The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMITIGATION FILE #6 (2)ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT RESOURCE, MANAGEMENT AGENCY STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director ~ DA VID PRICE III, RMADIRECTOR 2700"M" STREET, SUITE 300 ~ Engineering & Survey Servlr, es Department BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 ~ Envtronmenta!. Health Sen~ices Department Phone: (805) 862-8700 Planning Department FAX: (605) ~62-8701 Roads Department April 8, 1996 REMEDIAL ACTION COMPLETION CERTIFICATION Leo Black Estate Attention Tom Gilbert P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJECT: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK (UST) CASE Location: 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California Known As: Leo Black Electric Site No.: 050119 Dear Mr. Gilbert: This letter confirms the completion of site investigation and remedial action for the underground storage tank(s) formerly located at the above-described location. Enclosed is the Case Closure Summary for the referenced site for your records. Based on the available information, including the current land use, and with the provision that the information provided to this agency was accurate and representative of site conditions, no further action related to the underground tank release is required. This notice is issued pursuant to a regulation contained in Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 16, Section 2721(e). (If a change in land use is proposed, the owner must promptly notify this agency.) Please telephone Dolores Gough at (805) 862-8728 if you have any questions regarding this matter. S't'~ve McCalley, Director ~.. I ' Environmental Health Services'l~epartment SMc:DG:jrw Enclosure cc: Donna Roberts Winifred Thomson - Darling, Maclin & Thomson WZI, Inc. Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board State Board, Underground Tanks Program (hm~gough\050119.a) UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE (LEAK) / CONTAMINATION SITE REPORT EMER(~ENCY HAS STATE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES .:!'FoRliOCAI2!:AGENCYiUSE REPORT REEN FILED ? [] YES ]~ NO N~E OF INDIVDU~ FILING R~ORT I PHONE SI~A~RE ' REPRESENTING ~ ~NE~PE~TO. ~ REG~BOARD ~ COMPANYOR~EN~E ~ L~ALA~N~ ~ O~ER~ KERN CO. ENV. HEALTH SERVICES ADDRESS 2700 "M" ST., STE. ~%, ~ERSFIE~, CA 9330] . ~ ~A~ ZI~ NAME [ ~NT~T~[ROON ~ ~MONfi LEO B~CK ESTATE ~ UNKNOWN ~i GILBERT ( ) ADDRESS P. O. ~X ]2], %~F~ HEIGHTS, CA 932S5 c~ STA~ FACILI~ N~E (IF ~~ OPE~TOR J PHONE ADDRESS 3909 PIECE ~., B~FIE~, KE~N CO~, 93308 c~ CRO~ SYR~T L~ A~N~ AGENCY N~E ~NT~T PERSON PHONE KE~N CO. E~.~. H~TH SERVICES DE~. ~RES ~UGH (B05 ) 862-8700 REG~N~ BOARD PH~E CE~ VALLEY ~ION ( ) (1) NAME QUANTI~ LOS'~ (~LLONS) ~SOLINE U~K~OW~ ~ UNKNOWN DA~ DI~VERED ~ HOW DtS~VER~ ~ '~ORY ~R~ ~ SU~URFACE MON~ORING ~ NUIS~CE ~NDITIONS DA~ D~R~S ~. .~OD USeD TO STOP D,S~ARG~ (C.~CK HAS D.S~RG~ a~. STm.~ ~ ~ R~PA~R TANK ~ CLOS~ TANK & ~,~L ,. P~C~ ~ C.A.G~ PR~DUR~ 8 '17 ~ .EP~CE TANK ~ OTHER ~ YES ~ NO IFYE~DA~ ~12 ~ ], OI0 ~ , Y ~ TANK~ ~ UNK~N ~ OVERFI~ ~ RUPmR~AILURE ~ SPILL ~ PIPING~ ~ O~ER ~ ~RR~ION ~ UNKNOWN ~ O~ER CHECK ONE ONLY ~ UND~RMIN~ ~ SOiL ONLY ~ G<UN~ATER ~ DRINKING WATER-(CHECK ONLY IF WATER WELLS HA~ AC~ALLY B~N A~EC~D) ~ <AC~ONTA~N ~ PR~IMI~S~A~E~M~T~RK~NSUBMI~ ~ POLLUTIONC~RAC~R~TION ~ ~ BEI~ ~NFIRMED ~ PRELIMINARY ~ ~E~M~T UN~RWAY ~ POST CL~UP MONITORI~ IN PROGRE~ ~ REMED~N P~ ~ CASE CL~ED(~UP ~MP~D OR UNNECE~AR~ ~ CLE~UP UNDERWAY CHECK APPROPRIATE ACT~N(S) ~ EXCAVA~ & DISUSE ~ ~ REMOVE FREE PRODUCT (FP) ~ ENH~CED BfO DEG~DAT~N (1~ ~ C~ S~ (C~ ~ EXCAVA~ & TREAT (~ ~ PUMP & ~EAT GROUNDWA~R (G~ ~ REP~CE SUPPLY (R~ ~ ~NTAINMENT RARRIER (C8) ~ NO ~T~N REQUIRED ~) ' ~ TREA~E~ AT H~P (H~ ~ v~uuu EXT~C~ ~ O~ER (Oh ~O~R H~(~ Case CloSure Su , nary ~.eaking Underground Fuel Storage Tard< Program ~. A.qency Information Date: !1. Case Information Sitefacility~ddmss: ~cjo cj I?IE.~C~ /2D, ~ ,~AKE./25,1:I EI..D., · . EEl LUS115 Case No: I Local ~ No:' ¢~¢/./q I LOP Case No: URF firing date: j SWEEPS No: Responsible Parties t Addresses I Phone Numbers Tank No { Size in Gal. { Content~ Ctcmed in-Place/Removed? Dale ill. Release ~nd Site characterization Information Cause and type of release: O~,-~3 L. 1 8itecharacterizatiOncamplete? (~)' No j Date a~pmved by oversight agency:. Olo.it~ringWells In=lied? ~ No }Numb.,:. ® IP=p,,r~ i,,te,,,~? ~ No Mo~ ,~r~itiv~ Currant U~: ~eoO~Jp~d,4-r~,e -- Are drinking water wells effected? Yes ~[AquEer name: .'. Is surface water affected? Yes ~ J Nearest/affected SW name: Off-site beneficial use impacts (addresses/locations): Treatment. and Disposal of Affected Material Matedal Amount (Include Units) l Action (Treatment or DL~osai w/Destination) Date Piping JI Free Product GrounO~ater B~rrels Exhibit N Page 1 of 2 Case Closure Su , nary Leaking Underground Fuel Storage Ta~k Program I. Aaencv Information _ ' · Date: ~Agency ~me: KEPJ, J rCOO~r'Y E. tdV. HEAI..'I3-1 AddreSS: ~?OO "/~1" I!. Case Information RB LUSTIS Case No: Local C,~se No: ' ~G/I~ LOP Ca_-e No: URF filing date: I SVVEE~S No: Responsible Parties Addresses Phone Numbers Tank No Size in Gal. III. Release and Site Characterization Information C~use and type of ml,,-~.~: Site chamCterizati°n complete? Highest GW depth below ground surface: .~. Are drinking waterwelis affected? Yes (~ I Aquif'er name: ... Is sudace water affected? Yes ~ 1 Neamst/~'fe~_~_ SW name: Off-site beneficial use impacts (addm_~_~es/Iocatians): .Report(s) on file? Y~,~ No IWhere is report(s) ~ed? Treatment. and D~sposai of Affected Material Mate~a~ [Amount (Include Units)t Action frmatmentorDL~posaiw/Destirmt~_n) Date Groundwaterl Barrels Exhibit. ~?00 "~" Street, Su~ca ~ ~ Phone (805) 86!-3636 Pe=mig ~ O~)Jq~l-O_~ (8OS) 86~-3~2g ~PLICA~ON FOR PE~IT TO CONS~UCT, ~CONS~UCT, DEEPEN OR DES~OY A ~LL O~R: Lac B~a~X ~st~t~ ~/~ Donna Rch~r~ __ _ ~hone:805/399-~966 A~:ms.: LOC~ Lcrene Avenue' cl:y~ Bakersfield DRILL:NG CONT~CTOR,: Melton Driiiin~ _ ._ ,. A~rmma~ Ti0l Do'~Ing Avenue ..... C~=yh 3~kersfield zip: 93308 SUSCONT~C~OR~___ ,. . . Phone:. Address: City: ZLp: JO~ SX~ T 29S E ~75 Sec. ~3 40 Acre S=~U~2S if available : 3909 Pierce ~oad, ~ake~sffield TOX~AC~S~ 0.92 are lOCa~e~ along no~%h side o~'-prc~erz7 an~ cna ~oni~'~!ng wel~ is ~oaa~ea ~ sou~neas~ ~E OF WO~ TO SE DO~: (check one) ~ New Wail ~ Domescic/p=iva~e (I connection) ~ ~everse Ro~ar~ ~ Domescic/nonpu~li= (2-4 connec:ions} ~ Rotary ~ Domes~ic/pu~&~ (S o~ mo~e conn.) ~ Air R~=ary ~ Tee~ Hole ~ ca~hodl~ ~ O=he= Des%ructi~r, c~ k mo~ib_o_zi_n= w~ls S~ZNG ~I~ (check ~ne) ~ P~ (c~eck one) C NeaC cemefl= T~e Exts~a~asin~ - ~au~e/WaL1 , Pa3~,-,~-AACE$ TWO OR MOI~S PROPOSED Wlm'-?- DEs~U~ION Yes ~ N~ ~ wei!a~ each h0 ft. ~ee~ THIS APPLICATION BECOMES A PERMIT WHEN APPROVED ~N~AI.. 7. Aop~oval of water OualiW an~ final construction features ere r~cuiteO before the well t~ puc into us~. =o~lation ~ade. ~ee~ a~e -et refunOabl, nor ~ronsfera~le. I ce~ifv that I am me owner o~ ~he abcve-~escribed ~ro~e~y, =r t~e authorized reoresentadve of such awner, and ~h: T furnished ~tl of The s~oge information and inten~ to construct/destroy The welt as represented above. I understar :nat all weir con~itlons of the Permit Application incluain~ any conditions which may be added or changed by The Enviranmem Health ~ervices Oe~a~mehT u~on review of this Application ~na issuance of the Permit. I rusher understand that ar =ermic issue~ pursuant ccm~llance .with the peninen~ tegulatiens. Owner's Signature DaTe INTERNAL DaTe: ZONING ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT Zone: E-Log Required: m Yes :1 No Access AgproveO: = Yes o No Flood Plan Approval Eecluired: = Yes o No Gravel Chute Required: o Yes o No : APPROVED :~ I~ISAPPROVED BY: DATE: REA$O/V$ FOR DE/V/,4L OR CO/VD/T/OffS OF PERM/T: .. REMOVE ~LL BOX AND RESTORE SURFACE TQ ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION OR AS APPROPRIATE. I I I I _ I III I THIS APPLICATION BECO~M'ES A PERM'IT !ArfIEN APPROVED ~._~.e~ f i el d 4700 Stockdaie Highway, Suite 120 Post Office Box 9217 Bakersfield, California 93389 805/328.1112 805/328-0191 FAX FAX LEAD SHEET Total Number of Pages, Include Cover Page: ~ Fax Number', 5~Z.- ~_?O i Telephone Number: , , . File Number: ~,2C)G, o,ol O -' CONFIRMING TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (805) 3~-6.1112 WZI INC. FAX NUMBER IS (805) 326-0191 Oper,: Date Sent: ._--... Time Sent; Initials: ....... Return Original: Y N Copy Sender: Y N K~nA~F' ~2 '96 ~9:4SAM WZi !HC P.4 2700 "~" S~, $ui~ ~00 -- Bakersfield, ~ 9330L Pa~ce~ No. Phone (805) ~6~-3636 ~ (80S) 86~-342~ A;g~e=r'; Par=el No.: LOCATIO~ I LOCATION OF ~LL WITHIN SZCT~ON LZNES--Loca~e well ~y measuring f~om ~roposed si~e in =ela=ion to section lin~s or 1/2 ~ec=ion lines, ~ , NO. ; M~ L. K ~ d. N ~ P 1 - , Oas M~e .... ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Sr..,~VICES DEPARTMENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director ~ DA VID PRICE III, RMADIRECTOR 2700"M" STREET, SUITE 300 ~ Engineering & Survey Services Department BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 ~ Environmental Health Services Department Phone: (805)862-8700 Planning Department FAX: (805) 862-8701 Roads Department March 14, 1996 Ms. Winifred Thomson Darling, Maclin & Thomson P. O. Box 2411 Bakersfield, CA 93303 SUBJECT: Correction to March 12, 1996, Correspondence for Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA - (Permit No. 050119) Dear Ms. Thomson: Attached, please f'md a corrected copy of our March 12, 1996, letter regarding requirements to close the subject site. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused, and if you have 'any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (805) 862-8728. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gougt/ Hazardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch Attachment gough\050119j4.clt ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH .~ii~VlCES DEPARTMENT IESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY ~ ~ ~,~_~ector ~ DA VID PRICEIlI, RMA DIRECTOR 2700'M' STREET, SUITE 300 ~ Engineertng & Survey Sen~k~ Oepa~lment BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 ~ Ertvt ronmental Health Sarvlce~ Department Phone: (805) 862-8700 Planning Department FAX: (805) 862-8701 Roads Department March 13, 1996 Ms. Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Investigation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Ms. Roberts: The February 1996 groundwater mordtormg report prepared by WZI Inc. has been reviewed. The report results indicate none of the petroleum hydrocarbon constituents analyzed are present above detection limits. Based on these results and all the work conducted at this site, no further sampling or remediation associated with the underground tank release is required. However, before we can issue the final closure letter the four monitoring wells on site should be properly abandoned. Prior to beginning well abandonment activities, a permit from this Department must be obtained. If you have any questions regarding th.is matter, please call me at (805) 862-8728. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director BY: Dolores Gough Ha?_~rdous Materials Specialist HaTardous Materials Management Program cc: WZI, Inc. Tom Gilbert Wendy Thomson CVRWQCB O50t 19jr .crt ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LeVlCES DEPARTMENT ~/~ESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director ~ DA VlD PRICE III, RMADIRECTOR 2700"M" STREET, SUITE 300 ~ Engineering & Suwey Services Department BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 ~ Environmental Health Servicea Department Phone: (805) 862-8700 Planning Depaflmont FAX: (805) 862-8701 Reacts Department March 13,' 1996 Mr. Allen Waggoner WZI, Inc. 4700 Stockdale Highway, Suite 120 Bakersfield, CA 93309 SUBJECT: Correction to March 12, 1996 Correspondence for Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050I 19) Dear Mr. Waggoner: Attached please find a corrected copy of our March 12, 1996 letter regarding requirements to close the subject site. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused and if you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (805) 862-8728. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director BY: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program 050119j3.clt ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ~_'~RVICES DEPARTMENT ~'RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY STEVE MCCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director ~ DA VlD PRICE III, RMADIRECTOR 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 ~ Engineering & Survey Services Department BAKERSfiELD, CA 93301 ~ Environmental Health Services Department Phone: (805) 1}62-8700 Planning Department FAX: (805) 862-8701 Road~ Department March 12, 1996 Ms. Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Investigation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Mr. G~ert: The February 1996 groundwater monitoring report prepared by WZI Inc. has been reviewed. The report results indicate none of the petroleum hydrocarbon constituents analyzed are present above detection limits. Based on these results and all the work conducted at this site, no further sampling or remediation associated with the underground tank release is required. However, before we can issue the f'mal closure letter the four monitoring wells on site should be properly abandoned. Prior to beginning well abandonment activities, a permit from this Department must be obtained. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (805) 862-8728. Sincerely~ Steve McCalley, Director BY: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program cc: WZI, Inc. Tom Gilbert Wendy Thomson CVRWQCB 050119j.cR WZl ,.c. February 23, 1996 Ms. Dolores Gough Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: Quarterly Status Report Leo Black Electric Site, 3909 Pierce Road Bakersfield, California Dear Ms. Gough: Pursuant to your correspondence of January 5, 1996, groundwater monitoring was conducted at the Leo Black Electric site on February 1 and 2, 1996 to fulfill the requirement for quarterly monitoring prior to February 15, 1996. This letter report summarizes the groundwater sampling procedures and laboratory analyses. Groundwater Monitoring and Sampling The groundwater monitoring wells MW-1 to MW-4 were sampled on February 1 and 2, 1996. Prior to sampling each of the wells, the depth to water surface below the well casing survey point was measured with an electric tape sonde with an accuracy of 0.01 foot. Groundwater was then handbailed from each well until at least 3 to 5 well volumes were removed. Temperature, conductivity and pH of the bailed water were measured and recorded to establish the stability of the water conditions (Table 1). Groundwater samples were collected from each of the monitoring wells using disposable plastic bailers and placed into laboratory supplied 40 mi vials and one liter amber glass bottles that were treated with hydrochloric acid to prevent volatile organic constituents from coming out of solution. These samples were analyzed using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency test methods 8015-modified for total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline and diesel fuels, and 8020 for volatile organics. 02060010.037 1 4700 5TOCKDALE HIGHWAY, SUITE 120 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93309 (805) 326-1112 FAX: (805) 326-0191 4100 WESTHEIMER, SUITE 231 HOUSTC>.. TEXAS 77027 (713) 877-1149 FAX: (713) 877-1923 All analyses for the samples collected from wells MW-1 through MW-4 were reported to contain hydrocarbon constituents below laboratory analytical detection limits. Analytical summaries of samples are contained in Table 2 and copies of the analytical reports are attached to this letter report. Groundwater Gradient A map that depicts the local groundwater gradient as determined from the four monitoring wells is attached as Exhibit 1. The gradient map defines a direction of groundwater flow beneath the site to the southwest with a slope of approximately .015 feet/foot (80 feet/mile). Planned Work Groundwater monitoring at the Leo Black Electric site has shown two successive quarters of hydrocarbon constituent concentrations below laboratory detection limits, therefore, closure of the groundwater monitoring portion of the site characterization is requested. Per our conversation of February 5, 1996, this is consistent with the new Regional Water Quality Control Board Guidelines for Iow risk former underground storage tank sites which do not pose a risk to drinking water wells. As you may be aware, the nearest water well is located approximately 500 feet from the site. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at (805) 326-1112. Very truly yours, ?~J. Allen Waggoner ' - V/ Staff Geologist JAW/er Attachments: Table 1 Table 2 Exhibit 1 Laboratory Analytical Reports and Chain of Custody Documents 02060010.037 2 TABLE 1 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS GROUNDWATER SAMPLING - WATER CHARACTERISTIC DATA WELL SAMPLE DATE pH CONDUTIVITY TEMPERATURE NUMBER ' NUMBER COLLECTED (pH units) (uomhs/cm) (degrees F) MW-1 1 2/1/96 7,86 1.473 64.9 Water Depth (below wellhead): 14.60' 2 2/1/96 7.35 1.506 64.1 Wellhead Elevation (above SL): 402.65' 3 2/1/96 7.37 1.272 63.6 Groundwater Elevation (above SL): 388.05' 4 2/1/96 7.41 1.380 63.7 5 2/1/96 7.38 1.318 63.5 6 2/1/96 7.40 1.400 63.3 MW-2 1 2/1/96 7.56 0.929 61.1 Water Depth (below wellhead): 14.94' 2 2/1/96 7,44 0.884 61.9 Wellhead Elevation (above SL): 404.01' 3 2/1/96 7.50 0.881 62.0 Groundwater Elevation (above SL): 389.07' 4 2/1/96 7.39 0.871 62.5 5 2/1/96 7.51 0.875 62.7 6 2/1/96 7.48 0.876 63.0 MW-3 1 2/1/96 7.54 0.897 60.8 Water Depth (below wellhead): 15.13' 2 2/1/96 7.51 0.898 61.4 Wellhead Elevation (above SL): 402.83' 3 2/1/96 7.46 0.885 61.2 Groundwater Elevation (above SL): 387.7' 4 2/1/96 7.38 0.881 61.4 5 2/1/96 7.36 0.878 61.7 6 2/1/96 7.32 0.882 62.0 ; MW-4 1 2/2/96 7.03 0.849 60.6 Water Depth (below wellhead): 15.56' 2 2/2/96 7.33 0.798 60.7 Wellhead Elevation (above SL): 401.93' 3 2/2/96 7.22 0.765 61.9 Groundwater Elevation (above SL): 386.37' 4 2/2/96 7.21 0.757 61.9 5 2/2/96 7.22 0.759 62.2 6 2/2/96 7.53 0.753 62,4 F:\CLIENTS\LEOBLACK~WTRDATA3.WQ2 JAW 2/13/96 TABLE 2 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC LABORATORY ANALYSES SUMMARY WATER SAMPLES FROM MONITORING WELLS SAMPLE WELL DATE TPH GASOLINE TPH DIESEL BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYLBENZENE XYLENE NUMBER NUMBER COLLECTED ug/I ug/I ug/I ug/I ug/I ug/I LAB LB-MW1-2 MW-1 2/1/96 ND ND ND ND ND ND SHERWOOD LB-MW2-2 MW-2 2/1/96 ND ND ND ND ND ND SHERWOOD LB-MW3-2 MW-3 2/1/96 NO ND ND ND ND ND SHERWOOD LB-MW4-2 MW-4 2/2/96 ND ND ND ND ND ND SHERWOOD ND = NONE DECTECTED F:\CLIENTS' LEO B LACK\W'I'ERTBL2.WQ2 JAW 2/13/96 _ $herwoodRECEIVED BY 6on ,O,TH LA. DE, AVE. UE Labs c o . P o R A T ~o ~ FEB I 2 I~96 HILMAR, CALIFORNIA 95324 WZI INC. 02~07/96 OHS Certification ~ ~400 ANALYSIS REPORT: BTEX/To~[ Pedro. Hydrocarbons ss Gasoline CLIENT: ~Z[ [NC PO BOX 9217 Bakers~£e[d~ C~ 93389 ~n: ~lien ~aggone~ Pro~ec~ Name: Leo Black Es~a~e Da~e Sampled: 02/01/96 02/02/96 Da~e Received: 02/03/96 Da~e S~ar~ed: 02/05/96 Da~e Completed:02/06/96 Sampled By: ~[[en ~eggoner Lab Repor~ ~: H6020505 BTEX TPH-Ga$o[~ne RESULTS: EP~ 602 EPA ug/L ug/L E~hyi To~al Benzene, Toluene, Benzene, Xylene TPH PH6020633 NDe.3 ND~.3 ~D~.3 ND(.3 ND(50 LB-N~[-2 PH6020634 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<50 LB-MW2-2 PH6020635 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<50 LB-MW3-2 PH6020636 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<.3 ND<50 LB-M~4-2 Gloria P'o 1 1 'ng ~ Laborat:ory Direct:or OFFICE: (209) 667-5258 · FAX: (209) 667-2581 · BBS: (209) 667-4119 Sherwood Labs C 0 R P 0 R A T I0 N HILMAR, CALIFORNIA95324 02/06/96 DHS Certification ~: 1400 ANALYSIS REPORT': Total Recoverable ReCto. Hydrocarbons CLIENT: NZI INC RO 80X 9217 Bakersfield, CA 93389 Attn: Allen Waggoner Date Sampled: 02/01/96 02/02/96 Project Name: Leo Black Estate Date Receiv'ed: 02/03/96 Date Started: 02/05/96 Sampler: Allen Waggoner Date Completed:D2/06/96 Lab Report #: H6020505 RESULTS: TEPH-Diesel~ Kerosene~ Dielectric and Motor Oils EPA 3510/8015(~) ug/L PH6020633 ND<50 All Analytes LB-MN1-2 PH6020634 ND<50 All Analytes LB-MN2-2 PH6020635 ND<50 All Analytes LB-MN3-2 PH6020636 NO<50 All Analytes LB-MW4-2 Gloria Poling Laboratory Director OFFICE: (209) 667-5258 · FAX: (209) 667-2581 · BBS: (209) 667-4119 ~?,'IAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUM~,¢T WZI INC. t Office Box 9217 Bakemfield, Cal~ornia 93389 805~26-1112 ' Repo~ To: // [~~'~ ~ ~ Invoice To: Job Number: ~ ~- ~/0 /o Sample Type: (check one) ,, Drinking Water Sudace Water Waste Water Oil Soil Sludge ~her (sp~ify) D'~o~ ~ ~ ~ Sample Description(s): ~.~ ~Z ~'5 ~ Sample Number Date Colle~ed CollectoCs Name Type of Analysis ' j J ~d- ~z.- ~ ~/~/~ Sample(s) Relinquished by: Date: Time: Sample(s) Received by: _ . ~ .- . Date:/~/.....-'. Time: Sample Cond~ion When R~eiv~ By Lab: Name of Lab: ,. ~~q REED PARCEL PROPERTY BOUNDARY x x ~ x x .... x x x x x x ×/ x x / 387.7' LIMIT OF 1993 FORMER EXCA VA TION'~,I . AERATION PILE BUILDING LEO BLACK PARCEL LEGEND FENCE 3aa. o5 ~ GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL LOCATION 20' AND GROUNDWATER SURFACE ELEVATION I II I 'MW-2 MW-1 PROPERTY BOUNDARY 388.50' 'ORMER ~ ATION PILE ~ (~ ~ 388.00' 387.50' BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 3909 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MAP DATE 2/96 I 0206.0010 I EXHIBIT 1 I STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.,.S. 0 RECT0 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS C 0 U N MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Environmental 2700 'U" S~'eet, Suite 300 MONITORING WELL(S) PERMIT Health Bakersfield, CA 93301 Services (805)861-3636 Department (805)861-3429 FAX PERMIT #: MW 1531-05 OWNER'S NAME: Leo Black Estate MW 1532-05 MW 1533-05 FACILITY NAME: Leo Black Electric MW 1534-05 FACILITY LOCATION: 3909 Pierce Road DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CONTRACTOR: Melton Drilling LICENSE NO.: C 57 - 508270 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTRACTOR WZI, Inc. ,, TYPE OF MONITORING W-ELL(S) Groundwater NUMBER OF WELLS REQUIRED TO MONITOR FACILITY: Four (4) 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 years 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 destroyed 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. Approved Annular Seal Depth Approximately 37 Feet. THIS PERMIT MUST BE SIGNED BY EITHER THE CONTRACTOR OR OWNER~ OWNER'S SIGNATURE DATE C-C~AcTOR S SI~URE / DATE PERMIT APPROVED ElY: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist DATE: September 19, 1995 DO:cas ~gough\1531-05h.m46 STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~p' DIRECTOR C 0 U N T Y Environmental 2700 "M" Sb'eet, Suite 300 '~ ' Health Bakemfietd, CA 93301 Jartua~ 5, 1996 Services (805)861-3636 Department (805)861-3429 FAX Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Soil and Groundwater Assessment, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Dear Ms. Roberts: The report prepared by WZI Inc. for additional soil and groundwater assessment at the subject property has been reviewed. The following summarizes the information provided and our comments. Last September, four groundwater monitoring wells were installed on site in an effort to further investigate groundwater quality beneath the site. Soil samples were retrieved during drilling and two were analyzed for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and TPH as gasoline and diesel. Analytical results indicate these chemicals were not present above detection levels. They were also not found in the groundwater samples collected fi.om the four wells sampled. During thc installation, groundwater was encountered at approximately 15 feet below ground surface. In 1993 during soil excavation, groundwater depth was approximately 45 feet. All the impacted soil that remained on site for remediation was also sampled and analyzed during this phase of the investigation. Laboratory results indicate only low levels of diesel and motor oil (5 to 39 ppm) were present in the soil. Based on these results, all the soil was allowed to be used as backfill to the excavation pit. WZI recommended that no additional investigation or excavation is needed at the site. However, the wells should be sampled quarterly until four successive results show the contaminants are below detection levels. In reviewing the results of all work completed to date, this Department concurs with WZI's recommendation. The next monitoring event should be initiated no later than February 15, 1996. Donna Roberts Re: Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA January 5, 1996 Page 2 If you have any questions regarding this matter, you can contact me at (805) 862-8728. Sincerely,. Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:eh cc: WZI Inc. Wendy Thompson Tom Gilbert CV RWQCB gough\050119i.¢1t STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. DIRECTOfl C 0 U N T Y Environmental 2700 'M" Street, Suite 300 ..... Health Bakersfield, CA 93301 Ja.n. uaz-~ 5, 1996 Services (805)861-3636 Department (805)861-3429 FAX Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Soil and Groundwater Assessment, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Dear Ms. Roberts: The report prepared by WZI Inc. for additional soil and groundwater assessment at the subject property has been reviewed. The following summarizes the information provided and our comments. Last September, four groundwater monitoring wells were installed on site in an effort to further investigate groundwater quality beneath the site. Soil samples were retrieved during drilling and two were analyzed for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and TPH as gasoline and diesel. Analytical results indicate these chemicals were not present above detection levels. They were also notfound in the groundwater samples collected fi.om the four wells sampled. During the installation, groundwater was encountered at approximately 15 feet below ground surface. In 1993 during soil excavation, groundwater depth was approximately 45 feet. All the impacted soil that remained on site for remediation was also sampled and analyzed during this phase of the investigation. Laboratory results indicate only low levels of diesel and motor oil (5 to 39 ppm) were present in the soil. Based on these results, all the soil was allowed to be used as backfill to the excavation pit. WZI recommended that no additional investigation or excavation is needed at the site. However, the wells should be sampled quarterly until four. successive results show the contaminants are below detection levels. In reviewing the results of all work completed to date, this Department concurs with WZI's recommendation. The next monitoring event should be initiated no later than February 15, 1996. Donna Roberts Re: Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA January 5, 1996 Page 2 ' If you have any questions regarding this matter, you can contact me at (805) 862-8728. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: WZI Inc. Wendy Thompson Tom Gilbert CV RWQCB gough\050119i.clt ENVIRONMI-NTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR ~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 .~ (805) 861-3636 (805) 861-3429 FAX April 10, .1995 Leo Black Estate c/o Tom Gilbert & Donna Roberts P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Assessment and Interim Remedial Action Workplan for Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Mr. Gilbert & Ms. Roberts: The subject workplan prepared by WZI Inc. has been reviewed. The proposed tasks including the methods of implementation are acceptable to this Department. In regard to the stockpiled soil, 'sampling should be conducted before interim remedial action is initiated to determine if any volatile organics remain in the soil. We recommend retrieving a minimum of three samples composited to one for every 50 cubic yards. The field work for this phase of the investigation must be initiated within 60 days from the date of this letter. Please notify this office at least 48 hours prior to beginning any sampling and/or drilling actaMties. If you have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: WZI Inc. Central Valley RWQCB gough~050119f, clt OCT ~5 "'-~$ ~J3:~JSPH NZI P. 1 Post Office Box 92~ 7 ~akersfiela, Californ~ 93389 805/326-11~2 805/326-0191 FAX WZl FAX LEAD SHEET Company: _~d" ~/~""'/'.-/5 From: ,//l~'f//~.f;,'f ./.J~,',' ~ c,/4 d='¢''''' ,.../ Total Number of Pages, tncJuce ,...,...,'~-;, P~,ga: .., Date Transmitted: /~:' / / F~ Number: ~/'- ~ ~ ~ ~-' Telephone Number: FiJe Number: CONFIRMING TELEPHONE NUMBER IS (805) 326-1112 WZl INC. FAX NUMBER IS (80S) ,326-0191 Oper,; Date Sent; Time Sent: __ Initials: Return Original: Y N Copy Sencler: Y N ANALYSIS REPORT: BTEX/T~tal Petro. Hy~r~car~ona as Gasoline At~n~ Steve MulJr '. proJeat Name= Leo Blaok' Eetate D~c~ ~ampled= D~e Sts~te~, 1~/~3/95 Da~ Completed=le/~4tg$ Samplea By; Al. len Waggefle~ R£$ULTS~ EPA 6~2 EPA EthVl Total Benzene,! Toluene, ~en=e~¢, Xylene PH51~467 ND<.3 ND<,3 ND<.~ ND<.3 LB-MW1-1 PH~l~a468 NDe.3 ND<.3 NO<.~ ND<.3 ND~SB PH51~46g ND<,3 ND<.3 ND<.:~ ND<.3 ND<5~ LB-MW3-1 PH51~47~ ND<,3 ND<,3 NO<.~ ND<.3 ND<Se . .,,.. OlOrla P~ I. J I1g '"' Sherwood ANALYSIS R~PORT; To~al ~e=ovePaOle Pe=ro. PO BOX 9217 ~ ~.- ' At~n~ 5:eve ~ Oa'~ Sama led~ &gl27195 Proje;t Nante~ Leo ~lack~ ~s:;~e CA':~ Reeelved~ l~lB31g~ i D~:= Started- 1~1~3Ig5 ~ample~ At len W~ggener:= D~: Completed~1~/B4/95 '. Lab Re=ort RESULT$~ T. EPH-Di~_e_!, Kerose~.=..p_ielect.rl= PH~leg4~8 N~<5~ Ail Analy:~ g B-MW2-1 PH~1~46~ ND<5~ All Analyte~ Le-MW3 - 1 PH51&&47g N~<S& A~I Analyte~ LB-MW4-1 GlOria Poling ," -- OFFi¢~(2~)E57.5258 ~F~:t20g) E67,25~1 · BB$;('~0g) a6?,411g - herwoo ' - P.D. BOX ANALY~[& REPORT; BTEX/Tb~a[ Pr:re. Hy~ro=ar~ona as Gasoline CLtENT~ WZI IN¢ //- / Bakere¢lel~, CA g338g Project Name~ Leo Blae~ ~state Date 8ampJee~ Date Reoelved, Oa~e Star:ed= ~9/~5/gfi O~:e Comple~ed~9/29/95 ~ampled By~ Alien ~aggo~er · .Lab Reo~rt ~ HS&g2224. RE~ULT;~ EPA 8&2~ EPA uglKg mgiKg BeR~ene, Tolaene, &eflzene, Xvte~e TPH PHSB~Sal NOra ND<3 ND<~ ND<~ N,D<I LB-MWa-a PHS~g2582 ND<3 ND<~ ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-MW4-3 PHS~B258~ ND<3 fiD<3 ND<~ ND<3 NO<I LB-MWl-GRAB PHSeg~SB4 ND<3 NO(a ND<3 ND<a NDe1 LB-MW2-GRA8 PHS~g2585 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-MW3-GRAB PH5~82~88 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND~I LB-MW4-GRAB Glo~la Poling ..... OFFI:E:(~)~7, S2~ ......... ~Ax:(~os)ee?-;saq · aas:(~og)aer.4118 herwoo, d HILMA~, CALIFORNIA 9~3~4 ANALYSIS RBPORT~ 'T~tal ~e¢over~ble Petr~. PO 801 9217 , Bm~er$~iel~o CAI 93389. ~~-~'~ Attn~ Steve MulF ' i D~e Sampled, B9119195 Semple~ Allen Waggeries' Dele Comple~ed~9129195 La~ Retort ~: HSe92224 RESULTSm TEPH-Diesel, Keroeene~_.Oleleetrlo and Motor Oils EPA 351e/S¢l§CM) mg'Kg PH5~92581 ND,~5 All LB-MW3-3 PH5~92582 ND<5 All An~lyte~ LB-MW4-3 PHSBg25e3 15' Motor Oil R~nge LB-MW1-GRAB PH5~92§84 55 ~otor Oil Range Organics LB-MW2-GRAB 27 Diesel Range Or,chios PH$~92585 ND~5 All Analyteo L$-MW3-GRAB PH5~02566 27 Moto~ Oil R~nge O~ganio$ LB-MW4-GRAB 20 Diesel Range O~ganic~ Laboratory Director : OFFICE: (Z09~ ~7-52~ · FAX: (206) 667.2561 · BBS: (206) ~7-4119 ~HAIN ~F CU~ODY Uu~u~ one) , TOTAL P, ~, STEVE McCALLEY, R.LH.S. DIRECTOR C 0 U rd Environmental 2700 'M" SlTeet, Suite 300 Health Bakersfield, CA 93301 Services (805)861-3636 Department (805)861-3429 FAX October 9, 1995 '~ Allen Waggoner WZI, Inc. P. O. Box 9217 Bakersfield, CA 93389 SUBJECT: Soil and Groundwater Sampling Results, Leo Black Estate, Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Waggoner: We have reviewed the laboratory results of the soil (drill cuttings) and groundwater samples collected from the newly installed monitoring wells. Based on our review, this Department approves of your plan to spread the cuttings on site. The water may be left to evaporate on site or used for dust control during the soil spreading activities. If you have any questions regarding this letter, you may contact us at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Ha?ardous Materials Specialist II Ha?ardous Materials Management Program DG:cas cc: Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93308 \gough\050119H.clt STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. DIRECTOR C 0 U N T ~' Environmental 2700 'M" Street, Suite 300 Health SaJe~ieid, CA 93301 Services (805)861-3636 Department (805)861-3429 FAX Suly l O, 1995 James Allen Waggoner WZI, Inc. P. O. Box 9217 Bakersfield, CA 93389 SUBJECT: Stockpiled Soil Analysis, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) . Dear Mr. Waggoner: The laboratory results of the samples retrieved from the soil piles at the Leo Black Estate have been reviewed. As discussed, the soil may be used as backfill to the existing excavation at the site. Following completion of backfilling activities, implementation of the workplan recently approved may be initiated.If you have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DO:cas cc: Tom Gilbert / Donna Roberts Wendy Thompson ~gough\050119g.cit STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. I'~,, DIRECTOR C 0 U N T Y Environmental 2700 'M" S~'eet, Suite 300 Health ~e~ad, CA 93301 , Services ¢05)861-3636 .... Department (805)861-3429 FAX July l 0, 1995 Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Street Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Stockpiled Soil Analysis, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Ms. Roberts: The laboratory results of the samples retrieved from the soil piles at the Leo Black Estate have been reviewed. As discussed, the soil may be used as backfill to the existing excavation at the site. Following completion of backfilling activities, implementation of the workplan recently approved may be initiated.If you have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Ha?ardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:cas cc: Tom Gilbert / Donna Roberts Wendy Thompson \gough\050] 19-2.clt iBakersfield 4700 Stockdale Highway, Suite 120 Post Office Box 9217 Bakersfield, California 93389 805/326-1112 FAX 805/326-0191 VIA FAX: 805/861-3429 July 6, 1995 Ms. Dolores Gough Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Leo Black Site Soil Analyses Dear Ms. Gough: The accompanying laboratory analyses are for samples collected from the on-site soil piles at the Leo Black site at 3039 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California. Concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-G, EPA 5030/8015M) and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX, EPA 8020) are all below detection limits. Low levels of petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil and diesel were indicated by the analysis for total petroleum hydrocarbons (EPA 3540/8015M). These concentrations appear to be consistent with minor surface staining by hydrocarbons. Upon receipt of your written approval, we are prepared to begin the remaining work at the site by first backfilling the existing excavation with imported soils, followed by the on-site soils. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or require additional information. Very truly yours, James Allen Waggor{er /'// . ("' J^w/i~ cc: Wendy Thompson Enclosures O2060010.031 JUN-~?-!Dg5 !6:12 SHERWOOD LABS, INC. 20S66772581 P.83 Labs C T IO N 0 R P O R A HILUAR, CALJFORNIA9~24 ~ ~Fl~rtll'ic~tion ~.~ ~400 ANALYSIS REPOR'T.. Total R®¢over~bl~ Petro. Mydro¢~rbons CLIENT, WZ! IN.C PO BOX 9217 Bakers?leld, CA 93389 Attn~ Steve Muir Date Sampled= 06/22/95 Project NAme, Leo Black Estate Date Received~ 06/23/95 Date Started: ~6/26/9§ Sampler~ Stephen Muir Date Completed,~6/27/95 Lab ~eDort #= H5062606 RESULTS~ T~RPH-OleseI~ Kerosene, Dielectric and Motor Oils EPA 3540/8015(M) mglKg : PH5B63189 11 Motor 011 ':' LB-RP1-NW ~'. PH5~63190 7 Diesel LB-RP1-NE PH5~63191 39 Diesel LB-RP1-SW 1~ Motor 011 · . PN5~63192 5 Motor Oil LB-RP1-SE PH5~63193 17 Motor Oil LB-RP2-E 'PH5~63194 6 Diesel ~ LB-RP2-W $ Motor Oil Gloria Poi lng · '" Laboratory Director OFFICE: (:209) 667-5258 · FAX: (209) 667-2581 · BBS: (209) 667.4119 .~UN-~7-!~95 !6:12 SHERWOOD ~BS, lNG. ~096677~581 P.O~ 0 R P 0 R A P.O, BOX T I 0 NC HILMAR, CALIFORNIA95324 ~6127/~5 DHS CerTifiCation # 1400 ANALYSIS REPORT= BTEZ/TotsI Pervo. HydPoca~bon$ as Gasoline CLIENT~ WZi INC PO BOX 9217 BakePsfleld, CA 93389 Attn~ Steve Mui~ P~oJect Name= Leo Black Estate Date Sampled~ 05/22/g5 Date Received~ 0~12~195 Date StaPted~ 0612~195 Date Completed~6/27[95 Sampled By= Stephen Lab ~epo~t #~ HSffi62606 BTEX TPH-Gas'ollne RESULT$: EPA 8ffi20 EPA ug/Kg mglKg Ethyl Total Benzene~ Toluene, Benzene~ Xylene TPH PH5063189 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-RP1-NW PH5~63190 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-RP1-NE PH5063191 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-RPI-SW PH5063192 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-RP1-SE PH5063193 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-RP2-E' PHSffi63194 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<3 ND<I LB-RP2-W Laboratory Director OFFICE: (209) ~7-5258 · FAX: (209) 667-2581 · B~$; (209) ~7-411g DARLINg, MACLIN & THOMSON CURTIS DARLING TELEPHONE SUITE 850 BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING BRUCE MACLIN (805) 325-5075 WINIFRED THOMSON 1430 TRUXTUN AVENUE (8OB) 3:~5-3045 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93303 February 24, 1994 Kern County Environmental Health Services Department Attention= Ms. Dolores Gough Re= ~eo':Black....Estate=..Pierce;Road:.;$ite/ Dear Ms. Gough= This fi~m represents the ~eo Black ~state~ ~hich ow-ns the real property at 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California, and ~ith ~h±ch you have been dealing regarding its remediation of contamination caused by an underground gasoline storage That remediation is no~ complete, as show~ by the ~[[ Inc., report dated August, [993, entitled "~eo Black ~state Su~maary Of "S~ce ~he~e ~as a~ u~au~ho~zed ~e[ease o~ gasoline a~ ~he s~e a~d ~E as ~aso[~e ~as detected ~ the [ assume E~o~ you~ [e~e~ ~ha~ yo~ have accepted Do~a ~obe~s~ s~a~eme~ ~ha~ ~o d~ese[ ~as eve~ s~o~ed o~ add~o~, ~he~e ~as c[ea~ so~[ beneath ~he excava~ed p[~e o~ ~he beneath ~he ~[ac~ ~s~a~e p~ope~y ~s ~om o~s~e sources. Eu~he~ ~s~a~e ~e[ease. "ail ~he ~aso[~e co~am~a~o~ caused by ~he ~o~me~ u~de~g~ou~d ~e[ ~a~ has bee~ ~e~oved". (a~ page 2.) Kern County Environmental Health Services Department February 24, 1994 Page 2 The underground gasoline storage tank which leaked had been empty since 1984. This means that in the last ten years there has been no further contamination generated from the Estate property to push the old contamination into the groundwater. F~rther, even if it could be shown that any of the Black Estate contamination had reached the groundwater in the past, it has long since migrated away from the Black Estate property. · The County has not presented any evidence contrary to WZI's conclusion that the contamination has been removed from the site. The law will correctly agree that therefore there is no source of contamination on the Black Estate property. To imply, without any basis, that there continues to be a source of contamination located on the Black Estate property is unsupported. We are puzzled by the implication, and request an explanation for it. Pending such an explanation, we can only surmise that the only two reasons to require a monitoring program are to detect either offsite or onsite contamination, and as there is no further onsite contamination, that the purpose of the requirement is to detect contamination on the Black Estate property created by offsite sources. THERE IS A Z$ SQUARE MILE AREA OF CONTAMINATION AROUND THIS SITE. Such reasoning is in stark contrast to the conclusion that has been reached by the Kern County Superior Court. In the case of "People of The State Of California ex rel California Reqional Water Quality control Board. Central Valley Reqion, Plaintiffs v. Sabre Refininq, Inc., Sabre Refininq, Inc., Chapter 11 Debtor In Possession, Defendants" Case No. 183100 the Court held that the Defendant there was not required to complete a depth and areal report of soil and groundwater contamination as requested by Plaintiff. The reason for this, among others, was: "Further, the study and report would not be of substantial benefit due to the agency's report of a historical contamination of a larger 25 square mile area of ground water by numerous persons other than Defendants." The Sabre Refining, Inc., site is located less than one mile from the Black Estate site on Pierce Road, and so is well within the 25 square mile area of contamination found to exist by the court in that case. A copy of the judgment in that case is attached as Exhibit "A". Further evidence of the regional contamination is shown on a map which has been prepared by WZI locating various sources of offsite contamination near the Black Estate Property. A copy of that map is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated by reference. The cross-hatched sites show the larger sites where there is known Kern County Environmental Health Services Department February 24', 1994 Page 3 contamination, and the penciled-in sites show new sites with dry wells on the properties. A review of the information available at this time indicates that there are numerous operators in the one-half mile radius shown on the map which are actively using dry wells and in other ways allowing releases of hazardous materials or petroleum. These are very large or medium, active operators, as opposed to the Black Estate property which has not been operated forten years. Dry wells, active or inactive, whose purpose is disposal of wastes, are a far more direct, serious conduit of wastes than an underground storage tank which hadn't been used in ten years. One large site within a mile of the Black Estate property, the San Joaquin Refinery, may have active dry wells and leaking pipelines which are still generating contamination and pushing the existing contamination into the groundwater. It is possible that there is a course of conduct in the region of continuing to pollute while in the process of legal proceedings and/or negotiations with agencies which delay the remediation of properties. The Black Estate cannot afford such delays, and so it has meanwhile gone forward and complied to the letter with the law and the Health Services Department's requirements. The Black Estate has, in fact, gone above and beyond the call of duty in that it has remediated contamination from offsite sources as well as from its own tank. It is patently unfair that under such circumstances the little guy who has cleaned up his property in the hope of making economic use of it should be required to expend time and money to check on the other property owners' problems, especially when such problems are still ongoing and, worse yet, still being created! To require the Black Estate to conduct a monitoring program causes further delay to the use of the Black Estate property, and requires the Black Estate to produce funds it does not have to pay for the monitoring program. Expenditures of such funds would seem more logically required by those sites still generating contamination or harboring contaminated soils. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO FINGERPRINT THE CONT~INATION IN THE GROUNDWATER DUE TO THE REGIOB-AL CONTAMINATION. Due to the regional contamination, it is not possible to fingerprint any contamination in the groundwater below the Black Estate property. The myriad offsite sources which have contributed and continue to contribute to the groundwater contamination create a TPH concentration in the groundwater which is not capable of being linked to any particular site. GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS ARE~RE~DY IN PLACE TO MONITOR THE REGIONAL CONTAMINATION. The map attached as Exhibit "C" shows the locations of the many existing groundwater monitoring wells. If these wells are not sufficient to generate the information the County needs regarding the contamination which is in the groundwater in the area, then the County may desire to install additional wells, even on the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department February 24, 1994 Page 4 Black Estate property. However, the Black Estate should not bear the burden of doing so, as that would be for the purpose of monitoring offsite sources' contamination. NEITHER GROUND~TATER MONITORING ON ESTATE PROPERTY NOR ANYTHING ELSE THE ESTATE CAN DOWILL PREVENT CONT~INATION FROH OFFSITE SOURCES FROHENTERING ESTATE PROPERTY. THEREFOREv IT IS ARBITRARYAND CAPRICIOUS TO REQUIRE GROUND~TATER HONITORING. The Estate has shown that the source of gasoline which was released has been removed and all contaminated soil is being treated to remediate it. The--co~exeou~tor of the Estate haspresented evidence that there never was diesel stored on the property, and, as additional evidence, has shown th~t--~--o'~erator of the property did not own or use diesel equipment in his operations. The County has not produced any evidence to the contrary of either of these facts /!i~~ ,~ ~c~ In addition, there is ample evidence of contamination coming onto the Black Estate property from offsite sources./ Therefore, the County's choice of remedy is arbitrary and capricious and not supported by the record. The offsite sources should be required to install the monitoring wells, offsite operators should be required to indemnify other property owners like the Black Estate for the contamination they are causing when it migrates, and the Estate should not be penalized due to other properties' contamination. Installing monitoring wells will not prevent further contamination from offsite sources. Any other steps which a private party could take to prevent further contamination by offsite sources would in this case be prohibitively expensive, given the extent and the unknown mixture of the liability of the offsite sources. GROUNDWATER MONITORING WOULD BE~%NUNDUEHARD~HIP TO THE LEO BLACK ESTATE. The Leo Black Estate's only asset is the subject real property which has been remediated. The co-executors of the Estate will sell the real property as soon as it is marketable. There are no funds in the Estate to pay for the monitoring. The cost of the groundwater monitoring program is anticipated to cost $15,000.00 in the first year, and $2,000.00 per year thereafter. It is impossible, or at least an undue .hardship, for the Estate to finance this monitoring, especially inasmuch as the purpose and the objective of the monitoring do not appear to be caused by the Black Estate contamination. EVEN IF THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK FUND REIMBURSES THE ESTATE, THE HONITORING WOULD BE AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN ON THE STATE TAXPAYERS. Although it is possible that the State Underground Storage Tank Fund may reimburse the Estate for the costs of the monitoring, this result is not certain, and further, it is no less irrational to monitor the groundwater in either case. And even if the State Underground Storage Tank Fund will reimburse the Estate, the necessary Kern County Environmental Health Services Department February 24, 1994 Page 5 funds must be available to the Estate to pay contractors during the time the State Underground Storage Tank Fund takes to reimburse, and they are not. AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN WOULD ALLOW THE BTATE TO MONITOR THE GROUNDW]%TER AND CLOSE THE CASE. Based on the record, there is no reason for the Black Estate to be required to monitor the groundwater as it bears no rational relationship to the facts. The Black Estate remediation should be considered complete and a closure letter issued. The groundwater monitoring program would not be able to identify the source of the groundwater contamination as being from the Black Estate property--the TPH found already indicates that is 'the case. If the County needs a groundwater monitoring well on the Black Estate, it may be possible to arrange for a site to be used for that purpose, but not at the Estate's expense, and it should be in conjunction with a closure letter. The remediation has been completed. As was held in the Sabre Refining, Inc. case discussed above, there would be no substantial benefit to requiring the monitoring wells, and there would be no harm to the public interest in not requiring them. The co-executors of the Leo Black Estate have gone to great lengths to comply with the law and to work with the County to achieve the end of remediating this property, and they stand ready and willing to do whatever is reasonable. However, the co-executors of the Estate, well aware of their fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries, cannot go forward with a plan which is based on assumptions and conclusions which are not supported by the facts. We would be happy to discuss this further at any time. w WT:ls ~AW orr~c~s Or LE BEAU. THELEN. LA~4PE ~.,HClNTOSH r -, ATTORNEYS IrOl~ -"' ' "' Defendants, -' ' .' SABRE R£¥INING, ]:NC. AND SABRE RI::F:INING, INC. Dr.B?OR-IN- POSSESSION 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 11 12 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Case No. 183100 ex rel CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER ) 13 QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL ) NOTICE OF ENTRY O? VALLEY REGION ) JUDGmeNT t4 Plaintiffs, ) ) 15 v. ) ) 16 SABRE REFINING, INC., SABRE ) REFINING, INC., CHAPTER 1! DEBTOR ) 17 IN POSSESSION ) ) 18 Defendant. ) ) 19 20 To the People of the State of California ex re! California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley 21 22 Region, plaintiffs, and to the California Attorney General, 23 plaintiffs' attorney of recerd: 24 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that on September 28, 1989, 25 judgment was entered in the above-entitled action in favor of 26 the defendant Sabre Refining, inc., and against the plaintiff, 27 People of the State of California ex rel California Regional 2s IIII //// EVUI IT 1 Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, a copy of which is attached to this notice. 3 DATED: October 9, 1989 LeBEAU, THELEN, LAMPE, McINTOSH 4 CREAR '..,.-,, ,~ r;,. LA;/,PE DAVID R.. L, AJ~PE, Attorney for 6 Defendant Sabre Refining,. Inc. 7 8 9 10 11 12 ,.'- 15 ,.16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 2,4 25 26 27 28 1 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL (1013a. .2015.5 C.C.P.) 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 3 ) ss. COUNTY OF KERN ) I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of 5 the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to. the within action; my business address is: 7 5531 Business Park South, Suite 210, Bakersfield, California 8 93309. On October 10, 1989 , I served the within NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGF~ENT on the parties in said action, by placing a 10 true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Bakersfield, 12 California addressed as follows: 5ohn K. Van De ~a~u, .. 14 Attorney General of the State of California 15 Edwin J Dubiel Deputy Attorney General 16 3580 Wilshire Blvd. Gos Angeles, CA 900Z0 ~'17 !8 19 20 21 22 23 24 Z aecia~e unSer penalty o~ 2er~ury that the ~o~ego~ng 25 ~s t=ue an8 co;;ect. 28 Sxecute8 on October l0 27 28 ~ ~Aw orrlccs Or ~ ~S31 BUSINCSS P~K SOUT~ 5 ATTO~NZY5 to- Defendants, SABRE REFINING, INC. AND $%~g 6 SABRE REFINING, INC. DEBTOR-IN- ~[Y ~ POSSESSION 7 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 11 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Case No. 183100 12 ex rel CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER ) QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL ) JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL 13 VALLEY REGION ) BY SUPERIOR COURT Plaintiffs, ) 14 ) v. ) 15 ) SABRE REFINING, INC., SABRE ) 16 REFINING, INC., CHAPTER 1! DEBTOR ) IN POSSESSION ) 17 Defendant. ) 19 This cause came on for regularly for trial on April 3, 2O 1989 in Department 8 of' the above-entitled court, the Honorable 21 Lewis E. King, Judge, presiding, sitting without a jury, a jury 22 having been duly waived· Plaintiff appeared by its attorney, 23 Edward J. Dubiel, Esq., Deputy Attorney General· Defendant 24 appeared by its attorney, David R. Lampe, Esq., LeBEAU, TEELEN, 25 L;~MPE, McINTOS~ & CR~3~-R. Evidence, both oral and documentary, 26 having been presented by both parties, the cause having been 27 argued and submitted for decision, and a statement of decision 28 not having been requested, 1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that 2 plaintiff take nothing by way of its complaint and that 3 defendant have judgment on all causes of action of plaintiff's 4 complaint, and that defendant be and hereby is awarded its costs 5 of suit. JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR~.QOURT 8 9 10 11 ,. 12 << 2! 13 ~ ~'c~ ~' o ~ '14 o , ~' 5 .7 '15 16 19 2~ 21 22 24 2~ 2~ 2~ · '" '- SUPEK~OR COURT ')F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN August 28, 1989 4~00 P.M. 8 DALE: COUR! ~E1 A! D[PA£1~I:N! NO. LEWIS E. KING g.H. Ri~¢hie pI~IrSENT, HON, JUDGE , DJPUTY CLI[i~K NO NO R[POR~ER BAILIFF TITLE~ COUHSn. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIF. Edward gubiel, Deputy Attorney General " vs SABRE REFINING', INC., et al David Lampe COURT DECISION See Decision attached. A COPY OF THIS M.O. WAS SENT TO COUNSEL THIS DAT~K DR 1 2 3 4 5 6 IN TEE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 7 iN AND FOR T]IE COUrNTY OF KERN ~.~~ 9 PEOPLE OF TEE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Case No. 183100 10 ex fei. CALIFORNIA REGIONAL HATER ) QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CEh~RAL ) 11 VALLEY P~EGION, ) ) 12 Plaintiffs, ) ) 13 vs. ) ) 14 SABRE REFINING, INC., SABRE, ) ]~EFINING, INC., CHAPTER 11 DEBTOR ) DECISION 15 IN POSSESSION, ) 16 Defendants. ) ) 17 18 The Plaintiff, Attorney General for the Regional Wa~er 19 Control Board, filed a four count complaint for ~njunctions 20 and civil penal%les on June 21, 1983, under Division 7 of the 21 Water qode. 22 The action is based on the alleged violation of a cease 23 and desist order issue~.by the Water Control Board against the 24 Defendants on December 5, 1980. 25 The Defendants went into Bankruptcy on September 28, 26 1982. The Court finds that the Defendants stopped business 2 operations in 1981 and the waste water sump in issue has n 3 been used since 1981. 4 The Court grants judgment for the Defendants as the 5 Cease and Desist Order has been moot since 1981. 6 Count 1 of the complaint a]le~es violation of the Cease ? and Desist. Order 38-24 and requests an order of the Court 8 compelling compliance by the Defendants. g The Court orders judgment for the Defendants. In 10 addition to the f~nding of mootness, the Court.... is not 11 convinced that Plaintiff has proved Defenaants made any 12 d~scharge of prohibited materials into the water's of the State 13 since the date of the Cease and Desist Order. 14 ?he Court den~es the r'equest for a depth and areal 15 report of soil and ground water contamination reques 16 Plaintiff. 17 The Court has considered the evidence presented to the 18 Regional Water Control Board and the evidence presented at the 19 hearing in this Court. The Court ~s required to exercise its 20 independent judgment under Chapter ? of the Water Code. 21 The order for the depth and areal soil and water study 22 ~ss~.Ied by the Water Board was in violation of the Defendant's 23 due process rights in ,that there was not proper not~ce of th~s 24 issue, and-this, type of order is properly the subject matter 25 of an abatement and clean-up hearing and order. 26 The Court further finds that it is impossible for 1 Defendants to comply with the soil and water study because of 2 its cost of over $150,000 and the fact that Defendants do not 3 have funds to pay for such a study. 4 If not impo$$~ble, the Court finds that ]t would 5 undue hardship on the Defendants. 6 Further, the study and report would not...be., o.f. 7 substantial benefit due to the agency's report of a historical 8 contamination of a larger 25 square mile area of ground water 9 by numerous persons other than Defendants. 10 The Court further finds that there would be nc.harm to 11 the public interest in not requiring the report. 12 Counts 2 and 3 of the Complaint allege v~o]ations of 13 the Cease and Desist Order and requests the Court to order 14 monetary penalties against the Defendants. 15 The Court grants judgment fpr the Defendants on Counts 16 2 and 3. 17 In addition to mootness, there is insufficient proof of '18 any violation, any number of days of violation, and it is 19 impossible to determine with specJfdcity the amount of 20 penalties. 21 Also, because Defendants are out of business, the Court 22 would decline to impose any monetary penalties. 23 Count 4 of th~ Complaint seeks to enjoin a public '24 nuisance. 28 The Court gives judgment to the Defendants. 26 The Plaintiff has fai~ed to prove a public nuisance 1 exists. 2 The Defendants complied with the Regional Water Control 3 Board requirements for years. When the Water Board found it 4 necessary to change the requirements for the whole-Frultva]e 5 Field, the Defendants found that they could not comply with 6 ~'he new requirements, ceased the operat~ion, went out of 7 busine$$~ removed waste water p~pes, emptied the sealed sump 8 and went into the Bankruptcy Court. 9 DATED: August 24, 1989. 12 BEWI$ E. KING Judge of the Superior Court 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 REFINERY/ REFINERY . Bass Ave. I ,~ddian Ave. Turcon Ave. UN~:~I CARBIC~ I--~[ Odn ~. ~PER O[ T~L ~ ~ G~MORE AVE. ~ PIERCE RD. ~ ~7 ~ AVl 3747 G~OnE AVE. ~ I I ~ON~ PR~ERTIES 3110 GIB~N ST. 2~ ST~DARD ST, P~R~EUM ~L~S ~ GIB~N / wz~ INC. BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA I LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 0 Feet 2000' I 3090 PIERCEROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. I OFFSITE SOURCES OF KNOWN AND 0' Miles "Y, mi. ~J~. '1 SUSPECTED GROUND WATER 0 Kilometers .50kin " I CONTAMINATION , DATE EXHIBIT EXHIBIT "B" LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 3090 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. TEXACO SAN JOAQUIN REFINERY REFINERY / Idle Ave Brittan Rd. Bass Ave. . ~ POWER MACHINERY J ']3818 PIERCE RD. ~'~ DAVIES OIL CO. '3505 1/2 GULF ST. I LOCATION OF · 17 WELLS ,ridianAve. Turcon Ave. UN~3N C,~aIOE 3sos P~ERCE RD. Orin Wy. Gillmore A ye. ASSURED TRANSPORT ~ East Dr. 3228 GIBSON RD, 3! 15 PIERCE RD. LEGEND · APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF GROUND WATER MONITORING WELL Feet 2000' I~l wz, ,,c. BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ' i' I LEO BLACK ELECTRIC M il e s ¼ m i. 33 I. .0..,E.C~.O*O. E,~E,,F,E~. GROUND WATER MONrrORING Kilometers .50km WELL LOCATe" M~ DATE EXHI~T I1~11 DARLING, MACLIN & THOMSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW John H. Sears, Esq. ___------ Bronson, Bronson & McKinnon 505 Montgomery Street San Francisco, California 94111-2514 Re: Read Investments - Leo Black Temporary License Agreement Dear John: In response to your last letter, transmitted with the final Temporary License Agreement, I have discussed your request for a deed of trust with the co-executors and my partner, who is the attorney in charge of the probate, and they have indicated that in order for the co-executors to give a deed of trust a court order from the Probate Court would be required. Obtaining such a court order would take an inordinate amount of time, and would be prohibitive under the current time-frame imposed upon the Estate by the State Water Resources Control Board and the terms of the Temporary License Agreement. In addition, the co-executor who has been managing the cleanup problem told me that his understanding is that the State will pay 100% of the costs of the cleanup, less $10,000.00, which the Estate has already paid out of its own funds, and subject to the availability of funds in the State Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund. He has recently moved his residence and business, and is unable to place his hands on the initial letter of commitment, however, enclosed is a copy of a letter from the State Water Resources Control Board dated May 27, 1993, which is a general update to the underground storage tank owners, in which it is indicated that the Fund has ample monies at this time. In addition, I called the State Water Resources Control Board to confirm the availability of funds in excess of the $24,000.00 committed in the letter previously forwarded to you. I spoke with Barbara Andrews at 916-227-4417, who confirmed that additional funds would be automatically reimbursed, and the letters in my file indicate that Susan Phillips at 916-227-4366 is the first person to contact there, although she was out at the time that I called. John H. Sears, Esq. July 8, 1993 Page Two Finally, the co-executors are of the opinion that if the contamination from the Leo Black Estate property does encroach upon the Read Investments property, it is in a very minor amount, and that the deed of trust is unwarranted. The staff person at the lead agency, the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department, Dolores Gough, is of the same opinion. I would hope that the additional information about the availability of the State funds, of which I was unaware when I wrote to you previously, would give your client the level of comfort it requires under the circumstances, and as soon as I hear from you, I will have the Temporary License Agreement executed and forwarded to you, together with the insurance certificate and the contractor's information. I hope to hear from you soon. Very truly yours, Winifred Thm~son WT/sld Enclosure cc: Donna Roberts Tom Gilbert Dolores Gough Kern County Environmental Health Services Dept. STATE WATER RE~OURCE:~ CONTI:IOL BOARD O~WSlON OF CI. EAN WAI'E.'% I;'ROG~Md'~ ~,Ot4 T 51Tq~ET, SUITE 130 p.0. BOX ~44212 6A,C~AMENTO, CAMFOf~IA 9~434,~212~ (916) 9_27-4360 (916) 227-4530 (FAX) May 27, 1993 TO: Claimants ' Regul&tor~Agencies In,erected Parties ~UBJECT: I~DERGRO~RD 8TO~ TANK CLEANUP FUND (~) U~A~ ~~XON Our Feb~a~ 1, 1993 u~te on the ~nd received a n~r of favor~le counts. ~ch has ~pp~ed since wanted to keep eye,one advised of the ~d's profess. Many tank o~er~ ~y have recently received a ~iler w~ch ~ressed ~once~s r~arding the solvency of the ~d. the state~nts included in the ~iler were: (1) "the ~Jority of you will not receive one dime from the Under~o~d Storage Ta~ Cleanup ~d"; (2) "the ~d will ~ up long ~fore ~st of you receive anything"; a~d (3) =as ~y as 78% of you rei~ursed". Since this ~iler was p~lished, ~ received a nu~er of letters ~d calls to t~ ~nd fr~ contend olai~nts. The foll~l~ .~e the facts reg~ding the solven~ of the a. The ~d ~g~ collecting the storage fee on J~ua~ 1, 1991. Under ~ent law, the fee collection will stop on Janua~ 1, 1998. To ~te, ~t $20 million~r calen~r ~arter or ~ut Sa0 ~llion ~r year Is being collected. ~ereZore, ~sed on the e~rience to date and ~der th~ current law, the p~ram will' collect m~t $~60 million. b.. It wa~ always rec~ized that the initial fee et~cture of $0.006 ~r gallon would not be ca,bls of ~ndling all ~tential clai~. For this reason, the legislation provided a priority system which theoretically helps those who nee~ the assist~ce the most. c. ~yone fa~liar with the pr~ram ales knee that the legi~lat~on i~lementing the ~n4 was only a "f~= in the door" and that ~ce the ~nd was up and ~ing, and the needs of the priam better identified, legislation might !. Fund Up,ate [~. -2- i,;I : increase the fee and l~xtend the life of i.~he program. Because.' the program is still in ~?e early stages of /implementation, 'we "'. '.~'~':~.'.'. - decided not to Seek ~n increase of the f.~e during this 1993-.94'. legislative session. ',i The program may seek le~ielauiOn in the~:''' next legislative 'sesSion which would increas~ the fee, .extend t,.he life of the program, :as well as other needed changes: :1 ." d. At thi~ early st ~ge, it is very dif~cull;, to estimate what. t the average claim wl~, cost. ~ar eXPerience' to da~e is that ,: claimants tend to ov4~ estimate eligibl~ii costs on the . i applications.. In faa,t, there are a num~.'.r oZ claimants who ha~ · :i. estimated the maximum! cost of $1M even ~hough they have not ;' started work, The Aq~ Letters o~ commitments issued as of May : .5 mxl~.,mon or about $66,000 per 28, 199~ committed a!~otal of $26 ' claim. }{owever, for .~oney management PUrposes, we. consider the ~" 400 Letters of Commit..ment =0 be a potent.~al.obll~aCion on.~he :. F~nd of $60.0 millio~ior about $150,000 per claim. "... In summary, I believe~!that based on the 'exp. erience t° .date, -~.h..~re upon the number of future priority A a;nd B" claims sub~iDted. and depending upon t~e average cost per ~elaim, I believe under the current program ~unding, ther~.iwi11 be funding for most of the priority .."C' claims. It is.-'.not 'likely that'man~, 'if any, o~ the priority ~D" claim~ can be f~nded under the' curren~ fee structure, However, as previously m~ntloned, the program.' i will seek additional ~..f, undlng., a~ Ihs appropriate::: . ... time. '.- · . · · :.'~ We continue =o ge= q~. 's~ions about whether the money in the' Fund is protected from be~ used for other ~,~_rposes. AB~,188' (Hauser) :. was si~ned by the GoVernor on September :~0, 1992. Th/s bill placed the Fund in th9 stats Treasury r~her ~han the'General Fund. This insures that any funds borrowed fro~ the account" ': other state needs must De paid back, AI~ funds previously ':" ,.i ,i borrowed hags been repaid with interest.'i All claims submitted " for payment have been'~paid with absolutely no delay. As o~ May 28, 1995, s~a~f had completed ~etailed verifica~ion reviews of the claims 'wi~h =he regulatory agencies on 5~3 and issued 400 Lea%ers o~ Com~/tment. The face value of these 400'Letters of C~mmitment ad4 up.' to $26.5 million. However, these 400 claims have an estimate4 $6~'.0 i million obligation on..the Fund since we must reserve funds .~o.' :see .: these claims through Completion of cleanup. We' have processed ~ 163 payments and paid:~0u= a total of $6.'~0 million. " · ..:' 'J '" ~i~.~ ';': We have received a nu~k~r of inquiries f~m cl'almants' on wheuhe'r they must pay taxes o~. funds received. .~..e answer i~ that depends" and you shoul.,d check with your tax specialist. ' I can tell you tha~ there wall be Forms 1099 issued on all payments made and that. the Internal Reven%e Service has already expressed' an interest in the payments being made. Fund Update - 3- There are several bills that have been introduced in this legislative session. SB108 - Would require the development of a priority list at least annually instead of at least twice annually. Would all0ca=e ~9 to 15% of the total annual appropriation of the Fund to fund Priority Class 'C' claims and ~ 15% of the total annual appropriation of the Fund to fund Priority Class 'D' claim~. AB1061 - Would move local agencies (cities, count/es, districts) up to either Priority "B" or Priority "C." To qualify as a Priority ~B', the local agency would have to have total annual revenues of less than $7M. To qualify, as a Priority 'C", local agencies would have to have less nhan 500 employees. AB131 - Would move the point of collection of the 6 mill storage fee from the tank owner to the petroleum distributor. Since publication of our last up~ate, several excellent suggestions have been proposed for-future issues of this update. One of these was the addition of a 'Dear'Dave' column which wo=ld address ~uestlo~s of general interest raised by claimants and other interested parties. If you have any questions of general interest, please write to me. Another suggestion was to develop a standardized Bid/Bill FOrm which would serve two purposes: (1) standardize the bid process; and (2) standardize the bills that are submitted for payment tc the Fund. Lastly, several commentors suggeste~ that we publish a list o~ acceptable cost ranges for contractors, laboratory analyse~ and consultants. Several states currently have such lists. We are currently in the process of collecting an~ tabulati~g such costs. The Environmental Protection A~ency is also in the process of developing such costs. Sincerely, D~ve$. Deaner, Manager Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Program ENVIRONMF_.NTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR ~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 · (805) 861-3636 (805) 861-3429 FAX April 10, 1995 Leo Black Estate c/o Tom Gilbert & Donna Roberts P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Assessment and Interim Remedial Action Workplan for Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Mr. Gilbert & Ms. Roberts: The subject workplan prepared by WZI Inc. has been reviewed. The proposed tasks including the methods of implementation are acceptable to this Department. In regard to the stockpiled soil, sampling should be conducted before interim remedial action is initiated to determine if any volatile organics remain in the soil. We recommend retrieving a minimum of three samples composited to one for every 50 cubic yards. The field work for this phase of the investigation must be initiated within 60 days from the date of this letter. Please notify this office at least 48 hours prior to beginning any sampling and/or drilling activities. If you have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough HaTardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: WZI Inc. Central Valley RWQCB §ough\0J0119[ clt ENVIRONM ,qTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR ~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 861-3636 (805) 861-3429 FAX February 9, 1995 Leo Black Estate c/o Tom Gilbert & Donna Roberts P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJECT: Underground Storage Tank Investigation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Sir/Madam: A review of the subject facility file indicates that site closure was denied last year because of the contamination found in groundwater. Further investigation which may involve groundwater monitoring initially was required. To our knowledge this work has not been initiated to date. In order to facilitate site closure and keep the facility in compliance with the state's and our corrective action requirements, the additional groundwater assessment work must be initiated as soon as possible. Prior to beginning field activities, a workplan must be submitted for our approval within 30 days from the date of this letter. As previously discussed, the excavated soil may be utilized as backfill if confu'matory sampling shows that remediation has been successful. If you have any questions regarding this matter, you may contact us at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II Ha?ardous Materials Management Program DG:cas cc.' WZI CVRWQCB - Fresno \gough\050119e.clt ENVIRONMr-,,iTAL HEALTH: SERVIC,-$ DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR V Bakemfield, CA 93301 (805) 861-3636 ,(sos) .~-3429 tAX March 11, 1994 Central Valley.RWQCB 3614 E. Ashlan Fresno, California 93726 ATTN: Kevin Long SUB3EC~: Underground Tank Site Investigation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road,- Bakersfield, CA Gentlemen: As per our telephone conversation, Fnvironmental Health is requesting the Regional Water Quality Control Board's comments on the subject investigation, l%closed are copies of reports and correspondence relating to the case for your review. In February 1987, a 500-gallon underground storage tank was removed from the Leo Black Estate. Laboratonj results of soil samples retrieved beneath the tank indicated the presence of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination. These resUlts prompted a site characterization study wh/ch subsequently led to the excavation, of impacted soil; During excavation, a grab sample of groundwater was retrieved. Petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as gasoline and diesel were found in the sample. Based on the resul~ we have determined that further groundwater investigation is needed. Representatives of the estate are not in agreement with our decision. Accordingly, we are requesting that the case be also reviewed by the Board. Please note that the court judgement for the California. Regional Water Quality Control Board v. Sabre Refining, Inc., case in Kern County had been referenced for thi.~ site in the past. Information regarding this matter is also enclosed. We appreciate your as,s/stance in this investigation, and if you need additional information, please call me at (805) 861-3636. Steve McCalley, Director By:.Dolores Gou~' Hazardous Matezials Management Program DC-:.ch l~.nclosure STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CA,MFORNIA ENVIR~"~ PROTECTION AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAMS · . -. P.O. BOX S^CR^VE O, CA.FOR. ^ I9 Sl 227-4307 3 t99J .. Leo Black Estate ¢1o Tom Gilbert & Donna Roberts P. O. BOX 121 Wofford Heights, CA 9328§ UNDERGROUND STOP, GE TANK CLEANUP FUND PROGI~,M, REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST, CLAIM NUMBER 004076 We have reviewed and processed your Reimbursement Request No. I dated August 18, 19B3 for the subject claim and you will be receiving your funds shortly. Based on this review, we have determined 820,043.00 to be reimbursable as shown on the att~¢.~l Reimbursement Request Form. Total approved for payment to date is 820,043. Since the Letter of Commitment was for only 824,000 as shown on the attached Reimbursement Request Form, an amendment was processed (see attached). Please use the new forms for future requests. In order to assist you in determining how the eligible and ineligible costs were computed, we are attaching a copy of our calculations (Technical Review Summary). IJ you have any questions regarding the ineligible costs, please contact Patrick Wheeler at 1918) 227-227-0743. All costs which require additional information must be re- submitted with your next Reimbursement Request. The ineligible costs must be deleted from your next Reimbursement Request, unless you request a Final Staff Decision within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of this letter. When submitting Reimbursement Request //2, please enclose copies of cancelled checks for WZI invoice in the amount of $235.25, check #348. Please Note: Future "Reimbursement Requests" must show the cumulative totel Jtotal-to-date) of all costs incurred Jbring bel~ce forwardl as discussed on pages 5 ~d 6 of the Instruction Booklet. If you have any questions regarding reimbursement funds or need additional Reimbursement Requests or Spreadsheets, please call Barbara Andersen at (916) 227-4417. Sincerely, Barbara Andersen UST Cleanup Fund Program cc: Kern County EHD 2700 M Street, Ste. 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 ATFN: Joe Canas LETTER OF (. I ! MIT NT FOR REIMBUk,., glENT OF COSTS CLAIM NO: 004076 AMENDMENT NO: 1 CLAIt4ANT: LEO BLACK ESTATE BALANCE FORWARD: $24,000 CO-PAYEE: NONE THIS AMOUNT: $60,000 CLAIMANT ADDRESS: P. 0. BOX 121 WOFFORD HTS., CA 93285 NEW BALANCE: $84,000 TAX ID / SSA NO.: 95-6792747 Subject to availability of funds, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) agrees to reimburse Leo Black Estate (Claimant) for eligible corrective action costs at 3090 Pierce Rd., Bakersfield, CA 93309 (Site). The commitment reflected by this Letter is subject to all of the following terms and conditions: 1. Reimbursement shall not exceed $84,000 unless this amount is subsequently modified in writing by an amended Letter of Commitment. 2. The obligation to pay any sum under this Letter of Commitment is contingent upon availability of funds. In the event that sufficient funds are not available for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the State Board, the State Board shall not be obligated to make any disbursements hereunder. If any disbursements otherwise due under this Letter of Commitment are deferred because of unavailability of funds, such disbursements will promptly be made when sufficient funds do become available. Nothing herein shall be construed to provide the Claimant with a right of priority for disbursement over any other claimant who has a similar Letter of Commitment ...... 3. Unless modified in writing by the State Board, this Letter of Commitment covers work through Phase III of corrective action work. 4. All costs for which reimbursement is sought must be eligible for reimbursement and the Claimant must be the person entitled to reimbursement thereof. 5. Claimant must at all times be in compliance with all applicable state laws, rules and regulations and with all terms, conditions, and commitments contained in the Claimant's Application and any supporting documents or in any payment requests submitted by .the Claimant. 6. No disbursement under this Letter of Commitment will be made except upon receipt of acceptable Standard Form Payment Requests duly executed by or on behalf of the Claimant. All Payment Requests must be executed by the Claimant or a duly authorized representative who has been approved by the Division of Clean Water Programs. 7. Any and all disbursements payable under this Letter of Commitment may be withheld if the Claimant is not in compliance with the provisions of Paragraph 5 above. 8. Neither this Letter of Commitment nor any right thereunder is ~issignable by the Claimant without the written consent of the State Board. In the event of any such assignment, the rights of the assignee shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth in this Letter of Commitment and the State Board's consent. 9. This Letter of Commitment may be withdrawn at any time by the State Board if completion of corrective action is not performed with reasonable diligence. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Letter of Commitment has been issued by the State Board this 6th day of December, 1993. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD ~JTATE USE : . -- o53o ~a~ gB~;r' Un e('gr~l~J St°~age '~ank Cleanup Fund Pr°gramN.t~l~ lo~ .~~~,~ C~ Division-'Adm~ni~tr~t~e ~;ervices REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST - UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND CLAIM NO. 004076 REGION: $ REIMBURSEMENT NO. l CLAIMANT: LEO BLA CK ESTA TE CO-PAYEE: none CLAIMANTADDRESS: P.O. BOX121 WOFFORD HEIGITI~, CA 93285 CONTAM1NA TED SITE: ADDRESS: 3090 PIERCE RD BAKERSFIELD, CA 93309 LETTER OF COMMITMENT AMOUNT : $24,000 'AMENDMENT: 0 CERTIFICATION: I have read and agree with the "Conditions o£Pajanent', (Exhibit I), listed on the reverse side. o£ this document. NOTE: This request CANNOTBE PR OCESSED unless the "Conditions o£Payment" are included on the reverse side when submitted. The costs claimed have been incurred and have been paid or will be paid within thirty (30) days of receipt of the funds requested hereby. If such costs have not been paid within 30 days, [unds received under this request will be returned to the State Water Resources Control Board. Form USTCF- REQ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~~ 2700 "M" Street. Suite 300 ~lI~]ld~l (sos) 86~-3636 ~~~' ' (805) 861-3429 FAX January 11, 1994 Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Avenue Oildale, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Remediation, Leo Black Estate, Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Ms. Roberts: This Department is in receipt of your letter regarding the use and past chemical storage at the subject site and adjacent properties. After review and consideration of all information submitted to date, and discussions with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB), the Department still cannot close the' case at this time. Since there was an unauthorized release of gasoline at the site and TPH as gasoline was detected in the groundwater, further investigation of the groundwater is needed. The additional investigation work may commence with the installation of groundwater wells to monitor the water on a quarterly basis. The monitoring results will be evaluated after a year to determine the next course of action. If contamination other than gasoline remains in the water, we recommend that further investigation be conducted to determine possible sources. If you and/or your contractor has an alternate method to address this problem, please inform this office in writing. Otherwise, a plan for the additional work needs to be submitted within 60 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely,' Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: Tom Gilbert WZI, Inc. Central Valley RWQCB - Fresno gough\050119d.clt ENVIRONN,"I )TAL HEALTH SERViL; S DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ,,~\ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR ~~~, Bakerafield, CA 93301 ~r~~; (805) 861-3636 ,~~~ (805) 861-3429 FAX September 30, 1993 Tom Gilbert P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJE~: Under~ound Tank Site Remediation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA (Permit No. 050119) Dear Mr. Gilbert: The August 1993 soil remediafion report prepared by WZI Inc. t~r the subject site has been reviewed. ~e report results indicate that all gasoline-contaminated soil to an appro~mate depth of 45 feet has been removed. The groundwater grab sample results, however, showed the presence of significant levels of total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as gasoline and diesel. B~ed on our review, the Department does not require any additional excavation at the site. We concur with WZI's recommendation to remediate the contaminated soil presently stored on site by aeration. Upon success~l completion of remediation, the soil may be utilized as bac~fll for the remaining excavation. ~ to your request to discontinue groundwater monitoring, the Department does not concur ~th the e~lanation prohded to support the proposed action. Supposing documentation needs to be provided to prove that only gasoline was stored on site. ~though other sources of hydrocarbon contamination have been identified in the area, there is sufficient e~dence to suggest that Leo Black Estate also has conthbuted to this contamination as shown in the work reports to date. To this end, we require that gasohne contamination in the groundwater at this site be investigated further. Please submit your plan to address this matter within 60 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please ca~ me at (805) 861-3636. S~cerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: WZI Inc. Winifred ~omson Donna Roberts Read Investments, c/o John Sears Central Valley RWQCB g0ugh~ilber~.le~ .~mber 29., 1993 Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II 2700 "~"' Street Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Re: Leo Black Estate ~ Pierce Road Cleanup Dear Dolores Gough, I am writing this letter as a follow up of our conversation last week. I strongly disagreed with a statement in your letter dated September 30, 1993 and that ground water monitoring continue: The statement being '-' ~ ~ o~, I ~ve kept a ~ther"s ~tchful eye on th~s p~y since the death of ~ ~ther in 1~5. I ~ve had a l~ge n~ of f~ily ~r~ng on ~d f~ this pro~rty over the p~t 40 ye~s., ~ ~ ~owl~e there ~ n~er ~n ~y ~t~ial stor~ on the site in question, except the ~d~~d g~oline t~ t~t ~ ~tely, I ~ve ~de n~~ ~lls to long t~ c~t~rs ~d neigh~rs of the ~ Black Electric to verify w~t I ~mow to ~ t~e: ~ Black ~ n~er o~ or operat~ ~~nt or vehicles t~t us~ "~l. y~d for ~y ye~s. ~ the ~uth ~ a t~cking y~.. west~ refin~, e~t~iesel diesel on his p~pe~y"'. I ~ke to ~. A1 ~hetti, Electro, r, Glare St. ~is shop le~ half of the site for ~y ye~s ~d ~ve done b~ess ~th ~ Bla~ s~ce the 50 ~s. I ~ke to Olliver St~g~n of St~n ~d Son ~nst~ction, he ~d, no diesel. I ~ke to a gentl~ who p~c~s~ n~y pieces of the older vehicles ~d ~ent fr~ ~ Black. Several t~c~, a fork lift ~d-.~ He~ ~rald ~th ~nst~ction ~d ~les, stat~ t~t all of these ~re ~d ~e ~line ~iven. He ~s done ~siness ~th ~ Bla~ s~ce the e~ly 60',s ~d n~er ~ew ~ to use ~ything except g~l~e. ~e ~ Black Electric, Inc. now in o~ration on J~s ~ad~ ~ht the electric~ b~iness ~d ~ui~ent fr~ the estate in 1984 ~d stat~ nothi~ they p~c~sed ~ diesel ~iven. I n~ to ~ow ~t "~p~rt~g d~tation" I c~ "'p~vide to p~ve t~t only ga~line ~s stor~ on the site". I ~ve fo~d only ga~line ~es in the r~or~. ~. Gil~rt ~d I, ~ ~-~ecutors of the ~ Bla~ ~tate, ~ve done ~e~h~ r~uest~ ~d r~dr~ to cle~ up t~s ~tter to yo~ approval. We ~ ~io~ to ~lete t~s cle~up ~thout ~ch ~re delay. ~ you for yo~ help. It is ~eatly appreciate. S~$cerely, ~. . Donna Robe~ts~ co~-execu~or-of the Leo Black Estate 1004 Lorene Ave. Oildale, Ca. 93308 (_805) 399.-6966 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY Enviroru'nental Health Services Oegarlment RANDALL L. ABBOTT STEVE McCAI ~l:y, REHS, DIRECTOR DIRECTOR Air Pollution Control District DAVID PRICE !il VaLLU~ j. RODDY, APCO ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Planning & Development Services Department TED JAMES, ^ICP, DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT October 24, 1990 Thomas Gilbert 2000 Julian Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93304 Subject: Location: 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Known As: Leo Black Electric Permit #: 050119 Dear Mr. Gilbert: This letter is to confirm our October 11, 1990, telephone conversation regarding the delay in the implementation of the remediation workplan at the subject site. Until such time as this project is initiated, please inform us on the status on a bi-weekly basis. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (805) 861- 3636 extension 545. Sincerely, Do~ores Gough Hazardous Haterials Specialist Hazardous Hater~als Hanagement Program DG:cas \050119.~tr 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861-3636 ~AV. IOf~"t 0"I ~ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~:~1~ 2700 'M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR ..~ ,~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 I805) a61-3429 FAX July 19, 1993 John Sears Bronson & Bronson & McKinnon 505 Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94111-2514 SUBJECT: Underground Storage Tank Site Remediation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Sears: The presence of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination from an underground storage tank has been identified at the Leo Black Estate which is located adjacent to a vacant parcel currently owned by Read Investments. To remediate contamination that may have migrated beyond the boundary of the Leo Black estate, access upon the Read parcel is necessary. Due to the location of these properties, it is in the best interest of public health and welfare, and all parties concerned, to expedite remediation. In addition, further delays would allow continued m/gration of contaminants. 'It is our understanding that approval of an access agreement which was requested by representatives of the Leo Black Estate has not been finalized. This Department requests your cooperation in the timely resolution of this matter. Should the remediation of the Leo Black Estate be delayed further by your failure to grant access, the existing contamination at the Read Investments' site could result in your having to implement mitigation activities at a future date. If you have any questions or need more information regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:cas cc: Winifred Thomson Tom Gilbert Donna Roberts Central Valley RWQCB ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~~\ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 DIRECTOR ~~~~~ll~,'~ i~~ (805,Bakerefield'861-3636CA 93301 k~!!' (805) 861-3429 FAX July 19, 1993 Tom Gilbert P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Remediation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Gilbert: As per telephone conversation with Ms. Winifred Thomson, attorney for the estate, it is our understanding that access agreement with the new owners of the adjacent parcel has not been finalized. This Department will extend the deadline for commencement of remediation activities until August 20, 1993. Please be aware that failure to comply with this date could jeopardize your eligibility to receive reimbursements from the UST Cleanup Fund Program. Please inform this office at least 48 hours prior to starting remediation activities. If yoU have any questions regarding this matter, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:cas cc: Read Investments c/o John Sears Winifred Thomson Donna Roberts Central Valley RWQCB ~gough~gilbert.ltr ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 2700 'M" Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 DIRECTOR /~ (805) 861-3636 ~.~j~.,~~,,~ff/ (805) 861-3429 FAX May 7, 1993 Mr. Tom Gilbert P.O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 SUBJECT: Underground Storage Tank Remediation, Leo Black Estate, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Gilbert: This Department has considered your request for approval to proceed with the remediation of petroleum-contaminated soil at the subject property .only. It is the Department's understanding that site access to the Grossman's property for remedial action is being negotiated between the involved parties. Based on the information recently provided to this office, Grossman's Inc. appears to have previously granted a temporary license' and easement to the Leo Black estate for remedial action. This Department requests that 'this matter be resolved and access agreement documentation be provided to this office no later than June 7, 1993. Should an amicable agreement not be reached by the above date, this Department may consider the owners of the Grossman property responsible for cleanup of petroleum contamination that has migrated to their property. If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please call me at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials .Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: Richard K. Blankstein, Esq. Winifred Thomson Donna Roberts CV RWQCB goughXgilbert.let '- DARLING, MACLIN ~ THOMSON Canned Foods 2000 Fifth Street Berkeley, California 94710-1918 Re: License And Temporary Easement Agreement Leo Black Estate (Pierce Road Property, Bakersfield, CA) Dear Ms. Young: it was a pleasure speaking with you..today. 'We have been advised by the prior owner that Read Investments has purchased the vacant parcel adjoining property owned by the Leo Black Estate in Bakersfield, California. As we discussed, enclosed is a draft of the "License And Temporary Easement Agreement" by which Read Investments would'give access to its property on Pierce Road in Bakersfield, California to the Leo Black Estate in order that the Estate would be able to remediate underground storage tank contamination on estate property and on the Read Investments' property. Please note that we need to know what form of entity Read Investments is, and the jurisdiction of its formation. .We have assumed it is a corporation, and need the state of its incorporation. If it is a different form of entity, we need to know that, and where it is formed. You will also note that the we will need to insert the dates that the Estate anticipates beginning its remediation work, and the date that the right of entry will terminate, unless, as provided by paragraph 5, extended by reasons beyond the control of the Estate. I will insert that information in the final draft. Please advise m~ as to the exact nat"~re and duration of use made of the Read Investments property, or I can discuss this with Mr. Geertsen, so the environmental consultants can plan accordingly. Please contact me if you have any further questions or comments at this time. ~I would appreciate review of this agreement on behalf of Read Investments. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. V_er~truly 3ours, Winifred~l~homson WT/sld Enclosure cc: Tom Gilbert w/encl. Donna Roberts w/encl. Kern County Health Svc. Dept. Attn: Dorothy Gough w/encl. DRAET LICENSE AND TEMPORARY EASEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of ,1993, by and between Read Investments ("Read"), a corporation having its offices at 2000 Fifth Street, Berkeley, California 94710-1918, and Donna Roberts and Tom Gilbert, Co-Executors of the Estate of Leo Black (the "Estate"), having an address c/o Mr. Tom Gilbert at P.O. Box 121, Wofford Heights, California 93285. WHEREAS, Read owns a certain parcel of vacant land on Pierce Road in Bakersfield, CA (the "Read Parcel"), known as Kern County Assessor's Parcel Number 332-040-23; and : WHEREAS, the Estate owns property adjacent to the Read Parcels as described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference (the "Estate Parcel") from which site one underground fuel tank has been removed; and WHEREAS, the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department is requiring remediation of contamination resulting from such underground fuel tank previously located on the Estate Parcel (the "Estate's Contamination"), which contamination has been determined to be on the Estate Parcel and which may extend to the Read Parcel; and WHEREAS, the Estate believes that there may be contamination on the Read Parcel resulting from sources other than the underground storage tank removed from the Estate Parcel, which the Estate has no duty to cure or remove; and WHEREAS, the Estate is about to undertake site remediation work upon the Estate Parcel, to cure or remove the Estate's Contamination, which work may require access upon the Read Parcel; and WHEREAS, the Estate will also undertake site remediation work upon the Read Parcel to cure or remove the Estate's Contamination from the Read Parcel, if any, if during the site remediation the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department requires remediation of any contamination of the Read Parcel by the Estate's Contamination; and WHEREAS, Read desires that such work be conducted in a good and orderly manner and that the Estate perform such work relative to the Read Parcel as may be required by the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these presents, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Read hereby consents to the entry upon the Read Parcel by the Estate (through its duly authorized contractors, engineers and consultants, all of whom shall be of good reputation and experienced in the type of work to be performed) for the following purposes: a. For such access by vehicles and workers as may be necessary in connection with the site remediation work to be performed upon the Estate Parcel; and b. For the excavation upon the Read Parcel and, if necessary, remediation of such soil and other materials as may be necessary or appropriate in connection with the removal from the Read Parcel of all of the Estate's Contamination thereon (but not any other contamination). 2. All work performed hereunder by or for the Estate shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, in compliance with all laws and regulations and under the supervision of a reputable, experienced engineering or environmental consulting firm. Read shall have the right to have its representatives observe all tests and work performed by or for the Estate, and upon request Read shall promptly be given copies of all reports, test results and the like obtained by the Estate or its engineers or contractors relating to the Estate Parcel or the Read Parcel. All test and work performed by or for the Estate shall be performed so as to cause the minimum interference with the use of the Read Parcel. 3. The Estate shall give written notice in the manner provided below to Read at least three (3) days in advance of commencement of any tests or work upon or entry upon the Read Parcel, and all work upon or related to the Read Parcel shall be diligently prosecuted to completion by the Estate after the first entry or performance of tests or work upon the Read Parcel. In any event, such work shall commence no later than 2 ,1993, and be completed no later than ,1993, subject to the provisions of paragraph 5 below. 4. During the performance of any tests or work upon the'Read Parcel, or any entry upon the Read Parcel in connection with the work performed on the Estate Parcel, the Estate and its contractors shall maintain personal' injury and public liability insurance (in addition to their workmen's compensation insurance) naming Read as an additional insured, with policy limits of at least $300,000.00 for personal injury or death and $300,000.00 for property damage arising out of the performance of any such tests or work or an event occurring in connection with any such entry. 5. Rights of the Estate to enter upon the Read Parcel pursuant to the terms hereof shall expire on ,1993, unless a written extension agreement is executed by the parties; provided, however, this agreement shall be automatically extended after said expiration date or any extension thereof (but not beyond the latest date for the performance of the Estate's work as set by law, regulation or order of a public body or officer) for as long as reasonably necessary to complete any remediation work required by the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department in the event that the Estate's Contamination is more extensive than currently determined, or for as long as performance by the Estate shall be prevented by any act of God, act of a public enemy, by strike, war, insurrection, labor disturbance, fire, flood, earthquake, dust storm, wash-out, explosion, shortage of labor or supplies, insolvency, governmental action of any kind, any court order or decree, or by any other cause beyond the control of the Estate. 6. From time to time, at the request Read, and in any event before the Estate or any contractor or engineer or consultant enters upon the Read Parcel, the Estate shall provide Read with copies of the insurance policies maintained by the Estate and its contractors, consultants and engineers relative to the work described herein, and a list of names and addresses of the contractors, consultants and engineers employed in connection with such work. 7. This agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 8. All notices given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when received by hand delivery or three (3) business days .after sent by the 3 mail if sent, postage paid, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the parties at the address designated by each party below or to such other address which either party shall have given to the other for such purpose by notice hereunder: If to Estate: Leo Black Estate c/o Tom Gilbert P.O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, California 93285 With Copy to: Darling, Maclin & Thomson P.O. Box 2411 Bakersfield, California 93303 If to Read: Read Investments c/o Canned Foods 2000 Fifth Street Berkeley, California 94710-1918 9. This agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to such matter, and each party to this agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this agreement shall be valid or binding. EXECUTED as an agreement as of the date first above written. READ INVESTMENTS ESTATE OF LEO BLACK BY: BY: , President Donna Roberts, Co-Executor BY: BY' , Secretary Tom Gilbert, ,Co-Executor EXHIBIT "A" Real Property in the County of Kern, State of California, more particularly described as follows: Lots 11 and 12 of Tract 1001, in the County of Kern, State of C;alJfomJa, as per Map of said Tract recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of said County on ,September 26, 1930 in Book 4, page 27 of Maps, and that portion of Shell Street and alley adjoining said premises. Lots 13 and 14 of tract 1001, in the County of Kern, State of California as per Map of said Tract recorded in the Office of the County Recorded of said County on ,September 26, 1930 in Book 4, page 27 of Maps, and that portion of Shell Street and alley adjoining said premises which has been abandoned. EXCEPT THEREFORE 50% of all minerals. That portion of Lot 15, Tract No. 1001, in the County of Kern, State of California, as per map recorded September 26, 1930, in Book 4 of Maps at page 27, Kern County Records described as follows: BEGINNING at the Southeast corner, of said lot; thence (1) along the South line of said lot, North 89 Degrees, 12 Minutes, 13 Seconds West, 45.89 feet; thence (2) from a tangent which bears North 2 Degrees, 20 Minutes, 17 Seconds East, Northerly along a curve concave Easterly with a radius of 3940 feet through an angle of I Degree, 53 Minutes, 33 Seconds, an arc distance of 130.14 feet to the North line of said lot; thence (3), along Said North line, South 89 Degrees, 12 Minutes, 13 Seconds East, 39.63 feet to the East line of said lot; thence (4), along said East line, South 0 Degrees, 31 Minutes, 29 Seconds West, 130.00 feet to the point of beginning. Also that portion of Shell Street, w]~ich has been abandoned, adjoining said property. EXCEPTING AND RESERVING unto the State of California, any and all rights of Ingress to or egress from the land herein conveyed over and across the above described Course (2) and its Southerly extension to the South line of Shell Street. EXCEPTING THEREFROM all minerals, oil, gases and other hydrocarbons by whatsoever name known that may be within or under the parcel of land hereinabove described without, however, the right to drill, dig or mine through the surface thereof. 04×0?×93 15:51 UST CLEANUP FUND ~ D18050613429 N0.~42 ~01 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY , , ........... STAT WA E..'Esou'.cE DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROORAMS 2014 T STREET, SUITE 130 P.O. 8OX 944212. SACRAMENTO. CA 94244-2120 TRANSMITTAL OF FAX MATERIAL DATE ~, ,o.. FAX DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRANS FAX t (916) 227-4349 CLEANUP FUND FAX (916) 227-4530 (/ f .yo~ did not recefv~ ~,Ll.j~ur 'FAX, p lease ca l I (916) 227-._~..~J~ NO. OF PAGES ~ {including this sheet) /_----7 For your information /_---7 Per your request /~'7 For review and comments your R[MARKS: liTE NAME: SITE ADDRI ~88: ~ the I~king number. a~r~ve 2. Tu ID eurrenoe 1. ~ tank 3. L~kln~ tank 4. ia' ~e ~y ~=e S, If ~almant subm~ m~e ~an ~e claim f~ the ~te. ~eh cl~m is far a 2, (~latmant Wal both the owner and OpM&tM at time ~f 3. Client la the ~rr~t ~ner and R~d~ M~ Fu~ Tanko 1. UST I~t~ at ~e reaid~oe of ~ pr~y ~ r~td~t~l uae ~ly at time ~ l~k [UST I~t~ at prepay improv~ by ewne;-eeeupl~ aingle family dwelling ~ duplex dl~y? 3. UST was n~ u~ f~ agricultural ~ fm reeale ReNdentlal 8m~i Home H~flflg Oil Tanka /" 4. UST Io~t~ at ~e reNdenee of at time of leak discovery? 5. UST Io~t~ at prope~ improv~ by an owner-oe~pl~ single family dw~ling or dupl~ at time of I~k discovery? ., 6, U~T has a ~aelty of 1,t~ gNIons ~ leas? 7. U~T ia ue~ ~ly to stye home healing oil for c~sumptlve u~e on 8. UST wes not Iocat~ on agricultural prope~y on ~ after DETAILi *~EVIEW GHECKLIST - GONT'D PAGE 2 Flnan=lai Review Team ha. determined that the claimant ¢ ualllfes ' Class' 8. Financial Review Team has determined that the, for Pti* ' Class C. date release discovered ver~ed? 2. if property amlulrllel aftra' 1/1/84, exercirl~l due dlllgen=e er pr, eviour ~mer w.as eligible? '~.' 3. Claimant el~e~ h~d er apptl~l fo~ a permit | by 111/90, er war ablate substantiate why not abtaln~l? 4, UST ir net aro~ly out of compliance permit ~e.~. uireme~ts? 5, Claimant we~ required to initiate cortex'tire ~, =tf.t~dmant e!iaevlred UAR prier to 1t1/88 SEE PAGE 3.OF CHECKLIS? 8. la in ~mante? erig natures of all claimants and joint ~laimants? 2. F~Klulred. PROSL[M AREA8 AND ANY' ADDITIONAl. COMMENT8 · Compliance w th requ foments for' items listsU T~'~e~i'c~n ¥, (~entaminaaon $~t'~i'(3c¢~}'~oe 0ascription) anc~ ~ectJon iX. (Eligibility Re¢lu[rements) may require lead agency confirmation. Any items that c~n~ot be verifi~ through the appll~nt ~d whl~ will ~uire I~d agency ~eview and conflrma~on, should ba highlighted far fu~er review. In ell ~ses lead agent7 confirmation ef cerre~ve action eompllance will be 04×0?×93 15:54 UST .EANUP FUND * 918058613429 NO. 542 " NOTES' 04,,"P3?/cJ3 1_5-'51 U'=JT CLE~INUP FIJND -* '~lF-JO.~861342cj NO, ~i42 [~01 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CALIFORN{A ENVIRONMF..NTAL P~OT~¢TIC)N AGENCY I~ET£ WILSON, Governor STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD D~VISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAMS 2014 T STREET, SUITE 130 P O. 8OX 944212 SACRAMENTO, CA 94244,-2120 FAX (9161 227-4349 FAX {g16 227-4530 TRANSMIln[AL OF FAX IqATERIAL DATE: FAX FROH: DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAHS FAX t (916) 227-4349 CLEANUP FUND FAX (g16) 227-4530 ~FAX, NO. OF PAGES ~ (including this sheet) For your information /~/ Per your request /~-7 For your review and comments REMARKS: .~ 0~/07×95 15:52 UST CLEANUP FUND DATE REVI~ED; !11~'1~ JCONTACT P~R~N: _. C~IMANT INFORMATION ~AOO.I REJ. ,,,, HO~ INFORMATION WA~ ~ERIFiED / ......... ~f the I~kln~ UST? 4. Date ~te~t~,~¥ a~ul~ v~i~ed? ~ 1'. J~rt Claimant ie an own~ and/or e~erator? ~ 2. T~ ~D e,m~ provide? , X 3' ~e~nt, Claimant's prlori~ ~ees verlfl~? ............ 1.~ DeScription o~ tan~ and use gered? ~' ~ ~ ~'~ 2. ~ieter~ f~rm tank? .............. '~es ( N~ ~/~.. - .................. 3. L~klng tank eomaln~ eligible sub~,~e? ~, ~ 4, Is ~e any evidence that ~e UAR was the n~ligen~e? i ' ~-Ifaalmam subm~ m~e ~an one claim ~ for the site. ~eh ct~m ie for a 2. Cl~mant wa~ bo~ the ~wner and op~t~ ~ .... t ........... _ 3'. Cl~ma~ ~h~. ~urr~t owner and operator? ~{ No/NA prtg~,¢~,a,~ ~aa verified?~ ~ Z A. P~iortty Class A Re~d~flat M~ Fu~ Tanks l 1, UST Io~t~ at the ~ealdence of a per,on ~ --. ~ p~ope~ty ~ residential uae only at time of I~k dlscevety? ~ . , , dwelling or duplex et time of le~ ~ diet.e/y? 3. U~T w~s n~ us~ ~or agricultural purposes ~ ReNdentlal ~mall Home H~tlflg Oil Tanks I I ... ' 4. U~T Io~t~ at th~ re~dtnee of s p~son] at time ef leak diseove~v? ...~' owner-o~eupl~ single family dwelling or duplex at time of leak 6, U~T has a eapae~y of ~1~ 9~llo~a'~t' leas? 7. UOT i~ u~ed only to stye home he~ting oll ~ -- for consumptive ~e ~ p~operty?..._..~ 8. U~T wa~ ~ot I~cat~ on agricultural property 04/07/95 15:52 UST CLEANUP FUND DETAIL, tEVIEW CHECICI. IST - ~ONT'D PA~E 2 8 Rnanelel Review Teem has d~erm~ned th~ ~e claimant Ciasa' B. Rnanciat Review T~m has determined ~.. that the clalment c usli~es ~o~ ,Claes C. 3, Claimant ;iiN~ had or appll~ for a p~mit ~'l' ..... by 1/1/90, or wa~ ablate 4, U~T is not groesly out of compliance with'- 8, ,l~ eM~mant dis~er~ UAR prior to 1/1/88. ~ ,l~fl~t~ on ~ bafOre et~01887 r~u~tary r~ui~em~ts? SEE PAQE 3 OF CHECKLIST 8, Ct~mant Is In eompli~Ce with financial uirements? claimants and joint liniments? ~ ~ . PROBLEM AREAS AND ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENT~ ...... may require lead agency confirmation. Any items that cermet be vedfi~ th~augh the applicant ~nd which will require lead agency review end confirmation, should be highlighted for fu~her review. In ail cases lead' agency confirmation of corrosive action compliance will be require. D4,/07/93 15:53 U'.BT CLEANUP FUND -, 'B1805861342g NO. 5~2 I ~ATE ~ ACTION REQUIRED/RESPONSE 6 '~ . ~. ~ "~"~ ~' ~ c-w'S~,' ~ c:'~,~.~.~*~ ~.~'~, .... ~ ......... ' - ..,,~ ~-.. ,. -~ .... .~ -~- ~ , ~' . - .-' I ' ,-.- , .... - ..... , -;'--"- .... :' ....... .... , ~ .... ' "' '*' C~~ ~~." ~_ OF lANCE; awing the t .... ~ ~EVI~ER~S S{GNA~RE ILEAD AGENCY CON~'E~CE; A~hls date, the lead agency ~ies~tative eOncure with the det~minatign that the claimant ts in compliance with ~pll~ble eotre~lve e~on requirements. ~4,,~67x'B3 ~5:54 UST FIJi,.ID ~ 9~05~6~3429 N0.542 ~05 ' ~ NOTES STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CALIFORNIA ENVI PROTECTION AGSNCY PETE WILSON, Governor STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTR DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAMS P.O. BOX 944212 . SACRAMENTO, CA 94244-2120 (916}227-4307 (916) 227-4530 (FAX) Mr. Tom Gilbert 'P. O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, CA 93285 Dear Mr. Gilbert: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEA The State Water Resources Control Boa~ ed Letter of Commitment an amount not to exceed ~24,000. Th~ f the corrective act/on costs incurred to date and your application rec= .............. , ............. , the State Board in writing by an amended Letter of Commitment. The State Board will take steps to withdraw this Letter of Commitment after 90 calendar days from the date of this transmittal letter unless you proceed with due dil~qence with your cleanup effort. This means that you must take positive, concrete steps to ensure that corrective action is proceeding with all due speed. For example, if you have not started your cleanup effort, you must obtain three b/ds and sign a contract w/th one of these bidders within 90 calendar days. if your cleanup effort has a/ready started and was delayed, you must resume the expenditure of funds to ensure that your cleanup is proceeding in an expeditious manner. You are reminded that you must comply with ail regulatory agency time schedules and requirements. We constantly review the status of ail active c/a/ms, and failure to Proceed w/th due diligence w/ii be grounds for withdrawal of this Letter of Commitment. You should read the terms and conditions listed in the Letter of Commitment. A/so attached is' a "Reimbursement Request" package. The package includes: · Instructions for the comp/et/on of the "Reimbursement Request" form and should' be fei/owed when seeking reimbursement for corrective act/on costs incurred after January I, 1988. · A "Reimbursement Request - Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund" form which you must use to request re/mburaement of costs incurred. · A "Spreadsheet" which you must use in conjunct]on w/th your Reimbursement Request. · Samples of two completed Reimbursement Request forms and associated spreadsheets. · A "Bid Summary Sheet" to document data on b/ds received. · Recommended M/n/mum Invoice 'Cost Breakdown. · A "Certification of Non-Recovery From Other Sources" which must be returned before any reimbursements can be made. if you have any questions regarding the Letter of Commitment or the Reimbursement Request package, please contact Susan Phillips at (916) 2274366. Sincerely, Dave Deaner, Manager ~ Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Program Attachments cc: Kern County Environmental Health Central Valley Regional 8oard 2700 "M" Street, Ste 300 3443 Rout/er Rd., Ste A Bakersfield, CA $3301 Sacramento, CA 9582 7-3098 Attn: De/ores Gough Attn: Gordon Boggs CLAIM NO: 004076 AMENDMENT NO: 0 cLAIMANT: Leo Black. Estate BALANCE FORWARD: 0 CO-PAYEE: None THIS AMOUNT: $24,000 CLAIMANT ADDRESS: P.O. Box 121 Wofford Hts, CA 93285 NEW BALANCE: $24,000 TAX ID / SSA NO.: 95-6792747 Subject to availability of fundS,.the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) agrees to reimburse Leo Black Estate for eligible corrective action costs at 3090 Pierce Rd., Bakersfield, CA 93309~ The commitment reflected by this Letter is subject to all of the following terms and conditions: 1. Reimbursement shall not exceed $24,000 unless this amount is subsequently modified in writing by an amended Letter of Commitment. 2. The obligation to pay any sum under this Letter of Commitment is contingent upon availability of funds. In the event that sufficient funds are not available for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the State Board, the State Board shall not be obligated to make any disbursements hereunder. If any disbursements otherWise due under this Letter of Commitment are deferred because of unavailability of funds, such disbursements will promptly be made when sufficient funds do become available. Nothing herein shall be construed to provide the Claimant with a right of priority for disbursement over any other claimant who has a similar Letter of Commitment. 3. Unless modified in writing by the State Board, this Letter of Commitment covers work through Phase II of corrective action work. 4. Ail costs for which reimbursement is sought must be eligible for reimbursement and the Claimant must be the person entitled to reimbursement thereof. 5. Claimant must at all times be in ~ompliance with all applicable state laws, rules and regulations and with all terms, conditions, and commitments Contained in the Claimant's Application and any supporting documents or in any payment requests submitted by the Claimant. 6. No disbursement under this Letter of Commitment will be made except upon receipt of acceptable Standard Form Payment Requests duly executed by or on behalf of the Claimant. Ail Payment Requests must be executed by the Claimant or a duly authorized representative who has been approved by the Division of Clean Water Programs. 7. Any and all disbursement~ payable under this. Letter of Commitment may be w~thheld if the Claimant is not in'compliance with the provisions of Paragraph 5 above. 8. Neither this Letter of Commitment nor any right thereunder is assignable by the Claimant without the written consent of the State Board. In the event of any such assignment, the rights of the assignee shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth in this Letter of Commitment and the State Board's consent. 9. This Letter of Commitment may be withdrawn at any time by the State Board if completion of corrective action is not performed with reasonable diligence. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Letter of Commitment has been issued by the State Board this 14th day of April, 1993. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD ~A~ USE: . ~ - 30530 B~ ~ ~ager,~~ ~und~itorage Tank Cleanup Fund Program BY~-~'"'-----~'"'"'IL-I~~L'O~,~ ~.._)~ ef, Division strative Services ATTORNEYS AT LAW CURTIS DARLING BRUCE MACLIN SUITE 850 BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING TELEPHONE {805} 325-5075 WINIFRED THOMSON 1430 TRUXTUN AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX ~'411 /~, .~ TELECOPIER April 26, 1993 Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested Parcel Number: P 430 23~ ~58 Richard K. Blankstein, Esq. Posternak, Blankstein & Lund 100 Charles River Plaza Boston, MA 02114 Re: Leo Black Estate Cleanup Of Underground Storage Tank Contamination On Grossman's Property, Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. Blankstein: In 1991, an agreement was drafted between Grossman's, Inc. and the Leo Black Estate by which the Estate was given a license and temporary easement to enter onto the property of Grossman's, Inc. for the purpose of removing contamination from an underground storage tank which had been removed from the Leo Black Estate property. Due to lack of funds, the Estate did not go forward with the remediation. It appears that the Estate will have the funds available soon to proceed with the removal. Therefore, a redraft of the agreement has been enclosed, updating the agreement pursuant to the current situation. I would appreciate your reviewing the enclosed agreement, and contacting me with regard to any comments or questions you may have. Very truly yours, Winifred /C~omson WT/sld Enclosure cc: Donna Roberts w/encl. Tom-C~bert w/encl. ~or~ Gough Kern County Environmental Health Department w/encl. LICENSE AND TEMPORARY EASEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this day of ,1993,~ by and between Grossman's, Inc. ("Grossman's), a Delaware corporation having its offices at 200 Union Street, Braintree, MA 02184, and Donna Roberts and Tom Gilbert, Co-Executors of the Estate of Leo Black (the "Estate"), having an address c/o Mr. Tom Gilbert at P.O. Box 121, Wofford Heights, California 93285. WHEREAS, Grossman's owns a certain parcel of vacant land on Pierce Road in Bakersfield, CA (the "Owned Parcel"), used in connection with the adjacent Grossman's store; and WHEREAS, Grossman's leases a parcel of land adjacent to the Owned Parcel, on which is located the Grossman's store (the "Leased Parcel"); and WHEREAS, the Estate owns property adjacent to the Owned Parcel (the "Estate Parcel") from which site (the Estate represents), one underground fuel tank has been removed; and WHEREAS, it has been determined 'that there has been contamination resulting from such underground fuel tank previously located on the Estate Parcel (the "Estate's Contamination"), which contamination has been determined to be on the Estate Parcel and which Grossman's believes may extend to the Owned Parcel; and the Estate believes that [h~re may be-~ontamination on the_Qwned WHEREAS, Parcel and tl'ie Leased Parcel resulting from sources other than the underground storage tank removed from the Estate Parcel, which the E~st_ate._has_.~p...du~._.t_o_..~_u_.r_e...9_r._.r~oye; _ an~l ' WHEREAS, the Estate is about to undertake site remediation work upon the Estate Parcel to cure or remove the Estate's Contamination, which work may require access upon the Owned Parcel; and WHEREAS, the Estate will also undertake site remediation work upon the Owned Parcel to cure or remove the Estate's Contamination from the Owned Parcel, if any, if during the site remediation it is determined there is contamination of the Owned Parcel by the Estate,s Contamination; and WHEREAS, Grossman's desires that such work be. conducted in a good and orderly manner and that the Estate perform such work relative to the Owned Parcel and Leased Parcel as may' be required so as to remove therefrom any of the Estate's Contamination which has entered either of such Parcels from the Estate Parcel (directly or indirectly) and, only to the extent required due to the presence of the Estates Contamination, bring the Owned Parcel and Leased Parcel into compliance with all' applicable state, local and federal rules, statutes and regulations relative to hazardous waste and hazardous materials (as the same are defined in any state, local or federal rules, statutes or regulations) which have migrated or escaped from the Estate Parcel, but not as to such not so migrating or escaping from the Estate Parcel, as determined by the Kern County Environmental Health Department. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these presents, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Grossman's hereby consents to the entry upon the Owned Parcel by the Estate (through its duly authorized contractors, engineers and consultants, all of whom shall be of good reputation and experienced in the type of work to be performed) for the following purposes: a. For such access by vehicles and workers as may be necessary in connection with the site remediation work to be performed upon the Estate Parcel; and b. For the excavation upon, and removal from, the Owned Parcel of such soil and other materials as may be necessary or appropriate in connection with the removal from the Owned Parcel of all of the Estate's Contamination thereon (but not any other contamination); but c. Not for the transport on or to, or storage or treatment on the Owned Parcel of any hazardous materials or waste, or any soil or materials containing the same. 2 2. If and to the extent that any of the Estate's Contamination (but not any other contamination) is found upon the Leased Parcel, the Estate shall cause the same to be removed, consistent with the terms hereof, and the parties Shall promptly enter into a reasonably appropriate agreement by which the Estate shall have such access to the Leased Parcel as the Estate may reasonably require in connection with the performance of such work, such that the Estate shall not be required to unreasonably delay its remediation work. 3. All work performed hereunder by or for the Estate shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, in compliance with all laws and regulations and under the supervision of a.reputable, experienced engineering or environmental consulting firm. Grossman's shall have the right to have its representatives observe all tests and work performed by or for the Estate, and Grossman's shall promptly be given copies of all reports, test results and the like obtained by the Estate or its engineers or contractors relating to the Estate Parcel or the Owned Parcel or the Leased Parcel. All test and work performed by or for the Estate shall be performed so as to cause the minimum interference with the use of the Owned Parcel and the Leased Parcel. 4. The Estate shall give written notice in the manner provided below to Grossman's at least three (3) days in advance of commencement of any tests or work upon or entry upon the Owned Parcel, and all work upon or related to the Owned Parcel shall be diligently prosecuted to completion by the Estate after the first entry or performance of tests or work upon the Owned Parcel. In any event, such work shall commence no later than ,1993, and be completed no later than ,1993, subject to the provisions of paragraph 9 below. 5. During the performance of any tests or work upon the Owned Parcel, or any entry upon the Owned Parcel in connection with the work performed on the Estate Parcel, the Estate and its contractors shall maintain personal injury and public liability insurance (in addition to their workmen's compensation insurance) naming Grossman's as an additional insured, with policy limits of at least $300,000.00 for personal injury or death and $300,000.00 for property damage arising out of the performance of any such tests or work or an event occurring in connection with any such entry. 6. The site remediation work to be performed by the Estate relative to the Owned Parcel shall be performed by removal therefrom of all contaminated soil and materials due to the Estate's Contamination for remediation or disposition at another site, all in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Prompt!y after such removal of such soil and materials, the uncontaminated soil at the Owned Parcel shall be graded to a level surface as close as possible to its prior topography, and the Estate shall install such fences, retaining walls or the like as Grossman's may deem to be reasonably appropriate or necessary to prevent personal injury or property damage resulting from the altered condition of the Owned Parcel. Promptly after remediation of the soil and materials removed from the Owned Parcel (such that the same are free of contamination), but in any event by ,1993, subject to the provisions of paragraph 9 . below, the Estate shall cause the Owned Parcel to be restored to its prior condition, using such remediated soil and material and/or other appropriate fill, compacting the soil to at least its prior level of compaction, and bringing the Owned Parcel to its prior elevation and topography, with all landscaping being restored or replaced to substantially its prior condition. Before returning any remediated soil or material to the Owned Parcel, the Estate shall provide Grossman's with reasonably satisfactory evidence that the same is free of the Estate's Contamination (as evidenced by the report, release or other document of the Kern County Environmental Health Department). 7. The Estate shall indemnify and hold harmless Grossman's, its employees and representatives, and the owner of the Leased Parcel with respect to any claim, action, suit, liability, demand or obligation arising, or alleged to arise, in connection with (i) tests or (ii) site remediation work (of the Estate Parcel or Owned Parcel) performed by or for the Estate, or (iii) any contamination of the Owned Parcel or Leased Parcel arising out of the escape onto the Owned Parcel or Leased Parcel of the Estate's Contamination (directly or indirectly) from the Estate Parcel or released by reason of the Estate's site remediation work, or (iv) the Estate's entry upon the Owned Parcel, by itself or by its contractors or engineers. Such indemnification shall include, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees and expenges, the reasonable fees and expenses of engineers and consultants, and all reasonable costs and expenses arising out of litigation or administrative procedures. Without limiting the foregoing, the 'Estate shali indemnify and hold harmless Grossman's from and against all loss, cost, liability and expense (including reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses) incurred or arising out of the removal by the Estate, its agents and contractors, of any materials from the Owned Parcel or Leased Parcel and/or the treatment, transport, storage, use or disposition of the same, except for any such loss, cost, liability and expense arising from the negligence or reckless or wilful acts of Grossman's, its employees, agents and invitees (other than the Estate and its agents and contractors). 8. The Estate shall promptly provide Grossman's with copies of any' and all surveys, reports, studies or agreements of Which the Estate has actual knowledge relative to the contamination or risk of contamination of the Estate Parcel, .the Owned Parcel' or the Leased Parcel, whether now existing or hereafter obtained. 9. Rights of the Estate to enter upon the Owned Parcel pursuant to the terms hereof shall expire on ,1993, unless a written extension agreement is executed by the parties; provided, however, this agreement shall be automatically extended after said expiration date or any extension thereof (but not beyond the latest date for the performance of the Estate's work as set by law, regulation or order of a public body or officer) for as long as reasonably necessary to complete any remediation work the Estate is required to complete in order to comply with applicable laws in the event that the Estate's Contamination is more extensive than currently determined, or for as long as performance by the Estate shall be prevented by any act of God, act of a public enemy, by strike, war, insurrection,, labor disturbance, fire, flood, earthquake, dust storm, wash-out, explosion, shortage of labor or supplies, governmental action of any kind, any court order or decree, or by any other cause beyond the control of the Estate. 10. From time to time, at the request Grossman's, and in any event before the Estate or any contractor or engineer or consultant enters upon the Owned Parcel, the Estate shall provide Grossman's with copies of the insurance policies maintained by the 5 Estate and its contractors, consultants and engineers relative to the work described herein, and a list of names and addresses of the contractors, consultants and engineers employed in connection with such work. 11. Nothing in this agreement shall be deemed to limit or bar any other-rights or remedies which Grossman's may have, by law or contract, against the Estate or, others, with respect to any contamination of the Owned Parcel or Leased Parcel. 12. This agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, including Without limitation any successor owner or tenant of the Owned Parcel or Leased Parcel. 13. All notices given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when received by hand delivery or three (3) business days after sent by the mail if sent, postage paid, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the parties at the address designated by each party below or to such other address which either party shall have given to the other for such purpose by notice hereunder: If to Estate: . Leo Black Estate c/o Tom Gilbert P.O. Box 121 Wofford Heights, California 93285 With Copy to: Darling, Maclin & Thomson P.O. Box 2411 Bakersfield, California 93303 If to Grossman's: Grossman's, Inc. 200 Union Street Braintree, MA 02184 Attn: Real Estate Dept., E. xec. V.P. With Copy to: Postemak, Blankstein &Lund 100 Charles River Plaza Boston, MA 02114 Attn: Richard K. Blankstein, P.C. // // 6 14. This agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to such matter, and each party to this agreement acknowledges that no. representations, .inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this agreement shall be valid or binding. EXECUTED as an agreement as of the date first above written. GROSSMAN'S, INC. ESTATE OF LEO BLACK BY: BY: , President Donna Roberts, Co-Executor BY: . BY: , Secretary Tom Gilbert, Co-Executor REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL LEO BLACK ESTATE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA SOIL AERATION AND EXCAVATION BACKFILL 02060010.002 I. General Information A. Pro~ect Information The property is located at 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California, and is owned by the Leo Black Estate. The attorney representing Leo Black Estate is Mr. Curtis Darling, Esq. Exploratory trenching and excavation of hydrocarbon contaminated soil from an underground gasoline storage tank has resulted in a stockpile of gasoline contaminated soil that will require on-site aeration. A permit to aerate the soil has been obtained. The site is considered an OSHA prescribed Health and Safety Level D for purposes of personal protective equipment and clothing. B. Services Requested The services required for this project include: TASK 1: BACKFILL EXISTING HOLE Backfill the existing excavation as much as possible with existing clean soil available on- site. Compaction costs should include costs for either: (1) non-certified fill with approximately 90 % compaction or (2) certified fill with 95% field density compaction. Certified compaction efforts will be conducted under supervision of a State of California licensed Soils Engineer or Geotechnical Engineer. TASK 2: AERATION OF STOCKPILED GASOLINE CONTAMINATED SOIL Conduct the services as necessary to aerate on-site approximately 425 cubic yards of gasoline contaminated soil. Assume aeration will take 14 days at a rate of 30 cubic yards per day based on an estimated average concentration level of contamination (total volatile hydrocarbons) of 1000 parts per million. Confirmation soil sampling will be performed to determine areation completness. Aerated and compacted, Page I nonhazardous soil will be also bacldilled into remaining excavation. II. Proposal Information and Requirements A. General Instru .ctions The proposal shall be made in accordance with the following general instructions: 1. Only written proposals will be acceptable. No oral, telegraphic or telephonic proposals will be considered. 2. The consultant will be responsible to review the existing on-site conditions and anticipated conditions expected to be' encountered, character, quantity and scope of work to be performed, and the reporting and operation requirements of Mr. Darling. 3. Questions regarding this RFP should be directed to Susan Chandler Kiser, WZI Inc. (805)326-1112. B. Business Address Consultants shall furnish Mr. Darling with their business address. Communications directed either to the address so given or to the address listed on the proposal, and deposited in the U. S. Postal Service by Certified Mail shall constitute a legal service thereof upon the consultant. C. Proposal Format and Contents For ease in review and to facilitate evaluation, the proposals submitted for this project should be organized and presented in the order requested as follows: Page 2 Cover Page: Indicate the name of firm and project title. Section I - Or,qanizational Information: Provide specific information concerning your firm in this section. If two or more firms are involved in a joint venture for this project, information concerning the working relationship between the firms, i.e., prime contractor/subcontractor, must be provided. Section II - Qualifications and Experience: Provide specific information in this section concerning your firm's capabilities and experience as it relates to this project. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of client references for whom you have performed related work should be provided. Contractors must provide documentation of current California General Engineering Class A Contractors license with the HAZMAT certification. Copies of O.S.H.A. 40 Hour Health and Safety Traning for Hazardous Waste Workers as prescribed in CFR 1920.130. Certificates showing completion of training for personnel to be involved with the project and a copy of your company's health and safety program must also be provided. Section III - Professional Team: Identify key professionals to be assigned to this project. Include their resumes and qualifications. Those individuals identified are required to be assigned to the project in the capacity shown. Page 3 Section IV - Project Approach and Work Schedule: The proposal shall include a description of the methodology developed to perform all required services. A schedule containing specific milestones and dates of completion shall be included. Section V - Cost of Services: The proposal shall include an estimate of personnel time and total cost for each identified task or activity in the project approach. The billing rates for all personnel anticipated to be involved in the project and any and all other direct costs (outside services) shall be included. Section VI - Insurance: Proposal shall reflect insurance for (1) $1,000,000 for a Combined Single Umits Comprehensive General Uability policy covering Personal Injury Uability, Property Damage Liability and Contractual Uability; (2) Workers' Compensation Insurance, and (3) Automobile Uability in the combined amount of $500,000. Leo Black Estate and Mr. Darling shall be named as additional insureds. D. Selection Process 1. All proposals received by the specified deadline will be reviewed by Curtis Darling for content, related experience and professional qualifications. If it is deemed necessary, Mr. Darling will conduct interviews as part of the final selection process. Page 4 2. Mr. Darling' reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive informalities and minor irregularities in any proposal received. 3. Mr. Darling reserves the right to select the proposal which in his best judgement best meets the needs of the site, E. Proposal Submlssion Submit two copies of your proposal to · Mr. Curtis Darling, Esq. Darling, Maclin and Thompson, Attorneys at Law 1430 Truxtun'Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 ALL PROPOSALS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 4:00 P.M. ON JANUARY 11, 1993 AT THE ABOVE OFFICE AND ADDRESS. PROPOSALS SUBMITTED AFTER THE ABOVE DEADLINE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Paqe 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe I. General Information A. Project Information B. Services Requested II. Proposal Information and Requirements A. General Instructions B. Business Address C. Proposal Format and Contents D. Selection Process E. Proposal Submission EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Location Map Exhibit 2 Required Analytical Methods TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa~e I. General Information A. Project Information B. Services Requested II. Proposal Information and Requirements A. General Instructions B. Business Address C. Proposal Format and Contents D. Selection Process E. Proposal Submission EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Location Map Exhibit 2 Required Analytical Methods .- Primary Sch '' ~ .... "" ''~ 1' BM . -" :"~ .. oR~v~ .... ;~ ..: · , .' · ,~ .' , .,/-- - //, ~ / ..... 1'". I' o ~. I ~"~--~ .,. ·., ': Ill ~~ ,.~ · .... I ~ank~ ~ :. ' ' .......... · .~ ........ ~ITE LOCATION '., ~ ~ .,~' '" '~ · ~ Jill o I~}' ~' " ',.,, t ..... . -'." ,~,~ ~ · i I 22 : ' o I o;o~ / 0~ SumO°, L-' '.-~'1' .: 0o F'J '-.. ',~ 1: '~ ~ .. ,f~? ~' "26 , ~7 Mde 21 X · IIII LEO BLACK ELECTRIC HYDROGEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 3~0 PIERCE ~AD B~ERSFIELD, CALIF~N~ L~A~M ~P 0 2000' , - ~ INC ~RSFE~. CA EXHIBIT 2 REQUIRED ANALYTICAL METHODS Parameter EPA Method No. BTEX 8020 TPH-G 8015 modified 02060010.002 STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ,/~'~~~/ 2700 'M" Street. Suite 300 DIRECTOR ~'~i~/1~'~1~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 861-3636 -- (805) 861-3429 FAX November 19, 1992 Mr. Tom Gilbert 2000 Julian Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93304 Ms. Donna Roberts 1004 Lorene Street Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Underground Tank Site Investigation, Leo Black Electric, Bakersfield, CA Dear Ms. Roberts and Mr. Gilbert: On November 5, 1992, your file was reviewed by State Water Resources Control Board staff with the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Program (Cleanup Fund). The purpose of their review was to determine if you are in compliance with corrective action orders and directives. Compliance with corrective action orders and' directives is a requirement for reimbursement of cleanup costs from the Cleanup Fund. As a result of their review, it has been determined that you are currently not in compliance because implementation of the approved remedial action plan was not completed. For cases such as yours, the Cleanup Fund is providing responsible parties with an opportunity to come into compliance, provided the regulatory agency will issue a revised corrective action directive. You must take positive concrete steps to come into compliance. Please-refer to the attached memorandum from the Cleanup Fund regarding their requirements before a Letter of Commitment can be issued obligating funds to assist you with the cleanup of your site. Accordingly, you are hereby directed to begin the necessary work at your site within sixty (60) calendar days from the date of this letter. The required work shall include: 1. Implementation of the July 1990 remediation workplan, including revisions. 2. Submittal of report of field activities and results within 60 days from the date of groundwater sampling. [( ',~! ~ ~-., ,. Mr. Tom Gilbert Ms. Donna Roberts November 19, 1992 Page 2 Please notify this office on any pro. posed changes in this investigation, such as revision of specific task, change of contractor, etc. If you have any questions regarding the provisions of this letter and/or the necessary work at the site, I can be reached at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist II Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:ch cc: UST Cleanup Fund gough~gilbert.let STATE OF CAUFORNt& - C,M.~FORNU~, F' ~ PROTECTION AGENCY STATE'WATER RESOURCI=~= CONTROL BOARD ~ DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAMS ~ , 2014 T STREET, SUITE 130 i P.O. BOX g44212 SACRAMENTO, CA g4244-2120 (916) 7'39-4106 i (916) 739-2300 FAX TO: CLAIMANTS TO THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND SUBJECT: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND PROGRAM, COMPLIANCE WITH COP~ECTIVE ACTION ORDERS AND DIRECTIVES My staff recently reviewed the regulatory agency's records for the purpose of verifying the eligibility of your* claim-~pplication currentl~ on the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Priority List. In order to be eligible for reimburs~nt from the Cleanup Fund the claimant must be in compliance with (1) provisions of Chapter 6.7 of the California Health and Safety Code; (2) correc~ive action orders and directives; and theCorrective Action Regulations (Article 11, Chapter 16, Division 3, Title 23, California Code of Regulations. Our review of the regulatory agency records determined that you are currently not in compliance with corrective action directives and therefore are not eligible. Under circumstances such as yours the regulatory agency believes that there is justification to provide you with an opportunity to come into compliance and may be issuing a revised directive and schedule. Compliance with this directive and schedule may allow the Cleanup'Fund to find you in compliance with corrective action directions and therefore eligible for reimbursement from the Cleanup Fund. You must take positive, concrete steps to come into compliance. Upon submittal of documentation of compliance with the revised directive and schedule, and the~resolution on any other eligibility or priority issues, the Cleanup Fund will review your claim and determine whether a Letter of Commitment can be issued to you. Documentation must consist of (1) a copy of the regulatory agency's revised directive; a copy of the Invitation for Bid and responses .(if appropriate); (3) a copy of the contract with the consultant chosen; and (4) copies of invoices, etc. showing that work is underway and that costs are being incurred. If such work is not bid, contracted for, and initiated within the 90 day calendar period, the Cleanup Fund will take steps to remove your claim from the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Priority List. You are reminded that the Cleanup Fund requires three bids (estimates) from qualified firms for corrective action comts to be eligible. The firs= $10,000 of eligible costs is exempt from the three bid requirement. I suggest that you review our "Cleanup Fund Corrective Action Guide" for help with selecting consultants and contractors. Please contact the Cleanup Fund at (916) 739-4106 if you have questions regarding this notice. Sincerely, Deaner, Manager UST Cleanup Fund STATE OF CALIFORNIA ·. bop ' ' ' ' - PETE WILSON, Governor STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROLBOARD'~' DIVISION OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAMS SACRAMENTO, CA94244-2120 (916) 739-4345 (916) 739-2300 FAX ' ..~' Ms. Winifred Tho~st~ Darling, Maclin and Thomson P. O. Box 2411 Bakersfield, CA 93303 Dear Ms. Thomson: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK (UST) COST RECOVERY, KERN COUNTY, SITE NO.~50119 We have received your letters dated November 20, 1990 and January 14, 1991 concerning our UST Cleanup Site Invoices dated December 18, 1989, and August 15, 1990. We apologize for the delay in responding to your letters. When Kern County Hazardous Materials Section (County) identified contamination at the above site, they placed the site into the Local Oversight Program for further investigation and/or remediation. They notified your client of this fact by letter on April 15, 1989 (copy enclosed). The April 15, 1989 letter gave an explanation of the County's role in this program and also your client's responsibilities. All costs included in the subject invoice were costs incurred by the County and the Regional Water Quality Control Board in performing oversight services during remediation at your client's site. The following discussion is offered to further clarify the costs contained in our invoices. The invoice contains several categories of costs. Site specific charges represent those charges for work done that is directly related to your client's site. Examples of such activities include: sampling for soil or groundwater contamination, conducting site inspections, reviewing reports and workplans,-or preparing correspondence. Activities performed for your client's site are itemized on the bill. A description of activity codes is enclosed for your reference. Program management charges include all other County costs associated with initiating and maintaining program operations which are charged as direct charges to the Local Oversight Program. The County's program management charges include salaries and benefits for technical staff, one account clerk and one contact manager. The hours and tasks charged to program management benefit all the sites in the program but are not. related to only one specific site as the site-specific charges discussed above are. Program management charges also include Regional Water Quality Control Board work related to Local Oversight Program sites. Ms. Winifred Thomson -2- The program management charges may include the work coded with a first digit of "7" or "4" on the enclosed invoice activity code sheet. As stated in our letter', there are local and state program management charges. Local agency program management includes both start-up (program development) and ongoing activities (program implementation). State program management includes both the State Board and Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) work. The bill includes Regional Board program management charges, but not State Board program management. Your client will be billed in the near future for State Board program management. As stated in our invoice cover letters, your client's share of program management charges depend on how much site-specific time was charged to the site, compared with all site specific time charged by the local agency. For example, if 10 hours were charged to your client's site, and 1,000 hours were charged to all sites, then your client's share of program management costs would be 10 divided by 1,000 or one percent. The following is a breakdown of program management charges billed to your client's site on December 18, 1989 and August 15, 1990, respectively. SITE PROGRAM PROGRAM REGIONAL SITE HOURS DEV. IMPLE. BOARD SPEC. TOTAL 4.0 $ 85.26 $607.67 $256.10 $119.06 $1,068.09 9.0 $191.84 $833.45 $199.17 $278.81 $1,503.27 Program development, program implementation, and Regional Board (Program Management) costs are allocated to each site by mathematical calculations. You may use the enclosed Program Management Worksheets to calculate your portion of the program management costs. As we previously mentioned, your client will be receiving in the near future an invoice which covers our State Board program management time. State Board program management charges cover all activities by State Board staff which benefit the overall Local Oversight Program management. Examples of such activities include: general management and administrative support, accounting, program guidance and implementation, ~aj~ general community relations support, report and proposal writing, contingency planning and contractor support. State Board~program management also covers all activities by State Board staff related to the enforcement and cost recovery aspects of the Local Oversight Program. Examples include receiving and processing invoices and enforcement documents, preparation and processing of responsible party bills and Ms. Winifred Thomson -3- payments, and any extended cost recovery actions. Your letter requested a breakdown of the indirect costs also. The indirect cost rate ("IND# column on Itemized New Charges page of invoices) covers any costs incurred by the County in administering the program which are not charged directly (hour- by-hour) to the program. The nature of these services are that they benefit more then one County program. The County includes the following items in their indirect cost rate: data processing, Director's salary, building costs, telephone costs, insurance, transportation and travel costs, training and contract services. These costs are placed in a cost allocation plan and charged back to each County program as a percentage of salaries and benefits. The County's indirect cost rate for the Local Oversight Program is 51 percent. If you have any questions please telephone Donna Schimeck at (916) 739-2464 or Lori Casias at (916) 739-4344. Sincerely, Enclosures / cc: /Ms. Susan Gonzales Kern County Hazardous Material Section 2700 M Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY Environmental Health Services Department RANDALL L. ABBOTT STEVE McCA! ! Fy, REHS, DIRECTOR DIRECTOR Air Pollution Control District DAVID PRICE Iii ' WILLIAM J. RODDY. APCO ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Planning & Devel6pment SenAces Department TED JAMES, AICP, DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT October 24, 1990 Thomas Gilbert 2000 Julian Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93304 Subject: Location: 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Known As: Leo Black Electric Permit #: 050119 Dear Mr. Gilbert: This letter is to confirm our October 11, 1990, telephone conversation regarding the delay in the implementation of the remediation workplan at the subject site. Until such time as this project is initiated, please inform us on the status on a bi-weekly basis. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (805) 861- 3636 extension 545. Sincerely, Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:cas \050119.1tr 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861-3636 2700 M STREET r~ERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMI=NT .EAL~. OFF,CE. MAIUNG ADDRESS Leon M Hebertson, M.D. 1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH (805) 861-3636 Vernon S. Reichard June 27, 1988 Tom Gilbert 2000 Julian Avenue Bakersfield, Ca.lifornla 93304 " Re: Soil and Groundwater Contamination Detected Beneath the 500 Oallon Gasoline Tank at Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Road, in Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. Gilbert: The site characterization report prepared for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Road, in Bakersfield, California was received and reviewed by a representative of this department. The following information was provided in that report: j 1. Four soil borings were drilled and sampled to assess the soil around the old tank site. One boring (LB2) was drilled east, two borings (LB6 and LB3) were drilled west, and one boring (LB1) was drilled south of the old tank site. Significant levels of volatile hydrocarbons were detected in two soil borings (LB1 and LB3) which extended down to the water table. There were no groundwater monitoring wells installed at the site. 2. The soil samples showing the highest levels of volatile hydrocarbons were retrieved beneath the tank excavation during tank removal. 3. The boring labeled LB2 had elevated oil and grease levels at 5 and 10 feet below grade. The levels of oil and grease present in samples retrieved from LB2 were significantly higher than the levels beneath the tank and in other borings assessed. Tom Gilbert June 27, 1988 Page 2 The following information must still be obtained regarding the contamination plume. 1. Information must be provided on contamination present in the soil on the north side of the old tank site. 2. Oroundwater samples must be retrieved to assess the extent of contamination in groundwater supplies affected by this site. 3. A description of the vertical and lateral boundaries of the contamination plume in groundwater must be provided. 4. Information on the source of heavy hydrocarbon contamination must be provided. It will therefore be necessary for you to provide this department with a hydrogeological investigation workplan within 30 days. The workplan must be prepared under the direction of a California Registered engineer, engineering geologist, or geologist with at least 2 years experience doing hydrogeological investigations. A copy of the workplan and all other reports must also be sent to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. The workplan must be approved by this department before any assessment work ls performed. A copy of this department's outline is enclosed. It may be used as a guide for preparation of your report. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (805) 861-3636. S~cerely, ~-%-" Environmengal<~Healt~ Specialist Hazardous",~ater~-l-s/Management Program AEG/gb cc: Bill Baster, Regional Water Quality Control Board Susan Kiser, Wilson Zublin Inc. A6RICUZ lVllE LABORATORIES J. J. EGLIN, III:G. CHEM. ENGII. PETROLEUM MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD~*CA. 93308 PHONE 327-491 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) MC NABB CONST. ATTN: BRIAN MC NABB Date of 2616 STARK STREET REPORT:2-19-8? BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93305 LAB No.:2A37 Sample Description: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 5' UNDER TANK DATE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 2-10-87 2-11-87 2-17-87 Minimum Reporting Analyses Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene Hg/g 31.55 0.10 Toluene Wg/g 909.30 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ~g/g 323.59 0.10 p-Xylene .. ~g/g 1983.~6 0.10 m-Xylene ~g/g 1983.96 0.10 o-Xylene ~g/g 200~.81 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene Hg/g 29.?3 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons Hg/g 280?.5? 0.50 Total Volatile Hydrocarbons ~g/g 1007~.~? 0.10 EPA 5020/8020: DRY MATTER BASIS COMMENTS: Oil ~ Grease: 133 mg/kg VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a Benzene Factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. Total volatile hydrocarbon values may be less than, equal to, or greater than any other constituent, or the combined total. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all non-chlorinated constituents on this report. Analyst A6111CUZ TUIE J. J. EGLIN, IIEG. CHEM. ENGII. PET~IOLEUAI MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) MC NABB CONST. ATTN: BRIAN MC NABB Date of 8616 STARK STREET REPORT:8-19-8? BAKERSFIELD, CA 93305 - · LAB No :8436 Sample Descrip on: LEO BLACK ELECTRI~ 8' UNDER TANK ~ .... ]ECTR DATE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS SAMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 2-10-87 2-11-87 2-17-87 Minimum Reporting Analyses Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene Hg/g 5.24 0.10 Toluene Hg/g 50.36 0.10 Ethyl Benzene Hg/g 83.94 0.10 p-Xylene Hg/g 148.28 0.10 m-Xylene Hg/g 148.28 0.10 o-Xylene Hg/g 188.39 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene Hg/g 10.91 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons Hg/g 1459.39 0.50 Total Volatile Hydrocarbons Hg/g 2034.79 0.10 EPA 5020/8080: DRY MATTER BASIS COMMENTS: Oil ~ Grease: 130 mB/kg VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C80) utilizing a Benzene Factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. Total volatile hydrocarbon values may be less than, equal to, or greater than any other constituent, or the combined total. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all non-chlorinated constituents on this report. Analyst DARLING, MACLIN & THOMSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW CURTIS DARLING TELEPHONE BRUCE MACLIN SUITE 8SO BANK Of AMEI~ICA BUILDING (8OB) 325-5075 WINIFRED tHOMSON 1430 TI~UXTUN AVENUE ._ TELECOI~I E F~ POST OFFICE BOX 2411 OF COUNSEL ~AVID ~. DAY BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93303 ..~' ,,,'~? i'~ .'. / :;...? ,'/,, Mr. Steve McCalley "~./'.?'.7 .... Kern County Environmental Services '-.-..,~ ..... 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Road Bakersfield, CA 93309 Dear Mr. McCalley: Leo Black Electric Estate, hereinafter called "the Estate", has been diligently cooperating with the Kern County Health Department since early in 1987 in the resolution of the contamination which was discovered at 3909 Pierce Road. A recent court judgement in Kern County (California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region vs. Sabre Refining, Inc.) has direct bearing on the additional studies being 'required by the Kern County Health Department at Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Road. A copy of that Judgement is attachted. Inasmuch as the Estate is analogous to Sabre's situation in many ways and is located within the same "historical contamination of a larger 25 square mile area of groundwater by numerous persons other than defendants" (p. 3, lines 7-9), the estate should not be required to perform any further soil or water studies. As a resolution of their situation, the Estate proposes to excavate the contaminated soil and replace it with clean soil. The contaminated soil will be disposed of properly. With that action, hazards to surface use will have been removed and any incremental groundwater contamination which may have been possible due to overlying soil contamination will also have' been removed. Mr. Steve McCalley January 10, 1990 Page Two My client wishes to bring this compliance matter to resolution as soon as possible. Therefore, I will call in a Few days to arrange an appointment to discuss this matter with you. Very truly yours, DARLING, MACLIN & THOMSON CD:~i STATE OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD PAUL R. BONOERSON BUILDING 901 P STREET P.O, BOX 100 SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95801 (916) 324-6509 May 9, 1990 Mr. Curtis Darling Darling, Maclin & Thomson Attorneys at Law Bank of America Building 1430 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 850 Bakersfield, CA 93303 Dear Mr. Darling: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC, 3909 PIERCE ROAD, BAKERSFIELD Mr. Steve McCalley of Kern County Environmental Services forwarded a copy of your letter of January 10, 1990 to the Fresno office of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board,' Central Valley Region (Regional Board), and requested that the Regional Board respond to the letter. Your letter concerns' the remedial action at the Leo Black Electric facility in Bakersfield. Both the Regional Board and Kern County disagree with your conclusions and proposals in that letter. You have stated that Leo Black Electric Estate is in a position analogous to the situation involving Sabre Refining, Inc. as determined in the recent court decision in Kern County, People el tel California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region v. Sabre Refininq, Inc., Case No. 183100 (Cal. Superior Ct. Sept. 27, 1989). That case has no bearing on Leo Black Electric. The Sabre Refining case would have a bearing on Leo Black Electric only if the issues decided by the court were identical to issues involved in the Leo Black Electric facility. That is not the case. The Sabre Refining case involved different parties, a different location, and different factual and technical issues than are involved at the Leo Black Electric site. The court in the Sabre Refining case made no decisions concerning the type of contamination, the nature of the soil, or the location or flow of ground water at the Leo Black Electric site. Investigations concerning soil and ground water contamination are often difficult and technically complicated. Contamination caused by one facility in one location may have no bearing or connection to contamination by another facility. Mr. Curtis Darling -2- May 9, 1990 Without an investigation to determine location and flow of ground water and the extent and type of contamination any comparisons between facilities is not possible. Further, the court in the Sabre Refining case stated that the contamination in the area was caused by "numerous persons other than defendants." Leo. Black Electric may be "other persons" that have-caused contamination in the area since it has caused contamination at its facility. The Estate's proposal to excavate the contaminated soil and replace it with clean soil but not perform any further soil or water studies, is not acceptable to either Kern County or the Regional Board. Leo Black Electric is obligated to perform necessary investigations of soil and ground water contamination and to remediate contamination caused by the company. Litigation concerning another discharger i~ anether location is no excuse for failure to comply with state law. If Leo Black Electric fails to perform the necessary actions required by Kern County, the County is likely to refer the case to the Regional Board for enforcement action. Si~ncerely, , /~/~' .. Principal Engineer Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region 3614 East Ashland Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 Mr. Steve McCalley ~/ Kern County Environmental Services 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Ms. Sylvia Cano Hale Deputy Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 3580 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90010 RANDALL L. ABBOtt 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Agency Director Bakersfield. CA 93301 (805) 861-3502 Telephone (805) 861-3636 Telecopier (805) 861-3429 STEVE Mc CALLEY Director RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES August 14, lggo Curtis Darling Darling, Maclin & Thomson Attorneys at Law Bank of America Building 1430 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 850 Bakersfield, CA 93303 SUBJECT: Location: 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Known As: Leo Black Electric Permit #: 050119 Dear Mr. Darling: We have reviewed WZI's response to our comments on the July, 1990, Site Remediation Workplan for the subject site. The revised workplan is acceptable to this Department and must be implemented by September 17, [990. Please notify this Department at least 48 hours prior to starting work. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (BO5) B~1-3636, ext'. 545. Sincerely, Dolores GougM Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:jg cc: Susan Klzer, WZI Inc. -~800 Easton Drive, '..-utte 114 Bakersfield, California 93309 Post Office Box 9217 Bakersfield, California 93389 805/326-1112 805/326-0191 FAX August 10, 1990 Ms. Delores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield Permit #050119 By request of Curtis Darling, Attorney for Leo Black Estate, WZI is herein responding to your letter of July 30, 1990. The work plan will be revised to include the following: 1) Background Organic Vapor Meter levele will be established at an area outside the known area of contamination, 2) At least four (4) sidewall samples from each sidewall (total of four) will be collected, 3) The same numbering verification samples upon completion of aeration as was collected prior to aeration will be collected. 4) The soil will be aerated to non-detect levels or disposed of at an appropriate disposal facility. We appreciate your cooperation in handling this matter and look forward to prompt approval of the July 1990..Site Remediation Work Plan. Very truly yours, Susan Chandler Kiser, R.G., R.E.A. ~.'. Vice President, Project Development SCY,/ib .... 0206.0010A.010 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGLI~?CY Director ~ STEVE McCALLEY. REHS. DIRECTOR W~.~ J. RO~. A~'O T~ J~ES, AICP. DIRE('i'OR ENVIRONMF_NTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT July 30, 1990 Curtis Darling Darling,. Maclin & Thomson Attorney at Law Bank of America Building. 1430 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 850 Bakersfield, CA'93303 SUBJECT: Location: 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Known As: Leo Black Electric Permit #: 050119 Dea6 Mr. Darling: We have reviewed the July 1990, Site Remediation Workplan prepared by WZI Inc., .for the subject site. The following shall be resolved prior to granting approval of the workplan: 1. Contrary to your proposed procedure for establishing background OVM readings (page 1), such background levels shall be determined at an area outside the known area of contamination. 2. Regardless of whether the excavation is in contact with groundwater, samples shall be collected from each sidewall (for a total of at least 4 samples). It is recommended that you perform, at a minimum, the above number of sidewall samples. Should your office choose otherwise, an alternate sampling protocol consistent with SW-846 guidelines may be proposed. 3. Verification sampling conducted upon completion of aeration shall be performed in the same manner (i.e. number of composite samples) as that prior to aeration of the contaminated soil. 4. The workplan did not detail the clean-up levels of the sidewall samples and the verification samples after aeration. 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 861-3636 RECYCLED PAPER FAX: (805) 861'-3429 Curtis Darling July 30, 1990 Page 2 Please address the above items by August 10, 1990. If you ha~ any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (805) 861-3636, Ext. Sincerely, Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG: ch cc: Sue Kizer, WZI Inc. dolores\darling, let DARLING, MACLIN & THO,.~3N ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 850 BANK OF AMERICA BLDG. 1430 TRUXTUN AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 2411 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93303 July 13, 1990 Ms. Delores G°ugh Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: Leo Black Electric Case #: 050119 Dear Ms. Gough: Enclosed is a copy of the Site Remediation Workplan for the referenced project with revisions per your request during your meeting with WZI Inc. on June 5, 1990. The additions to the previously submitted workplan include the following: o Details of the soil sampling procedures o Aeration procedures as defined by Regulation 8, Rule 40 o Screening Health Risk Assessment for soil aeration o Map of proposed groundwater monitoring well locations If you have any questions regarding the workplan or require additional information, please contact Susan Kiser at WZI Inc. 805/326-1112. Sincerely, ~URTIS Curtis Darling REVISED TECHNICAL APPROACH LEO BLACK ESTATE After consideration of comments received from Kern County Health Department in a letter dated 2-6-90 and in a technical meeting on 1-31-90, it is proposed to deal with the contamination problem at Leo Black Estate in the following manner: Phase I Contaminated soil excavation/aeration per guidelines provided to WZI Inc. by the County (Exhibit 1). Phase II Determination of groundwater gradient from adjacent wells as identified in Exhibit 2 in accordance with County guidelines of one-half mile radius outlined in UT-50. Drill and install 2 groundwater monitoring wells (one up gradient and one down gradient) to characterize the current water quality beneath the property. The drilling, sampling, installation protocols as well as the Health and Safety Plan for this site were previously described in the workplan submitted to the County on 11-29-88, supplemented on 5-10- 89 and deemed acceptable on 2-6-90. Phase III Analysis of Water Samples. Upon receiving the Water analyses, all the available data will be integrated within one-half mile of the site, including those off-site wells used to establish the water gradient. A report will be prepared summarizing the field activities, the collection of data and analysis of any groundwater contamination found beneath the Leo Black Estate. REGULATION 8 ORGANIC COMPOUNDS RULE ~0 AERATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL AND REMOVAL OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (Adopted July 16, 1986) " 8-q0-100 GENERAL 8-~0-101 Descrlptlo~: The purpose of thls Rule is to limit the emission of organic compounds from soil that has been contaminated by organic chemical or petroleum chemic'al leaks or spills; to describe an acceptable soil .~eration procedure; and to describe an acceptable procedure for controlling emissions from underground storage tanks intended for removal. 8-~0-110 Exemption, Storage Plies: Calculations of aeration volume under Section 201~ shall not include storage piles that are covered per Section 8-~0-303; nor shall they include active storage piles. 8~0-111 Exemption, Excavated Hole: The exposed surface of 'an excavated holeshallnot be included in calculations of aerated volume under Section 8-~0-112 'Exemptlo~, .Sampllng: Contaminated soil exposed for the sole purpose of sampling shail not be considered to be aerated. Removal of soil for sampling shall not qualify a pile as "active." 8-1~0-113 Exemptlon, Non-volatile Hydrocarbons: The requirem.;ntsof this Rule shall not apply if the soil is contaminated by a known organic chemical or petroleum liquid, and that chemical or liquid has an initial boiling point of ]02°F or higher~ provided that the soil Is not heated. 8-~0-200 DEFINITIONS 8-~t0-201 ^ctlve Storage Pile: A pile of contaminated soil to which soil is currently being added or from which soil is currently being removed. Activity must have occurred or' be anticipated to occur within one hour to be current. 8-~0-202 Aeration: Exposure of excavated contaminated sol1 to the air. 8--/~0-203 Aeration Depth: The s'maller of the followlng: the actual average depth of contaminated soil;or 0.15 meters (0.5 feet) multiplled by the daily frequency with which soil Is turned. The exposed surface area lncludes the pile of excavated soii unless the pile is covered per Section 8-1t0-2011 Aeration Volume: The volume of soil being aerated shall be calculated as follows: the exposed surface area (in square feet or square meters) shall be multiplied by the aeration depth. 8-1t0-205 Contaminated $ol1: Soil which has an organic content, as measured using the procedure in Section 8-/~0'-602, exceeding 50 ppm(wt). 8-Jt0-206 Organic Coepound: Any compound of carbon, excluding methane, carbon- monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates and ammonium carbonate. 8-~0-~ -'JULY 16, 1D86 Exhibit: 1 8-~0-207 Organic Co~tent: The concentration of organic compounds measured in the composite sample collected and analyzed using the procedures in SectlonsS-q0- 601 and 8-40-602. 8-110-208 Vapor Free'- The process of purging gases from a tank using dry ice to replace organic vapors with an Inert atmosphere. 8.Ji0-209 Ventilation'- The 'process of purging gases from a tank by blowing or drawing another gas through the tank. 8-~0-300 STANOARDS 8~0-301 U nc on b-ol l ed Aeration: A person shall not aerate contaminated sol1 at a rate in excess of that ~pecified in Table 1 for the degree of organic content. The limltations in Table I apply to the entire facility, and Indicate the volume of contaminated soil that may be added~ on any one day~ to sol1 that is already aerating. Table I Allowable Rate of Uncontrolled Aeration ORGANIC CONTENT~' RATE OF UNCONTROLLED AERATION ppm (weight)~'/~i'~ Cubic meters/day Cubic yards/day <50 Exempt from this Rule. Subject to Rule 8-2. 50-100 ~59.0 600 100-500 91.8 120 500-1000 45.9 60 I000-2000 22.9 30 2000 -3000 11 .S 1S 3000-4000 7.6 10 4000-$000 5.7 8 )5000 0.08 0.1 8-~0-302 Controlled Aeratlom Soll may be aerated at rates exceeding the limitations of 8- 40-301 provided emissions of organic compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at least 90~ by weight. 8-~0-303 Storage Piles: Contaminated soil which is not being aerated shall be covered except when soil Is being added or removed. Any uncovered contaminated soil will be considered to be aerated. The soil may be covered with a layer of uncontaminated soil no less than six Inches deep; or it may be covered with a tarp or other coverlng~ provided no head space where vapors may accumulate is formed. 8-~0-310 Underground Storage Tanks-oOecommlssloning: Any person wishing to permanently decommission an underground storage tank which previously contained organic compounds shall follow the followlng procedure: 310.1 Allplping shallbe drained and Flushed ~nto the tank or other container. 310.2 AIl llclulds and sludges shall be removed, to the extent posslble~ from the tank.. It may be necessary to use a hand pump to remove the bottom few inches of product. 310.3 Vapors shall be removed from the tank using one of the followlng three 8-40-4 JULY 16, 1986 methods: 3.1 The tank .may be filled with water, displacing vapors and hydrocarbon Ilquids. Water used for this purpose must be collected and/or disposed of in a manner approved by .the APCO.- 3.2 Vapor freeing. 3.3 Ventilation. 8-~0-311 Vapor Freeing: No person shall vapor free a tank containing more than 0.001 gallonsof liquld organic compounds per gallon of tank capacity unless emlssions of organic compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at least ~0:~. 8-40-312 Ventilation: No person shall ventilate a tank containlng more than 0.001 gallons of liquid organic compounds per gallon of tank capacity unless emissions of organic compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at least 8o40.-~00 AOMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS 8-40-40! Excavation of Contaelnated SoU: The person resDonslble for aeration of any contaminated soil shall provide the Oistrict, by telephone, with the following information. Thisshail be provided no lessthan 2q hours prior to the spreading or heating of any Contaminated soil. TheOistrictshailbenotifled any of the parameters change. 401.1 Estimated total quantity of soil to be aerated. 401.2 Estimated quantity of soil to be aerated per day. q01.3 Estimated average degree of contamination, or totalorgan!c content of soil. 401.4 Chemlcal composition of contaminating organic compounds (I.e., gasoline, methylene chloride, etc.). 401.$ A description of the basis from which these estimates were derived (soil analysis test reports, etc.). 8-40-600 MANUAL OF PROCEOURES 8-40-~01 Soil Sampllng: One composite sample shall bec011ected and analyzed for every 50 cubic yards of excavated contaminated sou to be aerated. At least one composite sample shall be collected from each inactive, uncovered storage pile within 24 hours of excavation. Samples are not required if the soil is uncontaminated. 601.1 Each composite sample shall consist of four separate soil samples taken using the procedures described below. The soil samples shall remain separate until they are combined in the laboratory just prior to analysis. 601.2 Samples shall be taken from at least three inches below the surface of the pile. Samples shall be taken using one of the following two methods: 1.1 Samples shall be taken using a driven-tube type sampler, capped and sealed with inert materials, and extruded in the lab in order toreduce the loss of volatile materials; or 1.2 Samples shall be taken using a clean brass tube (at least three inches long) driven into the soil with a suitable instrument. The ends of the brass tube shall then be covered with aluminum foil, then plastic end caps, and finally wrapped with a suitable tape. The samples shall then be immediately placed on ice, or dry ice, for transport to a laboratory. 8-40-5 JULY 16, 1986 Hea~rementof Organic Contentz Organic content of soil shall be determined by the Regional Idater Quality Control Board's Revised Analytical Iqethodst Attachment 2~ 11/8/8~, or any other method approved by the 'APCO. Determination of Emissions: E~misslons of organic compounds as specified in Section 8-40-)02 shall be measured as prescribed in the Hanual of Procedures, Volume IV~ $T-7. 8-1+0-6 JULY 16, 1986 ~o ,~. ......... 0 " . ",'.',T E X A REFINE Sum /I ,I ! .~l t _.. o MILE Oo ' RADIUS · · · EFINI °° LE~EN~ ., P.M. POWER MACHINERY. ~18 PIERCE ROAD: CONTAMINATED SOIL D.O. DAVIES OIL CO., 350~ 1~2 GULF STREET: I:lEr~: WATER ELEVA'TI(3N, FREE PROOUCT PLUME S~g:q'. U.C. UNION CARBIDE. 3505 PIERCE ROAD: (I~WA-I.DJkl~ GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATED WZl INC. CUROL/NDWA/ERC,,ONTAMINATED LEO BLACK ESTATE V.P. VA! 1 t=y PERFORATING LOCATION MAP & NEAR BY CONTAMINATION SITES 0 1000' 2000' . I UZI linC. UORD PROCESSING JOB TICKET PROJECT DESCRIPTION: '~-/~/ '~. ~? / ' f:" JOB DUE DATE: ORDERED BY: '~"~"'~---.~ STORED AS: TIHE DATE & TIHE STAT. FoRM 1YPED PROOFED DATE IN TIHE REO OUT CC)DEe CODE* DESCRIPTIONS & INSTRUCTIONS BY BY 'q-~ l~-~..~ ~. t-:' *STATIONERY CODES *FORM CODES B=BOND D=DRAFT LeLETTERHEAD F=FINAL E=ENVELOPE 1 DARLING, MACLIN & THOMSON Attorneys at Law 2 1430 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 850 :~'- Bakersfield, CA 93301 3 (805) 325-5075 4 Attorneys for Petitioner, '5 6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 8 In the Matter of the Estate of'~ ) Case No. 33764 ) 9 LEO BLACK, ) PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL ) 10 Deceased. ) ) 11 · PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL (1013a, 2015.5 C. C. P.) '13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF KERN I am a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within entitled '] 4 action:, my business address is: 15 1430 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 850. Bak~_rsfi~_ld. Californ~ 16 On June 27, . 19 90 . I served the within EX PARTE ORDER INSTRUCTING 17 EXECUTORS :].8 on the interested parties in said action, by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon full.v prepaid, in the ].9 United States mail at Bakers field, California addressed as follows: 20 2]. ** SEE ATTACHMENT ** 27 I declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. June 27, 1990 Bakersfield, California 2 8 Executed on at (datet ~' '"--'") ///// (placec~!~5 BUIkDING STUAF~TS TRINITY TIMESAVER JULIE/LYON ATTACHMENT "A" Delbert L. Black Donna Roberts 1626 Pine 1004 Lorene Avenue Oxnard, CA 93030 Oildale, CA 93308 Patricia Kollenborn Bonnie'Winders 6308 Patton Way 5811 Pryor Bakersfield, CA 93308 Bakersfield, CA 93308 Connie Gilbert Thomas O. Gilbert 2000 Julian 2000 Julian Bakersfield, CA 93304 Bakersfield,.~CA 93304 J. Richard Thomas, Esq. Stephen Eyherabide, Esq. 1601 "F" Street 1400 Chester Ave., Ste. N Bakersfield, CA 93304 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Barry Lo McCown, Esq. Peter Lewis, Esq. 5000 California Ave., Ste. 202 .P.O. Box 2438 Bakersfield, CA 93309 Bakersfield, CA 93303 Susan Chandler Kiser Daphne Washington WZI, Inc. Kern County Environmental Health Dept~ P. O. Box 9217 2700 "M" Street Bakersfield, CA 93389 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Chris Burger Steve Schuett Kern county Environmental Health Dept. County Counsel 2700 "M" Street 1415 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93301 (SPACE BELOW FOR Fvv-r~'G STAMP ONLY) I DARLING. MAC:LIN & THOMSON HAKERSFIE~, ~LIFORNIA 93303 (8o~) ~zs.soTs 6 ? 8 IN ~E sUpERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN ~ND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 10 !1 .In ~he Mat:er of ~he Estate of: ) Case No. ) 1~ LEO BLACK, ) EX PARTE ORDER ) INSTRUCTING EXECUTORS 13 Deceased.. ) ). The Ex Parte Petition For Order Instructing Executors 15 of DONNA ROBERTS and THOMAS O. GILBERT, as co-executors of the 16 Estate of LEO BLACK, deceased, having been filed with the court, 17 the court makes the following findings: 18 1. DONNA ROBERTS and THOMAS 0. GILBERT, are 19 Co-Executors of the estate of Leo Black, deceased. 20 2. The personal representatives believe that they 21 should have instructions of this court concerning the following 22 matters: 23 The personal representatives have been advised that a 2~ gasoline tank of approximately 500 gallon capacity is buried on ~eal property which is located at ~909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California. The personal representatives have had the property tested by WZI, Inc., an environmental consulting company, which company has advised the personal representatives that the gasoline tank has leaked and has apparently contaminated the property under and surrounding the tank. The Kern County 6 Environmental Health Service Department has ~issued a Corrective ? Action Order No. 90-010 to the Leo Black Estate, which reflects 8 the Directives required by the County. 9 The personal representatives are further informed that 10 the old office and old shop of decedent need to be destroyed to ermit a clean up. The building destruction will cost approxi- z o 12 " o ~ ~ ately $7,000; the clean up of the soil may be as much a~ ~ ~--~ 000; and the test wells would be from $7,000 to $11,000'. ~ ~ WZI has prepared and presented the personal o- . _ epresentatives with a proposal with regard to the proposed ~ ~ ~ 3. The personal representatives believe that it is in a · 18 best interests of the estate and the interested parties that 19 be instructed and directed to employ WZI, Inc., to take the 2O ~teps proposed to the personal representatives as outlined on 21 ~×hibit "B" to the Ex ?ar~e Petition For Order Instructing xecutors filed herein, to clean up the contaminated p.ope, ty, 2~ ncluding, but not limited to, destruction of the shop and £~ ,ffice of decedent. ~. There is no other statutory procedure tha~ covers his ma~ter. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that: 1. The personal representatives, DONNA ROBERTS and THOMAS O. GILBERT, are instructed to employ WZI, Inc., to take the steps outlined on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incor- 5 pora~ed herein by reference, to clean up the contaminated 6 property, including, but not· limited~ to, destruction of t~he shop ? and office of decedent. 8 DATED: June , 1990 9 10 ll 1£ JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT (Signature follows last attachment) 18 '19 ~0 ~5 ~6 ~8 · REVISED TECHNICAL APPROACH LEO BLACK ESTATE AAer consideration of comments received from Kern County Health Department in a le~er dated 2-8-90 and in a technical meeting on 1-31-90, it is proposed to deal with the contamination problem at Leo Black Estate in the following manner: Phase I Contaminated soil excavation/aeration per guidelines provided to WZI Inc. .by the County (Exhibit 1). Phase 11 Determination of groundwater gradient from adjacent wells as identified ~n Exhibit 2 in accordance with County guide!ines of one-half mite radius ' outlined in UT-50. Drill and install 2 groundwater monitoring wells (one up gradient and one down gradient) to characterize the current water quality beneath the property. The drilling, sampling, installation protocols as well as the Health and Safety Plan for this site were previously described in the workplan submitted to the County on 11-29-88, supplemented on 5-10- 89 and deemed acceptable on 2-6-90. Phase III Analysis of Water Samples. Upon receiving the water analyses, all the available data will be integrated within one-half mile of the site, including those off-site wells used to establish the water gradient. A report will be prepared summarizing the field activities, the collection of data and analysis of any groundwater contamination found beneath the Leo Black Estate. REGULATION 8 ORGANIC COMPOUNDS RULE ~,0 AERATION OF CONTAM'INATED SOIL AND REMOVAL OF' UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (Adopted July 16, 198~) 8-A0-100 8-~0-101 DcscrIptlo~: The puEpose of ~hls Aule is to limit the emission of organic compounds From ~il that has bc:n contaminated by organic chemical or petroleum chemic'al leaks or spills~ to describe an acc:ptable ~[l ~eratfon procedure~ and to describe an acceptable procedure for controlIMg emissions from underground storage tanks intended for removal. B-60-110 Ex~mpdon~ StoragePile~ Calculationsofaer~tionvolumeunderbectionB-~0- ~0q shall not ·include storage piles that ~re covered per Sectlon B-q0-]0]I nor ' sh~ll they include active storage pile~ 8~0-111 Ex~mptlon~ E~cavat~ Hole: The.:xposed surface oF an excavated hole shall not be included in calculations of aerated volume ~nder Section 8-q0-Z0q. 8~0-11~ Exemptl~, Sampling: Contaminated ~11 exposed For the ~le purpose sampling shall not be considered to be aerated. Removal of ~11 for sa mplin~ shall not qualif7 a pile ~s "active." 8-~0-I13 E~emptlon~ Non-volatile Hydr~a~on~ The requlrem.]nts o? this Rule shall not apply if the ~il is contaminated by a known organic chemical or petroleum liquid, and that chemical or liquid h~s an initial boiling point of ]02°F or higher, provided that the ~il Is not heated. ~-~0-~01 Actlv:bt~ag:Pllc: Apil~ofcontaminat:d~ilt~hich~iliscurrentIybelng added or From ~hlch ~[I is currently being removed. Activity must h~ve occurred or' be ~nticipated to occur ~ithln one hour to be curren~ 8-~0-20Z ~er]tl~: E~posure of excavated contaminated ~il to the air. 8~0-~03 ~ratlon Oep~: The smaller of the follo~lng: the actu~l average depth of contaminated ~1t~ or 0.15 meters (0.5 Feet) multiplled by the dell7 Frequency ~ith ~hich~lllsturned. The exposed surface area includes the pile of exc~vated uhless the pile is covered per Section B~0-206 Aerat[~ Valuta:: The volume of ~il being ~er~ted shall be calculated follo~s: the ~xposed surfac: area (In square feet o? square meters) shall be multiplied by the aeration depth. B-60-~05 Con~mlnat~ ~oi1: $oil ~hlch h~s ~n organic content, as measured using the procedure in Section 8-~0-G02~ exceeding 50 B-~0-~OG O.rg~nlc Co~p~nd: Any compound of carbon, excluding methane, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates and ammonium carbonate. 8-~0-3 -'JULY 16, 1~8G Ex.hibi= i 8--~0-~07 Orgsnlc Con,cat: The cancentratlon oF org~nlc compounds measured in the -' composite s~mpie collected ~nd analyzed u~ing ~hc procedures In Sections ~-~0-20~ Va~ Fr~: The process of purging gases From a ~ank using dry icc to replace organic vapors with an Inert atmosphere. 8~0-20~ Vcntllatlon: Thc process oF purging gases From a ~ank by blowing or drawing another gaa through thc tank. ~0-~00 ~TANOARDS ~xc~ss ~ that sp~cified in Tabl~ ~ ~ar th~ dcgrcc o~ organic can~n~ Th~ limitations in Tabl~ i apply to ~h~ ~nC[r~ ~aci]l~y, and Indicate th~ vo]um~ contamlna~cd ~i] ~hat may b~ add~, on nny erie day, to ~] that is already aerating. Tabl~ ~ AHo~able RaCe ~ 'Uncan~ral]~d ORGANIC CONTENT~ RAT~ OF UNCONTROLLED AERATION ]000-~000 7.~ ~000-~000 ~.7 )~000 0.0~ 0.] ~0-~01 provided Cm~ssians af organic compounds to th~ a~masph~rc arc r~duccd by ~0-~0~ S~ngc PI]~ Can:nmlnat~d ~il ~hlch Is no~ being a~ratcd shall b~ covered ~xcept~hen~i] ~sb~ing added or r~mov~d. Any uncovered contaminated ~] ~i]] bc cons[dCr~d ~o b~ acrn~d. Th~ ~i] ma~ b~ covered ~th a l~y~r uncontaminated ~il na le~s ~han s~x Inches d~p; or i~ may b~ covered ~i:h ~ or other covering, provided no head space ~hcr~ vapors may' accumulate ~0-~]0 Undcrg~nd S~age Tanks--D~omml~i~ng: Any person ~lshing permanently decommission an und¢rground storag~ tank ~hich previously con~incd organic compounds shah follo~ ~h~ falio~lng procedure: Ali plp~n~ shah b~ draln~d and flushed in:o. th~ tank or other contalncr. All liquids and sludges shall b~ r~mov~d, to thc extent posslblc, ~rom the ~ank. [t may bc n~c~ssary ~a usC a hand pump to remav¢ ~hCbottom inch~s of product. ]10.~ Vapors shall b~ r~mav~d ~rom ~h~ tank using one o~ th~ follo~ng thr~e 8-40-~ JULY methods: 3.1 The I:ank may be filled wlth water, displacing vapors and hydrocarbon Ilquid~. Water used for this purpose must be collected and/or disposed of In a manner approved by, the APCO. 3.2 Vapor fre-,ing. 3.3 Ventilation. 8-~0-31t Vapt~' Freeing: ~o per,on ~hall vapor free a tank containing ~ore than 0.001 ~allon~ of liquid organic compound~ per 9allon o~ tank capacity unle~ emission~ or~anlc compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at lea~ ~0~. 8-~0-312 Vcnt~la~lon: ~oper~on~hallventilatea tank containing more than 0.001 9allons o~ liquid organic compounds per ~allon of t~nk capacity unle~ ~mi~ions organic compounds ~o ~he atmosphere are reduced bV at least ~0~. 8-~0-~OO AD ~INISTRATIVE REqUIREmEnT5 8-~O-~O] Excavation 0f Contaminated Sail: The per~n resoons[ble ~or ~eratian oE any contaminated soll sha'll provide ~h~ 01strict, by telephon~, ~ith th~ follo~ing in~orm~t[an.' Th[ssh~llb~prov[dednale~s~han~hourspriortothespreadingor heatlngo~anycan~am~n~t~dsoil. The0istHctshallbenodficd~i~h~n2~hours.if any of the parameters change. ~01.1 Estimated to~al quantity o~ sail to be ~01.2 Estimated quanc[~y o~ sail to b~ ~era~ed per d~y. ~Ol.] Es~lmated average degree of can~am~natian~ or to~nl organic · ~0i.4 Chemical composition o~ contaminating organic compounds (I.~, gasoline~ methylene chlor[de~ ~01.5 A description o~ the basis from ~hlch thes~ estimates ~re d~rived(soll ~n~lys[s ~est reparts~ 8-~0-600 ~A~IJAL 0F PROCEDURES 8-~04ag Soil S~mpll~: 0n~ composite s~mple shall be'collec~ed ~nd analyzed for ~v~ry 50 cubic yards o~ excavated contaminated soil to b~ aerated. At least one compas~e sampl~ shall be collected from each JnactJvc~ uncovered s~or~ge pile ~i~hin 2~ hours o~ excavation. Samples ~r~ no~ requlrcd I~ the soil uncontaminated. ~01.1 Each composJ~ s~mpl~ shall consist o~ four separate soil samples ~aken using th~ procedures described b¢la~. Thc ~il samples shall remain s~par~ until ~hey ~rc combined in th~ l~bar~tary just prior to analys[~ · ' 60~.2 Sampl~s shall be taken from a~lcast thrc¢inchesbelo~ thcsurf~ce pil~. S~mpl~s shall be t~ken using on~ oF th~ follo~ing t~o methods: 1.1 Samples sh~ll be taken using n driven-tube type sampl~G capped and scaled ~i~h inert matcrJals~ and extruded in ~he lab in order to reduce the lass of volatJl~ m8~erfals; or 1.2 Samples sh~ll be taken using n clenn b~ss tube (at le~s~ three inches long} driven in~o th~ ~Jl ~J~h a sultnbl~ instrument. The ends o~ ~he brass tube shall then be covered wJ~h ~luminum foil~ then pl~s~ic end caps~ nnd finally ~r~pped ~i~h a sultabl~ tape. The s~mplcs shall then immediately placed on ic~, or dry lc~, for transport to n laboratory. 8-40-5 JULY 16, 1986 Me~re~ cnt of 0rg~nic Conr, en~: 0rganic conic.of: or' soil shall be de~¢rmined by ~he .~egion~! ;/~ter Quallty Control 8oard's I~evised Analytical Methods, .~achm~n', 2.~ I1~5~ or any o~her method approved by I:he APe0. ~e~,,-rminatloo of Eml~ions: Emissions oF organic compounds as ~peciFied in Section 8-40-302 shall be measured as prescribed in the Manual of Procedures, Voiume IV~ ST-7. 8-40-6 JULY 16~ 1986 '::.TEXA C , ".~I REFINE Il 0 ~ Surer 2/I :l .. ! z~t I O · / ' " RADi ° SABI~ B' REFINI LEGEND .. P.)~. ~R ~AgNIN~, ~18 PI~R~ RO~: D.O. DAVI~S OIL~.,~ I~U~STR~E: '¢ ~~ WA~ ~A~ FRE~ PROOU~ PLUME ~. 1~ U.C. UNI~ C~81D~ 3~5 PIERCE ROAD: ~A- ~.~ GR~NDWA~R ~,NATED A.T. ~UR~O T~S~RT, m, glBS~ ROA0: B~ERSRELD. CALIFORN~ GR~N0WA~R ~INA~D LEO BLACK ESTATE V.P, VA~ PER~T~ L~AT~N ~P & N~R BY ~AMINAT~N S~ES 0 1000' 2000" I cY~lT ROBERT ANSPACH J~GE OF THE S~ERIOR COURT 6 8 9 10 !1 z ~ 0 ~ o ~o t6 a · 18 !9 ~0 GARY J. WICKS 2700 M Street, Suite 3~0 Agency Director Bakeflfleld, CA 93301 r~.::?~?~ Telephone (805) 861-363~ (805) 861-3502 '~"'" ~'~'~' Telecopler (805) 861-3429 STEVE McCALLEY ..,=,o, RESOURCE AGENCY D E PA RT~.~~~ M E NTA L May 24, 1990 TO: Steve Schuett, Assistant County Counsel's Office FROM: Steve McCalley, Director ~,'""t~::~ Environmental Health Services Department BY: Daphne H. Washington, Chief, Special Programs SUBJECT: Estate of Leo Black Electric Company On Thursday, May 24, I discussed with Tom Clow a request for Counsel participation in a meeting next week on the above subject. The issue involves the issuance of a Corrective Action Order by this Department to Curtis Darling, attorney, executor of the referenced estate. Mr. Darling alleges that the Department cannot hold an estate to the same standard as an operating company, and wishes to meet with us and our counsel. We would like to schedule a meeting possibly next Thursday or Friday. Please call and advise who from your office can be available and what date and time. I have attached some background information on the case to bring your staff up to speed. Thank you for your assistance. SMc:DHW:jg cc: Chris Burger Steve McCalley 1 Corrective Action Order No. 90-010 2 3 4 COUNTY OF KERN 5 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT ? IN RE: Leo Black Electric Company 8 3909 Pierce Road 9 Bakersfield, CA 93308 10 11 TO: Curtis Darling 12 1430 Truxtun Avenue 13 P.O. Box 2411 14 Bakersfield, CA 93303 15 16 AND 17 18 Thomas Gilbert, Co Executor 19 2000 Julian Avenue 20 Bakersfield, CA 93304 21 22 CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDER 23 24 Section 25299.37, Chapter 6.75 of Division 20 of 25 the California Health and Safety Code (H & S Code), 26 authorizes the issuance of a Corrective Action 1 Order for failure to initiate and complete a corrective 2 action in response to an unauthorized release from an 3 underground petroleum storage tank. 4 5 Violation § The Environmental Health Services DePartment of the ? County of Kern (hereinafter the Department) hereby issues 8 a Corrective Action Order to Leo Black Electric Company 9 (hereinafter Company) for failure to comply with H & S 10 Code Sections 25298 (c)(4), 25299 (a)(5), (b)(3), (b)(4), 11 25299.36 and 25299.37. These sections require the 12 Company to take corrective action, as defined in H & S 13 Code Section 25299.14, to ensure protection of human 14 health, safety and the environment. 15 16 History 17 On December 18, 1986, Company through its agent, 18 McNabb Construction Company, made application to the 19 Department for a Permit to abandon a 500 gallon gasoline 20 tank system. On January 9, 1987, Permit #A351-05 was 21 issued by the Department. 22 Based upon soil sample test results obtained from 23 beneath the tank at the time of removal on February 10, 24 1987, gasoline contamination of the soil was documented. 25 An Underground Storage Tank Unauthorized Release 26 (Leak)/Contamination Site Report was completed and -- 2 -- 1 forwarded by the Department to the State Department of 2 Health Services (DHS), State Water Resources Control 3 Board (SWRCB) and the Central Valley Regional Water 4 Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) on March 5, 1987. 5 On March 6, 1987, the Company was ordered to submit 6 a site characterization proposal to the Department within 7 thirty (30) days. 8 A site characterization work plan, prepared by WZI 9 Inc., was transmitted to the Department on May 27, 1987, 10 and approved on June 23, 1987. The plan was carried out 11 on July 1, 1987. Findings of the site characterization 12 work were transmitted to the Department on August 4, 131 1987. Gasoline constituents were found to be present in 141 groundwater underlying the site. 151 On August 18, 1987, the Department referred the case .161 file to the CVRWQCB for oversight due to the fact that 17 groundwater had been impacted. 18 On May 18, 1988, the Department became a Local 191 Implementing Agency (LIA) for the State Underground 20! Storage Tank Pilot Program. Effective that date, 21 3urisdiction for the case was transferred from the 22 CVRWQCB to the Department. 23 On June 27, 1988, and November 18, 1988, the 24 Department requested a hydrogeological investigation 25 workplan to assess the extent of groundwater 26 contamination underlying Company's property be submitted. 1 The requested hydrogeological workplan was submitted 2 by WZI, Inc. on November 29, 1988. S On January 10, 1989, and April 6, 1989, Department 4 comments regarding further information necessary to 5 approve the workplan were sent to Thomas Gilbert, co- 6 executor- 7 On May 10, 1989, the necessary information to 8 approve the hydrogeological workplan was supplied to the 9 Department by WZI, Inc. 10 On January 2, 1990, Thomas Gilbert was again 11 notified of the need to implement the approved 12 hydrogeological workplan. 13 Subsequent correspondence between the Company's 14 representatives and the Department as well as at least 15' two meetings have failed to produce measurable progress 16 toward implementation of the approved hydrogeological 17 workplan. 18 19 Directives 20 The Leo Black Electric Company through its 21 fiduciaries, Curtis Darling and Thomas Gilbert, is hereby 22, directed to take the following actions: 23 1. Implement the approved hydrogeological investigation 24 workplan as approved May 14, 1989, by June 15, 1990, 25 providing the Department at least 48 hours notice 26 prior to commencing work, and; - 4 - 1 2. Complete all of the work called out in the plan 2 referred to in provision "1" above and submit a 3 hydrogeological site characterization report by 4 August 15, 1990, or alternatively; § 3. Submit a revised hydrogeological investigation 6 workplan to the Department for review by June 1, ? 1990, and; 8 4. Upon the Department's approval of a revised 9 hydrogeological workplan referred to in provision 10 "2" above, complete all of the work called out in 11 that plan and submit a hydrogeological site 12 characterization report within 60 days of the date 13 of Department approval of the plan, providing 48 '14 hours notice to the Department prior to commencing 15 any work called for in the plan. 16 17 All required reports and any correspondence should 18 be submitted to: 19 Chris Burger, R.E.H.S. 20 Manager, Hazardous Materials Mgmt Program 21 Kern County Environmental Health 22 Services Department 23 2700 M Street, Suite 300 24 Bakersfield, CA 93301 25 /// 26 /// 1 Remedies ~ 2 Section 25299.37(f) of Chapter 6.75 of the H & S 3 Code allows the Department to undertake or contract for 4 corrective action and recover costs pursuant to Section 5 25299.53 for failure to comply with a Corrective Action 6 Order. 7 .Section 25299 of the H & S Code allows for the 8 assessment of Civil penalties for failure to comply with 9 the requirements of Chapter 6.?. 10 Failure to comply with any provision of the Chapter 11 may result in the Department imposing an administrative 12 penalty of not less than five hundred dollars ($500.00) 13 or more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) per day 14 for each day the violation(s) continues. 15 III 16 /// 17 /// 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 III ,fC, . /% DATE 24 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERV~ES 25 /// 26 /// ~ 6 ~ : 131 OSO011 SAISIOI~ TRUCK STOl' 871-08 0510818~ ~ .'' .~. 66 06~71 CHK~H O~-O~X~ ~ 478~.~0g/80 ~ '" .T. --~- 0~72 ~vx~ 0~ ~ ~67~5 02/09189 ~ 1~ O~OZ07 aOS~ P~P~Z~ X1120/80 ~ .... .T. ' (Z 050~Z8 B~. ~ STAT~ ~99-0~ 02/07/89 ~ ..... .~* B ......... LE BEAU, ThELEN, LAMPE & MCINTOSH ~S:~I 8USINr. SS PA~K $OU~N :'' " ~,. SUITE 210 . .- ATTORNEYc, lC'OR -:. · De~endant$, -, - SABRE RE¥INING~ INC. A~D SABRE REF~NING~ I~C. DER~OR-I~- POSSESSION 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 12 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Case No. 183100 ex rel CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER ) 13 QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL ) NOTICE OF ENTRY OF VALLEY REGION ) JUDGMENT 14 Plaintiffs, ) ) 15 v. ) ) 16 SABRE REFINING, INC., SABRE ) REFINING, INC., CHAPTER 11 DEBTOR ) 17 IN POSSESSION ) ) 18 Defendant. ) ) 19 20 To the People of the State of California ex rel California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley 21 22 Region, plaintiffs, and to the California Attorney General, 23 plaintiffs' attorney-of record: 24 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that on September 28, 1989, 25 judgment was entered in the above-entitled action in favor of 26 the defendant Sabre Refining, Inc., and against the plaintiff, 27 People of the State of California ex tel California Regional 28 //// //// 1 IT I$ HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that 2 plaintiff take nothing by way of its complaint and that 3 defendant have judgment on all causes of action of plaintiff's 4 complaint, and that defendant be and hereby is awarded its costs 5 of suit. ' JUDGE OF THE S~ERIO .COURT 8 10 11 12 "14 r~16 18 19 20 21 22 2~ 2~ 25 2~ 28 Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, a copy of which is attached to this notice. DATED: October 9, 1989 LeBEAU, THELEN, LAMPE, McINTOSH & 4 CREAR 5 DAV]' D R. 6 De~en~ant. Sabre Refining,. 8 9 10 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAlL (1013a. 2015.5 C.C.P.) 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 3 ) ss. COUNTY OF KERN ) I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of 5 the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action; my business address is: 7 5531 Business Park South, Suite 210, Bakersfield, California 8 93309. On October !0, !989 , I served the within NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT on the parties in said action, by placing a 10 true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage 11 thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Bakersfield, 12 California addressed as follows: John K. Van De Kamp, 14 Attorney General of the State of California 15 Edwin J. Dubiel Deputy Attorney General 16 3580 Wilshire Blvd. ~ ! ~ Los Angeles, CA 90010 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing 25 is true and correct. 2~ Executed on October 10 , 1989, at Bakersfield, 27 California. 28 THERESA H. SHER~TLL 2 S531 BUSINCSS PARK SOUTH SABRE REFINING, INC. AND 6 SABRE REFINING, INC. DEBTOR-IN- POSSESSION ? 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 1! PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Case No. 183100 12 ex rel. CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER ) QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL ) JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL 13 VALLEY REGION ) BY SUPERIOR COURT Plaintiffs,· ) 14 ) v. ) 15 ) SABRE REFINING, INC., SABRE ) 16 REFINING, INC., CHAPTER 11 DEBTOR ) IN POSSESSION ) I7 ) Defendant. ) 18 ) 19 This cause came on for regularly for trial on April 3, 20 1989 in Department 8 of the above-entitled court, the Honorable 21 Lewis E. King, Judge, presiding, sitting without a jury, a jury 22 having been duly waived. Plaintiff appeared by its attorney, 23 Edward J. Dubiel, Esq., Deputy Attorney General. Defendant 24 appeared by its attorney, David R. Lampe, Esq., LeBEAU, TEELEN, 25 L~2~PE, McINTOSH & CRF~. Evidence, both oral and documentary, 26 having been presented by both parties, the cause having been 27 argued and submitted for decision, and a statement of decision 28 not having been requested, · /' " SUPE~(~OR COURT ')F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN August 28, 1989 4;00 P.M. 8 DATE: COURT MET AT DEPARTMENT NO. LEWIS E. KING D.M. Ritchie PRESENT, HOLY, ., JUDGE , DEPUTY O,.ERK NO flO , REPORTER BAILIFF TITLE: COUNSB,.: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIF. Edward Dubiel, Deputy Attorney General vs SABRE REFINING, INC., et al David Lampe ?~ATU~E OF PIL~OGr--I:DING$: ACTION COURT DECISION See Decision attached. A COPY OF THIS M.O. WAS SENT TO COUNSEL THIS DAT~ DR 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ? IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Case No. 183100 10 ex re/. CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER ) QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL ) 11 VALLEY REGION, ) ) 12 Plaintiffs, ) ) 13 vs. ) ) 14 SABRE REFINING, INC., SABRE/ ) REFINING, INC., CHAPTER 1! DEBTOR } DEOISION 15 IN POSSESSION, ) ) 16 Defendants. ) 17 18 The Plaintiff, Attorney General for the Regional Water 19 Control Board, filed a four count comDlaint for injunctdons 20. and civil penalties on June 21, 1983, under Division 7 of the 21 Water qode. 22 The action is based on the alleged violation of a cease 23 and desist order issued.by the Water Control Board against the 24 Defendants on December 5, 1980. 25 The Defendants went into Bankruptcy on September 28, 28 1982. 1 The Court finds that the Defendants stopped business 2 operations in 1981 and the waste water s~mp in issue has not 3 been used s~nce 1981. 4 The Court grants judgment for the Defendants as' the 5 Cease and Desist Order has been moot since 1981. 6 Count 1 of the complaint alleges violation of the Cease 7 and Desist Order 78-24 and requests an order of the Court 8 compellJn~ compliance by the Defendants. 9 The Court orders 3udgment for the Defendants. In 10 addition to the finding of mootness, the Court is not 11 convinced that Plaintiff has proved Defendants made any 12 discharge of prohibited materials into the waters of the State 13 since the date of the Cease and Desist Order. 14 The Court denies the request for a depth and areal 15 report of soil and ground water contamination requested by 16 Plaintiff. 17 The Court has considered the evSdence presented to the 18 Regional Water Control Board and the evidence presented at t'he 19 hearing in this Court. The Court Js required to exercise its 20 independent judgment under Chapter 7 of the Water Code. 21 The order for the depth and areal soil and water study 22 issued by the Water Board was in violation of the Defendant's 23 due process rights in.that there was not proper notice of this 24 issue, and this type of order is properly the subject matter 25 of an abatement and clean-up hearin~ and order. 26 The Court further finds that it is impossible for 2 1 Defendants to comply with the soil and water Study because of 2 its cost of over $150,000 and the fact that Defendants do not 3 have funds to pay for such a study~ 4 If not impossJble, the Court finds that ]t would be. an 5 undue hardship on the Defendants. 6 Further, the study and report would not be of 7 substantial benefit due to the agency's report of a historical 8 contamination of a larger 25 square mile area of ground water 9 by numerous persons other than Defendants. 10 The Court further finds that there would be no harm to 11 the public interest in not requiring the report. 12 Counts 2 and 3 of the COmplaint allege v~o]atJons of 13 the Cease and Desist Order and requests the Court to order 14 monetary penalties against the Defendants. 15 The Court grants judgment fgr the Defendants on Counts 16 2 and 3. 17 In addition to mootness, there is insufficient proof of 18 any violation, any number of days of violation, and it is 19 impossible to determine with specificity the amount of 20 penalties. 21 Also, because Defendants are out of business, the Court would decline to impose any monetary penalties. 25 Count 4 of t~e Complaint seeks to enjoin a public 24 nuisance. 25 The Court gives judgment to the Defendants. 26 The Plaintiff has failed to prove a public nuisance 3 1 exists. 2 The Defendants complied with the Regional Water Control 3 Board requirements for years. When the Water Board found it 4 necessary to change the requirements for the whole Fruitva]e 5 Field, the Defendants 'found that they could not comply with 6 the new requirements, ceased the operation, went out of ? b~$iness~ removed waste water pipes, emptied the sealed sump 8 and went into the Bankruptcy Court. 9 DATED: August 24, Ig89. 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 · 24 ~os~ Office Box 9217 ~a~ersdeid. C~iIornia 93389 WZ~ , May 10, 1989 Amy E. Green Kern County Health Department Environmental Health Division 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Requested Revision Hydrogeologic Investigation Workplan for Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield Dear Ms. Green: The requested revisions t° the Hydrogeologic Investigation Workplan for Leo Black Electric have been prepared in accordance with your requests in correspondence dated January 10, 1989 and April 6, 1989. o The boring LBS-5, will be installed as a monitoring well at the former underground tank site as shown on the plot plan (Exhibit 1). Stainless steel casing will be installed so that this well can be utilized for long term r~(~hitoring. o Permits will be obtained from Kern County Environmental Health Staff for all monitoring wells and test holes. Test holes will be abandoned with sand cement or neat cement mixture and will be witnessed by an Environmental Health inspector. o Water samples will be collected from monitoring wells according to guidelines outlined in the Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Field (LUFT) Manual. The well will be purged until temperature, conductivity and pH stabilize - four or more well volumes. Water bailed from the wells will be stored on site pending analytical results. Water samples will be collected from test holes to check for floating product only. o Soil and water samples will be analyzed for oil and grease utilizing EPA method 413.1 (gravimetric method). Amy E. Green May 10, 1989 Page Two WZI Inc. is prepared to commence the workplan pending approval of the workplan by Kern County Health Department and once permits are obtained for the monitoring wells and test holes. If you need any additional information concerning the workplan, please do not hesitate to call me at (805) 326-1112. Very truly yours, Laura M. Bazeley, R.G. Manager, Geology LMB:bc/nt cc: Tom Gilbert 0206.30051.002 Boring (Alternate) LBS-4 ~ ESTIMATED E~ENTOF · SOIL CONTAMINATION BASED ON 7/87 SOIL SAMPLING x ~. ~ ~- - , - AND GRADIENT Alternate ~ " = ' I A LB 6 LB 3 HYDR~AR~N O~R TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS S - (ug/g) 5 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERI~TION 10 - None Det~ed) Nor VOLATILE HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATION PLUME: None DA~ 9/88 ~lBff 4 ~ .. DN 991 KERN COUNTY 2700 'M' Street. Ste. ~00 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Env'~n~ental Health Depaz~ent (805) 861-3636 STATE C.O.L.T. February 7, 1989 Mr. Tom Gilbert Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Rd. Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Location: 3909 Pierce Rd. Bakersfield, CA Known As: Leo Black Electric PERMIT #: 50119 Dear Mr. Tom Gilbert: This letter is an official notice to inform you that the property described above has been determined by Kern County Environmental Health to be the site of an unauthorized release of hazardous materials from an underground storage tank. This notice is sent to you because our records indicate that you are a responsible party for this property. As a responsible party, you must provide for all studies and work relating to the above described property and the cost for oversight of these activities. California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.7 and Kern County Ordinance Code Chapter 8.48 require a determination of the threat to the environment as a result of this release. THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY SHALL, ON A TIMELY BASIS, DEVELOP A SITE CHARACTERIZATION, FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FOR KER~. COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL BEFORE THE WORK IS INITIATED. Enclosed you will find attachment "A", Handbook UT-35, which states the minimum required site workplan activities, the necessary requirements for selecting environmental contractors, qualified to perform this work, a glossary of terms, example illustrations, and. a section discussing the answers to commonly asked questions. According to the criteria listed below and in Attachment "C", your site has been designated as environmentally sensitive. All environmentally sensitive sites are automatically enrolled into a State contract program for recovery of oversigh, t costs. The environmental sensitivity criteria for sites are as follows: 1. H.ighesc historic ground water is within 100 feet of ground surface, or 2. Nearest surface water in' unlined conveyance is within 75 feet of tank(s), or 3. Nearest agricultural or domestic water well is within 75 feet of tanks(s), or 4. Facility is located in a designated aquifer recharge area, or 5. Permitting Authority determines possible adverse environmental impact due to facility proximity to unique wildlife habitat areas. The cost incurred by Kern County Environmental Health for the oversight of the work for the site characterization, feasibility study, remediation action plan, site remediation, and ongoing monitoring is not covered by any fees or permits. These costs will be recovered by Kern County Environmental Health under the terms of the State contract described below. This contract ONlY pertains to costs associated with oversight. STATE CONTRACT The State Leaking Underground Storage Tank Pilot Program provides a mechanism for the State to reimburse .the County for County oversight. The County will conduct the necessary oversight and bill the State Water Resources Control Board under this State contract. The State will then charge you, a responsible party for both the costs incurred by the County and the State pertaining to your site. Accordingly, Attachment "D", the will serve as the official notification of enrollment into the State Contract. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please contact John Nilon, contract manager, at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Mary Weddell Assistant County Administrative Officer Environmental Health attachments KERN COUNTY 2700 'M' Street. Ste. 300 Bakersfield. CA93301 EnvironmentalHe~thDepartment ATTACI~ENT "D" (805) 661-~636 · February 7, 1989 Mr. Tom Gilbert Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Rd. Bakersfield, CA 93308 SUBJECT: Location: 3909 Pierce Rd. Bakersfield, CA Known As: Leo Black Electric PERMIT #: 50119 Dear Mr. Tom Gilbert: This letter will serve as the official notification concerning reimbursement requirements for a responsible party enrolled in the State Leaking Underground Stora§e Tank Pilot Program. As mentioned in the introductory letter, by either not respon6ing to this package within ten (10) calendar days or through your own selection of the State Contract option, your site will be placed under the terms explained below: Whereas the Legislature has appropriated funds from the California Hazardous Substance Clean-up Fund to pay the local and state agency administrative and oversight costs associated with the cleanup of releases from underground storage tanks; and Whereas the direct and' indirect costs of overseeing removal or remedial action at .the above site are funded, in whole or in part, from the Hazardous Substane~ Claa~up Fu~d| aBd Whereas the above individual(s) or entity(les) have been identified as the party or parties responsible for investigation and cleanup of the above site; YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that pursuant to Section 25360 of the Health and Safety code, the Above ResPonsible Party.or Parties shall reimburse the State Water Resources Control Board for all direct and indirect costs incurred by any and all state and local agencies while overseeing the cleanup of the above underground storage tank site, and the above Responsible Party or Parties shall make full payment of such costs within 30 days of receipt of a detailed invoice from the State Water Resources Control Board. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please contact John Nilon, contract manager, at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Mary Weddell Assistant County Administrative Officer Environmental Health attachments KERN COUNTY 2700 '~4' $~:eet, ~Ce. 300 eakef'sf'ieid. CA 93301 F, nvi.,,-on,ment, al Hea. lt.h Depa.rt.~ent (805) 861-3636 February 16, 1989 Mr. Tom Gilbert Leo Black Electric 2000 Julian Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93304 SUBJECT: Location: 3909 Pierce Rd. Bakersfield, CA 93308 Known As: Leo Black Electric PERMIT #: 050119 Dear Mr. Tom Gilbert: This letter is an official notice to inform you that the property described above has been determined by Kern County Environmental Health to be the site of an unauthorized release of hazardous materials from an underground storage tank. This notice is sent to you because our records indicate that you are a responsible party for this property. As a responsible party, you must provide for all studies and work relating to the above described property and the cost for oversight of these activities. California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.7 and Kern County Ordinance Code Chapter 8.48 require a determination of the threat to the environment as a result of this release. THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY SHALL, ON A TIMELY BASIS, DEVELOP A SITE CHARACTERIZATION, FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN FOR KERN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL BEFORE THE WORK IS INITIATED. Enclosed you will find attachment 'A", Handbook UT-35, which states 'the minimum required site workplan activities, the necessary requirements for selecting environmental contractors qualified to perform this work, a glossary of terms, example illustrations, and a section discussing the answers to commonly asked questions. According to the criteria listed below and in Attachment "C", your site has been designated as environmentally sensitive. All environmentally sensitive sites are automatically enrolled into a State contract program for recovery of oversight costs. The environmental sensitivity criteria for sites are as follows: 1.Highest historic ground water is within 100 feet of ground surface, or 2. Nearest surface water in unlined conveyance is within 75 feet of tank(s), or 3. Nearest agricultural or domestic water well is within 75 feet of tanks(s), or 4. Facility is located in a designated aquifer recharge area, or 5, Permitting Authority determines possible adverse environmenta! impact due to facility proximity to unique wildlife habitat areas, Tile cost incurred by Kern County Environmental Health for the oversight of the work for the site characterization, feasibility study, remediation action plan, site remediation, and ongoing monitoring is not covered by any fees or permits. These costs will be recovered by Kern County Environmental Health under the terms of the State contract described below. This contract ONLY pertains to costs associated with oversight. STATE CONTRACT The State Leaking Underground Storage Tank Pilot Program provides a mechanism for the State to reimburse the County for County oversight. The County will conduct the necessary oversight and bill the State Water Resources Control Board under this State contract. The State will then charge you, a responsible party for both the costs incurred by the County and tile State pertaining to your site. Accordingly, Attachment "D", the will serve as the official notification of enrollment into the State Contract. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please contact John Nilon, contract manager, at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Mary Weddell Assistant County Administrative Officer Environmental Health attachments KERN COUNTY 2700 'M' Street, See. 300 8akers~;~eid. CA 93301 EnvironmenCaJ. XealCh Depa_,W. ment (805) 861-~836 ATTACHMENT "D" February 16. 1989 Mr. Tom Gilbert Leo Black Electric 2000 Julian Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93304 SUBJECT: Location: 3909 Pierce Rd. Bakersfield, CA 93308 Known As: Leo Black Electric PERMIT #: 050119 Dear Mr. Tom Gilbert: This letter will serve as the official notification concerning reimbursement requirements for a responsible party enrolled in the State Leaking Underground Storage Tank Pilot Program. As mentioned in the introductory letter, by either not responding to this package within ten (10) calendar days or through your own selection of the State Contract option, your site will be placed under the terms explained below: Whereas the Legislature has apprcnriated funds from the California Hazardous Substance Clean-up Fund to pay the local and state agency administrative and oversight costs associated with the cleanup of.releases from underground storage tanks: and Whereas the direct and indirect costs of overseeing removal or remedial action at the above site are funded, in whole or in part, from the Hazardous Substance Cleanup Fund: and Whereas the above individual(s) or entity(les) have been identified as the party or parties responsible for investigation and cleanup of the above site: YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that pursuant to Section 25360 of the Health and Safety code, the Above Responsible Party or Parties shall reimburse the State Water Resources Control Board for all direct and indirect costs incurred by any and all state and local agencies while overseeing the cleanup of the above underground storage tank site, and the above Responsible Party or Parties shall make full payment of such costs within 30 days of receipt of a detailed invoice from the State Water Resources Control Board. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please contact John Nilon. contract manager, at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Mary Weddell Assistant County Administrative Officer Environmental Health Wi R REiCURCES C~,~.~OL BOARD UST CLEANUP PROGRAM SITE SPECiFiC QUARTERLY REPORT '- 12/15/88 CONTRACTOR NO: 15000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: L SUBSTANCE: SITE NO: ~40// ~ · FEDERAL EXEMPT: N PETROLEUM: Y SITE N~ME: /So f~/~i ~l'ec~r;~' DATE REPORTED: ADDRESS: 3~d ~ /P~'erc ¢ ~J. DATE CONFIRMED: · -' SITE STATUS CASE T~E: U CONTACT STATUS: 2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE: RP SEARCH: ~ DATE UNDERWAY: DATE COMPLETED: PRELIMINARY DATE UNDERWAY: DATE COMPLETED: ASSESSMENT REMEDIAL DATE UNDERWAY: DATE COMPLETED: I~ESTIGATION REMEDIAL ACTION: DATE UNDERWAY: DATE COMPLETED: POST REMEDIAL DATE U~ERWAY: DATE COMPLETED: ACTION MONITORING ENFORCEMENT ACTION TYPE: DATE TAKEN: TAKEN ~P REQUIRED DATE APPROVED: CASE CLOSED: DATE CLOSED: DATE EXCAVATION STARTED: REMEDIAL ACTIONS T~EN: '~ RESPONSIBLE PARTY GARY J. WICKS 2700 M Streel, Suite 300 Agency Director 8akerefleld, CA 93301 (805) 861-3502 ... .--. Telephone (805) 861-3~36 Telecopler (805) 861-3429 STEVE McCALLEY ~~ ~,,oc,o, R E S O U R C E M."':' ~:-E N T A G E N C Y .:..' ~ ~NMENTAL February 6, 1990 Curtis Darling, Esq. Darling, Maclin and Thomson P. O. Box 2411 Bakersfield, CA 93303 RE: Leo Black Electric Case #: 050119 Dear Mr. Darling: In response to your letter of January 10, 1990, and as a result of a meeting held with WZI, Inc. representatives on January31, 1990 we have reviewed the status of the Leo Black Electric file. Our review indicates that the Hydrogeological Investigation Work Plan (HIWP) submitted November 29, 1988, and supplemented May '10, 1989, has not yet been implemented. It is possible that our concurrance with the supplemented plan was never communicated formally to WZI, Inc. Please consider this letter formal approval of the plan as amended May 10, 1989 (enclosed). Your letter of January 10, 1990, proposes that contaminated soil at the site be excavated and replaced with clean soil. While the "dig and haul" technique is acceptable to the Department, you may wish to weigh the financial impact of its utilization versus other acceptable methods of soil remediation. A cost analysis may not be possible prior to completion of the HIWP which will fully delineate the vertical and areal extent of soil contamination present. In summary, it is this Department's position that execution of the HIWP is necessary to develop the data needed to make decisions with regard to closure of the case. Removal of contaminated soil prior, during or upon completion of the HIWP in accordance with applicable laws and regulations is an acceptable adjunct to the HIWP. Curtis Darling, Esq. February 6, 1990 Page 2 Please feel free to contact me at the above number should you have questions or wish to discuss the case further. Environmental Health Specialist IV Manager Hazardous Materials Management Program CB:cas Enclosures cc: M.J. Wilson, WZI \050119.1tr Agency Director ~ ,- ~:, Bakertfleld, CA 93301 (805) 861-3502 . ...... : ...... t ~ ~ TelecoplerTeteph°ne (805)(805)861-3429861'363' Dl~tor R ESOU RC E ~~G~:ENT AG ENCY danuary 2, 1900 Mr. Tom Gilbert 2000 Julian Avenue ~Bakersfield, CA 93304 Subject: Underground Tank Site Assessment 390g Pierce Road, Bakersfield, CA Permit No. 05001g Dear Mr. Gilbert: The intent of this letter is to inform you of the necessary deadlines for work required at the property described above. As a responsible party for a leaking underground storage tank, you have previously received a letter from this Department notifying you of the required work necessary to identify the extent of the contamination. A review of our records indicates that the hydrogeologic investigation workplan prepared by WZl~as approved by this Department. However, the workplan has not been implemented. Pursuant to Ohapter 6.7 of the California Health and Safety Code and Chapter 8.48 of the Kern County Ordinance Code, the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department requires a determination of the threat to the environment. Accordingly, the work must be initiated by February 5, 19g0. Prior to initiating work, please contact this office so that a convenient time can be arranged for a representative from this Department to witness/inspect s~te act(v(ties. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at {805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Dolores Gough Hazardous Materials Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program DG:cas \gilbert.ltr WATER RESOURES CONTROL BOARD DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY UST CLEANUP PROGRAM SITE SPECIFIC QUARTERLY REPORT CONTRACTOR NO: 15000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: S SUBSTANCE: 12031 SITE NO: 050119 FEDERAL EXEMPT: N PETROLEUM: Y SITE NAME: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC DATE REPORTED: 03/05/87 ADDRESS: 400 McKITTRICK HWY DATE CONFIRMED: 03/05/87 CITY/ZIP: BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308 CATEGORY: R SITE STATUS CASE TYPE: G CONTRACT STATUS 5 EMERGENCY RESPONSE: RP SEARCH: S DATE UNDERWAY: 03/05/87 DATE COMPLETED: 03/05/87 PRELIMINARYASSESSMENT: C DATE UNDERWAY: (3~/~/~? DATE COMPLETED: 08/04/87 REMEDIAL DATE UNDERWAY: 12/02/88 DATE COMPLETED: / / INVESTIGATION: U REMEDIAL ACTION: DATE UNDERWAY: / / DATE COMPLETED: / / POST REMEDIAL DATE UNDERWAY: DATE COMPLETED: ACTION MONITORING ENFORCEMENT ACTION TYPE: DATE TAKEN: TAKEN: RAP REQUIRED: DATE APPROVED: CASE CLOSED: DATE CLOSED: / / DATE EXCAVATION STARTED: REMEDIAL ACTIONS TAKEN: RESPONSIBLE PARTY CONTACT NAME: TOM GILBERT SPECIALIST: 9 COMPANY NAME: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SENSITIVITY: EES ADDRESS: 2000 JULIAN AVENUE VERIFIED (X) CITY/STATE: BAKERSFIELD, CA 93304 DATE OF REPORT: 12/19/89 WZ! INC. 4800 EASTON DR,, SUITE 114 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93309 FAX NO, 805-326-0191 FAX LEAD SHEET DATE TRANSMITTED ,,~//Z,/~..c¢ FAX NO. (~C)c~".8'(~ /%-~ V; ~. COMPANY _~ 04~ ~a~ ~~ TIME SENT _ ._ CONFIRMING PHONE NO. 805-32~-I ! 12 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS (IF ANY)__~.F~~ ~ - .... ' '- TOTAL NUMBER OF PA~ES, tNCLU' F'F~... _,. ~ . _ ,.- . , , ........ , ..... WZI,INc---,' 4800 Ear,on 8DS, 32~T~12 May 8, ~989 Amy E. Green Kern County Health Department Environmental Division 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, California 93~31 Re: January 10, 1989 Review of Hydrogeol0gical Investigation Workplan for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California Dear Ms. Green: Per your reqUest, the ~orrespondence of January 10, 1989 from you addressed to Tom Gilbert regarding the Hydrogeological Investigation Workplan submitted for Leo Black Electric located at 3909 Pierce Road in Bakersfield, California is enclosed for your reference. As we discussed, a second review of the Workplan was sent to Tom Gilbert on April 6, 1989'. Mr. Gilbert requests that he not be charged for tl~e review associated with the April 6, 1989 correspondence because it duplicates work performed for the January 10, 1989 correspondence. A letter responding to your requests concerning the workplan and a modified plot plan will be sent to you shortly. Very truly yours, Laura M. Bazeley, R.G. Manager, Geology LMB/mw Encl. 0206.30051.001 :. K=RN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMEN, HP.A~.THO--,Cln Z'/(IO M ~ ~HVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION L~ MiIII~ ~; Oi~TO~ O~ ~NVI~ONM~NTA~ HEALTH 1416 Tru=mn Avwe Tom Gilbert 2000 Ju2ian Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93304 Re= Hydrogeologic&l Investigation Wor~plan submitted for Leo Slack Electric, 3909 P/eros Rd. in BakersfieZd, CA Dear Mr. The hydrogeological Investiga~ion Wo~kplan p~epared for Black Electric, 3909 pierce Rd. in Bakersfiel&, Cal~fornia was received and reviewed by a representative o~ this ~epartment. The information provided within the proposed workplan is summarized below: 1. Depth to groundwa=er was estimated as beSng between 15 to 20 feet Below the grounds surface. (fo~ the first unconfined aquifer) 2. I~forma=~on was obtained from Kern County Water Agency ~ells near the s~te, and ~he ~ad~ent was estimated as d~pping approximately 3 degrees 3. WZI proposed ~netal~at~on of 4-6 borings, a~ound the tank excava~ion. The borings were iden~ified as LBS-I, LBS- 2, LBS-3, LBS-4, LBS-§ and LB~-6. They were in locat~ons which assist in de~lning the lateral ~pread of ~he con%am~nan~ in soil. $o~1 samples are to be retrieved a= ~ foot ~n~ervals. The sample$ will be sent to BO Labs, and analyzed for BTX. 4. WZ! proposed to conver~ LBS-l, LBS-6 ~S~ or LBS5 monitoring wells ~f ~he bo~eho~e ~s ~ela~!vel¥ clean, and ~f the grad~en~ appears to be as believed. The fol]ow~ng concerns mus= b~ a~d~e~=ed before ~he wo~kplan may be implemented. The workplan mus~ specify: 1. Your me~hod for determin~ng any Vertical of the contamination ~n groundwater. Pa~e ~ l= differs from the S' specified. The minimum analysis on so~l and waC.ar samples must also include o~1 and grease (since heavier. components were detected at ~h~s site during ~h~ saturated zone, and have no noticeable con~aminatio~% must be seale~ wi~h c~men= ~rom $' ~o ~rede. The remainder of the boring ca~l be filled with clean cu~tings. $. If the saturated zone is encountered, or you anticipate drilling ~o ~he saturated zone for a ~es~hole or moni%or~ng well must be obtained - the permit mhculd be ob=a~ned in advance, and a representa~ive of ~he Kern County Health Departmen= mus= be onsite when ~he well or test hole is.sealed. '-'" 6. All con~aminated borings mum~ be sealed with cement as spec~fied in the workplan. 7. A well mus% be installed ~o conf~rm the presence of groundwater contamination near the tank excavation, This well mus~ be drilled, ~n the area where high levels o~ contamina=ion were detected, or a~ ~he most ~0 fee~ away f~om that a?ea, ~o provide an idea of the highes~ levels encountered. LB$-3 must be convs~ed in~o a mont%oring wel~ or a new wet! must be drilled near the ~ank excava=~on. $. All e~mp~ng procedures for monitorin~ wells must be specified w~thin =he repor~ - ex. Sailing the we~l a minimum of $-5 well vol. then retrieving a sample. The water mus~ be held on site until analytical resul=s are obtained, ~anua~y ~0o If ¥04 here any qvestLons please feel f~ee to cal~ me et (805) 861-3636. ~nvtronm~tal Xea P Hazardous' H&~e~l~s Han&gemen~ Program AE6:dr 1-10-89 staff.haz\gllber~.l~ 3e~ersTiela. CshfornJa 93389 ~0~..~ MAY 0 .q lqfi9 May 8, 1989 WZl ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Amy E. Green Kern County Health Department Environmental Division 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, California 93301 Re: January 10, 1989 Review of Hydrogeological Investigation Workplan for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California Dear Ms. Green: Per your request, the correspondence of January 10, 1989 from you addressed to Tom Gilbert regarding the Hydrogeological Investigation Workplan submitted for Leo Black Electric located at 3909 Pierce Road in Bakersfield, California is enclosed for your reference. As we discussed, a second review of the Workplan was sent to Tom Gilbert on April 6, 1989. Mr. Gilbert requests that he not be charged for the review associated with the April 6, 1989 correspondence because it duplicates work performed for the January 10, 1989 correspondence. A letter responding to your requests concerning the workplan and a modified plot plan will be sent to you shortly. Very truly yours, Laura M. Bazeley, R.G. Manager, Geology LMB/mw Encl. 0206.30051.001 KERN C;OLJNTY ~700 'M' S~ree~. $~e. 300 {~m~v arvn .akers;i. ald, CA 93301 lro~en~ He~ Se~ices De.p t (805) 861-3636 ~ April 6, 1989 Tom Gilbert 2000 Julian Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93304 Re: HydrOgeological Investigation Workplan for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Rd. in Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Gilbert: The Hydrogeological Investigation Workplan prepared for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Rd. in Bakersfield, Cal{fomia was received and reviewed by a representative of this Department. The workplan provided the following information and approach proposed to investigate the site: 1. Depth to water was estimated as being 15 to 20 feet below ground surface. The gradient was estimated as being northwest, based on information obtained from eight wells in the vicinity of the site. 2. Wilson Zublin proposed to drill 4 to 6 borings around the site to obtain information on the extent of contamination in soft and groundwater. An estimate of the gasoline plume in the soft above the water table was provided from the 1987 investigation. There was evidence of a heavy hydrocarbon plume, which has not been defined. The proposed borings (LBS-l, LBS-2, LBS-3, and LBS-4) were placed in areas outside of the postulated groundwater contamination plume. Borings were not proposed within the old tank excavation area. All borings will be drilled beyond the 15 foot depth, so will have a high probability of impacting groundwater. Borings LBS-1 and LBS-3 will be converted into groundwater monitoring wells. Water samples will be retrieved from all borings. 3. Two borings were proposed as alternatives. LBS-5 is proposed southwest of LBS-2 and will be used if LBS-2 has high levels of soil contamination. LBS6 is proposed in an area northwest of LBS-4 and will be used if LBS-4 has high levels of soil contamination. Both LBS5 and LBS6 would be converted into groundwater monitoring wells if utilized. The following concerns must be addressed before the workplan may be utilized to assess the site: 1. A groundwater monitoring well permit must be obtained from Kern County Environmental Health Staff for all borings which will be converted into monitoring wells. The permits must be obtained before the wells are drilled. 2. A test hole permit must be obtained from Kern County Environmental Health Staff for all borings which will be drilled to groundwater that are not converted into monitoring wells. The permits must be obtained before any test holes are drilled. 3. Water samples retrieved from wells which are properly developed are more representative of the aquifer. The quality of samples retrieved from test holes are questionable, unless the contractor is simply looking for floating product. 4. There are no wells proposed within the old tank excavation area. At least one well should be installed in this area - since groundwater quality in this area will be compared to groundwater quality in all other wells installed. A revised plot plan, considering the tank excavation area must be submitted before the workplan is approved. 5. All testholes and wells must be sealed with a sand cement or neat cement mixture and an Environmental Health inspector must be onsite when the cement is mixed and poured into the well annular space or test hole. 6. pVC screens were proposed for all monitoring wells. All wells constructed with PVC screens in contaminated zones will be permitted as temporary wells needing to be abandoned at the end of a two year period. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at (805) 861-3636. · rely, "\ Hazardous 2ffaterials Ma'n~rogram · AG:dr amykgilbert.ltr cc: W.Z.I. ¥.;RN COUNTY HEALTH DEPART~4E.~JT 2700 M Street / HEALTH OFFICER B~ker~field, California ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION ~ Leon M Hebertson, M.D. Mailing Add rest: 1415 Truxtun Avenue DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Bakersfield, California 93301 Vernon S. Reichard (805) 861-3636 January 10, 1989 Tom Gilbert 2000 3ulian Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93304 Re: Hydrogeological Investigation Workplan submitted for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Rd. in Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Gilbert: The hydrogeological Investigation Workplan prepared for Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Rd. in Bakersfield, CalifOrnia was received and reviewed by a representative of this department. The information provided within the proposed workplan is summarized below: 1. Depth to groundwater was estimated as being between 15 to 20 feet below the grounds surface. (for the first unconfined aquifer) 2. Information was obtained from Kern County Water Agency Wells near the site, and the Gradient was estimated as dipping approximately 3 degrees NW. 3. WZI proposed installation of 4-6 borings, around the tank excavation. The borings were identified as LBS-i, LBS- 2, LBS-3, LBS-4, LBS-5 and LBS-6. They were positioned in locations which assist in defining the lateral spread of the contaminant in soil. Soil samples are to be retrieved at 5 foot intervals. The samples will be sent to BC Labs, and analyzed for BTX. 4. WZI proposed to convert LBS-i, LBS-6 LPS3 or LBS5 into monitoring wells if the borehole is relatively clean, and if the gradient appears to be as believed. The following concerns must be addressed before the workplan may be ilnplemented. The workplan .must specify: 1. Your method for determining any vertical migration of the contamination in groundwater. DISTRICT OFFICES Del~no . Lamont . Lake Isabella . Molave . Rldflec. rp.qt . ~h~ft~.r T~ft Tom Gilbert January 10, 1989 Page 2 2. The minimum sampling interval must be provided ~f it differs from the 5' specified. 3. The minimum analysis on so~l and water samples must also include oil and grease (since heavier components were detected at this site during the initial investigation.) 4. All borings which do not extend down to the saturated zone, and have no noticeable contamination must be sealed with cement from 5' to grade. The remainder of the boring can be filled with clean cuttings. 5. If the' saturated zone is encountered, or you anticipate drilling to the saturated zone a permit for a testhole or monitoring well must be obtained - the permit should be obtained in advance, and a representative of the Kern County Health Department must be onsite when the well or test hole is sealed. 6. Ail contaminated borings must be sealed with cement as specified in the workplan. 7. A well must be installed to confirm the presence of groundwater contamination near the tank excavation. This well must be drilled, in the area where high levels of contamination were detected, or at the most 10 feet away from that area, to provide.an idea of the highest levels encountered. LBS-3 must be converted ~n~o a monitoring well or a new well must be drilled near the tank excavation. 8. Ail sampling procedures for monitorin~ wells must be specified within the report - ex. Bailing the well a minimum of 3-5 well vol. then retrieving a salnple. The water must be held on site until analytical results are obtained. Tom Gilbert January 10, 1989 Page 3 If you have any questions please feel free to call me at (805) 861-3636. Sincerely, Environm~ltal Health~pecial Hazardous' Materials Management Program AEG:dr 1-10-89 staff.haz\gilbert.ltr ~NZ! ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH November 29, 1988 Ms. Amy Green Environmental Health Division Kern County Health Department 2700 "M" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Leo Black Electric Site Characterization Proposal Work Plan Dear Ms. Green: Attached is the Proposed Work Plan for the hydrogeological characterization on the property of Leo Black Electric, located at 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California. This plan was required by your correspondence dated June 27, 1988 and November 18, 1988. If additional information is required for approval, please contact Laura Bazeley or me at WZI Inc. at the address above. Sincerely, Susan Chandler Kiser V.P., Operations SCK: DJC: df Enclosures 30051 Hydrogeological Investigation Work Plan for LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 3090 Pierce Road Bakersfield, California Prepared For: Kern County Health Department by Susan Chandler Kiser Registered Geologist State of California No. 3831 Expiration Date: 6/30/90 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe Introduction ' 1 Previous Work 1 Hydrogeologic Setting 2 Drilling Program 2 Groundwater Monitoring Wells 3 Sampling, Handling and Collection Methodology 3 Water Sampling Program 5 Lithology and Plume Delineation 5 Health and Safety 5 References Cited 7 TABLES Table Soil Boring and Monitoring Well Rationale 1 EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Location Map 1 Depth to Groundwater - Unconfined Aquifer 2 Water Gradient Map Series 3 Well Location Map 4 Groundwater Monitoring Well Design 5 APPENDICES Appendix No. LUFT Soil and Water Sampling Methodology 1 Introduction This work plan responds to a request by the Kern County Health Department (KCHD) for an assessment of the soil and possible groundwater contamination on the Leo Black Electric property, located at 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California, Section 23, T.29S., R.27E., MDB & M (Exhibit 1). The proposed work will address the following specific issues required by the letter dated June 27, 1988, from Amy Green, Environmental Health Specialist for the KCHD: 1. Is there soil and/or groundwater contamination present north of the former underground tank site? 2. What is the extent of groundwater contamination, if any, created by this site? 3. What is the lateral and vertical extent of the possible groundwater contamination plume? 4. What is the probable extent and source of heavy hydrocarbon contamination on the site? Previous Work A site assessment of the property (plan approved by the KCHD June 23, 1987) was conducted by Wilson Zublin, Inc. (WZI Inc) in July, 1987. Soil samples from five auger boreholes near the underground tank site identified a BTEX (gasoline) plume and a concentration of heavy hydrocarbons in soil down to a depth of approximately 15 feet. No groundwater investigation was conducted at that time. Complete documentation of this site assessment was presented in the final report by WZI Inc, submitted to the Kern County Health Department in July, 1987. 1 Hydroqeologic Setting The water table beneath the site is between 15 to 20 feet below surface (Exhibit No. 2). Previous sample borings by WZI Inc on' site penetrated 15 feet of fine to medium-grained sand and then encountered moist soil which is compatible with the regional '~.~setting. _The water table gradient is believed to be to the northwest. '~This is based on past water level histories of eight Kern County ~Water Agency wells within the Improvement District No. 4, and ~located within a one-half mile radius of the site. Water depth ~measurements taken during the fall months for the years 1975, <~1979, 1982, and 1987 consistently show a gradient dipping C ~ ~approximately 3°NW (Exhibit No. 3). --VDrilling Program ~ ~~The present work plan utilizes all the data collected in the ~ ~ , previous site assessment as a basis from which to begin the ~ ~--groundwater and additional soil contamination study. ~.~~ The proposed sampling program is tailored to address the specific ~~deficiencies noted by the Kern County Health Department and at ,__the same time designed to accommodate a study to minimize the ~.~~ number of samples required to delineate the 'extent of ~,~contamination. The proposed borehole locations are identified on ~Exhibit No. 4 as LBS1, LBS2, and so on. Rationale for each of ~theTboreholein able No- ~cations and the sampling intervals is summarized The approved work plan must be flexible to allow for on-site decisions regarding choice of borehole location. Note that Exhibit No. 4 shows two alternate interpretations of the current data. One is a best fit model mapped as solid contours showing the possible extent of the plume most easily adapted to the 2 ,d'~northwestern groundwater gradient showing the postulated limit o~ ~_~contamination~ as a dash line. The first three soil borings of this work plan should establish a site specific groundwater gradient on the property and thus guide in the selection of alternate borings to most effectively delineate the contamination plume. Groundwater Monitorinq Wells .~Interpretation of the previous WZI Inc site assessment report ~suggests the possibility of gasoline contamination in the groundwater underneath the tank site, therefore a groundwater ~~onitoring program to monitor the extent of groundwater ~contamination, will be emplaced subsequent to the delineation of ~he areal extent ~q~ontamination. e groundwater gradient irection will dictate placement of _~t'~-~hese wells. Three monitoring wells are anticipated. The ~~location of the monitoring wells will be made according to water C~level measurements the day the borings are made. One to be Q3=,~!ocated in the up-gradient direction, one in the down-gradient ~~.irection. and the third in a lateral position so as to monitor ~C~chanm~_s_in the groundwater gradient. Boreholes~_~BS-1, LBS-6,~ _~L~LPS-3 or 5j are the monitoring well locations should the ground ~-'~' =~~ter gradient be as shown on Exhibit No. 3 and borehole samples c~indicate these locations are relatively, free of contamination. Water samples from all the proposed boreholes will also provide .. information on the lateral and vertical extent of any possible plume emanating from the former underground tank site. ~-~,~, ~ .0~,~ 3 Samplinq, Handlinq and Collection Methodology The monitoring well completion schematic is presented in Exhibit No. 5. This design reflects the construction and completion recommendations of the California Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Field Manual. Boring will be done by 6 1/2" hollow-stem auger and will be drilled approximating the order presented on Table No. 1 to minimize cross-contamination from the auger to the soil samples. Sampling will be accomplished by use of either a 1 3/8" or a 2 3/8" split spoon sampler fitted with three brass tubes. Sampling equipment will be prepared for use each time by washing with non-phosphate detergent and rinsed with acetone. Borings LBS-2, LBS-3, and LBS-5 will be drilled to the top of the ground water table while the remaining wells will penetrate to a depth of 30 feet. Sampling intervals is proposed for every 5 feet, However, on-site inspect__ion o~ c,]tt~n~, as they ar~ from the boreholes, may identify lithologic changes or changes in contamination that would requ~ a ~pecializ~e--~-~l~'~"-Pro ra~_r~_m~_ Bulk samples will be retained in labeled plastic bags for future reference. The sampling intervals summarized in Table No. 1 should be considered a collection, the cored soil sample will be prepared as owe.. 1. Ail three tubes will be capped with plastic, secured with plastic tape, and labeled with indelible ink. 2. The most representative sample will be stored on ice until taken by BC Laboratory personnel, with Chain of Custody documents, for laboratory analysis. .~..C~< 3. The remaining two capped tubes from each sample interval will be preserved on ice as back-up samples. Excess cuttings from the boring will be placed in approved containers and disposed of at an approved facility such as Petroleum Waste, Inc. with the appropriate Chain of Custody documents in the event of contamination. Otherwise~ uncontaminated cutting w~ll be used to backfill the borehole. Core samples will be analyzed for benzene, toluene, xylene (BTX) analyses, as recommended by the Kern County Health Department. B. C. Laboratories is a certified hazardous waste laboratory that routinely collects and analyzes soil samples associated with underground tank removal. The holding time for samples shall not exceed fourteen (14) days and most likely will be analyzed within 48 hours. Water Sampling Proqram Ail water sampling will be collected according to guidelines outlined in the Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Field (LUFT) Manual (1987), attached in this workplan in Appendix I. The rig will be equipped with a bailer in the event that the water table is reached. The groundwater samples will be collected in a sterile container and then be tested for BTX contamination. All groundwater hole,~ w~%_l ~e abandorked by filling with concrete Litholoqy and Plume Deliheation Upon completion of the sampling program, lithologic logs of each borehole will be prepared. Cross-sections will be constructed to allow review of the lab analyses of the samples within the 5 penetrated hydrogeologic framework. Maps which graphically depict the limits of the plume will be prepared. The Kern County Health Department guidelines for. the edge of the gasoline contamination are (1) a significant drop in contamination level or (2) contamination completely disappears. Health and Safety WZI Inc. personnel will implement a series of procedures in order to maintain a safe and healthy working environment during this field investigation. All subcontractors on the site will also comply with WZI Inc.'s health and safety procedures. The following protective gear will be available on site in the event that air monitoring equipment (HNU-PID) indicates the presence of benzene, toluene, or xylene in concentration greater than permissible exposure levels of 1 ppm, 200 ppm, and 100 ppm respectively, for eight (8) hour time weighted averages (29 CFR 1910.1000, air contamination). - Twin-cartridge respirators (half-mask) - Chemically resistant gloves and clothing - Safety glasses In addition, hard hats and chemically resistant steel-toed boots will be required for WZI Inc. personnel on location. A list of emergency response personnel and addresses will be constructed identifying nearby fire stations, hospitals, and police stations. It is WZI policy to evaluate and re-evaluate site conditions throughout the operation to maintain a safe and healthy working environment and make modifications to the above health/safety outline when necessary. References Cited Kern County Water Agency, 1987, Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4. State of California, Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Task Force, 1987, Leaking Underground fuel Tank (LUFT) Field Manual: Guidelines for site assessment, cleanup, and underground storage tank closure. 101 p. Wilson Zublin, Inc., May 1987, Leo Black Electric, Site Characterization Proposed Workplan, Prepared for Estate of Leo Black in response to Kern County Health Request (Dated March 6). Wilson Zublin, Inc., July 1987, Leo Black Electric Site Characterization. Report prepared for Estate of Leo Black. TABLE 1 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC BOREHOLE LOCATION AND RATIONALE BOREHOLE NO. LOCATION DEPTH RATIONALE LBS-l* 17' southeast o! former underground tank site 15'+ To further delineate the updip edge of heavy , hydrocarbon contamination in soil and install m~niloring well_~ LBS-2 16' southwest of the tank site 15'+ To constrain the southwestern boundary of soil contamination, both light and heavy hydrocarbon LBS-3* 10' northeast of tank site 15'+ To further delineate the northern boundary of light and heavy hydrocarbon contamination in soil LBS-4 24' northeast lrom former underground tank site 15'+ To delineate the downdip edge of hydrocarbon u,~. soil contamination LBS-5* 25' southwest of former underground tank site 15'+ In the event LBS-2 has high levels of alternate soil contamination LBS-6* 35' northwest of former underground tank site 15'+ In the event LBS-4 has high levels of alternate soil contamination 'POSSIBLE MONITOR HOLES 'L-- JL__JL._JL__tl ILv~ ~Ji , v I i' ~ Beards · Primary Sch , J'" ' "' ':"~' %' . Beardsle7 / /Soho! ~,~ · , ; ' o RR 43t Il o ~. ,r' ''' ~ ~ ~0~ : -- ', -, .fl ........ I~ .~ " Res ~1' o o ~ 99 ~:' '~ ~ ' ...................... 5ITE LOGATION //.. o ~ o e. -~:'.",',~,'..L~',':~.=: // ~ qU "'~'~ II ~ ~.,, it$ ~' o-' ,,"° o~,''' o~' " '(" ~: ' ' 0 ~ I1.~ , '0 ~ ; ~G I I I / ?;, , ,,// ~..../ o o //'t~ I Loz I o~ r. /,' ,/ : .' ~/,/...:..' ,3~':'~' " ' '0~ I: o -~ · - ~ ~ ~" " 26 ~7- ~ 'i .., ' 2~ Mile 21 ~ 99 ' X ~ .: 9 IIII LEO BLACK ELECTRIC HYDROGEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 3090 PIERCE ROAD BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA L~A~.N ~P 0 2000' , ~ ~ INC ~RSFIE~. CA FEET DA~ 8/88 ~HIBIT 1 "[ I~ I SITE LOCATION [MAN RD CHECO .. ~ ~: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 0 2000' SITE CHARACTERIZATION DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER UNCONFINED AQUIFER SOURCE: KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY, 1987, REPORT ON WATER CONDITIONS, WZl INC BAKERSFIELD, CA IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 4. DATE 9/88 EXHIBIT 2 DN 979 SEC. 23 T29S/R27E - 1975 SEC. 23 T29S/R27E - 1979 SEC. 23 T29S/R27E - 1982 SEC. 23 T29S/R27E - 1987 LEGEND LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION R5~-- WELL LOCATION W/WELL NAME WATER GRADIENT MAP SERIES [] SITE LOCATION GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY 0 2000' WZI INC BAKERSFIELD. CA I I DATE 9~88 EXHIBIT 3 DN 980 ~ PLAN ~ "- ~:' VI EW z '< i ~ D.<]/ Il c><](, i \ , ,TAL\ VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS ,-':IFT~EN FEET BELOW GROUND m \ (ug/g) o \ I (None Detected) LB 5 · / LBS-1 SCALE IN FEET -N- 3 FEET BELOW 0 5 10 m m m GROUND A' LB2 GROUND SURFACE 5L~ ~ HYOR~AR~N O~R HYDROCARBONS 0 (ug/g) 0 5 SCALE IN FEET , , ~.. ~ ' LEO BLACK ELECTRIC None Dete~ed) . SITE CHARACTERI~TION VOLATILE HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATION PLUME: MAPS and CROSS SEC~ON~ 'Boring (Alternate) L - Boring '~ h ,._ ., / '% '\\ / I ~o~ LBS-3 Boring ~ LBS-5 (No.~ A (No.~O~t~ct~ S ~ ~ 3 ~0075' Boring LB 6 ~ LB 3 LB 6000 ~ TOTAL' x FIFT ESTIMATED EXTENT OF SOIL CONTAMINATION BASED ~ 4000 ON 7/87 SOIL SAMPLING AND G~DIENT~ X LBS.~ ~O? '-. ". L~I 3691 LBS-5 ~ ~ *13FE 'Alternate ~ A LB 6 LB 3 LE FORM~=R LOCATION OF 2035 10 - None Det~ed) 'None Dete~ed) DEPTH GROUND SURFACE SLOPES AWAY IN FEET ~/'FROM WELL FOR SURFACE DRAINAGE CEMENT CASING, 4" SCHEDULE 40 PVC 5 3' BENTONITE SEAL SAND* PACK 24" ABOVE TOP OF WELL SCREEN 10 INTERIOR/EXTERIOR FLUSH '- THREADED COUPLING 15 V WATER TABLE (JULY 1987) L 2 o L'y,.~ ~.4" SLOTTED PVC P, .... ~ I~. ~,r 25 x~q., 30 BENTONITE SEAL LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION *NOTE: SLOT AND SAND SIZE TO ~ GROUNDWATER MONITORING BE DETERMINED DURING ~ WELL DESIGN DRILLING OF THE WELL. WZI INC. BAKERSFIELD, CA DATE 8 / 8 8 EXHIBIT 5 Appendix I From Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Field Manual : Appendix B SAMPLE COLLECTION, TRANSPORT, AND LABORATORY ANALYSES A. Sample Collection 1. Field'Notebook The field investigator should keep a field notebook (preferably bound with pages numbered) to record sample collection proce- dures, dates, laboratory identification, sample collection location, and the name of the sampler. This is important for later recall or legal challenge. 2. Soil Samples a. Hydrocarbons: Soil samples collected from a backhoe or from the ground should be collected in a thin-walled stainless steel or brass cylinder at least three inches long by one inch in diameter that has been prepared by the laboratory doing the analysis or the project consultant. .About'one inch of soil should be removed from the immediate surface area where the sample is to' be taken and the cylinder then pounded into the soil With a wooden mallet. No headspace should be present in the cylinder once the sample is col- lected. When the sample is collected, each end of the ~ cylinder should be covered with aluminum foil and then capped with a polyethylene lid, taped, and labeled. The sample should then be immediately placed in an ice chest containing dry ice and kept frozen for delivery to the laboratory. Care should be taken throughout to avoid contamination of both the inside and outside of the cylinder and its contents (1). Samples should be kept frozen at the laboratory until they are analyzed. Holding time should not exceed 14 days from the time of collection. Frozen soil cores should be removed from Ehe cylinders by spo~ heating the cylinder and immedi- ately extruding the sample (or a portion of it). A portion of the frozen sample should be removed and Rr.ePared for analysis according to approved EPA methods. In situations where the above procedure is inappropriate, i.e. semi-solid samples, glass vials (properly prepared by contract laboratory or consultant) with Teflon seal and screw cap should be used, and maintained at 4°C until analysis. b. Organolead: Tetraethyl/tetramethyl-lead are volatile; therefore, soil samples, should be collected in cylinders and frozen as described for volatile hydrocarbons above. -54- c. Shipping Samples: Vhere commercial shippers are' involved, dry ice may present Department of Transportation (DOT) i shipping problems and "blue ice" may have to be substituted. 3. Uater Samples a. Free floating product (from a well): Sampling of free floating product on the surface of ground water should not be performed until the well has been allowed to stabilize for at least 24 hours after development or other withdrawal procedure. A sample should be collected that is indicative of the thickness of floating product within the monitoring well. It, ts may be accomplished by the use of a clear, acrylic bailer designed to collect a liquid sample where free product and ~round water meet. A graduated scale on the bailer is helpful for determining the thickness of free product. Smmples should bo field-inspected for the presence of odor and/or sheen in addition to the above evaluation. Electronic measuring devices also are available for deter- mining the thickness of the hydrocarbon layer floating on ground water. b. Dissolved product (from a well): If free product is detected, analysis of water for dissolved product should be conducted. Prior to collecting a water sample, a well should be purged until temperature, conductivity and pH stabilize. Often, this will require removal of four or more well volumes by bailing or pumping. Once well volumes are removed and well water is stabilized, a sample can be taken after the water level approaches 80 percent of its initial level. Where water level recovery is slow, the sample can be collected after stabilization is achieved. Ground water samples should be collected in a manner which reduces or eliminates the possibility of loss of volatile constituents from the sample. For collecting samples, a gas-actuated positive displacement pump or a submersible pump is preferred. A Teflon or stainless steel bailer is acceptable. Peristaltic pumps or airlift pumps should not be used. Cross-contamination from transferring pumps (or bailers) from well to well can'-occur and should be avoided by thor- ough cleaning between sampling episodes. Dedicated (i.e., permanent installation) well pumps, while expensive, are often cost effective in the long term and ensure data reliability relative to cross-contamination. If transfer of equipment is necessary, sampling should proceed from the leas~ contaminated to the mos~ contaminated well, if the latter information is available before sample collection. -55- Vater samples should be collected in vials or containers specifically designed to prevent loss of volatile constitu- ents from the sample. These vials should be provided by an analytical laboratory,, and preferably, the laboratory conducting the analysis. No headspace~should be'~present in the sample container once the container has been capped. This can be checked by inverting the bottle, once the. sample is collected, and looking for bubbles. Sometimes it is not possible to collect a sample without air bubbles, particu- larly if water is aerated. In these cases, the investigator should record the problem and account for probable error. Cooling samples may also produce headspace (bubbles), but these will disappear once the sample is warmed for analysis. Samples should be placed in an ice chest maintained at 4°C with blue ice (care should be taken to prevent freezing of the water and bursting of the glass vial). A thermometer with a protected bulb should be carried in each ice chest. c. Surface water: Grab samples should be collected in appro- priate glass containers supplied by the laboratory. The sample should be collected in such a manner that air bubbles are not entrapped. Semisolid samples should be collected the same way. The collected samples should be refrigerated (blue ice, 4°C) for transport and analyzed within 14 days of collection. B. Guidelines for Handling Samples (Presented in Tables 3-2 and 3-3) TABLE 3-2 REQUIRED CONTAINERS, PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES, AND HOLDING TIMES FOR WATER SAMPLES 1_/ Maximum Test Container 2_/ Preservation Holding Time 3_/ Purgeable aromatic G, Teflon- Cool, 4°C, Analyze as soon hydrocarbons (BTX&E) lined septum 0,008~ Na2S203 G_/ as possible (max. Method 8020 or 602 HC1 to pH2 5_/ 14 days) Total petroleum G Cool, 4°C Analyze as soon hydrocarbons as 0,008% Na2S203 4_/ as possible (max. gasoline HC1 to pH2 5_/ 14 days) Total petroleum G Cool, 4oc 14 days; analyze ~ydrocarbons -- extrac: within diesel fuel oil 40 days 1_/ Modified from 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 136, Guide- lines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants Under the Clean Water Act. 2_/ Glass (G). 3_/ Samples should be analyzed as soon as possible after collection. times listed are the maximum times that samples may be held before analysis and still be considered valid. Samples may be held for a longer period only if the collector or laboratory has data on file show that the specific types of samples under study are stable for the longer time. Some. samples may not be stable for the maximum time period given in the table. 4_/ Should only be used in the presence of residual chlorine. 5_/ Sample receiving no pH adjustment mus: be analyzed within seven days of sampling. -57- TABLE 3- 3 ' HOLDING TIME FOR SOIL SAMPLES Analyte Holding Time for Soil Benzene, toluene, xylenes Analyze as soon as possible (maximum 14 days) Total Petroleum Hydrocar- Analyze as soon as possible bons, as gasoline (maximum 14 days) Total Petroleum Hydrocar- Extract within 14'days, bons, as diesel analyze within 40 days Results from samples not meeting the listed holding times should be considered minimum values. That is, the actual concentration is equal to or greater than the concentration determined after the holding time has expired. C. Recommended Analytical Methods Recommended analytical procedures ~are summarized in Table 3-4. The Department of Health Services may approve an alternate method which has at least equivalent detection limits, precision, and accuracy as the referenced methods. For example, a cyrogenic gas chromatogra- phy/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) system may be used instead of a gas chromatography (GC) system, provided the GC/MS system can produce .data which are equal or better than data provided by the referenced GC system in terms of d~tectton limits, precision, and accuracy for an identical sample matrix. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) arising from gasoline or diesel and total organic lead can be analyzed by the- attached Department of Health Services (DHS) methods. The investigator should alert the laboratories to the procedures given in Table 3-4 and supply the laboratories with copies of the.TPH and total organic lead methods, if necessary. TABLE 3-4 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES Substance to be Analytical Analyzed Method Reference 1. Gasoline: .BC = ~,'< ~o~ ....... ,.'/ TWH a. Benzene, toluene, xylene, EPA 8020 (soil) 2 ethylbenzene (aromatic volatile organics) EPA 602 (water) 3,5 b. Total Petroleum DHS (recommended See attached Hydrocarbons procedure) method c. Halogenated volatile EPA 8010 (soil) 2 organics, including 1,2-dibromoethane (EDB) EPA 601 (water) 3,5 1,2-dichloroethane (EDC) EDB DHS extraction 6 method 1_/ 2. Diesel: a. Total Petroleum DHS (recommended See attached Hydrocarbons procedure) method 'i b. Total Recoverable EPA 418.1 4 · Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TKPH) ~_/ 3. Organolead: DHS See attached DHS method 4. Ignitability: Flash Point EPA 1010, 1020 2 1_/ This is a liquid/liquid extraction procedure for water samples. The method was developed by DHS Aand provides a means for detecting EDB at a lower concentration (parts per trillion) than does EPA method 8010 (parts per billion). The procedure was developed to detect EDB in ground water, as part of the AB 1803 program. 2_/ This is a relatively quick analytical procedure that measures recover- able petroleum hydrocarbons, including oil and grease. It is applic- able for measuring light fuel fractions, but loses approximately half of any gasoline present (ref. 4). The method costs less than the recommended procedure and is useful primarily as a survey tool. Detection Limits for LUFf Investigations Minimum detection limits for key analytes are listed in Table 3-5. The detection limits for benzene, toluene, and xylene are consistent with the experience of several commercial lab6ratories'under optimal conditions. The detection limits for benzene, toluene, and xylene in soil assume the direct purging of a soil-water mixture and subsequent gas chromatography -photoionization detection (GC-PID). Lower detection limits are achievable with available technology by using: modifications of reference methods, a larger sample or additiOnal concentration techniques. Detection limits may be significantly higher in samples with interfe~ing organics or matrix effects. The readily obtainable 0.3 ppm detection limit cited on page 20 takes into account potential sample interferences. TABLE 3-5 DETECTION LIMITS FOR COMMONLY ANALYZED FUEL PRODUCTS Water Sbil Analyte ~g/1 ~g/kg Method Benzene 0.3 5 EPA 602, 8020 Toluene 0.3 5 EPA 602, 8020 Xylenes, total 0.6 15 EPA 602, 8020 Total Petroleum 500.0 10,000 DHS: GC-FID Hydrocarbons D. Recommended DHS Analytical Methods To=al Fe=roleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Analysis -- Gasoline and Diesel 1. Scope and Application a. This method is for the determination of gasoline and diesel in contaminated ground water, sludges, and soil. b. This method is recommended for use by, or under the super- vision of, analysts experienced in the operation of GC and in the interpretation of chromatograms. 2. Summary of Method -.) a. This method involves the determination of volatile hydro- carbons (gasoline) by the headspace method or the puree and trap method (EPA method 5030) (2) and the determination of semivolatile organics (diesel) by the extraction method. A sample, after headspace, purge and trap, or extraction treatment, is injected into a CC, and compounds in the GC effluent are detected by an FID. An aliquot of each sample will be spiked with standards to determine percent recovery and limits of detection for that sample. b. The sensitivity of this method usually depends on the level of interference rather than on instrument limitations. Table 3-6 lists the limits of detection in the absence of interferences for water and soil samples. TABLE 3-6 T?H METHOD DETECTION LIMITS Extraction Headspace Parameter Matrix Method Method Gasoline Aqueous 0.5 mg/1 5.0 mg/1 Soil 10.0 mg/kg 5.0 mg/kg Diesel Aqueous 0.5 mg/1 Soil 10.0 mg/kg 3. Interferences a. Solvents, reagents, glassware, and other sample-processing hardware must be demonstrated to be free from interferences under the conditions of the analysis by running method blanks. b. Before processing any' samples,' the analyst should demon- strate daily, chroQgh the analysis of.a solvent blank, thac the entire system is interference-free. 4. Apparatus and Materials a. Gas-tight syringe: One cubic centimeter (cc) with chromato- graphic needles. ..~ 5.4 Pipet 0.1 ml of 12 solution into the flask and mix for about ' one minute. 5.5 Pipet 5 ml of 1% Aliquat 336 in MIBK and mix. 5.6 Dilute to volume with MIBK and mix. 6. Standard and Blank Preparation Prepare appropriate working standards and blank from 100 g/ml Pb standard. 6.1 Add approximately 20 ml of xylene to 50 ml volumetric flask. Pipet the correct amount of the 100 ~g/ml Pb standard into the flask to prepare the right standard. 6.2 Add immediately 0.1 ml of 12 solution and mix well. 6.3 Add 5 ml of 1% Aliquat 336/MIBK and mix well. 6.4 Dilute to volume with MIBK and mix well. 6.5 Blank xylene/MIBK (40% xylene) should be treated as the working standard solutions. 7. Analysis r 7.1 Set up the AA according to the manufacturer's instructions. Use background correction to decrease broad band absorption interference. 7.2 Aspirate H20 into the flame and adjust the acetylene'flow to · 8.5 1/min and the air flow to 25 I/min. 7.3 Aspirate MIBK containing 40% xylene into the flame. 7.4 Reduce the acetylene flow to about 4.8 1/min and make fine adjustments in the acetylene flow to produce an even flame with no yellow luminescence to obtain optimum conditions. 7.5 Asp'irate into the flame' blank, working standards, and sample to measure the absorbencies. Estimate the concentrations of organolead in sample. 8. Calculations Solids: 100 ml 50 ml ug/1 x F - ~g/g organolead calculated 50g 20 ml 1000 ml/1 as Pb. where F - dilution factor. -68- E. Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) 1. Definition 'i Quality Assurance: Systematic procedures that are used to provide assurance to a producer or user of information that defined standards of quality were met. QA covers field and laboratory performance, i.e., the quality control procedures that have been followed. Quality Control: The activities that are used to implement the quality assurance plan· Quality includes adequacy of the methods employed, reliability of the results, and cost effectiveness· 2. Chain of Custody A Chain of Custody Record is the disposition of a sample from collection to laboratory delivery. A Chain of Custody Record should be made out after samples are collected and signed by individuals collecting, relinquishing, and receiving samples. See Figure III-4 for an example of a U. S. EPA Chain of Custody form. 3. Laboratory Certification Ail soil and water samples should be analyzed by a DHS-certified laboratory. Two certification programs exist in California and both are administered by DHS. Additional information can be · ~ obtained from the addresses listed: · Hazardous Materials Laboratory Certification Program California Department of Health Services Hazardous Materials Laboratory 2151 Berkeley Way, Room 234 Berkeley, CA 94704 (415) 540-3003 Drinking Water Laboratory Certification California Department of Health Services Sanitation and Radiation Laboratory 2151 Berkeley Way, Room 465 Berkele~,"CA 94704 (415) 540-2201 -69- Figure III-4 &EPA U~t~l St.tee Re~ion I0 £n~ronmental PtotK~lon 12~D Sl~h A,,~nue Agency Se. attte WA D6101 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD PROJECT SAMPLERS: no· REMARKS LAB # STATION DATE TIME SAMPLE TYPE ~,,~ RELINQUISHED BY: t$,e-a.,~ RECEIVED BY: ts~.~,- DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: t.t,~,~,.~ RECEIVED BY: t$;e-,.~,~ DATE/TiME RELINQUISHED BY: t$.~.,,~..~ RECEIVED BY: tsaa~,,~,~ DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: ts.~...,~..I REC'V'D BY MOBILE ~B FOR FIELD D~TE/TIME ANAl: t~ DISPATCHED MY: tl~ DATE/TIME RECEIVED FOR ~B BY: t~.~,~ DATE/TIME M~HOD OF SHIPMENT: ~ll~,~t~ Ot~t~l--ACCOm~nt Sh, p~t U.S. [PA Chain o[ Cus:ody -70- 4. 0A Project Plan: This is a plan that outlines objectives. operational procedures, and the means for assuring how data of known and acceptable qt.~ality can be obtained. WI,era major projects are involved in remedial action, a plan for a perform- ance audit (field and laboratory opera~iox,s) and corrective action may be needed. 5. Number of Samples to Collect: The number of samples required relates directly to project objectives and the level of data reliability desired. The following are minimal recommendations and do not ensure that representative or statistically valid sampling of a site has been achieved. Soil -- Tank excavation hole: At least two samples col- lected immediately after the tank is removed. This number should be increased for more accurate representation in very large excavatior~s. Soil backgro,~nd: Average of three samples. Soil: Where >10 samples are to be collected at the same site, five percent duplicates should be collected and analyze'd. Water: Volatile organic analysis (VOA): Ail VOA samples should be collected in duplicate and analyzed in duplicate. Water: Non-VOA analysis (.5-i-liter volume): One sample. QC for remedial action should be desigmed ~o meet clean- up/closure objectives for the particular site. The basic principles outlined should be applied. A general guide for field QC samples is presented in Table 3-7. 6. Special Split-Sample Collection Instructions (7) a. Purgeable organics or VOAs: Individual samples are taken rapidly in succession in the specified containers. The individual samples may then be analyzed in replicate. With the exception of samples collected in a bailer, VOA splits should not be collected by pouring from one container into another. Table 3-7 A General Guide for Collection of Field QC Samples (?) ~C Sample Description and Purpose Number of OC Samples lrip or Travel Blank A sample container filled in the 1. One per sample set. (~andatory for volatile laboratory with organic-free organics) water and carried unopened during '2J Greater than 20 samples the sampling trip. It must be per set 5 percent trip prepared by the laboratory supplying blank analysis should be sample containers. It iS used to done. Statistical need identify contamination introduced and cost effectiveness from the originating Laboratory. should be considered The trip blank remains with the where large numbers of collected samples and is analyzed samples are involved. ' along with the field samples to check residual contamination. Trip blanks are mandatory for volatile hydrocarbon analysts in water. Field Blank A sample container filled with 1. One for each team per trip (optional) organic-free water that is taken or on the field trip. It is opened and exposed at the sampling site 2. One for each relevant to detect contamination from air sample type or exposuhe. The water sample may be poured into appropriate containers 3. One per day at a single to simulate actual sampling conditions, site Contamination from air exposure can vary considerable .from site to site 4. The need for field blanks therefore, the need for this sample should be made relative to should be evaluated relative to the site specific conditions sampling situation. Reference and sampling require,ments. material (i.e.. chemically defined soil) can be used in lieu of organic- free water as dictated by the sampling needs. Blind Sample A sample whose composition or source 1. One per sample set up to (optional) is known to the submittee but not known 10 samples. by the person logging in samples or the analyst. It is submitted along with the 2. 10-14 samples: S percent regular field sample set. ~hen both the blind sample analysis. ~nttctpated sample composition and the >40 samples: requirements blind status of the sample are not known should be based on the to the analyst, the sample is called a needs of the project. a "~ouble blind' sample. A blind sample is used to check analytical performance and proficiency. Field Duplicate A second field sample collected identically I. The need to collect (optional except to and immediately after the first sample, duplicates is determined required for volatile This provides'a measure of analytical by project objectives. analysis (YOA) precision and second sample confirmation. It provides a means of determining random 2. The number of sample error when adequate numbers of duplicates duplicates required is are collected. Field duplicates may also determined by project be collected as splits. Duplicates can objectives and QC also serve as blind field samples, requirements. Split Sample 1/ The goal in obtaining splits is to 1. 10 percent (optional) obtain subsamples that do not differ significantly from each other or from 2. Need for these is determine¢ the original sample. These are used by project objectives. to compare performance between/among laboratories. 1_~/ Split sample collection has critical limitations. See special instructions in the following section. -72- b. Nonvolatile hydrophobic organics (e.g., PCBs): Due co the hydrophobi¢ character of these compounds, it is not prac- tical to split an aqueous sample. Consequently, ic ~s i reco~nended that replicates be run on the extract only. That is, when the analytical procedure for a hydrophobic organic is followed, the extract should be carried through in replicate through the column chromatography and analyt- ical determinations. c. Other analyses: Samples are split into portions while the original sample container is agitated. d. Metals, except chromium VI and dissolved metals: When splitting samples for metal analyses, the sample must be acidified with nitric acid to pH <2 before dividing the sample. Acidlffcation is especially critical if the sample is basic, in older to prevent precipitation of metallic hydroxides. REFERENCES 1. D. B. Cohen, D. Gilmore, ¢. Fischer, and G. W. Bowes. 195B. Water Quality and Pesticides: 1,2-Dichloropropane (1,2-D) and 1,2-Dichloro- propene (1,B-D). Special Projects Report No. 83-8SP. 'California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA. 2. U. S. EPA. 1982. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste; Phys- ical/Chemical Methods. SW-846, Second Edition. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U. S. EPA, Washington, D.C. (A third edition is available now, *but because of extensive changes that were made, U. S. EPA has not incorporated the third edition into RCRA regulations at this time.) 3. U. S. EPA. 1982. Test Methods for Organic Chemical Analysis of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater. EPA 600/4-82-057, U. S. EPA Enviroru~ental Monitoring and SupPort Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. 4. U. S. EPA. 1983. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. EPA 600/4-79-020, Revised March 1983. U. S. EPA Environmental Moni- toring Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. 5. U. S. EPA. 1984. Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants Under the Clean Water Act. Federal Register: 40 CFR, Part 136, Friday, October 26, 1984. Washington, D.C. 6. Department of Health Services. 1985. Recommended Methods of Analysis for the Organic Components Required for AB 1803, Fourth Edition. California DHS Sanitation and Radiation L~boratory, Berkeley, CA. 7. Fischer, C. 1986. Quality Assurance Management Guidelines for Environmental Studies. Draft Report. California State Water Resources Control BoArd, Sacramento, CA. 8. National Research Council. 1981. Prudent Practices for Handling Hazardous Chemicals in Laboratories. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. REVISED TECHNICAL APPROACH LEO BLACK ESTATE After consideration of comments received from Kern County Health Department in a letter dated 2-6-90 and in a technical meeting on 1-31-90, it is proposed to deal with the contamination problem at Leo Black Estate in the following manner: Phase I Contaminated soil excavation/aeration per guidelines provided to WZI Inc. by the County (Exhibit 1). Phase II Determination of groundwater gradient from adjacent wells as identified in Exhibit 2 in accordance with County guidelines of one-half mile radius outlined in UT-50. Drill and install 2 groundwater monitoring wells (one up gradient and one down gradient) to characterize the current water quality beneath the property. The drilling, sampling, installation protocols as well as the Health and Safety Plan for this site were previously described in the workplan submitted to the County on 11-29-88, supplemented on 5-10- 89 and deemed acceptable on 2-6-90. Phase ill AnalYsis of Water Samples. Upon receiving the water analyses, all the available data will be integrated within one-half mile of the site, including those off-site wells used to establish the water gradient. A report will be prepared summarizing the field activities, the collection of data and analysis of any groundwater contamination found beneath the Leo Black Estate. REGULATION 8 ORGANIC COMPOUNDS RULE ~0 AERATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL AND REMOVAL OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (Adopted July I~;, 1~8~) " 8-~0-100 GENERAL 8--~0-101 Descriptlo~: The purpose of this Rule ls to limit the emission of organic compounds from soil that has been contaminated by organic chemical or petroleum chemical leaks or spills; to describe an acceptable soll .aeration procedure; and to describe an acceptable procedure for controlling emissions from underground storage tanks intended for removal. 8-1t0-110 Exemption, Storage Piles: Calculations of aeration volume under SectionS-~0- 204 shall not include storage piles that are covered per Section 8-~0-303; nor shall they include active storage piles. 8-Jt0-111 Exe.ptlon, Excavated Hole: The exposed surface of an excavated hole shall not be included in calculations of' aerated volume under Section 8-~0-112 Exemptlon~ .Sampling: Contaminated soil exposed for the sole purpose of sampling shall not be considered to be aerated. Removal of soil for sampling shall not qualify a pile as "active." $-~0-113 Exemptlon~ Non-volatlle Hydrocarbons: The requlrem,:nts of this Rule shall not apply if the soil is contaminated by a known organic chemical or petroleum liquid, and that chemical or liquid has an initial boiling point of 302°F or hlgher~ provided that the soil Is not heated, 8-Jt0-200 DEFINITIONS 8-~0-201 Acttve Storage PII¢: k pile of contaminated soil to ~hich soil is currently being added or from which soil is currently being removed. Activity must have occurred or' be anticipated to occur within one hour to be current. 8-~0-202 Aeration: Exposure of excavated contaminated soil to the air. 8-J~0-20~ Aeration Depth'. The smaller of the follo~ing: the actual average depth of contaminated soil; or 0.15 meters (0.5 feet) multlplled by the daily frequency with which soil Is turned. The exposed surface area includes the pile of excavated soil unless the pile is covered per Section 8-~0-~0]. 8-~0-20~ Aeration Volume: The volume of soil being aerated shall be calculated as follows: the exposed surface area (in square feet or square meters) shall be multiplied by the aeration depth. 8-~0-205 Contaminated Soil: Soil which has an organic content, as.measured using the procedure in Section 8-/~0'-602, exceeding $0 ppm(wt). 8-~0-205 Organic Coepo~Jnd: Any compound of carbon, excluding methane, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates and ammonium carbonate. 8-t~O-~ -'JULY 16, I~86 Exhibi: 1 8-~0-207 Organic Content: The concentration of organic compounds measured In the composite sample collected and analyzed using the procedures in Sections 8-q0- 601 and 8-~0-208 Vapor Irree~ The process of purging gases from a tank using dry ice to replace organic vapors with an Inert atmosphere. 8-k0-20~) Ventilation: The process of purging gases from a tank by blowing or drawing another gas through the tank. 8.~0o300 STANOAROS 8-~0-301 UnconC,-olled Aeration: A person shall not aerate contaminated soil at a rate in excess of that specified in Table 1 for the degree of organic content. The limitations in Table I apply to the entire faculty, and Indicate the volume of contamlnated sol1 that may be added, on any one day, to soll that is already aerating. Table 1 Allowable Rate of Uncontrolled Aeration ORGANIC CONTENT~' RATE OF UNCONTROLLED AERATION ppm (weight)~T'/jl~ Cubic meters/day Cubic yards/day <50 Exempt from this Rule. Subject to Rule 8-2. 50-100 qSP).0 600 100-500 ~)l.B 120 500-1000 45.~) 60 1000-2000 22.9 2000-)000 11.5 1 )000-q000 7.6 10 q000-5000 5.7 8 >5000 0.08 0.1 8-~0-302 Controlled Aeration: Sol1 may be aerated at rates exceeding the limitations of 8- q0-)01 provided emissions of organic compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at least ~)0~ by weight. 8-A0-303 Storage Plies: Contaminated soil which is not being aerated shall be covered except when soil is being added or removed. Any uncovered contaminated soil will be considered to be aerated. The soil may be covered with a layer of uncontaminated soil no less than six Inches deep; or it may be covered with a tarp or other covering, provided no head space where vapors may accumulate is formed. 8-~0-310 Underground Storage Tanks--Oecommlssloning: Any person wishing to permanently decommission an underground storage tank which previously contained organic compounds shall follow the following procedure: Il0.1 All piping shall be drained and flushed into the tank or other container. ~)10.2 All liquids and sludges shall be removed, to the extent possible, from the tank. It may be necessary to use a hand pump to remove the bottom few inches of product. Il0.) Vapors shall be removed from the tank using one of the following three 8-q0-q JULY 16, I~86 methods: 3.1 The tank may be filled with water, displacing vapors and hydrocarbon liquids. Water used for this purpose must be collected and/or dlsposed of In a manner approved by the APCO.. 3.2 Vapor freeing. 3.3 Ventilation. 8-~0-311 Vapor Freeing: No person shall vapor free a tank containing more than 0.001 gallons of Hquld organic compounds per gallon of tank capacity unless emissions of organic compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at least 8-40-312 Ventilation: No person shallventilateatankcontainlng more than 0.001 gallons of liquid organic compounds per gallon of tank capacity unless emissions of organic compounds to the atmosphere are reduced by at least 8-40-~00 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS 8-40-401 Excavation of Contaelnated $oih The person responsible for aeration.of any contaminated soil shall prov{de the District, by telephone, with the following information. This shall be provided no less than 2q hours prior to the spreadlng or heating of any contaminated soil. The District shall be notified within any of the parameters change. 401.1 Estimated total quantity of soil to be aerated. /401.2 Estimated quantity of soil to be aerated per day. /401.3 Estimated average degree of contamination, or total organ!c content of soil. /401./4 Chemical compositlon of contaminating organic compounds (I.e., gasoline, methylene chloride, etc.). /401.5 A description of the basis from which these estimates were derived (soil analysis test reports, etc.). 8-40-600 MANUAL OF PROCEDURES 8-40-601 Soil Sampling: One composite sample shali be collected and analyzed for every 50 cubic yards of excavated contaminated soil to be aerated. At least one composite sample shall be collected from each inactive, uncovered storage pile within 2q hours of excavation. Samples are not required if the soil is uncontaminated. 601.1 Each composite sample shall consist of four separate soil samples taken using the procedures described below. The soil samples shall remain separate until they are combined in the laboratory just prior to analysis. 601.2 Samples shall be taken from at least three inches below the surface of the pile. Samples shall be taken using one of the following two methods: 1.1 Samples shall be taken using a driven-tube type sampler, capped and sealed with inert materials, and extruded in the lab in order toreduce the loss of volatile materials; or 1.2 Samples shall be taken using a clean brass tube (at least three inches long) driven into the soil with a suitable instrument. The ends of the brass tube shall then be covered with aluminum foil, then plastic end caps, and finally wrapped with a suitable tape. The samples shall then be immediately placed on ice, or dry ice, for transport to a laboratory. 8-40-5 JULY 16, 1986 $-ii0-60! ' I~eesurementof Organic Co~tentz 0rgenic content of soil shell be determined by the Regional ~ater Quality Control Board's Revised Analytlcel I1ethods~ Attachment 2~ 11/8/85, or any other method epproved by the APC0, 8~0-60) Determinatlo¢~ of Emissions: Emissions of orgenic compounds as specified in Section 8-q0-]02 shall be measured es prescribed in the Henual of Procedures, Volume IV, ST-7, 8-40-6 JULY 16, 1986 ,:- 0 " C '::','rEX REFINE Sum /! 'O 0 ° . MILl= o · · ' I RADIUS Iii · II- · $~ REFINI °° LEGEND_ ., P.M. POWER MACHINERY. 3818 PIERCE ROAD: CONTAMINATED SOIL D.O. DAVIES OIL CO.. 3506 1/2 GULF STREET: REFERi~ICE: WATER ELEVA31(~ FREE PRODUCT PLUME SEPT. lg~7 U.C. UNION CARBIDE. 3505 PIERCE ROAD: tl<iCWA- GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATED ~J W Z I I N C. A.T. ASSURED TRANSPORT, 3228 GIBSON ROAD: ~1 BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATED LEO BLACK ESTATE V.P. VAII ~-y PERFORATING LOCATION MAP & NEAR BY CONTAMINATION SITES B I 4/90 I I 2 IJZi INC. ~JORD PROCESSING JOB TICKET PRO.JECT DESCRIPTION: ":~"/1-¢~ -"~,::" .fj~' .JOB DUE DATE: ORDERED BY: '.~'"~ "-~'~_~ STORED AS: ..~70/O/~ C~ ~ ~ TIHE DATE & '[]HE STAT. FORM TYPED PROOFED DATE IN TIME REO OUT COOE* COOE* DESCRIPTIONS & INSTRUCTIONS BY BY *STATIONERY CODES *FORH CODES B-'BOND D=DRAFT L=:LETTERHEAD F=F i NAL E=ENVELOPE i~.dN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTML,~T- 2700 M Street HEALTH OFFICER Bakersfield. California ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Leon M Hebertson. M.D. Mailing Address: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 1415 Truxtun Avenue Vernon S. Reichard Bakersfield. California 93301 (805) 861-3636 November 18, 1988 Tom Gilbert 2000 Julian Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93304 Re: Soil and Groundwater Contamination detected beneath the 500 gallon gasoline tank removed from Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Rd., in Bakersfield, CA Dear Mr. Gilbert: The Kern County Health Department has not received a hydrogeological investigation workplan for contamination detected at Leo Black Electric, 3909 Pierce Rd. in Bakersfield, CA. The workplan must be approved before the assessment is initiated. As mentioned in previous correspondence, prompt action is required in order to protect groundwater sources.~The workplan must be submitted to this office by January 27, 198~. If you have any questions please feel free to ca~ll me at (805) 861-3636. ~~v¥~~!rely' Hazardous Materials Management Program AEG:cd OUTLINE FOR GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WOREPLAN The items on the outline below must be addressed, in the Geotechntcal Investigation Workplan. Missing Information may delay plan approval. I. Site Background A. Site Maps 1. Topographical Maps showing site location 2. Site Specific Plot Plan (including al/ process equipment, surface and subsurface piping, location of all abandoned and .existing tanks, product d~spensers and buildings). B. Documentation of suspected onstte and offsite contamination areas (including soil and groundwater analytical data). C. Description of known surface and subsurface geology and hydrogeology (including aquifer depths, gradients, drainage patterns and topographical features.) II. Proposal for identifying the plume. A. Soil Sampling Program 1. Site Map showing location and depths of all proposed soil sampling. 2. Justification and rationale for soil sample locations, depths and contaminants to be analyzed. 3. Sampling Equipment and procedure. 4. Laboratory that will do the analysis. B. Groundwater Sampling Program 1. Site Map showing location of all proposed groundwater monitoring wells. 2. Details of monitoring well construction. 3. Proposed frequency, number and methods for obtaining groundwater samples. 4. Justification and rationale for monitoring well locations, construction, sampling frequency and contaminants to be analyzed. 5. Sampling equipment and procedures. 6. Laboratory to be utilized, analysis requested, and QA/QC methods. ?. Proposed inventory of wells potentially impacted by site and immediate sampling plan. The assessment firm should be familiar with the Kern County Health Department permitting requirements for groundwater monitoring wells and test holes. WILSON ZUBLIN INC. TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANTS LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION This site characterization summarizes all sampling done to date at Leo Black Electric located at 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California, Section 23,T.29S, R.27E, M. D. B. & M. (Exhibit No. 1). The sampling was required by the Kern County Health Department (Amy Green letter dated March 6, 1987). Site History Leo Black Electric was in the business of sales and repairs on electric motors. The property is located in an industrial area of Bakersfield. The underground tank, which is the subject of this site characterization, had a capacity of 500 gallons and was installed in approximately 1956. The tank has been used intermittently for the storage of gasoline. It was not used in the last two years prior to removal; although, actual use has not been documented. No spills or leaks have been reported. McNabb Construction removed the tank on February 10, 1987. A copy of application for permit for abandonment of the underground tank is included as Exhibit No. 2. B. C. Laboratories collected and analyzed soil samples from depths of 2 and 5 feet below the tank. The analyses are included in Appendix No. 1. The site characterization work plan required by the Kern County Health Department, as stated above, was approved on June 23, 1987. The sampling at the site was completed on July 1, 1987. All the lab results were reported to Wilson Zublin Inc. by July 27, 1987. Contamination Mapping The extent of contamination has been summarized in a series of maps listed below: A. Total Volatile Hydrocarbons Exhibit No. 3 - Distribution at 10 feel~ below surface Exhibit No. 4 - Distribution at 15 feet below surface with cross sections A-A' and B-B' (east-west, north-south, respectively) 4800 EASTON DRIVE #114 * BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93309 POST OFFICE BOX 9217 · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93389 · 805/326-1112 Page 2 B. Isopach of Total Volatile Hydrocarbon Contamination (Exhibit No. 5) C. Oil and Grease Exhibit No. 6 - Distribution at 10 feet below surface Exhibit No. 7 - Distribution at 15 feet below surface with cross section C-C' and D-D' (east-west, north-south, respectively) The data indicates that BTX contamination (Exhibit No. 3 and 4) from the tank has reached groundwater. The toe of the contamination plume (identified on cross section. A-A', Exhibit No. 4) which has formed may be suggesting a southwesterly down-gradient direction. However, the borehole spacing was not designed to confirm our interpretation of a westerly regional gradient. The isopach of total volatile hydrocarbon contamination is presented in Exhibit No. 5. The oil and grease distribution (Exhibits No. 6 and 7) is offset to the east from the BTX plume. This situation suggests that there was a separate source of oil and grease contamination. The oil and grease concentration is at its highest at around 10 feet below the surface and decreases to less that 20 mg/kg at the water table at 15 feet. Discussion of Sampling, Lab Analysis The location of the boreholes drilled and sampled are identified in Exhibit Nos. 3 through 7. All the locations were measured from the 6 1/2" metal pipe near the northeast property corner; Borehole LB 2 was measured 5' south and 43' west of the corner. The locations on the Exhibits, therefore, are precise. Note that the location and number, of wells deviates from the original proposed work plan. The changes were discussed with Amy Green by telephone and with the attorney handling the estate on July 1, 1987 prior to drilling the modified and additional locations. Drilling and sampling was accomplished in accordance with the methodology outlined in the proposed work plan submitted to the Kern County Health Department on May 27, 1987. The data collected from each borehole is summarized in Appendix No. 2 (a total of five holes). The location at LB 4 was not drilled because contamination was documented in the surrounding holes and because the sampling that was done when the tank was removed was sufficient. WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Page 3 Table No. 1 summarizes the cores taken and preserved; those sent into B. C. Laboratories for analysis are also identified. The lab results of all the analyses along with copies of the Chain of Custody documents are included as Appendix No. 1. Hydrology The lithology in all the boreholes was massive sand to ~total depth. Groundwater was probably reached at 15 feet as noted on the lithologic logs in Appendix No. 1, but not penetrated enough to recover sufficient water sample for. analysis. The 15' water table is compatible with the regional setting. But as emphasized in the proposed work plan, the distribution of data is inadequate to precisely determine the gradient or the possibility of the water reached in these boreholes being perched water above the primary unconfined aquifer. Report Prepared By: Susan Chandler Kiser California Registered Geologist #3831 Expiration June 30, 1988 WILSON ZUBLIN INC. ORATORIES, Inc. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. PETROLEIJM 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12752 Sample Desc.: LB ~1 10-11.5' SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g 9 01 0 10 Toluene ug/g 19 21 0 10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g 11 84 0 10 p-Xylene ug/g 76 82 0 10 m-Xylene ug/g 181 92 0 10 o-Xylene ug/g 147 11 0 10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g 1847.92 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g 2293.83 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H,S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. ~/~.~J. ~f~'- Analyst LABORATORIES, In . P£TROLELIAf J' J' EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date ~of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12753 Sample Desc.: LB ~1 13-14.5' B SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: O1-Jul-87 O1-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g 1 90 0.10 Toluene ug/g 25 91 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g 47 O0 0.10 p-Xylene ug/g 115 13 0.10 m-Xylene ug/g 260 53 0.10 o-Xylene ug/g 266 62 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g 67.32 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g 2906.47 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g 3690.88 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C! to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. .~g-l~n- - Analyst .ABORATORIES, Ino. P~TROL~U~ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12754 Sample Desc.: LB ~2 10-11' SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: O1-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0 10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this. report. ~J~ ~li~ Analyst LABORATORIES. Inc. J. J. ~LIN, R~, CHEM. ENGR. ~TROLE~¥ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-8? BAKERSFIELD, CA..93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12755 Sample Desc.: LB ~2 15-16.§' SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 'Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (Cl to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. AG~I~LIL TIJR£ ABORATORIES, Inc. PET~OL£U¥ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12756 Sample Desc.: LB ~2 15-16.5' WATER' DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Ana lys i s Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0 10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g Hone Detected 0. l0 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: NO WATER IN SAMPLE. SOIL MATRIX OF SAMPLE WAS ANALYZED. VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin ated] constituents on this report. LABORATORIES, InC. ~T~OL~ 41(30 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12757 Sample Desc.: LB ~3 10.5-11' B SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level- Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. E~in Analyst LABORATORIES. In . 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12758 Sample Desc.: LB ~3 15-15.5' SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: O1-Jul-87 O1-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g 38 49 0.10 Toluene ug/g 48 62 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g 129 80 0.10 p-Xylene ug/g 330 30 0.10 m-Xylene ug/g 673 26 0.10 o-Xylene ug/g 324 74 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g 3717.99 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g 5263.20 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. LABORATORIES, Irq ':. ~TRO~E~¥ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12759 Sample Desc.: LB ~5 15-15.5' A.B.C. SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0 10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0 10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (Cl~to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. By ~<./_/J. ~lin~ Analyst LABORATORIES, Ir-Ir-:. 4100 PIER~E RD., BAKERSFIELD, ~ALIFOR~IA 93308 PHONE 327-491 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12760 Sample Desc.: LB ~6 10.5-11.0' B SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 o-Xylene ° ug/g None Detected 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 'Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. LABORATORIES, Inc. ~TROLEU¥ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Date of P.O. BOX 9217 Report: 13-Jul-87 BAKERSFIELD, CA. 93389 Attention:E. GREENWOOD Lab No.: 12761 Sample Desc.: LB ~6 13.9-14.3' B SOIL DATE SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 01-Jul-87 01-Jul-87 09-Jul-87 Minimum Reporting Analysis Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Toluene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Ethyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 p-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 m-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 o-Xylene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ug/g None Detected 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 5.00 Total Vol. Hydrocarbons ug/g None Detected 0.10 TEST METHOD: California State D.O.H.S. SW 5020: Dry Matter Basis Comments: VOLATILE.HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to C20) utilizing a benzene factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all [non-chlorin- ated] constituents on this report. By 6~ j~. J.~gl-~n Analyst AG~91~LII TUR~ ABORATORIES, Inc. J. J. EGLII',I, REG. CHEI~. PETtiOIEU¥ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Wilson Zublin, Inc. Date Reported: 7/21/87 P. O. Box 9217 Date Received: 7/1/87 Bakersfield, CA 93589 Laboratory No.: 127S4 - 127SS (addition) Sample Description: Oil & Grease, mg/kg LB#2 10-11', Soil, sampled by E. Greenwood/M. Rector 8S8. LB#2 1S-16.S', Soil, sampled by E. Greenwood/M. Rector (-) 20. B C LABORATORIES, INC. LABORATORIES, InC. J. J. EGLIN, REG. CHEM. ENGR. P~cTROL£U~ 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 Wilson Zublin, Inc. Date Reported: 07/28/87 P. O. Box 9217 Date Received: 07/24/87 Bakersfield, CA 93389 Laboratory No.: 14674 - 14676 Attention: Eric Greenwood Sample Descriptions: Oil & Grease~ mg/kg LB1 @ 13-14.5' 07/01/87 ,144. LB2 @ 5' 07/01/87 318. LB3 @ 10-10.5' 148. LABORATORIES, INC. - ..>,,' t.~.,~,~.- LABORATORIES, Int. J. J. EGLIN, I~EG. CHEM. ENGII. 4100 PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327°4911 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Report to: Company Attn:<',"V,'... Invoice ~o: Company (] '~ (~ 6~;'u-~ ~dress Sample Type: (check one) Drinking Water Surface Water Was.tewater -'--) Soil Sludge "'-~ Other (specify) Collector' s Name [:. (., ~'~'c,~t.~ ced ~'~'~ ~ ' / Company' Name ~..C', ~ 9,Y,'t '~-; L'~$ ~ Company's Address 6~':5 Date Collected: ')/'/~'-) Time collected: Sample 'Description(s) ~L~ i; I~~ 3 ~ ~ ~ Lt') 2_ Sample(s) Relinquished to lab by: --t,tC4 ~.-, ('~.~r';v.r',.~.r; .... .- ,-' Date Time Sample(s) Received in lab by; , ~,~.~ / Date Time 1. Sample Relinquished by: Name Date Time 2. Sample Received by: Name Date Time 3. Sample Relinquished by: Name Date Time 4. Sample Received by: Name Date Time 5. Sample Relinquished by: Name Date Time 6. Sample Received by: Name Date Time LABORATORIES, Ir-lc. ~E~OIEUm 41~ PIERCE RD., BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93308 PHONE 327-4911 CI~IN 0F CUSTODY RECO~ ' - / Invoice to: Company ~=~vo.~ ~- ~o~ Address Sample Type: (check one) Drinking Water Surface Water Wastewater Oil /Soil Sludge Other (specify) Collector's Name ~-~--_G~c-~s~[/J~, ~C~%~- Telephone( ) ~.-[((~ Company' s .Address t Date Time Sample(s) Received in lab by: Qjl. b½~L ,.~ Date· Time 1. Sample Relinquished by: Name Date Time 2. Sample Received by: Name Date Time 3. Sample Relinquished by: Name Date Time 4. Sample Received by: Name Date Time 5. Sample Relinquished by: Name Date Time 6. Sample Received by: Name Date Time APPENDIX 2 DATE DRILLED: 7/1/87 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC LOGGED BY:Rector, Kiser,Greenwood TEST BORING LB 1 HOLE DIAMETER: 6-!/2" O.D. WZl I SAMPLES DESCRIPTION Depth .ith- "[ NO. TYPE o~ m ~ REMARKS (ft) ! )logy ~o_ ~3-- ~' I-T' ASPHALT and ASPHALT RESIDUE "- ~ ~ 8:30 SAND, tan, fine to very fine grained with ocassional medium to coarse grains, angular to subangular, micaceous,~,::~.;~;~'~'~ massive, slightly moist, no gasoline odor .~ ...... A 1-3/8" split spoon sampler ~ ~ Split 3 was used after a 2-3/8" ~ sampler (equipted with brass 1 Spoon 2 ~i~I 1-3/8" 6 sleeves) failed to recover any Slight gasoline odor began at 7' · sample material. SAND, as above, except increasing ~'~ grain size with depth. .,;... · '~";' ~! Did not attempt to use a 2-3/8"' Increasing gasoline odor with depth ~ 1 0 .-;..;. 2 Split sampler .'¢ .'.'[/~J Spoon 13 9:15 TOTAL VOLATILE ,~-. 1-3/8" HYDROCARBONS: 2293 ug/g SAND, tan, medium to coarse grained ~?.'. OIL and GREASE:144 rog/kg with some finer grains, subangular to ~"." ,:.-.'. k"] Split 2 subrounded, micaceous, massive, ,;.-.',[/Y~J3 Spoon 4 TOTAL VOLATILE slightly moist, strong gasoline odor. 15 2-3/8" 6 HYDROCARBONS: 3691 ug/g No Free Groundwater20 Tota 10:10 Encountered Depl ~ Sand, fine grained, massive ~ Conglomerate I Asphalt ~ Sand, medium grained, massive ~ Siltstone / Asphalt Residue ~ Sand, coarse grained, massive ~ Clay or Claystone ~ Concrete ~ Sand, poorly sorted ~ Limestone ~ Hydrocarbon Odor DATE DRILLED:7/1/87 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC I~! LOGGED BY:Rector, Kiser,Greenwood TEST BORING LB 2~' HOLE DIAMETER: 6-1/2" O.D. .WZl . . SAMPLES _.c · Depthl Lith "' [ NO. TYPE o~~ m E REMARKS DESCRIPTION (ft)~1 olo(. I ~ o. ~ ~ ~ ASPHALT and ASPHALT RESIDUE 6:30 SAND, tan, fine to very fine grained with ocassional medium grains, ~ odor angularto subangular, micaceous, _~_ j~ ~ $ ~t'~~ ~: massive, slightly moist, no hydrocarbon i ~ Split OIL and GREASE: ~ 1 Spoon 13 318 mg/kg ' odor began at 7' ~ ~ 2-3/8" Slight hydrocarbon _ SAND,sAND, aStan,above,to exceptcoarse increasinggrained, grain _...~l[~ I size with depth, slight hydrocarbon odor. Increasing hydrocarbon odor with depth 10 L:~ Split 3 TOTAL VOLATILE fine .-'~i ~ 2 Spoon 3 7:20 HYDROCARBONS: very poorly sorted, subangular to~ 2-3/8" 5 (None Detected) OIL and GREASE: subrounded, micaceous, massive, ! ~ 858 mg/kg slightly moist, strong hydrocarbon odor. SAND, as above, except with less fines, Split TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: becoming meister. -- 1 $ '.'~ 3 Spoon. 14 (None Detected) Groundwater Encountered -- 1-3/8" at 15' 2" (measured with ai_~.- 8:30 OIL and GREASE: steel tape covered with a Less Than 20 rog/kg water- indicating chemical) 20 Hole was plugged with seven 60 pound sacks of cement ~ Sand, fine grained, massive ~ Conglomerate I Asphalt ~ Sand, medium grained, massive ~ Siltstone I Asphalt Residue ~ Sand, coarse grained, massive ~ Clay or Claystone ~ Concrete ~ Sand, poorly sorted ~ Limestone ~J HYdrOcarbon OdOr DATE DRILLED: 7/1/87 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC LOGGED BY:Rector, Kiser,Greenwood TEST BORING LB 3 HOLE DIAMETER: 6-~" O.D. WZl _E SAMPLES DESCRIPTION Depth Ih- ~ NO. TYPE ~o ~ I.= REMARKS (ft) y -r ASPHALT and ASPHALT RESIDUE _ ~ 10:20 ~,~,,,~., '~.~:~ SAND, tan, very fine to fine grained with - I ocassional medium to coarse grains, - I angular to subangul~.r, micaceous, - I~'~;~ "~'=="%' massive, slightly moist, no gasoline odor ~ -- 5 ~ ~:~..%==~.~=:~?. ~ Split 2 -~,.,~.. Spoon 4 ., SAND, as above, except increasing - I 2-3/8" 6 '.~.'~:..=~:~.: '.~:! grain size with depth. ~. - ; '; SAND, tan, fine to medium grained ~.~-'.~. TOTALVOLATILE with some coarser grains, subangular to ~ 10 {.'.,;.'.';. ~1~ Split HYDROCARBONS: ';~-;"-';[j~j2 Spoon 13 subrounded, micaceous, massive, - ¢.'.~.'.'~ (None Detected) slightly moist, no gasoline odor. ~'"-';'"~ 2-3/8" - OIL and GREASE: 148 mg/kg Slight gasoline odor began at 14' -~._. ~ ._= .-. ~ ;. ,; Did not attempt to use a -- :;:~ ~;".~'~ 2-3/8" sampler SAND, tan, medium to coarse grained, 15 ~ 3 Split 1 0 1 1 :40 subangular to subrounded, micaceous, - Totalv...3 Spoon NOTE: Hydrocarbon 'rainbow" massive, very moist, gasoline odor. Depth 1-3/8" appeared on the sampling tool - TOTAL VOLATILE No Free Groundwater - HYDROCARBONS: 5263 ug/g Encountered _ ~20 ~ Sand, coarse grained, massive , ~ Clay or Claystone ~ Concrete ~ Sand, poorly sorted ~ Limestone L~. Hydrocarbon Odor / DATE DRILLED:7/1/87 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC I~1 LOGGED BY:Rector, Kiser,Greenwood TEST BORING LB-6 HOLE DIAMETER: 6-~2' O.D. WZl DESCRIPTION Depth Lith. SAMPLES °~ r~ .____ ~e REMARKS (ft) ology ~. ~. NO. TYPE ASPHALT and ASPHALT RESIDUE 1:40 ..', ...', ...':. SAND, tan, very fine to medium grained, - angular to subangular, very micaceous, - .~...,;...-~...~ massive, slightly moist, no gasoline odor '~...'.;;.-.~;.{ -- -- 5 ~ ;.~".';".~ ~ Split SAND, tan, fine to medium grained, - -,;...,;...-,;...~LXjl Spoon 11 subangular to subrounded, micaceous, -; .'. ,; .'. ¢ .'. ~ 2-3/8" massive, slightly moist, no gasoline odor. ;,;...-,;...-~...~ - '{ ... ,; .-. ~..,. { 2:00 SAND, tan, fine to coarse grained .-~...-~;.,;...~ with rare small pebbles, subangular to -- 10 -,~...{..;.~;..-~ ~ Split TOTAL VOLATILE '~.'.,;.'.~,.'.~~ 2 Spoon 17 subrounded, micaceous, massive, - ;.~...-,;....;...~ HYDROCARBONS: slightly moist, no gasoline odor. _ .-;;...~...¢...~ 2-3/8" (None Detected) SAND, tan, medium to coarse grained, .'~;.'~;.¢,'.~ subangular to subrounded, micaceous, ';".';".¢".~ ~ Split TOTAL VOLATILE massive, very moist, no gasoline odor. ~ 15,_.,3 Spoon 21 2:25 HYDROCARBONS: - Total 2-3/8" (None Detected) No gasoline odors - Depth No Free Groundwater - Encountered , --20 ~ Sand, fine grained, massive ~ Conglomerate Ii Asphalt ~ Sand, medium grained, massive ~ Siltstone B Asphalt Residue ~ Sand, coarse grained, massive ~ Clay or CIaystone ~ Concrete ~ Sand, p0orly sorted ~J~ Limestone ~ Hydrocarbon Odor I I For D~a/l ~ > :::+:.:.:.:. I ~g , I , { , I ' ~WILSON ZUBLIN INC. 'Bakersfield~ California ASPHALT LEO BLACK ELECTRIC -.- SITE CHARACTERIZATION BUILDING i WORKPLAN sc^L£ IN FEET SITE-SPECIFIC PLOT PLAN 0 20 40 I 5/8'~IDN:I 29 Geology: S.C. Kiser EXHIBIT No.~ oo II ! {............~~.~.:........................~..............~.............................~......~....... SCALE IN FEET < ~ ""'"'"'" · '.°.'.'-*.* -0 5 10 I [ EXCAVATION FROM ~ A~c TANK REMOVAL CEMENT SLAB APPENDIX 1 FORN~E~R LOCATION OF :~OLJND TANK ,~. v FENCE PROPERTY LINE '~ ~, ' ' ' X ASPHALT (None Detected) (None Detected) (None Detected) A' LB 6 LB 3 LB 2 2293 ~ LB 5 ASPHALT !~ WILSON ZUBLIN INC. BUILDING B:lkersfield, California LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION -N- TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS SCALE IN FEET TEN FEET BELOW GROUND FEET BELOW (ug/g) GROUND 0 5 10 Geol.: Kiser, Greenwood~ 7/87 ~ DN: 144 Engr.:Wilson ~ EXHIBIT No. 3 FORMIER LOCATION OF [JNDF. RGROUND TANK " ' X FENCE '~ PRO'~ERIY LINE _~ ASPHALT LB 6 LB 3 I _, LB 2 LB 5 ASPHALT ~ WILSON ZUBLIN INC. BUILDING ,, Bakersfield1 California LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION OIL AND GREASE FIFTEEN FEET SCALE IN FEET BELOW GROUND (m~/k~) * 13 FEET BELOW 0 5 10 Geol.: Kiser, Greenwood~ 7/87 ~ DN: 146 GROUND Engr.: Wilson ! EXHIBIT No. 6 FORI~I~R LOCATION OF f JNIDIERGRO~JN[:) TANK PROPERTY LIN ~ ' X ,, , ASPHALT A' LB 6 3 LB 2 8 LB LB 5 6 2 ASPHALT I~ WILSON ZUBLIN INC. BUILDING ~ Bakersfield1 California LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION VOLATILE HYDROCARBON SCALE IN FEET CONTAMINATION ISOPACH 0 5 10 Ge01.: Kiser, GreenwoodI 7/87 I Engr.:Wilson ~ EXHIBIT NO. 5 Kern County }le~lth Depdrtment'-' Permit N... -~ Division of Environmental Health Application Date 1700 Flower Street, Bakersfi%eld, CA 93305 No. of Tanks to ~---~~d .... 'T~ of ~lication (Fil~ Out One Application Per Facilit~ · ~ : ~,~ra'rY C10~u¢e/A~ndo~e~ ~ _.. ~e~anent Closure/~ndor,,ent A. Project Contact (~me, ~¢ code, phone),: rays 7~-~l~-Nights O~.rator - - -~~ Tel~ph°ne .... ~dress .... ' / Zip . .. Worker's C~a%ion C~r~ffida~i~n ~ O~ ~(~ Insurer ~~ ~. Envi~o~estal ~es~e~Con~actor ~.e.e,~~. ~ License No..~ .%. , ~rker's C~nsation C~rfifi~ation ~ ~ .... Insurer ~ D. Ch~ical C~sition of Materials Stor~ Tank ~ Chemical Stored (non-co~ercial name) Dates Stored Chemical Previously Stored lif" d i fferent) to to P. This applica:ion flor: ~emoval or ~a~ndo~ent in place · * PB~B ~OVIDE INFO~'PION REQUESTED ~ ~E SIDE O~ ~IS SHEB~ BEFORE This form has been completed under penalty of perjury and to t_h~ best of my knowlu~dge is true a,¥J correct'--') EXI{IBIT N~. .. //../ /..//_., Pro'gi¢te Descript[o~ of Ph~ 'cai Lay, out of Facility Using ~'._.,'.'.e Provided Below; ---~, Location of Pank(s), Piping & Dispense~(s) ---~ ,Proposed Sampling LocatioI~ Indicating Approximate Depth ~//of Samples Nearest Street or Intersection -TZ' %y Water Wells or Surface Waters,Within 100' Radius of Facil i ty NORTH ' ", SYCAMOJ~ · -' " DR " ~¢~ WILLOW DRIVE ~' .... LEO BLACK .Z' ,. .. ' Pierce Road 3909 Bakersfield ',/; · " ×,.,,,,, , ." Gl STREET. GE ,/f" .--. -.- /' ~3 z gRIN WAY .,, j ,"' I ~- INIOWAY 1 / · "T'. / ~ )R T ~: S ST J.. z _.' > THOMAS AVE, ROSEDALE HWY. u. ~u ~, COMMERCIAL ST ?. :i./,~' .",-/ ~ WILSON ZUBLIS INC. BakersHeldI. LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION SCALE IN MILES -N- o 0.8 LOCATION MAP Geol.::,.,. ~m,~,Kiser' Groenwood~ 7/87 ~ DN: 1~ WILSON ZUBLIN INC. TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANTS May 20, 1988 Amy Green Kern County Health Department 2700 "M" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Site Remediation Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Road Bakersfield, CA Dear Amy: Sue Kiser spoke with you some time ago regarding site remediation requirements at the above captioned property. Inasmuch as we have not yet heard from you, I would' like to reiterate our client's wishes to you. Tom Gilbert, a co-executor of the estate of Leo Black Electric, has notified us of his desire to resolve this matter. As the Agent for Leo Black Electric, Wilson Zublin, Inc. is available to meet with you, at your convenience, to discuss our mutual interest in mitigation of the contamination problems on t~he property, for the protection of the ~earby groundwater. Please call me or Sue Kiser to arrange a time to discuss this project. Very truly yours, Mar~ Presideh~ SCK:MJW:df cc: Tom Gilbert Co-Executor, Leo Black Estate 30051 4800 EASTON DRIVE #114 · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93309 POST OFFICE BOX 9217 · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93389 · 805/326.1112 1700 Flower Street KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HEALTH OFFICER Bakerstield, California 93305 Leon M Hebertson, M.D. Telephone (805) 861-3636 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vernon S. Reichard August 18, 1987 Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 E. Ashland Fresno, California 93726 Attn; Jennifer Crone Re: Soil Contamination Below an Underground 6asollne Tank at Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Road in Bakersfield, California Dear Ms. Crone: The following information Is part of the Leo Black facility underground tank abandonment file. An assessment was performed of the soil below the location previously occupied by a 500 gallon underground gasoline tank. Contamination was found to extend down to ground water. No ground water samples have been obtained yet. This letter serves as a referral of a site which has significant contamination which threatens, and ~may be impacting under ground water sources. Any correspondence to the property owner should be mailed to: Tom Gilbert - Executor of Property 2000 Julian Avenue Bakersfield, California 93309 Please send copies of all correspondence pertainin~ to this case to the Kern County Health Department. A proposition 65 report has already been made. Sincerely, ~.. Amy E. Green Q_ J Environmental Heai~-h Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program AEG:aa DISTRICT OFFICES ..,.~,_ August 4, 1987 Amy Green K~rn County Health Department 1700 Flower Street Bakersfield, California 93305 Dear .Ms. Green: Attached is the report prepared by Wilson Zublin Inc. summarizing the site characterization work done to date. BTX contamination was found down to water but it has not been determined whether it is the main aquifer or a'perched layer. Because you have indicated to Sue Kiser that this case will be referred to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, no remediation recommendations are included at. this time. If you have any other questions regarding this work please contact Mary Jane Wilson or Sue Kiser at 805/326-1112. Very truly yours, T~rri TGilbert Co-executor of Leo Black Estate May, 27, 1987 ~k Elec Si~tric rOposed Work .,,.'erce Road ~,' .~ne Pron,~.n fop the ", y,OUr le**'- oakersfiel~'~Y, ot Leo : f a~:~. ~Ler dated ,, ~'. ~'aliforn;~ ~'~ ~. Kis~' 'urOrmation c~,~ o, 1987, ' address. TM or Mar}/ j~'n~*,,~Oired .... vvIISo~ Of alin Inc. '~ Box 9217 'd. California 93389 (805) 326-7772 *~ truly, )/OUrs, "?Xecutor -* :te of Leo Black :31ack Electric WILSON ZUBLIN INC. TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANTS LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION PROPOSED WORK PLAN This proposal has been prepared in response to the request by Amy Green of the Kern County Health Department (letter dated March 6, 1987), to submit a work plan for site characterization 'and mitigation on the property of Leo Black Electric, located at 3909 Pierce Road, Bakersfield, California, Section 23, T.29S., R.27E., M.D.B. & M. (Exhibit No. 1). Site History Leo Black Electric was in the business of sales and repairs on electric motors. The property is located in an industrial area of Bakersfield. The underground ta0k, which is the subject of this site characterization work plan, had a capacity of 500 gallons and was installed in approximately 1956. The tank has been used intermittently for the storage of gasoline. It was not used in the last two years prior to removal; although, actual use has not been documented. No spills or leaks have been reported. McNabb Construction removed the tank on February 10, 1987. A copy of application for permit for abandonment of the underground tank is inclUded as Exhibit No. 2. B. C. Laboratories collected and analyzed soil samples from depths of 2 and 5 feet below the tank. The analyses are attached as Exhibits No. 3 and No. 4. :. Hydrogeologic Settincj .The water table beneath the site is between 10 and 20 feet below surface as shown in Exhibit No. 5 (Plate 5, depth to water in wells - Unconfined Aquifer, Septeml~er 1986 of the 1986 Report on Water Conditions KCWA, Improvement District No. 4). The control used for contouring Plate 5 is inadequate to accurately determine the local gradient of water movement in the unconfined aquifer, although regionally it is to the northwest. Unfortunately, the property is currently located on top of a water table mound. Its apparent position through time may dramatically shift as additional data points are acquired and/or large fluctuations in recharge occur in the unconfined aquifer. 4800 EASTON DRIVE #114 · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93309 -- r~:~o~ la~¥ o~1'~ · I~AR'F~R]~It:.I.I3. CAI.IFORNIA 93389 · 805/326-1112 Page 2 In addition, review of lithologic logs from wells near the property indicate sands, boulders, and thin shallow clays of yet indeterminate subsurface lateral extent. The stratigraphic complexity beneath the site suggested by these lithologic logs indicate the published water table map may have included data points from perched water. This, along with the previously discussed questionable accuracy of the regional water table gradient, means that the data for this study will have to be carefully obtained and interpreted. Proposed Sampling Program The proposed sampling program is tailored to accommodate a multiphased study designed to optimize the number of samples required to delineate the extent of contamination. The proposed borehole locations are identified on Exhibit No. 6. The rationale for location and sampling intervals for each proposed borehole is summarized in Table No. 1. All samples will be appropriately collected and preserved as discussed under sample collection methodology. Only the samples from Borehole No. LB4 will be analyzed initially to confirm contamination and the need for analysis of sa~nples collected in Boreholes No, LB1, LB2, and LB3. Sample Handling and Collection Methodology The approved work plan must be flexible to allow for on-site decisions regarding sampling interval, total depth of each borehole and choice of samples for laboratory analysis. Boring will be done by 6 1/2" hollow-stem auger and will be drilled in the order presented on Table No. 1 to minimize cross-contamination '~' from the auger to the soil samples, although precautions will be taken to sanitize the core recovery tool. Sampling will be accomplished by use of either a 1 3/8" or a 2 3/8" split spoon sampler fitted with · three brass tubes. Sampling equipment will be prepared for use by washing with non-phosphate detergent and rinsed with acetone. On-site inspection of cuttings as they are removed from the boreholes may identify lithologic changes or noticeable changes in contamination that would require a specialized sampling program. Bulk samples will be retained in labelled plastic bags for future reference. The sampling intervals summarized in Table No. 1 should be considered a mi nimum. Upon collection, the cored soil sample will be prepared as follows: WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Page 3 1. All three tubes will be capped with plastic, secured with plastic tape, and labeled with indelible ink. 2. The middle tube will be stored on ice until taken by B. C. Laboratory personnel, with Chain of Custody documents, for laboratory analysis. 3. The remaining two capped tubes from each sample interval will be preserved on ice as back-up samples. Excess cuttings from the boring will be placed in approved containers and disposed of on an approved facility such as Petroleum Waste, Inc. with the appropriate Chain of Custody documents. Samples will be analyzed for benzene, toluene, xylene (BTX) analyses, as recommended by the Kern County Health Department. B. C. Laboratories is a certified hazardous waste laboratory that routinely collects and analyzes soil samples associated with underground tank removal. The analytical procedure utilized for analysis by B., C. Laboratories is in Appendix No. 1. The holding time for samples shall not exceed fourteen (lq] days and most likely will be analyzed within 48 hours. The rig will be equipp~ed with a bailer in the event that the water table is reached. PVC pipe with three feet of plastic screen to recover a water sample as free from up-hole contamination as is possible and placed in a B. C. Laboratories container. The groundwater samples will then be tested for BTX contamination. All groundwater holes will be abandoned by filling with concrete grout. Lithology and Plume Delineation Upon completion of the sampling program, lithologic logs of each .,, borehole will be prepared. Cross-sections will be constructed to allow review of the lab analyses of the samples within the penetrated hydrogeologic framework. Maps that will graphically depict the limits of the plume will be prepared. The Kern County Health Department .guidelines for the edge of the gasoline contamination are (1) a significant drop in contamination level or (2) contamination completely disappears. Health and Safety Wilson Zublin Inc. personnel will implement a series of procedures in order to maintain a safe and healthy working environment during this field investigation. All subcontractors on the site will also comply with Wilson Zublin Inc.'s health and safety procedures. The following protective gear will be available pn site in the event that air WILSON ZUBLIN INC. Page 4 monitoring equipment (HNU-PID) indicates the presence of benzene, toluene, or xylene in concentration greater than permissible exposure levels of 10 ppm, 200 ppm, and 100 ppm respectively, for eight (8) hour time weighted averages (29 CPIC 1910.1000, air contamination). Twin-cartridge respirators (half-mask) Chemically resistant gloves and clothing o Safety glasses In addition, hard hats, and chemically resistant steel-toed boots will be required for Wilson Zublin Inc. personnel on location. A list of emergency response personnel and addresses will be constructed identifying nearby fire stations, hospitals, and police stations. It is Wilson Zublin Inc.'s policy to evaluate and re-evaluate site conditions throughout the operation to maintain a safe and healthy working environment and make modifications to the above health/safety outline when necessary. Site Maps The site-specific plot plan is included as Exhibit No. 6. Only surface features are shown, subsurface piping is unknown at present. Prior to boring activity a metal detector survey will be utilized to establish the location of any subsurface piping. The borehole locations are identified on the Exhibit as No. LB1, LB2, LB3, and LB4. Final Evaluation The final repor:t will document and summarize the data collected for '~ the site-characterization. Recommendations for remediation, if needed, will be discussed. Susan Chandler Kiser California Registered Geologist #3831 Expiration June 30, 1988 WILSON ZUBLIN INC. " SYCAMO~ " ~ WILLOW DRIVE ~ .... LEO BLACK ELECTRIC .Z- ,. · 3909 Pierce Road Bakersfield ?.' "' ' : SH "~. "' " G[ STREET ~" '~" - "~ GE ~ ~ URIN WAY ; ~- ANTONI 0 WAY G~LMORE ~ )R 'T T ~ SST -L Z ROSEDALE HWY. "T' COMMERCIAL ST - FASTON _/../ ' ~' T WlLSON ZUBLIN INC. Bakersfield. California LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION SCALE IN MILES -N- WORKPLAN o o.~ o.~ ~ LOCATION MAP I s/s7 I DN:127 fern County Hedlth DepdcClnent: -" Permit N : ~ ~'~ )i',ision of Envit'o,~nental Health Application D~'~F~[~~ .700 Flower Street, Bakersft~eld, CA 93305 No. of Tanks to ~--~'~d ~.L.: ': :'~[ ~PLI~TI~ ~R P~IT ~ T~~ OR P~~ ~- m~ ..... '~.; ~ .... /A~ndo~e~ __ . ~Pe~anenc Closure/A~mdor,nent S~ T R .... (Rut y; . . omrator- ~ ~~. ~ - Tel~phb'ne ~dress - -- - - ~ zip son cn~rac~eri~cs .~ ~a~ ~~" L~~. ~~ . ~ ' . Worker's C~nsa~ion cec~ifida~ion ~ O~ ~;(~ Insurer ~~, ~. ~res~ ~ %~~,. ~~~.~ zm ~5~8 ~e~e~one m tab-t: ~te / ~ - ~['O~S~ ~etion Date ~ ~ ~rker's C~nsation Cert~ifidaEion ~ ~ ..... Insurer '~ .D. Ch~ical C~sition of Materials Stor~ Tank ~ Chemical Stored (non-co~nercial name) Dates Stored Chemical Previousl~ Stored to ~ratory/T~t ~11 Perfo~ ~yses of S~nDles ~'~. ~. This appiicatio, fo~: ~emoval or ~a~:n~o~ent in place * * PL~E PROVIDE INFO~'FION REQUESTED ~ ~E SIDE OF THIS SHEDF BEFORE APPLICATION ~R This form has been completed under p~nalty of perjury and to the best of my know].u~.lge is true a~¥3 correc~-'-~ EXHIBIT No. 2 pro.~ide Desc~'~ptl,o,~ of Ph, b-~yout of Facility Us ng .-'_~ Provided ~low; f~de All the ~ollowi~3"~,,fo~ati°n: ~ ~~cation of Tank(s), Piping & Ois~nse~(s) ~ ~ro~S~ S:~pling Locatio;m Indicati~ Approximate Dep~ ~/of Samples ~ ~ea~est Street or Intersection .~ ~y Water Wells or Surface Waters.Within 100' R~ius of Facil i ty NORTH " PEf~ EUM MAIN OFFICE--: 4100 PIERCE ROAD. BAKERSFIELD. CA. 93308 PHONE 327-491 ~ Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) NABB CONST. ATTN: BRIAN MC NABB Date of 16 STARK STREET REPORT:2-ig-8? <ERSFIELD, CA. 93305 LAB No. :2A36 mple Description: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC UNDER TANK TE ~' DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS ,MPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 2-10-87 2-11-87 2-17-87 Minimum Reporting Analyses Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene , Hg/g 5.2q 0.10 Toluene Hg/g 50.36 0.10 Ethyl Benzene Hg/g 23.9A 0.10 p-Xylene Hg/g 1A8.28 0.10 m-Xylene Hg/g lq8.28 0.10 o-Xylene ~g/g 188.39 0.10 Isopropyl Benzene ~g/g ' 10.91 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons Hg/g iq59.39 0.50 Total Volatile Hydrocarbons Hg/g EO3A.?~ 0.I0 EPA 5020/80~0: DRY MATTER BASIS COMMENTS: Oil ~ Grease: 130 mg/kg VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present (C1 to 'C20) utilizing a Benzene Factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. Total volatile hydrocarbon values may be less than, equal to, or gCeatec than any other constituent, or the combined total. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all non-chlorinated constituents on this report. Analyst WILSON ZUBLIN INC. EXHIBIT No. 3 LABORATORIES MAIN OFFICE: 4100 PIERCE ROAO, BAKERSFIELD, C'A. 9330~ PHONE 327-4911 Purgeable Aromatics (SOIL) 'lC NABB CONST. ATTN: BRIAN MC NABB Date of ~616 STARK STREET REPORT:8-1~'-8? ~AKERSFIELD, CA. 93305 LAB No.:SA37 ~amole Description: LEO BLACK ELECTRIC ~' UNDER TANK )ATE DATE SAMPLE DATE ANALYSIS ~AMPLE COLLECTED: RECEIVED @ LAB: COMPLETED: 8-10-87 8-11-87 8-17-87 Minimum Reporting Analyses Reporting Constituent Units Results Level Benzene Hg/g 31..55 0.10 Toluene Hg/g ~0~.30 0.10 Ethyl Benzene gg/g 323.5~ 0.10 p-Xylene Hg/g 1983.96 0.10 m-Xylene Hg/g 1~83.96 0.10 o-Xylene Hg/g 800q.81 0.10 [sopropyl Benzene Hg/g 2~.73 0.10 Volatile Hydrocarbons Hg/g 8807.57 0.50 Total Volatile Hydrocarbons Fg/g 1007q.q? 0.10 EPA 50~0/8080: DRY MATTER BASIS COMMENTS: 0il ~ Grease: 133 mg/kg VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: Quantification of volatile hydrocarbons present ¢C1 t.o CEO) utilizing a Benzene Factor. These volatile hydrocarbons are in addition to the constituents specifically defined on this report. Total volatile hydrocarbon values may be less than, equal to, or greater then any other constituent, or the combined total. TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS: The sum total of all non-chlorinated constituents on this report. WILSON ZUBLIN INC. EXHIBIT No. 4 LEO BLACK ELECTRIC 3909 Pierce Road Bakersfield R?O I 3OS. R Z6E. BakersfieldI California ~ -.- LEO BLACK ELECTRIC , _~~~/~/' ~ SITE CHARACTERIZATION WORKPLAN ~/ .... -~--- DEPTH TO WATER IN WELLS I---- SEPT. 1906 j KERN COUN'I'~ WAIfiR 5 / 8 7 / WATER CONDITIONS AGENCY-DIST. #4 EXHIBIT No. 5 TABLE NO. I Phase I Sampling Program* Location Rationale Sampling Depths Borehole #LB1 10' south of Borehole #LB'(-- assuming northwest gradient. 2', 5', and 5' thereafter to base to evaluate up-dip presence of of contamination contamination plume Borehole #LB2 10' east of Borehole #LB4. to assess lateral presence of 2', 5' and 5' thereafter to base contamination plume of contamination Borehole #LB3 10' west of Borehole #LB4- assuming northwest gradient, 2', 5', & 5' thereafter if to evaluate down-dip presence contamination is minor or of contamination plume non-existent, sampling will Borehole #LB4 Former Location of to confirm contamination found 2', 5', 10', 15', (stop at least underground tank in samples taken at time of 2' above water table) tank removal * Locations shown in Exhibit No. 6, the property map of Leo Black Electric property APPENDIX 1 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Gasoline and Diesel) 1.0 Scope and Application · ~" . " · 1.1 This method is for the determination of gasoline and diesel in contaminated groundwater, sludges,' and soil. 1.2 This method is recommended for use by, or under the supervision of, analysts experienced in the operation of gas chromatographs and in the interpretation of chromatograms. 2.0 S~am~r~ of 1.~thod , 2.1 This method involves the determination of volatile hydrocarbons (gasoline) by headspace method and the determination of semivolm- bile organics (diesel) by the extraction method. A sample of the headspace gas or an aliquot of the extract is injected into a gas chromatograph (GC) and compounds in the GC effluent are detected by a flame ionization detector (FID). An aliquot of each sample will be spiked with standards to determine percent recovery and limits of detection for that sample. 2.2 The sensitivity of this method' usually depends on the level of interference~ rather than on instrument limitations. Table i lis'ts the limits of detection in the absence~of interferences for water and soil samples. 3.0 Interferences 3.1 Solvents, reagents, glasswares and other semple processing hardware must be demonstrated to be free from interferences under the conditions of the analysis by running method blanks. 3,2 Before processing'any samples, the analyst should demonstrate 'daily through ~he aneZysi's'~of a '-solvent blank.that .the entire system is interference-free. h.O ~pparatus and Materials h.1 Gas-tight syringe: i cc with chromatographic needles. 4.2 Vial with cap: ~0 mL capacity screw cap (Pierce #13075 or' equivalent). Detergent wash, rinse with tap and distilled delonized water,-and dry at 105°C before use. h.3 Septum: Teflon-faced silicone (Pierce# 12722 or equivalent). Deter- gent wash, rince with tap and distilled, deionized ~ter, and dry at 105°C for 30 minutes before use. ~.4 Separatory funnel: R-liter, with Teflon Stopcock. 4.5 J~uderna-Danish (K-D) aparatus. 4.6 Boiling chips: Solvent.'e~tracted, approximately 10/40 mesh. · ~ 4.7 ~ater bath: Heated, with concentric ring cover, capable of tempera-- bu~e control. The bath should be used in a hood. 4.8 Gas chromatograph: Analytical system complete with programmable gas chromatograph suitable for on column injection and all required ~ccessories~ including FID, col~mn supplies, recorder and gases. data system for measuring peak area is recommended. 4.9 GC column: .6-ft x l[8".I.D, glass column packed with 55 SP-2100 on Supelcoport '60/80 mesh. 4.10 Detector: Flame ionization detector (FID). 4.11 J~crosyringes: l0 wL, '100 wL, 200 wL. 4.12 Erlenmeyer flask: Pyrex, .250 ml capacity with a screw cap. 4.1~ Mechanical Shaker 5.0 Rea~,~ts , 5.1 Stock diesel standard solutions: Prepare commercial diesel stan- dards in carbon disulfide. Place 9 mL of CS2 into a l0 mL glass- stoppered volumetric flask. Allow to stand for a few minutes. Weigh the flask '~ the' nearest 0.1 mg. Using a 100 ~L syringe, Immediately add an amount of diesel to the flask, then reweigh. Be sure that the liquid falls directly into the CS2 without contactin~.th~'neck of the flask. Dilute to volume, stopper, mix by inverting the flask several times.~ Calculate the'concentration in pg/ML from the net gain in weight'.~ Secondary working~ standards can be prepared from the stock ~standards. 5.2 Stock gasoline standard solutions: Gasoline stock standards can be prepared as above using commercial gasoline as standard in dodecane. 5.3 Sodium sulfate, .anhydrous, ACS, granular Carbon disulfide, glass distilled, high purity. 5.5 Dodecane, purified. 6.0 S~nple Collection~ Preservation 'and 'Handling 6.1 Grab samples must be collected in glass containers and V0A vials. Fill the sample bottles in such a manner that no air bubbles pass through the sample as the bottle is being filled. Seal the bottle so · that no air' bubbles are entrapped in it. Solid and semisolid samples are 'to be taken in the same. way. Maintain the hermetic seal on the sample until time of~analysis. \ 6.2The samples must be iced or refrigerated from time of collection ~u~til ~nalyses or extraction. 6.3 All samples must~ be analyzed within 14 days of collection. Procedures '" 7.1 Organic liquid - Organic liquid can be analyzed by dissolving a known ~mount of sample into certain volume of car.bon disulfide in a volu- metric flask. 7 · 2 ¥lat er 7.2.1 Transfer i liter of sample to the 2 liter separatory funnel. y.2.2 Add 60 mL of carbon disulfide to the separatory funnel. 7.2.3 Seal and shake the funnel for 60 sec with periodic venting to' release .vapor pressure. Y.2.~ 'Allow the phases to separate for minim~nn of l0 minutes. If emulsion occurs, the analyst must employ mechanical tech- niques to complete the phase separation. f.2.5 Colleot the extract and repeat the extraction two more times ~. using fresh portions of solvent. 7.2.6 Combine three extracts'and dry it by passing it through a column of anhydrous soidum sulfate. 7.2.7 Collect the dried extract in a Kuderna-Danish evaporative concentrator, equipped with a l0 mL collection ampule. '~.'2.8 ~dd 1 or 2 clean boiling chips to the flask and attach a three-ball Synder col%uan. Prewet the Synder column by adding i mL of solvent .to 'the top. Place.the K-D apparatus o~,} a · - steam or hot water bath. Adjust the water temperature as required to complete the concentration· in 15-20 minutes. ~uen the volume of liquid reaches i mL, remove the 'K-D apparatus and allow it to drain for at least l0 minutes°while cooling. '~,2.9 Rinse the 'K-D apparatus with a small vol~uae of solvent. Adjust the sample volume to 5 mL %rith the solvent to be used in instrumental analyses. 7.3 Soil and Sludges 7.3.1Weigh 20.0 g sample into a 250 mL screw cap erlenmeyer flask. Add 80 mr, of carbon disulfide. 7.3.2Cap the flask and shake on a mechanical shaker for at least 4 hours. 'F.3.3 After the extraction is complete, filter the extract and dry it by passing through~a column of anhydrous sodium sulfate. 7.3.4 Collect the dried extract in K-D flask, fitted with a l0 mL concentrator tube and a three-ball Synder column.~ Wash the extractor flask~and the sodium sulfate with a:,portion of carbon disulfide.and c°ll~$t it.into the K-D flask. '{.3.5 Add i or 2 clean boiling chips and concentrate the extract to 5 mL as discussed in 7.2.8 and 7.2.9. 7.4. <;~s Chromatographic Conditions 'f.4.1 The recommended gas chromatographic column and operating conditions are: Column: .6-ft x 1/8" I.D. glass column packed with 5% SP-2100 on Supelcoport, 60/80 mesh with nitrogen carrier gas at 20 mL/min, flow rate. Column temperature is set at 40°C at the time of injection, hold for 4 minutes, and progr,mmed at 10°C/min. to a final temperature of 265°C for l0 minutes. 7.5 Calibration 7.5.1 Establish gas chromatographic operating.parameters as specified in 7.4.1. By injecting secondary standards, adjust the sensitivity of the analytical system for the analysis of gasoline and diesel in environmental samples. Detection ltmtts for the extraction method and the headspace method are listed in Table 1. Calibrate the chromatographic system with with the external standard technique. At least 3 concentra- tion levels should be used for the preparation of the calibra- tion curve. One of the external standard should be at a concentration near, but above the method detection limit. The other standard should correspond, to the expected range of concentration froun in real samples or should define the Morking range of the detec%0r. '~.5.2" Using injections of 2 to 5 pL of each calibration standard, tabulate total peak height or area responses against the mass injected. The results can be used to prepare a calibration curve for gagoline and diesel. ~.5.3 The working calibration curve must be verified on each working day by the measurement of one or more calibration standards. If the response varies from the predicted response by more than ±10S, the test must be repeated using a fresh calibra- tion standard. Alternatively, a new calibration curve must be prepared. '[. 6 ~al[sts of Samples 7.6.1.1 Inject 2 to 5 wL o'f the' sample extract using the solvent flush technique. Record the volume injected to the nearest o.05 wL, and the resulting total peak areas in the chromatogram. ~ 7.6~1.2 If the total peak areas exceed the linear range of the system, dilute the extract and reanalyze. 7..6.1.B Examples of chromatograms of gasoline and diesel are shown in Fig. i and Fig. 2. '[~6.2 IIeadspace Me.thod 7.6.2.1 Place 20 g (mD) each of the waste sample into three separate 40 mL septum seal.vials. 7.6.2.2 Dose one sample vial through the septum with 200 ~L of the gasoline standard in dodecane. (Concentration 7500 Bg/mL). Label this "spike". 7.6.2.B Dose a separate (empty) 40 mL septum seal vial with 200 wL of the same standard. Label this "standard". 7..6.2.~ Place the sample, spike, and standard vials into a 90°C water bath for I hour. Store the r~m-ining sample vial at 4.0CC for possible future analysis. .7.6.2.5 While maintaining the vials at 90°C, withdraw i m~. of the headspace gas with a. gas-tight syringe and · analyze, by injecting into a GC, operating under the conditions mentioned above. ~-' 7.6.2.6 Analyze the standard and adjust instrument sensitivity to give minimum response of'at least 2x the back- ground. Record and sum up all peak areas of the gasoline standard. 7.6.2.7 Analyze the spike sample in the same manner. Record all 'peak areas. 7.6.2.8 Analyze the unclosed sample in Section 7.6.2.7. 7.6.2.9 Small sample size should be used if the concentra- tion is found to be outside the concentration range of the instrument. 8.0 Qualit~ Control 8.1 Standard quality assurance practices should be used with this method. Method blank, solvent blank should be analyze'd alongside .with each batch of samples. Field replicates should be collected to validate the precision of the sampling tech. nique.. Laboratory replicates should be analyzed to validate the precision Of. tha analysis. Spiked samples for each matrix should be analyzed to validate the accuracy of the method.' Where doubt exists over the identification of peak(s) on the chromatogram, confirmatory techniques by alternate method should be performed. 9.0 References "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods", SW-846, Second Edition, Revised 1984. ~ Methods 3510, 5020. Table 1 Method Detection Ltmtt Parameter b.~tri~,. .:- Extraction-Method. Headspace Method Gasoline Aqueous 0.5 wg/mL 5.0 wg/mL Soil lO.O wg/g 5.0 ~g/g Diesel Aqueous 0.5 wg/mL '~-- Soil lO.O ~g/g ''--- · _._ Chromatogram of gasoline. ~ . ; .~ 1 mL headspace sample of ~ -- 3750 pg spiked on 5 g of ---- soil ,~, . : O. 57 4083£ Et',/ O. 134 7 · " - O.7i 7831900 VH 0.136 Il. 6:-'C · ~. :'~ .88 - $ FIG. 2 '. : Chroma'togram of diesel· .......... 2 ~L of 300 ~g/mL 0.88 4?00 Fk,wer S~.,et K~'RN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HE^L'm OFFIC£R Bakersfield, California 93305 Leon M Hebertson, M.D. Telephone (805)861-3636 ENVIRONMENTAl. HEALTH DIVISION DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vernon S. Reichard June 23, 1987 Leo Black Electric 3903 Pierce Road Bakersfield, California 93301 RE: Site Characterization Proposal. Dear Sir/Madam: A representative from this department reviewed the site characterization proposal submitted for Leo Black Electric on Pierce Road, and discussed different aspects of the report with Susan Ktser of Wilson Zublin Inc. The Proposal meets the approval of this department and may be implemented, as long as the following discussed change is made: The proposal had sampling being initiated at two feet below grade. The sampling depths were discussed with the contractor. For the purpose of this report it will not be necessary to have samples retrieved two feet below grade and analyzed. The Kern County Health Department must be notified 24 hours before samples are retrieved. After all field work is complete, and laboratory results received, a final report must be' written describing the extent of contamination and suggesting mitigation measures. The final report must be submitted to this department within 30 days of analysis completion. The department's Mitigation Outline is enclosed. It may be used as a guide in preparing your final report. Please feel free to call me at (805) 861-3636, if you have any questions. erely, ) . A~y E. O en -t 't ' Environmental Health Spec ails Hazardous Materials Management Program AEG:sw Enclosure cc: Wilson ZublinInc. DISTRI~OFFICES MITIGATION OUTLINE Mitigation, or Remedial Action, is the method to lessen, alleviate, abate, correct, or olean-up the effects that a release of hazardous waste may have on the environment. Mitigation incorporates a remedial action plan that Is site specific and shall Include at least the following elements: 1. Brief discussion of the problem from prior site characterization or ' other studies 2. Findings: a. Vertical and lateral extent of contamination plume. b. Results of all analyses, including Interpretation of results. c. Hydrology o£ the site, including soil types down to ground water. 3. Remedial Action Alternatives Discussion a. At least 2 alternatives plus a "no action" alternative must be evaluated. b. Cost-benefit analysis of each alternative is to be included. c. Discussion must address short and long-term threat and effect to air, soil, surface and ground water, and biological receptors, and a discussion of potential migration routes. d. Time frames for complete remedlatlon for each alternative are to be listed. 1700 Flower Street KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HEALTH OFFICER Bakersfield, California 93305 Leon M Hebertson, M.D. ~l'elephone (805)861-3636 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vernon S. Relchard March 6, 1987 Leo Black Electric 3909 Pierce Road Bakersfield, California 93301 RE: Soil contamination beneath the 500 gallon underground fuel tank. Dear Sir/Madam: The laboratory results received on March 4, 1987 show contamination in the samples retrieved below the 500 gallon gasoline tank. To evaluate the extent of contamination present in that area you must prepare a site characterization proposal. This department does not approve of any additional work in the area around the contamination either in defining the plume or providing a permanent cover at the site until the site characterization proposal is approved by this department. The department's outline for preparation of the site characterization proposal is enclosed. It may be used as a guide tn preparing the proposal. Please submit your proposal to this department within 30 days. If you have any questions please call me at (805)861-3636. Sincerely, Environmental Health Specialist Hazardous Materials Management Program AEG:sw ~ ..---- UNDIERC · ~' PROPERTY LINE' A (None Detected) 5 2 6 3 LB 6 LB 3 /j~ 0~ 4: ~o.~ 800 6000 4000 3~1191 - TV/4 LB I 2000 A LB 6 LB 3 FORMER LOCATION UNDERGROUND TI :~.,.~ s- I I 1 0 - None Detected) None Detected) None Detected is- ~' /,' .,,.. OF VIEW X FENCE ASPHALT .~ ~.~ :..F~ /" . TILE HYDROCARBONS SCALE IN FEET -N- N 0 ~ I0 A 1 GROUND SURFACE I TOTAL VOLATILE HYDROCARBONS (ug/g) 0 0 5 SCALE IN FEET ~ WILSON ZUBLIN INC. )etected) BakersfieldI California LEO BLACK ELECTRIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION VOLATILE HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATION PLUME: Oetected) ,.C-:4:~l~:;~.. _ND..W.A,7'~, R_,., ,~, i ...................... MAPS and CROSS SECTIONS Geol.: Kiser, GreenwoodI 7/87 I DN: 145 Engr.:Wilson I EXHIBIT No. 4 / 1700FIowerStrset COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTME HEALTH OFFICER Bakersfield, California 93305 Leon M Hebertson, M.D. Telephone (805)861-3636 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vernon S. Reichard ~ERMIT FOR PERMANENT CLOSURE Permit Nu.mber A351-05 UNDERGROUND HAZARDOUS ~UBSTANCES STORAGE FACILITY FACILITY NAME AND ADDRESS: OWNER NAMB. AND ADDRESS: CONTRACTOR: Leo Black Electric Leo. Black Electric McNabb Construction 3909 pierce Road 3909 Pierce Road 2616 Stark Street Bakersfield, GA Bakersfield, GA 93308 Bakersfield, CA 93305 License No. 474331 PERMIT TO ABANDON PERMIT EXPIRES January 9,' 1988 1 TANK(S) AT ABOVE APPROVAL 'DATE January 9, 198.1~ . · ~~Amy E LOCATION APPROVED BY ';1/~')"){/ .... ~l~~ .................. POST ON PREMISES ............... 30NDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Permittee must obtain a Fire Department permit prior -to' initiating abandonment action. 2. All procedures used must be in accordance with requirements-of Standards and Guidelines developed for implementation of Kern County Ordinance Code. A copy of'these requirements are enclosed with this permit. 3. A minimum of two samples must be retrieved beneath the center of the tank at depths of approximately 2' and 6'. 4. All samples must be analyzed for benzene, toluene, xylene, and total petroleum.hydrocarbons. 5. Advise this office of the time and date of proposed sampling with 24 hours advance not/ce. DISTRICT OFFICES UNDERGROUND STORAGE TA~NAUTHORIZED RELEASE (LEAK)TC~ SITE REPORT . EMERGENCY / HAS STATE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY $ STATE TANK ID ~- ~ YES ~ NO REPORT BEEN FILED? ~ YES ORT DATE , ~ LO.~AL CASE ~ REGIONAL BOARD CASE ~ ~ US EPA ID I ET / T~TE _.__ , _ . _ ..... , ..... ~n~ ADDRESS , ' ' . ~Sr~, '~ / ' I TY.e Of ar~a ~C~MERCIAL ~ '~U~:'~' 'YP~INES~ ~ RETAIL FUEL STAT ION LOC~L'~G~NCY ~ AGE~Y NA.~/ ///~ CONTACT PERSOd . /~ P~NE ~ REGI~ ~oAro ' ~ ~U.K.OW~ m~ ~ (~[ [ [ [ [ [ I ~ I [ [ I [ , ~U.K.OW~ ~E~sc~v~D~ I How D~SCOV~RED ~ ,.W.TOR~CO.TROL '~ SUBSURfaCE ~ON~TOmNG DATE DISCHARGE BEGA~ / ' METHOD USED TO STOP DISCHARGE (cHECK ALL THAT APPL~) ~ MJ MI Di DI YJ YJ ~UNKNOWN , ~MOVE CONTENTS ' : REPLACE TANK ~OSE TANK HAS D CHARGE BEEN STOPPEDt * REPAIR A K ~[~< H~ · . ~ T" ~REPAIR PIPING ~CHANGE PROCEDURES ~ES ~NO IF YES DATE I M~ MI DI DI YI y ~OTHER ~ ~TANK LEAK ~ UNKNOWN/~/~ ~ ~ v ~OVERFILL ~CORROSlON ~ ~ PIPING LEAK ~RIAL ~RUPTURE/FAILURE ~SPILL U ~STEEL ~ FIBERGLASS RESOURCES AFFECTED WATER SUPPLIES AFFECTED THREAT- UN- ' OF ~ YES NO THREATENED UNKNOWN YE5 NO ENED KNOWN WELLS ~ AIR (VAPOR) ~ ~ ~ ~:~ PUBLIC DRINKING ~~ PRIVATE DRINKING ~ ~ ~ ~' GROUNDWATER ~ ~ ~ WATER ~ SURFACE WATER ORSTORM DRAIN ~ ~ ~ ~ INDUSTRIAL ~ ~ ~ ~ BUILDING OR UTILITY VAULT ~ ~ ~ ~ AGRICULTURAL ~ ~ ~ ~ OTHER (SPECIFY) ~ ~ ~ ~ OTHER(SPECIFY) ~ ~ ~ ~ GROUNDWATER BASIN NAME ~ UNKNOWN COMMENTS: Z O U I COMPLETE AND ATTACH A CLEANUP TRACKING REPORT IF ANY CLEANUP WORK OR PLANNING HAS STARTED dSC 0S