HomeMy WebLinkAboutMITIGATION (2) Environmental
.. ~' Consultants, Inc.
1.
]PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL ~ITE
. ...... '-?.~-~i,~~. .~_. .~ ~-. ~.. ~.~
ASSESSMENT AND REMEDIAL A~I'IQN
.1/2 GULF ~EET
DELTA PROJECT NO, 40-117=326
Prepared by: · ..:.
Rancho Cordova, California 95670
916/638-2085
"' "';'
DEFINITION
".'" .' ":"-" 2.1 Aquifer Test
.. "' 2.2 E~timat~d Di~olv,d Hydrocar~n
3 ?r0pos~ Monitoring Well Location~
· ?.2.4 Hydrocarbbn
'3,1Ground Water Ext~ction and Treatment
Infiltration G~I~ ~ign
~L G~DIE~ COBOL
REMARKS/SIGNATURES
· 'APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
' ' FIGURES
Regional Water Quahty Control Board Memorandums
Aquifer Performance Test ~ta and Calculations
Water Treatment System Design Drawings
:-..,. ~" APPENDIX D Infiltration Gallery Design
., :.~t~,C~.:::~;.L~. ',. :. . , '..
.' · -.;'c,, ;.77.!~!:' : ." [ .... .. '.
,-. :'ii' ,:' .' .'. '.,":'a/.' ~=:~, '.?'" ~' '"
.' ,":~!;'-? /.'~-~', '~.'.::..'"~'.5'. <~ '. ,' :~..' ' "' ' ' :~" · .''. '~, )".
FOR
ADDITIONAL
SITE
../.:~' ...... '..... ". . PROPOSAL
' ;' "i BAKERSFIELD, CA., ,:..~ ..... ·
........................ ,-PROJECT NO," 40-87-326:
"' ..... of ..this. document ~is':t° 'provide ;additional '%'t~ "[he Cen
'Control
-:,Valle
eStimate 'of the ~0uter .boundaries 'of'.the dissolved hydrocarbon ' plume'resultin
'the known leak Of g~oline that occurred during the winter months and
monitoring Well locations to bolpdefine this plume.
'2) ;:' "A "~'pr0p0sal to "assess ' the horizontal and vertical 'extent '"of soil
. petroleum hydrocarbons at the site. . - ..... ~.. .... ::::~..~;...,,.:::..:
· 'al ' C""The'";'~r°nosed nround :'water . treatmen~ system and :infiltration . gallerY:};!desIgn.
/ - ~.= :-! drawings. ' ~.' ' '" ?:??"?'.'... ~'~: ~. '. .... - : .'-' '~; '.~: ~:,:~'' ;'?. ::~'~/?-P.':'
'4) "An initial analyses of the recovery well capture zone. ' ' ': . ' ~;~'* r ' '
This information should be sufficient to allow the installation of a ~round water
. .. '-.. : . .~,
2,0 HYDROCARBON PLUME DEFINITION ,
This section presents an-analysis of all pertinent information collected '~to ,date to
develop an estimate of the lateral extent of the d~ssolved hydrocarbonThis estimatePlUme'~:n resultmgbe "used
from a gasoline leak which occurred during the fall of 1985.
to focus future monitoring well installation. Additionally, a scope of work is included
which will lead t° the development of a work plan to assess the horizontal and ':'~ertical
extent of h drocarbons In soils In the wclmty of momtormg well MW-3 which may
contributing to the dissolved hydrocarbons detected Iff 8round water samples from tbs
,, well. ,. '~" ' :
· . . , , , ., .. , · , ' ,.. ,. .,... :.~, .,.;-.,.. ,/~..,,
?'AL SlTI~
~. ' ~? r ... a event .·apl years ago.m
· , .....-;~'-i'"-ground water could have migrated approXimately i,I00 feet downgradient bYOctober
.. '/:..;~:~'.:~.:.~//.!~!~:~:~??~i;~,.~The~lateral extent of d,spersson was assumed based upon the .on=.s,te:plume .geometrY
.'.1,. ?i:'~ ':~:.i~i.!!?':?"O'fi~ Figuie' "i'~"'hl~'/'in'dic~ted" is. the"' sn-~site' 'fr~e" "prOduct 'plume'."~;S!n~"i''g~oline''~ fo'r'
' , . .\,~.most P~t is'a .floating contaminant, .the vertical extent of contam!nat!on..is ~su.med
I ~:~t~q'~,,~W4xtet~d'':'oniv ~'as :deen inio" the 'aquifer :as" '":natural advective 'f~rc~ :.?~ill alloW.' (i;:.i'?,
':~?'?~*~,'~\~, .. p~rposes' .of 'this ?:5ite,-~?e '~'can assume .'}that ·dissolved hydrocarbons },~,a,r,e ~,!!m!ted~. i, t° '.t. he
'~t ~:';:~ first.~?t'mi feet of the"'~sulficial aqUifer,'~'neglecting any vertical ~ground water 'grad,eats
' ':~'>~ '://~~ flow ;:).~elocities 'and ,snores '"addit,onal ,diSpersive .forces such .~ ~d~ect,on .'.~h,ch tend
[ "~,. '~ to accelerate plume movement but are very d,ff,cult to quant,fy. · . .:,,:,,,,~::~-~-:.. '...-. r.:..~:... ;.
~" . *, ~:' " .., ~ ~2,3 Proposed Monitorin, Well Locations .','~: ~;~.:.. ; ,.~,~'~ ?.~,//~ ~. . ., ~/~,~;=~;-.~'~ ~ ~. ':~. ~, . / : ;~,..:~',:. ~.~'.', :
..~:~... ,...,.....~.,.,.~.~.,;:~.In .order to verify the ~Umated .extent of .the d~olved hydrocarbon plum~, and to. help.
"=~. ;:~"~/;~:~valuate ~::;.~e 'scope ".'of :,;.any' ::,further/:~:s~te '~;~sessment, three ~;~Wo~.ch~dmme~er
' '~_ ".? .... :~",?~?~monitoring wells are 'proposed to be installed at the locat~ons shown on F~gure 1.
· ~ .. ': '?',~'~?~ .,.~'Monitoring wells I4 ~d 15 were located to provide information on ambient ground water
., ,. ~,,~, ~., - ..... ,,, . . ..... , ,
?:.:~.~ ::"~,?~?:~uality "~ in the ' area "and to "hopefully "'define . the . outer ~hm~. ~"~of :,the
· : ~. :' ~(~=-c~,:hydro~tbo~plume.._.Momtot~ngwell
....I ',~ .j: .- ASSESSMENT AND REMEDIAL ACTION . ..
-'~: ':h?:;!~'.~.~'.'.'.'' ..... . ' ' !' ' ' .... ' ' ~ ~, ; ~ '
:o~ dissolved hydrocarbon ~conCentrat[ons within :the
. ~jf~imately. ..-600 ~feet.. directly '~downg~dient. . "of... ,.."~the....,,.,~'leak'
nro mation' ,:then . % uate ?the :riCed rot. further .:': m hito ins
'"~" :~ :Right'-of-entry 'h~ 'been denied to' the ~ro~erty owned .by 'ril Andre,'
covered
.... agreements
, to access
"i'.i?i': '.: .The urpose of this section is to address Item II in the memorandum dated AugUs't 24, :and
; ',~:,,,~,.., P -~ ............... .,, -,. ,. , · ., .. .~ .~ '~::~.~.:~.~f-:~,..'~:c, ',..~,,'.~,~i.,,,.'~,.:~:~:
:~.,t~ ~:-, , . .,.' , ,:~x:..,:~~.-,-. ,' ~' .:.' '- .... .,,:,-'-.,.' '-' ' · '" ~,,z · - -~,.'~ .....
':,,¥'¥~¥: ~it~ ~ted in ~ memor~dum dat~ ~tober 3, '..1988,'by the CVRW~, ~;~
~?~"~ ?deli tltion 'of so~l con~naUon which ~y ~ be ~us~ng the detecUon o[ · ~.o:~,~a.~;n~me~?~n ,~.¥~,~;~?~:
.~ .'.t,.?"z.:,'~.momtormg wel~ MW-2 ~d MW-3, both are which are up~md~ent ef the ~n~rmed g~0. ·
] , . .. le,k. ~e ~use or source of these di~oived petroleumthe.hydrocarbons b~,..,r....~leged]'"°' .'been .:~{~,.'~e,~g:,[.
'?~?[=(.':~[:.',[];,..i.'t':'f:~[~detemined.' ':,No ~n~ormaUon m currentl avadable on'.origin or. ~use
these are~, a site history should be completed. ~e site history should include: ' .~-'.
''' ' ~' ..', [' ?".:",,. /., .':
· ~~~,),~.~: ) 1)' Any p~t sur,ace spills or leak events which may occurred in this area. .... ~::¥,'/,,~.~.¥?::-:..::.~::_~n:t:?,~..":~:~t-~':~'.. _, ,.,, ..... ~.~'-~,,~,~z.~¥~
2) An accurate survey of all undergrsund storage tanks, .product lines, and --'
pump locations. .: ...'-t .... ':'. [-....':'?~
~i?:-' .[ :. 3) A search for any other buried tanks in the area. ..,~. ~.;,,~::':"-:',~.;,,~..~.~:'z:'"'~?~?~. ~;~:,.. ,, ..,
~' Once this in[ormation has been compiled, and n more detailed she map h~ been
.developed, a work plan for ~nvestigating the horizontal and 'vertical . ex~nt "~='0[ '" "'
:' hydrocarbon impacted soils will be submitted. It is nnticipated that this ~n~ormatmn
will be cOllected during the installation off the proposed ground.-water ~eatment
,' ...... :'2 ': A work plan will then be submitted to'the CVRWQCB. It is anticipated that this work plan
.. ',[.'.. ,' "..,_.'..._.:...
..... : ... ...< ~.?/..
. ~i ,' '.. ~!~.' ]~ROPOSAL FOR A~)ITIONAL SITE ·
,~'infiltration
~:we
mtrol bacterial "growth in-'the ""infiltration '"and final..
' ...~.../,. :...infiltration gallery. · ' .. ,-.. . ... -..,,..' -,i~'. ..~ .'..'/':.~ .; - ". ' """ -'
~-- ' .-. ~'..:!,. :~.~,,-. · , ...... -.. - .... ~ =~.. "-,i:-~ ., '~ ... ~-!.:' '~ '; · , ',. ~Y,,,%:~,.'.~,'~;':-.~: ','.:.': "'~'~'~ ~, V,()~:;? i.
= . "-'~'.~'~ C ; .-:v~)'~;~' '~. "'. .. .~ ., ·
,~'.~-:.~.~??,~Ground water .~eatment wdl be accomphshed ?~th ?n a~r stripper :utd~n8
)~ :U~:'''' ~ , '~'::¢;77 ~' "~'-~" · '~';~ ~.~:c~: .~.-~ .:
.~.'. =:, '~.'~.-=," packing. ' ~e axr stripper ~ designed to handle 100 gallons per minute and have an.,...
~ · · , efficiency better'than 99 percent volatile organic removal.. The .stripper h~ been ..j,:?;= ..,.
] ' .;'.~..' :?}?i~?:.~s:'~¢~lv~d 'riO0 '~ ~nm' Can i' to' 'accommodate furore ~(8radient ' Control .wel~, if., nece~ary.
-.~ .~,,.~-~-~.~.~.. ~ er the d~schar e wall ~ routed g q P ,
.~.: ,..~.:,~:,,.a~.%~;¢~,~.~.~Follow!ng the mr str pp , . , . .g . ......... . ....... ,~.,,.,...=,,.~....~,~,~, ..: ...... ~..~..~: ........ .:~:~..;.~ ..... ~.,
' [.' '?"-~'~.~'~?~"Polish ':"the' ' Wat~r'""and remove 'any" residual "~rganics io.~" levels '" below analytical" ~b
' .' -.',:= '..[..detection 'limit. A high level shut off will be incorporated into the air stripper sump ~.:. ...~-.
~;i, to '~hut the system down ~n c~e of .overflow cond,t!ons m ~ ,9!r.~,~t~pper.-,~.P:,,~¥~.?.~:,~:~,
' . ..... filter pluggmg, or ~nfdtrat~on gallery plugging.' ': ' "' ' ~'" '''''/ '"'"./~"' :'' '".""u~". '":'
~'?-~':':'~':~::,:',:,~:(::~,¥;"~;~";. ~ ;t,.,-+-"+-- ,.- or-und water treatment layout. /All eqmpment wall be placed
. · '~"~ .' ':~ ~ Imtmllv two carbon falters ~n serzes wall be used. . , .... , ......... · , ..... : ~ ...~. , ...,~.:.:?: ./, .:, ~,,~..~.~,,~;~ ..~..
Delta P~J~t No. 40-87-~6 ~ ~ ~ -~'~' -~ ~ '~- ~ ......... ' ........ ,~.'~ ~. ~:-~cc -~ ~,~,~,~ ~ , ,~ ~ ~,. ~,~'~ ,", '-
ires · e recovery well. design showing the Hepths where the pum~ .wdl be
nd ~ the schema~c controls. ?Electromc conductivity prob~ wdl ,~ntrol ,the
epre~on pump m the recove~ well. '. ~ese probes will sense 8~ohne pr~uct: and .Wdl
~hut 'do~"~e subme.{ble water pump {f product comes within two .feet above 'the pump
' v "'will .'~ ,,accomplished
pump from the well into' a
{ er e( from..,".-the short .pump-,test on well RW-I and on an antic,pared ..total future
~ ~ I ~olume/of...100 gallons per-mmute.,.?~e destgn 'calculattons and d~gn:3.d~wmgs
.. we momtormg wells, ~W-I6 and ~W-17 are proposed to momtor ground ~ter ~ndmons
':' in the vicinity 'of the infilt~tion gallery. ~e location of these wells are shown
'. '??" ':'" >~_ ', :":',-'f:"~" ' ":-' 4+~ INI~AL AOUI~R CRADI~ CO~ROL ANALYSIS :.., ,; .:....
Che ..purpose 0f this section is to present our preliminary theoretical captur~one
~ ~lc~ese are on hydraulic conductivity obtaine~
calculations
based
C~ a very .... short pum~est of RW-I and an ~sumed aquifer thickness 22.5 fee~']'~ln:ese
~;~lculations are included in Appendix B. The initial calculations show that RW-I pumped
'.-~.-'-. ....... at rate qf~./gallons per minute will, theoretically, recover ground water from 324
...,:;,"'.,~.!~,.~.",i:~.~..downgrad~ent of RW-I and from a width of approximately 2,000 tee~)', This theoretical
' ',{ :t:?~'":::j'~'/'.downgradient' capture zone is plotted on Figure 1. The capture zone 'calculations
""'"/"-"'.indicate that, well RW-I will e~ily contain the free product plume 'and recover' a good
{~.'-;:~',: .~Z'; '.."'portion of the 'dissolved p~oduct .plume. Based on the estimated extent of dissolved
:T~t~'-):'~:~ ~'hYdrocarbons'Shown 'on Figure 1, an additional recovery well could be located on the
',-..~,,~ "~.:S~de of,Pierce Road' on the northwest corner of property owned by Cyril Andre. If the
.-'~ ~ 'd~ssolved hydrocarbons plume ~s ~ shown, additional wells may have to be located .to the
· ', .~,";f'~,:~'.;~-~west of Pierce Road, however necessity-for installation of addmonal r~overy wells can
}
to'initiate .install~°n of the proPosed grOund "water`.. ~tment
pumping '~' RW~:l:'~';~s~ s0~n' nS' ~n' Auth:~:i~/' t~" CO~;~*~t' P'e~.mit 'iS' Obtained'
Water
Pollutio~':.~Control District ~d approval .iS obtained from the '~e~io.M' ?'
' monitoring" oe insta.~
..:treatment
REMARKS/SIGNATURES
"with 'current aCCepted ' hydrogeologic gineering
repOrt w~ prepared b~
M~ael M. Westerheim
· · ' "'": ' This report and the work des-
cribed herein were performed
under the supervision of a CA
· 1,' · . .' '.. Calit'ornia Registered . ,
.. ~'.?.'," - · ~.~./;-~,/~(. - ../.. .... . . . ~ .- ' . . .
. ,. ?,.~. ~,~ · ,,;,.:~ ',,,?.~'~:~:,,,,,', :.. ,,'.. = ;.'", .... ,..,.. ,~.... q . ,.'.,- ~.:: . ,, , ~; '.'~ .., ,.
i £t'O AUG 3 1 1988
STATE OF CALl FORNIA GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD--
;"',:'?, 11030 ~tte Rock Road, .Suite 110
"of
~OSed ':~:,ifqUid
ted
[on ·"Presented ~'in
Lscusses
"..Our .~:,~ review :.indicates '~,~J~,,that ~,;the ii':',outer
io~-:"(both lateral · and "Vertical} [whluh'!Tesulted
~leak..at .the Site 'have "not,:.~b. een"~'~StabI'~
"that CpetroleUm '::based "C0ntamlnatlon
.' .' ;'~'of the 's~te that cannot be, attributed to the':'~onft~ed
' extent of the contamination ~n the "other" areas has s[m~larly
. ,.~,-'.,:..-r :,....*::,, not been defined. ,'. ...... :~*Y~,-.~,~ r~;:.-:':*
. ' ',, '*.L; ..... ~.'~ ' · ,' ' .... -~*', * ' · "." '~,''.:" -.
::~ ,~',:?.', :~'.':,. It..: is · our ',understanding that . Davies. ,Ozl Co. '~:would '~:,li~e '~::.to
' ":~J ..... ~'~'.~'[;:~.:," "~ ~, init[ate extraction, treatment, and discharge 'of. contamlna[~d
ground water as soon as .possible. Sections 13260 and 13264 of the
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act state that a Report of
Discharge containing the information .required by the Regional
Board and an appropriate filing' fee must be submitted not _less
than 120 .days prior to any new discharge of waste. ":Although '~we'
have received an application fo~ and a technical '~':report
regarding the proposed discharge, we have not received the filing ..
fee. Enclosed is a filing fee schedu%e. Please provide us with
the fee to complete the company's application. 'Also enclosed is a '~"~":'~':~.
copy of Waste Dzscharge Re~zrements that were adopted for./a ,~.,,..~.~
dicharge similar to the proposed discharge at the Davies Oil Co.
facility. It is likely that retirements for the Davies project
Prior to i October 1988 please provide us with a technical report
which contains a work plan to dete~ine the vertical and lateral
extent of contaminants in the soil and ground water. 'The reportG~?~''~
must be prepared under the' direct supe~ision of a .California .....
Registered Civil Engineer or Engineering .Geologist and ·must ,
.. contain a ·time schedule for conducting the work.' It will also be
-necessa~ ~to ~prov-ide .us -wi.~__.~=_tec~:ical~report ~ that isuppor-ts_the
removal capabilities of the proposed treatment system. Once :
~' lateral and"verti.cal exte.~t of contaminants in the ground' Water
'1'. ~'.' -' have b~en determined Davies will .need to demonstrate ~at the
., ,,;~'f;?..::':.~:~::' .' ..: ' extraction system is -adequate to - contain., and clean ~':up ~the
'.-,.it':."- ~'!?"~'?:":.".""~'~'~" co.tamt.ated -ground whter. ' ..... ~ ........... "''" '~'' ~""~. :' '~ ?'~'~ ...... : ~'~'~ :~:-~
' ~/":~"";::'; -" If you Should have any ~stions regarding ~is matter,:"pleaSe -?;.., ~. contact Ken Wilkins of our staff at (209) .445-6191.
, OALIFO'RNIA REGIONAL~aTER (IUALITY CONTROL BO~ R GENTRAL VALLEY REGION
3614 E. Ashlan SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED BRANCH Telephone: {209) ~145-51'16 ~, ..
Fresno, CA 93726-6905 State Lease Line: 421-5116
..%.Delta . '.Environmental +:,Consultants :.: on :;behalf
,~atl Lon:jw] ~ich ~resulte~ ~
~of '~re~lar ~.~ade .~gas°l~ne
... ~'proposes '":t° ':'remove '.dissolve~ "tfpe~ole~
" -,./-.discharge ~e treated water to an infiltration pond :on'Site.]~e
[acility ' ~s located '~n -'a co~ercial/industrial .,area no,west
"of Bakersfield tin Section 23 ."?T29S
'~ .......[ investigatory "work and-a-' desCriPtion of the proposed'"treatment'.....:...~.
'. and disposal system. Additxonally, the revxew wxll discuss the
:::%':,~i'::'.:.:~.'~:'.!::,:"~adequacy of the information 'submitted by Delta with
...:, ..... ~.,.,..:..:.: eneral informat~onal requirements (bold t~pe).
, ".-'-!:;?: ~' "i' . ': ' . ' · ' . '., - ' . , ..... ' ' ', · . ...... -.~ '..,: "f,:U.~.' :-~%:r~'~::~>,r""-.~
. ~. Soil types.'
B. Existence or absence of
.C. Ground water occurrence
D. Depth to ground water.
E. Ground water gradients.
(confi~'ed, 'unconfined, perched)
A total of nine monitoring well? (MW1-MW4, MWg-MW12) and'.thre~"..,~!.~i,:i,'i.
soil borings (B6'B8) have been Installed/completed ~t the
Soil boring logs indicate that the site is underlain by 'coarse
sands and small gravel .Litho'logic descriptions classify the soil'::¥'~'''''''
structure as sandy silt (SM) and poorly graded sand (SP) from
- :,. .. approximate depths of 7 to 25 feet. So~ls consisting pr~marlly of
":'"'/: .' fine-~rained particles, ' silts, were encountered in -the i.upper
'.' "::'::i.'::~ '.-. ~ ess 'than seven .feet below land surface) in several?of
...... "',.'' " ortion (1 .... . ...
the wells drmlled but the lm~hologic .descriptions
the presence o~ any potential con~ning layers
'.,~..:::':.:.::":.:.':. '.. below ground ~urface. . ... . .... ....- .. .
.';': , ~ . :.' ....
-' "' water'~I~-l--'%~fit-~r map a'~-i%~-~-~--from ~'=-e'~specific~easuramants
i
· indicates that the direction '°f flow is west-southwest. The
'-, ',.:)~ ~.~.~-~ gradient,-has been determined from the water level measurements to
"-~:~!ii.:.!.~:i,),i~ii!i~:'?,i,... be 0.003 ft/ft whi. ch .is consistent with. the Iocal.-:topography.']A
.. :',:!~!::.[~!,:?~i~,.-.~"~a.~ table ~f all ~ previous., ground ~wa. ter 'elevation · data .~ and physical
I' ~"-~-~:'.t ~-,~..observations is attached. ......-~,. ..... - .... , .~3-., : ,.-,. ,~¥u:?,...~-~;.::
' ~.~(.~:?~f:-~.~?~'.~,. ~e i,?~atio, .s~mi~ted by Delta ade~ately addresses
~ ~'~?]~,~?~',:'Lgeolog~c .~d h~olog~c re~ir~en~ outlined ~ove. '-~%~
'A.'.~ desCription'Of the work: completed ['2°
,n~ts ~d .their
~B,"%S~porting data =se~ ~o
C. Ident~f£cation/ of
,of. degradation .jLnc~ud~ng ~'~Icontam:Ln~ut"
rationale'
of :,the
~ ~,r '.~on; .ng 'we.
,-~--:. ':., :. 'construction, although no two wells are 'c0nst~uCted ,C~1]
~:~{~i.~.~j'~t.~:',:.~-,:.~l ,. of ~e wells are . const~cted w~ 2-~nch
~. ~f~:~[~:~/;%.;,~.:~ei~er -:: ~C ~/-or ,~::stainl ess :~, steel ?:.sc 'een .' ~ The ,;:~ ~creened
~~'~?~:[~ically ~begins :~,.about :~10 .~,~to ~:~.15/,feet.:': ~ elo~'~::Iand'~ c
. :~:,~:~::: .~t?~:.;:,:~.~?.e~ends :~ approximately ~I5 .,~feet. ::?~e ~wells ?are ::packe, ~
,~.;:: -?,... .... (~a~n s~ze ~spec~ed) - ~rom .. ~e '. -top "-':'~oE ~,~,~e
-approx~ma2e[~ one. ~oo2 be~o~ ~e screen The ~e[~s ~e sealed
-. :~.....'.. ',.:..:.:;. v~ benton~2e and cemen~ ~ou~. to ~e ~and Surface
' :..~:?.:%??:.?.V't.::"Del2a has ade~a~el7 de~cr[Bed ~e [nveS2~ga2o~ ~ork completed.
.... :'::~:"~" "?' "on-s~ke and provided rationale'flor ~el[ placement. ~ev[e~ o~ '~e'
I '":"~;::?'?':':::'~' ' ~on~or~ng ~e~l construction de,ails ~nd~ca~es ~a~ ~e ~ells-are
-::....:..~....~...-ade~ake [or ~e purposes oE kh~s ~n~es~[ga~on ~i~ respec~ ~o:" .
-?..:'.:.'-.~:,: .. '. casing ~aterial, screened [n~e~al, seal, e~c.. :.. ..:-.:;~:..
~17.~.:';-~;~:~,?~: ..... --.. ~ree rounds of ground water sampling to identify ~C°nt~inants'
'-. . and their limits (Hay 87, Oct. 87, March 88) have been completed
.,~.~, . at the site. Results from the March 1988 sampling event are given ~:.
;:[~:.~]?'" :':?':".:. benzene ~3 ND 40 2.2 10K 600' /900. : :'.-.-~;.:;::~.,'")':::"'" '0.7
'"~ ............. ~' .' '~ ethyl benZene '. 5 ND 3600 ND 3200 3700 "':2300 .'".~:~.~';~:~k.0.05
~lenes 39 ND 280 2 37K 42K 29K
...:.._-,~. ,. TPH ' 130 29K* 70K . ND 240K 100K 70K N/A .
K indicates 1000 times amount (e.g. 100K = 100,000) ~
· ..-~:..,.,~:,' .. . :-: . .. .,. .. : - : ,..,~.:.. ~.:!'.':'~.:.?~"~:'. , ~
As can be seen from the table, constituent concentrations for the
BTX&E COmpounds exceed the DHS action levels in some or all of
the wells at .the site. · ....... .,. :~. ..,:..-~,.~..~....~ ..,:-.,,~?~.~.-.?,~.??,~:..,,,:~-~,h~%.-.~:.~.,~,:,~,~.~,~:~:R~.;
e
~ag petrole,m hydrocarbons are present ~roughou~ ~, site,
?(~?~.~?~-%~;;.f?.'.;.:up~adien= and do~gradient of ~e ~o~ leak .loc~[tio,
F~}';}~?~:;>~:::/'tndtcate ~at lea~ may have oc~ed.'~.'For "example~
....... '~Diesel $2 :has been de~ected ~ 2
~of ~wh~ are .~upgradtent '.of ~-~e ..'~confi~ed .ieee.
. (a-~.i~.~h--~l)-'-~l~ws
~oten~ial ,,leak .', sources
,ensing':'
';diesel-;i and
esprea(
~'~'and propose~ to address'thOse ·areas suspected of being
::.'other leaks :(e~g..i.diesel) .separately .from the
leak..
'zc r.' 'OF
;::,:.:. f,, .,:: ,....~,,~. ,.~ -?}.:-/..::,..a~,?,, .~'~..":, .~. ?.".-.~4 ',: ,.: .?f;~.,.a -.,v,~,;~'Y>:~¥',~.:' ?'I~~ '' .... '"
I. I description of the work accomplished to 'identify
-.~ .. '...: ...'. c0nt~i~ants and their l~its. ~:' ...... ~ ~.. :'.:.~: :.....','.::j. }~
;:.[::~..-~':";~{?B.""B~portlng data·used to detemine'.'the'"~t' of
:'~ '.'..: ~J'(:-?: :':/-"=ont~inants . (location of borings ~ [.s~pling
' 'C. Identification of lateral ~'d vertical bo~daries ~of
cont--inants including continent concentrations ~nd
." relationships between soil ~d groun~ water elevations
. (no~al and m=im~). ' ' - ..... . ..... : ·
"The tnfomation s~mmtted bY 'Delta ~' .........
dmd not address the e~ent of
contamination in the soil.
_
a.' Descriptmon of progr~ which includes the procedures used'
for s=pling, s~ple prese~ation, chain of custody,
oh~ioal ~alyses, etc. The progr~ should also e~lain
._. ........ ... -,.-,..:....: '~%',., ;,%,:
~- deviations from reco~ended U.S. EPA methods. :.
',
Delta did outline the. sampling and 'analysis Plan to "be ..... used' .......
site including the sampling methods, 'chain of ~stody,'~JChemi'caI?J~:~,:t
analyses, etc. The plan states tha~ ground water samples will be
(or already have been) collected with a laborat°~ cleaned teflon
a =.r purgi.g thr.. vo .s
regular' lnte~als .to ensure that ~e parameters 'are stabmlized
: . -.. .:.....>~ , ..
prior to.sample collection. Upon c.oll.ection, each sample is 'to
/?,..: ~-~ ~~-.....i-..~.,:.~:~,-' be appropriately labeled., and stored:., in ice until delivered to the
· ......<. · ~ =~y~e= a~coru~ng =o ~mA me,od 524.2/8240 fuel fi~ua~,~
'~'~"-~-a~d ED · ' - : ---~-- = .....
~.. B, . B~&E, ~d -TPH.. The analyses ara ' .to be 'Parroted
......... as~a~c~. ' "' ."'"'::-: .... ::~:.t ,. ,,: .. ,..~ ;, ,, ::.:..:... ,....ct.t~:,:/t
..... . .' ,?:, -. .., :-?f-':.,~:~[.: · .j,.,,:~:_?*..~. ..
'- ].,..??. ;/. ..- ..'/'.' - ~ : :; .
Volume -~of. waSt~'~;d~sOh~;rga
. :::" ., ..;.....:.:':..-j" ..... "..'. '"C. 'Qualit~ of water to be treat'ed. ":' . - -
. -. ..... monitoring ~d st~ procedures '2o 'ass~e~ac] .ev~en2
...'....' ,..: ;.,.-,:of proposed d~scharge concentrations. ..... :
~.~'~[}[?it?]-~,~?:~i-:[,)~ :" hydrocarbons. ·will :hq .removed 'wt~ 'prOduct-'::recove~
'~::'~;~:~!~d-?;~::~};~~/;.: .'~:'~':.:-":'attached well location ~map). Delta has ~already "in~talled :.and
: .. - · .' test-p~ped one recove~ well, RW1, and has .datelined that "on~
,;:.:'(:',:.~ ....... well· will not be sufflclen~ to control the pl~e of contaminated'
· ?:~.,:~',~?~-:~j~'~'.~'./'...'v,ground water. Delta proposes to operate RW1 for appr?x~ately One
:~}~?~:.~.~::'~":'.:.':~' mon~ and establish a. ~apture zone", ~en approprlately'modif
". %~,.f'~:~'?:."-. ?-":' ~-;" · ' Y
· , ....... the system (place additional wells, increase treatment caDa
. so that ~e extent of ~e l~e can be full t .
.. . · P con a~ned -,~A
: .... :,: .... schematic drawing of RW-1 is attached. Y ...... ..:.. :,.-..:.,:.: .
. .:f~:~.:'.,.::,;..: :.... . . . ' '.
operational the .system will discharge an '.'estimated
":~)?'~'<.'...:~". .... '0.216 MGD '~f treated water on a continuous basis for.:-3 ~to't:~::~
.-.i[:-.:'o.:..-. years. The =reatment system will consist of two packed Col~n 'air
strippers 16 feet tall and 3 1/2 feet in diameter. Once treated
..~.:~,.,~,,~::.:~.':'~"~ ..... ~' ' ' "infiltration galle~"~ at
review
'Upon of ~e details of the treatment and disposal~;.~vstem.?~[~
"'?~"~"':~'"' ~" it appears that the system will be acceptable provided ~at Delta
:~?.._,:~.../.-::.~-. .can me~t th~ hydrocarbon =onsgitu~ng d{scharg~ limits (y~
· ' "(,'~/-:?":::::'::.~'~:.:~.~".. '?' capabilities . for .each c°nstltuent, '. monitoring · and/or
const~ction details of the proposed infiltration galle~. Soma
.. .....
.-.of 'the ..abov~ information is difficult to develop without Prior
knowledge .'of -the *. discharge limitations ?for '"-the '*?individual
?i, ? ]~?'ii~/i~ii[i,;.'~!~, ?.~( c on s t itu ent s.
CONCLUSIONS
.on ':p_r_~Y~dei ,cateS
Davies , ~f~petroleum .......
..(:and ,!downgradient ]~i:0f Athe/.~known
, ,~that/!previous ,!,~eaks ~have
atiOn:
,es'~ihas~tndicated~ji,,~.J~a~
leyiwould
.,of
ished
· Contaminants ,.in ."!the ."ground'
'to-i~include' 'additi6na]
r have
..wells '~n
'Definition of 'the o.uter boundaries (both Iateral and
Cica1) . .of . the '~ contam~at~on . 'at ~e ~'.'site .~ncluding
~[~'~,;~pl~e from ~e .-~o~ ~.le~ :of re~lar qasol~ne ~and ~all other
"Definition of ~e'extent Of Soil ::COntamination (both
lateral and yeS,cai)..~roughou~. ~e 'entire s~te. Prob~le
-~:~:,~;~::;'%'~?;~.~::f~?~;.~:~.'~::Cleanup strategies should be outlined for Our review.
'.'-'::'proposed treatment system, and const~ction de2a[ls 'of
'jjProposed infiltration galle~.. · .--
STATE OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN. Governor
ALIFORNIA 'REGIONAL'WATeR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD--
CENTRAL VALLEY RE.GION' ".
,.--'SAN jOAOUIN WATERSHED BRANCH OFFICE:
3614 EAST. ASHLAN AVENUE -,.,~.
· -~P o E:. 1209~ .-5 :,i&.:::;:,,:~.'!:?i~::: . . . 06 Octobe~:!.1988
.~r-..i?Sudhakar .Talanki ·
~elta. Environmental.
DAVIES'OIL'.COMPANY
'suant ~:.to .our
,~memo~
::::Indicated
irOund water ;extraction '!program. ~at :~.~,the ~ite '.~s.~-s00n~.~i~S
~cur :tha~'~lt ~wou'ld !,beneficial' )recess
nd treatment can 'begin ~'as :'~0on as 'P°Ssib]
.,[he d~scha~ge.,,~loca[[on :follo~n~:
.removal of petroleum ConstituentS.".-The deveI'~pment'-'Or adoption':'°f
the waste discharge :'~re~irements ~ does :,"not "" imply that '.the
extraction system has been or will be adequately' co~tStructed to
'control the plume. -.. To . the': 'contrary
?~:~:~:::~-Provided :. that .. demonstrates :?~ha t ~'the :~:'Sys~'em "will '. '~: be': %~loca'ted ,.
~:~:~:~.A?:-~;;:~:~?~Const~cted .or "opera[ed [n ~_a 'manner to,:::~ontFol..L~he.;e~i~e
· :~..:?'":.:}::..-Pr~or 'to 4 November I988 please provide us with,.a work 'plan which
'~':'~'~':~J~;~:?'~'~utlines~. ..... ~, _ _ ~':how 'you .. propose-: to .define %.the "~lateral .~and '~.yertical ....
~:~';t~Z~.~',~?~9'E~.~:' .~ :~ ~- ' ~' "~ - .
'~::-:'f<-'::i~:~;7?4~;~:,~,boundaries of .the 'plume and how the ,otheF:.:~items ~n.. ~he .~t~.ache~..~;.~?:.,:.
:::0,~:?:~}'?~;~:'~??,~;~.~-memorandum w[11 .be addressed..' .:~,
"':'"' ' '"' ' should:: "' '"' -' ' .have' ': "' ': spec~ f~c" ' ' '
.~,.[f .' you . 'any ... questions :. regard,ny
the
~tnf°~atlon we have :requested, please' "'telephone "Ken :Wilk~ns' of
.......... our .staff t .(209) A45 61 ! ,<,.,,~. ....... ~_,_,~:....,.~_.
F. Scott Nevlns . ..~, .... , ...... .~,., ....... ,~.. .....
~' Senior Enqtneer ',:?,' '/.':-"' .:...:'. '~¥~-~,:~,'::~?-..'~-, .~-'.. ::~T:?:~.
.,..," Kern County Hea~h Depar~h{'''' "<..'~-'::: '~' "~.'~%:~": "~?' ::':'":'~" ': :. '-'"'
· .. . ~ ..... .' . . ...:,.*- . .: -, . ..-~.
.....' ... . .- '. '' . . . . · .: .,
.:,? ........?..: . :. ~::.
i - --A c m o cl u m
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL~,'ER QUALITY CONTROL BOAR ENTRAL VALLEY REGION
[~' ' 3614 E. Ashlan ' [: SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED BRANCH ' Tele0hone: (209) 445-51i6 '.
-~ "" ~?'~-~.~.~['~' - Fresno, CA 93726-6905'... State Lease Line: 421-5116. ','
.... , .................. , , .-.
'~, ?"' v:~/,;:,,'~;'~L'-~,~.aU~;..;~'~'~?~:'~.~.'~;":~.~,~V~;,. " . . . . ' '.,
':j4. -~ ~;:'~-~ :~.;';~.4'~~ ,~'.' ~MU'A"A" NEVINS
~ .:? ?:~?..:?: ~?., :,..?v... SENIOR ENGINEER .... .
-.:- .,,.. ,:.,.. ~- .- :._,- -,., .: · -. .......
',: ,. :.. ,?;?: '. .:
O~OB~R 03 1988 ·
. . ..
i'i~ ;.':<Environme~ta 1 ;:-:Consultants ,!
,, !'i )elta :~was i:i~.hi~d ~:~!,ito ~i~,i.n~ t
~ ' ~:~:'.- ~,~ . - . · .. . .. ~3,,.. ~: ..-_.-.. -~, ': ~ 47"--' u~
"' ~oses :?.to "'remove :?'d~sSSlVed ':,Petroleum
discharge the treated water to an infiltration pond
Lty-:-'is .located in a comm~rcial/indu'Strial'
Of the Ion-su ted
. that "'petroleum based Contamination is PreSent-"'in ':~he'~
L: ;'. ' ' .>. ground water . at various locations . throughout .the ,'~:Site.~
:" '"~.'ii~i:i(.~(therefore ~tndlcated ...that the :.following .'.-additionali~)if~forma%.
. o r review .:as "part~.:~of
':':':'-,needed 'to ~":be provided . for,:.!, "i'i:.":!'-'i:/"':"':':::'/'~ ;i~iI ?
,tigation at the site: : ~:
1. Definition of the outer boundaries ~ - ~ ~~both-"']a~eral
t,~:'r~,,~%':',~,,?',/?~.,.~.~;~?L'~':]] ~7~rt[cal) of 'the contamination at the site including ~'r:the
' 4~,~(~J:;~:.~¢~:~;:::?3?~:,}~?:j.~.plU~a ~rom the known leak of regular gasoline and all
:~:~:,.%~(~::~:'~:~,.,~.h:~'..~::~h~<-:~(:contamina~ed areas. -. ' .... . · .'
.... . - ....... : .., . z. ue[xnxt~on om the ~xtent of soil .contamination · (both.
· ~?.,.-:...,.~,.:-~,.:, .,:.,. ,,,,-.[..:lateral and v~rtical) throughout the an[ir~ site. Probable :,.
cleanup stra/egies .should be outlined for our review;"'.z?.:z,z:;?~;:;..:'~:~..;
.73~: Info~at1on regarding the removal :capabilitieS'- ,of [-the
.~', ..:':..: :.?~"/~?~.'~:proposed treatment syste~, and construction detaiiS~ of "'the
.... , proposed infiltration gallery.
?. ,:'~ :.:%~-%5-.~:.~.,..; .... - . ..
,?~ ..... ~es "- ~ . . . _.. ,...-.......;.~ ..... ~..: _.~.f?.,,,~.~ .......
'~'::"We ~ ted a technical report with a work plan addressing 'the
· issues be submitted for our ' ...................................
:{i~?~L~;~ ".:~.'..:.' :' -. : . - ."~ ...... · - - .~ .'-,' "~¢C~Y3<~:~,-?~::~-~: ~.
, .............. ., ~:. ~.?
. CURRENT ~UBMITTAL ........ , ......... - .....
", .f.: ,'~' '~'.:~:~ V'" q~' :'" '"'" ~ '" ~''' '" ' ' ". ' · . ' , .. '- . - · z · ~. ~ ~.~.~ ' ~ ,'
September
',,~/:'::~L~:'ff':'::,::'::.:::,,:: On "09 1988. 'Del~a: ....... . . '.' ","-',~.:,.'e ~:~::?,",~..?,.
su tax,ted xnfomat~on pursuant 'to "our
':::[.:. ?~:~:~[;?~',%'?, re~es~."-. The · follo~xng ,.xs :'.abriar .. summary' :.,of ~he ::,info~a~'ion
':'. ":."' .... ~ '.'" submi~ed-'~Y~Delta-~i~h'''re'spect~to'.t~e'~three.:above...~tems.,...-.:.:."
:.::.:"~',i.~' ~... Del.ta l~dicates i.n the 09 September letter that a work .Plan
~.'~ '~: ~.'./.,: ' ~arterly monitoring report' dated 10 January 1988. The-proposal
called for "three and possibly four additional monitoring wells
~""~'~' ~3~.' be -installed at the site." '. The letter .also references
~ .~contamination at the site .(not attributable"t° ~the conf~'~
~'~ '~'.regular "~::.grade -::.gasoline) /~'and ~ states ;: "(-::.,the
":.':~?""~-:~:'?,[.addressing the apparently separate contamination .in ~-2_:~and
~.can ~,.~be [ re-evaluated ' at ~.a .zlater .:date,~.t~,based :on ?data
~.,future ?' gation
'i:~evaluate ,the %impaCts 3of
-,apparently'-
' contamination'
.four ~new" ...Wells 'proposed, '~three "'.Of . ) ".had .already .been ..installed
the ground water. The fourth well, ~-13, was proposed to
-. 'com~lete~ ~owngradient off-site buC was never const~cte~.-'"Since
· that .time 'no work 'has been acco~plishe~ and no 'a~ditionaI-~':~ells
' :[.;~t~.:~.',;i(;..f:[..:~:have 'b en proposed '(except ~-13) ,~to .-define .>:the 'do~grad~ent
?~t:~:<;i.':" lateral extent ' of "Contamination., '""Als°', %'t?no '":' work %has '~ti~been''
~ '~:':'"/'-"": acco~plished or Proposed to dete~ne the 'extent of 'contaminant
( /[~ Delta contends that they ' '
-,, cannot dete~ne the south/southwest ?-.~.,:~:..',
:. bounda~ of the plume of petroleum contamxnat~on because
have been denied access to the property south/southwest 'of
leak location. Delta has provided correspondence which indicates ']?'~.
5 that ~hey have offered the occupant of the i~ediately adjacent
J.. :::...,.~ .. property (Mr. Cyril Andre) a single pa~ent of $500 for'right 'of.- ~'~:'~
entry to the property to construct a m~n~to~ng and/o~ e~trac~tOn"]~/~'~~
j.~....."' well(s) and operate the 'wells for an indefinite period of tlme.'(~[~t.~[~lil~?:
-the lateral boundary of .the plume cannot be dete~ined for .the
~ J?~ ... following reasons: -...... · .., ..... ::......... ... ,;~. ~:,:,~:::~:~.::~t,~:~?.:~...-
1.' There is no evidence that the offer 'of a sxngie
of $500 is an ade~at~, offer for right of ~nt~ ..,.to .,.th~ ._,..:.j ....
~ ~' :.?t~.:.]', property for an indefinite period of time or that it will
- .Andre for his costs and lnconven~ence for
·
location'S if Delta is not granted ~right of entry to the
property.
>?? In addition to the lack of adequate work-to identify ~the'Plume .in
',~i:~':~'~i~!<:"'~'"~the ,~ lateral 'direction..,' -'~' there has been ~: no -" work '~'. conducted --::.to
'dete~ine the vertical extent of contamination. The current plans
· are to construct an extraction well without sufficient knowledge
'of whether or not the plume will be captured and .contained.
'the 09 'September '~letter 'Delta 'dld not 'propose ..any
~/?work ,'to 'define the extent .of .~isoil Contamination .at 'ithe
cleanup 'les ' were
131~' Information .. regarding ..the ' 'removal Capabilities'.,iof
~t ,stem ion .S'
~ProP°seal' ~t] iad - '.-19~'~'deS~ ..... ~'
new features and that the new design would be submitted'Yor Our
i:,review sometime ,in .the :near ~,,%future..~ Similarly~!"~the ConStrUction
for ~.the '~infiltratio~ ' ~re %to i:be ~'sUbm
CONCLUS IONS
In our Original letter we requested that a work plan be Submitted
~i:/'~Ji?ito address .~the 'lateral · and vertical . extent 'of ,.contamination ~-on
.-!'~.,;?~'and off-site, .-Including both the plume-from the confl~ed leak'~of
-~gasoline -and , all : other' 'contaminated .,. areas. -~:~The ,response .,.that
Delta has provided does not propose 'any '.'work 'which
Previously been completed and reviewed with the excepti°n of the
, proposed installation of ~-13. The work that has been completed
at the site indicates that ground water has been impacted. '~:It
'do~ not dofin~ ~ho boundar~ of'contamination. ~o work ha~
proposed to define the plum~ boundaries laterally or vertically
yet Delta has propOsed to Implement a ground ·water extraction
program under these unknown conditions
· . . .. ,....~: :. ,:': ~..:' .... !. ':
.. ._. . · - . . ..., , .
ent
· 9 '12.03 3,40 -
4 2,15 2,96 10 28.48 4.02
~ I :.'. St~aoe ~ffici~t CS) . 8. GE.02 ' '.
..." ® TPansMissivit ( ) = 12999 ...
~.?:.:~;. ... "~..?:.~ · .. ....
..:-:,:"....-....: -' ~ · ~ gpo r · 0~50 f~
~o. Tl~' ~ad~ ~. Ti~
· ' :- 2- .I.lJ .... L~ . ·
"' ~ .....I.E7 Lg~.'" '. " J 13.~
4 2.1~ ~ ' ' 10 ~.4~
5 2.~ 3.11
..,..S -3.~ 2.18
ti, indicatK the-data point vas excl~
fr~ .r~Hsi~ calc~ati~s
':' .It~ sin. t ~' tMn T
(ft)
'3.~
3.~ .....
3.~
4.~'
6.11£-o~ r q
:::[':::Slope (a) · 1,116 IHt/cycle Y-intercept (b) · 2.465 feet
· '-'... ' Cor~elatim Coefficient (ID - 0.~
.,~?.'?-.,.,:... :<?'~...~.::.'.-,. /...... :, ..' :-., - . :. :: ...... . '.....-..,,, /..:;" .":. . , ..
· ~ ~'I~D HYORO6Em.06IC PARAItETEItS
~L~ l' t ~ Tranuisoivit¥ CT) · 12000 gpd/ft ~
~ ~ ~-~ ~J'~' StornQe Coefficient ~) · G. tE-02
~: o, ~ T'-~........._:~
COMPUTEFI ANALYSIS BY:'" ~;;:i<
ILLINOIS STATE WATER SURVEY $OFTwAFIE '"
..... Aot~nm T~s'r CONOUC'r~ MAY 3,leSS
...... ...., .-..:,.:.,,?:..
A'Delta .' '.
Environmental .
Consultants, Inc, -' ': ..... '
· . '. :..' :i.' FIGURE 3 -:.:.~ '::':'"' ~:-'
:<:;. :RW-1 JACOB ANALYSIS DATA
......... : ......... =--3$05-'I~'/2'GULF STREET ' .
BAKERSFIELD, CA.
BY
JOB NO. 40-87-326 BY:,,,,,/~/~/~ /~, .~/.~¥,,
PROJECT
PROJECT NAME
.... CHECKED BY
1~ 030' White Rock, Suite 110
· Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 . ..
' 916-638-2085
Environmental
Consult. ants, Inc. DATE /~-.2s-- grf'
Delta
Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
11030 ·White Rock, Suite 110
· Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
P.OJECT NO.__~ ~ 7-S~__a
PROJECT NAME .L).~'I///'~'.¢ ~}/'/
· SUBJECT
· CHECKED BY
,ii.
Delta
! , & · Environmental
- ~ ~, 'Consultants, Inc.
' ~ ' ~lj, ' r .'''' ''~,,030'White Rock, Suite 110 ' .-
I ' %i' ha,oho Cordova, CA 95670 .: :'Fi' "-:., ,i.~ ..~:.:;,"
';:~!1//~ ,"~?916-63e-2oe5 ::~'?,,,,:~,~,~:?!:/~i~i!ii~,~!~ii,,~:,:ii:,7:i',,~:~:~':,:.{;~-;
'-'~'7-
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME~
BY /~~ DATE
· ,:~ ,SUBJECT~ ' ~.~' ~ ~" ' ~'/~.~1
. .;.. ,:..... ,.;.,.-.., ..... :: ..'-?..,.:' .'..;:
. · · ' ' : . . · ' * ; '~ ' . ' ,' * ~.". ' ,' , '. : : ."Z'.":. ~ .- ~
~ '~ -: .-.,. ',:~ ':':: · · ' ., ~.. 'i "; ;' ' · ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ '~-~. ':,:-~'::,',;.?,%,'.~,:::/'..~C'~.g~?:~"~¢~:'
I
I
, , :...t.;: .._:, ....~ ..... : ~:.- ,.. : .. ,: , : ,-~- -~, :..! ~..; ',~ ...,~ ,., ~ ~/
.:l~ '.;'.:~;~T::'~.~-~.:~?.~i~'L~:'.:~.;,L~,:,:~ ~.~. t:-~.,~. L-.:* , ...... - -ty-~.'-'~[' ~,-:~'"~:~'~'~;. ~ ~ -": w,~ ~ .. -:',' ,~'~;:1.;~,~!'
U.', ~ ~',',C:;:-t ~ :",::~':?:~?,:,~:'?' ';:~:~':':t:~"" ': "~'/' ~'.' '":': ~:"~ ,1".. ?'~-~).:~:~,.t-'~: ' ,.-',: ',..' :~'~"': .:' ' · :" % .... · .... '
·' .... ' ~ -] '' '. '"'. ' · ' ;' t ' r-'i =' ' ;' '" ~ '' ..... '' , '' '
, : . . .. , , I ,. , t : ~ . t ~ ,. ~ ; ~ . . . . . '..
.......v,.~,:~;~ ~., ,~/:'~~'. ?<::t' .-' "¢~,' "~.".F.~.~,.~h] t~.~"~-~-,~'Fh:;, ~:.~"~""i:./~.'~.~'~'~'~'"',: ....... ~:~t , ~~', :,~:~,':.,<~:' ' ~"...':.'.'.',:..?,':.~U.~.:..:%"~,;~:
.' 2;.~::F.':~ ~,:,Y{": ::~~~j~:.~- :':-~" "% '~?'~.,f, ~}',~.t~:~t,.-~f'~,% "' t ,:¢~:-Z.z.,~,~,;'~"-':-.~. ~:' ."' ,/ . ~.':~;t":','.': · /~, :,~:;" ?':"'/.:??,~7~: :*~,~',~,~-'.~"fi~
' .. ?:;'. . _. ':,.~' ' ...~ : ~.~' -;?.,,,,, ~'., . : .-.~ ''": .._ . ,. .'.. : .' . . . . .
I-
~;.~ /' ,' ~' ~. ~ .' '.' ':~C.-: ;'-~,' ',~ / ~ ~' '. ', ': ',~",',,; ., "'~ ~ .; ". ~,. · ~' .'t ' ''~.~' O~~ ',;'.~ ~:zZ.;,~.,~
i
- . ! ....... : .: , . . ~ .,;.: ...,'"- :_~ .: ..'- ~ ~. ,~,j~-:?,./.- .
.. .~ ,' ....... ' ' ..... ~ ~,, ' .',~ ~ '' ' - ' - ' i., ,"-~,,~';~ ~ .... ~ '. · . ":.~ ,:,'.',~':-,L:;". '~.,';:' ~u ':L:,~:)'~..-~: .....
"' .' ':'".- '.- ":.:,'i ' ?~.~':~ ' ~"". :""'~"',"' ;~:',, ~,'~".L'~'"P ~' L ~:":':'~.:', ~""~':':i,'~"~:":::':~':~'.' ....... ' .... ' .... "' ' ~'"'~"' "'"~';:"~'
:, .. '~;',*.~5.t'::/ ...... ~,?;~5~::".~..., ,~'.~'.~.,~.~ ~'~';'~'"j l ~ *i :'-'!"'::i~ ~'":' ~'' : / "'' ":'":' ~ " :"'* "::'*" "~:" ':':'"~"'~"""' '
...... !--,~::::~]::: ............ ~:~-*.-: ........ : -;":'m~.%-??,~].t- [: , ~ ~ : -' - . .
' - ' ..... " i ...... ' ' ' ~ ' ' " ~ ·
.::.- ..' . ,. '.-' '..: ~ ' '. , , ': ~ ~ ~ ' ' i ; i ' ' ~ ~ ;'~"' , . .
[.
L
!.
L
L
L
· -.=~ .... .. ~ . 'l ~ ' '
. ---.~' ~ · :' ' ".::.: ',.~;S:?~ ~(~ ~>~'~' -'?'~ .~ ~i~;'~''- ~.-, "~' ~- ' ' ' - ~ ·: ' ., .' - .' ' ~.t~ ~->xb-:-~ .... r~:~:~
- ..,.,.~:~. '.- .~ , ...... ._~.~.-..:.,-.?.:,~ , ..... - -~:.-_ - , ?:.::7i
~ '-~ -' ': :.S ~- '~-',,.;': :~::.-%;,~.-~.~;?~:?;-.::,'=.'~ ~:. :"-. - i ' ' :'.-:¢:e'.-"~;~-;:~u .... ~G,': ....
· .~.._ ~ ~ ~? ~-.::~?:~:;:,~:.:-~.~,.. ~ Environmental ;~,~..1'
- :-:.~:~ ll~ ~:,,,~:l I ~?-,'~,,'~' ~[~Consuitants,' Inc.
~' ~'-~':":~' "?':'"":: ' :~Nu= ~ ' ::r~' ~.:...~ ~=~< : '~' ~" FIGURE ~
. .;~?~ '1 I~~ ...:.,I I ~ .... RECOVERY YELL D[SION
~ ~ '?:.:..--, ~.,:i;:;:::'..-s:..=-, ~?.'?? ('-3305 l/~ GULF" STREET
.~-.'.' ~:..'-'='~ = ;~*~,,g ~ .~:,~:.~.,~:~::S~' ';:. .:. DAVIES OIL · ,
DELTa NI~ 4o-eT-326 I T~? ~.z~.-~
Delta
Environmental PROJECT NAME
Consultants, Inc. B~ ~
:,,..,, o. s
Delta
Environmental
Consultants, Inc,
11030 white Flock, Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
PROJECT ' V ! r~ ~, L"t ! ~__ , ' .
,,,, ,gtz-~-I ~,'~r'",'~\ ,:,,,TE' 1~2~'~'"'.
-/
uelta
Environmental 0
C°n"ultant., Inc.
il030 Wh~ Rock, Suite llO
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
916-638.2085
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME~ _~
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,'' --. . DATE :~ ,:,'~
SUBJECT. ~'- ,
': '"..':""'/:'(':..h': :..~,.., * . .
CHECKED "Y~~ATE-'.:.r ~,.~'... ,,
is. :4
' ·
Delta
Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock, Suite 110
· Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
916~638-2085
PROJECT NO. ~'- '? '
- ? ~ ~!' SHEET
PROJECT NAME
~("~ ':~ X '
;':'C ,'. c,' %, .
Io0 ~P/'I ? z. o ~
Frgo ¢:,o ¢
Delta e
Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock, Suite 110
· ,Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
PROJECT NO.~: ! '/~ SHEET
PROJECT NAME' ~'~1~'~ tJ I ~..~ (.,"~( ,
..' ' .~ ' DA~ ' '" ...... ,,~
Delta ~
Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock, Suite 110
· ,'. Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
':,;:'916-638-2085 : !?" i.i;'",~ , ?'
' i*,.'* ..*'..'-..,-.....*.:' . :'.
PROJECT NO. _._~,~ ~ ~' ~' SHEET
PROJECT NAME '~111~/0 /-~ V / ~ ~ C'3 ~ (
BY C~?-7' / r'/ F./~ '' ""DATE I0/~(~,
'-.',,~,~.:~ , ..~ .~...&~:.?;~ .,..?/ ~ ~ : ~., .... , -. ,7 ,.- %.. >,~ .-~',-l~'
SAMPLE
o'-... . ' - ~,~v~.v~,~ PETI=~3t. EUU PeOOUCT
- FEET r"~IJRFACE ELEVATION .' gq _ 1~11 ORIGIN N WL NO TYPE OBSERVATIONS
. ~::: SANO.WSILT,;ftne. o medium grained,
S
0ATE ?~ ~PTH ~PTH 0EPTH ~EO ~PTHS ~VEL UET~0 -~5
7-10 2:00 .25' ,. NHR
~o .
:r~o~tc*~~~°mpany; .~kersfield~ Cal iforni a
OEPTH OESCR~PTIO~ ~ ATERIAL ~ SAMPLE
IN
~ ORIGIN N ~ NO TYPE
FEET S~;ACE E~EVATION · ~. 7~; ' GEOLOGIC ~TR~M P~0~
7
1
4
0AT~ T~ D~PTH ~PTH ~H '~AILE0 ~P~H~ LEVEL
,. c.~w c.m~ Kroasena
' '-- " &
F
1
SURFACE REPLACED TO
_:_ ?::~:_E-X-IST/N!6BNDrT"/DN- --
SOIl.;"
'-' ~ " "~4 p£RFORATE]3 ])RAIN PIPE
~ ..-' 'S~T ~~N
PORT ~P. ~
LEVEL
[
[
[
(ME~IUM TO ODARS,,P')
L
NAT"/VE SD~L'
]IACKFII..L
'.COMPACT
.---.,'
;. 1/4 'In'-.'.'--
,. :...',~ PEA .'
'j,~,.;,4~RAVEL .,:
.~. :~..~?-...2,'~ _ ..
:.-, ~..',:'-. ~ 6: :;
·
'rD I:::DARSD :~
SECT,~.BN A'A'
ST~TF_ OF CALIFORNIA
GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD--
CENT L VALLEY REG!ON.
SAN JOAOUIN WATERSHED BRANCH OFFICE:
3614 EAST ASHLAN AVENUE
FRESNO. CALtFORNIA 93726
PHONE: (209) 445-5116
06 October 1988
Mr. Sudhakar Talanki
Delta Environmental_Consultants
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
DAVIES OIL COMPANY, BAKERSFIELD
Enclosed for your information is our review of the latest
.information you submitted for the subject facility. The attached "~
.................. memorandums_discusses the_adequacy, of .the information.you_provided ~LL ....
pursuant to our original request, 26 August 1988. As indicated in.
the attached memorandum, we have concluded that the proposal does
not adequately address our concerns with respect to lateral and
vertical definition of the plume boundaries. I '. ,. "
You have indicated to us that you would like to implement a
ground water extraction program at the site as soon as possible.
We concur that it would be beneficial to initiate this process in
a timely fashion. We will therefore begin developing waste
discharge requirements for the discharge so that the extraction
and treatment can begin as soon as possible.
The purpose for developing waste discharge requirements for this
operation is to ensure the protection of the ground water quality
at the discharge location following ground water extraction and
removal of petroleum constituents. The development or adoption of
the waste discharge requirements does not imply that the
extraction system has been or will be adequately contstructed to
control the plume. To the contrary, no information has been
provided that demonstrates that the system will be located,
constructed or operated in a manner to control the entire plume
of contamination.
Prior to 4 November 1988 please provide us with a work plan which
outlines how you propose to define .the lateral and vertical'
boundaries of the plume and how the other items in the attached
memorandum will be addressed. -
If you should have any specific questions regarding the
information we have requested, please telephone Ken Wilkins of
our staff ~t (209) 445-6191.
F. Scott Nevins
Senior Engineer
cc: W.C. Davies, Davies Oi}-~Co=-~---Bakersfield Kern County Health Department
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL
3614 E. Ashlan .-
Fresno, CA 93726:6905
W~TE;' QUALITY CONTROL BOARD · CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED BRANCH Telephone: (209) 445:5116
- State Lease Line: 421-5116
TO:
F. SCOTT. NEVINS
SENIOR ENGINEER
FROM:
KEN WILKINS
STAFF ENGINEER
DATE:
S U BJ ECT:
OCTOBER 03 1988
DAVIES OIL COMPANY, BAKERSFIELD
INTRODUCTION
Oh '11 jUly 'ig~8"~'-"~ceived an appIication-for""W~-~iEc-h~'~e
from Delta Environmental Consultants on behalf of Davies Oil
Company. Delta was hired to investigate the extent .of
contamination which resulted from a leak of approximately .2500
gallons of regular grade gasoline at the subject facility. Delta
proposes to remove dissolved ~etroleum hydrocarbons and then
discharge the treated water to an infiltration pond on site. The
facility is located in a commercial/industrial area northwest of
the City of Bakersfield in Section 23, T29S, R27E, MDB&M.
Upon review of the information submitted by Delta it was apparent
that petroleum based contamination is present in the soil and
ground water at various locations throughout the site. We
therefore indicated that the following additional information
needed to be provided for our review as part of a next phase
investigation at the site:
1. Definitibn .of the outer boundaries (both lateral and
vertical) of the contamination at the site including the
plume from the known leak of regular gasoline and all other
contaminated areas.
2. Definition of the extent of soil contamination (both
lateral and vertical) throughout the entire site. Probable
cleanup strategies.should be outlined for our review.
3. Information regarding the removal capabilities of the
proposed treatment system, and construction details of the
proposed infiltration gallery.
We requested a technical report with a work plan addressing the
above issues be submitted for our review.
CURRENT SUBMITTAL
On 09 SePtember 1988 Delta submitted information pursuant to our
_request. The following is a brief..summary of _..the .information
submitted, by Delta with reSPeCt~'~O the three above items.
[Reviewed by' [ ~AJ
Item
Delta indicates in the 09 September .letter that a work plan to
define the vertical-.and lateral extent of the dissolved
hydrocarbon plume (from the confirmed leak) was included in a
quarterly monitoring report~ dated 10 January 1988. The proposal
called for "three and possibly four additional monitoring wells
be installed at the site." The letter also references .the 10
~an~arY~-~quarterly
contamination at the site (not attributable to the confirmed leak
of regular grade gasoline) and states; "the necessity of
addressing the apparently separate contamination in MW-2 and MW-3
can. be re-evaluated at a later date, based on data collected
during future investigation and quarterly monitoring at the
site."
............................. 6~l{~%~d-i6ates. that ,,future~inves~igations,,'~'ill~-b~-'~0hd~tedto
evaluate the impacts of the "apparently separate contamination".
A request was made to outline what work would be completed
pursuant to investigating the contamination in our original
letter, but no new work has been proposed by Delta in the 09
September letter.
Of the four "new" wells proposed, three of the wells (MW-10, MW-
11, MW-12) had already been installed at the time of my original
review. The three wells were installed on the Davies property
and clearly indicate the presence of petroleum constituents in
the ground water. The fourth well, MW-13, was proposed to be
completed downgradient off-site but was never constructed. Since
that time no work has been accomplished and no additional wells
have been proposed (except MW-13) to define the downgradient
lateral extent of contamination. Also, no ~ork has been
.accomplished or proposed to determine the extent of contaminant
migration in the vertidal direction.
Delta contends that they cannot determine the south/southwest
boundary of the plume of petroleum contamination because they
have been denied access to the property south/southwest of the
leak location. Delta has provided correspondence which indicates
that they have offered the occupant of the immediately adjacent
property (Mr. Cyril Andre) a single payment of $500 for right of
entry to the property to construct a monitoring and/or extraction
well(s) and operate the wells for an indefinite period of time.
It is questionable whether this is'adequate demonstration that
the lateral boundary of the plume cannot be determined for .the
following reasons:
1. There is no evidence that the offer of a single paYment
of $500 is an adequate offer for right of entry to the
property for an indefinite period of 'time or that it will
even reimburse Mr. Andre for his costs and inconvenience for
the proposed time period.
2. There has been no proposal provided for alternative well
locations if Delta is not granted right of entry to the
property.
In addition to the lack of adequate work to identify the plume in
the lateral direction, there has been no work conducted to'
determine the vertical eXtent of contamination. The current plans
are to construct an extraction well without sufficient knowledge
of whether or not the plume will be captured and contained.
Item
In the 09 September letter Delta did not propose any additional
work to define the extent of soil contamination at the site.
Similarly, no cleanup strategi.es were proposed.
Information regarding the removal capabilities of the proposed
treatment system and construction details of the proposed
infiltration gallery were not included in the 09 September letter
from Delta. Mr. Talanki, 'a Delta representative, indicated that
the proposed treatment system had been re-designed to incorporate
new features and that the new design would be submitted for our
review sometime in the near future. Similarly, the construction
details for the infiltration gallery are to be submitted shortly.
CONCLUSIONS
In our original letter we requested that a work plan be submitted
to address the lateral and vertical extent of contamination on
and off-site, including both the plume from the confirmed leak of
gasoline and all other contaminated areas. The response that
Delta has provided does not propose any work which has not
previously been completed ahd reviewed with the exception of the
proposed installation of MW-13. The work that has been completed
at the site indicates that ground water has been impacted. It
does not define the boundaries of contamination. No work has been
proposed to define the plume boundaries laterally or vertically
yet Delta has proposed to implement a .ground water extraction
program under these unknown conditions.
.
Delta
Environmental
Consultants, Inc. ·
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, 'CA 95670
916 638-2085
september 6, 1988
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
3614 East Ashlan Avenue
Fresno, CA 93726
Attn: Mr. Ken Wilkins '
Subj: Liquid-Waste Discharge/Land 'Infiltration permit
Davies Oil Company J.
3305-1/2 Gulf Street ...... r
Bakersfield, CA
Delta Project No. 40-8?-326 ." '.
Dear Mr. Wilkins:
Enclosed is the information requested in your letter dated August 26,
1988, and also additional information pursuant to your /telephone
conversation with Mr. Michael Westerheim of Delta on August 31'71988. A
work plan to define the horizontal extent of the dissolved .¥hy'droc;arbon
plume was included in the quarterly monitoring report dated January 10,
1988 (attached). Additional monitoring wells were proposed at, that time.
Monitoring Wells MW- 10 and MW- 11 were installed, and MW- 12 and MW~ 13,were
not because we were denied access to the property. We still recommend
that MW-12 and MW-13 be installed to define the~downgradient ex.-t~iit''0f the
plume. As soon as ROE is obtained we will proceed' with 'the proposed work
plan. Copies of the correspondence between Delta and adjacent property
owners to gain "Right of Entry" are included with. this letter. The
$1,000.00 permit application process fee is being sent separatelY.
A brief description of our attempts to gain ROE (Right of Entry) is as
follows: Figure I shows the site vicinity map. Mr. Cyril Andre is the
owner of the property adjacent to the site. He has refused to grant us the
ROE to install a monitoring well on his property. Mr. Francis Perey is the
owner of the property which has been leased to Mr. Jim Boylan of Jim's
Steel and Supply. We proposed to drill monitoring wells MW-12 and MW-13
in our report dated January 10, 1988. Mr. Francis Perey granted us the ROE
on January 20, 1988 contingent upon approval from Mr. Jim Boylan. '-Mr. Jim
Boyish has refused us permission to drill on the site. Delta has made
efforts to resolve the problem in good faith but until we get cooperation
from the owners of the adjacent properties we cannot proceed with our
proposed work plan.
As we have discussed .in our quarterly monitoring reports dated January
10, 1988 and June 10, 1988 we would like to recover the free product and
install a ground water treatment system at the 'site based on the known
free product plume size. We would like to start the remediation process
as soon as possible to contain the known contaminant plume.
Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
Mr. Ken Wilkins
Californis l~egionai Water Quality Control Board
September 6, 1988
P~e 2
........... ' ...... :':'~":';~':':::~ ........ -: ") .... "'--' '-'=There 'has" l~een' some'-'-m0difi¢-~[i~i-~-i/F-the- ~r~und ' v~ter trea:/~nt:-::~l~.~teifi:
design submitted in the permit application on luly 6, '1988. .We will
submit the final detailed design and drawings of the infiltration gallery
and the treatment system by October 1, 1988.
We are working with the Kern County Air Pollution Control Board to obtain
'Authority to Construct/Permit to Operate' for the air stripper we
propose to use for the ground water treatment system. ..
If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact Mr.
Michael Westerheim or myself at (916)638-2085.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,.
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Sudhakar Talanki, M.S.
Environmental Engineer
STR:cm
Enclosures: Correspondence, Reports, Site Vicinity Map.
CC:
Davies Oil
Amy Green ~
Tod. D. Christenson'
St. Paul Office
!
1'
1'
I
I
_ GULF S?REET ~.
KEN
~ CUMMINGS RUSH b~VOAPE c :Fit'
; DIE~EL PROPERTIES ~ :
FU~
I
~O~NE ~R~E
~ ~R OFFICE
LO~
UNION
' e MW~O
'~0. 87 ~ KER~I~ ~AGE
~. FU~ DISPENSERS
Jl~ ~ ~ SUP~ SITE SURVEYED MAY 2, 1088
LEGEND:
· MONITORING WELl.
/~ RECOVERY WELL
FIGURE $
SFFE VICINITY MAP
3305 1/2 GULF STREET
BAKERSRELD, CALIF.
DELTA NO. 40-87.326
DRAWN BY: DATE:
CHECKED BY: DATE:
.!
D~v~e, Oil Company .'
C~usr~erly Monitorin~ R~ult~ & Proposed Work
Delt, Projec~ No. 40-87-326
~ A product ssmple collected from monitoring well MW-1 was found to contain $ rog/kg lead (see Appendix
.... ~_ ....... ~)_.._.__.T~._ ..!~_vel_o~. l~ad_is indicative of unleaded .gasoline ..... .
i
> 3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The December water=table cont0.?.map indi...cates' ~.a_[th.e. grou_n~r ~a.t.? ~sradie. n.t_¢_W_~,it3~_.~e_~t. _~a!!.d ......_' ....
sou~st. T~e 'flow gradient is relatively flat (about 0.003 ft./ft.) and conforms to local topo-
graphy. Transport of contaminants should, therefore, be from the leaded-gasoline leak location (see
Figure 3) toward the west and southwest. The presence of free product (gasoline) in IvIW= I would tend
to confirm this assumed pattern of contaminant transport.
The high level of total purgeable hydrocarbons (as gasoline) in MW-9 may also fit with this flow
pattern.. However, MW-9 is located over 400 feet down-gradient of the leak location. Since the
gradient is relatively flat, several years would be required for contamination from the leak location
to have reached lVlW-9. The exact time required depends on the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of
the underlying sediments, but under the most favorable conditions, the plume from the identified leak
would not be expected to reach MW-9 in less than five years. There is the possibility that as yet
unidentified sources have contributed to the contamination of soil and ground water at MW-9.
Unless the local ground-water flow gradient is subject to wide seasonal directional variations, the
presence of Iow levels of dissolved hydrocarbons in monitoring welh MW-2 and MW-3 seemingly cannot
be explained by transport of contaminants from the known leak locations. Flow gradients determined
in December, 1987, indicate that these wells are' not down-gradient of the known leak location ~~i[.[l~~'~! ~'~
(especially lvlW-3).~J~"Furthermore, both weLLs contain at least traces of diesel #2 (in l/ dissolved
phase); product lost at the known leak location was regular-grade gasoline. Contamination of ground
water in these two wells may represent a separate leak event at an unidentified up-gradient location,
or periodic small surface spills occurring over the years at that location. ' .
remedial effor~ on the area of known leak location f'~t, since free prod_uct and elevated con- ~i~-~
D,,vies Oil Company ~" ~
Delta Project No. 40-87-$26 F~ ~
product ~d con~nm~ated ground water present in ~e sou~ po~on of ~e site may reset ~ reduc-
.... ----_. ~;--. ~_.-~i0n of pollutants present at MW-2 and MW-3. The necessity of_addressing the apparently
con,ruination in MW-2 and MW-3 can be re-evaluated at a later date, based on da~a collected during
future investigation and quarterly monitoring at the site.
The I~ern County Health Department has expressed concern that the vertical extent of contamination
...... beneath_the.. _n.0w-remoyed.d.i. eseJ_~.n!~___.~_.~0_t~.~en defined. Since soil borings B-5, B-6, and B-?
(adjacent to the former diesel tank locations--Figure 3) were substantially free of contamination and
since ground-water samples 'collected from monitoring-well lVlW-8 (directly down-gradient of the
former diesel tank location) have shown no trace of contamination, we believe that any significant
soil contamination at this location was removed during the tank excavation process. If any con-
tamination is present, it may be effectively controlled and removed by remedial efforts in the area
of the known leak location.
,~.0 PROPOSED ADDITIONAL wORK
Based on the preceding discussion, we recommend that at least three and possibly four additional
monitoring wells be installed at the site. A recoverY well will also be installed to (I) determine
aquifer parameters, (2) to help prevent further down-gradient movement of the free-producttplume,
and (3),o initiate free-product recoverY at the .
4,1 Monitqrin~ Well Locatiqn~
Addifion~ da~ ~e required w fully delineate ~e distribution of con~n~ bo~ on ~d off'
ske. An up-8~dient well (MW-10) ~ proposed ne~ ~he kno~ le~ location (Fisure 5).
req~ed w co~ ~e infe~ed flow ~recfion ~d W ~ure ~at con~min~ have no~ ~en
~s~orted e~d by dhpe~ion.
The location of the proposed monitoring well MW-I 1 was' chosen to determine if there exists a con-
tinuous, high level of contamination between MW-1 (on site) and MW-9 (off site, down gradient).
LEGEND:
LEGEND:
· ~: PROPOSED RECOVERY OR MONITORING WELL
O~ 8OIL BORING/MONITORING WELL LOCATION
I 8OIL BORING LOCATION
L--_L~ PREVIOUS BURIED TANK LOCATION
....... .VAPOR LINE
DISPENSING LINE
'- =- PROPERTY LINE/FENCE
8OIL BORING
EXiSTING WELL
pROpOSED ~ELL
OFFICE
TRAILER
o 6O
E)MW-2
(CLAIM NO.
MW-O
83Z-26)
MW-11
UW-12~)
RW- 1._M.M
(CLAIM
OFFICE
PRODUCT
& VAPO
NO. 83Z-40)
40-87-326
~- __OMw~3
CT & VAPOR
~ ~W-lO
LEAK
LOCATION
i 'i MW_40
IB-6
I
OM W-8 t
PROPOSED RECOVERy AND
MONITORING WELL LOCATION8
DATEi FIGURE i
DEC.' 198? 5
Envllonment &!
Consultant I, lnG.
!
!
Davies Oil Company
Quarterly MoniWrmg l~sults & Proposal Work
Dell;a Proj~t No. 40-87-3~-6
Page 16
Proposed monitoring well MW-12 is intended' to delineate the extent of contamination directly down
--~-'-'~:g~a~i-~r-f~0-m-{he--ki/Owi/- leak location. -Ideally,"~--'~elI' ihbUld' be located-nearer the known.-point
of release. However, the intervening property is owned by Mr. Cyril Andre; Mr. Andre has denied
previous attempts to gain right-of-entry to his property. We are currently negotiating with Mr.
Andre for~'~right of entry to his properS. If access permission is granted, MW-12 will be moved to a
suitable location approximately 100 feet down-gradient of MW-1.
If soil and water samples from both MW-11 and MW-12 are conlaminated, a
fourth
well
may
be
sary at or near the point marked MW-13 on Figure ~. This we!l~ould~required to further del'me .
the extent of down-gradient contaminationo ./),
The Kern County Health Depa~iment now. requires that monitoring wells in areas of known contamina-
tion be constructed of materials other than PVC. In accordance with this regulation, the proposed
monitoring welh will be constructed of 2-inch, flush-threaded, galv~nlzed steel material The well
~ead will either extend one to two feet above grade or, if installed flush with grade, will be
encased in a metal christie box. The wells wiU be advanced by hollow-stem auger drilling, using
methods outlined in Section 5.0. Borehole diameter wiU be approximately seven inches. All monitor-
ins wells will be advanced a minimum of ten feet below the water table; screened intervals will
extend approximately five feet above and ten feet below the water table. Actual screened intervals
and well depths will be determined in the field by a Delta geologist or engineer. The annulus around
the screened interval will be filled with clean, imported gravel. The gravel pack will extend one or
two feet above the top of the screened interval. Above the gravel pack, a bentonite seal at least
two feet thick will be installed. The annular space above, the bentonite seal will be grot~ted to the
surface. All wells will be equipped with casing bottom plugs and lockable well caps.
a.l.2 Monitorin~-Well Drillini and Develovment Methods
4.1.2, I Soil $.amvle Collection and Screenin~
One soil sample will be collected from each boring at a depth of 10 feet below grade. Beginning.
at a depth of 12.5 feet, soil samples will be collected at 2.5 foot intervals to a depth of five
,.Il
feet below the water table.
'D,,vie~ Oil Company "
qu~-terb, lvionitorin~ P,~ults & Proposed Work
Delta Project Ho. 40-87-326
Pa~ 17
Upon recovery of the California-modified split-barrel sampler (see Section 5.0), a soil sample
---wiU be collected in a brass tube, capped, packaged and. preserved according to US EPA. p_r_o.~.edur~ ........ .~ ....
for Possible chemical analysis. A duplicate sample will be collected in a sealed glass jar and
held until completion of drilling activities. All soil samples collected in glass jars will be
brought to room temperature and the head space of each jar wiU be screened for total organic
vapors utilizing a portable photoionizafion detector. Cross sections showing the stratigraphy
................. of_ the site will. be.~ Constructed.-and the results .of _the $oi.l-..sam_p!e...?c~=eening will be plotted on
the cross sections, BaSed on this information, soil samples may be selec~ed-"~0~-'"~he---~ical ..
analysis to best define the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination.
Mgnitoring-W~ll Develovment and samvlin~
After installation, the monitoring wells will be developed by bailing using dedicated, labora-
wry-cleaned teflon balers until field measurements of pH, specific conductance, and temperature
stabilize and the produced water is relatively sediment free. If the well is bailed dry during
the development process, recharge rates will be recorded. No water or chemicals will be
introduced into the monitoring well during development. Following development, the wells will
not be disturbed for approximately two weeks to allow water levels to stabilize prior to
obtaining representative ground-water samples.
4,1,~ (~h~mic~l Analyses
4,1,3,1 Soil Chemical Analyses
Based on the results of soil-sample screening, soil samples may be selected for--chemical
analysis. The soil samples will be analyzed for fuel fingerprint, EDB, EDC, B'IX, ethylbenzene
and'total purgeable hydrocarbons by EPA method 524.2/8240 (gas chromatograph/mass spectro-
meter selected-ion method or GC/MS SIM). These analyses should indicate whether, ornot petro-
leum contamination has occurred and, if present, will aid in characterization of the type of
petroleum con~mlnation (gasoline or diesel fuel).
: j "
Davie~ Oil Compa~.y
(~uar~erly Mon/tor/n~ l~.sults & Proposed Work
Delt~ Project lqo. 40-87-$R6 · .
4~1,3.2 Ground-Water Chemical Analyses
All ground-water samples will be Subjected to the same analyses as described in Section 4.1.3.1
for soils.
~,2 Rec0,er*-Well Ins~allati0n and Pump Test
4,2,,I Reqgvq~-Well Location and Installation
Because of the presence of free petroleum product in monkoHng well MW-I at the site,' we
propose to install a product-recovery well at the location indicated on Figure 6. The weU wU1
be utilized to perform an aquifer test to calculate aquifer parameters and determine if addi-
tional recovery wells will be required, and where they should be loCated. Information will be
collected on flow rates and ground-water quality to determine the design of a water-treatment
system. The well will then be utilized to recover free product and to establish gradient
11
I
I
co~_~__o_l t_o_prevent movement of product plume.
4.2,2 Recovery-Well $1~ecifications
The recovery well will be drilled to a total depth of 35 feet. We recommend that the well be
completed with 12-inch casing to allow clearance for a down-hole, dual-pump system. The
borehole would be 20 inches in diameter, leaving a 4-inch annular space to insure adequate
gravel-pack thickness. We recommend use of a ~0 slot (0.040"), continuous galvanized screen.
The screen should be 20' feet in length and should be set between I? and 37 feet below grade.
Gravel-pack material should consist of uniformly graded, coarse sand (Monterey #3 or equiva-
lent), and should extend 3 or 4 feet above the screened interval. See Figure 6 for typical
recovery-well construction specifications.
4.2.3 Aouifer Test Soecifications
....... After the-recovery.-.well is installed and_fully, developed, __al!__._ ex_tended_pump test will .be con,
ducted to determine the long-term yield of the well and to determine aquifer parameters
D,,vies Oil Company
(~u~rterly l~lonitorinE Results ~, Propo~ecl Work
Delta Project No: 40-87-326
Pa~e S0
(hydraulic conductivity and storafivity). Water produced during the pump-test will be sampled
to determine the-concentrations of volatile organics; total dissolved solids,-cafions~'-anions,-
TOC, COD, field conductivity, temperature, and total lead content. This information will be
used to design a water treatment system.
Treatment and disposal of water produced by recovery wells is a primary design consideration.'
After. an initial investigation, it is .apparent that three water-disposal..opfions exist._These .......
options are: 1~ .discharge to existing storm sewer, 2) infiltration or injection on site, and
discharge to existing sanitary sewer.
Option 1, discharge to an existing storm sewer, would require that a National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System (N'PDES) permit be secured from the U,~. EPA. Water discharged to a
storm sewer would likely need treatment, using the best available technology, to high standards
(possibly drinking-water standards) under the terms of an NPDES permit. Extensive monitoring
of the quality of the discharge water would also be required. During a December field visit, it
was observed that no nearby storm sewers are available. Storm water in the area is apparently
controlled by surface run-off.
__O.n_-.s.ite._i.n_f_il_trati.0n__(_O_p.tion 2)...may also be an acceptable option: Water to be re-injected or
allowed to infiltrate may also require treatment to near-drinking water standards. Compliance
II
with such standards may require installation of expensive and maintenance-intensive treatment'
equipment on site. In addition, chemical constituents ~at may occur naturally in the water
(iron, carbonate) and bacterial components may have to be removed to prevent plugging of the
infiltration gallery.
Option 3, discharge to an existin, g sanitary sewer, seems to be a practical solution. A City of
Bakersfield sewer line is located approximntely 750 feet southeast of the site. However, the
Bakersfield Department of Public Works (DPW) has indicated a reluctance to allow discharge of
produced water to the sewer. The city requires that any discharge to the sewer must be cert-
ified by the California State Department of Health Services (DHS) as 'non-hn~rdous" under the
requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title' 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Article
An off/cial in the DHS, Alternative Technologies Division, indicated that such certifica-
Davie~ Oil Company
C~u~erly Monitoring l~e~ults ~, Propo~d Work
Delta Proiec~ No. 40-87-~26
P~ge 21
_~ :_.=_ :t ion normally_takes at least one year to complete.
Only after the discharge is certified as
non-h~%dous will the Bakersfield DPW consider allowing the discharge into the sanitary sewer.
However, officials at the DPW will not guarantee that the discharge water will be allowed to
enter .the sanitary sewer, even if it is classified as a non-hazardous waste.
......... -~' re~resentatives Will Con~n~ 'to Work 'Wi~ ~the'city Of 'Bakersfield,' th~ California Depart-,-
ment of Health, and the San :Ioacluln District of the Regional Water Quality Control Board to
insure that the water discharge will be disposed of in a mutually-acceptable nmnnner.' ..
f,O METHODS
All field work, data analysis and interpretation will be conducted under the supervision of a
California Registered Geologist.
$,1 Soil Samuline and Contamination Reduction
Monitoring-well drilling and soil sampling will be. performed under the direction of a Delta engineer
or geologist. The monitoring wells will be advanced using a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill
rig.
Upon recovery, a portion of the soil s~mple will be placed into a glass jar and sealed for later
screening with a photoionization deteclor. Another portion of the soil sample will be used for
classification and description. That part of the soil sample collected in brass tubes wit_hin the
California-type sampler will be stored at approximately 4o C. for transport to the laboratory.
We propose to utilize Central Coast Analytical Services, a State of California certified laboratory,
to perform the chemical analyses.
QUARTERLY MONITORING' I~PORT
Daviu Oil Compaay,.Ba~erafield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
P~e 9
On May 2, 1988 free-product thicknesses and water levels were remeasured. In May, MW-I contained 0.8
feet of free product. Water levels in the other monitoring wells were more than 1.5 feet lower than
in March.
'A water-table contour map was constructed from water level data obtained on May 2, 1988 (Figure 5).
The inf~erred direction of ground-water flow is from northeast to southwest. The gradient of flow
calculated from Figure 5 is 0.003 feet/foot.. :
2.~ Ground-Water (~hemicai Analyses
t
Each m~nitoring well, except MW-I, was bailed and sampled on March 4th or 5th, i988. MW-I was not
sampled because of the presence of free product in this well. The samples were submitted for
analyses of BTX, ethylbenzene, EDB, EDC, and TPH by EPA method 524.2. The results are summarized in
· Table 2 and the laboratory reports are included in Appendix C. Table 2 also contains the chemical
results from May and October 1987 for comparison.
1
,]
Maximum benzene concentrations in ground water were present in monitoring well MW-11 at 10 parts per
million (ppm). Water from the other monitoring wells contains benzene at concentrations less than 1
ppm, if it is present at all. The .highest TPH values are also found in monitoring well MW-I 1, at
240 ppm. Monitoring welli MW-12 and MW-9 also contain elevated concentrations of TPH, at I00 ppm
(70 ppm in the duplicate) and 70 ppm, respectively.
~.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULT~
Additional soil borings at the Davies Oil Company property confirm that the site is underlain by
sandy silt and sand with pebble and gravel horizons. A sieve analysis performed on samples collected
from 20.5 and 29 feet below grade indicate that the soil is within the sand grain-size
classification.
? An approximate hydraulic conductivity (K) can be calculated from grain=size distribution curves.using
an empirical relationship known as the Hazen approximation (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). This method
yields an approximate value for K on the order of 102 ft/day.
Although attempts at securing permission for an off-site downgradient well have so far been fruit-
iess,'theSe efforts will continue. 'Such a well is necess~ t_Xo_~tmen~the ,"-~* o~-4~n~i~iiU8n--::~-'--~-
and the effectiveness of the recovery well. While we consider it important that a downgradient well
~e i~mned, we dO not fielieve that remediation efforts should be delayed until the downgradient '
extent of the plume' is defined. ..
.~- .....' ................ Preliminary ~alculations indicate that' the~-re¢overy well installed on ~May ~rd, 1988-,should recover
· free petroleum product and ground water containing dissolved hydromrbons from most of the southern
! portion of the site. After this well has been tested, and more extensive analyses performed, recom-
' mendations may be made regarding the locations of additional recovery wells, if they are necessary.
Ground water levels rose more than one foot from December 1987 to March 1988. Water levels then
dropped more than 1.5 feet between March and May 1988. These water table movements may be due to
normal seasonal fluctuations. The inferred direction and gradient of ground water flow in May 1988
is consistent with measurements made in October and December 1987.
A survey of water wells in the area indicates that there is no knower use of ground water in the
immediate area. One abandoned well was located on the Teamster's Union property, west of the site.
Review of well-monitoring results indicates the presence of free product on the water table in the
area near MW-I. Five feet of product accumulated in recovery well RW-1 after only three hour~ of
pumping. RWol should be effective in removing the floating product.
Installation of additional monitoring wells MW-Il and MW-12 seems to indicate that a plume of
dissolved petroleum constituents extends from the area of MW-I to MW-9 off site to the west (Figure
6). MW-10, installed up gradient of the known leak location, contains very low levels of dissolved
constituents.
Delta continues its efforts to work toward a suitable water discharge optiOn with appropriate City of
Bakersfield and Kern County agencies. Recovery and treatment of contaminated ground water will begin
as soon as possible to prevent the further spread of dissolved hydrocarbon constituents.
QUARTERLY MOHITOR.12~G REPORT
Davie~ Oil Company, Bs&ersfield CA
Delt~ Project No.
Page 14
4.0 FUTURE WORK
During the next quarter Delta will be evaluating two different options for disPoSal of the' 'ir0-un~i
water generated during cleanup at the site: Option 1, discharge to the City of Bakersfield Sanitary
Sewer 'and Option 2, discharge to an infiltration gallery located on the northeastern portion of the
site. The evaluation will be based on initial capital cost and long-term maintenance, monitoring,
.... and treatment costs
Once a disposal alternative has been selected, a water-treatment system wUl be desi8ned to meet the
discharge'water quality criteria required by that alternative. Required permits will be applied for .
depending on the treatment technology chosen.
We anticipate that a product-recovery and water-treatment system sufficient to control the free
product can be designed and installed at the site in approximately three months.
Based on the known plume size, one well will not be sufficient to control the plume of con~minated
ground water, and additional recovery welh will have to be installed. Modifications to the treat~
ment system will likely have to be made to accomodate the increased volume of recovered ground
water. Once RW-1 has been operated for approximately one month, and data has been collected
establishing its capture zone, additional recovery wells can be specified as needed, depending on the
extent of the uncaptured contamination plume. We anticipate a total discharge of between 100 and 150
gallons per minute once the gradient control system is in full operation.'
The next monitoring-well sampling event should take place just prior to-recovery system start'up,
which should be sometime in August 1958.
QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT
Daviea Oil Company, l~ker~field CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 15
5.0 REMARKS/SIGNATURES '
The recommendations made in this report'"represeni'-~ur professional opinio~S~*
................. DELTA, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
These dpini6ns-are .......... '::
based on the currently available data and were arrived at in accordance with currently accepted
hydrogeologic and engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty is
implied or intended.
This report was prepared by:.
This report was reviewed by:.
This report and the work de-
scribed herein were performed
under the supervision of a
California Registered
Geologist:
Dale A. van Dam
Hydrogeologist
Date: ~/'~ / @*
Mi6hSael M. Westerheim, E.I.T.
Civil Engineer/Project Manager
Date:
. .~.~.
Brian L. Krogseng'
California Registered Geologist #2303
Date: !/~-,~ / ~.. l' ~
1
Delta n~,
Enviro entai
Consultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock Roa/L Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
916 638-2085
January 14, 1988
M~r. Cyril Andre
3616 La Costa
Bakersfield, CA 93306
Re: Proposed Monitoring-Well Installation
Ground-Water Quality Assessment
Davies OL1 Company
· _ .......... Bakersfield, CA
lrederated Claim ~ 83Z-9, 26 & 40
Delta Project ~.40-87-326
As I explained during our phone conversation of january 5th, Delta Environ-
mental Consultants, Inc. is currently investigating potential ground-water
contamination on the Davies Oil Company property at 3305-1/2 Gulf Street,
Bakersfield, California. As part of this investigation, Delta is monitoring ground-
water quality at four wells on the Davies property and at an additional well on
the Jerry Swope property to the west.
· In response to concerns expressed by the Kern County Health Depa~ctaent and
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Delta is now required to
in.staLl additional off-site monitoring wells on adjacent properties. Investigations
to date at the site have shown that a plume of gasoline (floating on the water
table apprwr;mately 18 feet below grade) may be migrating beneath your pro-
perty. Delta therefore requests permL~sion to install one two-inCh dinmeter
monitoring well on your property.
We propose that the well be located at a mutually-agreeable point within the area
marked on the attached map. Delta will work closely with you and with local
utility companies to insure that aH underground utilities are located pr/or to well
drilling. We estimate that the well will be drilled and h~talled in one day. The
well will be completed flush-with-grade and will not present an obstruction, nor
be an eye-sore to passers-by. Enclosed is a copy of the proposed well specifi-
cations. After completion of the Well, the site will be restored to its condition
prior to our entry.
After well installation, well sampling would be done by a Delta technician on a
quarterly basis. Delta would notify you 24 hours prior to each monitoring event.
We are aware that instalhfion of a monitoring well and quarterly visits to
sample the well may be an inconvenience to you. We aho appreciate the fact
.. that the well is being installed as a result of circumstances beyond your control.
Still, we believe that installation of the well will lead to an efficient and cost-
.......................................... effective remedy to the problem, minimizing potential, contamination of your
property and shortening the rime required to remove contaminated ground water.
To compensate you for your time and inconvenience, Delta is prepared to offer
you a one-time $500.00 (five hundred dollars) access fee.
Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
Mr. Cyril Andre
Sanuary 11, 1988
Page Two '.
In my discussions with Mr. Tim Garrison of the San .loaquin Watershed Branch,
Central Valley Region of the California Regional Water Qu~l;ty Control Board,
he has informed me that in Cases such is this, adjacent property owners do have
some responsibility to cooperate in reasonable investigations designed to dei"me
and remedy a contamination problem. If you have questions about r_hls, I would
~ suggest you contact Mr. Garrison at (209) 445-5500.
Attached is a right-of-entry agreement that will allow Delta permi~ion to install
the monitoring welL The right-of-entry also binds Delta to restore the site to
original conditions. Delta would appreciate your consideration in.~signin8 .the
attached doChmentand forwardin8 it to ns.'
If you have any questions regarding this matter.or desire further information,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 638-2085.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Hydro$~ologist
DV~.bk
Enclosure
cc:. Joe K.essing
Kern County
· Regional Water Quality Control Bd.
Michael M. Westerheim
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
D~lta
Environmental
Consultants. ]nc.
11C30 w2,,~e =oc:~ =oa:. Suite
Ranc.",c Sere:va. 'SA 95670
916 638-2C85
January 14, 1988
Route 1, Box 148
Re: Proposed Monitoring-Well Installation
Ground-Water Quality Assessment
Davies Oil Company
....................... Bakersfield; CA- .- - ....................
Federated Claim #s: 83Z-9, 26 & 40
Delta Project ~40-87-326
Dear Mr. Perey:
As I explained during our phone conversation of January 5th, Delta Environ-
mental Consultants, Inc. is currently investigating potential ground-water
contamination on the Davies Oil Company property at 3305-1/2 Gulf Street,
Bakersfield, California. As part of this investigation, Delta is monitoring ground-
water quality at four wells on the Davies property, and at an additional well on
the Jerry Swope property to the west.
In response to concerns expressed by the Kern County Health Department and
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Delta is now required to
install additional off-site monitoring wells on adjacent properties. Investigations
to date at the site have shown that a plume of gasoline (floating on the water
table approximately 18 feet below grade) may be migrating beneath your pro-
perry, pelta therefore requests permission to install one two-inch diameter
monitoring well on your property.
We propose that the well be located at a mutually-agreeable point within the area
marked on the attached map. Delta will work closely with you and with' local
utility companies tO insure that all underground utilities are located prior to well
drilling. We estimate that the well will be drilled and installed in one day. The
well will be completed flush-with-grade and will not present an obstruction, nor
be an eye-sore to passers-by. Enclosed is a copy of the proposed well specifi-
cations. After completion of the well, the site .will be restored tO its condition
prior to our entry.
After well !nstallation, well sampling would be done by a Delta technician on a
quarterly basis. Delta would notify you 24 hours prior to each monitoring event.
We are aware that installation of a monitoring well and quarterly visits to
sample the well may be an inconvenience to you. We also appreciate the fact
that the well is being installed as a result of circumstances beyond your control.
Still, we believe that installation of the well will lead to an efficient and cost-
effective- remedy to the problem, minimizing potential contamination of your
property and shortening the time required to remove contaminated ground water.
Pracl;cal Soiut~ons to -_-.~wronrne~.'.al Concerns ·
Mr. Francis Perey
January 14, 1988
Page Two
Attached is a right-of-entry agreement that will allow Delta permission to install
the monitoring well. The right-of-entry also binds Delta to restore the site to
.... Original conditions. Delta would al~preciate your consideration in 'Si~ning- the
attached document and forwarding it to us.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or desire further information,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 638-2085.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENT.~L CONSULTANTS~-i~C~
Dale A. van Dam
Hydrogeologist
DVD:.bk
Enclosure
cc:. Joe Kessing Kern County
Regional Water Quality Control Bd.
Michael M. Westerheim
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
Detta
Environmental
Consuttant~, ]nc.
~ancno C;rco',a. C.:, ~557~
9',. 5 ~8-2~35
January 15, 1988
Mr. Joe Kessing
Federated Insurance Company
P.O. Box 586
Citrus Heights, CA 95611
Sub j:
-Quarterly Monitoring Results and
Proposed Additional Work
Davies Oil Company site
3305-1/2 Gulf Street
Bakersfield, CA
Federated Claim Nos. 83Z-9, 26 & 40
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Dear Joe,
Enclosed are three copies of our report detailing our quarterly monitoring results
and proposing additional work at the referenced site. We would appreciate
receiving any comments you might have regarding the report at your earliest
convenience.
Mr. Cyril Andre, whose property borders the Davies Oil site on the south, has
been sent a written offer of $500.00 in exchange for permission to install a
monitoring well on his property. Mr. Francis Perey, who owns the next property
to the sou. th, has also been contacted to secure right-of-entry. The City of
Bakersfield has been contacted regarding the use of their sanitary sewer facilities
to dispose of ground water produced during testing of a recovery well. We will
be contacting a driller to install the additional monitoring wells and the recovery
well in January or early February.
Ii' you have any questions regarding the report, or any other manet concerning
the referenced site, please contact me at (916) 638-2085.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Dale A. van Dam
Hydrogeologist
DVD:bk
cc: Michael M. Westerheim
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
$"-ctlcal Solutions to ~.'Iv~ronment.=-I Concerns
1988'
RIGHT OF ENTRY
The undersigned, who are the fee owners of record (hereinafter referred to as "owners" with the
sole right to the affected property, do hereby consent and grant unto Delta Environmental Consultants,
Inc. - (hereinafter "Delta"), its agents, employees-and assigns,--the-right-to-enter upon and' install-one'
flush-with-grade monitoring well, and all activities required in connection therewith. This Right of'
Entry is effective immediately upon the execution of this document.
.
This Right of Entry is granted in consideration of the agreement of Delta, as set forth below, to
_repair any damage to the_ property resulting from Delta's entry onto the p. roperty. ' ·
Delta, agrees that ih consideration of owners granting it this Right of Entry, it will restore the
property as much as reasonably possible to its condition immediately prior to the entry if the property is
damaged as a result of its entry.
Dated this ~ c., day of '~~ , 1988.
Owner
Owner
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Signed
Dale A. van Dam
Typed Name
HYdroReologist
Title
Detta
En~/ironmentai
Consultants, ]nc.
Rancho Cc;c=,,.a. =.-'..%=~72
Mr. Cyril Andre
3616 La Costa
Bakersfield, CA
93306
': .......................................... 7 .............. SbtSj~ ...... Davies"Oil
Bakersfield, CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Dear Mr. Andre:
This letter is intended to supplement a'"Right of Entry" agreement forwarded for
your signature on Sanuary 14, 1988. In response to your concerns, Delta
Environmental Consultants, Inc. (Delta) agrees to hold you blameless for any
injuries to property, or life caused by Detta's entry onto your property. We
estimate that the monitoring well we install will need to be maintained for a
minimum of three years after its installation date. Enclosed is a Certificate of
Insurance for BSK & Associates Inc. of Fresno, California. BSK is the
subcontractor we have hired to drill and install the well.
Delta will work closely with you to select a location within the area marked in
our January 14th letter, to insure that your future expansion plans can be
accommodated. If no location within that circled area is suitable, we may be able
to select a location adjacent to the circle.
We would appreciate your consideration in signing the "Right of Entry" document
and forwarding it to us. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 638-2085.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Dale A. van Dam
Hydrogeologist
DVD:bk
cc: Tod D. Christenson Joe Kessing
K'~-iq/"CSQ-riw He-alt h~' De-pa~'t-mehk''
Regional Water Quality Control Board
St] Paul Office
SHE?~ERD KNAPP APPLETON,INC.
P 0 BOX 5537 ,'
FRESN0,CA. 93755
BSK & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNiCAL
'-CO'NEULTANTS<&~J-.H.A. GEOTECHNICA
CONSULTANTS, INC.
1414 STANISLAUS
FRESNO,CA. 93706
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF :NFORMATIDN ONLY AND CONFERS
NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. 'HIS ~RTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND.
E3CTENO OR ,M. TER THE COVERAGE AFFCRDED 5Y THE .a~UC:E$ ;~EI,.OW.
C~.MP~NY
C~MI~&NY
COMPANIES AFFORDING COVE.RAGE
FEB 1 2 1988
OR ION
...... - .' ' ....... . ; ~ :~:~ ....... ~--:~:' '--:.v~'f~ ~.-~
C~MPa, NY
,~-: ':=.a E
THI~ IS TO CE.qT3FY THAT I~OI,JC:F~. OF INSURANC~ I.J~TED BELOW NAVE ~EEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE .-'OR THE FOUCY PERIOD INDICATED.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMEN'r. TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CON*T'HACT DR OT~ER DOCUMENT ',~ITTt4 RE~PE~. TO WHIC~ THIS C:=.RTII=ICAT1= .MAY
BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN. THE JNSURANC.~ AFFORDED BY THE PQU¢:ES DESCRIBED HERE~N IS SUBJECT, TO A~' THE TERMS. EZC~.USIONS. AND CONDI-
-TIONS OF SUCH POtJC;ES. ·
C.,I TYPE OF INSUIRANC~
L.-~I
A
A
AUTOS iPRN
% Pm. IV. =k.c~, ,,
AUTOS
L~ASIUTY
OPP 424114
0PP 424114
9-1-87
9-1-87
9-1-88
9-1-88
.::~,,~.iSl,O00 S 1,OOC
!
;
i~CESS UASIUTY
UMBRELLA ~RM
OTHER ':'1.lAN UMBRELLA r-.ORM
! c:,~.~ I $! , 000
i,:, ~o I.
B
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
ANO
EMPLOYERS' LLASIL~rY
OTHER
CB 879 2228
9-1-87
CESCRIPTICN OF 0PE~TION~LC~ON&~EHIC~SPEC~L
RE: DAVIES OIL
ADDITIONAL
9-1-88
YRIL ANDRE
616 LA COSTA
BAKERSFIELD,CA. 93306
SHCULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POt..tC~ES BE CANC~'~ t;:n BEFORE THE ~.'X.
PIRAT~30,~ DATE THEREOF. THE-ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO
MAIL ,3 ~J OAYS wflrl-~'E~ NOTIC~ TO THE C$=RTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE
L~FT. BUT FAILURE TO M&IL $UC]'I NOTICE SHALL ~MPO~E NO OBLIGATION OR I.~ABILfTY
OF ANY KIND UPON THE COMPANY. ITS AGENTS OR REFRE.~ENTATIVES.
.~UThOfllZED REPRESENTA.T~E
. Ph:(~l~ %1°8999, 7ol] F~ - ~ onl%:
..... ~'" "" "' ' ' Toll Fre~ ~.~:'- 1-888-.a8~-1848
March 21, 1988
Cyril Andre
3616 La Costa
BAKERSFIELD CA 93306
CLAIM NO.:
:'~Be!ta-Project..No
Dear Mr. Andre:
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
~ 83Zg,~O3Z-86, 83~-40
............... 40-87~86
i: ~,:j/~.;~....-~..~..;..,Delta.Ehvironmenta1Co6sultants"has tried on-several occasions to get you to
...... sign a "Right of. Entry, 'agreement so.that we can install a monitoring well on
your property in order to determine the extent of' gasoline/diesel contamination
in the ground water. You'have repeatedly refused to allow us to install this
well.
Because of your refusal, Delta and Federated are unable to properly determine
the amount of contamination that may be in the ground water. There are several
ramifications to your refusal. The first is that we can not proDerly treat the
ground water problem as you will not allow us to ~iagnose it. The second is
that you may have contamination under your property' and there is nothing we can
do about it without scms cooperation from you. The third is that your refusal
may allow the product to migrate further away from our insured's premisis and
possibly contaminate someone elses property. If this does haPbe~, you can rest
assured that we will take all !eagal remedies available to us to defend our
insured against any such futu?e claims. This would include making it clear to
all concerned that you have refused to cooperate in our "Good Faith" efforts
to remediate this proble~.
It would obviously be in the best interest of all concerned if D~lta and
Federated were allowed to properly diagnose the problem and co~e up with thm
necessary remedial actions to bring the con~amination ir, the ground water down
to,environmentalty~acceptable !evels.~ I suggest that you seriously think about
your position and reconsider your refusal to allow us to install this
monitoring well.
Joseph M. Kessing../ , ..... r: .,
JMK: pm
cc: Delta Environmental Consultants
11030 White Rock Road, Suite I10
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Toll F~ -
C~il
3616 La Costa
BflKER~I~ CA 933~6
.(
. . ..:.. '.: . .~'." · ....'-:...,
'Thank you for your le{ter of Hatch Eg, .1988, I ~ill t~y a~d add~ess yom- ....
conditions in that letter one' Dy one. .
First 'of all you ~equi~e app~ovaI by your att,c~,",r~ the Right of Entry form.
" I have previously offered $~.8 to you. through Delta, for the righ~ to
install this ~ell. That offer still stands. I am sure your attorneys ca~
~ithin that budget; ;
,. The exact location of the well can be ~orked out Nith you in or'de, t° avoid
,. unnecessary/ inconvenience at your p~ope,ty. Before the drilling takes place, a
/' member of' Delta ~ilI neet ~ith you, or your ~ep~esentative and pick the
appropriate place.
Your third point states that the ~ell must be abandoned ~ithin one year of
installation. I think it is necessa.y to remind you that this well may have rd*
be used as a recovery well, depending uponwhat is encountered ~hen we drill
down to the g~ou~dwater. If it does have to be used as a ~ecovery ~ell, there
is no way to estimate ho~ long the well will have to be operational. For this
contamination problem.
Obviously it is your option whether o. not we are allowed to install the ~ell.
I must ~emind you that if you do refuse, it ~ill inhabit ou~ ability ~o
~emediate the contamination in the ~roundwater.
'My letter of Narch EI~ 1988 already spells out our position, if you refuse to
allow us to p~operly investigate this p~oblem. '
............... 8~Z9~ _83Z-L~6 83Z-48 .....
Ap~i 1 15~ 198a
Pa§e 2
It is imperative that 'we h~v~"
~our '~ns~e~ as soo~ as ~ssible and I look
Delta Environmental Consultants
'Attn: Mike Weste~heim
11838 White Rock Road~ Suite 118
Rancho Condova~, CA 95678
Since~l¥~
Joseph M. Kessing
Sr. Claims Supepvisop
· J~IK: pm
....:......., .::...:;-?...
· :.: i:' ":" .':.', ':' . .
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
501 'Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
(805) 326-3724
DALE HAWLEY, Manager
C
I
O
F
B
A
K
E
R
S
F
I
E
L
D
I'h-'. !i3 ucl I i a l<.7xr" Ta 1 6'n"d< i ~ I~l. ,.:3.
Rar, cho Cc, rciova, CA z,~=.~ _,
Dv.~!EiS OiL. COIvlIZ'AIqY '-'- :~[!:()5 1/'~ GULF STREE'T~ BgKERSFIELD
'~'i",ilz id't~?r" '~. :[7, r.e%,r:)or~!~c.:, ~,::, yc, ur i~:.t!:er dat~¢d July
Tho Oi~c:lnar"[~e lzmit'at i~::,,",~ L~:~.'L:ed ir, your let~c~i."
appare¢,t'ly ba~ed ,:,iq treath'.:-~rr~ at ar, activated ~ludge tr~.atrner~t
'facility. Please be advised that the treatmer, t 'facility
(Plar, t 2~) which would be r~ceiving the p~.~opc, s~,d wastewater
.~, ,?ADC'OV':(q,"i~"y ~7 r[~.,]'~] h',;.~)v',+: ~;) ii. ,.':~ ~'~'~; ~-; ) ~; ~ .7:~,z~,~'~v~ +:~<:J I a qoc,~q~. I-J]
~:J' ]:' ?" J[ L~('}2YJ~3 '?,":l),;] ~2~ .[ :.X r-: ':.' ,' .LE], LE ::'. (':(',.~ f':".]' ;'" C:/V"(.~[7~ ~ i" )"' J. [" i.; [' 2
Heavy Metal~:
I~h"~. '.fa ]. a r*,P. J.
D e 1 t a E'n v i r o n ;¥t c.~ 'n t ~ 1 C o n ~i~. u it t a n t s ~ I r~ c.
MoD,t. t or ing Fre~iu.~-r,cy
Based up,z,r, t he ir,'f'c r-r,~at i c,r, yc, u prov i decl ir~ ye, ur~ l et t er
~'~e~iia'r"d/r~g 'th~:, c,:,r, sisterrt perf,z, rmar~e c,f 'tine pr~treatmer~t
system~ we wi 1 1 modi fy the rmz, r~itc, ring frequer~cy. It wi 1 1
be c. lnar~ged to n'J,z, rrthly after you have prc, vided us with
satisfact,:,~y results of weekly monitorir~g for the first mc, r~th.
...I~ tb~.r.~.s}~l'ts are rJc, t cc, r~sis'ber, t, You. will_...b~...~t~_q~L~.E~ tc,.
mor~itor Neeh. ly urrt i I cc, r~si~ter~cy i~. d~veloped.
The 't r'.~:,atment cc, st may vary d~::-:,per~d i
ad,::,pted by '~h*='. c,::,un~ii for earl-, fi:~al year'. Encic, sed is a
oc, py c,Y the ,aurc'taarg~ s~hedule fc, r FY
Other admir~istrative cc, st ir~cludes cc, mpliar, ce ~,lor~ito~-ir, g
activi'ties~ such as., :inspectic, r,~ samplir, g~ lab ar, aiyses~ etc.
Th,.) e~t'er, t ,::,'~ '~l"~::.~.i, r,'p.:,',",i~or'ir~ activities depends ,:,r~ y,z, ur
c,],rn p 1 i ante st at
~',_,u also r, eed t,::, w,::,rt< witl-, the E-'r,g:,r~eerir, g Divisic, r, of the
Ci'L: y' '.:~ Pub t i c: Wc, rl.<s l)~.:.l:]ar-I: went l-"e~]ard i
E. W. S,::.'hulz
Public Wc, rl~.s
cc: F'Amy Green, , K~,r'~ Cc, ur, ty Health Departmer, t
TOI'I1 I"~',~ )(S(.si"I.~ t"~,.':':'~'~i~1 []O'.[/'1'~. y Hea 1 t h Depart me.r,t
U, uR FEES AND CHARGES
Schedule A - CommerCial and Industrial
This schedule shall apply to the. co~rercial and light industrial users
wi~h BeD and SS concentrations less than 400 Mg/1 and flow greater
than '0.16 ~iiii~=~' ~'ii~'~ar:. ' '~ -'~Urcharg~ for excess fI~~- shall .......... '
~ $496 ~r ~llio gallo ea
II. '-.,Schedule n - C~rczal and Industrzal.
· grea~er ~n 0.16 ~llion gallon/year. ~e 'surcharge for '~e'~ ...:u, ...~..7:~,.,. ):..[.;..~,~?.t-.; ~:.-'
excesses shall ~ as follows:
BeD greater than 595 lb/yeara:
SS grea~er than 534 lb/year:
$54.50/1000 lb.
'$53.20/1000 lb.
Flow greater than 0.16 Million Gallons per year:
$330.80 ,per Million Gallons/Year
abased on maximum month value.
III.
Schedule~C ~ Monitored Users~
This schedule shall apply to Monitored Users (commercial and indus-
trfai ·discharges) as defined in "Revenue Program Guidelines for
WastewaterAgencies," published by the State Water Resources Control
Board - Division of Water Quality. The following rates Or charges
shall be applied to Monitored Users based upon total annual BeD and
SS concentrations and flow:
D 4 i:sWUsER10
EW: wrn
DeJta
Environmental
C~nsultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
916 638-2085
August I, 1988
Kern County APCD
2700 M Street, Suite 275
Bakersfield, California 93301
Attn-' Thomas Pax. son ............. : ......; ....
Engineering Evaluation Section
Sub j:
Authority to Construct/Air Permit Application
3305 1/2 Gulf'Street
Bakersfi'eld, California 93308
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
AUG 0 4 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Dear Mr. Paxson:
Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. (Delta) on behalf of Davies Oil Company,
Bakersfield is submitting a preliminary Authority to Construct/Air Permit Application
for a packed column air stripper to remove petroleum hydrocarbons from gro/~nd
water at the referenced site. The purpose of this preliminary application is to
determine if the proposed air emissions are feasible and if further evaluation is
necessary. The application will be signed and dated once we agree upon your
recommendations. After reviewing the enclosed information please contact Delta with
your comments.
Site and Recovery Well Description
The site location is described in the attached quarterly monitoring report dated June
10, 1988. A site map showing the location of the recovery wells and the location of
the proposed treatment system is shown in Figure 1. The discharge rate from the
recovery well RW-I is expected to be about 40 to 50 gallons per minute (gpm). A
pump test was conducted in May 1988. The ground water from the pump test is
stored in a temporary tank kept on the site. Water samples were collected and sent to
the laboratory to determine concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons. The l~iboratory
reports are attached.
Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
Mr. Paxson
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
August 1, 1988
Page 2
SCREENING LEVEL HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
The health risk assessment is based on CAPCOA guidelines and is focused on the
cancer risk due to benzene emissions from the air stripper.
Treatment System Description
A schematic of the proposed treatment is shown in Figure 2. Preliminary design
calculations indicate a 3 foot diameter packed column air stripping tower. The tower
will have a height of 26 feet and will incorporate 17 1/2 feet of packing. The capacity
of the blower will be 4,800 elm. The loading on the air stripper is estimated at 7
gpm/ft2 with TPH (total petroleum hydrocarbons) concentrations of approximately 42
rog/1.
Emissions Calculations
The proposed treatment system is planned to operate continuously. The projected life
of the project is 3 to 5 years. Table I shows the expected quantities of air emissions
on a daily basis.
TABLE 1
Emission Points Flow rate Benzene. TPH Toluene X¥1ene
· (~pm) (Ibm/day) (Ibm/day) (Ibm/day) (Ibm/day)
Air Stripper 50 0.96 25.2 9.0 9.6
Calculations:
The amount of benzene (Ibm/day) released to the atmosphere can be calculated as
follows:
Mr. Paxson
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
August 1, 1988
Page 3
Assumptions:
1) 1.6 mg/1 (average of 2 water analyses) benzene in pumped water.
................. 2) ............ !_00% efficiency of the t_rea~ment system.
3) Pumping rate of ?2,000 gallons/day (50 gpm for 24 hours)
72,000 gallons x 3.79 liters x 1.6 mg benzene x
day gallon, liter
2.2 x 10'6lbs
mg
0.96 Ibm. benzene
day
Similarly, the amounts of TPH (42 mg/1 total petroleum hydrocarbons), toluene (15
mg/l), xylene (16mg/l) present in the ground water and emitted to the atmosphere are
calculated as:
TPH = 25.2 Ibm/day
Toluene = 9 Ibm/day
Xylene = 9.6 Ibm/day
Receptor Description,
The nearest building to the treatment facility is a residential building with ap-
proximate dimensions of height = 18 feet, length = 55 feet and width = 20 feel There
is a trailer court adjacent to the property. Please refer to the site vicinity ma~ (Figure
3) for more information.
SUMMARY OF HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
Table-2 is a summary of the cOntinuous air emissions from the air stripper. Table-
3 is a summary of predicted ambient air concentrations as calculated using the air
dispersion model PTPLU (version 2.0). Printouts of the model for benzene, toluene,
xylene (BTX), and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) emissions are attached. Table
4 shows the values of excess life time caner risk and the population excess cancer
burden for benzene and gasoline vapor~-emissions. -
Mr. Paxso~
Delta Project No.'40-87-326
August 1, 1988
Page 4
A
After reviewing the enclosed application and information please contact me at
(916)638-2085 with your comments on our Preliminary Authority to Construct/Air
Permit application and other relevant imfo/-mation.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Sudhakar Talanki, M.S.
Environmental Engineer
ST:cra
Enclosure:
Permit application, Quarterly Monitoring Report, site
schematic, water chemistry results, air dispersion models.
map,
cc w/o report:
W. C. Davies
Amy Green
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
KERN CO
2700 "M" Street, Suite 275
APPLICATION FOR:
[] Authority to Construct (ATC)
[] ATC- Modification
[] ATC- Renewal
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ~,~TRICT
Bakersfield, California 93301 Telephone:~ (805) 861-3682
[] Permit to Operate (PTO) [] Banking Certificate
[] PTO - Modification [] Transfer of Location
[] PTO - Transfer of Ownership
AN APPLICATION _IS R~=QUIRED FOR EACH SOURCE OPERATION AS DEFINED IN RuLE 102, SECTION cc.
PERMIT TO BE ISSUED TO: Name of organization to operate the following equipment:
Davies 0il Company
MAILING ADDRESS:
P.0. Box 80067~ Bakersfield~ CA
3. LOCATION AT WHICH THE EQUIPMENT IS TO 8E OPERATED:
ZipCode: 93380
3305{ Gulf Street, Bakersfield~ CA 93308
4. GENERAL NATURE OF BUSINESS:
Office, Petroleum Storage and Fueling Facility
o
EQUIPMENT FOR WHICH APPLICATION IS MADE:
Packed Column Air Stripper
Provide additional information as required by District "Instructions".
6. TYPE AND ESTIMATED COST OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMEN'F:
7. TYPE AND ESTIMATED COST OF BASIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT:
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT:'
9. TYPE .OR PRINT NAME OF SIGNER:
TITLE OF SIGNER:
DATE:
PHONE NO.:
DATE RECEIVED
Validation (For APCD Use Only)
FILING FEE: $
DATE:
RECEIPT NO.:
A~r Quality 580 gl49 011 (Rev. 3/aa)
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
r Central Coast Lab Number: E-~17
Analytical Services, Inc. Collected:
1~ Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: ~5/~/88 ~ 16~
'San Luis Ob~spo, California 93~1 Tested: ~5/~7/B8
(B~5) 5~3-255~ Collected by: Sudlakar
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA ~e~hod 52~.2/82~
Delta Environmental SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
1195~ White Rock Rd. Davies Oil, Bakersfield, Delta #~-B7-526,
Suite 114 Fed #85Zrq~.. RW-1 .... Water_
Rancho Cordova, CA 95674
Compound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentration
in ppm
Benzene ~
Toluene ~
Ethylbenzene ~
Xylenes ~
1,2-Dichloroethone (EDC) ~
Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) ~
1.4
15.
1.4
16.
not found
not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~.
(GASOLINE)
BTX as 0 Percent of Fuel 54.
Percent Surrogate Recovery 1~2.
MSD~3
E~17f.wrl/245
MH/sw/vg/r~
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
· Mary Havl'icek, Ph.D.
President
ICentrol
Coast
Analytical'
Services
Central Coast · Lab Number: E-~g17dup
Analytical Services, Inc. Collected:
1~1 Suburban Rood , Suite C-~ Received: g5/g~/88
San Luis Obispo, California 95~gl Tested: ~5/~7/88
(8~5) 5~3-2553 Collected by: Sudlakar Jr.
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA ~ethod 52~.2/82~
Delta Environmental SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
....... =~--~- ........ ~1~3~ Whi~.~ock Rd .......................... Davies. Oil .... Bakersfield, Del~a
Suite 11~ Fed #85Z-~, RW-1, Water
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
Compound.Analyzed Detection Limit Concentration
in ppm in ppm
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes
1,2-Dic~loroethone (EDC)
Ethylene Dibromiae (EDB)
1.8
>2.7
.2.2
16.
not found
not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1.
(GASOLINE)
23.
BTX os o Percent of Fuel
PeKcent Surrogate Recovery
MSD#3
E~17fd.wr1/2~]
MH/sw/vg/rh
89.
1¢5.
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Hovlidek, Ph.D.'
President
AiR, WATER & HAZARDOUS WASTE
Cen~ra~
Coast
Ana~y~ca~
Services
'~TORY (No.151) CERTIFIED by
Central Coast
Analytical Services
1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, CaZifornia 95~¢1
(8¢5) 5~3-2553
RNIA DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
R£C'D JUN 0
Delta Environmental
........................ 11¢5¢ White Rock. Road .......
Suite 11¢
Rancho Cordova, CA g567~
Lab Number:
Collected:
Rece£ved:
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakar TR
Sample Description:
Delta #~-87-526
Federated #8~Z-~
Davies 0il, R~-I
REPORT
CONSTZTUENT
EPA IRETHOD/DATE/ANALYST
DETECTZ:ON LZIRZT LEVEL FOUND -mg/1
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
¢5/18/88 RDM
5. 22.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
4~5.1 ~5/¢~/88 RDM
1¢.
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
~15.1 ¢5/11/88 TK
1. 1.
E~e17TOC. V~:~I/#1 ~5
mH/ke
RespectfulZy submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
AI.R,. WATER and HAZARDOUS WASTE LABORATORY CERI'IFIED Dy CALIFF
IA DEPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
Central I .' Central Coast
Coast I Analytical Services
Analytical' 141 Suburban Road, Suite
Services San L~is Obispo~ California
(8~5) 543-2553
Lab Number: E-4~17
Collected: ~5/~3/88
Received: ~5/~4/88
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakar TR
Delta Environmental
11~3~ White Rock Road
..Suite 11~ .-.
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
Sample Description:
Delta #4~-87-326
Federated #83Z-4~
Davies Oil, Rw-1
~etals digested by EPA 3g~5 on ~5/g9/88 by R3.
REPORT
CONSTITUENT
EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST
.... DETECTION --- LEVEL ........ LEVEL
'LIMIT FOUND FOUND
mg/1 mg/1 meq/1
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
6¢10' ~5/09/88 VK
6¢1~ ~5/¢9/88 VK
6e1~ ¢5/~9/88 VK
6¢10 ¢5/¢9/88 VK
~.1 25. 1.25
~.1 4. ¢.32
~.1 31. 1.36
¢.1 10. ~.26
SUM OF CATIONS,
2.5
ALKALINITY AS COCO3 51~.1 ~5/¢4/88 RDM
CltLORIDE 50~.~ 05/~4/88 LD
SULFATE 30~,~ 05/~4/88 LD
NITROGEN, NITRATE 5~.~ ~5/~4/88 LD
NITRATE 555.5 05/04/88 LD
FLUORIDE 30~.~ ~5/04/88 LD
IRON 200.7 05/09/88 VK
MANGANESE 20~.7 05/~9/88 VK
COPPER 2~0.7 05/~9/88 VK
ZINC 2~.7 05/09/88 VK
FOAMING AGENTS ~25.1 ~5/~/88 LD
1. 14¢. 1.48
5. 15. ~.42
5. 2~. ¢.42
1. ~.1
4. ¢.4 ....
~.1 ~.~ 0.~2
~.¢2 2.7
0.005 0.6~ ....
~.~5 ~.25
~.~5 <~.~5
¢.¢2 <¢.¢2
SUM OF ANIONS
2.3
pH (un,ts) 15¢.1
CONDUCTIVITY 120.1
(mlcromhos)
DISSOLVED SOLIDS, 16¢.1
TOTAL
HARDNESS 15¢.2
¢5/¢4/88 RDM ¢.1 7.2
¢5/¢4/88 RDM 1. 250.
¢5/¢9/88 AF 5. 14¢.
¢5/¢4/88 AF 0.1 8¢.
E4~17MEQ.WR1/#145
MH/ke
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D., President
AiR, WAIER and HAZAtiDOUS wASTE LAi3Oi<Ait)HY CLi-~iiFiED by CALii-L)i-.-'"'t.A DE?i o;' PUBLIC HEAL]'H
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
Central Coast
"Analytical Services
1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
San Luis 0bispo, California
(8e5) 5~-255~
Lob'Number: E-4¢17
Collected: ¢5/¢5/88
Received: ¢5/¢4/88 · 16¢6
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakor TR
Delta Environmental ~ample Description:
11¢5¢ White Rock Road Delta #~¢-87-326, Federated #85Z-~
Suite 1¢¢ RW-1
Rancho CordOVa,-'CA 9567¢ .... ~'~'"~'"~':='--::-~=-'~" '-:~=- ........ '~' .... ' ..... -:'~i~- ...... -
'CONSTITUENT
Holding'Time: Six Months Preserved (Hg: 28 Days)
*Digested by EPA 5¢¢5 on ¢5/¢9/88 by RJ
ICP/AA SCAN FOR CALDERON ~ETALS
ERA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST DETECTION
............................. LIMIT, mg/[ mg/1
STLC** '
*ANTIMONY 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK
*ARSENIC 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK
*BARIUM 6~1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK
*BERYLLIUM 601¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*CADMIUM 6~10 ~5/1~/88 VK
*CALCIUM 6~1¢ ¢5/:14/88 VK
*CHROMIUM 6¢1¢ ~5/14/88 VK
*COBALT 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK
*COPPER 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*IRON 601¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*LEAD 6¢10 ¢5/14/88 VK
*MAGNESIUM 6¢1¢ ~5/14/88 VK
3. <3.
2. <2.
¢.2 <¢.2
1. 25.
¢.¢5
¢.¢5 ¢.25
¢.¢5 2.7
1. 41.
¢.75
1.¢
NO LIMIT
56¢.
8¢.
25.
NO LIMIT
No LIMIT
*MANGANESE 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
MERCURY 747¢ ~5/1¢/88 KM
*MOLYBDENUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*NICKEL 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*POTASSIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*SELENIUM 7741 ¢5/14/88 MD
*SILVER 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*SODIUM 6010 ¢5/14/88 VK
*THALLIUM 7840 ¢5/15/88 VK
*VANADIUM ~ 6¢1¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
*ZINC 601¢ ¢5/14/88 VK
¢.¢2
¢.0¢02
5. 45.
~.~5 ¢.16
3. 1¢.
¢.¢¢5 <¢.¢¢5
¢,2 <¢.2
¢.1 31.
¢.¢5
¢.¢2 ¢.16
¢.¢5
NO LIMIT
0.2
35¢.
2¢.
NO LIMIT'
1.¢
5.
NO LIMIT
7.¢
24.
25¢.
**SOLUBLE THRESHOLD LIMIT CONCENTRATION as listed in 22 Col Adm Code Article
11 Sec. 88899 os persistent and biooccumiotive ~oxic substance. "NO LIMIT"
m~ons not listed therein os persistent and biooccumlotive toxic substance.
NOTE: Results obtained from ICP Scans (EPA 6¢10) ore susceptible to positive
interferences. Unacceptably high results using this method should be rechecked
using 'atomic absorption spectrometry.
E4¢17ICP.WR1/#1~5
MH/sm
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SER¥ICE$
Mary Hovlicek, Ph.D., President
oo
- X
'"-X X X X x X
X
x
X~X
X --x
SITE MAP
3305 112 GULF STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.
DELTA NO. 40-87-326
DRAWN BY: DATE:
CHECKED BY: DATE:
"V
.
,
, -~0 :::.:. ,,4L- ~'.R 0 r
L.
Inc.
KEN
· CUMMINGS RUSH SWOAPE 0 =FIC '.
DIESEL PROPERTIES
RUSH SWC ~g:~E ' -.. : ~.ILDINE
IPROPERTIES DAVIES ~ _.
VAI. L~?
PERFORATING
COM.
~ GASOLINE STORAGE
~ - ~ DIESF~ STORAGE
TEAMSTERS ABANDONED
.OCAI. UNION ,~ (/ PRIVATE WELL TRAILER OFFICE
~vo. er-[~] KERtCVlLLE STAGE ~W-Z ·
i ~ ~ FUEL DISPENSERS
Ri 1 . ~ ~- GASOUNE STORAGE .
'/ .'1 ,' L.~-.._ ..~ --'
. ~ .... j,),} I
JIM'S STEEL AND SUPPLY SITE SURVEYED MAY 2,
BM
GULF STREET (~ ~ --
PRIVATE SEWER UNE
. . ~
$
$
LEGEND:
~ MON, TOR~~G WELL
· ,~ '~ECOVERY WEi. L
E} ABANDONED
PRIVATE WELL
SITE VICINITY MAP
3305 112 GULF STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.
DELTA NO. 40.87-326
DRAWN BY: DATE:
CHECKED BY: DATE:
Source
Description
Substance
Emitted
(2)
Nearby
Maximum Releas~ Parameters Buildinq Dimensions
Emission Exit
Rate Ht.a Temp. Dta, Velocity Height Length Width
(g/sec) (m) (OK) (m) (m/sec) (m) (m) (m)
(3) (4) (s) (~) (7) (8) (~) (lO)
Comments
(11)
'2c- £,,)~. [' £,J [:
><"/L E'N E.
0,005--
D ,oq 7
O' o ~cO
'a Height above grade.
g,o A5 MA
~ &/ASOL~
.t
~E
Calculation ~x~um PredEcted Concen~r~
Technique ,1 heur 8 ho~r 2~ hour
Su~s~ (F',C,OW)a Average Average Average Average
-77 u~. N'~ ~-
a F = flat terrain
C = complex terrain
DW = downwasb
Carcinogen
(~>
Excess Lifetime " Number of People Population Exce§s
Unit RiSk - Cancer Riskb Exposed Cance~ Burden
Valuea Residential Employment Residential Employment. Residential Employment Total
(2) (~) .(~) (5) (6). (7).(3)x(5) (8)=(~)x(~) (~)
aThe ~t~ risk value IS the estimated pTobabllity Or a person contracting cancel'as a resolt'°f a con,rant exposure to an
a,n~ient ]concentration o~ 1 ug/m] ove~ a ?O-year period. The actual' excess zlsks a~e not likely to be hlghe~ than those
estimated using these values, and could conceivably be considerably lowe~ .... .
bThe p~o~uct o~ ~he maximum annual average concentta[[on , and the ~1~ ~isk value.
)'-.] c) ]- % '
PTPLU (Version 2,0)
Analysis of concentration as a function of stability and rind speed:
'(California Air Resources Board Hodeling Section version) j
(No title given)
Source Conditions
emission rate = 0.960 lbs/day = O.OOS g/sec
physical stack height = 26.00 ft = 7,92 m
stack gas temperature = 294.00 dec, K
stack gas velocity = 2711.87 fl/lin = 13.78'e/sec
stack diameter: 1.50 tt: 0.46 I
volume floe rate: 2.262 a^3/sec
buoyancy flux: 0.024 i*4/sec~3
Heteorological Conditions
ambient telperature = 293.00 deg. K
anemometer height = 10.00 I
lixing height = lO0.O0 m
Wind profile exponents{ A; 0.15~ B~ 0.15~ C= 0.20w 01 0.25w El 0.30~ FI 0,30
Receptor data
receptor elevation above ground level
0.00 s
Options used
stack dovnvash
buoyancy induced dispersion
urban dispersion coefficients (HcElroy~Pooler)
Results - using extrapolated minds
Stability
Wind Haxiiue Distance 'Effective
Speed Concentration of Hex. Height
(m/sec) (ug/i^3) (ki) (i)
0.48 9.156656-01 0.125 47.1
0.77 i.179406+00 0.088 32.4
0.97 1,2%816+00 0.075 27.5
1.45 1.464386+00 0.058 21.0
1.93 1.527556+00 0.050 17.7
2.41 1.536176+00 0.045 15.8
2.90 1,516226+00 0.0~1 14.4
B 0.48 9.166656-01 0.125 47.1
8 0.77 1.176406+00 0.088 32.4
D ' 0.97 1.29661£+00 0.075 27,5
8 1.45 1,464386+00 0.058 21.0
B 1,93 1.527556+00 0.050 17.7
D 2,41 1,536176+00 0,045 iS, g
B 2,90 i,516226+00 '0,041 14,4
0 3,86 i,437856+00 0,037 12,8
8 4.83 1.344276+00 0.034 11.8
1,91 1,797906+00 0,061 17,8
2.39 I,BI6BI£+O0 0,055 15,8
2,86 1,798896+00 0,051 14,5
3,82 i,7i4236+00 0,045 12,9
4.77 1,607366+00 0.042 11.9
6,68 1,400676+00 0,038 10,8
9,55 1,166636+00 0,035 9,9'
ilt15 i.oqooRF+o0 : 0 039 . ,, 9_3
14,32 9,84573£-01 0,031 8,8
(-- HAX
D
0
O
D
D
D
E
E
6
6
6
F
£
£
0,47 9,737556-01 0,235 46,0
0,75 1,282916+00 0,162 33,0
0.94 1.423776+00 0,137 28.0
1,42 1,632306+00. 0,105 21,3
1,89 1.718296+00 0,089 17,9
2,36 1,739126+00 0,080 15,9
2,83 1,724556+00 0.073 14,6
3..~7_ .... -1,646356100~0..0S5_. ,12,9--
~.72 {,545986+00 0.060 1i,9
6,60 i,349506+00 0,055 i0,8
9,44 i,i225i6+00 0,050 9,9
11,32 1,049826+00 0,047 9,3
14,15 9,493286-01 0,045 8,8
18.87 8,114586-01 0.042 8,2
1,87 1,536766+00 0,157 16,8
2,33 1,34773E+00 0.150 16,0
2,80 1,344006+00 0,137 i4,7
3.73 1,292666+00 0,121 13,0
4,66 1,21963£+00 O. lil 12,0
1,87 {,6954JE+00 0,149 16.0
2,33 1,462116+00 0,144 15,4
2.00 1,344006+00 0.137 14.?
3.73 1,292666+00 0.121 13.0
4.66 1,219636+00 O, lll. 12.0
PTPLU (Version 2.0)
Analysis of concentration as a function of sbabiHty and rind speedI
(California Air Resources Board Modeling Section version)
(No title given)
Source Conditions
emission raie; 0.047 g/sec ~ "'~-',3'L.U~ ~J~'
physical stack height = 7.92 n
stack gas temperature: 294.00 deg. K
stack gas velocity = 13.78 e/sec
stack diaseter = 0.46 m
volume f]ou rate = 2.290 m^3/sec
buoyancy flux = 0,024 e^4/sec^3
Neteorological Conditions
ambient temperature = 293.00 deg. K
anemometer height = 10,00 u
mixing height = lO0.O0 I
Nind profile exponents: A: 0.15~ Bi 0.15, :i 0.20, Dm 0,25, E: 0,30, Fi 0,30
Receptor data
receptor elevation above ground level =
Options used
stack dounvash
buoyancy induced dispersion
urban dispersion coefticients fHcElroy-PooIer)
Results - using extrapolated rinds
0.00 ·
Stability
Nind faxiuue Distance Effective
Speed Concentration o! fax, Height
(i/sec) (u9/l^3) (km) fi)
0.48 8.4629lE+00
0.77 1.08B91E+OI
0,97 1.19881E+01
1.45 1.35559E+01
1,93 1,41551E~01
2,41 1.42463E+01
2.90 1.40685E+01
0.125 47.3
0.088 32.5
0.075 27.6
0.059 21,0
0,050 17.8
0,045 15.8
0.04i 14.5
0,48 8.46291E+00
0.77 1,08991E+01
0.97 i.lgsBIE+Ol
1.45 . 1.35559E+0i
1,93 1.41551E+Oi
2.41 1.42463E+0l
2.90 1.40685E+01
3.86 1.33553E+01
4.S3 1.24940£+0i
0.125 47.3
0.088 32.5
0.075 27.6
0,059 21.0
0.050 i7.8
'0,045 15.8
0.04i 14.5
0.037 12,D
0.034 il.9
1.91 i.66584£+01
2.39 l. SB457E+Oi
2.86 i.669i4E+01
3.82 1.59202E+0i
4.77 i,49393£+0l
6.68 1.30308E+01
9.54 1.08626£+01
11.45 - 1,O1560E+Oi
14.32 9.18032E+00
0.47
0.75
0.94
1.42
1.89
2.36
2,83
0_~3J7
4.72
6.60
9,43
11.32
14, i5
18.87
0.062 17.9
0.055 15.9 (-- flAX
0.051 14.6
0.045 12.9
0,042 il.9
0.038 i0.8
0.035 9.9
0.033 .... 9.3
0,031 8.8
E
E
E.
E
E
1.66
2.33
2.60
3.73
4.66
1.86
2.33
2.80
3,73
4.66
B.gBSI7E+O0 0.236 46.2
1,18516E+Oi 0. i62 33.1
1.3lSllE+Oi O, I3B 26.1
1.51075E+0i 0,106 21,4
i.59i86E+Oi 0,090 i8.0
1.6125iE+Ol 0,080 16.0
1.59992E+0i 0,073 14.6
1.52892E+01 0.065 13.0
i.43674E+0i 0.060 ---~2~'d'~--'-
1.25546E~0i 0.055 i0.0
1.045i2£+01 0.050 9.9.
9,78090E+00 0.047 9.3
B.85154£+00 0.045 8.8
7,57248E+00 0,042 8.2
1.42756E+01 0.157 16.8
1.24933£+0i 0.150 16.1
1.24671E,+01 0,137 14,7
i.20032E+01 0.121 13.0
1.13339E+0i O. ii2 i2.0
1,57530E+01 0.150 16.0
1.35879E+01 0,144 15,4
1.246716+01 0.137 14,7
1.20032E+01 ~ 0,121 13,0
1,13339E+01 0.112 12.0
t
HPLU (Vereion 2,0) .
Analysis of concentration as a function of stability and uind speedj
(California Air Resources Board Hodeling Section version)
(No title given)
Source Conditions
emission rate = 0,133 g/sec ( TOTAL
physical stack height = 7.92 m
stack gas temperature = 294.00 deg. K
stack gas velocity = 13.78 e/sec
stack diaieter = 0,46 e
volume flor rate = 2,290 1^3/sec
buoyancy flux = 0,024 i^4/sec^3
Meteorological Conditions
ambient temperature = 293.00 deg. K
anemometer height: lO,O0 I
lixing height = iO0.O0 ·
Wind profile exponentsz A: 0,15~ B: 0.15~ C: 0,20, D: 0,25, E: 0,30, F: 0,30
Receptor data
receptor elevation above ground level
0.00 i
Options used
stack dovnvash
buoyancy induced dispersion
urban dispersion coefficients (McElroy-Pooler)
Resutts- using extrapolate~ minds
Wind HiXflUl Distance
Speed Concentration of Hex,
(m/sec) (ug/i^3) (kc)
9tabilit¥
0,48 2.39482E+OI
0.77 3,08422E+01
0,97 3,39239E+01
1.45 3.83603E+01
1.93 4,00558E+01
2.4! 4.03141E+01
2.90 3,98107E+01
A
A
A
A
A
'A
A
0. t25
0.088
0.075
0.059
0.050
0.045
0.041
Effective
Height
B 0.48 2.39482E+01 0,125
B 0.77 3.08422E+0i 0.088
B 0.97 3.39239E+01 0,075
B i.45 3.83603E+01 0,059
B i,93 4,0055BE+O) 0.050
B 2,41 4,03141E+0i 0,045
B 2.90 3.gBl07E+Oi 0.04i
B 3.86 3,77926E+0i 0.037
B 4.83 3.53554E+0i 0.034
l.gi 4.71397E+01 0.062
2.39 4,76698E+01 0.055
2.86 4,72331E+0i 0.051
3.82 4.50508E+01 0.045
4.77 4,22749E+01 0,042
6.68 3.68743E+01 0.038
g,54 3,07388E+01 0,035
11,45 2,87394E+01 0.033
14.32 2.59784E+0'i 0,031
47.3
32,5
27.6
2i.0
17.8
15.8
14.5
47.3
32.5
27.6
21.0
i7.8
i5.8
14.5
12.8
11.9
17.9
i5.9 <-- HAX
14.6
12.9
il.9
iO.B .
9.{
9.3
8.8
O 0.47 2.54289E+0i 0.236 48.2
0 0,75 3.35375E+01 0. i62 33.1
0 0.94 3.72431E+0i 0. i38 28.1
D 1.42 4.275i0E+01 0,106 21,4
D 1,89 4.50461E+01 0.090 18.0
0 2.36 4,56306E+01 0.080 i6.0
O 2.83 4.52744E+OI 0.073 14.6
0 3.77 4.326§1E+01 0,065 13,0
0 6.60 3.55270E+01 0.055 10.8
0 9.43 2.95745E+01 0,050 9.9
0 1i,32 2.76779E+01 0.047 9.3
0 14. i5 2.50480E+01 0.045 8.8
D i8.87 2,14285E+01 0.042 8.2
E 1.86 4.03968E+0i 0.157 16.8
E 2.33 3.53534E+01 ' 0.150 16.1
E · 2,80 3.52791E+01 0.137 14.7
E 3,73 3.39664E+01 O, i2i 13.0
E 4.66 3.20725E+0i 0, il2 i2.0
F 1,86 4.45776E+01
F 2.33 3.84510E+0i
F 2.80 3,52791E+01
F 3.73 3.39664E+01
F 4.66 3.20725E+OI
0.150 iB.O
0.144 15.4
0. i37 14,7
O. i21 i3.0
0,112 i2,0
Office 2~emoran'~um
· KERN COUNTY
G.S.S. 580 1151 395-5004 (Rev. 4/87)
Delta
'Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
11030 Wl~ite Rock Road. Suite 110
Rancho Cordova. CA 95670
916 638-2085
'JUL
July 6, 1988
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Central Valley Region
3614 East Ashlan Avenue
Fresno, .CA. 93726
Attn'-
Mr. Kenneth Wilkins
~tater Resources Control Engineer
Sub j:
Preliminary Application for Liquid Waste Disposal
Davies 0il Company
3305 1/2 Gulf Street
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Claim No. 83Z-40
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Dear Mr. Wilkins:
Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. (Delta) on behalf of Davies Oil
Company is submitting a preliminary application for liquid waste disposal
to land via an infiltration gallery at the referenced site. The waste will
consist of contaminated ground water treated to remove diss61ved petroleum
hydrocarbons.
The purpose of this preliminary', application is to determine discharge
monitoring requirements so that we can evaluate the economic feasibility
of this disposal alternative compared to using the sanitary sewer. After
reviewing the enclosed information please contact Delta with your comments
and proposed monitoring schedule.
Site Description
A USGS topo map of the site with township, range and section is included in
Figure 1. Figure 2 is a site map showing the recovery well (RW-I), and
proposed locations of two additional recovery wells, the treatment system
and the infiltration gallery.
Volume of Waste Discharge
The proposed volume of the waste discharge is calculated at 0.216 million
gallons per day (MGD) on a continuous basis for a period of 3 to 5 years.
Quality of Water to be Treated.
...Laboratory analysis of the source (contaminated .ground ..water) water .are
attached.
Mr. Kenneth Wilkins
July 6, 1988
Page 2
A schematic of the proposed treatment method is shown in Figure 3. The
dissolved petroleum hydrocarbons in the ground water are removed by using
two packed column air strippers. Preliminary design calculations indicate
two 3 1/2 foot diameter packed column air stripping towers. The towers will
each have a height of 16 feet and will incorporate 12 feet of packing. The
capacity of the blower will be 2000 cfm. .:
After reviewing ~ihe "~nclosed 'in~mati0n 'piea~-e -c'0nt~'r'~i~t~"-~tlth'--'"~ .....
comments including discharge water quality and monitoring requirements.
· :' If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me at
(916)638-2085.
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Sudhakar Talanki, M.S.
Environmental Engineer
ST:cra
Enclosure:
Permit application,. Quarterly Monitoring Report, site map,
schematic, water, che~nistry results.
CC:
Joe Kessing
W. C. Davies
Amy Green
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CON.TROL BOARD
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ~BO. ARD
QEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
APPLICATION FOR
FACILITY PERMIT/WASTE DISCHARGE
This form is to be used for filing a/an: (check all appropriate)
1., :~.REPORT OF WASTE DISCHARGE
(pursuant to Division 7 of the State Water Code)
2.' [-~-APPL. ICATION FQRA HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY'PERMIT
(Dursuan[ to Heaitl~ and Safety Code Section 25200)
3. [] APPLICATION FOR A SOLID WASTE FACILITIES PERMIT
(pursuant to Government Code Section ~7~.30)
4. [] APPLICATION FOR A RUBBISH DUMP PERMIT
(pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 4371--4375 and 4438)
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Form 200 Rec'd
Fee (RWQCB} (SWMB)__
~=-Cetter toOisc~arger: '=:' ..... ==~ .... = ....
Reoo~ R~'d
Eff~ti~ Date
CDF Notifi~
OOHS No.
~MB No.
· ' i. PrACII-ITY
........... -Davi~-s Oil-Cbmoany
33053 Gulf Street, Bakersfield, CA
W. C. Davies
33053 Gulf Street, Bakersfield, CA
(805 '~-323-~063
93308
93308
[] Sol, P orie,ors. ip Partne..io
Corporation
Go~rnment Agency
W. C. Davies
P.O. Box 80067, Bakersfield, CA 93380
II. ~:'ASON FOR ~It. ING
A. ['~ New discharge or facility
B.~:~ Existing discJ~arge or facility/
C. Increase in Cluantitv of discharge
Change in character of discharge
Change in place or method of dimosel
Change in design or operation
G. ~ Change in business oDeratim3 f~cilit'
H.~ Enla~ment of existing faciliW
I. Other (explain below)
Iii. TYPE OF' OPERATION
A. ~ Transfer station
B. Solid waste disposal site
C. Hazarctous waste disposal site
D. I I Sewage treatment
E.~ Industr~ (on-site disposal facility)
F. Industry {discharge to sewer)
G. ~ Woodwaste
H.r~ Other (explain below)
Petroleum Storage and
fueling facility
-, IV. TYPE 01r WASTE
., Industrial wastes F. Animal wastes J. Dead animals
. Municioai solid wastes G. Forest product wastes K. Tires
D. Hazardous wastes ............ ' · H. Construction/demolition wastes L. Other (explain below)
· Treated ground water infiltration resulting from aquifer restoration.
V. srrm~ O~SI(~N CAPACITY
OA''V.LOW (,.MGO): ~ 0.216
1
(IN TONS OR I ,'
__ I _ 0.216
(,. ACRES)
/
I
I
VII. LOCATION OF' POINT OF DISPOSAl- OR OPERATION
Site Location: Township 29.S; Range 27E; Section 23; 40 acre sub.; NW¼ of NW~.
Please see Figure 1
Viii. SOUR(:( OF WATER SUPPI. Y (CNlCK Al.I. APPIIrOPIIIIAI'I[I
A. [~ MUNICIPAL OR UTILITY SERVICE: B. [~] INDIVIDUAL (Wells}
C c{,/ oF .......
C. [~] SURFACE SUPPLY:
IX. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RF-PORT CE:IRI
Has an EIR been prepared for this project?
If "Yes", please enclose a copy.
If "No", will an EIR be prepared?
Will a negative declaration be prepared?
If "Yes", please ans~ver the following:
-"l Yes ~] No
OYes F--lNo
[~Ye, ~No
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury
rnents is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
CERTIFICATION
that the information provided in this application and in any attach.
LIST TITLES OP' ANY ATTACHMENTS:
You will be notified of the correctness of filing fee and submittal of any additional information deemed necessary to complete your Report of Waste
Discharge pursuant to Division 7. Section 13250 of the State Water Code. or to complete your permit application pursuant to Government Code
Section 66796.30 and Health and Safety Code Section 25200.
Services
Cen=rul Coos=
Anol¥=icol Services, Inc.
1~1' Su~ur~on Rood , Suite C-~
'Son Lui$ Obispo, Californio g~l
(SAS) 5~3-2553
/
Lab Number: E-A~17
Col[ec=ed:
Received: ~5/~/88e 16~e
Collected by: Sudlakar Jr.
FueZ Fingerprin= Analysis - EPA ~e~hod 52~.2/82~
Environmen~°l Rock
SAMPLE DESCRZPTZDN:
Dov£es 0il, Bakersfield, Del~= #k~-87-~26,
C~mpoun~ Analyzed
De~.ec'c£on Limi~ Concent. ra~.ion in ppm in ppm
1.~.
no= found
no~ found
Benzene
Toluene
E~nylbenzene
Xy[enes
1,2-Dtcn[o~oe=none (EDC)
E~nylene Oibrom~Oe (EDB)
~.1
~.1
~.1
~.1
0.1
0.1
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1~.
(GASOL[NE)
BTX as o Percen= of Fuel 5~.
Percen= Surrogo=e Recovery 1~2'.
Respectfully suDml=~e~,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Presiden~
E~e17f. wrl/2.~3
Coas~
Services
~ Cen'=ral Coos=
.. Analytical Services, Inc.
1~1 Suburban Rood , Suite C-~
Son Lui$ Obispo, California 93~1
(8~5) 5~3-2553
LaD NumDer: E-A~lTdup
Collected: ~5/~3/88
Received: ~5/0~/88 ~ 16~
Tes=ed:
Collec~e~ by: Sudlakar 3r.
Fuel Fingerpr~n= Analysis - EPA Me=hod 52~.2/82~
11~$~ Whi=e Rock Rd.
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
SA~:LE DESCRIPTION:
Davies 0il, Bakersfield, Delta #~-87-~2B,
Fed #83Z~'RW-l,-Wa=er-- ' · -" ~ ........ ~-~'-
Compound Analyzed
Benzene
Toluene
EaSy[benzene
Xy[enes
1,2-D~cn[oroe'.~ane (EDC)
E=nylene D~D~om~ae '(EDB)
De=ec=~on L~mi= Concen=ra=~cn
~n ppm ~n ppm
1.8
>2.7
2.2
.16.
no'~ found
no: founa
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEU~ HYDROCARBONS 1.
(GASOL[NE}
23.
BTX os o Percen= of Fuel
89.
Percen~ Surmogc=e Recovery
E~17fd. wrl/2~,3
r~H/~/vg/rn
Resoec'.ful!y suDmitte~,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
~a~y Havlidek, Ph.D.
Pme$iden=
.AZR, WATER & HAZARDOUS WASTE L~IATORY (:No.131) CERTZFiED by CAOgRN:]:A DEPT of HEALTH SERVZCES
Cen~ra$
Coa$~
Ana$y~.$ca$
Se~v$ces
Cen~ra~ Coa$~
AnaZ¥~caZ S®r-v~ces
1&1 Suburban ROod, Su$~e C-~
San Lugs 0b~spa, Ca$~orn~a 95~1
(8~5) 5~3-2553
De[~a Env~ronmen~aZ
11~3e Wh~e Rock Rood
Su~e 11~
Rancho Cordova, CA g567~
Lab Number:
Collected: ~5/~3/88
R®ca$ved:
Tested: As L~$~ad
Co~$ec~ed by: Sudlakar TR
SampZ® Description:
De~a #~-87-326
Fedem3~ed
DmvSes 051, RW-1
· ~ ~ REPORT
CONSTZTUENT EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST
DETECTZON L33~I"T
LEVEL FOUND -.~g/1
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
~1~.1 ~5/18/88 RDM
22.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
~05.1 ~5/~/B8 RDM
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
~15.1 ¢5/11/88 TK
E~elTTOC. WR1/~1 ~5
MH/ke
Respec'c~'ully submitted, - ..... ~
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTZCAL SERV3:CES
lt~ary Ha~licek, Ph.D., President.
WATER and HAZARDCUS W
LABORATORY CERTIFIED Oy CAL"~NIA DEPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
Centrol " Centrol Coast
Coos= . Anolytical Services
Analytical 1~1 SuburDon Rood, Suite C-~
Services San Luis Ob&spo~ C~lifornio g=~81
Delta Environmental
Lab Number: E-~17
Collected=
Received: es/e~/88
Tested= AS
Collected by: Sudlokor TR
Sample Description:
11ff3¢ Wh&te Rock Rood Delta #~E-87-326
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567¢ Davies O&[, R~-I
~etals d~gested by EPA 3¢¢5 on ¢5/¢9/88 by RJ.
REPORT
.............. CONSTITUENT
CALC[UM
MAGNESIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
SUM OF CATIONS
EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST ............ DETECTZON ..... EEVE~' ....... LEVEL
LIMIT FOU~ FOUND
mg/[ mg/[ meq/!
6¢1¢ ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 25. 1.25
6010 ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 4. ¢.~2
6¢1¢ ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 31. 1.36
6010 ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 1¢. ¢.26
ALKALINITY AS C=C05 31¢.1
CHLORIDE
SULFATE
NITROGEN, NITRATE
NITRATE
FLUORIDE
IRON 20¢.7
MANGANESE 20¢.7
COPPER 200.7
ZINC 200.7
FOAMING AGENTS ~25.1
SUM OF ANIONS
pH (un,ts)
CONDUCTIVITY
(m~c~omnos)
DISSOLVED SOLIDS,
TOTAL
HARDNESS
05/¢&/88 RDM
05/0~/88 LD
05/0~/88 LD
¢5/¢~/88 L9
05!'0~/88 LD
¢5/0~/88 LD
¢5/¢9/88 VK
¢5/09/88 VK
¢5/09/88 VK
¢5/¢9/88 VK
05/~/88 LD
2.5
1. 1~¢. 1.~8
5. 15.
5. 2¢. ¢.~2
1. ¢.1 ....
~. ¢.~ ....
¢.1 ¢.3 ¢.~2
0.02 2.7 --~-
¢.¢¢5 ¢.6~ ....
¢.¢5 ¢.25 ....
¢.¢5 <¢..¢5 ....
¢.~2 <¢.~2 ....
15¢.1 ¢5/0~/88 RDM ¢.1 .7.2
12¢'.1 05/0~/88 ROM 1. 250.
2.3
16¢.-1 ¢5/¢9/88 AF 5. 1~¢.
13¢.2 ¢5/0&/88 AF ¢.1
....................................................................................... RespectCu:].ly subm~.tted,
CENTRAL C~AST ANALYT]:CAI:
MH/ke y Ho~llcek, Ph.D., President.
,N£R, wAT£~ mhd HAZARDOUS WASTE _~3CRATSRY S£RTZF:ED Dy CALIFORNIA DEPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
Central
Analytical
Set-vices
Central Coast
Analytical Services
San Luis ODispo, California
(8e5) 5~3-2553
LaD NumDer: E-~17
Received= ~5/e~/8~ · 16ee
Tested= As Listed
Collected by: Sudlokor TR
Delta Environmental
11~5e WWite Rack Road
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
Sample Description:
Delta #~-87-326, Federated #85Z-~
R~-I ~ ...... ~ ....
Holding Time: Six Months Preserved (Hg: 28 Days)
*Oiges[ed by EPA ~5 on e5/~9/8~ by RJ
[CP/AA SCAN FOR CALDERON ~ETALS
DETECTION
:2 ......................~ONST~TUENT ......... £EA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST ; LIMIT, mg/1
TOTAL LEVEL
mg/[
*ANTIMONY 6¢1~ 05/1~/88 VK 3. <3. 15.
-ARSENIC 6010 ¢5/1~/88 VK 2. <2. 5.~
-BARIUM 6010 05/1~/88 VK ¢.¢1 <~.¢1 1¢0.
-BERYLLIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.¢1 <¢.¢1 ¢.75
*CADMIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.2 <0.2 1,¢
-CALCIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 1. 25. NO LIMIT
-CHROMIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/'1~/88 VK ~.05 ¢.25 56¢.
-COBALT 6¢10 ¢5/1~/88 VK 0.05 ~.11 80.
-COPPER 6¢1¢ 05/1~/88 VK ¢.05 ¢.25 25.
-IRON 60~0 05/~/88 VK 0.05 2.7 NO LIMIT
-LEAD 6¢1¢ 05/1.~/88 VK 1. 41. 5.¢
-MAGNESIUM 6¢1¢ 05/1~/88 VK 1. ~. NO LIMIT
-MANGANESE 6¢1¢ 05/1~/88 VK 0.02 0.60 'NO LIMIT
MERCURY 7~70 05/1¢/88 KM ¢.¢0¢2 <0.0002 0.2
-MOLYBDENUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK '~. 45.
'NICKEL 6010 05/1~/88 VK 0.05 ~.16 2¢.
-POTASSIUM 6010 ¢5/14/88 VK 5. 10. NO LIMIT
-SELENIUM 77~1 ¢5/1~/88 MD ¢.¢05 4¢.~05 1.~
*SILVER 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ~.2 <¢,2 5.
-SODIUM' 6¢1¢ 05/1~/88 VK ¢.1 31. NO LIMIT
-THALLIUM 78~0 ¢5/i5/88 VK .~.¢5 ~.~g 7.¢
*VANADIUM 601~ 05/1~/88 VK ~.¢2 ~.16 2~.
-ZINC 601¢ ¢5/14/88 VK ¢.05 <¢.¢5 , 25¢.
-'SOLUBLE THRESHOLD LIMIT CONCENTRATION os listed in 22 Col Adm Code Article
11 Sec. 66699 os persistent grid biooccumlotive toxic substonce. "NO LIMIT"
meons not listed therein os persistent GnU blooccumlotive toxic substonce,
NOTE: ~esults oDtained from ICP Scans (EPA 6g1¢) are susceptible to positive
interferences. Unacceptably high results using this method should be rechecked
using atomic absorption spectrometry.
E4~lTICP.WR1/#1~5
MH/sm
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST-ANALYTiCAL SERVZCES
Mary Hovlicek, Ph.D., Presio n
'1
J '"'1'- ,I
........ " .//13' ·
OILDALE, CALIF.
N3522.5-W1190017.5
PHOTOIN$1~-C,"T~D 1973
195~.
D~vle£
SITE LOCATION MAP
DATE
;I
PHOTO E E,/I$ E.'D 1968
~ecouEf~Y Lo~ tt
VAf~o;~ (-.~ g~xj[./~ ¥:
·
/~IR. 5-r f21pi't'~'
· KERN
COUNTY
G.$.S. 580 1151 395-5004 (Rev. 4/87)
Delta
Environ:.,ental
Consultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock Road. Suite 110
Rancho Cordova. CA 95670
916 638-2085
July 1, 1988
Kern County~A'PCD
2?00 M Street, Suite 275
Bakersfield, California 93301
Attm
Thomas Paxson
· Engineering Evaluation Section
Sub j:
Authority to Construct/Air Permit Application
_ 330.5-1/2. Gulf.Street ...................
Bakersfield, California 93308
Claim No. 83Z-40
Delta Project No. 40~-87-326
Dear Mr. Pay, son:
Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. (Delta) on behalf of Davies Oil Company,
Bakersfield is submitting a preliminary Authority to Construct/Air Permit Application
for a packed column air stripper to remove petroleum hydrocarbons from ground
water at the referenced site. The purpose of this preliminary application is to
determine if the proposed air emissions are feasible and if further evaluation is
necessary. After reviewing the enclosed information please contact Delta with your
comments.
~ite and Recovery Well Descrit~tion
The site location is described in the attached quarterly monitoring report dated June
10, 1988. A site map showing the location of the recovery wells and the location of
the proposed treatment system is shown in Figure 1. The discharge rate from the
recovery well RW-1 is expected to be about 40 to' 50 gallons per minute (gpm). A
pump test was conducted in May 1988. The ground water from the pump test is
stored in a temporary tank kept on the site. Water samples were collected and sent to
the laboratory to determine concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons. The laboratory
reports are attached.
Two additional gradient control/contaminated ground water recovery wells will be
installed and operated in the future once free product recovery is complete. Their
approximate locations are shown in Figure 1. Each of the wells will yield
approximately 50 gpm. The total discharge from all 3 wells will eventually be
approximately 150 gpm.
Practical Solutions (o Environmental Concerns
Mr. Paxson
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
July 1, 1988
Page 2
Trealment System Descriotion
A schematic of Se proposed treatment is shown in Figure 2~ Preliminary design
~ :" calculations indicate two 3 1/2 foot diameter packed column air stripping towers. The
?'-'~ ' towers will each have a height of 16 feet and will incorporate 12 feet of packing. The
~, ~i capacit3r of the blower will be 2,000 cfm. The initial loading (50 gpm yield) on.the
· - ....................................... air stripper is estimated at 5.2 gpm/ft2 With TPH (total petroleum hydrocarbons)
concentrations of approximately 42 mg/1. The final loading (150 gpm yield) is
estimated at 15.6 gpm/ftl with~ TPH concentrations of approximately 10 mg/l or less.
EmissiQn$ C~lcul~tion~
The proposed treatment system is planned to operate continuously. The projected life
of the project is 3 to 5 years. Table I shows the expected quantities of air emissions
on a daily basis.
TABLE I
Emission Points
Air Stripper
Air Stripper
Flow rate Time Benzene TPH Toluene
(gpm) (Ibm/day). (Ibm/day) (Ibm/day)
50 Existing 0.96 25.2
150 Future 0.18 18.05
9.0
Calculations:
The amount of benzene (Ibm/day) released to the atmosphere can be calculated as
follows:
Xylene
(Ibm/da'
9.6
Mr. Paxson
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
July 1, 1988
-Page 3
A. Existing
l)
3)
1.6 m8/1 (average of 2 water analyses) benzene in pumped water.
o
100% efficiency of the treatment system.
Pumping rate of 72,000 gallons/day (50 gpm for 24 hours)
72,000 gallons x 3.79 liters x 1.6 mg benzene x 2.2 x 10'6 lbs
day gallon liter mg
= 0.96 Ibm. benzene
day
Similarly, the mounts of TPH (42 rog/1 total petroleum hydrocarbons), toluene (15
mg/l), xylene (16mg/1) present inthe ground water and emitted to the atmosphere are
calculated as:
TPH = 25.2 Ibm/day
Toluene = 9 Ibm/day
Xylene = 9.6 Ibm/day
B. Future
1)0. I rog/1 benzene and 10 mg/l TPH in pumped water (estimated as a result of free
product recovery and dilution effects).
2)Pumping rate of 216,000 gallons/day (150 gpm for 24 hours)
216,000 gallons x 3.79 liters
day gallon
x 0.I mg benzene x 2.2 x 10'6lbs
liter mg
'= 0.18 Ibm. benzene
day
Mr. Paxson
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Suly I, 1988
Pa~e 4
Similarly, the future estimated air discharge assuming 10mg/I influent concentration
in ground water is calculated as TPH= 18.05 Ibm/day.
Recevtor Descrivtion
The nearest building to the treatment facility is a residential building with .ap=
pro~rlrnate dimensions'of-height ~- 18 feet, length =55 feet'and width = 20 feet;-' There
is a trailer court adjacent to the property.
Please refer to the site vicinity map (Figure 3) for more information.
After reviewing the enclosed application and information please contact me at
(916)638-2085 with your comments on how the standards.for the air emissions are set
and if they have numerical limits and other relevant information.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
DELTA EINVIRO1NMEi~TAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Sudhakar Talanki, M.S.
Environmental Engineer
ST:rc
Enclosure:
Permit application, Quarterly Monitoring Report, site map,
schematic, water chemistry results.
cc w/o Report
Joe Kessing
W. C. Davies
Amy Green
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
KERN
2700 "M" Streetl Suite Bakersfield, California 93301
AIR POLLUTION CONTRO.I.I~ISTRICT
i_,~pnone: (805)861-3682
APPLICATION FOR: ,
[] Authority to Construct (ATC) [] Permit to OI3erate (PTO)
[] ATC- Modification [] PTO- Modification
[] ATC - Renewal [] PTO - Transfer of Ownershio
[] Banking Certificate
[] Transfer of Location
AN APPLICATION IS REQUIRED FOR EACH SOURCE OPERATION AS DEFINED IN RuLE 102, SECTION
1. PERMIT TO BE ISSUED TO: Name of organization to operate the following equipment:
Davies Oil Company
2. MAILING ADDRESS:
, P.O. Box 80067~ Bakersfieldr CA
3. LOCATION 'AT WHICH THE EQUIPMENT IS TO BE OPERATED:
Zip Code: 93380
3305½ Gulf Street, Bakersfield, CA 93308
GENERAL NATURE OF BUSINESS:
0ffice, Petrol eum Storage and Fuel lng Facility
o
EQUIPMENT FOR WHICH APPLICATION IS MADE:
Packed Column Air Stripper
Provide additional information as required by Distric~ "Instructions".
6. TYPE AND ESTIMATED COST OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT:
TYPE AND ESTIMATED COST OF BASIC PROCESS EQUIPMENT:
8. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT:
9. TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF SIGNER:
TITLE OF SIGNER:
DATE:
PHONE NO.:
DATE RECEIVED
Validation (For APCD Use Only)
FILING FEE: $
RECEIPT NO.:
DATE:
A~r C3ul}W 5~O g14g Oll (~. 3/ma)
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
Central Coast Lob Number:
Analytical Services, Inc. Collected:
141' Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: ~5/~/~8 0 16~
'San Luis Obispo, California g$~gl Tested:
(B~5) 5~3-255~ Collected by: Sudlakar ~r.
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA ~ethod 52~.2/B2~
Delta Environmental SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
11~3~ White Rock Rd. Davies 0il, Bakersfield, Delta #~-87-325,
Sui~e_~ ......... ~__:__Fed.#8~Z,~. RW-l,._Woter
Rancho Cordova,
Compound Analyzed
Benzene
ToIuene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes
1.2-Dichloroeth~ne (EDC)
Ethylene Di~romiOe (EDB)
Detection Limit
in ppm
'Concentration
in ppm
1.~
15.
1.~
16.
not found
no~ foun~
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~0.
(GASOLINE)
BTX as o Percent of Fuel
Percent Surrogate Recovery
E~17f.wr1/2~5
~H/sw/vg/rh
54.
1~2.
Respectfully suDm~=ted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
President
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
' Central Coast Lab Number: E-~17dup
.. Analytical Services, Inc. Collected:
1~1 Suburban Rood , Suite C-~ Received: ~5/~/88 · 16~
San Luis Obispo, California 93kel Tested: ~5/~7/88
(8~5) 5~3-2553 Collected by: Sudlakar
Fuel Fingerprint Anmlysis - EPA Method
Delta Environmental
11~3~ White Rock Rd.
....... Suite:l.le ..... . ......
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
Davies 0il, Bakersfield, Deltm #~-87-326,
-Fed #83Z-~, RW-I-, Water .... ---- ..... --'~.' ........... ---
Compound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentrotion
in ppm
Benzene ~.~1 1.8
Toluene ~.~1 >2.7
Et~ylbenzene ~.~1 2.2
Xy~enes 0.~1 16.
1,2-Dic~oroe~one (EDC) ~.01 not ~ound
Ethylene DibromiOe (EDB) 0.01 not foun~
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1.
(GASOLINE)
23.
BTX os o Percent of Fuel
Bg.
Percent Surrogcte Recovery
MSD~3
E~lTfd.wrl/2~5
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
President
AiR, WATER & HAZARDOUS WASTE L~
ATORY (No.131) CERTIFIED by CA~i~I~ORNIA DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
ICentral
Coast
Anal~rtical
Services
· ' Central Coast
Analytical Services
1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo,'California 93~1
(8~5) 5~3-2555
Delta Environmental
11~3~ White Rock Road
Suite 11~
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
Lab Number: E-~17
Collected: E5/~3/88
Received: eS/~&/88
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakar TR
Sample Description:
....... ~Delta.-#~_87_$26
Federated #83Z-~
Davies Oil, RW-1
.................. CONSTI'TUENT
REPORT
EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST
DETECTZON CZMZT
'-LEVEL-FOUND"~/I'-'~
CHEMICAL OXYGEN ~10.1 ~5/18/88 RDM 5.
DEMAND
22.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN ~5.1 05/0~/88 RDM
DEMAND
'TOTAL ORGANIC ~15.1 ~5/11/88 TK 1.
CARBON
Respect'tully subm:].tted,
............................. CENTRAL COAST-'ANALY'T'3::CAL SERV]:CES
MH/ke ~ar¥ Ha~licek, Ph.D., President
AiR. WATER and HAZARDOUS
;TE LABORATORY CERTIFIED Oy CALZ
RNIA DEPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
i Central 1 .. Central Coast
Coast t Analytical Services
Analytical'I 1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
Services I Son Luis Obispo, California 95~el
(8e5) 5~5-2555
Lob Number: E-~17
Collected: ¢5/¢5/88
Received: ¢5/¢k/88
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakar TR
Delta Environmental
11~5~ White Rock Road
· Suitellg ...........
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
Sample Description:
Delta #~-87-$26
Federated #83Z-~ .......... .--.~:: .......
Davies Oil, Rw-1
Metals digested by EPA
.... REPORT
:": ................ CONSTZTUENT ............... EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST
DETECTION ---LEVEL ...... LEVEL
'LZMZT FOUND FOUND
mg/t mg/l meq/l
CALCIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 25. 1.25
MAGNESIUM
SODIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 51. 1.56
POTASSIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.1 1¢. ¢.26
SUM OF CATIONS
2.5
ALKALINITY AS COCO3 31¢.1 ¢5/¢4/88 RDM 1. 14¢.
CitLORIDE 30¢.0 ¢5/¢4/88 LD 5. 15.
SULFATE 3¢¢.¢ ¢5/¢4/88 LD 5. 2¢.
NITROGEN, NITRATE 3¢¢.¢ ¢5/¢4/88 LB 1. 0.1
'NITRATE 553.3 ¢5/¢4/88 LD 4.
FLUORIDE 300.¢ ¢5/¢4/88 LD ¢.1
IRON 2¢¢.7 ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.¢2 2.7
MANGANESE 20¢.7 ¢5/¢9/88 Vk 0.0¢5
COPPER 2¢¢.7 ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.¢5 ¢.25
ZINC 2¢¢.7 ¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.¢5 <¢.¢5
FOAMING AGENTS ~25.1 ¢5/¢4/88 LO ¢.¢2 4¢.¢2
I . 48
¢.42
¢.¢2
SUM ~F'ANIONS
2.3
pH (units) 15¢.1 ¢5/¢4/88 RDM ¢.1 7.2
CONDUCTIVITY 12¢.1 ¢5/¢4/88 ROM 1. 25¢,
(micromhos)
DISSOLVED SOLIDS, 16¢.1 05/¢9/88 AF 5.
TOTAL
HARDNESS 13¢.2
Respect~u!ly submitted,
.................................................. CENTRAL-'COAST ANALYTICAL ' SERVI'CES ........
MH/ke Mary Ha~licek, Ph.D., Presiden~
WATER mnm HAZARDOUS WASTE LABORATORY CERTiFiED by CAL:FORNZA DEPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
ICentral
Coast
Analytical
· Services
Central Coast
Analytical Services
· 1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
Son Luis Obispo, California 93~el
(8e5) 5~3-2553
Lob Number: E-~17
Collected: e5/~3/88
Received: ~5/~/88 ~
Tested= As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakor TR
Delta Environmental
11~3~ White Rock Road
Rancho Cordova, 'CA 9567¢
Sample Description:
Delta #~-87-326, Federated #83Z-~
RW-1 _ ...... ~ ...... ~:
Holding Time: Six Months Preserved (Hg: 28 Days)
"Digested by EPA 3~e5 on ~5/~9/88'by
ZCP/AA SCAN FOR CALDERON ~ETALS
..................... CONSTITUENT .............. ~.~E~OD/DAT£/ANALYST ..... DETECT~ON.._ TOTAL.LEVEL ....... STLC,~
LIMIT, mg/! mg/l mg/1
*ANTIMONY :6¢1¢ ¢5/18/88 VK 3. <3. 15.
*ARSENIC '601¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 2. <2. 5.¢
*BARIUM 6010 ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.01 4¢.¢1 10¢.
*BERYLLIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/18/8B VK ¢.¢1 <0.¢1 ¢.75
*CADMIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 0.2 <¢.2 1.¢
*CALCIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 1. 25. NO LIMIT
*CHROMIUM 6¢~¢ ¢5/~/88 VK ¢.¢5 ¢.2~ 56¢.
*COBALT 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 0.05 ¢.11
*COPPER 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.¢5 ¢.25 25.
*IRON 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.¢5 2.7 NO LIMIT
*LEAD 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 1. 41. 5.¢
*MAGNESIUM 6¢10 ¢5/1~/88 VK 1. 8. NO LIMIT
*MANGANESE 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 Vk ¢.02 ¢.6¢ NO LIMIT
MERCURY 7~70 ¢5/1¢/88 KM 0.00¢2 <0.¢0¢2 ¢.2
*MOLYBDENUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 Vk 5. 45.
*NICKEL 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.¢5 ¢.16 2¢.
*POTASSIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK 3. 1¢. NO LIMIT
*SELENIUM 77~1 ¢5/1~/88 MO ¢.¢05 4¢.¢¢5 1.¢
*SILVER 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.2 <¢.2 5.
*SODIUM' 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 Vk ¢.1 31. NO LIMIT
*THALLIUM 7B~¢ ¢5/15/88 VK ¢.¢5 ¢.¢9 7.¢
'*VANADIUM 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.¢2 ¢.16 2~.
*ZINC 6¢1¢ ¢5/1~/88 VK ¢.05 <¢.¢5. 250.
**SOLUBLE THRESHOLD LIMIT CONCENTRATION as listed in 22 Col Adm Code Article
11 Sec. 688gg os persistent ond biooccum!otive toxic substonce. "NO LIMIT"
meons not llste~ therein os persistent ond Dlooccumlotive toxic suDstonce.
NOTE: Results obtained from ICP. Scons (EPA 6¢1¢) are susceptible to positive
interferences. U~occeptobly high results using this method should be rechecked
using atomic absorption spectrometry.
E~I 7ICP. WR1/#1~5
MH/sm
Respect?ully submitted,
-.- CENTRAL COAST-ANALYT:ZCAL---SERV-ICES
~icek, Ph.D., President
X X X~X X X ~ X X X X X-, X~X ~ X X X
F~.I
~ D~AWN BY: DATE:
~' CHECKED BY: DATE:
u-~ ~=¥m ~E To
~ CUMMINGS ' RUSH SWOAPE C :FIC~
DIESEL PROPER?lES m
RUSH SWOAJ~E' -'
~ - DAVIES
~.~ ................................ ~.- OIL
..... CO~
D~ ....
OFFICE ~ ~ p~
~ - OIL ~O~GE
~OUNE S~RAGE
~RS ~NED ~ ~ ~ DIES~ ~RAGE
LO~ ~ION ~ ~ P~A~ ~ ~LER ~F~CE
~O FREIGHT =~ ' FUEL DISPENSERS
0
Jl~S ~ ~ ~ SITE SURVEYED MAY 2, 1988
LEGEND:
$
$
PRIVATE SEWER LINE
MONITORING WELL
RECOVER~' WE~.L
ABANDONED
PRIVATE WELL
SITE VICINITY MAP
3305 I/2 GULF STREET
BAKERSFIELD, CAUF.
DELTA NO. 40-87-326
DRAWN BY: DATE:
CHECKED BY: DATE:
x-,---x
X ' X~ X~X~X
· ' X ' '-)< .... X ,X X - X
X~X ~ ~
)~ .,-x x X
X
')
D~ita
E~vironmentai
Consultants, inc.
11030 White Rock Road. Suite 110
Ranct~o Cordova, CA 95670
916 638-2085
July 1, 1988
City of Bakersfield
Public Works Department
......... :- ........................................ -41101 Truxtun A,venue
; Bakersfield, CA 93309
Attn:
Wen-SM Cheung
Wastewater Division
Sub j:
Wastewater Discharge Limits
and Monitoring Frequency for.
Davies Oil Company
3305 1/2 Gulf Street
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Claim No. 83Z-40
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Dear Ms. Cheung:
As per your letter dated June 15, 1988, regarding the wastewater discharge permit
for Davies Oil Company, we are submitting information to complete the application
so that the final discharge permit can be prepared.
Item Description
A.7
B.3
B.10
C.8
SIC Code - Not a manufacturing facility.
11 Employees, 8 hours/day (estimate).
Additional wells - Of the 2 additiOnal wells to be
added, the first well will be installed during the
installation of the recovery system and tt/e second well
will be installed after we get permission to drill off-
site and define the extent of the dissolved hydrocarbon
plume.
Chemical compound Concentration susoected
Lead <I ppm
Mercury <0:0002 ppm
Ms. Cheung
Wastewater Division, City of Bakersfield
July 1, 1988
Page Two
Discharge Limitations
.: ...... After reviewing the wastewater discharge concentrations and monitoring
" requirements in the proposed permit, we feel that the proposed d~ily maxi. mum
:~zl ....................................... discharge limitations are unnecessarily stringent for discharge to an activatedsludge-~.
treatment facility. Low levels of dissolved hydrocarbons are easily removed in the
.,, activated sludge process by biodegradation and aeration. We propose the following
· . .... discharge limits:
Parameter
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
Benzene
Concentration in parts per million
10
1
Toluene 5
Xylene 5
Ethylene Dibromide 1
1,2-Dichloroethane 1
Since we are discharging ground water contaminated with dissolved hydrocarbons
and our initial chemical, analysis did not reveal significant concentrations of heavy
metals, we feel that monitoring the discharge for heavy metals is unnecessary. In
addition we have no reason to expect .that the discharge will contain carbon
tetrachloride, since this facility 0nly dandles petroleurh products for the
transportation industry.
Monitorin~ Freauenc¥
Since all the variables affecting process performance are fixed, that is,'the influent
to the pretreatment system is ground water at a constant flow rate, temperature, and
relatively constant dissolved hydrocarbon concentrations, the performance of the
pretreatment unit will be relatively constant. We propose to sample the discharge
weekly during the first month after the pretreatment system start up. If the
discharge concentrations meet the discharge limitations, monitoring will be
conducted on a monthly basis.
Ms. Cheung
Wastewater Division, City of Bakersfield
July I, 1988
Page Three ,
Special Conditions
Please supply us with the estimated costs to be incurred by the city under Part 4 of
the special conditions.
On behalf of Davies Oil Company, we are making every effort to restore the aquifer
in the vicinity of Davies Oil. Ground water in the area is in a highly conductive
shallow sand_aquifer with fairly rapid ground water flow rates.. It is-importantthat _,_~;~ - .
gradient control be implemented as soon as possible to prevent further spread of the.
dissolved hydrocarbon plume, Delta is currently seeking the most favorable
economic alternatives to remediate the site. Your cooperation is sincerely
appreciated. :.
Sincerely
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.,
Sudhakar Talanki, M.S.
Environmental Engineer
This letter/report was reviewed by:
W .C. Davies
Amy Green
Joe Kessing
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
ST:re
Richard L. Harness, P.E.
Registered Civil Engineer #41339
Date
TO
· KERN
COUNTY
G.S.S. 580 1151 395-5004 (Rev. 4/87)
.. i. Claim No. 83Z-9 ~ "'
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
June 1.0, 1988
Prepared BT.
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
(916)638-2085
· " TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Information and Site HistOry 1
1.2 Scope of Work - ..,, :1 ...:,~ .'
2.1 Additio~ ~il Boring and Monitoring Well Imtallafion ,
2.2 Recove~ Well ~s~lation .....
2.3 Wel~ on Ne~by Prope~ '6...,...' '
,2.4 Ground-Water Elevafiom ~d Obse~ations ,. .
' ' 2~5 Gro~d-Wafer Chemic~ An~yses
.4,0 F~RE WORK .. ,. , . .. -: ,.., . , ,, . . ,,; .; :.: :.,.~: , ,.~ ,.,.,:,.;~;~.;...~.~ ,.:, ~ -; ,:..ir,, .,. · ..,?,,:,,~,,: ,.
~'" '; · ' ' ......... ' "'"' ' ' ' ' ' '":~:i':'"" ""'".: '~ ":'""
TABLE I Ground-Water Elevafiofi ~ ~d Physi~ Obse~afiom ':: :,. ::' ..~,',~,:~,':' .., 8 :','"~,.:<~. ~. ...
TABLE 2 Chemis~ Resul~ May ~d ~tober 1987
and March 1988 Water ~¢les 11
Fieures
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
Site Location Map
Site Vicinity Map
Site Map
Recovery Well Construction Details
Water Table Contour Map
Inferred Free Product Extent
2
3
5
10
13
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
AnDendices
Soil Borings Logs: Monitoring Wells MW-I0, MW-11, MW-12
Monitoring Well Construction Specifications
Soil Grain-Size Analyses'
Analytical Lab Data
C~UART]~RLY MONITORING I~PORT
Ds~ Oil Comply, B~d CA
Delta P~j~t No. ~-~-326 ..
L~aOn Map). ,~ retort presen~ '~e resul~ of addi~on~ work ~de~e~' a~ ~e.site ~}M~Sh,'
Paul, Minnesota, con~n a descdpfion of how ~d when pe~oleum product lo~es were det~ted. ~ese
repo~ ~o con~ site descripfiom, hydrogeologic and st~tigmphic ~fOmafion, ~d r~o~t .of ..::
~e site: 'Ad~fiona1, field, work h~ ,pr°dUged, a ed Site Vic~' Map
(Figure 2), ~fing ~e su~ounding commerci~ development in greater dem~.
1,2 $¢ot~e of Work
· Since' Delta's last report (1/10/88), the following work has been completed:
l)
Three additional soil borings were drilled on March 2nd and 3rd, 1988.
2) Three additional monitoring wells were installed on March 4th, 1988..
The three new monitoring Wells were developed on March 5th, 1988.
Water levels in each monitoring well were measured on March 4th and 5th. Petroleum product
thickness was measured in MW-1.
Ground=water samples were collected and submitted for chemical analysis for benzene, toluene,
xylene (BTX), ethylbenzene, ethylene dibromide (EDB), 1,2-dichloroethane (EDC), and' total
purgeable petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH).
)avie~ Oil Company
Quarterly Monitoring
Delta Project No. 40-87-~6iili
Work
~;' ---... N_ ORRI$ ~58[ --
., Pr/mar~ .qch
i
o o
,Scale
a
2000
I
Feet
QUADRANGLE LOCATION
OILDALE, CALIF.
N3522.5-W11900/7.5
PHOTOINSPECTED 1973
195'$
PHOTOREVISED 1965
AMS 2154.1 NE,.--StrRIIES V895
o.'. /Dr~e-in
! ill
Ql~t
........ ~ ........... 81TE LOCATION- MAP
DELTA NO. DATE FIGURE
40-87-3261 12/87' 1
LEGEND: .' ~ , ~ .. .
~ ~ONITORIN~ WELL
FIGURE 2
S~ VICINITY M~
330~ I/2 GULF STRE~
BAKERSRE~, C~F.
t
,,. ,. ./ ~;'; .... ~', .,,; ~ k.~', ,~:...' '~'. ~.~ ~-%? ~ ~'..- .:.:~'~ ~i~L~.-?~..%~-:-Vc~;:,:~t'.~:~' ~':
~,~ES - : .,'~?'. ~;'7 ~,,~'.~-~-'~ "~?<-; ~'.~' ' ~';'.'-~:57 ~;" , '-.~:,',.-~01~ , .~.' ~ '"--;,'--;,':~ ::.'.:.v,;~ ':.~.'~'.,:~ :~,~ ~ 7~T%'-~:.~,~?~;~' ~?~ ~'.',?' r, ;.-.~:~.~...~. [~;~.:~.~,~,.~...;~.:~.~.~.~?.~ ~.~,
' .,' -: :'.~'~- .L.'? ',-;.~ - , ~ ~- · ~/: .... , '~-- · ~ ~'~=' ',' '~-'~ %-.~' ' ,'~-~.~ ~i~-~2
,,' . E~ Gig ~E , - .~ ~...~. ~ ~ ,..~ --? ;,' 'j .. ,-: :;~' ,, · ~- ~ -- ~' ' ' ' ' ' : '" ':'' ;9'/ ' 7¥. ~
:- '.~ ,~';'-' ?~-'~'~',~'~'-:'~ ',?' ~b: .~:~.~ ~ ~:~:
~NE~" ' ~ - ~ DIESEL ~RAGE
T~RS
/ PR~A~ WE~ ~R OFFICE
UNION
~o.~ ~ . : , ~E~=E ~.= ..~.-~ ..... · ~ :- ~ -..-/
~ -1 ~ G~NE ~R~E
I--
8UI~tNG F- m ~ ~
: ~ PIPE ~R~E
', JI~S ~ ~D SUPPLY SITE SURVEYED MAY 2, 1~88 .
,' ~= ',
-.- DELTA NO. 40-87-326
DRAWN BY; DATE:
~ CHECKED BY: DATE:
QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT
Davies Oil Compnny, Balt~t~/i~ld CA
D~lta Proj~t No. 40-87-336
Pag~ 4
· 7) -Regffiao~ age.les 'were c°n~c~d to sec~e au~or~fion
. '.~ ~ ~-~... ' . - ~-:. -~ ~.-~;~' ¥ :~," ;:,~i~',~ ~i- ~}'~'~'"'"L ~'.~.':.~ ~' -~?t~. :.
.... ' ,~ ':;~ :~'~'~/i~ ~',;-~,'=~',,~'8.) ~ff0~ ............................. ~d~g.. momWdng~welhonadj~ent;
, ', . , . . . . , · ~r ; .... ,~ .. ;: , · . ,. ,
I '" .~.:,,,a,;=~;' . ~.~ .',+ .. ~,' ,,: ,'.,,,,,'.,~,~.,:' ~ ~.-:,.';.-' .
.,?,'., ~ ' '., ~.. "' ' .-." ' : ~' -.~ ' '~ ..='.~--, "',~ .'::Y";:. '~.-~.':'C,".;' "~ i,~
..... '" 2,1 'AdOitlonal~il Borlnn and Monitofinn Well Installation
Additional monitoring wells MW-10, MW, I 1, and MW-12 were drilled and installed March 2 through 4, .:....
1988 (see Figure 3 for locations of all monitoring wells). S°il boring logs are included in'Appendix A. ' ..~:.I~
These borings encountered sandy silt at shallow depths and sand With some pebble or gravel horizons
beginning at about 15 feet below grade. See Appendix A for a detailed description of the stratigraphy
of soils encountered in borings MW-10, MW-11, and MW-12. Monitoring well construction specifications
are included in Appendix B.
A sieve analysis was performed on samples collected from 20.5 and 29 feet below grade from MW-10.
Graphical representation of the results is presented in Appendix C. In these samples, more than 95% of
the grains are coarser than fine' sand. The soils were classified as light brown sand (SP) by the Unified
Soil Classification System. : ' ' '.
· . .,:.~ . _ .... . .. - .: . , ,. ,. - ,-: ,.
In the Delta report dated Sanuary 10, 1988, it was proposed that additional monitoring wells be installed
on property adjacent to the Davies property on the south. Delta has repeatedly contacted Mr. Cyril
Andre to secure right oF entry to drill and install a monitoring Well on his property. Mr. Andre has not'
~-et' grab'ted-permission to do' so;'
X
'X
X
gg§l. '~ ,WIll 03A:~A~II~S 311S
1:t 0~' : NI 0
S3NI~ IHDIFIU:I (]NV
3DVIS
qUA/tTERLY MONITORING REPORT
Davies Oil Company, Bakersfield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 6
Mr. Francis Perey, owner of the next parcel 'to the south of Andre's property, has also been contacted
for permission to drill on his property: 'Mrl Perey granted access, but his tenant, Jim Boylan( hasdehied
permission to install a monitoring well on the parcel. "-
2.2 Recovery Well Installation .... . . . j. 'i~/i~i';/:.:i.~ i/~'.--:~I (
tion details of RW-I. ~ w~ll w~ pumped at a mt, of 50 gpm for ~ houm on May
'~[: ' :}:~i;}?-}~}':=;~ulin thiS':'um' 'i;"':';' ~ode"f'~e :~ater level in the Well 'W~ lowered 4"~ feet'
During three hours of pumping, appromtely five f~et of product accumulated in RW~ l.bWater leve~
monitoring wells MW-10, MW-I 1, MW-12 werelowerea 0.0 , 0.0 , aha 0.02 eet, r; ec vely,' durin
t_:, ', .. the three hours of pumping.
2.~ Wells on Nearby Pro~ert~
Nearby property owners and tenants were contacted regarding use of water'from wells in March of 1988.
Residents of a trailer on the Andre property stated that all of the businesses on Andre's property were
served by City of Bakersfield water. An employee of the Teamster's Union property (see Figure 2)
stated that they receive monthly bills for water from the City of Bakersfield and they must, therefore,
use city water. There is one abandoned well on the Teamster's property at the approximate location
shown .on Figure 2. Water was present in this well at a depth of 18.31 feet below the top of ihe
casing on March 2, 1988. Construction details for this well are not known.
2.4 Ground=Water Elevations and Observations
Water levels were measured in the nine monitoring wells on March 4, 1988. A layer of free product
· about 0~06 feet thick was measured in monitoring well MW-1 on March 4th. Free product was not
present in any of the other wells. . ~.
Gro'und-water elevations and physical observations are compiled in Table 1. Measurements dating to July
1986 are included for comparison. Reference elevations of all monitorings wells were surveyed on May
........ 2;-1-988;--Ail-previous'~vate~='l~el measu~emeiitS-ha~.~' been'corrected-'to the - new -datum.' ~' The new .............
referenced elevations and benchmark information are included in Table 1.
HEIGHT ABOVE GRADE = 2'
DATE INSTALLED: MAX 03,~88
PUMP TEST INFORMATION: 50 GPM
at 4.5 FT DRAWDOWN
o ~N 5 FT
0 IN 2 FT
4"ANNULUS
SCALES
VERTICAL FIGURE NO. 4
RECOVERY WELL'
..................... ....................... ~ ............. L~'4NSTALLATION DETAILS
HORTZONTAL
3305 '1/2 GULF STR.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.
DELTA NO. 40,87-326
qUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT
Davies Oil Company, B~kersfield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87~326 .
Page 8 ~"
/'=~ '"-:-'-~-:~"=:' ....-~GrSUnd=WaterElevation Data and Physi~al ObservatiOns
Physical
Monitoring Depth to Reference Ground-Water Characteristics/
~.. '. Well .. . Date Ground Water Elevation Elevation Comments
· ', .[" ~t{,..:~, MW-I,!~. ~,-, ..07/11/Se ~:. 14.ss , :..- -40~.ss' .~'.'394.47 . ' ', · -':, .
- /,.. · ' ' .,1 ' ' "-,'-L- ' ' , .... ',¥;:'
, ~.?.. ...... ,,.:. ,: ,;~ ~:..~,:,.-=,; ;~. ,, ~ _~ ,/'~'10/22/87 ",~ 19 7~ :']:~[::'~-/": -~:ii".-E~-,;[J' .' , .-" ~;i;.~'f,' 389.61 · ..,.,',,'~ r ?-',~, ,',,',~ ''''~ .,"Approx.' ""4 free product.'
.... :, ;'-¥.~f? %~.)~.?,'~;,':!:',.-~,'./~%f',l,~ ' ' '~. -.?~"6',i, ', ~'~} ':.. ,'. '-~ ~:,[;L~ .,.,:
- -- 03/04/88 19.09 390.24 Approx. 0.06' fre~ product.
!
J "~ "~.. '. . ' ,' 06/02/38 21.24 '.' ' ~. IL88.09 · ,..Approx. 0.8' free product.
~,, ..... · MW-~ . .... 07/11/86 .,-1~.0~t . - ~ 409.31 ..... ~, .. - 394.9-9 ........ ;,~,; ....,,~,
.-;.m,?,.'~--' · ., ,- ~,,~ '.. 03/08/87 -:.'-17.87 :. ; ~ ~, ....,- 391.44 ,' . ,..,: ,.,',.-:~,,-.,.
:f -.,..!?-,' ,~ . ,': ._,., -,-. 10/9-3/87 19.86 ·, i.~. y-?....,,.. '~ ':389.~ ., .. .. at. bo. ~,ble~o p~t.ct
1~-/03/87 ~-0.43 388.88 No product.
03/04/88 19.07 390.24 Noticeable odor.
os/oz/38 ~0.7o 388.81
/ 15.37 :' ' 410.2:2 394.85
9-0.77 389.45
19.42 390.80
21.10 389.12
MW-3 ' 07/n/86
08/08/87
· .' :,' ~. '.. ,.' ,:. lO/22/87
12/os/87
o3/04/88
o5/o2/88
MW-4
No odor.
No product.
Noticeable odor.
Slight odor.
MW-8
07111/86 lS.06 409.72 394.66
05/08/87 17.87 391.85
10/22/87 18.46 391.26 Brown; silty.
12/0~/87 20.41 ~89.31 No odor.
03/04/88 19.03 390.69 No odor, casing wet.
05/02/88 ~.0.58 389.14 No odor.
MW-9
05/08/87 18.00 409.08 391.08
I0/2~./87 19.60' 390.08' Brown; silty.
12/03/87 20.60 389.88 No odor.
03/04/88 19.27 390.41 No odor, casing wet.
05/02/88 .... Not measured.
05/08/87 15.37 406.60 391.23
10/22/87 17.38 389.22 P~inbows visible,no product
12/03/87 18.12 388.48 No product.
03/04/38 16.70 389.90 Slight odor.
05/02/38 18.26 388.34 No odor.
MW-10 03/03/38 17.52 408.12 . 390.60 No odor.
05/02/88 19.08 389.04 No odor.
MW-11 03/04/88 19.23 409.43 390.20 Strong odor.
05/02/88 ~0.78 388.66 No product.
MW-12 03/04/88 18.69. 408.67 390.06 Strong odor.
06/02/88 20.16 388.51 Slight odor.
*Adjusted elevation for a~umed error.
Street. The benchmark is a white wood post, elevation 409.50 feet above mean sea level. The
wells elevations were surveyed by Delta on May 2, 1988.
QUARTEI~LY MONITORING REPORT
Davies Oil Company, B~kersfield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326 · ·
Page 9
On May 2, 1988 free-product thicknesses andwater levels~ were remeasured, in May, MW-I contained 0.8
~. ~._~ .;_+=~___.~?__?~-~_:~},~fy~-~:-~i5 roduct~=water_ le~ei~:-ih~.-fh~7-~-~h .er-'~-~o-~i~n~i~*~
......................... 1
'a w~t~r~table contour may w~ constructed from water level dam obtained on May 2, 9 ( g
~'" .>. ....... ._~..~<a .............. direc~on' ..... -"~o' ......... ' ' s uthwest *~e ~dient of flow
nd-water flow m from northe~t to o .. ~.
~ ~ ...... ~ -- :~';~;':~', ; ~!~i.'.~,":'~*i;~;,· ~'~i~C.. '~ ., ' .~', ~ .... ,', ..' .... ','~ ,'~, ', . ."~,'
Each monitoring well, except MW-1, w~ b~led ~d s~pled on March 4th or ~th, 198~. MW-1 w~ not
.,stapled because of the Presence of free product .in th~ well. The staples w~re ~ubmitted for
~'ndly~;s of B~, ethylbenzene, EDB, [~, and ~H by EPA.method ~24.2. ~.~e,[esul~
Table'2 in~' th;"labor~t°~' re6oa''~;;inciudea in':'~'~Pendix C. Table 2 ~SO'C0n~ the Chemic~
results from May and October 1987 for comparison.
Maximum benzene concentrations in ground water were present in monitoring Well MW-I 1 at 10 parts per
million (ppm). Water from the other monitoring wells contains benzene at concentrations less than 1
ppm, if it is present at all. The highest TPH values are also found in monitoring well MW-I 1, at
240 ppm. Monitoring wells MW- 12 and MW-9 also contain elevated concentrations of TPH, at 100 ppm
· (70 ppm irn the duplicate) and 70 ppm,' respectively. .
3.0 DIsCussION OF RESULTS
Additional soil borings at the Davies Oil Company property confirm that the site is underlain by
sandy silt and sand with pebble and gravel horizons. A sieve analysis performed on samples collected
from 20.5 and 29 feet below grade indicate that the soil is within the sand grain-size
clas Sift cation.'
An approximate hydraulic conductivity (K) can be calculated from grain-size distribution curves using
an empirical relationship known as the Hazen approximation (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). This method
£
[
[
i
[
[
x
t
X
0
FIGURE 5
WATER TABLE CONTOUR MAP
DATE: MAY 2, 1988
3305 112 GULF STREET
· BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.
DELTA NO. 40-87-326
DRAWN BY: DATE:
CHECKED BY: DATE:
qUARTERLY MoNIToRING REPORT
Davies Oil Company! Bakersfield CA.
Delta Project No. 40-87-326 ·,
MW-9
MW-lO
MW-11
MW-12
MW-l~-(dup)
NOTES:
05/08/87 1.155
10/22/87 o.01
0~/04/88 o.o4
0s/04/88 0.00~
03/o4/88 ~o.
o~/os/~ o.e
os/os/ss o.9
3.810
1.6
- 1.1
'N.F.(3)
89.
'4.2 .
5.6
1.740 15.380
2.2 37
3.6 28
N.F.(3) 0.002
3.2 37.
3.7 42.
2.3 29.
(1) Values from Twin City Testing Corp., report dated
July 9, 1987.
(2) Not found at detection limit of 0.005 ppm.
(3) Not found at detection limit of 0.001 ppm. i ~
(4) Not found at detection limit of 0.0001 ppm.
* Detection limit.
33.400
170.
70.
<0.05'
240.
I00.
70.
G esollne
Ga~olLne
Gasoline
Gasoline
QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT
Davies Oil Company, Bakersfield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
~ a- ' :Although attempts at securing permission for an off-site downgradient well have so far been fruit-
~:.~iti; .'~l.' ~;~: ~'.~_...-qe s s i':: th'esi': ~ff outs-=~V ill--tOil tin ueT~Such-a::-well,--,is :necessary~ to=.. d°cumen t~:th e:'.~ X t~ n~-f~0 n ~inatio
i:f<. ';'..ff.'and:: the effectiveness of the recOvery Well. 'While we'conSider it importantl.be" thatun~ila 'downgra,dient_ well
1'. be installed, we do not believe that remediation efforts should delayed the'downgradient
· '. ' ~- '.' "' '~ - ~ ' · ' · -- ,;. '-- 5 '~,4~?¢.~ .: ,~ ~. :;~:.~.~... ~ ,, ~ %..3, ::'~ .'-0~' .4..?,.;~ ;. , .,i~. i:'~D%~'?~;?? v~,':.',k:/,'..;.i,
~ ~.%~ ~,,;'~: ~;free p,~oleum product ~d ground water Cont~ning ~ssolved hydrocarb6n~ fr~ .most 9[ th~
': ' "':"~":'~'~'"" ~'a'~'~; ?~Ponion"bf-'.the Site. ~:.~After' th~ Well h~ 'been tested and more'extens~ve analyses pen-o[mea, .~ecom-'~,~'~
.. ,~ <.~,;,,: :~,:,; 5;mendations may be de regard,ng the locatio= of, addit~on~ recovery' ~IN; ' ~the'ys~,...:: '?'..'are" .~.. neciu~;:?:}...
::.~'..'.':';,'~,.; Ground water lev, Is rose mor~ than oho foot from ~c~mb~r 1987 to March 1988. 'Water l~,~ls th~n
.';{ '."*;~f':~('5:; dr°p~ed ~°;e ih~ 1'5 feel'between'M~cd'~d May !988. ~ese'water t~ble'~;~men~ maybe
- .' ':;,.' O, a'< , ~. .... ; ~ .,., ,~ . 5~ , .... ..' , '. ,..~ : .. '. - .,a ~ ,-'.~ ~,',v: '; ' , , %~-, ' , ,>.: % ~ ,,' '..,i :., '., 5
""."" ',:"-nom~ se~on~ Huctuations. ~e ~e~ed d~rect~on and Student of ground water How m May 1988
is consistent with me~uremenm made in ~tober and December 1987.
.... . · ' · '. · , , .:' '. .~) i: ,~:.: ,..?'.~ :' ' . ?; .,'.~, ,a ~' --.:'' '.
~{ A survey of water wells in the area indicates that there is no known me of ground water in the
· immediate area. One abandoned well w~ located on the Teamster's Union ~ro~erty, west of the site.
Review of well-monitoring results indicates the presence of free product on the water table in the
area near MW-I. Five feet of product accumulated in recovery well RW-l'after °nly three hours of ,' ·
pumping. RW-1 should be effective in removing the floating product.
Installation of additional monitoring wells MW-II and MW-12 seems to indicate that a plume of ~.~ ...
dissolved petroleum constituents extends from the area of MW-1 to MW-9 off site to the west (Figure
6). MW-,10, installed up gradient of the known leak location, contains very low levels of dissolved
Delta continues its efforts to work toward a suitable water discharge option With appropriate City of '
Bakersfield and Kern County agencies. Recovery and treatment of contaminated ground water will begin
as soon as Possible to prevent the further spread of dissolved hydrocarbon constituents.
i'
L
L
FIGURE 8 -,
INFERRED FREE PRODUCT EXTENT
DATE: MAY 2, 1989
3305 112 GULF STREET"
BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.
DELTA NO. 40-87-326
DRAWN BY: DATE:
CHECKED BY: DATE:
Davies Oil Company, Bakersfield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 14
4.0 FUTURE WORK
During the next q~ter ~lta will be ev~uafin8 ~o d~ferent optiom for d~pos~ of ~e ~, ground
water generated during cle~up at the site: Option 1, d~ch~ge to the Ci~ of B~emfield ~ni~
Sewer ~d Option 2, ~ch~s~ to ~ ~iltmfion s~l~ry located on ~ no~tem.~o~o~:of
.?'~?~¢Y: ~1,~ .~ ~v~uafion Wili~ ~ b~ed on inifi~ caPi~ Cost' ~d long-te~ m~te~C~;~m0~
......... ' ' oS~ ~temafive h~ been selected, a water-~ea~ent system wffi be d~gned
74:.'~:~:.~':~,' ~disch~ge-water q~ criteria reqmted by ~at ~temauve. Req~ed
depending on the ~eatment technology chosen. '; ....
'W~ anticipat~ that a product-r~cov~ ~d wat~r-tr~a~nt ~y~t~m ~uffi~nt
product can be desisned ~d i~led at the s~te in apprommately ~ree mon~. . ..
B~ed on the kno~ plume size, one well will not be sufficient to control
ground water, and addition~ recovery wells will have to be ins~!ed. Modificafiom to ~e ~t-
ment system will likely have to be made to accomodate the inere~ed volume of recovered ground
water. Once RW-1 h~ been 'operated for approximately one month, and dam h~ been collated
establishing iB capture zone, addition~ recov~u w~lls can b~ specified
extent of the uncapmred contamination plume. We anticipate a tot~ disch~ge of be~een 100 ~d 150
gallons per minute once the gradient control system is in full operation.
The next monitoring-well sampling event should take place just prior to recovery system startup,
which should be sometime in August 1988. -'
QUARTERLY MONITORING REPORT
Davies Oil Company, Bakersfield CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326'
Page 15
The recommendations made in this ~eport represent our"professiona opinions~ ,~'~OSe opiniom ~e
b~ed on the currently av~lable da~ ~d were arrived at in accordance with cu~ently accepted
~ y~og~log~c ~d engineering practices ~t ~s t~m~ and location. Other th~ ~,' no w~r~ty ~ .:
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, ~C;: ~:Y?":e' '-
This report and the work de-
scribed herein were performed
under the supervision of a
California Registered
Geologist:
Date:
Bri"fin L~. Krogseng~ /-
California Registered Geologist #2303
LOG OF TEST BORIN
JOB NO,: ;~0-87-326.. )PROJECT: Davies 0il Company/Bakersfield
ELEVATION: 4o8.11 BORING NO: Mw-lo ~
OESGRII~TI(:]N
/SANDY SI LT; --fi ne-grai ned;--'dryF- dark- brown or.- gray ~--~ .~'
micaceous, coarsening downward, ~L
SIL~ SAND; medium to coarse-~ained, moist, gray, SP/SN
~ ·
~ 2 3 20
-' I ~
~' ", 3 2 17 '.- PEBBLY SAND; coarse-grainea, pebbles up to ~" diameter,
.; gray, wet at 173', SP
- ? 4 0 20 r'
,-
30 m 21 End of Boring at 30'
LOGGED BY: Dale van Dam DATE OF EXPLORATION: March 2, 1988
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC
WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE
LOG OF TEST BORING~e
JOB NO.: ' 40-87-326 .-
ELEVATION: 409.¢2
DI~pTH
!.
PROJECT: Davies 0il Company/Bakersfield
BORING NO: MW-11
Page 1 of 2
I
[ ..... SANDY SILT; fineJgrained, a few pe§bles, moi st,:'brown
.............. SILTY SAND; fih~-~rainedL dry,'brown, sligh~product
) odor, product staining at 9', SP/SN
.[
~ '
I
-
_ ~ [ ~ SAND; medium-grained, moist, wet at 17', gray, strong
: I i . ) ._ product odor, coarsening downward, SP
I
3 190 18 ~
7 "¢
."
720 -~
L
.OGGED BY:
230
16
37
Dale van Dam
Continued on next page
DATE OF EXPLORATION: March 3, 1988
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC
WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE
LOG OF TEST BORING
JO8 NO.: 40-87-326 . PROJECT: Davies 0il ComDany/BaKersfield
ELEVATION: I BORING NO: MW-ti Pa~e 2 of 2
IN IIKEy NO. O~F. AV
30_- 6.m 2.~o. -. 24 SAND -(see previous page) ---.-
' PEBBLY SAND; coarse-grained, wet, stent product odor,
pebbles up to 1" diameter, SP
35'-] 7~m 190 49 - -
I -
-'~I t) ~r product odor, wet, SP
9-m~190 ( 4 , 23 ' End of Boring at 45'
~=
. 2
LOGGED
BY' Dale van Dam
DATE OF EXPLORATION: March 3, 1988
DELTA
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, IN(;
WESTERN REGIONAL OFFi(;E
~1 LOG OF TEST BORING~
JOB NO.: 40-87-326" iPROJECT: 0avies 0il Company/Bakersfield
ELEVATION: 408.66 ~ BORING
NO:
MW-12
~- 0 ~ -- SANDY $ZLT; aedium-g~ained, brown, d~, HL
~ ..... I .... SZL~ SAND; fine-g~ained,~ s~ong produc~ odor, aois~,
-2o,, -~
.!
· 30 -
5
210
220
210
19
SAND; medium to coarse-grained, coarsening
moist, wet at 17', strong product odor, SP
End of Boring at 31'
downward, gray
LOGGED BY: Dale van Dam
DATE OF EXPLORATION: March 3, 1988
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CQNSULTANTS, INC
WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE
MONITORENG Wl~LL CONSTRUCTION Dk-i'AIL~
Flush Gr~de M~nhole
Davies 0il Coml)any/Bakersfield
~ .. .. 40-87-326
i~-10
Loc~8 ~ot~ve C~$
Dimeter ~d ~ted~ 10" Christy Box
........... · ..... To~ Lens~ ................................................ 12"
L~n~ Above Ground 1"
DI,-kM.ET~R. MATERIAL AND
IOIl',i-r TYPE OF tLISZP, PIPE
2" PVC
Flush Threaded
Grout from 7'
to surface
'I'~E OF BACX.,--iLL AROUND
BENTONITE SEAL
""~"-" -DIS'rANC~ OF ~LI.T~R SAND
ABOVE TOP OF SC?[EI~N
TYPE OF FiLTI~R AROUND
MON~OR~G ~LL MA~R~L
SCReeN GAUG~ OK ~ OF OPENINGS
(Slot No.)
DIAME~K AND L~NG~ OF SC~EN
DEP~ TO BOSOM OF MON~OKING WELL
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND
,, DL~M.ET~i~, OF BOREHOLE
3.75'
... #3 Monte?e¥ sand
PVC
- #30
2" x 15'
28.5'
29.5'
7"
DELTA EN¥I~,ONML-N-rAL-CONSULTANT~, 'INC7
MONITORiNG WELL CONSTRUCTION DE'rAIL~
Davies 0ii Company/Bakersfield
40-87-326
MW-11
Ven~d ~z~
~ l^~^~%T--ocking lh'~ecSve Casin~
2.02' (PVC riserI
Total Lensth
· Length Above Ground
~ DIAMLeT':_~ MATe. RIAL AND. ~,; ~vc
jo]~Tr "i"~ OF ~ ~ Klush Thre~dQd
~"k'PF. OF BACI~.Fi/.L A.ROT~ 1~!~ Grout from 7' to
surface
~".'t DISTANC~ OF FILTh--P, SAbrD
ABOVE TOP OF SCR_EF.N
TYPE OF FIL'/'~R AROUND SCR.E~N
'MONITOKING WI~LL MA'I'/KIAL
SCi~N GAUG~ OR S'zZ~- OF OPENI]'4GS
(Slot No.)
DIAMETER AND LF. NGTH OF SCK~N
~) Monterev sand
PVC
/t30'-
2" x 15'
28.38'
35'
7"
DEFTH TO BOTTOM OF MONITOP. ING
DE?tH TO BOTTOM OF FILTr_K SAND
DIA~R OF BOR.EHOL]~
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTAh'r$. INC.
MONITORING WELL CON~'RUCTION DE'TAILS
Davies Oil Company/Bakersfield
40-87-326
MW-12
Ven~ed
Locking lh-ote,~ve C~mg
.... Tom. l Lensth
D~ ~~ A.N~.
~OINT T~E OF ~ PIPE
........... ,8" Steel
3'
J.05' IPVC riser)
2" hvc
F1 ush Threaded
~-'k'PE OF BACK-ILL AROLTN'D R/SM.P,
DISTANC~ OF FILTER SAbFD
ABOV~ TOP OF SCR3.~.N
TYPE OF
MO~O~G ~LL
S~N GAUG~ OK ~ OF OPE~GS
(Slot No.)
DIAME~R A~ LENG~ OF S~EN
DE~ TO BOSOM OF MO~O~G ~LL
DE~ TO BOSOM OF ~~ S~ND
D~~ OF BO~HOLI
Grout from )2' to
surface
2~
2I
#3 Monterey sand
PVC
#30
2" x 15'
~9.35'
DELTA ENVIROb/ME.N'rAL CONSULTANTS. INC.
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATI;
COBBLE~ ORAVEL SAND SILT OR CL4Y
'U.S. SlJI~ ~1..~. 1~ IN~II~ 1.I.8. ~NB~ItB ~ N..
~ ~/4 ~/8 , ~o ~o ,o 8o ~4o 200
~80 i 20
40
60
) I BO
GRMN SIZE IN MI~IMETER
60 z
DEPTH
SYMBOL .~ORING ~-- (it)
O ~WlO 20.5
DESCRIPTION
Light Brown SAND (-~P)
Remark :
Project No.88010.6
Veer. or
Engineering
Davies Oil Co./Bakersfield 40-87-326
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Figure No.GS-1
100
8O
U~;!FIED ~OIL C[3,~8IFICATItJN
30 40 80 ~40 R00
60i 4,0
20 80
~..~ 100
] ,".' ..... ~".: ..... , ....... ~ ........ '~'l~ ..... l'_'~' ' '
CRAIH ,~I~E IN MILLI~.?~R
SY~ROL ~ORING
0 MWlO
L~PTH
29.0
DESCRIPTION
Light 8town SANO (SP)
Remark :
Proje. ct No.88010.6
Vector
Engineering
Davies Oil Co./Bakersfield 40-87-326
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Figure No. GS-2
AIR, WATER & HAZARDOUS
LABORATORY CERTIFIED by CALIe IA DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
Central Coast LaD Number: E-1828
Analytical Services, Inc. Collected:
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: ~3/~7/~8
San Luis O~ispo, California g~l Tested:
(8~5) 5~3-2555 Collected by: O. Van
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method
-~::- .... ----:-:-:-Delta Environmental
11~3~ White Rock Rd.
~- Suite 11~
I Rancho Cordova, CA
9567~
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: ....... ::==- ..... .'=:i.- ........... =:~ .....
Dovies 0il Co., Bokers~ield, CA
Gulf St. Field ID #326~W23~88, ~W ~2, Water
Delta
Co~pound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentration
~n ppm
Benzene ~.~1 ~.~13
Toluene ~.~1 ~.~2
Ethylbenzene 9.~01 ~.~05
Xylenes ~.;01 ~.~9
1,2-O~c~loroeth=ne (EDC) ~.~01 not found
Ethylene O~rom~de (EDB) ~.0~1 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~.1
(GASOLINE)
1.3
BTX as a Percent of Fuel
Percent Surrogate Recovery
E182Bf.wr1/2~9
mH/gh/vg/rn
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
President
AIR, WATER & HAZARDOUS
W~, LABORATORY CERTIFIED by
NIA DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Central
Analytioal
Services
Central Coast Lab Number: E-1829
Analytical Se?vices, Znc. Collected:
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: ~3/~?/88 · ~g~
San Luis Obispo, California 9~4el Tested: ~/~8/88
(8e5) $~3-2553 Collected by: D. Van Dam
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2/82~
Delta Environmental .......
11e~ White Roc~ Rd.
Suite 11~
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
:-SAMPLE DESCRZPTZON:
Davies Oi~ Co., Bakersfield, CA $~5-1/2
Gulf St; Field ~D #~26D~88, ~W #~, Water
Delta #~-87-326 '
compound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentrqtion
~ ppm
Benzene
Toluene
Ethy[benzene
Xylenes
1,2-Olcnloroethone (EDC)
Ethylene Olbromide (EOB)
~.~1 not found
~.~1 not found
~.~1 not found
~.~01 not found
~.~001 not found
~.0001 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~.~5
(DIESEL #2)
29.
BTX as a Percent of Fuel
Percent Surrogate Recovery'
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
E1829?.~r1/21~
~H/~k/vg/ch
AIR, WATER & HAZARDOUS
.ABORATORY CERTIFIED by CALIF~A DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Coos~
Central Coas~
Analy~icel Services,
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
Sa~ Luis Obispo, California
(885) 5~3-2553'
LeD Number: E-182~
Collected:
Received: 83/87/88
Tested: e~/eT/88
Collected ~y: D. Van Dam
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA ~e~hod 52~.2/82~8
DeiCe Env'ironmen~el-- -- .................... SA~PLE-DESCR[PTZON~----:
11838 Whi~e Rock Rd. Davies Oi~ Co., ~85.5 Gulf S~.,
Suite 118 Bekers~ield, CA, D~8-87-326,
Rencho Cardove, CA 95678
Compound Anal yzed
De~ec~on Limi~
in ppm
Cancan=re=ion in ppm
Benzene ~.~001 not foun~
Toluene ~.8~1 not found
Et~y~benzene ~.~01 not found
Xylenes ~.001 not found
1,2-Olcnloroet~one (EDC) ~.~001 not found
E~ylene O~brom~de (EDB) 0.~001 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~.~5
(GASOLINE)
<~.~5
BTX os o Percent of Fuel
not appllcaOle
Percent Surrogate Recovery
109.
Respectfully suOmitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVZCE$
Mary Hav'ticek, Ph.D.
Presiden~
E182~f.wr1/289
MH/sw/vg/sa
OEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Coast.
Analytical
Services
Cent.ral Coast.
AnoZy~ical Services, ~nc.
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
ian'Luis Obispo, California 9~81
(885) 5~3-2555
Lab Nudger: E-1822
Collected: ~/~/88
Received: eS/et/88
Tested:
Collect.ed by: O. Van
Fuel Fingerprint AnaZysis - EPA Method 52~.2/82~8
Delta Environment.al " SA~IPLE DE~CRZPTZON:
11~8 White Rock Rd. Davies OiZ Co., ~85.5 Gulf St.,
Suite 1lC Bakersfield, CA, D~e-87-~25,
Rancho Cordovo, CA 956?8 Field ZD~26hlW83~88, ~W ~8, W~er
Compound. Anolyzed
Detect. ion Limit
Benzene ..
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xyienes
1,2-Oic~loroet~ne (EDC)
Ethylene OlDromlde (EDe)
_..in ppm
Concentrcr'cion
.......... in ppm
~.~1 no[ found '
~.~1 not found
~.~1 noC found
~.~1 not found
~.~1 not found
~.~0~1 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~.~5
(GASOLINE)
<e. ~5
BT× as a Percent of Fuel
not oppllcoble
Percent Surrogate Recovery
Respectfully suDmitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANAI.YTICAL SERVICES
I~=m/ Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
MSD #3
E1822f. wrl/2~9
~H / sw/vg/sc
AIR', WATER & HAZARDOUS WASi
ABORATORY CERTIFIED by CAL!F(7, DEPT ol= HEALTH SERVICES
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
Central Coast
Analytical Services, Znc.
1~1 Suburban Rood Suite C-~
(8e5) 5~3-2553
Lo~ Number: E-1826
Collected: ~3/~/88
Received: e3/eT/88
Collected by: D. Yon Dam
Fuel Fingerprint Analysls - EPA ]vlet~od 52~.2/82~
..... !"':'--~: .... Delta Environmental ......... - ....... $-AI~PLE OESCRZPT~ON:
11~3a White Rock Rd. Davies 0il Co., $3a5.5 Gulf St.,
f" Suite 11~ Bakers~$eld, CA, D~-87-326,
{ Rancho Cordova, CA g567~ Field [D~$2s~wg3~88, ~W ~g, Water
Compound Analyzed
Detection Llmit Concentration
........ in ppm ............................... ~n__ppm .....
Benzene
Toluene
Et~ylbenzene
Xy[enes
1,2-D~ch[oroet~ne (EDC)
Ethylene D~brom~de (EDB)
~.1 1.1
~.1 ~.6
~. 1 28.
~.1 not 1=ound
~.1 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1~.
(GASOLINE)
BTX as a Percent o1= FueI
Percent Surrogate Recovery
~SD #3
E1826 f'. ~rl/2~g
MH/jc/vg/s¢
Respect1=ul1y submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
~ary Hmvlicek, Ph.D.
President
AIR', WATER & HAZARDOUS
~ABORATORY CERTIFIED by CALIFOe. A DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
AnalYtiCal Services,
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, California 93~el
(8eS) S~3-2SS3
Delta-Environmental
11~3~ White Rook Rd.
Suite 11~
Rancho Cordova, CA
9567~
Lob Number: E-1823
Collected:
Received: e3/eT/88
Tested: e3/~7/88
Collected by: D. Van Dam
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2/82~
Davies 0il Co., ~5~5.5 Gul~ St.,
Bakersfield, CA, D~e-87-326,
Field [D~326~Wlg3~88, ~ #1~, Wa~er
Compound Analyzed
DetectionLimit Concentration
.................... ~n-ppm ............................ ~n_ppm
Benzene ~.~001 ~.~022
Toluene ~.~01 no~ found
E~y[benzene ~.~01 no~ found
Xy~enes ~.001 ~.002
1,2-O~cn~oroet~ane (EDC) ~.~01 no~ ~ound
Ethylene Oibromi~e (EDB) ~.~001 no~ found
TOTAL PURGEABL[ PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ~.~5
(GASOLINE)
<~.05
BTX as a Percent of Fuel not appllcaOle
Percent Surrogate Recovery 102.
E1823f.wr1/2e9
MH/sw/vg/so
RespectfuLLy submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALY_TICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
·¸ ·
AIR',WATER & HAZARDOUS WAS~. _ABORATORY CERTIFIED Dy CALIFO) .A DEPT Of HEALTH SERVICES
Analytico$
De$ta Environmenta$'
11~3.~ White Roc~ Rd.
Rancho Cordova, CA g567~
Centra$ Coas~ Lab Number: E-1825
Ana~cicoL Services, Inc. Co~ec~ed:
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: ~3/~7/88
San Luis Obispo, C~$i?ornia 9~el Tested:
(8e5) 5~-2553 Co$Lec=ed by: D. Van Dom
Fuel Fingerpr&n~ AnaLysis - EPA Method 52~.2/82~
SANPLE D£SCRZPT~ON:
Davies OiL Co., ~5.5 GuL~ S~.,
BakersfieLd, CA,
Fie$d ID#526D~115~88, h~ #11, ~oter
Compound AnaLyzed Detection Limit Concentration
..... in ppm tn ppm .........
Benzene ~.5 1~. -
ToZuene ~.5 89.
Ethylbenzene ~.5 5.2
X¥[enes ~.5 57.
1,2-O$c~loroet~ane (EDC) ~.5 no~ foun~
E~ylene O~brom~e (EOB) ~.5 not ?oun~
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 50.
(GASOLINE)
2~0.
BTX as o Percent o? Fuel
57.
Percent Surrogate Recovery
88.
Respectfully suDmitteQ,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Diary Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
E1825?.wr1/2~9
~H/jc/vg/sc
AIR', WATER & HAZARDOUS
LABORATORY CERTIFIED by CALIF .OR~_A DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Services
Central Coast
Analytical Services, Inc.
· 1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
I San Luis Ob~spo,
(885)
11e38 White Rook Rd.
Suite 115
Rancho Cordova, CA
95678
Lob Number: E-1827
CoZlected: ~3/~5/88
Received: ~/~7/88
Tested:
CoZ$ected by: D. Van D~m
Fuel Fingerprint AnqZysis - EPA Me~hod 52~.2/82~8
SAMPLE DESCRiPTiON:
Dories Oil Co., ~e5.5
Boker$~ield, CA, D~8--87-326,
FSe$d ~D/~26~125.~88, ~W #12, Water
'Compound Ana.l, yzed
Detection Limi~ Concentrq~ion
.... in ppm ................................ in"ppm
Benzene ~.1
Toluene ~.1 ~.2
Ethy[benzene ~.1 5.7
XyIenes ~.1 ~2.
1,2-Dtc~loroet~=ne (EDC) ~.1 no~ found
Ethylene Di~omide (EDB) ~.1 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1~.
(GASOLINE)
BTX as a Percent of Fuel
Percent Surrogate Recovery
Respect?uiIv suUmitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Dlc~ry Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
E1827fc.wr1/211
MH/~c/vg/sc
AIR, WATER & HAZARDOUS
Central
Coos~
Analytical
Services
.ABORATORY CERTIFIED by CALIF~A DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Central Coas~ Lab NumOer: E-1827
Analytical Se~ices, Inc. Collected:
1~1 SuburOan Road , Suite C-a Received: ~/~7/8~
(8e5) 5~3-2555' Collected by: O. Van Dom
Fuel Fingerprin~ Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2/82~e
· : ' Delta Environmental
11~ White Rock Rd.
Suite 11e
Rancho Cordova, CA
Compound Analyzed
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
Dovies Oil Co., ~5.5 Gulf St.,
Bakersfield, CA, D~-87-~26,
Field ID~26MW12~88, MW #12, Water
Detection Limit Conc'entra=ion
in ppm in ppm
Benzene ~.1 ~.9 -
Toluene ~.1 5.6
Ethylbenzene ~.1 2.5
Xylenes ~.1 29.
1,2-Olcmloroet~one (EDC) ~.1 no= found
Ethylene Oibromide (EDB) ~.1 no~ found
TOTAL PUR~EABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 10.
(GASOLINE)
BTX os o Percent of Fuel
51.
Percent Surrogote Recovery
E1827¢.wr1/2~9
MH/~c/vg/sc
Respectfully suOmit, ted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary HovliceA, Ph.D.
P~esiden~
~*; * .;,~,*.. ~";.~...,.'.: :'.*.~*' ~'.'.' .':.:-.:',;...L . ~..** *., · ~-'" ~.'~ ,.*~...'** :'., * .. * . ' , ..., · . , . . . ;: .: - . . ..... ', .:.... * · * , , . ...,...~ ..,..~ . ~ ~
Sampler(s) (~lonnture)
Sealed for shipment by: !?lgnatura) : " 'd I -..Zi~.T~' .~,; ' . , .' Date/Time
Received for I.nb by: (signature) ".~',
, '
' Receiving Laboratory: Plea.e. retum odglnal form Ifler nlgnlng fro' receipt of .mplel.
: Oj~c~ N~mor~n~um · ~"" coum'r
G.S.S. 580 1151 395-5004 (Rev. 4/87}
DOEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS
tS0t Truxtun Avcau¢ Bakersfield, Cali[oraia 9330t (805~ 326-3724
Jur~e 1~, 19~8 DALE HAWLEY,'Manager ,
Mr. Sudhakar ]-alar~ki, M.S.
~ Delta Ermvirorm~ental Cor~sultants, Ir, c.
_ ........... 1.1_030 Whi't~_~Rock Road, Sui_t.e 110 ............................. ~ ....
· .' ..~ .- Rancho Cordova~ CA 95670 '
RE~ TENTATIVE WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT FOR
C DAVIES-OlD COMPANY - 3~05 1/2 GUDF STREET, BAKERSFIELD
..~ - · _~ · - . '. .-,~..~..
':: :T :c?..:...' . '~ We have ~eviewed the appliCation for wast.ewa~er discharge;'~permit
~.~ :'-;'~' '~ou"~ubm'itted On'JU~,e 2, 1988 for Davies'Oil Company
¥~ :~;.-.~??~] ~/':]. grour, dwater remediation efforts. Per yourJrequest,
~ ' In y,:,ur letter, you indicated a signed application will 'be
~ submitted ,:race the discharge lirait~ are agreed upor~. In addi'tiorq'~:~
the following items on ~h~ application need to be completed
· - the final discharge permit can be prepared
Page Item Descript ion
1 A. 7 SIC Code o'F the facility ... ...... ~
2 8.3 Nunlber Of employees and hours ¢,f work.
3 B. 10 Wher~ will the two additior~al wells be added.
5 C. 8 Ir~'Fc, rmatior~ of pric, rity pollutants: Lead and "" ""~
Mercury.
If you have ar~y questior~s, please call Wen-Shi Cheung at 3~613~38.
Very truly yours, .- ~.
E.' W. Schulz
Actir~g Public Works Manager
Charles J. ' r~er
Wast ewat er Super i r~t endent
Eric 1 os ute .... .k.
· ' ' cc: ray Green, Kern County Health Departmer~t, Hazardou~ Materials
Tom Paxsor~, Kerr~ Cour~ty Health Department, Air Pollution Cont ro 1 o i st r i ct
City of· Bakersfield
Public Wo~'ks Department
· TENTATIVE ,
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERlVIIT
Wastewater Division Permit Number: ~-BK-TO01 ..
PEflMITTEE MUST READ THIS MATERIAL IN ITS ENTIRETY· ' ..~...~.~. .
.... ....,., : ~ ..,. .,~.. .,/~/,~,,~ 3.~,. ~)...,
Cor,~par, Y' " '
'~:"?'"' Facility. Address: 3305 1/2 Gulf Sgreeg Bake'rsfield, CA ..~93308 .,.,',,,.-'~'~',~r~.
, .~ , ,. ..... ·
, ~ ~.-'. ~ ..~.
.,provisicms of Federal or State law or r~gula~ion and ghe ../ }'.,~.
' . ... terms arid cor, d it i,:,r,s set forth hereir, .... .~::...'. e.~../~.,.:-,~.~-..U ..
'~"??~;' ;'""' " filed with the City of Bakersfield on .... ' ·
-.~.,~.. ar, d ir, cor, formi~y with plar,~, spmcifica~ior, s and o~her data ..
- submitted to the City ir, support of the·above application. '.';:.';~ .... .''
. .. .. ~ - ...~.'..'~..~,'., ~; ,{ ... ~..
,4El, '"' ' ' ' · ' .... '" '.:'
Charles J. Turr, er Date '":..,.
~ Wastewater Superir, ter, dent
Page 1 of 6
Permit No: P--BK-TO01
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE LIMITATION8 AND MONITORIN~
DAILY 2/
PARAMETER MAX SAMPLE FREQUENCY
Flow 0.216 MGD Daily
'" -.. Ethyl Benzene 5.0 ug/1
..'. .: '-Ethylene Oibromide 0.05 ug/1
i/week
1/week
1/week
'~:/: ".'.:'i·' . .1,:~"-Dichloroethar, e 1.0 ug/1 '~' ."' .1/week" : 'Grab
, · . ..... ~ ..... Carbor Tetrachlorlde ~.~) ug/1 ~. ...... 1/week-.-~ ........ , ........ .~.~.~ ......... ;:~rab
: . 1/week ~, . Grab
Chror~ium (total
Copper
Lead
N i c ke i
pH
6.0-10.0 ur, its
1/ ee'k'
1/week
1/week
i/week
1/week
SAMPLE TYPE · ..
Grab '",.:'i"'.'.'.~'
:Grab '. '!.'.,?'~":;i'.': .'.
Grab ...
Grab
Grab
1_/
2/
4--/
Detectior, lin~its shall equal or be r,~ore precise thar, the daily max.
for each cor, stituent. ..
The self-n~or, itoring frequencies will be for an initial evaluation '
period of six (6) morrths. If the effluent n'~e.ets the discharge limits
cor, sistar, tly, the samplir, g frequer, cy will be ~nodified to or, ce per
rm:,nth after the initial six n~or~ths evaluatior, period. "
The iU shall perform samplir~g and analytical procedures irLacco~dar~ce .
with the Er~virc, nmental Protectior~ Agency's rec,:,nm~er, ded procedures.
The City reserves the right 'to modify effluent limitations and . ' ..;...:.
ir, dustrial user agrees to immediately comply with any rnodifiCatior~.
rag. ~ c,f 6
No, 8-BK-TO01
PART B; SPECIAL ~ONDITIONS/COMPLIANCE
1. Ir, ,-,taler'to r,~eet the wastmwater discharge l'imitation~ ~pecified
Part A, the IU will be requi~ed ~o i~stalI a wastewater ~nonitc, ri~g. '.
station to provide access for wastewater sar~plir~g and contir~uous
vapor monitoring dowr~stream c,~ all treatr~er~t processes arid prior to
point of discharge t,z, the wastmwatmr cc, llec'~ior~ syster~. The
mor~itorir~g station specifications shall be sub~itted ~c, the city for
approval. Th'e IU shall subr,~it a revised site-plan la,out after the
2. .Ir~ order to ir, sure that explosive atmospheres in the sewer are
prever~ted at all times, two lower explosive lir,~it mor~itors shall be
provided. Or~m shall r~onitor the effluerst fror~ the treatment system
..... ~.. an~ 'bhe other shall r~onitor a rnar~ho~e ~ownstr~am from ~he
".~m~¥..~.]point.~ Each LEL detector Shall be connecte~ to the groundwater
~'.. '~ ' treatrner~t facility such that if 40% of the LEL of gasoline 'is
'.~. shuts down or discor, tinues treatment .of-the groundwater,-.~ischarge
the sewer will be ter~ir, ated. This ~nay include (but not li~,~ited to)
ar, air pressure ser, sor or, the stripper tower that upon semsir, g a low
.:,... :' air flow shuts the facility down, ar, d ter~nir, ates. the discharge.
:~.:'4. 'Ail costs incUrred by the city for administration amd treatr, emt
the discharge are to be paid for by the discha6ger. '" '
.5.
.6.
The' city shall have access to the facility shutdowr, switch as well as .
copies of keys to all locked er, closures at the site. ''
The discharger shall establish ar, Emerger, cy Action Plan to include
the followir, g iter,~s:
a) P'rocedures for flushir~g gasolir, e f~,z, rn the sewer (water phase
arid air space).
b) List of authorities to contact. ~' ~-~
c) Map of path through sewer system to treat~,~er, t plant. ' ....
d) Locatior, of all drair~s, sumps, arid manholes ir, the area of
the site.
e) Provisic, r, of dikes or berms at the site for cor, tair,~ent of
pot er, t ial spills.
f) Li~its for restriction of access to areas where an expiosior,
might c. ccur. ~
g) Fir, ar, cial Issues - Whc. pays the bill for the mitigation
. Ir, the event of ar, y char, ge ir, cor, trol or ownership of land or waste
discharge facilities preser, tly owr, ed .or controlled by the discharger'
shall notify the succeeding owner ~or operator~ of the existence..of <'~..~:~..,~
this te~porary per~'~it by letter, a copy will also be forwarded ~o ~.
the Was~bewater Division.
P~rmi~ Nol 2-BK~TO01
REPORT!N~ REQUIREMENTS
The IU shall r, otify the City at 326-3238 immediately upor, ar, y'
accidental or "slug" discharge to the sanitary sewer of any material
whose .nature and quantity might be reasonably judged to constitute a
hazard to Public Works personr~el, Treatment 'Works, or the
envirc, rm~er~t, or which results in a temporary r~oncc, mpliance with
Categorical Pre'treatmerrt or local limits.
- .... ~-~-':--'=--:- .... Formai. wr it t er, r, ot i f i cat i on -d i scuss ing c i rcumst'ances' and - remed i:es ........ ~"~ ==
shall be submitted to the City within five (5) days of the
Slug Discharge - any pollutant', including oxyger,-demar, ding pollutants
(B~D, etc. ), released ir, a discharge at a flow rate ar, d/or.
-' ' ' ... concentrat ion which wi 11 cause interference at the POTW. '.':.~-.. ~.:..'"~-'.: ,. J.~?~.~:.~..~. -.
:~....,? :~.~.,!.~...~,~.. } .. . '~ :..~ .~. ~.j...
]L'~XLZ~?:' ~he...ZU Shall -notify' the- City"p~i°r to -the-~r,t~c~du~t'[on o~ '~eW
.. ~as~e~a~ep or pollutants or any substantial ~han~e in the vol~ime o~..::j'~.:..
· ~,'~. .- ' ~chara~tmristi~s of the ~astew'atmr bein~ intpod~ed i~to the POTW f~om.'~'
- "the User's ir~dustpial ppo~sses. Fopmal ~pitten notifi~ation Shall ':".".'.~-
follow within thirty (30). days of such introduction. . .: ..... : .
Any upset experier, ced by the IU of its treatment that places it in a
temporary state of r~or~-compliar~ce with wastewater discharge ~ ..¥.-
limitations contair, ed ir, this permit or other limitations specified
in the City's Ordinance shall be reported to the City within twenty-
four (24) hours of first awareness of the ccmm~er, cement of the upset.~
A detailed rep,z, rt shall be filed within five (5) days.
The IU is required to submit to the City semiar, r, ual reports on the
results of its samplir, g of the pollutants specified in Part A of this
permit in J~n~ arid Dec~lb~r.
5. The IU shall report cc, mpletic, 6 of its wastewater/~,]¢,r, ito'~.ir~g statior,.
Ali repc, rts shall be submitted t,:, the following address:
City of Bakersfield
Public W,:,~.~ks Department
4101 T'r'uxtur~ Ave.
Bake~.-~f ield, CA 93309
Attr~. : Wastewater' Divi. sion
P~r~' 4 of 6
P~rmit N~: ;~-~K-TO0
STANDAR~- CONDITIONS
The IU ~hall comply with all the ger, eral prohibitive discharge
standards ir, Sect ior~ 14. 12.220 c,f the Mur,icipal Code.
~-.'. RIGHT OF ENTRY
The IU shall allow the City or its representatives, exhibiting proper
credentials and ider~tification, to enter upon the premises c,f the
User, at ail rea~c, nable hours, for the purposes of ir, spection,
--=-:--~=-== ..... g~p-'lirlg, Or records irlspectiorl. Reasc, riabl'~-~;U~'s=~ the context
inspectior, and sampling ir~cludes ar, y time the Ir~dustrial User is
operatir~g ar~y process Which results in a process wastewater dischar'~m
to the City's sewerage system.
.-'. ..................... 'pu~Ch~'g'e'F'-'t']~;-~.-. prior writter~ approvai' of the City for cor~tinued :' ' .... discharge to the,.sewerage system.' . ' · , .
' . The. permit issued to the.IU..by the City may be. revoked when, after'
inspection, mc, r~itc, rir~g or ar~alysi~ it is determined-that the
discharge of .was~ewater t,:, the.sar~itary sewer is in vielation Of
Federal, Sbate~ or lc, cai laws~ ordir~ar~ces, or regulations, ~.-..-..' "·
' Additionally, falsif~cat, ior~ or ir~tentional misrepresentatior~ of dat~ "
']? .. op statements 'pertaining to the permit application' or any other
required repoptir~g form, shall be cause fc, r permit revocatiorN
5. MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PERMIT
a) The terms ar,d ~or, ditior, s of this permit may be subject to
modification by the City at any time as limitations or
'requirements as identified in the City's Ordinance, are modified
or other .j,.L~t cause exists.
b) This permit may~ also be mC;~ified to, ir~c, cpo~ate special
condi~ic, r,s resulting from the issuance of a special
~)'' The terms and ~ondi~ions ~ay be modified as a ~esul$ of EPA
promulgating a ~ew.'~ederal .pretreatmer~t standard.
d) Ar~y'Permit acidifications 'which result in new ~ondi~ons in the
"permit shall 'i~lude a rmasori'able time s~hedule fo~ ~ompliar,~e if
'...";" ...,':}:.':':'] LThe.p~ov~sions of this permit ape ~evePable~ and if any p~C, yis'iorl
.-:x.:;. '?.any eircums~ar, ce~.':is ,held invalids' ~he application.of such provisior,~:v:..
.:-:v'?~.;.'~;'~' ]'....:to othe~ cir~umstances~, and ~he pemair, de~ of ~this permit shall not.'be ..
'- ,"affected thereby. ' .... ' ...... ~ .... '
~.:'fhe Gity shall r~otify a Usep c,r~e hundred and eighty .(1~0) days
............... to the expiration 'of"'the-User"s Permit, ".'Within ninety (90) 'days of
the r~otificatior~ the User shall peapply for reissuance Of the permit
on a f'c, pm provided by the City.
Page 5 of 6
8. RECORDS RE]'EN]~I ON
a) The IU sh'&ll retair, ar,d preserve for rio less thar~ three (3)
years~ ar, y records, boo, ks, documer~ts, rnemorar~da, reports,
correspor~der~ce arid ar~y arid all sum~ari-es thereof~ relatir~g.to
r~]c,r~it,z?*i.r~g, ~an~plir~g and chemicaZ analy~es made by or ir~ behalf
of the user ir~ cor~r~ectior~ with its discharge.
, ~'7
b) Ali"reCords thab p.ertain to matters that afte the SubjeCt
..... special orders, or ar~y other er~forcemer~t o~ litigatior~ activities
ur, til 811 er, forcer;lent acti'~'i, ties have cc, nclud[ed and all periods '
of l imitatior~ with respect ~,=, ar~y arid all appeals have expired.'
Del,a
Environmental
.Consultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock Road. Suite 110
Rancho Cordova. CA' 95670
916 638-2085
June 2, 1988
City of Bakersfield
Public Works Department
4101 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93309
Attn: WenShi Chung-Waste Water Division
Sub j:
Cost and feasibilit~ study of permanent sewer connection
3305 1/-2 Gulf Street
Bakersfield, California 93308
Delta Project No. 40-8?-326
Dear Ms. Chung:
Enclosed is a sewer discharge permit application for determining the cost and
feasibility of a permanent sewer connection at the referenced Site.
The purpose of Delta's work is to clean up the contaminated ground water at the
site. At present there is no sewer service provided in the area, and our only other
option of discharging the treated water is to land via infiltration. The estimated
period of discharge is 3-5 years.
Based on the information in the permit application please supply us with the
following:
1) Maximum discharge concentrations to the sewer.
2) Required monitoring frequency.
A signed application will be submitted once. the discharge limits are agreed upon. If
you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (916)638=2085.
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Sudhakar Talanki, M.S.
Environmental Engineer
ST:cm
Enclosure: permit application, schematic, site sketch, water chemistry results.
' 'CC:
· W.C.-Davies ....
Amy Green
Joe Kessing
Michael M. Westerheim
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
Ci=Y Of Bakersfield
Public Works Departmen=
APPLICATION. FOR WAST~WAT~R DISCIL~RGE PEI~IT
SEG'TION A - GENEI~ INFORI~TION
1. C4mpany N~ Davi es 0i l Company
2. Mailing Address P.0. 8ox 80067
8akersfi el d? CA
3. Facility Address 3305% Gulf Street
4. Name of Signing Official W.C. Davies
5. Nan,, of Contac: Official Michael Westerheim
Business hiC. No.
Tele. No. ( 805 ) 323-6063
Zip Code 93380
Zip Code 93308
Title ' President
Title prn?r~ Knn~n~
Tele. No. ( 805 ) 323-6063
............ 6'.' ~Business Ac:ivicy- 0ffi cee and- Cardl ock fuel i ng faci 1 i ty ......................... (au:o repair,- machine shop, --elec-. -
:ropla:tng, warehousing, painting, printing, m~a: packing, food ~rocessing, etc.).
7. $:andard I~dustriai Classifica:ion Number(s) (SIC Code) for your facilities:
8. %his facility ~ene.--a=es The following =ypes of ~rastes .(check all ~i~a= apply):
~al/day
a. [ ] Dc~es:ic was:es
(res:ro~ms, e~. loyee showers, e:c.)
b. [ ] Cooling water, non-contac:
c. [ 2 Boiler/Tower bicrwdo~
Wastes are discharged =o (ckeck all cha= apply)
~al/dav_ .
[ ] Ground water
[ ~ Evaporation
~al/day
d. [ ] Cooling water, con:ac:
e. [ ] Process
f. [ ] Equi.mr~nt/Facili:y washdown
g. [ ] Air Poilu:ion Con:rol Uni:
h. [ ] $corm wa:er ranoff =O sewer
i. iX ] C:ker (describe) 72,000
Contaminated ?ound water cleanup
[X ] Sani:aQ' sewer
[ ] S~orm sewer
~ailday
72,000
[ ' Was:e haulers. [ ] Surface wa:er
Provide name and a~dress of waste hauier~s), if used.[ ] O:her (describe)
10. I~ a ~pill Preven:ion Conrr°~ and Coun:ermea~ure P~an prepared for :he fa¢ili:y? [ ] Yes [ X] No
This is :o be signed ~ em. c:4r, hcz,,~ed official of ~uour firm ~t~ ~fecun=e c:~.'~,;~ion of il, tis fon~ ard
review of :h~ info~.=~'2~. ~ :he ~ oL'"~t:l.
I have personnally examined and am familiar wi=h :he information submit:ed
in :his documen: and at=achmen:s. Based upon my inquiry of :hose individuals
immedia:ely responsible for obtaining =he information repot=ed herein, I be-
.lieve tha=._~he submi=~ed_information.is =rue,-.-accura~e--an~-.comple~e~.~l~.~
aware ~hat ~here are significanc penalties for submit:lng false information,
including ~he possibili:y of fine and/or imprisonment.
Dace Signacu're of Official
. .. 9/86
SECTION B - FACILITY OPERATION CHARACTEHISTIC-~
~tf your facility e~. ioys processes-in 'any-of ~he 3a ind,,~=rial-ca=egories"6~-~{i~iness-~:{vi={~-~is=~-
below and any df ~hese processes senera=e was=ewe=er or wa~=e sludge, place a check beside tile ca=egory
or business ac:ivi~y (check ail ~ apply).
A. 34 Industrial Categories:
3. [ ] Auto & Other Laundries 20. [ ] Pain~ & Ink
· ~. ' '[-]-'Sa~=e.--y .~ac~urtn~ ............... 21. "~-"] Pesticides ....
6. [ ] Coil Cea:Lng 23. [ ] Pbarmaceu=icals
8. [ ] Elec:ric & Elec:ronic C~. nen=$ 25. [ ] Plaa:i¢ & Syn:i~ic Ma~erial~
9. [ ] Elec-.ropia=ing 26. [ ] Plasrias Processing
r 1 Foundries 28. [ ] Prin:ing & .~lishing
11. ~ ~
II. ,~ ] inorganic ,%~emicais 30. [ ] Rubber
1~. [ ~ Iron ;. Sceei 31 F ] Seams & Decer~.encs
!~. [ ] Leacher Tanning & Finishing 32. [ ] Steam Z!ec:r!c
1O. [ ] Mec--zni'cal ?rodua:s 33. [ ] Texciie Mills
17. [ ] Nopderrous Me:als 34. [ ] Timner
B. O~her Busines~ Ac:ivi:ies:
Dairy, Products
Slaughcer/'Mea~ Packing/Rendering
Food/Edible ?roduc:s Processor
Beverage Bec:let
Provide a brief narrative description of ~he ~mnufacturing, produc:ion, or service a~:ivicies your
firm conduccs.
Petroleum storage and fueling facility
3. N~m~r of en~loyees and Hours of Work:
SATURBAY
SU~,~AY
OFFI~ PRDDUC!ICN
~AY SHIFT
SW/2qG SHIFT. NIGHt SHIFT
Raw water source:
Source
Recovery wel 1
(public utility name, priva=& well,
Accoun: ~ ~al/day
N/A 72,000
Use
N/^
5. Principal produc: produced: N/A
6. t~ ~a:eriaLs and process additives used:
N/A
7. Produc:ion process is:
Average nurser of ~c~-~s ~r 2~our ~y
8. Ho~s of o~ra~ion: a.m. ~o
9. Is prods=ion subject :o ~easo~i varia=ion?. ' . ~ Yes
If yes, briefly describe seasonal pro~:ion cycle.
~/~
% batch % concirmous
[ "Noj
L .~
10. Are any process ci'~r~es or ~p. ansions planne~ durir~ :he hex: three years?
IX ] Yes - ' .No Two (2) additional wells. Iota] estimated discharge 216,000 gal/day of
contaminat.ed ground .w.ater
If yes, aczacin a se=ara:e sheec ro :his form ~escr~oinE :he narure of plar~ned ci-mrges or &xpansions.
11. Sche~a=ic Flow Diagram: ins=ruccions see reverse side.
Ac:aclu a diagram .of :he flow pa:cern of ma:erials and water from s=ar= :o cca~. leced prodt~-., showin~
all unit processes generarlnE wascewa=er. See Figure ~
12. Buildin~ Layout:
At:ach a drawin~ or blue prin~ of :he loca~i°n of each buildin~ on :he premises. Show :he location
and size of wa~er me=ers, scorm drains, c~muni=y sewers and each buildin~ sewer connected :o ~he
cc~ni:y sewers.
No sewer connection at present. See F~gure 2
-3-
SECTION C- WASTEWATEH INFORMATION
1. Physical and chemical c.harac:eris=ica of w~n~s discharged (check all =ha~ apply):
[ ] Flmmmble [ ] Temperature over 150° F
[ ] Toxic or poisonous [ ] Total dissolved s~lids above 5000 ~/1
[ ] Toxic gases [ ] RainwaTer
[ ] Highly odorous [ ] DiluTion wa:er
[ ] Dissolved Sul id.s -ov.r'O. ...... ' .... [ ] Single po S cooling ...... -'- ........
[ ] was;e larger chart 3/8" in diameter [ ] Pe=role~n base soluble cuc:in~ oils
[ ] Cyanides [ ] ?e:rolek~n based oils
[ ] Highly colored [X] Ochers (specify) %ow concentratio, s of dissolved
[ ] RadioacTive ~¥drocarbons
Wa~=~ Cc~osirion paTchy=ers:
FLow (AvE.) 72~000 gal/day COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand) ~ mg/~
Flow (Peak) .... 72,000 gal/day --BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) 10
ToTal Dissolved $.oli~ ~o nB/1 SS (Suspended Solids) 'm~/1
pR range & e~ · Oil c.n~ Crc;cc TPH 60
Precrea~menc devices or processes used for TreaTing wascewarer or sludge (check as many as appropriate):
C ] Air flo~acion C ] Io, exchange
CenTrifuge
Chemical precipi:aclon
~'hlorina~ion
Cvcione
Flow eouaiizacion
C, rease or oil sep&rarion, ~ype
Grease Trao
Grlr removal
Biological crea:.-en:,
Rainwater diversion or s~orage,
O~her chemical creacren~, :.vpe
O~her physical crear, meng, Type
Ocher, =ype
Neucralizacion, pM correc:ion
Ozona:ion ,
Reverse Omrms is
Screen
Sed~ncacion
Septic
Soiven; seoara;ion
SmiI1. pro~ec:ion
Packed column air stripper
L J No precrearmenc provioed
4. Cerrifica:ion: Are precrearJnenc standards for your induscry being me: on a consiscen: basis by :his
facility? [ ] Yes[N/A] [ ] No If 'Tes," go on ~o Question 6.
5. If answer Fo number 4 is '~ao,"will additional precreacmenc and/or operations and mainTenance be
required for This facili:y :o meet precrea~Tenc standards? [ ] Yes [ ] No If '~ao," explain
reaSon for nonccmp[iance
If "yes," accach a description of The required 9recreacmenc and/or operations and rr~ihcenance co gain
cc~.liance, and include schedule of daces for ccrrrcencemenc and ccr~.lecion of even=s leading Fo che con-
sc.',acrion and 'operaTion of chis additional pre~reacmenc.
6. Lis= any o~her environmental con~rol 9ermics held by chis faci!i~y:
Rone
7. If any wascewa=er analyses have been performed on The was=ewa~er discharge(s) frcm your facili=ies,
aTTach a copy of ~he mus: recen= data :o this ques:ionnaire. Be sure :o include the dace of the
analysis, name of laboratory performing the analysis, and locaTion(s) frcrawhi~h sample(s) were rmken
................. (ac:achskecches, plans,.ecc..,...as necessary).
Priority I'oilutanC Infatuation: fleece indicate by plscfflS on 'x' In the appropriate boK br e~ch lintel chemlcll v~her lc Io ~SuoFEcted
ClIEHICAL
COHFOUItD
!. HETAI,S & INORCAHICS
I. Antimony
~o Arsenic
3, Asbestos
&. Beryllium
$. Cadmium
6. Chromium
~. Copper
8. Cyanide
9. Lead
lO. ttercur~
II. Nickel
12. Selefll,~
13. Silver
14. Thallium
IS. Zinc
II Il II
II Il II
Il Il Il
II Il I.I
II II II
IXl II II
Ixl I'l Il
II II II
II II II
II II II
IXl II II
II II II
II II II
IXl II II
II II II
!1. fllEHOLS AND CRESOLS
16. Fheflol(z)
I1. rhenol, 2-chloro
18. Phenol, ~,4-dlchloro
I~. Phenol ~,406-trlchloro
20. Phenol pentachloco
2J. fheflol 2-nitro
22. elleflol A-nitro
23. Phenol 2,4-dinttro
24. Phenol 2.4-dimethyi
25. m-Cresol, e-chloro
26. o-Cresol, 4,6-dlflltro
!!!. HOHOC¥CLEC A~OHATICS
(EXCLUDING FIIENOLS. CRESOLS
AND
Benzene
Benz~ne,chloro
Benzene, 1.2-dtchloro
Benzene, 1,3-dlchloro
Benzene, 1,4odlchloro
II
II
.Il
II
II
Il
II
II
II
Ii
Ix
IX
IX
I o_.2s
Ix
~x
I 0769
IX
I I I I IXl ~
" ",,'x'-
II II
I I II Ixl
II II I1~
I I I .I I~{ I
I I I I Ixl
I I I I Ixl
I I I I IXl
I I I I IXl
IXl I I I I I I 1.4__.ppm
II II II II
II Il II II --
I1'11 II II ~
II II II II
32. Benzene, I,Z,&-trlchloro
3]. Benzene,hexechloro
34. Beflze,e. ethyl
35. Benzene, nitro
36. Toluene
31. Toi~ene, 2,4--dinit~o
38. Toluene, 2,6-dlnlcro
IV. PCBe & RELATED COHPOUNDS
39. PCB-IaI6
~1. PC0-1232
42. PCB-1242
Al. eCl-12~8
45. PCB-1260
~6. 2-Chloronaphthelene
V. E~IERS
Ether, ble(chlorometh/l)
&8. Ether, bll(2-chleroethyl)
Ether, blz(2-chlornsoeroeyl)
50. Ether. Z-chinroethyl
51. Ether, &-bromophenyl
Ether, 4-chloropheflyl;phenyl
Si. BIs(2-chlnroethoay) methane
¥1. NITROSA~INES AND
NI[ROGEH-CON[AININO COIeFOUNOS
flltroezmlno0 dlmethpti
55. flltcosa,alneo dteheflyi!
Nitrosealne, dt-n-pro~yl
Benzlelne
58. leflzldlne, 3,Je~dlchloro
S9. flydrazlne. 1,2-dtphenyi
60. Ac~ylnnttrlln
II II II
II i1
IXl I I I
II II II
Ixl I I II
II II II
II II
II II II
II Il .11
Ii II '11
II II II
II II II
ii Il Ii
II II ~11
Il Il II
Il II
II II II
II II ill
Il Il
II II ~11
II II :11
II II ill
,!
II Il ~ll
II II ,11
II II '11
II II II
II II II
II II II
II
II
I I l~l..
II
II
II
IXl
Ixl __
Ixl __
IXl
IXl
Ixl
IXl
IXl
IX I __
Ixl __
IXl
IXl
IXl
IXl
iXI --
IXl
IXl
IXl
IXl
IXl
IXl
IXl
CHE;IICAL
COtfl)OUHD
VII. HALOGEHATED ALIPHATICS
SI. "nth, ne. bra,o- I I I I I I I Xl
~2. ,ethe,e. ct, lorn-~ ! I I J I J I×l
63. Methane, dtchloro I I I I I I I xl
6¢. Herbs,e. chlOrodfbrono I I I I I I IXl
aS. ~thane, alchlotobro.o I I I I I I IXl
66. Hethnne, t~lb~omo I I I I I I I xl
68. Hethane, tetrechloro I I I I I I I Xl
69. Hethafle, trtchlorofluoro
70. Methane, dichloroaifluoro [ ] I J I I (xJ
~J. Ethane. I.l-6tchJo[o I J I J I J IXJ
~. Ethane. 1.2-dtchlo[o I I I I I I IXl
~). Ethane. I.l.l-tclchloco
~4. Ethane. I.l.2-~[lchlo[o I I I I I I IXl
~5. Ethane. I.l.2.1-cetrichloco I I I I. I I Ixl
~6. Ethane, hexochlo[o
Il. Elbe,e. chloro I I I I I I I Xl
~8. Ethane. I.J-dic~Joro I I I I I I IXl
~9. Ethane, trono-dlchloro I I I I I I Ixl
80. Ethane. t~t~hioro I I I I I J IxJ
81. Elbe,e. tetrachloro [ .I I I I I IXl
82. ~[oea~e, l,l-dtchlo~o I I I J I I Ixl
8~. eroeene, 2,4-dtchloro I J I I I J Ixl
84. Butodieae, he~,chloro I I I J I I iXJ
85. Cycio~efltoalene, he,schists f I I J I I IXI
Vlll. i'ilTHALATE ESTERS
il. PoL~JcI[CLIC AROflATIC
liYDROCAR BaHs
iceneehthene ! J I I I J IX l
Acenephthliene I I I I I I IX I
Anthracene I I I I I I Ix l
e
95. Bents ia) anthracene
96. Be.to (h) fluo~snthene
91. Be.to (k) fluornntiaene
98. Be.to (Sial) ear/lena
99. Befits fo) pyrene
lO0. Chr ytene
IOI. Dlbeflxo fa,n,) aflthgicene
102. Fl sofa.these
lO]. fluorefle
I0~. lfldeno (I,2.3-cd) pyrene
10~. Na~t~thslene
106. ellenonthrene
I01. ~y[ene
~ES~ICIDES
IO8. Acroleln
lO9. Aldrln
!10. BIIC (Alpha}
Iii. eIIC (~ta}
112. ellC (Ga~a) or Lindens
114. Chlordane
Il/.
118. Dieldrin
119. Endooulfaa (Alehn)
120. Endooulfan (~ta)
12t. E.dosuJfon Sulfate
12]. End[la aldehyde
124. Ileetschlor .
125. liee~ac~loz epoxide
126.
12~. TCPO (az Otoxin)
128.
i( you ore unable to Identify the chemical constituents of products you use that dlscharfed Ia
materiels .efety dots sheets for ouch ~roduct..
Il I1%
II II
II II
II II
II I!
II II
II II
II II
II II
II II
II II
II II
I I IXl
II II
I I I~1
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I IXl
II
Il
II
Il
Il
Il
II
II
II
II
II
Il
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II II
II II
IJ
II II
II II
II II
II II
I'1 II
II II
II II
I I Ixl
I I IXl
I I IXl
I I Ixl
I I Ixl
I I IXl
II IXi
II IXl
II IXl
II Ixl
II IXl
II Ixl
'11 Ixl
'1 I IXl
II IXl
II IXl
II IXl
II IXl
II Ixl
;your vastevater, attach copies of the
SECTION D - OTHER ~ASTES
1. Are any liquid was=es or $1udEe~ fr~m =his firm disposed of by means o=her chart discharEe Co the
sewer system?
If "no," skip remainder of Sec=ion D.
If "yes," cc~p, lete i:ems 2 and 3.
2. These waste~ may best be described as:
[ ] ~Acids and Alkalies ~
[ ] Heavy Me=al SludEes
Ix] o=ga:i¢
[ ] Pain=s
[' ] Pesticides
[ ] ?la=ir~ Was:es
[ ] ?retrea~men~ SludEes
[ ] Solvents/Thinners
[ ] O~her Hazardous Was~es (specify)
~s:/mared Gallons or Pounds/Year
Gasoline-no estimate-probably less than 1000 gal/year
r ~ or~ner wastes (s=eclfv)
L J
For ~ne above ched<ed wastes, does your company prac:ice:
~ ] on-site storage
[ ] off-site s~orage
[ ] on-site disposai
[ ] off-site disposal
Briefly describe the method(s) of sc0rage or disposal checked above.
Store Pecovered product in above ground tank and ship it to refinery for recycling
RUSH SWOAPE
TEAMSTERS
DIESEL
RUSH SWOAPE
PROPERT/ES ....
KERNWLLE STAGE
AND FREIGHT
MW-I)
Bi, III. DING
OFFICE
GASOLJNE STORAGE
~ DIESEL STORAGE
TRAILER OFFICE
.. .-'
STF. EL PIPE STORAGE
JIM'~ S~r. EL AND SUPP~' ·
PRIVATE SEWER LINE
OIL STORAGE
FUEL DISPENSERS
VALLEY PERFORATING COM.
SITE VICINITY ~4AP
DAVIES OIL COMPANY
3305.112 GULF ST.
. BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.
· DELTA NO. 40-$7-326
??ODOC T
~>
!
..'"'/. ,;,:...
[::'rfl(" KE'D (OuUMl'3
A I C-. %q'-¢.', f'f'E f~
F' LOU6
AZR, WATER & HAZARDOUS WA:
LABORATORY CERTIFIED 0y CALIFJ~IIA DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Coast
Analytica~
Services
CentraZ Coast
Ana~ytica~ Services, Inc. ,
1~1Su~urDan Road , Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, California 9~1
(8~5) 5~-2553
LoB NumDer: E-k~17
Collected: e5/e~/88
Received: eS/ek/88 e 16e~
Tested: ~5/~7/88
Fuel Fingerprint Analys~s - EPA I~ethod 52~.2/82#~
Delta Environmental SAMPLE DESCRZPTZON:
..... ...--:~ -:11~-White Rock-:Rd.* ...................... Davies Oil, Bakers?teld,*'Del~a'
Suite 11~ Fed ~83Z-~, R~-I, Water
Rancho Cordova, CA 9567~
Compound AnaZyzed Detection Limit Concentration
in ppm in ppm
Benzene ~.1 1.~
Toluene e.1 15.
E~hylbenzene ~.1 1.~
Xylenes ~.1 16.
1,2-D~c~[oroe=hane (EDC) ~.1 no~ found
E~hylene Dlbromlae (EDB) ~.1 no~ ~oun~
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1~.
(GASOLINE)
60.
BTX as a Percent of Fuel 5g.
Percent SurroGate Recovery 102.
Respec=fu[[y subm~ed,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
President
~SD~
E~817~.~r1/2#~
MH/s~/vg/r~
AIR, WATER & HAZARDOU' W~
LABORATORY CERTIFIED by II
'lA DEPT of HEALTH SERVICES
Centra~
Coas~
Ana~yt~¢aZ
Services
" Central Coast LaD'Number: E-&~17dup
Analytical Services, ~nc. Collected:' ~5/~3/88
1~1 Suburban Rood , Suite C-~ Received: . ~5/~/88 · 16~8
Son Luis Obispo, California 93&~1 Tested: es/e7/88
(8e5) 5~-2553 ColLected by: Sudlakor Jr.
Fuel Fingerprin= AnaLysis - EPA ~ethod 52~.2/82~
Delta £nvironmen~a[
..... =:-~-' .... -~: '"11~3~ White RocA Rd~ .......... : '-
Suite 11~
Roncho Cordovo, CA 9567~
SAMPLE DE$CRZPT~ON:
"- Davies Oil,- gakersf~-e-l-d ~"-D®Lta-#&a~87;325 ;--: ::'::i ....
Fed ~8~Z-~, RW-1, Woter
compound Analyzed
Detection Limi~
in ppm
Concen~ration
tn ppm
Benzene ~.~1 1.8
Toluene ~.~1 >2.7
Ethylbenzene - ~.~1 2.2
Xylenes ~.~1 16.
1,2-Oic~loroethGne (EDC) ~.01 not found
,Ethylene Dlbromide (EDB) ~.01 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 1.
(GASOLINE),
8TX as a Percent of Fuel
89.
Percent SurrogGte Recovery
105.
MSi~3
E~17fd.~rl/2~3
~H/s~/vg/rh
Respectful[y submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
President
AIR, WATER and HAZARD.r
-E LA8ORATORY CERTIFIED by,
qlA DEPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
REC'0 MAY 2 7 i988
Central
Coas%
Analytical
Services
" Central Coast
Analytical Services
1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, California
(se5) 5~3-255~
Lab Number: E-~17
Collected=
Received:
Tested= As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakar TR
Delta Environmental
11~3~ White Rock Rood
...........
Ronc~o Cordova, CA 9567~
Sample Description:
Federated
Davies Oil, R~-I
CONSTITUENT
Metals digested by EPA
REPORT
EPA' METHOD/DATE/ANALYST
DETECTION LEVEL LEVEL
LIMIT FOUND FOUND
mg/1 .x~/1 meq/1
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
SODIUM
POTASSIUM
6e1~ ~5/~9/88 VK ~.1 25. 1.25
6010 ~5/09/88 VK ~.1 ~. ~.32
6010 ~5/09/88 VK ~.1 31. 1.36
6010 05/~9/88 VK ~.1 10. ~.26
SUM OF CATIONS
2.5
ALKALINITY AS COC03 310.1
CHLORIDE ~00.~
SULFATE 300.0
NITROGEN, NITRATE ~00.~
NITRATE ~53.3
FLUORIDE 300.0
IRON 2~0.7
MANGANESE 200.7
COPPER 200.7
ZINC 200.7
FOAMING AGENTS ~25.!
~5/~./88 ROM 3. ~.
~5/0~/88 LO 5. 15.
05/04/88 LD 5. 20.
05/0~/88 LD 1. ~.1
05/~4/88 LO ~. 0.~
05/0~/88 LD 0.~ ~.~
¢5/¢9/88 VK ¢.¢2 2.7
¢5/¢9/88 VK
¢5/¢9/88 VK
¢5/¢9/88 VK
¢5/¢~/88 LD ~.~2 <~.~2
I . 48
0.~2
¢.~2
¢.¢2
SUM OF ANIONS
2.3
pH (units) 150.1
CONDUCTIVITY 12¢,1
. (micromnos)
DISSOLVED SOLIDS, 160.1
TOTAL
HARDNESS 130,2
ROM ¢.1 .7.2
ROM 1.
AF 5.
AF ¢.1 80.
Ek¢lTMEO .'WR1/#1 ~,5
MH/ke
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Ha~licek, Ph.D;, President
AIR, WATER and HAZARC ~ 'E LABORATORY CERTIFIED Dy, LI IA _EPT of PUBLIC HEALTH
CentraZ
Coast
Ana~y~icaZ
Services
" Central Coast
Analytical Services
1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo~ California 9~1
(8e5)
Lob Number: E-4~17
Collected: e5/~/88
Received: es/e / · ~see
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Sudlakar TR
Delta Environmen~a't
11~3~ White Rock Road
Rancho Cordova, CA 95678
CONSTITUENT
Sample Description:
Delta.#~-87~26,_ Federated.~8~Z~ _..
R~-I
Holding Time: Six ~onths Preserved (Hg: 28 Days)
-Digested by EPA ~g5 on ~5/Bg/88 by R3
ZCP/AA SCAN FOR CALDERON Iv~.TALS
EpA'METHOD/DATE/ANALYST DETECT~ON
LZM[T, mcj/1
TOTAL LEVEL
rog/3.
*ANTIMONY 6~1~ ~5/1~/88 VK 5. <3. 15.
*ARSENIC 6~1~ 05/1~/88 VK '2. <2. 5.~
*~ARIUM 6010 05/1~/88 VK ~.~1 <~.~1 100.
*BERYLLIUM 6010 ~5/1~/88 VK 0,~1 <0,;1 ~.75
*CADMIUM 6~10 ~5/1~/88 VK ~.2 <0.2 1.~
-CALCIUM $~1~ ~5/1~/88 VK 1. 25. NO LIMIT
*CHROMIUM 6010 05/1~/88 VK 0.35 ~.25 '560.
*COBALT 6010 ~5/1~/88 VK ~.D5 ~.11 80.
*COPPER 601~ ~5./1~/88 VK ~.~5 ~.25 25.
-IRON 6010 05/1~/88 VK ~.~5 2.7 NO LIMIT
-LEAD 6010 05/1~/88 VK 1. (1.
-MAGNESIUM 6~1~ ~5/1~/88 VK 1. ~. NO LIMIT
*MANGANESE 6010 ~5/1~/88 VK ~.~2 ~.60 NO LIMIT
MERCURY 7~70 ~5/10/88 KM ~.~002 <~.~002 0.2
*MOLYBDENUM 601~ ~5/1~/88 VK 5. <5.
-NICKEL 6010 05/1~/88 VK 0.~5 ~.16 2~.
*POTASSIUM 6~1~ ~5/1~/88 VK 3. 1~. NO LIMIT
*SELENIUM 77~1. ~5/1~/B8 ~ ~.~05 <~.~05 1.~
*SILVER 6~10 ~5/1~/88 VK ~.2 <~.2 5.
*SODIUM 6010 ~5/1~/88 VK ~.1 31. NO LIMIT
#THALLIUM · 78~0 ~5/15/88 VK ~.~5 ~.~9 ~.~
-VANADIUM 6~1~ . ~5/1~/88 VK ~.~2 ~.16 2~.
-ZINC 601~ ~5/1~/88 VK ~.~5 <~.~5 - 250.
''SOLUBLE THRESHOLD LIMIT CONCENTRATION as listed in 22 Cai Adm Code Article
11 Sec. 66699 as persistent and biooccumlative toxic substance. "NO LIMIT"
means not listed therein as persistent and bioaccumlatlve toxic substance.
NOTE: Results obtained from ICP Scans (EPA 6~1~) are susceptible to positive
interferences. Unacceptably high results using this method should be rechecked
using atomic absorption spectrometry.
E~17ZCP.WR1/#1~5
MH/sm
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D., President
AIR,~ WATER & HAZARDOUS WAS LetATORY (No.I~I} CERTIFIED
C~,rORN[A OE?T of HEALTH SERVICES
C~nt~a~
Anm~¥tical
Services
Central Coast
1~1 Suburban Rood, Suite
San Luim
(895) 543-2553
· ' Oel~a Environmental,
............. 1.1131 Wll~teRoak Rood
Suite
Rancho Cordova, CA g567g
Collected:
Received:
Collected by: $ud~akarTR
CONSTZ'~JENT
· "" ,,.,~F/,../
EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST '.,DET~CTZON ~ LEVEL FOUND '-mg/1
CHEMICAL OXYOEN
DF]VIAND
~le.1 ~5/18/88 RDM
5. 22.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
ROM
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
~15.1 ~5/11/88 TK
E4gl 7TOC. ~Tll/tl ~5
~H/ke
~-Respect~u$$y mutx~Lt~ed, .........
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTZCAL SERVZCE$
Delt;
Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
711030 White Rock Road. Suite 110
Rancho Cordova. CA 95670
916 638-2085
~' Department of Public Works
· ~ City of Bakersfield
4101 Truxton Avenue
.. : Bak. e,~fie!d,_C~. 93301 ·
Attn:
Sub j:
lVls. Wen-SM W. Cheung
Disposal of Ground Water Pumped During Remediation Efforts
Davies Oil Company, Bakersfield, CA
Federated Claim Nos., 83Z-9, 83Z-26 and 83Z-40
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Dear Ms. Cheung:
As we discussed during our meeting on March 3, Delta is planning to in'stall a
well for recovery of contaminated ground water at the referenced site. Install-
ation o£ the well and subsequent pump tests are scheduled for the week of March
21-26.
Delta proposes to discharge well-development water through a temporary hose to
a sanitary sewer manhole located in the right-of-way of Arrow Street, east of the
property. As indicated in our letter 0f January 14, 1988, to Mr. Joe Turner, we
expect to produce 20 to 40 gallons per minute (gpm) from the well, and the time
required to complete the pump test will be 24 to 72 hours.
The proposed well will be approximately 32 feet deep, and the pump will be
placed near the bottom of the well. The liquid level in the well will be closely
monitored to ensure that there will be no discharge of free product to the sewer
system.
Pumping at the indicated rates will require disposal of from about_30,000 to about
60,000 gallons per day. Concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons are expected to
be much lower during pumping operations than identified during sampling at the
monitoring wells because of dilution. Concentrations of total dissolved
hydrocarbons Will likely be less than 10 ppm. During the test we will sample the
discharge daily to document concentrations of dissolved hydrocarbons and gain
necessary information to evaluate the discharge and design any required pre-
treatment systems.
'Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
--. (
Ms. Wen-Shi W. Cheung
Dept. of Public Works, City of Bakersfield
Delta Project, No. 40-87-326
Page 2
Please call if you have questions concerning this proposal, yoUr prompt attention
is greatly- appreciated~
Sincerely
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
......................................... Richard-L;-Harness, PE
Civil Engineer/Project Manager
RLH:bk:im
cc: $oe Kessing
~:Am~/'Green' "~ Rick Davies
Michael M. Westerheim
Tod D, Christenson
St. Paul Office
Delta )~
Envsronmental
co'nsultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
· Rancho Cordova, CA~ 95670
916 638-2085
February 12, 1988 -
Ms. Amy Green
Hazardous Materials Management Program
Kern County Health Department
1700 Flower Street
· . · ~ .~:.. Bakersfield, Ca 93305-4198
'~, : '-" '~' .~';~.~ ~:~'~' ··~ '~'"' - ~ ~ ' - h ·
,.?':' '~ ~,:.,~'~'.~','~:',~.:"~.'~.?~'*;~-:~:::'~-~ Subj' ?~v~es Off Company '. '
· ~-,;-.: ......z ....... ;::L_ZL- ' :3305a'172- G'hlf'Street
· Bakersfield, CA
..., .... :::,: .. ,~ ~,,. ,,.::,'.., :~ 'De~ Ms. Greem ,': ,'.-' 57~,. ".,:'_"/.. .'~:"
This letter is written in response to concerns you expressed in a February 2, 1988
letter regarding our proposed work plan for the referenced site.
· ' Be assured that we will continue t° work with your agency, the City of Bakers-
field, the California Department of Health Services, and the Regional Water
Quality Control Board~to insure that water produced by any remedial effort at.the
site will be disposed of in an economical and mutually-agreeable manner. Prior
to discharge of any appreciable quantities of contaminated ground water, proper
permitting will be accomplished. In the meantime, we wish to continue with our
investigative efforts; installing monitoring wells in the indicated locations to
define the extent of ground-water contamination. ·
A well survey will be conducted when we are on site to drill the proposed
monitorin~ wells. We will contact local agencies and residents to determine if
potential Conduits for vertical contaminant movement exist within a quarter-mile
radius of the site.
Enclosed is an application for permit to drill four monitoring wells and one
recovery well at the referenced site. We hope to install the monitoring wells on
February 25th and 26th, 1988. The recovery well will be installed soon after --
its installation has not yet been scheduled.
We have been informed that Kern County policy requires the use of non-PVC
well casing for monitoring wells to be installed in areas of known contamination.
We are unaware of evidence that suggests rigid PVC well casing is unsuitable for
monitoring ground-water contaminated with low levels of petroleum hydrocar-
bons. Neither the U.S.E.P.A., the California Department of Health Services, nor
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board currently require that non-
PVC casing be used in such situations.
............................................... The attached" article;'-excerpte~t-ftom-the -'Fall;-t98-7'-issue-of-"Grof~d' 'ltraikr ........
'Monitoring Review, seems to suggest that PVC may even b~ superior to stainless
steel and other "inert" materials for ground-water monitoring. These data are for
RCRA sites, which typically involve monitoring for trace mounts of chemicals
much more reactive than those found in petroleum products.
Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
Ms. Amy Green
Hazardous Materials Management Program
Kern County Health Department
February 12, 1988
Page Two
-A recentprice comparison suggests-that-stainless'-steel~asing~and screen-is--ten-
times more expensive than PVC material. We are unaware of evidence that
suggests the additional expenditure is warranted. Therefore, we propose to install
PVC well screens and riser pipe.in all wells installed at the site.
Please contact us if Kern County has any objections to this procedure. If you
· . ~: : have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (916) 638-2085.
· .: ':~ .: ~ '. _,.:,..,,-~ ~: '-.,..~ ,,,iI ....
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Dale A. van Dam
Hydrogeologist
DVD:bk
cc: Joe Kessing CRWQCB
Michael M. Westerheim
Tod D. Christenson
St. Paul Office
I
!
'ii
!
I
1
!
!
I
!
!
II
· tr. ' ' o'1 °
II o
"
o
It. o
/Dr&e-in
)' o ~o
I!
o N 2o, 00
QUAORANGL~' LOCATION
OILDALE, CALIF.
N$522.5-W1190017.5
PHOTOINSPECTED 1973
195,4,
PHOTCREVISED 1.9'58
AMS 2154 I NE--SEi~IE$ V895
/
/ GI
SITE LOCATION MAP'
FIGURE
1
DELTA NO. I DATE
40-87-3261 12/87
~Davies Oil Comparw
Quarterly Monitoring Results
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 6
GULF STREET
RUSH
8WOAPE
PROPERTIES
TEAMSTERS
LOCAL UNION
NO. 87
RUSH .......
....... SWOAPE
PROPERTIES
DAVIES OIL
COMPANY
ANDRE FAMILY RENTALS
M. NEAL
AND
BARBARA
K, GOFF
PIERCEDALE SUBDIVISION LOT 1
FRANCIS AND MURIEL. PEREY
APPROXIMATE SCALE
0 100 200' '. .....
SITE .SKETCH MAP ......
DELTA NO. I DATE
40-87-3261 12/87
FIGURE
2
J
Environmental
C~nsultants, Inc.
11030 White Rock Road,· Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA. 95670
916 638-2085
February. 29, 1988
· ..( 1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, CA 93305-4198
Attm Amy E. Green
.'<, .!~;f;,?:;.~?:..,.. _:: .-:i..:/ ,.,.; ,.,..... ~:, q.. i?':: .;'.:.ii:.'J-..' Claim # 83Z-9, 83Z-26, 83Z-40
;;:?~: ?.,,: ',, .: · ., .-... ::' :, ..,?,,, ~:.. :.': .'.. , . ·. , , : ·
..... Dear Ms. Green:
Street
The purpose of this letter is to respond to the topics discussed in a phone ,..'
conversation between Michael Westerheim of Delta Environmental Consultants
~ and Amy Green and Richard Casagrande of the Kern. County Health Department on ', ,
'Friday February 27, 1988. .-
The topics discussed included handling of monitoring well development water, the
use of PVC for monitoring wells, and right-of-entry access to Mr. Cyril Andre's
property. As we discussed, Delta will incorporate the following procedures when
performing work at the referenced site.
Use of PVC For Monitoring Wells
Kern County has indicated that they have information that PVC well casing may
degrade when exposed to organic contaminants after approximately two years or
more. Therefore Kern County will require the installation of stainless steel well
screen and casing unless the well can. be considered temporary and can be
removed within two years. Delta intends to initiate remedial action at the site,
including free product recovery, as soon as possible. The proposed monitoring
and recovery well installation should give us enough information to design a full
scale remedial action plan for this site. ExPerience at other sites has_shown that
free product recovery can be completed within approximately one year and that
the low level residual contamination can be purged from the aquifer in
approximately one additional year of pumping. The anticipated schedule should
have the site cleaned up within approximately two years, therefore Delta will
install PVC monitoring and recovery wells at the site.
An additional reason to install PVC at the site is to maintain consistency in
monitoring well construction across the site since there are already six PVC wells
currently in use.
-:. .................................. Monitoring Well Development:Water Handling
Pursuant to Kern County requirements Delta will retain in a suitable container all
water removed from all monitoring wells at the site during any routine sampling
Practical Solutions to Environmental Concerns
Kern County Department
Amy Green :
February 29; 1988
Page Two
or checking of the monitoring wells. One composite grab sample of the water
':"~-~' ~:~---..-~-~-::~..::.~`:~:~:~>~:=~;.~=-~:~:e~::retained~i~-~e`.~b~ect~d~-a~id ~"~alyzed-'-at ~the ~:laboratory-~to :-determine:~-~-- ~?---
~ concentrations of benzene, toluene, xylene, and total purgable petroleum
~ hydrocarbons. The laboratory report will be submitted to the Kern County Health
~///'/& Department and Kern County will make a determination of an acceptable disposal
~////~ alternative for the water. .~. , ~...; ,' .
.. {~'~, : . . .'., . , . . .....j. -~.. .... ~. '~ .
'.. :.'..-,... .... .:,~. . ' . .. Proposed Down-Ilradsent Monltorms~ Wells '.' i,'" './~ "'.". .,:,.~.:.-.'.i~.~. ~. '.t.:
: : Delta'h~"b~eii-d~ie-d-right'of-entry access 'to the property located south' ~f-the
· :.' ....' ' · site owned by Mr. Cyril Andre. One or' two monitoring wells on Mr. 'Andre's' :'-"';"
"i ..'~ ..... :"":' ':' '
.,..-:. '."' .... ". . .::'property are crucial to defining the down-gradient extent of the dissolVed and t,-".,;.... -.:":".' ..
· -" .... ,. ,'-.. .'.. ,:,.. 'i.i-I. free product phase contaminant plumes. Therefore Delta will not be able to ....~.
effectively track the movement of the plume or effectively evaluate the down- ?~:;i..
gradient influence of a recovery well installed on site. Delta feels that remedial
action must be initiated as soon as possible and will proceed with Proposed
Additional Work for Davies Oil Company dated ~anuary 10, 1988. Efforts must be
continued to secure access to Mr. Andre's property but these efforts should not
preclude the initiation of free product recovery at the site .... . ..' '"..
As we discussed, drilling will commence on Wednesday, March 2, 1988 if the
required well permits can be obtained by then. ..
If you have any questions or comments regarding this project, please contact
Michael Westerheim or Dale. van Dam at (916) 638-2085.
Sincerely,
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Michael M. Westerheim, EIT
Civil Engineer/Project Manager
MMW/cs
CC;
Federated Insurance Company
Attn: Joe Kessing
Davies Oil Company
Attn: Mr. Rick Davies
California Regional Water Quality Control Board/Fresno
Attn: Mr. Tim Garrison
~Telephoned ~. ~.~:?~,~:,~ ~:'~ '.~, .~.'~ ~i'tl call aga,n
-~'~.Holding on hne ~',;:~:.~:~;~:~ :,~ Pl~se 'call"'
Long distance call ;. '~'-' Returned your
Came to see you ;;:~' -:~.::~.: :" Waiting fo see
Date: ....................... . ..................................................
PAS 5~ 1151 3g~ (R.3-~)
) WEL:C~SITE:
'PE ~)F:.WORK DONE:
';RECONSTR UC'~ION
'DEPTH' TO
?~RAVEL PACK (CHECK
:EM
~ROPOSED
PROPOSED PERFORATIONS OR SCREEN
PROPOSED SEALS/PLUG(SD:
"OR
580 4113 306 EH (Rev. 5/87) (Pg. I of 3) ,, ,..:- '" ' "".' '? ...... "'; '".
RE~/ERSE
W
Z
!!1
n
I-
Z
O
BUILDING ADDRESS
OWNERS NAIViE PHONE
-CotITRACTORS AODRESS
ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER
LIc. No.
Lie. No.
ARCH. OR EHG, ADDRESS ZIP
ARCHITECT OR EHGINEER PHO~,~E
OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION
I hereby affirm that I am exempt from tho Contractor's License Law for
the following reason. (Sec. 7031.5, Business and Professions Code:
Any city or county which requires a pormit to cons;ruct, alt~r, improve
demolish or repair any structure prior to ils issuance.also r~'¢~i~,;s lbo
applicant for such permil to tile a signed statement that he is licensed
pursuant to the provisions el the contractor's License Law [C,hapler 9
(commencing with Sec. 7000) of Div. 3 of the Business and Pro[essions
code] or tha'J he is exempt therefrom add lhe basis lot lhe alleged
exemption. Any wolation of Soc. 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit
subjects the applicant ~o a civil penally el not more lhan live hundred
dollars ($500):
J~J I, as owner ofthe procerty, or my employees with wages as their
onered for sa~e {~ec. 7044 Business ane i-'romssions uoee: the
Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of properly who
bui ds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through
this own ,e,mplo,/ee,s,, provided that,se,ch improvemems are .riel i ,n!en.~ed
or offereo torsa~e. ~i', however the out,ding or improvement ~s so~o wnnin
one yearotcomplelion the owne.r-builder will have the burden el proving
that he did not build or improve tot per.poses of sale)·
J~J , as owner of the properlY, am ex'elusively contracting with,
licensed contractors lo construct ti~e project (,Sec. 7044, Business ano
Protessions Code: The contractor's License Law does not apply to ,an
owner of property. ',',,ho builds or improves thereon, and who contracts lot
such pro ects wi[h a conlractm(s) )icensed pursuant to the Contractor's
L canse Law.
J~J I am exempt under Sec. , B. & P.C. for this reason
Owner
LICENSED CONTRACTORS DECLARATION
I hereby affirm thai I am licensed under prows~on of Chapter 9 (cem-
mencing with Section 7000) el Division 3 el the Business and Pmlos-
sions (;ode, and my license is Jn tull Iorco and effect.
L.ic. Class Lic. Number
Date Conlractor
WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECLARATIOi'I
I hereby allirm that I have a certificate of consent to sell insure or a
certificate et Workers' Compenswion Insurance, or a c.8~t~ ~d cupy
thereof (Sec. 3800. Lab C:). .
Policy No, Company __
J~J Certified Copy is hereby furnished.
J~J Certified Copy is filed with the city inspection division.
Applicant
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM
WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE
[This section need no, t be cc, mp[oted il the permit is tor one hundred
~Jo ars ($100) or essj .
I cerlify that n he performance of lhe work for which this permit is issueo.
shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become sub ecl to
tile Worker's Con;pensat on Laws el Ca i[orn a.
Date
NOTICE TO APP,?CANT f after makin¢l this Certificate of Exemp-
ion you should become sub ecl to tho Wm,,ers' Compensation, provi-
sions olthe Labor Code, you must brthwith comply with such pruws~ons
or this perrnil shall be deemed revoked,
CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY
I hereby affirm that there.is a construction lending, age~y, for my
performance el the work which this permil is issued (Sec.
'Civ. C).
Lender's Name
Lender's Address
I certify that I have read .this application ,and .stat.e that th,e abo~e
ntormation is correct agree to comply w;m all city ano coumy
ordinances and slate laws re a ngo building construction, and hereby
authorize representatives olthis c~ty to enter upon the aPove-mentioned
properly or ~speclion purposes. .
Signature of Applicant Date ' ·
CITY OF BAKEt;SFIELD ..~ING DEPARTMENT
Application & Permit for:
[~ BUILDIt~G L-"'] J~t~CTRICAL ~ PLUklBING J~ MECHANICAL
~:~ OTHER
ALL IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED AND ACCEPTED BY THE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OF ANY STRUCTURE.
Use Zone . t Occ Type Const. Code Fire Sprinkler
~ New · ~ Addilion [] Alter [] Repair [] Demo. [] Sign
Tract/PM BIk. Lot Ape. No.
School Dislrict Dist. No. No. Bedrooms
[IseoiBuilding i :
Gros~ Areaof Bld~: ...... Slories~-- -=--~Condil. Area
PLUMBING
item I No. Fe-~'"' Item I No.I Fee
1 Balh ~"~.-'
2 Baths I [ W Line
3Baths J ! __ ~-Li-~-e
Sewer J J Bk FP
Toilets J J Pool Filter
Bath/ J t
Lavatory/t J
~ Issuance
E L ECTRIC-"~'~
Elect. Set. Motor HP
Outlet Area S.F.
Fixtures Plan Ck.
Range Issuance
Heater TOTAL FEE
MECHANICAL
New Units
1800 & Under
New Units
Over 1800 SF
Healing under
tO0,O00 BTU
Heating Over
IO0,O0O BI'U
Comb. H&C
Swamp Cooler
Compressor
Hood
Venl
Fan Venl
Pool Heater
PI3n Ck.
Jsstlaflce
TOTAl. FEE
FEES
Item J Accountt.lo. i Valuation
Plan Check 56030
Bldg. Permit
Plumb. Permit
Elect. Permit
Mech. Permit
Special
Sign Permit
Downtown
SchoolFees
Sewer
Bonds
H.C.P.
TOTAL
S-1
S-2
S-3
S-4
S-t06
811 ]
811
52030
52040
52O50
52070
52O35
52075
52510
56140
26127
26180
ENERGY T-24
NESW
Wall
Floor R-
Ceiling R-
Glazing S D T
Air Inflrat. S M
T: Mas~'KED B1,' B2_,_.~3__3_
HTG.
A/C
Shadinq
SPECIAL INSPECTION
J~J Concrete
j~ Weld, HS Bolts
J~J Structural Steel
[~J Masonry
J~ Fire Proofing
J~J Other
SPEC. SOIL REQD.
SPEC. SETBACKS/
ZONING REQ'D
Fee
Approved BUILDING DIRECTOR
BY
DATE
· ~'~' .:.~' ';~.T,"~ Flower Street , * .- , I* KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMEN~ ..... HEALYH OFFICER ......
.;':~;~?~ "~ield. California9~5 ,.~. :. .,~...~ *.~:. Divisionof Environmental Health ~. _: ,' ..:-L.nMH~e~n. MD'.?~,~':~:,:',~:~,·
........ ' ..... · ............ ~:.-~ ~...-, Well Permit Application ..:,: ~.:..: .,-~..%:~: .~V..n s...,~.~ ~::~?~:~:'~.'
THE CENTER OF .THE ROAD..
LEGEND:
PROPOSED RECOVERY OR
· SOIL BORING/MONITORING
SOIL BORING LOCATION
L__.~ PREVIOUS BURIED TANK
........ VAPOR LINE
DISPENSING LINE
~ PROPERTY LINE/FENCE
LEGEND:
· SOIL, 'BORING
EXISTING WELL
pROPOSED WELL
MONITORING. WELL1
WELL LOCATION
LOCATION
O' 50 'fl~
(CLAIM NO.
MW-9~
---.-- ~
83Z-26)
~MW-2
I~)MW- 11
MW- 12 E~) /
OFFICE
TRAILER
OFFICE
-- eu.w~3
PRODUCT
& VAP
~T & V':APOR
'i euw' °
LEAK
LOCATION
(CLAIM NO. 83Z-~4
~'¢~ H( L'-f '[7-¢-. IJ Tek.[
,I MW-4G
iB-5
--'~IB_6
I
PROPOSED RECOVERY AND
MONITORING WELL LOCA'-i'iONS
DELIA NO. DATE ~ FIGURE
, Delta
40--87--326 DEC. I 987[ 5 '~.,,i,o
1700 Flower Street
Bakersfield, California 93305-4198
Telephone (805) 861-3621 ·
(
KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
LEON M HEBERTSON, M.D.
Director of Public Health
Air Pollution Control Officer
February 2, ~988
Davies Oil Company
3305 Gulf Street
Bakersfield, California
93307
Re: Workplan fo~ Remedial/Characterization Activities at Davies
Oil Company, 3350 Gulf Street, in Bakersfield, California
Dear Sir/Madam:
The workplan prepared by Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc.
for your facility located at 3305 Gulf Street, in Bakersfield,
California, was received on January 20, 1988, and reviewed by a
representative from this department. The proposal is not
acceptable as written. The following issues must be addressed
before approval for implementation may be granted.
1. The workplan was submitted along with a copy of a letter
that had been sent to the City of Bakersfield - Department
of Public Works. The letter stated an intent to dispose of
contaminated water by discharging it to the City of
Bakersfield Sanitation Sewer.
Tile Kern County Health Department feels that the disposal
technique is unacceptable unless the facility can show by
ana'lysis -'that the contaminated waters are not hazardous
according to Title 22 of the California Administrative
Code.
'2. The w.orkplan provides an approach for obtaining the
horizontal extent 'of contamiaation in groundwater. The
vertical extent of contamination is. not addressed. The
presence or absence of fuel contaminants in drinking water
wells in the area, a search for possible conduits to deeper
aquifers in the contaminated area have not been addressed
and should be considered.
Davies 0il Company
February 2, 1988
Page 2
The issues addressed above must be considered and changes to
the workplan must be submitted in writing before approval may be
granted.
If you have any questions, please feel free to calll me at
(805) 861-3636. ~
~?~e'n~'Sincerely' '~~~/}~'~t.____. '
Environm~ta! Health Specialist
Hazardous Materials Management Program
AEG/gb
cc: Joe Turner, City of Bakersfield Dale VanDam, Delta Environmental
Tim Garrison, Central Valley Water Quality Control Board
1700 Flower Street
Bakerslield., California 93305-4198
Telephone (805) 861-3621
KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
LEON M HEBERTSON, M.D.
Director of Public Health
Air Pollution Control Officer
January 28, 1988
Delta Environmental Consultants Inc.
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Attention: Dale VanDam
Re:
Any Remedial/Characterization Activity at Davies 0il Co., 3305
Gulf Street, Bakersfield, California
Dear Mr. VanDam:
This is to acknowledge receipt of your proposal dated January
10, 1988, and to inform you of this department's policy on time
frames stipulated in that proposal.
Work that comes into this office requiring regulatory review
is handled in the order reveiwed unless it is determined by the
department to be of an emergency nature. For this reason, and in
the interest of fairness to all involved, we cannot accept the time
limitations described in your letter. We will however, make every
effort to review the information provided and make necessary
decisions as soon as possible so that your project may proceed
without undue delay. Be advised that the work you propose cannot
be initiated without prior approval of this department.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call
Ann Boyce: or Richard Casagrande, in the Hazardous Materials
Management Program at (805) 861-3636 or toll free at 1-800-322-
0722.
Sincerely,
~/~qF~d~c~'agrande, Manager
Hazardou~ Materials Management Program
RC:dr
QUARTERLY MONITORING RESULTS
AND
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL WORK
Davies Oil Company
Bakersfield, CA
Federated Claim Nos. 83Z-9, 26 & 40
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
January 10, 1988
Prepared By:
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
11030 White Rock Road, Suite 110
......... 'Rancho Cordova,-CA 95670
(916) 638-2085
~. Davies Oil Company
'~ Qu~terly Mon/torifig Results & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-$v-6
[' ;' Page ~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i.I 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.I Background'Information
1.2 Scope of Work
· -' 2.1 Site Geology
.__2.2~_Ground-Water Elevations -and Observations,
2.3 GroUnd-Water Quality
3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
4.0 PROPOSED ADDITIONAL WORK
4.1 Monitoring Well Locations
4.1.1 Monitoring Well Specifications
4.1.2 Monitoring-Well Drilling and Development Methods
4.1.2.1 Soil Sample Collection and Screening
4.1.2.2 Monitoring-Well Development and Sampling
4:1.3 Chemical Analyses
4.1.3.1 Soil Chemical Analyses
4.1.3.2 Ground-Water Chemical Analyses
4.2 Recovery-Well Installation and Pump Test
4.2.1 Recovery-Well Location and Installation
4.2.2 Recovery-Well Specifications
4.2.3 Aquifer Test Specifications
4
4
8
9
9
.13
14
14
16
16
16
17
17
17
18
18
18
18
18
5.0 METHODS 5.1 Soil Sampling and Contamination Reduction
5.2 Soil Classification
5.3 Monitoring-Well Development
5.4 Ground-Water Sampling
5.5 Petroleum Product
5.6 Soil-Sample Soreening/hNu Photoionization Detector Method
21
21
22
22
22
22
23'
6.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
23
7.0
QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
7.1 General Sample Collection and Handling Procedures
7.2 Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody Procedures
7.3 Analytical Quality Assurance
7.4 Miscellaneous Checks of Accuracy
23
23
24
24
25
,0
SITE SAFETY PLAN
8.1 Personnel Responsibilities
8.2 Personnel- Protection ....
25
25
26
D~vies Oil Company
(~uar~erly Monitori~8 R~ults & P~o~sad Work
Delta P~ject No. ~-87-326
Pa~e ~
9.0 SCHEDULE
' i010~'-REMXRi~S~SiGNATURES
TABLE 2
T~bles
Ground-Water Elevation Data and Physical Observations
Chemistry Results May and October, 1987 - Water Samples
FIGURE 1'
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE $
FIGURE 6
Fieures
Site Location Map
Site Sketch Map
Well Locations Map
Ground-Water Table Contours - December, 1987
Proposed Recovery- and Monitoring-Well Locations
Proposed Recovery Well Design
26
I0
11
5
6
7
12
15
19
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
Aonendices
Soil Boring Logs
Monitoring Well Construction Sheets
Chemical Analyses of Samples Collected in October, 1987
Davies Oil Company
Cluar~erly Monitoring P,~sulta & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Pase 4
INTRODUCTION
This report presents results of ground-water elevation and ground-water quality measurements made in
October, and ground-water elevation measurements made in December, 1987 in existing monitoring
wells at the Davies Oil Company site, 3305-1/2 Gulf Street, Bakersfield, California (see Figure 1,
........................ Site Location Map). Thi~ report also discmses proposed work to be undertaken at the site-in~ January
or February of 1988. Delta was authorized to complete this work by Federated Insurance Company for'
Davies Oil Company on September 23, 1987.
1,1 Backeround Information.
Previous reports on this project include:
Revort
Proposed Hydrogeologic Investigation
Proposed Hydrogeologic Study
Subsurface Contamination Assessment
Date
25 February 1987
22 Apr, il 1987
9 July 1987
Author
Twin City Testing Corp. (TCT)
TCT
TCT
Each of these TCT reports contains a brief site history and a description of how and when product
losses were detected.
The Davies Oil Company is located in a commercial/industrial area northwest of the City of Bakers-
field (see Figure 2 for adjacent property owners). The nearest residential area is a small mobil-
home park located east of the M.N. and B.K. Goff property, east of the site (Figure 2).
Over the course of its investigation, TCT Corporation installed six monitoring wells (MW-1 through
MW-4, MW-8, MW-9) and advanced three soil borings (B-5 through B-7). Figure 3 is a. Site Map
showing the locations of existing monitoring wells and the now-abandoned soil borings. Monitoring
wells MW-1 through MW-4 ·were installed in an attempt to delineate ground-water contamination due
~o a leak of apprqximately 2,500 gallo._ns_.,?£_~egularTg.m~e g_asoJine _from a dispe, nsing..!ine (TCT
report, 9 July 1987). Well MW-9 was installed to investigate down-gradient contamination when free
/-Davies Oil Gompany
Quarterly Monitoring Results &
Delta Project No. 40-87-3~-6
'.Oil
II
//
//
,WelL.
' Res ~, x ~
~O~ .....
II o
)
Work
I] II
, ............. u_ o.AW,
II :
o N 2000
Scale Feet
OUAORANGZ.~; t.O~ON '
OILDALE, CALIF.
N3522.5-W11900/7.5
PHOTOINSPEECTED 1973
1954
PHOTOREVISED 1968
AMS 2154 I NE--SERIES V895
,-Bem'cbley~
'. -',? ii .....
".- Il
.... ,...; .......... ' ' '¢~r~;
~'/0 . , j~, .'
'rE ...-.. ..--2..4.,'
/, ...' ::~:: /
DELTA NO. I
40-87-3261
SITE LOCATION· MAP
DATE
12/87
FIGURE
1
~Davies Oil Company df~
QuM-terl¥ Monitoring Results & Propose~j~ :k
Delta Project No. 40-87-$116
Page 6
GULF STREET
RUSH RUSH
-SWOAPE ................ SwoAPE
PROPERTIES PROPERTIES M. NEAL
DAVIES OIL AND
COMPANY BARBARA
K. GOFF
TEAMSTERS
LOCAL UNION
NO. 87'
ANDRE FAMILY RENTALS
PIERCEDALE SUBDIVISION LOT 1
FRANCIS AND MURIEL PEREY
APPROXIMATE S. CALE
O' 100 200' '
F'"- .....~- ', .. {
DELTA NO. {
40-87-326{
-SITE SKETCH MAP
DATE
12/87
FIGURE
2
'LEGEND:
,~) PROPO8ED RECOVERY OR MONITORING WELL
~ 80IL BORINGIMONITORING WELL LOCATION
· 80IL BORING LOCATION
, PREVIOUS BURIED TANK LOCATION
....... VAPOR LINE
-- DISPENSING LINE
-'- ' PROPERTY LINE/FENCE
0 5O
ii~M W-2
· (CLAIM NO. 83Z-26)
MW-9 ,;
OFFICE
TRAILER
IDELTA NO.
40-87-326
I
OFFICE
PRODUCT
& VAPO
MW.:- 1
(CLAIM NO. 83Z-40
81TE MAP
DATEi
DEC.. 1987
OT & .VAPOR
LEAK
LOCATION
FIGURE
3
Delta
Environmental
Conaultant$, triG.
Davi~s Oil Company
quarterly Monitoring Results & Proposed Work
Delta Proie¢~ No. 40-87-$~6
Page 8
product was found at MW-1. Soil borings B-5 through B-7 and monitoring well MW-g were drilled in
respon.~e to a ~eparate ciaim inVblving excavation and removal of-diesel fuel ianks (TCT'r~)'°rt, dated
9 1uly 1987). All soil-boring logs and monitoring-well specifications are contained in Appendix A
an~d Appendix B, respectively.
' I' '"' 1,2 Scope of Work
During the period September 23 to December 29, 1987, Delta has completed the following work:
1) A site visit was made in October to measure the depth to ground water, the free-product thick-
ness in MW-l, and to collect ground-water samples.
2)
Ground-water samples were submitted to the laboratory for analysis of benzene, xylene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, ethylene dibromide (EDB), 1,2-dichloroethane (EDC), and total purgeable hydrocar-
bons (as gasoline and/or diesel). A product sample was also collected from MW-I and analyzed
for total lead content.
3)
A site visit was made in December by a California-registered geologist to measure depth to
ground 'water and investigate water disposal options.
5)
Regulatory agencies were contacted to secure authorization to continue with investigative and
remedial activities, including monitoring-well and recovery-well installation, prOduct/water
treatment and disposal, and remediation-system construction.
This report was prepared, summarizing the results of our work and outlining recommendations for
additional ground-water contaminant plume assessment and initial remedial action plans.
Davies Oil Company ':
Quarterly Monitoring Results ~ Proposed Work
Delta Proj~t No. 40-87-$26
Page 9
2,1 ~ite Geoi0e~t
2.0 $.FFE DATA
Soil boring logs (Appendix A) indicate the Davies Oil Company site is underlain by fine to coarse,
micace~us sand, Silty sand, silt and minor gravel. Local topography and the site's proximity to the
present-_day Kern River, indicat_e tha. t_.th?_s..e._.de~0sits are probably of_ Quaternary age ..a!!..d that the_~
deposited in a fluvial or alluvial environment. According to the boring logs, only the upper portion
of borings B-.1 through B-4 contain stir; clay layers and potential aquitards were not encountered in
any of the soil borings completed at the site.
2.2 Gr0#nd-Water...Elevations an.d Observations
Depth to ground water was measured and physical observations recorded at monitoring wells lVlW-2,
MW-3, MW-4, MW-g, and MW-9 in October and December (Table 1 ). Product thickness was measured
in MW-I in October and in December. Note that the measured elevations are relative to a local
assumed 100.00 feet elevation at the side nut of the nearest hydrant on Gulf Street. The top of the
water table is currently about 18 feet below grade. A review of the historical ground-water eleva-
tion data shows the water table at the site has dropped approximately five feet since July, 1986.
Ground-water elevation data indicate ground-water flow is towards the west and southwest. A map of
ground-water contours in December, 1987, is presented as Figure 4.
2.7 Ground=Water Quality
Ground-water samples collected in October from monitoring wells MW-2, MW-3, MW~.4;- MW-g, and
MW-9 were analyzed to determine dissolved concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene,
EDB, EDC, and total purgeable hydrocarbons (as gasoline and/or diesel). Table 2 is a summary of the
results of these October analyses; laboratory analytical reports are included in Appendix A.
Included in Table 2 for comparison are analytical results of water samples collected from the same
monitoring wells on May 8, 1987. Note that May samples were analyzed by SMC Laboratory in Bakers-
field, and October samples were analyzed by Central Coast Analytical Services in San Lugs Obispo.
D~vies Oil Company "
Quar~eHy Monitoring Results ~ Proposed Work
Delta P~j~t No. ~-87-3~6
Page I0
TABLE 1,
Ground-Water Elevation-Data and Physical* Observations
Davies Oil Company, Bakersfield, CA
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
MonitOring
Well
MW-1
MW-I
MW- 1
MW-1
Date,
07/11/86
05/08/87
1o/22/87
12/03/87
Physical
Depth to Reference Ground-Water Characteristics/
.C~ Elevation, Elcvatipn ¢omment~
14.86 97.82 84.96
18.23 99.82 81.59
19.72 99.82 80.10 Approx. 4, free product.
20.66 99.82 79.16 Approx. 0.5' free product.
MW-2
· MW-2
MW-2
MW-2
07/11/86 15.02 99.82 84.80
05/08/87 17.87 99.82 81.95
10/22/87 19.35 99.82 80.47
12/03/87 20.43 99.82 79.39
Black, brackish; silty;
rainbows visible.
No product.
MW-3
MW-3
MW-3
MW-3
07/11/86 15.37 99.82 85.55
05/08/87 18.34 99.82 82.58
10/22/87 20.00 100.92 80.92
12/03/87 20.77 100.92 80.15
Dark brown-black; silty;
rainbows visible.
No product.
MW-4
MW-4
MW-4
MW-4
07/11/86 15.06. 100.20 85.55
05/08/87 17.87 100.20 82.33
10/22/87 18.46 100~20 81.74
12/03/87 20.41 100.20 79.79
Brown; silty.
No odor.
MW-8
MW-8
MW-8
05/08/87 18.00 100.16 82.16
10/22/87 19.60' 100.16 80.56*
12/03/87 20.60 100.16 79.56
Brown; silty.
No odor.
MW-9
MW-9
05/08/87 15.37 97.20 81.83
10/22/87 17.38 97.20 79.82
MW-9
12/03/87 18.12 97.20 79.0'8
Brown to black; brackish;
rainbows visible.
No product.
*Adjusted elevation for assumed error.
Davies Oil Company "
(~uarterly Monitorin~ Results ~' Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 11
TABLE 2
May *' and October, 1987
Water Samples
Concentrations in parts per million (ppm).
·
I-~-' '-" Monitoring ...... 'D~t~
Well Samvled Benzene Toluen~ benzene Xylene~ ED(~EDB __TPH
MW-2 05/08/87 0.089 <0.0005* <0.0005* 0.089 NA NA 4.1
MW-2 10/22/87 0.005 0.022 ND 0.012 ND ND 13
05/08/87 0.0009 <0.005* .<0.0005* <0.0005* NA NA 0,354
10/22/87 ND. 0.003 0.001 0.010 ND ND 12
MW-3
MW-3
MW-4. 05/08/87 0.0018 0.0076 <0.0005* 0.0052 NA NA 0.022
MW-4 10/22/87 0.0001 ND ND ND ND ND <0.05*
MW-8 05/08/87 <0.005* <0.005* <0.0005* <0.005* NA NA <0.010'
MW-8 10/22/87 ND ND, ND ND ND ND <0.05*
TVDO
Diesel #2
Gasoline &
Diesel #2
MW-9 05/08/87 1.155 3.810 1.740 15.3'80 NA NA 33.400
MW-9 10/22/87 0.01 1.6 2.2 37 ND ND 170
Gasoline
NOTES: **
* Detection limit.
EDC= 1,2-Dichloroethane
EDB = Ethylene Dibromide
TPH = Total Purgeable Petroleum Hydrocarbons
NA = Not analyzed for.
ND = Not detected.
Values from Twin City Testing Co~., report dated July 9, 1987.
LEGEND:
PROPOSED RECOVERY Off MONITORING WELL
· SOIL BORING/MONITORING WELL LOCATION
soIL BORING LOCATION
[ PREVIOUS BURIED TANK LOCATION
....... VAPOR LINE
DISPENSING LINE
· .' *- PROPERTY LINE/FENCE
o 5o ~
OFF
(?9.39
~MW-2
(CLAIM
(79.08)
MW
83Z-26)
OFF~CE
M
~MW~-3
18oi~)
CT
CT & VA
rlON
(CLAIM O. 83Z-
MW-
tB_§ ~ (79.7
-GROUND-W~'TE~R--Th-B"LE CON~'OUn"~i" .~E'CEMBER. 1087
DELTA NO. DATE i FIGURE :i. D.,..
40-87-326 DEC. 198~ 4 I' E.~.o .... ,.,
Cort ~ult ant s, Inc.
Davi~s Oil Company-'
Quarterly Monitoring Results & Proposed Work
Delta Proi~t No. 40-87-$9.6
Page i$
A product sample collected from monitoring well MW- i was found to contain 5 rog/kg lead (see Appendix
3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The'De~emb~'f~wite~:table contour map indicates that the ground-Water gradient is to~,ard'-~he-~estand .........
southwest. The flow gradient is relatively flat.out 0.003 ft./ft~ and conforms to local topo-
graphy. Transport of contaminants should, therefore, be from the leaded-gasoline leak location (see
Figure 3) toward the west and southwest. The presence of free product (gasoline) in MW-I would tend
to confirm this assumed pattern 'of contaminant transport.
I- It is possible that several separate contaminant plumes exist at the site. We intend to 'concentrate
...'- ............. remedial efforts on the area of known leak. location first, since free. product and elevated con-
taminant levels are associated with this southerly portion of the site. Efforts to recover free
The high level of total Purgeable hydrocarbons (as gasoline) in MW-9 may also fit with this flow
pattern. However, MW-9 is located over 400 feet down-gradient of the leak location. Since the
gradient is relatively flat, several years would be required for contaminati6n from the leak location
to have reached MW-9. The exact time required depends on the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of
the underlying sediments, but under the most favorable conditions, the plume from the identified leak
would not be expected to reach MW-9 in less than five years: There is the possibility that as yet~
unidentified sources have contributed to the contamination of Soil and ground water at MW-9.
Unless the local ground-water flow gradient is subject to wide seasonal directional variations, the
presence of low levels of dissolved hydrocarbons in monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-3 seemingly cannot
be explained by transport of contaminants from the known leak locations. Flow gradients determined
in December, 1987, indicate that these wells are not down-gradient of the known legk location
(especially MW-3). Furthermore, both wells contain at least traces of diesel ~,2 (in a dissolved-~
Phase); product lost at the known leak location was regular-grade gasoline. Contamination of ground ~.c,-
water in these two wells may represent a separate leak event at an unidentified up-gradient location,"
or periodic small surface spills occurring over the yem-s at that location.
D,,vies Oil Cornp~ny
Quarterly Monitoring Results & Proposed Work
Delta Project bio. 40-87-326
Pa~e 14
product and contaminated ground water present in the south portion of the site may result in reduc-
-'t[~i~- Of -Pollutants present at-Mw~-~-5.nd"Mw--3~ 'Th'e new, e-ssity of- ad~iressin~--the. 'apparently"'Sep-~a~-''-~-;'
contamination in MW-2 and MW-3 can be re-evaluated at a later date, based on data collected during
future investigation and quarterly monitoring at the site.
The Kern County Health Department has expressed concern that the vertical extent of co,n mination
................. beneath the"now-removed diesel tanks' has-not been defined~ Since-soil-borings B-5,--B-6;-and-B-7 ....
(adjacent to the former diesel tank locations--Figure 3) were substantially free of contamination and'
since ground-water samples collected from monitoring-well MW-8 (directly down-gradient of the
former diesel tank locaiion) have shown no trace of contamination, we believe that any significant
soil contamination at this location was removed during the tank excavation process If any con-
tamination is present, it may be effectively controlled and removed by remedial efforts in the area
of the known leak location. '
4,0 PROPOSED ADDITIONAL WORK
Based on the preceding discussion, we recommend that at least three and possibly four additional
monitoring wells be installed at the site. A recovery well will also be installed to (I) determine
aquifer parameters, (2) to help prevent further down-gradient movement of the free-product plume,
and (3) to initiate free-product recovery at the site.
4.1 Monitoring Well Locations
Additional data are required to fully delineate the distribution of contaminants both on and off
site. An up-gradient well (MW-10) is proposed near the known leak location (Figure 5). This well is
required to confirm the inferred flow direction and to insure that contaminants have not been
transported eastward by dispersion.
The location of the proposed monitoring well MW-11 was' chosen to determine if there exists a con-
...... tinuous, high level of contamination between MW-I (on site) and MW-9 (off site, down gradient).
LEGEND: ' '
/
~l PROPOSED RECOVERY OR MONITORING WELL[
~ SOIL BORING/MONITORING WELL LOCATION
· SOIL BORING LOCATION ,
L .... J PREVIOUS BURIED TANK LOCATION
....... VAPOR LINE
DISPENSING LINE
" " PROPERTY LINE/FENCE
LEGEND:
0 80IL BORING
'I~ EXISTING WELL
t~ PROPOSED WELL
~MW-2
(C'LAIM NO. 83Z-26)
MW-9
OFFICE
TRAILER
M W - 1 3 (1)
MW- 12 (~)
MW-11
OFFICE
PRODUCT
& VAPO
--OMW-3
PRODUCT & VAPOR'
, ~MW-~O
LEAK
,LOCATION
RW-
(CLAIM NO. 83Z-4 I
MW-4~
MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
DELTA NO. DAT1E9 ' FIGURE ,,..,.
40-87-326 DEC. 8 5 ..,,i,o.,...,,,
Conlullantl, Inc,
Davies Oil Company .
quarterly Monitoring Results & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Proposed monitoring well MW-12 is intended to delineate the extent of contamination directly down
'gradient from the known leak location. Ideally, this well should be located nearer the known point
If soil and water samples from both MW- 11 and MW' 12 are contaminated, a fourth well may be neces-
sar5' at or near the point marked MW-13 on Figure 5. This well would be required to further define
the extent of down-gradient contamination. ~ ~.~
of release. However, the intervening property is owned by Mr. Cyril Andre; Mr. Andre has denied
previous attempts to gain right-of-entry to his property. We are currently 'negotiating with Mr.
Andre for right of entry to his property. If access permission is granted, MW-12 will be moved to a
suitable location approximately 100 feet down-gradient of MW-I.
4,1,1 Monitgring Well Svecifications
\
The Kern County Health Department now requires that monitoring wells in areas of known contamina-
tion be constructed of materials other than PVC. In accordance with this regulation, the proposed
monitoring wells will be constructed of 2-inch, flush-threaded, galvanized steel material. The well
~ead will either extend one to two feet above grade or, if installed flush with grade, will be
encased in a metal christie box. The wells will be advanced by hollow-stem auger drilling, using
methods outlined in Section 5.0. Borehole diameter will be approximately seven inches. All monitor-
ing wells will be advanced a minimum of ten feet below the water table; screened intervah will
extend approximately five feet above and ten feet below the water table. Actual screened intervals
and well depths will be determined in the field by a Delta geologist or engineer. The annulus around
the screened interval will be filled with clean, imported gravel. The gravel pack will extend one or
two feet above the top of the screened interval. AbOve the gravel pack, a bentonite seal at least
two feet thick will be installed. The annular space above the bentonite seal will be grouted to
surface. All wells will be equipped with casing bottom plugs and lockable well caps.
4.1.2 Monitorina'-Well Drilline and Develooment Methods
4.1.2.1 Soil Samvle Collection and Screenine
One soil sample will be collected from each boring at a depth of 10 feet below grade. Beginning
at a depth of 12.5 feet, soil samples will be collected at 2.5 foot intervals to a depth of five
feet below the water table.
Davies Oil Cornpa~.~*
Quarterly Monitorin~ Results & Proposed Work
Delt,, Projec~ No. 40-87-3~6
P~ge 17
Upon recovery of the California-modified split-barrel sampler (see Section 5.0), a soil sample
will be Collected in a brass tube, capped, packaged and preserved according to UR EP'~-~r°CedU~s
for possible chemical analysis. A duplicate sample will be collected in a sealed glass jar and
held until completion of drilling activities. All soil samples collected id glass jars will be
brought to room temperature and the head space of each jar will be screened for total organic
vapors utilizing a portable photoionization detector. Cross sections showing the stratigraphy
of the site will be constructed and the results of the soil-sample screening will--b,plotted-on.
the cross sections. Based on this information, soil samples may be selected for chemicai
analysis to best define the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination.
4,1,2,2 M0nitoring-W~ll Develgpment and Samvlin~
After installation, the monitoring wells will be developed by bailing using dedicated, labora-
tory-cleaned teflon balers until field measurements of pH, specific conductance, and temperature'
stabilize and the produced water is relatively sediment free. If the well is bailed dry during
the development process, recharge rates will be recorded. No water or chemicals will be
introduced into the monitoring well during development. Following development, the wells will
not be disturbed for approximately two weeks to allow water levels to stabilize prior to
obtaining representative ground-water samples.
4.1.3 Chemical Analyses
4,1.3.1 S0il Chemical Analyses
Based on' the results of soil-sample screening, soil samples may be selected for chemical
analysis. The soil samples will be analyzed for fuel fingerprint, EDB, EDC, BTX, ethylbenzene
and total purgeable hydrocarbons by EPA method 524.2/8240 (gas chromatograph/mass spectro-
meter selected-ion method or GC/MS SIM). These analyses should indicate whether or not petro-
leum contamination has occurred and, if present, will aid in characterization of the type of
petroleum contamination (gasoline or diesel fuel).
Davies Oil Company
Quarterly Monit:orinl{ Rasul~;s & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-39.6
Pa~e 18
4.1,3,2 Gr0~nd-Water Chemical Analyses
4.2
All ground-water samples will be subjected to the same analyses as described in Section 4.1.3.1
for soils.
Rec0,ery-W~ll Inst:~llati0n and PumI~ Test
4,2.1 Rec0very-Well Locagi0n and Installation
Because of the presence of free petroleum product in monitoring well MW-I at the site, we
propose to install' a product-recovery well at the location indicated on Figure 6. The well will
be utilized to perform an aquifer test to calculate aquifer parameters and determine if addi-
tional recovery wells will be required, and where they should be located. Information will be
collected °n flow rates and ground-water quality to determine the design of a water-treatment
system. The well will then be utilized to recover free product and to establish gradient
control to prevent movement of product plume.
4.2,2 Recovery-Well Sl~ecifications
The recovery well will be drilled to a total depth of 35 feet. We recommend that the well be
completed with 12-inch casing to allow clearance for a down-hole, dual-pump system. The
borehole would be 20 inches in diameter, leaving a 4-inch annular space to insure adequate
gravel-pack thickness. We recommend use of a #40 slot (0.040"), continuous galvanized screen.
The screen should be 20 feet in length and should be set between 17 and 37 feet below grade.
Gravel-pack material should consist of uniformly graded, coarse sand (Monterey g3 or equiva-
lent), and should extend 3 or 4 feet above the screened interval. See Figure 6 for typical
recovery-well construction specifications.
4.2.3 Aouifer Test Soecifications
After the reco.very well is installed and fully developed, an extended pump test will be con-
ducted to determine the long-term yield of the well and to determine aquifer parameters
Davies Oil Company
Quarterly Monitorin~ Results & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-$7-326
Page 19
NOTE: NOT TO SCALE.
12" STEEL WELL CASING
STATIC WATER LEVEL 18' BELOW GRADE '-'
12", CONTINUOUS SLOT, ,P40,
GALVANIZED STEEL WELL SCREEN
20" BORE HOLE
--CLEAN IMPORTED GRAVEL PACK
4'° ANNULUS
PROPOSED
RECOVERY WELL DESIGN
DELTA NO.
40-87-326
DATE
12/87'
FIGURE
6
Consultant'%
Davies Oil Company
Quarterly Monitoring Results/z Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 20
(hydraulic conductivity and storativity). Water produced during the pump-test will be sampled ~
to determ, hm' the Concentrations of volatile organics, total dissolved sollds,,____'catlons, ............ amons,-.-.~.t{. .~i;
....
TOC,~/field conductivity, temperature, and total lead content. Thas information will.be ~.,.,
used to design a water treatment system.
"t,: Treatment and disposal of water produced by recovery wells is a primary design consideration.
'. ......................... After an initial' investigation, it is-.-apparent that .-three- water-disposal - options exist:-These
. options are: 1) discharge to existing storm sewer, 2) infiltration or injection on site, and
~" 3) discharge to existing sanitary sewer. ~.>\, ~b, ~
Option l, discharge' to an existing storm sewer, would require that a National Pollutant Dis-~
charge Elimination System (NPDES) permit be secured from the U.S. EPA. Water discharged to a
storm sewer would likely need treatment, using the best available technology, to high standards
(possibly drinking-water standards) under the terms of an NPDES permit. Extensive monitoring
of the quality of the discharge water would also be required. During a December field visit, it
was observed that no nearby storm sewers are available. Storm water in the area is apparently
controlled by surface run=off·
On=site infiltration (Option 2) may also be an acceptable option..Water to be re=injected or
allowed to infiltrate may also require treatment to near=drinking water standards. Compliance
with such standards may require installation of expensive and maintenance-intensive treatment
equipment on site, In addition, chemical constituents that may occur naturalIy in the water
(iron, carbonate) and bacterial components may have to be removed to prevent plugging of the
infiltration gallery.
Option 3, discharge to an existing sanitary sewer, seems to be a practical solution. A City of
Bakersfield sewer line is located approximately 750 feet southeast of the site. However, the
Bakersfield Department of Public Works (DPW) has indicated a reluctance to allow discharge of
produced water to the sewer. The city requires that any discharge to' the sewer must be cert-
ified by the California State Department of Health Services (DHS) as 'non-hazardous' under the
requirements of the Califo.rnia Administrative Code, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Article
11. An official in the DHS, Alternative Technologies Division, indicated that such certifica-
Davies Oil Company.
Quarterly Monitorin~ Results ~z Proposed Work
Del~;a Projec~ No. 40~87-326
Page 21.
tion normally takes at least one year to complete. Only after the discharge is certified as
non-hazardous will the Bakersfield DPW consider allowing the discharge in{o'-t~:-Sanitary sewer.
However, officials at the DPW will not guarantee that the discharge water will be allowed to
enter the sanitary sewer, even if it is classified as a non-hazardous waste.
· - ............ Delta representatives' will continue to-work With the City of Bakersfield; the-California'Depart-
'.. ment of Health, and the San Joaquin District of the Regional Water Quality Control Board to
insure that the water discharge will be disposed of in a mutually-acceptable manner.
(.
~;.0 METHODS
All field work, data analysis and interpretation will be conducted under the supervision of a
California Registered Geologist.
5.1 Soil Samoline and Conta, mination ·Reduction
Monitoring=well drilling and soil sampling will be performed under the direction of a Delta engineer
or geologist. The monitoring wells will be advanced using a truck=mounted hollow-stem auger drill
rig.
Upon recovery, a portion of the soil sa~nple will be placed into a glass jar and sealed for later
screening with a photoionization detector. Another portion of the soil sample will be used for
classification and description. That part of the soil sample collected in brass tubes within the
California-type sampler will be stored at approximately 4° C. for transport to the laboratory.
We propose to utilize Central Coast Analytical Service. s, a State of California certified labora~t,?ry,
tO perform the chemical analyses. , ~~" '
t
Davie. s Oil Compa~.y
Quarterly Monitorin$ Results ~ P~pos~ Work
Delta P~j~ ~o. ~-87-326
Page 22
As the samples are obtained in the field, they will be visually and manually classified by the crew
chief in accordance with AsTM:D 2488-84. Representative portions of the samples will then be
return~l to the laboratory, for further examination and for verification of the field classification.
Logs of the borings indicating the depth and identification of the various strata, the N value,
-,'-' ............... Water'~Iev-eI informa~tion and' pertinent information regarding-the 'methOd' of'advancing and-maintaining ............
the borehole will be made. Charts illustrating soil classification procedure and the descriptive
terminology and symbols used on the boring logs will also be made.
5,3 Monitorine-Weil Dev~looment
Each monitoring well will be developed after construction by bailing with a dedicated, laboratory-
cleaned teflon bailer until the water produced is relatively sediment free or until measurements of
pH, specific conductance, and temperature stabilize. If the well is bailed dry during the develop-
meat process, recharge rates will be recorded. No water or chemicals will be introduced into the
monitoring wells during well development.
Ground-Water Samulin~
Following well development, and after water levels have been allowed to stabilize in the well, three
to five volumes of liquid will be removed from each well by pumping or bailing. Measurements of pH,
specific conductance, and temperature will be made at regular intervals during this procedure.
Removal of liquid from each well will continue until the measured pH, specific conductance, and
temperature have stabilized. A liquid sample will then be collected from each well with a labora-
tory-cleaned, dedicated teflon bailer. Each sample will be appropriately labeled and stored in ice
from the time of collection through the time of delivery to the laboratory.
$.~ Pegroieum Product
If free petroleum product is present in a well, the thickness of the product layer will be measured
by collecting a sample in a transparent teflon bailer with a check valve at' the bottom or by
Davies Oil Company
quarterly Monitoring l?~sults & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
measurement using appropriate fluid-level sounding equipment. The sample will be transferred to an
aPProPriate:'-sa~iple-Container. and subsequently submitted. for" fuel-fingerprint anaiysiS-:~t the
laboratory.
5,6 Soi}-Sample Screenine/hNu Photoionization Detector Metho,d.
. ' .............. Upon .return-to .the-laboratory,-the head-space vapors of the s0il-sample jars-will-be-screened-with an
"[. hNu photoionization detector equipped with.a 10.2 eV lamp calibrated to benzene for direct reading in
ppm. The sample-jar lid will be opened and the hNu probe immediately placed within the head space
of the jar. The highest observed reading will be recorded.
~,0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
All soil and ground-water samples submitted to the laboratory will be analyzed by EPA Method 524.2/
8240 fuel fingerprint and EDB, B'IX, ethylbenzene, and total purgeable hydrocarbons.
7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
i
This item describes the field and analytical procedures to be followed throughout the investigation.
7,1 'General Sample Collection and Handling Procedures
Proper collection and handling are essential to ensure the quality of a sample. Each sample will'be
collected in a suitable container, preserved correctly for the intended analyses, and stored prior to
analysis for no longer than the maximum allowable holding time. Details on the procedure for collec-
-tion and handling of soil and ground-water samples to be used on this project can be found in
Section 4.0.
Davies Oil Company
Quarterly Mon/~-or/ng Resul~a & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page ~4
7,2 Sample Identification and Chain-of-Custody procedures
Sample identification and chain-of-custody procedures ensure sample integrity and document sample
possession from the time of collection to its ultimate disposal. Each sample container submitted for
analysis will have a label affixed to identify the job number, sampler, date and time of sample
collec-tion, and a sample number unique to that sample.' This information, in addition to a descrip-
tion of the sample, field measurements made, sampling methodology, names' of on-site personnel;-and
any other pertinent field observations will be recorded on the borehole log or in the field records.
All samples will be analyzed by Central Coast Analytical Services (CCAS) in California.
A chain-of-custody form will be used to record possession of the sample from time of collection to
its arrival at the laboratory. When the samples are shipped, the person in custody of them will
relinquish the samples by-signing the chain-of-custody form and noting the time. The sample-control
officer at CCAS wilI verify sample integrity and confirm that it was collected in the proper con-
tainer, preserved correctly, and that there is an adequate volume for analysis.
If these condilions are met, the sample will be assigned a unique log number for identification
throughout analysis and reporting. The log number will be recorded on the chain-of-custody form and
in the legally-required log book maintained by CCAS in the laboratory. The sample description, date
received, client's name, and any other relevant information will also be recorded.
7.3 Ana!vtical Quality Assurance
In addition to routine calibration of the analytical instruments with standards and blanks, the
analyst (CCAS) is required to run duplicates and spikes on 10 percent of the analyses to insure an
added measure of precision and accuracy. Accuracy is also verified through the following:
I) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and State certification programs.
2) Participation in an inter-laboratory or "round-robin" quality assurance program.
Davies Oil Company.
Quarterly Monitoring Rasults & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 25
Verification of results with an alternative method. For example, calcium may be determined
byatomic ~bso~'~tion~ ion chromatography or titrimetric methods. Volatile
organics may be determined through either purge and trap or liquid-liquid extraction
methods.
t . 7,4 . Miscel!a, eou~ (~hecks. 9f Accuracy
Where trace analysis is involved, purity of the solvents, reagent, and gases employed is of great
concern. CCA$ maintains a service contract on ali major instrumentation; gaz chromatographs, atomic
absorption, ion chromatography, and total organic carbon analyzers are all serviced and maintained
regularly.
The above program is more than sufficient for most needs. Additional quality assurance, such az
spikes and duplicates' on all analyses, will be provided if requested. ~
8.0 SITE SAFETY PLAN
This plan addresses safety provisions to be employed during monitoring-well and recovery-well
drilling at the Davies Oil site. The objective of the plan is to describe procedures and actions to
protect the worker, as well az uninvolved parties, from inhalation and ingestion of, and direct skin
contact with, potentially hazardous materials that may be encountered at the site. The plan des-
cribes 1) personnel responsibilities, and 2) protective equipment to be worn as appropriate when
working on the site.
$.1 Personnel Responsibilities,
Key personnel directly involved in the investigation who will be responsible for monitoring the
execution of safe-work practices and the Provisions of this plan are 1) the drilling-subcontractor
project supervisor and 2) the Delta project field manager. These personnel are responsible for
knowing the provisions of the plan, communicating plan requirements to workers under their super-
vision and to site visitors, and for enforcing the plan.
Davi~a Oil Compatl. y
Quarterly Monitoring l~sults & Proposed Work
Delta P~j~t. No. 40-87-~6
Page 26
8.2 Personnel Protection
................. 2)' Tyvek' coveralls
3) Butyl rubber or disposable vinyl gloves
4) Steel-toe boots
The designated personnel-protective equipment is selected to prevent field personnel from exposure to
gasoline fuel products that may be present at the site. To prevent direct skin contact, the Follow-
ing protective clothing will be worn as appropriate while working at the site:
1) Hard hat with optional face shield
5) Goggles or safety glasses (if optional Face shield not used on the hard hat)
The type of gloves used will be determined by the type of work being performed. Drilling personnel
will be required to wear butyl rubber gloves because they will have long-duration contact with the
subsurface materials. Delta sampling personnel will wear disposable gloves when handling any sample.
These gloves will be changed between each sample.
Personnel-protective equipment shall be put on before entering the immediate work area. The sleeves
of the coveralls shall be outside of the cuffs of the gloves to facilitate removal of clothing with
the least potential, contamination of personnel. If at any time protective clothing (coveralls, boots
or gloves) becomes torn, wet, or excessively soiled, it will be replaced immediately.
No eating, drinking, or smoking will be allowed in the vicinity of the drilling operations. Delta
will designate a separate area on site for eating and drinking. Smoking will not be allowed at the
vicinity of the site except in designated areas. No contact lenses will be worn 'by Field p_ersonnel.
9.0 ~CHF-DULE,
Delta proposes to begin work described herein as soon as approval is obtained.
Davies Oil Company
quarterly Monitoring Results & Proposed Work
Delta Project No. 40-87-326
Page 27
.10.0 REMARKS/SIGNATURES
The recommendations contained in this report represent our professional opinions. These opinions are
based on currently available information and are arrived at in accordance with currently accepted
hydroge~logic and engineering practices at this time and location.. Other than this, no warranty is
implied or intended.
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
Dale A. van Dam
Hydrogeologist
This report was prepared by:.
Date: ///~//~
This report was reviewed by.
Civil Engineer/Project Manager
Z .
The work performed in this
report was done under the
supervision of a California
Registered Geologist
Date:
Brian K~'ogseng -~'~--/~ ~-
California Registered Geologist **2303
API~ENDIX A
Soil Boring Logs
LOG OF TEST BORING,~i~
JOSNO 4231 87-533 " VER~C^LSC^LE 1" __~1~ BOR,~G.O.
PROJECT Davies Oil ~ompany; f)okersfi~Zd~ Califnrnia ,_.
DEPTH · 'DESCRIPTION OJ: .MATERIAl. SAMPLE PETROLEUM PRODUCT
GEOLOGIC
IN r(~ ¢ ORIGIN N WL ~O TYPE OBSERVATIONS
FEET SURFACE ELEVATION _R.
.~SILT, brown, moist (ML) FINE
ALLUVIUM 1 SB~
2 SB~
5 SAND, fine to meidum grained, COARSE 3 SB*
light brown dry ' (SP) [LLUVIUM
7'4 SANDY SILT, brownish gray, mo"~I~L,) FINE 4 .SB*
i.
8.3' ,, ALLUVIUM I ................
.,. SAND,. fine to medium grained, .~ COARSE - ' "....
brown, dry to about 15' then ALLUVIUM ,
- waterbearing (SP)
5 SB~
6 SB,
7 SB~ NSR
Continued on next page
" /
, tuJIrl :ltv I::Lm~l::lrll:3 ,
SE-V-21 (84-A).4 ~: I:N'I:N:~'~I:3~3 Fl
bOG OF TEST [50MING
1" = B-1 (Cont)
Joe NO 4231 87-533 ~ .i_ VERT,CAL S¢^,E t __ 8DraNO NO ·
~.OJ~CT Davies 0il ~any:~_akersfi~d~ California
DEPTH ! DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL SAMPLE
~N .. GEOLOGIC PETROLEUM PRODUCT
· FEET ORtGIN N WL NO TYPEi OBSERVATIONS
25
SAND W/SILT AND A LITTLE GRAVEL, fine COARSE 8 SB~
to medium grained, a few cobbles, ALLUVIUM
grayish brown,'waterbearing (SP-SM) (Cont)
31J 9 SB~
End of Boring
· MOdified California split barrel
sampl er.
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS START7-9-86 CO..LETE 7-9-86
S~M.tEO CAS'NG C^Vt-'N WA*E" UtT"Oo'~HSA'" 0"--30~- ............. @ 4110
7-9 10:30 17'. 15' ,o 15'_+
7-9 4:10 31~' ' None ,° NMR
Io ,. CREW CHIEF K r i~ i,.j ~ (~ n {]
cuJIn Cl~
SE.V-20(84-A)-4
LOG OF TEST BORINGe
J68NO 4231 87-533 ' --~' vE.T,CALSC^LE 1" =~! ' BOR,NC~NO __ fl-2
..OJECT 'Davies Oil Company; Bakersfie_ld_. Califnrnia
OI~PTH .DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL GEOLOGIC SAMPLE
· PETROLEUM PRODUCT
IN F ORIGIN N WL' NO TYPE OBSERVATIONS
FEET SURFACE ELEVATION 98. 191
SILT. grayish brown, dry' (ML) FINE 1 SB*
ALLUVIUM
2 SB*
5
SAND W/SILT. fine to medium grained, COARSE 3 SB*
brown to light tan. moist (SP-SM) ALLUVIUM
7
SAND, fine to medium grained,
light brown, moist (SP)
4 SB*
SAND, medium to fine grained, _
-:brown. wet to waterbearing (SP) 5 SB~
25_
End of Boring
*Modified California split barrel
samp 1 er.
WAT~,RL~:VEI.. MK.I,$UI~EMENT$ .~TART 7-- 10--86 CO,.'PL~TE 7-- 10--86
DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH · DEPTH BAILED DEPTHS LEVEL ·
7-10 10:30 25' ,o NMR
,o c. Ew c.,E~ Kro~sen9
3
SE-V-20(84-A)-4 co~'~on
LOG OF TEST BORIN~
JOB.O 4231 87-533 "? vERTICAL SCALE 1" ' 8-3
~ BORINCl NO
PIqOJEC? Davies Oil Componv: Bakersfield, Califnrnia
C)EPTH . .dESCRIPTION OF' MATERIAL SAMPLE
IN GEOLOGIC PETROLEUM
FEET FSURFACE ELEVATION 9q _ 10 i ORIGIN N WL NO TYPE OBSERVATIONS
SANDY SILT, grayish brown. FINE
dry (ML) ALLUVIUM 1 SB~
SAND'W/Si'LT, f'i-ne~ t'°''medium grained, 2 SB
tan, dry (SP-SM) COARSE
ALLUVIUM
7
SAND, medium grained, light 3 SB~
~ brown, moist (SP)
SAND, medium grained, gray,
wet to waterbearing (SP) 4 SB~
;>5_
End of goring --
*Modified California split barrel
.sampler.
w.r~. t. Evm. ME^SU.EME.TS . ST^., 7-10-86 COUPLETE 7-10-86
DAtE TIME SAMPLEO .... CASING CAVE.IN W~TER
to
7-10 2:00 25' ,o NMR
,~ c.[w c.,~. ~ro~sen9
~= V-~0~))4.A).4 cc3rDc)raClon
e. LOG OF TEST BORING....~/
JOBNO 4231 87-533 ' ' vE.T,CAI,SCALE 1".. ' BOR,N(; NO B-4
..OJECT Davies 0il Company~ Bakersfiel,d, California
J OEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL GEOLOGIC SAMPI,E
' .' PETROLEUM PRODUCT,
IN
FSURI:ACE E. LEVATION · 98. 79 I ORIGIN N WI. NO TYPE OBSERVATIONS
FEET
SANDY SILT, brown, moist to dry FINE
(Mt) ALLUVIUM
1 SB*!
7½
2 SB*
SILTY SAND, fine grained, brown, COARSE
.......dry to moist .......... (..SM). ~ ALLUVIUM .................. .
14½
- SAND W/SILT. medium to fine -
grained, brown, wet to water-(SP-SM) 3 SB*
bearing
25 -
End of Boring
-*Modified California split barrel
. sampler.
7-11-86 7-11-86
- sA,~.~o J CAS,~G c^v,-,- ........ w^,~.~E+-o0 HSA 0'-25' .......... J@.__9:15
DATE tiM; OEPTH _' DEPTH OEPTH BALLED OEPTHS LEVEk
lO'
7-11 9:15 25' ,o NMR
Io
,o c.~w ¢.,~, Kroqsenq
SE-V-20(84-A).4 C ~'1~0¢~0t"1
DATE' 5-5-87 '
LOG DESIGNATION
LOGGED BY: KC ..
ELEVATION;
WATER LEVEL:J6.5 ft. 408: B870f
EQUIPMENT' Hobile B-50, 8" hollow stem auger FIGURE:
-- l-.,
3:' Z t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u sOIL OR ROCK DESCRIPTION ....................... NOTES
SP SAND: light olive brown; fine to medium;
- damp; medium dense; micaceous.
2.5 ' i0
2.5 12
SW SAND: olive gray to light olive gray;
fine Co coarse; damp co moist; medium dense;
micaceous.
2.5 18
IO--
· i 2.5 I0 Moist at 10'.
2.5" 20
SP SAND: light olive gray; medium to coarse;
wet; medium dense; micaceous; with some
silty sand/silt and gravel lenses.
15-
2.5 23
2.5 32
' Boring
Terminated
at 17.5 '
ZO-
25
THE tOGS SHOW SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ( , ! 'S. aeL£. ,NS, Oe O,~u
IS NOT WARR~NT[O THAT TH[Y AR[ REPRE~[NTATIV[
O~'T~ 5-5-87 '
LOG~EO BY: ~C · ·"
ELEVATION:
WATER LEVEL:[6-5 ft.
5OU~PM~NT: Mobile B-50,
LOG DESIGNATION
8" hollow stem auger
FIGURE:
B870
I $ ~ .......... SOIL OR R~K DESCRIPTION-:
SP S~D: light yellow:tsh brown; fine; damp;
medium dense; micaceous.
2.5 15
SH SILTY SAND: light yellowish brown; ~'ine;
- damp; medium d~nse; ~caceous.
5-
S~ S~D: pale olive ~o light yellowish br0~;
f~e to coarse; damp t0 moist; medium dense.
' 2.5 17
IO-
2.5 18
2.5 26
Sand grades to coarse with ~nor gravel.
15- _
2.~ 27
~ SP S~D: light yellot~sh'bro~; coarse with "
2.~ 32 some ~ravel~ wetl dense.
Boring
Terminated
' aC 17.5'
20-
25
TME LOGS SHOW SUI~SIJRFACE CONOITiONS I ~ ! $~u,tt~ ,,S, Ot O,~u
IS NOT WA~R~NTE0 THaT THEY ~E REPRESENTATIVE
DATE' s-5-87 LOG DESIGNATION
LOGGED BY:KC ..
ELEVATION:
WATER LEVEL:!6-~) ft. JO8 B870
EOUIPMENT: Mobile B-50, 8" hollow stem auger F~OURE:
~: ~,- o u SOIL OR . ROCI< DESCRIPTION ' NOTES
. o >--- ¢~ ~- - - .... · .......
SP SAND: light yellowish brown; fine; damp;
medium dense; micaceous.
2.~ 15
.... SM SILTY SAND: pale olive; fine; damp; medium
- dense; micaceous.
5-
2.5 14
SP SAND: light olive brown to light yellowish
2.5 17 brown; fine to coarse; damp co moist; medium
dense; micaceous.
IO-
2..~
Some thin silty sand lenses noted at 12'.
2..: 22
15 - 2..~ 29'
Boring
Terminated
aC 17.5'
25
THE LOGS SHOW SUBSURFACE CONOITiONS ! , ) S&u~,~.rm IkS,OE O,nu
AT T~E DATES ~NO LOC~T,ONS ,NO,CATED. ~NO ,r (,1 ,.o,---.--~.-.,~c- o... ~C~
IS NOT wARRANT~ THAT THEY ARE REPrESENTATiVE
DATE' .5-5-87
LOGGED BY: TWL -..
ELEVATION:
WATER LEVEL:iS-'0 ft.
EQUIPMENT' Mobile B-50,
LOG DESIGNATION
hollow stem auger
JO8' B87C
F~GURE: 5
z:' z ~: ~. o ~ ~ SOIL OR ROCX DESCRIPTION . .. NOTES
SP SAND: light yellowish brown; fine; moist;
micaceous.
2.5 15
SM SILTY SAND: dark yellowish brown; fine;
moist; medium dense; micaceous.
5-
2.5i 19
2.5: 20
SP SAND: light yellow brown to. dark yellowish
brown; fine to medihm with some silt;
IO- moist; medium dense; micaceous.
2.5 21
2.5 20
SP SA/~D: olive to light yellowish brown;
15- medium Co coarse'; wet; loose.; micaceous.
2.5 8
20- Some gravel lenses noted at 20'.
Boring
Terminated
25 ac 25 '
THE LOGS SHOW SUBSURFACE CON01TIONS { , ! S.u.%£. ,.$,O£ O,A.
Off StrB~U~FACE CO~;O~TIONS AT OTNf~ t.O~ATIm~Jq I P ) NYD"~ULtCaLLY .,jS~[D ~ .....
DATE: 5-5-87
LOGGEO BY; KC "
ELEVATION '
WATER LEVEL:l 6.5
EQUIPMENT' Mob±le B-50,
LOG DESIGNATION
8" hollow stem auger
~g4-9
JOB'
FIGURE:
~ n- Z U.
~' z uJ ~ - u SOI~ OR ROCK. DESCRIPTION ..................... ~--NOT~S
SM SILTY S~D: dark grayish brown; fine to
- coarse; damp; medium dense.
2.5 16
SP SAND: light yellowish brown ~o light olive
bro~; damp; medium dense; ~caceous.
5-
2.5 15
2.~ 16
B870
THE LOGS SHOW SUBSURFACE CONOITIONS ( I I $&MI~I.£R IN$10~ OI~M
~S ~I0T w~R~ANTEC THaT THEY ~E REP~ESE~JTATI'TE
IO -
2.5 17
SP S~'JqD: very pale brown, to olive gray;
2.5 21 coarse; damp to moist; medium dense;
micaceous; interbedded with thin silty.
sand lenses.
2. ~ 24
- ~P' SA~D: olive gray; fine to coarse; wet;
2.~ 20 medium dense; micaceous; interbedded
*' with thin silty sand lenses.
ZO;
: Boring
Terminated
!;75 . at 25 '
APPENDI~ B
Monitoring Well Construction Sheets
lOB NO. ' 4231 87-533
GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION'
LI
~NSTALLATION OF MONITORING WE~0
MONITORING WELL NO. MW- 1
Davies 0il Company; Bakersfield: Cmli~nrni_m
99.82'
98.61'
TOP. QJ: RISER PI~E ELEVATION
[with cap removed)
NTED CAP
-- P~OTECriV,, CAS,NG
6" I.D. steel
Diameter and Type
5'
1.2'
Lenl'th Abo~,~ Ground
'HICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL grout;
DIAMETER AND TYPE OF RISER PIPE
2" PVC
L2
TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER
Sand
L3
AND TYPE OF SEAL
DEPTH TO TOP OF FILTER SAND 5 '
Sand
TYPE OF FILTER AROUND SCREEN'
MONITORING WELL Stainless
SCREEN GAUGE OR SiZE OF OPENINGS .020"
(SLOT NO.)
AND LENGTHOF$CREEN 2" x 15.8'
25.0'
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF MONITORING WELL
TO BOI'i'OM OF FILTER SAND
AND TYPE OF SEAL
Non'~
6"
Li= 1.2 FT
L2= 1~.2 IrT
INSTALLATION COMPLETED:
Daze 7-c~-86 Time 4.:
DIAMETER OF BOREHOLE
MONITORING WELL WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
DATE I TIME I BAILEDDEPTHS [ WATERLEVEL'~
7-10-86_ 4:03.. _, . 14.82' ..
?-11-86 111:40 I I 14.86'
I I i
W DEPTH BELOW TOP OF RISER PIPE
'~' IZLUIn C11::%~ t:EsCincl
iDB NO. 4231 87-533
GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION"
L!
INSTALLATION OF MONITORING ;YELL_
m
98.1~'
'MONITORING WELL NO. _
Davies 0il Company; Bakersfield'.
TOP. ~j~ RISER PIJ~E ELEVATION
(with cap removed)
NTED CAP
~ PROTECTIVE CASING
Diameter and Type
Total Length
Lehigh Abo~e Ground
6alifnrnia
99.82'
6" i.D. steel
'NICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
,
grout j
DIAMETER AND TYPE OF. RISER PIPE
2" PVC
TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER
Cement arout
L3
AND TYPE OF SEAL
1' bentonite
pellets
6.3'
DEPTH TO TOP OF FILTER SAND
- TYPE OF FILTER AROUND SCREEN' Sand
OF MONITORING WELL St ai n 1 es s
SCREEN GAUGE OR SIZE OF OPENINGS
(SLOT NO.) .020"
AND LENGTH OF SCREEN 2" X 15.8'
24.3'
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF MONITORING WELL
)EPTH TO BOq-rOM OF FILTER SAND
S AND TYPE OF SEAL
Li= 1 _F;' IrT
L2= 10.2 Fi' ·
L3= 15.8 Fl'
L4= 25.9 F-r
INSTALLATION COMPL.=TED:
Date 7-10-R6 Time 11
_I
-I
DIAMETER OF BOREHOLE
,1
7-10-86 3:55 .... 1.5.09' ..............
7-11-86 ~11:35 j I 15.02' m mm
I
DEPTH BELOW TOP OF RISER PIPE
t::LUln Clt::V t:eSt:lnc1
INSTALLATION OF MONITORING WEL
JOB NO.
4231
Davies 0il
99.10'
87-533
GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION"
L1
MONITORING WELL NO. ~ MW-3
Company; Bakersfieldt California
100.92'
TOP. C2F RISER PIJ~E ELEVATION
(with cap removed)
NTED CAP
tOTEC-rlVE CASING
Diameter Ind Type
1'oral Lenlth
Length Above Ground
6" I.D. steel
'HICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
5.2";=~:oncrete ~' '~
DIAMETER AND TYPE OF RISER PIPE
2" PVC
L2
TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER
Cement
L3
2'..
ESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
DEPTH TO TOP OF FILTER SAND
TYPE OF FILTER AROUND SCREEN' .Sand
TYPE O F MONITO RING WELL S t a i n 1 e s s
SCREEN GAUGE OR SIZE OF OPENINGS
(SLOT NO.) .020"
2" x 15.8'
D LENG'TH OF SCREEN
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF MONITORING WELL 24.2'
)EPTH TO BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND
'ESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
6"
1' bentonite
pellets
6.2'
Li= 1.8 .. FT
L2= 10.2 FT..
15.8 FT
L4= 25.0 Fl'
INSTALLATION COMPLETED:
Date 7-1fl-R6 Tim-. 2:20
DIAMETER OF BOREHOLE
MONITORING WELL WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
DATE TIME BALLED DEPTHS WATER LEVEL
-7--10-86 ..... i.- 4: 00-' .................... -15~-3'3 -'
7-11-86 1~1:30 15.37'
I
I
DEPTH BELOW TOP OF RISER PIPE
I:uJIn Clt:¥ testincl
INSTALLATION OF MONITORING W
f 106 NO. ,, '4231 87-533 - ~ MONITORING WELL NO.
' Davies Oil Company; Bakersfield, California
i GROUND SURFACE rL£V^TION 98,79' .lO' OF RISER PIPE EL£VATION
· ! (with r. mp removed)
!. NTED CAP
!. L] }T~C'TIV[ C,~ING
6" Steel
St Tem L~.
) ~h ~w Gm~ ........... 1
CKNESS ANDTYPE OF SEAL 5.7' Cement Grout
I
DIAMETER AND ~[ Or RISER
" ' Cement Grout
~ ~ TYPL OF ~AC~FILL AROUND RISER
I
)
'1 ~ 1' Bentonite Pel
L3
DEPTH TO TO* Or FILTER SAND , 6.7'
Sand
TYPE Olr FILTER AROUND SCR£EN ,
TYPE OF MONITORING WELL Stat nl ess
.020"
(SLOT #O.)
2"X 15.8'
£TER AND lENGTH OF SCR£~N ,,
DEPTH TO mol-roM OF MONITORING WELL
TO BOTTOM OF FILT£R SAND
ESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
24.6'
m
L1-
1.4
10.2'
15.8
25.0
~'m~'~ DIAM£?[R OF IOR£HOLE
INSTALLATION COMPL£T£D.
Da~e .117-11-86 _ Time 1~1 :~00
MONITORING WELL WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
DATE TIME BAILED DEPTHS WATER LEVEL
(1) o£Pz. m£LO~' lOP OF ,,SE* ~,PE
IDB NO.' 4231 87-533
· .MONITORING WELL NO.
(;ROUND SURFACE ELEVATION"
98.7 '
L2
TOP. (~ RISER PIJ~E I~LEVATION
(wilh cap removed)
NTED CAP '
[OTECTIVE: CASING
Diameter and Type
Toul Lenlth
ben G~'ound
AND'+Yi'E OF SEAL
DIAMETER AND TYPE OF' RISER PIPE
TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER
--THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
6" Steel
5-.5'--cement---:-.-~--
grout
2" PVC Sch 40
cement qrout
2' bentonite
DEPTH TO TOP OF FILTER SAND
-- TYPE OF FILTER AROUND SCREEN
TYPE OF MONITORING WELL
SCREEN GAUGE OR SIZE OF OPENINGS
(SLOT NO.)
~I'ER AND LENGTH OF SCREEN
7.5'
birdseye gravel
pack·
0.02"
2"x 1.5'
DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF MONITORING WELL , ?,~, ,~
BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND
ESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
I
Li=. 1.46
'~m~ DIAMETER OF BOREHOLE
L4= 23.5 lq'
I
INSTALLATION COMPLETED:
Date ,,~-1~-87 Time ,, 11; 15
· MONITORING WELL WATER LEVEL'MEASUREMENTS
DATE TIME BALLED DEPTHS WATER LEVEL
DEPTH BELOW TOP OF RISER PiPE
~"~ I:::UJIn (::!1:::~,~ t:last:lncl
JOB NO.' 4231 87-533
ALLATION
OF MONITORINGO _L
MONITORING WELL NO,
MW-9
-~
MARKERHEIGHT'
GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION q7_a
[--']'" --VENTED CAP
L4 ... -~ THICKNE
DEPTH
[ TYPE OF
~ TYPE
L3 ..
~ O[A~ET~
J :'. BFPTH
TOP OF'RISER ELEVATION 97.2Q
(With Cap Removed)
12" Steel
0" Steel
3'
A nd Type
Depth
IVE CASING
Diameter and Type
Total Length
AND TYPE OF SEAL
AND TYPE OF RISER PIPE
BACKFILL AROUND RISER
Cement/ Bentonite
Grout Mixture' to
Surface
2" Flush Thread PVC
AND TYPE OF SEAL
Cement Grout
TOP OF FILTER SAND
2.5'Bentonite Pellets
8'
birdseye gravel
stainless
FILTER AROUND SCREEN
MONITORING WELL
GAUGE OR SIZE OF OPENINGS
(SLOT NO.)
AND LENGTH OF SCREEN
0.020"
2"X 15.0'
26.2'
26.5'
L~= 11,0 Fi'
L3= .... i5.0 F'T
L4= 26.2 FT
INSTALLATION COMPLETED:
Date Time ~
DEPTIi TO BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND
THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL
N/A
DIAMETER OF BOREHOLE 8"
MONITORING WELL WATER LEVEL MEA. SUREMENTS
DATE TIME WATER LEVEL ( l )10BSERVATIOiiS
I:LUln tlt¥ I:eSl:lnCl
(1) DEPTH BELOW TOP OF RISER PIPE
APPENDIX (~
AnalYtical Lab Data
AIR, WATER mhd HAZ ~OUS WASTE LABORATORY CERTIFIED CALIFORNIA DEPT of PUBLIC HEAL~
Central Coast
AnaLyticaL Services
1~1 Suburban Road, Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, CaLifornia g3~1
(8~5) 5~3-2553
Central
Coast
AnaLytical
Services
Lab Number: D-8~52
ColLected: 1~/22/87 e 1~e5
Received: 1~/23/87 · 1see
Tested: As Listed
Collected by: Brian Gather
Delta Environmental ConsuLtants Sample Description:
; k55 University Ave. Ste. 1~
..... i='i:,--.-= ...... ~.-Sacramento, CA:-.-95825 .................... ............... -=~Davies=Oil-CFDelta #~-87-326 _~.~
I. ~ Fed# 83Z-g, 2~ & ~,'1~/-1
(_. Gasoline
.... CONSTZTUENT
REFORT
EPA METHOD/DATE/ANALYST
DETECTION LZMIT
TOTAL
EEVEL-FOUND-*-mg'/kg-~
LEAD
D~52DEL. WR1
~/sm
Reepectt'ully submitted,
Mary Havltcek, Ph.D., President
cL<.£Licm. AZR, WATER Grim HAZARDOUS WASTE LABORATORY CERTIFZED by CALZFORNZA DEPT o¢ PUBLZC HEAL
Central
Coast
Analytical'
Services
Central Coast
· Analytical Services, Inc.
1~1 Suburban Rood Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, California 93~1
(8e5} 5~3-2553
Lab Number: D-8~48
Collected: le/22/87
Received: 1~/23/87
Tested: 11/~3/87
Collected by: .B. Gather
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis.- EPA Method 524.2
'Delta Environmental SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
____455__Uq~yer$!t~ A~.e~ue ......................... Davies...Oil Co ._,_ Delta #4e-87~326 .... F~d
Suite le8 #83z-g , hfW-2, Water
Sacramento, CA 95825
Compound Analyzed Detection Limit Concentration
in ppm in ppm
Benzene
ToZuene
Ethy~benzene
Xylenes
1,2-Oichloroethone (EDC)
Ethylene D~brom~de (EDB)
e.ee5
~.e22
not found
~.e12
not found
not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (DIESEL #2) 13.
BTX as a Percent of Fuel
Percent Surrogate Recovery 12~.
D8~.Sf .wrl/138
-MH/tl/vg/jb
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
· ~ry Huvl~¢ek, Ph,D.
P~estden~
cL<ZL~¢m
AiR, WAFER and HAZARI OUS WASTE LABORATORY CERTIFIED by_CALIFORNIA DEPT of PUBLIC HEaLTh
Central
Coast
Analytical'
Services
Central Coast
Analytical Services, Inc.
161 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
San L~is Obispo, California 93~1
(8e5) 5~3-2553
Lab Number: D-8~9
Collected: le/22/87
Received: 1~/23/87
Tested: 11/~3/87
Collected by: B. Gather
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis , EPA Method 62~/82~
:. Delta Environmental SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
1'. ~55 University .Avenue ....... : .....:..Davies._Oil_Co, Delta #~-87-326,;.:Fed-#8~Z-9 .... --~=~--~
I Suite 1~ ~d-3, Water
'Sacramento, CA 95825
Com?ound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentration
in ppm
Benzene ~.~1 not found
Toluene ~.~1 9.~93
Ethylbenzene ~.~1 ~.~1
Xylenes ~.~1 ~.~1~
1,2-Oichloroethone (EDC) ~.~1 not found
Ethylene Oibromide (EDB) ~.~1 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE & DIESEL #2) 12.
BTX os a Percent of Fuel ~.1
Percent Surrogate Recovery 97.
Note: Sample contained both gasoline and diesel #2.
Respectfully submitted,
~~/~~'/CENTRAL COAST ~~S.
~ary Huvlicek, Ph.D.
President
DB~gf.wrl/1~2
MH/cs/vg/~b
Centra~
Coast
Ana~ytica~
$o~vices
~ Central Coast Lab Number: D-8~7
.. Analytical Services, Inc. Collected: 1~/22/87
i41 Suburban Road , Suite C-4 Received: 1~/23/87
San Luis Obispo, California 93~1 Tested: 11/~3/87
(8~5) 5~-255~ Collected by: B. Gather
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2
Delta Environmental
~55 University Avenue
...... :'.--~-~---'--'Suite 1~ ....... - ...............
Sacramento, CA 95825
I
SAMPLE DESCRZPTION:
Davies 0i1 Co., Delta #~-87-~26,
Fed.#8$z~g~lv~/;~-~-Wa~~ .................. ,._~ .... ~ .....=
Compound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Benzene ~.~0¢1
Toluene ~.~01
Ethylbenzene ~.~1
Xylenes ~,~1
1,2-Dlchloroethone (EDC) ~.0001
Ethylene Dlbromide (EDB) ~.~001
Concentration
in ppm
not found
not found
not found
not found
not' found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (oASOLINE) <~.~5
BTX os o Percent of Fuel
not applicable
Percent Surrogate Recovery
111~.
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
~ry Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
D8~7f. wrl/138
~H/tl/vg/~b
c[<l[10m AiR, WATER and HAZAF ~US WASTE LABORATORY CERTIFIED by CALiFORNI'A DEPT of PUBLIC HEALT=
ICentra~
Coast
Ana~ytica~
Services
Central Coast
Analytical Services, ~nc.
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
San Luis Obtspo, California 93~1
(8~5) 5~3-2553
Lob Number: D-8~5~
Collected: 1~/22/87
Received: 1~/23/87
Tested: 11/~6/87
Collected by: B. Garber
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2/~
, ? Delta Environmental
i- '---~-----: ........~55'-University · Avenue
Suite 1~
i~ Sacramento, CA 95825
I.
~[,.
SAMPLE DESCRZPTZON:
Dovies--'OiI'"Co.',DeltB-'~e;87;3257
Fed #83Z- , ~/-8, Water
ComPound Analyzed
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentration
in ppm
Benzene ~.¢0¢1 not found
Toluene ~.¢~1 not found
Ethylbenzene ~.¢01 not found
Xyienes ~.0~1 not found
1,2-Dlchloroethane (EDC) ~.~0~1 not found
Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0.~1 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE)
BTX as a Percent of Fuel
not applicable
Percent Surro[,ate Recovery 92.
D8~5~f; wrl/1~3
MH/ec/vg/jb
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
'Ph. D.
President
Central ~ Central Coast Lab Number: D-8~51
Coast .' Analytical Services, Inc. ColZected: le/22/87
Analytical. 1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: 1~/22/87
Services San Luis Obispo, California 93~1 Tested: 11/~3/87
(895) 5~3-2553 ColZected by: B. Gather
FueZ Fingerprint AnaZysis - EPA Method 52~.2
DeZta EnvironmentaZ SAmPlE DESCRIPTION:
~55 University Avenue Daviee OiZ Co., DeZta #~-87-326,
Sacramento, CA' 95825
Compound Analyzed Dete¢~ion Limi~ Concentration
.~ in ppm tn ppm
Benzene ~.~1 ~.~1
Toluene ~.~5 1.6
E[hylbenz~ne ~.~5 2.2
Xylenes ~.~5 57.
1,2-Olchloroethone (EDC) ~.~5 not found
Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) ~.~5 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEU~ HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE) 17~.
BTX ~s a Percent o~ Fuel 2~.
Percent Surrogate Recovery 125.
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D.
Preeident ,
D8~51f.wr1/1~
MH/jk/vg/nh
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
, Central Coast Lab Number: D-8~53
.. Analytical Services, Inc. Collected: le/22/87
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~ Received: 1~/25/87
San Luis Obispo, California 93~1 Tested: .11/~3/87
(8~5) 5~3-255~ Collected by: B. Gather
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2
Delta Environmental
~55 University Avenue
Suite
Sacramento, CA 95825
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
Davies 0il Co., Delta #~-87-~26, Fed.
#8~Z- -,-TB1~1987RWO~2,-Woter
Compound Analyzed
Benzene-
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes
1,2-Dlchloroethane (EDC)
Ethylene Dlbromide (EDB)
Detection Limit
in ppm
Concentration
in ppm
~.00~1 not found
~.~1 not found
~.001 not found
~.~1 not found
~.~001 not found
~.~0~1 .not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ('GASOLINE)
BTX os o Percent of Fuel
not applicable
Pqrcent Surrogate Recovery
97.
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
hlary Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
D8~557. wrl/1 ~1
MH/~k/vg/jb
Central
Coast
Analytical.
Services
~ Central Coast
.. Analytical Services, Inc.
1~1 Suburban Road , Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, Cali¢ornia 93~1
(8e5) 5~3-2553
Lab Number: S-11~67
Collected:
Received:
Tested: 11/e6/87
Collected by:
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 62~/82~
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
1/2X FF STD. (#11e687-~)
......................................................... ~ -VOA Spike: BTE and'EDC
Xylenes a~ ~.~6¢ ppm
Compound.Analyzed Detection Limit Concent~=tion Percent
~ in ppm in ppm Recovery
Benzene
Toluene 5.501
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes 5.551
1.2-Oichloroethane (EDC) 5.5551
Ethylene Dlbromide (EBB) 5.5551
¢21
52¢
525
¢62
521
¢25
1¢5.
155.
153.
1¢5.
not sp&ked
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE) not applicable
BTX as o Percent of Fuel not applicable
Percent Surrogate Recovery
150.
Respectfull, y submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
Sl1~67¢5.w¢1/1~3 ·
MH/~c/vg/~b
Central
Coast
Analytical
Services
~ Central Coast
· ' Analytical Services, Inc.
1~1 Subu?ban Road , Suite C-~
San Luis Obispo, California g~l
(8~5) 5~3-2553
Lab Number:
Collected:
Received:
Tested:
Collected by:
B-11~67
11/~S/87
Fuel Fingerprint Analysis - EPA Method 52~.2/82~g
I' - SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:
Instrument_Blank at g:e8 A~I.
Compound Analyzed Detection Limit concentration
~ in ppm in ppm
Benzene ~.~001 not found
Toluene ~.~01 not found
Ethylbenzene ~.~1 not found
Xylenes ~.~1 not found
1,2-Olchloroethone (EDC) ~..0001 not found
'Ethylene Dibromide (EOB) ~.~001 not found
TOTAL PURGEABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE) <0.~5
8TX os o Percent of Fuel
not applicable
Percent Surrogate Recovery
al 1 ~'6772.wrl/1~3'
MH/ec/vg/~b
Respectfully submitted,
CENTRAL COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICES
Mary Havlicek, Ph.D.
President
;...,. "-- :'---~-F .... ~'~ ~ ': '. ' . ..: -
· DELTA Samplo Identification/Field Chain of custody Record.
.,' 'ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. :' ~ '
.,?~0~.~:.
.:.:~h!~d bY:.. ~ .:.
to:-
'.~nts:..,. . ." ~/, ~ ~7~ -~.' ~Z~ --2~, .. P.? A' - F0 ~ Hazardous matedats suspected?~/no)
· ,.~ ?.: ~ .,. ~ / ~ :
~::' '* ' ~:'~ "' '". I ·
'~';' S~l~g Sample No. of ~ Analysis
t:., ·
.,, Point L~a~on FieM ID · Date ~ Type ~n~iners Requ~ed
~::~/~ /,
b,,_..) ,, ,, ,..... z ,,
II
'..:~" - "~ . ./' /" ~ ~- ~'::,.".: ;z.~. /.' ."/ 2 '~/' '//
~,~ .
,... n,~,.,: ~.. .~ . ~ i.
· ~'~: ~ .. : ,
Sampler(s) (s~nature)
:~"":'~' Field ID RaUnquished by: {signature) Received by: ~signature) : Date~me ~ Comments
!.."'.'~::.
,..:;~;:.':~., ..
..a:-~ .~ ...... .
.~k¢,~i'.,.'~.~ . '..
. ;?5,,
. ~.'- ?..i ~. ' .
...,,, ~/~
. ~1~ for shipment by: (signature) ~ '
,~,
R~ived for ~b by: (signature) '~-- ~,---~' L-' ~ / ( , ,' ~ -' Date~ime !~4,'" ;'", ~ .... ' ~.~ Comments
· . ~.~,~.', . , .- . ,
~;: ~:-: ·. : ~;, .
~'!::'~ ~ -~eceiving Laboratory: Ple~e ~eturn original form a~er signing for receipt of samples.