SIEVE SIZE
~"';//' ~ ~' ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
~ ~ '///' OH
~'/, HIGH PLASTICITY. ORGANIC SILTS
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
WELL LOG
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS
~pllng Hethod
Cal. Hod. - California modified split-spoon sampler (2"
inner diameter) driven 18" by a 140-pound hammer
having a 30" drop. Where penetration resistance
is designated #P", sampler was instead.Pushed
drill zig.
Disturbed - Sample taken from drill-return'materials as they
surfaced.
n/a - Not applicable
-/~ SYmbols
,,/--k~ ' -~ - First encountered .
/.. ~ ._~ __ ~ ~recovery
,~'~' ~- Static ground sampled
.,.,,.,, ,.., Detection
SOIL TEXTURALCLASSES
GRADE LIMITS GRADE N~E
U.S. Standard
inches sieve size
Boulders
--12.0-
Cobbles
---3.0- 3.0 in.
Gravel
---0.19 No. 4
Coarse
0.08 No. 10
Medium Sand
No. 40
Fine
No. 200 .......
Silt
Clay ,
~IL BE]RING LBG ~
LOCATION~ S505 PIERCE ~B,~ BAKE~SFIELD~
CLIENT~ LINDE GASES MONITORING WELL: MW-7
LOGGE~ BY~ VALENTIN CONSTANTINESCU
DATE DRILLED JUNE a7, ieel DRILLED BY MELTON DRILLING'
DRILLING METHOD H,S, Auger SAMPLE METHOD Spilt Spoon
Depth SQMples SOIL DESCRIPTION UnlFled Pene~rotlon
Be~o~ Collected So;~ LoQ Cot~ec~ed Construction
S~Mp~e Color, Gr~ln size, Texture,
;ur¢~ce INT No, Hols~ure, Consistency, Odor Picotlon BLOWS / 18' Det~;~s
~ry. ~ hy~rocorbon odors _ D. ~ .
5 SM o-<,~ c-°
o ( _~
~0 ........
no hydpoc~o~ odors
~ SLight hydroc~ o~ .v.v.'.v.v.v.v.v,
~ P :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:
:':':':':':':':,:-:':':':':':'
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
no hydrocarbon odo~
, 45 ~ SP :':':':':':':':':':':':':':':' 16~
~ ~vv~ ~7-46,~ Yarrow 9~v~ty ~a~ ~y, very dense ...............
~pprox~mo~ely ~ ¢t ~ ~ou~ sur¢~ce
Leg continued-see followint[ p~.ge
m
--~IL ]BORING LF]G -- Page
LOCATION~ 3505 PIERCE RD,~ BAKERSFIELD~
CLIENT~ LINDE GASES MONITORING WELL~ MW-7
LOOOED BY: VALE~TI~ CONSTA~TI~E~CU
DATE DRILLED JUNE 87, 1991 DRILLED BY MELTON D~ILLING~
DRILLING METHOD H,S, Auoer SAMPLE METHOD spt~ spoon
Depth S~mples SOIL 'DESCRIPTION UnIF~ed Penetration Well
Be[ow Collected Soil Log Cotlec~ed Construction'
S~mp[e Color, Gr~ln size, Texture,
~urPoc~ INT No, Holsture~ Consistency, Odor ~;cc~;on BLOWS/ 18'
no hy~ odor, } 0 0
55 )00
}0o
G~ )0o
60
)00 U
Orovel-~o~ ~xtu?e, ~t ) 0
below gro~d ~ur~oce,
70
U
0
U
0
U
/ELL DETAILS
MONITORING ~ELL: M~/-7
CLIENT: LINDE GASES
LOCATION~ 3505 PIERCE RD,~ t~AKERSFIELD~ CA
G A, TOTAL DEPTH: 65,6' BGS
B, BORING DIAMETER: 8"
D DRILLING METHOD: HSA
C, CASING LENGTH~ 65,6'
H MATER[AL~ SCHEDULE
PVC
D, CASING DIAMETER~
E, DEPTH TO PERFORATIONS:
· .. 45,6' ~GS
F, PERFORATED LENGTH: 20'
PERFORATED INTERVAL:
45,6' 3GS TO 65,6' BGS
A PERFORATION TYPE:
0,0£" SLOTTED SCREEN
[ G, SURFACE SEAL: CEMENT
O' BGS TO 38' BGS
.'.'.'.'.'.'.'i H, SEAL-' BENTONITE~
38' ]DGS TO 40' BGS
I, GRAVEL PACK,
.'.'.'.'.'.'.'i PACK MATERIAL:
....... ~3 MONTEREY
· "'"'""'" SILICA SAND
...... '. J, BOTTOM SEAL
~IL BI]RING
LF1CATIFIN~ 3505 PIERCE RD,, BAKERSFIELD, CA
CLIENT~ LINDE GASES MFINITFIRING WELL~ MW-8
LI]GGED BY: VALENTIN CDNSTANTINESCU
DATE DRILLEI)JUNE eT, es, 1991DRILLED BY MrCTnN DR~LLINa-
DRILLING METHDD H,S, augee SAMPLE METHOD Spti~ Spoon
Dep~ch S~mple$ SOIL DESCRIPTInN Unl?led Penetration
Belo~ Collected So~ Lo~ Collected Con~tpuctlon
S~mple Color, Gr~ln slze~ Texture, CI~s~-
Bup~c~ INT No, Moistupe~ Consistency, Odor
10 S~ ........
~ hy~r~on ~s .',','.'.',','. U
....~
Y~tow poor~y~ade~ ~s, dry, '~:'~'
,,, ~ Sl~h* h~arbon odor ...............
H~o~e hy~cobon o~or .v.v.v,v.'.'.v.v, ---
; p ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::3
','.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.','.'.'.'
3 5 , v ~ ~ NV~ Y~t~ poorl~oded ~ dry, v~y de~e, ,.'.v.v.v.v.v.v.'.'
:':':':':':':':':':';':':':':': 0
~ MV~g Gr~v~ o~ yellow ~d m~ure, ~o~
~ hy~r~on ~r
Lot[ co~tCinued-see folio,wing
~dlL :BORING LOG
LOCATION: 3505 PIERCE RD,, :BAKERSFIELD, CA
CLIENT~ LINDE GASES MONITORING WELL~ MW-8
LOGGED BY~ VALENTIN CONSTANTINESCU
DATE ~RILLE$JuNE a7, a8 i~DRILLED BY MELTBN DRILLING'
DRILLING METHOD H,s, Auger SAMPLE METHOD SpU~ Spoon
Depth Somptes SOIL DESCRIPTION Unl?led PenetrGtlon
Below Corrected Solt Log Corrected Cons%ruction
S~mpte Corot, Gr~ln size, Texture, Ct~ssl-
' ;urface INT No, Moisture, Consistency, Odor Plcallon ~[OWS/ 18' Detalts
no hydrocarbon ~ ) : 0
6p~vel 6n~ yetlow s~ ~x~upe, ~e~
0o
)0
60 ) 0
)00
0 U
Grovel ond yetlow
~5 no hydeoc=rbon
)00
~ E
~ ~d surFoce.
70
U
U
0
U
WELL ]]ETAILS
MONITORING 6/ELLI M6/-8
CLIENT', LINDE OASES
LOCATION~ 3505 PIERCE RD,, BAKERSFIELD, CA
A, TOTAL DEPTHI 67,3' BGS
G
3, BORING DIAMETER~ 8'
D DRILLING METHOD: HSA
C. CASING LENGTH: 67,3'
H MATERIAL: SCHEDULE 40
PVC
D, CASING DIAMETERs P'
E, DEPTH TO PERFORATIONSi
47.3'3GS
F, PERFORATED LENGTH: 20'
PERFORATED INTERVAL:
47' 3GS TO 67,3' BGS
A PERFORATION TYPE,
0,02" SLOTTED SCREEN
G, SURFACE SEAL: CEMENT
I O' 3GS TO 38' BGS
v.v.'.v. H, SEAL: BENTONITE:
· ...... 38' BGS TO 40' BGS
I, GRAVEL PACK,
~ ....... 40' 3GS TO 67,3' ]DGS
....... PACK MATERIAL:
'.'.'.'.'.'.'. ~3 MONTEREY
....... SILICA SAND
.'.'.'.'.'.'.' J, ]30TTOM SEAL
464 Lindbergh Avenue
Uri ah, In e. CA 04550
(415) 455-4991 Office
A~ E~viro~me~tal Services Co~piz~y (41§) 455-4995 Fax
I
CLIENT: LINDE GASES DATE: JULY 18, 1991
SITE COUNTY
ADDRESS: 3§05 PIERCE ROAD, REPRESENTATIVE: DOLORES GOUGH-
BAIC~.RSFIELD, CA 93308 CONTACTED PRIOR TO SAMPLING? YES'
Note 1: TOTAL WELL DEPTH & DEPTH TO WATER measurements are read to an
accuracy of .01' from a straight edge placed in a north-south
orientation on top of the christy box.
Note 2: The 0.17 figure used below to convert WATER COLUMN HEIGHT to gallons
has units of gallons/linear foot, and is for a g' diameter, Schedule 40
PVC pipe ~ith an inside diameter of 2.067'. Similarly, use a conversion
factor of 0.66 for a 4" pipe, which has a 4.026" I.D.
TOTAL WELL DEPTH 65.6 ft MONITORING WELL # M~-7
- DEPTH TO WATER 48.63 ft
= WATER COLUMN HEIGHT 16.97 X 0.17 = 2.88 Gallons (1 well volume)
Multiply 1 well volume by 3 to obtain the minimum number of gallons of
water to be purged from monitoring well prior to taking samples.
3 X 2.88 = 8.65 (3 well volumes)
TIM]g GALLONS TEMPE RATURE pH C 0NDUCTIyITY
°F ~zmhos/cm
11:37 0 80.5 7.75 6.22
11:40 1 80.7 7.74 5.12
11:43 2 80.7 7.77 5.03
11:46 3 81.0 7.73 4.54
11:49 4 81.5 7.71 4.92
11:53 5 81.2 7.55 4.72
11:57 6 81.7 7.60 4.75
12:00 7 82.6 7.62 4.77
12:03 8 81.8 7.69 4.69
12:08 9 82.6 7,74 5.01
CONTAMINANT ODOR? NO TIME OF SAMPLE COI,I,ECTION: 13:00
TURBIDITY LEVEL: MODERATE WITNESSED BY: DOLORES GOUGH
404 Lindbergh Avenue
U
ri ah, Inc.
(415) 455-4991 Office
Ar, £~viror~raer~tat Services Compar~y (415) 455-4995 Fax
I
CLIENT: LINDE GASES DATE: JULY 18, 1991
SITE COUNTY
ADDRESS: 3505 PIERCE ROAD, REPRESENTATIVE: DOLORES GOUGH
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 CONTACTED PRIOR TO SAMPLING? YES
Note 1: TOTAL WELL DEPTH & DEPTH TO WATER measurements are read to an
accuracy of .01' from a straight edge placed in a north-south
orientation on top of the christy box.
Note 2: The 0.17 figure used below to convert WATER COLUMN HEIGHT to gallons
has units of gallons/linear foot. and is for a g' diameter, Schedule 40
PVC pipe with an inside diameter of 2.087'. Similarly, use a conversion
factor of 0.66 for a 4' pipe. which has a 4.026" I.D.
TOTAL WELL DEPTH 67.30 ft MONITORING WELL # MW-8
- DEPTH TO WATER 48.85 ft
= WATER COLUMN HEIGHT 18.45 X 0.17- 3.14 Gallons (1 well volume)
Multiply 1 well volume by 3 to obtain the minimum number of gallons of
water to be purged from monitoring well prior to taking samples.
3 X 3.14 = 9.41 (3 well volumes)
TIME GALLONS TEMPERATURE pH CONDUCTIVITY
°F ;zmhos/em
10:48 0 93.0 7.82 5.80
10:50 1 81.4 7.37 5.78
10:52 2 79.6 7.51 4.65
10:55 3 78.3 7.40 3.68
10:59 4 80.1 7.21 4.49
11:02 5 78.5 7.40 4.33
11:07 6 81.8 7.11 4.82
11:14 7 53.4 7.36 4.50
11:17 8 84.3 7.93 4.65
11:27 9 80.4 7.51 4.73
11:30 9.5 52.4 7.45 4.72
CONTAMINANT ODOR? NO TIME OF SAMPLE COI.I.ECTION: 12:40
TURBIDITY LEVEL: MODERATE WITNESSED BY' DOLORES GOUGH
SHEEN ON WATER? NO SAMPLER'S SIGNATURE: fi~/~/*.'~/"~ ~<<~'/~'_~-~.'>"~'~
" RESOURCE MANAG A I CY
H~~S UA~RR~ ~~ON FOR
DEPTH TO GROUI~T[R & FLW DIRECTION PERFO~D BY: (~/~/~ /~~~~ R[GISTbTIOH I:
JOB SITE: 40.ACRE
DIRECTIONS TO WELL SITE:
GENERAL CONDmON$ OF THE PERMIT:
1. Permit aoollCatlons must t)e aubmlttecl to the Em~'onmental Hea~ gervtces Department at least 10 worldna daw odor to the DrOnoMKI
~tm'tfno date.
2. Well ~e epprovaJ IS required before 13eginning any work relatect to well conatrta=~ It ia unlawful to continue wcxk past the Itage at
which an Inspection IS requ~'~ unless inspection IS waivecl or complatecL
3, /Ofer requirecl Inspections lnoJucle: conductor casing, ali annulet eeaL~, an(= final cotlstmction
4. ~/'A'A phone call to the Department office Is requitecl on fe morning of fe c~ay fat work is to commence aha 24 hours laefom the
placement of any seals or plugs.
5. Constru~on un,er fie Permit is sut~lea'to any instructions 13y Del~rtment reprasentattvea.
6. Any n~srepresentazJon or noncompliance w~ mclutmcl Permit Conditions or Ordinance ~ ma~ in Isauance of a 'Stop WoW Order.'
7. · A copy of the Department of Water Resources Driller's Report. as well as copies of logs and water quality analyaea, must be mal~l~tecl
to the Environmental HeaJtrt Services Department within 14 days after completion of fie wotlc
8. A well cleatmcflon application must 13e fllecl with trda Department If a well Is Deing c~asttoy~ that la n~ in conJ~ with a teat hole
9. The permit IS void on the ninetieth (90) caisnclat clay after date of Issuance If wodc has not I~een etuted and reaaona~e progress toward
comlolation macle. Fee~ a/e not retundalole nor ttansferaDle.
10. I have re~.cLa~l-ag(ee~to comply with the General Con, Ions notec! al3ove. .? '
~ ' ,. , ....// .... · ,,;,. ~/
FA~I.LIT~ PLOT KAN - Pz'ovide a aescrip=tcm~ of ~ fac~ ~ ~ ~~, ~l~e
1~~ of ~, ~s~ =~ ~ ~ac~t, m~
~s ~ a 5~' ~ of fao~. ~1~ a~.
~ D~I~ - ~i~ a det~il~ ~g of ~(s). ~l~e: ~ of
~11, cas~g 1~, sm/fil~ ~ 1~
a=h.
~ ~ 2~~.~-~ ~lu~e f~ ~ ~1 a= e~ site ~ ~ ~= ~e'
~G: cd: f~=~l~m~
Environme~,a I-I~lth Sen~c~ Department
RANDALL L. ~BO~ s~ ~=c~ ~ ,v. ~s. D~OR
D~ECTOR ~ Po~t~ ~
DASD PRICE II! ~ J. RODDY, ~CO
~1~ D~OR ~ & ~t ~s ~m
~VIRONMENTAL H~L~ SER~CES DEP~E~
~RDOU8 ~T~RI~ PERM~ ~: ~
M~AOEMENT PROQ~ ~
MON~ORINO W~(8) PERMIT
OWNER'S NAME: Bakers Weldinq and Supply DATE: June 18, 1991
FACIETY NAME: I~akers Welding i~nd Supply
FACILITY LOCATION: 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfiel~l, CA. 93,?,08
DRILUNG METHOD: Hollow Stern Auger
CONTRACTOR: Melton Drillinq UCENSE NO.: C 57 / 50827
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTRACTOR Uriah
TYPE OF. MONITORING WELL(S) ~ Grourldwatqr
NUMBER OF WELLS' REQUIRED TO MONITOR FACILITY: Two (2) at this time,
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT:
1. Well site approval is required before beginning any work related to well construction. It Is unlawful to continue work past the stage
at which an Inspection is required unless Inspection is waived or completed.
2.Other required inspections include: conductor casing, all annular seals, and final construction features.
3. A phone call to the Department office Is required on the morning of the day that work Is to commence and 24 hours before the
placement of any seals or plugs.
4.Construction under this Permit is subject to any instructions by Department representatives.
5. All wells constructed of PVC located at a contaminated site where degradation may occur must be destroyed after 2 yearn or prove
no degradation Is occurring or has occurred.
6. Any misrepresentation or noncompliance with required Permit Conditions or Ordinance will result in Issuance of a 'STOP WORK
ORDER.'
7. A copy of the Department of Water Resources Driller's Report, as well as copies of logs and water quality analyses, must be
submitted to the Health Department within 14 days after completion of the work.
8. A well destruction application must be filed with this Department if a well is being cleatroyed that Is not in conjunction with a test hole
permit.
9. The permit is void on the ninetieth (90) calendar day after date of Issuance if work has not been started and reasonable progress
toward completion made. Fees are not refundable nor transferable.
10. I have read and agree to comply with the General Conditions noted above.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Approvecl Annular Seal Depth approximately 3:~'.
This permit must be signed by either tile contractor or owner.
OWNER'S SIGNATURE DATE CONTRACTOR'S SIGNATURE DATE
PERMIT APPROVED BY: Brian Pitts, Haz~rd0us Materials SoecJallst
DATE: .June 18. 1991 ~'/~
BP: cas
\65S.05.mw
2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861.3636
lAX: (805) 861-3429
Appendix "B"
ENVIRONMENTAL
LABORATORIES, INC.
PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR.
4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report= 07/02/91
LIVERMORE, CA 94550 Lab $: 7528-1
Attn.= VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description: LINDE BAKERSFIELD: MW7-36.5 (SOIL) 6/27/91 @ 8=40AM SAMPLE
COLLECTED BY VALENTIN
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed:
06/27/91 06/28/91 6-29-91
Minimum
Reporting Analysis Reporting
Constituents Units Results Level
Benzene mg/kg 0.0056 0.005
Toluene mg/kg 0.24 0.005
Ethyl Benzene mg/kg 0.012 0.005
o-Xylene mg/kg 0.051 0.005
m-Xylene mg/kg 0.059 0.005
p-Xylene mg/kg 0.270 0.005
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) mg/kg 1.3 1.
TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
As Received Basis
Comments:
California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186
/~ ~nalyst
ENVIRONMENTAL
LABO RATO RI F._°-,, INO.
PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENQR.
4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report: 07/02/91
LIVERMORE, CA 94550 Lab #: 7528-2
Attn.; VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description: LINDE BAKERSFIELD: MW7-46 (SOIL) 6/27/91 @ 9:lOAM SAMPLE COLLECTED
BY VALENTIN
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed:
06/27/91 06/28/91 6-28-91
Minimum
Reporting Analysis Reporting
Constituents Units Results Level
Benzene mg/kg 0.0051 0.005
Toluene mg/kg 0.039 0.005
Ethyl Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
o-Xylene mg/kg 0.013 0.005
m-Xylene mg/kg 0.016 0.005
p-Xylene mg/kg 0.026 0.005
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) mg/kg None Detected 1.
TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
As Received Basis
Comments:
California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186
~NVIRON~ENTAL
LABORATORIES, INC.
PETROLEUI, f J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR.
41~ AT~S CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93~ PHONE (~ 327~11 F~ (~ 327-1918
Pet=oleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report= 07/02/91
LIVERMORE, CA 94550 Lab $= 7528-3
Attn.= VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description= LINDE BAKERSFIELD= MW8-36 (SOIL) 6/27/91 @ 14=50AM SAMPLE COLLECTED
BY VALENTIN
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected= Received @ Lab: Completed=
06/27/91 06/28/91 6-28-91
Minimum
Reporting Analysis Reporting
Constituents Units Results Level
Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Toluene mg/kg 0.0072 0.005
Ethyl Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
o-Xylene mg/kg 0.0068 0.005
m-Xylene mg/kg 0.0094 0.005
p-Xylene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) mg/kg None Detected 1.
TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
As Received Basis
Comments:
California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186
. . f ~nalyst
EN~"IRONMENTAL
LABORATORIES, INC.
PETROLEU/iI J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR.
4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327-4911 FAX (805) 327-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report= 07/02/91
LIVERMORE, CA 94550 Lab ~= 7528-4
Attn.= VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description= LINDE BAKERSFIELD= MW8-41 (SOIL) 6/27/91 @ 15=10AM SAMPLE COLLECTED
BY VALENTIN
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected= Received @ Lab= Completed=
06/27/91 06/28/91 6-28-91
Minimum
Reporting Analysis Reporting
Constituents Units Results Level
Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Toluene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Ethyl Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
o-Xylene mg/kg 0.0090 0.005
m-Xylene mg/kg 0.014 0.005
p-Xylene mg/kg 0.013 0.005
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) mg/kg None Detected 1.
TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
As Received Basis
Comments:
California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186
~ - ~Analyst
ENVIt~NHENTAL
LABORATORIES, INC.
PETROLEUM J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR.
4100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE (805) 327.4911 FAX (805) 327'-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report: 07/02/91
LIVERMORE, CA 94550 Lab ~= 7528-5
Attn.: VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description= LINDE BAKERSFIELD= MW8-46 (SOIL) 6/28/91 @ 7=40AH SAMPLE COLLECTED
BY VALENTIN
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected= Received @ Lab= Completed=
06/28/91 06/28/91 6-28-91
Minimum
Reporting Analysis Reporting
Constituents Units Results Level
Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Toluene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Ethyl Benzene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
o-Xylene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
m-Xylene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
p-Xylene mg/kg None Detected 0.005
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) mg/kg None Detected 1.
TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
As Received Basis
Comments:
California D.O.H.S. Cert. #1186
~NVIi~ON¥£NTAL
LABORATORIES, INO.
PETROLEUM J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR.
4'100 ATLAS CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 9~ PHONE (~ 327~911 F~ (~5) 327-1918
BTXE/TPH GASOLINE
Quality Control Data
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL Spike ID: 7445-3
464 LINDBERGH Analysis Date: 29-Jun-91
LIVERMORE, CA 9455 Sample Matrix: SOLID
Attention: JIM COMBE
Quality Control
for Lab Nos: 7528-1,. 7528-2, 7528-3, 7528-4, 7528-5
Dup
Spike Spike Spike
Constituent % Rec % Rec RPD
Benzene 113.13 122.47 7.93
Toluene 109.,96 111.62 1.50
Ethyl Benzene 107.23 108.09 0.80
QC comments:
- '~ ..... ~ ......... ~ 464 Lindbergh Avenue-
U~'I , II'~ (415) 455-4992 Office
· An Env'-ronmental Services Company (415) 455-4995 F~
Chain of CUstodv
£N~*RONJIENTAL
LABORATORIES, INC.
PETROLEUM J' & EGLIN, REG. ~EM. EN~.
41~ AT~ CT. BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORN~ 9~ PHONE (~ 3~Mll F~ (~) 327-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report= 07/24/91
LIVER/~ORE, CA 94550 Lab ~z 8223-!
Attn. z VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description~ LINDE-BAK= WMW-7, 7/18/91 (WATER}
TEST METHOD= TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
Sample Matrix= WATER
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected= Received @ Lab= Completed=
o?/z8/gz o?/18/gz 07-~9-91
Minimum
Analysis Reporting Re~orting
Const£=uents Results Units Level
Benzene 6.7 Bg/L 0.5
Toluene 19. Bg/L 0.5
Ethyl Benzene None Detected ~g/L 0.5
o-Xylene 11. Bg/L 0.5
m-Xylene None Detected Bg/L 0.5
p-Xylene 45. Bg/L 0.5
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) 490. ~g/L 50.
California D.O.H.S. Cert. $1186
Department Supervisor
ENVIHONYENTAL
LABORATORIFS, INC.
P~ROL~ d' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR.
41~ AT~S CT., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 9~ PHONE (~ ~11 F~ (~ 327-1918
Petroleum Hydrocarbon.
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 111 Date of
464 LINDBERGH Report: 07/24/91
LIVERMORE, CA 94550 Lab $: 8223-2
Attn.: VALENTIN C. 415-455-4991
Sample Description: LINDE-BAK: WMW-8, 7/18/91 (WATER)
TEST METHOD: TPH by D.O.H.S. / L.U.F.T. Manual Method - Modified EPA 8015
Individual constituents by EPA Method 5030/8020.
Sample Matrix: WATER
Date Sample Date Sample Date Analysis
Collected: Received @ Lab: Completed~
07/18/91 07/18/91 07-18-91
Minimum
Analysis Reporting Reporting
Constituents Re~ul~s Un~t~ Leve~
Benzene None Detected Ug/L 0.5
Toluene 1.0 pg/L 0.5
Ethyl Benzene None Detected Bg/L 0.5
o-Xylene 0.7 ug/L 0.5
m-Xylene 0.6 ug/L 0.5
p-Xylene None Detected ug/L 0.5
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (gas) 71. #g/L 50.0
Comments:
California D.O.H.S. Cert. $1186
Department Supervisor
· ~ 45~. Ltxtdber~h Avenue-
Urn.ah, Inc.
(415) 455-4991 Office
· ~ ~o~=~ e,~, co=~ 1~5) ~55-~005 ~ Chain of Custody
......... . ~ ~ , ~, -t --
:~ ~w7~
.
v~ ' ·
Appendix "C"
DETERMINATION OF HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
The hydraulic conductivity K of the water-bearing formation
was determined for both MW-7 and MW-8 using the Hvorslev Method
(Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 340-342; Fetter, 1988, p. 196-199)
K = (r2 in [L/R]) / (2AT)
where K = hydraulic conductivity
r = radius of the well casing
R = radius of the filter pack
L = length of the well. screen below the static
water level
T = time for water level to recover 37% of its change
in level due to the addition or removal of water
With the Hvorslev Method, the value K is derived from
measurements made as the water level in' a well returns to its
original level after the addition or extraction of a known volume
of water. The time T is the period required for the water level
in the well to recover 37% of the change of elevation resulting
from the addition or removal of the water as determined from
a graph of the water level versus time.
For Well MW-7, the following values were determined:
T (from the removal of water) = 24.81 seconds
T (from the addition of water) = 25.51 seconds
r = 0.083 feet
R = 0.333 feet
L = 16.97 feet
-5 ft/sec.
When T = 24.81 sec, K = 3.24 x 10_4
or 9.88 x 10 cm/sec.
-5 ft/sec.
When T = 25.52 sec, K = 3.15 x 10_4
or 9.61 x 10 cm/sec.
For MW-8, the following values were determined:
T (from the removal of water) = 19.53 sec.
T (from the addition of water) = 20.55 sec.
r = 0.083 feet
R = 0.333 feet
L = 18.46 feet
When T = 19.53 sec, K = 3.87 x 10-5 ft/sec.
or 1.18 x 10-3 cm/sec.
-5 ft/sec.
When T = 20.55 sec, K = 3.67 x 10_3
or 1.12 x 10 cm/sec.
Please see Figures C-1 through C-4 for data plots.
A "best" hydraulic conductivity estimate, using the two K values
may be obtained with the following formula:
Kbest = (KRH - KFH)2
where: KRH = hydraulic conductivity as determined by the rising-
head method.
KFH = hydraulic conductivity as determined by the falling
head method.
(Sevee, 1991, p. 420)
Using this formula for MW-7:
Kbest = 3.19 x 10-5 ft/sec = 9.74 x 10-4 cm/sec
Using this formula for MW-8:
Kbest = 3.77 x 10-5 ft/sec = 1 .15 x 10-3 cm/sec
Slug Test 1 -Hvorslev Method
Groundwater Monitoring Well MW-7
Ratio h/hO
0.1
I
iT= 24.81 seconds
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100 120013001400
Time (seconds)
at 350§ Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Slug Test 2 - Hvorslev Method
Groundwater Monitoring Well MW-7
Ratio h/hO
1
~,.
I T= 25o51 socond$
0.001 ~ ~ ~ i ~
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time (seconds)
at 81505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Slug Test 1 - Hvorslev Method
Groundwater Monitoring Well MW-8
Ratio h/hO
0.1
T= 19.53 seconds
0.01 ~ ~ ~ ~ i I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (seconds)
at 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Slug Test 2 - Hvorslev Method
Groundwater Monitoring Well MW--8
Ratio h/hO
0.1
I
~' 0'011 I :.~
i'"
0.001I
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (seconds)
at 3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
~-D Distribution of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
After One Year of Pumping (Pumping Rate = 0.04 ft}/s)
0.00 25.00 50.00 75.00 100.00
80.00 N ~ in ~ I 80.00
~ u~, ~ ~MW 2~ ~
4 Values on curves in parts
per billion (ppb).
Pumping simulation performed
in both II1~-7 and M~-8
48.00 -3 - 48.00 with the same pumping rate.
~6.oo M~-8~; MW~~_6
Scale (ft)
0.00 0.00
0.00 25.00 50.00 75.00 100.00 0
2-D Distribution of Total Petroluem Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
After One Year of Pumping (Pumping Rate -- 0.2 ft}/s)
0.00 25.00 50.00 75.00 100.00
64.00 ~ 64.00
M Yalues on curves in p~rts
per billion (ppb).
Pumping simulation performed
in both M~-7 and M~-It
48.00 3 ~ 48.00 with the same pumping rate.
32.00 - 32.00
M'
16.00 1 fi.O0
i Scale (ft)
0.00 0.00
0.00 25.00 50.00 75.00 100.00 0
[
Appendix "D"
***** Ground-water flow and solute transDort at Linde
Bakersfield site
+++++++++ gradient=0.003 ft/ft; K=3x10-5 (NNE) to 4x10-5
(SSW); Q=0.04 ft~/s++++++++
SIMULATION MODE OPTIONS
- ASSUME SATURATED FLOW ONLY
- ASSUME STEADY-STATE FLOW FIELD CONSISTENT WITH INITIAL CONCENTRATIO
CONDITIONS
- ALLOW TIME-DEPENDENT TRANSPORT
- COLD START - BEGIN NEW SIMULATION
- STORE RESULTS AFTER EACH TIME STEP ON UNIT-66 AS BACK-UP AND FOR US
IN A SIMULATION RE-START
357 NUMBER OF NODES iN FINITE-ELEMENT MESH
320 NUMBER OF ELEMENTS IN MESH
37 ESTIMATED MAXIMUM FULL BAND WIDTH FOR MESH
0 EXACT NUMBER OF PINCH NODES iN MESH
.34 EXACT NUMBER OF NODES IN MESH AT WHICH PRESSURE IS A SPECI
':"[ED ,"'-,~,r'--"m~¥m "-:R ~x"W"~' O'v OF TI'qE
i EX_'-",_(_'[- :.(i_:~,iBER ,}F }.ODES ,[ ~.'i.~'[C~i :-'[..",./'.ED ?,[FLOW OR OUTFLOW IS
:: SPECIFIED CONSTANT OR FUNCTION oF Ti>IE
0 EXACT NUMBER OF NODES AT WHICH A SOURCE OR SINK OF SOLUTE
FlAgS IS A SPECIFIED CONSTANT OR FUNCTION OF TIME
0 EXACT NUMBER OF NODES AT WHICH PRESSURE AND CONCENTRATION
WILL BE OBSERVED
222 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TIME STEPS ON WHICH OBSERVATIONS WILL BE
MADE
..................... 7r~ 30UNDARY JONDITION FACTOR
TEMPORAL CONTROL AND S OL UT I ON C YC L I
NG DATA
3 MAXIMUM ALLOWED NUMBER OF TIME STEPS
3.1558D+07 INITIAL TIME STEP (IN SECONDS) ~ ~Z,-z
~c ~ ~960D~+~ MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIMULATION TIME (IN SECONDS)
· 3200 TIME STEP MULTIPLIER CYCLE (IN TIME STEPS)
/
1.00000 MULTIPLICATION FACTOR FOR TIME STEP CHANGE
~ 1.2960D+25 MAXIMUM ALLOWED TIME STEP (IN SECONDS)
1 FLOW SOLUTION CYCLE (IN TIME STEPS),
1 TRANSPORT SOLUTION CYCLE (IN TIME STEPS)
OUTPUT CONTROLS AND OPTIONS
1 PRINTED OUTPUT CYCLE (IN TIME STEPS)
- CANCEL PRINT OF NODE COORDINATES, THICKNESSES AND POROSITIES
- CANCEL PRINT OF ELEMENT PERMEABILITIES AND DISPERSIVITIES
- CANCEL PRINT OF NODE AND PINCH NODE INCIDENCES IN EACH ELEMENT
- CANCEL PLOT OF PRESSURES
- CANCEL PLOT OF CONCENTRATIONS
- CANCEL PRINT OF VELOCITIES
- CANCEL PRINT OF BUDGETS
ITERATION CONTROL DATA
NON-ITERATIVE SOLUTION
~ G >,i ~3 T A 2< Y P R O i? E R T ! E 8 O F ~3 L U I D
h i D 11A i R ! X
0.0000D+00 COMPRESSIBILITY OF FLUID
0.0000D+00 COMPRESSIBILITY OF POROUS MATRIX
1.0000D+00 FLUID VISCOSITY
1.0000D+00 DENSITY OF A SOLID GRAIN
FLUID DENSITY, RHOW
CALCULATED BY SUTRA IN TERMS OF SOLUTE CONCENTRATION,
RHOW = RHOW0 + DRWDU*(U-URHOW0)
.......... '~.'i ...... ,_,._,,. <RHOWO AT WHICH FLUID DENS
~TY-'S .~lr' BA:SE ~ ALU,r, ~'"~..~0
O.0000D+00 MOLECULAR DIFFUSIVITY OF SOLUTE IN FLUID
NODE INFORMATION
PRINTOUT OF NODE COORDINATES, THICKNESSES AND POROSITIES CANCELL
ED.
SCALE FACTORS :
6.2500D+00 X-SCALE
4.0000D+00 Y-SCALE
4.0000D+01 THICKNESS FACTOR
1.0000D-01 POROSITY FACTOR
ELEMENT INFORMATION
PRINTOUT OF ELEMENT PERMEABILITIES AND DISPERSIVITIES CANCELLED.
SCALE FACTORS :
1.0000D-05 MAXIMUM PERMEABILITY FACTOR
1.0000D-05 MINIMUM PERMEABILITY FACTOR
0.0000D+00 ANGLE FROM +X TO MAXIMUM DI
RECTION FACTOR
5.0000D+02 MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL DISPER
SIV!TY FACTOR
x.0O00D_~_~, ?IIN!MUM LONGITUDINAL DISPER
'_.6667D-'42 -PRANSVERSE 0ISPERSIVITY FAC
TOR
F L U I D S O U R C E D A T A
L ?: INFLOWS ,")P OliTw!.Ol4S ARE o
TIPiE_VARYiX: -
:~O MASS SOLUTE/MASS
FLOW RATE OR
CONCENTRATION )
74 -3.3420000E-02
191 -3.3420000E-02
1
'~':~ NODES AT ~'~HIC.~{ '~m¢~Rn~'...~_~..~ ARE SPECIFIED
(AS WELL SOLUTE CONCENTRATION OF
FLUID INFLOW WHICH MAY OCCUR AT THE POINT
OF SPECIFIED PRESSURE)
NODE PRESSURE CONCENTRATION
1 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
2 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
3 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
4 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
5 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
6 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
7 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
8 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D~05
9 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
10 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
11 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
12 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
13 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
14 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
15 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
16 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
17 4.0000000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
341 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
342 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
343 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
344 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
345 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
346 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
347 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
348 ~.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
349 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
350 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
351 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
352 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
353 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
354 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
355 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
356 4.0240000000000D+01 1.0000000000000D-05
TIME INCREMENT 3.1558D+07 SECONDS
ELAPSED TIME : 0.0000O~00 SECONDS
O.0000D+00 MINUTES
O.O000D-O0 HOURS
0.0000D+O0 DAYS
0.0000D+00 WEEKS
O.0000D+O0 MONTHS
0.0000D+O0 YEARS
C O N C E N T R A T I O N
NODE NODE NODE NODE
NODE NODE
1 1.10000000D-02 2 1.00000000D-02 3 9.00000000D-03 4 8.0
5 7.00000000D-03 6 6.00000000D-03
7 4.00000000D-03 8 2.00000000D-03 9 0.00000000D+00 10 0.0
O000000D+00 29 0.00000000D+00 30 0.00000000D+00
31 0.00000000D+00 32 0.00000000D+00 33 0.00000000D+00 34 0.0
0000000D+00 35 1.20000000D-02 36 1.10000000D-02
37 1.00000000D-02 38 8.00000000D-03 39 7.00000000D-03 40 6.0
0000000D-03 41 4.00000000D-03 42 2.00000000D-03
43 0.00000000D+00 44 0.00000000D+00 45 0.00000000D+00' 46 0.0
0000000D+00 47 0.00000000D+00 48 0.00000000D+00
49 0.00000000D+00 50 0.00000000D+00 51 0.00000000D+00 52 1.2
0000000D-02 53 1.10000000D-02 54 1.00000000D-02
55 8.00000000D-03 56 6.00000000D-03 57 4.00000000D-03 58 2.0
0000000D-03 59 0.00000000D+00 60 0.00000000D+00
61 0.00000000D+00 62 0.00000000D+00 63 0.00000000D+00 64 0.0
0000000D+00 65 0.00000000D+00 66 0.00000000D+00
67 0.00000000D+00 68 0..00000000D+00 69 1.30000000D-02 70 1.2
0000000D-02 71 1.10000000D-02 72 1.00000000D-02
73 8.00000000D-03 74 4.00000000D-03 75 2.00000000D-03 76 0.0
0000000D+00 77 0.00000000D+00 78 0.00000000D+00
79 0.00000000D+00 80 0.00000000D+00 81 0.00000000D+00 82 0.0
0000000D+00 83 0.00000000D+00 84 0.00000000D+00
85 0.00000000D+00 86 1.40000000D-02 87 1.30000000D-02 88 1.2
0000000D-02 89 1.00000000D-02 90 8.00000000D-03
91 6.00000000D-03 92 4.00000000D-03 93 2.00000000D-03 94 0.0
0000000D+00 95 0.00000000D+00 96 0.00000000D+00
97 0.00000000D+00 98 0.00000000D+00 99 0.00000000D+00 100 0.0
0000000D+00 101 0.00000000D+00 102 0.00000000D+00
103 1.50000000D-02 104 1 40000000D-02 105 1.30000000D-02 106 1.2
0000000D-02 107 1.00000000D-02 108 6.00000000D-03
!09 4.00000000D-03 110 2 00000000D-03 111 0.00000000D+00 112 0.0
<)000000D-00 113 0 00000000D+00 '114 0.00000000D+00
(15 O.OO000000D+00 1_16 0 00000000O+00 117 0.00000000D+00 118 0.0
0000000D=(~0 119 0 00000000D+00 120 1.50000000D-02
]_21 1.40000000D-02 122 'l 30000000D-02 123 1.20000000D-02 124 1.0
0000000D-02 125 6 00000000D-03 126 4.00000000D-03
127 2.00000000D-03 128 0 00000000D+00 [29 0.00000000D+00 130 0 0
0000000D+00 131 0 00000000D+00 132 0.00000000D+00
133 0.00000000D+00 134 0 90000000D+00 135 0.00000000D+00 136 0 0
0000000D+00 137 1 60000000D-02 138 1.50000000D-02
139 1.40000000D-02 140 I 20000000D-02 141 1.00000000D-02 142 6 0
0000000D-03 143 4 00000000D-03 144 2.00000000D-03
145 0.00000000D+00 146 0 00000000D+00 147 0.00000000D+00 148 0 0
0000000D+00 149 0 00000000D+00 150 0.00000000D~00
!_5'!. n ..... n~{~00000D+00_,.. !52 n, 000()00ql'~D~00... .... ~_~._,.~ 0..00000000D+00 't54_ 1 7
)000000D-0'?~_ =~n~, .~ 60000000D-02 ......... ~'~ 'k ':~,"000000D-n2.
L57 .L . 400000000-02 L58 L 200000000-02 L59 !.00000000D-02 160 6 0
0000000D-03 161 2 00000000D-03 i62 0.00O00000D+00
163 0.00000000D+00 164 0 00000000O+00 165 0.00000000D+00 166 0.0
0000000D+00 167 0 00000000D+00 168 0.00000000D+00
169 0.00000000D+00 170 0 00000000D+00 171 1.80000000D-02 172 1.7
0000000D-02 173 1.60000000D-02 174 1.40000000D-02
175 1.20000000D-02 176 1.00000000D-02 177 6.00000000D-03 178 2.0
0000000D-03 179 0.00000000D+00 180 0.00000000D+00
181 0.00000000D+00 182 0.00000000D+00 183 0.00000000D+00 184 0.0
0000000D+00 185 0.00000000D+00 186 0.00000000D+00
187 0.00000000D+00 188 1.70000000D-02 189 1.60000000D-02 190 1.5
0000000D-02 191 1.40000000D-02 192 1.00000000D-02
193 6.00000000D-03 194 2.00000000D-03 195 0.00000000D+00 196 0.0
0000000D+00 197 0.00000000D+00 198 0.00000000D+00
9000000D-02 209 6.00000000D-03 210 2.00000000D-03
211 0.00000000D~ 2~2 0.00000000D+00 0.00000000D+00 214 0.0
00000GOD+00 215 0.000000~'DD+00 216 0.00000000D+
217 0.00000000D+00 218 0.00000000D+00 219 0.00000000D+00 220 0.0
0000000D+00 221 0.00000000D+00 222 1.50000000D-02
223 1.20000000D-02 224 1.00000000D-02 225 6.00000000D-03 226 2.0
0000000D-03 227 0.00000000D+00 228 0.00000000D+00
229 0.00000000D+00 230 0.00000000D+00 231 0.00000000D+00 232 0.0
0000000D+00 233 0.00000000D+00 234 0.00000000D+00
235 0.00000000D+00 236 0.00000000D+00 237 0.00000000D+00 238 0.0
0000000D+00 239 1.40000000D-02 240 1.20000000D-02
241 1.00000000D-02 242 6.00000000D-03 243 2.00000000D-03 244 0.0
0000000D+00 245 0.00000000D+00 246 0.00000000D+00
247 0.00000000D+00 248 0.00000000D+00 249 0.00000000D+00 250 0.0
0000000D+00 251 0.00000000D+00 252 0.00000000D+00
253 0.00000000D+00 254 0.00000000D+00 255 0.00000000D+00 256 1.3
0000000D-02 257 1.10000000D-02 258 1.00000000D-02
259 8.00000000D-03 260 6.00000000D-03 261 2.00000000D-03 262 0.0
0000000D+00 263 0.00000000D+00 264 0.00000000D+00
265 0.00000000D+00 266 0.00000000D+00 267 0.00000000D+00 268 0.0
0000000D+00 269 0.00000000D+00 270 0.00000000D+00
271 0.00000000D+00 272 0.00000000D+00 273 1.30000000D-02 274 1.1
0000000D-02 275 1.00000000D-02 276 8.00000000D-03
277 6.00000000D-03 278 2.00000000D-03 279 0.00000000D+00 280 0.0
0000000D+00 281 0.00000000D+00 282 0.00000000D+00
283 0.00000000D+00 284 0.00000000D+00 285 0.00000000D+00 286 0.0
0000000D+00 287 0.00000000D+00 288 0.00000000D+00
289 0.00000000D+00 290 1.20000000D-02 291 1.00000000D-02 292 8.0
0000000D-03 293 6.00000000D-03 294 4.00000000D-03
295 2.00000000D-03 296 0.00000000D+00 297 0.00000000D+00 298 0.0
0000000D+00 299 0.00000000D+00 300 0.00000000D+00
301 0.00000000D+00 302 0.00000000D+00 303 0.00000000D+00 304 0.0
0000000D+00 305 0.00000000D+00 306 0.00000000D+00
307 1.10000000D-02 30~ 1.00000000D-02 309 8.00000000D-03 310 6.0
0000000D-03 311 4.00000000D-03 312 2.00000000D-03
313 0.00000000D+00 314 0.00000000D+00 315 0o00000000D+00 316 0.0
0000000D+00 317 0.00000000D+00 318 0.00000000D+00
319 0.00000000D+00 320 0.00000000D+00 321 0.00000000D+00 322 0.0
0000000D+00 323 0.00000000D+00 324 1.10000000D-02
325 1.00000000D-02 326 8.00000000D-03 327 6o00000000D-03 328 4.0
0000000D-03 329 2.00000000D-03 330 0.00000000D+00
331 0.'00000000D+00 332 0.00000000D+00 333 0o00000000D+00 334 0.0
0000000D+00 335 0.00000000D+00 336 0.00000000D+00
337 0.00000000D+00 338 0.00000000D+00 339 0o00000000D+00 340 0.0
0000000D+00 341 1.00000000D-02 342 9o00000000D-03
343 8.00000000D-03 344 6.00000000D-03 345 4.00000000D-03 346 2.0
0000000D-03 34? 0.00000000D+00 348 0.00000000D+00
349 0.00000000D+00 350 0.00000000D+00 351 0.00000000D+00 352 0.0
0000000D+00 353 0.00000000D+00 354 0o00000000D+00
355 0.00000000D+00 356 0.00000000D+00 357 0.00000000D+00
RESULTS FOR TIME STEP 0
S T E A D Y - S T A T E P R E S S U R E
NODE NODE NODE NODE
NODE NODE
9980659D+01 i1 3.999857 ~2D+01 12 3.99989176D+01
RESULTS FOR TIME STEP 1
TIME INCREMENT 3.1558D+07 SECONDS
ELAPSED TIME : 3.1558D+07 SECONDS
5.2596D+05 MINUTES
8.7660D+03 HOURS
3.6525D+02 DAYS
5.2179D+01 WEEKS
1.2000D+01 MONTHS
1.0000D+00 YEARS
C O N C E N T R A T I O N
NODE NODE NODE NODE
NODE NODE
i 1.56971555D-04 2 1.55770435D-04 3 1.52700132D-04 4 1.4
9288609D-04 5 1.47058784D-04 6 1.45885219D-04
7 1.45010856D-04 8 1.44060954D-04 9 1.42968690D-04 10 1.4
1951920D-04 11 1.40967923D-04 12 1.39937380D-04
13 1.38829285D-04 14 1.37667402D-04 15 1.36547629D-04 16 1.3
5674676D-04 17 1.35332624D-04 18 1.58202945D-04
19 1.57009234D-04 20 1.53905126D-04 21 1.50351856D-04 22 1.4
8067874D-04 23 1.46908593D-04 24 1.46032103D-04
25 1.45060667D-04 26 1.43960984D-04 27 1.42954339D-04 28 1.4
!973395D-04 29 1.40938236D-04 30 1.39823793D-04
31 1.38655707D-04 32 1.37529839D-04 33 1.36645055D-04 34 1.3
6300382D-04 35 1.59543117D-04 36 1.58382743D-04
37 1.55292860D-04 38 1.51370200D-04 39 1.48898376D-04 40 1.4
7796560D-04 41 1.46927521D-04 42 1.45918158D-04
43 1.44837118D-04 44 1.43879340D-04 45 1.42912421D-04 46 1.4
!876944D-04 47 1.40757287D-04 48 1.39586815D-04
49 1.38458814D-04 50 1.37564498D-04 51 1.37204849D-04 52 1.6
0953655D-04 53 1.59871811D-04 54 1.56867213D-04
55 1.52620163D-04 56 1.49539171D-04 57 1.48552478D-04 58 1.4
7675617D-04 59 1.46628333D-04 60 1.45668596D-04
61 !.44768571D-04 62 !.43817578D-04 63 1.42775410D-04 64 1.4
1646270D-04 65 1.40472294D-04 66 !.39342568D-04
67 1.38430382D-04 68 1.38050670D-04 69 1.62412258D-04 70 1.6
t434765D-04 71 1.58684397D-04 72 1.54318405D-04
73 1.50305267D-04 74 1.49090701D-04 75 1.48324026D-04 76 1.4
7322591D-04 77 1.46527894D-04 78 1.45672290D-04
79 1.44717021D-04 80 1.43651664D-04 81 1.42502279D-04 82 1.4
1319202D-04 83 1.40185131D-04 84 1.39249732D-04
85 1.38839957D-04 86 1.63881764D-04 87 1.62952123D-04 88 1.6
0721857D-04 89 1.56608317D-04 90 1.51567206D-04
91~ 1.49806523D-04 92 1.48737137D-04 93 1.48252974D-04 94 1.4
7493652D-04 95 1.46636057D-04 96 1.45631269D-04
97 1.44515107D-04 98 1.43329333D-04 99 1.42127668D-04 100 1.4
0984582D-04 101 1.40023686D-04 102 1.39572781D-04
103 1.65278304D-04 104 1.64382255D-04 105 1.62486173D-04 106 1.5
9637982D-04 107 1.55511566D-04 108 1.51143395D-04
109 1.50210987D-04 110 1.49459364D-04 111 1.48686996D-04 112 1.4
121 1.65577478D-04 122 1.63928725D-04 123 1.61969504D-04 124 1.5
~820398D-04 125 1.55614~ ,D-04 126 1.52897987D-04~
127 1.51368089D- 128 1.50085205D-04 12~"' 1.48835538D-04 130 1.4
7543403D-04 131 1.46229137D-04 132 1.44916392D-04
133 1.43641215D-04 134 1.42454978D-04 135 1.41439832D-04 136 1.4
0854591D-04 137 1.67814627D-04 138 1.66502570D-04
139 1.64957109D-04 140 1.63287979D-04 141 1.61196844D-04 142 1.5
~820015D-04 143 1.55954933D-04 144 1.53504583D-04
145 1.51603276D-04 146 1.49997529D-04 147 1.48497653D-04 148 1.4
7052783D-04 149 1.45659806D-04 150 1.44336068D-04
151 1.43117387D-04 152 1.42075134D-04 153 1.41385847D-04 154 1.6
3111514D-04 155 1.67164141D-04 156 1.65583258D-04
157 1.63933069D-04 158 1.62269997D-04 159 1.60475685D-04 160 1.5
Y955679D-04 161 1.55296715D-04 162 1.52988132D-04
163 1.51072283D-04 164 1.49370854D-04 165 1.47798190D-04 166 1.4
6328009D-04 167 1.44963308D-04 168 1.43724704D-04
169 1.42646505D-04 170 1..41824247D-04 171 1.70591566D-04 172 1.6
7922462D-04 173 1.65867345D-04 174 1.64260460D-04
175 1.62960007D-04 176 1.61292972D-04 177 1.58975290D-04 178 1.5
$420448D-04 179 1.53997198D-04 180 1.51903855D-04
181 1.50047522D-04 182 1.48361900D-04 183 1.46817056D-04 184 1.4
5413141D-04 185 1.44175029D-04 186 1.43157158D-04
187 1.42344920D-04 188 1.70573936D-04 189 1.68192249D-04 190 1.6
5674957D-04 191 1.64400658D-04 192 1.63419825D-04
193 1.61455331D-04 194 1.59312286D-04 195 1.56918835D-04 196 1.5
4603089D-04 197 1.52443502D-04 198 1.50482615D-04
199 1.48694354D-04 200 1.47060642D-04 201 1.45581954D-04 202 1.4
4278705D-04 203 1.43199029D-04 204 1.42410159D-04
205 1.69848276D-04 206 1.67710571D-04 207 1.65787655D-04 208 1.6
4396960D-04 209 1.63121615D-04 210 1.61442958D-04
211 1.59304974D-04 212 1.57096587D-04 213 1.54849368D-04 214 1.5
2692718D-04 215 1.50669597D-04 216 1.48795567D-04
217 1.47069999D-04 218 1.45500500D-04 219 1.44111138D-04 220 1.4
2954634D-04 221 1.42254508D-04 222 1.69201891D-04
223 1.67521922D-04 224 1.65840779D-04 225 1.64336917D-04 226 1.6
2853371D-04 227 1.61159651D-04 228 1.59157507D-04
229 1.57006928D-04 .230 1.54832548D-04 231 1.52690305D-04 232 1.5
0636988D-04 233 1.48699157D-04 234 1.46893861D-04
235 !.45240605D-04 236 1.43775402D-04 237 1.42571610D-04 238 1.4
1947541D-04 239 1.68604581D-04 240 1.67422479D-04
241 1.65823666D-04 242 1.64242720D-04 243 1.62605635D-04 244 1.6
0802831D-04 245 1.58833068D-04 246 1.56740770D-04
247 1.54609828D-04 248 1.52490560D-04 249 1.50423423D-04 250 1.4
8441827D-04 251 1.46572381D-04 252 1.44847054D-04
253 1.43317743D-04 254 1.42090220D-04 255 1.41521878D-04 256 1.6
8065463D-04 257 1.67173365D-04 258 1.65677887D-04
259 1.64057072D-04 260 1.62343490D-04 261 1.60400484D-04 262 1.5
8361390D-04 263 1.56306192D-04 264 1.54210924D-04
265 1.52113310D-04 266 1.50043901D-04 267 1.48033715D-04 268 1.4
6115221D-04 269 1.44331086D-04 270 1.42751838D-04
271 1.41519955D-04 272 1.40994084D-04 273 1.67474988D-04 274 1.6
6747804D-04 275 1.65344370D-04 276 1.63694480D-04
277 1.61913916D-04 278 1.59885099D-04 279 1.57780670D-04 280 1.5
5731904D-04 281 1.53666756D-04 282 1.51590287D-04
283 1.49525065D-04 284 1.47497844D-04 285 1.45543258D-04 286 1.4
3712899D-04 287 1.42096303D-04 288 1.40868922D-04
289 1.40373379D-04 290 1.66753713D-04 291 1.66130374D-04 292 1.6
4783987D-04 293 1.63123980D-04 294 1.61283972D-04
295 1.59240169D-04 296 1.57081836D-04 297 1.55031699D-04 298 1.5
2988551D-04 299 1.50933093D-04 300 1.48876408D-04
301 1.46841281D-04 302 1.44862585D-04 303 1.42998844D-04 304 1.4
2379230D-04 311 1.60507234D-04 312 1.58444241D-04
313 1.56259591D I 314 1.54208351D-04 3] 1.52183350D-04 316 1.5
0147715D-04 317 1.481 ~D-04 318 1.46067480D-
319 1.44076157D-04 320 1.42192279D-04 321 1.40536944D-04 322 1.3
9329159D-04 323 1.38870873D-04 324 1.64873531D-04
325 1.64366537D-04 326 1.63108611D-04 327 1.61452433D-04 328 1.5
9569266D-04 329 1.57499099D-04 330 1.55306817D-04
331 1.53261674D-04 332 1.51253284D-04 333 1.49236259D-04 334 1.4
7205432D-04 335 1.45176704D-04 336 1.43184073D-04
337 1.41293766D-04 338 1.39635733D-04 339 1.38438613D-04' 340 1.3
7990452D-04 341 1.63709166D-04 342 1.63212149D-04
343 1.61988938D-04 344 1.60340764D-04 345 1.58465004D-04 346 1.5
6403434D-04 347 1.54221064D-04 348 1.52189031D-04
349 1.50196960D-04 350 1.48196958D-04 351 1.46181709D-04 352 1.4
.4165995D-04 353 1.42183453D-04 354 1.40300940D-04
355 1.38650835D-04 356 1.37463832D-04 357 1.37021306D-04
RESULTS FOR TIME STEP 2
TIME INCREMENT 3.1558D+07 SECONDS
LAST SOLUTION HAS BEEN STORED ON UNIT 66 ~**
SUTRA SIMULATION TERMINATED AT COMPLETION OF TIME STEPS
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services Company
REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
FOR
BAKER'S WELDING SUPPLY
3505 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA
FEBRUARY 28, 1994
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
Uriah Inc.
An Environmental Services Company
February 28, 1991
Ms. Delores Gough, Hazardous Materials Specialist
Kern County Department of
Environmental Health Services
Hazardous Materials Management Program
2700 M Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: Remedial Action Plan for Baker's Welding Supply,
3505 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA
Dear Ms. Gough:
This document has been prepared with the approval of Linde Gases
of the West, Inc. and is intended to respond to requirements
for additional work which you set forth in recent correspondence
in a manner which meets the guidelines and standards for said
work established by the Kern County Department of Environmental
Health Services Hazardous Materials Management Program and the
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
WATER QUALITY DATA ACQUIRED ATTENDANT TO SITE C~RACTERIZATION
On May 2, August 7, and November 29, 1990, samples of groundwater
were acquired from on site monitoring wells previously installed
by Uriah and designated as' MW-1 thorough MW-6. These samples
were each obtained from developed--wells in a manner consistent
with Standard sampling, storage, and transportation protocols
and submitted for certified laboratory analyses for Total
Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline (TPH-G), benzene, toluene,
total xylenes, and ethylbenzene (BTX&E) using D.O.H.S.L.U.F.T.
and EPA Methods 5030/8020, respectively. The results of these
analyses may be summarized as follows:
WELL # AND DATE TPH-G BENZ TOL XYL E-BENZ
MW-1
5/2/90 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
8/7/90 ............. WELL DRY ...............
11/29/90 ............. WELL DRY ...............
464 Lindbergh Avenue · Livermore, California 94550 · (415) 455-4991
5/2/90 3?0 43 33 26.3 31
8/7/90 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
11/29/90 ............. WELL DRY ..............
MW-3
5/2/90 11,000 360 3,100 1,590 30~
8/7/90 6,000 220 2,700 720 84
11/29/90 18,000 200 3,800 3,110 260
M-4
5/2/90 1,900 110 110 406 N.D.
8/7/90 120 5.6 35 8.9 N.D.
11/29/90 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
M-5
5/2/90 6,000 68 130 969 290
8/7/90 7,100 48 470 1,490 380
11/29/90 640 26 19 154 3.5
MW-6
5/2/90 83 N.D. N.D. 2 N.D.
8/7/90 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.'D. N.D.
11/29/90 N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D.
All concentrations are in parts per billion (ppb).
Benz, Tol, Xyl, E-Benz...Benzene, Toluene, Total xylenes, and
ethylbenzene.
~4easurements made during December of 1990 indicate that the
groundwater flow direction for the area is from North-Northeast
(NNE) to South-Southwest (SSW). This flow is influenced by
the layer of soil with gravel illustrated within Figures #2
and 3, attached. The hydraulic conductivity and porosity within
the referenced layer are higher than in surrounding soils; and
so one can expect the primary direction of contaminant flow
to be along this layer. A decrease in contaminant concentrations
would be expected to the Southwest due to this "washing" factor.
The laboratory results are also indicative of a decrease of
contaminant concentrations over time at MW-4, MW-5, and MW-6.
The differences in depths to water at MW-3 (60.65) and MW-4
(60.76) appears to have allowed contaminant transport and
accumulation in the area of MW-3 (an area of improved geological
storage to the Northwest) despite the fact that the primary
direction of ground%~ater flow is to the SSW.
PROPOSED METHOD OF REMEDIATION
In consideration of hydrogeological data previously acquired
(and summarized above), it is proposed that an injection-
extraction system be employed to facilitate biological
2.
detoxification of waters and soils impacted by TPH-G and
its aromatic constituents (BTX&E). Specifically, it is proposed
existing monitoring wells, MW-3 and MW-5, (which are located
within the areas of greatest contamination) be utilized as
extraction points to remove contaminated groundwater; and that
this water be delivered to a surface treatment unit which would
consist of a fluidized-bed bioreactor vessel and ancillary
equipment (pumps, storage tanks, etc.) contained within a fenced
and bermed area. Specifics of the pumping system would be
determined through the application of the SUTRA software package
developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Air Force.
At such time as the SUTRA model is developed, a comprehensive
time line for all compliance activities may be developed.
The reactor vessel would contain a consortium of non-pathogenic,~
hydrocarbon utilizing bacteria capable of thoroughly aerobically
degrading (i.e. mineralizing) fuel hydrocarbons to form the
non-toxic end products of carbon dioxide, minerals, and water.
A schematic of the treatment unit; an overview of biological
detoxification processes in general; and pilot study data are
presented herein as Appendix '~C"
System efficiency is expected to be such that treated waters ~
will contain hydrocarbons in concentrations no greater than
ten times drinking water standards. It is proposed that a
portion of this treated water be discharged to the sanitary
sewer under permit...while the balance of the water, now
"conditioned" (i.e. containing high levels of dissolved oxygen,
nutrients, and hydrocarbon utilizing bacteria) be reinjected
-~-~dient wells MW-2 and MW-4 in order to facilitate in-
situ biodegradation of hydrocarbon contaminants resident in
both groundwater and soils within the c~apillary fring~_
Contamination which may persist at 20 feet within soils in the
area of MW-5 could also be remediated through the injection
of "conditioned" water at this depth, likely during the initial /
start up of the system...during which time groundwater would
be extracted only from MW-3.
It is proposed that confirmation of the effectiveness of the
groundwater treatment system be%by the sampling of 500 gallon~
batches of treated waters during the first several days of system
operation. At such time as certified laboratory analysis of
these samples confirm the effectiveness of the treatment system,
it if further proposed that continuous discharge be permitted
with confirmation sampling for compliance to be undertaken
quarterly. Samples would be introduced into two (2) Volatile
Organic Analysis (VOA) vials which would be promptly sealed
with teflon-lined screw caps, labeled, placed on blue ice, and
transported to a certified hazardous waste analytical laboratory
under chain of custody for subsequent analysis for TPH-G and
BTX&E using previously referenced D.O.H.S. and EPA methodology.
3.
Assurance of sample quality would be provided through the use
of blanks and/or duplicates as specified by the Kern County
Department of Environmental Health Services.
It is proposed that confirmation of remediation of residual '~-~
soil contamination would be through analysis of soil vapors ~
aspirated through 7/8" diameter stainless steel probes which
would be advanced to 15 feet and 20 feet below ground surface ~/~
-in the area of MW-5. Samples of soil gas thus acquired would
be collected within standard gas sample bags/tubes, marked,
and submitted for certified laboratory analysis for TPH-G and
BTX&E. ~
On site activities would be Undertaken in accordance with the
Health and Safety Plan previously submitted.
A quarterly summary report would be submitted every three months
which would provide an update of compliance activities; including
results of certified and uncertified analyses for degradation
rates, biological activity, intermediate product formation,
and soil-water chemistry.
Should you have any questions regarding this proposal, or if
we may otherwise be of assistance, please contact either of
the undersigned at (415).455-4991.
Sincerely,
Valentin Constantinescu, M.Sc.
Hydrog eo 1 og i s t
and
VC/JB:dr
enc.
Appendix "A"...Area and Site Maps
Appendix "B"...Geologic Cross Sections
Appendix "C"...Details of Treatment System
Appendix "D"...Professional Staff Vitae
Appendix "A" " - 'J?. "
3RIAN
~L ST
78
URIAH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
464 LINDBERGH AVENUE, LIVERMORE, CA
AT: Scale: N
1"= 2,200 ft.
3505 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA
(~ Main Building
I
I I
[ (~ Loading Dock I
I
60.2~
o~ I ~w-4 I
.~ Oroundwoter
- 60.1
I I
LP~ ,
i STORAGE ii ~ Monitoring Well J
J : TANK Groundwater Gradient
:~ Determined on 8/8/90 J
J . by Uriah Ine: J
Scale:
I I 25 FEET I I
J Figure ii1
Bakers Welding Supply ~T · .
Project Number: 12190WF~~1 a ~
3505 Pierce Road ' ''
Bakersfield, CA An Environmental Services Company
Appendix "B" ..: ' :".
I
A
~$) ~w-4
· ,_..~' ~'~
~ '" ~"-~ (J) Monitoring Well
A'
25 IrEET
I
B ,,
LPG
J 510RAgE
I
URIAH INC.
Bokers Welding Supply I Prelect Number: 12190WF
.3505 Pierce Road, Bokersfield, CA Date: May 1, 1990
I,Iodh
A .A'
MW - g MW - 4 MW- 2
I I I
SM
SW-SP . t0
ML //7 ~.' ML' ' 20 FeeLGradeBelow
", ~ - 30
SP ' 40
Geologic Cross Sec[ion A-A' URIAH INC.
Baker's Welding Supply An Environmental Services Company
Bakersfield California Job Number: 12190WF
' Dote' May 1, 1990
I I II II
B B'
M W-- S · MW- ~ MW- 1
SM
. tO
SW-SP ML
'~ ~ ~ 20
Feet
Below
Grade
- 80
s · URIAH INC
Geologic Cross ~_e¢:t~on B--B' ·
An £nvironmontol $orvicos Company
Baker's Welding Su. pplv
Bakersfield, Cali~.orn. ia Job Number: 12190WF
Doto: May 1, 1990
Hose a/4'
<~ Hose 3/4'
Holding Tank PVC Bio
Flow lleter ,
Pump soils ~
~ Existing Existing
Sewer ~ ~e~
OVERVIEW OF TREATMENT SYSTEM PROPOSED FOR: UI IAH INC.
An Environmental Services Company
Baker' s Welding Supply
3505 Pierce Road
Bakersfieldw CA 93301 DATE: February 28w 1 991
Elevation View
SchemaLic
Bioreaetor System URIAH INC.
Schematic An Environmental Services Co.
BIOREMEDIATION OF ORGANIC WASTES IN GROUNDWATER
USING A FLUIDIZED BIOFILM REACTOR
A Paper Presented To The National Water Well Association
Conference In Las Vegas, Nevada
May 17, 1990
URIAH, INC.
BIOREMEDIATION OF ORGANIC WASTES IN GROUNDWATER
USING A FLUIDIZED BIOFILM REACTOR
TARLOCHAN So NIJJARw JOHN E o RAPP
Contamination of groundwater by anth~opogeniG compounds
is a problem which has appropriately received much attention
in recent years. As the level of concern regarding this
problem has risen, so has the demand for additional treatment
alternatives; and many are now available in the marketplace,
however, a number of these employ physical and chemical
means which simply transfer contamination from one medium
to another, or sequester the materials of concern.
Remediation through biodegradation processes may reasonably
be considered the most notable exception among available
alternative technologies. As biological treatment has been
a major component in the treatment of municipal and
industrial waste waters for many years, the adaptation of
biological processes to groundwater contamination events
involving fuel hydrocarbons, solvents, or pesticides seems
a logical step...one which should be expected to provide
particularly efficient and cost effective remedies to a
wide variety of public health and/or environmental sensitive
problems which involve organic contaminants.
This concept is by no means a new one. Data concerning
engineered bioreactor systems may be found in technical
references dating from the 1960s. These biological process
reactors for water and waste water remediation are most
often categorized with regard to the nature of the biological
growth mechanism employed. When biomass is suspended as
free organisms or microbial aggregates, the system is
referred to as a "Suspended Growth Bioreactor, while those
in which growth occurs on the surface, or within, a solid
media are termed "Supported Growth" or "Fixed Film
Bioreactors". A particularly efficient form of fixed film
reactor is one in which biomass build up takes place on
inert support media such as plastic, glass beads, or sand;
or upon active media such as granular activated carbon.
In both cases with the design utilized here, toxics degrading
microorganisms resident on the biofilm support medium move
between areas of varying substrate concentrations as
contaminated water is introduced into the reactor system
in a manner which lifts, expands, and fluidizes the bed.
Each particle of support medium becomes covered with
microorganisms which can mineralize pollutants to form the
harmless end products of carbon dioxide, water, and minerals.
The expansion (i.e. fluidization) process makes the bed
more porous, allowing for large biomass and rapid contaminant
degradation. Media characteristics impacting the performance
of the fluidized reactor are particle size, density, surface
roughness, and resistance to abrasion. Activated carbon,
initially selected as the media of choice for its adsorption
and high surface area properties, may prove inadequate under
field conditions because of poor abrasion resistance and
the tendency of individual particles to break away from'
the top of the fluidized, wander through the recycling
system, build up on filter surfaces, and clog pumps and
valves.
Aware of the values inherent in engineered reactor systems,
Uriah, Inc. has sought to develop units which harness the
positive contaminant degradation features attendant to bio-
degradation processes while seeking concurrently to keep
construction, installation, and operation costs to a minimum.
In essence, to make available for the small site and the
responsible party with limited funds, a "user friendly",
small capacity, highly efficient system water treatment
system. Test data acquired to date has shown that the system
pictured in Figure #3 is well suited to meeting the stated
goals; with benzene, acetone, and diesel fuel contaminated
water have been successfully treated.
The reactor was constructed in accordance with standard
mechanical engineering principles. It consists of a 7'(H)
x .5'(D) clear PVC column with a fluid holding capacity
of approximately 6 gallons. The column is serviced by 1"
copper piping, a single 1/6 horsepower circulating pump,
manual and electronic values, a system of gauges, an
air compressor, and nutrient feed system contained within
an aluminum cabinet and powered by 110 AC at approximately
0.31 kw/hr.
Influent, recycle, and effluent discharge are controlled
by a series of valves on an electronic timing system. As
nutrient enriched influent enters the column, recycle
water/discharge effluent exit the column through a filter
located near the top of the column. Adjustments in the
rate of recycle and discharge are adjusted on the basis
of contaminant concentrations and compound degradability-
variables which may be determined through daily monitoring
of reactor effluent for 2-5 days following the establishment
of appropriate biomass. Subsequent to determining the proper
2.
treatment period and discharge rate, other variables e.g.
temperature, nutrients, dissolved oxygen, and pH can be
held constant or adjusted in response to fluctuations in
influent characteristics. Influent, effluent, and recycle
water are moved into, through, and out of the system as
illustrated in Figure ~1.
The introduction of fluids at the column base lifts and
expands the support medium which, in the unit described
herein, consists of 3mm diameter ABS (TP) plastic cubes
~~y of ~0~ grams er cubic ' ter. The
ABS occupies approximately one third of the volume of the
reactor column at rest and is expanded approximately 100%
during reactor operation. Companion reactors, of similar
size and as large as 15 gallons per minute treatment capacity
(a system which utilizes a 19 foot high reactor column),
have been constructed which employ granular activated carbon
(GAC) as a support medium, however, the wandering of random
particles of GAC as previously referenced has been a problem
which has been successfully addressed only through the
utilization of specialized pumps...a system modification
whose virtues are still being assessed.
Fluidization is achieved by introducing the contaminated
influent and recycled water into the base of the reactor
column through a diffuser. In the absence of a diffuser,
we have found that a portion of the support medium will
not fluidize in response to "dead spots" along the base
of the column. Upon being introduced as described, water
moves upward through the bed at a velocity sufficient to
expand the bed beyond the point at which the net downward
force exerted by gravity is equaled. Once at, or beyond,
this point of minimum fluidization, the particles comprising
the support medium are individually hydraulically supported.
Expansion of the bed through fluidization also results in
mixed-flow conditions where the biomass containing support
medium are set into a gentle rolling action which moves
each piece of medium first up and then down the column...thus
repeatedly cycling from greater to lesser concentrations
of contaminants. This process prevents shock loadings to
biomass and permits the entire population of hydrocarbon
degrading microorganisms to participate in the degradation
of significant concentrations of contaminants. Degradation
inhibition is also suppressed by preventing the rapid build
up of inhibitory intermediates, such as fatty acids, which,
in turn, also aids in the prevention of pH depression.
Fluidization also contributes to improved flow distribution'
and minimizes resistance to mass transport due to reduced
thickness of the hydrodynamic boundary layer.
In order to maintain aerobic conditions within the reactor
column, compressed air is also introduced at the column
base through a flexible, tubular sparger of foam-like
material. The sparger is formed into a circular pattern
on the column floor and provides the high volume of small
diameter air bubbles conducive to thorough aeration.
The particles comprising support medium, properly fluid-
ized and bathed with air, provide such a vast area for
microbial growth that biomass concentrations five to ten
times greater than those normally maintained in a suspended
growth bioreactor system are expected, thus reducing the
contact time necessary for. thorough degradation. The bio-
reactor column was inoculated with bacterial seed consisting
primarily of hydrocarbon utilizing bacteria obtained through
culturing and enrichment of isolates from active sludge
samples acquired from a muicipal waste water treatment
facility. Being located in the San Francisco Bay Area,
we had no difficulty in obtaining inoculum containing
organisms well adapted to dealing with a variety of
hydrocarbon contaminants.
By adjusting the reactor's timing system and electronic
valves, different volumes of treated water may be discharged
at selected intervals. In the cases presented here, approx-
imately one liter of water was discharged at 1 to 5 minute
intervals after all six gallons contained within the reactor
column had been cycled through the column one to five times.
This cycling process enhances rapid degradation by providing
repeated contact between the target contaminants and the
entire biomass.
Although the complete breakdown of hydrocarbon materials
into carbon dioxide, water, and minerals is theoretically
possible in almost any circumstance, real life experiences
have shown that thorough detoxification usually requires
careful management of biotic and abiotic parameters. This
is true largely due to the fact that petroleum hydrocarbons
are very complex mixtures containing large number of
alicyclic, aromatic, and other compounds. Each compound
possesses physical and chemical characteristics which differ
in their capacity to serve as microbial substrates (i.e.
to be used by bacteria and fungi as sources of carbon and
electrons). Bacterial utilization of the hydrocarbons
present in the contaminated water introduced into the
bioreactor commonly involve oxygenase enzymes (these being
chemical compounds whose catalytic action is necessary for
the transformation of oxygen). The compressed air supplied
to the system supplies the molecular oxygen necessary for
this process. While the contaminants are themselves a rich
4.
source of carbon, the addition of mineral nutrients
(nitrogen, phosphorus, and micronutrients) is usually
necessary and these were supplied to the waters treated
to data by metering calculated volumes of commercial
fertilizer solution into the influent line. Waters treated .
to date have required no pH adjustment, however, significant
pH fluctuations are likely with some contaminants. Should
this occur, the p~ of the system may be balanced by adjusting
the p~ of the nutrient supply. Likewise, no manipulation
of water temperature has been necessary; however, heaters
_ and insulation may be added for cold wearer applications.
Other additions to the basic system may include compounds
to serve as co-oxidizers or primary substrates to trigger
secondary substrate utilization. Although not necessary
in the cases presented here, these capabilities are important
features for treatment systems seeking to remediate to
drinking water standards, or comply with non-degradation
policies specifying detoxification to below detection levels.
Co-oxidation is a process in which compounds which otherwise
would not be degraded can be attacked by enzymes due to
the abilities of the microorganisms producing those enzymes
to utilize other hydrocarbons within the petroleum mixture.
Secondary substrate utilization is the process whereby a
substrate which does not supply sufficient energy or carbon
for cell growth and maintenance is used/degraded along with
a primary substrate which occurs, or is introduced, in order
to meet these needs.
Sites where it is necessary to remediate organic contaminants
in large volumes and as rapidly as possible favor the use
of fluidized-bed technology. Microbial detoxification and
degradation of complex organic molecules normally require
a long solids retention/cell residence time. This is not
the case with a fluidized-bed system. In addition, specific
microbial populations capable of degrading particular
contaminants may be maintained. This is achieved by
selection, enrichment, and application of specified
oligotrophic bacteria which are capable of surviving in
low substrate environments. In some cases it is possible
that an anthropogenic compound in low concentrations may
be as easily degraded as at higher concentrations. Should
this low substrate threshold effect be encountered due to
lack of enzyme induction or activation, secondary substrate
utilization/co-oxidation principles may be employed.
While a certain amount of biomass is expected to be lost
from all biofilm reactors during each treatment cycle, this
5.
loss is minimized in the fluidized system as most of the
biomass is attached to the support media and is resistant
to sheer. In an ideal system, the biomass loss will be
less than the rate of growth of new biofilm.
Aware of a number of sites at which shallow groundwater is
contaminated with gasoline/benzene, and acetone, it was
deemed appropriate for these compounds to be introduced
into bioreactors in concentrations simulating field
conditions. These compounds were excellent "test" chemicals
because of their high solubilities in water. The test
process consisted of creating a 55 gallon solution containing
a known'concentration of the target contaminant and then
pumping it through the reactor unit. Recycle and discharge
rates of the reactor were set to correspond to calculated
rates of degradation. Reactor effluent was collected in
Volatile Organics Analysis (VOA) vials from the discharge
line. The vials were promptly sealed with teflon-lined
screw caps, marked, and placed on blue ice pending transport
to a certified hazardous waste laboratory where they were
analyzed used specified EPA methodology.
Test results are summarized below:
TABLE #1- BENZENE, Physical/Chemical Parameters
TREATMENT TIME LEVELS OF BENZENE % DO pH TEMP
0 96.0 ppb 17.9 7.5 21
5 2.3 ppb 14.4 7.7 23
10 2.4 ppb 13.8 7.5 25
15 2.6 ppb 14.5 7.5 23
Ambient temperature: 19
TABLE #2- ACETONE, Physical/Chemical Parameters
TREATMENT TIME LEVELS OF ACETONE % DO pH TEMP
0 28.0 4.0 7.5 24
1 3.7 - - -
2 4.2 - - -
3 3.5 - - -
4 3.7 - - -
5 3.7 3.5 7.4 25
Ambient temperature 17
ppm...parts per million
ppb...parts per billion
All temperatures in degrees C
Samples were acquired after allowing the reactor column'
to fill completely with contaminated water.
TABLE #3- BENZENE, Biotic Parameters
Nitrogen/Phosphorus Ratio: 5:1
BACTERIAL POPULATIONS
TIME (MINUTES) POPULATION (NO/ml)
0 0.88 million
5 1.10 million
10 0.96 million
15 1.70 million
TABLE #4- ACETONE, Biotic Parameters
Nitrogen/Phosphorus Ratio: 5:1
BACTERIAL POPULATIONS
TIME (MINUTES) POPULATION (NO/ml)
5 1.80 million
As indicated within the preceding tables, the levels of
benzene in water were reduced by 97.3% to 97.6% within five
minutes; while the levels of acetone in water were reduced
85.0% to 87.5% in only one minute.
While drinking water standards were not achieved for benzene,
lengthening the treatment cycle would be expected to result
in further significant degradation of contaminants. Acetone
7.
displayed the same general degradation pattern as benzene,
but was more readily utilized by virtue of its more
simplistic chemical structure.
Elevated water temperatures recorded during reactor
operation are interpreted as indicative of biological heat
produced during exothermic metabolic reactions. Also,
increases in bacterial populations were as expected when
contaminated water was introduced into the column, with
an initial drop off consistent with reductions with high
contaminant concentrations.
Although data acquired to date is somewhat limited, the
engineering aspects of the system(s) described, are well
studied, with units having been continuously operated for
a number of months. Also, additional biodegradation data
is being acquired and will be available in the near future.
This data is expected to further support the value of low
capacity, fluidized-bed units as a cost effective and easily
maintained groundwater treatment alternative.
1. Alexander, M. Biode~radation of Chemicals of
Environmental Concern, Science #211: 132-138 (1981).
2. Atlas, R.M., Biodegradation of Hydrocarbons in the
Environment, Environmental Biotechnology #45: 211-222.
3. D.A.T.A. Inc., The International Plastics Selector,
1986.
4. Rittmann, B.E., et.al., Biode~radation of Trace Organic
Compounds in Ground Water Systems, Technical Report
No. 255, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford
University, CA. 1980.
5. Rittmann, B.E. and McCarty, P.L., Evaluation of Steady
State Biofilm Kinetics, Biotech. Bioengineering, 22(11):
2359-2374 1980.
6. Rittmann, B.E., Comparative Performance of Biofilm
Types, Biotech. Bioengineering, #24: 1341-1370, 1982.
7. Suidan, M.T., and Nabhla, G.F., Anaerobic Fluidized
Treatment of Hazardous Waste, Environmental Biotech-
nology #45: 295-306, 1987.
8.
8. Sutton, P.M., Biological Treatment of Surface and Ground
Water, Pollution Engineering, July 86-90.
Appendix "D" :--: '
~'~ [. /... · John RaPP,.'. B~SC. ~ Eavir°nmental' MicrObiology, San Jose
-~ " .,. it¥ 1983.
· .. ~. '. State'UniVers ,
. WOrk Experience':..-. ?~...i fr j.' ( . .(:i'' ' ~ .. '-':..
--: :' ' Hr, RaPp.,..h~S~' e~ghtO. Yea~s experience asa :..h&~ard0Us ma~er[als. management professional with local government' and. private
-- industry; and has overseen numerous assessment<and remedia~ion-.
projects both as a regulator and service provide=. '.He-.'has~ . .
developed and/or participated in the development of. a
.. of alternative remediation technologies.and, analYtical
~, involving.biological'detoxification of:'soils...and groUndwater.
Mr.-Rapp is a State,of. California Registered .Environmental Health
Specialist.in good standing; and is the founder'of .Uriah,:In~.
AntOny Skorupko, Ph'.D.,.Civil Engineering~",'Odessa SChool
of Civil Engineering, Odessa., USSR~
-1965. '"- -
..,
Professional Contributions: ...
Dr. Skorupko has authored more than twenty technical articles
and holds a number of patents.
Work Experience:
Prior to joining Uriah, Dr. Skorupko served for nine years as
Senior Engineer for the Department of Hydraulics and Environ-
mental Protection, Polytechnical Institute~ Odessa, USSR; fOllow-
ing thirteen years of service as an engineer with the Department
of Hydraulics, Wastewater Systems Design~ Odessa. His responsi-
bilities included design of facilities fo~ treatment and disposal
of sludge, groundwater supply and remediation systems~ water
and wastewater treatment plants; and biological and physio-
chemical process equipment.
Michael Wopat, Ph.D., Geology, University of California~
Berkeley, 1990o
M.Sc., Geology, University of Wisconsin~
Madison, 1974.
Registered Geologist #4445°
Professional Contributions:
1.
. -Dr~ Wopat-iS theauthor of ten.technical pub~icatio~S and papers~
~'.-".Work en
". Dr. Wopat"s SerVed.'as a geologist' and principal investigator
.... for. regional sCale geologic 'studies with the' Bendix Field
: 'Engineer~ng...Corpo=ation, participated, in'fiel~-oriented studies
.of neotectonicS!With theLawrence 'Berkeley Laboratory, and
.:---- -.instr~cted at .the~'un!versity level~ Additional Work has been
'undertaken. fn'hy~rPge°logy.;, ge°chemistry, petroleum geolog~
: .'"'- 1980.. ' .....
Mathematics~ 'BUcharest~
1988. .. .
-Mr. Constantinescu served With the-Romanian::Institute~"0fGeol°gy
and Geophysics, Department of Hydrogeology"and~Geophysical.
Methods for Groundwater Detection'from.1983-1990'.:.He.hasserVed
as the Senior Geologist and Project Leader in..oil..fiel~ .... '
contamination studies, nuclear power' plant location, studi~s~
and has extensive experience in hydrogeologic"andgeOelectri¢al
methods.. ......
Jack Becker, P.E., B.Sc. Civil Engineering (Sanitation 0pt~n)'~..
University of California~ ~953;~'..'" ".-.':
Registere~ Professional-Engineer.:#25472o
Work Experience= ... .. ,.:....:.~
Mr. Becker, a State of California Registere~ civil. Engine~'~,'
has thirty-five years of sanitary engineering, marketing, i'an~
research experience in water and wastewater systems~ hazardous
- waste remediation; and surety and property claims'analysis~
Mr. Becket's skills include those related to the management'
of soil and groundwater remediation projects~ preparation of'.
environmental impact reports, industrial ~ater project'studieS~
and the design of sewage lift stations° . .......
Kevin N. McNemara, B.Sc., Geology, University of New
1979. ,'.
Work Experience=
.~*.' . Mr, NcNamara'~comes to Uriah. with ten years eXPerienCe as a
~.:.... 'Wellsi'te and consHltin~.'geoiogist i~the oil and gas exploration
· i and 'geothermal industries~ a~d is skilled in th~ testing and
-/.", analysis of geothermal steam Wells, and hydrogen sulfide
f,'. abatement. HAs skills, are now being utilized in the environ-
:'.i..' mental services, field .and ~nclude those related to sampl/ng/
.'.:. moni~oring~ si~e characteriZatiOn, and remedial .technology'
~. ..... design, construction~ and operation~ . ,,. __
L ' '
~ !".'i.:' 'Denise'RapP,[B,S~N~ (Cum~ a~del,' University .of Californiaat
· . . ,. ,.~./.:...';.:,.. FreSn0~ 19'77.-:' ""
- p ie % .,,"' .....
:' . -" Work Ex er n ~",' ~- - ~';-'- ....... " ' ~. ': "' ' ...'::~-? ·': "
..,- . ... , . '/,' :..:,:. ,.!..... . .
~s,.,'~apP. brings:.li3"-years of' expertense, as a"health' Care---
-. profess!onal.:and'..6-Years,in the'environkental services field"'
'.to Uriah'as.its senior..technical write~":and:associate publiC~
i~p ct '
· . health a aSsessor. ' ..... ' ...... '
-'E'. Anthony Faver0~ B.A., Mathematics~ San. joSe;'~sta~e un't~rst~,i.
'Additional Academic Credentials: '' ~';'- '
With a 'minor in physics, Mr, Fay.to holdSa Standard _seCondar~
Teaching Credential in physical sciences and mathematics..
Post-graduate studies include mathematics~ chemistry~.geolog¥;'-
and statistics. ,.~ ...
Work Experience:
Mr. Fay.to has participated in civil engineering and land survey.
activities with the United States Forest Service and has
considerable teaching experience.
Jeffrey C. Schafer, B.Sc., Agricultural Engineering, California
Polytechnic State University, ~990o
Work Experience:
Mr. Schafer has designed heating, ventilating, and air condition-
ing systems, and harvesting equipment; and investigated improved
methods of plowing, planting, and harvesting corn silage. His
engineering skills are now focused on biological detoxification
methodology.
.... Tar~o~b~n So N~jjar~ M?sc;.', 'BiologiCal Sciences,
.... ' ~. . -'- '.Un~versity-~ Amrtstar,. india, 1986
"- ' : ~ ':i.'~.- '' .-. 'B.s'c~ ,,. :BiologY ~ and/.Chem£stry, G.N,Do
-- _: Toxic and~cytogenetic 'effects. of common environmental pollutants
.. Work Experience: ..... . ,. : .
Mutagenic and'.i.~last°genic'effects of s:ele¢ted~pestiCides. Anti-
mutagenic'and_anti-Clastogenic effectSof selected oxidants.
Management of"the"'microb~ological aspects of"numeroUs..soils
and groundwater:remediation, proJects invoiving:aerObic and.
anaerobic'procesSes. -Mr. Nijjar also'has sign~ficant eXPerien=e
in the development and utilization of .fluidi. Zed~bed.'and':.~acked
column.bioreactor:systems. ' '" ""- ? '~''~ .... · ...
".~ ::. , -.
Eddy Tabet, M.Sc., Civil Engineering, Columbia:'UniVer~£ty~ 'N,Y'.:,.
~983. ..... ,.. -
B.Sc., Civil Engineering, Columbia~.Universit¥,,..]9.~2.
ri '"~'
Work Expe ence: --
As a California Registered Professional Engineer, Mr~'Tabe~'
provides direct service and consulting support to Uriah' On
matters of civil and environmental enginee=in~ · Mr;..Tabet'has- ',
significant experience in the environmental field,' i~'part£cu'lar
as it relates to fueling facilities. He has been responsible..
for the operations of an LPG and gasoline.~hipping and'receiving
terminal, specified and installed maritim~ pipelines~.and-has -
performed design and analysis tasks for major structures-.-
including airports, nuclear power plants~ and bridges.
Lewis F. Rapp
Work Experience:
With 30 years experience in the engineering design and.·
development of municipal water and waste ~ater treatment
and numerous other civil engineering projects, Mr, Rappbrings...
considerable skill to Uriah as the person most responsible
the engineering design and construction of Uriah~s fluidized~.
bed bioreactor systems .... -
Tom! Lacey, B;A. ,. Marketing,.. Christian Bros-, College, ~Illino£s,
.'Experience= ': "'
-' Work :. -
'~-' ': As: a founding member.-of:.. . the/California:MUShrOom' Growers
~ '._:'" CoOperative. and. Ow~.er':of tw~:..'mushroom-~ f.a~., s,. :Mr.. LaCey. ha'S
_.---~.. considerable exPerience:Pi-th.mushroom' pr0duc2s,..He'iS the
'developer of! unique .!stra~ns.-Of' comPOst,.' compost .related
__ ~' .:"?materials,'and 'soils.handling:'equipment'..which ~ave..pro~en't0
"..--.'be .of.' Significant ...... valUe'in 's~i].s:.and .gr0u~dwater treatment
Roger. Debaun Owen, .B.iA'~.j"i. Environm&ntal Plann~ng~
... -. of California at Santa~Cruz~_1980,.
Mr:.- Owen has experience in'both marketing and the..'prepara~i0~
of Environmental Impact Reports, Environmental:-Impact:'Statements,-
and Environmental, Urban, and H~storical/Cultural Resource':
Planning documents. Environmental impact 'study.emphases
included geologic hazard analysis, hydrologic impact'analysis~.
air quality monitoring, development feasibili~y, publiccoSt/
benefit studies, and biotic resource surveys and inventories.